rwp - ever

rwp@Info @ I have called these volumes _Word Pictures_ for the obvious reason that language was originally purely pictographic. Children love to read by pictures either where it is all picture or where pictures are interspersed with simple words. The Rosetta Stone is a famous illustration. The Egyptian hieroglyphics come at the top of the stone, followed by the Demotic Egyptian language with the Greek translation at the bottom. By means of this stone the secret of the hieroglyphs or pictographs was unravelled. Chinese characters are also pictographic. The pictures were first for ideas, then for words, then for syllables, then for letters. Today in Alaska there are Indians who still use pictures alone for communicating their ideas. "Most words have been originally metaphors, and metaphors are continually falling into the rank of words" (Professor Campbell). Rather is it not true that words are metaphors, sometimes with the pictured flower still blooming, sometimes with the blossom blurred? Words have never gotten wholly away from the picture stage. These old Greek words in the New Testament are rich with meaning. They speak to us out of the past and with lively images to those who have eyes to see. It is impossible to translate all of one language into another. Much can be carried over, but not all. Delicate shades of meaning defy the translator. But some of the very words of Jesus we have still as he said: "The words that I have spoken unto you are spirit and are life" (John:6:63|). We must never forget that in dealing with the words of Jesus we are dealing with things that have life and breath. That is true of all the New Testament, the most wonderful of all books of all time. One can feel the very throb of the heart of Almighty God in the New Testament if the eyes of his own heart have been enlightened by the Holy Spirit. May the Spirit of God take of the things of Christ and make them ours as we muse over the words of life that speak to us out of the New Covenant that we call the New Testament. A.T. ROBERTSON. LOUISVILLE, KY. strkjv@Info:1Corinthians @ FIRST CORINTHIANS FROM EPHESUS A.D. 54 OR 55 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION It would be a hard-...epistles if indeed he ever lived...._Historic Doubts about Napolean Bonaparte_...that no such man ever existed,...(the Big Four of Pauline criticism). It is a waste of time now to prove what all admit to be true. Paul of Tarsus, the Apostle to the Gentiles, wrote I Corinthians.

rwp@1Corinthians:9:7 @{What soldier ever serveth?} (\tis strateuetai pote;\). "Who ever serves as a soldier?" serves in an army (\stratos\). Present middle of old verb \strateu\. {At his own charges} (\idiois opsniois\). This late word \opsnion\ (from \opson\, cooked meat or relish with bread, and \neomai\, to buy) found in Menander, Polybius, and very common in papyri and inscriptions in the sense of rations or food, then for the soldiers' wages (often provisions) or the pay of any workman. Songs:of the wages of sin (Romans:6:23|). Paul uses \labn opsnion\ (receiving wages, the regular idiom) in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:8|. See Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_; Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 148,266; _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 168. To give proof of his right to receive pay for preaching Paul uses the illustrations of the soldier (verse 7|), the husbandman (verse 7|), the shepherd (verse 7|), the ox treading out the grain (8|), the ploughman (verse 10|), the priests in the temple (13|), proof enough in all conscience, and yet not enough for some churches who even today starve their pastors in the name of piety. {Who planteth a vineyard?} (\tis phuteuei ampelna;\). \Ampeln\ no earlier than Diodorus, but in LXX and in papyri. Place of vines (\ampelos\), meaning of ending \-n\. {Who feedeth a flock?} (\tis poimainei poimnn;\). Cognate accusative, both old words. Paul likens the pastor to a soldier, vinedresser, shepherd. He contends with the world, he plants churches, he exercises a shepherd's care over them (Vincent).

rwp@1Corinthians:11:12 @{Of} (\ek\) {--by} (\dia\). Ever since the first creation man has come into existence by means of (\dia\ with genitive) the woman. The glory and dignity of motherhood. Cf. _The Fine Art of Motherhood_ by Ella Broadus Robertson.

rwp@1Corinthians:11:27 @{Unworthily} (\anaxis\). Old adverb, only here in N.T., not genuine in verse 29|. Paul defines his meaning in verse 29f|. He does not say or imply that we ourselves must be "worthy" (\axioi\)...Supper. No one would ever partake...{Shall be guilty} (\enochos estai\). Shall be held guilty as in strkjv@Matthew:5:21f.| which see. Shall be guilty of a crime committed against the body and blood of the Lord by such sacrilege (cf. strkjv@Hebrews:6:6; strkjv@10:29|).

rwp@1Corinthians:13:1 @{With the tongues} (\tais glssais\). Instrumental case. Mentioned first because really least and because the Corinthians put undue emphasis on this gift. Plato (_Symposium_, 197) and many others have written on love, but Paul has here surpassed them all in this marvellous prose-...strongest, deepest thing Paul ever wrote"...(Harnack). The condition (\ean\ and present subjunctive, \lal kai m ech\, though the form is identical with present indicative) is of the third class, a supposable case. {But have not love} (\agapn de m ech\). This is the _crux_ of the chapter. Love is the way _par excellence_ of strkjv@12:31|. It is not yet clearly certain that \agap\ (a back-formation from \agapa\) occurs before the LXX and the N.T. Plutarch used \agapsis\. Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 198) once suspected it on an inscription in Pisidia. It is still possible that it occurs in the papyri (Prayer to Isis). See _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 75 for details. The rarity of \agap\ made it easier for Christians to use this word for Christian love as opposed to \ers\ (sexual love). See also Moffatt's Love in the N.T. for further data. The word is rare in the Gospels, but common in Paul, John, Peter, Jude. Paul does not limit \agap\ at all (both toward God and man). Charity (Latin _caritas_) is wholly inadequate. "Intellect was worshipped in Greece, and power in Rome; but where did St. Paul learn the surpassing beauty of love?" (Robertson and Plummer). Whether Paul had ever seen Jesus in the flesh, he knows him in the spirit. One can substitute Jesus for love all through this panegyric. {I am become} (\gegona\). Second perfect indicative in the conclusion rather than the usual future indicative. It is put vividly, "I am already become." Sounding brass (\chalchos chn\). Old words. Brass was the earliest metal that men learned to use. Our word _echoing_ is \chn\, present active participle. Used in strkjv@Luke:21:25| of the roaring of the sea. Only two examples in N.T. {Clanging cymbal} (\kumbalon alalazon\). Cymbal old word, a hollow basin of brass. \Alalaz\, old onomatopoetic word to ring loudly, in lament (Mark:5:38|), for any cause as here. Only two N.T. examples.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:12 @{Is preached} (\krussetai\). Personal use of the verb, Christ is preached. {How say some among you?} (\ps legousin en humin tines?\). The question springs naturally from the proof of the fact of the resurrection of Christ (verses 1-11|) and the continual preaching which Paul here assumes by condition of the first class (\ei--krussetai\)...that miracles happen or ever did...

