Bible:
Filter: String:

NONE.filter - rwp saying:


rwp@1Corinthians:2:9 @{But as it is written} (\alla kath“s gegraptai\). Elliptical sentence like Rom strkjv@15:3| where \gegonen\ (it has happened) can be supplied. It is not certain where Paul derives this quotation as Scripture. Origen thought it a quotation from the _Apocalypse of Elias_ and Jerome finds it also in the _Ascension of Isaiah_. But these books appear to be post-Pauline, and Jerome denies that Paul obtained it from these late apocryphal books. Clement of Rome finds it in the LXX text of strkjv@Isaiah:64:4| and cites it as a Christian saying. It is likely that Paul here combines freely strkjv@Isaiah:64:4; strkjv@65:17; strkjv@52:15| in a sort of catena or free chain of quotations as he does in strkjv@Romans:3:10-18|. There is also an anacoluthon for \ha\ (which things) occurs as the direct object (accusative) with \eiden\ (saw) and \ˆkousan\ (heard), but as the subject (nominative) with \anebˆ\ (entered, second aorist active indicative of \anabain“\, to go up). {Whatsoever} (\hosa\). A climax to the preceding relative clause (Findlay). {Prepared} (\hˆtoimasen\). First aorist active indicative of \hetoimaz“\. The only instance where Paul uses this verb of God, though it occurs of final glory (Luke:2:31; strkjv@Matthew:20:23; strkjv@25:34; strkjv@Mark:10:40; strkjv@Hebrews:11:16|) and of final misery (Matthew:25:41|). But here undoubtedly the dominant idea is the present blessing to these who love God (1Corinthians:1:5-7|). {Heart} (\kardian\) here as in strkjv@Romans:1:21| is more than emotion. The Gnostics used this passage to support their teaching of esoteric doctrine as Hegesippus shows. Lightfoot thinks that probably the apocryphal _Ascension of Isaiah_ and _Apocalypse of Elias_ were Gnostic and so quoted this passage of Paul to support their position. But the next verse shows that Paul uses it of what is now {revealed} and made plain, not of mysteries still unknown.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:15 @{Judgeth all things} (\anakrinei panta\). The spiritual man (\ho pneumatikos\) is qualified to sift, to examine, to decide rightly, because he has the eyes of his heart enlightened (Ephesians:1:18|) and is no longer blinded by the god of this world (2Corinthians:4:4|). There is a great lesson for Christians who know by personal experience the things of the Spirit of God. Men of intellectual gifts who are ignorant of the things of Christ talk learnedly and patronizingly about things of which they are grossly ignorant. The spiritual man is superior to all this false knowledge. {He himself is judged of no man} (\autos de hup' oudenos anakrinetai\). Men will pass judgment on him, but the spiritual man refuses to accept the decision of his ignorant judges. He stands superior to them all as Polycarp did when he preferred to be burnt to saying, "Lord Caesar" in place of "Lord Jesus." He was unwilling to save his earthly life by the worship of Caesar in place of the Lord Jesus. Polycarp was a \pneumatikos\ man.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:7:26 @{I think therefore} (\nomiz“ oun\). Paul proceeds to express therefore the previously mentioned judgment (\gn“mˆn\) and calls it his opinion, not because he is uncertain, but simply because it is not a command, but advice. {By reason of the present distress} (\dia tˆn enest“san anagkˆn\). The participle \enest“san\ is second perfect active of \enistˆmi\ and means "standing on" or "present" (cf. strkjv@Galatians:1:4; strkjv@Hebrews:9:9|). It occurs in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2| of the advent of Christ as not "present." Whether Paul has in mind the hoped for second coming of Jesus in this verse we do not certainly know, though probably so. Jesus had spoken of those calamities which would precede his coming (Matthew:24:8ff.|) though Paul had denied saying that the advent was right at hand (2Thessalonians:2:2|). \Anagkˆ\ is a strong word (old and common), either for external circumstances or inward sense of duty. It occurs elsewhere for the woes preceding the second coming (Luke:21:23|) and also for Paul's persecutions (1Thessalonians:3:7; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:4; strkjv@12:10|). Perhaps there is a mingling of both ideas here. {Namely}. This word is not in the Greek. The infinitive of indirect discourse (\huparchein\) after \nomiz“\ is repeated with recitative \hoti\, "That the being so is good for a man" (\hoti kalon anthr“p“i to hout“s einai\). The use of the article \to\ with \einai\ compels this translation. Probably Paul means for one (\anthr“p“i\, generic term for man or woman) to remain as he is whether married or unmarried. The copula \estin\ is not expressed. He uses \kalon\ (good) as in strkjv@7:1|.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:30 @Paul carries on the supposed objective to his principle of love. Why incur the risk of being evil spoken of (\blasphˆmoumai\) for the sake of maintaining one's liberty? Is it worth it? See strkjv@Romans:14:6| where Paul justifies the conscience of one who eats the meat and of one who does not. Saying grace over food that one should not eat seems inconsistent. We have this very word _blaspheme_ in English.

rwp@1Corinthians:12:15 @{If the foot shall say} (\ean eipˆi ho pous\). Condition of third class (\ean\ and second aorist subjunctive \eipˆi\). In case the foot say. {I am not of the body} (\ouk eimi ek tou s“matos\). I am independent of the body, not dependent on the body. {It is not therefore not of the body} (\ou para touto ouk estin ek tou s“matos\). Thinking or saying so does not change the fact. \Para touto\ here means "alongside of this" (cf. IV Macc. strkjv@10:19) and so "because of," a rare use (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 616). The two negatives (\ou--ouk\) do not here destroy one another. Each retains its full force.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:25 @{Till he hath put} (\achri hou thˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \tithˆmi\, "till he put" (no sense in saying "hath put," merely effective aorist tense for climax. \Achri (hou), mechri (hou), he“s (hou)\ all are used for the same idea of indefinite future time.

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@1John:2:4 @{I know him} (\Egn“ka auton\). Perfect active indicative with recitative \hoti\ like quotation marks just before it. This is one of the pious platitudes, cheap claptrap of the Gnostics, who would bob up in meetings with such explosions. John punctures such bubbles with the sharp addition "and keepeth not" (\ho mˆ tˆr“n\, present active linear participle). "The one who keeps on saying: 'I have come to know him,' and keeps on not keeping his commandments is a liar" (\pseustˆs\, just like Satan, strkjv@John:8:44| and like strkjv@1John:1:8,10|), followed by the negative statement as in strkjv@1:8,10|. There is a whip-cracker effect in John's words.

rwp@1Thessalonians:5:3 @{When they are saying} (\hotan leg“sin\). Present active subjunctive picturing these false prophets of {peace and safety} like strkjv@Ezekiel:13:10| (Peace, and there is no peace). \Asphaleia\ only in N.T. in strkjv@Luke:1:4| (which see); strkjv@Acts:5:23| and here. {Sudden destruction} (\aiphnidios olethros\). \Olethros\ old word from \ollumi\, to destroy. See also strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:9|. \Aiphnidios\, old adjective akin to \aphn“\ and in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:21:34| where Westcott and Hort spell it \ephnidios\. {Cometh upon them} (\autois epistatai\). Unaspirated form instead of the usual \ephistatai\ (present middle indicative) from \ephistˆmi\ perhaps due to confusion with \epistamai\. {As travail upon a woman with child} (\h“sper hˆ “din tˆi en gastri echousˆi\). Earlier form \“dis\ for birth-pang used also by Jesus (Mark:13:8; strkjv@Matthew:24:8|). Technical phrase for pregnancy, {to the one who has it in belly} (cf. strkjv@Matthew:1:18| of Mary). {They shall in no wise escape} (\ou mˆ ekphug“sin\). Strong negative like that in strkjv@4:15| \ou mˆ\ (double negative) and the second aorist active subjunctive.

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:2:6 @{A ransom for all} (\antilutron huper pant“n\). "A reminiscence of the Lord's own saying" (Lock) in strkjv@Matthew:20:28| (Mark:10:45|) where we have \lutron anti poll“n\. In the papyri \huper\ is the ordinary preposition for the notion of substitution where benefit is involved as in this passage. \Anti\ has more the idea of exchange and \antilutron huper\ combines both ideas. \Lutron\ is the common word for ransom for a slave or a prisoner. Paul may have coined \antilutron\ with the saying of Christ in mind (only one MS. of strkjv@Psalms:48:9| and Orph. _Litt_. 588). See strkjv@Galatians:1:4| "who gave himself for our sins." {The testimony} (\to marturion\). Either the nominative absolute or the accusative absolute in apposition to the preceding clause like \to adunaton\ in strkjv@Romans:8:3|. {In its own times} (\kairois idiois\). Locative case as in strkjv@6:15; strkjv@Titus:1:3|. See strkjv@Galatians:6:9| for "due season." There is no predicate or participle here, "the testimony in its due seasons" (plural).

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: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:6:10 @{The love of money} (\hˆ philarguria\). Vulgate, _avaritia_. Common word (from \philarguros\, strkjv@2Timothy:3:12|, and that from \philos, arguros\), only here in N.T. Refers to verse 9| (\boulomenoi ploutein\). {A root of all kinds of evil} (\riza pant“n t“n kak“n\). A root (\riza\). Old word, common in literal (Matthew:3:10|) and metaphorical sense (Romans:11:11-18|). Field (_Ot. Norv_.) argues for "the root" as the idea of this predicate without saying that it is the only root. Undoubtedly a proverb that Paul here quotes, attributed to Bion and to Democritus (\tˆn philargurian einai mˆtropolin pant“n t“n kak“n\), where "metropolis" takes the place of "root." Surely men today need no proof of the fact that men and women will commit any sin or crime for money. {Reaching after} (\oregomenoi\). Present middle participle of \oreg“\ (see strkjv@3:1|) with genitive \hˆs\ (which). {Have been led astray} (\apeplanˆthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \apoplana“\, old compound verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:13:22|. {Have pierced themselves through} (\heautous periepeiran\). First aorist active (with reflexive pronoun) of late compound \peripeir“\, only here in N.T. Perfective use of \peri\ (around, completely to pierce). {With many sorrows} (\odunais pollais\). Instrumental case of \odunˆ\ (consuming, eating grief). In N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:9:2|.

rwp@2Corinthians:1:18 @{Is not yea and nay} (\ouk estin nai kai ou\). He is not a Yes and No man, saying Yes and meaning or acting No. Paul calls God to witness on this point.

rwp@2Peter:2:22 @{It has happened} (\sumbebˆken\). Perfect active indicative of \sumbain“\, for which see strkjv@1Peter:4:12|. {According to the true proverb} (\to tˆs alˆthous paroimias\). "The word (\to\ used absolutely, the matter of, as in strkjv@Matthew:21:21; strkjv@James:4:14|) of the true proverb" (\paroimia\ a wayside saying, for which see strkjv@John:10:6; strkjv@16:25,29|). The first proverb here given comes from strkjv@Proverbs:26:11|. \Exerama\ is a late and rare word (here only in N.T., in Diosc. and Eustath.) from \exera“\, to vomit. {The sow that had washed} (\h–s lousamenˆ\). \H–s\, old word for hog, here only in N.T. Participle first aorist direct middle of \lou“\ shows that it is feminine (anarthrous). This second proverb does not occur in the O.T., probably from a Gentile source because about the habit of hogs. Epictetus and other writers moralize on the habit of hogs, having once bathed in a filthy mud-hole, to delight in it. {To wallowing} (\eis kulismon\). "To rolling." Late and rare word (from \kuli“\, strkjv@Mark:9:20|), here only in N.T. {In the mire} (\borborou\). Objective genitive, old word for dung, mire, here only in N.T. J. Rendel Harris (_Story of Ahikar_, p. LXVII) tells of a story about a hog that went to the bath with people of quality, but on coming out saw a stinking drain and went and rolled himself in it.

rwp@2Timothy:1:8 @{Be not ashamed of} (\mˆ epaischunthˆis\). First aorist (ingressive) passive subjunctive (in prohibition) of \epaischunomai\, old word, to be ashamed. Again in verse 16| without augment (\epaischunthˆn\), transitive use of the passive voice as often in the _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 818). See strkjv@Romans:1:16; strkjv@6:21|. "Do not become ashamed" (as he had not). {The testimony of our Lord} (\to marturion tou kuriou\). For the old word \marturion\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:1:6; strkjv@2:1|. Paul probably has in mind the saying of Jesus preserved in strkjv@Mark:8:38| (Luke:9:26|). See also strkjv@2:12|. {His prisoner} (\ton desmion autou\). As in strkjv@Phillipians:1:12; strkjv@Philemon:1:1,9; strkjv@Ephesians:3:1; strkjv@4:1| (the first Roman captivity). Paul is in his last captivity and refers to it again in verse 16; strkjv@2:9|. {Suffer hardship with} (\sunkakopathˆson\). First aorist active imperative of the double compound \sunkakopathe“\, first known use and in N.T. only here and strkjv@2:3| (in eccles. writers). But \kakopathe“\, to suffer evil, is old verb (2:9; strkjv@4:5|). Paul is fond of compounds of \sun\. Paul challenges Timothy by this verb which he apparently coins for the purpose to a joint (\sun\) suffering with the Lord Jesus and Paul "for the gospel" (\t“i euaggeli“i\, dative case rather than associative instrumental "with"). {According to the power of God} (\kata dunamin theou\). Given by God (2Corinthians:6:7|).

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:2:18 @{Men who} (\hoitines\). "The very ones who." {Have erred} (\ˆstochˆsan\). "Missed the mark." First aorist active indicative of \astoche“\, for which see strkjv@1Timothy:1:6; strkjv@6:21|. {That the resurrection is past already} (\anastasin ˆdˆ gegonenai\). Second perfect active infinitive of \ginomai\ in indirect assertion after \legontes\ (saying) with the accusative of general reference (\anastasin\). {Overthrow} (\anatrepousin\). See strkjv@Titus:1:11|.

rwp@2Timothy:4:13 @{The cloke} (\tˆn phelonˆn\). More common form \pheilonˆ\. By metathesis for \phainolˆ\, Latin _paenula_, though which language transliterated the word into the other is not known. The meaning is also uncertain, though probably "cloke" as there are so many papyri examples in that sense (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Milligan (N.T. _Documents_, p. 20) had previously urged "book wrap" as probable but he changed his mind and rightly so. {With Carpus} (\para Karp“i\). "Beside Carpus," at his house. Not mentioned elsewhere. Probably a visit to Troas after Paul's return from Crete. {The books} (\ta biblia\). Probably papyrus rolls. One can only guess what rolls the old preacher longs to have with him, probably copies of Old Testament books, possibly copies of his own letters, and other books used and loved. The old preacher can be happy with his books. {Especially the parchments} (\malista tas membranas\). Latin _membrana_. The dressed skins were first made at Pergamum and so termed "parchments." These in particular would likely be copies of Old Testament books, parchment being more expensive than papyrus, possibly even copies of Christ's sayings (Luke:1:1-4|). We recall that in strkjv@Acts:26:24| Festus referred to Paul's learning (\ta grammata\). He would not waste his time in prison.

rwp@Acts:2:42 @{They continued steadfastly} (\ˆsan proskarturountes\). Periphrastic active imperfect of \proskarture“\ as in strkjv@Acts:1:14| (same participle in verse 46|). {Fellowship} (\koin“niƒi\). Old word from \koin“nos\ (partner, sharer in common interest) and this from \koinos\ what is common to all. This partnership involves participation in, as the blood of Christ (Phillipians:2:1|) or co-operation in the work of the gospel (Phillipians:1:5|) or contribution for those in need (2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@9:13|). Hence there is wide diversity of opinion concerning the precise meaning of \koin“nia\ in this verse. It may refer to the distribution of funds in verse 44| or to the oneness of spirit in the community of believers or to the Lord's Supper (as in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:16|) in the sense of communion or to the fellowship in the common meals or \agapae\ (love-feasts). {The breaking of bread} (\tˆi klasei tou artou\). The word \klasis\ is an old word, but used only by Luke in the N.T. (Luke:24:35; strkjv@Acts:2:42|), though the verb \kla“\ occurs in other parts of the N.T. as in verse 46|. The problem here is whether Luke refers to the ordinary meal as in strkjv@Luke:24:35| or to the Lord's Supper. The same verb \kla“\ is used of breaking bread at the ordinary meal (Luke:24:30|) or the Lord's Supper (Luke:22:19|). It is generally supposed that the early disciples attached so much significance to the breaking of bread at the ordinary meals, more than our saying grace, that they followed the meal with the Lord's Supper at first, a combination called \agapai\ or love-feasts. "There can be no doubt that the Eucharist at this period was preceded uniformly by a common repast, as was the case when the ordinance was instituted" (Hackett). This led to some abuses as in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:20|. Hence it is possible that what is referred to here is the Lord's Supper following the ordinary meal. "To simply explain \tˆi klasei tou artou\ as='The Holy Communion' is to pervert the plain meaning of words, and to mar the picture of family life, which the text places before us as the ideal of the early believers" (Page). But in strkjv@Acts:20:7| they seem to have come together especially for the observance of the Lord's Supper. Perhaps there is no way to settle the point conclusively here. {The prayers} (\tais proseuchais\). Services where they prayed as in strkjv@1:14|, in the temple (Acts:3:1|), in their homes (4:23|).

rwp@Acts:5:32 @{We are witnesses} (\hˆmeis esmen martures\). As in strkjv@2:32|. {Things} (\rhˆmat“n\). Literally, sayings, but like the Hebrew _dabhar_ for "word" it is here used for "things." {And so is the Holy Ghost} (\kai to pneuma to hagion\). The word for "is" (\estin\) is not in the Greek, but this is plainly the meaning. Peter claims the witness of the Holy Spirit to the raising of Jesus Christ, God's Son, by the Father.

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:5:41 @{They therefore} (\hoi men oun\). No answering \de\. {They were counted worthy to suffer dishonour for the Name} (\katˆxi“thˆsan huper tou onomatos atimasthˆnai\). First aorist passive indicative of \kataxio“\, old verb to count worthy. Three times in N.T. (Luke:20:35; strkjv@Acts:5:41; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:5|). First aorist passive infinitive of \atimaz“\, old verb to make one dishonoured (\atimos\). Forms here an oxymoron (\oxus\, sharp, \moros\, foolish) pointedly foolish saying "which is witty or impressive through sheer contradiction or paradox as laborious idleness, sublime indifference" (Vincent). The apostles felt honoured by dishonour. Note the same use of "the Name" as in strkjv@James:2:7; strkjv@3John:1:7|. With the Jews this absolute use of "the Name" meant Jehovah. The Christians now apply it to Jesus.

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:8:10 @{That power of God which is called Great} (\hˆ Dunamis tou theou hˆ kaloumenˆ Megalˆ\). Apparently here already the oriental doctrine of emanations or aeons so rampant in the second century. This "power" was considered a spark of God himself and Jerome (in strkjv@Matthew:24|) quotes Simon (Page) as saying: _Ego sum sermo Dei,... ego omnipotens, ego omnia Dei_. Simon claimed to _impersonate God_.

rwp@Acts:9:1 @{Yet} (\eti\). As if some time elapsed between the death of Stephen as is naturally implied by the progressive persecution described in strkjv@8:3|. The zeal of Saul the persecutor increased with success. {Breathing threatening and slaughter} (\enpne“n apeilˆs kai phonou\). Present active participle of old and common verb. Not "breathing out," but "breathing in" (inhaling) as in Aeschylus and Plato or "breathing on" (from Homer on). The partitive genitive of \apeilˆs\ and \phonou\ means that threatening and slaughter had come to be the very breath that Saul breathed, like a warhorse who sniffed the smell of battle. He breathed on the remaining disciples the murder that he had already breathed in from the death of the others. He exhaled what he inhaled. Jacob had said that "Benjamin shall ravin as a wolf" (Genesis:49:27|). This greatest son of Benjamin was fulfilling this prophecy (Furneaux). The taste of blood in the death of Stephen was pleasing to young Saul (8:1|) and now he revelled in the slaughter of the saints both men and women. In strkjv@26:11| Luke quotes Paul as saying that he was "exceedingly mad against them."

rwp@Acts:9:37 @{In an upper chamber} (\en huper“i“i\). See on ¯1:13|. Also in verse 39|. In that house. This service was rendered by the women, though Luke has \lousantes\ (masculine plural aorist active participle of \lou“\), a general way of saying "they washed." The interment was not hurried as in Jerusalem (Ananias and Sapphira) and the upper room is where the body was usually placed.

rwp@Acts:10:3 @{Coming in} (\eiselthonta\). Ingressive second aorist active participle, not present. Songs:punctiliar, "saw come," not "saw coming." Songs:also "say" or "speak," not "saying." Luke repeats the account of this vision to Cornelius twice (10:30; strkjv@11:13|) and also the story of the vision to Peter (10:1-16,28; strkjv@11:5|).

rwp@Acts:10:28 @{How that it is an unlawful thing} (\h“s athemiton estin\). The conjunction \h“s\ is sometimes equivalent to \hoti\ (that). The old form of \athemitos\ was \athemistos\ from \themisto\ (\themiz“, themis\, law custom) and \a\ privative. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@1Peter:4:3| (Peter both times). But there is no O.T. regulation forbidding such social contact with Gentiles, though the rabbis had added it and had made it binding by custom. There is nothing more binding on the average person than social custom. On coming from the market an orthodox Jew was expected to immerse to avoid defilement (Edersheim, _Jewish Social Life_, pp. 26-28; Taylor's _Sayings of the Jewish Fathers_, pp. 15, 26, 137, second edition). See also strkjv@Acts:11:3; strkjv@Galatians:2:12|. It is that middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile (Ephesians:2:14|) which Jesus broke down. {One of another nation} (\allophul“i\). Dative case of an old adjective, but only here in the N.T. (\allos\, another, \phulon\, race). Both Juvenal (_Sat_. XIV. 104, 105) and Tacitus (_History_, V. 5) speak of the Jewish exclusiveness and separation from Gentiles. {And yet unto} (\kamoi\). Dative of the emphatic pronoun (note position of prominence) with \kai\ (\crasis\) meaning here "and yet" or adversative "but" as often with \kai\ which is by no means always merely the connective "and" (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1182f.). Now Peter takes back both the adjectives used in his protest to the Lord (verse 14|) "common and unclean." It is a long journey that Peter has made. He here refers to "no one" (\mˆdena\), not to "things," but that is great progress.

