NONE.filter - rwp Beheld:

rwp@Info_1John @ BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexander, _Epistles of John_ (Speaker's Comm., 1889). Barrett, _Devotional Comm. on John_ (1910). Baumgartner, _Die Schriften des N.T_. (IV. 3, 1918). Belser, _Komm_. (1906). Bennett, _New-Century Bible_. Brooke, _Int. Crit. Comm_. (Johannine Epistles, 1912). Cox, _Private Letters of St. Paul and St. John_ (1887). Ebrard, _Die Briefe Johannis_ (1859). Ewald, _Die Johanneischen Schriften_ (1861). Findlay, _Fellowship in the Life Eternal_ (1909) Gibbon, _Eternal Life_ (1890). Gore, _Epistles of John_ (1921). Green, _Ephesian Canonical Writings_ (1910). Haring, _Die Johannesbriefe_ (1927). Haupt, _I John_ (1869). Hilgenfeld, _Das Evangelium und die Briefe Johannis nach ihrem Lehrbegriff dargestellt_ (1849). Holtzmann-Bauer, _Hand-Comm. sum N.T_. (1908). Holtzmann, _Das Problem des I Johannesbr. in seinem Ver- haltniss zum Evang_. (Jahrbuch fur Prot. Theologie, 1881, 1882). Huther, _Crit. and Exeget. to the General Eps. of James and John_ (1882). Karl, _Johanneische Studien_ (der I Johannes Brief, 1898). Law, _The Tests of Life_ (1909). Lias, _Epistles of John_ (1887). Loisy, _Les epitres dites de Jean_ (1921) in le quatrieme evan- gile. Lucke, _Comm. on Epistles of John_ (1837). Luthardt, _Strack-Zoeckler Komm_. (1895). Maurice, _The Epistles of St. John_ (1857). Plummer, _Cambridge Greek Test_ (1886). Ramsay, A., _Westminster N.T_. (1910). Ritter, _Die Gemeinschaft der Heiligen_ (1929). Robertson, J. A., _The Johannine Epistles_ (1920). Rothe, _Der erste Brief Johannis_ (1879). Sawtelle, _American Comm_. (1890). Smith, David, _The Expositor's Greek Testament_ (1910). Watson, _Epistles of John_ (1910). Weiss, B., _Die drei Briefe des Apostels Johannis_ (Meyer Komm. 1900). Wendt, _Die Johannesbriefe und das Johanneische Christen- tum_ (1925). Westcott, _The Epistles of St. John_. 3rd ed. (1892). Windisch, _Die Katholischer Briefe_ (Handbuch zum N.T., 2 Aufl., 1930). Wrede, _In Die Heiligen Schriften des N.T_. (2 Aufl., 1924). Wurm, _Die Irrlehrer im I Johannes Brief_ (1903). strkjv@1John:1:1 @{That which} (\ho\). Strictly speaking, the neuter relative here is not personal, but the message "concerning the Word of life" (\peri tou logou ts zs\), a phrase that reminds one at once of the Word (\Logos\) in strkjv@John:1:1,14; strkjv@Revelation:19:14| (an incidental argument for identity of authorship for all these books). For discussion of the \Logos\ see on ¯John:1:1-18|. Here the \Logos\ is described by \ts zs\ (of life), while in strkjv@John:1:4| he is called \h z\ (the Life) as here in verse 2| and as Jesus calls himself (John:11:25; strkjv@14:6|), an advance on the phrase here, and in strkjv@Revelation:19:14| he is termed \ho logos tou theou\ (the Word of God), though in strkjv@John:1:1| the \Logos\ is flatly named \ho theos\ (God). John does use \ho\ in a collective personal sense in strkjv@John:6:37,39|. See also \pan ho\ in strkjv@1John:5:4|. {From the beginning} (\ap' archs\). Anarthrous as in strkjv@John:1:1; strkjv@6:64; strkjv@16:4|. See same phrase in strkjv@2:7|. The reference goes beyond the Christian dispensation, beyond the Incarnation, to the eternal purpose of God in Christ (John:3:16|), "coeval in some sense with creation" (Westcott). {That which we have heard} (\ho akkoamen\). Note fourfold repetition of \ho\ (that which) without connectives (asyndeton). The perfect tense (active indicative of \akou\) stresses John's equipment to speak on this subject so slowly revealed. It is the literary plural unless John associates the elders of Ephesus with himself (Lightfoot) the men who certified the authenticity of the Gospel (John:21:24|). {That which we have seen} (\ho herakamen\). Perfect active, again, of \hora\, with the same emphasis on the possession of knowledge by John. {With our eyes} (\tois ophthalmois hmn\). Instrumental case and showing it was not imagination on John's part, not an optical illusion as the Docetists claimed, for Jesus had an actual human body. He could be heard and seen. {That which we beheld} (\ho etheasametha\). Repetition with the aorist middle indicative of \theaomai\ (the very form in strkjv@John:1:14|), "a spectacle which broke on our astonished vision" (D. Smith). {Handled} (\epslaphsan\). First aorist active indicative of \pslapha\, old and graphic verb (from \psa\, to touch), the very verb used by Jesus to prove that he was not a mere spirit (Luke:24:39|). Three senses are here appealed to (hearing, sight, touch) as combining to show the reality of Christ's humanity against the Docetic Gnostics and the qualification of John by experience to speak. But he is also "the Word of life" and so God Incarnate.

