rwp - est

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

rwp@Acts:16:3 @{Him would Paul have to go forth with him} (\touton thelsen ho Paulos sun auti exelthein\). This one (note emphatic position) Paul wanted (first aorist active indicative of \thel\ with temporal augment as if from \ethel\ the old form). Here was a gifted young man who was both Jew and Greek. {He took and circumcised him} (\labn perietemen auton\). Any one could perform this rite. Paul had stoutly resisted circumcision in the case of Titus, a pure Greek (Galatians:2:3,5|), because the whole principle of Gentile liberty was at stake. But Timothy was both Jew and Greek and would continually give offence to the Jews with no advantage to the cause of Gentile freedom. Songs:here for the sake of expediency, "because of the Jews" (\dia tous Ioudaious\), Paul voluntarily removed this stumbling-block to the ministry of Timothy. Otherwise Timothy could not have been allowed to preach ln the synagogues. _Idem non est semper idem_. But Timothy's case was not the case of Titus. Here it was a question of efficient service, not an essential of salvation. Hovey notes that Timothy was circumcised because of Jewish unbelievers, not because of Jewish believers. {Was a Greek} (\Helln huprchen\). Imperfect active in indirect assertion where ordinarily the present \huparchei\ would be retained, possibly indicating that his father was no longer living.

rwp@Acts:22:25 @{When they had tied him up} (\hos proeteinan auton\). First aorist active indicative of \protein\, old verb to stretch forward, only here in the N.T. Literally, "When they stretched him forward." {With the thongs} (\tois himasin\). If the instrumental case of \himas\, old word for strap or thong (for sandals as strkjv@Mark:1:7|, or for binding criminals as here), then Paul was bent forward and tied by the thongs to a post in front to expose his back the better to the scourges. But \tois himasin\ may be dative case and then it would mean "for the lashes." In either case it is a dreadful scene of terrorizing by the chiliarch. {Unto the centurion that stood by} (\pros ton hestta hekatontarchon\). He was simply carrying out the orders of the chiliarch (cf. strkjv@Matthew:27:54|). Why had not Paul made protest before this? {Is it lawful?} (\ei exestin?\). This use of \ei\ in indirect questions we have had before (1:6|). {A Roman and uncondemned} (\Romaion kai akatakriton\). Just as in strkjv@16:37| which see. Blass says of Paul's question: _Interrogatio subironica est confidentiae plena_.

rwp@John:9:24 @{A second time} (\ek deuterou\). He had given the Pharisees the facts the first time (9:15|). It was really the third time (see \palin\ in strkjv@9:17|). Now it was like a joke unless the Pharisees meant to imply that his previous story was untrue. {Give glory to God} (\dos doxan ti thei\). Second aorist active imperative of \didmi\ (cf. \sches, hes\). This phrase does not mean gratitude to God as in strkjv@Luke:17:18|. It is rather an adjuration to speak the truth (Joshua:7:19; strkjv@1Samuel:6:5|) as if he had not done it before. Augustine says: "_Quid est Daniel:gloriam Deo? Nega quod accepisti._" Is a sinner (\hamartlos estin\). They can no longer deny the fact of the cure since the testimony of the parents (9:19|) and now wish the man to admit that he was lying in saying that Jesus healed him. He must accept their ecclesiastical authority as proving that Jesus had nothing to do with the cure since Jesus is a sinner. They wish to decide the fact by logic and authority like all persecutors through the ages. Recall the Pharisaic distinction between \dikaios\ (righteous) and \hamartlos\ (sinner).

rwp@John:18:38 @{What is truth?} (\ti estin altheia;\). This famous sneer of Pilate reveals his own ignorance of truth, as he stood before Incarnate Truth (John:14:6|). _Quid est veritas?_ The answer in Latin is _Vir est qui adest_ as has been succinctly said by the use of the same letters. Pilate turned with indifference from his own great question and rendered his verdict: "I find no crime in him" (\eg oudemian heurisk en auti aitian\). For this use of \aitia\ see strkjv@Matthew:27:37; strkjv@Mark:15:26|. Pilate therefore should have set Jesus free at once.

CONCORD est