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:10:41 @{Chosen before} (\prokecheirotonˆmenois\). Perfect passive participle dative plural from \procheirotone“\, to choose or designate by hand (\cheirotone“, cheir\, hand, and \tein“\, to stretch, as in strkjv@Acts:14:23; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:19|), beforehand (\pro\), a double compound as old as Plato, but here alone in the N.T. Peter is evidently stating the thing as it happened and not trying to make a convincing story by saying that both friends and foes saw him after his resurrection. It is the "historian's candour" (Paley) in Luke here that adds to the credibility of the narrative. The sceptical Jews would not have believed and Jesus was kept from open contact with the world of sin after his Passion. {To us who did eat and drink with him} (\hˆmin hoitines sunephagomen kai sunepiomen aut“i\). The "who" (\hoitines\) is first person agreeing with "us" (\hˆmin\). Second aorist active indicative of the common verbs \sunesthi“\ and \sumpin“\. \Aut“i\ is associative instrumental case. There are difficulties to us in understanding how Jesus could eat and drink after the resurrection as told here and in strkjv@Luke:24:41-3|, but at any rate Peter makes it clear that it was no hallucination or ghost, but Jesus himself whom they saw after he rose from the dead, "after the rising as to him" (\meta to anastˆnai auton\, \meta\ with the accusative articular infinitive second aorist active and the accusative \auton\ of general reference). Furneaux dares to think that the disciples misunderstood Jesus about eating after the resurrection. But that is to deny the testimony merely because we cannot explain the transition state of the body of Jesus.

rwp@Acts:11:7 @{A voice saying} (\ph“nˆs legousˆs\). Genitive case after \ˆkousa\ (cf. strkjv@9:7| and accusative strkjv@9:4| which see for discussion). Participle \legousˆs\ (present active of \leg“\) agreeing with \ph“nˆs\, a kind of indirect discourse use of the participle.

rwp@Acts:11:13 @{Standing and saying} (\stathenta kai eiponta\). More precisely, "stand and say" (punctiliar act, first aorist passive and second aorist active participles). {Fetch Simon} (\metapempsai Sim“na\). First aorist middle imperative. Third time mentioned (10:5,22; strkjv@11:13|). Perhaps Peter is anxious to make it plain that he did not go of his own initiative into the house of Cornelius. He went under God's direct orders.

rwp@Acts:11:16 @{I remembered} (\emnˆsthˆn\). First aorist passive indicative of the common verb \mimnˆsk“\, to remind. Peter recalls the very words of Jesus as reported in strkjv@Acts:1:5|. Peter now understands this saying of Jesus as he had not done before. That is a common experience with us all as new experiences of grace open richer veins in God's truth (John:12:16|). Peter clearly sees that the water baptism is merely the symbol or picture of the spiritual baptism in the heart.

rwp@Acts:12:2 @{James the brother of John} (\Iak“bon ton adelphon I“anou\). He had been called by Jesus a son of thunder along with his brother John. Jesus had predicted a bloody death for both of them (Mark:10:38ff.; strkjv@Matthew:20:23|). James is the first of the apostles to die and John probably the last. He is not James the Lord's brother (Galatians:1:19|). We do not know why Luke tells so little about the death of James and so much about the death of Stephen nor do we know why Herod selected him as a victim. Eusebius (_H.E_. ii. 9) quotes Clement of Alexandria as saying that a Jew made accusations against James and was converted and beheaded at the same time with him. {Killed with the sword} (\aneilen machairˆi\). The verb is a favourite one with Luke (Acts:2:33; strkjv@5:33,36; strkjv@7:28; strkjv@9:23-29; strkjv@10:39|, etc.). Instrumental case and Ionic form of \machaira\. The Jews considered beheading a shameful death as in the case of the Baptist (Matthew:14:10|).

rwp@Acts:13:22 @{When he had removed him} (\metastˆsas auton\). First aorist active participle of \methistˆmi\, old verb to transfer, to transpose (note force of \meta\). This verb occurs in strkjv@Luke:16:4| by the unjust steward about his removal from office. Cf. strkjv@1Samuel:15:16|. {To be} (\eis\). As or for, Greek idiom like the Hebrew _le_, common in the LXX. {A man after my heart} (\andra kata tˆn kardian mou\). The words quoted by Paul as a direct saying of God are a combination of strkjv@Psalms:89:20, 21; strkjv@1Samuel:13:14| (the word of the Lord to Samuel about David). Knowling thinks that this free and rather loose quotation of the substance argues for the genuineness of the report of Paul's sermon. Hackett observes that the commendation of David is not absolute, but, as compared with the disobedient Saul, he was a man who did God's will in spite of the gross sin of which he repented (Psalms:51|). Note "wills" (\thelˆmata\), plural, of God.

rwp@Acts:13:45 @{The Jews} (\hoi Ioudaioi\). Certainly not the proselytes of verse 43|. Probably many of the Jews that were then favourably disposed to Paul's message had reacted against him under the influence of the rabbis during the week and evidently on this Sabbath very many Gentiles ("almost the whole city," "the multitudes" \tous ochlous\) had gathered, to the disgust of the stricter Jews. Nothing is specifically stated here about the rabbis, but they were beyond doubt the instigators of, and the ringleaders in, the opposition as in Thessalonica (17:5|). No such crowds (\ochlous\) came to the synagogue when they were the speakers. {With jealousy} (\zˆlou\). Genitive case of \zˆlos\ (from \ze“\, to boil) after \eplˆsthˆsan\ (effective first aorist passive indicative of \pimplˆmi\). Envy and jealousy arise between people of the same calling (doctors towards doctors, lawyers towards lawyers, preachers towards preachers). Songs:these rabbis boiled with jealousy when they saw the crowds gathered to hear Paul and Barnabas. {Contradicted} (\antelegon\). Imperfect active of \antileg“\, old verb to speak against, to say a word in opposition to (\anti\, face to face). It was interruption of the service and open opposition in the public meeting. Paul and Barnabas were guests by courtesy and, of course, could not proceed further, when denied that privilege. {Blasphemed} (\blasphˆmountes\). Blaspheming. Songs:the correct text without the addition \antilegontes\ (repeated from \antelegon\ above). Common verb in the Gospels for saying injurious and harmful things. Doubtless these rabbis indulged in unkind personalities and made it plain that Paul and Barnabas were going beyond the limitations of pure Judaism in their contacts with Gentiles.

rwp@Acts:15:5 @{But there rose up} (\exanestˆsan de\). Second aorist active indicative (intransitive). Note both \ex\ and \an\. These men rose up out of the crowd at a critical moment. They were believers in Christ (\pepisteukotes\, having believed), but were still members of "the sect of the Pharisees" (\tˆs hairese“s t“n Pharisai“n\). Evidently they still held to the Pharisaic narrowness shown in the attack on Peter (11:2f.|). Note the dogmatism of their "must" (\dei\) after the opposition of Paul and Barnabas to their "except" (\ean me\) at Antioch (15:1|). They are unconvinced and expected to carry the elders with them. Codex Bezae says that they had appealed to the elders (15:2,5|). At any rate they have made the issue in open meeting at the height of the jubilation. It is plain from verse 6| that this meeting was adjourned, for another gathering came together then. It is here that the private conference of which Paul speaks in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| took place. It was Paul's chance to see the leaders in Jerusalem (Peter, James, and John) and he won them over to his view of Gentile liberty from the Mosaic law so that the next public conference (Acts:15:6-29|) ratified heartily the views of Paul, Barnabas, Peter, James, and John. It was a diplomatic triumph of the first order and saved Christianity from the bondage of Jewish ceremonial sacramentalism. Songs:far as we know this is the only time that Paul and John met face to face, the great spirits in Christian history after Jesus our Lord. It is a bit curious to see men saying today that Paul surrendered about Titus and had him circumcised for the sake of peace, the very opposite of what he says in Galatians, "to whom I yielded, no not for an hour." Titus as a Greek was a red flag to the Judaizers and to the compromisers, but Paul stood his ground.

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: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:17:5 @{Moved with jealousy} (\zˆl“santes\). Both our English words, {zeal} and {jealousy}, are from the Greek \zˆlos\. In strkjv@13:45| the Jews (rabbis) "were filled with jealousy" (\eplˆsthˆsan zˆlou\). That is another way of saying the same thing as here. The success of Paul was entirely too great in both places to please the rabbis. Songs:here is jealousy of Jewish preachers towards Christian preachers. It is always between men or women of the same profession or group. In strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:3-10| Paul hints at some of the slanders spread against him by these rabbis (deceivers, using words of flattery as men-pleasers, after vain-glory, greed of gain, etc.). {Took unto them} (\proslabomenoi\). Second aorist middle (indirect, to themselves) participle of \proslamban“\, old and common verb. {Certain vile fellows of the rabble} (\t“n agorai“n andras tinas ponˆrous\). The \agora\ or market-place was the natural resort for those with nothing to do (Matthew:20:4|) like the court-house square today or various parks in our cities where bench-warmers flock. Plato (_Protagoras_ 347 C) calls these \agoraioi\ (common word, but in N.T. only here and strkjv@19:38|) idlers or good-for-nothing fellows. They are in every city and such "bums" are ready for any job. The church in Thessalonica caught some of these peripatetic idlers (2Thessalonians:3:10f.|) "doing nothing but doing about." Songs:the Jewish preachers gather to themselves a choice collection of these market-loungers or loafers or wharf-rats. The Romans called them _subrostrani_ (hangers round the rostrum or _subbasilicari_). {Gathering a crowd} (\ochlopoiˆsantes\). Literally, making or getting (\poie“\) a crowd (\ochlos\), a word not found elsewhere. Probably right in the \agora\ itself where the rabbis could tell men their duties and pay them in advance. Instance Hyde Park in London with all the curious gatherings every day, Sunday afternoons in particular. {Set the city on an uproar} (\ethoruboun\). Imperfect active of \thorube“\, from \thorubos\ (tumult), old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@20:10; strkjv@Matthew:9:23; strkjv@Mark:4:39|. They kept up the din, this combination of rabbis and rabble. {Assaulting the house of Jason} (\epistantes tˆi oikiƒi Iasonos\). Second aorist (ingressive) active of \ephistˆmi\, taking a stand against, rushing at, because he was Paul's host. He may have been a Gentile (Jason the name of an ancient king of Thessaly), but the Jews often used it for Joshua or Jesus (II Macc. strkjv@1:7). {They sought} (\ezˆtoun\). Imperfect active. They burst into the house and searched up and down. {Them} (\autous\). Paul and Silas. They were getting ready to have a lynching party.

rwp@Acts:17:7 @{Whom Jason hath received} (\hous hupodedektai Ias“n\). Present perfect middle indicative of \hupodechomai\, to entertain, old verb, but in N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:10:38; strkjv@19:6; strkjv@Acts:17:7; strkjv@James:2:25|. This is Jason's crime and he is the prisoner before the politarchs. {These all} (\houtoi pantes\). Jason, the "brethren" of verse 6|, Paul and Silas, and all Christians everywhere. {Contrary} (\apenanti\). Late compound preposition (\apo, en, anti\) found in Polybius, LXX, here only in the N.T. {The decrees of Caesar} (\t“n dogmat“n Kaisaros\). This was a charge of treason and was a sure way to get a conviction. Probably the Julian _Leges Majestatis_ are in mind rather than the definite decree of Claudius about the Jews (Acts:18:2|). {Saying that there is another king, one Jesus} (\Basilea heteron legontes einai Iˆsoun\). Note the very order of the words in the Greek indirect discourse with the accusative and infinitive after \legontes\. \Basilea heteron\ comes first, a different king, another emperor than Caesar. This was the very charge that the smart student of the Pharisees and Herodians had tried to catch Jesus on (Mark:12:14|). The Sanhedrin made it anyhow against Jesus to Pilate (Luke:23:2|) and Pilate had to notice it. "Although the emperors never ventured to assume the title _rex_ at Rome, in the Eastern provinces they were regularly termed _basileus_" (Page). The Jews here, as before Pilate (John:19:15|), renounce their dearest hope of a Messianic king. It is plain that Paul had preached about Jesus as the Messiah, King of the Kingdom of God over against the Roman Empire, a spiritual kingdom, to be sure, but the Jews here turn his language to his hurt as they did with Jesus. As a matter of fact Paul's preaching about the kingdom and the second coming of Christ was gravely misunderstood by the Christians at Thessalonica after his departure (1Thessalonians:4:13-5:4; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2|). The Jews were quick to seize upon his language about Jesus Christ to his own injury. Clearly here in Thessalonica Paul had faced the power of the Roman Empire in a new way and pictured over against it the grandeur of the reign of Christ.

rwp@Acts:20:12 @{They brought the lad alive} (\ˆgagon ton paida z“nta\). Second aorist active indicative of \ag“\. Evidently the special friends of the lad who now either brought him back to the room or (Rendall) took him home to his family. Knowling holds that \z“nta\ (living) here is pointless unless he had been dead. He had been taken up dead and now they brought him living. {Not a little} (\ou metri“s\). Not moderately, that is a great deal. Luke is fond of this use of the figure _litotes_ (use of the negative) instead of the strong positive (1:5|, etc.). D (Codex Bezae) has here instead of \ˆgagon\ these words: \alpazomen“n de aut“n ˆgagen ton neaniskon z“nta\ (while they were saying farewell he brought the young man alive). This reading pictures the joyful scene over the lad's restoration as Paul was leaving.

rwp@Acts:20:35 @{I gave you an example} (\hupedeixa\). First aorist active indicative of \hupodeiknumi\, old verb to show under one's eyes, to give object lesson, by deed as well as by word (Luke:6:47|). \Hupodeigma\ means example (John:13:15; strkjv@James:5:10|). Songs:Paul appeals to his example in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:1; strkjv@Phillipians:3:17|. \Panta\ is accusative plural of general reference (in all things). {Songs:labouring ye ought to help} (\hout“s kopi“ntas dei antilambanesthai\). So, as I did. Necessity (\dei\). Toiling (\kopi“ntas\) not just for ourselves, but to help (\antilambanesthai\), to take hold yourselves (middle voice) at the other end (\anti\). This verb common in the old Greek, but in the N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:1:54; strkjv@Acts:20:35; strkjv@1Timothy:6:2|. This noble plea to help the weak is the very spirit of Christ (1Thessalonians:5:14; strkjv@1Corinthians:12:28; strkjv@Romans:5:6; strkjv@14:1|). In strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:14| \antechesthe t“n asthenount“n\ we have Paul's very idea again. Every Community Chest appeal today re-echoes Paul's plea. {He himself said} (\autos eipen\). Not in the Gospels, one of the sayings of Jesus in current use that Paul had received and treasured. Various other _Agrapha_ of Jesus have been preserved in ancient writers and some in recently discovered papyri which may be genuine or not. We are grateful that Paul treasured this one. This Beatitude (on \makarion\ see on strkjv@Matthew:5:3-11|) is illustrated by the whole life of Jesus with the Cross as the culmination. Aristotle (Eth. IV. I) has a saying somewhat like this, but assigns the feeling of superiority as the reason (Page), an utterly different idea from that here. This quotation raises the question of how much Paul personally knew of the life and sayings of Jesus.

rwp@Acts:21:1 @{Were parted from them} (\apospasthentas ap' aut“n\). First aorist passive participle of \apospa“\ same verb as in strkjv@20:30; strkjv@Luke:22:41|. {Had set sail} (\anachthˆnai\). First aorist passive of \anag“\, the usual verb to put out (up) to sea as in verse 2| (\anˆchthˆmen\). {We came with a straight course} (\euthudromˆsantes ˆlthomen\). The same verb (aorist active participle of \euthudrome“\) used by Luke in strkjv@16:11| of the voyage from Troas to Samothrace and Neapolis, which see. {Unto Cos} (\eis tˆn Ko\). Standing today, about forty nautical miles south from Miletus, island famous as the birthplace of Hippocrates and Apelles with a great medical school. Great trading place with many Jews. {The next day} (\tˆi hexˆs\). Locative case with \hˆmerƒi\ (day) understood. The adverb \hexˆs\ is from \ech“\ (future \hex“\) and means successively or in order. This is another one of Luke's ways of saying "on the next day" (cf. three others in strkjv@20:15|). {Unto Rhodes} (\eis tˆn Rhodon\). Called the island of roses. The sun shone most days and made roses luxuriant. The great colossus which represented the sun, one of the seven wonders of the world, was prostrate at this time. The island was at the entrance to the Aegean Sea and had a great university, especially for rhetoric and oratory. There was great commerce also. {Unto Patara} (\eis Patara\). A seaport on the Lycian coast on the left bank of the Xanthus. It once had an oracle of Apollo which rivalled that at Delphi. This was the course taken by hundreds of ships every season.

rwp@Acts:22:7 @{I fell} (\epesa\). Second aorist active indicative with \-a\ rather than \epeson\, the usual form of \pipt“\. {Unto the ground} (\eis to edaphos\). Old word, here alone in N.T. Songs:the verb \edaphiz“\, is in strkjv@Luke:19:44| alone in the N.T. {A voice saying} (\ph“nˆs legousˆs\). Genitive after \ˆkousa\, though in strkjv@26:14| the accusative is used after \ˆkousa\, as in strkjv@22:14| after \akousai\, either being allowable. See on ¯9:7| for discussion of the difference in case. Saul's name repeated each time (9:4; strkjv@22:7; strkjv@26:14|). Same question also in each report: "Why persecuted thou me?" (\Ti me di“keis?\). These piercing words stuck in Paul's mind.

rwp@Acts:22:18 @{Saw him saying} (\idein auton legonta\). The first visit after his conversion when they tried to kill him in Jerusalem (9:29|). {Because} (\dioti, dia\ and \hoti\), {for that}.

rwp@Acts:23:7 @{When he had so said} (\touto autou lalountos\). Genitive absolute of present participle (Westcott and Hort) rather than aorist (\eipontos\). While he was saying this. {A dissension} (\stasis\). This old word for standing or station (Hebrews:9:8|) from \histˆmi\, to place, we have seen already to mean insurrection (Acts:19:40| which see). Here it is strife as in strkjv@15:2|. {Was divided} (\eschisthˆ\). See on ¯14:4|.

