CONCORD precise



rwp@Info_1Corinthians @...do not know the precise year,...(in round numbers) at Ephesus (Acts:20:31|). Like all the years in Paul's ministry we have to allow a sliding scale in relation to his other engagements. One may guess the early spring of A.D. 54 or 55.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:20 @{Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this world?} (\Pou sophos; pou grammateus; pou sunzˆtˆtˆs tou ai“nos toutou;\). Paul makes use of strkjv@Isaiah:33:18| without exact quotation. The sudden retreat of Sennacherib with the annihilation of his officers. "On the tablet of Shalmaneser in the Assyrian Gallery of the British Museum there is a surprisingly exact picture of the scene described by Isaiah" (Robertson and Plummer). Note the absence of the Greek article in each of these rhetorical questions though the idea is clearly definite. Probably \sophos\ refers to the Greek philosopher, \grammateus\ to the Jewish scribe and \sunzˆtˆtˆs\ suits both the Greek and the Jewish disputant and doubter (Acts:6:9; strkjv@9:29; strkjv@17:18; strkjv@28:29|). There is a note of triumph in these questions. The word \sunzˆtˆtˆs\ occurs here alone in the N.T. and elsewhere only in Ignatius, Eph. 18 quoting this passage, but the papyri give the verb \sunzˆte“\ for disputing (questioning together). {Hath not God made foolish?} (\ouchi em“ranen ho theos;\)...active indicative difficult of precise translation,...\m“rain“\ from \m“ros\, foolish, was to be foolish, to act foolish, then to prove one foolish as here or to make foolish as in strkjv@Romans:1:22|. In strkjv@Matthew:5:13; strkjv@Luke:14:34| it is used of salt that is tasteless. {World} (\kosmou\). Synonymous with \ai“n\ (age), orderly arrangement, then the non-Christian cosmos.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:6 @{I have in a figure transferred} (\meteschˆmatisa\). First aorist active (not perfect) indicative of \meta-schˆmatiz“\, used by Plato and Aristotle for changing the form of a thing (from \meta\, after, and \schˆma\, form or habit, like Latin _habitus_ from \ech“\ and so different from \morphˆ\ as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:7; strkjv@Romans:12:2|). For the idea of refashioning see Field, _Notes_, p. 169f. and Preisigke, _Fachworter_). Both Greek and Latin writers (Quintilian, Martial) used \schˆma\ for a rhetorical artifice. Paul's use of the word (in Paul only in N.T.) appears also further in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:13-15| where the word occurs three times, twice of the false apostles posing and passing as apostles of Christ and ministers of righteousness, and once of Satan as an angel of light, twice with \eis\ and once with \h“s\. In strkjv@Phillipians:3:21| the word is used for the change in the body of our humiliation to the body of glory. But here it is clearly the rhetorical figure for a veiled allusion to Paul and Apollos "for your sakes" (\dia humas\). {That in us ye may learn} (\hina en hˆmin mathˆte\). Final clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \manthan“\, to learn. As an object lesson in our cases (\en hˆmin\). It is no more true of Paul and Apollos than of other ministers, but the wrangles in Corinth started about them. Songs:Paul boldly puts himself and Apollos to the fore in the discussion of the principles involved. {Not to go beyond the things which are written} (\to Mˆ huper ha gegraptai\). It is difficult to reproduce the Greek idiom in English. The article \to\ is in the accusative case as the object of the verb \mathˆte\ (learn) and points at the words "\Mˆ huper ha gegraptai\," apparently a proverb or rule, and elliptical in form with no principal verb expressed with \mˆ\, whether "think" (Auth.) or "go" (Revised). There was a constant tendency to smooth out Paul's ellipses as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26,31|. Lightfoot thinks that Paul may have in mind O.T. passages quoted in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:19,31; strkjv@3:19,20|. {That ye be not puffed up} (\hina mˆ phusiousthe\). Sub-final use of \hina\ (second use in this sentence) with notion of result. It is not certain whether \phusiousthe\ (late verb form like \phusia“, phusa“\, to blow up, to inflate, to puff up), used only by Paul in the N.T., is present indicative with \hina\ like \zˆloute\ in strkjv@Galatians:4:17| (cf. \hina gin“skomen\ in strkjv@1John:5:20|) or the present subjunctive by irregular contraction (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 203, 342f.), probably the present indicative. \Phusio“\ is from \phusis\ (nature) and so meant to make natural, but it is used by Paul just like \phusa“\ or \phusia“\ (from \phusa\, a pair of bellows), a vivid picture of self-conceit. {One for the one against the other} (\heis huper tou henos kata tou heterou\). This is the precise idea of this idiom of partitive apposition. This is the rule with partisans. They are "for" (\huper\) the one and "against" (\kata\, down on, the genitive case) the other (\tou heterou\, not merely another or a second, but the different sort, \heterodox\).

rwp@1Peter:1:3 @{Blessed be} (\eulogˆtos\). No copula in the Greek (\est“\, let be, or \estin\, is, or \eiˆ\, may be). The verbal adjective (from \euloge“\) occurs in the N.T. only of God, as in the LXX (Luke:1:68|). See also strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3; strkjv@Ephesians:1:3|. {The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\ho theos kai patˆr tou kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou Christou\). This precise language in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3; Ephesians:I:3|; and part of it in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:31; strkjv@Romans:15:6|. See strkjv@John:20:17| for similar language by Jesus. {Great} (\polu\). Much. {Begat us again} (\anagennˆsas hˆmƒs\). First aorist active articular (\ho\, who) participle of \anagenna“\, late, and rare word to beget again, in Aleph for _Sirach_ (_Prol_. 20), in Philo, in Hermetic writings, in N.T. only here and verse 23|. "It was probably borrowed by the New Paganism from Christianity" (Bigg). The Stoics used \anagennˆsis\ for \palingenesia\ (Titus:3:5|). If \an“then\ in strkjv@John:3:3| be taken to mean "again," the same idea of regeneration is there, and if "from above" it is the new birth, anyhow. {Unto a living hope} (\eis elpida z“san\). Peter is fond of the word "living" (present active participle of \za“\) as in strkjv@1:23; strkjv@2:4,5,24; strkjv@4:5,6|. The Pharisees cherished the hope of the resurrection (Acts:23:6|), but the resurrection of Jesus gave it proof and permanence (1Corinthians:15:14,17|). It is no longer a dead hope like dead faith (James:2:17,26|). This revival of hope was wrought "by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (\dia anastase“s\). Hope rose up with Christ from the dead, though the disciples (Peter included) were slow at first to believe it.

rwp@1Peter:1:5 @{By the power of God} (\en dunamei theou\). No other \dunamis\ (power) like this (Colossians:1:3|). {Are guarded} (\phrouroumenous\). Present (continuous process) passive articular (\tous\) participle of \phroure“\, to garrison, old verb (from \phrouros\ sentinel), a military term (Acts:9:24; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:32|), used of God's love (Phillipians:4:7|) as here. "The inheritance is kept; the heirs are guarded" (Bengel). {Through faith} (\dia piste“s\). Intermediate agency (\dia\), the immediate being (\en\, in, by) God's power. {Unto a salvation} (\eis s“tˆrian\). Deliverance is the goal (\eis\) of the process and final salvation here, consummation as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:8|, from \s“tˆr\ (Saviour, from \s“z“\, to save). {Ready} (\hetoimˆn\). Prepared awaiting God's will (Galatians:3:23; strkjv@Romans:8:18|). {To be revealed} (\apokaluphthˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \apokalupt“\, to unveil. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:3:4| for \phanero“\ (to manifest) in this sense. {In the last time} (\en kair“i eschat“i\). This precise phrase nowhere else, but similar ones in strkjv@John:6:39; strkjv@Acts:2:17; strkjv@James:5:3; strkjv@2Timothy:3:1; strkjv@2Peter:3:3; He strkjv@1:2; strkjv@Jude:1:18; strkjv@1John:2:18|. Hort translates it here "in a season of extremity," but it is usually taken to refer to the Day of Judgment. That day no one knows, Jesus said.

rwp@1Peter:1:20 @{Who was foreknown indeed} (\proegn“smenou men\). Perfect passive participle (in genitive singular agreeing with \Christou\) of \progin“sk“\, old verb, to know beforehand (Romans:8:29; strkjv@2Peter:3:17|). See \progn“sin theou\ in verse 2|. {Before the foundation of the world} (\pro katabolˆs kosmou\). This precise curious phrase occurs in strkjv@John:17:24| in the Saviour's mouth of his preincarnate state with the Father as here and in strkjv@Ephesians:1:4|. We have \apo katabolˆs kosmou\ in strkjv@Matthew:25:34| (\kosmou\ omitted in strkjv@Matthew:13:35|); strkjv@Luke:11:50; strkjv@Hebrews:4:3; strkjv@9:26; strkjv@Revelation:13:8; strkjv@17:8|. \Katabolˆ\ (from \kataball“\) was originally laying the foundation of a house (Hebrews:6:1|). The preincarnate Messiah appears in the counsels of God also in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7; strkjv@Colossians:1:26f.; strkjv@Ephesians:1:9f.; strkjv@3:9-11; strkjv@Romans:16:25; strkjv@1Timothy:1:9|. {But was manifested} (\phaner“thentos de\). First aorist (ingressive) passive participle of \phanero“\, referring to the Incarnation in contrast with the preexistence of Christ (cf. strkjv@John:1:31; strkjv@1John:3:5,8|). {At the end of the times} (\ep' eschatou t“n chron“n\). Like \ep' eschatou t“n hˆmer“n\ (Hebrews:1:2|). The plural \chronoi\, doubtless referring to successive periods in human history until the fullness of the time came (Galatians:4:4|). {For your sake} (\di' humƒs\). Proof of God's love, not of their desert or worth (Acts:17:30f.; strkjv@Hebrews:11:39f.|).

rwp@Info_2Corinthians @...do not know the precise year,...(in round numbers) at Ephesus (Acts:20:31|). Like all the years in Paul's ministry we have to allow a sliding scale in relation to his other engagements. One may guess the early spring of A.D. 54 or 55.

rwp@2Corinthians:4:16 @{Wherefore we faint not} (\dio ouk egkakoumen\). Repeats from verse 1|. {Our outward man} (\ho ex“ hˆm“n anthr“pos\), {our inward man} (\ho es“ hˆm“n\). In strkjv@Romans:7:22; strkjv@Colossians:3:9; strkjv@Ephesians:4:22f.|, we have the inward man and the outward for the higher and the lower natures (the spirit and the flesh). "Here the decay (\diaphtheiretai\) of the bodily organism is set over against the growth in grace (\anakainoutai\, is refreshed) of the man himself" (Bernard). Plato (_Republ_. ix, p. 589) has \ho entos anthr“pos\. Cf. "the hidden man of the heart" (1Peter:3:4|). {Day by day} (\hˆmerƒi kai hˆmerƒi\). This precise idiom is not in LXX nor rest of N.T. It may be colloquial use of locative in repetition.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:3 @{I do not know} (\ouk oida\)...to pass on his precise condition...

