rwp - Plummer

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} (\kltos apostolos\). Verbal adjective \kltos\ 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 thelmatos tou theou\). The intermediate (\dia, duo\, two) agent between Paul's not being Christ's apostle and becoming one was God's will (\thelma\, 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:1:16 @{Also the household of Stephanas} (\kai ton Stephan oikon\)...an afterthought. Robertson and Plummer suggest...-fruit of Achaia (1Corinthians:16:15|) and so earlier than Crispus and he was one of the three who came to Paul from Corinth (16:17|), clearly a family that justified Paul's personal attention about baptism. {Besides} (\loipon\). Accusative of general reference, "as for anything else." Added to make clear that he is not meaning to omit any one who deserves mention. See also strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:1; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:2; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11; strkjv@2Timothy:4:8|. Ellicott insists on a sharp distinction from \to loipon\ "as for the rest" (2Thessalonians:3:1; strkjv@Phillipians:3:1; strkjv@4:8; strkjv@Ephesians:6:10|). Paul casts no reflection on baptism, for he could not with his conception of it as the picture of the new life in Christ (Romans:6:2-6|), but he clearly denies here that he considers baptism essential to the remission of sin or the means of obtaining forgiveness.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:7 @{Maketh thee to differ} (\se diakrinei\). Distinguishes thee, separates thee. \Diakrin\ means to sift or separate between (\dia\) as in strkjv@Acts:15:9| (which see) where \metaxu\ is added to make it plainer. All self-conceit rests on the notion of superiority of gifts and graces as if they were self-bestowed or self-acquired. {Which thou didst not receive} (\ho ouk elabes\). "Another home-thrust" (Robertson and Plummer). Pride of intellect, of blood, of race, of country, of religion, is thus shut out. {Dost thou glory} (\kauchasai\). The original second person singular middle ending \-sai\ is here preserved with variable vowel contraction, \kauchaesai=kauchasai\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 341). Paul is fond of this old and bold verb for boasting. {As if thou hadst not received it} (\hs m labn\). This neat participial clause (second aorist active of \lamban\) with \hs\ (assumption) and negative \m\...has asked. Robertson and Plummer say...9:16|, had crystallized in his mind the distinctively Augustinian doctrines of man's total depravity, of irresistible grace, and of absolute predestination." Human responsibility does exist beyond a doubt, but there is no foundation for pride and conceit.

rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ 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@2Corinthians:1:1 @{And Timothy} (\kai Timotheos\). Timothy is with Paul, having been sent on to Macedonia from Ephesus (Acts:19:22|). He is in no sense co-author any more than Sosthenes was in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:1|. {In all Achaia} (\en holi ti Achaii\). The Romans divided Greece into two provinces (Achaia and Macedonia). Macedonia included also Illyricum, Epirus, and Thessaly. Achaia was all of Greece south of this (both Attica and the Peloponnesus). The restored Corinth was made the capital of Achaia where the pro-consul resided (Acts:18:12|). He does not mention other churches in Achaia outside of the one in Corinth, but only "saints" (\hagiois\). Athens was in Achaia, but it is not clear that there was as yet a church there, though some converts had been won (Acts:17:34|), and there was a church in Cenchreae, the eastern port of Corinth (Romans:16:1|). Paul in strkjv@2Corinthians:9:2| speaks of Achaia and Macedonia together. His language here would seem to cover the whole (\holi\, all) of Achaia in his scope and not merely the environment around Corinth.

rwp@2Corinthians:6:16 @{Agreement} (\sunkatathesis\). Fifth of these words. Late word, but common, though here only in N.T. Approved by putting together the votes. In the papyri \ek sunkatatheses\ means "by agreement." On the temple of God and idols see strkjv@1Corinthians:10:14-22|. See strkjv@Luke:23:51| for the verb \sunkatatithmi\. {For we are the temple of the living God} (\hmeis gar naos theou esmen zntos\). We, not temples (Acts:7:48; strkjv@17:24; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:16; strkjv@6:19|). {As God said} (\kaths eipen ho theos\). A paraphrase and catena of quotations, what J. Rendel Harris calls _Testimonia_ (from strkjv@Leviticus:26:11f.; strkjv@Isaiah:52:11; strkjv@Ezekiel:20:34; strkjv@37:27; strkjv@2Samuel:7:8,14|). Plummer notes that at the beginning "I will dwell in them" (\enoiks en autois\) is not in any of them. "As God said" points to strkjv@Leviticus:26:12; strkjv@Ezekiel:37:27|.