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:25:10 @{I am standing before Caesar's judgment-seat} (\Hest“s epi tou bˆmatos Kaisaros eimi\). Periphrastic present perfect indicative (\hest“s eimi\), second perfect participle \hest“s\ of \histˆmi\ (intransitive). Paul means to say that he is a Roman citizen before a Roman tribunal. Festus was the representative of Caesar and had no right to hand him over to a Jewish tribunal. Festus recognized this by saying to Paul "wilt thou" (\theleis\). {Where I ought to be judged} (\hou me dei krinesthai\). Rather, "Where I must be judged," for \dei\ expresses necessity (it is necessary). Paul exposes the conduct of Festus with merciless precision. {As thou also very well knowest} (\h“s kai su kallion epigin“skeis\). "As thou also dost understand (hast additional knowledge, \epigin“skeis\) better" (than thou art willing to admit). That this is Paul's meaning by the use of the comparative \kallion\ (positive \kal“s\) is made plain by the confession of Festus to Agrippa in verse 18|. Paul says that Festus knows that he has done no wrong to the Jews at all (\ouden ˆdikˆka\) and yet he is trying to turn him over to the wrath of the Jews in Jerusalem.

rwp@Acts:25:26 @{No certain thing} (\asphales ti--ou\). Nothing definite or reliable (\a\ privative, \sphall“\, to trip). All the charges of the Sanhedrin slipped away or were tripped up by Paul. Festus confesses that he had nothing left and thereby convicts himself of gross insincerity in his proposal to Paul in verse 9| about going up to Jerusalem. By his own statement he should have set Paul free. The various details here bear the marks of the eyewitness. Luke was surely present and witnessed this grand spectacle with Paul as chief performer. {Unto my lord} (\t“i kuri“i\). Augustus (Octavius) and Tiberius refused the title of \kurios\ (lord) as too much like _rex_ (king) and like master and slave, but the servility of the subjects gave it to the other emperors who accepted it (Nero among them). Antoninus Pius put it on his coins. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 105) gives an ostracon dated Aug. 4, A.D. 63 with the words "in the year nine of Nero the lord" (\enatou Ner“nos tou kuriou\). Deissmann (_op. cit._, pp. 349ff.) runs a most interesting parallel "between the cult of Christ and the cult of Caesar in the application of the term \kurios\, lord" in ostraca, papyri, inscriptions. Beyond a doubt Paul has all this fully in mind when he says in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3| that "no one is able to say \Kurios Iˆsous\ except in the Holy Spirit" (cf. also strkjv@Phillipians:2:11|). The Christians claimed this word for Christ and it became the test in the Roman persecutions as when Polycarp steadily refused to say " Lord Caesar" and insisted on saying "Lord Jesus" when it meant his certain death. {Before you} (\eph' hum“n\). The whole company. In no sense a new trial, but an examination in the presence of these prominent men to secure data and to furnish entertainment and pleasure to Agrippa (verse 22|). {Especially before thee} (\malista epi sou\). Out of courtesy. It was the main reason as verse 22| shows. Agrippa was a Jew and Festus was glad of the chance to see what he thought of Paul's case. {After examination had} (\tˆs anakrise“s genomenˆs\). Genitive absolute, "the examination having taken place." \Anakrisis\ from \anakrin“\ (cf. strkjv@12:19; strkjv@24:8; strkjv@28:18|) is a legal term for preliminary examination. Only here in the N.T. Inscriptions and papyri give it as examination of slaves or other property. {That I may have somewhat to write} (\hop“s sch“ ti graps“\). Ingressive aorist subjunctive \sch“\ (may get) with \hop“s\ (final particle like \hina\). \Ti graps“\ in indirect question after \sch“\ is either future indicative or aorist subjunctive (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1045). Festus makes it plain that this is not a "trial," but an examination for his convenience to help him out of a predicament.

rwp@Acts:26:22 @{Having therefore obtained} (\oun tuch“n\). Second aorist active participle of old verb \tugchan“\. {The help that is from God} (\epikourias tˆs apo tou theou\). Old word from \epikoure“\, to aid, and that from \epikouros\, ally, assister. Only here in N.T. God is Paul's ally. All of the plots of the Jews against Paul had failed so far. {I stand} (\hestˆka\). Second perfect of \histˆmi\, to place, intransitive to stand. Picturesque word (Page) of Paul's stability and fidelity (cf. strkjv@Phillipians:4:1; strkjv@Ephesians:6:13|). {Both to small and great} (\mikr“i te kai megal“i\). Dative singular (rather than instrumental, taking \marturoumenos\ middle, not passive) and use of \te kai\ links the two adjectives together in an inclusive way. These two adjectives in the singular (representative singular rather than plural) can apply to age (young and old) or to rank (Revelation:11:18|) as is specially suitable here with Festus and Agrippa present. In strkjv@Acts:8:10| (Hebrews:8:11|) the phrase explains \pantes\ (all). {Saying nothing but what} (\ouden ektos leg“n h“n\). "Saying nothing outside of those things which." The ablative relative \h“n\ is attracted into the case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\ and so ablative after \ektos\ (adverbial preposition common in LXX, the papyri. In N.T. here and strkjv@1Corinthians:6:18; strkjv@15:27; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:2f.|). Cf. strkjv@Luke:16:29| about Moses and the prophets.

rwp@Acts:27:29 @{Lest haply we should be cast ashore on rocky ground} (\mˆ pou kata tracheis topous ekpes“men\). The usual construction after a verb of fearing (\mˆ\ and the aorist subjunctive \ekpes“men\). Literally, "Lest somewhere (\pou\) we should fall out down against (\kata\) rocky places." The change in the soundings made it a very real fear. \Tracheis\ (rough) is old adjective, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:3:5| (from strkjv@Isaiah:40:4|). {Four anchors} (\agkuras tessaras\). Old word from \agkˆ\. In N.T. only in this chapter, with \rhipt“\ here, with \ektein“\ in verse 30|, with \periaire“\ in verse 40|; and strkjv@Hebrews:6:19| (figuratively of hope). {From the stern} (\ek prumnˆs\). Old word, but in N.T. only in strkjv@Mark:4:38|; here and 41| in contrast with \pr“ira\ (prow). The usual practice was and is to anchor by the bows. "With a view to running the ship ashore anchoring from the stern would, it is said, be best" (Page). Nelson is quoted as saying that he had been reading strkjv@Acts:27| the morning of the Battle of Copenhagen (April, 1801) where he anchored his ships from the stern. {Wished for the day} (\ˆuchonto\). Imperfect middle, kept on praying for "day to come" (\hˆmeran genesthai\) before the anchors broke under the strain of the storm or began to drag. If the ship had been anchored from the prow, it would have swung round and snapped the anchors or the stern would have faced the beach.

rwp@Acts:27:31 @{Except these abide in the ship} (\Ean mˆ houtoi mein“sin en t“i ploi“i\). Condition of the third class (undetermined, but with hope, etc.). Paul has no hesitancy in saying this in spite of his strong language in verse 24| about God's promise. He has no notion of lying supinely down and leaving God to do it all. Without the sailors the ship could not be properly beached.

rwp@Acts:27:35 @{Gave thanks to God} (\eucharistˆsen t“i the“i\). First aorist active indicative of \euchariste“\ from which our word "Eucharist" comes. It was saying grace like the head of a Hebrew family and the example of Paul would encourage the others to eat. Probably Paul, Luke, and Aristarchus had memories of the Lord's supper (Acts:2:42|) while to others it was only an ordinary meal (Luke:24:30|).

rwp@Galatians:2:20 @{I have been crucified with Christ} (\Christ“i sunestaur“mai\). One of Paul's greatest mystical sayings. Perfect passive indicative of \sustauro“\ with the associative instrumental case (\Christ“i\). Paul uses the same word in strkjv@Romans:6:6| for the same idea. In the Gospels it occurs of literal crucifixion about the robbers and Christ (Matthew:27:44; strkjv@Mark:15:32; strkjv@John:19:32|). Paul died to the law and was crucified with Christ. He uses often the idea of dying with Christ (Galatians:5:24; strkjv@6:14; strkjv@Romans:6:8; strkjv@Colossians:2:20|) and burial with Christ also (Romans:6:4; strkjv@Colossians:2:12|). {No longer I} (\ouketi eg“\). Songs:complete has become Paul's identification with Christ that his separate personality is merged into that of Christ. This language helps one to understand the victorious cry in strkjv@Romans:7:25|. It is the union of the vine and the branch (John:15:1-6|). {Which is in the Son of God} (\tˆi tou huiou tou theou\). The objective genitive, not the faith of the Son of God. {For me} (\huper emou\). Paul has the closest personal feeling toward Christ. "He appropriates to himself, as Chrysostom observes, the love which belongs equally to the whole world. For Christ is indeed the personal friend of each man individually" (Lightfoot).

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: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:8:1 @{In the things which we are saying} (\epi tois legomenois\). Locative case of the articular present passive participle of \leg“\ after \epi\ as in strkjv@Luke:5:5; strkjv@Hebrews:11:4|, "in the matter of the things being discussed." {The chief point} (\kephalaion\). Neuter singular of the adjective \kephalaios\ (from \kephalˆ\, head), belonging to the head. Vulgate _capitulum_, nominative absolute in old and common sense, the main matter (even so without the article as in Thucydides), "the pith" (Coverdale), common in the papyri as in Greek literature. The word also occurs in the sense of the sum total or a sum of money (Acts:22:28|) as in Plutarch, Josephus, and also in the papyri (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). {Such an high priest} (\toiouton archierea\). As the one described in chapters strkjv@4:16-7:28| and in particular strkjv@7:26| (\toioutos\) strkjv@7:27,28|. But the discussion of the priestly work of Jesus continues through strkjv@12:3|. \Toioutos\ is both retrospective and prospective. Here we have a summary of the five points of superiority of Jesus as high priest (8:1-6|). He is himself a better priest than Aaron (\toioutos\ in strkjv@8:1| such as shown in strkjv@4:16-7:28|); he works in a better sanctuary (8:2,5|); he offers a better sacrifice (8:3f.|); he is mediator of a better covenant (8:6|); his work rests on better promises (8:6|); hence he has obtained a better ministry as a whole (8:6|). In this resum‚ (\kephelaion\) the author gives the pith (\kephalaion\) of his argument, curiously enough with both senses of \kephalaion\ (pith, summary) pertinent. He will discuss the four points remaining thus: (1) the better covenant, strkjv@8:7-13|. (2) The better sanctuary, strkjv@9:1-12|. (3) The better sacrifice, strkjv@9:13-10:18|. (4) The better promises, strkjv@10:19-12:3|. One point (the better high priest, like Melchizedek) has already been discussed (4:16-7:28|). {Sat down} (\ekathisen\). Repetition of strkjv@1:3| with \tou thronou\ (the throne) added. This phrase prepares the way for the next point.

rwp@Hebrews:8:13 @{In that he saith} (\en t“i legein\). Locative case of the articular present active infinitive of \leg“\, "in the saying as to him." {He hath made the first old} (\pepalai“ken tˆn pr“tˆn\). Perfect active indicative of \palaio“\, old verb from \palaios\ (in contrast with \kainos\, fresh, new), to treat as old and out of date. The conclusion is to the point. {That which is becoming old and waxeth aged} (\to palaioumenon kai gˆraskon\). \Gˆrask“\ is old verb from \gˆras\ (age) like \ger“n\ (old man) and refers to the decay of old age so that both ideas appear here in opposition to \kainos\ (\palaios\) and \neos\ (\geraios\). {Is nigh unto vanishing away} (\eggus aphanismou\). Genitive case with \eggus\ and late word for disappearance (from \aphaniz“\, strkjv@Matthew:6:19|), here only in the N.T. The author writes as if the Old Testament legal and ceremonial system were about to vanish before the new covenant of grace. If he wrote after A.D. 70, would he not have written "has vanished away"?

rwp@Hebrews:10:8 @{Saying above} (\an“teron leg“n\). Christ speaking as in verse 5|. "Higher up" (\an“teron\, comparative of \an“\, up) refers to verses 5,6| which are quoted again.

rwp@Hebrews:11:29 @{Which assaying to do} (\hˆs pieran labontes\). Literally, "of which taking trial" (second aorist active participle of \lamban“\, to take). The idiom \peiran lambanein\ occurs in strkjv@Deuteronomy:28:56|, in N.T. only here and verse 36|, though a classical idiom (Demosthenes, etc.). {Were swallowed up} (\katepothˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \katapin“\, to drink down, to swallow down (Matthew:23:24|).

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@Info_James @ THE STYLE James assumes the doctrinal features of Christianity, but he is concerned mainly with the ethical and social aspects of the gospel that Jewish followers of Christ may square their lives with the gospel which they believe and profess. But this fact does not justify Luther in calling the Epistle of James "a veritable Epistle of straw." Luther imagined that James contradicted Paul's teaching of justification by faith. That is not true and the criticism of Luther is unjust. We shall see that, though James and Paul use the same words (faith, works, justify), they mean different things by them. It is possible that both Paul and Peter had read the Epistle of James, though by no means certain. M. Jones (_New Testament in the Twentieth Century_, p. 316) thinks that the author was familiar with Stoic philosophy. This is also possible, though he may have learned it only indirectly through the Wisdom of Solomon and Philo. What is true is that the author writes in the easy and accurate _Koin‚_ Greek of a cultivated Jew (the literary _Koin‚_, not the vernacular), though not the artificial or stilted language of a professional stylist. Principal Patrick (_James the Lord's Brother_, p. 298) holds that he "had a wide knowledge of Classical Greek." This does not follow, though he does use the manner "of the Hellenistic diatribe" (Ropes, _Int. and Crit. Comm_., p. 19) so common at that time. Ropes (pp. 10-22) points out numerous parallels between James and the popular moral addresses of the period, familiar since the days of Socrates and at its height in Seneca and Epictetus. The use of an imaginary interlocutor is one instance (James:2:18f.; strkjv@5:13f.|) as is the presence of paradox (James:1:2,10; strkjv@2:5|; etc.). But the style of James is even more kin to that seen in the Jewish wisdom literature like Proverbs, the Wisdom of Solomon, etc. It is thus both tract and Epistle, a brief Christian sermon on a high plane for a noble purpose. But it is all natural and not artificial. The metaphors are many, but brief and remind one constantly of the Master's use of them in the Sermon on the Mount. Did not Mary the mother of Jesus and James make frequent use of such homely parables? The author shows acquaintance with the LXX, but there are few Hebraisms in the language, though the style is Hebraic, as is the whole tone of the book (Hebraic and Christian). "The style is especially remarkable for constant hidden allusions to our Lord's sayings, such as we find in the first three Gospels" (Hort).

rwp@James:1:6 @{In faith} (\en pistei\). Faith here "is the fundamental religious attitude" (Ropes), belief in God's beneficent activity and personal reliance on him (Oesterley). {Nothing doubting} (\mˆden diakrinomenos\). Negative way of saying \en pistei\ (in faith), present passive participle of \diakrin“\, old verb to separate (\krin“\) between (\dia\), to discriminate as shown clearly in strkjv@Acts:11:12, strkjv@15:9|, but no example of the sense of divided against oneself has been found earlier than the N.T., though it appears in later Christian writings. It is like the use of \diamerizomai\ in strkjv@Luke:11:18| and occurs in strkjv@Matthew:21:21; strkjv@Mark:11:23; strkjv@Acts:10:20; strkjv@Romans:2:4; strkjv@4:20; strkjv@14:23|. It is a vivid picture of internal doubt. {Is like} (\eoiken\). Second perfect active indicative with the linear force alone from \eik“\ to be like. Old form, but in N.T. only here and verse 23| (a literary touch, not in LXX). {The surge of the sea} (\klud“ni thalassˆs\). Old word (from \kluz“\ to wash against) for a dashing or surging wave in contrast with \kuma\ (successive waves), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:8:24|. In associative instrumental case after \eoiken\. In strkjv@Ephesians:4:14| we have \kludoniz“\ (from \klud“n\), to toss by waves. {Driven by the wind} (\anemizomen“i\). Present passive participle (agreeing in case with \klud“ni\) of \anemiz“\, earliest known example and probably coined by James (from \anemos\), who is fond of verbs in \-iz“\ (Mayor). The old Greek used \anemo“\. In strkjv@Ephesians:4:14| Paul uses both \kludoniz“\ and \peripher“ anem“i\. It is a vivid picture of the sea whipped into white-caps by the winds. {Tossed} (\ripizomen“i\). Present passive participle also in agreement with \klud“ni\ from \ripiz“\, rare verb (Aristophanes, Plutarch, Philo) from \ripis\ (a bellows or fire-fan), here only in N.T. It is a picture of "the restless swaying to and fro of the surface of the water, blown upon by shifting breezes" (Hort), the waverer with slight rufflement.

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:2:14 @{What doth it profit?} (\ti ophelos;\). Rhetorical question, almost of impatience. Old word from \ophell“\, to increase, in N.T. only here, verse 16; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:32|. "\Ti ophelos\ was a common expression in the vivacious style of a moral diatribe" (Ropes). {If a man say} (\ean legˆi tis\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and the present active subjunctive of \leg“\, "if one keep on saying." {He hath faith} (\pistin echein\). Infinitive in indirect assertion after \legˆi\. {But have not works} (\erga de mˆ echˆi\). Third-class condition continued, "but keeps on not having (\mˆ\ and present active subjunctive \echˆi\) works." It is the spurious claim to faith that James here condemns. {Can that faith save him?} (\mˆ dunatai hˆ pistis s“sai auton;\). Negative answer expected (\mˆ\). Effective aorist active infinitive \s“sai\ (from \s“z“\). The article \hˆ\ here is almost demonstrative in force as it is in origin, referring to the claim of faith without works just made.

rwp@James:4:15 @{For that ye ought to say} (\anti tou legein humƒs\). "Instead of the saying as to you" (genitive of the articular infinitive with the preposition \anti\ and the accusative of general reference with \legein\), "instead of your saying." {If the Lord will} (\ean ho kurios thelˆi\). Condition of the third class with \ean\ and the present active subjunctive (or first aorist active \thelesˆi\ in some MSS). The proper attitude of mind (Acts:18:21; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:19; strkjv@16:7; strkjv@Romans:1:19; strkjv@Phillipians:2:19,24; strkjv@Hebrews:6:3|), not to be uttered always in words like a charm. This Hellenistic formula was common among the ancient heathen, as today among modern Arabs like the Latin _deo volente_. {This or that} (\touto ˆ ekeino\). Applicable to every act.

rwp@James:5:20 @{Let him know} (\gin“sket“\). Present active imperative third person singular of \gin“sk“\, but Westcott and Hort read \gin“skete\ (know ye) after B. In either case it is the conclusion of the condition in verse 19|. {He which converteth} (\ho epistrepsas\). First aorist active articular participle of \epistreph“\ of verse 19|. {From the error} (\ek planˆs\). "Out of the wandering" of verse 19| (\planˆ\, from which \plana“\ is made). See strkjv@1John:4:6| for contrast between "truth" and "error." {A soul from death} (\psuchˆn ek thanatou\). The soul of the sinner (\hamart“lon\) won back to Christ, not the soul of the man winning him. A few MSS. have \autou\ added (his soul), which leaves it ambiguous, but \autou\ is not genuine. It is ultimate and final salvation here meant by the future (\s“sei\). {Shall cover a multitude of sins} (\kalupsei plˆthos hamarti“n\). Future active of \kalupt“\, old verb, to hide, to veil. But whose sins (those of the converter or the converted)? The Roman Catholics (also Mayor and Ropes) take it of the sins of the converter, who thus saves himself by saving others. The language here will allow that, but not New Testament teaching in general. It is apparently a proverbial saying which Resch considers one of the unwritten sayings of Christ (Clem. Al. _Paed_. iii. 12). It occurs also in strkjv@1Peter:4:8|, where it clearly means the sins of others covered by love as a veil thrown over them. The saying appears also in strkjv@Proverbs:10:12|: "Hatred stirs up strife, but love hides all transgressions"--that is "love refuses to see faults" (Mayor admits). That is undoubtedly the meaning in strkjv@1Peter:4:8; strkjv@James:5:20|.

rwp@Info_John @ NO EARLY MARTYRDOM FOR THE APOSTLE JOHN In 1862 a fragment of the Chronicle of Georgius Hamartolus, a Byzantine monk of the ninth century, was published. It is the _Codex Coislinianus_, Paris, 305, which differs from the other manuscripts of this author in saying that John according to Papias was slain by the Jews (\hupo Ioudai“n anˆirethˆ\) while the other manuscripts say that John rested in peace (\en eirˆnˆi anepausato\). The passage also quotes Eusebius to the effect that John received Asia as his sphere of work and lived and died in Ephesus. This same George the Sinner misquotes Origen about the death of John for Origen really says that the Roman king condemned him to the Isle of Patmos, not to death. Another fragment of Philip of Side, apparently used by Georgius, makes the same erroneous reference to Papias. It is therefore a worthless legend growing out of the martyrdom promised James and John by Jesus (Mark:10:39; strkjv@Matthew:20:23|) and realized by James first of all (Acts:12:1f.|). John drank the cup in the exile to Patmos. The correction to Peter in strkjv@John:21:20-23| would have no meaning if the Apostle John had already been put to death.

