Bible:
Filter: String:

NONE.filter - rwp apostol:


rwp@Info_1Corinthians @ Some good commentaries on I Corinthians are the following: On the Greek Bachmann in the _Zahn Kommentar_, Edwards, Ellicott, Findlay (Expositor's Greek Testament), Godet, Goudge, Lietzmann (_Handbuch zum N.T._), Lightfoot (chs. 1-7), Parry, Robertson and Plummer (_Int. Crit._), Stanley, J. Weiss (_Meyer Kommentar_); on the English Dods (_Exp. Bible_), McFadyen, Parry, Ramsay, Rendall, F. W. Robertson, Walker (_Reader's Comm._). strkjv@1Corinthians:1:1 @{Called to be an apostle} (\klˆtos apostolos\). Verbal adjective \klˆtos\ from \kale“\, without \einai\, to be. Literally, {a called apostle} (Romans:1:1|), not so-called, but one whose apostleship is due not to himself or to men (Galatians:1:1|), but to God, {through the will of God} (\dia thelˆmatos tou theou\). The intermediate (\dia, duo\, two) agent between Paul's not being Christ's apostle and becoming one was God's will (\thelˆma\, something willed of God), God's command (1Timothy:1:1|). Paul knows that he is not one of the twelve apostles, but he is on a par with them because, like them, he is chosen by God. He is an apostle of Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus (MSS. vary here, later epistles usually Christ Jesus). The refusal of the Judaizers to recognize Paul as equal to the twelve made him the more careful to claim his position. Bengel sees here Paul's denial of mere human authority in his position and also of personal merit: _Namque mentione Dei excluditur auctoramentum humanum, mentione Voluntatis Dei, meritum Pauli_. {Our brother} (\ho adelphos\). Literally, the brother, but regular Greek idiom for our brother. This Sosthenes, now with Paul in Ephesus, is probably the same Sosthenes who received the beating meant for Paul in Corinth (Acts:18:17|). If so, the beating did him good for he is now a follower of Christ. He is in no sense a co-author of the Epistle, but merely associated with Paul because they knew him in Corinth. He may have been compelled by the Jews to leave Corinth when he, a ruler of the synagogue, became a Christian. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:1| for the mention of Silas and Timothy in the salutation. Sosthenes could have been Paul's amanuensis for this letter, but there is no proof of it.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:2 @{The church of God} (\tˆi ekklˆsiƒi tou theou\). Belonging to God, not to any individual or faction, as this genitive case shows. In strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:1| Paul wrote "the church of the Thessalonians in God" (\en the“i\), but "the churches of God" in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:14|. See same idiom in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:32; strkjv@11:16,22; strkjv@15:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:1; strkjv@Galatians:1:13|, etc. {Which is in Corinth} (\tˆi ousˆi en Korinth“i\). See on strkjv@Acts:13:1| for idiom. It is God's church even in Corinth, "_laetum et ingens paradoxon_" (Bengel). This city, destroyed by Mummius B.C. 146, had been restored by Julius Caesar a hundred years later, B.C. 44, and now after another hundred years has become very rich and very corrupt. The very word "to Corinthianize" meant to practise vile immoralities in the worship of Aphrodite (Venus). It was located on the narrow Isthmus of the Peloponnesus with two harbours (Lechaeum and Cenchreae). It had schools of rhetoric and philosophy and made a flashy imitation of the real culture of Athens. See strkjv@Acts:18| for the story of Paul's work here and now the later developments and divisions in this church will give Paul grave concern as is shown in detail in I and II Corinthians. All the problems of a modern city church come to the front in Corinth. They call for all the wisdom and statesmanship in Paul. {That are sanctified} (\hˆgiasmenois\). Perfect passive participle of \hagiaz“\, late form for \hagiz“\, so far found only in the Greek Bible and in ecclesiastical writers. It means to make or to declare \hagion\ (from \hagos\, awe, reverence, and this from \haz“\, to venerate). It is significant that Paul uses this word concerning the {called saints} or {called to be saints} (\klˆtois hagiois\) in Corinth. Cf. \klˆtos apostolos\ in strkjv@1:1|. It is because they are sanctified {in Christ Jesus} (\en Christ“i Iˆsou\). He is the sphere in which this act of consecration takes place. Note plural, construction according to sense, because \ekklˆsia\ is a collective substantive. {With all that call upon} (\sun pƒsin tois epikaloumenois\). Associative instrumental case with \sun\ rather than \kai\ (and), making a close connection with "saints" just before and so giving the Corinthian Christians a picture of their close unity with the brotherhood everywhere through the common bond of faith. This phrase occurs in the LXX (Genesis:12:8; strkjv@Zechariah:13:9|) and is applied to Christ as to Jehovah (2Thessalonians:1:7,9,12; strkjv@Phillipians:2:9,10|). Paul heard Stephen pray to Christ as Lord (Acts:7:59|). Here "with a plain and direct reference to the Divinity of our Lord" (Ellicott). {Their Lord and ours} (\aut“n kai hˆm“n\). This is the interpretation of the Greek commentators and is the correct one, an afterthought and expansion (\epanorth“sis\) of the previous "our," showing the universality of Christ.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:17 @{For Christ sent me not to baptize} (\ou gar apesteilen me Christos baptizein\). The negative \ou\ goes not with the infinitive, but with \apesteilen\ (from \apostell“, apostolos\, apostle). {For Christ did not send me to be a baptizer} (present active infinitive, linear action) like John the Baptist. {But to preach the gospel} (\alla euaggelizesthai\). This is Paul's idea of his mission from Christ, as Christ's apostle, to be {a gospelizer}. This led, of course, to baptism, as a result, but Paul usually had it done by others as Peter at Caesarea ordered the baptism to be done, apparently by the six brethren with him (Acts:10:48|). Paul is fond of this late Greek verb from \euaggelion\ and sometimes uses both verb and substantive as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:1| "the gospel which I gospelized unto you." {Not in wisdom of words} (\ouk en sophiƒi logou\). Note \ou\, not \mˆ\ (the subjective negative), construed with \apesteilen\ rather than the infinitive. Not in wisdom of speech (singular). Preaching was Paul's forte, but it was not as a pretentious philosopher or professional rhetorician that Paul appeared before the Corinthians (1Corinthians:2:1-5|). Some who followed Apollos may have been guilty of a fancy for external show, though Apollos was not a mere performer and juggler with words. But the Alexandrian method as in Philo did run to dialectic subtleties and luxuriant rhetoric (Lightfoot). {Lest the cross of Christ should be made void} (\hina mˆ ken“thˆi ho stauros tou Christou\). Negative purpose (\hina mˆ\) with first aorist passive subjunctive, effective aorist, of \keno“\, old verb from \kenos\, to make empty. In Paul's preaching the Cross of Christ is the central theme. Hence Paul did not fall into the snare of too much emphasis on baptism nor into too little on the death of Christ. "This expression shows clearly the stress which St. Paul laid on the death of Christ, not merely as a great moral spectacle, and so the crowning point of a life of self-renunciation, but as in itself the ordained instrument of salvation" (Lightfoot).

rwp@1Corinthians:4:9 @{Hath set forth us the apostles last} (\hˆmas tous apostolous eschatous apedeixen\). The first aorist active indicative of \apodeiknumi\, old verb to show, to expose to view or exhibit (Herodotus), in technical sense (cf. strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:4|) for gladiatorial show as in \ethˆriomachˆsa\ (1Corinthians:15:32|). In this grand pageant Paul and other apostles come last (\eschatous\, predicate accusative after \apedeixen\) as a grand finale. {As men doomed to die} (\h“s epithanatious\). Late word, here alone in N.T. The LXX (Bel and the Dragon 31) has it for those thrown daily to the lions. Dionysius of Halicarnassus (_A.R_. vii. 35) uses it of those thrown from the Tarpeian Rock. The gladiators would say _morituri salutamus_. All this in violent contrast to the kingly Messianic pretensions of the Corinthians. {A spectacle} (\theatron\). Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:11:33-40|. The word, like our theatre, means the place of the show (Acts:19:29,31|). Then, it means the spectacle shown there (\theama\ or \thea\), and, as here, the man exhibited as the show like the verb \theatrizomenoi\, made a spectacle (Hebrews:10:33|). Sometimes it refers to the spectators (\theatai\) like our "house" for the audience. Here the spectators include "the world, both to angels and men" (\t“i kosm“i kai aggelois kai anthr“pois\), dative case of personal interest.

rwp@1Corinthians:5:3 @{For I verily} (\eg“ men gar\). Emphatic statement of Paul's own attitude of indignation, \eg“\ in contrast with \humeis\. He justifies his demand for the expulsion of the man. {Being absent} (\ap“n\) Although absent (concessive participle) and so of \par“n\ though present. Each with locative case (\t“i s“mati, t“i pneumati\). {Have already judged} (\ˆdˆ kekrika\). Perfect active indicative of \krin“\. I have already decided or judged, as though present (\h“s par“n\). Paul felt compelled to reach a conclusion about the case and in a sentence of much difficulty seems to conceive an imaginary church court where the culprit has been tried and condemned. There are various ways of punctuating the clauses in this sentence in verses 3-5|. It is not merely Paul's individual judgment. The genitive absolute clause in verse 4|, {ye being gathered together} (\sunachthent“n hum“n\, first aorist passive participle of \sunag“\, in regular assembly) {and my spirit} (\kai tou emou pneumatos\) with the assembly (he means) {and meeting in the name of our Lord Jesus} (\en t“i onomati tou Kuriou [hˆm“n] Iˆsou\) with the power of the Lord Jesus (\sun tˆi dunamei tou Kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou\), though this clause can be taken with the infinitive to deliver (\paradounai\). It makes good syntax and sense taken either way. The chief difference is that, if taken with "gathered together" (\sunachthent“n\) Paul assumes less apostolic prerogative to himself. But he did have such power and used it against Elymas (Acts:13:8ff.|) as Peter did against Ananias and Sapphira (Acts:5:1ff.|).

rwp@1Corinthians:6:13 @{But God shall bring to nought both it and them} (\ho de theos kai tautˆn kai tauta katargˆsei\). Another proverb about the adaptation of the belly (\koilia\) and food (\br“mata\, not just flesh), which had apparently been used by some in Corinth to justify sexual license (fornication and adultery). These Gentiles mixed up matters not alike at all (questions of food and sensuality). " We have traces of this gross moral confusion in the circumstances which dictated the Apostolic Letter (Acts:15:23-29|), where things wholly diverse are combined, as directions about meats to be avoided and a prohibition of fornication" (Lightfoot). Both the belly (\tautˆn\) and the foods (\tauta\) God will bring to an end by death and change. {But the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body} (\to de s“ma ou tˆi porneiƒi alla t“i kuri“i, kai ho kurios t“i s“mati\). Paul here boldly shows the fallacy in the parallel about appetite of the belly for food. The human body has a higher mission than the mere gratification of sensual appetite. Sex is of God for the propagation of the race, not for prostitution. Paul had already stated that God dwells in us as the sanctuary of the Holy Spirit (3:16f.|). This higher function of the body he here puts forward against the debased Greek philosophy of the time which ignored completely Paul's idea, "the body for the Lord and the Lord for the body" (dative of personal interest in both cases). "The Lord Jesus and \porneia\ contested for the bodies of Christian men; loyal to him they must renounce _that_, yielding to _that_ they renounce him" (Findlay).

rwp@1Corinthians:9:1 @{Amos:I not free?} (\Ouk eimi eleutheros;\). Free as a Christian from Mosaic ceremonialism (cf. strkjv@9:19|) as much as any Christian and yet he adapts his moral independence to the principle of considerate love in strkjv@8:13|. {Amos:I not an apostle?} (\ouk eimi apostolos;\). He has the exceptional privileges as an apostle to support from the churches and yet he foregoes these. {Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?} (\ouchi Iˆsoun ton Kurion hˆm“n heoraka;\). Proof (15:8; strkjv@Acts:9:17,27; strkjv@18:9; strkjv@22:14,17f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:1ff.|) that he has the qualification of an apostle (Acts:1:22|) though not one of the twelve. Note strong form of the negative \ouchi\ here. All these questions expect an affirmative answer. The perfect active \heoraka\ from \hora“\, to see, does not here have double reduplication as in strkjv@John:1:18|.

rwp@1Corinthians:12:28 @{God hath set some} (\hous men etheto ho theos\). See verse 18| for \etheto ho theos\. Note middle voice (for his own use). Paul begins as if he means to say \hous men apostolous, hous de prophˆtas\ (some apostles, some prophets), but he changes the construction and has no \hous de\, but instead \pr“ton, deuteron, epeita\ (first, second, then, etc.). {In the church} (\en tˆi ekklˆsiƒi\). The general sense of \ekklˆsia\ as in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| and later in strkjv@Colossians:1:18,24; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23,32; strkjv@Hebrews:12:23|. See list also in strkjv@Ephesians:4:11|. See on ¯Matthew:10:2| for \apostolous\, the official title given the twelve by Jesus, and claimed by Paul though not one of the twelve. {Prophets} (\prophˆtas\). For-speakers for God and Christ. See the list of prophets and teachers in strkjv@Acts:13:1| with Barnabas first and Saul last. Prophets are needed today if men will let God's Spirit use them, men moved to utter the deep things of God. {Teachers} (\didaskalous\). Old word from \didask“\, to teach. Used to the Baptist (Luke:3:12|), to Jesus (John:3:10; strkjv@13:13|), and of Paul by himself along with \apostolos\ (1Timothy:2:7|). It is a calamity when the preacher is no longer a teacher, but only an exhorter. See strkjv@Ephesians:4:11|. {Then miracles} (\epeita dunameis\). Here a change is made from the concrete to the abstract. See the reverse in strkjv@Romans:12:7|. See these words (\dunameis, iamˆt“n, gl“ss“n\) in verses 9,10| with \gl“ss“n\, last again. But these two new terms (helps, governments). {Helps} (\antilˆmpseis\). Old word, from \antilambanomai\, to lay hold of. In LXX, common in papyri, here only in N.T. Probably refers to the work of the deacons, help rendered to the poor and the sick. {Governments} (\kubernˆseis\). Old word from \kuberna“\ (cf. \Kubernˆtˆs\ in strkjv@Acts:27:11|) like Latin _gubernare_, our govern. Songs:a governing. Probably Paul has in mind bishops (\episcopoi\) or elders (\presbuteroi\), the outstanding leaders (\hoi proistamenoi\ in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:12; strkjv@Romans:12:8|; \hoi hˆgoumenoi\ in strkjv@Acts:15:22; strkjv@Hebrews:13:7,17,24|). Curiously enough, these two offices (pastors and deacons) which are not named specifically are the two that survive today. See strkjv@Phillipians:1:1| for both officers.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:7 @{To James} (\Iak“b“i\). The brother of the Lord. This fact explains the presence of the brothers of Jesus in the upper room (Acts:1:14|). {To all the apostles} (\tois apostolois pasin\). The Ascension of Christ from Olivet.

