Bible:
Filter: String:

NONE.filter - rwp text:


rwp@Info @ The words of the Canterbury Version will be used, sometimes with my own rendering added, and the transliterated Greek put in parenthesis. Thus one who knows no Greek can read straight ahead and get the point simply by skipping the Greek words which are of great value to those who do know some Greek. The text of Westcott and Hort will be used though not slavishly. Those who know Greek are expected to keep the Greek text open as they read or study these volumes. The publishers insisted on the transliteration to cut down the cost of printing.

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

rwp@1Corinthians: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:3:10 @{As a wise masterbuilder} (\h“s sophos architekt“n\). Paul does not shirk his share in the work at Corinth with all the sad outcome there. He absolves Apollos from responsibility for the divisions. He denies that he himself is to blame. In doing so he has to praise himself because the Judaizers who fomented the trouble at Corinth had directly blamed Paul. It is not always wise for a preacher to defend himself against attack, but it is sometimes necessary. Factions in the church were now a fact and Paul went to the bottom of the matter. God gave Paul the grace to do what he did. This is the only New Testament example of the old and common word \architekt“n\, our architect. \Tekt“n\ is from \tikt“\, to beget, and means a begetter, then a worker in wood or stone, a carpenter or mason (Matthew:13:55; strkjv@Mark:6:3|). \Archi-\ is an old inseparable prefix like \archaggelos\ (archangel), \archepiscopos\ (archbishop), \archiereus\ (chiefpriest). \Architekt“n\ occurs in the papyri and inscriptions in an even wider sense than our use of architect, sometimes of the chief engineers. But Paul means to claim primacy as pastor of the church in Corinth as is true of every pastor who is the architect of the whole church life and work. All the workmen (\tektones\, carpenters) work under the direction of the architect (Plato, _Statesman_, 259). "As a wise architect I laid a foundation" (\themelion ethˆka\). Much depends on the wisdom of the architect in laying the foundation. This is the technical phrase (Luke:6:48; strkjv@14:29|), a cognate accusative for \themelion\. The substantive \themelion\ is from the same root \the\ as \ethˆka\ (\ti-thˆmi\). We cannot neatly reproduce the idiom in English. "I placed a placing" does only moderately well. Paul refers directly to the events described by Luke in strkjv@Acts:18:1-18|. The aorist \ethˆka\ is the correct text, not the perfect \tetheika\. {Another buildeth thereon} (\allos epoikodomei\). Note the preposition \epi\ with the verb each time (10,11,12,14|). The successor to Paul did not have to lay a new foundation, but only to go on building on that already laid. It is a pity when the new pastor has to dig up the foundation and start all over again as if an earthquake had come. {Take heed how he buildeth thereon} (\blepet“ p“s epoikodomei\). The carpenters have need of caution how they carry out the plans of the original architect. Successive architects of great cathedrals carry on through centuries the original design. The result becomes the wonder of succeeding generations. There is no room for individual caprice in the superstructure.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:7:16 @{For how knowest thou?} (\ti gar oidas;\). But what does Paul mean? Is he giving an argument _against_ the believer accepting divorce or _in favour_ of doing so? The syntax allows either interpretation with \ei\ (if) after \oidas\. Is the idea in \ei\ (if) _hope_ of saving the other or _fear_ of not saving and hence peril in continuing the slavery of such a bondage? The latter idea probably suits the context best and is adopted by most commentators. And yet one hesitates to interpret Paul as _advocating_ divorce unless strongly insisted on by the unbeliever. There is no problem at all unless the unbeliever makes it. If it is a hopeless case, acquiescence is the only wise solution. But surely the believer ought to be sure that there is no hope before he agrees to break the bond. Paul raises the problem of the wife first as in verse 10|.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:34 @{And there is a difference also between the wife and the virgin} (\kai memeristai kai hˆ gunˆ kai hˆ parthenos\). But the text here is very uncertain, almost hopelessly so. Westcott and Hort put \kai memeristai\ in verse 33| and begin a new sentence with \kai hˆ gunˆ\ and add \hˆ agamos\ after \hˆ gunˆ\, meaning "the widow and the virgin each is anxious for the things of the Lord" like the unmarried man (\ho agamos\, bachelor or widow) in verse 32|. Possibly so, but the MSS. vary greatly at every point. At any rate Paul's point is that the married woman is more disposed to care for the things of the world. But, alas, how many unmarried women (virgins and widows) are after the things of the world today and lead a fast and giddy life.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:1 @{For} (\gar\). Correct text, not \de\. Paul appeals to the experience of the Israelites in the wilderness in confirmation of his statement concerning himself in strkjv@9:26f.| and as a powerful warning to the Corinthians who may be tempted to flirt with the idolatrous practices of their neighbours. It is a real, not an imaginary peril. {All under the cloud} (\pantes hupo tˆn nephelˆn\). They all marched under the pillar of cloud by day (Exodus:13:21; strkjv@14:19|) which covered the host (Numbers:14:14; strkjv@Psalms:95:39|). This mystic cloud was the symbol of the presence of the Lord with the people.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:11:24 @{When he had given thanks} (\eucharistˆsas\). First aorist active participle of \euchariste“\ from which word our word Eucharist comes, common late verb (see on ¯1:14|). {Which is for you} (\to huper hum“n\). \Kl“menon\ (broken) of the Textus Receptus (King James Version) is clearly not genuine. Luke (Luke:22:19|) has \didomenon\ (given) which is the real idea here. As a matter of fact the body of Jesus was not broken (John:19:36|). The bread was broken, but not the body of Jesus. {In remembrance of me} (\eis tˆn emˆn anamnˆsin\). The objective use of the possessive pronoun \emˆn\. Not my remembrance of you, but your remembrance of me. \Anamnˆsis\, from \anamimnˆsk“\, to remind or to recall, is an old word, but only here in N.T. save strkjv@Luke:22:19| which see.

