Bible:
Filter: String:

NONE.filter - rwp log:


rwp@Info @ WORD PICTURES IN THE NEW TESTAMENT BY ARCHIBALD THOMAS ROBERTSON A.M., D.D., LL.D., Litt.D. PROFESSOR OF NEW TESTAMENT INTERPRETATION IN THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY OF LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY VOLUME I THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK | VOLUME II | THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO LUKE | | VOLUME III | THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES | | VOLUME IV | THE EPISTLES OF PAUL | | VOLUME V (c) 1932 (through 2006) | THE FOURTH GOSPEL | THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS | | VOLUME VI (c) 1933 (through 2007) | THE GENERAL EPISTLES | THE REVELATION OF JOHN BAKER BOOK HOUSE Grand Rapids, Michigan 49516 Volumes 1-4 (c) 1930 [expired and now Public Domain] by Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention Six-volume Set ISBN: 0-8010-7710-9 Printed in the United States of America Volumes 5 (c) 1932 Renewal 1960 Broadman Press. All rights reserved. Used by permission. [expires and becomes Public Domain Dec 31, 2006]. Volumes 6 (c) 1933 Renewal 1960 Broadman Press. All rights reserved. Used by permission. [expires and becomes Public Domain Dec 31, 2007].

rwp@Info @ It has now been forty years since Dr. Marvin R. Vincent wrote his most useful series of volumes entitled _Word Studies in the New Testament_. They are still helpful for those for whom they were designed, but a great deal of water has run under the mill in these years. More scientific methods of philology are now in use. No longer are Greek tenses and prepositions explained in terms of conjectural English translations or interchanged according to the whim of the interpreter. Comparative grammar has thrown a flood of light on the real meaning of New Testament forms and idioms. New Testament writers are no longer explained as using one construction "for" another. New light has come also from the papyri discoveries in Egypt. Unusual Greek words from the standpoint of the literary critic or classical scholar are here found in everyday use in letters and business and public documents. The New Testament Greek is now known to be not a new or peculiar dialect of the Greek language, but the very lingo of the time. The vernacular _Koin‚_, the spoken language of the day, appears in the New Testament as in these scraps of Oxyrhynchus and Fayum papyri. There are specimens of the literary _Koin‚_ in the papyri as also in the writings of Luke, the Epistles of Paul, the Epistle to the Hebrews. A new Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament will come in due time which will take note of the many startling discoveries from the Greek papyri and inscriptions first brought to notice in their bearing on the New Testament by Dr. Adolf Deissmann, then of Heidelberg, now of Berlin. His _Bible Studies_ (Translation by Alexander Grieve, 1901) and his _Light from the Ancient East_ (Revised Edition translated by L.R.M. Strachan, 1927) are accessible to students unfamiliar with the German originals.

rwp@Info @ The six volumes will follow this order; Volume I, The Gospel according to Matthew and Mark; Vol. II, The Gospel according to Luke; Vol. III, The Acts of the Apostles; Vol. IV, The Pauline Epistles; Vol. V, The Gospel according to John and the Epistle to the Hebrews; Vol. VI, the general Epistles and the Revelation of John. For purely exegetical and expository development a more chronological order would be required. These volumes do not claim to be formal commentary. Nowhere is the whole text discussed, but everywhere those words are selected for discussion which seem to be richest for the needs of the reader in the light of present-day knowledge. A great deal of the personal equation is thus inevitable. My own remarks will be now lexical, now grammatical, now archaeological, now exegetical, now illustrative, anything that the mood of the moment may move me to write that may throw light here and there on the New Testament words and idioms. Another writer might feel disposed to enlarge upon items not touched upon here. But that is to be expected even in the more formal commentaries, useful as they are. To some extent it is true of lexicons. No one man knows everything, even in his chosen specialty, or has the wisdom to pick out what every reader wishes explained. But even diamonds in the rough are diamonds. It is for the reader to polish them as he will. He can turn the light this way and that. There is a certain amount of repetition at some points, part of it on purpose to save time and to emphasize the point.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:5 @{That} (\hoti\). Explicit specification of this grace of God given to the Corinthians. Paul points out in detail the unusual spiritual gifts which were their glory and became their peril (chapters strkjv@1Corinthians:12-14|). {Ye were enriched in him} (\eploutisthˆte en aut“i\). First aorist passive indicative of \ploutiz“\, old causative verb from \ploutos\, wealth, common in Attic writers, dropped out for centuries, reappeared in LXX. In N.T. only three times and alone in Paul (1Corinthians:1:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:10,11|). The Christian finds his real riches in Christ, one of Paul's pregnant phrases full of the truest mysticism. {In all utterance and all knowledge} (\en panti log“i kai pasˆi gn“sei\). One detail in explanation of the riches in Christ. The outward expression (\log“i\) here is put before the inward knowledge (\gn“sei\) which should precede all speech. But we get at one's knowledge by means of his speech. Chapters strkjv@1Corinthians:12-14| throw much light on this element in the spiritual gifts of the Corinthians (the gift of tongues, interpreting tongues, discernment) as summed up in strkjv@1Corinthians:13:1,2|, the greater gifts of strkjv@12:31|. It was a marvellously endowed church in spite of their perversions.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:11 @{For it hath been signified unto me} (\edˆl“thˆ gar moi\). First aorist passive indicative of \dˆlo“\ and difficult to render into English. Literally, It was signified to me. {By them of Chloe} (\hupo t“n Chloˆs\). Ablative case of the masculine plural article \t“n\, by the (folks) of Chloe (genitive case). The words "which are of the household" are not in the Greek, though they correctly interpret the Greek, "those of Chloe." Whether the children, the kinspeople, or the servants of Chloe we do not know. It is uncertain also whether Chloe lived in Corinth or Ephesus, probably Ephesus because to name her if in Corinth might get her into trouble (Heinrici). Already Christianity was working a social revolution in the position of women and slaves. The name {Chloe} means tender verdure and was one of the epithets of Demeter the goddess of agriculture and for that reason Lightfoot thinks that she was a member of the freedman class like Phoebe (Romans:16:1|), Hermes (Romans:16:14|), Nereus (Romans:16:15|). It is even possible that Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus (1Corinthians:16:17|) may have been those who brought Chloe the news of the schisms in Corinth. {Contentions} (\erides\). Unseemly wranglings (as opposed to discussing, \dialegomai\) that were leading to the {schisms}. Listed in works of the flesh (Galatians:5:19f.|) and the catalogues of vices (2Corinthians:12:20; strkjv@Romans:1:19f.; strkjv@1Timothy:6:4|).

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:1:18 @{For the word of the cross} (\ho logos gar ho tou staurou\). Literally, "for the preaching (with which I am concerned as the opposite of {wisdom of word} in verse 17|) that (repeated article \ho\, almost demonstrative) of the cross." "Through this incidental allusion to preaching St. Paul passes to a new subject. The discussions in the Corinthian Church are for a time forgotten, and he takes the opportunity of correcting his converts for their undue exaltation of human eloquence and wisdom" (Lightfoot). {To them that are perishing} (\tois men apollumenois\). Dative of disadvantage (personal interest). Present middle participle is here timeless, those in the path to destruction (not annihilation. See strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:10|). Cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:4:3|. {Foolishness} (\m“ria\). Folly. Old word from \m“ros\, foolish. In N.T. only in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:18,21,23; strkjv@2:14; strkjv@3:19|. {But unto us which are being saved} (\tois s“zomenois hˆmin\). Sharp contrast to those that are perishing and same construction with the articular participle. No reason for the change of pronouns in English. This present passive participle is again timeless. Salvation is described by Paul as a thing done in the past, "we were saved" (Romans:8:24|), as a present state, "ye have been saved" (Ep strkjv@2:5|), as a process, "ye are being saved" (1Corinthians:15:2|), as a future result, "thou shalt be saved" (Romans:10:9|). {The power of God} (\dunamis theou\). Songs:in strkjv@Romans:1:16|. No other message has this dynamite of God (1Corinthians:4:20|). God's power is shown in the preaching of the Cross of Christ through all the ages, now as always. No other preaching wins men and women from sin to holiness or can save them. The judgment of Paul here is the verdict of every soul winner through all time.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:21 @{Seeing that} (\epeidˆ\). Since (\epei\ and \dˆ\) with explanatory \gar\. {Through its wisdom} (\dia tˆs sophias\). Article here as possessive. The two wisdoms contrasted. {Knew not God} (\ouk egn“\). Failed to know, second aorist (effective) active indicative of \gin“sk“\, solemn dirge of doom on both Greek philosophy and Jewish theology that failed to know God. Has modern philosophy done better? There is today even a godless theology (Humanism). "Now that God's wisdom has reduced the self-wise world to ignorance" (Findlay). {Through the foolishness of the preaching} (\dia tˆs m“rias tou kˆrugmatos\). Perhaps "proclamation" is the idea, for it is not \kˆruxis\, the act of heralding, but \kˆrugma\, the message heralded or the proclamation as in verse 23|. The metaphor is that of the herald proclaiming the approach of the king (Matthew:3:1; strkjv@4:17|). See also \kˆrugma\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:4; strkjv@2Timothy:4:17|. The proclamation of the Cross seemed foolishness to the wiseacres then (and now), but it is consummate wisdom, God's wisdom and good-pleasure (\eudokˆsan\). The foolishness of preaching is not the preaching of foolishness. {To save them that believe} (\s“sai tous pisteuontas\). This is the heart of God's plan of redemption, the proclamation of salvation for all those who trust Jesus Christ on the basis of his death for sin on the Cross. The mystery-religions all offered salvation by initiation and ritual as the Pharisees did by ceremonialism. Christianity reaches the heart directly by trust in Christ as the Saviour. It is God's wisdom.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:30 @{Of him} (\ex autou\). Out of God. He chose you. {In Christ Jesus} (\en Christ“i Iˆsou\). In the sphere of Christ Jesus the choice was made. This is God's wisdom. {Who was made unto us wisdom from God} (\hos egenˆthˆ sophia hˆmin apo theou\). Note \egenˆthˆ\, became (first aorist passive and indicative), not \ˆn\, was, the Incarnation, Cross, and Resurrection. Christ is the wisdom of God (Co strkjv@2:2f.|) "both righteousness and sanctification and redemption" (\dikaiosunˆ te kai hagiasmos kai apolutr“sis\), as is made plain by the use of \te--kai--kai\. The three words (\dikaiosunˆ, hagiasmos, apolutr“sis\) are thus shown to be an epexegesis of \sophia\ (Lightfoot). All the treasures of wisdom and knowledge in Christ Jesus. We are made righteous, holy, and redeemed in Christ Jesus. Redemption comes here last for emphasis though the foundation of the other two. In strkjv@Romans:1:17| we see clearly Paul's idea of the God kind of righteousness (\dikaiosunˆ\) in Christ. In strkjv@Romans:3:24| we have Paul's conception of redemption (\apolutr“sis\, setting free as a ransomed slave) in Christ. In strkjv@Romans:6:19| we have Paul's notion of holiness or sanctification (\hagiasmos\) in Christ. These great theological terms will call for full discussion in Romans, but they must not be overlooked here. See also strkjv@Acts:10:35; strkjv@24:25; strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:3-7; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:2|.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:1 @{Not with excellency of speech or of wisdom} (\ou kath' huperochˆn logou ˆ sophias\). \Huperochˆ\ is an old word from the verb \huperech“\ (Phillipians:4:7|) and means preeminence, rising above. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1Timothy:2:2| of magistrates. It occurs in inscriptions of Pergamum for persons of position (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 255). Here it means excess or superfluity, "not in excellence of rhetorical display or of philosophical subtlety" (Lightfoot). {The mystery of God} (\to mustˆrion tou theou\). Songs:Aleph A C Copt. like strkjv@2:7|, but B D L P read \marturion\ like strkjv@1:6|. Probably {mystery} is correct. Christ crucified is the mystery of God (Colossians:2:2|). Paul did not hesitate to appropriate this word in common use among the mystery religions, but he puts into it his ideas, not those in current use. It is an old word from \mue“\, to close, to shut, to initiate (Phillipians:4:12|). This mystery was once hidden from the ages (Colossians:1:26|), but is now made plain in Christ (1Corinthians:2:7; strkjv@Romans:16:25f.|). The papyri give many illustrations of the use of the word for secret doctrines known only to the initiated (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_).

rwp@1Corinthians:2:4 @{Not in persuasive words of wisdom} (\ouk en pithois sophias logois\). This looks like a false disclaimer or mock modesty, for surely the preacher desires to be persuasive. This adjective \pithos\ (MSS. \peithos\) has not yet been found elsewhere. It seems to be formed directly from \peith“\, to persuade, as \pheidos\ (\phidos\) is from \pheidomai\, to spare. The old Greek form \pithanos\ is common enough and is used by Josephus (_Ant_. VIII. 9. 1) of "the plausible words of the lying prophet" in strkjv@1Kings:13|. The kindred word \pithanologia\ occurs in strkjv@Colossians:2:4| for the specious and plausible Gnostic philosophers. And gullible people are easy marks for these plausible pulpiteers. Corinth put a premium on the veneer of false rhetoric and thin thinking. {But in demonstration} (\all' en apodeixei\). In contrast with the {plausibility} just mentioned. This word, though an old one from \apodeiknumi\, to show forth, occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. {Spirit} (\pneuma\) here can be the Holy Spirit or inward spirit as opposed to superficial expression and {power} (\dunamis\) is moral power rather than intellectual acuteness (cf. strkjv@1:18|).

rwp@1Corinthians:2:11 @{Knoweth} (\oiden, egn“ken\). Second perfect of root \id-\, to see and so know, first perfect of \gin“sk“\, to know by personal experience, has come to know and still knows. See First John for a clear distinction in the use of \oida\ and \gin“sk“\. {The spirit of man that is in him} (\to pneuma tou anthr“pou to en aut“i\). The self-consciousness of man that resides in the man or woman (generic term for mankind, \anthr“pos\). {The Spirit of God} (\to pneuma tou theou\). Note the absence of \to en aut“i\. It is not the mere self-consciousness of God, but the personal Holy Spirit in his relation to God the Father. Paul's analogy between the spirit of man and the Spirit of God does not hold clear through and he guards it at this vital point as he does elsewhere as in strkjv@Romans:8:26| and in the full Trinitarian benediction in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:13|. \Pneuma\ in itself merely means breath or wind as in strkjv@John:3:8|. To know accurately Paul's use of the word in every instance calls for an adequate knowledge of his theology, and psychology. But the point here is plain. God's Holy Spirit is amply qualified to make the revelation claimed here in verses 6-10|.

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 anthr“pinˆs 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:2:14 @{Now the natural man} (\psuchikos de anthr“pos\). Note absence of article here, "A natural man" (an unregenerate man). Paul does not employ modern psychological terms and he exercises variety in his use of all the terms here present as \pneuma\ and \pneumatikos, psuchˆ\ and \psuchikos, sarx\ and \sarkinos\ and \sarkikos\. A helpful discussion of the various uses of these words in the New Testament is given by Burton in his _New Testament Word Studies_, pp. 62-68, and in his {Spirit, Soul, and Flesh}. The papyri furnish so many examples of \sarx, pneuma\, and \psuchˆ\ that Moulton and Milligan make no attempt at an exhaustive treatment, but give a few miscellaneous examples to illustrate the varied uses that parallel the New Testament. \Psuchikos\ is a qualitative adjective from \psuchˆ\ (breath of life like \anima\, life, soul). Here the Vulgate renders it by _animalis_ and the German by _sinnlich_, the original sense of animal life as in strkjv@Jude:1:19; strkjv@James:3:15|. In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:44,46| there is the same contrast between \psuchikos\ and \pneumatikos\ as here. The \psuchikos\ man is the unregenerate man while the \pneumatikos\ man is the renewed man, born again of the Spirit of God. {Receiveth not} (\ou dechetai\). Does not accept, rejects, refuses to accept. In strkjv@Romans:8:7| Paul definitely states the inability (\oude gar dunatai\) of the mind of the flesh to receive the things of the Spirit untouched by the Holy Spirit. Certainly the initiative comes from God whose Holy Spirit makes it possible for us to accept the things of the Spirit of God. They are no longer "foolishness" (\m“ria\) to us as was once the case (1:23|). Today one notes certain of the _intelligentsia_ who sneer at Christ and Christianity in their own blinded ignorance. {He cannot know them} (\ou dunatai gn“nai\). He is not able to get a knowledge (ingressive second aorist active infinitive of \gin“sk“\). His helpless condition calls for pity in place of impatience on our part, though such an one usually poses as a paragon of wisdom and commiserates the deluded followers of Christ. {They are spiritually judged} (\pneumatik“s anakrinetai\). Paul and Luke are fond of this verb, though nowhere else in the N.T. Paul uses it only in I Corinthians. The word means a sifting process to get at the truth by investigation as of a judge. In strkjv@Acts:17:11| the Beroeans scrutinized the Scriptures. These \psuchikoi\ men are incapable of rendering a decision for they are unable to recognize the facts. They judge by the \psuchˆ\ (mere animal nature) rather than by the \pneuma\ (the renewed spirit).

rwp@1Corinthians:3:5 @{What then?} (\ti oun;\). He does not say \tis\ (who), but \ti\ (what), neuter singular interrogative pronoun. {Ministers} (\diakonoi\). Not leaders of parties or sects, but merely servants through whom ye believed. The etymology of the word Thayer gives as \dia\ and \konis\ "raising dust by hastening." In the Gospels it is the servant (Matthew:20:26|) or waiter (John:2:5|). Paul so describes himself as a minister (Colossians:1:23,25|). The technical sense of deacon comes later (Phillipians:1:1; strkjv@1Timothy:3:8,12|). {As the Lord gave to him} (\h“s ho Kurios ed“ken\). Hence no minister of the Lord like Apollos and Paul has any basis for pride or conceit nor should be made the occasion for faction and strife. This idea Paul enlarges upon through chapters strkjv@1Corinthians:3; 4| and it is made plain in chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:12|.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:7 @{Songs:then neither--neither--but} (\H“ste oute--oute--all'\). Paul applies his logic relentlessly to the facts. He had asked {what} (\ti\) is Apollos or Paul (verse 5|). The answer is here. {Neither is anything} (\ti\) {the one who plants nor the one who waters}. God is the whole and we are not anything.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:11 @{Other foundation} (\themelion allon\). The gender of the adjective is here masculine as is shown by \allon\. If neuter, it would be \allo\. It is masculine because Paul has Christ in mind. It is not here \heteron\ a different kind of gospel (\heteron euaggelion\, strkjv@Galatians:1:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:4|) which is not another (\allo\, strkjv@Galatians:1:7|) in reality. But another Jesus (2Corinthians:11:4|, \allon Iˆsoun\) is a reflection on the one Lord Jesus. Hence there is no room on the platform with Jesus for another Saviour, whether Buddha, Mahomet, Dowie, Eddy, or what not. Jesus Christ is the one foundation and it is gratuitous impudence for another to assume the role of Foundation. {Than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus} (\para ton keimenon, hos estin Iˆsous Christos\). Literally, "alongside (\para\) the one laid (\keimenon\)," already laid (present middle participle of \keimai\, used here as often as the perfect passive of \tithˆmi\ in place of \tetheimenon\). Paul scouts the suggestion that one even in the interest of so-called "new thought" will dare to lay beside Jesus another foundation for religion. And yet I have seen an article by a professor in a theological seminary in which he advocates regarding Jesus as a landmark, not as a goal, not as a foundation. Clearly Paul means that on this one true foundation, Jesus Christ, one must build only what is in full harmony with the Foundation which is Jesus Christ. If one accuses Paul of narrowness, it can be replied that the architect has to be narrow in the sense of building here and not there. A broad foundation will be too thin and unstable for a solid and abiding structure. It can be said also that Paul is here merely repeating the claim of Jesus himself on this very subject when he quoted strkjv@Psalms:118:22f.| to the members of the Sanhedrin who challenged his authority (Mark:11:10f.; strkjv@Matthew:21:42-45; strkjv@Luke:20:17f.|). Apostles and prophets go into this temple of God, but Christ Jesus is the chief corner stone (\akrog“naios\, strkjv@Ephesians:2:20|). All believers are living stones in this temple (1Peter:2:5|). But there is only one foundation possible.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:20 @{And again} (\kai palin\). Another confirmatory passage from strkjv@Psalms:94:11|. {Reasonings} (\dialogismous\). More than _cogitationes_ (Vulgate), sometimes disputations (Phillipians:2:14|). Paul changes "men" of LXX to wise (\soph“n\) in harmony with the Hebrew context. {Vain} (\mataioi\). Useless, foolish, from \matˆ\, a futile attempt.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:8 @{Already are ye filled?} (\ˆdˆ kekoresmenoi este?\). Perfect passive indicative, state of completion, of \korennumi\, old Greek verb to satiate, to satisfy. The only other example in N.T. is strkjv@Acts:27:38| which see. Paul may refer to strkjv@Deuteronomy:31:20; strkjv@32:15|. But it is keen irony, even sarcasm. Westcott and Hort make it a question and the rest of the sentence also. {Already ye are become rich} (\ˆdˆ eploutˆsate\). Note change to ingressive aorist indicative of \ploute“\, old verb to be rich (cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9|). "The aorists, used instead of perfects, imply indecent haste" (Lightfoot). "They have got a private millennium of their own" (Robertson & Plummer) with all the blessings of the Messianic Kingdom (Luke:22:29f.; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:12; strkjv@2Timothy:2:12|). {Ye have reigned without us} (\ch“ris hˆm“n ebasileusate\). Withering sarcasm. Ye became kings without our company. Some think that Paul as in strkjv@3:21| is purposely employing Stoic phraseology though with his own meanings. If so, it is hardly consciously done. Paul was certainly familiar with much of the literature of his time, but it did not shape his ideas. {I would that ye did reign} (\kai ophelon ge ebasileusate\). More exactly, "And would at least that ye had come to reign (or become kings)." It is an unfulfilled wish about the past expressed by \ophelon\ and the aorist indicative instead of \ei gar\ and the aorist indicative (the ancient idiom). See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1003, for the construction with particle \ophelon\ (an unaugmented second aorist form). {That we also might reign with you} (\hina kai hˆmeis humin sunbasileus“men\). Ironical contrast to \ch“ris hˆm“n ebasileusate\, just before. Associative instrumental case of \humin\ after \sun-\.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:12 @{We toil} (\kopi“men\). Common late verb for weariness in toil (Luke:5:5|), {working with our own hands} (\ergazomenoi tais idiais chersin\) instrumental case \chersin\ and not simply for himself but also for Aquila and Priscilla as he explains in strkjv@Acts:20:34|. This personal touch gives colour to the outline. Paul alludes to this fact often (1Thessalonians:2:9; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:8; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:7|). "Greeks despised manual labour; St. Paul glories in it" (Robertson and Plummer). Cf. Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 317. {Being reviled we bless} (\loidoroumenoi eulogoumen\). Almost the language of Peter about Jesus (1Peter:2:23|) in harmony with the words of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:5:44; strkjv@Luke:6:27|. {Being persecuted we endure} (\di“komenoi anechometha\). We hold back and do not retaliate. Turn to Paul's other picture of his experiences in the vivid contrasts in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:7-10; strkjv@6:3-10| for an interpretation of his language here.

rwp@1Corinthians:5:8 @{Wherefore let us keep the feast} (\h“ste heortaz“men\). Present active subjunctive (volitive). Let us keep on keeping the feast, a perpetual feast (Lightfoot), and keep the leaven out. It is quite possible that Paul was writing about the time of the Jewish passover, since it was before pentecost (1Corinthians:16:8|). But, if so, that is merely incidental, and his language here is not a plea for the observance of Easter by Christians. {With the leaven of malice and wickedness} (\en zumˆi kakias kai ponˆrias\). Vicious disposition and evil deed. {With the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth} (\en azumois eilikrinias kai alˆtheias\). No word for "bread." The plural of \azumois\ may suggest "elements" or "loaves." \Eilikrinia\ (sincerity) does not occur in the ancient Greek and is rare in the later Greek. In the papyri it means probity in one example. The etymology is uncertain. Boisacq inclines to the notion of \heilˆ\ or \helˆ\, sunlight, and \krin“\, to judge by the light of the sun, holding up to the light. \Alˆtheia\ (truth) is a common word from \alˆthˆs\ (true) and this from \a\ privative and \lˆth“\ (\lathein, lanthan“\, to conceal or hide) and so unconcealed, not hidden. The Greek idea of truth is out in the open. Note strkjv@Romans:1:18| where Paul pictures those who are holding down the truth in unrighteousness.

rwp@1Corinthians:6:15 @{Members of Christ} (\melˆ Christou\). Old word for limbs, members. Even the Stoics held the body to be common with the animals (Epictetus, _Diss_. l. iii. 1) and only the reason like the gods. Without doubt some forms of modern evolution have contributed to the licentious views of animalistic sex indulgence, though the best teachers of biology show that in the higher animals monogamy is the rule. The body is not only adapted for Christ (verse 13|), but it is a part of Christ, in vital union with him. Paul will make much use of this figure further on (12:12-31; strkjv@Ephesians:4:11-16; strkjv@5:30|). {Shall I then take away?} (\aras oun;\). First aorist active participle of \air“\, old verb to snatch, carry off like Latin _rapio_ (our rape). {Make} (\poiˆs“\). Can be either future active indicative or first aorist active subjunctive (deliberative). Either makes good sense. The horror of deliberately taking "members of Christ" and making them "members of a harlot" in an actual union staggers Paul and should stagger us. {God forbid} (\mˆ genoito\). Optative second aorist in a negative wish for the future. {May it not happen!} The word "God" is not here. The idiom is common in Epictetus though rare in the LXX. Paul has it thirteen times and Luke once (Luke:20:16|).

rwp@1Corinthians:9:3 @{My defence} (\hˆ emˆ apologia\). Original sense, not idea of apologizing as we say. See on ¯Acts:22:1; strkjv@25:16|. Refers to what precedes and to what follows as illustration of strkjv@8:13|. {To them that examine me} (\tois eme anakrinousin\). See on ¯1Corinthians:2:15; strkjv@4:3|. The critics in Corinth were "investigating" Paul with sharp eyes to find faults. How often the pastor is under the critic's spy-glass.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:16 @{The cup of blessing} (\to potˆrion tˆs eulogias\). The cup over which we pronounce a blessing as by Christ at the institution of the ordinance. {A communion of the blood of Christ} (\koin“nia tou haimatos tou Christou\). Literally, a participation in (objective genitive) the blood of Christ. The word \koin“nia\ is an old one from \koin“nos\, partner, and so here and strkjv@Phillipians:2:1; strkjv@3:10|. It can mean also fellowship (Galatians:2:9|) or contribution (2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@Phillipians:1:5|). It is, of course, a spiritual participation in the blood of Christ which is symbolized by the cup. Same meaning for \koin“nia\ in reference to "the body of Christ." {The bread which we break} (\ton arton hon kl“men\). The loaf. Inverse attraction of the antecedent (\arton\) to the case (accusative) of the relative (\hon\) according to classic idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 488). \Artos\ probably from \ar“\, to join or fit (flour mixed with water and baked). The mention of the cup here before the bread does not mean that this order was observed for see the regular order of bread and then cup in strkjv@11:24-27|.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:20 @{But I say that} (\all' hoti\). The verb \phˆmi\ (I say) must be repeated from verse 19| before \hoti\. {To demons, and not to God} (\daimoniois kai ou the“i\). Referring to LXX text of strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:17|. It is probable that by \ou the“i\ Paul means "to a no-god" as also in strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:21| \ep' ouk ethnei\ (by a no-people). This is Paul's reply to the heathen who claimed that they worshipped the gods represented by the images and not the mere wood or stone or metal idols. The word \daimonia\ is an adjective \daimonios\ from \daim“n\, an inferior deity, and with same idea originally, once in this sense in N.T. (Acts:17:18|). Elsewhere in N.T. it has the notion of evil spirits as here, those spiritual forces of wickedness (Ephesians:6:12|) that are under the control of Satan. The word \daimonia\, so common in the Gospels, occurs in Paul's writings only here and strkjv@1Timothy:4:1|. Demonology is a deep and dark subject here pictured by Paul as the explanation of heathenism which is a departure from God (Romans:1:19-23|) and a substitute for the worship of God. It is a terrible indictment which is justified by the licentious worship associated with paganism then and now.

rwp@1Corinthians:11:2 @{Hold fast the traditions} (\tas paradoseis katechete\). Hold down as in strkjv@15:2|. \Paradosis\ (tradition) from \paradid“mi\ (\pared“ka\, first aorist active indicative) is an old word and merely something handed on from one to another. The thing handed on may be bad as in strkjv@Matthew:15:2f.| (which see) and contrary to the will of God (Mark:7:8f.|) or it may be wholly good as here. There is a constant conflict between the new and the old in science, medicine, law, theology. The obscurantist rejects all the new and holds to the old both true and untrue. New truth must rest upon old truth and is in harmony with it.

rwp@1Corinthians:11:7 @{The image and glory of God} (\eik“n kai doxa theou\). Anarthrous substantives, but definite. Reference to strkjv@Genesis:1:28; strkjv@2:26| whereby man is made directly in the image (\eik“n\) of God. It is the moral likeness of God, not any bodily resemblance. Ellicott notes that man is the glory (\doxa\) of God as the crown of creation and as endowed with sovereignty like God himself. {The glory of the man} (\doxa andros\). Anarthrous also, man's glory. In strkjv@Genesis:2:26| the LXX has \anthr“pos\ (Greek word for both male and female), not \anˆr\ (male) as here. But the woman (\gunˆ\) was formed from the man (\anˆr\) and this priority of the male (verse 8|) gives a certain superiority to the male. On the other hand, it is equally logical to argue that woman is the crown and climax of all creation, being the last.

rwp@1Corinthians:12:8 @{To one} (\h“i men\). Demonstrative \hos\ with \men\ in dative case, to this one. The distribution or correlation is carried on by \all“i de\ (verses 8,9,10|), \heter“i de\ (verses 9,10|) for variety, nine manifestations of the Spirit's work in verses 8-10|. {The Word of wisdom} (\logos sophias\). Old words. \Logos\ is reason, then speech. Wisdom is intelligence, then practical action in accord with it. Here it is speech full of God's wisdom (2:7|) under the impulse of the Spirit of God. This gift is placed first (revelation by the Spirit). {The word of knowledge} (\logos gn“se“s\). This gift is insight (illumination) according to (\kata\) the same Spirit.

rwp@1Corinthians:12:19 @{One member} (\hen melos\). Paul applies the logic of verse 17| to any member of the body. The application to members of the church is obvious. It is particularly pertinent in the case of a "church boss."

rwp@1Corinthians:13:5 @{Doth not behave itself unseemly} (\ouk aschˆmonei\). Old verb from \aschˆm“n\ (12:23|). In N.T. only here and strkjv@7:36|. Not indecent. {Seeketh not its own} (\ou zˆtei ta heautˆs\). Its own interests (10:24,33|). {Is not provoked} (\ou paroxunetai\). Old word. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:17:16| which see. Irritation or sharpness of spirit. And yet Paul felt it in Athens (exasperation) and he and Barnabas had \paroxusmos\ (paroxysm) in Antioch (15:39|). See good sense of \paroxusmos\ in strkjv@Hebrews:10:24|. {Taketh not account of evil} (\ou logizetai to kakon\). Old verb from \logos\, to count up, to take account of as in a ledger or note-book, "the evil" (\to kakon\) done to love with a view to settling the account.

rwp@1Corinthians:13:11 @{A child} (\nˆpios\). See on ¯3:1| for \nˆpios\ in contrast with \teleios\ (adult). {I spake} (\elaloun\). Imperfect active, I used to talk. {I felt} (\ephronoun\). Imperfect active, I used to think. Better, I used to understand. {I thought} (\elogizomˆn\). Imperfect middle, I used to reason or calculate. {Now that I am become} (\hote gegona\). Perfect active indicative \gegona\, I have become a man (\anˆr\) and remain so (Ephesians:4:14|). {I have put away} (\katˆrgˆka\). Perfect active indicative. I have made inoperative (verse 8|) for good.

rwp@1Corinthians:14:9 @{Unless ye utter speech easy to be understood} (\ean mˆ eusˆmon logon d“te\). Condition of third class again (\ean\ and aorist subjunctive). \Eusˆmon\ (\eu\, well, \sˆma\, sign) is old word, here only in N.T., well-marked, distinct, clear. Good enunciation, a hint for speakers. {Ye will be speaking into the air} (\esesthe eis aera lalountes\). Periphrastic future indicative (linear action). Cf. \aera der“n\ (beating the air) in strkjv@9:26|. Cf. our talking to the wind. This was before the days of radio.

rwp@1Corinthians:14:16 @{Else if thou bless with the spirit} (\epei ean eulogˆis en pneumati\). Third class condition. He means that, if one is praying and praising God (10:16|) in an ecstatic prayer, the one who does not understand the ecstasy will be at a loss when to say "amen" at the close of the prayer. In the synagogues the Jews used responsive amens at the close of prayers (Nehemiah:5:13; strkjv@8:6; strkjv@1Chronicles:16:36; strkjv@Psalms:106:48|). {He that filleth the place of the unlearned} (\ho anaplˆr“n ton topon tou idi“tou\). Not a special part of the room, but the position of the \idi“tou\ (from \idios\, one's own), common from Herodotus for private person (Acts:4:13|), unskilled (2Corinthians:11:6|), uninitiated (unlearned) in the gift of tongues as here and verses 23f|. {At thy giving of thanks} (\epi tˆi sˆi eucharistiƒi\). Just the prayer, not the Eucharist or the Lord's Supper, as is plain from verse 17|.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:2 @{In what words I preached it unto you} (\tini logoi euˆggelisamˆn humin\). Almost certainly \tis\ (\tini logoi\, locative or instrumental, in or with) here is used like the relative \hos\ as is common in papyri (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 93f.; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 737f.). Even so it is not clear whether the clause depends on \gn“riz“\ like the other relatives, but most likely so. {If we hold it fast} (\ei katechete\). Condition of first class. Paul assumes that they are holding it fast. {Except ye believed in vain} (\ektos ei mˆ eikˆi episteusate\). For \ektos ei mˆ\ see on ¯14:5|. Condition of first class, unless in fact ye did believe to no purpose (\eikˆi\, old adverb, only in Paul in N.T.). Paul holds this peril over them in their temptation to deny the resurrection.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:5 @{And that he appeared to Cephas} (\kai hoti “phthˆ Kˆphƒi\). First aorist passive indicative of the defective verb \hora“\, to see. Paul means not a mere "vision," but actual appearance. John uses \ephaner“thˆ\ (John:21:14|) from \phanero“\, to make manifest, of Christ's appearance to the seven by the Sea of Galilee. Peter was listed first (\pr“tos\) among the Apostles (Matthew:10:2|). Jesus had sent a special message to him (Mark:16:7|) after his resurrection. This special appearance to Peter is made the determining factor in the joyful faith of the disciples (Luke:24:34|), though mentioned incidentally here. Paul had told all these four facts to the Corinthians in his preaching. He gives further proof of the fact of Christ's resurrection. There are ten appearances given besides the one to Paul. Nine are in the Gospels (Mary Magdalene in John and Mark, the other women in Matthew, the two going to Emmaus in Luke, Simon Peter in Luke and I Corinthians, the ten apostles and others in Luke and John and Mark, the eleven and others in John, the seven by the sea in John, to over five hundred in Galilee in Matthew and Paul and Mark, to the apostles in Jerusalem in Luke and Mark and Acts and I Corinthians) and one in I Corinthians above (to James). It will be seen that Paul mentions only five of the ten, one, that to James, not given elsewhere. What he gives is conclusive evidence of the fact, particularly when re-enforced by his own experience (the sixth appearance mentioned by Paul). The way to prove this great fact is to start with Paul's own witness given in this undoubted Epistle. The natural way to understand Paul's adverbs of time here is chronological: {then} (\eita\), {then} (\epeita\), {then} (\epeita\), {then} (\eita\), {last of all} (\eschaton pant“n\). {To the twelve} (\tois d“deka\). The technical name. Only ten were present, for Judas was dead and Thomas was absent (John:20:24|).

rwp@1Corinthians:15:20 @{But now} (\nuni de\). Emphatic form of \nun\ with \-i\ added (cf. strkjv@12:18|). It is the logical triumph of Paul after the _reductio ad impossibile_ (Findlay) of the preceding argument. {The first-fruits} (\aparchˆ\). Old word from \aparchomai\, to offer firstlings or first-fruits. In LXX for first-fruits. In papyri for legacy-duty, entrance-fee, and also first-fruits as here. See also verse 23; strkjv@16:15; strkjv@Romans:8:23|, etc. Christ is "first-born from the dead" (Colossians:1:18|). Others raised from the dead died again, but not so Jesus. {That sleep} (\t“n kekoimˆmen“n\). Perfect middle participle as in strkjv@Matthew:27:52| which see. Beautiful picture of death from which word (\koimaomai\) comes our \cemetery\.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:35 @{But some one will say} (\alla erei tis\). Paul knows what the sceptics were saying. He is a master at putting the standpoint of the imaginary adversary. {How} (\p“s\). This is still the great objection to the resurrection of our bodies. Granted that Jesus rose from the dead, for the sake of argument, these sceptics refuse to believe in the possibility of our resurrection. It is the attitude of Matthew Arnold who said, "Miracles do not happen." Scientifically we know the "how" of few things. Paul has an astounding answer to this objection. Death itself is the way of resurrection as in the death of the seed for the new plant (verses 36f.|). {With what manner of body} (\poi“i s“mati\). This is the second question which makes plainer the difficulty of the first. The first body perishes. Will that body be raised? Paul treats this problem more at length (verses 38-54|) and by analogy of nature (Cf. Butler's famous _Analogy_). It is a spiritual, not a natural, body that is raised. \S“ma\ here is an organism. {Flesh} (\sarx\) is the \s“ma\ for the natural man, but there is spiritual (\pneumatikon\) \s“ma\ for the resurrection.

rwp@1Corinthians:16:1 @{Now concerning the collection for the saints} (\peri de tˆs logias tˆs eis tous hagious\). Paul has discussed all the problems raised by the Corinthians. Now he has on his own heart the collection for the saints in Jerusalem (see chapters strkjv@2Corinthians:8; 9|). This word \logia\ (or \-eia\) is now known to be derived from a late verb \logeu“\, to collect, recently found in papyri and inscriptions (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 143). The word \logia\ is chiefly found in papyri, ostraca, and inscriptions that tell of religious collections for a god or a temple (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 105). The introduction of this topic may seem sudden, but the Corinthians were behind with their part of it. They may even have asked further about it. Paul feels no conflict between discussion of the resurrection and the collection. {Songs:also do ye} (\hout“s kai humas poiˆsate\). Paul had given orders (\dietaxa\) to the churches of Galatia and now gives them like commands. As a matter of fact, they had promised a long time before this (2Corinthians:8:10; strkjv@9:1-5|). Now do what you pledged.

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

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

rwp@1John:1:2 @{Was manifested} (\ephaner“thˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \phanero“\, to make known what already exists, whether invisible (B. Weiss) or visible, "intellectual or sensible" (Brooke). In strkjv@Colossians:3:4| Paul employs it of the second coming of Christ. Verse 2| here is an important parenthesis, a mark of John's style as in strkjv@John:1:15|. By the parenthesis John heaps reassurance upon his previous statement of the reality of the Incarnation by the use of \he“rakamen\ (as in verse 1|) with the assertion of the validity of his "witness" (\marturoumen\) and "message" (\apaggellomen\), both present active indicatives (literary plurals), \apaggell“\ being the public proclamation of the great news (John:16:25|). {The life, the eternal life} (\tˆn z“ˆn tˆn ai“nion\). Taking up \z“ˆ\ of verse 1|, John defines the term by the adjective \ai“nios\, used 71 times in the N.T., 44 times with \z“ˆ\ and 23 in John's Gospel and Epistles (only so used in these books by John). Here lt means the divine life which the Logos was and is (John:1:4; strkjv@1John:1:1|). {Which} (\hˆtis\). Qualitative relative, "which very life." {Was with the Father} (\ˆn pros ton patera\). Not \egeneto\, but \ˆn\, and \pros\ with the accusative of intimate fellowship, precisely as in strkjv@John:1:1| \ˆn pros ton theon\ (was with God). Then John closes the parenthesis by repeating \ephaner“thˆ\.

rwp@1John:1:5 @{And} (\kai\). Mutual fellowship depends on mutual knowledge (Westcott). {Message} (\aggelia\). Old word (from \aggelos\, messenger), in N.T. only here and strkjv@3:11|, and note \ap' autou\ (from God like \apaggell“\ in verse 3|) and \anaggellomen\, to announce, to disclose, here as in strkjv@John:4:25|. {God is light} (\ho theos ph“s estin\). Precisely so the \Logos\ is light (John:1:4-9|) and what Jesus claimed to be (John:8:12|). John repeats it in negative form as he often does (John:1:3|).

rwp@1John:1:9 @{If we confess} (\ean homolog“men\). Third-class condition again with \ean\ and present active subjunctive of \homologe“\, "if we keep on confessing." Confession of sin to God and to one another (James:5:16|) is urged throughout the N.T. from John the Baptist (Mark:1:5|) on. {Faithful} (\pistos\). Jesus made confession of sin necessary to forgiveness. It is God's promise and he is "righteous" (\dikaios\). {To forgive} (\hina aphˆi\). Sub-final clause with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \aphiˆmi\. {And to cleanse} (\kai hagiasˆi\). Songs:again with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \kathariz“\ (verse 7|).

rwp@1John:2:22 @{The liar} (\ho pseustˆs\). The liar (with the article) _par excellence_. Rhetorical question to sharpen the point made already about lying in strkjv@1:6,10; strkjv@2:4,21|. See strkjv@5:5| for a like rhetorical question. {But} (\ei mˆ\). Except, if not. {That denieth that Jesus is the Christ} (\ho arnoumenos hoti Iˆsous ouk estin ho Christos\). Common Greek idiom for \ouk\ to appear after \arneomai\ like redundant \mˆ\ in strkjv@Luke:20:27; strkjv@Hebrews:12:19|. The old Latin retains _non_ here as old English did (Shakespeare, _Comedy of Errors_ IV. ii. 7, "He denied you had in him no right"). The Cerinthian Gnostics denied the identity of the man Jesus and Christ (an \aeon\, they held) like the modern Jesus or Christ controversy. {This is the antichrist} (\houtos estin ho antichristos\). The one just mentioned, Cerinthus himself in particular. {Even he that denieth the Father and the Son} (\ho arnoumenos ton patera kai ton huion\). This is the inevitable logic of such a rejection of the Son of God. Jesus had himself said this very same thing (John:5:23f.|).

rwp@1John:2:23 @{Hath not the Father} (\oude ton patera echei\). "Not even does he have the Father" or God (2John:1:9|). {He that confesseth the Son} (\ho homolog“n ton huion\). Because the Son reveals the Father (John:1:18; strkjv@14:9|). Our only approach to the Father is by the Son (John:14:6|). Confession of Christ before men is a prerequisite for confession by Christ before the Father (Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:8|).

rwp@1John:3:9 @{Doeth no sin} (\hamartian ou poiei\). Linear present active indicative as in verse 4| like \hamartanei\ in verse 8|. The child of God does not have the habit of sin. {His seed} (\sperma autou\). God's seed, "the divine principle of life" (Vincent). Cf. strkjv@John:1|. {And he cannot sin} (\kai ou dunatai hamartanein\). This is a wrong translation, for this English naturally means "and he cannot commit sin" as if it were \kai ou dunatai hamartein\ or \hamartˆsai\ (second aorist or first aorist active infinitive). The present active infinitive \hamartanein\ can only mean "and he cannot go on sinning," as is true of \hamartanei\ in verse 8| and \hamartan“n\ in verse 6|. For the aorist subjunctive to commit a sin see \hamartˆte\ and \hamartˆi\ in strkjv@2:1|. A great deal of false theology has grown out of a misunderstanding of the tense of \hamartanein\ here. Paul has precisely John's idea in strkjv@Romans:6:1| \epimen“men tˆi hamartiƒi\ (shall we continue in sin, present active linear subjunctive) in contrast with \hamartˆs“men\ in strkjv@Romans:6:15| (shall we commit a sin, first aorist active subjunctive).

rwp@1John:3:18 @{In word, neither with the tongue} (\log“i mˆde tˆi gl“ssˆi\). Either instrumental or locative makes sense. What John means is "not merely by word or by the tongue." He does not condemn kind words which are comforting and cheering, but warm words should be accompanied by warm deeds to make real "in deed and in truth" (\en erg“i kai alˆtheiƒi\). Here is a case where actions do speak louder than mere words.

rwp@1John:4:2 @{Hereby know ye} (\en tout“i gin“skete\). Either present active indicative or imperative. The test of "the Spirit of God" (\to pneuma tou theou\) here alone in this Epistle, save verse 13|. With the clamour of voices then and now this is important. The test (\en tout“i\, as in strkjv@3:19|) follows. {That Jesus Christ is come in the flesh} (\Iˆsoun Christon en sarki elˆluthota\). The correct text (perfect active participle predicate accusative), not the infinitive (\elˆluthenai\, B Vg). The predicate participle (see strkjv@John:9:22| for predicate accusative with \homologe“\) describes Jesus as already come in the flesh (his actual humanity, not a phantom body as the Docetic Gnostics held). See this same idiom in strkjv@2John:1:7| with \erchomenon\ (coming). A like test is proposed by Paul for confessing the deity of Jesus Christ in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3| and for the Incarnation and Resurrection of Jesus in strkjv@Romans:10:6-10|.

rwp@1John:4:3 @{Confesseth not} (\mˆ homologei\). Indefinite relative clause with the subjective negative \mˆ\ rather than the usual objective negative \ou\ (verse 6|). It is seen also in strkjv@2Peter:1:9; strkjv@Titus:1:11|, a survival of the literary construction (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 171). The Vulgate (along with Irenaeus, Tertullian, Augustine) reads _solvit_ (\luei\) instead of \mˆ homologei\, which means "separates Jesus," apparently an allusion to the Cerinthian heresy (distinction between Jesus and Christ) as the clause before refers to the Docetic heresy. Many MSS. have here also \en sarki elˆluthota\ repeated from preceding clause, but not A B Vg Cop. and not genuine. {The spirit of the antichrist} (\to tou antichristou\). \Pneuma\ (spirit) not expressed, but clearly implied by the neuter singular article to. It is a repetition of the point about antichrists made in strkjv@2:18-25|. {Whereof} (\ho\). Accusative of person (grammatical neuter referring to \pneuma\) with \akou“\ along with accusative of the thing (\hoti erchetai\, as in strkjv@2:18|, futuristic present middle indicative). Here the perfect active indicative (\akˆkoate\), while in strkjv@2:18| the aorist (\ˆkousate\). {And now already} (\kai nun ˆdˆ\). As in strkjv@2:18| also (many have come). "The prophecy had found fulfilment before the Church had looked for it" (Westcott). It is often so. For \ˆdˆ\ see strkjv@John:4:35; strkjv@9:27|.

rwp@1John:4:15 @{Whosoever shall confess} (\hos ean homologˆsˆi\). Indefinite relative clause with modal \ean\ (=an) and the first aorist active subjunctive, "whoever confesses." See strkjv@2:23; strkjv@4:2f.| for \homologe“\. {That} (\hoti\). Object clause (indirect assertion) after \homologe“\. This confession of the deity of Jesus Christ implies surrender and obedience also, not mere lip service (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3; strkjv@Romans:10:6-12|). This confession is proof (if genuine) of the fellowship with God (1:3f.; strkjv@3:24|).

rwp@1John:4:16 @{We know} (\egn“kamen\). Perfect active indicative, "we have come to know and still know" as in strkjv@John:6:9|, only there order is changed (\pepisteukamen\ coming before \egn“kamen\). Confession (\homologe“\) follows experimental knowledge (\gin“sk“\) and confident trust (\pisteu“\). Believers are the sphere (\en hˆmin\, in our case) in which the love of God operates (Westcott). See strkjv@John:13:35| for "having love." {God is love} (\ho theos agapˆ estin\). Repeated from verse 8|. Songs:he gathers up the whole argument that one who is abiding in love is abiding in God and shows that God is abiding in him. Thoroughly Johannine style.

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

rwp@1John:5:20 @{Is come} (\hˆkei\). Present active indicative, but the root has a perfect sense, "has come." See \exˆlthon kai hˆk“\ in strkjv@John:8:42|. {An understanding} (\dianoian\). Here alone in John's writings, but in Paul (Ephesians:4:18|) and Peter (1Peter:1:13|). John does not use \gn“sis\ (knowledge) and \nous\ (mind) only in strkjv@Revelation:13:18; strkjv@17:9|. {That we know} (\hina gin“skomen\). Result clause with \hina\ and the present active indicative, as is common with \hina\ and the future indicative (John:7:3|). It is possible that here \o\ was pronounced \“\ as a subjunctive, but many old MSS. have \hina gin“skousin\ (plainly indicative) in strkjv@John:17:3|, and in many other places in the N.T. the present indicative with \hina\ occurs as a variant reading as in strkjv@John:5:20|. {Him that is true} (\ton alˆthinon\). That is, God. Cf. strkjv@1:8|. {In him that is true} (\en t“i alˆthin“i\). In God in contrast with the world "in the evil one" (verse 19|). See strkjv@John:17:3|. {Even in his Son Jesus Christ} (\en t“i hui“i autou Iˆsou Christ“i\). The \autou\ refers clearly to \en t“i alˆthin“i\ (God). Hence this clause is not in apposition with the preceding, but an explanation as to how we are "in the True One" by being "in his Son Jesus Christ." {This} (\houtos\). Grammatically \houtos\ may refer to Jesus Christ or to "the True One." It is a bit tautological to refer it to God, but that is probably correct, God in Christ, at any rate. God is eternal life (John:5:26|) and he gives it to us through Christ.

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

rwp@1Peter:1:23 @{Having been begotten again} (\anagegennˆmenoi\). Perfect passive participle of \anagenna“\, which see in verse 2|. {Not of corruptible seed} (\ouk ek sporƒs phthartˆs\). Ablative with \ek\ as the source, for \phthartos\ see verse 18|, and \sporƒs\ (from \speir“\ to sow), old word (sowing, seed) here only in N.T., though \sporos\ in strkjv@Mark:4:26f.|, etc. For "incorruptible" (\aphthartou\) see verse 4; strkjv@3:4|. {Through the word of God} (\dia logou theou\). See strkjv@James:1:18| for "by the word of truth," verse 25| here, and Peter's use of \logos\ in strkjv@Acts:10:36|. It is the gospel message. {Which liveth and abideth} (\z“ntos kai menontos\). These present active participles (from \za“\ and \men“\) can be taken with \theou\ (God) or with \logou\ (word). In verse 25| \menei\ is used with \rˆma\ (word). Still in strkjv@Daniel:6:26| both \men“n\ and \z“n\ are used with \theos\. Either construction makes sense here.

rwp@1Peter:2:2 @{As newborn babes} (\h“s artigennˆta brephˆ\). \Brephos\, old word, originally unborn child (Luke:1:41-44|), then infant (Luke:2:12|), here figuratively, like \nˆpioi\. \Artigennˆta\ is a late and rare compound (Lucian, imperial inscription) from \arti\ and \genna“\, with evident allusion to \anagegennˆmenoi\ in strkjv@1:23|, probably meaning that they were recent converts, possibly slight proof that the Epistle written before Romans by Paul (Kuhl). {Long for} (\epipothˆsate\). First aorist (constative) active imperative of \epipothe“\, old verb for intense yearning (Phillipians:2:26|). {The spiritual milk which is without guile} (\to logikon adolon gala\). \Gala\ is old word for milk as in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:7| and as metaphor in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:2|. \Adolos\ is an old compound (here alone in N.T.) adjective (alpha privative and \dolos\ deceit), unadulterated milk which, alas, is so hard to get. \Logikon\ is an old adjective in \-ikos\, from \logos\ (reason, speech), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:12:1|, used here with allusion to \logou\ (1:23|) and \rˆma\ (1:25|), "the sincere milk of the word" ("the milk belonging to the word," either the milk which is the word or the milk contained in the word, that is Christ). Songs:Bigg holds. But in strkjv@Romans:12:1| Paul uses \logikon\ in the sense of "rational" or "spiritual," and that idea is possible here as Hort holds. In the Pelagia legend (Usener) we have the phrase \t“n logik“n probat“n tou Christou\ (the spiritual or rational sheep of Christ). {That ye may grow thereby} (\hina en aut“i auxˆthˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \auxan“\, old and common verb to grow. See this same metaphor in strkjv@Colossians:2:19; strkjv@Ephesians:4:15|. Peter uses the word of God as the food for growth, especially for babes in Christ, not emphasizing the distinction from solid food (\br“ma\) made in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:2; strkjv@Hebrews:5:13|. Salvation (\s“tˆrian\) here is final salvation.

rwp@1Peter:2:8 @{And} (\kai\). Peter now quotes strkjv@Isaiah:8:14| and gives a new turn to the previous quotation. To the disbelieving, Christ was indeed "a stone of stumbling (\lithos proskommatos\) and rock of offence (\petra skandalou\)," quoted also by Paul in strkjv@Romans:9:32f.|, which see for discussion. \Proskomma\ (from \proskopt“\, to cut against) is an obstacle against which one strikes by accident, while \skandalon\ is a trap set to trip one, but both make one fall. Too much distinction need not be made between \lithos\ (a loose stone in the path) and \petra\ (a ledge rising out of the ground). {For they} (\hoi\). Causal use of the relative pronoun. {Stumble at the word, being disobedient} (\proskoptousin t“i log“i apeithountes\). Present active indicative of \proskopt“\ with dative case, \log“i\, and present active participle of \apeithe“\ (cf. \apistousin\ in strkjv@2:7|) as in strkjv@3:1|. \T“i log“i\ can be construed with \apeithountes\ (stumble, being disobedient to the word). {Whereunto also they were appointed} (\eis ho kai etethˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \tithˆmi\. See this idiom in strkjv@1Timothy:2:7|. "Their disobedience is not ordained, the penalty of their disobedience is" (Bigg). They rebelled against God and paid the penalty.

rwp@1Peter:3:1 @{In like manner} (\homoi“s\). Adverb closely connected with \hupotassomenoi\, for which see strkjv@2:18|. {Ye wives} (\gunaikes\). Without article. About wives see also strkjv@Colossians:3:18; strkjv@Ephesians:5:22; strkjv@Titus:2:4|. {To your own husbands} (\tois idiois andrasin\). \Idiois\ occurs also in Ephesians and Titus, but not in Colossians. It strengthens the idea of possession in the article \tois\. Wives are not enjoined to be in subjection to the husbands of other women, as some think it fine to be (affinities!) {Even if any obey not the word} (\kai ei tines apeithousin t“i log“i\). Condition of first class and dative case of \logos\ (1:23,25; strkjv@2:8|), that is, remain heathen. {That they be gained} (\hina kerdˆthˆsontai\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and first future passive indicative of \kerdain“\, old verb, to gain (from \kerdos\, gain, interest) as in strkjv@Matthew:18:15|. See the future with \hina\ also in strkjv@Luke:20:10; strkjv@Revelation:3:9|. {Without the word} (\aneu logou\). Probably here "word from their wives" (Hart), the other sense of \logos\ (talk, not technical "word of God"). {By the behaviour of their wives} (\dia tˆs t“n gunaik“n anastrophˆs\). Won by pious living, not by nagging. Many a wife has had this blessed victory of grace.

rwp@1Peter:3:9 @{Not rendering evil for evil} (\mˆ apodidontes kakon anti kakou\). \Mˆ\ and the present active participle of \apodid“mi\, to give back. The same phrase in strkjv@Romans:12:17| and the same idea in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:15|. Peter may have obtained it from Paul or both from strkjv@Proverbs:17:13; strkjv@20:22|, "an approximation to Christ's repeal of the \lex talionis\ (Matthew:5:38ff.|) which Plato first opposed among the Greeks" (Hart). Common use of \anti\ for exchange. {Reviling for reviling} (\loidorian anti loidorias\). Allusion to strkjv@2:23| (Christ's own example). {But contrariwise blessing} (\tounantion de eulogountes\). Adverbial accusative and crasis (\to enantion\) of the neuter article and the adjective \enantios\ (\en, antios\, opposite, strkjv@Matthew:14:24|), "on the contrary." For \eulogountes\ (present active participle of \euloge“\) see strkjv@Luke:6:28; strkjv@Romans:12:14| (imperative \eulogeite\). {For hereunto were ye called} (\hoti eis touto eklˆthˆte\). See strkjv@2:21| for this verb and use of \eis touto\ (pointing to the preceding argument). {That ye should inherit a blessing} (\hina eulogian klˆronomˆsˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \klˆronome“\, a plain reference to Esau, who wanted "to inherit the blessing" (Hebrews:12:17|) after he had sold his birthright. Christians are the new Israel (both Gentiles and Jews) and are the spiritual descendants of Isaac (Galatians:4:22ff.|).

rwp@1Peter:3:14 @{But and if ye should suffer} (\all' ei kai paschoite\). "But if ye should also (or even) suffer." Condition of the fourth class with \ei\ and the optative (undetermined with less likelihood), a rare condition in the vernacular _Koin‚_, since the optative was a dying mode. If matters, in spite of the prophetic note of victory in verse 13|, should come to actual suffering "for righteousness' sake" (\dia dikaiosunˆn\) as in strkjv@Matthew:5:10| (\heneken\, not \dia\), then "blessed" (\makarioi\, the very word of Jesus there which see, a word meaning "happy," not \eulogˆtoi\) "are ye" (not in the Greek). If the conclusion were expressed regularly, it would be \eiˆte an\ (ye would be), not \este\ (ye are). It is interesting to note the third-class condition in verse 13| just before the fourth-class one in verse 14|. {Fear not their fear} (\ton phobon aut“n mˆ phobˆthˆte\). Prohibition with \mˆ\ and the first aorist (ingressive) passive subjunctive of \phobeomai\, to fear, and the cognate accusative \phobon\ (fear, terror). "Do not fear their threats" (Bigg). Quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:8:12f|. {Neither be troubled} (\mˆde taraxthˆte\). Prohibition with \mˆde\ and the first aorist (ingressive) subjunctive of \tarass“\, to disturb (Matthew:2:6; strkjv@John:12:27|). Part of the same quotation. Cf. strkjv@3:6|.

rwp@1Peter:3:15 @{Sanctify} (\hagiasate\). First aorist active imperative of \hagiaz“\. This instead of being afraid. {Christ as Lord} (\kurion ton Christon\). \Ton Christon\, direct object with article and \kurion\ predicate accusative (without article). This is the correct text, not \ton theon\ of the Textus Receptus. An adaptation to Christ of strkjv@Isaiah:8:13|. {Being ready always} (\hetoimoi aei\). No participle in the Greek, old adjective (Titus:3:1|). {To give answer} (\pros apologian\). "For an apology," the old sense of \apologia\, an answer back, a defence (not excuse), as in strkjv@Acts:22:1|, from \apologeomai\ to defend (not to apologize). {A reason concerning the hope that is in you} (\logon peri tˆs en humin elpidos\). Original sense of \logon\ (accusative of the thing with \aitounti\ with \humƒs\, accusative of the person) "concerning the in you hope." Ready with a spoken defence of the inward hope. This attitude calls for an intelligent grasp of the hope and skill in presenting it. In Athens every citizen was expected to be able to join in the discussion of state affairs. {Yet with meekness and fear} (\alla meta prautˆtos kai phobou\). Of God (2:18; strkjv@3:2,4|), not of man.

rwp@1Peter:4:5 @{Who shall give account} (\hoi apod“sousin logon\). Future active indicative of \apodid“mi\. For this use with \logon\ (account) see strkjv@Matthew:12:36; strkjv@Luke:16:2; strkjv@Acts:19:40; strkjv@Hebrews:13:17|. For the sudden use of the relative \hoi\ see strkjv@Romans:3:8|. {To him that is ready to judge} (\t“i hetoim“s krinonti\). Dative, "to the one readily judging," correct text, not \hetoim“s echonti krinai\, "to the one ready to judge," which "softens the rugged original" (Hart). That is Christ apparently (1:13; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:10|), but the Father in strkjv@1:17|. {The quick and the dead} (\z“ntas kai nekrous\). "Living and dead." Those living at the time and those already dead (1Thessalonians:4:15|).

rwp@1Peter:4:11 @{If any man speaketh} (\ei tis lalei\). Condition of first class, assumed as a fact. {Speaking as it were oracles of God} (\h“s logia theou\). No predicate in this conclusion of the condition. For \logia theou\ see strkjv@Acts:7:38| (Mosaic law); strkjv@Romans:3:2| (the Old Testament); strkjv@Hebrews:5:12| (the substance of Christian teaching), here of the utterances of God through Christian teachers. \Logion\ (old word) is a diminutive of \logos\ (speech, word). It can be construed here as nominative or as accusative. The verb has to be supplied. {If any one ministereth} (\ei tis diakonei\). First-class condition again. See strkjv@Acts:6:2-4| for the twofold division of service involved here. {Which God supplieth} (\hˆs chorˆgei ho theos\). Ablative case (\hˆs\) of the relative attracted from the accusative \hˆn\, object of \chorˆgei\ (present active indicative of \chorˆge“\, old verb, to supply from \chorˆgos\, chorus leader, in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:9:10|). Peter has the compound \epichorˆge“\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:5,11|. God is the supplier of strength. {That God may be glorified} (\hina doxazˆtai ho theos\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the present passive subjunctive of \doxaz“\. See strkjv@John:15:8|. {Whose is} (\h“i estin\). "To whom (dative) is," that is to Jesus Christ the immediate antecedent, but in strkjv@Romans:16:27; strkjv@Jude:1:25| the doxology is to God through Christ. For other doxologies see strkjv@1Peter:5:11; strkjv@2Peter:3:18; strkjv@Galatians:1:5; strkjv@Romans:9:5; strkjv@11:36; strkjv@Phillipians:4:20; strkjv@Ephesians:3:21; strkjv@1Timothy:1:17; strkjv@6:16; strkjv@2Timothy:4:18; strkjv@Hebrews:13:21; strkjv@Revelation:1:6; strkjv@5:13; strkjv@7:12|. The others addressed to Christ are strkjv@2Peter:3:18; strkjv@2Timothy:4:18; strkjv@Revelation:1:6|.

rwp@1Peter:5:4 @{When the chief Shepherd shall be manifested} (\phaner“thentos tou archipoimenos\). Genitive absolute with first aorist passive participle of \phanero“\, to manifest, and genitive of \archipoimˆn\, a compound (\archi, poimˆn\) after analogy of \archiereus\, here only in N.T., but in _Testam. of Twelve Patrs_. (Jud. 8) and on a piece of wood around an Egyptian mummy and also on a papyrus A.D. 338 (Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 100). See strkjv@Hebrews:13:20| for \ho poimˆn ho megas\ (the Shepherd the great). {Ye shall receive} (\komieisthe\). Future of \komiz“\ (1:9|, which see). {The crown of glory that fadeth not away} (\ton amarantinon tˆs doxˆs stephanon\). For "crown" (\stephanos\) see strkjv@James:1:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:25; strkjv@2Timothy:4:8; strkjv@Revelation:2:10; strkjv@3:10; strkjv@4:4|. In the Gospels it is used only of the crown of thorns, but Jesus is crowned with glory and honor (Hebrews:2:9|). In all these passages it is the crown of victory as it is here. See strkjv@1:4| for \amarantos\, unfading. \Amarantinos\ is made from that word as the name of a flower \amaranth\ (so called because it never withers and revives if moistened with water and so used as a symbol of immortality), "composed of amaranth" or "amarantine," "the amarantine (unfading) crown of glory."

rwp@1Peter:5:11 @{To him} (\aut“i\). To God (dative case). Note \kratos\ in the doxology as in strkjv@1Timothy:6:16| and briefer than the doxology in strkjv@1Peter:4:11|, to Christ.

rwp@1Peter:5:12 @{By Silvanus} (\dia Silouanou\). Probably this postscript (12-14|) is in Peter's own handwriting, as Paul did (2Thessalonians:3:17f.; strkjv@Galatians:6:11-18|). If so, Silvanus (Silas) was the amanuensis and the bearer of the Epistle. {As I account him} (\h“s logizomai\). Peter uses Paul's phrase (1Corinthians:4:1; strkjv@Romans:8:18|) in giving approval to Paul's former companion (Acts:15:40|). {I have written} (\egrapsa\). Epistolary aorist applying to this Epistle as in strkjv@1Corinthians:5:11| (not strkjv@1Corinthians:5:9|); strkjv@1Corinthians:9:15; strkjv@Galatians:6:11; strkjv@Romans:15:15; strkjv@Philemon:1:19,21|. {Briefly} (\di' olig“n\). "By few words," as Peter looked at it, certainly not a long letter in fact. Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:13:22|. {Testifying} (\epimartur“n\). Present active participle of \epimarture“\, to bear witness to, old compound, here alone in N.T., though the double compound \sunepimarture“\ in strkjv@Hebrews:2:4|. {That this is the true grace of God} (\tautˆn einai alˆthˆ charin tou theou\). Infinitive \einai\ in indirect assertion and accusative of general reference (\tautˆn\) and predicate accusative \charin\. Peter includes the whole of the Epistle by God's grace (1:10|) and obedience to the truth (John:1:17; Gal strkjv@2:5; strkjv@Colossians:1:6|). {Stand ye fast therein} (\eis hˆn stˆte\). "In which (grace) take your stand" (ingressive aorist active imperative of \histˆmi\).

rwp@Info_1Thessalonians @ FIRST THESSALONIANS FROM CORINTH A.D. 50 TO 51 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION We cannot say that this is Paul's first letter to a church, for in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2| he speaks of some as palming off letters as his and in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:17| he says that he appends his own signature to every letter after dictating it to an amanuensis (Romans:16:22|). We know of one lost letter (1Corinthians:5:11|) and perhaps another (2Corinthians:2:3|). But this is the earliest one that has come down to us and it may even be the earliest New Testament book, unless the Epistle of James antedates it or even Mark's Gospel. We know, as already shown, that Paul was in Corinth and that Timothy and Silas had just arrived from Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:3:6; strkjv@Acts:18:5|). They had brought supplies from the Macedonian churches to supply Paul's need (2Corinthians:11:9|), as the church in Philippi did once and again while Paul was in Thessalonica (Phillipians:4:15f.|). Before Timothy and Silas came to Corinth Paul had to work steadily at his trade as tent-maker with Aquila and Priscilla (Acts:18:3|) and could only preach in the synagogue on sabbaths, but the rich stores from Macedonia released his hands and "Paul devoted himself to the word" (\suneicheto t“i log“i Paulos\). He gave himself wholly to preaching now. But Timothy and Silas brought news of serious trouble in the church in Thessalonica. Some of the disciples there had misunderstood Paul's preaching about the second coming of Christ and had quit work and were making a decided disturbance on the subject. Undoubtedly Paul had touched upon eschatological matters while in Thessalonica. The Jewish leaders at Thessalonica charged it against Paul and Silas to the politarchs that they had preached another king, Jesus, in place of Caesar. Paul had preached Jesus as King of the spiritual kingdom which the Jews misrepresented to the politarchs as treason against Caesar as the Sanhedrin had done to Pilate about Jesus. Clearly Paul had said also that Jesus was going to come again according to his own promise before his ascension. Some asserted that Paul said Jesus was going to come right away and drew their own inferences for idleness and fanaticism as some do today. Strange as it may seem, there are scholars today who say that Paul did believe and say that Jesus was going to come back right away. They say this in spite of strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1f.| where Paul denies having ever said it. Undoubtedly Paul hoped for the early return of Jesus as most of the early Christians did, but that is a very different thing from setting a time for his coming. It is open to us all to hope for the speedy return of Christ, but times and seasons are with God and not with us. It is not open to us to excuse our negligence and idleness as Christians because of such a hope. That hope should serve as a spur to increased activity for Christ in order to hasten his coming. Songs:Paul writes this group of Epistles to correct gross misapprehension and misrepresentation of his preaching about last things (eschatology). It is a rare preacher who has never been misunderstood or misrepresented.

rwp@Info_1Thessalonians @ There are excellent commentaries on the Thessalonian Epistles. On the Greek text one may note those by Dibelius, _Handbuch zum N.T. Zweite Auflage_ (1925); Dobschutz, _Meyer-Kommentar_ (1909); Ellicott, _Crit. and Grammat. Comm._ (1884); Findlay, _Cambridge Gk. Test._ (1904); Frame, _Intern. Critical Comm._ (1912); Lightfoot, _Notes on Epistles of Paul_ (1895); Mayer, _Die Thessalonischerbriefe_ (1908); Milligan, _St. Paul's Epistles to the Thess._ (1908); Moffatt, _Expos. Gk. Test._ (1910); Plummer, _First Thess._ (1908), _Second Thess._ (1908); Wohlenberg, _Zahn-Komm. 2 aufl._ (1908). On the English text note those by Adeney, _New Century Bible_ (1907); Denney, _Expos. Bible_ (1892); Findlay, _Cambridge Bible_ (1891); Hutchinson, _Lectures on I & II Thess._ (1883). strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:1 @{Paul, and Silvanus, and Timothy} (\Paulos kai Silouanos kai Timotheos\). Nominative absolute as customary in letters. Paul associates with himself Silvanus (Silas of Acts, spelled \Silbanos\ in D and the papyri), a Jew and Roman citizen, and Timothy, son of Jewish mother and Greek father, one of Paul's converts at Lystra on the first tour. They had both been with Paul at Thessalonica, though Timothy is not mentioned by Luke in Acts in Macedonia till Beroea (Acts:17:14f.|). Timothy had joined Paul in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1f.|), had been sent back to Thessalonica, and with Silas had rejoined Paul in Corinth (1Thessalonians:3:5; strkjv@Acts:18:5, strkjv@2Corinthians:1:19|). Silas is the elder and is mentioned first, but neither is in any sense the author of the Epistle any more than Sosthenes is co-author of I Corinthians or Timothy of II Corinthians, though Paul may sometimes have them in mind when he uses "we" in the Epistle. Paul does not here call himself "apostle" as in the later Epistles, perhaps because his position has not been so vigorously attacked as it was later. Ellicott sees in the absence of the word here a mark of the affectionate relations existing between Paul and the Thessalonians. {Unto the church of the Thessalonians} (\tˆi ekklˆsiƒi Thessalonike“n\). The dative case in address. Note absence of the article with \Thessalonike“n\ because a proper name and so definite without it. This is the common use of \ekklˆsia\ for a local body (church). The word originally meant "assembly" as in strkjv@Acts:19:39|, but it came to mean an organization for worship whether assembled or unassembled (cf. strkjv@Acts:8:3|). The only superscription in the oldest Greek manuscripts (Aleph B A) is \Pros Thessalonikeis A\ ({To the Thessalonians First}). But probably Paul wrote no superscription and certainly he would not write A to it before he had written II Thessalonians (B). His signature at the close was the proof of genuineness (2Thessalonians:3:17|) against all spurious claimants (2Thessalonians:2:2|). Unfortunately the brittle papyrus on which he wrote easily perished outside of the sand heaps and tombs of Egypt or the lava covered ruins of Herculaneum. What a treasure that autograph would be! {In God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ} (\en the“i patri kai kuri“i Jˆsou Christ“i\). This church is grounded in (\en\, with the locative case) and exists in the sphere and power of {God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ}. No article in the Greek, for both \the“i patri\ and \kuri“i Jˆsou Christ“i\ are treated as proper names. In the very beginning of this first Epistle of Paul we meet his Christology. He at once uses the full title, "Lord Jesus Christ," with all the theological content of each word. The name "Jesus" (Saviour, strkjv@Matthew:1:21|) he knew, as the "Jesus of history," the personal name of the Man of Galilee, whom he had once persecuted (Acts:9:5|), but whom he at once, after his conversion, proclaimed to be "the Messiah," (\ho Christos\, strkjv@Acts:9:22|). This position Paul never changed. In the great sermon at Antioch in Pisidia which Luke has preserved (Acts:13:23|) Paul proved that God fulfilled his promise to Israel by raising up "Jesus as Saviour" (\s“tˆra Iˆsoun\). Now Paul follows the Christian custom by adding \Christos\ (verbal from \chri“\, to anoint) as a proper name to Jesus (Jesus Christ) as later he will often say "Christ Jesus" (Colossians:1:1|). And he dares also to apply \kurios\ (Lord) to "Jesus Christ," the word appropriated by Claudius (_Dominus_, \Kurios\) and other emperors in the emperor-worship, and also common in the Septuagint for God as in strkjv@Psalms:32:1f.| (quoted by Paul in strkjv@Romans:4:8|). Paul uses \Kurios\ of God (1Corinthians:3:5|) or of Jesus Christ as here. In fact, he more frequently applies it to Christ when not quoting the Old Testament as in strkjv@Romans:4:8|. And here he places "the Lord Jesus Christ" in the same category and on the same plane with "God the father." There will be growth in Paul's Christology and he will never attain all the knowledge of Christ for which he longs (Phillipians:3:10-12|), but it is patent that here in his first Epistle there is no "reduced Christ" for Paul. He took Jesus as "Lord" when he surrendered to Jesus on the Damascus Road: "And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said to me" (Acts:22:10|). It is impossible to understand Paul without seeing clearly this first and final stand for the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul did not get this view of Jesus from current views of Mithra or of Isis or any other alien faith. The Risen Christ became at once for Paul the Lord of his life. {Grace to you and peace} (\charis humin kai eirˆnˆ\). These words, common in Paul's Epistles, bear "the stamp of Paul's experience" (Milligan). They are not commonplace salutations, but the old words "deepened and spiritualised" (Frame). The infinitive (\chairein\) so common in the papyri letters and seen in the New Testament also (Acts:15:23; strkjv@23:26; strkjv@James:1:1|) here gives place to \charis\, one of the great words of the New Testament (cf. strkjv@John:1:16f.|) and particularly of the Pauline Epistles. Perhaps no one word carries more meaning for Paul's messages than this word \charis\ (from \chair“\, rejoice) from which \charizomai\ comes. {Peace} (\eirˆnˆ\) is more than the Hebrew _shal“m_ so common in salutations. One recalls the "peace" that Christ leaves to us (John:14:27|) and the peace of God that passes all understanding (Phillipians:4:7|). This introduction is brief, but rich and gracious and pitches the letter at once on a high plane.

rwp@1Thessalonians:1:4 @{Knowing} (\eidotes\). Second perfect active participle of \oida\ (\eidon\), a so-called causal participle=since we know, the third participle with the principal verb \eucharistoumen\, the Greek being fond of the circumstantial participle and lengthening sentences thereby (Robertson, _Grammar_, P. 1128). {Beloved by God} (\ˆgapˆmenoi hupo [tou] theou\). Perfect passive participle of \agapa“\, the verb so common in the N.T. for the highest kind of love. Paul is not content with the use of \adelphoi\ here (often in this Epistle as strkjv@2:1,14,17; strkjv@3:7; strkjv@4:1,10|), but adds this affectionate phrase nowhere else in the N.T. in this form (cf. strkjv@Jude:1:3|) though in Sirach strkjv@45:1 and on the Rosetta Stone. But in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:13| he quotes "beloved by the Lord" from strkjv@Deuteronomy:33:12|. The use of \adelphoi\ for members of the same brotherhood can be derived from the Jewish custom (Acts:2:29,37|) and the habit of Jesus (Matthew:12:48|) and is amply illustrated in the papyri for burial clubs and other orders and guilds (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). {Your election} (\tˆn eklogˆn hum“n\). That is the election of you by God. It is an old word from \eklegomai\ used by Jesus of his choice of the twelve disciples (John:15:16|) and by Paul of God's eternal selection (Ephesians:1:4|). The word \eklogˆ\ is not in the LXX and only seven times in the N.T. and always of God's choice of men (Acts:9:15; strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:4; strkjv@Romans:9:11; strkjv@11:5,7,58; strkjv@2Peter:1:10|). The divine \eklogˆ\ was manifested in the Christian qualities of verse 3| (Moffatt).

rwp@1Thessalonians:1:5 @{How that} (\hoti\). It is not certain whether \hoti\ here means "because" (\quia\) as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:7; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:14; strkjv@Romans:8:27| or declarative \hoti\ "how that," knowing the circumstances of your election (Lightfoot) or explanatory, as in strkjv@Acts:16:3; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:1; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:15; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:3f.; strkjv@Romans:13:11|. {Our gospel} (\to euaggelion hˆm“n\). The gospel (see on ¯Matthew:4:23; strkjv@Mark:1:1,15| for \euaggelion\) which we preach, Paul's phrase also in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:14; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:3; strkjv@Romans:2:16; strkjv@16:25; strkjv@2Timothy:2:8|. Paul had a definite, clear-cut message of grace that he preached everywhere including Thessalonica. This message is to be interpreted in the light of Paul's own sermons in Acts and Epistles, not by reading backward into them the later perversions of Gnostics and sacramentarians. This very word was later applied to the books about Jesus, but Paul is not so using the term here or anywhere else. In its origin Paul's gospel is of God (1Thessalonians:2:2,8,9|), in its substance it is Christ's (3:2; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:8|), and Paul is only the bearer of it (1Thessalonians:2:4,9; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:14|) as Milligan points out. Paul and his associates have been entrusted with this gospel (1Thessalonians:2:4|) and preach it (Galatians:2:2|). Elsewhere Paul calls it God's gospel (2Corinthians:11:7; strkjv@Romans:1:1; strkjv@15:16|) or Christs (1Corinthians:9:12; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12; strkjv@9:13; strkjv@10:14; strkjv@Galatians:1:7; strkjv@Romans:15:19; strkjv@Phillipians:1:27|). In both instances it is the subjective genitive. {Came unto you} (\egenˆthˆ eis humƒs\). First aorist passive indicative of \ginomai\ in practically same sense as \egeneto\ (second aorist middle indicative as in the late Greek generally). Songs:also \eis humƒs\ like the _Koin‚_ is little more than the dative \humin\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 594). {Not only--but also} (\ouk--monon, alla kai\). Sharp contrast, negatively and positively. The contrast between \logos\ (word) and \dunamis\ (power) is seen also in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:4; strkjv@4:20|. Paul does not refer to miracles by \dunamis\. {In the Holy Spirit and much assurance} (\en pneumati hagi“i kai plˆrophoriƒi pollˆi\). Preposition \en\ repeated with \log“i, dunamei\, but only once here thus uniting closely {Holy Spirit} and {much assurance}. No article with either word. The word \plˆrophoriƒi\ is not found in ancient Greek or the LXX. It appears once in Clement of Rome and one broken papyrus example. For the verb \plˆrophore“\ see on ¯Luke:1:1|. The substantive in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Colossians:2:2; strkjv@Hebrews:6:11; strkjv@10:22|. It means the full confidence which comes from the Holy Spirit. {Even as ye know} (\kath“s oidate\). Paul appeals to the Thessalonians themselves as witnesses to the character of his preaching and life among them. {What manner of men we showed ourselves toward you} (\hoioi egenˆthˆmen humin\). Literally, {What sort of men we became to you}. Qualitative relative \hoioi\ and dative \humin\ and first aorist passive indicative \egenˆthˆmen\, (not \ˆmetha\, we were). An epexegetical comment with {for your sake} (\di' humƒs\) added. It was all in their interest and for their advantage, however it may have seemed otherwise at the time.

rwp@1Thessalonians:1:6 @{Imitators of us and of the Lord} (\mimˆtai hˆm“n kai tou kuriou\). \Mimˆtˆs\ (\-tˆs\ expresses the agent) is from \mimeomai\, to imitate and that from \mimos\ (\mimic\, actor). Old word, more than "followers," in the N.T. only six times (1Thessalonians:1:6; strkjv@2:14; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:16; strkjv@11:1; strkjv@Ephesians:5:1; strkjv@Hebrews:6:12|). Again Paul uses \ginomai\, to become, not \eimi\, to be. It is a daring thing to expect people to "imitate" the preacher, but Paul adds "and of the Lord," for he only expected or desired "imitation" as he himself imitated the Lord Jesus, as he expressly says in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:1|. The peril of it all is that people so easily and so readily imitate the preacher when he does not imitate the Lord. The fact of the "election" of the Thessalonians was shown by the character of the message given them and by this sincere acceptance of it (Lightfoot). {Having received the word} (\dexamenoi ton logon\). First aorist middle participle of \dechomai\, probably simultaneous action (receiving), not antecedent. {In much affliction} (\en thlipsei pollˆi\). Late word, pressure. Tribulation (Latin _tribulum_) from \thlib“\, to press hard on. Christianity has glorified this word. It occurs in some Christian papyrus letters in this same sense. Runs all through the N.T. (2Thessalonians:1:4; strkjv@Romans:5:3|). Paul had his share of them (Colossians:1:24; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:4|) and so he understands how to sympathize with the Thessalonians (1Thessalonians:3:3f.|). They suffered after Paul left Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:2:14|). {With joy of the Holy Spirit} (\meta charas pneumatos hagiou\). The Holy Spirit gives the joy in the midst of the tribulations as Paul learned (Romans:5:3|). "This paradox of experience" (Moffatt) shines along the pathway of martyrs and saints of Christ.

rwp@1Thessalonians:1:8 @{From you hath sounded forth} (\aph' hum“n exˆchˆtai\). Perfect passive indicative of \exˆche“\, late compound verb (\ex, ˆchos, ˆch“, ˆchˆ\, our echo) to sound out of a trumpet or of thunder, to reverberate like our echo. Nowhere else in the N.T. Songs:"from you" as a sounding board or radio transmitting station (to use a modern figure). It marks forcibly "both the clear and the persuasive nature of the \logos tou Kuriou\" (Ellicott). This phrase, the word of the Lord, may be subjective with the Lord as its author or objective with the Lord as the object. It is both. It is a graphic picture with a pardonable touch of hyperbole (Moffatt) for Thessalonica was a great commercial and political centre for disseminating the news of salvation (on the Egnation Way). {But in every place} (\all' en panti top“i\). In contrast to Macedonia and Achaia. The sentence would naturally stop here, but Paul is dictating rapidly and earnestly and goes on. {Your faith to God-ward} (\hˆ pistis hum“n hˆ pros ton theon\). Literally, {the faith of you that toward the God}. The repeated article makes clear that their faith is now directed toward the true God and not toward the idols from which they had turned (verse 10|). {Is gone forth} (\exelˆluthen\). Second perfect active indicative of old verb \exerchomai\, to go out, state of completion like \exˆchˆtai\ above. {Songs:that we need not to speak anything} (\h“ste mˆ chreian echein hˆmƒs lalein ti\). \H“ste\ with the infinitive for actual result as in verse 7|. No vital distinction between \lalein\ (originally to chatter as of birds) and \legein\, both being used in the _Koin‚_ for speaking and preaching (in the N.T.).

rwp@1Thessalonians:1:10 @{To wait for his Son from heaven} (\anamenein ton huion autou ek t“n ouran“n\). Present infinitive, like \douleuein\, and so linear, to keep on waiting for. The hope of the second coming of Christ was real and powerful with Paul as it should be with us. It was subject to abuse then as now as Paul will have to show in this very letter. He alludes to this hope at the close of each chapter in this Epistle. {Whom he raised from the dead} (\hon ˆgeiren ek [t“n] nekr“n\). Paul gloried in the fact of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead of which fact he was himself a personal witness. This fact is the foundation stone for all his theology and it comes out in this first chapter. {Jesus which delivereth us from the wrath to come} (\Iˆsoun ton ruomenon hˆmƒs ek tˆs orgˆs tˆs erchomenˆs\). It is the historic, crucified, risen, and ascended Jesus Christ, God's Son, who delivers from the coming wrath. He is our Saviour (Matthew:1:21|) true to his name Jesus. He is our Rescuer (Romans:11:26|, \ho ruomenos\, from strkjv@Isaiah:59:20|). It is eschatological language, this coming wrath of God for sin (1Thessalonians:2:16; strkjv@Romans:3:5; strkjv@5:9; strkjv@9:22; strkjv@13:5|). It was Paul's allusion to the day of judgment with Jesus as Judge whom God had raised from the dead that made the Athenians mock and leave him (Acts:17:31f.|). But Paul did not change his belief or his preaching because of the conduct of the Athenians. He is certain that God's wrath in due time will punish sin. Surely this is a needed lesson for our day. It was coming then and it is coming now.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:5 @{Using words of flattery} (\en log“i kolakeias\). Literally, {in speech of flattery or fawning}. Old word, only here in N.T., from \kolaks\, a flatterer. An Epicurean, Philodemus, wrote a work \Peri Kolakeias\ (Concerning Flattery). Milligan (_Vocabulary_, etc.) speaks of "the selfish conduct of too many of the rhetoricians of the day," conduct extremely repugnant to Paul. The third time (verses 1,2,5|) he appeals to their knowledge of his work in Thessalonica. Frame suggests "cajolery." {Nor a cloke of covetousness} (\oute prophasei pleonexias\). Pretext (\prophasis\ from \prophain“\, to show forth, or perhaps from \pro-phˆmi\, to speak forth). This is the charge of self-interest rather than the mere desire to please people. Pretext of greediness is Frame's translation. \Pleonexia\ is merely "having more" from \pleonektˆs\, one eager for more, and \pleonekte“\, to have more, then to over-reach, all old words, all with bad meaning as the result of the desire for more. In a preacher this sin is especially fatal. Paul feels so strongly his innocence of this charge that he calls God as witness as in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:23; strkjv@Romans:9:1; strkjv@Phillipians:1:8|, a solemn oath for his own veracity.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:13 @{And for this cause we also} (\kai dia touto kai hˆmeis\). Note \kai\ twice. We as well as you are grateful for the way the gospel was received in Thessalonica. {Without ceasing} (\adialeipt“s\). Late adverb for which see on strkjv@1:2| and for \eucharistoumen\ see on ¯1:2|. {The word of the message} (\logon akoˆs\). Literally, {the word of} hearing, as in Sir. strkjv@42:1 and strkjv@Hebrews:4:2| \ho logos tˆs akoˆs\, the word marked by hearing (genitive case), the word which you heard. Here with \tou theou\ (of God) added as a second descriptive genitive which Paul expands and justifies. {Ye received it so} (\paralabontes\) and {accepted or welcomed it} (\edexasthe\) so, {not as the word of men} (\ou logou anthr“p“n\), {but as the word of God} (\alla logon theou\), {as it is in truth} (\kath“s alˆth“s estin\). This last clause is literally, {as it truly is}. Paul had not a doubt that he was proclaiming God's message. Should any preacher preach his doubts if he has any? God's message can be found and Paul found it. {Worketh in you} (\energeitai en humin\). Perhaps middle voice of \energe“\ (\en, ergon\, work) late verb, not in ancient Greek or LXX, but in papyri and late writers (Polybius, etc.) and in N.T. only by Paul and James. If it is passive, as Milligan thinks, it means "is set in operation," as Polybius has it. The idea then is that the word of God is set in operation in you that believe.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:8 @{Therefore} (\toigaroun\). This old triple compound particle (\toi, gar, oun\) is in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:12:1|. Paul applies the logic of the case. {He that rejecteth} (\ho athet“n\). This late verb (Polybius and LXX) is from \a-thetos\ (\a\ privative and verbal of \tithˆmi\, to proscribe a thing, to annul it. {But God} (\alla ton theon\). Paul sees this clearly and modern atheists see it also. In order to justify their licentiousness they do not hesitate to set aside God.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:15 @{By the word of the Lord} (\en log“i Kuriou\). We do not know to what word of the Lord Jesus Paul refers, probably Paul meaning only the point in the teaching of Christ rather than a quotation. He may be claiming a direct revelation on this important matter as about the Lord's Supper in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:23|. Jesus may have spoken on this subject though it has not been preserved to us (cf. strkjv@Mark:9:1|). {Ye that are alive} (\hˆmeis hoi z“ntes\). Paul here includes himself, but this by no means shows that Paul knew that he would be alive at the Parousia of Christ. He was alive, not dead, when he wrote. {Shall in no wise precede} (\ou mˆ phthas“men\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \phthan“\, to come before, to anticipate. This strong negative with \ou mˆ\ (double negative) and the subjunctive is the regular idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 929). Hence there was no ground for uneasiness about the dead in Christ.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:18 @{With these words} (\en tois logois toutois\). In these words. They were a comfort to the Thessalonians as they still comfort the people of God.

rwp@1Timothy:1:4 @{To give heed} (\prosechein\). With \noun\ understood. Old and common idiom in N.T. especially in Luke and Acts (Acts:8:10ff.|). Not in Paul's earlier Epistles. strkjv@1Timothy:3:8; strkjv@4:1,13; strkjv@Titus:1:14|. {To fables} (\muthois\). Dative case of old word for speech, narrative, story, fiction, falsehood. In N.T. only strkjv@2Peter:1:16; strkjv@1Timothy:1:4; strkjv@4:7; strkjv@Titus:1:14; strkjv@2Timothy:4:4|. {Genealogies} (\genealogiais\). Dative of old word, in LXX, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Titus:3:9|. {Endless} (\aperantois\). Old verbal compound (from \a\ privative and \perain“\, to go through), in LXX, only here in N.T. Excellent examples there for old words used only in the Pastorals because of the subject matter, describing the Gnostic emphasis on aeons. {Questionings} (\ekzˆtˆseis\). "Seekings out." Late and rare compound from \ekzˆte“\ (itself _Koin‚_ word, strkjv@Romans:3:11| from LXX and in papyri). Here only in N.T. Simplex \zˆtˆsis\ in strkjv@Acts:15:2; strkjv@1Timothy:6:4; strkjv@Titus:3:9; strkjv@2Timothy:2:23|. {A dispensation} (\oikonomian\). Pauline word (1Corinthians:9:17; strkjv@Colossians:1:25; strkjv@Ephesians:1:9; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@1Timothy:1:4|), strkjv@Luke:16:2-4| only other N.T. examples. {In faith} (\en pistei\). Pauline use of \pistis\.

rwp@1Timothy:1:6 @{Having swerved} (\astochˆsantes\). First aorist active participle of \astoche“\, compound _Koin‚_ verb (Polybius, Plutarch) from \astochos\ (\a\ privative and \stochos\, a mark), "having missed the mark." In N.T. only here, strkjv@6:21; strkjv@2Timothy:2:18|. With the ablative case \h“n\ (which). {Have turned aside} (\exetrapˆsan\). Second aorist passive indicative of \ektrep“\, old and common verb, to turn or twist out or aside. In medical sense in strkjv@Hebrews:12:13|. As metaphor in strkjv@1Timothy:1:6; strkjv@6:20; strkjv@2Timothy:4:4|. {Vain talking} (\mataiologian\). Late word from \mataiologos\, only here in N.T., in the literary _Koin‚_.