rwp@1Corinthians:16:3 @{When I arrive} (\hotan paragen“mai\). Whenever I arrive, indefinite temporal conjunction \hotan\ and second aorist middle subjunctive. {Whomsoever ye shall approve by letters} (\hous ean dokimasˆte di' epistol“n\). Indefinite relative with \ean\ and aorist subjunctive of \dokimaz“\ (to test and so approve as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:10|). "By letters" to make it formal and regular and Paul would approve their choice of messengers to go with him to Jerusalem (2Corinthians:8:20ff.|). Curiously enough no names from Corinth occur in the list in strkjv@Acts:20:4|. {To carry} (\apenegkein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \apopher“\, to bear away. {Bounty} (\charin\). Gift, grace, as in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:4-7|. As a matter of fact, the messengers of the churches (\apostoloi ekklˆsi“n\ strkjv@2Corinthians:8:23|) went along with Paul to Jerusalem (Acts:20:4f.|).

rwp@Info_1Peter @ SOME BOOKS Alford, H., Vol. IV. 1 of his _Greek Testament_ (1870). Baldwin, _The Fisherman of Galilee_ (1923). Barnes, _St. Peter in Rome and His Tomb on the Vatican Hill_. Beck, J. T., _Erklarung der Briefe Petri_ (1895). Bennett, W. H., _New-Century Bible_ (1901). Bigg, C., _Intern. Crit. Comm_. (1901). Birks, _Studies in the Life and Character of St. Peter_ (1887). Blenkin, _The First Ep. General of St. Peter_ (1915). Camerlinck, _Commentarius in epistolas catholicas_ (1909). Cooke and Lumby, _Speaker's Comm_. (1881). Couard, _Commentaire_ (1895). Couard, _Simon Petrus der Apostel des Herrn_. Davidson, _St. Peter and His Training_. Elert, _Die Religiositat des Petrus_ (1911). Erbes, _Die Todestage der Apostels Paulus and Petrus_ (1899). Foakes-Jackson, F. J., _Peter Prince of Apostles_ (1927). Foster, Ora D., _The Literary Relations of the First Epistle of Peter_ (1913). Fouard, C., _St. Peter and the First Years of Christianity_ (1892). Gallagher, M., _Was the Apostle Peter Ever at Rome?_ (1894). Goutard, _Essai critique et historique sur la prem. e'pitre de S. Pierre_ (1905). Green, S. G., _The Apostle Peter: His Life and Letters_ (1880). Guignebert, _Lamentations:Primaute' de Pierre et la Venue de Pierre a Rome_ (1909). Gunkel, H., _Die Schriften d. N.T_. 3 Aufl. (1917). Hart, J. H. A., _Expos. Greek Test_. (1910). Henriott, _Saint Pierre_ (1891). Hort, F. J. A., _The First Epistle of St. Peter strkjv@1:1-2:17_ (1898). Howson, J., _Horae Petrinae_ (1883). Jenkins, R. C., _The Apostle Peter. Claims of Catholics_ (1875). Johnstone, _The First Epistle of Peter_ (1888). Kasteren, Van, _Deuteronomy:Eerste Brief Van d. Ap. Petrus_ (1911). Keil, C. F., _Comm. uber die Briefe des Petrus und Juda_ (1883). Knopf, R., _Die Briefe Petri und Juda_ (1912). Kogel, J., _Die Gedankenheit des Ersten Briefes Petri_ (1902). Kuhl, E., _Die Briefe Petri und Judae_ (Meyer Komm., 6 Aufl., 1897). Lietzmann, _Petrus and Paulus in Rom_. Lumby, J. R., _Expositor's Bible_ (1893). Masterman, J. H. B., _Epistles of St. Peter_ (1900). McInnis, J.M., _Simon Peter Fisherman and Philosopher_ (1928). Meyer, F. B., _Peter: Fisherman, Disciple, Apostle_ (1920). Moffatt, James, _Moffatt Comm. on N.T._ (1930). Monneir, J., _Lamentations:premiere e'pitre de l'apotre Pierre_ (1900). Perdelwitz, _Die Mysterienreligion und das Problem des ersten Petrusbriefes_ (1911). Plumptre, _Cambridge Bible_ (1879). Reagan, _The Preaching of Peter, the Beginning of Christian Apologetics_ (1922). Robinson, C. G., _Simon Peter: His Life and Times_ (1889). Ross, J. M. E., _The First Epistle of Peter_ (1913). Salmond, A. D. F., _Schaff's Comm_. (1883). Scharfe, _Die petrinische Stromung der neut. Literatur_ (1893). Schmid, _Petrus in Rome_ (1879). Seeley, _The Life and Writings of St. Peter_. Soden, Von, H., _Hand-Komm_. (3 Aufl., 1899). Taylor, W. M., _Peter the Apostle_ (1876). Thomas, W. H., Griffith, _The Apostle Peter_ (2nd ed., 1905). Thompson, _Life-Work of Peter the Apostle_. Upham, _Simon Peter Shepherd_ (1910). Usteri, J. M., _Wiss. und prakt. Komm. uber den I Petrus- brief_ (1887). Volter, D., _Der I Petrusbrief_ (1906). Weiss, B., _Die erste Petrusbrief und die Kritik_ (1906). _Der petrinische Lehrbegriff_ (1855). Williams, N. M., _American Comm_. Windisch, H., _Die Katholische Briefe. Handbuch zum N.T._ (2 Aufl., 1930). Wohlenberg, G., _Der erste und zweite Petrusbrief und der Judasbrief_. (Zahn Komm., 2 Aufl., 1915.) strkjv@1Peter:1:1 @{Peter} (\Petros\). Greek form for the Aramaic (Chaldaic) \Cˆphƒs\, the nickname given Simon by Jesus when he first saw him (John:1:42|) and reaffirmed in the Greek form on his great confession (Matthew:16:18|), with an allusion to \petra\, another form for a rock, ledge, or cliff. In strkjv@2Peter:1:1| we have both \Sim“n\ and \Petros\. Paul in his Epistles always terms himself Paul, not Saul. Songs:Peter uses this name, not Cephas or Simon, because he is writing to Christians scattered over Asia Minor. The nominative absolute occurs here as in strkjv@James:1:1|, but without \chairein\ as there, the usual form of greeting in letters (Acts:23:26|) so common in the papyri. {An apostle of Jesus Christ} (\apostolos Iˆsou Christou\). This is his official title, but in strkjv@2Peter:1:1| \doulos\ is added, which occurs alone in strkjv@James:1:1|. In II and III John we have only \ho presbuteros\ (the elder), as Peter terms himself \sunpresbuteros\ in strkjv@1Peter:5:1|. Paul's usage varies greatly: only the names in I and II Thessalonians, the title \apostolos\ added and defended in Galatians and Romans as also in I and II Corinthians and Colossians and Ephesians and II Timothy with "by the will of God" added, and in I Timothy with the addition of "according to the command of God." In Philippians Paul has only "\doulos\ (slave) \Christou Iˆsou\," like James and Jude. In Romans and Titus Paul has both \doulos\ and \apostolos\, like II Peter, while in Philemon he uses only \desmios\ (prisoner) \Iˆsou Christou\. {To the elect} (\eklektois\). Without article (with the article in strkjv@Matthew:24:22,24,31|) and dative case, "to elect persons" (viewed as a group). Bigg takes \eklektois\ (old, but rare verbal adjective from \ekleg“\, to pick out, to select) as an adjective describing the next word, "to elect sojourners." That is possible and is like \genos eklekton\ in strkjv@2:9|. See the distinction between \klˆtoi\ (called) and \eklektoi\ (chosen) in strkjv@Matthew:22:14|. {Who are sojourners} (\parepidˆmois\). Late double compound adjective (\para, epidˆmountes\, strkjv@Acts:2:10|, to sojourn by the side of natives), strangers sojourning for a while in a particular place. Songs:in Polybius, papyri, in LXX only twice (Genesis:23:4|; 38 or 39 12), in N.T. only here, strkjv@2:11; strkjv@Hebrews:11:13|. The picture in the metaphor here is that heaven is our native country and we are only temporary sojourners here on earth. {Of the Dispersion} (\diasporƒs\). See strkjv@John:7:35| for literal sense of the word for scattered (from \diaspeir“\, to scatter abroad, strkjv@Acts:8:1|) Jews outside of Palestine, and strkjv@James:1:1| for the sense here to Jewish Christians, including Gentile Christians (only N T. examples). Note absence of the article, though a definite conception (of the Dispersion). The Christian is a pilgrim on his way to the homeland. These five Roman provinces include what we call Asia Minor north and west of the Taurus mountain range (Hort). Hort suggests that the order here suggests that Silvanus (bearer of the Epistle) was to land in Pontus from the Euxine Sea, proceed through Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, to Bithynia, where he would re-embark for Rome. This, he holds, explains the separation of Pontus and Bithynia, though the same province. Only Galatia and Asia are mentioned elsewhere in the N.T. as having Christian converts, but the N.T. by no means gives a full account of the spread of the Gospel, as can be judged from strkjv@Colossians:1:6,23|.

rwp@1Peter:1:2 @{According to} (\kata\). Probably to be connected with \eklektois\ rather than with \apostolos\ in spite of a rather loose arrangement of words and the absence of articles in verses 1,2|. {The foreknowledge} (\progn“sin\). Late substantive (Plutarch, Lucian, papyri) from \progin“sk“\ (1:20|), to know beforehand, only twice in N.T. (here and strkjv@Acts:2:23| in Peter's sermon). In this Epistle Peter often uses substantives rather than verbs (cf. strkjv@Romans:8:29|). {Of God the Father} (\theou patros\). Anarthous again and genitive case. See \patˆr\ applied to God also in strkjv@1:3,17| as often by Paul (Romans:1:7|, etc.). Peter here presents the Trinity (God the Father, the Spirit, Jesus Christ). {In sanctification of the Spirit} (\en hagiasm“i pneumatos\). Clearly the Holy Spirit, though anarthrous like \theou patros\. Late word from \hagiaz“\, to render holy (\hagios\), to consecrate, as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:7|. The subjective genitive here, sanctification wrought by the Spirit as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:13| (where the Trinity mentioned as here). {Unto obedience} (\eis hupakoˆn\). Obedience (from \hupakou“\, to hear under, to hearken) to the Lord Jesus as in strkjv@1:22| "to the truth," result of "the sanctification." {And sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ} (\rantismon haimatos Iˆsou Christou\). Late substantive from \rantiz“\, to sprinkle (Hebrews:9:13|), a word used in the LXX of the sacrifices (Numbers:19:9,13,20|, etc.), but not in any non-biblical source so far as known, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:12:24| (of the sprinkling of blood). Reference to the death of Christ on the Cross and to the ratification of the New Covenant by the blood of Christ as given in strkjv@Hebrews:9:19f.; strkjv@12:24| with allusion to strkjv@Exodus:24:3-8|. Paul does not mention this ritual use of the blood of Christ, but Jesus does (Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Mark:14:24|). Hence it is not surprising to find the use of it by Peter and the author of Hebrews. Hort suggests that Peter may also have an ulterior reference to the blood of the martyrs as in strkjv@Revelation:7:14f.; strkjv@12:11|, but only as illustration of what Jesus did for us, not as having any value. The whole Epistle is a commentary upon \progn“sis theou, hagiasmos pneumatos, haima Christou\ (Bigg). Peter is not ashamed of the blood of Christ. {Be multiplied} (\plˆthuntheiˆ\). First aorist passive optative (volitive) of \plˆthun“\, old verb (from \plˆthus\, fulness), in a wish. Songs:in strkjv@2Peter:1:2; strkjv@Jude:1:2|, but nowhere else in N.T. salutations. Grace and peace (\charis kai eirˆnˆ\) occur together in strkjv@2Peter:1:2|, in strkjv@2John:1:2| (with \eleos\), and in all Paul's Epistles (with \eleos\ added in I and II Timothy).

rwp@1Peter:2:25 @{For ye were going astray like sheep} (\ˆte gar h“s probata plan“menoi\). Brought from strkjv@Isaiah:53:6|, but changed to periphrastic imperfect indicative with \ˆte\ and present middle participle of \plana“\, to wander away. Recall the words of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:15:4-7|. {But are now returned} (\alla epestraphˆte\). Second aorist passive indicative of \epistreph“\, old verb, to turn, to return (Matthew:10:13|). {Unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls} (\epi ton poimena kai episkopon t“n psuch“n hum“n\). Jesus called himself the Good Shepherd (John:10:11|, and see also strkjv@Hebrews:13:20|). Here alone is Christ called our "Bishop" (overseer). See both ideas combined in strkjv@Ezekiel:34:11|. Philo calls God \Episcopos\. Jesus is also \Apostolos\ strkjv@Hebrews:3:1|) and he deserves all other titles of dignity that we can give him.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:6 @{Nor seeking glory of men} (\oute zˆtountes ex anthr“p“n doxan\). "Upon the repudiation of covetousness follows naturally the repudiation of worldly ambition" (Milligan). See strkjv@Acts:20:19; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:5; strkjv@Ephesians:4:2|. This third disclaimer is as strong as the other two. Paul and his associates had not tried to extract praise or glory out of (\ex\) men. {Neither from you nor from others} (\oute aph' hum“n oute aph' all“n\). He widens the negation to include those outside of the church circles and changes the preposition from \ex\ (out of) to \apo\ (from). {When we might have been burdensome, as apostles of Christ} (\dunamenoi en barei einai h“s Christou apostoloi\). Westcott and Hort put this clause in verse 7|. Probably a concessive participle, {though being able to be in a position of weight} (either in matter of finance or of dignity, or a burden on your funds or "men of weight" as Moffatt suggests). Milligan suggests that Paul "plays here on the double sense of the phrase" like the Latin proverb: _Honos propter onus_. Songs:he adds, including Silas and Timothy, {as Christ's apostles}, as missionaries clearly, whether in the technical sense or not (cf. strkjv@Acts:14:4,14; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:23; strkjv@11:13; strkjv@Romans:16:7; strkjv@Phillipians:2:25; strkjv@Revelation:2:2|). They were entitled to pay as "Christ's apostles" (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:7ff.|), though they had not asked for it.

rwp@1Timothy:1:15 @{Faithful is the saying} (\pistos ho logos\). Five times in the Pastorals (1Timothy:1:15; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@4:9; strkjv@Titus:3:8; strkjv@2Timothy:2:11|). It will pay to note carefully \pistis, pisteu“, pistos\. Same use of \pistos\ (trustworthy) applied to \logos\ in strkjv@Titus:1:9; strkjv@Revelation:21:5; strkjv@22:6|. Here and probably in strkjv@2Timothy:2:11| a definite saying seems to be referred to, possibly a quotation (\hoti\) of a current saying quite like the Johannine type of teaching. This very phrase (Christ coming into the world) occurs in strkjv@John:9:37; strkjv@11:27; strkjv@16:28; strkjv@18:37|. Paul, of course, had no access to the Johannine writings, but such "sayings" were current among the disciples. There is no formal quotation, but "the whole phrase implies a knowledge of Synoptic and Johannine language" (Lock) as in strkjv@Luke:5:32; strkjv@John:12:47|. {Acceptation} (\apodochˆs\). Genitive case with \axios\ (worthy of). Late word (Polybius, Diod., Jos.) in N.T. only here and strkjv@4:9|. {Chief} (\pr“tos\). Not \ˆn\ (I was), but \eimi\ (I am). "It is not easy to think of any one but St. Paul as penning these words" (White). In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:9| he had called himself "the least of the apostles" (\elachistos t“n apostol“n\). In strkjv@Ephesians:3:8| he refers to himself as "the less than the least of all saints" (\t“i elachistoter“i pant“n hagi“n\). On occasion Paul would defend himself as on a par with the twelve apostles (Galatians:2:6-10|) and superior to the Judaizers (2Corinthians:11:5f.; strkjv@12:11|). It is not mock humility here, but sincere appreciation of the sins of his life (cf. strkjv@Romans:7:24|) as a persecutor of the church of God (Galatians:1:13|), of men and even women (Acts:22:4f.; strkjv@26:11|). He had sad memories of those days.