rwp@2Corinthians:10:12 @{To number or compare ourselves} (\enkrinai sunkrinai\). Paronomasia here, play on the two words. \Enkrinai\ is first aorist active infinitive of old verb, but here only in N.T., to judge among, to judge one as worthy to be numbered among as here. The second verb \sunkrinai\ (first aorist active infinitive of \sunkrin\, old verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:2:13|) originally meant to combine as in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:13| (which see)...to mean to decide. Plummer suggests...{Measuring themselves by themselves} (\en heautois heautous metrountes\). Or "in themselves." Keenest sarcasm. Setting themselves up as the standards of orthodoxy these Judaizers always measure up to the standard while Paul falls short. {Comparing themselves with themselves} (\sunkrinontes heautous heautois\). Associate instrumental case \heautois\ after \sunkrinontes\ (verb just explained). Paul is not keen to fall into the trap set for him. {Are without understanding} (\ou sunisin\). The regular form for present active indicative third plural of \sunimi\, to comprehend, to grasp. Some MSS. have the late form \suniousin\ (omega form \suni\). It is a hard thing to see, but it is true. These men do not see their own picture so obvious to others (Ephesians:5:17; strkjv@1Timothy:1:7|). Cf. strkjv@Mark:8:17|.

rwp@Info_Epistles-Pastorial @ Special Books on the Pastoral Epistles (besides Introductions to the N.T., Apostolic History, Lives of Paul, the Epistles of Paul as a whole): Belser, Bernard (_Cambridge Gr. T., 1899), E. F. Brown (_Westminster_, 1917), Bowen (_Dates of P. Letters_, 1900), Dibelius (_Handbuch_, 1913), Ellicott, P. Fairbairn, P. N. Harrison (_Problem of the Past. Eps._, 1921), Harvey, Hesse (_Die Entst._, 1889), Humphreys (_Camb. B._, 1897), Huther, H. J. Holtzmann, James (_Genuineness and Authorship of P. Eps._, 1906), Kohler (_Schriften N.T._, 2 Aufl. 1907), Knabenbauer, Kraukenberg, Laughlin (_Past. Eps. in Light of One Rom. Imp._, 1905), Lilley, W. Lock (_Int. & Crit. Comm._, 1924), Lutgert (_Die Irrlehre d. P._, 1909), Maier (_Die Hauptprobleme d. P._, 1910), Mayer, Meinertz, Michaelis, W (Pastoralbriefe etc. zur Echtheitsfrage der Pastoralbriefe, 1930), Niebergall (_Handbuch_, 1909), Parry, Plummer (_Exp. B._, 1896), Pope, Riggenbach, Stock (_Plain Talks on_, 1914), Strachan (_Westm. N.T._, 1910), von Soden (_Hand-Comm._, 1891), Wace (_Sp. Comm._, 1885), B. Weiss (_Meyer Komm._, ed. 5, 1886), White (Exp. Grk. T., 1910), Wohlenberg (_Zahn's Komm._, 1906). Info_Epistles-Paul

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE SAME AUTHOR FOR GOSPEL AND ACTS The author of Acts refers to the Gospel specifically as "the first treatise," \ton prton 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} (\epoisamn\, 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|)...only an introductory clause. Plummer argues...

rwp@Info_Luke @...Tertullian, the Muratorian Fragment. Plummer holds...(I and II Corinthians, Galatians, Romans) which even Baur accepted, is scarcely more certain than the Lukan authorship of the Gospel. Even Renan says: "There is no very strong reason for supposing that Luke was not the author of the Gospel which bears his name."