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:1:17 @This noble doxology is a burst of gratitude for God's grace to Paul. For other doxologies see strkjv@Galatians:1:5; strkjv@Romans:11:36; strkjv@16:27; strkjv@Phillipians:4:20; strkjv@Ephesians:3:21; strkjv@1Timothy:6:16|. White suggests that Paul may have often used this doxology in his prayers. Lock suggests "a Jewish liturgical formula" (a needless suggestion in view of Paul's wealth of doxologies seen above). For God's creative activity (King of the ages) see strkjv@1Corinthians:10:11; strkjv@Ephesians:2:7; strkjv@3:9,11|. {Incorruptible} (\aphthart“i\). As an epithet of God also in strkjv@Romans:1:23|. {Invisible} (\aorat“i\). Epithet of God in strkjv@Colossians:1:15|. {The only God} (\mon“i the“i\). Songs:Romans:16:27; strkjv@John:5:44; strkjv@17:3|. {For ever and ever} (\eis tous ai“nas t“n ai“n“n\). "Unto the ages of ages." Cf. strkjv@Ephesians:3:21| "of the age of the ages."

rwp@1Timothy:2:8 @{I desire} (\boulomai\). Songs:Phillipians:1:12|. {The men} (\tous andras\). Accusative of general reference with the infinitive \proseuchesthai\. The men in contrast to "women" (\gunaikas\) in 9|. It is public worship, of course, and "in every place" (\en panti top“i\) for public worship. Many modern Christians feel that there were special conditions in Ephesus as in Corinth which called for strict regulations on the women that do not always apply now. {Lifting up holy hands} (\epairontas hosious cheiras\). Standing to pray. Note also \hosious\ used as feminine (so in Plato) with \cheiras\ instead of \hosias\. The point here is that only men should lead in public prayer who can lift up "clean hands" (morally and spiritually clean). See strkjv@Luke:24:50|. Adverb \hosi“s\ in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:10| and \hosiotˆs\ in strkjv@Ephesians:4:24|. {Without wrath and disputing} (\ch“ris orgˆs kai dialogismou\). See strkjv@Phillipians:2:14|.

rwp@1Timothy:3:1 @{Faithful is the saying} (\pistos ho logos\). Here the phrase points to the preceding words (not like strkjv@1:15|) and should close the preceding paragraph. {If a man seeketh} (\ei tis oregetai\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. Present middle indicative of \oreg“\, old verb to reach out after something, governing the genitive. In N.T. only here, strkjv@6:10; strkjv@Hebrews:11:16|. {The office of a bishop} (\episkopˆs\). Genitive case after \oregetai\. Late and rare word outside of LXX and N.T. (in a Lycaonian inscription). From \episkope“\ and means "over-seership" as in strkjv@Acts:1:20|.

rwp@1Timothy:3:8 @{Deacons} (\diakonous\). Accusative case of general reference like the preceding with \dei einai\ understood. Technical sense of the word here as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:1| which see (two classes of church officers, bishops or elders, deacons). {Grave} (\semnous\). See strkjv@Phillipians:4:8|. Repeated in verse 11; strkjv@Titus:2:2|. {Not double-tongued} (\mˆ dilogous\). Rare word (\dis, leg“\) saying same thing twice. Xenophon has \diloge“\ and \dilogia\. In Pollux, but LXX has \digl“ssos\ (double-tongued, Latin _bilinguis_). Only here in N.T. One placed between two persons and saying one thing to one, another to the other. Like Bunyan's Parson "Mr. Two-Tongues." {Not given to much wine} (\mˆ oin“i poll“i prosechontas\). "Not holding the mind (\ton noun\ understood as usual with \prosech“\, strkjv@1Timothy:1:4|) on much wine" (\oin“i\, dative case). That attitude leads to over-indulgence. {Not greedy of filthy lucre} (\mˆ aischrokerdeis\). Old word from \aischros\ (Ephesians:5:12|) and \kerdos\ (Phillipians:1:21|). "Making small gains in mean ways" (Parry). Not genuine in verse 3|. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Titus:1:7| (of bishops).

rwp@1Timothy:3:11 @{Women} (\gunaikas\). Accusative with \dei einai\ understood (\hosaut“s\, likewise) as in verse 8|. Apparently "women as deacons" (Romans:16:1| about Phoebe) and not women in general or just "wives of deacons." See Pliny (_Ep_. X. 97) _ministrae_. {Not slanderers} (\mˆ diabolous\). Original meaning of \diabolos\ (from \diaball“\, strkjv@Luke:16:1|), the devil being the chief slanderer (Ephesians:6:11|). "She-devils" in reality (Titus:2:3|). "While men are more prone to be \dilogous\, double-tongued, women are more prone than men to be slanderers" (White). {Faithful in all things} (\pistas en pƒsin\). Perhaps as almoners (Ellicott) the deaconesses had special temptations.

rwp@1Timothy:3:16 @{Without controversy} (\homologoumen“s\). Old adverb from the participle \homologoumenos\ from \homologe“\. Here only in N.T. "Confessedly." {Great} (\mega\). See strkjv@Ephesians:5:32|. "A great mystery." {The mystery of godliness} (\to tˆs eusebeias mustˆrion\). See verse 9| "the mystery of the faith," and strkjv@2:2| for \eusebeia\. Here the phrase explains "a pillar and stay of the truth" (verse 15|). See in particular Co strkjv@1:27|. "The revealed secret of true religion, the mystery of Christianity, the Person of Christ" (Lock). {He who} (\hos\). The correct text, not \theos\ (God) the reading of the Textus Receptus (Syrian text) nor \ho\ (neuter relative, agreeing with \mustˆrion\) the reading of the Western documents. Westcott and Hort print this relative clause as a fragment of a Christian hymn (like strkjv@Ephesians:5:14|) in six strophes. That is probably correct. At any rate \hos\ (who) is correct and there is asyndeton (no connective) in the verbs. Christ, to whom \hos\ refers, is the mystery (Colossians:1:27; strkjv@2:2|). {Was manifested} (\ephaner“thˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \phanero“\, to manifest. Here used to describe the incarnation (\en sarki\) of Christ (an answer also to the Docetic Gnostics). The verb is used by Paul elsewhere of the incarnation (Romans:16:26; strkjv@Colossians:1:26|) as well as of the second coming (Colossians:3:4|). {Justified in the spirit} (\edikai“thˆ en pneumati\). First aorist passive indicative of \dikaio“\, to declare righteous, to vindicate. Christ was vindicated in his own spirit (Hebrews:9:14|) before men by overcoming death and rising from the dead (Romans:1:3f.|). {Seen of angels} (\“phthˆ aggelois\). First aorist passive indicative of \hora“\, to see, with either the instrumental or the dative case of angels (\aggelois\). The words were probably suggested by the appearance of Jesus (\“phthˆ\, the usual form for the resurrection appearances of Christ) of the angels at the tomb and at the ascension of Christ. See strkjv@Phillipians:2:10; strkjv@1Peter:3:22| for the appearance of Jesus to the angels in heaven at the ascension. Some would take "angels" here to be "messengers" (the women). {Preached among the nations} (\ekˆruchthˆ en ethnesin\). First aorist passive indicative of \kˆruss“\, to proclaim. The word \ethnos\ may mean "all creation" (Colossians:1:23|) and not just Gentiles as distinct from Jews. Paul had done more of this heralding of Christ among the Gentiles than any one else. It was his glory (Ephesians:3:1,8|). Cf. strkjv@2:7|. {Believed on in the world} (\episteuthˆ en kosm“i\). First aorist indicative passive again of \pisteu“\, to believe (2Thessalonians:1:10|). Cf. strkjv@1:15; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:19|. {Received up in glory} (\anelˆmphthˆ en doxˆi\). First aorist passive again (six verbs in the same voice and tense in succession, a rhythmic arrangement like a hymn). Cf. strkjv@Romans:8:29f|. This time the verb is \analamban“\, the verb used of the ascension (Acts:1:11,22|, which see). In a wonderful way this stanza of a hymn presents the outline of the life of Christ.

rwp@1Timothy:4:2 @{Through the hypocrisy of men that speak lies} (\en hupokrisei pseudolog“n\). For \hupokrisis\, see strkjv@Galatians:2:13|. \Pseudologos\ (\pseudˆs, leg“\) _Koin‚_ word from Aristophanes on. Here only in N.T. "A good classical word for liars on a large scale" (Parry). {Branded in their own conscience as with a hot iron} (\kekaustˆriasmen“n tˆn idian suneidˆsin\). Accusative case \suneidˆsin\ retained with the perfect passive participle of \kaustˆriaz“\, a rare verb only here and once in Strabo. Branded with the mark of Satan (2Timothy:2:26|) as Paul was with the marks of Christ (Galatians:6:17|). Agreeing in case with \pseudolog“n\.

rwp@1Timothy:4:3 @{Forbidding to marry} (\k“luont“n gamein\). Present active participle of common verb \k“lu“\, to hinder, genitive case agreeing with \pseudolog“n\. See strkjv@Colossians:2:16,21f.|, where Paul condemns the ascetic practices of the Gnostics. The Essenes, Therapeutae and other oriental sects forbade marriage. In strkjv@1Corinthians:7| Paul does not condemn marriage. {To abstain from meats} (\apechesthai br“mat“n\). Infinitive dependent, not on \k“luont“n\, but on the positive idea \keleuont“n\ (implied, not expressed). Ablative case of \br“mat“n\ after \apechesthai\ (present direct middle, to hold oneself away from). See strkjv@1Corinthians:8-10; strkjv@Romans:14; 15| for disputes about "meats offered to idols" and Co strkjv@1:22f.| for the Gnostic asceticism. {Which God created} (\ha ho theos ektisen\). First active indicative of \ktiz“\ (Co strkjv@1:16|). Cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:10:25|. {To be received} (\eis metalˆmpsin\). "For reception." Old word, only here in N.T. {By them that believe and know} (\tois pistois kai epegn“kosi\). Dative case, "for the believers and those who (one article unites closely) have known fully" (perfect active participle of \epigin“sk“\), a Pauline use of the word (Colossians:1:6|).

rwp@1Timothy:4:5 @{It is sanctified} (\hagiazetai\). Present passive indicative of \hagiaz“\, here "rendered holy" rather than "declared holy." Cf. verse 4|. {Through the word of God and prayers} (\dia logou theou kai enteuxe“s\). See strkjv@2:1| for \enteuxis\. Paul seems to refer to Genesis 1. It is almost a hendiadys "by the use of Scripture in prayer."

rwp@1Timothy:4:6 @{If thou put the brethren in mind of these things} (\tauta hupotithemenos tois adelphois\). Present middle participle of \hupotithˆmi\, to place under, to suggest, old and common verb, here only in N.T., "suggesting these things to the brethren." {Thou shalt be a good minister of Christ Jesus} (\kalos esˆi diakonos Christou Iˆsou\). This beautiful phrase covers one's whole service for Christ (3:1-7|). {Nourished in} (\entrephomenos\). Present passive participle of \entreph“\, old verb, to nourish in, used by Plato of "nourished in the laws," here only in the N.T. {The words of the faith} (\tois logois tˆs piste“s\). Locative case. The right diet for babes in Christ. The Bolshevists in Russia are feeding the children on atheism to get rid of God. {Which thou hast followed} (\hˆi parˆkolouthˆkas\). Perfect active indicative of \parakolouthe“\, old verb, to follow beside, of persons (often in old Greek) or of ideas and things (Luke:1:3; strkjv@1Timothy:4:6; strkjv@2Timothy:3:10|). With associative instrumental case \hˆi\ (which).

rwp@1Timothy:4:12 @{Despise} (\kataphroneit“\). Imperative active third singular of \kataphrone“\, old verb, to think down on, to despise (Romans:2:4|). {Thy youth} (\sou tˆs neotˆtos\). Genitive case of old word (from \neos\) as in strkjv@Mark:10:20|. {Be thou} (\ginou\). Present middle imperative of \ginomai\. "Keep on becoming thou." {An ensample} (\tupos\). Old word from \tupt“\, a type. Pauline use of the word (1Thessalonians:1:7; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:9; strkjv@Phillipians:3:17; strkjv@Titus:2:7|). {To them that believe} (\t“n pist“n\). Objective genitive. {In word} (\en log“i\). In conversation as well as in public speech. {In manner of life} (\en anastrophˆi\). "In bearing" (Galatians:1:13; strkjv@Ephesians:4:22|). {In purity} (\en hagneiƒi\). Old word from \hagneu“\ (\hagnos\). Sinlessness of life. Used of a Nazirite (Numbers:6:2,21|). Only here and strkjv@5:2| in N.T.

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

rwp@1Timothy:5:18 @{Thou shalt not muzzle} (\ou phim“seis\). Prohibition by \ou\ and future (volitive) indicative of \phimo“\ (from \phimos\, muzzle), old word, quoted also in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:9| as here from strkjv@Deuteronomy:25:4|, and for the same purpose, to show the preacher's right to pay for his work. See strkjv@1Corinthians:9:9| for \alo“nta\ ({when he treadeth out the corn}). {The labourer is worthy of his hire} (\axios ho ergatˆs tou misthou autou\). These words occur in precisely this form in strkjv@Luke:10:7|. It appears also in strkjv@Matthew:10:10| with \tˆs trophˆs\ (food) instead of \tou misthou\. In strkjv@1Corinthians:9:14| Paul has the sense of it and says: "so also the Lord ordained," clearly meaning that Jesus had so said. It only remains to tell whether Paul here is quoting an unwritten saying of Jesus as he did in strkjv@Acts:20:35| or even the Gospel of Luke or Q (the Logia of Jesus). There is no way to decide this question. If Luke wrote his Gospel before A.D. 62 as is quite possible and Acts by A.D. 63, he could refer to the Gospel. It is not clear whether Scripture is here meant to apply to this quotation from the Lord Jesus. For \ergatˆs\ (labourer) see strkjv@Phillipians:3:2|.

rwp@1Timothy:6:3 @{Teacheth a different doctrine} (\heterodidaskalei\). See strkjv@1:3| for this verb, present active indicative here in condition of first class. {Consenteth not} (\mˆ proserchetai\). Also condition of first class with \mˆ\ instead of \ou\. \Proserchomai\ (old verb, to come to, to approach, with dative) is common enough in N.T. (Hebrews:4:16; strkjv@7:25|, etc.), but in the metaphorical sense of coming to one's ideas, assenting to, here only in N.T., but is so used in Philo and Irenaeus (Ellicott). {Sound words} (\hugiainousin logois\). See strkjv@1:10| for \hugiain“\. {The words of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\tois tou kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou Christou\). Either subjective genitive (the words from the Lord Jesus, a collection of his sayings in Lock's opinion like strkjv@5:18; strkjv@Acts:20:35|, at least in the Spirit of Jesus as strkjv@Acts:16:7; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:23|) or objective genitive about Jesus like strkjv@2Timothy:1:8; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:18|. {According to godliness} (\kata eusebeian\). Promoting (designed for) godliness as in strkjv@Titus:1:1|.

rwp@1Timothy:6:4 @{He is puffed up} (\tetuph“tai\). Perfect passive indicative of \tupho“\, for which see strkjv@3:6|. {Knowing nothing} (\mˆden epistamenos\). Present middle participle of \epistamai\. Ignorance is a frequent companion of conceit. {Doting} (\nos“n\). Present active participle of \nose“\, to be sick, to be morbid over, old word, only here in N.T. {Disputes of words} (\logomachias\). Our "logomachy." From \logomache“\ (2Timothy:2:14|), and that from \logos\ and \machomai\, to fight over words, late and rare word, here only in N.T. See Plato (_Tim_. 1085 F) for "wars in words" (\machas en logois\). {Whereof} (\ex h“n\). "From which things." {Surmisings} (\huponoiai\). Old word from \huponoe“\, to surmise, to suspect (Acts:25:18|), only here in N.T. All these words are akin (envy, \phthonos\, strife, \eris\, railings or slanders, \blasphˆmiai\), all products of an ignorant and conceited mind.

rwp@1Timothy:6:12 @{Fight the good fight} (\ag“nizou ton kalon ag“na\). Cognate accusative with present middle imperative of \ag“niz“\, Pauline word (1Corinthians:9:25; strkjv@Colossians:1:29|). {Lay hold on} (\epilabou\). Second (ingressive) aorist middle imperative of \epilamban“\, "get a grip on." See same verb with genitive also in verse 19|. {Thou wast called} (\eklˆthˆs\). First aorist passive of \kale“\ as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:9; strkjv@Colossians:3:15|. {The good confession} (\tˆn kalˆn homologian\). Cognate accusative with \h“mologˆsas\ (first aorist active indicative of \homologe“\, the public confession in baptism which many witnessed. See it also in verse 13| of Jesus.

rwp@1Timothy:6:13 @{Who quickeneth all things} (\tou z“ogonountos ta panta\). Present active participle of \z“ogone“\ (\z“ogonos\, from \z“os, gen“\), late word to give life, to bring forth alive, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:7:19|. See strkjv@1Samuel:2:6|. {Before Pontius Pilate} (\epi Pontiou Peilatou\). Not "in the time of," but "in the presence of." {Witnessed} (\marturˆsantos\). Note \marture“\, not \homologe“\ as in verse 12|. Christ gave his evidence as a witness to the Kingdom of God. Evidently Paul knew some of the facts that appear in strkjv@John:18|.

rwp@1Timothy:6:16 @{Who only hath immortality} (\ho monos ech“n athanasian\). "The one who alone has immortality." \Athanasia\ (\athanatos\, \a\ privative and \thanatos\), old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:15:53f|. Domitian demanded that he be addressed as "_Dominus et Deus noster_." Emperor worship may be behind the use of \monos\ (alone) here. {Unapproachable} (\aprositon\). See strkjv@Psalms:104:2|. Late compound verbal adjective (\a\ privative, \pros, ienai\, to go). Here only in N.T. Literary _Koin‚_ word. {Nor can see} (\oude idein dunatai\). See \aoraton\ in strkjv@Colossians:1:15| and also strkjv@John:1:18; strkjv@Matthew:11:27|. The "amen" marks the close of the doxology as in strkjv@1:17|.

rwp@2Corinthians:1:3 @{Blessed} (\eulogˆtos\). From old verb \euloge“\, to speak well of, but late verbal in LXX and Philo. Used of men in strkjv@Genesis:24:31|, but only of God in N.T. as in strkjv@Luke:1:68| and chiefly in Paul (2Corinthians:11:31; strkjv@Romans:1:25|). Paul has no thanksgiving or prayer as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:4-9|, but he finds his basis for gratitude in God, not in them. {The God and Father} (\ho theos kai patˆr\). Songs:rightly, only one article with both substantives as in strkjv@2Peter:1:1|. Paul gives the deity of Jesus Christ as our Lord (\Kuriou\), but he does not hesitate to use the language here as it occurs. See strkjv@1Peter:1:3; strkjv@Ephesians:1:3| where the language is identical with that here. {The father of mercies} (\ho patˆr t“n oiktirm“n\) and God of all comfort (\kai theos pasˆs paraklˆse“s\). Paul adds an item to each word. He is the compassionate Father characterized by mercies (\oiktirm“n\, old word from \oikteir“\, to pity, and here in plural, emotions and acts of pity). He is the God of all comfort (\paraklˆse“s\, old word from \parakale“\, to call to one's side, common with Paul). Paul has already used it of God who gave eternal comfort (2Thessalonians:2:16|). The English word comfort is from the Latin _confortis_ (brave together). The word used by Jesus of the Holy Spirit as the Comforter or Paraklete is this very word (John:14:16; strkjv@16:7|). Paul makes rich use of the verb \parakale“\ and the substantive \paraklˆsis\ in this passage (3-7|). He urges all sorrowing and troubled hearts to find strength in God.

rwp@2Corinthians:2:1 @{That I would not come again to you with sorrow} (\to mˆ palin en lupˆi pros humas elthein\). Articular second aorist active infinitive with negative \mˆ\ in apposition with \touto\ (this) preceding. What does Paul mean by "again" (\palin\)? Had he paid another visit besides that described in strkjv@Acts:18| which was in sorrow (\en lupˆi\)? Or does he mean that having had one joyful visit (that in strkjv@Acts:18|) he does not wish the second one to be in sorrow? Either interpretation is possible as the Greek stands and scholars disagree. Songs:in strkjv@12:14| "The third time I am ready to come" may refer to the proposed second visit (1:15f.|) and the present plan (a third). And so as to strkjv@13:1|. There is absolutely no way to tell clearly whether Paul had already made a second visit. If he had done so, it is a bit odd that he did not plainly say so in strkjv@1:15f.| when he is apologizing for not having made the proposed visit ("a second benefit").

rwp@2Corinthians:3:18 @{We all} (\hˆmeis pantes\). All of us Christians, not merely ministers. {With unveiled face} (\anakekalummen“i pros“p“i\). Instrumental case of manner. Unlike and like Moses. {Reflecting as in a mirror} (\katoptrizomenoi\). Present middle participle of \katoptriz“\, late verb from \katoptron\, mirror (\kata, optron\, a thing to see with). In Philo (_Legis Alleg_. iii. 33) the word means beholding as in a mirror and that idea suits also the figure in strkjv@1Corinthians:13:12|. There is an inscription of third century B.C. with \egkatoptrisasthai eis to hud“r\, to look at one's reflection in the water. Plutarch uses the active for mirroring or reflecting and Chrysostom takes it so here. Either makes good sense. The point that Paul is making is that we shall not lose the glory as Moses did. But that is true if we keep on beholding or keep on reflecting (present tense). Only here in N.T. {Are transformed} (\metamorphoumetha\). Present passive (are being transformed) of \metamorpho“\, late verb and in papyri. See on ¯Matthew:17:2; strkjv@Mark:9:2| where it is translated "transfigured." It is the word used for heathen mythological metamorphoses. {Into the same image} (\tˆn autˆn eikona\). Accusative retained with passive verb \metamorphoumetha\. Into the likeness of God in Christ (1Corinthians:15:48-53; strkjv@Romans:8:17,29; strkjv@Colossians:3:4; strkjv@1John:3:2|). {As from the Lord the Spirit} (\kathaper apo Kuriou pneumatos\). More likely, "as from the Spirit of the Lord."

rwp@2Corinthians:5:14 @{The love of Christ} (\hˆ agapˆ tou Christou\). Subjective genitive, Christ's love for Paul as shown by verse 15|. {Constraineth us} (\sunechei hˆmas\). Old and common verb, to hold together, to press the ears together (Acts:7:57|), to press on every side (Luke:8:45|), to hold fast (Luke:22:63|), to hold oneself to (Acts:18:5|), to be pressed (passive, strkjv@Luke:12:50; strkjv@Phillipians:1:23|). Songs:here Paul's conception of Christ's love for him holds him together to his task whatever men think or say. {Judging this} (\krinantas touto\). Having reached this conclusion, ever since his conversion (Galatians:1:17f.|). {One died for all} (\heis huper pant“n apethanen\). This is the central tenet in Paul's theology and Christology. \Huper\ (over) here is used in the sense of substitution as in strkjv@John:11:50; strkjv@Galatians:3:13|, death in behalf so that the rest will not have to die. This use of \huper\ is common in the papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 631). In fact, \huper\ in this sense is more usual in Greek than \anti, pro\ or any other preposition. {Therefore all died} (\ara hoi pantes apethanon\). Logical conclusion (\ara\, corresponding), the one died for the all and so the all died when he did, all the spiritual death possible for those for whom Christ died. This is Paul's gospel, clear-cut, our hope today.

rwp@2Corinthians:5:19 @{To wit, that} (\h“s hoti\). Latin puts it _quoniam quidem_. It is an unclassical idiom, but occurs in the papyri and inscriptions (Moulton, _Prol_., p. 212; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1033). It is in strkjv@Esther:4:14|. See also strkjv@2Corinthians:11:21; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2|. It probably means "how that." {Not reckoning} (\mˆ logizomenos\). What Jesus did (his death for us) stands to our credit (Romans:8:32|) if we make our peace with God. This is our task, "the word of reconciliation," that we may receive "the righteousness of God" and be adopted into the family of God.

rwp@2Corinthians:7:9 @{Now I rejoice} (\nun chair“\). Now that Titus has come and told him the good news from Corinth (2:12f.|). This was the occasion of the noble outburst in strkjv@2:12-6:10|. {Unto repentance} (\eis metanoian\). Note the sharp difference here between "sorrow" (\lupˆ\) which is merely another form of \metamelomai\ (regret, remorse) and "repentance" (\metanoia\) or change of mind and life. It is a linguistic and theological tragedy that we have to go on using "repentance" for \metanoia\. But observe that the "sorrow" has led to "repentance" and was not Itself the repentance. {After a godly sort} (\kata theon\). In God's way. "God's way as opposed to man's way and the devil's way" (Plummer). It was not mere sorrow, but a change in their attitude that counted. {That ye might suffer loss by us in nothing} (\hina en mˆdeni zˆmi“thˆte ex hum“n\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \zˆmio“\, old verb to suffer damage. See on ¯Matthew:16:26|. This was God's intention and so he overruled their sorrow to good.

rwp@2Corinthians:7:11 @{This selfsame thing} (\auto touto\). "This very thing," "the being made sorry according to God" (\to kata theon lupˆthˆnai\, articular first aorist passive infinitive with which \auto touto\ agrees and the proleptic subject of the verb \kateirgasato\. {Earnest care} (\spoudˆn\). Diligence, from \speud“\, to hasten. Cf. strkjv@Romans:12:11|. {Yea} (\alla\). Not adversative use of \alla\, but copulative as is common (half dozen examples here). {Clearing of yourselves} (\apologia\). In the old notion of \apologia\ (self-vindication, self-defence) as in strkjv@1Peter:3:15|. {Indignation} (\aganaktˆsin\). Old word, only here in N.T. From \aganakteo\ (Mark:10:14|, etc.). {Avenging} (\ekdikˆsin\). Late word from \ekdike“\, to avenge, to do justice (Luke:18:5; strkjv@21:22|), vindication from wrong as in strkjv@Luke:18:7|, to secure punishment (1Peter:2:14|). {Pure} (\hagnous\). Kin to \hagios\ (\haz“\, to reverence), immaculate.

rwp@2Corinthians:9:5 @{I thought} (\hegˆsamˆn\). Epistolary aorist again. See strkjv@Phillipians:2:25| for the expression here. {Go before} (\proelth“sin\). Second aorist active of \proerchomai\. Go to you before I come. {Make up beforehand} (\prokatartis“si\). Late and rare double compound verb \prokatartiz“\ (in Hippocrates). Only here in N.T. See \katartiz“\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:10|. {Your afore-promised bounty} (\tˆn proepˆggelmenˆn eulogian hum“n\). "Blessing" (\eulogia\) literally, but applied to good deeds also as well as good words (Genesis:33:11|). Note third use of "pro" before. He literally rubs it in that the pledge was overdue. {That the same might be ready} (\tautˆn hetoimˆn einai\). Here the infinitive alone (\einai\) is used to express purpose without \h“ste\ or \eis to\ or \pros to\ with the accusative of general reference (\tautˆn\). The feminine form \hetoimˆn\ is regular (1Peter:1:5|) though \hetoimos\ also occurs with the feminine like the masculine (Matthew:25:10|). {And not of extortion} (\kai mˆ h“s pleonexian\). "And not as covetousness." Some offerings exhibit covetousness on the part of the giver by their very niggardliness.

rwp@2Corinthians:9:13 @{Seeing that they glorify God} (\doxazontes ton theon\). Anacoluthon again. The nominative participle used independently like \ploutizomenoi\ in verse 11|. {Obedience} (\hupotagˆi\). Late and rare word from \hupotass“\, to subject, middle to obey. Only in Paul in N.T. {Of your confession} (\tˆs homologias hum“n\). Old word from \homologe“\ (\homologos, homou, leg“\), to say together. It is either to profess (Latin _profiteor_, to declare openly) or to confess (Latin _confiteor_, to declare fully, to say the same thing as another). Both confess and profess are used to translate the verb and each idea is present in the substantive. Only the context can decide. Actions speak louder than words. The brethren in Jerusalem will know by this collection that Gentiles make as good Christians as Jews. {For the liberality of your contribution} (\haplotˆti tˆs koin“nias\). This is the point that matters just now. Paul drives it home. On this use of \koin“nia\ see on ¯8:4|.

rwp@2Corinthians:10:3 @{In the flesh} (\en sarki\). But that is a very different thing from walking \kata sarka\ according to the standards of the flesh as his enemies charged. It is easy enough to make insinuations. {We war} (\strateuometha\). Literary plural again after \logizomai\ in verse 2|. Old word to lead an army (\stratos\). In N.T. only in the middle as here. Paul admits that he fights, but only the devil and his agents even if wearing the livery of heaven. Paul knew the Roman army well. He knows how to use the military metaphor.

rwp@2Corinthians:10:5 @{Casting down imaginations} (\logismous kathairountes\). The same military figure (\kathairesis\) and the present active participle agreeing with \strateuometha\ in verse 3| (verse 4| a parenthesis). The reasonings or imaginations (\logismous\, old word from \logizomai\, to reckon, only here in N.T. and strkjv@Romans:2:15|) are treated as forts or citadels to be conquered. {Every high thing that is exalted} (\pan hups“ma epairomenon\). Same metaphor. \Hups“ma\ from \hupso“\ is late _Koin‚_ word (in LXX, Plutarch, Philo, papyri) for height and that figure carried on by \epairomenon\. Paul aims to pull down the top-most perch of audacity in their reasonings against the knowledge of God. We need Paul's skill and courage today. {Bringing every thought into captivity} (\aichmal“tizontes pƒn noˆma\). Present active participle of \aichmal“tiz“\, common _Koin‚_ verb from \aichmal“tos\, captive in war (\aichmˆ\, spear, \hal“tos\ verbal of \haliskomai\, to be taken). See on ¯Luke:21:24|. Paul is the most daring of thinkers, but he lays all his thoughts at the feet of Jesus. For \noˆma\ (device) see on ¯2:11|. {To the obedience of Christ} (\eis tˆn hupakoˆn tou Christou\). Objective genitive, "to the obedience unto Christ." That is Paul's conception of intellectual liberty, freedom in Christ. Deissmann (_St. Paul_, p. 141) calls this "the mystic genitive."

rwp@2Corinthians:10:10 @{They say} (\phasin\). Reading of B old Latin Vulgate, but Westcott and Hort prefer \phˆsin\ (says one, the leader). This charge Paul quotes directly. {Weighty and strong} (\bareiai kai ischurai\). These adjectives can be uncomplimentary and mean "severe and violent" instead of "impressive and vigorous." The adjectives bear either sense. {His bodily presence} (\hˆ parousia tou s“matos\). This certainly is uncomplimentary. "The presence of his body." It seems clear that Paul did not have a commanding appearance like that of Barnabas (Acts:14:12|). He had some physical defect of the eyes (Galatians:4:14|) and a thorn in the flesh (2Corinthians:12:7|). In the second century _Acts of Paul and Thecla_ he is pictured as small, short, bow-legged, with eye-brows knit together, and an aquiline nose. A forgery of the fourth century in the name of Lucian describes Paul as "the bald-headed, hook-nosed Galilean." However that may be, his accusers sneered at his personal appearance as "weak" (\asthenˆs\). {His speech of no account} (\ho logos exouthenˆmenos\). Perfect passive participle of \exouthene“\, to treat as nothing (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:1:28|). The Corinthians (some of them) cared more for the brilliant eloquence of Apollos and did not find Paul a trained rhetorician (1Corinthians:1:17; strkjv@2:1,4; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:6|). He made different impressions on different people. "Seldom has any one been at once so ardently hated and so passionately loved as St. Paul" (Deissmann, _St. Paul_, p. 70). "At one time he seemed like a man, and at another he seemed like an angel" (_Acts of Paul and Thecla_). He spoke like a god at Lystra (Acts:14:8-12|), but Eutychus went to sleep on him (Acts:20:9|). Evidently Paul winced under this biting criticism of his looks and speech.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:6 @{Rude in speech} (\idi“tˆs t“i log“i\). Locative case with \idi“tˆs\ for which word see on ¯Acts:4:13; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:16,23,24|. The Greeks regarded a man as \idi“tˆs\ who just attended to his own affairs (\ta idia\) and took no part in public life. Paul admits that he is not a professional orator (cf. strkjv@10:10|), but denies that he is unskilled in knowledge (\all' ou tˆi gn“sei\). {Among all men} (\en pƒsin\). He has made his mastery of the things of Christ plain among all men. He knew his subject.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:24 @{Five times received I forty stripes save one} (\pentakis tesserakonta para mian elabon\). The Acts and the Epistles are silent about these Jewish floggings (Matthew:27:36|). See on ¯Luke:12:47| for omission of \plˆgas\ (stripes). Thirty-nine lashes was the rule for fear of a miscount (Deuteronomy:25:1-3|). Cf. Josephus (_Ant_. IV. 8, 1, 21).

rwp@2Corinthians:11:31 @{I am not lying} (\ou pseudomai\). The list seems so absurd and foolish that Paul takes solemn oath about it (cf. strkjv@1:23|). For the doxology see strkjv@Romans:1:25; strkjv@9:5|.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:19 @{Ye think all this time} (\palai dokeite\). Progressive present indicative, "for a long time ye have been thinking." {We are excusing ourselves} (\apologoumetha\). He is not just apologizing, but is in deadly earnest, as they will find out when he comes.

rwp@2John:1:7 @{Deceivers} (\planoi\). Late adjective (Diodorus, Josephus) meaning wandering, roving (1Timothy:4:1|). As a substantive in N.T. of Jesus (Matthew:27:63|), of Paul (2Corinthians:6:8|), and here. See the verb (\t“n planont“n humƒs\) in strkjv@1John:2:26| of the Gnostic deceivers as here and also of Jesus (John:7:12|). Cf. strkjv@1John:1:8|. {Are gone forth} (\exˆlthan\, alpha ending). Second aorist active indicative of \exerchomai\, perhaps an allusion to the crisis when they left the churches (1John:2:19|, same form). {Even they that confess not} (\hoi mˆ homologountes\). "The ones not confessing" (\mˆ\ regular negative with the participle). The articular participle describes the deceivers (\planoi\). {That Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh} (\Iˆsoun Christon erchomenon en sarki\). "Jesus Christ coming in the flesh." Present middle participle of \erchomai\ treating the Incarnation as a continuing fact which the Docetic Gnostics flatly denied. In strkjv@1John:4:2| we have \elˆluthota\ (perfect active participle) in this same construction with \homologe“\, because there the reference is to the definite historical fact of the Incarnation. There is no allusion here to the second coming of Christ. {This} (\houtos\). See strkjv@1John:2:18,22; strkjv@5:6,20|. {The deceiver and the antichrist} (\ho planos kai ho antichristos\). Article with each word, as in strkjv@Revelation:1:17|, to bring out sharply each separate phrase, though one individual is referred to. The one _par excellence_ in popular expectation (1John:2:22|), though many in reality (1John:2:18; strkjv@3John:1:7|).

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:1:10 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). Because of the exhortation and argument in verses 5-9|. {Give the more diligence} (\mƒllon spoudasate\). "Become diligent (first aorist ingressive active imperative of \spoudaz“\ as in strkjv@2Timothy:2:15; strkjv@2Peter:1:15|) the more" (\mallon\, not less). {To make} (\poieisthai\). Present middle infinitive of \poie“\, to make for yourselves. {Calling and election} (\klˆsin kai eklogˆn\). Both words (\klˆsin\, the invitation, \eklogˆn\, actual acceptance). See for \eklogˆ\ strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:4; strkjv@Romans:9:11|. {If ye do} (\poiountes\). Present active circumstantial (conditional) participle of \poie“\, "doing." {Ye shall never stumble} (\ou mˆ ptaisˆte pote\). Strong double negative (\ou mˆ pote\) with first aorist active subjunctive of \ptai“\, old verb to stumble, to fall as in strkjv@James:2:10; strkjv@3:2|.

rwp@2Peter:1:19 @{The word of prophecy} (\ton prophˆtikon logon\). "The prophetic word." Cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:10|, a reference to all the Messianic prophecies. {Made more sure} (\bebaioteron\). Predicate accusative of the comparative adjective \bebaios\ (2Peter:1:10|). The Transfiguration scene confirmed the Messianic prophecies and made clear the deity of Jesus Christ as God's Beloved Son. Some with less likelihood take Peter to mean that the word of prophecy is a surer confirmation of Christ's deity than the Transfiguration. {Whereunto} (\h“i\). Dative of the relative referring to "the prophetic word made more sure." {That ye take heed} (\prosechontes\). Present active participle with \noun\ (mind) understood, "holding your mind upon" with the dative (\h“i\). {As unto a lamp} (\h“s luchn“i\). Dative also after \prosechontes\ of \luchnos\, old word (Matthew:5:15|). {Shining} (\phainonti\). Dative also present active participle of \phain“\, to shine (John:1:5|). Songs:of the Baptist (John:5:35|). {In a dark place} (\en auchmˆr“i top“i\). Old adjective, parched, squalid, dirty, dark, murky, here only in N.T., though in Aristotle and on tombstone for a boy. {Until the day dawn} (\he“s hou hˆmera diaugasˆi\). First aorist active subjunctive of \diaugaz“\ with temporal conjunction \he“s hou\, usual construction for future time. Late compound verb \diaugaz“\ (Polybius, Plutarch, papyri) from \dia\ and \augˆ\, to shine through, here only in N.T. {The day-star} (\ph“sphoros\). Old compound adjective (\ph“s\, light, \pher“\, to bring), light-bringing, light-bearer (Lucifer) applied to Venus as the morning star. Our word \phosphorus\ is this word. In the LXX \he“sphoros\ occurs. Cf. strkjv@Malachi:4:2; strkjv@Luke:1:76-79; strkjv@Revelation:22:16| for "dawn" applied to the Messiah. {Arise} (\anateilˆi\). First aorist active subjunctive of \anatell“\ (James:1:11; strkjv@Matthew:5:45|).

rwp@2Peter:2:3 @{In covetousness} (\en pleonexiƒi\). As did Balaam (verse 15|). These licentious Gnostics made money out of their dupes. A merely intellectual Gnosticism had its fruit in immorality and fraud. {With feigned words} (\plastois logois\). Instrumental case. \Plastos\ is verbal adjective (from \plass“\, to mould as from clay, for which see strkjv@Romans:9:20|), here only in N.T. "With forged words." See sample in strkjv@3:4|. {Shall make merchandise of you} (\humas emporeusontai\). Future middle of \emporeuomai\ (from \emporos\, a travelling merchant), old word, to go in for trade, in N.T. only here and strkjv@James:4:13|, which see. Cf. our emporium (John:2:16|, market house). {Whose sentence} (\hois to krima\). "For whom (dative case) the sentence" (verdict, not process \krisis\). {Now from of old} (\ekpalai\). Late and common compound adverb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@3:5|. {Lingereth not} (\ouk argei\). "Is not idle," old verb, \arge“\ (from \argos\ not working, alpha privative and \ergon\), here only in N.T. {Slumbereth not} (\ou nustazei\). Old and common verb (from \nu“\ to nod), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:25:5|. Note \ap“leia\ (destruction) three times in verses 1-3|.

rwp@2Peter:2:12 @{But these} (\houtoi de\). The false teachers of verse 1|. {As creatures} (\z“a\). Living creatures, old word, from \z“os\ (alive), strkjv@Jude:1:10; strkjv@Revelation:4:6-9|. {Without reason} (\aloga\). Old adjective, in N.T. only here, strkjv@Jude:1:10; strkjv@Acts:25:27|. Brute beasts like \thˆria\ (wild animals). {Born} (\gegennˆmena\). Perfect passive participle of \genna“\. {Mere animals} (\phusika\). Old adjective in \-ikos\ (from \phusis\, nature), natural animals, here only in N.T. {To be taken} (\eis hal“sin\). "For capture" (old substantive, from \halo“\, here only in N.T.). {And destroyed} (\kai phthoran\). "And for destruction" just like a beast of prey caught. See strkjv@1:4|. {In matters whereof they are ignorant} (\en hois agnoousin\). "In which things they are ignorant." Here \en hois\ = \en toutois ha\ (in those things which), a common Greek idiom. For \agnoe“\ (present active indicative) see strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13; strkjv@1Timothy:1:7| for a like picture of loud ignoramuses posing as professional experts. {Shall in their destroying surely be destroyed} (\en tˆi phthorƒi aut“n phtharˆsontai\). Second future passive of \phtheir“\. Rhetorical Hebraism in the use of \en phthorƒi\ (same root as \phtheir“\), word four times in II Peter. See strkjv@Jude:1:10|.

rwp@2Peter:3:1 @{Beloved} (\agapˆtoi\). With this vocative verbal (four times in this chapter), Peter "turns away from the Libertines and their victims" (Mayor). {This is now the second epistle that I write unto you} (\tautˆn ˆdˆ deuteran humin graph“ epistolˆn\). Literally, "This already a second epistle I am writing to you." For \ˆdˆ\ see strkjv@John:21:24|. It is the predicate use of \deuteran epistolˆn\ in apposition with \tautˆn\, not "this second epistle." Reference apparently to I Peter. {And in both of them} (\en hais\). "In which epistles." {I stir up} (\diegeir“\). Present active indicative, perhaps conative, "I try to stir up." See strkjv@1:13|. {Mind} (\dianoian\). Understanding (Plato) as in strkjv@1Peter:1:13|. {Sincere} (\eilikrinˆ\). Old adjective of doubtful etymology (supposed to be \heilˆ\, sunlight, and \krin“\, to judge by it). Plato used it of ethical purity (\psuchˆ eilikrinˆs\) as here and strkjv@Phillipians:1:10|, the only N.T. examples. {By putting you in remembrance} (\en hupomnˆsei\). As in strkjv@1:13|.

rwp@2Peter:3:5 @{For this they wilfully forget} (\lanthanei gar autous touto thelontas\). Literally, "for this escapes them being willing." See this use of \lanthan“\ (old verb, to escape notice of, to be hidden from) in strkjv@Acts:26:26|. The present active participle \thelontas\ (from \thel“\, to wish) has almost an adverbial sense here. {Compacted} (\sunest“sa\). See Paul's \sunestˆken\ (Colossians:1:17|) "consist." Second perfect active (intransitive) participle of \sunistˆmi\, feminine singular agreeing with \gˆ\ (nearest to it) rather than with \ouranoi\ (subject of \ˆsan\ imperfect plural). There is no need to make Peter mean the Jewish mystical "seven heavens" because of the plural which was used interchangeably with the singular (Matthew:5:9f.|). {Out of water and amidst water} (\ex hudatos kai di' hudatos\). Out of the primeval watery chaos (Genesis:1:2|), but it is not plain what is meant by \di' hudatos\, which naturally means "by means of water," though \dia\ with the genitive is used for a condition or state (Hebrews:12:1|). The reference may be to strkjv@Genesis:1:9|, the gathering together of the waters. {By the word of God} (\t“i tou theou log“i\). Instrumental case \log“i\, "by the fiat of God" (Genesis:1:3; strkjv@Hebrews:11:3| \rˆmati theou\).

rwp@2Peter:3:6 @{By which means} (\di' h“n\). The two waters above or the water and the word of God. Mayor against the MSS. reads \di' hou\ (singular) and refers it to \log“i\ alone. {Being overshadowed} (\kataklustheis\). First aorist passive participle of \katakluz“\, old compound, here only in N.T., but see \kataklusmos\ in strkjv@2:5|. {With water} (\hudati\). Instrumental case of \hud“r\. {Perished} (\ap“leto\). Second aorist middle indicative of \apollumi\.

rwp@2Peter:3:7 @{That now are} (\nun\). "The now heavens" over against "the then world" (\ho tote kosmos\ verse 6|). {By the same word} (\t“i aut“i log“i\). Instrumental case again referring to \log“i\ in verse 6|. {Have been stored up} (\tethˆsaurismenoi eisin\). Perfect passive indicative of \thˆsauriz“\, for which verb see strkjv@Matthew:6:19; strkjv@Luke:12:21|. {For fire} (\puri\). Dative case of \pur\, not with fire (instrumental case). The destruction of the world by fire is here pictured as in strkjv@Joel:2:30f.; strkjv@Psalms:50:3|. {Being reserved} (\tˆroumenoi\). Present passive participle of \tˆre“\, for which see strkjv@2:4|. {Against} (\eis\). Unto. As in strkjv@2:4,9| and see strkjv@1Peter:1:4| for the inheritance reserved for the saints of God.

rwp@2Thessalonians:1:7 @{Rest with us} (\anesin meth' hˆm“n\). Let up, release. Old word from \aniˆmi\, from troubles here (2Corinthians:2:13; strkjv@7:5; strkjv@8:13|), and hereafter as in this verse. Vivid word. They shared suffering with Paul (verse 5|) and so they will share (\meth'\) the {rest}. {At the revelation of the Lord Jesus} (\en tˆi apokalupsei tou Kuriou Iˆsou\). Here the \Parousia\ (1Thessalonians:2:19; strkjv@3:13; strkjv@5:23|) is pictured as a {Revelation} (Un-veiling, \apo-kalupsis\) of the Messiah as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:7, strkjv@1Peter:1:7,13| (cf. strkjv@Luke:17:30|). At this Unveiling of the Messiah there will come the {recompense} (verse 6|) to the persecutors and the {rest} from the persecutions. This Revelation will be {from heaven} (\ap' ouranou\) as to place and {with the angels of his power} (\met' aggel“n duname“s autou\) as the retinue and {in flaming fire} (\en puri phlogos\, in a fire of flame, fire characterized by flame). In strkjv@Acts:7:30| the text is {flame of fire} where \puros\ is genitive (like strkjv@Isaiah:66:15|) rather than \phlogos\ as here (Exodus:3:2|).

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:2 @{To the end that} (\eis to\). One of Paul's favourite idioms for purpose, \eis to\ and the infinitive. {Ye be not quickly shaken} (\mˆ tache“s saleuthˆnai humas\). First aorist passive infinitive of \saleu“\, old verb to agitate, to cause to totter like a reed (Matthew:11:7|), the earth (Hebrews:12:26|). Usual negative \mˆ\ and accusative of general reference \humas\ with the infinitive. {From your mind} (\apo tou noos\). Ablative case of nous, mind, reason, sober sense, "from your witte" (Wyclif), to "keep their heads." {Nor yet be troubled} (\mˆde throeisthai\). Old verb \throe“\, to cry aloud (from \throos\, clamour, tumult), to be in a state of nervous excitement (present passive infinitive, as if it were going on), "a continued state of agitation following the definite shock received (\saleuthˆnai\)" (Milligan). {Either by spirit} (\mˆte dia pneumatos\). By ecstatic utterance (1Thessalonians:5:10|). The nervous fear that the coming was to be at once prohibited by \mˆde\ Paul divides into three sources by \mˆte, mˆte, mˆte\. No individual claim to divine revelation (the gift of prophecy) can justify the statement. {Or by word} (\mˆte dia logou\). Oral statement of a conversation with Paul (Lightfoot) to this effect {as from us}. An easy way to set aside Paul's first Epistle by report of a private remark from Paul. {Or by epistle as from us} (\mˆte di' epistolˆs h“s di' hˆm“n\). In strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13-5:3| Paul had plainly said that Jesus would come as a thief in the night and had shown that the dead would not be left out in the rapture. But evidently some one claimed to have a private epistle from Paul which supported the view that Jesus was coming at once, {as that the day of the Lord is now present} (\h“s hoti enestˆken hˆ hˆmera tou kuriou\). Perfect active indicative of \enistˆmi\, old verb, to place in, but intransitive in this tense to stand in or at or near. Songs:"is imminent" (Lightfoot). The verb is common in the papyri. In strkjv@1Corinthians:3:22; strkjv@Romans:8:38| we have a contrast between \ta enest“ta\, the things present, and \ta mellonta\, the things future (to come). The use of \h“s hoti\ may be disparaging here, though that is not true in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:19|. In the _Koin‚_ it comes in the vernacular to mean simply "that" (Moulton, _Proleg_., p. 212), but that hardly seems the case in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1033). Here it means "to wit that," though "as that" or "as if" does not miss it much. Certainly it flatly denies that by conversation or by letter he had stated that the second coming was immediately at hand. "It is this misleading assertion that accounts both for the increased discouragement of the faint-hearted to encourage whom Paul writes strkjv@1:3-2:17|, and for the increased meddlesomeness of the idle brethren to warn whom Paul writes strkjv@3:1-18|" (Frame). It is enough to give one pause to note Paul's indignation over this use of his name by one of the over-zealous advocates of the view that Christ was coming at once. It is true that Paul was still alive, but, if such a "pious fraud" was so common and easily condoned as some today argue, it is difficult to explain Paul's evident anger. Moreover, Paul's words should make us hesitate to affirm that Paul definitely proclaimed the early return of Jesus. He hoped for it undoubtedly, but he did not specifically proclaim it as so many today assert and accuse him of misleading the early Christians with a false presentation.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:15 @{Songs:then} (\ara oun\). Accordingly then. The illative \ara\ is supported (Ellicott) by the collective \oun\ as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:6; strkjv@Galatians:6:10|, etc. Here is the practical conclusion from God's elective purpose in such a world crisis. {Stand fast} (\stˆkete\). Present imperative active of the late present \stˆko\ from \hestˆka\ (perfect active of \histˆmi\). See on ¯1Thessalonians:3:8|. {Hold the traditions} (\krateite tas paradoseis\). Present imperative of \krate“\, old verb, to have masterful grip on a thing, either with genitive (Mark:1:31|) or usually the accusative as here. \Paradosis\ (tradition) is an old word for what is handed over to one. Dibelius thinks that Paul reveals his Jewish training in the use of this word (Galatians:1:14|), but the word is a perfectly legitimate one for teaching whether oral, {by word} (\dia logou\), or written, {by epistle of ours} (\di' epistolˆs hˆm“n\). Paul draws here no distinction between oral tradition and written tradition as was done later. The worth of the tradition lies not in the form but in the source and the quality of the content. Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:23| says: "I received from the Lord what I also handed over (\pared“ka\) unto you." He praises them because ye "hold fast the traditions even as I delivered them unto you." The {tradition} may be merely that of men and so worthless and harmful in place of the word of God (Mark:7:8; strkjv@Colossians:2:6-8|). It all depends. It is easy to scoff at truth as mere tradition. But human progress in all fields is made by use of the old, found to be true, in connection with the new if found to be true. In Thessalonica the saints were already the victims of theological charlatans with their half-baked theories about the second coming of Christ and about social duties and relations. {Which ye were taught} (\has edidachthˆte\). First aorist passive indicative of \didask“\, to teach, retaining the accusative of the thing in the passive as is common with this verb like _doce“_ in Latin and teach in English.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:1 @{Finally} (\to loipon\). Accusative of general reference. Cf. \loipon\ strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:1|. {Pray} (\proseuchesthe\). Present middle, keep on praying. Note \peri\ as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:25|. {That the word of the Lord may run and be glorified} (\hina ho logos tou kuriou trechˆi kai doxazˆtai\). Usual construction of \hina\ after \proseuchomai\, sub-final use, content and purpose combined. Note present subjunctive with both verbs rather than aorist, may keep on running and being glorified, two verbs joined together nowhere else in the N.T. Paul probably derived this metaphor from the stadium as in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:24ff.; strkjv@Galatians:2:2; strkjv@Romans:9:16; strkjv@Phillipians:2:16; strkjv@2Timothy:4:7|. Lightfoot translates "may have a triumphant career." On the word of the Lord see on ¯1Thessalonians:1:8|. Paul recognizes the close relation between himself and the readers. He needs their prayers and sympathy and he rejoices in their reception of the word of the Lord already, {even as also it is with you} (\kath“s kai pros humas\). "As it does in your case" (Frame).

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:11 @{For we hear} (\akouomen gar\). Fresh news from Thessalonica evidently. For the present tense compare strkjv@1Corinthians:11:18|. The accusative and the participle is a regular idiom for indirect discourse with this verb (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1040-2). Three picturesque present participles, the first a general description, \peripatountas atakt“s\, the other two specifying with a vivid word-play, {that work not at all, but are busy-bodies} (\mˆden ergazomenous alla periergazomenous\). Literally, {doing nothing but doing around}. Ellicott suggests, {doing no business but being busy bodies}. "The first persecution at Thessalonica had been fostered by a number of fanatical loungers (Acts:17:5|)" (Moffatt). These theological dead-beats were too pious to work, but perfectly willing to eat at the hands of their neighbours while they piddled and frittered away the time in idleness.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:14 @{And if any one obeyeth not our word by this epistle} (\ei de tis ouch hupakouei t“i log“i hˆm“n dia tˆs epistolˆs\). Paul sums up the issue bluntly with this ultimatum. Condition of the first class, with negative \ou\, assuming it to be true. {Note that man} (\touton sˆmeiousthe\). Late verb \sˆmeio“\, from \sˆmeion\, sign, mark, token. Put a tag on that man. Here only in N.T. "The verb is regularly used for the signature to a receipt or formal notice in the papyri and the ostraca of the Imperial period" (Moulton & Milligan's _Vocabulary_). How this is to be done (by letter or in public meeting) Paul does not say. {That ye have no company with him} (\mˆ sunanamignusthai aut“i\). The MSS. are divided between the present middle infinitive as above in a command like strkjv@Romans:12:15; strkjv@Phillipians:3:16| or the present middle imperative \sunanamignusthe\ (\-ai\ and \-e\ often being pronounced alike in the _Koin‚_). The infinitive can also be explained as an indirect command. This double compound verb is late, in LXX and Plutarch, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:5:9,11|. \Aut“i\ is in associative instrumental case. {To the end that he may be ashamed} (\hina entrapˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\. Second aorist passive subjunctive of \entrep“\, to turn on, middle to turn on oneself or to put to shame, passive to be made ashamed. The idea is to have one's thoughts turned in on oneself.

rwp@2Timothy:1:3 @{I thank} (\charin ech“\). "I have gratitude." As in strkjv@1Timothy:1:12|. Robinson cites examples of this phrase from the papyri. It occurs also in strkjv@Luke:17:9; strkjv@Acts:2:47|. \Charis\ in doxologies Paul uses (1Corinthians:15:57; strkjv@2:14; strkjv@8:16; strkjv@9:15; strkjv@Romans:6:17; strkjv@7:25|). His usual idiom is \eucharist“\ (1Corinthians:1:4; strkjv@Romans:1:8; strkjv@Philemon:1:4; strkjv@Phillipians:1:3|) or \eucharistoumen\ (1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@Colossians:1:3|) or \ou pauomai eucharist“n\ (Ephesians:1:16|) or \eucharistein opheilomen\ (2Thessalonians:1:3|). {Whom I serve from my forefathers} (\h“i latreu“ apo progon“n\). The relative \h“i\ is the dative case with \latreu“\ (see strkjv@Romans:1:9| for this verb), progressive present (I have been serving). For \progon“n\ (forefathers) see strkjv@1Timothy:5:4|. Paul claims a pious ancestry as in strkjv@Acts:24:14; strkjv@Acts:26:5; strkjv@Galatians:2:14; strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-7|. {In a pure conscience} (\en katharƒi suneidˆsei\). See strkjv@1Timothy:1:5; strkjv@Acts:23:1|. {Unceasing} (\adialeipton\). Late and rare compound, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:9:2| which see. The adverb \adialeipt“s\ is more frequent (in the papyri, literary _Koin‚_, strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@Romans:1:9|). The adjective here is the predicate accusative, "how I hold the memory concerning thee unceasing." The use of \adialeipt“s\ (adverb) is a sort of epistolary formula (papyri, strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@5:17; strkjv@Romans:1:9|). {Remembrance} (\mneian\). Old word, in N.T. only Pauline (seven times, strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@Romans:1:9; strkjv@Phillipians:1:3|).

rwp@2Timothy:1:13 @{The pattern of sound words} (\hupotup“sin hugiainont“n log“n\). See strkjv@1Timothy:1:16| for \hupotup“sin\ and strkjv@1Timothy:1:10| for \hugiain“\. {Which} (\h“n\). Genitive plural with \ˆkousas\ (didst hear) or attracted to case of \log“n\ (\akou“\ is used either with the accusative or the genitive).

rwp@2Timothy:2:4 @{No soldier on service} (\oudeis strateuomenos\). "No one serving as a soldier." See strkjv@1Corinthians:9:7| for this old verb and strkjv@2Corinthians:10:3; strkjv@1Timothy:1:18| for the metaphorical use. {Entangleth himself} (\empleketai\). Old compound, to inweave (see strkjv@Matthew:27:29| for \plek“\), in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Peter:2:20|. Present middle (direct) indicative. {In the affairs} (\tais pragmateiais\). Old word (from \pragmateuomai\, strkjv@Luke:19:13|), business, occupation, only here in N.T. {Of this life} (\tou biou\). No "this" in the Greek, "of life" (course of life as in strkjv@1Timothy:2:2|, not existence \z“ˆ\). {Him who enrolled him as a soldier} (\t“i stratologˆsanti\). Dative case after \aresˆi\ (first aorist active subjunctive of \aresk“\, to please, strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:4|, purpose clause with \hina\) of the articular first aorist active participle of \stratologe“\, literary _Koin‚_ word (\stratologos\, from \stratos\ and \leg“\), only here in N.T.

rwp@2Timothy:2:11 @{Faithful is the saying} (\pistos ho logos\). The saying which follows here though it can refer to the preceding as in strkjv@1Timothy:4:9|. See strkjv@1Timothy:1:15|. It is possible that from here to the end of 13| we have the fragment of an early hymn. There are four conditions in these verses (11-13|), all of the first class, assumed to be true. Parallels to the ideas here expressed are found in strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:3; strkjv@Romans:6:3-8; strkjv@Colossians:3:1-4|. Note the compounds with \sun\ (\sunapethanomen\, {we died with}, from \sunapothnesko\ as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:3|; \sunzˆsomen\, {we shall live with}, from \sunza“\ as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:3|; \sumbasileusomen\, {we shall reign with}, from \sumbasileu“\ as in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:8|). For \hupomenomen\ (we endure) see strkjv@1Corinthians:13:7| and for \apistoumen\ (we are faithless) see strkjv@Romans:3:3|. The verb \arneomai\, to deny (\arnˆsometha\, we shall deny, \arnˆsetai\, he will deny, \arnˆsasthai\, deny, first aorist middle infinitive) is an old word, common in the Gospels in the sayings of Jesus (Matthew:10:33; strkjv@Luke:12:9|), used of Peter (Mark:14:70|), and is common in the Pastorals (1Timothy:5:8; strkjv@Titus:2:12; strkjv@2Timothy:3:5|). Here in verse 13| it has the notion of proving false to oneself, a thing that Christ "cannot" (\ou dunatai\) do.

rwp@2Timothy:2:14 @{That they strive not about words} (\mˆ logomachein\). Word apparently coined by Paul from \logomachia\ (1Timothy:6:4| which see), a back formation in that case. A mere war of words displeases Paul. (Titus:3:9|). {Useful} (\chrˆsimon\). Late and rare word from \chraomai\, here only in N.T. {To the subverting} (\epi katastrophˆi\). Old word (from \katastreph“\, to turn down or over), here only in N.T. (except strkjv@2Peter:2:6| in some MSS., not in Westcott and Hort)." Because of the overthrow" (result \epi\, not aim), useless for this reason. Such war of words merely upsets the hearers.

rwp@2Timothy:4:2 @{Preach the word} (\kˆruxon ton logon\). First aorist active imperative of \kˆruss“\. For "the word" used absolutely, see strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:6; strkjv@Galatians:6:6|. {Be instant in season, out of season} (\epistˆthi eukair“s akair“s\). Second aorist (ingressive) active imperative of \ephistˆmi\ (intransitive use), "take a stand," "stand upon it or up to it," "carry on," "stick to it." The Vulgate has "_insta_." The two adverbs are like a proverb or a play (pun) on the word \kairos\. There are all sorts of seasons (\kairoi\), some difficult (\chalepoi\, strkjv@3:1|), some easy (\eukairˆi\, strkjv@1Corinthians:16:12|). {Reprove} (\elegxon\). First aorist active imperative of \elegch“\. "Bring to proof." strkjv@Ephesians:5:11|. {Rebuke} (\epitimˆson\). First aorist active imperative of \epitima“\, to give honour (or blame) to, to chide. Common in the Gospels (Luke:17:3|). {Exhort} (\parakaleson\). First aorist active imperative of \parakale“\, common Pauline word.

rwp@2Timothy:4:16 @{At my first defence} (\en tˆi pr“tˆi apologiƒi\). Original sense of "apology" as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:7,16|. Either the first stage in this trial or the previous trial and acquittal at the end of the first Roman imprisonment. Probably the first view is correct, though really there is no way to decide. {No one took my part} (\oudeis moi paregeneto\). "No one came by my side" (second aorist middle indicative of \paraginomai\). See strkjv@1Corinthians:16:3|. {But all forsook me} (\alla pantes me egkateleipon\). Same verb and tense used of Demas above (verse 10|), "But all were forsaking me" (one by one) or, if aorist \egkatelipon\, "all at once left me." {May it not be laid to their account} (\mˆ autois logistheiˆ\). First aorist passive optative in future wish with negative \mˆ\. Common Pauline verb \logizomai\ (1Corinthians:13:5; strkjv@Romans:4:3,5|).

rwp@2Timothy:4:18 @{Will deliver me} (\rusetai me\). Future middle. Recall the Lord's Prayer. Paul is not afraid of death. He will find his triumph in death (Phillipians:1:21f.|). {Unto his heavenly kingdom} (\eis tˆn basileian autou tˆn epouranion\). The future life of glory as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:24,50|. He will save (\s“sei\, effective future) me there finally and free from all evil. {To whom be the glory} (\h“i hˆ doxa\). No verb in the Greek. Paul's final doxology, his Swan Song, to Christ as in strkjv@Romans:9:5; strkjv@16:27|.

rwp@3John:1:10 @{If I come} (\ean elth“\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\. He hopes to come (verse 14|), as he had said in strkjv@2John:1:12| (one argument for identifying II John with the letter in strkjv@3John:1:9|). {I will bring to remembrance} (\hupomnˆs“\). Future active indicative of \hupomimnˆsk“\, old compound (John:14:26; strkjv@2Peter:1:12|). The aged apostle is not afraid of Diotrephes and here defies him. {Which he doeth} (\ha poiei\). Present active indicative, "which he keeps on doing." {Prating against us} (\phluar“n hˆmƒs\). Present active participle of old verb (from \phluaros\, babbling strkjv@1Timothy:5:13|), to accuse idly and so falsely, here only in N.T. with accusative \hˆmƒs\ (us). {With wicked words} (\logois ponˆrois\). Instrumental case. Not simply foolish chatter, but malevolent words. {Not content} (\mˆ arkoumenos\). Present passive participle of \arke“\ with usual negative \mˆ\. For this verb in this sense see strkjv@1Timothy:6:8; strkjv@Hebrews:13:5|, only there \epi\ is absent. John knows that the conduct of Diotrephes will not stand the light. See Paul's threats of exposure (1Corinthians:4:21; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:11; strkjv@13:1-3|). And John is the apostle of love all the same. {He himself} (\autos\). That was bad enough. {Them that would} (\tous boulomenous\). "Those willing or wishing or receive the brethren" from John. {He forbiddeth} (\k“luei\). "He hinders." Present active indicative of \k“lu“\ and means either actual success in one case (punctiliar use of the present indicative) or repetition in several instances (linear action) or conative action attempted, but not successful as in strkjv@Matthew:3:14| (this same verb) and strkjv@John:10:32|. {Casteth them out of the church} (\ek tˆs ekklˆsias ekballei\). Here again \ekballei\ can be understood in various ways, like \k“luei\. This verb occurs in strkjv@John:2:15| for casting out of the temple the profaners of it and for casting the blind man out of the synagogue (John:9:34f.|). If this ancient "church-boss" did not succeed in expelling John's adherents from the church, he certainly tried to do it.

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL ALSO The author of the Acts expressly states that he wrote "the first treatise (\ton pr“ton logon\) concerning all things, O Theophilus, that Jesus began both to do and to teach until which day he gave command through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen and was received up" (Acts:1:1f.|). There is no room for dispute that the reference is directly to the Gospel according to Luke as we have it now. Like the Gospel the book is dedicated to Theophilus. And, what is even more important, the same style appears in both Gospel and Acts. This fact Harnack has shown with great pains and conclusiveness. There is the same interest in medical matters and even Cadbury, who denies by implication the Lukan authorship, admits identity of authorship for both books.

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

rwp@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 PURPOSE OF THE ACTS It is not easy to say in a word precisely the object of Luke in writing this book. It is not the Acts of all the apostles. Outside of Peter and John little is told of any of them after chapter 3. And all the acts of Peter and John are not given for Peter disappears from the narrative after chapter 15, though he has been the central figure through chapter 11. Paul is not one of the twelve apostles, but Luke follows Paul's career mainly after chapter 8. Stephen and Barnabas come in also. Still (_St. Paul on Trial_, 1923) argues that Luke meant the book as an apology to be used in Paul's trial at Rome or at any rate to put Paul in the right light with the Jews in Rome. Hence the full account of Paul's series of defences in Jerusalem, Caesarea, Rome. There may be an element of truth in this idea, but it clearly does not cover the whole purpose of Luke. Others hold that Luke had a dramatic plan to get Paul to Rome as the climax of his campaign to win the Roman Empire to Christ. The book is not a history of all early Christianity. Peter and Paul dominate the atmosphere of the book with Paul as the great hero of Luke. But one can easily see that the work is done with consummate skill. The author is a man of culture, of Christian grace, of literary power. The book pulses with life today.

rwp@Acts:1:1 @{The former treatise} (\ton men pr“ton\). Literally, the first treatise. The use of the superlative is common enough and by no means implies, though it allows, a third volume. This use of \pr“tos\ where only two are compared is seen between the Baptist and Jesus (John:1:15|), John and Peter (John:20:4|). The idiom is common in the papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 662, 669). The use of \men solitarium\ here, as Hackett notes, is common in Acts. It is by no means true that \men\ requires a following \de\ by contrast. The word is merely a weakened form of \mˆn\=surely, indeed. The reference is to the "first treatise" and merely emphasizes that. The use of \logos\ (word) for treatise or historical narrative is common in ancient Greek as in Herodotus 6 and 9. Plato (_Phaedo_, p. 61 B) makes a contrast between \muthos\ and \logos\. {I made} (\epoiˆsamˆn\). Aorist middle indicative, the middle being the usual construction for mental acts with \poie“\. {O Theophilus} (\O Theophile\). The interjection \O\ here as is common, though not in strkjv@Luke:1:3|. But the adjective \kratiste\ (most excellent) is wanting here. See remarks on Theophilus on ¯Luke:1:3|. Hackett thinks that he lived at Rome because of the way Acts ends. He was a man of rank. He may have defrayed the expense of publishing both Luke and Acts. Perhaps by this time Luke may have reached a less ceremonious acquaintance with Theophilus. {Which Jesus began} (\h“n ˆrxato Iˆsous\). The relative is attracted from the accusative \ha\ to the genitive \h“n\ because of the antecedent \pant“n\ (all). The language of Luke here is not merely pleonastic as Winer held. Jesus "began" "both to do and to teach" (\poiein te kai didaskein\). Note present infinitives, linear action, still going on, and the use of \te--kai\ binds together the life and teachings of Jesus, as if to say that Jesus is still carrying on from heaven the work and teaching of the disciples which he started while on earth before his ascension. The record which Luke now records is really the Acts of Jesus as much as the Acts of the Apostles. Dr. A. T. Pierson called it "The Acts of the Holy Spirit," and that is true also. The Acts, according to Luke, is a continuation of the doings and teachings of Jesus. "The following writings appear intended to give us, and do, in fact, profess to give us, that which Jesus _continued_ to do and teach after the day in which he was taken up" (Bernard, _Progress of Doctrine in the N.T._).

rwp@Acts:1:16 @{Brethren} (\andres adelphoi\). Literally, men, brethren or brother men. More dignified and respectful than just "brethren." Demosthenes sometimes said \Andres Athˆnaioi\. Cf. our "gentlemen and fellow-citizens." Women are included in this address though \andres\ refers only to men. {It was needful} (\edei\). Imperfect tense of the impersonal \dei\ with the infinitive clause (first aorist passive) and the accusative of general reference as a loose subject. Peter here assumes that Jesus is the Messiah and finds scripture illustrative of the treachery of Judas. He applies it to Judas and quotes the two passages in verse 20| (Psalms:69:25; strkjv@109:8|). The Holy Spirit has not yet come upon them, but Peter feels moved to interpret the situation. He feels that his mind is opened by Jesus (Luke:24:45|). It is a logical, not a moral, necessity that Peter points out. Peter here claims the Holy Spirit as speaking in the scriptures as he does in strkjv@2Peter:1:21|. His description of Judas as "guide" (\hodˆgou\) to those who seized (\sullabousin\) Jesus is that of the base traitor that he was. This very verb occurs in strkjv@Luke:22:54| of the arrest of Jesus.

rwp@Acts:2:1 @{Was now come} (\en t“i sunplˆrousthai\). Luke's favourite idiom of \en\ with the articular present infinitive passive and the accusative of general reference, "in the being fulfilled completely (perfective use of \sun-\) as to the day of Pentecost." Common verb, but only in Luke in N.T. In literal sense of filling a boat in strkjv@Luke:8:23|, about days in strkjv@Luke:9:51| as here. Whether the disciples expected the coming of the Holy Spirit on this day we do not know. Blass holds that the present tense shows that the day had not yet come. It is a Hebrew idiom (Exodus:7:25|) and Luke may mean that the day of Pentecost was not yet over, was still going on, though Hackett takes it for the interval (fifty days) between Passover and Pentecost. Apparently this day of Pentecost fell on the Jewish Sabbath (our Saturday). It was the feast of first fruits. {All together in one place} (\pantes homou epi to auto\). All together in the same place. Note \homou\ here (correct text), not \homothumadon\ as in strkjv@1:14|, and so a bit of tautology.

rwp@Acts:2:16 @{This is that which hath been spoken by the prophet Joel} (\touto estin to eirˆmenon dia tou prophˆtou I“ˆl\). Positive interpretation of the supernatural phenomena in the light of the Messianic prophecy of strkjv@Joel:2:28-32|. Peter's mind is now opened by the Holy Spirit to understand the Messianic prophecy and the fulfilment right before their eyes. Peter now has spiritual insight and moral courage. The {power} (\dunamis\) of the Holy Spirit has come upon him as he proceeds to give the first interpretation of the life and work of Jesus Christ since his Ascension. It is also the first formal apology for Christianity to a public audience. Peter rises to the height of his powers in this remarkable sermon. Jesus had foretold that he would be a Rock and now he is no longer shale, but a solid force for aggressive Christianity. He follows here in verses 17-21| closely the LXX text of Joel and then applies the passage to the present emergency (22-24|).

rwp@Acts:2:20 @{Shall be turned} (\metastraphˆsetai\). Second future passive of \metastreph“\, common verb, but only three times in the N.T. (Acts:2:20| from Joel; strkjv@James:4:9; strkjv@Galatians:1:7|). These are the "wonders" or portents of verse 19|. It is worth noting that Peter interprets these "portents" as fulfilled on the Day of Pentecost, though no such change of the sun into darkness or of the moon into blood is recorded. Clearly Peter does not interpret the symbolism of Joel in literal terms. This method of Peter may be of some service in the Book of Revelation where so many apocalyptic symbols occur as well as in the great Eschatological Discourse of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:24,25|. In strkjv@Matthew:24:6,29| Jesus had spoken of wars on earth and wonders in heaven. {Before the day of the Lord come, that great and notable day} (\prin elthein hˆmeran kuriou tˆn megalˆn kai epiphanˆ\). The use of \prin\ with the infinitive and the accusative of general reference is a regular Greek idiom. The use of the adjectives with the article is also good Greek, though the article is not here repeated as in strkjv@1:25|. The Day of the Lord is a definite conception without the article. {Notable} (\epiphanˆ\) is the same root as epiphany (\epiphaneia\) used of the Second Coming of Christ (2Thessalonians:2:8; strkjv@1Timothy:6:14; strkjv@2Timothy:4:1; strkjv@Titus:2:13|). It translates here the Hebrew word for "terrible." In the Epistles the Day of the Lord is applied (Knowling) to the Coming of Christ for judgment (1Thessalonians:5:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:14; strkjv@Phillipians:1:10|).

rwp@Acts:2:22 @{Hear these words} (\akousate tous logous toutous\). Do it now (aorist tense). With unerring aim Peter has found the solution for the phenomena. He has found the key to God's work on this day in his words through Joel. {as ye yourselves know} (\kath“s autoi oidate\). Note \autoi\ for emphasis. Peter calls the audience to witness that his statements are true concerning "Jesus the Nazarene." He wrought his miracles by the power of God in the midst of these very people here present.

rwp@Acts:2:38 @{Repent ye} (\metanoˆsate\). First aorist (ingressive) active imperative. Change your mind and your life. Turn right about and do it now. You _crucified_ this Jesus. Now _crown_ him in your hearts as Lord and Christ. This first. {And be baptized every one of you} (\kai baptisthˆt“ hekastos h–m“n\). Rather, "And let each one of you be baptized." Change of number from plural to singular and of person from second to third. This change marks a break in the thought here that the English translation does not preserve. The first thing to do is make a radical and complete change of heart and life. Then let each one be baptized after this change has taken place, and the act of baptism be performed "in the name of Jesus Christ" (\en t“i onomati Iˆsou Christou\). In accordance with the command of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| (\eis to onoma\). No distinction is to be insisted on between \eis to onoma\ and \en t“i onomati\ with \baptiz“\ since \eis\ and \en\ are really the same word in origin. In strkjv@Acts:10:48| \en t“i onomati Iˆsou Christou\ occurs, but \eis\ to \onoma\ in strkjv@8:16; strkjv@19:5|. The use of \onoma\ means in the name or with the authority of one as \eis onoma prophˆtou\ (Matthew:10:41|) as a prophet, in the name of a prophet. In the Acts the full name of the Trinity does not occur in baptism as in strkjv@Matthew:28:19|, but this does not show that it was not used. The name of Jesus Christ is the distinctive one in Christian baptism and really involves the Father and the Spirit. See on ¯Matthew:28:19| for discussion of this point. "Luke does not give the form of words used in baptism by the Apostles, but merely states the fact that they baptized those who acknowledged Jesus as Messiah or as Lord" (Page). {Unto the remission of your sins} (\eis aphesin t“n hamarti“n h–m“n\). This phrase is the subject of endless controversy as men look at it from the standpoint of sacramental or of evangelical theology. In themselves the words can express aim or purpose for that use of \eis\ does exist as in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7| \eis doxan hˆm“n\ (for our glory). But then another usage exists which is just as good Greek as the use of \eis\ for aim or purpose. It is seen in strkjv@Matthew:10:41| in three examples \eis onoma prophˆtou, dikaiou, mathˆtou\ where it cannot be purpose or aim, but rather the basis or ground, on the basis of the name of prophet, righteous man, disciple, because one is, etc. It is seen again in strkjv@Matthew:12:41| about the preaching of Jonah (\eis to kˆrugma I“na\). They repented because of (or at) the preaching of Jonah. The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the _Koin‚_ generally (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 592). One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. Songs:I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received. {The gift of the Holy Ghost} (\tˆn d“rean tou hagiou pneumatos\). The gift consists (Acts:8:17|) in the Holy Spirit (genitive of identification).

rwp@Acts:2:40 @{With many other words} (\heterois logois pleiosin\). Instrumental case. Not necessarily "different" (\heterois\), but "further," showing that Luke does not pretend to give all that Peter said. This idea is also brought out clearly by \pleiosin\ ("more," not "many"), more than these given by Luke. {He testified} (\diemarturato\). First aorist middle of \diamarturomai\, old verb, to make solemn attestation or call to witness (perfective use of \dia\), while \marture“\ is to bear witness. Page insists that here it should be translated "protested solemnly" to the Jews as it seems to mean in strkjv@Luke:16:28; strkjv@Acts:20:23; strkjv@1Timothy:5:21; strkjv@2Timothy:2:14; strkjv@4:1|. {And exhorted} (\kai parekalei\). Imperfect active, kept on exhorting. {Save yourselves} (\s“thˆte\). First aorist passive of \s“z“\. Literally, Be ye saved. {Crooked} (\skolias\). Old word, opposite of \orthos\, straight. _Pravus_ the opposite of _rectus_, a perversity for turning off from the truth. Cf. strkjv@Luke:9:41; strkjv@Phillipians:2:15|.

rwp@Acts:3:26 @{Unto you first} (\Humin pr“ton\). The Jews were first in privilege and it was through the Jews that the Messiah was to come for "all the families of the earth." {His servant} (\ton paida autou\). As in verse 13|, the Messiah as God's Servant. {To bless you} (\eulogounta humas\). Present active participle to express purpose, blessing you (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 991). In turning away (\en t“i apostrephein\). Articular infinitive in the locative case, almost preserved in the English.

rwp@Acts:4:29 @{And now} (\kai ta nun\). "And as to (accusative of general reference) the now things (the present situation)." Only in the Acts in the N.T. (5:38; strkjv@17:30; strkjv@20:32; strkjv@27:22|). {Grant} (\dos\). Second aorist active imperative of \did“mi\, urgency of the aorist, Do it now. {To speak thy word with all boldness} (\meta parrˆsias pasˆs lalein ton logon sou\). Literally, "with all boldness to go on speaking (present active infinitive) thy word." Peter and John had defied the Sanhedrin in verse 20|, but all the same and all the more they pray for courage in deed to live up to their brave words. A wholesome lesson.

rwp@Acts:5:11 @{Upon the whole church} (\eph' holˆn tˆn ekklˆsian\). Here \ekklˆsia\ for the first time in Acts of the believers in Jerusalem. Twice already in the Gospels, once of the whole body of believers or the Kingdom (Matthew:16:18|), the other of the local body (Matthew:18:17|). In strkjv@Acts:7:38| it is used of the whole congregation of Israel while in strkjv@19:32| it is used of a public assembly in Ephesus. But already in strkjv@Acts:8:3| it is applied to the church which Saul was persecuting in their homes when not assembled. Songs:here the etymological meaning of "assembly" disappears for "the church" were now the scattered saints hiding in their separate homes. The whole body of believers in Jerusalem and all who heard of the fate of Ananias and Sapphira (beautiful, her name means) were in awe and dread. It was already a dangerous thing to be a follower of Christ unless one was willing to walk straight.

rwp@Acts:5:34 @{Gamaliel} (\Gamaliˆl\). The grandson of Hillel, teacher of Paul (Acts:22:3|), later president of the Sanhedrin, and the first of the seven rabbis termed "Rabban." It is held by some that he was one of the doctors who heard the Boy Jesus in the temple (Luke:2:47|) and that he was a secret disciple like Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, but there is no evidence of either position. Besides, he appears here as a loyal Pharisee and "a doctor of the law" (\nomodidaskalos\). This word appears already in strkjv@Luke:5:17| of the Pharisaic doctors bent on criticizing Jesus, which see. Paul uses it of Judaizing Christians (1Timothy:1:7|). Like other great rabbis he had a great saying: "Procure thyself a teacher, avoid being in doubt; and do not accustom thyself to give tithes by guess." He was a man of judicial temper and not prone to go off at a tangent, though his brilliant young pupil Saul went to the limit about Stephen without any restraint on the part of Gamaliel so far as the record goes. Gamaliel champions the cause of the apostles as a Pharisee to score a point against the Sadducees. He acts as a theological opportunist, not as a disciple of Christ. He felt that a temporizing policy was best. There are difficulties in this speech of Gamaliel and it is not clear how Luke obtained the data for the address. It is, of course, possible that Saul was present and made notes of it for Luke afterwards. {Had in honour of all the people} (\timios panti t“i la“i\). Ethical dative. \Timios\ from \timˆ\, old word meaning precious, dear. {The men} (\tous anthr“pous\). Correct text as in verse 35|, not "the apostles" as Textus Receptus.

rwp@Acts:6:4 @{But we} (\hemeis de\). In contrast to the work given the seven. {The ministry of the word} (\tˆi diakoniƒi tou logou\). The same word \diakoniƒi\ employed in verse 1|, but here about preaching as the special ministry with which the apostles were concerned. For "continue steadfastly" (\proskarterˆsomen\) see on ¯2:42|.

rwp@Acts:7:22 @{Was instructed} (\epaideuthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \paideu“\, to train a child (\pais\), the usual idea in ancient Greek as here. The notion of chastisement (Hebrews:12:6|) is also in the old Greek and especially in the LXX and the N.T. Here with instrumental case (\pasˆi sophiƒi\) or the locative. The accusative would usually be retained after this verb. The priestly caste in Egypt was noted for their knowledge of science, astronomy, medicine, and mathematics. This reputation was proverbial (1Kings:4:30|). Modern discoveries have thrown much light on the ancient civilization of Egypt. Moses, like Paul, was a man of the schools. {Mighty in his words and works} (\dunatos en logois kai ergois autou\). The same phrase used of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:24:19|. The adjective \dunatos\ is employed of Apollos as an interpreter of the Scriptures (Acts:18:24|). Moses did not have the rhetorical skill or eloquence of Aaron (Exodus:4:10|), but his words like his deeds carried weight and power.

rwp@Acts:7:30 @Sentence begins with genitive absolute again. {In a flame of fire in a bush} (\en phlogi puros batou\). Horeb in strkjv@Exodus:3:1|; but Sinai and Horeb were "probably peaks of one mountain range" (Page), Horeb "the mountain of the dried-up ground," Sinai "the mountain of the thorns." Literally, "in the flame of fire of a bush" (two genitives, \puros\ and \batou\ dependent on \phlogi\, flame). Descriptive genitives as in strkjv@9:15; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:8|. \Batos\ (bush) is the wild acacia (_mimosa nilotica_). In strkjv@Exodus:3:20| it is Jehovah who speaks. Hence "angel" here with Stephen is understood to be the Angel of the Presence, the Eternal Logos of the Father, the Angel of Jehovah.

rwp@Acts:7:38 @{In the church in the wilderness} (\en tˆi ekklˆsiƒi en tˆi erˆm“i\). Better rendered "congregation" here as in strkjv@Hebrews:2:12| (Psalms:22:22|), the people of Israel gathered at Mt. Sinai, the whole nation. Moses is here represented as receiving the law from an angel as in strkjv@Hebrews:2:2; strkjv@Galatians:3:19| (Deuteronomy:33:2|, LXX) and so was a mediator (\mesitˆs\) or middle man between the angel and the people whereas Jesus is the Mediator of a better covenant (Hebrews:8:6|). But Exodus does not speak of an angel. {Living oracles} (\logia z“nta\). A \logion\ is a little word (diminutive of \logos\). Common in the old Greek, LXX, Philo, in ecclesiastical writers for sayings of Christ, Papias (for instance) saying that Matthew wrote in Hebrew (Aramaic) "Logia of Jesus." Oxyrhynchus papyri fragments called "Logia of Jesus" are of much interest though only fragments. The Greeks used it of the "oracles" or brief sayings from Delphi. In the N.T. the word occurs only four times (Acts:7:38; strkjv@Romans:3:2; strkjv@Hebrews:5:12; strkjv@1Peter:4:11|). Here the participle \z“nta\, living, is the same used by Peter (1Peter:2:4f|.), stone (\lithos\) of Christ and Christians. The words from God to Moses are still "living" today. In strkjv@1Peter:4:11| the word is applied to one who speaks \logia theou\ (oracles of God). In strkjv@Romans:3:2| Paul refers to the substance of the law and of prophecy. In strkjv@Hebrews:5:12| the writer means the substance of the Christian religious teaching.

rwp@Acts:8:3 @{Laid waste} (\elumaineto\). Imperfect middle of \lumainomai\, old verb (from \lumˆ\, injury), to dishonour, defile, devastate, ruin. Only here in the N.T. Like the laying waste of a vineyard by a wild boar (Psalms:79:13|). Picturesque description of the havoc carried on by Saul now the leader in the persecution. He is victor over Stephen now who had probably worsted him in debate in the Cilician synagogue in Jerusalem. {Into every house} (\kata tous oikous\). But Luke terms it "the church" (\tˆn ekklˆsian\). Plainly not just an "assembly," but an organized body that was still "the church" when scattered in their own homes, "an unassembled assembly" according to the etymology. Words do not remain by the etymology, but travel on with usage. {Haling} (\sur“n\). Literally, dragging forcibly (=hauling). Present active participle of \sur“\, old verb. {Men and women} (\andras kai gunaikas\). A new feature of the persecution that includes the women. They met it bravely as through all the ages since (cf. strkjv@9:2; strkjv@22:4|). This fact will be a bitter memory for Paul always. {Committed} (\paredidou\). Imperfect active of \paradid“mi\, old verb, kept on handing them over to prison.

rwp@Acts:8:4 @{They therefore} (\hoi men oun\). Demonstrative \hoi\ as often (1:6|, etc.) though it will make sense as the article with the participle \diasparentes\. The general statement is made here by \men\ and a particular instance (\de\) follows in verse 5|. The inferential particle (\oun\) points back to verse 3|, the persecution by young Saul and the Pharisees. Jesus had commanded the disciples not to depart from Jerusalem till they received the Promise of the Father (1:4|), but they had remained long after that and were not carrying the gospel to the other peoples (1:8|). Now they were pushed out by Saul and began as a result to carry out the Great Commission for world conquest, that is those "scattered abroad" (\diasparentes\, second aorist passive participle of \diaspeir“\). This verb means disperse, to sow in separate or scattered places (\dia\) and so to drive people hither and thither. Old and very common verb, especially in the LXX, but in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:8:1,4; strkjv@11:19|. {Went about} (\diˆlthon\). Constative second aorist active of \dierchomai\, to go through (from place to place, \dia\). Old and common verb, frequent for missionary journeys in the Acts (5:40; strkjv@8:40; strkjv@9:32; strkjv@11:19; strkjv@13:6|). {Preaching the word} (\euaggelizomenoi ton logon\). Evangelizing or gospelizing the word (the truth about Christ). In strkjv@11:19| Luke explains more fully the extent of the labours of these new preachers of the gospel. They were emergency preachers, not ordained clergymen, but men stirred to activity by the zeal of Saul against them. The blood of the martyrs (Stephen) was already becoming the seed of the church. "The violent dispersion of these earnest disciples resulted in a rapid diffusion of the gospel" (Alvah Hovey).

rwp@Acts:8:21 @{Lot} (\klˆros\). Same idea as "part" (\meris\), only as a figure. {Matter} (\logoi\). Literally, word or subject (as in strkjv@Luke:1:4; strkjv@Acts:15:6|), the power of communicating the Holy Spirit. This use of \logos\ is in the ancient Greek. {Straight} (\eutheia\). Quotation from strkjv@Psalms:78:37|. Originally a mathematically straight line as in strkjv@Acts:9:11|, then moral rectitude as here.

rwp@Acts:9:15 @{A chosen vessel} (\skeuos eklogˆs\). A vessel of choice or selection. The genitive of quality is common in the Hebrew, as in the vernacular _Koin‚_. Jesus chose Saul before Saul chose Jesus. He felt of himself that he was an earthen vessel (2Corinthians:4:7|) unworthy of so great a treasure. It was a great message that Ananias had to bear to Saul. He told it in his own way (9:17; strkjv@22:14f.|) and in strkjv@26:16f.| Paul blends the message of Jesus to Ananias with that to him as one. {Before the Gentiles} (\en“pion t“n ethn“n\). This was the chief element in the call of Saul. He was to be an apostle to the Gentiles (Ephesians:3:6-12|).

rwp@Acts:10:29 @{Without gainsaying} (\anantirrhˆt“s\). \A\ privative with compound adverb from \anti\ (back, in return, against) and verbal \rhˆtos\ (from \errhˆthˆn\, to speak). Late and rare and here only in the N.T., but the adjective in strkjv@19:36|. Without answering back. That is true after the Holy Spirit expressly told Peter to go with the messengers of Cornelius (10:19-23|). Peter's objections were made to the Lord in the vision which he did not understand. But that vision prepared him for this great step which he had now taken. He had stepped over the line of Jewish custom. {With what intent} (\tini log“i\). More exactly, "for what reason" as in Plato, _Gorgias_ 512 C.

rwp@Acts:10:36 @{The word which he sent} (\ton logon hon apesteilen\). Many ancient MSS. (so Westcott and Hort) read merely \ton logon apesteilen\ (he sent the word). This reading avoids the anacoluthon and inverse attraction of \logon\ to the case of the relative \hon\ (which). {Preaching good tidings of peace through Jesus Christ} (\euaggelizomenos eirˆnˆn dia Iˆsou Christou\). Gospelizing peace through Jesus Christ. There is no other way to have real peace between individuals and God, between races and nations, than by Jesus Christ. Almost this very language occurs in strkjv@Ephesians:2:17| where Paul states that Jesus on the cross "preached (gospelized) peace to you who are afar off and peace to you who are near." Peter here sees what Paul will see later with great clearness. {He is Lord of all} (\houtos estin pant“n kurios\). A triumphant parenthesis that Peter throws in as the reason for his new truth. Jesus Christ is Lord of all, both Jews and Gentiles.