rwp@1Timothy:1:20 @{Hymenaeus} (\Humenaios\). The same heretic reappears in strkjv@2Timothy:2:17|. He and Alexander are the chief "wreckers" of faith in Ephesus. {Alexander} (\Alexandros\). Probably the same as the one in strkjv@2Timothy:4:14|, but not the Jew of that name in strkjv@Acts:19:33|, unless he had become a Christian since then. {I delivered unto Satan} (\pared“ka t“i Satanƒi\). See this very idiom (\paradounai t“i Satanƒi\) in strkjv@1Corinthians:5:5|. It is a severe discipline of apostolic authority, apparently exclusion and more than mere abandonment (1Thessalonians:2:18; strkjv@1Corinthians:5:11; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:11|), though it is an obscure matter. {That they might be taught not to blaspheme} (\hina paideuth“sin mˆ blasphˆmein\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \paideu“\. For this use of this common late verb, see strkjv@1Corinthians:11:32; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:9|.

rwp@1Timothy:2:7 @{For which} (\eis ho\). The testimony of Jesus in his self-surrender (verse 6|). See \eis ho\ in strkjv@2Timothy:1:11|. {I was appointed} (\etethˆn eg“\). First aorist passive indicative of \tithˆmi\. {Preacher and apostle} (\kˆrux kai apostolos\). In strkjv@2Timothy:1:10| Paul adds \didaskalos\ (herald, apostle, teacher) as he does here with emphasis. In strkjv@Colossians:1:23f.| he has \diakonos\ (minister). He frequently uses \kˆruss“\ of himself (1Corinthians:1:23; strkjv@9:27; strkjv@Galatians:2:2; strkjv@Romans:10:8f.|). {I speak the truth, I lie not} (\alˆtheian leg“, ou pseudomai\). A Pauline touch (Romans:9:1|). Cf. strkjv@Galatians:1:20; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:31|. Here alone he calls himself "a teacher of the Gentiles," elsewhere apostle (Romans:11:13|), minister (Romans:15:16|), prisoner (Ephesians:3:1|).

rwp@2Corinthians:8:23 @{About Titus} (\huper Titou\). There is no verb expressed. Supply "inquire." He endorses Titus up to the hilt. He is "my partner" (\koin“nos emos\) and "fellow-worker" (\sunergos\). {Messengers of the churches} (\apostoloi ekklˆsi“n\). Apostles in the general sense of "sent ones" (from \apostell“\, to send) by the churches and responsible to the churches for the handling of the funds. {The glory of Christ} (\doxa Christou\). Financial agents, please observe.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:5 @{That I am not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles} (\mˆden husterˆkenai t“n huperlian apostol“n\). Perfect active infinitive of \hustere“\, old verb to fall short with the ablative case. The rare compound adverb \huperlian\ (possibly in use in the vernacular) is probably ironical also, "the super apostles" as these Judaizers set themselves up to be. "The extra-super apostles" (Farrar). Also in strkjv@12:11|. He is not referring to the pillar-apostles of strkjv@Galatians:2:9|.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:13 @{False apostles} (\pseudapostoloi\). From \pseudˆs\, false, and \apostolos\. Paul apparently made this word (cf. strkjv@Revelation:2:2|). In verse 26| we have \pseudadelphos\, a word of like formation (Galatians:2:4|). See also \pseudochristoi\ and \pseudoprophˆtai\ in strkjv@Mark:13:22|. {Deceitful} (\dolioi\). Old word from \dolos\ (lure, snare), only here in N.T. (cf. strkjv@Romans:16:18|). {Fashioning themselves} (\metaschˆmatizomenoi\). Present middle (direct) participle of the old verb \metaschˆmatiz“\ for which see on strkjv@1Corinthians:4:6|. Masquerading as apostles of Christ by putting on the outward habiliments, posing as ministers of Christ ("gentlemen of the cloth," nothing but cloth). Paul plays with this verb in verses 13,14,15|.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:12 @{Of an apostle} (\tou apostolou\). "Of the apostle" (definite article). Note the three words here for miracles wrought by Paul (\sˆmeia\, signs, \terata\, wonders, \dunameis\, powers or miracles) as in strkjv@Hebrews:2:4|.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:7 @{Though we be as reprobate} (\hˆmeis de h“s adokimoi “men\). Literally, "And that" (\hina de\). Paul wishes them to do no wrong (\kakon mˆden\). He has no desire to exercise his apostolic authority and "appear approved" (\dokimoi phan“men\, second aorist passive subjunctive of \phain“\). He had far rather see them do "the noble thing" (\to kalon\) even if it should make him appear disapproved after all that he has said.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:9 @{For we rejoice} (\chairomen gar\). Paul had far rather be weak in the sense of failing to exercise his apostolic power because they did the noble thing. He is no Jonah who lamented when Ninevah repented. {Your perfecting} (\hum“n katartisin\). Late word from \katartiz“\, to fit, to equip (see verb in verse 11|). In Plutarch, only here in N.T.

rwp@Info_2Peter @ ANACHRONISMS It used to be said that it was impossible for II Peter to have been written in the first century, because it had the atmosphere of the second. But one fact is strongly against that argument. In strkjv@2Peter:3:8| occurs the quotation of strkjv@Psalms:90:4| about the thousand years without any chiliastic turn at all, a thing sure to happen in the second century after chiliasm had come to have such a swing. Peter's use of it suits the first century, not the second. As a matter of fact, the false teachers described in II Peter suit the first century precisely if one recalls Paul's troubles with the Judaizers in Galatia and Corinth and with the Gnostics in Colossae and Ephesus. "Every feature in the description of the false teachers and mockers is to be found in the apostolic age" (Bigg).

rwp@Info_2Peter @ BOOKS ON II PETER BESIDES THOSE ON I PETER ALSO Abbott, E. A., _The Expositor_ (Jan. to March, 1822). Chase, F. H., _Hastings D B_ (Second Peter). Deuteronomy:Zwaan, _2 Peter en Judas_ (1909). Dietlein, W. O., _Der 2 Brief Petri_ (1851). Grosch, H., _Die Echtheit des zweiten Briefes Petri_ (1889). Henkel, K., _Der zweite Brief des Apostelfursten Petrus_ (1904). Hofmann, J. C., _Der zweite Brief Petri und der Brief Juda (1875) Hundhausen, _Das zweite Pontifkalschreiben des Apostels Petrus_ (1873). James, M. R., _The Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of Jude_ (Cambridge Greek Testament, 1912). Lumby, J. R., _2 Peter and Jude_ (in Bible Commentary). Mayor, J. B., _The Epistle of St. Jude:and the Second Epistle of St. Peter_ (1907). Plummer, A., _The Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of Jude_ (Vol. 3, N.T. Commentary for English Readers by Ellicott). Robson, E. I., _Studies in the Second Epistle of St. Peter_ (1915). Schott, Th., _Der zweite Brief Petri und der Brief Juda_ (1863). Schott, _Der 2 Br. Petri und der Br. Juda Erkl_. (1863). Schweenhorst, H., _Das Verhaltnis des Judasbriefes zum zweiten Petrusbriefe_ (1904). Snyman, D. R., _The Authenticity of the Second Epistle of Peter_ (thesis in 1923 for Th.D. degree at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary). Spitta, F, _Der zweite Brief des Petrus und der Brief des Judas_ (1885). Strachan, R. D., _Expositor's Greek Testament_ (1910), Ullman, C., _Der 2 Brief Petri Krit. untersuch._ (1821). Warfield, B. B., _A Defence of 2 Peter_ (Southern Presbyterian Review, January, 1882).,_Dr. Edwin A. Abbott on the Genuineness of Second Peter (Southern Presbyterian Review_, 1883). Werdermann, _H., Die Irrlehrer des Judasbriefes und 2 Petrusbriefes_ (1913). Wiesinger, J. T. A., _Der zweite Brief des Apostels Petrus und der Brief des Judas_ (1862). strkjv@2Peter:1:1 @{Simon Peter} (\Sim“n Petros\). Aleph A K L P have \Syme“n\ as in strkjv@Acts:15:14|, while B has \Sim“n\. The two forms occur indifferently in I Macc. strkjv@2:3, 65 for the same man. {Servant and apostle} (\doulos kai apostolos\). Like strkjv@Romans:1:1; strkjv@Titus:1:1|. {To them that have obtained} (\tois lachousin\). Dative plural articular participle second aorist active of \lagchan“\, old verb, to obtain by lot (Luke:1:9|), here with the accusative (\pistin\) as in strkjv@Acts:1:17|. {Like precious} (\isotimon\). Late compound adjective (\isos\, equal, \timˆ\, honor, price), here only in N.T. But this adjective (Field) is used in two ways, according to the two ideas in \timˆ\ (value, honor), either like in value or like in honor. This second idea is the usual one with \isotimos\ (inscriptions and papyri, Josephus, Lucian), while \polutimos\ has the notion of price like \timˆ\ in strkjv@1:7,19; strkjv@2:4,6f|. The faith which they have obtained is like in honor and privilege with that of Peter or any of the apostles. {With us} (\hˆmin\). Associative-instrumental case after \isotimon\. Equal to \tˆi hˆm“n\ (the faith of us). {In the righteousness} (\en dikaiosunˆi\). Definite because of the preposition \en\ and the following genitive even though anarthrous. The O.T. sense of \dikaiosunˆ\ applied to God (Romans:1:17|) and here to Christ. {Of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ} (\tou theou hˆm“n kai s“tˆros Iˆsou Christou\). Songs:the one article (\tou\) with \theou\ and \s“tˆros\ requires precisely as with \tou kuriou hˆm“n kai s“tˆros Iˆsou Christou\ (of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ), one person, not two, in strkjv@1:11| as in strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:2,18|. Songs:in strkjv@1Peter:1:3| we have \ho theos kai patˆr\ (the God and Father), one person, not two. The grammar is uniform and inevitable (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 786), as even Schmiedel (Winer-Schmiedel, _Grammatik_, p. 158) admits: "Grammar demands that one person be meant." Moulton (_Prol._, p. 84) cites papyri examples of like usage of \theos\ for the Roman emperors. See the same idiom in strkjv@Titus:2:13|. The use of \theos\ by Peter as a predicate with Jesus Christ no more disproves the Petrine authorship of this Epistle than a like use in strkjv@John:1:1| disproves the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel and the same use in strkjv@Titus:2:13| disproves the genuineness of Titus. Peter had heard Thomas call Jesus God (John:20:28|) and he himself had called him the Son of God (Matthew:16:16|).

rwp@2Peter:3:2 @{That ye should remember} (\mnˆsthˆnai\). First aorist passive (deponent) infinitive of \mimnˆsk“\, to remind. Purpose (indirect command) is here expressed by this infinitive. Imperative in strkjv@Jude:1:17|. {Spoken before} (\proeirˆmen“n\). Perfect passive participle of \proeipon\ (defective verb). Genitive case \rˆmat“n\ after \mnˆsthˆnai\. {And the commandment} (\kai tˆs entolˆs\). Ablative case with \hupo\ (agency). {Of the Lord and Saviour through your apostles} (\t“n apostol“n hum“n tou kuriou kai s“tˆros\). \Hum“n\ (your) is correct, not \hˆm“n\ (our). But the several genitives complicate the sense. If \dia\ (through) occurred before \t“n apostol“n\, it would be clear. It is held by some that Peter would not thus speak of the twelve apostles, including himself, and that the forger here allows the mask to slip, but Bigg rightly regards this a needless inference. The meaning is that they should remember the teaching of their apostles and not follow the Gnostic libertines.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:4 @{And we have confidence} (\pepoithomen\). Second perfect indicative of \peith“\, to persuade, intransitive in this tense, we are in a state of trust. {In the Lord touching you} (\en kuri“i eph' humas\). Note the two prepositions, \en\ in the sphere of the Lord (1Thessalonians:4:1|) as the _ground_ of Paul's confident trust, \eph'\ (\epi\) with the accusative (towards you) where the dative could have been used (cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:2:3|). {Ye both do and will do} (\[kai] poieite kai poiˆsete\). Compliment and also appeal, present and future tenses of \poie“\. {The things which we command} (\ha paraggellomen\). Note of apostolic authority here, not advice or urging, but command.

rwp@Info_3John THIRD JOHN ABOUT A.D. 85 TO 90 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION Certainly III John is addressed to an individual, not to a church, though which Gaius we do not know. There are three friends of Paul with this name; Gaius of Corinth (1Corinthians:1:14|), Gaius of Macedonia (Acts:19:29|), Gaius of Derbe (Acts:20:4|), but it is unlikely that this Gaius of Pergamum (Findlay would call him) is either of these, though the _Apostolical Constitutions_ does identify him with Gaius of Derbe. It is possible that in strkjv@3John:1:9| there is an allusion to II John and, if so, then both letters went to individuals in the same church (one a loyal woman, the other a loyal man). Three persons are sharply sketched in III John (Gaius, Diotrephes, Demetrius). Gaius is the dependable layman in the church, Diotrephes the dominating official, Demetrius the kindly messenger from Ephesus with the letter, a vivid picture of early church life and missionary work. John is at Ephesus, the last of the apostles, and with an eagle's eye surveys the work in Asia Minor. The same Gnostic deceivers are at work as in the other Johannine Epistles. Pergamum is described in strkjv@Revelation:2:13| as the place "where Satan's throne is." strkjv@3John:1:1 @{The beloved} (\t“i agapˆt“i\). Four times in this short letter this verbal adjective is used of Gaius (here, 2,5,11|). See strkjv@2John:1:1| for the same phrase here, "whom I love in truth."

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION But for the Acts we should know nothing of the early apostolic period save what is told in the Epistles. There are various apocryphal "Acts," but they are without historical worth. Hence the importance of this book.

