Bible:
Filter: String:

NONE.filter - rwp Single:


rwp@1Corinthians:1:29 @{That no flesh should glory before God} (\hop“s mˆ kauchˆsˆtai pƒsa sarx en“pion tou theou\). This is the further purpose expressed by \hop“s\ for variety and appeals to God's ultimate choice in all three instances. The first aorist middle of the old verb \kauchaomai\, to boast, brings out sharply that not a single boast is to be made. The papyri give numerous examples of \en“pion\ as a preposition in the vernacular, from adjective \en-“pios\, in the eye of God. One should turn to strkjv@2Corinthians:4:7| for Paul's further statement about our having this treasure in earthen vessels that the excellency of the power may be of God and not of us.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:22 @{Yours} (\hum“n\). Predicate genitive, belong to you. All the words in this verse and 23| are anarthrous, though not indefinite, but definite. The English reproduces them all properly without the definite article except \kosmos\ (the world), and even here just world will answer. Proper names do not need the article to be definite nor do words for single objects like world, life, death. Things present (\enest“ta\, second perfect participle of \enistˆmi\) and things to come divide two classes. Few of the finer points of Greek syntax need more attention than the absence of the article. We must not think of the article as "omitted" (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 790). The wealth of the Christian includes all things, all leaders, past, present, future, Christ, and God. There is no room for partisan wrangling here.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:1 @{Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote} (\peri de h“n egrapsate\). An ellipsis of \peri tout“n\, the antecedent of \peri h“n\, is easily supplied as in papyri. The church had written Paul a letter in which a number of specific problems about marriage were raised. He answers them _seriatim_. The questions must be clearly before one in order intelligently to interpret Paul's replies. The first is whether a single life is wrong. Paul pointedly says that it is not wrong, but good (\kalon\). One will get a one-sided view of Paul's teaching on marriage unless he keeps a proper perspective. One of the marks of certain heretics will be forbidding to marry (1Timothy:4:3|). Paul uses marriage as a metaphor of our relation to Christ (2Corinthians:11:2; strkjv@Romans:7:4; strkjv@Ephesians:5:28-33|). Paul is not here opposing marriage. He is only arguing that celibacy may be good in certain limitations. The genitive case with \haptesthai\ (touch) is the usual construction.

rwp@1Corinthians:9:5 @{Have we no right?} (\Mˆ ouk echomen exousian;\). Same idiom. {To lead about a wife that is a believer?} (\adelphˆn gunaika periagein;\). Old verb \periag“\, intransitive in strkjv@Acts:13:11|. Two substantives in apposition, a sister a wife, a common Greek idiom. This is a plea for the support of the preacher's wife and children. Plainly Paul has no wife at this time. {And Cephas} (\kai Kˆphƒs\). Why is he singled out by name? Perhaps because of his prominence and because of the use of his name in the divisions in Corinth (1:12|). It was well known that Peter was married (Matthew:8:14|). Paul mentions James by name in strkjv@Galatians:1:19| as one of the Lord's brothers. All the other apostles were either married or had the right to be.

rwp@1Corinthians:11:6 @{Let her also be shorn} (\kai keirasth“\). Aorist middle imperative of \keir“\, to shear (as sheep). Let her cut her hair close. A single act by the woman. {If it is a shame} (\ei de aischron\). Condition of first class assumed to be true. \Aischron\ is old adjective from \aischos\, bareness, disgrace. Clearly Paul uses such strong language because of the effect on a woman's reputation in Corinth by such conduct that proclaimed her a lewd woman. Social custom varied in the world then as now, but there was no alternative in Corinth. {To be shorn or shaven} (\to keirasthai kai xurasthai\). Articular infinitives subject of copula \estin\ understood, \keirasthai\ first aorist middle, \xurasthai\ present middle. Note change in tense. {Let her be veiled} (\katakaluptesth“\). Present middle imperative of old compound \kata-kalupt“\, here alone in N.T. Let her cover up herself with the veil (down, \kata\, the Greek says, the veil hanging down from the head).

rwp@1Corinthians:11:22 @{What? Have ye not houses?} (\Mˆ gar oikias ouk echete;\) The double negative (\mˆ--ouk\) in the single question is like the idiom in strkjv@9:4f.| which see. \Mˆ\ expects a negative answer while \ouk\ negatives the verb \echete\. "For do you fail to have houses?" Paul is not approving gluttony and drunkenness but only expressing horror at their sacrilege (despising, \kataphroneite\) of the church of God. {That have not} (\tous mˆ echontas\). Not those without houses, but those who have nothing, "the have-nots" (Findlay) like strkjv@2Corinthians:8:12|, in contrast with \hoi echontes\ "the haves" (the men of property). {What shall I say to you?} (\ti eip“ humin;\) Deliberative subjunctive that well expresses Paul's bewilderment.

rwp@Info_1John @ THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN ABOUT A.D. 85 TO 90 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION RELATION TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL There are few scholars who deny that the Epistles of John and the Fourth Gospel are by the same writer. As a matter of fact "in the whole of the First Epistle there is hardly a single thought that is not found in the Gospel" (Schulze). H. J. Holtzmann (_Jahrbuch fur Protestantische Theologie_, 1882, P. 128) in a series of articles on the "Problem of the First Epistle of St. John in its Relation to the Gospel" thinks that the similarities are closer than those between Luke's Gospel and the Acts. Baur argued that this fact was explained by conscious imitation on the part of one or the other, probably by the author of the Epistle. The solution lies either in identity of authorship or in imitation. If there is identity of authorship, Holtzmann argues that the Epistle is earlier, as seems to me to be true, while Brooke holds that the Gospel is the earlier and that the First Epistle represents the more complete ideas of the author. Both Holtzmann and Brooke give a detailed comparison of likenesses between the First Epistle and the Fourth Gospel in vocabulary, syntax, style, ideas. The arguments are not conclusive as to the priority of Epistle or Gospel, but they are as to identity of authorship. One who accepts, as I do, the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel for the reasons given in Volume V of this series, does not feel called upon to prove the Johannine authorship of the three Epistles that pass under the Apostle's name. Westcott suggests that one compare strkjv@John:1:1-18| with strkjv@1John:1:1-4| to see how the same mind deals with the same ideas in different connections. "No theory of conscious imitation can reasonably explain the subtle coincidences and differences in these two short crucial passages."

rwp@1John:4:9 @{Was manifested} (\ephaner“thˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \phanero“\. The Incarnation as in strkjv@3:5|. Subjective genitive as in strkjv@2:5|. {In us} (\en hˆmin\). In our case, not "among us" nor "to us." Cf. strkjv@Galatians:1:16|. {Hath sent} (\apestalken\). Perfect active indicative of \apostell“\, as again in verse 14|, the permanent mission of the Son, though in verse 10| the aorist \apesteilen\ occurs for the single event. See strkjv@John:3:16| for this great idea. {His only-begotten Son} (\ton huion autou ton monogenˆ\). "His Son the only-begotten" as in strkjv@John:3:16|. John applies \monogenˆs\ to Jesus alone (John:1:14,18|), but Luke (Luke:7:12; strkjv@8:42; strkjv@9:38|) to others. Jesus alone completely reproduces the nature and character of God (Brooke). {That we might live through him} (\hina zˆs“men di' autou\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist (ingressive, get life) active subjunctive of \za“\. "Through him" is through Christ, who is the life (John:14:6|). Christ also lives in us (Galatians:2:20|). This life begins here and now.

rwp@1John:5:4 @{For} (\hoti\). The reason why God's commandments are not heavy is the power that comes with the new birth from God. {Whatsoever is begotten of God} (\pƒn to gegennˆmenon ek tou theou\). Neuter singular perfect passive participle of \genna“\ rather than the masculine singular (verse 1|) to express sharply the universality of the principle (Rothe) as in strkjv@John:3:6,8; strkjv@6:37,39|. {Overcometh the world} (\nikƒi ton kosmon\). Present active indicative of \nika“\, a continuous victory because a continuous struggle, "keeps on conquering the world" ("the sum of all the forces antagonistic to the spiritual life," D. Smith). {This is the victory} (\hautˆ estin hˆ nikˆ\). For this form of expression see strkjv@1:5; strkjv@John:1:19|. \Nikˆ\ (victory, cf. \nika“\), old word, here alone in N.T., but the later form \nikos\ in strkjv@Matthew:12:20; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:54f.,57|. {That overcometh} (\hˆ nikˆsasa\). First aorist active articular participle of \nika“\. The English cannot reproduce the play on the word here. The aorist tense singles out an individual experience when one believed or when one met temptation with victory. Jesus won the victory over the world (John:16:33|) and God in us (1John:4:4|) gives us the victory. {Even our faith} (\hˆ pistis hˆm“n\). The only instance of \pistis\ in the Johannine Epistles (not in John's Gospel, though in the Apocalypse). It is our faith in Jesus Christ as shown by our confession (verse 1|) and by our life (verse 2|).

rwp@1John:5:6 @{This} (\houtos\). Jesus the Son of God (verse 5|). {He that came} (\ho elth“n\). Second aorist active articular participle of \erchomai\, referring to the Incarnation as a definite historic event, the preexistent Son of God "sent from heaven to do God's will" (Brooke). {By water and blood} (\di' hudatos kai haimatos\). Accompanied by (\dia\ used with the genitive both as instrument and accompaniment, as in strkjv@Galatians:5:13|) water (as at the baptism) and blood (as on the Cross). These two incidents in the Incarnation are singled out because at the baptism Jesus was formally set apart to his Messianic work by the coming of the Holy Spirit upon him and by the Father's audible witness, and because at the Cross his work reached its culmination ("It is finished," Jesus said). There are other theories that do not accord with the language and the facts. It is true that at the Cross both water and blood came out of the side of Jesus when pierced by the soldier, as John bore witness (John:19:34|), a complete refutation of the Docetic denial of an actual human body for Jesus and of the Cerinthian distinction between Jesus and Christ. There is thus a threefold witness to the fact of the Incarnation, but he repeats the twofold witness before giving the third. The repetition of both preposition (\en\ this time rather than \dia\) and the article (\t“i\ locative case) argues for two separate events with particular emphasis on the blood ("not only" \ouk monon\, "but" \all'\) which the Gnostics made light of or even denied. {It is the Spirit that beareth witness} (\to pneuma estin to marturoun\). Present active articular participle of \marture“\ with article with both subject and predicate, and so interchangeable as in strkjv@3:4|. The Holy Spirit is the third and the chief witness at the baptism of Jesus and all through his ministry. {Because} (\hoti\). Or declarative "that." Either makes sense. In strkjv@John:15:26| Jesus spoke of "the Spirit of truth" (whose characteristic is truth). Here John identifies the Spirit with truth as Jesus said of himself (John:14:6|) without denying personality for the Holy Spirit.

rwp@1John:5:7 @{For there are three who bear witness} (\hoti treis eisin hoi marturountes\). At this point the Latin Vulgate gives the words in the Textus Receptus, found in no Greek MS. save two late cursives (162 in the Vatican Library of the fifteenth century, 34 of the sixteenth century in Trinity College, Dublin). Jerome did not have it. Cyprian applies the language of the Trinity and Priscillian has it. Erasmus did not have it in his first edition, but rashly offered to insert it if a single Greek MS. had it and 34 was produced with the insertion, as if made to order. The spurious addition is: \en t“i ouran“i ho patˆr, ho logos kai to hagion pneuma kai houtoi hoi treis hen eisin kai treis eisin hoi marturountes en tˆi gˆi\ (in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth). The last clause belongs to verse 8|. The fact and the doctrine of the Trinity do not depend on this spurious addition. Some Latin scribe caught up Cyprian's exegesis and wrote it on the margin of his text, and so it got into the Vulgate and finally into the Textus Receptus by the stupidity of Erasmus.

rwp@1Peter:2:10 @{Which in time past} (\hoi pote\). "Who once upon a time." {No people} (\ou laos\). This phrase from strkjv@Hosea:2:23|. Note use of \ou\ (not \oudeis\) with \laos\ like Hebrew negative. {Which had not obtained mercy} (\hoi ouk eleˆmenoi\). Perfect passive articular participle of \elee“\ and the emphatic negative \ou\, with which compare Paul's use of strkjv@Hosea:1; 2| in strkjv@Romans:9:25|, which may have been known to Peter or not. {But now have obtained mercy} (\nun de eleˆthentes\). Change to first aorist passive participle from "the long antecedent state" to "the single event of conversion which ended it" (Hort).