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:12 @{We command and exhort} (\paraggellomen kai parakaloumen\). Paul asserts his authority as an apostle and pleads as a man and minister. {That with quietness they work, and eat their own bread} (\hina meta hˆsuchias ergazomenoi ton heaut“n arton esthi“sin\). Substance of the command and exhortation by \hina\ and the present subjunctive \esthi“sin\. Literally, {that working with quietness they keep on eating their own bread}. The precise opposite of their conduct in verse 11|.

rwp@Acts:2:42 @{They continued steadfastly} (\ˆsan proskarturountes\). Periphrastic active imperfect of \proskarture“\ as in strkjv@Acts:1:14| (same participle in verse 46|). {Fellowship} (\koin“niƒi\). Old word from \koin“nos\ (partner, sharer in common interest) and this from \koinos\ what is common to all. This partnership involves participation in, as the blood of Christ (Phillipians:2:1|) or co-operation in the work of the gospel (Phillipians:1:5|) or contribution for those in need (2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@9:13|)...of opinion concerning the precise meaning...\koin“nia\ in this verse. It may refer to the distribution of funds in verse 44| or to the oneness of spirit in the community of believers or to the Lord's Supper (as in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:16|) in the sense of communion or to the fellowship in the common meals or \agapae\ (love-feasts). {The breaking of bread} (\tˆi klasei tou artou\). The word \klasis\ is an old word, but used only by Luke in the N.T. (Luke:24:35; strkjv@Acts:2:42|), though the verb \kla“\ occurs in other parts of the N.T. as in verse 46|. The problem here is whether Luke refers to the ordinary meal as in strkjv@Luke:24:35| or to the Lord's Supper. The same verb \kla“\ is used of breaking bread at the ordinary meal (Luke:24:30|) or the Lord's Supper (Luke:22:19|). It is generally supposed that the early disciples attached so much significance to the breaking of bread at the ordinary meals, more than our saying grace, that they followed the meal with the Lord's Supper at first, a combination called \agapai\ or love-feasts. "There can be no doubt that the Eucharist at this period was preceded uniformly by a common repast, as was the case when the ordinance was instituted" (Hackett). This led to some abuses as in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:20|. Hence it is possible that what is referred to here is the Lord's Supper following the ordinary meal. "To simply explain \tˆi klasei tou artou\ as='The Holy Communion' is to pervert the plain meaning of words, and to mar the picture of family life, which the text places before us as the ideal of the early believers" (Page). But in strkjv@Acts:20:7| they seem to have come together especially for the observance of the Lord's Supper. Perhaps there is no way to settle the point conclusively here. {The prayers} (\tais proseuchais\). Services where they prayed as in strkjv@1:14|, in the temple (Acts:3:1|), in their homes (4:23|).

rwp@Acts:10:38 @{Jesus of Nazareth} (\Iˆsoun ton apo Nazareth\). Jesus the one from Nazareth, the article before the city identifying him clearly. The accusative case is here by \prolepsis\, Jesus being expressed for emphasis before the verb "anointed" and the pronoun repeated pleonastically after it. "Jesus transfers the mind from the gospel-history to the personal subject of it" (Hackett). {God anointed him} (\echrisen, auton, ho theos\). First aorist active of the verb \chri“\, to anoint, from which the verbal \Christos\ is formed (Acts:2:36|). The precise event referred to by Peter could be the Incarnation (Luke:1:35f.|), the Baptism (Luke:3:22|), the Ministry at Nazareth (Luke:4:14|). Why not to the life and work of Jesus as a whole? {Went about doing good} (\diˆlthen euerget“n\). Beautiful description of Jesus. Summary (constative) aorist active of \dierehomai\, to go through (\dia\) or from place to place. The present active participle \euerget“n\ is from the old verb \euergete“\ (\eu\, well, \ergon\, work) and occurs only here in the N.T. The substantive \euergetˆs\ (benefactor) was often applied to kings like Ptolemy Euergetes and that is the sense in strkjv@Luke:22:25| the only N.T. example. But the term applies to Jesus far more than to Ptolemy or any earthly king (Cornelius a Lapide). {And healing} (\kai i“menos\). And in particular healing. Luke does not exclude other diseases (cf. strkjv@Luke:13:11,16|), but he lays special emphasis on demoniacal possession (cf. strkjv@Mark:1:23|). {That were oppressed} (\tous katadunasteuomenous\). Present passive articular participle of \katadunasteu“\. A late verb in LXX and papyri. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@James:2:6| (best MSS.). One of the compounds of \kata\ made transitive. The reality of the devil (the slanderer, \diabolos\) is recognized by Peter. {For God was with him} (\hoti ho theos ˆn met' autou\). Surely this reason does not reveal "a low Christology" as some charge. Peter had used the same language in strkjv@Acts:7:9| and earlier in strkjv@Luke:1:28,66| as Nicodemus does in strkjv@John:3:2|.

rwp@Acts:13:11 @{Upon thee} (\epi se\). The use of \epi\...rich and varied, the precise shade...(Acts:11:21|) or hostile (Hebrews:10:31|), but when God's hand touches one's life (Job:19:21|) it may be in judgment as here with Elymas. He has not humbled himself under the mighty hand of God (1Peter:5:6|). {Not seeing} (\mˆ blep“n\). Repeating with negative participle the negative idea in "blind" (\tuphlos\). "It was a judicial infliction; blindness for blindness, darkness without for wilful darkness within" (Furneaux). He was an example of the blind leading the blind that was to cease and Sergius Paulus was to be led into the light. The blindness was to be "for a season" (\achri kairou\, strkjv@Luke:4:13|), if it should please God to restore his sight. Paul apparently recalls his own blindness as he entered Damascus. {A mist} (\achlus\). Especially a dimness of the eyes, old poetic word and late prose, in LXX, only here in N.T. Galen uses it of the opacity of the eye caused by a wound. {He went about seeking some one to lead him by the hand} (\periag“n ezˆtei cheirag“gous\). A rather free rendering. Literally, "going about (\periag“n\, present active participle of \periag“\) he was seeking (\ezˆtei\, imperfect active of \zˆte“\) guides (\cheirag“gous\, from \cheir\, hand, and \ag“gos\, guide, from \ag“\, one who leads by the hand)." The very verb \cheirag“ge“\, to lead by the hand, Luke uses of Paul in strkjv@9:8|, as he entered Damascus.

rwp@Acts:13:25 @{As John was fulfilling his course} (\h“s eplˆrou I“anˆs ton dromon\). Imperfect active of \plˆro“\...ministry without defining the precise period...\dromos\ (course) of his own race (Acts:20:24; strkjv@2Timothy:4:7|). {What suppose ye that I am?} (\Ti eme huponoeite einai?\) Note \ti\ (neuter), not \tina\ (masculine), {what} not {who}, character, not identity. It is indirect discourse (the infinitive \einai\ and the accusative of general reference). {Huponoe“} (\hupo, noe“\) is to think secretly, to suspect, to conjecture. {I am not he} (\ouk eimi eg“\). These precise words are not given in the Gospels, but the idea is the same as the disclaimers by the Baptist in strkjv@John:1:19-27| (cf. also strkjv@Matthew:3:11; strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Luke:3:16|). Paul had a true grasp of the message of the Baptist. He uses the very form \l–sai\ (first aorist active infinitive of \lu“\) found in strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Luke:3:16| and the word for shoes (\hupodˆma\, singular) in all three. His quotation is remarkably true to the words in the Synoptic Gospels. How did Paul get hold of the words of the Baptist so clearly?