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE DATE There are three views about the date of the Acts. Baur and his Tubingen School held the second century to be the date of this late pamphlet as they termed it after the fashion of the Clementine Homilies. But that view is now practically abandoned save by the few who still strangely oppose the Lukan authorship. Probably the majority of those who accept the Lukan authorship place it in the latter part of the first century for two reasons. One is that the Gospel according to Luke is dated by them after the destruction of Jerusalem because of the prophecy by Jesus of the encompassing of the city by armies. Predictive prophecy that would be and so it is considered a prophecy _post eventum_. The other reason is the alleged use of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus by Luke. Josephus finished this work A.D. 93 so that, if Luke did use it, he must have written the Acts after that date. Usually this argument is made to show that Luke could not have written it at all, but some hold that he may have lived to an age that would allow it. But it cannot be assumed that Luke used Josephus because of his mention of Theudas and Judas the Galilean. They differ so widely (Acts:5:36f|. and Josephus, _Ant_. XX. v, 1, 2) that Von Dobschutz (_Dictionary of the Apostolic Church_, art. Josephus) argues that the two accounts are entirely independent of each other. Songs:Luke (Luke:13:1f.|) alludes to a Galilean revolt not mentioned by Josephus and Josephus records three revolts under Pilate not referred to by Luke. A comparison of the accounts of the death of Agrippa I in strkjv@Acts:12:20-23| and _Ant_. XIX. viii, 2 redounds to the credit of Luke. The Josephus phase of the argument may be brushed to one side. The third view, held by Harnack and adopted here, is that Luke wrote the Acts while with Paul in Rome and finished the book before Paul's release, that is by A.D. 63. This is the obvious and natural way to take the language of Luke at the close of Acts. Events had gone no farther and so he ends the narrative right there. It is argued against this that Luke contemplated a third volume and for this reason closed with the arrival of Paul in Rome. But the use of \pr“ton\ (first) in strkjv@Acts:1:1| is a common _Koin‚_ idiom and does not imply three volumes any more than first and second stories with us means that the house has three. Of course this date for the Acts puts the date of the Gospel further back either in Caesarea (57 to 59) or in Rome (60 to 62). And that means that Mark's Gospel is still earlier since Luke used it for his Gospel and the Logia (Q) earlier still. But all these dates are probable in the light of all the known facts.

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE TEXT OF THE ACTS A special problem arises concerning the text of Acts inasmuch as the Codex Bezae (D) with some other Western support presents a great many additions to the Neutral-Alexandrian text of Aleph A B C. Blass has even proposed the idea that Luke himself issued two editions of the book, an attractive hypothesis that is not generally accepted. J. M. Wilson has published _The Acts of the Apostles from Codex Bezae_. The whole subject is elaborately treated by J. H. Ropes in Vol. III, _The Text of Acts_ in Part I of _The Beginnings of Christianity_. Besides thorough discussion of all the problems of text involved Ropes gives the text of the Vatican Codex (B) on the left page and that of Codex Bezae (D) on the right, making comparison easy. Blass's ideas appear in his _Acta Apostolorum_.

rwp@Acts:1:1 @_The Title_ is simply _Acts_ (\Praxeis\) in Aleph, Origen, Tertullian, Didymus, Hilary, Eusebius, Epiphanius. _The Acts of the Apostles_ (\Praxeis apostol“n\) is the reading of B D (Aleph in subscription) Athanasius, Origen, Tertullian, Cyprian, Eusebius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Theodoret, Hilary. _The Acts of the Holy Apostles_ (\Praxeis t“n hagi“n apostol“n\) is read by A2 E G H A K Chrysostom. It is possible that the book was given no title at all by Luke, for it is plain that usage varied greatly even in the same writers. The long title as found in the Textus Receptus (Authorized Version) is undoubtedly wrong with the adjective "Holy." The reading of B D, "_The Acts of the Apostles_," may be accepted as probably correct.

rwp@Acts:1:25 @{Apostleship} (\apostolˆs\). Jesus had called the twelve apostles. An old word for sending away, then for a release, then the office and dignity of an apostle (Acts:1:25; strkjv@Romans:1:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:2; Gal strkjv@2:8|). {To his own place} (\eis ton topon ton idion\). A bold and picturesque description of the destiny of Judas worthy of Dante's _Inferno_. There is no doubt in Peter's mind of the destiny of Judas nor of his own guilt. He made ready his own berth and went to it.

rwp@Acts:5:42 @{Every day} (\pƒsan hˆmeran\). Accusative of extent of time, all through every day. {In the temple and at home} (\en t“i hier“i kai kat' oikon\). This was a distinct triumph to go back to the temple where they had been arrested (verse 25|) and at home or from house to house, as it probably means (cf. strkjv@2:46|). It was a great day for the disciples in Jerusalem. {They ceased not} (\ouk epauonto\). Imperfect middle. They kept it up. {Jesus as the Christ} (\ton Christon Iˆsoun\). Jesus is the direct object of the participles \didaskontes\ (teaching) and \euaggelizomenoi\ (preaching or evangelizing) while "the Christ" (\ton Christon\) is the predicate accusative. These words give the substance of the early apostolic preaching as these opening chapters of Acts show, that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah of promise. Gamaliel had opened the prison doors for them and they took full advantage of the opportunity that now was theirs.

rwp@Acts:8:1 @{Was consenting} (\ˆn suneudok“n\). Periphrastic imperfect of \suneudoke“\, a late double compound (\sun, eu, doke“\) that well describes Saul's pleasure in the death (\anairesis\, taking off, only here in the N.T., though old word) of Stephen. For the verb see on ¯Luke:23:32|. Paul himself will later confess that he felt so (Acts:22:20|), coolly applauding the murder of Stephen, a heinous sin (Romans:1:32|). It is a gruesome picture. Chapter 7 should have ended here. {On that day} (\en ekeinˆi tˆi hˆmerƒi\). On that definite day, that same day as in strkjv@2:41|. {A great persecution} (\di“gmos megas\). It was at first persecution from the Sadducees, but this attack on Stephen was from the Pharisees so that both parties are now united in a general persecution that deserves the adjective "great." See on ¯Matthew:13:21| for the old word \di“gmos\ from \di“k“\, to chase, hunt, pursue, persecute. {Were all scattered abroad} (\pantes diesparˆsan\). Second aorist passive indicative of \diaspeir“\, to scatter like grain, to disperse, old word, in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:8:1,4; strkjv@11:19|. {Except the apostles} (\plˆn t“n apostol“n\). Preposition \plˆn\ (adverb from \pleon\, more) with the ablative often in Luke. It remains a bit of a puzzle why the Pharisees spared the apostles. Was it due to the advice of Gamaliel in strkjv@Acts:5:34-40|? Or was it the courage of the apostles? Or was it a combination of both with the popularity of the apostles in addition?

rwp@Acts:9:3 @{As he journeyed} (\en t“i poreuesthai\). Luke's common idiom for a temporal clause (in the journeying), \en\ with the locative articular middle infinitive. {Drew nigh} (\eggizein\). Present active infinitive, was drawing nigh. {Shone round about him} (\auton periˆstrapsen\). First aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \periastrapt“\, late compound verb common in LXX and Byzantine writers, here and strkjv@22:6| alone in the N.T. "A light from heaven suddenly flashed around him." It was like a flash of lightning. Paul uses the same verb in strkjv@22:5|, but in strkjv@26:13| he employs \perilampsan\ (shining around). There are numerous variations in the historical narrative of Saul's conversion in strkjv@9:3-18| and Luke's report of Paul's two addresses, one on the steps of the Tower of Antonia facing the murderous mob (22:6-16|), the other before Festus and Agrippa (26:12-20|). A great deal of capital has been made of these variations to the discredit of Luke as a writer as if he should have made Paul's two speeches conform at every point with his own narrative. This objection has no weight except for those who hold that Luke composed Paul's speeches freely as some Greek writers used to do. But, if Luke had notes of Paul's speeches or help from Paul himself, he naturally preserved the form of the two addresses without trying to make them agree with each other in all details or with his own narrative in chapter 9. Luke evidently attached great importance to the story of Saul's conversion as the turning point not simply in the career of the man, but an epoch in the history of apostolic Christianity. In broad outline and in all essentials the three accounts agree and testify to the truthfulness of the account of the conversion of Saul. It is impossible to overestimate the worth to the student of Christianity of this event from every angle because we have in Paul's Epistles his own emphasis on the actual appearance of Jesus to him as the fact that changed his whole life (1Corinthians:15:8; strkjv@Galatians:1:16f.|). The variations that appear in the three accounts do not mar the story, when rightly understood, as we shall see. Here, for instance, Luke simply mentions "a light from heaven," while in strkjv@22:6| Paul calls it "a great (\hikanon\) light" "about noon" and in strkjv@26:13| "above the brightness of the sun," as it would have to be "at midday" with the sun shining.

rwp@Acts:9:27 @{Took him} (\epilabomenos\). Second aorist middle (indirect) participle of \epilamban“\, common verb to lay hold of. Barnabas saw the situation and took Saul to himself and listened to his story and believed it. It is to the credit of Barnabas that he had the insight and the courage to stand by Saul at the crucial moment in his life when the evidence seemed to be against him. It is a pleasing hypothesis that this influential disciple from Cyprus had gone to the University of Tarsus where he met Saul. If so, he would know more of him than those who only knew his record as a persecutor of Christians. That fact Barnabas knew also, but he was convinced that Jesus had changed the heart of Saul and he used his great influence (Acts:4:36; strkjv@11:22|) to win the favour of the apostles, Peter in particular (Galatians:1:19|) and James the half-brother of Jesus. The other apostles were probably out of the city as Paul says that he did not see them. {To the apostles} (\pros tous apostolous\). Both Barnabas and James are termed apostles in the general sense, though not belonging to the twelve, as Paul did not, though himself later a real apostle. Songs:Barnabas introduced Saul to Peter and vouched for his story, declared it fully (\diˆgˆsato\, in detail) including Saul's vision of Jesus (\eiden ton kurion\) as the vital thing and Christ's message to Saul (\elalˆsen aut“i\) and Saul's bold preaching (\ˆparrˆsiasato\, first aorist middle indicative of \parrˆsiaz“\ from \pan--rˆsia\ telling it all as in strkjv@Acts:2:29|). Peter was convinced and Saul was his guest for two weeks (Galatians:1:18|) with delightful fellowship (\historˆsai\). He had really come to Jerusalem mainly "to visit" (to see) Peter, but not to receive a commission from him. He had that from the Lord (Galatians:1:1f.|). Both Peter and James could tell Saul of their special experiences with the Risen Christ. Furneaux thinks that Peter was himself staying at the home of Mary the mother of John Mark (Acts:12:12|) who was a cousin of Barnabas (Colossians:4:10|). This is quite possible. At any rate Saul is now taken into the inner circle of the disciples in Jerusalem.

rwp@Acts:14:4 @{But the multitude of the city was divided} (\eschisthˆ de to plˆthos tˆs pole“s\). First aorist passive indicative of \schiz“\, old verb to split, to make a schism or factions as Sadducees and Pharisees (23:7|). This division was within the Gentile populace. Part held (\hoi men ˆsan\), literally "some were with the Jews" (\sun tois Ioudaiois\), part with the apostles (\hoi de sun tois apostolois\). Common demonstrative of contrast (\hoi men, hoi de\, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 694). The Jewish leaders made some impression on the Gentiles as at Antioch in Pisidia and later at Thessalonica (17:4f.|). This is the first time in the Acts that Paul and Barnabas are termed "apostles" (see also verse 14|). Elsewhere in the Acts the word is restricted to the twelve. Certainly Luke does not here employ it in that technical sense. To have followed Jesus in his ministry and to have seen the Risen Christ was essential to the technical use (1:22f.|). Whether Barnabas had seen the Risen Christ we do not know, but certainly Paul had (1Corinthians:9:1f.; strkjv@15:8|). Paul claimed to be an apostle on a par with the twelve (Galatians:1:1,16-18|). The word originally means simply one sent (John:13:16|) like messengers of the churches with the collection (2Corinthians:8:23|). The Jews used it of those sent from Jerusalem to collect the temple tribute. Paul applies the word to James the Lord's brother (Galatians:1:19|), to Epaphroditus (Phillipians:2:25|) as the messenger of the church in Philippi, to Silvanus and Timothy (1Thessalonians:2:6; strkjv@Acts:18:5|), apparently to Apollos (1Corinthians:4:9|), and to Andronicus and Junias (Romans:16:6f.|). He even calls the Judaizers "false apostles" (2Corinthians:11:13|).

rwp@Acts:15:2 @{When Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and questioning with them} (\Genomenˆs stase“s kai zˆtˆse“s ouk oligˆs t“i Paul“i kai Barnabƒi pros autous\). Genitive absolute of second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\, genitive singular agreeing with first substantive \stase“s\. Literally, "No little (litotes for much) strife and questioning coming to Paul and Barnabas (dative case) with them " (\pros autous\, face to face with them). Paul and Barnabas were not willing to see this Gentile church brow-beaten and treated as heretics by these self-appointed regulators of Christian orthodoxy from Jerusalem. The work had developed under the leadership of Paul and Barnabas and they accepted full responsibility for it and stoutly resisted these Judaizers to the point of sedition (riot, outbreak in strkjv@Luke:23:25; strkjv@Acts:19:40|) as in strkjv@23:7|. There is no evidence that the Judaizers had any supporters in the Antioch church so that they failed utterly to make any impression. Probably these Judaizers compelled Paul to think through afresh his whole gospel of grace and so they did Paul and the world a real service. If the Jews like Paul had to believe, it was plain that there was no virtue in circumcision (Galatians:2:15-21|). It is not true that the early Christians had no disagreements. They had selfish avarice with Ananias and Sapphira, murmuring over the gifts to the widows, simony in the case of Simon Magus, violent objection to work in Caesarea, and now open strife over a great doctrine (grace vs. legalism). {The brethren appointed} (\etaxan\). "The brethren" can be supplied from verse 1| and means the church in Antioch. The church clearly saw that the way to remove this deadlock between the Judaizers and Paul and Barnabas was to consult the church in Jerusalem to which the Judaizers belonged. Paul and Barnabas had won in Antioch. If they can win in Jerusalem, that will settle the matter. The Judaizers will be answered in their own church for which they are presuming to speak. The verb \etaxan\ (\tass“\, to arrange) suggests a formal appointment by the church in regular assembly. Paul (Galatians:2:2|) says that he went up by revelation (\kat' apokalupsin\), but surely that is not contradictory to the action of the church. {Certain others of them} (\tinas allous\). Certainly Titus (Galatians:2:1,3|), a Greek and probably a brother of Luke who is not mentioned in Acts. Rackham thinks that Luke was in the number. {The apostles and elders} (\tous apostolous kai presbuterous\). Note one article for both (cf. "the apostles and the brethren" in strkjv@11:1|). "Elders" now (11:30|) in full force. The apostles have evidently returned now to the city after the death of Herod Agrippa I stopped the persecution.

rwp@Acts:15:22 @{Then it seemed good} (\Tote edoxen\). First aorist active indicative of \doke“\. A regular idiom at the beginning of decrees. This Eirenicon of James commended itself to the whole assembly. Apparently a vote was taken which was unanimous, the Judaizers probably not voting. The apostles and the elders (\tois apostolois kai tois presbuterois\, article with each, dative case) probably all vocally expressed their position. {With the whole church} (\sun holei tˆi ekklˆsiƒi\). Probably by acclamation. It was a great victory. But James was a practical leader and he did not stop with speeches and a vote. {To choose men out of their company} (\eklezamenous andras ex aut“n\). Accusative case, though dative just before (\tois apostolois\, etc.), of first aorist middle participle of \ekleg“\, to select. This loose case agreement appears also in \grapsantes\ in verse 23| and in MSS. in verse 25|. It is a common thing in all Greek writers (Paul, for instance), especially in the papyri and in the Apocalypse of John. {Judas called Barsabbas} (\Ioudan ton kaloumenon Barsabban\). Not otherwise known unless he is a brother of Joseph Barsabbas of strkjv@1:23|, an early follower of Jesus. The other, Silas, is probably a shortened form of Silvanus (\Silouanos\, strkjv@1Peter:5:12|), the companion of Paul in his second mission tour (Acts:15:32,41; strkjv@16:25|). {Chief men} (\hˆgoumenous\). Leaders, leading men (participle from \hˆgeomai\, to lead).