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) \Cphs\, 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 \Simn\ 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 Isou 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 Isou\," 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) \Isou 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 \kltoi\ (called) and \eklektoi\ (chosen) in strkjv@Matthew:22:14|. {Who are sojourners} (\parepidmois\). Late double compound adjective (\para, epidmountes\, 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} (\diaspors\). 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@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|...his own signature to every letter...(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 ti logi 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...(eschatology). It is a rare preacher who has never been misunderstood or misrepresented.

rwp@1Timothy:1:17 @This noble doxology is a burst of gratitude for God's grace to Paul. For other doxologies see strkjv@Galatians:1:5; strkjv@Romans:11:36; strkjv@16:27; strkjv@Phillipians:4:20; strkjv@Ephesians:3:21; strkjv@1Timothy:6:16|. White suggests that Paul may have often used this doxology in his prayers. Lock suggests "a Jewish liturgical formula" (a needless suggestion in view of Paul's wealth of doxologies seen above). For God's creative activity (King of the ages) see strkjv@1Corinthians:10:11; strkjv@Ephesians:2:7; strkjv@3:9,11|. {Incorruptible} (\aphtharti\). As an epithet of God also in strkjv@Romans:1:23|. {Invisible} (\aorati\). Epithet of God in strkjv@Colossians:1:15|. {The only God} (\moni thei\). Songs:Romans:16:27; strkjv@John:5:44; strkjv@17:3|. {For ever and ever} (\eis tous ainas tn ainn\). "Unto the ages of ages." Cf. strkjv@Ephesians:3:21| "of the age of the ages."

rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ FIRST CORINTHIANS FROM EPHESUS A.D. 54 OR 55 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION It would be a hard-...epistles if indeed he ever lived...._Historic Doubts about Napolean Bonaparte_...that no such man ever existed,...(the Big Four of Pauline criticism). It is a waste of time now to prove what all admit to be true. Paul of Tarsus, the Apostle to the Gentiles, wrote I Corinthians.

rwp@2Corinthians:5:14 @{The love of Christ} (\h agap tou Christou\). Subjective genitive, Christ's love for Paul as shown by verse 15|. {Constraineth us} (\sunechei hmas\). Old and common verb, to hold together, to press the ears together (Acts:7:57|), to press on every side (Luke:8:45|), to hold fast (Luke:22:63|), to hold oneself to (Acts:18:5|), to be pressed (passive, strkjv@Luke:12:50; strkjv@Phillipians:1:23|). Songs:here Paul's conception of Christ's love for him holds him together to his task whatever men think or say. {Judging this} (\krinantas touto\)...Having reached this conclusion, ever since...(Galatians:1:17f.|). {One died for all} (\heis huper pantn apethanen\). This is the central tenet in Paul's theology and Christology. \Huper\ (over) here is used in the sense of substitution as in strkjv@John:11:50; strkjv@Galatians:3:13|, death in behalf so that the rest will not have to die. This use of \huper\ is common in the papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 631). In fact, \huper\ in this sense is more usual in Greek than \anti, pro\ or any other preposition. {Therefore all died} (\ara hoi pantes apethanon\). Logical conclusion (\ara\, corresponding), the one died for the all and so the all died when he did, all the spiritual death possible for those for whom Christ died. This is Paul's gospel, clear-cut, our hope today.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:28 @{Besides those things that are without} (\chris tn parektos\)...mentioned." Surely no man ever found...{That which presseth upon me daily} (\h epistasis moi h kath' hmeran\). For this vivid word \epistasis\ see strkjv@Acts:24:12|, the only other place in the N.T. where it occurs. It is like the rush of a mob upon Paul. {Anxiety for all the churches} (\h merimna pasn tn ekklsin\). Objective genitive after \merimna\ (distractions in different directions, from \meriz\) for which word see on ¯Matthew:13:22|. Paul had the shepherd heart. As apostle to the Gentiles he had founded most of these churches.

rwp@Acts:8:24 @{Pray ye for me} (\Dethte humeis huper emou\). Emphasis on \humeis\ (you)...no evidence that he ever changed...{Which} (\hn\). Genitive by attraction of the accusative relative \ha\ to case of the unexpressed antecedent \toutn\ (of those things), a common Greek idiom.