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

rwp@Acts:10:48 @{Commanded} (\prosetaxen\). First aorist active indicative. Peter himself abstained from baptizing on this occasion (cf. Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:14|). Evidently it was done by the six Jewish brethren. {Them to be baptized} (\autous baptisthˆnai\). Accusative of general reference with the first aorist passive infinitive. {In the name of Jesus Christ} (\en t“i onomati Iˆsou Christou\). The essential name in Christian baptism as in strkjv@2:38; strkjv@19:5|. But these passages give the authority for the act, not the formula that was employed (Alvah Hovey in Hackett's _Commentary_. See also chapter on the Baptismal Formula in my _The Christ of the Logia_). "Golden days" (\aurei dies\, Bengel) were these for the whole group.

rwp@Acts:12:18 @{As soon as it was day} (\Genomenˆs hˆmeras\). Genitive absolute, day having come. {No small stir} (\tarachos ouk oligos\). Litotes (\ouk oligos\), occurs eight times in the Acts as in strkjv@15:2|, and nowhere else in the N.T. \Tarachos\ (stir) is an old word from \tarass“\, to agitate. In the N.T only here and strkjv@19:23|. Probably all sixteen soldiers were agitated over this remarkable escape. They were responsible for the prisoner with their lives (cf. strkjv@Acts:16:27; strkjv@27:42|). Furneaux suggests that Manaen, the king's foster-brother and a Christian (13:1|), was the "angel" who rescued Peter from the prison. That is not the way that Peter looked at it. {What was become of Peter} (\ti ara ho Petros egeneto\). An indirect question with the aorist indicative retained. \Ara\ adds a syllogism (therefore) to the problem as in strkjv@Luke:1:66|. The use of the neuter \ti\ (as in strkjv@Acts:13:25|) is different from \tis\, though nominative like \Petros\, literally, "what then Peter had become," "what had happened to Peter" (in one idiom). See the same idiom in strkjv@John:21:21| (\houtos de ti\). {But this one what} (verb \genˆsetai\ not used).

rwp@Acts:13:15 @{After the reading of the law and the prophets} (\meta tˆn anagn“sin tou nomou kai t“n prophˆt“n\). The law was first read in the synagogues till B.C. 163 when Antiochus Epiphones prohibited it. Then the reading of the prophets was substituted for it. The Maccabees restored both. There was a reading from the law and one from the prophets in Hebrew which was interpreted into the Aramaic or the Greek _Koin‚_ for the people. The reading was followed by the sermon as when Jesus was invited to read and to preach in Nazareth (Luke:4:16f.|). For the service in the synagogue see Schuerer, _History of the Jewish People_, Div. II, Vol. II, pp. 79ff. It was the duty of the rulers of the synagogue (\archisunag“goi\) to select the readers and the speakers for the service (Mark:5:22,35-38; strkjv@Luke:8:49; strkjv@13:14; strkjv@Acts:13:15; strkjv@18:8,17|). Any rabbi or distinguished stranger could be called on to speak. {If ye have any word of exhortation for the people} (\ei tis estin en humin logos paraklˆse“s pros ton laon\). Literally, if there is among you any word of exhortation for the people. It is a condition of the first class and assumed to be true, a polite invitation. On "exhortation" (\paraklˆsis\) see strkjv@9:31|. It may be a technical phrase used in the synagogue (Hebrews:13:22; strkjv@1Timothy:4:13|).

rwp@Acts:13:16 @{Paul stood up} (\anastas Paulos\). The Jewish custom was to sit while speaking (Luke:4:20|), but the Greek and Roman was to stand (Acts:17:22|). It is possible as Lewin (_Life of St. Paul_, Vol. 1, p. 141) suggests that here Paul stepped upon the platform and then took his seat as he began to speak or he may have followed the Greek and Roman custom. Paul is the leader now and the more gifted speaker (Acts:14:12|), so that he responds to the courteous invitation of the rulers. {Beckoning} (\kataseisas\). First aorist active participle of \katasei“\, old verb to shake down, a dramatic gesture for quiet and order like Peter in strkjv@12:17| and Paul on the steps of the tower of Antonia (21:40|). {And ye that fear God} (\kai hoi phoboumenoi ton theon\). Evidently large numbers of these Gentiles like Cornelius in Caesarea were present. They offered Paul a great opportunity for reaching the purely pagan Gentiles. This (verses 16-41|) is the first full report of a sermon of Paul's that Luke has preserved for us. He is now a practised preacher of the gospel that he began proclaiming at Damascus, that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah of promise and the Saviour of the whole world both Jew and Gentile if they will only believe on him and be saved. It is possible that Paul here based his sermon on the passages of the law and the prophets that had just been read. He uses two words from the LXX, one in verse 19| from strkjv@Deuteronomy:1:31| \etrophophorˆsen\ (as a nursing-father bare he them), the reading of many old MSS. and the one preferred by the American Committee, the other in verse 17| from strkjv@Isaiah:1:2| \hups“sen\ (exalted). At any rate it is clear that Paul spoke in Greek so that all could understand his sermon. He may have written out notes of this sermon afterwards for Luke. The keynotes of Paul's theology as found in his Epistles appear in this sermon. It is interesting to observe the steady growth of Paul's Christology as he faced the great problems of his day. Here we see Paul's gospel for the Jews and the God-fearers (Gentiles friendly to the Jews).

rwp@Acts:13:26 @{To us} (\hˆmin\). Both Jews and Gentiles, both classes in Paul's audience, dative of advantage. {Is sent forth} (\exapestalˆ\). Second aorist passive indicative of the double compound verb \exapostell“\, common verb to send out (\ex\) and forth (\apo\). It is a climacteric or culminative aorist tense. It has come to us in one day, this glorious promise. {The word of this salvation} (\ho logos tˆs s“tˆrias tautˆs\). The message of Jesus as Saviour (verse 23|), long ago promised and now come to us as Saviour.

rwp@Acts:13:39 @{And by him every one that believeth is justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses} (\kai apo pant“n h“n ouk ˆdunˆthˆte en nom“i M“use“s dikaiothˆnai en tout“i pƒs ho pisteu“n dikaioutai\). This is a characteristic Greek sentence with the principal clause at the end and Pauline to the core. A literal rendering as to the order would be: "And from all the things from (\apo\ not repeated in the Greek, but understood, the ablative case being repeated) which ye were not able to be justified in this one every one who believes is justified." The climax is at the close and gives us the heart of Paul's teaching about Christ. "We have here the germ of all that is most characteristic in Paul's later teaching. It is the argument of the Epistle to Galatians and Romans in a sentence" (Furneaux). The failure of the Mosaic law to bring the kind of righteousness that God demands is stated. This is made possible in and by (\en\) Christ alone. Paul's favourite words occur here, \pisteu“\, believe, with which \pistis\, faith, is allied, \dikaio“\, to set right with God on the basis of faith. In strkjv@Romans:6:7| Paul uses \apo\ also after \dikaio“\. These are key words (\pisteu“\ and \dikaio“\) in Paul's theology and call for prolonged and careful study if one is to grasp the Pauline teaching. \Dikaio“\ primarily means to make righteous, to declare righteous like \axio“\, to deem worthy (\axios\). But in the end Paul holds that real righteousness will come (Romans:6-8|) to those whom God treats as righteous (Romans:3-5|) though both Gentile and Jew fall short without Christ (Romans:1-3|). This is the doctrine of grace that will prove a stumbling block to the Jews with their ceremonial works and foolishness to the Greeks with their abstract philosophical ethics (1Corinthians:1:23-25|). It is a new and strange doctrine to the people of Antioch.

rwp@Acts:13:48 @{As the Gentiles heard this they were glad} (\akouonta ta ethnˆ echairon\). Present active participle of \akou“\ and imperfect active of \chair“\, linear action descriptive of the joy of the Gentiles. {Glorified the word of God} (\edoxazon ton logon tou theou\). Imperfect active again. The joy of the Gentiles increased the fury of the Jews. "The synagogue became a scene of excitement which must have been something like the original speaking with tongues" (Rackham). The joy of the Gentiles was to see how they could receive the higher blessing of Judaism without circumcision and other repellent features of Jewish ceremonialism. It was the gospel of grace and liberty from legalism that Paul had proclaimed. Whether strkjv@Galatians:4:13| describes this incident or not (the South Galatian theory), it illustrates it when Gentiles received Paul as if he were Christ Jesus himself. It was triumph with the Gentiles, but defeat with the Jews. {As many as were ordained to eternal life} (\hosoi ˆsan tetagmenoi eis z“ˆn ai“nion\). Periphrastic past perfect passive indicative of \tass“\, a military term to place in orderly arrangement. The word "ordain" is not the best translation here. "Appointed," as Hackett shows, is better. The Jews here had voluntarily rejected the word of God. On the other side were those Gentiles who gladly accepted what the Jews had rejected, not all the Gentiles. Why these Gentiles here ranged themselves on God's side as opposed to the Jews Luke does not tell us. This verse does not solve the vexed problem of divine sovereignty and human free agency. There is no evidence that Luke had in mind an _absolutum decretum_ of personal salvation. Paul had shown that God's plan extended to and included Gentiles. Certainly the Spirit of God does move upon the human heart to which some respond, as here, while others push him away. {Believed} (\episteusan\). Summary or constative first aorist active indicative of \pisteu“\. The subject of this verb is the relative clause. By no manner of legerdemain can it be made to mean "those who believe were appointed." It was saving faith that was exercised only by those who were appointed unto eternal life, who were ranged on the side of eternal life, who were thus revealed as the subjects of God's grace by the stand that they took on this day for the Lord. It was a great day for the kingdom of God.

rwp@Acts:14:11 @{Lifted up their voice} (\epˆran tˆn ph“nˆn aut“n\). First aorist active of \epair“\. In their excitement they elevated their voices. {In the speech of Lycaonia} (\Lukaonisti\). Adverb from verb \lukaoniz“\, to use the language of Lycaonia found here alone, but formed regularly like \Ebraisti\ (John:5:2|), \Hellˆnisti\ (Acts:21:37|), \R“maisti\ (John:19:20|). Paul was speaking in Greek, of course, but the excitement of the crowd over the miracle made them cry out in their native tongue which Paul and Barnabas did not understand. Hence it was not till preparations for offering sacrifice to them had begun that Paul understood the new role in which he and Barnabas were held. {In the likeness of men} (\homoi“thentes anthr“pois\). First aorist passive participle of \homoi“\, to liken, with the associative instrumental case. In this primitive state the people hold to the old Graeco-Roman mythology. The story of Baucis and Philemon tells how Jupiter (Zeus) and Mercury (Hermes) visited in human form the neighbouring region of Phrygia (Ovid, _Meta_. VIII. 626). Jupiter (Zeus) had a temple in Lystra.

rwp@Acts:14:12 @{They called} (\ekaloun\). Inchoative imperfect began to call. {Barnabas, Jupiter} (\ton Barnaban Dia\). Because Barnabas was the older and the more imposing in appearance. Paul admits that he was not impressive in looks (2Corinthians:10:10|). {And Paul, Mercury} (\ton de Paulon Hermˆn\). Mercury (\Hermˆs\) was the messenger of the gods, and the spokesman of Zeus. \Hermˆs\ was of beautiful appearance and eloquent in speech, the inventor of speech in legend. Our word hermeneutics or science of interpretation comes from this word (Hebrews:7:2; strkjv@John:1:38|). {Because he was the chief speaker} (\epeidˆ autos ˆn ho hˆgoumenos tou logou\). Paul was clearly "the leader of the talk." Songs:it seemed a clear case to the natives. If preachers always knew what people really think of them! Whether Paul was alluding to his experience in Lystra or not in strkjv@Galatians:4:14|, certainly they did receive him as an angel of God, as if "Mercury" in reality.

rwp@Acts:14:19 @{But there came thither Jews from Antioch and Iconium} (\Epˆlthan de apo Antiocheias kai Ikoniou Ioudaioi\). Came to or upon them, \epˆlthan\, second aorist (ingressive) indicative of \eperchomai\. Whether news of the miracle had reached those cities we do not know. These may have been travelling grain merchants. At any rate there was an interval in which Paul and Barnabas won some disciples (verse 22|). There would be a natural reaction, even revulsion, in the minds of many who had come so near to worshipping Paul and Barnabas. The pendulum swings easily from one extreme to the other. The hostile Jews from Antioch and Iconium may even have followed Paul and Barnabas along the fine Roman road on purpose to keep them on the run. They had driven them out of Antioch and out of Iconium and now appear at Lystra at an opportune moment for their work. {Having persuaded the multitudes} (\peisantes tous ochlous\). First aorist (effective) active participle of \peith“\. They had complete success with many and struck at the psychological moment. {They stoned Paul} (\lithasantes ton Paulon\). First aorist active participle of \lithaz“\, late verb from \lithos\ for throwing stones (used by Paul referring to this one incident when alone he was stoned, strkjv@2Corinthians:11:25|). The wounds inflicted may have left some of the scars (\stigmata\) mentioned in strkjv@Galatians:6:17|. They stoned Paul as the chief speaker (Mercury) and passed by Barnabas (Jupiter). It was a Jewish mode of punishment as against Stephen and these Jews knew that Paul was the man that they had to deal with. Hackett notes that the Jews with two exceptions incited the persecutions which Paul endured. The exceptions were in Philippi (16:16-40|) and Ephesus (19:23-41|). {Dragged him out of the city} (\esuron ex“ tˆs pole“s\). They hurled Stephen outside of the city before stoning him (\7:58\). It was a hurried and irregular proceeding, but they were dragging (imperfect active of \sur“\, old verb) Paul out now. {Supposing that he were dead} (\nomizontes auton tethnˆkenai\). Present active participle with infinitive (second perfect active of \thnˆsk“\) in indirect discourse with accusative of general reference. The Jews are jubilant this time with memories of Paul's escape at Antioch and Iconium. The pagan mob feel that they have settled accounts for their narrow escape from worshipping two Jewish renegade preachers. It was a good day's work for them all. Luke does not say that Paul was actually dead.

rwp@Acts:14:24 @{When they had spoken the word in Perga} (\lalˆsantes en Pergˆi ton logon\). Now they stopped and preached in Perga which they had apparently not done before (see strkjv@13:13f.|). After leaving Antioch they passed on through Pisidia, as if Antioch was not strictly in Pisidia (see on strkjv@13:14|) and into Pamphylia. They crossed from Perga to Attaleia, the port of Perga, sixteen miles down the Cestus, and capital of Pamphylia, to find a ship for Antioch in Syria. It is now called Adala and for long was the chief harbour of the south coast of Asia Minor. We do not know why they did not revisit Cyprus, perhaps because no permanent Gentile churches were founded there.

rwp@Acts:14:27 @{Gathered the church together} (\sunagagontes tˆn ekklˆsian\). Second aorist active participle of \sunag“\. It "was the first missionary meeting in history" (Furneaux). It was not hard to get the church together when the news spread that Paul and Barnabas had returned. "The suitability of the Gospel to become the religion of the world had not before been put to the test" (Furneaux). Doubtless many "wise-acres" had predicted failure as they did for William Carey and for Adoniram Judson and Luther Rice. {Rehearsed} (\anˆggellon\). Imperfect active. It was a long story for they had many things to tell of God's dealings "with them" (\met' aut“n\) for God had been "with them" all the while as Jesus had said he would be (Matthew:28:20|, \meth' h–m“n\). Paul could recount some of the details given later in strkjv@2Corinthians:11|. {And how} (\kai hoti\). Or "and that" in particular, as the upshot of it all. {He had opened a door of faith unto the Gentiles} (\ˆnoixen tois ethnesin thuran piste“s\). Three times in Paul's Epistles (1Corinthians:16:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12; strkjv@Colossians:4:3|) he employed the metaphor of "door," perhaps a reminiscence of the very language of Paul here. This work in Galatia gained a large place in Paul's heart (Galatians:4:14f.|). The Gentiles now, it was plain, could enter the kingdom of God (verse 22|) through the door of faith, not by law or by circumcision or by heathen philosophy or mythology.

rwp@Acts:15:6 @{Were gathered together} (\sunˆchthˆsan\). First aorist (effective) passive indicative. The church is not named here as in verse 4|, but we know from verses 12-22| that the whole church came together this time also along with the apostles and elders. {Of this matter} (\peri tou logou toutou\). Same idiom in strkjv@8:21; strkjv@19:38|. They realized the importance of the issue.

rwp@Acts:15:15 @{To this agree} (\tout“i sumph“nousin\). Associative instrumental case (\tout“i\) after \sumph“nousin\ (voice together with, symphony with, harmonize with), from \sumph“ne“\, old verb seen already in strkjv@Matthew:18:19; strkjv@Luke:5:36; strkjv@Acts:5:9| which see. James cites only strkjv@Amos:9:11,12| from the LXX as an example of "the words of the prophets" (\hoi logoi t“n prophˆt“n\) to which he refers on this point. The somewhat free quotation runs here through verses 16-18| of strkjv@Acts:15| and is exceedingly pertinent. The Jewish rabbis often failed to understand the prophets as Jesus showed. The passage in Amos refers primarily to the restoration of the Davidic empire, but also the Messiah's Kingdom (the throne of David his father," strkjv@Luke:1:32|).

rwp@Acts:15:24 @{Certain which went from us} (\tines ex hˆm“n\, Aleph B omit \exelthontes\). A direct blow at the Judaizers, put in delicate language (we heard \ˆkousamen\) as if only at Antioch (15:1|), and not also in Jerusalem in open meeting (15:5|). {Have troubled you with words} (\etaraxan humas logois\). What a picture of turmoil in the church in Antioch, words, words, words. Aorist tense of the common verb \tarass“\, to agitate, to make the heart palpitate (John:14:1,27|) and instrumental case of \logois\. {Subverting your souls} (\anaskeuazontes tas psuchas hum“n\). Present active participle of \anaskeuaz“\, old verb (\ana\ and \skeuos\, baggage) to pack up baggage, to plunder, to ravage. Powerful picture of the havoc wrought by the Judaizers among the simple-minded Greek Christians in Antioch. {To whom we gave no commandment} (\hois ou diesteilametha\). First aorist middle indicative of \diastell“\, old verb to draw asunder, to distinguish, to set forth distinctly, to command. This is a flat disclaimer of the whole conduct of the Judaizers in Antioch and in Jerusalem, a complete repudiation of their effort to impose the Mosaic ceremonial law upon the Gentile Christians.

rwp@Acts:15:27 @{Who themselves also shall tell you the same things by word of mouth} (\kai autous dia logou apaggellontas ta auta\). Literally, "they themselves also by speech announcing the same things." The present participle, as here, sometimes is used like the future to express purpose as in strkjv@3:26| \eulogounta\ after \apesteilen\ and so here \apaggellontas\ after \apestalkamen\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1128). Judas and Silas are specifically endorsed (perfect active indicative of \apostell“\) as bearers of the epistle who will also verbally confirm the contents of the letter.

rwp@Acts:15:32 @{Being themselves also prophets} (\kai autoi prophˆtai ontes\). As well as Paul and Barnabas and like Agabus (11:27-30|), for-speakers for Christ who justify the commendation in the letter (verse 27|) "with many words" (\dia logou pollou\), "with much talk," and no doubt with kindly words concerning the part played at the Conference by Paul and Barnabas. {Confirmed} (\epestˆrixan\). See on ¯14:22|. It was a glorious time with no Judaizers to disturb their fellowship as in 1-3|.

rwp@Acts:16:16 @{A spirit of divination} (\pneuma puth“na\). Songs:the correct text with accusative (apparition, a spirit, a python), not the genitive (\puth“nos\). Hesychius defines it as \daimonion manikon\ (a spirit of divination). The etymology of the word is unknown. Bengel suggests \puthesthai\ from \punthanomai\, to inquire. Python was the name given to the serpent that kept guard at Delphi, slain by Apollo, who was called \Puthios Apollo\ and the prophetess at Delphi was termed Pythia. Certainly Luke does not mean to credit Apollo with a real existence (1Corinthians:8:4|). But Plutarch (A.D. 50-100) says that the term \puth“nes\ was applied to ventriloquists (\eggastrimuthoi\). In the LXX those with familiar spirits are called by this word ventriloquists (Leviticus:19:31; strkjv@20:6,27|, including the witch of Endor strkjv@1Samuel:28:7|). It is possible that this slave girl had this gift of prophecy "by soothsaying" (\manteuomenˆ\). Present middle participle of \manteuomai\, old heathen word (in contrast with \prophˆteu“\) for acting the seer (\mantis\) and this kin to \mainomai\, to be mad, like the howling dervishes of later times. This is the so-called instrumental use of the circumstantial participles. {Brought} (\pareichen\). Imperfect active of \parech“\, a steady source of income. {Much gain} (\ergasian pollˆn\). Work, business, from \ergazomai\, to work. {Her masters} (\tois kuriois autˆs\). Dative case. Joint owners of this poor slave girl who were exploiting her calamity, whatever it was, for selfish gain, just as men and women today exploit girls and women in the "white slave" trade. As a fortune-teller she was a valuable asset for all the credulous dupes of the community. Simon Magus in Samaria and Elymas Barjesus in Cyprus had won power and wealth as soothsayers.

rwp@Acts:16:21 @{Customs which it is not lawful for us to receive, or to observe, being Romans} (\ethˆ ha ouk estin hˆmin paradechesthai oude poiein R“maiois ousin\). Note the sharp contrast between "being Jews" in verse 20| and "being Romans" here. This pose of patriotism is all sound and fury. It is love of money that moves these "masters" far more than zeal for Rome. As Roman citizens in a colony they make full use of all their rights of protest. Judaism was a _religio licita_ in the Roman empire, only they were not allowed to make proselytes of the Romans themselves. No Roman magistrate would pass on abstract theological questions (18:15|), but only if a breach of the peace was made (\ektarassousin hˆm“n tˆn polin\) or the formation of secret sects and organizations. Evidently both of these last points are involved by the charges of "unlawful customs" by the masters who are silent about their real ground of grievance against Paul and Silas. \Ethos\ (kin to \ˆthos\, strkjv@1Corinthians:15:33|) is from \eth“\, to be accustomed or used to a thing. The Romans granted toleration to conquered nations to follow their religious customs provided they did not try to win the Romans. But the Jews had made great headway to favour (the God-fearers) with increasing hatred also. Emperor worship had in store grave peril for both Jews and Christians. The Romans will care more for this than for the old gods and goddesses. It will combine patriotism and piety.

rwp@Acts:16:24 @{Into the inner prison} (\eis tˆn es“teran phulakˆn\). The comparative form from the adverb \es“\ (within), Ionic and old Attic for \eis“\. In the LXX, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:6:19|. The Roman public prisons had a vestibule and outer prison and behind this the inner prison, a veritable dungeon with no light or air save what came through the door when open. One has only to picture modern cells in our jails, the dungeons in feudal castles, London prisons before the time of Howard, to appreciate the horrors of an inner prison cell in a Roman provincial town of the first century A.D. {Made their feet fast} (\tous podas ˆsphalisato aut“n\). First aorist (effective) middle of \asphaliz“\, from \asphalˆs\ (safe), common verb in late Greek, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:24:64ff|. The inner prison was safe enough without this refinement of cruelty. {In the stocks} (\eis to xulon\). \Xulon\, from \xu“\, to scrape or plane, is used for a piece of wood whether a cross or gibbet (Acts:5:30; strkjv@10:39; strkjv@13:29; strkjv@Galatians:3:13; strkjv@1Peter:2:24|) or a log or timber with five holes (four for the wrists and ankles and one for the neck) or two for the feet as here, \xulopedˆ\, Latin _vervus_, to shackle the feet stretched apart (Job:33:11|). This torment was practiced in Sparta, Athens, Rome, and Adonirom Judson suffered it in Burmah. \Xulon\ is also used in the N.T. for stick or staff (Matthew:26:47|) and even a tree (Luke:23:31|). Tertullian said of Christians in the stocks: _Nihil crus sentit in vervo, quum animus in caelo est_ (Nothing the limb feels in the stocks when the mind is in heaven).

rwp@Acts:16:32 @{They spake the word of God} (\elalˆsan ton logon tou theou\). Songs:Paul and Silas gave fuller exposition of the way of life to the jailor "with all that were in his house." It was a remarkable service with keenest attention and interest, the jailor with his warden, slaves, and family.

rwp@Acts:17:3 @{Opening and alleging} (\dianoig“n kai paratithemenos\). Opening the Scriptures, Luke means, as made plain by the mission and message of Jesus, the same word (\dianoig“\) used by him of the interpretation of the Scriptures by Jesus (Luke:24:32|) and of the opening of the mind of the disciples also by Jesus (Luke:24:45|) and of the opening of Lydia's heart by the Lord (16:14|). One cannot refrain from saying that such exposition of the Scriptures as Jesus and Paul gave would lead to more opening of mind and heart. Paul was not only "expounding" the Scriptures, he was also "propounding" (the old meaning of "allege") his doctrine or setting forth alongside the Scriptures (\para-tithemenos\), quoting the Scripture to prove his contention which was made in much conflict (1Thessalonians:2:2|), probably in the midst of heated discussion by the opposing rabbis who were anything but convinced by Paul's powerful arguments, for the Cross was a stumbling-block to the Jews (1Corinthians:1:23|). {That it behoved the Christ to suffer} (\hoti ton Christon edei pathein\). The second aorist active infinitive is the subject of \edei\ with \ton Christon\, the accusative of general reference. This is Paul's major premise in his argument from the Scriptures about the Messiah, the necessity of his sufferings according to the Scriptures, the very argument made by the Risen Jesus to the two on the way to Emmaus (Luke:24:25-27|). The fifty-third chapter of Isaiah was a passage in point that the rabbis had overlooked. Peter made the same point in strkjv@Acts:3:18| and Paul again in strkjv@Acts:26:23|. The minor premise is the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. {To rise again from the dead} (\anastˆnai ek nekr“n\). This second aorist active infinitive \anastˆnai\ is also the subject of \edei\. The actual resurrection of Jesus was also a necessity as Paul says he preached to them (1Thessalonians:4:14|) and argued always from Scripture (1Corinthians:15:3-4|) and from his own experience (Acts:9:22; strkjv@22:7; strkjv@26:8,14; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:8|). {This Jesus is the Christ} (\houtos estin ho Christos, ho Iˆsous\). More precisely, "This is the Messiah, viz., Jesus whom I am proclaiming unto you." This is the conclusion of Paul's line of argument and it is logical and overwhelming. It is his method everywhere as in Damascus, in Antioch in Pisidia, here, in Corinth. He spoke as an eye-witness.

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

rwp@Acts:17:18 @{And certain also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him} (\tines de kai t“n Epikouri“n kai St“ik“n philosoph“n suneballon aut“i\). Imperfect active of \sunball“\, old verb, in the N.T. only by Luke, to bring or put together in one's mind (Luke:2:19|), to meet together (Acts:20:14|), to bring together aid (18:27|), to confer or converse or dispute as here and already strkjv@4:15| which see. These professional philosophers were always ready for an argument and so they frequented the agora for that purpose. Luke uses one article and so groups the two sects together in their attitude toward Paul, but they were very different in fact. Both sects were eager for argument and both had disdain for Paul, but they were the two rival practical philosophies of the day, succeeding the more abstruse theories of Plato and Aristotle. Socrates had turned men's thought inward (\Gn“thi Seauton\, Know Thyself) away from the mere study of physics. Plato followed with a profound development of the inner self (metaphysics). Aristotle with his cyclopaedic grasp sought to unify and relate both physics and metaphysics. Both Zeno and Epicurus (340-272 B.C.) took a more practical turn in all this intellectual turmoil and raised the issues of everyday life. Zeno (360-260 B.C.) taught in the \Stoa\ (Porch) and so his teaching was called Stoicism. He advanced many noble ideas that found their chief illustration in the Roman philosophers (Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius). He taught self-mastery and hardness with an austerity that ministered to pride or suicide in case of failure, a distinctly selfish and unloving view of life and with a pantheistic philosophy. Epicurus considered practical atheism the true view of the universe and denied a future life and claimed pleasure as the chief thing to be gotten out of life. He did not deny the existence of gods, but regarded them as unconcerned with the life of men. The Stoics called Epicurus an atheist. Lucretius and Horace give the Epicurean view of life in their great poems. This low view of life led to sensualism and does today, for both Stoicism and Epicureanism are widely influential with people now. "Eat and drink for tomorrow we die," they preached. Paul had doubtless become acquainted with both of these philosophies for they were widely prevalent over the world. Here he confronts them in their very home. He is challenged by past-masters in the art of appealing to the senses, men as skilled in their dialectic as the Pharisaic rabbis with whom Paul had been trained and whose subtleties he had learned how to expose. But, so far as we know, this is a new experience for Paul to have a public dispute with these philosophical experts who had a natural contempt for all Jews and for rabbis in particular, though they found Paul a new type at any rate and so with some interest in him. "In Epicureanism, it was man's sensual nature which arrayed itself against the claims of the gospel; in Stoicism it was his self-righteousness and pride of intellect" (Hackett). Knowling calls the Stoic the Pharisee of philosophy and the Epicurean the Sadducee of philosophy. Socrates in this very agora used to try to interest the passers-by in some desire for better things. That was 450 years before Paul is challenged by these superficial sophistical Epicureans and Stoics. It is doubtful if Paul had ever met a more difficult situation. {What would this babbler say?} (\Ti an theloi ho spermologos houtos legein?\). The word for "babbler" means "seed-picker" or picker up of seeds (\sperma\, seed, \leg“\, to collect) like a bird in the agora hopping about after chance seeds. Plutarch applies the word to crows that pick up grain in the fields. Demosthenes called Aeschines a \spermologos\. Eustathius uses it of a man hanging around in the markets picking up scraps of food that fell from the carts and so also of mere rhetoricians and plagiarists who picked up scraps of wisdom from others. Ramsay considers it here a piece of Athenian slang used to describe the picture of Paul seen by these philosophers who use it, for not all of them had it ("some," \tines\). Note the use of \an\ and the present active optative \theloi\, conclusion of a fourth-class condition in a rhetorical question (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). It means, What would this picker up of seeds wish to say, if he should get off an idea? It is a contemptuous tone of supreme ridicule and doubtless Paul heard this comment. Probably the Epicureans made this sneer that Paul was a charlatan or quack. {Other some} (\hoi de\). But others, in contrast with the "some" just before. Perhaps the Stoics take this more serious view of Paul. {He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods} (\zen“n daimoni“n dokei kataggeleus einai\). This view is put cautiously by \dokei\ (seems). \Kataggeleus\ does not occur in the old Greek, though in ecclesiastical writers, but Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 99) gives an example of the word "on a marble stele recording a decree of the Mitylenaens in honour of the Emperor Augustus," where it is the herald of the games. Here alone in the N.T. \Daimonion\ is used in the old Greek sense of deity or divinity whether good or bad, not in the N.T. sense of demons. Both this word and \kataggeleus\ are used from the Athenian standpoint. \Xenos\ is an old word for a guest-friend (Latin _hospes_) and then host (Romans:16:23|), then for foreigner or stranger (Matthew:25:31; strkjv@Acts:17:21|), new and so strange as here and strkjv@Hebrews:13:9; strkjv@1Peter:4:12|, and then aliens (Ephesians:2:12|). This view of Paul is the first count against Socrates: Socrates does wrong, introducing new deities (\adikei S“kratˆs, kaina daimonia eispher“n\, Xen. _Mem_. I). On this charge the Athenians voted the hemlock for their greatest citizen. What will they do to Paul? This Athens was more sceptical and more tolerant than the old Athens. But Roman law did not allow the introduction of a new religion (_religio illicita_). Paul was walking on thin ice though he was the real master philosopher and these Epicureans and Stoics were quacks. Paul had the only true philosophy of the universe and life with Jesus Christ as the centre (Colossians:1:12-20|), the greatest of all philosophers as Ramsay justly terms him. But these men are mocking him. {Because he preached Jesus and the resurrection} (\hoti ton Iˆsoun kai tˆn anastasin euˆggelizato\). Reason for the view just stated. Imperfect middle indicative of \euaggeliz“\, to "gospelize." Apparently these critics considered \anastasis\ (Resurrection) another deity on a par with Jesus. The Athenians worshipped all sorts of abstract truths and virtues and they misunderstood Paul on this subject. They will leave him as soon as he mentions the resurrection (verse 32|). It is objected that Luke would not use the word in this sense here for his readers would not under stand him. But Luke is describing the misapprehension of this group of philosophers and this interpretation fits in precisely.

rwp@Acts:17:29 @{We ought not to think} (\ouk opheilomen nomizein\). It is a logical conclusion (\oun\, therefore) from the very language of Aratus and Cleanthes. {That the Godhead is like} (\to theion einai homoion\). Infinitive with accusative of general reference in indirect discourse. \To theion\ is strictly "the divine" nature like \theiotˆs\ (Romans:1:20|) rather than like \theotˆs\ (Colossians:2:9|). Paul may have used \to theion\ here to get back behind all their notions of various gods to the real nature of God. The Athenians may even have used the term themselves. After \homoios\ (like) the associative instrumental case is used as with \chrus“i, argur“i, lith“i\. {Graven by art and device of man} (\charagmati technˆs kai enthumˆse“s anthr“pou\). Apposition with preceding and so \charagmati\ in associative instrumental case. Literally, graven work or sculpture from \charass“\, to engrave, old word, but here alone in N.T. outside of Revelation (the mark of the beast). Graven work of art (\technˆs\) or external craft, and of thought or device (\enthumˆse“s\) or internal conception of man.

rwp@Acts:18:5 @{Was constrained by the word} (\suneicheto t“i log“i\). This is undoubtedly the correct text and not \t“i pneumati\ of the Textus Receptus, but \suneicheto\ is in my opinion the direct middle imperfect indicative, not the imperfect passive as the translations have it (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 808). Paul held himself together or completely to the preaching instead of just on Sabbaths in the synagogue (verse 4|). The coming of Silas and Timothy with the gifts from Macedonia (1Thessalonians:3:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:9; strkjv@Phillipians:4:15|) set Paul free from tent-making for a while so that he began to devote himself (inchoative imperfect) with fresh consecration to preaching. See the active in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14|. He was now also assisted by Silas and Timothy (2Corinthians:1:19|). {Testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ} (\diamarturomenos tois Ioudaiois einai ton Christon Iˆsoun\). Paul's witness everywhere (9:22; strkjv@17:3|). This verb \diamarturomenos\ occurs in strkjv@2:40| (which see) for Peter's earnest witness. Perhaps daily now in the synagogue he spoke to the Jews who came. \Einai\ is the infinitive in indirect discourse (assertion) with the accusative of general reference. By \ton Christon\ Paul means "the Messiah." His witness is to show to the Jews that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah.

rwp@Acts:18:14 @{When Paul was about to open his mouth} (\mellontos tou Paulou anoigein to stoma\). Genitive absolute again. Before Paul could speak, Gallio cut in and ended the whole matter. According to their own statement Paul needed no defence. {Wrong} (\adikˆma\). _Injuria_. Old word, a wrong done one. In N.T. only here, strkjv@Acts:24:20; strkjv@Revelation:18:5|. Here it may mean a legal wrong to the state. {Wicked villainy} (\rhƒidiourgˆma\). A crime, act of a criminal, from \rhƒidiourgos\ (\rhƒidios\, easy, \ergon\, work), one who does a thing with ease, adroitly, a "slick citizen." {Reason would that I should bear with you} (\kata logon an aneschomˆn hum“n\). Literally, "according to reason I should have put up with you (or held myself back from you)." This condition is the second class (determined as unfulfilled) and means that the Jews had no case against Paul in a Roman court. The verb in the conclusion (\aneschomˆn\) is second aorist middle indicative and means with the ablative \hum“n\ "I should have held myself back (direct middle) from you (ablative). The use of \an\ makes the form of the condition plain.

rwp@Acts:18:15 @{Questions} (\zˆtˆmata\). Plural, contemptuous, "a parcel of questions" (Knowling). {About words} (\peri logou\). Word, singular, talk, not deed or fact (\ergon, factum\). {And names} (\kai onomat“n\). As to whether "Jesus" should also be called "Christ" or "Messiah." The Jews, Gallio knew, split hairs over words and names. {And your own law} (\kai nomou tou kath' humƒs\) Literally, "And law that according to you." Gallio had not been caught in the trap set for him. What they had said concerned Jewish law, not Roman law at all. {Look to it yourselves} (\opsesthe autoi\). The volitive future middle indicative of \hora“\ often used (cf. strkjv@Matthew:27:4|) where an imperative could be employed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 874). The use of \autoi\ (yourselves) turns it all over to them. {I am not minded} (\ou boulomai\). I am not willing, I do not wish. An absolute refusal to allow a religious question to be brought before a Roman civil court. This decision of Gallio does not establish Christianity in preference to Judaism. It simply means that the case was plainly that Christianity was a form of Judaism and as such was not opposed to Roman law. This decision opened the door for Paul's preaching all over the Roman Empire. Later Paul himself argues (Romans:9-11|) that in fact Christianity is the true, the spiritual Judaism.

rwp@Acts:18:24 @{Apollos} (\Apoll“s\). Genitive \-“\ Attic second declension. Probably a contraction of \Apollonios\ as D has it here. {An Alexandrian} (\Alexandreus\). Alexander the Great founded this city B.C. 332 and placed a colony of Jews there which flourished greatly, one-third of the population at this time. There was a great university and library there. The Jewish-Alexandrian philosophy developed here of which Philo was the chief exponent who was still living. Apollos was undoubtedly a man of the schools and a man of parts. {A learned man} (\anˆr logios\). Or eloquent, as the word can mean either a man of words (like one "wordy," verbose) or a man of ideas, since \logos\ was used either for reason or speech. Apollos was doubtless both learned (mighty in the Scriptures) and eloquent, though eloquence varies greatly in people's ideas. {Mighty in the Scriptures} (\dunatos “n en tais graphais\). Being powerful (\dunatos\ verbal of \dunamai\ and same root as \dunamis\, dynamite, dynamo) in the Scriptures (in the knowledge and the use of the Scriptures), as should be true of every preacher. There is no excuse for ignorance of the Scriptures on the part of preachers, the professed interpreters of the word of God. The last lecture made to the New Testament English class in Southern Baptist Theological Seminary by John A. Broadus was on this passage with a plea for his students to be mighty in the Scriptures. In Alexandria Clement of Alexandria and Origen taught in the Christian theological school.

rwp@Acts:19:9 @{But when some were hardened} (\h“s de tines esklˆrunonto\). Imperfect passive of \sklˆrun“\, causative like _hiphil_ in Hebrew, to make hard (\sklˆros\) or rough or harsh (Matthew:25:24|). In LXX and Hippocrates and Galen (in medical writings). In N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:9:18| and 4 times in strkjv@Hebrews:3:8,13,15; strkjv@4:7,8| quoting and referring to strkjv@Psalms:95:8| about hardening the heart like a gristle. The inevitable reaction against Paul went on even in Ephesus though slowly. {Disobedient} (\epeithoun\). Imperfect again, showing the growing disbelief and disobedience (\apeithˆs\), both ideas as in strkjv@14:2; strkjv@17:5|, first refusal to believe and then refusal to obey. Both \sklˆrun“\ and \apeithe“\ occur together, as here, in Ecclus. strkjv@30:12. {Speaking evil of the Way} (\kakologountes tˆn hodon\). Late verb from \kakologos\ (speaker of evil) for the old \kak“s leg“\. Already in strkjv@Mark:7:10; strkjv@9:39; strkjv@Matthew:15:4|. Now these Jews are aggressive opponents of Paul and seek to injure his influence with the crowd. Note "the Way" as in strkjv@9:2| for Christianity. {He departed from them} (\apostas ap' aut“n\). Second aorist active participle of \aphistˆmi\, made an "apostasy" (standing off, cleavage) as he did at Corinth (18:7|, \metabas\, making a change). {Separated the disciples} (\aph“risen tous mathˆtas\). First aorist active indicative of \aphoriz“\, old verb to mark limits (horizon) as already in strkjv@13:2|. Paul himself was a spiritual Pharisee "separated" to Christ (Romans:1:1|). The Jews regarded this withdrawal as apostasy, like separating the sheep from the goats (Matthew:25:32|). Paul now made a separate church as he had done at Thessalonica and Corinth. {In the school of Tyrannus} (\en tˆi scholˆi Turannou\). \Scholˆ\ (our school) is an old word from \schein\ (\ech“\) to hold on, leisure and then in later Greek (Plutarch, etc.) a place where there is leisure as here. Only this example in the N.T. This is the Greek notion of "school," the Jewish being that of "yoke" as in strkjv@Matthew:11:29|. The name Tyrannus (our tyrant) is a common one. It is an inscription in the Columbarium of the Empress Livia as that of a physician in the court. Furneaux suggests the possibility that a relative of this physician was lecturing on medicine in Ephesus and so as a friend of Luke, the physician, would be glad to help Paul about a place to preach. It was probably a public building or lecture hall with this name whether hired by Paul or loaned to him. The pagan sophists often spoke in such halls. The Codex Bezae adds "from the fifth hour to the tenth" as the time allotted Paul for his work in this hall, which is quite possible, from just before midday till the close of the afternoon (from before the noon meal till two hours before sunset) each day. Here Paul had great freedom and a great hearing. As the church grows there will be other places of meeting as the church in the house of Aquila and Priscilla (1Corinthians:16:19|).

rwp@Acts:19:18 @{Came} (\ˆrchonto\). Imperfect middle, kept coming, one after another. Even some of the believers were secretly under the spell of these false spiritualists just as some Christians today cherish private contacts with so-called occult powers through mediums, seances, of which they are ashamed. {Confessing} (\exomologoumenoi\). It was time to make a clean breast of it all, to turn on the light, to unbosom their secret habits. {Declaring their deeds} (\anaggellontes tas praxeis aut“n\). Judgment was beginning at the house of God. The dupes (professing believers, alas) of these jugglers or exorcists now had their eyes opened when they saw the utter defeat of the tricksters who had tried to use the name of Jesus without his power. The boomerang was tremendous. The black arts were now laid bare in their real character. Gentile converts had a struggle to shake off their corrupt environment.

rwp@Acts:19:27 @{This our trade} (\touto to meros\). Part, share, task, job, trade. {Come into disrepute} (\eis apelegmon elthein\). Not in the old writers, but in LXX and _Koin‚_. Literally, reputation, exposure, censure, rejection after examination, and so disrepute. Their business of making gods would lose caste as the liquor trade (still called the trade in England) has done in our day. They felt this keenly and so Demetrius names it first. They felt it in their pockets. {Of the great goddess Artemis} (\tˆs megalˆs theas Artemidos\). She was generally known as the Great (\hˆ Megalˆ\). An inscription found at Ephesus calls her "the greatest god" (\hˆ megistˆ theos\). The priests were eunuchs and there were virgin priestesses and a lower order of slaves known as temple-sweepers (\ne“koroi\, verse 35|). They had wild orgiastic exercises that were disgraceful with their Corybantic processions and revelries. {Be made of no account} (\eis outhen logisthˆnai\). Be reckoned as nothing, first aorist passive infinitive of \logizomai\ and \eis\. {Should even be deposed of her magnificence} (\mellein te kai kathaireisthai tˆs megaleiotˆtos autˆs\). Note the present infinitive after \mellein\, ablative case (so best MSS.) after \kathaire“\, to take down, to depose, to deprive of. The word \megaleiotˆs\ occurs also in strkjv@Luke:9:43| (the majesty of God) and in strkjv@2Peter:1:16| of the transfiguration of Christ. It is already in the LXX and Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 363) thinks that the word runs parallel with terms used in the emperor-cult. {All Asia and the world} \holˆ (hˆ) Asia kai (hˆ) oikoumenˆ\. See strkjv@11:28| for same use of \oikoumenˆ\. An exaggeration, to be sure, but Pausanias says that no deity was more widely worshipped. Temples of Artemis have been found in Spain and Gaul. _Multitudo errantium non efficit veritatem_ (Bengel). Even today heathenism has more followers than Christianity. To think that all this splendour was being set at naught by one man and a despised Jew at that!

rwp@Acts:19:29 @{With the confusion} (\tˆs sugchuse“s\). Genitive case after \eplˆsthˆ\. An old word, but in the N.T. only here, from verb \sugche“\, to pour together like a flood (only in Acts in the N.T.). Vivid description of the inevitable riot that followed "the appearance of such a body in the crowded agora of an excitable city" (Rackham) "vociferating the city's watch-word." {They rushed} (\h“rmˆsan\). Ingressive aorist active indicative of \horma“\, old verb for impetuous dashing, a case of mob psychology (mob mind), with one accord (\homothumadon\ as in strkjv@Acts:1:14|, etc.). {Into the theatre} (\eis to theatron\). A place for seeing (\theaomai\) spectacles, originally for dramatic representation (Thucydides, Herodotus), then for the spectators, then for the spectacle or show (1Corinthians:4:9|). The theatre (amphitheatre) at Ephesus can still be traced in the ruins (Wood, _Ephesus_) and shows that it was of enormous size capable of seating fifty-six thousand persons (some estimate it only 24,500). It was the place for large public gatherings of any sort out of doors like our football and baseball parks. In particular, gladiatorial shows were held in these theatres. {Having seized Gaius and Aristarchus men of Macedonia} (\sunarpasantes Gaion kai Aristarchon Makedonas\). See strkjv@6:12| for this same verb. They wanted some victims for this "gladiatorial" show. These two men were "Paul's companions in travel" (\sunekdˆmous Paulou\), together (\sun\) with Paul in being abroad, away from home or people (\ek-dˆmous\, late word, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:8:19|). How the mob got hold of Gaius (Acts:20:4|) and Aristarchus (20:4; strkjv@27:2; strkjv@Colossians:4:10; strkjv@Philemon:1:24|) we do not know whether by accidental recognition or by search after failure to get Paul. In strkjv@Romans:16:4| Paul speaks of Priscilla and Aquila as those "who for my life laid down their own necks." Paul lived with them in Ephesus as in Corinth. It is possible that Demetrius led the mob to their house and that they refused to allow Paul to go or to be seized at the risk of their own lives. Paul himself may have been desperately ill at this time as we know was the case once during his stay in Ephesus when he felt the answer of death in himself (2Corinthians:1:9|) and when God rescued him. That may mean that, ill as he was, Paul wanted to go and face the mob in the theatre, knowing that it meant certain death.

rwp@Acts:19:33 @{And they brought Alexander out of the crowd} (\ek de tou ochlou sunebibasan Alexandron\). The correct text (Aleph A B) has this verb \sunebibasan\ (from \sunbibaz“\, to put together) instead of \proebibasan\ (from \probibaz“\, to put forward). It is a graphic word, causal of \bain“\, to go, and occurs in strkjv@Acts:16:10; strkjv@Colossians:2:19; strkjv@Ephesians:4:16|. Evidently some of the Jews grew afraid that the mob would turn on the Jews as well as on the Christians. Paul was a Jew and so was Aristarchus, one of the prisoners. The Jews were as strongly opposed to idolatry as were the Christians. {The Jews putting him forward} (\probalont“n auton t“n Ioudai“n\). Genitive absolute of the second aorist active participle of \proball“\, old verb to push forward as leaves in the spring (Luke:21:30|). In the N.T. only in these two passages. Alexandria had already disgraceful scenes of Jew-baiting and there was real peril now in Ephesus with this wild mob. Songs:Alexander was pushed forward as the champion to defend the Jews to the excited mob. He may be the same Alexander the coppersmith who did Paul much evil (2Timothy:4:14|), against whom Paul will warn Timothy then in Ephesus. "The Jews were likely to deal in the copper and silver required for the shrines, so he may have had some trade connexion with the craftsmen which would give him influence" (Furneaux). {Beckoned with the hand} (\kataseisas tˆn cheira\). Old verb \katasei“\, to shake down, here the hand, rapidly waving the hand up and down to get a hearing. In the N.T. elsewhere only in strkjv@Acts:12:17; strkjv@13:16; strkjv@21:40| where "with the hand" (\tˆi cheiri\, instrumental case) is used instead of \tˆn cheira\ (the accusative). {Would have made a defence unto the people} (\ˆthelen apologeisthai t“i dˆm“i\). Imperfect active, wanted to make a defence, tried to, started to, but apparently never got out a word. \Apologeisthai\ (present middle infinitive, direct middle, to defend oneself), regular word for formal apology, but in N.T. only by Luke and Paul (twice in Gospel, six times in Acts, and in strkjv@Romans:2:15; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:19|).

rwp@Acts:19:38 @{Have a matter against any one} (\echousin pros tina logon\). For this use of \ech“ logon\ with \pros\ see strkjv@Matthew:5:32; strkjv@Colossians:3:13|. The town-clerk names Demetrius and the craftsmen (\technitai\) as the parties responsible for the riot. {The courts are open} (\agoraioi agontai\). Supply \hˆmerai\ (days), court days are kept, or \sunodoi\, court-meetings are now going on, Vulgate _conventus forenses aguntur_. Old adjective from \agora\ (forum) marketplace where trials were held. Cf. strkjv@Acts:17:4|. There were regular court days whether they were in session then or not. {And there are proconsuls} (\kai anthupatoi eisin\). Asia was a senatorial province and so had proconsuls (general phrase) though only one at a time, "a rhetorical plural" (Lightfoot). Page quotes from an inscription of the age of Trajan on an aqueduct at Ephesus in which some of Luke's very words occur (\ne“koros, anthupatos, grammateus, dˆmos\). {Let them accuse one another} (\egkaleit“san allˆlois\). Present active imperative of \egkale“\ (\en, kale“\), old verb to call in one's case, to bring a charge against, with the dative. Luke uses the verb six times in Acts for judicial proceedings (19:38,40; strkjv@23:28,29; strkjv@26:2,7|). The town-clerk makes a definite appeal to the mob for orderly legal procedure as opposed to mob violence in a matter where money and religious prejudice unite, a striking rebuke to so-called lynch-law proceedings in lands today where Christianity is supposed to prevail.

rwp@Acts:19:40 @{For indeed we are in danger to be accused concerning this day's riot} (\kai gar kinduneuomen egkaleisthai stase“s peri tˆs sˆmeron\). The text is uncertain. The text of Westcott and Hort means "to be accused of insurrection concerning today's assembly." The peril was real. \Kinduneuomen\, from \kindunos\, danger, peril. Old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:8:23; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:30|. {There being no cause for it} (\mˆdenos aitiou huparchontos\). Genitive absolute with \aitios\, common adjective (cf. \aitia\, cause) though in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:5:9; strkjv@Luke:23:4,14,22|. {And as touching it} (\peri hou\). "Concerning which." But what? No clear antecedent, only the general idea. {Give an account of this concourse} (\apodounai logon peri tˆs sustrophˆs tautˆs\). _Rationem reddere_. They will have to explain matters to the proconsul. \Sustrophˆ\ (from \sun\, together, \streph“\, to turn) is a late word for a conspiracy (Acts:23:12|) and a disorderly riot as here (Polybius). In strkjv@Acts:28:12| \sustreph“\ is used of gathering up a bundle of sticks and of men combining in strkjv@Matthew:17:22|. Seneca says that there was nothing on which the Romans looked with such jealousy as a tumultuous meeting.

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

rwp@Acts:20:2 @{Those parts} (\ta merˆ ekeina\). We have no way of knowing why Luke did not tell of Paul's stay in Troas (2Corinthians:2:12f.|) nor of meeting Titus in Macedonia (2Corinthians:2:13-7:16|) nor of Paul's visit to Illyricum (Romans:15:19f.|) to give time for II Corinthians to do its work (2Corinthians:13|), one of the most stirring experiences in Paul's whole career when he opened his heart to the Corinthians and won final victory in the church by the help of Titus who also helped him round up the great collection in Achaia. He wrote II Corinthians during this period after Titus arrived from Corinth. The unity of II Corinthians is here assumed. Paul probably met Luke again in Macedonia, but all this is passed by except by the general phrase: "had given them much exhortation" (\parakalesas autous log“i poll“i\). Literally, "having exhorted them (the Macedonian brethren) with much talk" (instrumental case). {Into Greece} (\eis tˆn Hellada\). That is, Achaia (18:12; strkjv@19:21|), and particularly Corinth, whither he had at last come again after repeated attempts, pauses, and delays (2Corinthians:13:1|). Now at last the coast was clear and Paul apparently had an open door in Corinth during these three months, so completely had Titus at last done away with the opposition of the Judaizers there.

rwp@Acts:20:7 @{Upon the first day of the week} (\en de miƒi t“n sabbat“n\). The cardinal \miƒi\ used here for the ordinal \pr“tˆi\ (Mark:16:9|) like the Hebrew _ehadh_ as in strkjv@Mark:16:2; strkjv@Matthew:28:1; strkjv@Luke:24:1; strkjv@John:20:1| and in harmony with the _Koin‚_ idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 671). Either the singular (Mark:16:9|) \sabbatou\ or the plural \sabbaton\ as here was used for the week (sabbath to sabbath). For the first time here we have services mentioned on the first day of the week though in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:2| it is implied by the collections stored on that day. In strkjv@Revelation:1:10| the Lord's day seems to be the day of the week on which Jesus rose from the grave. Worship on the first day of the week instead of the seventh naturally arose in Gentile churches, though strkjv@John:20:26| seems to mean that from the very start the disciples began to meet on the first (or eighth) day. But liberty was allowed as Paul makes plain in strkjv@Romans:14:5f|. {When we were gathered together} (\sunˆgmen“n hˆm“n\). Genitive absolute, perfect passive participle of \sunag“\, to gather together, a formal meeting of the disciples. See this verb used for gatherings of disciples in strkjv@Acts:4:31; strkjv@11:26; strkjv@14:27; strkjv@15:6,30; strkjv@19:7,8; strkjv@1Corinthians:5:4|. In strkjv@Hebrews:10:25| the substantive \episunag“gˆn\ is used for the regular gatherings which some were already neglecting. It is impossible for a church to flourish without regular meetings even if they have to meet in the catacombs as became necessary in Rome. In Russia today the Soviets are trying to break up conventicles of Baptists. They probably met on our Saturday evening, the beginning of the first day at sunset. Songs:these Christians began the day (Sunday) with worship. But, since this is a Gentile community, it is quite possible that Luke means our Sunday evening as the time when this meeting occurs, and the language in strkjv@John:20:19| "it being evening on that day the first day of the week" naturally means the evening following the day, not the evening preceding the day. {To break bread} (\klasai arton\). First aorist active infinitive of purpose of \kla“\. The language naturally bears the same meaning as in strkjv@2:42|, the Eucharist or the Lord's Supper which usually followed the \Agapˆ\. See strkjv@1Corinthians:10:16|. The time came, when the \Agapˆ\ was no longer observed, perhaps because of the abuses noted in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:20ff|. Rackham argues that the absence of the article with bread here and its presence (\ton arton\) in verse 11| shows that the \Agapˆ\ is ] referred to in verse 7| and the Eucharist in verse 11|, but not necessarily so because \ton arton\ may merely refer to \arton\ in verse 7|. At any rate it should be noted that Paul, who conducted this service, was not a member of the church in Troas, but only a visitor. {Discoursed} (\dielegeto\). Imperfect middle because he kept on at length. {Intending} (\mell“\). Being about to, on the point of. {On the morrow} (\tˆi epaurion\). Locative case with \hˆmerƒi\ understood after the adverb \epaurion\. If Paul spoke on our Saturday evening, he made the journey on the first day of the week (our Sunday) after sunrise. If he spoke on our Sunday evening, then he left on our Monday morning. {Prolonged his speech} (\Pareteinen ton logon\). Imperfect active (same form as aorist) of \paratein“\, old verb to stretch beside or lengthwise, to prolong. Vivid picture of Paul's long sermon which went on and on till midnight (\mechri mesonuktiou\). Paul's purpose to leave early next morning seemed to justify the long discourse. Preachers usually have some excuse for the long sermon which is not always clear to the exhausted audience.

rwp@Acts:20:17 @{Called to him} (\metekalesato\). Aorist middle (indirect) indicative of \metakale“\, old verb to call from one place to another (\meta\ for "change"), middle to call to oneself, only in Acts in the N.T. (7:14; strkjv@10:32; strkjv@20:17; strkjv@24:25|). Ephesus was some thirty miles, a stiff day's journey each way. They would be with Paul the third day of the stay in Miletus. {The elders of the church} (\tous presbuterous tˆs ekklˆsias\). The very men whom Paul terms "bishops" (\episkopous\) in verse 28| just as in strkjv@Titus:1:5,7| where both terms (\presbuterous, ton episkopon\) describe the same office. The term "elder" applied to Christian ministers first appears in strkjv@Acts:11:30| in Jerusalem and reappears in strkjv@15:4,6,22| in connection with the apostles and the church. The "elders" are not "apostles" but are "bishops" (cf. strkjv@Phillipians:1:1|) and with "deacons" constitute the two classes of officers in the early churches. Ignatius shows that in the early second century the office of bishop over the elders had developed, but Lightfoot has shown that it was not so in the first century. Each church, as in Jerusalem, Philippi, Ephesus, had a number of "elders" ("bishops") in the one great city church. Hackett thinks that other ministers from the neighbourhood also came. It was a noble group of preachers and Paul, the greatest preacher of the ages, makes a remarkable talk to preachers with all the earmarks of Pauline originality (Spitta, _Apostelgeschichte_, p. 252) as shown by the characteristic Pauline words, phrases, ideas current in all his Epistles including the Pastoral (testify, course, pure, take heed, presbyter, bishop, acquire, apparel). Luke heard this address as he may and probably did hear those in Jerusalem and Caesarea (Acts:21-26|). Furneaux suggests that Luke probably took shorthand notes of the address since Galen says that his students took down his medical lectures in shorthand: "At any rate, of all the speeches in the Acts this contains most of Paul and least of Luke.... It reveals Paul as nothing else does. The man who spoke it is no longer a man of eighteen centuries ago: he is of yesterday; of today. He speaks as we speak and feels as we feel; or rather as we fain would speak and feel." We have seen and listened to Paul speak to the Jews in Antioch in Pisidia as Luke pictures the scene, to the uneducated pagans at Lystra, to the cultured Greeks in Athens. We shall hear him plead for his life to the Jewish mob in Jerusalem, to the Roman governor Felix in Caesarea, to the Jewish "King" Herod Agrippa II in Caesarea, and at last to the Jews in Rome. But here Paul unbosoms himself to the ministers of the church in Ephesus where he had spent three years (longer than with any other church) and where he had such varied experiences of prowess and persecution. He opens his heart to these men as he does not to the average crowd even of believers. It is Paul's _Apologia pro sua Vita_. He will probably not see them again and so the outlook and attitude is similar to the farewell discourse of Jesus to the disciples in the upper room (John:13-17|). He warns them about future perils as Jesus had done. Paul's words here will repay any preacher's study today. There is the same high conception of the ministry here that Paul had already elaborated in strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12-6:10| (see my _Glory of the Ministry_). It is a fitting time and occasion for Paul to take stock of his ministry at the close of the third mission tour. What wonders had God wrought already.

rwp@Acts:20:24 @{But I hold not my life of any account} (\all' oudenos logou poioumai tˆn psuchˆn\). Neat Greek idiom, accusative \psuchˆn\ and genitive \logou\ and then Paul adds "dear unto myself" (\timian emaut“i\) in apposition with \psuchˆn\ (really a combination of two constructions). {Songs:that I may accomplish my course} (\h“s telei“s“ dromon mou\). Rather, "In order that" (purpose, not result). Aleph and B read \telei“s“\ here (first aorist active subjunctive) rather than \telei“sai\ (first aorist active infinitive). It is the lone instance in the N.T. of \h“s\ as a final particle (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 987). Paul in strkjv@Acts:13:25| in his sermon at Antioch in Pisidia described John as fulfilling his course and in strkjv@2Timothy:4:7| he will say: "I have finished my course" (\ton dromon teteleka\). He will run the race to the end. {Which I received from the Lord Jesus} (\hˆn elabon para tou kuriou Iˆsou\). Of that fact he never had a doubt and it was a proud boast (Gal strkjv@1:1; strkjv@Romans:11:13|). {The gospel of the grace of God} (\to euaggelion tˆs charitos tou theou\). To Paul the gospel consisted in the grace of God. See this word "grace" (\charis\) in Romans and his other Epistles.

rwp@Acts:20:32 @{And now} (\kai ta nun\). Same phrase as in verses 22,25| save that \idou\ (behold) is wanting and the article \ta\ occurs before \nun\, accusative of general reference. And as to the present things (or situation) as in strkjv@4:29|. {I commend} (\paratithemai\). Present middle indicative of \paratithˆmi\, old verb to place beside, middle, to deposit with one, to interest as in strkjv@1Timothy:1:18; strkjv@2Timothy:2:2|. Paul can now only do this, but he does it hopefully. Cf. strkjv@1Peter:4:19|. {The word of his grace} (\t“i log“i tˆs charitos autou\). The instrumentality through preaching and the Holy Spirit employed by God. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:4:6; strkjv@Ephesians:4:29|. {Which is able to build up} (\t“i dunamen“i oikodomˆsai\). God works through the word of his grace and so it is able to build up (edify); a favourite Pauline word (1Corinthians:3:10-14; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1; strkjv@Ephesians:2:20-22; strkjv@2Timothy:3:15|; etc.), and strkjv@James:1:21|. The very words "build" and "inheritance among the sanctified" will occur in strkjv@Ephesians:1:11; strkjv@2:30; strkjv@3:18| and which some may recall on reading. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:1:12|. Stephen in strkjv@Acts:7:5| used the word "inheritance" (\klˆronomian\), nowhere else in Acts, but in strkjv@Ephesians:1:14,18; strkjv@5:5|. In strkjv@Ephesians:1:18| the very expression occurs "his inheritance among the saints " (\tˆn klˆronomian autou en tois hagiois\).

rwp@Acts:20:38 @{Sorrowing} (\odun“menoi\). Present middle participle of \oduna“\, old verb to cause intense pain, to torment (Luke:16:24|), middle to distress oneself (Luke:2:48; strkjv@Acts:20:38|). Nowhere else in N.T. {Which he had spoken} (\h“i eirˆkei\). Relative attracted to the case of the antecedent \log“i\ (word). Past perfect indicative of \eipon\. {They brought him on his way} (\proepempon auton\). Imperfect active of \propemp“\, old verb to send forward, to accompany as in strkjv@Acts:15:3; strkjv@20:38; strkjv@21:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:6,11; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:16; strkjv@Titus:3:13; strkjv@3John:1:6|. Graphic picture of Paul's departure from this group of ministers.

rwp@Acts:22:1 @{Brethren and fathers} (\Andres adelphoi kai pateres\) Men, brethren, and fathers. The very language used by Stephen (7:2|) when arraigned before the Sanhedrin with Paul then present. Now Paul faces a Jewish mob on the same charges brought against Stephen. These words are those of courtesy and dignity (_amoris et honoris nomina_, Page). These men were Paul's brother Jews and were (many of them) official representatives of the people (Sanhedrists, priests, rabbis). Paul's purpose is conciliatory, he employs "his ready tact" (Rackham). {The defence which I now make unto you} (\mou tˆs pros humas nuni apologias\). Literally, My defence to you at this time. \Nuni\ is a sharpened form (by \-i\) of \nun\ (now), just now. The term \apologia\ (apology) is not our use of the word for apologizing for an offence, but the original sense of defence for his conduct, his life. It is an old word from \apologeomai\, to talk oneself off a charge, to make defence. It occurs also in strkjv@Acts:25:16| and then also in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:11; strkjv@Phillipians:1:7,16; strkjv@2Timothy:4:16; strkjv@1Peter:3:15|. Paul uses it again in strkjv@Acts:25:16| as here about his defence against the charges made by the Jews from Asia. He is suspected of being a renegade from the Mosaic law and charged with specific acts connected with the alleged profanation of the temple. Songs:Paul speaks in Aramaic and recites the actual facts connected with his change from Judaism to Christianity. The facts make the strongest argument. He first recounts the well-known story of his zeal for Judaism in the persecution of the Christians and shows why the change came. Then he gives a summary of his work among the Gentiles and why he came to Jerusalem this time. He answers the charge of enmity to the people and the law and of desecration of the temple. It is a speech of great skill and force, delivered under remarkable conditions. The one in chapter strkjv@Acts:26| covers some of the same ground, but for a slightly different purpose as we shall see. For a discussion of the three reports in Acts of Paul's conversion see chapter strkjv@Acts:9|. Luke has not been careful to make every detail correspond, though there is essential agreement in all three.

rwp@Acts:22:4 @{And I} (\hos\). {I who}, literally. {This Way} (\tautˆn tˆn hodon\). The very term used for Christianity by Luke concerning Paul's persecution (9:2|), which see. Here it "avoids any irritating name for the Christian body" (Furneaux) by using this Jewish terminology. {Unto the death} (\achri thanatou\). Unto death, actual death of many as strkjv@26:10| shows. {Both men and women} (\andras te kai gunaikas\). Paul felt ashamed of this fact and it was undoubtedly in his mind when he pictured his former state as "a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious (1Timothy:1:13|), the first of sinners" (1Timothy:1:15|). But it showed the lengths to which Paul went in his zeal for Judaism.

rwp@Acts:22:22 @{They gave him audience} (\ˆkouon\). Imperfect active, they kept on listening, at least with respectful attention. {Unto this word} (\achri toutou tou logou\). But "this word" was like a spark in a powder magazine or a torch to an oil tank. The explosion of pent-up indignation broke out instantly worse than at first (21:30|). {Away with such a fellow from the earth} (\Aire apo tˆs gˆs ton toiouton\). They renew the cry with the very words in strkjv@21:36|, but with "from the earth" for vehemence. {For it is not fit} (\ou gar kathˆken\). Imperfect active of \kathˆk“\, old verb to come down to, to become, to fit. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:1:28|. The imperfect is a neat Greek idiom for impatience about an obligation: It was not fitting, he ought to have been put to death long ago. The obligation is conceived as not lived up to like our "ought" (past of owe). See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 886.

rwp@Acts:23:1 @{Looking steadfastly} (\atenisas\). See on this word strkjv@1:10; strkjv@3:12; strkjv@6:15; strkjv@7:55; strkjv@13:9|. Paul may have had weak eyes, but probably the earnest gaze was to see if he recognized any faces that were in the body that tried Stephen and to which he apparently once belonged. {I have lived before God} (\pepoliteumai t“i the“i\). Perfect middle indicative of \politeu“\, old verb to manage affairs of city (\polis\) or state, to be a citizen, behave as a citizen. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Phillipians:1:27|. The idea of citizenship was Greek and Roman, not Jewish. "He had lived as God's citizen, as a member of God's commonwealth" (Rackham). God (\the“i\) is the dative of personal interest. As God looked at it and in his relation to God. {In all good conscience unto this day} (\pasˆi suneidˆsei agathˆi achri tautˆs tˆs hˆmeras\). This claim seems to lack tact, but for brevity's sake Paul sums up a whole speech in it. He may have said much more than Luke here reports along the line of his speech the day before, but Paul did not make this claim without consideration. It appears to contradict his confession as the chief of sinners (1Timothy:1:13-16|). But that depends on one's interpretation of "good conscience." The word \suneidˆsis\ is literally "joint-knowledge" in Greek, Latin (_conscientia_) and English "conscience" from the Latin. It is a late word from \sunoida\, to know together, common in O.T., Apocrypha, Philo, Plutarch, New Testament, Stoics, ecclesiastical writers. In itself the word simply means consciousness of one's own thoughts (Hebrews:10:2|), or of one's own self, then consciousness of the distinction between right and wrong (Romans:2:15|) with approval or disapproval. But the conscience is not an infallible guide and acts according to the light that it has (1Corinthians:8:7,10; strkjv@1Peter:2:19|). The conscience can be contaminated (Hebrews:10:22|, evil \ponˆrƒs\). All this and more must be borne in mind in trying to understand Paul's description of his motives as a persecutor. Alleviation of his guilt comes thereby, but not removal of guilt as he himself felt (1Timothy:1:13-16|). He means to say to the Sanhedrin that he persecuted Christians as a conscientious (though mistaken) Jew (Pharisee) just as he followed his conscience in turning from Judaism to Christianity. It is a pointed disclaimer against the charge that he is a renegade Jew, an opposer of the law, the people, the temple. Paul addresses the Sanhedrin as an equal and has no "apologies" (in our sense) to make for his career as a whole. The golden thread of consistency runs through, as a good citizen in God's commonwealth. He had the consolation of a good conscience (1Peter:3:16|). The word does not occur in the Gospels and chiefly in Paul's Epistles, but we see it at work in strkjv@John:8:9| (the interpolation strkjv@7:53-8:11|).

rwp@Acts:23:25 @{And he wrote} (\grapsas\). First aorist active participle of \graph“\, agreeing with the subject (Lysias) of \eipen\ (said) back in verse 23| (beginning). {After this form} (\echousan ton tupon touton\). Textus Receptus has \periechousan\. The use of \tupon\ (type or form) like _exemplum_ in Latin (Page who quotes Cicero _Ad Att_. IX. 6. 3) may give merely the purport or substantial contents of the letter. But there is no reason for thinking that it is not a genuine copy since the letter may have been read in open court before Felix, and Luke was probably with Paul. The Roman law required that a subordinate officer like Lysias in reporting a case to his superior should send a written statement of the case and it was termed _elogium_. A copy of the letter may have been given Paul after his appeal to Caesar. It was probably written in Latin. The letter is a "dexterous mixture of truth and falsehood" (Furneaux) with the stamp of genuineness. It puts things in a favourable light for Lysias and makes no mention of his order to scourge Paul.

rwp@Acts:24:10 @{When the governor had beckoned to him} (\neusantos aut“i tou hˆgemonos\). Genitive absolute again with first aorist active participle of \neu“\, to give a nod, old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@John:13:24|. "The governor nodding to him." {Forasmuch as I know} (\epistamenos\). Knowing, from \epistamai\. {That thou hast been of many years a judge} (\ek poll“n et“n onta se kritˆn\). The participle in indirect assertion after \epistamenos\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1041). Paul goes as far as he can in the way of a compliment. For seven years Felix has been governor, \onta\ being a sort of progressive present participle with \ek poll“n et“n\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 892). {Cheerfully} (\euthum“s\). Old adverb from \euthumos\ (\eu\ and \thumos\, good spirit), here only in N.T. {Make my defence} (\apologoumai\). Old and regular word for this idea as in strkjv@Luke:21:14| which see.

rwp@Acts:24:14 @{I confess} (\homolog“\). The only charge left was that of being a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes. This Paul frankly confesses is true. He uses the word in its full sense. He is "guilty" of that. {After the Way} (\kata tˆn hodon\). This word Paul had already applied to Christianity (22:4|). He prefers it to "sect" (\hairesin\ which means a choosing, then a division). Paul claims Christianity to be the real (whole, catholic) Judaism, not a "sect" of it. But he will show that Christianity is not a deviation from Judaism, but the fulfilment of it (Page) as he has already shown in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9|. {Songs:serve I the God of our fathers} (\hout“s latreu“ t“i patr“i“i the“i\). Paul has not stretched the truth at all. He has confirmed the claim made before the Sanhedrin that he is a spiritual Pharisee in the truest sense (23:6|). He reasserts his faith in all the law and the prophets, holding to the Messianic hope. A curious "heretic" surely! {Which these themselves also look for} (\hˆn kai autoi houtoi prosdechontai\). Probably with a gesture towards his accusers. He does not treat them all as Sadducees. See strkjv@Titus:2:13| for similar use of the verb (\prosdechomenoi tˆn makarian elpida\, looking for the happy hope).

rwp@Acts:25:8 @{While Paul said in his defence} (\tou Paulou apologoumenou\). Genitive absolute again, present middle participle of \apologeomai\, old verb to make defence as in strkjv@19:33; strkjv@24:10; strkjv@26:1,2|. The recitative \hoti\ of the Greek before a direct quotation is not reproduced in English. {Have I sinned at all} (\ti hˆmarton\). Constative aorist active indicative of \hamartan“\, to miss, to sin. The \ti\ is cognate accusative (or adverbial accusative). Either makes sense. Paul sums up the charges under the three items of law of the Jews, the temple, the Roman state (Caesar). This last was the one that would interest Festus and, if proved, would render Paul guilty of treason (\majestas\). Nero was Emperor A.D. 54-68, the last of the emperors with any hereditary claim to the name "Caesar." Soon it became merely a title like Kaiser and Czar (modern derivatives). In Acts only "Caesar" and "Augustus" are employed for the Emperor, not "King" (\Basileus\) as from the time of Domitian. Paul's denial is complete and no proof had been presented. Luke was apparently present at the trial.

rwp@Acts:25:16 @{It is not the custom of the Romans} (\hoti ouk estin ethos R“maiois\). If a direct quotation, \hoti\ is recitative as in Authorized Version. Canterbury Revision takes it as indirect discourse after \apekrithˆn\ (I answered), itself in a relative clause (\pros hous\) with the present tense (\estin\, is) preserved as is usual. There is a touch of disdain (Furneaux) in the tone of Festus. He may refer to a demand of the Jews before they asked that Paul be brought to Jerusalem (25:3|). At any rate there is a tone of scorn towards the Jews. {Before that the accused have} (\prin ˆ ho katˆgoroumenos echoi\). This use of the optative in this temporal clause with \prin ˆ\ instead of the subjunctive \an echˆi\ is in conformity with literary Greek and occurs only in Luke's writings in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 970). This sequence of modes is a mark of the literary style occasionally seen in Luke. It is interesting here to note the succession of dependent clauses in verses 14-16|. {The accusers face to face} (\kata pros“pon tous katˆgorous\). Same word \katˆgoros\ as in strkjv@23:30,35; strkjv@25:18|. This all sounds fair enough. {And have had opportunity to make his defence concerning the matter laid against him} (\topon te apologias laboi peri tou egklˆmatos\). Literally, "And should receive (\laboi\ optative for same reason as \echoi\ above, second aorist active of \lamban“\) opportunity for defence (objective genitive) concerning the charge" (\egklˆmatos\ in N.T. only here and strkjv@23:19| which see).

