CONCORD dwells




rwp@1Corinthians:6:13 @{But God shall bring to nought both it and them} (\ho de theos kai tautˆn kai tauta katargˆsei\). Another proverb about the adaptation of the belly (\koilia\) and food (\br“mata\, not just flesh), which had apparently been used by some in Corinth to justify sexual license (fornication and adultery). These Gentiles mixed up matters not alike at all (questions of food and sensuality). " We have traces of this gross moral confusion in the circumstances which dictated the Apostolic Letter (Acts:15:23-29|), where things wholly diverse are combined, as directions about meats to be avoided and a prohibition of fornication" (Lightfoot). Both the belly (\tautˆn\) and the foods (\tauta\) God will bring to an end by death and change. {But the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body} (\to de s“ma ou tˆi porneiƒi alla t“i kuri“i, kai ho kurios t“i s“mati\)...already stated that God dwells in...(3:16f.|). This higher function of the body he here puts forward against the debased Greek philosophy of the time which ignored completely Paul's idea, "the body for the Lord and the Lord for the body" (dative of personal interest in both cases). "The Lord Jesus and \porneia\ contested for the bodies of Christian men; loyal to him they must renounce _that_, yielding to _that_ they renounce him" (Findlay).

rwp@1Corinthians:6:19 @{Your body is a temple} (\to s“ma hum“n naos estin\). A sanctuary as in strkjv@3:16|...and the Holy Spirit dwells in...{Ye are not your own} (\ouk este heaut“n\). Predicate genitive. Ye do not belong to yourselves, even if you could commit fornication without personal contamination or self-violation. Christianity makes unchastity dishonour in both sexes. There is no double standard of morality. Paul's plea here is primarily to men to be clean as members of Christ's body.

rwp@1John:1:7 @{If we walk} (\ean peripat“men\). Condition of third class also with \ean\ and present active subjunctive (keep on walking in the light with God). {As he} (\h“s autos\). As God is light (verse 5|) and dwells in light unapproachable (1Timothy:6:16|). {One with another} (\met' allˆl“n\). As he has already said in verse 3|. But we cannot have fellowship with one another unless we have it with God in Christ, and to do that we must walk in the light with God. {And the blood of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from all sin} (\kai to haima Iˆsou tou huiou autou katharizei hˆmƒs apo pƒsˆs hamartias\). This clause with \kai\ in true Johannine style is coordinate with the preceding one. Walking in the light with God makes possible fellowship with one another and is made possible also by the blood of Jesus (real blood and no mere phantom, atoning blood of the sinless Son of God for our sins). John is not ashamed to use this word. It is not the mere "example" of Jesus that "cleanses" us from sin. It does cleanse the conscience and life and nothing else does (Hebrews:9:13f.; strkjv@Titus:2:14|). See in verse 9| both forgiveness and cleansing. Cf. strkjv@1John:3:3|.

rwp@2Corinthians:3:17 @{Now the Lord is the Spirit} (\ho de Kurios to pneuma estin\). Some, like E. F. Scott (_The Spirit in the N.T._), take \Kurios\ here to be Christ and interpret Paul as denying the personality of the Holy Spirit, identifying Christ and the Holy Spirit. But is not Bernard right here in taking \Kurios\ (Lord) in the same sense here as in strkjv@Exodus:34:34| (\enanti Kuriou\, before the Lord), the very passage that Paul is quoting? Certainly, the Holy Spirit is interchangeably called in the N.T. the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ (Romans:8:9f.|). Christ dwells in us by the Holy Spirit, but the language here in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:17| should not be pressed unduly (Plummer. See also P. Gardner, _The Religious Experience of St. Paul_, p. 176f.). Note "the Spirit of the Lord" here. {Liberty} (\eleutheria\). Freedom of access to God without fear in opposition to the fear in strkjv@Exodus:34:30|. We need no veil and we have free access to God.