rwp@Acts:16:6 @{The region of Phrygia and Galatia} (\tn Phrugian kai Galatikn chran\). This is probably the correct text with one article and apparently describes one "Region" or District in The Province of Galatia which was also Phrygian (the old-ethnographic name with which compare the use of Lycaonia in strkjv@14:6|). Strictly speaking Derbe and Lystra, though in the Province of Galatia, were not Phrygian, and so Luke would here be not resumptive of the record in verses 1-5|...is hotly disputed at every point...18:23|, it is still possible for Paul in strkjv@Galatians:1:2| to use the term Galatia of the whole province of that name which could, in fact, apply to either South or North Galatia or to both. He could, of course, use it also in the ethnographic sense of the real Gauls or Celts who dwelt in North Galatia. Certainly the first tour of Paul and Barnabas was in the Province of Galatia though touching only the Regions of Pisidia, Phrygia, and Lycaonia, which province included besides the Gauls to the north. In this second tour Lycaonia has been already touched (Derbe and Lystra) and now Phrygia. The question arises why Luke here and in strkjv@18:23| adds the term "of Galatia" (\Galatikn\) though not in strkjv@13:14| (Pisidian Antioch) nor in strkjv@14:6| (cities of Lycaonia). Does Luke mean to use "of Galatia" in the same ethnographic sense as "of Phrygia" or does he here add the province (Galatia) to the name of the Region (Phrygia)? In itself either view is possible and it really matters very little except that the question is raised whether Paul went into the North Galatian Region on this occasion or later (18:23|). He could have done so and the Epistle be addressed to the churches of South Galatia, North Galatia, or the province as a whole. But the Greek participle \kluthentes\ ("having been forbidden") plays a part in the argument that cannot be overlooked whether Luke means to say that Paul went north or not. This aorist passive participle of \klu\, to hinder, can only express simultaneous or antecedent action, not subsequent action as Ramsay argues. No example of the so-...the aorist participle has ever been...(Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 860-63, 1112-14). The only natural meaning of \kluthentes\ is that Paul with Silas and Timothy "passed through the region of Phrygia and Galatia" because they were hindered by the Holy Spirit from speaking the word in Asia (the Province of Asia of which Ephesus was the chief city and west of Derbe and Lystra). This construction implies that the country called "the region of Phrygia and Galatia" is not in the direct line west toward Ephesus. What follows in verse 7| throws further light on the point.

rwp@Acts:17:18 @{And certain also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him} (\tines de kai tn Epikourin kai Stikn philosophn suneballon auti\). Imperfect active of \sunball\, old verb, in the N.T. only by Luke, to bring or put together in one's mind (Luke:2:19|), to meet together (Acts:20:14|), to bring together aid (18:27|), to confer or converse or dispute as here and already strkjv@4:15| which see. These professional philosophers were always ready for an argument and so they frequented the agora for that purpose. Luke uses one article and so groups the two sects together in their attitude toward Paul, but they were very different in fact. Both sects were eager for argument and both had disdain for Paul, but they were the two rival practical philosophies of the day, succeeding the more abstruse theories of Plato and Aristotle. Socrates had turned men's thought inward (\Gnthi Seauton\, Know Thyself) away from the mere study of physics. Plato followed with a profound development of the inner self (metaphysics). Aristotle with his cyclopaedic grasp sought to unify and relate both physics and metaphysics. Both Zeno and Epicurus (340-272 B.C.)...raised the issues of everyday life....(360-260 B.C.) taught in the \Stoa\ (Porch) and so his teaching was called Stoicism. He advanced many noble ideas that found their chief illustration in the Roman philosophers (Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius). He taught self-mastery and hardness with an austerity that ministered to pride or suicide in case of failure, a distinctly selfish and unloving view of life and with a pantheistic philosophy. Epicurus considered practical atheism the true view of the universe and denied a future life and claimed pleasure as the chief thing to be gotten out of life. He did not deny the existence of gods, but regarded them as unconcerned with the life of men. The Stoics called Epicurus an atheist. Lucretius and Horace give the Epicurean view of life in their great poems. This low view of life led to sensualism and does today, for both Stoicism and Epicureanism are widely influential with people now. "Eat and drink for tomorrow we die," they preached. Paul had doubtless become acquainted with both of these philosophies for they were widely prevalent over the world. Here he confronts them in their very home. He is challenged by past-masters in the art of appealing to the senses, men as skilled in their dialectic as the Pharisaic rabbis with whom Paul had been trained and whose subtleties he had learned how to expose. But, so far as we know, this is a new experience for Paul to have a public dispute with these philosophical experts who had a natural contempt for all Jews and for rabbis in particular, though they found Paul a new type at any rate and so with some interest in him. "In Epicureanism, it was man's sensual nature which arrayed itself against the claims of the gospel; in Stoicism it was his self-righteousness and pride of intellect" (Hackett). Knowling calls the Stoic the Pharisee of philosophy and the Epicurean the Sadducee of philosophy. Socrates in this very agora used to try to interest the passers-...doubtful if Paul had ever met...{What would this babbler say?} (\Ti an theloi ho spermologos houtos legein?\). The word for "babbler" means "seed-picker" or picker up of seeds (\sperma\, seed, \leg\, to collect) like a bird in the agora hopping about after chance seeds. Plutarch applies the word to crows that pick up grain in the fields. Demosthenes called Aeschines a \spermologos\. Eustathius uses it of a man hanging around in the markets picking up scraps of food that fell from the carts and so also of mere rhetoricians and plagiarists who picked up scraps of wisdom from others. Ramsay considers it here a piece of Athenian slang used to describe the picture of Paul seen by these philosophers who use it, for not all of them had it ("some," \tines\). Note the use of \an\ and the present active optative \theloi\, conclusion of a fourth-class condition in a rhetorical question (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). It means, What would this picker up of seeds wish to say, if he should get off an idea? It is a contemptuous tone of supreme ridicule and doubtless Paul heard this comment. Probably the Epicureans made this sneer that Paul was a charlatan or quack. {Other some} (\hoi de\). But others, in contrast with the "some" just before. Perhaps the Stoics take this more serious view of Paul. {He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods} (\zenn daimonin dokei kataggeleus einai\). This view is put cautiously by \dokei\ (seems). \Kataggeleus\ does not occur in the old Greek, though in ecclesiastical writers, but Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 99) gives an example of the word "on a marble stele recording a decree of the Mitylenaens in honour of the Emperor Augustus," where it is the herald of the games. Here alone in the N.T. \Daimonion\ is used in the old Greek sense of deity or divinity whether good or bad, not in the N.T. sense of demons. Both this word and \kataggeleus\ are used from the Athenian standpoint. \Xenos\ is an old word for a guest-friend (Latin _hospes_) and then host (Romans:16:23|), then for foreigner or stranger (Matthew:25:31; strkjv@Acts:17:21|), new and so strange as here and strkjv@Hebrews:13:9; strkjv@1Peter:4:12|, and then aliens (Ephesians:2:12|). This view of Paul is the first count against Socrates: Socrates does wrong, introducing new deities (\adikei Skrats, kaina daimonia eisphern\, Xen. _Mem_. I). On this charge the Athenians voted the hemlock for their greatest citizen. What will they do to Paul? This Athens was more sceptical and more tolerant than the old Athens. But Roman law did not allow the introduction of a new religion (_religio illicita_). Paul was walking on thin ice though he was the real master philosopher and these Epicureans and Stoics were quacks. Paul had the only true philosophy of the universe and life with Jesus Christ as the centre (Colossians:1:12-20|), the greatest of all philosophers as Ramsay justly terms him. But these men are mocking him. {Because he preached Jesus and the resurrection} (\hoti ton Isoun kai tn anastasin euggelizato\). Reason for the view just stated. Imperfect middle indicative of \euaggeliz\, to "gospelize." Apparently these critics considered \anastasis\ (Resurrection) another deity on a par with Jesus. The Athenians worshipped all sorts of abstract truths and virtues and they misunderstood Paul on this subject. They will leave him as soon as he mentions the resurrection (verse 32|). It is objected that Luke would not use the word in this sense here for his readers would not under stand him. But Luke is describing the misapprehension of this group of philosophers and this interpretation fits in precisely.

