CONCORD Did



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@Info_1Corinthians @ The occasion of the Epistle is made plain by numerous allusions personal and otherwise. Paul had arrived in Ephesus from Antioch shortly after the departure of Apollos for Corinth with letters of commendation from Priscilla and Aquila (Acts:18:28-19:1|). It is not clear how long Apollos remained in Corinth, but he is back in Ephesus when Paul writes the letter and he has declined Paul's request to go back to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:12|). Some of the household of Chloe had heard or come from Corinth with full details of the factions in the church over Apollos and Paul, clearly the reason why Apollos left (1Corinthians:1:10-12|). Even Cephas nominally was drawn into it, though there is no evidence that Peter himself had come to Corinth. Paul had sent Timothy over to Corinth to put an end to the factions (1Corinthians:4:17|), though he was uneasy over the outcome (1Corinthians:16:10f.|). This disturbance was enough of itself to call forth a letter from Paul. But it was by no means the whole story. Paul had already written a letter, now lost to us, concerning a peculiarly disgusting case of incest in the membership (1Corinthians:5:9|). They were having lawsuits with one another before heathen judges. Members of the church had written Paul a letter about marriage whether any or all should marry (1Corinthians:7:1|). They were troubled also whether it was right to eat meat that had been offered to idols in the heathen temples (1Corinthians:8:1|). Spiritual gifts of an unusual nature were manifested in Corinth and these were the occasion of a deal of trouble (1Corinthians:12:1|). The doctrine of the resurrection gave much trouble in Corinth (1Corinthians:15:12|). Paul was interested in the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem (1Corinthians:16:1|) and in their share in it. The church in Corinth had sent a committee (Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus) to Paul in Ephesus. He hopes to come himself after passing through Macedonia (1Corinthians:16:5f.|). It is possible that he had made a short visit before this letter (2Corinthians:13:1|), though not certain as he may have intended to go one time without going as he certainly once changed his plans on the subject (2Corinthians:1:15-22|). Whether Titus took the letter on his visit or it was sent on after the return of Timothy is not perfectly clear. Probably Timothy returned to Ephesus from Corinth shortly after the epistle was sent on, possibly by the committee who returned to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:17|), for Timothy and Erastus were sent on from Ephesus to Macedonia before the outbreak at the hands of Demetrius (Acts:19:22|). Apparently Timothy had not fully succeeded in reconciling the factions in Corinth for Paul dispatched Titus who was to meet him at Troas as he went on to Macedonia. Paul's hurried departure from Ephesus (Acts:20:1|) took him to Troas before Titus arrived and Paul's impatience there brought him to Macedonia where he did meet Titus on his return from Corinth (2Corinthians:2:12f.|).

rwp@Info_1Corinthians @ It is clear therefore that Paul wrote what we call I Corinthians in a disturbed state of mind. He had founded the church there, had spent two years there (Acts:18|), and took pardonable pride in his work there as a wise architect (1Corinthians:3:10|) for he had built the church on Christ as the foundation. He was anxious that his work should abide. It is plain that the disturbances in the church in Corinth were fomented from without by the Judaizers whom Paul had defeated at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:1-35; strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10|). They were overwhelmed there, but renewed their attacks in Antioch (Galatians:2:11-21|). Henceforth throughout the second mission tour they are a disturbing element in Galatia, in Corinth, in Jerusalem. While Paul is winning the Gentiles in the Roman Empire to Christ, these Judaizers are trying to win Paul's converts to Judaism. Nowhere do we see the conflict at so white a heat as in Corinth. Paul finally will expose them with withering sarcasm (2Corinthians:10-13|) as Jesus did the Pharisees in strkjv@Matthew:23| on that last day in the temple. Factional strife, immorality, perverted ideas about marriage, spiritual gifts, and the resurrection, these complicated problems are a vivid picture of church life in our cities today. The discussion of them shows Paul's manysidedness and also the powerful grasp that he has upon the realities of the gospel. Questions of casuistry are faced fairly and serious ethical issues are met squarely. But along with the treatment of these vexed matters Paul sings the noblest song of the ages on love (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13|) and writes the classic discussion on the resurrection (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:15|). If one knows clearly and fully the Corinthian Epistles and Paul's dealings with Corinth, he has an understanding of a large section of his life and ministry. No church caused him more anxiety than did Corinth (2Corinthians:11:28|).

rwp@Info_1Corinthians @ Some good commentaries on I Corinthians are the following: On the Greek Bachmann in the _Zahn Kommentar_, Edwards, Ellicott, Findlay (Expositor's Greek Testament), Godet, Goudge, Lietzmann (_Handbuch zum N.T._), Lightfoot (chs. 1-7), Parry, Robertson and Plummer (_Int. Crit._), Stanley, J. Weiss (_Meyer Kommentar_); on the English Dods (_Exp. Bible_), McFadyen, Parry, Ramsay, Rendall, F. W. Robertson, Walker (_Reader's Comm._). strkjv@1Corinthians:1:1 @{Called to be an apostle} (\klˆtos apostolos\). Verbal adjective \klˆtos\ from \kale“\, without \einai\, to be. Literally, {a called apostle} (Romans:1:1|), not so-called, but one whose apostleship is due not to himself or to men (Galatians:1:1|), but to God, {through the will of God} (\dia thelˆmatos tou theou\). The intermediate (\dia, duo\, two) agent between Paul's not being Christ's apostle and becoming one was God's will (\thelˆma\, something willed of God), God's command (1Timothy:1:1|). Paul knows that he is not one of the twelve apostles, but he is on a par with them because, like them, he is chosen by God. He is an apostle of Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus (MSS. vary here, later epistles usually Christ Jesus). The refusal of the Judaizers to recognize Paul as equal to the twelve made him the more careful to claim his position. Bengel sees here Paul's denial of mere human authority in his position and also of personal merit: _Namque mentione Dei excluditur auctoramentum humanum, mentione Voluntatis Dei, meritum Pauli_. {Our brother} (\ho adelphos\). Literally, the brother, but regular Greek idiom for our brother. This Sosthenes, now with Paul in Ephesus, is probably the same Sosthenes who received the beating meant for Paul in Corinth (Acts:18:17|). If so, the beating did him good for he is now a follower of Christ. He is in no sense a co-author of the Epistle, but merely associated with Paul because they knew him in Corinth. He may have been compelled by the Jews to leave Corinth when he, a ruler of the synagogue, became a Christian. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:1| for the mention of Silas and Timothy in the salutation. Sosthenes could have been Paul's amanuensis for this letter, but there is no proof of it.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:17 @{For Christ sent me not to baptize} (\ou gar apesteilen me Christos baptizein\). The negative \ou\ goes not with the infinitive, but with \apesteilen\ (from \apostell“, apostolos\, apostle). {For Christ did not send me to be a baptizer} (present active infinitive, linear action) like John the Baptist. {But to preach the gospel} (\alla euaggelizesthai\). This is Paul's idea of his mission from Christ, as Christ's apostle, to be {a gospelizer}. This led, of course, to baptism, as a result, but Paul usually had it done by others as Peter at Caesarea ordered the baptism to be done, apparently by the six brethren with him (Acts:10:48|). Paul is fond of this late Greek verb from \euaggelion\ and sometimes uses both verb and substantive as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:1| "the gospel which I gospelized unto you." {Not in wisdom of words} (\ouk en sophiƒi logou\). Note \ou\, not \mˆ\ (the subjective negative), construed with \apesteilen\ rather than the infinitive. Not in wisdom of speech (singular). Preaching was Paul's forte, but it was not as a pretentious philosopher or professional rhetorician that Paul appeared before the Corinthians (1Corinthians:2:1-5|). Some who followed Apollos may have been guilty of a fancy for external show, though Apollos was not a mere performer and juggler with words. But the Alexandrian method as in Philo did run to dialectic subtleties and luxuriant rhetoric (Lightfoot). {Lest the cross of Christ should be made void} (\hina mˆ ken“thˆi ho stauros tou Christou\). Negative purpose (\hina mˆ\) with first aorist passive subjunctive, effective aorist, of \keno“\, old verb from \kenos\, to make empty. In Paul's preaching the Cross of Christ is the central theme. Hence Paul did not fall into the snare of too much emphasis on baptism nor into too little on the death of Christ. "This expression shows clearly the stress which St. Paul laid on the death of Christ, not merely as a great moral spectacle, and so the crowning point of a life of self-renunciation, but as in itself the ordained instrument of salvation" (Lightfoot).

rwp@1Corinthians:1:21 @{Seeing that} (\epeidˆ\). Since (\epei\ and \dˆ\) with explanatory \gar\. {Through its wisdom} (\dia tˆs sophias\). Article here as possessive. The two wisdoms contrasted. {Knew not God} (\ouk egn“\). Failed to know, second aorist (effective) active indicative of \gin“sk“\, solemn dirge of doom on both Greek philosophy and Jewish theology that failed to know God. Has modern philosophy done better? There is today even a godless theology (Humanism). "Now that God's wisdom has reduced the self-wise world to ignorance" (Findlay). {Through the foolishness of the preaching} (\dia tˆs m“rias tou kˆrugmatos\). Perhaps "proclamation" is the idea, for it is not \kˆruxis\, the act of heralding, but \kˆrugma\, the message heralded or the proclamation as in verse 23|. The metaphor is that of the herald proclaiming the approach of the king (Matthew:3:1; strkjv@4:17|). See also \kˆrugma\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:4; strkjv@2Timothy:4:17|. The proclamation of the Cross seemed foolishness to the wiseacres then (and now), but it is consummate wisdom, God's wisdom and good-pleasure (\eudokˆsan\). The foolishness of preaching is not the preaching of foolishness. {To save them that believe} (\s“sai tous pisteuontas\). This is the heart of God's plan of redemption, the proclamation of salvation for all those who trust Jesus Christ on the basis of his death for sin on the Cross. The mystery-religions all offered salvation by initiation and ritual as the Pharisees did by ceremonialism. Christianity reaches the heart directly by trust in Christ as the Saviour. It is God's wisdom.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:1 @{Not with excellency of speech or of wisdom} (\ou kath' huperochˆn logou ˆ sophias\). \Huperochˆ\ is an old word from the verb \huperech“\ (Phillipians:4:7|) and means preeminence, rising above. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1Timothy:2:2| of magistrates. It occurs in inscriptions of Pergamum for persons of position (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 255). Here it means excess or superfluity, "not in excellence of rhetorical display or of philosophical subtlety" (Lightfoot). {The mystery of God} (\to mustˆrion tou theou\). Songs:Aleph A C Copt. like strkjv@2:7|, but B D L P read \marturion\ like strkjv@1:6|. Probably {mystery} is correct. Christ crucified is the mystery of God (Colossians:2:2|). Paul did not hesitate to appropriate this word in common use among the mystery religions, but he puts into it his ideas, not those in current use. It is an old word from \mue“\, to close, to shut, to initiate (Phillipians:4:12|). This mystery was once hidden from the ages (Colossians:1:26|), but is now made plain in Christ (1Corinthians:2:7; strkjv@Romans:16:25f.|). The papyri give many illustrations of the use of the word for secret doctrines known only to the initiated (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_).

rwp@1Corinthians:2:2 @{For I determined not to know anything among you} (\ou gar ekrina ti eidenai en humin\). Literally, "For I did not decide to know anything among you." The negative goes with \ekrina\, not with \ti\. Paul means that he did not think it fit or his business to know anything for his message beyond this "mystery of God." {Save Jesus Christ} (\ei mˆ Iˆsoun Christon\). Both the person and the office (Lightfoot). I had no intent to go beyond him and in particular, {and him crucified} (\kai touton estaur“menon\). Literally, {and this one as crucified} (perfect passive participle). This phase in particular (1:18|) was selected by Paul from the start as the centre of his gospel message. He decided to stick to it even after Athens where he was practically laughed out of court. The Cross added to the \scandalon\ of the Incarnation, but Paul kept to the main track on coming to Corinth.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:6 @{Among the perfect} (\en tois teleiois\). Paul is not here drawing a distinction between exoteric and esoteric wisdom as the Gnostics did for their initiates, but simply to the necessary difference in teaching for babes (3:1|) and adults or grown men (common use of \teleios\ for relative perfection, for adults, as is in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:20; strkjv@Phillipians:3:15; strkjv@Ephesians:4:13; strkjv@Hebrews:5:14|). Some were simply old babes and unable in spite of their years to digest solid spiritual food, "the ample teaching as to the Person of Christ and the eternal purpose of God. Such 'wisdom' we have in the Epistles to the Ephesians and the Colossians especially, and in a less degree in the Epistle to the Romans. This 'wisdom' is discerned in the Gospel of John, as compared with the other Evangelists" (Lightfoot). These imperfect disciples Paul wishes to develop into spiritual maturity. {Of this world} (\tou ai“nos toutou\). This age, more exactly, as in strkjv@1:20|. This wisdom does not belong to the passing age of fleeting things, but to the enduring and eternal (Ellicott). {Which are coming to naught} (\t“n katargoumen“n\). See on ¯1:28|. Present passive participle genitive plural of \katarge“\. The gradual nullification of these "rulers" before the final and certain triumph of the power of Christ in his kingdom.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:15 @{Judgeth all things} (\anakrinei panta\). The spiritual man (\ho pneumatikos\) is qualified to sift, to examine, to decide rightly, because he has the eyes of his heart enlightened (Ephesians:1:18|) and is no longer blinded by the god of this world (2Corinthians:4:4|). There is a great lesson for Christians who know by personal experience the things of the Spirit of God. Men of intellectual gifts who are ignorant of the things of Christ talk learnedly and patronizingly about things of which they are grossly ignorant. The spiritual man is superior to all this false knowledge. {He himself is judged of no man} (\autos de hup' oudenos anakrinetai\). Men will pass judgment on him, but the spiritual man refuses to accept the decision of his ignorant judges. He stands superior to them all as Polycarp did when he preferred to be burnt to saying, "Lord Caesar" in place of "Lord Jesus." He was unwilling to save his earthly life by the worship of Caesar in place of the Lord Jesus. Polycarp was a \pneumatikos\ man.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:2 @{I fed you with milk, not with meat} (\gala humas epotisa, ou br“ma\). Note two accusatives with the verb, \epotisa\, first aorist active indicative of \potiz“\, as with other causative verbs, that of the person and of the thing. In the LXX and the papyri the verb often means to irrigate. \Br“ma\ does not mean meat (flesh) as opposed to bread, but all solid food as in "meats and drinks" (Hebrews:9:7|). It is a zeugma to use \epotisa\ with \br“ma\. Paul did not glory in making his sermons thin and watery. Simplicity does not require lack of ideas or dulness. It is pathetic to think how the preacher has to clip the wings of thought and imagination because the hearers cannot go with him. But nothing hinders great preaching like the dulness caused by sin on the part of auditors who are impatient with the high demands of the gospel.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:6 @{I planted} (\eg“ ephuteusa\). First aorist active indicative of old verb \phuteu“\. This Paul did as Luke tells us in strkjv@Acts:18:1-18|. {Apollos watered} (\Apoll“s epotisen\). Apollos irrigated the church there as is seen in strkjv@Acts:18:24-19:1|. Another aorist tense as in verse 2|. {But God gave the increase} (\alla ho theos ˆuxanen\). Imperfect tense here (active indicative) for the continuous blessing of God both on the work of Paul and Apollos, co-labourers with God in God's field (verse 9|). Reports of revivals sometimes give the glory to the evangelist or to both evangelist and pastor. Paul gives it all to God. He and Apollos cooperated as successive pastors.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:10 @{As a wise masterbuilder} (\h“s sophos architekt“n\). Paul does not shirk his share in the work at Corinth with all the sad outcome there. He absolves Apollos from responsibility for the divisions. He denies that he himself is to blame. In doing so he has to praise himself because the Judaizers who fomented the trouble at Corinth had directly blamed Paul. It is not always wise for a preacher to defend himself against attack, but it is sometimes necessary. Factions in the church were now a fact and Paul went to the bottom of the matter. God gave Paul the grace to do what he did. This is the only New Testament example of the old and common word \architekt“n\, our architect. \Tekt“n\ is from \tikt“\, to beget, and means a begetter, then a worker in wood or stone, a carpenter or mason (Matthew:13:55; strkjv@Mark:6:3|). \Archi-\ is an old inseparable prefix like \archaggelos\ (archangel), \archepiscopos\ (archbishop), \archiereus\ (chiefpriest). \Architekt“n\ occurs in the papyri and inscriptions in an even wider sense than our use of architect, sometimes of the chief engineers. But Paul means to claim primacy as pastor of the church in Corinth as is true of every pastor who is the architect of the whole church life and work. All the workmen (\tektones\, carpenters) work under the direction of the architect (Plato, _Statesman_, 259). "As a wise architect I laid a foundation" (\themelion ethˆka\). Much depends on the wisdom of the architect in laying the foundation. This is the technical phrase (Luke:6:48; strkjv@14:29|), a cognate accusative for \themelion\. The substantive \themelion\ is from the same root \the\ as \ethˆka\ (\ti-thˆmi\). We cannot neatly reproduce the idiom in English. "I placed a placing" does only moderately well. Paul refers directly to the events described by Luke in strkjv@Acts:18:1-18|. The aorist \ethˆka\ is the correct text, not the perfect \tetheika\. {Another buildeth thereon} (\allos epoikodomei\). Note the preposition \epi\ with the verb each time (10,11,12,14|). The successor to Paul did not have to lay a new foundation, but only to go on building on that already laid. It is a pity when the new pastor has to dig up the foundation and start all over again as if an earthquake had come. {Take heed how he buildeth thereon} (\blepet“ p“s epoikodomei\). The carpenters have need of caution how they carry out the plans of the original architect. Successive architects of great cathedrals carry on through centuries the original design. The result becomes the wonder of succeeding generations. There is no room for individual caprice in the superstructure.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:8 @{Already are ye filled?} (\ˆdˆ kekoresmenoi este?\). Perfect passive indicative, state of completion, of \korennumi\, old Greek verb to satiate, to satisfy. The only other example in N.T. is strkjv@Acts:27:38| which see. Paul may refer to strkjv@Deuteronomy:31:20; strkjv@32:15|. But it is keen irony, even sarcasm. Westcott and Hort make it a question and the rest of the sentence also. {Already ye are become rich} (\ˆdˆ eploutˆsate\). Note change to ingressive aorist indicative of \ploute“\, old verb to be rich (cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9|). "The aorists, used instead of perfects, imply indecent haste" (Lightfoot). "They have got a private millennium of their own" (Robertson & Plummer) with all the blessings of the Messianic Kingdom (Luke:22:29f.; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:12; strkjv@2Timothy:2:12|). {Ye have reigned without us} (\ch“ris hˆm“n ebasileusate\). Withering sarcasm. Ye became kings without our company. Some think that Paul as in strkjv@3:21| is purposely employing Stoic phraseology though with his own meanings. If so, it is hardly consciously done. Paul was certainly familiar with much of the literature of his time, but it did not shape his ideas. {I would that ye did reign} (\kai ophelon ge ebasileusate\). More exactly, "And would at least that ye had come to reign (or become kings)." It is an unfulfilled wish about the past expressed by \ophelon\ and the aorist indicative instead of \ei gar\ and the aorist indicative (the ancient idiom). See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1003, for the construction with particle \ophelon\ (an unaugmented second aorist form). {That we also might reign with you} (\hina kai hˆmeis humin sunbasileus“men\). Ironical contrast to \ch“ris hˆm“n ebasileusate\, just before. Associative instrumental case of \humin\ after \sun-\.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:19 @{If the Lord will} (\ean ho kurios thelˆsˆi\). Third-class condition. See James strkjv@4:15; strkjv@Acts:18:21; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:7| for the use of this phrase. It should represent one's constant attitude, though not always to be spoken aloud. {But the power} (\alla tˆn dunamin\). The puffed up Judaizers did a deal of talking in Paul's absence. He will come and will know their real strength. II Corinthians gives many evidences of Paul's sensitiveness to their talk about his inconsistencies and cowardice (in particular chs. 2 Co 1; 2; 10; 11; 12; 13|). He changed his plans to spare them, not from timidity. It will become plain later that Timothy failed on this mission and that Titus succeeded.

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:5:6 @{Not good} (\ou kalon\). Not beautiful, not seemly, in view of this plague spot, this cancer on the church. They needed a surgical operation at once instead of boasting and pride (puffed up). \Kauchˆma\ is the thing gloried in. {A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump} (\mikra zumˆ holon to phurama zumoi\). This proverb occurs _verbatim_ in strkjv@Galatians:5:9|. \Zumˆ\ (leaven) is a late word from \ze“\, to boil, as is \zumo“\, to leaven. The contraction is regular (\-oei=oi\) for the third person singular present indicative. See the parables of Jesus for the pervasive power of leaven (Matthew:13:33|). Some of the members may have argued that one such case did not affect the church as a whole, a specious excuse for negligence that Paul here answers. The emphasis is on the "little" (\mikra\, note position). Lump (\phurama\ from \phura“\, to mix, late word, in the papyri mixing a medical prescription) is a substance mixed with water and kneaded like dough. Compare the pervasive power of germs of disease in the body as they spread through the body.

rwp@1Corinthians:5:11 @{But now I write unto you} (\nun de egrapsa humin\). This is the epistolary aorist referring to this same epistle and not to a previous one as in verse 9|. As it is (when you read it) I did write unto you. {If any man that is named a brother be} (\ean tis adelphos onomazomenos ˆi\). Condition of the third class, a supposable case. {Or a reviler or a drunkard} (\ˆ loidoros ˆ methusos\). \Loidoros\ occurs in Euripides as an adjective and in later writings. In N.T. only here and strkjv@6:10|. For the verb see strkjv@1Corinthians:4:12|. \Methusos\ is an old Greek word for women and even men (cf. \paroinos\, of men, strkjv@1Timothy:3:3|). In N.T. only here and strkjv@6:10|. Cf. strkjv@Romans:13:13|. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 316) gives a list of virtues and vices on counters for Roman games that correspond remarkably with Paul's list of vices here and in strkjv@6:10|. Chrysostom noted that people in his day complained of the bad company given by Paul for revilers and drunkards as being men with more "respectable" vices! {With such a one, no, not to eat} (\t“i toiout“i mˆde sunesthiein\). Associative instrumental case of \toiout“i\ after \sunesthiein\, "not even to eat with such a one." Social contacts with such "a brother" are forbidden

rwp@1Corinthians:7:10 @{To the married} (\tois gegamˆkosin\). Perfect active participle of \game“\, old verb, to marry, and still married as the tense shows. {I give charge} (\paraggell“\). Not mere wish as in verses 7,8|. {Not I, but the Lord} (\ouk eg“ alla ho kurios\). Paul had no commands from Jesus to the unmarried (men or women), but Jesus had spoken to the married (husbands and wives) as in strkjv@Matthew:5:31f.; strkjv@19:3-12; strkjv@Mark:10:9-12; strkjv@Luke:16:18|. The Master had spoken plain words about divorce. Paul reenforces his own inspired command by the command of Jesus. In strkjv@Mark:10:9| we have from Christ: "What therefore God joined together let not man put asunder" (\mˆ chorizet“\). {That the wife depart not from her husband} (\gunaika apo andros mˆ choristhˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive (indirect command after \paraggell“\) of \choriz“\, old verb from adverbial preposition \ch“ris\, separately, apart from, from. Here used of divorce by the wife which, though unusual then, yet did happen as in the case of Salome (sister of Herod the Great) and of Herodias before she married Herod Antipas. Jesus also spoke of it (Mark:10:12|). Now most of the divorces are obtained by women. This passive infinitive is almost reflexive in force according to a constant tendency in the _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 817).

rwp@1Corinthians:7:12 @{But to the rest say I, not the Lord} (\tois de loipois leg“ eg“, ouch ho Kurios\). Paul has no word about marriage from Jesus beyond the problem of divorce. This is no disclaimer of inspiration. He simply means that here he is not quoting a command of Jesus. {An unbelieving wife} (\gunaika apiston\). This is a new problem, the result of work among the Gentiles, that did not arise in the time of Jesus. The form \apiston\ is the same as the masculine because a compound adjective. Paul has to deal with mixed marriages as missionaries do today in heathen lands. The rest (\hoi loipoi\) for Gentiles (Ephesians:2:3|) we have already had in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13; strkjv@5:6| which see. The Christian husband married his wife when he himself was an unbeliever. The word \apistos\ sometimes means unfaithful (Luke:12:46|), but not here (cf. strkjv@John:20:27|). {She is content} (\suneudokei\). Late compound verb to be pleased together with, agree together. In the papyri. {Let him not leave her} (\mˆ aphiet“ autˆn\). Perhaps here and in verses 11,13| \aphiˆmi\ should be translated "put away" like \apolu“\ in strkjv@Mark:10:1|. Some understand \aphiˆmi\ as separation from bed and board, not divorce.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:25 @{I have no commandment of the Lord} (\epitagˆn Kuriou ouk ech“\). A late word from \epitass“\, old Greek verb to enjoin, to give orders to. Paul did have (verse 10|) a command from the Lord as we have in Matthew and Mark. It was quite possible for Paul to know this command of Jesus as he did other sayings of Jesus (Acts:20:35|) even if he had as yet no access to a written gospel or had received no direct revelation on the subject from Jesus (1Corinthians:11:23|). Sayings of Jesus were passed on among the believers. But Paul had no specific word from Jesus on the subject of virgins. They call for special treatment, young unmarried women only Paul means (7:25,28,34,36-38|) and not as in strkjv@Revelation:14:4| (metaphor). It is probable that in the letter (7:1|) the Corinthians had asked about this problem. {But I give my judgment} (\gn“mˆn de did“mi\). About mixed marriages (12-16|) Paul had the command of Jesus concerning divorce to guide him. Here he has nothing from Jesus at all. Songs:he gives no "command," but only "a judgment," a deliberately formed decision from knowledge (2Corinthians:8:10|), not a mere passing fancy. {As one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful} (\h“s ˆleˆmenos hupo kuriou pistos einai\). Perfect passive participle of \elee“\, old verb to receive mercy (\eleos\). \Pistos\ is predicate nominative with infinitive \einai\. This language, so far from being a disclaimer of inspiration, is an express claim to help from the Lord in the forming of this duly considered judgment, which is in no sense a command, but an inspired opinion.

rwp@1Corinthians:8:12 @{Wounding their conscience} (\tuptontes aut“n tˆn suneidˆsin\). Old verb \tupt“\, to smite with fist, staff, whip. The conscience is sensitive to a blow like that, a slap in the face. {Ye sin against Christ} (\eis Christon hamartanete\). That fact they were overlooking. Jesus had said to Saul that he was persecuting him when he persecuted his disciples (Acts:9:5|). One may wonder if Paul knew the words of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:25:40|, "ye did it unto me."

rwp@1Corinthians:9:14 @{Even so did the Lord ordain} (\hout“s kai ho Kurios dietaxen\). Just as God gave orders about the priests in the temple, so did the Lord Jesus give orders for those who preach the gospel to live out of the gospel (\ek tou euaggeliou zˆin\). Evidently Paul was familiar with the words of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:10:10; strkjv@Luke:10:7f.| either in oral or written form. He has made his argument for the minister's salary complete for all time.

rwp@1Corinthians:9:17 @{Of mine own will} (\hek“n\) {--not of mine own will} (\ak“n\). Both common adjectives, but only here in N.T. save \hek“n\, also in strkjv@Romans:8:20|. The argument is not wholly clear. Paul's call was so clear that he certainly did his work {willingly} and so had a reward (see on ¯Matthew:6:1| for \misthos\); but the only {reward} that he had for his willing work (Marcus Dods) was to make the gospel {free of expense} (\adapanon\, verse 18|, rare word, here only in N.T., once in inscription at Priene). This was his \misthos\. It was glorying (\kauchˆma\, to be able to say so as in strkjv@Acts:20:33f.|). {I have a stewardship intrusted to me} (\oikonomian pepisteumai\). Perfect passive indicative with the accusative retained. I have been intrusted with a stewardship and so would go on with my task like any \oikonomos\ (steward) even if \ak“n\ (unwilling).

rwp@1Corinthians:9:26 @{So} (\hout“s\). Both with \trech“\ (run) and \pukteu“\ (fight). {As not uncertainly} (\h“s ouk adˆl“s\). Instead of exhorting them further Paul describes his own conduct as a runner in the race. He explains \hout“s\. \Adˆl“s\ old adverb, only here in N.T. His objective is clear, with Christ as the goal (Phillipians:3:14|). He kept his eye on Christ as Christ watched him. {Fight} (\pukteu“\). Paul changes the metaphor from the runner to the boxer. Old verb (only here in N.T.) from \puktˆs\ (pugilist) and that from \pugmˆ\ (fist). See on ¯Mark:7:3|). {As not beating the air} (\h“s ouk aera der“n\). A boxer did this when practising without an adversary (cf. doing "the daily dozen") and this was called "shadow-fighting" (\skiamachia\). He smote something more solid than air. Probably \ou\ negatives \aera\, though it still occurs with the participle as a strong and positive negative.

rwp@1Corinthians:11:4 @{Having his head covered} (\kata kephalˆs ech“n\). Literally, having a veil (\kalumma\ understood) down from the head (\kephalˆs\ ablative after \kata\ as with \kata\ in strkjv@Mark:5:13; strkjv@Acts:27:14|). It is not certain whether the Jews at this time used the _tallith_, "a four-corned shawl having fringes consisting of eight threads, each knotted five times" (Vincent) as they did later. Virgil (_Aeneid_ iii., 545) says: "And our heads are shrouded before the altar with a Phrygian vestment." The Greeks (both men and women) remained bareheaded in public prayer and this usage Paul commends for the men.

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:12:10 @{Workings of miracles} (\energˆmata duname“n\). Workings of powers. Cf. \energ“n dunameis\ in strkjv@Galatians:3:5; strkjv@Hebrews:2:4| where all three words are used (\sˆmeia\, signs, \terata\, wonders, \dunameis\, powers). Some of the miracles were not healings as the blindness on Elymas the sorcerer. {Prophecy} (\prophˆteia\). Late word from \prophˆtˆs\ and \prophˆmi\, to speak forth. Common in papyri. This gift Paul will praise most (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:14|). Not always prediction, but a speaking forth of God's message under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. {Discernings of spirits} (\diakriseis pneumat“n\). \Diakrisis\ is old word from \diakrin“\ (see strkjv@11:29|) and in N.T. only here; strkjv@Romans:14:1; strkjv@Hebrews:5:14|. A most needed gift to tell whether the gifts were really of the Holy Spirit and supernatural (cf. so-called "gifts" today) or merely strange though natural or even diabolical (1Timothy:4:1; strkjv@1John:4:1f.|). {Divers kinds of tongues} (\genˆ gl“ss“n\). No word for "divers" in the Greek. There has arisen a great deal of confusion concerning the gift of tongues as found in Corinth. They prided themselves chiefly on this gift which had become a source of confusion and disorder. There were varieties (kinds, \genˆ\) in this gift, but the gift was essentially an ecstatic utterance of highly wrought emotion that edified the speaker (14:4|) and was intelligible to God (14:2,28|). It was not always true that the speaker in tongues could make clear what he had said to those who did not know the tongue (14:13|): It was not mere gibberish or jargon like the modern "tongues," but in a real language that could be understood by one familiar with that tongue as was seen on the great Day of Pentecost when people who spoke different languages were present. In Corinth, where no such variety of people existed, it required an interpreter to explain the tongue to those who knew it not. Hence Paul placed this gift lowest of all. It created wonder, but did little real good. This is the error of the Irvingites and others who have tried to reproduce this early gift of the Holy Spirit which was clearly for a special emergency and which was not designed to help spread the gospel among men. See on ¯Acts:2:13-21; strkjv@10:44-46; strkjv@19:6|. {The interpretation of tongues} (\hermˆneia gl“ss“n\). Old word, here only and strkjv@14:26| in N.T., from \hermˆneu“\ from \Hermˆs\ (the god of speech). Cf. on \diermˆneu“\ in strkjv@Luke:24:27; strkjv@Acts:9:36|. In case there was no one present who understood the particular tongue it required a special gift of the Spirit to some one to interpret it if any one was to receive benefit from it.

rwp@1Corinthians:12:18 @{But now} (\nun de\). But as things are, in contrast to that absurdity. {Hath God set} (\ho theos etheto\). Second aorist middle indicative. God did it and of himself. {Even as it pleased him} (\kath“s ˆthelˆsen\). Why challenge God's will? Cf. strkjv@Romans:9:20|.

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:14:11 @{The meaning of the voice} (\tˆn dunamin tˆs ph“nˆs\). The power (force) of the voice. {A barbarian} (\barbaros\). Jargon, \bar-bar\. The Egyptians called all \barbarous\ who did not speak their tongue. The Greeks followed suit for all ignorant of Greek language and culture. They divided mankind into Hellenes and Barbarians. {Unto me} (\en emoi\). In my case, almost like a dative.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:2 @{In what words I preached it unto you} (\tini logoi euˆggelisamˆn humin\). Almost certainly \tis\ (\tini logoi\, locative or instrumental, in or with) here is used like the relative \hos\ as is common in papyri (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 93f.; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 737f.). Even so it is not clear whether the clause depends on \gn“riz“\ like the other relatives, but most likely so. {If we hold it fast} (\ei katechete\). Condition of first class. Paul assumes that they are holding it fast. {Except ye believed in vain} (\ektos ei mˆ eikˆi episteusate\). For \ektos ei mˆ\ see on ¯14:5|. Condition of first class, unless in fact ye did believe to no purpose (\eikˆi\, old adverb, only in Paul in N.T.). Paul holds this peril over them in their temptation to deny the resurrection.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:12 @{Is preached} (\kˆrussetai\). Personal use of the verb, Christ is preached. {How say some among you?} (\p“s legousin en humin tines?\). The question springs naturally from the proof of the fact of the resurrection of Christ (verses 1-11|) and the continual preaching which Paul here assumes by condition of the first class (\ei--kˆrussetai\). There were sceptics in Corinth, possibly in the church, who denied the resurrection of dead people just as some men today deny that miracles happen or ever did happen. Paul's answer is the resurrection of Christ as a fact. It all turns on this fact.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:17 @{Vain} (\mataia\). Old word from adverb \matˆn\ (Matthew:15:9|), devoid of truth, a lie. Stronger word than \kenon\ in verse 14|. {Ye are yet in your sins} (\eti este en tais hamartiais hum“n\). Because the death of Christ has no atoning value if he did not rise from the dead. In that case he was only a man like other men and did not die for our sins (verse 3|).

rwp@1Corinthians:15:18 @{Then also} (\ara kai\). Inevitable inference. {Have perished} (\ap“lonto\). Did perish. Second aorist middle indicative of \apollumi\, to destroy, middle, to perish (delivered up to eternal misery). Cf. strkjv@8:11|.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:27 @{He put} (\hupetaxen\). First aorist active of \hupotass“\, to subject. Supply God (\theos\) as subject (Psalms:8:7|). See strkjv@Hebrews:2:5-9| for similar use. Cf. strkjv@Psalms:8|. {But when he saith} (\hotan de eipˆi\). Here Christ must be supplied as the subject if the reference is to his future and final triumph. The syntax more naturally calls for God as the subject as before. Either way makes sense. But there is no need to take \eipˆi\ (second aorist active subjunctive) as _a futurum exactum_, merely "whenever he shall say." {Are put in subjection} (\hupotetaktai\). Perfect passive indicative, state of completion, final triumph. {It is evident that} (\dˆlon hoti\). Supply \estin\ (is) before \hoti\. {He is excepted who did subject} (\ektos tou hupotaxantos\). "Except the one (God) who did subject (articular aorist active participle) the all things to him (Christ)."

rwp@1Corinthians:16:6 @{It may be} (\tuchon\). Neuter accusative of second aorist active participle of \tugchan“\ used as an adverb (in Plato and Xenophon, but nowhere else in N.T.). {Or even winter} (\ˆ kai paracheimas“\). Future active of late verb \paracheimaz“\ (\cheim“n\, winter). See on ¯Acts:27:12; strkjv@28:11; strkjv@Titus:3:12|. He did stay in Corinth for three months (Acts:20:3|), probably the coming winter. {Whithersoever I go} (\hou ean poreu“mai\). Indefinite local clause with subjunctive. As a matter of fact, Paul had to flee from a conspiracy in Corinth (Acts:20:3|).

rwp@1Corinthians:16:7 @{Now by the way} (\arti en parod“i\). Like our "by the way" (\parodos\), incidentally. {If the Lord permit} (\ean ho Kurios epitrepsˆi\). Condition of the third class. Paul did everything \en Kuri“i\ (Cf. strkjv@Acts:18:21|).

rwp@1Corinthians:16:15 @{Ye know} (\oidate\). _Koin‚_ form for second perfect indicative used as present of \hora“\. Parenthetic clause through rest of the verse. Stephanas is mentioned also in strkjv@1:16| and in strkjv@16:17|. For \aparchˆ\ see on ¯15:20,23|. {They have set themselves} (\etaxan heautous\). Remarkable statement worthy of attention today. This noble family appointed themselves to be ministers to the saints that needed it (the poor and needy). Personal work for Christ is still the only way to win the world for Christ, voluntary personal work. If all Christians did it!

rwp@1Corinthians:16:18 @{For they refreshed my spirit and yours} (\anepausan gar to emon pneuma kai to hum“n\). They did both. The very verb used by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:11:28| for the refreshment offered by him to those who come to him, fellowship with Jesus, and here fellowship with each other.

rwp@Info_1John @ GNOSTICISM The Epistle is not a polemic primarily, but a letter for the edification of the readers in the truth and the life in Christ. And yet the errors of the Gnostics are constantly before John's mind. The leaders had gone out from among the true Christians, but there was an atmosphere of sympathy that constituted a subtle danger. There are only two passages (1John:2:18f.; strkjv@4:1-6|) in which the false teachers are specifically denounced, but "this unethical intellectualism" (Robert Law) with its dash of Greek culture and Oriental mysticism and licentiousness gave a curious attraction for many who did not know how to think clearly. John, like Paul in Colossians, Ephesians, and the Pastoral Epistles, foresaw this dire peril to Christianity. In the second century it gave pure Christianity a gigantic struggle. "The great Gnostics were the first Christian philosophers" (Robert Law, _The Tests of Life_, p. 27) and threatened to undermine the Gospel message by "deifying the devil" (ib., p. 31) along with dethroning Christ. There were two kinds of Gnostics, both agreeing in the essential evil of matter. Both had trouble with the Person of Christ. The Docetic Gnostics denied the actual humanity of Christ, the Cerinthian Gnostics distinguished between the man Jesus and the \aeon\ Christ that came on him at his baptism and left him on the Cross. Some practised asceticism, some licentiousness. John opposes both classes in his Epistles. They claimed superior knowledge (\gn“sis\) and so were called Gnostics (\Gn“stikoi\). Nine times John gives tests for knowing the truth and uses the verb \gin“sk“\ (know) each time (1John:2:3,5; strkjv@3:16,19,24; strkjv@4:2,6,13; strkjv@5:2|). Some of the leaders he calls antichrists. There are stories about John's dread of Cerinthus and his unwillingness to be seen in the same public bath with him. The Apostle of love, as he is, is a real son of thunder when Gnosticism shows its head. Westcott thinks that the Fourth Gospel was written to prove the deity of Christ, assuming his humanity, while I John was written to prove the humanity of Christ, assuming his deity. Certainly both ideas appear in both books.

rwp@1John:2:8 @{Again a new commandment} (\palin entolˆn kainˆn\). Paradox, but truth. Old in teaching (as old as the story of Cain and Abel, strkjv@3:11f.), but new in practice. For this use of \palin\ for a new turn see strkjv@John:16:28|. To walk as Christ walked is to put in practice the old commandment and so make it new (ever new and fresh), as love is as old as man and fresh in every new experience. {True in him and in you} (\alˆthes en aut“i kai en humin\). This newness is shown supremely in Christ and in disciples when they walk as Jesus did (verse 6|). {Because} (\hoti\). Explanation of the paradox. {Is passing away} (\paragetai\). Present middle indicative of \parag“\, old verb, to lead by, to go by (intransitive), as in strkjv@Matthew:20:30|. Night does pass by even if slowly. See this verb in verse 17| of the world passing by like a procession. {True} (\alˆthinon\). Genuine, reliable, no false flicker. {Already shineth} (\ˆdˆ phainei\). Linear present active, "is already shining" and the darkness is already passing by. Dawn is here. Is John thinking of the second coming of Christ or of the victory of truth over error, of light over darkness (cf. strkjv@John:1:5-9|), the slow but sure victory of Christ over Satan as shown in the Apocalypse? See strkjv@1:5|.

rwp@1John:2:22 @{The liar} (\ho pseustˆs\). The liar (with the article) _par excellence_. Rhetorical question to sharpen the point made already about lying in strkjv@1:6,10; strkjv@2:4,21|. See strkjv@5:5| for a like rhetorical question. {But} (\ei mˆ\). Except, if not. {That denieth that Jesus is the Christ} (\ho arnoumenos hoti Iˆsous ouk estin ho Christos\). Common Greek idiom for \ouk\ to appear after \arneomai\ like redundant \mˆ\ in strkjv@Luke:20:27; strkjv@Hebrews:12:19|. The old Latin retains _non_ here as old English did (Shakespeare, _Comedy of Errors_ IV. ii. 7, "He denied you had in him no right"). The Cerinthian Gnostics denied the identity of the man Jesus and Christ (an \aeon\, they held) like the modern Jesus or Christ controversy. {This is the antichrist} (\houtos estin ho antichristos\). The one just mentioned, Cerinthus himself in particular. {Even he that denieth the Father and the Son} (\ho arnoumenos ton patera kai ton huion\). This is the inevitable logic of such a rejection of the Son of God. Jesus had himself said this very same thing (John:5:23f.|).

rwp@1John:2:26 @{Concerning them that would lead you astray} (\peri t“n plan“nt“n humas\). "Concerning those that are trying to lead you astray" (conative use of the present active articular participle of \plana“\. See strkjv@1:8| for this verb. John is doing his part to rescue the sheep from the wolves, as Paul did (Acts:20:29|).

rwp@1John:4:8 @{He that loveth not} (\ho mˆ agap“n\). Present active articular participle of \agapa“\ "keeps on not loving." {Knoweth not God} (\ouk egn“ ton theon\). Timeless aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\, has no acquaintance with God, never did get acquainted with him. {God is love} (\ho theos agapˆ estin\). Anarthrous predicate, not \hˆ agapˆ\. John does not say that love is God, but only that God is love. The two terms are not interchangeable. God is also light (1:5|) and spirit (John:4:24|).

rwp@1John:5:7 @{For there are three who bear witness} (\hoti treis eisin hoi marturountes\). At this point the Latin Vulgate gives the words in the Textus Receptus, found in no Greek MS. save two late cursives (162 in the Vatican Library of the fifteenth century, 34 of the sixteenth century in Trinity College, Dublin). Jerome did not have it. Cyprian applies the language of the Trinity and Priscillian has it. Erasmus did not have it in his first edition, but rashly offered to insert it if a single Greek MS. had it and 34 was produced with the insertion, as if made to order. The spurious addition is: \en t“i ouran“i ho patˆr, ho logos kai to hagion pneuma kai houtoi hoi treis hen eisin kai treis eisin hoi marturountes en tˆi gˆi\ (in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth). The last clause belongs to verse 8|. The fact and the doctrine of the Trinity do not depend on this spurious addition. Some Latin scribe caught up Cyprian's exegesis and wrote it on the margin of his text, and so it got into the Vulgate and finally into the Textus Receptus by the stupidity of Erasmus.

rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER ABOUT A.D. 65 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION THE AUTHOR The Epistle is not anonymous, but claims to be written by "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ" (1Peter:1:1|), that is Cephas (Simon Peter). If this is not true, then the book is pseudonymous by a late writer who assumed Peter's name, as in the so-called Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, etc. "There is no book in the New Testament which has earlier, better, or stronger attestation, though Irenaeus is the first to quote it by name" (Bigg). Eusebius (_H.E_. iii. 25.2) places it among the acknowledged books, those accepted with no doubt at all. We here assume that Simon Peter wrote this Epistle or at any rate dictated it by an amanuensis, as Paul did in Romans (Romans:16:22|). Bigg suggests Silvanus (Silas) as the amanuensis or interpreter (1Peter:5:12|), the obvious meaning of the language (\dia\, through). He may also have been the bearer of the Epistle. It happens that we know more of Peter's life than of any of the twelve apostles because of his prominence in the Gospels and in the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. In the _Student's Chronological New Testament_ I have given a full list of the passages in the Gospels where Peter appears with any clearness and the material is rich and abundant. The account in Acts is briefer, though Peter is the outstanding man in the first five chapters during his career in Jerusalem. After the conversion of Saul he begins to work outside of Jerusalem and after escaping death at the hands of Herod Agrippa I (Acts:12:3ff.|) he left for a while, but is back in Jerusalem at the Conference called by Paul and Barnabas (Acts:15:6-14; Gal strkjv@2:1-10|). After that we have no more about him in Acts, though he reappears in Antioch and is rebuked by Paul for cowardice because of the Judaizers (Galatians:2:11-21). He travelled for the Gospel among the Jews of the Dispersion (Galatians:2:9|) with his wife (1Corinthians:9:5|), and went to Asia Minor (1Peter:1:1|) and as far as Babylon or Rome (1Peter:5:13|). Besides Silvanus he had John Mark with him also (1Peter:5:13|), who was said by the early Christian writers to have been Peter's "interpreter" in his preaching, since Peter was not expert in the Greek (Acts:4:13|), and who also wrote his Gospel under the inspiration of Peter's preaching. We are not able to follow clearly the close of his life or to tell precisely the time of his death. He was apparently put to death in A.D. 67 or 68, but some think that he was executed in Rome in A.D. 64.

rwp@1Peter:1:2 @{According to} (\kata\). Probably to be connected with \eklektois\ rather than with \apostolos\ in spite of a rather loose arrangement of words and the absence of articles in verses 1,2|. {The foreknowledge} (\progn“sin\). Late substantive (Plutarch, Lucian, papyri) from \progin“sk“\ (1:20|), to know beforehand, only twice in N.T. (here and strkjv@Acts:2:23| in Peter's sermon). In this Epistle Peter often uses substantives rather than verbs (cf. strkjv@Romans:8:29|). {Of God the Father} (\theou patros\). Anarthous again and genitive case. See \patˆr\ applied to God also in strkjv@1:3,17| as often by Paul (Romans:1:7|, etc.). Peter here presents the Trinity (God the Father, the Spirit, Jesus Christ). {In sanctification of the Spirit} (\en hagiasm“i pneumatos\). Clearly the Holy Spirit, though anarthrous like \theou patros\. Late word from \hagiaz“\, to render holy (\hagios\), to consecrate, as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:7|. The subjective genitive here, sanctification wrought by the Spirit as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:13| (where the Trinity mentioned as here). {Unto obedience} (\eis hupakoˆn\). Obedience (from \hupakou“\, to hear under, to hearken) to the Lord Jesus as in strkjv@1:22| "to the truth," result of "the sanctification." {And sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ} (\rantismon haimatos Iˆsou Christou\). Late substantive from \rantiz“\, to sprinkle (Hebrews:9:13|), a word used in the LXX of the sacrifices (Numbers:19:9,13,20|, etc.), but not in any non-biblical source so far as known, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:12:24| (of the sprinkling of blood). Reference to the death of Christ on the Cross and to the ratification of the New Covenant by the blood of Christ as given in strkjv@Hebrews:9:19f.; strkjv@12:24| with allusion to strkjv@Exodus:24:3-8|. Paul does not mention this ritual use of the blood of Christ, but Jesus does (Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Mark:14:24|). Hence it is not surprising to find the use of it by Peter and the author of Hebrews. Hort suggests that Peter may also have an ulterior reference to the blood of the martyrs as in strkjv@Revelation:7:14f.; strkjv@12:11|, but only as illustration of what Jesus did for us, not as having any value. The whole Epistle is a commentary upon \progn“sis theou, hagiasmos pneumatos, haima Christou\ (Bigg). Peter is not ashamed of the blood of Christ. {Be multiplied} (\plˆthuntheiˆ\). First aorist passive optative (volitive) of \plˆthun“\, old verb (from \plˆthus\, fulness), in a wish. Songs:in strkjv@2Peter:1:2; strkjv@Jude:1:2|, but nowhere else in N.T. salutations. Grace and peace (\charis kai eirˆnˆ\) occur together in strkjv@2Peter:1:2|, in strkjv@2John:1:2| (with \eleos\), and in all Paul's Epistles (with \eleos\ added in I and II Timothy).

rwp@1Peter:1:11 @{Searching} (\eraun“ntes\). Present active participle of \erauna“\, late form for older \ereuna“\ (both in the papyri), uncompounded verb (John:7:52|), the compound occurring in verse 10| above. {What time or what manner of time} (\eis tina ˆ poion kairon\). Proper sense of \poios\ (qualitative interrogative) kept here as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:35, strkjv@Romans:3:27|, though it is losing its distinctive sense from \tis\ (Acts:23:34|). The prophets knew what they prophesied, but not at what time the Messianic prophecies would be fulfilled. {The Spirit of Christ which was in them} (\to en autois pneuma Christou\). Peter definitely asserts here that the Spirit of Jesus Christ (the Messiah) was in the Old Testament prophets, the Holy Spirit called the Spirit of Christ and the Spirit of God (Romans:8:9|), who spoke to the prophets as he would speak to the apostles (John:16:14|). {Did point unto} (\edˆlou\). Imperfect active of \dˆlo“\, to make plain, "did keep on pointing to," though they did not clearly perceive the time. {When it testified beforehand} (\promarturomenon\). Present middle participle of \promarturomai\, a late compound unknown elsewhere save in a writer of the fourteenth century (Theodorus Mech.) and now in a papyrus of the eighth. It is neuter here because \pneuma\ is neuter, but this grammatical gender should not be retained as "it" in English, but should be rendered "he" (and so as to strkjv@Acts:8:15|). Here we have predictive prophecy concerning the Messiah, though some modern critics fail to find predictions of the Messiah in the Old Testament. {The sufferings of Christ} (\ta eis Christon pathˆmata\). "The sufferings for (destined for) Christ" like the use of \eis\ in verse 10| (\eis humas\ for you). {The glories that should follow them} (\tas meta tauta doxas\). "The after these things (sufferings) glories." The plural of \doxa\ is rare, but occurs in strkjv@Exodus:15:11; strkjv@Hosea:9:11|. The glories of Christ followed the sufferings as in strkjv@4:13; strkjv@5:1,6|.

rwp@1Peter:2:1 @{Putting away therefore} (\apothemenoi oun\). Second aorist middle participle of \apotithˆmi\, old and common verb, in metaphorical sense either to cleanse defilements (3:21; strkjv@James:1:21|) or to put off clothing (Romans:13:12; strkjv@Colossians:3:5ff.; strkjv@Ephesians:4:22|). Either sense suits here. Therefore (\oun\) because of the new birth (1:23|) and the new life demanded. {Wickedness} (\kakian\). This old word, from \kakos\ (evil), in the ancients meant vice of any kind and note \pƒsan\ (all) here. {Guile} (\dolon\). Old word (from \del“\, to catch with bait), deceit. {Hypocrisies} (\hupokriseis\). Singular (\hupokrisin\) in the best MSS. See strkjv@1:22| (\anupokriton\) and strkjv@Mark:7:6f.| for Christ's denunciation of hypocrites which the disciples did not understand, including Peter (Matthew:15:16ff.|). {Envies} (\phthonous\). Genuine here, not \phonous\ (murders), as B has it. For the word see strkjv@Matthew:27:18|. {Evil speakings} (\katalalias\). Late word (from \katalalos\, defamer, strkjv@Romans:1:30|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:12:20|. "Backbitings." For verb see strkjv@2:12|.

rwp@1Peter:2:12 @{Seemly} (\kalˆn\). Predicate adjective with \anastrophˆn\, for which see strkjv@1:15,18|. The Gentiles are on the watch for slips in moral conduct by the Christians. {That} (\hina\). Final conjunction with \doxas“sin\ (they may glorify, first aorist active subjunctive of \doxaz“\, the purpose of the Christians about the Gentiles. {Wherein} (\en h“i\). "In what thing." {As evil-doers} (\h“s kakopoi“n\). As they did and do, old word (from \kakon\ and \poie“\, strkjv@John:18:30|), in N.T. only here and verse 14| in correct text. Heathen talk against us (\katalalousin\) gleefully. {By your good works} (\ek t“n kal“n erg“n\). "Out of (as a result of) your good (beautiful) deeds." {Which they behold} (\epopteuontes\). Present active participle of \epopteu“\, old verb (from, \epoptˆs\, overseer, spectator, strkjv@2Peter:1:16|), to be an overseer, to view carefully, in N.T. only here and strkjv@3:2|. {In the day of visitation} (\en hˆmerƒi episkopˆs\). From strkjv@Isaiah:10:33|. Cf. its use in strkjv@Luke:19:44|, which see for the word \episkopˆ\ (from \episkope“\, to inspect (Hebrews:12:15|). Clear echo here of strkjv@Matthew:5:16|.

rwp@1Peter:2:21 @{For hereunto were ye called} (\eis touto gar eklˆthˆte\). First aorist indicative of \kale“\, to call. They were called to suffer without flinching (Hort), if need be. {Because} (\hoti\). The fact that Christ suffered (\epathen\) lifts their suffering to a new plane. {Leaving you an example} (\humin hupolimpan“n hupogrammon\). Present active participle of the late Ionic verb \hupolimpan“\ (in the papyri) for the common \hupoleip“\, to leave behind (under), here only in N.T. \Hupogrammos\ is also a late and rare word (from \hupograph“\, to write under), a writing-copy for one to imitate, in II Macc. strkjv@2:28; Philo, Clement of Rome, here only in N.T. Clement of Alex. (_Strom_. V. 8. 49) uses it of the copy-head at the top of a child's exercise book for the child to imitate, including all the letters of the alphabet. The papyri give many examples of \hupographˆ\ and \hupograph“\ in the sense of copying a letter. {That ye should follow his steps} (\hina epakolouthˆsˆte tois ichnesin autou\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \epakolouthe“\, old verb, to follow closely upon, with the associative-instrumental (1Timothy:5:10,24|) or the locative here. \Ichnos\ is old word (from \hik“\, to go), tracks, footprints, in N.T. only here, strkjv@2Corinthians:12:18; strkjv@Romans:4:12|. Peter does not mean that Christ suffered only as an example (1:18|), but he did leave us his example for our copying (1John:2:6|).

rwp@1Peter:2:22 @{Who did no sin} (\hos hamartian ouk epoiˆsen\). Quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:53:9|. He has already expressed the sinlessness of Christ in strkjv@1:19|. The next clause is a combination of strkjv@Isaiah:53:9; strkjv@Zephaniah:3:13|. For "guile" (\dolos\) see verse 1|. {Was found} (\heurethˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \heurisk“\. Christ's guilelessness stood the test of scrutiny (Vincent), as Peter knew (Matthew:26:60; strkjv@John:18:38; strkjv@19:4,6|).

rwp@1Peter:3:18 @{Because Christ also died} (\hoti kai Christos apethanen\). Songs:the best MSS.; later ones \epathen\ (suffered). The example of Christ should stir us to patient endurance. {For sins} (\peri hamarti“n\). "Concerning sins" (not his, but ours, strkjv@1:18|). \Peri\ (around, concerning) with \hamartias\ in the regular phrase for the sin offering (Leviticus:5:7; strkjv@6:30|), though \huper hamartias\ does occur (Ezekiel:43:25|). Songs:in the N.T. we find both \peri hamarti“n\ (Hebrews:5:3|) and \huper hamarti“n\ (Hebrews:5:1|). {Once} (\hapax\). Once for all (Hebrews:9:28|), not once upon a time (\pote\). {The righteous for the unrighteous} (\dikaios huper adik“n\). Literally, "just for unjust" (no articles). See strkjv@1Peter:2:19| for the sinlessness of Christ as the one perfect offering for sin. This is what gives Christ's blood value. He has no sin himself. Some men today fail to perceive this point. {That he might bring us to God} (\hina hˆmƒs prosagagˆi t“i the“i\). Purpose clause with \hina\, with second aorist active subjunctive of \prosag“\ and the dative case \t“i the“i\. The MSS. vary between \hˆmƒs\ (us) and \humƒs\ (you). The verb \prosag“\ means to lead or bring to (Matthew:18:24|), to approach God (cf. \prosag“gˆn\ in strkjv@Ephesians:2:18|), to present us to God on the basis of his atoning death for us, which has opened the way (Romans:3:25; strkjv@Hebrews:10:19f|.) {Being put to death in the flesh} (\thanat“theis men sarki\). First aorist passive participle of \thanato“\, old verb (from \thanatos\ death), to put to death. \Sarki\ is locative case of \sarx\. {But quickened in the spirit} (\z“opoiˆtheis de pneumati\). First aorist passive participle of \z“opoie“\ rare (Aristotle) verb (from \z“opoios\ making alive), to make alive. The participles are not antecedent to \apethanen\, but simultaneous with it. There is no such construction as the participle of subsequent action. The spirit of Christ did not die when his flesh did, but "was endued with new and greater powers of life" (Thayer). See strkjv@1Corinthians:15:22| for the use of the verb for the resurrection of the body. But the use of the word \pneumati\ (locative case) in contrast with \sarki\ starts Peter's mind off in a long comparison by way of illustration that runs from verses 19-22|. The following verses have caused more controversy than anything in the Epistle.

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:4:6 @{Was the gospel preached} (\euˆggelisthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \euaggeliz“\. Impersonal use. {Even to the dead} (\kai nekrois\). Does Peter here mean preached to men after they are dead or to men once alive but dead now or when the judgment comes? There are those (Augustine, Luther, etc.) who take "dead" here in the spiritual sense (dead in trespasses and sins as in strkjv@Colossians:2:13; strkjv@Ephesians:2:1|), but consider it "impossible" for Peter to use the same word in two senses so close together; but Jesus did it in the same sentence, as in the case of \psuchˆ\ (life) in strkjv@Matthew:16:25|. Bigg takes it to mean that all men who did not hear the gospel message in this life will hear it in the next before the final judgment. {That they might be judged} (\hina krith“sin men\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \krin“\, to judge, whereas \z“sin de\ (by contrast) is the present active subjunctive of \za“\, to live. There is contrast also between \kata anthr“pous\ (according to men) and \kata theon\ (according to God).

rwp@1Peter:4:7 @{But the end of all things is at hand} (\pant“n de to telos ˆggiken\). Perfect active indicative of \eggiz“\, to draw near, common late verb (from \eggus\), same form used by the Baptist of the Messiah's arrival (Matthew:3:2|) and by James in strkjv@5:8| (of the second coming). How near Peter does not say, but he urges readiness (1:5f.; strkjv@4:6|) as Jesus did (Mark:14:38|) and Paul (1Thessalonians:5:6|), though it is drawing nearer all the time (Romans:12:11|), but not at once (2Thessalonians:2:2|). {Be ye therefore of sound mind} (\s“phronˆsate oun\). In view of the coming of Christ. First aorist (ingressive) active imperative of \s“phrone“\ (\s“s\, sound, \phrˆn\, mind) as in strkjv@Mark:5:15|. {Be sober unto prayer} (\nˆpsate eis proseuchas\). First aorist (ingressive of \nˆph“\ (see strkjv@1:13|) and plural \proseuchas\, (prayers). Cf. strkjv@Ephesians:6:18|.

rwp@1Peter:5:5 @{Be subject} (\hopotagˆte\). Second aorist passive imperative of \hupotass“\. {Unto the elder} (\presbuterois\). Dative case. Here the antithesis between younger and elder shows that the word refers to age, not to office as in strkjv@5:1|. See a like change in meaning in strkjv@1Timothy:5:1,17|. {All} (\pantes\). All ages, sexes, classes. {Gird yourselves with humility} (\tˆn tapeinophrosunˆn egkomb“sasthe\). First aorist middle imperative of \egkomboomai\, late and rare verb (in Apollodorus, fourth cent. B.C.), here only in N.T., from \en\ and \kombos\ (knot, like the knot of a girdle). \Egkomb“ma\ was the white scarf or apron of slaves. It is quite probable that Peter here is thinking of what Jesus did (John:13:4ff.|) when he girded himself with a towel and taught the disciples, Peter in particular (John:13:9ff.|), the lesson of humility (John:13:15|). Peter had at last learned the lesson (John:21:15-19|). {The proud} (\huperˆphanois\). Dative plural of \huperˆphanos\ (James:4:6; strkjv@Romans:1:30|) after \antitassetai\ (present middle indicative of \antitass“\ as in strkjv@James:4:6| (quoted there as here from strkjv@Proverbs:3:34|).

rwp@1Peter:5:12 @{By Silvanus} (\dia Silouanou\). Probably this postscript (12-14|) is in Peter's own handwriting, as Paul did (2Thessalonians:3:17f.; strkjv@Galatians:6:11-18|). If so, Silvanus (Silas) was the amanuensis and the bearer of the Epistle. {As I account him} (\h“s logizomai\). Peter uses Paul's phrase (1Corinthians:4:1; strkjv@Romans:8:18|) in giving approval to Paul's former companion (Acts:15:40|). {I have written} (\egrapsa\). Epistolary aorist applying to this Epistle as in strkjv@1Corinthians:5:11| (not strkjv@1Corinthians:5:9|); strkjv@1Corinthians:9:15; strkjv@Galatians:6:11; strkjv@Romans:15:15; strkjv@Philemon:1:19,21|. {Briefly} (\di' olig“n\). "By few words," as Peter looked at it, certainly not a long letter in fact. Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:13:22|. {Testifying} (\epimartur“n\). Present active participle of \epimarture“\, to bear witness to, old compound, here alone in N.T., though the double compound \sunepimarture“\ in strkjv@Hebrews:2:4|. {That this is the true grace of God} (\tautˆn einai alˆthˆ charin tou theou\). Infinitive \einai\ in indirect assertion and accusative of general reference (\tautˆn\) and predicate accusative \charin\. Peter includes the whole of the Epistle by God's grace (1:10|) and obedience to the truth (John:1:17; Gal strkjv@2:5; strkjv@Colossians:1:6|). {Stand ye fast therein} (\eis hˆn stˆte\). "In which (grace) take your stand" (ingressive aorist active imperative of \histˆmi\).

rwp@Info_1Thessalonians @ FIRST THESSALONIANS FROM CORINTH A.D. 50 TO 51 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION We cannot say that this is Paul's first letter to a church, for in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2| he speaks of some as palming off letters as his and in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:17| he says that he appends his own signature to every letter after dictating it to an amanuensis (Romans:16:22|). We know of one lost letter (1Corinthians:5:11|) and perhaps another (2Corinthians:2:3|). But this is the earliest one that has come down to us and it may even be the earliest New Testament book, unless the Epistle of James antedates it or even Mark's Gospel. We know, as already shown, that Paul was in Corinth and that Timothy and Silas had just arrived from Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:3:6; strkjv@Acts:18:5|). They had brought supplies from the Macedonian churches to supply Paul's need (2Corinthians:11:9|), as the church in Philippi did once and again while Paul was in Thessalonica (Phillipians:4:15f.|). Before Timothy and Silas came to Corinth Paul had to work steadily at his trade as tent-maker with Aquila and Priscilla (Acts:18:3|) and could only preach in the synagogue on sabbaths, but the rich stores from Macedonia released his hands and "Paul devoted himself to the word" (\suneicheto t“i log“i Paulos\). He gave himself wholly to preaching now. But Timothy and Silas brought news of serious trouble in the church in Thessalonica. Some of the disciples there had misunderstood Paul's preaching about the second coming of Christ and had quit work and were making a decided disturbance on the subject. Undoubtedly Paul had touched upon eschatological matters while in Thessalonica. The Jewish leaders at Thessalonica charged it against Paul and Silas to the politarchs that they had preached another king, Jesus, in place of Caesar. Paul had preached Jesus as King of the spiritual kingdom which the Jews misrepresented to the politarchs as treason against Caesar as the Sanhedrin had done to Pilate about Jesus. Clearly Paul had said also that Jesus was going to come again according to his own promise before his ascension. Some asserted that Paul said Jesus was going to come right away and drew their own inferences for idleness and fanaticism as some do today. Strange as it may seem, there are scholars today who say that Paul did believe and say that Jesus was going to come back right away. They say this in spite of strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1f.| where Paul denies having ever said it. Undoubtedly Paul hoped for the early return of Jesus as most of the early Christians did, but that is a very different thing from setting a time for his coming. It is open to us all to hope for the speedy return of Christ, but times and seasons are with God and not with us. It is not open to us to excuse our negligence and idleness as Christians because of such a hope. That hope should serve as a spur to increased activity for Christ in order to hasten his coming. Songs:Paul writes this group of Epistles to correct gross misapprehension and misrepresentation of his preaching about last things (eschatology). It is a rare preacher who has never been misunderstood or misrepresented.

rwp@Info_1Thessalonians @ There are excellent commentaries on the Thessalonian Epistles. On the Greek text one may note those by Dibelius, _Handbuch zum N.T. Zweite Auflage_; Dobschutz, _Meyer-Kommentar_; Ellicott, _Crit. and Grammat. Comm._; Findlay, _Cambridge Gk. Test._; Frame, _Intern. Critical Comm._; Lightfoot, _Notes on Epistles of Paul_; Mayer, _Die Thessalonischerbriefe_; Milligan, _St. Paul's Epistles to the Thess._; Moffatt, _Expos. Gk. Test._; Plummer, _First Thess._, _Second Thess._; Wohlenberg, _Zahn-Komm. 2 aufl._. On the English text note those by Adeney, _New Century Bible_; Denney, _Expos. Bible_; Findlay, _Cambridge Bible_; Hutchinson, _Lectures on I & II Thess._. strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:1 @{Paul, and Silvanus, and Timothy} (\Paulos kai Silouanos kai Timotheos\). Nominative absolute as customary in letters. Paul associates with himself Silvanus (Silas of Acts, spelled \Silbanos\ in D and the papyri), a Jew and Roman citizen, and Timothy, son of Jewish mother and Greek father, one of Paul's converts at Lystra on the first tour. They had both been with Paul at Thessalonica, though Timothy is not mentioned by Luke in Acts in Macedonia till Beroea (Acts:17:14f.|). Timothy had joined Paul in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1f.|), had been sent back to Thessalonica, and with Silas had rejoined Paul in Corinth (1Thessalonians:3:5; strkjv@Acts:18:5, strkjv@2Corinthians:1:19|). Silas is the elder and is mentioned first, but neither is in any sense the author of the Epistle any more than Sosthenes is co-author of I Corinthians or Timothy of II Corinthians, though Paul may sometimes have them in mind when he uses "we" in the Epistle. Paul does not here call himself "apostle" as in the later Epistles, perhaps because his position has not been so vigorously attacked as it was later. Ellicott sees in the absence of the word here a mark of the affectionate relations existing between Paul and the Thessalonians. {Unto the church of the Thessalonians} (\tˆi ekklˆsiƒi Thessalonike“n\). The dative case in address. Note absence of the article with \Thessalonike“n\ because a proper name and so definite without it. This is the common use of \ekklˆsia\ for a local body (church). The word originally meant "assembly" as in strkjv@Acts:19:39|, but it came to mean an organization for worship whether assembled or unassembled (cf. strkjv@Acts:8:3|). The only superscription in the oldest Greek manuscripts (Aleph B A) is \Pros Thessalonikeis A\ ({To the Thessalonians First}). But probably Paul wrote no superscription and certainly he would not write A to it before he had written II Thessalonians (B). His signature at the close was the proof of genuineness (2Thessalonians:3:17|) against all spurious claimants (2Thessalonians:2:2|). Unfortunately the brittle papyrus on which he wrote easily perished outside of the sand heaps and tombs of Egypt or the lava covered ruins of Herculaneum. What a treasure that autograph would be! {In God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ} (\en the“i patri kai kuri“i Jˆsou Christ“i\). This church is grounded in (\en\, with the locative case) and exists in the sphere and power of {God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ}. No article in the Greek, for both \the“i patri\ and \kuri“i Jˆsou Christ“i\ are treated as proper names. In the very beginning of this first Epistle of Paul we meet his Christology. He at once uses the full title, "Lord Jesus Christ," with all the theological content of each word. The name "Jesus" (Saviour, strkjv@Matthew:1:21|) he knew, as the "Jesus of history," the personal name of the Man of Galilee, whom he had once persecuted (Acts:9:5|), but whom he at once, after his conversion, proclaimed to be "the Messiah," (\ho Christos\, strkjv@Acts:9:22|). This position Paul never changed. In the great sermon at Antioch in Pisidia which Luke has preserved (Acts:13:23|) Paul proved that God fulfilled his promise to Israel by raising up "Jesus as Saviour" (\s“tˆra Iˆsoun\). Now Paul follows the Christian custom by adding \Christos\ (verbal from \chri“\, to anoint) as a proper name to Jesus (Jesus Christ) as later he will often say "Christ Jesus" (Colossians:1:1|). And he dares also to apply \kurios\ (Lord) to "Jesus Christ," the word appropriated by Claudius (_Dominus_, \Kurios\) and other emperors in the emperor-worship, and also common in the Septuagint for God as in strkjv@Psalms:32:1f.| (quoted by Paul in strkjv@Romans:4:8|). Paul uses \Kurios\ of God (1Corinthians:3:5|) or of Jesus Christ as here. In fact, he more frequently applies it to Christ when not quoting the Old Testament as in strkjv@Romans:4:8|. And here he places "the Lord Jesus Christ" in the same category and on the same plane with "God the father." There will be growth in Paul's Christology and he will never attain all the knowledge of Christ for which he longs (Phillipians:3:10-12|), but it is patent that here in his first Epistle there is no "reduced Christ" for Paul. He took Jesus as "Lord" when he surrendered to Jesus on the Damascus Road: "And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said to me" (Acts:22:10|). It is impossible to understand Paul without seeing clearly this first and final stand for the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul did not get this view of Jesus from current views of Mithra or of Isis or any other alien faith. The Risen Christ became at once for Paul the Lord of his life. {Grace to you and peace} (\charis humin kai eirˆnˆ\). These words, common in Paul's Epistles, bear "the stamp of Paul's experience" (Milligan). They are not commonplace salutations, but the old words "deepened and spiritualised" (Frame). The infinitive (\chairein\) so common in the papyri letters and seen in the New Testament also (Acts:15:23; strkjv@23:26; strkjv@James:1:1|) here gives place to \charis\, one of the great words of the New Testament (cf. strkjv@John:1:16f.|) and particularly of the Pauline Epistles. Perhaps no one word carries more meaning for Paul's messages than this word \charis\ (from \chair“\, rejoice) from which \charizomai\ comes. {Peace} (\eirˆnˆ\) is more than the Hebrew _shal“m_ so common in salutations. One recalls the "peace" that Christ leaves to us (John:14:27|) and the peace of God that passes all understanding (Phillipians:4:7|). This introduction is brief, but rich and gracious and pitches the letter at once on a high plane.

rwp@1Thessalonians:1:2 @{We give thanks} (\eucharistoumen\). Late denominative verb \euchariste“\ from \eucharistos\ (grateful) and that from \eu\, well and \charizomai\, to show oneself kind. See \charis\ in verse 1|. "The plural implies that all three missionaries prayed together" (Moffatt). {Always} (\pantote\). Late word, rare in LXX. Songs:with \euchariste“\ in strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:3; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:4; strkjv@Ephesians:5:20; strkjv@Phillipians:1:3|. Moffatt takes it to mean "whenever Paul was at his prayers." Of course, he did not make audible prayer always, but he was always in the spirit of prayer, "a constant attitude" (Milligan), "in tune with the Infinite." {For you all} (\peri pant“n hum“n\). Paul "encircled (\peri\, around) them all," including every one of them and the church as a whole. Distance lends enchantment to the memory of slight drawbacks. Paul is fond of this phrase "you all," particularly in Phil. (Phillipians:1:3,7|). {Making mention} (\mneian poioumenoi\). Paul uses this very idiom in Rom strkjv@1:9; strkjv@Ephesians:1:16; strkjv@Philemon:1:4|. Milligan cites a papyrus example of \mneian poioumenoi\ in prayer (B. Y. U. 652, 5). Did Paul have a prayer list of the Thessalonian disciples which he read over with Silas and Timothy? {In} here is \epi=\"in the time of our prayers." "Each time that they are engaged in prayers the writers mention the names of the converts" (Frame).

rwp@1Thessalonians:1:10 @{To wait for his Son from heaven} (\anamenein ton huion autou ek t“n ouran“n\). Present infinitive, like \douleuein\, and so linear, to keep on waiting for. The hope of the second coming of Christ was real and powerful with Paul as it should be with us. It was subject to abuse then as now as Paul will have to show in this very letter. He alludes to this hope at the close of each chapter in this Epistle. {Whom he raised from the dead} (\hon ˆgeiren ek [t“n] nekr“n\). Paul gloried in the fact of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead of which fact he was himself a personal witness. This fact is the foundation stone for all his theology and it comes out in this first chapter. {Jesus which delivereth us from the wrath to come} (\Iˆsoun ton ruomenon hˆmƒs ek tˆs orgˆs tˆs erchomenˆs\). It is the historic, crucified, risen, and ascended Jesus Christ, God's Son, who delivers from the coming wrath. He is our Saviour (Matthew:1:21|) true to his name Jesus. He is our Rescuer (Romans:11:26|, \ho ruomenos\, from strkjv@Isaiah:59:20|). It is eschatological language, this coming wrath of God for sin (1Thessalonians:2:16; strkjv@Romans:3:5; strkjv@5:9; strkjv@9:22; strkjv@13:5|). It was Paul's allusion to the day of judgment with Jesus as Judge whom God had raised from the dead that made the Athenians mock and leave him (Acts:17:31f.|). But Paul did not change his belief or his preaching because of the conduct of the Athenians. He is certain that God's wrath in due time will punish sin. Surely this is a needed lesson for our day. It was coming then and it is coming now.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:2 @{But having suffered before} (\alla propathontes\). Strong adversative \alla\, antithesis to \kenˆ\. Appeal to his personal experiences in Thessalonica known to them ({as ye know}, \kath“s oidate\). Second aorist active participle of \propasch“\, old compound verb, but here alone in the N.T. The force of \pro-\ (before) is carried over to the next verb. The participle may be regarded as temporal (Ellicott) or concessive (Moffatt). {And been shamefully entreated in Philippi} (\kai hubristhentes en Philippois\). First aorist passive participle of \hubriz“\, old verb, to treat insolently. "More than the bodily suffering it was the personal indignity that had been offered to him as a Roman citizen" (Milligan), for which account see strkjv@Acts:16:16-40|, an interesting example of how Acts and the Epistles throw light on each other. Luke tells how Paul resented the treatment accorded to him as a Roman citizen and here Paul shows that the memory still rankled in his bosom. {We waxed bold in our God} (\eparrˆsiasametha en t“i the“i hˆm“n\). Ingressive first aorist middle of \parrˆsiazomai\, old deponent verb from \parrˆsia\ (full story, \pan-, rˆsia\). In his reply to Festus (Acts:26:26|) Paul uses \parrˆsiazomenos lal“\, {being bold I speak}, while here he has {we waxed bold to speak} (\eparrˆsiasametha lalˆsai\). The insult in Philippi did not close Paul's mouth, but had precisely the opposite effect "in our God." It was not wild fanaticism, but determined courage and confidence in God that spurred Paul to still greater boldness in Thessalonica, {unto you} (\pros humƒs\), be the consequences what they might, {the gospel of God in much conflict}, (\to euaggelion tou theou en poll“i ag“ni\). This figure of the athletic games (\ag“n\) may refer to outward conflict like strkjv@Phillipians:1:30| or inward anxiety (Colossians:2:1|). He had both in Thessalonica.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:10 @{How holily and righteously and unblameably} (\h“s hosi“s kai dikai“s kai amempt“s\). Paul calls the Thessalonians and God as witnesses (\martures\) to his life toward you the believers (\humin tois pisteuousin\) dative of personal interest. He employs three common adverbs that show how holily toward God and how righteously toward men so that they did not blame him and his associates in either respect. Songs:there is a reason for each adverb. All this argues that Paul spent a considerable time in Thessalonica, more than the three sabbaths mentioned by Luke. The pastor ought to live so that his life will bear close inspection.