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@Acts:26:1 @{Thou art permitted} (\epitrepetai soi\). Literally, It is permitted thee. As if Agrippa were master of ceremonies instead of Festus. Agrippa as a king and guest presides at the grand display while Festus has simply introduced Paul. {For thyself} (\huper seautou\). Some MSS. have \peri\ (concerning). Paul is allowed to speak in his own behalf. No charges are made against him. In fact, Festus has admitted that he has no real proof of any charges. {Stretched forth his hand} (\ekteinas tˆn cheira\). Dramatic oratorical gesture (not for silence as in strkjv@12:17; strkjv@13:16|) with the chain still upon it (verse 29|) linking him to the guard. First aorist active participle of \ektein“\, to stretch out. {Made his defence} (\apelogeito\). Inchoative imperfect of \apologeomai\ (middle), "began to make his defence." This is the fullest of all Paul's defences. He has no word of censure of his enemies or of resentment, but seizes the opportunity to preach Christ to such a distinguished company which he does with "singular dignity" (Furneaux). He is now bearing the name of Christ "before kings" (Acts:9:15|). In general Paul follows the line of argument of the speech on the stairs (chapter strkjv@Acts:22|).

rwp@Acts:26:2 @{I think myself happy} (\hˆgˆmai emauton makarion\). See on ¯Matthew:5:3| for \makarios\. Blass notes that Paul, like Tertullus, begins with _captatio benevolentiae_, but _absque adulatione_. He says only what he can truthfully speak. For \hˆgˆmai\ see strkjv@Phillipians:3:7; strkjv@1Timothy:6:1| (perfect middle indicative of \hˆgeomai\), I have considered. {That I am to make my defence} (\mell“n apologeisthai\). Literally, "being about to make my defence." {Whereof I am accused} (\h“n egkaloumai\). Genitive with \egkaloumai\ as in strkjv@19:40| or by attraction from accusative of relative (\ha\) to case of antecedent (\pant“n\).

rwp@Acts:26:3 @{Especially because thou art expert} (\malista gn“stˆn onta se\). Or like the margin, "because thou art especially expert," according as \malista\ is construed. \Gn“stˆn\ is from \gin“sk“\ and means a knower, expert, connoisseur. Plutarch uses it and Deissmann (_Light_, etc., p. 367) restores it in a papyrus. Agrippa had the care of the temple, the appointment of the high priest, and the care of the sacred vestments. But the accusative \onta se\ gives trouble here coming so soon after \sou\ (genitive with \epi\). Some MSS. insert \epistamenos\ or \eid“s\ (knowing) but neither is genuine. Page takes it as "governed by the sense of thinking or considering." Knowling considers it an anacoluthon. Buttmann held it to be an accusative absolute after the old Greek idiom. \Tuchon\ is such an instance though used as an adverb (1Corinthians:16:6|). It is possible that one exists in strkjv@Ephesians:1:18|. See other examples discussed in Robertson's _Grammar_, pp. 490f. {Customs and questions} (\eth“n te kai zˆtˆmat“n\). Both _consuetudinum in practicis_ and _quaestionum in theoreticis_ (Bengel). Agrippa was qualified to give Paul an understanding and a sympathetic hearing. Paul understands perfectly the grand-stand play of the whole performance, but he refused to be silent and chose to use this opportunity, slim as it seemed, to get a fresh hearing for his own case and to present the claims of Christ to this influential man. His address is a masterpiece of noble apologetic. {Patiently} (\makrothum“s\). Adverb from \makrothumos\. Only here in the N.T., though \makrothumia\ occurs several times. Vulgate has _longanimiter_. Long spirit, endurance, opposite of impatience. Songs:Paul takes his time.

rwp@Acts:26:4 @{My manner of life} (\tˆn men oun bi“sin mou\). With \men oun\ Paul passes from the _captatio benevolentiae_ (verses 1,2|) "to the _narratio_ or statement of his case" (Page). \Bi“sis\ is from \bio“\ (1Peter:4:2|) and that from \bios\ (course of life). This is the only instance of \bi“sis\ yet found except the Prologue (10) of Ecclesiasticus and an inscription given in Ramsay's _Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia_, Vol II, p. 650. {Know} (\isƒsi\). Literary form instead of the vernacular _Koin‚_ \oidasin\. Paul's early life in Tarsus and Jerusalem was an open book to all Jews.

rwp@Acts:26:20 @{But declared} (\alla apˆggellon\). Imperfect active of \apaggell“\, repeatedly. {Throughout all the country of Judea} (\pƒsan te tˆn ch“ran tˆs Ioudaias\). The accusative here in the midst of the datives (\tois en Damask“i, Ierosolumois, tois ethnesin\) seems strange and Page feels certain that \eis\ should be here even though absent in Aleph A B. But the accusative of extent of space will explain it (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 469). {Doing works worthy of repentance} (\axia tˆs metanoias erga prassontas\). Accusative case of present active participle \prassontas\ because of the implied \autous\ with the present infinitive \metanoein\ (repent) and \epistrephein\ (turn), though the dative \prassousin\ could have been used to agree with \ethnesin\ (Gentiles). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:3:8| for similar language used of the Baptist. Paul, the greatest of theologians, was an interesting practical preacher.

rwp@Acts:26:24 @{As he thus made his defence} (\tauta autou apologoumenou\). Genitive absolute again with present middle participle. Paul was still speaking when Festus interrupted him in great excitement. {With a loud voice} (\megalˆi tˆi ph“nˆi\). Associative instrumental case showing manner (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 530) and the predicate use of the adjective, "with the voice loud" (elevated). {Thou art mad} (\mainˆi\). Old verb for raving. See also strkjv@John:10:20; strkjv@Acts:12:15; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:23|. The enthusiasm of Paul was too much for Festus and then he had spoken of visions and resurrection from the dead (verse 8|). "Thou art going mad" (linear present), Festus means. {Thy much learning doth turn thee to madness} (\ta polla se grammata eis manian peritrepei\). "Is turning thee round." Old verb \peritrep“\, but only here in N.T. Festus thought that Paul's "much learning" (="many letters," cf. strkjv@John:7:15| of Jesus) of the Hebrew Scriptures to which he had referred was turning his head to madness (wheels in his head) and he was going mad right before them all. The old word \mania\ (our mania, frenzy, cf. maniac) occurs here only in N.T. Note unusual position of \se\ between \polla\ and \grammata\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 418, 420)

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

rwp@Acts:28:4 @{The beast} (\to thˆrion\). Diminutive of \thˆr\ and so little beast. See on ¯Mark:1:13|. Aristotle and the medical writers apply the word to venomous serpents, the viper in particular (Knowling), as Luke does here. Vincent calls attention to the curious history of our word "_treacle_" for molasses (Latin _theriaca_) from \thˆriakˆ\, an antidote made from the flesh of vipers. Coverdale translates strkjv@Jeremiah:8:22|: "There is no more treacle in Gilead." Jeremy Taylor: "We kill the viper and make treacle of him." {Hanging from his hand} (\kremamenon ek tˆs cheiros autou\). Vivid picture of the snake dangling from Paul's hand. Present middle participle of \kremamai\, late form for \kremannumi\, to hang up, to suspend (cf. strkjv@Galatians:3:13|). {No doubt} (\pant“s\). Literally, By all means, old adverb. Cf. strkjv@21:22; strkjv@Luke:4:23; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:22|. Only by Luke and Paul in the N.T. "They _knew_ that he was a prisoner being taken to Rome on some grave charge, and _inferred_ that the charge was murder" (Page). {Though he hath escaped} (\dias“thenta\). First aorist passive participle of \dias“z“\ (same verb used in strkjv@24:43,44; strkjv@28:1|), so-called concessive use of the participle (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1129). {Yet Justice} (\dikˆ\). An abstraction personified like the Latin _Justitia_ (Page). The natives speak of \Dikˆ\ as a goddess, but we know nothing of such actual worship in Malta, though the Greeks worshipped abstractions as in Athens. {Hath not suffered} (\ouk eiasen\). Did not suffer. They look on Paul as a doomed man as good as dead. These people thought that calamity was proof of guilt, poor philosophy and worse theology.

rwp@Colossians:1:5 @{Because of the hope} (\dia tˆn elpida\). See strkjv@Romans:8:24|. It is not clear whether this phrase is to be linked with \eucha istoumen\ at the beginning of verse 3| or (more likely) with \tˆn agapˆn\ just before. Note also here \pistis\ (faith), \agapˆ\ (love), \elpis\ (hope), though not grouped together so sharply as in strkjv@1Corinthians:13:13|. Here hope is objective, the goal ahead. {Laid up} (\apokeimeinˆn\). Literally, "laid away or by." Old word used in strkjv@Luke:19:20| of the pound laid away in a napkin. See also \apothˆsauriz“\, to store away for future use (1Timothy:6:19|). The same idea occurs in strkjv@Matthew:6:20| (treasure in heaven) and strkjv@1Peter:1:4| and it is involved in strkjv@Philemon:3:20|. {Ye heard before} (\proˆkousate\). First aorist indicative active of this old compound \proakou“\, though only here in the N.T. Before what? Before Paul wrote? Before the realization? Before the error of the Gnostics crept in? Each view is possible and has advocates. Lightfoot argues for the last and it is probably correct as is indicated by the next clause. {In the word of the truth of the gospel} (\en t“i log“i tˆs alˆtheias tou euaggeliou\). "In the preaching of the truth of the gospel" (Galatians:2:5,14|) which is come (\parontos\, present active participle agreeing with \euaggeliou\, being present, a classical use of \pareimi\ as in strkjv@Acts:12:20|). They heard the pure gospel from Epaphras before the Gnostics came.

rwp@Colossians:1:15 @{The image} (\eik“n\). In predicate and no article. On \eik“n\, see strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4; strkjv@3:18; strkjv@Romans:8:29; strkjv@Colossians:3:10|. Jesus is the very stamp of God the Father as he was before the Incarnation (John:17:5|) and is now (Phillipians:2:5-11; strkjv@Hebrews:1:3|). {Of the invisible God} (\tou theou tou aoratou\). But the one who sees Jesus has seen God (John:14:9|). See this verbal adjective (\a\ privative and \hora“\) in strkjv@Romans:1:20|. {The first born} (\pr“totokos\). Predicate adjective again and anarthrous. This passage is parallel to the \Logos\ passage in strkjv@John:1:1-18| and to strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4| as well as strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11| in which these three writers (John, author of Hebrews, Paul) give the high conception of the Person of Christ (both Son of God and Son of Man) found also in the Synoptic Gospels and even in Q (the Father, the Son). This word (LXX and N.T.) can no longer be considered purely "Biblical" (Thayer), since it is found In inscriptions (Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 91) and in the papyri (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary, etc._). See it already in strkjv@Luke:2:7| and Aleph for strkjv@Matthew:1:25; strkjv@Romans:8:29|. The use of this word does not show what Arius argued that Paul regarded Christ as a creature like "all creation" (\pƒsˆs ktise“s\, by metonomy the _act_ regarded as _result_). It is rather the comparative (superlative) force of \pr“tos\ that is used (first-born of all creation) as in strkjv@Colossians:1:18; strkjv@Romans:8:29; strkjv@Hebrews:1:6; strkjv@12:23; strkjv@Revelation:1:5|. Paul is here refuting the Gnostics who pictured Christ as one of the aeons by placing him before "all creation" (angels and men). Like \eik“n\ we find \pr“totokos\ in the Alexandrian vocabulary of the \Logos\ teaching (Philo) as well as in the LXX. Paul takes both words to help express the deity of Jesus Christ in his relation to the Father as \eik“n\ (Image) and to the universe as \pr“totokos\ (First-born).

rwp@Colossians:1:19 @{For it was the good pleasure of the Father} (\hoti eudokˆsen\). No word in the Greek for "the Father," though the verb calls for either \ho theos\ or \ho patˆr\ as the subject. This verb \eudoke“\ is common in the N.T. for God's will and pleasure (Matthew:3:17; strkjv@1Corinthians:10:5|). {All the fulness} (\pƒn to plˆr“ma\). The same idea as in strkjv@2:9| \pƒn to plˆr“ma tˆs theotˆtos\ (all the fulness of the Godhead). "A recognized technical term in theology, denoting the totality of the Divine powers and attributes" (Lightfoot). It is an old word from \plˆro“\, to fill full, used in various senses as in strkjv@Mark:8:20| of the baskets, strkjv@Galatians:4:10| of time, etc. The Gnostics distributed the divine powers among various aeons. Paul gathers them all up in Christ, a full and flat statement of the deity of Christ. {Should dwell} (\katoikˆsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \katoike“\, to make abode or home. All the divine attributes are at home in Christ (\en aut“i\).

rwp@Colossians:1:25 @{According to the dispensation of God} (\kata tˆn oikonomian tou theou\). "According to the economy of God." An old word from \oikonome“\, to be a house steward (\oikos, nem“\) as in strkjv@Luke:16:2-4; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:17; strkjv@Ephesians:1:9; strkjv@3:9|. It was by God's stewardship that Paul was made a minister of Christ. {To fulfil the word of God} (\plˆr“sai ton logon tou theou\). First aorist active infinitive of purpose (\plˆro“\), a fine phrase for a God-called preacher, to fill full or to give full scope to the Word of God. The preacher is an expert on the word of God by profession. See Paul's ideal about preaching in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:1|.

rwp@Colossians:2:1 @{How greatly I strive} (\hˆlikon ag“na ech“\). Literally, "how great a contest I am having." The old adjectival relative \hˆlikos\ (like Latin _quantus_) is used for age or size in N.T. only here and strkjv@James:3:5| (twice, how great, how small). It is an inward contest of anxiety like the \merimna\ for all the churches (2Corinthians:11:28|). \Ag“na\ carries on the metaphor of \ag“nizomenos\ in strkjv@1:29|. {For them at Laodicea} (\t“n en Laodikiƒi\). {Supply} \huper\ as with \huper hum“n\. Paul's concern extended beyond Colossae to Laodicea (4:16|) and to Hierapolis (4:13|), the three great cities in the Lycus Valley where Gnosticism was beginning to do harm. Laodicea is the church described as lukewarm in strkjv@Revelation:3:14|. {For as many as have not seen my face} (\hosoi ouch heorakan to pros“pon mou\). The phrase undoubtedly includes Hierapolis (4:13|), and a few late MSS. actually insert it here. Lightfoot suggests that Hierapolis had not yet been harmed by the Gnostics as much as Colossae and Laodicea. Perhaps so, but the language includes all in that whole region who have not seen Paul's face in the flesh (that is, in person, and not in picture). How precious a real picture of Paul would be to us today. The antecedent to \hosoi\ is not expressed and it would be \tout“n\ after \huper\. The form \heorakan\ (perfect active indicative of \hora“\ instead of the usual \he“rakasin\ has two peculiarities \o\ in Paul's Epistles (1Corinthians:9:1|) instead of \“\ (see strkjv@John:1:18| for \he“raken\) and \-an\ by analogy in place of \-asin\, which short form is common in the papyri. See strkjv@Luke:9:36| \he“rakan\.

rwp@Colossians:2:4 @{This I say} (\touto leg“\). Paul explains why he has made this great claim for Christ at this point in his discussion. {May delude} (\paralogizˆtai\). Present middle subjunctive of \paralogizomai\, old verb, only here in N.T., from \para\ and \logizomai\, to count aside and so wrong, to cheat by false reckoning, to deceive by false reasoning (Epictetus). {With persuasiveness of speech} (\en pithanologiƒi\). Rare word (Plato) from \pithanos\ and \logos\, speech, adapted to persuade, then speciously leading astray. Only here in N.T. One papyrus example. The art of persuasion is the height of oratory, but it easily degenerates into trickery and momentary and flashy deceit such as Paul disclaimed in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:4| (\ouk en pithois sophias logois\) where he uses the very adjective \pithos\ (persuasive) of which \pithanos\ (both from \peith“\) is another form. It is curious how winning champions of error, like the Gnostics and modern faddists, can be with plausibility that catches the gullible.

rwp@Colossians:2:13 @{And you} (\kai humas\). Emphatic position, object of the verb \sunez“opoiˆsen\ (did he quicken) and repeated (second \humƒs\). You Gentiles as he explains. {Being dead through your trespasses} (\nekrous ontas tois parapt“masin\). Moral death, of course, as in strkjv@Romans:6:11; strkjv@Ephesians:2:1,5|. Correct text does not have \en\, but even so \parapt“masin\ (from \parapipt“\, to fall beside or to lapse, strkjv@Hebrews:6:6|), a lapse or misstep as in strkjv@Matthew:6:14; strkjv@Romans:5:15-18; strkjv@Galatians:6:1|, can be still in the locative, though the instrumental makes good sense also. {And the uncircumcision of your flesh} (\kai tˆi akroboustiƒi tˆs sarkos hum“n\). "Dead in your trespasses and your alienation from God, of which the uncircumcision of your flesh was a symbol" (Abbott). Clearly so, "the uncircumcision" used merely in a metaphorical sense. {Did he quicken together with him} (\sunez“opoiˆsen sun aut“i\). First aorist active indicative of the double compound verb \sunz“opoie“\, to make alive (\z“os, poie“\) with (\sun\, repeated also with \aut“i\, associative instrumental), found only here and in strkjv@Ephesians:2:5|, apparently coined by Paul for this passage. Probably \theos\ (God) is the subject because expressly so stated in strkjv@Ephesians:2:4f.| and because demanded by \sun aut“i\ here referring to Christ. This can be true even if Christ be the subject of \ˆrken\ in verse 14|. {Having forgiven us} (\charisamenos hˆmin\). First aorist middle participle of \charizomai\, common verb from \charis\ (favour, grace). Dative of the person common as in strkjv@3:13|. The act of forgiving is simultaneous with the quickening, though logically antecedent.

rwp@Colossians:2:19 @{Not holding fast the Head} (\ou krat“n tˆn kephalˆn\). Note negative \ou\, not \mˆ\, actual case of deserting Christ as the Head. The Gnostics dethroned Christ from his primacy (1:18|) and placed him below a long line of aeons or angels. They did it with words of praise for Christ as those do now who teach Christ as only the noblest of men. The headship of Christ is the keynote of this Epistle to the Colossians and the heart of Paul's Christology. {From whom} (\ex hou\). Masculine ablative rather than \ex hˆs\ (\kephalˆs\) because Christ is the Head. He develops the figure of the body of which Christ is Head (1:18,24|). {Being supplied} (\epichorˆgoumenon\). Present passive participle (continuous action) of \epichorˆge“\, for which interesting verb see already strkjv@2Corinthians:9:10; strkjv@Galatians:3:5| and further strkjv@2Peter:1:5|. {Knit together} (\sunbibazomenon\). Present passive participle also (continuous action) of \sunbibaz“\, for which see strkjv@Colossians:2:2|. {Through the joints} (\dia t“n haph“n\). Late word \haphˆ\ (from \hapt“\, to fasten together), connections (_junctura_ and _nexus_ in the Vulgate). {And bonds} (\kai sundesm“n\). Old word from \sunde“\, to bind together. Aristotle and Galen use it of the human body. Both words picture well the wonderful unity in the body by cells, muscles, arteries, veins, nerves, skin, glands, etc. It is a marvellous machine working together under the direction of the head. {Increaseth with the increase of God} (\auxei tˆn auxˆsin tou theou\). Cognate accusative (\auxˆsin\) with the old verb \auxei\.

rwp@Colossians:2:23 @{Which things} (\hatina\). "Which very things," these ascetic regulations. {Have indeed a show of wisdom} (\estin logon men echonta sophias\). Periphrastic present indicative with \estin\ in the singular, but present indicative \echonta\ in the plural (\hatina\). \Logon sophias\ is probably "the repute of wisdom" (Abbott) like Plato and Herodotus. \Men\ (in deed) has no corresponding \de\. {In will-worship} (\en ethelothrˆskiƒi\). This word occurs nowhere else and was probably coined by Paul after the pattern of \ethelodouleia\, to describe the voluntary worship of angels (see strkjv@2:18|). {And humility} (\kai tapeinophrosunˆi\). Clearly here the bad sense, "in mock humility." {And severity to the body} (\kai apheidiƒi s“matos\). Old word (Plato) from \apheidˆs\, unsparing (\a\ privative, \pheidomai\, to spare). Here alone in N.T. Ascetics often practice flagellations and other hardnesses to the body. {Not of any value} (\ouk en timˆi tini\). \Timˆ\ usually means honour or price. {Against the indulgence of the flesh} (\pros plˆsmonˆn tˆs sarkos\). These words are sharply debated along with \timˆ\ just before. It is not unusual for \pros\ to be found in the sense of "against" rather than "with" or "for." See \pros\ in sense of {against} in strkjv@3:13; strkjv@Ephesians:6:11f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:6:1|. \Plˆsmonˆ\ is an old word from \pimplˆmi\, to fill and means satiety. It occurs here only in the N.T. Peake is inclined to agree with Hort and Haupt that there is a primitive corruption here. But the translation in the Revised Version is possible and it is true that mere rules do not carry us very far in human conduct as every father or mother knows, though we must have some regulations in family and state and church. But they are not enough of themselves.

rwp@Colossians:3:8 @{But now} (\nuni de\). Emphatic form of \nun\ in decided contrast (to \pote\ in verse 7|) in the resurrection life of strkjv@2:12; strkjv@3:1|. {Put ye also away} (\apothesthe kai humeis\). Second aorist middle imperative of old verb \apotithˆmi\, to put away, lay aside like old clothes. This metaphor of clothing Paul now uses with several verbs (\apothesthe\ here, \apekdusamenoi\ in verse 9|, \endusamenoi\ in verse 10|, \endusasthe\ in verse 12|). {All these} (\ta panta\). The whole bunch of filthy rags (anger \orgˆn\, wrath \thumon\, malice \kakian\, railing \blasphˆmian\, shameful speaking \aischrologian\). See somewhat similar lists of vices in strkjv@Colossians:3:5; strkjv@Galatians:5:20; strkjv@Ephesians:4:29-31|. These words have all been discussed except \aischrologian\, an old word for low and obscene speech which occurs here only in the N.T. It is made from \aischrologos\ (\aischros\ as in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:6| and that from \aischos\, disgrace). Note also the addition of "out of your mouth" (\ek tou stomatos hum“n\). The word was used for both abusive and filthy talk and Lightfoot combines both ideas as often happens. Such language should never come out of the mouth of a Christian living the new life in Christ.

rwp@Colossians:3:10 @{And have put on} (\kai endusamenoi\). First aorist middle participle (in causal sense as before) of \endun“\, old and common verb (Latin _induo_, English endue) for putting on a garment. Used of putting on Christ (Galatians:3:27; strkjv@Romans:13:14|). {The new man} (\ton neon\). "The new (young as opposed to old \palaion\) man" (though \anthr“pon\ is not here expressed, but understood from the preceding phrase). In strkjv@Ephesians:4:24| Paul has \endusasthai ton kainon\ (fresh as opposed to worn out) \anthr“pon\. {Which is being renewed} (\ton anakainoumenon\). Present passive articular participle of \anakaino“\. Paul apparently coined this word on the analogy of \ananeomai\. \Anakainiz“\ already existed (Hebrews:6:6|). Paul also uses \anakain“sis\ (Romans:12:2; strkjv@Titus:3:5|) found nowhere before him. By this word Paul adds the meaning of \kainos\ to that of \neos\ just before. It is a continual refreshment (\kainos\) of the new (\neos\, young) man in Christ Jesus. {Unto knowledge} (\eis epign“sin\). "Unto full (additional) knowledge," one of the keywords in this Epistle. {After the image} (\kat' eikona\). An allusion to strkjv@Genesis:1:26,28|. The restoration of the image of God in us is gradual and progressive (2Corinthians:3:18|), but will be complete in the final result (Romans:8:29; strkjv@1John:3:2|).

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

rwp@Colossians:3:17 @{Whatsoever ye do} (\pƒn hoti ean poiˆte\). Indefinite relative (everything whatever) with \ean\ and the present active subjunctive, a common idiom in such clauses. {Do all} (\panta\). The imperative \poieite\ has to be supplied from \poiˆte\ in the relative clause. \Panta\ is repeated from \pƒn\ (singular), but in the plural (all things). \Pƒn\ is left as a nominative absolute as in strkjv@Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:10|. This is a sort of Golden Rule for Christians "in the name of the Lord Jesus" (\en onomati Kuriou Iˆsou\), in the spirit of the Lord Jesus (Ephesians:5:20|). What follows (directions to the various groups) is in this same vein. Sociological problems have always existed. Paul puts his finger on the sore spot in each group with unerring skill like a true diagnostician.

rwp@Colossians:4:3 @{Withal} (\hama\). At the same time. {That God may open} (\hina ho theos anoixˆi\). Common use of \hina\ and the subjunctive (aorist), the sub-final use so common in the N.T. as in the _Koin‚_. {A door for the word} (\thuran tou logou\). Objective genitive, a door for preaching. It is comforting to other preachers to see the greatest of all preachers here asking prayer that he may be set free again to preach. He uses this figure elsewhere, once of a great and open door with many adversaries in Ephesus (1Corinthians:16:9|), once of an open door that he could not enter in Troas (2Corinthians:2:12|). {The mystery of Christ} (\to mustˆrion tou Christou\). The genitive of apposition, the mystery which is Christ (2:2|), one that puts out of comparison the foolish "mysteries" of the Gnostics. {For which I am also in bonds} (\di' ho kai dedemai\). Perfect passive indicative of \de“\. Paul is always conscious of this limitation, this chain. At bottom he is a prisoner because of his preaching to the Gentiles.

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

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

rwp@Ephesians:3:20 @{That is able to do} (\t“i dunamen“i poiˆsai\). Dative case of the articular participle (present middle of \dunamai\). Paul is fully aware of the greatness of the blessings asked for, but the Doxology ascribes to God the power to do them for us. {Above all} (\huper panta\). Not simply \panta\, but \huper\ beyond and above all. {Exceedingly abundantly} (\huperekperissou\). Late and rare double compound (\huper, ek, perissou\) adverb (LXX, strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:10; strkjv@5:13; strkjv@Ephesians:3:20|). It suits well Paul's effort to pile Pelion on Ossa. {That we ask} (\h“n aitoumetha\). Ablative of the relative pronoun attracted from the accusative \ha\ to the case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\. Middle voice (\aitoumetha\) "we ask for ourselves." {Or think} (\ˆ nooumen\). The highest aspiration is not beyond God's "power" (\dunamin\) to bestow.

rwp@Ephesians:4:16 @{From which} (\ex hou\). Out of which as the source of energy and direction. {Fitly framed} (\sunarmologoumenon\). See strkjv@2:21| for this verb. {Through that which every joint supplieth} (\dia pasˆs haphˆs tˆs epichorˆgias\). Literally, "through every joint of the supply." See strkjv@Colossians:2:19| for \haphˆ\ and strkjv@Phillipians:1:19| for the late word \epichorˆgia\ (only two examples in N.T.) from \epichorˆge“\, to supply (Colossians:2:19|). {In due measure} (\en metr“i\). Just "in measure" in the Greek, but the assumption is that each part of the body functions properly in its own sphere. {Unto the building up of itself} (\eis oikodomˆn heautou\). Modern knowledge of cell life in the human body greatly strengthens the force of Paul's metaphor. This is the way the body grows by cooperation under the control of the head and all "in love" (\en agapˆi\).

rwp@Ephesians:5:4 @{Filthiness} (\aischrotˆs\). Old word from \aischros\ (base), here alone in N.T. {Foolish talking} (\m“rologia\). Late word from \m“rologos\ (\m“ros, logos\), only here in N.T. {Jesting} (\eutrapelia\). Old word from \eutrapelos\ (\eu, trep“\, to turn) nimbleness of wit, quickness in making repartee (so in Plato and Plutarch), but in low sense as here ribaldry, scurrility, only here in N.T. All of these disapproved vices are \hapax legomena\ in the N.T. {Which are not befitting} (\ha ouk anˆken\). Same idiom (imperfect with word of propriety about the present) in strkjv@Colossians:3:18|. Late MSS. read \ta ouk anˆkonta\ like \ta mˆ kathˆkonta\ in strkjv@Romans:1:28|.

rwp@Ephesians:5:6 @{With empty words} (\kenois logois\). Instrumental case. Probably Paul has in mind the same Gnostic praters as in strkjv@Colossians:2:4f|. See strkjv@2:2|.

rwp@Ephesians:6:19 @{That utterance may be given unto me} (\hina moi dothˆi logos\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \did“mi\, to give. See a like request in strkjv@Colossians:4:3|. Paul wishes their prayer for courage for himself.

rwp@Info_Epistles-General @ ORDER AND DATES The oldest Greek manuscripts give these General Epistles immediately after the Acts, and Westcott and Hort so print them in their Greek New Testament. But the English Versions follow the Textus Receptus and put them just before the Apocalypse. The order of the seven letters varies greatly in the different manuscripts, though usually James comes first and Jude:last (as the last accepted and the least known of the four authors). It is possible that the order of James, Peter, and John (omitting Jude) represented a sort of chronological precedence in some minds. It is possible also that no importance is to be attached to this order. Certainly John wrote last and after the destruction of Jerusalem, while the others come before that great event if they are genuine, as I believe, though there are difficulties of a serious nature concerning II Peter. James may be very early. If so, these seven Epistles are scattered all the way from A.D. 45 to 90. They have no connection with one another save in the case of the Epistles of Peter and Jude.

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ THE EPISTLES OF PAUL BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION IMPORTANCE OF PAUL'S WORK It is impossible to put too much emphasis on the life and work of Paul as the great interpreter of Christ. He has been misunderstood in modern times as he was during his career. Some accuse him of perverting the pure gospel of Christ about the Kingdom of God into a theological and ecclesiastical system. He has been accused of rabbinizing the gospel by carrying over his Pharisaism, while others denounce him for Hellenizing the gospel with Greek philosophy and the Greek mystery-religions. But out of all the welter of attacks Paul's Epistles stand as the marvellous expression of his own conception of Christ and the application of the gospel to the life of the Christians in the Graeco-Roman world in which they lived by eternal principles that apply to us today. In order to understand Paul's Epistles one must know the Acts of the Apostles in which Luke has drawn with graphic power the sudden change of the foremost opponent of Christ into the chief expounder and proclaimer of the gospel of the Risen Christ. The Acts and the Epistles supplement each other in a marvellous way, though chiefly in an incidental fashion. It is by no means certain that Luke had access to any of Paul's Epistles before he wrote the Acts, though that was quite possible for the early Epistles. It does not greatly matter for Luke had access to Paul himself both in Caesarea and in Rome. The best life of Paul one can get comes by combining the Acts with the Epistles if he knows how to do it. Paul is Luke's hero, but he has not overdrawn the picture in the Acts as is made clear by the Epistles themselves which reveal his own grasp and growth. The literature on Paul is vast and constantly growing. He possesses a fascination for students of the New Testament and of Christianity. It is impossible here to allude even to the most important in so vast a field. Conybeare and Howson's _Life and Epistles of St. Paul_ still has value. Sir W. M. Ramsay has a small library on Paul and his Epistles. Stalker's masterful little book on Paul still grips men as does the work of Sabatier. Deissmann's _St. Paul _ continues to throw light on the great Apostle to the Gentiles. Those who wish my own view at greater length will find them in my various books on Paul (_Epochs in the Life of Paul_, _Paul the Interpreter of Christ_, etc.).

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ FOUR GROUPS OF PAULINE EPISTLES I. First Thessalonians. | Second Thessalonians. | A.D. 50 to 51. Chief topic Eschatology. To correct misconceptions in Thessalonica. II. First Corinthians. | Second Corinthians | Galatians | A.D. 54 to 57. Romans. | Chief topic Justification by Faith. Defence against the Judaizers. III. Philippians. | Philemon. | Colossians. | A.D. 61 to 63. Ephesians (Laodiceans). Chief topic Christology. Defence against the Gnostic perversions of the Person of Christ. IV. First Timothy. | Titus. | A.D. 65 to 68. Second Timothy. | Ecclesiastical Problems to the fore. DEVELOPMENT IN PAUL'S THEOLOGY

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ The study of Paul's Epistles in the order of their writing is the best possible way of seeing his own growth as a theologian and interpreter of Christ. Sabatier long ago laid emphasis on this point in his book _The Apostle Paul_ as did Matheson in _The Spiritual Development of Paul_. It is a tragedy to have to read Paul's Epistles as printed in the usual Greek text of Westcott and Hort and the English translations, beginning with Romans and ending with Philemon. In the manuscripts that give Paul's Epistles Romans comes first as the largest and most important, but Titus and Philemon come after II Timothy (the last just before his death). We know something of Paul's early preaching how he laid emphasis on the Messiahship of Jesus proven by his resurrection, Paul himself having seen the Risen Christ (Acts:9:22|). This conviction and experience lay at the foundation of all his work and he never faltered concerning it (Acts:17:3). In the earliest sermon of which we have a full report Paul proclaims justification by faith in Christ with forgiveness of sins (Acts:13:38f.|), blessings not obtained by the law of Moses. In the unfolding life of Paul he grappled with great problems of Jewish rabbinism and Greek philosophy and mystery-religions and Paul himself grew in stature as he courageously and victoriously faced Judaizer and Gnostic. There are scholars who claim that Paul surrendered to the appeal of Gnostic sacramentarianism and so went back on his great doctrine of justification by faith, not by works. It will be shown at the proper time that this view misinterprets Paul's attitude. The events given by Luke in the Acts fit in with the self-revelation of Paul in his own Epistles as we read them. Each one of the four groups of Epistles has a slightly different style and vocabulary as is natural when one comes to think of it. The same thing is true of the plays of Shakespeare and the poems of Milton. Style is the man, Buffon says. Yes, but style is also a function of the subject. Particularly is this true of vocabulary which has to vary with the different topics treated. But style in the same man varies with different ages. Ripened old age mellows the exuberance of youth and the passionate vehemence of manhood. We shall see Paul himself in his Epistles, letting himself go in various ways and in different moods. But in all the changing phases of his life and work there is the same masterful man who glories in being the slave of Jesus Christ and the Apostle to the Gentiles. The passion of Paul is Christ and one can feel the throb of the heart of the chief of sinners who became the chief of saints in all his Epistles. There is the Pauline glow and glory in them all.

rwp@Galatians:1:5 @{To whom be the glory} (\h“i hˆ doxa\). No verb in the Greek. For like doxologies see strkjv@Romans:9:5; strkjv@11:36; strkjv@16:27; strkjv@Ephesians:3:21; strkjv@1Timothy:1:17|.

rwp@Galatians:1:18 @{Then after three years} (\epeita meta tria etˆ\). A round number to cover the period from his departure from Jerusalem for Damascus to his return to Jerusalem. This stay in Damascus was an important episode in Paul's theological readjustment to his new experience. {To visit Cephas} (\historˆsai Kˆphƒn\). First aorist infinitive of \histore“\, old verb (from \hist“r\, one who knows by inquiry), to gain knowledge by visiting. Only here in N.T. If we turn to strkjv@Acts:9:26-30|, we shall see that the visit of two weeks to Peter came after Barnabas endorsed Paul to the suspicious disciples in Jerusalem and probably while he was preaching in the city. It was a delightful experience, but Peter did not start Paul upon his apostleship. He visited him as an equal. Peter no doubt had much to say to Paul.

rwp@Galatians:2:10 @{Only} (\monon\). One item was emphasized. {We should remember} (\mnˆmoneu“men\). Present active subjunctive, "that we should keep on remembering." {Which very thing} (\ho--auto touto\). Repetition of relative and demonstrative, tautology, "which this very thing." In fact Barnabas and Saul had done it before (Acts:11:30|). It was complete victory for Paul and Barnabas. Paul passes by the second public meeting and the letters to Antioch (Acts:15:6-29|) and passes on to Peter's conduct in Antioch.

rwp@Galatians:2:17 @{We ourselves were found sinners} (\heurethˆmen kai autoi hamart“loi\). Like the Gentiles, Jews who thought they were not sinners, when brought close to Christ, found that they were. Paul felt like the chief of sinners. {A minister of sin} (\hamartias diakonos\). Objective genitive, a minister to sin. An illogical inference. We were sinners already in spite of being Jews. Christ simply revealed to us our sin. {God forbid} (\mˆ genoito\). Literally, "May it not happen." Wish about the future (\mˆ\ and the optative).

rwp@Galatians:3:6 @{It was reckoned unto him for righteousness} (\elogisthˆ eis dikaiosunˆn\). First aorist passive indicative of \logizomai\. See on ¯1Corinthians:13:5| for this old word. He quotes strkjv@Genesis:15:6| and uses it at length in strkjv@Romans:4:3ff.| to prove that the faith of Abraham was reckoned "for" (\eis\, good _Koin‚_ idiom though more common in LXX because of the Hebrew) righteousness before he was circumcised. James (James:2:23|) quotes the same passage as proof of Abraham's obedience to God in offering up Isaac (beginning to offer him). Paul and James are discussing different episodes in the life of Abraham. Both are correct.

rwp@Galatians:3:8 @{Foreseeing} (\proidousa\). Second aorist active participle of \proora“\. The Scripture is here personified. Alone in this sense of "sight," but common with \legei\ or \eipen\ (says, said) and really in verse 22| "hath shut up" (\sunekleisen\). {Would justify} (\dikaioi\). Present active indicative, "does justify." {Preached the gospel beforehand} (\proeuˆggelisato\). First aorist middle indicative of \proeuaggelizomai\ with augment on \a\ though both \pro\ and \eu\ before it in composition. Only instance in N.T. It occurs in Philo. and Schol. Soph. This Scripture announced beforehand the gospel on this point of justification by faith. He quotes the promise to Abraham in strkjv@Genesis:12:3; strkjv@18:18|, putting \panta ta ethnˆ\ (all the nations) in strkjv@18:18| for \pƒsai hai phulai\ (all the tribes) of the earth. It is a crucial passage for Paul's point, showing that the promise to Abraham included all the nations of the earth. The verb \eneuloge“\ (future passive here) occurs in the LXX and here only in N.T. (not strkjv@Acts:3:25| in correct text). {In thee} (\en soi\). "As their spiritual progenitor" (Lightfoot).

rwp@Galatians:3:10 @{Under a curse} (\hupo kataran\). Picture of the curse hanging over them like a Damocles' blade. Cf. strkjv@Romans:3:9| "under sin" (\huph' hamartian\). The word for "curse" (\katara\) is an old one (\kata\, down, \ara\, imprecation), often in LXX, in N.T. only here and 13; strkjv@James:3:10; strkjv@2Peter:2:14|. Paul quotes strkjv@Deuteronomy:27:26|, the close of the curses on Mt. Ebal. He makes a slight explanatory modification of the LXX changing \logois\ to \gegrammenois en t“i bibli“i\. The idea is made clearer by the participle (\gegrammenois\) and \bibli“i\ (book). The curse becomes effective only when the law is violated. {Cursed} (\epikataratos\). Verbal adjective from \epikataraomai\, to imprecate curses, late word, common in LXX. In N.T. only here and verse 13|, but in inscriptions also (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 96). The emphasis is on "continueth" (\emmenei\) and "all" (\pƒsin\).

rwp@Galatians:3:17 @{Now this I say} (\touto de leg“\). Now I mean this. He comes back to his main point and is not carried afield by the special application of \sperma\ to Christ. {Confirmed beforehand by God} (\prokekur“menˆn hupo tou theou\). Perfect passive participle of \prokuro“\, in Byzantine writers and earliest use here. Nowhere else in N.T. The point is in \pro\ and \hupo tou theou\ (by God) and in \meta\ (after) as Burton shows. {Four hundred and thirty years after} (\meta tetrakosia kai triakonta etˆ\). Literally, "after four hundred and thirty years." This is the date in strkjv@Exodus:12:40| for the sojourn in Egypt (cf. strkjv@Genesis:15:13|). But the LXX adds words to include the time of the patriarchs in Canaan in this number of years which would cut the time in Egypt in two. Cf. strkjv@Acts:7:6|. It is immaterial to Paul's argument which chronology is adopted except that "the longer the covenant had been in force the more impressive is his statement" (Burton). {Doth not disannul} (\ouk akuroi\). Late verb \akuro“\, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:15:6; strkjv@Mark:7:13| (from \a\ privative and \kuros\, authority). On \katargˆsai\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:1:28; strkjv@2:6; strkjv@15:24,26|.

rwp@Galatians:5:4 @{Ye are severed from Christ} (\katˆrgˆthˆte apo Christou\). First aorist passive of \katarge“\, to make null and void as in strkjv@Romans:7:2,6|. {Who would be justified by the law} (\hoitines en nom“i dikaiousthe\). Present passive conative indicative, "ye who are trying to be justified in the law." {Ye are fallen away from grace} (\tˆs charitos exepesate\). Second aorist active indicative of \ekpipt“\ (with \a\ variable vowel of the first aorist) and followed by the ablative case. "Ye did fall out of grace," "ye left the sphere of grace in Christ and took your stand in the sphere of law" as your hope of salvation. Paul does not mince words and carries the logic to the end of the course. He is not, of course, speaking of occasional sins, but he has in mind a far more serious matter, that of substituting law for Christ as the agent in salvation.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE STYLE It is called an epistle and so it is, but of a peculiar kind. In fact, as has been said, it begins like a treatise, proceeds like a sermon, and concludes like a letter. It is, in fact, more like a literary composition than any other New Testament book as Deissmann shows: "It points to the fact that the Epistle to the Hebrews, with its more definitely artistic, more literary language (corresponding to its more theological subject matter), constituted an epoch in the history of the new religion. Christianity is beginning to lay hands on the instruments of culture; the literary and theological period has begun" (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 70f.). But Blass (_Die Rhythmen der asianischen und romischen Kunstprosa_, 1905) argues that the author of Hebrews certainly and Paul probably were students of Greek oratory and rhetoric. He is clearly wrong about Paul and probably so about the author of Hebrews. There is in Hebrews more of "a studied rhetorical periodicity" (Thayer), but with many "parenthetical involutions" (Westcott) and with less of "the impetuous eloquence of Paul." The eleventh chapter reveals a studied style and as a whole the Epistle belongs to the literary _Koin‚_ rather than to the vernacular. Moulton (_Cambridge Biblical Essays_, p. 483) thinks that the author did not know Hebrew but follows the Septuagint throughout in his abundant use of the Old Testament.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE PURPOSE The author states it repeatedly. He urges the Jewish Christians to hold fast the confession which they have made in Jesus as Messiah and Saviour. Their Jewish neighbours have urged them to give up Christ and Christianity and to come back to Judaism. The Judaizers tried to make Jews out of Gentile Christians and to fasten Judaism upon Christianity with a purely sacramental type of religion as the result. Paul won freedom for evangelical and spiritual Christianity against the Judaizers as shown in the Corinthian Epistles, Galatians, and Romans. The Gnostics in subtle fashion tried to dilute Christianity with their philosophy and esoteric mysteries and here again Paul won his fight for the supremacy of Christ over all these imaginary \aeons\ (Colossians and Ephesians). But in Hebrews the author is battling to stop a stampede from Christ back to Judaism, a revolt (apostasy) in truth from the living God. These Jews argued that the prophets were superior to Jesus, the law came by the ministry of angels, Moses was greater than Jesus, and Aaron than Jesus. The author turns the argument on the Jews and boldly champions the Glory of Jesus as superior at every point to all that Judaism had, as God's Son and man's Saviour, the crown and glory of the Old Testament prophecy, the hope of mankind. It is the first great apologetic for Christianity and has never been surpassed. Moffatt terms it "a profound homily."

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ SOME BOOKS ON HEBREWS ANDEL, _Deuteronomy:Brief aan de Hebraer_ (1906). ANDERSON, R., _The Hebrews Epistle in the Light of the Types_ (1911). AYLES, _Destination, Date and Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1899). BAILEY, _Leading Ideas of the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1907). BLASS, F., _Brief an die Hebraer, Text, Angabe der Rhythmen_ (1903). BLEEK, F., _Der Hebraerbrief Erklart_ (1840). BRUCE, A. B., _The Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1899). DALE, R. W., _The Jewish Temple in the Christian Church_ (1865). DAVIDSON, A. B., _The Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1882). DELITZSCH, F., _Commentary on the Hebrews_ (1857). DIBELIUS, M., _Der Verfasser des Hebraerbriefes_ (1910). DODS, M., _Expositor's Greek Testament_ (1910). DU BOSE, W. P., _High Priesthood and sacrifice_ (1908). EDWARDS, T. C., _Expositor's Bible_ (1888). FARRAR, F. W., _Cambridge Greek Testament_ (1893). GOODSPEED, E. J., _Bible for Home and School_ (1908). GRIFFTH-THOMAS, W. H., _Let Us Go On_ (1923). HEIGL, _Verfalser und Addresse des Briefes an die Hebraer_ (1905). HOLLMANN, _Schriften d. N. T_. 2 Aufl. (1907). KENDRICK, A. C., _American Commentary_ (1890). LIDGETT, J. S., _Sonship and Salvation_ (1921). LOWRIE, _An Explanation of Hebrews_ (1921). LUNEMANN, G., _Meyer Komm_. (1882). MACFADYEN, J. F., _Through the Eternal Spirit_ (1925). MACNEILL, _The Christology of the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1914). MENEGOZ, E., _Lamentations:Theologie de l'epitre aux Hebreaux_ (1894). MILLIGAN, G., _The Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1899). MOFFATT JAMES, _Int. and Cosit. Comm_. (1924) MOULE, H. C., _Messages from the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1909). MURRAY, ANDREW, _Devotional Commentary_. NAIRNE, A., _The Epistle of Priesthood_ (1913). NAIRNE, A., _The Alexandrian Gospel_ (1917). PEAKE, A. S., _New Century Bible_ (1904). PORTER, S. J., _The Twelve-Gemmed Crown_ (1913). RENDALL, F., _The Theology of the Hebrew Christians_ (1886). RIGGENBACH, M., _Zoeckler Komm_. 2 Aufl. (1913). ROTHERHAM, _The Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1906). SAPHIR, A., _Exposition of Hebrews_. SCOTT, E. F., _The Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1922). SEEBERG, A., _Der Brief an die Hebraer_ (1912). SLOT, _Deuteronomy:Letterkundige Vorm van den Brief aan de Hebraer (1912). SODEN, VON, _Hand-Comm_. (1899). THOLUCK, A., _Komm. zum Briefe an die Hebraer_. VAUGHAN, C. J., _Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1899). WADE, _The Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1923). WEISS, B., _Meyer-Komm_. 6 Aufl. (1902). WEISS, B., _Der Hebraerbrief in Zeitgeschichtlicher Bekuch- tung_ (1910). WELCH, _Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1899). WESTCOTT, B. F., _Epistle to the Hebrews_ (3rd ed. 1906). WICKHAM, E. C., _Westminster Comm_. (1910). WINDISCH, H., _Handbuch zum N.T_. (1913). WREDE, W., _Das literarisches Ratsel des Hebraerbriefs_ (1906). strkjv@Hebrews:1:1 @{God} (\ho theos\). This Epistle begins like Genesis and the Fourth Gospel with God, who is the Author of the old revelation in the prophets and of the new in his Son. Verses 1-3| are a _proemium_ (Delitzsch) or introduction to the whole Epistle. The periodic structure of the sentence (1-4|) reminds one of strkjv@Luke:1:1-4, strkjv@Romans:1:1-7, strkjv@1John:1:1-4|. The sentence could have concluded with \en hui“i\ in verse 2|, but by means of three relatives (\hon, di' hou, hos\) the author presents the Son as "the exact counterpart of God" (Moffatt). {Of old time} (\palai\). "Long ago" as in strkjv@Matthew:11:21|. {Having spoken} (\lalˆsas\). First aorist active participle of \lale“\, originally chattering of birds, then used of the highest form of speech as here. {Unto the fathers} (\tois patrasin\). Dative case. The Old Testament worthies in general without "our" or "your" as in strkjv@John:6:58; strkjv@7:22; strkjv@Romans:9:5|. {In the prophets} (\en tois prophˆtais\). As the quickening power of their life (Westcott). strkjv@Songs:4:7|. {By divers portions} (\polumer“s\). "In many portions." Adverb from late adjective \polumerˆs\ (in papyri), both in _Vettius Valens_, here only in N.T., but in Wisdom strkjv@7:22 and Josephus (_Ant_. VIII, 3, 9). The Old Testament revelation came at different times and in various stages, a progressive revelation of God to men. {In divers manners} (\polutrop“s\). "In many ways." Adverb from old adjective \polutropos\, in Philo, only here in N.T. The two adverbs together are "a sonorous hendiadys for 'variously'" (Moffatt) as Chrysostom (\diaphor“s\). God spoke by dream, by direct voice, by signs, in different ways to different men (Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, Isaiah, etc.).

rwp@Hebrews:1:3 @{Being} (\“n\). Absolute and timeless existence (present active participle of \eimi\) in contrast with \genomenos\ in verse 4| like \ˆn\ in strkjv@John:1:1| (in contrast with \egeneto\ in strkjv@1:14|) and like \huparch“n\ and \genomenos\ in strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f|. {The effulgence of his glory} (\apaugasma tˆs doxˆs\). The word \apaugasma\, late substantive from \apaugaz“\, to emit brightness (\augˆ, augaz“\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4|), here only in the N.T., but in Wisdom strkjv@7:26 and in Philo. It can mean either reflected brightness, refulgence (Calvin, Thayer) or effulgence (ray from an original light body) as the Greek fathers hold. Both senses are true of Christ in his relation to God as Jesus shows in plain language in strkjv@John:12:45; strkjv@14:9|. "The writer is using metaphors which had already been applied to Wisdom and the Logos" (Moffatt). The meaning "effulgence" suits the context better, though it gives the idea of eternal generation of the Son (John:1:1|), the term Father applied to God necessarily involving Son. See this same metaphor in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:6|. {The very image of his substance} (\charaktˆr tˆs hupostase“s\). \Charaktˆr\ is an old word from \charass“\, to cut, to scratch, to mark. It first was the agent (note ending \=tˆr\) or tool that did the marking, then the mark or impress made, the exact reproduction, a meaning clearly expressed by \charagma\ (Acts:17:29; strkjv@Revelation:13:16f.|). Menander had already used (Moffatt) \charaktˆr\ in the sense of our "character." The word occurs in the inscriptions for "person" as well as for "exact reproduction" of a person. The word \hupostasis\ for the being or essence of God "is a philosophical rather than a religious term" (Moffatt). Etymologically it is the sediment or foundation under a building (for instance). In strkjv@11:1| \hypostasis\ is like the "title-deed" idea found in the papyri. Athanasius rightly used strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4| in his controversy with Arius. Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11| pictures the real and eternal deity of Christ free from the philosophical language here employed. But even Paul's simpler phrase \morphˆ theou\ (the form of God) has difficulties of its own. The use of \Logos\ in strkjv@John:1:1-18| is parallel to strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4|. {And upholding} (\pher“n te\). Present active participle of \pher“\ closely connected with \“n\ (being) by \te\ and like strkjv@Colossians:1:17| in idea. The newer science as expounded by Eddington and Jeans is in harmony with the spiritual and personal conception of creation here presented. {By the word of his power} (\t“i rˆmati tˆs duname“s autou\). Instrumental case of \rˆma\ (word). See strkjv@11:3| for \rˆmati theou\ (by the word of God) as the explanation of creation like Genesis, but here \autou\ refers to God's Son as in strkjv@1:2|. {Purification of sins} (\katharismon t“n hamarti“n\). \Katharismos\ is from \kathariz“\, to cleanse (Matthew:8:3; strkjv@Hebrews:9:14|), here only in Hebrews, but in same sense of cleansing from sins, strkjv@2Peter:1:9; strkjv@Job:7:21|. Note middle participle \poiˆsamenos\ like \heuramenos\ in strkjv@9:12|. This is the first mention of the priestly work of Christ, the keynote of this Epistle. {Sat down} (\ekathisen\). First aorist active of \kathiz“\, "took his seat," a formal and dignified act. {Of the Majesty on high} (\tˆs megalosunˆs en hupsˆlois\). Late word from \megas\, only in LXX (Deuteronomy:32:3; strkjv@2Samuel:7:23|, etc.), Aristeas, strkjv@Hebrews:1:3; strkjv@8:1; strkjv@Jude:1:25|. Christ resumed his original dignity and glory (John:17:5|). The phrase \en hupsˆlois\ occurs in the Psalms (Psalms:93:4|), here only in N.T., elsewhere \en hupsistois\ in the highest (Matthew:21:9; strkjv@Luke:2:14|) or \en tois epouraniois\ in the heavenlies (Ephesians:1:3,20|). Jesus is here pictured as King (Prophet and Priest also) Messiah seated at the right hand of God.

rwp@Hebrews:1:7 @{Of the angels} (\pros tous aggelous\). "With reference to" (\pros\) as in strkjv@Luke:20:9|. Songs:"of the Son" in verse 8|. Note \men\ here and \de\ in verse 8| in carefully balanced contrast. The quotation is from strkjv@Psalms:104:4|. {Winds} (\pneumata\). "Spirits" the word also means. The meaning (note article with \aggelous\, not with \pneumata\) apparently is one that can reduce angels to the elemental forces of wind and fire (Moffatt). {A flame of fire} (\puros phloga\). Predicate accusative of \phlox\, old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:16:24|. Lunemann holds that the Hebrew here is wrongly rendered and means that God makes the wind his messengers (not angels) and flaming fire his servants. That is all true, but that is not the point of this passage. Preachers also are sometimes like a wind-storm or a fire.

rwp@Hebrews:2:9 @{Even Jesus} (\Iˆsoun\). We do not see man triumphant, but we do see Jesus, for the author is not ashamed of his human name, realizing man's destiny, "the very one who has been made a little lower than the angels" (\ton brachu ti par' aggelous ˆlatt“menon\), quoting and applying the language of the Psalm in verse 7| to Jesus (with article \ton\ and the perfect passive participle of \elatta“\). But this is not all. Death has defeated man, but Jesus has conquered death. {Because of the suffering of death} (\dia to pathˆma tou thanatou\). The causal sense of \dia\ with the accusative as in strkjv@1:14|. Jesus in his humanity was put lower than the angels "for a little while" (\brachu ti\). Because of the suffering of death we see (\blepomen\) Jesus crowned (\estephan“menon\, perfect passive participle of \stephano“\ from verse 7|), crowned already "with glory and honour" as Paul shows in strkjv@Phillipians:2:9-11| (more highly exalted, \huperups“sen\) "that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow." There is more glory to come to Jesus surely, but he is already at God's right hand (1:3|). {That by the grace of God he should taste death for every man} (\hop“s chariti theou huper pantos geusˆtai thanatou\). This purpose clause (\hop“s\ instead of the more usual \hina\) is pregnant with meaning. The author interprets and applies the language of the Psalm to Jesus and here puts Christ's death in behalf of (\huper\), and so instead of, every man as the motive for his incarnation and death on the Cross. The phrase to taste death (\geuomai thanatou\) occurs in the Gospels (Matthew:16:28; strkjv@Mark:9:1; strkjv@Luke:9:27; strkjv@John:8:52|), though not in the ancient Greek. It means to see death (Hebrews:11:5|), "a bitter experience, not a rapid sip" (Moffatt). His death was in behalf of every one (not everything as the early Greek theologians took it). The death of Christ (Andrew Fuller) was sufficient for all, efficient for some. It is all "by the grace (\chariti\, instrumental case) of God," a thoroughly Pauline idea. Curiously enough some MSS. read \ch“ris theou\ (apart from God) in place of \chariti theou\, Nestorian doctrine whatever the origin.

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

rwp@Hebrews:4:2 @{For indeed we have had good tidings preached unto us} (\kai gar esmen euˆggelismenoi esmen\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \euaggeliz“\ (from \euaggelion\, good news, glad tidings) to bring good news, used here in its original sense as in verse 6| of the Israelites (\euaggelisthentes\ first aorist passive participle). {Even as also they} (\kathaper kakeinoi\). See verse 6|. We have the promise of rest as the Israelites had. The parallel holds as to the promise, the privilege, the penalty. {The word of hearing} (\ho logos tˆs akoˆs\). As in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:13|. Genitive \akoˆs\ describing \logos\, the word marked by hearing (the word heard). {Because they were not united by faith with them that heard} (\mˆ sunkekerasmenous tˆi pistei tois akousasin\). \Mˆ\, the usual negative of the participle. A very difficult phrase. The text is uncertain whether the participle (perfect passive of \sunkerannumi\, old verb to mix together) ends in \-os\ agreeing with \logos\ or \-ous\ agreeing with \ekeinous\ (them). Taking it in \-ous\ the translation is correct. \Pistei\ is in the instrumental case and \tois akousasin\ in the associative instrumental after \sun\.

rwp@Hebrews:4:12 @{The word of God} (\ho logos tou theou\). That just quoted about the promise of rest and God's rest, but true of any real word of God. {Living} (\z“n\). Cf. the Living God (3:12|). In Philo and the Book of Wisdom the Logos of God is personified, but still more in strkjv@John:1:1-18| where Jesus is pictured as the Logos on a par with God. "Our author is using Philonic language rather than Philonic ideas" (Moffatt). See strkjv@John:6:63|: "The words which I have spoken are spirit and are life." {Active} (\energˆs\). Energetic, powerful (John:1:12; strkjv@Phillipians:3:21; strkjv@Colossians:1:29|). {Sharper} (\tom“teros\). Comparative of \tomos\, cutting (from \temn“\, to cut), late adjective, here only in the N.T. {Than} (\huper\). Often so after a comparative (Luke:16:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:13|). {Two-edged} (\distomon\). "Two-mouthed" (\di-, stoma\), double-mouthed like a river (Polybius), branching ways (Sophocles), applied to sword (\xiphos\) by Homer and Euripides. {Piercing} (\diiknoumenos\). Present middle participle of \diikneomai\, old verb to go through, here only in N.T. {Even to the dividing} (\achri merismou\). Old word from \meriz“\ (\meros\, part), to partition. {Of soul and spirit} (\psuchˆs kai pneumatos\). As in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:23; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:45|, but not an argument for trichotomy. Psychology is constantly changing its terminology. {Of both joints and marrow} (\harm“n te kai muel“n\). From \ar“\, to join, comes \harmos\, old word, here only in the N.T. \Muelos\ (from \mu“\, to shut), old word, here only in N.T. This surgeon goes into and through the joints and marrow, not cleaving between them. {Quick to discern} (\kritikos\). Verbal adjective in \-ikos\, from \krin“\, skilled in judging, as the surgeon has to be and able to decide on the instant what to do. Songs:God's word like his eye sees the secret lurking doubt and unbelief "of the thoughts and intents of the heart" (\enthumˆse“n kai ennoi“n kardias\). The surgeon carries a bright and powerful light for every dark crevice and a sharp knife for the removal of all the pus revealed by the light. It is a powerful picture here drawn.

rwp@Hebrews:4:13 @{That is not manifest} (\aphanˆs\). Old adjective (\a\ privative and \phain“\, to show), here only in the N.T. God's microscope can lay bare the smallest microbe of doubt and sin. {Naked} (\gumna\). Both soul and body are naked to the eye of God. {Laid open} (\tetrachˆlismena\). Perfect passive participle of \trachˆliz“\, late verb to bend back the neck (\trachˆlos\, strkjv@Matthew:18:6|) as the surgeon does for operating, here only in N.T. See strkjv@Romans:16:4| for the peril of risking one's neck (\trachˆlon hupotithenai\). God's eyes see all the facts in our inmost hearts. There are no mental reservations from God. {With whom we have to do} (\pros hon hˆmin ho logos\). "With whom the matter or account for us is." There is a slight play here on \logos\ of verse 12|. Surely every servant of Christ today needs to gaze into this revealing mirror and be honest with himself and God.

rwp@Hebrews:4:14 @{A great high priest} (\archierea megan\). The author now takes up the main argument of the Epistle, already alluded to in strkjv@1:3; strkjv@2:17f.; strkjv@3:1|, the priestly work of Jesus as superior to that of the Levitical line (4:14-12:3|). Jesus is superior to the prophets (1:1-3|), to angels (1:4-2:18|), to Moses (3:1-4:13|), he has already shown. Here he only terms Jesus "great" as high priest (a frequent adjective with high priest in Philo) but the superiority comes out as he proceeds. {Who hath passed through the heavens} (\dielˆluthota tous ouranous\). Perfect active participle of \dierchomai\, state of completion. Jesus has passed through the upper heavens up to the throne of God (1:3|) where he performs his function as our high priest. This idea will be developed later (6:19f.; strkjv@7:26-28; strkjv@9:11f.,24f.|). {Jesus the Son of God} (\Iˆsoun ton huion tou theou\). The human name linked with his deity, clinching the argument already made (1:1-4:13|). {Let us hold fast our confession} (\krat“men tˆs homologias\). Present active volitive subjunctive of \krate“\, old verb (from \kratos\, power), with genitive to cling to tenaciously as here and strkjv@6:18| and also with the accusative (2Thessalonians:2:15; strkjv@Colossians:2:19|). "Let us keep on holding fast." This keynote runs all through the Epistle, the exhortation to the Jewish Christians to hold on to the confession (3:1|) of Christ already made. Before making the five points of Christ's superior priestly work (better priest than Aaron, strkjv@5:1-7:25|; under a better covenant, strkjv@8:1-13|; in a better sanctuary, strkjv@9:1-12|; offering a better sacrifice, strkjv@9:13-10:18|; based on better promises, strkjv@10:19-12:3|), the author gives a double exhortation (4:14-16|) like that in strkjv@2:1-4| to hold fast to the high priest (14f.|) and to make use of him (16|).

rwp@Hebrews:5:12 @{Teachers} (\didaskaloi\). Predicate nominative after \einai\. {By reason of the time} (\dia ton chronon\). Alas, what a commentary on modern Christians. {That some one teach you the rudiments} (\tou didaskein humas tina ta stoicheia\). Neat Greek idiom, genitive case of the articular infinitive (need of the teaching) with two accusatives of the person (\humas\, you) and the thing (\ta stoicheia\, the rudiments) and the accusative of general reference (\tina\, as to some one). For \stoicheia\ see strkjv@Galatians:4:3,9; strkjv@Colossians:2:8|. {Of the first principles of the oracles of God} (\tˆs archˆs t“n logi“n tou theou\). Three genitives linked to each other. \Archˆs\ (beginning) illustrates \ta stoicheia\, just before, the A B C of Christian teaching like strkjv@Hebrews:6:1f|. \Logion\ is a diminutive of logos, divine oracles being usually brief, common in the O.T. and Philo for God's words, in N.T. used for the O.T. (Acts:7:38; Rom strkjv@3:2|), of God's word through Christians (1Peter:4:11|), of the substance of Christian teaching (Hebrews:5:12|). {Of milk} (\galaktos\). Because still babes (1Corinthians:3:2|) and not able to chew "solid food" (\stereƒs trophˆs\), without intellectual and spiritual teeth.

rwp@Hebrews:6:1 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). Because of the argument already made about the difficulty of the subject and the dulness of the readers. {Let us cease to speak} (\aphentes ton logon\). Second aorist active participle of \aphiˆmi\, to leave off or behind. {Of the first principles of Christ} (\tˆs archˆs tou Christou\). Objective genitive \Christou\ (about Christ). "Leaving behind the discussion of the beginning about Christ," another way of saying again \ta stoicheia tˆs archˆs t“n logi“n tou theou\ of strkjv@5:12|. {And press on} (\kai pher“metha\). Volitive present subjunctive passive, "Let us be borne on" (both the writer and the readers). The Pythagorean Schools use \pher“metha\ in precisely this sense of being borne on to a higher stage of instruction. Bleek quotes several instances of Greek writers using together as here of \aphentes pher“metha\ (Eurip., _Androm_. 393, for instance). {Unto perfection} (\epi tˆn teleiotˆta\). Old word from \teleios\ mature, adults as in strkjv@5:14|. Only twice in N.T. (here and strkjv@Colossians:3:14|). Let us go on to the stage of adults, not babes, able to masticate solid spiritual food. The writer will assume that the readers are adults in his discussion of the topic. {Not laying again the foundation} (\mˆ palin themelion kataballomenoi\). The regular idiom for laying down the foundation of a building (\themelion\, strkjv@Luke:6:48f.|). The metaphor is common (1Corinthians:3:11|) and the foundation is important, but one cannot be laying the foundation always if he is to build the house. There are six items mentioned here as part of the "foundation," though the accusative \didachˆn\ in apposition with \themelion\ may mean that there are only four included in the \themelion\. Two are qualitative genitives after \themelion\ (\metanoias\ and \piste“s\). What is meant by "dead works" (\apo nekr“n erg“n\) is not clear (9:14|), though the reference may be to touching a corpse (Numbers:19:1f.; strkjv@31:19|). There are frequent allusions to the deadening power of sin (James:2:17,26; strkjv@John:7:25; Rom strkjv@6:1,11; strkjv@7:8; strkjv@Colossians:2:13; strkjv@Ephesians:2:1,5|). The use of repentance and faith together occurs also elsewhere (Mark:1:15; strkjv@Acts:20:21; strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:9|).

rwp@Hebrews:6:7 @{Which hath drunk} (\hˆ piousa\). Articular second aorist active participle of \pin“\, to drink. {Herbs} (\botanˆn\). Old word from \bosk“\, to feed, green plant, only here in N.T. Cf. our botany. {Meet} (\eutheton\). Old compound verbal (\eu, tithˆmi\) well-placed, fit (Luke:9:62|). {It is tilled} (\ge“rgeitai\). Present passive indicative of \ge“rge“\, old and rare verb from \ge“rgos\ (tiller of the soil, \gˆ, ergon\, strkjv@2Timothy:2:6|), here only in the N.T. {Receives} (\metalambanei\). Present active indicative of \metalamban“\, old verb to share in, with genitive (\eulogias\) as here (Acts:2:46|) or with accusative (Acts:24:25|).

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

rwp@Hebrews:6:14 @{Surely} (\ei mˆn\). By itacism for \ˆ mˆn\ (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 205). The quotation is from strkjv@Genesis:22:16f|. (the promise renewed to Abraham with an oath after offering of Isaac). {Blessing} (\eulog“n\). Hebraism (present active participle) for the Hebrew infinitive absolute and so with \plˆthun“n\ (multiplying).

rwp@Hebrews:6:16 @{In every dispute} (\pasˆs antilogias\). Objective genitive of old word several times in Hebrews (6:16; strkjv@7:7; strkjv@12:3|). Talking back, face to face, in opposition. {Final} (\peras\). Limit, boundary (Matthew:12:42|). Men may perjure themselves.

rwp@Hebrews:7:3 @{Without father, without mother, without genealogy} (\apat“r, amˆt“r, agenealogˆtos\). Alliteration like strkjv@Romans:1:30|, the first two old words, the third coined by the author (found nowhere else) and meaning simply "devoid of any genealogy." The argument is that from silence, made much of by Philo, but not to be pressed. The record in Genesis tells nothing of any genealogy. Melchizedek stands alone. He is not to be understood as a miraculous being without birth or death. Melchizedek has been made more mysterious than he is by reading into this interpretation what is not there. {Made like} (\aph“moi“menos\). Perfect passive participle of \aphomoio“\, old verb, to produce a facsimile or copy, only here in N.T. The likeness is in the picture drawn in Genesis, not in the man himself. Such artificial interpretation does not amount to proof, but only serves as a parallel or illustration. {Unto the Son of God} (\t“i hui“i tou theou\). Associative instrumental case of \huios\. {Abideth a priest} (\menei hiereus\). According to the record in Genesis, the only one in his line just as Jesus stands alone, but with the difference that Jesus continues priest in fact in heaven. {Continually} (\eis to diˆnekes\). Old phrase (for the continuity) like \eis ton ai“na\, in N.T. only in Hebrews (7:3; strkjv@10:1,14,21|).

rwp@Hebrews:7:6 @{He whose genealogy is not counted} (\ho mˆ genealogoumenos\). Articular participle with negative \mˆ\ (usual with participles) of the old verb \genealoge“\ trace ancestry (cf. verse 3|) {Hath taken tithes} (\dedekat“ken\). Perfect active indicative of \dekato“\, standing on record in Genesis. {Hath blessed} (\eulogˆken\). Perfect active indicative of \euloge“\, likewise standing on record. Note the frequent perfect tenses in Hebrews. {Him that hath the promises} (\ton echonta tas epaggelias\). Cf. strkjv@6:12,13-15| for allusion to the repeated promises to Abraham (Genesis:12:3,7; strkjv@13:14; strkjv@15:5; strkjv@17:5; strkjv@22:16-18|).

rwp@Hebrews:7:7 @{Dispute} (\antilogias\). Ablative case with \ch“ris\. For the word see strkjv@6:16|. The writer makes a parenthetical generalization and uses the article and neuter adjective (\to elasson\, the less, \hupo tou kreittonos\, by the better), a regular Greek idiom.

rwp@Hebrews:8:3 @{Is appointed} (\kathistatai\). As in strkjv@5:1|. {To offer} (\eis to prospherein\). Articular infinitive accusative case with \eis\ as is common while \hina prospherˆi\ (\hina\ with present active subjunctive) for purpose in strkjv@5:1|, with \d“ra te kai thusias\ as there. {It is necessary} (\anagkaion\). A moral and logical necessity (from \anagkˆ\ necessity) as seen in strkjv@Acts:13:46; strkjv@Phillipians:1:24|. {This high priest also} (\kai touton\). "This one also," no word for high priest, accusative of general reference with the infinitive \echein\ (have). {Somewhat to offer} (\ti h“ prosenegkˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \prospher“\ (verse 3|). Vulgate _aliquid quod offerat_. The use of the subjunctive in this relative clause is probably volitive as in strkjv@Acts:21:16; strkjv@Hebrews:12:28| (possibly here merely futuristic), but note \ho prospherei\ (present indicative) in strkjv@9:7|. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 955.

rwp@Hebrews:8:6 @{But now} (\nun de\). Logical use of \nun\, as the case now stands, with Jesus as high priest in heaven. {Hath he obtained} (\tetuchen\). Perfect active indicative of \tugchan“\ with the genitive, a rare and late form for \teteuchen\ (also \teteuchˆken\), old verb to hit the mark, to attain. {A ministry the more excellent} (\diaphor“teras leitourgias\). "A more excellent ministry." For the comparative of \diaphoros\ see strkjv@1:4|. This remark applies to all the five points of superiority over the Levitical priesthood. {By how much} (\hos“i\). Instrumental case of the relative \hosos\ between two comparative adjectives as in strkjv@1:4|. {The mediator} (\mesitˆs\). Late word from \mesos\ (amid) and so a middle man (arbitrator). Already in strkjv@Galatians:3:19f.| and see strkjv@1Timothy:2:5|. See strkjv@Hebrews:9:15; strkjv@12:24| for further use with \diathˆkˆ\. {Of a better covenant} (\kreittonos diathˆkˆs\). Called "new" (\kainˆs, neas\ in strkjv@9:15; strkjv@12:24|). For \diathˆkˆ\ see strkjv@Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Luke:1:72; strkjv@Galatians:3:17|, etc. This idea he will discuss in strkjv@8:7-13|. {Hath been enacted} (\nenomothetˆtai\). Perfect passive indicative of \nomothete“\ as in strkjv@7:11| which see. {Upon better promises} (\epi kreittosin epaggeliais\). Upon the basis of (\epi\). But how "better" if the earlier were also from God? This idea, alluded to in strkjv@6:12-17|, Will be developed in strkjv@10:19-12:3| with great passion and power. Thus it is seen that "better" (\kreiss“n\) is the keynote of the Epistle. At every point Christianity is better than Judaism.

rwp@Hebrews:10:18 @{There is no more offering for sin} (\ouketi prosphora peri hamartias\). This is the logical and triumphant conclusion concerning the better sacrifice offered by Christ (9:13-10:18|). As Jeremiah had prophesied, there is actually remission (\aphesis\, removal) of sins. Repetition of the sacrifice is needless.

rwp@Hebrews:11:19 @{Accounting} (\logisamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \logizomai\. Abraham had God's clear command that contravened God's previous promise. This was his solution of his difficult situation. {God is able} (\dunatai ho theos\). God had given him Isaac in his old age. God can raise him from the dead. It was Abraham's duty to obey God. {In a parable} (\en parabolˆi\). See already strkjv@9:9| for \parabolˆ\. Because of (\hothen\, whence) Abraham's superb faith Isaac was spared and so he received him back (\ekomisato\) as almost from the dead. This is the test that Abraham stood of which James speaks (James:2:23|).

rwp@Hebrews:12:3 @{Consider} (\analogisasthe\). First aorist middle imperative of \analogizomai\, old word to reckon up, to compare, to weigh, only here in the N.T. See \katanoˆsate\ in strkjv@3:1|. Understanding Jesus is the key to the whole problem, the cure for doubt and hesitation. {Endured} (\hupomemenˆkota\). Perfect active participle of the same verb \hupomen“\ used in verse 2|. {Gainsaying} (\antilogian\). Old word from \antilogos\ (from \antileg“\), already in strkjv@6:16; strkjv@7:7|. {Of sinners} (\hupo t“n hamart“l“n\). "By sinners." {Against themselves} (\eis heautous\). Against their better selves if a genuine reading. But \eis heauton\ (against himself), against Christ, is far more likely correct. {That ye wax not weary} (\hina mˆ kamˆte\). Negative final clause with \hina mˆ\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \kamn“\, old verb to be weary as here or sick as in strkjv@James:5:15|. {Fainting in your souls} (\tais psuchais hum“n ekluomenoi\). Present passive participle of \eklu“\, old verb to loosen out, to set free, and in passive to be enfeebled, to be tired out (here in soul with locative case), as in verse 5|. The rest of the Epistle drives home the argument.

rwp@Hebrews:12:17 @{Ye know} (\iste\). Regular form for the second person of \oida\ rather than the _Koin‚_ \oidate\. {He was rejected} (\apedokimasthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \apodokimaz“\, old verb to disapprove (Matthew:21:42|). {Place of repentance} (\metanoias topon\). \Metanoia\ is change of mind and purpose, not sorrow though he had tears (\meta dakru“n\) afterwards as told in strkjv@Genesis:27:38|. He sought it (\autˆn\, the blessing \eulogian\) with tears, but in vain. There was no change of mind in Isaac. The choice was irrevocable as Isaac shows (Genesis:27:33|). Esau is a tragic example of one who does a wilful sin which allows no second chance (Hebrews:6:6; strkjv@10:26|). The author presses the case of Esau as a warning to the Christians who were tempted to give up Christ.

rwp@Hebrews:12:19 @{Unto blackness} (\gnoph“i\). Dative case of \gnophos\ (late form for earlier \dnophos\ and kin to \nephos\, cloud), here only in N.T. Quoted here from strkjv@Exodus:10:22|. {Darkness} (\zoph“i\). Old word, in Homer for the gloom of the world below. In the Symmachus Version of strkjv@Exodus:10:22|, also in strkjv@Jude:1:6; strkjv@2Peter:2:4,15|. {Tempest} (\thuellˆi\). Old word from \thu“\ (to boil, to rage), a hurricane, here only in N.T. From strkjv@Exodus:10:22|. {The sound of a trumpet} (\salpiggos ˆch“i\). From strkjv@Exodus:19:16|. \Echos\ is an old word (our \echo\) as in strkjv@Luke:21:25; strkjv@Acts:2:2|. {The voice of words} (\ph“nˆi rˆmat“n\). From strkjv@Exodus:19:19; strkjv@Deuteronomy:4:12|. {Which voice} (\hˆs\). Relative referring to \ph“nˆ\ (voice) just before, genitive case with \akousantes\ (heard, aorist active participle). {Intreated} (\parˆitˆsanto\). First aorist middle (indirect) indicative of \paraiteomai\, old verb, to ask from alongside (Mark:15:6|), then to beg away from oneself, to depreciate as here, to decline (Acts:25:11|), to excuse (Luke:14:18|), to avoid (1Timothy:4:7|). {That no word should be spoken unto them} (\prostethˆnai autois logon\). First aorist passive infinitive of \prostithˆmi\, old word to add, here with accusative of general reference (\logon\), "that no word be added unto them." Some MSS. have here a redundant negative \mˆ\ with the infinitive because of the negative idea in \parˆitˆsanto\ as in strkjv@Galatians:5:7|.

rwp@Hebrews:13:7 @{Remember} (\mnˆmoneuete\). Present active imperative of \mnˆmoneu“\, old verb to be _mindful_ of (from \mnˆm“n\, mindful) with genitive (John:15:20|) or accusative (Matthew:16:9|). "Keep in mind." Cf. strkjv@11:22|. {Them that had the rule over you} (\t“n hˆgoumen“n hum“n\). Present middle participle of \hˆgeomai\ with genitive of the person (\hum“n\) as in verses 17,24|. The author reminds them of the founders of their church in addition to the long list of heroes in chapter strkjv@Acts:11|. See a like exhortation to respect and follow their leaders in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:12f|. Few lessons are harder for the average Christian to learn, viz., good following. {The word of God} (\ton logon tou theou\). The preaching of these early disciples, apostles, and prophets (1Corinthians:1:17|). {And considering the issue of their life} (\h“n anathe“rountes tˆn ekbasin tˆs anastrophˆs\). No "and" in the Greek, but the relative \h“n\ (whose) in the genitive case after \anastrophˆs\, "considering the issue of whose life." Present active participle of \anathe“re“\, late compound, to look up a subject, to investigate, to observe accurately, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:17:23|. \Ekbasis\ is an old word from \ekbain“\, to go out (Hebrews:11:15|, here only in N.T.), originally way out (1Corinthians:10:13|), but here (only other N.T. example) in sense of end or issue as in several papyri examples (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). {Imitate their faith} (\mimeisthe tˆn pistin\). Present middle imperative of \mimeomai\, old verb (from \mimos\, actor, mimic), in N.T. only here, strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:7,9; strkjv@3John:1:11|. Keep on imitating the faith of the leaders.

rwp@Hebrews:13:15 @{Through him} (\di' autou\). That is Jesus. He is our Priest and Sacrifice, the only efficient and sufficient one. {Let us offer up} (\anapher“men\). Present active volitive subjunctive of \anapher“\, "let us keep on offering up." Jesus is living and let us go to him. {A sacrifice of praise} (\thusian ainese“s\). This phrase occurs in strkjv@Leviticus:7:12; strkjv@Psalms:54:8|. The word \ainesis\ (from \aine“\, to praise), common in LXX, is only here in N.T. {The fruit of lips} (\karpon cheile“n\). In apposition (\tout 'estin\) and explanation of \thusian ainese“s\. Cf. strkjv@Hosea:14:3; strkjv@Isaiah:57:19|. {Which made confession to his name} (\homologount“n t“i onomati autou\). This use of \homologe“\ with the dative in the sense of praise like \exomologe“\ is unique, though the papyri furnish examples in the sense of gratitude (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_).

rwp@Hebrews:13:17 @{Obey} (\peithesthe\). Present middle imperative of \peith“\ with dative case. {Submit} (\hupeikete\). Present active imperative of \hupeik“\, old compound to yield under, to give up. Here only in N.T. {They watch} (\agrupnousin\). Present active indicative of \agrupne“\ old verb (from \agre“\, to search, \hupnos\, sleep), to seek after sleep, to be sleepless, be watchful (Mark:13:33|). {As they that shall give account} (\h“s logon apod“sontes\). Regular Greek idiom with \h“s\ and the future participle. For \logon apodid“mi\, to render account, see strkjv@Matthew:12:36|. These leaders as good shepherds recognize keenly their responsibility for the welfare of the flock. {And not with grief} (\kai mˆ stenazontes\). "And not groaning" (cf. strkjv@Romans:8:23|). {Unprofitable} (\alusiteles\). Old double compound adjective (alpha privative and \lusitelˆs\ and this from \lu“\, to pay, and \telos\, tax, useful or profitable as strkjv@Luke:17:2|), not profitable, not advantageous, by _litotes_, hurtful, pernicious. Common rhetorical _litotes_, here only in N.T.

rwp@Hebrews:13:21 @{Make you perfect} (\katartisai\). First aorist active optative of \katartiz“\, to equip, as in strkjv@10:5|. A wish for the future. See strkjv@1Corinthians:1:10; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11; strkjv@2Timothy:3:17|. {Working in us} (\poi“n en hemin\). "Doing in us." Some MSS. read "in you." {Well-pleasing} (\euareston\). Compound adjective (\eu, arestos\). Usually with the dative (Romans:12:2|), here with \en“pion autou\ more like the Hebrew. This is one of the noblest doxologies in the N.T.

rwp@Hebrews:13:22 @{Bear with} (\anechesthe\). Present middle imperative (some MSS. have \anechesthai\, infinitive) of \anech“\ with the ablative, "hold yourselves back from" as in strkjv@Colossians:3:13|. {The word of exhortation} (\tou logou tˆs paraklˆse“s\). His description of the entire Epistle. It certainly is that, a powerful appeal in fact. {I have written} (\epesteila\). First aorist active indicative (epistolary aorist) of \epistell“\, old word to send a letter (\epistolˆ\) as in strkjv@Acts:15:20|. {In few words} (\dia brache“n\). Common Greek idiom, here only in N.T. (from \brachus\, brief, short). Cf. \di' olig“n egrapsa\ in strkjv@1Peter:5:12|.