rwp@Acts:15:23 @{And they wrote} (\grapsantes\). First aorist active participle of \graph“\ and the nominative as if a principal verb \epempsan\ had been used instead of \pempsai\, the first aorist active infinitive (anacoluthon). This committee of four (Judas, Silas, Barnabas, Paul) carried the letter which embodied the decision of the Conference. This letter is the writing out of the judgment of James and apparently written by him as the President. {The apostles and the elders, brethren} (\hoi apostoloi kai hoi presbuteroi, adelphoi\). Songs:the oldest and best MSS. without \kai\ (and) before "brethren." This punctuation is probably correct and not "elder brethren." The inquiry had been sent to the apostles and elders (verse 2|) though the whole church joined in the welcome (verse 4|) and in the decision (verse 22|). The apostles and elders send the epistle, but call themselves "brothers to brothers," _Fratres Fratibus Salutem_. "The brothers" (\tois adelphois\) addressed (dative case) are of the Gentiles (\ex ethn“n\) and those in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia, because they were immediately involved. But the decision of this Conference was meant for Gentile Christians everywhere (16:4|). {Greeting} (\Chairein\). The customary formula in the beginning of letters, the absolute infinitive (usually \chairein\) with the nominative absolute also as in strkjv@James:1:1; strkjv@Acts:23:26| and innumerable papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1902f.).

rwp@Acts:18:26 @{They took him unto them} (\proselabonto\). Second aorist middle (indirect) indicative of \proslamban“\, old verb, to their home and heart as companion (cf. the rabbis and the ruffians in strkjv@17:5|). Probably for dinner after service. {Expounded} (\exethento\). Second aorist (effective) middle indicative of \ektithˆmi\ seen already in strkjv@11:4|, to set forth. {More carefully} (\akribesteron\). Comparative adverb of \akrib“s\. More accurately than he already knew. Instead of abusing the young and brilliant preacher for his ignorance they (particularly Priscilla) gave him the fuller story of the life and work of Jesus and of the apostolic period to fill up the gaps in his knowledge. It is a needed and delicate task, this thing of teaching gifted young ministers. They do not learn it all in schools. More of it comes from contact with men and women rich in grace and in the knowledge of God's ways. He was not rebaptized, but only received fuller information.

rwp@Acts:19:5 @{The name of the Lord Jesus} (\to onoma ton kuriou Iˆsou\). Apollos was not rebaptized. The twelve apostles were not rebaptized. Jesus received no other baptism than that of John. The point here is simply that these twelve men were grossly ignorant of the meaning of John's baptism as regards repentance, the Messiahship of Jesus, the Holy Spirit. Hence Paul had them baptized, not so much again, as really baptized this time, in the name or on the authority of the Lord Jesus as he had himself commanded (Matthew:28:19|) and as was the universal apostolic custom. Proper understanding of "Jesus" involved all the rest including the Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). Luke does not give a formula, but simply explains that now these men had a proper object of faith (Jesus) and were now really baptized.

rwp@Acts:21:5 @{That we had accomplished the days} (\exartisai hˆmƒs tas hˆmeras\). First aorist active infinitive of \exartiz“\, to furnish perfectly, rare in ancient writers, but fairly frequent in the papyri. Only twice in the N.T., here and strkjv@2Timothy:3:17|. Finish the exact number of days (seven) of verse 4|. The accusative of general reference \hˆmƒs\ is the usual construction and the infinitive clause is the subject of \egeneto\. We departed and went on our journey (\exelthontes eporeuometha\). Sharp distinction between the first aorist active participle \exelthontes\ (from \exerchomai\, to go out) and the imperfect middle \eporeuometha\ from \poreu“\ (we were going on). {And they all, with wives and children, brought us on our way} (\propempont“n hˆmƒs pant“n sun gunaixi kai teknois\). No "and" in the Greek, simply genitive absolute, "They all with wives and children accompanying us," just as at Miletus (20:28|), same verb \propemp“\ which see. The first mention of children in connection with the apostolic churches (Vincent). Vivid picture here as at Miletus, evident touch of an eyewitness. {Till we were out of the city} (\he“s ex“ tˆs pole“s\). Note both adverbial prepositions (\he“s ex“\) clear outside of the city.

rwp@Acts:25:27 @{Unreasonable} (\alogon\). Old word from \a\ privative and \logos\ (reason, speech). "Without reason" as of animals (Jude:1:10; strkjv@2Peter:2:12|), "contrary to reason" here. These the only N.T. instances and in harmony with ancient usage. {In sending} (\pemponta\). Note accusative case with the infinitive \sˆmƒnai\ though \moi\ (dative) just before. Cf. same variation in strkjv@15:22f.; strkjv@22:17|. {Signify} (\sˆmƒnai\). First aorist active infinitive (not \sˆmˆnai\, the old form) of \sˆmain“\, to give a sign (\sˆmeion\). {The charges} (\tas aitias\). This naive confession of Festus reveals how unjust has been his whole treatment of Paul. He had to send along with the appeal of Paul _litterae dimissoriae_ (\apostoli\) which would give a statement of the case (Page).

rwp@Ephesians:1:6 @{To the praise} (\eis epainon\). Note the prepositions in this sentence. {Which} (\hˆs\). Genitive case of the relative \hˆn\ (cognate accusative with \echarit“sen\ (he freely bestowed), late verb \charito“\ (from \charis\, grace), in N.T. attracted to case of antecedent \charitos\ only here and strkjv@Luke:1:28|. {In the Beloved} (\en t“i ˆgapˆmen“i\). Perfect passive participle of \agapa“\. This phrase nowhere else in the N.T. though in the Apostolic Fathers.

rwp@Ephesians:1:18 @{Having the eyes of your heart enlightened} (\peph“tismenous tous ophthalmous tˆs kardias hum“n\). A beautiful figure, the heart regarded as having eyes looking out toward Christ. But the grammar is difficult. There are three possible interpretations. One is an anacoluthon, the case of \peph“tismenous\ being changed from the dative \humin\ (to you) to the accusative because of the following infinitive like \eklexamenous\ (Acts:15:22|) after \apostolois\. Another way of explaining it is to regard it as a tertiary predicate of \d“iˆ\, a loose expansion of \pneuma\. The third way is to regard the construction as the accusative absolute, a rare idiom possible in strkjv@Acts:26:3; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:3; strkjv@1Timothy:2:6|. In this case, the participle merely agrees with \tous ophthalmous\, not with \humin\, "the eyes of your heart having been enlightened." Otherwise \tous ophthalmous\ is the accusative retained after the passive participle. {That ye may know} (\eis to eidenai\). Final use of \eis to\ and the infinitive (second perfect of \oida\) as in verse 12|. Note three indirect questions after \eidenai\ (what the hope \tis hˆ elpis\, what the riches \tis ho ploutos\, and what the surpassing greatness \kai ti to huperballon megethos\). When the Holy Spirit opens the eyes of the heart, one will be able to see all these great truths. {In the saints} (\en tois hagiois\). Our riches is in God, God's is in his saints.

rwp@Ephesians:2:20 @{Being built upon} (\epoikodomˆthentes\). First aorist passive participle of \epoikodome“\, for which double compound verb see strkjv@1Corinthians:3:10; Co; strkjv@2:17|. {The foundation} (\epi t“i themeli“i\). Repetition of \epi\ with the locative case. See strkjv@1Corinthians:3:11| for this word. {Of the apostles and prophets} (\ton apostol“n kai prophˆt“n\). Genitive of apposition with \themeli“i\, consisting in. If one is surprised that Paul should refer so to the apostles, he being one himself, Peter does the same thing (2Peter:3:2|). Paul repeats this language in strkjv@3:5|. {Christ Jesus himself being the chief corner stone} (\ont“s akrog“nianiou autou Christou Iˆsou\). Genitive absolute. The compound \akrog“niaios\ occurs only in the LXX (first in strkjv@Isaiah:28:16|) and in the N.T. (here, strkjv@1Peter:2:6|). \Lithos\ (stone) is understood. Jesus had spoken of himself as the stone, rejected by the Jewish builders (experts), but chosen of God as the head of the corner (Matthew:21:42|), \eis kephalˆn g“nias\. "The \akrog“niaios\ here is the primary foundation-stone at the angle of the structure by which the architect fixes a standard for the bearings of the walls and cross-walls throughout" (W. W. Lloyd).

rwp@Ephesians:3:13 @{That ye faint not} (\mˆ enkakein\). Object infinitive with \mˆ\ after \aitoumai\. The infinitive (present active) \enkakein\ is a late and rare word (see already strkjv@Luke:18:1; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:13; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:1,16; strkjv@Galatians:6:9|) and means to behave badly in, to give in to evil (\en, kakos\). Paul urges all his apostolic authority to keep the readers from giving in to evil because of his tribulations for them. {Your glory} (\doxa hum“n\). As they could see.

rwp@Ephesians:4:11 @{And he gave} (\kai autos ed“ken\). First aorist active indicative of \did“mi\. In strkjv@1Corinthians:12:28| Paul uses \etheto\ (more common verb, appointed), but here repeats \ed“ken\ from the quotation in verse 8|. There are four groups (\tous men\, \tous de\ three times, as the direct object of \ed“ken\). The titles are in the predicate accusative (\apostolous, prophˆtas, poimenas kai didaskalous\). Each of these words occurs in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:28| (which see for discussion) except \poimenas\ (shepherds). This word \poimˆn\ is from a root meaning to protect. Jesus said the good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep (John:10:11|) and called himself the Good Shepherd. In strkjv@Hebrews:13:20| Christ is the Great Shepherd (cf. strkjv@1Peter:2:25|). Only here are preachers termed shepherds (Latin _pastores_) in the N.T. But the verb \poimain“\, to shepherd, is employed by Jesus to Peter (John:21:16|), by Peter to other ministers (1Peter:5:2|), by Paul to the elders (bishops) of Ephesus (Acts:20:28|). Here Paul groups "shepherds and teachers" together. All these gifts can be found in one man, though not always. Some have only one.

rwp@Info_Epistles-Pastorial @ Objections on internal grounds are made on the lines laid down by Baur and followed by Renan. They are chiefly four. The "most decisive" as argued by McGiffert (_History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age_, p. 402) is that "the Christianity of the Pastoral Epistles is not the Christianity of Paul." He means as we know Paul in the other Epistles. But this charge is untrue. It is true that Paul here lists faith with the virtues, but he does that in strkjv@Galatians:5:22|. Nowhere does Paul give a loftier word about faith than in strkjv@1Timothy:1:12-17|. Another objection urged is that the ecclesiastical organization seen in the Pastoral Epistles belongs to the second century, not to the time of Paul's life. Now we have the Epistles of Ignatius in the early part of the second century in which "bishop" is placed over "elders" of which there is no trace in the New Testament (Lightfoot). A forger in the second century would certainly have reproduced the ecclesiastical organization of that century instead of the first as we have it in the Pastoral Epistles. There is only here the normal development of bishop (=elder) and deacon. A third objection is made on the ground that there is no room in Paul's life as we know it in the Acts and the other Pauline Epistles for the events alluded to in the Pastoral Epistles and it is also argued on late and inconclusive testimony that Paul was put to death A.D. 64 and had only one Roman imprisonment. If Paul was executed A.D. 64, this objection has force in it, though Bartlet (_The Apostolic Age_) tries to make room for them in the period covered by the Acts. Duncan makes the same attempt for the Pauline scraps admitted by him as belonging to the hypothecated imprisonment in Ephesus. But, if we admit the release of Paul from the first Roman imprisonment, there is ample room before his execution in A.D. 68 for the events referred to in the Pastoral Epistles and the writing of the letters (his going east to Ephesus, Macedonia, to Crete, to Troas, to Corinth, to Miletus, to Nicopolis, to Rome), including the visit to Spain before Crete once planned for (Romans:15:24,28|) and mentioned by Clement of Rome as a fact ("the limit of the west"). The fourth objection is that of the language in the Pastoral Epistles. Probably more men are influenced by this argument than by any other. The ablest presentation of this difficulty is made by P. N. Harrison in _The Problem of the Pastoral Epistles_ (1921). Besides the arguments Dr. Harrison has printed the Greek text in a fashion to help the eye see the facts. Words not in the other Pauline Epistles are in red, Pauline phrases (from the other ten) are underlined, _hapax legomena_ are marked by an asterisk. At a superficial glance one can see that the words here not in the other Pauline Epistles and the common Pauline phrases are about equal. The data as to mere words are broadly as follows according to Harrison: Words in the Pastorals, not elsewhere in the N.T. (Pastoral _hapax legomena_) 175 (168 according to Rutherford); words in the other ten Pauline Epistles not elsewhere in the N.T. 470 (627 according to Rutherford). Variations in MSS. will account for some of the difficulty of counting. Clearly there is a larger proportion of new words in the Pastorals (about twice as many) than in the other Pauline Epistles. But Harrison's tables show remarkable differences in the other Epistles also. The average of such words per page in Romans is 4, but 5.6 in II Corinthians, 6.2 in Philippians, and only 4 in Philemon. Parry (_Comm._, p. CXVIII) notes that of the 845 words in the Pastorals as compared with each other 278 occur only in I Tim., 96 only in Titus, 185 only in II Tim. "If vocabulary alone is taken, this would point to separate authorship of each epistle." And yet the same style clearly runs through all three. After all vocabulary is not wholly a personal problem. It varies with age in the same person and with the subject matter also. Precisely such differences exist in the writings of Shakespeare and Milton as critics have long ago observed. The only problem that remains is whether the differences are so great in the Pastoral Epistles as to prohibit the Pauline authorship when "Paul the aged" writes on the problem of pastoral leadership to two of the young ministers trained by him who have to meet the same incipient Gnostic heresy already faced in Colossians and Ephesians. My judgment is that, all things considered, the contents and style of the Pastoral Epistles are genuinely Pauline, mellowed by age and wisdom and perhaps written in his own hand or at least by the same amanuensis in all three instances. Lock suggests Luke as the amanuensis for the Pastorals.

rwp@Info_Epistles-Pastorial @ Special Books on the Pastoral Epistles (besides Introductions to the N.T., Apostolic History, Lives of Paul, the Epistles of Paul as a whole): Belser (1907), Bernard (_Cambridge Gr. T., 1899), E. F. Brown (_Westminster_, 1917), Bowen (_Dates of P. Letters_, 1900), Dibelius (_Handbuch_, 1913), Ellicott (1883), P. Fairbairn, P. N. Harrison (_Problem of the Past. Eps._, 1921), Harvey (1890), Hesse (_Die Entst._, 1889), Humphreys (_Camb. B._, 1897), Huther (1890), H. J. Holtzmann (1880), James (_Genuineness and Authorship of P. Eps._, 1906), Kohler (_Schriften N.T._, 2 Aufl. 1907), Knabenbauer (1913), Kraukenberg (1901), Laughlin (_Past. Eps. in Light of One Rom. Imp._, 1905), Lilley (1901), W. Lock (_Int. & Crit. Comm._, 1924), Lutgert (_Die Irrlehre d. P._, 1909), Maier (_Die Hauptprobleme d. P._, 1910), Mayer (1913), Meinertz (1913), Michaelis, W (Pastoralbriefe etc. zur Echtheitsfrage der Pastoralbriefe, 1930), Niebergall (_Handbuch_, 1909), Parry (1920), Plummer (_Exp. B._, 1896), Pope (1901), Riggenbach (1898), Stock (_Plain Talks on_, 1914), Strachan (_Westm. N.T._, 1910), von Soden (_Hand-Comm._, 1891), Wace (_Sp. Comm._, 1885), B. Weiss (_Meyer Komm._, ed. 5, 1886), White (Exp. Grk. T., 1910), Wohlenberg (_Zahn's Komm._, 1906). Info_Epistles-Paul

rwp@Galatians:2:8 @{He that wrought for Peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision} (\ho gar energˆsas Petr“i eis apostolˆn tˆs peritomˆs\). Paul here definitely recognizes Peter's leadership (apostleship, \apostolˆn\, late word, already in strkjv@Acts:1:25; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:2|) to the Jews and asserts that Peter acknowledges his apostleship to the Gentiles. This is a complete answer to the Judaizers who denied the genuineness of Paul's apostleship because he was not one of the twelve.

rwp@Galatians:5:2 @{I Paul} (\eg“ Paulos\). Asserts all his personal and apostolic authority. For both words see also strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:16; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:1; strkjv@Colossians:1:23; strkjv@Ephesians:3:1|. {If ye receive circumcision} (\ean peritemnˆsthe\). Condition of third class and present passive subjunctive, a supposable case, but with terrible consequences, for they will make circumcision a condition of salvation. In that case Christ will help them not at all.