rwp@Acts:15:1 @{And certain men came down from Judea} (\kai tines katelthontes apo tˆs Ioudaias\). Evidently the party of the circumcision in the church in Jerusalem (11:2|) had heard of the spread of the gospel among the Gentiles in Cyprus, Pamphylia, and South Galatia (Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycaonia). Possibly John Mark after his desertion at Perga (13:13|) told of this as one of his reasons for coming home. At any rate echoes of the jubilation in Antioch in Syria would be certain to reach Jerusalem. The Judaizers in Jerusalem, who insisted that all the Gentile Christians must become Jews also, had acquiesced in the case of Cornelius and his group (11:1-18|) after plain proof by Peter that it was the Lord's doing. But they had not agreed to a formal campaign to turn the exception into the rule and to make Christianity mainly Gentile with a few Jews instead of mainly Jewish with a few Gentiles. Since Paul and Barnabas did not come up to Jerusalem, the leaders among the Judaizers decided to go down to Antioch and attack Paul and Barnabas there. They had volunteered to go without church action in Jerusalem for their activity is disclaimed by the conference (Acts:15:24|). In strkjv@Galatians:2:4| Paul with some heat describes these Judaizers as "false brethren, secretly introduced who sneaked in to spy out our liberty." It is reasonably certain that this visit to Jerusalem described in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| is the same one as the Jerusalem Conference in Acts strkjv@15:5-29| in spite of the effort of Ramsay to identify it with that in strkjv@11:29f|. Paul in Galatians is not giving a list of his visits to Jerusalem. He is showing his independence of the twelve apostles and his equality with them. He did not see them in strkjv@11:29f.|, but only "the elders." In strkjv@Acts:15| Luke gives the outward narrative of events, in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| Paul shows us the private interview with the apostles when they agreed on their line of conduct toward the Judaizers. In strkjv@Galatians:2:2| by the use of "them" (\autois\) Paul seems to refer to the first public meeting in Acts before the private interview that came in between verses strkjv@15:5-6|. If we recall the difficulty that Peter had on the subject of preaching the gospel to the heathen (10:1-11:18|), we can the better understand the attitude of the Judaizers. They were men of sincere convictions without a doubt, but they were obscurantists and unable and unwilling to receive new light from the Lord on a matter that involved their racial and social prejudices. They recalled that Jesus himself had been circumcised and that he had said to the Syro-Phoenician woman that he had come only save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew:15:24ff.|). They argued that Christ had not repealed circumcision. Songs:one of the great religious controversies of all time was begun, that between spiritual religion and ritualistic or ceremonial religion. It is with us yet with baptism taking the place of circumcision. These self-appointed champions of circumcision for Gentile Christians were deeply in earnest. {Taught the brethren} (\edidaskon tous adelphous\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to teach and kept it up. Their attitude was one of supercilious superiority. They probably resented the conduct of Barnabas, who, when sent by the Church in Jerusalem to investigate the conversion of the Greeks in Antioch (11:20-26|), did not return and report till a strong church had been established there with the help of Saul and only then with a big collection to confuse the issue. Paul and Barnabas were on hand, but the Judaizers persisted in their efforts to force their views on the church in Antioch. It was a crisis. {Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved} (\ean me peritmˆthˆte t“i ethei M“use“s, ou dunasthe s“thˆnai\)...This is probably the precise language...(undetermined, but with prospect of being determined, \ean\ plus the first aorist passive subjunctive of \peritemn“\). There was thus hope held out for them, but only on condition that they be circumcised. The issue was sharply drawn. The associative instrumental case (\t“i ethei\) is customary. "Saved" (\s“thˆnai\) here is the Messianic salvation. This doctrine denied the efficacy of the work of Christ.

rwp@Acts:19:35 @{The town-clerk} (\ho grammateus\). Ephesus was a free city and elected its own officers and the recorder or secretary was the chief magistrate of the city, though the proconsul of the province of Asia resided there. This officer is not a mere secretary of another officer or like the copyists and students of the law among the Jews, but the most influential person in Ephesus who drafted decrees with the aid of the \stratˆgoi\...have it also. The precise function...{Had quieted the multitude} (\katasteilas ton ochlon\). First aorist active participle of \katastell“\, to send down, arrange dress (Euripides), lower (Plutarch), restrain (papyrus example), only twice in the N.T. (here and verse 36|, be quiet), but in LXX and Josephus. He evidently took the rostrum and his very presence as the city's chief officer had a quieting effect on the billowy turmoil and a semblance of order came. He waited, however, till the hubbub had nearly exhausted itself (two hours) and did not speak till there was a chance to be heard. {Saith} (\phˆsin\). Historical present for vividness. {How that}. Merely participle \ousan\ and accusative \polin\ in indirect discourse, no conjunction at all (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1040ff.), common idiom after \gin“sk“\, to know. {Temple-keeper} (\ne“koron\). Old word from \ne“s\ (\naos)\, temple, and \kore“\, to sweep. Warden, verger, cleaner of the temple, a sacristan. Songs:in Xenophon and Plato. Inscriptions so describe Ephesus as \ne“koron tˆs Artemidos\ as Luke has it here and also applied to the imperial _cultus_ which finally had several such temples in Ephesus. Other cities claimed the same honour of being \ne“koros\, but it was the peculiar boast of Ephesus because of the great temple of Artemis. A coin of A.D. 65 describes Ephesus as \ne“koros\. There are papyri examples of the term applied to individuals, one to Priene as \ne“koros\ of the temple in Ephesus (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). {And of the image which fell down from Jupiter} (\kai tou diopetous\). Supply \agalma\ (image), "the from heaven-fallen image." From Zeus (\Dios\) and \pet“\ (\pipt“, pipet“\), to fall. Zeus (Jupiter) was considered lord of the sky or heaven and that is the idea in \diopetous\ here. The legend about a statue fallen from heaven occurs concerning the statue of Artemis at Tauris, Minerva at Athens, etc. Thus the recorder soothed the vanity (Rackham) of the crowd by appeal to the world-wide fame of Ephesus as sacristan of Artemis and of her heaven-fallen image.

rwp@Acts:20:6 @{After the days of unleavened bread} (\meta tas hˆmerƒs t“n azum“n\). Paul was a Jew, though a Christian, and observed the Jewish feasts, though he protested against Gentiles being forced to do it (Galatians:4:10; strkjv@Colossians:2:16|). Was Luke a proselyte because he notes the Jewish feasts as here and in strkjv@Acts:27:9|? He may have noted them merely because Paul observed them. But this passover was a year after that in Ephesus when Paul expected to remain there till Pentecost (1Corinthians:16:8|). He was hoping now to reach Jerusalem by Pentecost (Acts:20:16|)...do not know the precise year,...56 or 57. {In five days} (\achri hˆmer“n pente\). Up to five days (cf. strkjv@Luke:2:37|). D has \pemptaioi\, "fifth day men," a correct gloss. Cf. \deuteraioi\, second-day men (Acts:28:13|). In strkjv@Acts:16:11| they made the voyage in two days. Probably adverse winds held them back here. {Seven days} (\hepta hˆmeras\). To atone for the short stay in Troas before (2Corinthians:2:12f.|) when Paul was so restless. Now he preaches a week to them.

rwp@Acts:21:26 @{Took the men} (\paralab“n tous andras\). The very phrase used in verse 24| to Paul. {The next day} (\tˆi echomenˆi\). One of the phrases in strkjv@20:15| for the coming day. Locative case of time. {Purifying himself with them} (\sun autois hagnistheis\, first aorist passive participle of \hagniz“\). The precise language again of the recommendation in verse 24|. Paul was conforming to the letter. {Went into the temple} (\eisˆiei eis to hieron\). Imperfect active of \eiseimi\ as in verse 18| which see. Went on into the temple, descriptive imperfect. Paul joined the four men in their vow of separation. {Declaring} (\diaggell“n\). To the priests what day he would report the fulfilment of the vow. The priests would desire notice of the sacrifice. This verb only used by Luke in N.T. except strkjv@Romans:11:17| (quotation from the LXX). It is not necessary to assume that the vows of each of the five expired on the same day (Rackham). {Until the offering was offered for every one of them} (\he“s hou prosˆnechthˆ huper henos hekastou aut“n hˆ prosphora\). This use of \he“s hou\ (like \he“s\, alone) with the first aorist passive indicative \prosˆnechthˆ\ of \prospher“\, to offer, contemplates the final result (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 974f.) and is probably the statement of Luke added to Paul's announcement. He probably went into the temple one day for each of the brethren and one for himself. The question arises whether Paul acted wisely or unwisely in agreeing to the suggestion of James. What he did was in perfect harmony with his principle of accommodation in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:20| when no principle was involved. It is charged that here on this occasion Paul was unduly influenced by considerations of expediency and was willing for the Jewish Christians to believe him more of a Jew than was true in order to placate the situation in Jerusalem. Furneaux calls it a compromise and a failure. I do not so see it. To say that is to obscure the whole complex situation. What Paul did was not for the purpose of conciliating his opponents, the Judaizers, who had diligently spread falsehoods about him in Jerusalem as in Corinth. It was solely to break the power of these "false apostles" over the thousands in Jerusalem who have been deluded by Paul's accusers. Songs:far as the evidence goes that thing was accomplished. In the trouble that comes in Jerusalem and Caesarea the Judaizers cut no figure at all. The Jewish Christians do not appear in Paul's behalf, but there was no opportunity for them to do so. The explosion that came on the last day of Paul's appearance in the temple was wholly disconnected from his offerings for the four brethren and himself. It must be remembered that Paul had many kinds of enemies. The attack on him by these Jews from Asia had no connexion whatever with the slanders of the Judaizers about Paul's alleged teachings that Jewish Christians in the dispersion should depart from the Mosaic law. That slander was put to rest forever by his following the advice of James and justifies the wisdom of that advice and Paul's conduct about it.