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

rwp@James:1:18 @{Of his own will} (\boulˆtheis\). First aorist passive participle of \boulomai\. Repeating the metaphor of birth in verse 15|, but in good sense. God as Father acted deliberately of set purpose. {He brought us forth} (\apekuˆsen\). First aorist active indicative of \apokue“\ (verse 15|), only here of the father (4 Macc. strkjv@15:17), not of the mother. Regeneration, not birth of all men, though God is the Father in the sense of creation of all men (Acts:17:28f.|). {By the word of truth} (\log“i alˆtheias\). Instrumental case \log“i\. The reference is thus to the gospel message of salvation even without the article (2Corinthians:6:7|) as here, and certainly with the article (Colossians:1:5; strkjv@Ephesians:1:13; strkjv@2Timothy:2:15|). The message marked by truth (genitive case \alˆtheias\). {That we should be} (\eis to einai hˆmƒs\). Purpose clause \eis to\ and the infinitive \einai\ with the accusative of general reference \hˆmƒs\ (as to us). {A kind of first-fruits} (\aparchˆn tina\). "Some first-fruits" (old word from \aparchomai\), of Christians of that age. See strkjv@Romans:16:5|.

rwp@James:1:21 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). Because of this principle. See strkjv@Ephesians:4:25|. {Putting away} (\apothemenoi\). Second aorist middle participle of \apotithˆmi\, to put off, metaphor of removing clothing as in strkjv@Romans:13:12; strkjv@Colossians:3:8; strkjv@Ephesians:4:22,25; strkjv@1Peter:2:1|. {Filthiness} (\ruparian\). Late word (Plutarch) from \ruparos\, dirty (James:2:2|), here only in N.T. Surely a dirty garment. {Overflowing of wickedness} (\perisseian kakias\). \Perisseia\ is a late word (from \perissos\, abundant, exceeding), only four times in N.T., in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:2| with \charas\ (of joy), in strkjv@Romans:5:17| with \charitos\ (of grace). \Kakia\ (from \kakos\, evil) can be either general like \ruparia\ (filthiness, naughtiness), or special like "malice." But any of either sense is a "superfluity." {With meekness} (\en pra–tˆti\). In docility. "The contrast is with \orgˆ\ rather than \kakias\" (Ropes). {The implanted word} (\ton emphuton logon\). This old verbal adjective (from \emphu“\ to implant, to grow in), only here in N.T., meaning properly ingrown, inborn, not \emphuteuton\ (engrafted). It is "the rooted word" (verse 18|), sown in the heart as the soil or garden of God (Matthew:13:3-23; strkjv@15:13; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:6|). {Able to save} (\dunamenon s“sai\). Cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:9; strkjv@James:2:14; strkjv@4:12; strkjv@5:20; strkjv@Romans:1:16|. Ultimate salvation (effective aorist active infinitive \s“sai\ from \s“z“\).

rwp@James:1:22 @{But be ye} (\ginesthe de\). Rather, "But keep on becoming" (present middle imperative of \ginomai\). {Doers of the word} (\poiˆtai logou\). Old word for agent (\-tˆs\) from \poie“\ to do as in strkjv@4:11; strkjv@Romans:2:13|, but in strkjv@Acts:17:28| our "poet" (long regarded as a "doer" or "maker"). {Hearers} (\akroatai\). Old word for agent again from \akroamai\ (to be a hearer), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:2:13|. {Deluding yourselves} (\paralogizomenoi heautous\). Present middle (direct) participle of \paralogizomai\, to reckon aside (\para\) and so wrong, to cheat, to deceive. Redundant reflexive \heautous\ with the middle. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Colossians:2:4|. Such a man does not delude anyone but himself.

rwp@James:1:26 @{Thinketh himself to be religious} (\dokei thrˆskos einai\). Condition of first class (\ei-dokei\). \Thrˆskos\ (of uncertain etymology, perhaps from \threomai\, to mutter forms of prayer) is predicate nominative after \einai\, agreeing with the subject of \dokei\ (either "he seems" or "he thinks"). This source of self-deception is in saying and doing. The word \thrˆskos\ is found nowhere else except in lexicons. Hatch (_Essays in Biblical Greek_, pp. 55-57) shows that it refers to the external observances of public worship, such as church attendance, almsgiving, prayer, fasting (Matthew:6:1-18|). It is the Pharisaic element in Christian worship. {While he bridleth not his tongue} (\mˆ chalinag“g“n gl“ssan heautou\). "Not bridling his own tongue." A reference to verse 19| and the metaphor is repeated in strkjv@3:12|. This is the earliest known example of the compound \chalinag“ge“\ (\chalinos\, bridle \ago\, to lead). It occurs also in Lucian. The picture is that of a man putting the bridle in his own mouth, not in that of another. See the similar metaphor of muzzling (\phimo“\) one's mouth (Matthew:22:12| \ephim“thˆ\). {Deceiveth} (\apat“n\). Present active participle from \apatˆ\ (deceit). He plays a trick on himself. {Religion} (\thrˆskeia\). Later form of \thrˆskiˆ\ (Herodotus) from \thrˆskos\ above. It means religious worship in its external observances, religious exercise or discipline, but not to the exclusion of reverence. In the N.T. we have it also in strkjv@Acts:26:5| of Judaism and in strkjv@Colossians:2:18| of worshipping angels. It is vain (\mataios\, feminine form same as masculine) or empty. Comes to nothing.

rwp@James:2:4 @{Are ye not divided in your own mind?} (\ou diekrithˆte en heautois;\). First aorist (gnomic) passive indicative of \diakrin“\, to separate, conclusion of the third-class condition (future) in a rhetorical question in the gnomic aorist (as if past) with ou expecting an affirmative answer. For this idiom (gnomic aorist) in a conclusion of the third-class condition see strkjv@1Corinthians:7:28|. "Were ye not divided in (among) yourselves?" Cf. strkjv@1:6; strkjv@Matthew:21:21|. {Judges with evil thoughts} (\kritai dialogism“n ponˆr“n\). Descriptive genitive as in strkjv@1:25|. \Dialogismos\ is an old word for reasoning (Romans:1:21|). Reasoning is not necessarily evil, but see strkjv@Matthew:15:19| (\ponˆroi\) and strkjv@Mark:7:21| (\kakoi\) for evil reasonings, and strkjv@1Timothy:2:8| without an adjective. See strkjv@James:1:8; strkjv@4:8| for \dipsuchos\. They are guilty of partiality (a divided mind) as between the two strangers.

rwp@James:3:2 @{In many things} (\polla\). Accusative neuter plural either cognate with \ptaiomen\ or accusative of general reference. On \ptaiomen\ (stumble) see on ¯2:10|. James includes himself in this list of stumblers. {If not} (\ei-ou\). Condition of first class with \ou\ (not \mˆ\) negativing the verb \ptaiei\. {In word} (\en log“i\). In speech. The teacher uses his tongue constantly and so is in particular peril on this score. {The same} (\houtos\). "This one" (not \ho autos\ the same). {A perfect man} (\teleios anˆr\). "A perfect husband" also, for \anˆr\ is husband as well as man in distinction from woman (\gunˆ\). The wife is at liberty to test her husband by this rule of the tongue. {To bridle the whole body also} (\chalinag“gˆsai kai holon to s“ma\). See strkjv@1:26| for this rare verb applied to the tongue (\gl“ssan\). Here the same metaphor is used and shown to apply to the whole body as horses are led by the mouth. The man follows his own mouth whether he controls the bridle therein (1:26|) or someone else holds the reins. James apparently means that the man who bridles his tongue does not stumble in speech and is able also to control his whole body with all its passions. See strkjv@Titus:1:11| about stopping people's mouths (\epistomiz“\).

rwp@James:3:6 @{The tongue is a fire} (\hˆ gl“ssa pur\). Songs:necessarily since there is no article with \pur\ (apparently same word as German _feuer_, Latin _purus_, English _pure, fire_). This metaphor of fire is applied to the tongue in strkjv@Proverbs:16:27; strkjv@26:18-22|; Sirach strkjv@28:22. {The world of iniquity} (\ho kosmos tˆs adikias\). A difficult phrase, impossible to understand according to Ropes as it stands. If the comma is put after \pur\ instead of after \adikias\, then the phrase may be the predicate with \kathistatai\ (present passive indicative of \kathistˆmi\, "is constituted," or the present middle "presents itself"). Even so, \kosmos\ remains a difficulty, whether it means the "ornament" (1Peter:3:3|) or "evil world" (James:1:27|) or just "world" in the sense of widespread power for evil. The genitive \adikias\ is probably descriptive (or qualitative). Clearly James means to say that the tongue can play havoc in the members of the human body. {Which defileth the whole body} (\hˆ spilousa holon to s“ma\). Present active participle of \spilo“\ late _Koin‚_, verb, to stain from \spilos\ (spot, also late word, in N.T. only in strkjv@Ephesians:5:27; strkjv@2Peter:2:13|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Judges:1:23|. Cf. strkjv@1:27| \aspilon\ (unspotted). {Setteth on fire} (\phlogizousa\). Present active participle of \phlogiz“\, old verb, to set on fire, to ignite, from \phlox\ (flame), in N.T. only in this verse. See \anaptei\ (verse 5|). {The wheel of nature} (\ton trochon genese“s\). Old word for wheel (from \trech“\, to run), only here in N.T. "One of the hardest passages in the Bible" (Hort). To what does \trochon\ refer? For \genese“s\ see strkjv@1:23| apparently in the same sense. Vincent suggests "the wheel of birth" (cf. strkjv@Matthew:1:1,18|). The ancient writers often use this same phrase (or \kuklos\, cycle, in place of \trochos\), but either in a physiological or a philosophical sense. James may have caught the metaphor from the current use, but certainly he has no such Orphic or Pythagorean doctrine of the transmigration of souls, "the unending round of death and rebirth" (Ropes). The wheel of life may be considered either in motion or standing still, though setting on fire implies motion. There is no reference to the zodiac. {And is set on fire by hell} (\kai phlogizomenˆ hupo gehennˆs\). Present passive participle of \phlogiz“\, giving the continual source of the fire in the tongue. For the metaphor of fire with \gehenna\ see strkjv@Matthew:5:22|.

rwp@James:3:9 @{Therewith} (\en autˆi\). This instrumental use of \en\ is not merely Hebraistic, but appears in late _Koin‚_ writers (Moulton, _Prol._, pp. 11f., 61f.). See also strkjv@Romans:15:6|. {We bless} (\eulogoumen\). Present active indicative of \euloge“\, old verb from \eulogos\ (a good word, \eu, logos\), as in strkjv@Luke:1:64| of God. "This is the highest function of speech" (Hort). {The Lord and Father} (\ton kurion kai patera\). Both terms applied to God. {Curse we} (\katar“metha\). Present middle indicative of the old compound verb \kataraomai\, to curse (from \katara\ a curse), as in strkjv@Luke:6:28|. {Which are made after the likeness of God} (\tous kath' homoi“sin theou gegonotas\). Second perfect articular participle of \ginomai\ and \homoi“sis\, old word from \homoio“\ (to make like), making like, here only in N.T. (from strkjv@Genesis:1:26; strkjv@9:6|), the usual word being \homoi“ma\, resemblance (Phillipians:2:7|). It is this image of God which sets man above the beasts. Cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:3:18|.

rwp@James:5:4 @{The hire} (\ho misthos\). Old word for wages (Matthew:20:8|). {Labourers} (\ergat“n\). Any one who works (\ergazomai\), especially agricultural workers (Matthew:9:37|). {Who mowed} (\t“n amˆsant“n\). Genitive plural of the articular first aorist active participle of \ama“\ (from \hama\, together), old verb, to gather together, to reap, here only in N.T. {Fields} (\ch“ras\). Estates or farms (Luke:12:16|). {Which is of you kept back by fraud} (\ho aphusterˆmenos aph' hum“n\). Perfect passive articular participle of \aphustere“\, late compound (simplex \hustere“\ common as strkjv@Matthew:19:20|), to be behindhand from, to fail of, to cause to withdraw, to defraud. Pitiful picture of earned wages kept back by rich Jews, old problem of capital and labour that is with us yet in acute form. {The cries} (\hai boai\). Old word from which \boa“\ comes (Matthew:3:3|), here only in N.T. The stolen money "cries out" (\krazei\), the workers cry out for vengeance. {That reaped} (\t“n therisant“n\). Genitive plural of the articular participle first aorist active of \theriz“\ (old verb from \theros\, summer, strkjv@Matthew:24:32|), to reap, to harvest while summer allows (Matthew:6:26|). {Have entered} (\eiselˆluthan\). Perfect active third person plural indicative of \eiserchomai\, old and common compound, to go or come into. This late form is by analogy of the aorist for the usual form in \-asi\. {Of the Lord of Sabaoth} (\Kuriou Saba“th\). "Of the Lord of Hosts," quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:5:9| as in strkjv@Romans:9:29|, transliterating the Hebrew word for "Hosts," an expression for the omnipotence of God like \Pantokrat“r\ (Revelation:4:8|). God hears the cries of the oppressed workmen even if the employers are deaf.

rwp@James:5:8 @{Ye also} (\kai humeis\). As well as the farmers. {Stablish} (\stˆrixate\). First aorist active imperative of \stˆriz“\, old verb, (from \stˆrigx\, a support) to make stable, as in strkjv@Luke:22:32; strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:13|. {Is at hand} (\ˆggiken\). Present perfect active indicative of \eggiz“\, common verb, to draw near (from \eggus\), in strkjv@James:4:8|, for drawing near. Same form used by John in his preaching (Matthew:3:2|). In strkjv@1Peter:4:7| the same word appears to have an eschatological sense as apparently here. How "near" or "nigh" did James mean? Clearly, it could only be a hope, for Jesus had distinctly said that no one knew when he would return.

rwp@James:5:16 @{Confess therefore your sins one to another} (\exomologeisthe oun allˆlois tas hamartias\). Present middle (indirect) of \exomologe“\. Confession of sin to God is already assumed. But public confession of certain sins to one another in the meetings is greatly helpful in many ways. This is not confessing to one man like a priest in place of the public confession. One may confess to the pastor without confessing to God or to the church, with little benefit to anybody. {Pray for one another} (\proseuchesthe huper allˆl“n\). Present middle imperative. Keep this up. {That ye may be healed} (\hop“s iathˆte\). Purpose clause with \hop“s\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \iaomai\. Probably of bodily healing (verse 14|), though \iaomai\ is used also of healing of the soul (Matthew:13:15; strkjv@1Peter:2:24; strkjv@Hebrews:12:13|) as Mayor takes it here. {Availeth much} (\polu ischuei\). "Has much force." Present active indicative of \ischu“\ (from \ischus\, strength). {In its working} (\energoumenˆ\). Probably the present middle participle of \energe“\ as Paul apparently uses it in strkjv@Galatians:5:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:12; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:7|, meaning "when it works." The passive is possible, as is the usual idiom elsewhere. Mayor argues strongly for the passive here, "when it is exercised" (Ropes).

rwp@James:5:17 @{Of like passions with us} (\homoiopathˆs hˆmin\). Associative-instrumental case \hˆmin\ as with \homoios\. This old compound adjective (\homoios, pasch“\), suffering the like with another, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:14:15|. {He prayed fervently} (\proseuchˆi prosˆuxato\). First aorist middle indicative of \proseuchomai\ and the instrumental case \proseuchˆi\ (cognate substantive), after idiom for intensity in classical Greek, like \pheugein phugˆi\, to flee with all speed (_figura etymologica_), but particularly frequent in the LXX (Genesis:2:17; strkjv@31:30|) in imitation of the Hebrew infinitive absolute. Songs:Luke:22:15; strkjv@John:3:29; strkjv@Acts:4:17|. {That it might not rain} (\tou mˆ brexai\). Genitive of the articular infinitive (\brexai\, first aorist active of \brech“\, old verb, to moisten, strkjv@Luke:7:38|, to rain, strkjv@Matthew:5:45|) with negative \mˆ\ used either for direct purpose, for an object clause as here and strkjv@Acts:3:12; strkjv@15:20|, or even for result. {For three years and six months} (\eniautous treis kai mˆnas hex\). Accusative of extent of time.

rwp@Info_John @ THE BELOVED DISCIPLE The book claims to be written by "the disciple whom Jesus loved" (John:21:20|) who is pointedly identified by a group of believers (apparently in Ephesus) as the writer: "This is the disciple which beareth witness of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his witness is true" (John:21:24|). This is the first criticism of the Fourth Gospel of which we have any record, made at the time when the book was first sent forth, made in a postscript to the epilogue or appendix. Possibly the book closed first with strkjv@John:20:31|, but chapter 21 is in precisely the same style and was probably added before publication by the author. The natural and obvious meaning of the language in strkjv@John:21:24| is that the Beloved Disciple wrote the whole book. He is apparently still alive when this testimony to his authorship is given. There are scholars who interpret it to mean that the Beloved Disciple is responsible for the facts in the book and not the actual writer, but that is a manifest straining of the language. There is in this verse no provision made for a redactor as distinct from the witness as is plausibly set forth by Dr. A. E. Garvie in _The Beloved Disciple_ (1922).

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

rwp@Info_John @ EARLY AND CLEAR WITNESS TO THE APOSTLE JOHN Ignatius (_ad Philad_. vii. 1) about A.D. 110 says of the Spirit that "he knows whence he comes and whither he is going," a clear allusion to strkjv@John:3:8|. Polycarp (_ad Phil_. S 7) quotes strkjv@1John:4:2,3|. Eusebius states that Papias quoted First John. Irenaeus is quoted by Eusebius (H.E. V, 20) as saying that he used as a boy to hear Polycarp tell "of his intercourse with John and the others who had seen the Lord." Irenaeus accepted all our Four Gospels. Tatian made his _Diatessaron_ out of the Four Gospels alone. Theophilus of Antioch (_Ad Autol_. ii. 22) calls John the author of the Fourth Gospel. This was about A.D. 180. The Muratorian Canon near the close of the second century names John as the author of the Fourth Gospel. Till after the time of Origen no opposition to the Johannine authorship appears outside of Marcion and the Alogi. No other New Testament book has stronger external evidence.

rwp@Info_John @ THE USE OF THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS As the latest of the Gospels and by the oldest living apostle, it is only natural that there should be an infrequent use of the Synoptic Gospels. Outside of the events of Passion Week and the Resurrection period the Fourth Gospel touches the Synoptic narrative in only one incident, that of the Feeding of the Five Thousand and the walking on the water. The author supplements the Synoptic record in various ways. He mentions two passovers not given by the other Gospels (John:2:23; strkjv@6:4|) and another (John:5:1|) may be implied. Otherwise we could not know certainly that the ministry of Jesus was more than a year in length. He adds greatly to our knowledge of the first year of our Lord's public ministry ("the year of obscurity," Stalker) without which we should know little of this beginning (John:1:19-4:45|). The Synoptics give mainly the Galilean and Perean and Judean ministry, but John adds a considerable Jerusalem ministry which is really demanded by allusions in the Synoptics. The Prologue (John:1:1-18|) relates the Incarnation to God's eternal purpose as in strkjv@Colossians:1:14-20| and strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-3| and employs the language of the intellectuals of the time (\Logos\ -- Word) to interpret Christ as the Incarnate Son of God.

rwp@Info_John @ A DIFFERENT STYLE OF TEACHING Songs:different is it in fact that some men bluntly assert that Jesus could not have spoken in the same fashion as presented in the Synoptics and in the Fourth Gospel. Such critics need to recall the Socrates of Xenophon's _Memorabilia_ and of Plato's _Dialogues_. There is a difference beyond a doubt, but there is also some difference in the reports in the Synoptics. Jesus for the most part spoke in Aramaic, sometimes in Greek, as to the great crowds from around Palestine (the Sermon on the Mount, for instance). There is the Logia of Jesus (Q of criticism) preserved in the non-Markan portions of Matthew and Luke besides Mark, and the rest of Matthew and Luke. Certain natural individualities are preserved. The difference is greater in the Fourth Gospel, because John writes in the ripeness of age and in the richness of his long experience. He gives his reminiscences mellowed by long reflection and yet with rare dramatic power. The simplicity of the language leads many to think that they understand this Gospel when they fail to see the graphic pictures as in chapters strkjv@John:7-11|. The book fairly throbs with life. There is, no doubt, a Johannine style here, but curiously enough there exists in the Logia (Q) a genuine Johannine passage written long before the Fourth Gospel (Matthew:11:25-30; strkjv@Luke:10:21-24|). The use of "the Father" and "the Son" is thoroughly Johannine. It is clear that Jesus used the Johannine type of teaching also. Perhaps critics do not make enough allowance for the versatility and variety in Jesus.

rwp@Info_John @ LIKE THE JOHANNINE EPISTLES Critics of all classes agree that, whoever was the author of the Fourth Gospel, the same man wrote the First Epistle of John. There is the same inimitable style, the same vocabulary, the same theological outlook. Undoubtedly the same author wrote also Second and Third John, for, brief as they are, they exhibit the same characteristics. In Second and Third John the author describes himself as "the Elder" (\ho presbuteros\), which fact has led some to argue for the mythical "Presbyter John" as the author in place of the Apostle John and so of First John and the Fourth Gospel. It is argued that the Apostle John would have termed himself "the Apostle John" after the fashion of Paul. But the example of the Apostle Peter disposes of that argument, for in addressing the elders (1Peter:5:1|) he calls himself "your fellow-elder" (\ho sunpresbuteros\). In the Epistles John opposes Gnosticism both of the Docetic type which denied the actual humanity of Jesus as in strkjv@1John:1:1-4| and the Cerinthian type which denied the identity of the man Jesus and the _aeon_ Christ which came on Jesus at his baptism and left him at his death on the Cross as in strkjv@1John:2:22|. One of the many stories told about John is his abhorrence of Cerinthus when found in the same public bath with him. As Westcott shows, the Epistles of John prove his actual humanity while assuming his deity, whereas the Fourth Gospel proves his deity while assuming his humanity.

rwp@Info_John @ THE UNITY OF THE GOSPEL This has been attacked in various ways in spite of the identity of style throughout. There are clearly three parts in the Gospel: the Prologue, strkjv@John:1:1-18|, the Body of the Book, strkjv@John:1:19-20:31|, the Epilogue, strkjv@John:21|. But there is no evidence that the Prologue was added by another hand, even though the use of Logos (Word) for Christ does not occur thereafter. This high conception of Christ dominates the whole book. Some argue that the Epilogue was added by some one else than John, but here again there is no proof and no real reason for the supposition. It is possible, as already stated, that John stopped at strkjv@John:20:31| and then added strkjv@John:21| before sending the book forth after his friends added strkjv@John:21:24| as their endorsement of the volume. Some scholars claim that they detect various displacements in the arrangement of the material, but such subjective criticism is never convincing. There are undoubtedly long gaps in the narrative as between chapters 5 and 6, but John is not giving a continuous narrative, but only a supplementary account assuming knowledge of the Synoptics. It is held that editorial comments by redactors can be detected here and there. Perhaps, and perhaps not. The unity of this great book stands even if that be true.

rwp@Info_John @ THE PURPOSE OF THE BOOK He tells us himself in strkjv@John:20:30f|. He has made a selection of the many signs wrought by Jesus for an obvious purpose: "But these are written, that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye may have life in his name." This is the high and noble purpose plainly stated by the author. The book is thus confessedly apologetic and this fact ruins it with the critics who demand a dull and dry chronicle of events without plan or purpose in a book of history. Such a book would not be read and would be of little value if written. Each of the Synoptics is written with a purpose and every history or biography worth reading is written with a purpose. It is one thing to have a purpose in writing, but quite another to suppress or distort facts in order to create the impression that one wishes. This John did not do. He has given us his deliberate, mature, tested view of Jesus Christ as shown to him while alive and as proven since his resurrection. He writes to win others to like faith in Christ.

rwp@Info_John @ JOHN'S PORTRAIT OF CHRIST No one questions that the Fourth Gospel asserts the deity of Christ. It is in the Prologue at the very start: "And the Word was God" (John:1:1|) and in the correct text of strkjv@John:1:18|, "God only begotten" (\theos monogenˆs\). It occurs repeatedly in the book as in the witness of the Baptist: "This is the Son of God" (John:1:34|). It is in the charge of the Pharisees (John:5:18|) and the claim of Christ himself (John:5:20-23; strkjv@6:48; strkjv@8:12,58; strkjv@11:25; strkjv@14:9; strkjv@17:5|) with the full and frank conviction of the author in strkjv@John:20:31|. He has made good his purpose. He has proven that Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God. With some critics this purpose has vitiated the entire book. The effort has been made to show that Paul, Peter, the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Synoptics give a lower view of Christ without the term \theos\ applied to him. In particular it was once argued that Q, the Logia of Jesus, used by Matthew and Luke (the non-Markan portions in both Matthew and Luke), gives a reduced picture of Jesus as on a lower plane than God, the Arian or Ritschlian view at any rate as answering for God to us though not God in actual nature. But in the Logia of Jesus we find the same essential picture of Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Son of Man as I have shown in my _The Christ of the Logia_ (1924). The only way to get rid of the deity of Christ in the New Testament is to throw overboard all the books in it as legendary or reflections of late theological development away from the original picture. The very earliest picture drawn of Christ that has been preserved to us, that in the Logia of Jesus (drawn W. M. Ramsay believes before Christ's crucifixion), is in essential agreement with the fully drawn portrait in the Fourth Gospel. Each picture in the Four Gospels adds touches of its own, but the features are the same, those of the God-Man Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world. The brilliant blind preacher of Edinburgh, George Matheson, sees this clearly (_Studies in the Portrait of the Messiah_, 1900; _St. John's Portrait of Christ_, 1910).

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:1:2 @{The same} (\houtos\). "This one," the Logos of verse 1|, repeated for clarity, characteristic of John's style. He links together into one phrase two of the ideas already stated separately, "in the beginning he was with God," "afterwards in time he came to be with man" (Marcus Dods). Thus John clearly states of the Logos Pre-existence before Incarnation, Personality, Deity.

rwp@John:1:3 @{All things} (\panta\). The philosophical phrase was \ta panta\ (the all things) as we have it in strkjv@1Corinthians:8:6; strkjv@Romans:11:36; strkjv@Colossians:1:16|. In verse 10| John uses \ho kosmos\ (the orderly universe) for the whole. {Were made} (egeneto). Second aorist middle indicative of \ginomai\, the constative aorist covering the creative activity looked at as one event in contrast with the continuous existence of \ˆn\ in verses 1,2|. All things "came into being." Creation is thus presented as a becoming (\ginomai\) in contrast with being (\eimi\). {By him} (\di' autou\). By means of him as the intermediate agent in the work of creation. The Logos is John's explanation of the creation of the universe. The author of Hebrews (Hebrews:1:2|) names God's Son as the one "through whom he made the ages." Paul pointedly asserts that "the all things were created in him" (Christ) and "the all things stand created through him and unto him" (Colossians:1:16|). Hence it is not a peculiar doctrine that John here enunciates. In strkjv@1Corinthians:8:6|, Paul distinguishes between the Father as the primary source (\ex hou\) of the all things and the Son as the intermediate agent as here (\di' hou\). {Without him} (\ch“ris autou\). Old adverbial preposition with the ablative as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:14|, "apart from." John adds the negative statement for completion, another note of his style as in strkjv@John:1:20; strkjv@1John:1:5|. Thus John excludes two heresies (Bernard) that matter is eternal and that angels or aeons had a share in creation. {Not anything} (\oude hen\). "Not even one thing." Bernard thinks the entire Prologue is a hymn and divides it into strophes. That is by no means certain. It is doubtful also whether the relative clause "that hath been made" (\ho gegonen\) is a part of this sentence or begins a new one as Westcott and Hort print it. The verb is second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. Westcott observes that the ancient scholars before Chrysostom all began a new sentence with \ho gegonen\. The early uncials had no punctuation.

rwp@John:1:4 @{In him was life} (\en aut“i z“ˆ ˆn\). That which has come into being (verse 3|) in the Logos was life. The power that creates and sustains life in the universe is the Logos. This is what Paul means by the perfect passive verb \ektistai\ (stands created) in strkjv@Colossians:1:16|. This is also the claim of Jesus to Martha (John:11:25|). This is the idea in strkjv@Hebrews:1:3| "bearing (upholding) the all things by the word of his power." Once this language might have been termed unscientific, but not so now after the spiritual interpretation of the physical world by Eddington and Jeans. Usually in John \z“ˆ\ means spiritual life, but here the term is unlimited and includes all life; only it is not \bios\ (manner of life), but the very principle or essence of life. That is spiritual behind the physical and to this great scientists today agree. It is also personal intelligence and power. Some of the western documents have \estin\ here instead of \ˆn\ to bring out clearly the timelessness of this phrase of the work of the \Logos\. {And the life was the light of men} (\kai hˆ z“ˆ ˆn to ph“s t“n anthr“p“n\). Here the article with both \z“ˆ\ and \ph“s\ makes them interchangeable. "The light was the life of men" is also true. That statement is curiously like the view of some physicists who find in electricity (both light and power) the nearest equivalent to life in its ultimate physical form. Later Jesus will call himself the light of the world (John:8:12|). John is fond of these words life and light in Gospel, Epistles, Revelation. He here combines them to picture his conception of the Pre-incarnate Logos in his relation to the race. He was and is the Life of men (\t“n anthr“pon\, generic use of the article) and the Light of men. John asserts this relation of the Logos to the race of men in particular before the Incarnation.

rwp@John:1:5 @{Shineth} (\phainei\). Linear present active indicative of \phain“\, old verb from \pha“\, to shine (\phaos, ph“s\). "The light keeps on giving light." {In the darkness} (\en tˆi skotiƒi\). Late word for the common \skotos\ (kin to \skia\, shadow). An evident allusion to the darkness brought on by sin. In strkjv@2Peter:2:17| we have \ho zophos tou skotou\ (the blackness of darkness). The Logos, the only real moral light, keeps on shining both in the Pre-incarnate state and after the Incarnation. John is fond of \skotia\ (\skotos\) for moral darkness from sin and \ph“s\ (\ph“tiz“, phain“\) for the light that is in Christ alone. In strkjv@1John:2:8| he proclaims that "the darkness is passing by and the true light is already shining." The Gnostics often employed these words and John takes them and puts them in the proper place. {Apprehended it not} (\auto ou katelaben\). Second aorist active indicative of \katalamban“\, old verb to lay hold of, to seize. This very phrase occurs in strkjv@John:12:35| (\hina mˆ skotia humas katalabˆi\) "that darkness overtake you not," the metaphor of night following day and in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:4| the same idiom (\hina katalabˆi\) is used of day overtaking one as a thief. This is the view of Origen and appears also in 2Macc. strkjv@8:18. The same word appears in Aleph D in strkjv@John:6:17| \katelabe de autous hˆ skotia\ ("but darkness overtook them," came down on them). Hence, in spite of the Vulgate _comprehenderunt_, "overtook" or "overcame" seems to be the idea here. The light kept on shining in spite of the darkness that was worse than a London fog as the Old Testament and archaeological discoveries in Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Persia, Crete, Asia Minor show.

rwp@John:1:7 @{For witness} (\eis marturian\). Old word from \marture“\ (from \martus\), both more common in John's writings than the rest of the N.T. This the purpose of the Baptist's ministry. {That he might bear witness} (\hina marturˆsˆi\). Final clause with \hina\ and aorist active subjunctive of \marture“\ to make clearer \eis marturian\. {Of the light} (\peri tou ph“tos\). "Concerning the light." The light was shining and men with blinded eyes were not seeing the light (John:1:26|), blinded by the god of this world still (2Corinthians:4:4|). John had his own eyes opened so that he saw and told what he saw. That is the mission of every preacher of Christ. But he must first have his own eyes opened. {That all might believe} (\hina pisteus“sin\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \pisteu“\, ingressive aorist "come to believe." This is one of John's great words (about 100 times), "with nine times the frequency with which it is used by the Synoptists" (Bernard). And yet \pistis\, so common in Paul, John uses only in strkjv@1John:5:4| and four times in the Apocalypse where \pisteu“\ does not occur at all. Here it is used absolutely as in strkjv@John:1:50|, etc. {Through him} (\di' autou\). As the intermediate agent in winning men to believe in Christ (the Logos) as the Light and the Life of men. This is likewise the purpose of the author of this book (21:31|). The preacher is merely the herald to point men to Christ.

rwp@John:1:9 @{There was} (\ˆn\). Imperfect indicative. Emphatic position at the beginning of the sentence and so probably not periphrastic conjugation with \erchomenon\ (coming) near the end, though that is possible. {The true light} (\to ph“s to alˆthinon\). "The light the genuine," not a false light of wreckers of ships, but the dependable light that guides to the harbor of safety. This true light had been on hand all the time in the darkness (\ˆn\ imperfect, linear action) before John came. {Even the light} (not in the Greek). Added in the English to make plain this interpretation. {Lighteth every man} (\ph“tizei panta anthr“pon\). Old verb (from \ph“s\) to give light as in strkjv@Revelation:22:5; strkjv@Luke:11:35f|. The Quakers appeal to this phrase for their belief that to every man there is given an inner light that is a sufficient guide, the Quaker's text it is called. But it may only mean that all the real light that men receive comes from Christ, not necessarily that each one receives a special revelation. {Coming} (\erchomenon\). This present middle participle of \erchomai\ can be taken with \anthr“pon\ just before (accusative masculine singular), "every man as he comes into the world." It can also be construed with \ph“s\ (nominative neuter singular). This idea occurs in strkjv@John:3:19; strkjv@11:27; strkjv@12:46|. In the two last passages the phrase is used of the Messiah which makes it probable here. But even so the light presented in strkjv@11:27; strkjv@12:46| is that of the Incarnate Messiah, not the Pre-incarnate Logos. Here \kosmos\ rather than \panta\ occurs in the sense of the orderly universe as often in this Gospel. See strkjv@Ephesians:1:4|.

rwp@John:1:10 @{He was in the world} (\en t“i kosm“i ˆn\). Imperfect tense of continuous existence in the universe before the Incarnation as in verses 1,2|. {Was made by him} (\di' autou egeneto\). "Through him." Same statement here of "the world" (\ho kosmos\) as that made in verse 3| of \panta\. {Knew him not} (\auton ouk egn“\). Second aorist active indicative of common verb \ginosk“\, what Gildersleeve called a negative aorist, refused or failed to recognize him, his world that he had created and that was held together by him (Colossians:1:16|). Not only did the world fail to know the Pre-incarnate Logos, but it failed to recognize him when he became Incarnate (John:1:26|). Two examples in this sentence of John's fondness for \kai\ as in verses 1,4,5,14|, the paratactic rather than the hypotactic construction, like the common Hebrew use of _wav_.

rwp@John:1:11 @{Unto his own} (\eis ta idia\). Neuter plural, "unto his own things," the very idiom used in strkjv@19:27| when the Beloved Disciple took the mother of Jesus "to his own home." The world was "the own home" of the Logos who had made it. See also strkjv@16:32; strkjv@Acts:21:6|. {They that were his own} (\hoi idioi\). In the narrower sense, "his intimates," "his own family," "his own friends" as in strkjv@13:1|. Jesus later said that a prophet is not without honour save in his own country (Mark:6:4; strkjv@John:4:44|), and the town of Nazareth where he lived rejected him (Luke:4:28f.; strkjv@Matthew:13:58|). Probably here \hoi idioi\ means the Jewish people, the chosen people to whom Christ was sent first (Matthew:15:24|), but in a wider sense the whole world is included in \hoi idioi\. Conder's _The Hebrew Tragedy_ emphasizes the pathos of the situation that the house of Israel refused to welcome the Messiah when he did come, like a larger and sadder Enoch Arden experience. {Received him not} (\auton ou parelabon\). Second aorist active indicative of \paralamban“\, old verb to take to one's side, common verb to welcome, the very verb used by Jesus in strkjv@14:3| of the welcome to his Father's house. Cf. \katelaben\ in verse 5|. Israel slew the Heir (Hebrews:1:2|) when he came, like the wicked husbandmen (Luke:20:14|).

rwp@John:1:13 @{Which were born} (\hoi egennˆthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \genna“\, to beget, "who were begotten." By spiritual generation (of God, \ek theou\), not by physical (\ex haimat“n\, plural as common in classics and O.T., though why it is not clear unless blood of both father and mother; \ek thelˆmatos sarkos\, from sexual desire; \ek thelˆmatos andros\, from the will of the male). But _b_ of the old Latin reads _qui natus est_ and makes it refer to Christ and so expressly teach the Virgin Birth of Jesus. Likewise Irenaeus reads _qui natus est_ as does Tertullian who argues that _qui nati sunt_ (\hoi egennˆthˆsan\) is an invention of the Valentinian Gnostics. Blass (_Philology of the Gospels_, p. 234) opposes this reading, but all the old Greek uncials read \hoi egennˆthˆsan\ and it must be accepted. The Virgin Birth is doubtless implied in verse 14|, but it is not stated in verse 13|.

rwp@John:1:14 @{And the Word became flesh} (\kai ho logos sarx egeneto\). See verse 3| for this verb and note its use for the historic event of the Incarnation rather than \ˆn\ of verse 1|. Note also the absence of the article with the predicate substantive \sarx\, so that it cannot mean "the flesh became the Word." The Pre-existence of the Logos has already been plainly stated and argued. John does not here say that the Logos entered into a man or dwelt in a man or filled a man. One is at liberty to see an allusion to the birth narratives in strkjv@Matthew:1:16-25; strkjv@Luke:1:28-38|, if he wishes, since John clearly had the Synoptics before him and chiefly supplemented them in his narrative. In fact, one is also at liberty to ask what intelligent meaning can one give to John's language here apart from the Virgin Birth? What ordinary mother or father ever speaks of a child "becoming flesh"? For the Incarnation see also strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Galatians:4:4; strkjv@Romans:1:3; strkjv@8:3; strkjv@Phillipians:2:7f.; strkjv@1Timothy:3:16; strkjv@Hebrews:2:14|. "To explain the exact significance of \egeneto\ in this sentence is beyond the powers of any interpreter" (Bernard). Unless, indeed, as seems plain, John is referring to the Virgin Birth as recorded in Matthew and Luke. "The Logos of philosophy is, John declares, the Jesus of history" (Bernard). Thus John asserts the deity and the real humanity of Christ. He answers the Docetic Gnostics who denied his humanity. {Dwelt among us} (\eskˆn“sen en hˆmin\). First aorist ingressive aorist active indicative of \skˆno“\, old verb, to pitch one's tent or tabernacle (\skˆnos\ or \skˆnˆ\), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:7-15; strkjv@12:12; strkjv@13:6; strkjv@21:3|. In Revelation it is used of God tabernacling with men and here of the Logos tabernacling, God's Shekinah glory here among us in the person of his Son. {We beheld his glory} (\etheasametha tˆn doxan autou\). First aorist middle indicative of \theaomai\ (from \thea\, spectacle). The personal experience of John and of others who did recognize Jesus as the Shekinah glory (\doxa\) of God as James, the brother of Jesus, so describes him (James:2:1|). John employs \theaomai\ again in strkjv@1:32| (the Baptist beholding the Spirit coming down as a dove) and strkjv@1:38| of the Baptist gazing in rapture at Jesus. Songs:also strkjv@4:35; strkjv@11:45; strkjv@1John:1:1f.; strkjv@4:12,14|. By this word John insists that in the human Jesus he beheld the Shekinah glory of God who was and is the Logos who existed before with God. By this plural John speaks for himself and all those who saw in Jesus what he did. {As of the only begotten from the Father} (\h“s monogenous para patros\). Strictly, "as of an only born from a father," since there is no article with \monogenous\ or with \patros\. In strkjv@John:3:16; strkjv@1John:4:9| we have \ton monogenˆ\ referring to Christ. This is the first use in the Gospel of \patˆr\ of God in relation to the Logos. \Monogenˆs\ (only born rather than only begotten) here refers to the eternal relationship of the Logos (as in strkjv@1:18|) rather than to the Incarnation. It distinguishes thus between the Logos and the believers as children (\tekna\) of God. The word is used of human relationships as in strkjv@Luke:7:12; strkjv@8:42; strkjv@9:38|. It occurs also in the LXX and strkjv@Hebrews:11:17|, but elsewhere in N.T. only in John's writings. It is an old word in Greek literature. It is not clear whether the words \para patros\ (from the Father) are to be connected with \monogenous\ (cf. strkjv@6:46; strkjv@7:29|, etc.) or with \doxan\ (cf. strkjv@5:41,44|). John clearly means to say that "the manifested glory of the Word was as it were the glory of the Eternal Father shared with His only Son" (Bernard). Cf. strkjv@8:54; strkjv@14:9; strkjv@17:5|. {Full} (\plˆrˆs\). Probably indeclinable accusative adjective agreeing with \doxan\ (or genitive with \monogenous\) of which we have papyri examples (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 275). As nominative \plˆrˆs\ can agree with the subject of \eskˆn“sen\. {Of grace and truth} (\charitos kai alˆtheias\). Curiously this great word \charis\ (grace), so common with Paul, does not occur in John's Gospel save in strkjv@1:14,16,17|, though \alˆtheia\ (truth) is one of the keywords in the Fourth Gospel and in 1John, occurring 25 times in the Gospel and 20 in the Johannine Epistles, 7 times in the Synoptics and not at all in Revelation (Bernard). In strkjv@1:17| these two words picture the Gospel in Christ in contrast with the law of Moses. See Epistles of Paul for origin and use of both words.

rwp@John:1:15 @{Beareth witness} (\marturei\). Historical (dramatic) present indicative of this characteristic word in John (cf. strkjv@1:17f.|). See strkjv@1:32,34| for historical examples of John's witness to Christ. This sentence is a parenthesis in Westcott and Hort's text, though the Revised Version makes a parenthesis of most of verse 14|. The witness of John is adduced in proof of the glory full of grace and truth already claimed for the Incarnate Logos. {Crieth} (\kekragen\). Second perfect active indicative of \kraz“\, old verb for loud crying, repeated in dramatic form again for emphasis recalling the wonderful Voice in the wilderness which the Beloved Disciple can still hear echoing through the years. {This was} (\houtos ˆn\). Imperfect indicative where John throws the tense back in past time when he looked forward to the coming of the Messiah as in strkjv@Acts:3:10| where we should prefer "is" (\estin\). Gildersleeve (_Syntax_, p. 96) calls this the "imperfect of sudden appreciation of the real state of things." {Of whom I said} (\hon eipon\). But B C and a corrector of Aleph (Westcott and Hort) have \ho eip“n\ "the one who said," a parenthetical explanation about the Baptist, not the words of the Baptist about Christ. {After me} (\opis“ mou\). See also strkjv@1:27|. Later in time John means. He described "the Coming One" (\ho erchomenos\) before he saw Jesus. The language of John here is precisely that in strkjv@Matthew:3:11| \ho opis“ mou erchomenos\ (cf. strkjv@Mark:1:7|). The Beloved Disciple had heard the Baptist say these very words, but he also had the Synoptic Gospels. {Is become} (\gegonen\). Second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. It is already an actual fact when the Baptist is speaking. {Before me} (\emprosthen mou\). In rank and dignity, the Baptist means, \ho ischuroteros mou\ "the one mightier than I" (Mark:1:7|) and \ischuroteros mou\ "mightier than I" (Matthew:3:11|). In strkjv@John:3:28| \emprosthen ekeinou\ (before him, the Christ) does mean priority in time, but not here. This superior dignity of the Messiah John proudly recognizes always (John:3:25-30|). {For he was before me} (\hoti pr“tos mou ˆn\). Paradox, but clear. He had always been (\ˆn imperfect\) before John in his Pre-incarnate state, but "after" John in time of the Incarnation, but always ahead of John in rank immediately on his Incarnation. \Pr“tos mou\ (superlative with ablative) occurs here when only two are compared as is common in the vernacular _Koin‚_. Songs:the Beloved Disciple came first (\pr“tos\) to the tomb, ahead of Peter (20:4|). Songs:also \pr“ton hum“n\ in strkjv@15:18| means "before you" as if it were \proteron hum“n\. Verse 30| repeats these words almost exactly.

rwp@John:1:16 @{For} (\hoti\). Correct text (Aleph B C D L) and not \kai\ (and) of the Textus Receptus. Explanatory reason for verse 14|. {Of his fulness} (\ek tou plˆr“matos\). The only instance of \plˆr“ma\ in John's writings, though five times of Christ in Paul's Epistles (Colossians:1:19; strkjv@2:9; strkjv@Ephesians:1:23; strkjv@3:19; strkjv@4:13|). See strkjv@Colossians:1:19| for discussion of these terms of the Gnostics that Paul employs for all the attributes of God summed up in Christ (Colossians:2:9|) and so used here by John of the Incarnate Logos. {We all} (\hˆmeis pantes\). John is facing the same Gnostic depreciation of Christ of which Paul writes in Colossians. Songs:here John appeals to all his own contemporaries as participants with him in the fulness of the Logos. {Received} (\elabomen\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\, a wider experience than beholding (\etheasametha\, verse 14|) and one that all believers may have. {Grace for grace} (\charin anti charitos\). The point is in \anti\, a preposition disappearing in the _Koin‚_ and here only in John. It is in the locative case of \anta\ (end), "at the end," and was used of exchange in sale. See strkjv@Luke:11:11|, \anti ichthuos ophin\, "a serpent for a fish," strkjv@Hebrews:12:2| where "joy" and "cross" are balanced against each other. Here the picture is "grace" taking the place of "grace" like the manna fresh each morning, new grace for the new day and the new service.

rwp@John:1:17 @{Was given} (\edothˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \did“mi\. {By Moses} (\dia M“use“s\). "Through Moses" as the intermediate agent of God. {Came} (\egeneto\). The historical event, the beginning of Christianity. {By Jesus Christ} (\dia Iˆsou Christou\). "Through Jesus Christ," the intermediate agent of God the Father. Here in plain terms John identifies the Pre-incarnate Logos with Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah. The full historical name "Jesus Christ" is here for the first time in John. See also strkjv@17:3| and four times in 1John and five times in Revelation. Without Christ there would have been no Christianity. John's theology is here pictured by the words "grace and truth" (\hˆ charis kai hˆ alˆtheia\), each with the article and each supplementary to the other. It is grace in contrast with law as Paul sets forth in Galatians and Romans. Paul had made grace "a Christian commonplace" (Bernard) before John wrote. It is truth as opposed to Gnostic and all other heresy as Paul shows in Colossians and Ephesians. The two words aptly describe two aspects of the Logos and John drops the use of \Logos\ and \charis\, but clings to \alˆtheia\ (see strkjv@8:32| for the freedom brought by truth), though the ideas in these three words run all through his Gospel.

rwp@John:1:18 @{No man hath seen God at any time} (\theon oudeis he“raken p“pote\). "God no one has ever seen." Perfect active indicative of \hora“\. Seen with the human physical eye, John means. God is invisible (Exodus:33:20; strkjv@Deuteronomy:4:12|). Paul calls God \aoratos\ (Colossians:1:15; strkjv@1Timothy:1:17|). John repeats the idea in strkjv@John:5:37; strkjv@6:46|. And yet in strkjv@14:7| Jesus claims that the one who sees him has seen the Father as here. {The only begotten Son} (\ho monogenˆs huios\). This is the reading of the Textus Receptus and is intelligible after \h“s monogenous para patros\ in verse 14|. But the best old Greek manuscripts (Aleph B C L) read \monogenˆs theos\ (God only begotten) which is undoubtedly the true text. Probably some scribe changed it to \ho monogenˆs huios\ to obviate the blunt statement of the deity of Christ and to make it like strkjv@3:16|. But there is an inner harmony in the reading of the old uncials. The Logos is plainly called \theos\ in verse 1|. The Incarnation is stated in verse 14|, where he is also termed \monogenˆs\. He was that before the Incarnation. Songs:he is "God only begotten," "the Eternal Generation of the Son" of Origen's phrase. {Which is in the bosom of the Father} (\ho “n eis ton kolpon tou patros\). The eternal relation of the Son with the Father like \pros ton theon\ in verse 1|. In strkjv@3:13| there is some evidence for \ho “n en t“i ouran“i\ used by Christ of himself while still on earth. The mystic sense here is that the Son is qualified to reveal the Father as Logos (both the Father in Idea and Expression) by reason of the continual fellowship with the Father. {He} (\ekinos\). Emphatic pronoun referring to the Son. {Hath declared him} (\exˆgˆsato\). First aorist (effective) middle indicative of \exˆgeomai\, old verb to lead out, to draw out in narrative, to recount. Here only in John, though once in Luke's Gospel (24:35|) and four times in Acts:(10:8; strkjv@15:12,14; strkjv@21:19|). This word fitly closes the Prologue in which the Logos is pictured in marvellous fashion as the Word of God in human flesh, the Son of God with the Glory of God in him, showing men who God is and what he is.

rwp@John:1:19 @{And this is the witness of John} (\kai hautˆ estin hˆ marturia tou I“anou\). He had twice already alluded to it (verses 7f., 15|) and now he proceeds to give it as the most important item to add after the Prologue. Just as the author assumes the birth narratives of Matthew and Luke, so he assumes the Synoptic accounts of the baptism of Jesus by John, but adds various details of great interest and value between the baptism and the Galilean ministry, filling out thus our knowledge of this first year of the Lord's ministry in various parts of Palestine. The story in John proceeds along the same lines as in the Synoptics. There is increasing unfolding of Christ to the disciples with increasing hostility on the part of the Jews till the final consummation in Jerusalem. {When the Jews sent unto him} (\hote apesteilan pros auton hoi Ioudaioi\). John, writing in Ephesus near the close of the first century long after the destruction of Jerusalem, constantly uses the phrase "the Jews" as descriptive of the people as distinct from the Gentile world and from the followers of Christ (at first Jews also). Often he uses it of the Jewish leaders and rulers in particular who soon took a hostile attitude toward both John and Jesus. Here it is the Jews from Jerusalem who sent (\apesteilan\, first aorist active indicative of \apostell“\). {Priests and Levites} (\hiereis kai Leueitas\). Sadducees these were. Down below in verse 24| the author explains that it was the Pharisees who sent the Sadducees. The Synoptics throw a flood of light on this circumstance, for in strkjv@Matthew:3:7| we are told that the Baptist called the Pharisees and Sadducees "offspring of vipers" (Luke:3:7|). Popular interest in John grew till people were wondering "in their hearts concerning John whether haply he were the Christ" (Luke:3:15|). Songs:the Sanhedrin finally sent a committee to John to get his own view of himself, but the Pharisees saw to it that Sadducees were sent. {To ask him} (\hina er“tˆs“sin auton\). Final \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \er“ta“\, old verb to ask a question as here and often in the _Koin‚_ to ask for something (John:14:16|) like \aite“\. {Who art thou?} (\su tis ei;\). Direct question preserved and note proleptic position of \su\, "Thou, who art thou?" The committee from the Sanhedrin put the question sharply up to John to define his claims concerning the Messiah.

rwp@John:1:20 @{And he confessed} (\kai h“mologˆsen\). The continued paratactic use of \kai\ (and) and the first aorist active indicative of \homologe“\, old verb from \homologos\ (\homon, leg“\, to say the same thing), to confess, in the Synoptics (Matthew:10:32|) as here. {And denied not} (\kai ouk ˆrnˆsato\). Negative statement of same thing in Johannine fashion, first aorist middle indicative of \arneomai\, another Synoptic and Pauline word (Matthew:10:33; strkjv@2Timothy:2:12|). He did not contradict or refuse to say who he was. {And he confessed} (\kai h“mologˆsen\). Thoroughly Johannine again in the paratactic repetition. {I am not the Christ} (\Eg“ ouk eimi ho Christos\). Direct quotation again with recitative \hoti\ before it like our modern quotation marks. "I am not the Messiah," he means by \ho Christos\ (the Anointed One). Evidently it was not a new question as Luke had already shown (Luke:3:15|).

rwp@John:1:23 @{He said} (\ephˆ\). Common imperfect active (or second aorist active) of \phˆmi\, to say, old defective verb. {I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness} (\Eg“ ph“nˆ bo“ntos en tˆi erˆm“i\). For his answer John quotes strkjv@Isaiah:40:3|. The Synoptics (Mark:1:3; strkjv@Matthew:3:3; strkjv@Luke:3:4|) quote this language from Isaiah as descriptive of John, but do not say that he also applied it to himself. There is no reason to think that he did not do so. John also refers to Isaiah as the author of the words and also of the message, "{Make straight the way of the Lord}" (\Euthunate tˆn hodon tou kuriou\). By this language (\euthun“\ in N.T. only here and strkjv@James:3:4|, first aorist active imperative here) John identifies himself to the committee as the forerunner of the Messiah. The early writers note the differences between the use of \Logos\ (Word) for the Messiah and \ph“nˆ\ (Voice) for John.

rwp@John:1:34 @{I have seen} (\he“raka\). Present perfect active of \hora“\. John repeats the statement of verse 32| (\tetheamai\). {Have borne witness} (\memarturˆka\). Perfect active indicative of \marture“\ for which verb see 32|. {This is the Son of God} (\ho huios tou theou\). The Baptist saw the Spirit come on Jesus at his baptism and undoubtedly heard the Father's voice hail him as "My Beloved Son" (Mark:1:11; strkjv@Matthew:3:17; strkjv@Luke:3:22|). Nathanael uses it as a Messianic title (John:1:49|) as does Martha (11:27|). The Synoptics use it also of Christ (Mark:3:11; strkjv@Matthew:14:33; strkjv@Luke:22:70|). Caiaphas employs it to Christ as a Messianic title (Matthew:26:63|) and Jesus confessed under oath that he was (verse strkjv@Matthew:26:64|), thus applying the term to himself as he does in John's Gospel (5:25; strkjv@10:36; strkjv@11:4|) and by implication (the Father, the Son) in strkjv@Matthew:11:27| (Luke:10:22|). Hence in the Synoptics also Jesus calls himself the Son of God. The phrase means more than just Messiah and expresses the peculiar relation of the Son to the Father (John:3:18; strkjv@5:25; strkjv@17:5; strkjv@19:7; strkjv@20:31|) like that of the Logos with God in strkjv@1:1|.

rwp@John:1:51 @{Verily, Verily} (\Amˆn, amˆn\). Hebrew word transliterated into Greek and then into English, our "amen." John always repeats it, not singly as in the Synoptics, and only in the words of Jesus, an illustration of Christ's authoritative manner of speaking as shown also by \leg“ humin\ (I say unto you). Note plural \humin\ though \aut“i\ just before is singular (to him). Jesus addresses thus others besides Nathanael. {The heaven opened} (\ton ouranon ane“igota\). Second perfect active participle of \anoig“\ with double reduplication, standing open. The words remind one of what took place at the baptism of Jesus (Matthew:3:16; strkjv@Luke:3:21|), but the immediate reference is to the opened heaven as the symbol of free intercourse between God and man (Isaiah:64:1|) and as it was later illustrated in the death of Stephen (Acts:7:56|). There is a quotation from strkjv@Genesis:28:12f.|, Jacob's vision at Bethel. That was a dream to Jacob, but Christ is himself the bond of fellowship between heaven and earth, between God and man, for Jesus is both "the Son of God" as Nathanael said and "the Son of Man" (\epi ton huion tou anthr“pou\) as Jesus here calls himself. God and man meet in Christ. He is the true Jacob's Ladder. "I am the Way," Jesus will say. He is more than King of Israel, he is the Son of Man (the race). Songs:quickly has this Gospel brought out in the witness of the Baptist, the faith of the first disciples, the claims of Jesus Christ, the fully developed picture of the Logos who is both God and man, moving among men and winning them to his service. At the close of the ministry Christ will tell Caiaphas that he will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming with the clouds of heaven (Mark:14:62|). Here at the start Jesus is conscious of the final culmination and in apocalyptic eschatological language that we do not fully understand he sets forth the dignity and majesty of his Person.

rwp@John:2:22 @{When therefore he was raised from the dead} (\Hote oun ˆgerthˆ ek nekr“n\). First aorist passive indicative of \egeir“\, to raise up. And not at first then, but only slowly after the disciples themselves were convinced. Then "they believed the Scripture" (\episteusan tˆi graphˆi\). They "believed" again. Dative case \graphˆi\. Probably strkjv@Psalms:16:10| is meant (Acts:2:31; strkjv@13:35|). {And the word which Jesus had said} (\kai t“i log“i hon eipen\). Dative case \log“i\ also, but \hon\ (relative) is not attracted to the dative. Clearly then John interprets Jesus to have a parabolic reference to his death and resurrection by his language in strkjv@2:19|. There are those who bluntly say that John was mistaken. I prefer to say that these scholars are mistaken. Even Bernard considers it "hardly possible" that John interprets Jesus rightly in strkjv@1:21|. "Had he meant that, He would have spoken with less ambiguity." But how do we know that Jesus wished to be understood clearly at this time? Certainly no one understood Christ when he spoke the words. The language of Jesus is recalled and perverted at his trial as "I will destroy" (Mark:14:58|), "I can destroy" (Matthew:26:61|), neither of which he said.

rwp@John:3:8 @{The wind} (\to pneuma\). In Greek \pneuma\ means either wind or spirit as _spiritus_ does in Latin (so also in Hebrew and Syriac). Wycliff follows the Latin and keeps spirit here and Marcus Dods argues for it. The word \pneuma\ occurs 370 times in the N.T. and never means wind elsewhere except in a quotation from the O.T. (Hebrews:1:7| from strkjv@Psalms:104:4|), though common in the LXX. On the other hand \pne“\ (bloweth, \pnei\) occurs five times elsewhere in the N.T. and always of the wind (like strkjv@John:6:18|). Songs:\ph“nˆ\ can be either sound (as of wind) or voice (as of the Spirit). In simple truth either sense of \pneuma\ can be taken here as one wills. Tholuck thinks that the night-wind swept through the narrow street as Jesus spoke. In either case the etymology of \pneuma\ is "wind" from \pne“\, to blow. The Spirit is the use of \pneuma\ as metaphor. Certainly the conclusion "of the Spirit" is a direct reference to the Holy Spirit who works his own way beyond our comprehension even as men even yet do not know the law of the wind.

rwp@John:3:10 @{The teacher of Israel} (\ho didaskalos tou Israˆl\). The well-known or the authorized (the accepted) teacher of the Israel of God. Note both articles. {And understandest not these things?} (\kai tauta ou gin“skeis;\). After being told by Jesus and after so propitious a start. His Pharisaic theology had made him almost proof against spiritual apprehension. It was outside of his groove (rote, rut, rot, the three terrible r's of mere traditionalism).

rwp@John:3:15 @{That whosoever believeth may in him have eternal life} (\hina pas ho pisteu“n en aut“i echˆi z“ˆn ai“nion\). Final use of \hina\ with present active subjunctive of \ech“\, that he may keep on having eternal life (a frequent phrase in John, always in John \ai“nios\ occurs with \z“ˆ\, 16 times in the Gospel, 6 in 1John, ageless or endless life, beginning now and lasting forever). It is more than endless, for it is sharing in the life of God in Christ (5:26; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@1John:5:12|). Songs:here \en aut“i\ (in him) is taken with \echˆi\ rather than with \pisteu“n\. The interview with Nicodemus apparently closes with verse 15|. In verses 16-21| we have past tenses constantly as is natural for the reflection of John, but unnatural for Jesus speaking. There are phrases like the Prologue (verse 19; strkjv@1:9-11|). "Only begotten" does not occur elsewhere in the words of Jesus, but is in strkjv@1:14,18; strkjv@1John:4:9|. John often puts in explanatory comments (1:16-18; strkjv@12:37-41|).

rwp@John:3:19 @{And this is the judgment} (\hautˆ de estin hˆ krisis\). A thoroughly Johannine phrase for sequence of thought (15:12; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@1John:1:5; strkjv@5:11,14; strkjv@3John:1:6|). It is more precisely the process of judging (\kri-sis\) rather than the result (\kri-ma\) of the judgment. "It is no arbitrary sentence, but the working out of a moral law" (Bernard). {The light is come} (\to ph“s elˆluthen\). Second perfect active indicative of \erchomai\, a permanent result as already explained in the Prologue concerning the Incarnation (1:4,5,9,11|). Jesus is the Light of the world. {Loved darkness} (\ˆgapˆsan to skotos\). Job:(Job:24:13|) spoke of men rebelling against the light. Here \to skotos\, common word for moral and spiritual darkness (1Thessalonians:5:5|), though \hˆ skotia\ in strkjv@John:1:5|. "Darkness" is common in John as a metaphor for the state of sinners (8:12; strkjv@12:35, 46; strkjv@1John:1:6; strkjv@2:8,9,11|). Jesus himself is the only moral and spiritual light of the world (8:12|) as he dared claim to his enemies. The pathos of it all is that men fall in love with the darkness of sin and rebel against the light like denizens of the underworld, "for their works were evil (\ponˆra\)." When the light appears, they scatter to their holes and dens. \Ponˆros\ (from \ponos\, toil, \pone“\, to toil) is used of the deeds of the world by Jesus (7:7|). In the end the god of this world blinds men's eyes so that they do not see the light (2Corinthians:4:4|). The fish in the Mammoth Cave have no longer eyes, but only sockets where eyes used to be. The evil one has a powerful grip on the world (1John:5:19|).

rwp@John:4:19 @{Sir} (\Kurie\). Songs:still. {I perceive} (\the“r“\). "I am beginning to perceive" from what you say, your knowledge of my private life (verse 29|). See strkjv@2:23| for \the“re“\ which John's Gospel has 23 times, of bodily sight (20:6,14|), of mental contemplation (12:45; strkjv@14:17|). See both \the“re“\ and \optomai\ in strkjv@1:51; strkjv@16:16|. {That thou art a prophet} (\hoti prophˆtˆs ei su\). "That a prophet art thou" (emphasis on "thou"). She felt that this was the explanation of his knowledge of her life and she wanted to change the subject at once to the outstanding theological dispute.

rwp@John:4:20 @{In this mountain} (\en t“i orei tout“i\). Jacob's Well is at the foot of Mount Gerizim toward which she pointed. Sanballat erected a temple on this mountain which was destroyed by John Hyrcanus B.C. 129. Abraham (Genesis:12:7|) and Jacob (Genesis:33:20|) set up altars at Shechem. On Gerizim were proclaimed the blessings recorded in strkjv@Deuteronomy:28|. The Samaritan Pentateuch records an altar set up on Gerizim that is on Ebal (over 200 feet higher than Gerizim) in the Hebrew (Deuteronomy:27:4|). The Samaritans held that Abraham offered up Isaac on Gerizim. The Samaritans kept up this worship on this mountain and a handful do it still. {And ye say} (\kai humeis legete\). Emphasis on \humeis\ (ye). Ye Jews. {Ought to worship} (\proskunein dei\). "Must worship," as of necessity (\dei\). The woman felt that by raising this theological wrangle she would turn the attention of Jesus away from herself and perhaps get some light on the famous controversy. \Proskune“\ in John is always worship, not just respect.

rwp@John:4:37 @{For herein} (\en gar tout“i\). In this relation between the sower and the reaper. {The saying} (\ho logos\). Like strkjv@1Timothy:1:15; strkjv@3:1|, etc. Probably a proverb that is particularly true (\alˆthinos\ for which see strkjv@1:9|) in the spiritual realm. {One soweth, and another reapeth} (\allos estin ho speir“n kai allos ho theriz“n\). "One is the sower and another the reaper." It is sad when the sower misses the joy of reaping (Job:31:8|) and has only the sowing in tears (Psalms:126:5f.|). This may be the punishment for sin (Deuteronomy:28:30; strkjv@Micah:6:15|). Sometimes one reaps where he has not sown (Deuteronomy:6:11; strkjv@Joshua:24:13|). It is the prerogative of the Master to reap (Matthew:25:26f.|), but Jesus here lets the disciples share his joy.

rwp@John:4:39 @{Because of the saying of the woman who testified} (\dia ton logon tˆs gunaikos marturousˆs\). She bore her witness clearly and with discretion. She told enough to bring her neighbours to Christ. They knew her evil life and she frankly confessed Christ's rebuke to her. She had her share in this harvest. How timid and cowardly we often are today in not giving our testimony for Christ to our neighbour.

rwp@John:4:50 @{Thy son liveth} (\ho huios sou zˆi\). "Thy son is living," and will not now die, Jesus means. Words too good and gracious to be true. His son is healed without Jesus even going to Capernaum, "absent treatment" so to speak, but without the cure being absent. {Believed the word} (\episteusen t“i log“i\). Instantaneous faith (aorist active indicative), trusted the word (dative case \log“i\). {Went his way} (\eporeueto\). Inchoative imperfect middle, "started on his way," acted on his faith.

rwp@John:5:18 @{Sought the more} (\mallon ezˆtoun\). Imperfect active of \zˆte“\, graphic picture of increased and untiring effort "to kill him" (\auton apokteinai\, first aorist active, to kill him off and be done with him). John repeats this clause "they sought to kill him" in strkjv@7:1,19,25; strkjv@8:37,40|. Their own blood was up on this Sabbath issue and they bend every energy to put Jesus to death. If this is a passover, this bitter anger, murderous wrath, will go on and grow for two years. {Not only brake the Sabbath} (\ou monon elue to sabbaton\). Imperfect active of \lu“\. He was now a common and regular Sabbath-breaker. \Lu“\ means to loosen, to set at naught. The papyri give examples of \lu“\ in this sense like \luein ta penthˆ\ (to break the period of mourning). This was the first grudge against Jesus, but his defence had made the offence worse and had given them a far graver charge. {But also called God his own Father} (\alla kai patera idion elege ton theon\). "His own" (\idion\) in a sense not true of others. That is precisely what Jesus meant by "My Father." See strkjv@Romans:8:32| for \ho idios huios\, "his own Son." {Making himself equal with God} (\ison heauton poi“n t“i the“i\). \Isos\ is an old common adjective (in papyri also) and means {equal}. In strkjv@Phillipians:2:6| Paul calls the Pre-incarnate Christ \isa the“i\, "equal to God" (plural \isa\, attributes of God). Bernard thinks that Jesus would not claim to be \isos the“i\ because in strkjv@John:14:28| he says: "The Father is greater than I." And yet he says in strkjv@14:7| that the one who sees him sees in him the Father. Certainly the Jews understood Jesus to claim equality with the Father in nature and privilege and power as also in strkjv@10:33; strkjv@19:7|. Besides, if the Jews misunderstood Jesus on this point, it was open and easy for him to deny it and to clear up the misapprehension. This is precisely what he does not do. On the contrary Jesus gives a powerful apologetic in defence of his claim to equality with the Father (verses 19-47|).

rwp@John:5:23 @{That all may honour the Son} (\hina pantes tim“sin ton huion\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \tima“\ (may keep on honouring the Son). {He that honoureth not the Son} (\ho mˆ tim“n ton huion\). Articular present active participle of \tima“\ with negative \mˆ\. Jesus claims here the same right to worship from men that the Father has. Dishonouring Jesus is dishonouring the Father who sent him (8:49; strkjv@12:26; strkjv@15:23; strkjv@1John:2:23|). See also strkjv@Luke:10:16|. There is small comfort here for those who praise Jesus as teacher and yet deny his claims to worship. The Gospel of John carries this high place for Christ throughout, but so do the other Gospels (even Q, the Logia of Jesus) and the rest of the New Testament.

rwp@John:5:26 @{In himself} (\en heaut“i\). The Living God possesses life wholly in himself and so he has bestowed this power of life to the Son as already stated in the Prologue of the Logos (1:3|). For "gave" (\ed“ken\, timeless aorist active indicative) see also strkjv@3:35; strkjv@17:2,24|. The particles "as" (\h“sper\) and "so" (\hout“s\) mark here the fact, not the degree (Westcott).

rwp@John:5:35 @{He} (\ekeinos\). "That one" (John of 33|). Common demonstrative (that one) in John to point out the subject. Used in strkjv@1:8| of the Baptist as here. John was now in prison and so Christ uses \ˆn\ (was). His active ministry is over. {The lamp} (\ho luchnos\). The lamp in the room (Mark:4:21|). Old word for lamp or candle as in strkjv@Matthew:5:15|. Used of Christ (the Lamb) as the Lamp of the New Jerusalem (Revelation:21:23|). \Lampas\ (Matthew:25:1,3|, etc.) is a torch whose wick is fed with oil. The Baptist was not the Light (\to ph“s\, strkjv@1:8|), but a lamp shining in the darkness. "When the Light comes, the lamp is no longer needed" (Bernard). "_Non Lux iste, sed lucerna_." Jesus by his own claim is the Light of the World (8:12; strkjv@9:5; strkjv@12:46|). And yet all believers are in a sense "the light of the world" (Matthew:5:14|) since the world gets the Light of Christ through us. {That burneth} (\ho kaiomenos\). See strkjv@Matthew:5:15| for this verb used with \luchnos\ (lighting a candle or lamp). The lamp that is lit and is burning (present passive participle of \kai“\, and so is consumed). {And shineth} (\kai phain“n\). See strkjv@1:4| for this verb used of the Logos shining in the darkness. Cf. strkjv@1John:2:8|. John was giving light as he burned for those in darkness like these Jews. {And ye were willing} (\humeis de ˆthelˆsate\). "But ye became willing." Ingressive aorist active indicative of \thel“\. Reference again to strkjv@1:19|. Cf. also for the temporary popularity of the Baptist strkjv@Mark:1:5; strkjv@Matthew:3:5; strkjv@11:7; strkjv@21:26|. The Jews were attracted to John "like moths to a candle" (Bernard). {To rejoice} (\agalliathˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \agalliaomai\, late word for \agallomai\ for which see strkjv@Matthew:5:12|. "They were attracted by his brightness, not by his warmth" (Bengel). Even so the brightness of John's shining did not really enlighten their minds. "The interest in the Baptist was a frivolous, superficial, and short-lived excitement" (Vincent). It was only "for an hour" (\pros h“ran\) when they turned against him.

rwp@John:5:38 @{And} (\kai\). "And yet" as in strkjv@1:10| and strkjv@5:40| below. {His word abiding in you} (\ton logon autou en humin menonta\). But God's word had come to them through the centuries by the prophets. For the phrase see strkjv@10:35; strkjv@15:3; strkjv@17:6; strkjv@1John:1:10; strkjv@2:14|. {Him ye believe not} (\tout“i humeis ou pisteuete\). "This one" (\tout“i\, dative case with \pisteuete\) in emphatic relation to preceding "he" (\ekeinos\, God). Jesus has given them God's word, but they reject both Jesus and God's word (John:14:9|).

rwp@John:6:11 @{The loaves} (\tous artous\). Those of verse 9|. {Having given thanks} (\eucharistˆsas\). The usual grace before meals (Deuteronomy:8:10|). The Synoptics use "blessed" \eulogˆsen\ (Mark:6:41; strkjv@Matthew:14:19; strkjv@Luke:9:16|). {He distributed} (\died“ken\). First aorist active indicative of \diadid“mi\, old verb to give to several (\dia\, between). {To them that were set down} (\tois anakeimenois\). Present middle participle (dative case) of \anakeimai\, old verb to recline like \anapesein\ in verse 10|. {As much as they would} (\hoson ˆthelon\). Imperfect active of \thel“\, "as much as they wished."

rwp@John:6:35 @{I am the bread of life} (\Eg“ eimi ho artos tˆs z“ˆs\). This sublime sentence was startling in the extreme to the crowd. Philo does compare the manna to the \theios logos\ in an allegorical sense, but this language is far removed from Philo's vagueness. In the Synoptics (Mark:14:22; strkjv@Matthew:26:26; strkjv@Luke:22:19|) Jesus uses bread (\artos\) as the symbol of his body in the Lord's Supper, but here Jesus offers himself in place of the loaves and fishes which they had come to seek (24,26|). He is the bread of life in two senses: it has life in itself, the living bread (51|), and it gives life to others like the water of life, the tree of life. John often has Jesus saying "I am" (\eg“ eimi\). As also in strkjv@6:41,48,51; strkjv@8:12; strkjv@10:7,9,11,14; strkjv@11:25; strkjv@14:6; strkjv@15:1,5|. {He that cometh to me} (\ho erchomenos pros eme\). The first act of the soul in approaching Jesus. See also verse 37|. {Shall not hunger} (\ou mˆ peinasˆi\). Strong double negative \ou me\ with first aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive, "shall not become hungry." {He that believeth on me} (\ho pisteu“n eis eme\). The continuous relation of trust after coming like \pisteuˆte\ (present tense) in verse 29|. See both verbs used together also in strkjv@7:37f|. {Shall never thirst} (\ou mˆ dipsˆsei p“pote\). Songs:the old MSS. the future active indicative instead of the aorist subjunctive as above, an even stronger form of negation with \p“pote\ (1:18|) added.

rwp@John:7:15 @{Marvelled} (\ethaumazon\). Picturesque imperfect active of \thaumaz“\, "were wondering." After all the bluster of the rulers (verse 13|) here was Jesus teaching without interruption. {Knoweth letters} (\grammata oiden\). Second perfect active indicative used as present. \Grammata\, old word from \graph“\, to write, is originally the letters formed (Galatians:6:11|), then a letter or epistle (Acts:28:21|), then the sacred Scriptures (John:5:47; strkjv@2Timothy:3:15|), then learning like Latin _litterae_ and English letters (Acts:26:24; strkjv@John:7:15|). "The marvel was that Jesus showed Himself familiar with the literary methods of the time, which were supposed to be confined to the scholars of the popular teachers" (Westcott). {Having never learned} (\mˆ memathˆk“s\). Perfect active participle of \manthan“\ with \mˆ\, the usual negative (subjective) with the participle. It is not the wisdom of Jesus that disconcerted the Jewish leaders, but his learning (Marcus Dods). And yet Jesus had not attended either of the rabbinical theological schools in Jerusalem (Hillel, Shammai). He was not a rabbi in the technical sense, only a carpenter, and yet he surpassed the professional rabbis in the use of their own methods of debate. It is sometimes true today that unschooled men in various walks of life forge ahead of men of lesser gifts with school training. See the like puzzle of the Sanhedrin concerning Peter and John (Acts:4:13|). This is not an argument against education, but it takes more than education to make a real man. Probably this sneer at Jesus came from some of the teachers in the Jerusalem seminaries. "Christ was in the eyes of the Jews a merely self-taught enthusiast" (Westcott).

rwp@John:7:27 @{Howbeit} (\alla\). Clearly adversative here. {This man} (\touton\). Possibly contemptuous use of \houtos\ as may be true in 25,26|. {Whence he is} (\pothen estin\). The Galilean Jews knew the family of Jesus (6:42|), but they knew Jesus only as from Nazareth, not as born in Bethlehem (verse 42|). {When the Christ cometh} (\ho Christos hotan erchˆtai\). Prolepsis of \ho Christos\ and indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the present middle subjunctive \erchˆtai\ rather than the more usual second aorist active \elthˆi\ as in verse 31|, a trifle more picturesque. This is a piece of popular theology. "Three things come wholly unexpected--Messiah, a godsend, and a scorpion" (_Sanhedrin_ 97a). The rulers knew the birthplace to be Bethlehem (7:42; strkjv@Matthew:2:5f.|), but some even expected the Messiah to drop suddenly from the skies as Satan proposed to Jesus to fall down from the pinnacle of the temple. The Jews generally expected a sudden emergence of the Messiah from concealment with an anointing by Elijah (_Apoc. of Bar_. XXIX. 3; 2Esdr. strkjv@7:28; strkjv@13:32; Justin Martyr, _Tryph_. 110).

rwp@John:7:28 @{And I am not come of myself} (\kai ap' emautou ouk elˆlutha\). \Kai\ here="and yet." Jesus repeats the claim of verse 17| and also in strkjv@5:30; strkjv@8:28; strkjv@12:49; strkjv@14:10|. {Whom ye know not} (\hon humeis ouk oidate\). Jesus passes by a controversy over the piece of popular theology to point out their ignorance of God the Father who sent him. He tersely agrees that they know something of him. Jesus says of these Jews that they know not God as in strkjv@8:19,55|.

rwp@John:7:36 @{What is this word?} (\Tis estin ho logos houtos;\). Puzzled and uneasy over this unintelligible saying. Even Peter is distressed over it later (\13:37\).

rwp@John:8:12 @{Again therefore} (\palin oun\). This language fits in better with strkjv@7:52| than with strkjv@8:11|. Just suppose Jesus is in the temple on the following day. {Unto them} (\autois\). The Pharisees and crowds in the temple after the feast was past. {I am the light of the world} (\eg“ eimi to ph“s tou kosmou\). Jesus had called his followers "the light of the world" (Matthew:5:14|), but that was light reflected from him. Already Jesus (the Logos) had been called the true light of men (1:9; strkjv@3:19|). The Psalmist calls God his Light (27:1|). Songs:Isaiah:60:19|. At the feast of tabernacles in the Court of the Women where Jesus was on this day (8:20|) there were brilliant candelabra and there was the memory of the pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night. But with all this background this supreme and exclusive claim of Jesus (repeated in strkjv@9:5|) to being the light of the whole world (of Gentiles as well as of Jews) startled the Pharisees and challenged their opposition. {Shall have the light of life} (\hexei to ph“s tˆs z“ˆs\). The light which springs from and issues in life (Westcott). Cf. strkjv@6:33,51| about Jesus being the Bread of Life. In this sublime claim we come to a decisive place. It will not do to praise Jesus and deny his deity. Only as the Son of God can we justify and accept this language which otherwise is mere conceit and froth.

rwp@John:8:31 @{Which had believed him} (\tous pepisteukotas aut“i\). Articular perfect active participle of \pisteu“\ with dative \aut“i\ (trusted him) rather than \eis auton\ (on him) in verse 30|. They believed him (cf. strkjv@6:30|) as to his claims to being the Messiah with their own interpretation (6:15|), but they did not commit themselves to him and may represent only one element of those in verse 30|, but see strkjv@2:23| for \pisteu“ eis\ there. {If ye abide in my word} (\ean humeis meinˆte en t“i log“i t“i em“i\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and first aorist (constative) active subjunctive. {Are ye truly my disciples} (\alˆth“s mathˆtai mou este\). Your future loyalty to my teaching will prove the reality of your present profession. Songs:the conclusion of this future condition is put in the present tense. As then, so now. We accept church members on _profession_ of trust in Christ. Continuance in the word (teaching) proves the sincerity or insincerity of the profession. It is the acid test of life.

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

rwp@John:8:43 @{My speech} (\tˆn lalian tˆn emˆn\) and {my word} (\ton logon ton emon\). Perhaps \lalia\, old word from \lalos\ (talk), means here more manner of speech than just story (4:42|), while \logos\ refers rather to the subject matter. They will not listen (\ou dunasthe akouein\) to the substance of Christ's teaching and hence they are impatient with the way that he talks. How often that is true.

rwp@John:8:51 @{If a man keep my word} (\ean tis ton emon logon tˆrˆsˆi\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and constative aorist active subjunctive of \tˆre“\. Repeated in verse 52|. See verse 43| about hearing the word of Christ. Common phrase in John (8:51,52,55; strkjv@14:23,24; strkjv@15:20; strkjv@17:6; strkjv@1John:2:5|). Probably the same idea as keeping the commands of Christ (14:21|). {He shall never see death} (\thanaton ou mˆ the“rˆsˆi eis ton aiona\). Spiritual death, of course. Strong double negative \ou mˆ\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \the“re“\. The phrase "see death" is a Hebraism (Psalms:89:48|) and occurs with \idein\ (see) in strkjv@Luke:2:26; strkjv@Hebrews:11:5|. No essential difference meant between \hora“\ and \the“re“\. See strkjv@John:14:23| for the blessed fellowship the Father and the Son have with the one who keeps Christ's word.

rwp@John:9:10 @{How then were thine eyes opened?} (\P“s oun ˆne“ichthˆsan sou hoi ophthalmoi;\). Natural and logical (\oun\) question. First aorist passive indicative (triple augment) of \anoig“\. These neighbours admit the fact and want the manner ("how") of the cure made clear.

rwp@John:9:18 @{The Jews} (\hoi Ioudaioi\). Probably the incredulous and hostile section of the Pharisees in verse 16| (cf. strkjv@5:10|). {Did not believe} (\ouk episteusan\). The facts told by the man, "that he had been blind and had received his sight" (\hoti ˆn tuphlos kai aneblepsen\), conflicted with their theological views of God and the Sabbath. Songs:they refused belief "until they called the parents" (\he“s hotou eph“nˆsan tous goneis\). Usual construction of \he“s hotou\ ( = until which time, like \he“s\ alone) with aorist active indicative of \ph“ne“\, old verb from \ph“nˆ\ (voice, sound). They called out loud for his parents to throw light on this grave problem to cover up their own stupidity.

rwp@John:9:22 @{Because they feared the Jews} (\hoti ephobounto tous Ioudaious\). Imperfect middle, a continuing fear and not without reason. See already the whispers about Jesus because of fear of the Jews (7:13|). {Had agreed already} (\ˆdˆ sunetetheinto\). Past perfect middle of \suntithˆmi\, to put together, to form a compact (7:32,47-49|). {If any man should confess him to be Christ} (\ean tis auton homologˆsˆi Christon\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \homologe“\ and predicate accusative \Christon\. Jesus had made confession of himself before men the test of discipleship and denial the disproof (Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:8|). We know that many of the rulers nominally believed on Jesus (12:42|) and yet "did not confess him because of the Pharisees" (\alla dia tous Pharisaious ouch h“mologoun\), for the very reason given here, "that they might not be put out of the synagogue" (\hina mˆ aposunag“goi gen“ntai\). Small wonder then that here the parents cowered a bit. {That he should be put out of the synagogue} (\hina aposunag“gos genˆtai\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\. \Aposunag“gos\ (\apo\ and \sunag“gˆ\) is found in N.T. only here and strkjv@12:42; strkjv@16:2|. A purely Jewish word naturally. There were three kinds of excommunication (for thirty days, for thirty more, indefinitely).

rwp@John:9:24 @{A second time} (\ek deuterou\). He had given the Pharisees the facts the first time (9:15|). It was really the third time (see \palin\ in strkjv@9:17|). Now it was like a joke unless the Pharisees meant to imply that his previous story was untrue. {Give glory to God} (\dos doxan t“i the“i\). Second aorist active imperative of \did“mi\ (cf. \sches, hes\). This phrase does not mean gratitude to God as in strkjv@Luke:17:18|. It is rather an adjuration to speak the truth (Joshua:7:19; strkjv@1Samuel:6:5|) as if he had not done it before. Augustine says: "_Quid est Daniel:gloriam Deo? Nega quod accepisti._" Is a sinner (\hamart“los estin\). They can no longer deny the fact of the cure since the testimony of the parents (9:19|) and now wish the man to admit that he was lying in saying that Jesus healed him. He must accept their ecclesiastical authority as proving that Jesus had nothing to do with the cure since Jesus is a sinner. They wish to decide the fact by logic and authority like all persecutors through the ages. Recall the Pharisaic distinction between \dikaios\ (righteous) and \hamart“los\ (sinner).

rwp@John:9:33 @{If this man were not from God} (\ei mˆ ˆn houtos para theou\). Negative condition of second class with imperfect indicative. Assuming that Jesus is not "from God" (\para theou\) as some argued in strkjv@9:16|, "he could do nothing" (\ouk ˆdunato poiein ouden\). Conclusion of the second-class condition with imperfect indicative (double augment in \ˆdunato\) without \an\ as is usual in conditions of possibility, propriety, obligation (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 920,1014). The man has scored with terrific power in his use of Scripture and logic.

rwp@John:10:5 @{A stranger} (\allotri“i\). Literally, "One belonging to another" (from \allos\, opposed to \idios\). A shepherd of another flock, it may be, not necessarily the thief and robber of verse 1|. Note associative instrumental case after \akolouthˆsousin\ (future active indicative of \akolouthe“\, verse 4|). Note the strong double negative \ou mˆ\ here with the future indicative, though usually with the aorist subjunctive (Aleph L W have it here). They simply will not follow such a man or woman, these well-trained sheep will not. {But will flee from him} (\alla pheuxontai ap' autou\). Future middle of \pheug“\ and ablative case with \apo\. They will flee as if from a wolf or from the plague. Alas and alas, if only our modern pastors had the sheep (old and young) so trained that they would run away from and not run after the strange voices that call them to false philosophy, false psychology, false ethics, false religion, false life.

rwp@John:10:35 @{If he called them gods} (\ei ekeinous eipen theous\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. The conclusion (verse 36|) is \humeis legete\; ({Do ye say?}). As Jews (and rabbis) they are shut out from charging Jesus with blasphemy because of this usage in the O.T. It is a complete _ad hominem_ argument. To be sure, it is in strkjv@Psalms:82:6| a lower use of the term \theos\, but Jesus did not call himself "Son of Jahweh," but "\huios theou\" which can mean only "Son of _Elohim_." It must not be argued, as some modern men do, that Jesus thus disclaims his own deity. He does nothing of the kind. He is simply stopping the mouths of the rabbis from the charge of blasphemy and he does it effectually. The sentence is quite involved, but can be cleared up. {To whom the word of God came} (\pros hous ho logos tou theou egeneto\). The relative points to \ekeinous\, before. These judges had no other claim to the term \theoi\ (_elohim_). {And the scripture cannot be broken} (\kai ou dunatai luthˆnai hˆ graphˆ\). A parenthesis that drives home the pertinency of the appeal, one that the Pharisees had to accept. \Luthˆnai\ is first aorist passive infinitive of \lu“\, to loosen, to break.

rwp@John:12:13 @{Took} (\elabon\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\. {The branches of the palm-trees} (\ta baia t“n phoinik“n\). \Phoinix\ is an old word for palm-tree (Revelation:7:9| for the branches) and in strkjv@Acts:27:12| the name of a city. \Baion\ is apparently a word of Egyptian origin, palm branches, here only in N.T., but in the papyri and I Macc. strkjv@13:51. Here we have "the palm branches of the palm-trees." The use in 1 Macc. strkjv@13:51 (cf. II Macc. strkjv@10:7) is in the account of Simon's triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Bernard notes that to carry palms was a mark of triumphant homage to a victor or a king (Revelation:7:9|). Palm-trees grew on the Mount of Olives (Mark:11:8|) on the road from Bethany to Jerusalem. The crowds (one in front and one behind, strkjv@Mark:11:9; strkjv@Matthew:21:9; strkjv@John:2:18|) cut the branches as they came (Matthew:21:8|). {To meet him} (\eis hupantˆsin aut“i\). Literally, {for a meeting} (\hupantˆsis\, late word from the verb \hupanta“\, strkjv@Matthew:8:28; strkjv@John:11:20,30; strkjv@12:18|, in the papyri, but only here in the N.T.) with him" (\aut“i\, associative instrumental case after \hupantˆsin\ as after the verb in verse 18|). It was a scene of growing excitement. {And cried out} (\kai ekraugazon\). Imperfect active of \kraugaz“\, old and rare verb (from \kraugˆ\) as in strkjv@Matthew:12:19; strkjv@John:19:15|. {Hosannah} (\H“sannah\). Transliteration of the Hebrew word meaning "Save now." The LXX renders it by \S“son dˆ\ (Save now). {Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord} (\eulogˆmenos ho erchomenos en onomati kuriou\). Perfect passive participle of \euloge“\. Quotation from strkjv@Psalms:118:25f.|, written, some think, for the dedication of the second temple, or, as others think, for the feast of tabernacles after the return (Ezra:3:1f.|). It was sung in the processional recitation then as a welcome to the worshippers. Here the words are addressed to the Messiah as is made plain by the addition of the words, "even the king of Israel" (\kai ho basileus tou Israˆl\) as Nathanael called him (1:49|). Jesus is here hailed by the multitudes as the long-looked for Messiah of Jewish hope and he allows them so to greet him (Luke:19:38-40|), a thing that he prevented a year before in Galilee (John:6:14f.|). It is probable that "in the name of the Lord" should be taken with "blessed" as in strkjv@Deuteronomy:21:5; strkjv@2Samuel:6:18; strkjv@1Kings:22:16; strkjv@2Kings:2:24|. The Messiah was recognized by Martha as the Coming One (John:11:27|) and is so described by the Baptist (Matthew:11:3|). Mark (Mark:11:10|) adds "the kingdom that cometh" while Luke (19:38|) has "the king that cometh." "It was this public acclamation of Jesus as King of Israel or King of the Jews which was the foundation of the charge made against him before Pilate (18:33|)" (Bernard).

rwp@John:12:35 @{Yet a little while is the light among you} (\eti mikron chronon to ph“s en humin estin\). \Chronon\ is the accusative of extent of time. Jesus does not argue the point of theology with the crowd who would not understand. He turns to the metaphor used before when he claimed to be the light of the world (8:12|) and urges that they take advantage of their privilege "while ye have the light" (\h“s to ph“s echete\). {That darkness overtake you not} (\hina mˆ skotia humas katalabˆi\). Purpose (negative) with \hina mˆ\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \katalamban“\. See this verb in strkjv@1:5|. In strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:4| this verb occurs with \hˆmera\ (day) overtaking one like a thief. {Knoweth not whither he goeth} (\ouk oiden pou hupagei\). See strkjv@11:10| for this idea and the same language in strkjv@1John:2:11|. The ancients did not have our electric street lights. The dark streets were a terror to travellers.

rwp@John:12:42 @{Nevertheless even} (\hom“s mentoi kai\). For the old \hom“s\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:14:7; strkjv@Galatians:3:15| (only other examples in N.T.), here only with \mentoi\, "but yet," and \kai\, "even." In spite of what has just been said "many (\polloi\) even of the rulers" (recall the lonely shyness of Nicodemus in strkjv@3:1ff.|). These actually "believed on him" (\episteusan eis auton\) in their convictions, a remarkable statement as to the effect that Christ had in Jerusalem as the Sanhedrin plotted his death. Cf. Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea. {But because of the Pharisees} (\alla dia tous Pharisaious\). Like the whispered talk in strkjv@7:13| "because of the fear of the Jews." Once the Pharisees sneeringly asked the officers (7:48|): "Hath any one of the rulers believed on him?" And now "many of the rulers have believed on him." {They did not confess} (\ouch h“mologoun\). Negative imperfect in contrast to the punctiliar aorist \episteusan\. "They kept on not confessing." How like the cowardly excuses made today by those under conviction who refuse to step out for Christ. {Lest they should be put out of the synagogue} (\hina mˆ aposunag“goi gen“ntai\). Cf. strkjv@9:22| where this very word occurs in a purpose clause like this. Only once more in the N.T. (16:2|), a Jewish word not in profane authors. This ostracism from the synagogue was dreaded by the Jews and made cowards of these "believing elders." {More than} (\mallon ˆper\). They preferred the glory and praise of men more than the glory and praise of God. How \apropos\ these words are to some suave cowards today.