rwp@1Timothy:5:17 @{The elders that rule well} (\hoi kal“s proest“tes presbuteroi\). See verse 1| for ordinary sense of \presbuteros\ for "older man." But here of position in same sense as \episkopos\ (3:2|) as in strkjv@Titus:1:5| = \episkopos\ in verse 7|. Cf. Luke's use of \presbuteros\ (Acts:20:17|) = Paul's \episkopous\ (Acts:20:28|). \Proest“tes\ is second perfect active participle of \proistˆmi\ (intransitive use) for which see strkjv@3:4|. {Let be counted worthy} (\axiousth“san\). Present passive imperative of \axio“\, to deem worthy (2Thessalonians:1:11|). With genitive case here. {Of double honour} (\diplˆs timˆs\). Old and common contract adjective (\diploos\, two-fold, in opposition to \haploos\, single fold). But why "of double honour"? See strkjv@6:1| for "of all honour." White suggests "remuneration" rather than "honour" for \timˆs\ (a common use for price or pay). Liddon proposes "honorarium" (both honour and pay and so "double"). Wetstein gives numerous examples of soldiers receiving double pay for unusual services. Some suggest twice the pay given the enrolled widows. {Especially those who labour in word and teaching} (\malista hoi kopi“ntes en log“i kai didaskaliƒi\). Either those who work hard or toil (usual meaning of \kopia“\, strkjv@2Timothy:2:6|) in preaching and teaching (most probable meaning. See verse 18|) or those who teach and preach and not merely preside (a doubtful distinction in "elders" at this time). See strkjv@Titus:1:8f|. See both \kopia“\ and \proistamai\ used for same men (elders) in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:12| and the use of \kopia“\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:10; strkjv@16:16|.

rwp@2Corinthians:8:2 @{Proof} (\dokimˆi\). Tests as of metals as in strkjv@2:9|. {Abundance} (\perisseia\). Late word from \perisseu“\, to overflow. {Their deep poverty} (\hˆ kata bathous pt“cheia aut“n\). \Pt“cheia\ is old word from \pt“cheu“\, to be a beggar, as of Jesus in strkjv@8:9| (from \pt“chos\, cowering in fear and poverty, as in strkjv@Luke:14:13|, but ennobled by Christ as in strkjv@Matthew:5:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9|). Poverty down deep. Strabo (LX 419) has \kata bathous\, down to the bottom. {Liberality} (\haplotˆtos\). From \haplous\, single, simple (Matthew:6:22|). "The passage from single-mindedness or simplicity to liberality is not quite obvious" (Plummer). Perhaps "heartiness" supplies the connecting link. See also strkjv@9:11-13|.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:2 @{I know a man} (\oida anthr“pon\). Paul singles out one incident of ecstasy in his own experience that he declines to describe. He alludes to it in this indirect way as if it were some other personality. {Fourteen years ago} (\pro et“n dekatessar“n\). Idiomatic way of putting it, the preposition \pro\ (before) before the date (Robertson, _Grammar, p. 621f.) as in strkjv@John:12:1|. The date was probably while Paul was at Tarsus (Acts:9:30; strkjv@11:25|). We have no details of that period. {Caught up} (\harpagenta\). Second aorist passive participle of \harpaz“\, to seize (see on strkjv@Matthew:11:12|). {Even to the third heaven} (\he“s tritou ouranou\). It is unlikely that Paul alludes to the idea of seven heavens held by some Jews (_Test. of the Twelve Pat._, Levi ii. iii.). He seems to mean the highest heaven where God is (Plummer).

rwp@Info_2John @ SECOND JOHN ABOUT A.D. 85 TO 90 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION There is little to add to what was said about the First Epistle except that here the author terms himself "the elder" (\ho presbuteros\) and writes to "the elect lady" (\eklektˆi kuriƒi\). There is dispute about both of these titles. Some hold that it is the mythical "presbyter John" of whom Papias may speak, if so understood, but whose very existence is disproved by Dom Chapman in _John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel_ (1911). Peter the apostle (1Peter:1:1|) calls himself "fellow-elder" (\sunpresbuteros\) with the other elders (1Peter:5:1|). The word referred originally to age (Luke:15:25|), then to rank or office as in the Sanhedrin (Matthew:16:21; strkjv@Acts:6:12|) and in the Christian churches (Acts:11:30; strkjv@20:17; strkjv@1Timothy:5:17,19|) as here also. A few even deny that the author is the same as in the First Epistle of John, but just an imitator. But the bulk of modern scholarly opinion agrees that the same man wrote all three Epistles and the Fourth Gospel (the Beloved Disciple, and many still say the Apostle John) whatever is true of the Apocalypse. There is no way of deciding whether "the elect lady" is a woman or a church. The obvious way of taking it is to a woman of distinction in one of the churches, as is true of "the co-elect lady in Babylon" (1Peter:5:13|), Peter's wife, who travelled with him (1Corinthians:9:5|). Some even take \kuria\ to be the name of the lady (Cyria). Some also take it to be "Eklecta the lady." Dr. Findlay (_Fellowship in the Life Eternal_, p. 31) holds that Pergamum is the church to which the letter was sent. The same commentaries treat I, II, and III John as a rule, though Poggel has a book on II, III John (1896) and Bresky (1906) has _Das Verhaltnis des Zweiten Johannesbriefes zum dritten_. Dr. J. Rendel Harris has an interesting article in _The Expositor_ of London for March, 1901, on "The Problem of the Address to the Second Epistle of John," in which he argues from papyri examples that \kuria\ here means "my dear" or "my lady." But Findlay (_Fellowship in the Life Eternal_, p. 26) argues that "the qualifying adjunct 'elect' lifts us into the region of Christian calling and dignity." It is not certain that II John was written after I John, though probable. Origen rejected it and the Peshitta Syriac does not have II and III John. strkjv@2John:1:1 @{And her children} (\kai tois teknois autˆs\). As with \eklektˆ kuria\, so here \tekna\ may be understood either literally as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:4|, or spiritually, as in strkjv@Galatians:4:19,25; strkjv@1Timothy:1:2|. For the spiritual sense in \teknia\ see strkjv@1John:2:1,12|. {Whom} (\hous\). Masculine accusative plural, though \teknois\ is neuter plural (dative), construction according to sense, not according to grammatical gender, "embracing the mother and the children of both sexes" (Vincent). See thus \hous\ in strkjv@Galatians:4:19|. {I} (\Eg“\). Though \ho presbuteros\ is third person, he passes at once after the Greek idiom to the first and there is also special emphasis here in the use of \agap“\ with the addition of \en alˆtheiƒi\ (in truth, in the highest sphere, as in strkjv@John:17:19; strkjv@3John:1:1|) and \ouk eg“ monos\ (not I only, "not I alone"). Brooke argues that this language is unsuitable if to a single family and not to a church. But Paul employs this very phrase in sending greetings to Prisca and Aquila (Romans:16:4|). {That know} (\hoi egn“kotes\). Perfect active articular participle of \gin“sk“\, "those that have come to know and still know."

rwp@Info_2Peter @ THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER ABOUT A.D. 66 OR 67 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION MOST DOUBTFUL NEW TESTAMENT BOOK Every book in the New Testament is challenged by some one, as indeed the historicity of Jesus Christ himself is and the very existence of God. But it is true that more modern scholars deny the genuineness of II Peter than that of any single book in the canon. This is done by men like F. H. Chase, J. B. Mayor, and R. D. Strachan, who are followers of Christ as Lord and Saviour. One has to admit that the case concerning II Peter has problems of peculiar difficulty that call for careful consideration and balanced judgment. One other word needs to be said, which is that an adverse decision against the authenticity of II Peter stands by itself and does not affect the genuineness of the other books. It is easy to take an extreme position for or against it without full knowledge of all the evidence.

rwp@2Peter:3:18 @{But grow} (\auxanete de\). Present active imperative of \auxan“\, in contrast with such a fate pictured in verse 17|, "but keep on growing." {In the grace and knowledge} (\en chariti kai gn“sei\). Locative case with \en\. Grow in both. Keep it up. See on ¯1:1| for the idiomatic use of the single article (\tou\) here, "of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." {To him} (\aut“i\). To Christ. {For ever} (\eis hˆmeran ai“nos\). "Unto the day of eternity." Songs:Sirach strkjv@18:9f. One of the various ways of expressing eternity by the use of \ai“n\. Songs:\eis ton ai“na\ in strkjv@John:6:5; strkjv@12:34|.

rwp@Info_Acts @ SOURCES OF THE ACTS Beyond a doubt Luke employed a variety of sources for this great history as he did for the Gospel (Luke:1:1-4|). In fact, Cadbury argues that this Prologue was meant to apply to the Acts also as Volume II whether he intended to write a third volume or not. Certainly we are entitled to say that Luke used the same historical method for Acts. Some of these sources are easy to see. Luke had his own personal experience for the "we" sections. Then he had the benefit of Paul's own notes or suggestions for all that portion where Paul figures from chapters 8 to 28, since Luke was apparently with Paul in Rome when he finished the Book. This would include Paul's sermons and addresses which Luke gives unless one wishes to say, as some do, that Luke followed the style of Thucydides and composed the kind of addresses that he thought Paul would make. I see no evidence of that for each address differs from the others and suits precisely the occasion when it was delivered. The ancients frequently employed shorthand and Paul may have preserved notes of his addresses. Prof. C. C. Torrey, of Yale University, argues in his _Composition and Date of Acts_ (1916) that Luke used an Aramaic document for the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. There is an Aramaic element in certain portions of these chapters, but nothing like so pronounced as in Luke 1 and 2 after strkjv@Luke:1:1-4|. It cannot be said that Torrey has made out his case for such a single document. Luke may have had several such documents besides access to others familiar with the early days of the work in Jerusalem. There was Simon Peter whom Paul visited for two weeks in Jerusalem (Galatians:1:18|) besides other points of contact with him in Jerusalem and Antioch (Acts:15| and strkjv@Galatians:2|). There was also Barnabas who was early Paul's friend (Acts:9:27|) and who knew the beginnings as few did (Acts:4:36f.|). Besides many others it is to be observed that Paul with Luke made a special visit to Caesarea where he spent a week with the gifted Philip and his daughters with the gift of prophecy (Acts:21:8f.|). But with all the inevitable variety of sources for the information needed to cover the wide field of the Book of Acts the same mind has manifestly worked through it and it is the same style all through that appears in the "we" sections where the writer is confessedly a companion of Paul. No other companion of Paul carries this claim for the authorship and no other was a physician and no author has the external evidence from early writers.

rwp@Acts:2:3 @{Parting asunder} (\diamerizomenai\). Present middle (or passive) participle of \diameriz“\, old verb, to cleave asunder, to cut in pieces as a butcher does meat (aorist passive in strkjv@Luke:11:17f.|). Songs:middle here would mean, parting themselves asunder or distributing themselves. The passive voice would be "being distributed." The middle is probably correct and means that "the fire-like appearance presented itself at first, as it were, in a single body, and then suddenly parted in this direction and that; so that a portion of it rested on each of those present" (Hackett). The idea is not that each tongue was cloven, but each separate tongue looked like fire, not real fire, but looking like (\h“sei\, as if) fire. The audible sign is followed by a visible one (Knowling). "Fire had always been, with the Jews, the symbol of the Divine presence (cf. strkjv@Exodus:3:2; strkjv@Deuteronomy:5:4|). No symbol could be more fitting to express the Spirit's purifying energy and refining energy" (Furneaux). The Baptist had predicted a baptizing by the Messiah in the Holy Spirit and in fire (Matthew:3:11|). {It sat} (\ekathisen\). Singular verb here, though plural \“pthˆsan\ with tongues (\gl“ssai\). A tongue that looked like fire sat upon each one.

rwp@Acts:2:21 @{Shall call on} (\epikalesˆtai\). First aorist middle subjunctive of \epikale“\, common verb, to call to, middle voice for oneself in need. Indefinite relative clause with \ean\ and so subjunctive, punctiliar idea, in any single case, and so aorist.

rwp@Acts:2:46 @{With one accord in the temple} (\homothumadon en t“i hier“i\). See on ¯1:14| for \homothumadon\. They were still worshipping in the temple for no breach had yet come between Christians and Jews. Daily they were here and daily breaking bread at home (\kat' oikon\) which looks like the regular meal. {They did take their food} (\metelambanon trophˆs\). Imperfect tense again and clearly referring to the regular meals at home. Does it refer also to the possible \agapai\ or to the Lord's Supper afterwards as they had common meals "from house to house" (\kat' oikon\)? We know there were local churches in the homes where they had "worship rooms," the church in the house. At any rate it was "with singleness" (\aphelotˆti\) of heart. The word occurs only here in the N.T., though a late _Koin‚_ word (papyri). It comes from \aphelˆs\, free from rock (\phelleus\ is stony ground), smooth. The old form was \apheleia\.

rwp@Acts:4:37 @{Having a held} (\huparchontos aut“i agrou\). Genitive absolute with present active participle of \huparch“\ and dative of possession. {Sold it and brought} (\p“lˆsas ˆnegken\). Aorist active participle of \p“le“\ and second aorist active indicative of \pher“\ because a single definite instance. Songs:also with \ethˆken\ (laid), first aorist active.

rwp@Acts:5:1 @{Sold} (\ep“lˆsen\). Aorist active indicative again, for a single case.