rwp@Acts:24:27 @{But when two years were fulfilled} (\dietias de plˆr“theisˆs\). Genitive absolute first aorist passive of \plˆro“\, common verb to fill full. \Dietia\, late word in LXX and Philo, common in the papyri, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:28:30|. Compound of \dia\, two (\duo, dis\) and \etos\, year. Songs:Paul lingered on in prison in Caesarea, waiting for the second hearing under Felix which never came. Caesarea now became the compulsory headquarters of Paul for two years. With all his travels Paul spent several years each at Tarsus, Antioch, Corinth, Ephesus, though not as a prisoner unless that was true part of the time at Ephesus for which there is some evidence though not of a convincing kind. We do not know that Luke remained in Caesarea all this time. In all probability he came and went with frequent visits with Philip the Evangelist. It was probably during this period that Luke secured the material for his Gospel and wrote part or all of it before going to Rome. He had ample opportunity to examine the eyewitnesses who heard Jesus and the first attempts at writing including the Gospel of Mark (Luke:1:1-4|). {Was succeeded by} (\elaben diadochon\). Literally, "received as successor." \Diadochos\ is an old word from \diadechomai\, to receive in succession (\dia, duo\, two) and occurs here alone in the N.T. Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 115) gives papyri examples where \hoi diadochoi\ means "higher officials at the court of the Ptolemies," probably "deputies," a usage growing out of the "successors" of Alexander the Great (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_), though here the original notion of "successor" occurs (cf. Josephus, _Ant_. XX. 8, 9). Luke does not tell why Felix "received" a successor. The explanation is that during these two years the Jews and the Gentiles had an open fight in the market-place in Caesarea. Felix put the soldiers on the mob and many Jews were killed. The Jews made formal complaint to the Emperor with the result that Felix was recalled and Porcius Festus sent in his stead. {Porcius Festus} (\Porkion Phˆston\). We know very little about this man. He is usually considered a worthier man than Felix, but Paul fared no better at his hands and he exhibits the same insincerity and eagerness to please the Jews. Josephus (_Ant_. XX. 8, 9)...successor to Felix." The precise year...62, so that it is probable that Festus came A.D. 58 (or 59). Death cut short his career in a couple of years though he did more than Felix to rid the country of robbers and _sicarii_. Some scholars argue for an earlier date for the recall of Felix. Nero became Emperor Oct. 13, A.D. 54. Poppaea, his Jewish mistress and finally wife, may have had something to do with the recall of Felix at the request of the Jews. {Desiring to gain favour with the Jews} (\thel“n te charita katathesthai tois Ioudaiois\). Reason for his conduct. Note second aorist (ingressive) middle infinitive \katathesthai\ from \katatithˆmi\, old verb to place down, to make a deposit, to deposit a favour with, to do something to win favour. Only here and strkjv@25:9| in N.T., though in some MSS. in strkjv@Mark:15:46|. It is a banking figure. {Left Paul in bonds} (\katelipe ton Paulon dedemenon\). Effective aorist active indicative of \kataleip“\, to leave behind. Paul "in bonds" (\dedemenon\, perfect passive participle of \de“\, to bind) was the "deposit" (\katathesthai\) for their favour. Codex Bezae adds that Felix left Paul in custody "because of Drusilla" (\dia Drousillan\). She disliked Paul as much as Herodias did John the Baptist. Songs:Pilate surrendered to the Jews about the death of Jesus when they threatened to report him to Caesar. Some critics would date the third group of Paul's Epistles (Philippians, Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians) to the imprisonment here in Caesarea, some even to one in Ephesus. But the arguments for either of these two views are more specious than convincing. Furneaux would even put strkjv@2Timothy:4:9-22| here in spite of the flat contradiction with strkjv@Acts:21:29| about Trophimus being in Jerusalem instead of Miletus (2Timothy:4:20|), a "mistake" which he attributes to Luke! That sort of criticism can prove anything.

rwp@Acts:27:16 @{Running under the lee of} (\hupodramontes\). Second aorist active participle of \hupotrech“\. Same use of \hupo\ as in \hupepleusamen\ (verses 4,8|) for "under the lee", under the protection of. \Nˆsion\ is diminutive of \nˆsos\, a small island. The MSS. vary between Cauda (B) and Clauda (Aleph). {To secure the boat} (\perikrateis genesthai tˆs skaphˆs\). "To become masters (\perikrateis\ from \peri\ and \kratos\, power over, found in Susannah and ecclesiastical writers, and here only in N.T.) of the boat ("dug out," like Indian boats, literally, from \skapt“\, to dig, old word, here only in N.T. and verses 30,32|). The smooth water behind the little island enabled them to do this. {When they had hoisted it up} (\hˆn ƒrantes\). "Which (the little boat) having hoisted up (\arantes\, verse 13|)." Even so it was "with difficulty" (\molis\). Perhaps the little boat was waterlogged. {Used helps} (\boˆtheiais echr“nto\). Imperfect middle of \chraomai\ with instrumental case. The "helps" were ropes or chains, no doubt. {Under-girding the ship} (\hupoz“nnuntes to ploion\). Present active participle of \hupoz“nnumi\. Old verb, here only in N.T. Probably cables (\hupoz“mata\) or ropes were used under the hull of the ship laterally or even longitudinally, tightly secured on deck. This "frapping" was more necessary for ancient vessels because of the heavy mast. The little island made it possible to do this also. {Lest we be cast upon the Syrtis} (\mˆ eis tˆn Surtin ekpes“sin\). Final clause after verb of fearing (\phoboumenoi\) with \mˆ\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \ekpipt“\, old verb to fall out or off, to be cast away. Songs:here and verses 26,29|, a classical use of the verb for a ship driven out of its course on to shoals or rocks (Page who cites Xenophon, _Anab_. VII. 5, 12). The Syrtis was the name for two quicksands between Carthage and Cyrenaica, this clearly being the Syrtis Major most dangerous because of the sandbanks (\surtis\, from \sur“\). The wind would drive the ship right into this peril if something were not done. {They lowered the gear} (\chalasantes to skeuos\). First aorist active participle of \chala“\ (cf. strkjv@Luke:5:4| for lowering the nets). \Skeuos\ means vessel or gear. They slackened or reduced sail, especially the mainsail, but leaving enough to keep the ship's head as close to the wind as was practicable. {Songs:were driven} (\hout“s epheronto\). Imperfect passive indicative again as in verse 15| with the addition of \hout“s\ (thus). The ship was now fixed as near to the wind (E N E) as possible (seven points). That would enable the ship to go actually W by N and so avoid the quicksands. J. Smith has shown that, a day being lost around Cauda, the ship going 36 miles in 24 hours in 13 days would make 468 miles. The Island of Malta (Melita) is precisely in that direction (W by N) from Cauda and is 480 miles. Page sees a difficulty about this explanation of the steady drift of the ship in the word \diapheromenon\ in verse 27|, but that was at the end of the drifting and the varied winds could have come then and not before. The whole narrative as explained carefully in Smith's _Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul_...is a masterpiece of precise and..._Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_.

rwp@Colossians:3:16 @{The word of Christ} (\ho logos tou Christou\). This precise phrase only here, though "the word of the Lord" in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:8; strkjv@4:15; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:1|. Elsewhere "the word of God." Paul is exalting Christ in this Epistle. \Christou\ can be either the subjective genitive (the word delivered by Christ) or the objective genitive (the word about Christ). See strkjv@1John:2:14|. {Dwell} (\enoikeit“\). Present active imperative of \enoike“\, to make one's home, to be at home. {In you} (\en humin\). Not "among you." {Richly} (\plousi“s\). Old adverb from \plousios\ (rich). See strkjv@1Timothy:6:17|. The following words explain \plousi“s\. {In all wisdom} (\en pasˆi sophiƒi\). It is not clear whether this phrase goes with \plousi“s\ (richly) or with the participles following (\didaskontes kai nouthetountes\, see strkjv@1:28|). Either punctuation makes good sense. The older Greek MSS. had no punctuation. There is an anacoluthon here. The participles may be used as imperatives as in strkjv@Romans:12:11f.,16|. {With psalms} (\psalmois\, the Psalms in the Old Testament originally with musical accompaniment), {hymns} (\humnois\, praises to God composed by the Christians like strkjv@1Timothy:3:16|), {spiritual songs} (\“idais pneumatikais\, general description of all whether with or without instrumental accompaniment). The same song can have all three words applied to it. {Singing with grace} (\en chariti ƒidontes\). In God's grace (2Corinthians:1:12|). The phrase can be taken with the preceding words. The verb \ƒid“\ is an old one (Ephesians:5:19|) for lyrical emotion in a devout soul. {In your hearts} (\en tais kardiais hum“n\). Without this there is no real worship "to God" (\t“i the“i\). How can a Jew or Unitarian in the choir lead in the worship of Christ as Saviour? Whether with instrument or with voice or with both it is all for naught if the adoration is not in the heart.

rwp@Ephesians:1:3 @{Blessed} (\eulogˆtos\). Verbal of \euloge“\, common in the LXX for Hebrew _baruk_ (Vulgate _benedictus_) and applied usually to God, sometimes to men (Genesis:24:31|), but in N.T. always to God (Luke:1:68|), while \eulogˆmenos\ (perfect passive participle) is applied to men (Luke:1:42|). "While \eulogˆmenos\ points to an isolated act or acts, \eulogˆtos\ describes the intrinsic character" (Lightfoot). Instead of the usual \eucharistoumen\ (Colossians:1:3|) Paul here uses \eulogˆtos\, elsewhere only in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3| in opening, though in a doxology in strkjv@Romans:1:25; strkjv@9:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:31|. The copula here is probably \estin\ (is), though either \est“\ (imperative) or \eiˆ\ (optative as wish) will make sense. {The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\ho theos kai patˆr tou Kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou Christou\). \Kai\ is genuine here, though not in strkjv@Colossians:1:3|. The one article (\ho\) with \theos kai patˆr\ links them together as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:3; strkjv@3:11,13; strkjv@Galatians:1:4|. See also the one article in strkjv@2Peter:1:1,11|. In strkjv@Ephesians:1:17| we have \ho theos tou Kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou Christou\, and the words of Jesus in strkjv@John:20:17|. {Who hath blessed us} (\ho eulogˆsas humƒs\). First aorist active participle of \euloge“\, the same word, antecedent action to the doxology (\eulogˆtos\). {With} (\en\). So-called instrumental use of \en\ though {in} is clear. {Every spiritual blessing} (\pasˆi eulogiƒi pneumatikˆi\). Third use of the root \eulog\ (verbal, verb, substantive). Paul lovingly plays with the idea. The believer is a citizen of heaven and the spiritual blessings count for most to him. {In the heavenly places in Christ} (\en tois epouraniois en Christ“i\). In four other places in Eph. (1:20; strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:10; strkjv@6:12|). This precise phrase (with \en\) occurs nowhere else in the N.T. and has a clearly local meaning in strkjv@1:20; strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:10|, doubtful in strkjv@6:12|, but probably so here. In strkjv@2:6| the believer is conceived as already seated with Christ. Heaven is the real abode of the citizen of Christ's kingdom (Phillipians:3:20|) who is a stranger on earth (Phillipians:1:27; strkjv@Ephesians:2:19|). The word \epouranios\ (heavenly) occurs in various passages in the N.T. in contrast with \ta epigeia\ (the earthly) as in strkjv@John:3:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:40,48,49; strkjv@Phillipians:2:10|, with \patris\ (country) in strkjv@Hebrews:11:16|, with \klˆsis\ (calling) in strkjv@Hebrews:3:1|, with \d“rea\ (gift) in strkjv@Hebrews:6:4|, with \basileia\ (kingdom) in strkjv@2Timothy:4:18|.

