CONCORD Himself



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 @ 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:1:12 @{Now this I mean} (\leg“ de touto\). Explanatory use of \leg“\. Each has his party leader. \Apoll“\ is genitive of \Apoll“s\ (Acts:18:24|), probably abbreviation of \Apoll“nius\ as seen in Codex Bezae for strkjv@Acts:18:24|. See on Acts for discussion of this "eloquent Alexandrian" (Ellicott), whose philosophical and oratorical preaching was in contrast "with the studied plainness" of Paul (1Corinthians:2:1; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:10|). People naturally have different tastes about styles of preaching and that is well, but Apollos refused to be a party to this strife and soon returned to Ephesus and refused to go back to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:12|). \Cˆphƒ\ is the genitive of \Cˆphƒs\, the Aramaic name given Simon by Jesus (John:1:42|), \Petros\ in Greek. Except in strkjv@Galatians:2:7,8| Paul calls him Cephas. He had already taken his stand with Paul in the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:7-11; strkjv@Galatians:2:7-10|). Paul had to rebuke him at Antioch for his timidity because of the Judaizers (Galatians:2:11-14|), but, in spite of Baur's theory, there is no evidence of a schism in doctrine between Paul and Peter. If strkjv@2Peter:3:15f.| be accepted as genuine, as I do, there is proof of cordial relations between them and strkjv@1Corinthians:9:5| points in the same direction. But there is no evidence that Peter himself visited Corinth. Judaizers came and pitted Peter against Paul to the Corinthian Church on the basis of Paul's rebuke of Peter in Antioch. These Judaizers made bitter personal attacks on Paul in return for their defeat at the Jerusalem Conference. Songs:a third faction was formed by the use of Peter's name as the really orthodox wing of the church, the gospel of the circumcision. {And I of Christ} (\eg“ de Christou\). Still a fourth faction in recoil from the partisan use of Paul, Apollos, Cephas, with "a spiritually proud utterance" (Ellicott) that assumes a relation to Christ not true of the others. "Those who used this cry arrogated the common watchword as their _peculium_" (Findlay). This partisan use of the name of Christ may have been made in the name of unity against the other three factions, but it merely added another party to those existing. In scouting the names of the other leaders they lowered the name and rank of Christ to their level.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:13 @{Is Christ divided?} (\memeristai ho Christos;\). Perfect passive indicative, Does Christ stand divided? It is not certain, though probable, that this is interrogative like the following clauses. Hofmann calls the assertory form a "rhetorical impossibility." The absence of \mˆ\ here merely allows an affirmative answer which is true. The fourth or Christ party claimed to possess Christ in a sense not true of the others. Perhaps the leaders of this Christ party with their arrogant assumptions of superiority are the false apostles, ministers of Satan posing as angels of light (2Corinthians:11:12-15|). {Was Paul crucified for you?} (\Mˆ Paulos estaur“thˆ huper hum“n;\). An indignant "No" is demanded by \mˆ\. Paul shows his tact by employing himself as the illustration, rather than Apollos or Cephas. Probably \huper\, over, in behalf of, rather than \peri\ (concerning, around) is genuine, though either makes good sense here. In the _Koin‚_ \huper\ encroaches on \peri\ as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1|. {Were ye baptized into the name of Paul?} (\eis to onoma Paulou ebaptisthˆte;\). It is unnecessary to say {into} for \eis\ rather than {in} since \eis\ is the same preposition originally as \en\ and both are used with \baptiz“\ as in strkjv@Acts:8:16; strkjv@10:48| with no difference in idea (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 592). Paul evidently knows the idea in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| and scouts the notion of being put on a par with Christ or the Trinity. He is no rival of Christ. This use of \onoma\ for the person is not only in the LXX, but the papyri, ostraca, and inscriptions give numerous examples of the name of the king or the god for the power and authority of the king or god (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 146ff., 196ff.; _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 121).

rwp@1Corinthians:1:15 @{Lest any man should say} (\hina mˆ tis eipˆi\). Certainly sub-final \hina\ again or contemplated result as in strkjv@7:29; strkjv@John:9:2|. Ellicott thinks that already some in Corinth were laying emphasis on the person of the baptizer whether Peter or some one else. It is to be recalled that Jesus himself baptized no one (John:4:2|) to avoid this very kind of controversy. And yet there are those today who claim Paul as a sacramentalist, an impossible claim in the light of his words here.

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:3:5 @{What then?} (\ti oun;\). He does not say \tis\ (who), but \ti\ (what), neuter singular interrogative pronoun. {Ministers} (\diakonoi\). Not leaders of parties or sects, but merely servants through whom ye believed. The etymology of the word Thayer gives as \dia\ and \konis\ "raising dust by hastening." In the Gospels it is the servant (Matthew:20:26|) or waiter (John:2:5|). Paul so describes himself as a minister (Colossians:1:23,25|). The technical sense of deacon comes later (Phillipians:1:1; strkjv@1Timothy:3:8,12|). {As the Lord gave to him} (\h“s ho Kurios ed“ken\). Hence no minister of the Lord like Apollos and Paul has any basis for pride or conceit nor should be made the occasion for faction and strife. This idea Paul enlarges upon through chapters strkjv@1Corinthians:3; 4| and it is made plain in chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:12|.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:3:15 @{Shall be burned} (\katakaˆsetai\). First-class condition again, assumed as true. Second future (late form) passive indicative of \katakai“\, to burn down, old verb. Note perfective use of preposition \kata\, shall be burned down. We usually say "burned up," and that is true also, burned up in smoke. {He shall suffer loss} (\zˆmi“thˆsetai\). First future passive indicative of \zˆmi“\, old verb from \zˆmia\ (damage, loss), to suffer loss. In strkjv@Matthew:16:26; strkjv@Mark:8:36; strkjv@Luke:9:25| the loss is stated to be the man's soul (\psuchˆn\) or eternal life. But here there is no such total loss as that. The man's work (\ergon\) is burned up (sermons, lectures, books, teaching, all dry as dust). {But he himself shall be saved} (\autos de s“thˆsetai\). Eternal salvation, but not by purgatory. His work is burned up completely and hopelessly, but he himself escapes destruction because he is really a saved man a real believer in Christ. {Yet so as through fire} (\hout“s de h“s dia puros\). Clearly Paul means with his work burned down (verse 15|). It is the tragedy of a fruitless life, of a minister who built so poorly on the true foundation that his work went up in smoke. His sermons were empty froth or windy words without edifying or building power. They left no mark in the lives of the hearers. It is the picture of a wasted life. The one who enters heaven by grace, as we all do who are saved, yet who brings no sheaves with him. There is no garnered grain the result of his labours in the harvest field. There are no souls in heaven as the result of his toil for Christ, no enrichment of character, no growth in grace.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:4:3 @{But with me} (\emoi de\). The ethical dative of personal relation and interest, "as I look at my own case." Cf. strkjv@Phillipians:1:21|. {It is a very small thing} (\eis elachiston estin\). This predicate use of \eis\ is like the Hebrew, but it occurs also in the papyri. The superlative \elachiston\ is elative, very little, not the true superlative, least. "It counts for very little with me." {That I should be judged of you} (\hina huph' hum“n anakrith“\). Same use of \hina\ as in verse 2|. For the verb (first aorist passive subjunctive of \anakrin“\) see on ¯1Corinthians:2:14f|. Paul does not despise public opinion, but he denies "the competency of the tribunal" in Corinth (Robertson and Plummer) to pass on his credentials with Christ as his Lord. {Or of man's judgement} (\ˆ hupo anthr“pinˆs hˆmeras\). Or "by human day," in contrast to the Lord's Day (_der Tag_) in strkjv@3:13|. "_That_ is the tribunal which the Apostle recognizes; a _human_ tribunal he does not care to satisfy" (Robertson and Plummer). {Yea, I judge not mine own self} (\all' oude emauton anakrin“\). \Alla\ here is confirmatory, not adversative. "I have often wondered how it is that every man sets less value on his own opinion of himself than on the opinion of others" (M. Aurelius, xii. 4. Translated by Robertson and Plummer). Paul does not even set himself up as judge of himself.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:6 @{I have in a figure transferred} (\meteschˆmatisa\). First aorist active (not perfect) indicative of \meta-schˆmatiz“\, used by Plato and Aristotle for changing the form of a thing (from \meta\, after, and \schˆma\, form or habit, like Latin _habitus_ from \ech“\ and so different from \morphˆ\ as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:7; strkjv@Romans:12:2|). For the idea of refashioning see Field, _Notes_, p. 169f. and Preisigke, _Fachworter_). Both Greek and Latin writers (Quintilian, Martial) used \schˆma\ for a rhetorical artifice. Paul's use of the word (in Paul only in N.T.) appears also further in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:13-15| where the word occurs three times, twice of the false apostles posing and passing as apostles of Christ and ministers of righteousness, and once of Satan as an angel of light, twice with \eis\ and once with \h“s\. In strkjv@Phillipians:3:21| the word is used for the change in the body of our humiliation to the body of glory. But here it is clearly the rhetorical figure for a veiled allusion to Paul and Apollos "for your sakes" (\dia humas\). {That in us ye may learn} (\hina en hˆmin mathˆte\). Final clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \manthan“\, to learn. As an object lesson in our cases (\en hˆmin\). It is no more true of Paul and Apollos than of other ministers, but the wrangles in Corinth started about them. Songs:Paul boldly puts himself and Apollos to the fore in the discussion of the principles involved. {Not to go beyond the things which are written} (\to Mˆ huper ha gegraptai\). It is difficult to reproduce the Greek idiom in English. The article \to\ is in the accusative case as the object of the verb \mathˆte\ (learn) and points at the words "\Mˆ huper ha gegraptai\," apparently a proverb or rule, and elliptical in form with no principal verb expressed with \mˆ\, whether "think" (Auth.) or "go" (Revised). There was a constant tendency to smooth out Paul's ellipses as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26,31|. Lightfoot thinks that Paul may have in mind O.T. passages quoted in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:19,31; strkjv@3:19,20|. {That ye be not puffed up} (\hina mˆ phusiousthe\). Sub-final use of \hina\ (second use in this sentence) with notion of result. It is not certain whether \phusiousthe\ (late verb form like \phusia“, phusa“\, to blow up, to inflate, to puff up), used only by Paul in the N.T., is present indicative with \hina\ like \zˆloute\ in strkjv@Galatians:4:17| (cf. \hina gin“skomen\ in strkjv@1John:5:20|) or the present subjunctive by irregular contraction (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 203, 342f.), probably the present indicative. \Phusio“\ is from \phusis\ (nature) and so meant to make natural, but it is used by Paul just like \phusa“\ or \phusia“\ (from \phusa\, a pair of bellows), a vivid picture of self-conceit. {One for the one against the other} (\heis huper tou henos kata tou heterou\). This is the precise idea of this idiom of partitive apposition. This is the rule with partisans. They are "for" (\huper\) the one and "against" (\kata\, down on, the genitive case) the other (\tou heterou\, not merely another or a second, but the different sort, \heterodox\).

rwp@1Corinthians:4:12 @{We toil} (\kopi“men\). Common late verb for weariness in toil (Luke:5:5|), {working with our own hands} (\ergazomenoi tais idiais chersin\) instrumental case \chersin\ and not simply for himself but also for Aquila and Priscilla as he explains in strkjv@Acts:20:34|. This personal touch gives colour to the outline. Paul alludes to this fact often (1Thessalonians:2:9; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:8; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:7|). "Greeks despised manual labour; St. Paul glories in it" (Robertson and Plummer). Cf. Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 317. {Being reviled we bless} (\loidoroumenoi eulogoumen\). Almost the language of Peter about Jesus (1Peter:2:23|) in harmony with the words of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:5:44; strkjv@Luke:6:27|. {Being persecuted we endure} (\di“komenoi anechometha\). We hold back and do not retaliate. Turn to Paul's other picture of his experiences in the vivid contrasts in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:7-10; strkjv@6:3-10| for an interpretation of his language here.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:14 @{To shame you} (\entrep“n\). Literally, shaming you (present active participle of \entrep“\), old verb to turn one on himself either middle or with reflexive pronoun and active, but the reflexive \heautois\ is not expressed here. See on ¯2Thessalonians:3:14|. The harsh tone has suddenly changed.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:8 @{To the unmarried and to the widows} (\tois agamois kai tais chˆrais\). It is possible that by "the unmarried" (masculine plural) the apostle means only men since widows are added and since virgins receive special treatment later (verse 25|) and in verse 32| \ho agamos\ is the unmarried man. It is hardly likely that Paul means only widowers and widows and means to call himself a widower by \h“s kag“\ (even as I). After discussing marital relations in verses 2-7| he returns to the original question in verse 1| and repeats his own personal preference as in verse 7|. He does not say that it is _better_ to be unmarried, but only that it is _good_ (\kalon\ as in verse 1|) for them to remain unmarried. \Agamos\ is an old word and in N.T. occurs only in this passage. In verses 11, 34| it is used of women where the old Greeks would have used \anandros\, without a husband.

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:7:22 @{The Lord's freedman} (\apeleutheros Kuriou\). \Apeleutheros\ is an old word for a manumitted slave, \eleutheros\ from \erchomai\, to go and so go free, \ap-\ from bondage. Christ is now the owner of the Christian and Paul rejoices to call himself Christ's slave (\doulos\). But Christ set us free from sin by paying the ransom (\lutron\) of his life on the Cross (Matthew:20:28; strkjv@Romans:8:2; strkjv@Galatians:5:1|). Christ is thus the _patronus_ of the _libertus_ who owes everything to his _patronus_. He is no longer the slave of sin (Romans:6:6,18|), but a slave to God (Romans:6:22|). {Likewise the freeman when called is Christ's slave} (\homoi“s ho eleutheros klˆtheis doulos estin Christou\). Those who were not slaves, but freemen, when converted, are as much slaves of Christ as those who were and still were slaves of men. All were slaves of sin and have been set free from sin by Christ who now owns them all.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:36 @{That he behaveth himself unseemly} (\aschˆmonein\). Old verb, here only in N.T., from \aschˆm“n\ (1Corinthians:12:23|), from \a\ privative and \schˆma\. Occurs in the papyri. Infinitive in indirect discourse after \nomizei\ (thinks) with \ei\ (condition of first class, assumed as true). {If she be past the flower of her age} (\ean ˆi huperakmos\). Old word, only here in N.T., from \huper\ (over) and \akmˆ\ (prime or bloom of life), past the bloom of youth, _superadultus_ (Vulgate). Compound adjective with feminine form like masculine. Apparently the Corinthians had asked Paul about the duty of a father towards his daughter old enough to marry. {If need so requireth} (\kai hout“s opheilei ginesthai\). "And it ought to happen." Paul has discussed the problem of marriage for virgins on the grounds of expediency. Now he faces the question where the daughter wishes to marry and there is no serious objection to it. The father is advised to consent. Roman and Greek fathers had the control of the marriage of their daughters. "My marriage is my father's care; it is not for me to decide about that" (Hermione in Euripides' _Andromache_, 987). {Let them marry} (\gameit“san\). Present active plural imperative (long form).

rwp@1Corinthians:9:21 @{To them that are without law} (\tois anomois\). The heathen, those outside the Mosaic law (Romans:2:14|), not lawless (Luke:22:37; strkjv@Acts:2:23; strkjv@1Timothy:1:9|). See how Paul bore himself with the pagans (Acts:14:15; strkjv@17:23; strkjv@24:25|), and how he quoted heathen poets. "Not being an outlaw of God, but an inlaw of Christ" (Evans, Estius has it _exlex, inlex_, \mˆ “n anomos theou, all' ennomos Christou\). The genitive case of \theou\ and \Christou\ (specifying case) comes out better thus, for it seems unusual with \anomos\ and \ennomos\, both old and regular adjectives.

rwp@1Corinthians:9:25 @{That striveth in the games} (\ho ag“nizomenos\). Common verb for contest in the athletic games (\ag“n\), sometimes with the cognate accusative, \ag“na ag“nizomai\ as in strkjv@1Timothy:6:12; strkjv@2Timothy:4:7|. Probably Paul often saw these athletic games. {Is temperate in all things} (\panta egkrateuetai\). Rare verb, once in Aristotle and in a late Christian inscription, and strkjv@1Corinthians:7:9| and here, from \egkratˆs\, common adjective for one who controls himself. The athlete then and now has to control himself (direct middle) in all things (accusative of general reference). This is stated by Paul as an athletic axiom. Training for ten months was required under the direction of trained judges. Abstinence from wine was required and a rigid diet and regimen of habits.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:1 @{For} (\gar\). Correct text, not \de\. Paul appeals to the experience of the Israelites in the wilderness in confirmation of his statement concerning himself in strkjv@9:26f.| and as a powerful warning to the Corinthians who may be tempted to flirt with the idolatrous practices of their neighbours. It is a real, not an imaginary peril. {All under the cloud} (\pantes hupo tˆn nephelˆn\). They all marched under the pillar of cloud by day (Exodus:13:21; strkjv@14:19|) which covered the host (Numbers:14:14; strkjv@Psalms:95:39|). This mystic cloud was the symbol of the presence of the Lord with the people.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:3 @{The same spiritual meat} (\to auto pneumatikon br“ma\). Westcott and Hort needlessly bracket to \auto\. \Br“ma\ is food, not just flesh. The reference is to the manna (Exodus:16:13ff.|) which is termed "spiritual" by reason of its supernatural character. Jesus called himself the true bread from heaven (John:6:35|) which the manna typified.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:29 @{For why is my liberty judged by another conscience?} (\hina ti gar hˆ eleutheria mou krinetai hupo allˆs suneidˆse“s;\). Supply \genˆtai\ (deliberative subjunctive) after \ti\. Paul deftly puts himself in the place of the strong brother at such a banquet who is expected to conform his conscience to that of the weak brother who makes the point about a particular piece of meat. It is an abridgment of one's personal liberty in the interest of the weak brother. Two individualities clash. The only reason is love which builds up (8:2| and all of chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13|). There is this eternal collision between the forces of progress and reaction. If they work together, they must consider the welfare of each other.

rwp@1Corinthians:11:1 @{Imitators of me} (\mimˆtai mou\). In the principle of considerate love as so clearly shown in chapters strkjv@1Corinthians:8-10| and in so far as (\kath“s\) Paul is himself an imitator of Christ. The preacher is a leader and is bound to set an example or pattern (\tupos\) for others (Titus:2:7|). This verse clearly belongs to the preceding chapter and not to chapter 11.

rwp@1Corinthians:11:23 @{For I received of the Lord} (\ego gar parelabon apo tou Kuriou\). Direct claim to revelation from the Lord Jesus on the origin of the Lord's Supper. Luke's account (Luke:22:17-20|) is almost identical with this one. He could easily have read I Corinthians before he wrote his Gospel. See strkjv@15:3| for use of both \parelabon\ and \pared“ka\. Note \para\ in both verbs. Paul received the account from (\para--apo\) the Lord and passed it on from himself to them, a true \paradosis\ (tradition) as in strkjv@11:2|. {He was betrayed} (\paredideto\). Imperfect passive indicative (irregular form for \paredidoto\, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 340). Same verb as \pared“ka\ (first aorist active indicative just used for "I delivered").

rwp@1Corinthians:11:28 @{Let a man prove himself} (\dokimazet“ anthr“pos heauton\). Test himself as he would a piece of metal to see if genuine. Such examination of one's motives would have made impossible the disgraceful scenes in verses 20ff|.

rwp@1Corinthians:12:28 @{God hath set some} (\hous men etheto ho theos\). See verse 18| for \etheto ho theos\. Note middle voice (for his own use). Paul begins as if he means to say \hous men apostolous, hous de prophˆtas\ (some apostles, some prophets), but he changes the construction and has no \hous de\, but instead \pr“ton, deuteron, epeita\ (first, second, then, etc.). {In the church} (\en tˆi ekklˆsiƒi\). The general sense of \ekklˆsia\ as in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| and later in strkjv@Colossians:1:18,24; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23,32; strkjv@Hebrews:12:23|. See list also in strkjv@Ephesians:4:11|. See on ¯Matthew:10:2| for \apostolous\, the official title given the twelve by Jesus, and claimed by Paul though not one of the twelve. {Prophets} (\prophˆtas\). For-speakers for God and Christ. See the list of prophets and teachers in strkjv@Acts:13:1| with Barnabas first and Saul last. Prophets are needed today if men will let God's Spirit use them, men moved to utter the deep things of God. {Teachers} (\didaskalous\). Old word from \didask“\, to teach. Used to the Baptist (Luke:3:12|), to Jesus (John:3:10; strkjv@13:13|), and of Paul by himself along with \apostolos\ (1Timothy:2:7|). It is a calamity when the preacher is no longer a teacher, but only an exhorter. See strkjv@Ephesians:4:11|. {Then miracles} (\epeita dunameis\). Here a change is made from the concrete to the abstract. See the reverse in strkjv@Romans:12:7|. See these words (\dunameis, iamˆt“n, gl“ss“n\) in verses 9,10| with \gl“ss“n\, last again. But these two new terms (helps, governments). {Helps} (\antilˆmpseis\). Old word, from \antilambanomai\, to lay hold of. In LXX, common in papyri, here only in N.T. Probably refers to the work of the deacons, help rendered to the poor and the sick. {Governments} (\kubernˆseis\). Old word from \kuberna“\ (cf. \Kubernˆtˆs\ in strkjv@Acts:27:11|) like Latin _gubernare_, our govern. Songs:a governing. Probably Paul has in mind bishops (\episcopoi\) or elders (\presbuteroi\), the outstanding leaders (\hoi proistamenoi\ in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:12; strkjv@Romans:12:8|; \hoi hˆgoumenoi\ in strkjv@Acts:15:22; strkjv@Hebrews:13:7,17,24|). Curiously enough, these two offices (pastors and deacons) which are not named specifically are the two that survive today. See strkjv@Phillipians:1:1| for both officers.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:9 @{The least} (\ho elachistos\). True superlative, not elative. Explanation of the strong word \ektr“ma\ just used. See strkjv@Ephesians:3:8| where he calls himself "less than the least of all saints" and strkjv@1Timothy:1:15| the "chief" (\pr“tos\) of sinners. Yet under attack from the Judaizers Paul stood up for his rank as equal to any apostle (2Corinthians:11:5f.,23|). {Because I persecuted the church of God} (\edi“xa tˆn ekklˆsian tou theou\). There were times when this terrible fact confronted Paul like a nightmare. Who does not understand this mood of contrition?

rwp@1Corinthians:15:36 @{Thou foolish one} (\aphr“n\). Old word (\a\ privative, \phrˆn\), lack of sense. It is a severe term and justified by the implication "that the objector plumes himself on his acuteness" (Robertson and Plummer). Proleptic position of \su\ (thou) sharpens the point. Sceptics (agnostics) pose as unusually intellectual (the intelligentsia), but the pose does not make one intelligent. {Except it die} (\ean mˆ apothanˆi\). Condition of third class, possibility assumed. This is the answer to the "how" question. In plant life death precedes life, death of the seed and then the new plant.

rwp@Info_1John @ BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexander, _Epistles of John_ (Speaker's Comm., 1889). Barrett, _Devotional Comm. on John_. Baumgartner, _Die Schriften des N.T_. (IV. 3, 1918). Belser, _Komm_.. Bennett, _New-Century Bible_. Brooke, _Int. Crit. Comm_. (Johannine Epistles, 1912). Cox, _Private Letters of St. Paul and St. John_. Ebrard, _Die Briefe Johannis_. Ewald, _Die Johanneischen Schriften_. Findlay, _Fellowship in the Life Eternal_ Gibbon, _Eternal Life_. Gore, _Epistles of John_. Green, _Ephesian Canonical Writings_. Haring, _Die Johannesbriefe_. Haupt, _I John_. Hilgenfeld, _Das Evangelium und die Briefe Johannis nach ihrem Lehrbegriff dargestellt_. Holtzmann-Bauer, _Hand-Comm. sum N.T_.. Holtzmann, _Das Problem des I Johannesbr. in seinem Ver- haltniss zum Evang_. (Jahrbuch fur Prot. Theologie, 1881, 1882). Huther, _Crit. and Exeget. to the General Eps. of James and John_. Karl, _Johanneische Studien_ (der I Johannes Brief, 1898). Law, _The Tests of Life_. Lias, _Epistles of John_. Loisy, _Les epitres dites de Jean_ in le quatrieme evan- gile. Lucke, _Comm. on Epistles of John_. Luthardt, _Strack-Zoeckler Komm_.. Maurice, _The Epistles of St. John_. Plummer, _Cambridge Greek Test_. Ramsay, A., _Westminster N.T_.. Ritter, _Die Gemeinschaft der Heiligen_. Robertson, J. A., _The Johannine Epistles_. Rothe, _Der erste Brief Johannis_. Sawtelle, _American Comm_.. Smith, David, _The Expositor's Greek Testament_. Watson, _Epistles of John_. Weiss, B., _Die drei Briefe des Apostels Johannis_ (Meyer Komm. 1900). Wendt, _Die Johannesbriefe und das Johanneische Christen- tum_. Westcott, _The Epistles of St. John_. 3rd ed.. Windisch, _Die Katholischer Briefe_ (Handbuch zum N.T., 2 Aufl., 1930). Wrede, _In Die Heiligen Schriften des N.T_. (2 Aufl., 1924). Wurm, _Die Irrlehrer im I Johannes Brief_. strkjv@1John:1:1 @{That which} (\ho\). Strictly speaking, the neuter relative here is not personal, but the message "concerning the Word of life" (\peri tou logou tˆs z“ˆs\), a phrase that reminds one at once of the Word (\Logos\) in strkjv@John:1:1,14; strkjv@Revelation:19:14| (an incidental argument for identity of authorship for all these books). For discussion of the \Logos\ see on ¯John:1:1-18|. Here the \Logos\ is described by \tˆs z“ˆs\ (of life), while in strkjv@John:1:4| he is called \hˆ z“ˆ\ (the Life) as here in verse 2| and as Jesus calls himself (John:11:25; strkjv@14:6|), an advance on the phrase here, and in strkjv@Revelation:19:14| he is termed \ho logos tou theou\ (the Word of God), though in strkjv@John:1:1| the \Logos\ is flatly named \ho theos\ (God). John does use \ho\ in a collective personal sense in strkjv@John:6:37,39|. See also \pan ho\ in strkjv@1John:5:4|. {From the beginning} (\ap' archˆs\). Anarthrous as in strkjv@John:1:1; strkjv@6:64; strkjv@16:4|. See same phrase in strkjv@2:7|. The reference goes beyond the Christian dispensation, beyond the Incarnation, to the eternal purpose of God in Christ (John:3:16|), "coeval in some sense with creation" (Westcott). {That which we have heard} (\ho akˆkoamen\). Note fourfold repetition of \ho\ (that which) without connectives (asyndeton). The perfect tense (active indicative of \akou“\) stresses John's equipment to speak on this subject so slowly revealed. It is the literary plural unless John associates the elders of Ephesus with himself (Lightfoot) the men who certified the authenticity of the Gospel (John:21:24|). {That which we have seen} (\ho he“rakamen\). Perfect active, again, of \hora“\, with the same emphasis on the possession of knowledge by John. {With our eyes} (\tois ophthalmois hˆm“n\). Instrumental case and showing it was not imagination on John's part, not an optical illusion as the Docetists claimed, for Jesus had an actual human body. He could be heard and seen. {That which we beheld} (\ho etheasametha\). Repetition with the aorist middle indicative of \theaomai\ (the very form in strkjv@John:1:14|), "a spectacle which broke on our astonished vision" (D. Smith). {Handled} (\epsˆlaphˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \psˆlapha“\, old and graphic verb (from \psa“\, to touch), the very verb used by Jesus to prove that he was not a mere spirit (Luke:24:39|). Three senses are here appealed to (hearing, sight, touch) as combining to show the reality of Christ's humanity against the Docetic Gnostics and the qualification of John by experience to speak. But he is also "the Word of life" and so God Incarnate.

rwp@1John:2:2 @{And he} (\kai autos\). He himself in his own person, both priest and sacrifice (Hebrews:9:14|). {The propitiation} (\hilasmos\). Late substantive from \hilaskomai\ (Luke:18:13; strkjv@Hebrews:2:17|), in LXX, Philo, Plutarch, in N.T. only here and strkjv@4:10|. Christ himself is the means of propitiation for (\peri\ concerning) our sins. See \hilastˆrion\ in strkjv@Romans:3:15|. {For the whole world} (\peri holou tou kosmou\). It is possible to supply the ellipsis here of \t“n hamarti“n\ (the sins of) as we have it in strkjv@Hebrews:7:27|, but a simpler way is just to regard "the whole world" as a mass of sin (5:19|). At any rate, the propitiation by Christ provides for salvation for all (Hebrews:2:9|) if they will only be reconciled with God (2Corinthians:5:19-21|).

rwp@1John:2:14 @{I have written} (\egrapsa\). Repeated three times. Epistolary aorist referring to this Epistle, not to a previous Epistle. Law (_Tests of Life_, p. 309) suggests that John was interrupted at the close of verse 13| and resumes here in verse 14| with a reference to what he had previously written in verse 13|. But that is needless ingenuity. It is quite in John's style to repeat himself with slight variations. {The Father} (\ton patera\). The heavenly Father as all of God's children should come to know him. He repeats from verse 13| what he said to "fathers." To the young men he adds \ischuroi\ (strong) and the word of God abiding in them. That is what makes them powerful (\ischuroi\) and able to gain the victory over the evil one.

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:2:27 @{And as for you} (\kai humeis\). Prolepsis again as in verse 24|. {Which ye received of him} (\ho elabete ap' autou\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\, a definite experience, this anointing (\chrisma\), from Christ himself as in verse 20|. This Paraclete was promised by Christ (John:14:26; strkjv@16:13ff.|) and came on the great Pentecost, as they knew, and in the experience of all who yielded themselves to the Holy Spirit. {That any one teach you} (\hina tis didaskˆi humas\). Sub-final use of \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \didask“\, "that any one keep on teaching you." {Teacheth you} (\didaskei humas\). Present active indicative. The Holy Spirit was to bring all things to their remembrance (John:14:26|) and to bear witness concerning Christ (John:15:26; strkjv@16:12-15|). Yet they need to be reminded of what they already know to be "true" (\alˆthes\) and "no lie" (\ouk estin pseudos\), according to John's habit of positive and negative (1:5|). Songs:he exhorts them to "abide in him" (\menete en aut“i\, imperative active, though same form as the indicative). Precisely so Jesus had urged that the disciples abide in him (John:15:4f.|).

rwp@1John:3:5 @{He} (\ekeinos\). As in verse 3; strkjv@John:1:18|. {Was manifested} (\ephaner“thˆ\). Same form as in verse 2|, but here of the Incarnation as in strkjv@John:21:1|, not of the second coming (1John:2:28|). {To take away sins} (\hina tas hamartias arˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \air“\ as in strkjv@John:1:29|. In strkjv@Isaiah:53:11| we have \anapher“\ for bearing sins, but \air“\ properly means to lift up and carry away (John:2:16|). Songs:in strkjv@Hebrews:10:4| we find \aphaire“\ and strkjv@Hebrews:10:11| \periaire“\, to take away sins completely (the complete expiation wrought by Christ on Calvary). The plural \hamartias\ here, as in strkjv@Colossians:1:14|, not singular (collective sense) \hamartian\ as in strkjv@John:1:29|. {And in him is no sin} (\kai hamartia en aut“i ouk estin\). "And sin (the sinful principle) in him is not." As Jesus had claimed about himself (John:7:18; strkjv@8:46|) and as is repeatedly stated in the N.T. (2Corinthians:5:21; strkjv@Hebrews:4:15; strkjv@7:26; strkjv@9:13|).

rwp@1John:3:16 @{Know we} (\egn“kamen\). Perfect active indicative, "we have come to know and still know." See strkjv@2:3| for "hereby" (\en tout“i\). {Love} (\tˆn agapˆn\). "The thing called love" (D. Smith). {He for us} (\ekeinos huper hˆm“n\). \Ekeinos\ as in strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:3,5|, \huper\ here alone in this Epistle, though common in John's Gospel (10:11,15; strkjv@11:50|, etc.) and in strkjv@3John:1:7|. {Laid down his life} (\tˆn psuchˆn autou ethˆken\). First aorist active indicative of \tithˆmi\, the very idiom used by Jesus of himself in strkjv@John:10:11,17f|. {We ought} (\hˆmeis opheilomen\). Emphatic \hˆmeis\ again. For \opheil“\ see strkjv@2:6|. Of course our laying down our lives for the brethren has no atoning value in our cases as in that of Christ, but is a supreme proof of one's love (John:13:37f.; strkjv@15:13|), as often happens.

rwp@1John:5:6 @{This} (\houtos\). Jesus the Son of God (verse 5|). {He that came} (\ho elth“n\). Second aorist active articular participle of \erchomai\, referring to the Incarnation as a definite historic event, the preexistent Son of God "sent from heaven to do God's will" (Brooke). {By water and blood} (\di' hudatos kai haimatos\). Accompanied by (\dia\ used with the genitive both as instrument and accompaniment, as in strkjv@Galatians:5:13|) water (as at the baptism) and blood (as on the Cross). These two incidents in the Incarnation are singled out because at the baptism Jesus was formally set apart to his Messianic work by the coming of the Holy Spirit upon him and by the Father's audible witness, and because at the Cross his work reached its culmination ("It is finished," Jesus said). There are other theories that do not accord with the language and the facts. It is true that at the Cross both water and blood came out of the side of Jesus when pierced by the soldier, as John bore witness (John:19:34|), a complete refutation of the Docetic denial of an actual human body for Jesus and of the Cerinthian distinction between Jesus and Christ. There is thus a threefold witness to the fact of the Incarnation, but he repeats the twofold witness before giving the third. The repetition of both preposition (\en\ this time rather than \dia\) and the article (\t“i\ locative case) argues for two separate events with particular emphasis on the blood ("not only" \ouk monon\, "but" \all'\) which the Gnostics made light of or even denied. {It is the Spirit that beareth witness} (\to pneuma estin to marturoun\). Present active articular participle of \marture“\ with article with both subject and predicate, and so interchangeable as in strkjv@3:4|. The Holy Spirit is the third and the chief witness at the baptism of Jesus and all through his ministry. {Because} (\hoti\). Or declarative "that." Either makes sense. In strkjv@John:15:26| Jesus spoke of "the Spirit of truth" (whose characteristic is truth). Here John identifies the Spirit with truth as Jesus said of himself (John:14:6|) without denying personality for the Holy Spirit.

rwp@1John:5:12 @{Hath the life} (\echei tˆn z“ˆn\). The life which God gave (verse 11|). This is the position of Jesus himself (John:5:24; strkjv@14:6|).

rwp@1John:5:18 @{We know} (\oidamen\). As in strkjv@3:2,14; strkjv@5:15,19,20|. He has "ye know" in strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:5,15|. {Sinneth not} (\ouch hamartanei\). Lineal present active indicative, "does not keep on sinning," as he has already shown in strkjv@3:4-10|. {He that was begotten of God} (\ho gennˆtheis ek tou theou\). First aorist passive articular participle referring to Christ, if the reading of A B is correct (\tˆrei auton\, not \tˆrei heauton\). It is Christ who keeps the one begotten of God (\gegennˆmenos ek tou theou\ as in strkjv@3:9| and so different from \ho gennˆtheis\ here). It is a difficult phrase, but this is probably the idea. Jesus (John:18:37|) uses \gegennˆmai\ of himself and uses also \tˆre“\ of keeping the disciples (John:17:12,15; strkjv@Revelation:3:10|). {The evil one} (\ho ponˆros\). Masculine and personal as in strkjv@2:13|, not neuter, and probably Satan as in strkjv@Matthew:6:13|, not just any evil man. {Touchest him not} (\ouch haptetai autou\). Present middle indicative of \hapt“\, elsewhere in John only strkjv@John:20:17|. It means to lay hold of or to grasp rather than a mere superficial touch (\thiggan“\, both in strkjv@Colossians:2:21|). Here the idea is to touch to harm. The devil cannot snatch such a man from Christ (John:6:38f.|).

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

rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE READERS Peter writes "to the elect who are sojourners of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia" (1Peter:1:1|). These five Roman provinces are naturally given from the standpoint of Babylon. In Galatia and Asia Paul had labored, though not all over these provinces. At any rate, there is no reason to wonder that Peter should himself work in the same regions where Paul had been. In a general way Paul and Peter had agreed on separate spheres of activity, Paul to the Gentiles and Peter to the Jews (Galatians:21:7ff.|), though the distinction was not absolute, for Paul usually began his work in the Jewish synagogue. Probably the readers are mainly Jewish Christians. but not to the exclusion of Gentiles. Peter has clearly Paul's idea that Christianity is the true Judaism of God's promise (1Peter:2:4-10|)

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

rwp@1Peter:2:7 @{The preciousness} (\hˆ timˆ\). Or "the honour." Explanation of \entimon\ and \ou mˆ kataischunthˆi\ and only true "for you which believe" (\tois pisteuousin\ ethical dative of articular present active participle of \pisteu“\ to believe). {But for such as disbelieve} (\apistousin de\). Dative present active participle again of \apiste“\, opposite of \pisteu“\ (Luke:24:11|). {Was made the head of the corner} (\egenˆthˆ eis kephalˆn g“nias\). This verse is from strkjv@Psalms:118:22| with evident allusion to strkjv@Isaiah:28:16| (\kephalˆn g“nias=akrog“niaion\). See strkjv@Matthew:21:42; strkjv@Mark:12:10; strkjv@Luke:20:17|, where Jesus himself quotes strkjv@Psalms:118:22| and applies the rejection of the stone by the builders (\hoi oikodomountes\, the experts) to the Sanhedrin's conduct toward him. Peter quoted it also (and applied it as Jesus had done) in his speech at the Beautiful Gate (Acts:4:11|). Here he quotes it again to the same purpose.

rwp@1Peter:2:23 @{When he was reviled} (\loidoroumenos\). Present passive participle of \loidore“\, old verb (from \loidoros\, reviler, strkjv@1Corinthians:5:11|) as in strkjv@John:9:28|. {Reviled not again} (\ouk anteloidorei\). Imperfect active (for repeated incidents) of \antiloidore“\, late and rare compound (Plutarch, Lucian, one papyrus example with compound following the simplex verb as here, Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_), here only in N.T. Idiomatic use of \anti\ (in turn, return, back). {Threatened not} (\ouk ˆpeilei\). Imperfect again (repeated acts) of \apeile“\, old compound (from \apeilˆ\, threat, strkjv@Acts:9:1|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:4:17|. {But committed himself} (\paredidou de\). Imperfect active again (kept on committing himself) of \paradid“mi\, to hand over, usually of one to a judge, but here not of another (as the Sanhedrin), but himself (supply \heauton\), for Jesus uses this very idea in strkjv@Luke:23:46| as he dies. Jesus thus handed himself and his cause over to the Father who judges righteously (\t“i krinonti dikai“s\, dative of present active articular participle of \krin“\).

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

rwp@1Peter:5:1 @{Who am a fellow-elder} (\ho sunpresbuteros\). Earliest use of this compound in an inscription of B.C. 120 for fellow-elders (alderman) in a town, here only in N.T., in eccles. writers. For the word \presbuteros\ in the technical sense of officers in a Christian church (like elder in the local synagogues of the Jews) see strkjv@Acts:11:30; strkjv@20:17|. It is noteworthy that here Peter the Apostle (1:1|) calls himself an elder along with (\sun\) the other "elders." {A witness} (\martus\). This is what Jesus had said they must be (Acts:1:8|) and what Peter claimed to be (Acts:3:15; strkjv@10:39|). Songs:Paul was to be a \martus\ (Acts:22:15|). {Who am also a partaker} (\ho kai koin“nos\). "The partner also," "the partaker also." See strkjv@Luke:5:10; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:7; strkjv@2Peter:1:4|. See same idea in strkjv@Romans:8:17|. In strkjv@Galatians:3:23; strkjv@Romans:8:18| we have almost this about the glory about to be revealed to us where \mell“\ as here is used with the infinitive.

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@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:1:6 @{Imitators of us and of the Lord} (\mimˆtai hˆm“n kai tou kuriou\). \Mimˆtˆs\ (\-tˆs\ expresses the agent) is from \mimeomai\, to imitate and that from \mimos\ (\mimic\, actor). Old word, more than "followers," in the N.T. only six times (1Thessalonians:1:6; strkjv@2:14; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:16; strkjv@11:1; strkjv@Ephesians:5:1; strkjv@Hebrews:6:12|). Again Paul uses \ginomai\, to become, not \eimi\, to be. It is a daring thing to expect people to "imitate" the preacher, but Paul adds "and of the Lord," for he only expected or desired "imitation" as he himself imitated the Lord Jesus, as he expressly says in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:1|. The peril of it all is that people so easily and so readily imitate the preacher when he does not imitate the Lord. The fact of the "election" of the Thessalonians was shown by the character of the message given them and by this sincere acceptance of it (Lightfoot). {Having received the word} (\dexamenoi ton logon\). First aorist middle participle of \dechomai\, probably simultaneous action (receiving), not antecedent. {In much affliction} (\en thlipsei pollˆi\). Late word, pressure. Tribulation (Latin _tribulum_) from \thlib“\, to press hard on. Christianity has glorified this word. It occurs in some Christian papyrus letters in this same sense. Runs all through the N.T. (2Thessalonians:1:4; strkjv@Romans:5:3|). Paul had his share of them (Colossians:1:24; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:4|) and so he understands how to sympathize with the Thessalonians (1Thessalonians:3:3f.|). They suffered after Paul left Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:2:14|). {With joy of the Holy Spirit} (\meta charas pneumatos hagiou\). The Holy Spirit gives the joy in the midst of the tribulations as Paul learned (Romans:5:3|). "This paradox of experience" (Moffatt) shines along the pathway of martyrs and saints of Christ.

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

rwp@1Timothy:1:15 @{Faithful is the saying} (\pistos ho logos\). Five times in the Pastorals (1Timothy:1:15; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@4:9; strkjv@Titus:3:8; strkjv@2Timothy:2:11|). It will pay to note carefully \pistis, pisteu“, pistos\. Same use of \pistos\ (trustworthy) applied to \logos\ in strkjv@Titus:1:9; strkjv@Revelation:21:5; strkjv@22:6|. Here and probably in strkjv@2Timothy:2:11| a definite saying seems to be referred to, possibly a quotation (\hoti\) of a current saying quite like the Johannine type of teaching. This very phrase (Christ coming into the world) occurs in strkjv@John:9:37; strkjv@11:27; strkjv@16:28; strkjv@18:37|. Paul, of course, had no access to the Johannine writings, but such "sayings" were current among the disciples. There is no formal quotation, but "the whole phrase implies a knowledge of Synoptic and Johannine language" (Lock) as in strkjv@Luke:5:32; strkjv@John:12:47|. {Acceptation} (\apodochˆs\). Genitive case with \axios\ (worthy of). Late word (Polybius, Diod., Jos.) in N.T. only here and strkjv@4:9|. {Chief} (\pr“tos\). Not \ˆn\ (I was), but \eimi\ (I am). "It is not easy to think of any one but St. Paul as penning these words" (White). In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:9| he had called himself "the least of the apostles" (\elachistos t“n apostol“n\). In strkjv@Ephesians:3:8| he refers to himself as "the less than the least of all saints" (\t“i elachistoter“i pant“n hagi“n\). On occasion Paul would defend himself as on a par with the twelve apostles (Galatians:2:6-10|) and superior to the Judaizers (2Corinthians:11:5f.; strkjv@12:11|). It is not mock humility here, but sincere appreciation of the sins of his life (cf. strkjv@Romans:7:24|) as a persecutor of the church of God (Galatians:1:13|), of men and even women (Acts:22:4f.; strkjv@26:11|). He had sad memories of those days.

rwp@1Timothy:2:6 @{A ransom for all} (\antilutron huper pant“n\). "A reminiscence of the Lord's own saying" (Lock) in strkjv@Matthew:20:28| (Mark:10:45|) where we have \lutron anti poll“n\. In the papyri \huper\ is the ordinary preposition for the notion of substitution where benefit is involved as in this passage. \Anti\ has more the idea of exchange and \antilutron huper\ combines both ideas. \Lutron\ is the common word for ransom for a slave or a prisoner. Paul may have coined \antilutron\ with the saying of Christ in mind (only one MS. of strkjv@Psalms:48:9| and Orph. _Litt_. 588). See strkjv@Galatians:1:4| "who gave himself for our sins." {The testimony} (\to marturion\). Either the nominative absolute or the accusative absolute in apposition to the preceding clause like \to adunaton\ in strkjv@Romans:8:3|. {In its own times} (\kairois idiois\). Locative case as in strkjv@6:15; strkjv@Titus:1:3|. See strkjv@Galatians:6:9| for "due season." There is no predicate or participle here, "the testimony in its due seasons" (plural).

rwp@1Timothy:2:7 @{For which} (\eis ho\). The testimony of Jesus in his self-surrender (verse 6|). See \eis ho\ in strkjv@2Timothy:1:11|. {I was appointed} (\etethˆn eg“\). First aorist passive indicative of \tithˆmi\. {Preacher and apostle} (\kˆrux kai apostolos\). In strkjv@2Timothy:1:10| Paul adds \didaskalos\ (herald, apostle, teacher) as he does here with emphasis. In strkjv@Colossians:1:23f.| he has \diakonos\ (minister). He frequently uses \kˆruss“\ of himself (1Corinthians:1:23; strkjv@9:27; strkjv@Galatians:2:2; strkjv@Romans:10:8f.|). {I speak the truth, I lie not} (\alˆtheian leg“, ou pseudomai\). A Pauline touch (Romans:9:1|). Cf. strkjv@Galatians:1:20; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:31|. Here alone he calls himself "a teacher of the Gentiles," elsewhere apostle (Romans:11:13|), minister (Romans:15:16|), prisoner (Ephesians:3:1|).

rwp@1Timothy:5:1 @{Rebuke not an elder} (\presbuter“i mˆ epiplˆxˆis\). Dative case \presbuter“i\ used in the usual sense of an older man, not a minister (bishop as in strkjv@3:2|) as is shown by "as a father." First aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive with negative \mˆ\ (prohibition against committing the act) of \epiplˆss“\, to strike upon, old verb, but here only in N.T. and in figurative sense with words rather than with fists. Respect for age is what is here commanded, an item appropriate to the present time. {The younger men as brethren} (\ne“terous h“s adelphous\). Comparative adjective \ne“teros\ from \neos\ (young). No article, "younger men." Wise words for the young minister to know how to conduct himself with old men (reverence) and young men (fellowship, but not stooping to folly with them).