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 @ 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:1:27 @{Coming after me} (\opis“ mou erchomenos\). No article (\ho\) in Aleph B. John as the forerunner of the Messiah has preceded him in time, but not in rank as he instantly adds. {The latchet of whose shoe I am not worthy to unloose} (\hou ouk eimi axios hina lus“ autou ton himanta tou hupodˆmatos\). Literally, "of whom I am not worthy that I unloose the latchet (see strkjv@Mark:1:7| for \himas\) of his sandal (see strkjv@Matthew:3:11| for \hupodˆma\, bound under the foot)." Only use of \axios\ with \hina\ in John, though used by Paul in this saying of the Baptist (Acts:13:25|), \hikanos hina\ in strkjv@Matthew:3:8|, but \hikanos lusai\ (aorist active infinitive instead of \lus“\, aorist active subjunctive) in strkjv@Mark:1:7| (Luke:3:16|) and \bastasai\ in strkjv@Matthew:3:11|.

rwp@John:1:46 @{Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?} (\Ek Nazaret dunatai ti agathon einai;\). Literally, "Out of Nazareth can anything good be." There is a tinge of scorn in the question as if Nazareth (note position at beginning of sentence) had a bad name. Town rivalry may account to some extent for it since Cana (home of Nathanael) was near Nazareth. Clearly he had never heard of Jesus. The best thing in all the world came out of Nazareth, but Philip does not argue the point. A saying had arisen that no prophet comes out of Galilee (John:7:52|), untrue like many such sayings. {Come and see} (\erchou kai ide\). Present middle imperative (come on) and second active imperative (and see at once). Philip followed the method of Jesus with Andrew and John (verse 39|), probably without knowing it. Wise is the one who knows how to deal with the sceptic.

rwp@John:3:5 @{Of water and the Spirit} (\ex hudatos kai pneumatos\). Nicodemus had failed utterly to grasp the idea of the spiritual birth as essential to entrance into the Kingdom of God. He knew only Jews as members of that kingdom, the political kingdom of Pharisaic hope which was to make all the world Jewish (Pharisaic) under the King Messiah. Why does Jesus add \ex hudatos\ here? In verse 3| we have "\an“then\" (from above) which is repeated in verse 7|, while in verse 8| we have only \ek tou pneumatos\ (of the Spirit) in the best manuscripts. Many theories exist. One view makes baptism, referred to by \ex hudatos\ (coming up out of water), essential to the birth of the Spirit, as the means of obtaining the new birth of the Spirit. If so, why is water mentioned only once in the three demands of Jesus (3,5,7|)? Calvin makes water and Spirit refer to the one act (the cleansing work of the Spirit). Some insist on the language in verse 6| as meaning the birth of the flesh coming in a sac of water in contrast to the birth of the Spirit. One wonders after all what was the precise purpose of Jesus with Nicodemus, the Pharisaic ceremonialist, who had failed to grasp the idea of spiritual birth which is a commonplace to us. By using water (the symbol before the thing signified) first and adding Spirit, he may have hoped to turn the mind of Nicodemus away from mere physical birth and, by pointing to the baptism of John on confession of sin which the Pharisees had rejected, to turn his attention to the birth from above by the Spirit. That is to say the mention of "water" here may have been for the purpose of helping Nicodemus without laying down a fundamental principle of salvation as being by means of baptism. Bernard holds that the words \hudatos kai\ (water and) do not belong to the words of Jesus, but "are a gloss, added to bring the saying of Jesus into harmony with the belief and practice of a later generation." Here Jesus uses \eiselthein\ (enter) instead of \idein\ (see) of verse 3|, but with the same essential idea (participation in the kingdom).

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:5:20 @{Loveth} (\philei\). In strkjv@3:35| we have \agapƒi\ from \agapa“\, evidently one verb expressing as noble a love as the other. Sometimes a distinction (21:17|) is made, but not here, unless \phile“\ presents the notion of intimate friendship (\philos\, friend), fellowship, the affectionate side, while \agapa“\ (Latin _diligo_) is more the intelligent choice. But John uses both verbs for the mystery of love of the Father for the Son. {Greater works than these} (\meizona tout“n erga\). \Tout“n\ is ablative case after the comparative \meizona\ (from \megas\, great). John often uses \erga\ for the miracles of Christ (5:36; strkjv@7:3,21; strkjv@10:25,32,38|, etc.). It is the Father who does these works (14:10|). There is more to follow. Even the disciples will surpass what Christ is doing in the extent of the work (14:12|). \Deixei\ is future active indicative of \deiknumi\, to show. See also strkjv@10:32|. {That ye may marvel} (\hina humeis thaumazˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \thaumaz“\. Wonder belongs to childhood and to men of knowledge. Modern science has increased the occasion for wonder. Clement of Alexandria has a saying of Jesus: "He that wonders shall reign, and he that reigns shall rest."

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

rwp@John:6:35 @{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:6:36 @{That ye have seen me} (\hoti kai he“rakate me\). It is not certain that \me\ is genuine. If not, Jesus may refer to verse 26|. If genuine, some other saying is referred to that we do not have. Note \kai\ (also or even). {And yet believe not} (\kai ou pisteuete\). Use of \kai\ = and yet.

rwp@John:6:60 @{A hard saying} (\sklˆros\). "This saying is a hard one." Old adjective, rough, harsh, dried hard (from \skell“\, to dry), probably the last saying of Jesus that he was the bread of life come down from heaven and they were to eat him. It is to be hoped that none of the twelve joined the many disciples in this complaint. {Hear it} (\autou akouein\). Or "hear him," hear with acceptation. For \akou“\ with the genitive see strkjv@10:3,16,27|.

rwp@John:6:66 @{Upon this} (\ek toutou\). Same idiom in strkjv@19:12|. "Out of this saying or circumstance." Jesus drew the line of cleavage between the true and the false believers. {Went back} (\apˆlthon eis ta opis“\). Aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \aperchomai\ with \eis ta opis“\, "to the rear" (the behind things) as in strkjv@18:6|. {Walked no more with him} (\ouketi met' autou periepatoun\). Imperfect active of \peripate“\. The crisis had come. These half-hearted seekers after the loaves and fishes and political power turned abruptly from Jesus, walked out of the synagogue with a deal of bluster and were walking with Jesus no more. Jesus had completely disillusioned these hungry camp-followers who did not care for spiritual manna that consisted in intimate appropriation of the life of Jesus as God's Son.

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:8:46 @{Which of you convicteth me of sin?} (\Tis ex hum“n elegchei me peri hamaritas;\). See on strkjv@3:20; strkjv@16:8| (the work of the Holy Spirit) for \elegch“\ for charge and proof. The use of \hamartia\ as in strkjv@1:29| means sin in general, not particular sins. The rhetorical question which receives no answer involves sinlessness (Hebrews:4:15|) without specifically saying so. Bernard suggests that Jesus paused after this pungent question before going on. {Why do ye not believe me?} (\Dia ti humeis ou pisteuete moi;\). This question drives home the irrationality of their hostility to Jesus. It was based on prejudice and predilection.

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:10:6 @{This parable} (\tautˆn tˆn paroimian\). Old word for proverb from \para\ (beside) and \oimos\, way, a wayside saying or saying by the way. As a proverb in N.T. in strkjv@2Peter:2:22| (quotation from strkjv@Proverbs:26:11|), as a symbolic or figurative saying in strkjv@John:16:25,29|, as an allegory in strkjv@John:10:6|. Nowhere else in the N.T. Curiously enough in the N.T. \parabolˆ\ occurs only in the Synoptics outside of strkjv@Hebrews:9:9; strkjv@11:19|. Both are in the LXX. \Parabolˆ\ is used as a proverb (Luke:4:23|) just as \paroimia\ is in strkjv@2Peter:2:22|. Here clearly \paroimia\ means an allegory which is one form of the parable. Songs:there you are. Jesus spoke this \paroimia\ to the Pharisees, "but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them" (\ekeinoi de ouk egn“san tina ˆn ha elalei autois\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\ and note \ˆn\ in indirect question as in strkjv@2:25| and both the interrogative \tina\ and the relative \ha\. "Spake" (imperfect \elalei\) should be "Was speaking or had been speaking."

rwp@John:10:11 @{I am the good shepherd} (\eg“ eimi ho poimˆn ho kalos\). Note repetition of the article, "the shepherd the good one." Takes up the metaphor of verses 2ff|. Vulgate _pastor bonus_. Philo calls his good shepherd \agathos\, but \kalos\ calls attention to the beauty in character and service like "good stewards" (1Peter:4:10|), "a good minister of Christ Jesus" (1Timothy:4:6|). Often both adjectives appear together in the ancient Greek as once in the New Testament (Luke:8:15|). "Beauty is as beauty does." That is \kalos\. {Layeth down his life for his sheep} (\tˆn psuchˆn autou tithˆsin huper t“n probat“n\). For illustration see strkjv@1Samuel:17:35| (David's experience) and strkjv@Isaiah:31:4|. Dods quotes Xenophon (_Mem_. ii. 7, 14) who pictures even the sheep dog as saying to the sheep: "For I am the one that saves you also so that you are neither stolen by men nor seized by wolves." Hippocrates has \psuchˆn katetheto\ (he laid down his life, i.e. died). In strkjv@Judges:12:3| \ethˆka tˆn psuchˆn\ means "I risked my life." The true physician does this for his patient as the shepherd for his sheep. The use of \huper\ here (over, in behalf of, instead of), but in the papyri \huper\ is the usual preposition for substitution rather than \anti\. This shepherd gives his life for the sin of the world (1:29; strkjv@1John:2:2|).

rwp@John:10:30 @{One} (\hen\). Neuter, not masculine (\heis\). Not one person (cf. \heis\ in strkjv@Galatians:3:28|), but one essence or nature. By the plural \sumus\ (separate persons) Sabellius is refuted, by \unum\ Arius. Songs:Bengel rightly argues, though Jesus is not referring, of course, to either Sabellius or Arius. The Pharisees had accused Jesus of making himself equal with God as his own special Father (John:5:18|). Jesus then admitted and proved this claim (5:19-30|). Now he states it tersely in this great saying repeated later (17:11, 21|). Note \hen\ used in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:3| of the oneness in work of the planter and the waterer and in strkjv@17:11,23| of the hoped for unity of Christ's disciples. This crisp statement is the climax of Christ's claims concerning the relation between the Father and himself (the Son). They stir the Pharisees to uncontrollable anger.

rwp@John:11:3 @{Sent saying} (\apesteilan legousai\). First aorist active indicative of \apostell“\ and present active participle. The message was delivered by the messenger. {Thou lovest} (\phileis\). \Phile“\ means to love as a friend (see \philos\ in verse 11|) and so warmly, while \agapa“\ (akin to \agamai\, to admire, and \agathos\, good) means high regard. Here both terms occur of the love of Jesus for Lazarus (\ˆgapa\ in verse 5|). Both occur of the Father's love for the Son (\agapƒi\ in strkjv@3:35|, \philei\ in strkjv@5:20|). Hence the distinction is not always observed.

rwp@John:12:25 @{Loseth it} (\apolluei autˆn\). The second paradox. Present active indicative of \apollu“\. This great saying was spoken at various times as in strkjv@Mark:8:35| (Matthew:16:25; strkjv@Luke:9:24|) and strkjv@Mark:10:39| (Luke:17:33|). See those passages for discussion of \psuchˆ\ (life or soul). For "he that hateth his life" (\ho mis“n tˆn psuchˆn autou\) see the sharp contrasts in Luke strkjv@14:26-35| where \mise“\ is used of father, mother, wife, children, brothers, sisters, as well as one's own life. Clearly \mise“\ means "hate" when the issue is between Christ and the dearest things of life as happens when the choice is between martyrdom and apostasy. In that case one keeps his soul for eternal life by losing his life (\psuchˆ\, each time) here. That is the way to "guard" (\phulaxei\) life by being true to Christ. This is the second paradox to show Christ's philosophy of life.

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:15:14 @{If ye do} (\ean poiˆte\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and the present active subjunctive, "if ye keep on doing," not just spasmodic obedience. Just a different way of saying what is in verse 10|. Obedience to Christ's commands is a prerequisite to discipleship and fellowship (spiritual friendship with Christ). He repeats it in the Great Commission (Matthew:28:20|, \eneteilamˆn\, I commanded) with the very word used here (\entellomai\, I command).

rwp@John:16:29 @{No proverb} (\paroimian oudemian\). No wayside saying, no dark saying. See strkjv@10:6; strkjv@16:25|.

rwp@John:18:9 @{That might be fulfilled} (\hina plˆr“thˆi\). The regular formula (17:12|) for Scripture, here applied to the prophecy of Jesus (17:12|) as in verse 32|. John treats the saying of Jesus as on a par with the O.T.

rwp@John:18:32 @{By what manner of death} (\poi“i thanat“i\). Instrumental case of the qualitative interrogative \poios\ in an indirect question, the very idiom used in strkjv@John:12:32| concerning the Cross and here treated as prophecy (Scripture) with \hina plˆr“thˆi\ like the saying of Jesus in verse 9| which see.

rwp@John:19:3 @{They came} (\ˆrchonto\). Imperfect middle of repeated action, "they kept coming and saying" (\elegon\) in derision and mock reverence with \Ave\ (\chaire\, Hail!) as if to Caesar. Note \ho basileus\ (the king) in address. {They struck him with their hands} (\edidosan aut“i rapismata\). Imperfect of \did“mi\, repetition, "they kept on giving him slaps with their hands." See on ¯18:22| for this use of \rapisma\.

rwp@John:19:30 @{Had received} (\elaben\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\. Jesus took the vinegar (a stimulant), though he had refused the drugged vinegar. It is finished (\tetelestai\). Same for as in verse 28|. A cry of victory in the hour of defeat like \nenikˆka\ in strkjv@16:33|. Jesus knew the relation of his death to redemption for us (Mark:10:45; strkjv@Matthew:20:28; strkjv@26:28|). {Bowed his head} (\klinas tˆn kephalˆn\). First aorist active participle of \klin“\. This vivid detail only in John. {Gave up his spirit} (\pared“ken to pneuma\). With the quotation of strkjv@Psalms:31:5| according to strkjv@Luke:23:46|, "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit" (the last of the seven sayings of Jesus on the Cross that are preserved for us). Jesus died with the words of this Psalm upon his lips. The apostle John had come back to the Cross.

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@Luke:1:63 @{Tablet} (\pinakidion\). Diminutive of \pinakis\. In Aristotle and the papyri for writing tablet, probably covered with wax. Sometimes it was a little table, like Shakespeare's "the table of my memory" (Hamlet, i.5). It was used also of a physician's note-book. {Wrote, saying} (\egrapsen leg“n\). Hebrew way of speaking (2Kings:10:6|).

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:2:19 @{Kept} (\sunetˆrei\). Imperfect active. She kept on keeping together (\sun-\) all these things. They were meat and drink to her. She was not astonished, but filled with holy awe. The verb occurs from Aristotle on. She could not forget. But did not Mary keep also a Baby Book? And may not Luke have seen it? {Pondering} (\sunballousa\). An old Greek word. Placing together for comparison. Mary would go over each detail in the words of Gabriel and of the shepherds and compare the sayings with the facts so far developed and brood over it all with a mother's high hopes and joy.

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:2:51 @{He was subject unto them} (\ˆn hupotassomenos autois\). Periphrastic imperfect passive. He continued subject unto them, this wondrous boy who really knew more than parents and rabbis, this gentle, obedient, affectionate boy. The next eighteen years at Nazareth (Luke:3:23|) he remained growing into manhood and becoming the carpenter of Nazareth (Mark:6:3|) in succession to Joseph (Matthew:13:55|) who is mentioned here for the last time. Who can tell the wistful days when Jesus waited at Nazareth for the Father to call him to his Messianic task? {Kept} (\dietˆrei\). Imperfect active. Ancient Greek word (\diatˆre“\), but only here and strkjv@Acts:15:29| in the N.T. though in strkjv@Genesis:37:11|. She kept thoroughly (\dia\) all these recent sayings (or things, \rhˆmata\). In strkjv@2:19| \sunetˆrei\ is the word used of Mary after the shepherds left. These she kept pondering and comparing all the things. Surely she has a full heart now. Could she foresee how destiny would take Jesus out beyond her mother's reach?

rwp@Luke:4:23 @{Doubtless} (\pant“s\). Adverb. Literally, at any rate, certainly, assuredly. Cf. strkjv@Acts:21:22; strkjv@28:4|. {This parable} (\tˆn parabolˆn tautˆn\). See discussion on ¯Matthew:13|. Here the word has a special application to a crisp proverb which involves a comparison. The word physician is the point of comparison. Luke the physician alone gives this saying of Jesus. The proverb means that the physician was expected to take his own medicine and to heal himself. The word \parabolˆ\ in the N.T. is confined to the Synoptic Gospels except strkjv@Hebrews:9:9; strkjv@11:19|. This use for a proverb occurs also in strkjv@Luke:5:36; strkjv@6:39|. This proverb in various forms appears not only among the Jews, but in Euripides and Aeschylus among the Greeks, and in Cicero's _Letters_. Hobart quotes the same idea from Galen, and the Chinese used to demand it of their physicians. The point of the parable seems to be that the people were expecting him to make good his claim to the Messiahship by doing here in Nazareth what they had heard of his doing in Capernaum and elsewhere. "Establish your claims by direct evidence" (Easton). This same appeal (Vincent) was addressed to Christ on the Cross (Matthew:27:40,42|). There is a tone of sarcasm towards Jesus in both cases. {Heard done} (\ˆkousamen genomena\). The use of this second aorist middle participle \genomena\ after \ˆkousamen\ is a neat Greek idiom. It is punctiliar action in indirect discourse after this verb of sensation or emotion (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1040-42, 1122-24). {Do also here} (\poiˆson kai h“de\). Ingressive aorist active imperative. Do it here in thy own country and town and do it now. Jesus applies the proverb to himself as an interpretation of their real attitude towards himself.

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

rwp@Luke:6:17 @{He came down with them} (\katabas met' aut“n\). Second aorist active participle of \katabain“\, common verb. This was the night of prayer up in the mountain (Mark:31:3; strkjv@Luke:6:12|) and the choice of the Twelve next morning. The going up into the mountain of strkjv@Matthew:5:1| may simply be a summary statement with no mention of what Luke has explained or may be a reference to the elevation, where he "sat down" (Matthew:5:1|), above the plain or "level place" (\epi topou pedinou\) on the mountain side where Jesus "stood" or "stopped" (\estˆ\). It may be a level place towards the foot of the mountain. He stopped his descent at this level place and then found a slight elevation on the mountain side and began to speak. There is not the slightest reason for making Matthew locate this sermon on the mountain and Luke in the valley as if the places, audiences, and topics were different. For the unity of the sermon see discussion on ¯Matthew:5:1f|. The reports in Matthew and Luke begin alike, cover the same general ground and end alike. The report in Matthew is longer chiefly because in Chapter 5, he gives the argument showing the contrast between Christ's conception of righteousness and that of the Jewish rabbis. Undoubtedly, Jesus repeated many of the crisp sayings here at other times as in Luke 12, but it is quite gratuitous to argue that Matthew and Luke have made up this sermon out of isolated sayings of Christ at various times. Both Matthew and Luke give too much that is local of place and audience for that idea. strkjv@Matthew:5:1| speaks of "the multitudes" and "his disciples." strkjv@Luke:6:17| notes "a great multitude of his disciples, and a great number of the people from all Judea and Jerusalem, and the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon." They agree in the presence of disciples and crowds besides the disciples from whom the twelve apostles were chosen. It is important to note how already people were coming from "the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon" "to hear him and to be healed (\iathˆnai\, first aorist passive of \iaomai\) of their diseases."

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:6:31 @{As ye would} (\kath“s thelete\). In strkjv@Matthew:7:12| the Golden Rule begins: \Panta hosa ean thelˆte\. Luke has "likewise" (\homoi“s\) where Matthew has \hout“s\. See on Matthew for discussion of the saying.

rwp@Luke:6:39 @{Also a parable} (\kai parabolˆn\). Plummer thinks that the second half of the sermon begins here as indicated by Luke's insertion of "And he spake (\eipen de\) at this point. Luke has the word parable some fifteen times both for crisp proverbs and for the longer narrative comparisons. This is the only use of the term parable concerning the metaphors in the Sermon on the Mount. But in both Matthew and Luke's report of the discourse there are some sixteen possible applications of the word. Two come right together: The blind leading the blind, the mote and the beam. Matthew gives the parabolic proverb of the blind leading the blind later (Matthew:15:14|). Jesus repeated these sayings on various occasions as every teacher does his characteristic ideas. Songs:Luke strkjv@6:40; strkjv@Matthew:10:24|, strkjv@Luke:6:45; strkjv@Matthew:12:34f.| {Can} (\Mˆti dunatai\). The use of \mˆti\ in the question shows that a negative answer is expected. {Guide} (\hodˆgein\). Common verb from \hodˆgos\ (guide) and this from \hodos\ (way) and \hˆgeomai\, to lead or guide. {Shall they not both fall?} (\ouchi amphoteroi empesountai;\). \Ouchi\, a sharpened negative from \ouk\, in a question expecting the answer Yes. Future middle indicative of the common verb \empipt“\. {Into a pit} (\eis bothunon\). Late word for older \bothros\.

rwp@Luke:6:44 @{Is known} (\gin“sketai\). The fruit of each tree reveals its actual character. It is the final test. This sentence is not in strkjv@Matthew:7:17-20|, but the same idea is in the repeated saying (Matthew:7:16,20|): "By their fruits ye shall know them," where the verb {epign“sesthe} means full knowledge. The question in strkjv@Matthew:7:16| is put here in positive declarative form. The verb is in the plural for "men" or "people," \sullegousin\. See on ¯Matthew:7:16|. {Bramble bush} (\batou\). Old word, quoted from the LXX in strkjv@Mark:12:26; strkjv@Luke:20:37| (from strkjv@Exodus:3:6|) about the burning bush that Moses saw, and by Stephen (Acts:7:30,35|) referring to the same incident. Nowhere else in the N.T. "Galen has a chapter on its medicinal uses, and the medical writings abound in prescriptions of which it is an ingredient" (Vincent). {Gather} (\trug“sin\). A verb common in Greek writers for gathering ripe fruit. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:14:18f|. {Grapes} (\staphulˆn\). Cluster of grapes.

rwp@Luke:6:45 @{Bringeth forth} (\propherei\). In a similar saying repeated later. strkjv@Matthew:12:34f.| has the verb \ekballei\ (throws out, casts out), a bolder figure. "When men are natural, heart and mouth act in concert. But otherwise the mouth sometimes professes what the heart does not feel" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:7:6 @{Went with them} (\eporeueto sun autois\). Imperfect indicative middle. He started to go along with them. {Now} (\ˆdˆ\). Already like Latin _jam_. In strkjv@1Corinthians:4:8| \nun ˆdˆ\ like _jam nunc_. {Sent friends} (\epempsen philous\). This second embassy also, wanting in Matthew's narrative. He "puts the message of both into the mouth of the centurion himself" (Plummer). Note saying (\leg“n\), present active singular participle, followed by direct quotation from the centurion himself. {Trouble not thyself} (\Mˆ skullou\). Present middle (direct use) imperative of \skull“\, old verb originally meaning to skin, to mangle, and then in later Greek to vex, trouble, annoy. Frequent in the papyri in this latter sense. {For I am not worthy that} (\ou gar hikanos eimi hina\). The same word \hikanos\, not \axios\, as in strkjv@Matthew:8:8|, which see for discussion, from \hik“, hikan“\, to fit, to reach, be adequate for. \Hina\ in both places as common in late Greek. See strkjv@Matthew:8:8| also for "roof" (\stegˆn\, covering).

rwp@Luke:7:19 @{Calling unto him} (\proskalesamenos\). First aorist middle (indirect) participle. {Two} (\duo tinas\). Certain two. Not in strkjv@Matthew:11:2|. {Saying} (\leg“n\). John saying by the two messengers. The message is given precisely alike in strkjv@Matthew:11:3|, which see. In both we have \heteron\ for "another," either a second or a different kind. In verse 20| Westcott and Hort read \allon\ in the text, \heteron\ in the margin. \Prosdok“men\, may be present indicative or present subjunctive (deliberative), the same contract form (\ao= “, a“ “\).