rwp@Acts:10:33 @{And thou hast well done that thou art come} (\su te kal“s epoiˆsas paragenomenos\). "And thou didst well in coming." A regular formula for expressing thanks as in strkjv@Phillipians:4:14; strkjv@3John:1:6; strkjv@2Peter:1:19|. The participle completes the idea of \kal“s poie“\ neatly. Cornelius commends Peter for his courage in breaking away from Jewish custom and takes no offence at the implied superiority of the Jews over the Gentiles. Cornelius and his circle of kinsmen and close friends are prepared soil for a new era in the history of Christianity. The Samaritans were now nominal Jews and the Ethiopian eunuch was a single case, but here Peter the chief apostle, not Philip the preaching deacon (evangelist), was involved. It was a crisis. Cornelius reveals an open mind for the message of God through Peter. {Commanded thee} (\prostetagmena soi\). Perfect passive participle with the dative case (\soi\). Cornelius is a military man and he employs a military term (\prostass“\, old word to command). He is ready for orders from the Lord.

rwp@Acts:12:10 @{When they were past} (\dielthontes\). Second aorist active participle of \dierchomai\, transitive with \dia\ in composition. {The first and the second ward} (\pr“tˆn phulakˆn kai deuteran\). It is not clear to what this language refers. Some take it to mean single soldiers, using \phulakˆn\ in the sense of a guard (one before the door, one at the iron gate). But it seems hardly likely that the two soldiers with whom Peter had been stationed are meant. Probably the "first ward" means the two soldiers of the quaternion stationed by the door and the second ward some other soldiers, not part of the sixteen, further on in the prison by the iron gate. However understood, the difficulties of escape are made plain. {Unto the iron gate that leadeth into the city} (\epi tˆn pulˆn tˆn sidˆrƒn tˆn pherousan eis tˆn polin\). Note the triple use of the article (the gate the iron one the one leading into the city). For this resumptive use of the article see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 762, 764. This iron gate may have opened from a court out into the street and effectually barred escape. {Opened to them} (\ˆnoigˆ autois\). Second aorist passive indicative of \anoig“\, the usual later form though \ˆnoichthˆ\ (first aorist passive) occurs also, was opened. {Of its own accord} (\automatˆ\). Old compound adjective (\autos\, self, obsolete \ma“\, to desire eagerly, feminine form though masculine \automatos\ also used as feminine). In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:4:28|. It was a strange experience for Peter. The Codex Bezae adds here "went down the seven steps" (\katebˆsan tous hepta bathmous\), an interesting detail that adds to the picture. {One street} (\rhumˆn mian\). The angel saw Peter through one of the narrow streets and then left him. We have no means of knowing precisely the location of the prison in the city. On "departed" (\apestˆ\) see on verse ¯7|.

rwp@Acts:14:10 @{Upright} (\orthos\). Predicate adjective. In this sense Galen and Hippocrates frequently use \orthos\ (erect, straight). Paul spoke in a loud (\megalˆi\) voice so that all could hear and know. {He leaped up and walked} (\hˆlato kai periepatei\). Rather, He leaped up with a single bound and began to walk. The second aorist middle indicative (with first aorist vowel \a\) of \hallomai\ (late verb, in papyri) and inchoative imperfect active of \peripate“\, common verb to walk around. This graphic picture is concealed by the usual English rendering. It is possible that Luke obtained the vivid report of this incident from Timothy who may have witnessed it and who was probably converted during Paul's stay here (16:3|). His father was a prominent Greek and his mother Eunice, possibly a widow, may have lived here with her mother Lois (2Timothy:1:5|).

rwp@Acts:14:17 @{And yet} (\kaitoi\). Old Greek compound particle (\kai toi\). In the N.T. twice only, once with finite verb as here, once with the participle (Hebrews:4:3|). {Without witness} (\amarturon\). Old adjective (\a\ privative and \martus\, witness), only here in the N.T. {Left} (\aphˆken\). First aorist active (\k\ aorist indicative of \aphiˆmi\). {In that he did good} (\agathourg“n\). Present active causal participle of \agathourge“\, late and rare verb (also \agathoerge“\ strkjv@1Timothy:6:18|), reading of the oldest MSS. here for \agathopoie“\, to do good. Note two other causal participles here parallel with \agathourg“n\, viz., \didous\ ("giving you") present active of \did“mi, empipl“n\ ("filling") present active of \empimpla“\ (late form of \empimplˆmi\). This witness to God (his doing good, giving rains and fruitful seasons, filling your hearts with food and gladness) they could receive without the help of the Old Testament revelation (Romans:1:20|). Zeus was regarded as the god of rain (Jupiter Pluvius) and Paul claims the rain and the fruitful (\karpophorous, karpos\, and \pher“\, fruit bearing, old word, here alone in N.T.) seasons as coming from God. Lycaonia was often dry and it would be an appropriate item. "Mercury, as the God of merchandise, was also the dispenser of food" (Vincent). Paul does not talk about laws of nature as if they governed themselves, but he sees the living God "behind the drama of the physical world" (Furneaux). These simple country people could grasp his ideas as he claims everything for the one true God. {Gladness} (\euphrosunˆs\). Old word from \euphr“n\ (\eu\ and \phrˆn\), good cheer. In the N.T. only strkjv@Acts:2:28| and here. Cheerfulness should be our normal attitude when we consider God's goodness. Paul does not here mention Christ because he had the single definite purpose to dissuade them from worshipping Barnabas and himself.

rwp@Acts:20:1 @{After the uproar was ceased} (\meta to pausasthai ton thorubon\). Literally, after the ceasing (accusative of articular aorist middle infinitive of \pau“\, to make cease) as to the uproar (accusative of general reference). Noise and riot, already in strkjv@Matthew:26:5; strkjv@27:24; strkjv@Mark:5:38; strkjv@14:2|; and see in strkjv@Acts:21:34; strkjv@24:18|. Pictures the whole incident as bustle and confusion. {Took leave} (\aspamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \aspazomai\, old verb from \a\ intensive and \spa“\, to draw, to draw to oneself in embrace either in greeting or farewell. Here it is in farewell as in strkjv@21:6|. Salutation in strkjv@21:7,19|. {Departed for to go into Macedonia} (\exˆlthen poreuesthai eis Makedonian\). Both verbs, single act and then process. Luke here condenses what was probably a whole year of Paul's life and work as we gather from II Corinthians, one of Paul's "weighty and powerful" letters as his enemies called them (2Corinthians:10:10|). "This epistle more than any other is a revelation of S. Paul's own heart: it is his spiritual autobiography and _apologia pro vita sua_."

rwp@Acts:25:3 @{Asking favour against him} (\aitoumenoi charin kat' autou\). A favour to themselves (middle voice), not to Paul, but "against" (\kat'\, down, against) him. {That he would send for} (\hop“s metapempsˆtai\). First aorist middle subjunctive of \metapemp“\ (see strkjv@24:24,26|) with final particle \hop“s\ like \hina\. Aorist tense for single case. {Laying wait} (\enedran poiountes\). See on ¯23:16| for the word \enedra\. Old idiom (Thucydides) for laying a plot or ambush as here. Only these two uses of \enedra\ in N.T. Two years before the Sanhedrin had agreed to the plot of the forty conspirators. Now they propose one on their own initiative. {On the way} (\kata tˆn hodon\). Down along, up and down along the way. Plenty of opportunity would occur between Caesarea and Jerusalem for ambush and surprise attacks.

rwp@Acts:25:11 @{If I am a wrong-doer} (\ei men oun adik“\). Condition of the first class with \ei\ and the present active indicative of \adike“\ (\a\ privative and \dikˆ\): "If I am in the habit of doing injustice," assuming it to be true for the sake of argument. {And have committed anything worthy of death} (\kai axion thanatou pepracha\). Same condition with the difference in tense (\pepracha\, perfect active indicative) of a single case instead of a general habit. Assuming either or both Paul draws his conclusion. {I refuse not to die} (\ou paraitoumai to apothanein\). Old verb to ask alongside, to beg from, to deprecate, to refuse, to decline. See on ¯Luke:14:18f|. Josephus (_Life_, 29) has \thanein ou paraitoumai\. Here the articular second aorist active infinitive is in the accusative case the object of \paraitoumai\: "I do not beg off dying from myself." {But if none of these things is} (\ei de ouden estin\). \De\ here is contrasted with \men\ just before. No word for "true" in the Greek. \Estin\ ("is") in the Greek here means "exists." Same condition (first class, assumed as true). {Whereof these accuse me} (\h“n houtoi katˆgorousin mou\). Genitive of relative \hon\ by attraction from \ha\ (accusative with \katˆgorousin\) to case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\ ("of these things"). \Mou\ is genitive of person after \katˆgorousin\. {No man can give me up to them} (\oudeis me dunatai autois charisasthai\). "Can" legally. Paul is a Roman citizen and not even Festus can make a free gift (\charisasthai\) of Paul to the Sanhedrin. {I appeal unto Caesar} (\Kaisara epikaloumai\). Technical phrase like Latin _Caesarem appello_. Originally the Roman law allowed an appeal from the magistrate to the people (_provocatio ad populum_), but the emperor represented the people and so the appeal to Caesar was the right of every Roman citizen. Paul had crossed the Rubicon on this point and so took his case out of the hands of dilatory provincial justice (really injustice). Roman citizens could make this appeal in capital offences. There would be expense connected with it, but better that with some hope than delay and certain death in Jerusalem. Festus was no better than Felix in his vacillation and desire to curry favour with the Jews at Paul's expense. No doubt Paul's long desire to see Rome (19:21; strkjv@Romans:15:22-28|) and the promise of Jesus that he would see Rome (Acts:23:11|) played some part in Paul's decision. But he made it reluctantly for he says in Rome (Acts:28:19|): "I was constrained to appeal." But acquittal at the hands of Festus with the hope of going to Rome as a free man had vanished.

rwp@Acts:26:28 @{With but little persuasion thou wouldest fain make me a Christian} (\en olig“i me peitheis Christianon poiˆsai\). The Authorized rendering is impossible: "Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian." \En olig“i\ does not mean "almost." That would require \oligou, par' oligon\, or \dei oligou\. It is not clear, however, precisely what \en oligoi\ does mean. It may refer to time (in little time) or a short cut, but that does not suit well \en megal“i\ in verse 29|. Tyndale and Crammer rendered it "somewhat" (in small measure or degree). There are, alas, many "somewhat" Christians. Most likely the idea is "in (or with) small effort you are trying to persuade (\peitheis\, conative present active indicative) me in order to make me a Christian." This takes the infinitive \poiˆsai\ to be purpose (Page renders it by "so as") and thus avoids trying to make \poiˆsai\ like \genesthai\ (become). The aorist is punctiliar action for single act, not "perfect." The tone of Agrippa is ironical, but not unpleasant. He pushes it aside with a shrug of the shoulders. The use of "Christian" is natural here as in the other two instances (11:26; strkjv@1Peter:4:16|).

rwp@Colossians:3:22 @{Your masters according to the flesh} (\tois kata sarka kuriois\). "Lords" really, but these Christian slaves (\douloi\) had Christ as lord, but even so they were to obey their lords in the flesh. {Not with eye-service} (\mˆ en ophthalmodouliais\). Another Pauline word (here only and strkjv@Ephesians:6:6|), elsewhere only in Christian writers after Paul, an easy and expressive compound, service while the master's eye was on the slave and no longer. {Men-pleasers} (\anthr“pareskoi\). Late compound only in LXX and Paul (here and strkjv@Ephesians:6:6|). {In singleness of heart} (\en haplotˆti kardias\). Songs:in strkjv@Ephesians:6:5|. Old and expressive word from \haplous\ (simple, without folds). See strkjv@2Corinthians:11:3|. {Fearing the Lord} (\phoboumenoi ton Kurion\). Rather than the lords according to the flesh.

rwp@Ephesians:4:1 @{Wherewith ye were called} (\hˆs eklˆthˆte\). Attraction of the relative \hˆs\ to the genitive of the antecedent \klˆse“s\ (calling) from the cognate accusative \hˆn\ with \eklˆthˆte\ (first aorist passive indicative of \kale“\, to call. For the list of virtues here see strkjv@Colossians:3:12|. To \anechomenoi allˆl“n\ (Colossians:3:13|) Paul here adds "in love" (\en agapˆi\), singled out in strkjv@Colossians:3:14|.

rwp@Galatians:1:7 @{Which is not another} (\ho ouk estin allo\). It is no "gospel" (good news) at all, but a yoke of bondage to the law and the abolition of grace. There is but one gospel and that is of grace, not works. The relative \ho\ (which) refers to \heteron euaggelion\ (a different gospel) "taken as a single term and designating the erroneous teachings of the Judaizers" (Burton). {Only} (\ei mˆ\). Literally, "except," that is, "Except in this sense," "in that it is an attempt to pervert the one true gospel" (Lightfoot). {Who disturb you} (\hoi tarassontes\). The disturbers. This very verb \tarass“\ is used in strkjv@Acts:17:8| of the Jews in Thessalonica who "disturbed" the politarchs and the people about Paul. {Would pervert} (\thelontes metastrepsai\). "Wish to turn about," change completely as in strkjv@Acts:2:20; strkjv@James:4:9|. The very existence of the gospel of Christ was at stake.