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@2Corinthians:1:10 @{Out of so great a death} (\ek tˆlikoutou thanatou\). He had considered himself as good as dead. {Delivered} (\erusato\) {--will deliver} (\rusetai\). Old verb \ru“\, middle, \ruomai\, draw oneself, as out of a pit, rescue. Songs:Paul faces death without fear. {On whom we have set our hope} (\eis hon ˆlpikamen\). Perfect active indicative of \elpiz“\. We still have that hope, emphasized by \eti rusetai\ (he will still deliver).

rwp@2Corinthians:2:15 @{A sweet savour of Christ} (\Christou eu“dia\). Old word from \eu\, well, and \oz“\, to smell. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Phillipians:4:18; strkjv@Ephesians:5:2|. In spreading the fragrance of Christ the preacher himself becomes fragrant (Plummer). {In them that are perishing} (\en tois apollumenois\). Even in these if the preacher does his duty.

rwp@2Corinthians:2:16 @{From death unto death} (\ek thanatou eis thanaton\). From one evil condition to another. Some people are actually hardened by preaching. {And who is sufficient for these things?} (\kai pros tauta tis hikanos?\). Rhetorical question. In himself no one is. But some one has to preach Christ and Paul proceeds to show that he is sufficient. {For we are not as the many} (\ou gar esmen h“s hoi polloi\). A bold thing to say, but necessary and only from God (3:6|).

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

rwp@2Corinthians:5:18 @{Who reconciled us to himself through Christ} (\tou katallaxantos hˆmas heaut“i dia Christou\). Here Paul uses one of his great doctrinal words, \katallass“\, old word for exchanging coins. \Diallass“\, to change one's mind, to reconcile, occurs in N.T. only in strkjv@Matthew:5:24| though in papyri (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 187), and common in Attic. \Katallass“\ is old verb, but more frequent in later writers. We find \sunallass“\ in strkjv@Acts:7:26| and \apokatallass“\ in strkjv@Colossians:1:20f.; strkjv@Ephesians:2:16| and the substantive \katallagˆ\ in strkjv@Romans:5:11; strkjv@11:15| as well as here. It is hard to discuss this great theme without apparent contradiction. God's love (John:3:16|) provided the means and basis for man's reconciliation to God against whom he had sinned. It is all God's plan because of his love, but God's own sense of justice had to be satisfied (Romans:3:26|) and so God gave his Son as a propitiation for our sins (Romans:3:25; strkjv@Colossians:1:20; strkjv@1John:2:2; strkjv@4:10|). The point made by Paul here is that God needs no reconciliation, but is engaged in the great business of reconciling us to himself. This has to be done on God's terms and is made possible through (\dia\) Christ. {And gave unto us the ministry of reconciliation} (\kai dontos hˆmin tˆn diakonian tˆs katallagˆs\). It is a ministry marked by reconciliation, that consists in reconciliation. God has made possible through Christ our reconciliation to him, but in each case it has to be made effective by the attitude of each individual. The task of winning the unreconciled to God is committed to us. It is a high and holy one, but supremely difficult, because the offending party (the guilty) is the hardest to win over. We must be loyal to God and yet win sinful men to him.

rwp@2Corinthians:5:20 @{We are ambassadors therefore on behalf of Christ} (\huper Christou oun presbeuomen\). Old word from \presbus\, an old man, first to be an old man, then to be an ambassador (here and strkjv@Ephesians:6:20| with \en halusˆi\ in a chain added), common in both senses in the Greek. "The proper term in the Greek East for the Emperor's Legate" (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 374), in inscriptions and papyri. Songs:Paul has a natural pride in using this dignified term for himself and all ministers. The ambassador has to be _persona grata_ with both countries (the one that he represents and the one to which he goes). Paul was Christ's _Legate_ to act in his behalf and in his stead. {As though God were intreating by us} (\h“s tou theou parakalountos di' hˆm“n\). Genitive absolute with \h“s\ used with the participle as often to give the reason (apparent or real). Here God speaks through Christ's Legate. {Be ye reconciled to God} (\katallagˆte t“i the“i\). Second aorist passive imperative of \katallass“\ and used with the dative case. "Get reconciled to God," and do it now. This is the ambassador's message as he bears it to men from 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:7:1 @{These promises} (\tautas tas epaggelias\). Songs:many and so precious (2Peter:2:4| \epaggelmata\; strkjv@Hebrews:11:39f.|). {Let us cleanse ourselves} (\katharis“men heautous\). Old Greek used \kathair“\ (in N.T. only in strkjv@John:15:2|, to prune). In _Koin‚_ \kathariz“\ occurs in inscriptions for ceremonial cleansing (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 216f.). Paul includes himself in this volitive aorist subjunctive. {From all defilement} (\apo pantos molusmou\). Ablative alone would have done, but with \apo\ it is plainer as in strkjv@Hebrews:9:14|. \Molusmos\ is a late word from \molun“\, to stain (see on ¯1Corinthians:8:7|), to pollute. In the LXX, Plutarch, Josephus. It includes all sorts of filthiness, physical, moral, mental, ceremonial, "of flesh and spirit." Missionaries in China and India can appreciate the atmosphere of pollution in Corinth, for instance. {Perfecting holiness} (\epitelountes hagiosunˆn\). Not merely negative goodness (cleansing), but aggressive and progressive (present tense of \epitele“\) holiness, not a sudden attainment of complete holiness, but a continuous process (1Thessalonians:3:13; strkjv@Romans:1:4; strkjv@1:6|).

rwp@2Corinthians:7:15 @{Whilst he remembereth} (\anamimnˆskomenou\). Present middle participle of \anamimnˆsk“\, to remind, in the genitive case agreeing with \autou\ (his, of him). {The obedience of you all} (\tˆn pant“n hum“n hupakouˆn\). A remarkable statement of the complete victory of Titus in spite of a stubborn minority still opposing Paul. {With fear and trembling} (\meta phobou kai tromou\). He had brought a stern message (1Corinthians:5:5|) and they had trembled at the words of Titus (cf. strkjv@Ephesians:6:5; strkjv@Phillipians:2:12|). Paul had himself come to the Corinthians at first with a nervous dread (1Corinthians:2:3|).

rwp@2Corinthians:10:1 @{Now I Paul myself} (\Autos de eg“ Paulos\). Cf. strkjv@Galatians:5:2|. Paul now turns to the third part of the epistle in chapters 10-13| in which he vigorously defends himself against the accusations of the stubborn minority of Judaizers in Corinth. Great ministers of Christ through the ages have had to pass through fiery trials like these. Paul has shown the way for us all. He speaks of himself now plainly, but under compulsion, as is clear. It may be that at this point he took the pen from the amanuensis and wrote himself as in strkjv@Galatians:6:11|. {By the meekness and gentleness of Christ} (\dia tes prautˆtos kai epieikias tou Christou\). This appeal shows (Plummer) that Paul had spoken to the Corinthians about the character of Christ. Jesus claimed meekness for himself (Matthew:11:29|) and felicitated the meek (Matthew:5:5|) and he exemplified it abundantly (Luke:23:34|). See on ¯Matthew:5:15; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:21| for this great word that has worn thin with us. Plutarch combines \prautˆs\ with \epieikia\ as Paul does here. Matthew Arnold suggested "sweet reasonableness" for \epieikeia\ in Plato, Aristotle, Plutarch. It is in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:24:4| (\to epieikes\ in strkjv@Phillipians:4:5|). In Greek Ethics the equitable man was called \epieikˆs\, a man who does not press for the last farthing of his rights (Bernard). {Lowly among you} (\tapeinos en humin\). The bad use of \tapeinos\, the old use, but here alone in N.T. in that meaning. Socrates and Aristotle used it for littleness of soul. Probably Paul here is quoting one of the sneers of his traducers in Corinth about his humble conduct while with them (1Corinthians:2:23; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:6|) and his boldness (\ap“n tharr“\) when away (1Corinthians:7:16|). "It was easy to satirize and misrepresent a depression of spirits, a humility of demeanour, which were either the direct results of some bodily affliction, or which the consciousness of this affliction had rendered habitual" (Farrar). The words stung Paul to the quick.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:9 @{I was not a burden to any man} (\ou katenarkˆsa outhenos\). First aorist active indicative of \katanarka“\. Jerome calls this word one of Paul's _cilicisms_ which he brought from Cilicia. But the word occurs in Hippocrates for growing quite stiff and may be a medical term in popular use. \Narka“\ means to become numb, torpid, and so a burden. It is only here and strkjv@12:13f|. Paul "did not benumb the Corinthians by his demand for pecuniary aid" (Vincent). {From being burdensome} (\abarˆ\). Old adjective, free from weight or light (\a\ privative and \baros\, weight). See on ¯1Thessalonians:2:9| for same idea. Paul kept himself independent.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:9 @{He hath said} (\eirˆken\). Perfect active indicative, as if a final word. Paul probably still has the thorn in his flesh and needs this word of Christ. {Is sufficient} (\arkei\). Old word of rich meaning, perhaps kin to Latin _arceo_, to ward off against danger. Christ's grace suffices and abides. {Is perfected} (\teleitai\). Present passive indicative of \tele“\, to finish. It is linear in idea. Power is continually increased as the weakness grows. See strkjv@Phillipians:4:13| for this same noble conception. The human weakness opens the way for more of Christ's power and grace. {Most gladly rather} (\hˆdista mallon\). Two adverbs, one superlative (\hˆdista\), one comparative (\mallon\). "Rather" than ask any more (thrice already) for the removal of the thorn or splinter "most gladly will I glory in my weaknesses." Slowly Paul had learned this supreme lesson, but it will never leave him (Romans:5:2; strkjv@2Timothy:4:6-8|). {May rest upon me} (\episkˆn“sˆi ep' eme\). Late and rare verb in first aorist active subjunctive with \hina\ (final clause), to fix a tent upon, here upon Paul himself by a bold metaphor, as if the Shechinah of the Lord was overshadowing him (cf. strkjv@Luke:9:34|), the power (\dunamis\) of the Lord Jesus.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:11 @{I am become foolish} (\gegona aphr“n\). Perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. In spite of what he said in verse 6| that he would not be foolish if he gloried in the other Paul. But he feels that he has dropped back to the mood of strkjv@11:1,16|. He has been swept on by the memory of the ecstasy. {For I ought to have been commended by you} (\eg“ gar “pheilon huph' hum“n sunistasthai\). Explanation of "ye compelled me." Imperfect active \“pheilon\ of \opheil“\, to be under obligation, and the tense here expresses an unfulfilled obligation about the present. But \sunistasthai\ is present passive infinitive, not aorist or perfect passive. He literally means, "I ought now to be commended by you" instead of having to glorify myself. He repeats his boast already made (11:5f.|), that he is no whit behind "the super-extra apostles" (the Judaizers), "though I am nothing" (\ei kai ouden eimi\). Even boasting himself against those false apostles causes a reaction of feeling that he has to express (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:15:9; strkjv@1Timothy:1:15f.|).

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

rwp@Info_2John @ SECOND JOHN ABOUT A.D. 85 TO 90 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION There is little to add to what was said about the First Epistle except that here the author terms himself "the elder" (\ho presbuteros\) and writes to "the elect lady" (\eklektˆi kuriƒi\). There is dispute about both of these titles. Some hold that it is the mythical "presbyter John" of whom Papias may speak, if so understood, but whose very existence is disproved by Dom Chapman in _John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel_. Peter the apostle (1Peter:1:1|) calls himself "fellow-elder" (\sunpresbuteros\) with the other elders (1Peter:5:1|). The word referred originally to age (Luke:15:25|), then to rank or office as in the Sanhedrin (Matthew:16:21; strkjv@Acts:6:12|) and in the Christian churches (Acts:11:30; strkjv@20:17; strkjv@1Timothy:5:17,19|) as here also. A few even deny that the author is the same as in the First Epistle of John, but just an imitator. But the bulk of modern scholarly opinion agrees that the same man wrote all three Epistles and the Fourth Gospel (the Beloved Disciple, and many still say the Apostle John) whatever is true of the Apocalypse. There is no way of deciding whether "the elect lady" is a woman or a church. The obvious way of taking it is to a woman of distinction in one of the churches, as is true of "the co-elect lady in Babylon" (1Peter:5:13|), Peter's wife, who travelled with him (1Corinthians:9:5|). Some even take \kuria\ to be the name of the lady (Cyria). Some also take it to be "Eklecta the lady." Dr. Findlay (_Fellowship in the Life Eternal_, p. 31) holds that Pergamum is the church to which the letter was sent. The same commentaries treat I, II, and III John as a rule, though Poggel has a book on II, III John and Bresky has _Das Verhaltnis des Zweiten Johannesbriefes zum dritten_. Dr. J. Rendel Harris has an interesting article in _The Expositor_ of London for March, 1901, on "The Problem of the Address to the Second Epistle of John," in which he argues from papyri examples that \kuria\ here means "my dear" or "my lady." But Findlay (_Fellowship in the Life Eternal_, p. 26) argues that "the qualifying adjunct 'elect' lifts us into the region of Christian calling and dignity." It is not certain that II John was written after I John, though probable. Origen rejected it and the Peshitta Syriac does not have II and III John. strkjv@2John:1:1 @{And her children} (\kai tois teknois autˆs\). As with \eklektˆ kuria\, so here \tekna\ may be understood either literally as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:4|, or spiritually, as in strkjv@Galatians:4:19,25; strkjv@1Timothy:1:2|. For the spiritual sense in \teknia\ see strkjv@1John:2:1,12|. {Whom} (\hous\). Masculine accusative plural, though \teknois\ is neuter plural (dative), construction according to sense, not according to grammatical gender, "embracing the mother and the children of both sexes" (Vincent). See thus \hous\ in strkjv@Galatians:4:19|. {I} (\Eg“\). Though \ho presbuteros\ is third person, he passes at once after the Greek idiom to the first and there is also special emphasis here in the use of \agap“\ with the addition of \en alˆtheiƒi\ (in truth, in the highest sphere, as in strkjv@John:17:19; strkjv@3John:1:1|) and \ouk eg“ monos\ (not I only, "not I alone"). Brooke argues that this language is unsuitable if to a single family and not to a church. But Paul employs this very phrase in sending greetings to Prisca and Aquila (Romans:16:4|). {That know} (\hoi egn“kotes\). Perfect active articular participle of \gin“sk“\, "those that have come to know and still know."

rwp@2John:1:5 @{Beseech} (\er“t“\). For pray as in strkjv@1John:5:16|. {Lady} (\kuria\). Vocative case and in the same sense as in 1|. {As though I wrote} (\h“s graph“n\). Common idiom \h“s\ with the participle (present active) for the alleged reason. {New} (\kainˆn\). As in strkjv@1John:2:7f.|, which see. {We had} (\eichamen\). Imperfect active (late \-a\ form like \eichan\ in strkjv@Mark:8:7|) of \ech“\ and note \eichete\ with \ap' archˆs\ in strkjv@1John:2:7|. Not literary plural, John identifying all Christians with himself in this blessing. {That we love one another} (\hina agap“men allˆlous\). Either a final clause after \er“t“\ as in strkjv@John:17:15| or an object clause in apposition with \entolˆn\, like strkjv@1John:2:27; strkjv@3:23| and like verse 6|.

rwp@Info_2Peter @ THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER ABOUT A.D. 66 OR 67 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION MOST DOUBTFUL NEW TESTAMENT BOOK Every book in the New Testament is challenged by some one, as indeed the historicity of Jesus Christ himself is and the very existence of God. But it is true that more modern scholars deny the genuineness of II Peter than that of any single book in the canon. This is done by men like F. H. Chase, J. B. Mayor, and R. D. Strachan, who are followers of Christ as Lord and Saviour. One has to admit that the case concerning II Peter has problems of peculiar difficulty that call for careful consideration and balanced judgment. One other word needs to be said, which is that an adverse decision against the authenticity of II Peter stands by itself and does not affect the genuineness of the other books. It is easy to take an extreme position for or against it without full knowledge of all the evidence.

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

rwp@Info_2Peter @ BOOKS ON II PETER BESIDES THOSE ON I PETER ALSO Abbott, E. A., _The Expositor_ (Jan. to March, 1822). Chase, F. H., _Hastings D B_ (Second Peter). Deuteronomy:Zwaan, _2 Peter en Judas_. Dietlein, W. O., _Der 2 Brief Petri_. Grosch, H., _Die Echtheit des zweiten Briefes Petri_. Henkel, K., _Der zweite Brief des Apostelfursten Petrus_. Hofmann, J. C., _Der zweite Brief Petri und der Brief Juda Hundhausen, _Das zweite Pontifkalschreiben des Apostels Petrus_. James, M. R., _The Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of Jude_ (Cambridge Greek Testament, 1912). Lumby, J. R., _2 Peter and Jude_ (in Bible Commentary). Mayor, J. B., _The Epistle of St. Jude:and the Second Epistle of St. Peter_. Plummer, A., _The Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of Jude_ (Vol. 3, N.T. Commentary for English Readers by Ellicott). Robson, E. I., _Studies in the Second Epistle of St. Peter_. Schott, Th., _Der zweite Brief Petri und der Brief Juda_. Schott, _Der 2 Br. Petri und der Br. Juda Erkl_.. Schweenhorst, H., _Das Verhaltnis des Judasbriefes zum zweiten Petrusbriefe_. Snyman, D. R., _The Authenticity of the Second Epistle of Peter_ (thesis in 1923 for Th.D. degree at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary). Spitta, F, _Der zweite Brief des Petrus und der Brief des Judas_. Strachan, R. D., _Expositor's Greek Testament_, Ullman, C., _Der 2 Brief Petri Krit. untersuch._. Warfield, B. B., _A Defence of 2 Peter_ (Southern Presbyterian Review, January, 1882).,_Dr. Edwin A. Abbott on the Genuineness of Second Peter (Southern Presbyterian Review_, 1883). Werdermann, _H., Die Irrlehrer des Judasbriefes und 2 Petrusbriefes_. Wiesinger, J. T. A., _Der zweite Brief des Apostels Petrus und der Brief des Judas_. strkjv@2Peter:1:1 @{Simon Peter} (\Sim“n Petros\). Aleph A K L P have \Syme“n\ as in strkjv@Acts:15:14|, while B has \Sim“n\. The two forms occur indifferently in I Macc. strkjv@2:3, 65 for the same man. {Servant and apostle} (\doulos kai apostolos\). Like strkjv@Romans:1:1; strkjv@Titus:1:1|. {To them that have obtained} (\tois lachousin\). Dative plural articular participle second aorist active of \lagchan“\, old verb, to obtain by lot (Luke:1:9|), here with the accusative (\pistin\) as in strkjv@Acts:1:17|. {Like precious} (\isotimon\). Late compound adjective (\isos\, equal, \timˆ\, honor, price), here only in N.T. But this adjective (Field) is used in two ways, according to the two ideas in \timˆ\ (value, honor), either like in value or like in honor. This second idea is the usual one with \isotimos\ (inscriptions and papyri, Josephus, Lucian), while \polutimos\ has the notion of price like \timˆ\ in strkjv@1:7,19; strkjv@2:4,6f|. The faith which they have obtained is like in honor and privilege with that of Peter or any of the apostles. {With us} (\hˆmin\). Associative-instrumental case after \isotimon\. Equal to \tˆi hˆm“n\ (the faith of us). {In the righteousness} (\en dikaiosunˆi\). Definite because of the preposition \en\ and the following genitive even though anarthrous. The O.T. sense of \dikaiosunˆ\ applied to God (Romans:1:17|) and here to Christ. {Of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ} (\tou theou hˆm“n kai s“tˆros Iˆsou Christou\). Songs:the one article (\tou\) with \theou\ and \s“tˆros\ requires precisely as with \tou kuriou hˆm“n kai s“tˆros Iˆsou Christou\ (of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ), one person, not two, in strkjv@1:11| as in strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:2,18|. Songs:in strkjv@1Peter:1:3| we have \ho theos kai patˆr\ (the God and Father), one person, not two. The grammar is uniform and inevitable (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 786), as even Schmiedel (Winer-Schmiedel, _Grammatik_, p. 158) admits: "Grammar demands that one person be meant." Moulton (_Prol._, p. 84) cites papyri examples of like usage of \theos\ for the Roman emperors. See the same idiom in strkjv@Titus:2:13|. The use of \theos\ by Peter as a predicate with Jesus Christ no more disproves the Petrine authorship of this Epistle than a like use in strkjv@John:1:1| disproves the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel and the same use in strkjv@Titus:2:13| disproves the genuineness of Titus. Peter had heard Thomas call Jesus God (John:20:28|) and he himself had called him the Son of God (Matthew:16:16|).

rwp@2Peter:1:6 @{Temperance} (\tˆn egkrateian\). Self-control. Old word (from \egkratˆs\, \en\ and \kratos\, one holding himself in as in strkjv@Titus:1:8|), in N.T. only here, strkjv@Acts:24:25; strkjv@Galatians:5:23|. The opposite of the \pleonexia\ of the heretics. {Patience} (\tˆn hupomonˆn\). For which see strkjv@James:1:3|. {Godliness} (\tˆn eusebeian\). For which see verse 3|.

rwp@2Peter:2:22 @{It has happened} (\sumbebˆken\). Perfect active indicative of \sumbain“\, for which see strkjv@1Peter:4:12|. {According to the true proverb} (\to tˆs alˆthous paroimias\). "The word (\to\ used absolutely, the matter of, as in strkjv@Matthew:21:21; strkjv@James:4:14|) of the true proverb" (\paroimia\ a wayside saying, for which see strkjv@John:10:6; strkjv@16:25,29|). The first proverb here given comes from strkjv@Proverbs:26:11|. \Exerama\ is a late and rare word (here only in N.T., in Diosc. and Eustath.) from \exera“\, to vomit. {The sow that had washed} (\h–s lousamenˆ\). \H–s\, old word for hog, here only in N.T. Participle first aorist direct middle of \lou“\ shows that it is feminine (anarthrous). This second proverb does not occur in the O.T., probably from a Gentile source because about the habit of hogs. Epictetus and other writers moralize on the habit of hogs, having once bathed in a filthy mud-hole, to delight in it. {To wallowing} (\eis kulismon\). "To rolling." Late and rare word (from \kuli“\, strkjv@Mark:9:20|), here only in N.T. {In the mire} (\borborou\). Objective genitive, old word for dung, mire, here only in N.T. J. Rendel Harris (_Story of Ahikar_, p. LXVII) tells of a story about a hog that went to the bath with people of quality, but on coming out saw a stinking drain and went and rolled himself in it.

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

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:1 @{Finally} (\to loipon\). Accusative of general reference. Cf. \loipon\ strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:1|. {Pray} (\proseuchesthe\). Present middle, keep on praying. Note \peri\ as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:25|. {That the word of the Lord may run and be glorified} (\hina ho logos tou kuriou trechˆi kai doxazˆtai\). Usual construction of \hina\ after \proseuchomai\, sub-final use, content and purpose combined. Note present subjunctive with both verbs rather than aorist, may keep on running and being glorified, two verbs joined together nowhere else in the N.T. Paul probably derived this metaphor from the stadium as in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:24ff.; strkjv@Galatians:2:2; strkjv@Romans:9:16; strkjv@Phillipians:2:16; strkjv@2Timothy:4:7|. Lightfoot translates "may have a triumphant career." On the word of the Lord see on ¯1Thessalonians:1:8|. Paul recognizes the close relation between himself and the readers. He needs their prayers and sympathy and he rejoices in their reception of the word of the Lord already, {even as also it is with you} (\kath“s kai pros humas\). "As it does in your case" (Frame).

rwp@2Timothy:4:7 @{I have fought the good fight} (\ton kalon ag“na ˆg“nismai\). Perfect middle indicative of \ag“nizomai\, a favourite figure with Paul (1Corinthians:9:25; strkjv@Colossians:1:29|), with the cognate accusative \ag“na\ (Phillipians:1:27,30|, etc.). The "fight" is the athletic contest of his struggle for Christ. {I have finished the course} (\ton dromon teteleka\). Perfect active indicative of \tele“\. He had used this metaphor also of himself to the elders at Ephesus (Acts:20:24|). Then the "course" was ahead of him. Now it is behind him. {I have kept the faith} (\tˆn pistin tetˆrˆka\). Perfect active indicative again of \tˆre“\. Paul has not deserted. He has kept faith with Christ. For this phrase, see strkjv@Revelation:14:12|. Deissmann (_Light, etc._, p. 309) gives inscriptions in Ephesus of a man who says: "I have kept faith" (\tˆn pistin etˆrˆsa\) and another of a man of whom it is said: "He fought three fights, and twice was crowned."

rwp@3John:1:7 @{For the sake of the Name} (\huper tou onomatos\). The name of Jesus. See strkjv@Acts:5:4; strkjv@Romans:1:5| for \huper tou onomatos\ and strkjv@James:2:7| for the absolute use of "the name" as in strkjv@1Peter:4:16|. "This name is in essence the sum of the Christian creed" (Westcott) as in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3; strkjv@Romans:10:9|. It is like the absolute use of "the Way" (Acts:9:2; strkjv@19:9,23; strkjv@24:22|). {Taking nothing} (\mˆden lambanontes\). Present active participle with the usual negative with participles (1John:2:4|). {Of the Gentiles} (\apo t“n ethnik“n\). Instead of the usual \ethn“n\ (Luke:2:32|), late adjective for what is peculiar to a people (\ethnos\) and then for the people themselves (Polybius, Diodorus, not in LXX), in N.T. only here, strkjv@Matthew:5:47; strkjv@6:7; strkjv@18:17|. Like our heathen, pagan. John is anxious that Christian missionaries receive nothing from the heathen, as our missionaries have to watch against the charge of being after money. There were many travelling lecturers out for money. Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:9| defends the right of preachers to pay, but refuses himself to accept it from Corinth because it would be misunderstood (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:6ff.; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:16ff. strkjv@12:16ff.|). Note \apo\ here as in collecting taxes (Matthew:17:25|) rather than \para\, which may be suggestive.

rwp@3John:1:12 @{Demetrius hath the witness of all men} (\Dˆmˆtri“i memarturˆtai hupo pant“n\). Perfect passive indicative of \marture“\, "it has been witnessed to Demetrius (dative case) by all." We know nothing else about him, unless, as is unlikely, he be identified with Demas as a shortened form (Philemon:1:24; strkjv@Colossians:4:4; strkjv@2Timothy:4:10|), who has come back after his desertion or with the Ephesian silversmith (Acts:19:21ff.|), who may have been converted under John's ministry, which one would like to believe, though there is no evidence for it. He may indeed be the bearer of this letter from Ephesus to Gaius and may also have come under suspicion for some reason and hence John's warm commendation. {And of the truth itself} (\kai hupo autˆs tˆs alˆtheias\). A second commendation of Demetrius. It is possible, in view of strkjv@1John:5:6| (the Spirit is the truth), that John means the Holy Spirit and not a mere personification of the truth. {Yea we also} (\kai hˆmeis de\). A third witness to Demetrius, that is John himself (literary plural). {Thou knowest} (\oidas\). "The words in strkjv@John:21:24| sound like an echo of this sentence" (Westcott). John knew Demetrius well in Ephesus.

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE TEXT OF THE ACTS A special problem arises concerning the text of Acts inasmuch as the Codex Bezae (D) with some other Western support presents a great many additions to the Neutral-Alexandrian text of Aleph A B C. Blass has even proposed the idea that Luke himself issued two editions of the book, an attractive hypothesis that is not generally accepted. J. M. Wilson has published _The Acts of the Apostles from Codex Bezae_. The whole subject is elaborately treated by J. H. Ropes in Vol. III, _The Text of Acts_ in Part I of _The Beginnings of Christianity_. Besides thorough discussion of all the problems of text involved Ropes gives the text of the Vatican Codex (B) on the left page and that of Codex Bezae (D) on the right, making comparison easy. Blass's ideas appear in his _Acta Apostolorum_.

rwp@Acts:1:3 @{To whom also} (\hois kai\). He chose them and then also manifested himself to these very same men that they might have personal witness to give. {Shewed himself alive} (\parestˆsen heauton z“nta\). To the disciples the first Sunday evening (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:36-43; strkjv@John:20:19-25|), the second Sunday evening (John:20:26-29|), at the Sea of Tiberias (John:21:1-23|), on the mountain in Galilee (Matthew:28:16-20; strkjv@Mark:16:15-18; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:6|), to the disciples in Jerusalem and Olivet (Luke:24:44-53; strkjv@Mark:16-19f.; strkjv@Acts:1:1-11|). Luke uses this verb \paristˆmi\ 13 times in the Acts both transitively and intransitively. It is rendered by various English words (present, furnish, provide, assist, commend). The early disciples including Paul never doubted the fact of the Resurrection, once they were convinced by personal experience. At first some doubted like Thomas (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:41; strkjv@John:20:24f.; strkjv@Matthew:28:17|). But after that they never wavered in their testimony to their own experience with the Risen Christ, "whereof we are witnesses" Peter said (Acts:3:15|). They doubted at first, that we may believe, but at last they risked life itself in defence of this firm faith. {After his passion} (\meta to pathein auton\). Neat Greek idiom, \meta\ with the articular infinitive (second aorist active of \pasch“\) and the accusative of general reference, "after the suffering as to him." For \pathein\ used absolutely of Christ's suffering see also strkjv@Acts:17:3; strkjv@26:23|. {By many proofs} (\en pollois tekmˆriois\). Literally, "in many proofs." \Tekmˆrion\ is only here in the N.T., though an old and common word in ancient Greek and occurring in the _Koin‚_ (papyri, etc.). The verb \tekmair“\, to prove by sure signs, is from \tekmar\, a sign. Luke does not hesitate to apply the definite word "proofs" to the evidence for the Resurrection of Christ after full investigation on the part of this scientific historian. Aristotle makes a distinction between \tekmˆrion\ (proof) and \sˆmeion\ (sign) as does Galen the medical writer. {Appearing} (\optanomenos\). Present middle participle from late verb \optan“\, late _Koin‚_ verb from root \opt“\ seen in \opsomai, “phthˆn\. In LXX, papyri of second century B.C. (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 83). Only here in the N.T. For \optasia\ for vision see strkjv@Acts:26:19; strkjv@Luke:1:22; strkjv@24:23|. {By the space of forty days} (\di' hˆmer“n tesserakonta\). At intervals (\dia\, between) during the forty days, ten appearances being known to us. Jesus was not with them continually now in bodily presence. The period of forty days is given here alone. The Ascension was thus ten days before Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came. Moses was in the mount forty days (Exodus:24:18|) and Jesus fasted forty days (Matthew:4:2|). In the Gospel of Luke 24 this separation of forty days between the Resurrection and the Ascension is not drawn. {The things concerning the Kingdom of God} (\ta peri tˆs basileias tou theou\). This phrase appears 33 times in Luke's Gospel, 15 times in Mark, 4 times in Matthew who elsewhere has "the kingdom of heaven," once in John, and 6 times in Acts. No essential distinction is to be drawn between the two for the Jews often used "heaven" rather than "God" to avoid using the Tetragrammaton. But it is noticeable how the word kingdom drops out of Acts. Other words like gospel (\euaggelion\) take the place of "kingdom." Jesus was fond of the word "kingdom" and Luke is fond of the idiom "the things concerning" (\ta peri\). Certainly with Jesus the term "kingdom" applies to the present and the future and covers so much that it is not strange that the disciples with their notions of a political Messianic kingdom (Acts:1:6|) were slow to comprehend the spiritual nature of the reign of God.

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

rwp@Acts:1:18 @{Now this man} (\Houtos men oun\). Note \men oun\ again without a corresponding \de\ as in strkjv@1:6|. Verses 18,19| are a long parenthesis of Luke by way of explanation of the fate of Judas. In verse 20| Peter resumes and quotes the scripture to which he referred in verse 16|. {Obtained} (\ektˆsato\). First aorist middle indicative of \ktaomai\, to acquire, only in the middle, to get for oneself. With the covenant money for the betrayal, acquired it indirectly apparently according to strkjv@Matthew:26:14-16; strkjv@27:3-8| which see. {Falling headlong} (\prˆnˆs genomenos\). Attic form usually \pranˆs\. The word means, not "headlong," but "flat on the face" as opposed to \huptios\ on the back (Hackett). Hackett observes that the place suits admirably the idea that Judas hung himself (Matthew:27:5|) and, the rope breaking, fell flat on his face and {burst asunder in the midst} (\elakˆsen mesos\). First aorist active indicative of \lask“\ old verb (here only in the N.T.), to clang, to crack, to crash, like a falling tree. Aristophanes uses it of crashing bones. \Mesos\ is predicate nominative referring to Judas. {Gushed out} (\exechuthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \ekche“\, to pour out.

rwp@Acts:3:13 @{His servant Jesus} (\ton paida Iˆsoun\). This phrase occurs in strkjv@Isaiah:42:1; strkjv@52:13| about the Messiah except the name "Jesus" which Peter adds, the first part of the quotation is from strkjv@Exodus:3:6; strkjv@5:30|. The LXX translated the Hebrew _ebhedh_ by \pais\, the servant of Jehovah being a Messianic designation. But the phrase "servant of God" (\pais theou\) is applied also to Israel (Luke:1:54|) and to David (Luke:1:69; strkjv@Acts:4:25|). Paul terms himself \doulos theou\ (Titus:1:1|). \Pais\ is just child (boy or girl), and it was also used of a slave (Matthew:8:6,8,13|). But it is not here \huios\ (son) that Peter uses, but \pais\. Luke quotes Peter as using it again in this Messianic sense in strkjv@Acts:3:26; strkjv@4:27,30|. {Whom ye delivered up} (\hon humeis men pared“kate\). Note emphatic use of \humeis\ (ye). No \de\ to correspond to \men\. First aorist active (\k\ aorist) plural indicative of \paradid“mi\ (usual form \paredote\, second aorist). {When he} (\ekeinou\). Emphatic pronoun, that one, in contrast with "ye" (\humeis\), genitive absolute with \krinantos\, here the nearest word (Pilate), the latter.

rwp@Acts:4:11 @{Of you the builders} (\huph' hum“n t“n oikodom“n\). The experts, the architects, had rejected Jesus for their building (Psalms:118:22|) as Jesus himself had pointed out (Matthew:21:42; strkjv@Luke:21:17|). This very Rejected Stone God had made the head of the corner (either the highest corner stone right under the roof or the corner stone under the building, strkjv@Isaiah:28:16|) as Jesus showed, as Peter here declares and repeats later (1Peter:2:6f.|).

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:5:2 @{Kept back} (\enosphisato\). First aorist middle indicative of \nosphiz“\, old verb from \nosphi\, afar, apart, and so to set apart, to separate for oneself, but only here, verse 3; strkjv@Titus:2:10| in the N.T. {His wife also being privy to it} (\suneiduiˆs kai tˆs gunaikos\). Genitive absolute with second perfect participle of \sunoida\, to know together with one, "his wife also knowing it together with him." {Brought a certain part} (\enegkas meros ti\). Aorist active participle of \pher“\, for a definite act. The praise of Joseph was too much for Ananias, but he was not willing to turn over all. He wanted praise for giving all and yet he took care of himself by keeping some. Thus he started the Ananias Club that gave a new meaning to his lovely name (God is gracious).

rwp@Acts:7:12 @{That there was corn} (\onta sitia\). Participle (present active of \eimi\) in indirect discourse, after \akousas\, "heard of corn being in Egypt." \Sitia\ is diminutive of \sitos\ and means grain (wheat, barley, not our maize or Indian corn), old word also for provisions, victuals, here only in the N.T. {The first time} (\pr“ton\). While Jacob himself remained in Canaan before he went down to Egypt and died there (verse 15f.|).

rwp@Acts:7:23 @{When he was well-nigh forty years old} (\H“s eplˆrouto aut“i tessarakontaetˆs chronos\). A rather awkward Greek idiom for the English: "When a forty year old time (same idiom in strkjv@Acts:13:18| and only twice in the N.T.) was being fulfilled (\eplˆrouto\, imperfect passive) for him (dative case)." The life of Moses is divided into three periods of forty years each (in Egypt 40 years, in Midian 40, governed Israel 40, 120 when he died, strkjv@Deuteronomy:34:7|). {It came into his heart} (\anebˆ epi tˆn kardian autou\). Second aorist active indicative of \anabain“\, common verb. Came up as if from the lower deeps of his nature. This Hebrew image occurs in strkjv@Jeremiah:3:16; strkjv@Isaiah:65:17; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:9|. {To visit} (\episkepsasthai\). First aorist middle infinitive of \episkeptomai\, old verb to go to see for oneself, with his own eyes, to help if possible. Used of God visiting his people (Luke:7:16|). Our "visit" is from Latin _video_, to see, _visito_, to go to see. During the Welsh mining troubles the Prince of Wales made a sympathetic visit to see for himself the actual condition of the coal miners. Moses desired to know first hand how his kinsmen were faring.

rwp@Acts:7:31 @{The sight} (\to horama\). Used of visions in the N.T. as in strkjv@Matthew:17:9|. {As he drew near} (\proserchomenou autou\). Genitive absolute with present middle participle of \proserchomai\. {A voice of the Lord} (\ph“nˆ kuriou\). Here the angel of Jehovah of verse 30| is termed Jehovah himself. Jesus makes powerful use of these words in his reply to the Sadducees in defence of the doctrine of the resurrection and the future life (Mark:12:26; strkjv@Matthew:22:32; strkjv@Luke:20:37f.|) that God here describes himself as the God of the living. {Trembled} (\entromos genomenos\). Literally, becoming tremulous or terrified. The adjective \entromos\ (\en, tromos\ from \trem“\, to tremble, to quake) occurs in Plutarch and the LXX. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:16:29|. {Durst not} (\ouk etolma\). Imperfect active, was not daring, negative conative imperfect.

rwp@Acts:7:37 @{Like unto me} (\h“s eme\). This same passage Peter quoted to the crowd in Solomon's Porch (Acts:3:22|). Stephen undoubtedly means to argue that Moses was predicting the Messiah as a prophet like himself who is no other than Jesus so that these Pharisees are in reality opposing Moses. It was a neat turn.

rwp@Acts:7:46 @{Asked} (\ˆitˆsato\). Aorist middle (indirect) indicative, asked for himself (as a favour to himself). Cf. strkjv@2Samuel:7:2f|. {A habitation} (\skˆn“ma\). Like strkjv@Psalms:132:5|, but it was a house that David proposed to build (2Samuel:7:2|), not a tent (\skˆnˆ\) which already existed. \Skˆn“ma\ here means a more permanent abode (\oikon\, house, in verse 47|), though from the same root as \skˆnˆ\.

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:7:51 @{Stiffnecked} (\sklˆrotrachˆloi\). From \sklˆros\ (hard) and \trachˆlos\, neck, both old words, but this compound only in the LXX and here alone in the N.T. Critics assume that Stephen was interrupted at this point because of the sharp tone of the speech. That may be true, but the natural climax is sufficient explanation. {Uncircumcised in heart} (\aperitmˆtoi kardiais\). Late adjective common in LXX and here only in the N.T. Verbal of \peritemn“\, to cut around and \a\ privative. Both of these epithets are applied to the Jews in the O.T. (Exodus:32:9; strkjv@33:3,5; strkjv@34:9; strkjv@Leviticus:26:41; strkjv@Deuteronomy:9:6; strkjv@Jeremiah:6:10|). \Kardiais\ is locative plural like \“sin\ (ears), but some MSS. have genitive singular \kardias\ (objective genitive). No epithet could have been more galling to these Pharisees than to be turned "uncircumcised in heart" (Romans:2:29|). They had only the physical circumcision which was useless. {Ye always} (\humeis aei\). Emphatic position of humeis and "always" looks backward over the history of their forefathers which Stephen had reviewed. {Resist} (\antipiptete\). Old word to fall against, to rush against. Only here in the N.T., but used in the O.T. which is here quoted (Numbers:27:14|). Their fathers had made "external worship a substitute for spiritual obedience" (Furneaux). Stephen has shown how God had revealed himself gradually, the revelation sloping upward to Christ Jesus. "And as he saw his countrymen repeating the old mistake--clinging to the present and the material, while God was calling them to higher spiritual levels--and still, as ever, resisting the Holy Spirit, treating the Messiah as the patriarchs had treated Joseph, and the Hebrews Moses--the pity of it overwhelmed him, and his mingled grief and indignation broke out in words of fire, such as burned of old on the lips of the prophets" (Furneaux). Stephen, the accused, is now the accuser, and the situation becomes intolerable to the Sanhedrin.

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:8:1 @{Was consenting} (\ˆn suneudok“n\). Periphrastic imperfect of \suneudoke“\, a late double compound (\sun, eu, doke“\) that well describes Saul's pleasure in the death (\anairesis\, taking off, only here in the N.T., though old word) of Stephen. For the verb see on ¯Luke:23:32|. Paul himself will later confess that he felt so (Acts:22:20|), coolly applauding the murder of Stephen, a heinous sin (Romans:1:32|). It is a gruesome picture. Chapter 7 should have ended here. {On that day} (\en ekeinˆi tˆi hˆmerƒi\). On that definite day, that same day as in strkjv@2:41|. {A great persecution} (\di“gmos megas\). It was at first persecution from the Sadducees, but this attack on Stephen was from the Pharisees so that both parties are now united in a general persecution that deserves the adjective "great." See on ¯Matthew:13:21| for the old word \di“gmos\ from \di“k“\, to chase, hunt, pursue, persecute. {Were all scattered abroad} (\pantes diesparˆsan\). Second aorist passive indicative of \diaspeir“\, to scatter like grain, to disperse, old word, in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:8:1,4; strkjv@11:19|. {Except the apostles} (\plˆn t“n apostol“n\). Preposition \plˆn\ (adverb from \pleon\, more) with the ablative often in Luke. It remains a bit of a puzzle why the Pharisees spared the apostles. Was it due to the advice of Gamaliel in strkjv@Acts:5:34-40|? Or was it the courage of the apostles? Or was it a combination of both with the popularity of the apostles in addition?

rwp@Acts:8:10 @{That power of God which is called Great} (\hˆ Dunamis tou theou hˆ kaloumenˆ Megalˆ\). Apparently here already the oriental doctrine of emanations or aeons so rampant in the second century. This "power" was considered a spark of God himself and Jerome (in strkjv@Matthew:24|) quotes Simon (Page) as saying: _Ego sum sermo Dei,... ego omnipotens, ego omnia Dei_. Simon claimed to _impersonate God_.