rwp@1Corinthians:12:3 @{Wherefore I give you to understand} (\dio gn“riz“ humin\). Causative idea (only in Aeschylus in old Greek) in papyri (also in sense of recognize) and N.T., from root \gn“\ in \gin“sk“\, to know. {Speaking in the Spirit of God} (\en pneumati theou lal“n\). Either sphere or instrumentality. No great distinction here between \lale“\ (utter sounds) and \leg“\ (to say). {Jesus is anathema} (\anathema Iˆsous\). On distinction between \anathema\ (curse) and \anathˆma\ (offering strkjv@Luke:21:5|) see discussion there. In LXX \anathˆma\ means a thing devoted to God without being redeemed, doomed to destruction (Leviticus:27:28f.; strkjv@Joshua:6:17; strkjv@7:12|). See strkjv@1Corinthians:16:22; strkjv@Galatians:1:8f.; strkjv@Romans:9:3|. This blasphemous language against Jesus was mainly by the Jews (Acts:13:45; strkjv@18:6|). It is even possible that Paul had once tried to make Christians say \Anathema Iˆsous\ (Acts:26:11|). {Jesus is Lord} (\Kurios Iˆsous\). The term \Kurios\, as we have seen, is common in the LXX for God. The Romans used it freely for the emperor in the emperor worship. "Most important of all is the early establishment of a polemical parallelism between the cult of Christ and the cult of Caesar in the application of the term \Kurios\, 'lord.' The new texts have here furnished quite astonishing revelations" (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 349). Inscriptions, ostraca, papyri apply the term to Roman emperors, particularly to Nero when Paul wrote this very letter (_ib._, p. 353f.): "One with 'Nero Kurios' quite in the manner of a formula (without article, like the 'Kurios Jesus' in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3|." "The battle-cries of the spirits of error and of truth contending at Corinth" (Findlay). One is reminded of the demand made by Polycarp that he say \Kurios Caesar\ and how each time he replied \Kurios Iˆsous\. He paid the penalty for his loyalty with his life. Lighthearted men today can say "Lord Jesus" in a flippant or even in an irreverent way, but no Jew or Gentile then said it who did not mean it.

rwp@1Corinthians:13:3 @{Bestow to feed} (\Ps“mis“\). First aorist active subjunctive of \ps“miz“\, to feed, to nourish, from \ps“mos\, morsel or bit, and so to feed, by putting a morsel into the mouth like infant (or bird). Old word, but only here in N.T. {To be burned} (\hina kauthˆs“mai\). First future passive subjunctive (Textus Receptus), but D \kauthˆsomai\ (future passive indicative of \kai“\, old word to burn). There were even some who courted martyrdom in later years (time of Diocletian). This Byzantine future subjunctive does not occur in the old MSS. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 876). Aleph A B here read \kauchˆs“mai\, first aorist middle subjunctive of \kauchaomai\ (so Westcott and Hort), "that I may glory." This is correct. {It profiteth me nothing} (\ouden “pheloumai\). Literally, I am helped nothing. \Ouden\ in the accusative case retained with passive verb. See two accusatives with \“phele“\ in strkjv@14:6|. Verb is old and from \ophelos\ (profit).