rwp@Hebrews:1:5 @{Unto which} (\Tini\). "To which individual angel." As a class angels are called sons of God (Elohim) (Psalms:29:1|), but no single angel is called God's Son like the Messiah in strkjv@Psalms:2:7|. Dods takes "have I begotten thee" (\gegennˆka se\, perfect active indicative of \genna“\) to refer to the resurrection and ascension while others refer it to the incarnation. {And again} (\kai palin\). This quotation is from strkjv@2Samuel:7:14|. Note the use of \eis\ in the predicate with the sense of "as" like the Hebrew (LXX idiom), not preserved in the English. See strkjv@Matthew:19:5; strkjv@Luke:2:34|. Like Old English "to" or "for." See strkjv@2Corinthians:6:18; strkjv@Revelation:21:7| for the same passage applied to relation between God and Christians while here it is treated as Messianic.

rwp@Hebrews:2:11 @{He that sanctifieth} (\ho hagiaz“n\). Present active articular participle of \hagiaz“\. Jesus is the sanctifier (9:13f.; strkjv@13:12|). {They that are sanctified} (\hoi hagiazomenoi\). Present passive articular participle of \hagiaz“\. It is a process here as in strkjv@10:14|, not a single act, though in strkjv@10:10| the perfect passive indicative presents a completed state. {Of one} (\ex henos\). Referring to God as the Father of Jesus and of the "many sons" above (verse 10|) and in harmony with verse 14| below. Even before the incarnation Jesus had a kinship with men though we are not sons in the full sense that he is. {He is not ashamed} (\ouk epaischunetai\). Present passive indicative of \epaischunomai\, old compound (Romans:1:16|). Because of the common Father Jesus is not ashamed to own us as "brothers" (\adelphous\), unworthy sons though we be.

rwp@Hebrews:3:1 @{Holy brethren} (\adelphoi hagioi\). Only here in N.T., for \hagiois\ in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:27| only in late MSS. See strkjv@Hebrews:2:11| for same idea. First time the author makes direct appeal to the readers, though first person in strkjv@2:1|. {Partakers} (\metochoi\). See strkjv@Luke:5:7| for "partners" in the fishing, elsewhere in N.T. only in Hebrews (1:9; strkjv@6:4; strkjv@12:8|) in N.T. {Of a heavenly calling} (\klˆse“s epouraniou\). Only here in the N.T., though same idea in strkjv@9:15|. See \hˆ an“ klˆsis\ in strkjv@Phillipians:3:14| (the upward calling). The call comes from heaven and is to heaven in its appeal. {Consider} (\katanoˆsate\). First aorist active imperative of \katanoe“\, old compound verb (\kata, nous\), to put the mind down on a thing, to fix the mind on as in strkjv@Matthew:7:3; strkjv@Luke:12:24|. {Even Jesus} (\Iˆsoun\). No "even" in the Greek, just like the idiom in strkjv@2:9|, the human name held up with pride. {The Apostle and High Priest of our confession} (\ton apostolon kai archierea tˆs homologias hˆm“n\). In descriptive apposition with \Iˆsoun\ and note the single article \ton\. This is the only time in the N.T. that Jesus is called \apostolos\, though he often used \apostell“\ of God's sending him forth as in strkjv@John:17:3| (\apesteilas\). This verb is used of Moses as sent by God (Exodus:3:10|). Moffatt notes that \apostolos\ is Ionic for \presbeutˆs\, "not a mere envoy, but an ambassador or representative sent with powers." The author has already termed Jesus high priest (2:17|). For \homologia\ (confession) see strkjv@2Corinthians:9:13; strkjv@1Timothy:6:12|. These Hebrew Christians had confessed Jesus as their Apostle and High Priest. They do not begin to understand what Jesus is and means if they are tempted to give him up. The word runs through Hebrews with an urgent note for fidelity (4:14; strkjv@10:23|). See \homologe“\ (\homon\, same, \leg“\, say), to say the same thing, to agree, to confess, to profess.

rwp@Hebrews:6:9 @{But we are persuaded} (\pepeismetha de\). Perfect passive indicative of \peith“\, literary plural. Note Paul's use of \pepeismai\ in strkjv@2Timothy:1:12|. {Better things} (\ta kreissona\). "The better things" than those pictures in strkjv@6:4-8|. {That accompany salvation} (\echomena s“tˆrias\). "Things holding on to salvation" (Mark:1:38|), a common Greek phrase \echomena\, present middle participle of \ech“\. {Though we thus speak} (\ei kai hout“s laloumen\). Concessive condition of the first class. Explanatory, not apologetic, of his plain talk. {Not unrighteous to forget} (\ou gar adikos epilathesthai\). Second aorist middle infinitive of \epilanthan“\ with genitive case (\ergou\, work, \agapˆs\, love). But even God cannot remember what they did not do. {In that ye ministered and still do minister} (\diakonˆsantes kai diakonountes\). First aorist active and present active participle of the one verb \diakone“\, the sole difference being the tense (single act _aorist_, repeated acts _present_).

rwp@Hebrews:6:18 @{By two immutable things} (\dia duo pragmat“n ametathet“n\). See verse 17|. God's promise and God's oath, both unchangeable. {In which it is impossible for God to lie} (\en hois adunaton pseusasthai theon\). Put this "impossibility" by that in verses 4-6|. {Theon} is accusative of general reference with \pseusasthai\, first aorist middle infinitive of \pseudomai\. {That we may have} (\hina ech“men\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \ech“\, "that we may keep on having." {Strong consolation} (\ischuran paraklˆsin\). "Strong encouragement" by those two immutable things. {Who have fled for refuge} (\hoi kataphugontes\). Articular effective second aorist active participle of \katapheug“\, old verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:14:6|. The word occurs for fleeing to the cities of refuge (Deuteronomy:4:42; strkjv@19:5; strkjv@Joshua:20:9|). {To lay hold of} (\kratˆsai\). First aorist active (single act) infinitive of \krate“\ in contrast with present tense in strkjv@4:14| (hold fast). {Set before us} (\prokeimenˆs\). Placed before us as the goal. See this same participle used with the "joy" (\charas\) set before Jesus (12:2|).

rwp@Hebrews:10:12 @{When he had offered} (\prosenegkas\). Second aorist active participle (with first aorist ending \-as\ in place of \-on\) of \prospher“\, single act in contrast to present participle \prospher“n\ above. {One sacrifice} (\mian thusian\). This the main point. The one sacrifice does the work that the many failed to do. One wonders how priests who claim that the "mass" is the sacrifice of Christ's body repeated explain this verse. {For ever} (\eis to diˆnekes\). Can be construed either with \mian thusian\ or with \ekathisen\ (sat down). See strkjv@1:3| for \ekathisen\.

rwp@Hebrews:12:1 @{Therefore} (\toigaroun\). Triple compound inferential participle (\toi, gar, oun\) like the German _doch denn nun_, a conclusion of emphasis, old particle, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:8|. There should be no chapter division here, since strkjv@12:1-3| really is the climax in the whole argument about the better promises (10:19-12:3|) with a passionate appeal for loyalty to Christ. {Us also} (\kai hˆmeis\). We as well as "these all" of strkjv@11:39| and all the more because of the "something better" given us in the actual coming of Christ. {Compassed about} (\echontes perikeimenon\). Literally, "having (\echontes\, present active participle of \ech“\) lying around us" (\perikeimenon\, present middle participle of \perikeimai\, old verb as in strkjv@Luke:17:2|). {Cloud of witnesses} (\nephos martur“n\). Old word (Latin _nubes_), here only in the N.T., for vast mass of clouds. \Nephelˆ\ is a single cloud. The metaphor refers to the great amphitheatre with the arena for the runners and the tiers upon tiers of seats rising up like a cloud. The \martures\ here are not mere spectators (\theatai\), but testifiers (witnesses) who testify from their own experience (11:2,4,5,33,39|) to God's fulfilling his promises as shown in chapter strkjv@Hebrews:11|. {Laying aside} (\apothemenoi\). Second aorist-middle (indirect, from ourselves) participle of \apotithˆmi\, old verb as in strkjv@Colossians:3:8| (laying off old clothes). The runners ran in the stadium nearly naked. {Every weight} (\ogkon panta\). Old word (kin to \enegkein, pher“\) like \phortos, baros\. Here every encumbrance that handicaps like doubt, pride, sloth, anything. No trailing garment to hinder or trip one. {The sin which doth so easily beset us} (\tˆn euperistaton hamartian\). "The easily besetting sin." There are a dozen possible renderings of this double compound verbal from \eu\, well, and \periistˆmi\, to place around or to stand around (intransitive). The Vulgate has _circumstans nos peccatum_ (the sin standing around us). Probably this is the true idea here, "the easily encompassing (or surrounding) sin." In this case apostasy from Christ was that sin. In our cases it may be some other sin. The verbal adjective reminds one of the ring of wild beasts in the jungle that encircle the camp-fire at night each ready to pounce upon a careless victim. {Let us run} (\trech“men\). Present active volitive subjunctive of \trech“\, "let us keep on running." {With patience} (\di' hupomonˆs\). Not with impatience, doubt, or despair. {The race that is set before us} (\ton prokeimenon hˆmin ag“na\). Note the article and the present middle participle of \prokeimai\, old compound (already in strkjv@6:18|, and also in strkjv@12:2|). Dative case (\hˆmin\) of personal interest.

rwp@James:1:3 @{Knowing} (\gin“skontes\). Present active participle of \gin“sk“\ (experimental knowledge, the only way of getting this view of "trials" as "all joy"). {The proof} (\to dokimion\). Now known (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 259ff.) from the papyri examples of \dokimios\ as an adjective in the same sense (good gold, standard gold) as \dokimos\ proved or tested (James:1:12|). The use of \to dokimion\ (neuter article with neuter single adjective) here and in strkjv@1Peter:1:7|, clearly means "the genuine element in your faith," not "crucible" nor "proving." Your faith like gold stands the test of fire and is approved as standard. James here, as in verse 6; strkjv@2:1; strkjv@5:15|, regards faith (\pistis\) like Paul "as the very foundation of religion" (Mayor). {Worketh} (\katergazetai\). Present (durative) middle indicative of the compound verb with the perfective sense of \kata\ as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:12|, which see. {Patience} (\hupomonˆn\). Old and common word for remaining under (\hupomen“\), "staying power" (Ropes), as in strkjv@Colossians:1:11|.

rwp@James:1:5 @{Lacketh wisdom} (\leipetai sophias\). Condition of first class, assumed as true, \ei\ and present passive indicative of \leip“\ to be destitute of, with ablative case \sophias\. "If any one falls short of wisdom." A banking figure, to have a shortage of wisdom (not just knowledge, \gn“se“s\, but wisdom \sophias\, the practical use of knowledge). {Let him ask} (\aiteit“\). Present active imperative of \aite“\, "let him keep on asking." {Of God} (\para tou theou\). "From (from beside) God," ablative case with \para\. Liberally (\hapl“s\). This old adverb occurs here only in the N.T. (from \haplous\, single-fold, strkjv@Matthew:6:22|, and \haplotˆs\, simplicity, generosity, is common-- strkjv@2Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@Romans:12:8|). But the adverb is common in the papyri by way of emphasis as simply or at all (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). Mayor argues for the sense of "unconditionally" (the logical moral sense) while Hort and Ropes agree and suggest "graciously." The other sense of "abundantly" or "liberally" suits the idea in \haplotˆs\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@Romans:12:8|, but no example of the adverb in this sense has been found unless this is one here. See strkjv@Isaiah:55:1| for the idea of God's gracious giving and the case of Solomon (1Kings:3:9-12; strkjv@Proverbs:2:3|). {Upbraideth not} (\mˆ oneidizontos\). Present active participle of \oneidiz“\ (old verb to reproach, to cast in one's teeth, strkjv@Matthew:5:11|) in the ablative case like \didontos\ agreeing with \theou\ and with the usual negative of the participle (\me\). This is the negative statement of \didontos hapl“s\ (giving graciously). The evil habit of giving stinging words along with the money is illustrated in Sirach strkjv@41:22 and Plutarch (_Deuteronomy:adulat._, p. 64A). ] Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:4:16|. {And it shall be given him} (\kai dothˆsetai aut“i\). First future passive of \did“mi\, a blessed promise in accord with the words of Jesus (Matthew:7:7,11; strkjv@Luke:11:13|), meaning here not only "wisdom," but all good gifts, including the Holy Spirit. There are frequent reminiscences of the words of Jesus in this Epistle.