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:8:35 @{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:9:2 @{Asked} (\ˆitˆsato\). First aorist middle indicative, the indirect middle, asked for himself (as a favour to himself). Felten notes that "Saul as a Pharisee makes request of a Sadducee" (the high priest) either Caiaphas if before A.D. 35, but if in 36 Jonathan, son of Caiaphas or if in 37 Theophilus, another son of Caiaphas. {Letters} (\epistolas\). Julius Ceasar and Augustus had granted the high priest and Sanhedrin jurisdiction over Jews in foreign cities, but this central ecclesiastical authority was not always recognized in every local community outside of Judea. Paul says that he received his authority to go to Damascus from the priests (Acts strkjv@26:10|) and "the estate of the elders" (22:5|), that is the Sanhedrin. {To Damascus} (\eis Damaskon\). As if no disciples of importance (outside the apostles in Jerusalem) were left in Judea. Damascus at this time may have been under the rule of Aretas of Arabia (tributary to Rome) as it certainly was a couple of years later when Saul escaped in a basket (2Corinthians:11:32|). This old city is the most enduring in the history of the world (Knowling). It is some 150 miles Northeast from Jerusalem and watered by the river Abana from Anti-Lebanon. Here the Jews were strong in numbers (10,000 butchered by Nero later) and here some disciples had found refuge from Saul's persecution in Judea and still worshipped in the synagogues. Paul's language in strkjv@Acts:26:11| seems to mean that Damascus is merely one of other "foreign cities" to which he carried the persecution. {If he found} (\ean heurˆi\). Third class condition with aorist subjunctive retained after secondary tense (asked). {The Way} (\tˆs hodou\). A common method in the Acts for describing Christianity as the Way of life, absolutely as also in strkjv@19:9,23; strkjv@22:4; strkjv@24:14,22| or the way of salvation (16:17|) or the way of the Lord (18:25|). It is a Jewish definition of life as in strkjv@Isaiah:40:3| "the way of the Lord," strkjv@Psalms:1:6| "the way of the righteous," "the way of the wicked." Jesus called himself "the way" (John:14:6|), the only way to the Father. The so-called Epistle of Barnabas presents the Two Ways. The North American Indians call Christianity the Jesus Road. {That he might bring them bound} (\hop“s dedemenous agagˆi\). Final clause with \hop“s\ (less common than \hina\) and aorist (effective) subjunctive (\agagˆi\, reduplicated aorist of \ag“\, common verb) and perfect passive participle (\dedemenous\) of \de“\, in a state of sheer helplessness like his other victims both men and women. Three times (8:3; strkjv@9:2; strkjv@22:4|) this fact of persecuting women is mentioned as a special blot in Paul's cruelty (the third time by Paul himself) and one of the items in his being chief of sinners (1Timothy:1:15|).

rwp@Acts:9:4 @{He fell upon the earth} (\pes“n epi tˆn gˆn\). Second aorist active participle. Songs:in strkjv@22:7| Paul says: "I fell unto the ground" (\epesa eis to edaphos\) using an old word rather than the common \gˆn\. In strkjv@26:14| Paul states that "we were all fallen to the earth" (\pant“n katapesont“n hˆm“n eis tˆn gˆn\, genitive absolute construction). But here in verse 7| "the men that journeyed with him stood speechless" (\histˆkeisan eneoi\). But surely the points of time are different. In strkjv@26:14| Paul refers to the first appearance of the vision when all fell to the earth. Here in verse 7| Luke refers to what occurred after the vision when both Saul and the men had risen from the ground. {Saul, Saul} (\Saoul, Saoul\). The Hebrew form occurs also in strkjv@22:7; strkjv@26:14| where it is expressly stated that the voice was in the Hebrew (Aramaic) tongue as also in strkjv@9:17| (Ananias). Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 316) terms this use of \Saoul\ "the historian's sense of liturgical rhythm." For the repetition of names by Jesus note strkjv@Luke:10:41| (Martha, Martha), strkjv@Luke:22:31| (Simon, Simon). {Me} (\me\). In persecuting the disciples, Saul was persecuting Jesus, as the words of Jesus in verse 5| made plain. Christ had already spoken of the mystic union between himself and his followers (Matthew:10:40; strkjv@25:40,45; strkjv@John:15:1-5|). The proverb (Pindar) that Jesus quotes to Saul about kicking against the goad is genuine in strkjv@26:14|, but not here.

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:9:15 @{A chosen vessel} (\skeuos eklogˆs\). A vessel of choice or selection. The genitive of quality is common in the Hebrew, as in the vernacular _Koin‚_. Jesus chose Saul before Saul chose Jesus. He felt of himself that he was an earthen vessel (2Corinthians:4:7|) unworthy of so great a treasure. It was a great message that Ananias had to bear to Saul. He told it in his own way (9:17; strkjv@22:14f.|) and in strkjv@26:16f.| Paul blends the message of Jesus to Ananias with that to him as one. {Before the Gentiles} (\en“pion t“n ethn“n\). This was the chief element in the call of Saul. He was to be an apostle to the Gentiles (Ephesians:3:6-12|).

rwp@Acts:9:26 @{He assayed} (\epeirazen\). Imperfect active of conative action. {To join himself} (\kollasthai\). Present middle (direct) infinitive of conative action again. Same word \kolla“\ in strkjv@Luke:15:15; strkjv@Acts:10:28|. See on ¯Matthew:19:5| for discussion. {Were all afraid of him} (\pantes ephobounto auton\). They were fearing him. Imperfect middle picturing the state of mind of the disciples who had vivid recollections of his conduct when last here. What memories Saul had on this return journey to Jerusalem after three years. He had left a conquering hero of Pharisaism. He returns distrusted by the disciples and regarded by the Pharisees as a renegade and a turncoat. He made no effort to get in touch with the Sanhedrin who had sent him to Damascus. He had escaped the plots of the Jews in Damascus only to find himself the object of suspicion by the disciples in Jerusalem who had no proof of his sincerity in his alleged conversion. {Not believing} (\mˆ pisteuontes\). They had probably heard of his conversion, but they frankly disbelieved the reports and regarded him as a hypocrite or a spy in a new role to ruin them. {Was} (\estin\). The present tense is here retained in indirect discourse according to the common Greek idiom.

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:10:10 @{Hungry} (\prospeinos\) Only instance of the word known, a \hapax legomenon\. Probably "very hungry" (\pros\=besides, in addition). {Desired} (\ˆthelen\). Imperfect active. Was longing to eat. It was about twelve o'clock noon and Peter may even have smelt the savory dishes, "while they made ready" (\paraskeuazont“n\). "The natural and the supernatural border closely on one another, with no definable limits" (Furneaux). {He fell into a trance} (\egeneto ep' auton ekstasis\). More exactly, "An ecstasy came upon him," in which trance he passed out of himself (\ekstasis\, from \existˆmi\) and from which one came to himself (12:11|). Cf. also strkjv@11:5; strkjv@22:17|. It is thus different from a vision (\horama\) as in verse 3|.

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:10:43 @{Every one that believeth} (\panta ton pisteuonta\). This accusative active participle of general reference with the infinitive in indirect discourse is the usual idiom. Only \labein\ (second aorist active infinitive of \lamban“\) is not indirect statement so much as indirect command or arrangement. The prophets bear witness to Jesus Christ to this effect. It is God's plan and no race distinctions are drawn. Peter had already said the same thing at Pentecost (2:38|), but now he sees himself that Gentiles do not have to become Jews, but have only to believe in Jesus as Messiah and Judge as foretold by the prophets. It was glorious news to Cornelius and his group. {Through his name} (\dia tou onomatos autou\), not as a _title_ or magic formula (Acts:18:13|), but the power of Christ himself represented by his name.

rwp@Acts:10:48 @{Commanded} (\prosetaxen\). First aorist active indicative. Peter himself abstained from baptizing on this occasion (cf. Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:14|). Evidently it was done by the six Jewish brethren. {Them to be baptized} (\autous baptisthˆnai\). Accusative of general reference with the first aorist passive infinitive. {In the name of Jesus Christ} (\en t“i onomati Iˆsou Christou\). The essential name in Christian baptism as in strkjv@2:38; strkjv@19:5|. But these passages give the authority for the act, not the formula that was employed (Alvah Hovey in Hackett's _Commentary_. See also chapter on the Baptismal Formula in my _The Christ of the Logia_). "Golden days" (\aurei dies\, Bengel) were these for the whole group.

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:11:4 @{Began} (\arxamenos\). Not pleonastic here, but graphically showing how Peter began at the beginning and gave the full story of God's dealings with him in Joppa and Caesarea. {Expounded} (\exetitheto\). Imperfect middle of \ektithˆmi\, to set forth, old verb, but in the N.T. only in Acts (7:21; strkjv@11:4; strkjv@18:26; strkjv@28:23|), a deliberate and detailed narrative "in order" (\kathexˆs\). Old word for in succession. In the N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:1:2; strkjv@8:1; strkjv@Acts:3:24; strkjv@11:14; strkjv@18:23|. Luke evidently considered this defence of Peter important and he preserves the marks of authenticity. It came originally from Peter himself (verses 5,6,15,16|). "The case of Cornelius was a test case of primary importance" (Page), "the first great difficulty of the early Church." Part of the story Luke gives three times (10:3-6,30-32; strkjv@11:13f.|). See the discussion chapter 10 for details given here.

rwp@Acts:12:11 @{Was come to himself} (\en heaut“i genomenos\). Second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\ with \en\ and the locative case, "becoming at himself." In strkjv@Luke:15:17| we have \eis heauton elth“n\ (coming to himself, as if he had been on a trip away from himself). {Now I know of a truth} (\nun oida alˆth“s\). There was no further confusion of mind that it was an ecstasy as in strkjv@10:10|. But he was in peril for the soldiers would soon learn of his escape, when the change of guards came at 6 A.M. {Delivered me} (\exeilato me\). Second aorist middle indicative of \exaire“\. The Lord rescued me of himself by his angel. {Expectation} (\prosdokias\). Old word from \prosdoka“\, to look for. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:21:26|. James had been put to death and the Jewish people were eagerly waiting for the execution of Peter like hungry wolves.

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:12:21 @{Upon a set day} (\taktˆi hˆmerƒi\). Locative case and the verbal adjective of \tass“\, to arrange, appoint, old word, here only in the N.T. Josephus (_Ant_. XVII. 6, 8; XIX. 8, 2) gives a full account of the occasion and the death of Herod Agrippa. It was the second day of the festival in honour of the Emperor Claudius, possibly his birthday rather than the _Quinquennalia_. The two accounts of Luke and Josephus supplement each other with no contradiction. Josephus does not mention the name of Blastus. {Arrayed himself in royal apparel} (\endusamenos esthˆta basilikˆn\). First aorist middle (indirect) participle of \endun“\ or \endu“\, common verb to put on. Literally, having put royal apparel on himself (a robe of silver tissue, Josephus says). The rays of the sun shone on this brilliant apparel and the vast crowd in the open amphitheatre became excited as Herod began to speak. {Made an oration} (\edˆmˆgorei\). Imperfect active of \dˆmˆgore“\, old verb from \dˆmˆgoros\ (haranguer of the people), and that from \dˆmos\ (people) and \agoreu“\, to harangue or address the people. Only here in the N.T. He kept it up.

rwp@Acts:13:11 @{Upon thee} (\epi se\). The use of \epi\ with the accusative is rich and varied, the precise shade of meaning depending on the content. The "hand of the Lord" might be kindly (Acts:11:21|) or hostile (Hebrews:10:31|), but when God's hand touches one's life (Job:19:21|) it may be in judgment as here with Elymas. He has not humbled himself under the mighty hand of God (1Peter:5:6|). {Not seeing} (\mˆ blep“n\). Repeating with negative participle the negative idea in "blind" (\tuphlos\). "It was a judicial infliction; blindness for blindness, darkness without for wilful darkness within" (Furneaux). He was an example of the blind leading the blind that was to cease and Sergius Paulus was to be led into the light. The blindness was to be "for a season" (\achri kairou\, strkjv@Luke:4:13|), if it should please God to restore his sight. Paul apparently recalls his own blindness as he entered Damascus. {A mist} (\achlus\). Especially a dimness of the eyes, old poetic word and late prose, in LXX, only here in N.T. Galen uses it of the opacity of the eye caused by a wound. {He went about seeking some one to lead him by the hand} (\periag“n ezˆtei cheirag“gous\). A rather free rendering. Literally, "going about (\periag“n\, present active participle of \periag“\) he was seeking (\ezˆtei\, imperfect active of \zˆte“\) guides (\cheirag“gous\, from \cheir\, hand, and \ag“gos\, guide, from \ag“\, one who leads by the hand)." The very verb \cheirag“ge“\, to lead by the hand, Luke uses of Paul in strkjv@9:8|, as he entered Damascus.

rwp@Acts:13:12 @{Believed} (\episteusen\). Ingressive aorist active indicative. Renan considers it impossible that a Roman proconsul could be converted by a miracle. But it was the teaching about the Lord (\tou kuriou\, objective genitive) by which he was astonished (\ekplˆssomenos\, present passive participle of \ekplˆss“\, see on ¯Matthew:7:28|) or struck out as well as by the miracle. The blindness came "immediately" (\paraehrˆma\) upon the judgment pronounced by Paul. It is possible that Sergius Paulus was converted to Christ without openly identifying himself with the Christians as his baptism is not mentioned as in the case of Cornelius. But, even if he was baptized, he need not have been deposed from his proconsulship as Furneaux and Rackham argue because his office called for "official patronage of idolatrous worship." But that could have been merely perfunctory as it probably was already. He had been a disciple of the Jewish magician, Elymas Barjesus, without losing his position. Imperial persecution against Christianity had not yet begun. Furneaux even suggests that the conversion of a proconsul to Christianity at this stage would have called for mention by the Roman and Greek historians. There is the name Sergia Paullina in a Christian cemetery in Rome which shows that one of his family was a Christian later. One will believe what he wills about Sergius Paulus, but I do not see that Luke leaves him in the category of Simon Magus who "believed" (8:13|) for revenue only.

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:16:2 @{Was well reported of} (\emartureito\). Imperfect passive. It was a continuous witness that was borne the young disciple both in his home town of Lystra and in Derbe. Already he had so borne himself that his gifts and graces for the ministry were recognized. It is a wise precaution that the approval of the local church is necessary for the licensing and the ordaining of a preacher. If God has called a man for the work signs of it will be manifest to others.

rwp@Acts:16:12 @{To Philippi} (\eis Philippous\). The plural like \Athˆnai\ (Athens) is probably due to separate sections of the city united (Winer-Moulton, _Grammar_, p. 220). The city (ancient name Krenides or Wells) was renamed after himself by Philip, the father of Alexander the Great. It was situated about a mile east of the small stream Gangites which flows into the river Strymon some thirty miles away. In this valley the Battle of Philippi was fought B.C. 42 between the Second Triumvirate (Octavius, Antonius, Lepidus) and Brutus and Cassius. In memory of the victory Octavius made it a colony (\kol“nia\) with all the privileges of Roman citizenship, such as freedom from scourging, freedom from arrest save in extreme cases, and the right of appeal to the emperor. This Latin word occurs here alone in the N.T. Octavius planted here a colony of Roman veterans with farms attached, a military outpost and a miniature of Rome itself. The language was Latin. Here Paul is face to face with the Roman power and empire in a new sense. He was a new Alexander, come from Asia to conquer Europe for Christ, a new Caesar to build the Kingdom of Christ on the work of Alexander and Caesar. One need not think that Paul was conscious of all that was involved in destiny for the world. Philippi was on the Egnatian Way, one of the great Roman roads, that ran from here to Dyrrachium on the shores of the Adriatic, a road that linked the east with the west. {The first of the district} (\pr“tˆ tˆs meridos\). Philippi was not the first city of Macedonia nor does Luke say so. That honour belonged to Thessalonica and even Amphipolis was larger than Philippi. It is not clear whether by \meris\ Luke means a formal division of the province, though the _Koin‚_ has examples of this geographical sense (papyri). There is no article with \pr“tˆ\ and Luke may not mean to stress unduly the position of Philippi in comparison with Amphipolis. But it was certainly a leading city of this district of Macedonia. {We were tarrying} (\ˆmen diatribontes\). Periphrastic imperfect active.

rwp@Acts:17:2 @{As his custom was} (\kata to ei“thos t“i Paul“i\). The same construction in strkjv@Luke:4:16| about Jesus in Nazareth (\kata to ei“thos aut“i\) with the second perfect active participle neuter singular from \eth“\. Paul's habit was to go to the Jewish synagogue to use the Jews and the God-fearers as a springboard for his work among the Gentiles. {For three Sabbaths} (\epi sabbata tria\). Probably the reference is to the first three Sabbaths when Paul had a free hand in the synagogue as at first in Antioch in Pisidia. Luke does not say that Paul was in Thessalonica only three weeks. He may have spoken there also during the week, though the Sabbath was the great day. Paul makes it plain, as Furneaux shows, that he was in Thessalonica a much longer period than three weeks. The rest of the time he spoke, of course, outside of the synagogue. Paul implies an extended stay by his language in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:8|. The church consisted mainly of Gentile converts (2Thessalonians:3:4,7,8|) and seems to have been well organized (1Thessalonians:5:12|). He received help while there several times from Philippi (Phillipians:4:16|) and even so worked night and day to support himself (1Thessalonians:2:9|). His preaching was misunderstood there in spite of careful instruction concerning the second coming of Christ (1Thessalonians:4:13-5:5; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1-12|). {Reasoned} (\dielexato\). First aorist middle indicative of \dialegomai\, old verb in the active to select, distinguish, then to revolve in the mind, to converse (interchange of ideas), then to teach in the Socratic ("dialectic") method of question and answer (cf. \dielegeto\ in verse 17|), then simply to discourse, but always with the idea of intellectual stimulus. With these Jews and God-fearers Paul appealed to the Scriptures as text and basis (\apo\) of his ideas.

rwp@Acts:17:25 @{As though he needed anything} (\prosdeomenos tinos\). Present middle participle of \prosdeomai\, to want besides, old verb, but here only in the N.T. This was strange doctrine for the people thought that the gods needed their offerings for full happiness. This self-sufficiency of God was taught by Philo and Lucretius, but Paul shows that the Epicurean missed it by putting God, if existing at all, outside the universe. {Seeing he himself giveth to all} (\autos didous pasin\). This Supreme Personal God is the source of life, breath, and everything. Paul here rises above all Greek philosophers.

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:18:3 @{Because he was of the same trade} (\dia to homotechnon einai\). Same construction with \dia\ as above. \Homotechnon\ is an old word (\homos, technˆ\), though here alone in N.T. Rabbi Judah says: "He that teacheth not his son a trade, doth the same as if he taught him to be a thief." Songs:it was easy for Paul to find a home with these "tentmakers by trade" (\skˆnoipoioi tˆi technˆi\). Late word from \skˆnˆ\ and \poie“\, here only in the N.T. They made portable tents of leather or of cloth of goat's hair. Songs:Paul lived in this home with this noble man and his wife, all the more congenial if already Christians which they soon became at any rate. They worked as partners in the common trade. Paul worked for his support elsewhere, already in Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:2:9; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:8|) and later at Ephesus with Aquila and Priscilla (Acts:18:18,26; strkjv@20:34; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:19|). They moved again to Rome (Romans:16:3|) and were evidently a couple of considerable wealth and generosity. It was a blessing to Paul to find himself with these people. Songs:he "abode" (\emenen\, imperfect active) with them and "they wrought" (\ˆrgazonto\, imperfect middle), happy and busy during week days.

rwp@Acts:18:5 @{Was constrained by the word} (\suneicheto t“i log“i\). This is undoubtedly the correct text and not \t“i pneumati\ of the Textus Receptus, but \suneicheto\ is in my opinion the direct middle imperfect indicative, not the imperfect passive as the translations have it (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 808). Paul held himself together or completely to the preaching instead of just on Sabbaths in the synagogue (verse 4|). The coming of Silas and Timothy with the gifts from Macedonia (1Thessalonians:3:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:9; strkjv@Phillipians:4:15|) set Paul free from tent-making for a while so that he began to devote himself (inchoative imperfect) with fresh consecration to preaching. See the active in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14|. He was now also assisted by Silas and Timothy (2Corinthians:1:19|). {Testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ} (\diamarturomenos tois Ioudaiois einai ton Christon Iˆsoun\). Paul's witness everywhere (9:22; strkjv@17:3|). This verb \diamarturomenos\ occurs in strkjv@2:40| (which see) for Peter's earnest witness. Perhaps daily now in the synagogue he spoke to the Jews who came. \Einai\ is the infinitive in indirect discourse (assertion) with the accusative of general reference. By \ton Christon\ Paul means "the Messiah." His witness is to show to the Jews that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah.

rwp@Acts:18:6 @{When they opposed themselves} (\antitassomen“n aut“n\). Genitive absolute with present middle (direct middle again) of \antitass“\, old verb to range in battle array (\tass“\) face to face with or against (\anti\). In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:13:2; strkjv@James:4:6; strkjv@1Peter:5:5|. Paul's fresh activity roused the rabbis as at Antioch in Pisidia and at Thessalonica in concerted opposition and railing (blasphemy). {He shook out his raiment} (\ektinaxamenos ta himatia\). First aorist middle of \ektinass“\, old verb, in the N.T. only here as in strkjv@13:51| (middle) and strkjv@Mark:6:11; strkjv@Matthew:10:15| where active voice occurs of shaking out dust also. Vivid and dramatic picture here like that in strkjv@Nehemiah:5:13|, "undoubtedly a very exasperating gesture" (Ramsay), but Paul was deeply stirred. {Your blood be upon your own heads} (\To haima hum“n epi tˆn kephalˆn hum“n\). As in strkjv@Ezekiel:3:18f., strkjv@33:4,8f.; strkjv@2Samuel:1:16|. Not as a curse, but "a solemn disclaimer of responsibility" by Paul (Page) as in strkjv@Acts:20:26|. The Jews used this very phrase in assuming responsibility for the blood of Jesus (Matthew:27:25|). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:23:35|. {I am clean} (\katharos eg“\). Pure from your blood. Repeats the claim made in previous sentence. Paul had done his duty. {From henceforth} (\apo tou nun\). Turning point reached in Corinth. He will devote himself to the Gentiles, though Jews will be converted there also. Elsewhere as in Ephesus (19:1-10|) and in Rome (Acts:28:23-28|) Paul will preach also to Jews.

rwp@Acts:18:15 @{Questions} (\zˆtˆmata\). Plural, contemptuous, "a parcel of questions" (Knowling). {About words} (\peri logou\). Word, singular, talk, not deed or fact (\ergon, factum\). {And names} (\kai onomat“n\). As to whether "Jesus" should also be called "Christ" or "Messiah." The Jews, Gallio knew, split hairs over words and names. {And your own law} (\kai nomou tou kath' humƒs\) Literally, "And law that according to you." Gallio had not been caught in the trap set for him. What they had said concerned Jewish law, not Roman law at all. {Look to it yourselves} (\opsesthe autoi\). The volitive future middle indicative of \hora“\ often used (cf. strkjv@Matthew:27:4|) where an imperative could be employed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 874). The use of \autoi\ (yourselves) turns it all over to them. {I am not minded} (\ou boulomai\). I am not willing, I do not wish. An absolute refusal to allow a religious question to be brought before a Roman civil court. This decision of Gallio does not establish Christianity in preference to Judaism. It simply means that the case was plainly that Christianity was a form of Judaism and as such was not opposed to Roman law. This decision opened the door for Paul's preaching all over the Roman Empire. Later Paul himself argues (Romans:9-11|) that in fact Christianity is the true, the spiritual Judaism.

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:19:5 @{The name of the Lord Jesus} (\to onoma ton kuriou Iˆsou\). Apollos was not rebaptized. The twelve apostles were not rebaptized. Jesus received no other baptism than that of John. The point here is simply that these twelve men were grossly ignorant of the meaning of John's baptism as regards repentance, the Messiahship of Jesus, the Holy Spirit. Hence Paul had them baptized, not so much again, as really baptized this time, in the name or on the authority of the Lord Jesus as he had himself commanded (Matthew:28:19|) and as was the universal apostolic custom. Proper understanding of "Jesus" involved all the rest including the Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). Luke does not give a formula, but simply explains that now these men had a proper object of faith (Jesus) and were now really baptized.

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:19:21 @{Purposed in the spirit} (\etheto en t“i pneumati\). Second aorist middle indicative for mental action and "spirit" expressed also. A new stage in Paul's career begins here, a new division of the Acts. {Passed through} (\dielth“n\). Word (\dierchomai\) used ten times in Acts (cf. strkjv@19:1|) of missionary journeys (Ramsay). {Macedonia and Achaia} (\tˆn Makedonian kai Achaian\). This was the way that he actually went, but originally he had planned to go to Achaia (Corinth) and then to Macedonia, as he says in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:15f.|, but he had now changed that purpose, perhaps because of the bad news from Corinth. Already when he wrote I Corinthians he proposed to go first to Macedonia (1Corinthians:16:5-7|). He even hoped to spend the winter in Corinth "if the Lord permit" and to remain in Ephesus till Pentecost, neither of which things he did. {I must also see Rome} (\dei me kai R“mˆn idein\). This section of Acts begins with Rome in the horizon of Paul's plans and the book closes with Paul in Rome (Rackham). Here he feels the necessity of going as in strkjv@Romans:1:15| he feels himself "debtor" to all including "those in Rome" (Romans:1:16|). Paul had long desired to go to Rome (Rom strkjv@1:10|), but had been frequently hindered (Romans:1:13|), but he has definitely set his face to go to Rome and on to Spain (Romans:15:23-29|). Paley calls sharp attention to this parallel between strkjv@Acts:19:21| and strkjv@Romans:1:10-15; strkjv@15:23-29|. Rome had a fascination for Paul as the home of Aquila and Priscilla and numerous other friends (Romans:16|), but chiefly as the capital of the Roman Empire and a necessary goal in Paul's ambition to win it to Jesus Christ. His great work in Asia had stirred afresh in him the desire to do his part for Rome. He wrote to Rome from Corinth not long after this and in Jerusalem Jesus in vision will confirm the necessity (\dei\) that Paul see Rome (Acts strkjv@23:11|).

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:19:24 @{Demetrius, a silversmith} (\Dˆmˆtrios argurokopos\). The name is common enough and may or may not be the man mentioned in strkjv@3John:1:12| who was also from the neighbourhood of Ephesus. There is on an inscription at Ephesus near the close of the century a Demetrius called \neopoios Artemidos\ a temple warden of Artemis (Diana). Zoeckler suggests that Luke misunderstood this word \neopoios\ and translated it into \argurokopos\, a beater (\kopt“\, to beat) of silver (\arguros\, silver), "which made silver shrines of Artemis" (\poi“n naous\ (\argurous\) \Artemidos\). It is true that no silver shrines of the temple have been found in Ephesus, but only numerous terra-cotta ones. Ramsay suggests that the silver ones would naturally be melted down. The date is too late anyhow to identify the Demetrius who was \neopoios\ with the Demetrius \argurokopos\ who made little silver temples of Artemis, though B does not have the word \argurous\. The poor votaries would buy the terra-cotta ones, the rich the silver shrines (Ramsay, _Paul the Traveller_, p. 278). These small models of the temple with the statue of Artemis inside would be set up in the houses or even worn as amulets. It is a pity that the Revised Version renders Artemis here. Diana as the Ephesian Artemis is quite distinct from the Greek Artemis, the sister of Apollo, the Diana of the Romans. This temple, built in the 6th century B.C., was burnt by Herostratus Oct. 13 B.C. 356, the night when Alexander the Great was born. It was restored and was considered one of the seven wonders of the world. Artemis was worshipped as the goddess of fertility, like the Lydian Cybele, a figure with many breasts. The great festival in May would offer Demetrius a golden opportunity for the sale of the shrines. {Brought no little business} (\pareicheto ouk oligˆn ergasian\). Imperfect middle, continued to bring (furnish, provide). The middle accents the part that Demetrius played as the leader of the guild of silversmiths, work for himself and for them. {Unto the craftsmen} (\tais technitais\). The artisans from \technˆ\ (craft, art). Trade guilds were common in the ancient world. Demetrius had probably organized this guild and provided the capital for the enterprise.

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

rwp@Acts:19:31 @{Certain also of the chief officers of Asia} (\tines de kai t“n Asiarch“n\). These "Asiarchs" were ten officers elected by cities in the province who celebrated at their own cost public games and festivals (Page). Each province had such a group of men chosen, as we now know from inscriptions, to supervise the funds connected with the worship of the emperor, to preside at games and festivals even when the temple services were to gods like Artemis. Only rich men could act, but the position was eagerly sought. {Being his friends} (\ontes aut“i philoi\). Evidently the Asiarchs had a high opinion of Paul and were unwilling for him to expose his life to a wild mob during the festival of Artemis. They were at least tolerant toward Paul and his preaching. "It was an Asiarch who at Smyrna resisted the cry of the populace to throw Polycarp to the lions" (Furneaux). {Besought him} (\parekaloun auton\). Imperfect active, showing that the messengers sent had to insist over Paul's protest. "{Not to adventure himself}" (\mˆ dounai heauton\). It was a hazard, a rash adventure "to give himself" (second aorist active infinitive of \did“mi\). Just this sense of "adventure" with the idiom occurs only here in the N.T., though in Polybius V., 14, 9. But the phrase itself Paul uses of Jesus who gave himself for our sins (Galatians:1:4; strkjv@1Timothy:2:6; strkjv@Titus:2:14|). It is not the first time that friends had rescued Paul from peril (Acts:9:25,30; strkjv@17:10,14|). The theatre was no place for Paul. It meant certain death.

rwp@Acts:20:4 @{Accompanied him} (\suneipeto aut“i\). Imperfect of \sunepomai\, old and common verb, but only here in the N.T. The singular is used agreeing with the first name mentioned \S“patros\ and to be supplied with each of the others. Textus Receptus adds here "into Asia" (\achri tˆs Asias\, as far as Asia), but the best documents (Aleph B Vulg. Sah Boh) do not have it. As a matter of fact, Trophimus went as far as Jerusalem (Acts:21:29|) and Aristarchus as far as Rome (27:2; strkjv@Colossians:4:10|), The phrase could apply only to Sopatros. It is not clear though probable that Luke means to say that these seven brethren, delegates of the various churches (2Corinthians:8:19-23|) started from Corinth with Paul. Luke notes the fact that they accompanied Paul, but the party may really have been made up at Philippi where Luke himself joined Paul, the rest of the party having gone on to Troas (20:5f.|). These were from Roman provinces that shared in the collection (Galatia, Asia, Macedonia, Achaia). In this list three were from Macedonia, Sopater of Beroea, Aristarchus and Secundus of Thessalonica; two from Galatia, Gaius of Derbe and Timothy of Lystra; two from Asia, Tychicus and Trophimus. It is a bit curious that none are named from Achaia. Had Corinth failed after all (2Corinthians:8; 9|) to raise its share of the collection after such eager pledging? Rackham suggests that they may have turned their part over directly to Paul. Luke joined Paul in Philippi and could have handled the money from Achaia. It was an important event and Paul took the utmost pains to remove any opportunity for scandal in the handling of the funds.

rwp@Acts:20:13 @{To the ship} (\epi to ploion\). Note article. It is possible that Paul's party had chartered a coasting vessel from Philippi or Troas to take them to Patara in Lycia. Hence the boat stopped when and where Paul wished. That is possible, but not certain, for Paul could simply have accommodated himself to the plans of the ship's managers. {To take in Paul} (\analambanein ton Paulon\). Songs:in verse 14|. Same use in strkjv@2Timothy:4:11|: "Picking up Mark" (\Markon analab“n\). Assos was a seaport south of Troas in Mysia in the province of Asia. {He had appointed} (\diatetagmenos ˆn\). Past perfect periphrastic middle of \diatass“\, old verb to give orders (military in particular). {To go by land} (\pezeuein\). Present active infinitive of \pezeu“\, old verb to go on foot, not on horse back or in a carriage or by ship. Here only in the N.T. It was about twenty miles over a paved Roman road, much shorter (less than half) than the sea voyage around Cape Lectum. It was a beautiful walk in the spring-time and no doubt Paul enjoyed it whatever his reason was for going thus to Assos while the rest went by sea. Certainly he was entitled to a little time alone, this one day, as Jesus sought the Father in the night watches (Matthew:14:23|).

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:20:19 @[After what manner I was with you} (\p“s meth' h–m“n egenomˆn\). Literally, "How I came (from Asia and so was) with you." Cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:5; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1-10| where Paul likewise dares to refer boldly to his life while with them "all the time" (\ton panta chronon\). Accusative of duration of time. Songs:far as we know, Paul stuck to Ephesus the whole period. He had devoted himself consecratedly to the task in Ephesus. Each pastor is bishop of his field and has a golden opportunity to work it for Christ. One of the saddest things about the present situation is the restlessness of preachers to go elsewhere instead of devoting themselves wholly to the task where they are. 19|. {Serving the Lord} (\douleu“n t“i kuri“i\). It was Paul's glory to be the \doulos\ (bond-slave) as in strkjv@Romans:1:1; strkjv@Phillipians:1:1|. Paul alone, save Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:6:24; strkjv@Luke:16:13|, uses \douleu“\ six times for serving God (Page). {With all lowliness of mind} (\meta pasˆs tapeinophrosunˆs\). Lightfoot notes that heathen writers use this word for a grovelling, abject state of mind, but Paul follows Christ in using it for humility, humble-mindedness that should mark every Christian and in particular the preacher. {With tears} (\dakru“n\). Construed with \meta\. Paul was a man of the deepest emotion along with his high intellectuality. He mentions his tears again in verse 31|, tears of sorrow and of anxiety. He refers to his tears in writing the sharp letter to the church in Corinth (2Corinthians:2:4|) and in denouncing the sensual apostates in strkjv@Phillipians:3:18|. Adolphe Monod has a wonderful sermon on the tears of Paul. Consider also the tears of Jesus. {Trials which befell me} (\peirasm“n t“n sumbant“n moi\). Construed also with \meta\. Second aorist active participle of \sunbain“\, to walk with, to go with, to come together, to happen, to befall. Very common in this sense in the old Greek (cf. strkjv@Acts:3:10|). {By the plots of the Jews} (\en tais epiboulais t“n Ioudai“n\). Like the plot (\epiboulˆ\) against him in Corinth (20:3|) as well as the earlier trial before Gallio and the attacks in Thessalonica. In strkjv@Acts:19:9| Luke shows the hostile attitude of the Jews in Ephesus that drove Paul out of the synagogue to the school of Tyrannus. He does not describe in detail these "plots" which may easily be imagined from Paul's own letters and may be even referred to in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:10; strkjv@15:30ff.; strkjv@16:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:4-10; strkjv@7:5; strkjv@11:23|. In fact, one has only to dwell on the allusions in strkjv@2Corinthians:11| to picture what Paul's life was in Ephesus during these three years. Luke gives in strkjv@Acts:19| the outbreak of Demetrius, but Paul had already fought with "wild-beasts" there.

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:20:35 @{I gave you an example} (\hupedeixa\). First aorist active indicative of \hupodeiknumi\, old verb to show under one's eyes, to give object lesson, by deed as well as by word (Luke:6:47|). \Hupodeigma\ means example (John:13:15; strkjv@James:5:10|). Songs:Paul appeals to his example in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:1; strkjv@Phillipians:3:17|. \Panta\ is accusative plural of general reference (in all things). {Songs:labouring ye ought to help} (\hout“s kopi“ntas dei antilambanesthai\). So, as I did. Necessity (\dei\). Toiling (\kopi“ntas\) not just for ourselves, but to help (\antilambanesthai\), to take hold yourselves (middle voice) at the other end (\anti\). This verb common in the old Greek, but in the N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:1:54; strkjv@Acts:20:35; strkjv@1Timothy:6:2|. This noble plea to help the weak is the very spirit of Christ (1Thessalonians:5:14; strkjv@1Corinthians:12:28; strkjv@Romans:5:6; strkjv@14:1|). In strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:14| \antechesthe t“n asthenount“n\ we have Paul's very idea again. Every Community Chest appeal today re-echoes Paul's plea. {He himself said} (\autos eipen\). Not in the Gospels, one of the sayings of Jesus in current use that Paul had received and treasured. Various other _Agrapha_ of Jesus have been preserved in ancient writers and some in recently discovered papyri which may be genuine or not. We are grateful that Paul treasured this one. This Beatitude (on \makarion\ see on strkjv@Matthew:5:3-11|) is illustrated by the whole life of Jesus with the Cross as the culmination. Aristotle (Eth. IV. I) has a saying somewhat like this, but assigns the feeling of superiority as the reason (Page), an utterly different idea from that here. This quotation raises the question of how much Paul personally knew of the life and sayings of Jesus.

rwp@Acts:21:11 @{Coming} (\elth“n\, second aorist active participle of \erchomai\), taking (\aras\, first aorist active participle of \air“\, to take up), {binding} (\dˆsas\, first aorist active participle of \de“\, to bind). Vivid use of three successive participles describing the dramatic action of Agabus. {Paul's girdle} (\tˆn z“nˆn tou Paulou\). Old word from \z“nnumi\, to gird. See on ¯12:8|. {His own feet and hands} (\heautou tous podas kai tas cheiras\). Basis for the interpretation. Old Testament prophets often employed symbolic deeds (1Kings:22:11; strkjv@James:2:2; strkjv@Jeremiah:13:1-7; strkjv@Ezekiel:4:1-6|). Jesus interpreted the symbolism of Peter's girding himself (John:21:18|). {So} (\hout“s\). As Agabus had bound himself. Agabus was just from Jerusalem and probably knew the feeling there against Paul. At any rate the Holy Spirit revealed it to him as he claims. {Shall deliver} (\parad“sousin\). Like the words of Jesus about himself (Matthew:20:19|). He was "delivered" into the hands of the Gentiles and it took five years to get out of those hands.

rwp@Acts:21:25 @{We wrote} (\epesteilamen\). First aorist active of \epistell“\, to send to and so to write like our epistle (\epistolˆ\). Old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:15:20; strkjv@Hebrews:13:22|. It is the very word used by James in this "judgment" at the Conference (Acts:15:20|, \episteilai\). B D here read \apesteilamen\ from \apostell“\, to send away, to give orders. Wendt and Schuerer object to this as a gloss. Rather is it an explanation by James that he does not refer to the Gentile Christians whose freedom from the Mosaic ceremonial law was guaranteed at the Jerusalem Conference. James himself presided at that Conference and offered the resolution that was unanimously adopted. James stands by that agreement and repeats the main items (four: anything sacrificed to idols, blood, anything strangled, fornication, for discussion see strkjv@Acts:15|) from which they are to keep themselves (direct middle \phulassesthai\ of \phulass“\, indirect command after \krinantes\ with accusative, \autous\, of general reference). James has thus again cleared the air about the Gentiles who have believed (\pepisteukot“n\, perfect active participle genitive plural of \pisteu“\). He asks that Paul will stand by the right of Jewish Christians to keep on observing the Mosaic law. He has put the case squarely and fairly.

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:21:28 @{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:21:37 @{May I say something unto thee?} (\Ei exestin moi eipein ti pros se?\). On this use of \ei\ in a direct question see on ¯1:6|. The calm self-control of Paul in the presence of this mob is amazing. His courteous request to Lysias was in Greek to the chiliarch's amazement. {Dost thou know Greek?} (\Hellˆnisti gin“skeis?\). Old Greek adverb in \-i\ from \Hellˆniz“\, meaning "in Greek." "Do you know it in Greek?" In the N.T. only here and strkjv@John:19:20|. {Art thou not then the Egyptian?} (\Ouk ara su ei ho Aiguptios?\). Expects the answer _Yes_ and \ara\ argues the matter (therefore). The well-known (\ho\) Egyptian who had given the Romans so much trouble. {Stirred up to sedition} (\anastat“sas\). First aorist active participle of \anastato“\, a late verb from \anastatos\, outcast, and so to unsettle, to stir up, to excite, once known only in LXX and strkjv@Acts:17:6| (which see); strkjv@21:38; strkjv@Galatians:5:12|, but now found in several papyri examples with precisely this sense to upset. {Of the Assassins} (\t“n sikari“n\). Latin word _sicarius_, one who carried a short sword \sica\ under his cloak, a cutthroat. Josephus uses this very word for bands of robbers under this Egyptian (_War_ II. 17,6 and 13,5; _Ant_. XX. 8,10). Josephus says that there were 30,000 who gathered on the Mount of Olives to see the walls of Jerusalem fall down and not merely 4,000 as Lysias does here. But Lysias may refer to the group that were armed thus (banditti) the core of the mob of 30,000. Lysias at once saw by Paul's knowledge of Greek that he was not the famous Egyptian who led the Assassins and escaped himself when Felix attacked and slew the most of them.

rwp@Acts:21:39 @{I am} (\Eg“ men eimi\). In contrast with the wild guess of Lysias Paul uses \men\ and \de\. He tells briefly who he is: {a Jew} (\Ioudaios\) by race, {of Tarsus in Cilicia} (\Tarseus tˆs Kilikias\) by country, belonging to Tarsus (this adjective \Tarseus\ only here and strkjv@Acts:9:11|), and proud of it, one of the great cities of the empire with a great university. {A citizen of no mean city} (\ouk asˆmou pole“s politˆs\). Litotes again, "no mean" (\asˆmos\, old adjective, unmarked, \a\ privative and \sˆma\, mark, insignificant, here only in the N.T.). This same litotes used by Euripides of Athens (_Ion_ 8). But Paul calls himself a citizen (\politˆs\) of Tarsus. Note the "effective assonance" (Page) in \pole“s politˆs\. Paul now (\de\) makes his request (\deomai\) of Lysias. {Give me leave} (\epitrepson moi\). First aorist active imperative of \epitrep“\, old and common verb to turn to, to permit, to allow. It was a strange request and a daring one, to wish to speak to this mob howling for Paul's blood.

rwp@Acts:21:40 @{When he had given him leave} (\epitrepsantos autou\). Genitive absolute of aorist active participle of the same verb \epitrep“\. {Standing on the stairs} (\hest“s epi t“n anabathm“n\). Second perfect active participle of \histˆmi\, to place, but intransitive to stand. Dramatic scene. Paul had faced many audiences and crowds, but never one quite like this. Most men would have feared to speak, but not so Paul. He will speak about himself only as it gives him a chance to put Christ before this angry Jewish mob who look on Paul as a renegade Jew, a turncoat, a deserter, who went back on Gamaliel and all the traditions of his people, who not only turned from Judaism to Christianity, but who went after Gentiles and treated Gentiles as if they were on a par with Jews. Paul knows only too well what this mob thinks of him. {Beckoned with the hand} (\kateseise tˆi cheiri\). He shook down to the multitude with the hand (instrumental case \cheiri\), while Alexander, Luke says (19:33|), "shook down the hand" (accusative with the same verb, which see). In strkjv@26:1| Paul reached out the hand (\ekteinas tˆn cheira\). {When there was made a great silence} (\pollˆs sigˆs genomenˆs\). Genitive absolute again with second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\, "much silence having come." Paul waited till silence had come. {In the Hebrew language} (\tˆi Ebraidi dialekt“i\). The Aramaean which the people in Jerusalem knew better than the Greek. Paul could use either tongue at will. His enemies had said in Corinth that "his bodily presence was weak and his speech contemptible" (2Corinthians:10:10|). But surely even they would have to admit that Paul's stature and words reach heroic proportions on this occasion. Self-possessed with majestic poise Paul faces the outraged mob beneath the stairs.

rwp@Acts:22:3 @{I am a Jew} (\Eg“ eimi anˆr Ioudaios\). Note use of \Eg“\ for emphasis. Paul recounts his Jewish advantages or privileges with manifest pride as in strkjv@Acts:26:4f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:22; strkjv@Galatians:1:14; strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-7|. {Born} (\gegennˆmenos\). Perfect passive participle of \genna“\. See above in strkjv@21:39| for the claim of Tarsus as his birth-place. He was a Hellenistic Jew, not an Aramaean Jew (cf. strkjv@Acts:6:1|). {Brought up} (\anatethrammenos\). Perfect passive participle again of \anatreph“\, to nurse up, to nourish up, common old verb, but in the N.T. only here, strkjv@7:20ff.|, and MSS. in strkjv@Luke:4:16|. The implication is that Paul was sent to Jerusalem while still young, "from my youth" (26:4|), how young we do not know, possibly thirteen or fourteen years old. He apparently had not seen Jesus in the flesh (2Corinthians:5:16|). {At the feet of Gamaliel} (\pros tous podas Gamaliˆl\). The rabbis usually sat on a raised seat with the pupils in a circle around either on lower seats or on the ground. Paul was thus nourished in Pharisaic Judaism as interpreted by Gamaliel, one of the lights of Judaism. For remarks on Gamaliel see chapter strkjv@5:34ff|. He was one of the seven Rabbis to whom the Jews gave the highest title \Rabban\ (our Rabbi). \Rabbi\ (my teacher) was next, the lowest being \Rab\ (teacher). "As Aquinas among the schoolmen was called _Doctor Angelicus_, and Bonaventura _Doctor Seraphicus_, so Gamaliel was called _the Beauty of the Law_" (Conybeare and Howson). {Instructed} (\pepaideumenos\). Perfect passive participle again (each participle beginning a clause), this time of \paideu“\, old verb to train a child (\pais\) as in strkjv@7:22| which see. In this sense also in strkjv@1Timothy:1:20; strkjv@Titus:2:12|. Then to chastise as in strkjv@Luke:23:16,22| (which see); strkjv@2Timothy:2:25; strkjv@Hebrews:12:6f|. {According to the strict manner} (\kata akribeian\). Old word, only here in N.T. Mathematical accuracy, minute exactness as seen in the adjective in strkjv@26:5|. See also strkjv@Romans:10:2; Gal strkjv@1:4; strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-7|. {Of our fathers} (\patr“iou\). Old adjective from \pater\, only here and strkjv@24:14| in N.T. Means descending from father to son, especially property and other inherited privileges. \Patrikos\ (patrician) refers more to personal attributes and affiliations. {Being zealous for God} (\zˆl“tˆs huparch“n tou theou\). Not adjective, but substantive {zealot} (same word used by James of the thousands of Jewish Christians in Jerusalem, strkjv@21:20| which see) with objective genitive \tou theou\ (for God). See also verse 14; strkjv@28:17; strkjv@2Timothy:1:3| where he makes a similar claim. Songs:did Peter (Acts:3:13; strkjv@5:30|) and Stephen (7:32|). Paul definitely claims, whatever freedom he demanded for Gentile Christians, to be personally "a zealot for God" "even as ye all are this day" (\kath“s pantes humeis este sˆmeron\). In his conciliation he went to the limit and puts himself by the side of the mob in their zeal for the law, mistaken as they were about him. He was generous surely to interpret their fanatical frenzy as zeal for God. But Paul is sincere as he proceeds to show by appeal to his own conduct.