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

rwp@Luke:1:45 @{For} (\hoti\). It is not certain whether \hoti\ here is "that" or "because." It makes good sense either way. See also strkjv@7:16|. This is the first beatitude in the New Testament and it is similar to the last one in the Gospels spoken to Thomas to discourage his doubt (John:20:29|). Elisabeth wishes Mary to have full faith in the prophecy of the angel. This song of Elisabeth is as real poetry as is that of Mary (1:47-55|) and Zacharias (1:68-70|)...they are very beautiful. Plummer notes...(46-48|,49,50|,51-53|,54,55|). Every idea here occurs in the Old Testament, showing that Mary's mind was full of the spiritual message of God's word.

rwp@Luke:1:51 @{Showed strength} (\epoisen kratos\). "Made might" (Wycliff). A Hebrew conception as in strkjv@Psalms:118:15|. Plummer notes six aorist indicatives in this sentence (51-63|), neither corresponding to our English idiom, which translates here by "hath" each time. {Imagination} (\dianoii\). Intellectual insight, moral understanding.

rwp@Luke:2:14 @{Among men in whom he is well pleased} (\en anthrpois eudokias\). The Textus Receptus (Authorized Version also has \eudokia\, but the genitive \eudokias\ is undoubtedly correct, supported by the oldest and best uncials. (Aleph, A B D W)...has a lacuna here. Plummer justly...\eudokias\, the correct text. But it makes perfectly good sense and better sense. As a matter of fact real peace on earth exists only among those who are the subjects of God's goodwill, who are characterized by goodwill toward God and man. This word \eudokia\ we have already had in strkjv@Matthew:11:26|. It does not occur in the ancient Greek. The word is confined to Jewish and Christian writings, though the papyri furnish instances of \eudoksis\. Wycliff has it "to men of goodwill."

rwp@Luke:2:31 @{Of all the peoples} (\pantn tn lan\). Not merely Jews. Another illustration of the universality of Luke's Gospel seen already in strkjv@1:70|...the song according to Plummer showing...

rwp@Luke:3:23 @{Jesus Himself} (\autos Isous\). 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} (\n hsei etn 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 hs enomizeto Isph 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" (\hs enomizeto\). His own narrative in strkjv@Luke:1:26-38|...actual father of Jesus. Plummer objects...\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:4:18 @{Anointed me} (\echrisen me\). First aorist active indicative of the verb \chri\ from which {Christ} (\Christos\) is derived, the Anointed One. Isaiah is picturing the Jubilee year and the release of captives and the return from the Babylonian exile with the hope of the Messiah through it all. Jesus here applies this Messianic language to himself. "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me" as was shown at the baptism (Luke:3:21|) where he was also "anointed" for his mission by the Father's voice (3:22|). {To the poor} (\ptchois\). Jesus singles this out also as one of the items to tell John the Baptist in prison (Luke:7:22|). Our word _Gospel_ is a translation of the Greek \Euaggelion\, and it is for the poor. {He hath sent me} (\apestalken me\). Change of tense to perfect active indicative. He is now on that mission here. Jesus is God's _Apostle_ to men (John:17:3|, Whom thou didst send). {Proclaim} (\kruxai\). As a herald like Noah (2Peter:2:5|). {To the captives} (\aichmaltois\). Prisoners of war will be released (\aichm\, a spear point, and \haltos\, from \haliskomai\, to be captured). Captured by the spear point. Common word, but here only in the N.T. {Set at liberty} (\aposteilai\). First aorist active infinitive of \apostell\. Same verb as \apestalken\, above. Brought in here from strkjv@Isaiah:58:6|. Plummer suggests that Luke inserts it here from memory. But Jesus could easily have turned back the roll and read it so. {Them that are bruised} (\tethrausmenous\). Perfect passive participle of \thrau\, an old verb, but here only in the N.T. It means to break in pieces broken in heart and often in body as well. One loves to think that Jesus felt it to be his mission to mend broken hearts like pieces of broken earthenware, real rescue-mission work. Jesus mends them and sets them free from their limitations.

rwp@Luke:4:33 @{Which had} (\echn\). Mark has \en\. {A spirit of an unclean demon} (\pneuma daimoniou akathartou\)...unique in this combination. Plummer notes...\daimonion\ ten times and \akatharton\ twice as an epithet of \pneuma\; Mark has \daimonion\ thirteen times and \akatharton\ eleven times as an epithet of \pneuma\. Luke's Gospel uses \daimonion\ twenty-two times and \akatharton\ as an epithet, once of \daimonion\ as here and once of \pneuma\. In Mark the man is in (\en\) the power of the unclean spirit, while here the man "has" a spirit of an unclean demon. {With a loud voice} (\phni megali\). Not in Mark. Really a scream caused by the sudden contact of the demon with Jesus.

