Bible:
Filter: String:

NONE.filter - rwp opta:


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:13:4 @Verses 4-7| picture the character or conduct of love in marvellous rhapsody. {Suffereth long} (\makrothumei\). Late _Koin‚_ word (Plutarch) from \makros\, long, \thumos\, passion, ardour. Cf. strkjv@James:5:7f|. {Is kind} (\chrˆsteuetai\). From \chrˆstos\ (useful, gracious, kind) and that from \chraomai\, to use. Not found elsewhere save in Clement of Rome and Eusebius. "Perhaps of Paul's coining" (Findlay). Perhaps a vernacular word ready for Paul. Gentle in behaviour. {Envieth not} (\ou zˆloi\). Present active indicative of \zˆlo“\ (contraction \oei=oi\, same as subjunctive and optative forms). Bad sense of \zˆlos\ from \ze“\, to boil, good sense in strkjv@12:31|. Love is neither jealous nor envious (both ideas). {Vaunteth not itself} (\ou perpereuetai\). From \perperos\, vainglorious, braggart (Polybius, Epictetus) like Latin _perperus_. Only here in N.T. and earliest known example. It means play the braggart. Marcus Anton. V. 5 uses it with \areskeuomai\, to play the toady. {Is not puffed up} (\ou phusioutai\). Present direct middle indicative of \phusio“\ from \phusis\ (late form for \phusa“, phusia“\ from \phusa\, bellows), to puff oneself out like a pair of bellows. This form in Herodas and Menander. Is not arrogant. See on ¯4:6|.

rwp@1Corinthians:14:10 @{It may be} (\ei tuchoi\). Condition of fourth class (\ei\ and aorist optative of \tugchan“\), if it should happen. Common enough idiom. Cf. \tuchon\ in strkjv@16:6|. {Without signification} (\aph“non\). Old adjective (\a\ privative and \ph“nˆ\). Without the faculty of speech (12:2; strkjv@Acts:8:32; strkjv@2Peter:2:16|).

rwp@1Corinthians:15:24 @{Then cometh the end} (\eita to telos\). No verb \ginetai\ in the Greek. Supply "at his coming," the end or consummation of the age or world (Matthew:13:39,49; strkjv@1Peter:4:7|), {When he shall deliver up} (\hotan paradid“i\). Present active subjunctive (not optative) of \paradid“mi\ with \hotan\, whenever, and so quite indefinite and uncertain as to time. Present subjunctive rather than aorist \parad“i\ because it pictures a future proceeding. {To God, even the Father} (\t“i the“i kai patri\). Better, "to the God and Father" or to "His God and Father." The Kingdom belongs to the Father. {When he shall have abolished} (\hotan katargˆsˆi\). First aorist active subjunctive with \hotan\, indefinite future time. Simply, "whenever he shall abolish," no use in making it future perfect, merely aorist subjunctive. On \katarge“\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:6:13; strkjv@13:8,10,11|. {Rule} (\archˆn\), {authority} (\exousian\), {power} (\dunamin\). All forms of power opposing the will of God. Constative aorist tense covering the whole period of conflict with final victory as climax.

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

rwp@1Peter: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:3:17 @{Better} (\kreitton\). Comparative of \kratus\ as in strkjv@2Peter:2:21; strkjv@Hebrews:1:4|. Patient endurance not only silences calumny (verse 16|), is Christlike (verse 18|), but it has a value of its own (verse 17|). {If the will of God should so will} (\ei theloi to thelˆma tou theou\). Condition of the fourth class again (\ei--theloi\) with \ei\ and the optative. For a like pleonasm see strkjv@John:7:17|. {For well-doing than for evil-doing} (\agathopoiountas ˆ kakopoiountas\). Accusative plural agreeing with \humƒs\ understood (accusative of general reference with the infinitive \paschein\ (to suffer) of the participles from \agathopoie“\ (see strkjv@2:15|) and \kakopoie“\ (Mark:3:4|, and see strkjv@1Peter:2:14| for \kakopoios\).

rwp@1Thessalonians:3:11 @{Our God and Father himself} (\autos ho theos kai patˆr hˆm“n\). Note one article with both substantives for one person. {And our Lord Jesus} (\kai ho Kurios hˆm“n Iˆsous\). Separate article here with \Iˆsous\. In strkjv@Titus:2:13; strkjv@2Peter:1:1| only one article (not two) treating "our God and Saviour Jesus Christ" as one just like "our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" in strkjv@2Peter:1:11; strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:18|. {Direct our way} (\kateuthunai tˆn hodon hˆm“n\). First aorist optative (acute accent on penult, not circumflex first aorist active infinitive) of \kateuthun“\, old verb to make straight path. Singular verb also, though both God and Christ mentioned as subject (unity in the Godhead). Apart from \mˆ genoito\ ({may it not come to pass}) the optative in a wish of the third person is found in N.T. only in strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:11,12; strkjv@5:23; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:17; strkjv@3:5,16; strkjv@Romans:15:5,13|.

rwp@1Thessalonians:3:12 @{The Lord} (\ho Kurios\). The Lord Jesus. Paul prays to Christ. {Make you to increase} (\humas pleonasai\). First aorist active optative (wish for future) of \pleonaz“\, late verb from \pleon\ (more), {to superabound}. {And abound} (\perisseusai\). First aorist active optative (wish for future) of \perisseu“\ from \perissos\, old verb, to be over (common in N.T.). It is hard to see much difference between the two verbs.

rwp@1Thessalonians:5:23 @{The God of peace} (\ho theos tˆs eirˆnˆs\). The God characterized by peace in his nature, who gladly bestows it also. Common phrase (Milligan) at close of Paul's Epistles (2Corinthians:13:11; strkjv@Romans:15:33; strkjv@16:20; strkjv@Phillipians:4:9|) and {the Lord of peace} in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:6|. {Sanctify you} (\hagiasai humƒs\). First aorist active optative in a wish for the future. New verb in LXX and N.T. for the old \hagiz“\, to render or to declare holy (\hagios\), to consecrate, to separate from things profane. {Wholly} (\holoteleis\). Predicate adjective in plural (\holos\, whole, \telos\, end), not adverb \holotel“s\. Late word in Plutarch, Hexapla, and in inscription A.D. 67 (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Here alone in N.T. Here it means the whole of each of you, every part of each of you, "through and through" (Luther), qualitatively rather than quantitatively. {Your spirit and soul and body} (\hum“n to pneuma kai hˆ psuchˆ kai to s“ma\). Not necessarily trichotomy as opposed to dichotomy as elsewhere in Paul's Epistles. Both believers and unbelievers have an inner man (soul \psuchˆ\, mind \nous\, heart \kardia\, the inward man \ho es“ anthr“pos\) and the outer man (\s“ma, ho ex“ anthr“pos\). But the believer has the Holy Spirit of God, the renewed spirit of man (1Corinthians:2:11; strkjv@Romans:8:9-11|). {Be preserved entire} (\holoklˆron tˆrˆtheiˆ\). First aorist passive optative in wish for the future. Note singular verb and singular adjective (neuter) showing that Paul conceives of the man as "an undivided whole" (Frame), prayer for the consecration of both body and soul (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:6|). The adjective \holoklˆron\ is in predicate and is an old form and means complete in all its parts (\holos\, whole, \klˆros\, lot or part). There is to be no deficiency in any part. \Teleios\ (from \telos\, end) means final perfection. {Without blame} (\amempt“s\). Old adverb (\a\ privative, \memptos\, verbal of \memphomai\, to blame) only in I Thess. in N.T. (2:10; strkjv@3:13; strkjv@5:23|). Milligan notes it in certain sepulchral inscriptions discovered in Thessalonica. {At the coming} (\en tˆi parousiƒi\). The Second Coming which was a sustaining hope to Paul as it should be to us and mentioned often in this Epistle (see on ¯2:19|).