rwp@Acts:21:29 @{For} (\gar\). Luke adds the reason for the wild charges made against Paul. {They had before seen} (\san proerakotes\). Periphrastic past perfect of \proora\, old verb to see before, whether time or place. Only twice in the N.T., here and strkjv@Acts:2:25| quoted from strkjv@Psalms:15:8|. Note the double reduplication in \-e-\ as in Attic (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 364). {With him in the city Trophimus the Ephesian} (\Trophimon ton Ephesion en ti polei sun auti\). The Jews from Asia (Ephesus) knew Trophimus by sight as well as Paul. One day they saw both of them together (\sun\) in the city. That was a fact. They had just seized Paul in the temple (\hieron\). That was another fact. {They supposed} (\enomizon\). Imperfect active of \nomiz\...temple, nor had they ever seen...(therefore, did bring him, \eisgagen\ as in verse 28|) into the temple, that is into the court of Israel and therefore both Paul and Trophimus were entitled to death, especially Paul who had brought him in (if he had) and, besides, they now had Paul. This is the way of the mob-mind in all ages. Many an innocent man has been rushed to his death by the fury of a lynching party.

rwp@Acts:22:30 @{To know the certainty} (\gnnai to asphales\). Same idiom in strkjv@21:34| which see. {Wherefore he was accused} (\to ti kategoreitai\). Epexegetical after to \asphales\. Note article (accusative case) with the indirect question here as in strkjv@Luke:22:1,23,24| (which see), a neat idiom in the Greek. {Commanded} (\ekeleusen\). Songs:the Sanhedrin had to meet, but in the Tower of Antonia, for he brought Paul down (\katagagn\, second aorist active participle of \katag\). {Set him} (\estsen\). First aorist active (transitive) indicative of \histmi\, not the intransitive second aorist \est\...Paul, more puzzled than ever by...

rwp@Acts:23:15 @{Ye} (\humeis\). Emphatic. {Signify} (\emphanisate\). First aorist active imperative of \emphaniz\. Make plain from \emphans\, chiefly in Acts. Repeated in verse 22|. The authority is with the chiliarch not with the Sanhedrin, but he had appealed to the Sanhedrin for advice. {As though ye would judge of his case more exactly} (\hs mellontas diaginskein akribesteron ta peri autou\). \Hs\ with the participle gives the alleged reason as here. Songs:also in verse 20|. \Diagnosk\, old verb to distinguish accurately, only here in N.T. and strkjv@24:22|. {Or ever come near} (\pro tou eggisai auton\). "Before the coming near as to him." \Pro\ and the genitive of the articular infinitive of \eggiz\ with accusative of general reference. {We are ready to slay him} (\hetoimoi esmen tou anelein auton\). Genitive of purpose of the articular infinitive after the adjective \hetoimoi\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1061). \Anelein\, second aorist active of \anaire\.

rwp@Colossians:2:11 @{Ye were also circumcised} (\kai perietmthte\). First aorist passive indicative of \peritemn\, to circumcise. But used here as a metaphor in a spiritual sense as in strkjv@Romans:2:29| "the circumcision of the heart." {Not made with hands} (\acheiropoiti\). This late and rare negative compound verbal occurs only in the N.T. (Mark:14:58; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1; strkjv@Colossians:2:11|) by merely adding \a\ privative to the old verbal \cheiropoitos\ (Acts:7:48; strkjv@Ephesians:2:11|), possibly first in strkjv@Mark:14:58| where both words occur concerning the temple. In strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1| the reference is to the resurrection body. The feminine form of this compound adjective is the same as the masculine. {In the putting off} (\en ti apekdusei\). As if an old garment (the fleshly body). From \apekduomai\ (Colossians:2:15|, possibly also coined by Paul) and occurring nowhere else so far as known. The word is made in a perfectly normal way by the perfective use of the two Greek prepositions (\apo, ek\), "a resource available for and generally used by any real thinker writing Greek" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_)...and surely no one ever had...{Of Christ} (\tou Christou\). Specifying genitive, the kind of circumcision that belongs to Christ, that of the heart.

rwp@Info_Ephesians @ THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS FROM ROME A.D. 63 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION There are some problems of a special nature that confront us about the so-...of its origin has ever been...

rwp@Info_Ephesians @ THE CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLE The same Gnostic heresy is met as in Colossians, but with this difference. In Colossians the emphasis is on the Dignity of Christ as the Head of the Church, while in Ephesians chief stress is placed upon the Dignity of the Church as the Body of Christ the Head. Paul has written nothing more profound than chapters strkjv@Ephesians:1-3|...them the profoundest thing ever written....

rwp@Ephesians:5:28 @{Even so ought} (\houts opheilousin\). As Christ loves the church (his body). And yet some people actually say that Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:7| gives a degrading view of marriage. How can one say that after reading strkjv@Ephesians:5:22-33|...noblest picture of marriage ever drawn...