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@Info_James @ THE EPISTLE OF JAMES BEFORE A.D. 50 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION THE AUTHOR He claims to be James, and so the book is not anonymous. It is either genuine or pseudonymous. He does not claim to be the brother of the Lord Jesus, as one might expect. James the brother of John was put to death by Herod Agrippa I about A.D. 44 (Acts:12:2|). But James the brother of Jesus (Galatians:1:19|) was still alive and became a leader of the church in Jerusalem (Acts:12:17|), presiding over the Conference in Jerusalem (Acts:15:13-21|) and apparently writing the message from the Conference to the Gentile churches (Acts:15:22-29|), and was still the leading elder in Jerusalem on Paul's last visit (Acts:21:18-25|). James does not claim here to be an apostle and he was not one of the twelve apostles, and the dispute about accepting it of which Eusebius spoke was about its apostolicity since James was only an apostle by implication (Galatians:1:19|) in the general sense of that term like Barnabas (Acts:14:14|), perhaps Silas and Timothy (1Thessalonians:2:7|), certainly not on a par with Paul, who claimed equality with the twelve. James, like the other brothers of Jesus, had once disbelieved his claims to be the Messiah (John:7:6f.|), but he was won by a special vision of the Risen Christ (1Corinthians:15:7|) and was in the upper room before the great pentecost (Acts:1:14|). It is plain that he had much to overcome as a zealous Jew to become a Christian, though he was not a mere cousin of Jesus or a son of Joseph by a former marriage. He was strictly the half-brother of Jesus, since Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. There is no reason to believe that he was a Nazirite. We know that he was married (1Corinthians:9:5|). He came to be called James the Just and was considered very devout. The Judaizers had counted on him to agree with them against Paul and Barnabas, but he boldly stood for Gentile freedom from the ceremonial law. The Judaizers still claimed him at Antioch and used his name wrongly to frighten Peter thereby (Galatians:2:12|). But to the end he remained the loyal friend to Paul and his gospel rightly understood (Acts:21:18-25|). Clement of Alexandria (_Hypot_. vii) says that, when he bore strong testimony to Jesus as the Son of man, they flung him down from the gable of the temple, stoned him, and beat him to death with a club. But Josephus (_Ant_. XX. ix. I) says that the Sadducees about A.D. 62 had James and some others brought before the Sanhedrin (Ananus presiding) and had them stoned as transgressors of the law. At any rate he won a martyr's crown like Stephen and James the brother of John.

rwp@Info_John @ A BRIEF BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RECENT LITERATURE (SINCE 1880) ABBOT, EZRA, _On the Authorship of the Fourth Gospel_ (1880). ABBOT, PEABODY, and LIGHTFOOT, _The Fourth Gospel_ (1891). ABBOTT, E.A., _Johannine Vocabulary_ (1935).,_Johannine Grammar_ (1906). APPEL, _Die Echtheit des Johannesevangeliums_ (1915). ASKWITH, E.H., _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1910). BACON, B.W., _The Fourth Gospel in Research and Debate_ (1910). BALDENSPERGER, W., _Der Prolog des vierten Evangeliums_ (1898). BARTH, K., _The Gospel of John and the Synoptic Gospels_ (1907). BAUER, W., _Das Johannes-Evangelium_. 2 Aufl. (1925). BELZER, _Das Evangelium des heiligen Johannes_ (1905). BERNARD, J. H., _Gospel according to St. John_ (2 vols., 1929), in Int. Crit. Comm. BERT, _Das Evangelium des Johannes_ (1922). BLASS, F., _Evangelium secundum Johannem_ (1902). BROOKE, A. E., _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (Cambridge Biblical Essays, pp. 289 to 328. 1909). BURCH, VACHER, _The Structure and Message of St. John's Gospel_ (1928). BURNEY, C. F., _The Aramaic Origin of the Fourth Gospel_ (1922). CALMES, _L'Evangile selon S. Jean_ (1904). CANDLER, W. A., _Practical Studies in the Gospel of John_ (3 vols,, 1912-15). CARPENTER, J. ESTLIN, _The Johannine Writings_ (1927). CHAPMAN, DOM JOHN, _John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel_ (1911). CHARNWOOD, LORD, _According to St. John_ (1925). CLEMEN, C., _Die Entstehung des Johannesevangeliums_ (1912). D'ALMA, _Lamentations:Controverse du quatrieme evangile_ (1908).,Philo et le quotrieme evangile_ (1911). DAUSCH' _Das Johannesevangelium_ (1909). DELFF, H., _Das vierte Evangelium wiederhergestellt_ (1890).,Neue Beitrage zur Kritik und Erklarung des vierten Evangeliums (1890). DODS, M., _Expositor's Bible_ (2 vols., 1891).,Expositor's Greek Testament_ (1897). DRUMMOND, JAMES, _An Inquiry into the Character and Author- ship of the Fourth Gospel_ (1904). EVANS, H. H., _St. John the Author of the Fourth Gospel_ (1888). EWALD, P., _Das Hauptproblem der Evangelienfrage und der Weg zu seiner Losung_ (1890). FOUARD, S., _Jean et la hn de l'age apostolique_ (1904). GARDNER, P., _The Ephesian Gospel_ (1915). GARVIE, A. E., _The Beloved Disciple_ (1922). GOBEL, _Die Reden des Herrn nach Johannes_ (2 vols., 1906, 1910). GODET, F., _Comm. on the Gospel of St. John_ (Tr., 2 vols., 1886--90). GOGUEL, M., _Les sources du recit Johannique de la Passion_ (1910).,Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_ (1924). GORDON, S. D., _Quiet Talks on St. John's Gospel_. GORE, C., _Exposition of the Gospel of John_ (1920). GREEN, A. V., _The Ephesian Canonical Writings_ (1910). GREGORY, C. R., _Wellhausen und Johannes_ (1910). GRILL, J., _Untersuchungen uber die Entstehung des vierten Evangeliums_ (1902). GUMBEL, _Das Johannesevangelium Eine Erganzung des Lukas ev_. (1911). HARRIS, J. RENDEL, _The Origin of the Prologue to St. John's Gospel_ (1917). HAYES, D. A., _John and His Writings_ (1917). HOERNLE, E. S., _The Record of the Loved Disciple_ etc. (1913). HOLLAND, H. S., _The Philosophy of Faith and the Fourth Gospel_ (1919).,_The Fourth Gospel_ (1923). HOLTZMANN, H. J., _Evangelium, Briefe, und Offenbarung des Johannes_. 3 Aufl. (1908). HOLTZMANN, _Hand-Comm_. 3 Aufl. von Bauer (1908). HOVEY, A. H., _In American Comm_. (1885). HOWARD, W. F., _The Fourth Gospel in Recent Criticism and Interpretation_ (1931). IVERACH, JAMES, _Gospel of John_ (Int. Stand. Bible Encycl.). JACKSON, H. L., _The Fourth Gospel and Some Recent German Criticism_ (1906).,_The Problem of the Fourth Gospel_ (1918). JOHNSTON, J. S., _The Philosophy of the Fourth Gospel_ (1909). KEISKER, _The Inner Witness of the Fourth Gospel_ (1922). KREYENBUHL, _Neue Losung der Johanneischen Frage_ (1905). LARFIELD, _Die beide Johannes von Ephesus_ (1914). LEATHES, STANLEY, _The Witness of St. John to Christ_. LEPIN, _L'origine du quatrieme evangile_ (1907; 1927).,_Lamentations:valeur historique du quatrieme euangile_ (1910). LEWIS, F. G., _The Irenaeus Testimony to the Fourth Gospel_ (1908). LEWIS, F. G., _Disarrangements in the Fourth Gospel_ (1910). LIGHTFOOT, J. B., _Biblical Essays_ (pages 1-198; I-III, 1893). LLOYD, J. P. D., _The Son of Thunder_ (1932). LOISY, A., _Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_ (1903). LOWRIE, _The Doctrine of John_ (1899). LYMAN, MARY ELY, _The Fourth Gospel and the Life of Today_ (1931). MANSON, W., _The Incarnate Glory_ (1923). MAURICE, F. D., _The Gospel of St. John_ (1906). McGREGoR, G. H., _The Moffatt Commentary_ (1930). MONTGOMERY, J. A., _The Origin of the Gospel According to St. John_ (1923). MOUSE, _Johannes und Paulus_ (1915). MUIRHEAD, L. A., _The Message of the Fourth Gospel_ (1925). NOLLOTH, C. F., _The Fourth Evangelist_ (1925). NUNN, H. P. V., _The Son of Zebedee and the Fourth Gospel (1927). ORR, JAMES, _The Authenticity of St. John's Gospel Deduced from Internal Evidence_. OVERBECK, _Das Johannesevangelium_ (1911). PLUMMER, A., _Cambridge Greek Testament_ (1913). REVILLE, J., _Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_ (1901). REYNOLDS, H. R., _Gospel of John_ (Hastings, D. B., 1899). RICHMOND, W., _The Gospel of the Rejection_ (1906). ROBERTSON, A. T., _The Divinity of Christ in the Gospel of John_ (1916). ROBINSON, A., _The Historical Character of St. John's Gospel_ (1929). ROBINSON, B. W., _The Gospel of John_ (1925). SANDAY, W., _Criticism of the Fourth Gospel_ (1905). SCHLATTER, _Die Sprache und Heimath des vierten Evangelisten_ (1903). SCHMIEDEL, P. W., _The Johannine Writings_ (1908). SCOTT, E. F., _The Fourth Gospel: Its Purpose and Theology_ (1906). SCOTT, E. F., _The Historical and Religious Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1903). SCOTT-MONCRIEFF, C. E., _St. John, Apostle, Evangelist and Prophet_ (1909). SELBIE, W. B., _Belief and Life: Studies in the Thought of the Fourth Gospel_ (1916). SMITH, J. R., _The Teaching of the Fourth Gospel_ (1903). SMITH, P. V., _The Fourth Gospel: Its Historical Importance_ (1926). SPEER, R. E., _The Greatest Book in the World_ (1915). SPITTA, F., _Das Johannesevangelium als Quelle der Geschichte Jesu_ (1910). STANGE, _Die Eigenart des Johanneischen Produktion_ (1914). STANTON, V. H., _The Fourth Gospel_ (Part III of Gospels as Hist. Documents, 1921). STEVENS, G. B., _The Johannine Theology_ (1898). STRACHAN, R. H., _Gospel of John_ (Hastings, D C G 1906).,The Fourth Gospel: Its Significance and Environ- ment_ (1917).,The Fourth Evangelist: Dramatist or Historian_ (1925). TILLMANN, FRITZ, _Das Johannesevangelium Uebersetzt und Erklart_ (1931). VEDDER, H. C., _The Johannine Writings and the Johannine Problems_ (1917). WARSCHAUER, J., _The Problem of the Fourth Gospel_. WATKINS, W. H., _Modern Criticism Considered in its Rela- tion to the Fourth Gospel_ (1890). WATSON, H. A., _The Mysticism of St. John's Gospel_ (1916). WEARING, _The World View of the Fourth Gospel_ (1918). WEISS, B., _Meyer Komm_. 9 Aufl. (1902).,_Das Johannesevangelium als einheitliches Werk_ (1911). WELLHAUSEN, J., _Das Evangelium Johannis_ (1908). WENDT, H. H., _The Gospel according to St. John: An Inquiry into its Genesis and Historical Value_ (1911).,_Die Schichten im vierten Evangelium_ (1911). WESTCOTT, B. F., _The Gospel according to St. John_ (2 vols., 1908). WHITELAW, _The Gospel of John_ (1888). WINDISCH, H., _Johannes und die Synoptiker_ (1927). WORSLEY, _The Fourth Gospel and the Synoptists_ (1911). WREDE, W., _Charakter und Tendenz del Johannesevangelium_ (1903). ZAHN, TH., _Dal Evangelium Johannis (1908). 6 Aufl. (1921). strkjv@John:1:1 @{In the beginning} (\en archˆi\). \Archˆ\ is definite, though anarthrous like our at home, in town, and the similar Hebrew _be reshith_ in strkjv@Genesis:1:1|. But Westcott notes that here John carries our thoughts beyond the beginning of creation in time to eternity. There is no argument here to prove the existence of God any more than in Genesis. It is simply assumed. Either God exists and is the Creator of the universe as scientists like Eddington and Jeans assume or matter is eternal or it has come out of nothing. {Was} (\ˆn\). Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of \eimi\ to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence. Quite a different verb (\egeneto\, became) appears in verse 14| for the beginning of the Incarnation of the Logos. See the distinction sharply drawn in strkjv@8:58| "before Abraham came (\genesthai\) I am" (\eimi\, timeless existence). {The Word} (\ho logos\). \Logos\ is from \leg“\, old word in Homer to lay by, to collect, to put words side by side, to speak, to express an opinion. \Logos\ is common for reason as well as speech. Heraclitus used it for the principle which controls the universe. The Stoics employed it for the soul of the world (\anima mundi\) and Marcus Aurelius used \spermatikos logos\ for the generative principle in nature. The Hebrew _memra_ was used in the Targums for the manifestation of God like the Angel of Jehovah and the Wisdom of God in strkjv@Proverbs:8:23|. Dr. J. Rendel Harris thinks that there was a lost wisdom book that combined phrases in Proverbs and in the Wisdom of Solomon which John used for his Prologue (_The Origin of the _Prologue to St. John_, p. 43) which he has undertaken to reproduce. At any rate John's standpoint is that of the Old Testament and not that of the Stoics nor even of Philo who uses the term \Logos\, but not John's conception of personal pre-existence. The term \Logos\ is applied to Christ only in strkjv@John:1:1,14; strkjv@Revelation:19:13; strkjv@1John:1:1| "concerning the Word of life" (an incidental argument for identity of authorship). There is a possible personification of "the Word of God" in strkjv@Hebrews:4:12|. But the personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f.; strkjv@Colossians:1:17|) and in strkjv@Hebrews:1:2f.| and in strkjv@John:17:5|. This term suits John's purpose better than \sophia\ (wisdom) and is his answer to the Gnostics who either denied the actual humanity of Christ (Docetic Gnostics) or who separated the \aeon\ Christ from the man Jesus (Cerinthian Gnostics). The pre-existent Logos "became flesh" (\sarx egeneto\, verse 14|) and by this phrase John answered both heresies at once. {With God} (\pros ton theon\). Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. \Pros\ with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In strkjv@1John:2:1| we have a like use of \pros\: "We have a Paraclete with the Father" (\paraklˆton echomen pros ton patera\). See \pros“pon pros pros“pon\ (face to face, strkjv@1Corinthians:13:12|), a triple use of \pros\. There is a papyrus example of \pros\ in this sense \to gn“ston tˆs pros allˆlous sunˆtheias\, "the knowledge of our intimacy with one another" (M.&M., _Vocabulary_) which answers the claim of Rendel Harris, _Origin of Prologue_, p. 8) that the use of \pros\ here and in strkjv@Mark:6:3| is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is _Koin‚_, not old Attic. In strkjv@John:17:5| John has \para soi\ the more common idiom. {And the Word was God} (\kai theos ˆn ho logos\). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying \ho theos ˆn ho logos\. That would mean that all of God was expressed in \ho logos\ and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (\ho logos\) and the predicate without it (\theos\) just as in strkjv@John:4:24| \pneuma ho theos\ can only mean "God is spirit," not "spirit is God." Songs:in strkjv@1John:4:16| \ho theos agapˆ estin\ can only mean "God is love," not "love is God" as a so-called Christian scientist would confusedly say. For the article with the predicate see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 767f. Songs:in strkjv@John:1:14| \ho Logos sarx egeneto\, "the Word became flesh," not "the flesh became Word." Luther argues that here John disposes of Arianism also because the Logos was eternally God, fellowship of Father and Son, what Origen called the Eternal Generation of the Son (each necessary to the other). Thus in the Trinity we see personal fellowship on an equality.