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:23:6 @{But when Paul perceived} (\gnous de ho Paulos\). Perceiving (second aorist ingressive of \gin“sk“\). Paul quickly saw that his cause was ruined before the Sanhedrin by his unwitting attack on the high priest. It was impossible to get a fair hearing. Hence, Vincent says, "Paul, with great tact, seeks to bring the two parties of the council into collision with each other." Songs:Alford argues with the motto "divide and conquer." Farrar condemns Paul and takes strkjv@24:21| as a confession of error here, but that is reading into Paul's word about the resurrection more than he says. Page considers Luke's report meagre and unsatisfactory. Rackham thinks that the trial was already started and that Paul repeated part of his speech of the day before when "the Sadducees received his words with ostentatious scepticism and ridicule: this provoked counter-expressions of sympathy and credulity among the Pharisees." But all this is inference. We do not have to adopt the Jesuitical principle that the end justifies the means in order to see shrewdness and hard sense in what Paul said and did. Paul knew, of course, that the Sanhedrin was nearly evenly divided between Pharisees and Sadducees, for he himself had been a Pharisee. {I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees} (\Eg“ Pharisaios eimi huios Pharisai“n\). This was strictly true as we know from his Epistles (Phillipians:3:5|). {Touching the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question} (\peri elpidos kai anastase“s nekr“n krinomai\). This was true also and this is the point that Paul mentions in strkjv@24:21|. His failure to mention again the fact that he was a Pharisee throws no discredit on Luke's report here. The chief point of difference between Pharisees and Sadducees was precisely this matter of the resurrection. And this was Paul's cardinal doctrine as a Christian minister. It was this fact that convinced him that Jesus was the Messiah and was "the very centre of his faith" (Page) and of his preaching. It was not a mere trick for Paul to proclaim this fact here and so divide the Sanhedrin. As a matter of fact, the Pharisees held aloof when the Sadducees persecuted Peter and the other apostles for preaching resurrection in the case of Jesus and even Gamaliel threw cold water on the effort to punish them for it (Acts:5:34-39|). Songs:then Paul was really recurring to the original cleavage on this point and was able to score a point against the Sadducees as Gamaliel, his great teacher, had done before him. Besides, "Paul and Pharisaism seem to us such opposite ideas that we often forget that to Paul Christianity was the natural development of Judaism" (Page). Paul shows this in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11|.

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:24:2 @{When he (Paul) was called} (\klˆthentos autou\). Genitive absolute (as so often in Acts) with first aorist passive participle of \kale“\. Seeing that by thee we enjoy much peace (\pollˆs eirˆnˆs tugchanontes dia sou\). Literally, obtaining much peace by thee. A regular piece of flattery, _captatio benevolentiae_, to ingratiate himself into the good graces of the governor. Felix had suppressed a riot, but Tacitus (_Ann_. XII. 54) declares that Felix secretly encouraged banditti and shared the plunder for which the Jews finally made complaint to Nero who recalled him. But it sounded well to praise Felix for keeping peace in his province, especially as Tertullus was going to accuse Paul of being a disturber of the peace. {And that by thy providence} (\kai dia tˆs pronoias\). Forethought, old Greek word from \pronoos\ (\pronoe“\ in strkjv@1Timothy:5:8; strkjv@Romans:12:17; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:21|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:13:14|. "Providence" is Latin _Providentia_ (foreseeing, _provideo_). Roman coins often have _Providentia Caesaris_. Post-Augustan Latin uses it of God (Deus). {Evils are corrected for this nation} (\diorth“mat“n ginomen“n t“i ethnei tout“i\). Genitive absolute again, \ginomen“n\, present middle participle describing the process of reform going on for this nation (dative case of personal interest). \Diorth“ma\ (from \diortho“\, to set right) occurs from Aristotle on of setting right broken limbs (Hippocrates) or reforms in law and life (Polybius, Plutarch). "Reform continually taking place for this nation." Felix the Reform Governor of Judea! It is like a campaign speech, but it doubtless pleased Felix.

rwp@Acts:24:6 @{Assayed to profane} (\epeirasen bebˆl“sai\). A flat untruth, but the charge of the Asian Jews (21:28-30|). _Verbum optum ad calumnian_ (Bengel). {We seized} (\ekratˆsamen\). As if the Sanhedrin had arrested Paul, Tertullus identifying himself with his clients. But it was the mob (21:28-31|) that attacked Paul and Lysias who rescued him (21:32ff.|).

rwp@Acts:25:5 @{Them therefore which are of power among you} (\hoi oun en humin dunatoi\). "The mighty ones among you," "the men of power" (\dunatoi\) and authority, "the first men," the Sanhedrin, in other words. Note change here by Luke from indirect discourse in verse 4|, to direct in verse 5| (\phˆsin\, says he). {Go down with me} (\sunkatabantes\). Double compound (\sun, kata\) second aorist active participle of \sunkatabain“\. It was a fair proposal. {If there is anything amiss in the man} (\ei ti estin en t“i andri atopon\). Condition of the first class, assuming that there is (to be courteous to them), but not committing himself on the merits of the case. \Atopon\ is an old word, specially common in Plato, meaning "out of place." In N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:23:41| which see; strkjv@Acts:28:6; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:2|. Note present tense active voice of \katˆgoreit“san\ (imperative) of \katˆgore“\, repeat their accusations.

rwp@Acts:25:26 @{No certain thing} (\asphales ti--ou\). Nothing definite or reliable (\a\ privative, \sphall“\, to trip). All the charges of the Sanhedrin slipped away or were tripped up by Paul. Festus confesses that he had nothing left and thereby convicts himself of gross insincerity in his proposal to Paul in verse 9| about going up to Jerusalem. By his own statement he should have set Paul free. The various details here bear the marks of the eyewitness. Luke was surely present and witnessed this grand spectacle with Paul as chief performer. {Unto my lord} (\t“i kuri“i\). Augustus (Octavius) and Tiberius refused the title of \kurios\ (lord) as too much like _rex_ (king) and like master and slave, but the servility of the subjects gave it to the other emperors who accepted it (Nero among them). Antoninus Pius put it on his coins. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 105) gives an ostracon dated Aug. 4, A.D. 63 with the words "in the year nine of Nero the lord" (\enatou Ner“nos tou kuriou\). Deissmann (_op. cit._, pp. 349ff.) runs a most interesting parallel "between the cult of Christ and the cult of Caesar in the application of the term \kurios\, lord" in ostraca, papyri, inscriptions. Beyond a doubt Paul has all this fully in mind when he says in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3| that "no one is able to say \Kurios Iˆsous\ except in the Holy Spirit" (cf. also strkjv@Phillipians:2:11|). The Christians claimed this word for Christ and it became the test in the Roman persecutions as when Polycarp steadily refused to say " Lord Caesar" and insisted on saying "Lord Jesus" when it meant his certain death. {Before you} (\eph' hum“n\). The whole company. In no sense a new trial, but an examination in the presence of these prominent men to secure data and to furnish entertainment and pleasure to Agrippa (verse 22|). {Especially before thee} (\malista epi sou\). Out of courtesy. It was the main reason as verse 22| shows. Agrippa was a Jew and Festus was glad of the chance to see what he thought of Paul's case. {After examination had} (\tˆs anakrise“s genomenˆs\). Genitive absolute, "the examination having taken place." \Anakrisis\ from \anakrin“\ (cf. strkjv@12:19; strkjv@24:8; strkjv@28:18|) is a legal term for preliminary examination. Only here in the N.T. Inscriptions and papyri give it as examination of slaves or other property. {That I may have somewhat to write} (\hop“s sch“ ti graps“\). Ingressive aorist subjunctive \sch“\ (may get) with \hop“s\ (final particle like \hina\). \Ti graps“\ in indirect question after \sch“\ is either future indicative or aorist subjunctive (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1045). Festus makes it plain that this is not a "trial," but an examination for his convenience to help him out of a predicament.

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:27:21 @{When they had been long without food} (\pollˆs te asitias huparchousˆs\). Genitive absolute, the old word \asitia\ from \asitos\ (verse 33|) \a\ privative and \sitos\, food, here alone in N.T. Literally, "There being much abstinence from food." They had plenty of grain on board, but no appetite to eat (sea-sickness) and no fires to cook it (Page). "Little heart being left for food" (Randall). Galen and other medical writers use \asitia\ and \asitos\ for want of appetite. {Stood forth} (\statheis\). As in strkjv@1:15; strkjv@2:14; strkjv@17:22|. Pictorial word (Page) that sets forth the vividness and solemnity of the scene (Knowling). {Ye should have hearkened unto me} (\edei men peitharchˆsantas moi\). Literally, "It was necessary for you hearkening unto me not to set sail (\mˆ anagesthai\)." It was not the "I told you so" of a small nature, "but a reference to the wisdom of his former counsel in order to induce acceptance of his present advice" (Furneaux). The first aorist active participle is in the accusative of general reference with the present infinitive \anagesthai\. {And have gotten this injury and loss} (\kerdˆsai te tˆn hubrin tautˆn kai tˆn zˆmian\). This Ionic form \kerdˆsai\ (from \kerda“\) rather than \kerdˆnai\ or \kerdƒnai\ is common in late Greek (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 349). The Revised Version thus carries over the negative \mˆ\ to this first aorist active infinitive \kerdˆsai\ from \kerda“\ (cf. on ¯Matthew:16:26|). But Page follows Thayer in urging that this is not exact, that Paul means that by taking his advice they ought to have escaped this injury and loss. "A person is said in Greek 'to gain a loss' when, being in danger of incurring it, he by his conduct saves himself from doing so." This is probably Paul's idea here.

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

rwp@Info_Colossians @ THE OCCASION The Epistle itself gives it as being due to the arrival of Epaphras from Colossae (Colossians:1:7-9; strkjv@4:12f.|). He is probably one of Paul's converts while in Ephesus who in behalf of Paul (Colossians:1:7|) evangelized the Lycus Valley (Colossae, Hierapolis, Laodicea) where Paul had never been himself (Colossians:2:1; strkjv@4:13-16|). Since Paul's departure for Rome, the "grievous wolves" whom he foresaw in Miletus (Acts:20:29f.|) had descended upon these churches and were playing havoc with many and leading them astray much as new cults today mislead the unwary. These men were later called Gnostics (see Ignatius) and had a subtle appeal that was not easy to withstand. The air was full of the mystery cults like the Eleusinian mysteries, Mithraism, the vogue of Isis, what not. These new teachers professed new thought with a world-view that sought to explain everything on the assumption that matter was essentially evil and that the good God could only touch evil matter by means of a series of aeons or emanations so far removed from him as to prevent contamination by God and yet with enough power to create evil matter. This jejune theory satisfied many just as today some are content to deny the existence of sin, disease, death in spite of the evidence of the senses to the contrary. In his perplexity Epaphras journeyed all the way to Rome to obtain Paul's help.

rwp@Info_Colossians @ SOME BOOKS ABOUT COLOSSIANS One may note commentaries by T. K. Abbott (_Int. Crit_. 1897), Gross Alexander, Dargan, Dibelius, Ellicott, Ewald, Griffith-Thomas, Findlay, Haupt, M. Jones, Lightfoot, Maclaren, Meinertz, Moule, Mullins, Oltramare, Peake, Radford, A. T. Robertson, Rutherford, E. F. Scott, Von Soden, F. B. Westcott, Williams. strkjv@Colossians:1:1 @{Of Christ Jesus} (\Christou Iˆsou\). This order in the later epistles shows that \Christos\ is now regarded as a proper name and not just a verbal adjective (Anointed One, Messiah). Paul describes himself because he is unknown to the Colossians, not because of attack as in strkjv@Galatians:1:1|. {Timothy} (\Timotheos\). Mentioned as in I and II Thess. when in Corinth, II Cor. when in Macedonia, Phil. and Philemon when in Rome as here.

rwp@Colossians:1:17 @{Before all things} (\pro pant“n\). \Pro\ with the ablative case. This phrase makes Paul's meaning plain. The precedence of Christ in time and the preeminence as Creator are both stated sharply. See the claim of Jesus to eternal timeless existence in strkjv@John:8:58; strkjv@17:5|. See also strkjv@Revelation:23:13| where Christ calls himself the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning (\archˆ\) and the End (\telos\). Paul states it also in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f|. {Consist} (\sunestˆken\). Perfect active indicative (intransitive) of \sunistˆmi\, old verb, to place together and here to cohere, to hold together. The word repeats the statements in verse 16|, especially that in the form \ektistai\. Christ is the controlling and unifying force in nature. The Gnostic philosophy that matter is evil and was created by a remote aeon is thus swept away. The Son of God's love is the Creator and the Sustainer of the universe which is not evil.

rwp@Colossians:1:18 @{The head of the body} (\hˆ kephalˆ tou s“matos\). Jesus is first also in the spiritual realm as he is in nature (verses 18-20|). Paul is fond of the metaphor of the body (\s“ma\) for believers of which body Christ is the head (\kephalˆ\) as seen already in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:3; strkjv@12:12,27; strkjv@Romans:12:5|. See further strkjv@Colossians:1:24: strkjv@2:19; strkjv@Ephesians:1:22f.; strkjv@4:2,15; strkjv@5:30|. {The church} (\tˆs ekklˆsias\) Genitive case in explanatory apposition with \tou s“matos\. This is the general sense of \ekklˆsia\, not of a local body, assembly, or organization. Here the contrast is between the realm of nature (\ta panta\) in verses 15-17| and the realm of spirit or grace in verses 18-20|. A like general sense of \ekklˆsia\ occurs in strkjv@Ephesians:1:22f.; strkjv@5:24-32; strkjv@Hebrews:12:23|. In strkjv@Ephesians:2:11-22| Paul uses various figures for the kingdom of Christ (commonwealth \politeia\, verse 12|, one new man \eis hena kainon anthr“pon\, verse 15|, one body \en heni s“mati\, verse 16|, family of God \oikeioi tou theou\, verse 19|, building or temple \oikodomˆ\ and \naos\, verses 20-22|). {Who} (\hos\). Causal use of the relative, "in that he is." {The beginning} (\hˆ archˆ\). It is uncertain if the article (\hˆ\) is genuine. It is absolute without it. Christ has priority in time and in power. See strkjv@Revelation:3:14| for his relation as \archˆ\ to creation and strkjv@1Corinthians:15:20,23| for \aparchˆ\ used of Christ and the resurrection and strkjv@Acts:3:14| for \archˆgos\ used of him as the author of life and strkjv@Hebrews:2:10| of Jesus and salvation and strkjv@Hebrews:12-2| of Jesus as the pioneer of faith. {That in all things he might have the preeminence} (\hina genˆtai en pƒsin autos pr“teu“n\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\, "that he himself in all things (material and spiritual) may come to (\genˆtai\, not \ˆi\, be) hold the first place" (\pr“teu“n\, present active participle of \pr“teu“\, old verb, to hold the first place, here only in the N.T.). Christ is first with Paul in time and in rank. See strkjv@Revelation:1:5| for this same use of \pr“totokos\ with \t“n nekr“n\ (the dead).

rwp@Colossians:1:23 @{If so be that ye continue in the faith} (\ei ge epimenete tˆi pistei\). Condition of the first class (determined as fulfilled), with a touch of eagerness in the use of \ge\ (at least). \Epi\ adds to the force of the linear action of the present tense (continue and then some). {Pistei} is in the locative case (in faith). {Grounded} (\tethemeli“menoi\). Perfect passive participle of \themelio“\, old verb from \themelios\ (adjective, from \thema\ from \tithˆmi\, laid down as a foundation, substantive, strkjv@1Corinthians:3:11f.|). Picture of the saint as a building like strkjv@Ephesians:2:20|. {Steadfast} (\hedraioi\). Old adjective from \hedra\ (seat). In N.T. only here, strkjv@1Corinthians:7:37; strkjv@15:58|. Metaphor of seated in a chair. {Not moved away} (\mˆ metakinoumenoi\). Present passive participle (with negative \mˆ\) of \metakine“\, old verb, to move away, to change location, only here in N.T. Negative statement covering the same ground. {From the hope of the gospel} (\apo tˆs elpidos tou euaggeliou\). Ablative case with \apo\. The hope given by or in the gospel and there alone. {Which ye heard} (\hou ˆkousate\). Genitive case of relative either by attraction or after \ˆkousate\. The Colossians had in reality heard the gospel from Epaphras. {Preached} (\kˆruchthentos\). First aorist passive participle of \kˆruss“\, to herald, to proclaim. {In all creation} (\en pasˆi ktisei\). \Ktisis\ is the act of founding (Romans:1:20|) from \ktiz“\ (verse 16|), then a created thing (Romans:1:25|), then the sum of created things as here and strkjv@Revelation:3:14|. It is hyperbole, to be sure, but Paul does not say that all men are converted, but only that the message has been heralded abroad over the Roman Empire in a wider fashion than most people imagine. {A minister} (\diakonos\). General term for service (\dia, konis\, raising a dust by speed) and used often as here of preachers like our "minister" today, one who serves. Jesus used the verb \diakonˆsai\ of himself (Mark:10:45|). Our "deacon" is this word transliterated and given a technical meaning as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:1|.

rwp@Colossians:1:27 @{God was pleased} (\ˆthelˆsen ho theos\). First aorist active indicative of \thel“\, to will, to wish. "God willed" this change from hidden mystery to manifestation. {To make known} (\gn“risai\). First aorist active infinitive of \gn“riz“\ (from \gin“sk“\). Among the Gentiles (\en tois ethnesin\). This is the crowning wonder to Paul that God had included the Gentiles in his redemptive grace, "the riches of the glory of this mystery" (\to ploutos tˆs doxˆs tou mustˆriou toutou\) and that Paul himself has been made the minister of this grace among the Gentiles (Ephesians:3:1-2|). He feels the high honour keenly and meets the responsibility humbly. {Which} (\ho\). Grammatical gender (neuter) agreeing with \mustˆriou\ (mystery), supported by A B P Vulg., though \hos\ (who) agreeing with \Christos\ in the predicate is read by Aleph C D L. At any rate the idea is simply that the personal aspect of "this mystery" is "Christ in you the hope of glory" (\Christos en humin hˆ elpis tˆs doxˆs\). He is addressing Gentiles, but the idea of \en\ here is in, not among. It is the personal experience and presence of Christ in the individual life of all believers that Paul has in mind, the indwelling Christ in the heart as in strkjv@Ephesians:3:17|. He constitutes also the hope of glory for he is the \Shekinah\ of God. Christ is our hope now (1Timothy:1:1|) and the consummation will come (Romans:8:18|).

rwp@Colossians:4:18 @{Of me Paul with mine own hand} (\tˆi emˆi cheiri Paulou\). More precisely, "with the hand of me Paul." The genitive \Paulou\ is in apposition with the idea in the possessive pronoun \emˆi\, which is itself in the instrumental case agreeing with \cheiri\. Songs:also strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:17; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:21|. {My bonds} (\mou t“n desm“n\). Genitive case with \mnemoneuete\ (remember). The chain (\en halusei\ strkjv@Ephesians:6:20|) clanked afresh as Paul took the pen to sign the salutation. He was not likely to forget it himself

rwp@Ephesians:2:20 @{Being built upon} (\epoikodomˆthentes\). First aorist passive participle of \epoikodome“\, for which double compound verb see strkjv@1Corinthians:3:10; Co; strkjv@2:17|. {The foundation} (\epi t“i themeli“i\). Repetition of \epi\ with the locative case. See strkjv@1Corinthians:3:11| for this word. {Of the apostles and prophets} (\ton apostol“n kai prophˆt“n\). Genitive of apposition with \themeli“i\, consisting in. If one is surprised that Paul should refer so to the apostles, he being one himself, Peter does the same thing (2Peter:3:2|). Paul repeats this language in strkjv@3:5|. {Christ Jesus himself being the chief corner stone} (\ont“s akrog“nianiou autou Christou Iˆsou\). Genitive absolute. The compound \akrog“niaios\ occurs only in the LXX (first in strkjv@Isaiah:28:16|) and in the N.T. (here, strkjv@1Peter:2:6|). \Lithos\ (stone) is understood. Jesus had spoken of himself as the stone, rejected by the Jewish builders (experts), but chosen of God as the head of the corner (Matthew:21:42|), \eis kephalˆn g“nias\. "The \akrog“niaios\ here is the primary foundation-stone at the angle of the structure by which the architect fixes a standard for the bearings of the walls and cross-walls throughout" (W. W. Lloyd).

rwp@Ephesians:3:5 @{In other generations} (\heterais geneais\). Locative case of time. He had already claimed this revelation for himself (verse 3|). Now he claims it for all the other apostles and prophets of God.

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

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

rwp@Ephesians:5:2 @{An offering and a sacrifice to God} (\prosphoran kai thusian t“i the“i\). Accusative in apposition with \heauton\ (himself). Christ's death was an offering to God "in our behalf" (\huper hˆm“n\) not an offering to the devil (Anselm), a ransom (\lutron\) as Christ himself said (Matthew:20:28|), Christ's own view of his atoning death. {For an odour of a sweet smell} (\eis osmˆn eu“dias\). Same words in strkjv@Phillipians:4:18| from strkjv@Leviticus:4:31| (of the expiatory offering). Paul often presents Christ's death as a propitiation (Romans:3:25|) as in strkjv@1John:2:2|.

rwp@Ephesians:6:6 @{But as servants of Christ} (\all' h“s douloi Christou\). Better "slaves of Christ" as Paul rejoiced to call himself (Phillipians:1:1|). {Doing the will of God} (\poiountes to thelˆma tou theou\). Even while slaves of men.

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

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ The 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:1:15 @{It was the good pleasure of God} (\eudokˆsen ho theos\). Paul had no doubt about God's purpose in him (1Thessalonians:2:8|). {Who separated me} (\ho aphorisas me\). \Aphoriz“\ is old word (from \apo\ and \horos\) to mark off from a boundary or line. The Pharisees were the separatists who held themselves off from others. Paul conceives himself as a spiritual Pharisee "separated unto the gospel of God" (Romans:1:1|, the same word \aph“rismenos\). Before his birth God had his plans for him and called him.

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:2:18 @{A transgressor} (\parabatˆn\). Peter, by his shifts had contradicted himself helplessly as Paul shows by this condition. When he lived like a Gentile, he tore down the ceremonial law. When he lived like a Jew, he tore down salvation by grace.

rwp@Galatians:4:6 @{Because ye are sons} (\hoti este huioi\). This is the reason for sending forth the Son (4:4| and here). We were "sons" in God's elective purpose and love. \Hoti\ is causal (1Corinthians:12:15; strkjv@Romans:9:7|). {The Spirit of his Son} (\to pneuma tou huioi autou\). The Holy Spirit, called the Spirit of Christ (Romans:8:9f.|), the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Phillipians:1:19|). The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son (John:15:26|). {Crying, Abba, Father} (\krazon Abba ho patˆr\). The participle agrees with \pneuma\ neuter (grammatical gender), not neuter in fact. An old, though rare in present as here, onomatopoetic word to croak as a raven (Theophrastus, like Poe's _The Raven_), any inarticulate cry like "the unuttered groanings" of strkjv@Romans:8:26| which God understands. This cry comes from the Spirit of Christ in our hearts. \Abba\ is the Aramaic word for father with the article and \ho patˆr\ translates it. The articular form occurs in the vocative as in strkjv@John:20:28|. It is possible that the repetition here and in strkjv@Romans:8:15| may be "a sort of affectionate fondness for the very term that Jesus himself used" (Burton) in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mark:14:36|). The rabbis preserve similar parallels. Most of the Jews knew both Greek and Aramaic. But there remains the question why Jesus used both in his prayer. Was it not natural for both words to come to him in his hour of agony as in his childhood? The same thing may be true here in Paul's case.

rwp@Galatians:4:10 @{Ye observe} (\paratˆreisthe\). Present middle indicative of old verb to stand beside and watch carefully, sometimes with evil intent as in strkjv@Luke:6:7|, but often with scrupulous care as here (so in Dio Cassius and Josephus). The meticulous observance of the Pharisees Paul knew to a nicety. It hurt him to the quick after his own merciful deliverance to see these Gentile Christians drawn into this spider-web of Judaizing Christians, once set free, now enslaved again. Paul does not itemize the "days" (Sabbaths, fast-days, feast-days, new moons) nor the "months" (Isaiah:66:23|) which were particularly observed in the exile nor the "seasons" (passover, pentecost, tabernacles, etc.) nor the "years" (sabbatical years every seventh year and the Year of Jubilee). Paul does not object to these observances for he kept them himself as a Jew. He objected to Gentiles taking to them as a means of salvation.

rwp@Galatians:4:19 @{I am in travail} (\“din“\). I am in birth pangs. Old word for this powerful picture of pain. In N.T. only here, verse 27; strkjv@Revelation:12:2|. {Until Christ be formed in you} (\mechris hou morph“thˆi Christos en humin\). Future temporal clause with \mechris hou\ (until which time) and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \morpho“\, late and rare verb, in Plutarch, not in LXX, not in papyri, only here in N.T. This figure is the embryo developing into the child. Paul boldly represents himself as again the mother with birth pangs over them. This is better than to suppose that the Galatians are pregnant mothers (Burton) by a reversal of the picture as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:7|.

rwp@Galatians:6:11 @{With how large letters} (\pˆlikois grammasin\). Paul now takes the pen from the amanuensis (cf. strkjv@Romans:16:22|) and writes the rest of the Epistle (verses 11-18|) himself instead of the mere farewell greeting (2Thessalonians:3:17; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:21; strkjv@Colossians:4:18|). But what does he mean by "with how large letters"? Certainly not "how large a letter." It has been suggested that he employed large letters because of defective eyesight or because he could only write ill-formed letters because of his poor handwriting (like the print letters of children) or because he wished to call particular attention to this closing paragraph by placarding it in big letters (Ramsay). This latter is the most likely reason. Deissmann, (_St. Paul_, p. 51) argues that artisans write clumsy letters, yes, and scholars also. Milligan (_Documents_, p. 24; _Vocabulary_, etc.) suggests the contrast seen in papyri often between the neat hand of the scribe and the big sprawling hand of the signature. {I have written} (\egrapsa\). Epistolary aorist. {With mine own hand} (\tˆi emˆi cheiri\). Instrumental case as in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:21|.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE PICTURE OF CHRIST At once we are challenged by the bold stand taken by the author concerning the Person of Christ as superior to the prophets of the Old Testament because he is the Son of God through whom God has spoken in the new dispensation (Hebrews:1:1-3|), this Son who is God's Agent in the work of creation and of grace as we see it stated in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11; strkjv@Colossians:1:13-20; strkjv@John:1:1-18|. This high doctrine of Jesus as God's Son with the glory and stamp of God's nature is never lowered, for as God's Son he is superior to angels (Hebrews:1:4-2:4|), though the humanity of Jesus is recognized as one proof of the glory of Jesus (Hebrews:2:5-18|). Jesus is shown to be superior to Moses as God's Son over God's house (Hebrews:3:1-4:13|), But the chief portion of the Epistle is devoted to the superiority of Jesus Christ as priest to the work of Aaron and the whole Levitical line (Hebrews:4:14-12:3|). Here the author with consummate skill, though with rabbinical refinements at times, shows that Jesus is like Melchizedek and so superior to Aaron (Hebrews:4:14-7:28|), works under a better covenant of grace (Hebrews:8:1-13|), works in a better sanctuary which is in heaven (Hebrews:9:1-12|), offers a better sacrifice which is his own blood (Hebrews:9:13-10:18|), and gives us better promises for the fulfilment of his task (Hebrews:10:19-12:3|). Hence this Epistle deserves to be called the Epistle of the Priesthood of Christ. Songs:W. P. Du Bose calls his exposition of the book, _High Priesthood and Sacrifice_. This conception of Christ as our Priest who offered himself on the Cross and as our Advocate with the Father runs all through the New Testament (Mark:10:46; strkjv@Matthew:20:28; strkjv@John:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Romans:8:32; strkjv@1Peter:1:18f.; strkjv@1John:2:1f.; strkjv@Revelation:5:9|, etc.). But it is in Hebrews that we have the full-length portrait of Jesus Christ as our Priest and Redeemer. The Glory of Jesus runs through the whole book.

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:2:18 @{In that} (\en h“i\). Literally, "In which" (\=en tout“i en h“i\, in that in which), a causal idea, though in strkjv@Romans:14:22| \en h“i\ means "wherein." {Hath suffered} (\peponthen\). Second perfect active indicative of \pasch“\, permanent part of Christ's experience. {Being tempted} (\peirastheis\). First aorist passive participle of \peiraz“\. The temptation to escape the shame of the Cross was early and repeatedly presented to Christ, by Satan in the wilderness (Matthew:4:8-11|), by Peter in the spirit of Satan (Matthew:16:22f.|), in Gethsemane (Matthew:26:39|), and caused intense suffering to Jesus (Luke:22:44; strkjv@Hebrews:5:8|). {He is able} (\dunatai\). This word strikes the heart of it all. Christ's power to help is due not merely to his deity as God's Son, but also to his humanity without which he could not sympathize with us (Hebrews:4:15|). {To succour} (\boˆthˆsai\). First aorist active infinitive of the old compound verb \boˆthe“\ (\boˆ\, a cry, \the“\, to run), to run at a cry or call for help (Matthew:15:25|). {Them that are tempted} (\tois peirazomenois\). Dative plural of the articular participle (present passive) of \peiraz“\. These Jewish Christians were daily tempted to give up Christ, to apostatize from Christianity. Jesus understands himself (\autos\) their predicament and is able to help them to be faithful.

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

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

rwp@Hebrews:5:4 @{Taketh the honour unto himself} (\heaut“i lambanei tˆn timˆn\). Dative case of personal interest (\heaut“i\). The priest was called of God. This is the ideal and was true of Aaron. The modern minister is not a priest, but he also should be a God-called man and not one who pushes himself into the ministry or into ecclesiastical office.

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:7:28 @{After the law} (\meta ton nomon\). As shown in verses 11-19|, and with an oath (Psalms:110:4|). {Son} (\huion\). As in strkjv@Psalms:2:7; strkjv@Hebrews:1:2| linked with strkjv@Psalms:110:4|. {Perfected} (\tetelei“menon\). Perfect passive participle of \teleio“\. The process (2:10|) was now complete. Imperfect and sinful as we are we demand a permanent high priest who is sinless and perfectly equipped by divine appointment and human experience (2:17f.; strkjv@5:1-10|) to meet our needs, and with the perfect offering of himself as sacrifice.

rwp@Hebrews:8:1 @{In the things which we are saying} (\epi tois legomenois\). Locative case of the articular present passive participle of \leg“\ after \epi\ as in strkjv@Luke:5:5; strkjv@Hebrews:11:4|, "in the matter of the things being discussed." {The chief point} (\kephalaion\). Neuter singular of the adjective \kephalaios\ (from \kephalˆ\, head), belonging to the head. Vulgate _capitulum_, nominative absolute in old and common sense, the main matter (even so without the article as in Thucydides), "the pith" (Coverdale), common in the papyri as in Greek literature. The word also occurs in the sense of the sum total or a sum of money (Acts:22:28|) as in Plutarch, Josephus, and also in the papyri (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). {Such an high priest} (\toiouton archierea\). As the one described in chapters strkjv@4:16-7:28| and in particular strkjv@7:26| (\toioutos\) strkjv@7:27,28|. But the discussion of the priestly work of Jesus continues through strkjv@12:3|. \Toioutos\ is both retrospective and prospective. Here we have a summary of the five points of superiority of Jesus as high priest (8:1-6|). He is himself a better priest than Aaron (\toioutos\ in strkjv@8:1| such as shown in strkjv@4:16-7:28|); he works in a better sanctuary (8:2,5|); he offers a better sacrifice (8:3f.|); he is mediator of a better covenant (8:6|); his work rests on better promises (8:6|); hence he has obtained a better ministry as a whole (8:6|). In this resum‚ (\kephelaion\) the author gives the pith (\kephalaion\) of his argument, curiously enough with both senses of \kephalaion\ (pith, summary) pertinent. He will discuss the four points remaining thus: the better covenant, strkjv@8:7-13|. The better sanctuary, strkjv@9:1-12|. The better sacrifice, strkjv@9:13-10:18|. The better promises, strkjv@10:19-12:3|. One point (the better high priest, like Melchizedek) has already been discussed (4:16-7:28|). {Sat down} (\ekathisen\). Repetition of strkjv@1:3| with \tou thronou\ (the throne) added. This phrase prepares the way for the next point.

rwp@Hebrews:9:12 @{Through his own blood} (\dia tou idiou haimatos\). This is the great distinction between Christ as High Priest and all other high priests. They offer blood (verse 7|), but he offered his own blood. He is both victim and High Priest. See the same phrase in strkjv@13:12; strkjv@Acts:20:28|. {Once for all} (\ephapax\). In contrast to the repeated (annual) entrances of the Levitical high priests (9:7|). {Into the holy place} (\eis ta hagia\). Here, as in verses 8,24| heaven itself. {Having obtained} (\heuramenos\). First aorist middle (indirect) participle of \heurisk“\, simultaneous action with \eisˆlthen\, and by or of himself "as the issue of personal labour directed to this end" (Westcott). The value of Christ's offering consists in the fact that he is the Son of God as well as the Son of man, that he is sinless and so a perfect sacrifice with no need of an offering for himself, and that it is voluntary on his part (John:10:17|). \Lutr“sis\ (from \lutro“\) is a late word for the act of ransoming (cf. \lutron\, ransom), in O.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:1:68; strkjv@2:38|. But \apolutr“sis\ elsewhere (as in strkjv@Luke:21:28; strkjv@Romans:3:24; strkjv@Hebrews:9:15; strkjv@11:35|). For "eternal" (\ai“nian\, here feminine form) see strkjv@6:2|. The author now turns to discuss the better sacrifice (9:13-10:18|) already introduced.

rwp@Hebrews:9:25 @{That he should offer himself often} (\hina pollakis prospherˆi heauton\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \prospher“\ (keep on offering himself, like strkjv@5:1,3|). {With blood not his own} (\en haimati allotri“i\). So-called instrumental use of \en\ (accompaniment). \allotrios\ means "belonging to another," "not one's own" (Luke:16:12|).

rwp@Hebrews:9:27 @{It is appointed} (\apokeitai\). Present middle (or passive) of \apokeimai\, "is laid away" for men. Cf. same verb in strkjv@Luke:19:20; strkjv@Colossians:1:5; strkjv@2Timothy:4:8| (Paul's crown). {Once to die} (\hapax apothanein\). Once for all to die, as once for all to live here. No reincarnation here. {After this cometh judgement} (\meta touto krisis\). Death is not all. Man has to meet Christ as Judge as Jesus himself graphically pictures (Matthew:25:31-46; strkjv@John:5:25-29|).

rwp@Hebrews:10:5 @{When he cometh into the world} (\eiserchomenos eis ton kosmon\). Reference to the Incarnation of Christ who is represented as quoting strkjv@Psalms:40:7-9| which is quoted. The text of the LXX is followed in the main which differs from the Hebrew chiefly in having \s“ma\ (body) rather than \“tia\ (ears). The LXX translation has not altered the sense of the Psalm, "that there was a sacrifice which answered to the will of God as no animal sacrifice could" (Moffatt). Songs:the writer of Hebrews "argues that the Son's offering of himself is the true and final offering for sin, because it is the sacrifice, which, according to prophecy, God desired to be made" (Davidson). {A body didst thou prepare for me} (\s“ma katˆrtis“ moi\). First aorist middle indicative second person singular of \katartiz“\, to make ready, equip. Using \s“ma\ (body) for \“tia\ (ears) does not change the sense, for the ears were the point of contact with God's will.

rwp@Hebrews:10:7 @{Then} (\tote\). When it was plain that God could not be propitiated by such sacrifices. {Lo, I am come} (\Idou hˆk“\). The Messiah is represented as offering himself to do God's will (\tou poiˆsai to thelˆma sou\, the genitive articular infinitive of purpose). {In the roll of the book it is written of me} (\en kephalidi bibliou gegraptai peri emou\). Stands written (\gegraptai\, perfect passive indicative). \Kephalis\ is a diminutive of \kephalˆ\ (head), a little head, then roll only here in N.T., but in the papyri. Here it refers "to the O.T. as a prediction of Christ's higher sacrifice" (Moffatt).

rwp@Hebrews:10:33 @{Partly} (\touto men\) {and partly} (\touto de\). Accusative of general reference (\touto\) with \men\ and \de\ for contrast. {Being made a gazing-stock} (\theatrizomenoi\). Late verb to bring upon the stage, to hold up to derision. See Paul's use of \theatron\ of himself in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:9|. {By reproaches and afflictions} (\oneidismois te kai thlipsesin\). Instrumental case. See strkjv@Romans:15:3|. {Partakers} (\koin“noi\). Partners (Luke:5:10|) with those (\t“n\ objective genitive). {Songs:used} (\hout“s anastrephomen“n\). Present middle articular participle of \anastreph“\, to conduct oneself (2Corinthians:1:12|).

rwp@Hebrews:11:7 @{Being warned of God} (\chrˆmatistheis\). First aorist passive participle of \chrˆmatiz“\, old word for oracular or divine communications as already in strkjv@8:5| (cf. strkjv@Matthew:2:12,22|, etc.). {Moved with godly fear} (\eulabˆthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \eulabeomai\, old verb from \eulabˆs\ (from \eu\ and \labein\, to take hold well or carefully), to show oneself \eulabˆs\, to act circumspectly or with reverence, here only in N.T. (save Textus Receptus in strkjv@Acts:23:10|), often in LXX. {An ark} (\kib“ton\). strkjv@Genesis:6:15; strkjv@Matthew:24:38|. Shaped like a box (cf. strkjv@Hebrews:9:4|). {Through which} (\di' hˆs\). Through his faith as shown in building the ark. {The world} (\ton kosmon\). Sinful humanity as in verse 38|. {Heir} (\klˆronomos\). In strkjv@2Peter:2:5| Noah is called "a preacher of righteousness" as here "heir of righteousness." He himself believed his message about the flood. Like Enoch he walked with God (Genesis:6:9|).

rwp@Hebrews:11:37 @{They were stoned} (\elithasthˆsan\). Like Zechariah son of Jehoiada (2Chronicles:24:20|). "A characteristic Jewish punishment" (Vincent). First aorist passive indicative of \lithaz“\ (John:10:31|). {They were sawn asunder} (\epristhˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \pri“\ or \priz“\, old verb (\prion\, a saw). Cruel Jewish punishment (Amos:1:3|) said to have been inflicted on Isaiah. {They were tempted} (\epeirasthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \peiraz“\. The MSS. vary greatly in the text here and the order of these two items. This mild word seems an anticlimax after \epristhˆsan\. One of the seven brothers was fried (II Macc. strkjv@7:4) and so \eprˆsthesan\ (were burned) from \pimpra“\ (Acts:28:6|) has been suggested. {With the sword} (\en phon“i machairˆs\). "In (by) slaughter of the sword" (Ionic form of the genitive \machaires\ as in strkjv@Exodus:17:13; strkjv@Numbers:21:24|). The fate of unpopular prophets (1Kings:10:10; strkjv@Jeremiah:26:23|). {They went about} (\periˆlthon\). Constative aorist active indicative of \perierchomai\ (picturesque compound verb). Here the sufferings of the living. {In sheep skins} (\en mˆl“tais\). Late word from \mˆlon\ (sheep), rough garment of prophets as Elijah (1Kings:19:13,19|), here only in N.T. In Byzantine Greek a monk's garb. {In goatskins} (\en aigeiois dermasin\). \Derma\, old word from \der“\, to flay (Matthew:21:35|), here only in N.T. \Aigeios\, old adjective (from \aix\, goat), here only in N.T. {Being destitute} (\husteroumenoi\). Present passive participle of \hustere“\, old verb to be left behind, used by Paul of himself (2Corinthians:11:9|). {Afflicted} (\thlibomenoi\). Present passive participle of \thlib“\, common verb to oppress. {Evil entreated} (\kakouchoumenoi\). Present passive participle of \kakouche“\, late compound verb from obsolete \kakouchos\ (\kakos\ and \ech“\), in LXX (1Kings:2:26|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@13:3|. See \sunkakoucheisthai\ in strkjv@11:25|.

rwp@Hebrews:13:5 @{Be ye free from the love of money} (\aphilarguros ho tropos\). No copula, but supply \esto\: "Let your manner of life (\tropos\, way, strkjv@Matthew:23:37|), be without love of money" (\aphilarguros\, double compound), once found only in the N.T., here and strkjv@1Timothy:3:3|, but now several times--or the adverb \aphilargur“s\ --in papyri and inscriptions (Deissmann, _Light_, etc., pp. 85f.). Alpha privative and \philos\ and \arguros\. The N.T. is full of the peril of money on the character as modern life is also. {Content with such things as ye have} (\arkoumenoi tois parousin\). Present passive participle of \arke“\, to suffice, to be content as in strkjv@Luke:3:14|. Cf. \autarkˆs\ in strkjv@Phillipians:4:11|. Here in the nominative plural with no substantive or pronoun (anacoluthon, as in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:7|) or the participle used as a principal verb as in strkjv@Romans:12:16|. "Contented with the present things" (\tois parousin\, associative instrumental case of \ta paronta\, present active neuter plural participle of \pareimi\, to be present or on hand). {For himself hath said} (\autos gar eirˆken\). God himself as in strkjv@Acts:20:33| of Christ. Perfect active indicative as in strkjv@1:13; strkjv@4:3f.; strkjv@10:9|. The quotation is a free paraphrase of strkjv@Genesis:28:15; strkjv@Deuteronomy:31:8; strkjv@Joshua:1:5; strkjv@1Chronicles:28:20|. Philo (de Confus. Ling. 32) has it in this form, "a popular paraphrase" (Moffatt). Note the five negatives strengthening each other (\ou mˆ\ with the second aorist active subjunctive \an“\ from \aniˆmi\, to relate, as in strkjv@Acts:16:26|; \oud' ou mˆ\ with second aorist active subjunctive \egkatalip“\ from \egkataleip“\, to leave behind, as in strkjv@Matthew:27:46; strkjv@2Timothy:4:10|). A noble promise in times of depression.

rwp@Hebrews:13:13 @{Let us therefore go forth to him} (\toinun exerch“metha pros auton\). Inferential particle (\toi, nun\), usually post-positive (Luke:20:25; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:26|) only N.T. examples. Present middle volitive subjunctive of \exerchomai\. "Let us keep on going out there to him." If a separation has to come between Judaism and Christianity, let us give up Judaism, and go out to Christ "outside the camp" and take our stand with him there on Golgotha, "bearing his reproach (\ton oneidismon autou pherontes\) as Jesus himself endured the Cross despising the shame (12:2|) and as Moses accepted "the reproach of the Messiah" (11:26|) in his day. The only decent place for the follower of Christ is beside the Cross of Christ with the reproach and the power (Romans:8:1f.|) in it. This is the great passionate plea of the whole Epistle.

rwp@Info_James @ THE READERS The author addresses himself "to the twelve tribes which are of the Dispersion" (Jam strkjv@1:1|). Clearly, then, he is not writing to Gentiles, unless he includes the spiritual children of Abraham in the term \Diaspora\ as Paul does for believers (Galatians:3:29; strkjv@Romans:9:6f.|). The word \diaspora\ occurs elsewhere in the N.T. only in strkjv@John:7:35; strkjv@1Peter:1:1|. It apparently has the spiritual significance in strkjv@1Peter:1:1|, but in strkjv@John:7:35| the usual meaning of Jews scattered over the world. The use here of "the twelve tribes" makes the literal sense probable here. Clearly also James knew nothing of any "lost" tribes, for the Jews of the Dispersion were a blend of all the twelve tribes. It is probable also that James is addressing chiefly the Eastern Dispersion in Syria, Mesopotamia, and Babylonia as Peter writes to five provinces in the Western Dispersion in Asia Minor. It is possible that James has in mind Christian and non-Christian Jews, not wholly non-Christian Jews as some hold. He may have in mind merely Christian Jews outside of Palestine, of whom there were already many scattered since the great pentecost. The use of synagogue as a place of worship (James:2:2|) like church (James:5:14|) argues somewhat for this view. He presents the Mosaic law as still binding (James:2:9-11; strkjv@4:11|). As the leading elder of the great church in Jerusalem and as a devout Jew and half-brother of Jesus, the message of James had a special appeal to these widely scattered Jewish Christians.