rwp@Galatians:2:21 @{I do not make void the grace of God} (\ouk athet tn charin tou theou\). Common word in LXX and Polybius and on, to make ineffective (\a\ privative and \tithmi\, to place or put). Some critic would charge him with that after his claim to such a close mystic union with Christ. {Then Christ died for nought} (\ara Christos drean apethanen\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. If one man apart from grace can win his own righteousness, any man can and should. Hence (\ara\, accordingly) Christ died gratuitously (\drean\), unnecessarily. Adverbial accusative of \drea\, a gift. This verse is a complete answer to those who say that the heathen (or any mere moralist)...one, apart from Jesus, ever did...(\dia nomou\)...knows. That no one ever did....

rwp@Galatians:3:11 @{In the sight of God} (\para ti thei\). By the side of (\para\)...one except Jesus has ever kept..._all_ the law, God's perfect law.

rwp@Hebrews:9:16 @{A testament} (\diathk\). The same word occurs for covenant (verse 15|) and will (verse 16|). This double sense of the word is played upon also by Paul in strkjv@Galatians:3:15f|. We say today "The New Testament" (_Novum Testamentum_) rather than " The New Covenant." Both terms are pertinent. {That made it} (\tou diathemenou\). Genitive of the articular second aorist middle participle of \diatithmi\ from which \diathk\ comes. The notion of will here falls in with \klronomia\ (inheritance, strkjv@1Peter:1:4|) as well as with \thanatos\ (death). {Of force} (\bebaia\). Stable, firm as in strkjv@3:6,14|. {Where there hath been death} (\epi nekrois\). "In the case of dead people." A will is only operative then. {For doth it ever avail while he that made it liveth?} (\epei m pote ischuei hote zi ho diathemenos;\). This is a possible punctuation with \m pote\ in a question (John:7:26|). Without the question mark, it is a positive statement of fact. Aleph and D read \tote\ (then) instead of \pote\. The use of \m\ in a causal sentence is allowable (John:3:18|, \hoti m\).

rwp@Hebrews:10:10 @{We have been sanctified} (\hgiasmenoi esmen\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \hagiaz\...put sinful men for ever into...(Denney, _The Death of Christ_, p. 234).

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 \n\ 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|...ordinary mother or father ever speaks...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} (\esknsen en hmin\). First aorist ingressive aorist active indicative of \skno\, old verb, to pitch one's tent or tabernacle (\sknos\ or \skn\), 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 tn 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} (\hs 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 monogen\ referring to Christ. This is the first use in the Gospel of \patr\ of God in relation to the Logos. \Monogens\ (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} (\plrs\). Probably indeclinable accusative adjective agreeing with \doxan\ (or genitive with \monogenous\) of which we have papyri examples (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 275). As nominative \plrs\ can agree with the subject of \esknsen\. {Of grace and truth} (\charitos kai altheias\). 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 \altheia\ (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 heraken ppote\)..."God no one has ever seen."...\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 monogens huios\). This is the reading of the Textus Receptus and is intelligible after \hs monogenous para patros\ in verse 14|. But the best old Greek manuscripts (Aleph B C L) read \monogens theos\ (God only begotten) which is undoubtedly the true text. Probably some scribe changed it to \ho monogens 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 \monogens\. 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 ti ourani\ 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} (\exgsato\). First aorist (effective) middle indicative of \exgeomai\, 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:4:29 @{All things that ever I did} (\panta ha epoisa\). {Ha}, not \hosa\ (as many as), no "ever" in the Greek. But a guilty conscience (verse 18f.|) led her to exaggerate a bit. {Can this be the Christ?} (\mti houtos estin ho Christos;\). She is already convinced herself (verses 26f.|), but she puts the question in a hesitant form to avoid arousing opposition. With a woman's intuition she avoided \ouk\ and uses \mti\. She does not take sides, but piques their curiosity.

rwp@John:10:1 @{Verily, Verily} (\Amn, amn\). Solemn prelude by repetition as in strkjv@1:51|...The words do not ever introduce...(cf. strkjv@8:34,51,58|). Songs:in strkjv@10:7|. The Pharisees had previously assumed (Vincent) they alone were the authoritative guides of the people (9:24,29|). Songs:Jesus has a direct word for them. Songs:Jesus begins this allegory in a characteristic way. John does not use the word \parabol\, but \paroimia\ (verse 6|), and it really is an allegory of the Good Shepherd and self-explanatory like that of the Prodigal Son in strkjv@Luke:15|. He first tells it in verses 1-5| and then explains and expands it in verses 7-18|. {Into the fold of the sheep} (\eis tn auln tn probatn\). Originally \aul\ (from \a\, to blow) in Homer's time was just an uncovered space around the house enclosed by a wall, then a roofless enclosure in the country where flocks were herded as here and verse 16|. It later came to mean the house itself or palace (Matthew:26:3,58|, etc.). In the papyri it means the court attached to the house. {Climbeth up} (\anabainn\). Present active participle of \anabain\, to go up. One who goes up, not by the door, has to climb up over the wall. {Some other way} (\allachothen\). Rare word for old \allothen\, but in 4Macc. strkjv@1:7 and in a papyrus. Only here in N.T. {The same} (\ekeinos\). "That one" just described. {Is a thief and a robber} (\klepts estin kai lists\). Both old and common words (from \klept\, to steal, \lizomai\, to plunder). The distinction is preserved in the N.T. as here. Judas was a \klepts\ (John:12:6|), Barabbas a robber (18:40|) like the two robbers (Matthew:27:38,44|) crucified with Jesus erroneously termed thieves like "the thief on the cross" by most people. See strkjv@Mark:11:17|. Here the man jumping over the wall comes to steal and to do it by violence like a bandit. He is both thief and robber.