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:2:19 @{Crown of glorying} (\stephanos kauchˆse“s\). When a king or conqueror came on a visit he was given a chaplet of glorying. Paul is answering the insinuation that he did not really wish to come. {At his coming} (\en tˆi autou parousiƒi\). This word \parousia\ is untechnical (just _presence_ from \pareimi\) in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:9; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:17; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:6f.; strkjv@10:10; strkjv@Phillipians:1:26; strkjv@2:12|. But here (also strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:13; strkjv@4:15; strkjv@5:23; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1,8; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:23|) we have the technical sense of the second coming of Christ. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 372ff.) notes that the word in the papyri is almost technical for the arrival of a king or ruler who expects to receive his "crown of coming." The Thessalonians, Paul says, will be his crown, glory, joy when Jesus comes.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:3 @{Your sanctification} (\ho hagiasmos hum“n\). Found only in the Greek Bible and ecclesiastical writers from \hagiaz“\ and both to take the place of the old words \hagiz“, hagismos\ with their technical ideas of consecration to a god or goddess that did not include holiness in life. Songs:Paul makes a sharp and pointed stand here for the Christian idea of sanctification as being "the will of God" (apposition) and as further explained by the epexegetic infinitive {that ye abstain from fornication} (\apechesthai humas apo tˆs porneias\). Pagan religion did not demand sexual purity of its devotees, the gods and goddesses being grossly immoral. Priestesses were in the temples for the service of the men who came.

rwp@1Timothy:3:14 @{Shortly} (\en tachei\). Old idiom (locative case of \tachos\, quickness, speed). See strkjv@Romans:16:20|. A pseudonymous writer would hardly have put in this phrase. Paul's hopes were not to be realized, but he did not know that.

rwp@1Timothy:4:14 @{Neglect not} (\mˆ amelei\). Present active imperative in prohibition of \amele“\, old verb, rare in N.T. (Matthew:22:5; strkjv@1Timothy:4:14; strkjv@Hebrews:2:3; strkjv@8:9|). From \amelˆs\ (\a\ privative and \melei\, not to care). Use with genitive. {The gift that is in thee} (\tou en soi charismatos\). Late word of result from \charizomai\, in papyri (Preisigke), a regular Pauline word in N.T. (1Corinthians:1:7; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:11; strkjv@Romans:1:11|; etc.). Here it is God's gift to Timothy as in strkjv@2Timothy:1:6|. {By prophecy} (\dia prophˆteias\). Accompanied by prophecy (1:18|), not bestowed by prophecy. {With the laying on of the hands of the presbytery} (\meta epithese“s t“n cheir“n tou presbuteriou\). In strkjv@Acts:13:2f.|, when Barnabas and Saul were formally set apart to the mission campaign (not then ordained as ministers, for they were already that), there was the call of the Spirit and the laying on of hands with prayer. Here again \meta\ does not express instrument or means, but merely accompaniment. In strkjv@2Timothy:1:6| Paul speaks only of his own laying on of hands, but the rest of the presbytery no doubt did so at the same time and the reference is to this incident. There is no way to tell when and where it was done, whether at Lystra when Timothy joined Paul's party or at Ephesus just before Paul left Timothy there (1:3|). \Epithesis\ (\from epitithˆmi\, to lay upon) is an old word, in LXX, etc. In the N.T. we find it only here, strkjv@2Timothy:1:16; strkjv@Acts:8:18; strkjv@Hebrews:6:2|, but the verb \epitithˆmi\ with \tas cheiras\ more frequently (Acts:6:6| of the deacons; strkjv@8:19; strkjv@13:3; strkjv@1Timothy:5:22|, etc.). \Presbuterion\ is a late word (ecclesiastical use also), first for the Jewish Sanhedrin (Luke:22:66; strkjv@Acts:22:5|), then (here only in N.T.) of Christian elders (common in Ignatius), though \presbuteros\ (elder) for preachers (bishops) is common (Acts:11:30; strkjv@15:2; strkjv@20:17|, etc.).

rwp@1Timothy:5:18 @{Thou shalt not muzzle} (\ou phim“seis\). Prohibition by \ou\ and future (volitive) indicative of \phimo“\ (from \phimos\, muzzle), old word, quoted also in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:9| as here from strkjv@Deuteronomy:25:4|, and for the same purpose, to show the preacher's right to pay for his work. See strkjv@1Corinthians:9:9| for \alo“nta\ ({when he treadeth out the corn}). {The labourer is worthy of his hire} (\axios ho ergatˆs tou misthou autou\). These words occur in precisely this form in strkjv@Luke:10:7|. It appears also in strkjv@Matthew:10:10| with \tˆs trophˆs\ (food) instead of \tou misthou\. In strkjv@1Corinthians:9:14| Paul has the sense of it and says: "so also the Lord ordained," clearly meaning that Jesus had so said. It only remains to tell whether Paul here is quoting an unwritten saying of Jesus as he did in strkjv@Acts:20:35| or even the Gospel of Luke or Q (the Logia of Jesus). There is no way to decide this question. If Luke wrote his Gospel before A.D. 62 as is quite possible and Acts by A.D. 63, he could refer to the Gospel. It is not clear whether Scripture is here meant to apply to this quotation from the Lord Jesus. For \ergatˆs\ (labourer) see strkjv@Phillipians:3:2|.

rwp@1Timothy:5:21 @{The elect angels} (\t“n eklekt“n aggel“n\). For this triad of God, Christ, angels, see strkjv@Luke:9:26|. "Elect" in the sense of the "holy" angels who kept their own principality (Jude:1:6|) and who did not sin (2Peter:2:4|). Paul shows his interest in angels in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:9; strkjv@11:10|. {Observe} (\phulaxˆis\). First aorist active subjunctive of \phulass“\, to guard, to keep (Romans:2:26|). Subfinal use of \hina\. {Without prejudice} (\ch“ris prokrimatos\). Late and rare word (from \prokin“\, to judge beforehand), three times in the papyri, here only in N.T. "Without prejudgment." {By partiality} (\kata prosklisin\). Late word from \prosklin“\, to incline towards one (Acts:5:36|), only here in N.T.

rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ 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@Info_2Corinthians @ The occasion of the Epistle is made plain by numerous allusions personal and otherwise. Paul had arrived in Ephesus from Antioch shortly after the departure of Apollos for Corinth with letters of commendation from Priscilla and Aquila (Acts:18:28-19:1|). It is not clear how long Apollos remained in Corinth, but he is back in Ephesus when Paul writes the letter and he has declined Paul's request to go back to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:12|). Some of the household of Chloe had heard or come from Corinth with full details of the factions in the church over Apollos and Paul, clearly the reason why Apollos left (1Corinthians:1:10-12|). Even Cephas nominally was drawn into it, though there is no evidence that Peter himself had come to Corinth. Paul had sent Timothy over to Corinth to put an end to the factions (1Corinthians:4:17|), though he was uneasy over the outcome (1Corinthians:16:10f.|). This disturbance was enough of itself to call forth a letter from Paul. But it was by no means the whole story. Paul had already written a letter, now lost to us, concerning a peculiarly disgusting case of incest in the membership (1Corinthians:5:9|). They were having lawsuits with one another before heathen judges. Members of the church had written Paul a letter about marriage whether any or all should marry (1Corinthians:7:1|). They were troubled also whether it was right to eat meat that had been offered to idols in the heathen temples (1Corinthians:8:1|). Spiritual gifts of an unusual nature were manifested in Corinth and these were the occasion of a deal of trouble (1Corinthians:12:1|). The doctrine of the resurrection gave much trouble in Corinth (1Corinthians:15:12|). Paul was interested in the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem (1Corinthians:16:1|) and in their share in it. The church in Corinth had sent a committee (Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus) to Paul in Ephesus. He hopes to come himself after passing through Macedonia (1Corinthians:16:5f.|). It is possible that he had made a short visit before this letter (2Corinthians:13:1|), though not certain as he may have intended to go one time without going as he certainly once changed his plans on the subject (2Corinthians:1:15-22|). Whether Titus took the letter on his visit or it was sent on after the return of Timothy is not perfectly clear. Probably Timothy returned to Ephesus from Corinth shortly after the epistle was sent on, possibly by the committee who returned to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:17|), for Timothy and Erastus were sent on from Ephesus to Macedonia before the outbreak at the hands of Demetrius (Acts:19:22|). Apparently Timothy had not fully succeeded in reconciling the factions in Corinth for Paul dispatched Titus who was to meet him at Troas as he went on to Macedonia. Paul's hurried departure from Ephesus (Acts:20:1|) took him to Troas before Titus arrived and Paul's impatience there brought him to Macedonia where he did meet Titus on his return from Corinth (2Corinthians:2:12f.|).

rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ It is clear therefore that Paul wrote what we call I Corinthians in a disturbed state of mind. He had founded the church there, had spent two years there (Acts:18|), and took pardonable pride in his work there as a wise architect (1Corinthians:3:10|) for he had built the church on Christ as the foundation. He was anxious that his work should abide. It is plain that the disturbances in the church in Corinth were fomented from without by the Judaizers whom Paul had defeated at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:1-35; strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10|). They were overwhelmed there, but renewed their attacks in Antioch (Galatians:2:11-21|). Henceforth throughout the second mission tour they are a disturbing element in Galatia, in Corinth, in Jerusalem. While Paul is winning the Gentiles in the Roman Empire to Christ, these Judaizers are trying to win Paul's converts to Judaism. Nowhere do we see the conflict at so white a heat as in Corinth. Paul finally will expose them with withering sarcasm (2Corinthians:10-13|) as Jesus did the Pharisees in strkjv@Matthew:23| on that last day in the temple. Factional strife, immorality, perverted ideas about marriage, spiritual gifts, and the resurrection, these complicated problems are a vivid picture of church life in our cities today. The discussion of them shows Paul's manysidedness and also the powerful grasp that he has upon the realities of the gospel. Questions of casuistry are faced fairly and serious ethical issues are met squarely. But along with the treatment of these vexed matters Paul sings the noblest song of the ages on love (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13|) and writes the classic discussion on the resurrection (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:15|). If one knows clearly and fully the Corinthian Epistles and Paul's dealings with Corinth, he has an understanding of a large section of his life and ministry. No church caused him more anxiety than did Corinth (2Corinthians:11:28|).

rwp@2Corinthians:1:14 @{As also ye did acknowledge us in part} (\kath“s kai epegn“te hˆmas apo merous\). Gracious acknowledgment (second aorist active indicative of \epign“sk“\) to the original Pauline party (1Corinthians:1:12; strkjv@3:4|) that he had seemed to care so little for them. And now in his hour of victory he shows that, if he is their ground of glorying, they are his also (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:19f.; strkjv@Phillipians:2:16|).

rwp@2Corinthians:1:16 @{And again} (\kai palin\). This would have been the second benefit or joy. But he changed his plans and did not make that trip directly to Corinth, but came on to Macedonia first (Acts:19:21; strkjv@20:1f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:2; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12|). {To be set forward by you} (\huph' hum“n propemphthˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \propemp“\. Paul uses this same verb in strkjv@Romans:15:24| for the same service by the Roman Christians on his proposed trip to Spain. The Corinthians, especially the anti-Pauline party, took advantage of Paul's change of plans to criticize him sharply for vacillation and flippancy. How easy it is to find fault with the preacher! Songs:Paul has to explain his conduct.

rwp@2Corinthians:2:1 @{That I would not come again to you with sorrow} (\to mˆ palin en lupˆi pros humas elthein\). Articular second aorist active infinitive with negative \mˆ\ in apposition with \touto\ (this) preceding. What does Paul mean by "again" (\palin\)? Had he paid another visit besides that described in strkjv@Acts:18| which was in sorrow (\en lupˆi\)? Or does he mean that having had one joyful visit (that in strkjv@Acts:18|) he does not wish the second one to be in sorrow? Either interpretation is possible as the Greek stands and scholars disagree. Songs:in strkjv@12:14| "The third time I am ready to come" may refer to the proposed second visit (1:15f.|) and the present plan (a third). And so as to strkjv@13:1|. There is absolutely no way to tell clearly whether Paul had already made a second visit. If he had done so, it is a bit odd that he did not plainly say so in strkjv@1:15f.| when he is apologizing for not having made the proposed visit ("a second benefit").

rwp@2Corinthians:5:16 @{Henceforth} (\apo tou nun\). From the time that we gained this view of Christ's death for us. {After the flesh} (\kata sarka\). According to the flesh, the fleshy way of looking at men. He, of course, knows men "in the flesh (\en tˆi sarki\), but Paul is not speaking of that. Worldly standards and distinctions of race, class, cut no figure now with Paul (Galatians:3:28|) as he looks at men from the standpoint of the Cross of Christ. {Even though we have known Christ after the flesh} (\ei kai egn“kamen kata sarka Christon\). Concessive clause (\ei kai\, if even or also) with perfect active indicative. Paul admits that he had once looked at Christ \kata sarka\, but now no longer does it. Obviously he uses \kata sarka\ in precisely the same sense that he did in verse 15| about men. He had before his conversion known Christ \kata sarka\, according to the standards of the men of his time, the Sanhedrin and other Jewish leaders. He had led the persecution against Jesus till Jesus challenged and stopped him (Acts:9:4|). That event turned Paul clean round and he no longer knows Christ in the old way \kata sarka\. Paul may or may not have seen Jesus in the flesh before his death, but he says absolutely nothing on that point here.

rwp@2Corinthians:5:17 @{A new creature} (\kainˆ ktisis\). A fresh start is made (\kainˆ\). \Ktisis\ is the old word for the act of creating (Romans:1:20|), but in N.T. by metonymy it usually bears the notion of \ktisma\, the thing created or creature as here. {The old things are passed away} (\ta archaia parˆlthen\). Did pass by, he means. Second aorist active of \parerchomai\, to go by. The ancient (\archaia\) way of looking at Christ among other things. And yet today there are scholars who are trying to revive the old prejudiced view of Jesus Christ as a mere man, a prophet, to give us "a reduced Christ." That was once Paul's view, but it passed by forever for him. It is a false view and leaves us no gospel and no Saviour. {Behold, they are become new} (\idou, gegone kaina\). Perfect active indicative of \ginomai\, have become new (fresh, \kaina\) to stay so.

rwp@2Corinthians:5:19 @{To wit, that} (\h“s hoti\). Latin puts it _quoniam quidem_. It is an unclassical idiom, but occurs in the papyri and inscriptions (Moulton, _Prol_., p. 212; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1033). It is in strkjv@Esther:4:14|. See also strkjv@2Corinthians:11:21; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2|. It probably means "how that." {Not reckoning} (\mˆ logizomenos\). What Jesus did (his death for us) stands to our credit (Romans:8:32|) if we make our peace with God. This is our task, "the word of reconciliation," that we may receive "the righteousness of God" and be adopted into the family of God.

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:7:8 @{Though} (\ei kai\). If also. Paul treats it as a fact. {With my epistle} (\en tˆi epistolˆi\). The one referred to in strkjv@2:3f|. {I do not regret it} (\ou metamelomai\). This verb really means "repent" (be sorry again) which meaning we have transferred to \metanoe“\, to change one's mind (not to be sorry at all). See strkjv@Matthew:21:30; strkjv@27:3| for the verb \metamelomai\, to be sorry, to regret as here. Paul is now glad that he made them sorry. {Though I did regret} (\ei kai metemelomˆn\). Imperfect indicative in the concessive clause. I was in a regretful mood at first. {For I see} (\blep“ gar\). A parenthetical explanation of his present joy in their sorrow. B D do not have \gar\. The Latin Vulgate has _videns_ (seeing) for \blep“n\. {For a season} (\pros h“ran\). Cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:17|. It was only "for an hour."

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:11:7 @{In abasing myself} (\emauton tapein“n\). Humbling myself by making tents for a living while preaching in Corinth. He is ironical still about "doing a sin" (\hamartian epoiˆsa\). {For nought} (\d“rean\). _Gratis_. Accusative of general reference, common adverb. It amounts to sarcasm to ask if he did a sin in preaching the gospel free of expense to them "that ye may be exalted."

rwp@2Corinthians:12:14 @{Third time I am ready to come} (\triton touto hetoim“s ech“\). Had he been already twice or only once? He had changed his plans once when he did not go (1:15f.|). He will not change his plans now. This looks as if he had only been once (that in strkjv@Acts:18|). Note the third use of \katanarka“\ (11:9; strkjv@12:13,14|). They need not be apprehensive. He will be as financially independent of them as before. "I shall not sponge on you." {Not yours, but you} (\ou ta hum“n, alla humas\). The motto of every real preacher. {To lay up} (\thˆsaurizein\). For this use of the verb see strkjv@1Corinthians:16:2| (Matthew:6:19-21; strkjv@James:5:3|).

rwp@2Corinthians:12:16 @{I did not myself burden you} (\eg“ ou katebarˆsa humas\). First aorist active of late verb \katabare“\, to press a burden down on one. Only here in N.T. {Crafty} (\panourgos\). Old word from \pan\, all, and \ergo\, to do anything (good or bad). Good sense is skilful, bad sense cunning. Only here in N.T. and Paul is quoting the word from his enemies. {With guile} (\dol“i\). Instrumental case of \dolos\, bait to catch fish with. The enemies of Paul said that he was raising this big collection for himself. Moffatt has done well to put these charges in quotation marks to make it plain to readers that Paul is ironical.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:20 @{Lest by any means, when I come, I should find you not such as I would} (\mˆ p“s elth“n ouch hoious thel“ heur“ humas\). An idiomatic construction after the verb of fearing (\phoboumai\) with \mˆ p“s\ as the conjunction and with \ouch\ as the negative of the verb \heur“\ (second aorist active subjunctive of \heurisk“\), \mˆ\ the conjunction, \ouch\ the negative. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 995. {And I be found} (\kag“ heureth“\). Same construction with first aorist passive subjunctive. {Such as ye would not} (\hoion ou thelete\). Neat change in voice just before and position of the negative here. {Lest by any means} (\mˆ p“s\). Still further negative purpose by repeating the conjunction. With graphic pen pictures Paul describes what had been going on against him during his long absence. {Backbitings} (\katalaliai\). Late and rare word. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1Peter:2:1|. If it only existed nowhere else! {Whisperings} (\psithurismoi\). Late word from \psithuriz“\, to whisper into one's ear. An onomatopoetic word for the sibilant murmur of a snake charmer (Ecclesiastes:10:11|). Only here in N.T. {Swellings} (\phusi“seis\). From \phusio“\...and in ecclesiastical writers. Did Paul...¯1Corinthians:4:6| for verb. {Tumults} (\akatastasiai\). See on strkjv@2Corinthians:6:5|.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:9 @{For we rejoice} (\chairomen gar\). Paul had far rather be weak in the sense of failing to exercise his apostolic power because they did the noble thing. He is no Jonah who lamented when Ninevah repented. {Your perfecting} (\hum“n katartisin\). Late word from \katartiz“\, to fit, to equip (see verb in verse 11|). In Plutarch, only here in N.T.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:13 @{The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all} (\hˆ charis tou Kuriou Iˆsou Christou kai hˆ agapˆ tou theou kai hˆ koin“nia tou hagiou pneumatos meta pant“n hum“n\). This benediction is the most complete of them all. It presents the persons of the Trinity in full form. From strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:17| it appears that Paul wrote the greeting or benediction with his own hand. We know from strkjv@Romans:15:19| that Paul went round about unto Illyricum before, apparently, he came on to Corinth. When he did arrive (Acts:20:1-3|) the troubles from the Judaizers had disappeared. Probably the leaders left after the coming of Titus and the brethren with this Epistle. The reading of it in the church would make a stir of no small proportions. But it did the work.

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 @ HE ACCEPTS PAUL'S EPISTLES AS SCRIPTURE This fact (2Peter:3:15f.|) has been used as conclusive proof by Baur and his school that Peter could not have written the Epistle after the stern rebuke from Paul at Antioch (Galatians:2:11f.|). But this argument ignores one element in Peter's impulsive nature and that is his coming back as he did with Jesus. Paul after that event in Antioch spoke kindly of Peter (1Corinthians:9:5|). Neither Peter nor Paul cherished a personal grudge where the Master's work was involved. It is also objected that Peter would not have put Paul's Epistles on the level with the O.T. and call them by implication "Scripture." But Paul claimed the help of the Holy Spirit in his writings and Peter knew the marks of the Holy Spirit's power. Besides, in calling Paul's Epistles Scripture he may not have meant to place them exactly on a par with the Old Testament.

rwp@2Peter:1:15 @Peter may also have had an intimation by vision of his approaching death (cf. the legend _Domine quo vadis_) as Paul often did (Acts:16:9; strkjv@18:9; strkjv@21:11; strkjv@23:11; strkjv@27:23|). {At every time} (\hekastote\). As need arises, old adverb, here alone in N.T. {After my decease} (\meta tˆn emˆn exodon\). For \exodos\ meaning death see strkjv@Luke:9:31|, and for departure from Egypt (way out, \ex, hodos\) see strkjv@Hebrews:11:22|, the only other N.T. examples. Here again Peter was present on the Transfiguration mount when the talk was about the "exodus" of Jesus from earth. {That ye may be able} (\echein humas\). Literally, "that ye may have it," the same idiom with \ech“\ and the infinitive in strkjv@Mark:14:8; strkjv@Matthew:18:25|. It is the object-infinitive after \spoudas“\ (I will give diligence, for which see verse 10|). {To call these things to remembrance} (\tˆn tout“n mnˆmˆn poieisthai\). Present middle infinitive of \poie“\ (as in verse 10|). \Mnˆmˆ\ is an old word (from \mnaomai\), here alone in N.T. This idiom, like the Latin _mentionem facere_, is common in the old writers (papyri also both for "mention" and "remembrance"), here only in N.T., but in strkjv@Romans:1:20| we have \mneian poioumai\ (I make mention). Either sense suits here. It is possible, as Irenaeus (iii. I. I) thought, that Peter had in mind Mark's Gospel, which would help them after Peter was gone. Mark's Gospel was probably already written at Peter's suggestion, but Peter may have that fact in mind here.

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:1:17 @{For he received} (\lab“n gar\). Second aorist active participle nominative singular of \lamban“\, "he having received," but there is no finite verb, anacoluthon, changing in verse 19| (after parenthesis in 18|) to \echomen bebaioteron\ rather than \ebebai“sen\. {When there came such a voice to him} (\ph“nˆs enechtheisˆs aut“i toiasde\). Genitive absolute with first aorist passive participle feminine singular of \pher“\ (cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:13|), repeated \enechtheisan\ in verse 18|. \Ph“nˆ\ (voice) is used also of Pentecost (Acts:2:6|). \Toiosde\ (classical demonstrative) occurs here alone in the N.T. {From the excellent glory} (\hupo tˆs megaloprepous doxˆs\). "By the majestic glory." \Megaloprepˆs\, old compound (\megas\, great, \prepei\, it is becoming), here only in N.T., several times in O.T., Apocr. (II Macc. strkjv@8:15), adverb in the inscriptions. Probably a reference to \nephelˆ ph“teinˆ\ (bright cloud, shekinah) in strkjv@Matthew:17:5|. The words given here from the "voice" agree exactly with strkjv@Matthew:17:5| except the order and the use of \eis hon\ rather than \en h“i\. Mark (Mark:9:7|) and Luke (Luke:9:35|) have \akouete\. But Peter did not need any Gospel for his report here.

rwp@2Peter:2:3 @{In covetousness} (\en pleonexiƒi\). As did Balaam (verse 15|). These licentious Gnostics made money out of their dupes. A merely intellectual Gnosticism had its fruit in immorality and fraud. {With feigned words} (\plastois logois\). Instrumental case. \Plastos\ is verbal adjective (from \plass“\, to mould as from clay, for which see strkjv@Romans:9:20|), here only in N.T. "With forged words." See sample in strkjv@3:4|. {Shall make merchandise of you} (\humas emporeusontai\). Future middle of \emporeuomai\ (from \emporos\, a travelling merchant), old word, to go in for trade, in N.T. only here and strkjv@James:4:13|, which see. Cf. our emporium (John:2:16|, market house). {Whose sentence} (\hois to krima\). "For whom (dative case) the sentence" (verdict, not process \krisis\). {Now from of old} (\ekpalai\). Late and common compound adverb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@3:5|. {Lingereth not} (\ouk argei\). "Is not idle," old verb, \arge“\ (from \argos\ not working, alpha privative and \ergon\), here only in N.T. {Slumbereth not} (\ou nustazei\). Old and common verb (from \nu“\ to nod), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:25:5|. Note \ap“leia\ (destruction) three times in verses 1-3|.

rwp@2Peter:3:4 @{Where is the promise of his coming?} (\pou estin hˆ epaggelia tˆs parousias autou;\). This is the only sample of the questions raised by these mockers. Peter had mentioned this subject of the \parousia\ in strkjv@1:16|. Now he faces it squarely. Peter, like Paul (1Thessalonians:5:1f.; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1f.|), preached about the second coming (1:16; strkjv@Acts:3:20f.|), as Jesus himself did repeatedly (Matthew:24:34|) and as the angels promised at the Ascension (Acts:1:11|). Both Jesus and Paul (2Thessalonians:2:1f.|) were misunderstood on the subject of the time and the parables of Jesus urged readiness and forbade setting dates for his coming, though his language in strkjv@Matthew:24:34| probably led some to believe that he would certainly come while they were alive. {From the day that} (\aph' hˆs\). "From which day." See strkjv@Luke:7:45|. {Fell asleep} (\ekoimˆthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \koima“\, old verb, to put sleep, classic euphemism for death (John:11:11|) like our cemetery (sleeping-place). {Continue} (\diamenei\). Present active indicative of \diamen“\, to remain through (Luke:1:22|). _In statu quo_. {As they were} (\hout“s\). "Thus." {From the beginning of creation} (\ap' archˆs ktise“s\). Precisely so in strkjv@Mark:10:6|, which see.

rwp@2Peter:3:16 @{As also in all his epistles} (\h“s kai en pasais epistolais\). We do not know to how many Peter here refers. There is no difficulty in supposing that Peter "received every one of St. Paul's Epistles within a month or two of its publication" (Bigg). And yet Peter does not here assert the formation of a canon of Paul's Epistles. {Speaking in them of these things} (\lal“n en autais peri tout“n\). Present active participle of \lale“\. That is to say, Paul also wrote about the second coming of Christ, as is obviously true. {Hard to be understood} (\dusnoˆta\). Late verbal from \dus\ and \noe“\ (in Aristotle, Lucian, Diog. Laert.), here only in N.T. We know that the Thessalonians persisted in misrepresenting Paul on this very subject of the second coming as Hymenaeus and Philetus did about the resurrection (2Timothy:2:17|) and Spitta holds that Paul's teaching about grace was twisted to mean moral laxity like strkjv@Galatians:3:10; strkjv@Romans:3:20,28; strkjv@5:20| (with which cf. strkjv@6:1| as a case in point), etc. Peter does not say that he himself did not understand Paul on the subject of faith and freedom. {Unlearned} (\amatheis\). Old word (alpha privative and \manthan“\ to learn), ignorant, here only in N.T. {Unsteadfast} (\astˆriktoi\). See on ¯2:14|. {Wrest} (\streblousin\). Present active indicative of \streblo“\, old verb (from \streblos\ twisted, \streph“\, to turn), here only in N.T. {The other scriptures} (\tas loipas graphas\). There is no doubt that the apostles claimed to speak by the help of the Holy Spirit (1Thessalonians:5:27; strkjv@Colossians:4:16|) just as the prophets of old did (2Peter:1:20f.|). Note \loipas\ (rest) here rather than \allas\ (other). Peter thus puts Paul's Epistles on the same plane with the O.T., which was also misused (Matthew:5:21-44; strkjv@15:3-6; strkjv@19:3-10|).

rwp@Info_1Thessalonians @ SECOND THESSALONIANS FROM CORINTH A.D. 50 OR 51 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION It is plain that First Thessalonians did not settle all the difficulties in Thessalonica. With some there was precisely the opposite result. There was some opposition to Paul's authority and even defiance. Songs:Paul repeats his "command" for discipline (2Thessalonians:3:6|) as he had done when with them (3:10|). He makes this Epistle a test of obedience (3:14|) and finds it necessary to warn the Thessalonians against the zeal of some deceivers who even invent epistles in Paul's name to carry their point in the church (2:1f.|), an early instance of pseudepigraphic "Pauline" epistles, but not for a "pious" purpose. Paul's keen resentment against the practise should make us slow to accept the pseudepigraphic theory about other Pauline Epistles. He calls attention to his own signature at the close of each genuine letter. As a rule he dictated the epistle, but signed it with his own hand (3:17|). Paul writes to calm excitement (Ellicott) and to make it plain that he had not said that the Second Coming was to be right away.

rwp@2Thessalonians:1:4 @{Songs:that} (\h“ste\). Another example of \h“ste\ and the infinitive (\enkauchƒsthai\) for result as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:7| which see. {We ourselves} (\autous hˆmas\). Accusative of general reference with the infinitive, but not merely \hˆmƒs\ (or \heautous\), perhaps in contrast with \en humin\ (in you), as much as to say, "so that we ourselves, contrary to your expectations, are boasting" (Frame). \Enkauchaomai\ occurs here alone in N.T., but is found in the LXX and in _Aesop's Fables_, proof enough of its vernacular use. Paul was not above praising one church to other churches, to provoke them to good works. Here he is boasting of Thessalonica in Macedonia to the Corinthians as he did later to the Corinthians about the collection (2Corinthians:8:1-15|) after having first boasted to the Macedonians about the Corinthians (2Corinthians:9:1-5|). There were other churches in Achaia besides Corinth (2Corinthians:1:1|). {For} (\huper\). Over, about, like \peri\ (1Thessalonians:1:2|). {In all your persecutions} (\en pasin tois di“gmois hum“n\). Their patience and faith had already attracted Paul's attention (1Thessalonians:1:3|) and their tribulations \thlipsesin\ (1Thessalonians:1:6|). Here Paul adds the more specific term \di“gmos\, old word from \di“k“\, to chase, to pursue, a word used by Paul of his treatment in Corinth (2Corinthians:12:10|). {Which ye endure} (\hais anechesthe\). B here reads \enechesthe\, to be entangled in, to be held in as in strkjv@Galatians:5:1|, but \anechesthe\ is probably correct and the \hais\ is probably attracted to locative case of \thlipsesin\ from the ablative \h“n\ after \anechesthe\, {from which ye hold yourselves back} (cf. strkjv@Colossians:3:13|).

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:2:12 @{That they all might be judged} (\hina krith“sin pantes\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \krin“\, to sift, to judge, with \hina\. Ultimate purpose, almost result, of the preceding obstinate resistance to the truth and "the judicial infatuation which overtakes them" (Lightfoot), now final punishment. Condemnation is involved in the fatal choice made. These victims of the man of sin did not believe the truth and found pleasure in unrighteousness.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:8 @{For nought} (\d“rean\). Adverbial accusative, as a gift, gift-wise (\d“rea\, gift, from \did“mi\). Same claim made to the Corinthians (2Corinthians:11:7|), old word, in LXX, and papyri. He lodged with Jason, but did not receive his meals _gratis_, for he paid for them. Apparently he received no invitations to meals. Paul had to make his financial independence clear to avoid false charges which were made in spite of all his efforts. To eat bread is merely a Hebraism for eat (verse 10|). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:9| for labour and travail, and night and day (\nuktos kai hˆmeras\, genitive of time, by night and by day). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:9| for rest of the verse in precisely the same words.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:9 @{Not because we have not the right} (\ouch hoti ouk echomen exousian\). Paul is sensitive on his {right} to receive adequate support (1Thessalonians:2:6; 1 Co strkjv@9:4| where he uses the same word \exousian\ in the long defence of this {right}, strkjv@1Corinthians:9:1-27|). Songs:he here puts in this limitation to avoid misapprehension. He did allow churches to help him where he would not be misunderstood (2Corinthians:11:7-11; strkjv@Phillipians:4:45f.|). Paul uses \ouch hoti\ elsewhere to avoid misunderstanding (2Corinthians:1:24; strkjv@3:5; strkjv@Phillipians:4:17|). {But to make ourselves an ensample unto you} (\all' hina heautous tupon d“men humin\). Literally, {but that we might give ourselves a type to you}. Purpose with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \did“mi\. On \tupon\ see on ¯1Thessalonians:1:7|.

rwp@2Timothy:1:17 @{When he was in Rome} (\genomenos en Romˆi\). Second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\ (coming to Rome, happening in Rome). {He sought me diligently and found me} (\spoudai“s ezˆtˆsen me kai heuren\). Effective aorists both of them (first of \zˆte“\, second of \heurisk“\). He did it at the risk of his own life apparently.

rwp@2Timothy:1:18 @{Grant to him to and mercy} (\d“iˆ aut“i heurein eleos\). Second aorist active optative in wish for the future again as in verse 16|. Find mercy from the Lord (Jesus) as he found me. {Thou knowest very well} (\beltion su gin“skeis\). Literally, "thou knowest better (than I)," for he did those things in Ephesus where thou art. Only N.T. example of \beltion\, in D text of strkjv@Acts:10:28|.

rwp@2Timothy:2:3 @{Suffer hardship with me} (\sunkakopathˆson\). See strkjv@1:8| for this verb. The old preacher challenges the young one to share hardship with him for Christ. {As a good soldier} (\hos kalos strati“tˆs\). Paul does not hesitate to use this military metaphor (this word only here for a servant of Christ) with which he is so familiar. He had already used the metaphor in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:7; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:3f.; strkjv@1Timothy:1:18|. In strkjv@Phillipians:2:25| he called Epaphroditus "my fellow-soldier" (\sunstrati“tˆn mou\) as he did Archippus in strkjv@Philemon:1:2|.

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 @ SOURCES OF THE ACTS Beyond a doubt Luke employed a variety of sources for this great history as he did for the Gospel (Luke:1:1-4|). In fact, Cadbury argues that this Prologue was meant to apply to the Acts also as Volume II whether he intended to write a third volume or not. Certainly we are entitled to say that Luke used the same historical method for Acts. Some of these sources are easy to see. Luke had his own personal experience for the "we" sections. Then he had the benefit of Paul's own notes or suggestions for all that portion where Paul figures from chapters 8 to 28, since Luke was apparently with Paul in Rome when he finished the Book. This would include Paul's sermons and addresses which Luke gives unless one wishes to say, as some do, that Luke followed the style of Thucydides and composed the kind of addresses that he thought Paul would make. I see no evidence of that for each address differs from the others and suits precisely the occasion when it was delivered. The ancients frequently employed shorthand and Paul may have preserved notes of his addresses. Prof. C. C. Torrey, of Yale University, argues in his _Composition and Date of Acts_ that Luke used an Aramaic document for the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. There is an Aramaic element in certain portions of these chapters, but nothing like so pronounced as in Luke 1 and 2 after strkjv@Luke:1:1-4|. It cannot be said that Torrey has made out his case for such a single document. Luke may have had several such documents besides access to others familiar with the early days of the work in Jerusalem. There was Simon Peter whom Paul visited for two weeks in Jerusalem (Galatians:1:18|) besides other points of contact with him in Jerusalem and Antioch (Acts:15| and strkjv@Galatians:2|). There was also Barnabas who was early Paul's friend (Acts:9:27|) and who knew the beginnings as few did (Acts:4:36f.|). Besides many others it is to be observed that Paul with Luke made a special visit to Caesarea where he spent a week with the gifted Philip and his daughters with the gift of prophecy (Acts:21:8f.|). But with all the inevitable variety of sources for the information needed to cover the wide field of the Book of Acts the same mind has manifestly worked through it and it is the same style all through that appears in the "we" sections where the writer is confessedly a companion of Paul. No other companion of Paul carries this claim for the authorship and no other was a physician and no author has the external evidence from early writers.

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE DATE There are three views about the date of the Acts. Baur and his Tubingen School held the second century to be the date of this late pamphlet as they termed it after the fashion of the Clementine Homilies. But that view is now practically abandoned save by the few who still strangely oppose the Lukan authorship. Probably the majority of those who accept the Lukan authorship place it in the latter part of the first century for two reasons. One is that the Gospel according to Luke is dated by them after the destruction of Jerusalem because of the prophecy by Jesus of the encompassing of the city by armies. Predictive prophecy that would be and so it is considered a prophecy _post eventum_. The other reason is the alleged use of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus by Luke. Josephus finished this work A.D. 93 so that, if Luke did use it, he must have written the Acts after that date. Usually this argument is made to show that Luke could not have written it at all, but some hold that he may have lived to an age that would allow it. But it cannot be assumed that Luke used Josephus because of his mention of Theudas and Judas the Galilean. They differ so widely (Acts:5:36f|. and Josephus, _Ant_. XX. v, 1, 2) that Von Dobschutz (_Dictionary of the Apostolic Church_, art. Josephus) argues that the two accounts are entirely independent of each other. Songs:Luke (Luke:13:1f.|) alludes to a Galilean revolt not mentioned by Josephus and Josephus records three revolts under Pilate not referred to by Luke. A comparison of the accounts of the death of Agrippa I in strkjv@Acts:12:20-23| and _Ant_. XIX. viii, 2 redounds to the credit of Luke. The Josephus phase of the argument may be brushed to one side. The third view, held by Harnack and adopted here, is that Luke wrote the Acts while with Paul in Rome and finished the book before Paul's release, that is by A.D. 63. This is the obvious and natural way to take the language of Luke at the close of Acts. Events had gone no farther and so he ends the narrative right there. It is argued against this that Luke contemplated a third volume and for this reason closed with the arrival of Paul in Rome. But the use of \pr“ton\ (first) in strkjv@Acts:1:1| is a common _Koin‚_ idiom and does not imply three volumes any more than first and second stories with us means that the house has three. Of course this date for the Acts puts the date of the Gospel further back either in Caesarea (57 to 59) or in Rome (60 to 62). And that means that Mark's Gospel is still earlier since Luke used it for his Gospel and the Logia (Q) earlier still. But all these dates are probable in the light of all the known facts.

rwp@Acts:1:4 @{Being assembled together with them} (\sunalizomenos\). Present passive participle from \sunaliz“\, an old verb in Herodotus, Xenophon, etc., from sun, with, and \haliz“\, from \halˆs\, crowded. The margin of both the Authorized and the Revised Versions has "eating with them" as if from \sun\ and \hals\ (salt). Salt was the mark of hospitality. There is the verb \halisthˆte en aut“i\ used by Ignatius _Ad Magnes_. X, "Be ye salted in him." But it is more than doubtful if that is the idea here though the Vulgate does have _convescens illis_ "eating with them," as if that was the common habit of Jesus during the forty days (Wendt, Feine, etc.). Jesus did on occasion eat with the disciples (Luke:24:41-43; strkjv@Mark:16:14|). {To wait for the promise of the Father} (\perimenein tˆn epaggelian tou patros\). Note present active infinitive, to keep on waiting for (around, \peri\). In the Great Commission on the mountain in Galilee this item was not given (Matthew:28:16-20|). It is the subjective genitive, the promise given by the Father (note this Johannine use of the word), that is the Holy Spirit ("the promise of the Holy Spirit," objective genitive). {Which ye heard from me} (\hˆn ˆkousate mou\). Change from indirect discourse (command), infinitives \ch“rizesthai\ and \perimenein\ after \parˆggeilen\ to direct discourse without any \ephˆ\ (said he) as the English (Italics). Luke often does this (_oratior ariata_). Note also the ablative case of \mou\ (from me). Luke continues in verse 5| with the direct discourse giving the words of Jesus.

rwp@Acts:1:26 @{He was numbered} (\sunkatepsˆphisthˆ\). To the Jews the lot did not suggest gambling, but "the O.T. method of learning the will of Jehovah" (Furneaux). The two nominations made a decision necessary and they appealed to God in this way. This double compound \sunkatapsˆphiz“\ occurs here alone in the N.T. and elsewhere only in Plutarch (_Them_. 21) in the middle voice for condemning with others. \Sunpsˆphiz“\ occurs in the middle voice in strkjv@Acts:19:19| for counting up money and also in Aristophanes. \Psˆphiz“\ with \dapanˆn\ occurs in strkjv@Luke:14:28| for counting the cost and in strkjv@Revelation:13:18| for "counting" the number of the beast. The ancients used pebbles (\psˆphoi\) in voting, black for condemning, white (Revelation:2:17|) in acquitting. Here it is used in much the same sense as \katarithme“\ in verse 17|.

rwp@Acts:2:4 @{With other tongues} (\heterais gl“ssais\). Other than their native tongues. Each one began to speak in a language that he had not acquired and yet it was a real language and understood by those from various lands familiar with them. It was not jargon, but intelligible language. Jesus had said that the gospel was to go to all the nations and here the various tongues of earth were spoken. One might conclude that this was the way in which the message was to be carried to the nations, but future developments disprove it. This is a third miracle (the sound, the tongues like fire, the untaught languages). There is no blinking the fact that Luke so pictures them. One need not be surprised if this occasion marks the fulfilment of the Promise of the Father. But one is not to confound these miraculous signs with the Holy Spirit. They are merely proof that he has come to carry on the work of his dispensation. The gift of tongues came also on the house of Cornelius at Caesarea (Acts:10:44-47; strkjv@11:15-17|), the disciples of John at Ephesus (Acts:19:6|), the disciples at Corinth (1Corinthians:14:1-33|). It is possible that the gift appeared also at Samaria (Acts:8:18|). But it was not a general or a permanent gift. Paul explains in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:22| that "tongues" were a sign to unbelievers and were not to be exercised unless one was present who understood them and could translate them. This restriction disposes at once of the modern so-called tongues which are nothing but jargon and hysteria. It so happened that here on this occasion at Pentecost there were Jews from all parts of the world, so that some one would understand one tongue and some another without an interpreter such as was needed at Corinth. The experience is identical in all four instances and they are not for edification or instruction, but for adoration and wonder and worship. {As the Spirit gave them utterance} (\kath“s to pneuma edidou apophtheggesthai autois\). This is precisely what Paul claims in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:10,28|, but all the same without an interpreter the gift was not to be exercised (1Corinthians:14:6-19|). Paul had the gift of tongues, but refused to exercise it except as it would be understood. Note the imperfect tense here (\edidou\). Perhaps they did not all speak at once, but one after another. \Apophtheggesthai\ is a late verb (LXX of prophesying, papyri). Lucian uses it of the ring of a vessel when it strikes a reef. It is used of eager, elevated, impassioned utterance. In the N.T. only here, verse 14; strkjv@26:25|. \Apophthegm\ is from this verb.

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:2:23 @{Him} (\touton\). "This one," resumptive and emphatic object of "did crucify and slay." {Being delivered up} (\ekdoton\). Verbal adjective from \ekdid“mi\, to give out or over. Old word, but here only in the N.T. Delivered up by Judas, Peter means. {By the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God} (\tˆi h“rismenˆi boulˆi kai progn“sˆi tou theou\). Instrumental case. Note both purpose (\boulˆ\) and foreknowledge (\progn“sis\) of God and "determined" (\h“rismenˆ\, perfect passive participle, state of completion). God had willed the death of Jesus (John:3:16|) and the death of Judas (Acts:1:16|), but that fact did not absolve Judas from his responsibility and guilt (Luke:22:22|). He acted as a free moral agent. {By the hand} (\dia cheiros\). Luke is fond of these figures (hand, face, etc.) very much like the Hebrew though the vernacular of all languages uses them. {Lawless men} (\anom“n\). Men without law, who recognize no law for their conduct, like men in high and low stations today who defy the laws of God and man. Old word, very common in the LXX. {Ye did crucify} (\prospˆxantes\). First aorist active participle of \prospˆgnumi\, rare compound word in Dio Cassius and here only in the N.T. One must supply \t“i staur“i\ and so it means "fastened to the cross," a graphic picture like Paul's "nailed to the cross" (\prosˆl“sas t“i staur“i\) in strkjv@Colossians:2:14|. {Did slay} (\aneilate\). Second aorist active indicative with first aorist vowel \a\ instead of \o\ as is common in the _Koin‚_. This verb \anaire“\, to take up, is often used for kill as in strkjv@Acts:12:2|. Note Peter's boldness now under the power of the Holy Spirit. He charges the people to their faces with the death of Christ.

rwp@Acts:2:31 @{Foreseeing} (\proid“n\)...Second aorist active participle. Did it...{Of the Christ} (\tou Christou\). Of the Messiah. See under verse 32|. This is a definite statement by Peter that David knew that in strkjv@Psalms:16| he was describing the resurrection of the Messiah.

rwp@Acts:2:44 @{Were together} (\ˆsan epi to auto\). Some MSS. \ˆsan kai\ (were and). But they were together in the same place as in strkjv@2:1|. {And had} (\kai eichon\). Imperfect active, kept on having, a habit in the present emergency. {Common} (\koina\). It was not actual communism, but they held all their property ready for use for the common good as it was needed (4:32|). This situation appears nowhere else except in Jerusalem and was evidently due to special conditions there which did not survive permanently. Later Paul will take a special collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem.

rwp@Acts:2:46 @{With one accord in the temple} (\homothumadon en t“i hier“i\). See on ¯1:14| for \homothumadon\. They were still worshipping in the temple for no breach had yet come between Christians and Jews. Daily they were here and daily breaking bread at home (\kat' oikon\) which looks like the regular meal. {They did take their food} (\metelambanon trophˆs\). Imperfect tense again and clearly referring to the regular meals at home. Does it refer also to the possible \agapai\ or to the Lord's Supper afterwards as they had common meals "from house to house" (\kat' oikon\)? We know there were local churches in the homes where they had "worship rooms," the church in the house. At any rate it was "with singleness" (\aphelotˆti\) of heart. The word occurs only here in the N.T., though a late _Koin‚_ word (papyri). It comes from \aphelˆs\, free from rock (\phelleus\ is stony ground), smooth. The old form was \apheleia\.

rwp@Acts:3:20 @{And that he may send the Christ who hath been appointed for you, even Jesus} (\kai aposteilˆi ton prokecheirismenon humin Christon Iˆsoun\). First aorist active subjunctive with \hop“s an\ as in strkjv@15:17| and strkjv@Luke:2:35|. There is little real difference in idea between \hop“s an\ and \hina an\. There is a conditional element in all purpose clauses. The reference is naturally to the second coming of Christ as verse 21| shows. Knowling admits "that there is a spiritual presence of the enthroned Jesus which believers enjoy as a foretaste of the visible and glorious Presence of the \Parousia\." Jesus did promise to be with the disciples all the days (Matthew:28:20|), and certainly repentance with accompanying seasons of refreshing help get the world ready for the coming of the King. The word \prokecheirismenon\ (perfect passive participle of \procheiriz“\, from \procheiros\, at hand, to take into one's hands, to choose) is the correct text here, not \prokekˆrugmenon\. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:22:14; strkjv@26:16|. It is not "Jesus Christ" here nor "Christ Jesus," but "the Messiah, Jesus," identifying Jesus with the Messiah. See the Second Epiphany of Jesus foretold also in strkjv@1Timothy:6:15| and the First Epiphany described in strkjv@1Peter:1:20|.

rwp@Acts:4:13 @{The boldness} (\tˆn parrˆsian\). Telling it all (\pan, rˆsia\). See also verses 29,31|. Actually Peter had turned the table on the Sanhedrin and had arraigned them before the bar of God. {Had perceived} (\katalabomenoi\). Second aorist middle participle of \katalamban“\, common verb to grasp strongly (\kata\), literally or with the mind (especially middle voice), to comprehend. The rulers recalled Peter and John from having seen them often with Jesus, probably during the temple teaching, etc. {They were unlearned} (\agrammatoi eisin\). Present indicative retained in indirect discourse. Unlettered men without technical training in the professional rabbinical schools of Hillel or Shammai. Jesus himself was so regarded (John:7:15|, "not having learned letters"). {And ignorant} (\kai idi“tai\). Old word, only here in the N.T. and strkjv@1Corinthians:14:24; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:6|. It does not mean "ignorant," but a layman, a man not in office (a private person), a common soldier and not an officer, a man not skilled in the schools, very much like \agrammatos\. It is from \idios\ (one's own) and our "idiosyncracy" is one with an excess of such a trait, while "idiot" (this very word) is one who has nothing but his idiosyncracy. Peter and John were men of ability and of courage, but they did not belong to the set of the rabbis. {They marvelled} (\ethaumazon\). Imperfect (inchoative) active, began to wonder and kept it up. {Took knowledge of them} (\epegin“skon autous\). Imperfect (inchoative) active again, they began to recognize them as men that they had seen with Jesus.

rwp@Acts:4:36 @{Barnabas} (\Barnabas\). His name was Joseph (correct text, and not Jesus) and he is mentioned as one illustration of those in verse 34| who selling brought the money. The apostles gave him the nickname Barnabas by which later he was known because of this noble deed. This fact argues that all did not actually sell, but were ready to do so if needed. Possibly Joseph had a larger estate than some others also. The meaning of the nickname is given by Luke as "son of consolation or exhortation" (\huios paraklˆse“s\). Doubtless his gifts as a preacher lay along this same line. Rackham thinks that the apostles gave him this name when he was recognized as a prophet. In strkjv@Acts:11:23| the very word \parekalei\ (exhorted) is used of Barnabas up at Antioch. He is the type of preacher described by Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:3|. Encouragement is the chief idea in \paraklˆsis\ though exhortation, comfort, consolation are used to render it (Acts:9:31; strkjv@13:15; strkjv@15:31|). See also strkjv@16:9; strkjv@20:12|. It is not necessary to think that the apostles coined the name Barnabas for Joseph which originally may have come from \Barnebous\ (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 308-10), son of Nebo, or even the Hebrew _Bar Nebi_ (son of a prophet). But, whatever the origin, the popular use is given by Luke. He was even called apostle along with Paul (Acts:14:14|) in the broad sense of that word.

rwp@Acts:5:4 @{Whiles it remained} (\menon\). Present active participle of mend, unsold, Peter means. {After it was sold} (\prathen\). First aorist passive of \piprask“\, to sell. {How is that thou hast conceived} (\Ti hoti ethou\). _Quid est quod_. See strkjv@Luke:2:49|. See also strkjv@Acts:5:9|. Second aorist middle indicative second person singular of \tithˆmi\. The devil filled his heart (verse 3|), but all the same Ananias did it too and is wholly responsible.

rwp@Acts:6:9 @{The synagogue of the Libertines} (\ek tˆs sunag“gˆs tˆs legomenˆs Libertin“n\). The Libertines (Latin _libertinus_, a freedman or the son of a freedman) were Jews, once slaves of Rome (perhaps descendants of the Jews taken to Rome as captives by Pompey), now set free and settled in Jerusalem and numerous enough to have a synagogue of their own. Schuerer calls a Talmudic myth the statement that there were 480 synagogues in Jerusalem. There were many, no doubt, but how many no one knows. These places of worship and study were in all the cities of the later times where there were Jews enough to maintain one. Apparently Luke here speaks of five such synagogues in Jerusalem (that of the Libertines, of the Cyrenians, of the Alexandrians, of Cilicia, and of Asia). There probably were enough Hellenists in Jerusalem to have five such synagogues. But the language of Luke is not clear on this point. He may make only two groups instead of five since he uses the article \t“n\ twice (once before \Libertin“n kai Kurˆnai“n kai Alexandre“n\, again before \apo Kilikias kai Asias\). He also changes from the genitive plural to \apo\ before Cilicia and Asia. But, leaving the number of the synagogues unsettled whether five or two, it is certain that in each one where Stephen appeared as a Hellenist preaching Jesus as the Messiah he met opposition. Certain of them "arose" (\anestˆsan\) "stood up" after they had stood all that they could from Stephen, "disputing with Stephen" (\sunzˆtountes t“i Stephan“i\). Present active participle of \sunzˆte“\, to question together as the two on the way to Emmaus did (Luke:24:15|). Such interruptions were common with Jews. They give a skilled speaker great opportunity for reply if he is quick in repartee. Evidently Stephen was fully equipped for the emergency. One of their synagogues had men from Cilicia in it, making it practically certain that young Saul of Tarsus, the brilliant student of Gamaliel, was present and tried his wits with Stephen. His ignominious defeat may be one explanation of his zest in the stoning of Stephen (Acts:8:1|).

rwp@Acts:6:11 @{Then they suborned men} (\tote hupebalon andras\). Second aorist active indicative of \hupoball“\, old verb, but here only in the N.T., to put under like a carpet, to bring men under one's control by suggestion or by money. One recalls the plight of Caiaphas in the trial of Jesus when he sought false witnesses. _Subornaverunt_. They put these men forward in an underhand way for fraud. {Blasphemous words against Moses and God} (\blasphˆma eis M“usˆn kai ton theon\). The punishment for blasphemy was stoning to death. See strkjv@Matthew:12:31| for discussion of the word \blasphˆmia, blasphˆme“, blasphˆmos\, all in the N.T. from \blapt“\, to harm, and \phˆmˆ\, speech, harmful speech, or \blax\, stupid, and \phˆmˆ\. But the charge against Stephen was untrue. Please note that Moses is here placed before God and practically on a par with God in the matter of blasphemy. The purpose of this charge is to stir the prejudices of the people in the matter of Jewish rights and privileges. It is the Pharisees who are conducting this attack on Stephen while the Sadducees had led them against Peter and John. The position of Stephen is critical in the extreme for the Sadducees will not help him as Gamaliel did the apostles.

rwp@Acts:6:13 @{False witnesses} (\marturas pseudeis\). Just as Caiaphas did with Jesus. {Ceaseth not} (\ou pauetai\). Wild charge just like a false witness that Stephen talks in the synagogues against the law and the holy temple.

rwp@Acts:6:15 @{As if the face of an angel} (\h“sei pros“pon aggelou\). Even his enemies saw that, wicked as they were. See strkjv@Exodus:34:30| for the face of Moses when he came down from Sinai (2Corinthians:3:7|). Page quotes Tennyson: "God's glory smote him on the face." Where were Peter and John at this crisis? Apparently Stephen stands alone before the Sanhedrin as Jesus did. But he was not alone for he saw Jesus standing at the right hand of God (Acts:7:56|). There was little that Peter and John could have done if they had been present. Gamaliel did not interpose this time for the Pharisees were behind the charges against Stephen, false though they were as Gamaliel could have found out.

rwp@Acts:7:22 @{Was instructed} (\epaideuthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \paideu“\, to train a child (\pais\), the usual idea in ancient Greek as here. The notion of chastisement (Hebrews:12:6|) is also in the old Greek and especially in the LXX and the N.T. Here with instrumental case (\pasˆi sophiƒi\) or the locative. The accusative would usually be retained after this verb. The priestly caste in Egypt was noted for their knowledge of science, astronomy, medicine, and mathematics. This reputation was proverbial (1Kings:4:30|). Modern discoveries have thrown much light on the ancient civilization of Egypt. Moses, like Paul, was a man of the schools. {Mighty in his words and works} (\dunatos en logois kai ergois autou\). The same phrase used of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:24:19|. The adjective \dunatos\ is employed of Apollos as an interpreter of the Scriptures (Acts:18:24|). Moses did not have the rhetorical skill or eloquence of Aaron (Exodus:4:10|), but his words like his deeds carried weight and power.

rwp@Acts:7:41 @{They made a calf} (\emoschopoiˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \moschopoie“\, here only in the N.T. and unknown elsewhere. The LXX (Exodus:32:3|) has \epoiˆse moschon\ from which phrase the word is evidently made. Aaron made the calf, but so did the people (Exodus:32:35|). {The idol} (\t“i eid“l“i\). Stephen calls it by the right name. The people said it was their way of worshipping Jehovah! Songs:the Egyptians worshipped the bull Apis at Memphis as the symbol of Osiris (the sun). They had another sacred bull Mnevis at Leontopolis. \Eid“lon\ (from \eidos\, form or figure) is the image or likeness of anything. The heathen worship the god through the image or idol. {Rejoiced} (\euphrainonto\). Imperfect, middle, kept on rejoicing (Exodus:32:6,18|) or making merry.

rwp@Acts:7:48 @{Howbeit} (\all'\). By contrast with what Solomon did and David planned. Note emphatic position of "not" (\all' ouch\), "But not does the Most High dwell." The presence of the Most High is not confined in any building, even one so splendid as Solomon's Temple as Solomon himself foresaw and acknowledged in his prayer (1Kings:8:27; strkjv@2Chronicles:6:18|). {In houses made with hands} (\en cheiropoiˆtois\). No word here for "houses" or "temples" in correct text (\naois\ temples in Textus Receptus). Literally, "In things made with hands" (\cheir\, hand, \poiˆtos\, verbal adjective of \poie“\). It occurs in strkjv@Mark:14:58| of the temple and of the sanctuary of Moab (Isaiah:16:12|). It occurs also in strkjv@Acts:7:24; strkjv@Hebrews:9:11,24; strkjv@Ephesians:2:11|. Common in the old Greek. {The prophet} (\ho prophˆtˆs\). strkjv@Isaiah:66:1|. Isaiah taught plainly that heaven is God's throne.

rwp@Acts:7:57 @{Stopped their ears} (\suneschon ta “ta aut“n\). Second aorist active of \sunech“\, to hold together. They held their ears together with their hands and affected to believe Stephen guilty of blasphemy (cf. strkjv@Matthew:26:65|). {Rushed upon him with one accord} (\h“rmˆsan homothumadon ep' auton\). Ingressive aorist active indicative of \horma“\, to rush impetuously as the hogs did down the cliff when the demons entered them (Luke:8:33|). No vote was taken by the Sanhedrin. No scruple was raised about not having the right to put him to death (John:8:31|). It may have taken place after Pilate's recall and before his successor came or Pilate, if there, just connived at such an incident that did not concern Rome. At any rate it was mob violence like modern lynching that took the law into the hands of the Sanhedrin without further formalities. {Out of the city} (\ek tˆs pole“s\). To keep from defiling the place with blood. But they sought to kill Paul as soon as they got him out of the temple area (Acts:21:30f.|). {Stoned} (\elithoboloun\). Imperfect active indicative of \lithobole“\, began to stone, from \lithobolos\ (\lithos\, stone, \ball“\, to throw), late Greek verb, several times in the N.T. as strkjv@Luke:13:34|. Stoning was the Jewish punishment for blasphemy (Leviticus:24:14-16|). {The witnesses} (\hoi martures\). The false testifiers against Stephen suborned by the Pharisees (Acts:6:11,13|). These witnesses had the privilege of casting the first stones (Deuteronomy:13:10; strkjv@17:7|) against the first witness for Christ with death (_martyr_ in our modern sense of the word). {At the feet of a young man named Saul} (\para tous podas neaniou kaloumenou Saulou\). Beside (\para\) the feet. Our first introduction to the man who became the greatest of all followers of Jesus Christ. Evidently he was not one of the "witnesses" against Stephen, for he was throwing no stones at him. But evidently he was already a leader in the group of Pharisees. We know from later hints from Saul (Paul) himself that he had been a pupil of Gamaliel (Acts:22:3|). Gamaliel, as the Pharisaic leader in the Sanhedrin, was probably on hand to hear the accusations against Stephen by the Pharisees. But, if so, he does not raise his voice against this mob violence. Saul does not seem to be aware that he is going contrary to the views of his master, though pupils often go further than their teachers.

rwp@Acts:8:13 @{And Simon also himself believed} (\Hosea:de Sim“n kai autos episteusen\). Note the same verb in the aorist tense \episteusen\. What did he believe? Evidently that Jesus was this "power of God" not himself (Simon). He saw that the miracles wrought by Philip in the name of Christ were genuine while he knew that his own were frauds. He wanted this power that Philip had to add to his own pretensions. "He was probably half victim of self-delusion, half conscious impostor" (Furneaux). He was determined to get this new "power," but had no sense of personal need of Jesus as Saviour for his sins. Songs:he submitted to baptism (\baptistheis\, first aorist passive participle of \baptiz“\), clear proof that baptism does not convey salvation. {He continued with Philip} (\ˆn proskarter“n t“i Philipp“i\). Periphrastic imperfect of the verb \proskartere“\ (see on ¯2:46|). He stuck to Philip (dative case) to find out the secret of his power. {Beholding} (\the“r“n\). Watching the signs and miracles (powers, \dunameis\ that threw his "power" in the shade) as they were wrought (\ginomenas\, present middle participle of \ginomai\). The more he watched the more the wonder grew (\existato\). He had "amazed" (verse 9|) the people by his tricks and he was himself more "amazed" than they by Philip's deeds.

rwp@Acts:8:15 @{That they might receive} (\hop“s lab“sin\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \lamban“\, final clause with \hop“s\. Did they wish the Samaritan Pentecost to prove beyond a doubt that the Samaritans were really converted when they believed? They had been baptized on the assumption that the Holy Spirit had given them new hearts. The coming of the Holy Spirit with obvious signs (cf. strkjv@10:44-48|) as in Jerusalem would make it plain.

rwp@Acts:8:17 @{Laid they their hands} (\epetithesan tas cheiras\). Imperfect active, repetition. The laying on of hands did not occur at the great Pentecost (2:4,33|) nor in strkjv@4:31; strkjv@10:44| nor is it mentioned in strkjv@1Corinthians:12; 14|. It is mentioned in strkjv@Acts:6:7| about the deacons and in strkjv@13:3| when Barnabas and Saul left Antioch. And in Saul's case it was Ananias who laid his hands on him (9:17|). Hence it cannot be concluded that the Holy Spirit was received only by the laying on of the hands of the apostles or by the hands of anyone. The so-called practice of "confirmation" appeals to this passage, but inconclusively. {They received} (\elambanon\). Imperfect active, repetition as before and \pari passu\ with the laying on of the hands.

rwp@Acts:8:30 @{Understandest thou what thou readest?} (\Ara ge gin“skeis ha anagin“skeis?\) The interrogative particle \ara\ and the intensive particle \ge\ indicate doubt on Philip's part. The play (\paranomasia\) upon the words in the Greek is very neat: {Do you know what you know again (read)?} The verb for read (\anagin“sko\) means to know the letters again, recognize, read. The famous comment of Julian about the Christian writings is often quoted: \Anegn“n, egn“n, kategn“n\ (I read, I understood, I condemned). The keen retort was: \Anegn“s, all'ouk egn“s, ei gar egn“s, ouk an kategn“s\ (You read, but did not understand; for if you had understood, you would not have condemned).

rwp@Acts:8:35 @{Beginning from this scripture} (\arxamenos apo tˆs graphˆs tautˆs\). As a text. Philip needed no better opening than this Messianic passage in Isaiah. {Preached unto him Jesus} (\euˆggelisato aut“i ton Iˆsoun\). Philip had no doubt about the Messianic meaning and he knew that Jesus was the Messiah. There are scholars who do not find Jesus in the Old Testament at all, but Jesus himself did (Luke:24:27|) as Philip does here. Scientific study of the Old Testament (historical research) misses its mark if it fails to find Christ the Center of all history. The knowledge of the individual prophet is not always clear, but after events throw a backward light that illumines it all (1Peter:1:11f.; strkjv@2Peter:1:19-21|).

rwp@Acts:9:5 @{Lord} (\kurie\). It is open to question if \kurie\ should not here be translated "Sir" as in strkjv@16:30| and in strkjv@Matthew:21:29,30; strkjv@John:5:7; strkjv@12:21; strkjv@20:15|; and should be so in strkjv@John:9:36|. It is hardly likely that at this stage Saul recognized Jesus as Lord, though he does so greet him in strkjv@22:10| "What shall I do, Lord?" Saul may have recognized the vision as from God as Cornelius says "Lord" in strkjv@10:4|. Saul surrendered instantly as Thomas did (John:20:28|) and as little Samuel (1Samuel:3:9|). This surrender of the will to Christ was the conversion of Saul. He saw a real Person, the Risen Christ, to whom he surrendered his life. On this point he never wavered for a moment to the end.

rwp@Acts:9:7 @{That journeyed with him} (\hoi sunodeuontes aut“i\). Not in the older Greek, but in the _Koin‚_, with the associative instrumental. {Speechless} (\eneoi\). Mute. Only here in N.T., though old word. {Hearing the voice, but beholding no man} (\akouontes men tˆs ph“nˆs, mˆdena de the“rountes\). Two present active participles in contrast (\men, de\). In strkjv@22:9| Paul says that the men "beheld the light" (\to men ph“s etheasanto\), but evidently did not discern the person. Paul also says there, "but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me" (\tˆn de ph“nˆn ouk ˆkousan tou lalountos moi\). Instead of this being a flat contradiction of what Luke says in strkjv@9:7| it is natural to take it as being likewise (as with the "light" and "no one") a distinction between the "sound" (original sense of \ph“nˆ\ as in strkjv@John:3:8|) and the separate words spoken. It so happens that \akou“\ is used either with the accusative (the extent of the hearing) or the genitive (the specifying). It is possible that such a distinction here coincides with the two senses of \ph“nˆ\. They heard the sound (9:7|), but did not understand the words (22:9|). However, this distinction in case with \akou“\, though possible and even probable here, is by no means a necessary one for in strkjv@John:3:8| where \ph“nˆn\ undoubtedly means "sound" the accusative occurs as Luke uses \ˆkousen ph“nˆn\ about Saul in strkjv@Acts:9:4|. Besides in strkjv@22:7| Paul uses \ˆkousa ph“nˆs\ about himself, but \ˆkousa ph“nˆn\ about himself in strkjv@76:14|, interchangeably.

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:9:27 @{Took him} (\epilabomenos\). Second aorist middle (indirect) participle of \epilamban“\, common verb to lay hold of. Barnabas saw the situation and took Saul to himself and listened to his story and believed it. It is to the credit of Barnabas that he had the insight and the courage to stand by Saul at the crucial moment in his life when the evidence seemed to be against him. It is a pleasing hypothesis that this influential disciple from Cyprus had gone to the University of Tarsus where he met Saul. If so, he would know more of him than those who only knew his record as a persecutor of Christians. That fact Barnabas knew also, but he was convinced that Jesus had changed the heart of Saul and he used his great influence (Acts:4:36; strkjv@11:22|) to win the favour of the apostles, Peter in particular (Galatians:1:19|) and James the half-brother of Jesus. The other apostles were probably out of the city as Paul says that he did not see them. {To the apostles} (\pros tous apostolous\). Both Barnabas and James are termed apostles in the general sense, though not belonging to the twelve, as Paul did not, though himself later a real apostle. Songs:Barnabas introduced Saul to Peter and vouched for his story, declared it fully (\diˆgˆsato\, in detail) including Saul's vision of Jesus (\eiden ton kurion\) as the vital thing and Christ's message to Saul (\elalˆsen aut“i\) and Saul's bold preaching (\ˆparrˆsiasato\, first aorist middle indicative of \parrˆsiaz“\ from \pan--rˆsia\ telling it all as in strkjv@Acts:2:29|). Peter was convinced and Saul was his guest for two weeks (Galatians:1:18|) with delightful fellowship (\historˆsai\). He had really come to Jerusalem mainly "to visit" (to see) Peter, but not to receive a commission from him. He had that from the Lord (Galatians:1:1f.|). Both Peter and James could tell Saul of their special experiences with the Risen Christ. Furneaux thinks that Peter was himself staying at the home of Mary the mother of John Mark (Acts:12:12|) who was a cousin of Barnabas (Colossians:4:10|). This is quite possible. At any rate Saul is now taken into the inner circle of the disciples in Jerusalem.

rwp@Acts:9:29 @{Preaching boldly} (\parrˆsiazomenos\). For a while. Evidently Saul did not extend his preaching outside of Jerusalem (Galatians:1:22|) and in the city preached mainly in the synagogues of the Hellenists (\pros tous Hellenistas\) as Stephen had done (Acts:8:9|). As a Cilician Jew he knew how to speak to the Hellenists. {Disputed} (\sunezˆtei\). Imperfect active of \sunzˆte“\, the very verb used in strkjv@6:9| of the disputes with Stephen in these very synagogues in one of which (Cilicia) Saul had probably joined issue with Stephen to his own discomfort. It was intolerable to these Hellenistic Jews now to hear Saul taking the place of Stephen and using the very arguments that Stephen had employed. {But they went about to kill him} (\Hoi de epecheiroun anelein auton\). Demonstrative \hoi\ with \de\ and the conative imperfect of \epicheire“\, to put the hand to, to try, an old verb used in the N.T. only three times (Luke:1:1; strkjv@Acts:9:29; strkjv@19:3|). They offer to Saul the same conclusive answer that he gave to Stephen, death. Paul tells how the Lord Jesus appeared to him at this juncture in a vision in the temple (Acts:22:17-21|) with the distinct command to leave Jerusalem and how Paul protested that he was willing to meet the fate of Stephen in whose death he had a shameful part. That is to Saul's credit, but the Lord did not want Saul to be put to death yet. His crown of martyrdom will come later.

rwp@Acts:9:36 @{At Joppa} (\En Ioppˆi\). The modern Jaffa, the port of Jerusalem (2Chronicles:2:16|). {Disciple} (\mathˆtria\). Feminine form of \mathˆtˆs\, a learner from \manthan“\, to learn, a late word and only here in the N.T. {Tabitha} (\Tabeitha\). Aramaic form of the Hebrew _Tsebi_ and, like the Greek word {Dorcas} (\Dorkas\), means Gazelle, "the creature with the beautiful look" (or eyes), from \derkomai\. The gazelle was a favourite type for beauty in the orient (Song of Solomon strkjv@2:9,17; strkjv@4:5; strkjv@7:3|). She may have had both the Aramaic and the Greek name, Tabitha Dorcas like John Mark. There is nothing said about a husband and so she was probably unmarried. She is the second woman mentioned by name after Pentecost (Sapphira the other). She did her beautiful deeds by herself. She did not have a Dorcas society. {Did} (\epoiei\). Imperfect active, her habit.

rwp@Acts:9:43 @{Many days} (\hˆmeras hikanas\). See on verse ¯23|. Luke is fond of the phrase and uses it for time, number, size. It might be "ten days, ten months, or ten years" (Page). {With one Simon a tanner} (\para tini Sim“ni bursei\). The use of \para\ is usual for staying with one (by his side). "The more scrupulous Jews regarded such an occupation as unclean, and avoided those who pursued it. The conduct of Peter here shows that he did not carry his prejudices to that extent" (Hackett). One of the rabbis said: "It is impossible for the world to do without tanners; but woe to him who is a tanner." A Jewess could sue for divorce if she discovered that her husband was a tanner. And yet Peter will have scruples on the housetop in the tanner's house about eating food considered unclean. "The lodging with the tanner was a step on the road to eating with a Gentile" (Furneaux).

rwp@Acts:10:14 @{Not so, Lord} (\Mˆdam“s, kurie\). The negative \mˆdam“s\ calls for the optative \eiˆ\ (may it not be) or the imperative \est“\ (let it be). It is not \oudam“s\, a blunt refusal (I shall not do it). And yet it is more than a mild protest as Page and Furneaux argue. It is a polite refusal with a reason given. Peter recognizes the invitation to slay (\thuson\) the unclean animals as from the Lord (\kurie\) but declines it three times. {For I have never eaten anything} (\hoti oudepote ephagon pan\). Second aorist active indicative, I never did anything like this and I shall not do it now. The use of \pan\ (everything) with \oudepote\ (never) is like the Hebrew (_lo--k“l_) though a like idiom appears in the vernacular _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 752). {Common and unclean} (\koinon kai akatharton\). \Koinos\ from epic \xunos\ (\xun, sun\, together with) originally meant common to several (Latin _communis_) as in strkjv@Acts:2:44; strkjv@4:32; strkjv@Titus:1:4; strkjv@Jude:1:3|. The use seen here (also strkjv@Mark:7:2,5; strkjv@Romans:14:14; strkjv@Hebrews:10:29; strkjv@Revelation:21:27; strkjv@Acts:10:28; strkjv@11:8|), like Latin _vulgaris_ is unknown in ancient Greek. Here the idea is made plain by the addition of \akatharton\ (unclean), ceremonially unclean, of course. We have the same double use in our word "common." See on ¯Mark:7:18f.| where Mark adds the remarkable participle \kathariz“n\ (making all meats clean), evidently from Peter who recalls this vision. Peter had been reared from childhood to make the distinction between clean and unclean food and this new proposal even from the Lord runs against all his previous training. He did not see that some of God's plans for the Jews could be temporary. This symbol of the sheet was to show Peter ultimately that Gentiles could be saved without becoming Jews. At this moment he is in spiritual and intellectual turmoil.

rwp@Acts:10:29 @{Without gainsaying} (\anantirrhˆt“s\). \A\ privative with compound adverb from \anti\ (back, in return, against) and verbal \rhˆtos\ (from \errhˆthˆn\, to speak). Late and rare and here only in the N.T., but the adjective in strkjv@19:36|. Without answering back. That is true after the Holy Spirit expressly told Peter to go with the messengers of Cornelius (10:19-23|). Peter's objections were made to the Lord in the vision which he did not understand. But that vision prepared him for this great step which he had now taken. He had stepped over the line of Jewish custom. {With what intent} (\tini log“i\). More exactly, "for what reason" as in Plato, _Gorgias_ 512 C.

rwp@Acts:10:41 @{Chosen before} (\prokecheirotonˆmenois\). Perfect passive participle dative plural from \procheirotone“\, to choose or designate by hand (\cheirotone“, cheir\, hand, and \tein“\, to stretch, as in strkjv@Acts:14:23; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:19|), beforehand (\pro\), a double compound as old as Plato, but here alone in the N.T. Peter is evidently stating the thing as it happened and not trying to make a convincing story by saying that both friends and foes saw him after his resurrection. It is the "historian's candour" (Paley) in Luke here that adds to the credibility of the narrative. The sceptical Jews would not have believed and Jesus was kept from open contact with the world of sin after his Passion. {To us who did eat and drink with him} (\hˆmin hoitines sunephagomen kai sunepiomen aut“i\). The "who" (\hoitines\) is first person agreeing with "us" (\hˆmin\). Second aorist active indicative of the common verbs \sunesthi“\ and \sumpin“\. \Aut“i\ is associative instrumental case. There are difficulties to us in understanding how Jesus could eat and drink after the resurrection as told here and in strkjv@Luke:24:41-3|, but at any rate Peter makes it clear that it was no hallucination or ghost, but Jesus himself whom they saw after he rose from the dead, "after the rising as to him" (\meta to anastˆnai auton\, \meta\ with the accusative articular infinitive second aorist active and the accusative \auton\ of general reference). Furneaux dares to think that the disciples misunderstood Jesus about eating after the resurrection. But that is to deny the testimony merely because we cannot explain the transition state of the body of Jesus.

rwp@Acts:10:42 @{He charged} (\parˆggeilen\). First aorist active indicative as in strkjv@1:4|. There Jesus is the subject and so probably here, though Page insists that \ho theos\ (God) is here because of verse 40|. {To testify} (\diamarturasthai\). First aorist middle infinitive. See on ¯2:40|. {Ordained} (\h“rismenos\). Perfect passive participle of \horiz“\, old verb, to mark out, to limit, to make a horizon. {Judge} (\kritˆs\). The same point made by Peter in strkjv@1Peter:4:5|. He does not use the word "Messiah" to these Gentiles though he did say "anointed" (\echrisen\) in verse 38|. Peter's claim for Jesus is that he is the Judge of Jew and Gentile (living and dead).