rwp@Ephesians:2:21 @{Each several building} (\pƒsa oikodomˆ\). Songs:without article Aleph B D G K L. \Oikodomˆ\ is a late word from \oikos\ and \dem“\, to build for building up (edification) as in strkjv@Ephesians:4:29|, then for the building itself as here (Mark:13:1f.|). Ordinary Greek idiom here calls for "every building," not for "all the building" (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 772), though it is not perfectly clear what that means. Each believer is called a \naos theou\ (1Corinthians:3:16|). One may note the plural in strkjv@Mark:13:1| (\oikodomai\)...the idea here without precise definition...\oikodomˆ\. But there are examples of \pƒs\ without the article where "all" is the idea as in \pƒsˆs ktise“s\ (all creation) in strkjv@Colossians:1:15|. {Fitly framed together} (\sunarmologoumenˆ\). Double compound from \sun\ and \harmologos\ (binding, \harmos\, joint and \leg“\), apparently made by Paul and in N.T. only here and strkjv@Ephesians:4:16|. Architectural metaphor. {Into a holy temple} (\eis naon hagion\). The whole structure with all the \oikodomai\. Another metaphor for the Kingdom of God with which compare Peter's "spiritual house" (\oikos pneumatikos\) in which each is a living stone being built in (1Peter:2:5|).

rwp@Ephesians:4:21 @{If so be that} (\ei ge\). "If indeed." Condition of first class with aorist indicatives here, assumed to be true (\ˆkousate kai edidachthˆte\). {Even as truth is in Jesus} (\kath“s estin alˆtheia en t“i Iˆsou\)...not clear what Paul's precise idea...(verse 20|) and Jesus (verse 21|). At any rate he flatly affirms that there is "truth in Jesus" which is in direct opposition to the heathen manner of life and which is further explained by the epexegetical infinitives that follow (\apothesthai, ananeousthai de, kai endusasthai\).

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ DATES OF HIS EPISTLES Unfortunately there is not complete agreement among scholars as to the dates of some of Paul's Epistles. Baur denied the Pauline authorship of all the Epistles save I and II Corinthians, Galatians, Romans. Today some deny that Paul wrote the Pastoral Epistles, though admitting the others. Some admit Pauline fragments even in the Pastoral Epistles, but more about this when these Epistles are reached. There is more doubt about the date of Galatians than any of the others. Lightfoot put it just before Romans, while Ramsay now makes it the earliest of all. The Epistle itself has no notes of place or time. The Epistles to the Thessalonians were written from Corinth after Timothy had been sent from Athens by Paul to Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:3:1f.|) and had just returned to Paul (1Thessalonians:3:6|) which we know was in Corinth (Acts:18:5|) shortly before Gallio came as Proconsul of Achaia (Acts:18:12|). We can now feel certain from the new "acclamation" of Claudius in the inscription at Delphi recently explained by Deissmann in his _St. Paul_ that the Thessalonian Epistles were written 50 to 51 A.D. We know also that he wrote I Corinthians while in Ephesus (1Corinthians:16:8|)...before pentecost, though the precise year...(Acts:19:8,10; strkjv@20:31|) and he wrote just before he left, probably spring of A.D. 54 or 55. He wrote II Corinthians from Macedonia shortly after leaving Ephesus (2Corinthians:2:12|) ] apparently the same year. Romans was written from Corinth and sent by Phoebe of Cenchreae (Romans:16:1f.|) unless strkjv@Romans:16| be considered a separate Epistle to Ephesus as some hold, a view that does not commend itself to me. Deissmann (_New Testament in the Light of Modern Research_, p. 33) accepts a modern theory that Ephesus was the place of the writing of the first prison Epistles (Philippians, Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians) as well as I Corinthians and Galatians and dates them all between A.D. 52 and 55. But we shall find that these prison Epistles most naturally fall to Rome between A.D. 61 and 63. If the Pastoral Epistles are genuine, as I hold, they come between A.D. 65 and 68. Bartlet argues for a date before A.D. 64, accepting the view that Paul was put to death then. But it is still far more probable that Paul met his death in Rome in A.D. 68 shortly before Nero's death which was June 8, A.D. 68. It will thus be seen that the dates of several of the Epistles are fairly clear, while some remain quite uncertain. In a broad outlook they must all come between A.D. 50 and 68.

rwp@Galatians:6:8 @{Corruption} (\phthoran\). For this old word from \phtheir“\, see on ¯1Corinthians:15:42|. The precise meaning turns on the context, here plainly the physical and moral decay or rottenness that follows sins of the flesh as all men know. Nature writes in one's body the penalty of sin as every doctor knows. {Eternal life} (\z“ˆn ai“nion\). See on ¯Matthew:25:46| for this interesting phrase so common in the Johannine writings. Plato used \ai“nios\ for perpetual. See also strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:9|. It comes as nearly meaning "eternal" as the Greek can express that idea.

rwp@James:1:17 @{Gift} (\dosis\) {--boon} (\d“rˆma\). Both old substantives from the same original verb (\did“mi\), to give. \Dosis\ is the act of giving (ending \-sis\), but sometimes by metonymy for the thing given like \ktisis\ for \ktisma\ (Colossians:1:15|). But \d“rˆma\ (from \d“re“\, from \d“ron\ a gift) only means a gift, a benefaction (Romans:5:16|). The contrast here argues for "giving" as the idea in \dosis\. Curiously enough there is a perfect hexameter line here: \pƒsa do / sis aga / thˆ kai / pƒn d“ / rˆma te / leion\. Such accidental rhythm occurs occasionally in many writers. Ropes (like Ewald and Mayor) argues for a quotation from an unknown source because of the poetical word \d“rˆma\, but that is not conclusive. {From above} (\an“then\). That is, from heaven. Cf. strkjv@John:3:31; strkjv@19:11|. {Coming down} (\katabainon\). Present active neuter singular participle of \katabain“\ agreeing with \d“rˆma\, expanding and explaining \an“then\ (from above). {From the Father of lights} (\apo tou patros t“n ph“t“n\). "Of the lights" (the heavenly bodies). For this use of \patˆr\ see strkjv@Job:38:28| (Father of rain); strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3; strkjv@Ephesians:1:17|. God is the Author of light and lights. {With whom} (\par' h“i\). For \para\ (beside) with locative sense for standpoint of God see \para t“i the“i\ (Mark:10:27; strkjv@Romans:2:11; strkjv@9:14; strkjv@Ephesians:6:9|. {Can be no} (\ouk eni\). This old idiom (also in strkjv@Galatians:3:28; strkjv@Colossians:3:11|) may be merely the original form of \en\ with recessive accent (Winer, Mayor) or a shortened form of \enesti\. The use of \eni en\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:5| argues for this view, as does the use of \eine\ (\einai\) in Modern Greek (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 313). {Variation} (\parallagˆ\). Old word from \parallass“\, to make things alternate, here only in N.T. In Aristeas in sense of alternate stones in pavements. Dio Cassius has \parallaxis\ without reference to the modern astronomical parallax, though James here is comparing God (Father of the lights) to the sun (Malachi:4:2|), which does have periodic variations. {Shadow that is cast by turning} (\tropˆs aposkiasma\). \Tropˆ\ is an old word for "turning" (from \trep“\ to turn), here only in N.T. \Aposkiasma\ is a late and rare word (\aposkiasmos\ in Plutarch) from \aposkiaz“\ (\apo, skia\)...not clear what the precise metaphor...(\aposkiaz“\ in Plato) or the borrowed light of the moon lost to us as it goes behind the earth. In fact, the text is by no means certain, for Aleph B papyrus of fourth century actually read \hˆ tropˆs aposkiasmatos\ (the variation of the turning of the shadow). Ropes argues strongly for this reading, and rather convincingly. At any rate there is no such periodic variation in God like that we see in the heavenly bodies.

rwp@John:3:5 @{Of water and the Spirit} (\ex hudatos kai pneumatos\). Nicodemus had failed utterly to grasp the idea of the spiritual birth as essential to entrance into the Kingdom of God. He knew only Jews as members of that kingdom, the political kingdom of Pharisaic hope which was to make all the world Jewish (Pharisaic) under the King Messiah. Why does Jesus add \ex hudatos\ here? In verse 3| we have "\an“then\" (from above) which is repeated in verse 7|, while in verse 8| we have only \ek tou pneumatos\ (of the Spirit) in the best manuscripts. Many theories exist. One view makes baptism, referred to by \ex hudatos\ (coming up out of water), essential to the birth of the Spirit, as the means of obtaining the new birth of the Spirit. If so, why is water mentioned only once in the three demands of Jesus (3,5,7|)? Calvin makes water and Spirit refer to the one act (the cleansing work of the Spirit). Some insist on the language in verse 6|...all what was the precise purpose...(the symbol before the thing signified) first and adding Spirit, he may have hoped to turn the mind of Nicodemus away from mere physical birth and, by pointing to the baptism of John on confession of sin which the Pharisees had rejected, to turn his attention to the birth from above by the Spirit. That is to say the mention of "water" here may have been for the purpose of helping Nicodemus without laying down a fundamental principle of salvation as being by means of baptism. Bernard holds that the words \hudatos kai\ (water and) do not belong to the words of Jesus, but "are a gloss, added to bring the saying of Jesus into harmony with the belief and practice of a later generation." Here Jesus uses \eiselthein\ (enter) instead of \idein\ (see) of verse 3|, but with the same essential idea (participation in the kingdom).