rwp@John:18:15 @{Followed} (\kolouthei\). Imperfect active of \akolouthe\, "was following," picturesque and vivid tense, with associative instrumental case \ti Isou\. {Another disciple} (\allos mathts\). Correct text without article \ho\ (genuine in verse 16|). Peter's companion was the Beloved Disciple, the author of the book (John:21:24|). {Was known unto the high priest} (\n gnstos ti archierei\). Verbal adjective from \ginsk\, to know (Acts:1:19|) with dative case. How well known the word does not say, not necessarily a personal friend, well enough known for the portress to admit John. "The account of what happened to Peter might well seem to be told from the point of view of the servants' hall" (Sanday, _Criticism of the Fourth Gospel_, p. 101). {Entered in with Jesus} (\suneislthen ti Isou\). Second aorist active indicative of the double compound \suneiserchomai\, old verb, in N.T. here and strkjv@6:22|. With associative instrumental case. {Into the court} (\eis tn auln\)...clear that this word ever means...(uncovered enclosure) as always in the papyri (very common). Clearly courtyard in strkjv@Mark:14:66| (Matthew:26:69; strkjv@Luke:22:55|). Apparently Annas had rooms in the official residence of Caiaphas.

rwp@John:18:20 @{Openly} (\parrsii\). As already shown (7:4; strkjv@8:26; strkjv@10:24,39; strkjv@16:25,29|. See strkjv@7:4| for same contrast between \en parrsii\ and \en krupti\. {I ever taught} (\eg pantote edidaxa\). Constative aorist active indicative. For the temple teaching see strkjv@John:2:19; strkjv@7:14,28; strkjv@8:20, strkjv@19:23; strkjv@Mark:14:49| and strkjv@John:6:59| for the synagogue teaching (often in the Synoptics). Examples of private teaching are Nicodemus (John:3|) and the woman of Samaria (John:4|). Jesus ignores the sneer at his disciples, but challenges the inquiry about his teaching as needless.

rwp@John:19:6 @{Crucify him, crucify him} (\staurson, staurson\). First aorist active imperative of \stauro\ for which verb see strkjv@Matthew:29:19|, etc. Here the note of urgency (aorist imperative) with no word for "him," as they were led by the chief priests and the temple police till the whole mob takes it up (Matthew:27:22|). {For I find no crime in him} (\eg gar ouch heurisk\). This is the third time Pilate has rendered his opinion of Christ's innocence (18:38; strkjv@19:4|). And here he surrenders in a fret to the mob and gives as his reason (\gar\, for) for his surrender the innocence of Jesus (the strangest judicial decision ever rendered). Perhaps Pilate was only franker than some judges!

rwp@Jude:1:25 @{To the only God our Saviour} (\moni thei stri hmn\). Dative in the noble doxology. See strkjv@Romans:16:27|, \moni sophi thei\ (to the alone wise God), where also we have \dia Isou Christou\, but without \tou kuriou hmn\ (our Lord) as here. \Str\ is used of God eight times in the N.T., six of them in the Pastoral Epistles. \Doxa\ (glory) to God or Christ in all the doxologies except strkjv@1Timothy:6:16|. \Megalosun\ (Majesty) is a late LXX word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:1:3; strkjv@8:1|. {Before all time} (\pro pantos tou ainos\). Eternity behind us. See same idea in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7| \pro tn ainn\. {Now} (\nun\). The present. {For ever more} (\eis pantas tous ainas\). "Unto all the ages." All the future. As complete a statement of eternity as can be made in human language.

rwp@Luke:2:46 @{After three days} (\meta hmeras treis\). One day out, one day back, and on the third day finding him. {In the temple} (\en ti hieri\). Probably on the terrace where members of the Sanhedrin gave public instruction on sabbaths and feast-days, so probably while the feast was still going on. The rabbis probably sat on benches in a circle. The listeners on the ground, among whom was Jesus the boy in a rapture of interest. {Both hearing them and asking them questions} (\kai akouonta autn kai epertnta autous\). Paul sat at the feet of Gamaliel (Acts:22:3|)...father or mother has ever been...

rwp@Luke:9:48 @{This little child} (\touto to paidion\). As Jesus spoke he probably had his hand upon the head of the child. strkjv@Matthew:18:5| has "one such little child." The honoured disciple, Jesus holds, is the one who welcomes little children "in my name" (\epi ti onomati mou\), upon the basis of my name and my authority. It was a home-...of greatness. Have preachers ever yet...{For he that is least among you all} (\ho gar mikroteros en pasin humin huparchn\). Note the use of \huparch\ as in strkjv@8:41; strkjv@23:50|. The comparative \mikroteros\ is in accord with the _Koin_ idiom where the superlative is vanishing (nearly gone in modern Greek). But {great} (\megas\) is positive and very strong. This saying peculiar to Luke here.

rwp@Luke:10:28 @{Thou hast answered right} (\orths apekriths\). First aorist passive indicative second singular with the adverb \orths\. The answer was correct so far as the words went. In strkjv@Mark:12:34| Jesus commends the scribe for agreeing to his interpretation of the first and the second commandments. That scribe was "not far from the kingdom of God," but this lawyer was "tempting" Jesus. {Do this and thou shalt live} (\touto poiei kai zsi\). Present imperative (keep on doing this forever)...one ever did or ever can...{by doing what}. Of course, if he kept the law {perfectly always}, he would inherit eternal life.

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:22:44 @{In an agony} (\en agnii\). It was conflict, contest from \agn\...pressed Jesus harder than ever before....{As it were great drops of blood} (\hsei thromboi haimatos\). Thick, clotted blood. An old word (\thromboi\) common in medical works, but here only in the N.T. This passage (verses 43,44|) is absent from some ancient documents. Aristotle speaks of a bloody sweat as does Theophrastus.

rwp@Mark:3:29 @{Guilty of an eternal sin} (\enochos estin ainiou hamartmatos\). The genitive of the penalty occurs here with \enochos\. In saying that Jesus had an unclean spirit (verse 30|)...such an environment can ever repent....\hamartmatos\ (sin), not \krises\ (judgment), as the Textus Receptus has it.