rwp@Info_James @ RECENT BOOKS ON JAMES Baljon, J. M. S., _Comm. op de katholieke brieven_. Bardenhewer, O., _Der Brief des hl. Jakobus_. Bartmann, _St. Paulus und St. Jakobus_. Belser, J. E., _Epistel des hl. Jakobus_. Beyschlag, W., _Der Brief des Jakobus_. Meyer Komm. 6 Aufl.. Brown, Charles, _The General Epistle of James_. 2nd ed.. Camerlinck, _Commentarius in epistolas catholicas_. Carpenter, W. Boyd, _The Wisdom of James the Just_. Carr, Arthur, _The General Epistle of James_. Cambridge Greek Testament. New ed.. Chaine, J., _L Epitre de S. Jacques_. Dale, R. W., _Discourses on the Epistle of James. Deems, C. F., _The Gospel of Common Sense_. Dibelius, _M., Meyer's Comm. 7 Aufl.. Feine, _Der Jakobusbrief_, etc.. Fitch, _James the Lord's Brother_. Gaugusch, L., _Der Lehrgehalt der Jakobus-epistel_. Grafe, _Stellung und Bedeutung des Jakobusbriefes_. Grosheide, F. W., _Deuteronomy:brief aan de Hebreen en de brief des Jakobus_. Hauck, F., _Der Br. d. Jak. in Zahn's Komm_.. Hollmann, G., _Die Schriften d. N.T_. 3 Aufl.. Holtzmann, O., _Das N.T. II_. Hort, F. J. A., _The Epistle of James as far as strkjv@4:7_. Huther, J. E., _Meyer's Komm_. 3 Aufl.. Johnstone, R., _Lectures Exegetical and Practical_. 2nd ed.. Knowling, R. J., _Comm. on the Epistle of St. James_. Westminster Series. Mayor, J. B., _The Epistle of St. James_. 3rd ed.. Meinertz, _Der Jakobusbrief und sein Verfasser_. Meyer, A., _Das Ratsel des Jak_.. Moffatt, James, _The General Epistles (James, Peter, and Judas_). Osterley, W. E., _The Epistle of St. James_. Expos. Gk. Test.. Parry, J., _The General Epistle of James_. Patrick, W., _James, the Lord's Brother_. Plummer, A., _The General Epistle of St. James_. Expos. Bible. Rendall, G. H., _The Epistle of St. James and Judaic Chris- tianity_. Robertson, A. T., _Studies in the Epistle of James_. 3rd ed.. First in 1915 as _Pract. and Social Aspects of Christianity_. Ropes, J. H., _A Crit. and Exeget. Comm. on the Epistle of St. James_. Int. and Crit. Comm.. Smith, H. M., _The Epistle of James_. Soden, H. Von, _Der Brief des Jakobus_. Hand-Comm.. Spitta, F., _Der Brief des Jakobus untersucht_. Taylor, J. F., _The Apostle of Patience_. Weiss, B., _Die Katholische Briefe_. _Der Jakobusbrief und die neuere Kritik_. Windisch, H., _Die Katholische Briefe. Handbuch Zum N.T._, 2 Aufl.. strkjv@James:1:1 @{James} (\Iak“bos\). Grecised form (nominative absolute) of the Hebrew \Iak“b\ (so LXX). Common name among the Jews, and this man in Josephus (_Ant_. XX.9.1) and three others of this name in Josephus also. {Servant} (\doulos\). Bond-servant or slave as Paul (Romans:1:1; strkjv@Phillipians:1:1; strkjv@Titus:1:1|). {Of the Lord Jesus Christ} (\kuriou Iˆsou Christou\). Here on a par with God (\theou\) and calls himself not \adelphos\ (brother) of Jesus, but \doulos\. The three terms here as in strkjv@2:1| have their full significance: Jesus is the Messiah and Lord. James is not an Ebionite. He accepts the deity of Jesus his brother, difficult as it was for him to do so. The word \kurios\ is frequent in the LXX for _Elohim_ and _Jahweh_ as the Romans applied it to the emperor in their emperor worship. See strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3| for \Kurios Iˆsous\ and strkjv@Phillipians:2:11| for \Kurios Iˆsous Christos\. {To the twelve tribes} (\tais d“deka phulais\). Dative case. The expression means "Israel in its fulness and completeness" (Hort), regarded as a unity (Acts:26:7|) with no conception of any "lost" tribes. {Which are of the Dispersion} (\tais en tˆi diasporƒi\). "Those in the Dispersion" (repeated article). The term appears in strkjv@Deuteronomy:28:25| (LXX) and comes from \diaspeir“\, to scatter (sow) abroad. In its literal sense we have it in strkjv@John:7:34|, but here and in strkjv@1Peter:1:1| Christian Jews are chiefly, if not wholly, in view. The Jews at this period were roughly divided into Palestinian Jews (chiefly agriculturists) and Jews of the Dispersion (dwellers in cities and mainly traders). In Palestine Aramaic was spoken as a rule, while in the Western Diaspora the language was Greek (_Koin‚_, LXX), though the Eastern Diaspora spoke Aramaic and Syriac. The Jews of the Diaspora were compelled to compare their religion with the various cults around them (comparative religion) and had a wider outlook on life. James writes thus in cultural _Koin‚_ but in the Hebraic tone. {Greeting} (\chairein\). Absolute infinitive (present active of \chair“\) as in strkjv@Acts:15:23| (the Epistle to Antioch and the churches of Syria and Galatia). It is the usual idiom in the thousands of papyri letters known to us, but in no other New Testament letter. But note \chairein legete\ in strkjv@2John:1:10,11|.

rwp@James:1:13 @{Let no one say} (\mˆdeis leget“\). Present active imperative, prohibiting such a habit. {When he is tempted} (\peirazomenos\). Present passive participle of \peiraz“\, here in evil sense of tempt, not test, as in strkjv@Matthew:4:1|. Verses 12-18| give a vivid picture of temptation. {I am tempted of God} (\apo theou peirazomai\). The use of \apo\ shows origin (\apo\ with ablative case), not agency (\hupo\), as in strkjv@Mark:1:13|, of Satan. It is contemptible, but I have heard wicked and weak men blame God for their sins. Cf. strkjv@Proverbs:19:3|; Sirach strkjv@15:11f. Temptation does not spring "from God." {Cannot be tempted with evil} (\apeirastos kak“n\). Verbal compound adjective (alpha privative and \peiraz“\), probably with the ablative case, as is common with alpha privative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516), though Moulton (_Prolegomena_, p. 74) treats it as the genitive of definition. The ancient Greek has \apeiratos\ (from \peira“\), but this is the earliest example of \apeirastos\ (from \peiraz“\) made on the same model. Only here in the N.T. Hort notes \apeiratos kak“n\ as a proverb (Diodorus, Plutarch, Josephus) "free from evils." That is possible here, but the context calls for "untemptable" rather than "untempted." {And he himself tempteth no man} (\peirazei de autos oudena\). Because "untemptable."

rwp@James:1:24 @{He beholdeth himself} (\katenoˆsen heauton\). Usually explained as gnomic aorist like those in strkjv@1:11|, but the ordinary force of the tenses is best here. "He glanced at himself (\katenoˆsen\ aorist) and off he has gone (\apelˆluthen\ perfect active) and straightway forgot (\epelatheto\, second aorist middle indicative of \epilanthanomai\) what sort of a man he was" (\hopoios ˆn\, back in the picture, imperfect tense). The tenses thus present a vivid and lifelike picture of the careless listener to preaching (Christ's wayside hearer).

rwp@James:1:26 @{Thinketh himself to be religious} (\dokei thrˆskos einai\). Condition of first class (\ei-dokei\). \Thrˆskos\ (of uncertain etymology, perhaps from \threomai\, to mutter forms of prayer) is predicate nominative after \einai\, agreeing with the subject of \dokei\ (either "he seems" or "he thinks"). This source of self-deception is in saying and doing. The word \thrˆskos\ is found nowhere else except in lexicons. Hatch (_Essays in Biblical Greek_, pp. 55-57) shows that it refers to the external observances of public worship, such as church attendance, almsgiving, prayer, fasting (Matthew:6:1-18|). It is the Pharisaic element in Christian worship. {While he bridleth not his tongue} (\mˆ chalinag“g“n gl“ssan heautou\). "Not bridling his own tongue." A reference to verse 19| and the metaphor is repeated in strkjv@3:12|. This is the earliest known example of the compound \chalinag“ge“\ (\chalinos\, bridle \ago\, to lead). It occurs also in Lucian. The picture is that of a man putting the bridle in his own mouth, not in that of another. See the similar metaphor of muzzling (\phimo“\) one's mouth (Matthew:22:12| \ephim“thˆ\). {Deceiveth} (\apat“n\). Present active participle from \apatˆ\ (deceit). He plays a trick on himself. {Religion} (\thrˆskeia\). Later form of \thrˆskiˆ\ (Herodotus) from \thrˆskos\ above. It means religious worship in its external observances, religious exercise or discipline, but not to the exclusion of reverence. In the N.T. we have it also in strkjv@Acts:26:5| of Judaism and in strkjv@Colossians:2:18| of worshipping angels. It is vain (\mataios\, feminine form same as masculine) or empty. Comes to nothing.

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

rwp@James:3:2 @{In many things} (\polla\). Accusative neuter plural either cognate with \ptaiomen\ or accusative of general reference. On \ptaiomen\ (stumble) see on ¯2:10|. James includes himself in this list of stumblers. {If not} (\ei-ou\). Condition of first class with \ou\ (not \mˆ\) negativing the verb \ptaiei\. {In word} (\en log“i\). In speech. The teacher uses his tongue constantly and so is in particular peril on this score. {The same} (\houtos\). "This one" (not \ho autos\ the same). {A perfect man} (\teleios anˆr\). "A perfect husband" also, for \anˆr\ is husband as well as man in distinction from woman (\gunˆ\). The wife is at liberty to test her husband by this rule of the tongue. {To bridle the whole body also} (\chalinag“gˆsai kai holon to s“ma\). See strkjv@1:26| for this rare verb applied to the tongue (\gl“ssan\). Here the same metaphor is used and shown to apply to the whole body as horses are led by the mouth. The man follows his own mouth whether he controls the bridle therein (1:26|) or someone else holds the reins. James apparently means that the man who bridles his tongue does not stumble in speech and is able also to control his whole body with all its passions. See strkjv@Titus:1:11| about stopping people's mouths (\epistomiz“\).

rwp@James:5:20 @{Let him know} (\gin“sket“\). Present active imperative third person singular of \gin“sk“\, but Westcott and Hort read \gin“skete\ (know ye) after B. In either case it is the conclusion of the condition in verse 19|. {He which converteth} (\ho epistrepsas\). First aorist active articular participle of \epistreph“\ of verse 19|. {From the error} (\ek planˆs\). "Out of the wandering" of verse 19| (\planˆ\, from which \plana“\ is made). See strkjv@1John:4:6| for contrast between "truth" and "error." {A soul from death} (\psuchˆn ek thanatou\). The soul of the sinner (\hamart“lon\) won back to Christ, not the soul of the man winning him. A few MSS. have \autou\ added (his soul), which leaves it ambiguous, but \autou\ is not genuine. It is ultimate and final salvation here meant by the future (\s“sei\). {Shall cover a multitude of sins} (\kalupsei plˆthos hamarti“n\). Future active of \kalupt“\, old verb, to hide, to veil. But whose sins (those of the converter or the converted)? The Roman Catholics (also Mayor and Ropes) take it of the sins of the converter, who thus saves himself by saving others. The language here will allow that, but not New Testament teaching in general. It is apparently a proverbial saying which Resch considers one of the unwritten sayings of Christ (Clem. Al. _Paed_. iii. 12). It occurs also in strkjv@1Peter:4:8|, where it clearly means the sins of others covered by love as a veil thrown over them. The saying appears also in strkjv@Proverbs:10:12|: "Hatred stirs up strife, but love hides all transgressions"--that is "love refuses to see faults" (Mayor admits). That is undoubtedly the meaning in strkjv@1Peter:4:8; strkjv@James:5:20|.

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

rwp@Info_John @ HISTORICAL VALUE OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL It is just here that the chief attack is made on the Fourth Gospel even by some who admit the Johannine authorship. It is now assumed by some that the Fourth Gospel is not on a par with the Synoptics in historical reliability and some harmonies omit it entirely or place it separately at the close, though certainly Tatian used it with the Synoptics in his _Diatessaron_, the first harmony of the Gospels. Some even follow Schmiedel in seeing only a symbolic or parabolic character in the miracles in the Fourth Gospel, particularly in the narrative of the raising of Lazarus in chapter strkjv@John:11| which occurs here alone. But John makes this miracle play quite an important part in the culmination of events at the end. Clearly the author professes to be giving actual data largely out of his own experience and knowledge. It is objected by some that the Fourth Gospel gives an unnatural picture of Christ with Messianic claims at the very start. But the Synoptics give that same claim at the baptism and temptation, not to mention Luke's account of the Boy Jesus in the temple. The picture of the Jews as hostile to Jesus is said to be overdrawn in the Fourth Gospel. The answer to that appears in the Sermon on the Mount, the Sabbath miracles, the efforts of the Pharisees and lawyers to catch Jesus in his talk, the final denunciation in strkjv@Matthew:23|, all in the Synoptics. The opposition to Jesus grew steadily as he revealed himself more clearly. Some of the difficulties raised are gratuitous as in the early cleansing of the temple as if it could not have happened twice, confounding the draught of fishes in chapter strkjv@John:21| with that in strkjv@Luke:5|, making Mary of Bethany at the feast of a Simon in chapter strkjv@John:12| the same as the sinful woman at the feast of another Simon in strkjv@Luke:7|, making John's Gospel locate the last passover meal a day ahead instead of at the regular time as the Synoptics have it. Rightly interpreted these difficulties disappear. In simple truth, if one takes the Fourth Gospel at its face value, the personal recollections of the aged John phrased in his own way to supplement the narratives in the Synoptics, there is little left to give serious trouble. The Jerusalem ministry with the feasts is a case in point. The narrative of the call of the first disciples in chapter strkjv@John:1| is another. The author followed Simon in bringing also his own brother James to Jesus. John was present in the appearance of Christ before Annas, and Pilate. He was at the Cross when no other apostles were there. He took the mother of Jesus to his home and then returned to the Cross. He saw the piercing of the side of Jesus. He knew and saw the deed of Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus. E. H. Askwith has a most helpful discussion of this whole problem in _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_.

rwp@Info_John @ LIKE THE JOHANNINE EPISTLES Critics of all classes agree that, whoever was the author of the Fourth Gospel, the same man wrote the First Epistle of John. There is the same inimitable style, the same vocabulary, the same theological outlook. Undoubtedly the same author wrote also Second and Third John, for, brief as they are, they exhibit the same characteristics. In Second and Third John the author describes himself as "the Elder" (\ho presbuteros\), which fact has led some to argue for the mythical "Presbyter John" as the author in place of the Apostle John and so of First John and the Fourth Gospel. It is argued that the Apostle John would have termed himself "the Apostle John" after the fashion of Paul. But the example of the Apostle Peter disposes of that argument, for in addressing the elders (1Peter:5:1|) he calls himself "your fellow-elder" (\ho sunpresbuteros\). In the Epistles John opposes Gnosticism both of the Docetic type which denied the actual humanity of Jesus as in strkjv@1John:1:1-4| and the Cerinthian type which denied the identity of the man Jesus and the _aeon_ Christ which came on Jesus at his baptism and left him at his death on the Cross as in strkjv@1John:2:22|. One of the many stories told about John is his abhorrence of Cerinthus when found in the same public bath with him. As Westcott shows, the Epistles of John prove his actual humanity while assuming his deity, whereas the Fourth Gospel proves his deity while assuming his humanity.

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@Info_John @ JOHN'S PORTRAIT OF CHRIST No one questions that the Fourth Gospel asserts the deity of Christ. It is in the Prologue at the very start: "And the Word was God" (John:1:1|) and in the correct text of strkjv@John:1:18|, "God only begotten" (\theos monogenˆs\). It occurs repeatedly in the book as in the witness of the Baptist: "This is the Son of God" (John:1:34|). It is in the charge of the Pharisees (John:5:18|) and the claim of Christ himself (John:5:20-23; strkjv@6:48; strkjv@8:12,58; strkjv@11:25; strkjv@14:9; strkjv@17:5|) with the full and frank conviction of the author in strkjv@John:20:31|. He has made good his purpose. He has proven that Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God. With some critics this purpose has vitiated the entire book. The effort has been made to show that Paul, Peter, the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Synoptics give a lower view of Christ without the term \theos\ applied to him. In particular it was once argued that Q, the Logia of Jesus, used by Matthew and Luke (the non-Markan portions in both Matthew and Luke), gives a reduced picture of Jesus as on a lower plane than God, the Arian or Ritschlian view at any rate as answering for God to us though not God in actual nature. But in the Logia of Jesus we find the same essential picture of Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Son of Man as I have shown in my _The Christ of the Logia_. The only way to get rid of the deity of Christ in the New Testament is to throw overboard all the books in it as legendary or reflections of late theological development away from the original picture. The very earliest picture drawn of Christ that has been preserved to us, that in the Logia of Jesus (drawn W. M. Ramsay believes before Christ's crucifixion), is in essential agreement with the fully drawn portrait in the Fourth Gospel. Each picture in the Four Gospels adds touches of its own, but the features are the same, those of the God-Man Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world. The brilliant blind preacher of Edinburgh, George Matheson, sees this clearly (_Studies in the Portrait of the Messiah_, 1900; _St. John's Portrait of Christ_, 1910).

rwp@John:1:4 @{In him was life} (\en aut“i z“ˆ ˆn\). That which has come into being (verse 3|) in the Logos was life. The power that creates and sustains life in the universe is the Logos. This is what Paul means by the perfect passive verb \ektistai\ (stands created) in strkjv@Colossians:1:16|. This is also the claim of Jesus to Martha (John:11:25|). This is the idea in strkjv@Hebrews:1:3| "bearing (upholding) the all things by the word of his power." Once this language might have been termed unscientific, but not so now after the spiritual interpretation of the physical world by Eddington and Jeans. Usually in John \z“ˆ\ means spiritual life, but here the term is unlimited and includes all life; only it is not \bios\ (manner of life), but the very principle or essence of life. That is spiritual behind the physical and to this great scientists today agree. It is also personal intelligence and power. Some of the western documents have \estin\ here instead of \ˆn\ to bring out clearly the timelessness of this phrase of the work of the \Logos\. {And the life was the light of men} (\kai hˆ z“ˆ ˆn to ph“s t“n anthr“p“n\). Here the article with both \z“ˆ\ and \ph“s\ makes them interchangeable. "The light was the life of men" is also true. That statement is curiously like the view of some physicists who find in electricity (both light and power) the nearest equivalent to life in its ultimate physical form. Later Jesus will call himself the light of the world (John:8:12|). John is fond of these words life and light in Gospel, Epistles, Revelation. He here combines them to picture his conception of the Pre-incarnate Logos in his relation to the race. He was and is the Life of men (\t“n anthr“pon\, generic use of the article) and the Light of men. John asserts this relation of the Logos to the race of men in particular before the Incarnation.

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:1:18 @{No man hath seen God at any time} (\theon oudeis he“raken p“pote\). "God no one has ever seen." Perfect active indicative of \hora“\. Seen with the human physical eye, John means. God is invisible (Exodus:33:20; strkjv@Deuteronomy:4:12|). Paul calls God \aoratos\ (Colossians:1:15; strkjv@1Timothy:1:17|). John repeats the idea in strkjv@John:5:37; strkjv@6:46|. And yet in strkjv@14:7| Jesus claims that the one who sees him has seen the Father as here. {The only begotten Son} (\ho monogenˆs huios\). This is the reading of the Textus Receptus and is intelligible after \h“s monogenous para patros\ in verse 14|. But the best old Greek manuscripts (Aleph B C L) read \monogenˆs theos\ (God only begotten) which is undoubtedly the true text. Probably some scribe changed it to \ho monogenˆs huios\ to obviate the blunt statement of the deity of Christ and to make it like strkjv@3:16|. But there is an inner harmony in the reading of the old uncials. The Logos is plainly called \theos\ in verse 1|. The Incarnation is stated in verse 14|, where he is also termed \monogenˆs\. He was that before the Incarnation. Songs:he is "God only begotten," "the Eternal Generation of the Son" of Origen's phrase. {Which is in the bosom of the Father} (\ho “n eis ton kolpon tou patros\). The eternal relation of the Son with the Father like \pros ton theon\ in verse 1|. In strkjv@3:13| there is some evidence for \ho “n en t“i ouran“i\ used by Christ of himself while still on earth. The mystic sense here is that the Son is qualified to reveal the Father as Logos (both the Father in Idea and Expression) by reason of the continual fellowship with the Father. {He} (\ekinos\). Emphatic pronoun referring to the Son. {Hath declared him} (\exˆgˆsato\). First aorist (effective) middle indicative of \exˆgeomai\, old verb to lead out, to draw out in narrative, to recount. Here only in John, though once in Luke's Gospel (24:35|) and four times in Acts:(10:8; strkjv@15:12,14; strkjv@21:19|). This word fitly closes the Prologue in which the Logos is pictured in marvellous fashion as the Word of God in human flesh, the Son of God with the Glory of God in him, showing men who God is and what he is.

rwp@John:1:21 @{And they asked him} (\kai ˆr“tˆsan auton\). Here the paratactic \kai\ is like the transitional \oun\ (then). {What then?} (\Ti oun;\). Argumentative \oun\ like Paul's \ti oun\ in strkjv@Romans:6:15|. _Quid ergo?_ {Art thou Elijah?} (\Su Elias ei;\). The next inevitable question since Elijah had been understood to be the forerunner of the Messiah from strkjv@Malachi:4:5|. In strkjv@Mark:9:11f.| Jesus will identify John with the Elijah of Malachi's prophecy. Why then does John here flatly deny it? Because the expectation was that Elijah would return in person. This John denies. Jesus only asserts that John was Elijah in spirit. Elijah in person they had just seen on the Mount of Transfiguration. {He saith} (\legei\). Vivid dramatic present. {I am not} (\ouk eimi\). Short and blunt denial. {Art thou the prophet?} (\ho prophˆtˆs ei su;\). "The prophet art thou?" This question followed naturally the previous denials. Moses (Deuteronomy:18:15|) had spoken of a prophet like unto himself. Christians interpreted this prophet to be the Messiah (Acts:3:22; strkjv@7:37|), but the Jews thought him another forerunner of the Messiah (John:7:40|). It is not clear in strkjv@John:6:15| whether the people identified the expected prophet with the Messiah, though apparently so. Even the Baptist later became puzzled in prison whether Jesus himself was the true Messiah or just one of the forerunners (Luke:7:19|). People wondered about Jesus himself whether he was the Messiah or just one of the looked for prophets (Mark:8:28; strkjv@Matthew:16:14|). {And he answered} (\kai apekrithˆ\). First aorist passive (deponent passive, sense of voice gone) indicative of \apokrinomai\, to give a decision from myself, to reply. {No} (\Ou\). Shortest possible denial.

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:1:34 @{I have seen} (\he“raka\). Present perfect active of \hora“\. John repeats the statement of verse 32| (\tetheamai\). {Have borne witness} (\memarturˆka\). Perfect active indicative of \marture“\ for which verb see 32|. {This is the Son of God} (\ho huios tou theou\). The Baptist saw the Spirit come on Jesus at his baptism and undoubtedly heard the Father's voice hail him as "My Beloved Son" (Mark:1:11; strkjv@Matthew:3:17; strkjv@Luke:3:22|). Nathanael uses it as a Messianic title (John:1:49|) as does Martha (11:27|). The Synoptics use it also of Christ (Mark:3:11; strkjv@Matthew:14:33; strkjv@Luke:22:70|). Caiaphas employs it to Christ as a Messianic title (Matthew:26:63|) and Jesus confessed under oath that he was (verse strkjv@Matthew:26:64|), thus applying the term to himself as he does in John's Gospel (5:25; strkjv@10:36; strkjv@11:4|) and by implication (the Father, the Son) in strkjv@Matthew:11:27| (Luke:10:22|). Hence in the Synoptics also Jesus calls himself the Son of God. The phrase means more than just Messiah and expresses the peculiar relation of the Son to the Father (John:3:18; strkjv@5:25; strkjv@17:5; strkjv@19:7; strkjv@20:31|) like that of the Logos with God in strkjv@1:1|.

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:1:48 @{Whence knowest thou me?} (\Pothen me gin“skeis;\). Nathanael is astonished at this tribute, at any knowledge about himself by Jesus. He had overheard Christ's comment and longed to know its source. {Before Philip called thee} (\Pro tou se Philippon ph“nˆsai\). Idiomatic Greek, \pro\ and the ablative case of the articular aorist active infinitive (\tou ph“nˆsai\, from \ph“ne“\, to call) with \se\ as the object and \Philippon\, the accusative of general reference, "before the calling thee as to Philip." {When thou wast under the fig tree} (\onta hupo tˆn sukˆn\). "Being under the fig tree," accusative present participle agreeing with \se\. The fig tree was a familiar object in Palestine, probably in leaf at this time, the accusative with \hupo\ may suggest that Nathanael had withdrawn there for prayer. Note genitive with \hupokat“\ in verse 50|. Jesus saw Nathanael's heart as well as his mere presence there. He saw him in his worship and so knew him.

rwp@John:1:51 @{Verily, Verily} (\Amˆn, amˆn\). Hebrew word transliterated into Greek and then into English, our "amen." John always repeats it, not singly as in the Synoptics, and only in the words of Jesus, an illustration of Christ's authoritative manner of speaking as shown also by \leg“ humin\ (I say unto you). Note plural \humin\ though \aut“i\ just before is singular (to him). Jesus addresses thus others besides Nathanael. {The heaven opened} (\ton ouranon ane“igota\). Second perfect active participle of \anoig“\ with double reduplication, standing open. The words remind one of what took place at the baptism of Jesus (Matthew:3:16; strkjv@Luke:3:21|), but the immediate reference is to the opened heaven as the symbol of free intercourse between God and man (Isaiah:64:1|) and as it was later illustrated in the death of Stephen (Acts:7:56|). There is a quotation from strkjv@Genesis:28:12f.|, Jacob's vision at Bethel. That was a dream to Jacob, but Christ is himself the bond of fellowship between heaven and earth, between God and man, for Jesus is both "the Son of God" as Nathanael said and "the Son of Man" (\epi ton huion tou anthr“pou\) as Jesus here calls himself. God and man meet in Christ. He is the true Jacob's Ladder. "I am the Way," Jesus will say. He is more than King of Israel, he is the Son of Man (the race). Songs:quickly has this Gospel brought out in the witness of the Baptist, the faith of the first disciples, the claims of Jesus Christ, the fully developed picture of the Logos who is both God and man, moving among men and winning them to his service. At the close of the ministry Christ will tell Caiaphas that he will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming with the clouds of heaven (Mark:14:62|). Here at the start Jesus is conscious of the final culmination and in apocalyptic eschatological language that we do not fully understand he sets forth the dignity and majesty of his Person.

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:2:24 @{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:3:11 @{We speak that we do know} (\ho oidamen laloumen\). Jesus simply claims knowledge of what he has tried to make plain to the famous Rabbi without success. John uses \lale“\ some 60 times, half of them by Jesus, very little distinction existing between the use of \lale“\ and \leg“\ in John. Originally \lale“\ referred to the chatter of birds. Note John's frequent use of \amˆn amˆn\ and \leg“\ (double emphasis). {And bear witness of that we have seen} (\kai ho he“rakamen marturoumen\). The same use of neuter singular relative \ho\ as before. Perfect active indicative of \hora“\. He is not a dreamer, guesser, or speculator. He is bearing witness from personal knowledge, strange as this may seem to Nicodemus. {And ye receive not our witness} (\kai tˆn marturian hˆm“n ou lambanete\). This is the tragedy of the matter as John has shown (1:11,26|) and as will continue to be true even today. Jesus probably associates here with himself ("we") those who have personal experience of grace and so are qualified as witnesses. Note the plural in strkjv@1John:1:1f|. Bernard thinks that John has here read into the words of Jesus the convictions of a later age, a serious charge to make.

rwp@John:3:14 @{Moses lifted up the serpent} (\M“usˆs hups“sen ton ophin\). Reference to strkjv@Numbers:21:7ff.| where Moses set the brazen serpent upon the standard that those who believed might look and live. Jesus draws a vivid parallel between the act of Moses and the Cross on which he himself (the Son of man) "must" (\dei\, one of the heavenly things) "be lifted up" (\hups“thˆnai\, first aorist passive infinitive of \hupso“\, a word not used about the brazen serpent). In John \hupso“\ always refers to the Cross (8:28; strkjv@12:32,34|), though to the Ascension in Acts (Acts:2:33; strkjv@5:31|). Jesus is complimenting the standing and intelligence of Nicodemus as "the teacher of Israel" by telling him this great truth and fact that lies at the basis of the work of the kingdom of God (the atoning death of Christ on the Cross).

rwp@John:3:19 @{And this is the judgment} (\hautˆ de estin hˆ krisis\). A thoroughly Johannine phrase for sequence of thought (15:12; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@1John:1:5; strkjv@5:11,14; strkjv@3John:1:6|). It is more precisely the process of judging (\kri-sis\) rather than the result (\kri-ma\) of the judgment. "It is no arbitrary sentence, but the working out of a moral law" (Bernard). {The light is come} (\to ph“s elˆluthen\). Second perfect active indicative of \erchomai\, a permanent result as already explained in the Prologue concerning the Incarnation (1:4,5,9,11|). Jesus is the Light of the world. {Loved darkness} (\ˆgapˆsan to skotos\). Job:(Job:24:13|) spoke of men rebelling against the light. Here \to skotos\, common word for moral and spiritual darkness (1Thessalonians:5:5|), though \hˆ skotia\ in strkjv@John:1:5|. "Darkness" is common in John as a metaphor for the state of sinners (8:12; strkjv@12:35, 46; strkjv@1John:1:6; strkjv@2:8,9,11|). Jesus himself is the only moral and spiritual light of the world (8:12|) as he dared claim to his enemies. The pathos of it all is that men fall in love with the darkness of sin and rebel against the light like denizens of the underworld, "for their works were evil (\ponˆra\)." When the light appears, they scatter to their holes and dens. \Ponˆros\ (from \ponos\, toil, \pone“\, to toil) is used of the deeds of the world by Jesus (7:7|). In the end the god of this world blinds men's eyes so that they do not see the light (2Corinthians:4:4|). The fish in the Mammoth Cave have no longer eyes, but only sockets where eyes used to be. The evil one has a powerful grip on the world (1John:5:19|).

rwp@John:3:29 @{The bridegroom} (\numphios\). Predicate nominative without article. Both \numphˆ\ (bride) and \numphios\ are old and common words. Jesus will use this metaphor of himself as the Bridegroom (Mark:2:19|) and Paul develops it (2Corinthians:11:2; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23-32|) and so in Revelation (19:7; strkjv@21:2|). John is only like the _paranymph_ (\paranumphios\) or "the friend of the bridegroom." His office is to bring groom and bride together. Songs:he stands expectant (\hestˆk“s\, second perfect active participle of \histˆmi\) and listens (\akou“n\, present active participle of \akou“\) with joy ({rejoiceth greatly}, \charƒi chairei\, "with joy rejoices") to the music of the bridegroom's voice. {This my joy therefore is fulfilled} (\hautˆ oun hˆ chara peplˆr“tai\). Perfect passive indicative of \plˆro“\, stands filled like a cup to the brim with joy.

rwp@John:4:2 @{Although Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples} (\kaitoige Iˆsous autos ouk ebaptizen all' hoi mathˆtai autou\). Parenthetical explanation that applies also to strkjv@3:22|. Imperfect tense means that it was not the habit of Jesus. This is the only N.T. instance of \kaitoige\ (and yet indeed), compound conjunction (\kaitoi\ in strkjv@Acts:14:17; strkjv@Hebrews:4:3|) with intensive particle \ge\ added. This is the last mention of baptism under the direction of Jesus till the Great Commission (Matthew:28:19|). It is possible that Jesus stopped the baptizing because of the excitement and the issue raised about his Messianic claims till after his resurrection when he enjoined it upon his disciples as a rite of public enlistment in his service.

rwp@John:4:10 @{Answered and said} (\apekrithˆ kai eipen\). As often (redundant) in John. The first aorist passive (\apekrithˆ\) is deponent, no longer passive in sense. {If thou knewest} (\ei ˆideis\). Condition of second class, determined as unfulfilled, \ei\ and past perfect \ˆideis\ (used as imperfect) in condition and \an\ and aorist active indicative in conclusion (\an ˆitˆsas kai an ed“ken\, note repetition of \an\, not always done). {The gift of God} (\tˆn d“rean tou theou\). Naturally the gift mentioned in strkjv@3:16| (Westcott), the inexpressible gift (2Corinthians:9:15|). Some take it to refer to the living water below, but that is another allusion (metaphor) to strkjv@3:16|. See strkjv@Ephesians:4:7| for Paul's use of both \charis\ and \d“rea\ (from \did“mi\, to give). {Who it is} (\tis estin\). She only knew that he was a Jew. This Messianic self-consciousness of Jesus is plain in John, but it is early in the Synoptics also. {Living water} (\hud“r z“n\). Running water like a spring or well supplied by springs. This Jacob's Well was filled by water from rains percolating through, a sort of cistern, good water, but not equal to a real spring which was always preferred (Genesis:26:19; strkjv@Leviticus:14:5; strkjv@Numbers:19:17|). Jesus, of course, is symbolically referring to himself as the Living Water though he does not say it in plain words as he does about the Living Bread (6:51|). The phrase "the fountain of life" occurs in strkjv@Proverbs:13:14|. Jesus supplies the water of life (John:7:39|). Cf. strkjv@Revelation:7:17; strkjv@22:1|.

rwp@John:4:23 @{And now is} (\kai nun estin\). See this same phrase in strkjv@5:25|. This item could not be added in verse 21| for local worship was not abolished, but spiritual independence of place was called for at once. Songs:contrast strkjv@5:25,28; strkjv@16:25,32|. {The true worshippers} (\hoi alˆthinoi proskunˆtai\). See strkjv@1:9| for \alˆthinos\ (genuine). \Proskunˆtˆs\ is a late word from \proskune“\, to bow the knee, to worship, occurs here only in N.T., but is found in one pre-Christian inscription (Deissmann, _Light_, etc., p. 101) and in one of the 3rd century A.D. (Moulton & Milligan, _Vocabulary_). {In spirit and truth} (\en pneumati kai alˆtheiƒi\). This is what matters, not where, but how (in reality, in the spirit of man, the highest part of man, and so in truth). All this is according to the Holy Spirit (Romans:8:5|) who is the Spirit of truth (John:16:13|). Here Jesus has said the final word on worship, one needed today. {Seeketh} (\zˆtei\). The Father has revealed himself in the Son who is the truth (John:14:6,9|). It does matter whether we have a true conception of God whom we worship. {To be his worshippers} (\tous proskunountas auton\). Rather, "seeks such as those who worship him" (predicate accusative articular participle in apposition with \toioutous\ (such). John pictures the Father as seeking worshippers, a doctrine running all through the Gospel (3:16; strkjv@6:44; strkjv@15:16; strkjv@1John:4:10|).

rwp@John:4:25 @{Messiah cometh} (\Messias erchetai\). Hebrew word in N.T. only here and strkjv@1:41| and explained by \Christos\ in both places. The Samaritans looked for a Messiah, a prophet like Moses (Deuteronomy:18:18|). Simon Magus gave himself out in Samaria as some great one and had a large following (Acts:8:9|). Pilate quelled an uprising in Samaria over a fanatical Messianic claimant (Josephus, _Ant_. XVIII. iv. 1). {When he is come} (\hotan elthˆi ekeinos\). "Whenever that one comes." Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ (\hote\, \an\) and the second aorist active subjunctive. Wistfully she turns to this dim hope as a bare possibility about this strange "prophet." {He will declare unto us all things} (\anaggelei hˆmin hapanta\). Future active indicative of \anaggell“\, old and common verb to announce fully (\ana\, up and down). See also strkjv@16:13|. Perhaps here is light on the knowledge of her life by Jesus as well as about the way to worship God.

rwp@John:4:44 @{For Jesus himself testified} (\autos gar Iˆsous emarturˆsen\). John's explanation of the conduct of Jesus by quoting a proverb often used by Jesus (Mark:6:4; strkjv@Matthew:13:57; strkjv@Luke:4:24| in reference to Nazareth), but not necessarily used by Jesus on this occasion. A similar proverb has been found in Plutarch, Pliny, Seneca. {A prophet hath no honour in his own country} (\prophˆtˆs en tˆi idiƒi patridi timˆn ouk echei\). What is meant by \patridi\? In the Synoptics (Luke:4:24; strkjv@Mark:6:4; strkjv@Matthew:13:57|) the reference is to Nazareth where he was twice rejected. But what has John in mind in quoting it here? He probably knew the quotations in the Synoptics. Does John refer to Judea by "his own country"? If so, the application hardly fits for he had already explained that Jesus was leaving Judea because he was too popular there (4:1-3|). If he means Galilee, he immediately mentions the cordial welcome accorded Jesus there (verse 45|). But even so this is probably John's meaning for he is speaking of the motive of Jesus in going into Galilee where he had not yet laboured and where he apparently had no such fame as in Judea and now in Samaria.

rwp@John:4:53 @{Songs:the father knew} (\egn“ oun ho patˆr\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. Inferential use of \oun\. {Himself believed} (\episteusen autos\). Not just the word of Jesus (verse 50|), but complete faith in Jesus himself as the Messiah, absolute use of \pisteu“\ as in strkjv@1:7|. {And his whole house} (\kai hˆ oikia autou\). All his family, the first example of a whole family believing in Jesus like the later case of Crispus (Acts:18:8|).

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

rwp@John:5:15 @{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:5:17 @{Answered} (\apekrinato\). Regular aorist middle indicative of \apokrinomai\, in John here only and verse 19|, elsewhere \apekrithˆ\ as in verse 11|. {My Father} (\ho pater mou\). Not "our Father," claim to peculiar relation to the Father. {Worketh even until now} (\he“s arti ergazetai\). Linear present middle indicative, "keeps on working until now" without a break on the Sabbath. Philo points out this fact of the continuous activity of God. Justin Martyr, Origen and others note this fact about God. He made the Sabbath for man's blessing, but cannot observe it himself. {And I work} (\kag“ ergazomai\). Jesus puts himself on a par with God's activity and thus justifies his healing on the Sabbath.

rwp@John:5:18 @{Sought the more} (\mallon ezˆtoun\). Imperfect active of \zˆte“\, graphic picture of increased and untiring effort "to kill him" (\auton apokteinai\, first aorist active, to kill him off and be done with him). John repeats this clause "they sought to kill him" in strkjv@7:1,19,25; strkjv@8:37,40|. Their own blood was up on this Sabbath issue and they bend every energy to put Jesus to death. If this is a passover, this bitter anger, murderous wrath, will go on and grow for two years. {Not only brake the Sabbath} (\ou monon elue to sabbaton\). Imperfect active of \lu“\. He was now a common and regular Sabbath-breaker. \Lu“\ means to loosen, to set at naught. The papyri give examples of \lu“\ in this sense like \luein ta penthˆ\ (to break the period of mourning). This was the first grudge against Jesus, but his defence had made the offence worse and had given them a far graver charge. {But also called God his own Father} (\alla kai patera idion elege ton theon\). "His own" (\idion\) in a sense not true of others. That is precisely what Jesus meant by "My Father." See strkjv@Romans:8:32| for \ho idios huios\, "his own Son." {Making himself equal with God} (\ison heauton poi“n t“i the“i\). \Isos\ is an old common adjective (in papyri also) and means {equal}. In strkjv@Phillipians:2:6| Paul calls the Pre-incarnate Christ \isa the“i\, "equal to God" (plural \isa\, attributes of God). Bernard thinks that Jesus would not claim to be \isos the“i\ because in strkjv@John:14:28| he says: "The Father is greater than I." And yet he says in strkjv@14:7| that the one who sees him sees in him the Father. Certainly the Jews understood Jesus to claim equality with the Father in nature and privilege and power as also in strkjv@10:33; strkjv@19:7|. Besides, if the Jews misunderstood Jesus on this point, it was open and easy for him to deny it and to clear up the misapprehension. This is precisely what he does not do. On the contrary Jesus gives a powerful apologetic in defence of his claim to equality with the Father (verses 19-47|).

rwp@John:5:25 @{And now is} (\kai nun estin\). See strkjv@4:23| for this phrase. Not the future resurrection in verse 28|, but the spiritual resurrection here and now. {The dead} (\hoi nekroi\). The spiritually dead, dead in trespasses and sins (Ephesians:2:1,5; strkjv@5:14|). {Shall hear the voice of the Son of God} (\akousousin tˆs ph“nˆs tou huiou tou theou\). Note three genitives (\ph“nˆs\ after \akousousin\, \huiou\ with \ph“nˆs\, \theou\ with \huiou\). Note three articles (correlation of the article) and that Jesus here calls himself "the Son of God" as in strkjv@10:36; strkjv@11:4|. {Shall live} (\zˆsousin\). Future active indicative, shall come to life spiritually.

rwp@John:5:26 @{In himself} (\en heaut“i\). The Living God possesses life wholly in himself and so he has bestowed this power of life to the Son as already stated in the Prologue of the Logos (1:3|). For "gave" (\ed“ken\, timeless aorist active indicative) see also strkjv@3:35; strkjv@17:2,24|. The particles "as" (\h“sper\) and "so" (\hout“s\) mark here the fact, not the degree (Westcott).

rwp@John:5:27 @{Because he is the Son of man} (\hoti huios anthr“pou estin\). Rather, "because he is a son of man" (note absence of articles and so not as the Messiah), because the judge of men must partake of human nature himself (Westcott). Bernard insists that John is here giving his own reflections rather than the words of Jesus and uses \huios anthr“pou\ in the same sense as \ho huios tou anthr“pou\ (always in the Gospels used by Jesus of himself). But that in my opinion is a wrong view since we have here ostensibly certainly the words of Jesus himself. Songs:in strkjv@Revelation:1:13; strkjv@4:14| \huion anthr“pou\ means "a son of man."

rwp@John:5:31 @{If I bear witness of myself} (\Ean eg“ martur“ peri emautou\). Condition of third class, undetermined with prospect of determination (\ean\ and present active subjunctive of \marture“\). The emphasis is on \eg“\ (I alone with no other witness). {Is not true} (\ouk estin alˆthˆs\). In law the testimony of a witness is not received in his own case (Jewish, Greek, Roman law). See strkjv@Deuteronomy:19:15| and the allusion to it by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:18:16|. See also strkjv@2Corinthians:13:1; strkjv@1Timothy:5:19|. And yet in strkjv@8:12-19| Jesus claims that his witness concerning himself is true because the Father gives confirmation of his message. The Father and the Son are the two witnesses (8:17|). It is a paradox and yet true. But here Jesus yields to the rabbinical demand for proof outside of himself. He has the witness of another (the Father, strkjv@5:32,37|), the witness of the Baptist (5:33|), the witness of the works of Jesus (5:36|), the witness of the Scriptures (5:39|), the witness of Moses in particular (5:45|).

rwp@John:6:35 @{I am the bread of life} (\Eg“ eimi ho artos tˆs z“ˆs\). This sublime sentence was startling in the extreme to the crowd. Philo does compare the manna to the \theios logos\ in an allegorical sense, but this language is far removed from Philo's vagueness. In the Synoptics (Mark:14:22; strkjv@Matthew:26:26; strkjv@Luke:22:19|) Jesus uses bread (\artos\) as the symbol of his body in the Lord's Supper, but here Jesus offers himself in place of the loaves and fishes which they had come to seek (24,26|). He is the bread of life in two senses: it has life in itself, the living bread (51|), and it gives life to others like the water of life, the tree of life. John often has Jesus saying "I am" (\eg“ eimi\). As also in strkjv@6:41,48,51; strkjv@8:12; strkjv@10:7,9,11,14; strkjv@11:25; strkjv@14:6; strkjv@15:1,5|. {He that cometh to me} (\ho erchomenos pros eme\). The first act of the soul in approaching Jesus. See also verse 37|. {Shall not hunger} (\ou mˆ peinasˆi\). Strong double negative \ou me\ with first aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive, "shall not become hungry." {He that believeth on me} (\ho pisteu“n eis eme\). The continuous relation of trust after coming like \pisteuˆte\ (present tense) in verse 29|. See both verbs used together also in strkjv@7:37f|. {Shall never thirst} (\ou mˆ dipsˆsei p“pote\). Songs:the old MSS. the future active indicative instead of the aorist subjunctive as above, an even stronger form of negation with \p“pote\ (1:18|) added.

rwp@John:6:48 @{I am the bread of life} (\eg“ eimi ho artos tˆs z“ˆs\). Jesus repeats the astounding words of verse 35| after fuller explanation. The believer in Christ has eternal life because he gives himself to him.