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:8:16 @{When he hath lighted a lamp} (\luchnon hapsas\). It is a portable lamp (\luchnon\) that one lights (\hapsas\ aorist active participle of \hapt“\, to kindle, fasten to, light). {With a vessel} (\skeuei\, instrumental case of \skeuos\). Here strkjv@Mark:4:21| has the more definite figure "under the bushel" as has strkjv@Matthew:5:15|. {Under the bed} (\hupokat“ klinˆs\). Here strkjv@Mark:4:21| has the regular \hupo tˆn klinˆn\ instead of the late compound \hupokat“\. Ragg notes that Matthew distributes the sayings of Jesus given here by strkjv@Luke:8:16-18; strkjv@Mark:4:21-25| concerning the parable of the lamp and gives them in three separate places (Matthew:5:15; strkjv@10:26; strkjv@13:12|). That is true, but it does not follow that Mark and Luke have bunched together separate sayings or that Matthew has scattered sayings delivered only on one occasion. One of the slowest lessons for some critics to learn is that Jesus repeated favourite sayings on different occasions and in different groupings just as every popular preacher and teacher does today. See on ¯Mark:4:21| for further discussion of the lamp and stand. {May see the light} (\Blep“sin to ph“s\). In strkjv@Matthew:5:16| Jesus has it "may see your good works." The purpose of light is to let one see something else, not the light. Note present subjunctive (\blep“sin\), linear action "Jesus had kindled a light within them. They must not hide it, but must see that it spreads to others" (Plummer). The parable of the lamp throws light on the parable of the sower.

rwp@Luke:8:18 @{How ye hear} (\p“s akouete\). The manner of hearing. strkjv@Mark:4:24| has "what ye hear" (\ti akouete\), the matter that is heard. Both are supremely important. Some things should not be heard at all. Some that are heard should be forgotten. Others should be treasured and practised. {For whosoever hath} (\Hosea:an gar echˆi\). Present active subjunctive of the common verb \ech“\ which may mean "keep on having" or "acquiring." See on ¯Mark:4:25| for discussion. {Thinketh he hath} (\dokei echein\), or {seems to acquire or to hold}. Losses in business illustrate this saying as when we see their riches take wings and fly away. Songs:it is with hearing and heeding. Self-deception is a common complaint.

rwp@Luke:9:22 @{Rejected} (\apodokimasthˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \apodokimaz“\, to reject after trial. {The third day} (\tˆi tritˆi hˆmerƒi\). Locative case of time as in strkjv@Matthew:16:21|. Here in the parallel passage strkjv@Mark:8:31| has "after three days" (\meta treis hˆmeras\) in precisely the same sense. That is to say, "after three days" is just a free way of saying "on the third day" and cannot mean "on the fourth day" if taken too literally. For discussion of this plain prediction of the death of Christ with various details see discussion on strkjv@Matthew:16:21; strkjv@Mark:8:31|. It was a melancholy outlook that depressed the disciples as Mark and Matthew show in the protest of Peter and his rebuke.

rwp@Luke:9:33 @{As they were departing from him} (\en t“i diach“rizesthai autous ap' autou\). Peculiar to Luke and another instance of Luke's common idiom of \en\ with the articular infinitive in a temporal clause. This common verb occurs here only in the N.T. The present middle voice means to separate oneself fully (direct middle). This departing of Moses and Elijah apparently accompanied Peter's remark as given in all three Gospels. See for details on Mark and Matthew. {Master} (\Epistata\) here, {Rabbi} (Mark:9:5|), {Lord} (\Kurie\, strkjv@Matthew:17:4|). {Let us make} (\poiˆs“men\, first aorist active subjunctive) as in strkjv@Mark:9:5|, but strkjv@Matthew:17:4| has "I will make" (\poiˆs“\). It was near the time of the feast of the tabernacles. Songs:Peter proposes that they celebrate it up here instead of going to Jerusalem for it as they did a bit later (John:7|). {Not knowing what he said} (\mˆ eid“s ho legei\). Literally, {not understanding what he was saying} (\mˆ\, regular negative with participle and \legei\, present indicative retained in relative clause in indirect discourse). Luke puts it more bluntly than Mark (Peter's account), "For he wist not what to answer; for they became sore afraid" (Mark:9:6|). Peter acted according to his impulsive nature and spoke up even though he did not know what to say or even what he was saying when he spoke. He was only half awake as Luke explains and he was sore afraid as Mark (Peter) explains. He had bewilderment enough beyond a doubt, but it was Peter who spoke, not James and John.

rwp@Luke:9:45 @{It was concealed from them} (\ˆn parakekalummenon ap' aut“n\). Periphrastic past perfect of \parakalupt“\, a common verb, but only here in the N.T., to cover up, to hide from. This item only in Luke. {That they should not perceive it} (\hina mˆ aisth“ntai auto\). Second aorist middle subjunctive of the common verb \aisthanomai\ used with \hina mˆ\, negative purpose. This explanation at least relieves the disciples to some extent of full responsibility for their ignorance about the death of Jesus as strkjv@Mark:9:32| observes, as does Luke here that they were afraid to ask him. Plummer says, "They were not allowed to understand the saying then, in order that they might remember it afterwards, and see that Jesus had met His sufferings with full knowledge and free will." Perhaps also, if they had fully understood, they might have lacked courage to hold on to the end. But it is a hard problem.

rwp@Luke:9:48 @{This little child} (\touto to paidion\). As Jesus spoke he probably had his hand upon the head of the child. strkjv@Matthew:18:5| has "one such little child." The honoured disciple, Jesus holds, is the one who welcomes little children "in my name" (\epi t“i onomati mou\), upon the basis of my name and my authority. It was a home-thrust against the selfish ambition of the Twelve. Ministry to children is a mark of greatness. Have preachers ever yet learned how to win children to Christ? They are allowed to slip away from home, from Sunday school, from church, from Christ. {For he that is least among you all} (\ho gar mikroteros en pasin humin huparch“n\). Note the use of \huparch“\ as in strkjv@8:41; strkjv@23:50|. The comparative \mikroteros\ is in accord with the _Koin‚_ idiom where the superlative is vanishing (nearly gone in modern Greek). But {great} (\megas\) is positive and very strong. This saying peculiar to Luke here.

rwp@Luke:9:50 @{"Against you is for you"} (\kath' h–m“n huper h–m“n\). strkjv@Mark:9:40| has "against us is for us" (\hˆm“n... hˆm“n\). The _Koin‚_ Greek \ˆ\ and \–\ were often pronounced alike and it was easy to interchange them. Songs:many MSS. here read just as in Mark. The point is precisely the same as it is a proverbial saying. See a similar saying in strkjv@Luke:11:23|: "He that is not with me is against me." The prohibition here as in strkjv@Mark:9:39| is general: "Stop hindering him" (\mˆ k“luete, mˆ\ and the present imperative, not \mˆ\ and the aorist subjunctive). The lesson of toleration in methods of work for Christ is needed today.

rwp@Luke:9:55 @{But he turned} (\strapheis de\). Second aorist passive participle of \streph“\, common verb, to turn round. Dramatic act. Some ancient MSS. have here: {Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of} (\ouk oidate poiou pneumatos este\). This sounds like Christ and may be a genuine saying though not a part of Luke's Gospel. A smaller number of MSS. add also: {For the Son of Man came not to destroy men's lives, but to save them} (\Hosea:gar huios tou anthr“pou ouk ˆlthen psuchas anthr“p“n apolesai alla s“sai\), a saying reminding us of strkjv@Matthew:5:17; strkjv@Luke:19:10|. Certain it is that here Jesus rebuked the bitterness of James and John toward Samaritans as he had already chided John for his narrowness towards a fellow-worker in the kingdom.

rwp@Luke:10:7 @{In that same house} (\en autˆi tˆi oikiƒi\). Literally, in the house itself, not "in the same house" (\en tˆi autˆi oikiƒi\), a different construction. A free rendering of the common Lukan idiom is, "in that very house." {Eating} (\esthontes\). An old poetic verb \esth“\ for \esthi“\ that survives in late Greek. {Such things as they give} (\ta par' aut“n\). "The things from them." {For the labourer is worthy of his hire} (\axios gar ho ergatˆs tou misthou autou\). In strkjv@Matthew:10:10| we have \tˆs trophˆs autou\ (his food). strkjv@1Timothy:5:18| has this saying quoted as scripture. That is not impossible if Luke wrote by A.D. 62. Paul there however may quote only strkjv@Deuteronomy:25:4| as scripture and get this quotation either from strkjv@Luke:10:7| or from a proverbial saying of Jesus. It is certainly not a real objection against the Pauline authorship of First Timothy. {Go not from house to house} (\mˆ metabainete ex oikias eis oikian\). As a habit, \mˆ\ and the present imperative, and so avoid waste of time with such rounds of invitations as would come.

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:10:23 @{Turning to the disciples} (\strapheis pros tous mathˆtas\). Second aorist passive of \streph“\ as in strkjv@9:55|. The prayer was a soliloquy though uttered in the presence of the Seventy on their return. Now Jesus turned and spoke "privately" or to the disciples (the Twelve, apparently), whether on this same occasion or a bit later. {Blessed} (\makarioi\). A beatitude, the same adjective as in strkjv@Matthew:5:3-11|. A beatitude of privilege very much like that in strkjv@Matthew:5:13-16|. Jesus often repeated his sayings.

rwp@Luke:11:13 @{Know how to give} (\oidate didonai\). See on strkjv@Matthew:7:11| for this same saying. Only here Jesus adds the Holy Spirit (\pneuma hagion\) as the great gift (the _summum bonum_) that the Father is ready to bestow. Jesus is fond of "how much more" (\pos“i mƒllon\, by how much more, instrumental case).

rwp@Luke:12:1 @{In the meantime} (\en hois\). It is a classic idiom to start a sentence or even a paragraph as here with a relative, "in which things or circumstances," without any expressed antecedent other than the incidents in strkjv@11:53f|. In strkjv@12:3| Luke actually begins the sentence with two relatives \anth' h“n hosa\ (wherefore whatsoever). {Many thousands} (\muriad“n\). Genitive absolute with \episunachtheis“n\ (first aorist passive participle feminine plural because of \muriad“n\), a double compound late verb, \episunag“\, to gather together unto. The word "myriads" is probably hyperbolical as in strkjv@Acts:21:20|, but in the sense of ten thousand, as in strkjv@Acts:19:19|, it means a very large crowd apparently drawn together by the violent attacks of the rabbis against Jesus. {Insomuch that they trode one upon another} (\h“ste katapatein allˆlous\). The imagination must complete the picture of this jam. {Unto his disciples first of all} (\pros tous mathˆtas autou pr“ton\). This long discourse in strkjv@Luke:12| is really a series of separate talks to various groups in the vast crowds around Jesus. This particular talk goes through verse 12|. {Beware of} (\prosechete heautois apo\). Put your mind (\noun\ understood) for yourselves (dative) and avoid (\apo\ with the ablative). {The leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocrisy} (\tˆs zumˆs hˆtis estin hupocrisis t“n Pharisai“n\). In strkjv@Mark:8:15| Jesus had coupled the lesson of the Pharisees with that of Herod, in strkjv@Matthew:16:6| with that of the Sadducees also. He had long ago called the Pharisees hypocrites (Matthew:6:2,5,16|). The occasion was ripe here for this crisp saying. In strkjv@Matthew:13:33| leaven does not have an evil sense as here, which see. See strkjv@Matthew:23:13| for hypocrites. Hypocrisy was the leading Pharisaic vice (Bruce) and was a mark of sanctity to hide an evil heart.

rwp@Luke:12:2 @{Covered up} (\sugkekalummenon estin\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \sugkalupt“\, an old verb, but here only in the N.T., to cover up on all sides and so completely. Verses 2-9| here are parallel with strkjv@Matthew:10:26-33| spoken to the Twelve on their tour of Galilee, illustrating again how often Jesus repeated his sayings unless we prefer to say that he never did so and that the Gospels have hopelessly jumbled them as to time and place. See the passage in Matthew for discussion of details.

rwp@Luke:12:10 @{But unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Spirit} (\t“i de eis to hagion pneuma blasphˆmˆsanti\). This unpardonable sin is given by strkjv@Mark:3:28f.; strkjv@Matthew:12:31f.| immediately after the charge that Jesus was in league with Beelzebub. Luke here separates it from the same charge made in Judea (11:15-20|). As frequently said, there is no sound reason for saying that Jesus only spoke his memorable sayings once. Luke apparently finds a different environment here. Note the use of \eis\ here in the sense of "against."

rwp@Luke:12:20 @{Thou foolish one} (\aphr“n\). Fool, for lack of sense (\a\ privative and \phrˆn\, sense) as in strkjv@11:40; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:19|. Old word, used by Socrates in Xenophon. Nominative form as vocative. {Is thy soul required of thee} (\tˆn psuchˆn sou aitousin apo sou\). Plural active present, not passive: "They are demanding thy soul from thee." The impersonal plural (aitousin) is common enough (Luke:6:38; strkjv@12:11; strkjv@16:9; strkjv@23:31|). The rabbis used "they" to avoid saying "God."

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:12:49 @{I came to cast fire} (\Pur ˆlthon balein\). Suddenly Jesus lets the volcano in his own heart burst forth. The fire was already burning. "Christ came to set the world on fire, and the conflagration had already begun" (Plummer). The very passion in Christ's heart would set his friends on fire and his foes in opposition as we have just seen (Luke:11:53f.|). It is like the saying of Jesus that he came to bring not peace, but a sword, to bring cleavage among men (Matthew:10:34-36|). {And what will I, if it is already kindled?} (\kai ti thel“ ei ˆdˆ anˆphthˆ;\). It is not clear what this passage means. Probably \ti\ is be taken in the sense of "how" (\p“s\). How I wish. Then \ei\ can be taken as equal to \hoti\. How I wish that it were already kindled. \Anˆphthˆ\ is first aorist passive of \anapt“\, to set fire to, to kindle, to make blaze. Probably Luke means the conflagration to come by his death on the Cross for he changes the figure and refers to that more plainly.

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:13:30 @{Last} (\eschatoi\). This saying was repeated many times (Matthew:19:30; strkjv@Mark:10:31; strkjv@Matthew:20:16|).

rwp@Luke:14:11 @{Shall be humbled} (\tapein“thˆsetai\). First future passive. One of the repeated sayings of Jesus (18:14; strkjv@Matthew:23:12|).

rwp@Luke:14:35 @{Dunghill} (\koprian\). Later word in the _Koin‚_ vernacular. Here only in the N.T., though in the LXX. {Men cast it out} (\ex“ ballousin auto\). Impersonal plural. This saying about salt is another of Christ's repeated sayings (Matthew:5:13; strkjv@Mark:9:50|). Another repeated saying is the one here about having ears to hear (Luke:8:8; strkjv@14:35, strkjv@Matthew:11:15; strkjv@13:43|).

rwp@Luke:16:10 @{Faithful in a very little} (\pistos en elachist“i\). Elative superlative. One of the profoundest sayings of Christ. We see it in business life. The man who can be trusted in a very small thing will be promoted to large responsibilities. That is the way men climb to the top. Men who embezzle in large sums began with small sums. Verses 10-13| here explain the point of the preceding parables.

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:16:16 @{Entereth violently into it} (\eis autˆn biazetai\). A corresponding saying occurs in strkjv@Matthew:11:12| in a very different context. In both the verb \biazetai\, occurs also, but nowhere else in the N.T. It is present middle here and can be middle or passive in Matthew, which see. It is rare in late prose. Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 258) cites an inscription where \biazomai\ is reflexive middle and used absolutely. Here the meaning clearly is that everyone forces his way into the kingdom of God, a plea for moral enthusiasm and spiritual passion and energy that some today affect to despise.

rwp@Luke:16:18 @{Committeth adultery} (\moicheuei\). Another repeated saying of Christ (Matthew:5:32; strkjv@Mark:10:11f.; strkjv@Matthew:19:9f.|). Adultery remains adultery, divorce or no divorce, remarriage or no marriage.

rwp@Luke:16:31 @{Neither will they be persuaded} (\oud' peisthˆsontai\). First future passive of \peith“\. Gressmann calls attention to the fact that Jesus is saying this in the conclusion of the parable. It is a sharp discouragement against efforts today to communicate with the dead. "Saul was not led to repentance when he saw Samuel at Endor nor were the Pharisees when they saw Lazarus come forth from the tomb. The Pharisees tried to put Lazarus to death and to explain away the resurrection of Jesus" (Plummer). Alford comments on the curious fact that Lazarus was the name of the one who did rise from the dead but whose return from the dead "was the immediate exciting cause of their (Pharisees) crowning act of unbelief."

rwp@Luke:17:1 @{It is impossible} (\anendekton estin\). See \ouk endechetai\ in strkjv@13:33|. Alpha privative (\an-\) and \endektos\, verbal adjective, from \endechomai\. The word occurs only in late Greek and only here in the N.T. The meaning is inadmissible, unallowable. {But that occasions of stumbling should come} (\tou ta skandala mˆ elthein\). This genitive articular infinitive is not easy to explain. In strkjv@Acts:10:25| there is another example where the genitive articular infinitive seems to be used as a nominative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1040). The loose Hebrew infinitive construction may have a bearing here, but one may recall that the original infinitives were either locatives (\-eni\) or datives (\-ai\). \Ta skandala\ is simply the accusative of general reference. Literally, the not coming as to occasions of stumbling. For \skandalon\ (a trap) see on ¯Matthew:5:29; strkjv@16:23|. It is here only in Luke. The positive form of this saying appears in strkjv@Matthew:18:7|, which see.

rwp@Luke:17:21 @{Within you} (\entos hum“n\). This is the obvious, and, as I think, the necessary meaning of \entos\. The examples cited of the use of \entos\ in Xenophon and Plato where \entos\ means "among" do not bear that out when investigated. Field (_Ot. Norv_.) "contends that there is no clear instance of \entos\ in the sense of among" (Bruce), and rightly so. What Jesus says to the Pharisees is that they, as others, are to look for the kingdom of God within themselves, not in outward displays and supernatural manifestations. It is not a localized display "Here" or "There." It is in this sense that in strkjv@Luke:11:20| Jesus spoke of the kingdom of God as "come upon you" (\ephthasen eph' humƒs\), speaking to Pharisees. The only other instance of \entos\ in the N.T. (Matthew:23:26|) necessarily means "within" ("the inside of the cup"). There is, beside, the use of \entos\ meaning "within" in the Oxyrhynchus Papyrus saying of Jesus of the Third Century (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 426) which is interesting: "The kingdom of heaven is within you" (\entos hum“n\ as here in strkjv@Luke:17:21|).

rwp@Luke:18:14 @{This man} (\houtos\). This despised publican referred to contemptuously in verse 11| as "this" (\houtos\) publican. {Rather than the other} (\par' ekeinon\). In comparison with (placed beside) that one. A neat Greek idiom after the perfect passive participle \dedikaiomenos\. {For} (\hoti\). This moral maxim Christ had already used in strkjv@14:11|. Plummer pertinently asks: "Why is it assumed that Jesus did not repeat his sayings?"

rwp@Luke:18:34 @{And they perceived not} (\kai ouk egin“skon\). Imperfect active. They kept on not perceiving. Twice already Luke has said this in the same sentence. {They understood none of these things} (\ouden tout“n sunˆkan\). First aorist active indicative, a summary statement. {This saying was hid from them} (\ˆn to rhˆma touto kekrummenon ap' aut“n\). Past perfect passive indicative (periphrastic), state of completion. It was a puzzling experience. No wonder that Luke tries three times to explain the continued failure of the apostles to understand Jesus. The words of Christ about his death ran counter to all their hopes and beliefs.