rwp@2Corinthians:12:1 @{I must needs glory} (\kauchasthai dei\). This is the reading of B L Latin Syriac, but Aleph D Bohairic have \de\ while K M read \dˆ\. The first is probably correct. He must go on with the glorying already begun, foolish as it is, though it is not expedient (\ou sumpheron\). {Visions} (\optasias\). Late word from \optaz“\. See on ¯Luke:1:22; strkjv@Acts:26:19|. {Revelations of the Lord} (\apokalupseis Kuriou\). Unveilings (from \apokalupt“\ as in strkjv@Revelation:1:1|). See on ¯2Thessalonians:1:7; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:7; strkjv@14:26|. Paul had both repeated visions of Christ (Acts:9:3; strkjv@16:9; strkjv@18:9; strkjv@22:17; strkjv@27:23f.|) and revelations. He claimed to speak by direct revelation (1Corinthians:11:23; strkjv@15:3; strkjv@Galatians:1:12; strkjv@Ephesians:3:3|, etc.).

rwp@2John:1:3 @{Shall be with us} (\estai meth' hˆm“n\). He picks up the words before in reverse order. Future indicative here, not a wish with the optative (\eie\) as we have in strkjv@1Peter:1:2; strkjv@2Peter:1:2|. The salutation is like that in the Pastoral Epistles: "\Charis\, the wellspring in the heart of God; \eleos\, its outpourings; \eirˆnˆ\, its blessed effect" (David Smith). {And from Jesus Christ} (\kai para Iˆsou Christou\). The repetition of \para\ (with the ablative) is unique. "It serves to bring out distinctly the twofold personal relation of man to the Father and to the Son" (Westcott). "The Fatherhood of God, as revealed by one who being His Son _can_ reveal the Father, and who as man (\Iˆsou\) can make him known to men" (Brooke).

rwp@2Peter:1:2 @{Be multiplied} (\plˆthuntheiˆ\). First aorist passive optative of \plˆthun“\ in a wish for the future (volitive use) as in strkjv@1Peter:1:2; strkjv@Jude:1:2|. {In the knowledge} (\en epign“sei\). Full (additional, \epi\) knowledge as in strkjv@1:8| (only \gn“sis\ in strkjv@1:5,6; strkjv@3:18|), but \epign“sin\ again in strkjv@1:3,8; strkjv@2:20|. As in Colossians, so here full knowledge is urged against the claims of the Gnostic heretics to special \gn“sis\. {Of God and of Jesus our Lord} (\tou theou kai Iˆsou tou kuriou hˆm“n\). At first sight the idiom here seems to require one person as in strkjv@1:1|, though there is a second article (\tou\) before \kuriou\, and \Iˆsou\ is a proper name. But the text here is very uncertain. Bengel, Spitta, Zahn, Nestle accept the short reading of P and some Vulgate MSS. and some minuscles with only \tou kuriou hˆm“n\ (our Lord) from which the three other readings may have come. Elsewhere in II Peter \gn“sis\ and \epign“sis\ are used of Christ alone. The text of II Peter is not in a good state of preservation.

rwp@2Peter:1:16 @{We did not follow} (\ouk exakolouthˆsantes\). First aorist active participle of \exakolouthe“\, late compound verb, to follow out (Polybius, Plutarch, LXX, papyri, inscriptions as of death following for any Gentile in the temple violating the barrier), with emphatic negative \ouk\, "not having followed." See also strkjv@2:2| for this verb. {Cunningly devised fables} (\sesophismenois muthois\). Associative instrumental case of \muthos\ (old term for word, narrative, story, fiction, fable, falsehood). In N.T. only here and the Pastoral Epistles (1Timothy:1:4|, etc.). Perfect passive participle of \sophiz“\, old word (from \sophos\), only twice in N.T., in causative sense to make wise (2Timothy:3:15|), to play the sophist, to invent cleverly (here) and so also in the old writers and in the papyri. Some of the false teachers apparently taught that the Gospel miracles were only allegories and not facts (Bigg). Cf. strkjv@2:3| for "feigned words." {When we made known unto you} (\egn“risamen humin\). First aorist active indicative of \gn“riz“\, to make known unto you. Possibly by Peter himself. {The power and coming} (\tˆn dunamin kai parousian\). These words can refer (Chase) to the Incarnation, just as is true of \epiphaneia\ in strkjv@2Timothy:1:10| (second coming in strkjv@1Timothy:6:14|), and is true of \parousia\ (2Corinthians:7:6| of Titus). But elsewhere in the N.T. \parousia\ (technical term in the papyri for the coming of a king or other high dignitary), when used of Christ, refers to his second coming (2Peter:3:4,12|). {But we were eye-witnesses} (\all' epoptai genˆthentes\). First aorist passive participle of \ginomai\, "but having become eye-witnesses." \Epoptai\, old word (from \epopt“\ like \epopteu“\ in strkjv@1Peter:2:12; strkjv@3:2|), used of those who attained the third or highest degree of initiates in the Eleusinian mysteries (common in the inscriptions). Cf. \autoptˆs\ in strkjv@Luke:1:2|. {Of his majesty} (\tˆs ekeinou megaleiotˆtos\). Late and rare word (LXX and papyri) from \megaleios\ (Acts:2:11|), in N.T. only here, strkjv@Luke:9:43| (of God); strkjv@Acts:19:27| (of Artemis). Peter clearly felt that he and James and John were lifted to the highest stage of initiation at the Transfiguration of Christ. Emphatic \ekeinou\ as in strkjv@2Timothy:2:26|.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:17 @{Comfort and stablish} (\parakalesai kai stˆrixai\). First aorist active optative of wish for the future of two common verbs \parakale“\ (see on ¯1Thessalonians:3:7; strkjv@4:18; strkjv@5:14|) and \steriz“\ (see on ¯1Thessalonians:3:2,13|). God is the God of {comfort} (2Corinthians:1:3-7|) and strength (Romans:1:11; strkjv@16:25|).