rwp@1John:4:12 @{No one hath beheld God at any time} (\theon oudeis ppote tethetai\). Perfect middle indicative of \theaomai\ (John:1:14|). Almost the very words of strkjv@John:1:18| \theon oudeis ppote heraken\ (instead of \tethetai\). {If we love one another} (\ean agapmen alllous\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and the present active subjunctive, "if we keep on loving one another." {God abideth in us} (\ho theos en hmin menei\). Else we cannot go on loving one another. {His love} (\h agap autou\). More than merely subjective or objective (2:5; strkjv@4:9|). "Mutual love is a sign of the indwelling of God in men" (Brooke). {Is perfected} (\teteleimen estin\). Periphrastic (see usual form \teteleitai\ in strkjv@2:5; strkjv@4:17|) perfect passive indicative of \teleio\ (cf. strkjv@1:4|). See verse 18| for "perfect love."

rwp@1John:4:14 @{We have beheld} (\tethemetha\). Perfect middle of \theaomai\ as in verse 12|, though the aorist in strkjv@1:1; strkjv@John:1:14| (\ethesametha\). John is qualified to bear witness (\marturoumen\ as in strkjv@1:2|) as Jesus had charged the disciples to do (Acts:1:8|). {Hath sent} (\apestalken\). As in verse 9|, though \apesteilen\ in verse 10|. {To be the Saviour of the world} (\stra tou kosmou\). Predicate accusative of \str\ (Saviour), like \hilasmon\ in verse 10|. This very phrase occurs elsewhere only in strkjv@John:4:42| as the confession of the Samaritans, but the idea is in strkjv@John:3:17|.

rwp@Acts:2:25 @{Concerning him} (\eis auton\). Peter interprets strkjv@Psalms:16:8-11| as written by David and with reference to the Messiah. There is but one speaker in this Psalm and both Peter here and Paul in strkjv@Acts:13:36| make it the Messiah. David is giving his own experience which is typical of the Messiah (Knowling). {I beheld} (\proormn\). Imperfect middle without augment of \proora\, common verb, but only twice in the N.T., to see beforehand (Acts:21:29|) or to see right before one as here. This idea of \pro-\ is made plainer by "before my face" (\enpion mou\). {On my right hand} (\ek dexin mou\). The Lord Jehovah like a defender or advocate stands at David's right hand as in trials in court (Psalms:109:31|). {That} (\hina\) here is almost result. {Moved} (\saleuth\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \saleu\, to shake like an earthquake.