rwp@John:5:47 @{His writings} (\tois ekeinou grammasin\). Dative case with \pistuete\. See strkjv@Luke:16:31| for a like argument. The authority of Moses was the greatest of all for Jews. There is a contrast also between {writings} (\grammasin\, from \graph“\, to write) and {words} (\rˆmasin\, from \eipon\). \Gramma\ may mean the mere letter as opposed to spirit (2Corinthians:3:6; strkjv@Romans:2:27,29; strkjv@7:6|), a debtor's bond (Luke:16:6f.|), letters or learning (John:7:15; strkjv@Acts:26:24|) like \agrammatoi\ for unlearned (Acts:4:13|), merely written characters (Luke:23:38; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:7; strkjv@Galatians:6:11|), official communications (Acts:28:21|), once \hiera grammata\ for the sacred writings (2Timothy:3:15|) instead of the more usual \hai hagiai graphai\. \Graphˆ\ is used also for a single passage (Mark:12:10|), but \biblion\ for a book or roll (Luke:4:17|) or \biblos\ (Luke:20:42|). Jesus clearly states the fact that Moses wrote portions of the Old Testament, what portions he does not say. See also strkjv@Luke:24:27,44| for the same idea. There was no answer from the rabbis to this conclusion of Christ. The scribes (\hoi grammateis\) made copies according to the letter (\kata to gramma\).

rwp@John:6:27 @{Work not for} (\mˆ ergazesthe\). Prohibition with \mˆ\ and present middle imperative of \ergazomai\, old verb from \ergon\, work. {The meat} (\tˆn br“sin\). The act of eating (Romans:14:17|), corrosion (Matthew:6:19|), the thing eaten as here (2Corinthians:9:10|). See on ¯John:4:32|. {Which perisheth} (\tˆn apollumenˆn\). Present middle participle of \apollumi\. They were already hungry again. {Unto eternal life} (\eis z“ˆn ai“nion\). Mystical metaphor quite beyond this crowd hungry only for more loaves and fishes. Bernard thinks that John has here put together various sayings of Christ to make one discourse, a gratuitous interpretation. {Will give} (\d“sei\). Future active indicative of \did“mi\. The outcome is still future and will be decided by their attitude towards the Son of man (verse 51|). {For him the Father, even God, hath sealed} (\touton gar ho patˆr esphragisen ho theos\). Literally, "For this one the Father sealed, God." First aorist active indicative of \sphragiz“\, to seal. See elsewhere in strkjv@John:3:33| (attestation by man). Sealing by God is rare in N.T. (2Corinthians:1:22; strkjv@Ephesians:1:13; strkjv@4:30|). It is not clear to what item, if any single one, John refers when the Father set his seal of approval on the Son. It was done at his baptism when the Holy Spirit came upon him and the Father spoke to him. Cf. strkjv@5:37|.

rwp@John:6:28 @{What must we do?} (\Ti poi“men;\). Present active deliberative subjunctive of \poie“\, "What are we to do as a habit?" For the aorist subjunctive (\poiˆs“men\) in a like question for a single act see strkjv@Luke:3:10|. For the present indicative (\poioumen\) of inquiry concerning actual conduct see strkjv@John:11:47| (what are we doing?). {That we may work the works of God} (\hina ergaz“metha ta erga tou theou\). Final clause with \hina\ and the present middle subjunctive, "that we may go on working the works of God." There may have been an element of vague sincerity in this question in spite of their supercilious attitude.

rwp@John:8:17 @{Yea and in your law} (\kai en t“i nom“i de t“i humeter“i\). Same use of \kai--de\ as in verse 16|. They claimed possession of the law (7:49|) and so Jesus takes this turn in answer to the charge of single witness in verse 13|. He will use similar language (your law) in strkjv@10:34| in an _argumentum ad hominem_ as here in controversy with the Jews. In strkjv@15:24| to the apostles Jesus even says "in their law" in speaking of the hostile Jews plotting his death. He does not mean in either case to separate himself wholly from the Jews and the law, though in Matthew 5 he does show the superiority of his teaching to that of the law. For the Mosaic regulation about two witnesses see strkjv@Deuteronomy:17:6; strkjv@19:15|. This combined witness of two is not true just because they agree, unless true in fact separately. But if they disagree, the testimony falls to the ground. In this case the Father confirms the witness of the Son as Jesus had already shown (5:37|).

rwp@John:8:34 @{Every one that committeth sin is the bondservant of sin} (\pas ho poi“n tˆn hamartian doulos estin [tˆs hamartias]\). The Western class omits \tˆs hamartias\ (sin), but that is the idea anyhow. Note the use of \poi“n\ (present active participle, continuous habit or practice), not \poiˆsas\ (aorist active participle for single act), precisely as in strkjv@1John:3:4-8|. Note also strkjv@3:21| for \ho poi“n tˆn alˆtheian\ (the one who practises the truth). Sin, like the worst narcotic, is habit forming. Hence the problem today for criminologists for paroled or pardoned criminals nearly always go back to crime, sink again into sin, the slaves of sin. Xenophon has this notion of the slavery of sin (_Memor_. IV. 5. 3). Songs:Paul clearly in strkjv@Romans:6:17,20| "slaves of sin" (\douloi tˆs hamartias\).

rwp@John:9:21 @{But how he now seeth we know not} (\p“s de nun blepei ouk oidamen\). Concerning the third question they profess ignorance both as to the "how" (\p“s\) and the "who" (\tis\). {Opened} (\ˆnoixen\). First aorist active indicative with single augment of \anoig“\, same form as \ˆne“ixen\ (triple augment) in verse 17|. They were not witnesses of the cure and had the story only from the son as the Pharisees had. {He is of age} (\hˆlikian echei\). "He has maturity of age." He is an adult. A regular classical phrase in Plato, etc. The parents were wholly right and within their rights.

rwp@John:10:18 @{And I have power to take it again} (\kai exousian ech“ palin labein autˆn\). Note second aorist active infinitive in both cases (\theinai\ from \tithˆmi\ and \labein\ from \lamban“\), single acts. Recall strkjv@2:19| where Jesus said: "And in three days I will raise it up." He did not mean that he will raise himself from the dead independently of the Father as the active agent (Romans:8:11|). {I received from my Father} (\elabon para tou patros mou\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\. He always follows the Father's command (\entolˆ\) in all things (12:49f.; strkjv@14:31|). Songs:now he is doing the Father's will about his death and resurrection.

rwp@John:12:5 @{Sold} (\eprathˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \piprask“\, old verb to sell (Matthew:13:46|). {For three hundred pence} (\triakosi“n dˆnari“n\). Genitive of price. Same item in strkjv@Mark:14:5|, while in strkjv@Matthew:26:9| it is simply "for much" (\pollou\). But all three have "given to the poor" (\edothˆ pt“chois\). First aorist passive indicative of \did“mi\ with dative case \pt“chois\ (note absence of the article, poor people), real beggars, mendicants (Matthew:19:21; strkjv@Luke:14:13|). But only John singles out Judas as the one who made the protest against this waste of money while Mark says that "some" had indignation and Matthew has it that "the disciples" had indignation. Clearly Judas was the spokesman for the group who chimed in and agreed with his protest. The amount here spent by Mary (ten guineas) would equal a day labourer's wages for a year (Dods).

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE SAME AUTHOR FOR GOSPEL AND ACTS The author of Acts refers to the Gospel specifically as "the first treatise," \ton pr“ton logon\, (Acts:1:1|) and both are addressed to Theophilus (Luke:1:3; strkjv@Acts:1:1|). He speaks of himself in both books as "me" (\kamoi\, strkjv@Luke:1:3|) and {I made} (\epoiˆsamˆn\, strkjv@Acts:1:1|). He refers to himself with others as "we" and "us" as in strkjv@Acts:16:10|, the "we" sections of Acts. The unity of Acts is here assumed until the authorship of Acts is discussed in Volume III. The same style appears in Gospel and Acts, so that the presumption is strongly in support of the author's statement. It is quite possible that the formal Introduction to the Gospel (Luke:1:1-4|) was intended to apply to the Acts also which has only an introductory clause. Plummer argues that to suppose that the author of Acts imitated the Gospel purposely is to suppose a literary miracle. Even Cadbury, who is not convinced of the Lucan authorship, says: "In my study of Luke and Acts, their unity is a fundamental and illuminating axiom." He adds: "They are not merely two independent writings from the same pen; they are a single continuous work. Acts is neither an appendix nor an afterthought. It is probably an integral part of the author's original plan and purpose."

rwp@Luke:1:37 @{No word} (\ouk rhˆma\). \Rhˆma\ brings out the single item rather than the whole content (\logos\). Songs:in verse 38|.

rwp@Luke:3:7 @{To the multitude that went out} (\tois exporeuomenois ochlois\). Plural, {Multitudes}. The present participle also notes the repetition of the crowds as does \elegen\ (imperfect), he used to say. strkjv@Matthew:3:7-10| singles out the message of John to the Pharisees and Sadducees, which see for discussion of details. Luke gives a summary of his preaching to the crowds with special replies to these inquiries: the multitudes, 10,11|, the publicans 12,13|, the soldiers 14|. {To be baptized of him} (\baptisthˆnai hup' autou\). This is the purpose of their coming. strkjv@Matthew:3:7| has simply "to his baptism." John's metaphors are from the wilderness (vipers, fruits, axe, slave boy loosing sandals, fire, fan, thrashing-floor, garner, chaff, stones). {Who warned you?} (\tis hepedeixen humin;\). The verb is like our "suggest" by proof to eye, ear, or brain (Luke:6:47; strkjv@12:5; strkjv@Acts:9:16; strkjv@20:35; strkjv@Matthew:3:7|). Nowhere else in the N.T. though common ancient word (\hupodeiknumi\, show under, point out, give a tip or private hint).

rwp@Luke:4:18 @{Anointed me} (\echrisen me\). First aorist active indicative of the verb \chri“\ from which {Christ} (\Christos\) is derived, the Anointed One. Isaiah is picturing the Jubilee year and the release of captives and the return from the Babylonian exile with the hope of the Messiah through it all. Jesus here applies this Messianic language to himself. "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me" as was shown at the baptism (Luke:3:21|) where he was also "anointed" for his mission by the Father's voice (3:22|). {To the poor} (\pt“chois\). Jesus singles this out also as one of the items to tell John the Baptist in prison (Luke:7:22|). Our word _Gospel_ is a translation of the Greek \Euaggelion\, and it is for the poor. {He hath sent me} (\apestalken me\). Change of tense to perfect active indicative. He is now on that mission here. Jesus is God's _Apostle_ to men (John:17:3|, Whom thou didst send). {Proclaim} (\kˆruxai\). As a herald like Noah (2Peter:2:5|). {To the captives} (\aichmal“tois\). Prisoners of war will be released (\aichmˆ\, a spear point, and \hal“tos\, from \haliskomai\, to be captured). Captured by the spear point. Common word, but here only in the N.T. {Set at liberty} (\aposteilai\). First aorist active infinitive of \apostell“\. Same verb as \apestalken\, above. Brought in here from strkjv@Isaiah:58:6|. Plummer suggests that Luke inserts it here from memory. But Jesus could easily have turned back the roll and read it so. {Them that are bruised} (\tethrausmenous\). Perfect passive participle of \thrau“\, an old verb, but here only in the N.T. It means to break in pieces broken in heart and often in body as well. One loves to think that Jesus felt it to be his mission to mend broken hearts like pieces of broken earthenware, real rescue-mission work. Jesus mends them and sets them free from their limitations.