rwp@1Corinthians:13:8 @{Love never faileth} (\Hˆ agapˆ oudepote piptei\). New turn for the perpetuity of love. \Piptei\ correct text, not \ekpiptei\, as in strkjv@Luke:16:17|. Love survives everything. {They shall be done away} (\katargˆthˆsontai\). First future passive of \katarge“\. Rare in old Greek, to make idle (\argos\), inoperative. All these special spiritual gifts will pass. It is amazing how little of human work lasts. {They shall cease} (\pausontai\). Future middle indicative of \pau“\, to make cease. They shall make themselves cease or automatically cease of themselves.

rwp@1John:3:1 @{What manner of love} (\potapˆn agapˆn\). Qualitative interrogative as in strkjv@2Peter:3:11; strkjv@Matthew:8:27|. Only here in John's writings. Originally of what country or race. {Hath bestowed} (\ded“ken\). Perfect active indicative of \did“mi\, state of completion, "the endowment of the receiver" (Vincent). {That we should be called} (\hina klˆth“men\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with the first aorist passive subjunctive of \kale“\, to call or name, as in strkjv@Matthew:2:23|. {Children} (\tekna\). As in strkjv@John:1:12| and with an allusion to \gegennˆtai\ in strkjv@2:29| in an effort "to restore the waning enthusiasm of his readers, and to recall them to their first love" (Brooke). {And such we are} (\kai esmen\). "And we are." A parenthetical reflection characteristic of John (\kai nun estin\ in strkjv@John:5:25| and \kai ouk eisin\ in strkjv@Revelation:2:2; strkjv@3:9|) omitted by Textus Receptus, though, in the old MSS. {Because it knew him not} (\hoti ouk egn“ auton\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\, precisely the argument in strkjv@John:15:18f|.

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

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

rwp@1Peter:1:7 @{The proof of your faith} (\to dokimion hum“n tˆs piste“s\). The identical phrase in strkjv@James:1:3| and probably derived from there by Peter. See there for discussion of \to dokimion\ (the test or touchstone of faith). {Being more precious} (\polutimoteron\). No word for "being" (\on\) in the Greek. The secondary uncials have \polu timi“teron\. The text is the comparative of \polutimos\, late adjective (Plutarch) from \polu\ and \timˆ\ (of great price) as in strkjv@Matthew:13:46|. {Than gold} (\chrusiou\). Ablative case after the comparative adjective. {That perisheth} (\tou apollumenou\). Present middle articular participle of \apollumi\ to destroy. Even gold perishes (wears away). {Though it is proved by fire} (\dia puros de dokimazomenou\). Present passive articular participle (in the ablative like \chrusiou\) of \dokimaz“\ (common verb for testing metals) with \de\, which gives a concessive sense to the participle. Faith stands the test of fire better than gold, but even gold is refined by fire. {That might be found} (\hina heurethˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \heurisk“\, common verb, to find. As in strkjv@2Peter:3:14|, this is the result of the probation by God as the Refiner of hearts. {Unto praise and glory and honour} (\eis epainon kai doxan kai timˆn\). Here probably both to God and man in the result. Cf. strkjv@Matthew:5:11f.; strkjv@Romans:2:7,10; strkjv@1Timothy:1:17|. {At the revelation of Jesus Christ} (\en apokalupsei Iˆsou Christou\). Songs:also in strkjv@1:13; strkjv@4:13; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:7; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:7; strkjv@Luke:17:30| of the second coming of Christ as the Judge and Rewarder (Bigg).