rwp@Luke:20:26 @{They were not able} (\ouk ischusan\). They did not have strength. An old verb \ischu“\ from \ischus\ (strength). They failed "to take hold (cf. verse 20|) of the saying before the people." These "crack" students had made an ignominious failure and were not able to make a case for the surrender of Jesus to Pilate. He had slipped through their net with the utmost ease. {Held their peace} (\esigˆsan\). Ingressive aorist active of \siga“\. They became silent as they went back with the "dry grins."

rwp@Luke:22:17 @{He received a cup} (\dexamenos potˆrion\). This cup is a diminutive of \potˆr\. It seems that this is still one of the four cups passed during the passover meal, though which one is uncertain. It is apparently just before the formal introduction of the Lord's Supper, though he gave thanks here also (\eucharistˆsas\). It is from this verb \euchariste“\ (see also verse 19|) that our word Eucharist comes. It is a common verb for giving thanks and was used also for "saying grace" as we call it.

rwp@Luke:23:2 @{Began to accuse} (\ˆrxanto katˆgorein\). They went at it and kept it up. Luke mentions three, but neither of them includes their real reason nor do they mention their own condemnation of Jesus. They had indulged their hatred in doing it, but they no longer have the power of life and death. Hence they say nothing to Pilate of that. {We found} (\heuramen\). Second aorist active indicative with first aorist vowel \a\. Probably they mean that they had caught Jesus in the act of doing these things (_in flagrante delicto_) rather than discovery by formal trial. {Perverting our nation} (\diastrephonta to ethnos hˆm“n\). Present active participle of \diastreph“\, old verb to turn this way and that, distort, disturb. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:13:10|. The Sanhedrin imply that the great popularity of Jesus was seditious. {Forbidding to give tribute to Caesar}, (\k“luonta phorous kaisari didonai\). Note object infinitive \didonai\ after the participle \k“luonta\. Literally, hindering giving tribute to Caesar. This was a flat untruth. Their bright young students had tried desperately to get Jesus to say this very thing, but they had failed utterly (Luke:20:25|). {Saying that he himself is Christ a king} (\legonta hauton Christon basilea einai\). Note the indirect discourse here after the participle \legonta\ with the accusative (\hauton\ where \auton\ could have been used), and the infinitive. This charge is true, but not in the sense meant by them. Jesus did claim to be the Christ and the king of the kingdom of God. But the Sanhedrin wanted Pilate to think that he set himself up as a rival to Caesar. Pilate would understand little from the word "Christ," but "King" was a different matter. He was compelled to take notice of this charge else he himself would be accused to Caesar of winking at such a claim by Jesus.

rwp@Luke:23:48 @{Certainly} (\ont“s\). Really, old adverb from the participle \on\ from \eimi\, to be. Used also in strkjv@24:34| of the resurrection of Jesus. {A righteous man} (\dikaios\). strkjv@Mark:15:39| (Matthew:27:54|) which see, represents the centurion as saying \theou huios\ (God's Son) which may mean to him little more than "righteous man." {That came together} (\sunparagenomenoi\). Double compound (\sun\, together, \para\, along), that came along together. {To this sight} (\epi tˆn the“rian tautˆn\). This spectacle (\the“rian\ from \the“re“\, verse 35|). {Returned} (\hupestrephon\). Imperfect active of \hupostreph“\. See them slowly wending their way back to the city from this Tragedy of the Ages which they had witnessed in awe.

rwp@Luke:24:34 @{Saying} (\legontas\). Accusative present active participle agreeing with "the eleven and those with them" in verse 33|. {Indeed} (\ont“s\). Really, because "he has appeared to Simon" (\“pthˆ Sim“ni\). First aorist passive indicative of \hora“\. This is the crucial evidence that turned the scales with the disciples and explains "indeed." Paul also mentions it (1Corinthians:15:5|).

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@Mark:2:27 @{For man} (\dia ton anthr“pon\). Mark alone has this profound saying which subordinates the sabbath to man's real welfare (mankind, observe, generic article with \anthr“pos\, class from class). Man was not made for the sabbath as the rabbis seemed to think with all their petty rules about eating an egg laid on the sabbath or looking in the glass, _et cetera_. See 2Macc. strkjv@5:19 and _Mechilta_ on strkjv@Exodus:31:13|: "The sabbath is delivered unto you and ye are not delivered unto the sabbath." Christianity has had to fight this same battle about institutionalism. The church itself is for man, not man for the church.

rwp@Mark:3:21 @{His friends} (\hoi par' autou\). The phrase means literally "those from the side of him (Jesus)." It could mean another circle of disciples who had just arrived and who knew of the crowds and strain of the Galilean ministry who now come at this special juncture. But the idiom most likely means the kinspeople or family of Jesus as is common in the LXX. The fact that in verse 31| "his mother and his brothers" are expressly mentioned would indicate that they are "the friends" alluded to in verse 21|. It is a mournful spectacle to think of the mother and brothers saying, {He is beside himself} (\exestˆ\). Second aorist active indicative intransitive. The same charge was brought against Paul (Acts:26:24; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:13|). We say that one is out of his head. Certainly Mary did not believe that Jesus was in the power of Beelzebub as the rabbis said already. The scribes from Jerusalem are trying to discount the power and prestige of Jesus (3:22|). See on ¯Matthew:9:32-34; strkjv@10:25; strkjv@12:24| for Beelzebub and Beelzebul. Mary probably felt that Jesus was overwrought and wished to take him home out of the excitement and strain that he might get rest and proper food. See my _The Mother of Jesus: Her Problems and Her Glory_. The brothers did not as yet believe the pretensions and claims of Jesus (John:7:5|). Herod Antipas will later consider Jesus as John the Baptist _redivivus_, the scribes treat him as under demonic possession, even the family and friends fear a disordered mind as a result of overstrain. It was a crucial moment for Jesus. His family or friends came to take him home, to lay hold of him (\kratˆsai\), forcibly if need be.

rwp@Mark:3:29 @{Guilty of an eternal sin} (\enochos estin ai“niou hamartˆmatos\). The genitive of the penalty occurs here with \enochos\. In saying that Jesus had an unclean spirit (verse 30|) they had attributed to the devil the work of the Holy Spirit. This is the unpardonable sin and it can be committed today by men who call the work of Christ the work of the devil, Nietzsche may be cited as an instance in point. Those who hope for a second probation hereafter may ponder carefully how a soul that eternally sins in such an environment can ever repent. That is eternal punishment. The text here is \hamartˆmatos\ (sin), not \krise“s\ (judgment), as the Textus Receptus has it.

rwp@Mark:4:11 @{Unto you is given the mystery of the kingdom of God} (\Humin to mustˆrion dedotai tˆs basileias tou theou\). See on ¯Matthew:13:11| for word \mustˆrion\. Here (Mark:4:11; strkjv@Matthew:13:11; strkjv@Luke:8:10|) alone in the Gospels, but in Paul 21 times and in the Revelation 4 times. It is frequent in Daniel and O.T. Apocrypha. Matthew and Luke use it here in the plural. Matthew and Luke add the word {to know} (\gn“nai\), but Mark's presentation covers a wider range than growing knowledge, the permanent possession of the mystery even before they understand it. The secret is no longer hidden from the initiated. Discipleship means initiation into the secret of God's kingdom and it will come gradually to these men. {But unto them that are without} (\ekeinois de tois ex“\). Peculiar to Mark, those outside our circle, the uninitiated, the hostile group like the scribes and Pharisees, who were charging Jesus with being in league with Beelzebub. strkjv@Luke:8:10| has "to the rest" (\tois loipois\), strkjv@Matthew:13:11| simply "to them" (\ekeinois\). Without the key the parables are hard to understand, for parables veil the truth of the kingdom being stated in terms of another realm. Without a spiritual truth and insight they are unintelligible and are often today perverted. The parables are thus a condemnation on the wilfully blind and hostile, while a guide and blessing to the enlightened. {That} (\hina\). Mark has the construction of the Hebrew "lest" of strkjv@Isaiah:6:9f|. with the subjunctive and so strkjv@Luke:8:10|, while strkjv@Matthew:13:13| uses causal \hoti\ with the indicative following the LXX. See on ¯Matthew:13:13| for the so-called causal use of \hina\. Gould on strkjv@Mark:4:12| has an intelligent discussion of the differences between Matthew and Mark and Luke. He argues that Mark here probably "preserves the original form of Jesus' saying." God ironically commands Isaiah to harden the hearts of the people. If the notion of purpose is preserved in the use of \hina\ in Mark and Luke, there is probably some irony also in the sad words of Jesus. If \hina\ is given the causative use of \hoti\ in Matthew, the difficulty disappears. What is certain is that the use of parables on this occasion was a penalty for judicial blindness on those who will not see.

rwp@Mark:4:21 @{Not to be put on the stand?} (\ouch hina epi tˆn luchnian tethˆi;\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \tithˆmi\ with \hina\ (purpose). The lamp in the one-room house was a familiar object along with the bushel, the bed, the lampstand. Note article with each. \Mˆti\ in the Greek expects the answer no. It is a curious instance of early textual corruption that both Aleph and B, the two oldest and best documents, have \hupo tˆn luchnian\ (under the lampstand) instead of \epi tˆn luchnian\, making shipwreck of the sense. Westcott and Hort actually put it in the margin but that is sheer slavery to Aleph and B. Some of the crisp sayings were repeated by Jesus on other occasions as shown in Matthew and Luke. To put the lamp under the bushel (\modion\) would put it out besides giving no light. Songs:as to the bed or table-couch (\klinˆn\) if it was raised above the floor and liable to be set on fire.

rwp@Mark:4:30 @{How shall we liken?} (\P“s homoi“s“men?\) Deliberative first aorist subjunctive. This question alone in Mark. Songs:with the other question: {In what parable shall we set it forth?} (\en tini autˆn parabolˆi th“men;\). Deliberative second aorist subjunctive. The graphic question draws the interest of the hearers (_we_) by fine tact. strkjv@Luke:13:18f.| retains the double question which strkjv@Matthew:13:31f.| does not have, though he has it in a very different context, probably an illustration of Christ's favourite sayings often repeated to different audiences as is true of all teachers and preachers.

rwp@Mark:5:8 @{For he said} (\elegen gar\). For he had been saying (progressive imperfect). Jesus had already repeatedly ordered the demon to come out of the man whereat the demon made his outcry to Jesus and protested. strkjv@Matthew:8:29| had "before the time" (\pro kairou\) and strkjv@8:31| shows that the demons did not want to go back to the abyss (\tˆn abusson\) right now. That was their real home, but they did not wish to return to the place of torment just now.

rwp@Mark:5:39 @{Make a tumult} (\thorubeisthe\). Middle voice. Jesus had dismissed one crowd (verse 37|), but finds the house occupied by the hired mourners making bedlam (\thorubos\) as if that showed grief with their ostentatious noise. strkjv@Matthew:9:23| spoke of flute-players (\aulˆtas\) and the hubbub of the excited throng (\thoruboumenon\. Cf. strkjv@Mark:14:2; strkjv@Acts:20:1,21,34|). Mark, Matthew, and Luke all quote Jesus as saying that "the child is not dead, but sleepeth." Jesus undoubtedly meant that she was not dead to stay dead, though some hold that the child was not really dead. It is a beautiful word (she is {sleeping}, \katheudei\) that Jesus uses of death.

rwp@Mark:7:11 @{Corban} (\korban ho estin d“ron\). See on ¯Matthew:15:5|. Mark preserves the Hebrew word for a gift or offering to God (Exodus:21:17; strkjv@Leviticus:20:9|), indeclinable here, meaning {gift} (\d“ron\), but declinable \korbanas\ in strkjv@Matthew:27:6|, meaning sacred treasury. The rabbis ({but ye say}, \humeis de legete\) actually allowed the mere saying of this word by an unfaithful son to prevent the use of needed money for the support of father or mother. It was a home thrust to these pettifogging sticklers for ceremonial punctilios. They not only justified such a son's trickery, but held that he was prohibited from using it for father or mother, but he might use it for himself.

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:8:32 @{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: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:9:28 @{Privately, saying} (\kat' idian hoti\). Indoors the nine disciples seek an explanation for their colossal failure. They had cast out demons and wrought cures before. The Revisers are here puzzled over Mark's use of \hoti\ as an interrogative particle meaning {why} where strkjv@Matthew:17:19| has \dia ti\. Some of the manuscripts have \dia ti\ here in strkjv@Mark:9:28| as all do in strkjv@Matthew:17:19|. See also strkjv@Mark:2:16| and strkjv@9:11|. It is probable that in these examples \hoti\ really means {why}. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 730. The use of \hos\ as interrogative "is by no means rare in the late Greek" (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 126).

rwp@Mark:9:32 @{But they understood not the saying} (\hoi de ˆgnooun to rhˆma\). An old word. Chiefly in Paul's Epistles in the N.T. Imperfect tense. They continued not to understand. They were agnostics on the subject of the death and resurrection even after the Transfiguration experience. As they came down from the mountain they were puzzled again over the Master's allusion to his resurrection (Mark:9:10|). strkjv@Matthew:17:23| notes that "they were exceeding sorry" to hear Jesus talk this way again, but Mark adds that they "were afraid to ask him" (\ephobounto auton eper“tˆsai\). Continued to be afraid (imperfect tense), perhaps with a bitter memory of the term "Satan" hurled at Peter when he protested the other time when Jesus spoke of his death (Mark:8:33; strkjv@Matthew:16:23|). strkjv@Luke:9:45| explains that "it was concealed from them," probably partly by their own preconceived ideas and prejudices.

rwp@Mark:9:35 @{He sat down and called the twelve} (\kathisas eph“nˆsen tous d“deka\). Deliberate action of Jesus to handle this delicate situation. Jesus gives them the rule of greatness: "If any man would be first (\pr“tos\) he shall be last (\eschatos\) of all, and minister (\diakonos\) of all." This saying of Christ, like many others, he repeated at other times (Mark:10:43f.; strkjv@Matthew:23:8ff.; strkjv@Luke:22:24f.|). strkjv@Matthew:18:2| says that he called a little child, one there in the house, perhaps Peter's child. strkjv@Luke:9:47| notes that he "set him by his side." Then Jesus {taking him in his arms} (\enagkalisamenos\, aorist middle participle, late Greek word from \agkalˆ\ as in strkjv@Luke:2:28|) spoke again to the disciples.

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: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:14:67 @{Warming himself} (\thermainomenon\). Mark mentions this fact about Peter twice (14:54,67|) as does John (John:18:18,25|). He was twice beside the fire. It is quite difficult to relate clearly the three denials as told in the Four Gospels. Each time several may have joined in, both maids and men. {The Nazarene} (\tou Nazarˆnou\). In strkjv@Matthew:26:69| it is "the Galilean." A number were probably speaking, one saying one thing, another another.

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 TITLE The Textus Receptus has "The Holy Gospel according to Matthew" (\to kata Matthaion hagion Euaggelion\), though the Elzevirs omit "holy," not agreeing here with Stephanus, Griesbach, and Scholz. Only minuscules (cursive Greek manuscripts) and all late have the adjective. Other minuscules and nine uncials including W (the Washington Codex of the fifth century), C of the fifth century (the palimpsest manuscript) and Delta of the ninth together with most Latin manuscripts have simply "Gospel according to Matthew" (\Euaggelion kata Matthaion\). But Aleph and B the two oldest and best Greek uncials of the fourth century have only "According to Matthew" (\Kata Maththaion\) (note double th) and the Greek uncial D of the fifth or sixth century follows Aleph and B as do some of the earliest Old Latin manuscripts and the Curetonian Syriac. It is clear, therefore, that the earliest form of the title was simply "According to Matthew." It may be doubted if Matthew (or the author, if not Matthew) had any title at all. The use of "according to" makes it plain that the meaning is not "the Gospel of Matthew," but the Gospel as given by Matthew, \secundum Matthaeum\, to distinguish the report by Matthew from that by Mark, by Luke, by John. Least of all is there any authority in the manuscripts for saying "Saint Matthew," a Roman Catholic practice observed by some Protestants.

rwp@Matthew:1:19 @{A Righteous Man} (\dikaios\). Or just, not benignant or merciful. The same adjective is used of Zacharias and Elizabeth (Luke:1:6|) and Simeon (Luke:2:25|). "An upright man," the _Braid Scots_ has it. He had the Jewish conscientiousness for the observance of the law which would have been death by stoning (Deuteronomy:22:23|). Though Joseph was upright, he would not do that. "As a good Jew he would have shown his zeal if he had branded her with public disgrace" (McNeile). {And yet not willing} (\kai mˆ thel“n\). Songs:we must understand \kai\ here, "and yet." Matthew makes a distinction here between "willing" (\thel“n\) and "wishing" (\eboulˆthˆ\), that between purpose (\thel“\) and desire (\boulomai\) a distinction not always drawn, though present here. It was not his purpose to "make her a public example" (\deigmatisai\), from the root (\deiknumi\ to show), a rare word (Colossians:2:15|). The Latin Vulgate has it _traducere_, the Old Latin _divulgare_, Wycliff _pupplische_ (publish), Tyndale _defame_, Moffatt _disgrace_, Braid Scots "Be i the mooth o' the public." The substantive (\deigmatismos\) occurs on the Rosetta Stone in the sense of "verification." There are a few instances of the verb in the papyri though the meaning is not clear (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). The compound form appears (\paradeigmatiz“\) in strkjv@Hebrews:6:6| and there are earlier instances of this compound than of the uncompounded, curiously enough. But new examples of the simple verb, like the substantive, may yet be found. The papyri examples mean to furnish a sample (P Tebt. 5.75), to make trial of (P Ryl. I. 28.32). The substantive means exposure in (P Ryl. I. 28.70). At any rate it is clear that Joseph "was minded to put her away privily." He could give her a bill of divorcement (\apolusai\), the \gˆt\ laid down in the Mishna, without a public trial. He had to give her the writ (\gˆt\) and pay the fine (Deuteronomy:24:1|). Songs:he proposed to do this privately (\lathrai\) to avoid all the scandal possible. One is obliged to respect and sympathize with the motives of Joseph for he evidently loved Mary and was appalled to find her untrue to him as he supposed. It is impossible to think of Joseph as the actual father of Jesus according to the narrative of Matthew without saying that Matthew has tried by legend to cover up the illegitimate birth of Jesus. The Talmud openly charges this sin against Mary. Joseph had "a short but tragic struggle between his legal conscience and his love" (McNeile).

rwp@Matthew:1:22 @{That it may be fulfilled} (\hina plˆr“thˆi\). Alford says that "it is impossible to interpret \hina\ in any other sense than in order that." That was the old notion, but modern grammarians recognize the non-final use of this particle in the _Koin‚_ and even the consecutive like the Latin _ut_. Some even argue for a causal use. If the context called for result, one need not hesitate to say so as in strkjv@Mark:11:28; strkjv@John:9:36; strkjv@1John:1:9; strkjv@Revelation:9:20; strkjv@13:13|. See discussion in my _Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research_, pp. 997-9. All the same it is purpose here, God's purpose, Matthew reports the angel as saying, spoken "by (\hupo\, immediate agent) the Lord through (\dia\, intermediate agent) the prophet." {"All this has happened"} (\touto de holon gegonen\, present perfect indicative), stands on record as historical fact. But the Virgin Birth of Jesus is not due to this interpretation of strkjv@Isaiah:7:14|. It is not necessary to maintain (Broadus) that Isaiah himself saw anything more in his prophecy than that a woman then a virgin, would bear a son and that in the course of a few years Ahaz would be delivered from the king of Syria and Israel by the coming of the Assyrians. This historical illustration finds its richest fulfilment in the birth of Jesus from Mary. "Words of themselves are empty. They are useful only as vessels to convey things from mind to mind" (Morison). The Hebrew word for young woman is translated by virgin (\parthenos\), but it is not necessary to conclude that Isaiah himself contemplated the supernatural birth of Jesus. We do not have to say that the idea of the Virgin Birth of Jesus came from Jewish sources. Certainly it did not come from the pagan myths so foreign to this environment, atmosphere and spirit. It is far simpler to admit the supernatural fact than try to explain the invention of the idea as a myth to justify the deification of Jesus. The birth, life, and death of Jesus throw a flood of light on the Old Testament narrative and prophecies for the early Christians. In Matthew and John in particular we often see "that the events of Christ's life were divinely ordered for the express purpose of fulfilling the Old Testament" (McNeile). See strkjv@Matthew:2:15,23; strkjv@4:14-17; strkjv@8:17; strkjv@12:17-21; strkjv@13:25; strkjv@21:4f.; strkjv@John:12:38f.; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@19:24,28,36f|.

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:5:28 @{In his heart} (\en tˆi kardiƒi autou\). Not just the centre of the blood circulation though it means that. Not just the emotional part of man's nature, but here the inner man including the intellect, the affections, the will. This word is exceedingly common in the New Testament and repays careful study always. It is from a root that means to quiver or palpitate. Jesus locates adultery in the eye and heart before the outward act. Wunsche (_Beitrage_) quotes two pertinent rabbinical sayings as translated by Bruce: "The eye and the heart are the two brokers of sin." "Passions lodge only in him who sees." Hence the peril of lewd pictures and plays to the pure.