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:15:16 @{But I chose you} (\all' eg“ exelexamˆn humas\). First aorist middle indicative of \ekleg“\. See this same verb and tense used for the choice of the disciples by Christ (6:70; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@15:19|). Jesus recognizes his own responsibility in the choice after a night of prayer (Luke:6:13|). Songs:Paul was "a vessel of choice" (\skeuos eklogˆs\, strkjv@Acts:9:15|). Appointed (\ethˆka\). First aorist active indicative (\k\ aorist) of \tithˆmi\. Note three present active subjunctives with \hina\ (purpose clause) to emphasize continuance (\hupagˆte\, keep on going, \pherˆte\, keep on bearing fruit, \menˆi\, keep on abiding), not a mere spurt, but permanent growth and fruit-bearing. {He may give} (\d“i\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \did“mi\ with \hina\ (purpose clause). Cf. strkjv@14:13| for the same purpose and promise, but with \poiˆs“\ (I shall do). See also strkjv@16:23f.,26|.

rwp@John:15:20 @{Remember} (\mnˆmoneuete\). Present active imperative of \mnˆmoneu“\, old verb from \mnˆm“n\, in John again in strkjv@16:4,21|. See strkjv@13:16| for this word. {If they persecuted me} (\ei eme edi“xan\). Condition of first class. They certainly did persecute (first aorist active of \di“k“\, to chase like a wild beast like the Latin _persequor_, our "persecute") Jesus (5:16|). They will persecute those like Jesus. Cf. strkjv@16:33; strkjv@Mark:10:30; strkjv@Luke:21:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:12; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:9; strkjv@Galatians:4:29; strkjv@2Timothy:3:12| for proof that this prophecy came true. But the alternative is true and is stated by Jesus with a like condition of the first class, "if they kept my word" (\ei ton logon mou etˆrˆsan\). The world does praise the word of Jesus, but dreads to follow it.

rwp@John:16:8 @{And he} (\kai ekeinos\). Emphatic demonstrative masculine pronoun. {When he is come} (\elth“n\). Second aorist active participle of \erchomai\, "having come" or "coming." {Will convict the world} (\elegxei ton kosmon\). Future active of \elegch“\, old word for confuting, convicting by proof already in strkjv@3:29; strkjv@8:46|. Jesus had been doing this (7:7|), but this is pre-eminently the work of the Holy Spirit and the most needed task today for our complacent age. {In respect of sin} (\peri hamartias\). Concerning the reality of sin as missing the mark and as wronging God and man, and not a mere slip or animal instinct or devoid of moral responsibility or evil. Some scientists and psychologists (Freudians and behaviourists) seem bent on destroying man's sense of sin. Hence crime waves even in youth. {And of righteousness} (\kai peri dikaiosunˆs\). The opposite of "sin" and to be yearned for after conviction. Cf. strkjv@Romans:1:19-3:21| about the necessity of the God-kind of righteousness and the Sermon on the Mount for Christ's idea of righteousness. {And of judgment} (\kai peri krise“s\). As certain to come as condemnation because of sin and the lack of righteousness. These are not played out motives in human life, but basal. For this ministry we have the help of the Paraclete. The Paraclete is here spoken of "not as man's advocate with God (1John:2:1|), but as Christ's advocate with the world" (Bernard).

rwp@John:17:2 @{Authority over all flesh} (\exousian pasˆs sarkos\). \Sarkos\ is objective genitive. Stupendous claim impossible for a mere man to make. Made already in strkjv@Matthew:11:27; strkjv@Luke:10:22| (Q, the Logia of Jesus, our earliest known document about Jesus) and repeated in strkjv@Matthew:28:18| after his resurrection. {That} (\hina\). Secondary purpose with \hina d“sei\ (future active indicative) carrying on the idea of \hina doxasˆi\. See strkjv@13:34; strkjv@17:21| for \hina, kath“s, hina\. {Whatsoever} (\pƒn ho\). A peculiar classical Greek idiom, the collective use of the singular \pƒn ho\ as in strkjv@6:37,39| and \ho\ in strkjv@17:24| and the nominative absolute (_nom. pendens_) with \autois\ (to them), the dative plural explaining the construction. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 653.

rwp@John:17:8 @{The words} (\ta rˆmata\). Plural, each word of God, as in strkjv@3:34|, and of Christ (5:47; strkjv@6:63,68|), while the singular (\ton logon sou\) in verses 6,14| views God's message as a whole. {Knew} (\egn“san\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\ like \elabon\ in contrast with \egn“kan\ (perfect) in verse 7|. They definitely "received and recognized truly" (\alˆth“s\). There was comfort to Christ in this fact. {They believed} (\episteusan\). Another aorist parallel with \elabon\ and \egn“san\. The disciples believed in Christ's mission from the Father (John:6:69; strkjv@Matthew:16:16|). Note \apesteilas\ here as in verse 3|. Christ is God's {Apostle} to man (Hebrews:3:1|). This statement, like a solemn refrain (\Thou didst send me\), occurs five times in this prayer (verses 8,18,21,23,25|).

rwp@John:17:20 @{Through their word} (\dia tou logou aut“n\). Through the agency of conversation and preaching, blessed privilege open to all believers thus to win men to Christ, but an agency sadly limited by the lives of those who speak in Christ's name.

rwp@John:19:34 @{With a spear} (\logchˆi\). Instrumental case of this old word, here only in the N.T. {Pierced his side} (\autou tˆn pleuran enuxen\). First aorist active indicative of \nuss“\, old word to pierce, here only in N.T., and \pleuran\ (side), another old word, occurs in N.T. only here and strkjv@John:20:20,25,27|. {Blood and water} (\haima kai hud“r\). Dr. W. Stroud (_Physical Cause of the Death of Christ_) argues that this fact proves that the spear pierced the left side of Jesus near the heart and that Jesus had died literally of a broken heart since blood was mixed with water.

rwp@John:20:31 @{Are written} (\gegraptai\). Perfect passive indicative of \graph“\, "have been written" by John. {That ye may believe} (\hina pisteuˆte\). Purpose with \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \pisteu“\, "that you may keep on believing." The book has had precisely this effect of continuous and successive confirmation of faith in Jesus Christ through the ages. {Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God} (\Iˆsous estin ho Christos ho huios tou theou\). The man named Jesus is identical with the Messiah (the Anointed One) as opposed to the Cerinthian separation of the Jesus of history and the Christ (\aeon\) of theology. And the Docetic notion of a phantom body for Jesus with no actual human body is also false. Jesus is the Son of God with all that this high term implies, the Logos of strkjv@John:1:1-18| (the Prologue). "Very God of very God," Incarnate Revealer of God. But there is a further purpose. {And that believing ye may have life in his name} (\kai hina pisteuontes z“ˆn echˆte en t“i onomati autou\). Note present participle \pisteuontes\ (continuing to believe) and the present active subjunctive \echˆte\ (keep on having). "Life" (\z“ˆn\) is eternal life so often mentioned in this Gospel, life to be found only in the name (and power) of Jesus Christ the Son of God. This verse constitutes a fitting close for this wonderful book and John may at first have intended to stop here. But before he published the work he added the Epilogue (Chapter XXI) which is written in the same style and gives a beautiful picture of the Risen Christ with a side-light on John and Peter (restored to fellowship).

rwp@John:21:20 @{Turning about} (\epistrapheis\). Second aorist passive participle of \epistreph“\, old verb, here a sudden turning round (ingressive aorist). For the simplex verb \streph“\ see strkjv@20:14,16|. {Following} (\akolouthounta\). Following both Jesus and Peter, perhaps having heard the graphic dialogue above.

rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE STYLE It is terse and picturesque, with a fondness for triplets. The use of the O.T. is very much like that in II Peter. Alford notes that it is impassioned invective with epithet on epithet, image on image. Bigg remarks on the stern and unbending nature of the author, with no pathos and a harsh view of things and with frequent use of Pauline phraseology. There are some fifteen words not in the rest of the N.T. The grammar is less irregular than that of II Peter. There is often a poetic ring in his words.

rwp@Jude:1:10 @{Whatsoever things they know not} (\hosa ouk oidasin\). Here strkjv@2Peter:2:12| has \en hois agnoousin\. The rest of the sentence is smoother than strkjv@2Peter:2:12|. {Naturally} (\phusik“s\). Here only in N.T. strkjv@2Peter:2:12| has \gegennˆmena phusika\. Jude:has the article \ta\ with \aloga z“a\ and the present passive \phtheirontai\ instead of the future passive \phtharˆsontai\.

rwp@Jude:1:11 @{Woe to them} (\ouai autois\). Interjection with the dative as is common in the Gospels (Matthew:11:21|). {Went} (\eporeuthˆsan\). First aorist passive (deponent) indicative of \poreuomai\. {In the way of Cain} (\tˆi hod“i tou Kain\). Locative case \hod“i\. Cain is Jude's fourth example. Not in II Peter, but in strkjv@Hebrews:11:4; strkjv@1John:3:11f|. From strkjv@Genesis:4:7|. {Ran riotously} (\exechuthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \ekche“\, to pour out, "they were poured out," vigorous metaphor for excessive indulgence. But it is used also of God's love for us (Romans:5:5|). {In the error of Balaam} (\tˆi planˆi tou Balaam\). The fifth example in Jude. In II Peter also (2Peter:2:15|). Either locative case (in) or instrumental (by). \Planˆ\ (in Peter also) is the common word for such wandering (Matthew:24:4ff.|, etc.). {Perished} (\ap“lonto\). Second aorist middle (intransitive) of \apollumi\. {In the gainsaying of Korah} (\tˆi antilogiƒi tou Kore\). Again either locative or instrumental. The word \antilogia\ is originally answering back (Hebrews:6:16|), but it may be by act also (Romans:10:21|) as here. This is the sixth example in Jude, not in II Peter.

rwp@Jude:1:14 @{And to these also} (\de kai toutois\). Dative case, for these false teachers as well as for his contemporaries. {Enoch the seventh from Adam} (\hebdomos apo Adam Hen“ch\). The genealogical order occurs in strkjv@Genesis:5:4-20|, with Enoch as seventh. He is so termed in Enoch strkjv@60:8; strkjv@93:3. {Prophesied} (\eprophˆteusen\). First aorist active indicative of \prophˆteu“\. If the word is given its ordinary meaning as in strkjv@1Peter:1:10|, then Jude:terms the Book of Enoch an inspired book. The words quoted are "a combination of passages from Enoch" (Bigg), chiefly from Enoch strkjv@1:9. {With ten thousand of his holy ones} (\en hagiais muriasin autou\). "With (\en\ of accompaniment, strkjv@Luke:14:31|) his holy ten thousands" (\murias\ regular word, feminine gender, for ten thousand, strkjv@Acts:19:19|, there an unlimited number like our myriads, strkjv@Luke:12:1|).

rwp@Jude:1:19 @{They who make separations} (\hoi apodiorizontes\). Present active articular participle of the double compound \apodioriz“\ (from \apo, dia, horiz“, horos\, boundary, to make a horizon), rare word, in Aristotle for making logical distinctions, here only in N.T. \Dioriz“\ occurs in strkjv@Leviticus:20:24| and \aphoriz“\ in strkjv@Matthew:25:32|, etc. See \haireseis\ in strkjv@2Peter:2:1|. {Sensual} (\psuchikoi\). Old adjective from \psuchˆ\ as in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:14; strkjv@15:44; strkjv@James:3:15|. Opposed to \pneumatikos\. Not used by Peter. {Having not the Spirit} (\pneuma mˆ echontes\). Usual negative \mˆ\ with the participle (present active of \ech“\). Probably \pneuma\ here means the Holy Spirit, as is plain in verse 20|. Cf. strkjv@Romans:8:9|.

rwp@Jude:1:25 @{To the only God our Saviour} (\mon“i the“i s“tˆri hˆm“n\). Dative in the noble doxology. See strkjv@Romans:16:27|, \mon“i soph“i the“i\ (to the alone wise God), where also we have \dia Iˆsou Christou\, but without \tou kuriou hˆm“n\ (our Lord) as here. \S“tˆr\ is used of God eight times in the N.T., six of them in the Pastoral Epistles. \Doxa\ (glory) to God or Christ in all the doxologies except strkjv@1Timothy:6:16|. \Megalosunˆ\ (Majesty) is a late LXX word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:1:3; strkjv@8:1|. {Before all time} (\pro pantos tou ai“nos\). Eternity behind us. See same idea in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7| \pro t“n ai“n“n\. {Now} (\nun\). The present. {For ever more} (\eis pantas tous ai“nas\). "Unto all the ages." All the future. As complete a statement of eternity as can be made in human language.

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

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE SOURCES OF THE GOSPEL In his Preface or Prologue (Luke:1:1-4|) the author tells us that he had two kinds of sources, oral and written, and that they were many, how many we have no way of telling. It is now generally accepted that we know two of his written sources, Mark's Gospel and Q or the Logia of Jesus (written by Matthew, Papias says). Mark is still preserved and it is not difficult for any one by the use of a harmony of the Gospels to note how Luke made use of Mark, incorporating what he chose, adapting it in various ways, not using what did not suit his purposes. The other source we only know in the non-Markan portions of Matthew and Luke, that is the material common to both, but not in Mark. This also can be noted by any one in a harmony. Only it is probable that this source was more extensive than just the portions used by both Matthew and Luke. It is probable that both Matthew and Luke each used portions of the Logia not used by the other. But there is a large portion of Luke's Gospel which is different from Mark and Matthew. Some scholars call this source L. There is little doubt that Luke had another document for the material peculiar to him, but it is also probable that he had several others. He spoke of "many." This applies especially to chapters 9 to 21. But Luke expressly says that he had received help from "eye-witnesses and ministers of the word," in oral form this means. It is, then, probable that Luke made numerous notes of such data and used them along with the written sources at his command. This remark applies particularly to chapters 1 and 2 which have a very distinct Semitic (Aramaic) colouring due to the sources used. It is possible, of course, that Mary the mother of Jesus may have written a statement concerning these important matters or that Luke may have had converse with her or with one of her circle. Ramsay, in his volume, _Was Christ Born at Bethlehem?_ shows the likelihood of Luke's contact with Mary or her circle during these two years at Caesarea. Luke handles the data acquired with care and skill as he claims in his Prologue and as the result shows. The outcome is what Renan called the most beautiful book in the world.

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE CHARACTER OF THE BOOK Literary charm is here beyond dispute. It is a book that only a man with genuine culture and literary genius could write. It has all the simple grace of Mark and Matthew plus an indefinable quality not in these wonderful books. There is a delicate finish of detail and proportion of parts that give the balance and poise that come only from full knowledge of the subject, the chief element in a good style according to Dr. James Stalker. This scientific physician, this man of the schools, this converted Gentile, this devoted friend of Paul, comes to the study of the life of Christ with a trained intellect, with an historian's method of research, with a physician's care in diagnosis and discrimination, with a charm of style all his own, with reverence for and loyalty to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. One could not afford to give up either of the Four Gospels. They each supplement the other in a wonderful way. John's Gospel is the greatest book in all the world, reaching the highest heights of all. But if we had only Luke's Gospel, we should have an adequate portrait of Jesus Christ as Son of God and Son of Man. If Mark's is the Gospel for the Romans and Matthew's for the Jews, the Gospel of Luke is for the Gentile world. He shows the sympathy of Jesus for the poor and the outcast. Luke understands women and children and so is the universal Gospel of mankind in all phases and conditions. It is often called the Gospel of womanhood, of infancy, of prayer, of praise. We have in Luke the first Christian hymns. With Luke we catch some glimpses of the child Jesus for which we are grateful. Luke was a friend and follower of Paul, and verbal parallels with Paul's Epistles do occur, but there is no Pauline propaganda in the Gospel as Moffatt clearly shows (_Intr. to Lit. of the N.T._, p. 281). The Prologue is in literary _Koin‚_ and deserves comparison with those in any Greek and Latin writers. His style is versatile and is often coloured by his source. He was a great reader of the Septuagint as is shown by occasional Hebraisms evidently due to reading that translation Greek. He has graciousness and a sense of humour as McLachlan and Ragg show. Every really great man has a saving sense of humour as Jesus himself had. Ramsay dares to call Luke, as shown by the Gospel and Acts, the greatest of all historians not even excepting Thucydides. Ramsay has done much to restore Luke to his rightful place in the estimation of modern scholars. Some German critics used to cite strkjv@Luke:2:1-7| as a passage containing more historical blunders than any similar passage in any historian. The story of how papyri and inscriptions have fully justified Luke in every statement here made is carefully worked out by Ramsay in his various books, especially in _The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament_. The main feature of this proof appears also in my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_. Songs:many items, where Luke once stood alone, have been confirmed by recent discoveries that the burden of proof now rests on those who challenge Luke in those cases where he still stands alone.

rwp@Luke:1:1 @{Forasmuch as} (\epeidˆper\). Here alone in the N.T., though common in literary Attic. Appears in the papyri. A triple compound (\epei\ = since, \dˆ\ = admittedly true, \per\ = intensive particle to emphasize importance). {Many} (\polloi\). How many no one knows, but certainly more than two or three. We know that Luke used the Logia of Jesus written by Matthew in Aramaic (Papias) and Mark's Gospel. Undoubtedly he had other written sources. {Have taken in hand} (\epecheirˆsan\). A literal translation of \epicheire“\ (from \cheir\, hand and \epi\, upon). Both Hippocrates and Galen use this word in their introduction to their medical works. Here only in the N.T., though a common literary word. Common in the papyri for undertaking with no idea of failure or blame. Luke does not mean to cast reflection on those who preceded him. The apocryphal gospels were all much later and are not in his mind. Luke had secured fuller information and planned a book on a larger scale and did surpass them with the result that they all perished save Mark's Gospel and what Matthew and Luke possess of the Logia of Jesus. There was still room for Luke's book. That motive influences every author and thus progress is made. {To draw up, a narrative} (\anataxasthai diˆgˆsin\). Ingressive aorist middle infinitive. This verb \anataxasthai\ has been found only in Plutarch's _Moral_. 968 CD about an elephant "rehearsing" by moonlight certain tricks it had been taught (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). That was from memory going regularly through the thing again. But the idea in the word is plain enough. The word is composed of \tass“\, a common verb for arranging things in proper order and \ana\, again. Luke means to say that those before him had made attempts to rehearse in orderly fashion various matters about Christ. "The expression points to a connected series of narratives in some order (\taxis\), topical or chronological rather than to isolated narratives" (Bruce). "They had produced something more than mere notes or anecdotes" (Plummer). \Diˆgˆsis\ means leading or carrying a thing through, not a mere incident. Galen applies this word some seventy-five times to the writing of Hippocrates. {Which have been fulfilled} (\t“n peplˆr“phorˆmen“n\). Perfect passive participle from \plˆrophore“\ and that from \plˆrˆs\ (full) and \pher“\ (to bring). Hence to bring or make full. The verb is rare outside of the LXX and the N.T. Papyri examples occur for finishing off a legal matter or a financial matter in full. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 86f.) gives examples from the papyri and inscriptions for completing a task or being convinced or satisfied in mind. The same ambiguity occurs here. When used of persons in the N.T. the meaning is to be convinced, or fully persuaded (Romans:4:21; strkjv@14:5; strkjv@Hebrews:6:11; strkjv@10:22|). When used of things it has the notion of completing or finishing (2Timothy:4:5,17|). Luke is here speaking of "matters" (\pragmat“n\). Luke may refer to the matters connected with Christ's life which have been brought to a close among us or accomplished. Bruce argues plausibly that he means fulness of knowledge "concerning the things which have become widely known among us Christians." In strkjv@Colossians:2:2| we have "fulness of understanding" (\tˆs plˆrophorias tˆs sunese“s\). In modern Greek the verb means to inform. The careful language of Luke here really pays a tribute to those who had preceded him in their narratives concerning Christ.

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:1:3 @{It seemed good to me also} (\edoxe kamoi\). A natural conclusion and justification of Luke's decision to write his narrative. They had ample reason to draw up their narratives. Luke has more reason to do so because of his fuller knowledge and wider scope. {Having traced the course of all things} (\parˆkolouthˆkoti pƒsin\). The perfect active participle of a common verb of the ancient Greek. Literally it means to follow along a thing in mind, to trace carefully. Both meanings occur abundantly in the ancient Greek. Cadbury (Appendix C to _Beginnings of Christianity_, Vol. II, pp. 489ff.) objects to the translation "having traced" here as implying research which the word does not here mean. Milligan (_Vocabulary_) is somewhat impressed by this argument. See my discussion of the point in Chapter XVI of _Studies in the Text of the N.T._ (The Implications in Luke's Preface) where the point is made that Luke here claims fulness of knowledge before he began to write his book. He had the traditions of the eyewitnesses and ministers of the word and the narratives previously drawn up. Whether he was a personal contemporary with any or all of these events we do not know and it is not particularly pertinent. He had _mentally_ followed along by the side of these events. Galen used this verb for the investigation of symptoms. Luke got himself ready to write before he began by full and accurate knowledge of the subject. \Akrib“s\ (accurately) means going into minute details, from \akron\, the topmost point. And he did it {from the first} (\an“then\). He seems to refer to the matters in Chapters strkjv@1:5-2:52|, the Gospel of the Infancy. {In order} (\kathexˆs\). Chronological order in the main following Mark's general outline. But in strkjv@9:51-18:10| the order is often topical. He has made careful investigation and his work deserves serious consideration. {Most excellent Theophilus} (\kratiste Theophile\). The name means god-lover or god-beloved. He may have been a believer already. He was probably a Gentile. Ramsay holds that "most excellent" was a title like "Your Excellency" and shows that he held office, perhaps a Knight. Songs:of Felix (Acts:23:26|) and Festus (Acts:26:25|). The adjective does not occur in the dedication in strkjv@Acts:1:1|.

rwp@Luke:1:4 @{Mightest know} (\epign“is\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \epigin“sk“\. Full knowledge (\epi\-), in addition to what he already has. {The certainty} (\tˆn asphaleian\). Make no slip (\sphall“\, to totter or fall, and \a\ privative). Luke promises a reliable narrative. "Theophilus shall know that the faith which he has embraced has an impregnable historical foundation" (Plummer). {The things} (\log“n\). Literally "words," the details of the words in the instruction. {Wast instructed} (\katˆchˆthˆs\). First aorist passive indicative. Not in O.T. and rare in ancient Greek. Occurs in the papyri. The word \ˆche“\ is our word echo (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:8| for \exˆchˆtai\, has sounded forth). \Katˆche“\ is to sound down, to din, to instruct, to give oral instruction. Cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:14:9; strkjv@Acts:21:21,24; strkjv@18:25; Gal strkjv@6:6|. Those men doing the teaching were called _catechists_ and those receiving it were called _catechumens_. Whether Theophilus was still a catechumen is not known. This Preface by Luke is in splendid literary _Koin‚_ and is not surpassed by those in any Greek writer (Herodotus, Thucydides, Polybius). It is entirely possible that Luke was familiar with this habit of Greek historians to write prefaces since he was a man of culture.

rwp@Luke:1:29 @{Cast in her mind} (\dielogizeto\). Imperfect indicative. Note aorist \dietarachthˆ\. Common verb for reckoning up different reasons. She was both upset and puzzled.

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

rwp@Luke:1:42 @{With a loud cry} (\kraugˆi megalˆi\). A moment of ecstatic excitement. {Blessed art thou} (\eulogˆmenˆ\). Perfect passive participle. A Hebraistic equivalent for the superlative.

rwp@Luke:1:47 @{Hath rejoiced} (\ˆgalliasen\). This is aorist active indicative. Greek tenses do not correspond to those in English. The verb \agallia“\ is a Hellenistic word from the old Greek \agall“\. It means to exult. See the substantive \agalliasis\ in strkjv@Luke:1:14,44|. Mary is not excited like Elisabeth, but breathes a spirit of composed rapture. {My spirit} (\to pneuma mou\). One need not press unduly the difference between "soul" (\psuchˆ\) in verse 46| and "spirit" here. Bruce calls them synonyms in parallel clauses. Vincent argues that the soul is the principle of individuality while the spirit is the point of contact between God and man. It is doubtful, however, if the trichotomous theory of man (body, soul, and spirit) is to be insisted on. It is certain that we have an inner spiritual nature for which various words are used in strkjv@Mark:12:30|. Even the distinction between intellect, emotions, and will is challenged by some psychologists. {God my Saviour} (\t“i the“i t“i sotˆri mou\). Article with each substantive. God is called Saviour in the O.T. (Deuteronomy:32:15, strkjv@Psalms:24:5; strkjv@95:1|).

rwp@Luke:1:67 @{Prophesied} (\eprophˆteusen\). Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This _Benedictus_ (\Eulogˆtos\, {Blessed}) of Zacharias (68-79|) may be what is referred to in verse 64| "he began to speak blessing God" (\eulog“n\). Nearly every phrase here is found in the O.T. (Psalms and Prophets). He, like Mary, was full of the Holy Spirit and had caught the Messianic message in its highest meaning.

rwp@Luke:2:5 @{To enrol himself with Mary} (\apograpsasthai sun Mariam\). Direct middle. "With Mary" is naturally taken with the infinitive as here. If so, that means that Mary's family register was in Bethlehem also and that she also belonged to the house of David. It is possible to connect "with Mary" far back with "went up" (\anebˆ\) in verse 4|, but it is unnatural to do so. There is no real reason for doubting that Mary herself was a descendant of David and that is the obvious way to understand Luke's genealogy of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:3:23-38|). The Syriac Sinaitic expressly says that both Joseph and Mary were of the house and city of David. {Betrothed} (\emnˆsteumenˆn\). Same verb as in strkjv@1:27|, but here it really means "married" or "espoused" as strkjv@Matthew:1:24f.| shows. Otherwise she could not have travelled with Joseph. {Great with child} (\enku“i\). Only here in N.T. Common Greek word.

rwp@Luke:2:15 @{Said to one another} (\elaloun pros allˆlous\). Imperfect tense, inchoative, "began to speak," each to the other. It suggests also repetition, they kept saying, {Now} (\dˆ\). A particle of urgency. {This thing} (\to rhˆma touto\). A Hebraistic and vernacular use of \rhˆma\ (something said) as something done. See on ¯Luke:1:65|. The ancient Greek used \logos\ in this same way.

rwp@Luke:2:35 @{A sword} (\rhomphaia\). A large sword, properly a long Thracian javelin. It occurs in the LXX of Goliath's sword (1Samuel:17:51|). How little Mary understood the meaning of Simeon's words that seemed so out of place in the midst of the glorious things already spoken, a sharp thorn in their roses, a veritable bitter-sweet. But one day Mary will stand by the Cross of Christ with this Thracian javelin clean through her soul, \stabat Mater Dolorosa\ (John:19:25|). It is only a parenthesis here, and a passing cloud perhaps passed over Mary's heart already puzzled with rapture and ecstasy. {May be revealed} (\apokaluphth“sin\). Unveiled. First aorist passive subjunctive after \hop“s an\ and expresses God's purpose in the mission of the Messiah. He is to test men's thoughts (\dialogismoi\) and purposes. They will be compelled to take a stand for Christ or against him. That is true today.

rwp@Luke:2:38 @{Coming up} (\epistƒsa\). Second aorist active participle. The word often has the notion of coming suddenly or bursting in as of Martha in strkjv@Luke:10:40|. But here it probably means coming up and standing by and so hearing Simeon's wonderful words so that her words form a kind of footnote to his. {Gave thanks} (\anth“mologeito\). Imperfect middle of a verb (\anthomologe“\) in common use in Greek writers and in the LXX though here alone in the N.T. It had the idea of a mutual agreement or of saying something before one (\anti\). Anna was evidently deeply moved and repeated her thanksgiving and kept speaking (\elalei\, imperfect again) "to all them that were looking for (\prosdechomenois\, as in strkjv@1:35| of Simeon) the redemption of Jerusalem (\lutr“sin Ierousalˆm\)." There was evidently a group of such spirits that gathered in the temple either men around her and Simeon or whom she met from time to time. There was thus a nucleus of old saints in Jerusalem prepared for the coming of the Messiah when he at last appears as the Messiah in Jerusalem (John 2 and 3). These probably all passed away. But they had a happy hour of hope and joy. The late MSS. have "in Jerusalem" but "of Jerusalem" is correct. What they meant by the "redemption of Jerusalem" is not clear, whether political or spiritual or both. Simeon was looking for the consolation of Israel (2:25|) and Zacharias (1:68|) sang of redemption for Israel (Isaiah:40:2|).

rwp@Luke:2:46 @{After three days} (\meta hˆmeras treis\). One day out, one day back, and on the third day finding him. {In the temple} (\en t“i hier“i\). Probably on the terrace where members of the Sanhedrin gave public instruction on sabbaths and feast-days, so probably while the feast was still going on. The rabbis probably sat on benches in a circle. The listeners on the ground, among whom was Jesus the boy in a rapture of interest. {Both hearing them and asking them questions} (\kai akouonta aut“n kai eper“t“nta autous\). Paul sat at the feet of Gamaliel (Acts:22:3|). Picture this eager boy alive with interest. It was his one opportunity in a theological school outside of the synagogue to hear the great rabbis expound the problems of life. This was the most unusual of all children, to be sure, in intellectual grasp and power. But it is a mistake to think that children of twelve do not think profoundly concerning the issues of life. What father or mother has ever been able to answer a child's questions?

rwp@Luke:3:1 @{Now in the fifteenth year} (\en etei de pentekaidekat“i\). Tiberius Caesar was ruler in the provinces two years before Augustus Caesar died. Luke makes a six-fold attempt here to indicate the time when John the Baptist began his ministry. John revived the function of the prophet (\Ecce Homo\, p. 2|) and it was a momentous event after centuries of prophetic silence. Luke begins with the Roman Emperor, then mentions Pontius Pilate Procurator of Judea, Herod Antipas Tetrarch of Galilee (and Perea), Philip, Tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis, Lysanias, Tetrarch of Abilene (all with the genitive absolute construction) and concludes with the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas (son-in-law and successor of Annas). The ancients did not have our modern system of chronology, the names of rulers as here being the common way. Objection has been made to the mention of Lysanias here because Josephus (_Ant_. XXVII. I) tells of a Lysanias who was King of Abila up to B.C. 36 as the one referred to by Luke with the wrong date. But an inscription has been found on the site of Abilene with mention of "Lysanias the tetrarch" and at the time to which Luke refers (see my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_, pp. 167f.). Songs:Luke is vindicated again by the rocks.

rwp@Luke:3:15 @{Were in expectation} (\prosdok“ntos\). Genitive absolute of this striking verb already seen in strkjv@1:21|. {Reasoned} (\dialogizomen“n\). Genitive absolute again. John's preaching about the Messiah and the kingdom of God stirred the people deeply and set them to wondering. {Whether haply he were the Christ} (\mˆpote autos eiˆ ho Christos\). Optative \eiˆ\ in indirect question changed from the indicative in the direct (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1031). John wrought no miracles and was not in David's line and yet he moved people so mightily that they began to suspect that he himself (\autos\) was the Messiah. The Sanhedrin will one day send a formal committee to ask him this direct question (John:1:19|).

rwp@Luke:3:23 @{Jesus Himself} (\autos Iˆsous\). Emphatic intensive pronoun calling attention to the personality of Jesus at this juncture. When he entered upon his Messianic work. {When he began to teach} (\archomenos\). The words "to teach" are not in the Greek text. The Authorized Version "began to be about thirty years of age," is an impossible translation. The Revised Version rightly supplies "to teach" (\didaskein\) after the present participle \archomenos\. Either the infinitive or the participle can follow \archomai\, usually the infinitive in the _Koin‚_. It is not necessary to supply anything (Acts:1:22|). {Was about thirty years of age} (\ˆn h“sei et“n triakonta\). Tyndale has it right "Jesus was about thirty yere of age when he beganne." Luke does not commit himself definitely to precisely thirty years as the age of Christ. The Levites entered upon full service at that age, but that proves nothing about Jesus. God's prophets enter upon their task when the word of God comes to them. Jesus may have been a few months under or over thirty or a year or two less or more. {Being Son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli} (\“n huios h“s enomizeto I“sˆph tou Helei\). For the discussion of the genealogy of Jesus see on ¯Matthew:1:1-17|. The two genealogies differ very widely and many theories have been proposed about them. At once one notices that Luke begins with Jesus and goes back to Adam, the Son of God, while Matthew begins with Abraham and comes to "Joseph the husband of Mary of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ" (Matthew:1:16|). Matthew employs the word "begot" each time, while Luke has the article \tou\ repeating \huiou\ (Son) except before Joseph. They agree in the mention of Joseph, but Matthew says that "Jacob begat Joseph" while Luke calls "Joseph the son of Heli." There are other differences, but this one makes one pause. Joseph, of course, did not have two fathers. If we understand Luke to be giving the real genealogy of Jesus through Mary, the matter is simple enough. The two genealogies differ from Joseph to David except in the cases of Zorobabel and Salathiel. Luke evidently means to suggest something unusual in his genealogy by the use of the phrase "as was supposed" (\h“s enomizeto\). His own narrative in strkjv@Luke:1:26-38| has shown that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. Plummer objects that, if Luke is giving the genealogy of Jesus through Mary, \huios\ must be used in two senses here (son as was supposed of Joseph, and grandson through Mary of Heli). But that is not an unheard of thing. In neither list does Matthew or Luke give a complete genealogy. Just as Matthew uses "begat" for descent, so does Luke employ "son" in the same way for descendant. It was natural for Matthew, writing for Jews, to give the legal genealogy through Joseph, though he took pains to show in strkjv@Matthew:1:16,18-25| that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. It was equally natural for Luke, a Greek himself and writing for the whole world, to give the actual genealogy of Jesus through Mary. It is in harmony with Pauline universality (Plummer) that Luke carries the genealogy back to Adam and does not stop with Abraham. It is not clear why Luke adds "the Son of God" after Adam (3:38|). Certainly he does not mean that Jesus is the Son of God only in the sense that Adam is. Possibly he wishes to dispose of the heathen myths about the origin of man and to show that God is the Creator of the whole human race, Father of all men in that sense. No mere animal origin of man is in harmony with this conception.

rwp@Luke:4:2 @{Being tempted} (\peirazomenos\). Present passive participle and naturally parallel with the imperfect passive \ˆgeto\ (was led) in verse 1|. This is another instance of poor verse division which should have come at the end of the sentence. See on ¯Matthew:4:1; strkjv@Mark:1:13| for the words "tempt" and "devil." The devil challenged the Son of man though also the Son of God. It was a contest between Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, and the slanderer of men. The devil had won with Adam and Eve. He has hopes of triumph over Jesus. The story of this conflict is given only in strkjv@Matthew:4:1-11; strkjv@Luke:4:1-13|. There is a mere mention of it in strkjv@Mark:1:12f|. Songs:then here is a specimen of the Logia of Jesus (Q), a non-Markan portion of Matthew and Luke, the earliest document about Christ. The narrative could come ultimately only from Christ himself. It is noteworthy that it bears all the marks of the high conception of Jesus as the Son of God found in the Gospel of John and in Paul and Hebrews, the rest of the New Testament in fact, for Mark, Matthew, Luke, Acts, Peter, and Jude:follow in this same strain. The point is that modern criticism has revealed the Messianic consciousness of Jesus as God's Son at his Baptism and in his Temptations at the very beginning of his ministry and in the oldest known documents about Christ (The Logia, Mark's Gospel). {He did eat nothing} (\ouk ephagen ouden\). Second aorist (constative) active indicative of the defective verb \esthi“\. Mark does not give the fast. strkjv@Matthew:4:2| has the aorist active participle \nˆsteusas\ which usually means a religious fast for purposes of devotion. That idea is not excluded by Luke's words. The entrance of Jesus upon his Messianic ministry was a fit time for this solemn and intense consecration. This mental and spiritual strain would naturally take away the appetite and there was probably nothing at hand to eat. The weakness from the absence of food gave the devil his special opportunity to tempt Jesus which he promptly seized. {When they were completed} (\suntelestheis“n aut“n\). Genitive absolute with the first aorist passive participle feminine plural because \hemer“n\ (days) is feminine. According to Luke the hunger (\epeinasen\, became hungry, ingressive aorist active indicative) came at the close of the forty days as in strkjv@Matthew:4:2|.

rwp@Luke:4:21 @{And he began to say} (\ˆrxato de legein\). Aorist ingressive active indicative and present infinitive. He began speaking. The moment of hushed expectancy was passed. These may or may not be the first words uttered here by Jesus. Often the first sentence is the crucial one in winning an audience. Certainly this is an arresting opening sentence. {Hath been fulfilled} (\peplˆr“tai\). Perfect passive indicative, {stands fulfilled}. "Today this scripture (Isaiah:61:1,2|, just read) stands fulfilled in your ears." It was a most amazing statement and the people of Nazareth were quick to see the Messianic claim involved. Jesus could only mean that the real year of Jubilee had come, that the Messianic prophecy of Isaiah had come true today, and that in him they saw the Messiah of prophecy. There are critics today who deny that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah. To be able to do that, they must reject the Gospel of John and all such passages as this one. And it is no apocalyptic eschatological Messiah whom Jesus here sets forth, but the one who forgives sin and binds up the broken-hearted. The words were too good to be true and to be spoken here at Nazareth by one of their own townsmen!

rwp@Luke:4:22 @{Bare him witness} (\emarturoun\). Imperfect active, perhaps inchoative. They all began to bear witness that the rumours were not exaggerations (4:14|) as they had supposed, but had foundation in fact if this discourse or its start was a fair sample of his teaching. The verb \marture“\ is a very old and common one. It is frequent in Acts, Paul's Epistles, and the Johannine books. The substantive \martur\ is seen in our English \martyr\, one who witnesses even by his death to his faith in Christ. {And wondered} (\kai ethaumazon\). Imperfect active also, perhaps inchoative also. They began to marvel as he proceeded with his address. This verb is an old one and common in the Gospels for the attitude of the people towards Jesus. {At the words of grace} (\epi tois logois tˆs charitos\). See on ¯Luke:1:30; strkjv@2:52| for this wonderful word \charis\ so full of meaning and so often in the N.T. The genitive case (case of genus or kind) here means that the words that came out of the mouth of Jesus in a steady stream (present tense, \ekporeuomenois\) were marked by fascination and charm. They were "winning words" as the context makes plain, though they were also "gracious" in the Pauline sense of "grace." There is no necessary antithesis in the ideas of graceful and gracious in these words of Jesus. {Is not this Joseph's son?} (\Ouchi huios estin I“sˆph houtos;\). Witness and wonder gave way to bewilderment as they began to explain to themselves the situation. The use of \ouchi\ intensive form of \ouk\ in a question expects the answer "yes." Jesus passed in Nazareth as the son of Joseph as Luke presents him in strkjv@3:23|. He does not stop here to correct this misconception because the truth has been already amply presented in strkjv@1:28-38; strkjv@2:49|. This popular conception of Jesus as the son of Joseph appears also in strkjv@John:1:45|. The puzzle of the people was due to their previous knowledge of Jesus as the carpenter (Mark:6:3|; the carpenter's son, strkjv@Matthew:13:55|). For him now to appear as the Messiah in Nazareth where he had lived and laboured as the carpenter was a phenomenon impossible to credit on sober reflection. Songs:the mood of wonder and praise quickly turned with whispers and nods and even scowls to doubt and hostility, a rapid and radical transformation of emotion in the audience.

rwp@Luke:5:1 @{Pressed upon him} (\epikeisthai\). Luke in this paragraph (5:1-11; strkjv@Mark:1:16-20; strkjv@Matthew:4:18-22|) does not follow the chronology of Mark as he usually does. It seems reasonably clear that the renewed call of the four fishermen came before the first tour of Galilee in strkjv@Luke:4:42-44|. It is here assumed that Luke is describing in his own way the incident given in Mark and Matthew above. Luke singles out Simon in a graphic way. This verb \epikeisthai\ is an old one and means to \lie upon\, rest upon as of a stone on the tomb (John:11:38|) or of fish on the burning coals (John:21:9|). Songs:it is used of a tempest (Acts:27:20|) and of the urgent demands for Christ's crucifixion (Luke:23:23|). Here it vividly pictures the eager crowds around Jesus. \En t“i epikeisthai\ is a favourite idiom with Luke as we have already seen, \en\ with the articular infinitive in the locative case. {That} (\kai\). \Kai\ does not technically mean the declarative conjunction "that," but it is a fair rendering of the somewhat awkward idiom of Luke to a certain extent imitating the Hebrew use of _wav_. {Was standing} (\ˆn hest“s\). Periphrastic second past perfect of \histˆmi\ which here is equal to a practical imperfect. {By the lake} (\para tˆn limnˆn\). The use of the accusative with \para\, alongside, after a verb of rest used to be called the pregnant use, came and was standing. But that is no longer necessary, for the accusative as the case of extension is the oldest of the cases and in later Greek regains many of the earlier uses of the other cases employed for more precise distinctions. See the same idiom in verse 2|. We need not here stress the notion of extension. "With characteristic accuracy Luke never calls it a sea, while the others never call it a lake" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:5:17 @{That} (\kai\). Use of \kai\ = \hoti\ (that) like the Hebrew _wav_, though found in Greek also. {He} (\autos\). Luke sometimes has \autos\ in the nominative as unemphatic "he" as here, not "he himself." {Was teaching} (\ˆn didask“n\). Periphrastic imperfect again like our English idiom. {Were sitting by} (\ˆsan kathˆmenoi\). Periphrastic imperfect again. There is no "by" in the Greek. {Doctors of the law} (\nomodidaskaloi\). A compound word formed after analogy of \hierodidaskalos\, but not found outside of the N.T. and ecclesiastical writers, one of the very few words apparently N.T. in usage. It appears here and strkjv@Acts:5:34; strkjv@1Timothy:1:7|. It is not likely that Luke and Paul made the word, but they simply used the term already in current use to describe teachers and interpreters of the law. Our word "doctor" is Latin for "teacher." These "teachers of the law" are called elsewhere in the Gospels "scribes" (\grammateis\) as in Matthew and Mark (see on ¯Matthew:5:20; strkjv@23:34|) and strkjv@Luke:5:21; strkjv@19:47; strkjv@21:1; strkjv@22:2|. Luke also employs \nomikos\ (one skilled in the law, \nomos\) as in strkjv@10:25|. One thinks of our LL.D. (Doctors of Civil and Canon Law), for both were combined in Jewish law. They were usually Pharisees (mentioned here for the first time in Luke) for which see on ¯Matthew:3:7,20|. Luke will often speak of the Pharisees hereafter. Not all the "Pharisees" were "teachers of the law" so that both terms often occur together as in verse 21| where Luke has separate articles (\hoi grammateis kai hoi Pharisaioi\), distinguishing between them, though one article may occur as in strkjv@Matthew:5:20| or no article as here in verse 17|. Luke alone mentions the presence here of these Pharisees and doctors of the law "which were come" (\hoi ˆsan elˆluthotes\, periphrastic past perfect active, {had come}). {Out of every village of Galilee and Judea and Jerusalem} (\ek pasˆs k“mˆs tˆs Galilaias kai Ioudaias kai Ierousalˆm\). Edersheim (_Jewish Social Life_) observes that the Jews distinguished Jerusalem as a separate district in Judea. Plummer considers it hyperbole in Luke to use "every village." But one must recall that Jesus had already made one tour of Galilee which stirred the Pharisees and rabbis to active opposition. Judea had already been aroused and Jerusalem was the headquarters of the definite campaign now organized against Jesus. One must bear in mind that strkjv@John:4:1-4| shows that Jesus had already left Jerusalem and Judea because of the jealousy of the Pharisees. They are here on purpose to find fault and to make charges against Jesus. One must not forget that there were many kinds of Pharisees and that not all of them were as bad as these legalistic and punctilious hypocrites who deserved the indictment and exposure of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:23|. Paul himself is a specimen of the finer type of Pharisee which, however, developed into the persecuting fanatic till Jesus changed his whole life. {The power of the Lord was with him to heal} (\dunamis Kuriou ˆn eis to iƒsthai auton\). Songs:the best texts. It is neat Greek, but awkward English: "Then was the power of the Lord for the healing as to him (Jesus)." Here \Kuriou\ refers to Jehovah. {Dunamis} (dynamite) is one of the common words for "miracles" (\dunameis\). What Luke means is that Jesus had the power of the Lord God to heal with. He does not mean that this power was intermittent. He simply calls attention to its presence with Jesus on this occasion.

rwp@Luke:5:22 @{Perceiving} (\epignous\). Same form (second aorist active participle of \epigin“sk“\, common verb for knowing fully) in strkjv@Mark:2:8|. {Reason ye} (\dialogizesthe\) as in strkjv@Mark:2:8|. strkjv@Matthew:9:4| has \enthumeisthe\.

rwp@Luke:6:8 @{But he knew their thoughts} (\autos de ˆidei tous dialogismous aut“n\). In Luke alone. Imperfect in sense, second past perfect in form \ˆidei\ from \oida\. Jesus, in contrast to these spies (Plummer), read their intellectual processes like an open book. {His hand withered} (\xˆran tˆn cheira\). Predicate position of the adjective. Songs:in strkjv@Mark:3:3|. {Stand forth} (\stˆthi\). Luke alone has this verb, second aorist active imperative. strkjv@Mark:3:3| has {Arise into the midst} (\egeire eis to meson\). Luke has {Arise and step forth into the midst} (\egeire kai stˆthi eis to meson\). Christ worked right out in the open where all could see. It was a moment of excitement when the man stepped forth (\estˆ\) there before them all.

rwp@Luke:6:20 @{And he lifted up his eyes} (\kai autos eparas tous opthalmous autou\). First aorist active participle from \epair“\. Note also Luke's favourite use of \kai autos\ in beginning a paragraph. Vivid detail alone in Luke. Jesus looked the vast audience full in the face. strkjv@Matthew:5:2| mentions that "he opened his mouth and taught them" (began to teach them, inchoative imperfect, \edidasken\). He spoke out so that the great crowd could hear. Some preachers do not open their mouths and do not look up at the people, but down at the manuscript and drawl along while the people lose interest and even go to sleep or slip out. {Ye poor} (\hoi pt“choi\). {The poor}, but "yours" (\humetera\) justifies the translation "ye." Luke's report is direct address in all the four beatitudes and four woes given by him. It is useless to speculate why Luke gives only four of the eight beatitudes in Matthew or why Matthew does not give the four woes in Luke. One can only say that neither professes to give a complete report of the sermon. There is no evidence to show that either saw the report of the other. They may have used a common source like Q (the Logia of Jesus) or they may have had separate sources. Luke's first beatitude corresponds with Matthew's first, but he does not have "in spirit" after "poor." Does Luke represent Jesus as saying that poverty itself is a blessing? It can be made so. Or does Luke represent Jesus as meaning what is in Matthew, poverty of spirit? {The kingdom of God} (\hˆ basileia tou theou\). strkjv@Matthew:5:3| has "the kingdom of heaven" which occurs alone in Matthew though he also has the one here in Luke with no practical difference. The rabbis usually said "the kingdom of heaven." They used it of the political Messianic kingdom when Judaism of the Pharisaic sort would triumph over the world. The idea of Jesus is in the sharpest contrast to that conception here and always. See on ¯Matthew:3:2| for discussion of the meaning of the word "kingdom." It is the favourite word of Jesus for the rule of God in the heart here and now. It is both present and future and will reach a glorious consummation. Some of the sayings of Christ have apocalyptic and eschatological figures, but the heart of the matter is here in the spiritual reality of the reign of God in the hearts of those who serve him. The kingdom parables expand and enlarge upon various phases of this inward life and growth.

rwp@Luke:7:5 @{For} (\gar\). This clause gives the reason why the elders of the Jews consider him "worthy" (\axios\, drawing down the scale, \axis\, \ago\). He was hardly a proselyte, but was a Roman who had shown his love for the Jews. {Himself} (\autos\). All by himself and at his own expense. {Us} (\hˆmin\). Dative case, for us. It is held by some archaeologists that the black basalt ruins in Tell Hum are the remains of the very synagogue (\tˆn sunag“gˆn\). Literally, {the synagogue}, the one which we have, the one for us.

rwp@Luke:7:7 @{Wherefore neither thought I myself worthy to come unto thee} (\dio oude emauton ˆxi“sa pros se elthein\). Not in Matthew because he represents the centurion as coming to Jesus. {Speak the word} (\eipe log“i\). As in strkjv@Matthew:8:8|. Second aorist active imperative with instrumental case, speak with a word. {My servant shall be healed} (\iathˆt“ ho pais mou\). Imperative first aorist passive, let be healed. \Pais\ literally means "boy," an affectionate term for the "slave," \doulos\ (verse 2|), who was "dear" to him.

rwp@Luke:7:17 @{This report} (\ho logos houtos\). That God had raised up a great prophet who had shown his call by raising the dead.

rwp@Luke:7:24 @{When the messengers of John were departed} (\apelthont“n t“n aggel“n I“anou\). Genitive absolute of aorist active participle. strkjv@Matthew:11:7| has the present middle participle \poreuomen“n\, suggesting that Jesus began his eulogy of John as soon as the messengers (angels, Luke calls them) were on their way. The vivid questions about the people's interest in John are precisely alike in both Matthew and Luke.

rwp@Luke:7:29 @{Justified God} (\edikai“san ton theon\). They considered God just or righteous in making these demands of them. Even the publicans did. They submitted to the baptism of John (\baptisthentes to baptisma tou I“anou\. First aorist passive participle with the cognate accusative retained in the passive. Some writers consider verses 29,30| a comment of Luke in the midst of the eulogy of John by Jesus. This would be a remarkable thing for so long a comment to be interjected. It is perfectly proper as the saying of Jesus.

rwp@Luke:8:11 @{Is this} (\estin de hautˆ\). Means this. Jesus now proceeds to interpret his own parable. {The seed is the word of God} (\ho sporos estin ho logos tou theou\). The article with both subject and predicate as here means that they are interchangeable and can be turned round: The word of God is the seed. The phrase "the word of God" does not appear in Matthew and only once in Mark (Mark:7:13|) and John (John:10:35|), but four times in Luke (5:1; strkjv@8:11,21; strkjv@11:28|) and twelve times in Acts. In strkjv@Mark:4:14| we have only "the word." In strkjv@Mark:3:31| we have "the will of God," and in strkjv@Matthew:12:46| "the will of my Father" where strkjv@Luke:8:21| has "the word of God." This seems to show that Luke has the subjective genitive here and means the word that comes from God.

rwp@Luke:8:21 @{These which hear the word of God and do it} (\hoi ton logon tou theou akouontes kai poiountes\). The absence of the article with "mother" and "brothers" probably means, as Plummer argues, "Mother to me and brothers to me are those who &c." No one is a child of God because of human parentage (John:1:13|). "Family ties are at best temporal; spiritual ties are eternal" (Plummer). Note the use of "hear and do" together here as in strkjv@Matthew:7:24; strkjv@Luke:6:47| at the close of the Sermon on the Mount. The parable of the sower is almost like a footnote to that sermon. Later Jesus will make "doing" a test of friendship for him (John:15:14|).

rwp@Luke:9:36 @{When the voice came} (\en toi genesthai tˆn ph“nˆn\). Another example of Luke's idiom, this time with the second aorist middle infinitive. Literally, "on the coming as to the voice" (accusative of general reference). It does not mean that it was "after" the voice was past that Jesus was found alone, but simultaneously with it (ingressive aorist tense). {Alone} (\monos\). Same adjective in strkjv@Mark:9:8; strkjv@Matthew:17:8| translated "only." Should be rendered "alone" there also. {They held their peace} (\esigˆsan\). Ingressive aorist active of common verb \siga“\, became silent. In strkjv@Mark:9:9; strkjv@Matthew:17:9|, Jesus commanded them not to tell till His Resurrection from the dead. Luke notes that they in awe obeyed that command and it turns out that they finally forgot the lesson of this night's great experience. By and by they will be able to tell them, but not "in those days." {Which they had seen} (\h“n he“rakan\). Attraction of the relative \ha\ into the case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\. Perfect active indicative \he“rakan\ with _Koin‚_ (papyri) form for the ancient \he“rakƒsin\ changed by analogy to the first aorist ending in \-an\ instead of \-asin\.

rwp@Luke:9:46 @{A reasoning} (\dialogismos\). A dispute. The word is from \dialogizomai\, the verb used in strkjv@Mark:9:33| about this incident. In Luke this dispute follows immediately after the words of Jesus about his death. They were afraid to ask Jesus about that subject, but strkjv@Matthew:18:1| states that they came to Jesus to settle it. {Which of them should be greatest} (\to tis an eiˆ meiz“n aut“n\). Note the article with the indirect question, the clause being in the accusative of general reference. The optative with \an\ is here because it was so in the direct question (potential optative with \an\ retained in the indirect). But Luke makes it plain that it was not an abstract problem about greatness in the kingdom of heaven as they put it to Jesus (Matthew:18:1|), but a personal problem in their own group. Rivalries and jealousies had already come and now sharp words. By and by James and John will be bold enough to ask for the first places for themselves in this political kingdom which they expect (Mark:10:35; strkjv@Matthew:20:20|). It is a sad spectacle.

rwp@Luke:9:57 @{A certain man} (\tis\). strkjv@Matthew:8:19| calls him "a scribe." strkjv@Luke:9:57-60; strkjv@Matthew:8:19-22|, but not in Mark and so from Q or the Logia. {Wherever you go} (\hopou ean aperchˆi\) is the present middle subjunctive with the indefinite relative adverb \ean\, common Greek idiom. See on Matthew for "holes," "nests," "Son of man." The idiom "where to lay his head" (\pou tˆn kephalˆn klinˆi\) is the same in both, the deliberative subjunctive retained in the indirect question. "Jesus knows the measure of the scribe's enthusiasm" (Plummer). The wandering life of Jesus explains this statement.

rwp@Luke:9:59 @{And he said unto another} (\eipen de pros heteron\). strkjv@Matthew:8:21| omits Christ's "Follow me" (\akolouthei moi\) and makes this man a volunteer instead of responding to the appeal of Jesus. There is no real opposition, of course. In Matthew's account the man is apologetic as in Luke. Plummer calls him "one of the casual disciples" of whom there are always too many. The scribes knew how to give plausible reasons for not being active disciples. {First} (\pr“ton\). One of the problems of life is the relation of duties to each other, which comes first. The burial of one's father was a sacred duty (Genesis:25:9|), but, as in the case of Tobit strkjv@4:3, this scribe's father probably was still alive. What the scribe apparently meant was that he could not leave his father while still alive to follow Jesus around over the country.

rwp@Luke:9:61 @{And another also said} (\eipen de kai heteros\). A volunteer like the first. This third case is given by Luke alone, though the incident may also come from the same Logia as the other two. \Heteros\ does not here mean one of a "different" sort as is sometimes true of this pronoun, but merely another like \allos\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 749). {But first} (\pr“ton de\). He also had something that was to come "first." {To bid farewell to them that are at my house} (\apotaxasthai tois eis ton oikon mou\). In itself that was a good thing to do. This first aorist middle infinitive is from \apotass“\, an old verb, to detach, to separate, to assign as a detachment of soldiers. In the N.T. it only appears in the middle voice with the meaning common in late writers to bid adieu, to separate oneself from others. It is used in strkjv@Acts:18:18| of Paul taking leave of the believers in Corinth. See also strkjv@Mark:6:46; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:13|. It is thus a formal function and this man meant to go home and set things in order there and then in due time to come and follow Jesus.

rwp@Luke:10:21 @{In that same hour} (\en autˆi tˆi h“rƒi\). Literally, "at the hour itself," almost a demonstrative use of \autos\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 686) and in Luke alone in the N.T. (2:38; strkjv@10:21; strkjv@12:12; strkjv@20:19|). strkjv@Matthew:11:25| uses the demonstrative here, "at that time" (\en ekein“i t“i kair“i\). {Rejoiced in the Holy Spirit} (\ˆgalliasato t“i pneumati t“i hagi“i\). First aorist middle of the late verb \agallia“\ for \agall“\, to exult. Always in the middle in the N.T. save strkjv@Luke:1:47| in Mary's _Magnificat_. This holy joy of Jesus was directly due to the Holy Spirit. It is joy in the work of his followers, their victories over Satan, and is akin to the joy felt by Jesus in strkjv@John:4:32-38| when the vision of the harvest of the world stirred his heart. The rest of this verse is precisely like strkjv@Matthew:11:25f.|, a peculiarly Johannine passage in Matthew and Luke, but not in Mark, and so from Q (the Logia of Jesus). It has disturbed critics who are unwilling to admit the Johannine style and type of teaching as genuine, but here it is. See on Matthew for discussion. "That God had proved his independence of the human intellect is a matter for thankfulness. Intellectual gifts, so far from being necessary, are often a hindrance" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:10:22 @{Knoweth who the Son is} (\gin“skei tis estin ho huios\). Knows by experience, \gin“skei\. Here strkjv@Matthew:11:27| has \epigin“skei\ (fully knows) and simply \ton huion\ (the Son) instead of the "who" (\tis\) clause. Songs:also in "who the Father is" (\tis estin ho pater\). But the same use and contrast of "the Father," "the Son." in both Matthew and Luke, "an aerolite from the Johannean heaven" (Hase). No sane criticism can get rid of this Johannine bit in these Gospels written long before the Fourth Gospel was composed. We are dealing here with the oldest known document about Christ (the Logia) and the picture is that drawn in the Fourth Gospel (see my _The Christ of the Logia_). It is idle to try to whittle away by fantastic exegesis the high claims made by Jesus in this passage. It is an ecstatic prayer in the presence of the Seventy under the rapture of the Holy Spirit on terms of perfect equality and understanding between the Father and the Son in the tone of the priestly prayer in strkjv@John:17|. We are justified in saying that this prayer of supreme Fellowship with the Father in contemplation of final victory over Satan gives us a glimpse of the prayers with the Father when the Son spent whole nights on the mountain alone with the Father. Here is the Messianic consciousness in complete control and with perfect confidence in the outcome. Here as in strkjv@Matthew:11:27| by the use of {willeth to reveal him} (\boulˆtai apokalupsai\). The Son claims the power to reveal the Father "to whomsoever he wills" (\h“i an boulˆtai\, indefinite relative and present subjunctive of \boulomai\, to will, not the future indicative). This is divine sovereignty most assuredly. Human free agency is also true, but it is full divine sovereignty in salvation that is here claimed along with possession (\paredothˆ\, timeless aorist passive indicative) of all power from the Father. Let that supreme claim stand.

rwp@Luke:11:27 @{As he said these things} (\en t“i legein auton\). Luke's common idiom, \en\ with articular infinitive. Verses 27,28| are peculiar to Luke. His Gospel in a special sense is the Gospel of Woman. This woman "speaks well, but womanly" (Bengel). Her beatitude (\makaria\) reminds us of Elisabeth's words (Luke:1:42|, \eulogˆmenˆ\). She is fulfilling Mary's own prophecy in strkjv@1:48| (\makariousin me\, shall call me happy).

rwp@Luke:11:38 @{That he had not first washed before dinner} (\hoti ou pr“ton ebaptisthˆ pro tou aristou\). The verb is first aorist passive indicative of \baptiz“\, to dip or to immerse. Here it is applied to the hands. It was the Jewish custom to dip the hands in water before eating and often between courses for ceremonial purification. In Galilee the Pharisees and scribes had sharply criticized the disciples for eating with unwashed hands (Mark:7:1-23; strkjv@Matthew:15:1-20|) when Jesus had defended their liberty and had opposed making a necessity of such a custom (tradition) in opposition to the command of God. Apparently Jesus on this occasion had himself reclined at the breakfast (not dinner) without this ceremonial dipping of the hands in water. The Greek has "first before" (\pr“ton pro\), a tautology not preserved in the translation.

rwp@Luke:11:51 @{From the blood of Abel to the blood of Zachariah} (\apo haimatos Abel he“s haimatos Zachariou\). The blood of Abel is the first shed in the Old Testament (Genesis:4:10|), that of Zacharias the last in the O.T. canon which ended with Chronicles (2Chronicles:24:22|). Chronologically the murder of Uriah by Jehoiakim was later (Jeremiah:26:23|), but this climax is from Genesis to II Chronicles (the last book in the canon). See on ¯Matthew:23:35| for discussion of Zachariah as "the son of Barachiah" rather than "the son of Jehoiada." {Between the altar and the sanctuary} (\metaxu tou thusiastˆriou kai tou oikou\). Literally, between the altar and the house (Matthew:23:35| has temple, \naou\).

rwp@Luke:12:8 @{Everyone who shall confess me} (\pas hos an homologˆsei en emoi\). Just like strkjv@Matthew:10:32| except the use of \an\ here which adds nothing. The Hebraistic use of \en\ after \homologe“\ both here and in Matthew is admitted by even Moulton (_Prolegomena_, p. 104). {The Son of man} (\ho huios tou anthr“pou\). Here strkjv@Matthew:10:32| has \k'ag“\ (I also) as the equivalent.

rwp@Luke:12:11 @{Be not anxious} (\mˆ merimnˆsˆte\). First aorist active subjunctive with \mˆ\ in prohibition. Do not become anxious. See a similar command to the Twelve on their Galilean tour (Matthew:10:19f.|) and in the great discourse on the Mount of Olives at the end (Mark:13:11; strkjv@Luke:21:14f.|), given twice by Luke as we see. {How or what ye shall answer} (\p“s ˆ ti apologˆsˆsthe\). Indirect question and retaining the deliberative subjunctive \apologˆsˆsthe\ and also \eipˆte\ (say).

rwp@Luke:12:17 @{Reasoned within himself} (\dielogizeto en haut“i\). Imperfect middle, picturing his continued cogitations over his perplexity. {Where to bestow} (\pou sunax“\). Future indicative deliberative, where I shall gather together. {My fruits} (\tous karpous mou\). Songs:it is with the rich fool: my fruits, my barns, my corn, my goods, just like Nabal whose very name means fool (1Samuel:25:11|), whether a direct reference to him or not.

rwp@Luke:12:22 @{Unto his disciples} (\pros tous mathˆtas autou\). Songs:Jesus turns from the crowd to the disciples (verses 22-40|, when Peter interrupts the discourse). From here to the end of the chapter Luke gives material that appears in Matthew, but not in one connection as here. In Matthew part of it is in the charge to the Twelve on their tour in Galilee, part in the eschatological discourse on the Mount of Olives. None of it is in Mark. Hence Q or the Logia seems to be the source of it. The question recurs again whether Jesus repeated on other occasions what is given here or whether Luke has here put together separate discourses as Matthew is held by many to have done in the Sermon on the Mount. We have no way of deciding these points. We can only say again that Jesus would naturally repeat his favourite sayings like other popular preachers and teachers. Songs:Luke:12:22-31| corresponds to strkjv@Matthew:6:25-33|, which see for detailed discussion. The parable of the rich fool was spoken to the crowd, but this exhortation to freedom from care (22-31|) is to the disciples. Songs:the language in strkjv@Luke:12:22| is precisely that in strkjv@Matthew:6:25|. See there for \mˆ merimnƒte\ (stop being anxious) and the deliberative subjunctive retained in the indirect question (\phagˆte, endusˆsthe\). Songs:verse 23| here is the same in strkjv@Matthew:6:25| except that there it is a question with \ouch\ expecting the affirmative answer, whereas here it is given as a reason (\gar\, for) for the preceding command.

rwp@Luke:12:46 @{Shall cut him asunder} (\dichotomˆsei\). An old and somewhat rare word from \dichotomos\ and that from \dicha\ and \temn“\, to cut, to cut in two. Used literally here. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:24:51|. {With the unfaithful} (\meta t“n apist“n\). Not here "the unbelieving" though that is a common meaning of \apistos\ (\a\ privative and \pistos\, from \peith“\), but the unreliable, the untrustworthy. Here strkjv@Matthew:24:51| has "with the hypocrites," the same point. The parallel with strkjv@Matthew:24:43-51| ends here. strkjv@Matthew:24:51| adds the saying about the wailing and the gnashing of teeth. Clearly there Luke places the parable of the wise steward in this context while Matthew has it in the great eschatological discourse. Once again we must either think that Jesus repeated the parable or that one of the writers has misplaced it. Luke alone preserves what he gives in verses 47,48|.

rwp@Luke:12:54 @{To the multitudes also} (\kai tois ochlois\). After the strong and stirring words just before with flash and force Jesus turns finally in this series of discourses to the multitudes again as in verse 15|. There are similar sayings to these verses 54-59| in strkjv@Matthew:16:1f; strkjv@5:25f|. There is a good deal of difference in phraseology whether that is due to difference of source or different use of the same source (Q or Logia) we do not know. Not all the old MSS. give strkjv@Matthew:16:2,3|. In Matthew the Pharisees and Sadducees were asking for a sign from heaven as they often did. These signs of the weather, "a shower" (\ombros\, strkjv@Luke:12:54|) due to clouds in the west, "a hot wave" (\kaus“n\, verse 55) due to a south wind (\noton\) blowing, "fair weather" (\eudia\, strkjv@Matthew:16:2|) when the sky is red, are appealed to today. They have a more or less general application due to atmospheric and climatic conditions.

rwp@Luke:13:23 @{Are they few that be saved?} (\ei oligoi hoi s“zomenoi;\). Note use of \ei\ as an interrogative which can be explained as ellipsis or as \ei=ˆ\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1024). This was an academic theological problem with the rabbis, the number of the elect.

rwp@Luke:16:2 @{What is this that I hear?} (\ti touto akou“;\). There are several ways of understanding this terse Greek idiom. The Revised Version (above) takes \ti\ to be equal to \ti estin touto ho akou“\; That is a possible use of the predicate \touto\. Another way is to take \ti\ to be exclamatory, which is less likely. Still another view is that \ti\ is " Why": "Why do I hear this about thee?" See strkjv@Acts:14:15| where that is the idiom employed. {Render} (\apodos\). Second aorist active imperative of \apodid“mi\, Give back (and at once). {The account} (\ton logon\). The reckoning or report. Common use of \logos\. {Stewardship} (\oikonomias\). Same root as \oikonomos\ (steward). This demand does not necessarily mean dismissal if investigation proved him innocent of the charges. But the reason given implies that he is to be dismissed: {Thou canst no longer} (\ou gar dunˆi\).

rwp@Luke:16:13 @{Servant} (\oiketˆs\). Household (\oikos\) servant. This is the only addition to strkjv@Matthew:6:24| where otherwise the language is precisely the same, which see. Either Matthew or Luke has put the \logion\ in the wrong place or Jesus spoke it twice. It suits perfectly each context. There is no real reason for objecting to repetition of favourite sayings by Jesus.

rwp@Luke:16:22 @{Was borne} (\apenechthˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive from \apopher“\, a common compound defective verb. The accusative case of general reference (\auton\) is common with the infinitive in such clauses after \egeneto\, like indirect discourse. It is his soul, of course, that was so borne by the angels, not his body. {Into Abraham's bosom} (\eis ton holpon Abraam\). To be in Abraham's bosom is to the Jew to be in Paradise. In strkjv@John:1:18| the Logos is in the bosom of the Father. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are in heaven and welcome those who come (Matthew:8:11|; 4Macc. strkjv@14:17). The beloved disciple reclined on the bosom of Jesus at the last passover (John:13:23|) and this fact indicates special favour. Songs:the welcome to Lazarus was unusual. {Was buried} (\etaphˆ\). Second aorist (effective) passive of the common verb \thapt“\. Apparently in contrast with the angelic visitation to the beggar.

rwp@Luke:17:18 @{Save this stranger} (\ei mˆ ho allogenˆs\). The old word was \allophulos\ (Acts:10:28|), but \allogenˆs\ occurs in the LXX, Josephus, and inscriptions. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 80) gives the inscription from the limestone block from the Temple of Israel in Jerusalem which uses this very word which may have been read by Jesus: {Let no foreigner enter within the screen and enclosure surrounding the sanctuary} (\Mˆthena allogenˆ eisporeuesthai entos tou peri to hieron truphaktou kai peribolou\).

rwp@Luke:17:31 @{Let him not go down} (\mˆ katabat“\). Second aorist active imperative of \katabain“\ with \mˆ\ in a prohibition in the third person singular. The usual idiom here would be \mˆ\ and the aorist subjunctive. See strkjv@Mark:13:15f.; strkjv@Matthew:24:17f.| when these words occur in the great eschatological discussion concerning flight before the destruction of Jerusalem. Here the application is "absolute indifference to all worldly interests as the attitude of readiness for the Son of Man" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:19:45 @{Began to cast out} (\ˆrxato ekballein\). Songs:Mark:11:15| whereas strkjv@Matthew:21:12| has simply "he cast out." See Mark and Matthew for discussion of this second cleansing of the temple at the close of the public ministry in relation to the one at the beginning in strkjv@John:2:14-22|. There is nothing gained by accusing John or the Synoptics of a gross chronological blunder. There was abundant time in these three years for all the abuses to be revived.

rwp@Luke:20:3 @{Question} (\logon\). Literally, word. Songs:in strkjv@Mark:11:29; strkjv@Matthew:21:24|.

rwp@Luke:20:5 @{They reasoned with themselves} (\sunelogisanto\). First aorist middle of \sullogizomai\, to bring together accounts, an old word, only here in the N.T. Mark and Matthew have \dielogizonto\ (imperfect middle of \dialogizomai\, a kindred verb, to reckon between one another, confer). This form (\dielogizonto\) in verse 14| below. {If we shall say} (\ean eip“men\). Third-class condition with second aorist active subjunctive. Suppose we say! Songs:in verse 6|.

rwp@Luke:20:20 @{They watched him} (\paratˆrˆsantes\). First aorist active participle of \paratˆre“\, a common Greek verb to watch on the side or insidiously or with evil intent as in strkjv@Luke:6:7| (\paretˆrounto\) of the scribes and Pharisees. See on ¯Mark:3:2|. There is no "him" in the Greek. They were watching their chance. {Spies} (\enkathetous\). An old verbal adjective from \enkathiˆmi\, to send down in or secretly. It means liers in wait who are suborned to spy out, one who is hired to trap one by crafty words. Only here in the N.T. {Feigned themselves} (\hupokrinomenous heautous\). Hypocritically professing to be "righteous" (\dikaious\). "They posed as scrupulous persons with a difficulty of conscience" (Plummer). {That they might take hold of his speech} (\hina epilab“ntai autou logou\). Second aorist middle of \epilamban“\, an old verb for seizing hold with the hands and uses as here the genitive case. These spies are for the purpose of (\hina\) catching hold of the talk of Jesus if they can get a grip anywhere. This is their direct purpose and the ultimate purpose or result is also stated, "so as to deliver him up" (\h“ste paradounai auton\). Second aorist active infinitive of \paradid“mi\, to hand over, to give from one's side to another. The trap is all set now and ready to be sprung by these "spies." {Of the governor} (\tou hˆgemonos\). The Sanhedrin knew that Pilate would have to condemn Jesus if he were put to death. Songs:then all their plans focus on this point as the goal. Luke alone mentions this item here.

rwp@Luke:20:21 @{Rightly} (\orth“s\). Matthew (Matthew:22:16|) notes that these "spies" were "disciples" (students) of the Pharisees and Mark (Mark:12:13|) adds that the Herodians are also involved in the plot. These bright theologues are full of palaver and flattery and openly endorse the teaching of Jesus as part of their scheme. {Acceptest not the person of any} (\ou lambaneis pros“pon\). Dost not take the face (or personal appearance) as the test. It is a Hebraism from which the word \pros“polempsia\ (James:2:1|) comes. Originally it meant to lift the face, to lift the countenance, to regard the face, to accept the face value. See strkjv@Mark:12:13-17; strkjv@Matthew:22:15-22| for discussion of details here. They both have \blepeis\ here.

rwp@Luke:21:9 @{Be not terrified} (\mˆ ptoˆthˆte\). First aorist passive subjunctive with \mˆ\ from \ptoe“\ an old verb to terrify, from \ptoa\, terror. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:24:37|. {First} (\Pr“ton\). It is so easy to forget this and to insist that the end is "immediately" in spite of Christ's explicit denial here. See strkjv@Matthew:24:4-42; strkjv@Mark:13:1-37| for discussion of details for strkjv@Luke:21:8-36|, the great eschatological discourse of Jesus

rwp@Luke:21:14 @{Not to meditate beforehand} (\mˆ promeletƒin\). The classical word for conning a speech beforehand. strkjv@Mark:13:11| has \promerimna“\, a later word which shows previous anxiety rather than previous preparation. {How to answer} (\apologˆthˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive. It is the preparation for the speech of defence (apology) that Jesus here forbids, not the preparation of a sermon.

rwp@Luke:21:32 @{This generation} (\hˆ genea hautˆ\). Naturally people then living. {Shall not pass away} (\ou mˆ parelthˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \parerchomai\. Strongest possible negative with \ou mˆ\. {Till all things be accomplished} (\he“s an panta genˆtai\). Second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\ with \he“s\, common idiom. The words give a great deal of trouble to critics. Some apply them to the whole discourse including the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem, the second coming and the end of the world. Some of these argue that Jesus was simply mistaken in his eschatology, some that he has not been properly reported in the Gospels. Others apply them only to the destruction of Jerusalem which did take place in A.D. 70 before that generation passed away. It must be said for this view that it is not easy in this great eschatological discourse to tell clearly when Jesus is discussing the destruction of Jerusalem and when the second coming. Plummer offers this solution: "The reference, therefore, is to the destruction of Jerusalem regarded as the type of the end of the world."

rwp@Luke:21:33 @{My words shall not pass away} (\hoi logoi mou ou mˆ pareleusontai\). Future middle indicative with \ou mˆ\, a bit stronger statement than the subjunctive. It is noteworthy that Jesus utters these words just after the difficult prediction in verse 32|.

rwp@Luke:22:6 @{Consented} (\ex“mologˆsen\). Old verb, but the ancients usually used the simple form for promise or consent rather than the compound. This is the only instance of this sense in the N.T. It is from \homologos\ (\homos\, same, and \leg“\, to say), to say the same thing with another and so agree. {Opportunity} (\eukarian\). From \eukairos\ (\eu, kairos\), a good chance. Old word, but in the N.T. only here and parallel passage strkjv@Matthew:26:16|. {In the absence of the multitude} (\ater ochlou\). \Ater\ is an old preposition, common in the poets, but rare in prose. Also in verse 35|. It means "without," "apart from," like \ch“ris\. The point of Judas was just this. He would get Jesus into the hands of the Sanhedrin during the feast in spite of the crowd. It was necessary to avoid tumult (Matthew:26:5|) because of the popularity of Jesus.

rwp@Luke:23:9 @{He questioned} (\epˆr“tƒ\). Imperfect active, kept on questioning. {In many words} (\en logois hikanois\). Same use of \hikanos\ as in verse 8|.

rwp@Luke:24:35 @{Rehearsed} (\exˆgounto\). Imperfect middle indicative of \exˆgeomai\, verb to lead out, to rehearse. Our word exegesis comes from this verb. Their story was now confirmatory, not revolutionary. The women were right then after all. {Of them} (\autois\). To them, dative case. They did not recognize Jesus in his exegesis, but did in the breaking of bread. One is reminded of that saying in the _Logia of Jesus_: "Raise the stone and there thou shalt find me, cleave the wood and there am I."

rwp@Luke:24:39 @{Myself} (\autos\). Jesus is patient with his proof. They were convinced before he came into the room, but that psychological shock had unnerved them all. {Handle} (\psˆlaphˆsate\). This very word is used in strkjv@1John:1:1| as proof of the actual human body of Jesus. It is an old verb for touching with the hand. {Flesh and bones} (\sarka kai ostea\). At least this proves that he is not just a ghost and that Jesus had a real human body against the Docetic Gnostics who denied it. But clearly we are not to understand that our resurrection bodies will have "flesh and bones." Jesus was in a transition state and had not yet been glorified. The mystery remains unsolved, but it was proof to the disciples of the identity of the Risen Christ with Jesus of Nazareth.

rwp@Luke:24:50 @{Over against Bethany} (\he“s pros Bˆthanian\). That is on Olivet. On this blessed spot near where he had delivered the great Eschatological Discourse he could see Bethany and Jerusalem.

rwp@Info_Mark @ THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION One of the clearest results of modern critical study of the Gospels is the early date of Mark's Gospel. Precisely how early is not definitely known, but there are leading scholars who hold that A.D. 50 is quite probable. My own views are given in detail in my _Studies in Mark's Gospel_. Zahn still argues that the Gospel according to Matthew is earlier than that according to Mark, but the arguments are against him. The framework of Mark's Gospel lies behind both Matthew and Luke and nearly all of it is used by one or the other. One may satisfy himself on this point by careful use of a Harmony of the Gospels in Greek or English. Whether Mark made use of Q (_Logia of Jesus_) or not is not yet shown, though it is possible. But Mark and Q constitute the two oldest known sources of our Matthew and Luke. We have much of Q preserved in the Non-Markan portions of both Matthew and Luke, though the document itself has disappeared. But Mark's work has remained in spite of its exhaustive use by Matthew and Luke, all except the disputed close. For this preservation we are all grateful. Streeter (_The Four Gospels_) has emphasized the local use of texts in preserving portions of the New Testament. If Mark wrote in Rome, as is quite possible, his book was looked upon as the Roman Gospel and had a powerful environment in which to take root. It has distinctive merits of its own that helped to keep it in use. It is mainly narrative and the style is direct and simple with many vivid touches, like the historical present of an eyewitness. The early writers all agree that Mark was the interpreter for Simon Peter with whom he was at one time, according to Peter's own statement, either in Babylon or Rome (1Peter:5:13|).

rwp@Info_Mark @ The closing passage in the Textus Receptus, strkjv@Mark:16:9-20|, is not found in the oldest Greek Manuscripts, Aleph and B, and is probably not genuine. A discussion of the evidence will appear at the proper place. Swete points out that Mark deals with two great themes, the Ministry in Galilee (Chs. 1 to 9) and the Last Week in Jerusalem (11 to 16) with a brief sketch of the period of withdrawal from Galilee (ch. 10). The first fourteen verses are introductory as strkjv@Mark:16:9-20| is an appendix. The Gospel of Mark pictures Christ in action. There is a minimum of discourse and a maximum of deed. And yet the same essential pictures of Christ appear here as in the Logia, in Matthew, in Luke, in John, in Paul, in Peter, in Hebrews as is shown in my _The Christ of the Logia_. The cry of the critics to get back to the Synoptics and away from Paul and John has ceased since it is plain that the Jesus of Mark is the same as the Christ of Paul. There is a different shading in the pictures, but the same picture, Son of God and Son of Man, Lord of life and death, worker of miracles and Saviour from sin. This Gospel is the one for children to read first and is the one that we should use to lay the foundation for our picture of Christ. In my _Harmony of the Gospels_ I have placed Mark first in the framework since Matthew, Luke, and John all follow in broad outline his plan with additions and supplemental material. Mark's Gospel throbs with life and bristles with vivid details. We see with Peter's eyes and catch almost the very look and gesture of Jesus as he moved among men in his work of healing men's bodies and saving men's souls. strkjv@Mark:1:1 @{The beginning} (\archˆ\). There is no article in the Greek. It is possible that the phrase served as a heading or title for the paragraph about the ministry of the Baptist or as the superscription for the whole Gospel (Bruce) placed either by Mark or a scribe. And then the Gospel of Jesus Christ means the Message about Jesus Christ (objective genitive). The word Gospel here (\euaggelion\) comes close to meaning the record itself as told by Mark. Swete notes that each writer has a different starting point (\archˆ\). Mark, as the earliest form of the evangelic tradition, begins with the work of the Baptist, Matthew with the ancestry and birth of the Messiah, Luke with the birth of the Baptist, John with the Preincarnate Logos, Paul with the foundation of each of the churches (Phillipians:4:15|). {The Son of God} (\Huiou theou\). Aleph 28, 255 omit these words, but B, D, L, have them and the great mass of the manuscripts have \huiou tou theou\. If this is a heading added to what Mark wrote, the heading may have existed early in two forms, one with, one without "Son of God." If Mark wrote the words, there is no reason to doubt the genuineness since he uses the phrase elsewhere.

rwp@Mark:1:4 @{John came} (\egeneto I“anˆs\). His coming was an epoch (\egeneto\), not a mere event (\ˆn\). His coming was in accordance with the prophetic picture (\kath“s\, strkjv@1:2|). Note the same verb about John in strkjv@John:1:6|. The coming of John the Baptizer was the real beginning of the spoken message about Christ. He is described as {the baptizing one} (\ho haptiz“n\) in the wilderness (\en tˆi erˆm“i\). The baptizing took place in the River Jordan (Mark:1:5,9|) which was included in the general term the wilderness or the deserted region of Judea. {Preached the baptism of repentance} (\kˆruss“n baptisma metanoias\). Heralded a repentance kind of baptism (genitive case, genus case), a baptism marked by repentance. See on ¯Matthew:3:2| for discussion of repent, an exceedingly poor rendering of John's great word \metanoias\. He called upon the Jews to change their minds and to turn from their sins, "confessing their sins" (\exomologoumenoi tas hamartias aut“n\). See strkjv@Matthew:3:16|. The public confessions produced a profound impression as they would now. {Unto remission of sins} (\eis aphesin hamarti“n\). This is a difficult phrase to translate accurately. Certainly John did not mean that the baptism was the means of obtaining the forgiveness of their sins or necessary to the remission of sins. The trouble lies in the use of \eis\ which sometimes is used when purpose is expressed, but sometimes when there is no such idea as in strkjv@Matthew:10:41| and strkjv@Matthew:12:41|. Probably "with reference to" is as good a translation here as is possible. The baptism was on the basis of the repentance and confession of sin and, as Paul later explained (Romans:6:4|), was a picture of the death to sin and resurrection to new life in Christ. This symbol was already in use by the Jews for proselytes who became Jews. John is treating the Jewish nation as pagans who need to repent, to confess their sins, and to come back to the kingdom of God. The baptism in the Jordan was the objective challenge to the people.

rwp@Mark:1:9 @{In the Jordan} (\eis ton Iordanˆn\). Songs:in verse 10|, \ek tou hudatos\, out of the water, after the baptism into the Jordan. Mark is as fond of "straightway" (\euthus\) as Matthew is of "then" (\tote\). {Rent asunder} (\schizomenous\). Split like a garment, present passive participle. Jesus saw the heavens parting as he came up out of the water, a more vivid picture than the "opened" in strkjv@Matthew:3:16| and strkjv@Luke:3:21|. Evidently the Baptist saw all this and the Holy Spirit coming down upon Jesus as a dove because he later mentions it (John:1:32|). The Cerinthian Gnostics took the dove to mean the heavenly _aeon Christ_ that here descended upon the man Jesus and remained with him till the Cross when it left him, a sort of forecast of the modern distinction between the Jesus of history and the theological Christ.

rwp@Mark:1:13 @{With the wild beasts} (\meta t“u thˆri“n\). Mark does not give the narrative of the three temptations in Matthew and Luke (apparently from the Logia and originally, of course, from Jesus himself). But Mark adds this little touch about the wild beasts in the wilderness. It was the haunt at night of the wolf, the boar, the hyena, the jackal, the leopard. It was lonely and depressing in its isolation and even dangerous. Swete notes that in strkjv@Psalms:90:13| the promise of victory over the wild beasts comes immediately after that of angelic guardianship cited by Satan in strkjv@Matthew:4:6|. The angels did come and minister (\diˆkonoun\), imperfect tense, kept it up till he was cheered and strengthened. Dr. Tristram observes that some Abyssinian Christians are in the habit of coming to the Quarantania during Lent and fasting forty days on the summit amid the ruins of its ancient cells and chapels where they suppose Jesus was tempted. But we are all tempted of the devil in the city even worse than in the desert.

rwp@Mark:1:23 @{With an unclean spirit} (\en pneumati akathart“i\). This use of \en\ "with" is common in the Septuagint like the Hebrew _be_, but it occurs also in the papyri. It is the same idiom as "in Christ," "in the Lord" so common with Paul. In English we speak of our being in love, in drink, in his cups, etc. The unclean spirit was in the man and the man in the unclean spirit, a man in the power of the unclean spirit. Luke has "having," the usual construction. See on ¯Matthew:22:43|. Unclean spirit is used as synonymous with {demon} (\daimonion\). It is the idea of estrangement from God (Zechariah:13:2|). The whole subject of demonology is difficult, but no more so than the problem of the devil. Jesus distinguishes between the man and the unclean spirit. Usually physical or mental disease accompanied the possession by demons. One wonders today if the degenerates and confirmed criminals so common now are not under the power of demons. The only cure for confirmed criminals seems to be conversion (a new heart).

rwp@Mark:2:2 @{Songs:that there was no longer room for them, no, not even about the door} (\h“ste mˆketi ch“rein mˆde ta pros tˆn thuran\). Another graphic Markan detail seen through Peter's eyes. The double compound negative in the Greek intensifies the negative. This house door apparently opened into the street, not into a court as in the larger houses. The house was packed inside and there was a jam outside. {And he spake the word unto them} (\kai elalei autois ton logon\). And he was speaking the word unto them, Mark's favourite descriptive imperfect tense (\elalei\). Note this word \lale“\ about the preaching of Jesus (originally just sounds like the chatter of birds, the prattling of children, but here of the most serious kind of speech. As contrasted with \leg“\ (to say) it is rather an onomatopoetic word with some emphasis on the sound and manner of speaking. The word is com- mon in the vernacular papyri examples of social inter-course.

rwp@Mark:2:6 @{Sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts} (\ekei kathˆmenoi kai dialogizomenoi en tais kardiais aut“n\). Another of Mark's pictures through Peter's eyes. These scribes (and Pharisees, strkjv@Luke:5:21|) were there to cause trouble, to pick flaws in the teaching and conduct of Jesus. His popularity and power had aroused their jealousy. There is no evidence that they spoke aloud the murmur in their hearts, "within themselves" (Matthew:9:3|). It was not necessary, for their looks gave them away and Jesus knew their thoughts (Matthew:9:4|) and perceived their reasoning (Luke:5:22|). {Instantly Jesus recognized it in his own spirit} (\euthus epignous ho Iˆsous t“i pneumati autou\, strkjv@Mark:2:8|). The Master at once recognizes the hostile atmosphere in the house. The debate (\dialogizomenoi\) in their hearts was written on their faces. No sound had come, but feeling did.

rwp@Mark:2:7 @{He blasphemeth} (\blasphˆmei\). This is the unspoken charge in their hearts which Jesus read like an open book. The correct text here has this verb. They justify the charge with the conviction that God alone has the power (\dunatai\) to forgive sins. The word \blasphˆme“\ means injurious speech or slander. It was, they held, blasphemy for Jesus to assume this divine prerogative. Their logic was correct. The only flaw in it was the possibility that Jesus held a peculiar relation to God which justified his claim. Songs:the two forces clash here as now on the deity of Christ Jesus. Knowing full well that he had exercised the prerogative of God in forgiving the man's sins he proceeds to justify his claim by healing the man.

rwp@Mark:2:16 @{The scribes of the Pharisees} (\hoi grammateis t“n Pharisai“n\). This is the correct text. Cf. "their scribes" in strkjv@Luke:5:30|. Matthew gave a great reception (\dochˆn\, strkjv@Luke:5:29|) in his house (Mark:2:15|). These publicans and sinners not simply accepted Levi's invitation, but they imitated his example "and were following Jesus" (\kai ˆkolouthoun aut“i\). It was a motly crew from the standpoint of these young theologues, scribes of the Pharisees, who were on hand, being invited to pick flaws if they could. It was probably in the long hall of the house where the scribes stood and ridiculed Jesus and the disciples, unless they stood outside, feeling too pious to go into the house of a publican. It was an offence for a Jew to eat with Gentiles as even many of the early Jewish Christians felt (Acts:11:3|) and publicans and sinners were regarded like Gentiles (1Corinthians:5:11|).

rwp@Mark:4:14 @{The sower soweth the word} (\ho speir“n ton logon speirei\). Not put thus clearly and simply in strkjv@Matthew:13:19| or strkjv@Luke:8:11|.

rwp@Mark:4:15 @{Where the word is sown} (\hopou speiretai ho logos\). Explanatory detail only in Mark. {Satan} (\Satanƒs\) where strkjv@Matthew:13:19| has {the evil one} (\ho ponˆros\) and strkjv@Luke:8:12| {the devil} (\ho diabolos\). {Sown in them} (\esparmenon eis autous\). Within them, not just among them, "in his heart" (Matt.).