rwp@1Peter:1:9 @{Receiving} (\komizomenoi\). Present middle participle of \komiz“\, old verb, to receive back, to get what is promised (5:4; strkjv@Hebrews:10:36|). {The end of your faith} (\to telos tˆs piste“s\). The conclusion, the culmination of faith (2Corinthians:3:13; strkjv@Romans:2:21f.; strkjv@10:4|). See strkjv@Hebrews:12:2| of Jesus as "Pioneer and Perfecter of Faith." {Even the salvation of your souls} (\s“tˆrian psuch“n\). No "even" in the text, just the accusative of apposition with \telos\, viz., final salvation.

rwp@1Peter:1:21 @{Who through him are believers in God} (\tous di' autou pistous eis theon\). Accusative case in apposition with \humƒs\ (you), "the through him (that is Christ as in strkjv@1:8; strkjv@Acts:3:16|) believers (\pistous\ correct text of A B) in God." {Which raised} (\ton egeiranta\). Accusative singular articular (agreeing with \theon\) first aorist active participle of \egeir“\ (cf. \di' anastase“s Iˆsou\ in verse 3|). {Gave glory to him} (\doxan aut“i donta\). Second aorist active participle of \did“mi\ agreeing also with \theon\. See Peter's speech in strkjv@Acts:3:13| about God glorifying (\edoxasen\) Jesus and also the same idea by Peter in strkjv@Acts:2:33-36; strkjv@5:31|. {Songs:that your faith and hope might be in God} (\h“ste tˆn pistin hum“n kai elpida eis theon\). \H“ste\ with the infinitive (\einai\) and the accusative of general reference (\pistin kai elpida\) is used in the N.T. as in the _Koin‚_ for either purpose (Matthew:10:1|) or usually result (Mark:4:37|). Hence here result (so that is) is more probable than design.

rwp@1Peter:2:12 @{Seemly} (\kalˆn\). Predicate adjective with \anastrophˆn\, for which see strkjv@1:15,18|. The Gentiles are on the watch for slips in moral conduct by the Christians. {That} (\hina\). Final conjunction with \doxas“sin\ (they may glorify, first aorist active subjunctive of \doxaz“\, the purpose of the Christians about the Gentiles. {Wherein} (\en h“i\). "In what thing." {As evil-doers} (\h“s kakopoi“n\). As they did and do, old word (from \kakon\ and \poie“\, strkjv@John:18:30|), in N.T. only here and verse 14| in correct text. Heathen talk against us (\katalalousin\) gleefully. {By your good works} (\ek t“n kal“n erg“n\). "Out of (as a result of) your good (beautiful) deeds." {Which they behold} (\epopteuontes\). Present active participle of \epopteu“\, old verb (from, \epoptˆs\, overseer, spectator, strkjv@2Peter:1:16|), to be an overseer, to view carefully, in N.T. only here and strkjv@3:2|. {In the day of visitation} (\en hˆmerƒi episkopˆs\). From strkjv@Isaiah:10:33|. Cf. its use in strkjv@Luke:19:44|, which see for the word \episkopˆ\ (from \episkope“\, to inspect (Hebrews:12:15|). Clear echo here of strkjv@Matthew:5:16|.

rwp@1Peter:2:16 @{As free} (\h“s eleutheroi\). Note nominative again connected with \hupotagˆte\ in verse 13|, not with \phimoin\ in verse 14| (a parenthesis in fact). For this ethical sense of \eleutheros\ see strkjv@Galatians:4:26|. {And not using your freedom} (\kai mˆ echontes tˆn eleutherian\). "And not holding your liberty" (present active participle of \ech“\, with usual negative \mˆ\ with participle. {For a cloke of wickedness} (\h“s epikalumma tˆs kakias\). \Epikalumma\ (from \epikalupt“\ strkjv@Romans:4:7|) is a rare word (Aristotle, LXX) for veil, here only in N.T. and in figurative sense for pretext to do wickedness under, a thing, alas, that sometimes happens. {But as bondservants of God} (\all' h“s theou douloi\). Paul's proud title. There is no such thing as absolute freedom (personal freedom), for that is anarchy. Cf. strkjv@Romans:6:22| "enslaved to God."