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

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

rwp@John:7:6 @{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:7:15 @{Marvelled} (\ethaumazon\). Picturesque imperfect active of \thaumaz“\, "were wondering." After all the bluster of the rulers (verse 13|) here was Jesus teaching without interruption. {Knoweth letters} (\grammata oiden\). Second perfect active indicative used as present. \Grammata\, old word from \graph“\, to write, is originally the letters formed (Galatians:6:11|), then a letter or epistle (Acts:28:21|), then the sacred Scriptures (John:5:47; strkjv@2Timothy:3:15|), then learning like Latin _litterae_ and English letters (Acts:26:24; strkjv@John:7:15|)...was that Jesus showed Himself familiar...(Westcott). {Having never learned} (\mˆ memathˆk“s\). Perfect active participle of \manthan“\ with \mˆ\, the usual negative (subjective) with the participle. It is not the wisdom of Jesus that disconcerted the Jewish leaders, but his learning (Marcus Dods). And yet Jesus had not attended either of the rabbinical theological schools in Jerusalem (Hillel, Shammai). He was not a rabbi in the technical sense, only a carpenter, and yet he surpassed the professional rabbis in the use of their own methods of debate. It is sometimes true today that unschooled men in various walks of life forge ahead of men of lesser gifts with school training. See the like puzzle of the Sanhedrin concerning Peter and John (Acts:4:13|). This is not an argument against education, but it takes more than education to make a real man. Probably this sneer at Jesus came from some of the teachers in the Jerusalem seminaries. "Christ was in the eyes of the Jews a merely self-taught enthusiast" (Westcott).

rwp@John:7:29 @{I know him} (\eg“ oida auton\). In contrast to the ignorance of these people. See the same words in strkjv@8:55| and the same claim in strkjv@17:25; strkjv@Matthew:11:27; strkjv@Luke:10:22| (the Johannine aerolite). "These three words contain the unique claim of Jesus, which is pressed all through the chapters of controversy with the Jews" (Bernard). Jesus is the Interpreter of God to men (John:1:18|). {And he sent me} (\kakeinos me apesteilen\). First aorist active indicative of \apostell“\, the very verb used of Jesus when he sent forth the twelve (Matthew:10:5|) and used by Jesus again of himself in strkjv@John:17:3|. He is the Father's Apostle to men.

rwp@John:7:39 @{Which} (\hou\). Genitive by attraction of the relative \ho\ (accusative singular object of \lambanein\) to the case of \tou pneumatos\ (the Spirit) the antecedent. But it is purely grammatical gender (neuter \ho\ because of \pneuma\) which we do not have in English. Even here one should say "whom," not which, of the Spirit of God. {Were to receive} (\emellon lambanein\). Imperfect active of \mell“\ with the present active infinitive \lambanein\, to receive, one of the three constructions with \mell“\ (present, aorist, or future infinitive). Literally, "whom they were about to receive," a clear reference to the great pentecost. {For the Spirit was not yet given} (\oup“ gar ˆn pneuma\). No verb for "given" in the Greek. The reference is not to the existence of the Spirit, but to the dispensation of the Spirit. This same use of \eimi\ like \pareimi\ (to be present) appears in strkjv@Acts:19:2| of the Spirit's activity. John, writing at the close of the century, inserts this comment and interpretation of the language of Jesus as an allusion to the coming of the Holy Spirit at pentecost (the Promise of the Father). {Because Jesus was not yet glorified} (\hoti Iˆsous oup“ edoxasthˆ\). Reason for the previous statement, the pentecostal outpouring following the death of Jesus here called "glorified" (\edoxasthˆ\, first aorist passive indicative of \doxaz“\), used later of the death of Jesus (12:16|), even by Jesus himself (12:23; strkjv@13:31|).

rwp@John:7:52 @{Art thou also of Galilee?} (\Mˆ kai su ek tˆs Galilaias ei;\). Formally negative answer expected by \mˆ\, but really they mean to imply that Nicodemus from local feeling or prejudice has lined himself up with this Galilean mob (\ochlos\) of sympathizers with Jesus and is like Jesus himself a Galilean. "These aristocrats of Jerusalem had a scornful contempt for the rural Galileans" (Bernard). {That out of Galilee ariseth no prophet} (\hoti ek tˆs Galilaias prophˆtˆs ouk egeiretai\). As a matter of fact Jonah, Hosea, Nahum, possibly also Elijah, Elisha, and Amos were from Galilee. It was simply the rage of the Sanhedrin against Jesus regardless of the facts. Westcott suggests that they may have reference to the future, but that is a mere excuse for them.

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

rwp@John:8:17 @{Yea and in your law} (\kai en t“i nom“i de t“i humeter“i\). Same use of \kai--de\ as in verse 16|. They claimed possession of the law (7:49|) and so Jesus takes this turn in answer to the charge of single witness in verse 13|. He will use similar language (your law) in strkjv@10:34| in an _argumentum ad hominem_ as here in controversy with the Jews. In strkjv@15:24| to the apostles Jesus even says "in their law" in speaking of the hostile Jews plotting his death. He does not mean in either case to separate himself wholly from the Jews and the law, though in Matthew 5 he does show the superiority of his teaching to that of the law. For the Mosaic regulation about two witnesses see strkjv@Deuteronomy:17:6; strkjv@19:15|. This combined witness of two is not true just because they agree, unless true in fact separately. But if they disagree, the testimony falls to the ground. In this case the Father confirms the witness of the Son as Jesus had already shown (5:37|).

rwp@John:8:53 @{Art thou greater than our father Abraham?} (\Mˆ su meiz“n ei tou patros hˆm“n Abraam;\). Negative answer expected by \mˆ\ with ablative case of comparison in \patros\ after \meiz“n\. The question was designed to put Jesus in a difficult position, for Abraham and the prophets all "died." They do not see that Jesus uses death in a different sense. {Whom makest thou thyself?} (\tina seauton poieis;\). \Seauton\ is predicate accusative with \poieis\. They suspect that Jesus is guilty of blasphemy as they charged in strkjv@5:18| in making himself equal with God. Later they will make it specifically (10:33; strkjv@19:7|). They set a trap for Jesus for this purpose.

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

rwp@John:9:22 @{Because they feared the Jews} (\hoti ephobounto tous Ioudaious\). Imperfect middle, a continuing fear and not without reason. See already the whispers about Jesus because of fear of the Jews (7:13|). {Had agreed already} (\ˆdˆ sunetetheinto\). Past perfect middle of \suntithˆmi\, to put together, to form a compact (7:32,47-49|). {If any man should confess him to be Christ} (\ean tis auton homologˆsˆi Christon\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \homologe“\ and predicate accusative \Christon\. Jesus had made confession of himself before men the test of discipleship and denial the disproof (Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:8|). We know that many of the rulers nominally believed on Jesus (12:42|) and yet "did not confess him because of the Pharisees" (\alla dia tous Pharisaious ouch h“mologoun\), for the very reason given here, "that they might not be put out of the synagogue" (\hina mˆ aposunag“goi gen“ntai\). Small wonder then that here the parents cowered a bit. {That he should be put out of the synagogue} (\hina aposunag“gos genˆtai\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\. \Aposunag“gos\ (\apo\ and \sunag“gˆ\) is found in N.T. only here and strkjv@12:42; strkjv@16:2|. A purely Jewish word naturally. There were three kinds of excommunication (for thirty days, for thirty more, indefinitely).

rwp@John:9:37 @{Thou hast both seen him} (\kai he“rakas auton\). Perfect active indicative (double reduplication) of \hora“\. Since his eyes were opened. {And he it is that speaketh with thee} (\kai ho lal“n meta sou ekeinos estin\). "And the one speaking with thee is that man." See strkjv@19:35| for \ekeinos\ used of the speaker. In strkjv@4:26| Jesus reveals himself in like manner to the Samaritan woman as Messiah while here as the Son of Man (or the Son of God).

rwp@John:10:2 @{The shepherd of the sheep} (\poimˆn estin t“n probat“n\). No article with \poimˆn\, "a shepherd to the sheep." He comes in by the door with the sheep whom he leads. Old word is \poimˆn\, root meaning to protect. Jesus applies it to himself in verse 16| and implies it here. It is used of Christ in strkjv@1Peter:2:25; strkjv@Hebrews:13:20|. Paul applies it to ministers in strkjv@Ephesians:4:11|. Jesus uses the verb \poimain“\, to shepherd, to Peter (John:21:16|) and Peter uses it to other preachers (1Peter:5:2|) and Paul uses it for bishops (elders) in strkjv@Acts:20:28|. Our word pastor is simply Latin for shepherd. Christ is drawing a sharp contrast after the conduct of the Pharisees towards the blind man between himself and them.

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:10:30 @{One} (\hen\). Neuter, not masculine (\heis\). Not one person (cf. \heis\ in strkjv@Galatians:3:28|), but one essence or nature. By the plural \sumus\ (separate persons) Sabellius is refuted, by \unum\ Arius. Songs:Bengel rightly argues, though Jesus is not referring, of course, to either Sabellius or Arius. The Pharisees had accused Jesus of making himself equal with God as his own special Father (John:5:18|). Jesus then admitted and proved this claim (5:19-30|). Now he states it tersely in this great saying repeated later (17:11, 21|). Note \hen\ used in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:3| of the oneness in work of the planter and the waterer and in strkjv@17:11,23| of the hoped for unity of Christ's disciples. This crisp statement is the climax of Christ's claims concerning the relation between the Father and himself (the Son). They stir the Pharisees to uncontrollable anger.

rwp@John:10:31 @{Took up stones again} (\ebastasan palin lithous\). First aorist active indicative of \bastaz“\, old verb to pick up, to carry (John:12:6|), to bear (Galatians:6:5|). The \palin\ refers to strkjv@John:8:59| where \ˆran\ was used. They wanted to kill him also when he made himself equal to God in strkjv@5:18|. Perhaps here \ebastasan\ means "they fetched stones from a distance." {To stone him} (\hina lithas“sin auton\). Final clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \lithaz“\, late verb (Aristotle, Polybius) from \lithos\ (stone, small, strkjv@Matthew:4:6|, or large, strkjv@Matthew:28:2|), in strkjv@John:10:31-33; strkjv@11:8; strkjv@Acts:5:26; strkjv@14:19; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:25; strkjv@Hebrews:11:37|, but not in the Synoptics. It means to pelt with stones, to overwhelm with stones.

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: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:11:27 @{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: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:12:16 @{Understood not} (\ouk egn“san\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. Another comment by John concerning the failure of the disciples to know what was happening (cf. strkjv@2:22; strkjv@7:39|). {At the first} (\to pr“ton\). Adverbial accusative, as in strkjv@10:40; strkjv@19:39|. {Was glorified} (\edoxasthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \doxaz“\, to glorify, used of his death already in strkjv@7:39| and by Jesus himself of his death, resurrection, and ascension in strkjv@12:23; strkjv@13:31|. {Then remembered they} (\tote emnˆsthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \mimnˆsk“\. It was easier to understand then and they had the Holy Spirit to help them (16:13-15|). {Were written of him} (\ˆn ep' aut“i gegrammena\). Periphrastic past perfect passive of \graph“\ with neuter plural participle agreeing with \tauta\ (these things) and singular verb, though the plural \ˆsan\ could have been used. Note the threefold repetition of \tauta\ in this verse, "clumsy" Bernard calls it, but making for clarity. The use of \ep' aut“i\ for "of him" rather than \peri autou\ is unusual, but occurs in strkjv@Revelation:10:11; strkjv@22:16|. {They had done} (\epoiˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \poie“\, simply, "they did."

rwp@John:12:24 @{Except} (\ean mˆ\). Negative condition of third class (undetermined, supposable case) with second aorist active participle \pes“n\ (from \pipt“\, to fall) and the second aorist active subjunctive of \apothnˆsk“\, to die. {A grain of wheat} (\ho kokkos tou sitou\). Rather, "the grain of wheat." {By itself alone} (\autos monos\). Both predicate nominatives after \menei\. It is not necessary to think (nor likely) that Jesus has in mind the Eleusinian mysteries which became a symbol of the mystery of spring. Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:36| uses the same illustration of the resurrection that Jesus does here. Jesus shows here the paradox that life comes through death. Whether the Greeks heard him or not we do not know. If so, they heard something not in Greek philosophy, the Christian ideal of sacrifice, "and this was foreign to the philosophy of Greece" (Bernard). Jesus had already spoken of himself as the bread of life (6:35-65|). {But if it die} (\ean de apothanˆi\). Parallel condition of the third class. Grains of wheat have been found in Egyptian tombs three or four thousand years old, but they are now dead. They bore no fruit.

rwp@John:12:36 @{Believe in the light} (\pisteuete eis to ph“s\). That is, "believe in me as the Messiah" (8:12; strkjv@9:5|). {That ye may become sons of light} (\hina huioi ph“tos genˆsthe\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist subject of \ginomai\, to become. They were not "sons of light," a Hebrew idiom (cf. strkjv@17:12; strkjv@Luke:16:8| with the contrast), an idiom used by Paul in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:5; strkjv@Ephesians:5:8|. It is equivalent to "enlightened men" (Bernard) and Jesus called his disciples the light of the world (Matthew:5:14|). {Hid himself from them} (\ekrubˆ ap' aut“n\). Second aorist passive indicative of \krupt“\, late form (in LXX) for old \ekruphˆ\, "was hidden from them," as in strkjv@8:59|. This part of verse 36| begins a new paragraph.

rwp@John:12:48 @{Rejecteth} (\athet“n\). Present active participle of \athete“\, late _Koin‚_ verb (from \athetos\, \a\ privative, and \tithˆmi\), to render null and void, only here in John, but see strkjv@Mark:6:26; strkjv@7:9|. {One that judgeth him} (\ton krinonta auton\). Articular present active participle of \krin“\. See same idea in strkjv@5:45; strkjv@9:50|. {The same} (\ekeinos\). "That" very word of Christ which one rejects will confront him and accuse him to the Father "at the last day" (\en tˆi eschatˆi hˆmerai\, this phrase peculiar to John). There is no escaping it. And yet Jesus himself will bear witness for or against the one whose conduct has already revealed his attitude towards the message of God (Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:8f.|).

rwp@John:13:13 @{Ye} (\humeis\). Emphatic. {Call me} (\ph“neite me\). "Address me." \Ph“ne“\ regular for addressing one with his title (1:48|). {Master} (\Hosea:didaskalos\). Nominative form (not in apposition with \me\ accusative after \ph“neite\), but really vocative in address with the article (called titular nominative sometimes) like \Hosea:Kurios kai ho theos mou\ in strkjv@20:28|. "Teacher." See strkjv@11:28| for Martha's title for Jesus to Mary. {Lord} (\Hosea:Kurios\). Another and separate title. In strkjv@1:38| we have \Didaskale\ (vocative form) for the Jewish \Rabbei\ and in strkjv@9:36,38| \Kurie\ for the Jewish _Mari_. It is significant that Jesus approves (\kal“s\, well) the application of both titles to himself as he accepts from Thomas the terms \kurios\ and \theos\. {For I am} (\eimi gar\). Jesus distinctly claims here to be both Teacher and Lord in the full sense, at the very moment when he has rendered this menial, but symbolic, service to them. Here is a hint for those who talk lightly about "the peril of worshipping Jesus!"

rwp@John:13:23 @{Was at the table reclining in Jesus' bosom} (\ˆn anakeimenos en t“i kolp“i tou Iˆsou\). No word for "table" in the text. Periphrastic imperfect of \anakeimai\, to lie back, to recline. \Kolpos\ usual word for bosom (1:18|). {Whom Jesus loved} (\hon ˆgapa Iˆsous\). Imperfect active of \agapa“\, John's description of himself of which he was proud (19:26; strkjv@20:2; strkjv@21:7,20|), identified in strkjv@21:24| as the author of the book and necessarily one of the twelve because of the "explicit" (Bernard) language of Mark (Mark:14:17; strkjv@Luke:22:14|). John son of Zebedee and brother of James. At the table John was on the right of Jesus lying obliquely so that his head lay on the bosom of Jesus. The centre, the place of honour, Jesus occupied. The next place in rank was to the left of Jesus, held by Peter (Westcott) or by Judas (Bernard) which one doubts.

rwp@John:14:6 @{I am the way, and the truth, and the life} (\Eg“ eimi hˆ hodos kai hˆ alˆtheia kai hˆ z“ˆ\). Either of these statements is profound enough to stagger any one, but here all three together overwhelm Thomas. Jesus had called himself "the life" to Martha (11:25|) and "the door" to the Pharisees (10:7|) and "the light of the world" (8:12|). He spoke "the way of God in truth" (Mark:12:14|). He is the way to God and the only way (verse 6|), the personification of truth, the centre of life. {Except by me} (\ei mˆ di' emou\). There is no use for the Christian to wince at these words of Jesus. If he is really the Incarnate Son of God (1:1,14,18|, they are necessarily true.

rwp@John:15:1 @{The true vine} (\hˆ ampelos hˆ alˆthinˆ\). "The vine the genuine." Assuming that the Lord's Supper had just been instituted by Jesus the metaphor of the vine is naturally suggested by "the fruit of the vine" (Mark:14:25; strkjv@Matthew:26:29|). \Ampelos\ in the papyri (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_) is sometimes used in the sense of _ampel“n_ (vineyard), but not so here. Jesus uses various metaphors to illustrate himself and his work (the light, strkjv@8:12|; the door, strkjv@10:7|; the shepherd, strkjv@10:11|; the vine, strkjv@15:1|). The vine was common in Palestine. See strkjv@Psalms:80:8f|. "On the Maccabean coinage Israel was represented by a vine" (Dods). Jesus is the genuine Messianic vine. {The husbandman} (\ho ge“rgos\) as in strkjv@Mark:12:1; strkjv@James:5:7; strkjv@2Timothy:2:6|. cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:3:9|, \theou ge“rgion\ (God's field).

rwp@John:15:15 @{No longer} (\ouketi\). As he had done in strkjv@13:16|. He was their Rabbi (1:38; strkjv@13:13|) and Lord (13:13|). Paul gloried in calling himself Christ's \doulos\ (bond-slave). {Servants} (\doulous\). Bond-servants, slaves. {I have called you friends} (\humas eirˆka philous\). Perfect active indicative, permanent state of new dignity. They will prove worthy of it by continued obedience to Christ as Lord, by being good \douloi\. Abraham was called the Friend of God (James:2:23|). Are we friends of Christ?

rwp@John:17:1 @{Lifting up} (\eparas\). First aorist active participle of \epair“\, old and common verb with \ophthalmous\ (eyes) as in strkjv@4:35; strkjv@6:5; strkjv@11:41|. {Father} (\Pater\). Vocative form as in verses 5,11; strkjv@11:41|, Christ's usual way of beginning his prayers. It is inconceivable that this real _Lord's Prayer_ is the free composition of a disciple put into the mouth of Jesus. It is rather "the tenacious memory of an old man recalling the greatest days of his life" (Bernard), aided by the Holy Spirit promised for this very purpose (John:14:26; strkjv@16:13f.|). Jesus had the habit of prayer (Mark:1:35; strkjv@6:46; strkjv@Matthew:11:25f.; strkjv@Luke:3:21; strkjv@5:16; strkjv@6:12; strkjv@9:18,28; strkjv@11:22,42; strkjv@23:34,46; strkjv@John:11:41; strkjv@12:27|). He prayed here for himself (1-5|), for the disciples (6-19|), for all believers (20-26|). The prayer is similar in spirit to the Model Prayer for us in strkjv@Matthew:6:9-13|. The hour for his glorification has come as he had already told the disciples (13:31f.; strkjv@12:23|). {Glorify thy Son} (\doxason sou ton huion\). First aorist active imperative of \doxaz“\, the only personal petition in this prayer. Jesus had already used this word \doxaz“\ for his death (13:31f.|). Here it carries us into the very depths of Christ's own consciousness. It is not merely for strength to meet the Cross, but for the power to glorify the Father by his death and resurrection and ascension, "that the Son may glorify thee" (\hina ho huios doxasˆi se\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive.

rwp@John:17:3 @{Should know} (\gin“sk“sin\). Present active subjunctive with \hina\ (subject clause), "should keep on knowing." {Even Jesus Christ} (\Iˆsoun Christon\). See strkjv@1:17| for the only other place in John's Gospel where the words occur together. Coming here in the Lord's own prayer about himself they create difficulty, unless, as Westcott suggests, \Christon\ be regarded as a predicate accusative, "Jesus as the Christ" (Messiah). Otherwise the words would seem to be John's parenthetical interpretation of the idea of Jesus. Lucke thinks that the solemnity of this occasion explains Jesus referring to himself in the third person. The knowledge of "the only true God" is through Jesus Christ (14:6-9|).

rwp@John:17:5 @{With thine own self} (\para seaut“i\). "By the side of thyself." Jesus prays for full restoration to the pre-incarnate glory and fellowship (cf. strkjv@1:1|) enjoyed before the Incarnation (John:1:14|). This is not just ideal pre-existence, but actual and conscious existence at the Father's side (\para soi\, with thee) "which I had" (\hˆi eichon\, imperfect active of \ech“\, I used to have, with attraction of case of \hˆn\ to \hˆi\ because of \doxˆi\), "before the world was" (\pro tou ton kosmon einai\), "before the being as to the world" (cf. verse 24|). It is small wonder that those who deny or reject the deity of Jesus Christ have trouble with the Johannine authorship of this book and with the genuineness of these words. But even Harnack admits that the words here and in verse 24| are "undoubtedly the reflection of the certainty with which Jesus himself spoke" (_What Is Christianity_, Engl. Tr., p. 132). But Paul, as clearly as John, believes in the actual pre-existence and deity of Jesus Christ (Phillipians:2:5-11|).

rwp@John:17:26 @{And will make it known} (\kai gn“ris“\). Future active of \gn“riz“\, the perpetual mission of Christ through the Spirit (16:12,25; strkjv@Matthew:28:20|) as he himself has done heretofore (17:6|). {Wherewith} (\hen\). Cognate accusative relative with \ˆgapˆsas\ which has also the accusative of the person \me\ (me).

rwp@John:18:18 @{A fire of coals} (\anthrakian\). Old word, in LXX, only here and strkjv@21:9| in N.T. A heap of burning coals (\anthrax\, coal). Cf. our "anthracite." It was cold (\psuchos ˆn\). "There was coldness." The soldiers had apparently returned to their barracks. {Were warming themselves} (\ethermainonto\). Direct middle imperfect indicative of \thermain“\ (from \thermos\). Songs:as to \thermainomenos\ about Peter. "Peter, unabashed by his lie, joined himself to the group and stood in the light of the fire" (Dods).

rwp@John:18:26 @{Did not I see thee in the garden with him?} (\ouk eg“ se eidon en t“i kˆp“i met' autou;\). This staggering and sudden thrust expects an affirmative answer by the use of \ouk\, not \mˆ\ as in verses 17,25|, but Peter's previous denials with the knowledge that he was observed by a kinsman of Malchus whom he had tried to kill (verse 10|) drove him to the third flat denial that he knew Jesus, this time with cursing and swearing (Mark:14:71; strkjv@Matthew:26:73|). Peter was in dire peril now of arrest himself for attempt to kill. {Straightway} (\euthe“s\). As in strkjv@Matthew:26:74| while Luke has \parachrˆma\ (Luke:22:60|). Mark (Mark:14:68,72|) speaks of two crowings as often happens when one cock crows. See strkjv@Matthew:26:34| for \alekt“r\ (cock). That was usually the close of the third watch of the night (Mark:13:35|), about 3 A.M. Luke (Luke:22:61|) notes that Jesus turned and looked on Peter probably as he passed from the rooms of Annas to the trial before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin (the ecclesiastical court). See Mrs. Browning's beautiful sonnets on "The Look".

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:19:7 @{Because he made himself the Son of God} (\hoti huion theou heauton epoiˆsen\). Here at last the Sanhedrin give the real ground for their hostility to Jesus, one of long standing for probably three years (John:5:18|) and the one on which the Sanhedrin voted the condemnation of Jesus (Mark:14:61-64; strkjv@Matthew:27:23-66|), but even now they do not mention their own decision to Pilate, for they had no legal right to vote Christ's death before Pilate's consent which they now have secured.

rwp@John:19:12 @{Sought} (\ezˆtei\). Imperfect active, "kept on seeking," "made renewed efforts to release him." He was afraid to act boldly against the will of the Jews. {If thou release this man} (\ean touton apolusˆis\). Condition of third class, a direct threat to Pilate. He knew all the time that the Sanhedrin might tell Caesar on him. {Thou art not Caesar's friend} (\ouk ei philos tou kaisaros\). Later to Vespasian this was an official title, here simply a daring threat to Pilate. {Speaketh against Caesar} (\antilegei t“i kaisari\). Caesar brooks no rival. Jesus had allowed himself to be acclaimed king of Israel in the Triumphal Entry (John:12:13; strkjv@Mark:11:10; strkjv@Luke:19:38|). The Sanhedrin have caught Pilate in their toils.

rwp@John:19:19 @{Pilate wrote a title also} (\egrapsen kai titlon ho Peilatos\). Only John tells us that Pilate himself wrote it and John alone uses the technical Latin word _titlon_ (several times in inscriptions), for the board with the name of the criminal and the crime in which he is condemned; Mark (Mark:15:26|) and Luke (Luke:23:28|) use \epigraphˆ\ (superscription). Matthew (Matthew:27:37|) has simply \aitian\ (accusation). The inscription in John is the fullest of the four and has all in any of them save the words "this is" (\houtos estin\) in strkjv@Matthew:27:37|.

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@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@Info_Luke @ THE SAME AUTHOR FOR GOSPEL AND ACTS The author of Acts refers to the Gospel specifically as "the first treatise," \ton pr“ton logon\, (Acts:1:1|) and both are addressed to Theophilus (Luke:1:3; strkjv@Acts:1:1|). He speaks of himself in both books as "me" (\kamoi\, strkjv@Luke:1:3|) and {I made} (\epoiˆsamˆn\, strkjv@Acts:1:1|). He refers to himself with others as "we" and "us" as in strkjv@Acts:16:10|, the "we" sections of Acts. The unity of Acts is here assumed until the authorship of Acts is discussed in Volume III. The same style appears in Gospel and Acts, so that the presumption is strongly in support of the author's statement. It is quite possible that the formal Introduction to the Gospel (Luke:1:1-4|) was intended to apply to the Acts also which has only an introductory clause. Plummer argues that to suppose that the author of Acts imitated the Gospel purposely is to suppose a literary miracle. Even Cadbury, who is not convinced of the Lucan authorship, says: "In my study of Luke and Acts, their unity is a fundamental and illuminating axiom." He adds: "They are not merely two independent writings from the same pen; they are a single continuous work. Acts is neither an appendix nor an afterthought. It is probably an integral part of the author's original plan and purpose."

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE CHARACTER OF THE BOOK Literary charm is here beyond dispute. It is a book that only a man with genuine culture and literary genius could write. It has all the simple grace of Mark and Matthew plus an indefinable quality not in these wonderful books. There is a delicate finish of detail and proportion of parts that give the balance and poise that come only from full knowledge of the subject, the chief element in a good style according to Dr. James Stalker. This scientific physician, this man of the schools, this converted Gentile, this devoted friend of Paul, comes to the study of the life of Christ with a trained intellect, with an historian's method of research, with a physician's care in diagnosis and discrimination, with a charm of style all his own, with reverence for and loyalty to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. One could not afford to give up either of the Four Gospels. They each supplement the other in a wonderful way. John's Gospel is the greatest book in all the world, reaching the highest heights of all. But if we had only Luke's Gospel, we should have an adequate portrait of Jesus Christ as Son of God and Son of Man. If Mark's is the Gospel for the Romans and Matthew's for the Jews, the Gospel of Luke is for the Gentile world. He shows the sympathy of Jesus for the poor and the outcast. Luke understands women and children and so is the universal Gospel of mankind in all phases and conditions. It is often called the Gospel of womanhood, of infancy, of prayer, of praise. We have in Luke the first Christian hymns. With Luke we catch some glimpses of the child Jesus for which we are grateful. Luke was a friend and follower of Paul, and verbal parallels with Paul's Epistles do occur, but there is no Pauline propaganda in the Gospel as Moffatt clearly shows (_Intr. to Lit. of the N.T._, p. 281). The Prologue is in literary _Koin‚_ and deserves comparison with those in any Greek and Latin writers. His style is versatile and is often coloured by his source. He was a great reader of the Septuagint as is shown by occasional Hebraisms evidently due to reading that translation Greek. He has graciousness and a sense of humour as McLachlan and Ragg show. Every really great man has a saving sense of humour as Jesus himself had. Ramsay dares to call Luke, as shown by the Gospel and Acts, the greatest of all historians not even excepting Thucydides. Ramsay has done much to restore Luke to his rightful place in the estimation of modern scholars. Some German critics used to cite strkjv@Luke:2:1-7| as a passage containing more historical blunders than any similar passage in any historian. The story of how papyri and inscriptions have fully justified Luke in every statement here made is carefully worked out by Ramsay in his various books, especially in _The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament_. The main feature of this proof appears also in my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_. Songs:many items, where Luke once stood alone, have been confirmed by recent discoveries that the burden of proof now rests on those who challenge Luke in those cases where he still stands alone.

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:1:19 @{Gabriel} (\Gabriˆl\). The Man of God (Daniel:8:6; strkjv@9:21|). The other angel whose name is given in Scripture is Michael (Daniel:10:13,21; strkjv@Jude:1:9; strkjv@Revelation:12:7|). The description of himself is a rebuke to the doubt of Zacharias.

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:2:5 @{To enrol himself with Mary} (\apograpsasthai sun Mariam\). Direct middle. "With Mary" is naturally taken with the infinitive as here. If so, that means that Mary's family register was in Bethlehem also and that she also belonged to the house of David. It is possible to connect "with Mary" far back with "went up" (\anebˆ\) in verse 4|, but it is unnatural to do so. There is no real reason for doubting that Mary herself was a descendant of David and that is the obvious way to understand Luke's genealogy of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:3:23-38|). The Syriac Sinaitic expressly says that both Joseph and Mary were of the house and city of David. {Betrothed} (\emnˆsteumenˆn\). Same verb as in strkjv@1:27|, but here it really means "married" or "espoused" as strkjv@Matthew:1:24f.| shows. Otherwise she could not have travelled with Joseph. {Great with child} (\enku“i\). Only here in N.T. Common Greek word.

rwp@Luke:2:29 @{Now lettest thou} (\nun apolueis\). Present active indicative, {Thou art letting}. The _Nunc Dimittis_, adoration and praise. It is full of rapture and vivid intensity (Plummer) like the best of the Psalms. The verb \apolu“\ was common for the manumission of slaves and Simeon here calls himself "thy slave (\doulon sou\), Lord (\Despota\, our despot)." See strkjv@2Peter:2:1|.

rwp@Luke:3:15 @{Were in expectation} (\prosdok“ntos\). Genitive absolute of this striking verb already seen in strkjv@1:21|. {Reasoned} (\dialogizomen“n\). Genitive absolute again. John's preaching about the Messiah and the kingdom of God stirred the people deeply and set them to wondering. {Whether haply he were the Christ} (\mˆpote autos eiˆ ho Christos\). Optative \eiˆ\ in indirect question changed from the indicative in the direct (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1031). John wrought no miracles and was not in David's line and yet he moved people so mightily that they began to suspect that he himself (\autos\) was the Messiah. The Sanhedrin will one day send a formal committee to ask him this direct question (John:1:19|).

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:4:23 @{Doubtless} (\pant“s\). Adverb. Literally, at any rate, certainly, assuredly. Cf. strkjv@Acts:21:22; strkjv@28:4|. {This parable} (\tˆn parabolˆn tautˆn\). See discussion on ¯Matthew:13|. Here the word has a special application to a crisp proverb which involves a comparison. The word physician is the point of comparison. Luke the physician alone gives this saying of Jesus. The proverb means that the physician was expected to take his own medicine and to heal himself. The word \parabolˆ\ in the N.T. is confined to the Synoptic Gospels except strkjv@Hebrews:9:9; strkjv@11:19|. This use for a proverb occurs also in strkjv@Luke:5:36; strkjv@6:39|. This proverb in various forms appears not only among the Jews, but in Euripides and Aeschylus among the Greeks, and in Cicero's _Letters_. Hobart quotes the same idea from Galen, and the Chinese used to demand it of their physicians. The point of the parable seems to be that the people were expecting him to make good his claim to the Messiahship by doing here in Nazareth what they had heard of his doing in Capernaum and elsewhere. "Establish your claims by direct evidence" (Easton). This same appeal (Vincent) was addressed to Christ on the Cross (Matthew:27:40,42|). There is a tone of sarcasm towards Jesus in both cases. {Heard done} (\ˆkousamen genomena\). The use of this second aorist middle participle \genomena\ after \ˆkousamen\ is a neat Greek idiom. It is punctiliar action in indirect discourse after this verb of sensation or emotion (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1040-42, 1122-24). {Do also here} (\poiˆson kai h“de\). Ingressive aorist active imperative. Do it here in thy own country and town and do it now. Jesus applies the proverb to himself as an interpretation of their real attitude towards himself.

rwp@Luke:4:24 @{And he said} (\eipen de\). Also in strkjv@1:13|. The interjection of these words here by Luke may indicate a break in his address, though there is no other indication of an interval here. Perhaps they only serve to introduce solemnly the new proverb like the words {Verily I say unto you} (\amˆn leg“ humin\). This proverb about the prophet having no honour in his own country Jesus had already applied to himself according to strkjv@John:4:44|. Both strkjv@Mark:6:4| and strkjv@Matthew:13:57| give it in a slightly altered form on the last visit of Jesus to Nazareth. The devil had tempted Jesus to make a display of his power to the people by letting them see him floating down from the pinnacle of the temple (Luke:4:9-11|).

rwp@Luke:4:26 @{Unto Zarephath} (\eis Sarepta\). The modern village Surafend on the coast road between Tyre and Sidon. {Unto a woman that was a widow} (\pros gunaika chˆran\). Literally, unto a woman a widow (like our vernacular widow woman). This is an illustration of the proverb from the life of Elijah (1Kings:17:8,9|). This woman was in the land of Sidon or Phoenicia, a heathen, where Jesus himself will go later.

rwp@Luke:5:16 @{But he withdrew himself in the deserts and prayed} (\autos de ˆn hupoch“r“n en tais erˆmois kai proseuchomenos\). Periphrastic imperfects. Literally, "But he himself was with drawing in the desert places and praying." The more the crowds came as a result of the leper's story, the more Jesus turned away from them to the desert regions and prayed with the Father. It is a picture of Jesus drawn with vivid power. The wild enthusiasm of the crowds was running ahead of their comprehension of Christ and his mission and message. \Hupoch“re“\ (perhaps with the notion of slipping away secretly, \hupo-\) is a very common Greek verb, but in the N.T. occurs in Luke alone. Elsewhere in the N.T. \anach“re“\ (to go back) appears.

rwp@Luke:5:17 @{That} (\kai\). Use of \kai\ = \hoti\ (that) like the Hebrew _wav_, though found in Greek also. {He} (\autos\). Luke sometimes has \autos\ in the nominative as unemphatic "he" as here, not "he himself." {Was teaching} (\ˆn didask“n\). Periphrastic imperfect again like our English idiom. {Were sitting by} (\ˆsan kathˆmenoi\). Periphrastic imperfect again. There is no "by" in the Greek. {Doctors of the law} (\nomodidaskaloi\). A compound word formed after analogy of \hierodidaskalos\, but not found outside of the N.T. and ecclesiastical writers, one of the very few words apparently N.T. in usage. It appears here and strkjv@Acts:5:34; strkjv@1Timothy:1:7|. It is not likely that Luke and Paul made the word, but they simply used the term already in current use to describe teachers and interpreters of the law. Our word "doctor" is Latin for "teacher." These "teachers of the law" are called elsewhere in the Gospels "scribes" (\grammateis\) as in Matthew and Mark (see on ¯Matthew:5:20; strkjv@23:34|) and strkjv@Luke:5:21; strkjv@19:47; strkjv@21:1; strkjv@22:2|. Luke also employs \nomikos\ (one skilled in the law, \nomos\) as in strkjv@10:25|. One thinks of our LL.D. (Doctors of Civil and Canon Law), for both were combined in Jewish law. They were usually Pharisees (mentioned here for the first time in Luke) for which see on ¯Matthew:3:7,20|. Luke will often speak of the Pharisees hereafter. Not all the "Pharisees" were "teachers of the law" so that both terms often occur together as in verse 21| where Luke has separate articles (\hoi grammateis kai hoi Pharisaioi\), distinguishing between them, though one article may occur as in strkjv@Matthew:5:20| or no article as here in verse 17|. Luke alone mentions the presence here of these Pharisees and doctors of the law "which were come" (\hoi ˆsan elˆluthotes\, periphrastic past perfect active, {had come}). {Out of every village of Galilee and Judea and Jerusalem} (\ek pasˆs k“mˆs tˆs Galilaias kai Ioudaias kai Ierousalˆm\). Edersheim (_Jewish Social Life_) observes that the Jews distinguished Jerusalem as a separate district in Judea. Plummer considers it hyperbole in Luke to use "every village." But one must recall that Jesus had already made one tour of Galilee which stirred the Pharisees and rabbis to active opposition. Judea had already been aroused and Jerusalem was the headquarters of the definite campaign now organized against Jesus. One must bear in mind that strkjv@John:4:1-4| shows that Jesus had already left Jerusalem and Judea because of the jealousy of the Pharisees. They are here on purpose to find fault and to make charges against Jesus. One must not forget that there were many kinds of Pharisees and that not all of them were as bad as these legalistic and punctilious hypocrites who deserved the indictment and exposure of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:23|. Paul himself is a specimen of the finer type of Pharisee which, however, developed into the persecuting fanatic till Jesus changed his whole life. {The power of the Lord was with him to heal} (\dunamis Kuriou ˆn eis to iƒsthai auton\). Songs:the best texts. It is neat Greek, but awkward English: "Then was the power of the Lord for the healing as to him (Jesus)." Here \Kuriou\ refers to Jehovah. {Dunamis} (dynamite) is one of the common words for "miracles" (\dunameis\). What Luke means is that Jesus had the power of the Lord God to heal with. He does not mean that this power was intermittent. He simply calls attention to its presence with Jesus on this occasion.

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:7:3 @{Sent unto him elders of the Jews} (\apesteilen pros auton presbouterous t“n Ioudai“n\). strkjv@Matthew:8:5| says "the centurion came unto him." For discussion of this famous case of apparent discrepancy see discussion on Matthew. One possible solution is that Luke tells the story as it happened with the details, whereas Matthew simply presents a summary statement without the details. What one does through another he does himself. {Asking him} (\er“t“n auton\). Present active participle, masculine singular nominative, of the verb \er“ta“\ common for asking a question as in the old Greek (Luke:22:68|). But more frequently in the N.T. the verb has the idea of making a request as here. This is not a Hebraism or an Aramaism, but is a common meaning of the verb in the papyri (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 168). It is to be noted here that Luke represents the centurion himself as "asking" through the elders of the Jews (leading citizens). In strkjv@Matthew:8:6| the verb is \parakal“n\ (beseeching). {That he would come and save} (\hop“s elth“n dias“sˆi\). \Hina\ is the more common final or sub-final (as here) conjunction, but \hop“s\ still occurs. \Dias“sˆi\ is effective aorist active subjunctive, to bring safe through as in a storm (Acts:28:1,4|). Common word.

rwp@Luke:7:5 @{For} (\gar\). This clause gives the reason why the elders of the Jews consider him "worthy" (\axios\, drawing down the scale, \axis\, \ago\). He was hardly a proselyte, but was a Roman who had shown his love for the Jews. {Himself} (\autos\). All by himself and at his own expense. {Us} (\hˆmin\). Dative case, for us. It is held by some archaeologists that the black basalt ruins in Tell Hum are the remains of the very synagogue (\tˆn sunag“gˆn\). Literally, {the synagogue}, the one which we have, the one for us.

rwp@Luke:7:36 @{That he would eat with him} (\hina phagˆi met' autou\). Second aorist active subjunctive. The use of \hina\ after \er“ta“\ (see also strkjv@Luke:16:27|) is on the border between the pure object clause and the indirect question (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1046) and the pure final clause. Luke has two other instances of Pharisees who invited Jesus to meals (11:37; strkjv@14:1|) and he alone gives them. This is the Gospel of Hospitality (Ragg). Jesus would dine with a Pharisee or with a publican (Luke:5:29; strkjv@Mark:2:15; strkjv@Matthew:9:10|) and even invited himself to be the guest of Zaccheus (Luke:9:5|). This Pharisee was not as hostile as the leaders in Jerusalem. It is not necessary to think this Pharisee had any sinister motive in his invitation though he was not overly friendly (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:8:19 @{His mother and brethren} (\hˆ mˆtˆr kai hoi adelphoi autou\). strkjv@Mark:3:31-35; strkjv@Matthew:12:46-50| place the visit of the mother and brothers of Jesus before the parable of the sower. Usually Luke follows Mark's order, but he does not do so here. At first the brothers of Jesus (younger sons of Joseph and Mary, I take the words to mean, there being sisters also) were not unfriendly to the work of Jesus as seen in strkjv@John:2:12| when they with the mother of Jesus are with him and the small group (half dozen) disciples in Capernaum after the wedding in Cana. But as Jesus went on with his work and was rejected at Nazareth (Luke:4:16-31|), there developed an evident disbelief in his claims on the part of the brothers who ridiculed him six months before the end (John:7:5|). At this stage they have apparently come with Mary to take Jesus home out of the excitement of the crowds, perhaps thinking that he is beside himself (Mark:3:21|). They hardly believed the charge of the rabbis that Jesus was in league with Beelzebub. Certainly the mother of Jesus could give no credence to that slander. But she herself was deeply concerned and wanted to help him if possible. See discussion of the problem in my little book _The Mother of Jesus_ and also on ¯Mark:3:31| and ¯Matthew:12:46|. {Come to him} (\suntuchein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \suntugchan“\, an old verb, though here alone in the N.T., meaning to meet with, to fall in with as if accidentally, here with associative instrumental case \aut“i\.

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:8:49 @{From the ruler of the synagogue's house} (\para tou archisunag“gou\). The word "house" is not in the Greek here as in strkjv@Mark:5:35| where \apo\ is used rather than \para\, as here. But the ruler himself had come to Jesus (Luke:8:41|) and this is the real idea. Trouble not (\mˆketi skulle\). See on ¯Luke:7:6| for this verb and also strkjv@Mark:5:35; strkjv@Matthew:9:36|.

rwp@Luke:9:21 @{To tell this to no man} (\mˆdeni legein touto\). Indirect command with the negative infinitive after {commanded} (\parˆggeilen\). It had been necessary for Jesus to cease using the word {Messiah} (\Christos\) about himself because of the political meaning to the Jews. Its use by the disciples would lead to revolution as was plain after the feeding of the five thousand (John:6:15|).

rwp@Luke:9:47 @{Took a little child} (\epilabomenos paidion\). Second aorist middle participle of the common verb \epilamban“\. Strictly, Taking a little child to himself (indirect middle). strkjv@Mark:9:36| has merely the active \lab“n\ of the simple verb \lamban“\. Set him by his side (\estˆsen auto par' heaut“i\). "In his arms" strkjv@Mark:9:36| has it, "in the midst of them" strkjv@Matthew:18:3| says. All three attitudes following one another (the disciples probably in a circle around Jesus anyhow) and now the little child (Peter's child?) was slipped down by the side of Jesus as he gave the disciples an object lesson in humility which they sorely needed.

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

rwp@Luke:10:27 @{And he answering} (\ho de apokritheis\). First aorist participle, no longer passive in idea. The lawyer's answer is first from the _Shema_ (Deuteronomy:6:3; strkjv@11:13|) which was written on the phylacteries. The second part is from strkjv@Leviticus:19:18| and shows that the lawyer knew the law. At a later time Jesus himself in the temple gives a like summary of the law to a lawyer (Mark:12:28-34; strkjv@Matthew:22:34-40|) who wanted to catch Jesus by his question. There is no difficulty in the two incidents. God is to be loved with all of man's four powers (heart, soul, strength, mind) here as in strkjv@Mark:12:30|.

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:11:38 @{That he had not first washed before dinner} (\hoti ou pr“ton ebaptisthˆ pro tou aristou\). The verb is first aorist passive indicative of \baptiz“\, to dip or to immerse. Here it is applied to the hands. It was the Jewish custom to dip the hands in water before eating and often between courses for ceremonial purification. In Galilee the Pharisees and scribes had sharply criticized the disciples for eating with unwashed hands (Mark:7:1-23; strkjv@Matthew:15:1-20|) when Jesus had defended their liberty and had opposed making a necessity of such a custom (tradition) in opposition to the command of God. Apparently Jesus on this occasion had himself reclined at the breakfast (not dinner) without this ceremonial dipping of the hands in water. The Greek has "first before" (\pr“ton pro\), a tautology not preserved in the translation.