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:6:9 @{After this manner therefore pray ye} (\hout“s oun proseuchesthe humeis\). "You" expressed in contrast with "the Gentiles." It should be called "The Model Prayer" rather than "The Lord's Prayer." "Thus" pray as he gives them a model. He himself did not use it as a liturgy (cf. strkjv@John:17|). There is no evidence that Jesus meant it for liturgical use by others. In strkjv@Luke:11:2-4| practically the same prayer though briefer is given at a later time by Jesus to the apostles in response to a request that he teach them how to pray. McNeile argues that the form in Luke is the original to which Matthew has made additions: "The tendency of liturgical formulas is towards enrichment rather than abbreviation." But there is no evidence whatever that Jesus designed it as a set formula. There is no real harm in a liturgical formula if one likes it, but no one sticks to just one formula in prayer. There is good and not harm in children learning and saying this noble prayer. Some people are disturbed over the words "Our Father" and say that no one has a right to call God Father who has not been "born again." But that is to say that an unconverted sinner cannot pray until he is converted, an absurd contradiction. God is the Father of all men in one sense; the recognition of Him as the Father in the full sense is the first step in coming back to him in regeneration and conversion.

rwp@Matthew:9:6 @{That ye may know} (\hina eidˆte\). Jesus accepts the challenge in the thoughts of the scribes and performs the miracle of healing the paralytic, who so far only had his sins forgiven, to prove his Messianic power on earth to forgive sins even as God does. The word \exousia\ may mean either power or authority. He had both as a matter of fact. Note same word in strkjv@9:8|. {Then saith he to the sick of the palsy} (\tote legei t“i paralutik“i\). These words of course, were not spoken by Jesus. Curiously enough Matthew interjects them right in the midst of the sayings of Jesus in reply to the scorn of the scribes. Still more remarkable is the fact that Mark (Mark:2:10|) has precisely the same words in the same place save that Matthew has added \tote\, of which he is fond, to what Mark already had. Mark, as we know, largely reports Peter's words and sees with Peter's eyes. Luke has the same idea in the same place without the vivid historical present \legei (eipen t“i paralelumen“i)\ with the participle in place of the adjective. This is one of the many proofs that both Matthew and Luke made use of Mark's Gospel each in his own way. {Take up thy bed} (\ƒron sou tˆn klinˆn\). Pack up at once (aorist active imperative) the rolled-up pallet.

rwp@Matthew:10:10 @{No wallet} (\mˆ pˆran\). Better than "scrip." It can be either a travelling or bread bag. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 108f.) shows that it can mean the beggar's collecting bag as in an inscription on a monument at Kefr Hanar in Syria: "While Christianity was still young the beggar priest was making his rounds in the land of Syria on behalf of the national goddess." Deissmann also quotes a pun in the _Didaskalia=Const. Apost_. 3, 6 about some itinerant widows who said that they were not so much \chˆrai\ (spouseless) as \pˆrai\ (pouchless). He cites also Shakespeare, _Troilus and Cressida_ III. iii. 145: "Time hath, my lord, a wallet at his back, wherein he puts alms for oblivion." {For the labourer is worthy of his food} (\axios gar ho ergatˆs tˆs trophˆs autou\). The sermon is worth the dinner, in other words. Luke in the charge to the seventy (Luke:10:7|) has the same words with \misthou\ (reward) instead of \trophˆs\ (food). In strkjv@1Timothy:5:18| Paul quotes Luke's form as scripture (\hˆ graphˆ\) or as a well-known saying if confined to the first quotation. The word for workman here (\ergatˆs\) is that used by Jesus in the prayer for labourers (Matthew:9:38|). The well-known _Didachˆ_ or _Teaching of the Twelve_ (xiii) shows that in the second century there was still a felt need for care on the subject of receiving pay for preaching. The travelling sophists added also to the embarrassment of the situation. The wisdom of these restrictions was justified in Galilee at this time. Mark (Mark:6:6-13|) and Luke (Luke:9:1-6|) vary slightly from Matthew in some of the details of the instructions of Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:10:23 @{Till the Son of man be come} (\he“s elthˆi ho huios tou anthr“pou\). Moffatt puts it "before the Son of man arrives" as if Jesus referred to this special tour of Galilee. Jesus could overtake them. Possibly so, but it is by no means clear. Some refer it to the Transfiguration, others to the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, others to the Second Coming. Some hold that Matthew has put the saying in the wrong context. Others bluntly say that Jesus was mistaken, a very serious charge to make in his instructions to these preachers. The use of \he“s\ with aorist subjunctive for a future event is a good Greek idiom.

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:10:39 @{Shall lose it} (\apolesei autˆn\). This paradox appears in four forms according to Allen (I) strkjv@Matthew:10:39| (2) strkjv@Mark:8:35; strkjv@Matthew:16:25; strkjv@Luke:9:24| (3) strkjv@Luke:17:33| (4) strkjv@John:12:25|. _The Wisdom of Sirach_ (Hebrew text) in strkjv@51:26 has: "He that giveth his life findeth her (wisdom)." It is one of the profound sayings of Christ that he repeated many times. Plato (_Gorgias_ 512) has language somewhat similar though not so sharply put. The article and aorist participles here (\ho heur“n, ho apolesas\) are timeless in themselves just like \ho dechomenos\ in verses 40| and 41|.

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:12:34 @{Ye offspring of vipers} (\gennˆmata echidn“n\). These same terrible words the Baptist had used to the Pharisees and Sadducees who came to his baptism (Matthew:3:7|). But these Pharisees had deliberately made their choice and had taken Satan's side. The charge against Jesus of being in league with Satan reveals the evil heart within. The heart "spurts out" (\ekballei\) good or evil according to the supply (treasure, \thˆsaurou\) within. Verse 33| is like strkjv@Matthew:7:17-19|. Jesus often repeated his crisp pungent sayings as every teacher does.

rwp@Matthew:13:3 @{Many things in parables} (\polla en parabolais\). It was not the first time that Jesus had used parables, but the first time that he had spoken so many and some of such length. He will use a great many in the future as in Luke 12 to 18 and Matt. 24 and 25. The parables already mentioned in Matthew include the salt and the light (5:13-16|), the birds and the lilies (6:26-30|), the splinter and the beam in the eye (7:3-5|), the two gates (7:13f.|), the wolves in sheep's clothing (7:15|), the good and bad trees (7:17-19|), the wise and foolish builders (7:24-27|), the garment and the wineskins (9:16f.|), the children in the market places (11:16f.|). It is not certain how many he spoke on this occasion. Matthew mentions eight in this chapter (the Sower, the Tares, the Mustard Seed, the Leaven, the Hid Treasure, the Pearl of Great Price, the Net, the Householder). Mark adds the Parable of the Lamp (Mark:4:21; strkjv@Luke:8:16|), the Parable of the Seed Growing of Itself (Mark:4:26-29|), making ten of which we know. But both Mark (Mark:4:33|) and Matthew (13:34|) imply that there were many others. "Without a parable spake he nothing unto them" (Matthew:13:34|), on this occasion, we may suppose. The word parable (\parabolˆ\ from \paraball“\, to place alongside for measurement or comparison like a yardstick) is an objective illustration for spiritual or moral truth. The word is employed in a variety of ways (a) as for sententious sayings or proverbs (Matthew:15:15; strkjv@Mark:3:23; strkjv@Luke:4:23; strkjv@5:36-39; strkjv@6:39|), for a figure or type (Heb. strkjv@9:9; strkjv@11:19|); (b) a comparison in the form of a narrative, the common use in the Synoptic Gospels like the Sower; (c) "A narrative illustration not involving a comparison" (Broadus), like the Rich Fool, the Good Samaritan, etc. "The oriental genius for picturesque speech found expression in a multitude of such utterances" (McNeile). There are parables in the Old Testament, in the Talmud, in sermons in all ages. But no one has spoken such parables as these of Jesus. They hold the mirror up to nature and, as all illustrations should do, throw light on the truth presented. The fable puts things as they are not in nature, Aesop's Fables, for instance. The parable may not be actual fact, but it could be so. It is harmony with the nature of the case. The allegory (\allˆgoria\) is a speaking parable that is self-explanatory all along like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_. All allegories are parables, but not all parables are allegories. The Prodigal Son is an allegory, as is the story of the Vine and Branches (John:15|). John does not use the word parable, but only \paroimia\, a saying by the way (John:10:6; strkjv@16:25,29|). As a rule the parables of Jesus illustrate one main point and the details are more or less incidental, though sometimes Jesus himself explains these. When he does not do so, we should be slow to interpret the minor details. Much heresy has come from fantastic interpretations of the parables. In the case of the Parable of the Sower (13:3-8|) we have also the careful exposition of the story by Jesus (18-23|) as well as the reason for the use of parables on this occasion by Jesus (9-17|).

rwp@Matthew:13:9 @{He that hath ears let him hear} (\ho ech“n “ta akouet“\), Songs:also in strkjv@11:15| and strkjv@13:43|. It is comforting to teachers and preachers to observe that even Jesus had to exhort people to listen and to understand his sayings, especially his parables. They will bear the closest thought and are often enigmatical.

rwp@Matthew:13:18 @{Hear then ye the parable} (\humeis oun akousate tˆn parabolˆn\). Jesus has given in strkjv@13:13| one reason for his use of parables, the condemnation which the Pharisees have brought on themselves by their spiritual dulness: "Therefore I speak to them in parables" (\dia touto en parab“lais antois lal“\). He can go on preaching the mysteries of the kingdom without their comprehending what he is saying, but he is anxious that the disciples really get personal knowledge (\gn“nai\, verse 11|) of these same mysteries. Songs:he explains in detail what he means to teach by the Parable of the Sower. He appeals to them (note position of \h–meis\) to listen as he explains.

rwp@Matthew:15:15 @{Declare unto us the parable} (\phrason h–min tˆn parabolˆn\). Explain the parable (pithy saying) in verse 11|, not in verse 14|. As a matter of fact, the disciples had been upset by Christ's powerful exposure of the "Corban" duplicity and the words about "defilement" in verse 11|.

rwp@Matthew:15:33 @{And the disciples say to him} (\kai legousin aut“i hoi mathˆtai\). It seems strange that they should so soon have forgotten the feeding of the five thousand (Matthew:14:13-21|), but they did. Soon Jesus will remind them of both these demonstrations of his power (16:9,10|). They forgot both of them, not just one. Some scholars scout the idea of two miracles so similar as the feeding of the five thousand and the four thousand, though both are narrated in detail by both Mark and Matthew and both are later mentioned by Jesus. Jesus repeated his sayings and wrought multitudes of healings. There is no reason in itself why Jesus should not on occasion repeat a nature miracle like this elsewhere. He is in the region of Decapolis, not in the country of Philip (\Trachonitis\).

rwp@Matthew:16:2 @{Fair weather} (\eudia\). An old poetic word from \eu\ and \Zeus\ as the ruler of the air and giver of fair weather. Songs:men today say "when the sky is red at sunset." It occurs on the Rosetta Stone and in a fourth century A.D. Oxyr. papyrus for "calm weather" that made it impossible to sail the boat. Aleph and B and some other MSS. omit verses 2 and 3. W omits part of verse 2. These verses are similar to strkjv@Luke:12:54-56|. McNeile rejects them here. Westcott and Hort place in brackets. Jesus often repeated his sayings. Zahn suggests that Papias added these words to Matthew.

rwp@Matthew:16:24 @{Take up his cross} (\arat“ ton stauron autou\). Pick up at once, aorist tense. This same saying in strkjv@10:38|, which see. But pertinent here also in explanation of Christ's rebuke to Peter. Christ's own cross faces him. Peter had dared to pull Christ away from his destiny. He would do better to face squarely his own cross and to bear it after Jesus. The disciples would be familiar with cross-bearing as a figure of speech by reason of the crucifixion of criminals in Jerusalem. {Follow} (\akaloutheit“\). Present tense. Keep on following.

rwp@Matthew:17:4 @{And Peter answered} (\apokritheis de ho Petros\). "Peter to the front again, but not greatly to his credit" (Bruce). It is not clear what Peter means by his saying: "It is good for us to be here" (\kalon estin hˆmƒs h“de einai\). Luke (Luke:9:33|) adds "not knowing what he said," as they "were heavy with sleep." Songs:it is not well to take Peter too seriously on this occasion. At any rate he makes a definite proposal. {I will make} (\paiˆs“\). Future indicative though aorist subjunctive has same form. {Tabernacles} (\skˆnas\), booths. The Feast of Tabernacles was not far away. Peter may have meant that they should just stay up here on the mountain and not go to Jerusalem for the feast.

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

rwp@Matthew:18:4 @{This little child} (\to paidion touto\). This saying about humbling oneself Jesus repeated a number of times as for instance in strkjv@Matthew:23:12|. Probably Jesus pointed to the child by his side. The ninth-century story that the child was Ignatius is worthless. It is not that the child humbled himself, but that the child is humble from the nature of the case in relation to older persons. That is true, however "bumptious" the child himself may be. Bruce observes that to humble oneself is "the most difficult thing in the world for saint as for sinner."

rwp@Matthew:18:8 @In verses 8| and 9| we have one of the dualities or doublets in Matthew (5:29-30|). Jesus repeated his pungent sayings many times. Instead of \eis geennan\ (5:29|) we have \eis to pur to ai“nion\ and at the end of verse 9| \tou puros\ is added to \tˆn geennan\. This is the first use in Matthew of \ai“nios\. We have it again in strkjv@19:16,29| with \zoˆ\, in strkjv@25:41| with \pur\, in strkjv@25:46| with \kolasin\ and \zoˆn\. The word means ageless, without beginning or end as of God (Romans:16:26|), without beginning as in strkjv@Romans:16:25|, without end as here and often. The effort to make it mean "\aeonian\" fire will make it mean "\aeonian\" life also. If the punishment is limited, _ipso facto_ the life is shortened. In verse 9| also \monophthalmon\ occurs. It is an Ionic compound in Herodotus that is condemned by the Atticists, but it is revived in the vernacular _Koin‚_. Literally one-eyed. Here only and strkjv@Mark:9:47| in the New Testament.

rwp@Matthew:18:20 @{There am I} (\ekei eimi\). This blessed promise implies that those gathered together are really disciples with the spirit of Christ as well as "in his name" (\eis to emon onoma\). One of the Oxyrhynchus _Sayings of Our Lord_ is: "Wherever there are (two) they are not without God, and wherever there is one alone I say I am with him." Also this: "Raise the stone and there thou shalt find me, cleave the wood and there am I." See strkjv@Malachi:3:16|.

rwp@Matthew:20:23 @{Ye shall drink} (\piesthe\). Future middle from \pin“\. Christ's cup was martyrdom. James was the first of the Twelve to meet the martyr's death (Acts:12:2|) and John the last if reports are true about him. How little they knew what they were saying.

rwp@Matthew:22:1 @{Again in parables} (\palin en parabolais\). Matthew has already given two on this occasion (The Two Sons, The Wicked Husbandmen). He alone gives this Parable of the Marriage Feast of the King's Son. It is somewhat similar to that of The Supper in strkjv@Luke:14:16-23| given on another occasion. Hence some scholars consider this merely Matthew's version of the Lucan parable in the wrong place because of Matthew's habit of grouping the sayings of Jesus. But that is a gratuitous indictment of Matthew's report which definitely locates the parable here by \palin\. Some regard it as not spoken by Jesus at all, but an effort on the part of the writer to cover the sin and fate of the Jews, the calling of the Gentiles, and God's demand for righteousness. But here again it is like Jesus and suits the present occasion.

rwp@Matthew:22:14 @{For many are called, but few chosen} (\polloi gar eisin klˆtoi oligoi de eklektoi\). This crisp saying of Christ occurs in various connections. He evidently repeated many of his sayings many times as every teacher does. There is a distinction between the called (\klˆtoi\) and the chosen (\eklektoi\) called out from the called.

rwp@Matthew:23:13 @{Hypocrites} (\hupokritai\). This terrible word of Jesus appears first from him in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew:6:2,5,16; strkjv@7:5|), then in strkjv@15:7| and strkjv@22:18|. Here it appears "with terrific iteration" (Bruce) save in the third of the seven woes (23:13,15,23,25,27,29|). The verb in the active (\hupokrin“\) meant to separate slowly or slightly subject to gradual inquiry. Then the middle was to make answer, to take up a part on the stage, to act a part. It was an easy step to mean to feign, to pretend, to wear a masque, to act the hypocrite, to play a part. This hardest word from the lips of Jesus falls on those who were the religious leaders of the Jews (Scribes and Pharisees), who had justified this thunderbolt of wrath by their conduct toward Jesus and their treatment of things high and holy. The _Textus Receptus has eight woes, adding verse 14| which the Revised Version places in the margin (called verse 13| by Westcott and Hort and rejected on the authority of Aleph B D as a manifest gloss from strkjv@Mark:12:40| and strkjv@Luke:20:47|). The MSS. that insert it put it either before 13 or after 13. Plummer cites these seven woes as another example of Matthew's fondness for the number seven, more fancy than fact for Matthew's Gospel is not the Apocalypse of John. These are all illustrations of Pharisaic saying and not doing (Allen). {Ye shut the kingdom of heaven} (\kleiete tˆn basileian t“n ouran“n\). In strkjv@Luke:11:52| the lawyers are accused of keeping the door to the house of knowledge locked and with flinging away the keys so as to keep themselves and the people in ignorance. These custodians of the kingdom by their teaching obscured the way to life. It is a tragedy to think how preachers and teachers of the kingdom of God may block the door for those who try to enter in (\tous eiserchomenous\, conative present middle participle). {Against} (\emprosthen\). Literally, before. These door-keepers of the kingdom slam it shut in men's faces and they themselves are on the outside where they will remain. They hide the key to keep others from going in.

rwp@Matthew:26:7 @{An alabaster cruse of exceeding precious ointment} (\alabastron murou barutimou\). The flask was of alabaster, a carbonate of lime or sulphate of lime, white or yellow stone, named alabaster from the town in Egypt where it was chiefly found. It was used for a phial employed for precious ointments in ancient writers, inscriptions and papyri just as we speak of a glass for the vessel made of glass. It had a cylindrical form at the top, as a rule, like a closed rosebud (Pliny). Matthew does not say what the ointment (\murou\) was, only saying that it was "exceeding precious" (\barutimou\), of weighty value, selling at a great price. Here only in the N.T. "An alabaster of nard (\murou\) was a present for a king" (Bruce). It was one of five presents sent by Cambyses to the King of Ethiopia (Herodotus, iii. 20). {She poured it upon his head} (\katecheen epi tˆs kephalˆs autou\). Songs:Mark (Mark:14:3|), while John (John:12:3|) says that she "anointed the feet of Jesus." Why not both? The verb \katecheen\ is literally to pour down. It is the first aorist active indicative, unusual form.

rwp@Matthew:27:46 @{My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?} (\Thee mou, thee mou, hina ti me egkatelipes;\). Matthew first transliterates the Aramaic, according to the Vatican manuscript (B), the words used by Jesus: _El“i, el“i, lema sabachthanei_; Some of the MSS. give the transliteration of these words from strkjv@Psalms:22:1| in the Hebrew (_Eli, Eli, lama Zaphthanei_). This is the only one of the seven sayings of Christ on the Cross given by Mark and Matthew. The other six occur in Luke and John. This is the only sentence of any length in Aramaic preserved in Matthew, though he has Aramaic words like amen, corban, mammon, pascha, raca, Satan, Golgotha. The so-called Gospel of Peter preserves this saying in a Docetic (Cerinthian) form: "My power, my power, thou hast forsaken me!" The Cerinthian Gnostics held that the _aeon_ Christ came on the man Jesus at his baptism and left him here on the Cross so that only the man Jesus died. Nothing from Jesus so well illustrates the depth of his suffering of soul as he felt himself regarded as sin though sinless (2Corinthians:5:21|). strkjv@John:3:16| comes to our relief here as we see the Son of God bearing the sin of the world. This cry of desolation comes at the close of the three hours of darkness.

