rwp - Repeat

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:3:23 @{His commandment} (\h entol autou\). {That} (\hina\). Subfinal use of \hina\ in apposition with \entol\ (commandment) and explanatory of it, as in strkjv@John:15:12| (\entol hina\). See Christ's summary of the commandments (Mark:12:28-31; strkjv@Matthew:22:34-40|). Songs:these two points here {We should believe} (\pisteusmen\, first aorist active subjunctive according to B K L, though Aleph A C read the present subjunctive \pisteumen\) either in a crisis (aorist) or the continuous tenor (present) of our lives. The "name" of Jesus Christ here stands for all that he is, "a compressed creed " (Westcott) as in strkjv@1:3|. Note dative \onomati\ here with \pisteu\ as in strkjv@5:10|, though \eis onoma\ (on the name) in strkjv@5:13; strkjv@John:1:12; strkjv@2:23; strkjv@3:18|. But we should love one another" (\agapmen alllous\), as he has already urged (2:7f.; strkjv@3:11|) and as he will repeat (4:7,11f.; strkjv@2John:1:5|) as Jesus (even as he gave us commandment, that is Christ) had previously done (John:13:34; strkjv@15:12,17|). There are frequent points of contact between this Epistle and the words of Jesus in strkjv@John:13-17|.

rwp@Acts:11:15 @{As I began to speak} (\en ti arxasthai me lalein\). \En\ with the locative of the articular aorist infinitive \arxasthai\ (punctiliar action simply) and the accusative of general reference. The second infinitive \lalein\ (to speak) is dependent on \arxasthai\, "In the beginning to speak as to me." {Even as on us at the beginning} (\hsper kai eph' hms en archi\). Peter recalls vividly the events at Pentecost, the speaking with tongues and all. It is noteworthy that Peter does not here repeat his sermon. "He rests his defence, not on what he said, but on what God did" (Furneaux).

rwp@Acts:15:38 @{But Paul thought not good to take with them} (\Paulos de xiou--m sunparalambanein touton\). The Greek is far more effective than this English rendering. It is the imperfect active of \axio\, old verb to think meet or right and the present active infinitive of the same verb (\sunparalamban\) with negative used with this infinitive. Literally, "But Paul kept on deeming it wise not to be taking along with them this one." Barnabas looked on it as a simple punctiliar proposal (aorist infinitive), but Paul felt a lively realization of the problem of having a quitter on his hands (present infinitive). Each was insistent in his position (two imperfects). Paul had a definite reason for his view describing John Mark as "him who withdrew from them from Pamphylia" (\ton apostanta ap' autn apo Pamphulias\). Second aorist active articular participle of \aphistmi\, intransitive use, "the one who stood off from, apostatized from" (our very word "apostasy"). And also as the one who "went not with them to the work" (\kai m sunelthonta autois eis to ergon\). At Perga Mark had faced the same task that Paul and Barnabas did, but he flinched and flickered and quit. Paul declined to repeat the experiment with Mark.

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

rwp@Acts: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| (\phsin\, 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 ti 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 \katgoreitsan\ (imperative) of \katgore\, repeat their accusations.

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

rwp@Luke: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@Matthew:6:7 @{Use not vain repetitions} (\m battalogste\). 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 ti polulogii\). 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:15:33 @{And the disciples say to him} (\kai legousin auti hoi mathtai\). It seems strange that they should so soon have forgotten the feeding of the five thousand (Matthew:14:13-21|), but they did. Soon Jesus will remind them of both these demonstrations of his power (16:9,10|). They forgot both of them, not just one. Some scholars scout the idea of two miracles so similar as the feeding of the five thousand and the four thousand, though both are narrated in detail by both Mark and Matthew and both are later mentioned by Jesus. Jesus repeated his sayings and wrought multitudes of healings. There is no reason in itself why Jesus should not on occasion repeat a nature miracle like this elsewhere. He is in the region of Decapolis, not in the country of Philip (\Trachonitis\).

rwp@Matthew:16:21 @{From that time began} (\apo tote rxato\). It was a suitable time for the disclosure of the greatest secret of his death. It is now just a little over six months before the cross. They must know it now to be ready then. The great confession of Peter made this seem an appropriate time. He will repeat the warnings (17:22f.| with mention of betrayal; strkjv@20:17-19| with the cross) which he now "began." Songs:the necessity (\dei\, must) of his suffering death at the hands of the Jerusalem ecclesiastics who have dogged his steps in Galilee is now plainly stated. Jesus added his resurrection "on the third day" (\ti triti hmeri\), not "on the fourth day," please observe. Dimly the shocked disciples grasped something of what Jesus said.

rwp@Matthew:21:9 @{That went before him and that followed} (\hoi proagontes auton kai hoi akolouthountes\). Note the two groups with two articles and the present tense (linear action) and the imperfect \ekrazon\ "were crying" as they went. {Hosanna to the Son of David} (\Hosanna ti huii Daueid\). They were now proclaiming Jesus as the Messiah and he let them do it. "Hosanna" means "Save, we pray thee." They repeat words from the _Hallel_ (Psalms:148:1|) and one recalls the song of the angelic host when Jesus was born (Luke:2:14|). "Hosanna in the highest" (heaven) as well as here on earth.

rwp@Matthew:21:12 @{Cast out} (\exebalen\). Drove out, assumed authority over "the temple of God" (probably correct text with \tou theou\, though only example of the phrase). John (John:2:14|) has a similar incident at the beginning of the ministry of Jesus. It is not impossible that he should repeat it at the close after three years with the same abuses in existence again. It is amazing how short a time the work of reformers lasts. The traffic went on in the court of the Gentiles and to a certain extent was necessary. Here the tables of {the money-changers} (\tn kollubistn\, from \kollubos\, a small coin) were overturned. See on ¯17:24| for the need of the change for the temple tax. The doves were the poor man's offering.