rwp@Mark:6:6 @{And he marvelled because of their unbelief} (\kai ethaumasen dia tn apistian autn\). Aorist tense, but Westcott and Hort put the imperfect in the margin. Jesus had divine knowledge and accurate insight into the human heart, but he had human limitations in certain things that are not clear to us. He marvelled at the faith of the Roman centurion where one would not expect faith (Matthew:8:10; strkjv@Luke:7:9|). Here he marvels at the lack of faith where he had a right to expect it, not merely among the Jews, but in his own home town, among his kinspeople, even in his own home. One may excuse Mary, the mother of Jesus, from this unbelief, puzzled, as she probably was, by his recent conduct (Mark:3:21,31|)...no proof that she ever lost...{He went round about the villages teaching} (\perigen ts kmas kukli didaskn\). A good illustration of the frequent poor verse division. An entirely new paragraph begins with these words, the third tour of Galilee. They should certainly be placed with verse 7|. The Revised Version would be justified if it had done nothing else than give us paragraphs according to the sense and connection. "Jesus resumes the role of a wandering preacher in Galilee" (Bruce). Imperfect tense, \perigen\.

rwp@Mark:11:2 @{As ye enter} (\eisporeuomenoi\). Songs:also strkjv@Luke:19:30|. Present middle participle. {Colt} (\plon\). Songs:Luke:19:30|. strkjv@Matthew:21:2| speaks of the ass (\onon\) also. {Whereon no one ever yet sat} (\eph' hon oudeis anthrpn ekathisen\). Songs:Luke:19:30|.

rwp@Mark:12:12 @{Against them} (\pros autous\). Songs:Luke. It was a straight shot, this parable of the Rejected Stone (12:10f.|) and the longer one of the Wicked Husbandmen. There was no mistaking the application, for he had specifically explained the application (Matthew:21:43-45|)...enthusiastic for Jesus than ever held...(Matthew:22:1-14|).

rwp@Info_Matthew @ The word Gospel (\Euaggelion\) comes to mean good news in Greek, though originally a reward for good tidings as in Homer's _Odyssey_ XIV. 152 and in strkjv@2Kings:4:10|. In the New Testament it is the good news of salvation through Christ. The English word Gospel probably comes from the Anglo-Saxon Godspell, story or narrative of God, the life of Christ. It was early confused with the Anglo-Saxon godspell, good story, which seems like a translation of the Greek \euaggelion\...that the world has ever had....(\Logos\) in strkjv@John:1:1,14|. Songs:then it is, according to the Greek, not the Good News of Matthew, but the Good News of God, brought to us in Christ the Word, the Son of God, the Image of the Father, the Message of the Father. We are to study this story first as presented by Matthew. The message is God's and it is as fresh to us today in Matthew's record as when he first wrote it.

rwp@Matthew:1:20 @{An angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream} (\aggelos kuriou kat' onar ephan auti\). This expression (\aggelos kuriou\) is without the article in the New Testament except when, as in strkjv@1:24|...needed God's help if ever man...1:16|. Mary is called his "wife" (\tn gunaika sou\). He is told "not to become afraid" (ingressive first aorist passive subjunctive in prohibition, (\m phobthis\), "to take to his side" (\paralabein\, ingressive aorist active infinitive) her whom he had planned (\enthumthentos\, 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:2:1 @{Now when Jesus was born} (\tou de Isou gennthentos\). The fact of the birth of Jesus is stated by the genitive absolute construction (first aorist passive participle of the same verb \genna\ used twice already of the birth of Jesus, strkjv@1:16,20|, and used in the genealogy, strkjv@1:2-16|)...born at all or ever lived,...-born Messianic King. Homage from afar, hostility at home; foreshadowing the fortunes of the new faith: reception by the Gentiles, rejection by the Jews" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:14:23 @{Into the mountain} (\eis to oros\)...mountains to pray. If ever he...

rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{The gates of Hades} (\pulai hidou\) {shall not prevail against it} (\ou katischusousin auts\). Each word here creates difficulty. Hades is technically the unseen world, the Hebrew Sheol, the land of the departed, that is death. Paul uses \thanate\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:55| in quoting strkjv@Hosea:13:14| for \hid\. It is not common in the papyri, but it is common on tombstones in Asia Minor, "doubtless a survival of its use in the old Greek religion" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). The ancient pagans divided Hades (\a\ privative and \idein\, to see, abode of the unseen) into Elysium and Tartarus as the Jews put both Abraham's bosom and Gehenna in Sheol or Hades (cf. strkjv@Luke:16:25|). Christ was in Hades (Acts:2:27,31|), not in Gehenna. We have here the figure of two buildings, the Church of Christ on the Rock, the House of Death (Hades). "In the Old Testament the 'gates of Hades' (Sheol) never bears any other meaning (Isaiah:38:10|; Wisd. strkjv@16:3; 3Macc. strkjv@5:51) than death," McNeile claims. See also strkjv@Psalms:9:13; strkjv@107:18; strkjv@Job:38:17| (\pulai thanatou pulroi hidou\). It is not the picture of Hades _attacking_ Christ's church, but of death's possible victory over the church. "The \ekklsia\ is built upon the Messiahship of her master, and death, the gates of Hades, will not prevail against her by keeping Him imprisoned. It was a mysterious truth, which He will soon tell them in plain words (verse 21|); it is echoed in strkjv@Acts:2:24,31|" (McNeile)...forth conqueror. He will ever live...\katischu\ (literally have strength against, \ischu\ from \ischus\ and \kat-\) occurs also in strkjv@Luke:21:36; strkjv@23:23|. It appears in the ancient Greek, the LXX, and in the papyri with the accusative and is used in the modern Greek with the sense of gaining the mastery over. The wealth of imagery in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| makes it difficult to decide each detail, but the main point is clear. The \ekklsia\ which consists of those confessing Christ as Peter has just done will not cease. The gates of Hades or bars of Sheol will not close down on it. Christ will rise and will keep his church alive. _Sublime Porte_ used to be the title of Turkish power in Constantinople.