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@Philippians:1:10 @{Songs:that ye may} (\eis to humas\). Either purpose or result (\eis to\ plus infinitive as in strkjv@Romans:1:11,20; strkjv@3:26|, etc.). {Approve the things that are excellent} (\dokimazein ta diapheronta\). Originally, "test the things that differ." Cf. same idiom in strkjv@Romans:2:28|. The verb was used for assaying metals. Either sense suits this context, but the first step is to distinguish between good and evil and that is not always easy in our complex civilization. {Sincere} (\eilikrineis\). Old word of uncertain origin from \krin“\, to judge, by \heilˆ\ (sunlight) or to sift by rapid rolling (\eilos\). At any rate it means pure, unsullied. {Void of offence} (\aproskopoi\). Alpha privative \pros\ and \kopt“\, to cut, "not stumbled against" (not causing others to stumble) or if active "not stumbling against." Passive sense probably, not active as in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:32|. Common in the papyri, though not in ancient Greek writers.

rwp@Revelation:1:10 @{I was in the Spirit} (\egenomˆn en pneumati\). Rather, "I came to be (as in strkjv@1:9|) in the Spirit," came into an ecstatic condition as in strkjv@Acts:10:10f.; strkjv@22:17|, not the normal spiritual condition (\einai en pneumati\, strkjv@Romans:8:9|). {On the Lord's Day} (\en tˆi kuriakˆi hˆmerƒi\). Deissmann has proven (_Bible Studies_, p. 217f.; _Light_, etc., p. 357ff.) from inscriptions and papyri that the word \kuriakos\ was in common use for the sense "imperial" as imperial finance and imperial treasury and from papyri and ostraca that \hˆmera Sebastˆ\ (Augustus Day) was the first day of each month, Emperor's Day on which money payments were made (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:16:1f.|). It was easy, therefore, for the Christians to take this term, already in use, and apply it to the first day of the week in honour of the Lord Jesus Christ's resurrection on that day (_Didache_ 14, Ignatius _Magn_. 9). In the N.T. the word occurs only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:11:20| (\kuriakon deipnon the Lord's Supper\). It has no reference to \hˆmera kuriou\ (the day of judgment, strkjv@2Peter:3:10|). {Behind me} (\opis“ mou\). "The unexpected, overpowering entrance of the divine voice" (Vincent). Cf. strkjv@Ezekiel:3:12|. {Voice} (\ph“nˆn\). Of Christ, as is plain in verses 12f|. {As of a trumpet} (\h“s salpiggos\). Songs:in strkjv@4:1| referring to this. {Saying} (\legousˆs\). Present active participle genitive case agreeing with \salpiggos\ rather than \legousan\, accusative agreeing with \ph“nˆn\. Songs:on purpose, as is clear from strkjv@4:1|, where \lalousˆs\ also agrees with \salpiggos\.

rwp@Revelation:2:9 @{Thy tribulation and thy poverty} (\sou tˆn thlipsin kai pt“cheian\). Separate articles of same gender, emphasizing each item. The tribulation was probably persecution, which helped to intensify the poverty of the Christians (James:2:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:10; strkjv@8:2|). In contrast with the wealthy church in Laodicea (3:17|). {But thou art rich} (\alla plousios ei\). Parenthesis to show the spiritual riches of this church in contrast with the spiritual poverty in Laodicea (3:17|), this a rich poor church, that a poor rich church. Rich in grace toward God (Luke:12:21|) and in good deeds (1Timothy:6:18|). Perhaps Jews and pagans had pillaged their property (Hebrews:10:34|), poor as they already were. {Blasphemy} (\blasphˆmian\). Reviling believers in Christ. See strkjv@Mark:7:22|. The precise charge by these Jews is not indicated, but see strkjv@Acts:13:45|. {Of them which say} (\ek t“n legont“n\). "From those saying" (\ek\ with the ablative plural of the present active articular participle of \leg“\). {They are Jews} (\Ioudaious einai heautous\). This is the accusative of general reference and the infinitive in indirect discourse after \leg“\ (Acts:5:36; strkjv@8:9|) even though \legont“n\ is here ablative (cf. strkjv@3:9|), common idiom. These are actual Jews and only Jews, not Christians. {And they are not} (\kai ouk eisin\). Another parenthesis like that in strkjv@2:2|. These are Jews in name only, not spiritual Jews (Galatians:6:15f., strkjv@Romans:2:28|). {A synagogue of Satan} (\sunag“gˆ tou Satanƒ\). In strkjv@3:9| again and note strkjv@2:13,24|, serving the devil (John:8:44|) instead of the Lord (Numbers:16:3; strkjv@20:4|).

rwp@Revelation:3:5 @{Shall be arrayed} (\peribaleitai\). Future middle indicative of \periball“\, to fling around one, here and in strkjv@4:4| with \en\ and the locative, but usually in this book with the accusative of the thing, retained in the passive or with the middle (7:9,13; strkjv@10:1; strkjv@11:3; strkjv@12:1; strkjv@17:4; strkjv@18:16; strkjv@19:8,13|). {In white garments} (\en himatiois leukois\). Apparently the spiritual bodies in the risen life as in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1,4| and often in Revelation (3:4,5; strkjv@6:11; strkjv@7:9,13f.; strkjv@19:8|). {I will in no wise blot out} (\ou mˆ exaleips“\). Strong double negative \ou mˆ\ and the first aorist active (or future) of \exaleiph“\, old word, to wipe out (Acts:3:19|). {Of the book of life} (\ek tˆs biblou tˆs z“ˆs\). Ablative case with \ek\. This divine register first occurs in strkjv@Exodus:32:32f.| and often in the O.T. See strkjv@Luke:10:20; strkjv@Phillipians:4:3; strkjv@Revelation:13:8; strkjv@20:15; strkjv@21:27|. The book is in Christ's hands (13:8; strkjv@21:27|). {His name} (\to onoma autou\). The name of the one who overcomes (\ho nik“n\). Clear reminiscence of the words of Christ about confessing to the Father those who confess him here (Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Mark:8:38; strkjv@Luke:9:26; strkjv@12:8|). Whether John knew the Synoptic Gospels (and why not?) he certainly knew such sayings of Jesus.

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: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:7:13 @{Answered} (\apekrithˆ\). First aorist passive (deponent) of \apokrinomai\ with \leg“n\ (saying), a common (only here in the Apocalypse) Hebrew redundancy in the Gospels (Mark:9:5|). An elder intervenes, though no question has been asked to interpret the vision (Swete). {These} (\houtoi\). Prophetic predicate nominative put before \tines eisin\ (who are they). Note article repeated with \stolas\ pointing to verse 9|, and accusative also retained after \peribeblˆmenoi\ as there. Both "who" and "whence" as in strkjv@Joshua:9:8|.

rwp@Revelation:9:14 @{One saying to the sixth angel} (\legonta t“i hekt“i\). Accusative masculine singular active participle of \leg“\, personifying \ph“nˆn\ and agreeing with it in case, though not in gender. This voice speaks to the sixth angel (dative case). {Which had the trumpet} (\ho ech“n tˆn salpigga\). Nominative case in apposition with \aggel“i\ (dative), the same anomalous phenomenon in strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:12; strkjv@14:12|. Swete treats it as a parenthesis, like strkjv@4:1; strkjv@11:15|. {Loose} (\luson\). First aorist (ingressive) active imperative of \lu“\, "let loose." Another group of four angels (7:1|) like strkjv@Acts:12:4|, described here "which are bound" (\tous dedemenous\). Perfect passive articular participle of \de“\, evidently the leaders of the demonic horsemen (9:15ff.|) as the four angels let loose the demonic locusts (7:1ff.|), both quaternions agents of God's wrath. {At the great river Euphrates} (\epi t“i potam“i t“i megal“i Euphratˆi\). A regular epithet of the Euphrates (16:12; strkjv@Genesis:15:18; strkjv@Deuteronomy:1:7|). It rises in Armenia and joins the Tigris in lower Babylonia, a total length of nearly 1800 miles, the eastern boundary of the Roman Empire next to Parthia.

rwp@Revelation:10:8 @{Again speaking and saying} (\palin lalousan kai legousan\). Present active predicate participles feminine accusative singular agreeing with \hˆn\ (object of \ˆkousa\), not with \ph“nˆ\ (nominative) as most of the cursives have it (\lalousa kai legousa\). Ordinarily it would be \elalei kai elegen\. See strkjv@4:1| for like idiom. This is the voice mentioned in verse 4|. No great distinction is to be made here between \lale“\ and \leg“\. {Go, take} (\Hupage labe\). Present active imperative of \hupag“\ and second aorist active imperative of \lamban“\. The use of \hupage\ (exclamation like \ide\) is common in N.T. (Matthew:5:24; strkjv@8:4; strkjv@19:21; strkjv@John:4:16; strkjv@9:7|). Charles calls it a Hebraism (16:1|). Note the repeated article here (\to\) referring to the open book in the hand of the angel (verse 2|), only here \biblion\ is used, not the diminutive of \biblaridion\ of verses 2,9,10|.

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:11:12 @{Saying} (\legousˆs\). Present active predicate participle of \leg“\, feminine genitive agreeing with \ph“nˆs\, though some MSS. have the accusative \ph“nˆn legousan\, either construction being proper after \ˆkousan\ (they heard). There is a little evidence for \ˆkousa\ like strkjv@12:10| (24 times in the book). Cf. strkjv@John:5:28|. {Come up hither} (\anabate h“de\). Second aorist active imperative of \anabain“\. The ascension of these two witnesses is in full view of their enemies, not just in the presence of a few friends as with Christ (Acts:1:9|). {They went up} (\anebˆsan\). Second aorist active indicative of \anabain“\. {In the cloud} (\en tˆi nephelˆi\). As Jesus did (Acts:1:9|) and like Elijah (2Kings:2:11|). Their triumph is openly celebrated before their enemies and is like the rapture described by Paul in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:17|.

rwp@Revelation:11:15 @{There followed} (\egenonto\). "There came to pass." There was silence in heaven upon the opening of the seventh seal (8:1|), but here "great voices." Perhaps the great voices are the \z“a\ of strkjv@4:6ff.; strkjv@5:8|. {Saying} (\legontes\). Construction according to sense; \legontes\, masculine participle (not \legousai\), though \ph“nai\, feminine. John understood what was said. {Is become} (\egeneto\). "Did become," prophetic use of the aorist participle, already a fact. See \egeneto\ in strkjv@Luke:19:9|. {The kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ} (\tou kuriou hˆm“n kai tou Christou autou\). Repeat \hˆ basileia\ from the preceding. God the Father is meant here by \kuriou\ (Lord), as \autou\ (his) shows. This is the certain and glorious outcome of the age-long struggle against Satan, who wields the kingdom of the world which he offered to Christ on the mountain for one act of worship. But Jesus scorned partnership with Satan in the rule of the world, and chose war, war up to the hilt and to the end. Now the climax has come with Christ as Conqueror of the kingdom of this world for his Father. This is the crowning lesson of the Apocalypse. {He shall reign} (\basileusei\). Future active of \basileu“\. God shall reign, but the rule of God and of Christ is one as the kingdom is one (1Corinthians:15:27|). Jesus is the Lord's Anointed (Luke:2:26; strkjv@9:20|).

rwp@Revelation:12:10 @{A great voice saying} (\ph“nˆn megalˆn legousan\). Accusative after \ˆkousa\ in this phrase as in strkjv@5:11; strkjv@10:4; strkjv@14:2; strkjv@18:4|, but the genitive \ph“nˆs legousˆs\ in strkjv@11:12; strkjv@14:13|. We are not told whence this voice or song comes, possibly from one of the twenty-four elders (Swete) or some other heavenly beings (11:15|) who can sympathize with human beings (19:10|), the martyrs in heaven (Charles). {Now is come} (\arti egeneto\). \Arti\ (John:13:33|) shows how recent the downfall of Satan here proleptically pictured as behind us in time (aorist tense \egeneto\). {The salvation} (\hˆ s“tˆria\). Here "the victory" as in strkjv@7:10; strkjv@19:1|. {The power} (\hˆ dunamis\). Gods power over the dragon (cf. strkjv@7:12; strkjv@11:17; strkjv@19:1|). {The kingdom} (\hˆ basileia\). "The empire of God" as in strkjv@11:15|. {The authority of his Christ} (\hˆ exousia tou Christou autou\). Which Christ received from the Father (Matthew:28:18; strkjv@John:17:2|). See strkjv@11:15| (Psalms:2:2|) for "his Anointed." {The accuser} (\ho katˆg“r\). The regular form, \katˆgoros\, occurs in strkjv@John:8:10; strkjv@Acts:23:30,35; strkjv@25:16,18| and in many MSS. here in strkjv@Revelation:12:10|, but A reads \katˆg“r\, which Westcott and Hort accept. It was once considered a Greek transliteration of a Hebrew word, but Deissmann (_Light_, etc., p. 93f.) quotes it from a vernacular magical papyrus of the fourth century A.D. with no sign of Jewish or Christian influence, just as \diak“n\ appears as a vernacular form of \diakonos\. Only here is the word applied to Satan in the N.T. In late Judaism Satan is the accuser, and Michael the defender, of the faithful. {Of our brethren} (\t“n adelph“n hˆm“n\). The saints still on earth battling with Satan and his devices. {Which accuseth them} (\ho katˆgor“n autous\). Articular present active participle of \katˆgore“\, old verb, to accuse, usually with the genitive of the person (John:5:45|), but here with the accusative. This is the devil's constant occupation (Job:1:6f.|). {Day and night} (\hˆmeras kai nuktos\). Genitive of time. "By day and by night."

rwp@Revelation:13:9 @{If any one hath an ear} (\ei tis echei ous\). Condition of first class, repetition of the saying in strkjv@2:7,11,17,29|, etc.

rwp@Revelation:19:1 @{After these things} (\meta tauta\). Often when a turn comes in this book. But Beckwith is probably correct in seeing in strkjv@19:1-5| the climax of chapter strkjv@Revelation:18|. This first voice (verses 1,2|) \h“s ph“nˆn megalˆn ouchlou pollou\ (as it were great voice of much multitude) is probably the response of the angelic host (Revelation:5:11; strkjv@Hebrews:12:22|). There is responsive singing (grand chorus) as in chapters strkjv@Revelation:4; 5|. {Saying} (\legont“n\). Present active participle of \leg“\, genitive plural, though \ochlou\ is genitive singular (collective substantive, agreement in sense). {Hallelujah} (\Allˆlouia\). Transliteration of the Hebrew seen often in the Psalms (LXX) and in III. Macc. strkjv@7:13, in N.T. only in strkjv@Revelation:19:1,3,4,6|. It means, "Praise ye the Lord." Fifteen of the Psalms begin or end with this word. The Great Hallel (a title for strkjv@Psalms:104-109|) is sung chiefly at the feasts of the passover and tabernacles. This psalm of praise uses language already in strkjv@12:10|.

rwp@Revelation:19:6 @{As it were the voice} (\h“s ph“nˆn\). Used here three times, as once in verse 1|: once of a second great multitude (\ochlou pollou\), not of angels as in verse 1|, but the innumerable multitude of the redeemed of strkjv@7:9|; then "of many waters" (\hudat“n poll“n\) as in strkjv@1:15; strkjv@14:2| like "the roar of a cataract" (Swete); and once more "the voice of mighty thunders" (\bront“n ischur“n\) as in strkjv@6:1; strkjv@10:3ff|. {Saying} (\legont“n\). The best attested reading, genitive plural of \leg“\, agreeing with \ochlou\ (genitive singular), for roll of the waters and the roar of the thunders were not articulate. Some MSS. have \legontes\ (nominative plural) referring also to \ochlou\, though nominative instead of genitive. The fourth "Hallelujah" comes from this vast multitude. {The Lord our God, the Almighty} (\Kurios, ho theos, ho pantokrat“r\). For this designation of God see also strkjv@1:8; strkjv@4:8; strkjv@11:17; strkjv@15:3; strkjv@16:7,14; strkjv@19:15; strkjv@21:22|. Cf. _deus et dominus noster_ used of the Roman emperor. {Reigneth} (\ebasileusen\). First aorist active of \basileu“\. Probably ingressive prophetic aorist, "God became king" in fulness of power on earth with the fall of the world power.

rwp@Revelation:21:5 @{Behold, I make all things new} (\Idou kaina poi“ panta\). The first time since strkjv@1:8| that God has been represented as speaking directly, though voices have come out of the throne before (21:3|) and out of the sanctuary (16:1,17|), which may be from God himself, though more likely from one of the angels of the Presence. This message is not addressed to John (7:14; strkjv@17:7; strkjv@21:6; strkjv@22:6|), but to the entire world of the blessed. See strkjv@Isaiah:43:18f.| for the words (\Idou eg“ poi“ kaina\). The idea of a new heaven and a new earth is in strkjv@Isaiah:65:17; strkjv@66:22; strkjv@Psalms:102:25f|. For the locative here with \epi\ (\epi t“i thron“i\) see strkjv@7:10; strkjv@19:4| (genitive more usual, strkjv@4:9f.; strkjv@5:1,7,13|, etc.). See strkjv@20:11| for the picture. {And he saith} (\kai legei\). Probably this means a change of speakers, made plain by \moi\ (to me) in many MSS. An angel apparently (as in strkjv@14:13; strkjv@19:9f.|) assures John and urges him to write (\grapson\ as in strkjv@1:11; strkjv@2:1,8,12,18; strkjv@3:1,7,14; strkjv@14:3|). The reason given (\hoti\, for) is precisely the saying in strkjv@22:6| and he uses the two adjectives (\pistoi kai alˆthinoi\) employed in strkjv@19:11| about God himself, and strkjv@3:14| about Christ. In strkjv@19:9| \alˆthinoi\ occurs also about "the words of God" as here. They are reliable and genuine.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE DATE There are two chief theories, the Neronic, soon after Nero's death, the other in the reign of Domitian. Irenaeus is quoted by Eusebius as saying expressly that the Apocalypse of John was written at the close of the reign of Domitian. This testimony is concurred in by Clement of Alexandria, by Origen, by Eusebius, by Jerome. In harmony with this clear testimony the severity of the persecutions suit the later date better than the earlier one. There is, besides, in strkjv@Revelation:17:11f.| an apparent reference to the story that Nero would return again. The fifth king who is one of the seven is an eighth. There was a Nero legend, to be sure, that Nero either was not dead but was in Parthia, or would be _redivivus_ after death. Juvenal termed Domitian "a bald Nero" and others called Domitian "a second Nero." But in spite of all this Hort, Lightfoot, Sanday, Westcott have argued strongly for the Neronic era. Peake is willing to admit allusions to the Neronic period as Swete is also, but both consider the Domitianic date the best supported. Moffatt considers any earlier date than Domitian "almost impossible."

rwp@Romans:1:12 @{That is} (\touto de estin\). "An explanatory correction" (Denney). The \de\ should not be ignored. Instead of saying that he had a spiritual gift for them, he wishes to add that they also have one for him. {That I with you may be comforted} (\sunparaklˆthˆnai en humin\). "My being comforted in you (\en humin\) together (\sun-\) with you," a mutual blessing to each party (you and me).

rwp@Romans:1:22 @{Professing themselves to be wise} (\phaskontes einai sophoi\). \Sophoi\ is predicate nominative with \einai\ in indirect discourse agreeing with \phaskontes\ (old verb, from \phˆmi\, to say, rare in N.T.) in case and number according to regular Greek idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1038). {Became vain} (\ematai“thˆsan\). Ingressive first aorist passive indicative of \mataio“\ from \mataios\ (empty). Empty reasonings as often today. {Became fools} (\em“ranthˆsan\). Ingressive first aorist passive of \m“rain“\, to be a fool, old word from \m“ros\, a fool. An oxymoron or sharp saying, true and one that cuts to the bone. {For the likeness of an image} (\en homoi“mati eikonos\). Both words, "a likeness which consists in an image or copy" (Lightfoot). See strkjv@Phillipians:2:7| for "likeness of men" and strkjv@Colossians:1:15| for "image of God." Paul shows indignant contempt for these grotesque efforts to present pictures of a deity that had been lost (Denney). Why is it that heathen images of gods in the form of men and beasts are so horrible to look upon?

rwp@Romans:10:6 @{Saith thus} (\hout“s legei\). Paul personifies "the from faith righteousness" (\hˆ ek piste“s dikaiosunˆ\). A free reproduction from strkjv@Deuteronomy:30:11-14|. Paul takes various phrases from the LXX and uses them for "his inspired conviction and experiences of the gospel" (Denney). He does not quote Moses as saying this or meaning this. {Say not in thy heart} (\mˆ eipˆis en tˆi kardiƒi sou\). Second aorist active subjunctive with \mˆ\ like strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:17|. To say in the heart is to think (Matthew:3:9|). {That is, to bring Christ down} (\tout' estin Christon katagagein\). Second aorist active infinitive of the common verb \katag“\, to bring or lead down. It is dependent on the preceding verb \anabˆsetai\ (shall ascend). \Tout' estin\ (that is) is what is called _Midrash_ or interpretation as in strkjv@9:8|. It occurs three times here (verses 6-8|). Paul applies the words of Moses to Christ. There is no need for one to go to heaven to bring Christ down to earth. The Incarnation is already a glorious fact. Today some men scout the idea of the Deity and Incarnation of Christ.

rwp@Romans:10:21 @{All the day long} (\holˆn tˆn hˆmeran\). Accusative of extent of time. He quotes strkjv@Isaiah:65:2|. {Did I spread out} (\exepetasa\). First aorist active indicative of \ekpetannumi\, old verb, to stretch out, bold metaphor, only here in N.T. {Unto a disobedient and a gainsaying people} (\pros laon apeithounta kai antilegonta\). "Unto a people disobeying and talking back." The two things usually go together. Contrary and contradictory (Luke:13:34f.|).

rwp@Titus:2:9 @{Servants} (\doulous\). "Slaves." Supply "exhort" (\parakalei\). See strkjv@1Timothy:6:1| for "masters" (\despotais\). {Well-pleasing} (\euarestous\). See on ¯2Corinthians:5:9|. {Not gainsaying} (\mˆ antilegontas\). "Not answer back." See strkjv@Romans:10:21|.

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]
Sun Jun 2 22:59:09 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020