rwp@Mark:6:14 @{Heard} (\ˆkousen\). This tour of Galilee by the disciples in pairs wakened all Galilee, for the name of Jesus thus became known (\phaneron\) or known till even Herod heard of it in the palace. "A palace is late in hearing spiritual news" (Bengel). {Therefore do these powers work in him} (\dia touto energousin hai dunameis en aut“i\). "A snatch of Herod's theology and philosophy" (Morison). John wrought no miracles (John:10:41|), but if he had risen from the dead perhaps he could. Songs:Herod may have argued. "Herod's superstition and his guilty conscience raised this ghost to plague him" (Gould). Our word _energy_ is this same Greek word here used (\energousin\). It means at work. Miraculous powers were at work in Jesus whatever the explanation. This all agreed, but they differed widely as to his personality, whether Elijah or another of the prophets or John the Baptist. Herod was at first much perplexed (\diˆporei\, strkjv@Luke:9:7| and strkjv@Mark:6:20|).

rwp@Mark:6:17 @{For Herod himself} (\Autos gar ho Hˆr“idˆs\). Mark now proceeds to give the narrative of the death of John the Baptist some while before these nervous fears of Herod. But this _post eventum_ narrative is very little out of the chronological order. The news of John's death at Machaerus may even have come at the close of the Galilean tour. "The tidings of the murder of the Baptist seem to have brought the recent circuit to an end" (Swete). The disciples of John "went and told Jesus. Now when Jesus heard it, he withdrew from thence in a boat" (Matthew:14:12f.|). See on ¯Matthew:14:3-12| for the discussion about Herod Antipas and John and Herodias.

rwp@Mark:6:44 @{Men} (\andres\). Men as different from women as in strkjv@Matthew:14:21|. This remarkable miracle is recorded by all Four Gospels, a nature miracle that only God can work. No talk about accelerating natural processes will explain this miracle. And three eyewitnesses report it: the Logia of Matthew, the eyes of Peter in Mark, the witness of John the Beloved Disciple (Gould). The evidence is overwhelming.

rwp@Mark:7:13 @{Making void the word of God by your tradition} (\akurountes ton logon tou theou tˆi paradosei hum“n\). See on ¯Matthew:15:6| for the word \akurountes\, invalidating, a stronger word than \athetein\, to set aside, in verse 9|. See both used in strkjv@Galatians:3:15,17|. Setting aside does invalidate.

rwp@Mark:7:18 @{Are ye so without understanding also?} (\Hout“s kai humeis asunetoi este;\). See on ¯Matthew:15:16|. You also as well as the multitude. It was a discouraging moment for the great Teacher if his own chosen pupils (disciples) were still under the spell of the Pharisaic theological outlook. It was a riddle to them. "They had been trained in Judaism, in which the distinction between clean and unclean is ingrained, and could not understand a statement abrogating this" (Gould). They had noticed that the Pharisees stumbled at the parable of Jesus (Matthew:15:12|). They were stumbling themselves and did not know how to answer the Pharisees. Jesus charges the disciples with intellectual dulness and spiritual stupidity.

rwp@Mark:7:21 @{Evil thoughts} (\hoi dialogismoi hoi kakoi\). These come out of the heart (\ek tˆs kardias\), the inner man, and lead to the dreadful list here given like the crimes of a modern police court: {fornications} (\porneiai\, usually of the unmarried), {adulteries} (\moichaiai\, of the married), {thefts} (\klopai\, stealings), {covetings} (\pleonexiai\, craze for more and more), {murders} (\phonoi\, growing out of the others often), {wickednesses} (\ponˆriai\, from \ponos\, toil, then drudge, bad like our _knave_, serving boy like German _Knabe_, and then criminal), {deceit} (\dolos\, lure or snare with bait), {lasciviousness} (\aselgeia\, unrestrained sex instinct), {evil eye} (\ophthalmos ponˆros\) or eye that works evil and that haunts one with its gloating stare, {railing} (\blasphˆmia\, blasphemy, hurtful speech), {pride} (\huperˆphania\, holding oneself above others, stuck up), {foolishness} (\aphrosunˆ\, lack of sense), a fitting close to it all.

rwp@Mark:7:29 @{For this saying} (\dia touton ton logon\). She had faith, great faith as strkjv@Matthew:15:28| shows, but it was her quick and bright repartee that pleased Jesus. He had missed his rest, but it was worth it to answer a call like this.

rwp@Mark:8:15 @{Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and the leaven of Herod} (\Horƒte, blepete apo tˆs zumˆs t“n Pharisai“n kai tˆs zumˆs Hˆr“idou\). Present imperatives. Note \apo\ and the ablative case. \Zumˆ\ is from \zumo“\ and occurs already in strkjv@Matthew:13:33| in a good sense. For the bad sense see strkjv@1Corinthians:5:6|. He repeatedly charged (\diestelleto\, imperfect indicative), showing that the warning was needed. The disciples came out of a Pharisaic atmosphere and they had just met it again at Dalmanutha. It was insidious. Note the combination of Herod here with the Pharisees. This is after the agitation of Herod because of the death of the Baptist and the ministry of Jesus (Mark:6:14-29; strkjv@Matthew:14:1-12; strkjv@Luke:9:7-9|). Jesus definitely warns the disciples against "the leaven of Herod" (bad politics) and the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees (bad theology and also bad politics).

rwp@Mark:8:16 @{They reasoned one with another} (\dielogizonto pros allˆlous\), implying discussion. Imperfect tense, kept it up. strkjv@Matthew:16:7| has \en heautois\, in themselves or among themselves.

rwp@Mark:8:32 @{Spake the saying openly} (\parrˆsiƒi ton logon elalei\). He held back nothing, told it all (\pƒn\, all, \rˆsia\, from \eipon\, say), without reserve, to all of them. Imperfect tense \elalei\ shows that Jesus did it repeatedly. Mark alone gives this item. Mark does not give the great eulogy of Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:17,19| after his confession (Mark:8:29; strkjv@Matthew:16:16; strkjv@Luke:9:20|), but he does tell the stinging rebuke given Peter by Jesus on this occasion. See discussion on ¯Matthew:16:21,26|.

rwp@Mark:8:38 @{For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and my words} (\hos gar ean epaischunthˆi me kai tous emous logous\). More exactly, {whosoever is ashamed} (first aorist passive subjunctive with indefinite relative and \ean = an\. See Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 957-9. It is not a statement about the future conduct of one, but about his present attitude toward Jesus. The conduct of men toward Christ now determines Christ's conduct then (\epaischunthˆsetai\, first future passive indicative). This passive verb is transitive and uses the accusative (\me, auton\). {In this adulterous and sinful generation} (\en tˆi geneƒi tautˆi tˆi moichalidi kai hamart“l“i\). Only in Mark. {When he cometh} (\hotan elthˆi\). Aorist active subjunctive with reference to the future second coming of Christ with the glory of the Father with his holy angels (cf. strkjv@Matthew:16:27|). This is a clear prediction of the final eschatological coming of Christ. This verse could not be separated from strkjv@Mark:9:1| as the chapter division does. These two verses in strkjv@Mark:8:38; strkjv@9:1| form one paragraph and should go together.

rwp@Mark:9:10 @{They kept the saying} (\ton logon ekratˆsan\) to themselves as Jesus had directed, but {questioning among themselves} (\pros heautous sunzˆtountes\). Now they notice his allusion to rising from the dead which had escaped them before (Mark:8:31|).

rwp@Mark:9:33 @{In the house} (\en tˆi oikiƒi\). Probably Peter's house in Capernaum which was the home of Jesus when in the city. {What were ye reasoning in the way?} (\Ti en tˆi hod“i dielogiszethe;\). Imperfect tense. They had been disputing (verse 34|), not about the coming death of the Master, but about the relative rank of each of them in the political kingdom which they were expecting him to establish. Jesus had suspected the truth about them and they had apparently kept it up in the house. See on ¯Matthew:18:1| where the disciples are represented as bringing the dispute to Jesus while here Jesus asks them about it. Probably they asked Jesus first and then he pushed the matter further and deeper to see if this had not been the occasion of the somewhat heated discussion on the way in.

rwp@Mark:9:40 @{He that is not against us is with us} (\hos ouk estin kath' hˆm“n huper hˆm“n estin\). This profound saying throws a flood of light in every direction. The complement of this logion is that in strkjv@Matthew:12:30|: "He that is not with me is against me." Both are needed. Some people imagine that they are really for Christ who refuse to take a stand in the open with him and for him.

rwp@Mark:10:15 @{As a little child} (\h“s paidion\). How does a little child receive the kingdom of God? The little child learns to obey its parents simply and uncomplainingly. There are some new psychologists who argue against teaching obedience to children. The results have not been inspiring. Jesus here presents the little child with trusting and simple and loving obedience as the model for adults in coming into the kingdom. Jesus does not here say that children are in the kingdom of God because they are children.

rwp@Mark:10:16 @{He took them in his arms} (\enagkalisamenos\). A distinct rebuke to the protest of the over-particular disciples. This word already in strkjv@Mark:9:36|. In strkjv@Luke:2:28| we have the full idiom, to receive into the arms (\eis tƒs agkalas dechesthai\). Songs:with tender fondling Jesus repeatedly blessed (\kateulogei\, imperfect), laying his hands upon each of them (\titheis\, present participle). It was a great moment for each mother and child.

rwp@Mark:10:37 @{In thy glory} (\en tˆi doxˆi\). strkjv@Matthew:20:21| has "in thy kingdom." See on ¯Matthew:20:20| for the literal interpretation of strkjv@Matthew:19:28|. They are looking for a grand Jewish world empire with apocalyptic features in the eschatological culmination of the Messiah's kingdom. That dream brushed aside all the talk of Jesus about his death and resurrection as mere pessimism.

rwp@Mark:12:13 @{That they might catch him in talk} (\hina auton agreus“sin log“i\). Ingressive aorist subjunctive. The verb is late from \agra\ (a hunt or catching). It appears in the LXX and papyri. Here alone in the N.T. strkjv@Luke:20:20| has the same idea, "that they may take hold of his speech" (\epilab“ntai autou logon\) while strkjv@Matthew:22:15| uses \pagideus“sin\ (to snare or trap). See discussion in Matthew. We have seen the scribes and Pharisees trying to do this very thing before (Luke:11:33f.|). Mark and Matthew note here the combination of Pharisees and Herodians as Mark did in strkjv@3:6|. Matthew speaks of "disciples" or pupils of the Pharisees while Luke calls them "spies" (\enkathetous\).

rwp@Mark:12:14 @{Shall we give or shall we not give?} (\d“men ˆ mˆ d“men;\). Mark alone repeats the question in this sharp form. The deliberative subjunctive, aorist tense active voice. For the discussion of the palaver and flattery of this group of theological students see on ¯Matthew:22:16-22|.

rwp@Mark:12:18 @{There come unto him Sadducees} (\erchontai Saddoukaioi pros auton\). Dramatic present. The Pharisees and Herodians had had their turn after the formal committee of the Sanhedrin had been so completely routed. It was inevitable that they should feel called upon to show their intellectual superiority to these raw Pharisaic and Herodian theologians. See on ¯Matthew:22:23-33| for discussion of details. It was a good time to air their disbelief in the resurrection at the expense of the Pharisees and to score against Jesus where the Sanhedrin and then the Pharisees and Herodians had failed so ignominiously.

rwp@Mark:13:3 @{Over against the temple} (\katenanti tou hierou\). In full view of the temple about which they had been speaking. {Privately} (\kat' idian\). Peter and James and John and Andrew (named only in Mark) had evidently been discussing the strange comment of Jesus as they were coming out of the temple. In their bewilderment they ask Jesus a bit to one side, though probably all the rest drew up as Jesus began to speak this great eschatological discourse.

rwp@Mark:13:5 @{Take need that no man lead you astray} (\Blepete mˆ tis h–mƒs planˆsˆi\). Same words in strkjv@Matthew:24:4|. strkjv@Luke:21:8| has it "that ye be not led astray" (\mˆ planˆthˆte\). This word \plana“\ (our _planet_) is a bold one. This warning runs through the whole discussion. It is pertinent today after so many centuries. About the false Christs then and now see on ¯Matthew:24:5|. It is amazing the success that these charlatans have through the ages in winning the empty-pated to their hare-brained views. Only this morning as I am writing a prominent English psychologist has challenged the world to a radio communication with Mars asserting that he has made frequent trips to Mars and communicated with its alleged inhabitants. And the daily papers put his ebullitions on the front page. For discussion of the details in verses 6-8| see on ¯Matthew:24:5-8|. All through the ages in spite of the words of Jesus men have sought to apply the picture here drawn to the particular calamity in their time.

rwp@Mark:13:13 @{But he that endureth to the end} (\ho de hupomeinas eis telos\). Note this aorist participle with the future verb. The idea here is true to the etymology of the word, remaining under (\hupomen“\) until the end. The divisions in families Jesus had predicted before (Luke:12:52f.; strkjv@14:25f.|). {Be saved} (\s“thˆsetai\). Here Jesus means final salvation (effective aorist future passive), not initial salvation.

rwp@Mark:14:58 @{Made with hands} (\cheiropoiˆton\). In Mark alone. An old Greek word. The negative form \acheiropoiˆton\ here occurs elsewhere only in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1; strkjv@Colossians:2:11|. In strkjv@Hebrews:9:11| the negative \ou\ is used with the positive form. It is possible that a real \logion\ of Jesus underlies the perversion of it here. Mark and Matthew do not quote the witnesses precisely alike. Perhaps they quoted Jesus differently and therein is shown part of the disagreement, for Mark adds verse 59| (not in Matthew). "And not even so did their witness agree together," repeating the point of verse 57|. Swete observes that Jesus, as a matter of fact, did do what he is quoted as saying in Mark: "He said what the event has proved to be true; His death destroyed the old order, and His resurrection created the new." But these witnesses did not mean that by what they said. The only saying of Jesus at all like this preserved to us is that in strkjv@John:2:19|, when he referred not to the temple in Jerusalem, but to the temple of his body, though no one understood it at the time.

rwp@Mark:15:43 @{A councillor of honourable estate} (\euschˆm“n bouleutˆs\). A senator or member of the Sanhedrin of high standing, rich (Matthew:27:57|). {Looking for the Kingdom of God} (\ˆn prosdechomenos tˆn basileian tou theou\). Periphrastic imperfect. Also strkjv@Luke:23:51|. The very verb used by Luke of Simeon and Anna (Luke:2:25,38|). strkjv@Matthew:27:57| calls him "Jesus' disciple" while strkjv@John:19:38| adds "secretly for fear of the Jews." He had evidently taken no public stand for Jesus before now. {Boldly} (\tolmˆsas\). Aorist (ingressive) active participle, becoming bold. It is the glory of Joseph and Nicodemus, secret disciples of Jesus, that they took a bold stand when the rest were in terror and dismay. That is love psychology, paradoxical as it may seem.

rwp@Mark:16:19 @{Was received up into heaven} (\anelˆmpthˆ eis ton ouranon\). First aorist passive indicative. Luke gives the fact of the Ascension twice in Gospel (Luke:24:50f.|) and strkjv@Acts:1:9-11|. The Ascension in Mark took place after Jesus spoke to the disciples, not in Galilee (16:15-18|), nor on the first or second Sunday evening in Jerusalem. We should not know when it took place nor where but for Luke who locates it on Olivet (Luke:24:50|) at the close of the forty days (Acts:1:3|) and so after the return from Galilee (Matthew:28:16|). {Sat down at the right hand of God} (\ekathisen ek dexi“n tou theou\). Swete notes that the author "passes beyond the field of history into that of theology," an early and most cherished belief (Acts:7:55f.; strkjv@Romans:8:34; strkjv@Ephesians:1:20; strkjv@Colossians:3:1; strkjv@Hebrews:1:3; strkjv@8:1; strkjv@10:12; strkjv@12:2; strkjv@1Peter:3:22; strkjv@Revelation:3:21|).

rwp@Info_Matthew @ THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION The passing years do not make it any plainer who actually wrote our Greek Matthew. Papias records, as quoted by Eusebius, that Matthew wrote the _Logia_ of Jesus in Hebrew (Aramaic). Is our present Matthew a translation of the Aramaic _Logia_ along with Mark and other sources as most modern scholars think? If so, was the writer the Apostle Matthew or some other disciple? There is at present no way to reach a clear decision in the light of the known facts. There is no real reason why the Apostle Matthew could not have written both the Aramaic _Logia_ and our Greek Matthew, unless one is unwilling to believe that he would make use of Mark's work on a par with his own. But Mark's book rests primarily on the preaching of Simon Peter. Scholfield has recently (1927) published _An Old Hebrew Text of St. Matthew's Gospel_. We know quite too little of the origin of the Synoptic Gospels to say dogmatically that the Apostle Matthew was not in any real sense the author.

rwp@Info_Matthew @ Matthew was in the habit of keeping accounts and it is quite possible that he took notes of the sayings of Jesus as he heard them. At any rate he gives much attention to the teachings of Jesus as, for instance, the Sermon on the Mount in chapters strkjv@Matthew:5-7|, the parables in strkjv@Matthew:13|, the denunciation of the Pharisees in strkjv@Matthew:23|, the great eschatological discourse in strkjv@Matthew:24; 25|. As a publican in Galilee he was not a narrow Jew and so we do not expect a book prejudiced in favor of the Jews and against the Gentiles. He does seem to show that Jesus is the Messiah of Jewish expectation and hope and so makes frequent quotations from the Old Testament by way of confirmation and illustration. There is no narrow nationalism in Matthew. Jesus is both the Messiah of the Jews and the Saviour of the world.

rwp@Info_Matthew @ The book follows the same general chronological plan as that in Mark, but with various groups like the miracles in strkjv@Matthew:8; 9|, the parables in strkjv@Matthew:13|.

rwp@Info_Matthew @ The word Gospel (\Euaggelion\) comes to mean good news in Greek, though originally a reward for good tidings as in Homer's _Odyssey_ XIV. 152 and in strkjv@2Kings:4:10|. In the New Testament it is the good news of salvation through Christ. The English word Gospel probably comes from the Anglo-Saxon Godspell, story or narrative of God, the life of Christ. It was early confused with the Anglo-Saxon godspell, good story, which seems like a translation of the Greek \euaggelion\. But primarily the English word means the God story as seen in Christ which is the best news that the world has ever had. One thinks at once of the use of "word" (\Logos\) in strkjv@John:1:1,14|. Songs:then it is, according to the Greek, not the Good News of Matthew, but the Good News of God, brought to us in Christ the Word, the Son of God, the Image of the Father, the Message of the Father. We are to study this story first as presented by Matthew. The message is God's and it is as fresh to us today in Matthew's record as when he first wrote it.

rwp@Matthew:1:1 @{The Book} (\biblos\). There is no article in the Greek, but the following genitives make it definite. It is our word Bible that is here used, _the_ Book as Sir Walter Scott called it as he lay dying. The usual word for book is a diminutive form (\biblion\), a little book or roll such as we have in strkjv@Luke:4:17|, "The roll of the prophet Isaiah." The pieces of papyrus (\papuros\), our paper, were pasted together to make a roll of varying lengths according to one's needs. Matthew, of course, is not applying the word book to the Old Testament, probably not to his own book, but to "the genealogical table of Jesus Christ" (\biblos genese“s Iˆsou Christou\), "the birth roll of Jesus Christ" Moffatt translates it. We have no means of knowing where the writer obtained the data for this genealogy. It differs radically from that in strkjv@Luke:3:23-38|. One can only give his own theory of the difference. Apparently in Matthew we have the actual genealogy of Joseph which would be the legal pedigree of Jesus according to Jewish custom. In Luke we apparently have the actual genealogy of Mary which would be the real line of Jesus which Luke naturally gives as he is writing for the Gentiles.

rwp@Matthew:1:1 @{The Son of David, the son of Abraham} (\huiou Daueid huiou Abraam\). Matthew proposes to show that Jesus Christ is on the human side the son of David, as the Messiah was to be, and the son of Abraham, not merely a real Jew and the heir of the promises, but the promise made to Abraham. Songs:Matthew begins his line with Abraham while Luke traces his line back to Adam. The Hebrew and Aramaic often used the word son (\bˆn\) for the quality or character, but here the idea is descent. Christians are called sons of God because Christ has bestowed this dignity upon us (Romans:8:14; strkjv@9:26; strkjv@Galatians:3:26; strkjv@4:5-7|). Verse 1 is the description of the list in verses 2-17|. The names are given in three groups, Abraham to David (2-6|), David to Babylon Removal (6-11|), Jechoniah to Jesus (12-16|). The removal to Babylon (\metoikesias Babul“nos\) occurs at the end of verse 11|, the beginning of verse 12|, and twice in the resume in verse 17|. This great event is used to mark off the two last divisions from each other. It is a good illustration of the genitive as the case of genus or kind. The Babylon removal could mean either to Babylon or from Babylon or, indeed, the removal of Babylon. But the readers would know the facts from the Old Testament, the removal of the Jews to Babylon. Then verse 17| makes a summary of the three lists, fourteen in each by counting David twice and omitting several, a sort of mnemonic device that is common enough. Matthew does not mean to say that there were only fourteen in actual genealogy. The names of the women (Thamar, Rahab, Ruth, Bathsheba the wife of Uriah) are likewise not counted. But it is a most interesting list.

rwp@Matthew:1:18 @{The birth of Jesus Christ} (\tou [Iˆsou] Christou hˆ genesis\). In the Greek Jesus Christ comes before birth as the important matter after strkjv@1:16|. It is not certain whether "Jesus" is here a part of the text as it is absent in the old Syriac and the Old Latin while the Washington Codex has only "Christ." The Vatican Codex has "Christ Jesus." But it is plain that the story of the birth of Jesus Christ is to be told briefly as follows, "on this wise" (\hout“s\), the usual Greek idiom. The oldest and best manuscripts have the same word genealogy (\genesis\) used in strkjv@1:1|, not the word for birth (begotten) as in strkjv@1:16| (\gennˆsis\). "It is in fact the word Genesis. The evangelist is about to describe, not the genesis of the heaven and the earth, but the genesis of Him who made the heaven and the earth, and who will yet make a new heaven and a new earth" (Morison).

rwp@Matthew:2:1 @{Now when Jesus was born} (\tou de Iˆsou gennˆthentos\). The fact of the birth of Jesus is stated by the genitive absolute construction (first aorist passive participle of the same verb \genna“\ used twice already of the birth of Jesus, strkjv@1:16,20|, and used in the genealogy, strkjv@1:2-16|). Matthew does not propose to give biographic details of the supernatural birth of Jesus, wonderful as it was and disbelieved as it is by some today who actually deny that Jesus was born at all or ever lived, men who talk of the Jesus Myth, the Christ Myth, etc. "The main purpose is to show the reception given by the world to the new-born Messianic King. Homage from afar, hostility at home; foreshadowing the fortunes of the new faith: reception by the Gentiles, rejection by the Jews" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:2:1 @{Wise men from the east} (\magoi apo anatol“n\). The etymology of \Magi\ is quite uncertain. It may come from the same Indo-European root as _(megas) magnus_, though some find it of Babylonian origin. Herodotus speaks of a tribe of Magi among the Medians. Among the Persians there was a priestly caste of Magi like the Chaldeans in Babylon (Daniel:1:4|). Daniel was head of such an order (Daniel:2:48|). It is the same word as our "magician" and it sometimes carried that idea as in the case of Simon Magus (Acts:8:9,11|) and of Elymas Barjesus (Acts:13:6,8|). But here in Matthew the idea seems to be rather that of astrologers. Babylon was the home of astrology, but we only know that the men were from the east whether Arabia, Babylon, Persia, or elsewhere. The notion that they were kings arose from an interpretation of Is strkjv@60:3; strkjv@Revelation:21:24|. The idea that they were three in number is due to the mention of three kinds of gifts (gold, frankincense, myrrh), but that is no proof at all. Legend has added to the story that the names were Caspar, Balthasar, and Melchior as in _Ben Hur_ and also that they represent Shem, Ham, and Japhet. A casket in the Cologne Cathedral actually is supposed to contain the skulls of these three Magi. The word for east (\apo anatol“n\) means "from the risings" of the sun.

rwp@Matthew:2:2 @{For we saw his star in the east} (\eidomen gar autou ton astera en tˆi anatolˆi\). This does not mean that they saw the star which was in the east. That would make them go east to follow it instead of west from the east. The words "in the east" are probably to be taken with "we saw" i.e. we were in the east when we saw it, or still more probably "we saw his star at its rising" or "when it rose" as Moffatt puts it. The singular form here (\tˆi anatolˆi\) does sometimes mean "east" (Revelation:21:13|), though the plural is more common as in strkjv@Matthew:2:1|. In strkjv@Luke:1:78| the singular means dawn as the verb (\aneteilen\) does in strkjv@Matthew:4:16| (Septuagint). The Magi ask where is the one born king of the Jews. They claim that they had seen his star, either a miracle or a combination of bright stars or a comet. These men may have been Jewish proselytes and may have known of the Messianic hope, for even Vergil had caught a vision of it. The whole world was on tiptoe of expectancy for something. Moulton (_Journal of Theological Studies_, 1902, p. 524) "refers to the Magian belief that a star could be the _fravashi_, the counterpart or angel (cf. strkjv@Matthew:18:10|) of a great man" (McNeile). They came to worship the newly born king of the Jews. Seneca (_Epistle_ 58) tells of Magians who came to Athens with sacrifices to Plato after his death. They had their own way of concluding that the star which they had seen pointed to the birth of this Messianic king. Cicero (_Deuteronomy:Divin_. i. 47) "refers to the constellation from which, on the birthnight of Alexander, Magians foretold that the destroyer of Asia was born" (McNeile). Alford is positive that no miracle is intended by the report of the Magi or by Matthew in his narrative. But one must be allowed to say that the birth of Jesus, if really God's only Son who has become Incarnate, is the greatest of all miracles. Even the methods of astrologers need not disturb those who are sure of this fact.

rwp@Matthew:3:2 @{For the kingdom of heaven is at hand} (\ˆggiken gar hˆ Basileia t“n ouran“n\). Note the position of the verb and the present perfect tense. It was a startling word that John thundered over the hills and it re-echoed throughout the land. The Old Testament prophets had said that it would come some day in God's own time. John proclaims as the herald of the new day that it has come, has drawn near. How near he does not say, but he evidently means very near, so near that one could see the signs and the proof. The words "the kingdom of heaven" he does not explain. The other Gospels use "the kingdom of God" as Matthew does a few times, but he has "the kingdom of heaven" over thirty times. He means "the reign of God," not the political or ecclesiastical organization which the Pharisees expected. His words would be understood differently by different groups as is always true of popular preachers. The current Jewish apocalypses had numerous eschatological ideas connected with the kingdom of heaven. It is not clear what sympathy John had with these eschatological features. He employs vivid language at times, but we do not have to confine John's intellectual and theological horizon to that of the rabbis of his day. He has been an original student of the Old Testament in his wilderness environment without any necessary contact with the Essenes who dwelt there. His voice is a new one that strikes terror to the perfunctory theologians of the temple and of the synagogue. It is the fashion of some critics to deny to John any conception of the spiritual content of his words, a wholly gratuitous criticism.

rwp@Matthew:3:6 @{And they were baptized} (\kai ebaptizonto\). It is the imperfect tense to show the repetition of the act as the crowds from Judea and the surrounding country kept going out to him (\exeporeueto\), imperfect again, a regular stream of folks going forth. Moffatt takes it as causative middle, "got baptized," which is possible. "The movement of course was gradual. It began on a small scale and steadily grew till it reached colossal proportions" (Bruce). It is a pity that baptism is now such a matter of controversy. Let Plummer, the great Church of England commentator on Matthew, speak here of John's baptising these people who came in throngs: "It is his office to bind them to a new life, symbolized by immersion in water." That is correct, symbolized, not caused or obtained. The word "river" is in the correct text, "river Jordan." They came "confessing their sins" (\exomologoumenoi\), probably each one confessing just before he was baptized, "making open confession" (Weymouth). Note \ex\. It was a never to be forgotten scene here in the Jordan. John was calling a nation to a new life. They came from all over Judea and even from the other side of El Ghor (the Jordan Gorge), Perea. Mark adds that finally all Jerusalem came.

rwp@Matthew:3:7 @{The Pharisees and Sadducees} (\t“n Pharisai“n kai Saddoukai“n\). These two rival parties do not often unite in common action, but do again in strkjv@Matthew:16:1|. "Here a strong attraction, there a strong repulsion, made them for the moment forget their differences" (McNeile). John saw these rival ecclesiastics "coming for baptism" (\erchomenous epi to baptisma\). Alford speaks of "the Pharisees representing hypocritical superstition; the Sadducees carnal unbelief." One cannot properly understand the theological atmosphere of Palestine at this time without an adequate knowledge of both Pharisees and Sadducees. The books are numerous besides articles in the Bible dictionaries. I have pictured the Pharisees in my first (1916) Stone Lectures, _The Pharisees and Jesus_. John clearly grasped the significance of this movement on the part of the Pharisees and Sadducees who had followed the crowds to the Jordan. He had welcomed the multitudes, but right in the presence of the crowds he exposes the hypocrisy of the ecclesiastics. {Ye offspring of vipers} (\gennˆmata echidn“n\). Jesus (Matthew:12:34; strkjv@23:33|) will use the same language to the Pharisees. Broods of snakes were often seen by John in the rocks and when a fire broke out they would scurry (\phugein\) to their holes for safety. "The coming wrath" was not just for Gentiles as the Jews supposed, but for all who were not prepared for the kingdom of heaven (1Thessalonians:1:10|). No doubt the Pharisees and Sadducees winced under the sting of this powerful indictment.

rwp@Matthew:4:8 @{And showeth him} (\kai deiknusin aut“i\). This wonderful panorama had to be partially mental and imaginative, since the devil caused to pass in review "all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them." But this fact does not prove that all phases of the temptations were subjective without any objective presence of the devil. Both could be true. Here again we have the vivid historical present (\deiknusin\). The devil now has Christ upon a very high mountain whether the traditional Quarantania or not. It was from Nebo's summit that Moses caught the vision of the land of Canaan (Deuteronomy:34:1-3|). Luke (Luke:4:5|) says that the whole panorama was "in a moment of time" and clearly psychological and instantaneous.

rwp@Matthew:4:10 @{Get thee hence, Satan} (\Hupage, Satanƒ\). The words "behind me" (\opis“ mou\) belong to strkjv@Matthew:16:23|, not here. "Begone" Christ says to Satan. This temptation is the limit of diabolical suggestion and argues for the logical order in Matthew. "Satan" means the adversary and Christ so terms the devil here. The third time Jesus quotes Deuteronomy, this time strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:13|, and repels the infamous suggestion by Scripture quotation. The words "him alone thou shalt serve" need be recalled today. Jesus will warn men against trying to serve God and mammon (Matthew:6:24|). The devil as the lord of the evil world constantly tries to win men to the service of the world and God. This is his chief camouflage for destroying a preacher's power for God. The word here in strkjv@Matthew:4:10| for serve is \latreuseis\ from \latris\ a hired servant, one who works for hire, then render worship.

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

rwp@Matthew:5:20 @{Shall exceed} (\perisseusˆi pleion\). Overflow like a river out of its banks and then Jesus adds "more" followed by an unexpressed ablative (\tˆs dikaiosunˆs\), brachylogy. A daring statement on Christ's part that they had to be better than the rabbis. They must excel the scribes, the small number of regular teachers (5:21-48|), and the Pharisees in the Pharisaic life (6:1-18|) who were the separated ones, the orthodox pietists.

rwp@Matthew:5:27 @{Thou shalt not commit adultery} (\ou moicheuseis\). These quotations (verses 21,27,33|) from the Decalogue (Exodus:20| and strkjv@Deuteronomy:5|) are from the Septuagint and use \ou\ and the future indicative (volitive future, common Greek idiom). In strkjv@5:43| the positive form, volitive future, occurs (\agapˆseis\). In strkjv@5:41| the third person (\dot“\) singular second aorist active imperative is used. In strkjv@5:38| no verb occurs.

rwp@Matthew:5:32 @{Saving for the cause of fornication} (\parektos logou porneias\). An unusual phrase that perhaps means "except for a matter of unchastity." "Except on the ground of unchastity" (Weymouth), "except unfaithfulness" (Goodspeed), and is equivalent to \mˆ epi porneiƒi\ in strkjv@Matthew:19:9|. McNeile denies that Jesus made this exception because Mark and Luke do not give it. He claims that the early Christians made the exception to meet a pressing need, but one fails to see the force of this charge against Matthew's report of the words of Jesus. It looks like criticism to meet modern needs.

rwp@Matthew:6:7 @{Use not vain repetitions} (\mˆ battalogˆsˆte\). Used of stammerers who repeat the words, then mere babbling or chattering, empty repetition. The etymology is uncertain, but it is probably onomatopoetic like "babble." The worshippers of Baal on Mount Carmel (1Kings:8:26|) and of Diana in the amphitheatre at Ephesus who yelled for two hours (Acts:19:34|) are examples. The Mohammedans may also be cited who seem to think that they "will be heard for their much speaking" (\en tˆi polulogiƒi\). Vincent adds "and the Romanists with their _paternosters_ and _avast_." The Syriac Sinaitic has it: "Do not be saying idle things." Certainly Jesus does not mean to condemn all repetition in prayer since he himself prayed three times in Gethsemane "saying the same words again" (Matthew:26:44|). "As the Gentiles do," says Jesus. "The Pagans thought that by endless repetitions and many words they would inform their gods as to their needs and weary them ('_fatigare deos_') into granting their requests" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:6:13 @The Doxology is placed in the margin of the Revised Version. It is wanting in the oldest and best Greek manuscripts. The earliest forms vary very much, some shorter, some longer than the one in the Authorized Version. The use of a doxology arose when this prayer began to be used as a liturgy to be recited or to be chanted in public worship. It was not an original part of the Model Prayer as given by Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:7:3 @{The mote} (\to karphos\). Not dust, but a piece of dried wood or chaff, splinter (Weymouth, Moffatt), speck (Goodspeed), a very small particle that may irritate. {The beam} (\tˆn dokon\). A log on which planks in the house rest (so papyri), joist, rafter, plank (Moffatt), pole sticking out grotesquely. Probably a current proverb quoted by Jesus like our people in glass houses throwing stones. Tholuck quotes an Arabic proverb: "How seest thou the splinter in thy brother's eye, and seest not the cross-beam in thine eye?"

rwp@Matthew:7:5 @{Shalt thou see clearly} (\diablepseis\). Only here and strkjv@Luke:6:42| and strkjv@Mark:8:25| in the New Testament. Look through, penetrate in contrast to \blepeis\, to gaze at, in verse 3|. Get the log out of your eye and you will see clearly how to help the brother get the splinter out (\ekbalein\) of his eye.

rwp@Matthew:7:22 @{Did we not prophesy in thy name?} (\ou t“i s“i onomati eprophˆteusamen;\). The use of \ou\ in the question expects the affirmative answer. They claim to have prophesied (preached) in Christ's name and to have done many miracles. But Jesus will tear off the sheepskin and lay bare the ravening wolf. "I never knew you" (\oudepote egn“n h–mƒs\). "I was never acquainted with you" (experimental knowledge). Success, as the world counts it, is not a criterion of one's knowledge of Christ and relation to him. "I will profess unto them" (\homologˆs“ autois\), the very word used of profession of Christ before men (Matthew:10:32|). This word Jesus will use for public and open announcement of their doom.

rwp@Matthew:8:16 @{When even was come} (\opsias genomenˆs\). Genitive absolute. A beautiful sunset scene at the close of the Sabbath day (Mark:1:21|). Then the crowds came as Jesus stood in the door of Peter's house (Mark:1:33; strkjv@Matthew:8:14|) as all the city gathered there with the sick, "all those who had it bad" (see on ¯Matthew:4:24|) and he healed them "with a word" (\log“i\). It was a never to be forgotten memory for those who saw it.

rwp@Matthew:8:29 @{Thou Son of God} (\huie tou theou\). The recognition of Jesus by the demons is surprising. The whole subject of demonology is difficult. Some hold that it is merely the ancient way of describing disease. But that does not explain the situation here. Jesus is represented as treating the demons as real existences separate from the human personality. Missionaries in China today claim that they have seen demons cast out. The devil knew Jesus clearly and it is not strange that Jesus was recognized by the devil's agents. They know that there is nothing in common between them and the Son of God (\hˆmin kai soi\, ethical dative) and they fear torment "before the time" (\pro kairou\). Usually \ta daimonia\ is the word in the New Testament for demons, but in strkjv@8:31| we have \hoi daimones\ (the only example in the N.T.). \Daimonion\ is a diminutive of \daim“n\. In Homer \daim“n\ is used synonymously with \theos\ and \thea\. Hesiod employed \daim“n\ of men of the golden age as tutelary deities. Homer has the adjective \daimonios\ usually in an evil sense. Empedocles considered the demons both bad and good. They were thus used to relieve the gods and goddesses of much rascality. Grote (_History of Greece_) notes that the Christians were thus by pagan usage justified in calling idolatry the worship of demons. See strkjv@1Corinthians:10:20f.; strkjv@1Timothy:4:1; strkjv@Revelation:9:20; strkjv@16:13f|. In the Gospels demons are the same as unclean spirits (Mark:5:12,15; strkjv@3:22,30; strkjv@Luke:4:33|). The demons are disturbers (Vincent) of the whole life of man (Mark:5:2f.; strkjv@7:25; strkjv@Matthew:12:45; strkjv@Luke:13:11,16|).

rwp@Matthew:10:25 @{Beelzebub} (\beezeboul\ according to B, \beelzeboul\ by most Greek MSS., \beelzeboub\ by many non-Greek MSS.). The etymology of the word is also unknown, whether "lord of a dwelling" with a pun on "the master of the house" (\oikodespotˆn\) or "lord of flies" or "lord of dung" or "lord of idolatrous sacrifices." It is evidently a term of reproach. "An opprobrious epithet; exact form of the word and meaning of the name have given more trouble to commentators than it is all worth" (Bruce). See strkjv@Matthew:12:24|.

rwp@Matthew:10:32 @{Shall confess me} (\homologˆsei en emoi\). An Aramaic idiom, not Hebrew, see also strkjv@Luke:12:8|. Songs:also here, "him will I also confess" (\homologˆs“ k'ag“ en aut“i\). Literally this Aramaic idiom reproduced in the Greek means "confess in me," indicating a sense of unity with Christ and of Christ with the man who takes the open stand for him.

rwp@Matthew:10:33 @{Shall deny me} (\arnˆsˆtai me\). Aorist subjunctive here with \hostis\, though future indicative \homologˆsei\ above. Note accusative here (case of extension), saying "no" to Christ, complete breach. This is a solemn law, not a mere social breach, this cleavage by Christ of the man who repudiates him, public and final.

rwp@Matthew:11:1 @{He departed thence to teach and preach} (\metebˆ ekeithen tou didaskein kai kˆrussein\). In five instances (7:28; strkjv@11:1; strkjv@13:53; strkjv@19:1; strkjv@26:1|) after great discourses by Jesus "the transition to what follows is made with the formula, 'And it came to pass when Jesus had ended'" (McNeile). This is a wrong chapter division, for strkjv@11:1| belongs with the preceding section. "{Commanding}" (\diatass“n\, complementary participle with \etelesen\), means giving orders in detail (\dia-\) for each of them. Note both "teach and preach" as in strkjv@4:23|. Where did Jesus go? Did he follow behind the twelve as he did with the seventy "whither he himself was about to come" (Luke:10:1|)? Bruce holds with Chrysostom that Jesus avoided the places where they were, giving them room and time to do their work. But, if Jesus himself went to the chief cities of Galilee on this tour, he would be compelled to touch many of the same points. Jesus would naturally follow behind at some distance. At the end of the tour the apostles come together in Capernaum and tell Jesus all that they had done and that they had taught (Mark:6:30|). Matthew follows the general outline of Mark, but the events are not grouped in chronological order here.

rwp@Matthew:11:5 @{And the dead are raised up} (\kai nekroi egeirontai\). Like that of the son of the widow of Nain. Did he raise the dead also on this occasion? "Tell John your story over again and remind him of these prophetic texts, strkjv@Isaiah:35:5; strkjv@61:1|" (Bruce). The items were convincing enough and clearer than mere eschatological symbolism. "The poor" in particular have the gospel, a climax.

rwp@Matthew:11:7 @{As these went their way} (\tout“n poreuomen“n\). Present participle genitive absolute. The eulogy of Jesus was spoken as the two disciples of John were going away. Is it a matter of regret that they did not hear this wondrous praise of John that they might cheer him with it? "It may almost be called the funeral oration of the Baptist, for not long afterwards Herodias compassed his death" (Plummer). {A reed shaken by the wind} (\kalamon hupo anemou saleuomenon\). Latin _calamus_. Used of the reeds that grew in plenty in the Jordan Valley where John preached, of a staff made of a reed (Matthew:27:29|), as a measuring rod (Revelation:11:1|), of a writer's pen (3John:1:13|). The reeds by the Jordan bent with the wind, but not so John.

rwp@Matthew:11:12 @{Suffereth violence} (\biazetai\). This verb occurs only here and in strkjv@Luke:16:16| in the N.T. It seems to be middle in Luke and Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 258) quotes an inscription "where \biazomai\ is without doubt reflexive and absolute" as in strkjv@Luke:16:16|. But there are numerous papyri examples where it is passive (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_, etc.) so that "there seems little that promises decisive help for the difficult Logion of strkjv@Matthew:11:12; strkjv@Luke:16:16|." Songs:then in strkjv@Matthew:11:12| the form can be either middle or passive and either makes sense, though a different sense. The passive idea is that the kingdom is forced, is stormed, is taken by men of violence like "men of violence take it by force" (\biastai harpazousin autˆn\) or seize it like a conquered city. The middle voice may mean "experiences violence" or "forces its way" like a rushing mighty wind (so Zahn holds). These difficult words of Jesus mean that the preaching of John "had led to a violent and impetuous thronging to gather round Jesus and his disciples" (Hort, _Judaistic Christianity_, p. 26).

rwp@Matthew:11:25 @{At that season Jesus answered and said} (\en ekein“i t“i kair“i apokritheis eipen\). Spoke to his Father in audible voice. The time and place we do not know. But here we catch a glimpse of Jesus in one of his moods of worship. "It is usual to call this golden utterance a prayer, but it is at once prayer, praise, and self-communing in a devout spirit" (Bruce). Critics are disturbed because this passage from the Logia of Jesus or Q of Synoptic criticism (Matthew:11:25-30; strkjv@Luke:10:21-24|) is so manifestly Johannine in spirit and very language, "the Father" (\ho patˆr\), "the son" (\ho huios\), whereas the Fourth Gospel was not written till the close of the first century and the Logia was written before the Synoptic Gospels. The only satisfying explanation lies in the fact that Jesus did have this strain of teaching that is preserved in John's Gospel. Here he is in precisely the same mood of elevated communion with the Father that we have reflected in John 14 to 17. Even Harnack is disposed to accept this Logion as a genuine saying of Jesus. The word "thank" (\homologoumai\) is better rendered "praise" (Moffatt). Jesus praises the Father "not that the \sophoi\ were ignorant, but that the \nˆpioi\ knew" (McNeile).

rwp@Matthew:12:25 @{Knowing their thoughts} (\eid“s de tas enthumˆseis aut“n\). What they were revolving in their minds. They now find out what a powerful opponent Jesus is. By parables, by a series of conditions (first class), by sarcasm, by rhetorical question, by merciless logic, he lays bare their hollow insincerity and the futility of their arguments. Satan does not cast out Satan. Note timeless aorist passive \emeristhˆ\ in 26|, \ephthasen\ in 28| (simple sense of arriving as in strkjv@Phillipians:3:16| from \phthan“\). Christ is engaged in deathless conflict with Satan the strong man (29|). "Goods" (\skeuˆ\) means house-gear, house furniture, or equipment as in strkjv@Luke:17:36| and strkjv@Acts:27:17|, the tackling of the ship.

rwp@Matthew:13:22 @{Choke the word} (\sunpnigei ton logon\). We had \apepnixan\ (choked off) in strkjv@13:7|. Here it is \sunpnigei\ (choke together), historical present and singular with both subjects lumped together. "Lust for money and care go together and between them spoil many an earnest religious nature" (Bruce), "thorns" indeed. The thorns flourish and the character sickens and dies, choked to death for lack of spiritual food, air, sunshine.

rwp@Matthew:13:57 @{And they were offended in him} (\kai eskandalizonto en aut“i\). Graphic imperfect passive. Literally, "They stumbled at him," "They were repelled by him" (Moffatt), "They turned against him" (Weymouth). It was unpardonable for Jesus not to be commonplace like themselves. {Not without honour} (\ouk estin atimos\). This is a proverb found in Jewish, Greek, and Roman writers. Seen also in the _Logia of Jesus_ (_Oxyr. Papyri_ i. 3).

rwp@Matthew:14:7 @{Promised with an oath} (\meta horkou h“mologˆsen\). Literally, "confessed with an oath." For this verb in the sense of promise, see strkjv@Acts:7:17|. Note middle voice of \aitˆsˆtai\ (ask for herself). Cf. strkjv@Esther:5:3; strkjv@7:2|.

rwp@Matthew:14:22 @{Constrained} (\ˆnagkasen\). Literally, "compelled" or "forced." See this word also in strkjv@Luke:14:23|. The explanation for this strong word in strkjv@Mark:6:45| and strkjv@Matthew:14:22| is given in strkjv@John:6:15|. It is the excited purpose of the crowd to take Jesus by force and to make him national king. This would be political revolution and would defeat all the plans of Jesus about his kingdom. Things have reached a climax. The disciples were evidently swept off their feet by the mob psychology for they still shared the Pharisaic hope of a political kingdom. With the disciples out of the way Jesus could handle the crowd more easily, {till he should send the multitudes away} (\he“s hou apolusˆi tous ochlous\). The use of the aorist subjunctive with \he“s\ or \he“s hou\ is a neat and common Greek idiom where the purpose is not yet realized. Songs:in strkjv@18:30; strkjv@26:36|. "While" sometimes renders it well. The subjunctive is retained after a past tense instead of the change to the optative of the ancient Attic. The optative is very rare anyhow, but Luke uses it with \prin ˆ\ in strkjv@Acts:25:16|.

rwp@Matthew:15:6 @{Ye have made void the word of God} (\ekur“sate ton logon tou theou\). It was a stinging indictment that laid bare the hollow pretence of their quibbles about handwashing. \Kuros\ means force or authority, \akuros\ is without authority, null and void. It is a late verb, \akuro“\ but in the LXX, Gal strkjv@3:17|; and in the papyri Adjective, verb, and substantive occur in legal phraseology like cancelling a will, etc. The moral force of God's law is annulled by their hairsplitting technicalities and immoral conduct.

rwp@Matthew:15:18 @{Out of the mouth} (\ek tou stomatos\). Spoken words come out of the heart and so are a true index of character. By "heart" (\kardias\) Jesus means not just the emotional nature, but the entire man, the inward life of "evil thoughts" (\dialogismoi ponˆroi\) that issue in words and deeds. "These defile the man," not "eating with unwashed hands." The captious quibblings of the Pharisees, for instance, had come out of evil hearts.

rwp@Matthew:15:36 @{Gave thanks} (\eucharistˆsas\). In strkjv@14:19| the word used for "grace" or "blessing" is \eulogˆsen\. Vincent notes that the Jewish custom was for the head of the house to say the blessing only if he shared the meal unless the guests were his own household. But we need not think of Jesus as bound by the peccadilloes of Jewish customs.

rwp@Matthew:16:7 @{They reasoned} (\dielogizonto\). It was pathetic, the almost jejune inability of the disciples to understand the parabolic warning against "the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees" (verse 6|) after the collision of Christ just before with both parties in Magadan. They kept it up, imperfect tense. It is "loaves" (\artous\) rather than "bread."

rwp@Matthew:16:17 @{Blessed art thou} (\makarios ei\). A beatitude for Peter. Jesus accepts the confession as true. Thereby Jesus on this solemn occasion solemnly claims to be the Messiah, the Son of the living God, his deity in other words. The disciples express positive conviction in the Messiahship or Christhood of Jesus as opposed to the divided opinions of the populace. "The terms in which Jesus speaks of Peter are characteristic--warm, generous, unstinted. The style is not that of an ecclesiastical editor laying the foundation for church power, and prelatic pretentions, but of a noble-minded Master eulogizing in impassioned terms a loyal disciple" (Bruce). The Father had helped Peter get this spiritual insight into the Master's Person and Work.

rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{And I also say unto thee} (\k'ag“ de soi leg“\). "The emphasis is not on 'Thou art Peter' over against 'Thou art the Christ,' but on \Kag“\: 'The Father hath revealed to thee one truth, and I also tell you another" (McNeile). Jesus calls Peter here by the name that he had said he would have (John:1:42|). Peter (\Petros\) is simply the Greek word for Cephas (Aramaic). Then it was prophecy, now it is fact. In verse 17| Jesus addresses him as "Simon Bar-Jonah," his full patronymic (Aramaic) name. But Jesus has a purpose now in using his nickname "Peter" which he had himself given him. Jesus makes a remarkable play on Peter's name, a pun in fact, that has caused volumes of controversy and endless theological strife. {On this rock} (\epi tautˆi tˆi petrƒi\) Jesus says, a ledge or cliff of rock like that in strkjv@7:24| on which the wise man built his house. \Petros\ is usually a smaller detachment of the massive ledge. But too much must not be made of this point since Jesus probably spoke Aramaic to Peter which draws no such distinction (\Kˆphƒ\). What did Jesus mean by this word-play?

rwp@Matthew:16:19 @{The Keys of the kingdom} (\tas kleidas tˆs basileias\). Here again we have the figure of a building with keys to open from the outside. The question is raised at once if Jesus does not here mean the same thing by "kingdom" that he did by "church" in verse 18|. In strkjv@Revelation:1:18; strkjv@3:7| Christ the Risen Lord has "the keys of death and of Hades." He has also "the keys of the kingdom of heaven" which he here hands over to Peter as "gatekeeper" or "steward" (\oikonomos\) provided we do not understand it as a special and peculiar prerogative belonging to Peter. The same power here given to Peter belongs to every disciple of Jesus in all the ages. Advocates of papal supremacy insist on the primacy of Peter here and the power of Peter to pass on this supposed sovereignty to others. But this is all quite beside the mark. We shall soon see the disciples actually disputing again (Matthew:18:1|) as to which of them is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven as they will again (20:21|) and even on the night before Christ's death. Clearly neither Peter nor the rest understood Jesus to say here that Peter was to have supreme authority. What is added shows that Peter held the keys precisely as every preacher and teacher does. To "bind" (\dˆsˆis\) in rabbinical language is to forbid, to "loose" (\lusˆis\) is to permit. Peter would be like a rabbi who passes on many points. Rabbis of the school of Hillel "loosed" many things that the school of Schammai "bound." The teaching of Jesus is the standard for Peter and for all preachers of Christ. Note the future perfect indicative (\estai dedemenon, estai lelumenon\), a state of completion. All this assumes, of course, that Peter's use of the keys will be in accord with the teaching and mind of Christ. The binding and loosing is repeated by Jesus to all the disciples (18:18|). Later after the Resurrection Christ will use this same language to all the disciples (John:20:23|), showing that it was not a special prerogative of Peter. He is simply first among equals, _primus inter pares_, because on this occasion he was spokesman for the faith of all. It is a violent leap in logic to claim power to forgive sins, to pronounce absolution, by reason of the technical rabbinical language that Jesus employed about binding and loosing. Every preacher uses the keys of the kingdom when he proclaims the terms of salvation in Christ. The proclamation of these terms when accepted by faith in Christ has the sanction and approval of God the Father. The more personal we make these great words the nearer we come to the mind of Christ. The more ecclesiastical we make them the further we drift away from him.

rwp@Matthew:16:28 @{Some of them that stand here} (\tines t“n hode hest“t“n\). A _crux interpretum_ in reality. Does Jesus refer to the Transfiguration, the Resurrection of Jesus, the great Day of Pentecost, the Destruction of Jerusalem, the Second Coming and Judgment? We do not know, only that Jesus was certain of his final victory which would be typified and symbolized in various ways. The apocalyptic eschatological symbolism employed by Jesus here does not dominate his teaching. He used it at times to picture the triumph of the kingdom, not to set forth the full teaching about it. The kingdom of God was already in the hearts of men. There would be climaxes and consummations.

rwp@Matthew:17:2 @{He was transfigured before them} (\metemorph“thˆ emprosthen aut“n\). The word is the same as the metamorphoses (cf. Ovid) of pagan mythology. Luke does not use it. The idea is change (\meta-\) of form (\morphˆ\). It really presents the essence of a thing as separate from the \schˆma\ (fashion), the outward accident. Songs:in strkjv@Romans:12:2| Paul uses both verbs, \sunschematizesthe\ (be not fashioned) and \metamorphousthe\ (be ye transformed in your inner life). Songs:in strkjv@1Corinthians:7:31| \schˆma\ is used for the fashion of the world while in strkjv@Mark:16:12| \morphˆ\ is used of the form of Jesus after his resurrection. The false apostles are described by \metaschˆmatisomai\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:13-15|. In strkjv@Phillipians:2:6| we have \en morphˆi\ used of the Preincarnate state of Christ and \morphˆn doulou\ of the Incarnate state (Phillipians:2:7|), while \schˆmati h“s anthr“pos\ emphasizes his being found "in fashion as a man." But it will not do in strkjv@Matthew:17:2| to use the English transliteration \metamorph“sis\ because of its pagan associations. Songs:the Latin _transfigured_ (Vulgate _transfiguratus est_) is better. "The deeper force of \metamorphousthai\ is seen in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:18| (with reference to the shining on Moses' face), strkjv@Romans:12:2|" (McNeile). The word occurs in a second-century papyrus of the pagan gods who are invisible. Matthew guards against the pagan idea by adding and explaining about the face of Christ "as the sun" and his garments "as the light."

rwp@Matthew:17:10 @{Elijah must first come} (\Eleian dei elthein pr“ton\). Songs:this piece of theology concerned them more than anything else. They had just seen Elijah, but Jesus the Messiah had come before Elijah. The scribes used strkjv@Malachi:4:5|. Jesus had also spoken again of his death (resurrection). Songs:they are puzzled.

rwp@Matthew:17:26 @{The sons} (\hoi huioi\). Christ, of course, and the disciples also in contrast with the Jews. Thus a reply to Peter's prompt "Yes." Logically (\arage\) free from the temple tax, but practically not as he proceeds to show.

rwp@Matthew:18:23 @{Make a reckoning} (\sunƒrai logon\). Seen also in strkjv@25:19|. Perhaps a Latinism, _rationes conferre_. First aorist active infinitive of \sunair“\, to cast up accounts, to settle, to compare accounts with. Not in ancient Greek writers, but in two papyri of the second century A.D. in the very sense here and the substantive appears in an ostracon from Nubia of the early third century (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 117).

rwp@Matthew:18:28 @{A hundred pence} (\hekaton dˆnaria\). A denarius was worth about eight and a half pence. The hundred denarii here were equal to some "fifty shillings" (Bruce), "about 4 pounds" (McNeile), "twenty pounds" (Moffatt), "twenty dollars" (Goodspeed), "100 shillings" (Weymouth). These are various efforts to represent in modern language the small amount of this debt compared with the big one. {Took him by the throat} (\epnigen\). "Held him by the throat" (Allen). It is imperfect, probably inchoative, "began to choke or throttle him." The Roman law allowed this indignity. Vincent quotes Livy (iv. 53) who tells how the necks were twisted (_collum torsisset_) and how Cicero (_Pro Cluentio_, xxi.) says: "Lead him to the judgment seat with twisted neck (_collo obtorto_)." {What thou owest} (\ei ti opheileis\). Literally, "if thou owest anything," however little. He did not even know how much it was, only that he owed him something. "The 'if' is simply the expression of a pitiless logic" (Meyer).

rwp@Matthew:19:1 @{He departed} (\metˆren\). Literally, to lift up, change something to another place. Transitive in the LXX and in a Cilician rock inscription. Intransitive in strkjv@13:53| and here, the only N.T. instances. Absence of \hoti\ or \kai\ after \kai egeneto\, one of the clear Hebraisms in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1042f.). This verse is a sort of formula in Matthew at the close of important groups of \logia\ as in strkjv@7:28; strkjv@11:1; strkjv@13:53|. {The borders of Judea beyond Jordan} (\eis ta horia tˆs Ioudaias peran tou Iordanou\). This is a curious expression. It apparently means that Jesus left Galilee to go to Judea by way of Perea as the Galileans often did to avoid Samaria. Luke (Luke:17:11|) expressly says that he passed through Samaria and Galilee when he left Ephraim in Northern Judea (John:11:54|). He was not afraid to pass through the edge of Galilee and down the Jordan Valley in Perea on this last journey to Jerusalem. McNeile is needlessly opposed to the trans-Jordanic or Perean aspect of this phase of Christ's work.

rwp@Matthew:19:3 @{Pharisees tempting him} (\Pharisaioi peirazontes auton\). They "could not ask a question of Jesus without sinister motives" (Bruce). See strkjv@4:1| for the word (\peiraz“\). {For every cause} (\kata pasan aitian\). This clause is an allusion to the dispute between the two theological schools over the meaning of strkjv@Deuteronomy:24:1|. The school of Shammai took the strict and unpopular view of divorce for unchastity alone while the school of Hillel took the liberal and popular view of easy divorce for any passing whim if the husband saw a prettier woman (modern enough surely) or burnt his biscuits for breakfast. It was a pretty dilemma and meant to do Jesus harm with the people. There is no real trouble about the use of \kata\ here in the sense of \propter\ or because of (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 509).

rwp@Matthew:19:9 @{Except for fornication} (\parektos logou porneias\). This is the marginal reading in Westcott and Hort which also adds "maketh her an adulteress" (\poiei autˆn moicheuthˆnai\) and also these words: "and he that marrieth her when she is put away committeth adultery" (\kai ho apolelumenˆn gamˆsas moichatai\). There seems to be a certain amount of assimilation in various manuscripts between this verse and the words in strkjv@5:32|. But, whatever reading is accepted here, even the short one in Westcott and Hort (\mˆ epi porneiƒi\, not for fornication), it is plain that Matthew represents Jesus in both places as allowing divorce for fornication as a general term (\porneia\) which is technically adultery (\moicheia\ from \moicha“ or moicheu“\). Here, as in strkjv@5:31f.|, a group of scholars deny the genuineness of the exception given by Matthew alone. McNeile holds that "the addition of the saving clause is, in fact, opposed to the spirit of the whole context, and must have been made at a time when the practice of divorce for adultery had already grown up." That in my opinion is gratuitous criticism which is unwilling to accept Matthew's report because it disagrees with one's views on the subject of divorce. He adds: "It cannot be supposed that Matthew wished to represent Jesus as siding with the school of Shammai." Why not, if Shammai on this point agreed with Jesus? Those who deny Matthew's report are those who are opposed to remarriage at all. Jesus by implication, as in strkjv@5:31|, does allow remarriage of the innocent party, but not of the guilty one. Certainly Jesus has lifted the whole subject of marriage and divorce to a new level, far beyond the petty contentions of the schools of Hillel and Shammai.

rwp@Matthew:19:20 @{What lack I yet?} (\ti eti huster“?\) Here is a psychological paradox. He claims to have kept all these commandments and yet he was not satisfied. He had an uneasy conscience and Jesus called him to something that he did not have. He thought of goodness as quantitative (a series of acts) and not qualitative (of the nature of God). Did his question reveal proud complacency or pathetic despair? A bit of both most likely.

rwp@Matthew:20:28 @{A ransom for many} (\lutron anti poll“n\). The Son of man is the outstanding illustration of this principle of self-abnegation in direct contrast to the self-seeking of James and John. The word translated "ransom" is the one commonly employed in the papyri as the price paid for a slave who is then set free by the one who bought him, the purchase money for manumitting slaves. See examples in Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_ and Deissmann's _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 328f. There is the notion of exchange also in the use of \anti\. Jesus gave his own life as the price of freedom for the slaves of sin. There are those who refuse to admit that Jesus held this notion of a substitutionary death because the word in the N.T. occurs only here and the corresponding passage in strkjv@Mark:10:45|. But that is an easy way to get rid of passages that contradict one's theological opinions. Jesus here rises to the full consciousness of the significance of his death for men.

rwp@Matthew:21:24 @{One question} (\logon hena\). Literally "one word" or "a word." The answer to Christ's word will give the answer to their query. The only human ecclesiastical authority that Jesus had came from John.

rwp@Matthew:21:25 @{The baptism of John} (\to baptisma to I“anou\). This represents his relation to Jesus who was baptized by him. At once the ecclesiastical leaders find themselves in a dilemma created by their challenge of Christ. {They reasoned with themselves} (\dielogizonto\). Picturesque imperfect tense describing their hopeless quandary.

rwp@Matthew:21:29 @{I will not} (\ou thel“\). Songs:many old manuscripts, though the Vatican manuscript (B) has the order of the two sons reversed. Logically the "I, sir" (\eg“, kurie\) suits better for the second son (verse 30|) with a reference to the blunt refusal of the first. Songs:also the manuscripts differ in verse 31| between the first (\ho pr“tos\) and the last (\ho husteros\ or \eschatos\). But the one who actually did the will of the father is the one who {repented and went} (\metamelˆtheis apˆlthen\). This word really means "repent," to be sorry afterwards, and must be sharply distinguished from the word \metanoe“\ used 34 times in the N.T. as in strkjv@Matthew:3:2| and \metanoia\ used 24 times as in strkjv@Matthew:3:8|. The verb \metamelomai\ occurs in the N.T. only five times (Matthew:21:29,32; strkjv@27:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:8; strkjv@Hebrews:7:21| from strkjv@Psalms:109:4|). Paul distinguishes sharply between mere sorrow and the act "repentance" which he calls \metanoian\ (2Corinthians:7:9|). In the case of Judas (Matthew:27:3|) it was mere remorse. Here the boy got sorry for his stubborn refusal to obey his father and went and obeyed. Godly sorrow leads to repentance (\metanoian\), but mere sorrow is not repentance.

rwp@Matthew:21:31 @{Go before you} (\proagousin\). "In front of you" (Weymouth). The publicans and harlots march ahead of the ecclesiastics into the kingdom of heaven. It is a powerful indictment of the complacency of the Jewish theological leaders.

rwp@Matthew:22:15 @{Went} (\poreuthentes\). So-called deponent passive and redundant use of the verb as in strkjv@9:13|: "Go and learn." {Took counsel} (\sumboulion elabon\). Like the Latin _consilium capere_ as in strkjv@12:14|. {Ensnare in his talk} (\pagideus“sin en log“i\). From \pagis\, a snare or trap. Here only in the N.T. In the LXX (1Kings:28:9; strkjv@Ecclesiastes:9:12|; Test. of Twelve Patriarchs, _Joseph_ strkjv@7:1). Vivid picture of the effort to trip Jesus in his speech like a bird or wild beast.

rwp@Matthew:22:16 @{Their disciples} (\tous mathˆtas aut“n\). Students, pupils, of the Pharisees as in strkjv@Mark:2:18|. There were two Pharisaic theological seminaries in Jerusalem (Hillel, Shammai). {The Herodians} (\t“n Her“idian“n\). Not members of Herod's family or Herod's soldiers, but partisans or followers of Herod. The form in \-ianos\ is a Latin termination like that in \Christianos\ (Acts:11:26|). Mentioned also in strkjv@Mark:3:6| combining with the Pharisees against Jesus. {The person of men} (\pros“pon anthr“p“n\). Literally, face of men. Paying regard to appearance is the sin of partiality condemned by James (James:2:1,9|) when \pros“polˆmpsia, pros“polˆmptein\ are used, in imitation of the Hebrew idiom. This suave flattery to Jesus implied "that Jesus was a reckless simpleton" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:22:36 @{The great commandment in the law} (\entolˆ megalˆ en t“i nom“i\). The positive adjective is sometimes as high in rank as the superlative. See \megas\ in strkjv@Matthew:5:19| in contrast with \elachistos\. The superlative \megistos\ occurs in the N.T. only in strkjv@2Peter:1:4|. Possibly this scribe wishes to know which commandment stood first (Mark:12:28|) with Jesus. "The scribes declared that there were 248 affirmative precepts, as many as the members of the human body; and 365 negative precepts, as many as the days in the year, the total being 613, the number of letters in the Decalogue" (Vincent). But Jesus cuts through such pettifogging hair-splitting to the heart of the problem.

rwp@Matthew:24:3 @{As he sat} (\kathˆmenou\). Genitive absolute. Picture of Jesus sitting on the Mount of Olives looking down on Jerusalem and the temple which he had just left. After the climb up the mountain four of the disciples (Peter, James, John, Andrew) come to Jesus with the problem raised by his solemn words. They ask these questions about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, his own second coming (\parousia\, presence, common in the papyri for the visit of the emperor), and the end of the world. Did they think that they were all to take place simultaneously? There is no way to answer. At any rate Jesus treats all three in this great eschatological discourse, the most difficult problem in the Synoptic Gospels. Many theories are advanced that impugn the knowledge of Jesus or of the writers or of both. It is sufficient for our purpose to think of Jesus as using the destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem which did happen in that generation in A.D. 70, as also a symbol of his own second coming and of the end of the world (\sunteleias tou ai“nos\) or consummation of the age. In a painting the artist by skilful perspective may give on the same surface the inside of a room, the fields outside the window, and the sky far beyond. Certainly in this discourse Jesus blends in apocalyptic language the background of his death on the cross, the coming destruction of Jerusalem, his own second coming and the end of the world. He now touches one, now the other. It is not easy for us to separate clearly the various items. It is enough if we get the picture as a whole as it is here drawn with its lessons of warning to be ready for his coming and the end. The destruction of Jerusalem came as he foretold. There are some who would date the Synoptic Gospels after A.D. 70 in order to avoid the predictive element involved in the earlier date. But that is to limit the fore-knowledge of Jesus to a merely human basis. The word \parousia\ occurs in this chapter alone (3,27,37,39|) in the Gospels, but often in the Epistles, either of presence as opposed to absence (Phillipians:2:12|) or the second coming of Christ (2Thessalonians:2:1|).

rwp@Matthew:24:4 @{Lead you astray} (\h–mƒs planˆsˆi\). This warning runs all through the discourse. It is amazing how successful deceivers have been through the ages with their eschatological programs. The word in the passive appears in strkjv@18:12| when the one sheep wanders astray. Here it is the active voice with the causative sense to lead astray. Our word planet comes from this root.

rwp@Matthew:24:29 @{Immediately} (\euthe“s\). This word, common in Mark's Gospel as \euthus\, gives trouble if one stresses the time element. The problem is how much time intervenes between "the tribulation of those days" and the vivid symbolism of verse 29|. The use of \en tachei\ in strkjv@Revelation:1:1| should make one pause before he decides. Here we have a prophetic panorama like that with foreshortened perspective. The apocalyptic pictures in verse 29| also call for sobriety of judgment. One may compare Joel's prophecy as interpreted by Peter in strkjv@Acts:21:16-22|. Literalism is not appropriate in this apocalyptic eschatology.

rwp@Matthew:25:19 @{Maketh a reckoning} (\sunairei logon\). As in strkjv@18:23|. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 117) gives two papyri quotations with this very business idiom and one Nubian ostracon with it. The ancient Greek writers do not show it.

rwp@Matthew:25:46 @{Eternal punishment} (\kolasin ai“nion\). The word \kolasin\ comes from \kolaz“\, to mutilate or prune. Hence those who cling to the larger hope use this phrase to mean age-long pruning that ultimately leads to salvation of the goats, as disciplinary rather than penal. There is such a distinction as Aristotle pointed out between \m“ria\ (vengeance) and \kolasis\. But the same adjective \ai“nios\ is used with \kolasin\ and \z“ˆn\. If by etymology we limit the scope of \kolasin\, we may likewise have only age-long \z“ˆn\. There is not the slightest indication in the words of Jesus here that the punishment is not coeval with the life. We can leave all this to the King himself who is the Judge. The difficulty to one's mind about conditional chastisement is to think how a life of sin in hell can be changed into a life of love and obedience. The word \ai“nios\ (from \ai“n\, age, \aevum, aei\) means either without beginning or without end or both. It comes as near to the idea of eternal as the Greek can put it in one word. It is a difficult idea to put into language. Sometimes we have "ages of ages" (\ai“nes t“n ai“n“n\).

rwp@Matthew:26:26 @{And blessed and brake it} (\eulogˆsas eklasen\). Special "Grace" in the middle of the passover meal, "as they were eating," for the institution of the Supper. Jesus broke one of the passover wafers or cakes that each might have a piece, not as a symbol of the breaking of his body as the Textus Receptus has it in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:24|. The correct text there has only to \huper hum“n\ without \kl“menon\. As a matter of fact the body of Jesus was not "broken" (John:19:33|) as John expressly states. {This is my body} (\touto estin to s“ma mou\). The bread as a symbol _represents_ the body of Jesus offered for us, "a beautifully simple, pathetic, and poetic symbol of his death" (Bruce). But some have made it "run into fetish worship" (Bruce). Jesus, of course, does not mean that the bread actually becomes his body and is to be worshipped. The purpose of the memorial is to remind us of his death for our sins.

rwp@Matthew:26:28 @{The Covenant} (\tˆs diathˆkˆs\). The adjective \kainˆs\ in Textus Receptus is not genuine. The covenant is an agreement or contract between two (\dia, duo, thˆke\, from \tithˆmi\). It is used also for will (Latin, _testamentum_) which becomes operative at death (Hebrews:9:15-17|). Hence our _New Testament_. Either covenant or will makes sense here. Covenant is the idea in strkjv@Hebrews:7:22; strkjv@8:8| and often. In the Hebrew to make a covenant was to cut up the sacrifice and so ratify the agreement (Genesis:15:9-18|). Lightfoot argues that the word \diathˆke\ means covenant in the N.T. except in strkjv@Hebrews:9:15-17|. Jesus here uses the solemn words of strkjv@Exodus:24:8| "the blood of the covenant" at Sinai. "My blood of the covenant" is in contrast with that. This is the New Covenant of strkjv@Jeremiah:31; strkjv@Hebrews:8|. {Which is shed for many} (\to peri poll“n ekchunnomenon\). A prophetic present passive participle. The act is symbolized by the ordinance. Cf. the purpose of Christ expressed in strkjv@20:28|. There \anti\ and here \peri\. {Unto remission of sins} (\eis aphesin hamarti“n\). This clause is in Matthew alone but it is not to be restricted for that reason. It is the truth. This passage answers all the modern sentimentalism that finds in the teaching of Jesus only pious ethical remarks or eschatological dreamings. He had the definite conception of his death on the cross as the basis of forgiveness of sin. The purpose of the shedding of his blood of the New Covenant was precisely to remove (forgive) sins.

rwp@Matthew:26:37 @{He took with him} (\paralab“n\). Taking along, by his side (\para-\), as a mark of special favour and privilege, instead of leaving this inner circle of three (Peter, James, and John) with the other eight. The eight would serve as a sort of outer guard to watch by the gate of the garden for the coming of Judas while the three would be able to share the agony of soul already upon Jesus so as at least to give him some human sympathy which he craved as he sought help from the Father in prayer. These three had been with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration and now they are with him in this supreme crisis. The grief of Christ was now severe. The word for {sore troubled} (\adˆmonein\) is of doubtful etymology. There is an adjective \adˆmos\ equal to \apodˆmos\ meaning "not at home," "away from home," like the German _unheimisch, unheimlich_. But whatever the etymology, the notion of intense discomfort is plain. The word \adˆmonein\ occurs in P.Oxy. II, 298,456 of the first century A.D. where it means "excessively concerned." See strkjv@Phillipians:2:26| where Paul uses it of Epaphroditus. Moffatt renders it here "agitated." The word occurs sometimes with \apore“\ to be at a loss as to which way to go. The _Braid Scots_ has it "sair putten-aboot." Here Matthew has also "to be sorrowful" (\lupeisthai\), but Mark (Mark:14:33|) has the startling phrase {greatly amazed and sore troubled} (\ekthambeisthai kai adˆmonein\), a "feeling of terrified surprise."

rwp@Matthew:26:52 @{Put up again thy sword} (\apostrepson tˆn machairan sou\). Turn back thy sword into its place. It was a stern rebuke for Peter who had misunderstood the teaching of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:22:38| as well as in strkjv@Matthew:5:39| (cf. strkjv@John:18:36|). The reason given by Jesus has had innumerable illustrations in human history. The sword calls for the sword. Offensive war is here given flat condemnation. The Paris Pact of 1928 (the Kellogg Treaty) is certainly in harmony with the mind of Christ. The will to peace is the first step towards peace, the outlawing of war. Our American cities are often ruled by gangsters who kill each other off.

rwp@Matthew:28:1 @{Now late on the sabbath as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week} (\opse de sabbat“n, tˆi epiph“skousˆi eis mian sabbat“n\). This careful chronological statement according to Jewish days clearly means that before the sabbath was over, that is before six P.M., this visit by the women was made "to see the sepulchre" (\theorˆsai ton taphon\). They had seen the place of burial on Friday afternoon (Mark:15:47; strkjv@Matthew:27:61; strkjv@Luke:23:55|). They had rested on the sabbath after preparing spices and ointments for the body of Jesus (Luke:23:56|), a sabbath of unutterable sorrow and woe. They will buy other spices after sundown when the new day has dawned and the sabbath is over (Mark:16:1|). Both Matthew here and Luke (Luke:23:54|) use dawn (\epiph“sk“\) for the dawning of the twenty-four hour-day at sunset, not of the dawning of the twelve-hour day at sunrise. The Aramaic used the verb for dawn in both senses. The so-called Gospel of Peter has \epiph“sk“\ in the same sense as Matthew and Luke as does a late papyrus. Apparently the Jewish sense of "dawn" is here expressed by this Greek verb. Allen thinks that Matthew misunderstands Mark at this point, but clearly Mark is speaking of sunrise and Matthew of sunset. Why allow only one visit for the anxious women?

rwp@Matthew:28:19 @{All the nations} (\panta ta ethnˆ\). Not just the Jews scattered among the Gentiles, but the Gentiles themselves in every land. And not by making Jews of them, though this point is not made plain here. It will take time for the disciples to grow into this _Magna Charta_ of the missionary propaganda. But here is the world program of the Risen Christ and it should not be forgotten by those who seek to foreshorten it all by saying that Jesus expected his second coming to be very soon, even within the lifetime of those who heard. He did promise to come, but he has never named the date. Meanwhile we are to be ready for his coming at any time and to look for it joyfully. But we are to leave that to the Father and push on the campaign for world conquest. This program includes making disciples or learners (\mathˆteusate\) such as they were themselves. That means evangelism in the fullest sense and not merely revival meetings. Baptism in (\eis\, not _into_) the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, in the name of the Trinity. Objection is raised to this language in the mouth of Jesus as too theological and as not a genuine part of the Gospel of Matthew for the same reason. See strkjv@Matthew:11:27|, where Jesus speaks of the Father and the Son as here. But it is all to no purpose. There is a chapter devoted to this subject in my _The Christ of the Logia_ in which the genuineness of these words is proven. The name of Jesus is the essential part of it as is shown in the Acts. Trine immersion is not taught as the Greek Church holds and practices, baptism in the name of the Father, then of the Son, then of the Holy Spirit. The use of name (\onoma\) here is a common one in the Septuagint and the papyri for power or authority. For the use of \eis\ with \onoma\ in the sense here employed, not meaning _into_, see strkjv@Matthew:10:41f.| (cf. also strkjv@12:41|).

rwp@Philemon:1:18 @{But if he hath wronged thee at all} (\ei de ti ˆdikˆse se\). Condition of the first class, assumed to be true. Onesimus did wrong (\ˆdikˆse\, first aorist active indicative of \adikˆo\, to wrong, without justice). He had probably robbed Philemon before he ran away. {Or oweth} (\ˆ opheilei\). Delicate way of putting the stealing. {Put that to mine account} (\touto emoi ellogƒ\). Present active imperative of \elloga“\. In the _Koin‚_ verbs in \-e“\ often appear in \-a“\ like \elee“, elea“\. Songs:with \elloge“\ as \elloga“\, late verb in inscriptions and papyri (Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 84), though in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:5:13|. It means to set to one's account.

rwp@Info_Philipians @ Meanwhile he tells the Philippians about the difficulties and triumphs in Rome. The Judaizers have followed Paul here and there is an echo in chapters strkjv@Phillipians:1; 3| of their opposition. But Paul rises to full stature in the great Christological passages in chapters strkjv@Phillipians:2; 3| which prepare the way for the controversy with the Gnostics over the Person of Christ in Colossians and Ephesians.

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

rwp@Philippians:1:7 @{Because I have you in my heart} (\dia to echein me en tˆi kardiƒi humas\). Or "because you hold me in your heart." Literally, "because of the holding me (or you) in the heart as to you (or me)." One accusative is the object of the infinitive \echein\, the other is the accusative of general reference. There is no way to decide which is the idea meant except to say that love begets love. The pastor who, like Paul, holds his people in his heart will find them holding him in their hearts. {In the defence} (\en tˆi apologiƒi\). Old word (our word apology, but not our idea of apologizing), in the original sense in strkjv@Acts:22:1; strkjv@25:16|. Songs:also in verse 16| below. {Confirmation} (\bebai“sei\). Old word from \bebaio“\ (\bebaios, bain“\), to make stable. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:6:16| about oath. {Partakers with me of grace} (\sugkoin“nous mou tˆs charitos\). Literally, "my co-sharers in grace" (objective genitive). "Grace prompted them to alleviate his imprisonment, to cooperate with him in defending and propagating the gospel, and to suffer for its sake" (Vincent, _Int. Crit. Comm_.).

rwp@Philippians:2:11 @{Should confess} (\exomologˆsˆtai\). First aorist middle subjunctive of \exomologeomai\ with \hina\ for purpose. {Lord} (\Kurios\). Peter (Acts:2:36|) claimed that God made Christ "Lord." See also strkjv@1Corinthians:8:6; strkjv@12:3; strkjv@Romans:10:9|. Kennedy laments that the term Lord has become one of the most lifeless in the Christian vocabulary, whereas it really declares the true character and dignity of Jesus Christ and "is the basis and the object of worship."

rwp@Philippians:2:14 @{Without murmurings} (\ch“ris goggusm“n\). See on strkjv@Acts:6:1| for this late onomatopoetic word from \gogguz“\, to mutter, to grumble. {Disputings} (\dialogism“n\). Or questionings as in strkjv@Luke:24:38|. The grumblings led to disputes.

rwp@Philippians:2:26 @{He longed after} (\epipoth“n ˆn\). Periphrastic imperfect of \epipothe“\ (Phillipians:1:8|), "he was yearning after." {You all} (\pantas humas\). Songs:again (1:5,7,8|). {Was sore troubled} (\adˆmon“n\). Periphrastic imperfect again (repeat \ˆn\) of the old word \adˆmone“\ either from an unused \adˆm“n\ (\a\ privative and \dˆmos\, away from home, homesick) or from \adˆm“n, adˆsai\ (discontent, bewilderment). The _Vocabulary_ of Moulton and Milligan gives one papyrus example in line with the latter etymology. See already strkjv@Matthew:26:37; strkjv@Mark:14:33|. In any case the distress of Epaphroditus was greatly increased when he knew that the Philippians (the home-folks) had learned of his illness, "because ye had heard that he was sick" (\dioti ˆkousate hoti ˆsthenˆse\), "because ye heard that he fell sick" (ingressive aorist). {He was sick} (\ˆsthenˆse\). Ingressive aorist, "he did become sick." {Nigh unto death} (\paraplˆsion thanat“i\). Only example in N.T. of this compound adverbial preposition (from the adjective \paraplˆsios\) with the dative case.

rwp@Philippians:3:8 @{Yea, verily, and} (\alla men oun ge kai\). Five particles before Paul proceeds (yea, indeed, therefore, at least, even), showing the force and passion of his conviction. He repeats his affirmation with the present middle indicative (\hˆgoumai\), "I still count all things loss for the excellency of the knowledge (\to huperechon\, the surpassingness, neuter articular participle of \huperech“\, strkjv@Phillipians:2:3|) of Christ Jesus my Lord." {Dung} (\skubala\). Late word of uncertain etymology, either connected with \sk“r\ (dung) or from \es kunas ball“\, to fling to the dogs and so refuse of any kind. It occurs in the papyri. Here only in the N.T. {That I may gain Christ} (\hina Christon kerdˆs“\). First aorist active subjunctive of \kerda“\, Ionic form for \kerdain“\ with \hina\ in purpose clause. Paul was never satisfied with his knowledge of Christ and always craved more fellowship with him.

rwp@Philippians:4:8 @{Finally} (\to loipon\). See on ¯3:1|. {Whatsoever} (\hosa\). Thus he introduces six adjectives picturing Christian ideals, old-fashioned and familiar words not necessarily from any philosophic list of moral excellencies Stoic or otherwise. Without these no ideals can exist. They are pertinent now when so much filth is flaunted before the world in books, magazines and moving-pictures under the name of realism (the slime of the gutter and the cess-pool). {Honourable} (\semna\). Old word from \seb“\, to worship, revere. Songs:revered, venerated (1Timothy:3:8|). {Pure} (\hagna\). Old word for all sorts of purity. There are clean things, thoughts, words, deeds. {Lovely} (\prosphilˆ\). Old word, here only in N.T., from \pros\ and \phile“\, pleasing, winsome. {Of good report} (\euphˆma\. Old word, only here in N.T., from \eu\ and \phˆmˆ\, fair-speaking, attractive. {If there be any} (\ei tis\). Paul changes the construction from \hosa\ (whatsoever) to a condition of the first class, as in strkjv@2:1|, with two substantives. {Virtue} (\aretˆ\). Old word, possibly from \aresk“\, to please, used very often in a variety of senses by the ancients for any mental excellence or moral quality or physical power. Its very vagueness perhaps explains its rarity in the N.T., only four times (Phillipians:4:8; strkjv@1Peter:2:9; strkjv@2Peter:1:3,5|). It is common in the papyri, but probably Paul is using it in the sense found in the LXX (Isaiah:42:12; strkjv@43:21|) of God's splendour and might (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 95) in connection with "praise" (\epainos\) as here or even meaning praise. {Think on these things} (\tauta logizesthe\). Present middle imperative for habit of thought. We are responsible for our thoughts and can hold them to high and holy ideals.

rwp@Philippians:4:15 @{In the beginning of the gospel} (\en archˆi tou euaggeliou\). After he had wrought in Philippi (2Thessalonians:2:13|). {Had fellowship} (\ekoin“nˆsen\). "Had partnership" (first aorist active indicative). {In the matter} (\eis logon\). "As to an account." No other church opened an account with Paul. {Of giving and receiving} (\dose“s kai lˆmpse“s\). Credit and debit. A mercantile metaphor repeated in verse 17| by \eis logon hum“n\ (to your account). Paul had to keep books then with no other church, though later Thessalonica and Beroea joined Philippi in support of Paul's work in Corinth (2Corinthians:11:8f.|). {But ye only} (\ei mˆ humeis monoi\). Not even Antioch contributed anything but good wishes and prayers for Paul's work (Acts:13:1-3|).

rwp@Philippians:4:20 @{The glory} (\hˆ doxa\). "The doxology flows out of the joy of the whole epistle" (Bengel).

rwp@Revelation:1:2 @{Bare witness} (\emarturˆsen\). First aorist active indicative of \marture“\, which, along with \martus\ and \marturia\, is common in all the Johannine books (cf. strkjv@22:18,20|), usually with \peri\ or \hoti\, but with cognate accusative as here in strkjv@22:16,20; strkjv@1John:5:10|. Epistolary aorist here, referring to this book. {The word of God} (\ton logon tou theou\). Subjective genitive, given by God. The prophetic word as in strkjv@1:9; strkjv@6:9; strkjv@20:4|, not the personal Word as in strkjv@19:14|. {The testimony of Jesus Christ} (\tˆn marturian Iˆsou Christou\). Subjective genitive again, borne witness to by Jesus Christ. {Even of all the things that he saw} (\hosa eiden\). Relative clause in apposition with \logon\ and \marturian\.

rwp@Revelation:1:5 @{Who is the faithful witness} (\ho martus ho pistos\). "The witness the faithful," nominative in apposition like \pr“totokos\ and \arch“n\ with the preceding ablative \Iˆsou Christou\ with \apo\, a habit of John in this book (apparently on purpose) as in strkjv@2:13,20; strkjv@3:12|, etc. See this same phrase in strkjv@2:13; strkjv@3:14|. The use of \martus\ of Jesus here is probably to the witness (1:1|) in this book (22:16f.|), not to the witness of Jesus before Pilate (1Timothy:6:13|). {The first-born of the dead} (\ho pr“totokos t“n nekr“n\). A Jewish Messianic title (Psalms:88:28|) and as in strkjv@Colossians:1:18| refers to priority in the resurrection to be followed by others. See strkjv@Luke:2:7| for the word. {The ruler of the kings of the earth} (\ho arch“n t“n basile“n tˆs gˆs\). Jesus by his resurrection won lordship over the kings of earth (17:14; strkjv@19:16|), what the devil offered him by surrender (Matthew:4:8f.|). {Unto him that loveth us} (\t“i agap“nti hˆmƒs\). Dative of the articular present (not aorist \agapˆsanti\) active participle of \agapa“\ in a doxology to Christ, the first of many others to God and to Christ (1:6; strkjv@4:11; strkjv@5:9,12f.; strkjv@7:10,12|, etc.). For the thought see strkjv@John:3:16|. {Loosed} (\lusanti\). First aorist active participle of \lu“\ (Aleph A C), though some MSS. (P Q) read \lousanti\ (washed), a manifest correction. Note the change of tense. Christ loosed us once for all, but loves us always. {By his blood} (\en t“i haimati autou\). As in strkjv@5:9|. John here as in the Gospel and Epistles states plainly and repeatedly the place of the blood of Christ in the work of redemption.

rwp@Revelation:1:6 @{And he made} (\kai epoiˆsen\). Change from the participle construction, which would be \kai poiˆsanti\ (first aorist active of \poie“\) like \lusanti\ just before, a Hebraism Charles calls it, but certainly an anacoluthon of which John is very fond, as in strkjv@1:18; strkjv@2:2,9,20; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@7:14; strkjv@14:2f.; strkjv@15:3|. {Kingdom} (\basileian\). Songs:correctly Aleph A C, not \basileis\ (P cursives). Perhaps a reminiscence of strkjv@Exodus:19:6|, a kingdom of priests. In strkjv@5:10| we have again "a kingdom and priests." The idea here is that Christians are the true spiritual Israel in God's promise to Abraham as explained by Paul in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9|. {To be priests} (\hiereis\). In apposition with \basileian\, but with \kai\ (and) in strkjv@5:10|. Each member of this true kingdom is a priest unto God, with direct access to him at all times. {Unto his God and Father} (\t“i the“i kai patri autou\). Dative case and \autou\ (Christ) applies to both \the“i\ and \patri\. Jesus spoke of the Father as his God (Matthew:27:46; strkjv@John:20:17|) and Paul uses like language (Ephesians:1:17|), as does Peter (1Peter:1:3|). {To him} (\aut“i\). Another doxology to Christ. "The adoration of Christ which vibrates in this doxology is one of the most impressive features of the book" (Moffatt). Like doxologies to Christ appear in strkjv@5:13; strkjv@7:10; strkjv@1Peter:4:11; strkjv@2Peter:3:18; strkjv@2Timothy:4:18; He strkjv@13:21|. These same words (\hˆ doxa kai to kratos\) in strkjv@1Peter:4:11|, only \hˆ doxa\ in strkjv@2Peter:3:18; strkjv@2Timothy:4:18|, but with several others in strkjv@Revelation:5:13; strkjv@7:10|.

rwp@Revelation:1:7 @{Behold, he cometh with the clouds} (\idou erchetai meta t“n nephel“n\). Futuristic present middle indicative of \erchomai\, a reminiscence of strkjv@Daniel:7:13| (Theodotion). "It becomes a common eschatological refrain" (Beckwith) as in strkjv@Mark:13:26; strkjv@14:62; strkjv@Matthew:24:30; strkjv@26:64; strkjv@Luke:21:27|. Compare the manifestation of God in the clouds at Sinai, in the cloudy pillar, the Shekinah, at the transfiguration" (Vincent). {Shall see} (\opsetai\). Future middle of \hora“\, a reminiscence of strkjv@Zechariah:12:10| according to the text of Theodotion (Aquila and Symmachus) rather than the LXX and like that of strkjv@Matthew:24:30| (similar combination of Daniel and Zechariah) and strkjv@26:64|. This picture of the victorious Christ in his return occurs also in strkjv@14:14, 18-20; strkjv@19:11-21; strkjv@20:7-10|. {And they which} (\kai hoitines\). "And the very ones who," Romans and Jews, all who shared in this act. {Pierced} (\exekentˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \ekkente“\, late compound (Aristotle, Polybius, LXX), from \ek\ and \kente“\ (to stab, to pierce), in N.T., only here and strkjv@John:19:37|, in both cases from strkjv@Zechariah:12:10|, but not the LXX text (apparently proof that John used the original Hebrew or the translation of Theodotion and Aquila). {Shall mourn} (\kopsontai\). Future middle (direct) of \kopt“\, old verb, to cut, "they shall cut themselves," as was common for mourners (Matthew:11:17; strkjv@Luke:8:52; strkjv@23:27|). From strkjv@Zechariah:12:12|. See also strkjv@Revelation:18:9|. {Tribes} (\phulai\). Not just the Jewish tribes, but the spiritual Israel of Jews and Gentiles as in strkjv@7:4-8|. No nation had then accepted Christ as Lord and Saviour, nor has any yet done so.