rwp@Acts:9:7 @{That journeyed with him} (\hoi sunodeuontes auti\). Not in the older Greek, but in the _Koin_, with the associative instrumental. {Speechless} (\eneoi\). Mute. Only here in N.T., though old word. {Hearing the voice, but beholding no man} (\akouontes men ts phns, mdena de therountes\). Two present active participles in contrast (\men, de\). In strkjv@22:9| Paul says that the men "beheld the light" (\to men phs etheasanto\), but evidently did not discern the person. Paul also says there, "but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me" (\tn de phnn ouk kousan tou lalountos moi\). Instead of this being a flat contradiction of what Luke says in strkjv@9:7| it is natural to take it as being likewise (as with the "light" and "no one") a distinction between the "sound" (original sense of \phn\ as in strkjv@John:3:8|) and the separate words spoken. It so happens that \akou\ is used either with the accusative (the extent of the hearing) or the genitive (the specifying). It is possible that such a distinction here coincides with the two senses of \phn\. They heard the sound (9:7|), but did not understand the words (22:9|). However, this distinction in case with \akou\, though possible and even probable here, is by no means a necessary one for in strkjv@John:3:8| where \phnn\ undoubtedly means "sound" the accusative occurs as Luke uses \kousen phnn\ about Saul in strkjv@Acts:9:4|. Besides in strkjv@22:7| Paul uses \kousa phns\ about himself, but \kousa phnn\ about himself in strkjv@76:14|, interchangeably.

rwp@Acts:17:16 @{Now while Paul waited for them in Athens} (\En de tais Athnais ekdechomenou autous tou Paulou\). Genitive absolute with present middle participle of \ekdechomai\, old verb to receive, but only with the sense of looking out for, expecting found here and elsewhere in N.T We know that Timothy did come to Paul in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1,6|) from Thessalonica and was sent back to them from Athens. If Silas also came to Athens, he was also sent away, possibly to Philippi, for that church was deeply interested in Paul. At any rate both Timothy and Silas came from Macedonia to Corinth with messages and relief for Paul (Acts:18:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:8f.|). Before they came and after they left, Paul felt lonely in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1|), the first time on this tour or the first that he has been completely without fellow workers. Athens had been captured by Sulla B.C. 86. After various changes Achaia, of which Corinth is the capital, is a separate province from Macedonia and A.D. 44 was restored by Claudius to the Senate with the Proconsul at Corinth. Paul is probably here about A.D. 50. Politically Athens is no longer of importance when Paul comes though it is still the university seat of the world with all its rich environment and traditions. Rackham grows eloquent over Paul the Jew of Tarsus being in the city of Pericles and Demosthenes, Socrates and Plato and Aristotle, Sophocles and Euripides. In its Agora Socrates had taught, here was the Academy of Plato, the Lyceum of Aristotle, the Porch of Zeno, the Garden of Epicurus. Here men still talked about philosophy, poetry, politics, religion, anything and everything. It was the art centre of the world. The Parthenon, the most beautiful of temples, crowned the Acropolis. Was Paul insensible to all this cultural environment? It is hard to think so for he was a university man of Tarsus and he makes a number of allusions to Greek writers. Probably it had not been in Paul's original plan to evangelize Athens, difficult as all university seats are, but he cannot be idle though here apparently by chance because driven out of Macedonia. {Was provoked} (\parxuneto\). Imperfect passive of \paroxun\, old verb to sharpen, to stimulate, to irritate (from \para, oxus\), from \paroxusmos\ (Acts:15:39|), common in old Greek, but in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:13:5|. It was a continual challenge to Paul's spirit when he beheld (\therountos\, genitive of present participle agreeing with \autou\ (his), though late MSS. have locative \therounti\ agreeing with \en auti\). {The city full of idols} (\kateidlon ousan tn polin\). Note the participle \ousan\ not preserved in the English (either the city being full of idols or that the city was full of idols, sort of indirect discourse). Paul, like any stranger was looking at the sights as he walked around. This adjective \kateidlon\ (perfective use of \kata\ and \eidlon\ is found nowhere else, but it is formed after the analogy of \katampelos, katadendron\), full of idols. Xenophon (_de Republ. Ath_.) calls the city \hol bomos, hol thuma theois kai anathma\ (all altar, all sacrifice and offering to the gods). These statues were beautiful, but Paul was not deceived by the mere art for art's sake. The idolatry and sensualism of it all glared at him (Romans:1:18-32|). Renan ridicules Paul's ignorance in taking these statues for idols, but Paul knew paganism better than Renan. The superstition of this centre of Greek culture was depressing to Paul. One has only to recall how superstitious cults today flourish in the atmosphere of Boston and Los Angeles to understand conditions in Athens. Pausanias says that Athens had more images than all the rest of Greece put together. Pliny states that in the time of Nero Athens had over 30,000 public statues besides countless private ones in the homes. Petronius sneers that it was easier to find a god than a man in Athens. Every gateway or porch had its protecting god. They lined the street from the Piraeus and caught the eye at every place of prominence on wall or in the agora.

