NONE.filter - rwp inspiration:

rwp@1Corinthians:2:13 @{Which things also we speak} (\ha kai laloumen\). This onomatopoetic verb \lale\ (from \la-la\), to utter sounds. In the papyri the word calls more attention to the form of utterance while \leg\ refers more to the substance. But \lale\ in the N.T. as here is used of the highest and holiest speech. Undoubtedly Paul employs the word purposely for the utterance of the revelation which he has understood. That is to say, there is revelation (verse 10|), illumination (verse 12|), and inspiration (verse 13|). Paul claims therefore the help of the Holy Spirit for the reception of the revelation, for the understanding of it, for the expression of it. Paul claimed this authority for his preaching (1Thessalonians:4:2|) and for his epistles (2Thessalonians:3:14|). {Not in words which man's wisdom teacheth} (\ouk en didaktois anthrpins sophias logois\). Literally, "not in words taught by human wisdom." The verbal adjective \didaktois\ (from \didask\, to teach) is here passive in idea and is followed by the ablative case of origin or source as in strkjv@John:6:45|, \esontai pantes didaktoi theou\ (from strkjv@Isaiah:54:13|), "They shall all be taught by God." The ablative in Greek, as is well known, has the same form as the genitive, though quite different in idea (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516). Songs:then Paul claims the help of the Holy Spirit in the utterance (\laloumen\) of the words, "which the Spirit teacheth (\en didaktois pneumatos\), "in words taught by the Spirit" (ablative \pneumatos\ as above). Clearly Paul means that the help of the Holy Spirit in the utterance of the revelation extends to the words. No theory of inspiration is here stated, but it is not _mere_ human wisdom. Paul's own Epistles bear eloquent witness to the lofty claim here made. They remain today after nearly nineteen centuries throbbing with the power of the Spirit of God, dynamic with life for the problems of today as when Paul wrote them for the needs of the believers in his time, the greatest epistles of all time, surcharged with the energy of God. {Comparing spiritual things with spiritual} (\pneumatikois pneumatika sunkrinontes\). Each of these words is in dispute. The verb \sunkrin\, originally meant to combine, to join together fitly. In the LXX it means to interpret dreams (Genesis:40:8,22; strkjv@41:12|) possibly by comparison. In the later Greek it may mean to compare as in strkjv@2Corinthians:10:12|. In the papyri Moulton and Milligan (_Vocabulary_) give it only for "decide," probably after comparing. But "comparing," in spite of the translations, does not suit well here. Songs:it is best to follow the original meaning to combine as do Lightfoot and Ellicott. But what gender is \pneumatikois\? Is it masculine or neuter like \pneumatika\? If masculine, the idea would be "interpreting (like LXX) spiritual truths to spiritual persons" or "matching spiritual truths with spiritual persons." This is a possible rendering and makes good sense in harmony with verse 14|. If \pneumatikois\ be taken as neuter plural (associative instrumental case after \sun\ in \sunkrinontes\), the idea most naturally would be, "combining spiritual ideas (\pneumatika\) with spiritual words" (\pneumatikois\). This again makes good sense in harmony with the first part of verse 13|. On the whole this is the most natural way to take it, though various other possibilities exist.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:12 @{But to the rest say I, not the Lord} (\tois de loipois leg eg, ouch ho Kurios\). Paul has no word about marriage from Jesus beyond the problem of divorce. This is no disclaimer of inspiration. He simply means that here he is not quoting a command of Jesus. {An unbelieving wife} (\gunaika apiston\). This is a new problem, the result of work among the Gentiles, that did not arise in the time of Jesus. The form \apiston\ is the same as the masculine because a compound adjective. Paul has to deal with mixed marriages as missionaries do today in heathen lands. The rest (\hoi loipoi\) for Gentiles (Ephesians:2:3|) we have already had in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13; strkjv@5:6| which see. The Christian husband married his wife when he himself was an unbeliever. The word \apistos\ sometimes means unfaithful (Luke:12:46|), but not here (cf. strkjv@John:20:27|). {She is content} (\suneudokei\). Late compound verb to be pleased together with, agree together. In the papyri. {Let him not leave her} (\m aphiet autn\). Perhaps here and in verses 11,13| \aphimi\ should be translated "put away" like \apolu\ in strkjv@Mark:10:1|. Some understand \aphimi\ as separation from bed and board, not divorce.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:25 @{I have no commandment of the Lord} (\epitagn Kuriou ouk ech\). A late word from \epitass\, old Greek verb to enjoin, to give orders to. Paul did have (verse 10|) a command from the Lord as we have in Matthew and Mark. It was quite possible for Paul to know this command of Jesus as he did other sayings of Jesus (Acts:20:35|) even if he had as yet no access to a written gospel or had received no direct revelation on the subject from Jesus (1Corinthians:11:23|). Sayings of Jesus were passed on among the believers. But Paul had no specific word from Jesus on the subject of virgins. They call for special treatment, young unmarried women only Paul means (7:25,28,34,36-38|) and not as in strkjv@Revelation:14:4| (metaphor). It is probable that in the letter (7:1|) the Corinthians had asked about this problem. {But I give my judgment} (\gnmn de didmi\). About mixed marriages (12-16|) Paul had the command of Jesus concerning divorce to guide him. Here he has nothing from Jesus at all. Songs:he gives no "command," but only "a judgment," a deliberately formed decision from knowledge (2Corinthians:8:10|), not a mere passing fancy. {As one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful} (\hs lemenos hupo kuriou pistos einai\). Perfect passive participle of \elee\, old verb to receive mercy (\eleos\). \Pistos\ is predicate nominative with infinitive \einai\. This language, so far from being a disclaimer of inspiration, is an express claim to help from the Lord in the forming of this duly considered judgment, which is in no sense a command, but an inspired opinion.