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:5 @{Direct} (\kateuthunai\). First aorist active optative of wish for the future as in strkjv@2:17; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:23| from \kateuthun“\, old verb, as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:11| (there {way}, here {hearts}) and strkjv@Luke:1:79| of {feet} (\podas\). Perfective use of \kata\. Bold figure for making smooth and direct road. The Lord here is the Lord Jesus. {Into the love of God} (\eis tˆn agapˆn tou theou\). Either subjective or objective genitive makes sense and Lightfoot pleads for both, "not only as an objective attribute of deity, but as a ruling principle in our hearts," holding that it is "seldom possible to separate the one from the other." Most scholars take it here as subjective, the characteristic of God. {Into the patience of Christ} (\eis tˆn hupomnˆn tou Christou\). There is the same ambiguity here, though the subjective idea, the patience shown by Christ, is the one usually accepted rather than "the patient waiting for Christ" (objective genitive).

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:16 @{The Lord of peace himself} (\autos ho kurios tˆs eirˆnˆs\). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:23| for {the God of peace himself}. {Give you peace} (\doiˆ humin tˆn eirˆnˆn\). Second aorist active optative (_Koin‚_) of \did“mi\, not \d“ˆi\ (subjunctive). Songs:also strkjv@Romans:15:5; strkjv@2Timothy:1:16,18|. The Lord Jesus whose characteristic is peace, can alone give real peace to the heart and to the world. (John:14:27|).

rwp@2Timothy:1:16 @{Grant mercy} (\d“iˆ eleos\). The phrase nowhere else in the N.T. Second aorist active optative of \did“mi\, the usual form being \doiˆ\. This is the usual construction in a wish about the future. {Unto the house of Onesiphorus} (\t“i Onˆsiphorou oik“i\). The same phrase in strkjv@4:19|. Apparently Onesiphorus is now dead as is implied by the wish in strkjv@1:18|. {For he oft refreshed me} (\hoti pollakis me anepsuxen\). First aorist active indicative of \anapsuch“\, old verb, to cool again, in LXX and _Koin‚_ often, here only in N.T., but \anapsuxis\ in strkjv@Acts:3:20|. In the first imprisonment or the second. If he lost his life for coming to see Paul, it was probably recently during this imprisonment. {Was not ashamed of my chain} (\halusin mou ouk epaischunthˆ\). Passive deponent again (first aorist indicative) with accusative as in strkjv@1:8|. For \halusin\ (chain) see strkjv@Ephesians:6:20|. Note absence of augment in \epaischunthˆ\.

rwp@2Timothy:1:18 @{Grant to him to and mercy} (\d“iˆ aut“i heurein eleos\). Second aorist active optative in wish for the future again as in verse 16|. Find mercy from the Lord (Jesus) as he found me. {Thou knowest very well} (\beltion su gin“skeis\). Literally, "thou knowest better (than I)," for he did those things in Ephesus where thou art. Only N.T. example of \beltion\, in D text of strkjv@Acts:10:28|.

rwp@2Timothy:2:25 @{Correcting} (\paideuonta\). See strkjv@Titus:2:12|. "Schooling" (Parry). {Oppose themselves} (\antidiatithemenous\). Present middle (direct) participle of \antidiatithˆmi\, late double compound (Diodorus, Philo) to place oneself in opposition, here only in N.T. {If peradventure God may give} (\mˆ pote d“iˆ ho theos\). Here Westcott and Hort read the late form of the second aorist active optative of \did“mi\ for the usual \doiˆ\ as they do in strkjv@1:18|. But there it is a wish for the future and so regular, while here the optative with \mˆ pote\ in a sort of indirect question is used with a primary tense \dei\ (present) and parallel with an undoubted subjunctive \ananˆps“sin\, while in strkjv@Luke:3:15| \mˆ pote eie\ is with a secondary tense. Examples of such an optative do occur in the papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 989) so that we cannot go as far as Moulton does and say that we "must" read the subjunctive \d“ˆi\ here (_Prolegomena_, pp. 55, 193). {Repentance} (\metanoian\). "Change of mind" (2Corinthians:7:10; strkjv@Romans:2:4|). {Unto the knowledge of the truth} (\eis epign“sin alˆtheias\). Paul's word "full knowledge" (Co strkjv@1:9|).

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@Acts:1:3 @{To whom also} (\hois kai\). He chose them and then also manifested himself to these very same men that they might have personal witness to give. {Shewed himself alive} (\parestˆsen heauton z“nta\). To the disciples the first Sunday evening (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:36-43; strkjv@John:20:19-25|), the second Sunday evening (John:20:26-29|), at the Sea of Tiberias (John:21:1-23|), on the mountain in Galilee (Matthew:28:16-20; strkjv@Mark:16:15-18; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:6|), to the disciples in Jerusalem and Olivet (Luke:24:44-53; strkjv@Mark:16-19f.; strkjv@Acts:1:1-11|). Luke uses this verb \paristˆmi\ 13 times in the Acts both transitively and intransitively. It is rendered by various English words (present, furnish, provide, assist, commend). The early disciples including Paul never doubted the fact of the Resurrection, once they were convinced by personal experience. At first some doubted like Thomas (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:41; strkjv@John:20:24f.; strkjv@Matthew:28:17|). But after that they never wavered in their testimony to their own experience with the Risen Christ, "whereof we are witnesses" Peter said (Acts:3:15|). They doubted at first, that we may believe, but at last they risked life itself in defence of this firm faith. {After his passion} (\meta to pathein auton\). Neat Greek idiom, \meta\ with the articular infinitive (second aorist active of \pasch“\) and the accusative of general reference, "after the suffering as to him." For \pathein\ used absolutely of Christ's suffering see also strkjv@Acts:17:3; strkjv@26:23|. {By many proofs} (\en pollois tekmˆriois\). Literally, "in many proofs." \Tekmˆrion\ is only here in the N.T., though an old and common word in ancient Greek and occurring in the _Koin‚_ (papyri, etc.). The verb \tekmair“\, to prove by sure signs, is from \tekmar\, a sign. Luke does not hesitate to apply the definite word "proofs" to the evidence for the Resurrection of Christ after full investigation on the part of this scientific historian. Aristotle makes a distinction between \tekmˆrion\ (proof) and \sˆmeion\ (sign) as does Galen the medical writer. {Appearing} (\optanomenos\). Present middle participle from late verb \optan“\, late _Koin‚_ verb from root \opt“\ seen in \opsomai, “phthˆn\. In LXX, papyri of second century B.C. (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 83). Only here in the N.T. For \optasia\ for vision see strkjv@Acts:26:19; strkjv@Luke:1:22; strkjv@24:23|. {By the space of forty days} (\di' hˆmer“n tesserakonta\). At intervals (\dia\, between) during the forty days, ten appearances being known to us. Jesus was not with them continually now in bodily presence. The period of forty days is given here alone. The Ascension was thus ten days before Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came. Moses was in the mount forty days (Exodus:24:18|) and Jesus fasted forty days (Matthew:4:2|). In the Gospel of Luke 24 this separation of forty days between the Resurrection and the Ascension is not drawn. {The things concerning the Kingdom of God} (\ta peri tˆs basileias tou theou\). This phrase appears 33 times in Luke's Gospel, 15 times in Mark, 4 times in Matthew who elsewhere has "the kingdom of heaven," once in John, and 6 times in Acts. No essential distinction is to be drawn between the two for the Jews often used "heaven" rather than "God" to avoid using the Tetragrammaton. But it is noticeable how the word kingdom drops out of Acts. Other words like gospel (\euaggelion\) take the place of "kingdom." Jesus was fond of the word "kingdom" and Luke is fond of the idiom "the things concerning" (\ta peri\). Certainly with Jesus the term "kingdom" applies to the present and the future and covers so much that it is not strange that the disciples with their notions of a political Messianic kingdom (Acts:1:6|) were slow to comprehend the spiritual nature of the reign of God.