rwp@1Peter:2:19 @{For this is acceptable} (\touto gar charis\). "For this thing (neuter singular \touto\, obedience to crooked masters) is grace" (\charis\ is feminine, here "thanks" as in strkjv@Romans:7:25|). "Acceptable" calls for \euprosdekton\ (2:5|), which is not the text here. {If a man endureth griefs} (\ei huopherei tis lupas\). Condition of first class with \ei\ and present active indicative of \hupopher“\, old verb, to bear up under, in N.T. only here, strkjv@1Corinthians:10:13; strkjv@2Timothy:3:11|. Note plural of \lupˆ\ (grief). {For conscience toward God} (\dia suneidˆsin theou\). Suffering is not a blessing in and of itself, but, if one's duty to God is involved (Acts:4:20|), then one can meet it with gladness of heart. \Theou\ (God) is objective genitive. For \suneidˆsis\ (conscience) see on ¯Acts:23:1; strkjv@1Corinthians:8:7|. It occurs again in strkjv@1Peter:3:16|. {Suffering wrongfully} (\pasch“n adik“s\). Present active participle of \pasch“\ and the common adverb \adik“s\, unjustly, here alone in N.T. This is the whole point, made clear already by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:5:10-12|, where Jesus has also "falsely" (\pseudomenoi\). See also strkjv@Luke:6:32-34|.

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

rwp@1Peter:3:19 @{In which also} (\en h“i kai\). That is, in spirit (relative referring to \pneumati\). But, a number of modern scholars have followed Griesbach's conjecture that the original text was either \N“e kai\ (Noah also), or \En“ch kai\ (Enoch also), or \en h“i kai En“ch\ (in which Enoch also) which an early scribe misunderstood or omitted \En“ch kai\ in copying (\homoioteleuton\). It is allowed in Stier and Theile's _Polyglott_. It is advocated by J. Cramer in 1891, by J. Rendel Harris in _The Expositor_ (1901), and _Sidelights on N.T. Research_ (p. 208), by Nestle in 1902, by Moffatt's New Translation of the New Testament. Windisch rejects it as inconsistent with the context. There is no manuscript for the conjecture, though it would relieve the difficulty greatly. Luther admits that he does not know what Peter means. Bigg has no doubt that the event recorded took place between Christ's death and his resurrection and holds that Peter is alluding to Christ's _Descensus ad Inferos_ in strkjv@Acts:2:27| (with which he compares strkjv@Matthew:27:52f.; strkjv@Luke:23:34; strkjv@Ephesians:4:9|). With this Windisch agrees. But Wohlenberg holds that Peter means that Christ in his preexistent state preached to those who rejected the preaching of Noah who are now in prison. Augustine held that Christ was in Noah when he preached. Bigg argues strongly that Christ during the time between his death and resurrection preached to those who once heard Noah (but are now in prison) and offered them another chance and not mere condemnation. If so, why did Jesus confine his preaching to this one group? Songs:the theories run on about this passage. One can only say that it is a slim hope for those who neglect or reject Christ in this life to gamble with a possible second chance after death which rests on very precarious exegesis of a most difficult passage in Peter's Epistle. Accepting the text as we have, what can we make of it? {He went and preached} (\poreutheis ekˆruxen\). First aorist passive (deponent) participle of \poreuomai\ and first aorist active indicative of \kˆruss“\, the verb commonly used of the preaching of Jesus. Naturally the words mean personal action by Christ "in spirit" as illustration of his "quickening" (verse 18|) whether done before his death or afterwards. It is interesting to observe that, just as the relative \en h“i\ here tells something suggested by the word \pneumati\ (in spirit) just before, so in verse 21| the relative \ho\ (which) tells another illustration of the words \di' hudatos\ (by water) just before. Peter jumps from the flood in Noah's time to baptism in Peter's time, just as he jumped backwards from Christ's time to Noah's time. He easily goes off at a word. What does he mean here by the story that illustrates Christ's quickening in spirit? {Unto the spirits in prison} (\tois en phulakˆi pneumasin\). The language is plain enough except that it does not make it clear whether Jesus did the preaching to spirits in prison at the time or to people whose spirits are now in prison, the point of doubt already discussed. The metaphorical use of \en phulakˆi\ can be illustrated by strkjv@2Peter:2:4; strkjv@Jude:1:6; strkjv@Revelation:20:7| (the final abode of the lost). See strkjv@Hebrews:12:23| for the use of \pneumata\ for disembodied spirits.