rwp@John:3:17 @{For God sent not the Son} (\ou gar apesteilen ho theos ton huion\). Explanation (\gar\) of God's sending the Son into the world. First aorist active indicative of \apostell“\. John uses both \apostell“\ from which comes \apostolos\ (3:34; strkjv@5:36,38|, etc.) and \pemp“\ (4:34; strkjv@5:23,24,30|, etc.) for God's sending the Son and \pemp“\ more frequently, but with no real difference in meaning. All the Gospels use \ho huios\ in the absolute sense in contrast with the Father (Mark:13:32; strkjv@Matthew:11:27; strkjv@Luke:10:22|). {To judge} (\hina krinˆi\). Final clause with \hina\ and the present (or aorist) active subjunctive of \krin“\. The Messiah does judge the world as Jesus taught (Matthew:25:31f.; strkjv@John:5:27|), but this was not the primary or the only purpose of his coming. See on ¯Matthew:7:1| for \krin“\, to pick out, select, approve, condemn, used so often and in so many varying contexts in the N.T. {But that the world should be saved through him} (\all hina s“thˆi ho kosmos di' autou\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \s“z“\, the common verb to save (from \s“s\, safe and sound), from which \s“tˆr\ (Saviour) comes (the Saviour of the world, strkjv@4:42; strkjv@1John:4:14|) and \s“tˆria\ (salvation, strkjv@4:22| here only in John). The verb \s“z“\ is often used for physical health (Mark:5:28|), but here of the spiritual salvation as in strkjv@5:34|.

rwp@John:13:16 @{Is not greater} (\ouk estin meiz“n\). Comparative adjective of \megas\ (greater) followed by the ablative case \kuriou\ (contrast between slave, lord) and \tou pempsantos\ (articular participle of \pemp“\, to send, with contrast with apostle, "one sent" (\apostolos\) from \apostell“\). Jesus here enforces the dignity of service. In strkjv@Luke:22:27| Jesus argues this point a bit. In strkjv@Luke:6:40| the contrast is between the pupil and the teacher, though some pupils consider themselves superior to the teacher. In strkjv@Matthew:10:24| Jesus uses both forms of the saying (pupil and slave). He clearly repeated this \logion\ often.

rwp@John:20:24 @{Didymus} (\Didumos\). The same expression applied to Thomas in strkjv@11:16; strkjv@21:2|, but nowhere else in N.T. Old word for twin (double), "the pessimist of the apostolic band" (Bernard). The term twelve is still applied to the group, though Judas, the traitor, is dead.

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

rwp@Luke:6:13 @{When it was day} (\hote egeneto hˆmera\). When day came, after the long night of prayer. {He chose from them twelve} (\eklexamenos ap' aut“n d“deka\). The same root (\leg\) was used for picking out, selecting and then for saying. There was a large group of "disciples" or "learners" whom he "called" to him (\proseph“nˆsen\), and from among whom he chose (of himself, and for himself, indirect middle voice (\eklexamenos\). It was a crisis in the work of Christ. Jesus assumed full responsibility even for the choice of Judas who was not forced upon Jesus by the rest of the Twelve. "You did not choose me, but I chose you," (John:15:16|) where Jesus uses \exelexasthe\ and \exelexamˆn\ as here by Luke. {Whom also he named apostles} (\hous kai apostolous “nomasen\). Songs:then Jesus gave the twelve chosen disciples this appellation. Aleph and B have these same words in strkjv@Mark:3:14| besides the support of a few of the best cursives, the Bohairic Coptic Version and the Greek margin of the Harclean Syriac. Westcott and Hort print them in their text in strkjv@Mark:3:14|, but it remains doubtful whether they were not brought into Mark from strkjv@Luke:6:13| where they are undoubtedly genuine. See strkjv@Matthew:10:2| where the connection with sending them out by twos in the third tour of Galilee. The word is derived from \apostell“\, to send (Latin, _mitto_) and apostle is missionary, one sent. Jesus applies the term to himself (\apesteilas\, strkjv@John:17:3|) as does strkjv@Hebrews:3:1|. The word is applied to others, like Barnabas, besides these twelve including the Apostle Paul who is on a par with them in rank and authority, and even to mere messengers of the churches (2Corinthians:8:23|). But these twelve apostles stand apart from all others in that they were all chosen at once by Jesus himself "that they might be with him" (Mark:3:14|), to be trained by Jesus himself and to interpret him and his message to the world. In the nature of the case they could have no successors as they had to be personal witnesses to the life and resurrection of Jesus (Acts:1:22|). The selection of Matthias to succeed Judas cannot be called a mistake, but it automatically ceased. For discussion of the names and groups in the list see discussion on ¯Matthew:10:1-4; strkjv@Mark:3:14-19|.

rwp@Mark:1:29 @{The house of Simon and Andrew} (\tˆn oikian Sim“nos kai Andreou\). Peter was married and both he and Andrew lived together in "Peter's house" (Matthew:8:14|) with Peter's wife and mother-in-law. Peter was evidently married before he began to follow Jesus. Later his wife accompanied him on his apostolic journeys (1Corinthians:9:5|). This incident followed immediately after the service in the synagogue on the sabbath. All the Synoptics give it. Mark heard Peter tell it as it occurred in his own house where Jesus made his home while in Capernaum. Each Gospel gives touches of its own to the story. Mark has "lay sick of a fever " (\katekeito puressousa\), lay prostrate burning with fever. Matthew puts it "stretched out (\beblˆmenˆn\) with a fever." Luke has it "holden with a great fever" (\ˆn sunechomenˆ puret“i megal“i\), a technical medical phrase. They all mention the instant recovery and ministry without any convalescence. Mark and Matthew speak of the touch of Jesus on her hand and Luke speaks of Jesus standing over her like a doctor. It was a tender scene.

rwp@Mark:3:14 @{He appointed twelve} (\epoiˆsen d“deka\). This was a second selection out of those invited to the hills and after the night of prayer and after day came (Luke:6:13|). Why he chose twelve we are not told, probably because there were twelve tribes in Israel. It was a good round number at any rate. They were to be princes in the new Israel (cf. strkjv@Matthew:19:28; strkjv@Luke:22:30; strkjv@Revelation:21:14,15|). Luke (Luke:6:13-16|) also gives the list of the twelve at this point while Matthew (Matthew:10:1-4|) postpones giving the names till they are sent out in Galilee. There is a fourth list in strkjv@Acts:1:13|. See discussion of the names of the apostles on ¯Matthew:10:1-4| and pp. 271-3 of my _Harmony of the Gospels for Students of the Life of Christ_. The three groups of four begin alike (Simon, Philip, James). There are some difficulties. {Whom he also named apostles} (\hous kai apostolous “nomasen\). Margin of Revised Version, the text of Westcott and Hort after Aleph, B, C, etc. Genuine in strkjv@Luke:6:13| and probably so here. The meaning is that Jesus himself gave the name apostle or missionary (\apostell“\, to send) to this group of twelve. The word is applied in the New Testament to others besides as delegates or messengers of churches (2Corinthians:8:23; strkjv@Phillipians:2:25|), and messenger (John:13:16|). It is applied also to Paul on a par with the twelve (Galatians:1:1,11f.|, etc.) and also to Barnabas (Acts:14:14|), and perhaps also to Timothy and Silas (1Timothy:2:6f.|). Two purposes of Jesus are mentioned by Mark in the choice of these twelve, {that they might be with him} (\hina “sin met' autou\), {and that he might send them forth} (\kai hina apostellˆi autous\). They were not ready to be sent forth till they had been with Jesus for some time. This is one of the chief tasks of Christ to train this group of men. See Bruce's _The Training of the Twelve_. The very word \apostolos\ is from \apostell“\. There were two purposes in sending them forth expressed by two infinitives, one to preach (\kˆrussein\, from \kˆrux\, herald), the other to have power to cast out demons (\echein exousian ekballein ta daimonia\). This double ministry of preaching and healing was to mark their work. The two things are, however, different, and one does not necessarily involve the other.

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:6:30 @{And the apostles gather themselves together unto Jesus} (\kai sunagontai hoi apostoloi pros ton Iˆsoun\). Vivid historical present. {All things whatsoever they had done and whatsoever they had taught} (\panta hosa epoiˆsan kai hosa edidaxan\). Not past perfect in the Greek, just the aorist indicative, constative aorist that summed it all up, the story of this their first tour without Jesus. And Jesus listened to it all (Luke:9:10|). He was deeply concerned in the outcome.

rwp@Mark:16:17 @{They shall speak with new tongues} (\gl“ssais lalˆsousin [kainais]\). Westcott and Hort put \kainais\ (new) in the margin. Casting out demons we have seen in the ministry of Jesus. Speaking with tongues comes in the apostolic era (Acts:2:3f.; strkjv@10:46; strkjv@19:6; strkjv@1Corinthians:12:28; 14|).

rwp@Matthew:10:2 @{The names of the twelve apostles} (\t“n d“deka apostol“n ta onomata\). This is the official name (missionaries) used here by Matthew for the first time. The names are given here, but Matthew does not say that they were chosen at this time. Mark (Mark:3:13-19|) and Luke (Luke:6:12-16|) state that Jesus "chose" them, "appointed" them after a night of prayer in the mountain and came down with them and then delivered the Sermon (Luke:6:17|). Simon heads the list (\pr“tos\) in all four lists including strkjv@Acts:1:13f|. He came to be first and foremost at the great Pentecost (Acts:2| and strkjv@Acts:3|). The apostles disputed a number of times as to which was greatest. Judas Iscariot comes last each time save that he is absent in Acts, being already dead. Matthew calls him the betrayer (\ho paradidous\). Iscariot is usually explained as "man of Kerioth" down near Edom (Joshua:15:25|). Philip comes fifth and James the son of Alphaeus the ninth. Bartholomew is the name for Nathanael. Thaddaeus is Judas the brother of James. Simon Zelotes is also called Simon the Canaanean (Zealous, Hebrew word). This is apparently their first preaching and healing tour without Jesus. He sends them forth by twos (Mark:6:7|). Matthew names them in pairs, probably as they were sent out.

rwp@Info_Philemon @ THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON FROM ROME A.D. 63 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION This little letter was sent to Philemon by Onesimus, a converted runaway slave of Philemon, along with Tychicus who is going to Colossae with Onesimus (Colossians:4:7-9|) as the bearer also of the so-called Epistle to the Ephesians (Ephesians:6:21f.|). Hence it is clear that these three Epistles were carried to the Province of Asia at the same time. Colossians was probably written before Ephesians which appears to be a general treatment of the same theme. Whether Philemon was actually penned before the other two there is no way of knowing. But it is put first here as standing apart. Probably Paul wrote it himself without dictation because in verse 19| it constitutes a note in his own hand to Philemon for what Onesimus may owe him. Paul applies the spirit of Christianity to the problem of slavery in words that have ultimately set the slaves free from bondage to men. strkjv@Philemon:1:1 @{A prisoner of Christ Jesus} (\desmios Christou Iˆsou\). As verse 9| and in strkjv@Ephesians:3:1; strkjv@4:1|. Old adjective from \desmos\ (bond, \de“\, to bind). Apparently used here on purpose rather than \apostolos\ as more effective with Philemon and a more touching occasion of pride as Paul writes with his manacled right hand. {Timothy} (\Timotheos\). With Paul in Ephesus (Acts:19:22|) and probably known to Philemon. Associated with Paul also in I and II Thess., II Cor., Philipp., Col. {To Philemon} (\Philˆmoni\). A resident of Colossae and a convert of Paul's (verse 19|), perhaps coming to Ephesus while Paul was there when his ministry had so much influence over the province of Asia (Acts:19:9f., 26; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:19|). The name Philemon occurs in the legend of Baucis and Philemon (Ovid's _Metamorphoses_), but with no connection with the brother here. He was active in the church in Colossae ("our co-worker," \sunerg“i hˆm“n\) and was beloved (\agapˆt“i\) by Paul.

rwp@Philippians:2:25 @{I counted it} (\hˆgˆsamˆn\). Epistolary aorist from the point of view of the readers. {Epaphroditus} (\Epaphroditon\). Common name, though only in Philippians in N.T., contracted into Epaphras, though not the same man as Epaphras in strkjv@Colossians:1:7|. Note one article \ton\ (the) with the three epithets given in an ascending scale (Lightfoot), brother (\adelphon\, common sympathy), fellow-worker (\sunergon\, common work), fellow-soldier (\sunstrati“tˆn\, common danger as in strkjv@Philemon:1:2|). \Mou\ (my) and \hum“n\ (your) come together in sharp contrast. {Messenger} (\apostolon\). See strkjv@2Corinthians:8:23| for this use of \apostolos\ as messenger (missionary). {Minister} (\leitourgon\). See on ¯Romans:13:6; strkjv@15:16| for this ritualistic term.