rwp@Acts:5:24 @{They were much perplexed} (\diˆporoun\). Imperfect active of \diapore“\ old verb by Luke only in the N.T. See already on strkjv@Acts:2:12|. They continued puzzled. {Whereunto this would grow} (\ti an genoito touto\). More exactly, {As to what this would become}. Second aorist middle optative of \ginomai\ with \an\, the conclusion of a condition of the fourth class (undetermined with less likelihood of determination), the unexpressed condition being "if the thing should be allowed to go on." The indirect question simply retains the optative with \an\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1021, 1044). If they had only known how this grain of mustard seed would grow into the greatest tree on earth and how dwarfed the tree of Judaism would be beside it!

rwp@Acts:8:20 @{Perish with thee} (\sun soi eiˆ eis ap“leian\). Literally, Be with thee for destruction. Optative for a future wish. The use of \eis\ with the accusative in the predicate is especially common in the LXX. The wish reveals Peter's indignation at the base offer of Simon. Peter was no grafter to accept money for spiritual power. He spurned the temptation. The natural meaning of Peter's language is that Simon was on the road to destruction. It is a warning and almost a curse on him, though verse 22| shows that there was still room for repentance. {To obtain} (\ktƒsthai\). To acquire. Usual meaning of the present tense (infinitive middle) of \ktaomai\.

rwp@Acts:8:31 @{How can I, except some one shall guide me?} (\P“s gar an dunaimˆn ean me tis hodˆgˆsei me?\). This is a mixed condition, the conclusion coming first belongs to the fourth class (undetermined with less likelihood of being determined) with \an\ and the optative, but the condition (\ean\, instead of the usual \ei\, and the future indicative) is of the first class (determined or fulfilled. Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1022), a common enough phenomenon in the _Koin‚_. The eunuch felt the need of some one to guide (\hodˆge“\ from \hodˆgos\, guide, and that from \hodos\, way, and \hegeomai\, to lead).

rwp@Acts:10:14 @{Not so, Lord} (\Mˆdam“s, kurie\). The negative \mˆdam“s\ calls for the optative \eiˆ\ (may it not be) or the imperative \est“\ (let it be). It is not \oudam“s\, a blunt refusal (I shall not do it). And yet it is more than a mild protest as Page and Furneaux argue. It is a polite refusal with a reason given. Peter recognizes the invitation to slay (\thuson\) the unclean animals as from the Lord (\kurie\) but declines it three times. {For I have never eaten anything} (\hoti oudepote ephagon pan\). Second aorist active indicative, I never did anything like this and I shall not do it now. The use of \pan\ (everything) with \oudepote\ (never) is like the Hebrew (_lo--k“l_) though a like idiom appears in the vernacular _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 752). {Common and unclean} (\koinon kai akatharton\). \Koinos\ from epic \xunos\ (\xun, sun\, together with) originally meant common to several (Latin _communis_) as in strkjv@Acts:2:44; strkjv@4:32; strkjv@Titus:1:4; strkjv@Jude:1:3|. The use seen here (also strkjv@Mark:7:2,5; strkjv@Romans:14:14; strkjv@Hebrews:10:29; strkjv@Revelation:21:27; strkjv@Acts:10:28; strkjv@11:8|), like Latin _vulgaris_ is unknown in ancient Greek. Here the idea is made plain by the addition of \akatharton\ (unclean), ceremonially unclean, of course. We have the same double use in our word "common." See on ¯Mark:7:18f.| where Mark adds the remarkable participle \kathariz“n\ (making all meats clean), evidently from Peter who recalls this vision. Peter had been reared from childhood to make the distinction between clean and unclean food and this new proposal even from the Lord runs against all his previous training. He did not see that some of God's plans for the Jews could be temporary. This symbol of the sheet was to show Peter ultimately that Gentiles could be saved without becoming Jews. At this moment he is in spiritual and intellectual turmoil.

rwp@Acts:10:17 @{Was much perplexed in himself} (\en heaut“i diˆporei\). Imperfect active of \diapore“\, intensive compound (\dia\, thoroughly, and \a\ privative and \poros\, way), to be completely at a loss to know what road to take. Old verb, but in N.T. only in Luke and Acts. Page notes that Luke is singularly fond of verbs compounded with \dia\. See on ¯Luke:9:7| and strkjv@Acts:2:12|. When out of the ecstasy he was more puzzled than ever. {Might be} (\an eiˆ\). Optative with \an\ in indirect question simply retained from the direct (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1021, 1044). See strkjv@Acts:17:18|, for the direct and strkjv@Luke:1:62| for the indirect (\an theloi\ both times). It is the conclusion of a fourth class condition. {Having made inquiry} (\dier“tˆsantes\). First aorist active participle of \dier“ta“\, another compound of \dia\, to ask one after another, to ask through, old verb, but only here in the N.T. It took diligent inquiry to find the obscure house of Simon the tanner. {Stood before the gate} (\epestˆsan epi ton pul“na\). Second aorist active indicative of \ephistˆmi\, intransitive. Note repetition of \epi\. The messengers stopped right at the folding gates of the passage (\pul“na\) which led from the street to the inner court or house.

rwp@Acts:17:11 @{More noble than those} (\eugenesteroi t“n\). Comparative form of \eugenˆs\, old and common adjective, but in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:19:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26|. Followed by ablative case \t“n\ as often after the comparative. {With all readiness of mind} (\meta pƒsˆs prothumias\). Old word from \prothumos\ (\pro, thumos\) and means eagerness, rushing forward. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:8:11-19; strkjv@9:2|. In Thessalonica many of the Jews out of pride and prejudice refused to listen. Here the Jews joyfully welcomed the two Jewish visitors. {Examining the Scriptures daily} (\kath' hˆmeran anakrinontes tas graphas\). Paul expounded the Scriptures daily as in Thessalonica, but the Beroeans, instead of resenting his new interpretation, examined (\anakrin“\ means to sift up and down, make careful and exact research as in legal processes as in strkjv@Acts:4:9; strkjv@12:19|, etc.) the Scriptures for themselves. In Scotland people have the Bible open on the preacher as he expounds the passage, a fine habit worth imitating. {Whether these things were so} (\ei echoi tauta hout“s\). Literally, "if these things had it thus." The present optative in the indirect question represents an original present indicative as in strkjv@Luke:1:29| (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1043f.). This use of \ei\ with the optative may be looked at as the condition of the fourth class (undetermined with less likelihood of determination) as in strkjv@Acts:17:27; strkjv@20:16; strkjv@24:19; strkjv@27:12| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). The Beroeans were eagerly interested in the new message of Paul and Silas but they wanted to see it for themselves. What a noble attitude. Paul's preaching made Bible students of them. The duty of private interpretation is thus made plain (Hovey).