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} (\n didaskn\). Periphrastic imperfect again like our English idiom. {Were sitting by} (\san kathmenoi\). 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 san elluthotes\, periphrastic past perfect active, {had come}). {Out of every village of Galilee and Judea and Jerusalem} (\ek pass kms ts Galilaias kai Ioudaias kai Ierousalm\). Edersheim (_Jewish Social Life_)...separate district in Judea. Plummer considers...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 n eis to isthai 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:6:39 @{Also a parable} (\kai paraboln\). Plummer thinks that the second half of the sermon begins here as indicated by Luke's insertion of "And he spake (\eipen de\) at this point. Luke has the word parable some fifteen times both for crisp proverbs and for the longer narrative comparisons. This is the only use of the term parable concerning the metaphors in the Sermon on the Mount. But in both Matthew and Luke's report of the discourse there are some sixteen possible applications of the word. Two come right together: The blind leading the blind, the mote and the beam. Matthew gives the parabolic proverb of the blind leading the blind later (Matthew:15:14|). Jesus repeated these sayings on various occasions as every teacher does his characteristic ideas. Songs:Luke strkjv@6:40; strkjv@Matthew:10:24|, strkjv@Luke:6:45; strkjv@Matthew:12:34f.| {Can} (\Mti dunatai\). The use of \mti\ in the question shows that a negative answer is expected. {Guide} (\hodgein\). Common verb from \hodgos\ (guide) and this from \hodos\ (way) and \hgeomai\, to lead or guide. {Shall they not both fall?} (\ouchi amphoteroi empesountai;\). \Ouchi\, a sharpened negative from \ouk\, in a question expecting the answer Yes. Future middle indicative of the common verb \empipt\. {Into a pit} (\eis bothunon\). Late word for older \bothros\.

rwp@Luke:8:10 @{The mysteries} (\ta mustria\). See for this word on ¯Matthew:13:11; strkjv@Mark:4:11|. Part of the mystery here explained is how so many people who have the opportunity to enter the kingdom fail to do so because of manifest unfitness. {That} (\hina\). Here strkjv@Mark:4:11| also has \hina\ while strkjv@Matthew:13:13| has \hoti\ (because). On the so-called causal use of \hina\ as here equal to \hoti\ see discussion on ¯Matthew:13:13; strkjv@Mark:4:11|. Plummer sensibly argues that there is truth both in the causal \hoti\ of Matthew and the final \hina\ of Mark and Matthew. "But the principle that he who hath shall receive more, while he who hath not shall be deprived of what he seemeth to have, explains both the \hina\ and the \hoti\. Jesus speaks in parables because the multitudes see without seeing and hear without hearing. But He also speaks in parable {in order that} they may see without seeing and hear without hearing." Only for "hearing" Luke has "understand" \sunisin\, present subjunctive from a late omega form \suni\ instead of the \-mi\ verb \sunimi\.

rwp@Luke:8:21 @{These which hear the word of God and do it} (\hoi ton logon tou theou akouontes kai poiountes\)..."brothers" probably means, as Plummer argues,...&c." No one is a child of God because of human parentage (John:1:13|). "Family ties are at best temporal; spiritual ties are eternal" (Plummer). Note the use of "hear and do" together here as in strkjv@Matthew:7:24; strkjv@Luke:6:47| at the close of the Sermon on the Mount. The parable of the sower is almost like a footnote to that sermon. Later Jesus will make "doing" a test of friendship for him (John:15:14|).

rwp@Luke:9:45 @{It was concealed from them} (\n parakekalummenon ap' autn\). Periphrastic past perfect of \parakalupt\, a common verb, but only here in the N.T., to cover up, to hide from. This item only in Luke. {That they should not perceive it} (\hina m aisthntai auto\). Second aorist middle subjunctive of the common verb \aisthanomai\ used with \hina m\, negative purpose. This explanation at least relieves the disciples to some extent of full responsibility for their ignorance about the death of Jesus as strkjv@Mark:9:32|...afraid to ask him. Plummer says,...

rwp@Luke:9:59 @{And he said unto another} (\eipen de pros heteron\). strkjv@Matthew:8:21| omits Christ's "Follow me" (\akolouthei moi\)...apologetic as in Luke. Plummer calls...{First} (\prton\). One of the problems of life is the relation of duties to each other, which comes first. The burial of one's father was a sacred duty (Genesis:25:9|), but, as in the case of Tobit strkjv@4:3, this scribe's father probably was still alive. What the scribe apparently meant was that he could not leave his father while still alive to follow Jesus around over the country.