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

rwp@Luke:14:15 @{Blessed} (\makarios\). Happy, same word in the Beatitudes of Jesus (Matthew:5:3ff.|). This pious platitude whether due to ignorance or hypocrisy was called forth by Christ's words about the resurrection. It was a common figure among the rabbis, the use of a banquet for the bliss of heaven. This man may mean that this is a prerogative of the Pharisees. He assumed complacently that he will be among the number of the blest. Jesus himself uses this same figure of the spiritual banquet for heavenly bliss (Luke:22:29|). {Shall eat} (\phagetai\). Future middle from \esthi“\, defective verb, from stem of the aorist (\ephagon\) like \edomai\ of the old Greek.

rwp@Luke:15:5 @{On his shoulders} (\epi tous “mous autou\). He does it himself in exuberant affection and of necessity as the poor lost sheep is helpless. Note the plural shoulders showing that the sheep was just back of the shepherd's neck and drawn around by both hands. The word for shoulder (\“mos\) is old and common, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:23:4|. {Rejoicing} (\chair“n\). "There is no upbraiding of the wandering sheep, nor murmuring at the trouble" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:15:17 @{But when he came to himself} (\eis heauton de elth“n\). As if he had been far from himself as he was from home. As a matter of fact he had been away, out of his head, and now began to see things as they really were. Plato is quoted by Ackerman (_Christian Element in Plato_) as thinking of redemption as coming to oneself. {Hired servants} (\misthioi\). A late word from \misthos\ (hire). In the N.T. only in this chapter. The use of "many" here suggests a wealthy and luxurious home. {Have bread enough and to spare} (\perisseuontai art“n\). Old verb from \perissos\ and that from \peri\ (around). Present passive here, "are surrounded by loaves" like a flood. {I perish} (\eg“ de lim“i h“de apollumai\). Every word here counts: While I on the other hand am here perishing with hunger. It is the linear present middle of \apollumi\. Note \eg“\ expressed and \de\ of contrast.

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

rwp@Luke:16:19 @{He was clothed} (\enedidusketo\). Imperfect middle of \endidusk“\, a late intensive form of \endu“\. He clothed himself in or with. It was his habit. {Purple} (\porphuran\). This purple dye was obtained from the purple fish, a species of mussel or \murex\ (1Macc. strkjv@4:23). It was very costly and was used for the upper garment by the wealthy and princes (royal purple). They had three shades of purple (deep violet, deep scarlet or crimson, deep blue). See also strkjv@Mark:15:17,20; strkjv@Revelation:18:12|. {Fine linen} (\busson\). {Byssus} or Egyptian flax (India and Achaia also). It is a yellowed flax from which fine linen was made for undergarments. It was used for wrapping mummies. "Some of the Egyptian linen was so fine that it was called _woven air_" (Vincent). Here only in the N.T. for the adjective \bussinos\ occurs in strkjv@Revelation:18:12; strkjv@19:8,14|. {Faring sumptuously} (\euphrainomenos lampr“s\). {Making merry brilliantly}. The verb \euphrainomai\ we have already had in strkjv@12:19; strkjv@15:23,25,32|. \Lampr“s\ is an old adverb from \lampros\, brilliant, shining, splendid, magnificent. It occurs here only in the N.T. This parable apparently was meant for the Pharisees (verse 14|) who were lovers of money. It shows the wrong use of money and opportunity.

rwp@Luke:18:10 @{Stood} (\statheis\). First aorist passive participle of \histˆmi\. Struck an attitude ostentatiously where he could be seen. Standing was the common Jewish posture in prayer (Matthew:6:5; strkjv@Mark:11:25|). {Prayed thus} (\tauta prosˆucheto\). Imperfect middle, was praying these things (given following). {With himself} (\pros heauton\). A soliloquy with his own soul, a complacent recital of his own virtues for his own self-satisfaction, not fellowship with God, though he addresses God. {I thank thee} (\eucharist“ soi\). But his gratitude to God is for his own virtues, not for God's mercies to him. One of the rabbis offers a prayer like this of gratitude that he was in a class by himself because he was a Jew and not a Gentile, because he was a Pharisee and not of the _am-haaretz_ or common people, because he was a man and not a woman. {Extortioners} (\harpages\). An old word, \harpax\ from same root as \harpaz“\, to plunder. An adjective of only one gender, used of robbers and plunderers, grafters, like the publicans (Luke:3:13|), whether wolves (Matthew:7:15|) or men (1Corinthians:5:19f.|). The Pharisee cites the crimes of which he is not guilty. {Or even} (\ˆ kai\). As the climax of iniquity (Bruce), he points to "this publican." Zaccheus will admit robbery (Luke:19:8|). {God} (\ho theos\). Nominative form with the article as common with the vocative use of \theos\ (so verse 13; strkjv@John:20:28|).

rwp@Luke:18:13 @{Standing afar off} (\makrothen hest“s\). Second perfect active participle of \histˆmi\, intransitive like \statheis\ above. But no ostentation as with the Pharisee in verse 11|. At a distance from the Pharisee, not from the sanctuary. {Would not lift} (\ouk ˆthelen oude epƒrai\). Negatives (double) imperfect of {thel“}, was not willing even to lift up, refused to lift (\epƒrai\, first aorist active infinitive of the liquid compound verb, \ep-air“\). Smote (\etupte\). Imperfect active of \tupt“\, old verb, kept on smiting or beating. Worshippers usually lifted up their closed eyes to God. {Be merciful} (\hilasthˆti\). First aorist passive imperative of \hilaskomai\, an old verb, found also in LXX and inscriptions (\exhilaskomai\, Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 224). {A sinner} (\t“i hamart“l“i\). The sinner, not a sinner. It is curious how modern scholars ignore this Greek article. The main point in the contrast lies in this article. The Pharisee thought of others as sinners. The publican thinks of himself alone as the sinner, not of others at all.

rwp@Luke:18:16 @{Called} (\prosekalesato\). Indirect middle aorist indicative, called the children with their parents to himself and then rebuked the disciples for their rebuke of the parents. The language of Jesus is precisely that of strkjv@Mark:10:14| which see, and nearly that of strkjv@Matthew:19:14| which see also. The plea of Jesus that children be allowed to come to him is one that many parents need to heed. It is a tragedy to think of parents "forbidding" their children or of preachers doing the same or of both being stumbling-blocks to children.

rwp@Luke:19:7 @{Murmured} (\diegogguzonto\). Imperfect middle of this compound onomatopoetic word \dia-gogguz“\. In strkjv@Luke:5:30| we have the simple \gogguz“\, a late word like the cooing doves or the hum of bees. This compound with \dia-\ is still rarer, but more expressive. {To lodge} (\katalusai\). Jesus was the hero of this crowd from Galilee on their way to the passover. But here he had shocked their sensibilities and those of the people of Jericho by inviting himself to be the guest of this chief publican and notorious sinner who had robbed nearly everybody in the city by exorbitant taxes.

rwp@Luke:19:12 @{To take to himself a kingdom} (\labein heaut“i basileian\). Second aorist active infinitive of \lamban“\ with the dative reflexive \heaut“i\ where the middle voice could have been used. Apparently this parable has the historical basis of Archelaus who actually went from Jerusalem to Rome on this very errand to get a kingdom in Palestine and to come back to it. This happened while Jesus was a boy in Nazareth and it was a matter of common knowledge.

rwp@Luke:19:33 @{As they were loosing} (\luont“n aut“n\). Genitive absolute. {The owners thereof} (\hoi kurioi autou\). The same word \kurios\ used of the Lord Jesus in verse 31| (and 34|) and which these "owners" would understand. See on ¯Matthew:21:3; strkjv@Mark:11:3| for \kurios\ used by Jesus about himself with the expectation that these disciples would recognize him by that title as they did. The word in common use for the Roman emperor and in the LXX to translate the Hebrew _Elohim_ (God).

rwp@Luke:22:56 @{In the light} (\pros to ph“s\). Facing (\pros\) the light, for the fire gave light as well as heat. strkjv@Mark:14:65| has "warming himself in the light," John (John:18:18,25|) "warming himself." {Looking steadfastly} (\atenisasa\). Favourite word in Luke (4:20|, etc.) for gazing steadily at one. {This man also} (\kai houtos\). As if pointing to Peter and talking about him. The other Gospels (Mark:14:67; strkjv@Matthew:26:69; strkjv@John:18:25|) make a direct address to Peter. Both could be true, as she turned to Peter.

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:23:7 @{When he knew} (\epignous\). Second aorist active participle from \epigin“sk“\, having gained full (\epi\, added knowledge). {Of Herod's jurisdiction} (\ek tˆs exousias Hˆr“idou\). Herod was naturally jealous of any encroachment by Pilate, the Roman Procurator of Judea. Songs:here was a chance to respect the prerogative (\exousia\) of Herod and get rid of this troublesome case also. {Sent him up} (\anepempsen\). First aorist active indicative of \anapemp“\. This common verb is used of sending back as in verse 11| or of sending up to a higher court as of Paul to Caesar (Acts:25:21|). {Who himself also was} (\onta kai auton\). Being also himself in Jerusalem. Present active participle of \eimi\.

rwp@Luke:23:35 @{The people stood beholding} (\histˆkei\). Past perfect active of \histˆmi\, intransitive and like imperfect. A graphic picture of the dazed multitude, some of whom may have been in the Triumphal Entry on Sunday morning. {Scoffed} (\exemuktˆrizon\). Imperfect active, perhaps inchoative, began to turn up (out, \ex\) at the dying Christ. The language comes from strkjv@Psalms:22:7|. {The Christ of God} (\ho Christos tou theou\). He had claimed to be just this (22:67,70|). The sarcastic sneer (he saved others; let him save others, for himself he cannot save) is in strkjv@Mark:15:31; strkjv@Matthew:27:42|. Luke alone gives the contemptuous use of \houtos\ (this fellow) and the fling in "the elect" (\ho eklektos\). These rulers were having their day at last.

rwp@Luke:23:37 @{If} (\ei\). Condition of the first class as is text in verse 35| used by the rulers. The soldiers pick out "the king of the Jews" as the point of their sneer, the point on which Jesus was condemned. But both soldiers and rulers fail to understand that Jesus could not save himself if he was to save others.

rwp@Luke:23:40 @{Rebuking} (\epitim“n\). From what Mark and Matthew say both robbers sneered at Jesus at first, but this one came to himself and turned on his fellow robber in a rage. {Dost thou not even fear God?} (\Oude phobˆi ton theon;\). \Oude\ here goes with the verb. \Phobˆi\ (second person singular present indicative middle of \phobeomai\. Both of you will soon appear before God. Jesus has nothing to answer for and you have added this to your other sins.

rwp@Luke:24:27 @{Interpreted} (\diˆrmˆneusen\). First aorist active (constative aorist) indicative of \diermˆneu“\ (Margin has the imperfect \diˆrmˆneuen\), intensive compound (\dia\) of \hermˆneu“\, the old verb to interpret from \hermˆneus\, interpreter, and that from \Hermˆs\, the messenger of the gods as the people of Lystra took Paul to be (Acts:14:12|). But what wonderful exegesis the two disciples were now hearing! {Concerning himself} (\peri heauton\). Jesus found himself in the Old Testament, a thing that some modern scholars do not seem able to do.

rwp@Luke:24:36 @{He himself stood} (\autos estˆ\). He himself stepped and stood. Some documents do not have "Peace be unto you."

rwp@Info_Mark @ THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION One of the clearest results of modern critical study of the Gospels is the early date of Mark's Gospel. Precisely how early is not definitely known, but there are leading scholars who hold that A.D. 50 is quite probable. My own views are given in detail in my _Studies in Mark's Gospel_. Zahn still argues that the Gospel according to Matthew is earlier than that according to Mark, but the arguments are against him. The framework of Mark's Gospel lies behind both Matthew and Luke and nearly all of it is used by one or the other. One may satisfy himself on this point by careful use of a Harmony of the Gospels in Greek or English. Whether Mark made use of Q (_Logia of Jesus_) or not is not yet shown, though it is possible. But Mark and Q constitute the two oldest known sources of our Matthew and Luke. We have much of Q preserved in the Non-Markan portions of both Matthew and Luke, though the document itself has disappeared. But Mark's work has remained in spite of its exhaustive use by Matthew and Luke, all except the disputed close. For this preservation we are all grateful. Streeter (_The Four Gospels_) has emphasized the local use of texts in preserving portions of the New Testament. If Mark wrote in Rome, as is quite possible, his book was looked upon as the Roman Gospel and had a powerful environment in which to take root. It has distinctive merits of its own that helped to keep it in use. It is mainly narrative and the style is direct and simple with many vivid touches, like the historical present of an eyewitness. The early writers all agree that Mark was the interpreter for Simon Peter with whom he was at one time, according to Peter's own statement, either in Babylon or Rome (1Peter:5:13|).

rwp@Mark:1:7 @{Mightier than I} (\ho ischuroteros mou\). In each of the Synoptics. Gould calls it a skeptical depreciation of himself by John. But it was sincere on John's part and he gives a reason for it. {The Latchet} (\ton himanta\). The thong of the sandal which held it together. When the guest comes into the house, performed by a slave before one enters the bath. Mark alone gives this touch.

rwp@Mark:1:45 @{Began to publish it much} (\ˆrxato kˆrussein polla\). strkjv@Luke:5:15| puts it, "so much the more" (\mƒllon\). One of the best ways to spread a thing is to tell people not to tell. It was certainly so in this case. Soon Jesus had to avoid cities and betake himself to desert places to avoid the crowds and even then people kept coming to Jesus (\ˆrchonto\, imperfect tense). Some preachers are not so disturbed by the onrush of crowds.

rwp@Mark:2:19 @{The sons of the bridechamber} (\hoi huioi tou numph“nos\). Not merely the groomsmen, but the guests also, the \paranymphs\ (\paranumphoi\ of the old Greek). Jesus here adopts the Baptist's own metaphor (John:3:29|), changing the friend of the bridegroom (\ho philos tou numphiou\) to sons of the bridechamber. Jesus identifies himself with the bridegroom of the O.T. (Hosea:2:21|), God in his covenant relation with Israel (Swete). Mourning does not suit the wedding feast. Mark, Matthew, and Luke all give the three parables (bridegroom, unfulled cloth, new wineskins) illustrating and defending the conduct of Jesus in feasting with Levi on a Jewish fast-day. strkjv@Luke:5:36| calls these parables. Jesus here seems iconoclastic to the ecclesiastics and revolutionary in emphasis on the spiritual instead of the ritualistic and ceremonial.

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:3:14 @{He appointed twelve} (\epoiˆsen d“deka\). This was a second selection out of those invited to the hills and after the night of prayer and after day came (Luke:6:13|). Why he chose twelve we are not told, probably because there were twelve tribes in Israel. It was a good round number at any rate. They were to be princes in the new Israel (cf. strkjv@Matthew:19:28; strkjv@Luke:22:30; strkjv@Revelation:21:14,15|). Luke (Luke:6:13-16|) also gives the list of the twelve at this point while Matthew (Matthew:10:1-4|) postpones giving the names till they are sent out in Galilee. There is a fourth list in strkjv@Acts:1:13|. See discussion of the names of the apostles on ¯Matthew:10:1-4| and pp. 271-3 of my _Harmony of the Gospels for Students of the Life of Christ_. The three groups of four begin alike (Simon, Philip, James). There are some difficulties. {Whom he also named apostles} (\hous kai apostolous “nomasen\). Margin of Revised Version, the text of Westcott and Hort after Aleph, B, C, etc. Genuine in strkjv@Luke:6:13| and probably so here. The meaning is that Jesus himself gave the name apostle or missionary (\apostell“\, to send) to this group of twelve. The word is applied in the New Testament to others besides as delegates or messengers of churches (2Corinthians:8:23; strkjv@Phillipians:2:25|), and messenger (John:13:16|). It is applied also to Paul on a par with the twelve (Galatians:1:1,11f.|, etc.) and also to Barnabas (Acts:14:14|), and perhaps also to Timothy and Silas (1Timothy:2:6f.|). Two purposes of Jesus are mentioned by Mark in the choice of these twelve, {that they might be with him} (\hina “sin met' autou\), {and that he might send them forth} (\kai hina apostellˆi autous\). They were not ready to be sent forth till they had been with Jesus for some time. This is one of the chief tasks of Christ to train this group of men. See Bruce's _The Training of the Twelve_. The very word \apostolos\ is from \apostell“\. There were two purposes in sending them forth expressed by two infinitives, one to preach (\kˆrussein\, from \kˆrux\, herald), the other to have power to cast out demons (\echein exousian ekballein ta daimonia\). This double ministry of preaching and healing was to mark their work. The two things are, however, different, and one does not necessarily involve the other.

rwp@Mark:3:31 @{Standing without} (\ex“ stˆkontes\). A late present from the perfect \hestˆka\. Pathetic picture of the mother and brothers standing on the outside of the house thinking that Jesus inside is beside himself and wanting to take him home. They were crowded out. {They sent unto him, calling him} (\apesteilan pros auton kalountes auton\). They were unwilling to disclose their errand to take him home (Swete) and so get the crowd to pass word unto Jesus on the inside, "calling him" through others. Some of the MSS. add "sisters" to mother and brothers as seeking Jesus.

rwp@Mark:5:5 @{He was crying out, and cutting himself with stones} (\ˆn kraz“n kai katakopt“n heauton lithois\). Further vivid details by Mark. Night and day his loud scream or screech could be heard like other demoniacs (cf. strkjv@1:26; strkjv@3:11; strkjv@9:26|). The verb for cutting himself occurs here only in the N.T., though an old verb. It means to _cut down_ (perfective use of \kata-\). We say _cut up_, gash, hack to pieces. Perhaps he was scarred all over with such gashes during his moments of wild frenzy night and day in the tombs and on the mountains. Periphrastic imperfect active with \ˆn\ and the participles.

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

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

rwp@Mark:6:45 @{To Bethsaida} (\pros Bˆthsaidan\). This is Bethsaida on the Western side, not Bethsaida Julias on the Eastern side where they had just been (Luke:9:10|). {While he himself sendeth the multitude away} (\he“s autos apoluei ton ochlon\). strkjv@Matthew:14:22| has it "till he should send away" (\he“s hou apolusˆi\) with the aorist subjunctive of purpose. Mark with the present indicative \apoluei\ pictures Jesus as personally engaged in persuading the crowds to go away now. strkjv@John:6:41f.| explains this activity of Jesus. The crowds had become so excited that they were in the mood to start a revolution against the Roman government and proclaim Jesus king. He had already forced in reality the disciples to leave in a boat {to go before him} (\proagein\) in order to get them out of this atmosphere of overwrought excitement with a political twist to the whole conception of the Messianic Kingdom. They were in grave danger of being swept off their feet and falling heedlessly into the Pharisaic conception and so defeating the whole teaching and training of Jesus with them. See on ¯Matthew:14:22,23|. To this pass things had come one year before the Crucifixion. He had done his best to help and bless the crowds and lost his chance to rest. No one really understood Jesus, not the crowds, not the disciples. Jesus needed the Father to stay and steady him. The devil had come again to tempt him with world dominion in league with the Pharisees, the populace, and the devil in the background.

rwp@Mark:8:27 @{Into the villages of Caesarea Philippi} (\eis tƒs k“mas Kaisariƒs tˆs Philippou\). Parts (\merˆ\) strkjv@Matthew:16:13| has, the Caesarea of Philippi in contrast to the one down on the Mediterranean Sea. Mark means the villages belonging to the district around Caesarea Philippi. This region is on a spur of Mount Hermon in Iturea ruled by Herod Philip so that Jesus is safe from annoyance by Herod Antipas or the Pharisees and Sadducees. Up here on this mountain slope Jesus will have his best opportunity to give the disciples special teaching concerning the crucifixion just a little over six months ahead. Songs:Jesus asked (\epˆr“tƒ\, descriptive imperfect) {Who do men say that I am?} (\Tina me legousin hoi anthr“poi einai;\). strkjv@Matthew:16:13| has "the Son of Man" in place of "I" here in Mark and in strkjv@Luke:9:18|. He often described himself as "the Son of Man." Certainly here the phrase could not mean merely "a man." They knew the various popular opinions about Jesus of which Herod Antipas had heard (Mark:3:21,31|). It was time that the disciples reveal how much they had been influenced by their environment as well as by the direct instruction of Jesus.

rwp@Mark:8:33 @{He turning about and seeing his disciples} (\epistrapheis kai id“n tous mathˆtƒs autou\). Peter had called Jesus off to himself (\proskalesamenos\), but Jesus quickly wheeled round on Peter (\epistrapheis\, only \strapheis\ in Matthew). In doing that the other disciples were in plain view also (this touch only in Mark). Hence Jesus rebukes Peter in the full presence of the whole group. Peter no doubt felt that it was his duty as a leader of the Twelve to remonstrate with the Master for this pessimistic utterance (Swete). It is even possible that the others shared Peter's views and were watching the effect of his daring rebuke of Jesus. It was more than mere officiousness on the part of Peter. He had not risen above the level of ordinary men and deserves the name of Satan whose role he was now acting. It was withering, but it was needed. The temptation of the devil on the mountain was here offered by Peter. It was Satan over again. See on ¯Matthew:16:23|.

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) and adds "with power." Certainly the second coming did not take place while some of those standing there still lived. Did Jesus mean that? The very next incident in the Synoptic Gospels is the Transfiguration on Mount Hermon. Does not Jesus have that in mind here? The language will apply also to the coming of the Holy Spirit on the great Day of Pentecost. Some see in it a reference to the destruction of the temple. It is at least open to question whether the Master is speaking of the same event in strkjv@Mark:8:38; strkjv@9:1|.

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:12:28 @{Heard them questioning together} (\akousas aut“n sunzˆtount“n\). The victory of Christ over the Sadducees pleased the Pharisees who now had come back with mixed emotions over the new turn of things (Matthew:22:34|). strkjv@Luke:20:39| represents one of the scribes as commending Jesus for his skilful reply to the Sadducees. Mark here puts this scribe in a favourable light, "knowing that he had answered them well" (\eid“s hoti kal“s apekrithˆ autois\). "Them" here means the Sadducees. But strkjv@Matthew:22:35| says that this lawyer (\nomikos\) was "tempting" (\peiraz“n\) by his question. "A few, among whom was the scribe, were constrained to admire, even if they were willing to criticize, the Rabbi who though not himself a Pharisee, surpassed the Pharisees as a champion of the truth." That is a just picture of this lawyer. {The first of all} (\pr“tˆ pant“n\). First in rank and importance. strkjv@Matthew:22:36| has "great" (\megalˆ\). See discussion there. Probably Jesus spoke in Aramaic. "First" and "great" in Greek do not differ essentially here. Mark quotes strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:4f.| as it stands in the LXX and also strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|. strkjv@Matthew:22:40| adds the summary: "On these two commandments hangeth (\krematai\) the whole law and the prophets."

rwp@Mark:12:35 @{How say the scribes} (\P“s legousin hoi grammateis\). The opponents of Jesus are silenced, but he answers them and goes on teaching (\didask“n\) in the temple as before the attacks began that morning (11:27|). They no longer dare to question Jesus, but he has one to put to them "while the Pharisees were gathered together" (Matthew:22:41|). The question is not a conundrum or scriptural puzzle (Gould), but "He contents himself with pointing out a difficulty, in the solution of which lay the key to the whole problem of His person and work" (Swete). The scribes all taught that the Messiah was to be the son of David (John:7:41|). The people in the Triumphal Entry had acclaimed Jesus as the son of David (Matthew:21:9|). But the rabbis had overlooked the fact that David in strkjv@Psalms:110:1| called the Messiah his Lord also. The deity and the humanity of the Messiah are both involved in the problem. strkjv@Matthew:22:45| observes that "no one was able to answer him a word."

rwp@Mark:13:1 @{Master, behold, what manner of stones and what manner of buildings} (\didaskale, ide potapoi lithoi kai potapai oikodomai\). strkjv@Matthew:24:1| and strkjv@Luke:21:5| tell of the fact of the comment, but Mark alone gives the precise words. Perhaps Peter himself (Swete) was the one who sought thus by a pleasant platitude to divert the Teacher's attention from the serious topics of recent hours in the temple. It was not a new observation, but the merest commonplace might serve at this crisis. Josephus (_Ant_. xv. II, 3) speaks of the great size of these stones and the beauty of the buildings. Some of these stones at the southeastern and southwestern angles survive today and measure from twenty to forty feet long and weigh a hundred tons. Jesus had, of course, often observed them.

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

rwp@Mark:14:54 @{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:15:2 @{Art thou the King of the Jews?} (\Su ei ho basileus t“n Ioudai“n;\). This is the only one of the charges made by the Sanhedrin to Pilate (Luke:23:2|) that he notices. He does not believe this one to be true, but he has to pay attention to it or be liable to charges himself of passing over a man accused of rivalry and revolution against Caesar. strkjv@John:18:28-32| gives the interview with Jesus that convinces Pilate that he is a harmless religious fanatic. See on ¯Matthew:26:11|. {Thou sayest} (\su legeis\). An affirmation, though in strkjv@John:18:34-37| there is a second and fuller interview between Pilate and Jesus. "Here, as in the trial before the Sanhedrin, this is the one question that Jesus answers. It is the only question on which his own testimony is important and necessary" (Gould). The Jews were out on the pavement or sidewalk outside the palace while Pilate came out to them from above on the balcony (John:18:28f.|) and had his interviews with Jesus on the inside, calling Jesus thither (John:18:33|).

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@Mark:16:20 @{The Lord working with them} (\tou kuriou sunergountos\). Genitive absolute. This participle not in Gospels elsewhere nor is \bebaiountos\ nor the compound \epakolouthount“n\, all in Paul's Epistles. \Pantacho–\ once in Luke. Westcott and Hort give the alternative ending found in L: "And they announced briefly to Peter and those around him all the things enjoined. And after these things Jesus himself also sent forth through them from the east even unto the west the holy and incorruptible proclamation of the eternal salvation."

rwp@Matthew:1:20 @{An angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream} (\aggelos kuriou kat' onar ephanˆ aut“i\). This expression (\aggelos kuriou\) is without the article in the New Testament except when, as in strkjv@1:24|...the Old Testament Jehovah Himself is...1:16|. Mary is called his "wife" (\tˆn gunaika sou\). He is told "not to become afraid" (ingressive first aorist passive subjunctive in prohibition, (\mˆ phobˆthˆis\), "to take to his side" (\paralabein\, ingressive aorist active infinitive) her whom he had planned (\enthumˆthentos\, genitive absolute again, from \en\ and \thumos\) to send away with a writ of divorce. He had pondered and had planned as best he knew, but now God had called a halt and he had to decide whether he was willing to shelter Mary by marrying her and, if necessary, take upon himself whatever stigma might attach to her. Joseph was told that the child was begotten of the Holy Spirit and thus that Mary was innocent of any sin. But who would believe it now if he told it of her? Mary knew the truth and had not told him because she could not expect him to believe it.

rwp@Matthew:1:21 @{Thou shalt call his name Jesus} (\Kalesies to onoma autou Iˆsoun\). The rabbis named six whose names were given before birth: "Isaac, Ishmael, Moses, Solomon, Josiah, and the name of the Messiah, whom may the Holy One, blessed be His name, bring in our day." The angel puts it up to Joseph as the putative father to name the child. "Jesus is the same as Joshua, a contraction of Jehoshuah (Numbers:13:16; strkjv@1Chronicles:7:27|), signifying in Hebrew, 'Jehovah is helper,' or 'Help of Jehovah'" (Broadus). Songs:Jesus is the Greek form of Joshua (Hebrews:4:8|). He is another Joshua to lead the true people of God into the Promised Land. The name itself was common enough as Josephus shows. Jehovah is Salvation as seen in Joshua for the Hebrews and in Jesus for all believers. "The meaning of the name, therefore, finds expression in the title _Saviour_ applied to our Lord (Luke:1:47; strkjv@2:11; strkjv@John:4:42|)" (Vincent). He will save (\s“sei\) his people from their sins and so be their Saviour (\S“tˆr\). He will be prophet, priest, and king, but "Saviour" sums it all up in one word. The explanation is carried out in the promise, "for he is the one who (\autos\) will save (\s“sei\ with a play on the name Jesus) his people from their sins." Paul will later explain that by the covenant people, the children of promise, God means the spiritual Israel, all who believe whether Jews or Gentiles. This wonderful word touches the very heart of the mission and message of the Messiah. Jesus himself will show that the kingdom of heaven includes all those and only those who have the reign of God in their hearts and lives. {From their sins} (\apo t“n hamarti“n aut“n\). Both sins of omission and of commission. The substantive (\hamartia\) is from the verb (\hamartanein\) and means missing the mark as with an arrow. How often the best of us fall short and fail to score. Jesus will save us away from (\apo\) as well as out of (\ex\) our sins. They will be cast into oblivion and he will cover them up out of sight.

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:2:5 @{And they said unto him} (\hoi de eipan aut“i\). Whether the ecclesiastics had to search their scriptures or not, they give the answer that is in accord with the common Jewish opinion that the Messiah was to come from Bethlehem and of the seed of David (John:7:42|). Songs:they quote strkjv@Micah:5:2|, "a free paraphrase" Alford calls it, for it is not precisely like the Hebrew text or like the Septuagint. It may have come from a collection of _testimonia_ with which J. Rendel Harris has made the world familiar. He had consulted the experts and now he has their answer. Bethlehem of Judah is the place. The use of the perfect passive indicative (\gegraptai\) is the common form in quoting scripture. It stands written. {Shall be shepherd} (\poimanei\). The Authorized Version had "shall rule," but "shepherd" is correct. "Homer calls kings 'the shepherds of the people'" (Vincent). In strkjv@Hebrews:13:20| Jesus is called "the great shepherd of the sheep." Jesus calls himself "the good shepherd" (John:10:11|). Peter calls Christ "the chief shepherd" (1Peter:2:25|). "The Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall be their shepherd" (Revelation:7:17|). Jesus told Peter to "shepherd" the lambs (John:21:16|). Our word pastor means shepherd.

rwp@Matthew:2:7 @{Then Herod privily called the wise men} (\tote Hˆr“idˆs lathrai kalesas tous magous\). He had manifestly not told members of the Sanhedrin why he was concerned about the Messiah. Songs:he conceals his motives to the Magi. And yet he "learned of them carefully" (\ekrib“sen\), "learned exactly" or "accurately." He was anxious to see if the Jewish prophecy of the birthplace of the Messiah agreed with the indications of the star to the Magi. He kept to himself his purpose. The time of the appearing star (\ton chronon tou phainomenou asteros\) is not "the time when the star appeared," but the age of the star's appearance.

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:4:3 @{If thou art the Son of God} (\ei huios ei tou theou\). More exactly, "If thou art Son of God," for there is no article with "Son." The devil is alluding to the words of the Father to Jesus at the baptism: "This is my Son the Beloved." He challenges this address by a condition of the first class which assumes the condition to be true and deftly calls on Jesus to exercise his power as Son of God to appease his hunger and thus prove to himself and all that he really is what the Father called him. {Become bread} (\artoi gen“ntai\). Literally, "that these stones (round smooth stones which possibly the devil pointed to or even picked up and held) become loaves" (each stone a loaf). It was all so simple, obvious, easy. It would satisfy the hunger of Christ and was quite within his power. {It is written} (\gegraptai\). Perfect passive indicative, stands written and is still in force. Each time Jesus quotes Deuteronomy to repel the subtle temptation of the devil. Here it is strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:3| from the Septuagint. Bread is a mere detail (Bruce) in man's dependence upon God.

rwp@Matthew:4:6 @{Cast thyself down} (\bale seauton kat“\). The appeal to hurl himself down into the abyss below would intensify the nervous dread that most people feel at such a height. The devil urged presumptuous reliance on God and quotes Scripture to support his view (Psalms:91:11f.|). Songs:the devil quotes the Word of God, misinterprets it, omits a clause, and tries to trip the Son of God by the Word of God. It was a skilful thrust and would also be accepted by the populace as proof that Jesus was the Messiah if they should see him sailing down as if from heaven. This would be a sign from heaven in accord with popular Messianic expectation. The promise of the angels the devil thought would reassure Jesus. They would be a spiritual parachute for Christ.

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:5:19 @{Shall do and teach} (\poiˆsˆi kai didaxˆi\). Jesus puts practice before preaching. The teacher must apply the doctrine to himself before he is qualified to teach others. The scribes and Pharisees were men who "say and do not" (Matthew:23:3|), who preach but do not perform. This is Christ's test of greatness.

rwp@Matthew:5:34 @{Swear not at all} (\mˆ omosai hol“s\). More exactly "not to swear at all" (indirect command, and aorist infinitive). Certainly Jesus does not prohibit oaths in a court of justice for he himself answered Caiaphas on oath. Paul made solemn appeals to God (1Thessalonians:5:27; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:31|). Jesus prohibits all forms of profanity. The Jews were past-masters in the art of splitting hairs about allowable and forbidden oaths or forms of profanity just as modern Christians employ a great variety of vernacular "cuss-words" and excuse themselves because they do not use the more flagrant forms.

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:6:7 @{Use not vain repetitions} (\mˆ battalogˆsˆte\). Used of stammerers who repeat the words, then mere babbling or chattering, empty repetition. The etymology is uncertain, but it is probably onomatopoetic like "babble." The worshippers of Baal on Mount Carmel (1Kings:8:26|) and of Diana in the amphitheatre at Ephesus who yelled for two hours (Acts:19:34|) are examples. The Mohammedans may also be cited who seem to think that they "will be heard for their much speaking" (\en tˆi polulogiƒi\). Vincent adds "and the Romanists with their _paternosters_ and _avast_." The Syriac Sinaitic has it: "Do not be saying idle things." Certainly Jesus does not mean to condemn all repetition in prayer since he himself prayed three times in Gethsemane "saying the same words again" (Matthew:26:44|). "As the Gentiles do," says Jesus. "The Pagans thought that by endless repetitions and many words they would inform their gods as to their needs and weary them ('_fatigare deos_') into granting their requests" (Bruce).

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:8:7 @{I will come and heal him} (\eg“ elth“n therapeus“ auton\). Future indicative, not deliberative subjunctive in question (McNeile). The word here for heal (\therapeus“\) means first to serve, give medical attention, then cure, restore to health. The centurion uses the more definite word for healing (\iathˆsetai\ strkjv@8:8|) as Matthew does in strkjv@8:13| (\iathˆ\). Luke (Luke:9:11|), like a physician, says that Jesus healed (\iato\) those in need of treatment (\therapeias\), but the distinction is not always observed. In strkjv@Acts:28:8| Luke uses \iasato\ of the miraculous healings in Malta by Paul while he employs \etherapeuonto\ (Acts:28:9|) apparently of the practice of Luke the physician (so W. M. Ramsay). Matthew represents the centurion himself as speaking to Jesus while Luke has it that two committees from the centurion brought the messages, apparently a more detailed narrative. What one does through others he does himself as Pilate "scourged Jesus" (had him scourged).

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: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 follow behind the twelve as he did with the seventy "whither he himself was about to come" (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:11:14 @{This is Elijah} (\autos estin Eleias\). Jesus here endorses John as the promise of Malachi. The people understood strkjv@Malachi:4:1| to mean the return of Elijah in person. This John denied as to himself (John:1:21|). But Jesus affirms that John is the Elijah of promise who has come already (Matthew:17:12|). He emphasizes the point: "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."

rwp@Matthew:12:30 @{He that is not with me} (\ho mˆ “n met' emou\). With these solemn words Jesus draws the line of cleavage between himself and his enemies then and now. Jesus still has his enemies who hate him and all noble words and deeds because they sting what conscience they have into fury. But we may have our choice. We either gather with (\sunag“n\) Christ or scatter (\skorpizei\) to the four winds. Christ is the magnet of the ages. He draws or drives away. "Satan is the arch-waster, Christ the collector, Saviour" (Bruce).

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:13:3 @{Many things in parables} (\polla en parabolais\). It was not the first time that Jesus had used parables, but the first time that he had spoken so many and some of such length. He will use a great many in the future as in Luke 12 to 18 and Matt. 24 and 25. The parables already mentioned in Matthew include the salt and the light (5:13-16|), the birds and the lilies (6:26-30|), the splinter and the beam in the eye (7:3-5|), the two gates (7:13f.|), the wolves in sheep's clothing (7:15|), the good and bad trees (7:17-19|), the wise and foolish builders (7:24-27|), the garment and the wineskins (9:16f.|), the children in the market places (11:16f.|). It is not certain how many he spoke on this occasion. Matthew mentions eight in this chapter (the Sower, the Tares, the Mustard Seed, the Leaven, the Hid Treasure, the Pearl of Great Price, the Net, the Householder). Mark adds the Parable of the Lamp (Mark:4:21; strkjv@Luke:8:16|), the Parable of the Seed Growing of Itself (Mark:4:26-29|), making ten of which we know. But both Mark (Mark:4:33|) and Matthew (13:34|) imply that there were many others. "Without a parable spake he nothing unto them" (Matthew:13:34|), on this occasion, we may suppose. The word parable (\parabolˆ\ from \paraball“\, to place alongside for measurement or comparison like a yardstick) is an objective illustration for spiritual or moral truth. The word is employed in a variety of ways (a) as for sententious sayings or proverbs (Matthew:15:15; strkjv@Mark:3:23; strkjv@Luke:4:23; strkjv@5:36-39; strkjv@6:39|), for a figure or type (Heb. strkjv@9:9; strkjv@11:19|); (b) a comparison in the form of a narrative, the common use in the Synoptic Gospels like the Sower; (c) "A narrative illustration not involving a comparison" (Broadus), like the Rich Fool, the Good Samaritan, etc. "The oriental genius for picturesque speech found expression in a multitude of such utterances" (McNeile). There are parables in the Old Testament, in the Talmud, in sermons in all ages. But no one has spoken such parables as these of Jesus. They hold the mirror up to nature and, as all illustrations should do, throw light on the truth presented. The fable puts things as they are not in nature, Aesop's Fables, for instance. The parable may not be actual fact, but it could be so. It is harmony with the nature of the case. The allegory (\allˆgoria\) is a speaking parable that is self-explanatory all along like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_. All allegories are parables, but not all parables are allegories. The Prodigal Son is an allegory, as is the story of the Vine and Branches (John:15|). John does not use the word parable, but only \paroimia\, a saying by the way (John:10:6; strkjv@16:25,29|). As a rule the parables of Jesus illustrate one main point and the details are more or less incidental, though sometimes Jesus himself explains these. When he does not do so, we should be slow to interpret the minor details. Much heresy has come from fantastic interpretations of the parables. In the case of the Parable of the Sower (13:3-8|) we have also the careful exposition of the story by Jesus (18-23|) as well as the reason for the use of parables on this occasion by Jesus (9-17|).

rwp@Matthew:13:14 @{Is fulfilled} (\anaplˆroutai\). Aoristic present passive indicative. Here Jesus points out the fulfilment and not with Matthew's usual formula (\hina\ or \hop“s pl“rˆthˆi to rhˆthen\ (see strkjv@1:22|). The verb \anaplˆro“\ occurs nowhere else in the Gospels, but occurs in the Pauline Epistles. It means to fill up like a cup, to fill another's place (1Corinthians:14:16|), to fill up what is lacking (Phillipians:2:30|). Here it means that the prophecy of Isaiah is fully satisfied in the conduct of the Pharisees and Jesus himself points it out. Note two ways of reproducing the Hebrew idiom (infinitive absolute), one by \akoˆi\ the other by \blepontes\. Note also the strong negative \ou mˆ\ with aorist subjunctive.

rwp@Matthew:13:44 @{And hid} (\kai ekrupsen\). Not necessarily bad morality. "He may have hid it to prevent it being stolen, or to prevent himself from being anticipated in buying a field" (Plummer). But if it was a piece of sharp practice, that is not the point of the parable. That is, the enormous wealth of the Kingdom for which any sacrifice, all that one has, is not too great a price to pay.

rwp@Matthew:15:5 @{But ye say} (\h–meis de legete\). In sharp contrast to the command of God. Jesus had quoted the fifth commandment (Exodus:20:12,16|) with the penalty "die the death" (\thanat“i teleutat“\), "go on to his end by death," in imitation of the Hebrew idiom. They dodged this command of God about the penalty for dishonouring one's father or mother by the use "Corban" (\korban\) as Mark calls it (Mark:7:11|). All one had to do to evade one's duty to father or mother was to say "Corban" or "Gift" (\D“ron\) with the idea of using the money for God. By an angry oath of refusal to help one's parents, the oath or vow was binding. By this magic word one set himself free (\ou mˆ timˆsei\, he shall not honour) from obedience to the fifth commandment. Sometimes unfilial sons paid graft to the rabbinical legalists for such dodges. Were some of these very faultfinders guilty?

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:16:20 @{That they should tell no man} (\hina mˆdeni eip“sin\). Why? For the very reason that he had himself avoided this claim in public. He was the Messiah (\ho Christos\), but the people would inevitably take it in a political sense. Jesus was plainly profoundly moved by Peter's great confession on behalf of the disciples. He was grateful and confident of the final outcome. But he foresaw peril to all. Peter had confessed him as the Messiah and on this rock of faith thus confessed he would build his church or kingdom. They will all have and use the keys to this greatest of all buildings, but for the present they must be silent.

rwp@Matthew:18:4 @{This little child} (\to paidion touto\). This saying about humbling oneself Jesus repeated a number of times as for instance in strkjv@Matthew:23:12|. Probably Jesus pointed to the child by his side. The ninth-century story that the child was Ignatius is worthless. It is not that the child humbled himself, but that the child is humble from the nature of the case in relation to older persons. That is true, however "bumptious" the child himself may be. Bruce observes that to humble oneself is "the most difficult thing in the world for saint as for sinner."

rwp@Matthew:24:22 @{Had been shortened} (\ekolob“thˆsan\). From \kolobos\, lopped, mutilated, as the hands, the feet. It is a second-class condition, determined as unfulfilled. It is a prophetic figure, the future regarded as past. {For the elect's sake} (\dia tous eklektous\). See strkjv@Matthew:22:14| for another use of this phrase by Jesus and also strkjv@24:31|. The siege was shortened by various historical events like the stopping of the strengthening of the walls by Herod Agrippa by orders from the Emperor, the sudden arrival of Titus, the neglect of the Jews to prepare for a long siege. "Titus himself confessed that God was against the Jews, since otherwise neither his armies nor his engines would have availed against their defences" (Vincent).

rwp@Matthew:24:30 @{The sign of the Son of Man in heaven} (\to sˆmeion tou huiou tou anthr“pou en ouran“i\). Many theories have been suggested like the cross in the sky, etc. Bruce sees a reference to strkjv@Daniel:7:13| "one like the Son of man" and holds that Christ himself is the sign in question (the genitive of apposition). This is certainly possible. It is confirmed by the rest of the verse: "They shall see the Son of man coming." See strkjv@Matthew:16:27; strkjv@26:64|. The Jews had repeatedly asked for such a sign (Broadus) as in strkjv@Matthew:12:38; strkjv@16:1; strkjv@John:2:18|.

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

rwp@Matthew:26:29 @{When I drink it new with you} (\hotan auto pin“ meth' hum“n kaimon\). This language rather implies that Jesus himself partook of the bread and the wine, though it is not distinctly stated. In the Messianic banquet it is not necessary to suppose that Jesus means the language literally, "the fruit of the vine." Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, pp. 109f.) gives an instance of \genˆma\ used of the vine in a papyrus 230 B.C. The language here employed does not make it obligatory to employ wine rather than pure grape juice if one wishes the other.

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:26:65 @{He hath spoken blasphemy} (\eblasphˆmˆsen\). There was no need of witnesses now, for Jesus had incriminated himself by claiming under oath to be the Messiah, the Son of God. Now it would not be blasphemy for the real Messiah to make such a claim, but it was intolerable to admit that Jesus could be the Messiah of Jewish hope. At the beginning of Christ's ministry he occasionally used the word Messiah of himself, but he soon ceased, for it was plain that it would create trouble. The people would take it in the sense of a political revolutionist who would throw off the Roman yoke. If he declined that role, the Pharisees would have none of him for that was the kind of a Messiah that they desired. But the hour has now come. At the Triumphal Entry Jesus let the Galilean crowds hail him as Messiah, knowing what the effect would be. Now the hour has struck. He has made his claim and has defied the High Priest.

rwp@Matthew:26:69 @{Thou also} (\kai su\). Peter had gone within (\es“\) the palace (26:58|), but was sitting {without} (\ex“\) the hall where the trial was going on in the open central court with the servants or officers (\hupˆret“n\, under rowers, literally, strkjv@26:58|) of the Sanhedrin. But he could possibly see through the open door above what was going on inside. It is not plain at what stage of the Jewish trial the denials of Peter took place nor the precise order in which they came as the Gospels give them variously. This maid (\paidiskˆ\, slave girl) stepped up to Peter as he was sitting in the court and pointedly said: "Thou also wast with Jesus the Galilean." Peter was warming himself by the fire and the light shone in his face. She probably had noticed Peter come in with John the Beloved Disciple who went on up into the hall of trial. Or she may have seen Peter with Jesus on the streets of Jerusalem.

rwp@Matthew:26:74 @{Then began he to curse and to swear} (\tote ˆrxato katathematizein kai omnuein\). He repeated his denial with the addition of profanity to prove that he was telling the truth instead of the lie that they all knew. His repeated denials gave him away still more, for he could not pronounce the Judean gutterals. He called down on himself (\katathematizein\) imprecations in his desperate irritation and loss of self-control at his exposure. {The cock crew} (\alekt“n eph“nˆsen\). No article in the Greek, just "a cock crew" at that juncture, "straightway" (\euthus\). But it startled Peter.