rwp@John:7:6 @{My time is not yet come} (\ho kairos ho emos oup“ parestin\). Only use with verse 8| of \kairos\ in this Gospel, elsewhere \chronos\ (John:5:6|) or more often \h“ra\ (2:4|) "the predestined hour" (Bernard). Here \kairos\ is the fitting or proper occasion for Christ's manifesting himself publicly to the authorities as Messiah as in verse 8|. At the feast of tabernacles Jesus did make such public claims (7:29,33; strkjv@8:12,28,38,42,58|). \Parestin\ is present active indicative of \pareimi\...the feast, but the precise day...

rwp@John:7:10 @{Were gone up} (\anebˆsan\). Second aorist active indicative of \anabain“\, not past perfect though the action is antecedent in fact to the following \tote anebˆ\...not always draw the precise distinction...(aorist) antecedent action and the past perfect (2:9; strkjv@4:45|). {He also} (\tote autos\). As well as the brothers. {Not publicly} (\ou phaner“s\). Against their advice in verse 4|, using \phaner“son\ (the very same word stem). {But as it were in secret} (\alla h“s en krupt“i\). "Not with the usual caravan of pilgrims" (Bernard). Just the opposite of their advice in verse 4| with the same phrase \en phaner“i\. Plainly Jesus purposely went contrary to the insincere counsel of his brothers as to the manner of his Messianic manifestation. This secrecy concerned solely the journey to Jerusalem, not his public teaching there after his arrival (7:26,28; strkjv@18:20|).

rwp@John:7:38 @{He that believeth on me} (\ho pisteu“n eis eme\). Nominative absolute as is not uncommon. {The scripture} (\hˆ graphˆ\). No precise passage can be quoted, though similar idea in several (Isaiah:55:1; strkjv@58:11; strkjv@Zechariah:13:1; strkjv@14:8; strkjv@Ezekiel:47:1; strkjv@Joel:3:18|). Chrysostom confines it to strkjv@Isaiah:28:16| by punctuation (only the nominative absolute as the Scripture). {Out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water} (\potamoi ek tˆs koilias autou reusousin hudatos z“ntos\). Some ancient Western writers connect \pinet“\ of verse 37| with \ho pisteu“n\ in verse 38|. By this arrangement \autou\ (his) with \koilias\ is made to refer to Christ, not to the believer. Burney argues that \koilia\ is a mistranslation of the Aramaic (fountain, not belly) and that the reference is to strkjv@Ezekiel:47:1|. C.C. Torrey refers to strkjv@Zechariah:14:8|. But the Eastern writers refer \autou\ (his) to the believer who not only quenches in Christ his own thirst, but becomes a source of new streams for others (John:4:14|). It is a difficult question and Westcott finally changed his view and held \autou\ to refer to Christ. \Reusousin\ is future active indicative of \re“\, old verb, to flow, here only in the N.T.

rwp@John:8:21 @{Again} (\palin\). Probably \palin\ (again) in verse 12| refers to a day after the feast is over since the last day is mentioned in strkjv@7:37|. Songs:then here again we probably move on to another day still beyond that in verse 12|. {And ye shall seek me} (\kai zˆtˆsete me\). As in strkjv@7:34|, "the search of despair" (Bernard), seeking for the Messiah when it is too late, the tragedy of Judaism today (1:11|). {And ye shall die in your sin} (\kai en tˆi hamartiƒi hum“n apothaneisthe\). Future middle indicative of \apothnˆsk“\ which is the emphatic word here (cf. strkjv@Ezekiel:3:18; strkjv@18:18; strkjv@Proverbs:24:9|). Note singular \hamartiƒi\ (sin) here, but plural \hamartiais\ (sins) when the phrase is repeated in verse 24| (sin in its essence, sin in its acts). {Ye cannot come} (\humeis ou dunasthe elthein\). Precise language of strkjv@7:34| to the Jews and to the apostles in strkjv@13:33|.

rwp@John:10:24 @{Came round about him} (\ekukl“san auton\). Aorist active indicative of \kuklo“\, old verb from \kuklos\ (cycle, circle). See strkjv@Acts:14:20| for the circle of disciples around Paul when stoned. Evidently the hostile Jews cherished the memory of the stinging rebuke given them by Jesus when here last, particularly the allegory of the Good Shepherd (10:1-19|), in which he drew so sharply their own picture. {How long dost thou hold us in suspense?} (\he“s pote tˆn psuchˆn hˆm“n aireis;\). Literally, "Until when dost thou lift up our soul?" But what do they mean by this metaphor? \Air“\ is common enough to lift up the eyes (John:11:41|), the voice (Luke:17:13|), and in strkjv@Psalms:25:1; strkjv@86:4| (Josephus, _Ant_. III. ii. 3)...context to judge the precise meaning....{If thou art the Christ} (\ei su ei ho Christos\). Condition of first class assumed to be true for the sake of argument. {Tell us plainly} (\eipon hˆmin parrˆsiƒi\). Conclusion with \eipon\ rather than the usual \eipe\ as if first aorist active imperative like \luson\. The point is in "plainly" (\parrˆsiƒi\), adverb as in strkjv@7:13,26| which see. That is to say "I am the Christ" in so many words. See strkjv@11:14; strkjv@16:29| for the same use of \parrˆsiƒi\. The demand seemed fair enough on the surface. They had made it before when here at the feast of tabernacles (8:25|). Jesus declined to use the word \Christos\ (Messiah) then as now because of the political bearing of the word in their minds. The populace in Galilee had once tried to make him king in opposition to Pilate (John:6:14f.|). When Jesus does confess on oath before Caiaphas that he is the Christ the Son of God (Mark:14:61f.; strkjv@Matthew:26:63f.|), the Sanhedrin instantly vote him guilty of blasphemy and then bring him to Pilate with the charge of claiming to be king as a rival to Caesar. Jesus knew their minds too well to be caught now.

rwp@Info_Jude:@ SPECIAL BOOKS ON JUDE (Apart from those on II Peter or the Catholic Epistles) Chase, F. H., _Jude:in Hastings D B_. Ermoni, V., _L'epitre de Jude_ (1903, in Vigoroux, Diction- naire de la Bible). Georchin, B., _Der Brief Judas_. Kasteren, J. P., _Deuteronomy:brief uan den apostel Judas_. Maier, F., _Der Judasbrief_. Mayor, J. B., _The Epistle of Jude_ (in Expositor's Greek Testament, 1910). Plummer, A., _St. James and St. Jude_ (Expositor's Bible). Rampf, M. F., _Der Brief Juda_. Stier, R., _Der Brief Judas, des Bruders des Herrn_. Wandel, G., _Der Brief des Judas_. strkjv@Jude:1:1 @{Servant} (\doulos\). Precisely as James (James:1:1|), only James added \kuriou\ (Lord). {Brother of James} (\adelphos Iak“bou\). Thus Jude:identifies himself. But not the "Judas of James" (Luke:6:16; strkjv@Acts:1:13|). {To them that are called} (\tois--klˆtois\). But this translation (treating \klˆtois\ as a substantive like strkjv@Romans:1:6; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:24|) is by no means certain as two participles come in between \tois\ and \klˆtois\. \Klˆtois\ may be in the predicate position (being called), not attributive. But see strkjv@1Peter:1:1|. {Beloved in God the Father} (\en the“i patri ˆgapˆmenois\). Perfect passive participle of \agapa“\, but no precise parallel to this use of \en\ with \agapa“\. {Kept for Jesus Christ} (\Iˆsou Christ“i tetˆrˆmenois\). Perfect passive participle again with dative, unless it is the instrumental, "kept by Jesus Christ," a quite possible interpretation.