rwp@1Corinthians:14:37 @{The commandment of the Lord} (\Kuriou entol\). The prophet or the one with the gift of tongues or the disturbing woman would be quick to resent the sharp words of Paul. He claims inspiration for his position.

rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER ABOUT A.D. 65 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION THE AUTHOR The Epistle is not anonymous, but claims to be written by "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ" (1Peter:1:1|), that is Cephas (Simon Peter). If this is not true, then the book is pseudonymous by a late writer who assumed Peter's name, as in the so-called Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, etc. "There is no book in the New Testament which has earlier, better, or stronger attestation, though Irenaeus is the first to quote it by name" (Bigg). Eusebius (_H.E_. iii. 25.2) places it among the acknowledged books, those accepted with no doubt at all. We here assume that Simon Peter wrote this Epistle or at any rate dictated it by an amanuensis, as Paul did in Romans (Romans:16:22|). Bigg suggests Silvanus (Silas) as the amanuensis or interpreter (1Peter:5:12|), the obvious meaning of the language (\dia\, through). He may also have been the bearer of the Epistle. It happens that we know more of Peter's life than of any of the twelve apostles because of his prominence in the Gospels and in the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. In the _Student's Chronological New Testament_ I have given a full list of the passages in the Gospels where Peter appears with any clearness and the material is rich and abundant. The account in Acts is briefer, though Peter is the outstanding man in the first five chapters during his career in Jerusalem. After the conversion of Saul he begins to work outside of Jerusalem and after escaping death at the hands of Herod Agrippa I (Acts:12:3ff.|) he left for a while, but is back in Jerusalem at the Conference called by Paul and Barnabas (Acts:15:6-14; Gal strkjv@2:1-10|). After that we have no more about him in Acts, though he reappears in Antioch and is rebuked by Paul for cowardice because of the Judaizers (Galatians:2:11-21). He travelled for the Gospel among the Jews of the Dispersion (Galatians:2:9|) with his wife (1Corinthians:9:5|), and went to Asia Minor (1Peter:1:1|) and as far as Babylon or Rome (1Peter:5:13|). Besides Silvanus he had John Mark with him also (1Peter:5:13|), who was said by the early Christian writers to have been Peter's "interpreter" in his preaching, since Peter was not expert in the Greek (Acts:4:13|), and who also wrote his Gospel under the inspiration of Peter's preaching. We are not able to follow clearly the close of his life or to tell precisely the time of his death. He was apparently put to death in A.D. 67 or 68, but some think that he was executed in Rome in A.D. 64.

rwp@1Peter:1:12 @{To whom} (\hois\). Dative plural of the relative pronoun. To the prophets who were seeking to understand. Bigg observes that "the connexion between study and inspiration is a great mystery." Surely, but that is no argument for ignorance or obscurantism. We do the best that we can and only skirt the shore of knowledge, as Newton said. {It was revealed} (\apekaluphth\). First aorist passive indicative of \apokalupt\, old verb, to reveal, to unveil. Here is revelation about the revelation already received, revelation after research. {Did they minister} (\dikonoun\). Imperfect active of \diakone\, old verb, to minister, "were they ministering." {Have been announced} (\anggel\). Second aorist passive indicative of {anaggell}, to report, to bring back tidings (John:4:25|). {Through them} (\dia tn\). Intermediate agent (\dia\), "the gospelizers" (\tn euaggelisamenn\, articular first aorist middle participle of \euaggeliz\, to preach the gospel). {By the Holy Ghost} (\pneumati hagii\). Instrumental case of the personal agent, "by the Holy Spirit" (without article). {Sent forth from heaven} (\apostalenti\). Second aorist passive participle of \apostell\ in instrumental case agreeing with \pneumati hagii\ (the Spirit of Christ of verse 11|. {Desire} (\epithumousin\). Eagerly desire (present active indicative of \epithume\, to long for). {To look into} (\parakupsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \parakupt\, old compound to peer into as in strkjv@Luke:24:12; strkjv@John:20:5,11; strkjv@James:1:25|, which see. For the interest of angels in the Incarnation see strkjv@Luke:2:13f|.