rwp@Matthew:21:19 @{A fig tree} (\sukn mian\). "A single fig tree" (Margin of Rev. Version). But \heis\ was often used = \tis\ or like our indefinite article. See strkjv@Matthew:8:10; strkjv@26:69|. The Greek has strictly no indefinite article as the Latin has no definite article. {...from thee henceforward for ever...} (\ou mketi sou karpos gentai eis ton aina\). Strictly speaking this is a prediction, not a prohibition or wish as in strkjv@Mark:11:14| (optative \phagoi\)...you no fruit shall ever grow...(Weymouth). The double negative \ou m\ with the aorist subjunctive (or future indicative) is the strongest kind of negative prediction. It sometimes amounts to a prohibition like \ou\ and the future indicative (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 926f.). The early figs start in spring before the leaves and develop after the leaves. The main fig crop was early autumn (Mark:11:14|). There should have been figs on the tree with the crop of leaves. It was a vivid object lesson. Matthew does not distinguish between the two mornings as Mark does (Mark:11:13,20|), but says "immediately" (\parachrma\) twice (21:19,20|). This word is really \para to chrma\ like our "on the spot" (Thayer). It occurs in the papyri in monetary transactions for immediate cash payment.

rwp@Matthew:23:5 @{To be seen of men} (\pros to theathnai tois anthrpois\). See strkjv@6:1| where this same idiom occurs. Ostentation regulates the conduct of the rabbis. {Phylacteries} (\phulaktria\). An adjective from \phulaktr, phulass\ (to guard). Songs:a fortified place, station for garrison, then a safeguard, protecting charm or amulet. The rabbis wore \tephillin\ or prayer-fillets, small leather cases with four strips of parchment on which were written the words of strkjv@Exodus:13:1-10,11-16; strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:4-9; strkjv@11:13-21|. They took literally the words about "a sign unto thy hand," "a memorial between thine eyes," and "frontlets." "That for the head was to consist of a box with four compartments, each containing a slip of parchment inscribed with one of the four passages. Each of these strips was to be tied up with a well-...any fungoid growth should ever pollute..._tephillin_" (Vincent). It is small wonder that Jesus ridiculed such minute concern for pretentious externalism and literalism. These _tephillin_ "are still worn at the present day on the forehead and left arm by Jews at the daily Morning Prayer" (McNeile). "The size of the phylacteries indexed the measure of zeal, and the wearing of large ones was apt to take the place of obedience" (Bruce). Hence they made them "broad." The superstitious would wear them as mere charms to ward off evil. {Enlarge the borders} (\megalunousin ta kraspeda\). In strkjv@9:20| we see that Jesus, like the Jews generally, wore a tassel or tuft, hem or border, a fringe on the outer garment according to strkjv@Numbers:15:38|. Here again the Jewish rabbi had minute rules about the number of the fringes and the knots (see on ¯9:20|). They made a virtue of the size of the fringes also. "Such things were useful as reminders; they were fatal when they were regarded as charms" (Plummer).

rwp@Matthew:27:54 @{Truly this was the Son of God} (\alths theou huios n houtos\). There is no article with God or Son in the Greek so that it means "God's Son," either "the Son of God" or "a Son of God." There is no way to tell. Evidently the centurion (\hekatontarchos\ here, ruler of a hundred, Latin word _kenturin_ in strkjv@Mark:15:39|) was deeply moved by the portents which he had witnessed. He had heard the several flings at Jesus for claiming to be the Son of God and may even have heard of his claim before the Sanhedrin and Pilate. How much he meant by his words we do not know, but probably he meant more than merely "a righteous man" (Luke:23:47|)...Cross. All who are ever saved...

rwp@Info_Philipians @...in Ephesus if he ever was..._St. Paul's Ephesian Ministry_. But, when all is considered carefully in the light of the facts in the Acts and the Epistles, the best that one can say is that a possible case is made out with many difficulties remaining unexplained. The argument is more ingenious than convincing. It is not possible here to review the arguments _pro_ and _con_ that convince me that Paul was in Rome when he wrote this letter to Philippi. It is not clear whether it was written before the three that went together (Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians) or afterwards. Probably there was no great difference in time, but there was time for Epaphroditus to come to Rome, to fall sick, for the news to reach Philippi and for Epaphroditus to hear of their concern about him. The church in Philippi was Paul's joy and pride and they had helped him before as they did this time.

rwp@Revelation:14:11 @{The smoke of their torment} (\ho kapnos tou basanismou autn\). See strkjv@9:5| for \basanismos\...here it is "for ever and...(\eis ainas ainn\, unto ages of ages). See also strkjv@18:9; strkjv@19:3; strkjv@20:10|. {They have no rest} (\ouk echousin anapausin\). The very language used in strkjv@4:8| of the four living creatures in praising God. "Those who desert Christ for Caesar will be the victims of a remorse that never dies or sleeps" (Swete). The rest of the verse repeats the solemn challenge of verse 9|.

rwp@Revelation:15:7 @{Seven golden bowls} (\hepta phialas chruss\). Golden saucers, but not full of incense as in strkjv@5:8|, but "full (\gemousas\ for which see strkjv@5:8|)...God who liveth for ever and...(\tou thumou tou theou tou zntos eis tous ainas tn ainn\). Portents of dreadful events.

rwp@Revelation:20:10 @{Was cast} (\eblth\). First aorist (prophetic, affective) passive indicative of \ball\ (verse 3|). {Into the lake of fire and brimstone} (\eis tn limnn tou puros kai theiou\). As in strkjv@19:20| with the two beasts, as he adds, "where are also the beast and the false prophet" (\hopou kai to thrion kai ho pseudoprophts\). {They shall be tormented} (\basanisthsontai\). Return to the prophetic future of verses 7,8|. For \basaniz\ see strkjv@9:5; strkjv@14:10|. For "day and night" (\hmeras kai nuktos\) see strkjv@4:8; strkjv@7:15; strkjv@12:10; strkjv@14:11|...For "for ever and ever"... (\eis tous ainas ton ainn\) see strkjv@1:6,18; strkjv@4:9,10; strkjv@5:13; strkjv@7:12; strkjv@10:6; strkjv@11:15|, etc. The devil was cast down from heaven (12:9|), then imprisoned (20:2ff.|), now he received his final doom.

CONCORD ever