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

rwp@Matthew:27:24 @{Washed his hands} (\apenipsato tas cheiras\). As a last resort since the hubbub (\thorubos\) increased because of his vacillation. The verb \aponipt“\ means to wash off and the middle voice means that he washed off his hands for himself as a common symbol of cleanliness and added his pious claim with a slap at them. {I am innocent of the blood of this righteous man} (or {this blood}); {see ye to it}. (\Ath“ios eimi apo tou haimatos tou dikaiou toutou\ or \tou haimatos toutou\ as some manuscripts have it, \humeis opsesthe\.) The Jews used this symbol (Deuteronomy:21:6; strkjv@Psalms:26:6; strkjv@73:13|). Plummer doubts if Pilate said these words with a direct reference to his wife's message (26:19|), but I fail to see the ground for that scepticism. The so-called _Gospel of Peter_ says that Pilate washed his hands because the Jews refused to do so.

rwp@Matthew:27:32 @{Compelled} (\ˆggareusan\). This word of Persian origin was used in strkjv@Matthew:5:41|, which see. There are numerous papyri examples of Ptolemaic date and it survives in modern Greek vernacular. Songs:the soldiers treat Simon of Cyrene (a town of Libya) as a Persian courier (\aggaros\) and impress him into service, probably because Jesus was showing signs of physical weakness in bearing his own Cross as the victims had to do, and not as a mere jest on Simon. "Gethsemane, betrayal, the ordeal of the past sleepless night, scourging, have made the flesh weak" (Bruce). Yes, and the burden of sin of the world that was breaking his heart. {His cross} (\ton stauron autou\). Jesus had used the term cross about himself (16:24|). It was a familiar enough picture under Roman rule. Jesus had long foreseen and foretold this horrible form of death for himself (Matthew:20:19; strkjv@23:24; strkjv@26:2|). He had heard the cry of the mob to Pilate that he be crucified (27:22|) and Pilate's surrender (27:26|) and he was on the way to the Cross (27:31|). There were various kinds of crosses and we do not know precisely the shape of the Cross on which Jesus was crucified, though probably the one usually presented is correct. Usually the victim was nailed (hands and feet) to the cross before it was raised and it was not very high. The crucifixion was done by the soldiers (27:35|) in charge and two robbers were crucified on each side of Jesus, three crosses standing in a row (27:38|).

rwp@Matthew:27:42 @{He saved others; himself he cannot save} (\allous es“sen; heauton ou dunatai s“sai\). The sarcasm is true, though they do not know its full significance. If he had saved himself now, he could not have saved any one. The paradox is precisely the philosophy of life proclaimed by Jesus himself (Matthew:10:39|). {Let him now come down} (\katabat“ nun\). Now that he is a condemned criminal nailed to the Cross with the claim of being "the King of Israel" (the Jews) over his head. Their spiteful assertion that they would then believe upon Jesus (\ep' auton\) is plainly untrue. They would have shifted their ground and invented some other excuse. When Jesus wrought his greatest miracles, they wanted "a sign from heaven." These "pious scoffers" (Bruce) are like many today who make factitious and arbitrary demands of Christ whose character and power and deity are plain to all whose eyes are not blinded by the god of this world. Christ will not give new proofs to the blind in heart.

rwp@Matthew:27:46 @{My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?} (\Thee mou, thee mou, hina ti me egkatelipes;\). Matthew first transliterates the Aramaic, according to the Vatican manuscript (B), the words used by Jesus: _El“i, el“i, lema sabachthanei_; Some of the MSS. give the transliteration of these words from strkjv@Psalms:22:1| in the Hebrew (_Eli, Eli, lama Zaphthanei_). This is the only one of the seven sayings of Christ on the Cross given by Mark and Matthew. The other six occur in Luke and John. This is the only sentence of any length in Aramaic preserved in Matthew, though he has Aramaic words like amen, corban, mammon, pascha, raca, Satan, Golgotha. The so-called Gospel of Peter preserves this saying in a Docetic (Cerinthian) form: "My power, my power, thou hast forsaken me!" The Cerinthian Gnostics held that the _aeon_ Christ came on the man Jesus at his baptism and left him here on the Cross so that only the man Jesus died. Nothing from Jesus so well illustrates the depth of his suffering of soul as he felt himself regarded as sin though sinless (2Corinthians:5:21|). strkjv@John:3:16| comes to our relief here as we see the Son of God bearing the sin of the world. This cry of desolation comes at the close of the three hours of darkness.

rwp@Info_Philemon @ THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON FROM ROME A.D. 63 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION This little letter was sent to Philemon by Onesimus, a converted runaway slave of Philemon, along with Tychicus who is going to Colossae with Onesimus (Colossians:4:7-9|) as the bearer also of the so-called Epistle to the Ephesians (Ephesians:6:21f.|). Hence it is clear that these three Epistles were carried to the Province of Asia at the same time. Colossians was probably written before Ephesians which appears to be a general treatment of the same theme. Whether Philemon was actually penned before the other two there is no way of knowing. But it is put first here as standing apart. Probably Paul wrote it himself without dictation because in verse 19| it constitutes a note in his own hand to Philemon for what Onesimus may owe him. Paul applies the spirit of Christianity to the problem of slavery in words that have ultimately set the slaves free from bondage to men. strkjv@Philemon:1:1 @{A prisoner of Christ Jesus} (\desmios Christou Iˆsou\). As verse 9| and in strkjv@Ephesians:3:1; strkjv@4:1|. Old adjective from \desmos\ (bond, \de“\, to bind). Apparently used here on purpose rather than \apostolos\ as more effective with Philemon and a more touching occasion of pride as Paul writes with his manacled right hand. {Timothy} (\Timotheos\). With Paul in Ephesus (Acts:19:22|) and probably known to Philemon. Associated with Paul also in I and II Thess., II Cor., Philipp., Col. {To Philemon} (\Philˆmoni\). A resident of Colossae and a convert of Paul's (verse 19|), perhaps coming to Ephesus while Paul was there when his ministry had so much influence over the province of Asia (Acts:19:9f., 26; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:19|). The name Philemon occurs in the legend of Baucis and Philemon (Ovid's _Metamorphoses_), but with no connection with the brother here. He was active in the church in Colossae ("our co-worker," \sunerg“i hˆm“n\) and was beloved (\agapˆt“i\) by Paul.

rwp@Philemon:1:9 @{Paul the aged} (\Paulos presbutˆs\). Paul is called \neanias\ (a young man) at the stoning of Stephen (Acts:7:58|). He was perhaps a bit under sixty now. Hippocrates calls a man \presbutˆs\ from 49 to 56 and \ger“n\ after that. The papyri use \presbutˆs\ for old man as in strkjv@Luke:1:18| of Zacharias and in strkjv@Titus:2:2|. But in strkjv@Ephesians:6:20| Paul says \presbeu“ en halusei\ (I am an ambassador in a chain). Hence Lightfoot holds that here \presbutˆs\ = \presbeutˆs\ because of common confusion by the scribes between \u\ and \eu\. In the LXX four times the two words are used interchangeably. There is some confusion also in the papyri and the inscriptions. Undoubtedly ambassador (\presbeutˆs\) is possible here as in strkjv@Ephesians:6:20| (\presbeu“\) though there is no real reason why Paul should not term himself properly "Paul the aged."

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:2:30 @{Hazarding his life} (\paraboleusamenos tˆi psuchˆi\). First aorist middle participle of \paraboleu“\ (from the adjective \parabolos\), to place beside. The old Greek writers used \paraballomai\, to expose oneself to danger. But Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 88) cites an example of \paraboleusamenos\ from an inscription at Olbia or the Black Sea of the second century A.D. where it plainly means "exposing himself to danger" as here. Lightfoot renders it here "having gambled with his life." The word \parabolani\ (riskers) was applied to the Christians who risked their lives for the dying and the dead.

rwp@Philippians:3:5 @{Thinketh to have confidence} (\dokei pepoithenai\). Second perfect active infinitive. Old idiom, "seems to himself to have confidence." Later idiom like strkjv@Matthew:3:9| "think not to say" and strkjv@1Corinthians:11:16|, "thinks that he has ground of confidence in himself." {I yet more} (\eg“ mallon\). "I have more ground for boasting than he" and Paul proceeds to prove it in the rest of verses 5,6|. {Circumcised the eighth day} (\peritomˆi oktaˆmeros\). "In circumcision (locative case) an eighth day man." Use of the ordinal with persons like \tetartaios\ (John:11:39|). Ishmaelites were circumcised in the thirteenth year, proselytes from Gentiles in mature age, Jews on the eighth day (Luke:2:21|). {Of the stock of Israel} (\ek genous Israˆl\). Of the original stock, not a proselyte. {Benjamin} (\Beniamin\). Son of the right hand (that is, left-handed), son of Rachel. The first King, Saul (Paul's own Hebrew name) was from this little tribe. The battle cry of Israel was "After thee, O Benjamin" (Judges:5:14|). {A Hebrew of the Hebrews} (\Ebraios ex Ebrai“n\). Of Hebrew parents who retained the characteristic qualities in language and custom as distinct from the Hellenistic Jews (Acts:6:1|). Paul was from Tarsus and knew Greek as well as Aramaic (Acts:21:40; strkjv@22:2|) and Hebrew, but he had not become Hellenized. {A Pharisee} (\Pharisaios\). In distinction from the Sadducees (Galatians:1:14|) and he continued a Pharisee in many essential matters like the doctrine of the resurrection (Acts:23:6|). Cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:11:22|.

rwp@Philippians:3:14 @{Toward the goal} (\kata skopon\). "Down upon the goal," who is Jesus himself to whom we must continually look as we run (Hebrews:12:2|). The word means a watchman, then the goal or mark. Only here in N.T. {Unto the prize} (\eis to brabeion\). Late word (Menander and inscriptions) from \brabeus\ (umpire who awards the prize). In N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:9:24|. {Of the high calling} (\tˆs an“ klˆse“s\). Literally, "of the upward calling." The goal continually moves forward as we press on, but yet never out of sight.

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

rwp@Revelation:1:19 @{Therefore} (\oun\). In view of Christ's words about himself in verse 18| and the command in verse 11|. {Which thou sawest} (\ha eides\). The vision of the Glorified Christ in verses 13-18|. {The things which are} (\ha eisin\). Plural verb (individualising the items) though \ha\ is neuter plural, certainly the messages to the seven churches (1:20-3:22|) in relation to the world in general, possibly also partly epexegetic or explanatory of \ha eides\. {The things which shall come to pass hereafter} (\ha mellei ginesthai meta tauta\). Present middle infinitive with \mellei\, though both aorist and future are also used. Singular verb here (\mellei\) blending in a single view the future. In a rough outline this part begins in strkjv@4:1 and goes to end of chapter 22, though the future appears also in chapters 2 and 3 and the present occurs in 4 to 22 and the elements in the vision of Christ (1:13-18|) reappear repeatedly.

rwp@Revelation:2:6 @{That thou hatest} (\hoti miseis\). Accusative object clause in apposition with \touto\ (this). Trench tells of the words used in ancient Greek for hatred of evil (\misoponˆria\) and \misoponˆros\ (hater of evil), neither of which occurs in the N.T., but which accurately describe the angel of the church in Ephesus. {Of the Nicolaitans} (\t“n Nikolait“n\). Mentioned again in verse 15| and really meant in verse 2|. Irenaeus and Hippolytus take this sect to be followers of Nicolaus of Antioch, one of the seven deacons (Acts:6:5|), a Jewish proselyte, who is said to have apostatized. There was such a sect in the second century (Tertullian), but whether descended from Nicolaus of Antioch is not certain, though possible (Lightfoot). It is even possible that the Balaamites of verse 14| were a variety of this same sect (verse 15|). {Which I also hate} (\ha kag“ mis“\). Christ himself hates the teachings and deeds of the Nicolaitans (\ha\, not \hous\, deeds, not people), but the church in Pergamum tolerated them.

rwp@Revelation:2:10 @{Fear not} (\mˆ phobou\). As in strkjv@1:17|. Worse things are about to come than poverty and blasphemy, perhaps prison and death, for the devil "is about to cast" (\mellei ballein\), "is going to cast." {Some of you} (\ex hum“n\). Without \tinas\ (some) before \ex hum“n\, a common idiom as in strkjv@3:9; strkjv@11:19; strkjv@Luke:11:49|. {That ye may be tried} (\hina peirasthˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \peiraz“\. John himself is in exile. Peter and John had often been in prison together. James the brother of John, Paul, and Peter had all suffered martyrdom. In strkjv@3:10| a general persecution is outlined by \peirasmos\. {Ye shall have} (\hexete\). Future active, but some MSS. read \echˆte\ (present active subjunctive with hina, "that ye may have"). {Tribulation ten days} (\thlipsin hˆmer“n deka\). "Tribulation of ten days" (or "within ten days"). It is unwise to seek a literal meaning for ten days. Even ten days of suffering might seem an eternity while they lasted. {Be thou faithful} (\ginou pistos\). "Keep on becoming faithful" (present middle imperative of \ginomai\), "keep on proving faithful unto death" (Hebrews:12:4|) as the martyrs have done (Jesus most of all). {The crown of life} (\ton stephanon tˆs z“ˆs\). See this very image in strkjv@James:1:12|, a familiar metaphor in the games at Smyrna and elsewhere in which the prize was a garland. See also strkjv@3:11|. The crown consists in life (2:7|). See Paul's use of \stephanos\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:25; strkjv@2Timothy:4:8|.

rwp@Revelation:2:17 @{Of the hidden manna} (\tou manna tou kekrummenou\). "Of the manna the hidden" (perfect passive articular participle of \krupt“\). The partitive genitive, the only N.T. example with \did“mi\, though Q reads \to\ (accusative) here. For examples of the ablative with \apo\ and \ek\ see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 519. See strkjv@John:6:31,49| for the indeclinable word \manna\. The golden pot of manna was "laid up before God in the ark" (Exodus:16:23|). It was believed that Jeremiah hid the ark, before the destruction of Jerusalem, where it would not be discovered till Israel was restored (II Macc. strkjv@2:5ff.). Christ is the true bread from heaven (John:6:31-33, 48-51|) and that may be the idea here. Those faithful to Christ will have transcendent fellowship with him. Swete takes it to be "the life-sustaining power of the Sacred Humanity now hid with Christ in God." {A white stone} (\psˆphon leukˆn\). This old word for pebble (from \psa“\, to rub) was used in courts of justice, black pebbles for condemning, white pebbles for acquitting. The only other use of the word in the N.T. is in strkjv@Acts:26:10|, where Paul speaks of "depositing his pebble" (\katˆnegka psˆphon\) or casting his vote. The white stone with one's name on it was used to admit one to entertainments and also as an amulet or charm. {A new name written} (\onoma kainon gegrammenon\). Perfect passive predicate participle of \graph“\. Not the man's own name, but that of Christ (Heitmuller, _Im Namen Jˆsu_, p. 128-265). See strkjv@3:12| for the name of God so written on one. The man himself may be the \psˆphos\ on which the new name is written. "The true Christian has a charmed life" (Moffatt). {But he that receiveth it} (\ei mˆ ho lamban“n\). "Except the one receiving it." See strkjv@Matthew:11:27| for like intimate and secret knowledge between the Father and the Son and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal the Father. See also strkjv@Revelation:19:12|.

rwp@Revelation:2:18 @{In Thyatira} (\en Thuateirois\). Some forty miles south-east of Pergamum, a Lydian city on the edge of Mysia, under Rome since B.C. 190, a centre of trade, especially for the royal purple, home of Lydia of Philippi (Acts:16:14f.|), shown by inscriptions to be full of trade guilds, Apollo the chief deity with no emperor-worship, centre of activity by the Nicolaitans with their idolatry and licentiousness under a "prophetess" who defied the church there. Ramsay calls it "Weakness Made Strong" (_op. cit._, p. 316). {The Son of God} (\ho huios tou theou\). Here Jesus is represented as calling himself by this title as in strkjv@John:11:4| and as he affirms on oath in strkjv@Matthew:26:63f|. "The Word of God" occurs in strkjv@19:13|. {His eyes like a flame of fire} (\tous ophthalmous autou h“s phloga puros\). As in strkjv@1:14|. {His feet like burnished brass} (\hoi podes autou homoioi chalkoliban“i\). As in strkjv@1:15|.

rwp@Revelation:3:12 @{He that overcometh} (\ho nik“n\). Nominative absolute as in strkjv@2:26|, resumed by the accusative \auton\ (him). {A pillar} (\stulon\). Old word for column, in N.T. only here, strkjv@10:1; strkjv@Galatians:2:9; strkjv@1Timothy:3:15|. Metaphorical and personal use with a double significance of being firmly fixed and giving stability to the building. Philadelphia was a city of earthquakes. "Temple" (\naos\) here is also metaphorical (7:15|), as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:15| for the people of God. In strkjv@21:22| we read that there is no temple in the heavenly Jerusalem (21:10-22:5|) descending as the new Jerusalem with God himself as the temple, though the metaphorical temple is mentioned in strkjv@7:15|. {He shall go out thence no more} (\ex“ ou mˆ elthˆi\). Strong double negative \ou mˆ\ with the second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\. The subject is \ho nik“n\ (the one overcoming). "Fixity of character is at last achieved" (Charles). He, like the \stulos\ (pillar), remains in place. {Upon him} (\ep' auton\). Upon \ho nik“n\ (the victor), not upon the pillar (\stulos\). He receives this triple name (of God, of the city of God, of Christ) on his forehead (14:1; strkjv@7:3; strkjv@17:5; strkjv@22:4|) just as the high-priest wore the name of Jehovah upon his forehead (Exodus:28:36,38|), the new name (2:17|), without any magical or talismanic power, but as proof of ownership by God, as a citizen of the New Jerusalem, with the new symbol of the glorious personality of Christ (Revelation:19:12|), in contrast with the mark of the beast on others (13:17; strkjv@14:17|). For citizenship in God's city see strkjv@Galatians:4:26; strkjv@Phillipians:3:20; strkjv@Hebrews:11:10; strkjv@12:22; strkjv@13:14|. {The new Jerusalem} (\tˆs kainˆs Ierousalˆm\). Not \neas\ (young), but \kainˆs\ (fresh). See also strkjv@21:2,10| and already strkjv@Galatians:4:26; strkjv@Hebrews:12:22|. Charles distinguishes between the Jerusalem before the final judgment and this new Jerusalem after that event. Perhaps so! In the Apocalypse always this form \Ierousalˆm\ (3:12; strkjv@21:2,10|), but in John's Gospel \Hierosoluma\ (1:19|, etc.). {Which cometh down} (\hˆ katabainousa\). Nominative case in apposition with the preceding genitive \pole“s\ as in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@2:20|, etc. {Mine own new name} (\to onoma mou to kainon\). For which see strkjv@2:17; strkjv@19:12,16|. Christ himself will receive a new name along with all else in the future world (Gressmann).

rwp@Revelation:6:17 @{The great day} (\hˆ hˆmera hˆ megalˆ\). The phrase occurs in the O.T. prophets (Joel:2:11,31; strkjv@Zephaniah:1:14|. Cf. strkjv@Jude:1:6|) and is here combined with "of their wrath" (\tˆs orgˆs aut“n\) as in strkjv@Zephaniah:1:15,18; strkjv@2:3; Rom strkjv@2:5|. "Their" (\aut“n\) means the wrath of God and of the Lamb put here on an equality as in strkjv@1:17f., strkjv@22:3,13; strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:11; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:16|. Beckwith holds that this language about the great day having come "is the mistaken cry of men in terror caused by the portents which are bursting upon them." There is something, to be sure, to be said for this view which denies that John commits himself to the position that this is the end of the ages. {And who is able to stand?} (\kai tis dunatai stathˆnai?\). Very much like the words in strkjv@Nahum:1:6; strkjv@Malachi:3:2|. First aorist passive infinitive of \histˆmi\. It is a rhetorical question, apparently by the frightened crowds of verse 15|. Swete observes that the only possible answer to that cry is the command of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:21:36|: "Keep awake on every occasion, praying that ye may get strength to stand (\stathˆnai\, the very form) before the Son of Man."

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:13:3 @{And I saw} (\kai\). No verb (\eidon\) in the old MSS., but clearly understood from verse 2|. {As though it had been smitten} (\h“s esphagmenˆn\). Perfect passive participle of \sphaz“\, as in strkjv@5:6|, accusative singular agreeing with \mian\ (one of the heads), object of \eidon\ understood, "as though slain" (so the word means in seven other instances in the book). There is a reference to the death and new life of the Lamb in strkjv@5:6|. {And his death-stroke was healed} (\kai hˆ plˆgˆ autou etherapeuthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \therapeu“\. "The stroke of death" (that led to death). Apparently refers to the death of Nero in June 68 A.D. by his own hand. But after his death pretenders arose claiming to be Nero _redivivus_ even as late as 89 (Tacitus, _Hist_. i. 78, ii. 8, etc.). John seems to regard Domitian as Nero over again in the persecutions carried on by him. The distinction is not always preserved between the beast (Roman Empire) and the seven heads (emperors), but in strkjv@17:10| the beast survives the loss of five heads. Here it is the death-stroke of one head, while in verses 12,14| the beast himself receives a mortal wound. {Wondered after the beast} (\ethaumasthˆ opis“ tou thˆriou\). First aorist passive (deponent) indicative of \thaumaz“\, to wonder at, to admire, as in strkjv@17:8|. For this pregnant use of \opis“\ see strkjv@John:12:9; strkjv@Acts:5:37; strkjv@20:30; strkjv@1Timothy:5:15|. "All the earth wondered at and followed after the beast," that is Antichrist as represented by Domitian as Nero _redivivus_. But Charles champions the view that Caligula, not Nero, is the head that received the death-stroke and recovered and set up statues of himself for worship, even trying to do it in Jerusalem.

rwp@Revelation:17:10 @{Seven kings} (\basileis hepta\). This is another change in the symbolism. The identification of these seven kings is one of the puzzles of the book. {The five are fallen} (\hoi pente epesan\). Second aorist active indicative of \pipt“\ with the \-an\ ending. Common for the downfall of kings (Ezekiel:29:5; strkjv@30:6; strkjv@Isaiah:21:9|, etc.). See strkjv@2Samuel:3:38|. {The one is} (\ho heis estin\). The one when this vision is dated. {The other is not yet come} (\ho allos oup“ ˆlthen\). Prophetic second aorist active of \erchomai\. Charles takes this as the date of this "source" or part of the Apocalypse. But John could himself have used this language in the time of Domitian even if he was the one who had not yet come. The difficulty about counting these emperors is that Galba, Otho, Vitellius reigned so briefly that they hardly merit being included. {When he cometh} (\hotan elthˆi\). Indefinite temporal clause for the future, with \hotan\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\, "whenever he comes." {He must continue a little while} (\oligon auton dei meinai\). Swete takes this to be Titus, who died September 13, 81, after a short reign.

rwp@Revelation:17:11 @{Is himself also an eighth and is of the seven} (\kai autos ogdoos kai ek t“n hepta\). This is the angel's interpretation and it looks like a reference to Domitian as the eighth, who is regarded as one of the seven because he was considered a second Nero (Nero _redivivus_). For \ek t“n hepta\ see strkjv@Acts:21:8|. John may have used \ek t“n\ instead of \heis ek t“n\ to avoid absolute identity between Domitian and Nero (Beckwith). {And he goeth unto perdition} (\kai eis ap“leian hupagei\). As in verse 8|. "Domitian was assassinated (September 18, 96), after a terrible struggle with his murderers. The tyrant's end was a symbol of the end to which the Beast which he personated was hastening" (Swete). Cf. strkjv@19:11-21|.

rwp@Revelation:19:10 @{To worship him} (\proskunˆsai aut“i\). First aorist active infinitive of purpose. John either felt that the angel represented God or he was beside himself with excitement over the glorious consummation. He was tempted to worship an angel (Colossians:2:18|). {See thou do it not} (\hora mˆ\). Repeated in strkjv@22:9|. Here there is no verb after \mˆ\ (ellipse of \poiˆsˆis touto\) as in strkjv@Mark:1:44; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:15|), the aorist subjunctive of negative purpose with \mˆ\ after \hora\ (present active imperative of \hora“\), a common enough idiom. {Fellow-servant} (\sundoulos\). The angel refuses worship from John on this ground. All Christians are \sundouloi\ (fellow-servants) as Christ taught (Matthew:18:28ff.; strkjv@24:49|) and as Paul (Colossians:1:7; strkjv@4:7|) and John (Revelation:6:11|) taught. Angels are God's servants also (Hebrews:1:4-14|). For "the testimony of Jesus see strkjv@1:2,9; strkjv@6:9; strkjv@12:17; strkjv@22:4|. {Worship God} (\t“i the“i proskunˆson\). And Christ, who is the Son of God (5:13f.|). {The spirit of prophecy} (\to pneuma tˆs prophˆteias\). Explanatory use of \gar\ (for) here as in 8|. The possession of the prophetic spirit shows itself in witness to Jesus. In illustration see strkjv@Mark:1:10; strkjv@Matthew:3:16; strkjv@Luke:3:21; strkjv@John:1:51; strkjv@Revelation:4:1; strkjv@10:1; strkjv@11:19; strkjv@14:17; strkjv@15:5; strkjv@18:1; strkjv@19:1,7-9|.

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

rwp@Revelation:20:3 @{Into the abyss} (\eis tˆn abusson\). The one in strkjv@9:1f.| and the one spoken of by the legion of demons in strkjv@Luke:8:31| under the charge of the angel of the abyss (Apollyon, strkjv@Revelation:9:11|) who is either Satan himself or a kindred power. "Already he has been cast out of Heaven (12:9|), now he is cast out of the earth, and returns to his own place" (Swete). {Shut it and sealed it} (\ekleisen kai esphragisen\). Effective first aorists active indicative of \klei“\ and \sphragiz“\. {That he should deceive no more} (\hina mˆ planˆsˆi\). Negative purpose clause with \hina mˆ\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \plana“\. Glorious relief after the strain of the previous visions of conflict. Small wonder that Christians today cherish this blessed hope whatever the actual meaning may be. {Until should be finished} (\achri telesthˆi\). Temporal clause of future purpose with \achri\ (as a conjunction like \he“s\) and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \tele“\. Repeated in verse 5| and see \achri\ and the subjunctive in strkjv@7:3; strkjv@15:8|. {He must be loosed} (\dei luthˆnai\). Sad necessity, alas, with \dei\ and the first aorist passive infinitive of \lu“\. {For a little time} (\mikron chronon\). Accusative of time. Whatever the thousand years means, it is here said plainly that after it is over the devil will again have power on earth "for a little time."

rwp@Revelation:22:17 @{The Spirit and the bride} (\to pneuma kai hˆ numphˆ\). The Holy Spirit, speaking through the prophets or the Spirit of prophecy (2:7; strkjv@16:4; strkjv@18:24|), joins with the bride (21:2|), the people of God, in a response to the voice of Jesus just heard. After the picture of heaven in strkjv@22:1-5| there is intense longing (19:7|) of God's people for the consummation of the marriage of the Lamb and the Bride. Songs:now "the prophets and the saints" (Swete) make a common plea to the Lord Jesus to "come" (\Erchou\, present middle imperative of \erchomai\, Come on) as he has just said twice that he would do (22:1,12|). The call for Christ is to be repeated by every hearer (\ho akou“n\) as in strkjv@1:3|. {Let him come} (\erchesth“\). Change of person and this verb applied not to Christ as just before, but to the one who wishes to greet Christ. The thirsty man is bidden to come himself before it is too late. See strkjv@5:6| for \dipsa“\, used for spiritual thirst, and in particular strkjv@John:6:35; strkjv@7:37| for one thirsting for the water of life (21:6; strkjv@22:1|). Cf. strkjv@Isaiah:55:1|. {He that will} (\ho thel“n\). Even if not yet eagerly thirsting. This one is welcome also. For this use of \thel“\ see strkjv@Phillipians:2:13|. {Let him take} (\labet“\). Second ingressive aorist active imperative of \lamban“\. In accordance with the free promise in strkjv@21:6|, "freely" (\d“rean\) here as there. This gracious and wide invitation is cheering after the gloomy picture of the doomed and the damned. The warnings against the dragon and the two beasts with all their dreadful consequences are meant to deter men from falling victims to all the devil's devices then and now. The door of mercy still stands wide open today, for the end has not yet come. The series of panoramas is over, with the consummation pictured as a reality. Now we drop back to the standpoint before we saw the visions through John's eyes. In verse 17| we hear the voice of the Spirit of God inviting all who hear and see to heed and to come and drink of the water of life freely offered by the Lamb of God.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE APOCALYPTIC STYLE The book claims to be an apocalypse (Revelation:1:1|) and has to be treated as such. It is an unveiling (\apokalupsis\, from \apokalupt“\) or revelation of Jesus Christ, a prophecy, in other words, of a special type, like Ezekiel, Zechariah, and Daniel in the Old Testament. There was a considerable Jewish apocalyptic literature by this time when John wrote, much of it B.C., some of it A.D., like the Book of Enoch, the Apocalypse of Baruch, the Book of Jubilees, the Assumption of Moses, the Psalms of Solomon, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the Sibylline Oracles, some of them evidently "worked over by Christian hands" (Swete). Jesus himself used the apocalyptic style at times (Mark:13; strkjv@Matthew:24,25; strkjv@Luke:21|). Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:14| spoke of the unpremeditated apocalyptic utterances in the Christian meetings and suggested restraints concerning them. "The Revelation of John is the only written apocalypse, as it is the only written prophecy of the Apostolic age.... The first Christian apocalypse came on the crest of this long wave of apocalyptic effort" (Swete). The reason for this style of writing is usually severe persecution and the desire to deliver a message in symbolic form. The effort of Antiochus Epiphanes, who claimed to be "a god manifest," to hellenize the Jews aroused violent opposition and occasioned many apocalypses to cheer the persecuted Jews.

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@Romans:1:3 @{Concerning his Son} (\peri tou huiou autou\). Just as Jesus found himself in the O.T. (Luke:24:27,46|). The deity of Christ here stated. {According to the flesh} (\kata sarka\). His real humanity alongside of his real deity. For the descent from David see strkjv@Matthew:1:1,6,20; strkjv@Luke:1:27; strkjv@John:7:42; strkjv@Acts:13:23|, etc.

rwp@Romans:1:4 @{Who was declared} (\tou horisthentos\). Articular participle (first aorist passive) of \horiz“\ for which verb see on ¯Luke:22:22; strkjv@Acts:2:23|. He was the Son of God in his preincarnate state (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6|) and still so after his Incarnation (verse 3|, "of the seed of David"), but it was the Resurrection of the dead (\ex anastase“s nekr“n\, the general resurrection implied by that of Christ) that definitely marked Jesus off as God's Son because of his claims about himself as God's Son and his prophecy that he would rise on the third day. This event (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:15|) gave God's seal "with power" (\en dunamei\), "in power," declared so in power (2Corinthians:13:4|). The Resurrection of Christ is the miracle of miracles. "The resurrection only declared him to be what he truly was" (Denney). {According to the spirit of holiness} (\kata pneuma hagi“sunˆs\). Not the Holy Spirit, but a description of Christ ethically as \kata sarka\ describes him physically (Denney). \Hagi“sunˆ\ is rare (1Thessalonians:3:13; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:1| in N.T.), three times in LXX, each time as the attribute of God. "The \pneuma hagi“sunˆs\, though not the Divine nature, is that in which the Divinity or Divine Personality Resided " (Sanday and Headlam). {Jesus Christ our Lord} (\Iˆsou Christou tou kuriou hˆm“n\). These words gather up the total personality of Jesus (his deity and his humanity).

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

rwp@Romans:2:20 @{A corrector of the foolish} (\paideutˆn aphron“n\). Old word (from \paideu“\) for instructor, in Plato, and probably so here, though corrector or chastiser in strkjv@Hebrews:12:9| (the only N.T. instances). See strkjv@Luke:23:16|. Late inscriptions give it as instructor (Preisigke). \Aphron“n\ is a hard word for Gentiles, but it is the Jewish standpoint that Paul gives. Each termed the other "dogs." {Of babes} (\nˆpi“n\). Novitiates or proselytes to Judaism just as in strkjv@Galatians:4:1|. Paul used it of those not of legal age. {The form} (\tˆn morph“sin\). Rare word only in Theophrastus and Paul (here and strkjv@2Timothy:3:5|). Pallis regards it as a Stoical term for education. Lightfoot considers the \morph“sis\ as "the rough-sketch, the pencilling of the \morphˆ\," the outline or framework, and in strkjv@2Timothy:3:5| "the outline without the substance." This is Paul's picture of the Jew as he sees himself drawn with consummate skill and subtle irony.

rwp@Romans:3:7 @{Through my lie} (\en t“i em“i pseusmati\). ] Old word from \pseudomai\, to lie, only here in N.T. Paul returns to the imaginary objection in verse 5|. The MSS. differ sharply here between \ei de\ (but if) and \ei gar\ (for if). Paul "uses the first person from motives of delicacy" (Sanday and Headlam) in this supposable case for argument's sake as in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:6|. Songs:here he "transfers by a fiction" (Field) to himself the objection.

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:3:26 @{For the shewing} (\pros tˆn endeixin\). Repeats point of \eis endeixin\ of 25| with \pros\ instead of \eis\. {At this present season} (\en t“i nun kair“i\). "In the now crisis," in contrast with "done aforetime." {That he might himself be} (\eis to einai auton\). Purpose with \eis\ to and the infinitive \einai\ and the accusative of general reference. {Just and the justifier of} (\dikaion kai dikaiounta\). "This is the key phrase which establishes the connexion between the \dikaiosunˆ theou\ and the \dikaiosunˆ ek piste“s\" (Sanday and Headlam). Nowhere has Paul put the problem of God more acutely or profoundly. To pronounce the unrighteous righteous is unjust by itself (Romans:4:5|). God's mercy would not allow him to leave man to his fate. God's justice demanded some punishment for sin. The only possible way to save some was the propitiatory offering of Christ and the call for faith on man's part.

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

rwp@Romans:4:19 @{Without being weakened in faith} (\mˆ asthenˆsas tˆi pistei\). "Not becoming weak in faith." Ingressive first aorist active participle with negative \mˆ\. {Now as good as dead} (\ˆdˆ nenekr“menon\). Perfect passive participle of \nekro“\, "now already dead." B omits \ˆdˆ\. He was, he knew, too old to become father of a child. {About} (\pou\). The addition of \pou\ (somewhere, about) "qualifies the exactness of the preceding numeral" (Vaughan). The first promise of a son to Abraham and Sarah came (Genesis:15:3f.|) before the birth of Ishmael (86 when Ishmael was born). The second promise came when Abraham was 99 years old (Genesis:17:1|), calling himself 100 (Genesis:17:17|).

rwp@Romans:5:10 @{We were reconciled to God} (\katˆllagˆmen t“i the“i\). Second aorist passive indicative of \katallass“\ for which great Pauline word see on ¯2Corinthians:5:18f|. The condition is the first class. Paul does not conceive it as his or our task to reconcile God to us. God has attended to that himself (Romans:3:25f.|). We become reconciled to God by means of the death of God's Son. "Much more" again we shall be saved "by his life" (\en tˆi z“ˆi autou\). "In his life," for he does live, "ever living to intercede for them" (Hebrews:7:25|).

rwp@Romans:7:24 @{O wretched man that I am} (\talaip“ros eg“ anthr“pos\). "Wretched man I." Old adjective from \tla“\, to bear, and \p“ros\, a callus. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:3:17|. "A heart-rending cry from the depths of despair" (Sanday and Headlam). {Out of the body of this death} (\ek tou s“matos tou thanatou toutou\). Songs:the order of words demands. See verse 13| for "death" which finds a lodgment in the body (Lightfoot). If one feels that Paul has exaggerated his own condition, he has only to recall strkjv@1Timothy:1:15| when he describes himself a chief of sinners. He dealt too honestly with himself for Pharisaic complacency to live long.

rwp@Romans:12:1 @{Therefore} (\oun\). This inferential participle gathers up all the great argument of chapters 1-11|. Now Paul turns to exhortation (\parakal“\), "I beseech you." {By the mercies} (\dia t“n oiktirm“n\). "By means of the mercies of God" as shown in his argument and in our lives. See strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3| for "the Father of mercies." {To present} (\parastˆsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \paristˆmi\, for which verb see strkjv@6:13|, a technical term for offering a sacrifice (Josephus, _Ant_. IV. 6, 4), though not in the O.T. Used of presenting the child Jesus in the temple (Luke:2:22|), of the Christian presenting himself (Romans:6:13|), of God presenting the saved (Ephesians:5:27|), of Christ presenting the church (Colossians:1:28|). {Bodies} (\s“mata\). Songs:literally as in strkjv@6:13,19; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:10| and in contrast with \nous\ (mind) in verse 2|. {A living sacrifice} (\thusian z“san\). In contrast with the Levitical sacrifices of slain animals. Cf. strkjv@6:8,11,13|. Not a propitiatory sacrifice, but one of praise. {Acceptable} (\euareston\). "Well-pleasing." See on ¯2Corinthians:5:9|. {Which is your reasonable service} (\tˆn logikˆn hum“n latreian\). "Your rational (spiritual) service (worship)." For \latreia\, see on ¯9:4|. \Logikos\ is from \logos\, reason. The phrase means here "worship rendered by the reason (or soul)." Old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Peter:2:2| \to logikon gala\ (not logical milk, but the milk nourishing the soul).

rwp@Romans:12:3 @{Not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think} (\mˆ huperphronein par' ho dei phronein\). Indirect negative command after \leg“\ (I say). Play on the two infinitives \phronein\, to think, and \huperphronein\ (old verb from \huperphr“n\, over-proud, here only in N.T.) to "over-think" with \par' ho\ (beyond what) added. Then another play on \phronein\ and \s“phronein\ (old verb from \s“phr“n\, sober-minded), to be in one's right mind (Mark:5:15; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:13|). Self-conceit is here treated as a species of insanity. {A measure of faith} (\metron piste“s\). Accusative case, the object of the verb \emerisen\. Each has his gift from God (1Corinthians:3:5; strkjv@4:7|). There is no occasion for undue pride. {To each man} (\hekast“i\). Emphatic position before \h“s\ (as) and emphasizes the diversity.

rwp@Romans:13:2 @{He that resisteth} (\ho antitassomenos\). Present middle articular participle of \antitass“\, old verb to range in battle against as in strkjv@Acts:18:6|, "he that lines himself up against." {Withstandeth} (\anthestˆken\). Perfect active indicative of \anthistˆmi\ and intransitive, "has taken his stand against." {The ordinance of God} (\tˆi tou theou diatagˆi\). Late word, but common in papyri (Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 89), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:7:53|. Note repetition of root of \tass“\. {To themselves} (\heautois\). Dative of disadvantage. See strkjv@Mark:12:40| for "shall receive a judgment" (\krina lˆmpsontai\). Future middle of \lamban“\.

rwp@Romans:13:6 @{Ye pay} (\teleite\). Present active indicative (not imperative) of \tele“\, to fulfil. {Tribute} (\phorous\). Old word from \pher“\, to bring, especially the annual tax on lands, etc. (Luke:20:22; strkjv@23:1|). Paying taxes recognizes authority over us. {Ministers of God's service} (\leitourgoi theou\). Late word for public servant (unused \leitos\ from Attic \le“s\, people, and \erg“\, to work). Often used of military servants, servants of the king, and temple servants (Hebrews:8:2|). Paul uses it also of himself as Christ's \leitourgos\ (Romans:15:16|) and of Epaphroditus as a minister to him (Phillipians:2:25|). See \theou diakonos\ in verse 4|. {Attending continually} (\proskarterountes\). Present active participle of the late verb \proskartere“\ (\pros\ and \kartere“\ from \kartos\ or \kratos\, strength) to persevere. See on ¯Acts:2:42; strkjv@8:13|.

rwp@Romans:14:1 @{Him that is weak} (\ton asthenounta\). See on ¯1Corinthians:8:7-12; strkjv@9:22; strkjv@Romans:4:19|. {Receive ye} (\proslambanesthe\). Present middle imperative (indirect), "take to yourselves." {Yet not to doubtful disputations} (\mˆ eis diakriseis dialogism“n\). "Not for decisions of opinions." Note \dia\ (between, two or \duo\) in both words. Discriminations between doubts or hesitations. For \diakrisis\, see strkjv@1Corinthians:12:10; strkjv@Hebrews:5:14| (only N.T. examples). For \dialogismos\ see strkjv@Luke:2:35; strkjv@24:38; strkjv@Phillipians:2:14|. The "strong" brother is not called upon to settle all the scruples of the "weak" brother. But each takes it on himself to do it.

rwp@Romans:14:22 @{Have thou to thyself before God} (\su--kata seauton eche en“pion tou theou\). Very emphatic position of \su\ at the beginning of the sentence, "Thou there." The old MSS. put \hˆn\ (relative "which") after \pistin\ and before \echeis\. This principle applies to both the "strong" and the "weak." He is within his rights to act "according to thyself," but it must be "before God" and with due regard to the rights of the other brethren. {In that which he approveth} (\en hoi dokimazei\). This beatitude cuts both ways. After testing and then approving (1:28; strkjv@2:18|) one takes his stand which very act may condemn himself by what he says or does. "It is a rare felicity to have a conscience untroubled by scruples" (Denney).

rwp@Romans:15:1 @{We the strong} (\hˆmeis hoi dunatoi\). Paul identifies himself with this wing in the controversy. He means the morally strong as in strkjv@2Corinthians:12:10; strkjv@13:9|, not the mighty as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26|. {The infirmities} (\ta asthenˆmata\). "The weaknesses" (cf. \asthen“n\ in strkjv@14:1,2|), the scruples "of the not strong" (\t“n adunat“n\). See strkjv@Acts:14:8| where it is used of the man weak in his feet (impotent). {To bear} (\bastazein\). As in strkjv@Galatians:6:2|, common in the figurative sense. {Not to please ourselves} (\mˆ heautois areskein\). Precisely Paul's picture of his own conduct in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:33|.

rwp@Romans:15:5 @{The God of patience and comfort} (\ho theos tˆs hupomonˆs kai tˆs paraklˆse“s\). Genitive case of the two words in verse 4| used to describe God who uses the Scriptures to reveal himself to us. See strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3| for this idea; strkjv@Romans:15:13| for "the God of hope"; strkjv@15:33| for "the God of peace." {Grant you} (\d“iˆ humin\). Second aorist active optative (_Koin‚_ form for older \doiˆ\) as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:16; strkjv@Ephesians:1:17; strkjv@2Timothy:1:16,18; strkjv@2:25|, though MSS. vary in strkjv@Ephesians:1:17; strkjv@2Timothy:2:25| for \d“ˆi\ (subjunctive). The optative here is for a wish for the future (regular idiom). {According to Christ Jesus} (\kata Christon Iˆsoun\). "According to the character or example of Christ Jesus" (2Corinthians:11:17; strkjv@Colossians:2:8; strkjv@Ephesians:5:24|).

rwp@Titus:2:8 @{Sound} (\hugiˆ\, Attic usually \hugiƒ\ in accusative singular), elsewhere in Pastorals participle \hugian“n\ (verse 1|). {That cannot be condemned} (\akatagn“ston\). Only N.T. example (verbal, \a\ privative and \katagn“stos\) and in IV Macc. strkjv@4:47. Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 200) quotes it from an inscription and the adverb from a papyrus. {He that is of the contrary part} (\ho ex enantias\). "The one on the opposite side" (your opponent). Cf. verse 9; strkjv@1Timothy:5:14|. {May be ashamed} (\hina entrapˆi\). Final clause with \hina\ and second aorist passive subjunctive of \entrep“\, to turn, in middle and passive to turn one on himself and so be ashamed (to blush) as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:14; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:14|. This sense in the papyri. {Evil} (\phaulon\). Old word, easy (easy morals), worthless; bad, as in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:10|.

rwp@Titus:2:14 @{Who gave himself for us} (\hos ed“ken heauton huper hˆm“n\). Paul's great doctrine (Galatians:1:4; strkjv@2:20; strkjv@1Timothy:2:6|). {That he might redeem us} (\hina lutr“sˆtai\). Final clause, \hina\ and the aorist middle subjunctive of \lutro“\, old verb from \lutron\ (ransom), in N.T. only here, strkjv@Luke:24:21; strkjv@1Peter:1:18|. {Purify to himself} (\katharisˆi heaut“i\). Final clause with first aorist active subjunctive of \kathariz“\, for which verb see strkjv@Ephesians:5:26|. {Lawlessness} (\anomias\). See strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3|. {A people for his own possession} (\laon periousion\). A late word (from \perieimi\, to be over and above, in papyri as well as \periousia\), only in LXX and here, apparently made by the LXX, one's possession, and so God's chosen people. See strkjv@1Peter:2:9| (\laos eis peripoiˆsin\). {Zealous of good works} (\zˆl“tˆn kal“n erg“n\). "A zealot for good works." Substantive for which see strkjv@1Corinthians:14:12; strkjv@Galatians:1:14|. Objective genitive \erg“n\.

Seeker Overlay: Off On

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

[pBiblx2]
Mon Jun 3 01:42:07 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020