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE DATE OF THE GOSPEL There are two outstanding facts to mark off the date of this Gospel by Luke. It was later than the Gospel of Mark since Luke makes abundant use of it. It was before the Acts of the Apostles since he definitely refers to it in strkjv@Acts:1:1|. Unfortunately the precise date of both _termini_ is uncertain. There are still some scholars who hold that the author of the Acts shows knowledge of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus and so is after A.D. 85, a mistaken position, in my opinion, but a point to be discussed when Acts is reached. Still others more plausibly hold that the Acts was written after the destruction of Jerusalem and that the Gospel of Luke has a definite allusion to that event (Luke:21:20f.|), which is interpreted as a prophecy _post eventum_ instead of a prediction by Christ a generation beforehand. Many who accept this view hold to authorship of both Acts and Gospel by Luke. I have long held the view, now so ably defended by Harnack, that the Acts of the Apostles closes as it does for the simple and obvious reason that Paul was still a prisoner in Rome. Whether Luke meant the Acts to be used in the trial in Rome, which may or may not have come to pass, is not the point. Some argue that Luke contemplated a third book which would cover the events of the trial and Paul's later career. There is no proof of that view. The outstanding fact is that the book closes with Paul already a prisoner for two years in Rome. If the Acts was written about A.D. 63, as I believe to be the case, then obviously the Gospel comes earlier. How much before we do not know. It so happens that Paul was a prisoner a little over two years in Caesarea. That period gave Luke abundant opportunity for the kind of research of which he speaks in strkjv@Luke:1:1-4|. In Palestine he could have access to persons familiar with the earthly life and teachings of Jesus and to whatever documents were already produced concerning such matters. Luke may have produced the Gospel towards the close of the stay of Paul in Caesarea or during the early part of the first Roman imprisonment, somewhere between A.D. 59 and 62. The other testimony concerns the date of Mark's Gospel which has already been discussed in volume I. There is no real difficulty in the way of the early date of Mark's Gospel. All the facts that are known admit, even argue for a date by A.D. 60. If Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome, as is possible, it would certainly be before A.D. 64, the date of the burning of Rome by Nero. There are scholars, however, who argue for a much earlier date for his gospel, even as early as A.D. 50. The various aspects of the Synoptic problem are ably discussed by Hawkins in his _Horae Synopticae_, by Sanday and others in _Oxford Studies in the Synoptic Problem_, by Streeter in his _The Four Gospels_, by Hayes in his _The Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts_, by Harnack in his _Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_, by Stanton in his _The Gospels as Historical Documents_, and by many others. My own views are given at length in my _Studies in Mark's Gospel_ and in _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_.

rwp@Luke:5:1 @{Pressed upon him} (\epikeisthai\). Luke in this paragraph (5:1-11; strkjv@Mark:1:16-20; strkjv@Matthew:4:18-22|) does not follow the chronology of Mark as he usually does. It seems reasonably clear that the renewed call of the four fishermen came before the first tour of Galilee in strkjv@Luke:4:42-44|. It is here assumed that Luke is describing in his own way the incident given in Mark and Matthew above. Luke singles out Simon in a graphic way. This verb \epikeisthai\ is an old one and means to \lie upon\, rest upon as of a stone on the tomb (John:11:38|) or of fish on the burning coals (John:21:9|). Songs:it is used of a tempest (Acts:27:20|) and of the urgent demands for Christ's crucifixion (Luke:23:23|). Here it vividly pictures the eager crowds around Jesus. \En t“i epikeisthai\ is a favourite idiom with Luke as we have already seen, \en\ with the articular infinitive in the locative case. {That} (\kai\). \Kai\ does not technically mean the declarative conjunction "that," but it is a fair rendering of the somewhat awkward idiom of Luke to a certain extent imitating the Hebrew use of _wav_. {Was standing} (\ˆn hest“s\). Periphrastic second past perfect of \histˆmi\ which here is equal to a practical imperfect. {By the lake} (\para tˆn limnˆn\). The use of the accusative with \para\...cases employed for more precise distinctions....2|. We need not here stress the notion of extension. "With characteristic accuracy Luke never calls it a sea, while the others never call it a lake" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:6:49 @{He that heareth and doeth not} (\ho de akousas kai mˆ poiˆsas\). Aorist active participle with article. Particular case singled out (punctiliar, aorist). {Like a man} (\homoios estin anthr“p“i\). Associative instrumental case after \homoios\ as in verse 47|. {Upon the earth} (\epi tˆn gˆn\). strkjv@Matthew:7:26| has "upon the sand" (\epi tˆn ammon\), more precise and worse than mere earth. But not on the rock. {Without a foundation} (\ch“ris themeliou\). The foundation on the rock after deep digging as in verse 48|. {It fell in} (\sunepesen\). Second aorist active of \sunpipt“\, to fall together, to collapse. An old verb from Homer on, but only here in the N.T. {The ruin} (\to rˆgma\). The crash like a giant oak in the forest resounded far and wide. An old word for a rent or fracture as in medicine for laceration of a wound. Only here in the N.T.

rwp@Luke:8:23 @{He fell asleep} (\aphupn“sen\). First aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \aphupno“\, to put to sleep, to fall off to sleep, a late verb for which the older Greek used \kathupno“\. Originally \aphupno“\ meant to waken from sleep, then to fall off to sleep (possibly a medical use). This is the only passage which speaks of the sleep of Jesus. Here only in the N.T. {Came down} (\katebˆ\). Second aorist active indicative of \katabain“\, common verb. It was literally true. These wind storms (\lailaps\. Songs:also strkjv@Mark:4:37|) rushed from Hermon down through the Jordan gorge upon the Sea of Galilee and shook it like a tempest (Matthew:8:24|). Mark's (Mark:4:37|) vivid use of the dramatic present \ginetai\ (ariseth) is not so precise as Luke's "came down." See on ¯Matthew:8:24|. These sudden squalls were dangerous on this small lake. {They were filling} (\suneplˆrounto\). Imperfect passive. It was the boat that was being filled (Mark:4:37|) and it is here applied to the navigators as sailors sometimes spoke. An old verb, but in the N.T. used only by Luke (8:23; strkjv@9:51; strkjv@Acts:2:1|). {Were in jeopardy} (\ekinduneuon\). Imperfect active, vivid description. Old verb, but in the N.T. only here, strkjv@Acts:19:27; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:30|.

rwp@Luke:11:40 @{Howbeit} (\plˆn\). See strkjv@Luke:6:24|. Instead of devoting so much attention to the outside. {Those things which are within} (\ta enonta\). Articular neuter plural participle from \eneimi\...in, common verb. This precise phrase...(\kathara\). Properly understood, this is not irony and is not Ebionism, but good Christianity (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:14:18 @{With one consent} (\apo mias\). Some feminine substantive like \gn“mˆs\ or \psuchˆs\...to be supplied. This precise idiom...{To make excuse} (\paraiteisthai\). This common Greek verb is used in various ways, to ask something from one (Mark:15:6|), to deprecate or ask to avert (Hebrews:12:19|), to refuse or decline (Acts:25:11|), to shun or to avoid (2Timothy:2:23|), to beg pardon or to make excuses for not doing or to beg (Luke:14:18ff.|). All these ideas are variations of \aite“\, to ask in the middle voice with \para\ in composition. {The first} (\ho pr“tos\). In order of time. There are three of the "many" ("all"), whose excuses are given, each more flimsy than the other. {I must needs} (\ech“ anagkˆn\). I have necessity. The land would still be there, a strange "necessity." {Have me excused} (\eche me parˆitˆmenon\). An unusual idiom somewhat like the English perfect with the auxiliary "have" and the modern Greek idiom with \ech“\, but certainly not here a Greek periphrasis for \parˆitˆso\. This perfect passive participle is predicate and agrees with \me\. See a like idiom in strkjv@Mark:3:1; strkjv@Luke:12:19| (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 902f.). The Latin had a similar idiom, _habe me excusatum_. Same language in verse 19|.

rwp@Luke:24:3 @{Of the Lord Jesus} (\tou kuriou Iˆsou\). The Western family of documents does not have these words and Westcott and Hort bracket them as Western non-interpolations. There are numerous instances of this shorter Western text in this chapter. For a discussion of the subject see my _Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament_, pp. 225-237. This precise combination (the Lord Jesus) is common in the Acts, but nowhere else in the Gospels.

rwp@Mark:13:1 @{Master, behold, what manner of stones and what manner of buildings} (\didaskale, ide potapoi lithoi kai potapai oikodomai\). strkjv@Matthew:24:1| and strkjv@Luke:21:5|...Mark alone gives the precise words....(Swete) was the one who sought thus by a pleasant platitude to divert the Teacher's attention from the serious topics of recent hours in the temple. It was not a new observation, but the merest commonplace might serve at this crisis. Josephus (_Ant_. xv. II, 3) speaks of the great size of these stones and the beauty of the buildings. Some of these stones at the southeastern and southwestern angles survive today and measure from twenty to forty feet long and weigh a hundred tons. Jesus had, of course, often observed them.

rwp@Mark:13:27 @{Shall gather together his elect} (\episunaxei tous eklektous autou\). This is the purpose of God through the ages. {From the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven} (\ap' akrou gˆs he“s akrou ouranou\)...tip of heaven." This precise phrase...

rwp@Mark:16:2 @{When the sun was risen} (\anateilantos tou hˆliou\). Genitive absolute, aorist participle, though some manuscripts read \anatellontos\, present participle. strkjv@Luke:24:1| has it "at early dawn" (\orthrou batheos\) and strkjv@John:20:1| "while it was yet dark." It was some two miles from Bethany to the tomb. Mark himself gives both notes of time, "very early" (\lian pr“i\), "when the sun was risen." Probably they started while it was still dark and the sun was coming up when they arrived at the tomb. All three mention that it was on the first day of the week, our Sunday morning when the women arrive. The body of Jesus was buried late on Friday before the sabbath (our Saturday) which began at sunset. This is made clear as a bell by strkjv@Luke:23:54| "and the sabbath drew on." The women rested on the sabbath (Luke strkjv@23:56|). This visit of the women was in the early morning of our Sunday, the first day of the week. Some people are greatly disturbed over the fact that Jesus did not remain in the grave full seventy-...to be exact and precise like..._Harmony of the Gospels_, pp. 289-91.

rwp@Matthew:2:1 @{In the days of Herod the King} (\en hˆmerais Hˆr“idou tou Basile“s\)...Luke gives a more precise date...(Luke:2:1-3|), the time of the first enrolment by Augustus and while Cyrenius was ruler of Syria. More will be said of Luke's date when we come to his Gospel. We know from Matthew that Jesus was born while Herod was king, the Herod sometimes called Herod the Great. Josephus makes it plain that Herod died B.C. 4. He was first Governor of Galilee, but had been king of Judaea since B.C. 40 (by Antony and Octavius). I call him "Herod the Great Pervert" in _Some Minor Characters in the New Testament_. He was great in sin and in cruelty and had won the favour of the Emperor. The story in Josephus is a tragedy. It is not made plain by Matthew how long before the death of Herod Jesus was born. Our traditional date A.D. 1, is certainly wrong as Matthew shows. It seems plain that the birth of Jesus cannot be put later than B.C. 5. The data supplied by Luke probably call for B.C. 6 or 7.