rwp@Acts:22:9 @{But they heard not the voice} (\tn de phnn ouk kousan\). The accusative here may be used rather than the genitive as in verse 7| to indicate that those with Paul did not understand what they heard (9:7|) just as they beheld the light (22:9|), but did not see Jesus (9:7|). The difference in cases allows this distinction, though it is not always observed as just noticed about strkjv@22:14; strkjv@26:14|. The verb \akou\ is used in the sense of understand (Mark:4:33; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:2|). It is one of the evidences of the genuineness of this report of Paul's speech that Luke did not try to smooth out apparent discrepancies in details between the words of Paul and his own record already in ch. 9. The Textus Receptus adds in this verse: "And they became afraid" (\kai emphoboi egenonto\). Clearly not genuine.

rwp@Info_John @ A PERSONAL WITNESS It is manifest all through the book that the writer is the witness who is making the contribution of his personal knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ during his earthly ministry. In strkjv@John:1:14| he plainly says that "the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory" (\etheasametha tn doxan autou\). He here associates others with him in this witness to the glory of the Word, but in strkjv@John:21:25| he employs the singular "I suppose" (\oimai\) in sharp dis- tinction from the plural "we know" (\oidamen\) just before. The writer is present in nearly all the scenes described. The word witness (\marture, marturia\) so common in this Gospel (John:1:7,8,19; strkjv@3:11,26,33; strkjv@5:31; strkjv@12:17; strkjv@21:24|, etc.) illustrates well this point of view. In the Gospel of Luke we have the work of one who was not a personal witness of Christ (Luke:1:1-4|). In the Gospel of Matthew we possess either the whole work of a personal follower and apostle or at least the Logia of Matthew according to Papias preserved in it. In Mark's Gospel we have as the basis the preaching of Simon Peter as preserved by his interpreter John Mark. John's Gospel claims to be the personal witness of "the disciple whom Jesus loved" and as such deserves and has received exceptional esteem. One may note all through the book evidences of an eye-witness in the vivid details.

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|, if he wishes, since John clearly had the Synoptics before him and chiefly supplemented them in his narrative. In fact, one is also at liberty to ask what intelligent meaning can one give to John's language here apart from the Virgin Birth? What ordinary mother or father ever speaks of a child "becoming flesh"? For the Incarnation see also strkjv@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:1:32 @{Bare witness} (\emartursen\). First aorist active indicative of \marture\. Another specimen of John's witness to the Messiah (1:7,15,19,29,35,36|). {I have beheld} (\tetheamai\). Perfect middle indicative of \theaomai\, the realization of the promise of the sign (verse 33|) by which he should recognize the Messiah. As a matter of fact, we know that he so recognized Jesus as Messiah when he came for baptism before the Holy Spirit came (Matthew:3:14ff.|). But this sight of the Spirit descending as a dove upon Jesus at his baptism (Mark:1:10; strkjv@Matthew:3:16; strkjv@Luke:3:22|) became permanent proof to him. John's allusion assumes the Synoptic record. The Semites regarded the dove as a symbol of the Spirit.