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\, alongside, after a verb of rest used to be called the pregnant use, came and was standing. But that is no longer necessary, for the accusative as the case of extension is the oldest of the cases and in later Greek regains many of the earlier uses of the other cases employed for more precise distinctions. See the same idiom in verse 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:7:21 @{In that hour he cured} (\en ekeinˆi tˆi horƒi etherapeusen\). This item is not in Matthew. Jesus gave the two disciples of John an example of the direct method. They had heard. Then they saw for themselves. {Diseases} (\nos“n\), {plagues} (\mastig“n\), {evil spirits} (\pneumat“n ponˆr“n\), all kinds of bodily ills, and he singles out the {blind} (\tuphlois\) to whom in particular he bestowed sight (\echarizato blepein\), gave as a free gift (from \charis\, grace) seeing (\blepein\).

rwp@Luke:9:16 @{The five... the two} (\tous pente... tous duo\). Pointing back to verse 13|, fine example of the Greek article. {And gave} (\kai edidou\). Imperfect active of \did“mi\, kept on giving. This picturesque imperfect is preceded by the aorist \kateklasen\ (brake), a single act. This latter verb in the N.T. only here and the parallel in strkjv@Mark:6:41|, though common enough in ancient Greek. We say "break off" where here the Greek has "break down" (or thoroughly), perfective use of \kata\.

rwp@Luke:11:1 @{As he was praying in a certain place} (\en t“i einai auton en top“i tini proseuchomenon\). Characteristically Lukan idiom: \en\ with articular periphrastic infinitive (\einai proseuchomenon\) with accusative of general reference (\auton\). {That}. Not in the Greek, asyndeton (\kai egeneto eipen\). {When he ceased} (\h“s epausato\). Supply \proseuchomenos\ (praying), complementary or supplementary participle. {Teach us} (\didaxon hˆmas\). Jesus had taught them by precept (Matthew:6:7-15|) and example (Luke:9:29|). Somehow the example of Jesus on this occasion stirred them to fresh interest in the subject and to revival of interest in John's teachings (Luke:5:33|). Songs:Jesus gave them the substance of the Model Prayer in Matthew, but in shorter form. Some of the MSS. have one or all of the phrases in Matthew, but the oldest documents have it in the simplest form. See on ¯Matthew:6:7-15| for discussion of these details (Father, hallowed, kingdom, daily bread, forgiveness, bringing us into temptation). In strkjv@Matthew:6:11| "give" is \dos\ (second aorist active imperative second singular, a single act) while here strkjv@Luke:11:3| "give" is \didou\ (present active imperative, both from \did“mi\) and means, "keep on giving." Songs:in strkjv@Luke:11:4| we have "For we ourselves also forgive" (\kai gar autoi aphiomen\), present active indicative of the late \“\ verb \aphi“\ while strkjv@Matthew:6:12| has "as we also forgave" (\h“s kai hˆmeis aphˆkamen\), first aorist (\k\ aorist) active of \aphiˆmi\. Songs:also where strkjv@Matthew:6:12| has "debts" (\ta opheilˆmata\) strkjv@Luke:11:4| has "sins" (\tas hamartias\). But the spirit of each prayer is the same. There is no evidence that Jesus meant either form to be a ritual. In both strkjv@Matthew:6:13; strkjv@Luke:11:4| \mˆ eisenegkˆis\ occurs (second aorist subjunctive with \mˆ\ in prohibition, ingressive aorist). "Bring us not" is a better translation than "lead us not." There is no such thing as God enticing one to sin (James:1:13|). Jesus urges us to pray not to be tempted as in strkjv@Luke:22:40| in Gethsemane.

rwp@Luke:11:22 @{But when} (\epan de\). Note \hotan\ in verse 21|. {Stronger than he} (\ischuroteros autou\). Comparative of \ischuros\ followed by the ablative. {Come upon him and overcome him} (\epelth“n nikˆsˆi auton\). Second aorist active participle of \eperchomai\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \nika“\. Aorist tense here because a single onset while in verse 22| the guarding (\phulassˆi\, present active subjunctive) is continuous. {His whole armour} (\tˆn panoplian autou\). An old and common word for all the soldier's outfit (shield, sword, lance, helmet, greaves, breastplate). Tyndale renders it "his harness." In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Ephesians:6:11,13| where the items are given. {Wherein he trusted} (\eph' hˆi epepoithei\). Second past perfect active of \peith“\, to persuade. The second perfect \pepoitha\ is intransitive, to trust. Old and common verb. He trusted his weapons which had been so efficacious. {His spoils} (\ta skula autou\). It is not clear to what this figure refers. Strong as Satan is Jesus is stronger and wins victories over him as he was doing then. In strkjv@Colossians:2:15| Christ is pictured as triumphing openly over the powers of evil by the Cross.

rwp@Luke:11:37 @{Now as he spake} (\en de t“i lalˆsai\). Luke's common idiom, \en\ with the articular infinitive (aorist active infinitive) but it does not mean "after he had spoken" as Plummer argues, but simply "in the speaking," no time in the aorist infinitive. See strkjv@3:21| for similar use of aorist infinitive with \en\. {Asketh} (\er“tƒi\). Present active indicative, dramatic present. Request, not question. {To dine} (\hop“s aristˆsˆi\). Note \hop“s\ rather than the common \hina\. Aorist active subjunctive rather than present, for a single meal. The verb is from \ariston\ (breakfast). See distinction between \ariston\ and \deipnon\ (dinner or supper) in strkjv@Luke:14:12|. It is the morning meal (breakfast or lunch) after the return from morning prayers in the synagogue (Matthew:22:4|), not the very early meal called \akratisma\. The verb is, however, used for the early meal on the seashore in strkjv@John:21:12,15|. {With him} (\par' aut“i\). By his side. {Sat down to meat} (\anepesen\). Second aorist active indicative of \anapipt“\, old verb, to recline, to fall back on the sofa or lounge. No word here for "to meat."

rwp@Luke:12:36 @{When he shall return from the marriage feast} (\pote analusˆi ek t“n gam“n\). The interrogative conjunction \pote\ and the deliberative aorist subjunctive retained in the indirect question. The verb \analu“\, very common Greek verb, but only twice in the N.T. (here and strkjv@Phillipians:1:23|). The figure is breaking up a camp or loosening the mooring of a ship, to depart. Perhaps here the figure is from the standpoint of the wedding feast (plural as used of a single wedding feast in strkjv@Luke:14:8|), departing from there. See on ¯Matthew:22:2|. {When he cometh and knocketh} (\elthontos kai krousantos\). Genitive absolute of the aorist active participle without \autou\ and in spite of \autoi\ (dative) being used after \anoix“sin\ (first aorist active subjunctive of \anoig“\).

rwp@Luke:15:9 @{Her friends and neighbours} (\tas philas kai geitonas\). Note single article and female friends (feminine article and \philas\). \He“s hou eurˆi\ here as in verse 4|, only \hou\ added after \he“s\ (until which time) as often. {Which I lost} (\hˆn ap“lesa\). First aorist active indicative of \apollumi\. She lost the coin (note article). The shepherd did not lose the one sheep.

rwp@Luke:22:32 @{That thy faith fail not} (\hina mˆ eklipˆi he pistis mou\). Second aorist active subjunctive of purpose with \hina\ after \edeˆthˆn\ ({I prayed}) of \ekleip“\, old verb. Our word _eclipse_ is this word. Evidently Jesus could not keep Satan from attacking Peter. He had already captured Judas. Did he not repeatedly attack Jesus? But he could and did pray for Peter's faith and his praying won in the end, though Peter stumbled and fell. {And do thou} (\kai su\). The words single out Peter sharply. {Once thou hast turned again} (\pote epistrepsas\). First aorist active participle of \epistreph“\, common verb to turn to, to return. But the use of this word implied that Peter would fall though he would come back and "strengthen thy brethren."

rwp@Mark:4:26 @{As if a man should cast} (\h“s anthr“pos balˆi\). Note \h“s\ with the aorist subjunctive without \an\. It is a supposable case and so the subjunctive and the aorist tense because a single instance. Blass considers this idiom "quite impossible," but it is the true text here and makes good sense (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 968). The more common idiom would have been \h“s ean\ (or \an\).

rwp@Mark:4:28 @{Of herself} (\automatˆ\). Automatically, we say. The secret of growth is in the seed, not in the soil nor in the weather nor in the cultivating. These all help, but the seed spontaneously works according to its own nature. The word \automatˆ\ is from \autos\ (self) and \memaa\ desire eagerly from obsolete \ma“\. Common word in all Greek history. Only one other example in N.T., in strkjv@Acts:12:10| when the city gate opens to Peter of its own accord. "The mind is adapted to the truth, as the eye to the light" (Gould). Songs:we sow the seed, God's kingdom truth, and the soil (the soul) is ready for the seed. The Holy Spirit works on the heart and uses the seed sown and makes it germinate and grow, "first the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear" (\pr“ton chorton, eiten stachun, eiten plˆrˆ siton en t“i stachui\). This is the law and order of nature and also of grace in the kingdom of God. Hence it is worth while to preach and teach. "This single fact creates the confidence shown by Jesus in the ultimate establishment of his kingdom in spite of the obstacles which obstruct its progress" (Gould).

rwp@Mark:5:30 @{Perceiving in himself} (\epignous en heaut“i\). She thought, perhaps, that the touch of Christ's garment would cure her without his knowing it, a foolish fancy, no doubt, but one due to her excessive timidity. Jesus felt in his own consciousness. The Greek idiom more exactly means: "Jesus perceiving in himself the power from him go out" (\tˆn ex autou dunamin exelthousan\). The aorist participle here is punctiliar simply and timeless and can be illustrated by strkjv@Luke:10:18|: "I was beholding Satan fall" (\ethe“roun ton Satanƒn pesonta\), where \pesonta\ does not mean _fallen_ (\pept“kota\) as in strkjv@Revelation:9:1| nor falling (\piptonta\) but simply the constative aorist {fall} (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 684). Songs:here Jesus means to say: "I felt in myself the power from me go." Scholars argue whether in this instance Jesus healed the woman by conscious will or by unconscious response to her appeal. Some even argue that the actual healing took place after Jesus became aware of the woman's reaching for help by touching his garment. What we do know is that Jesus was conscious of the going out of power from himself. strkjv@Luke:8:46| uses \egn“n\ (personal knowledge), but Mark has \epignous\ (personal and additional, clear knowledge). One may remark that no real good can be done without the outgoing of power. That is true of mother, preacher, teacher, doctor. {Who touched my garments?} (\Tis mou hˆpsato t“n himati“n;\). More exactly, {Who touched me on my clothes}; The Greek verb uses two genitives, of the person and the thing. It was a dramatic moment for Jesus and for the timid woman. Later it was a common practice for the crowds to touch the hem of Christ's garments and be healed (Mark:6:56|). But here Jesus chose to single out this case for examination. There was no magic in the garments of Jesus. Perhaps there was superstition in the woman's mind, but Jesus honoured her darkened faith as in the case of Peter's shadow and Paul's handkerchief.

rwp@Mark:5:42 @{Rose up, and walked} (\anestˆ kai periepatei\). Aorist tense (single act) followed by the imperfect ({the walking went on}). {For she was twelve years old} (\ˆn gar et“n d“deka\). The age mentioned by Mark alone and here as explanation that she was old enough to walk. {Amazed} (\exestˆsan\). We have had this word before in strkjv@Matthew:12:23| and strkjv@Mark:2:12|, which see. Here the word is repeated in the substantive in the associative instrumental case (\ekstasei megalˆi\), with a great ecstasy, especially on the part of the parents (Luke:8:56|), and no wonder.

rwp@Mark:6:7 @{By two and two} (\duo duo\). This repetition of the numeral instead of the use of \ana duo\ or \kata duo\ is usually called a Hebraism. The Hebrew does have this idiom, but it appears in Aeschylus and Sophocles, in the vernacular _Koin‚_ (Oxyrhynchus Papyri No. 121), in Byzantine Greek, and in modern Greek (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 122f.). Mark preserves the vernacular _Koin‚_ better than the other Gospels and this detail suits his vivid style. The six pairs of apostles could thus cover Galilee in six different directions. Mark notes that he "began to send them forth" (\ˆrxato autous apostellein\). Aorist tense and present infinitive. This may refer simply to this particular occasion in Mark's picturesque way. But the imperfect tense \edidou\ means he kept on giving them all through the tour, a continuous power (authority) over unclean spirits singled out by Mark as representing "all manner of diseases and all manner of sickness" (Matthew:10:1|), "to cure diseases" (\iasthai\, strkjv@Luke:9:1|), healing power. They were to preach and to heal (Luke:9:1; strkjv@Matthew:10:7|). Mark does not mention preaching as a definite part of the commission to the twelve on this their first preaching tour, but he does state that they did preach (6:12|). They were to be missioners or missionaries (\apostellein\) in harmony with their office (\apostoloi\).

rwp@Mark:8:24 @{I see men, for I behold them as trees walking} (\Blep“ tous anthr“pous hoti h“s dendra hor“ peripatountas\). A vivid description of dawning sight. His vision was incomplete though he could tell that they were men because they were walking. This is the single case of a gradual cure in the healings wrought by Jesus. The reason for this method in this case is not given.

rwp@Mark:11:23 @{Shall not doubt in his heart} (\mˆ diakrithˆi en tˆi kardiƒi autou\). First aorist passive subjunctive with \hos an\. The verb means a divided judgment (\dia\ from \duo\, two, and \krin“\, to judge). Wavering doubt. Not a single act of doubt (\diakrithˆi\), but continued faith (\pisteuˆi\). {Cometh to pass} (\ginetai\). Futuristic present middle indicative.

rwp@Matthew:2:4 @{He inquired of them where the Christ should be born} (\epunthaneto par' aut“n pou ho Christos gennƒtai\). The prophetic present (\gennƒtai\) is given, the very words of Herod retained by Matthew's report. The imperfect tense (epunthaneto) suggests that Herod inquired repeatedly, probably of one and another of the leaders gathered together, both Sadducees (chief priests) and Pharisees (scribes). McNeile doubts, like Holtzmann, if Herod actually called together all the Sanhedrin and probably "he could easily ask the question of a single scribe," because he had begun his reign with a massacre of the Sanhedrin (Josephus, _Ant_. XIV. ix. 4). But that was thirty years ago and Herod was desperately in earnest to learn what the Jews really expected about the coming of "the Messiah." Still Herod probably got together not the Sanhedrin since "elders" are not mentioned, but leaders among the chief priests and scribes, not a formal meeting but a free assembly for conference. He had evidently heard of this expected king and he would swallow plenty of pride to be able to compass the defeat of these hopes.