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:17:27 @{That they should seek God} (\Zˆtein ton theon\). Infinitive (present active) of purpose again. Seek him, not turn away from him as the nations had done (Romans:1:18-32|). {If haply they might feel after him} (\ei ara ge psˆlaphˆseian auton\). First aorist active (Aeolic form) optative of \psˆlapha“\, old verb from \psa“\, to touch. Songs:used by the Risen Jesus in his challenge to the disciples (Luke:24:39|), by the Apostle John of his personal contact with Jesus (1John:1:1|), of the contact with Mount Sinai (Hebrews:12:18|). Here it pictures the blind groping of the darkened heathen mind after God to "find him" (\heuroien\, second aorist active optative) whom they had lost. One knows what it is in a darkened room to feel along the walls for the door (Deuteronomy:28:29; strkjv@Job:5:14; strkjv@12:25; strkjv@Isaiah:59:10|). Helen Keller, when told of God, said that she knew of him already, groping in the dark after him. The optative here with \ei\ is due to the condition of the fourth class (undetermined, but with vague hope of being determined) with aim also present (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). Note also \ara ge\ the inferential particle \ara\ with the delicate intensive particle \ge\. {Though he is not far from each one of us} (\kai ge ou makran apo henos hekastou hˆm“n huparchonta\). More exactly with B L (\kai ge\ instead of \kaitoi\ or \kaitoi ge\), "and yet being not far from each one of us," a direct statement rather than a concessive one. The participle \huparchonta\ agrees with \auton\ and the negative \ou\ rather than the usual \me\ with the participle makes an emphatic negative. Note also the intensive particle \ge\.

rwp@Acts:20:16 @{For Paul had determined} (\kekrikei gar ho Paulos\). Past perfect active (correct text) of \krin“\ and not the aorist \ekrine\. Either Paul controlled the ship or the captain was willing to oblige him. {To sail past Ephesus} (\parapleusai tˆn Epheson\). First aorist active infinitive of \paraple“\, old verb to sail beside, only here in the N.T. {That he might not have} (\hop“s mˆ genˆtai aut“i\). Final clause (negative) with aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\ and dative "that it might not happen to him." {To spend time} (\chronotribˆsai\). First aorist active of the late compound verb \chronotribe“\ (\chronos\, time, \trib“\, to spend), only here in the N.T. The verb \trib“\, to rub, to wear out by rubbing, lends itself to the idea of wasting time. It was only a year ago that Paul had left Ephesus in haste after the riot. It was not expedient to go back so soon if he meant to reach Jerusalem by Pentecost. Paul clearly felt (Romans:15|) that the presentation of this collection at Pentecost to the Jewish Christians would have a wholesome influence as it had done once before (Acts:11:30|). {He was hastening} (\espeuden\). Imperfect active of \speud“\, old verb to hasten as in strkjv@Luke:2:16; strkjv@19:56|. {If it were possible for him} (\ei dunaton eiˆ aut“i\). Condition of the fourth class (optative mode), if it should be possible for him. The form is a remote possibility. It was only some thirty days till Pentecost. {The day of Pentecost} (\tˆn hˆmeran tˆs pentˆkostˆs\). Note the accusative case. Paul wanted to be there for the whole day. See strkjv@Acts:2:1| for this very phrase.

rwp@Acts:21:33 @{Came near} (\eggisas\). First aorist active participle of \eggiz“\, to draw near, _Koin‚_ verb from \eggus\, near, and common in the N.T. {Laid hold on him} (\epelabeto antou\). See same verb in verse 30|. {To be bound} (\dethˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \de“\ (see verse 11|). {With two chains} (\halusesi dusi\). Instrumental case of \halusis\, old word from \a\ privative and \lu“\ (not loosing, i.e. chaining). With two chains as a violent and seditious person, probably leader of a band of assassins (verse 38|). See on ¯Mark:5:4|. {Inquired} (\epunthaneto\). Imperfect middle of \punthanomai\, old and common verb used mainly by Luke in the N.T. Lysias repeated his inquiries. {Who he was} (\tis eiˆ\). Present active optative of \eimi\ changed from \estin\ (present indicative) in the indirect question, a change not obligatory after a past tense, but often done in the older Greek, rare in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1043f.). {And what he had done} (\kai ti estin pepoiˆk“s\). Periphrastic perfect active indicative of \poie“\ here retained, not changed to the optative as is true of \eiˆ\ from \estin\ in the same indirect question, illustrating well the freedom about it.

rwp@Acts:23:12 @{Banded together} (\poiˆsantes sustrophˆn\). See on strkjv@19:40| (riot), but here conspiracy, secret combination, binding together like twisted cords. {Bound themselves under a curse} (\anethematisan heautous\). First aorist active indicative of \anathematiz“\, a late word, said by Cremer and Thayer to be wholly Biblical or ecclesiastical. But Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 95) quotes several examples of the verb in an Attic cursing tablet from Megara of the first or second century A.D. This proof shows that the word, as well as \anathema\ (substantive) from which the verb is derived, was employed by pagans as well as by Jews. Deissmann suggests that Greek Jews like the seven sons of Sceva may have been the first to coin it. It occurs in the LXX as well as strkjv@Mark:14:71| (which see and Luke strkjv@21:5|); strkjv@Acts:23:12,14,21|. They placed themselves under an anathema or curse, devoted themselves to God (cf. strkjv@Leviticus:27:28f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:22|). {Drink} (\pein=piein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \pin“\. For this shortened form see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 343. {Till they had killed} (\he“s hou apoktein“sin\). First aorist active subjunctive of \apoktein“\, common verb. No reason to translate "had killed," simply "till they should kill," the aorist merely punctiliar action, the subjunctive retained instead of the optative for vividness as usual in the _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 974-6). Same construction in verse 14|. King Saul took an "anathema" that imperilled Jonathan (1Samuel:14:24|). Perhaps the forty felt that the rabbis could find some way to absolve the curse if they failed. See this verse repeated in verse 21|.

rwp@Acts:24:19 @{But certain Jews from Asia} (\tines de apo tˆs Alias Ioudaioi\). No verb appears in the Greek for these words. Perhaps he meant to say that "certain Jews from Asia charged me with doing these things." Instead of saying that, Paul stops to explain that they are not here, a thoroughly Pauline anacoluthon (2Corinthians:7:5|) as in strkjv@26:9|. "The passage as it stands is instinct with life, and seems to exhibit the abruptness so characteristic of the Pauline Epistles" (Page). {Who ought to have been here before thee} (\hous edei epi sou pareinai\). This use of \epi\ with genitive of the person is common. The imperfect indicative with verbs of necessity and obligation to express failure to live up to it is common in Greek (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 919-21). "The accusers who were present had not witnessed the alleged offence: those who could have given evidence at first-hand were not present" (Furneaux). There was no case in a Roman court. These Asiatic Jews are never heard of after the riot, though they almost succeeded in killing Paul then. {If they had aught against me} (\ei ti echoien pros eme\). A condition of the fourth class or undetermined with less likelihood of being determined (\ei\ with the optative, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). This is a "mixed condition" (_op.cit._, p. 1022) with a conclusion of the second class.