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:11:3 @{Thou wentest in} (\eisˆlthes\). Direct form, but Westcott and Hort have it \eisˆlthen\ (he went in), indirect form. Songs:with \sunephages\ (didst eat) and \sunephagen\ (did eat). The direct is more vivid. {Men uncircumcised} (\andras akrobustian echontas\). "Men having uncircumcision." It is a contemptuous expression. They did not object to Peter's preaching to the Gentiles, but to his going into the house of Cornelius and eating with them, violating his supposed obligations as a Jew (Hackett). It was the same complaint in principle that the Pharisees had made against Jesus when he ate with publicans and sinners (Luke:15:12|). The Jews had not merely the Mosaic regulations about clean and unclean food, but also the fact that at a Gentile table some of the meat may have been an idol sacrifice. And Peter himself had similar scruples when the vision came to him at Joppa and when he entered the house of Cornelius in Caesarea strkjv@10:28|). Peter had been led beyond the circumcision party.

rwp@Acts:11:13 @{Standing and saying} (\stathenta kai eiponta\). More precisely, "stand and say" (punctiliar act, first aorist passive and second aorist active participles). {Fetch Simon} (\metapempsai Sim“na\). First aorist middle imperative. Third time mentioned (10:5,22; strkjv@11:13|). Perhaps Peter is anxious to make it plain that he did not go of his own initiative into the house of Cornelius. He went under God's direct orders.

rwp@Acts:11:19 @{They therefore that were scattered abroad} (\hoi men oun diasparentes\). Precisely the same words used in strkjv@8:4| about those scattered by Saul (which see) and a direct reference to it is made by the next words, "upon the tribulation that arose about Stephen" (\apo tˆs thlipse“s tˆs genomenˆs epi Stephan“i\). As a result of (\apo\), in the case of (\epi\) Stephen. From that event Luke followed Saul through his conversion and back to Jerusalem and to Tarsus. Then he showed the activity of Peter outside of Jerusalem as a result of the cessation of the persecution from the conversion of Saul with the Gentile Pentecost in Caesarea and the outcome in Jerusalem. Now Luke starts over again from the same persecution by Saul and runs a new line of events up to Antioch parallel to the other, probably partly following. {Except to Jews only} (\ei mˆ monon Ioudaiois\). Clearly these disciples did not know anything about the events in Caesarea and at first their flight preceded that time. But it was a wonderful episode, the eager and loyal preaching of the fleeing disciples. The culmination in Antioch was probably after the report of Peter about Caesarea. This Antioch by the Orontes was founded 300 B.C. by Seleucus Nicator and was one of five cities so named by the Seleucides. It became the metropolis of Syria though the Arabs held Damascus first. Antioch ranked next to Rome and Alexandria in size, wealth, power, and vice. There were many Jews in the cosmopolitan population of half a million. It was destined to supplant Jerusalem as the centre of Christian activity.

rwp@Acts:12:6 @{Was about to bring him forth} (\ˆmellen prosagagein\ or \proagagein\). The MSS. vary, but not \anagagein\ of verse 4|. {The same night} (\tˆi nukti ekeinˆi\). Locative case, {on that (very) night}. {Was sleeping} (\ˆn koim“menos\). Periphrastic middle imperfect. {Bound with two chains} (\dedemenos halusesin dusin\). Perfect passive participle of \de“\, to bind, followed by instrumental case. One chain was fastened to each soldier (one on each side of Peter). {Kept} (\etˆroun\)...according to Roman rule. Did Peter...(John:21:18|)? Jesus had not said, as Furneaux does, that he would die by crucifixion.

rwp@Acts:12:9 @{Wist not} (\ouk ˆidei\). Past perfect of \oida\ used as imperfect, did not know. {Followed} (\ˆkolouthei\). Imperfect active, kept on following as the angel had directed (verse 8|). That it was true (\hoti alˆthes estin\). Indirect assertion and so present tense retained. Note "true" (\alˆthes\) in the sense of reality or actuality. {Which was done} (\to ginomenon\). Present middle participle, that which was happening. {Thought he saw a vision} (\edokei horama blepein\). Imperfect active, kept on thinking, puzzled as he was. \Blepein\ is the infinitive in indirect assertion without the pronoun (he) expressed which could be either nominative in apposition with the subject as in strkjv@Romans:1:22| or accusative of general reference as in strkjv@Acts:5:36; strkjv@8:9| (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1036-40). Peter had had a vision in Joppa (10:10|) which Luke describes as an "ecstasy," but here is objective fact, at least Luke thought so and makes that distinction. Peter will soon know whether he is still in the cell or not as we find out that a dream is only a dream when we wake up.

rwp@Acts:12:17 @There were probably loud exclamations of astonishment and joy. {Beckoning with the hand} (\kataseisas tˆi cheiri\). First aorist active participle of \katasei“\, old verb to signal or shake down with the hand (instrumental case \cheiri\). In the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:12:17; strkjv@13:16; strkjv@19:33; strkjv@21:40|. The speaker indicates by a downward movement of the hand his desire for silence (to hold their peace, \sigƒin\, present active infinitive, to keep silent). Peter was anxious for every precaution and he wanted their instant attention. {Declared} (\diˆgˆsato\). First aorist middle of \diˆgeomai\, old verb to carry through a narrative, give a full story. See also strkjv@Acts:9:27| of Barnabas in his defence of Saul. Peter told them the wonderful story. {Unto James and the brethren} (\Iak“b“i kai tois adelphois\). Dative case after \apaggeilate\ (first aorist active imperative). Evidently "James and the brethren" were not at this meeting, probably meeting elsewhere. There was no place where all the thousands of disciples in Jerusalem could meet. This gathering in the house of Mary may have been of women only or a meeting of the Hellenists. It is plain that this James the Lord's brother, is now the leading presbyter or elder in Jerusalem though there were a number (11:30; strkjv@21:18|). Paul even terms him apostle (Gal strkjv@1:19|), though certainly not one of the twelve. The twelve apostles probably were engaged elsewhere in mission work save James now dead (Acts:12:2|) and Peter. The leadership of James is here recognized by Peter and is due, partly to the absence of the twelve, but mainly to his own force of character. He will preside over the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:13|). {To another place} (\eis heteron topon\). Probably Luke did not know the place and certainly it was prudent for Peter to conceal it from Herod Agrippa. Probably Peter left the city. He is back in Jerusalem at the Conference a few years later (Acts:15:7|) and after the death of Herod Agrippa. Whether Peter went to Rome during these years we do not know. He was recognized later as the apostle to the circumcision (Gal strkjv@2:7; strkjv@1Peter:1:1|) and apparently was in Rome with John Mark when he wrote the First Epistle (1Peter:5:13|), unless it is the real Babylon. But, even if Peter went to Rome during this early period, there is no evidence that he founded the church there. If he had done so, in the light of strkjv@2Corinthians:10:16| it would be strange that Paul had not mentioned it in writing to Rome, for he was anxious not to build on another man's foundation (Romans:15:20|). Paul felt sure that he himself had a work to do in Rome. Unfortunately Luke has not followed the ministry of Peter after this period as he does Paul (appearing again only in chapter strkjv@Acts:15|). If Peter really left Jerusalem at this time instead of hiding in the city, he probably did some mission work as Paul says that he did (1Corinthians:9:5|).

rwp@Acts:13:3 @{When they had fasted} (\nˆsteusantes\). Either finishing the same fast in verse 2| or another one (Hackett), but clearly a voluntary fast. {Laid their hands upon them} (\epithentes tas cheiras autois\). Second aorist active participle of \epitithˆmi\. Not ordination to the ministry, but a solemn consecration to the great missionary task to which the Holy Spirit had called them. Whether the whole church took part in this ceremony is not clear, though in strkjv@15:40| "the brethren" did commend Paul and Silas. Perhaps some of them here acted for the whole church, all of whom approved the enterprise. But Paul makes it plain in strkjv@Phillipians:4:15| that the church in Antioch did not make financial contribution to the campaign, but only goodwill. But that was more than the church at Jerusalem would have done as a whole since Peter had been arraigned there for his activities in Caesarea (Acts:11:1-18|). Clearly Barnabas and Saul had to finance the tour themselves. It was Philippi that first gave money to Paul's campaigns. There were still heathen enough in Antioch, but the church approved the going of Barnabas and Saul, their very best.

rwp@Acts:13:5 @{Proclaimed} (\katˆggellon\). Imperfect active of \kataggell“\, inchoative, began to proclaim. This was Paul's rule of procedure, "to the Jew first" (Romans:1:16; strkjv@Acts:13:46; strkjv@17:2; strkjv@18:4,19; strkjv@19:8|). {They had also} (\eichon de kai\). Imperfect active, descriptive. {As their attendant} (\hupˆretˆn\). Literally, "under-rower" (\hupo, ˆretˆs\) in the trireme. Probably here minister (\chazzan\) or assistant in the synagogue as in strkjv@Luke:4:20|. Cf. strkjv@Matthew:5:25|. It is not clear what John Mark did, though he was evidently selected by Barnabas as his cousin. He may have helped in the baptizing. There were probably others also in the company (verse 13|). The "also" may mean that Mark did some preaching. Barnabas was probably the leader in the work in these Jewish synagogues.

rwp@Acts:13:22 @{When he had removed him} (\metastˆsas auton\). First aorist active participle of \methistˆmi\, old verb to transfer, to transpose (note force of \meta\). This verb occurs in strkjv@Luke:16:4| by the unjust steward about his removal from office. Cf. strkjv@1Samuel:15:16|. {To be} (\eis\). As or for, Greek idiom like the Hebrew _le_, common in the LXX. {A man after my heart} (\andra kata tˆn kardian mou\). The words quoted by Paul as a direct saying of God are a combination of strkjv@Psalms:89:20, 21; strkjv@1Samuel:13:14| (the word of the Lord to Samuel about David). Knowling thinks that this free and rather loose quotation of the substance argues for the genuineness of the report of Paul's sermon. Hackett observes that the commendation of David is not absolute, but, as compared with the disobedient Saul, he was a man who did God's will in spite of the gross sin of which he repented (Psalms:51|). Note "wills" (\thelˆmata\), plural, of God.

rwp@Acts:13:24 @{When John had first preached} (\prokˆruxantos I“anou\). Literally, John heralding beforehand, as a herald before the king (Luke:3:3|). Genitive absolute of first aorist active participle of \prokˆruss“\, old verb to herald beforehand, here alone in the N.T., though Textus Receptus has it also in strkjv@Acts:3:20|. {Before his coming} (\pro pros“pou tˆs eisodou autou\). Literally, before the face of his entering in (here act of entrance as strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:9|, not the gate as in strkjv@Hebrews:10:19|). See strkjv@Malachi:3:1| quoted in strkjv@Matthew:11:10| (Luke:7:27|) for this Hebrew phrase and also strkjv@Luke:1:76|. {The baptism of repentance} (\baptisma metanoias\). Baptism marked by, characterized by (genitive case, case of kind or species) repentance (change of mind and life). The very phrase used of John's preaching in strkjv@Mark:1:4; strkjv@Luke:3:3|. It is clear therefore that Paul understood John's ministry and message as did Peter (Acts:2:38; strkjv@10:37|).

rwp@Acts:13:25 @{As John was fulfilling his course} (\h“s eplˆrou I“anˆs ton dromon\). Imperfect active of \plˆro“\, describing his vivid ministry without defining the precise period when John asked the question. Paul uses this word \dromos\ (course) of his own race (Acts:20:24; strkjv@2Timothy:4:7|). {What suppose ye that I am?} (\Ti eme huponoeite einai?\) Note \ti\ (neuter), not \tina\ (masculine), {what} not {who}, character, not identity. It is indirect discourse (the infinitive \einai\ and the accusative of general reference). {Huponoe“} (\hupo, noe“\) is to think secretly, to suspect, to conjecture. {I am not he} (\ouk eimi eg“\). These precise words are not given in the Gospels, but the idea is the same as the disclaimers by the Baptist in strkjv@John:1:19-27| (cf. also strkjv@Matthew:3:11; strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Luke:3:16|). Paul had a true grasp of the message of the Baptist. He uses the very form \l–sai\ (first aorist active infinitive of \lu“\) found in strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Luke:3:16| and the word for shoes (\hupodˆma\, singular) in all three. His quotation is remarkably true to the words in the Synoptic Gospels. How did Paul get hold of the words of the Baptist so clearly?

rwp@Acts:13:27 @{Because they knew him not} (\touton agnoˆsantes\). First aorist active participle (causal) of \agnoe“\, old verb, not to know. Peter gives "ignorance" (\agnoia\) as the excuse of the Jews in the death of Christ (3:17|) and Paul does the same about his conduct before his conversion (1Timothy:1:13|). This ignorance mitigated the degree of their guilt, but it did not remove it, for it was willing ignorance and prejudice. {The voices of the prophets which are read} (\tas ph“nas t“n prophˆt“n tas anagin“skomenas\). Object also of \agnoˆsantes\, though it could be the object of \eplˆr“san\ (fulfilled) if \kai\ is taken as "also". The "voices" were heard as they were read aloud each Sabbath in the synagogue. In their ignorant condemnation they fulfilled the prophecies about the suffering Messiah.

rwp@Acts:13:28 @{Though they found no cause of death} (\mˆdemian aitian thanatou heurontes\). Second aorist active with usual negative of the participle. As a matter of fact the Sanhedrin did charge Jesus with blasphemy, but could not prove it (Matthew:26:65; strkjv@27:24; strkjv@Luke:23:22|). At this time no Gospel had probably been written, but Paul knew that Jesus was innocent. He uses this same idiom about his own innocence (Acts:28:18|). {That he should be slain} (\anairethˆnai auton\). First aorist passive infinitive, the accusative case, the direct object of \ˆitˆsanto\ (first aorist middle indicative, asked as a favour to themselves).

rwp@Acts:13:32 @{We bring you good tidings of the promise} (\hˆmeis humƒs euaggelizometha tˆn epaggelian\). Two accusatives here (person and thing), old Greek did not use accusative of the person with this verb as in strkjv@16:10; strkjv@Luke:3:18|. Note "we you" together. Here the heart of Paul's message on this occasion.

rwp@Acts:13:34 @{Now no more to return to corruption} (\mˆketi mellonta hupostrephein eis diaphthoran\). No longer about to return as Lazarus did. Jesus did not die again and so is the first fruits of the resurrection (1Corinthians:15:23; strkjv@Romans:6:9|). {He hath spoken} (\eirˆken\). Present perfect active indicative, common way of referring to the permanent utterances of God which are on record in the Scriptures. {The holy and sure blessings of David} (\ta hosia Daueid ta pista\). See strkjv@2Samuel:7:13|. Literally, "the holy things of David the trustworthy things." He explains "the holy things" at once.

rwp@Acts:13:35 @{Because} (\dioti\). Compound conjunction (\dia, hoti\) like our "because that." The reason for the previous statement about "the holy things." {Thou wilt not give thy holy one to see corruption} (\ou d“seis ton hosion sou idein diaphthoran\). Quotation from strkjv@Psalms:16:10| to show that Jesus did not see corruption in his body, a flat contradiction for those who deny the bodily resurrection of Jesus.

rwp@Acts:13:36 @{His own generation} (\idiƒi geneƒi\). Either locative case, "in his own generation" or dative object of \hupˆretˆsas\ (served). {The counsel of God} (\tˆi tou theou boulˆi\). Songs:here, either the dative, the object of \hupˆretˆsas\ if \geneƒi\ is locative, or the instrumental case "by the counsel of God" which again may be construed either with \hupˆretˆsas\ (having served) or after \ekoimˆthˆ\ (fell on sleep). Either of the three ways is grammatical and makes good sense. \Koimaomai\ for death we have already had (Acts:7:60|). Songs:Jesus (John:11:11|) and Paul (1Corinthians:15:6,51|). {Was laid} (\prosetethˆ\). Was added unto (first aorist passive indicative of \prostithˆmi\). See the verb in strkjv@2:47; strkjv@5:14|. This figure for death probably arose from the custom of burying families together (Genesis:15:15; strkjv@Judges:2:10|). {Saw corruption} (\eiden diaphthoran\). As Jesus did not (Acts:2:31|) as he shows in verse 37|.

rwp@Acts:14:11 @{Lifted up their voice} (\epˆran tˆn ph“nˆn aut“n\). First aorist active of \epair“\. In their excitement they elevated their voices. {In the speech of Lycaonia} (\Lukaonisti\). Adverb from verb \lukaoniz“\, to use the language of Lycaonia found here alone, but formed regularly like \Ebraisti\ (John:5:2|), \Hellˆnisti\ (Acts:21:37|), \R“maisti\ (John:19:20|). Paul was speaking in Greek, of course, but the excitement of the crowd over the miracle made them cry out in their native tongue which Paul and Barnabas did not understand. Hence it was not till preparations for offering sacrifice to them had begun that Paul understood the new role in which he and Barnabas were held. {In the likeness of men} (\homoi“thentes anthr“pois\). First aorist passive participle of \homoi“\, to liken, with the associative instrumental case. In this primitive state the people hold to the old Graeco-Roman mythology. The story of Baucis and Philemon tells how Jupiter (Zeus) and Mercury (Hermes) visited in human form the neighbouring region of Phrygia (Ovid, _Meta_. VIII. 626). Jupiter (Zeus) had a temple in Lystra.

rwp@Acts:14:12 @{They called} (\ekaloun\). Inchoative imperfect began to call. {Barnabas, Jupiter} (\ton Barnaban Dia\). Because Barnabas was the older and the more imposing in appearance. Paul admits that he was not impressive in looks (2Corinthians:10:10|). {And Paul, Mercury} (\ton de Paulon Hermˆn\). Mercury (\Hermˆs\) was the messenger of the gods, and the spokesman of Zeus. \Hermˆs\ was of beautiful appearance and eloquent in speech, the inventor of speech in legend. Our word hermeneutics or science of interpretation comes from this word (Hebrews:7:2; strkjv@John:1:38|). {Because he was the chief speaker} (\epeidˆ autos ˆn ho hˆgoumenos tou logou\). Paul was clearly "the leader of the talk." Songs:it seemed a clear case to the natives. If preachers always knew what people really think of them! Whether Paul was alluding to his experience in Lystra or not in strkjv@Galatians:4:14|, certainly they did receive him as an angel of God, as if "Mercury" in reality.

rwp@Acts:14:16 @{In the generations gone by} (\en tais par“ichˆmenais geneais\). Perfect middle participle from \paroichomai\, to go by, old verb, here alone in the N.T. {Suffered} (\eiasen\). Constative aorist active indicative of \ea“\ (note syllabic augment). Paul here touches God in history as he did just before in creation. God's hand is on the history of all the nations (Gentile and Jew), only with the Gentiles he withdrew the restraints of his grace in large measure (Acts:17:30; strkjv@Romans:1:24,26,28|), judgment enough for their sins. {To walk in their ways} (\poreuesthai tais hodois aut“n\). Present middle infinitive, to go on walking, with locative case without \en\. This philosophy of history does not mean that God was ignorant or unconcerned. He was biding his time in patience.

rwp@Acts:14:17 @{And yet} (\kaitoi\). Old Greek compound particle (\kai toi\). In the N.T. twice only, once with finite verb as here, once with the participle (Hebrews:4:3|). {Without witness} (\amarturon\). Old adjective (\a\ privative and \martus\, witness), only here in the N.T. {Left} (\aphˆken\). First aorist active (\k\ aorist indicative of \aphiˆmi\). {In that he did good} (\agathourg“n\). Present active causal participle of \agathourge“\, late and rare verb (also \agathoerge“\ strkjv@1Timothy:6:18|), reading of the oldest MSS. here for \agathopoie“\, to do good. Note two other causal participles here parallel with \agathourg“n\, viz., \didous\ ("giving you") present active of \did“mi, empipl“n\ ("filling") present active of \empimpla“\ (late form of \empimplˆmi\). This witness to God (his doing good, giving rains and fruitful seasons, filling your hearts with food and gladness) they could receive without the help of the Old Testament revelation (Romans:1:20|). Zeus was regarded as the god of rain (Jupiter Pluvius) and Paul claims the rain and the fruitful (\karpophorous, karpos\, and \pher“\, fruit bearing, old word, here alone in N.T.) seasons as coming from God. Lycaonia was often dry and it would be an appropriate item. "Mercury, as the God of merchandise, was also the dispenser of food" (Vincent). Paul does not talk about laws of nature as if they governed themselves, but he sees the living God "behind the drama of the physical world" (Furneaux). These simple country people could grasp his ideas as he claims everything for the one true God. {Gladness} (\euphrosunˆs\). Old word from \euphr“n\ (\eu\ and \phrˆn\), good cheer. In the N.T. only strkjv@Acts:2:28| and here. Cheerfulness should be our normal attitude when we consider God's goodness. Paul does not here mention Christ because he had the single definite purpose to dissuade them from worshipping Barnabas and himself.

rwp@Acts:14:21 @{When they had preached the gospel to that city} (\euaggelisamenoi tˆn polin ekeinˆn\). Having evangelized (first aorist middle participle) that city, a smaller city and apparently with no trouble from the Jews. {Had made many disciples} (\mathˆteusantes hikanous\). First aorist active participle of \mathˆteu“\ from \mathˆtˆs\, a learner or disciple. Late verb in Plutarch, to be a disciple (Matthew:27:57| like strkjv@John:19:38|) and then to disciple (old English, Spenser), to make a disciple as in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| and here. Paul and Barnabas were literally here obeying the command of Jesus in discipling people in this heathen city. {They returned to Lystra and to Iconium, and to Antioch} (\hupestrepsan eis tˆn Lustran kai eis Ikonion kai eis Antiocheian\). Derbe was the frontier city of the Roman empire. The quickest way to return to Antioch in Syria would have been by the Cilician Gates or by the pass over Mt. Taurus by which Paul and Silas will come to Derbe in the second tour (Acts:15:41-16:1|), but difficult to travel in winter. But it was necessary to revisit the churches in Lystra, Iconium, Antioch in Pisidia and to see that they were able to withstand persecution. Paul was a Roman citizen though he had not made use of this privilege as yet for his own protection. Against mob violence it would count for little, but he did not hesitate. Paul had been stoned in Lystra, threatened in Iconium, expelled in Antioch. He shows his wisdom in conserving his work.

rwp@Acts:14:22 @{Confirming} (\epistˆrizontes\). Late verb (in LXX), in N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:14:22; strkjv@15:32,41|, to make more firm, to give additional (\epi\) strength. Each time in Acts the word is used concerning these churches. {To continue in the faith} (\emmenein tˆi pistei\). To remain in with locative, old verb. It is possible that \pistis\ here has the notion of creed as Paul uses it later (Colossians:1:23| with \epimen“\; strkjv@1Timothy:5:8|). It seems to be here more than trust or belief. These recent converts from heathenism were ill-informed, were persecuted, had broken family and social ties, greatly needed encouragement if they were to hold out. {We must} (\dei hˆmƒs\). It does not follow from this use of "we" that Luke was present, since it is a general proposition applying to all Christians at all times (2Timothy:3:12|). Luke, of course, approved this principle. Knowling asks why Timothy may not have told Luke about Paul's work. It all sounds like quotation of Paul's very language. Note the change of construction here after \parakalountes\ (infinitive of indirect command, \emmenein\, but \hoti dei\, indirect assertion). They needed the right understanding of persecution as we all do. Paul frankly warned these new converts in this heathen environment of the many tribulations through which they must enter the Kingdom of God (the culmination at last) as he did at Ephesus (Acts:20:20|) and as Jesus had done (John:16:33|). These saints were already converted.

rwp@Acts:14:24 @{When they had spoken the word in Perga} (\lalˆsantes en Pergˆi ton logon\). Now they stopped and preached in Perga which they had apparently not done before (see strkjv@13:13f.|). After leaving Antioch they passed on through Pisidia, as if Antioch was not strictly in Pisidia (see on strkjv@13:14|) and into Pamphylia. They crossed from Perga to Attaleia, the port of Perga, sixteen miles down the Cestus, and capital of Pamphylia, to find a ship for Antioch in Syria. It is now called Adala and for long was the chief harbour of the south coast of Asia Minor. We do not know why they did not revisit Cyprus, perhaps because no permanent Gentile churches were founded there.

rwp@Acts:14:27 @{Gathered the church together} (\sunagagontes tˆn ekklˆsian\). Second aorist active participle of \sunag“\. It "was the first missionary meeting in history" (Furneaux). It was not hard to get the church together when the news spread that Paul and Barnabas had returned. "The suitability of the Gospel to become the religion of the world had not before been put to the test" (Furneaux). Doubtless many "wise-acres" had predicted failure as they did for William Carey and for Adoniram Judson and Luther Rice. {Rehearsed} (\anˆggellon\). Imperfect active. It was a long story for they had many things to tell of God's dealings "with them" (\met' aut“n\) for God had been "with them" all the while as Jesus had said he would be (Matthew:28:20|, \meth' h–m“n\). Paul could recount some of the details given later in strkjv@2Corinthians:11|. {And how} (\kai hoti\). Or "and that" in particular, as the upshot of it all. {He had opened a door of faith unto the Gentiles} (\ˆnoixen tois ethnesin thuran piste“s\). Three times in Paul's Epistles (1Corinthians:16:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12; strkjv@Colossians:4:3|) he employed the metaphor of "door," perhaps a reminiscence of the very language of Paul here. This work in Galatia gained a large place in Paul's heart (Galatians:4:14f.|). The Gentiles now, it was plain, could enter the kingdom of God (verse 22|) through the door of faith, not by law or by circumcision or by heathen philosophy or mythology.

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:15:14 @{Hearken unto me} (\akousate mou\). Usual appeal for attention. James was termed James the Just and was considered a representative of the Hebraic as opposed to the Hellenistic wing of the Jewish Christians (Acts:6:1|). The Judaizers had doubtless counted on him as a champion of their view and did later wrongfully make use of his name against Peter at Antioch (Galatians:2:12|). There was instant attention when James began to speak. {Symeon} (\Sume“n\). The Aramaic form of Simon as in strkjv@2Peter:2:1|. This little touch would show his affinities with the Jewish Christians (not the Judaizers). This Aramaic form is used also in strkjv@Luke:2:25,34| of the old prophet in the temple. Possibly both forms (Symeon, Aramaic, and Simon, Greek) were current in Jerusalem. {How} (\kath“s\). Strictly, "according as," here like \hos\ in indirect discourse somewhat like the epexegetic or explanatory use in strkjv@3John:1:3|. {First} (\pr“ton\). Told by Peter in verse 7|. James notes, as Peter did, that this experience of Barnabas and Paul is not the beginning of work among the Gentiles. {Did visit} (\epeskepsato\). First aorist middle indicative of \episkeptomai\, old verb to look upon, to look after, provide for. This same verb occurs in strkjv@James:1:27| and is one of various points of similarity between this speech of James in Acts and the Epistle of James as shown by Mayor in his _Commentary on James_. Somehow Luke may have obtained notes of these various addresses. {To take from the Gentiles a people for his name} (\labein ex ethn“n laon t“i onomati autou\). Bengel calls this _egregium paradoxon_, a chosen people (\laon\) out of the Gentiles (\ethn“n\). This is what is really involved in what took place at Caesarea at the hands of Peter and the campaign of Barnabas and Paul from Antioch. But such a claim of God's purpose called for proof from Scripture to convince Jews and this is precisely what James undertakes to give. This new Israel from among the Gentiles is one of Paul's great doctrines as set forth in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11|. Note the use of God's "name" here for "the Israel of God" (Galatians:6:16|).

rwp@Acts:15:22 @{Then it seemed good} (\Tote edoxen\). First aorist active indicative of \doke“\. A regular idiom at the beginning of decrees. This Eirenicon of James commended itself to the whole assembly. Apparently a vote was taken which was unanimous, the Judaizers probably not voting. The apostles and the elders (\tois apostolois kai tois presbuterois\, article with each, dative case) probably all vocally expressed their position. {With the whole church} (\sun holei tˆi ekklˆsiƒi\). Probably by acclamation. It was a great victory. But James was a practical leader and he did not stop with speeches and a vote. {To choose men out of their company} (\eklezamenous andras ex aut“n\). Accusative case, though dative just before (\tois apostolois\, etc.), of first aorist middle participle of \ekleg“\, to select. This loose case agreement appears also in \grapsantes\ in verse 23| and in MSS. in verse 25|. It is a common thing in all Greek writers (Paul, for instance), especially in the papyri and in the Apocalypse of John. {Judas called Barsabbas} (\Ioudan ton kaloumenon Barsabban\). Not otherwise known unless he is a brother of Joseph Barsabbas of strkjv@1:23|, an early follower of Jesus. The other, Silas, is probably a shortened form of Silvanus (\Silouanos\, strkjv@1Peter:5:12|), the companion of Paul in his second mission tour (Acts:15:32,41; strkjv@16:25|). {Chief men} (\hˆgoumenous\). Leaders, leading men (participle from \hˆgeomai\, to lead).

rwp@Acts:15:28 @{To the Holy Spirit and to us} (\t“i pneumati t“i hagi“i kai hˆmin\). Dative case after \edoxen\ (third example, verses 22,25,28|). Definite claim that the church in this action had the guidance of the Holy Spirit. That fact was plain to the church from what had taken place in Caesarea and in this campaign of Paul and Barnabas (verse 8|). Jesus had promised that the Holy Spirit would guide them into all truth (John:16:13|). Even so the church deliberated carefully before deciding. What a blessing it would be if this were always true! But even so the Judaizers are only silenced for the present, not convinced and only waiting for a better day to start over again. {No greater burden} (\mˆden pleon baros\). The restrictions named did constitute some burden (cf. strkjv@Matthew:20:12|), for the old word \baros\ means weight or heaviness. Morality itself is a restraint upon one's impulses as is all law a prohibition against license.

rwp@Acts:15:29 @{Than these necessary things} (\plˆn tout“n t“n epanagkes\). This old adverb (from \epi\ and \anagkˆ\) means on compulsion, of necessity. Here only in the N.T. For discussion of these items see on verses 20,21|. In comparison with the freedom won this "burden" is light and not to be regarded as a compromise in spite of the arguments of Lightfoot and Ramsay. It was such a concession as any converted Gentile would be glad to make even if "things strangled" be included. This "necessity" was not a matter of salvation but only for fellowship between Jews and Gentiles. The Judaizers made the law of Moses essential to salvation (15:16|). {It shall be well with you} (\eu praxete\). Ye shall fare well. A classical idiom used here effectively. The peace and concord in the fellowship of Jews and Gentiles will justify any slight concession on the part of the Gentiles. This letter is not laid down as a law, but it is the judgment of the Jerusalem Christians for the guidance of the Gentiles (16:4|) and it had a fine effect at once (15:30-35|). Trouble did come later from the Judaizers who were really hostile to the agreement in Jerusalem, but that opposition in no way discredits the worth of the work of this Conference. No sane agreement will silence perpetual and professional disturbers like these Judaizers who will seek to unsettle Paul's work in Antioch, in Corinth, in Galatia, in Jerusalem, in Rome. {Fare ye well} (\Err“sthe\). _Valete_. Perfect passive imperative of \rh“nnumi\, to make strong. Common at the close of letters. Be made strong, keep well, fare well. Here alone in the N.T. though some MSS. have it in strkjv@23:30|.

rwp@Acts:15:31 @{When they had read it} (\anagnontes\). Second aorist active participle of \anagin“sk“\. Public reading, of course, to the church. {They rejoiced} (\echarˆsan\). Second aorist (ingressive) passive indicative of \chair“\. They burst into exultant joy showing clearly that they did not consider it a weak compromise, but a glorious victory of Gentile liberty. {For the consolation} (\epi tˆi paraklˆsei\). The encouragement, the cheer in the letter. See \parekalesan\ in verse 32|. Consolation and exhortation run into one another in this word.

rwp@Acts:16:13 @{By a river side} (\para potamon\). The little river Gangites (or Gargites) was one mile west of the town. Philippi as a military outpost had few Jews. There was evidently no synagogue inside the city, but "without the gates" (\ex“ tˆs pulˆs\) they had noticed an enclosure "where we supposed" (\hou enomizomen\, correct text, imperfect active), probably as they came into the city, "was a place of prayer" (\proscuchˆn einai\). Infinitive with accusative of general reference in indirect discourse. \Proseuchˆ\ is common in the LXX and the N.T. for the act of prayer as in strkjv@Acts:2:42| then for a place of prayer either a synagogue (III Macc. strkjv@7:20) or more often an open air enclosure near the sea or a river where there was water for ceremonial ablutions. The word occurs also in heathen writers for a place of prayer (Schurer, _Jewish People_, Div. II, Vol. II, p. 69, Engl. Tr.). Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 222) quotes an Egyptian inscription of the third century B.C. with this sense of the word and one from Panticapaeum on the Black Sea of the first century A.D. (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 102). Juvenal (III. 296) has a sneering reference to the Jewish \proseucha\. Josephus (_Ant_. XIV. 10, 23) quotes a decree of Halicarnassus which allowed the Jews "to make their prayers (\proseuchas\) on the seashore according to the custom of their fathers." There was a synagogue in Thessalonica, but apparently none in Amphipolis and Apollonia (Acts:17:1|). The rule of the rabbis required ten men to constitute a synagogue, but here were gathered only a group of women at the hour of prayer. In pioneer days in this country it was a common thing to preach under bush arbours in the open air. John Wesley and George Whitfield were great open air preachers. Paul did not have an inspiring beginning for his work in Europe, but he took hold where he could. The conjecture was correct. It was a place of prayer, but only a bunch of women had come together (\tais sunelthousais gunaixin\), excuse enough for not preaching to some preachers, but not to Paul and his party. The "man of Macedonia" turned out to be a group of women (Furneaux). Macedonian inscriptions show greater freedom for women in Macedonia than elsewhere at this time and confirm Luke's story of the activities of women in Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea. {We sat down and spake} (\kathisantes elaloumen\). Having taken our seats (aorist active participle of \kathiz“\) we began to speak or preach (inchoative imperfect of \lale“\, often used for preaching). Sitting was the Jewish attitude for public speaking. It was not mere conversation, but more likely conversational preaching of an historical and expository character. Luke's use of the first person plural implies that each of the four (Paul, Silas, Timothy, Luke) preached in turn, with Paul as chief speaker.

rwp@Acts:16:15 @{And when she was baptized} (\h“s de ebaptisthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \baptiz“\. The river Gangites was handy for the ordinance and she had now been converted and was ready to make this public declaration of her faith in Jesus Christ. {And her household} (\kai ho oikos autˆs\). Who constituted her "household"? The term \oikos\, originally means the building as below, "into my house" and then it includes the inmates of a house. There is nothing here to show whether Lydia's "household" went beyond "the women" employed by her who like her had heard the preaching of Paul and had believed. "Possibly Euodia and Syntyche and the other women, strkjv@Phillipians:4:2,3|, may have been included in the family of Lydia, who may have employed many slaves and freed women in her trade" (Knowling). "This statement cannot be claimed as any argument for infant baptism, since the Greek word may mean her servants or her work-people" (Furneaux). In the household baptisms (Cornelius, Lydia, the jailor, Crispus) one sees "infants" or not according to his predilections or preferences. {If ye have judged me} (\ei kekrikate me\). Condition of the first class, assumed to be true (\ei\ and the indicative, here perfect active of \krin“\). She had confessed her faith and submitted to baptism as proof that she was "faithful to the Lord" (\pistˆn t“i kuri“i\), believing on the Lord. "If she was fit for that, surely she was fit to be their hostess" (Furneaux). And Paul and his party had clearly no comfortable place to stay while in Philippi. The ancient hotels or inns were abominable. Evidently Paul demurred for there were four of them and he did not wish to sacrifice his independence or be a burden even to a woman of wealth. {And she constrained us} (\kai parebiasato hˆmas\). Effective first aorist middle of \parabiazomai\, late word, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:24:29|. Some moral force (\bia\) or hospitable persuasion was required (cf. strkjv@1Samuel:28:23|), but Lydia had her way as women usually do. Songs:he accepted Lydia's hospitality in Philippi, though he worked for his own living in Thessalonica (2Thessalonians:3:8|) and elsewhere (2Corinthians:11:9|). Songs:far only women have been won to Christ in Philippi. The use of "us" shows that Luke was not a householder in Philippi.

rwp@Acts:16:18 @{She did} (\epoiei\). Imperfect active, kept it up for many days. The strange conduct gave Paul and the rest an unpleasant prominence in the community. {Being sore troubled} (\diaponˆtheis\). First aorist passive of \diapone“\, old verb, to work laboriously, then in passive to be "worked up," displeased, worn out. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@4:2| which see (there of the Sadducees about Peter's preaching). Paul was grieved, annoyed, indignant. He wanted no testimony from a source like this any more than he did the homage of the people of Lystra (14:14|). {That very hour} (\autˆi tˆi h“rƒi\). Locative case of time and familiar Lukan idiom in his Gospel, "at the hour itself." The cure was instantaneous. Paul, like Jesus, distinguished between the demon and the individual.

rwp@Acts:16:20 @{Unto the magistrates} (\tois stratˆgois\). Greek term (\stratos, ag“\) for leader of an army or general. But in civic life a governor. The technical name for the magistrates in a Roman colony was _duumviri_ or duumvirs, answering to consuls in Rome. \Stratˆgoi\ here is the Greek rendering of the Latin _praetores_ (praetors), a term which they preferred out of pride to the term _duumviri_. Since they represented consuls, the praetors or duumvirs were accompanied by lictors bearing rods (verse 35|). {These men} (\houtoi hoi anthr“poi\). Contemptuous use. {Being Jews} (\Ioudaioi huparchontes\). The people of Philippi, unlike those in Antioch (11:26|), did not recognize any distinction between Jews and Christians. These four men were Jews. This appeal to race prejudice would be especially pertinent then because of the recent decree of Claudius expelling Jews from Rome (18:2|). It was about A.D. 49 or 50 that Paul is in Philippi. The hatred of the Jews by the Romans is known otherwise (Cicero, _Pro Flacco_, XXVIII; Juvenal, XIV. 96-106). {Do exceedingly trouble} (\ektarassousin\). Late compound (effective use of \ek\ in composition) and only here in the N.T.

rwp@Acts:16:21 @{Customs which it is not lawful for us to receive, or to observe, being Romans} (\ethˆ ha ouk estin hˆmin paradechesthai oude poiein R“maiois ousin\). Note the sharp contrast between "being Jews" in verse 20| and "being Romans" here. This pose of patriotism is all sound and fury. It is love of money that moves these "masters" far more than zeal for Rome. As Roman citizens in a colony they make full use of all their rights of protest. Judaism was a _religio licita_ in the Roman empire, only they were not allowed to make proselytes of the Romans themselves. No Roman magistrate would pass on abstract theological questions (18:15|), but only if a breach of the peace was made (\ektarassousin hˆm“n tˆn polin\) or the formation of secret sects and organizations. Evidently both of these last points are involved by the charges of "unlawful customs" by the masters who are silent about their real ground of grievance against Paul and Silas. \Ethos\ (kin to \ˆthos\, strkjv@1Corinthians:15:33|) is from \eth“\, to be accustomed or used to a thing. The Romans granted toleration to conquered nations to follow their religious customs provided they did not try to win the Romans. But the Jews had made great headway to favour (the God-fearers) with increasing hatred also. Emperor worship had in store grave peril for both Jews and Christians. The Romans will care more for this than for the old gods and goddesses. It will combine patriotism and piety.

rwp@Acts:16:22 @{Rose up together} (\sunepestˆ\). Second aorist (ingressive) active of the double compound \sunephistˆmi\, intransitive, old verb, but only here in the N.T. (cf. \katepestˆsan\ in strkjv@18:12|). There was no actual attack of the mob as Paul and Silas were in the hands of the officers, but a sudden and violent uprising of the people, the appeal to race and national prejudice having raised a ferment. {Rent their garments off them} (\perirˆxantes aut“n ta himatia\). First aorist active participle of \perirˆgnumi\, old verb, to break off all around, to strip or rend all round. Here only in the N.T. The duumvirs probably gave orders for Paul and Silas to be stripped of their outer garments (\himatia\), though not actually doing it with their own hands, least of all not stripping off their own garments in horror as Ramsay thinks. That would call for the middle voice. In II Macc. strkjv@4:38 the active voice is used as here of stripping off the garments of others. Paul in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:2| refers to the shameful treatment received in Philippi, "insulted" (\hubristhentas\). As a Roman citizen this was unlawful, but the duumvirs looked on Paul and Silas as vagabond and seditious Jews and "acted with the highhandedness characteristic of the fussy provincial authorities" (Knowling). {Commanded} (\ekeleuon\). Imperfect active, repeatedly ordered. The usual formula of command was: "Go, lictors; strip off their garments; let them be scourged." {To beat them with rods} (\rhabdizein\). Present active infinitive of \rhabdiz“\, old verb, but in the N.T.=_virgis caedere_ only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:11:25| where Paul alludes to this incident and two others not given by Luke (\tris erhabdisthˆn\). He came near getting another in Jerusalem (Acts:22:25|). Why did not Paul say here that he was a Roman citizen as he does later (verse 37|) and in Jerusalem (22:26f.|)? It might have done no good in this hubbub and no opportunity was allowed for defence of any kind.

rwp@Acts:16:27 @{Being roused out of sleep} (\exupnos genomenos\). Becoming \exupnos\ (rare word, only here in N.T., in LXX and Josephus). An earthquake like that would wake up any one. {Open} (\ane“igmenos\). Perfect passive participle with double reduplication in predicate position, standing open. {Drew his sword} (\spasamenos tˆn machairan\). First aorist middle participle of \spa“\, to draw, as in strkjv@Mark:14:47|, drawing his own sword himself. Our word spasm from this old word. {Was about} (\ˆmellen\). Imperfect active of \mell“\ with both syllabic and temporal augment and followed here by present infinitive. He was on the point of committing suicide as Brutus had done near here. Stoicism had made suicide popular as the escape from trouble like the Japanese _harikari_. {Had escaped} (\ekpepheugenai\). Second perfect active infinitive of \ekpheug“\, old verb with perfective force of \ek\, to flee out, to get clean away. This infinitive and accusative of general reference is due to indirect discourse after \nomiz“n\. Probably the prisoners were so panic stricken by the earthquake that they did not rally to the possibility of escape before the jailor awoke. He was responsible for the prisoners with his life (12:19; strkjv@27:42|).

rwp@Acts:16:31 @{To be saved} (\hina s“th“\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive. What did he mean by "saved"? Certainly more than escape from peril about the prisoners or because of the earthquake, though these had their influences on him. Cf. way of salvation in verse 17|. {Believe on the Lord Jesus} (\Pisteuson epi ton kurion Iˆsoun\). This is what Peter told Cornelius (10:43|). This is the heart of the matter for both the jailor and his house.

rwp@Acts:16:33 @{Washed their stripes} (\elousen apo t“n plˆg“n\). Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 227) cites an inscription of Pergamum with this very construction of \apo\ and the ablative, to wash off, though it is an old verb. This first aorist active indicative of \lou“\, to bathe, succinctly shows what the jailor did to remove the stains left by the rods of the lictors (verse 22|). \Nipt“\ was used for washing parts of the body. {And was baptized, he and all his, immediately} (\kai ebaptisthˆ autos kai hoi autou hapantes parachrˆma\). The verb is in the singular agreeing with \autos\, but it is to be supplied with \hoi autou\, and it was done at once.

rwp@Acts:16:37 @{Unto them} (\pros autous\). The lictors by the jailor. The reply of Paul is a marvel of brevity and energy, almost every word has a separate indictment showing the utter illegality of the whole proceeding. {They have beaten us} (\deirantes hˆmas\). First aorist active participle of \der“\, old verb to flay, to skin, to smite. The _Lex Valeria_ B.C. 509 and the _Lex Poscia_ B.C. 248 made it a crime to inflict blows on a Roman citizen. Cicero says, "To fetter a Roman citizen was a crime, to scourge him a scandal, to slay him--parricide." Claudius had "deprived the city of Rhodes of its freedom for having crucified some citizen of Rome" (Rackham). {Publicly} (\dˆmosiƒi\). This added insult to injury. Common adverb (\hod“i\) supplied with adjective, associative instrumental case, opposed to \idiƒi\ or \kat' oikous\, strkjv@Acts:20:20|) {Uncondemned} (\akatakritous\). This same verbal adjective from \kata-krin“\ with \a\ privative is used by Paul in strkjv@22:25| and nowhere else in the N.T. Rare in late Greek like \akatagn“stos\, but in late _Koin‚_ (papyri, inscriptions). The meaning is clearly "without being tried." Paul and Silas were not given a chance to make a defence. They were sentenced unheard (25:16|). Even slaves in Roman law had a right to be heard. {Men that are Romans} (\anthr“pous Romaious huparchontas\). The praetors did not know, of course, that Paul and Silas were Roman citizens any more than Lysias knew it in strkjv@Acts:22:27|. Paul's claim is not challenged in either instance. It was a capital offence to make a false claim to Roman citizenship. {Have cast us into prison} (\ebalan eis phulakˆn\). Second aorist active indicative of \ball“\, old verb, with first aorist ending as often in the _Koin‚_ (\-an\, not \-on\). This was the climax, treating them as criminals. {And now privily} (\kai nun lathrƒi\). Paul balances their recent conduct with the former. {Nay verily, but} (\ou gar, alla\). No indeed! It is the use of \gar\ so common in answers (\ge+ara\) as in strkjv@Matthew:27:23|. \Alla\ gives the sharp alternative. {Themselves} (\autoi\). As a public acknowledgment that they had wronged and mistreated Paul and Silas. Let them come themselves and lead us out (\exagaget“san\, third person plural second aorist active imperative of \exag“\). It was a bitter pill to the proud praetors.

rwp@Acts:17:7 @{Whom Jason hath received} (\hous hupodedektai Ias“n\). Present perfect middle indicative of \hupodechomai\, to entertain, old verb, but in N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:10:38; strkjv@19:6; strkjv@Acts:17:7; strkjv@James:2:25|. This is Jason's crime and he is the prisoner before the politarchs. {These all} (\houtoi pantes\). Jason, the "brethren" of verse 6|, Paul and Silas, and all Christians everywhere. {Contrary} (\apenanti\). Late compound preposition (\apo, en, anti\) found in Polybius, LXX, here only in the N.T. {The decrees of Caesar} (\t“n dogmat“n Kaisaros\). This was a charge of treason and was a sure way to get a conviction. Probably the Julian _Leges Majestatis_ are in mind rather than the definite decree of Claudius about the Jews (Acts:18:2|). {Saying that there is another king, one Jesus} (\Basilea heteron legontes einai Iˆsoun\). Note the very order of the words in the Greek indirect discourse with the accusative and infinitive after \legontes\. \Basilea heteron\ comes first, a different king, another emperor than Caesar. This was the very charge that the smart student of the Pharisees and Herodians had tried to catch Jesus on (Mark:12:14|). The Sanhedrin made it anyhow against Jesus to Pilate (Luke:23:2|) and Pilate had to notice it. "Although the emperors never ventured to assume the title _rex_ at Rome, in the Eastern provinces they were regularly termed _basileus_" (Page). The Jews here, as before Pilate (John:19:15|), renounce their dearest hope of a Messianic king. It is plain that Paul had preached about Jesus as the Messiah, King of the Kingdom of God over against the Roman Empire, a spiritual kingdom, to be sure, but the Jews here turn his language to his hurt as they did with Jesus. As a matter of fact Paul's preaching about the kingdom and the second coming of Christ was gravely misunderstood by the Christians at Thessalonica after his departure (1Thessalonians:4:13-5:4; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2|). The Jews were quick to seize upon his language about Jesus Christ to his own injury. Clearly here in Thessalonica Paul had faced the power of the Roman Empire in a new way and pictured over against it the grandeur of the reign of Christ.

rwp@Acts:17:16 @{Now while Paul waited for them in Athens} (\En de tais Athˆnais ekdechomenou autous tou Paulou\). Genitive absolute with present middle participle of \ekdechomai\, old verb to receive, but only with the sense of looking out for, expecting found here and elsewhere in N.T We know that Timothy did come to Paul in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1,6|) from Thessalonica and was sent back to them from Athens. If Silas also came to Athens, he was also sent away, possibly to Philippi, for that church was deeply interested in Paul. At any rate both Timothy and Silas came from Macedonia to Corinth with messages and relief for Paul (Acts:18:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:8f.|). Before they came and after they left, Paul felt lonely in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1|), the first time on this tour or the first that he has been completely without fellow workers. Athens had been captured by Sulla B.C. 86. After various changes Achaia, of which Corinth is the capital, is a separate province from Macedonia and A.D. 44 was restored by Claudius to the Senate with the Proconsul at Corinth. Paul is probably here about A.D. 50. Politically Athens is no longer of importance when Paul comes though it is still the university seat of the world with all its rich environment and traditions. Rackham grows eloquent over Paul the Jew of Tarsus being in the city of Pericles and Demosthenes, Socrates and Plato and Aristotle, Sophocles and Euripides. In its Agora Socrates had taught, here was the Academy of Plato, the Lyceum of Aristotle, the Porch of Zeno, the Garden of Epicurus. Here men still talked about philosophy, poetry, politics, religion, anything and everything. It was the art centre of the world. The Parthenon, the most beautiful of temples, crowned the Acropolis. Was Paul insensible to all this cultural environment? It is hard to think so for he was a university man of Tarsus and he makes a number of allusions to Greek writers. Probably it had not been in Paul's original plan to evangelize Athens, difficult as all university seats are, but he cannot be idle though here apparently by chance because driven out of Macedonia. {Was provoked} (\par“xuneto\). Imperfect passive of \paroxun“\, old verb to sharpen, to stimulate, to irritate (from \para, oxus\), from \paroxusmos\ (Acts:15:39|), common in old Greek, but in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:13:5|. It was a continual challenge to Paul's spirit when he beheld (\the“rountos\, genitive of present participle agreeing with \autou\ (his), though late MSS. have locative \the“rounti\ agreeing with \en aut“i\). {The city full of idols} (\kateid“lon ousan tˆn polin\). Note the participle \ousan\ not preserved in the English (either the city being full of idols or that the city was full of idols, sort of indirect discourse). Paul, like any stranger was looking at the sights as he walked around. This adjective \kateid“lon\ (perfective use of \kata\ and \eid“lon\ is found nowhere else, but it is formed after the analogy of \katampelos, katadendron\), full of idols. Xenophon (_de Republ. Ath_.) calls the city \holˆ bomos, holˆ thuma theois kai anathˆma\ (all altar, all sacrifice and offering to the gods). These statues were beautiful, but Paul was not deceived by the mere art for art's sake. The idolatry and sensualism of it all glared at him (Romans:1:18-32|). Renan ridicules Paul's ignorance in taking these statues for idols, but Paul knew paganism better than Renan. The superstition of this centre of Greek culture was depressing to Paul. One has only to recall how superstitious cults today flourish in the atmosphere of Boston and Los Angeles to understand conditions in Athens. Pausanias says that Athens had more images than all the rest of Greece put together. Pliny states that in the time of Nero Athens had over 30,000 public statues besides countless private ones in the homes. Petronius sneers that it was easier to find a god than a man in Athens. Every gateway or porch had its protecting god. They lined the street from the Piraeus and caught the eye at every place of prominence on wall or in the agora.

rwp@Acts:17:18 @{And certain also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him} (\tines de kai t“n Epikouri“n kai St“ik“n philosoph“n suneballon aut“i\). Imperfect active of \sunball“\, old verb, in the N.T. only by Luke, to bring or put together in one's mind (Luke:2:19|), to meet together (Acts:20:14|), to bring together aid (18:27|), to confer or converse or dispute as here and already strkjv@4:15| which see. These professional philosophers were always ready for an argument and so they frequented the agora for that purpose. Luke uses one article and so groups the two sects together in their attitude toward Paul, but they were very different in fact. Both sects were eager for argument and both had disdain for Paul, but they were the two rival practical philosophies of the day, succeeding the more abstruse theories of Plato and Aristotle. Socrates had turned men's thought inward (\Gn“thi Seauton\, Know Thyself) away from the mere study of physics. Plato followed with a profound development of the inner self (metaphysics). Aristotle with his cyclopaedic grasp sought to unify and relate both physics and metaphysics. Both Zeno and Epicurus (340-272 B.C.) took a more practical turn in all this intellectual turmoil and raised the issues of everyday life. Zeno (360-260 B.C.) taught in the \Stoa\ (Porch) and so his teaching was called Stoicism. He advanced many noble ideas that found their chief illustration in the Roman philosophers (Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius). He taught self-mastery and hardness with an austerity that ministered to pride or suicide in case of failure, a distinctly selfish and unloving view of life and with a pantheistic philosophy. Epicurus considered practical atheism the true view of the universe and denied a future life and claimed pleasure as the chief thing to be gotten out of life. He did not deny the existence of gods, but regarded them as unconcerned with the life of men. The Stoics called Epicurus an atheist. Lucretius and Horace give the Epicurean view of life in their great poems. This low view of life led to sensualism and does today, for both Stoicism and Epicureanism are widely influential with people now. "Eat and drink for tomorrow we die," they preached. Paul had doubtless become acquainted with both of these philosophies for they were widely prevalent over the world. Here he confronts them in their very home. He is challenged by past-masters in the art of appealing to the senses, men as skilled in their dialectic as the Pharisaic rabbis with whom Paul had been trained and whose subtleties he had learned how to expose. But, so far as we know, this is a new experience for Paul to have a public dispute with these philosophical experts who had a natural contempt for all Jews and for rabbis in particular, though they found Paul a new type at any rate and so with some interest in him. "In Epicureanism, it was man's sensual nature which arrayed itself against the claims of the gospel; in Stoicism it was his self-righteousness and pride of intellect" (Hackett). Knowling calls the Stoic the Pharisee of philosophy and the Epicurean the Sadducee of philosophy. Socrates in this very agora used to try to interest the passers-by in some desire for better things. That was 450 years before Paul is challenged by these superficial sophistical Epicureans and Stoics. It is doubtful if Paul had ever met a more difficult situation. {What would this babbler say?} (\Ti an theloi ho spermologos houtos legein?\). The word for "babbler" means "seed-picker" or picker up of seeds (\sperma\, seed, \leg“\, to collect) like a bird in the agora hopping about after chance seeds. Plutarch applies the word to crows that pick up grain in the fields. Demosthenes called Aeschines a \spermologos\. Eustathius uses it of a man hanging around in the markets picking up scraps of food that fell from the carts and so also of mere rhetoricians and plagiarists who picked up scraps of wisdom from others. Ramsay considers it here a piece of Athenian slang used to describe the picture of Paul seen by these philosophers who use it, for not all of them had it ("some," \tines\). Note the use of \an\ and the present active optative \theloi\, conclusion of a fourth-class condition in a rhetorical question (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). It means, What would this picker up of seeds wish to say, if he should get off an idea? It is a contemptuous tone of supreme ridicule and doubtless Paul heard this comment. Probably the Epicureans made this sneer that Paul was a charlatan or quack. {Other some} (\hoi de\). But others, in contrast with the "some" just before. Perhaps the Stoics take this more serious view of Paul. {He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods} (\zen“n daimoni“n dokei kataggeleus einai\). This view is put cautiously by \dokei\ (seems). \Kataggeleus\ does not occur in the old Greek, though in ecclesiastical writers, but Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 99) gives an example of the word "on a marble stele recording a decree of the Mitylenaens in honour of the Emperor Augustus," where it is the herald of the games. Here alone in the N.T. \Daimonion\ is used in the old Greek sense of deity or divinity whether good or bad, not in the N.T. sense of demons. Both this word and \kataggeleus\ are used from the Athenian standpoint. \Xenos\ is an old word for a guest-friend (Latin _hospes_) and then host (Romans:16:23|), then for foreigner or stranger (Matthew:25:31; strkjv@Acts:17:21|), new and so strange as here and strkjv@Hebrews:13:9; strkjv@1Peter:4:12|, and then aliens (Ephesians:2:12|). This view of Paul is the first count against Socrates: Socrates does wrong, introducing new deities (\adikei S“kratˆs, kaina daimonia eispher“n\, Xen. _Mem_. I). On this charge the Athenians voted the hemlock for their greatest citizen. What will they do to Paul? This Athens was more sceptical and more tolerant than the old Athens. But Roman law did not allow the introduction of a new religion (_religio illicita_). Paul was walking on thin ice though he was the real master philosopher and these Epicureans and Stoics were quacks. Paul had the only true philosophy of the universe and life with Jesus Christ as the centre (Colossians:1:12-20|), the greatest of all philosophers as Ramsay justly terms him. But these men are mocking him. {Because he preached Jesus and the resurrection} (\hoti ton Iˆsoun kai tˆn anastasin euˆggelizato\). Reason for the view just stated. Imperfect middle indicative of \euaggeliz“\, to "gospelize." Apparently these critics considered \anastasis\ (Resurrection) another deity on a par with Jesus. The Athenians worshipped all sorts of abstract truths and virtues and they misunderstood Paul on this subject. They will leave him as soon as he mentions the resurrection (verse 32|). It is objected that Luke would not use the word in this sense here for his readers would not under stand him. But Luke is describing the misapprehension of this group of philosophers and this interpretation fits in precisely.

rwp@Acts:17:22 @{Stood in the midst of the Areopagus} (\statheis en mes“i tou Areiou Pagou\). First aorist passive of \histˆmi\ used of Peter in strkjv@2:14|. Majestic figure whether on Mars Hill or in the Stoa Basilica before the Areopagus Court. There would be a crowd of spectators and philosophers in either case and Paul seized the opportunity to preach Christ to this strange audience as he did in Caesarea before Herod Agrippa and the crowd of prominent people gathered by Festus for the entertainment. Paul does not speak as a man on trial, but as one trying to get a hearing for the gospel of Christ. {Somewhat superstitious} (\h“s deisidaimonesterous\). The Authorized Version has "too superstitious," the American Standard "very religious." \Deisidaim“n\ is a neutral word (from \deid“\, to fear, and \daim“n\, deity). The Greeks used it either in the good sense of pious or religious or the bad sense of superstitious. Thayer suggests that Paul uses it "with kindly ambiguity." Page thinks that Luke uses the word to represent the religious feeling of the Athenians (_religiosus_) which bordered on superstition. The Vulgate has _superstitiosiores_. In strkjv@25:19| Festus uses the term \deisidaimonia\ for "religion." It seems unlikely that Paul should give this audience a slap in the face at the very start. The way one takes this adjective here colours Paul's whole speech before the Council of Areopagus. The comparative here as in verse 21| means more religions than usual (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 664f.), the object of the comparison not being expressed. The Athenians had a tremendous reputation for their devotion to religion, "full of idols" (verse 16|).

rwp@Acts:17:26 @{And he made of one} (\epoiˆsen te ex henos\). The word \haimatos\ (blood) is absent from Aleph A B and is a later explanatory addition. What Paul affirms is the unity of the human race with a common origin and with God as the Creator. This view runs counter to Greek exclusiveness which treated other races as barbarians and to Jewish pride which treated other nations as heathen or pagan (the Jews were \laos\, the Gentiles \ethnˆ\). The cosmopolitanism of Paul here rises above Jew and Greek and claims the one God as the Creator of the one race of men. The Athenians themselves claimed to be \antochthonous\ (indigenous) and a special creation. Zeno and Seneca did teach a kind of cosmopolitanism (really pantheism) far different from the personal God of Paul. It was Rome, not Greece, that carried out the moral ideas of Zeno. Man is part of the universe (verse 24|) and God created (\epoiˆsen\) man as he created (\poiˆsas\) the all. {For to dwell} (\katoikein\). Infinitive (present active) of purpose, so as to dwell. {Having determined} (\horisas\). First aorist active participle of \horiz“\, old verb to make a horizon as already in strkjv@19:42| which see. Paul here touches God's Providence. God has revealed himself in history as in creation. His hand appears in the history of all men as well as in that of the Chosen People of Israel. {Appointed seasons} (\prostetagmenous kairous\). Not the weather as in strkjv@14:17|, but "the times of the Gentiles" (\kairoi ethn“n\) of which Jesus spoke (Luke:21:24|). The perfect passive participle of \prostass“\, old verb to enjoin, emphasizes God's control of human history without any denial of human free agency as was involved in the Stoic Fate (\Heirmarmenˆ\). {Bounds} (\horothesias\). Limits? Same idea in strkjv@Job:12:23|. Nations rise and fall, but it is not blind chance or hard fate. Thus there is an interplay between God's will and man's activities, difficult as it is for us to see with our shortened vision.

rwp@Acts:17:31 @{Inasmuch as} (\kathoti\). According as (\kata, hoti\). Old causal conjunction, but in N.T. only used in Luke's writings (Luke:1:7; strkjv@19:9; strkjv@Acts:2:45; strkjv@4:35; strkjv@17:31|). {Hath appointed a day} (\estˆsen hˆmeran\) First aorist active indicative of \histˆmi\, to place, set. God did set the day in his counsel and he will fulfil it in his own time. {Will judge} (\mellei krinein\). Rather, is going to judge, \mell“\ and the present active infinitive of \krin“\. Paul here quotes strkjv@Psalms:9:8| where \krinei\ occurs. {By the man whom he hath ordained} (\en andri h“i h“risen\). Here he adds to the Psalm the place and function of Jesus Christ, a passage in harmony with Christ's own words in strkjv@Matthew:25|. \H“i\ (whom) is attracted from the accusative, object of \h“risen\ (first aorist active indicative of \horiz“\) to the case of the antecedent \andri\. It has been said that Paul left the simple gospel in this address to the council of the Areopagus for philosophy. But did he? He skilfully caught their attention by reference to an altar to an Unknown God whom he interprets to be the Creator of all things and all men who overrules the whole world and who now commands repentance of all and has revealed his will about a day of reckoning when Jesus Christ will be Judge. He has preached the unity of God, the one and only God, has proclaimed repentance, a judgment day, Jesus as the Judge as shown by his Resurrection, great fundamental doctrines, and doubtless had much more to say when they interrupted his address. There is no room here for such a charge against Paul. He rose to a great occasion and made a masterful exposition of God's place and power in human history. {Whereof he hath given assurance} (\pistin parasch“n\). Second aorist active participle of \parech“\, old verb to furnish, used regularly by Demosthenes for bringing forward evidence. Note this old use of \pistis\ as conviction or ground of confidence (Hebrews:11:1|) like a note or title-deed, a conviction resting on solid basis of fact. All the other uses of \pistis\ grow out of this one from \peith“\, to persuade. {In that he hath raised him from the dead} (\anastˆsas auton ek nekr“n\). First aorist active participle of \anistˆmi\, causal participle, but literally, "having raised him from the dead." This Paul knew to be a fact because he himself had seen the Risen Christ. Paul has here come to the heart of his message and could now throw light on their misapprehension about "Jesus and the Resurrection" (verse 18|). Here Paul has given the proof of all his claims in the address that seemed new and strange to them.

rwp@Acts:17:32 @{The resurrection of the dead} (\anastasin nekr“n\). Rather, "a resurrection of dead men." No article with either word. The Greeks believed that the souls of men lived on, but they had no conception of resurrection of the body. They had listened with respect till Paul spoke of the actual resurrection of Jesus from the dead as a fact, when they did not care to hear more. {Some mocked} (\hoi men echleuazon\). Imperfect active of \chleuaz“\, a common verb (from \chleuˆ\, jesting, mockery). Only here in the N.T. though late MSS. have it in strkjv@2:13| (best MSS. \diachleuaz“\). Probably inchoative here, began to mock. In contempt at Paul's statement they declined to listen further to "this babbler" (verse 18|) who had now lost what he had gained with this group of hearers (probably the light and flippant Epicureans). {But others} (\hoi de\). A more polite group like those who had invited him to speak (verse 19|). They were unconvinced, but had better manners and so were in favour of an adjournment. This was done, though it is not clear whether it was a serious postponement or a courteous refusal to hear Paul further (probably this). It was a virtual dismissal of the matter. " It is a sad story--the noblest of ancient cities and the noblest man of history--and he never cared to look on it again" (Furneaux).

rwp@Acts:18:13 @{Contrary to the law} (\para ton nomon\). They did not accuse Paul of treason as in Thessalonica, perhaps Paul had been more careful in his language here. They bring the same charge here that the owners of the slave-girl brought in Philippi (16:21|) Perhaps they fear to go too far with Gallio, for they are dealing with a Roman proconsul, not with the politarchs of Thessalonica. The Jewish religion was a _religio licita_ and they were allowed to make proselytes, but not among Roman citizens. To prove that Paul was acting contrary to Roman law (for Jewish law had no standing with Gallio though the phrase has a double meaning) these Jews had to show that Paul was making converts in ways that violated the Roman regulations on that subject. The accusation as made did not show it nor did they produce any evidence to do it. The verb used \anapeithei\ means to stir up by persuasion (old verb here only in the N.T.), a thing that he had a right to do.

rwp@Acts:18:17 @{They all laid hold on Sosthenes} (\epilabomenoi pantes S“sthenˆn\). See strkjv@16:19; strkjv@17:19| for the same form. Here is violent hostile reaction against their leader who had failed so miserably. {Beat him} (\etupton\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to beat him, even if they could not beat Paul. Sosthenes succeeded Crispus (verse 8|) when he went over to Paul. The beating did Sosthenes good for he too finally is a Christian (1Corinthians:1:1|), a co-worker with Paul whom he had sought to persecute. {And Gallio cared for none of these things} (\kai ouden tout“n t“i Galli“ni emelen\). Literally, "no one of these things was a care to Gallio." The usually impersonal verb (\melei, emelen\, imperfect active) here has the nominative as in strkjv@Luke:10:40|. These words have been often misunderstood as a description of Gallio's lack of interest in Christianity, a religious indifferentist. But that is quite beside the mark. Gallio looked the other way with a blind eye while Sosthenes got the beating which he richly deserved. That was a small detail for the police court, not for the proconsul's concern. Gallio shows up well in Luke's narrative as a clear headed judge who would not be led astray by Jewish subterfuges and with the courage to dismiss a mob.

rwp@Acts:18:21 @{I shall return} (\anakamps“\). Future active indicative of \anakampt“\, old verb to bend back, turn back (Matthew:2:2|). {If God will} (\tou theou thelontos\). Genitive absolute of present active participle. This expression (\ean\ with subjunctive) occurs also in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:19; strkjv@16:7; strkjv@James:4:15|. Such phrases were common among Jews, Greeks, and Romans, and are today. It is simply a recognition that we are in God's hands. The Textus Receptus has here a sentence not in the best MSS.: "I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem." This addition by D and other documents may have been due to a desire to give a reason for the language in verse 22| about "going up" to Jerusalem. Whether Paul said it or not, it was in the spring when he made this journey with a company of pilgrims probably going to the feast of Pentecost in Jerusalem. We know that later Paul did try to reach Jerusalem for Pentecost (20:16|) and succeeded. As the ship was leaving, Paul had to go, but with the hope of returning soon to Ephesus as he did.

rwp@Acts:18:22 @{He went up and saluted the church} (\anabas kai aspasamenos tˆn ekklˆsian\). The language could refer to the church in Caesarea where Paul had just landed, except for several things. The going up (\anabas\, second aorist active participle of \anabain“\) is the common way of speaking of going to Jerusalem which was up from every direction save from Hebron. It was the capital of Palestine as people in England today speaking of going up to London. Besides "he went down to Antioch" (\katebˆ eis Antiocheian\, second aorist active indicative of \katabain“\) which language suits better leaving Jerusalem than Caesarea. Moreover, there was no special reason for this trip to Caesarea, but to Jerusalem it was different. Here Paul saluted the church in the fourth of his five visits after his conversion (9:26; strkjv@11:30; strkjv@15:4; strkjv@18:22; strkjv@21:17|). The apostles may or may not have been in the city, but Paul had friends in Jerusalem now. Apparently he did not tarry long, but returned to Antioch to make a report of his second mission tour as he had done at the close of the first when he and Barnabas came back (14:26-28|). He had started on this tour with Silas and had picked up Timothy and Luke, but came back alone. He had a great story to tell.

rwp@Acts:18:23 @{Having spent some time} (\poiˆsas chronon tina\). Literally, having done some time. How long we do not know, probably not long. There are those who place the visit of Peter here to which Paul alludes in strkjv@Galatians:2:11ff.| and which we have located while Paul was here the last time (Acts:15:35|). {He departed} (\exˆlthen\). Thus simply and alone Paul began the third mission tour without a Barnabas or a Silas. {Went through} (\dierchomenos\). Present middle participle, going through. {The region of Galatia and Phrygia} (\ten Galatikˆn ch“ran kai Phrygian\). See on ¯Acts:16:6| for discussion of this phrase, here in reverse order, passing through the Galatic region and then Phrygia. Does Luke mean Lycaonia (Derbe and Lystra) and Phrygia (Iconium and Pisidian Antioch)? Or does he mean the route west through the old Galatia and the old Phrygia on west into Asia? The same conflict exists here over the South Galatian and the North Galatian theories. Phrygia is apparently distinguished from the Galatic region here. It is apparently A.D. 52 when Paul set out on this tour. {In order} (\kathexˆs\). In succession as in strkjv@11:4|, though the names of the cities are not given. {Stablishing} (\stˆriz“n\). As he did in the second tour (15:41|, \epistˆriz“n\, compound of this same verb) which see.

rwp@Acts:18:27 @{Encouraged him} (\protrepsamenoi\). First aorist middle participle of \protrep“\, old verb, to urge forward, to push on, only here in the N.T. Since Apollos wanted (\boulomenou autou\, genitive absolute) to go into Achaia, the brethren (including others besides Priscilla and Aquila) wrote (\egrapsan\) a letter of introduction to the disciples in Corinth to receive him (\apodexasthai auton\), a nice letter of recommendation and a sincere one also. But Paul will refer to this very letter later (2Corinthians:3:1|) and observe that he himself needed no such letter of commendation. The Codex Bezae adds here that certain Corinthians who had come to Ephesus heard Apollos and begged him to cross over with them to Corinth. This may very well be the way that Apollos was led to go. Preachers often receive calls because visitors from other places hear them. Priscilla and Aquila were well known in Corinth and their approval would carry weight. But they did not urge Apollos to stay longer in Ephesus. {Helped them much} (\sunebaleto polu\). Second aorist middle indicative of \sunball“\ used in strkjv@17:18| for "dispute," old verb to throw together, in the N.T. always in the active save here in the middle (common in Greek writers) to put together, to help. {Through grace} (\dia tˆs charitos\). This makes sense if taken with "believed," as Hackett does (cf. strkjv@13:48; strkjv@16:14|) or with "helped" (1Corinthians:3:10; strkjv@15:10; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:12|). Both are true as the references show.

rwp@Acts:18:28 @{Powerfully} (\euton“s\). Adverb from \eutonos\ (\eu\, well, \tein“\, to stretch), well-strung, at full stretch. {Confuted} (\diakatˆlegcheto\). Imperfect middle of the double compound verb \dia-kat-elegchomai\, to confute with rivalry in a contest, here alone. The old Greek has \dielegch“\, to convict of falsehood, but not this double compound which means to argue down to a finish. It is the imperfect tense and does not mean that Apollos convinced these rabbis, but he had the last word. {Publicly} (\dˆmosiƒi\). See strkjv@5:18; strkjv@16:37|. In open meeting where all could see the victory of Apollos. {Shewing} (\epideiknus\). Present active participle of \epideiknumi\, old verb to set forth so that all see. {By the Scriptures} (\dia t“n graph“n\). In which Apollos was so "mighty" (verse 24|) and the rabbis so weak for they knew the oral law better than the written (Mark:7:8-12|). {That Jesus was the Christ} (\einai ton Christon Iˆsoun\). Infinitive and the accusative in indirect assertion. Apollos proclaims the same message that Paul did everywhere (17:3|). He had not yet met Paul, but he had been instructed by Priscilla and Aquila. He is in Corinth building on the foundation laid so well by Paul (1Corinthians:3:4-17|). Luke has here made a brief digression from the story of Paul, but it helps us understand Paul better There are those who think that Apollos wrote Hebrews, a guess that may be correct.

rwp@Acts:19:1 @{While Apollos was at Corinth} (\en t“i ton Apoll“ einai en Korinth“i\). Favourite idiom with Luke, \en\ with the locative of the articular infinitive and the accusative of general reference (Luke:1:8; strkjv@2:27|, etc.). {Having passed through the upper country} (\dielthonta ta an“terika merˆ\). Second aorist active participle of \dierchomai\, accusative case agreeing with \Paulon\, accusative of general reference with the infinitive \elthein\, idiomatic construction with \egeneto\. The word for "upper" (\an“terika\) is a late form for \an“tera\ (Luke:14:10|) and occurs in Hippocrates and Galen. It refers to the highlands (cf. Xenophon's _Anabasis_) and means that Paul did not travel the usual Roman road west by Colossae and Laodicea in the Lycus Valley, cities that he did not visit (Colossians:2:1|). Instead he took the more direct road through the Cayster Valley to Ephesus. Codex Bezae says here that Paul wanted to go back to Jerusalem, but that the Holy Spirit bade him to go into Asia where he had been forbidden to go in the second tour (16:6|). Whether the upper "parts" (\merˆ\) here points to North Galatia is still a point of dispute among scholars. Songs:he came again to Ephesus as he had promised to do (18:21|). The province of Asia included the western part of Asia Minor. The Romans took this country B.C. 130. Finally the name was extended to the whole continent. It was a jewel in the Roman empire along with Africa and was a senatorial province. It was full of great cities like Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicea (the seven churches of strkjv@Revelation:2;3|), Colossae, Hierapolis, Apamea, to go no further. Hellenism had full sway here. Ephesus was the capital and chief city and was a richer and larger city than Corinth. It was located at the entrance to the valley of the Maeander to the east. Here was the power of Rome and the splendour of Greek culture and the full tide of oriental superstition and magic. The Temple of Artemis was one of the seven wonders of the world. While in Ephesus some hold that Paul at this time wrote the Epistle to the Galatians after his recent visit there, some that he did it before his recent visit to Jerusalem. But it is still possible that he wrote it from Corinth just before writing to Rome, a point to discuss later. {Certain disciples} (\tinas mathˆtas\). Who were they? Apollos had already gone to Corinth. They show no connection with Priscilla and Aquila. Luke calls them "disciples" or "learners" (\mathˆtas\) because they were evidently sincere though crude and ignorant. There is no reason at all for connecting these uninformed disciples of the Baptist with Apollos. They were floating followers of the Baptist who drifted into Ephesus and whom Paul found. Some of John's disciples clung to him till his death (John:3:22-25; strkjv@Luke:7:19; strkjv@Matthew:14:12|). Some of them left Palestine without the further knowledge of Jesus that came after his death and some did not even know that, as turned out to be the case with the group in Ephesus.

rwp@Acts:19:2 @{Did ye receive the Holy Spirit when ye believed?} (\ei pneuma hagion elabete pisteusantes?\). This use of \Pi\ in a direct question occurs in strkjv@1:6|, is not according to the old Greek idiom, but is common in the LXX and the N.T. as in strkjv@Luke:13:23| which see (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 916). Apparently Paul was suspicious of the looks or conduct of these professed disciples. The first aorist active participle \pisteusantes\ is simultaneous with the second aorist active indicative \elabete\ and refers to the same event. {Nay, we did not so much as hear whether the Holy Spirit was} (\All' oude ei pneuma hagion estin ˆkousamen\). The reply of these ignorant disciples is amazing. They probably refer to the time of their baptism and mean that, when baptized, they did not hear whether (\ei\ in indirect question) the Holy Spirit was (\estin\ retained as in strkjv@John:7:39|). Plain proof that they knew John's message poorly.

rwp@Acts:19:4 @{With the baptism of repentance} (\baptisma metanoias\). Cognate accusative with \ebaptisen\ and the genitive \metanoias\ describing the baptism as marked by (case of species or genus), not as conveying, repentance just as in strkjv@Mark:1:4| and that was the work of the Holy Spirit. But John preached also the baptism of the Holy Spirit which the Messiah was to bring (Mark:1:7f.; strkjv@Matthew:3:11f.; strkjv@Luke:3:16|). If they did not know of the Holy Spirit, they had missed the point of John's baptism. {That they should believe on him that should come after him, that is on Jesus} (\eis ton erchomenon met' auton hina pisteus“sin, tout' estin eis ton Iˆsoun\). Note the emphatic prolepsis of \eis ton erchomenon met' auton\ before \hina pisteus“sin\ with which it is construed. This is John's identical phrase, "the one coming after me" as seen in strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Matthew:3:11; strkjv@Luke:3:16; strkjv@John:1:15|. It is not clear that these "disciples" believed in a Messiah, least of all in Jesus. They were wholly unprepared for the baptism of John. Paul does not mean to say that John's baptism was inadequate, but he simply explains what John really taught and so what his baptism signified.

rwp@Acts:19:6 @{When Paul had laid his hands upon them} (\epithentos autois tou Paulou cheiras\). Genitive absolute of second aorist active participle of \epitithˆmi\. This act of laying on of the hands was done in Samaria by Peter and John (8:16|) and in Damascus in the case of Paul (9:17|) and was followed as here by the descent of the Holy Spirit in supernatural power. {They spake with tongues} (\elaloun gl“ssais\). Inchoative imperfect, began to speak with tongues as in Jerusalem at Pentecost and as in Caesarea before the baptism. {Prophesied} (\eprophˆteuon\). Inchoative imperfect again, began to prophesy. The speaking with tongues and prophesying was external and indubitable proof that the Holy Spirit had come on these twelve uninformed disciples now fully won to the service of Jesus as Messiah. But this baptism in water did not "convey" the Holy Spirit nor forgiveness of sins. Paul was not a sacramentalist.

rwp@Acts:19:9 @{But when some were hardened} (\h“s de tines esklˆrunonto\). Imperfect passive of \sklˆrun“\, causative like _hiphil_ in Hebrew, to make hard (\sklˆros\) or rough or harsh (Matthew:25:24|). In LXX and Hippocrates and Galen (in medical writings). In N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:9:18| and 4 times in strkjv@Hebrews:3:8,13,15; strkjv@4:7,8| quoting and referring to strkjv@Psalms:95:8| about hardening the heart like a gristle. The inevitable reaction against Paul went on even in Ephesus though slowly. {Disobedient} (\epeithoun\). Imperfect again, showing the growing disbelief and disobedience (\apeithˆs\), both ideas as in strkjv@14:2; strkjv@17:5|, first refusal to believe and then refusal to obey. Both \sklˆrun“\ and \apeithe“\ occur together, as here, in Ecclus. strkjv@30:12. {Speaking evil of the Way} (\kakologountes tˆn hodon\). Late verb from \kakologos\ (speaker of evil) for the old \kak“s leg“\. Already in strkjv@Mark:7:10; strkjv@9:39; strkjv@Matthew:15:4|. Now these Jews are aggressive opponents of Paul and seek to injure his influence with the crowd. Note "the Way" as in strkjv@9:2| for Christianity. {He departed from them} (\apostas ap' aut“n\). Second aorist active participle of \aphistˆmi\, made an "apostasy" (standing off, cleavage) as he did at Corinth (18:7|, \metabas\, making a change). {Separated the disciples} (\aph“risen tous mathˆtas\). First aorist active indicative of \aphoriz“\, old verb to mark limits (horizon) as already in strkjv@13:2|. Paul himself was a spiritual Pharisee "separated" to Christ (Romans:1:1|). The Jews regarded this withdrawal as apostasy, like separating the sheep from the goats (Matthew:25:32|). Paul now made a separate church as he had done at Thessalonica and Corinth. {In the school of Tyrannus} (\en tˆi scholˆi Turannou\). \Scholˆ\ (our school) is an old word from \schein\ (\ech“\) to hold on, leisure and then in later Greek (Plutarch, etc.) a place where there is leisure as here. Only this example in the N.T. This is the Greek notion of "school," the Jewish being that of "yoke" as in strkjv@Matthew:11:29|. The name Tyrannus (our tyrant) is a common one. It is an inscription in the Columbarium of the Empress Livia as that of a physician in the court. Furneaux suggests the possibility that a relative of this physician was lecturing on medicine in Ephesus and so as a friend of Luke, the physician, would be glad to help Paul about a place to preach. It was probably a public building or lecture hall with this name whether hired by Paul or loaned to him. The pagan sophists often spoke in such halls. The Codex Bezae adds "from the fifth hour to the tenth" as the time allotted Paul for his work in this hall, which is quite possible, from just before midday till the close of the afternoon (from before the noon meal till two hours before sunset) each day. Here Paul had great freedom and a great hearing. As the church grows there will be other places of meeting as the church in the house of Aquila and Priscilla (1Corinthians:16:19|).