rwp@Matthew:2:23 @{Should be called a Nazarene} (\Naz“raios klˆthˆsetai\). Matthew says "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets" (\dia t“n prophˆt“n\). It is the plural and no single prophecy exists which says that the Messiah was to be called a Nazarene. It may be that this term of contempt (John:1:46; strkjv@7:52|) is what is meant, and that several prophecies are to be combined like Ps. strkjv@22:6,8; strkjv@69:11,19; strkjv@Isaiah:53:2,3,4|. The name Nazareth means a shoot or branch, but it is by no means certain that Matthew has this in mind. It is best to confess that we do not know. See Broadus on Matthew for the various theories. But, despised as Nazareth was at that time, Jesus has exalted its fame. The lowly Nazarene he was at first, but it is our glory to be the followers of the Nazarene. Bruce says that "in this case, therefore, we certainly know that the historic fact suggested the prophetic reference, instead of the prophecy creating the history." The parallels drawn by Matthew between the history of Israel and the birth and infancy of Jesus are not mere fancy. History repeats itself and writers of history find frequent parallels. Surely Matthew is not beyond the bounds of reason or of fact in illustrating in his own way the birth and infancy of Jesus by the Providence of God in the history of Israel.

rwp@Matthew:5:3 @{Blessed} (\makarioi\). The English word "blessed" is more exactly represented by the Greek verbal \eulogˆtoi\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:68| of God by Zacharias, or the perfect passive participle \eulogˆmenos\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:42| of Mary by Elizabeth and in strkjv@Matthew:21:9|. Both forms come from \euloge“\, to speak well of (\eu, logos\). The Greek word here (\makarioi\) is an adjective that means "happy" which in English etymology goes back to hap, chance, good-luck as seen in our words haply, hapless, happily, happiness. "Blessedness is, of course, an infinitely higher and better thing than mere happiness" (Weymouth). English has thus ennobled "blessed" to a higher rank than "happy." But "happy" is what Jesus said and the _Braid Scots New Testament_ dares to say "Happy" each time here as does the _Improved Edition of the American Bible Union Version_. The Greek word is as old as Homer and Pindar and was used of the Greek gods and also of men, but largely of outward prosperity. Then it is applied to the dead who died in the Lord as in strkjv@Revelation:14:13|. Already in the Old Testament the Septuagint uses it of moral quality. "Shaking itself loose from all thoughts of outward good, it becomes the express symbol of a happiness identified with pure character. Behind it lies the clear cognition of sin as the fountain-head of all misery, and of holiness as the final and effectual cure for every woe. For knowledge as the basis of virtue, and therefore of happiness, it substitutes faith and love" (Vincent). Jesus takes this word "happy" and puts it in this rich environment. "This is one of the words which have been transformed and ennobled by New Testament use; by association, as in the Beatitudes, with unusual conditions, accounted by the world miserable, or with rare and difficult" (Bruce). It is a pity that we have not kept the word "happy" to the high and holy plane where Jesus placed it. "If you know these things, happy (\makarioi\) are you if you do them" (John:13:17|). "Happy (\makarioi\) are those who have not seen and yet have believed" (John:20:29|). And Paul applies this adjective to God, "according to the gospel of the glory of the happy (\makariou\) God" (1Timothy:1:11|. Cf. also strkjv@Titus:2:13|). The term "Beatitudes" (Latin _beatus_) comes close to the meaning of Christ here by \makarioi\. It will repay one to make a careful study of all the "beatitudes" in the New Testament where this word is employed. It occurs nine times here (3-11|), though the beatitudes in verses 10 and 11 are very much alike. The copula is not expressed in either of these nine beatitudes. In each case a reason is given for the beatitude, "for" (\hoti\), that shows the spiritual quality involved. Some of the phrases employed by Jesus here occur in the Psalms, some even in the Talmud (itself later than the New Testament, though of separate origin). That is of small moment. "The originality of Jesus lies in putting the due value on these thoughts, collecting them, and making them as prominent as the Ten Commandments. No greater service can be rendered to mankind than to rescue from obscurity neglected moral commonplaces " (Bruce). Jesus repeated his sayings many times as all great teachers and preachers do, but this sermon has unity, progress, and consummation. It does not contain all that Jesus taught by any means, but it stands out as the greatest single sermon of all time, in its penetration, pungency, and power. {The poor in spirit} (\hoi pt“choi t“i pneumati\). Luke has only "the poor," but he means the same by it as this form in Matthew, "the pious in Israel, for the most part poor, whom the worldly rich despised and persecuted" (McNeile). The word used here (\pt“choi\) is applied to the beggar Lazarus in strkjv@Luke:16:20,22| and suggests spiritual destitution (from \pt“ss“\ to crouch, to cower). The other word \penˆs\ is from \penomai\, to work for one's daily bread and so means one who works for his living. The word \pt“chos\ is more frequent in the New Testament and implies deeper poverty than \penˆs\. "The kingdom of heaven" here means the reign of God in the heart and life. This is the _summum bonum_ and is what matters most.

rwp@Matthew:5:15 @{Under the bushel} (\hupo ton modion\). Not a bushel. "The figure is taken from lowly cottage life. There was a projecting stone in the wall on which the lamp was set. The house consisted of a single room, so that the tiny light sufficed for all" (Bruce). It was not put under the bushel (the only one in the room) save to put it out or to hide it. The bushel was an earthenware grain measure. "{The stand}" (\tˆn luchnian\), not "candlestick." It is "lamp-stand" in each of the twelve examples in the Bible. There was the one lamp-stand for the single room.

rwp@Matthew:6:22 @{Single} (\haplous\). Used of a marriage contract when the husband is to repay the dowry "pure and simple" (\tˆn phernˆn haplˆn\), if she is set free; but in case he does not do so promptly, he is to add interest also (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_, etc.). There are various other instances of such usage. Here and in strkjv@Luke:11:34| the eye is called "single" in a moral sense. The word means "without folds" like a piece of cloth unfolded, _simplex_ in Latin. Bruce considers this parable of the eye difficult. "The figure and the ethical meaning seem to be mixed up, moral attributes ascribed to the physical eye which with them still gives light to the body. This confusion may be due to the fact that the eye, besides being the organ of vision, is the seat of expression, revealing inward dispositions." The "evil" eye (\ponˆros\) may be diseased and is used of stinginess in the LXX and so \haplous\ may refer to liberality as Hatch argues (_Essays in Biblical Greek_, p. 80). The passage may be elliptical with something to be supplied. If our eyes are healthy we see clearly and with a single focus (without astigmatism). If the eyes are diseased (bad, evil), they may even be cross-eyed or cock-eyed. We see double and confuse our vision. We keep one eye on the hoarded treasures of earth and roll the other proudly up to heaven. Seeing double is double-mindedness as is shown in verse 24|.

rwp@Matthew:13:31 @{Is like} (\homoia estin\). Adjective for comparison with associative instrumental as in strkjv@13:13,44,45,47,52|. {Grain of mustard seed} (\kokk“i sinape“s\). Single grain in contrast with the collective \sperma\ (17:20|). {Took and sowed} (\lab“n espeiren\). Vernacular phrasing like Hebrew and all conversational style. In _Koin‚_.

rwp@Matthew:17:27 @{Lest we cause them to stumble} (\hina mˆ skandalis“men autous\). He does not wish to create the impression that he and the disciples despise the temple and its worship. Aorist tense (punctiliar single act) here, though some MSS. have present subjunctive (linear). "A hook" (\agkistron\). The only example in the N.T. of fishing with a hook. From an unused verb \agkiz“\, to angle, and that from \agkos\, a curve (so also \agkalˆ\ the inner curve of the arm, strkjv@Luke:2:38|). {First cometh up} (\ton anabanta pr“ton ichthun\). More correctly, "the first fish that cometh up." {A shekel} (\statˆra\). Greek stater = four drachmae, enough for two persons to pay the tax. {For me and thee} (\anti emou kai sou\). Common use of \anti\ in commercial transactions, "in exchange for." Here we have a miracle of foreknowledge. Such instances have happened. Some try to get rid of the miracle by calling it a proverb or by saying that Jesus only meant for Peter to sell the fish and thus get the money, a species of nervous anxiety to relieve Christ and the Gospel of Matthew from the miraculous. "All the attempts have been in vain which were made by the older Rationalism to put a non-miraculous meaning into these words" (B. Weiss). It is not stated that Peter actually caught such a fish though that is the natural implication. Why provision is thus only made for Peter along with Jesus we do not know.

rwp@Matthew:18:1 @{Who then is greatest} (\tis ara meiz“n estin\). The \ara\ seems to point back to the tax-collection incident when Jesus had claimed exemption for them all as "sons" of the Father. But it was not a new dispute, for jealousy had been growing in their hearts. The wonderful words of Jesus to Peter on Mount Hermon (Matthew:16:17-19|) had evidently made Peter feel a fresh sense of leadership on the basis of which he had dared even to rebuke Jesus for speaking of his death (16:22|). And then Peter was one of the three (James and John also) taken with the Master up on the Mount of Transfiguration. Peter on that occasion had spoken up promptly. And just now the tax-collectors had singled out Peter as the one who seemed to represent the group. Mark (Mark:9:33|) represents Jesus as asking them about their dispute on the way into the house, perhaps just after their question in strkjv@Matthew:18:1|. Jesus had noticed the wrangling. It will break out again and again (Matthew:20:20-28; strkjv@Luke:22:24|). Plainly the primacy of Peter was not yet admitted by the others. The use of the comparative \meiz“n\ (so \ho meiz“n\ in verse 4|) rather than the superlative \megistos\ is quite in accord with the _Koin‚_ idiom where the comparative is displacing the superlative (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 667ff.). But it is a sad discovery to find the disciples chiefly concerned about their own places (offices) in the political kingdom which they were expecting.

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

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

rwp@Philippians:1:1 @{Paul} (\Paulos\). He does not mention his apostleship as he usually does. Omitted also in I and II Thess. and Philemon. {Timothy} (\Timotheos\). In no sense the author, but associated with Paul because with him here in Rome as in Corinth when I and II Thessalonians written and in Ephesus when I Corinthians sent and in Macedonia when II Corinthians written. Timothy was with Paul when the Philippian church was founded (Acts:16:1,13; strkjv@17:14|). He had been there twice since (Acts:19:22; strkjv@20:3f.|). {To all the saints} (\pƒsi tois hagiois\). The word saint (\hagios\) here is used for the professing Christians as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:2| which see as well as strkjv@Romans:1:7| for the origin of the word. The word "all" (\pƒsi\) means that all individual believers are included. Paul employs this word frequently in Philippians. {In Christ Jesus} (\en Christ“i Iˆsou\). The centre for all Christian relations and activities for Paul and for us. {In Philippi} (\en Philippois\). See on ¯Acts:16:12| for discussion of this name. {With the bishops} (\sun episkopois\). "Together with bishops," thus singled out from "all the saints." See strkjv@Acts:20:17,28| for the use of this most interesting word as equivalent to \presbuteros\ (elder). It is an old word from \episkeptomai\, to look upon or after, to inspect, so the overseer or superintendent. In the second century \episcopos\ (Ignatius) came to mean one superior to elders, but not so in the N.T. The two New Testament church officers are here mentioned (bishops or elders and deacons). The plural is here employed because there was usually one church in a city with several pastors (bishops, elders). {And deacons} (\kai diakonois\). Technical sense here of the other church officers as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:8-13|, not the general use as in strkjv@Matthew:22:13|. The origin of the office is probably seen in strkjv@Acts:6:1-6|. The term is often applied to preachers (1Corinthians:3:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:6|). The etymology (\dia, konis\) suggests raising a dust by hastening.

rwp@Philippians:1:21 @{For to me} (\emoi gar\). Fine example of the ethical dative. Paul gives his own view of living. {To live is Christ} (\to zˆin Christos\). No copula (\estin\), but \to zˆin\ (the act of living present active infinitive) is the subject as is shown by the article \to\. Living is coextensive with Christ. {Gain} (\kerdos\). Old word for any gain or profit, interest on money (so in papyri). In N.T. only here, strkjv@Phillipians:3:7; strkjv@Titus:1:11|. {To die} (\to apothanein\, second aorist active infinitive, single act) is to cash in both principal and interest and so to have more of Christ than when living. Songs:Paul faces death with independence and calm courage.