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:25:20 @{Being perplexed} (\aporoumenos\). Present middle participle of the common verb \apore“\ (\a\ privative and \poros\ way), to be in doubt which way to turn, already in strkjv@Mark:6:20| which see and strkjv@Luke:24:4|. The Textus Receptus has \eis\ after here, but critical text has only the accusative which this verb allows (Mark:6:20|) as in Thucydides and Plato. {How to inquire concerning these things} (\tˆn peri tout“n zˆtˆsin\). Literally, "as to the inquiry concerning these things." This is not the reason given by Luke in verse 9| (wanting to curry favour with the Jews), but doubtless this motive also actuated Festus as both could be true. {Whether he would go to Jerusalem} (\ei bouloito poreuesthai eis Ierosoluma\). Optative in indirect question after \elegon\ (asked or said) imperfect active, though the present indicative could have been retained with change of person: "Dost thou wish, etc.," (\ei boulˆi\, etc.). See Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1031, 1044. This is the question put to Paul in verse 9| though \theleis\ is there used.

rwp@Acts:25:22 @{I also could wish} (\eboulomˆn kai autos\). The imperfect for courtesy, rather than the blunt \boulomai\, I wish, I want. Literally, "I myself also was wishing" (while you were talking), a compliment to the interesting story told by Festus. The use of \an\ with the imperfect would really mean that he does not wish (a conclusion of the second class condition, determined as unfulfilled). \An\ with the optative would show only a languid desire. The imperfect is keen enough and yet polite enough to leave the decision with Festus if inconvenient for any reason (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 885-7). Agrippa may have heard much about Christianity.

rwp@Acts:26:19 @{Wherefore} (\hothen\). This relatival adverb (cf. strkjv@14:26; strkjv@28:13|) gathers up all that Paul has said. {I was not disobedient} (\ouk egenomˆn apeithˆs\). Litotes again, "I did not become (second aorist middle indicative of \ginomai\) disobedient" (\apeithˆs\, old word already in strkjv@Luke:1:17|). {Unto the heavenly vision} (\tˆi ourani“i optasiƒi\). A later form of \opsis\, from \optaz“\, in LXX, and in N.T. (Luke:1:22; strkjv@24:23; strkjv@Acts:26:19; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:1|). Only time that Paul uses it about seeing Christ on the Damascus road, but no reflection on the reality of the event.

rwp@Acts:26:29 @{I would to God} (\euxaimˆn an t“i the“i\). Conclusion of fourth-class condition (optative with \an\), undetermined with less likelihood, the so-called potential optative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). Polite and courteous wish (first aorist middle optative of \euchomai\). {Whether with little or with much} (\kai en mikr“i kai en megal“i\). Literally, "both in little and in great," or "both with little and with great pains" or "both in some measure and in great measure." Paul takes kindly the sarcasm of Agrippa. {Such as I am} (\toioutous hopoios kai eg“ eimi\). Accusative \toioutous\ with the infinitive \genesthai\. Paul uses these two qualitative pronouns instead of repeating the word "Christian." {Except these bonds} (\parektos t“n desm“n tout“n\). Ablative case with \parektos\ (late preposition for the old \parek\). Paul lifts his right manacled hand with exquisite grace and good feeling.

rwp@Acts:27:12 @{Because the haven was not commodious to winter in} (\aneuthetou tou limenos huparchontos pros paracheimasian\). Genitive absolute again present tense of \huparch“\: "The harbour being unfit (\aneuthetou\, this compound not yet found elsewhere, simplex in strkjv@Luke:9:62; strkjv@14:35; strkjv@Hebrews:6:7|) for wintering" (\paracheimasia\, only here in N.T., but in Polybius and Diodorus, in an inscription A.D. 48, from \paracheimaz“\). {The more part advised} (\hoi pleiones ethento boulˆn\). Second aorist middle indicative of \tithˆmi\, ancient idiom with \boulˆn\, to take counsel, give counsel. Lysias held a council of the officers of the ship on the issue raised by Paul. {If by any means they could reach Phoenix and winter there} (\ei p“s dunainto katantˆsantes eis Phoinika paracheimasai\). The optative \dunainto\ (present middle of \dunamai\) here with \ei\ is a condition of the fourth class with the notion of purpose implied and indirect discourse (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). "We vote for going on the chance that we may be able" (Page). Phoenix is the town of palms (John:12:13|), the modern Lutro, the only town in Crete on the southern coast with a harbour fit for wintering, though Wordsworth and Page argue for Phineka which suits Luke's description better. The verb \paracheimaz“\, to winter, is from \para\ and \cheim“n\ (see also strkjv@28:11|). Used in several _Koin‚_ writers. {Looking northeast and southeast} (\bleponta kata liba kai kata ch“ron\). There are two ways of interpreting this language. \Lips\ means the southwest wind and \ch“ros\ the northwest wind. But what is the effect of \kata\ with these words? Does it mean "facing" the wind? If so, we must read "looking southwest and northwest." But \kata\ can mean down the line of the wind (the way the wind is blowing). If so, then it is proper to translate "looking northeast and southeast." This translation suits Lutro, the other suits Phoenike. Ramsay takes it to be Lutro, and suggests that sailors describe the harbour by the way it looks as they go into it (the subjectivity of the sailors) and that Luke so speaks and means Lutro which faces northeast and southeast. On the whole Lutro has the best of the argument.

rwp@Acts:27:39 @{They knew not} (\ouk epegin“skon\). Imperfect active of \epigin“sk“\, to recognize. Probably conative, tried to recognize and could not (Conybeare and Howson). The island was well-known (28:1|, \epegn“men\), but St. Paul's Bay where the wreck took place was some distance from the main harbour (Valetta) of Melita (Malta). {They perceived} (\katenooun\). Imperfect active of \katanoe“\, gradually perceived after some effort as in strkjv@11:16|. This beach seemed their only hope. {They took counsel} (\ebouleuonto\). Imperfect middle showing the process of deliberation and doubt. The bay "having a beach" (\echonta aigialon\) is a phrase found in Xenophon's _Anabasis_ VI. 4, 4. {Whether they could drive} (\ei dunainto eks“sai\). This use of the optative with \ei\ in questions of this sort (implied indirect) is a neat Greek idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). B C Bohairic read \eks“sai\ (first aorist active infinitive of \eks“z“\), to save out (so Westcott and Hort), instead of \ex“sai\ (from \ex“the“\, to push out, as Textus Receptus).