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:19:14 @{Seven sons of Sceva} (\Skeuƒ hepta huioi\). Who this Sceva was we do not know. If a high priest, he was highly connected in Jerusalem (cf. strkjv@5:24|). Some MSS. have ruler instead of priest. His name may be Latin in origin. \Skeuƒ\...in this superstitious city. Did they...

rwp@Acts:19:22 @{Timothy and Erastus} (\Timotheon kai Eraston\). Paul had sent Timothy to Corinth (1Corinthians:4:17|) and had requested kindly treatment of this young minister in his difficult task of placating the divided church (1Corinthians:16:10-11|) that he might return to Paul as he evidently had before Paul leaves Ephesus. He then despatched Titus to Corinth to finish what Timothy had not quite succeeded in doing with instructions to meet him in Troas. Now Timothy and Erastus (cf. strkjv@Romans:16:23; strkjv@2Timothy:4:20|) go on to Macedonia to prepare the way for Paul who will come on later. {He himself stayed in Asia for a while} (\autos epeschen chronon eis tˆn Asian\). Literally, He himself had additional time in Asia. Second aorist active indicative of \epech“\, old and common idiom, only here in the N.T. in this sense and the verb only in Luke and Paul. The reason for Paul's delay is given by him in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:8f.|, the great door wide open in Ephesus. Here again Luke and Paul supplement each other. Pentecost came towards the end of May and May was the month of the festival of Artemis (Diana) when great multitudes would come to Ephesus. But he did not remain till Pentecost as both Luke and Paul make plain.

rwp@Acts:19:26 @{At Ephesus} (\Ephesou\). Genitive of place as also with \Asias\ (Asia). Cf. Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 494f. {This Paul} (\ho Paulos houtos\). Contemptuous use of \houtos\. {Hath turned away} (\metestˆsen\). Changed, transposed. First aorist active indicative, did change. Tribute to Paul's powers as a preacher borne out by Luke's record in strkjv@19:10|. There may be an element of exaggeration on the part of Demetrius to incite the workmen to action, for the worship of Artemis was their wealth. Paul had cut the nerve of their business. There had long been a Jewish colony in Ephesus, but their protest against idolatry was as nothing compared with Paul's preaching (Furneaux). {Which are made with hands} (\hoi dia cheir“n ginomenoi\). Note the present tense, made from time to time. No doubt Paul had put the point sharply as in Athens (Acts:17:29|). Isaiah (Isaiah:44:9-17|) had pictured graphically the absurdity of worshipping stocks and stones, flatly forbidden by the Old Testament (Exodus:20:4; strkjv@Psalms:135:15-18|). The people identified their gods with the images of them and Demetrius reflects that point of view. He was jealous of the brand of gods turned out by his factory. The artisans would stand by him on this point. It was a reflection on their work.

rwp@Acts:19:28 @{They were filled with wrath} (\genomenoi plereis thumou\). Having become full of wrath. {Cried out} (\ekrazon\). Inchoative imperfect, began to cry out and kept it up continuously. Reiteration was characteristic of the orgiastic exercises. The Codex Bezae adds after \thumou\ (wrath): \Dramontes eis tˆn amphodon\ (running into the street), which they certainly did after the speech of Demetrius. {Great is Artemis of the Ephesians} (\Megalˆ hˆ Artemis Ephesi“n\). D (Codex Bezae) omits \hˆ\ (the) and makes it read: "Great Artemis of the Ephesians." This was the usual cry of the votaries in their orgies as the inscriptions show, an ejaculatory outcry or prayer instead of an argument as the other MSS. have it. That is vivid and natural (Ramsay, _Church in the Roman Empire_, pp. 135ff.). Yet on this occasion the artisans were making an argumentative protest and plea against Paul. An inscription at Dionysopolis has "Great is Apollo."

rwp@Acts:19:33 @{And they brought Alexander out of the crowd} (\ek de tou ochlou sunebibasan Alexandron\). The correct text (Aleph A B) has this verb \sunebibasan\ (from \sunbibaz“\, to put together) instead of \proebibasan\ (from \probibaz“\, to put forward). It is a graphic word, causal of \bain“\, to go, and occurs in strkjv@Acts:16:10; strkjv@Colossians:2:19; strkjv@Ephesians:4:16|. Evidently some of the Jews grew afraid that the mob would turn on the Jews as well as on the Christians. Paul was a Jew and so was Aristarchus, one of the prisoners. The Jews were as strongly opposed to idolatry as were the Christians. {The Jews putting him forward} (\probalont“n auton t“n Ioudai“n\). Genitive absolute of the second aorist active participle of \proball“\, old verb to push forward as leaves in the spring (Luke:21:30|). In the N.T. only in these two passages. Alexandria had already disgraceful scenes of Jew-baiting and there was real peril now in Ephesus with this wild mob. Songs:Alexander was pushed forward as the champion to defend the Jews to the excited mob. He may be the same Alexander the coppersmith who did Paul much evil (2Timothy:4:14|), against whom Paul will warn Timothy then in Ephesus. "The Jews were likely to deal in the copper and silver required for the shrines, so he may have had some trade connexion with the craftsmen which would give him influence" (Furneaux). {Beckoned with the hand} (\kataseisas tˆn cheira\). Old verb \katasei“\, to shake down, here the hand, rapidly waving the hand up and down to get a hearing. In the N.T. elsewhere only in strkjv@Acts:12:17; strkjv@13:16; strkjv@21:40| where "with the hand" (\tˆi cheiri\, instrumental case) is used instead of \tˆn cheira\ (the accusative). {Would have made a defence unto the people} (\ˆthelen apologeisthai t“i dˆm“i\). Imperfect active, wanted to make a defence, tried to, started to, but apparently never got out a word. \Apologeisthai\ (present middle infinitive, direct middle, to defend oneself), regular word for formal apology, but in N.T. only by Luke and Paul (twice in Gospel, six times in Acts, and in strkjv@Romans:2:15; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:19|).

rwp@Acts:19:35 @{The town-clerk} (\ho grammateus\). Ephesus was a free city and elected its own officers and the recorder or secretary was the chief magistrate of the city, though the proconsul of the province of Asia resided there. This officer is not a mere secretary of another officer or like the copyists and students of the law among the Jews, but the most influential person in Ephesus who drafted decrees with the aid of the \stratˆgoi\, had charge of the city's money, was the power in control of the assembly, and communicated directly with the proconsul. Inscriptions at Ephesus give frequently this very title for their chief officer and the papyri have it also. The precise function varied in different cities. His name appeared on the coin at Ephesus issued in his year of office. {Had quieted the multitude} (\katasteilas ton ochlon\). First aorist active participle of \katastell“\, to send down, arrange dress (Euripides), lower (Plutarch), restrain (papyrus example), only twice in the N.T. (here and verse 36|, be quiet), but in LXX and Josephus. He evidently took the rostrum and his very presence as the city's chief officer had a quieting effect on the billowy turmoil and a semblance of order came. He waited, however, till the hubbub had nearly exhausted itself (two hours) and did not speak till there was a chance to be heard. {Saith} (\phˆsin\). Historical present for vividness. {How that}. Merely participle \ousan\ and accusative \polin\ in indirect discourse, no conjunction at all (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1040ff.), common idiom after \gin“sk“\, to know. {Temple-keeper} (\ne“koron\). Old word from \ne“s\ (\naos)\, temple, and \kore“\, to sweep. Warden, verger, cleaner of the temple, a sacristan. Songs:in Xenophon and Plato. Inscriptions so describe Ephesus as \ne“koron tˆs Artemidos\ as Luke has it here and also applied to the imperial _cultus_ which finally had several such temples in Ephesus. Other cities claimed the same honour of being \ne“koros\, but it was the peculiar boast of Ephesus because of the great temple of Artemis. A coin of A.D. 65 describes Ephesus as \ne“koros\. There are papyri examples of the term applied to individuals, one to Priene as \ne“koros\ of the temple in Ephesus (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). {And of the image which fell down from Jupiter} (\kai tou diopetous\). Supply \agalma\ (image), "the from heaven-fallen image." From Zeus (\Dios\) and \pet“\ (\pipt“, pipet“\), to fall. Zeus (Jupiter) was considered lord of the sky or heaven and that is the idea in \diopetous\ here. The legend about a statue fallen from heaven occurs concerning the statue of Artemis at Tauris, Minerva at Athens, etc. Thus the recorder soothed the vanity (Rackham) of the crowd by appeal to the world-wide fame of Ephesus as sacristan of Artemis and of her heaven-fallen image.

rwp@Acts:20:2 @{Those parts} (\ta merˆ ekeina\). We have no way of knowing why Luke did not tell of Paul's stay in Troas (2Corinthians:2:12f.|) nor of meeting Titus in Macedonia (2Corinthians:2:13-7:16|) nor of Paul's visit to Illyricum (Romans:15:19f.|) to give time for II Corinthians to do its work (2Corinthians:13|), one of the most stirring experiences in Paul's whole career when he opened his heart to the Corinthians and won final victory in the church by the help of Titus who also helped him round up the great collection in Achaia. He wrote II Corinthians during this period after Titus arrived from Corinth. The unity of II Corinthians is here assumed. Paul probably met Luke again in Macedonia, but all this is passed by except by the general phrase: "had given them much exhortation" (\parakalesas autous log“i poll“i\). Literally, "having exhorted them (the Macedonian brethren) with much talk" (instrumental case). {Into Greece} (\eis tˆn Hellada\). That is, Achaia (18:12; strkjv@19:21|), and particularly Corinth, whither he had at last come again after repeated attempts, pauses, and delays (2Corinthians:13:1|). Now at last the coast was clear and Paul apparently had an open door in Corinth during these three months, so completely had Titus at last done away with the opposition of the Judaizers there.

rwp@Acts:20:3 @{When he had spent three months there} (\poiˆsas mˆnas treis\). Literally, "having done three months," the same idiom in strkjv@Acts:14:33; strkjv@18:23; strkjv@James:5:13|. During this period Paul may have written Galatians as Lightfoot argued and certainly did Romans. We do not have to say that Luke was ignorant of Paul's work during this period, only that he did not choose to enlarge upon it. {And a plot was laid against him by the Jews} (\genomenˆs epiboulˆs aut“i hupo t“n Ioudai“n\). Genitive absolute, "a plot by the Jews having come against him." \Epiboulˆ\ is an old word for a plot against one. In the N.T. only in Acts (9:24; strkjv@20:3,19; strkjv@23:30|). Please note that this plot is by the Jews, not the Judaizers whom Paul discusses so vehemently in strkjv@2Corinthians:10-13|. They had given Paul much anguish of heart as is shown in I Cor. and in strkjv@2Corinthians:1-7|, but that trouble seems now past. It is Paul's old enemies in Corinth who had cherished all these years their defeat at the hands of Gallio (Acts:18:5-17|) who now took advantage of Paul's plans for departure to compass his death if possible. {As he was about to set sail for Syria} (\mellonti anagesthai eis tˆn Surian\). The participle \mellonti\ agrees in case (dative) with \aut“i\. For the sense of intending see also verse 13|. \Anagesthai\ (present middle infinitive) is the common word for putting out to sea (going up, they said, from land) as in strkjv@13:13|. {He determined} (\egeneto gn“mˆs\). The best MSS. here read \gn“mˆs\ (predicate ablative of source like \epiluse“s\, strkjv@2Peter:1:20|, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 514), not \gn“mˆ\ (nominative). "He became of opinion." The Jews had heard of Paul's plan to sail for Syria and intended in the hurly-burly either to kill him at the docks in Cenchreae or to push him overboard from the crowded pilgrim ship bound for the passover. Fortunately Paul learned of their plot and so eluded them by going through Macedonia. The Codex Bezae adds here that "the Spirit bade him return into Macedonia."

rwp@Acts:20:10 @{Fell on him} (\epepesen aut“i\). Second aorist active indicative of \epipipt“\ with dative case as Elijah did (1Kings:17:21|) and Elisha (2Kings:4:34|). {Embracing} (\sunperilab“n\). Second aorist active participle of \sunperilamban“\, old verb to embrace completely (take hold together round), but only here in the N.T. In strkjv@Ezra:5:3|. {Make ye no ado} (\mˆ thorubeisthe\). Stop (\mˆ\ and present middle imperative of \thorube“\) making a noise (\thorubos\) as the people did on the death of Jairus's daughter (Matthew:9:23| \thoruboumenou\ and strkjv@Mark:5:38| \thorubou\) when Jesus asked \Ti thorubeisthe?\ {For his life is in him} (\hˆ gar psuchˆ autou en aut“i estin\). This language is relied on by Ramsay, Wendt, Zoeckler to show that Eutychus had not really died, but had merely swooned. Paul's language would suit that view, but it suits equally well the idea that he had just been restored to life and so is indecisive. Furneaux urges also the fact that his friends did not bring him back to the meeting till morning (verse 12|) as additional evidence that it was a case of swooning rather than of death. But this again is not conclusive as they would naturally not take him back at once. One will believe here as the facts appeal to him.

rwp@Acts:20:17 @{Called to him} (\metekalesato\). Aorist middle (indirect) indicative of \metakale“\, old verb to call from one place to another (\meta\ for "change"), middle to call to oneself, only in Acts in the N.T. (7:14; strkjv@10:32; strkjv@20:17; strkjv@24:25|). Ephesus was some thirty miles, a stiff day's journey each way. They would be with Paul the third day of the stay in Miletus. {The elders of the church} (\tous presbuterous tˆs ekklˆsias\). The very men whom Paul terms "bishops" (\episkopous\) in verse 28| just as in strkjv@Titus:1:5,7| where both terms (\presbuterous, ton episkopon\) describe the same office. The term "elder" applied to Christian ministers first appears in strkjv@Acts:11:30| in Jerusalem and reappears in strkjv@15:4,6,22| in connection with the apostles and the church. The "elders" are not "apostles" but are "bishops" (cf. strkjv@Phillipians:1:1|) and with "deacons" constitute the two classes of officers in the early churches. Ignatius shows that in the early second century the office of bishop over the elders had developed, but Lightfoot has shown that it was not so in the first century. Each church, as in Jerusalem, Philippi, Ephesus, had a number of "elders" ("bishops") in the one great city church. Hackett thinks that other ministers from the neighbourhood also came. It was a noble group of preachers and Paul, the greatest preacher of the ages, makes a remarkable talk to preachers with all the earmarks of Pauline originality (Spitta, _Apostelgeschichte_, p. 252) as shown by the characteristic Pauline words, phrases, ideas current in all his Epistles including the Pastoral (testify, course, pure, take heed, presbyter, bishop, acquire, apparel). Luke heard this address as he may and probably did hear those in Jerusalem and Caesarea (Acts:21-26|). Furneaux suggests that Luke probably took shorthand notes of the address since Galen says that his students took down his medical lectures in shorthand: "At any rate, of all the speeches in the Acts this contains most of Paul and least of Luke.... It reveals Paul as nothing else does. The man who spoke it is no longer a man of eighteen centuries ago: he is of yesterday; of today. He speaks as we speak and feels as we feel; or rather as we fain would speak and feel." We have seen and listened to Paul speak to the Jews in Antioch in Pisidia as Luke pictures the scene, to the uneducated pagans at Lystra, to the cultured Greeks in Athens. We shall hear him plead for his life to the Jewish mob in Jerusalem, to the Roman governor Felix in Caesarea, to the Jewish "King" Herod Agrippa II in Caesarea, and at last to the Jews in Rome. But here Paul unbosoms himself to the ministers of the church in Ephesus where he had spent three years (longer than with any other church) and where he had such varied experiences of prowess and persecution. He opens his heart to these men as he does not to the average crowd even of believers. It is Paul's _Apologia pro sua Vita_. He will probably not see them again and so the outlook and attitude is similar to the farewell discourse of Jesus to the disciples in the upper room (John:13-17|). He warns them about future perils as Jesus had done. Paul's words here will repay any preacher's study today. There is the same high conception of the ministry here that Paul had already elaborated in strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12-6:10| (see my _Glory of the Ministry_). It is a fitting time and occasion for Paul to take stock of his ministry at the close of the third mission tour. What wonders had God wrought already.

rwp@Acts:20:20 @{How that I shrank not} (\h“s ouden hupesteilamen\). Still indirect discourse (question) after \epistasthe\ (ye know) with \h“s\ like \p“s\ in verse 18|. First aorist middle of \hupostell“\, old verb to draw under or back. It was so used of drawing back or down sails on a ship and, as Paul had so recently been on the sea, that may be the metaphor here. But it is not necessarily so as the direct middle here makes good sense and is frequent, to withdraw oneself, to cower, to shrink, to conceal, to dissemble as in strkjv@Habbakkuk:2:4| (Hebrews:10:38|). Demosthenes so used it to shrink from declaring out of fear for others. This open candour of Paul is supported by his Epistles (1Thessalonians:2:4,11; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:2; strkjv@Galatians:1:10|). {From declaring unto you} (\tou mˆ anaggeilai humin\). Ablative case of the articular first aorist active infinitive of \anaggell“\ with the redundant negative after verbs of hindering, etc. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1094). {Anything that was profitable} (\t“n sumpheront“n\). Partitive genitive after \ouden\ of the articular present active participle of \sumpher“\, to bear together, be profitable. {Publicly} (\dˆmosiƒi\, adverb) {and from house to house} (\kai kat' oikous\). By (according to) houses. It is worth noting that this greatest of preachers preached from house to house and did not make his visits merely social calls. He was doing kingdom business all the while as in the house of Aquila and Priscilla (1Corinthians:16:19|).

rwp@Acts:20:21 @{Testifying} (\diamarturomenos\). As Peter did (Acts:2:40|) where Luke uses this same word thoroughly Lucan and Pauline. Songs:again in verses 23,24|. Paul here as in strkjv@Romans:1:16| includes both Jews and Greeks, to the Jew first. {Repentance toward God} (\tˆn eis theon metanoian\) {and faith toward our Lord Jesus} (\kai pistin eis ton kurion hˆm“n Iˆsoun\). These two elements run through the Epistle to the Romans which Paul had recently written and sent from Corinth. These two elements appear in all Paul's preaching whether "to Jews or Gentiles, to philosophers at Athens or to peasants at Lystra, he preached repentance toward God and faith toward the Lord Jesus" (Knowling).

rwp@Acts:20:25 @{And now, behold} (\kai nun, idou\). Second time and solemn reminder as in verse 22|. {I know} (\eg“ oida\). Emphasis on \eg“\ which is expressed. {Ye all} (\humeis pantes\). In very emphatic position after the verb \opsesthe\ (shall see) and the object (my face). Twice Paul will write from Rome (Phillipians:2:24; strkjv@Philemon:1:22|) the hope of coming east again; but that is in the future, and here Paul is expressing his personal conviction and his fears. The Pastoral Epistles show Paul did come to Ephesus again (1Timothy:1:3; strkjv@3:14; strkjv@4:13|) and Troas (2Timothy:4:13|) and Miletus (2Timothy:4:20|). There need be no surprise that Paul's fears turned out otherwise. He had reason enough for them. {Among whom I went about} (\en hois diˆlthon\). Apparently Paul here has in mind others beside the ministers. They represented the church in Ephesus and the whole region where Paul laboured.

rwp@Acts:20:28 @{Take heed unto yourselves} (\prosechete heautois\). The full phrase had \ton noun\, hold your mind on yourselves (or other object in the dative), as often in old writers and in strkjv@Job:7:17|. But the ancients often used the idiom with \noun\ understood, but not expressed as here and strkjv@Acts:5:35; strkjv@Luke:12:1; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@21:34; strkjv@1Timothy:1:4; strkjv@3:8; strkjv@4:13|. \Epeche\ is so used in strkjv@1Timothy:4:16|. {To all the flock} (\panti t“i poimni“i\). Contracted form of \poimenion = poimnˆ\ (John:10:16|) already in strkjv@Luke:12:32| and also in strkjv@Acts:20:29; strkjv@1Peter:5:2,3|. Common in old Greek. {Hath made} (\etheto\). Did make, second aorist middle indicative of \tithˆmi\, did appoint. Paul evidently believed that the Holy Spirit calls and appoints ministers. {Bishops} (\episkopous\). The same men termed elders in verse 17| which see. {To shepherd} (\poimainein\). Present active infinitive of purpose of \poimain“\, old verb to feed or tend the flock (\poimnˆ, poimnion\), to act as shepherd (\poimˆn\). These ministers are thus in Paul's speech called elders (verse 17|), bishops (verse 28|), and shepherds (verse 28|). Jesus had used this very word to Peter (John:21:16|, twice \boske\, feed, strkjv@21:15,17|) and Peter will use it in addressing fellow-elders (1Peter:5:2|) with memories, no doubt of the words of Jesus to him. The "elders" were to watch over as "bishops" and "tend and feed as shepherds" the flock. Jesus is termed "the shepherd and bishop of your souls" in strkjv@1Peter:2:25| and "the great Shepherd of the sheep" in strkjv@Hebrews:13:20|. Jesus called himself "the good Shepherd" in strkjv@John:10:11|. {The church of God} (\tˆn ekklˆsian tou theou\). The correct text, not "the church of the Lord" or "the church of the Lord and God" (Robertson, _Introduction to Textual Criticism of the N.T._, p. 189). {He purchased} (\periepoiˆsato\). First aorist middle of \peripoie“\, old verb to reserve, to preserve (for or by oneself, in the middle). In the N.T. only in Luke strkjv@17:33; strkjv@Acts:20:28; strkjv@1Timothy:3:13|. The substantive \peripoiˆsin\ (preservation, possession) occurs in strkjv@1Peter:2:9| ("a peculiar people" = a people for a possession) and in strkjv@Ephesians:1:14|. {With his own blood} (\dia tou haimatos tou idiou\). Through the agency of (\dia\) his own blood. Whose blood? If \tou theou\ (Aleph B Vulg.) is correct, as it is, then Jesus is here called "God" who shed his own blood for the flock. It will not do to say that Paul did not call Jesus God, for we have strkjv@Romans:9:5; strkjv@Colossians:2:9; strkjv@Titus:2:13| where he does that very thing, besides strkjv@Colossians:1:15-20; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|.

rwp@Acts:20:31 @{Wherefore watch ye} (\dio grˆgoreite\). Paul has concluded his defence of himself and his warning. Now he exhorts on the basis of it (\dio\) because of which thing. The very command of Jesus concerning the perils before his return as in strkjv@Mark:13:35| (\grˆgoreite\), the very form (late present imperative from the second perfect \egrˆgora\ of \egeir“\, to arouse). Stay awake. {I ceased not to admonish} (\ouk epausamˆn nouthet“n\). Participle describes Paul, I did not cease admonishing, night and day (\nukta kai hˆmeran\, accusative of extent of time, for three years \trietian\, accusative of extent of time also). \Nouthet“n\ is from \nouthete“\, to put sense into one. Songs:Paul kept it up with tears (verse 19|) if so be he could save the Ephesians from the impending perils. Forewarned is to be forearmed. Paul did his duty by them.

rwp@Acts:20:33 @{No man's silver or gold or apparel} (\arguriou ˆ chrusiou ˆ himatismou oudenos\). Genitive case after \epethumˆsa\. One of the slanders against Paul was that he was raising this collection, ostensibly for the poor, really for himself (2Corinthians:12:17f.|). He includes "apparel" because oriental wealth consisted largely in fine apparel (not old worn out clothes). See strkjv@Genesis:24:53; strkjv@2Kings:5:5; strkjv@Psalms:45:13f.; strkjv@Matthew:6:19|. Paul did not preach just for money.

rwp@Acts:21:6 @{Beach} (\aigialon\). As in strkjv@Matthew:13:2| which see. This scene is in public as at Miletus, but they did not care. {Bade each other farewell} (\apespasametha allˆlous\). First aorist middle of \apaspazomai\. Rare compound, here alone in the N.T. Tender scene, but "no bonds of long comradeship, none of the clinging love" (Furneaux) seen at Miletus (Acts:20:37f.|). {Home again} (\eis ta idia\). To their own places as of the Beloved Disciple in strkjv@John:19:27| and of Jesus in strkjv@John:1:11|. This idiom in the papyri also.

rwp@Acts:21:8 @{On the morrow} (\tˆi epaurion\). Another and the more common way of expressing this idea of "next day" besides the three in strkjv@20:15| and the one in strkjv@21:1|. {Unto Caesarea} (\eis Kaisarian\). Apparently by land as the voyage (\ploun\) ended at Ptolemais (verse 7|). Caesarea is the political capital of Judea under the Romans where the procurators lived and a city of importance, built by Herod the Great and named in honour of Augustus. It had a magnificent harbour built Most of the inhabitants were Greeks. This is the third time that we have seen Paul in Caesarea, on his journey from Jerusalem to Tarsus (Acts:9:30|), on his return from Antioch at the close of the second mission tour (18:22|) and now. The best MSS. omit \hoi peri Paulou\ (we that were of Paul's company) a phrase like that in strkjv@13:13|. {Into the house of Philip the evangelist} (\eis ton oikon Philippou tou euaggelistou\). Second in the list of the seven (6:5|) after Stephen and that fact mentioned here. By this title he is distinguished from "Philip the apostle," one of the twelve. His evangelistic work followed the death of Stephen (Acts:8|) in Samaria, Philistia, with his home in Caesarea. The word "evangelizing" (\euˆggelizeto\) was used of him in strkjv@8:40|. The earliest of the three N.T. examples of the word "evangelist" (Acts:21:8; strkjv@Ephesians:4:11; strkjv@2Timothy:4:5|). Apparently a word used to describe one who told the gospel story as Philip did and may have been used of him first of all as John was termed "the baptizer" (\ho baptiz“n\, strkjv@Mark:1:4|), then "the Baptist" (\ho baptistˆs\, strkjv@Matthew:3:1|). It is found on an inscription in one of the Greek islands of uncertain date and was used in ecclesiastical writers of later times on the Four Gospels as we do. As used here the meaning is a travelling missionary who "gospelized" communities. This is probably Paul's idea in strkjv@2Timothy:4:5|. In strkjv@Ephesians:4:11| the word seems to describe a special class of ministers just as we have them today. Men have different gifts and Philip had this of evangelizing as Paul was doing who is the chief evangelist. The ideal minister today combines the gifts of evangelist, herald, teacher, shepherd. "{We abode with him}" (\emeinamen par' aut“i\). Constative aorist active indicative. \Par aut“i\ (by his side) is a neat idiom for "at his house." What a joyful time Paul had in conversation with Philip. He could learn from him much of value about the early days of the gospel in Jerusalem. And Luke could, and probably did, take notes from Philip and his daughters about the beginnings of Christian history. It is generally supposed that the "we" sections of Acts represent a travel document by Luke (notes made by him as he journeyed from Troas to Rome). Those who deny the Lukan authorship of the whole book usually admit this. Songs:we may suppose that Luke is already gathering data for future use. If so, these were precious days for him.

rwp@Acts:21:9 @{Virgins which did prophesy} (\parthenoi prophˆteusai\). Not necessarily an "order" of virgins, but Philip had the honour of having in his home four virgin daughters with the gift of prophecy which was not necessarily predicting events, though that was done as by Agabus here. It was more than ordinary preaching (cf. strkjv@19:6|) and was put by Paul above the other gifts like tongues (1Corinthians:14:1-33|). The prophecy of Joel (2:28f.|) about their sons and daughters prophesying is quoted by Peter and applied to the events on the day of Pentecost (Acts:2:17|). Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:5| gives directions about praying and prophesying by the women (apparently in public worship) with the head uncovered and sharply requires the head covering, though not forbidding the praying and prophesying. With this must be compared his demand for silence by the women in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:34-40; strkjv@1Timothy:2:8-15| which it is not easy to reconcile. One wonders if there was not something known to Paul about special conditions in Corinth and Ephesus that he has not told. There was also Anna the prophetess in the temple (Luke:2:36|) besides the inspired hymns of Elizabeth (Luke:1:42-45|) and of Mary (Luke:1:46-55|). At any rate there was no order of women prophets or official ministers. There were Old Testament prophetesses like Miriam, Deborah, Huldah. Today in our Sunday schools the women do most of the actual teaching. The whole problem is difficult and calls for restraint and reverence. One thing is certain and that is that Luke appreciated the services of women for Christ as is shown often in his writings (Luke:8:1-3|, for instance) before this incident.

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:21:26 @{Took the men} (\paralab“n tous andras\). The very phrase used in verse 24| to Paul. {The next day} (\tˆi echomenˆi\). One of the phrases in strkjv@20:15| for the coming day. Locative case of time. {Purifying himself with them} (\sun autois hagnistheis\, first aorist passive participle of \hagniz“\). The precise language again of the recommendation in verse 24|. Paul was conforming to the letter. {Went into the temple} (\eisˆiei eis to hieron\). Imperfect active of \eiseimi\ as in verse 18| which see. Went on into the temple, descriptive imperfect. Paul joined the four men in their vow of separation. {Declaring} (\diaggell“n\). To the priests what day he would report the fulfilment of the vow. The priests would desire notice of the sacrifice. This verb only used by Luke in N.T. except strkjv@Romans:11:17| (quotation from the LXX). It is not necessary to assume that the vows of each of the five expired on the same day (Rackham). {Until the offering was offered for every one of them} (\he“s hou prosˆnechthˆ huper henos hekastou aut“n hˆ prosphora\). This use of \he“s hou\ (like \he“s\, alone) with the first aorist passive indicative \prosˆnechthˆ\ of \prospher“\, to offer, contemplates the final result (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 974f.) and is probably the statement of Luke added to Paul's announcement. He probably went into the temple one day for each of the brethren and one for himself. The question arises whether Paul acted wisely or unwisely in agreeing to the suggestion of James. What he did was in perfect harmony with his principle of accommodation in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:20| when no principle was involved. It is charged that here on this occasion Paul was unduly influenced by considerations of expediency and was willing for the Jewish Christians to believe him more of a Jew than was true in order to placate the situation in Jerusalem. Furneaux calls it a compromise and a failure. I do not so see it. To say that is to obscure the whole complex situation. What Paul did was not for the purpose of conciliating his opponents, the Judaizers, who had diligently spread falsehoods about him in Jerusalem as in Corinth. It was solely to break the power of these "false apostles" over the thousands in Jerusalem who have been deluded by Paul's accusers. Songs:far as the evidence goes that thing was accomplished. In the trouble that comes in Jerusalem and Caesarea the Judaizers cut no figure at all. The Jewish Christians do not appear in Paul's behalf, but there was no opportunity for them to do so. The explosion that came on the last day of Paul's appearance in the temple was wholly disconnected from his offerings for the four brethren and himself. It must be remembered that Paul had many kinds of enemies. The attack on him by these Jews from Asia had no connexion whatever with the slanders of the Judaizers about Paul's alleged teachings that Jewish Christians in the dispersion should depart from the Mosaic law. That slander was put to rest forever by his following the advice of James and justifies the wisdom of that advice and Paul's conduct about it.

rwp@Acts:21:27 @{The seven days} (\hai hepta hˆmerai\). For which Paul had taken the vow, though there may be an allusion to the pentecostal week for which Paul had desired to be present (20:16|). There is no necessary connexion with the vow in strkjv@18:15|. In strkjv@24:17| Paul makes a general reference to his purpose in coming to Jerusalem to bring alms and offerings (\prosphoras\, sacrifices). Paul spent seven days in Troas (20:6|), Tyre (21:4|), and had planned for seven here if not more. It was on the last of the seven days when Paul was completing his offerings about the vows on all five that the incident occurred that was to make him a prisoner for five years. {When they saw him in the temple} (\theasamenoi auton en t“i hier“i\). First aorist middle participle of \theaomai\ (from \thea\, a view, cf. theatre) to behold. In the very act of honouring the temple these Jews from Asia raise a hue and cry that he is dishonouring it. Paul was not known by face now to many of the Jerusalem Jews, though once the leader of the persecution after the death of Stephen and the outstanding young Jew of the day. But the Jews in Ephesus knew him only too well, some of whom are here at the pentecostal feast. They had plotted against him in Ephesus to no purpose (Acts:19:23-41; strkjv@20:19|), but now a new opportunity had come. It is possible that the cry was led by Alexander put forward by the Jews in Ephesus (19:33|) who may be the same as Alexander the coppersmith who did Paul so much harm (2Timothy:4:14|). Paul was not in the inner sanctuary (\ho naos\), but only in the outer courts (\to hieron\). {Stirred up all the multitude} (\sunecheon panta ton ochlon\). Imperfect (kept on) active of \sunche“\ or \sunchun“\ (\-unn“\), to pour together, to confuse as in strkjv@Acts:2:6; strkjv@9:22; strkjv@19:31,32; strkjv@21:31| and here to stir up by the same sort of confusion created by Demetrius in Ephesus where the same word is used twice (19:31,32|). The Jews from Ephesus had learned it from Demetrius the silversmith. {Laid hands on him} (\epebalan ep' auton tas cheiras\). Second aorist (ingressive, with endings of the first aorist, \-an\) active indicative of \epiball“\, old verb to lay upon, to attack (note repetition of \epi\). They attacked and seized Paul before the charge was made.

rwp@Acts:21:28 @{Help} (\boˆtheite\). Present active imperative of \boˆthe“\, to run (\the“\) at a cry (\boˆ\), as if an outrage had been committed like murder or assault. {All men everywhere} (\panta pantachˆi\). Alliterative. \Pantachˆi\ is a variation in MSS., often \pantachou\, and here only in the N.T. The charges against Paul remind one of those against Stephen (Acts:6:13|) in which Paul had participated according to his confession (22:20|). Like the charges against Stephen and Jesus before him truth and falsehood are mixed. Paul had said that being a Jew would not save a man. He had taught the law of Moses was not binding on Gentiles. He did hold, like Jesus and Stephen, that the temple was not the only place to worship God. But Paul gloried himself in being a Jew, considered the Mosaic law righteous for Jews, and was honouring the temple at this very moment. {And moreover also he brought Greeks also into the temple} (\eti te kai Hellˆnas eisˆgagen eis to hieron\). Note the three particles (\eti te kai\), {and} (\te\) {still more} (\eti\) {also} or {even} (\kai\). Worse than his teaching (\didask“n\) is his dreadful deed: he actually brought (\eisˆgagen\, second aorist active indicative of \eisag“\). This he had a right to do if they only went into the court of the Gentiles. But these Jews mean to imply that Paul had brought Greeks beyond this court into the court of Israel. An inscription was found by Clermont-Ganneau in Greek built into the walls of a mosque on the Via Dolorosa that was on the wall dividing the court of Israel from the court of the Gentiles. Death was the penalty to any Gentile who crossed over into the Court of Israel (_The Athenaeum_, July, 1871). {Hath defiled this holy place} (\kekoin“ken ton hagion topon touton\). Present perfect active of \koino“\, to make common (see on ¯10:14|). Note vivid change of tense, the defilement lasts (state of completion). All this is the substance of the call of these shrewd conspirators from Ephesus, Jews (not Jewish Christians, not even Judaizers) who hated him for his work there and who probably "spoke evil of the Way before the multitude" there so that Paul had to separate the disciples from the synagogue and go to the School of Tyrannus (19:9f.|). These enemies of Paul had now raised the cry of "fire" and vanish from the scene completely (24:19|). This charge was absolutely false as we shall see, made out of inferences of hate and suspicion.

rwp@Acts:21:29 @{For} (\gar\). Luke adds the reason for the wild charges made against Paul. {They had before seen} (\ˆsan proe“rakotes\). Periphrastic past perfect of \proora“\, old verb to see before, whether time or place. Only twice in the N.T., here and strkjv@Acts:2:25| quoted from strkjv@Psalms:15:8|. Note the double reduplication in \-e“-\ as in Attic (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 364). {With him in the city Trophimus the Ephesian} (\Trophimon ton Ephesion en tˆi polei sun aut“i\). The Jews from Asia (Ephesus) knew Trophimus by sight as well as Paul. One day they saw both of them together (\sun\) in the city. That was a fact. They had just seized Paul in the temple (\hieron\). That was another fact. {They supposed} (\enomizon\). Imperfect active of \nomiz“\, common to think or suppose. Perfectly harmless word, but they did, as so many people do, put their supposed inference on the same basis with the facts. They did not see Trophimus with Paul now in the temple, nor had they ever seen him there. They simply argued that, if Paul was willing to be seen down street with a Greek Christian, he would not hesitate to bring him (therefore, did bring him, \eisˆgagen\ as in verse 28|) into the temple, that is into the court of Israel and therefore both Paul and Trophimus were entitled to death, especially Paul who had brought him in (if he had) and, besides, they now had Paul. This is the way of the mob-mind in all ages. Many an innocent man has been rushed to his death by the fury of a lynching party.

rwp@Acts:21:30 @{All the city was shaken} (\ekinˆthˆ hˆ polis holˆ\). First aorist passive of \kine“\, common verb for violent motion and emotion. See also strkjv@24:5| where the word is used by Tertullus of Paul as the stirrer up of riots! {The people ran together} (\egeneto sundromˆ tou laou\). Rather, There came a running together (\sun-dromˆ\ from \sun-trech“\) of the people. The cry spread like wildfire over the city and there was a pell-mell scramble or rush to get to the place of the disturbance. {They laid hold on Paul} (\epilabomenoi tou Paulou\). Second aorist middle participle of \epilambanomai\ with the genitive (cf. \epebalan\ in verse 27|). {Dragged} (\heilkon\). Imperfect active of \helk“\ (and also \helku“\), old verb to drag or draw. Imperfect tense vividly pictures the act as going on. They were saving the temple by dragging Paul outside. Curiously enough both \epilabomenoi\ and \heilkusan\ occur in strkjv@16:19| about the arrest of Paul and Silas in Philippi. {Straightway the doors were shut} (\euthe“s ekleisthˆsan hai thurai\). With a bang and at once. First aorist (effective) passive of \klei“\. The doors between the inner court and the court of the Gentiles. But this was only the beginning, the preparation for the real work of the mob. They did not wish to defile the holy place with blood. The doors were shut by the Levites.

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:22:9 @{But they heard not the voice} (\tˆn de ph“nˆn ouk ˆkousan\). The accusative here may be used rather than the genitive as in verse 7| to indicate that those with Paul did not understand what they heard (9:7|) just as they beheld the light (22:9|), but did not see Jesus (9:7|). The difference in cases allows this distinction, though it is not always observed as just noticed about strkjv@22:14; strkjv@26:14|. The verb \akou“\ is used in the sense of understand (Mark:4:33; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:2|). It is one of the evidences of the genuineness of this report of Paul's speech that Luke did not try to smooth out apparent discrepancies in details between the words of Paul and his own record already in ch. 9. The Textus Receptus adds in this verse: "And they became afraid" (\kai emphoboi egenonto\). Clearly not genuine.

rwp@Acts:22:20 @{Was shed} (\exechunneto\). Imperfect passive of \ekchunn“\ (see on ¯Matthew:23:35|), was being shed. {Witness} (\marturos\). And "martyr" also as in strkjv@Revelation:2:13; strkjv@17:6|. Transition state for the word here. {I also was standing by} (\kai autos ˆmˆn ephest“s\). Periphrastic second past perfect in form, but imperfect (linear) in sense since \hest“s=histamenos\ (intransitive). {Consenting} (\suneudok“n\). The very word used by Luke in strkjv@Acts:8:1| about Paul. _Koin‚_ word for being pleased at the same time with (cf. strkjv@Luke:11:48|). Paul adds here the item of "guarding the clothes of those who were slaying (\anairount“n\ as in strkjv@Luke:23:32; strkjv@Acts:12:2|) him" (Stephen). Paul recalls the very words of protest used by him to Jesus. He did not like the idea of running away to save his own life right where he had helped slay Stephen. He is getting on dangerous ground.

rwp@Acts:22:28 @{With a great sum} (\pollou kephalaiou\). The use of \kephalaiou\ (from \kephalˆ\, head) for sums of money (principal as distinct from interest) is old and frequent in the papyri. Our word capital is from \caput\ (head). The genitive is used here according to rule for price. "The sale of the Roman citizenship was resorted to by the emperors as a means of filling the exchequer, much as James I. made baronets" (Page). Dio Cassius (LX., 17) tells about Messalina the wife of Claudius selling Roman citizenship. Lysias was probably a Greek and so had to buy his citizenship. {But I am a Roman born} (\Eg“ de kai gegennˆmai\). Perfect passive indicative of \genna“\. The word "Roman" not in the Greek. Literally, "But I have been even born one," (i.e. born a Roman citizen). There is calm and simple dignity in this reply and pardonable pride. Being a citizen of Tarsus (21:39|) did not make Paul a Roman citizen. Tarsus was an _urbs libera_, not a _colonia_ like Philippi. Some one of his ancestors (father, grandfather) obtained it perhaps as a reward for distinguished service. Paul's family was of good social position. "He was educated by the greatest of the Rabbis; he was at an early age entrusted by the Jewish authorities with an important commission; his nephew could gain ready access to the Roman tribune; he was treated as a person of consequence by Felix, Festus, Agrippa, and Julius" (Furneaux).

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:23:5 @{I wist not} (\ouk ˆidein\). Second past perfect of \oida\ used as an imperfect. The Greek naturally means that Paul did not know that it was the high priest who gave the order to smite his mouth. If this view is taken, several things may be said by way of explanation. The high priest may not have had on his official dress as the meeting was called hurriedly by Lysias. Paul had been away so long that he may not have known Ananias on sight. And then Paul may have had poor eyesight or the high priest may not have been sitting in the official seat. Another way of explaining it is to say that Paul was so indignant, even angry, at the command that he spoke without considering who it was that gave the order. The Greek allows this idea also. At any rate Paul at once recognizes the justice of the point made against him. He had been guilty of irreverence against the office of high priest as the passage from strkjv@Exodus:22:18| (LXX) shows and confesses his fault, but the rebuke was deserved. Jesus did not threaten (1Peter:2:23|) when smitten on the cheek (John:18:22|), but he did protest against the act and did not turn the other cheek.

rwp@Acts:23:14 @{Came to the chief priests and the elders} (\proselthontes tois archiereusin kai tois presbuterois\). The Sanhedrin, just as Judas did (Luke:22:4|). {With a great curse} (\anathemati\). This use of the same word as the verb repeated in the instrumental case is in imitation of the Hebrew absolute infinitive and common in the LXX, the very idiom and words of strkjv@Deuteronomy:13:15; strkjv@20:17|, an example of translation Greek, though found in other languages (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 531). See on ¯Luke:21:5| for the distinction between \anathema\ and \anathˆma\. Jesus had foretold: "Whoso killeth you will think that he doeth God service" (John:16:2|).

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:24:25 @{Was terrified} (\emphobos genomenos\). Ingressive aorist middle of \ginomai\, "becoming terrified." \Emphobos\ (\en\ and \phobos\) old word, in the N.T. only strkjv@Luke:24:5; strkjv@Acts:10:5; strkjv@24:25; strkjv@Revelation:11:13|. Paul turned the tables completely around and expounded "the faith in Christ Jesus" as it applied to Felix and Drusilla and discoursed (\dialegomenou autou\, genitive absolute) concerning "righteousness" (\dikaiosunˆs\) which they did not possess, "self-control" or temperance (\egkrateias\) which they did not exhibit, and "the judgment to come" (\tou krimatos tou mellontos\) which was certain to overtake them. Felix was brought under conviction, but apparently not Drusilla. Like another Herodias her resentment was to be feared (Knowling). {Go thy way for this time} (\to nun echon poreuou\). The ancient Greek has this use of \to nun echon\ (Tobit strkjv@7:11) in the accusative of time, "as for the present or holding the now." {When I have a convenient season} (\kairon metalab“n\). Second aorist active participle of the old verb \metalamban“\, to find a share in, to obtain. It was his "excuse" for dodging the personal turn that Paul had given.

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:25:4 @{Howbeit} (\men oun\). No antithesis expressed, though Page considers \de\ in verse 6| to be one. They probably argued that it was easier for one man (Paul) to come to Jerusalem than for many to go down there. But Festus was clearly suspicious (verse 6|) and was wholly within his rights to insist that they make their charges in Caesarea where he held court. {Was kept in charge} (\tˆreisthai\). Present passive infinitive of \tˆre“\ in indirect assertion. \Hoti\ with finite verb is more common after \apokrinomai\, but the infinitive with the accusative of general reference is proper as here (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1036). {Shortly} (\en tachei\). In quickness, in speed. Old and common usage, seen already in strkjv@Luke:18:8; strkjv@Acts:12:7; strkjv@22:18|. Festus is clearly within his rights again since his stay in Caesarea had been so brief. He did go down in "eight or ten days" (verse 6|). Luke did not consider the matter important enough to be precise.

rwp@Acts:25:23 @{When Agrippa was come and Bernice} (\elthontos tou Agrippa kai tˆs Bernikˆs\). Genitive absolute, the participle agreeing in number and gender (masculine singular, \elthontos\) with \Agrippa\, \Bernikˆs\ being added as an afterthought. {With great pomp} (\meta pollˆs phantasias\). \Phantasia\ is a _Koin‚_ word (Polybius, Diodorus, etc.) from the old verb \phantaz“\ (Hebrews:12:21|) and it from \phain“\, common verb to show, to make an appearance. This is the only N.T. example of \phantasia\, though the kindred common word \phantasma\ (appearance) occurs twice in the sense of apparition or spectre (Matthew:14:26; strkjv@Mark:6:49|). Herodotus (VII. 10) used the verb \phantaz“\ for a showy parade. Festus decided to gratify the wish of Agrippa by making the "hearing" of Paul the prisoner (verse 22|) an occasion for paying a compliment to Agrippa (Rackham) by a public gathering of the notables in Caesarea. Festus just assumed that Paul would fall in with this plan for a grand entertainment though he did not have to do it. {Into the place of hearing} (\eis to akroatˆrion\). From \akroaomai\ (to be a hearer) and, like the Latin _auditorium_, in Roman law means the place set aside for hearing, and deciding cases. Here only in the N.T. Late word, several times in Plutarch and other _Koin‚_ writers. The hearing was "semi-official" (Page) as is seen in verse 26|. {With the chief captains} (\sun te chiliarchois\). \Chiliarchs\, each a leader of a thousand. There were five cohorts of soldiers stationed in Caesarea. {And the principal men of the city} (\kai andrasin tois kat' exochˆn\). The use of \kat' exochˆn\, like our French phrase _par excellence_, occurs here only in the N.T., and not in the ancient Greek, but it is found in inscriptions of the first century A.D. (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). \Exochˆ\ in medical writers is any protuberance or swelling. Cf. our phrase "outstanding men." {At the command of Festus} (\keleusantos tou Phˆstou\). Genitive absolute again, "Festus having commanded."

rwp@Acts:26:16 @{Arise and stand} (\anastˆthi kai stˆthi\). "Emphatic assonance" (Page). Second aorist active imperative of compound verb (\anistˆmi\) and simplex (\histˆmi\). "Stand up and take a stand." {Have I appeared unto thee} (\“phthˆn soi\). First aorist passive indicative of \hora“\. See on ¯Luke:22:43|. {To appoint thee} (\procheirisasthai se\). See strkjv@3:30; strkjv@22:14| for this verb. {Both of the things wherein thou hast seen me} (\h“n te eides me\). The reading \me\ (not in all MSS.) makes it the object of \eides\ (didst see) and \h“n\ is genitive of \ha\ (accusative of general reference) attracted to the case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\. Paul is thus a personal eyewitness of the Risen Christ (Luke:1:1; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:1; strkjv@9:1|). {And of the things wherein I will appear unto thee} (\h“n te ophthˆsomai soi\). Here again \h“n\ is genitive of the accusative (general reference) relative \ha\ attracted to the case of the antecedent \tout“n\ or \ekein“n\ as before. But \ophthˆsomai\ is first future passive of \hora“\ and cannot be treated as active or middle. Page takes it to mean "the visions in which I shall be seen by you," the passive form bringing out the agency of God. See those in strkjv@Acts:18:9; strkjv@23:11; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:2|. The passive voice, however, like \apekrithˆn\ and \ephobˆthˆn\, did become sometimes transitive in the _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 819).

rwp@Acts:26:19 @{Wherefore} (\hothen\). This relatival adverb (cf. strkjv@14:26; strkjv@28:13|) gathers up all that Paul has said. {I was not disobedient} (\ouk egenomˆn apeithˆs\). Litotes again, "I did not become (second aorist middle indicative of \ginomai\) disobedient" (\apeithˆs\, old word already in strkjv@Luke:1:17|). {Unto the heavenly vision} (\tˆi ourani“i optasiƒi\). A later form of \opsis\, from \optaz“\, in LXX, and in N.T. (Luke:1:22; strkjv@24:23; strkjv@Acts:26:19; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:1|). Only time that Paul uses it about seeing Christ on the Damascus road, but no reflection on the reality of the event.

rwp@Acts:26:27 @{I know that thou believest} (\oida hoti pisteueis\). Paul had "cornered" Agrippa by this direct challenge. As the Jew in charge of the temple he was bound to confess his faith in the prophets. But Paul had interpreted the prophets about the Messiah in a way that fell in with his claim that Jesus was the Messiah risen from the dead. To say, "Yes" would place himself in Paul's hands. To say "No" would mean that he did not believe the prophets. Agrippa had listened with the keenest interest, but he slipped out of the coils with adroitness and a touch of humour.

rwp@Acts:27:5 @{When we had sailed across} (\diapleusantes\). First aorist active participle of \diaple“\ (another compound of \ple“\). {The sea which is off Cilicia and Pamphylia} (\to pelagos to kata tˆn Kilikian kai Pamphulian\). \Pelagos\ is properly the high sea as here. In strkjv@Matthew:18:6| (which see) Jesus uses it of "the depth of the sea." Only these examples in the N.T. The current runs westward along the coast of Cilicia and Pamphylia and the land would protect from the wind. {We came to Myra of Lycia} (\katˆlthamen eis Murra tˆs Lukias\). Literally, "We came down." This town was two and a half miles from the coast of Lycia. The port Andriace had a fine harbour and did a large grain business. No disciples are mentioned here nor at Lasea, Melita, Syracuse, Rhegium.

rwp@Acts:27:9 @{Where much time was spent} (\Hikanou chronou diagenomenou\). Genitive absolute again with second aorist middle participle of \diaginomai\, to come in between (\dia\). "Considerable time intervening," since they became weatherbound in this harbour, though some take it since they left Caesarea. {And the voyage was now dangerous} (\kai ontos ˆdˆ episphalous\). Genitive absolute, "and the voyage being already (\ˆdˆ\=Latin _jam_) dangerous" (old word from \epi\ and \sphall“\, to trip, to fall, and so prone to fall, here only in N.T.). {Because the Fast was now already gone by} (\dia to kai tˆn nˆsteian ˆdˆ parelˆluthenai\). Accusative (after \dia\) of the articular infinitive perfect active of \parerchomai\, to pass by, with the accusative of general reference (\nˆsteian\, the great day of atonement of the Jews, strkjv@Leviticus:16:29ff.|) occurring about the end of September. The ancients considered navigation on the Mediterranean unsafe from early October till the middle of March. In A.D. 59 the Fast occurred on Oct. 5. There is nothing strange in Luke using this Jewish note of time as in strkjv@20:6| though a Gentile Christian. Paul did it also (1Corinthians:16:8|). It is no proof that Luke was a Jewish proselyte. We do not know precisely when the party left Caesarea (possibly in August), but in ample time to arrive in Rome before October if conditions had been more favourable. But the contrary winds had made the voyage very slow and difficult all the way (verse 7|) besides the long delay here in this harbour of Fair Havens. {Paul admonished them} (\parˆinˆi ho Paulos\). Imperfect active of \paraine“\, old word to exhort from \para\ and \aine“\, to praise (3:8|), only here and verse 22| in N.T. It is remarkable that a prisoner like Paul should venture to give advice at all and to keep on doing it (imperfect tense inchoative, began to admonish and kept on at it). Paul had clearly won the respect of the centurion and officers and also felt it to be his duty to give this unasked for warning. {I perceive} (\the“r“\). Old word from \the“ros\, a spectator. See strkjv@Luke:10:18|. Paul does not here claim prophecy, but he had plenty of experience with three shipwrecks already (2Corinthians:11:25|) to justify his apprehension. {Will be} (\mellein esesthai\). Infinitive in indirect assertion followed by future infinitive after \mellein\ in spite of \hoti\ which would naturally call for present indicative \mellei\, an anacoluthon due to the long sentence (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 478). {With injury} (\meta hubre“s\). An old word from \huper\ (above, upper, like our "uppishness") and so pride, insult, personal injury, the legal word for personal assault (Page). Josephus (_Ant_. III. 6, 4) uses it of the injury of the elements. {Loss} (\zˆmian\). Old word, opposite of \kerdos\, gain or profit (Phillipians:3:7f.|). Nowhere else in N.T. {Lading} (\phortiou\). Diminutive of \phortos\ (from \pher“\, to bear) only in form. Common word, but in N.T. only here in literal sense, as metaphor in strkjv@Matthew:11:30; strkjv@23:4; strkjv@Luke:11:46; strkjv@Galatians:6:5|. {But also of our lives} (\alla kai t“n psuch“n\). Common use of \psuchˆ\ for life, originally "breath of life" (Acts:20:10|), and also "soul" (14:2|). Fortunately no lives were lost, though all else was. But this outcome was due to the special mercy of God for the sake of Paul (verse 24|), not to the wisdom of the officers in rejecting Paul's advice. Paul begins now to occupy the leading role in this marvellous voyage.

rwp@Acts:27:13 @{When the south wind blew softly} (\hupopneusantos notou\). Genitive absolute with aorist active participle of \hupopne“\, old verb to blow under, then to blow gently, here only in N.T. "A south wind having blown gently," in marked contrast to the violent northwest wind that they had faced so long. They were so sure of the wisdom of their decision that they did not even draw up the small boat attached by a rope to the vessel's stern (verse 16|). It was only some forty miles to Lutro. {Their purpose} (\tˆs prothese“s\, set before them, from \protithˆmi\), genitive after \krate“\ (\kekratˆkenai\, perfect active infinitive in indirect discourse). {They weighed anchor} (\ƒrantes\). First aorist active participle of \air“\, old verb used in technical sense with \tas agkuras\ (anchors) understood as in Thucydides I. 52; II. 23, "having lifted the anchors." Page takes it simply as "moving." {Sailed along Crete} (\parelegonto tˆn Krˆtˆn\). Imperfect middle. See verse 8|, "were coasting along Crete." {Close in shore} (\ƒsson\). Comparative adverb of \agki\, near, and so "nearer" to shore. Only here in N.T.

rwp@Acts:27:42 @{Counsel was to kill} (\boulˆ egeneto hina--apoktein“sin\). The soldiers did not relish the idea of the escape of the prisoners. Hence there came this "counsel" (\boulˆ\). Regular Greek idiom for purpose (\hina\ and aorist active subjunctive of \apoktein“\, to kill). Soldiers were responsible for the lives of prisoners (Acts:12:19|). {Swim out} (\ekkolumbˆsas\). First aorist active participle of \ekkolumba“\, old verb to swim out and so away. {Escape} (\diaphugˆi\). Second aorist (effective) active subjunctive of \diapheug“\, to make a clean (\dia\) escape.

rwp@Acts:28:2 @{The barbarians} (\hoi barbaroi\). The Greeks called all men "barbarians" who did not speak Greek (Romans:1:14|), not "barbarians" in our sense of rude and uncivilized, but simply "foreign folk." Diodorus Siculus (V. 12) says that it was a colony of the Phoenicians and so their language was Punic (Page). The word originally meant an uncouth repetition (\barbar\) not understood by others (1Corinthians:14:11|). In strkjv@Colossians:3:11| Paul couples it with Scythian as certainly not Christian. These are (with verse 4| below) the only N.T. instances. {Showed us} (\pareichan\). Imperfect active of \parech“\ with \-an\ instead of \-on\ as \eichan\ in strkjv@Mark:8:7| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 339). It was their habit on this occasion, Luke means, they kept on showing. {No common kindness} (\ou tˆn tuchousan philanthr“pian\). The old word \philanthr“pia\ (\philos\, \anthr“pos\), love of mankind, occurs in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Titus:3:4| (adverb in strkjv@27:3|). See on ¯19:11| for this use of \ou tˆn tuchousan\, "not the kindness that happens every day." They were not "wreckers" to take advantage of the calamity. {They kindled a fire} (\hapsantes puran\). The only N.T. example and verse 3| of the old word \pura\ (from \pur\, fire), a pile of burning fuel (sticks). First aorist active participle of \hapt“\, to set fire to, to kindle. Cf. \anapt“\ in strkjv@Luke:12:49|. {Received us all} (\proselabonto pantas hˆmƒs\). Second aorist middle (indirect indicative of \proslamban“\. They took us all to themselves (cf. strkjv@Acts:18:26|). {The present} (\ton ephest“ta\). Second perfect active participle (intransitive) of \ephistˆmi\, "the rain that stood upon them" (the pouring rain). Only in Luke and Paul in N.T.

rwp@Acts:28:4 @{The beast} (\to thˆrion\). Diminutive of \thˆr\ and so little beast. See on ¯Mark:1:13|. Aristotle and the medical writers apply the word to venomous serpents, the viper in particular (Knowling), as Luke does here. Vincent calls attention to the curious history of our word "_treacle_" for molasses (Latin _theriaca_) from \thˆriakˆ\, an antidote made from the flesh of vipers. Coverdale translates strkjv@Jeremiah:8:22|: "There is no more treacle in Gilead." Jeremy Taylor: "We kill the viper and make treacle of him." {Hanging from his hand} (\kremamenon ek tˆs cheiros autou\). Vivid picture of the snake dangling from Paul's hand. Present middle participle of \kremamai\, late form for \kremannumi\, to hang up, to suspend (cf. strkjv@Galatians:3:13|). {No doubt} (\pant“s\). Literally, By all means, old adverb. Cf. strkjv@21:22; strkjv@Luke:4:23; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:22|. Only by Luke and Paul in the N.T. "They _knew_ that he was a prisoner being taken to Rome on some grave charge, and _inferred_ that the charge was murder" (Page). {Though he hath escaped} (\dias“thenta\). First aorist passive participle of \dias“z“\ (same verb used in strkjv@24:43,44; strkjv@28:1|), so-called concessive use of the participle (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1129). {Yet Justice} (\dikˆ\). An abstraction personified like the Latin _Justitia_ (Page). The natives speak of \Dikˆ\ as a goddess, but we know nothing of such actual worship in Malta, though the Greeks worshipped abstractions as in Athens. {Hath not suffered} (\ouk eiasen\). Did not suffer. They look on Paul as a doomed man as good as dead. These people thought that calamity was proof of guilt, poor philosophy and worse theology.

rwp@Acts:28:20 @{Did I intreat} (\parekalesa\). Did I invite you. {Because of the hope of Israel} (\heineken tˆs elpidos tou Israel\). Genitive with preposition \heineken\. The hope of the Messiah is his point as in strkjv@26:6|. {I am bound with this chain} (\tˆn halusin tautˆn perikeimai\). This old verb means to lie around as in strkjv@Luke:17:2; strkjv@Hebrews:12:1|. But it is also used as the passive of \peritithˆmi\, to place around with the accusative of \peritithˆmi\ retained. It is a transitive passive. Paul does not lie around the chain, but the chain lies around him, a curious reversal of the imagery (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 815).

rwp@Acts:28:23 @{Appointed} (\taxamenoi\). First aorist middle participle of \tass“\. Formal arrangement as in strkjv@Matthew:28:16| when Jesus appointed the mountain for his meeting in Galilee. {In great number} (\pleiones\). Comparative of \polus\, "more than a few." {Expounded} (\exetitheto\). Imperfect middle of \ektithˆmi\, to set forth, as in strkjv@11:4; strkjv@18:26|. He did it with detail and care and spent all day at it, "from morning till evening" (\apo pr“i he“s hesperas\). In N.T. only here, strkjv@4:3| and strkjv@Luke:24:29|, though common word. {Persuading them concerning Jesus} (\peith“n autous peri tou Iˆsou\). Conative present active participle, trying to persuade. It was only about Jesus that he could make good his claim concerning the hope of Israel (verse 20|). It was Paul's great opportunity. Songs:he appealed both to Moses and to the prophets for proof as it was his custom to do.

rwp@Info_Colossians @ THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS FROM ROME A.D. 63 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION GENUINENESS The author claims to be Paul (Colossians:1:1|) and there is no real doubt about it in spite of Baur's denial of the Pauline authorship which did not suit his _Tendenz_ theory of the New Testament books. There is every mark of Paul's style and power in the little Epistle and there is no evidence that any one else took Paul's name to palm off this striking and vigorous polemic.

rwp@Info_Colossians @ PURPOSE OF THE EPISTLE Epaphras did not come in vain, for Paul was tremendously stirred by the peril to Christianity from the Gnostics (\hoi gn“stikoi\, the knowing ones). He had won his fight for freedom in Christ against the Judaizers who tried to fasten Jewish sacramentarianism upon spiritual Christianity. Now there is an equal danger of the dissipation of vital Christianity in philosophic speculation. In particular, the peril was keen concerning the Person of Christ when the Gnostics embraced Christianity and applied their theory of the universe to him. They split into factions on the subject of Christ. The Docetic (from \doke“\, to seem) Gnostics held that Jesus did not have a real human body, but only a phantom body. He was, in fact, an aeon and had no real humanity. The Cerinthian (followers of Cerinthus) Gnostics admitted the humanity of the man Jesus, but claimed that the Christ was an aeon that came on Jesus at his baptism in the form of a dove and left him on the Cross so that only the man Jesus died. At once this heresy sharpened the issue concerning the Person of Christ already set forth in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|. Paul met the issue squarely and powerfully portrayed his full-length portrait of Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Son of Man (both deity and humanity) in opposition to both types of Gnostics. Songs:then Colossians seems written expressly for our own day when so many are trying to rob Jesus Christ of his deity. The Gnostics took varying views of moral issues also as men do now. There were the ascetics with rigorous rules and the licentious element that let down all the bars for the flesh while the spirit communed with God. One cannot understand Colossians without some knowledge of Gnosticism such as may be obtained in such books as Angus's _The Mystery-Religions and Christianity_, Glover's _The Conflict of Religion in the Early Roman Empire_, Kennedy's St. _Paul and the Mystery-Religions_, Lightfoot's _Commentary on Colossians_.

rwp@Colossians:1:24 @{Now I rejoice} (\nun chairomen\). This is not a new note for Paul. See him in jail in Philippi (Acts:16:25|) and in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:16-33; strkjv@Romans:5:3; strkjv@Phillipians:2:18|. {Fill up on my part} (\antanaplˆr“\). Very rare double compound verb (here only in N.T.) to fill (\plˆro“\) up (\ana\), in turn (\anti\). It is now Paul's "turn" at the bat, to use a baseball figure. Christ had his "turn," the grandest of all and suffered for us all in a sense not true of any one else. It is the idea of balance or correspondence in \anti\ as seen in Demosthenes's use of this verb (_Deuteronomy:Symm_., p. 282), "the poor balancing the rich." And yet Christ did not cause suffering to cease. There is plenty left for Paul and for each of us in his time. {That which is lacking} (\ta husterˆmata\). "The left-overs," so to speak. Late word from \hustere“\, to come behind, to be left, to fail. See strkjv@Luke:21:4; strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:10; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:14; strkjv@9:12|. {For his body's sake} (\huper tou s“matos autou\). As Paul showed in his exultation in suffering in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:16-33|, though not in the same sense in which Christ suffered and died for us as Redeemer. Paul attaches no atoning value whatever to his own sufferings for the church (see also verse 18|).

rwp@Colossians:2:19 @{Not holding fast the Head} (\ou krat“n tˆn kephalˆn\). Note negative \ou\, not \mˆ\, actual case of deserting Christ as the Head. The Gnostics dethroned Christ from his primacy (1:18|) and placed him below a long line of aeons or angels. They did it with words of praise for Christ as those do now who teach Christ as only the noblest of men. The headship of Christ is the keynote of this Epistle to the Colossians and the heart of Paul's Christology. {From whom} (\ex hou\). Masculine ablative rather than \ex hˆs\ (\kephalˆs\) because Christ is the Head. He develops the figure of the body of which Christ is Head (1:18,24|). {Being supplied} (\epichorˆgoumenon\). Present passive participle (continuous action) of \epichorˆge“\, for which interesting verb see already strkjv@2Corinthians:9:10; strkjv@Galatians:3:5| and further strkjv@2Peter:1:5|. {Knit together} (\sunbibazomenon\). Present passive participle also (continuous action) of \sunbibaz“\, for which see strkjv@Colossians:2:2|. {Through the joints} (\dia t“n haph“n\). Late word \haphˆ\ (from \hapt“\, to fasten together), connections (_junctura_ and _nexus_ in the Vulgate). {And bonds} (\kai sundesm“n\). Old word from \sunde“\, to bind together. Aristotle and Galen use it of the human body. Both words picture well the wonderful unity in the body by cells, muscles, arteries, veins, nerves, skin, glands, etc. It is a marvellous machine working together under the direction of the head. {Increaseth with the increase of God} (\auxei tˆn auxˆsin tou theou\). Cognate accusative (\auxˆsin\) with the old verb \auxei\.

rwp@Colossians:4:1 @{That which is just and equal} (\to dikaion kai tˆn isotˆta\). Paul changes from \to ison\ (like \to dikaion\, neuter singular adjective with article for abstract idea) to the abstract substantive \isotˆs\, old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:8:13f|. If employers always did this, there would be no labour problem. {A Master in heaven} (\Kurion en ouran“i\). A wholesome reminder to the effect that he keeps his eye on the conduct of masters of men here towards their employees.

rwp@Info_Ephesians @ THE DESTINATION The oldest documents (Aleph and B) do not have the words \en Ephes“i\ (in Ephesus) in strkjv@Ephesians:1:1| (inserted by a later hand). Origen did not have them in his copy. Marcion calls it the Epistle to the Laodiceans. We have only to put here strkjv@Colossians:4:16| "the letter from Laodicea" to find the probable explanation. After writing the stirring Epistle to the Colossians Paul dictated this so-called Epistle to the Ephesians as a general or circular letter for the churches in Asia (Roman province). Perhaps the original copy had no name in strkjv@Ephesians:1:1| as seen in Aleph and B and Origen, but only a blank space. Marcion was familiar with the copy in Laodicea. Basil in the fourth century mentions some MSS. with no name in the address. Most MSS. were copies from the one in Ephesus and so it came to be called the Epistle to the Ephesians. The general nature of the letter explains also the absence of names in it, though Paul lived three years in Ephesus.

rwp@Info_Ephesians @ SPECIAL BOOKS ON EPHESIANS One may note Abbott (_Int. Crit. Comm_. 1897), Gross Alexander, Beet, Belser, Candlish, Dale (_Lectures on Ephesians_), Dibelius (_Handbuch_, 1912), Eadie, Ellicott, Ewald (_Zahn Komm._, 2 Auf. 1910), Findlay, Gore (_Practical Exposition_, 1898), Haupt (_Meyer Komm._, 8 Auf. 1902), Hitchcock, Hort (_Intr_. 1895), Knabenbauer, Krukenberg, Lidgett, Lock, Lueken, Martin (_New Century Bible_), McPhail, McPherson, Meinertz, Moule, Mullins, Murray, Oltramare, Robinson, Salmond, E. F. Scott (_Moffatt Comm._, 1930), Stroeter (_The Glory of the Body of Christ_, 1909), Von Soden (2 Aufl. 1893), F. B. Westcott, Wohlenberg. strkjv@Ephesians:1:1 @{Of Christ Jesus} (\Christou Iˆsou\). Songs:B D, though Aleph A L have \Iˆsou Christou\. Paul is named as the author and so he is. Otherwise the Epistle is pseudepigraphic. {By the will of God} (\dia thelˆmatos theou\). As in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:1; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:1; strkjv@Romans:1:1|. {At Ephesus} (\en Ephes“i\). In Aleph and B these words are inserted by later hands, though both MSS. give the title \Pros Ephesious\. Origen explains the words \tois hagiois tois ousin\ as meaning "the saints that are" (genuine saints), showing that his MSS. did not have the words \en Ephes“i\. The explanation of the insertion of these words has already been given in the remarks on "The Destination" as one copy of the general letter that was preserved in Ephesus. It is perfectly proper to call it the Epistle to the Ephesians if we understand the facts.

rwp@Ephesians:2:1 @{And you did he quicken} (\kai humƒs\). The verb for {did he quicken} does not occur till verse 5| and then with \hˆmƒs\ (us) instead of \humƒs\ (you). There is a like ellipsis or anacoluthon in strkjv@Colossians:1:21,22|, only there is no change from \humƒs\ to \hˆmƒs\. {When ye were dead} (\ontas nekrous\). Present active participle referring to their former state. Spiritually dead. {Trespasses and sins} (\parapt“masin kai hamartiais\). Both words (locative case) though only one in verse 5|.

rwp@Ephesians:2:14 @{For he is our peace} (\autos gar estin hˆ eirˆnˆ hˆm“n\). He himself, not just what he did (necessary as that was and is). He is our peace with God and so with each other (Jews and Gentiles). {Both one} (\ta amphotera hen\). "The both" (Jew and Gentile). Jesus had said "other sheep I have which are not of this fold" (John:10:16|). {One} (\hen\) is neuter singular (oneness, unity, identity) as in strkjv@Galatians:3:28|. Race and national distinctions vanish in Christ. If all men were really in Christ, war would disappear. {Brake down the middle wall of partition} (\to mesotoichon tou phragmou lusas\). "Having loosened (first aorist active participle of \lu“\, see strkjv@John:2:19|) the middle-wall (late word, only here in N.T., and very rare anywhere, one in papyri, and one inscription) of partition (\phragmou\, old word, fence, from \phrass“\, to fence or hedge, as in strkjv@Matthew:21:33|)." In the temple courts a partition wall divided the court of the Gentiles from the court of Israel with an inscription forbidding a Gentile from going further (Josephus, _Ant_. VIII. 3, 2). See the uproar when Paul was accused of taking Trophimus beyond this wall (Acts:21:28|).

rwp@Ephesians:4:20 @{But ye did not so learn Christ} (\Humeis de ouch hout“s emathete ton Christon\). In sharp contrast to pagan life (\hout“s\). Second aorist active indicative of \manthan“\.

rwp@Ephesians:4:21 @{If so be that} (\ei ge\). "If indeed." Condition of first class with aorist indicatives here, assumed to be true (\ˆkousate kai edidachthˆte\). {Even as truth is in Jesus} (\kath“s estin alˆtheia en t“i Iˆsou\). It is not clear what Paul's precise idea is here. The Cerinthian Gnostics did distinguish between the man Jesus and the aeon Christ. Paul here identifies Christ (verse 20|) and Jesus (verse 21|). At any rate he flatly affirms that there is "truth in Jesus" which is in direct opposition to the heathen manner of life and which is further explained by the epexegetical infinitives that follow (\apothesthai, ananeousthai de, kai endusasthai\).

rwp@Ephesians:4:28 @{Steal no more} (\mˆketi kleptet“\). Clearly here, cease stealing (present active imperative with \mˆketi\). {The thing that is good} (\to agathon\). "The good thing" opposed to his stealing and "with his hands" (\tais chersin\, instrumental case) that did the stealing. See strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:10|. Even unemployment is no excuse for stealing. {To give} (\metadidonai\). Present active infinitive of \metadid“mi\, to share with one.

rwp@Ephesians:5:5 @{Ye know of a surety} (\iste gin“skontes\). The correct text has \iste\, not \este\. It is the same form for present indicative (second person plural) and imperative, probably indicative here, "ye know." But why \gin“skontes\ added? Probably, "ye know recognizing by your own experience." {No} (\pƒs--ou\). Common idiom in the N.T. like the Hebrew= _oudeis_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 732). {Covetous man} (\pleonektˆs, pleon ech“\). Old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:5:10f.; strkjv@6:10|. {Which is} (\ho estin\). Songs:Aleph B. A D K L have \hos\ (who), but \ho\ is right. See strkjv@Colossians:3:14| for this use of \ho\ (which thing is). On \eid“lolatrˆs\ (idolater) see strkjv@1Corinthians:5:10f|. {In the Kingdom of Christ and God} (\en tˆi basileiƒi tou Christou kai theou\). Certainly the same kingdom and Paul may here mean to affirm the deity of Christ by the use of the one article with \Christou kai theou\. But Sharp's rule cannot be insisted on here because \theos\ is often definite without the article like a proper name. Paul did teach the deity of Christ and may do it here.

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-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:1:3 @{Grace to you and peace} (\charis humin kai eirˆnˆ\). As in I Thess., II Thess., I Cor., II Cor. (already written) and in all the later Epistles save that in I and II Timothy "mercy" is added. But this customary salutation (see on ¯1Thessalonians:1:1|) is not a perfunctory thing with Paul. He uses it here even when he has so much fault to find just as he did in I and II Corinthians.

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:1:17 @{Before me} (\pro emou\). The Jerusalem apostles were genuine apostles, but so is Paul. His call did not come from them nor did he receive confirmation by them. {Into Arabia} (\eis Arabian\). This visit to Arabia has to come between the two visits to Damascus which are not distinguished in strkjv@Acts:9:22f|. In verse 23| Luke does speak of "considerable days" and so we must place the visit to Arabia between verses 22,23|.

rwp@Galatians:1:18 @{Then after three years} (\epeita meta tria etˆ\). A round number to cover the period from his departure from Jerusalem for Damascus to his return to Jerusalem. This stay in Damascus was an important episode in Paul's theological readjustment to his new experience. {To visit Cephas} (\historˆsai Kˆphƒn\). First aorist infinitive of \histore“\, old verb (from \hist“r\, one who knows by inquiry), to gain knowledge by visiting. Only here in N.T. If we turn to strkjv@Acts:9:26-30|, we shall see that the visit of two weeks to Peter came after Barnabas endorsed Paul to the suspicious disciples in Jerusalem and probably while he was preaching in the city. It was a delightful experience, but Peter did not start Paul upon his apostleship. He visited him as an equal. Peter no doubt had much to say to Paul.

rwp@Galatians:2:12 @{For before that certain came from James} (\pro tou gar elthein tinas apo Iak“bou\). The reason (\gar\) for Paul's condemnation of Peter. Articular infinitive in the genitive after \pro\ with the accusative of general reference (\tinas\), "for before the coming as to some from James." Does Paul mean to say that these "certain" ones had been sent by James to Antioch to inspect the conduct of Peter and the other Jewish brethren? Some scholars think so. No doubt these brethren let the idea get out that they were emissaries "from James." But that idea is inconsistent with the position of James as president of the conference and the author of the resolution securing liberty to the Gentile Christians. No doubt these brethren threatened Peter to tell James and the church about his conduct and they reminded Peter of his previous arraignment before the Jerusalem Church on this very charge (Acts:11:1-18|). As a matter of fact the Jerusalem Conference did not discuss the matter of social relations between Jews and Gentiles though that was the charge made against Peter (Acts:11:1ff.|). {He did eat with the Gentiles} (\meta t“n ethn“n sunˆsthien\). It was his habit (imperfect tense). {He drew back} (\hupestellen\). Imperfect tense, inchoative action, "he began to draw himself (\heauton\) back." Old word \hupostell“\. See middle voice to dissemble (Acts:20:20,27|), to shrink (Hebrews:10:38|). {Separated himself} (\aph“rizen heauton\). Inchoative imperfect again, "began to separate himself" just like a Pharisee (see on ¯1:15|) and as if afraid of the Judaizers in the Jerusalem Church, perhaps half afraid that James might not endorse what he had been doing. {Fearing them that were of the circumcision} (\phoboumenos tous ek peritomˆs\). This was the real reason for Peter's cowardice. See strkjv@Acts:11:2| for "\hoi ek peritomˆs\" (they of the circumcision), the very phrase here. It was not that Peter had changed his views from the Jerusalem resolutions. It was pure fear of trouble to himself as in the denials at the trial of Christ.

rwp@Galatians:2:14 @{But when I saw} (\All' hote eidon\). Paul did see and saw it in time to speak. {That they walked not uprightly} (\hoti orthopodousin\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse, "they are not walking straight." \Orthopode“\ (\orthos\, straight, \pous\, foot). Found only here and in later ecclesiastical writers, though \orthopodes bainontes\ does occur. {According to the truth of the gospel} (\pros tˆn alˆtheian tou euaggeliou\). Just as in strkjv@2:5|. Paul brought them to face (\pros\) that. {I said unto Cephas before them all} (\eipon t“i Kˆphƒi emprosthen pant“n\). {Being a Jew} (\Ioudaios huparch“n\, though being a Jew). Condition of first class, assumed as true. It was not a private quarrel, but a matter of public policy. One is a bit curious to know what those who consider Peter the first pope will do with this open rebuke by Paul, who was in no sense afraid of Peter or of all the rest. {As do the Gentiles} (\ethnik“s\). Late adverb, here only in N.T. Like Gentiles. {As do the Jews} (\Ioudaik“s\). Only here in N.T., but in Josephus. {To live as do the Jews} (\Iouda‹zein\). Late verb, only here in the N.T. From \Ioudaios\, Jew. Really Paul charges Peter with trying to compel (conative present, \anagkazeis\) the Gentiles to live all like Jews, to Judaize the Gentile Christians, the very point at issue in the Jerusalem Conference when Peter so loyally supported Paul. It was a bold thrust that allowed no reply. But Paul won Peter back and Barnabas also. If II Peter is genuine, as is still possible, he shows it in strkjv@2Peter:3:15|. Paul and Barnabas remained friends (Acts:15:39f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:6|), though they soon separated over John Mark.

rwp@Galatians:2:16 @{Is not justified} (\ou dikaioutai\). Present passive indicative of \dikaio“\, an old causative verb from \dikaios\, righteous (from \dike\, right), to make righteous, to declare righteous. It is made like \axio“\, to deem worthy, and \koino“\, to consider common. It is one of the great Pauline words along with \dikaiosunˆ\, righteousness. The two ways of getting right with God are here set forth: by faith in Christ Jesus (objective genitive), by the works of the law (by keeping all the law in the most minute fashion, the way of the Pharisees). Paul knew them both (see strkjv@Romans:7|). In his first recorded sermon the same contrast is made that we have here (Acts:13:39|) with the same word \dikaio“\, employed. It is the heart of his message in all his Epistles. The terms faith (\pistis\), righteousness (\dikaiosunˆ\), law (\nomos\), works (\erga\) occur more frequently in Galatians and Romans because Paul is dealing directly with the problem in opposition to the Judaizers who contended that Gentiles had to become Jews to be saved. The whole issue is here in an acute form. {Save} (\ean mˆ\). Except. {Even we} (\kai hˆmeis\). We Jews believed, had to believe, were not saved or justified till we did believe. This very point Peter had made at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:10f.|). He quotes strkjv@Psalms:143:2|. Paul uses \dikaiosunˆ\ in two senses Justification, on the basis of what Christ has done and obtained by faith. Thus we are set right with God. strkjv@Romans:1-5|. Sanctification. Actual goodness as the result of living with and for Christ. strkjv@Romans:6-8|. The same plan exists for Jew and Gentile.