rwp@Matthew:8:17 @{Himself took our infirmities and bare our diseases} (\autos tas astheneias elaben kai tas nosous ebastasen\). A quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:53:4|...Isaiah whether in the precise sense...(_Bible Studies_, pp. 102f.) thinks that Matthew has made a free interpretation of the Hebrew, has discarded the translation of the Septuagint, and has transposed the two Hebrew verbs so that Matthew means: "He took upon himself our pains, and bore our diseases." Plummer holds that "It is impossible, and also unnecessary, to understand what the Evangelist understood by 'took ' (\elaben\) and 'bare' (\ebastasen\). It at least must mean that Christ removed their sufferings from the sufferers. He can hardly have meant that the diseases were transferred to Christ." \Bastaz“\ occurs freely in the papyri with the sense of lift, carry, endure, carry away (the commonest meaning, Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_), pilfer. In strkjv@Matthew:3:11| we have the common vernacular use to take off sandals. The Attic Greek did not use it in the sense of carrying off. "This passage is the cornerstone of the faith-cure theory, which claims that the atonement of Christ includes provision for _bodily_ no less than for spiritual healing, and therefore insists on translating 'took away'" (Vincent). We have seen that the word \bastaz“\ will possibly allow that meaning, but I agree with McNeile: "The passage, _as Mt. employs it_, has no bearing on the doctrine of the atonement." But Jesus does show his sympathy with us. "Christ's sympathy with the sufferers was so intense that he really felt their weaknesses and pains." In our burdens Jesus steps under the load with us and helps us to carry on.

rwp@Matthew:26:69 @{Thou also} (\kai su\). Peter had gone within (\es“\) the palace (26:58|), but was sitting {without} (\ex“\) the hall where the trial was going on in the open central court with the servants or officers (\hupˆret“n\, under rowers, literally, strkjv@26:58|)...took place nor the precise order...(\paidiskˆ\, slave girl) stepped up to Peter as he was sitting in the court and pointedly said: "Thou also wast with Jesus the Galilean." Peter was warming himself by the fire and the light shone in his face. She probably had noticed Peter come in with John the Beloved Disciple who went on up into the hall of trial. Or she may have seen Peter with Jesus on the streets of Jerusalem.

rwp@Matthew:27:14 @{And he gave him no answer, not even to one word} (\kai ouk apekrithˆ aut“i pros oude hen rhˆma\). Jesus refused to answer the charges of the Jews (verse 12|)...The Greek is very precise besides...

rwp@Matthew:28:2 @{There was a great earthquake} (\seismos egeneto megas\). Clearly not the earthquake of strkjv@27:51|. The precise time of this earthquake is not given. It was before sunrise on the first day of the week when the women made the next visit. Matthew alone relates the coming of the angel of the Lord who rolled away the stone and was sitting upon it (\apekulise ton lithon kai ekathˆto epan“ autou\). If one is querulous about these supernatural phenomena, he should reflect that the Resurrection of Jesus is one of the great supernatural events of all time. Cornelius … Lapide dares to say: "The earth, which trembled with sorrow at the Death of Christ as it were leaped for joy at His Resurrection." The Angel of the Lord announced the Incarnation of the Son of God and also His Resurrection from the grave. There are apparent inconsistencies in the various narratives of the Resurrection and the appearances of the Risen Christ. We do not know enough of the details to be able to reconcile them. But the very variations strengthen the independent witness to the essential fact that Jesus rose from the grave. Let each writer give his own account in his own way. The stone was rolled away not to let the Lord out, but to let the women in to prove the fact of the empty tomb (McNeile).

rwp@Revelation:1:1 @{The Revelation} (\apokalupsis\). Late and rare word outside of N.T. (once in Plutarch and so in the vernacular _Koin‚_), only once in the Gospels (Luke:2:32|), but in LXX and common in the Epistles (2Thessalonians:1:7|), though only here in this book besides the title, from \apokalupt“\, old verb, to uncover, to unveil. In the Epistles \apokalupsis\ is used for insight into truth (Ephesians:1:17|) or for the revelation of God or Christ at the second coming of Christ (2Thessalonians:1:7; strkjv@1Peter:1:7|). It is interesting to compare \apokalupsis\ with \epiphaneia\ (2Thessalonians:2:8|) and \phaner“sis\ (1Corinthians:12:7|). The precise meaning here turns on the genitive following. {Of Jesus Christ} (\Iˆsou Christou\). Hort takes it as objective genitive (revelation about Jesus Christ), but Swete rightly argues for the subjective genitive because of the next clause. {Gave him} (\ed“ken autoi\). It is the Son who received the revelation from the Father, as is usual (John:5:20f.,26|, etc.). {To shew} (\deixai\). First aorist active infinitive of \deiknumi\, purpose of God in giving the revelation to Christ. {Unto his servants} (\tois doulois autou\). Believers in general and not just to officials. Dative case. God's servants (or Christ's). {Must shortly come to pass} (\dei genesthai en tachei\). Second aorist middle infinitive of \ginomai\ with \dei\. See this same adjunct (\en tachei\) in strkjv@Luke:18:8; strkjv@Romans:16:20; strkjv@Revelation:22:6|. It is a relative term to be judged in the light of strkjv@2Peter:3:8| according to God's clock, not ours. And yet undoubtedly the hopes of the early Christians looked for a speedy return of the Lord Jesus. This vivid panorama must be read in the light of that glorious hope and of the blazing fires of persecution from Rome. {Sent and signified} (\esˆmanen aposteilas\). "Having sent (first aorist active participle of \apostell“\, strkjv@Matthew:10:16| and again in strkjv@Revelation:22:6| of God sending his angel) signified" (first aorist active indicative of \sˆmain“\, from \sˆma\, sign or token, for which see strkjv@John:12:33; strkjv@Acts:11:28|). See strkjv@12:1| for \sˆmeion\, though \sˆmain“\ (only here in the Apocalypse) suits admirably the symbolic character of the book. {By his angel} (\dia tou aggelou autou\). Christ's angel as Christ is the subject of the verb \esˆmanen\, as in strkjv@22:16 Christ sends his angel, though in strkjv@22:6| God sends. {Unto his servant John} (\t“i doul“i autou I“anei\). Dative case. John gives his name here, though not in Gospel or Epistles, because "prophecy requires the guarantee of the individual who is inspired to utter it" (Milligan). "The genesis of the Apocalypse has now been traced from its origin in the Mind of God to the moment when it reached its human interpreter" (Swete). "Jesus is the medium of all revelation" (Moffatt).

rwp@Revelation:2:9 @{Thy tribulation and thy poverty} (\sou tˆn thlipsin kai pt“cheian\). Separate articles of same gender, emphasizing each item. The tribulation was probably persecution, which helped to intensify the poverty of the Christians (James:2:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:10; strkjv@8:2|). In contrast with the wealthy church in Laodicea (3:17|). {But thou art rich} (\alla plousios ei\). Parenthesis to show the spiritual riches of this church in contrast with the spiritual poverty in Laodicea (3:17|), this a rich poor church, that a poor rich church. Rich in grace toward God (Luke:12:21|) and in good deeds (1Timothy:6:18|). Perhaps Jews and pagans had pillaged their property (Hebrews:10:34|), poor as they already were. {Blasphemy} (\blasphˆmian\). Reviling believers in Christ. See strkjv@Mark:7:22|. The precise charge by these Jews is not indicated, but see strkjv@Acts:13:45|. {Of them which say} (\ek t“n legont“n\). "From those saying" (\ek\ with the ablative plural of the present active articular participle of \leg“\). {They are Jews} (\Ioudaious einai heautous\). This is the accusative of general reference and the infinitive in indirect discourse after \leg“\ (Acts:5:36; strkjv@8:9|) even though \legont“n\ is here ablative (cf. strkjv@3:9|), common idiom. These are actual Jews and only Jews, not Christians. {And they are not} (\kai ouk eisin\). Another parenthesis like that in strkjv@2:2|. These are Jews in name only, not spiritual Jews (Galatians:6:15f., strkjv@Romans:2:28|). {A synagogue of Satan} (\sunag“gˆ tou Satanƒ\). In strkjv@3:9| again and note strkjv@2:13,24|, serving the devil (John:8:44|) instead of the Lord (Numbers:16:3; strkjv@20:4|).

rwp@Info_Romans @ THE TIME AND PLACE The place is settled if we accept strkjv@Romans:16:1|. The time of the year is in the spring if we combine statements in the Acts and the Epistle. He says: "I am now going to Jerusalem ministering to the saints" (Romans:15:25|). In strkjv@Acts:20:3| we read that Paul spent three months in Corinth. In II Corinthians we have a full account of the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem. The account of the journey from Corinth to Jerusalem is given in strkjv@Acts:20:3-21:17|. It was in the spring between passover at Philippi (Acts:20:6|) and pentecost in Jerusalem (20:16; strkjv@21:17|). The precise year is not quite so certain, but we may suggest A.D. 57 or 58 with reasonable confidence.

rwp@Romans:5:14 @{Even over them that had not sinned after the likeness of Adam's transgression} (\kai epi tous mˆ hamartˆsantas epi t“i homoi“mati tˆs parabase“s Adam\). Adam violated an express command of God and Moses gave the law of God clearly. And yet sin and death followed all from Adam on till Moses, showing clearly that the sin of Adam brought terrible consequences upon the race. Death has come upon infants and idiots also as a result of sin, but one understands Paul to mean that they are not held responsible by the law of conscience. {A figure} (\tupos\). See on ¯Acts:7:43; strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:7; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:9; strkjv@1Corinthians:10:6|...the parallel is not precise as...

Seeker Overlay: Off On

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

[pBiblx2]
Sat Jun 29 23:22:56 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020