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:1:17 @{The Father of glory} (\ho patˆr tˆs doxˆs\). The God characterized by glory (the Shekinah, strkjv@Hebrews:9:5|) as in strkjv@Acts:7:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3; strkjv@James:2:1|. {That--may give} (\hina--d“iˆ\). In strkjv@Colossians:1:9| \hina\ is preceded by \aitoumenoi\, but here the sub-final use depends on the general idea asking in the sentence. The form \d“iˆ\ is a late _Koin‚_ optative (second aorist active) for the usual \doiˆ\. It occurs also in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:16; strkjv@Romans:15:5; strkjv@2Timothy:1:16,18| in the text of Westcott and Hort. Here B 63 read \d“i\ (like strkjv@John:15:16|) second aorist active subjunctive, the form naturally looked for after a primary tense (\pauomai\). This use of the volitive optative with \hina\ after a primary tense is rare, but not unknown in ancient Greek. {A spirit of wisdom and revelation} (\pneuma sophias kai apokalupse“s\). The Revised Version does not refer this use of \pneuma\ to the Holy Spirit (cf. strkjv@Galatians:6:1; strkjv@Romans:8:15|), but it is open to question if it is possible to obtain this wisdom and revelation apart from the Holy Spirit. {In the knowledge of him} (\en epign“sei autou\). In the full knowledge of Christ as in Colossians.

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:6:14 @{Far be it from me} (\emoi mˆ genoito\). Second aorist middle optative of \ginomai\ in a negative (\mˆ\) wish about the future with dative case: "May it not happen to me." See strkjv@2:17|. The infinitive \kauchƒsthai\ (to glory) is the subject of \genoito\ as is common in the LXX, though not elsewhere in the N.T. {Hath been crucified unto me} (\emoi estaur“tai\). Perfect passive indicative of \stauro“\, stands crucified, with the ethical dative again (\emoi\). This is one of the great sayings of Paul concerning his relation to Christ and the world in contrast with the Judaizers. Cf. strkjv@2:19f.; strkjv@3:13; strkjv@4:4f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:23f.; strkjv@Romans:1:16; strkjv@3:21ff.; strkjv@4:25; strkjv@5:18|. {World} (\kosmos\) has no article, but is definite as in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:19|. Paul's old world of Jewish descent and environment is dead to him (Phillipians:3:3f.|).

rwp@Hebrews:4:1 @{Let us fear therefore} (\phobˆth“men oun\). First aorist passive volitive subjunctive of \phobeomai\, to be afraid. There is no break in the argument on strkjv@Psalms:95|. This is a poor chapter division. The Israelites perished because of disbelief. We today face a real peril. {Lest haply} (\mˆ pote\) Here with the present subjunctive (\dokei\), but future indicative in strkjv@3:12|, after the verb of fearing. For the optative see strkjv@2Timothy:2:25|. {A promise being left} (\kataleipomenˆs epaggelias\). Genitive absolute of the present passive participle of \kataleip“\, to leave behind. God's promise still holds good for us in spite of the failure of the Israelites. {Should seem to have come short of it} (\dokei husterˆkenai\). Perfect active infinitive of \hustere“\, old verb from \husteros\ (comparative of root \ud\ like our out, outer, outermost), to be too late, to fail to reach the goal as here, common in the N.T. (11:37; strkjv@12:15|).

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@Jude:1:2 @{Be multiplied} (\plˆthuntheiˆ\). First aorist passive optative of \plˆthun“\ as in strkjv@1Peter:1:2; strkjv@2Peter:1:2|.

rwp@Jude:1:9 @{Michael the archangel} (\ho Michael ho archaggelos\). Michael is mentioned also in strkjv@Daniel:10:13,21; strkjv@12:1; strkjv@Revelation:12:7|. \Archaggelos\ in N.T. occurs only here and strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:16|, but in strkjv@Daniel:10:13,20; strkjv@12:1|. {Contending with the devil} (\t“i diabol“i diakrinomenos\). Present middle participle of \diakrin“\, to separate, to strive with as in strkjv@Acts:11:2|. Dative case \diabol“i\. {When he disputed} (\hote dielegeto\). Imperfect middle of \dialegomai\ as in strkjv@Mark:9:34|. {Concerning the body of Moses} (\peri tou M“use“s s“matos\). Some refer this to strkjv@Zechariah:3:1|, others to a rabbinical comment on strkjv@Deuteronomy:34:6|. There is a similar reference to traditions in strkjv@Acts:7:22; strkjv@Galatians:3:19; strkjv@Hebrews:2:2; strkjv@2Timothy:3:8|. But this explanation hardly meets the facts. {Durst not bring} (\ouk etolmˆsen epenegkein\). "Did not dare (first aorist active indicative of \tolma“\), to bring against him" (second aorist active infinitive of \epipher“\). {A railing accusation} (\krisin blasphˆmias\). "Charge of blasphemy" where strkjv@2Peter:2:11| has "\blasphˆmon krisin\." Peter also has \para kuri“i\ (with the Lord), not in Jude. {The Lord rebuke thee} (\epitimˆsai soi kurios\). First aorist active optative of \epitima“\, a wish about the future. These words occur in strkjv@Zechariah:3:1-10| where the angel of the Lord replies to the charges of Satan. Clement of Alex. (_Adumb. in Ep. Judae_) says that Jude:quoted here the _Assumption of Moses_, one of the apocryphal books. Origen says the same thing. Mayor thinks that the author of the _Assumption of Moses_ took these words from Zechariah and put them in the mouth of the Archangel Michael. There is a Latin version of the _Assumption_. Some date it as early as B.C. 2, others after A.D. 44.

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:1:62 @{Made signs} (\eneneuon\). Imperfect tense, repeated action as usual when making signs. In strkjv@1:22| the verb used of Zacharias is \dianeu“n\. {What he would have him called} (\to ti an theloi kaleisthai auto\). Note article \to\ with the indirect question, accusative of general reference. The optative with \an\ is here because it was used in the direct question (cf. strkjv@Acts:17:18|), and is simply retained in the indirect. {What would he wish him to be called?} ({if he could speak}), a conclusion of the fourth-class condition.

rwp@Luke:2:26 @{It had been revealed unto him} (\ˆn aut“i kechrˆmatismenon\). Periphrastic past perfect passive indicative. Common Greek verb. First to transact business from \chrˆma\ and that from \chraomai\, to use, make use of; then to do business with public officials, to give advice (judges, rulers, kings), then to get the advice of the Delphic and other oracles (Diodorus, Plutarch). The LXX and Josephus use it of God's commands. A Fayum papyrus of 257 B.C. has the substantive \chrˆmastismos\ for a divine response (cf. strkjv@Romans:11:4|). See Deissmann, _Light From the Ancient East_, p. 153. {Before} (\prin ˆ\). Classic Greek idiom after a negative to have subjunctive as here (only example in the N.T.) or the optative after past tense as in strkjv@Acts:25:16| (subjunctive changed to optative in indirect discourse). Elsewhere in the N.T. the infinitive follows \prin\ as in strkjv@Matthew:1:18|.