rwp@Luke:11:37 @{Now as he spake} (\en de ti lalsai\). Luke's common idiom, \en\ with the articular infinitive (aorist active infinitive)...he had spoken" as Plummer argues,...3:21| for similar use of aorist infinitive with \en\. {Asketh} (\erti\). Present active indicative, dramatic present. Request, not question. {To dine} (\hops aristsi\). Note \hops\ rather than the common \hina\. Aorist active subjunctive rather than present, for a single meal. The verb is from \ariston\ (breakfast). See distinction between \ariston\ and \deipnon\ (dinner or supper) in strkjv@Luke:14:12|. It is the morning meal (breakfast or lunch) after the return from morning prayers in the synagogue (Matthew:22:4|), not the very early meal called \akratisma\. The verb is, however, used for the early meal on the seashore in strkjv@John:21:12,15|. {With him} (\par' auti\). By his side. {Sat down to meat} (\anepesen\). Second aorist active indicative of \anapipt\, old verb, to recline, to fall back on the sofa or lounge. No word here for "to meat."

rwp@Luke:13:34 @{O Jerusalem, Jerusalem} (\Ierousalm, Ierousalm\). In strkjv@Matthew:23:37f.|...there and here, but Plummer considers...(Luke:13:34f.; strkjv@Matthew:23:37-39|). For details see on Matthew. In Luke we have \episunaxai\ (late first aorist active infinitive) and in Matthew \episunagagein\ (second aorist active infinitive), both from \episunag\, a double compound of late Greek (Polybius). Both have "How often would I" (\posakis thelsa\). How often did I wish. Clearly showing that Jesus made repeated visits to Jerusalem as we know otherwise only from John's Gospel. {Even as} (\hon tropon\). Accusative of general reference and in strkjv@Matthew:23:37| also. Incorporation of antecedent into the relative clause. {Brood} (\nossian\) is in Luke while Matthew has {chickens} (\nossia\), both late forms for the older \neossia\. The adjective {desolate} (\ermos\) is wanting in strkjv@Luke:13:35| and is doubtful in strkjv@Matthew:23:39|.

rwp@Luke:15:14 @{When he had spent} (\dapansantos autou\). Genitive absolute. The verb is here used in a bad sense as in strkjv@James:4:3|. See on \dapan\ ¯Luke:14:28|. {He} (\autos\). Emphasis. {To be in want} (\hustereisthai\). The verb is from \husteros\, behind or later (comparative). We use "fall behind" (Vincent)...one in straitened circumstances. Plummer notes...

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

rwp@Luke:18:18 @{Ruler} (\archn\). Not in strkjv@Mark:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:19:16|. {What shall I do to inherit?} (\Ti poisas klronoms;\). "By doing what shall I inherit?" Aorist active participle and future active indicative. Precisely the same question is asked by the lawyer in strkjv@Luke:10:25|. This young man probably thought that by some one act he could obtain eternal life. He was ready to make a large expenditure for it. {Good} (\agathon\). See on ¯Mark:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:19:16|...adjective for absolute goodness. Plummer observes...

rwp@Luke:19:30 @{Whereon no man ever yet sat} (\eph' hon oudeis ppote anthrpn ekathisen\). Plummer holds that this fact indicated to the disciples a royal progress into the city of a piece with the Virgin Birth of Jesus and the burial in a new tomb.

rwp@Luke:21:12 @{But before all these things} (\pro de toutn pantn\). In strkjv@Mark:13:8; strkjv@Matthew:24:8|...be the idea here. Plummer insists...{Bringing you} (\apagomenous\). Present passive participle from \apag\, an old verb to lead off or away. But here the participle is in the accusative plural, not the nominative like \paradidontes\ (present active participle, delivering you up), agreeing with \humas\ not expressed the object of \paradidontes\, "you being brought before or led off." "A technical term in Athenian legal language" (Bruce).

rwp@Luke:21:32 @{This generation} (\h genea haut\). Naturally people then living. {Shall not pass away} (\ou m parelthi\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \parerchomai\. Strongest possible negative with \ou m\. {Till all things be accomplished} (\hes an panta gentai\). Second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\ with \hes\...when the second coming. Plummer offers...

rwp@Info_Matthew @ Plummer shows the broad general plan of both Mark and Matthew to be the same as follows: Introduction to the Gospel: strkjv@Mark:1:1-13; strkjv@Matthew:3:1-4:11|.

rwp@Matthew:3:4 @{Now John himself} (\autos de ho Ians\). 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|)...the hair of camels. Plummer holds...