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:1:16 @{And he had} (\kai ech“n\). "And having," present active participle of \ech“\, loose use of the participle (almost like \eiche\, imperfect) and not in agreement with \autou\, genitive case. This is a common idiom in the book; a Hebraism, Charles calls it. {In his right hand} (\en tˆi dexiƒi cheiri\). For safe keeping as in strkjv@John:10:28|. {Seven stars} (\asteras hepta\). Symbols of the seven churches (verse 20|), seven planets rather than Pleiades or any other constellation like the bear. {Proceeded} (\ekporeuomenˆ\). Present middle participle of \ekporeuomai\, old compound (Matthew:3:5|) used loosely again like \ech“n\. {A sharp two-edged sword} (\romphaia distomos oxeia\). "A sword two-mouthed sharp." \Romphaia\ (as distinct from \machaira\) is a long sword, properly a Thracian javelin, in N.T. only strkjv@Luke:2:35; strkjv@Revelation:1:16; strkjv@2:12; strkjv@Hebrews:4:12|. See \stoma\ used with \machairˆs\ in strkjv@Luke:21:24| (by the mouth of the sword). {Countenance} (\opsis\). Old word (from \opt“\), in N.T. only here, strkjv@John:7:24; strkjv@11:44|. {As the sun shineth} (\h“s ho hˆlios phainei\). Brachylogy, "as the sun when it shines." For \phainei\ see strkjv@John:1:5|.

rwp@Revelation:1:20 @{The mystery of the seven stars} (\to mustˆrion t“n hepta aster“n\). On the word \mustˆrion\ see on ¯Matthew:13:11; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:7; strkjv@Colossians:1:26|. Here it means the inner meaning (the secret symbol) of a symbolic vision (Swete) as in strkjv@10:7; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@17:7,9; strkjv@Daniel:2:47|. Probably the accusative absolute (Charles), "as for the mystery" (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 490, 1130), as in strkjv@Romans:8:3|. This item is picked out of the previous vision (1:16|) as needing explanation at once and as affording a clue to what follows (2:1,5|). {Which} (\hous\). Masculine accusative retained without attraction to case of \aster“n\ (genitive, \h“n\). {In my right hand} (\epi tˆs dexias mou\). Or "upon," but \en tˆi\, etc., in verse 16|. {And the seven golden candlesticks} (\kai tas hepta luchnias tas chrusƒs\). "The seven lampstands the golden," identifying the stars of verse 16| with the lampstands of verse 12|. The accusative case here is even more peculiar than the accusative absolute \mustˆrion\, since the genitive \luchni“n\ after \mustˆrion\ is what one would expect. Charles suggests that John did not revise his work. {The angels of the seven churches} (\aggeloi t“n hepta ekklˆsi“n\). Anarthrous in the predicate (angels of, etc.). "The seven churches" mentioned in strkjv@1:4,11|. Various views of \aggelos\ here exist. The simplest is the etymological meaning of the word as messenger from \aggell“\ (Matthew:11:10|) as messengers from the seven churches to Patmos or by John from Patmos to the churches (or both). Another view is that \aggelos\ is the pastor of the church, the reading \tˆn gunaika sou\ (thy wife) in strkjv@2:20| (if genuine) confirming this view. Some would even take it to be the bishop over the elders as \episcopos\ in Ignatius, but a separate \aggelos\ in each church is against this idea. Some take it to be a symbol for the church itself or the spirit and genius of the church, though distinguished in this very verse from the churches themselves (the lampstands). Others take it to be the guardian angel of each church assuming angelic patrons to be taught in strkjv@Matthew:18:10; strkjv@Acts:12:15|. Each view is encompassed with difficulties, perhaps fewer belonging to the view that the "angel" is the pastor. {Are seven churches} (\hepta ekklˆsiai eisin\). These seven churches (1:4,11|) are themselves lampstands (1:12|) reflecting the light of Christ to the world (Matthew:5:14-16; strkjv@John:8:12|) in the midst of which Christ walks (1:13|).

rwp@Revelation:2:18 @{In Thyatira} (\en Thuateirois\). Some forty miles south-east of Pergamum, a Lydian city on the edge of Mysia, under Rome since B.C. 190, a centre of trade, especially for the royal purple, home of Lydia of Philippi (Acts:16:14f.|), shown by inscriptions to be full of trade guilds, Apollo the chief deity with no emperor-worship, centre of activity by the Nicolaitans with their idolatry and licentiousness under a "prophetess" who defied the church there. Ramsay calls it "Weakness Made Strong" (_op. cit._, p. 316). {The Son of God} (\ho huios tou theou\). Here Jesus is represented as calling himself by this title as in strkjv@John:11:4| and as he affirms on oath in strkjv@Matthew:26:63f|. "The Word of God" occurs in strkjv@19:13|. {His eyes like a flame of fire} (\tous ophthalmous autou h“s phloga puros\). As in strkjv@1:14|. {His feet like burnished brass} (\hoi podes autou homoioi chalkoliban“i\). As in strkjv@1:15|.

rwp@Revelation:2:23 @{I will kill with death} (\apokten“ en thanat“i\). Future (volitive) active of \apoktein“\ with the tautological (cognate) \en thanat“i\ (in the sense of pestilence) as in strkjv@Ezekiel:33:27|. {Her children} (\ta tekna autˆs\). Either her actual children, like the fate of Ahab's sons (2Kings:10:7|) or "her spiritual progeny" (Swete) who have completely accepted her Nicolaitan practices. {Shall know} (\gn“sontai\). Future (ingressive punctiliar) middle of \gin“sk“\, "shall come to know." "The doom of the offenders was to be known as widely as the scandal had been" (Charles). {Searcheth} (\eraun“n\). Present active articular participle of \erauna“\, to follow up, to track out, late form for \ereuna“\, from strkjv@Jeremiah:17:10|. {Reins} (\nephrous\). Old word for kidneys, here only in N.T., quoted also with \kardias\ from strkjv@Jeremiah:17:10|. See strkjv@22:17| for the reward of punishment.

rwp@Revelation:4:1 @{After these things} (\meta tauta\). Change in the panorama, not chronology (7:1,9; strkjv@15:5; strkjv@18:1; strkjv@19:1|). This vision is of heaven, not of earth as was true of chapters strkjv@Revelation:1; 2|. The first vision of Christ and the messages to the seven churches began in strkjv@1:12f|. This new vision of the throne in heaven (4:1-11|) succeeds that to which it here alludes. {I saw} (\eidon\). Second aorist active indicative of \hora“\. {Behold} (\idou\). Exclamation of vivid emotion as John looked. No effect on the structure and nominative case \thura\ (door) follows it. {Opened} (\ˆne“igmenˆ\). Perfect (triple reduplication) passive participle of \anoig“\ as in strkjv@3:8| (door of opportunity) and strkjv@3:20| (door of the heart), here the door of revelation (Swete). {In heaven} (\en t“i ouran“i\). As in strkjv@Ezekiel:1:1; strkjv@Mark:1:10; strkjv@John:1:51|. In Revelation always in singular except strkjv@12:12|. {The first} (\hˆ pr“tˆ\). Reference is to strkjv@1:10|. {Speaking} (\lalousˆs\). From \lale“\, rather \legousˆs\ of strkjv@1:10| from \leg“\, both agreeing with \salpiggos\ (trumpet). {Saying} (\leg“n\). Present active participle of \leg“\ repeating the idea of \lalousˆs\, but in the nominative masculine singular construed with \ph“nˆ\ (feminine singular), construction according to sense because of the person behind the voice as in strkjv@11:15; strkjv@19:14|. {Come up} (\anaba\). Short _Koin‚_ form for \anabˆthi\ (second aorist active imperative second person singular of \anabain“\). {Hither} (\h“de\). Originally "here," but vernacular use (John:6:25; strkjv@10:27|). {I will show} (\deix“\). Future active of \deiknumi\ in same sense in strkjv@1:1|. {Hereafter} (\meta tauta\). Some editors (Westcott and Hort) connect these words with the beginning of verse 2|.

rwp@Revelation:4:11 @{Our Lord and our God} (\ho kurios kai ho theos hˆm“n\). The nominative form here used as vocative as in strkjv@John:20:28| and often. {To receive} (\labein\). Epexegetic second aorist active infinitive of \lamban“\ with \axios\ (worthy). {The glory} (\tˆn doxan\). The article referring to \doxan\ in verse 9| and so with \tˆn timˆn\ (the honour), though \tˆn dunamin\ (the power) is not in verse 9|, but is the power due to be ascribed to God. {Thou didst create} (\su ektisas\). Emphasis on \su\ (thou), first aorist active indicative of \ktiz“\, the verb used about the act of creation by Paul in strkjv@Colossians:1:16| (\ektisthˆ, ektistai\), constative aorist giving a summary picture of the whole (not as a process). {Because of thy will} (\dia to thelˆma sou\). Reason for creation of the universe as in strkjv@Hebrews:2:10| (\di' hon\). {They were} (\ˆsan\). Imperfect tense with a cursory glance at the universe as a fact, possibly a potential existence in God's purpose in the eternal past before the actual creation in time. {And were created} (\kai ektisthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of the same verb, \ktiz“\, just used and in the plural, while Paul (Colossians:1:16|) uses the singular \ektisthˆ\. See strkjv@1Corinthians:8:6|. God's will wrought through the Logos (Christ).

rwp@Revelation:5:12 @{Worthy} (\axion\). Agreeing in gender (grammatical neuter) with \arnion\, but some MSS. have \axios\ (masculine, natural gender). Note change to third person \estin\ instead of second \ei\. The point of the song is the same as that in verses 9,10|, but the language differs. Note the repeated article \to\ (the lamb the slain) referring to verses 6,9|. Note also the one article \tˆn\ before \dunamin\ for all the seven grounds of praise (\dunamin\, power, \plouton\, wealth, \sophian\, wisdom, \ischun\, strength, \timˆn\, honor, \doxan\, glory, \eulogian\, blessing), though \plouton\ is masculine, in contrast with separate article for each item (all three feminine) in strkjv@4:11|, here grouping them all together, "a heptad of praise" (Swete).

rwp@Revelation:5:13 @{Every created thing} (\pƒn ktisma\). Every creature in a still wider antiphonal circle beyond the circle of angels (from \ktiz“\, for which see strkjv@1Timothy:4:4; strkjv@James:1:18|), from all the four great fields of life (in heaven, upon the earth, under the earth as in verse 3|, with on the sea \epi tˆs thalassˆs\ added). No created thing is left out. This universal chorus of praise to Christ from all created life reminds one of the profound mystical passage in strkjv@Romans:8:20-22| concerning the sympathetic agony of creation (\ktisis\) in hope of freedom from the bondage of corruption. If the trail of the serpent is on all creation, it will be ultimately thrown off. {Saying} (\legontas\). Masculine (construction according to sense, personifying the created things) if genuine, though some MSS. have \legonta\ (grammatical gender agreeing with \panta\) present active participle of \leg“\, to say. {And to the Lamb} (\kai t“i arni“i\). Dative case. Praise and worship are rendered to the Lamb precisely as to God on the throne. Note separate articles here in the doxology as in strkjv@4:11| and the addition of \to kratos\ (active power) in place of \ischus\ (reserve of strength) in strkjv@5:12|.

rwp@Revelation:5:14 @{Amen} (\Amˆn\). The four living creatures give their approval to the doxology after the antiphonal songs. {Fell down and worshipped} (\epesan kai prosekunˆsan\). In silent adoration that closes the whole service of praise to the One upon the throne and to the Lamb. As in strkjv@4:10| so here the representatives of the redeemed bow in silent worship. Pliny says that the Christians sing a song to Christ as to God. He is here worshipped by the universe (Phillipians:2:10f.|).

rwp@Revelation:6:9 @{Under the altar} (\hupokat“ tou thusiastˆriou\). "Under" (\hupokat“\), for the blood of the sacrifices was poured at the bottom of the altar (Leviticus:4:7|). The altar of sacrifice (Exodus:39:39; strkjv@40:29|), not of incense. The imagery, as in Hebrews, is from the tabernacle. For the word see strkjv@Matthew:5:23f.|, often in Rev. (Revelation:8:3,5; strkjv@9:13; strkjv@11:1; strkjv@14:18; strkjv@16:7|). This altar in heaven is symbolic, of course, the antitype for the tabernacle altar (Hebrews:8:5|). The Lamb was slain (5:6,9,12|) and these martyrs have followed the example of their Lord. {The souls} (\tas psuchas\). The lives, for the life is in the blood (Leviticus:17:11|), were given for Christ (Phillipians:2:17; strkjv@2Timothy:4:6|). {Of the slain} (\t“n esphagmen“n\). See strkjv@5:6|. Christians were slain during the Neronian persecution and now again under Domitian. A long line of martyrs has followed. {For the word of God} (\dia ton logon tou theou\). As in strkjv@1:9|, the confession of loyalty to Christ as opposed to emperor-worship. {And for the testimony which they held} (\kai dia tˆn marturian hˆn eichon\). See also strkjv@1:9|. Probably \kai\ equals "even" here, explaining the preceding. The imperfect tense \eichon\ suits the repetition of the witness to Christ and the consequent death.

rwp@Revelation:6:12 @{There was a great earthquake} (\seismos megas egeneto\). "There came a great earthquake." Jesus spoke of earthquakes in his great eschatological discourse (Mark:13:8|). In strkjv@Matthew:24:29| the powers of the heavens will be shaken. \Seismos\ is from \sei“\, to shake, and occurs also in strkjv@Revelation:8:5; strkjv@11:13,19; strkjv@16:18|. The reference is not a local earthquake like those so common in Asia Minor. {As sackcloth of hair} (\h“s sakkos trichinos\). \Sakkos\ (Attic \sakos\), Latin _saccus_, English _sack_, originally a bag for holding things (Genesis:42:25,35|), then coarse garment of hair (\trichinos\, old word from \thrix\, here only in N.T.) clinging to one like a sack, of mourners, suppliants, prophets leading austere lives (Matthew:3:4; strkjv@11:21; strkjv@Luke:10:13|). Here the hair is that of the black goat (Isaiah:50:3|). Cf. strkjv@Joel:2:10; strkjv@Ezekiel:32:7f.; strkjv@Isaiah:13:10; strkjv@Mark:13:24f|. See strkjv@Ecclesiastes:12:2| for eclipses treated as symbols of old age. Apocalyptic pictures all have celestial phenomena following earthquakes. {As blood} (\h“s haima\). In strkjv@Acts:2:20| we find Peter interpreting the apocalyptic eschatological language of strkjv@Joel:2:31| about the sun being turned into darkness and the moon into blood as pointing to the events of the day of Pentecost as also "the great day of the Lord." Peter's interpretation of Joel should make us cautious about too literal an exegesis of these grand symbols.

rwp@Revelation:7:12 @Note \amˆn\ at the beginning and the close of the doxology. Note also separate feminine article with each of the seven attributes given God, as in strkjv@4:11; strkjv@5:12,13|.

rwp@Revelation:11:1 @{A reed} (\kalamos\). Old word for a growing reed (Matthew:11:7|) which grew in immense brakes in the Jordan valley, a writer's reed (3John:1:7|), a measuring-rod (here, strkjv@21:15f.; strkjv@Ezekiel:40:3-6; strkjv@42:16-19|). {Like a rod} (\homoios rabd“i\). See strkjv@2:27; strkjv@Mark:6:8| for \rabdos\. {And one said} (\leg“n\). "Saying" (present active masculine participle of \leg“\) is all that the Greek has. The participle implies \ed“ken\ (he gave), not \edothˆ\, a harsh construction seen in strkjv@Genesis:22:20; strkjv@38:24|, etc. {Rise and measure} (\egeire kai metrˆson\). Present active imperative of \egeir“\ (intransitive, exclamatory use as in strkjv@Mark:2:11|) and first aorist active imperative of \metre“\. In strkjv@Ezekiel:42:2ff.| the prophet measures the temple and that passage is probably in mind here. But modern scholars do not know how to interpret this interlude (11:1-13|) before the seventh trumpet (11:15|). Some (Wellhausen) take it to be a scrap from the Zealot party before the destruction of Jerusalem, which event Christ also foretold (Mark:13:2; strkjv@Matthew:24:2; strkjv@Luke:21:6|) and which was also attributed to Stephen (Acts:6:14|). Charles denies any possible literal interpretation and takes the language in a wholly eschatological sense. There are three points in the interlude, however understood: the chastisement of Jerusalem or Israel (verses 1,2|), the mission of the two witnesses (3-12|), the rescue of the remnant (13|). There is a heavenly sanctuary (7:15; strkjv@11:19; strkjv@14:15|, etc.), but here \naos\ is on earth and yet not the actual temple in Jerusalem (unless so interpreted). Perhaps here it is the spiritual (3:12; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:16f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:16; strkjv@Ephesians:2:19ff.|). For altar (\thusiastˆrion\) see strkjv@8:3|. Perhaps measuring as applied to "them that worship therein" (\tous proskunountas en aut“i\) implies a word like numbering, with an allusion to the 144,000 in chapter 7 (a zeugma).

rwp@Revelation:12:1 @{A great sign} (\sˆmeion mega\). The first of the visions to be so described (13:3; strkjv@15:1|), and it is introduced by \“phthˆ\ as in strkjv@11:19; strkjv@12:3|, not by \meta tauto\ or by \eidon\ or by \eidon kai idou\ as heretofore. This "sign" is really a \teras\ (wonder), as it is so by association in strkjv@Matthew:24:24; strkjv@John:4:48; strkjv@Acts:2:22; strkjv@5:12|. The element of wonder is not in the word \sˆmeion\ as in \teras\, but often in the thing itself as in strkjv@Luke:21:11; strkjv@John:9:16; strkjv@Revelation:13:13ff.; strkjv@15:1; strkjv@16:14; strkjv@19:20|. {A woman} (\gunˆ\). Nominative case in apposition with \sˆmeion\. "The first 'sign in heaven' is a Woman--the earliest appearance of a female figure in the Apocalyptic vision" (Swete). {Arrayed with the sun} (\peribeblˆmenˆ ton hˆlion\). Perfect passive participle of \periball“\, with the accusative retained as so often (9 times) in the Apocalypse. Both Charles and Moffatt see mythological ideas and sources behind the bold imagery here that leave us all at sea. Swete understands the Woman to be "the church of the Old Testament" as "the Mother of whom Christ came after the flesh. But here, as everywhere in the Book, no sharp dividing line is drawn between the Church of the Old Testament and the Christian Society." Certainly she is not the Virgin Mary, as verse 17| makes clear. Beckwith takes her to be "the heavenly representative of the people of God, the _ideal_ Zion, which, so far as it is embodied in concrete realities, is represented alike by the people of the Old and the New Covenants." John may have in mind strkjv@Isaiah:7:14| (Matthew:1:23; strkjv@Luke:1:31|) as well as strkjv@Micah:4:10; strkjv@Isaiah:26:17f.; strkjv@66:7| without a definite picture of Mary. The metaphor of childbirth is common enough (John:16:21; strkjv@Galatians:4:19|). The figure is a bold one with the moon "under her feet" (\hupokat“ t“n pod“n autˆs\) and "a crown of twelve stars" (\stephanos aster“n d“deka\), a possible allusion to the twelve tribes (James:1:1; strkjv@Revelation:21:12|) or to the twelve apostles (Revelation:21:14|).

rwp@Revelation:12:11 @{They overcame him} (\autoi enikˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \nika“\, the verb used by Jesus of his own victory (John:16:33|) and about him (Revelation:3:21; strkjv@5:5|). "The victory of the martyrs marks the failure of Satan's endeavours" (Swete). {Because of the blood of the Lamb} (\dia to haima tou arniou\). As in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@5:6,9; strkjv@7:14|. The blood of Christ is here presented by \dia\ as the ground for the victory and not the means, as by \en\ in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@5:9|. Both ideas are true, but \dia\ with the accusative gives only the reason. The blood of Christ does cleanse us from sin (John:1:29; strkjv@1John:1:7|). Christ conquered Satan, and so makes our victory possible (Luke:11:21f.; strkjv@Hebrews:2:18|). "Thus the Lamb is the true \sunˆgoros\ (like Michael) of the New Israel, its \paraklˆtos pros ton patera\ (1John:2:1|)" (Swete). {Because of the Word of their testimony} (\dia ton logon tˆs marturias aut“n\). The same use of \dia\, "because of their testimony to Jesus" as in John's own case in strkjv@1:9|. These martyrs have been true to their part. {They loved not their life even unto death} (\ouk ˆgapˆsan ten psuchˆn aut“n achri thanatou\). First aorist active indicative of \agapa“\. They did resist "unto blood" (\mechris haimatos\ strkjv@Hebrews:12:4|) and did not put their own lives before loyalty to Christ. There is a direct reference to the words of Jesus in strkjv@John:12:25| as illustrated also in strkjv@Mark:8:35; strkjv@Matthew:10:39; strkjv@16:25; strkjv@Luke:9:24; strkjv@17:33|. Paul's own example is pertinent (Acts:21:13; strkjv@Phillipians:1:20ff.|). Jesus himself had been "obedient unto death" (Phillipians:2:8|). These martyrs seem to be still alive on earth, but their heroism is proleptically pictured.

rwp@Revelation:17:17 @{Did put} (\ed“ken\). "Did give" (first aorist active of \did“mi\. {To do his mind} (\poiˆsai tˆn gn“mˆn autou\). Epexegetic first aorist active infinitive of \poie“\ after \ed“ken\, as often in this book. They are of one mind (verse 13|) because God put them up to it, clear statement of God's over-ruling hand among the nations. {Until the words of God should be accomplished} (\achri telesthˆsontai hoi logoi tou theou\). Temporal clause about the future with \achri\ (like \he“s\), with the future indicative of \tele“\, but with aorist passive subjunctive \telesth“sin\ in strkjv@15:8|. For \tele“\ see also strkjv@10:7|. For "the words of God" see strkjv@19:9|. They will be fulfilled.

rwp@Revelation:18:14 @{The fruits} (\hˆ op“ra\). The ripe autumn fruit (Jeremiah:40:10,12|). Here only in N.T. Of uncertain etymology (possibly \opos\, sap, \h“ra\, hour, time for juicy sap). See strkjv@Jude:1:12| for \dendra phthinop“rinos\ (autumn trees). {Which thy soul lusteth after} (\sou tˆs epithumias tˆs psuchˆs\). "Of the lusting of thy soul." {Are gone from thee} (\apˆlthen apo sou\). Prophetic aorist active indicative of \aperchomai\ with repetition of \apo\. {All things that were dainty and sumptuous} (\panta ta lipara kai ta lampra\). "All the dainty and the gorgeous things." \Liparos\ is from \lipos\ (grease) and so fat, about food (here only in N.T.), while \lampros\ is bright and shining (James:2:2f.|), about clothing. {Are perished from thee} (\ap“leto apo sou\). Prophetic second aorist middle indicative of \apollumi\ (intransitive). {Shall find them no more at all} (\ouketi ou mˆ auta heurˆsousin\). Doubled double negative with future active, as emphatic a negation as the Greek can make.

rwp@Revelation:19:9 @{Write} (\Grapson\). First aorist active imperative of \graph“\ as in strkjv@1:11; strkjv@14:13|. The speaker may be the angel guide of strkjv@17:1|. {It is another beatitude} (\makarioi\, Blessed) like that in strkjv@14:13| (fourth of the seven in the book). {They which are bidden} (\hoi keklˆmenoi\). Articular perfect passive participle of \kale“\, like strkjv@Matthew:22:3; strkjv@Luke:14:17|. Cf. strkjv@Revelation:17:14|. This beatitude reminds us of that in strkjv@Luke:14:15|. (Cf. strkjv@Matthew:8:11; strkjv@26:29|.) {These are true words of God} (\Houtoi hoi logoi alˆthinoi tou theou eisin\). Undoubtedly, but one should bear in mind that apocalyptic symbolism "has its own methods and laws of interpretation, and by these the student must be guided" (Swete).

rwp@Revelation:19:13 @{Arrayed} (\peribeblˆmenos\). Perfect passive participle of \periball“\, to clothe, often in this book. {In a garment} (\himation\). Accusative case after the passive participle \peribeblˆmenos\. {Sprinkled} (\rerantismenon\). Perfect passive participle of \rantiz“\, in the predicate accusative case agreeing with \himation\. A Q here read \bebammenon\ (perfect passive participle of \bapt“\, to dip). Probably \rerantismenon\ (sprinkled) is correct, because the picture comes from strkjv@Isaiah:63:3|, where Aquila and Symmachus use \rantiz“\. The use of \bebammenon\ (dipped) is a bolder figure and Charles considers it correct. In either case it is the blood of Christ's enemies with which his raiment (\himation\, perhaps a \chlamus\ strkjv@Matthew:27:28,31|) is sprinkled or dipped as the case may be, not his own blood on Calvary (1:5; strkjv@5:9; strkjv@7:14; strkjv@12:11|), but proleptically and prophetically the blood of Christ's enemies. \Haimati\ can be either locative case with \bebammenon\ (dipped in blood) or instrumental with \rerantismenon\ (sprinkled with blood). {The Word of God} (\ho Logos tou theou\). Some scholars hold this addition inconsistent with verse 12|, but it may be merely the explanation of the secret name or still another name besides that known only to himself. The personal use of the Logos applied to Christ occurs only in the Johannine writings unless that is the idea in strkjv@Hebrews:4:12|. In strkjv@John:1:1,14| it is merely \ho Logos\ (the Word), in strkjv@1John:1:1| \ho Logos tˆs z“ˆs\ (the Word of Life), while here it is \ho Logos tou theou\ (the Word of God), one of the strongest arguments for identity of authorship. The idiom here is one common in Luke and Paul for the teaching of Christ (Luke:5:1; strkjv@8:11|, etc.; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:36; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:17|, etc.). Jesus is himself the final and perfect revelation of God to men (Hebrews:1:1f.|).

rwp@Revelation:20:13 @{Gave up} (\ed“ken\). Just "gave" (first aorist active indicative of \did“mi\), but for the sea to give is to give up (effective aorist). Sea as well as land delivers its dead (all kinds of dead, good and bad). Swete notes that accidental deaths will not prevent any from appearing. Milligan is sure that the sea here means "the sea of the troubled and sinful world." {Death and Hades} (\ho thanatos kai ho hƒidˆs\). "An inseparable pair" (Swete) as in strkjv@1:18; strkjv@6:8; strkjv@20:14|. Songs:in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| "the gates of Hades" means the power of death. Etymologically Hades is the unseen world where all who die are as opposed to this visible world, but in actual use Hades is sometimes treated as the abode of the unrighteous (Luke:16:23|). Charles thinks that this is true here, though there is nothing to show it apart from the personification of death and Hades and the casting of both into the lake of fire in verse 14|. Here again "each man" (\hekastos\) receives judgment according to his deeds (Matthew:16:27; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:13; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:10; strkjv@Romans:2:6; strkjv@14:12; strkjv@1Peter:1:17; strkjv@Revelation:2:23|).

rwp@Revelation:21:27 @{There shall in no wise enter into it} (\ou mˆ eiselthˆi eis autˆn\). Double negative again with the second aorist active subjunctive of \eiserchomai\ with \eis\ repeated. Like strkjv@Isaiah:52:1; strkjv@Ezekiel:44:9|. {Anything unclean} (\pƒn koinon\). Common use of \pƒn\ with negative like \ouden\, and the use of \koinos\ for defiled or profane as in strkjv@Mark:7:2; strkjv@Acts:10:14|, not just what is common to all (Titus:1:4|). {Or he that} (\kai ho\). "And he that." {Maketh an abomination and a lie} (\poi“n bdelugma kai pseudos\). Like Babylon (17:4| which see for \bdelugma\) and strkjv@21:8| for those in the lake of fire and brimstone, and strkjv@22:15| for "every one loving and doing a lie." These recurrent glimpses of pagan life on earth and of hell in contrast to heaven in this picture raise the question already mentioned whether John is just running parallel pictures of heaven and hell after the judgment or whether, as Charles says: "The unclean and the abominable and the liars are still on earth, but, though the gates are open day and night, they cannot enter." In apocalyptic writing literalism and chronology cannot be insisted on as in ordinary books. The series of panoramas continue to the end. {But only they which are written} (\ei mˆ hoi gegrammenoi\). "Except those written." For "the book of life" see strkjv@3:5; strkjv@13:8; strkjv@20:15|. Cf. strkjv@Daniel:12:1|.

rwp@Revelation:22:2 @{In the midst of the street thereof} (\en mes“i tˆs plateias autˆs\). Connected probably with the river in verse 1|, though many connect it with verse 2|. Only one street mentioned here as in strkjv@21:21|. {On this side of the river and on that} (\tou potamou enteuthen kai ekeithen\). \Enteuthen\ occurs as a preposition in strkjv@Daniel:12:5| (Theodoret) and may be so here (post-positive), purely adverbial in strkjv@John:19:18|. {The tree of life} (\xulon z“ˆs\). For the metaphor see strkjv@Genesis:1:11f.| and strkjv@Revelation:2:7; strkjv@22:14|. \Xulon\ is used for a green tree in strkjv@Luke:23:31; strkjv@Ezekiel:47:12|. {Bearing} (\poioun\). Neuter active participle of \poie“\ (making, producing, as in strkjv@Matthew:7:17|). Some MSS. have \poi“n\ (masculine), though \xulon\ is neuter. {Twelve manner of fruits} (\karpous d“deka\). "Twelve fruits." {Yielding} (\apodidoun\). Neuter active participle of \apodid“mi\, to give back, but some MSS. have \apodidous\ (masculine) like \poi“n\. {For the healing of the nations} (\eis therapeian t“n ethn“n\). Spiritual healing, of course, as leaves (\phulla\) are often used for obtaining medicines. Here again the problem occurs whether this picture is heaven before the judgment or afterwards. Charles distinguishes sharply between the Heavenly City for the millennial reign and the New Jerusalem that descends from heaven after the judgment. Charles rearranges these chapters to suit his theory. But chronology is precarious here.

rwp@Revelation:22:6 @{He said unto me} (\eipen moi\). Apparently the same angel as in strkjv@22:1| (21:9,15|). {These words} (\houtoi hoi logoi\). The same words used in strkjv@21:5| by the angel there. Whatever the application there, here the angel seems to endorse as "faithful and true" (\pistoi kai alˆthinoi\) not merely the preceding vision (21:9-22:5|), but the revelations of the entire book. The language added proves this: "Sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly come to pass" (\apesteilen ton aggelon autou deixai tois doulois autou ha dei genesthai en tachei\), a direct reference to strkjv@1:1| concerning the purpose of Christ's revelation to John in this book. For "the God of the spirits of the prophets" (\ho theos t“n pneumat“n t“n prophˆt“n\) see strkjv@19:10; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:32|. Probably the prophets' own spirits enlightened by the Holy Spirit (10:7; strkjv@11:8; strkjv@22:9|).

rwp@Revelation:22:9 @{See thou do it not} (\Hora mˆ\). The angel promptly interposes (\legei\, dramatic present). See strkjv@19:10| for discussion of this same phrase \hora mˆ\ when John had once before started to worship the angel in his excitement. Here we have added to the words in strkjv@19:10| "the prophets (\t“n prophˆt“n\) and also "them which keep the words of this book" (\t“n tˆrount“n tous logous tou bibliou toutou\), the last a repetition from strkjv@22:7|. In both places we have "Worship God" (\t“i the“i proskunˆson\). And not an angel.

rwp@Revelation:22:16 @{I Jesus} (\Eg“ Iˆsous\). The last and most solemn attestation to the book that from Jesus (the historic Jesus known to the churches), in harmony with strkjv@1:1f|. {Have sent} (\epempsa\). First aorist active indicative of \pemp“\, used here in the same sense as \aposteilas\ in strkjv@1:1| as his personal messenger. It is the Jesus of history here speaking, who is also the Christ of theology and the Lamb of God. {For the churches} (\epi tais ekklˆsiais\). For this use of \epi\ see strkjv@10:11; strkjv@John:12:16|. It is not just for the seven churches (1:4|), but for all the churches in the world then and now. {I am the root and the offspring of David} (\Eg“ eimi hˆ riza kai to genos Daueid\). See strkjv@5:5| for "the root of David," to which John now adds \to genos\ in the sense of "offspring" (Acts:17:28f.|), not of family or race (Acts:4:6; strkjv@7:13|). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:22:42-45|. {The bright, the morning star} (\ho astˆr ho lampros ho pr“inos\). The Davidic King is called a star in strkjv@Numbers:24:17; strkjv@Luke:1:78|. This "day-star" (\ph“sphoros\) is interpreted as Christ (2Peter:1:19|). In strkjv@Revelation:2:28| the phrase "the morning star" occurs in Christ's words, which is here interpreted. Christ is the Light that was coming into the world (John:1:9; strkjv@8:12|).

rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE UNITY OF THE APOCALYPSE Repeated efforts have been made to show that the Apocalypse of John is not the work of one man, but a series of Jewish and Christian apocalypses pieced together in a more or less bungling fashion. Spitta argued for this in 1889. Vischer was followed by Harnack in the view there was a Jewish apocalypse worked over by a Christian. Gunkel (_Creation and Chaos_, 1895) argued for a secret apocalyptic tradition of Babylonian origin. In 1904 J. Weiss carried on the argument for sources behind the Apocalypse. Many of the Jewish apocalypses do show composite authorship. There was a current eschatology which may have been drawn on without its being a written source. It is in chapter strkjv@Revelation:12| where the supposed Jewish source is urged more vigorously about the woman, the dragon, and the man child. There are no differences in language (vocabulary or grammar) that argue for varied sources. The author may indeed make use of events in the reign of Nero as well as in the reign of Domitian, but the essential unity of the book has stood the test of the keenest criticism.

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

rwp@Info_Revelation @ A BRIEF BIBLIOGRAPHY (ONLY BOOKS SINCE 1875) Abbott, E. A., _Johannine Grammar_ (1906).,_Notes on New Testament Criticism_ (Part VII of Diatessarica, 1907). Allo, E. B., _L'apocalypse et l'epoque de la parousia_ (1915).,_Saint Jean. L'apocalypse_ (1921). Baldensperger, _Messian. Apok. Hoffnung_. 3rd ed. (1903). Baljon, J. M. S., _Openbaring van Johannes_ (1908). Beckwith, J. T., _The Apocalypse of John_ (1919). Benson, E. W., _The Apocalypse_ (1900). Berg, _The Drama of the Apocalypse_ (1894). Bleek, F., _Lectures on the Apocalypse_ (1875). Boll, _Aus der Offenbarung Johannis_ (1914). Bousset, W., _Die Offenbarung Johannis_. 2 Aufl. (1906).,_Zur Textkritik der Apokalypse_ (1894). Brown, Charles, _Heavenly Visions_ (1911). Brown, D., _The Structure of the Apocalypse_ (1891). Bullinger, _Die Apokalypse_ (1904). Bungeroth, _Schlussel zur Offenbarung Johannis_ (1907). Burger, C. H. A., _Offenbarung Johannis_ (1877). Cadwell, _The Revelation of Jesus Christ_ (1920). Calmes, _L'Apokalypse devant la Critique_ (1907). Campbell, _The Patmos Letters Applied to Modern Criticism_ (1908). Carrington, P., _The Meaning of the Revelation_ (1931). Case, S. J., _The Millennial Hope_ (1918).,_The Revelation of John_ (1920). Charles, R. H., _Studies in the Apocalypse_ (1913).,_The Revelation of St. John_. 2 vols. (1921). Chevalin, _L'apocalypse et les temps presents_ (1904). Crampon, _L'apocalypse de S. Jean_ (1904). Dean, J. T., _The Book of Revelation_ (1915) Deissmann, A., _Light from the Ancient East_. Tr. by Strachan (1927). Delaport, _Fragments sahidiques du N.T. Apocalypse_ (1906). Douglas, C. E., _New Light on the Revelation of St. John the Divine_ (1923). Dusterdieck, _Offenbarung Johannis_. 4 Aufl. (1887). Eckman, _When Christ Comes Again_ (1917). Erbes, _Offenbar. Johan. Kritischuntersucht_ (1891). Forbes, H. P., _International Handbook on the Apocalypse_ (1907). Gebhardt, _Doctrine of the Apocalypse_ (1878). Geil, W. E., _The Isle That Is Called Patmos_ (1905). Gibson, E. C. S., _The Revelation of St. John_ (1910). Gigot, _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1915). Glazebrook, _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1924). Gunkel, H., _Schopfung und Chaos_ (1895). Gwynn, _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1897). Harnack, A., _Die Chronologie der altchristlichen Litteratur_. Bd I (1897). Henderson, B. W., _The Life and Principate of the Emperor Nero_ (1903). Hill, _Apocalyptic Problems_ (1916). Hill, Erskine, _Mystic Studies in the Apocalypse_ (1931). Hirscht, _Die Apokalypse und ihre neueste Kritik_ (1895). Holtzmann, H. J., _Die Offenbarung Johannis_ (1891). Holtzmann-Bauer, _Hand-Comm., Offenbarung des Johannis_. 3 Aufl. (1908). Horne, _The Meaning of the Apocalypse_ (1916). Hort, F. J. A., _The Apocalypse of St. John, Chs. 1-3_ (1908). James, M. R., _The Apocalypse in Art_ (1931). Jowett, G. T., _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1910). Kubel, _Offenbarung Johannis_ (1893). Laughlin, _The Solecisms of the Apocalypse_ (1902). Lee, S., _Revelation in Speaker's Comm_. (1881). Linder, _Die Offenbarung des Johannis aufgeschlossen_ (1905). Llwyd, J. P. D., _The Son of Thunder_ (1932). Lohmeyer, E., _Die Offenbarung des Johannes_. Handbuch zum N.T. (1926). Loisy, A., _L'Apocalypse de Jean_ (1923). Matheson, _Sidelights upon Patmos_. Milligan, W., _The Revelation of St. John_. Schaff's Popular Comm. (1885).,_The Book of Revelation_. Expositor's Bible (1889).,_Lectures on the Apocalypse_ (1892).,_Discussions on the Apocalypse_ (1893). Moffatt, James, _Intr. to Literature of the N.T_. (1911).,_Revelation in Expos. Greek Testament_ (1910). Moule, H.C., _Some Thoughts on the Seven Epistles_ (1915). Mozley, _The Christian's Hope in the Apocalypse_ (1915). Oman, John, _The Book of Revelation_ (1923).,_The Text of Revelation_ (1928). Osborn, _The Lion and the Lamb_ (1922). Palmer, _The Drama of the Apocalypse_ (1902). Paul, _Latter Day Light on the Apocalypse_ (1898). Peake, A. S., _The Revelation of John_ (1921). Porter, F. C., _The Messages of the Apocalyptic Writers_ (1905). Pounder, _Historical Notes on the Book of Revelation_ (1912). Prager, L., _Die Offenbarung Johannis_ (1901). Ramsay, A., _Revelation in Westminster N.T_. (1910). Ramsay, W. M., _The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia_ (1904). Rauch, _Offenbarung des Johannis_ (1894). Reymond, _L'apocalypse_ (1908). Ross, J. J., _Pearls from Patmos_ (1923). Russell, J. S., _The Parousia_ (1878). Sabatier, _Les Origines Litteraires et la Comp. de l'Apoc_. (1888). Schlatter, _Der Evangelist Johannes_ (1931). Schoen, _L'Origine de l'Apocalypse_ (1887). Scott, C. Anderson, _Revelation in New Century Bible_ (1902). Scott, C. A., _Revelation in Devot. Comm_. (1906). Scott, J. J., _Lectures on the Apocalypse_ (1909). Selwyn, E. C., _The Christian Prophets and the Prophetic Apocalypse_ (1901). Shepherd, W. J. L., _The Revelation of St. John the Divine_. 2 vols. (1923). Simcox, W. H., _Revelation in Cambridge Greek Testament_ (1893). Smith, J. A., _Revelation in American Comm_. (1888).,_The World Lighted_ (1890).,_The Divine Parable of History_ (1901). Spitta, F., _Die Offenbarung des Johannis_ (1889). Strange, _Instructions on the Revelation of St. John the Divine_ (1900). Swete, H. B., _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1906). 2nd ed. 1907. Turner, C. H., _Studies in Early Church History_ (1912). Vischer, _Die Offenb. Johan. eine judische Apok_ (1886). Volter, _Offenb. Johannis_. 2 Aufl. (1911).,_Das Problem der Apok_. (1893). Weiss, B., _Die Johannes-Apokalypse_. Textkrit. (1891, 2 Aufl. 1902). Weiss, J., _Offenb. Johannis_ (1904). Wellhausen, J., _Analyse der Offenb_. (1907). Weyland, _Omwerkings-en Compilatie-Hupothesen Toegepast op de Apok_. (1888). Whiting, _The Revelation of John_ (1918). Zahn, _Introduction to the N.T_. 3 vols. (1909).,_Komm_. (1926).

rwp@Info_Romans @ THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS SPRING OF A.D. 57 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION INTEGRITY OF THE EPISTLE The genuineness of the Epistle is so generally admitted by scholars that it is unnecessary to prove it here, for Loman, Steck, and the Dutch scholars (Van Manen, etc.) who deny it as Pauline are no longer taken seriously. He wrote it from Corinth because he sent it to Rome by Phoebe of Cenchreae (Romans:16:2|) if chapter 16 is acknowledged to be a part of the Epistle. Chapter 16 is held by some to be really a short epistle to Ephesus because of the long list of names in it, because of Paul's long stay in Ephesus, because he had not yet been to Rome, and because, in particular, Aquila and Priscilla are named (Romans:16:3-5|) who had been with Paul in Ephesus. But they had come from Rome before going to Corinth and there is no reason for thinking that they did not return to Rome. It was quite possible for Paul to have many friends in Rome whom he had met elsewhere. People naturally drifted to Rome from all over the empire. The old MSS. (Aleph A B C D) give chapter 16 as an integral part of the Epistle. Marcion rejected it and chapter 15 also for reasons of his own. Renan's theory that Romans was a circular letter like Ephesians sent in different forms to different churches (Rome, Ephesus, Thessalonica, etc.) has appealed to some scholars as explaining the several doxologies in the Epistle, but they cause no real difficulty since Paul interjected them in his other epistles according to his moods (2Corinthians:1:20|, for instance). That theory raises more problems than it solves as, for example, Paul's remarks about going to Rome (Romans:1:9-16|) which apply to Rome. Lightfoot suggests the possibility that Paul added strkjv@Romans:16:25-27| some years after the original date so as to turn it into a circular letter. But the MSS. do not support that theory and that leaves strkjv@Romans:15:22-33 in the Epistle quite unsuitable to a circular letter. Modern knowledge leaves the Epistle intact with occasional variations in the MSS. on particular points as is true of all the N.T.

rwp@Info_Romans @ THE PURPOSE Paul tells this himself. He had long cherished a desire to come to Rome (Acts:19:21|) and had often made his plans to do so (Romans:1:13|) which were interrupted (Romans:15:22|), but now he definitely plans to go from Jerusalem, after taking the contribution there (Romans:15:26|), to Rome and then on to Spain (Romans:15:24,28|). Meanwhile he sends this Epistle that the Romans may know what Paul's gospel really is (Romans:1:15; strkjv@2:16|). He is full of the issues raised by the Judaizing controversy as set forth in the Epistles to Corinth and to Galatia. Songs:in a calmer mood and more at length he presents his conception of the Righteousness demanded by God (Romans:1:17|) of both Gentile (Romans:1:18-32|) and Jew (Romans:2:1-3:20|) and only to be obtained by faith in Christ who by his atoning death (justification) has made it possible (Romans:3:21-5:21|). This new life of faith in Christ should lead to holiness of life (sanctification, chapters strkjv@Romans:6-8|). This is Paul's gospel and the remaining chapters deal with corollaries growing out of the doctrine of grace as applied to practical matters. It is a cause for gratitude that Paul did write out so full a statement of his message. He had a message for the whole world and was anxious to win the Roman Empire to Christ. It was important that he go to Rome for it was the centre of the world's life. Nowhere does Paul's Christian statesmanship show to better advantage than in this greatest of his Epistles. It is not a book of formal theology though Paul is the greatest of theologians. Here Paul is seen in the plenitude of his powers with all the wealth of his knowledge of Christ and his rich experience in mission work. The church in Rome is plainly composed of both Jews and Greeks, though who started the work there we have no way of knowing. Paul's ambition was to preach where no one else had been (Romans:15:20|), but he has no hesitation in going on to Rome.

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:1:7 @{In Rome} (\en R“mˆi\). One late uncial (G of tenth century) and a cursive omit these words here and one or two other late MSS. omit \en R“mˆi\ in verse 15|. This possibly proves the Epistle was circulated as a circular to a limited extent, but the evidence is late and slight and by no means shows that this was the case in the first century. It is not comparable with the absence of \en Ephes“i\ in strkjv@Ephesians:1:1| from Aleph and B (the two oldest and best MSS.). {Beloved of God} (\agapˆtois theou\). Ablative case of \theou\ after the verbal adjective like \didaktoi theou\ (taught of God) in strkjv@John:6:45| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516). {From God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ} (\apo theou patros hˆm“n kai kuriou Iˆsou Christou\). "St. Paul, if not formally enunciating a doctrine of the Divinity of Christ, held a view which cannot really be distinguished from it" (Sanday and Headlam). Paul's theology is clearly seen in the terms used in verses 1-7|.

rwp@Romans:1:8 @{First} (\pr“ton men\). Adverb in the accusative case, but no \epeita de\ (in the next place) as in strkjv@Hebrews:7:2| or \epeita\ as in strkjv@James:3:17| follows. The rush of thoughts crowds out the balanced phraseology as in strkjv@Romans:3:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:18|. {Through} (\dia\). As the mediator or medium of thanksgiving as in strkjv@7:25|. {For} (\peri\). Concerning, about. {That} (\hoti\). Or because. Either declarative or causal \hoti\ makes sense here. {Your faith} (\hˆ pistis hum“n\). "Your Christianity" (Sanday and Headlam). {Is proclaimed} (\kataggelletai\). Present passive indicative of \kataggell“\, to announce (\aggell“\) up and down (\kata\). See also \anaggell“\, to bring back news (John:5:15|), \apaggell“\, to announce from one as the source (Matthew:2:8|), \prokataggell“\, to announce far and wide beforehand (Acts:3:18|). {Throughout all the world} (\en hol“i t“i kosm“i\). Natural hyperbole as in strkjv@Colossians:1:6; strkjv@Acts:17:6|. But widely known because the church was in the central city of the empire.

rwp@Romans:1:19 @{Because} (\dioti\). Gives the reason (\dia, hoti\ like our "for that") for the revelation of God's wrath. {That which may be known of God} (\to gn“ston tou theou\). Verbal adjective from \gin“sk“\, either "the known" as elsewhere in N.T. (Acts:1:19; strkjv@15:18|, etc.) or "the knowable" as usual in ancient Greek, that is "the knowledge" (\hˆ gn“sis\) of God. See strkjv@Phillipians:3:8|. Cf. same use of the verbal \chrˆston\ in strkjv@Romans:2:4|, \ametatheton\ in strkjv@Hebrews:6:17|. {Manifest in them} (\phaneron en autois\). In their hearts and consciences. {God manifested} (\ho theos ephaner“sen\). First aorist active indicative of \phanero“\. Not mere tautology. See strkjv@2:14-16|.

rwp@Romans:1:20 @{The invisible things of him} (\ta aorata autou\). Another verbal adjective (\a\ privative and \hora“\, to see), old word, either unseen or invisible as here and elsewhere in N.T. (Colossians:1:15f.|, etc.). The attributes of God's nature defined here as "his everlasting power and divinity" (\hˆ te aidios autou dunamis kai theiotˆs\). \Aidios\ is for \aeidios\ from \aei\ (always), old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Jude:1:6|, common in Philo (\z“ˆ aidios\), elsewhere \ai“nios\. \Theiotˆs\ is from \theios\ (from \theos\) quality of \theos\ and corresponds more to Latin _divinitas_ from _divus_, divine. In strkjv@Colossians:2:9| Paul uses \theotˆs\ (Latin _deitas_ from _deus_) {deity}, both old words and nowhere else in the N.T. \Theotˆs\ is Divine Personality, \theiotˆs\, Divine Nature and properties (Sanday and Headlam). {Since the creation of the world} (\apo ktise“s kosmou\). He means by God and unto God as antecedent to and superior to the world (cf. strkjv@Colossians:1:15f|. about Christ). {Are clearly seen} (\kathoratai\). Present passive indicative of \kathora“\ (perfective use of \kata-\), old word, only here in N.T., with direct reference to \aorata\. {Being perceived} (\nooumena\). Present passive participle of \noe“\, to use the \nous\ (intellect). {That they may be without excuse} (\eis to einai autous anapologˆtous\). More likely, "so that they are without excuse." The use of \eis to\ and the infinitive (with accusative of general reference) for result like \h“ste\ is reasonably clear in the N.T. (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 219; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1003). \Anapologˆtous\ is another verbal with \an\ from \apologeomai\. Old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:2:1| ("inexcusable" here).

rwp@Romans:1:24 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). Paul's inexorable logic. See it also in verse 26| with the same verb and in verse 28| \kai\ like "and so." {God gave them up} (\pared“ken autous ho theos\). First aorist active indicative of \paradid“mi\, old and common verb to hand over (beside, \para\) to one's power as in strkjv@Matthew:4:12|. These people had already wilfully deserted God who merely left them to their own self-determination and self-destruction, part of the price of man's moral freedom. Paul refers to this stage and state of man in strkjv@Acts:17:30| by "overlooked" (\huperid“n\). The withdrawal of God's restraint sent men deeper down. Three times Paul uses \pared“ken\ here (verses 24,26,28|), not three stages in the giving over, but a repetition of the same withdrawal. The words sound to us like clods on the coffin as God leaves men to work their own wicked will. {That their bodies should be dishonoured} (\tou atimazesthai ta s“mata aut“n\). Contemplated result expressed by \tou\ (genitive article) and the passive infinitive \atimazesthai\ (from \atimos\, \a\ privative and \timos\, dishonoured) with the accusative of general reference. Christians had a new sense of dignity for the body (1Thessalonians:4:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:6:13|). Heathenism left its stamp on the bodies of men and women.

rwp@Romans:1:25 @{Exchanged} (\metˆllaxan\). First aorist active indicative of \metallass“\, old word for exchanging trade, only here and verse 26| in N.T. What a bargain they made, "the truth of God for (\en\) the (\t“i\) lie." "The price of mythology" (Bengel). {Worshipped} (\esebasthˆsan\). First aorist passive (used transitively) of \sebazomai\, old verb, used in late Greek like \sebomai\, to worship. {Rather than the Creator} (\para ton ktisanta\). Placed side by side (\para\, the Creator and the creature, \ktisis\) they preferred the creature. {Who is blessed forever. Amen} (\hos estin eulogˆtos. Amˆn\). One of Paul's doxologies which may come at any moment when he is greatly stirred, as in strkjv@9:5|. \Eulogˆtos\ is verbal of \euloge“\.

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

rwp@Romans:2:15 @{In that they} (\hoitines\). "The very ones who," qualitative relative. {Written in their hearts} (\grapton en tais kardiais aut“n\). Verbal adjective of \graph“\, to write. When their conduct corresponds on any point with the Mosaic law they practise the unwritten law in their hearts. {Their conscience bearing witness therewith} (\sunmarturousˆs aut“n tˆs suneidˆse“s\). On conscience (\suneidˆsis\) see on ¯1Corinthians:8:7; strkjv@10:25f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:12|. Genitive absolute here with present active participle \sunmarturousˆs\ as in strkjv@9:1|. The word \suneidˆsis\ means co-knowledge by the side of the original consciousness of the act. This second knowledge is personified as confronting the first (Sanday and Headlam). The Stoics used the word a great deal and Paul has it twenty times. It is not in the O.T., but first in this sense in Wisdom strkjv@17:10. All men have this faculty of passing judgment on their actions. It can be over-scrupulous (1Corinthians:10:25|) or "seared" by abuse (1Timothy:4:12|). It acts according to the light it has. {Their thoughts one with another accusing or also excusing them} (\metaxu allˆl“n t“n logism“n katˆgorount“n ˆ kai apologoumen“n\). Genitive absolute again showing the alternative action of the conscience, now accusing, now excusing. Paul does not say that a heathen's conscience always commends everything that he thinks, says, or does. In order for one to be set right with God by his own life he must always act in accord with his conscience and never have its disapproval. That, of course, is impossible else Christ died for naught (Galatians:2:21|). Jesus alone lived a sinless life. For one to be saved without Christ he must also live a sinless life.

rwp@Romans:2:29 @{Who is one inwardly} (\ho en t“i krupt“i\). Repeat \Ioudaios\ (Jew) here also, "the in the inward part Jew" (circumcision of the heart \peritomˆ kardias\ and not a mere surgical operation as in strkjv@Colossians:2:11|, in the spirit \en pneumati\, with which compare strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3,6|). This inward or inside Jew who lives up to his covenant relation with God is the high standard that Paul puts before the merely professional Jew described above. {Whose praise} (\hou ho epainos\). The antecedent of the relative \hou\ is \Ioudaios\ (Jew). Probably (Gifford) a reference to the etymology of Judah (praise) as seen in strkjv@Galatians:49:8|.

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

rwp@Romans:3:21 @{But now apart from the law} (\nuni de ch“ris nomou\). He now (\nuni\ emphatic logical transition) proceeds carefully in verses 21-31| the {nature} of the God-kind of righteousness which stands manifested (\dikaiosunˆ theou pephaner“tai\, perfect passive indicative of \phanero“\, to make manifest), the {necessity} of which he has shown in strkjv@1:18-3:20|. This God kind of righteousness is "apart from law" of any kind and all of grace (\chariti\) as he will show in verse 24|. But it is not a new discovery on the part of Paul, but "witnessed by the law and the prophets" (\marturoumenˆ\, present passive participle, \hupo tou nomou kai t“n prophˆt“n\), made plain continuously by God himself.

rwp@Romans:3:28 @{We reckon therefore} (\logizometha oun\). Present middle indicative. Westcott and Hort read \gar\ instead of \oun\. "My fixed opinion" is. The accusative and infinitive construction occurs after \logizometha\ here. On this verb \logizomai\, see strkjv@2:3; strkjv@4:3f.; strkjv@8:18; strkjv@14:14|. Paul restates verses 21f|.

rwp@Romans:4:3 @{It was reckoned unto him for righteousness} (\elogisthˆ eis dikaiosunˆn\). First aorist passive indicative of \logizomai\, old and common verb to set down accounts (literally or metaphorically). It was set down on the credit side of the ledger "for" (\eis\ as often) righteousness. What was set down? His believing God (\episteusen t“i the“i\).

rwp@Romans:4:8 @{To whom} (\h“i\). But the best MSS. read \hou\ like the LXX and so Westcott and Hort, "whose sin." {Will not reckon} (\ou mˆ logisˆtai\). Strong negation by double negative and aorist middle subjunctive.

rwp@Romans:4:11 @{The sign of circumcision} (\sˆmeion peritomˆs\). It is the genitive of apposition, circumcision being the sign. {A seal of the righteousness of the faith} (\sphragida tˆs dikaiosunˆs tˆs piste“s\). \Sphragis\ is old word for the seal placed on books (Revelation:5:1|), for a signet-ring (Revelation:7:2|), the stamp made by the seal (2Timothy:2:19|), that by which anything is confirmed (1Corinthians:9:2|) as here. The circumcision did not convey the righteousness, but only gave outward confirmation. It came by faith and "the faith which he had while in uncircumcision" (\tˆs en tˆi akrobustiƒi\), "the in the state of uncircumcision faith." Whatever parallel exists between baptism and circumcision as here stated by Paul argues for faith before baptism and for baptism as the sign and seal of the faith already had before baptism. {That he might be} (\eis to einai auton\). This idiom may be God's purpose (contemplated result) as in \eis to logisthˆnai\ below, or even actual result (so that he was) as in strkjv@1:20|. {Though they be in uncircumcision} (\di' akrobustias\). Simply, "of those who believe while in the condition of uncircumcision."

rwp@Romans:4:13 @{That he should be the heir of the world} (\to klˆronomon auton einai kosmou\). The articular infinitive (\to einai\) with the accusative of general reference in loose apposition with \hˆ epaggelia\ (the promise). But where is that promise? Not just strkjv@Genesis:12:7|, but the whole chain of promises about his son, his descendants like the stars in heaven, the Messiah and the blessing to the world through him. In these verses (13-17|) Paul employs (Sanday and Headlam) the keywords of his gospel (faith, promise, grace) and arrays them against the current Jewish theology (law, works, merit).

rwp@Romans:5:13 @{Until the law} (\achri nomou\). Until the Mosaic law. Sin was there before the Mosaic law, for the Jews were like Gentiles who had the law of reason and conscience (2:12-16|), but the coming of the law increased their responsibility and their guilt (2:9|). {Sin is not imputed} (\hamartia de ouk ellogeitai\). Present passive indicative of late verb \elloga“\ (\-e“\) from \en\ and \logos\, to put down in the ledger to one's account, examples in inscription and papyri. {When there is no law} (\mˆ ontos nomou\). Genitive absolute, no law of any kind, he means. There was law _before_ the Mosaic law. But what about infants and idiots in case of death? Do they have responsibility? Surely not. The sinful nature which they inherit is met by Christ's atoning death and grace. No longer do men speak of "elect infants."

rwp@Romans:5:21 @{That--even so grace might reign} (\hina--houtos kai hˆ charis basileusˆi\). Final \hina\ here, the purpose of God and the goal for us through Christ. Lightfoot notes the force of the aorist indicative (\ebasileusen\, established its throne) and the aorist subjunctive (\basileusˆi\, might establish its throne), the ingressive aorist both times. "This full rhetorical close has almost the value of a doxology" (Denney).

rwp@Romans:6:11 @{Reckon ye also yourselves} (\kai humeis logizesthe\). Direct middle imperative of \logizomai\ and complete proof that Paul does not mean that baptism makes one dead to sin and alive to God. That is a spiritual operation "in Christ Jesus" and only pictured by baptism. This is a plea to live up to the ideal of the baptized life.

rwp@Romans:7:4 @{Ye also were made to the law} (\kai humeis ethanat“thˆte\). First aorist indicative passive of \thanato“\, old verb, to put to death (Matthew:10:21|) or to make to die (extinct) as here and strkjv@Romans:8:13|. The analogy calls for the death of the law, but Paul refuses to say that. He changes the structure and makes them dead to the law as the husband (6:3-6|). The relation of marriage is killed "through the body of Christ" as the "propitiation" (3:25|) for us. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:1:22|. {That we should be joined to another} (\eis to genesthai heter“i\). Purpose clause with \eis to\ and the infinitive. First mention of the saints as wedded to Christ as their Husband occurs in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:13; strkjv@Galatians:4:26|. See further strkjv@Ephesians:5:22-33|. {That we might bring forth fruit unto God} (\hina karpophorˆs“men t“i the“i\). He changes the metaphor to that of the tree used in strkjv@6:22|.

rwp@Romans:7:17 @{Songs:now} (\nuni de\). A logical contrast, "as the case really stands." {But sin that dwelleth in me} (\all' hˆ enoikousa en emoi hamartia\). "But the dwelling in me sin." Not my true self, my higher personality, but my lower self due to my slavery to indwelling sin. Paul does not mean to say that his whole self has no moral responsibility by using this paradox. "To be saved from sin, a man must at the same time own it and disown it" (Denney).

rwp@Romans:9:5 @{Of whom} (\ex h“n\). Fourth relative clause and here with \ex\ and the ablative. {Christ} (\ho Christos\). The Messiah. {As concerning the flesh} (\to kata sarka\). Accusative of general reference, "as to the according to the flesh." Paul limits the descent of Jesus from the Jews to his human side as he did in strkjv@1:3f|. {Who is over all, God blessed for ever} (\ho on epi pant“n theos eulogˆtos\). A clear statement of the deity of Christ following the remark about his humanity. This is the natural and the obvious way of punctuating the sentence. To make a full stop after \sarka\ (or colon) and start a new sentence for the doxology is very abrupt and awkward. See strkjv@Acts:20:28; strkjv@Titus:2:13| for Paul's use of \theos\ applied to Jesus Christ.

rwp@Romans:9:9 @{A word of promise} (\epaggelias ho logos houtos\). Literally, "this word is one of promise." Paul combines strkjv@Genesis:18:10,14| from the LXX.

rwp@Romans:9:11 @{The children being not yet born} (\mˆp“ gennˆthent“n\). Genitive absolute with first aorist passive participle of \genna“\, to beget, to be born, though no word for children nor even the pronoun \aut“n\ (they). {Neither having done anything good or bad} (\mˆde praxant“n ti agathon ˆ phaulon\). Genitive absolute again with first active participle of \prass“\. On \phaulon\, see strkjv@2Corinthians:5:10|. {The purpose of God} (\hˆ prothesis tou theou\). See strkjv@8:28| for \prothesis\. {According to election} (\kat' eklogˆn\). Old word from \ekleg“\, to select, to choose out. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:4|. Here it is the purpose (\prothesis\) of God which has worked according to the principles of election. {Not of works} (\ouk ex erg“n\). Not of merit.

rwp@Romans:10:9 @{If thou shalt confess} (\ean homologˆsˆis\). Third class condition (\ean\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \homologe“\). {With thy mouth Jesus as Lord} (\en t“i stomati sou Kurion Iˆsoun\). This is the reading of nearly all the MSS. But B 71 Clem of Alex. read \to rˆma en t“i stomati sou hoti Kurios Iˆsous\ (the word in thy mouth that Jesus is Lord). The idea is the same, the confession of Jesus as Lord as in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3; strkjv@Phillipians:2:11|. No Jew would do this who had not really trusted Christ, for \Kurios\ in the LXX is used of God. No Gentile would do it who had not ceased worshipping the emperor as \Kurios\. The word \Kurios\ was and is the touchstone of faith. {And shalt believe} (\kai pisteusˆis\). Same construction. Faith precedes confession, of course.

rwp@Romans:10:10 @{Man believeth} (\pisteuetai\). Impersonal construction, "it is believed" (present passive indicative of \pisteu“\). The order is reversed in this verse and the true order (faith, then confession). {Confession is made} (\homologeitai\). Impersonal construction again, "it is confessed," "man confesses." Both \kardiƒi\ (heart) and \stomati\ (mouth) are in the instrumental case.

rwp@Romans:11:3 @{They have digged down} (\kateskapsan\). First aorist active indicative of \kataskapt“\, to dig under or down. Old verb, here only in N.T. (critical text). LXX has \katheilan\ "pulled down." Paul has reversed the order of the LXX of strkjv@1Kings:19:10,14,18|. {Altars} (\thusiastˆria\). Late word (LXX, Philo, Josephus, N.T. eccl. writers) from \thusiaz“\, to sacrifice. See strkjv@Acts:17:23|. {And I am left alone} (\kag“ hupeleiphthˆn monos\). First aorist passive indicative of \hupoleip“\, old word, to leave under or behind, here only in N.T. Elijah's mood was that of utter dejection in his flight from Jezebel. {Life} (\psuchˆn\). It is not possible to draw a clear distinction between \psuchˆ\ (soul) and \pneuma\ (spirit). \Psuchˆ\ is from \psuch“\, to breathe or blow, \pneuma\ from \pne“\, to blow. Both are used for the personality and for the immortal part of man. Paul is usually dichotomous in his language, but sometimes trichotomous in a popular sense. We cannot hold Paul's terms to our modern psychological distinctions.

rwp@Romans:11:5 @{Remnant} (\limma\). Old word, but only here in N.T., but in papyri also and with this spelling rather than \leimma\. From \leip“\, to leave. {According to the election of grace} (\kat' eklogˆn charitos\). As in strkjv@9:6-13|. The election is all of God. Verse 6| explains it further.

rwp@Romans:11:7 @{What then?} (\ti oun?\). Since God did not push Israel away (verse 1|), what is true? {The election} (\hˆ eklogˆ\). Abstract for concrete (the elect). {Obtained} (\epetuchen\). Second aorist active indicative of \epitugchan“\, old verb, to hit upon, only here in Paul. See strkjv@9:30-33| for the failure of the Jews. {Were hardened} (\ep“r“thˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \p“ro“\, late verb, to cover with thick skin (\p“ros\). See on strkjv@2Corinthians:3:14; strkjv@Mark:3:5|.

rwp@Romans:11:25 @{This mystery} (\to mustˆrion touto\). Not in the pagan sense of an esoteric doctrine for the initiated (from \mue“\, to blink, to wink), unknown secrets (2Thessalonians:2:7|), or like the mystery religions of the time, but the revealed will of God now made known to all (1Corinthians:2:1,7; strkjv@4:1|) which includes Gentiles also (Romans:16:25; strkjv@Colossians:1:26f.; strkjv@Ephesians:3:3f.|) and so far superior to man's wisdom (Colossians:2:2; strkjv@4:13; strkjv@Ephesians:3:9; strkjv@5:32; strkjv@6:19; strkjv@Matthew:13:11; strkjv@Mark:4:11|). Paul has covered every point of difficulty concerning the failure of the Jews to accept Jesus as the Messiah and has shown how God has overruled it for the blessing of the Gentiles with a ray of hope still held out for the Jews. "In early ecclesiastical Latin \mustˆrion\ was rendered by _sacramentum_, which in classical Latin means _the military oath_. The explanation of the word _sacrament_, which is so often founded on this etymology, is therefore mistaken, since the meaning of sacrament belongs to \mustˆrion\ and not to _sacramentum_ in the classical sense" (Vincent). {Wise in your own conceits} (\en heautois phronimoi\). "Wise in yourselves." Some MSS. read \par' heautois\ (by yourselves). Negative purpose here (\hina mˆ ˆte\), to prevent self-conceit on the part of the Gentiles who have believed. They had no merit in themselves {A hardening} (\p“r“sis\). Late word from \p“ro“\ (11:7|). Occurs in Hippocrates as a medical term, only here in N.T. save strkjv@Mark:3:5; strkjv@Ephesians:4:18|. It means obtuseness of intellectual discernment, mental dulness. {In part} (\apo merous\). Goes with the verb \gegonen\ (has happened in part). For \apo merous\, see strkjv@2Corinthians:1:14; strkjv@2:5; strkjv@Romans:15:24|; for \ana meros\, see strkjv@1Corinthians:14:27|; for \ek merous\, see strkjv@1Corinthians:12:27; strkjv@13:9|; for \kata meros\, see strkjv@Hebrews:9:5|; for \meros ti\ (adverbial accusative) partly see strkjv@1Corinthians:11:18|. Paul refuses to believe that no more Jews will be saved. {Until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in} (\achri hou to plˆr“ma t“n ethn“n eiselthˆi\). Temporal clause with \achri hou\ (until which time) and the second aorist active subjunctive of \eiserchomai\, to come in (Matthew:7:13,21|). {For fulness of the Gentiles} (\to plˆr“ma t“n ethn“n\) see on verse ¯12|, the complement of the Gentiles.

rwp@Romans:11:28 @{As touching the gospel} (\kata to euaggelion\). "According to (\kata\ with the accusative) the gospel" as Paul has shown in verses 11-24|, the gospel order as it has developed. {Enemies} (\echthroi\). Treated as enemies (of God), in passive sense, because of their rejection of Christ (verse 10|), just as \agapˆtoi\ (beloved) is passive. {As touching the election} (\kata tˆn eklogˆn\). "According to the election" (the principle of election, not as in verses 5f.| the elect or abstract for concrete). {For the fathers' sake} (\dia tous pateras\). As in strkjv@9:4; strkjv@11:16f|.

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 ai“nas\). "For the ages." Alford terms this doxology in verses 33-36| "the sublimest apostrophe existing even in the pages of inspiration itself."

rwp@Romans:12:1 @{Therefore} (\oun\). This inferential participle gathers up all the great argument of chapters 1-11|. Now Paul turns to exhortation (\parakal“\), "I beseech you." {By the mercies} (\dia t“n oiktirm“n\). "By means of the mercies of God" as shown in his argument and in our lives. See strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3| for "the Father of mercies." {To present} (\parastˆsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \paristˆmi\, for which verb see strkjv@6:13|, a technical term for offering a sacrifice (Josephus, _Ant_. IV. 6, 4), though not in the O.T. Used of presenting the child Jesus in the temple (Luke:2:22|), of the Christian presenting himself (Romans:6:13|), of God presenting the saved (Ephesians:5:27|), of Christ presenting the church (Colossians:1:28|). {Bodies} (\s“mata\). Songs:literally as in strkjv@6:13,19; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:10| and in contrast with \nous\ (mind) in verse 2|. {A living sacrifice} (\thusian z“san\). In contrast with the Levitical sacrifices of slain animals. Cf. strkjv@6:8,11,13|. Not a propitiatory sacrifice, but one of praise. {Acceptable} (\euareston\). "Well-pleasing." See on ¯2Corinthians:5:9|. {Which is your reasonable service} (\tˆn logikˆn hum“n latreian\). "Your rational (spiritual) service (worship)." For \latreia\, see on ¯9:4|. \Logikos\ is from \logos\, reason. The phrase means here "worship rendered by the reason (or soul)." Old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Peter:2:2| \to logikon gala\ (not logical milk, but the milk nourishing the soul).

rwp@Romans:12:6 @{Differing} (\diaphora\). Old adjective from \diapher“\, to differ, to vary. Songs:Hebrews:9:10|. {According to the proportion of our faith} (\kata tˆn analogian tˆs piste“s\). The same use of \pistis\ (faith) as in verse 3| "the measure of faith." Old word. \analogia\ (our word "analogy") from \analogos\ (analogous, conformable, proportional). Here alone in N.T. The verb \prophˆteu“men\ (present active volitive subjunctive, let us prophesy) must be supplied with which \echontes\ agrees. The context calls for the subjective meaning of "faith" rather than the objective and outward standard though \pistis\ does occur in that sense (Galatians:1:23; strkjv@3:23|).

rwp@Romans:14:1 @{Him that is weak} (\ton asthenounta\). See on ¯1Corinthians:8:7-12; strkjv@9:22; strkjv@Romans:4:19|. {Receive ye} (\proslambanesthe\). Present middle imperative (indirect), "take to yourselves." {Yet not to doubtful disputations} (\mˆ eis diakriseis dialogism“n\). "Not for decisions of opinions." Note \dia\ (between, two or \duo\) in both words. Discriminations between doubts or hesitations. For \diakrisis\, see strkjv@1Corinthians:12:10; strkjv@Hebrews:5:14| (only N.T. examples). For \dialogismos\ see strkjv@Luke:2:35; strkjv@24:38; strkjv@Phillipians:2:14|. The "strong" brother is not called upon to settle all the scruples of the "weak" brother. But each takes it on himself to do it.

rwp@Romans:14:11 @{As I live} (\z“ eg“\). "I live." The LXX here (Isaiah:45:23|) has \kat' emautou omnnu“\, "I swear by myself." {Shall confess to God} (\exomologˆsetai t“i the“i\). Future middle of \exomologe“\, to confess openly (\ex\) with the accusative as in strkjv@Matthew:3:6|. With the dative as here the idea is to give praise to, to give gratitude to (Matthew:11:25|).

rwp@Romans:14:12 @{Shall give account} (\logon d“sei\). Songs:Aleph A C rather than \apod“sei\ of Textus Receptus. Common use of \logos\ for account (bookkeeping, ledger) as in strkjv@Luke:16:2|.

rwp@Romans:14:17 @{The kingdom of God} (\hˆ basileia tou theou\). Not the future kingdom of eschatology, but the present spiritual kingdom, the reign of God in the heart, of which Jesus spoke so often. See strkjv@1Corinthians:4:21|. Paul scores heavily here, for it is not found in externals like food and drink, but in spiritual qualities and graces.

rwp@Romans:14:23 @{He that doubteth} (\ho diakrinomenos\). Present middle participle of \diakrin“\, to judge between (\dia\), to hesitate. See strkjv@James:1:6f.| for this same picture of the double-minded man. Cf. strkjv@Romans:4:20; strkjv@Mark:11:23|. {Is condemned} (\katakekritai\). Perfect passive indicative of \katakrin“\ (note \kata-\), "stands condemned." {If he eat} (\ean phagˆi\). Third class condition, \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive. If in spite of his doubt, he eat. {Whatsoever is not of faith is sin} (\pan ho ouk ek piste“s hamartia estin\). {Faith} (\pistis\) here is subjective, one's strong conviction in the light of his relation to Christ and his enlightened conscience. To go against this combination is sin beyond a doubt. Some MSS. (A L etc.) put the doxology here which most place in strkjv@16:25-27|. But they all give chapters 15 and 16. Some have supposed that the Epistle originally ended here, but that is pure speculation. Some even suggest two editions of the Epistle. But chapter 15 goes right on with the topic discussed in chapter 14.

rwp@Romans:15:9 @{And that the Gentiles might praise} (\ta de ethnˆ doxasai\). Coordinate with \bebai“sai\ and \eis to\, to be repeated with \ta ethnˆ\, the accusative of general reference and \ton theon\ the object of \doxasai\. Thus the Gentiles were called through the promise to the Jews in the covenant with Abraham (4:11f.,16f.|). Salvation is of the Jews. Paul proves his position by a chain of quotations from the O.T., the one in verse 9| from strkjv@Psalms:18:50|. For \exomologe“\, see strkjv@14:10|. {I will sing} (\psal“\). Future active of \psall“\, for which verb see on strkjv@1Corinthians:14:15|.

rwp@Romans:15:14 @{I myself also} (\kai autos eg“\). See strkjv@7:25| for a like emphasis on himself, here in contrast with "ye yourselves" (\kai autoi\). The argument of the Epistle has been completed both in the main line (chapters 1-8|) and the further applications (9:1-15:13|). Here begins the Epilogue, the personal matters of importance. {Full of goodness} (\mestoi agathosunˆs\). See strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:11; strkjv@Galatians:5:22| for this LXX and Pauline word (in ecclesiastical writers also) made from the adjective \agathos\, good, by adding \-sunˆ\ (common ending for words like \dikaiosunˆ\. See strkjv@1:29| for \mestos\ with genitive and \peplˆr“menoi\ (perfect passive participle of \plˆro“\ as here), but there with instrumental case after it instead of the genitive. Paul gives the Roman Christians (chiefly Gentiles) high praise. The "all knowledge" is not to be pressed too literally, "our Christian knowledge in its entirety" (Sanday and Headlam). {To admonish} (\nouthetein\). To put in mind (from \nouthetˆs\ and this from \nous\ and \tithˆmi\). See on ¯1Thessalonians:5:12,14|. "Is it laying too much stress on the language of compliment to suggest that these words give a hint of St. Paul's aim in this Epistle?" (Sanday and Headlam). The strategic position of the church in Rome made it a great centre for radiating and echoing the gospel over the world as Thessalonica did for Macedonia (1Thessalonians:1:8|).

rwp@Romans:15:18 @{Any things save those which Christ wrought through me} (\ti h“n ou kateirgasato Christos di' emou\). Rather, "any one of those things which Christ did not work through me." The antecedent of \h“n\ is the unexpressed \tout“n\ and the accusative relative \ha\ (object of \kateirgasato\) is attracted into the genitive case of \tout“n\ after a common idiom. {By word and deed} (\log“i kai erg“i\). Instrumental case with both words. By preaching and life (Luke:24:19; strkjv@Acts:1:1; strkjv@7:22; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:11|).

rwp@Romans:15:25 @{But now} (\nuni de\). Repeats the very words used in 23|. {I go} (\poreuomai\). Futuristic present as in strkjv@John:14:2|. {Ministering unto the saints} (\diakonon tois hagiois\). Present active participle of purpose like \eulogounta\ in strkjv@Acts:3:26|. This collection had been one of Paul's chief cares for over a year now (see strkjv@2Corinthians:8; 9|). See strkjv@2Corinthians:8:4|.

rwp@Romans:15:29 @{When I come} (\erchomenos\). Present middle participle of \erchomai\ with the time of the future middle indicative \eleusomai\ (coming I shall come). {In the fulness of the blessing of Christ} (\en plˆr“mati eulogias Christou\). On \plˆr“mati\, see strkjv@11:12|. Paul had already (1:11f.|) said that he had a \charisma pneumatikon\ (spiritual blessing) for Rome. He did bring that to them.

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.

rwp@Romans:16:15 @{Philologus} (\Philologon\). Another common slave name. {Julia} (\Ioulian\). The commonest name for female slaves in the imperial household because of Julius Caesar. Possibly these two were husband and wife. {Nereus} (\Nˆrea\). Found in inscriptions of the imperial household. But the sister's name is not given. One wonders why. {Olympas} (\Olumpƒn\). Possibly an abbreviation for Olympiodorus. {All the saints that are with them} (\tous sun autois pantas hagious\). Possibly another church in the house. These unnamed, the "and others," constitute the great majority in all our churches.

rwp@Romans:16:18 @{But their own belly} (\alla tˆi heaut“n koiliƒi\). Dative case after \douleuousin\. A blunt phrase like the same picture in strkjv@Phillipians:3:19| "whose god is the belly," more truth than caricature in some cases. {By their smooth and fair speech} (\dia tˆs chrˆstologias kai eulogias\). Two compounds of \logos\ (speech), the first (from \chrˆstos\ and \logos\) is very rare (here only in N.T.), the second is very common (\eu\ and \logos\). {Beguile} (\exapat“sin\). Present active indicative of the double compound verb \exapata“\ (see strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:18|). {Of the innocent} (\t“n akak“n\). Old adjective (\a\ privative and \kakos\), without evil or guile, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:7:26| (of Christ).

rwp@Romans:16:25 @Verses 25-27| conclude the noble Epistle with the finest of Paul's doxologies. {To him that is able} (\t“i dunamen“i\). Dative of the articular participle of \dunamai\. See similar idiom in strkjv@Ephesians:3:20|. {To stablish} (\stˆrixai\). First aorist active infinitive of \stˆriz“\, to make stable. {According to my gospel} (\kata to euaggelion mou\). Same phrase in strkjv@2:16; strkjv@2Timothy:2:8|. Not a book, but Paul's message as here set forth. {The preaching} (\to kˆrugma\). The proclamation, the heralding. {Of Jesus Christ} (\Iˆsou Christou\). Objective genitive, "about Jesus Christ." {Revelation} (\apokalupsin\). "Unveiling." {Of the mystery} (\mustˆriou\). Once unknown, but now revealed. {Kept in silence} (\sesigˆmenou\). Perfect passive participle of \siga“\, to be silent, state of silence. {Through times eternal} (\chronois ai“niois\). Associative instrumental case, "along with times eternal" (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 527). See strkjv@1Corinthians:2:6,7,10|.

rwp@Titus:1:9 @{Holding to} (\antechomenon\). Present middle participle of \antech“\, old verb, to hold back, in middle to hold oneself face to face with, to cling to, as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:14|. {The faithful word} (\tou pistou logou\). See strkjv@1Timothy:1:15; strkjv@6:3; strkjv@Romans:16:17|. Some would see a reference here to Christ as the Personal Logos. {That he may be able} (\hina dunatos ˆi\). Final clause with present active subjunctive. Paul several times uses \dunatos eimi\ in the sense of \dunamai\, with infinitive as here (Romans:4:21; strkjv@11:23; strkjv@2Timothy:1:12|). {The gainsayers} (\tous antilegontas\). Present active participle of \antileg“\, old word, to answer back, as in strkjv@Romans:10:21|. "The talkers back."

rwp@Titus:1:10 @{Vain talkers} (\mataiologoi\). Late and rare compound, empty talkers, in Vett. Val. and here. See strkjv@1Timothy:1:6| for \mataiologia\. {Deceivers} (\phrenapatai\). Late and rare compound, in papyri, eccl. writers, here alone in N.T. "Mind-deceivers." See strkjv@Galatians:6:3| for \phrenapatƒin\. {Specially they of the circumcision} (\malista hoi ek tˆs peritomˆs\). Same phrase in strkjv@Acts:11:2; strkjv@Galatians:2:12; strkjv@Colossians:4:11|. Jews are mentioned in Crete in strkjv@Acts:2:11|. Apparently Jewish Christians of the Pharisaic type tinged with Gnosticism.

rwp@Titus:1:16 @{They profess} (\homologousin\). Present active indicative of \homologe“\, common verb (\homou, leg“\) as in strkjv@Romans:10:10f|. \Eidenai\ (know) is second perfect active infinitive of \oida\ in indirect assertion. {By their works} (\tois ergois\). Instrumental case. {They deny} (\arnountai\). Present middle of \arneomai\, old verb, common in the Gospels and the Pastoral Epistles (1Timothy:5:8; strkjv@Titus:2:12; strkjv@2Timothy:2:12|). {Abominable} (\bdeluktoi\). Verbal adjective from \bdelussomai\. Only in LXX and here. {Disobedient} (\apeitheis\). See strkjv@Romans:1:30|. {Reprobate} (\adokimoi\). See on ¯1Corinthians:9:27; strkjv@Romans:1:28|.

rwp@Titus:3:8 @{The saying} (\ho logos\). In verses 4-7|. {I will} (\boulomai\). See strkjv@1Timothy:2:8|. {That thou affirm confidently} (\se diabebaiousthai\). Indirect command. For the verb see strkjv@1Timothy:1:7|. {That they may be careful} (\hina phrontiz“sin\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with present active subjunctive of \phrontiz“\, old verb, only here in N.T. {To maintain good works} (\kal“n erg“n pro‹stasthai\). Present middle infinitive of \proistˆmi\, intransitive use, to stand before, to take the lead in, to care for. Paul is anxious that "believers" may take the lead in good works.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Tue Jul 2 23:14:14 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020