rwp@1Peter:4:3 @{Past} (\parelˆluth“s\). Perfect active participle of the compound verb \parerchomai\, old verb, to go by (beside) as in strkjv@Matthew:14:15| with \h“ra\ (hour). {May suffice} (\arketos\). No copula in the Greek, probably \estin\ (is) rather than \dunatai\ (can). Late and rare verbal adjective from \arke“\, to suffice, in the papyri several times, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:6:34; strkjv@10:25|, apparently referring to Christ's words in strkjv@Matthew:6:34| (possibly an axiom or proverb). {To have wrought} (\kateirgasthai\). Perfect middle infinitive of \katergazomai\, common compound (\kata, ergon\ work) as in strkjv@1Corinthians:5:3|. {The desire} (\to boulˆma\). Correct text, not \thelˆma\. Either means the thing desired, willed. Jews sometimes fell in with the ways of Gentiles (Romans:2:21-24; strkjv@3:9-18; strkjv@Ephesians:2:1-3|) as today some Christians copy the ways of the world. {And to have walked} (\peporeumenous\). Perfect middle participle of \poreuomai\ in the accusative plural of general reference with the infinitive \kateirgasthai\. Literally, "having walked or gone." {In lasciviousness} (\en aselgeiais\). All these sins are in the locative case with \en\. "In unbridled lustful excesses" (2Peter:2:7; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:21|). {Lusts} (\epithumiais\). Cf. strkjv@2:11; strkjv@4:2|. {Winebibbings} (\oinophlugiais\). Old compound (\oinos\, wine, \phlu“\, to bubble up), for drunkenness, here only in N.T. (also in strkjv@Deuteronomy:21:20|). {Revellings} (\komois\). Old word (from \keimai\, to lie down), rioting drinking parties, in N.T. here and strkjv@Galatians:5:21; strkjv@Romans:13:13|. {Carousings} (\potois\). Old word for drinking carousal (from \pin“\, to drink), here only in the N.T. In the light of these words it seems strange to find modern Christians justifying their "personal liberty" to drink and carouse, to say nothing of the prohibition law. The Greeks actually carried lust and drunkenness into their religious observances (Aphrodite, for instance). {Abominable idolatries} (\athemitois eid“lolatriais\). To the Christian all "idolatry," (\eid“lon, latreia\), worship of idols, is "abominable," not allowed (alpha privative and \themitos\, \themistos\ the old form, verbal of \themiz“\, to make lawful), but particularly those associated with drinking and licentiousness. The only other N.T. example of \athemitos\ is by Peter also (Acts:10:28|) and about the Mosaic law. That may be the idea here, for Jews often fell into idolatrous practices (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 274).

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

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

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

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:8 @{Even so, being affectionately desirous of you} (\hout“s omeiromenoi hum“n\). Clearly the correct text rather than \himeiromenoi\ from \himeir“\, old verb to long for. But the verb \homeiromai\ (Westcott and Hort _om_., smooth breathing) occurs nowhere else except MSS. in strkjv@Job:3:21; strkjv@Psalms:62:2| (Symmachus) and the Lycaonian sepulchral inscription (4th cent. A.D.) about the sorrowing parents \homeiromenoi peri paidos\, {greatly desiring their son} (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Moulton suggests that it comes from a root \smer\, remember, and that \o-\ is a derelict preposition \o\ like \o-duromai, o-kell“, “-keanos\. Wohlenberg (Zahn, _Kommentar_) calls the word "a term of endearment," "derived from the language of the nursery" (Milligan). {We were well pleased} (\ˆudokoumen\). Imperfect active of \eudoke“\, common verb in later Greek and in N.T. (see on strkjv@Matthew:3:17|), picturing Paul's idea of their attitude while in Thessalonica. Paul often has it with the infinitive as here. {To impart} (\metadounai\). Second aorist active infinitive of \metadid“mi\, old verb to share with (see on strkjv@Luke:3:11|). Possible zeugma with {souls} (\psuchas\), though Lightfoot renders "lives." Paul and his associates held nothing back. {Because ye were become very dear to us} (\dioti agapˆtoi hˆmin egenˆthˆte\). Note \dioti\ (double cause, \dia, hoti\, for that), use of \ginomai\ again for become, and dative \hˆmin\ with verbal \agapˆtoi\, beloved and so dear. A beautiful picture of the growth of Paul's affection for them as should be true with every pastor.