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.)...and bore our diseases." Plummer holds...(\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:21:21 @{Doubt not} (\m diakrithte\). First aorist passive subjunctive, second-class condition. To be divided in mind, to waver, to doubt, the opposite of "faith" (\pistin\), trust, confidence. {What is done to the fig tree} (\to ts suks\). The Greek means "the matter of the fig tree," as if a slight matter in comparison with {this mountain} (\ti orei touti\). Removing a mountain is a bigger task than blighting a fig tree. "The cursing of the fig-tree has always been regarded as of symbolic import, the tree being in Christ's mind an emblem of the Jewish people, with a great show of religion and no fruit of real godliness. This hypothesis is very credible" (Bruce). Plummer follows Zahn in referring it to the Holy City. Certainly "this mountain" is a parable and one already reported in strkjv@Matthew:17:20| (cf. sycamine tree in Lk strkjv@17:6|). Cf. strkjv@Zechariah:17:4|.

rwp@Matthew:23:13 @{Hypocrites} (\hupokritai\). This terrible word of Jesus appears first from him in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew:6:2,5,16; strkjv@7:5|), then in strkjv@15:7| and strkjv@22:18|. Here it appears "with terrific iteration" (Bruce) save in the third of the seven woes (23:13,15,23,25,27,29|). The verb in the active (\hupokrin\) meant to separate slowly or slightly subject to gradual inquiry. Then the middle was to make answer, to take up a part on the stage, to act a part. It was an easy step to mean to feign, to pretend, to wear a masque, to act the hypocrite, to play a part. This hardest word from the lips of Jesus falls on those who were the religious leaders of the Jews (Scribes and Pharisees), who had justified this thunderbolt of wrath by their conduct toward Jesus and their treatment of things high and holy. The _Textus Receptus has eight woes, adding verse 14| which the Revised Version places in the margin (called verse 13| by Westcott and Hort and rejected on the authority of Aleph B D as a manifest gloss from strkjv@Mark:12:40| and strkjv@Luke:20:47|). The MSS. that insert it put it either before 13 or after 13. Plummer cites these seven woes as another example of Matthew's fondness for the number seven, more fancy than fact for Matthew's Gospel is not the Apocalypse of John. These are all illustrations of Pharisaic saying and not doing (Allen). {Ye shut the kingdom of heaven} (\kleiete tn basileian tn ourann\). In strkjv@Luke:11:52| the lawyers are accused of keeping the door to the house of knowledge locked and with flinging away the keys so as to keep themselves and the people in ignorance. These custodians of the kingdom by their teaching obscured the way to life. It is a tragedy to think how preachers and teachers of the kingdom of God may block the door for those who try to enter in (\tous eiserchomenous\, conative present middle participle). {Against} (\emprosthen\). Literally, before. These door-keepers of the kingdom slam it shut in men's faces and they themselves are on the outside where they will remain. They hide the key to keep others from going in.

rwp@Matthew:25:1 @{Ten virgins} (\deka parthenois\)...the wedding festivities. But Plummer places...{Lamps} (\lampadas\). Probably torches with a wooden staff and a dish on top in which was placed a piece of rope or cloth dipped in oil or pitch. But sometimes \lampas\ has the meaning of oil lamp (\luchnos\) as in strkjv@Acts:20:8|. That may be the meaning here (Rutherford, _New Phrynichus_).

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}. (\Athios 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@Info_Philipians @ Some special books on Philippians are those by Beet, Burns, Dibelius, Ellicott (new ed. 1890), Wohlenberg in Zahn Komm. (3rd ed. 1917), Haupt in Meyer Komm. (8 ed. 1902), Jones in Westm. Comm., Johnstone, Jowett, Kennedy in Exp. Gk. Test., Klopper, Knabenbauer, Lightfoot (9 ed. 1891), Lipsius, Lohmeyer in Meyer Komm. (8 ed. 1930), Lueken, Martin (New Cent. Bible), Michael, Moule (Phil. Studies), Plummer, Rainy (Exp. Bible 1893), Robertson, Vincent (Int. Crit., 2 ed. 1910).

CONCORD Plummer