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:3:1 @{Who did bewitch you?} (\tis humas ebaskanen?\). Somebody "fascinated" you. Some aggressive Judaizer (5:7|), some one man (or woman). First aorist active indicative of \baskain“\, old word kin to \phask“\ (\bask“\), to speak, then to bring evil on one by feigned praise or the evil eye (hoodoo), to lead astray by evil arts. Only here in the N.T. This popular belief in the evil eye is old (Deuteronomy:28:54|) and persistent. The papyri give several examples of the adjective \abaskanta\, the adverb \abaskant“s\ (unharmed by the evil eye), the substantive \baskania\ (witchcraft). {Before whose eyes Jesus Christ was openly set forth crucified} (\hois kat' ophthalmous Iˆsous Christos proegraphˆ estaur“menos\). Literally, "to whom before your very eyes Jesus Christ was portrayed as crucified." Second aorist passive indicative of \prograph“\, old verb to write beforehand, to set forth by public proclamation, to placard, to post up. This last idea is found in several papyri (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_) as in the case of a father who posted a proclamation that he would no longer be responsible for his son's debts. \Graph“\ was sometimes used in the sense of painting, but no example of \prograph“\ with this meaning has been found unless this is one. With that idea it would be to portray, to picture forth, a rendering not very different from placarding. The foolish Galatians were without excuse when they fell under the spell of the Judaizer. \Estaur“menos\ is perfect passive participle of \stauro“\, the common verb to crucify (from \stauros\, stake, cross), to put on the cross (Matthew:20:19|), same form as in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:2|.

rwp@Galatians:3:22 @{Hath shut up} (\sunekleisen\). Did shut together. First aorist active indicative of \sunklei“\, old verb to shut together, on all sides, completely as a shoal of fish in a net (Luke:5:6|). Songs:verse 23; strkjv@Romans:11:32|. {Under sin} (\hupo hamartian\). See \hupo kataran\ in verse 10|. As if the lid closed in on us over a massive chest that we could not open or as prisoners in a dungeon. He uses \ta panta\ (the all things), the totality of everything. See strkjv@Romans:3:10-19; strkjv@11:32|. {That} (\hina\). God's purpose, personifying scripture again. {Might be given} (\dothˆi\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \did“mi\ with \hina\.

rwp@Galatians:4:15 @{That gratulation of yourselves} (\ho makarismos hum“n\). "Your felicitation." Rare word from \makariz“\, to pronounce happy, in Plato, Aristotle, Plutarch. See also strkjv@Romans:4:6,9|. You no longer felicitate yourselves on my presence with you. {Ye would have plucked out your eves and given them to me} (\tous ophthalmous hum“n exoruxantes ed“kate moi\). This is the conclusion of a condition of the second class without \an\ expressed which would have made it clearer. But see strkjv@John:16:22,24; strkjv@Romans:7:7| for similar examples where the context makes it plain without \an\. It is strong language and is saved from hyperbole by "if possible" (\ei dunaton\). Did Paul not have at this time serious eye trouble?

rwp@Galatians:5:4 @{Ye are severed from Christ} (\katˆrgˆthˆte apo Christou\). First aorist passive of \katarge“\, to make null and void as in strkjv@Romans:7:2,6|. {Who would be justified by the law} (\hoitines en nom“i dikaiousthe\). Present passive conative indicative, "ye who are trying to be justified in the law." {Ye are fallen away from grace} (\tˆs charitos exepesate\). Second aorist active indicative of \ekpipt“\ (with \a\ variable vowel of the first aorist) and followed by the ablative case. "Ye did fall out of grace," "ye left the sphere of grace in Christ and took your stand in the sphere of law" as your hope of salvation. Paul does not mince words and carries the logic to the end of the course. He is not, of course, speaking of occasional sins, but he has in mind a far more serious matter, that of substituting law for Christ as the agent in salvation.

rwp@Galatians:5:7 @Who did hinder you? (\tis humas enekopsen?\). First aorist active indicative of \enkopt“\, to cut in on one, for all the world like our use of one cutting in on us at the telephone. For this late verb see on ¯Acts:24:4; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:18|. Note the singular \tis\. There was some ringleader in the business. Some one "cut in" on the Galatians as they were running the Christian race and tried to trip them or to turn them.

rwp@Galatians:5:14 @{Even in this} (\en t“i\). Just the article with \en\, "in the," but it points at the quotation from strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|. Jews (Luke:10:29|) confined "neighbour" (\plˆsion\) to Jews. Paul uses here a striking paradox by urging obedience to the law against which he has been arguing, but this is the moral law as proof of the new love and life. See also strkjv@Romans:13:8|, precisely as Jesus did (Matthew:22:40|).

rwp@Galatians:5:21 @{Forewarn} (\proleg“\) {--did forewarn} (\proeipon\). Paul repeats his warning given while with them. He did his duty then. Gentile churches were peculiarly subject to these sins. But who is not in danger from them? {Practise} (\prassontes\). \Prass“\ is the verb for habitual practice (our very word, in fact), not \poie“\ for occasional doing. The {habit} of these sins is proof that one is not in the Kingdom of God and will not inherit it.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE STYLE It is called an epistle and so it is, but of a peculiar kind. In fact, as has been said, it begins like a treatise, proceeds like a sermon, and concludes like a letter. It is, in fact, more like a literary composition than any other New Testament book as Deissmann shows: "It points to the fact that the Epistle to the Hebrews, with its more definitely artistic, more literary language (corresponding to its more theological subject matter), constituted an epoch in the history of the new religion. Christianity is beginning to lay hands on the instruments of culture; the literary and theological period has begun" (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 70f.). But Blass (_Die Rhythmen der asianischen und romischen Kunstprosa_, 1905) argues that the author of Hebrews certainly and Paul probably were students of Greek oratory and rhetoric. He is clearly wrong about Paul and probably so about the author of Hebrews. There is in Hebrews more of "a studied rhetorical periodicity" (Thayer), but with many "parenthetical involutions" (Westcott) and with less of "the impetuous eloquence of Paul." The eleventh chapter reveals a studied style and as a whole the Epistle belongs to the literary _Koin‚_ rather than to the vernacular. Moulton (_Cambridge Biblical Essays_, p. 483) thinks that the author did not know Hebrew but follows the Septuagint throughout in his abundant use of the Old Testament.

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:1:6 @{And when he again bringeth in} (\hotan de palin eisagagˆi\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \eisag“\. If \palin\ is taken with \eisagagˆi\, the reference is to the Second Coming as in strkjv@9:28|. If \palin\ merely introduces another quotation (Psalms:97:7|) parallel to \kai palin\ in verse 5|, the reference is to the incarnation when the angels did worship the Child Jesus (Luke:2:13f.|). There is no way to decide certainly about it. {The first-born} (\ton pr“totokon\). See strkjv@Psalms:89:28|. For this compound adjective applied to Christ in relation to the universe see strkjv@Colossians:1:15|, to other men, strkjv@Romans:8:29; strkjv@Colossians:1:18|, to the other children of Mary, strkjv@Luke:2:7|; here it is used absolutely. {The world} (\tˆn oikoumenˆn\). "The inhabited earth." See strkjv@Acts:17:6|. {Let worship} (\proskunˆsat“san\). Imperative first aorist active third plural of \proskune“\, here in the full sense of worship, not mere reverence or courtesy. This quotation is from the LXX of strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:43|, but is not in the Hebrew, though most of the LXX MSS. (except F) have \huioi theou\, but the substance does occur also in strkjv@Psalms:97:7| with \hoi aggeloi autou\.

rwp@Hebrews:2:5 @{For not unto angels} (\ou gar aggelois\). The author now proceeds to show (2:5-18|) that the very humanity of Jesus, the Son of Man, likewise proves his superiority to angels. {The world to come} (\tˆn oikoumenˆn tˆn mellousan\). The new order, the salvation just described. See a like use of \mell“\ (as participle) with \s“tˆria\ (1:14|), \ai“n\ (6:4f.|), \agatha\ (9:11; strkjv@10:1|), \polis\ (13:14|). {Whereof we speak} (\peri hˆs laloumen\). The author is discussing this new order introduced by Christ which makes obsolete the old dispensation of rites and symbols. God did not put this new order in charge of angels.

rwp@Hebrews:2:13 @{I will put my trust in him} (\Eg“ esomai pepoith“s ep' aut“i\). A rare periphrastic (intransitive) future perfect of \peith“\, a quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:8:17|. The author represents the Messiah as putting his trust in God as other men do (cf. strkjv@Hebrews:12:2|). Certainly Jesus did this constantly. The third quotation (\kai palin\, And again) is from strkjv@Isaiah:8:18| (the next verse), but the Messiah shows himself closely linked with the children (\paidia\) of God, the sons (\huioi\) of verse 10|.

rwp@Hebrews:3:2 @{Who was faithful} (\piston onta\). Present active participle with predicate accusative agreeing with \Iˆsoun\, "as being faithful." {That appointed him} (\t“i poiˆsanti auton\). See strkjv@1Samuel:12:6|. Dative case of the articular participle (aorist active) of \poie“\ and the reference is to God. Note \pistos\ as in strkjv@2:17|. {As also was Moses} (\h“s kai M“usˆs\). The author makes no depreciatory remarks about Moses as he did not about the prophets and the angels. He cheerfully admits that Moses was faithful "in all his house" (\en hol“i t“i oik“i autou\), an allusion to strkjv@Numbers:12:7| (\ean hol“i t“i oik“i mou\) about Moses. The "his" is God's. The use of \oikos\ for the people (family) of God, not the building, but the group (1Timothy:3:15|) in which God is the Father. But wherein is Jesus superior to Moses? The argument is keen and skilful.

rwp@Hebrews:3:10 @{And saw} (\kai eidon\). "And yet saw." {Wherefore} (\dio\). Not in the LXX, but it makes clear the argument in the Psalm. {I was displeased} (\pros“chthisa\). First aorist active of \prosochthiz“\, late compound for extreme anger and disgust. In N.T. only here and verse 17|. {Err} (\plan“ntai\). Present middle indicative of \plana“\, to wander astray, common verb. {They did not know} (\ouk egn“san\). In spite of God's works (\erga\) and loving patience the Israelites failed to understand God's ways with them. Are we any better? They "cared not to take my road" (Moffatt).

rwp@Hebrews:3:16 @{Who} (\Tines\). Clearly interrogative, not indefinite (some). {Did provoke} (\parepikranan\). First aorist active indicative of \parapikrin“\, apparently coined by the LXX like \parapikrasmos\ (verse 15|) to which it points, exasperating the anger of God. {Nay, did not all} (\all' ou pantes\). "A favourite device of the diatribe style" (Moffatt), answering one rhetorical question with another (Luke:17:8|) as in verses 17,18|, There was a faithful minority mentioned by Paul (1Corinthians:10:7f.|).

rwp@Hebrews:4:10 @{As God did from his} (\h“sper apo t“n idi“n ho theos\). It is not cessation of work, but rather of the weariness and pain in toil. The writer pictures salvation as God's rest which man is to share and God will have perfect satisfaction when man is in harmony with him (Dods).

rwp@Hebrews:4:15 @{That cannot be touched with the feeling} (\mˆ dunamenon sunpathˆsai\). "Not able to sympathize with." First aorist passive infinitive of \sunpathe“\, late compound verb from the late adjective \sunpathos\ (Romans:12:15|), both from \sunpasch“\, to suffer with (1Corinthians:12:26; strkjv@Romans:8:17|), occurring in Aristotle and Plutarch, in N.T. only in Hebrews (here and strkjv@10:34|). {One that hath been tempted} (\pepeirasmenon\). Perfect passive participle of \peiraz“\, as already shown in strkjv@2:17f|. {Without sin} (\ch“ris hamartias\). This is the outstanding difference that must never be overlooked in considering the actual humanity of Jesus. He did not yield to sin. But more than this is true. There was no latent sin in Jesus to be stirred by temptation and no habits of sin to be overcome. But he did have "weaknesses" (\astheneiai\) common to our human nature (hunger, thirst, weariness, etc.). Satan used his strongest weapons against Jesus, did it repeatedly, and failed. Jesus remained "undefiled" (\amiantos\) in a world of sin (John:8:46|). This is our ground of hope, the sinlessness of Jesus and his real sympathy.

rwp@Hebrews:5:5 @{Songs:Christ also} (\hout“s kai ho Christos\). Just as with Aaron. Jesus had divine appointment as high priest also. {To be made} (\genˆthˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \ginomai\. {High priest} (\archierea\). Predicate accusative agreeing with \heauton\ (himself) object of \edoxasen\. {But he that spake unto him} (\all' ho lalˆsas pros auton\). Ellipsis of \edoxasen\ to be supplied from preceding clause. God did glorify Jesus in appointing him priest as we see in strkjv@Psalms:2:7| quoted already as Messianic (Hebrews:1:5|). Jesus himself repeatedly claimed that the Father sent him on his mission to the world (John:5:30,43; strkjv@8:54; strkjv@17:5|, etc.). Bruce holds that Christ's priesthood is co-eval with his Sonship. Davidson thinks it is merely suitable because he is Son. Clearly the Father nominated (Dods) the Son to the Messianic priesthood (John:3:16|).

rwp@Hebrews:5:7 @{In the days of his flesh} (\en tais hˆmerais tˆs sarkos autou\). Here (verses 7-9|) the author turns to the other requirement of a high priest (human sympathy). Since Jesus was "without sin" (4:15|) he did not have to offer sacrifices "for himself," yet in all other points he felt the sympathy of the human high priest, even more so by reason of his victory over sin. {Having offered up} (\prosenegkas\). Second aorist active (\-a\ form) participle of \prospher“\ (cf. verse 3|). An allusion to the Agony of Christ in Gethsemane. {Supplications} (\hiketˆrias\). Socrates, Polybius, Job:(Job:40:22|) combine this word with \deˆseis\ (prayers) as here. The older form was \hikesia\. The word \hiketˆrios\ is an adjective from \hiketˆs\ (a suppliant from \hik“\, to come to one) and suggests one coming with an olive-branch (\elaia\). Here only in the N.T. {With strong crying and tears} (\meta kraugˆs ischuras kai dakru“n\). See strkjv@Luke:22:44f|. for a picture of the scene in Gethsemane (anguish and pathos). No doubt the writer has in mind other times when Jesus shed tears (John:11:35; strkjv@Luke:19:41|), but Gethsemane chiefly. {To save him from death} (\s“zein ek thanatou\). A reference to the cry of Jesus in Gethsemane (Matthew:26:39|). {Having been heard for his godly fear} (\eisakoustheis apo tˆs eulabeias\). Old word from \eulabˆs\ (taking hold well, strkjv@Luke:2:25| from \eu, lamban“\, the verb \eulabeomai\ in N.T. only in strkjv@Hebrews:11:7|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@12:28|. Fine picture of Christ's attitude toward the Father in the prayer in Gethsemane and in all his prayers. Jesus in Gethsemane at once surrendered his will to that of the Father who heard his plea and enabled him to acquiesce in the Father's will.

rwp@Hebrews:5:8 @{Though he was a Son} (\kaiper “n huios\). Concessive participle with \kaiper\, regular Greek idiom as in strkjv@7:5; strkjv@12:17|. {Yet learned obedience} (\emathen hupakoˆn\). Second aorist active indicative of \manthan“\. Succinct and crisp statement of the humanity of Jesus in full harmony with strkjv@Luke:2:40,52| and with strkjv@Hebrews:2:10|. {By the things which he suffered} (\aph' h“n epathen\). There is a play on the two verbs (\emathen--epathen\), paronomasia. Second aorist active indicative of \pasch“\. He always did his Father's will (John:8:29|), but he grew in experience as in wisdom and stature and in the power of sympathy with us.

rwp@Hebrews:6:9 @{But we are persuaded} (\pepeismetha de\). Perfect passive indicative of \peith“\, literary plural. Note Paul's use of \pepeismai\ in strkjv@2Timothy:1:12|. {Better things} (\ta kreissona\). "The better things" than those pictures in strkjv@6:4-8|. {That accompany salvation} (\echomena s“tˆrias\). "Things holding on to salvation" (Mark:1:38|), a common Greek phrase \echomena\, present middle participle of \ech“\. {Though we thus speak} (\ei kai hout“s laloumen\). Concessive condition of the first class. Explanatory, not apologetic, of his plain talk. {Not unrighteous to forget} (\ou gar adikos epilathesthai\). Second aorist middle infinitive of \epilanthan“\ with genitive case (\ergou\, work, \agapˆs\, love). But even God cannot remember what they did not do. {In that ye ministered and still do minister} (\diakonˆsantes kai diakonountes\). First aorist active and present active participle of the one verb \diakone“\, the sole difference being the tense (single act _aorist_, repeated acts _present_).

rwp@Hebrews:9:4 @{Having a golden censer} (\chrusoun echousa thumiatˆrion\). The present active participle \echousa\ (feminine singular) agrees with \skˆnˆ\ (the Holy of Holies). It is not certain whether \thumiatˆrion\ here means censer or altar of incense. In the LXX (2Chronicles:26:19; strkjv@Exodus:8:11|; IV Macc. strkjv@7:11) it means censer and apparently so in the inscriptions and papyri. But in Philo and Josephus it means altar of incense for which the LXX has \thusiastˆrion tou thumiatos\ (Exodus:30:1-10|). Apparently the altar of incense was in the Holy Place, though in strkjv@Exodus:30:1-10| it is left quite vague. B puts it in verse 2|. Songs:we leave the discrepancy unsettled. At any rate the altar of incense was used for the Holy of Holies ("its ritual associations," Dods). {The ark of the covenant} (\tˆn kib“ton tˆs diathˆkˆs\). A box or chest four feet long, two and a half broad and high (Exodus:25:10f.|). The Scotch have a "meal-ark." {Wherein} (\en hˆi\). In the ark. There were three treasures in the ark of the covenant (a pot of manna, Aaron's rod, the tables of the covenant). For the pot of manna (golden added in the LXX) see strkjv@Exodus:16:32-34|. For Aaron's rod that budded (\hˆ blastˆsasa\, first aorist active participle of \blastan“\) see strkjv@Numbers:17:1-11|. For the tables of the covenant see strkjv@Exodus:25:16f.; strkjv@31:18; strkjv@Deuteronomy:9:9; strkjv@10:5|. Not definitely clear about these items in the ark, but on front, except that strkjv@1Kings:8:9| states that it did contain the tables of the covenant. For \plakes\ (tables) see strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3| (only other N.T. example).

rwp@Hebrews:10:2 @{Else they would not have ceased?} (\epei ouk an epausanto;\). Ellipsis of condition after \epei\ (since if they really did perfect) with the conclusion of the second-class condition (\an\ and the aorist middle indicative of \pauomai\). {To be offered} (\prospheromenai\). Regular idiom, participle (present passive) with \pauomai\ (Acts:5:42|). {Because} (\dia to\). \Dia\ with the accusative of the articular infinitive, "because of the having" (\echein\) as to the worshippers (\tous latreuontas\, accusative of general reference of the articular participle), not "would have had." {No more conscience of sins} (\mˆdemian eti suneidˆsin hamarti“n\). Rather "consciousness of sins" as in strkjv@9:14|. {Having been once cleansed} (\hapax kekatharismenous\). Perfect passive participle of \kathariz“\, "if they had once for all been cleansed."

rwp@Hebrews:11:8 @{Not knowing whither he went} (\mˆ epistamenos pou erchetai\). Usual negative \mˆ\ with a participle (present middle from \epistamai\, old and common verb to put the mind on). Present middle indicative (\erchetai\) preserved in the indirect question after the secondary tense \exˆlthen\ (went out) from which \epistamenos\ gets its time. Abraham is a sublime and graphic example of faith. He did not even know where the land was that he was going to receive "as an inheritance" (\eis klˆronomian\).

rwp@Hebrews:11:13 @{In faith} (\kata pistin\). Here a break in the routine \pistei\ (by faith), "according to faith," either for literary variety "or to suggest \pistis\ as the sphere and standard of their characters" (Moffatt). {These all} (\houtoi pantes\). Those in verses 9-12| (Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Jacob). {Not having the promises} (\mˆ komisamenoi tas epaggelias\). First aorist middle participle of \komiz“\, to obtain, as in strkjv@10:36; strkjv@11:39|. And yet the author mentions Abraham (6:15|) as having obtained the promise. He received the promise of the Messiah, but did not live to see the Messiah come as we have done. It is in this sense that we have "better promises." {Greeted them} (\aspasamenoi\). First aorist middle participle of \aspazomai\, to salute (Matthew:5:47|). Abraham rejoiced to see Christ's day in the dim distance (John:8:56|). {Strangers} (\zenoi\). Foreigners. "To reside abroad carried with it a certain stigma" (Moffatt). But they "confessed" it (Genesis:23:4; strkjv@47:9|). {Pilgrims} (\parepidˆmoi\). Late double compound (\para, epi, dˆmos\), a sojourner from another land, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Peter:1:1; strkjv@2:11|.

rwp@Hebrews:11:27 @{Not fearing} (\mˆ phobˆtheis\). Negative \mˆ\ with first aorist passive participle of \phobe“\ here used transitively with the accusative as in strkjv@Matthew:10:26|. Moses did flee from Egypt after slaying the Egyptian (Exodus:2:15|), but the author omits that slaughter and ignores it as the dominant motive in the flight of Moses. \Thumon\ (wrath) is common in the N.T. (Luke:4:28|), though here only in Hebrews. {He endured} (\ekarterˆsen\). First aorist (constative) active indicative of \kartere“\, old word from \karteros\, strong, here only in N.T. Moses had made his choice before slaying the Egyptian. He stuck to its resolutely. {As seeing him who is invisible} (\ton aoraton h“s hor“n\). This is the secret of his choice and of his loyalty to God and to God's people. This is the secret of loyalty in any minister today who is the interpreter of God to man (2Corinthians:4:16-18|).

rwp@Hebrews:11:33 @{Through faith} (\dia piste“s\). Change thus from the routine \pistei\ used so far. {Subdued kingdoms} (\katˆg“nisanto basileias\). First aorist middle indicative of \katag“nizomai\, _Koin‚_ verb to struggle against, to overcome, here alone in the N.T. Used by Josephus of David's conquests. The author has here (verses 33,34|), "nine terse clauses" (Moffatt) with no connective (asyndeton) with great rhetorical and oratorical force (sledge-hammer style). For "wrought righteousness" (\ˆrgasanto dikaiosunˆn\, first aorist middle indicative of \ergazomai\) see strkjv@Acts:10:35|. {Obtained promises} (\epetuchon epaggeli“n\). Second aorist active indicative of \epitugchan“\, old verb (already in strkjv@6:15|) with genitive. But they did not see the fulfilment of the Messianic promise (11:39f.|). {Stopped the mouths of lions} (\ephraxan stomata leont“n\). First aorist active indicative of \phrass“\, old verb to fence in, to block up. See strkjv@Daniel:6:18-23|.

rwp@Hebrews:11:39 @{These all} (\houtoi pantes\). The whole list in verses 5-38|. Cf. verse 13|. {Through their faith} (\dia piste“s\). Here rather than \pistei\ as so often. {Received not the promise} (\ouk ekomisanto tˆn epaggelian\). First aorist middle of \komiz“\. The Messianic promise they did not live to see (11:13|), though they had individual special promises fulfilled as already shown (11:33|).

rwp@Hebrews:12:2 @{Looking unto} (\aphor“ntes eis\). Present active participle of \aphora“\, old verb to look away, "looking away to Jesus." In N.T. only here and strkjv@Phillipians:2:23|. Fix your eyes on Jesus, after a glance at "the cloud of witnesses," for he is the goal. Cf. Moses in strkjv@11:26| (\apeblepen\). {The author} (\ton archˆgon\). See strkjv@2:10| for this word. "The pioneer of personal faith" (Moffatt). {Perfecter} (\telei“tˆn\). A word apparently coined by the writer from \teleio“\ as it has been found nowhere else. Vulgate has _consummator_. {For the joy} (\anti tˆs charas\). Answering to, in exchange for (verse 16|), at the end of the race lay the joy "set before him" (\prokeimenˆs aut“i\), while here was the Cross (\stauron\) at this end (the beginning of the race) which he endured (\hupemeinen\, aorist active indicative of \hupomen“\), {despising shame} (\aischunˆs kataphronˆsas\). The cross at his time brought only shame (most shameful of deaths, "yea, the death of the cross" strkjv@Phillipians:2:8|). But Jesus despised that, in spite of the momentary shrinking from it, and did his Father's will by submitting to it. {Hath sat down} (\kekathiken\). Perfect active indicative of \kathiz“\, and still is there (1:3|).

rwp@Hebrews:12:20 @{For they could not endure} (\ouk epheron gar\). Imperfect active of \pher“\, "for they were not enduring (bearing)." {That which was enjoined} (\to diastellomenon\). Present passive articular participle of \diastell“\, old verb to distinguish, to dispose, to order. The quotation is from strkjv@Exodus:19:12f|. The people appealed to Moses (Exodus:20:19|) and the leaders did so also (Deuteronomy:5:23f.|), both in terror. {If even} (\kan\). "Even if." Condition of third class with second aorist active subjunctive of \thiggan“\ as in strkjv@11:28|, followed by genitive \orous\ (mountain). {It shall be stoned} (\lithobolˆthˆsetai\). From strkjv@Exodus:19:13|. Late compound verb from \lithobolos\ (from \lithos, ball“\) as in strkjv@Matthew:21:35|.

rwp@Hebrews:12:25 @{See} (\blepete\). Earnest word as in strkjv@3:12|. Driving home the whole argument of the Epistle by this powerful contrast between Mount Zion and Mount Sinai. The consequences are dreadful to apostates now, for Zion has greater terrors than Sinai, great as those were. {That ye refuse not} (\mˆ paraitˆsˆsthe\). Negative purpose with \mˆ\ and the first aorist middle subjunctive of \paraiteomai\, the same verb used in verse 19| about the conduct of the Israelites at Sinai and also below. {Him that speaketh} (\ton lalounta\). Present active articular participle of \lale“\ as in verse 24| (Jesus speaking by his blood). {For if they did not escape} (\ei gar ekeinoi ouk exephugon\). Condition of first class with \ei\ and second aorist active indicative of \ekpheug“\, to escape. Direct reference to Sinai with use of the same verb again (\paraitˆsamenoi\, when they refused). {Him that warned} (\ton chrˆmatizonta\). That is Moses. For \chrˆmatiz“\ see strkjv@8:5; strkjv@11:7|. {Much more we} (\polu mallon hˆmeis\). Argument from the less to the greater, \polu\, adverbial accusative case. The verb has to be supplied from the condition, "We shall not escape." Our chance to escape is far less, "we who turn away (\apostrephomenoi\, middle participle, turn ourselves away from) the one from heaven (\ton ap' ouran“n\)," God speaking through his Son (1:2|).

rwp@Hebrews:13:1 @{Brotherly love} (\philadelphia\). Late word from \philadelphos\ (1Peter:3:8|). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:9|. It is always in order in a church. {To show love unto strangers} (\tˆs philoxenias\). Old word for hospitality, from \philoxenos\ (1Timothy:3:2|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:12:3|. In genitive case with \epilanthanesthe\ (present middle imperative, cf. strkjv@Hebrews:6:10|). {Have entertained angels unawares} (\elathon xenisantes aggelous\). Second aorist active indicative of \lanthan“\, old verb to escape notice and first aorist active participle of \xeniz“\, old verb to entertain a guest (\xenos\, stranger), according to a classic idiom seen with \lanthan“, tugchan“, phthan“\, by which the chief idea is expressed by the participle (supplementary participle), here meaning, "some escaped notice when entertaining angels." The reference is to strkjv@Genesis:18; 19| (Abraham and Sarah did this very thing).

rwp@Info_James @ THE PURPOSE If James is writing solely to non-Christian Jews, the purpose is to win them to Christ, and so he puts the gospel message in a way to get a hearing from the Jews. That is true, whether he has them in mind or not, though he does not do it by the suppression of the deity of Jesus Christ. In the very first verse he places him on a par with God as "the Lord Jesus Christ." In strkjv@James:2:1| he presents Jesus as the object of faith: "as you believe in our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the Glory" (Moffatt's Translation), where Jesus is termed the Shekinah Glory of God. It is true that there is no discussion in the Epistle of the cross and the resurrection of Jesus, but there is an allusion to the murder of Jesus in strkjv@James:5:6| and the second coming in strkjv@James:5:8|. The chief aim of the Epistle is to strengthen the faith and loyalty of the Jewish Christians in the face of persecution from rich and overbearing Jews who were defrauding and oppressing them. It is a picture of early Christian life in the midst of difficult social conditions between capital and labor which also exist today. Songs:then it is a very modern message even if it is the earliest New Testament book. The glory of the New Testament lies precisely at this point in that the revelation of God in Christ meets our problems today because it did meet those of the first century A.D. Christian principles stand out clearly for our present-day living.

rwp@Info_James @ THE STYLE James assumes the doctrinal features of Christianity, but he is concerned mainly with the ethical and social aspects of the gospel that Jewish followers of Christ may square their lives with the gospel which they believe and profess. But this fact does not justify Luther in calling the Epistle of James "a veritable Epistle of straw." Luther imagined that James contradicted Paul's teaching of justification by faith. That is not true and the criticism of Luther is unjust. We shall see that, though James and Paul use the same words (faith, works, justify), they mean different things by them. It is possible that both Paul and Peter had read the Epistle of James, though by no means certain. M. Jones (_New Testament in the Twentieth Century_, p. 316) thinks that the author was familiar with Stoic philosophy. This is also possible, though he may have learned it only indirectly through the Wisdom of Solomon and Philo. What is true is that the author writes in the easy and accurate _Koin‚_ Greek of a cultivated Jew (the literary _Koin‚_, not the vernacular), though not the artificial or stilted language of a professional stylist. Principal Patrick (_James the Lord's Brother_, p. 298) holds that he "had a wide knowledge of Classical Greek." This does not follow, though he does use the manner "of the Hellenistic diatribe" (Ropes, _Int. and Crit. Comm_., p. 19) so common at that time. Ropes (pp. 10-22) points out numerous parallels between James and the popular moral addresses of the period, familiar since the days of Socrates and at its height in Seneca and Epictetus. The use of an imaginary interlocutor is one instance (James:2:18f.; strkjv@5:13f.|) as is the presence of paradox (James:1:2,10; strkjv@2:5|; etc.)...Sermon on the Mount. Did not...(Hebraic and Christian). "The style is especially remarkable for constant hidden allusions to our Lord's sayings, such as we find in the first three Gospels" (Hort).

rwp@James:2:5 @{Did not God choose?} (\ouch ho theos exelexato;\). Affirmative answer expected. First aorist middle (indirect, God chose for himself) indicative of \ekleg“\, the very form used by Paul three times of God's choice in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:27f|. {As to the world} (\t“i kosm“i\). The ethical dative of interest, as the world looks at it as in strkjv@Acts:7:20; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:18; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:4; strkjv@James:4:4|. By the use of the article (the poor) James does not affirm that God chose all the poor, but only that he did choose poor people (Matthew:10:23-26; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26-28|). {Rich in faith} (\plousious en pistei\). Rich because of their faith. As he has shown in strkjv@1:9f|. {Which he promised} (\hˆs epeggeilato\). Genitive of the accusative relative \hˆn\ attracted to the case of the antecedent \basileias\ (the Messianic kingdom), the same verb and idea already in strkjv@1:12| (\epˆggeilato\). Cf. the beatitude of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:5:3| for the poor in spirit.

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:5:8 @{Ye also} (\kai humeis\). As well as the farmers. {Stablish} (\stˆrixate\). First aorist active imperative of \stˆriz“\, old verb, (from \stˆrigx\, a support) to make stable, as in strkjv@Luke:22:32; strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:13|. {Is at hand} (\ˆggiken\). Present perfect active indicative of \eggiz“\, common verb, to draw near (from \eggus\), in strkjv@James:4:8|, for drawing near. Same form used by John in his preaching (Matthew:3:2|). In strkjv@1Peter:4:7| the same word appears to have an eschatological sense as apparently here. How "near" or "nigh" did James mean? Clearly, it could only be a hope, for Jesus had distinctly said that no one knew when he would return.

rwp@Info_John @ THE FOURTH GOSPEL BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION GREATEST OF BOOKS The test of time has given the palm to the Fourth Gospel over all the books of the world. If Luke's Gospel is the most beautiful, John's Gospel is supreme in its height and depth and reach of thought. The picture of Christ here given is the one that has captured the mind and heart of mankind. It is not possible for a believer in Jesus Christ as the Son of God to be indifferent to modern critical views concerning the authorship and historical value of this Holy of Holies of the New Testament. Here we find _The Heart of Christ_ (E. H. Sears), especially in chapters strkjv@John:14-17|. If Jesus did not do or say these things, it is small consolation to be told that the book at least has symbolic and artistic value for the believer. The language of the Fourth Gospel has the clarity of a spring, but we are not able to sound the bottom of the depths. Lucidity and profundity challenge and charm us as we linger over it.

rwp@Info_John @ THE SAME STYLE IN THE DISCOURSES It is further objected that there is no difference in style between the discourses of Jesus in John's Gospel and his own narrative style. There is an element of truth in this criticism. There are passages where it is not easy to tell where discourse ends and narrative begins. See, for instance, strkjv@John:3:16-21|. Does the discourse of Jesus end with verse 15,16, or 21? Songs:in strkjv@John:12:44-50|. Does John give here a resume of Christ's teaching or a separate discourse? It is true also that John preserves in a vivid way the conversational style of Christ as in chapters 4,6,7,8,9. In the Synoptic Gospels this element is not so striking, but we do not have to say that John has done as Shakespeare did with his characters. Each Gospel to a certain extent has the colouring of the author in reporting the words of Jesus. An element of this is inevitable unless men are mere automata, phonographs, or radios. But each Gospel preserves an accurate and vivid picture of Christ. We need all four pictures including that of John's Gospel for the whole view of Christ.

rwp@Info_John @ ORIGINAL LANGUAGE OF THE BOOK The late Dr. C. F. Burney of Oxford wrote a volume called, _The Aramaic Origin of the Fourth Gospel_ in which he tried to prove that the Fourth Gospel is really the first in time and was originally written in Aramaic. The theory excited some interest, but did not convince either Aramaic or Greek scholars to an appreciable extent. Some of the examples cited are plausible and some quite fanciful. This theory cannot be appealed to in any serious interpretation of the Fourth Gospel. The author was beyond doubt a Jew, but he wrote in the _Koin‚_ Greek of his time that is comparatively free from crude Semiticisms, perhaps due in part to the help of the friends in Ephesus.

rwp@Info_John @ THE PURPOSE OF THE BOOK He tells us himself in strkjv@John:20:30f|. He has made a selection of the many signs wrought by Jesus for an obvious purpose: "But these are written, that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye may have life in his name." This is the high and noble purpose plainly stated by the author. The book is thus confessedly apologetic and this fact ruins it with the critics who demand a dull and dry chronicle of events without plan or purpose in a book of history. Such a book would not be read and would be of little value if written. Each of the Synoptics is written with a purpose and every history or biography worth reading is written with a purpose. It is one thing to have a purpose in writing, but quite another to suppress or distort facts in order to create the impression that one wishes. This John did not do. He has given us his deliberate, mature, tested view of Jesus Christ as shown to him while alive and as proven since his resurrection. He writes to win others to like faith in Christ.

rwp@John:1:10 @{He was in the world} (\en t“i kosm“i ˆn\). Imperfect tense of continuous existence in the universe before the Incarnation as in verses 1,2|. {Was made by him} (\di' autou egeneto\). "Through him." Same statement here of "the world" (\ho kosmos\) as that made in verse 3| of \panta\. {Knew him not} (\auton ouk egn“\). Second aorist active indicative of common verb \ginosk“\, what Gildersleeve called a negative aorist, refused or failed to recognize him, his world that he had created and that was held together by him (Colossians:1:16|). Not only did the world fail to know the Pre-incarnate Logos, but it failed to recognize him when he became Incarnate (John:1:26|). Two examples in this sentence of John's fondness for \kai\ as in verses 1,4,5,14|, the paratactic rather than the hypotactic construction, like the common Hebrew use of _wav_.

rwp@John:1:11 @{Unto his own} (\eis ta idia\). Neuter plural, "unto his own things," the very idiom used in strkjv@19:27| when the Beloved Disciple took the mother of Jesus "to his own home." The world was "the own home" of the Logos who had made it. See also strkjv@16:32; strkjv@Acts:21:6|. {They that were his own} (\hoi idioi\). In the narrower sense, "his intimates," "his own family," "his own friends" as in strkjv@13:1|. Jesus later said that a prophet is not without honour save in his own country (Mark:6:4; strkjv@John:4:44|), and the town of Nazareth where he lived rejected him (Luke:4:28f.; strkjv@Matthew:13:58|). Probably here \hoi idioi\ means the Jewish people, the chosen people to whom Christ was sent first (Matthew:15:24|), but in a wider sense the whole world is included in \hoi idioi\. Conder's _The Hebrew Tragedy_ emphasizes the pathos of the situation that the house of Israel refused to welcome the Messiah when he did come, like a larger and sadder Enoch Arden experience. {Received him not} (\auton ou parelabon\). Second aorist active indicative of \paralamban“\, old verb to take to one's side, common verb to welcome, the very verb used by Jesus in strkjv@14:3| of the welcome to his Father's house. Cf. \katelaben\ in verse 5|. Israel slew the Heir (Hebrews:1:2|) when he came, like the wicked husbandmen (Luke:20:14|).

rwp@John:1:12 @{As many as received him} (\hosoi elabon auton\). Effective aorist active indicative of \lamban“\ "as many as did receive him," in contrast with \hoi idioi\ just before, exceptional action on the part of the disciples and other believers. {To them} (\autois\). Dative case explanatory of the relative clause preceding, an anacoluthon common in John 27 times as against 21 in the Synoptists. This is a common Aramaic idiom and is urged by Burney (_Aramaic Origin_, etc., p. 64) for his theory of an Aramaic original of the Fourth Gospel. {The right} (\exousian\). In strkjv@5:27| \ed“ken\ (first aorist active indicative of \did“mi\) \exousian\ means authority but includes power (\dunamis\). Here it is more the notion of privilege or right. {To become} (\genesthai\). Second aorist middle of \ginomai\, to become what they were not before. {Children of God} (\tekna theou\). In the full spiritual sense, not as mere offspring of God true of all men (Acts:17:28|). Paul's phrase \huioi theou\ (Gal strkjv@3:26|) for believers, used also by Jesus of the pure in heart (Matthew:5:9|), does not occur in John's Gospel (but in strkjv@Revelation:21:7|). It is possible that John prefers \ta tekna tou theou\ for the spiritual children of God whether Jew or Gentile (John:11:52|) because of the community of nature (\teknon\ from root \tek-\, to beget). But one cannot follow Westcott in insisting on "adoption" as Paul's reason for the use of \huioi\ since Jesus uses \huioi theou\ in strkjv@Matthew:5:9|. Clearly the idea of regeneration is involved here as in strkjv@John:3:3|. {Even to them that believe} (\tois pisteuousin\). No "even" in the Greek, merely explanatory apposition with \autois\, dative case of the articular present active participle of \pisteu“\. {On his name} (\eis to onoma\). Bernard notes \pisteu“ eis\ 35 times in John, to put trust in or on. See also strkjv@2:23; strkjv@3:38| for \pisteu“ eis to onoma autou\. This common use of \onoma\ for the person is an Aramaism, but it occurs also in the vernacular papyri and \eis to onoma\ is particularly common in the payment of debts (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). See strkjv@Acts:1:15| for \onomata\ for persons.

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:1:20 @{And he confessed} (\kai h“mologˆsen\). The continued paratactic use of \kai\ (and) and the first aorist active indicative of \homologe“\, old verb from \homologos\ (\homon, leg“\, to say the same thing), to confess, in the Synoptics (Matthew:10:32|) as here. {And denied not} (\kai ouk ˆrnˆsato\). Negative statement of same thing in Johannine fashion, first aorist middle indicative of \arneomai\, another Synoptic and Pauline word (Matthew:10:33; strkjv@2Timothy:2:12|). He did not contradict or refuse to say who he was. {And he confessed} (\kai h“mologˆsen\). Thoroughly Johannine again in the paratactic repetition. {I am not the Christ} (\Eg“ ouk eimi ho Christos\). Direct quotation again with recitative \hoti\ before it like our modern quotation marks. "I am not the Messiah," he means by \ho Christos\ (the Anointed One). Evidently it was not a new question as Luke had already shown (Luke:3:15|).

rwp@John:1:23 @{He said} (\ephˆ\). Common imperfect active (or second aorist active) of \phˆmi\, to say, old defective verb. {I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness} (\Eg“ ph“nˆ bo“ntos en tˆi erˆm“i\). For his answer John quotes strkjv@Isaiah:40:3|. The Synoptics (Mark:1:3; strkjv@Matthew:3:3; strkjv@Luke:3:4|) quote this language from Isaiah as descriptive of John, but do not say that he also applied it to himself. There is no reason to think that he did not do so. John also refers to Isaiah as the author of the words and also of the message, "{Make straight the way of the Lord}" (\Euthunate tˆn hodon tou kuriou\). By this language (\euthun“\ in N.T. only here and strkjv@James:3:4|, first aorist active imperative here) John identifies himself to the committee as the forerunner of the Messiah. The early writers note the differences between the use of \Logos\ (Word) for the Messiah and \ph“nˆ\ (Voice) for John.

rwp@John:1:25 @{Why then baptizest thou?} (\Ti oun baptizeis;\). In view of his repeated denials (three here mentioned). {If thou art not} (\ei su ouk ei\). Condition of first class. They did not interpret his claim to be "the voice" to be important enough to justify the ordinance of baptism. Abrahams (_Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels_) shows that proselyte baptism was probably practised before John's time, but its use by John was treating the Jews as if they were themselves Gentiles.

rwp@John:1:29 @{On the morrow} (\tˆi epaurion\). Locative case with \hˆmˆrƒi\ (day) understood after the adverb \epaurion\. "Second day of this spiritual diary" (Bernard) from verse 19|. {Seeth Jesus coming} (\blepei ton Iˆsoun erchomenon\). Dramatic historical present indicative (\blepei\) with vivid present middle participle (\erchomenon\). Graphic picture. {Behold the Lamb of God} (\ide ho amnos tou theou\). Exclamation \ide\ like \idou\, not verb, and so nominative \amnos\. Common idiom in John (1:36; strkjv@3:26|, etc.). For "the Lamb of God" see strkjv@1Corinthians:5:7| (cf. strkjv@John:19:36|) and strkjv@1Peter:1:19|. The passage in strkjv@Isaiah:53:6f.| is directly applied to Christ by Philip in strkjv@Acts:8:32|. See also strkjv@Matthew:8:17; strkjv@1Peter:2:22f.; strkjv@Hebrews:9:28|. But the Jews did not look for a suffering Messiah (John:12:34|) nor did the disciples at first (Mark:9:32; strkjv@Luke:24:21|). But was it not possible for John, the Forerunner of the Messiah, to have a prophetic insight concerning the Messiah as the Paschal Lamb, already in strkjv@Isaiah:53|, even if the rabbis did not see it there? Symeon had it dimly (Luke:2:35|), but John more clearly. Songs:Westcott rightly. Bernard is unwilling to believe that John the Baptist had more insight on this point than current Judaism. Then why and how did he recognize Jesus as Messiah at all? Certainly the Baptist did not have to be as ignorant as the rabbis. {Which taketh away the sin of the world} (\ho air“n tˆn hamartian tou kosmou\). Note singular \hamartian\ not plural \hamartias\ (1John:3:5|) where same verb \air“\, to bear away, is used. The future work of the Lamb of God here described in present tense as in strkjv@1John:1:7| about the blood of Christ. He is the Lamb of God for the world, not just for Jews.

rwp@John:1:41 @{He findeth first} (\heuriskei houtos pr“ton\). "This one finds (vivid dramatic present) first" (\prot“n\). \Prot“n\ (adverb supported by Aleph A B fam. 13) means that Andrew sought "his own brother Simon" (\ton adelphon ton idion Sim“na\) before he did anything else. But Aleph L W read \pr“tos\ (nominative adjective) which means that Andrew was the first who went after his brother implying that John also went after his brother James. Some old Latin manuscripts (b, e, r apparently), have \mane\ for Greek \pr“i\ (early in the morning). Bernard thinks that this is the true reading as it allows more time for Andrew to bring Simon to Jesus. Probably \pr“ton\ is correct, but even so John likely brought also his brother James after Andrew's example. {We have found the Messiah} (\Heurˆkamen ton Messian\). First aorist active indicative of \heurisk“\. Andrew and John had made the greatest discovery of the ages, far beyond gold or diamond mines. The Baptist had told about him. "We have seen him." {Which is} (\ho estin\). Same explanatory neuter relative as in verse 38|, "which word is." This Aramaic title Messiah is preserved in the N.T. only here and strkjv@4:25|, elsewhere translated into \Christos\, Anointed One, from \chri“\, to anoint. See on ¯Matthew:1:1| for discussion.

rwp@John:1:45 @{Philip findeth} (\heuriskei Philippos\). Dramatic present again. Philip carries on the work. One wins one. If that glorious beginning had only kept on! Now it takes a hundred to win one. {Nathaniel} (\ton Nathanaˆl\). It is a Hebrew name meaning "God has given" like the Greek \Theodore\ (Gift of God). He was from Cana of Galilee (John:21:2|), not far from Bethsaida and so known to Philip. His name does not occur in the Synoptics while Bartholomew (a patronymic, _Bar Tholmai_) does not appear in John. They are almost certainly two names of the same man. Philip uses \heurˆkamen\ (verse 41|) also to Nathanael and so unites himself with the circle of believers, but instead of \Messian\ describes him "of whom (\hon\ accusative with \egrapsen\) Moses in the law (Deuteronomy:18:15|) and the prophets (so the whole O.T. as in strkjv@Luke:24:27,44|) did write." {Jesus of Nazareth the son of Joseph} (\Iˆsoun huion tou I“sˆph ton apo Nazaret\). More exactly, "Jesus, son of Joseph, the one from Nazareth." Jesus passed as son (no article in the Greek) of Joseph, though John has just described him as "God-only Begotten" in verse 18|, but certainly Philip could not know this. Bernard terms this part "the irony of St. John" for he is sure that his readers will agree with him as to the real deity of Jesus Christ. These details were probably meant to interest Nathanael.

rwp@John:2:11 @{This beginning of his signs did Jesus} (\tautˆn epoiˆsen archˆn t“n sˆmei“n ho Iˆsous\). Rather, "this Jesus did as a beginning of his signs," for there is no article between \tautˆn\ and \archˆn\. "We have now passed from the 'witness' of the Baptist to the 'witness' of the works of Jesus" (Bernard). This is John's favourite word "signs" rather than wonders (\terata\) or powers (\dunameis\) for the works (\erga\) of Jesus. \Sˆmeion\ is an old word from \sˆmain“\, to give a sign (12:33|). He selects eight in his Gospel by which to prove the deity of Christ (20:30|) of which this is the first. {Manifested his glory} (\ephaner“sen tˆn doxan autou\). First aorist (effective) active indicative of \phanero“\, that glory of which John spoke in strkjv@1:14|. {Believed on him} (\episteusan eis auton\). First aorist active indicative of \pisteu“\, to believe, to put trust in, so common in John. These six disciples (learners) had already believed in Jesus as the Messiah (1:35-51|). Now their faith was greatly strengthened. Songs:it will be all through this Gospel. Jesus will increasingly reveal himself while the disciples will grow in knowledge and trust and the Jews will become increasingly hostile till the culmination.

rwp@John:2:23 @{In Jerusalem} (\en tois Ierosolumois\). The form \Ierosoluma\ as in strkjv@2:13| always in this Gospel and in Mark, and usually in Matthew, though \Ierousalˆm\ only in Revelation, and both forms by Luke and Paul. {During the feast} (\en tˆi heortˆi\). The feast of unleavened bread followed for seven days right after the passover (one day strictly), though \to pascha\ is used either for the passover meal or for the whole eight days. {Believed on his name} (\episteusan eis to onoma autou\). See on ¯1:12| for this phrase. Only one has to watch for the real import of \pisteu“\. {Beholding his signs} (\the“rountes autou ta sˆmeia\). Present active participle (causal use) of \the“re“\. {Which he did} (\ha epoiei\). "Which he was doing" (imperfect tense). He did his first sign in Cana, but now he was doing many in Jerusalem. Already Jesus had become the cynosure of all eyes in Jerusalem at this first visit in his ministry.

rwp@John:2:24 @{But Jesus did not trust himself to them} (\autos de Iˆsous ouk episteuen hauton autois\). "But Jesus himself kept on refusing (negative imperfect) to trust himself to them." The double use of \pisteu“\ here is shown by strkjv@Acts:8:13| where Simon Magus "believed" (\episteusen\) and was baptized, but was unsaved. He merely believed that he wanted what Philip had. {For that he knew all men} (\dia to auton gin“skein pantas\). Causal use of \dia\ and the accusative case of the articular infinitive \to gin“skein\ (because of the knowing) with the object of the infinitive (\pantas\, all men) and the accusative of general reference (\auton\, as to himself).

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:3:1 @{Now} (\de\). Songs:often in John \de\ is explanatory and transitional, not adversative. Nicodemus is an instance of Christ's knowledge of men (2:25|) and of one to whom he did trust himself unlike those in strkjv@2:24|. As a Pharisee "he belonged to that party which with all its bigotry contained a salt of true patriotism and could rear such cultured and high-toned men as Gamaliel and Paul" (Marcus Dods). {Named Nicodemus} (\Nikodˆmos onoma\). Same construction as in strkjv@1:6|, "Nicodemus name to him." Songs:Revelation:6:8|. It is a Greek name and occurs in Josephus (_Ant_. XIV. iii. 2) as the name of an ambassador from Aristobulus to Pompey. Only in John in N.T. (here, strkjv@7:50; strkjv@19:39|). He was a Pharisee, a member of the Sanhedrin, and wealthy. There is no evidence that he was the young ruler of strkjv@Luke:18:18| because of \arch“n\ (ruler) here.

rwp@John:3:2 @{The same} (\houtos\). "This one." {By night} (\nuktos\). Genitive of time. That he came at all is remarkable, not because there was any danger as was true at a later period, but because of his own prominence. He wished to avoid comment by other members of the Sanhedrin and others. Jesus had already provoked the opposition of the ecclesiastics by his assumption of Messianic authority over the temple. There is no ground for assigning this incident to a later period, for it suits perfectly here. Jesus was already in the public eye (2:23|) and the interest of Nicodemus was real and yet he wished to be cautious. {Rabbi} (\Rabbei\). See on ¯1:38|. Technically Jesus was not an acknowledged Rabbi of the schools, but Nicodemus does recognize him as such and calls him "My Master" just as Andrew and John did (1:38|). It was a long step for Nicodemus as a Pharisee to take, for the Pharisees had closely scrutinized the credentials of the Baptist in strkjv@1:19-24| (Milligan and Moulton's _Comm_.). {We know} (\oidamen\). Second perfect indicative first person plural. He seems to speak for others of his class as the blind man does in strkjv@9:31|. Westcott thinks that Nicodemus has been influenced partly by the report of the commission sent to the Baptist (1:19-27|). {Thou art a teacher come from God} (\apo theou elˆluthas didaskalos\). "Thou hast come from God as a teacher." Second perfect active indicative of \erchomai\ and predicative nominative \didaskalos\. This is the explanation of Nicodemus for coming to Jesus, obscure Galilean peasant as he seemed, evidence that satisfied one of the leaders in Pharisaism. {Can do} (\dunatai poiein\). "Can go on doing" (present active infinitive of \poie“\ and so linear). {These signs that thou doest} (\tauta ta sˆmeia ha su poieis\). Those mentioned in strkjv@2:23| that convinced so many in the crowd and that now appeal to the scholar. Note \su\ (thou) as quite out of the ordinary. The scorn of Jesus by the rulers held many back to the end (John:12:42|), but Nicodemus dares to feel his way. {Except God be with him} (\ean mˆ ˆi ho theos met' autou\). Condition of the third class, presented as a probability, not as a definite fact. He wanted to know more of the teaching accredited thus by God. Jesus went about doing good because God was with him, Peter says (Acts:10:38|).

rwp@John:3:12 @{If I told} (\ei eipon\). Condition of the first class, assumed to be true. {Earthly things} (\ta epigeia\). Things upon the earth like \ta epi tˆs gˆs\ (Colossians:3:2|), not things of an earthly nature or worldly or sinful. The work of the kingdom of God including the new birth which Nicodemus did not understand belongs to \ta epigeia\. {If I tell you heavenly things} (\ean eip“ humin ta epourania\). Condition of the third class, undetermined. What will Nicodemus do in that case? By \ta epourania\ Jesus means the things that take place in heaven like the deep secrets of the purpose of God in the matter of redemption such as the necessity of the lifting up of Christ as shown in verse 14|. Both Godet and Westcott note that the two types of teaching here pointed out by Jesus (the earthly, the heavenly) correspond in general to the difference between the Synoptics (the earthly) and the Fourth Gospel (the heavenly), a difference noted here in the Fourth Gospel as shown by Jesus himself. Hence the one should not be pitted against the other. There are specimens of the heavenly in the Synoptics as in strkjv@Matthew:11:25ff.; strkjv@Luke:10:18ff|.

rwp@John:3:22 @{After these things} (\meta tauta\). Transition after the interview with Nicodemus. For the phrase see strkjv@5:1; strkjv@6:1; strkjv@7:1|. {Into the land of Judea} (\eis tˆn Ioudaian gˆn\). Into the country districts outside of Jerusalem. The only example of this phrase in the N.T., but "the region of Judea" (\hˆ Ioudaia ch“ra\) in strkjv@Mark:1:5|. {He tarried} (\dietriben\). Descriptive imperfect active of \diatrib“\, old verb to rub between or hard, to spend time (Acts:14:3|). {Baptized} (\ebaptizen\). Imperfect active of \baptiz“\. "He was baptizing." The six disciples were with him and in strkjv@4:2| John explains that Jesus did the baptizing through the disciples.

rwp@John:4:1 @{When therefore} (\H“s oun\). Reference to strkjv@3:22f|. the work of the Baptist and the jealousy of his disciples. \Oun\ is very common in John's Gospel in such transitions. {The Lord} (\ho Kurios\). Songs:the best manuscripts (Neutral Alexandrian), though the Western class has \ho Iˆsous\. Mark usually has \ho Iˆsous\ and Luke often \ho Kurios\. In the narrative portion of John we have usually \ho Iˆsous\, but \ho Kurios\ in five passages (4:1; strkjv@6:23; strkjv@11:2; strkjv@20:20; strkjv@21:12|). There is no reason why John should not apply \ho Kurios\ to Jesus in the narrative sections as well as Luke. Bernard argues that these are "explanatory glosses," not in the first draft of the Gospel. But why? When John wrote his Gospel he certainly held Jesus to be \Kurios\ (Lord) as Luke did earlier when he wrote both Gospel and Acts This is hypercriticism. {Knew} (\egn“\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. The Pharisees knew this obvious fact. It was easy for Jesus to know the attitude of the Pharisees about it (2:24|). Already the Pharisees are suspicious of Jesus. {How that} (\hoti\). Declarative \hoti\ (indirect assertion). {Was making and baptizing more disciples than John} (\pleionas mathˆtas poiei kai baptizei ˆ I“anˆs\). Present active indicative in both verbs retained in indirect discourse. Recall the tremendous success of John's early ministry (Mark:1:5; strkjv@Matthew:3:5; strkjv@Luke:3:7,15|) in order to see the significance of this statement that Jesus had forged ahead of him in popular favour. Already the Pharisees had turned violently against John who had called them broods of vipers. It is most likely that they drew John out about the marriage of Herod Antipas and got him involved directly with the tetrarch so as to have him cast into prison (Luke:3:19f.|). Josephus (_Ant_. XVIII. v. 2) gives a public reason for this act of Herod Antipas, the fear that John would "raise a rebellion," probably the public reason for his private vengeance as given by Luke. Apparently John was cast into prison, though recently still free (John:3:24|), before Jesus left for Galilee. The Pharisees, with John out of the way, turn to Jesus with envy and hate.

rwp@John:4:3 @{Left Judea} (\aphˆken tˆn Ioudaian\). Unusual use of \aphiˆmi\. First (\Kappa\) aorist active indicative. Originally the word means to send away, to dismiss, to forsake, to forgive, to allow. Jesus uses it in this sense in strkjv@16:28|. Evidently because Jesus did not wish to bring the coming conflict with the Pharisees to an issue yet. Songs:he mainly avoids Jerusalem and Judea now till the end. Each time hereafter that Jesus appears in Jerusalem and Judea before the last visit there is an open breach with the Pharisees who attack him (John:5:1-47; strkjv@7:14-10:21; strkjv@10:22-42; strkjv@11:17-53|). {Again into Galilee} (\palin eis tˆn Galilaian\). Reference to strkjv@2:1-12|. The Synoptics tell nothing of this early work in Perea (John:1:19-51|), Galilee, or Judea (2:13-4:2|). John supplements their records purposely.

rwp@John:4:15 @{Sir} (\Kurie\). Not yet "Lord" for her. See verse 11|. {This water} (\touto to hud“r\). This peculiar kind of water. She did not grasp the last phrase "unto life eternal," and speaks half ironically of "this water." {That I thirst not} (\hina mˆ dips“\). Final clause with \hina\, alluding to the words of Jesus, water that will prevent thirst. {Neither come} (\mˆde dierch“mai\). Carrying on the negative purpose with present middle subjunctive, "nor keep on coming" as she has to do once or twice every day. She is evidently puzzled and yet attracted.

rwp@John:4:42 @{Not because of thy speaking} (\ouketi dia tˆn sˆn lalian\). "No longer because of thy talk," good and effective as that was. \Lalia\ (cf. \lale“\) is talk, talkativeness, mode of speech, one's vernacular, used by Jesus of his own speech (John:8:43|). {We have heard} (\akˆkoamen\). Perfect active indicative of \akou“\, their abiding experience. {For ourselves} (\autoi\). Just "ourselves." {The Saviour of the world} (\ho s“tˆr tou kosmou\). See strkjv@Matthew:1:21| for s“sei used of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term \s“tˆr\ to Jesus again in strkjv@1John:4:14|. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (verse 22|). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (verse 26|) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: "At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah." But why "merely"? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their "Saviour," Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on strkjv@John:4:42|: "That in the first century Messiah was given the title s“tˆr is not proven." The use of "saviour and god" for Ptolemy in the third century B.C. is well known. "The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East" (Deissmann, _Light_, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke:2:11; strkjv@John:4:42; strkjv@Acts:5:31; strkjv@3:23; strkjv@Phillipians:3:20; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23; strkjv@Titus:1:4; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@3:6; strkjv@2Timothy:1:10; strkjv@2Peter:1:1,11; strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:2,18|). All these are writings of the first century A.D. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world.

rwp@John:4:45 @{Songs:when} (\hote oun\). Transitional use of \oun\, sequence, not consequence. {Received him} (\edexanto auton\). First aorist middle of \dechomai\, "welcomed him." Jesus had evidently anticipated a quiet arrival. {Having seen} (\he“rakotes\). Perfect active participle of \hora“\. Note \the“rountes\ in strkjv@2:23| about this very thing at the feast in Jerusalem. The miracles of Jesus at that first passover made a stir. {For they also went} (\kai autoi gar ˆlthon\). The Samaritans did not go and so Jesus was a new figure to them, but the Galileans, as orthodox Jews, did go and so were predisposed in his favour.

rwp@John:4:54 @{The second sign that} (\deuteron sˆmeion\). No article, simply predicate accusative, "This again a second sign did Jesus having come out of Judea into Galilee." The first one was also in Cana (2:1ff.|), but many were wrought in Jerusalem also (2:23|).

rwp@John:5:11 @{But he answered} (\hos de apekrithˆ\). Demonstrative \hos\ (But this one) and deponent use of \apekrithˆ\ (first aorist passive indicative of \apokrinomai\ with no passive force). {The same} (\ekeinos\). "That one," emphatic demonstrative as often in John (1:18,33; strkjv@9:37; strkjv@10:1|, etc.). The man did not know who Jesus was nor even his name. He quotes the very words of Jesus. {Whole} (\hugiˆ\). Predicate accusative agreeing with \me\ (me).

rwp@John:5:15 @{Went away and told} (\apˆlthen kai eipen\). Both aorist active indicatives. Instead of giving heed to the warning of Jesus about his own sins he went off and told the Jews that now he knew who the man was who had commanded him to take up his bed on the Sabbath Day, to clear himself with the ecclesiastics and escape a possible stoning. {That it was Jesus} (\hoti Iˆsous estin\). Present indicative preserved in indirect discourse. The man was either ungrateful and wilfully betrayed Jesus or he was incompetent and did not know that he was bringing trouble on his benefactor. In either case one has small respect for him.

rwp@John:5:35 @{He} (\ekeinos\). "That one" (John of 33|). Common demonstrative (that one) in John to point out the subject. Used in strkjv@1:8| of the Baptist as here. John was now in prison and so Christ uses \ˆn\ (was). His active ministry is over. {The lamp} (\ho luchnos\). The lamp in the room (Mark:4:21|). Old word for lamp or candle as in strkjv@Matthew:5:15|. Used of Christ (the Lamb) as the Lamp of the New Jerusalem (Revelation:21:23|). \Lampas\ (Matthew:25:1,3|, etc.) is a torch whose wick is fed with oil. The Baptist was not the Light (\to ph“s\, strkjv@1:8|), but a lamp shining in the darkness. "When the Light comes, the lamp is no longer needed" (Bernard). "_Non Lux iste, sed lucerna_." Jesus by his own claim is the Light of the World (8:12; strkjv@9:5; strkjv@12:46|). And yet all believers are in a sense "the light of the world" (Matthew:5:14|) since the world gets the Light of Christ through us. {That burneth} (\ho kaiomenos\). See strkjv@Matthew:5:15| for this verb used with \luchnos\ (lighting a candle or lamp). The lamp that is lit and is burning (present passive participle of \kai“\, and so is consumed). {And shineth} (\kai phain“n\). See strkjv@1:4| for this verb used of the Logos shining in the darkness. Cf. strkjv@1John:2:8|. John was giving light as he burned for those in darkness like these Jews. {And ye were willing} (\humeis de ˆthelˆsate\). "But ye became willing." Ingressive aorist active indicative of \thel“\. Reference again to strkjv@1:19|. Cf. also for the temporary popularity of the Baptist strkjv@Mark:1:5; strkjv@Matthew:3:5; strkjv@11:7; strkjv@21:26|. The Jews were attracted to John "like moths to a candle" (Bernard). {To rejoice} (\agalliathˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \agalliaomai\, late word for \agallomai\ for which see strkjv@Matthew:5:12|. "They were attracted by his brightness, not by his warmth" (Bengel). Even so the brightness of John's shining did not really enlighten their minds. "The interest in the Baptist was a frivolous, superficial, and short-lived excitement" (Vincent). It was only "for an hour" (\pros h“ran\) when they turned against him.

rwp@John:5:36 @{But the witness which I have is greater than that of John} (\Eg“ de ech“ tˆn marturian meiz“ tou I“anou\). Literally, "But I have the witness greater than John's." \Meiz“\ (\meizona\) is predicate accusative and \I“anou\ is ablative of comparison after \meiz“\. Good as the witness of John is, Christ has superior testimony. {To accomplish} (\hina telei“s“\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \teleio“\, the same idiom in strkjv@4:34|. Jesus felt keenly the task laid on him by the Father (cf. strkjv@3:35|) and claimed at the end that he had performed it (17:4; strkjv@19:30|). Jesus held that the highest form of faith did not require these "works" (\erga\) as in strkjv@2:23; strkjv@10:38; strkjv@14:11|. But these "works" bear the seal of the Father's approval (5:20,36; strkjv@10:25|) and to reject their witness is wrong (10:25; strkjv@10:37f.; strkjv@15:24|). {The very works} (\auta ta erga\). "The works themselves," repeating \ta erga\ just before for vernacular emphasis. {Hath sent me} (\me apestalken\). Perfect active indicative of \apostell“\, the permanence of the mission. Cf. strkjv@3:17|. The continuance of the witness is emphasized in strkjv@5:32; strkjv@8:18|.

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:5:41 @{Glory from men} (\doxan para anthr“p“n\). Mere honour and praise Jesus does not expect from men (verse 34|). This is not wounded pride, for ambition is not Christ's motive. He is unlike the Jews (5:44; strkjv@12:43; strkjv@Matthew:6:1f.|) and seeks not his own glory, but the glory and fellowship of the Father (1:14; strkjv@2:11; strkjv@7:18|). Paul did not seek glory from men (1Thessalonians:2:6|).

rwp@John:5:42 @{But I know you} (\alla egn“ka humas\). Perfect active indicative of \gin“sk“\, "I have come to know and still know," the knowledge of personal experience (2:24f.|). {The love o' God} (\tˆn agapˆn tou theou\). Objective genitive, "the love toward God." See strkjv@Luke:11:42| for this phrase in the same sense (only other instance in the Gospels, but common in 1John (1John:2:5; strkjv@3:17; strkjv@4:7,9; strkjv@5:3|) and in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:14; strkjv@Romans:5:5|. The sense of God's love for man occurs in strkjv@1John:3:1; strkjv@4:9,10,16; strkjv@John:15:9f.| of Christ's love for man. These rabbis did not love God and hence did not love Christ.

rwp@John:5:46 @{Ye would believe me} (\episteuete an emoi\). Conclusion of condition of second class (determined as unfulfilled) with imperfect indicative in both protasis and apodosis and \an\ in apodosis. This was a home-thrust, proving that they did not really believe Moses. {For he wrote of me} (\peri gar emou ekeinos egrapsen\). strkjv@Deuteronomy:18:18f.| is quoted by Peter (Acts:3:22|) as a prophecy of Christ and also by Stephen in strkjv@Acts:7:37|. See also strkjv@John:3:14| about the brazen serpent and strkjv@8:56| about Abraham foreseeing Christ's day. Jesus does here say that Moses wrote concerning him.

rwp@John:6:22 @{Which stood} (\ho hestˆk“s\). Perfect active (intransitive) participle of \histˆmi\, to put, to stand. Jesus had sent the multitudes away the evening before (Mark:6:45; strkjv@Matthew:14:22|), but evidently some did not go very far, still lingering in excitement on the eastern side of the lake next morning. {Boat} (\ploiarion\). Diminutive of \ploion\, little boat (Mark:3:9|). {Entered not with} (\ou suneisˆlthen\). Second aorist active of the double compound verb \suneiserchomai\, followed by associative instrumental case \mathˆtais\. {Went away alone} (\monoi apˆlthon\). Second aorist active indicative of \aperchomai\, to go away or off. \Monoi\ is predicate nominative. These people noted these three items.

rwp@John:6:24 @{When the multitude therefore saw} (\hote oun eiden ho ochlos\). Resumption and clarification of the complicated statements of verse 22|. {That Jesus was not there} (\hoti Iˆsous ouk estin ekei\). Present indicative retained in indirect discourse. They still did not understand how Jesus had crossed over, but they acted on the basis of the plain fact. {They themselves got into} (\enebˆsan autoi eis\). Second aorist active indicative of \embain“\ followed by \eis\ (both \en\ and \eis\ together as often in N.T.). {Seeking Jesus} (\zˆtountes ton Iˆsoun\). Present active participle of \zˆte“\. They had a double motive apart from the curiosity explained in verse 22|. They had clearly not given up the impulse of the evening before to make Jesus king (6:15|) and they had hopes of still another bountiful repast at the hands of Jesus as he said (6:26|).

rwp@John:6:30 @{For a sign} (\sˆmeion\). Predicate accusative, as a sign, with \ti\ (what). As if the sign of the day before was without value. Jesus had said that they did not understand his signs (verse 26|). {That we may see, and believe thee} (\hina id“men kai pisteus“men\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of \hora“\ and the first aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of \pisteu“\, "that we may come to see and come to have faith in thee." It is hard to have patience with this superficial and almost sneering mob. {What workest thou?} (\Ti ergazˆi;\). They not simply depreciate the miracle of the day before, but set up a standard for Jesus.

rwp@John:6:49 @{And they died} (\kai apethanon\). Physical death. The manna did not prevent death. But this new manna will prevent spiritual death.

rwp@John:6:64 @{That believe not} (\hoi ou pisteuousin\). Failure to believe kills the life in the words of Jesus. {Knew from the beginning} (\ˆidei ex archˆs\). In the N.T. we have \ex archˆs\ only here and strkjv@16:4|, but \ap' archˆs\ in apparently the same sense as here in strkjv@15:27; strkjv@1John:2:7,24; strkjv@3:11| and see strkjv@Luke:1:2; strkjv@1John:1:1|. From the first Jesus distinguished between real trust in him and mere lip service (2:24; strkjv@8:31|), two senses of \pisteu“\. {Were} (\eisin\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse. {And who it was that should betray him} (\kai tis estin ho parad“s“n\). Same use of \estin\ and note article and future active participle of \paradid“mi\, to hand over, to betray. John does not say here that Jesus knew that Judas would betray him when he chose him as one of the twelve, least of all that he chose him for that purpose. What he does say is that Jesus was not taken by surprise and soon saw signs of treason in Judas. The same verb is used of John's arrest in strkjv@Matthew:4:12|. Once Judas is termed traitor (\prodotˆs\) in strkjv@Luke:6:16|. Judas had gifts and was given his opportunity. He did not have to betray Jesus.

rwp@John:6:65 @{Except it be given him of the Father} (\ean mˆ ˆi dedomenon aut“i ek tou patros\). Condition of third class with \ean mˆ\ and periphrastic perfect passive subjunctive of \did“mi\. Precisely the same point as in verse 44| where we have \helkusˆi\ instead of \ˆi dedomenon\. The impulse to faith comes from God. Jesus does not expect all to believe and seems to imply that Judas did not truly believe.

rwp@John:6:66 @{Upon this} (\ek toutou\). Same idiom in strkjv@19:12|. "Out of this saying or circumstance." Jesus drew the line of cleavage between the true and the false believers. {Went back} (\apˆlthon eis ta opis“\). Aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \aperchomai\ with \eis ta opis“\, "to the rear" (the behind things) as in strkjv@18:6|. {Walked no more with him} (\ouketi met' autou periepatoun\). Imperfect active of \peripate“\. The crisis had come. These half-hearted seekers after the loaves and fishes and political power turned abruptly from Jesus, walked out of the synagogue with a deal of bluster and were walking with Jesus no more. Jesus had completely disillusioned these hungry camp-followers who did not care for spiritual manna that consisted in intimate appropriation of the life of Jesus as God's Son.

rwp@John:6:70 @{And one of you is a devil} (\kai ex hum“n heis diabolos estin\). Jesus does not say that Judas was a devil when he chose him, but that he is one now. In strkjv@13:2,27| John speaks of the devil entering Judas. How soon the plan to betray Jesus first entered the heart of Judas we do not know (12:4|). One wonders if the words of Jesus here did not cut Judas to the quick.

rwp@John:7:5 @{For even his brethren did not believe on him} (\oude gar hoi adelphoi autou episteuon eis auton\). Literally, "For not even were his brothers believing on him." Imperfect tense of \pisteu“\ with sad picture of the persistent refusal of the brothers of Jesus to believe in his Messianic assumptions, after the two rejections in Capernaum (Luke:4:16-31; strkjv@Mark:6:1-6; strkjv@Matthew:13:54-58|), and also after the blasphemous accusation of being in league with Beelzebub when the mother and brothers came to take Jesus home (Mark:3:31-35; strkjv@Matthew:12:46-50; strkjv@Luke:8:19-21|). The brothers here are sarcastic.

rwp@John:7:6 @{My time is not yet come} (\ho kairos ho emos oup“ parestin\). Only use with verse 8| of \kairos\ in this Gospel, elsewhere \chronos\ (John:5:6|) or more often \h“ra\ (2:4|) "the predestined hour" (Bernard). Here \kairos\ is the fitting or proper occasion for Christ's manifesting himself publicly to the authorities as Messiah as in verse 8|. At the feast of tabernacles Jesus did make such public claims (7:29,33; strkjv@8:12,28,38,42,58|). \Parestin\ is present active indicative of \pareimi\, old compound, to be by, to be present. The brothers of Jesus had the regular Jewish obligation to go up to the feast, but the precise day was a matter of indifference to them.

rwp@John:7:8 @{Go ye up to the feast} (\humeis anabˆte eis tˆn heortˆn\). The emphatic word by position is \humeis\ (ye) in contrast with \eg“\ (I). Second aorist active imperative of \anabain“\, old and common verb for going up to the feast (2:13|) or anywhere. Take your own advice (7:3|). {I go not up yet} (\eg“ oup“ anabain“\). Songs:Westcott and Hort after B W L (Neutral) while \ou\ (not) is read by Aleph D, African Latin, Vulgate, Coptic (Western). Some of the early Greek Fathers were puzzled over the reading \ouk\ (I go not up) as contradictory to verse 10| wherein it is stated that Jesus did go up. Almost certainly \ouk\ (not) is correct and is not really contradictory when one notes in verse 10| that the manner of Christ's going up is precisely the opposite of the advice of the brothers in verses 3,4|. "Not yet" (\oup“\) is genuine before "fulfilled" (\peplˆr“tai\, perfect passive indicative of \plˆro“\). One may think, if he will, that Jesus changed his plans after these words, but that is unnecessary. He simply refused to fall in with his brothers' sneering proposal for a grand Messianic procession with the caravan on the way to the feast. He will do that on the journey to the last passover.

rwp@John:7:13 @{Howbeit} (\mentoi\). See strkjv@4:27| for this compound particle (\men, toi\), by way of exception, but yet. {Spake} (\elalei\). Imperfect active of \lale“\, "was speaking," picturing the whispering or secret talk ({no man openly}, \oudeis parrˆsiƒi\). Best MSS. do not have \en\ here with \parrˆsiƒi\ (locative or instrumental case of manner) as in strkjv@7:26; strkjv@10:24; strkjv@11:54|, but \en\ genuine in strkjv@7:4; strkjv@Colossians:2:15|. This adverbial use of \parrˆsiƒi\ is common enough (Mark:8:37|). {For fear of the Jews} (\dia ton phobon t“n Ioudai“n\). Objective genitive. The crowds really feared the Jewish leaders and evidently did not wish to involve Jesus or themselves. See the same phrase and attitude on the part of the disciples in strkjv@19:38; strkjv@20:19|.

rwp@John:7:45 @{Why did ye not bring him?} (\Dia ti ouk ˆgagete auton;\). Second aorist active indicative of \ag“\. Indignant outburst of the Sanhedrin (both Sadducees and Pharisees) at the failure of the (\tous\, note article here referring to verse 32|) temple police to arrest Jesus. "Apparently they were sitting in expectation of immediately questioning him" (Dods). They were stunned at this outcome.

rwp@John:8:3 @{The scribes and the Pharisees} (\hoi grammateis kai hoi Pharisaioi\). John does not mention "scribes," though this combination (note two articles) is common enough in the Synoptics (Luke:5:30; strkjv@6:7|, etc.). {Bring} (\agousin\). Vivid dramatic present active indicative of \ag“\. Dods calls this "in itself an unlawful thing to do" since they had a court for the trial of such a case. Their purpose is to entrap Jesus. {Taken in adultery} (\epi moicheiƒi kateilemmenˆn\). Perfect passive participle of \katalamban“\, old compound to seize (Mark:9:18|), to catch, to overtake (John:12:35|), to overcome (or overtake) in strkjv@1:5|. {Having let her in the midst} (\stˆsantes autˆn en mes“i\). First aorist active (transitive) participle of \histˆmi\. Here all could see her and what Jesus did with such a case. They knew his proneness to forgive sinners.

rwp@John:8:7 @{When they continued asking} (\h“s epemenon er“t“ntes\). Imperfect active indicative of \epimen“\ (waiting in addition or still, \epi\, old verb) with supplementary active participle of \er“ta“\, to question. See same construction in strkjv@Acts:12:16| The verb \epimen“\ does not occur in John. They saw that Jesus seemed embarrassed, but did not know that it was as much because of "the brazen hardness of the prosecutors" as because of the shame of the deed. {He lifted himself up} (\anekupsen\). First aorist active indicative of \anakupt“\, the opposite of \katakupt“\, to bend down (verse 8|) or of \kat“ kupt“\ (verse 6|). {He that is without sin} (\ho anamartˆtos\). Verbal adjective (\an\ privative and \hamartˆtos\ from \hamartan“\), old word, either one who has not sinned as here and strkjv@Deuteronomy:29:19| or one who cannot sin, not in the N.T. {Among you} (\hum“n\). Objective genitive. {First cast} (\pr“tos balet“\). The nominative \pr“tos\ means first before others, be the first to cast, not cast before he does something else. See strkjv@20:4|. The verb is second aorist imperative of \ball“\, old verb to fling or cast. Jesus thus picks out the executioner in the case.

rwp@John:8:29 @{Is with me} (\met' emou estin\). The Incarnation brought separation from the Father in one sense, but in essence there is complete harmony and fellowship as he had already said (8:16|) and will expand in strkjv@17:21-26|. {He hath not left me alone} (\ouk aphˆken me monon\). First aorist active indicative of \aphiˆmi\. "He did not leave me alone." However much the crowds and the disciples misunderstood or left Jesus, the Father always comforted and understood him (Mark:6:46; strkjv@Matthew:14:23; strkjv@John:6:15|). {That are pleasing to him} (\ta aresta aut“i\). This old verbal adjective, from \aresk“\, to please, in N.T. only here, strkjv@Acts:6:2; strkjv@12:3; strkjv@1John:3:32|. The joy of Jesus was in doing the will of the Father who sent him (4:34|).

rwp@John:8:31 @{Which had believed him} (\tous pepisteukotas aut“i\). Articular perfect active participle of \pisteu“\ with dative \aut“i\ (trusted him) rather than \eis auton\ (on him) in verse 30|. They believed him (cf. strkjv@6:30|) as to his claims to being the Messiah with their own interpretation (6:15|), but they did not commit themselves to him and may represent only one element of those in verse 30|, but see strkjv@2:23| for \pisteu“ eis\ there. {If ye abide in my word} (\ean humeis meinˆte en t“i log“i t“i em“i\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and first aorist (constative) active subjunctive. {Are ye truly my disciples} (\alˆth“s mathˆtai mou este\). Your future loyalty to my teaching will prove the reality of your present profession. Songs:the conclusion of this future condition is put in the present tense. As then, so now. We accept church members on _profession_ of trust in Christ. Continuance in the word (teaching) proves the sincerity or insincerity of the profession. It is the acid test of life.

rwp@John:8:40 @{But now} (\nun de\). Clear statement that they are not doing "the works of Abraham" in seeking to kill him. See this use of \nun de\ after a condition of second class without \an\ in strkjv@John:16:22,24|. {This did not Abraham} (\touto Abraam ouk epoiˆsen\). Blunt and pointed of their unlikeness to Abraham. {A man that hath told you the truth} (\anthr“pon hos ten alˆtheian humin lelalˆka\). \Anthr“pon\ (here=person, one) is accusative case in apposition with {me} (\me\) just before. The perfect active indicative \lelalˆka\ from \lale“\ is in the first person singular because the relative \hos\ has the person of \me\, an idiom not retained in the English {that hath} (that have or who have) though it is retained in the English of strkjv@1Corinthians:15:9| "that am" for \hos eimi\. {Which I heard from God} (\hˆn ˆkousa para tou theou\). Here we have "I" in the English. "God" here is equal to "My Father" in verse 38|. The only crime of Jesus is telling the truth directly from God.