rwp@John:1:38 @{Turned} (\strapheis\). Second aorist passive participle of \streph\, vividly picturing the sudden act of Jesus on hearing their steps behind him. {Beheld} (\theasamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \theaomai\ (verse 32|). Both participles here express antecedent action to \legei\ (saith). {Following} (\akolothountas\). Present active participle of \akolouthe\ (verse 37|). It was Christ's first experience of this kind and the two came from the Baptist to Jesus. {What seek ye?} (\Ti zteite;\). Not "whom" (\tina\ strkjv@18:4; strkjv@20:15|), but "what purpose have you." The first words of Jesus preserved in this Gospel. See strkjv@Luke:2:49; strkjv@Matthew:3:15| for words spoken before this and strkjv@Mark:1:15| for Mark's first report in the Galilean ministry. {Rabbi} (\Rabbei\). Aramaic title for "Teacher" which John here translates by \Didaskale\ as he is writing late and for general readers. Luke, a Greek Christian, does not use it, but John recalls his first use of this term to Jesus and explains it. Matthew has it only in the greeting of Judas to the Master (Matthew:26:25,49|) and Mark once by Judas (Mark:14:45|) and twice by Peter (Mark:9:5; strkjv@11:21|). John's Gospel has the disciples at first addressing Jesus by Rabbi while others address him by \Kurie\ (Lord or Sir) as in strkjv@4:11,49; strkjv@5:7|. Peter uses \Kurie\ in strkjv@6:68|. In the end the disciples usually say \Kurie\ (13:6,25|, etc.), but Mary Magdalene says \Rabbounei\ (20:16|). {Being interpreted} (\methermmeuomenon\). Present passive participle of \methermneu\, late compound of \meta\ and \hermneu\, to explain (John:1:42|), old word from \Hermes\, the god of speech (hermeneutics). John often explains Aramaic words (1:38,41,42; strkjv@4:25; strkjv@9:7|, etc.). {Where abidest thou?} (\Pou meneis;\). They wished a place for quiet converse with Jesus.

rwp@John:6:2 @{Followed} (\kolouthei\). Descriptive imperfect active, picturing the crowd, but without the details of the boat for Christ and the rapid race of the crowd on foot (Mark:6:32f.; strkjv@Matthew:14:13f.|). {They beheld} (\etheroun\). Imperfect active of \there\. They had been beholding the signs which Jesus had been doing (\epoiei\, imperfect again) for a long time (2:23|), most of which John has not given (Mark:1:29f.; strkjv@2:1; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@6:5|). The people were eager to hear Jesus again (Luke:9:11|) and to get the benefit of his healing power "on them that were sick" (\epi tn asthenountn\, the weak or feeble, without strength, \a\ privative and \sthenos\, strength).

rwp@John:11:45 @{Beheld that which he did} (\theasamenoi ho epoisen\). First aorist middle participle of \theaomai\ and first aorist active indicative of \poie\ in the relative (\ho\) clause. They were eye-witnesses of all the details and did not depend on hearsay. {Believed on him} (\episteusan eis auton\). Such a result had happened before (7:31|), and all the more in the presence of this tremendous miracle which held many to Jesus (12:11,17|).

rwp@Luke:1:2 @{Even as} (\kaths\). This particle was condemned by the Atticists though occurring occasionally from Aristotle on. It is in the papyri. Luke asserts that the previous narratives had their sound basis. {Delivered unto us} (\paredsan hmin\). Second aorist active indicative of \paradidmi\. Luke received this tradition along with those who are mentioned above (the many). That is he was not one of the "eyewitnesses." He was a secondary, not a primary, witness of the events. Tradition has come to have a meaning of unreliability with us, but that is not the idea here. Luke means to say that the handing down was dependable, not mere wives' fables. Those who drew up the narratives had as sources of knowledge those who handed down the data. Here we have both written and oral sources. Luke had access to both kinds. {Which from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word} (\hoi ap' archs autoptai kai hupretai genomenoi tou logou\). "Who" is better than "which" for the article here. The word for {eyewitnesses} (\autoptai\) is an old Greek word and appears in the papyri also. It means seeing with one's own eyes. It occurs here only in the N.T. We have the very word in the medical term _autopsy_. Greek medical writers often had the word. It is a different word from \epoptai\ (eyewitness) in strkjv@2Peter:1:16|, a word used of those who beheld heavenly mysteries. The word for "ministers" (\hupretai\), under rowers or servants we have had already in strkjv@Matthew:5:25; strkjv@26:58; strkjv@Mark:14:54,65|, which see. We shall see it again in strkjv@Luke:4:20| of the attendant in the synagogue. In the sense of a preacher of the gospel as here, it occurs also in strkjv@Acts:26:16|. Here "the word" means the gospel message, as in strkjv@Acts:6:4; strkjv@8:4|, etc. {From the beginning} apparently refers to the beginning of the ministry of Jesus as was true of the apostles (Acts:1:22|) and of the early apostolic preaching (Acts:10:37-43|). The Gospel of Mark follows this plan. The Gospel of Luke goes behind this in chapters 1 and 2 as does Matthew in chapters 1 and 2. But Luke is not here referring to himself. The matters about the childhood of Jesus Christ would not form part of the traditional preaching for obvious reasons.