rwp@2Timothy:3:16 @{Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable} (\psa graph theopneustos kai phelimos\). There are two matters of doubt in this clause. One is the absence of the article \h\ before \graph\, whether that makes it mean "every scripture" or "all scripture" as of necessity if present. Unfortunately, there are examples both ways with both \ps\ and \graph\. Twice we find \graph\ in the singular without the article and yet definite (1Peter:2:6; strkjv@2Peter:1:20|). We have \ps Isral\ (Romans:11:26|) for all Israel (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 772). Songs:far as the grammatical usage goes, one can render here either "all scripture" or "every scripture." There is no copula (\estin\) in the Greek and so one has to insert it either before the \kai\ or after it. If before, as is more natural, then the meaning is: "All scripture (or every scripture) is inspired of God and profitable." In this form there is a definite assertion of inspiration. That can be true also of the second way, making "inspired of God" descriptive of "every scripture," and putting \estin\ (is) after \kai\: "All scripture (or every scripture), inspired of God, is also profitable." {Inspired of God} (\theopneustos\). "God-breathed." Late word (Plutarch) here only in N.T. Perhaps in contrast to the commandments of men in strkjv@Titus:1:14|. {Profitable} (\phelimos\). See strkjv@1Timothy:4:8|. See strkjv@Romans:15:4|. Four examples of \pros\ (facing, with a view to, for): \didaskalian\, teaching; \elegmon\, reproof, in LXX and here only in N.T.; \epanorthsin\, correction, old word, from \epanortho\, to set up straight in addition, here only in N.T., with which compare \epidiortho\ in strkjv@Titus:1:5|; \paideian\, instruction, with which compare strkjv@Ephesians:6:4|.

rwp@Acts:11:27 @{Prophets} (\prophtai\). Christian prophets these were (cf. strkjv@13:1|) who came from Jerusalem (the headquarters, strkjv@8:15|). Judas and Silas are called prophets (14:4; strkjv@15:32|). They were not just fore-tellers, but forth-tellers. The prophet had inspiration and was superior to the speaker with tongues (1Corinthians:14:3|). John was a prophet (Luke:7:26|). We need prophets in the ministry today.

rwp@Luke:20:42 @{For David himself} (\autos gar Daueid\). This language of Jesus clearly means that he treats David as the author of strkjv@Psalms:110|. The inspiration of this Psalm is expressly stated in strkjv@Mark:12:36; strkjv@Matthew:22:43| (which see) and the Messianic character of the Psalm in all three Synoptics who all quote the LXX practically alike. Modern criticism that denies the Davidic authorship of this Psalm has to say either that Jesus was ignorant of the fact about it or that he declined to disturb the current acceptation of the Davidic authorship. Certainly modern scholars are not agreed on the authorship of strkjv@Psalms:110|. Meanwhile one can certainly be excused for accepting the natural implication of the words of Jesus here, "David himself." {In the book of the Psalms} (\en bibli Psalmn\). Compare strkjv@3:4| "in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet."

rwp@Matthew:16:22 @{Peter took him} (\proslabomenos auton ho Petros\). Middle voice, "taking to himself," aside and apart, "as if by a right of his own. He acted with greater familiarity after the token of acknowledgment had been given. Jesus, however, reduces him to his level" (Bengel). "Peter here appears in a new character; a minute ago speaking under inspiration from heaven, now under inspiration from the opposite quarter" (Bruce). Syriac Sinaitic for strkjv@Mark:8:32| has it "as though pitying him." But this exclamation and remonstrance of Peter was soon interrupted by Jesus. {God have mercy on thee} (\hiles\. Supply \ei\ or \est ho theos\). {This shall never be} (\ou m estai soi touto\). Strongest kind of negation, as if Peter would not let it happen. Peter had perfect assurance.

rwp@Romans:11:36 @{Of him} (\ex autou\), {through him} (\di' autou\), {unto him} (\eis auton\). By these three prepositions Paul ascribes the universe (\ta panta\) with all the phenomena concerning creation, redemption, providence to God as the {Source} (\ex\), the {Agent} (\di\), the {Goal} (\eis\). {For ever} (\eis tous ainas\). "For the ages." Alford terms this doxology in verses 33-36| "the sublimest apostrophe existing even in the pages of inspiration itself."