rwp@Acts:17:28 @{For in him} (\en aut“i gar\)...in God as God dwells in...(\z“men, kinoumetha, esmen\) form an ascending scale and reach a climax in God (life, movement, existence). \Kinoumetha\ is either direct middle present indicative (we move ourselves) or passive (we are moved). {As certain even of your own poets} (\h“s kai tines t“n kath' humƒs poiˆt“n\). "As also some of the poets among you." Aratus of Soli in Cilicia (ab. B.C. 270) has these very words in his _Ta Phainomena_ and Cleanthes, Stoic philosopher (300-220 B.C.) in his _Hymn to Zeus_ has \Ek sou gar genos esmen\. In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:32| Paul quotes from Menander and in strkjv@Titus:1:12| from Epimenides. J. Rendel Harris claims that he finds allusions in Paul's Epistles to Pindar, Aristophanes, and other Greek writers. There is no reason in the world why Paul should not have acquaintance with Greek literature, though one need not strain a point to prove it. Paul, of course, knew that the words were written of Zeus (Jupiter), not of Jehovah, but he applies the idea in them to his point just made that all men are the offspring of God.

rwp@Colossians:2:9 @{For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily} (\hoti en aut“i katoikei pƒn to plˆr“ma tˆs theotˆtos s“matik“s\). In this sentence, given as the reason (\hoti\, because)...Person of Christ. There dwells... (at home) in Christ not one or more aspects of the Godhead (the very \essence\ of God, from \theos, deitas\) and not to be confused with \theiotes\ in strkjv@Romans:1:20| (from \theios\, the {quality} of God, _divinitas_), here only in N.T. as \theiotˆs\ only in strkjv@Romans:1:20|. The distinction is observed in Lucian and Plutarch. \Theiotˆs\ occurs in the papyri and inscriptions. Paul here asserts that "all the \plˆr“ma\...not just certain aspects, dwells in...(\s“matik“s\, late and rare adverb, in Plutarch, inscription, here only in N.T.), dwells now in Christ in his glorified humanity (Phillipians:2:9-11|), "the body of his glory" (\t“i s“mati tˆs doxˆs\). The fulness of the God-head was in Christ before the Incarnation (John:1:1,18; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6|), during the Incarnation (John:1:14,18; strkjv@1John:1:1-3|). It was the Son of God who came in the likeness of men (Phillipians:2:7|). Paul here disposes of the Docetic theory that Jesus had no human body as well as the Cerinthian separation between the man Jesus and the aeon Christ. He asserts plainly the deity and the humanity of Jesus Christ in corporeal form.

rwp@Revelation:12:14 @{There were given} (\edothˆsan\). As in strkjv@8:2; strkjv@9:1,3|. {The two wings of the great eagle} (\hai duo pteruges tou aetou tou megalou\). Not the eagle of strkjv@8:13|, but the generic use of the article. Every eagle had two wings. Probably here, as in strkjv@Matthew:24:28|, the griffon or vulture rather than the true eagle is pictured. For the eagle in the O.T. see strkjv@Exodus:19:4; strkjv@Isaiah:40:31; strkjv@Job:9:26; strkjv@Proverbs:24:54|. {That she might fly} (\hina petˆtai\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present middle subjunctive of \petomai\, old verb, to fly, in N.T. only in the Apocalypse (4:7; strkjv@8:13; strkjv@12:14; strkjv@14:6; strkjv@19:17|). Resumption of the details in verse 6| (which see) about the "wilderness," her "place," the redundant \ekei\ with \hopou\, the "time and times, and half a time" (\kairon kai kairous kai hˆmisu\), 1260 days, but with \trephetai\ (present passive indicative) instead of \treph“sin\ (general plural of the present active subjunctive), and with the addition of "from the face of the serpent" (\apo pros“pou tou ophe“s\)...present order the Church dwells in...(Swete), and yet we must carry on for Christ.


Seeker Overlay: Off On

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