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:6:11 @{They were filled with madness} (\eplˆsthˆsan anoias\) First aorist passive (effective) with genitive: In strkjv@5:26| we saw the people filled with fear. Here is rage that is kin to insanity, for \anoias\ is lack of sense (\a\ privative and \nous\, mind). An old word, but only here and strkjv@2Timothy:3:9| in the N.T. {Communed} (\dielaloun\), imperfect active, picturing their excited counsellings with one another. strkjv@Mark:3:6| notes that they bolted out of the synagogue and outside plotted even with the Herodians how to destroy Jesus, strange co-conspirators these against the common enemy. {What they might do to Jesus} (\ti an poiˆsaien Iˆsou\). Luke puts it in a less damaging way than strkjv@Mark:3:6; strkjv@Matthew:12:14|. This aorist optative with \an\ is the deliberative question like that in strkjv@Acts:17:18| retained in the indirect form here. Perhaps Luke means, not that they were undecided about killing Jesus, but only as to the best way of doing it. Already nearly two years before the end we see the set determination to destroy Jesus. We see it here in Galilee. We have already seen it at the feast in Jerusalem (John:5:18|) where "the Jews sought the more to kill him." John and the Synoptics are in perfect agreement as to the Pharisaic attitude toward Jesus.

rwp@Luke:8:9 @{Asked} (\epˆr“t“n\). Imperfect of \eper“ta“\ (\epi\ and \er“ta“\) where strkjv@Mark:4:10| has \ˆr“t“n\ (uncompounded imperfect), both the tense and the use of \epi\ indicate eager and repeated questions on the part of the disciples, perhaps dimly perceiving a possible reflection on their own growth. {What this parable might be} (\tis hautˆ eiˆ hˆ parabolˆ\). A mistranslation, What this parable was (or meant). The optative \eiˆ\ is merely due to indirect discourse, changing the indicative \estin\ (is) of the direct question to the optative \eiˆ\ of the indirect, a change entirely with the writer or speaker and without any change of meaning (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1043f.).

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:18:36 @{Inquired} (\epunthaneto\). Imperfect middle. Repeatedly inquired as he heard the tramp of the passing crowd going by (\diaporeuomenou\). {What this meant} (\Ti eiˆ touto\). Literally, What it was. Without \an\ the optative is due to indirect discourse, changed from \estin\. With \an\ (margin of Westcott and Hort) the potential optative of the direct discourse is simply retained.

rwp@Luke:19:15 @{When he was come back again} (\en t“i epanelthein auton\). "On the coming back again as to him." Luke's favourite idiom of the articular infinitive after \en\ and with the accusative of general reference. {Had given} (\ded“kei\). Past perfect active indicative without augment of \did“mi\. {That he might know} (\hina gnoi\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \ginosk“\. The optative would be \gnoiˆ\.

rwp@Luke:20:16 @{God forbid} (\mˆ genoito\). Optative of wish about the future with \mˆ\. Literally, {may it not happen}. No word "God" in the Greek. This was the pious protest of the defeated members of the Sanhedrin who began to see the turn of the parable against themselves.

rwp@Luke:22:23 @{Which of them it was} (\to tis ara eiˆ ex aut“n\). Note the article \to\ with the indirect question as in verses 2,4|. The optative \eiˆ\ here is changed from the present active indicative \estin\, though it was not always done, for see \dokei\ in verse 24| where the present indicative is retained. They all had their hands on the table. Whose hand was it?

rwp@Luke:24:42 @{A piece of broiled fish} (\ichthuos optou meros\). \Optos\ is a verbal from \opta“\, to cook, to roast, to broil. Common word, but only here in the N.T. The best old documents omit "and a honeycomb" (\kai apo melissiou kˆriou\).

rwp@Mark:11:14 @{No man eat fruit from thee henceforward forever} (\Mˆketi eis ton ai“na ek sou mˆdeis karpon phagoi\). The verb \phagoi\ is in the second aorist active optative. It is a wish for the future that in its negative form constitutes a curse upon the tree. strkjv@Matthew:21:19| has the aorist subjunctive with double negative \ou mˆketi genˆtai\, a very strong negative prediction that amounts to a prohibition. See on Matthew. Jesus probably spoke in the Aramaic on this occasion. {And his disciples heard it} (\kai ˆkouon hoi mathˆtai autou\). Imperfect tense, "were listening to it," and evidently in amazement, for, after all, it was not the fault of the poor fig tree that it had put out leaves. One often sees peach blossoms nipped by the frost when they are too precocious in the changeable weather. But Jesus offered no explanation at this time.

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

rwp@Philemon:1:20 @{Let me have joy of thee} (\eg“ sou onaimˆn\). Second aorist middle optative of \oninˆmi\, old verb, only here in N.T. Optative the regular construction for a wish about the future. "May I get profit from thee in the Lord." {Refresh my heart in Christ} (\anapauson mou ta splagchna en Christ“i\). See verse 7| for \anapauson\ (first aorist active imperative of \anapau“\) and \splagchna\ (3 times in this letter, 7,12,20|).

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

rwp@Romans:15:5 @{The God of patience and comfort} (\ho theos tˆs hupomonˆs kai tˆs paraklˆse“s\). Genitive case of the two words in verse 4| used to describe God who uses the Scriptures to reveal himself to us. See strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3| for this idea; strkjv@Romans:15:13| for "the God of hope"; strkjv@15:33| for "the God of peace." {Grant you} (\d“iˆ humin\). Second aorist active optative (_Koin‚_ form for older \doiˆ\) as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:16; strkjv@Ephesians:1:17; strkjv@2Timothy:1:16,18; strkjv@2:25|, though MSS. vary in strkjv@Ephesians:1:17; strkjv@2Timothy:2:25| for \d“ˆi\ (subjunctive). The optative here is for a wish for the future (regular idiom). {According to Christ Jesus} (\kata Christon Iˆsoun\). "According to the character or example of Christ Jesus" (2Corinthians:11:17; strkjv@Colossians:2:8; strkjv@Ephesians:5:24|).

rwp@Romans:15:13 @{The God of hope} (\ho theos tˆs elpidos\). Taking up the idea in verse 12| as in verse 5| from 4|. {Fill you} (\plˆr“sai humas\). Optative (first aorist active of \plˆro“\) of wish for the future. Cf. \d“iˆ\ in verse 5|. {In believing} (\en t“i pisteuein\). "In the believing" (\en\ with locative of the articular infinitive, the idiom so common in Luke's Gospel). {That ye may abound} (\eis to perisseuein humas\). Purpose clause with \eis to\, as in verse 8|, with \perisseuein\ (present active infinitive of \perisseu“\, with accusative of general reference, \humas\). This verse gathers up the points in the preceding quotations.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Tue Jul 2 19:00:16 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020