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:8:50 @{But I seek not mine own glory} (\eg“ de ou zˆt“ tˆn doxan mou\). As they did not seek the glory of God (5:44; strkjv@8:4|). {And judgeth} (\kai krin“n\). The Father judges between you and me, though the Son is the Judge of mankind (5:22|). "It is only the \doxa\ (glory) that comes from God that is worth having" (Bernard).

rwp@John:8:52 @{Now we know} (\nun egn“kamen\). Perfect active indicative of \gin“sk“\, state of completion, "Now since such talk we have come to certain knowledge that thou hast a demon" (verse 48|). {Is dead} (\apethanen\). Second aorist active indicative of \apothnˆsk“\. "Abraham died." {And thou sayest} (\kai su legeis\). Adversative use of \kai\, "and yet." Emphatic position of \su\ (thou). Same condition quoted as in verse 51|. {He shall never taste of death} (\ou me geusˆtai thanatou eis ton aiona\). Same emphatic negative with subjunctive as in verse 51|, but \geusˆtai\ (first aorist middle subjunctive of \geu“\ with genitive case \thanatou\ (death). Another Hebraism for dying like \the“rˆsˆi\ (see) in verse 51|. Used in strkjv@Hebrews:2:9| of the death of Jesus and in Synoptics (Matthew:16:28; strkjv@Mark:9:1; strkjv@Luke:9:27|). It occurs in the Talmud, but not in the O.T. The Pharisees thus did not misquote Jesus, though they misunderstood him.

rwp@John:8:56 @{Rejoiced} (\ˆgalliasato\). First aorist middle indicative of \agalliaomai\, a word of Hellenistic coinage from \agallomai\, to rejoice. {To see} (\hina idˆi\). Sub-final use of \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \hora“\. This joy of Abraham is referred to in strkjv@Hebrews:11:13| (saluting, \aspasamenoi\, the promises from afar). There was a Jewish tradition that Abraham saw the whole history of his descendants in the vision of strkjv@Genesis:15:6f.|, but that is not necessary here. He did look for and welcome the Messianic time, "my day" (\tˆn hˆmeran tˆn emˆn\). "He saw it, and was glad" (\eiden kai echarˆ\). Second aorist active indicative of \hora“\ and second aorist passive indicative of \chair“\. Ye see it and are angry!

rwp@John:9:2 @{Who did sin?} (\tis hˆmarten;\). Second aorist active indicative of \hamartan“\. See strkjv@Acts:3:2; strkjv@14:8| for two examples of lameness from birth. Blindness is common in the Orient and Jesus healed many cases (cf. strkjv@Mark:8:23; strkjv@10:46|) and mentions this fact as one of the marks of the Messiah in the message to the Baptist (Matthew:11:5|). This is the only example of congenital blindness healed. It is not clear that the disciples expected Jesus to heal this case. They are puzzled by the Jewish notion that sickness was a penalty for sin. The Book of Job:had shown that this was not always the case and Jesus shows it also (Luke:13:1-5|). If this man was guilty, it was due to prenatal sin on his part, a curious notion surely. The other alternative charged it upon his parents. That is sometimes true (Exodus:20:5|, etc.), but by no means always. The rabbinical casuists loved to split hairs on this problem. Ezekiel (Ezekiel:18:20|) says: "The soul that sinneth it shall die" (individual responsibility for sin committed). There is something in heredity, but not everything. {That he should be born blind} (\hina tuphlos gennˆthˆi\). Probably consecutive (or sub-final) use of \hina\ with first aorist passive subjunctive of \genna“\.

rwp@John:9:6 @{He spat on the ground} (\eptusen chamai\). First aorist active indicative of the old verb \ptu“\ for which see strkjv@Mark:7:33|. \Chamai\ is an old adverb either in the dative or locative (sense suits locative), in N.T. only here and strkjv@John:18:6|. Jesus was not asked to cure this man. The curative effects of saliva are held in many places. The Jews held saliva efficacious for eye-trouble, but it was forbidden on the Sabbath. "That Jesus supposed some virtue lay in the application of the clay is contradicted by the fact that in other cases of blindness He did not use it" (Dods). Cf. strkjv@Mark:8:23|. Why he here accommodated himself to current belief we do not know unless it was to encourage the man to believe. {He made clay} (\epoiˆsen pˆlon\). Only use of \pˆlos\, old word for clay, in N.T. in this chapter and strkjv@Romans:9:21|. The kneading of the clay and spittle added another offence against the Sabbath rules of the rabbis. {Anointed his eyes with the clay} (\epechrisen autou ton pˆlon epi tous ophthalmous\). First aorist active indicative of \epichri“\, old verb, to spread on, anoint, here only and verse 11| in N.T. "He spread the clay upon his eyes." B C read \epethˆken\ (first aorist active indicative of \epitithˆmi\, to put on).

rwp@John:9:25 @{One thing I know} (\hen oida\). This man is keen and quick and refuses to fall into the trap set for him. He passes by their quibbling about Jesus being a "sinner" (\hamart“los\) and clings to the one fact of his own experience. {Whereas I was blind, now I see} (\tuphlos “n arti blep“\). Literally, "Being blind I now see." The present active participle \“n\ of \eimi\ by implication in contrast with \arti\ (just now, at this moment) points to previous and so past time. It must be borne in mind that the man did not at this stage know who Jesus was and so had not yet taken him as Saviour (9:36-38|).

rwp@John:9:26 @{What did he do to thee?} (\Ti epoiˆsen soi;\). Another cross-examination, now admitting that Jesus opened his eyes and wishing again (9:15,17|) to know "how."

rwp@John:9:29 @{We know that God hath spoken unto Moses} (\hˆmeis oidamen hoti M“usei lelalˆken ho theos\). Perfect active indicative of \lale“\, so still on record. See strkjv@Exodus:33:11|. For \lale“\ used of God speaking see strkjv@Hebrews:1:1|. They are proud to be disciples of Moses. {But as for this man, we do not know whence he is} (\touton de ouk oidamen pothen estin\). "This fellow" they mean by "\touton\" in emphatic position, we do not even know whence he is. Some of the people did (7:27|), but in the higher sense none of the Jews knew (8:14|). These Pharisees neither knew nor cared.

rwp@John:9:38 @{Lord, I believe} (\Pisteu“, kurie\). \Kurie\ here = Lord (reverence, no longer respect as in 36|). A short creed, but to the point. {And he worshipped him} (\kai prosekunˆsen aut“i\). Ingressive first aorist active indicative of \proskune“\, old verb to fall down in reverence, to worship. Sometimes of men (Matthew:18:26|). In John (see strkjv@4:20|) this verb "is always used to express divine worship" (Bernard). It is tragic to hear men today deny that Jesus should be worshipped. He accepted worship from this new convert as he later did from Thomas who called him "God" (John:20:28|). Peter (Acts:10:25f.|) refused worship from Cornelius as Paul and Barnabas did at Lystra (Acts:14:18|), but Jesus made no protest here.

rwp@John:10:8 @{Before me} (\pro emou\). Aleph with the Latin, Syriac, and Sahidic versions omit these words (supported by A B D L W). But with or without \pro emou\ Jesus refers to the false Messiahs and self-appointed leaders who made havoc of the flock. These are the thieves and robbers, not the prophets and sincere teachers of old. The reference is to verse 1|. There had been numerous such impostors already (Josephus, _Ant_. XVIII. i. 6; _War_ II. viii. I) and Jesus will predict many more (Matthew:24:23f.|). They keep on coming, these wolves in sheep's clothing (Matthew:7:15|) who grow rich by fooling the credulous sheep. In this case "the sheep did not hear them" (\ouk ˆkousan aut“n ta probata\). First aorist active indicative with genitive. Fortunate sheep who knew the Shepherd's voice.

rwp@John:10:18 @{And I have power to take it again} (\kai exousian ech“ palin labein autˆn\). Note second aorist active infinitive in both cases (\theinai\ from \tithˆmi\ and \labein\ from \lamban“\), single acts. Recall strkjv@2:19| where Jesus said: "And in three days I will raise it up." He did not mean that he will raise himself from the dead independently of the Father as the active agent (Romans:8:11|). {I received from my Father} (\elabon para tou patros mou\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\. He always follows the Father's command (\entolˆ\) in all things (12:49f.; strkjv@14:31|). Songs:now he is doing the Father's will about his death and resurrection.

rwp@John:10:33 @{For a good work we stone thee not} (\peri kalou ergou ou lithazomen\). "Concerning a good deed we are not stoning thee." Flat denial that the healing of the blind man on the Sabbath had led them to this attempt (8:59|) in spite of the facts. {But for blasphemy} (\alla peri blasphˆmias\). See strkjv@Acts:26:7| where \peri\ with the genitive is also used with \egkaloumai\ for the charge against Paul. This is the only example in John of the word \blasphˆmia\ (cf. strkjv@Matthew:12:31|). {And because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God} (\kai hoti su anthr“pos “n poieis seauton theon\). In strkjv@5:18| they stated the charge more accurately: "He called God his own Father, making himself equal with God." That is, he made himself the Son of God. This he did beyond a doubt. But was it blasphemy? Only if he was not the Son of God. The penalty for blasphemy was death by stoning (Leviticus:24:16; strkjv@1Kings:21:10,13|).

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:10:41 @{Many came to him} (\polloi ˆlthon pros auton\). Jesus was busy here and in a more congenial atmosphere than Jerusalem. John wrought no signs the crowds recall, though Jesus did many here (Matthew:19:2|). The crowds still bear the impress of John's witness to Christ as "true" (\alˆthˆ\). Here was prepared soil for Christ.

rwp@John:11:4 @{Heard it} (\akousas\). The messenger delivered the message of the sisters. The reply of Jesus is for him and for the apostles. {Is not unto death} (\ouk estin pros thanaton\). Death in the final issue, to remain dead. Lazarus did die, but he did not remain dead. See \hamartia pros thanaton\ in strkjv@1John:5:16|, "sin unto death" (final death). {But for the glory of God} (\all' huper tˆs doxˆs tou theou\). In behalf of God's glory, as the sequel shows. Cf. strkjv@9:3| about the man born blind. The death of Lazarus will illustrate God's glory. In some humble sense those who suffer the loss of loved ones are entitled to some comfort from this point made by Jesus about Lazarus. In a supreme way it is true of the death of Christ which he himself calls glorification of himself and God (13:31|). In strkjv@7:39| John had already used \doxaz“\ of the death of Christ. {That the Son of God may be glorified thereby} (\hina doxasthˆi ho huios tou theou di' autˆs\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \doxaz“\. Here Jesus calls himself "the Son of God." In strkjv@8:54| Jesus had said: "It is my Father that glorifieth me." The raising of Lazarus from the tomb will bring glory to the Son of God. See strkjv@17:1| for this idea in Christ's prayer. The raising of Lazarus will also bring to an issue his own death and all this involves the glorification of the Father (7:39; strkjv@12:16; strkjv@13:31; strkjv@14:13|). The death of Lazarus brings Jesus face to face with his own death.

rwp@John:11:10 @{But if a man walk in the night} (\ean de tis peripatˆi en tˆi nukti\). Third condition again. It is spiritual darkness that Jesus here pictures, but the result is the same. See the same figure in strkjv@12:35| (1John:2:11|). The ancients had poor illumination at night as indeed we did before Edison gave us electric lights. Pedestrians actually used to have little lamps fastened on the feet to light the path. {In him} (\en aut“i\). Spiritual darkness, the worst of all (cf. strkjv@Matthew:6:23; strkjv@John:8:12|). Man has the capacity for light, but is not the source of light. "By the application of this principle Christianity is distinguished from Neo-Platonism" (Westcott).

rwp@John:11:24 @{In the resurrection at the last day} (\en tˆi anastasei en tˆi eschatˆi hˆmerƒi\). Did Jesus mean only that? She believed it, of course, and such comfort is often offered in case of death, but that idea did not console Martha and is not what she hinted at in verse 22|.

rwp@John:11:27 @{Yea, Lord} (\Nai, kurie\). Martha probably did not understand all that Jesus said and meant, but she did believe in the future resurrection, in eternal life for believers in Christ, in the power of Christ to raise even the dead here and now. She had heroic faith and makes now her own confession of faith in words that outrank those of Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:16| because she makes hers with her brother dead now four days and with the hope that Jesus will raise him up now. {I have believed} (\pepisteuka\). Perfect active indicative of \pisteu“\. It is my settled and firm faith. Peter uses this same tense in strkjv@6:69|. {That thou art the Son of God} (\hoti su ei ho Christos ho huios tou theou\). The Messiah or the Christ (1:41|) was to be also "the Son of God" as the Baptist said he had found Jesus to be (1:34|), as Peter confessed on Hermon for the apostles (Matthew:16:16|), as Jesus claimed to be (John:11:41|) and confessed on oath before Caiaphas that he was (Matthew:26:63f.|), and as John stated that it was his purpose to prove in his Gospel (20:31|). But no one said it under more trying circumstances than Martha. {Even he that cometh into the world} (\ho eis ton kosmon erchomenos\). No "even" in the Greek. This was a popular way of putting the people's expectation (6:14; strkjv@Matthew:11:3|). Jesus himself spoke of his coming into the world (9:39; strkjv@16:28; strkjv@8:37|).

rwp@John:11:31 @{Followed her} (\ˆkolouthˆsan autˆi\). First aorist active indicative of \akolouthe“\ with associative instrumental case (\autˆi\). This crowd of consolers (\paramuthoumenoi\) meant kindly enough, but did the one wrong thing for Mary wished to see Jesus alone. People with kind notions often so act. The secrecy of Martha (verse 28|) was of no avail. {Supposing that she was going unto the tomb} (\doxantes hoti hupagei eis to mnˆmeion\). First aorist active participle of \doke“\, justifying their conduct by a wrong inference. Note retention of present tense \hupagei\ in indirect discourse after the secondary tense \ˆkolouthˆsan\. {To weep there} (\hina klausˆi ekei\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \klai“\, old verb to weep. Sometimes to wail or howl in oriental style of grief, but surely not that here. At any rate this supposed purpose of Mary was a real reason for this crowd {not} to go with her.

rwp@John:11:40 @{Said I not unto thee?} (\Ouk eipon soi;\). Jesus pointedly reminds Martha of his promise to raise Lazarus (verses 25f.|). {That if thou believedst} (\hoti ean pisteusˆis\). Indirect discourse with \ean\ and the first aorist active subjunctive (condition of third class) retained after the secondary tense \eipon\. He had not said this very phrase, \ean pisteusˆis\, to Martha, but he did say to her: \Pisteueis touto\; (Believest thou this?). He meant to test Martha as to her faith already hinted at (verse 22|) on this very point. Jesus had also spoken of increase of faith on the part of the disciples (verse 15|). {Thou shouldest see the glory of God} (\opsˆi tˆn doxan tou theou\). Future middle indicative of the old defective verb \hora“\ retained in the conclusion of this condition in indirect discourse. Jesus means the glory of God as shown in the resurrection of Lazarus as he had already said to the disciples (verse 4|) and as he meant Martha to understand (verse 25|) and may in fact have said to her (the report of the conversation is clearly abridged). Hence Bernard's difficulty in seeing how Martha could understand the words of Jesus about the resurrection of Lazarus here and now seems fanciful and far-fetched.

rwp@John:11:45 @{Beheld that which he did} (\theasamenoi ho epoiˆsen\). First aorist middle participle of \theaomai\ and first aorist active indicative of \poie“\ in the relative (\ho\) clause. They were eye-witnesses of all the details and did not depend on hearsay. {Believed on him} (\episteusan eis auton\). Such a result had happened before (7:31|), and all the more in the presence of this tremendous miracle which held many to Jesus (12:11,17|).

rwp@John:11:46 @{Went away to the Pharisees} (\apˆlthon pros tous Pharisaious\). Second aorist active indicative of \aperchomai\. This "some" (\tines\) did who were deeply impressed and yet who did not have the courage to break away from the rabbis without consulting them. It was a crisis for the Sanhedrin.

rwp@John:11:48 @{If we let him thus alone} (\ean aph“men auton hout“s\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \apiˆmi\. "Suppose we leave him thus alone." Suppose also that he keeps on raising the dead right here next door to Jerusalem! {All will believe on him} (\pantes pisteusousin eis auton\). Future active of \pisteu“\. The inevitable conclusion, "all" (\pantes\), not just "some" (\tines\). as now. {And the Romans will come} (\kai eleusontai hoi R“maioi\). Another inevitable result with the future middle of \erchomai\. Only if the people take Jesus as their political Messiah (6:15|) as they had once started to do. This is a curious muddle for the rulers knew that Jesus did not claim to be a political Messiah and would not be a rival to Caesar. And yet they use this fear (their own belief about the Messiah) to stir themselves to frenzy as they will use it with Pilate later. {And take away both our place and our nation} (\kai arousin hˆm“n kai ton topon kai to ethnos\). Future active of \air“\, another certain result of their inaction. Note the order here when "place" (job) is put before nation (patriotism), for all the world like modern politicians who make the fate of the country turn on their getting the jobs which they are seeking. In the course of time the Romans will come, not because of the leniency of the Sanhedrin toward Jesus, but because of the uprising against Rome led by the Zealots and they will destroy both temple and city and the Sanhedrin will lose their jobs and the nation will be scattered. Future historians will say that this fate came as punishment on the Jews for their conduct toward Jesus.

rwp@John:12:6 @{Not because he cared for the poor} (\ouch hoti peri t“n pt“ch“n emelen aut“i\). Literally, "not because it was a care to him concerning the poor" (impersonal imperfect of \melei\, it was a care). John often makes explanatory comments of this kind as in strkjv@2:21f.; strkjv@7:22,39|. {But because he was a thief} (\alle hoti kleptˆs ˆn\). Clearly the disciples did not know then that Judas was a petty thief. That knowledge came later after he took the bribe of thirty pieces of silver for betraying Jesus (Matthew:26:15|), for the disciples did not suspect Judas of treachery (13:28f.|), let alone small peculations. There is no reason for thinking that John is unfair to Judas. "Temptation commonly comes through that for which we are naturally fitted" (Westcott). In this case Judas himself was "the poor beggar" who wanted this money. {And having the bag took away what was put therein} (\kai to gl“ssokomon ech“n ta ballomena ebastazen\). This is the correct text. This compound for the earlier \gl“ssokomeion\ (from \gl“ssa\, tongue, and \kome“\, to tend) was originally a receptacle for the tongues or mouth-pieces of wind instruments. The shorter form is already in the Doric inscriptions and is common in the papyri for "money-box" as here. It occurs also in Josephus, Plutarch, etc. In N.T. only here and strkjv@13:29| in same sense about Judas. \Ballomena\ is present passive participle (repeatedly put in) of \ball“\, to cast or fling. The imperfect active (custom) of \bastaz“\, old verb to pick up (John:10:31|), to carry (19:17|), but here and strkjv@20:15| with the sense to bear away as in Polybius, Josephus, Diogenes Laertes, and often so in the papyri.

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:12:29 @{That it had thundered} (\brontˆn gegonenai\). Perfect active infinitive of \ginomai\ in indirect discourse after \elegen\ and the accusative of general reference (\brontˆn\, thunder, as in strkjv@Mark:3:17|), "that thunder came to pass." Songs:the crowd "standing by" (\hest“s\, second perfect active participle of \histˆmi\), but Jesus understood his Father's voice. {An angel hath spoken to him} (\Aggelos aut“i lelalˆken\). Perfect active indicative of \lale“\. So, when Jesus spoke to Saul on the way to Damascus, those with Saul heard the voice, but did not understand (Acts:9:7; strkjv@22:9|).

rwp@John:12:31 @{The judgement} (\krisis\). No article, "A judgement." The next few days will test this world. {The prince of this world} (\ho arch“n tou kosmou toutou\). This phrase here, descriptive of Satan as in possession of the evil world, occurs again in strkjv@14:30; strkjv@16:11|. In the temptations Satan claims power over the world and offers to share it with Jesus (Matthew:4:8-10; strkjv@Luke:4:5-8|). Jesus did not deny Satan's power then, but here proclaims final victory over him. {Shall be cast out} (\ekblˆthˆsetai ex“\). Future passive of \ekball“\. Note \ex“\, clean out. The Book of Revelation also proclaims final victory over Satan.

rwp@John:12:35 @{Yet a little while is the light among you} (\eti mikron chronon to ph“s en humin estin\). \Chronon\ is the accusative of extent of time. Jesus does not argue the point of theology with the crowd who would not understand. He turns to the metaphor used before when he claimed to be the light of the world (8:12|) and urges that they take advantage of their privilege "while ye have the light" (\h“s to ph“s echete\). {That darkness overtake you not} (\hina mˆ skotia humas katalabˆi\). Purpose (negative) with \hina mˆ\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \katalamban“\. See this verb in strkjv@1:5|. In strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:4| this verb occurs with \hˆmera\ (day) overtaking one like a thief. {Knoweth not whither he goeth} (\ouk oiden pou hupagei\). See strkjv@11:10| for this idea and the same language in strkjv@1John:2:11|. The ancients did not have our electric street lights. The dark streets were a terror to travellers.

rwp@John:12:42 @{Nevertheless even} (\hom“s mentoi kai\). For the old \hom“s\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:14:7; strkjv@Galatians:3:15| (only other examples in N.T.), here only with \mentoi\, "but yet," and \kai\, "even." In spite of what has just been said "many (\polloi\) even of the rulers" (recall the lonely shyness of Nicodemus in strkjv@3:1ff.|). These actually "believed on him" (\episteusan eis auton\) in their convictions, a remarkable statement as to the effect that Christ had in Jerusalem as the Sanhedrin plotted his death. Cf. Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea. {But because of the Pharisees} (\alla dia tous Pharisaious\). Like the whispered talk in strkjv@7:13| "because of the fear of the Jews." Once the Pharisees sneeringly asked the officers (7:48|): "Hath any one of the rulers believed on him?" And now "many of the rulers have believed on him." {They did not confess} (\ouch h“mologoun\). Negative imperfect in contrast to the punctiliar aorist \episteusan\. "They kept on not confessing." How like the cowardly excuses made today by those under conviction who refuse to step out for Christ. {Lest they should be put out of the synagogue} (\hina mˆ aposunag“goi gen“ntai\). Cf. strkjv@9:22| where this very word occurs in a purpose clause like this. Only once more in the N.T. (16:2|), a Jewish word not in profane authors. This ostracism from the synagogue was dreaded by the Jews and made cowards of these "believing elders." {More than} (\mallon ˆper\). They preferred the glory and praise of men more than the glory and praise of God. How \apropos\ these words are to some suave cowards today.

rwp@John:13:4 @{Riseth from supper} (\egeiretai ek tou deipnou\). Vivid dramatic present middle indicative of \egeir“\. From the couch on which he was reclining. {Layeth aside} (\tithˆsin\). Same dramatic present active of \tithˆmi\. {His garments} (\ta himatia\). The outer robe \tallith\ (\himation\) and with only the tunic (\chit“n\) on "as one that serveth" (Luke:22:27|). Jesus had already rebuked the apostles for their strife for precedence at the beginning of the meal (Luke:22:24-30|). {A towel} (\lention\). Latin word _linteum_, linen cloth, only in this passage in the N.T. {Girded himself} (\diez“sen heauton\). First aorist active indicative of \diaz“nnu“\ (\-umi\), old and rare compound (in Plutarch, LXX, inscriptions, and papyri), to gird all around. In N.T. only in John (13:4,5; strkjv@21:7|). Did Peter not recall this incident when in strkjv@1Peter:5:5| he exhorts all to "gird yourselves with humility" (\tˆn tapeinophrosunˆn egkomb“sasthe\)?

rwp@John:13:10 @{He that is bathed} (\ho leloumenos\). Perfect passive articular participle of \lou“\, to bathe the whole body (Acts:9:37|). {Save to wash his feet} (\ei mˆ tous podas nipsasthai\). Aleph and some old Latin MSS. have only \nipsasthai\, but the other words are genuine and are really involved by the use of \nipsasthai\ (first aorist middle infinitive of \nipt“\, to wash parts of the body) instead of \lousasthai\, to bathe the whole body (just used before). The guest was supposed to bathe (\lou“\) before coming to a feast and so only the feet had to be washed (\nipt“\) on removing the sandals. {Clean} (\katharos\). Because of the bath. For \katharos\ meaning external cleanliness see strkjv@Matthew:23:26; strkjv@27:59;| but in strkjv@John:15:3| it is used for spiritual purity as here in "ye are clean" (\katharoi\). {Every whit} (\holos\). All of the body because of the bath. For this same predicate use of \holos\ see strkjv@9:34|. {But not all} (\all' ouchi pantes\). Strongly put exception (\ouchi\). Plain hint of the treachery of Judas who is reclining at the table after having made the bargain with the Sanhedrin (Mark:14:11|). A year ago Jesus knew that Judas was a devil and said to the apostles: "One of you is a devil" (6:64,70|). But it did not hurt them then nor did they suspect each other then or now. It is far-fetched to make Jesus here refer to the cleansing power of his blood or to baptism as some do.

rwp@John:13:11 @{For he knew him that should betray him} (\ˆidei gar ton paradidonta auton\). Past perfect \ˆidei\ used as imperfect. Jesus had known for a year at least (6:64,70|) and yet he treated Judas with his usual courtesy. The articular present participle of \paradid“mi\...engaged in the process. Did Judas...

rwp@John:13:14 @{If I then} (\ei oun eg“\). Argumentative sense of \oun\ (therefore). Condition of first class, assumed to be true, with first aorist active indicative of \nipt“\, "If I, being what I am, washed your feet" (as I did). {Ye also ought} (\kai humeis opheilete\). The obligation rests on you _a fortiori_. Present active indicative of the old verb \opheil“\, to owe a debt (Matthew:18:30|). The mutual obligation is to do this or any other needed service. The widows who washed the saints' feet in strkjv@1Timothy:5:10| did it "as an incident-of their hospitable ministrations" (Bernard). Up to 1731 the Lord High Almoner in England washed the feet of poor saints (_pedilavium_) on Thursday before Easter, a custom that arose in the fourth century, and one still practised by the Pope of Rome.

rwp@John:15:20 @{Remember} (\mnˆmoneuete\). Present active imperative of \mnˆmoneu“\, old verb from \mnˆm“n\, in John again in strkjv@16:4,21|. See strkjv@13:16| for this word. {If they persecuted me} (\ei eme edi“xan\). Condition of first class. They certainly did persecute (first aorist active of \di“k“\, to chase like a wild beast like the Latin _persequor_, our "persecute") Jesus (5:16|). They will persecute those like Jesus. Cf. strkjv@16:33; strkjv@Mark:10:30; strkjv@Luke:21:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:12; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:9; strkjv@Galatians:4:29; strkjv@2Timothy:3:12| for proof that this prophecy came true. But the alternative is true and is stated by Jesus with a like condition of the first class, "if they kept my word" (\ei ton logon mou etˆrˆsan\). The world does praise the word of Jesus, but dreads to follow it.

rwp@John:16:22 @{And ye therefore now} (\kai humeis oun nun\). See strkjv@8:38| for like emphasis on {ye} (\humeis\). The "sorrow" (\lupˆn\) is like that of the mother in childbirth (real, but fleeting, with permanent joy following). The metaphor points, of course, to the resurrection of Jesus which did change the grief of the disciples to gladness, once they are convinced that Jesus has risen from the dead. {But I will see you again} (\palin de opsomai humas\). Future middle of \hora“\, to see. In verses 16,19| Jesus had said "ye shall see me" (\opsesthe me\), but here we have one more blessed promise, "I shall see you," showing "that we are the objects of God's regard" (Westcott). {Shall rejoice} (\charˆsetai\). Second future passive of \chair“\. {Taketh away} (\airei\). Present active indicative, futuristic present, but B D have \arei\ the future active (shall take away). This joy is a permanent possession.

rwp@John:16:26 @{I say not} (\ou leg“\). "I speak not." Christ did pray for the disciples before his death (John:14:16; strkjv@17:9,15,24|) and he prays also for sinners (Luke:23:34; strkjv@1John:2:1|). Here it is the special love of God for disciples of Jesus (John:14:21,23; strkjv@17:23; strkjv@1John:4:19|). Note \aite“\ and \er“ta“\ used in practically the same sense as in verse 23|.

rwp@John:17:25 @{O righteous Father} (\Patˆr dikaie\). Nominative form with \patˆr\ used as vocative (cf. strkjv@John:20:28|), but vocative form \dikaie\. Then the righteousness of God is appealed to like God's holiness in verse 11|. {The world} (\kai ho kosmos\). The translations usually slur over the \kai\ as untranslatable in English. Westcott suggests "while" as a sort of correlative. It is quite possible that here \kai\ is almost concessive like "though" and \de\=yet: "though the world did not know thee, yet I knew thee, and these knew thee." See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1182 for \kai--de--kai\ and various other uses of \kai\ in John's Gospel.

rwp@John:18:6 @{Fell to the ground} (\epesan chamai\). Second aorist active indicative of \pipt“\ with first aorist ending (\-an\). This recoil made them stumble. But why did they step back? Was it the former claim of Jesus ({I am}, \eg“ eimi\) to be on an equality with God (8:58; strkjv@13:19|) or mere embarrassment and confusion or supernatural power exerted by Jesus? B adds \Iˆsous\ which must mean simply: "I am Jesus."

rwp@John:18:23 @{If I have spoken evil} (\ei kak“s elalˆsa\). Condition of first class (assumed to be true), with \ei\ and aorist active indicative. Jesus had not spoken evilly towards Annas, though he did not here turn the other cheek, one may note. For the sake of argument, Jesus puts it as if he did speak evilly. Then prove it, that is all. {Bear witness of the evil} (\marturˆson peri tou kakou\). First aorist active imperative of \marture“\, to testify. This is the conclusion (apodosis). Jesus is clearly entitled to proof of such a charge if there is any. {But if well} (\ei de kal“s\). Supply the same verb \elalˆsa\. The same condition, but with a challenging question as the apodosis. {Smitest} (\dereis\). Old verb \der“\, to flay, to skin, to beat, as in strkjv@Matthew:21:35; strkjv@Luke:22:63; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:20| (of an insulting blow in the face as here).

rwp@John:18:28 @{They lead} (\agousin\). Dramatic historical present of \ag“\, plural "they" for the Sanhedrists (Luke:23:1|). John gives no details of the trial before the Sanhedrin (only the fact, strkjv@John:18:24,28|) when Caiaphas presided, either the informal meeting at night (Mark:14:53,55-65; strkjv@Matthew:26:57,59-68; strkjv@Luke:22:54,63-65|) or the formal ratification meeting after dawn (Mark:15:1; strkjv@Matthew:27:1; strkjv@Luke:22:66-71|), but he gives much new material of the trial before Pilate (18:28-38|). {Into the palace} (\eis to prait“rion\). For the history and meaning of this interesting Latin word, _praetorium_, see on ¯Matthew:27:27; strkjv@Acts:23:35; strkjv@Phillipians:1:13|. Here it is probably the magnificent palace in Jerusalem built by Herod the Great for himself and occupied by the Roman Procurator (governor) when in the city. There was also one in Caesarea (Acts:23:35|). Herod's palace in Jerusalem was on the Hill of Zion in the western part of the upper city. There is something to be said for the Castle of Antonia, north of the temple area, as the location of Pilate's residence in Jerusalem. {Early} (\pr“i\). Technically the fourth watch (3 A.M. to 6 A.M.). There were two violations of Jewish legal procedure (holding the trial for a capital case at night, passing condemnation on the same day of the trial). Besides, the Sanhedrin no longer had the power of death. A Roman court could meet any time after sunrise. John (19:14|) says it was "about the sixth hour" when Pilate condemned Jesus. {That they might not be defiled} (\hina mˆ mianth“sin\). Purpose clause with \hina mˆ\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \miain“\, to stain, to defile. For Jewish scruples about entering the house of a Gentile see strkjv@Acts:10:28; strkjv@11:3|. {But might eat the passover} (\alla phag“sin to pascha\). Second aorist active subjunctive of the defective verb \esthi“\, to eat. This phrase may mean to eat the passover meal as in strkjv@Matthew:27:17| (Mark:14:12,14; strkjv@Luke:22:11,15|), but it does not have to mean that. In strkjv@2Chronicles:30:22| we read: "And they did eat the festival seven days" when the paschal festival is meant, not the paschal lamb or the paschal supper. There are eight other examples of \pascha\ in John's Gospel and in all of them the feast is meant, not the supper. If we follow John's use of the word, it is the feast here, not the meal of strkjv@John:13:2| which was the regular passover meal. This interpretation keeps John in harmony with the Synoptics.

rwp@John:18:33 @{Again} (\palin\). Back into the palace where Pilate was before. {Called} (\eph“nˆsen\). First aorist active indicative of \ph“ne“\. Jesus was already inside the court (verse 28|). Pilate now summoned him to his presence since he saw that he had to handle the case. The charge that Jesus claimed to be a king compelled him to do so (Luke:23:2|). {Art thou the King of the Jews?} (\su ei ho basileus t“n Ioudai“n;\). This was the vital problem and each of the Gospels has the question (Mark:15:2; strkjv@Matthew:27:1; strkjv@Luke:23:3; strkjv@John:18:33|), though Luke alone (23:2|) gives the specific accusation. {Thou} (\su\). Emphatic. Jesus did claim to be the spiritual king of Israel as Nathanael said (John:1:49|) and as the ecstatic crowd hailed him on the Triumphal Entry (John:12:13|), but the Sanhedrin wish Pilate to understand this in a civil sense as a rival of Caesar as some of the Jews wanted Jesus to be (John:6:15|) and as the Pharisees expected the Messiah to be.

rwp@John:19:1 @{Took and scourged} (\elaben kai emastig“sen\). First aorist active indicative of \lamban“\ and \mastigo“\ (from \mastix\, whip). For this redundant use of \lamban“\ see also verse 6|. It is the causative use of \mastigo“\, for Pilate did not actually scourge Jesus. He simply ordered it done, perhaps to see if the mob would be satisfied with this penalty on the alleged pretender to royalty (Luke:23:22|) whom Pilate had pronounced innocent (John:18:38|), an illegal act therefore. It was a preliminary to crucifixion, but Jesus was not yet condemned. The Sanhedrin had previously mocked Jesus (Mark:14:65; strkjv@Matthew:26:67f.; strkjv@Luke:22:63ff.|) as the soldiers will do later (Mark:15:16-19; strkjv@Matthew:27:27-30|). This later mock coronation (Mark and Matthew) was after the condemnation. {Plaited a crown of thorns} (\plexantes stephanon ex akanth“n\). Old verb \plek“\, to weave, in the N.T. only here, strkjv@Mark:15:17; strkjv@Matthew:27:19|. Not impossible for the mock coronation to be repeated. {Arrayed him} (\periebalon auton\). "Placed around him" (second aorist active indicative of \periball“\). {In a purple garment} (\himation porphuroun\). Old adjective \porphureos\ from \porphura\, purple cloth (Mark:15:17,20|), dyed in purple, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:18:16|. Jesus had been stripped of his outer garment \himation\ (Matthew:27:28|) and the scarlet cloak of one of the soldiers may have been put on him (Matthew:27:28|).

rwp@John:19:5 @{Wearing} (\phor“n\). Present active participle of \phore“\, an early frequentative of \pher“\, denoting a continual wearing, though not true here (only temporary). Jesus bore the mockery with kingly dignity as part of the shame of the Cross (Hebrews:12:2|). {Behold, the man} (\Idou ho anthr“pos\). _Ecce Homo!_ by Pilate. This exclamatory introduction of Jesus in mock coronation robes to the mob was clearly intended to excite pity and to show how absurd the charge of the Sanhedrin was that such a pitiable figure should be guilty of treason. Pilate failed utterly in this effort and did not dream that he was calling attention to the greatest figure of history, the Man of the ages.

rwp@John:19:11 @{Thou wouldest have} (\ouk eiches\). Imperfect active indicative without \an\, but apodosis of second-class condition as in strkjv@15:22,24|. {Except it were given thee} (\ei mˆ ˆn dedomenon\). Periphrastic past perfect indicative of \did“mi\ (a permanent possession). {From above} (\an“then\). From God (cf. strkjv@3:3|), the same doctrine of government stated by Paul in strkjv@Romans:13:1f|. Pilate did not get his "authority" from the Sanhedrin, but from Caesar. Jesus makes God the source of all real "authority." {Hath greater sin} (\meizona hamartian echei\). The same idiom in strkjv@9:41|. Caiaphas has his authority from God also and has used Pilate for his own base end.

rwp@John:19:20 @{Read} (\anegn“san\). Second aorist active indicative of \anagin“sk“\. It was meant to be read. Latin was the legal and official language; Aramaic (Hebrew) was for the benefit of the people of Jerusalem; Greek was for everybody who passed by who did not know Aramaic. Many of the Jews mocked as they read the accusation. This item alone in John.

rwp@John:19:28 @{Are now finished} (\ˆdˆ tetelestai\). Perfect passive indicative of \tele“\. See same form in verse 30|. As in strkjv@13:1|, where Jesus is fully conscious (knowing, \eid“s\) of the meaning of his atoning death. {Might be accomplished} (\telei“thˆi\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \teleio“\ rather than the usual \plˆr“thˆi\ (verse 24|) with \hina\. John sees the thirst of Jesus in strkjv@Psalms:69:21f|. Jesus, of course, did not make the outcry in any mechanical way. Thirst is one of the severest agonies of crucifixion. For the "perfecting" of the Messiah by physical suffering see strkjv@Hebrews:2:10; strkjv@5:7ff|.

rwp@John:19:35 @{He that hath seen} (\ho he“rak“s\). Perfect active articular participle of \hora“\. John the Apostle was there and saw this fact (still sees it, in fact). This personal witness disproves the theory of the Docetic Gnostics that Jesus did not have a real human body. {He knoweth} (\ekeinos oiden\). That is John does like strkjv@9:37|. It is possible that \ekeinos\ may be a solemn appeal to God as in strkjv@1:33| or Christ as in strkjv@1John:3:5|. Bernard argues that the final editor is distinguishing the Beloved Disciple from himself and is endorsing him. But the example of Josephus (_War_. III. 7, 16) is against this use of \ekeinos\. John is rather referring to himself as still alive.

rwp@John:20:8 @{Then therefore} (\tote oun\). After Peter in time and influenced by the boldness of Peter. {And he saw and believed} (\kai eiden kai episteusen\). Both aorist active indicative (second and first). Peter saw more after he entered than John did in his first glance, but John saw into the meaning of it all better than Peter. Peter had more sight, John more insight. John was the first to believe that Jesus was risen from the tomb even before he saw him. According to strkjv@Luke:24:12| Peter went away "wondering" still. The Sinaitic Syriac and 69 and 124 wrongly read here "they believed." John was evidently proud to be able to record this great moment when he believed without seeing in contrast to Thomas (20:29|). Peter and John did not see the angels.

rwp@John:20:11 @{Was standing} (\histˆkei\). Past perfect of \histˆmi\ as imperfect as in strkjv@19:25|. {At the tomb} (\pros t“i mnˆmei“i\). \Pros\ (in front of) with locative while \para\ (by the side of) with locative in strkjv@19:25|. Pathetic and common picture of a woman weeping by the tomb. See strkjv@11:31|. {As she wept} (\h“s eklaien\). Imperfect, "as she was weeping." {She stooped and looked} (\parekupsen\). Aorist active indicative of \parakupt“\ for which see verse 5|. Mary "peeped into" the tomb, but did not enter.

rwp@John:20:13 @{I do not know} (\ouk oida\). Singular here, not plural as in verse 2|, because clearly Mary is alone here. But the problem is the same. She did not see Peter and John at the tomb.

rwp@John:20:15 @{Sir} (\Kurie\). Clearly not "Lord" here, for she thought him to be "the gardener" (\ho kˆpouros\), old word (\kˆpos, ouros\), keeper of the garden, only here in the N.T. {If thou hast borne him hence} (\ei su ebastasos auton\). Condition of the first class. Note emphasis on \su\ (thou). A new idea struck Mary as mistaken as the other one. Jesus had repeated the question of the angels, but she did not recognize him. {And I} (\kag“\). Emphasis and crasis.

rwp@John:20:18 @{And telleth} (\aggellousa\). Present active participle, "announcing." {I have seen the Lord} (\He“raka ton kurion\). Perfect active indicative of \hora“\. She will always carry in her heart that vision (picture) of the Risen Christ. She tells this fact before she delivers Christ's message to the brethren of Christ. {How that}. No word in the Greek, but a conjunction like \h“s\ is implied. \Hoti\ here is recitative. The disciples (brethren) did not believe Mary's story nor that of the other women (Luke:24:11; strkjv@Mark:16:11|). Paul does not mention the vision to Mary or the women in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:5-7|. But Mary Magdalene was the first one to see the Risen Lord.

rwp@John:20:28 @{My Lord and my God} (\Hosea:kurios mou kai ho theos mou\). Not exclamation, but address, the vocative case though the form of the nominative, a very common thing in the _Koin‚_. Thomas was wholly convinced and did not hesitate to address the Risen Christ as Lord and God. And Jesus accepts the words and praises Thomas for so doing.

rwp@John:21:11 @{Went up} (\anebˆ\). Into the little boat or dinghy. {Drew} (\heilkusen\). Same verb as \helkusai\ in verse 6|. Peter now did what they had failed to do. {Three} (\tri“n\). The addition "three" to the "hundred and fifty" looks as if they were actually counted these "large" (\megal“n\) fish. It was a great fish story that John recalls vividly. {Was not rent} (\ouk eschisthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \schiz“\, to split (our word "schism").

rwp@John:21:19 @{By what manner of death} (\poi“i thanat“i\). Undoubtedly John, who is writing long after Peter's death, seems to mean that Peter was to die (and did die) a martyr's death. "Whither thou wouldest not." There is a tradition that Peter met death by crucifixion and asked to be crucified head downwards, but that is not made plain here.

rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE EPISTLE OF JUDE ABOUT A.D. 65 TO 67 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION THE AUTHOR He calls himself Judas, but this was a very common name. In the N.T. itself we have Judas Iscariot and Judas not Iscariot (John:14:22|; also called Judas of James, son or brother, strkjv@Luke:6:6|), Judas a brother of our Lord (Matthew:13:55|), Judas of Galilee (Acts:5:37|), Judas of Damascus (Acts:9:11|), Judas Barsabbas (Acts:15:22|). The author explains that he is a "slave" of Jesus Christ as James did (Jude:1:1|), and adds that he is also a brother of James. Clement of Alexandria thinks that, like James, he deprecated being called the brother of the Lord Jesus (as by Hegesippus later) as claiming too much authority. Keil identifies him with Jude:the Apostle (not Iscariot), but that is most unlikely. The Epistle is one of the disputed books of Eusebius. It was recognized in the canon in the Third Council of Carthage (A.D. 397). It appears in the Muratorian Canon (A.D. 170).

rwp@Jude:1:21 @{Keep yourselves} (\heautous tˆrˆsate\). First aorist active imperative (of urgency) of \tˆre“\. In verse 1| they are said to be kept, but note the warning in verse 5| from the angels who did not keep their dominion. See also strkjv@James:1:27|. In strkjv@Phillipians:2:12| both sides (human responsibility and divine sovereignty are presented side by side). {Looking for} (\prosdechomenoi\). Present middle participle of \prosdechomai\, the very form in strkjv@Titus:2:13|. The same idea in \prosdok“ntes\ in strkjv@2Peter:3:14|.

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:1:1 @{Forasmuch as} (\epeidˆper\). Here alone in the N.T., though common in literary Attic. Appears in the papyri. A triple compound (\epei\ = since, \dˆ\ = admittedly true, \per\ = intensive particle to emphasize importance). {Many} (\polloi\). How many no one knows, but certainly more than two or three. We know that Luke used the Logia of Jesus written by Matthew in Aramaic (Papias) and Mark's Gospel. Undoubtedly he had other written sources. {Have taken in hand} (\epecheirˆsan\). A literal translation of \epicheire“\ (from \cheir\, hand and \epi\, upon). Both Hippocrates and Galen use this word in their introduction to their medical works. Here only in the N.T., though a common literary word. Common in the papyri for undertaking with no idea of failure or blame. Luke does not mean to cast reflection on those who preceded him. The apocryphal gospels were all much later and are not in his mind. Luke had secured fuller information and planned a book on a larger scale and did surpass them with the result that they all perished save Mark's Gospel and what Matthew and Luke possess of the Logia of Jesus. There was still room for Luke's book. That motive influences every author and thus progress is made. {To draw up, a narrative} (\anataxasthai diˆgˆsin\). Ingressive aorist middle infinitive. This verb \anataxasthai\ has been found only in Plutarch's _Moral_. 968 CD about an elephant "rehearsing" by moonlight certain tricks it had been taught (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). That was from memory going regularly through the thing again. But the idea in the word is plain enough. The word is composed of \tass“\, a common verb for arranging things in proper order and \ana\, again. Luke means to say that those before him had made attempts to rehearse in orderly fashion various matters about Christ. "The expression points to a connected series of narratives in some order (\taxis\), topical or chronological rather than to isolated narratives" (Bruce). "They had produced something more than mere notes or anecdotes" (Plummer). \Diˆgˆsis\ means leading or carrying a thing through, not a mere incident. Galen applies this word some seventy-five times to the writing of Hippocrates. {Which have been fulfilled} (\t“n peplˆr“phorˆmen“n\). Perfect passive participle from \plˆrophore“\ and that from \plˆrˆs\ (full) and \pher“\ (to bring). Hence to bring or make full. The verb is rare outside of the LXX and the N.T. Papyri examples occur for finishing off a legal matter or a financial matter in full. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 86f.) gives examples from the papyri and inscriptions for completing a task or being convinced or satisfied in mind. The same ambiguity occurs here. When used of persons in the N.T. the meaning is to be convinced, or fully persuaded (Romans:4:21; strkjv@14:5; strkjv@Hebrews:6:11; strkjv@10:22|). When used of things it has the notion of completing or finishing (2Timothy:4:5,17|). Luke is here speaking of "matters" (\pragmat“n\). Luke may refer to the matters connected with Christ's life which have been brought to a close among us or accomplished. Bruce argues plausibly that he means fulness of knowledge "concerning the things which have become widely known among us Christians." In strkjv@Colossians:2:2| we have "fulness of understanding" (\tˆs plˆrophorias tˆs sunese“s\). In modern Greek the verb means to inform. The careful language of Luke here really pays a tribute to those who had preceded him in their narratives concerning Christ.

rwp@Luke:1:3 @{It seemed good to me also} (\edoxe kamoi\). A natural conclusion and justification of Luke's decision to write his narrative. They had ample reason to draw up their narratives. Luke has more reason to do so because of his fuller knowledge and wider scope. {Having traced the course of all things} (\parˆkolouthˆkoti pƒsin\). The perfect active participle of a common verb of the ancient Greek. Literally it means to follow along a thing in mind, to trace carefully. Both meanings occur abundantly in the ancient Greek. Cadbury (Appendix C to _Beginnings of Christianity_, Vol. II, pp. 489ff.) objects to the translation "having traced" here as implying research which the word does not here mean. Milligan (_Vocabulary_) is somewhat impressed by this argument. See my discussion of the point in Chapter XVI of _Studies in the Text of the N.T._ (The Implications in Luke's Preface) where the point is made that Luke here claims fulness of knowledge before he began to write his book. He had the traditions of the eyewitnesses and ministers of the word and the narratives previously drawn up. Whether he was a personal contemporary with any or all of these events we do not know and it is not particularly pertinent. He had _mentally_ followed along by the side of these events. Galen used this verb for the investigation of symptoms. Luke got himself ready to write before he began by full and accurate knowledge of the subject. \Akrib“s\ (accurately) means going into minute details, from \akron\, the topmost point. And he did it {from the first} (\an“then\). He seems to refer to the matters in Chapters strkjv@1:5-2:52|, the Gospel of the Infancy. {In order} (\kathexˆs\). Chronological order in the main following Mark's general outline. But in strkjv@9:51-18:10| the order is often topical. He has made careful investigation and his work deserves serious consideration. {Most excellent Theophilus} (\kratiste Theophile\). The name means god-lover or god-beloved. He may have been a believer already. He was probably a Gentile. Ramsay holds that "most excellent" was a title like "Your Excellency" and shows that he held office, perhaps a Knight. Songs:of Felix (Acts:23:26|) and Festus (Acts:26:25|). The adjective does not occur in the dedication in strkjv@Acts:1:1|.

rwp@Luke:1:5 @{There was} (\egeneto\). Not the usual \en\ for "was," but there arose or came into notice. With this verse the literary _Koin‚_ of verses 1 to 4 disappears. To the end of chapter 2 we have the most Hebraistic (Aramaic) passage in Luke's writings, due evidently to the use of documents or notes of oral tradition. Plummer notes a series of such documents ending with strkjv@1:80, strkjv@2:40, strkjv@2:52|. If the mother of Jesus was still alive, Luke could have seen her. She may have written in Aramaic an account of these great events. Natural reserve would keep her from telling too much and from too early publicity. Luke, as a physician, would take special interest in her birth report. The supernatural aspects disturb only those who do not admit the real Incarnation of Jesus Christ and who are unable to believe that God is superior to nature and that the coming of the Son of God to earth justifies such miraculous manifestations of divine power. Luke tells his story from the standpoint of Mary as Matthew gives his from the standpoint of Joseph. The two supplement each other. We have here the earliest documentary evidence of the origins of Christianity that has come down to us (Plummer). {Herod, King of Judea} (\Hˆr“idou basile“s tˆs Ioudaias\). This note of time locates the events before the death of Herod the Great (as he was called later), appointed King of Judea by the Roman Senate B.C. 40 at the suggestion of Octavius and Antony. He died B.C. 4. {Of the course of Abijah} (\ex ephˆmerias Abia\). Not in old Greek, but in LXX and modern Greek. Papyri have a verb derived from it, \ephˆmere“\. Daily service (Nehemiah:13:30; strkjv@1Chronicles:25:8|) and then a course of priests who were on duty for a week (1Chronicles:23:6; strkjv@28:13|). There were 24 such courses and that of Abijah was the eighth (1Chronicles:24:10; strkjv@2Chronicles:8:14|). Only four of these courses (Jedaiah, Immer, Pashur, Harim) returned from Babylon, but these four were divided into twenty-four with the old names. Each of these courses did duty for eight days, sabbath to sabbath, twice a year. On sabbaths the whole course did duty. At the feast of tabernacles all twenty-four courses were present. {Of the daughters of Aaron} (\ek t“n thugater“n Aar“n\). "To be a priest and married to a priest's daughter was a double distinction" (Plummer). Like a preacher married to a preacher's daughter.

rwp@Luke:1:35 @{Shall overshadow thee} (\episkiasei\). A figure of a cloud coming upon her. Common in ancient Greek in the sense of obscuring and with accusative as of Peter's shadow in strkjv@Acts:5:15|. But we have seen it used of the shining bright cloud at the Transfiguration of Jesus (Matthew:17:5; strkjv@Mark:9:7; strkjv@Luke:9:34|). Here it is like the Shekinah glory which suggests it (Exodus:40:38|) where the cloud of glory represents the presence and power of God. {Holy, the Son of God} (\Hagion huios theou\). Here again the absence of the article makes it possible for it to mean "Son of God." See strkjv@Matthew:5:9|. But this title, like the Son of Man (\Hosea:huios tou anthr“pou\) was a recognized designation of the Messiah. Jesus did not often call himself Son of God (Matthew:27:43|), but it is assumed in his frequent use of the Father, the Son (Matthew:11:27; strkjv@Luke:10:21; strkjv@John:5:19ff.|). It is the title used by the Father at the baptism (Luke:3:22|) and on the Mount of Transfiguration (Luke:9:35|). The wonder of Mary would increase at these words. The Miraculous Conception or Virgin Birth of Jesus is thus plainly set forth in Luke as in Matthew. The fact that Luke was a physician gives added interest to his report.

rwp@Luke:1:66 @{What then} (\ti ara\). With all these supernatural happenings they predicted the marvellous career of this child. Note \Ti\, {what}, not \Tis\, {who}. Cf. strkjv@Acts:12:18|. {They laid them up} (\ethento\, second aorist middle indicative) as Mary did (2:19|). {The hand of the Lord} (\cheir Kuriou\). Luke's explanation in addition to the supernatural events. The expression occurs only in Luke's writing (Acts:11:21; strkjv@13:11|).

rwp@Luke:2:19 @{Kept} (\sunetˆrei\). Imperfect active. She kept on keeping together (\sun-\) all these things. They were meat and drink to her. She was not astonished, but filled with holy awe. The verb occurs from Aristotle on. She could not forget. But did not Mary keep also a Baby Book? And may not Luke have seen it? {Pondering} (\sunballousa\). An old Greek word. Placing together for comparison. Mary would go over each detail in the words of Gabriel and of the shepherds and compare the sayings with the facts so far developed and brood over it all with a mother's high hopes and joy.

rwp@Luke:2:23 @{In the law of the Lord} (\en nom“i Kuriou\). No articles, but definite by preposition and genitive. Vincent notes that "law" occurs in this chapter five times. Paul (Gal strkjv@4:4|) will urge that Jesus "was made under the law" as Luke here explains. The law did not require that the child be brought to Jerusalem. The purification concerned the mother, the presentation the son.

rwp@Luke:3:1 @{Now in the fifteenth year} (\en etei de pentekaidekat“i\). Tiberius Caesar was ruler in the provinces two years before Augustus Caesar died. Luke makes a six-fold attempt here to indicate the time when John the Baptist began his ministry. John revived the function of the prophet (\Ecce Homo\, p. 2|) and it was a momentous event after centuries of prophetic silence. Luke begins with the Roman Emperor, then mentions Pontius Pilate Procurator of Judea, Herod Antipas Tetrarch of Galilee (and Perea), Philip, Tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis, Lysanias, Tetrarch of Abilene (all with the genitive absolute construction) and concludes with the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas (son-in-law and successor of Annas). The ancients did not have our modern system of chronology, the names of rulers as here being the common way. Objection has been made to the mention of Lysanias here because Josephus (_Ant_. XXVII. I) tells of a Lysanias who was King of Abila up to B.C. 36 as the one referred to by Luke with the wrong date. But an inscription has been found on the site of Abilene with mention of "Lysanias the tetrarch" and at the time to which Luke refers (see my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_, pp. 167f.). Songs:Luke is vindicated again by the rocks.

rwp@Luke:3:5 @{Valley} (\pharagx\). Here only in the N.T., though in the LXX and ancient Greek. It is a ravine or valley hedged in by precipices. {Shall be filled} (\plˆr“thˆsetai\). Future passive indicative of \plˆro“\. In 1845 when the Sultan visited Brusa the inhabitants were called out to clear the roads of rocks and to fill up the hollows. Oriental monarchs often did this very thing. A royal courier would go ahead to issue the call. Songs:the Messiah sends his herald (John) before him to prepare the way for him. Isaiah described the preparation for the Lord's triumphal march and John used it with great force. {Hill} (\bounos\). Called a Cyrenaic word by Herodotus, but later Greek writers use it as does the LXX. {Brought low} (\tapein“thˆsetai\). Future passive indicative of \tapeino“\. Literal meaning here of a verb common in the metaphorical sense. {Crooked} (\skolia\). Common word, curved, opposite of \orthos\ or \euthus\, straight.

rwp@Luke:3:12 @{Also publicans} (\kai tel“nai\). We have had the word already in Matthew (Matthew:5:46; strkjv@9:10; strkjv@11:19; strkjv@18:17; strkjv@21:31f.|) and Mark (Mark:11:15f.|). It is sometimes coupled with harlots and other sinners, the outcasts of society. The word is made up from \telos\, tax, and \“neomai\, to buy, and is an old one. The renter or collector of taxes was not popular anywhere, but least of all when a Jew collected taxes for the Romans and did it by terrible graft and extortions. {Extort} (\prassete\). The verb means only to do or practice, but early the tax-collectors learned how to "do" the public as regular "blood-suckers." Lucian links them with crows and sycophants.

rwp@Luke:3:18 @{Many other exhortations} (\polla men oun kai hetera\). Literally, many and different things did John \evangelize\, \euaggelizeto\, to the people. Luke has given a bare sample of the wonderful messages of the Baptist. Few as his words preserved are they give a definite and powerful conception of his preaching.

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:4:2 @{Being tempted} (\peirazomenos\). Present passive participle and naturally parallel with the imperfect passive \ˆgeto\ (was led) in verse 1|. This is another instance of poor verse division which should have come at the end of the sentence. See on ¯Matthew:4:1; strkjv@Mark:1:13| for the words "tempt" and "devil." The devil challenged the Son of man though also the Son of God. It was a contest between Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, and the slanderer of men. The devil had won with Adam and Eve. He has hopes of triumph over Jesus. The story of this conflict is given only in strkjv@Matthew:4:1-11; strkjv@Luke:4:1-13|. There is a mere mention of it in strkjv@Mark:1:12f|. Songs:then here is a specimen of the Logia of Jesus (Q), a non-Markan portion of Matthew and Luke, the earliest document about Christ. The narrative could come ultimately only from Christ himself. It is noteworthy that it bears all the marks of the high conception of Jesus as the Son of God found in the Gospel of John and in Paul and Hebrews, the rest of the New Testament in fact, for Mark, Matthew, Luke, Acts, Peter, and Jude:follow in this same strain. The point is that modern criticism has revealed the Messianic consciousness of Jesus as God's Son at his Baptism and in his Temptations at the very beginning of his ministry and in the oldest known documents about Christ (The Logia, Mark's Gospel). {He did eat nothing} (\ouk ephagen ouden\). Second aorist (constative) active indicative of the defective verb \esthi“\. Mark does not give the fast. strkjv@Matthew:4:2| has the aorist active participle \nˆsteusas\ which usually means a religious fast for purposes of devotion. That idea is not excluded by Luke's words. The entrance of Jesus upon his Messianic ministry was a fit time for this solemn and intense consecration. This mental and spiritual strain would naturally take away the appetite and there was probably nothing at hand to eat. The weakness from the absence of food gave the devil his special opportunity to tempt Jesus which he promptly seized. {When they were completed} (\suntelestheis“n aut“n\). Genitive absolute with the first aorist passive participle feminine plural because \hemer“n\ (days) is feminine. According to Luke the hunger (\epeinasen\, became hungry, ingressive aorist active indicative) came at the close of the forty days as in strkjv@Matthew:4:2|.

rwp@Luke:6:13 @{When it was day} (\hote egeneto hˆmera\). When day came, after the long night of prayer. {He chose from them twelve} (\eklexamenos ap' aut“n d“deka\). The same root (\leg\) was used for picking out, selecting and then for saying. There was a large group of "disciples" or "learners" whom he "called" to him (\proseph“nˆsen\), and from among whom he chose (of himself, and for himself, indirect middle voice (\eklexamenos\). It was a crisis in the work of Christ. Jesus assumed full responsibility even for the choice of Judas who was not forced upon Jesus by the rest of the Twelve. "You did not choose me, but I chose you," (John:15:16|) where Jesus uses \exelexasthe\ and \exelexamˆn\ as here by Luke. {Whom also he named apostles} (\hous kai apostolous “nomasen\). Songs:then Jesus gave the twelve chosen disciples this appellation. Aleph and B have these same words in strkjv@Mark:3:14| besides the support of a few of the best cursives, the Bohairic Coptic Version and the Greek margin of the Harclean Syriac. Westcott and Hort print them in their text in strkjv@Mark:3:14|, but it remains doubtful whether they were not brought into Mark from strkjv@Luke:6:13| where they are undoubtedly genuine. See strkjv@Matthew:10:2| where the connection with sending them out by twos in the third tour of Galilee. The word is derived from \apostell“\, to send (Latin, _mitto_) and apostle is missionary, one sent. Jesus applies the term to himself (\apesteilas\, strkjv@John:17:3|) as does strkjv@Hebrews:3:1|. The word is applied to others, like Barnabas, besides these twelve including the Apostle Paul who is on a par with them in rank and authority, and even to mere messengers of the churches (2Corinthians:8:23|). But these twelve apostles stand apart from all others in that they were all chosen at once by Jesus himself "that they might be with him" (Mark:3:14|), to be trained by Jesus himself and to interpret him and his message to the world. In the nature of the case they could have no successors as they had to be personal witnesses to the life and resurrection of Jesus (Acts:1:22|). The selection of Matthias to succeed Judas cannot be called a mistake, but it automatically ceased. For discussion of the names and groups in the list see discussion on ¯Matthew:10:1-4; strkjv@Mark:3:14-19|.

rwp@Luke:6:26 @{In the same manner did their fathers} (\ta auta epoioun hoi pateres aut“n\). Literally, their fathers did the same things to the false prophets. That is they spoke well (\kal“s\), finely of false prophets. Praise is sweet to the preacher but all sorts of preachers get it. {Of you} (\humas\). Accusative case after words of speaking according to regular Greek idiom, to speak one fair, to speak well of one.

rwp@Luke:6:48 @{Digged and went deep} (\eskapsen kai ebathunen\). Two first aorist indicatives. Not a _hendiadys_ for dug deep. \Skapt“\, to dig, is as old as Homer, as is \bathun“\, to make deep. {And laid a foundation} (\kai ethˆken themelion\). That is the whole point. This wise builder struck the rock before he laid the foundation. {When a flood arose} (\plˆmmurˆs genomenˆs\). Genitive absolute. Late word for flood, \plˆmmura\, only here in the N.T., though in strkjv@Job:40:18|. {Brake against} (\proserˆxen\). First aorist active indicative from \prosrˆgnumi\ and in late writers \prosrˆss“\, to break against. Only here in the N.T. strkjv@Matthew:7:25| has \prosepesan\, from \prospipt“\, to fall against. {Could not shake it} (\ouk ischusen saleusai autˆn\). Did not have strength enough to shake it. {Because it had been well builded} (\dia to kal“s oikodomˆsthai autˆn\). Perfect passive articular infinitive after \dia\ and with accusative of general reference.

rwp@Luke:7:14 @{Touched the bier} (\hˆpsato tou sorou\). An urn for the bones or ashes of the dead in Homer, then the coffin (Genesis:5:26|), then the funeral couch or bier as here. Only here in the N.T. Jesus touched the bier to make the bearers stop, which they did ({stood still}, \estˆsan\), second aorist active indicative of \histˆmi\.

rwp@Luke:7:32 @{And ye did not weep} (\kai ouk eklausate\). Here strkjv@Matthew:1:17| has "and ye did not mourn (or beat your breast, \ouk ekopsasthe\). They all did it at funerals. These children would not play wedding or funeral.

rwp@Luke:8:27 @{And for a long time} (\kai chron“i hikan“i\). The use of the associative instrumental case in expressions of time is a very old Greek idiom that still appears in the papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 527). {He had worn no clothes} (\ouk enedusato himation\). First aorist middle indicative, constative aorist, viewing the "long time" as a point. Not pluperfect as English has it and not for the pluperfect, simply "and for a long time he did not put on himself (indirect middle) any clothing." The physician would naturally note this item. Common verb \endu“\ or \endun“\. This item in Luke alone, though implied by strkjv@Mark:5:15| "clothed" (\himatismenon\). {And abode not in any house} (\kai en oikiƒi ouk emenen\). Imperfect active. Peculiar to Luke, though implied by the mention of tombs in all three (Mark:5:3; strkjv@Matthew:8:28; strkjv@Luke:8:27|).

rwp@Luke:9:26 @{Whosoever shall be ashamed} (\hos an epaischunthˆi\). Rather, {Whosoever is ashamed} as in strkjv@Mark:8:38|. The first aorist passive subjunctive in an indefinite relative clause with \an\. The passive verb is transitive here also. This verb is from \epi\ and \aischunˆ\, shame (in the eyes of men). Jesus endured the shame of the cross (Hebrews:12:2|). The man at the feast who had to take a lower seat did it with shame (Luke:14:9|). Paul is not ashamed of the Gospel (Romans:1:16|). Onesiphorus was not ashamed of Paul (2Timothy:1:16|). {In his own glory} (\en tˆi doxˆi autou\). This item added to what is in strkjv@Mark:8:38; strkjv@Matthew:16:27|.

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:9:33 @{As they were departing from him} (\en t“i diach“rizesthai autous ap' autou\). Peculiar to Luke and another instance of Luke's common idiom of \en\ with the articular infinitive in a temporal clause. This common verb occurs here only in the N.T. The present middle voice means to separate oneself fully (direct middle). This departing of Moses and Elijah apparently accompanied Peter's remark as given in all three Gospels. See for details on Mark and Matthew. {Master} (\Epistata\) here, {Rabbi} (Mark:9:5|), {Lord} (\Kurie\, strkjv@Matthew:17:4|). {Let us make} (\poiˆs“men\, first aorist active subjunctive) as in strkjv@Mark:9:5|, but strkjv@Matthew:17:4| has "I will make" (\poiˆs“\). It was near the time of the feast of the tabernacles. Songs:Peter proposes that they celebrate it up here instead of going to Jerusalem for it as they did a bit later (John:7|). {Not knowing what he said} (\mˆ eid“s ho legei\). Literally, {not understanding what he was saying} (\mˆ\, regular negative with participle and \legei\, present indicative retained in relative clause in indirect discourse). Luke puts it more bluntly than Mark (Peter's account), "For he wist not what to answer; for they became sore afraid" (Mark:9:6|). Peter acted according to his impulsive nature and spoke up even though he did not know what to say or even what he was saying when he spoke. He was only half awake as Luke explains and he was sore afraid as Mark (Peter) explains. He had bewilderment enough beyond a doubt, but it was Peter who spoke, not James and John.

rwp@Luke:9:49 @{And John answered} (\apokritheis de I“anˆs\). As if John wanted to change the subject after the embarrassment of the rebuke for their dispute concerning greatness (Luke:9:46-48|). {Master} (\epistata\). Only in Luke in the N.T. as already four times (5:5; strkjv@8:24,45; strkjv@9:33|). {We forbade him} (\ek“luomen auton\). Conative imperfect as in strkjv@Mark:9:38|, We tried to hinder him. {Because he followeth not with us} (\hoti ouk akolouthei meth hˆm“n\). Present tense preserved for vividness where Mark has imperfect {ˆkolouthei}. Note also here "with us" (\meth' hˆm“n\) where Mark has associative instrumental \hˆmin\. It is a pitiful specimen of partisan narrowness and pride even in the Beloved Disciple, one of the Sons of Thunder. The man was doing the Master's work in the Master's name and with the Master's power, but did not run with the group of the Twelve.

rwp@Luke:9:52 @{Sent messengers} (\apesteilen aggelous\). As a precaution since he was going to Jerusalem through Samaria. The Samaritans did not object when people went north from Jerusalem through their country. He was repudiating Mount Gerizim by going by it to Jerusalem. This was an unusual precaution by Jesus and we do not know who the messengers ({angels}) were. {To make ready for him} (\h“s hetoimasai aut“i\). \H“s\ is correct here, not \h“ste\. The only examples of the final use of \h“s\ with the infinitive in the N.T. are this one and strkjv@Hebrews:7:9| (absolute use). In Acts strkjv@20:24| Westcott and Hort read \h“s telei“s“\ and put \h“s telei“sai\ in the margin (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1091).

rwp@Luke:9:53 @{And they did not receive him} (\kai ouk edexanto auton\). Adversative use of \kai\ = But. {Because his face was going to Jerusalem} (\hoti to pros“pon autou ˆn poreuomenon eis Ierousalˆm\). Periphrastic imperfect middle. It was reason enough to the churlish Samaritans.

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:10:29 @{Desiring to justify himself} (\thel“n dikai“sai heauton\). The lawyer saw at once that he had convicted himself of asking a question that he already knew. In his embarrassment he asks another question to show that he did have some point at first: {And who is my neighbour?} (\kai tis estin mou plˆsion;\). The Jews split hairs over this question and excluded from "neighbour" Gentiles and especially Samaritans. Songs:here was his loop-hole. A neighbour is a nigh dweller to one, but the Jews made racial exceptions as many, alas, do today. The word \plˆsion\ here is an adverb (neuter of the adjective \plˆsios\) meaning \ho plˆsion “n\ (the one who is near), but \“n\ was usually not expressed and the adverb is here used as if a substantive.

rwp@Luke:10:33 @{A certain Samaritan} (\Samareitˆs de tis\). Of all men in the world to do a neighbourly act! {As he journeyed} (\hodeu“n\). Making his way. {Came where he was} (\ˆlthen kat' auton\). Literally, "came down upon him." He did not sidestep or dodge him, but had compassion on him.

rwp@Luke:11:46 @{Grievous to be borne} (\dusbastakta\). A late word in LXX and Plutarch (\dus\ and \bastaz“\). Here alone in text of Westcott and Hort who reject it in strkjv@Matthew:23:4| where we have "heavy burdens" (\phortia barea\). In Gal strkjv@6:2| we have \barˆ\ with a distinction drawn. Here we have \phortizete\ (here only in the N.T. and strkjv@Matthew:11:28|) for "lade," \phortia\ as cognate accusative and then \phortiois\ (dative after \ou prospsauete\, touch not). It is a fierce indictment of scribes (lawyers) for their pettifogging interpretations of the written law in their oral teaching (later written down as _Mishna_ and then as _Gemarah_), a terrible load which these lawyers did not pretend to carry themselves, not even "with one of their fingers" to "touch" (\prospsau“\, old verb but only here in the N.T.), touch with the view to remove. strkjv@Matthew:23:4| has \kinˆsai\, to move. A physician would understand the meaning of \prospau“\ for feeling gently a sore spot or the pulse.

rwp@Luke:12:2 @{Covered up} (\sugkekalummenon estin\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \sugkalupt“\, an old verb, but here only in the N.T., to cover up on all sides and so completely. Verses 2-9| here are parallel with strkjv@Matthew:10:26-33| spoken to the Twelve on their tour of Galilee, illustrating again how often Jesus repeated his sayings unless we prefer to say that he never did so and that the Gospels have hopelessly jumbled them as to time and place. See the passage in Matthew for discussion of details.

rwp@Luke:12:33 @{Sell that ye have} (\P“lˆsate ta huparchonta hum“n\). Not in Matthew. Did Jesus mean this literally and always? Luke has been charged with Ebionism, but Jesus does not condemn property as inherently sinful. "The attempt to keep the letter of the rule here given (Acts:2:44,45|) had disastrous effects on the church of Jerusalem, which speedily became a church of paupers, constantly in need of alms (Romans:15:25,26; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@9:1|)" (Plummer). {Purses which wax not old} (\ballantia mˆ palaioumena\). Songs:already \ballantion\ in strkjv@Luke:10:4|. Late verb \palaio“\ from \palaios\, old, to make old, declare old as in strkjv@Hebrews:8:13|, is passive to become old as here and strkjv@Hebrews:1:11|. {That faileth not} (\anekleipton\). Verbal from \a\ privative and \ekleip“\, to fail. Late word in Diodorus and Plutarch. Only here in the N.T. or LXX, but in papyri. "I prefer to believe that even Luke sees in the words not a mechanical rule, but a law for the spirit" (Bruce). {Draweth near} (\eggizei\). Instead of strkjv@Matthew:6:19| "dig through and steal." {Destroyeth} (\diaphtheirei\). Instead of "doth consume" in strkjv@Matthew:6:19|.

rwp@Luke:12:37 @{He shall gird himself} (\periz“setai\). Direct future middle. Jesus did this (John:13:4|), not out of gratitude, but to give the apostles an object lesson in humility. See the usual course in strkjv@Luke:17:7-10| with also the direct middle (verse 8|) of \peris“nnu“\.

rwp@Luke:13:34 @{O Jerusalem, Jerusalem} (\Ierousalˆm, Ierousalˆm\). In strkjv@Matthew:23:37f.| Jesus utters a similar lament over Jerusalem. The connection suits both there and here, but Plummer considers it "rather a violent hypothesis" to suppose that Jesus spoke these words twice. It is possible, of course, though not like Luke's usual method, that he put the words here because of the mention of Jerusalem. In itself it is not easy to see why Jesus could not have made the lament both here and in Jerusalem. The language of the apostrophe is almost identical in both places (Luke:13:34f.; strkjv@Matthew:23:37-39|). For details see on Matthew. In Luke we have \episunaxai\ (late first aorist active infinitive) and in Matthew \episunagagein\ (second aorist active infinitive), both from \episunag“\, a double compound of late Greek (Polybius). Both have "How often would I" (\posakis ˆthelˆsa\). How often did I wish. Clearly showing that Jesus made repeated visits to Jerusalem as we know otherwise only from John's Gospel. {Even as} (\hon tropon\). Accusative of general reference and in strkjv@Matthew:23:37| also. Incorporation of antecedent into the relative clause. {Brood} (\nossian\) is in Luke while Matthew has {chickens} (\nossia\), both late forms for the older \neossia\. The adjective {desolate} (\erˆmos\) is wanting in strkjv@Luke:13:35| and is doubtful in strkjv@Matthew:23:39|.

rwp@Luke:14:6 @{Could not answer again} (\ouk ischusan antapokrithˆnai\). Did not have strength to answer back or in turn (\anti-\) as in strkjv@Romans:9:20|. They could not take up the argument and were helpless. They hated to admit that they cared more for an ox or ass or even a son than for this poor dropsical man.

rwp@Luke:14:18 @{With one consent} (\apo mias\). Some feminine substantive like \gn“mˆs\ or \psuchˆs\ has to be supplied. This precise idiom occurs nowhere else. It looked like a conspiracy for each one in his turn did the same thing. {To make excuse} (\paraiteisthai\). This common Greek verb is used in various ways, to ask something from one (Mark:15:6|), to deprecate or ask to avert (Hebrews:12:19|), to refuse or decline (Acts:25:11|), to shun or to avoid (2Timothy:2:23|), to beg pardon or to make excuses for not doing or to beg (Luke:14:18ff.|). All these ideas are variations of \aite“\, to ask in the middle voice with \para\ in composition. {The first} (\ho pr“tos\). In order of time. There are three of the "many" ("all"), whose excuses are given, each more flimsy than the other. {I must needs} (\ech“ anagkˆn\). I have necessity. The land would still be there, a strange "necessity." {Have me excused} (\eche me parˆitˆmenon\). An unusual idiom somewhat like the English perfect with the auxiliary "have" and the modern Greek idiom with \ech“\, but certainly not here a Greek periphrasis for \parˆitˆso\. This perfect passive participle is predicate and agrees with \me\. See a like idiom in strkjv@Mark:3:1; strkjv@Luke:12:19| (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 902f.). The Latin had a similar idiom, _habe me excusatum_. Same language in verse 19|.

rwp@Luke:14:27 @{His own cross} (\ton stauron heauto–\). This familiar figure we have had already (Luke:9:23; strkjv@Mark:8:34; strkjv@Matthew:10:38; strkjv@16:24|). Each follower has a cross which he must bear as Jesus did his. \Bastaz“\ is used of cross bearing in the N.T. only here (figuratively) and strkjv@John:19:17| literally of Jesus. Crucifixion was common enough in Palestine since the days of Antiochus Epiphanes and Alexander Jannaeus.

rwp@Luke:15:9 @{Her friends and neighbours} (\tas philas kai geitonas\). Note single article and female friends (feminine article and \philas\). \He“s hou eurˆi\ here as in verse 4|, only \hou\ added after \he“s\ (until which time) as often. {Which I lost} (\hˆn ap“lesa\). First aorist active indicative of \apollumi\. She lost the coin (note article). The shepherd did not lose the one sheep.

rwp@Luke:15:12 @{The portion} (\to meros\). The Jewish law alloted one-half as much to the younger son as to the elder, that is to say one-third of the estate (Deuteronomy:21:17|) at the death of the father. The father did not have to abdicate in favour of the sons, but "this very human parable here depicts the impatience of home restraints and the optimistic ambition of youth" (Ragg). {And he divided} (\ho de dieilen\). The second aorist active indicative of \diaire“\, an old and common verb to part in two, cut asunder, divide, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:12:11|. The elder son got his share also of the "substance" or property or estate (\tˆs ousias\), "the living" (\ton bion\) as in strkjv@Mark:12:44|, not "life" as in strkjv@Luke:8:14|.

rwp@Luke:15:18 @{I will arise and go} (\anastas proreusomai\). This determination is the act of the will after he comes to himself and sees his real condition. {I did sin} (\hˆmarton\). That is the hard word to say and he will say it first. The word means to miss the mark. I shot my bolt and I missed my aim (compare the high-handed demand in verse 12|).

rwp@Luke:15:30 @{This thy son} (\ho huios sou houtos\). Contempt and sarcasm. He does not say: "This my brother." {Came} (\ˆlthen\). He does not even say, came back or came home. {Devoured} (\kataphag“n\). We say, "eaten up," but the Greek has, "eaten down" (perfective use of \kata-\). Suggested by the feasting going on. {With harlots} (\meta porn“n\). This may be true (verse 13|), but the elder son did not know it to be true. He may reflect what he would have done in like case.

rwp@Luke:16:11 @{Faithful in the unrighteous mammon} (\en t“i adik“i mam“nƒi\). In the use of what is considered "unrighteous" as it so often is. Condition of the first class, "if ye did not prove to be" (\ei ouk egenesthe\). Failure here forfeits confidence in "the true riches" (\to alˆthinon\). There is no sadder story than to see a preacher go down by the wrong use of money, caught in this snare of the devil.

rwp@Luke:16:12 @{That which is your own} (\to h–meteron\). But Westcott and Hort read \to hˆmeteron\ (our own) because of B L Origen. The difference is due to itacism in the pronunciation of \h–-\ and \hˆ\ alike (long \i\). But the point in the passage calls for "yours" as correct. Earthly wealth is ours as a loan, a trust, withdrawn at any moment. It belongs to another (\en t“i allotri“i\). If you did not prove faithful in this, who will give you what is really yours forever? Compare "rich toward God" (Luke:12:21|).