rwp@Luke:10:18 @{I beheld Satan fallen} (\etheroun ton Satann pesonta\). Imperfect active (I was beholding) and second aorist (constative) active participle of \pipt\ (not {fallen}, \peptkota\, perfect active participle, nor {falling}, \piptonta\, present active participle, but {fall}, \pesonta\). As a flash of lightning out of heaven, quick and startling, so the victory of the Seventy over the demons, the agents of Satan, forecast his downfall and Jesus in vision pictured it as a flash of lightning.

rwp@Luke:23:55 @{Had come with him} (\san sunelluthuiai\). Periphrastic past perfect active of \sunerchomai\. {Followed after} (\katakolouthsasai\). Aorist active participle of \katakolouthe\, an old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:16:17|. It is possible that they followed after Joseph and Nicodemus so that they "beheld the tomb," (\etheasanto to mnmeion\), and also "how his body was laid" (\hs eteth to sma autou\). First aorist passive indicative of \tithmi\. They may in fact, have witnessed the silent burial from a distance. The Syriac Sinaitic and the Syriac Curetonian give it thus: "and the women, who came with Him from Galilee went to the sepulchre in their footsteps, and saw the body when they had brought it in there." At any rate the women saw "that" and "how" the body of Jesus was laid in this new tomb of Joseph in the rocks.

rwp@Mark:3:11 @{Whensoever they beheld him} (\hotan auton etheroun\). Imperfect indicative with \hotan\ of repeated action. They kept falling down before him (\prosepipton\) and crying, (\ekrazon\) and he kept charging or rebuking (\epitim\) them, all imperfects. The unclean spirits (demons) recognize Jesus as the Son of God, as before. Jesus charged them not to make him known as he had also done before. He did not wish this testimony. It was a most exciting ordeal and is given only by Mark. Note non-final use of \hina\.

rwp@Mark:12:41 @{Sat down over against the treasury} (\kathisas katenanti tou gazophulakiou\). The storm is over. The Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, scribes, have all slunk away in terror ere the closing words. Mark draws this immortal picture of the weary Christ sitting by the treasury (compound word in the LXX from \gaza\, Persian word for treasure, and \phulak\, guard, so safe for gifts to be deposited). {Beheld} (\etherei\). Imperfect tense. He was watching {how the multitude cast money} (\ps ho ochlos ballei\) into the treasury. The rich were casting in (\eballon\, imperfect tense) as he watched.

rwp@Mark:15:47 @{Beheld} (\etheroun\). Imperfect tense picturing the two Marys "sitting over against the sepulchre" (Matthew:27:61|) and watching in silence as the shadows fell upon all their hopes and dreams. Apparently these two remained after the other women who had been beholding from afar the melancholy end (Mark:15:40|) had left and "were watching the actions of Joseph and Nicodemus" (Swete). Probably also they saw the body of Jesus carried and hence they knew where it was laid and saw that it remained there (\tetheitai\, perfect passive indicative, state of completion). "It is evident that they constituted themselves a party of observation" (Gould).