rwp@Revelation:1:9 @{I John} (\Eg“ I“anˆs\). strkjv@Songs:22:8|. In apocalyptic literature the personality of the writer is always prominent to guarantee the visions (Daniel:8:1; strkjv@10:2|). {Partaker with you} (\sunkoin“nos\). See already strkjv@1Corinthians:9:23|. "Co-partner with you" (Romans:11:17|). One article with \adelphos\ and \sunkoin“nos\ unifying the picture. The absence of \apostolos\ here does not show that he is not an apostle, but merely his self-effacement, as in the Fourth Gospel, and still more his oneness with his readers. Songs:there is only one article (\tˆi\) with \thlipsei\ (tribulation), \basileiƒi\ (kingdom), \hupomonˆi\ (patience), ideas running all through the book. Both the tribulation (see strkjv@Matthew:13:21| for \thlipsis\) and the kingdom (see strkjv@Matthew:3:2| for \basileia\) were present realities and called for patience (\hupomonˆ\ being "the spiritual alchemy" according to Charles for those in the kingdom, for which see strkjv@Luke:8:15; strkjv@James:5:7|). All this is possible only "in Jesus" (\en Iˆsou\), a phrase on a par with Paul's common \en Christ“i\ (in Christ), repeated in strkjv@14:13|. Cf. strkjv@3:20; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:5|. {Was} (\egenomˆn\). Rather, "I came to be," second aorist middle indicative of \ginomai\. {In the isle that is called Patmos} (\en tˆi nˆs“i tˆi kaloumenˆi Patm“i\). Patmos is a rocky sparsely settled island some ten miles long and half that wide, one of the Sporades group in the Aegean Sea, south of Miletus. The present condition of the island is well described by W. E. Geil in _The Isle That Is Called Patmos_ (1905). Here John saw the visions described in the book, apparently written while still a prisoner there in exile. {For the word of God and the testimony of Jesus} (\dia ton logon tou theou kai tˆn marturian Iˆsou\). The reason for (\dia\ and the accusative) John's presence in Patmos, naturally as a result of persecution already alluded to, not for the purpose of preaching there or of receiving the visions. See verse 2| for the phrase.

rwp@Revelation:2:2 @{I know} (\oida\). Rather than \gin“sk“\ and so "emphasizes better the absolute clearness of mental vision which photographs all the facts of life as they pass" (Swete). Songs:also in strkjv@2:9,13,19; strkjv@3:1,8,15|. For the distinction see strkjv@John:21:17|, "where the universal knowledge passes into the field of special observation." {Works} (\erga\). The whole life and conduct as in strkjv@John:6:29|. {And thy toil and patience} (\kai ton kopon kai tˆn hupomonˆn sou\). "Both thy toil and patience," in explanation of \erga\, and see strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:3|, where all three words (\ergon, kopos, hupomonˆ\) occur together as here. See strkjv@14:13| for sharp distinction between \erga\ (activities) and \kopoi\ (toils, with weariness). Endurance (\hupomonˆ\) in hard toil (\kopos\). {And that} (\kai hoti\). Further explanation of \kopos\ (hard toil). {Not able} (\ou dunˆi\). This _Koin‚_ form for the Attic \dunasai\ (second person singular indicative middle) occurs also in strkjv@Mark:9:22; strkjv@Luke:16:2|. {Bear} (\bastasai\). First aorist active infinitive of \bastaz“\, for which verb see strkjv@John:10:31; strkjv@12:6; strkjv@Galatians:6:2|. These evil men were indeed a heavy burden. {And didst try} (\kai epeirasas\). First aorist active indicative of \peiraz“\, to test, a reference to a recent crisis when these Nicolaitans (verse 6|) were condemned. The present tenses (\dunˆi, echeis\) indicate the continuance of this attitude. Cf. strkjv@1John:4:1|. {Which call themselves apostles} (\tous legontas heautous apostolous\). Perhaps itinerant missionaries of these Nicolaitans who posed as equal to or even superior to the original apostles, like the Judaizers so described by Paul (2Corinthians:11:5,13; strkjv@12:11|). Paul had foretold such false teachers (Gnostics), grievous wolves, in strkjv@Acts:20:29|; in sheep's clothing, Jesus had said (Matthew:7:15|). {And they are not} (\kai ouk eisin\). A parenthesis in Johannine style (John:2:9; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@1John:3:1|) for \kai ouk ontas\ to correspond to \legontas\. {And didst find} (\kai heures\). Second aorist active indicative of \heurisk“\. Dropping back to the regular structure parallel with \epeirasas\. {False} (\pseudeis\). Predicate accusative plural of \pseudˆs\, self-deceived deceivers as in strkjv@21:8|.

rwp@Revelation:21:14 @{Had} (\ech“n\). Masculine present active participle of \ech“\ instead of \echon\ (neuter like to \teichos\), and the participle occurs independently as if a principal verb (\eichen\) as often in this book. {Twelve foundations} (\themelious d“deka\). Foundation stones, old adjective (from \thema\, from \tithˆmi\), here as in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:11ff.; strkjv@2Timothy:2:19|, with \lithous\ (stones understood), though often neuter substantive to \themelion\ (Luke:6:48f.; strkjv@Acts:16:26|). See strkjv@Isaiah:28:16; strkjv@Hebrews:11:10|. Twelve because of the twelve apostles as foundation stones (Ephesians:2:20|). {On them} (\ep' aut“n\). On the twelve foundation stones. {Names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb} (\onomata t“n d“deka apostol“n tou arniou\). Jesus had spoken of twelve thrones for the apostles (Matthew:19:28|); names of all twelve are here written, not just that of Peter, as some would argue from strkjv@Matthew:16:18|. As a matter of fact, Christ is the corner stone or \akrog“niaion\ (1Peter:2:6; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:10; strkjv@Ephesians:2:20|), though rejected by the Sanhedrin (Matthew:21:42ff.|). One may wonder if the name of Judas is on that stone or that of Matthias.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE APOCALYPTIC STYLE The book claims to be an apocalypse (Revelation:1:1|) and has to be treated as such. It is an unveiling (\apokalupsis\, from \apokalupt“\) or revelation of Jesus Christ, a prophecy, in other words, of a special type, like Ezekiel, Zechariah, and Daniel in the Old Testament. There was a considerable Jewish apocalyptic literature by this time when John wrote, much of it B.C., some of it A.D., like the Book of Enoch, the Apocalypse of Baruch, the Book of Jubilees, the Assumption of Moses, the Psalms of Solomon, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the Sibylline Oracles, some of them evidently "worked over by Christian hands" (Swete). Jesus himself used the apocalyptic style at times (Mark:13; strkjv@Matthew:24,25; strkjv@Luke:21|). Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:14| spoke of the unpremeditated apocalyptic utterances in the Christian meetings and suggested restraints concerning them. "The Revelation of John is the only written apocalypse, as it is the only written prophecy of the Apostolic age.... The first Christian apocalypse came on the crest of this long wave of apocalyptic effort" (Swete). The reason for this style of writing is usually severe persecution and the desire to deliver a message in symbolic form. The effort of Antiochus Epiphanes, who claimed to be "a god manifest," to hellenize the Jews aroused violent opposition and occasioned many apocalypses to cheer the persecuted Jews.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ RELATION TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL Here scholars divide again. Many who deny the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel and the Epistles accept the apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse, Baur, for instance. Hort, Lightfoot, and Westcott argued for the Johannine authorship on the ground that the Apocalypse was written early (time of Nero or Vespasian) when John did not know Greek so well as when the Epistles and the Gospel were written. There are numerous grammatical laxities in the Apocalypse, termed by Charles a veritable grammar of its own. They are chiefly retention of the nominative case in appositional words or phrases, particularly participles, many of them sheer Hebraisms, many of them clearly intentional (as in strkjv@Revelation:1:4|), all of them on purpose according to Milligan (_Revelation_ in Schaff's Pop. Comm.) and Heinrici (_Der Litterarische Charakter der neutest. Schriften_, p. 85). Radermacher (_Neutestamentliche Grammatik_, p. 3) calls it "the most uncultured literary production that has come down to us from antiquity," and one finds frequent parallels to the linguistic peculiarities in later illiterate papyri. J. H. Moulton (_Grammar_, Vol. II, Part I, p. 3) says: "Its grammar is perpetually stumbling, its idiom is that of a foreign language, its whole style that of a writer who neither knows nor cares for literary form." But we shall see that the best evidence is for a date in Domitian's reign and not much later than the Fourth Gospel. It is worth noting that in strkjv@Acts:4:13| Peter and John are both termed by the Sanhedrin \agrammatoi kai idi“tai\ (unlettered and unofficial men). We have seen the possibility that II Peter represents Peter's real style or at least that of a different amanuensis from Silvanus in strkjv@1Peter:5:12|. It seems clear that the Fourth Gospel underwent careful scrutiny and possibly by the elders in Ephesus (John:21:24|). If John wrote the Apocalypse while in Patmos and so away from Ephesus, it seems quite possible that here we have John's own uncorrected style more than in the Gospel and Epistles. There is also the added consideration that the excitement of the visions played a part along with a certain element of intentional variations from normal grammatical sequence. An old man's excitement would bring back his early style. There are numerous coincidences in vocabulary and style between the Fourth Gospel and the Apocalypse.

rwp@Info_Romans @{Paul} @(\Paulos\). Roman name (\Paulus\). See on ¯Acts:13:9| for the origin of this name by the side of Saul. {Servant} (\doulos\). Bond-slave of Jesus Christ (or Christ Jesus as some MSS. give it and as is the rule in the later Epistles) for the first time in the Epistles in the opening sentence, though the phrase already in strkjv@Galatians:1:10|. Recurs in strkjv@Phillipians:1:1| and \desmios\ (bondsman) in strkjv@Philemon:1:1|. {Called to be an apostle} (\klˆtos apostolos\). An apostle by vocation (Denney) as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:1|. In strkjv@Galatians:1:1| \klˆtos\ is not used, but the rest of the verse has the same idea. {Separated} (\aph“rismenos\). Perfect passive participle of \aphoriz“\ for which verb see on ¯Galatians:1:15|. Paul is a spiritual Pharisee (etymologically), separated not to the oral tradition, but to God's gospel, a chosen vessel (Acts:9:15|). By man also (Acts:13:2|). Many of Paul's characteristic words like \euaggelion\ have been already discussed in the previous Epistles that will call for little comment from now on.

rwp@Romans:10:14 @{How then shall they call?} (\p“s oun epikales“ntai?\). Deliberative subjunctive (first aorist middle) of \epikaleomai\ (see verses 12,13|). The antecedent of \eis hon\ (in whom) is not expressed. {How shall they believe?} (\pos pisteus“sin?\). Deliberative subjunctive again (first aorist active of \pisteu“\ just used). Each time Paul picks up the preceding verb and challenges that. Here again the antecedent \eis touton\ before \hon\ is not expressed. {How shall they hear?} (\pos akous“sin?\). Deliberative subjunctive (first aorist active of \akou“\). {Without a preacher?} (\ch“ris kˆrussontos?\). Preposition \ch“ris\ with ablative singular masculine present active participle of \kˆruss“\, "without one preaching." {How shall they preach?} (\p“s kˆrux“sin?\). Deliberative subjunctive again (first aorist active \kˆruss“\, to preach). {Except they be sent?} (\ean mˆ apostal“sin?\). Second aorist passive deliberative subjunctive of \apostell“\, to send, from which verb \apostolos\ apostle comes. Negative condition of third class. In graphic style Paul has made a powerful plea for missions. It is just as true today as then.

rwp@Romans:10:15 @{How beautiful} (\H“s h“raioi\). A quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:52:7| more like the Hebrew than the LXX, picturing the messengers of the restoration from the Jewish captivity. Paul assumes that the missionaries (\apostoloi\) have been sent as implied in verse 14|.

rwp@Romans:11:13 @{To you that are Gentiles} (\humin tois ethnesin\). "To you the Gentiles." He has a serious word to say to them. {Inasmuch then} (\eph' hoson men oun\). Not temporal, _quamdiu_, "so long as" (Matthew:9:15|), but qualitative _quatenus_ "in so far then as" (Matthew:25:40|). {I glorify my ministry} (\tˆn diakonian mou doxaz“\). As apostle to the Gentiles (\ethn“n apostolos\, objective genitive). Would that every minister of Christ glorified his ministry. {If by any means} (\ei p“s\). This use of \ei\ with purpose or aim is a kind of indirect discourse. {I may provoke} (\parazˆl“s“\). Either future active indicative or first aorist active subjunctive, see same uncertainty in strkjv@Phillipians:3:10| \katantˆs“\, but in strkjv@3:11| \katalab“\ after \ei\ is subjunctive. The future indicative is clear in strkjv@Romans:1:10| and the optative in strkjv@Acts:27:12|. Doubtful whether future indicative or aorist subjunctive also in \s“s“\ (save).

rwp@Romans:16:1 @{I commend} (\sunistˆmi\). The regular word for letters of commendation as in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:1| (\sustatik“n epistol“n\). See also strkjv@Romans:3:5|. Songs:here verses 1,2| constitute Paul's recommendation of Phoebe, the bearer of the Epistle. Nothing else is known of her, though her name (\Phoibˆ\) means bright or radiant. {Sister} (\adelphˆn\). In Christ, not in the flesh. {Who is a servant of the church} (\ousan diakonon tˆs ekklˆsias\). The etymology of \diakonos\ we have had repeatedly. The only question here is whether it is used in a general sense or in a technical sense as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:1; strkjv@1Timothy:3:8-13|. In favour of the technical sense of "deacon" or "deaconess" is the addition of "\tˆs ekklˆsias\" (of the church). In some sense Phoebe was a servant or minister of the church in Cenchreae. Besides, right in the midst of the discussion in strkjv@1Timothy:3:8-13| Paul has a discussion of \gunaikas\ (verse 11|) either as women as deaconesses or as the wives of deacons (less likely though possible). The _Apostolic Constitutions_ has numerous allusions to deaconesses. The strict separation of the sexes made something like deaconesses necessary for baptism, visiting the women, etc. Cenchreae, as the eastern port of Corinth, called for much service of this kind. Whether the deaconesses were a separate organization on a par with the deacons we do not know nor whether they were the widows alluded to in strkjv@1Timothy:5:9f|.

rwp@Romans:16:7 @{Andronicus and Junias} (\Andronicou kai Iounian\). The first is a Greek name found even in the imperial household. The second name can be either masculine or feminine. {Kinsmen} (\suggeneis\). Probably only fellow-countrymen as in strkjv@9:13|. {Fellow-prisoners} (\sunaichmal“tus\). Late word and rare (in Lucian). One of Paul's frequent compounds with \sun\. Literally, fellow captives in war. Perhaps they had shared one of Paul's numerous imprisonments (2Corinthians:11:23|). In N.T. only here, strkjv@Philemon:1:23; strkjv@Colossians:4:10|. {Of note} (\episˆmoi\). Stamped, marked (\epi sˆma\). Old word, only here and strkjv@Matthew:27:16| (bad sense) in N.T. {Among the apostles} (\en tois apostolois\). Naturally this means that they are counted among the apostles in the general sense true of Barnabas, James, the brother of Christ, Silas, and others. But it can mean simply that they were famous in the circle of the apostles in the technical sense. {Who have been in Christ before me} (\hoi kai pro emou gegonan en Christ“i\). Andronicus and Junias were converted before Paul was. Note \gegonan\ (_Koin‚_ form by analogy) instead of the usual second perfect active indicative form \gegonasin\, which some MSS. have. The perfect tense notes that they are still in Christ.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Tue Jul 2 22:02:44 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020