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:16:31 @{Neither will they be persuaded} (\oud' peisthˆsontai\). First future passive of \peith“\. Gressmann calls attention to the fact that Jesus is saying this in the conclusion of the parable. It is a sharp discouragement against efforts today to communicate with the dead. "Saul was not led to repentance when he saw Samuel at Endor nor were the Pharisees when they saw Lazarus come forth from the tomb. The Pharisees tried to put Lazarus to death and to explain away the resurrection of Jesus" (Plummer). Alford comments on the curious fact that Lazarus was the name of the one who did rise from the dead but whose return from the dead "was the immediate exciting cause of their (Pharisees) crowning act of unbelief."

rwp@Luke:17:11 @{Through the midst of Samaria and Galilee} (\dia meson Samarias kai Galilaias\). This is the only instance in the N.T. of \dia\ with the accusative in the local sense of "through." Xenophon and Plato use \dia mesou\ (genitive). Jesus was going from Ephraim (John:11:54|) north through the midst of Samaria and Galilee so as to cross over the Jordan near Bethshean and join the Galilean caravan down through Perea to Jerusalem. The Samaritans did not object to people going north away from Jerusalem, but did not like to see them going south towards the city (Luke:9:51-56|).

rwp@Luke:17:23 @{Go not away nor follow after them} (\mˆ apelthˆte mˆde di“xˆte\). Westcott and Hort bracket \apelthˆte mˆde\. Note aorist subjunctive with \mˆ\ in prohibition, ingressive aorist. Do not rush after those who set times and places for the second advent. The Messiah was already present in the first advent (verse 21|) though the Pharisees did not know it.

rwp@Luke:18:14 @{This man} (\houtos\). This despised publican referred to contemptuously in verse 11| as "this" (\houtos\) publican. {Rather than the other} (\par' ekeinon\). In comparison with (placed beside) that one. A neat Greek idiom after the perfect passive participle \dedikaiomenos\. {For} (\hoti\). This moral maxim Christ had already used in strkjv@14:11|. Plummer pertinently asks: "Why is it assumed that Jesus did not repeat his sayings?"

rwp@Luke:20:26 @{They were not able} (\ouk ischusan\). They did not have strength. An old verb \ischu“\ from \ischus\ (strength). They failed "to take hold (cf. verse 20|) of the saying before the people." These "crack" students had made an ignominious failure and were not able to make a case for the surrender of Jesus to Pilate. He had slipped through their net with the utmost ease. {Held their peace} (\esigˆsan\). Ingressive aorist active of \siga“\. They became silent as they went back with the "dry grins."

rwp@Luke:21:4 @{All these did cast} (\pantes houtoi ebalon\). Constative second aorist active indicative covering the whole crowd except the widow. {Living} (\bion\). Livelihood as in strkjv@Mark:12:44|, not \z“ˆn\, principle of life.

rwp@Luke:21:8 @{That ye be not led astray} (\mˆ planˆthˆte\). First aorist passive subjunctive with \mˆ\ (lest). This verb \plana“\ occurs here only in Luke though often in the rest of the N.T. (as strkjv@Matthew:24:4,5,11,24|, which see). Our word _planet_ is from this word. {The time is at hand} (\ho kairos ˆggiken\). Just as John the Baptist did of the kingdom (Matthew:3:2|) and Jesus also (Mark:1:15|). {Go ye not after them} (\mˆ poreuthˆte opis“ aut“n\). First aorist passive subjunctive with \mˆ\. A needed warning today with all the false cries in the religious world.

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:21:32 @{This generation} (\hˆ genea hautˆ\). Naturally people then living. {Shall not pass away} (\ou mˆ parelthˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \parerchomai\. Strongest possible negative with \ou mˆ\. {Till all things be accomplished} (\he“s an panta genˆtai\). Second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\ with \he“s\, common idiom. The words give a great deal of trouble to critics. Some apply them to the whole discourse including the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem, the second coming and the end of the world. Some of these argue that Jesus was simply mistaken in his eschatology, some that he has not been properly reported in the Gospels. Others apply them only to the destruction of Jerusalem which did take place in A.D. 70 before that generation passed away. It must be said for this view that it is not easy in this great eschatological discourse to tell clearly when Jesus is discussing the destruction of Jerusalem and when the second coming. Plummer offers this solution: "The reference, therefore, is to the destruction of Jerusalem regarded as the type of the end of the world."

rwp@Luke:22:32 @{That thy faith fail not} (\hina mˆ eklipˆi he pistis mou\). Second aorist active subjunctive of purpose with \hina\ after \edeˆthˆn\ ({I prayed}) of \ekleip“\, old verb. Our word _eclipse_...had already captured Judas. Did he...{And do thou} (\kai su\). The words single out Peter sharply. {Once thou hast turned again} (\pote epistrepsas\). First aorist active participle of \epistreph“\, common verb to turn to, to return. But the use of this word implied that Peter would fall though he would come back and "strengthen thy brethren."

rwp@Luke:22:38 @{Lord, behold, here are two swords} (\kurie idou machairai h“de duo\). They took his words literally. And before this very night is over Peter will use one of these very swords to try to cut off the head of Malchus only to be sternly rebuked by Jesus (Mark:14:47; strkjv@Matthew:26:51f.; strkjv@Luke:22:50f.; strkjv@John:18:10f.|). Then Jesus will say: "For all that take the sword shall perish with the sword" (Matthew:26:52|). Clearly Jesus did not mean his language even about the sword to be pressed too literally. Songs:he said: "It is enough" (\Hikanon estin\). It is with sad irony and sorrow that Jesus thus dismisses the subject. They were in no humour now to understand the various sides of this complicated problem. Every preacher and teacher understands this mood, not of impatience, but of closing the subject for the present.

rwp@Luke:22:48 @{With a kiss} (\philˆmati\). Instrumental case. Jesus challenges the act of Judas openly and calls it betrayal, but it did not stop him.

rwp@Luke:23:2 @{Began to accuse} (\ˆrxanto katˆgorein\). They went at it and kept it up. Luke mentions three, but neither of them includes their real reason nor do they mention their own condemnation of Jesus. They had indulged their hatred in doing it, but they no longer have the power of life and death. Hence they say nothing to Pilate of that. {We found} (\heuramen\). Second aorist active indicative with first aorist vowel \a\. Probably they mean that they had caught Jesus in the act of doing these things (_in flagrante delicto_) rather than discovery by formal trial. {Perverting our nation} (\diastrephonta to ethnos hˆm“n\). Present active participle of \diastreph“\, old verb to turn this way and that, distort, disturb. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:13:10|. The Sanhedrin imply that the great popularity of Jesus was seditious. {Forbidding to give tribute to Caesar}, (\k“luonta phorous kaisari didonai\). Note object infinitive \didonai\ after the participle \k“luonta\. Literally, hindering giving tribute to Caesar. This was a flat untruth. Their bright young students had tried desperately to get Jesus to say this very thing, but they had failed utterly (Luke:20:25|). {Saying that he himself is Christ a king} (\legonta hauton Christon basilea einai\). Note the indirect discourse here after the participle \legonta\ with the accusative (\hauton\ where \auton\ could have been used), and the infinitive. This charge is true, but not in the sense meant by them. Jesus did claim to be the Christ and the king of the kingdom of God. But the Sanhedrin wanted Pilate to think that he set himself up as a rival to Caesar. Pilate would understand little from the word "Christ," but "King" was a different matter. He was compelled to take notice of this charge else he himself would be accused to Caesar of winking at such a claim by Jesus.

rwp@Luke:23:43 @{Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise} (\Sˆmeron met' emou esˆi en t“i paradeis“i\). However crude may have been the robber's Messianic ideas Jesus clears the path for him. He promises him immediate and conscious fellowship after death with Christ in Paradise which is a Persian word and is used here not for any supposed intermediate state; but the very bliss of heaven itself. This Persian word was used for an enclosed park or pleasure ground (so Xenophon). The word occurs in two other passages in the N.T. (2Corinthians:12:4; strkjv@Revelation:2:7|), in both of which the reference is plainly to heaven. Some Jews did use the word for the abode of the pious dead till the resurrection, interpreting "Abraham's bosom" (Luke:16:22f.|) in this sense also. But the evidence for such an intermediate state is too weak to warrant belief in it.

rwp@Luke:24:35 @{Rehearsed} (\exˆgounto\). Imperfect middle indicative of \exˆgeomai\, verb to lead out, to rehearse. Our word exegesis comes from this verb. Their story was now confirmatory, not revolutionary. The women were right then after all. {Of them} (\autois\). To them, dative case. They did not recognize Jesus in his exegesis, but did in the breaking of bread. One is reminded of that saying in the _Logia of Jesus_: "Raise the stone and there thou shalt find me, cleave the wood and there am I."

rwp@Info_Mark @ This Gospel is the briefest of the four, but is fullest of striking details that apparently came from Peter's discourses which Mark heard, such as green grass, flower beds (Mark:6:38|), two thousand hogs (Mark:5:13|), looking round about (Mark:3:5,34|). Peter usually spoke in Aramaic and Mark has more Aramaic phrases than the others, like _Boanerges_ (Mark:3:17|), _Talitha cumi_ (Mark:5:41|), _Korban_ (Mark:7:11|), _Ephphatha_ (Mark:7:34|), _Abba_ (Mark:14:36|). The Greek is distinctly vernacular _Koin‚_ like one-eyed (\monophthalmon\, strkjv@Mark:9:47|) as one would expect from both Peter and Mark. There are also more Latin phrases and idioms like _centurio_ (Mark:15:39|), _quadrans_ (Mark:12:42|), _flagellare_ (Mark:15:15|), _speculator_ (Mark:6:27|), _census_ (Mark:12:14|), _sextarius_ (Mark:7:4|), _praetorium_ (Mark:15:6|), than in the other Gospels, so much so that C. H. Turner raises the question whether Mark wrote first in Latin, or at any rate in Rome. There are some who hold that Mark wrote first in Aramaic, but the facts are sufficiently accounted for by the fact of Peter's preaching and the activity in Rome. Some even think that he wrote the Gospel in Rome while with Peter who suggested and read the manuscript. B.W. Bacon holds that this Gospel has a distinct Pauline flavour and may have had several recensions. The Ur-Marcus theory does not have strong support now. Mark was once a co-worker with Barnabas and Paul, but deserted them at Perga. Paul held this against Mark and refused to take him on the second mission tour. Barnabas took Mark, his cousin, with him and then he appeared with Simon Peter with whom he did his greatest work. When Mark had made good with Barnabas and Peter, Paul rejoiced and commends him heartily to the Colossians (Colossians:4:10|) In the end Paul will ask Timothy to pick up Mark and bring him along with him to Paul in Rome, for he has found him useful for ministry, this very young man who made such a mistake that Paul would have no more of him. This tribute to Mark by Paul throws credit upon both of them as is shown in my _Making Good in the Ministry_. The character of the Gospel of Mark is determined largely by the scope of Peter's preaching as we see it in strkjv@Acts:10:36-42|, covering the period in outline from John the Baptist to the Resurrection of Jesus. There is nothing about the birth of the Baptist or of Jesus. This peculiarity of Mark's Gospel cannot be used against the narratives of the Virgin Birth of Jesus in Matthew and Luke, since Mark tells nothing whatever about his birth at all.

rwp@Mark:1:4 @{John came} (\egeneto I“anˆs\). His coming was an epoch (\egeneto\), not a mere event (\ˆn\). His coming was in accordance with the prophetic picture (\kath“s\, strkjv@1:2|). Note the same verb about John in strkjv@John:1:6|. The coming of John the Baptizer was the real beginning of the spoken message about Christ. He is described as {the baptizing one} (\ho haptiz“n\) in the wilderness (\en tˆi erˆm“i\). The baptizing took place in the River Jordan (Mark:1:5,9|) which was included in the general term the wilderness or the deserted region of Judea. {Preached the baptism of repentance} (\kˆruss“n baptisma metanoias\). Heralded a repentance kind of baptism (genitive case, genus case), a baptism marked by repentance. See on ¯Matthew:3:2| for discussion of repent, an exceedingly poor rendering of John's great word \metanoias\. He called upon the Jews to change their minds and to turn from their sins, "confessing their sins" (\exomologoumenoi tas hamartias aut“n\). See strkjv@Matthew:3:16|. The public confessions produced a profound impression as they would now. {Unto remission of sins} (\eis aphesin hamarti“n\). This is a difficult phrase to translate accurately. Certainly John did not mean that the baptism was the means of obtaining the forgiveness of their sins or necessary to the remission of sins. The trouble lies in the use of \eis\ which sometimes is used when purpose is expressed, but sometimes when there is no such idea as in strkjv@Matthew:10:41| and strkjv@Matthew:12:41|. Probably "with reference to" is as good a translation here as is possible. The baptism was on the basis of the repentance and confession of sin and, as Paul later explained (Romans:6:4|), was a picture of the death to sin and resurrection to new life in Christ. This symbol was already in use by the Jews for proselytes who became Jews. John is treating the Jewish nation as pagans who need to repent, to confess their sins, and to come back to the kingdom of God. The baptism in the Jordan was the objective challenge to the people.

rwp@Mark:1:13 @{With the wild beasts} (\meta t“u thˆri“n\). Mark does not give the narrative of the three temptations in Matthew and Luke (apparently from the Logia and originally, of course, from Jesus himself). But Mark adds this little touch about the wild beasts in the wilderness. It was the haunt at night of the wolf, the boar, the hyena, the jackal, the leopard. It was lonely and depressing in its isolation and even dangerous. Swete notes that in strkjv@Psalms:90:13| the promise of victory over the wild beasts comes immediately after that of angelic guardianship cited by Satan in strkjv@Matthew:4:6|. The angels did come and minister (\diˆkonoun\), imperfect tense, kept it up till he was cheered and strengthened. Dr. Tristram observes that some Abyssinian Christians are in the habit of coming to the Quarantania during Lent and fasting forty days on the summit amid the ruins of its ancient cells and chapels where they suppose Jesus was tempted. But we are all tempted of the devil in the city even worse than in the desert.

rwp@Mark:1:14 @{Jesus came into Galilee} (\ˆlthen ho Iˆsous eis tˆn Galilaian\). Here Mark begins the narrative of the active ministry of Jesus and he is followed by Matthew and Luke. Mark undoubtedly follows the preaching of Peter. But for the Fourth Gospel we should not know of the year of work in various parts of the land (Perea, Galilee, Judea, Samaria) preceding the Galilean ministry. John supplements the Synoptic Gospels at this point as often. The arrest of John had much to do with the departure of Jesus from Judea to Galilee (John:4:1-4|). {Preaching the gospel of God} (\kˆruss“n to euaggelion tou theou\). It is the subjective genitive, the gospel that comes from God. Swete observes that repentance (\metanoia\) is the keynote in the message of the Baptist as gospel (\euaggelion\) is with Jesus. But Jesus took the same line as John and proclaimed both repentance and the arrival of the kingdom of God. Mark adds to Matthew's report the words "the time is fulfilled" (\peplˆr“tai ho kairos\). It is a significant fact that John looks backward to the promise of the coming of the Messiah and signalizes the fulfilment as near at hand (perfect passive indicative). It is like Paul's fulness of time (\plˆr“ma tou chronou\) in strkjv@Galatians:4:4| and fulness of the times (\plˆr“ma ton kair“n\) in strkjv@Ephesians:1:10| when he employs the word \kairos\, opportunity or crisis as here in Mark rather than the more general term \chronos\. Mark adds here also: "and believe in the gospel" (\kai pisteuete en t“i euaggeli“i\). Both repent and believe in the gospel. Usually faith in Jesus (or God) is expected as in John strkjv@14:1|. But this crisis called for faith in the message of Jesus that the Messiah had come. He did not use here the term Messiah, for it had come to have political connotations that made its use at present unwise. But the kingdom of God had arrived with the presence of the King. It does make a difference what one believes. Belief or disbelief in the message of Jesus made a sharp cleavage in those who heard him. "Faith in the message was the first step; a creed of some kind lies at the basis of confidence in the Person of Christ, and the occurrence of the phrase \pistuete en t“i euaggeli“i\ in the oldest record of the teaching of our Lord is a valuable witness to this fact" (Swete).

rwp@Mark:1:32 @{When the sun did set} (\hote edusen ho hˆlios\). This picturesque detail Mark has besides "at even" (\opsias genomenˆs\, genitive absolute, evening having come). Matthew has "when even was come," Luke "when the sun was setting." The sabbath ended at sunset and so the people were now at liberty to bring their sick to Jesus. The news about the casting out of the demon and the healing of Peter's mother-in-law had spread all over Capernaum. They brought them in a steady stream (imperfect tense, \epheron\). Luke (Luke:4:40|) adds that Jesus laid his hand on every one of them as they passed by in grateful procession.

rwp@Mark:2:13 @{By the seaside} (\para tˆn thalassan\). A pretty picture of Jesus walking by the sea and a walk that Jesus loved (Mark:1:16; strkjv@Matthew:4:18|). Probably Jesus went out from the crowd in Peter's house as soon as he could. It was a joy to get a whiff of fresh air by the sea. But it was not long till all the crowd began to come to Jesus (\ˆrcheto\, imperfect) and Jesus was teaching them (\edidasken\, imperfect). It was the old story over again, but Jesus did not run away.

rwp@Mark:3:11 @{Whensoever they beheld him} (\hotan auton ethe“roun\). Imperfect indicative with \hotan\ of repeated action. They kept falling down before him (\prosepipton\) and crying, (\ekrazon\) and he kept charging or rebuking (\epitimƒ\) them, all imperfects. The unclean spirits (demons) recognize Jesus as the Son of God, as before. Jesus charged them not to make him known as he had also done before. He did not wish this testimony. It was a most exciting ordeal and is given only by Mark. Note non-final use of \hina\.

rwp@Mark:3:13 @{He goeth up into the mountain} (\anabainei eis to oros\). Songs:Matthew (Matthew:5:1|) and Luke (Luke:6:12|), "to pray" Luke adds. Historical present so common in Mark's vivid narrative. Neither Gospel gives the name of the mountain, assuming it as well known, probably not far from the lake. {Whom he himself would} (\hous ˆthelen autos\). Emphatic use of \autos\ (himself) at end of sentence. Whether by personal imitation or through the disciples Jesus invites or calls to himself (\proskaleitai\, historical middle present indicative) a select number out of the vast crowds by the sea, those whom he really wished to be with him. {They went off to him} (\apˆlthon pros auton\). Luke states that Jesus "continued all night in prayer, to God." It was a crisis in the ministry of Christ. This select group up in the hills probably respected the long agony of Jesus though they did not comprehend his motive. They formed a sort of spiritual body-guard around the Master during his night vigil in the mountain.

rwp@Mark:3:19 @{He cometh into a house} (\erchetai eis oikon\). Historical present again and no article with noun. He comes home from the mountain, probably the house of Simon as in strkjv@1:29|. Mark passes by the Sermon on the Mount given by Matthew and Luke on the mountain (plateau on the mountain in Luke). We have to allow a reasonable interval for Mark's narrative. Mark's Gospel is full of action and does not undertake to tell all that Jesus did and said.

rwp@Mark:3:21 @{His friends} (\hoi par' autou\). The phrase means literally "those from the side of him (Jesus)." It could mean another circle of disciples who had just arrived and who knew of the crowds and strain of the Galilean ministry who now come at this special juncture. But the idiom most likely means the kinspeople or family of Jesus as is common in the LXX. The fact that in verse 31| "his mother and his brothers" are expressly mentioned would indicate that they are "the friends" alluded to in verse 21|. It is a mournful spectacle to think of the mother and brothers saying, {He is beside himself} (\exestˆ\). Second aorist active indicative intransitive. The same charge was brought against Paul (Acts:26:24; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:13|). We say that one is out of his head. Certainly Mary did not believe that Jesus was in the power of Beelzebub as the rabbis said already. The scribes from Jerusalem are trying to discount the power and prestige of Jesus (3:22|). See on ¯Matthew:9:32-34; strkjv@10:25; strkjv@12:24| for Beelzebub and Beelzebul. Mary probably felt that Jesus was overwrought and wished to take him home out of the excitement and strain that he might get rest and proper food. See my _The Mother of Jesus: Her Problems and Her Glory_. The brothers did not as yet believe the pretensions and claims of Jesus (John:7:5|). Herod Antipas will later consider Jesus as John the Baptist _redivivus_, the scribes treat him as under demonic possession, even the family and friends fear a disordered mind as a result of overstrain. It was a crucial moment for Jesus. His family or friends came to take him home, to lay hold of him (\kratˆsai\), forcibly if need be.

rwp@Mark:3:34 @{Looking round on them} (\periblepsamenos\). Another of Mark's life-like touches. Jesus calls those who do the will of God his mother, brothers, and sisters. This does not prove that the sisters were actually there. The brothers were hostile and that gives point to the tragic words of Jesus. One's heart goes out to Mary who has to go back home without even seeing her wondrous Son. What did it all mean to her at this hour?

rwp@Mark:4:10 @{When he was alone} (\hote egeneto kata monas\). Only in Mark. Vivid recollection of Peter. Mark has also "they that were about him with the twelve" (\hoi peri auton sun tois d“deka\), Matthew and Luke simply "the disciples." They did not want the multitude to see that they did not understand the teaching of Jesus.

rwp@Mark:4:33 @{As they were able to hear it} (\kath“s ˆdunanto akouein\). Only in Mark. Imperfect indicative. See strkjv@John:16:12| for \ou dunasthe bastazein\, not able to bear. Jesus used parables now largely, but there was a limit even to the use of them to these men. He gave them the mystery of the kingdom in this veiled parabolic form which was the only feasible form at this stage. But even so they did not understand what they heard.

rwp@Mark:5:8 @{For he said} (\elegen gar\). For he had been saying (progressive imperfect). Jesus had already repeatedly ordered the demon to come out of the man whereat the demon made his outcry to Jesus and protested. strkjv@Matthew:8:29| had "before the time" (\pro kairou\) and strkjv@8:31| shows that the demons did not want to go back to the abyss (\tˆn abusson\) right now. That was their real home, but they did not wish to return to the place of torment just now.

rwp@Mark:5:20 @{He went his way} (\apˆlthen\). He went off and did as Jesus told him. He heralded (\kˆrussein\) or published the story till all over Decapolis men marvelled (\ethaumazon\) at what Jesus did, kept on marvelling (imperfect tense). The man had a greater opportunity for Christ right in his home land than anywhere else. They all knew this once wild demoniac who now was a new man in Christ Jesus. Thousands of like cases of conversion under Christ's power have happened in rescue missions in our cities.

rwp@Mark:5:26 @{Had suffered many things of many physicians} (\polla pathousa hupo poll“n iatr“n\). A pathetic picture of a woman with a chronic case who had tried doctor after doctor. {Had spent all that she had} (\dapanˆsasa ta par' autˆs panta\). Having spent the all from herself, all her resources. For the idiom with \para\ see strkjv@Luke:10:7; strkjv@Phillipians:4:18|. The tragedy of it was that she "was nothing bettered, but rather grew worse" (\mˆden “phelˆtheisa alla mƒllon eis to cheiron elthousa\). Her money was gone, her disease was gaining on her, her one chance came now with Jesus. Matthew says nothing about her experience with the doctors and strkjv@Luke:8:43| merely says that she "had spent all her living upon physicians and could not be healed of any," a plain chronic case. Luke the physician neatly takes care of the physicians. But they were not to blame. She had a disease that they did not know how to cure. Vincent quotes a prescription for an issue of blood as given in the Talmud which gives one a most grateful feeling that he is not under the care of doctors of that nature. The only parallel today is Chinese medicine of the old sort before modern medical schools came.

rwp@Mark:5:28 @{If I touch but his garments} (\Ean haps“mai k'an t“n himati“n autou\). She was timid and shy from her disease and did not wish to attract attention. Songs:she crept up in the crowd and touched the hem or border of his garment (\kraspedon\) according to strkjv@Matthew:9:20| and strkjv@Luke:8:44|.

rwp@Mark:5:35 @{While he yet spake} (\Eti autou lalountos\). Genitive absolute. Another vivid touch in Mark and strkjv@Luke:8:49|. The phrase is in strkjv@Genesis:29:9|. Nowhere does Mark preserve better the lifelike traits of an eyewitness like Peter than in these incidents in chapter 5. The arrival of the messengers from Jairus was opportune for the woman just healed of the issue of blood (\en husei haimatos\) for it diverted attention from her. Now the ruler's daughter has died (\apethane\). {Why troublest thou the master any further?} (\Ti eti skulleis ton didaskalon;\). It was all over, so they felt. Jesus had raised from the dead the son of the widow of Nain (Luke:7:11-17|), but people in general did not expect him to raise the dead. The word \skull“\, from \skulon\ (_skin, pelt, spoils_), means to skin, to flay, in Aeschylus. Then it comes to mean to vex, annoy, distress as in strkjv@Matthew:9:36|, which see. The middle is common in the papyri for bother, worry, as in strkjv@Luke:7:6|. There was no further use in troubling the Teacher about the girl.

rwp@Mark:5:41 @{Talitha cumi}. These precious Aramaic words, spoken by Jesus to the child, Peter heard and remembered so that Mark gives them to us. Mark interprets the simple words into Greek for those who did not know Aramaic (\to korasion, egeire\), that is, {Damsel, arise}. Mark uses the diminutive \korasi“n\, a little girl, from \korˆ\, girl. _Braid Scots_ has it: "Lassie, wauken." strkjv@Luke:8:5-9| has it \Hˆ pais, egeire\, {Maiden, arise}. All three Gospels mention the fact that Jesus took her by the hand, a touch of life (\kratˆsas tˆs cheiros\), giving confidence and help.

rwp@Mark:6:7 @{By two and two} (\duo duo\). This repetition of the numeral instead of the use of \ana duo\ or \kata duo\ is usually called a Hebraism. The Hebrew does have this idiom, but it appears in Aeschylus and Sophocles, in the vernacular _Koin‚_ (Oxyrhynchus Papyri No. 121), in Byzantine Greek, and in modern Greek (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 122f.). Mark preserves the vernacular _Koin‚_ better than the other Gospels and this detail suits his vivid style. The six pairs of apostles could thus cover Galilee in six different directions. Mark notes that he "began to send them forth" (\ˆrxato autous apostellein\). Aorist tense and present infinitive. This may refer simply to this particular occasion in Mark's picturesque way. But the imperfect tense \edidou\ means he kept on giving them all through the tour, a continuous power (authority) over unclean spirits singled out by Mark as representing "all manner of diseases and all manner of sickness" (Matthew:10:1|), "to cure diseases" (\iasthai\, strkjv@Luke:9:1|), healing power. They were to preach and to heal (Luke:9:1; strkjv@Matthew:10:7|). Mark does not mention preaching as a definite part of the commission to the twelve on this their first preaching tour, but he does state that they did preach (6:12|). They were to be missioners or missionaries (\apostellein\) in harmony with their office (\apostoloi\).

rwp@Mark:6:20 @{Feared John} (\ephobeito ton I“anˆn\). Imperfect tense, continual state of fear. He feared John and also Herodias. Between the two Herod vacillated. He knew him to be righteous and holy (\dikaion kai hagion\) and so innocent of any wrong. Songs:he {kept him safe} (\sunetˆrei\). Imperfect tense again. Late Greek verb. From the plots and schemes of Herodias. She was another Jezebel towards John and with Herod. {Much perplexed} (\polla ˆporei\). This the correct text not \polla epoiei\, did many things. Imperfect tense again. {He heard him gladly} (\hˆde“s ˆkouen\). Imperfect tense again. This is the way that Herod really felt when he could slip away from the meshes of Herodias. These interviews with the Baptist down in the prison at Machaerus during his occasional visits there braced "his jaded mind as with a whiff of fresh air" (Swete). But then he saw Herodias again and he was at his wits' end (\ˆporei\, lose one's way, \a\ privative and \poros\, way), for he knew that he had to live with Herodias with whom he was hopelessly entangled.

rwp@Mark:6:50 @{It is I} (\ego eimi\). These were the astounding words of cheer. They did not recognize Jesus in the darkness. They had never seen him or any one walk on the water. His voice reassured them.

rwp@Mark:6:54 @{Knew him} (\epignontes auton\). Recognizing Jesus, knowing fully (\epi\) as nearly all did by now. Second aorist active participle.

rwp@Mark:7:18 @{Are ye so without understanding also?} (\Hout“s kai humeis asunetoi este;\). See on ¯Matthew:15:16|. You also as well as the multitude. It was a discouraging moment for the great Teacher if his own chosen pupils (disciples) were still under the spell of the Pharisaic theological outlook. It was a riddle to them. "They had been trained in Judaism, in which the distinction between clean and unclean is ingrained, and could not understand a statement abrogating this" (Gould). They had noticed that the Pharisees stumbled at the parable of Jesus (Matthew:15:12|). They were stumbling themselves and did not know how to answer the Pharisees. Jesus charges the disciples with intellectual dulness and spiritual stupidity.

rwp@Mark:7:31 @{Through the midst of the borders of Decapolis} (\ana meson t“n hori“n Dekapole“s\). Jesus left Phoenicia, but did not go back into Galilee. He rather went east and came down east of the Sea of Galilee into the region of the Greek cities of Decapolis. He thus kept out of the territory of Herod Antipas. He had been in this region when he healed the Gadarene demoniac and was asked to leave.

rwp@Mark:8:12 @{He sighed deeply in his spirit} (\anastenaxas t“i pneumati\). The only instance of this compound in the N.T. though in the LXX. The uncompounded form occurs in strkjv@Mark:7:34| and it is common enough. The preposition \ana-\ intensifies the meaning of the verb (perfective use). "The sigh seemed to come, as we say, from the bottom of his heart, the Lord's human spirit was stirred to its depths" (Swete). Jesus resented the settled prejudice of the Pharisees (and now Sadducees also) against him and his work. {There shall no sign be given unto this generation} (\ei dothˆsetai tˆi geneƒi tautˆi sˆmeion\). strkjv@Matthew:16:4| has simply \ou dothˆsetai\, plain negative with the future passive indicative. Mark has \ei\ instead of \ou\, which is technically a conditional clause with the conclusion unexpressed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1024), really aposiopesis in imitation of the Hebrew use of \im\. This is the only instance in the N.T. except in quotations from the LXX (Hebrews:3:11; strkjv@4:3,5|). It is very common in the LXX. The rabbis were splitting hairs over the miracles of Jesus as having a possible natural explanation (as some critics do today) even if by the power of Beelzebub, and those not of the sky (from heaven) which would be manifested from God. Songs:they put up this fantastic test to Jesus which he deeply resents. strkjv@Matthew:16:4| adds "but the sign of Jonah" mentioned already by Jesus on a previous occasion (Matthew:12:39-41|) at more length and to be mentioned again (Luke:11:32|). But the mention of the sign of Jonah was "an absolute refusal of signs in their sense" (Bruce). And when he did rise from the dead on the third day, the Sanhedrin refused to be convinced (see Acts 3 to 5).

rwp@Mark:8:17 @Mark here (vv. 17-20|) gives six keen questions of Jesus while strkjv@Matthew:16:8-11| gives as four that really include the six of Mark running some together. The questions reveal the disappointment of Jesus at the intellectual dulness of his pupils. The questions concern the intellect (\noeite\, from \nous, suniete\, comprehend), the heart in a {hardened state} (\pep“r“menˆn\, perfect passive predicate participle as in strkjv@Mark:6:52|, which see), the eyes, the ears, the memory of both the feeding of the five thousand and the four thousand here sharply distinguished even to the two kinds of baskets (\kophinous, sphurid“n\). The disciples did recall the number of baskets left over in each instance, twelve and seven. Jesus "administers a sharp rebuke for their preoccupation with mere temporalities, as if there were nothing higher to be thought of _than bread_" (Bruce). "For the time the Twelve are way-side hearers, with hearts like a beaten path, into which the higher truths cannot sink so as to germinate" (Bruce).

rwp@Mark:8:29 @{Thou art the Christ} (\Su ei ho Christos\). Mark does not give "the Son of the living God" (Matthew:16:16|) or "of God" (Luke:9:20|). The full confession is the form in Matthew. Luke's language means practically the same, while Mark's is the briefest. But the form in Mark really means the full idea. Mark omits all praise of Peter, probably because Peter had done so in his story of the incident. For criticism of the view that Matthew's narrative is due to ecclesiastical development and effort to justify ecclesiastical prerogatives, see discussion on ¯Matthew:16:16,18|. The disciples had confessed him as Messiah before. Thus strkjv@John:1:41; strkjv@4:29; strkjv@6:69; strkjv@Matthew:14:33|. But Jesus had ceased to use the word Messiah to avoid political complications and a revolutionary movement (John:6:14f.|). But did the disciples still believe in Jesus as Messiah after all the defections and oppositions seen by them? It was a serious test to which Jesus now put them.

rwp@Mark:8:32 @{Spake the saying openly} (\parrˆsiƒi ton logon elalei\). He held back nothing, told it all (\pƒn\, all, \rˆsia\, from \eipon\, say), without reserve, to all of them. Imperfect tense \elalei\ shows that Jesus did it repeatedly. Mark alone gives this item. Mark does not give the great eulogy of Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:17,19| after his confession (Mark:8:29; strkjv@Matthew:16:16; strkjv@Luke:9:20|), but he does tell the stinging rebuke given Peter by Jesus on this occasion. See discussion on ¯Matthew:16:21,26|.

rwp@Mark:9:1 @{Till they see the kingdom of God come with power} (\he“s an id“sin tˆn basileian tou theou elˆluthuian en dunamei\). In strkjv@8:38| Jesus clearly is speaking of the second coming. To what is he referring in strkjv@9:1|? One is reminded of strkjv@Mark:13:32; strkjv@Matthew:24:36| where Jesus expressly denies that anyone save the Father himself (not even the Son) knows the day or the hour. Does he contradict that here? It may be observed that Luke has only "see the kingdom of God," while Matthew has "see the Son of man coming" (\erchomenon\, present participle, a process). Mark has "see the kingdom of God come" (\elˆluthuian\, perfect active participle, already come)...standing there still lived. Did Jesus...8:38; strkjv@9:1|.

rwp@Mark:9:6 @{For he wist not what to answer} (\ou gar ˆidei ti apokrithˆi\). Deliberative subjunctive retained in indirect question. But why did Peter say anything? Luke says that he spoke, "not knowing what he said," as an excuse for the inappropriateness of his remarks. Perhaps Peter felt embarrassed at having been asleep (Luke:9:32|) and the feast of tabernacles or booths (\skˆnai\) was near. See on ¯Matthew:17:4|. Peter and the others apparently had not heard the talk of Moses and Elijah with Jesus about his decease (\exodon\, exodus, departure) and little knew the special comfort that Jesus had found in this understanding of the great approaching tragedy concerning which Peter had shown absolute stupidity (Mark:8:32f.|) so recently. See on ¯Matthew:17:5| about the overshadowing and the voice.

rwp@Mark:9:18 @{Wheresoever it taketh him} (\hopou ean auton katalabˆi\). Seizes him down. Our word catalepsy is this same word. The word is used by Galen and Hippocrates for fits. The word is very common in the papyri in various senses as in the older Greek. Each of the verbs here in Mark is a graphic picture. {Dashes down} (\rˆssei\). Also \rˆgnumi, mi\ form. Convulses, rends, tears asunder. Old and common word. {Foameth} (\aphrizei\). Here only in the N.T. Poetic and late word. {Grindeth} (\trizei\). Another _hapax legomenon_ in the N.T. Old word for making a shrill cry or squeak. {Pineth away} (\xˆrainetai\). Old word for drying or withering as of grass in strkjv@James:1:11|. {And they were not able} (\kai ouk ischusan\). They did not have the strength (\ischus\) to handle this case. See strkjv@Matthew:17:16; strkjv@Luke:9:40| (\kai ouk ˆdunˆthˆsan\, first aorist passive). It was a tragedy.

rwp@Mark:9:26 @{Having torn much} (\sparaxas\). The uncompounded verb used in verse 20|. {Became as one dead} (\egeneto h“sei nekros\). As if dead from the violence of the spasm. The demon did him all possible harm in leaving him.

rwp@Mark:9:37 @{One of such little children} (\hen t“n toiout“n paidi“n\). strkjv@Matthew:18:5| has "one such little child" and strkjv@Luke:9:48| "this little child." It was an object lesson to the arrogant conceit of the twelve apostles contending for primacy. They did not learn this lesson for they will again wrangle over primacy (Mark:10:33-45; strkjv@Matthew:20:20-28|) and they will be unable to comprehend easily what the attitude of Jesus was toward children (Mark:10:13-16; strkjv@Matthew:19:13-15; strkjv@Luke:8:15-17|). The child was used as a rebuke to the apostles.

rwp@Mark:10:3 @{What did Moses command you?} (\Ti humin eneteilato M“usˆs;\). Jesus at once brought up the issue concerning the teaching of Moses (Deuteronomy:24:1|). But Jesus goes back beyond this concession here allowed by Moses to the ideal state commanded in strkjv@Genesis:1:27|.

rwp@Mark:10:18 @{Why callest thou me good?} (\Ti me legeis agathon;\). Songs:Luke:18:19|. strkjv@Matthew:19:17|...him as was proper. Did he...(\agathos\) in the absolute sense as applied to God? The language is not a disclaiming of deity on the part of Jesus. {That I may inherit} (\hina klˆronomˆs“\). strkjv@Matthew:19:16| has (\sch“\), that I may "get."

rwp@Mark:11:8 @{Branches} (\stibadas\). A litter of leaves and rushes from the fields. Textus Receptus spells this word \stoibadas\. strkjv@Matthew:21:8| has \kladous\, from \kla“\, to break, branches broken or cut from trees. strkjv@John:12:13| uses the branches of the palm trees (\ta baia t“n phoinik“n\), "the feathery fronds forming the tufted crown of the tree" (Vincent). That is to say, some of the crowd did one of these things, some another. See on ¯Matthew:21:4-9| for discussion of other details. The deliberate conduct of Jesus on this occasion could have but one meaning. It was the public proclamation of himself as the Messiah, now at last for his "hour" has come. The excited crowds in front (\hoi proagontes\) and behind (\hoi akolouthountes\) fully realize the significance of it all. Hence their unrestrained enthusiasm. They expect Jesus, of course, now to set up his rule in opposition to that of Caesar, to drive Rome out of Palestine, to conquer the world for the Jews.

rwp@Mark:11:11 @{When he had looked round about upon all things} (\periblepsamenos panta\). Another Markan detail in this aorist middle participle. Mark does not give what strkjv@Luke:19:39-55| has nor what strkjv@Matthew:21:10-17| does. But it is all implied in this swift glance at the temple before he went out to Bethany with the Twelve, {it being now eventide} (\opse ˆdˆ ousˆs tˆs h“rƒs\). Genitive absolute, the hour being already late. What a day it had been! What did the apostles think now?

rwp@Mark:11:17 @{For all the nations} (\pƒsin tois ethnesin\). Mark alone has this phrase from strkjv@Isaiah:56:7; strkjv@Jeremiah:7:11|. The people as well as the temple authorities were guilty of graft, extortion, and desecration of the house of prayer. Jesus assumes and exercises Messianic authority and dares to smite this political and financial abuse. Some people deny the right of the preacher to denounce such abuses in business and politics even when they invade the realm of morals and religion. But Jesus did not hesitate.

rwp@Mark:12:13 @{That they might catch him in talk} (\hina auton agreus“sin log“i\). Ingressive aorist subjunctive. The verb is late from \agra\ (a hunt or catching). It appears in the LXX and papyri. Here alone in the N.T. strkjv@Luke:20:20| has the same idea, "that they may take hold of his speech" (\epilab“ntai autou logon\) while strkjv@Matthew:22:15| uses \pagideus“sin\ (to snare or trap). See discussion in Matthew. We have seen the scribes and Pharisees trying to do this very thing before (Luke:11:33f.|). Mark and Matthew note here the combination of Pharisees and Herodians as Mark did in strkjv@3:6|. Matthew speaks of "disciples" or pupils of the Pharisees while Luke calls them "spies" (\enkathetous\).

rwp@Mark:12:15 @{Knowing their hypocrisy} (\eid“s aut“n tˆn hupocrisin\). strkjv@Matthew:22:18| has "perceived their wickedness" (\gnous tˆn ponˆrian aut“n\) while strkjv@Luke:20:23| says, "perceived their craftiness" (\katanoˆsas aut“n tˆn panourgian\). Each of these words throws a flash-light on the spirit and attitude of these young men. They were sly, shrewd, slick, but they did not deceive Jesus with their pious palaver. See on Matthew for further details.

rwp@Mark:14:10 @{He that was one of the twelve} (\ho heis t“n d“deka\). Note the article here, "the one of the twelve," Matthew has only \heis\, "one." Some have held that Mark here calls Judas the primate among the twelve. Rather he means to call attention to the idea that he was the one of the twelve who did this deed.

rwp@Mark:14:54 @{Peter had followed him afar off} (\Hosea:Petros apo makrothen ˆkolouthˆsen aut“i\). Here Mark uses the constative aorist (\ˆkolouthˆsen\) where strkjv@Matthew:26:58|, and strkjv@Luke:22:54| have the picturesque imperfect (\ˆkolouthei\), was following. Possibly Mark did not care to dwell on the picture of Peter furtively following at a distance, not bold enough to take an open stand with Christ as the Beloved Disciple did, and yet unable to remain away with the other disciples. {Was sitting with} (\ˆn sunkathˆmenos\). Periphrastic imperfect middle, picturing Peter making himself at home with the officers (\hupˆret“n\), under rowers, literally, then servants of any kind. strkjv@John:18:25| describes Peter as standing (\hest“s\). Probably he did now one, now the other, in his restless weary mood. {Warming himself in the light} (\thermainomenos pr“s to ph“s\). Direct middle. Fire has light as well as heat and it shone in Peter's face. He was not hidden as much as he supposed he was.

rwp@Mark:14:56 @{Their witness agreed not together} (\isai hai marturiai ouk ˆsan\). Literally, the testimonies were not equal. They did not correspond with each other on essential points. {Many were bearing false witness} (\epseudomarturoun\, imperfect, repeated action) {against him}. No two witnesses bore joint testimony to justify a capital sentence according to the law (Deuteronomy:19:15|). Note imperfects in these verses (55-57|) to indicate repeated failures.

rwp@Mark:14:58 @{Made with hands} (\cheiropoiˆton\). In Mark alone. An old Greek word. The negative form \acheiropoiˆton\ here occurs elsewhere only in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1; strkjv@Colossians:2:11|. In strkjv@Hebrews:9:11| the negative \ou\ is used with the positive form. It is possible that a real \logion\ of Jesus underlies the perversion of it here. Mark and Matthew do not quote the witnesses precisely alike. Perhaps they quoted Jesus differently and therein is shown part of the disagreement, for Mark adds verse 59| (not in Matthew). "And not even so did their witness agree together," repeating the point of verse 57|. Swete observes that Jesus, as a matter of fact, did do what he is quoted as saying in Mark: "He said what the event has proved to be true; His death destroyed the old order, and His resurrection created the new." But these witnesses did not mean that by what they said. The only saying of Jesus at all like this preserved to us is that in strkjv@John:2:19|, when he referred not to the temple in Jerusalem, but to the temple of his body, though no one understood it at the time.

rwp@Mark:14:64 @{They all} (\hoi de pantes\). This would mean that Joseph of Arimathea was not present since he did not consent to the death of Jesus (Luke:23:51|). Nicodemus was apparently absent also, probably not invited because of previous sympathy with Jesus (John:7:50|). But all who were present voted for the death of Jesus.

rwp@Mark:15:32 @{Now come down} (\katabat“ nun\). Now that he is nailed to the cross. {That we may see and believe} (\hina id“men kai pisteus“men\). Aorist subjunctive of purpose with \hina\. They use almost the very language of Jesus in their ridicule, words that they had heard him use in his appeals to men to see and believe. {Reproached him} (\“neidizon auton\). Imperfect tense. They did it several times. Mark and Matthew both fail to give the story of the robber who turned to Christ on the Cross as told in strkjv@Luke:23:39-43|.

rwp@Mark:15:33 @{The sixth hour} (\h“ras hektˆs\). That is, noon (Jewish time), as the third hour was nine A.M. (Mark:15:25|). See on ¯Matthew:27:45| for discussion. Given also by strkjv@Luke:23:44|. Mark gives the Aramaic transliteration as does B in strkjv@Matthew:27:45|, which see for discussion. {Forsaken} (\egkatelipes\). Some MSS. give \“neidisas\ (reproached). We are not able to enter into the fulness of the desolation felt by Jesus at this moment as the Father regarded him as sin (2Corinthians:5:21|). This desolation was the deepest suffering. He did not cease to be the Son of God. That would be impossible.

rwp@Mark:16:1 @{When the sabbath was past} (\diagenomenou tou sabbatou\). Genitive absolute, the sabbath having come in between, and now over. For this sense of the verb (common from Demosthenes on) see strkjv@Acts:25:13; strkjv@27:9|. It was therefore after sunset. {Bought spices} (\ˆgorasan ar“mata\). As Nicodemus did on the day of the burial (John:19:40|). Gould denies that the Jews were familiar with the embalming process of Egypt, but at any rate it was to be a reverential anointing (\hina aleips“sin\) of the body of Jesus with spices. They could buy them after sundown. Salome in the group again as in strkjv@Mark:15:40|. See on ¯Matthew:28:1| for discussion of "late on the sabbath day" and the visit of the women to the tomb before sundown. They had returned from the tomb after the watching late Friday afternoon and had prepared spices (Luke:23:56|). Now they secured a fresh supply.

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:1:18 @{Betrothed to Joseph} (\Mnˆsteutheisˆs t“i I“sˆph\). Matthew proceeds to explain his statement in strkjv@1:16| which implied that Joseph, though the legal father of Jesus in the royal line, was not the actual father of Mary's Son. Betrothal with the Jews was a serious matter, not lightly entered into and not lightly broken. The man who betrothed a maiden was legally husband (Genesis:29:21; strkjv@Deuteronomy:22:23f.|) and "an informal cancelling of betrothal was impossible" (McNeile). Though they did not live together as husband and wife till actual marriage, breach of faithfulness on the part of the betrothed was treated as adultery and punished with death. _The New Testament in Braid Scots_ actually has "mairry't till Joseph" for "betrothed to Joseph." Matthew uses the genitive absolute construction here, a very common Greek idiom.

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:1:22 @{That it may be fulfilled} (\hina plˆr“thˆi\). Alford says that "it is impossible to interpret \hina\ in any other sense than in order that." That was the old notion, but modern grammarians recognize the non-final use of this particle in the _Koin‚_ and even the consecutive like the Latin _ut_. Some even argue for a causal use. If the context called for result, one need not hesitate to say so as in strkjv@Mark:11:28; strkjv@John:9:36; strkjv@1John:1:9; strkjv@Revelation:9:20; strkjv@13:13|. See discussion in my _Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research_, pp. 997-9. All the same it is purpose here, God's purpose, Matthew reports the angel as saying, spoken "by (\hupo\, immediate agent) the Lord through (\dia\, intermediate agent) the prophet." {"All this has happened"} (\touto de holon gegonen\, present perfect indicative), stands on record as historical fact. But the Virgin Birth of Jesus is not due to this interpretation of strkjv@Isaiah:7:14|. It is not necessary to maintain (Broadus) that Isaiah himself saw anything more in his prophecy than that a woman then a virgin, would bear a son and that in the course of a few years Ahaz would be delivered from the king of Syria and Israel by the coming of the Assyrians. This historical illustration finds its richest fulfilment in the birth of Jesus from Mary. "Words of themselves are empty. They are useful only as vessels to convey things from mind to mind" (Morison). The Hebrew word for young woman is translated by virgin (\parthenos\), but it is not necessary to conclude that Isaiah himself contemplated the supernatural birth of Jesus. We do not have to say that the idea of the Virgin Birth of Jesus came from Jewish sources. Certainly it did not come from the pagan myths so foreign to this environment, atmosphere and spirit. It is far simpler to admit the supernatural fact than try to explain the invention of the idea as a myth to justify the deification of Jesus. The birth, life, and death of Jesus throw a flood of light on the Old Testament narrative and prophecies for the early Christians. In Matthew and John in particular we often see "that the events of Christ's life were divinely ordered for the express purpose of fulfilling the Old Testament" (McNeile). See strkjv@Matthew:2:15,23; strkjv@4:14-17; strkjv@8:17; strkjv@12:17-21; strkjv@13:25; strkjv@21:4f.; strkjv@John:12:38f.; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@19:24,28,36f|.

rwp@Matthew:2:1 @{In Bethlehem of Judea} (\en Bˆthleem tˆs Ioudaias\). There was a Bethlehem in Galilee seven miles northwest of Nazareth (Josephus, _Antiquities_ XIX. 15). This Bethlehem (house of bread, the name means) of Judah was the scene of Ruth's life with Boaz (Ruth:1:1f.; Mt. strkjv@1:5|) and the home of David, descendant of Ruth and ancestor of Jesus (Mt. strkjv@1:5|). David was born here and anointed king by Samuel (1Samuel:17:12|). The town came to be called the city of David (Luke:2:11|). Jesus, who was born in this House of Bread called himself the Bread of Life (John:6:35|), the true Manna from heaven. Matthew assumes the knowledge of the details of the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem which are given in strkjv@Luke:2:1-7| or did not consider them germane to his purpose. Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem from Nazareth because it was the original family home for both of them. The first enrolment by the Emperor Augustus as the papyri show was by families (\kat' oikian\). Possibly Joseph had delayed the journey for some reason till now it approached the time for the birth of the child.

rwp@Matthew:2:16 @{Slew all the male children that were in Bethlehem} (\aneilen pantas tous paidas tous en Bˆthleem\). The flight of Joseph was justified, for Herod was violently enraged (\ethum“thˆ lian\) that he had been mocked by the Magi, deluded in fact (\enepaichthˆ\). Vulgate _illusus esset_. Herod did not know, of course, how old the child was, but he took no chances and included all the little boys (\tous paidas\, masculine article) in Bethlehem two years old and under, perhaps fifteen or twenty. It is no surprise that Josephus makes no note of this small item in Herod's chamber of horrors. It was another fulfilment of the prophecy in strkjv@Jeremiah:31:15|. The quotation (2:18|) seems to be from the Septuagint. It was originally written of the Babylonian captivity but it has a striking illustration in this case also. Macrobius (_Sat_. II. iv. II) notes that Augustus said that it was better to be Herod's sow (\hus\) than his son (\huios\), for the sow had a better chance of life.

rwp@Matthew:3:2 @{Repent} (\metanoeite\). Broadus used to say that this is the worst translation in the New Testament. The trouble is that the English word "repent" means "to be sorry again" from the Latin _repoenitet_ (impersonal). John did not call on the people to be sorry, but to change (think afterwards) their mental attitudes (\metanoeite\) and conduct. The Vulgate has it "do penance" and Wycliff has followed that. The Old Syriac has it better: "Turn ye." The French (Geneva) has it "Amendez vous." This is John's great word (Bruce) and it has been hopelessly mistranslated. The tragedy of it is that we have no one English word that reproduces exactly the meaning and atmosphere of the Greek word. The Greek has a word meaning to be sorry (\metamelomai\) which is exactly our English word repent and it is used of Judas (Matthew:27:3|). John was a new prophet with the call of the old prophets: "Turn ye" (Joel:2:12; Isa. strkjv@55:7; strkjv@Ezekiel:33:11,15|).

rwp@Matthew:3:4 @{Now John himself} (\autos de ho I“anˆs\). Matthew thus introduces the man himself and draws a vivid sketch of his dress (note \eichen\, imperfect tense), his habit, and his food. Would such an uncouth figure be welcome today in any pulpit in our cities? In the wilderness it did not matter. It was probably a matter of necessity with him, not an affectation, though it was the garb of the original Elijah (2Kings:1:8|), rough sackcloth woven from the hair of camels. Plummer holds that "John consciously took Elijah as a model."

rwp@Matthew:4:1 @{To be tempted of the devil} (\peirasthˆnai hupo tou diabolou\). Matthew locates the temptation at a definite time, "then" (\tote\) and place, "into the wilderness" (\eis tˆn erˆmon\), the same general region where John was preaching. It is not surprising that Jesus was tempted by the devil immediately after his baptism which signified the formal entrance upon the Messianic work. That is a common experience with ministers who step out into the open for Christ. The difficulty here is that Matthew says that "Jesus was led up into the wilderness by the Spirit to be tempted by the devil." Mark (Mark:1:12|) puts it more strongly that the Spirit "drives" (\ekballei\) Christ into the wilderness. It was a strong impulsion by the Holy Spirit that led Jesus into the wilderness to think through the full significance of the great step that he had now taken. That step opened the door for the devil and involved inevitable conflict with the slanderer (\tou diabolou\). Judas has this term applied to him (John:6:70|) as it is to men (2Timothy:3:3; strkjv@Titus:2:3|) and women (she devils, strkjv@1Timothy:3:11|) who do the work of the arch slanderer. There are those today who do not believe that a personal devil exists, but they do not offer an adequate explanation of the existence and presence of sin in the world. Certainly Jesus did not discount or deny the reality of the devil's presence. The word "tempt" here (\peiraz“\) and in strkjv@4:3| means originally to test, to try. That is its usual meaning in the ancient Greek and in the Septuagint. Bad sense of \ekpeiraz“\ in strkjv@4:7| as in strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:16|. Here it comes to mean, as often in the New Testament, to solicit to sin. The evil sense comes from its use for an evil purpose.

rwp@Matthew:5:2 @{Taught them} (\edidasken\). Inchoative imperfect, began to teach. He sat down on the mountain side as the Jewish rabbis did instead of standing. It was a most impressive scene as Jesus opened his mouth wide and spoke loud enough for the great throng to hear him. The newly chosen twelve apostles were there, "a great number of disciples and a great number of the people" (Luke:6:17|).

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|) though Bruce thinks that it is the whole earth. Can it be the solid earth as opposed to the sea or the air?

rwp@Matthew:5:17 @{I came not to destroy, but to fulfil} (\ouk ˆlthon katalusai alla plˆr“sai\). The verb "destroy" means to "loosen down" as of a house or tent (2Corinthians:5:1|). Fulfil is to fill full. This Jesus did to the ceremonial law which pointed to him and the moral law he kept. "He came to fill the law, to reveal the full depth of meaning that it was intended to hold" (McNeile).

rwp@Matthew:5:43 @{And hate thine enemy} (\kai misˆseis\). This phrase is not in strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|, but is a rabbinical inference which Jesus repudiates bluntly. The Talmud says nothing of love to enemies. Paul in strkjv@Romans:12:20| quotes strkjv@Proverbs:25:22| to prove that we ought to treat our enemies kindly. Jesus taught us to pray for our enemies and did it himself even when he hung upon the cross. Our word "neighbour" is "nigh-bor," one who is nigh or near like the Greek word \plˆsion\ here. But proximity often means strife and not love. Those who have adjoining farms or homes may be positively hostile in spirit. The Jews came to look on members of the same tribe as neighbours as even Jews everywhere. But they hated the Samaritans who were half Jews and lived between Judea and Galilee. Jesus taught men how to act as neighbours by the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke:10:29ff.|).

rwp@Matthew:6:9 @{After this manner therefore pray ye} (\hout“s oun proseuchesthe humeis\). "You" expressed in contrast with "the Gentiles." It should be called "The Model Prayer" rather than "The Lord's Prayer." "Thus" pray as he gives them a model. He himself did not use it as a liturgy (cf. strkjv@John:17|). There is no evidence that Jesus meant it for liturgical use by others. In strkjv@Luke:11:2-4| practically the same prayer though briefer is given at a later time by Jesus to the apostles in response to a request that he teach them how to pray. McNeile argues that the form in Luke is the original to which Matthew has made additions: "The tendency of liturgical formulas is towards enrichment rather than abbreviation." But there is no evidence whatever that Jesus designed it as a set formula. There is no real harm in a liturgical formula if one likes it, but no one sticks to just one formula in prayer. There is good and not harm in children learning and saying this noble prayer. Some people are disturbed over the words "Our Father" and say that no one has a right to call God Father who has not been "born again." But that is to say that an unconverted sinner cannot pray until he is converted, an absurd contradiction. God is the Father of all men in one sense; the recognition of Him as the Father in the full sense is the first step in coming back to him in regeneration and conversion.

rwp@Matthew:7:13 @{By the narrow gate} (\dia tˆs stenˆs pulˆs\). The Authorized Version "at the strait gate" misled those who did not distinguish between "strait" and "straight." The figure of the Two Ways had a wide circulation in Jewish and Christian writings (cf. strkjv@Deuteronomy:30:19; strkjv@Jeremiah:21:8; strkjv@Psalms:1|). See the _Didache_ i-vi; Barnabas xviii-xx. "The narrow gate" is repeated in verse 14| and {straitened the way} (\tethlimmenˆ hˆ hodos\) added. The way is "compressed," narrowed as in a defile between high rocks, a tight place like \stenoch“ria\ in strkjv@Romans:8:35|. "The way that leads to life involves straits and afflictions" (McNeile). Vincent quotes the _Pinax_ or _Tablet_ of Cebes, a contemporary of Socrates: "Seest thou not, then, a little door, and a way before the door, which is not much crowded, but very few travel it? This is the way that leadeth unto true culture." "The broad way" (\euruch“ros\) is in every city, town, village, with the glaring white lights that lure to destruction.

rwp@Matthew:8:12 @{The sons of the kingdom} (\hoi huioi tˆs basileias\). A favourite Hebrew idiom like "son of hell" (Matthew:23:15|), "sons of this age" (Luke:16:8|). The Jews felt that they had a natural right to the privileges of the kingdom because of descent from Abraham (Matthew:3:9|). But mere natural birth did not bring spiritual sonship as the Baptist had taught before Jesus did.

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:9:9 @{At the place of toll} (\epi to tel“nion\). The tax-office or custom-house of Capernaum placed here to collect taxes from the boats going across the lake outside of Herod's territory or from people going from Damascus to the coast, a regular caravan route. "{Called Matthew}" (\Maththaion legomenon\) and in strkjv@10:3| Matthew the publican is named as one of the Twelve Apostles. Mark (Mark:2:14|) and Luke (Luke:5:27|) call this man Levi. He had two names as was common, Matthew Levi. The publicans (\tel“nai\) get their name in English from the Latin _publicanus_ (a man who did public duty), not a very accurate designation. They were detested because they practised graft. Even Gabinius the proconsul of Syria was accused by Cicero of relieving Syrians and Jews of legitimate taxes for graft. He ordered some of the tax-officers removed. Already Jesus had spoken of the publican (5:46|) in a way that shows the public disfavour in which they were held.

rwp@Matthew:9:18 @{Is even now dead} (\arti eteleutˆsen\). Aorist tense with \arti\ and so better, "just now died," "just dead" (Moffatt). Mark (Mark:5:23|) has it "at the point of death," Luke (Luke:8:42|) "lay a dying." It is not always easy even for physicians to tell when actual death has come. Jesus in strkjv@9:24| pointedly said, "The damsel is not dead, but sleepeth," meaning that she did not die to stay dead.

rwp@Matthew:9:29 @{Touched their eyes} (\hˆpsato t“n ophthalm“n\). The men had faith (9:28|) and Jesus rewards their faith and yet he touched their eyes as he sometimes did with kindly sympathy.

rwp@Matthew:10:1 @{His twelve disciples} (\tous d“deka mathˆtas autou\). First mention of the group of "learners" by Matthew and assumed as already in existence (note the article) as they were (Mark:3:14|). They were chosen before the Sermon on the Mount was delivered, but Matthew did not mention it in connection with that sermon.

rwp@Matthew:10:1 @{Gave them authority} (\ed“ken autois exousian\). "Power" (Moffatt, Goodspeed). One may be surprised that here only the healing work is mentioned, though Luke (Luke:9:2|) has it "to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal the sick." And Matthew says (Matthew:10:7|), "And as ye go, preach." Hence it is not fair to say that Matthew knows only the charge to heal the sick, important as that is. The physical distress was great, but the spiritual even greater. Power is more likely the idea of \exousia\ here. This healing ministry attracted attention and did a vast deal of good. Today we have hospitals and skilled physicians and nurses, but we should not deny the power of God to bless all these agencies and to cure disease as he wills. Jesus is still the master of soul and body. But intelligent faith does not justify us in abstaining from the help of the physician who must not be confounded with the quack and the charlatan.

rwp@Matthew:10:14 @{Shake off the dust} (\ektinaxate ton koniorton\). Shake out, a rather violent gesture of disfavour. The Jews had violent prejudices against the smallest particles of Gentile dust, not as a purveyor of disease of which they did not know, but because it was regarded as the putrescence of death. If the apostles were mistreated by a host or hostess, they were to be treated as if they were Gentiles (cf. strkjv@Matthew:18:17; strkjv@Acts:18:6|). Here again we have a restriction that was for this special tour with its peculiar perils.

rwp@Matthew:10:38 @{Doth not take his cross} (\ou lambanei ton stauron autou\). The first mention of cross in Matthew. Criminals were crucified in Jerusalem. It was the custom for the condemned person to carry his own cross as Jesus did till Simon of Cyrene was impressed for that purpose. The Jews had become familiar with crucifixion since the days of Antiochus Epiphanes and one of the Maccabean rulers (Alexander Jannaeus) had crucified 800 Pharisees. It is not certain whether Jesus was thinking of his own coming crucifixion when he used this figure, though possible, perhaps probable. The disciples would hardly think of that outcome unless some of them had remarkable insight.

rwp@Matthew:11:1 @{He departed thence to teach and preach} (\metebˆ ekeithen tou didaskein kai kˆrussein\). In five instances (7:28; strkjv@11:1; strkjv@13:53; strkjv@19:1; strkjv@26:1|) after great discourses by Jesus "the transition to what follows is made with the formula, 'And it came to pass when Jesus had ended'" (McNeile). This is a wrong chapter division, for strkjv@11:1| belongs with the preceding section. "{Commanding}" (\diatass“n\, complementary participle with \etelesen\), means giving orders in detail (\dia-\) for each of them. Note both "teach and preach" as in strkjv@4:23|...Where did Jesus go? Did he...(Luke:10:1|)? Bruce holds with Chrysostom that Jesus avoided the places where they were, giving them room and time to do their work. But, if Jesus himself went to the chief cities of Galilee on this tour, he would be compelled to touch many of the same points. Jesus would naturally follow behind at some distance. At the end of the tour the apostles come together in Capernaum and tell Jesus all that they had done and that they had taught (Mark:6:30|). Matthew follows the general outline of Mark, but the events are not grouped in chronological order here.

rwp@Matthew:11:5 @{And the dead are raised up} (\kai nekroi egeirontai\)...the widow of Nain. Did he...35:5; strkjv@61:1|" (Bruce). The items were convincing enough and clearer than mere eschatological symbolism. "The poor" in particular have the gospel, a climax.

rwp@Matthew:11:7 @{As these went their way} (\tout“n poreuomen“n\). Present participle genitive absolute. The eulogy of Jesus was spoken as the two disciples of John were going away. Is it a matter of regret that they did not hear this wondrous praise of John that they might cheer him with it? "It may almost be called the funeral oration of the Baptist, for not long afterwards Herodias compassed his death" (Plummer). {A reed shaken by the wind} (\kalamon hupo anemou saleuomenon\). Latin _calamus_. Used of the reeds that grew in plenty in the Jordan Valley where John preached, of a staff made of a reed (Matthew:27:29|), as a measuring rod (Revelation:11:1|), of a writer's pen (3John:1:13|). The reeds by the Jordan bent with the wind, but not so John.

rwp@Matthew:11:19 @{Wisdom is justified by her works} (\edikai“thˆ apo t“n erg“n autˆs\). A timeless aorist passive (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 836f.). The word "justified" means "set right" Luke (Luke:7:35|) has "by all her children" as some MSS. have here to make Matthew like Luke. These words are difficult, but understandable. God's wisdom has planned the different conduct of both John and Jesus. He does not wish all to be just alike in everything. "This generation" (verse 16|) is childish, not childlike, and full of whimsical inconsistencies in their faultfinding. They exaggerate in each case. John did not have a demon and Jesus was not a glutton or a winebibber. "And, worse than either, for \philos\ is used in a sinister sense and implies that Jesus was the comrade of the worst characters, and like them in conduct. A malicious nickname at first, it is now a name of honour: the sinner's lover" (Bruce). Cf. strkjv@Luke:15:2|. The plan of God is justified by results.

rwp@Matthew:11:25 @{At that season Jesus answered and said} (\en ekein“i t“i kair“i apokritheis eipen\). Spoke to his Father in audible voice. The time and place we do not know. But here we catch a glimpse of Jesus in one of his moods of worship. "It is usual to call this golden utterance a prayer, but it is at once prayer, praise, and self-communing in a devout spirit" (Bruce). Critics are disturbed because this passage from the Logia of Jesus or Q of Synoptic criticism (Matthew:11:25-30; strkjv@Luke:10:21-24|) is so manifestly Johannine in spirit and very language, "the Father" (\ho patˆr\), "the son" (\ho huios\), whereas the Fourth Gospel was not written till the close of the first century and the Logia was written before the Synoptic Gospels. The only satisfying explanation lies in the fact that Jesus did have this strain of teaching that is preserved in John's Gospel. Here he is in precisely the same mood of elevated communion with the Father that we have reflected in John 14 to 17. Even Harnack is disposed to accept this Logion as a genuine saying of Jesus. The word "thank" (\homologoumai\) is better rendered "praise" (Moffatt). Jesus praises the Father "not that the \sophoi\ were ignorant, but that the \nˆpioi\ knew" (McNeile).

rwp@Matthew:12:3 @{What David did} (\ti epoiˆsen Daueid\). From the necessity of hunger. The first defence made by Christ appeals to the conduct of David (2Samuel:21:6|). David and those with him did "what was not lawful" (\ho ouk exon ˆn\) precisely the charge made against the disciples (\ho ouk exestin\ in verse 2|).

rwp@Matthew:12:7 @{The guiltless} (\tous anaitious\). Songs:in verse 5|. Common in ancient Greek. No real ground against, it means \an\ + \aitios\. Jesus quotes strkjv@Hosea:6:6| here as he did in strkjv@Matthew:9:13|. A pertinent prophecy that had escaped the notice of the sticklers for ceremonial literalness and the letter of the law.

rwp@Matthew:12:13 @{Stretch forth thy hand} (\ekteinon sou tˆn cheira\). Probably the arm was not withered, though that is not certain. But he did the impossible. "He stretched it forth," straight, I hope, towards the Pharisees who were watching Jesus (Mark:3:2|).

rwp@Matthew:12:20 @{A bruised reed} (\kalamon suntetrimmenon\). Perfect passive participle of \suntrib“\. A crushed reed he will not break. The curious augment in \kateaxei\ (future active indicative) is to be noted. The copyists kept the augment where it did not belong in this verb (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1212) even in Plato. "Smoking flax" (\linon tuphomenon\). The wick of a lamp, smoking and flickering and going out. Only here in N.T. Flax in strkjv@Exodus:9:31|. Vivid images that picture Jesus in the same strain as his own great words in strkjv@Matthew:11:28-30|.

rwp@Matthew:12:46 @{His mother and his brothers} (\hˆ mˆtˆr kai hoi adelphoi autou\). Brothers of Jesus, younger sons of Joseph and Mary. The charge of the Pharisees that Jesus was in league with Satan was not believed by the disciples of Jesus, but some of his friends did think that he was beside himself (Mark:3:21|) because of the excitement and strain. It was natural for Mary to want to take him home for rest and refreshment. Songs:the mother and brothers are pictured standing outside the house (or the crowd). They send a messenger to Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:13:21 @{Yet hath he not root in himself} (\ouk echei de rhizan en heaut“i\). Cf. strkjv@Colossians:2:7| and strkjv@Ephesians:3:18| \erriz“memoi\. Stability like a tree. Here the man has a mushroom growth and "endureth for a while" (\proskairos\), temporary, quick to sprout, quick to stumble (\skandalizetai\). What a picture of some converts in our modern revivals. They drop away overnight because they did not have the root of the matter in them. This man does not last or hold out.

rwp@Matthew:14:23 @{Into the mountain} (\eis to oros\). After the dismissal of the crowd Jesus went up alone into the mountain on the eastern side of the lake to pray as he often did go to the mountains to pray. If ever he needed the Father's sympathy, it was now. The masses were wild with enthusiasm and the disciples wholly misunderstood him. The Father alone could offer help now.