rwp@Philippians:1:22 @{If this is the fruit of my work} (\touto moi karpos ergou\). There is no \ei\ (if) here in the Greek, but \touto\ (this) seems to be resumptive and to repeat the conditional clause just before. If so, \kai\ just after means {then} and introduces the conclusion of the condition. Otherwise \touto\ introduces the conclusion and \kai\ means {and}. {I wot not} (\ou gnriz\). "I know not." It seems odd to preserve the old English word "wot" here. But it is not clear that \gnriz\ (old causative verb from \ginsk\) means just to know. Elsewhere in the N.T., as in strkjv@Luke:2:15; strkjv@Romans:9:22|, it means to make known, to declare. The papyri examples mean to make known. It makes perfectly good sense to take its usual meaning here, "I do not declare what I shall choose."

rwp@Philippians:1:25 @{And abide with you all} (\kai paramen psin humin\). Common Pauline idiom to repeat the simple verb (\men\) as a compound (\paramen\, future active indicative), old verb, to remain beside followed by locative case. See same idiom in \chair, sunchair\ (Phillipians:2:17|).

rwp@Philippians:3:1 @{Finally} (\to loipon\). Accusative of general reference, literally, "as for the rest." Songs:again in strkjv@4:8|. It (or just \loipon\) is a common phrase towards the close of Paul's Epistles (2Thessalonians:3:1; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11|). In strkjv@Ephesians:6:10| we have \tou loipou\ (genitive case). But Paul uses the idiom elsewhere also as in strkjv@1Corinthians:7:29; strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:1| before the close of the letter is in sight. It is wholly needless to understand Paul as about to finish and then suddenly changing his mind like some preachers who announce the end a half dozen times. {To write the same things} (\ta auta graphein\). Present active articular infinitive, "the going on writing the same things." What things? He has just used \chairete\ (go on rejoicing) again and he will repeat it in strkjv@4:4|. But in verse 2| he uses \blepete\ three times. At any rate Paul, as a true teacher, is not afraid of repetition. {Irksome} (\oknron\). Old adjective from \okne\, to delay, to hesitate. It is not tiresome to me to repeat what is "safe" (\asphales\) for you. Old adjective from \a\ privative and \sphall\, to totter, to reel. See strkjv@Acts:21:34|.

rwp@Revelation:11:15 @{There followed} (\egenonto\). "There came to pass." There was silence in heaven upon the opening of the seventh seal (8:1|), but here "great voices." Perhaps the great voices are the \za\ of strkjv@4:6ff.; strkjv@5:8|. {Saying} (\legontes\). Construction according to sense; \legontes\, masculine participle (not \legousai\), though \phnai\, feminine. John understood what was said. {Is become} (\egeneto\). "Did become," prophetic use of the aorist participle, already a fact. See \egeneto\ in strkjv@Luke:19:9|. {The kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ} (\tou kuriou hmn kai tou Christou autou\). Repeat \h basileia\ from the preceding. God the Father is meant here by \kuriou\ (Lord), as \autou\ (his) shows. This is the certain and glorious outcome of the age-long struggle against Satan, who wields the kingdom of the world which he offered to Christ on the mountain for one act of worship. But Jesus scorned partnership with Satan in the rule of the world, and chose war, war up to the hilt and to the end. Now the climax has come with Christ as Conqueror of the kingdom of this world for his Father. This is the crowning lesson of the Apocalypse. {He shall reign} (\basileusei\). Future active of \basileu\. God shall reign, but the rule of God and of Christ is one as the kingdom is one (1Corinthians:15:27|). Jesus is the Lord's Anointed (Luke:2:26; strkjv@9:20|).

rwp@Romans:2:28 @{Which is one outwardly} (\ho en ti phaneri\). \Ioudaios\ (Jew) has to be repeated (ellipse) with the article, "the in the open Jew" (circumcision, phylacteries, tithes, etc.). Likewise repeat \peritom\ (circumcision).

rwp@Romans:2:29 @{Who is one inwardly} (\ho en ti krupti\). Repeat \Ioudaios\ (Jew) here also, "the in the inward part Jew" (circumcision of the heart \peritom kardias\ and not a mere surgical operation as in strkjv@Colossians:2:11|, in the spirit \en pneumati\, with which compare strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3,6|). This inward or inside Jew who lives up to his covenant relation with God is the high standard that Paul puts before the merely professional Jew described above. {Whose praise} (\hou ho epainos\). The antecedent of the relative \hou\ is \Ioudaios\ (Jew). Probably (Gifford) a reference to the etymology of Judah (praise) as seen in strkjv@Galatians:49:8|.

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

rwp@Romans:4:12 @{The father of circumcision} (\patera peritoms\). The accusative with \eis to einai\ to be repeated from verse 11|. Lightfoot takes it to mean, not "a father of a circumcised progeny," but "a father belonging to circumcision," a less natural interpretation. {But who also walk} (\alla kai tois stoichousin\). The use of \tois\ here is hard to explain, for \ou monon\ and \alla kai\ both come after the preceding \tois\. All the MSS. have it thus. A primitive error in a copyist is suggested by Hort who would omit the second \tois\. Lightfoot regards it less seriously and would repeat the second \tois\ in the English: "To those who are, I do not say of circumcision only, but also to those who walk." {In the steps} (\tois ichnesin\). Locative case. See on ¯2Corinthians:12:18|. \Stoiche\ is military term, to walk in file as in strkjv@Galatians:5:25; strkjv@Phillipians:3:16|.

CONCORD Repeat