rwp@Philippians:3:12 @{Not that} (\ouch hoti\). To guard against a misunderstanding as in strkjv@John:6:26; strkjv@12:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:24; strkjv@Phillipians:4:11,17|. {I have already obtained} (\ˆdˆ elabon\). Rather, "I did already obtain," constative second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\, summing up all his previous experiences as a single event. {Or am already made perfect} (\ˆ ˆdˆ tetelei“mai\). Perfect passive indicative (state of completion) of \teleio“\, old verb from \teleios\ and that from \telos\ (end). Paul pointedly denies that he has reached a spiritual impasse of non- development. Certainly he knew nothing of so-called sudden absolute perfection by any single experience. Paul has made great progress in Christlikeness, but the goal is still before him, not behind him. {But I press on} (\di“k“ de\). He is not discouraged, but encouraged. He keeps up the chase (real idea in \di“k“\, as in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:1; strkjv@Romans:9:30; strkjv@1Timothy:6:11|). {If so be that} (\ei kai\). "I follow after." The condition (third class, \ei--katalab“\, second aorist active subjunctive of \katalamban“\) is really a sort of purpose clause or aim. There are plenty of examples in the _Koin‚_ of the use of \ei\ and the subjunctive as here (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1017), "if I also may lay hold of that for which (\eph' h“i\, purpose expressed by \epi\) I was laid hold of (\katelˆmphthˆn\, first aorist passive of the same verb \katalamban“\) by Christ Jesus." His conversion was the beginning, not the end of the chase.

rwp@Revelation:1:19 @{Therefore} (\oun\). In view of Christ's words about himself in verse 18| and the command in verse 11|. {Which thou sawest} (\ha eides\). The vision of the Glorified Christ in verses 13-18|. {The things which are} (\ha eisin\). Plural verb (individualising the items) though \ha\ is neuter plural, certainly the messages to the seven churches (1:20-3:22|) in relation to the world in general, possibly also partly epexegetic or explanatory of \ha eides\. {The things which shall come to pass hereafter} (\ha mellei ginesthai meta tauta\). Present middle infinitive with \mellei\, though both aorist and future are also used. Singular verb here (\mellei\) blending in a single view the future. In a rough outline this part begins in strkjv@4:1 and goes to end of chapter 22, though the future appears also in chapters 2 and 3 and the present occurs in 4 to 22 and the elements in the vision of Christ (1:13-18|) reappear repeatedly.

rwp@Revelation:2:25 @{Howbeit} (\plˆn\). Common after \ouk allo\ as a preposition with the ablative (Mark:12:32|), but here a conjunction as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:18|. {Hold fast} (\kratˆsate\). First aorist active imperative of \krate“\, either ingressive (get a grip on) or constative (hold on as a single decisive effort). See present imperative \kratei\ in strkjv@3:11| (keep on holding). {Till I come} (\achri hou an hˆx“\). Indefinite temporal clause with \achri hou\ (until which time) with modal \an\ and either the future active indicative or the first aorist active subjunctive of \hˆk“\ (usual idiom with \achri\ in Revelation as in strkjv@7:3; strkjv@15:8; strkjv@20:3,5|).

rwp@Revelation:11:7 @{When they shall have finished} (\hotan teles“sin\). Merely the first aorist active subjunctive of \tele“\ with \hotan\ in an indefinite temporal clause with no _futurum exactum_ (future perfect), "whenever they finish." {The beast} (\to thˆrion\). "The wild beast comes out of the abyss" of strkjv@9:1f|. He reappears in strkjv@13:1; strkjv@17:8|. In strkjv@Daniel:7:3| \thˆria\ occurs. Nothing less than antichrist will satisfy the picture here. Some see the abomination of strkjv@Daniel:7:7; strkjv@Matthew:24:15|. Some see Nero _redivivus_. {He shall make war with them} (\poiˆsei met' aut“n polemon\). This same phrase occurs in strkjv@12:17| about the dragon's attack on the woman. It is more the picture of single combat (2:16|). {He shall overcome them} (\nikˆsei autous\). Future active of \nika“\. The victory of the beast over the two witnesses is certain, as in strkjv@Daniel:7:21|. {And kill them} (\kai apoktenei\). Future active of \apoktein“\. Without attempting to apply this prophecy to specific individuals or times, one can agree with these words of Swete: "But his words cover in effect all the martyrdoms and massacres of history in which brute force has seemed to triumph over truth and righteousness."

rwp@Revelation:18:11 @{The merchants} (\hoi emporoi\). As in strkjv@18:3,15,23|. The dirge of the merchants follows the wail of the kings. {Weep and mourn} (\klaiousin kai penthousin\). Present active indicatives of \klai“\ and \penthe“\ as in verses 9| (for \klai“\), 15,19|. {For no man buyeth their merchandise any more} (\hoti ton gomon aut“n oudeis agorazei ouketi\). Reason enough for their sorrow over Rome's fall. \Gomos\ is old word (from \gem“\ to be full) for a ship's cargo (Acts:21:3|) and then any merchandise (Revelation:18:11f.|). Galen, Pliny, Aristides tell of the vastness of the commerce and luxury of Rome, the world's chief market. Many of the items here are like those in the picture of the destruction of Tyre in strkjv@Ezekiel:26; 27|. There are twenty-nine items singled out in verses 12,13| of this merchandise or cargo (\gomon\), imports into the port of Rome. Only a few need any comment.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE REVELATION OF JOHN ABOUT A.D. 95 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION DIFFICULTY IN THE PROBLEM Perhaps no single book in the New Testament presents so many and so formidable problems as the Apocalypse of John. These difficulties concern the authorship, the date, the apocalyptic method, the relation to the other Johannine books, the purpose, the historical environment, the reception of the book in the New Testament canon, the use and misuse of the book through the ages, etc. In the eastern churches the recognition of the Apocalypse of John was slower than in the west, since it was not in the Peshitta Syriac Version. Caius of Rome attributed the book to Cerinthus the Gnostic, but he was ably answered by Hippolytus, who attributed it to the Apostle John. The Council of Laodicea (about A.D. 360) omitted it, but the third Council of Carthage (A.D. 397) accepted it. The dispute about millenarianism led Dionysius of Alexandria (middle of the third century, A.D.) to deny the authorship to the Apostle John, though he accepted it as canonical. Eusebius suggested a second John as the author. But finally the book was accepted in the east as Hebrews was in the west after a period of doubt.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ POOR STATE OF THE TEXT There are only five uncials that give the text of John's Apocalypse (Aleph A C P Q). Of these Aleph belongs to the fourth century, A and C to the fifth, Q (really B2, B ending with strkjv@Hebrews:9:13|, both in the Vatican Library) to the eighth, P to the ninth. Only Aleph A Q (=B2) are complete, C lacking strkjv@Revelation:1:1, strkjv@3:19-5:14, strkjv@7:14-17, strkjv@8:5-9:16, strkjv@10:10-11:3,14:13-18:2, strkjv@19:5-21|, P lacking strkjv@Revelation:16:12--17:1, strkjv@19:21-20:9,22:6-21|. Both C and P are palimpsests. In the 400 verses of the book "over 1,600 variants have been counted" (Moffatt). Erasmus had only one cursive (of the twelfth century numbered Ir) for his first edition, and the last six verses of the Apocalypse, save verse 20, were a translation from the Vulgate. The result is that the versions are of special importance for the text of the book, since in no single MS. or group of MSS. do we have a fairly accurate text, though Aleph A C and A C Vulgate are the best two groups.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ EMPEROR WORSHIP AS THE OCCASION FOR JOHN'S APOCALYPSE There is no doubt at all that the emperor cult (emperor worship) played a main part in the persecution of the Christians that was the occasion for this great Christian apocalypse. The book itself bears ample witness to this fact, if the two beasts refer to the Roman power as the agent of Satan. It is not possible to single out each individual emperor in the graphic picture. Most would take the dragon to be Satan and the first and the second beasts to be the imperial and provincial Roman power. The Roman emperors posed as gods and did the work of Satan. In particular there were two persecuting emperors (Nero and Domitian) who were responsible for many martyrs for Christ. But emperor worship began before Nero. Julius Caesar was worshipped in the provinces. Octavius was called Augustus (\Sebastos\, Reverend). The crazy Emperor Caius Caligula not simply claimed to be divine, but actually demanded that his statue be set up for worship in the Holy of Holies in the Temple in Jerusalem. He was killed in January A.D. 41 before he could execute his dire purpose. But the madcap Nero likewise demanded worship and blamed in A.D. 64 the burning of Rome on the Christians, though guilty of it himself. He set the style for persecuting Christians, which slumbered on and burst into flames again under Domitian, who had himself commonly termed _Dominus ac Deus noster_ (Our Lord and God). The worship of the emperor did not disturb the worshippers of other gods save the Jews and the Christians, and in particular the Christians were persecuted after the burning of Rome when they were distinguished from the Jews. Up till then Christians were regarded (as by Gallio in Corinth) as a variety of Jews and so entitled to tolerance as a _religio licita_, but they had no standing in law by themselves and their refusal to worship the emperor early gave offence, as Paul indicates in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3|. It was \Kurios Iˆsous\ or \Kurios Kaisar\. On this very issue Polycarp lost his life. The emperors as a rule were tolerant about it, save Nero and Domitian, who was called Nero _redivivus_, or Nero back again. Trajan in his famous letter to Pliny advised tolerance except in stubborn cases, when the Christians had to be put to death. After Nero it was a crime to be a Christian and all sorts of slanders about them were circulated. We have seen already in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3ff.|, the man of sin who sets himself above God as the object of worship. We have seen also in strkjv@1John:2:18,22; strkjv@4:3; strkjv@2John:1:7| the term antichrist applied apparently to Gnostic heretics. One may wonder if, as Beckwith argues, in the Apocalypse the man of sin and the antichrist are united in the beast.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE VISIONS No theory of authorship, sources, or date should ignore the fact that the author claims to have had a series of visions in Patmos. It does not follow that he wrote them down at once and without reflection, but it seems hardly congruous to think that he waited till he had returned from exile in Patmos to Ephesus before writing them out. In fact, there is a note of sustained excitement all through the book, combined with high literary skill in the structure of the book in spite of the numerous grammatical lapses. The series of sevens bear a relation to one another, but more in the fashion of a kaleidoscope than of a chronological panorama. And yet there is progress and power in the arrangement and the total effect. There is constant use of Old Testament language and imagery, almost a mosaic, but without a single formal quotation. There is constant repetition of words and phrases in true Johannine style. Each of the messages to the seven churches picks out a metaphor in the first picture of Christ in chapter I and there are frequent other allusions to the language in this picture. In fact there is genuine artistic skill in the structure of the book, in spite of the deflections from ordinary linguistic standards. In the visions and all through the book there is constant use of symbols, as is the fashion in apocalypses like the beasts, the scorpions, the horses, etc. These symbols probably were understood by the first readers of the book, though the key to them is lost to us. Even the numbers in the book (3 1/2, 7, 3, 4, 12, 24, 1000) cannot be pressed, though some do so. Even Harnack called the Apocalypse the plainest book in the New Testament, by using Harnack's key for the symbols.

rwp@Romans:2:1 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). See strkjv@1:24,26| for this relative conjunction, "because of which thing." {Without excuse} (\anapologˆtos\). See on ¯1:21|. {Whosoever thou art that judgest} (\pas ho krin“n\). Literally, "every one that judgest," vocative case in apposition with \anthr“pe\. Paul begins his discussion of the failure of the Jew to attain to the God-kind of righteousness (2:1-3:20|) with a general statement applicable to all as he did (1:18|) in the discussion of the failure of the Gentiles (Lightfoot). The Gentile is readily condemned by the Jew when he sins and equally so is the Jew condemned by the Gentile in like case. \Krin“\ does not of itself mean to condemn, but to pick out, separate, approve, determine, pronounce judgment, condemn (if proper). {Another} (\ton heteron\). Literally, "the other man." The notion of two in the word, one criticizing the other. {Thou condemnest thyself} (\seauton katakrineis\). Note \kata\ here with \krin“\, to make plain the adverse judgment. {For} (\gar\). Explanatory reason for the preceding statement. The critic {practises} (\prasseis\, not single acts \poie“\, but the habit \prass“\) the same things that he condemns.

rwp@Romans:3:2 @{Much every way} (\polu kata panta\). \Polu\ points back to \to perisson\. Songs:it means the overplus of the Jew is much from every angle. {First of all} (\pr“ton men\). As in strkjv@1:8; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:18| Paul does not add to his "first." He singles out one privilege of the many possessed by the Jew. {They were intrusted with} (\episteuthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \pisteu“\, to intrust, with accusative of the thing and dative of the person in the active. In the passive as here the accusative of the thing is retained as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:4|. {The oracles of God} (\ta logia tou theou\). In the accusative case, therefore, the object of \episteuthˆsan\. \Logion\ is probably a diminutive of \logos\, word, though the adjective \logios\ also occurs (Acts:18:24|). The word was early used for "oracles" from Delphi and is common in the LXX for the oracles of the Lord. But from Philo on it was used of any sacred writing including narrative. It occurs four times in the N.T. (Acts:7:38|, which see; strkjv@Romans:3:2; strkjv@Hebrews:5:12; strkjv@1Peter:4:11|). It is possible that here and in strkjv@Acts:7:38| the idea may include all the Old Testament, though the commands and promises of God may be all.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Thu Jul 4 00:21:59 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020