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:15:2 @{The tradition of the elders} (\tˆn paradosin t“n presbuter“n\). This was the oral law, handed down by the elders of the past in _ex cathedra_ fashion and later codified in the Mishna. Handwashing before meals is not a requirement of the Old Testament. It is, we know, a good thing for sanitary reasons, but the rabbis made it a mark of righteousness for others at any rate. This item was magnified at great length in the oral teaching. The washing (\niptontai\, middle voice, note) of the hands called for minute regulations. It was commanded to wash the hands before meals, it was one's duty to do it after eating. The more rigorous did it between the courses. The hands must be immersed. Then the water itself must be "clean" and the cups or pots used must be ceremonially "clean." Vessels were kept full of clean water ready for use (John:2:6-8|). Songs:it went on _ad infinitum_. Thus a real issue is raised between Jesus and the rabbis. It was far more than a point of etiquette or of hygienics. The rabbis held it to be a mortal sin. The incident may have happened in a Pharisee's house.

rwp@Matthew:15:7 @{Well did Isaiah prophesy of you} (\kal“s eprophˆteusen peri h–m“n Esaias\). There is sarcasm in this pointed application of Isaiah's words (Isaiah:29:13|) to these rabbis. He "beautifully pictured" them. The portrait was to the very life, "teaching as their doctrines the commandments of men." They were indeed far from God if they imagined that God would be pleased with such gifts at the expense of duty to one's parents.

rwp@Matthew:15:23 @{For she crieth after us} (\hoti krazei opisthen hˆm“n\)...They disliked a sensation. Did they...

rwp@Matthew:16:1 @{The Pharisees and Sadducees} (\hoi Pharisaioi kai Saddoukaioi\). The first time that we have this combination of the two parties who disliked each other exceedingly. Hate makes strange bedfellows. They hated Jesus more than they did each other. Their hostility has not decreased during the absence of Jesus, but rather increased. {Tempting him} (\peirazontes\). Their motive was bad. {A sign from heaven} (\sˆmeion ek tou ouranou\). The scribes and Pharisees had already asked for a sign (12:38|). Now this new combination adds "from heaven." What did they have in mind? They may not have had any definite idea to embarrass Jesus. The Jewish apocalypses did speak of spectacular displays of power by the Son of Man (the Messiah). The devil had suggested that Jesus let the people see him drop down from the pinnacle of the temple and the people expected the Messiah to come from an unknown source (John:7:27|) who would do great signs (John:7:31|). Chrysostom (_Hom_. liii.) suggests stopping the course of the sun, bridling the moon, a clap of thunder.

rwp@Matthew:16:14 @{And they said} (\hoi de eipan\). They were ready to respond for they knew that popular opinion was divided on that point (14:1f.|). They give four different opinions. It is always a risky thing for a pastor to ask for people's opinions of him. But Jesus was not much concerned by their answers to this question. He knew by now that the Pharisees and Sadducees were bitterly hostile to him. The masses were only superficially following him and they looked for a political Messiah and had vague ideas about him. How much did the disciples understand and how far have they come in their development of faith? Are they still loyal?

rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{And I also say unto thee} (\k'ag“ de soi leg“\). "The emphasis is not on 'Thou art Peter' over against 'Thou art the Christ,' but on \Kag“\: 'The Father hath revealed to thee one truth, and I also tell you another" (McNeile). Jesus calls Peter here by the name that he had said he would have (John:1:42|). Peter (\Petros\) is simply the Greek word for Cephas (Aramaic). Then it was prophecy, now it is fact. In verse 17| Jesus addresses him as "Simon Bar-Jonah," his full patronymic (Aramaic) name. But Jesus has a purpose now in using his nickname "Peter" which he had himself given him. Jesus makes a remarkable play on Peter's name, a pun in fact, that has caused volumes of controversy and endless theological strife. {On this rock} (\epi tautˆi tˆi petrƒi\) Jesus says, a ledge or cliff of rock like that in strkjv@7:24| on which the wise man built his house. \Petros\ is usually a smaller detachment of the massive ledge. But too much must not be made of this point since Jesus probably spoke Aramaic to Peter which draws no such distinction (\Kˆphƒ\). What did Jesus mean by this word-play?

rwp@Matthew:16:19 @{The Keys of the kingdom} (\tas kleidas tˆs basileias\). Here again we have the figure of a building with keys to open from the outside. The question is raised at once if Jesus does not here mean the same thing by "kingdom" that he did by "church" in verse 18|. In strkjv@Revelation:1:18; strkjv@3:7| Christ the Risen Lord has "the keys of death and of Hades." He has also "the keys of the kingdom of heaven" which he here hands over to Peter as "gatekeeper" or "steward" (\oikonomos\) provided we do not understand it as a special and peculiar prerogative belonging to Peter. The same power here given to Peter belongs to every disciple of Jesus in all the ages. Advocates of papal supremacy insist on the primacy of Peter here and the power of Peter to pass on this supposed sovereignty to others. But this is all quite beside the mark. We shall soon see the disciples actually disputing again (Matthew:18:1|) as to which of them is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven as they will again (20:21|) and even on the night before Christ's death. Clearly neither Peter nor the rest understood Jesus to say here that Peter was to have supreme authority. What is added shows that Peter held the keys precisely as every preacher and teacher does. To "bind" (\dˆsˆis\) in rabbinical language is to forbid, to "loose" (\lusˆis\) is to permit. Peter would be like a rabbi who passes on many points. Rabbis of the school of Hillel "loosed" many things that the school of Schammai "bound." The teaching of Jesus is the standard for Peter and for all preachers of Christ. Note the future perfect indicative (\estai dedemenon, estai lelumenon\), a state of completion. All this assumes, of course, that Peter's use of the keys will be in accord with the teaching and mind of Christ. The binding and loosing is repeated by Jesus to all the disciples (18:18|). Later after the Resurrection Christ will use this same language to all the disciples (John:20:23|), showing that it was not a special prerogative of Peter. He is simply first among equals, _primus inter pares_, because on this occasion he was spokesman for the faith of all. It is a violent leap in logic to claim power to forgive sins, to pronounce absolution, by reason of the technical rabbinical language that Jesus employed about binding and loosing. Every preacher uses the keys of the kingdom when he proclaims the terms of salvation in Christ. The proclamation of these terms when accepted by faith in Christ has the sanction and approval of God the Father. The more personal we make these great words the nearer we come to the mind of Christ. The more ecclesiastical we make them the further we drift away from him.

rwp@Matthew:17:3 @{There appeared} (\“phthˆ\). Singular aorist passive verb with Moses (to be understood also with Elijah), but the participle \sunlalountes\ is plural agreeing with both. "Sufficient objectivity is guaranteed by the vision being enjoyed by all three" (Bruce). The Jewish apocalypses reveal popular expectations that Moses and Elijah would reappear. Both had mystery connected with their deaths. One represented law, the other prophecy, while Jesus represented the gospel (grace). They spoke of his decease (Luke:9:31|), the cross, the theme uppermost in the mind of Christ and which the disciples did not comprehend. Jesus needed comfort and he gets it from fellowship with Moses and Elijah.

rwp@Matthew:17:24 @{They that received the half-shekel} (\hoi ta didrachma lambanontes\). This temple tax amounted to an Attic drachma or the Jewish half-shekel, about one-third of a dollar. Every Jewish man twenty years of age and over was expected to pay it for the maintenance of the temple. But it was not a compulsory tax like that collected by the publicans for the government. "The tax was like a voluntary church-rate; no one could be compelled to pay" (Plummer). The same Greek word occurs in two Egyptian papyri of the first century A.D. for the receipt for the tax for the temple of Suchus (Milligan and Moulton's _Vocabulary_). This tax for the Jerusalem temple was due in the month Adar (our March) and it was now nearly six months overdue. But Jesus and the Twelve had been out of Galilee most of this time. Hence the question of the tax-collectors. The payment had to be made in the Jewish coin, half-shekel. Hence the money-changers did a thriving business in charging a small premium for the Jewish coin, amounting to some forty-five thousand dollars a year, it is estimated. It is significant that they approached Peter rather than Jesus, perhaps not wishing to embarrass "Your Teacher," "a roundabout hint that the tax was overdue" (Bruce). Evidently Jesus had been in the habit of paying it (Peter's).

rwp@Matthew:18:28 @{A hundred pence} (\hekaton dˆnaria\). A denarius was worth about eight and a half pence. The hundred denarii here were equal to some "fifty shillings" (Bruce), "about 4 pounds" (McNeile), "twenty pounds" (Moffatt), "twenty dollars" (Goodspeed), "100 shillings" (Weymouth). These are various efforts to represent in modern language the small amount of this debt compared with the big one. {Took him by the throat} (\epnigen\). "Held him by the throat" (Allen). It is imperfect, probably inchoative, "began to choke or throttle him." The Roman law allowed this indignity. Vincent quotes Livy (iv. 53) who tells how the necks were twisted (_collum torsisset_) and how Cicero (_Pro Cluentio_, xxi.) says: "Lead him to the judgment seat with twisted neck (_collo obtorto_)." {What thou owest} (\ei ti opheileis\). Literally, "if thou owest anything," however little. He did not even know how much it was, only that he owed him something. "The 'if' is simply the expression of a pitiless logic" (Meyer).

rwp@Matthew:19:1 @{He departed} (\metˆren\). Literally, to lift up, change something to another place. Transitive in the LXX and in a Cilician rock inscription. Intransitive in strkjv@13:53| and here, the only N.T. instances. Absence of \hoti\ or \kai\ after \kai egeneto\, one of the clear Hebraisms in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1042f.). This verse is a sort of formula in Matthew at the close of important groups of \logia\ as in strkjv@7:28; strkjv@11:1; strkjv@13:53|. {The borders of Judea beyond Jordan} (\eis ta horia tˆs Ioudaias peran tou Iordanou\). This is a curious expression. It apparently means that Jesus left Galilee to go to Judea by way of Perea as the Galileans often did to avoid Samaria. Luke (Luke:17:11|) expressly says that he passed through Samaria and Galilee when he left Ephraim in Northern Judea (John:11:54|). He was not afraid to pass through the edge of Galilee and down the Jordan Valley in Perea on this last journey to Jerusalem. McNeile is needlessly opposed to the trans-Jordanic or Perean aspect of this phase of Christ's work.

rwp@Matthew:19:13 @{Rebuked them} (\epetimˆsen autois\). No doubt people did often crowd around Jesus for a touch of his hand and his blessing. The disciples probably felt that they were doing Jesus a kindness. How little they understood children and Jesus. It is a tragedy to make children feel that they are in the way at home and at church. These men were the twelve apostles and yet had no vision of Christ's love for little children. The new child world of today is due directly to Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:19:20 @{What lack I yet?} (\ti eti huster“?\) Here is a psychological paradox. He claims to have kept all these commandments and yet he was not satisfied. He had an uneasy conscience and Jesus called him to something that he did not have. He thought of goodness as quantitative (a series of acts) and not qualitative (of the nature of God). Did his question reveal proud complacency or pathetic despair? A bit of both most likely.

rwp@Matthew:19:24 @{It is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye} (\eukop“teron estin kamˆlon dia trˆmatos rhaphidos eiselthein\). Jesus, of course, means by this comparison, whether an eastern proverb or not, to express the impossible. The efforts to explain it away are jejune like a ship's cable, \kamilon\ or \rhaphis\ as a narrow gorge or gate of entrance for camels which recognized stooping, etc. All these are hopeless, for Jesus pointedly calls the thing "impossible" (verse 26|). The Jews in the Babylonian Talmud did have a proverb that a man even in his dreams did not see an elephant pass through the eye of a needle (Vincent). The Koran speaks of the wicked finding the gates of heaven shut "till a camel shall pass through the eye of a needle." But the Koran may have got this figure from the New Testament. The word for an ordinary needle is \rhaphis\, but, Luke (Luke:18:25|) employs \belonˆ\, the medical term for the surgical needle not elsewhere in the N.T.

rwp@Matthew:19:28 @{In the regeneration} (\en tˆi palingenesiƒi\). The new birth of the world is to be fulfilled when Jesus sits on his throne of glory. This word was used by the Stoics and the Pythagoreans. It is common also in the mystery religions (Angus, _Mystery Religions and Christianity_, pp. 95ff.). It is in the papyri also. We must put no fantastic ideas into the mouth of Jesus. But he did look for the final consummation of his kingdom. What is meant by the disciples also sitting on twelve thrones is not clear.

rwp@Matthew:21:4 @{By the prophet} (\dia tou prophˆtou\). The first line is from strkjv@Isaiah:62:11|, the rest from strkjv@Zechariah:9:9|. John (John:12:14f.|) makes it clear that Jesus did not quote the passage himself. In Matthew it is not so plain, but probably it is his own comment about the incident. It is not Christ's intention to fulfil the prophecy, simply that his conduct did fulfil it.

rwp@Matthew:21:29 @{I will not} (\ou thel“\). Songs:many old manuscripts, though the Vatican manuscript (B) has the order of the two sons reversed. Logically the "I, sir" (\eg“, kurie\) suits better for the second son (verse 30|) with a reference to the blunt refusal of the first. Songs:also the manuscripts differ in verse 31| between the first (\ho pr“tos\) and the last (\ho husteros\ or \eschatos\). But the one who actually did the will of the father is the one who {repented and went} (\metamelˆtheis apˆlthen\). This word really means "repent," to be sorry afterwards, and must be sharply distinguished from the word \metanoe“\ used 34 times in the N.T. as in strkjv@Matthew:3:2| and \metanoia\ used 24 times as in strkjv@Matthew:3:8|. The verb \metamelomai\ occurs in the N.T. only five times (Matthew:21:29,32; strkjv@27:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:8; strkjv@Hebrews:7:21| from strkjv@Psalms:109:4|). Paul distinguishes sharply between mere sorrow and the act "repentance" which he calls \metanoian\ (2Corinthians:7:9|). In the case of Judas (Matthew:27:3|) it was mere remorse. Here the boy got sorry for his stubborn refusal to obey his father and went and obeyed. Godly sorrow leads to repentance (\metanoian\), but mere sorrow is not repentance.

rwp@Matthew:22:12 @{Not having a wedding-garment} (\mˆ ech“n enduma gamou\). \Mˆ\ is in the _Koin‚_ the usual negative with participles unless special emphasis on the negative is desired as in \ouk endedumenon\. There is a subtle distinction between \mˆ\ and \ou\ like our subjective and objective notions. Some hold that the wedding-garment here is a portion of a lost parable separate from that of the Wedding Feast, but there is no evidence for that idea. Wunsche does report a parable by a rabbi of a king who set no time for his feast and the guests arrived, some properly dressed waiting at the door; others in their working clothes did not wait, but went off to work and, when the summons suddenly came, they had no time to dress properly and were made to stand and watch while the others partook of the feast.

rwp@Matthew:23:25 @{From extortion and excess} (\ex harpagˆs kai akrasias\). A much more serious accusation. These punctilious observers of the external ceremonies did not hesitate at robbery (\harpages\) and graft (\akrasias\), lack of control. A modern picture of wickedness in high places both civil and ecclesiastical where the moral elements in life are ruthlessly trodden under foot. Of course, the idea is for both the outside \ektos\ and the inside (\entos\) of the cup and the platter (fine side dish). But the inside is the more important. Note the change to singular in verse 26| as if Jesus in a friendlier tone pleads with a Pharisee to mend his ways.

rwp@Matthew:23:37 @{How often would I have gathered} (\posakis ˆthelˆsa episunagein\). More exactly, how often did I long to gather to myself (double compound infinitive). The same verb (\episunagei\) is used of the hen with the compound preposition \hupokat“\. Everyone has seen the hen quickly get together the chicks under her wings in the time of danger. These words naturally suggest previous visits to Jerusalem made plain by John's Gospel.

rwp@Matthew:24:3 @{As he sat} (\kathˆmenou\). Genitive absolute. Picture of Jesus sitting on the Mount of Olives looking down on Jerusalem and the temple which he had just left. After the climb up the mountain four of the disciples (Peter, James, John, Andrew) come to Jesus with the problem raised by his solemn words. They ask these questions about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, his own second coming (\parousia\, presence, common in the papyri for the visit of the emperor)...end of the world. Did they...70, as also a symbol of his own second coming and of the end of the world (\sunteleias tou ai“nos\) or consummation of the age. In a painting the artist by skilful perspective may give on the same surface the inside of a room, the fields outside the window, and the sky far beyond. Certainly in this discourse Jesus blends in apocalyptic language the background of his death on the cross, the coming destruction of Jerusalem, his own second coming and the end of the world. He now touches one, now the other. It is not easy for us to separate clearly the various items. It is enough if we get the picture as a whole as it is here drawn with its lessons of warning to be ready for his coming and the end. The destruction of Jerusalem came as he foretold. There are some who would date the Synoptic Gospels after A.D. 70 in order to avoid the predictive element involved in the earlier date. But that is to limit the fore-knowledge of Jesus to a merely human basis. The word \parousia\ occurs in this chapter alone (3,27,37,39|) in the Gospels, but often in the Epistles, either of presence as opposed to absence (Phillipians:2:12|) or the second coming of Christ (2Thessalonians:2:1|).

rwp@Matthew:25:16 @{Straightway} (\euthe“s\). Beginning of verse 16, not the end of verse 15|. The business temper of this slave is shown by his promptness. {With them} (\en autois\). Instrumental use of \en\. He worked (\ˆrgasato\), did business, traded with them. "The virgins wait, the servants work" (Vincent). {Made} (\epoiˆsen\). But Westcott and Hort read \ekerdˆsen\, gained, as in verse 17|. \Kerdos\ means interest. This gain was a hundred per cent.

rwp@Matthew:25:27 @{Thou oughtest therefore} (\edsi se oun\). His very words of excuse convict him. It was a necessity (\edei\) that he did not see. {The bankers} (\tois trapezeitais\). The benchers, money-changers, brokers, who exchanged money for a fee and who paid interest on money. Word common in late Greek. {I should have received back} (\eg“ ekomisamˆn an\). Conclusion of a condition of the second class (determined as unfulfilled). The condition is not expressed, but it is implied. "If you had done that." {With interest} (\sun tok“i\). Not with "usury" in the sense of extortion or oppression. Usury only means "use" in itself. The word is from \tikt“\, to bring forth. Compound interest at six per cent doubles the principal every twenty years. It is amazing how rapidly that piles up if one carries it on for centuries and millenniums. "In the early Roman Empire legal interest was eight per cent, but in usurious transactions it was lent at twelve, twenty-four, and even forty-eight" (Vincent). Such practices exist today in our cities. The Mosaic law did not allow interest in dealings between Hebrews, but only with strangers (Deuteronomy:23:19,20; strkjv@Psalms:15:5|).

rwp@Matthew:25:40 @{Ye did it unto me} (\emoi epoiˆsate\). Dative of personal interest. Christ identifies himself with the needy and the suffering. This conduct is proof of possession of love for Christ and likeness to him.

rwp@Matthew:25:42 @{No meat} (\ouk ed“kate moi phagein\). You did not give me anything to eat. The repetition of the negative \ou\ in 42| and 43| is like the falling of clods on the coffin or the tomb. It is curious the surprise here shown both by the sheep and the goats. Some sheep will think that they are goats and some goats will think that they are sheep.

rwp@Matthew:26:12 @{To prepare me for burial} (\pros to entaphiasai me\). Mary alone had understood what Jesus had repeatedly said about his approaching death. The disciples were so wrapped up in their own notions of a political kingdom that they failed utterly to sympathize with Jesus as he faced the cross. But Mary with the woman's fine intuitions did begin to understand and this was her way of expressing her high emotions and loyalty. The word here is the same used in strkjv@John:19:40| about what Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus did for the body of Jesus before burial with the addition of \pros to\ showing the purpose of Mary (the infinitive of purpose). Mary was vindicated by Jesus and her noble deed has become a "memorial of her" (\eis mnˆmosumon autˆs\) as well as of Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:26:23 @{He that dipped} (\ho embapsas\). They all dipped their hands, having no knives, forks, or spoons. The aorist participle with the article simply means that the betrayer is the one who dips his hand in the dish (\en t“i trubli“i\) or platter with the broth of nuts and raisins and figs into which the bread was dipped before eating. It is plain that Judas was not recognized by the rest as indicated by what Jesus has said. This language means that one of those who had eaten bread with him had violated the rights of hospitality by betraying him. The Arabs today are punctilious on this point. Eating one's bread ties your hands and compels friendship. But Judas knew full well as is shown in verse 25| though the rest apparently did not grasp it.

rwp@Matthew:26:30 @{Sang a hymn} (\humnˆsantes\). The _Hallel_, part of strkjv@Psalms:115-118|. But apparently they did not go out at once to the Garden of Gethsemane. Jesus tarried with them in the Upper Room for the wonderful discourse and prayer in strkjv@John:14-17|. They may have gone out to the street after strkjv@John:14:31|. It was no longer considered obligatory to remain in the house after the passover meal till morning as at the start (Exodus:12:22|). Jesus went out to Gethsemane, the garden of the agony, outside of Jerusalem, toward the Mount of Olives.

rwp@Matthew:26:38 @{Watch with me} (\grˆgoreite met' emou\). This late present from the perfect \egrˆgora\ means to keep awake and not go to sleep. The hour was late and the strain had been severe, but Jesus pleaded for a bit of human sympathy as he wrestled with his Father. It did not seem too much to ask. He had put his sorrow in strong language, "even unto death" (\he“s thanatou\) that ought to have alarmed them.

rwp@Matthew:26:41 @{Watch and pray} (\grˆgoreite kai proseuchesthe\). Jesus repeats the command of verse 38| with the addition of prayer and with the warning against the peril of temptation. He himself was feeling the worst of all temptations of his earthly life just then. He did not wish then to enter such temptation (\peirasmon\, here in this sense, not mere trial). Thus we are to understand the prayer in strkjv@Matthew:6:13| about leading (being led) into temptation. Their failure was due to weakness of the flesh as is often the case. {Spirit} (\pneuma\) here is the moral life (\intellect, will, emotions\) as opposed to the flesh (cf. strkjv@Isaiah:31:3; strkjv@Romans:7:25|). {Except I drink it} (\ean mˆ auto pi“\). Condition of the third class undetermined, but with likelihood of determination, whereas {if this cannot pass away} (\ei ou dunatai touto parelthein\) is first-class condition, determined as fulfilled, assumed to be true. This delicate distinction accurately presents the real attitude of Jesus towards this subtle temptation.

rwp@Matthew:26:63 @{Held his peace} (\esi“pa\). Kept silent, imperfect tense. Jesus refused to answer the bluster of Caiaphas. {I adjure thee by the living God} (\exorkiz“ se kata tou theou tou z“ntos\). Songs:Caiaphas put Jesus on oath in order to make him incriminate himself, a thing unlawful in Jewish jurisprudence. He had failed to secure any accusation against Jesus that would stand at all. But Jesus did not refuse to answer under solemn oath, clearly showing that he was not thinking of oaths in courts of justice when he prohibited profanity. The charge that Caiaphas makes is that Jesus claims to be the Messiah, the Son of God. To refuse to answer would be tantamount to a denial. Songs:Jesus answered knowing full well the use that would be made of his confession and claim.

rwp@Matthew:26:66 @{He is worthy of death} (\enochos thanatou estin\). Held in the bonds of death (\en, ech“\) as actually guilty with the genitive (\thanatou\). The dative expresses liability as in strkjv@Matthew:5:21| (\tˆi krisei\) and as \eis\ and the accusative (Matthew:5:22|). They took the vote though it was at night and they no longer had the power of death since the Romans took it away from them. Death was the penalty of blasphemy (Leviticus:24:15|). But they enjoyed taking it as their answer to his unanswerable speeches in the temple that dreadful Tuesday a few days before. It was unanimous save that Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus did not agree. They were probably absent and not even invited as being under suspicion for being secret disciples of Christ.

rwp@Matthew:26:75 @{Peter remembered} (\emnˆsthˆ ho Petros\). A small thing, but _magna circumstantia_ (Bengel). In a flash of lightning rapidity he recalled the words of Jesus a few hours before (Matthew:26:34|) which he had then scouted with the proud boast that "even if I must die with thee, yet will I not deny thee" (26:35|). And now this triple denial was a fact. There is no extenuation for the base denials of Peter. He had incurred the dread penalty involved in the words of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:10:33| of denial by Jesus before the Father in heaven. But Peter's revulsion of feeling was as sudden as his sin. {He went out and wept bitterly} (\exelth“n ex“ eklausen pikr“s\). Luke adds that the Lord turned and looked upon Peter (Luke:22:61|). That look brought Peter back to his senses. He could not stay where he now was with the revilers of Jesus. He did not feel worthy or able to go openly into the hall where Jesus was. Songs:outside he went with a broken heart. The constative aorist here does not emphasize as Mark's imperfect does (Mark:14:72|, \eklaien\) the continued weeping that was now Peter's only consolation. The tears were bitter, all the more so by reason of that look of understanding pity that Jesus gave him. One of the tragedies of the Cross is the bleeding heart of Peter. Judas was a total wreck and Peter was a near derelict. Satan had sifted them all as wheat, but Jesus had prayed specially for Peter (Luke:22:31f.|). Will Satan show Peter to be all chaff as Judas was?

rwp@Matthew:27:14 @{And he gave him no answer, not even to one word} (\kai ouk apekrithˆ aut“i pros oude hen rhˆma\). Jesus refused to answer the charges of the Jews (verse 12|). Now he continued silent under the direct question of Pilate. The Greek is very precise besides the double negative. "He did not reply to him up to not even one word." This silent dignity amazed Pilate and yet he was strangely impressed.

rwp@Matthew:27:25 @{His blood be upon us and upon our children} (\to haima autou kai epi ta tekna hˆm“n\). These solemn words do show a consciousness that the Jewish people recognized their guilt and were even proud of it. But Pilate could not wash away his own guilt that easily. The water did not wash away the blood of Jesus from his hands any more than Lady Macbeth could wash away the blood-stains from her lily-white hands. One legend tells that in storms on Mt. Pilatus in Switzerland his ghost comes out and still washes his hands in the storm-clouds. There was guilt enough for Judas, for Caiaphas and for all the Sanhedrin both Sadducees and Pharisees, for the Jewish people as a whole (\pas ho laos\), and for Pilate. At bottom the sins of all of us nailed Jesus to the Cross. This language is no excuse for race hatred today, but it helps explain the sensitiveness between Jew and Christians on this subject. And Jews today approach the subject of the Cross with a certain amount of prejudice.

rwp@Matthew:27:48 @{Gave him to drink} (\epotizen\). Imperfect of conative action, {offered him a drink} of vinegar on the sponge on a reed. Others interrupted this kindly man, but Jesus did taste this mild stimulant (John:19:30|) for he thirsted (John:19:28|).

rwp@Matthew:27:50 @{Yielded up his spirit} (\aphˆken to pneuma\). The loud cry may have been strkjv@Psalms:31:5| as given in strkjv@Luke:23:46|: "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit." John (John:19:30|) gives {It is finished} (\tetelestai\), though which was actually last is not clear. Jesus did not die from slow exhaustion, but with a loud cry. {He breathed out} (\exepneusen\, strkjv@Mark:15:37|), {sent back his spirit} (Matthew:27:50|), {gave up his spirit} (\pared“ken to pneuma\, strkjv@John:19:30|). "He gave up his life because he willed it, when he willed it, and as he willed it" (Augustine). Stroud (_Physical Cause of the Death of Christ_) considers the loud cry one of the proofs that Jesus died of a ruptured heart as a result of bearing the sin of the world.

rwp@Matthew:27:51 @{Was rent} (\eschisthˆ\). Both Mark (Mark:15:38|) and Luke (Luke:23:45|) mention also this fact. Matthew connects it with the earthquake, "the earth did quake" (\hˆ gˆ eseisthˆ\). Josephus (_War_ VI. 299) tells of a quaking in the temple before the destruction and the Talmud tells of a quaking forty years before the destruction of the temple. Allen suggests that "a cleavage in the masonry of the porch, which rent the outer veil and left the Holy Place open to view, would account for the language of the Gospels, of Josephus, and of the Talmud." This veil was a most elaborately woven fabric of seventy-two twisted plaits of twenty-four threads each and the veil was sixty feet long and thirty wide. The rending of the veil signified the removal of the separation between God and the people (Gould).

rwp@Matthew:27:55 @{Many women} (\gunaikes pollai\). We have come to expect the women from Galilee to be faithful, last at the Cross and first at the tomb. Luke (Luke:23:49|) says that "all his acquaintance" (\pantes hoi gn“stoi aut“i\) stood at a distance and saw the end. One may hope that the apostles were in that sad group. But certainly many women were there. The Mother of Jesus had been taken away from the side of the Cross by the Beloved Disciple to his own home (John:19:27|). Matthew names three of the group by name. Mary Magdalene is mentioned as a well-known person though not previously named in Matthew's Gospel. Certainly she is not the sinful woman of strkjv@Luke:7| nor Mary of Bethany. There is another Mary, the mother of James and Joseph (Joses) not otherwise known to us. And then there is the mother of the sons of Zebedee (James and John), usually identified with Salome (Mark:15:40|). These noble and faithful women were "beholding from afar" (\apo makrothen the“rousai\). These three women may have drawn nearer to the Cross for Mary the Mother of Jesus stood beside the Cross (\para t“i staur“i\) with Mary of Clopas and Mary Magdalene (John:19:25|) before she left. They had once ministered unto Jesus (\diakonousai aut“i\) and now he is dead. Matthew does not try to picture the anguish of heart of these noble women nor does he say as Luke (Luke:23:48|) does that "they returned smiting their breasts." He drops the curtain on that saddest of all tragedies as the loyal band stood and looked at the dead Christ on Golgotha. What hope did life now hold for them?

rwp@Matthew:27:66 @{Sealing the stone, the guard being with them} (\sphragisantˆs ton lithon meta tˆs koust“dias\). Probably by a cord stretched across the stone and sealed at each end as in strkjv@Daniel:6:17|. The sealing was done in the presence of the Roman guard who were left in charge to protect this stamp of Roman authority and power. They did their best to prevent theft and the resurrection (Bruce), but they overreached themselves and provided additional witness to the fact of the empty tomb and the resurrection of Jesus (Plummer).

rwp@Matthew:28:4 @{The watchers did quake} (\eseisthˆsan hoi tˆrountes\). And no wonder that they became as dead men and fled before the women came.

rwp@Matthew:28:7 @{He goeth before you into Galilee} (\proagei humas eis tˆn Galilaian\). Jesus did appear to the disciples in Galilee on two notable occasions (by the beloved lake, strkjv@John:21|, and on the mountain, strkjv@Matthew:28:16-20|). Probably before the women were permitted to tell this story in full to the disciples who scouted as idle talk (John:24:11|) their first accounts, Jesus appeared to various disciples in Jerusalem on this first great Sunday. Jesus did not say that he would not see any of them in Jerusalem. He merely made a definite appointment in Galilee which he kept.

rwp@Matthew:28:19 @{All the nations} (\panta ta ethnˆ\). Not just the Jews scattered among the Gentiles, but the Gentiles themselves in every land. And not by making Jews of them, though this point is not made plain here. It will take time for the disciples to grow into this _Magna Charta_ of the missionary propaganda. But here is the world program of the Risen Christ and it should not be forgotten by those who seek to foreshorten it all by saying that Jesus expected his second coming to be very soon, even within the lifetime of those who heard. He did promise to come, but he has never named the date. Meanwhile we are to be ready for his coming at any time and to look for it joyfully. But we are to leave that to the Father and push on the campaign for world conquest. This program includes making disciples or learners (\mathˆteusate\) such as they were themselves. That means evangelism in the fullest sense and not merely revival meetings. Baptism in (\eis\, not _into_) the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, in the name of the Trinity. Objection is raised to this language in the mouth of Jesus as too theological and as not a genuine part of the Gospel of Matthew for the same reason. See strkjv@Matthew:11:27|, where Jesus speaks of the Father and the Son as here. But it is all to no purpose. There is a chapter devoted to this subject in my _The Christ of the Logia_ in which the genuineness of these words is proven. The name of Jesus is the essential part of it as is shown in the Acts. Trine immersion is not taught as the Greek Church holds and practices, baptism in the name of the Father, then of the Son, then of the Holy Spirit. The use of name (\onoma\) here is a common one in the Septuagint and the papyri for power or authority. For the use of \eis\ with \onoma\ in the sense here employed, not meaning _into_, see strkjv@Matthew:10:41f.| (cf. also strkjv@12:41|).

rwp@Philemon:1:18 @{But if he hath wronged thee at all} (\ei de ti ˆdikˆse se\). Condition of the first class, assumed to be true. Onesimus did wrong (\ˆdikˆse\, first aorist active indicative of \adikˆo\, to wrong, without justice). He had probably robbed Philemon before he ran away. {Or oweth} (\ˆ opheilei\). Delicate way of putting the stealing. {Put that to mine account} (\touto emoi ellogƒ\). Present active imperative of \elloga“\. In the _Koin‚_ verbs in \-e“\ often appear in \-a“\ like \elee“, elea“\. Songs:with \elloge“\ as \elloga“\, late verb in inscriptions and papyri (Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 84), though in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:5:13|. It means to set to one's account.

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:1:27 @{Let your manner of life} (\politeuesthe\). Old verb from \politˆs\, citizen, and that from \polis\, city, to be a citizen, to manage a state's affairs, to live as a citizen. Only twice in N.T., here and strkjv@Acts:23:1|. Philippi as a colony possessed Roman citizenship and Paul was proud of his own possession of this right. The Authorized Version missed the figure completely by the word "conversation" which did refer to conduct and not mere talk as now, but did not preserve the figure of citizenship. Better render, "Only do ye live as citizens." {Striving} (\sunathlountes\). Rather, "striving together" as in an athletic contest. Late and rare word (Diodorus). "The very energy of the Christian faith to produce energetic individualities" (Rainy). "Striving in concert" (Lightfoot). {For the faith} (\tˆi pistei\). For the teaching of the gospel, objective sense of \pistis\ (faith).

rwp@Philippians:2:6 @{Being} (\huparch“n\). Rather, "existing," present active participle of \huparch“\. In the form of God (\en morphˆi theou\). \Morphˆ\ means the essential attributes as shown in the form. In his preincarnate state Christ possessed the attributes of God and so appeared to those in heaven who saw him. Here is a clear statement by Paul of the deity of Christ. {A prize} (\harpagmon\). Predicate accusative with \hˆgˆsato\. Originally words in \-mos\ signified the act, not the result (\-ma\). The few examples of \harpagmos\ (Plutarch, etc.) allow it to be understood as equivalent to \harpagma\, like \baptismos\ and \baptisma\. That is to say Paul means a prize to be held on to rather than something to be won ("robbery"). {To be on an equality with God} (\to einai isa theoi\). Accusative articular infinitive object of \hˆgˆsato\, "the being equal with God" (associative instrumental case \the“i\ after \isa\). \Isa\ is adverbial use of neuter plural with \einai\ as in strkjv@Revelation:21:16|. {Emptied himself} (\heauton eken“se\). First aorist active indicative of \keno“\, old verb from \kenos\, empty. Of what did Christ empty himself? Not of his divine nature. That was impossible. He continued to be the Son of God. There has arisen a great controversy on this word, a \Kenosis\ doctrine. Undoubtedly Christ gave up his environment of glory. He took upon himself limitations of place (space) and of knowledge and of power, though still on earth retaining more of these than any mere man. It is here that men should show restraint and modesty, though it is hard to believe that Jesus limited himself by error of knowledge and certainly not by error of conduct. He was without sin, though tempted as we are. "He stripped himself of the insignia of majesty" (Lightfoot).

rwp@Philippians:2:9 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). Because of which act of voluntary and supreme humility. {Highly exalted} (\huperups“se\). First aorist indicative of \huperupso“\ (\huper\ and \hupsos\) late and rare word (LXX and Byzantine). Here only in N.T. Because of Christ's voluntary humiliation God lifted him above or beyond (\huper\) the state of glory which he enjoyed before the Incarnation. What glory did Christ have after the Ascension that he did not have before in heaven? What did he take back to heaven that he did not bring? Clearly his humanity. He returned to heaven the Son of Man as well as the Son of God. {The name which is above every name} (\to onoma to huper pan onoma\). What name is that? Apparently and naturally the name {Jesus}, which is given in verse 10|. Some think it is "Jesus Christ," some "Lord," some the ineffable name Jehovah, some merely dignity and honour.

rwp@Philippians:2:22 @{The proof} (\tˆn dokimˆn\). "The test" as of metals (2Corinthians:2:9; strkjv@9:13|). Three times they had seen Timothy (Acts:16:13; strkjv@19:22; strkjv@20:3f.|). {With me} (\sun emoi\). Paul's delicacy of feeling made him use \sun\ rather than \emoi\ alone. Timothy did not serve Paul. {In furtherance of} (\eis\). See strkjv@Phillipians:1:5| for this use of \eis\.

rwp@Philippians:2:26 @{He longed after} (\epipoth“n ˆn\). Periphrastic imperfect of \epipothe“\ (Phillipians:1:8|), "he was yearning after." {You all} (\pantas humas\). Songs:again (1:5,7,8|). {Was sore troubled} (\adˆmon“n\). Periphrastic imperfect again (repeat \ˆn\) of the old word \adˆmone“\ either from an unused \adˆm“n\ (\a\ privative and \dˆmos\, away from home, homesick) or from \adˆm“n, adˆsai\ (discontent, bewilderment). The _Vocabulary_ of Moulton and Milligan gives one papyrus example in line with the latter etymology. See already strkjv@Matthew:26:37; strkjv@Mark:14:33|. In any case the distress of Epaphroditus was greatly increased when he knew that the Philippians (the home-folks) had learned of his illness, "because ye had heard that he was sick" (\dioti ˆkousate hoti ˆsthenˆse\), "because ye heard that he fell sick" (ingressive aorist). {He was sick} (\ˆsthenˆse\). Ingressive aorist, "he did become sick." {Nigh unto death} (\paraplˆsion thanat“i\). Only example in N.T. of this compound adverbial preposition (from the adjective \paraplˆsios\) with the dative case.

rwp@Philippians:3:12 @{Not that} (\ouch hoti\). To guard against a misunderstanding as in strkjv@John:6:26; strkjv@12:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:24; strkjv@Phillipians:4:11,17|. {I have already obtained} (\ˆdˆ elabon\). Rather, "I did already obtain," constative second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\, summing up all his previous experiences as a single event. {Or am already made perfect} (\ˆ ˆdˆ tetelei“mai\). Perfect passive indicative (state of completion) of \teleio“\, old verb from \teleios\ and that from \telos\ (end). Paul pointedly denies that he has reached a spiritual impasse of non- development. Certainly he knew nothing of so-called sudden absolute perfection by any single experience. Paul has made great progress in Christlikeness, but the goal is still before him, not behind him. {But I press on} (\di“k“ de\). He is not discouraged, but encouraged. He keeps up the chase (real idea in \di“k“\, as in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:1; strkjv@Romans:9:30; strkjv@1Timothy:6:11|). {If so be that} (\ei kai\). "I follow after." The condition (third class, \ei--katalab“\, second aorist active subjunctive of \katalamban“\) is really a sort of purpose clause or aim. There are plenty of examples in the _Koin‚_ of the use of \ei\ and the subjunctive as here (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1017), "if I also may lay hold of that for which (\eph' h“i\, purpose expressed by \epi\) I was laid hold of (\katelˆmphthˆn\, first aorist passive of the same verb \katalamban“\) by Christ Jesus." His conversion was the beginning, not the end of the chase.

rwp@Philippians:4:10 @{I rejoice} (\echarˆn\). Second aorist passive indicative of \chair“\, a timeless aorist. I did rejoice, I do rejoice. {Greatly} (\megal“s\). Old adverb, only here in N.T., from \megas\ (great). {Now at length} (\ˆdˆ pote\). In N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:1:10|. \Pote\ is indefinite past (interval), \ˆdˆ\ immediate present. {Ye have revived} (\anethalete\). Second aorist active indicative of old poetic word (Homer), \anathall“\, to sprout again, to shoot up, to blossom again. Songs:in the LXX five times, though rare and literary word. {Your thought for me} (\to huper emou phronein\). Accusative case of the articular present active infinitive the object of \anethalete\ used transitively. "You caused your thinking of me to bloom afresh." {Wherein} (\eph' h“i\). "In which," "upon which" (locative case). A loose reference to Paul's interests as involved in their thinking of him. {Ye did indeed take thought} (\kai ephroneite\). Imperfect active, "ye were also (or had been also) thinking." {Ye lacked opportunity} (\ˆkaireisthe\). Imperfect middle of \akaireomai\, late and rare word, here only in N.T., from \akairos\ (\a\ privative, \kairos\), not to have a chance, the opposite of \eukaire“\ (Mark:6:31|).

rwp@Philippians:4:11 @{In respect of want} (\kath' husterˆsin\). Late and rare word from \hustere“\, to be behind or too late, only here and strkjv@Mark:12:44| in N.T. {I have learned} (\emathon\). Simply, "I did learn" (constative second aorist active indicative of \manthan“\, to learn, looking at his long experience as a unit. {In whatsoever state I am} (\en hois eimi\). "In what things (circumstances) I am." {To be content} (\autarkˆs einai\). Predicate nominative with the infinitive of the old adjective \autarkˆs\ (from \autos\ and \arke“\, to be self-sufficient), self-sufficing. Favourite word with the Stoics, only here in N.T., though \autarkeia\ occurs in strkjv@2Corinthians:9:8; strkjv@1Timothy:6:6|. Paul is contented with his lot and he learned that lesson long ago. Socrates said as to who is wealthiest: "He that is content with least, for \autarkeia\ is nature's wealth."

rwp@Philippians:4:14 @{That ye had fellowship} (\sunkoin“nˆsantes\). First aorist active participle (simultaneous action with the principal verb \kal“s epoiˆsate\). "Ye did well contributing for my affliction."

rwp@Philippians:4:16 @{Once and again} (\kai hapax kai dis\). "Both once and twice" they did it "even in Thessalonica" and so before Paul went to Corinth." See the same Greek idiom in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:18|.

rwp@Revelation:1:20 @{The mystery of the seven stars} (\to mustˆrion t“n hepta aster“n\). On the word \mustˆrion\ see on ¯Matthew:13:11; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:7; strkjv@Colossians:1:26|. Here it means the inner meaning (the secret symbol) of a symbolic vision (Swete) as in strkjv@10:7; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@17:7,9; strkjv@Daniel:2:47|. Probably the accusative absolute (Charles), "as for the mystery" (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 490, 1130), as in strkjv@Romans:8:3|. This item is picked out of the previous vision (1:16|) as needing explanation at once and as affording a clue to what follows (2:1,5|). {Which} (\hous\). Masculine accusative retained without attraction to case of \aster“n\ (genitive, \h“n\). {In my right hand} (\epi tˆs dexias mou\). Or "upon," but \en tˆi\, etc., in verse 16|. {And the seven golden candlesticks} (\kai tas hepta luchnias tas chrusƒs\). "The seven lampstands the golden," identifying the stars of verse 16| with the lampstands of verse 12|. The accusative case here is even more peculiar than the accusative absolute \mustˆrion\, since the genitive \luchni“n\ after \mustˆrion\ is what one would expect. Charles suggests that John did not revise his work. {The angels of the seven churches} (\aggeloi t“n hepta ekklˆsi“n\). Anarthrous in the predicate (angels of, etc.). "The seven churches" mentioned in strkjv@1:4,11|. Various views of \aggelos\ here exist. The simplest is the etymological meaning of the word as messenger from \aggell“\ (Matthew:11:10|) as messengers from the seven churches to Patmos or by John from Patmos to the churches (or both). Another view is that \aggelos\ is the pastor of the church, the reading \tˆn gunaika sou\ (thy wife) in strkjv@2:20| (if genuine) confirming this view. Some would even take it to be the bishop over the elders as \episcopos\ in Ignatius, but a separate \aggelos\ in each church is against this idea. Some take it to be a symbol for the church itself or the spirit and genius of the church, though distinguished in this very verse from the churches themselves (the lampstands). Others take it to be the guardian angel of each church assuming angelic patrons to be taught in strkjv@Matthew:18:10; strkjv@Acts:12:15|. Each view is encompassed with difficulties, perhaps fewer belonging to the view that the "angel" is the pastor. {Are seven churches} (\hepta ekklˆsiai eisin\). These seven churches (1:4,11|) are themselves lampstands (1:12|) reflecting the light of Christ to the world (Matthew:5:14-16; strkjv@John:8:12|) in the midst of which Christ walks (1:13|).

rwp@Revelation:2:24 @{To you the rest} (\humin tois loipois\). Dative case. Those who hold out against Jezebel, not necessarily a minority (9:20; strkjv@19:21; strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13|). {As many as} (\hosoi\). Inclusive of all "the rest." {This teaching} (\tˆn didachˆn tautˆn\). That of Jezebel. {Which} (\hoitines\). "Which very ones," generic of the class, explanatory definition as in strkjv@1:7|. {Know not} (\ouk egn“san\). Second aorist (ingressive) active of \gin“sk“\, "did not come to know by experience." {The deep things of Satan} (\ta bathea tou Satanƒ\). The Ophites (worshippers of the serpent) and other later Gnostics (Cainites, Carpocratians, Naassenes) boasted of their knowledge of "the deep things," some claiming this very language about Satan (the serpent) as Paul did of God (1Corinthians:2:10|). It is not clear whether the words here quoted are a boast of the Nicolaitans or a reproach on the other Christians for not knowing the depths of sin. Some even claimed that they could indulge in immorality without sinning (1John:1:10; strkjv@3:10|). Perhaps both ideas are involved. {As they say} (\h“s legousin\). Probably referring to the heretics who ridicule the piety of the other Christians. {None other burden} (\ou--allo baros\). \Baros\ refers to weight (Matthew:20:12|), \phortion\, from \pher“\, to bear, refers to load (Galatians:6:5|), \ogkos\ to bulk (Hebrews:12:1|). Apparently a reference to the decision of the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:28|) where the very word \baros\ is used and mention is made about the two items in verse 20| (fornication and idolatry) without mentioning the others about things strangled, etc. See the Pharisaic narrowness in strkjv@Matthew:23:4|.

rwp@Revelation:3:17 @{I am rich} (\hoti plousios eimi\). Recitative \hoti\ like quotation marks before direct quotation. Old adjective from \ploutos\, riches, wealth. Laodicea was a wealthy city and the church "carried the pride of wealth into its spiritual life" (Swete). {Have gotten riches} (\peploutˆka\). Perfect active indicative of \ploute“\, old verb from \ploutos\, used here of imagined spiritual riches which the church did not possess, just the opposite of church in Smyrna (poor in wealth, rich in grace). This church was in a rich city and was rich in pride and conceit, but poor in grace and ignorant of its spiritual poverty (\ouk oidas\, knowest not). {The wretched one} (\ho talaip“ros\). Old adjective from \tla“\, to endure, and \p“ros\, a callus, afflicted, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:7:24|. Note the one article in the predicate with all these five adjectives unifying the picture of sharp emphasis on "thou" (\su\), "thou that boastest." {Miserable} (\eleeinos\). Pitiable as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:19|. {Poor} (\pt“chos\). See strkjv@2:9| for spiritual poverty. Perhaps some local example of self-complacency is in mind. {Blind} (\tuphlos\). Spiritual blindness as often (Matthew:23:17|), and note "eye-salve" in verse 18|. {Naked} (\gumnos\). "The figure completes the picture of actual poverty" (Beckwith). See 15,16|.

rwp@Revelation:7:4 @{The number of the sealed} (\ton arithmon t“n esphragismen“n\). Accusative case object of \ˆkousa\ and genitive of the perfect passive articular participle of \sphragiz“\. He did not see the sealing or count them himself, but only heard. {A hundred and forty and four thousand} (\hekaton tesserakonta tessares chiliades\). Symbolical, of course, and not meant to be a complete number of the sealed (or saved) even in that generation, let alone for all time. The number connotes perfection (Alford), 12x12x1000 = a hundred and forty-four thousands (\chiliades\, strkjv@5:11|). Nominative absolute, not agreeing in case either with \arithmon\ (accusative) or \esphragismen“n\ (genitive). Songs:as to the case of \esphragismenoi\. {Out of every tribe of the children of Israel} (\ek pƒsˆs phulˆs hui“n Israˆl\). There are two opposite views here, one taking the sealed as referring only to Jews (either actual Jews as a remnant or just Jewish Christians), the other including Gentiles as well as Jewish Christians, that is the true Israel as in strkjv@2:9; strkjv@3:9ff.| and like Paul in Galatians and Romans. This is the more probable view and it takes the twelve tribes in a spiritual sense. But in either view there remains the difficulty about names of the tribes. The list is not geographical, since Levi is included, but Dan is omitted and Manasseh put in his place, though he as the son of Joseph is included in Joseph. Irenaeus suggested that Antichrist was expected to come from the tribe of Dan and hence the omission here. There are various lists of the tribes in the O.T. (Genesis:35:22f.; strkjv@46:8ff.,49; strkjv@Exodus:1:1ff.; strkjv@Numbers:1:2; strkjv@13:4ff; strkjv@26:34; strkjv@Deuteronomy:27:11f.; strkjv@33:6ff.; strkjv@Joshua:13-22; strkjv@Judges:5; strkjv@1Chronicles:2-8; strkjv@12:24ff.; strkjv@27:16ff.; strkjv@Ezekiel:48|) and given in various orders. In strkjv@1Chronicles:7:12| both Dan and Zebulon are omitted. Joseph is given here in place of Ephraim. The distribution is equal (12,000) to each tribe.

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:11:6 @{To shut the heaven} (\kleisai ton ouranon\). First aorist active infinitive of \klei“\. As Elijah did by prayer (1Kings:17:1; strkjv@Luke:4:25; strkjv@James:5:17|). {That it rain not} (\hina mˆ huetos brechˆi\). Sub-final use of \hina mˆ\ with the present active subjunctive of \brech“\, old verb to rain (Matthew:5:45|), here with \huetos\ as subject. {During the days} (\tas hˆmeras\). Accusative of extent of time. In strkjv@Luke:4:25; strkjv@James:5:17| the period of the drouth in Elijah's time was three and a half years, just the period here. {Of their prophecy} (\tˆs prophˆteias aut“n\). Not here the gift of prophecy (1Corinthians:12:10|) or a particular prophecy or collection of prophecies (Revelation:1:3; strkjv@22:7f.|), but "the execution of the prophetic office" (Swete). {Over the waters} (\epi t“n hudat“n\). "Upon the waters." As Moses had (Exodus:7:20|). {Into blood} (\eis haima\). As already stated in strkjv@8:8| about the third trumpet and now again here. {To smite} (\pataxai\). First aorist active infinitive of \patass“\, used here with \exousian echousin\ (they have power), as is \strephein\ (to turn). {With every plague} (\en pasˆi plˆgˆi\). In strkjv@1Kings:4:8|, but with reference to the plagues in Egypt. {As often as they shall desire} (\hosakis ean thelˆs“sin\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hosakis\ and modal \ean\ (= \an\) and the first aorist active subjunctive of \thel“\, "as often as they will."

rwp@Revelation:11:12 @{Saying} (\legousˆs\). Present active predicate participle of \leg“\, feminine genitive agreeing with \ph“nˆs\, though some MSS. have the accusative \ph“nˆn legousan\, either construction being proper after \ˆkousan\ (they heard). There is a little evidence for \ˆkousa\ like strkjv@12:10| (24 times in the book). Cf. strkjv@John:5:28|. {Come up hither} (\anabate h“de\). Second aorist active imperative of \anabain“\. The ascension of these two witnesses is in full view of their enemies, not just in the presence of a few friends as with Christ (Acts:1:9|). {They went up} (\anebˆsan\). Second aorist active indicative of \anabain“\. {In the cloud} (\en tˆi nephelˆi\). As Jesus did (Acts:1:9|) and like Elijah (2Kings:2:11|). Their triumph is openly celebrated before their enemies and is like the rapture described by Paul in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:17|.

rwp@Revelation:12:4 @{His tail} (\hˆ oura autou\). See strkjv@9:10,19|. {Draweth} (\surei\). Present active indicative of \sur“\, old verb, to drag, here alone in the Apocalypse, but see strkjv@John:21:8|. {The third part of the stars} (\to triton t“n aster“n\). Like a great comet is this monster. See strkjv@Daniel:8:10|. Perhaps only the third is meant to soften the picture as in strkjv@Revelation:8:7f|. {Did cast them} (\ebalen autous\). Second aorist active indicative. Charles takes this to refer to a war in heaven between the good angels and Satan, with the fall of some angels (Jude:1:6|). But John may have in mind the martyrs before Christ (Hebrews:11:32f.|) and after Christ's ascension (Matthew:23:35|). {Stood} (\estˆken\). Imperfect active of a late verb, \stˆk“\, from the perfect \hestˆka\ of \histˆmi\, graphic picture of the dragon's challenge of the woman who is about to give birth. {When she was delivered} (\hotan tekˆi\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \tikt“\, "whenever she gives birth." {That he might devour} (\hina kataphagˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \katesthi“\, to eat up (down). Cf. strkjv@Jeremiah:28:34|. This is what Pharaoh did to Israel (Exodus:1:15-22; strkjv@Psalms:85:13; strkjv@Isaiah:27:1; strkjv@51:9; strkjv@Ezekiel:29:3|). Precisely so the devil tried to destroy the child Jesus on his birth.

rwp@Revelation:12:11 @{They overcame him} (\autoi enikˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \nika“\, the verb used by Jesus of his own victory (John:16:33|) and about him (Revelation:3:21; strkjv@5:5|). "The victory of the martyrs marks the failure of Satan's endeavours" (Swete). {Because of the blood of the Lamb} (\dia to haima tou arniou\). As in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@5:6,9; strkjv@7:14|. The blood of Christ is here presented by \dia\ as the ground for the victory and not the means, as by \en\ in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@5:9|. Both ideas are true, but \dia\ with the accusative gives only the reason. The blood of Christ does cleanse us from sin (John:1:29; strkjv@1John:1:7|). Christ conquered Satan, and so makes our victory possible (Luke:11:21f.; strkjv@Hebrews:2:18|). "Thus the Lamb is the true \sunˆgoros\ (like Michael) of the New Israel, its \paraklˆtos pros ton patera\ (1John:2:1|)" (Swete). {Because of the Word of their testimony} (\dia ton logon tˆs marturias aut“n\). The same use of \dia\, "because of their testimony to Jesus" as in John's own case in strkjv@1:9|. These martyrs have been true to their part. {They loved not their life even unto death} (\ouk ˆgapˆsan ten psuchˆn aut“n achri thanatou\). First aorist active indicative of \agapa“\. They did resist "unto blood" (\mechris haimatos\ strkjv@Hebrews:12:4|) and did not put their own lives before loyalty to Christ. There is a direct reference to the words of Jesus in strkjv@John:12:25| as illustrated also in strkjv@Mark:8:35; strkjv@Matthew:10:39; strkjv@16:25; strkjv@Luke:9:24; strkjv@17:33|. Paul's own example is pertinent (Acts:21:13; strkjv@Phillipians:1:20ff.|). Jesus himself had been "obedient unto death" (Phillipians:2:8|). These martyrs seem to be still alive on earth, but their heroism is proleptically pictured.

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:14:17 @{He also} (\kai autos\). As well as the Reaper on the cloud. This is the fifth angel who is God's messenger from heaven (temple where God dwells). This fifth angel with his sharp sickle is to gather the vintage (18-20|) as Christ did the wheat.

rwp@Revelation:16:9 @{Were scorched} (\ekaumatisthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of same verb. {With great heat} (\kauma mega\). Cognate accusative retained with the passive verb. Old word (from \kai“\ to burn), in N.T. only strkjv@7:16| and here. For blaspheming the name of God see strkjv@13:6; strkjv@James:2:7; strkjv@Romans:2:24; strkjv@1Timothy:6:1|. They blamed God for the plagues. {They repented not} (\ou metenoˆsan\). This solemn negative aorist of \metanoe“\ is a refrain like a funeral dirge (9:20f.; strkjv@16:11|). In strkjv@11:13| some did repent because of the earthquake. Even deserved punishment may harden the heart. {To give him glory} (\dounai aut“i doxan\). Second aorist active infinitive of \did“mi\, almost result. For the phrase see strkjv@11:13; strkjv@14:7; strkjv@19:7|.

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:18:2 @{Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great} (\epesen, epesen Babul“n hˆ megalˆ\). The very words of strkjv@14:8|: "Did fall, did fall Babylon the great." Prophetic aorists of \pipt“\ repeated like a solemn dirge of the damned. {Is become} (\egeneto\). Prophetic aorist middle. {A habitation of devils} (\katoikˆtˆrion\). Late word (from \katoike“\, to dwell), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Ephesians:2:22|. Devils should be demons, of course. Songs:Isaiah prophesied of Babylon (Isaiah:12:21f.|) and also Jeremiah (Jeremiah:50:39|) and Zephaniah of Nineveh (Zephaniah:2:14|). Both Babylon and Nineveh are ruins. {A hold of every unclean spirit} (\phulakˆ pantos pneumatos akathartou\). \Phulakˆ\ is garrison or watch-tower as in strkjv@Habbakkuk:2:1|, rather than a prison (20:7|). {A hold of every unclean and hateful bird} (\phulakˆ pantos orneou akathartou kai memisˆmenou\). \Orneou\ is old word for bird, in N.T. only strkjv@Revelation:18:2; strkjv@19:17,21|. "The evil spirits, watching over fallen Rome like night-birds or harpies that wait for their prey, build their eyries in the broken towers which rise from the ashes of the city" (Swete). Long ago true of Babylon and Nineveh, some day to be true of Rome.

rwp@Revelation:20:1 @{Coming down out of heaven} (\katabainonta ek tou ouranou\). As in strkjv@10:1; strkjv@18:1|. {The key of the abyss} (\tˆn klein tˆs abussou\). As in strkjv@9:1|. {A great chain} (\halusin megalˆn\). Paul wore a \halusis\ (alpha privative and \lu“\, to loose) in Rome (2Timothy:1:16|;, as did Peter in prison in Jerusalem (Acts:12:6|). {In his hand} (\epi tˆn cheira autou\). "Upon his hand," ready for use. See \epi\ with the genitive in strkjv@1:20|.

rwp@Revelation:21:22 @{I saw no temple therein} (\naon ouk eidon en autˆi\). "Temple I did not see in it." The whole city is a temple in one sense (verse 16|), but it is something more than a temple even with its sanctuary and Shekinah Glory in the Holy of Holies. {For the Lord God the Almighty, and the Lamb are the temple thereof} (\ho gar Kurios ho theos ho pantokrat“r, naos autˆs estin kai to arnion\). "For the Lord God, the Almighty, is the sanctuary of it and the Lamb." The Eternal Presence is the Shekinah Glory of God (verse 3|). In strkjv@2Corinthians:6:16| we are the sanctuary of God here, but now God is our Sanctuary, and so is the Lamb as in chapters strkjv@Revelation:4; 5|. See strkjv@1:8| and often for the description of God here.

rwp@Revelation:21:23 @{To shine upon it} (\hina phain“sin autˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \phain“\, to keep on shining. Light is always a problem in our cities. See strkjv@Isaiah:60:19ff|. {Did lighten it} (\eph“tisen autˆn\). First aorist active indicative of \ph“tiz“\, to illumine, old verb from \ph“s\ (Luke:11:36|). If the sun and moon did shine, they would give no added light in the presence of the Shekinah Glory of God. See verse 11| for "the glory of God." Cf. strkjv@18:1; strkjv@21:3|. "Their splendour is simply put to shame by the glory of God Himself" (Charles). {And the lamp thereof is the Lamb} (\kai ho luchnos autˆs to arnion\). Charles takes \ho luchnos\ as predicate, "and the Lamb is the lamp thereof." Bousset thinks that John means to compare Christ to the moon the lesser light (Genesis:1:16|), but that contrast is not necessary. Swete sees Christ as the one lamp for all in contrast with the many \luchniai\ of the churches on earth (1:12,20|). "No words could more clearly demonstrate the purely spiritual character of St. John's conception of the New Jerusalem" (Swete).

rwp@Info_Revelation @ EMPEROR WORSHIP AS THE OCCASION FOR JOHN'S APOCALYPSE There is no doubt at all that the emperor cult (emperor worship) played a main part in the persecution of the Christians that was the occasion for this great Christian apocalypse. The book itself bears ample witness to this fact, if the two beasts refer to the Roman power as the agent of Satan. It is not possible to single out each individual emperor in the graphic picture. Most would take the dragon to be Satan and the first and the second beasts to be the imperial and provincial Roman power. The Roman emperors posed as gods and did the work of Satan. In particular there were two persecuting emperors (Nero and Domitian) who were responsible for many martyrs for Christ. But emperor worship began before Nero. Julius Caesar was worshipped in the provinces. Octavius was called Augustus (\Sebastos\, Reverend). The crazy Emperor Caius Caligula not simply claimed to be divine, but actually demanded that his statue be set up for worship in the Holy of Holies in the Temple in Jerusalem. He was killed in January A.D. 41 before he could execute his dire purpose. But the madcap Nero likewise demanded worship and blamed in A.D. 64 the burning of Rome on the Christians, though guilty of it himself. He set the style for persecuting Christians, which slumbered on and burst into flames again under Domitian, who had himself commonly termed _Dominus ac Deus noster_ (Our Lord and God). The worship of the emperor did not disturb the worshippers of other gods save the Jews and the Christians, and in particular the Christians were persecuted after the burning of Rome when they were distinguished from the Jews. Up till then Christians were regarded (as by Gallio in Corinth) as a variety of Jews and so entitled to tolerance as a _religio licita_, but they had no standing in law by themselves and their refusal to worship the emperor early gave offence, as Paul indicates in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3|. It was \Kurios Iˆsous\ or \Kurios Kaisar\. On this very issue Polycarp lost his life. The emperors as a rule were tolerant about it, save Nero and Domitian, who was called Nero _redivivus_, or Nero back again. Trajan in his famous letter to Pliny advised tolerance except in stubborn cases, when the Christians had to be put to death. After Nero it was a crime to be a Christian and all sorts of slanders about them were circulated. We have seen already in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3ff.|, the man of sin who sets himself above God as the object of worship. We have seen also in strkjv@1John:2:18,22; strkjv@4:3; strkjv@2John:1:7| the term antichrist applied apparently to Gnostic heretics. One may wonder if, as Beckwith argues, in the Apocalypse the man of sin and the antichrist are united in the beast.

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 @ RELATION TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL Here scholars divide again. Many who deny the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel and the Epistles accept the apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse, Baur, for instance. Hort, Lightfoot, and Westcott argued for the Johannine authorship on the ground that the Apocalypse was written early (time of Nero or Vespasian) when John did not know Greek so well as when the Epistles and the Gospel were written. There are numerous grammatical laxities in the Apocalypse, termed by Charles a veritable grammar of its own. They are chiefly retention of the nominative case in appositional words or phrases, particularly participles, many of them sheer Hebraisms, many of them clearly intentional (as in strkjv@Revelation:1:4|), all of them on purpose according to Milligan (_Revelation_ in Schaff's Pop. Comm.) and Heinrici (_Der Litterarische Charakter der neutest. Schriften_, p. 85). Radermacher (_Neutestamentliche Grammatik_, p. 3) calls it "the most uncultured literary production that has come down to us from antiquity," and one finds frequent parallels to the linguistic peculiarities in later illiterate papyri. J. H. Moulton (_Grammar_, Vol. II, Part I, p. 3) says: "Its grammar is perpetually stumbling, its idiom is that of a foreign language, its whole style that of a writer who neither knows nor cares for literary form." But we shall see that the best evidence is for a date in Domitian's reign and not much later than the Fourth Gospel. It is worth noting that in strkjv@Acts:4:13| Peter and John are both termed by the Sanhedrin \agrammatoi kai idi“tai\ (unlettered and unofficial men). We have seen the possibility that II Peter represents Peter's real style or at least that of a different amanuensis from Silvanus in strkjv@1Peter:5:12|. It seems clear that the Fourth Gospel underwent careful scrutiny and possibly by the elders in Ephesus (John:21:24|). If John wrote the Apocalypse while in Patmos and so away from Ephesus, it seems quite possible that here we have John's own uncorrected style more than in the Gospel and Epistles. There is also the added consideration that the excitement of the visions played a part along with a certain element of intentional variations from normal grammatical sequence. An old man's excitement would bring back his early style. There are numerous coincidences in vocabulary and style between the Fourth Gospel and the Apocalypse.

rwp@Info_Romans @ THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS SPRING OF A.D. 57 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION INTEGRITY OF THE EPISTLE The genuineness of the Epistle is so generally admitted by scholars that it is unnecessary to prove it here, for Loman, Steck, and the Dutch scholars (Van Manen, etc.) who deny it as Pauline are no longer taken seriously. He wrote it from Corinth because he sent it to Rome by Phoebe of Cenchreae (Romans:16:2|) if chapter 16 is acknowledged to be a part of the Epistle. Chapter 16 is held by some to be really a short epistle to Ephesus because of the long list of names in it, because of Paul's long stay in Ephesus, because he had not yet been to Rome, and because, in particular, Aquila and Priscilla are named (Romans:16:3-5|) who had been with Paul in Ephesus. But they had come from Rome before going to Corinth and there is no reason for thinking that they did not return to Rome. It was quite possible for Paul to have many friends in Rome whom he had met elsewhere. People naturally drifted to Rome from all over the empire. The old MSS. (Aleph A B C D) give chapter 16 as an integral part of the Epistle. Marcion rejected it and chapter 15 also for reasons of his own. Renan's theory that Romans was a circular letter like Ephesians sent in different forms to different churches (Rome, Ephesus, Thessalonica, etc.) has appealed to some scholars as explaining the several doxologies in the Epistle, but they cause no real difficulty since Paul interjected them in his other epistles according to his moods (2Corinthians:1:20|, for instance). That theory raises more problems than it solves as, for example, Paul's remarks about going to Rome (Romans:1:9-16|) which apply to Rome. Lightfoot suggests the possibility that Paul added strkjv@Romans:16:25-27| some years after the original date so as to turn it into a circular letter. But the MSS. do not support that theory and that leaves strkjv@Romans:15:22-33 in the Epistle quite unsuitable to a circular letter. Modern knowledge leaves the Epistle intact with occasional variations in the MSS. on particular points as is true of all the N.T.

rwp@Info_Romans @ THE PURPOSE Paul tells this himself. He had long cherished a desire to come to Rome (Acts:19:21|) and had often made his plans to do so (Romans:1:13|) which were interrupted (Romans:15:22|), but now he definitely plans to go from Jerusalem, after taking the contribution there (Romans:15:26|), to Rome and then on to Spain (Romans:15:24,28|). Meanwhile he sends this Epistle that the Romans may know what Paul's gospel really is (Romans:1:15; strkjv@2:16|). He is full of the issues raised by the Judaizing controversy as set forth in the Epistles to Corinth and to Galatia. Songs:in a calmer mood and more at length he presents his conception of the Righteousness demanded by God (Romans:1:17|) of both Gentile (Romans:1:18-32|) and Jew (Romans:2:1-3:20|) and only to be obtained by faith in Christ who by his atoning death (justification) has made it possible (Romans:3:21-5:21|). This new life of faith in Christ should lead to holiness of life (sanctification, chapters strkjv@Romans:6-8|). This is Paul's gospel and the remaining chapters deal with corollaries growing out of the doctrine of grace as applied to practical matters. It is a cause for gratitude that Paul did write out so full a statement of his message. He had a message for the whole world and was anxious to win the Roman Empire to Christ. It was important that he go to Rome for it was the centre of the world's life. Nowhere does Paul's Christian statesmanship show to better advantage than in this greatest of his Epistles. It is not a book of formal theology though Paul is the greatest of theologians. Here Paul is seen in the plenitude of his powers with all the wealth of his knowledge of Christ and his rich experience in mission work. The church in Rome is plainly composed of both Jews and Greeks, though who started the work there we have no way of knowing. Paul's ambition was to preach where no one else had been (Romans:15:20|), but he has no hesitation in going on to Rome.

rwp@Romans:1:14 @On {debtor} (\opheiletˆs\) see strkjv@Galatians:5:3|. {Both to Greeks and to Barbarians} (\Hellˆsin te kai barbarois\). The whole human race from the Greek point of view, Jews coming under \barbarois\. On this word see strkjv@Acts:18:2,4; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:11; strkjv@Colossians:3:11| (only N.T. instances)...termed all others Gentiles. Did Paul...

rwp@Romans:2:1 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). See strkjv@1:24,26| for this relative conjunction, "because of which thing." {Without excuse} (\anapologˆtos\). See on ¯1:21|. {Whosoever thou art that judgest} (\pas ho krin“n\). Literally, "every one that judgest," vocative case in apposition with \anthr“pe\. Paul begins his discussion of the failure of the Jew to attain to the God-kind of righteousness (2:1-3:20|) with a general statement applicable to all as he did (1:18|) in the discussion of the failure of the Gentiles (Lightfoot). The Gentile is readily condemned by the Jew when he sins and equally so is the Jew condemned by the Gentile in like case. \Krin“\ does not of itself mean to condemn, but to pick out, separate, approve, determine, pronounce judgment, condemn (if proper). {Another} (\ton heteron\). Literally, "the other man." The notion of two in the word, one criticizing the other. {Thou condemnest thyself} (\seauton katakrineis\). Note \kata\ here with \krin“\, to make plain the adverse judgment. {For} (\gar\). Explanatory reason for the preceding statement. The critic {practises} (\prasseis\, not single acts \poie“\, but the habit \prass“\) the same things that he condemns.

rwp@Romans:3:20 @{Because} (\dioti\, again, \dia, hoti\). {By the works of the law} (\ex erg“n nomou\). "Out of works of law." Mosaic law and any law as the source of being set right with God. Paul quotes strkjv@Psalms:43:2| as he did in strkjv@Galatians:2:16| to prove his point. {The knowledge of sin} (\epign“sis hamartias\). The effect of law universally is rebellion to it (1Corinthians:15:56|). Paul has shown this carefully in strkjv@Galatians:3:19-22|. Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:10:3|. He has now proven the guilt of both Gentile and Jew.

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:3:25 @{Set forth} (\proetheto\). Second aorist middle indicative. See on ¯1:13| for this word. Also in strkjv@Ephesians:1:9|, but nowhere else in N.T. God set before himself (purposed) and did it publicly before (\pro\) the whole world. {A propitiation} (\hilastˆrion\). The only other N.T. example of this word is in strkjv@Hebrews:9:5| where we have the "cherubim overshadowing the mercy seat" (\to hilastˆrion\). In Hebrews the adjective is used as a substantive or as "the propitiatory place " But that idea does not suit here. Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, pp. 124-35) has produced examples from inscriptions where it is used as an adjective and as meaning "a votive offering" or "propitiatory gift." Hence he concludes about strkjv@Romans:3:25|: "The crucified Christ is the votive gift of the Divine Love for the salvation of men." God gave his Son as the means of propitiation (1John:2:2|). \Hilastˆrion\ is an adjective (\hilastˆrios\) from \hilaskomai\, to make propitiation (Hebrews:2:17|) and is kin in meaning to \hilasmos\, propitiation (1John:2:2; strkjv@4:10|). There is no longer room for doubting its meaning in strkjv@Romans:3:25|. {Through faith, by his blood} (\dia piste“s en t“i autou haimati\). Songs:probably, connecting \en toi haimati\ (in his blood) with \proetheto\. {To show his righteousness} (\eis endeixin tˆs dikaiosunˆs autou\). See strkjv@2Corinthians:8:24|. "For showing of his righteousness," the God-kind of righteousness. God could not let sin go as if a mere slip. God demanded the atonement and provided it. {Because of the passing over} (\dia tˆn paresin\). Late word from \pariˆmi\, to let go, to relax. In Dionysius Hal., Xenophon, papyri (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 266) for remission of punishment, especially for debt, as distinct from \aphesis\ (remission). {Done aforetime} (\progegonot“n\). Second perfect active genitive participle of \proginomai\. The sins before the coming of Christ (Acts:14:16; strkjv@17:30; strkjv@Hebrews:9:15|). {Forbearance} (\anochˆi\). Holding back of God as in strkjv@2:4|. In this sense Christ tasted death for every man (Hebrews:2:9|).

rwp@Romans:4:11 @{The sign of circumcision} (\sˆmeion peritomˆs\). It is the genitive of apposition, circumcision being the sign. {A seal of the righteousness of the faith} (\sphragida tˆs dikaiosunˆs tˆs piste“s\). \Sphragis\ is old word for the seal placed on books (Revelation:5:1|), for a signet-ring (Revelation:7:2|), the stamp made by the seal (2Timothy:2:19|), that by which anything is confirmed (1Corinthians:9:2|) as here. The circumcision did not convey the righteousness, but only gave outward confirmation. It came by faith and "the faith which he had while in uncircumcision" (\tˆs en tˆi akrobustiƒi\), "the in the state of uncircumcision faith." Whatever parallel exists between baptism and circumcision as here stated by Paul argues for faith before baptism and for baptism as the sign and seal of the faith already had before baptism. {That he might be} (\eis to einai auton\). This idiom may be God's purpose (contemplated result) as in \eis to logisthˆnai\ below, or even actual result (so that he was) as in strkjv@1:20|. {Though they be in uncircumcision} (\di' akrobustias\). Simply, "of those who believe while in the condition of uncircumcision."

rwp@Romans:6:12 @{Reign} (\basileuet“\). Present active imperative, "let not sin continue to reign" as it did once (5:12|). {Mortal} (\thnˆtoi\). Verbal adjective from \thnˆsk“\, subject to death. The reign of sin is over with you. Self-indulgence is inconsistent with trust in the vicarious atonement. {That ye should obey} (\eis to hupakouein\). With a view to obeying.

rwp@Romans:6:20 @{Free in regard of righteousness} (\eleutheroi tˆi dikaiosunˆi\). Ye wore no collar of righteousness, but freely did as ye pleased. They were "free." Note dative case, personal relation, of \dikaiosunˆi\.

rwp@Romans:7:9 @{I was alive} (\ez“n\). Imperfect active. Apparently, "the lost paradise in the infancy of men" (Denney), before the conscience awoke and moral responsibility came, "a seeming life" (Shedd). {Sin revived} (\hˆ hamartia anezˆsen\). Sin came back to life, waked up, the blissful innocent stage was over, "the commandment having come" (\elthousˆs tˆs entolˆs\, genitive absolute). {But I died} (\eg“ de apethanon\). My seeming life was over for I was conscious of sin, of violation of law. I was dead before, but I did not know. Now I found out that I was spiritually dead.

rwp@Romans:7:13 @{Become death unto me?} (\emoi egeneto thanatos?\). Ethical dative \emoi\ again. New turn to the problem. Admitting the goodness of God's law, did it issue in death for me? Paul repels (\mˆ genoito\) this suggestion. It was sin that (But sin, \alla hˆ hamartia\) "became death for me." {That it might be shown} (\hina phanˆi\). Final clause, \hina\ and second aorist passive subjunctive of \phain“\, to show. The sinfulness of sin is revealed in its violations of God's law. {By working death to me} (\moi katergazomenˆ thanaton\). Present middle participle, as an incidental result. {Might become exceedingly sinful} (\genˆtai kath' huperbolˆn hamart“los\). Second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\ with \hina\ in final clause. On \kath' huperbolˆn\, see on ¯1Corinthians:12:31|. Our _hyperbole_ is the Greek \huperbolˆ\. The excesses of sin reveal its real nature. Only then do some people get their eyes opened.

rwp@Romans:9:5 @{Of whom} (\ex h“n\). Fourth relative clause and here with \ex\ and the ablative. {Christ} (\ho Christos\). The Messiah. {As concerning the flesh} (\to kata sarka\). Accusative of general reference, "as to the according to the flesh." Paul limits the descent of Jesus from the Jews to his human side as he did in strkjv@1:3f|. {Who is over all, God blessed for ever} (\ho on epi pant“n theos eulogˆtos\). A clear statement of the deity of Christ following the remark about his humanity. This is the natural and the obvious way of punctuating the sentence. To make a full stop after \sarka\ (or colon) and start a new sentence for the doxology is very abrupt and awkward. See strkjv@Acts:20:28; strkjv@Titus:2:13| for Paul's use of \theos\ applied to Jesus Christ.

rwp@Romans:9:13 @Paul quotes strkjv@Malachi:1:2f|. {But Esau I hated} (\ton de Esau emisˆsa\). This language sounds a bit harsh to us. It is possible that the word \mise“\ did not always carry the full force of what we mean by "hate." See strkjv@Matthew:6:24| where these very verbs (\mise“\ and \agapa“\) are contrasted. Songs:also in strkjv@Luke:14:26| about "hating" (\mise“\) one's father and mother if coming between one and Christ. Songs:in strkjv@John:12:25| about "hating" one's life. There is no doubt about God's preference for Jacob and rejection of Esau, but in spite of Sanday and Headlam one hesitates to read into these words here the intense hatred that has always existed between the descendants of Jacob and of Esau.

rwp@Romans:9:22 @{Willing} (\thel“n\). Concessive use of the participle, "although willing," not causal, "because willing" as is shown by "with much long-suffering" (\en pollˆi makrothumiƒi\, in much long-suffering). {His power} (\to dunaton autou\). Neuter singular of the verbal adjective rather than the substantive \dunamin\. {Endured} (\ˆnegken\). Constative second aorist active indicative of the old defective verb \pher“\, to bear. {Vessels of wrath} (\skeuˆ orgˆs\). The words occur in strkjv@Jeremiah:50:25| (LXX strkjv@Jeremiah:27:25|), but not in the sense here (objective genitive like \tekna orgˆs\, strkjv@Ephesians:2:3|, the objects of God's wrath). {Fitted} (\katˆrtismena\). Perfect passive participle of \katartiz“\, old verb to equip (see strkjv@Matthew:4:21; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11|), state of readiness. Paul does not say here that God did it or that they did it. That they are responsible may be seen from strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:15f|. {Unto destruction} (\eis ap“leian\). Endless perdition (Matthew:7:13; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3; strkjv@Phillipians:3:19|), not annihilation.

rwp@Romans:10:1 @{Desire} (\eudokia\). No papyri examples of this word, though \eudokˆsis\ occurs, only in LXX and N.T., but no example for "desire" unless this is one, though the verb \eudoke“\ is common in Polybius, Diodorus, Dion, Hal. It means will, pleasure, satisfaction (Matthew:11:26; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:11; strkjv@Phillipians:1:15; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@Ephesians:1:5,9|). {Supplication} (\deˆsis\). Late word from \deomai\, to want, to beg, to pray. In the papyri. See strkjv@Luke:1:13|. It is noteworthy that, immediately after the discussion of the rejection of Christ by the Jews, Paul prays so earnestly for the Jews "that they may be saved" (\eis s“tˆrian\), literally "unto salvation." Clearly Paul did not feel that the case was hopeless for them in spite of their conduct. Bengel says: _Non orasset Paul si absolute reprobati essent_ (Paul would not have prayed if they had been absolutely reprobate). Paul leaves God's problem to him and pours out his prayer for the Jews in accordance with his strong words in strkjv@9:1-5|.

rwp@Romans:10:3 @{Being ignorant of God's righteousness} (\agnoountes tˆn tou theou dikaiosunˆn\). A blunt thing to say, but true as Paul has shown in strkjv@2:1-3:20|. They did not understand the God-kind of righteousness by faith (1:17|). They misconceived it (2:4|). {They did not subject themselves} (\ouch hupetagˆsan\). Second aorist passive indicative of \hupotass“\, common _Koin‚_ verb, to put oneself under orders, to obey, here the passive in sense of the middle (James:4:7|) like \apekrithˆn\, I answered.

rwp@Romans:10:16 @{But they did not all hearken} (\ou pantes hupˆkousan\). They heard, but did not heed. Some disbelieve now (3:3|) as they did then. On obedience and disobedience see strkjv@5:19; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:13; strkjv@Galatians:3:2|. He quotes strkjv@Isaiah:53:1| to show how Isaiah felt. {Report} (\akoˆi\). Literally, "hearing" (Matthew:14:1; strkjv@Mark:13:7|).

rwp@Romans:11:7 @{What then?} (\ti oun?\). Since God did not push Israel away (verse 1|), what is true? {The election} (\hˆ eklogˆ\). Abstract for concrete (the elect). {Obtained} (\epetuchen\). Second aorist active indicative of \epitugchan“\, old verb, to hit upon, only here in Paul. See strkjv@9:30-33| for the failure of the Jews. {Were hardened} (\ep“r“thˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \p“ro“\, late verb, to cover with thick skin (\p“ros\). See on strkjv@2Corinthians:3:14; strkjv@Mark:3:5|.

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:11:17 @{Branches} (\klad“n\). From \kla“\, to break. {Were broken off} (\exeklasthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \ekkla“\. Play on the word \klados\ (branch) and \ekkla“\, to break off. Condition of first class, assumed as true. Some of the individual Jews (natural Israel) were broken off the stock of the tree (spiritual Israel). {And thou} (\kai su\). An individual Gentile. {Being a wild olive} (\agrielaios “n\). This word, used by Aristotle, occurs in an inscription. Ramsay (_Pauline Studies_, pp. 219ff.) shows that the ancients used the wild-olive graft upon an old olive tree to reinvigorate the tree precisely as Paul uses the figure here and that both the olive tree and the graft were influenced by each other, though the wild olive graft did not produce as good olives as the original stock. But it should be noted that in verse 24| Paul expressly states that the grafting of Gentiles on to the stock of the spiritual Israel was "contrary to nature" (\para phusin\). {Wast grafted in} (\enekentristhˆs\). First aorist passive indicative of \enkentriz“\, to cut in, to graft, used by Aristotle. Belongs "to the higher _Koin‚_" (literary _Koin‚_) according to Milligan. {Partaker} (\sunkoin“nos\). Co-partner. {Fatness} (\piotˆtos\). Old word from \pi“n\ (fat), only here in N.T. Note three genitives here "of the root of the fatness of the olive."

rwp@Romans:11:34 @{Who hath known?} (\tis egn“?\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\, a timeless aorist, did know, does know, will know. Quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:40:13|. Quoted already in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:16|. {Counsellor} (\sumboulos\). Old word from \sun\ and \boulˆ\. Only here in N.T. {His} (\autou\). Objective genitive, counsellor to him (God). Some men seem to feel competent for the job.

rwp@Romans:15:14 @{I myself also} (\kai autos eg“\). See strkjv@7:25| for a like emphasis on himself, here in contrast with "ye yourselves" (\kai autoi\). The argument of the Epistle has been completed both in the main line (chapters 1-8|) and the further applications (9:1-15:13|). Here begins the Epilogue, the personal matters of importance. {Full of goodness} (\mestoi agathosunˆs\). See strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:11; strkjv@Galatians:5:22| for this LXX and Pauline word (in ecclesiastical writers also) made from the adjective \agathos\, good, by adding \-sunˆ\ (common ending for words like \dikaiosunˆ\. See strkjv@1:29| for \mestos\ with genitive and \peplˆr“menoi\ (perfect passive participle of \plˆro“\ as here), but there with instrumental case after it instead of the genitive. Paul gives the Roman Christians (chiefly Gentiles) high praise. The "all knowledge" is not to be pressed too literally, "our Christian knowledge in its entirety" (Sanday and Headlam). {To admonish} (\nouthetein\). To put in mind (from \nouthetˆs\ and this from \nous\ and \tithˆmi\). See on ¯1Thessalonians:5:12,14|. "Is it laying too much stress on the language of compliment to suggest that these words give a hint of St. Paul's aim in this Epistle?" (Sanday and Headlam). The strategic position of the church in Rome made it a great centre for radiating and echoing the gospel over the world as Thessalonica did for Macedonia (1Thessalonians:1:8|).

rwp@Romans:15:18 @{Any things save those which Christ wrought through me} (\ti h“n ou kateirgasato Christos di' emou\). Rather, "any one of those things which Christ did not work through me." The antecedent of \h“n\ is the unexpressed \tout“n\ and the accusative relative \ha\ (object of \kateirgasato\) is attracted into the genitive case of \tout“n\ after a common idiom. {By word and deed} (\log“i kai erg“i\). Instrumental case with both words. By preaching and life (Luke:24:19; strkjv@Acts:1:1; strkjv@7:22; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:11|).

rwp@Romans:15:19 @{In power of signs and wonders} (\en dunamei sˆmei“n kai terat“n\). Note all three words as in strkjv@Hebrews:2:4|, only here \dunamis\ is connected with \sˆmeia\ and \terata\. See all three words used of Paul's own work in strkjv@2Corinthians:12:12| and in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:9| of the Man of Sin. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:4| for the "power" of the Holy Spirit in Paul's preaching. Note repetition of \en dunamei\ here with \pneumatos hagiou\. {Songs:that} (\h“ste\). Result expressed by the perfect active infinitive \peplˆr“kenai\ (from \plˆro“\) with the accusative \me\ (general reference). {Round about even unto Illyricum} (\kukl“i mechri tou Illurikou\). "In a ring" (\kukl“i\, locative case of \kuklos\). Probably a journey during the time when Paul left Macedonia and waited for II Corinthians to have its effect before coming to Corinth. If so, see strkjv@2Corinthians:13; strkjv@Acts:20:1-3|. When he did come, the trouble with the Judaizers was over. Illyricum seems to be the name for the region west of Macedonia (Dalmatia). Strabo says that the Egnatian Way passed through it. Arabia and Illyricum would thus be the extreme limits of Paul's mission journeys so far.

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:15:29 @{When I come} (\erchomenos\). Present middle participle of \erchomai\ with the time of the future middle indicative \eleusomai\ (coming I shall come). {In the fulness of the blessing of Christ} (\en plˆr“mati eulogias Christou\). On \plˆr“mati\, see strkjv@11:12|. Paul had already (1:11f.|) said that he had a \charisma pneumatikon\ (spiritual blessing) for Rome. He did bring that to them.

Seeker Overlay: Off On

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

[pBiblx2]
Mon Jul 1 11:26:23 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020