rwp@Revelation:5:6 @{And I saw} (\kai eidon\). Stirred by the words of the elder in verse 5| (\idou\, behold). "I beheld." {In the midst} (\en mesi\). See strkjv@4:6| for this idiom. It is not quite clear where the Lamb was standing in the vision, whether close to the throne or in the space between the throne and the elders (perhaps implied by "came" in verse 7|, but nearness to the throne is implied by strkjv@14:1; strkjv@Acts:7:56; strkjv@Hebrews:10:11|). {A Lamb} (\arnion\). Elsewhere in the N.T. \ho amnos\ is used of Christ (John:1:29,36; Acts strkjv@8:32; strkjv@1Peter:1:19| like strkjv@Isaiah:53:7|), but in the Apocalypse \to arnion\ occurs for the Crucified Christ 29 times in twelve chapters. {Standing} (\hestkos\). Second perfect active (intransitive of \histmi\) neuter accusative singular (grammatical gender like \arnion\), though some MSS. read \hestks\ (natural gender masculine and nominative in spite of \eidon\ construction according to sense). {As though it had been slain} (\hs esphagmenon\). Perfect passive predicate participle of \sphaz\, old word, in N.T. only in strkjv@Revelation:5:6,9,12; strkjv@6:4,9; strkjv@13:3; strkjv@18:24; strkjv@1John:3:12|. \Hs\ (as if) is used because the Lamb is now alive, but (in appearance) with the marks of the sacrifice. The Christ as the Lamb is both sacrifice and Priest (Hebrews:9:12f.; strkjv@10:11|). {Having} (\echn\). Construction according to sense again with masculine nominative participle instead of \echonta\ (masculine accusative singular) or \echon\ (neuter accusative singular). Seven horns (\keras\) is a common symbol in the O.T. for strength and kingly power (1Samuel:2:10; strkjv@1Kings:22:11; strkjv@Psalms:112:9; strkjv@Daniel:7:7,20ff.|) and often in Rev. (Revelation:12:3; strkjv@13:1; strkjv@17:3,12|). Fulness of power (the All-powerful one) is symbolized by seven. {Seven eyes} (\ophthalmous hepta\). Like strkjv@Zechariah:3:9; strkjv@4:10| and denotes here, as there, omniscience. Here they are identified with the seven Spirits of Christ, while in strkjv@1:4| the seven Spirits are clearly the Holy Spirit of God (3:1|), and blaze like torches (4:5|), like the eyes of Christ (1:14|). The Holy Spirit is both Spirit of God and of Christ (Romans:8:9|). {Sent forth} (\apestalmenoi\). Perfect passive predicate participle of \apostell\, masculine plural (agreeing with \hoi\ and \ophthalmous\ in gender), but some MSS. have \apestalmena\ agreeing with the nearer \pneumata\.

rwp@Revelation:11:11 @{After the} (\meta tas\ etc.). The article \tas\ (the) points back to strkjv@11:9|. {The breath of life from God} (\pneuma zs ek tou theou\). This phrase (\pneuma zs\) occurs in strkjv@Genesis:6:17; strkjv@7:15,22| of the lower animals, but here there is clearly an allusion to strkjv@Ezekiel:37:5,10| (also strkjv@2Kings:13:21|), where the dead bones lived again. {Entered into them} (\eislthen en autois\). Second aorist active indicative of \eiserchomai\ with \en\ rather than \eis\ after it (cf. strkjv@Luke:9:46|). The prophecy has here become fact (change from future \pempsousin\ to aorist \eislthen\). {They stood upon their feet} (\estsan epi tous podas autn\). Ingressive second aorist active indicative of \histmi\ (intransitive). Reference to strkjv@Ezekiel:37:10|, but with the accusative in place of genitive there after \epi\ as in strkjv@2Kings:13:21|. {Fell upon} (\epepesen epi\). Second aorist active indicative of \epipipt\ with repetition of \epi\. The same prophetic use of the aorist as in \eislthen\ and \estsan\. {Beheld} (\therountas\). Present active articular participle of \there\. "The spectators were panic-stricken" (Swete).