rwp@1Thessalonians:3:8 @{If ye stand fast} (\ean humeis stˆkete\). Condition of first class, \ean\ and present active indicative (correct text, not \stˆkˆte\ subj.) of \stˆk“\, late form from perfect \hestˆka\ of \histˆmi\, to place.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:6 @{That no man transgress} (\to mˆ huperbainein\). Old verb to go beyond. Final use of \to\ (accusative of general reference) and the infinitive (negative \mˆ\), parallel to \apechesthai\ and \eidenai ktasthai\ above. {And wrong his brother} (\kai pleonektein ton adelphon autou\). To take more, to overreach, to take advantage of, to defraud. {In the matter} (\en t“i pragmati\). The delicacy of Paul makes him refrain from plainer terms and the context makes it clear enough as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:11| (\t“i pragmati\). {An avenger} (\ekdikos\). Regular term in the papyri for legal avenger. Modern men and women need to remember that God is the avenger for sexual wrongs both in this life and the next.

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

rwp@1Timothy:5:5 @{Desolate} (\memon“menˆ\). Perfect passive participle of \mono“\ (from \monos\), "left alone," old verb, here alone in N.T. Without husband, children, or other close kin. {Hath her hope set on God} (\ˆlpiken epi theon\). Perfect active indicative of \elpiz“\, "hath placed her hope (and keeps it) on God." Text doubtful whether God (\theon\) or Lord (\Kurion\). {Continues} (\prosmenei\). See on ¯1:3|. With dative case here. {Night and day} (\nuktos kai hˆmeras\). "By night and by day" (genitive, not accusative). Paul does not say that she should pray "all night and day."

rwp@1Timothy:5:19 @{Against an elder} (\kata presbuterou\). In the official sense of verses 17f|. {Receive not} (\mˆ paradechou\). Present middle imperative with \mˆ\ (prohibition) of \paradechomai\, to receive, to entertain. Old verb. See strkjv@Acts:22:18|. {Accusation} (\katˆgorian\). Old word (from \katˆgoros\). In N.T. only here, strkjv@Titus:1:6; strkjv@John:18:29| in critical text. {Except} (\ektos ei mˆ\). For this double construction see strkjv@1Corinthians:14:5; strkjv@15:2|. {At the mouth of} (\epi\). Idiomatic use of \epi\ (upon the basis of) as in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:1|.

rwp@1Timothy:5:22 @{Lay hands hastily} (\cheiras tache“s epitithei\). Present active imperative of \epitithˆmi\ in the sense of approval (ordination) as in strkjv@Acts:6:6; strkjv@13:3|. But it is not clear whether it is the case of ministers just ordained as in strkjv@4:14| (\epithesis\), or of warning against hasty ordination of untried men, or the recognition and restoration of deposed ministers (verse 20|) as suits the context. The prohibition suits either situation, or both. {Be partakers of other men's sins} (\koin“nei hamartiais allotriais\). Present active imperative of \koin“ne“\ (from \koin“nos\, partner) with \mˆ\ in prohibition with associative instrumental case as in strkjv@2John:1:11; strkjv@Romans:12:13|. On \allotrios\ (belonging to another) see strkjv@Romans:14:4|. {Keep thyself pure} (\seauton hagnon tˆrei\). "Keep on keeping thyself pure." Present active imperative of \tˆre“\.

rwp@1Timothy:6:20 @{Guard that which is committed unto thee} (\tˆn parathˆkˆn phulaxon\). "Keep (aorist of urgency) the deposit." \Parathˆkˆn\ (from \paratithˆmi\, to place beside as a deposit, strkjv@2Timothy:2:2|), a banking figure, common in the papyri in this sense for the Attic \parakatathˆkˆ\ (Textus Receptus here, strkjv@2Timothy:1:12,14|). See substantive also in strkjv@2Timothy:1:12,14|. {Turning away from} (\ektrepomenos\). Present middle participle of \ektrep“\, for which see strkjv@1:6; strkjv@5:15|. {Babblings} (\kenoph“nias\). From \kenoph“nos\, uttering emptiness. Late and rare compound, in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Timothy:2:16|. {Oppositions} (\antitheseis\). Old word (\anti, thesis\), antithesis, only here in N.T. {Of the knowledge which is falsely so called} (\tˆs pseud“numou gn“se“s\). "Of the falsely named knowledge." Old word (\pseudˆs, onoma\). Our "pseudonymous." Only here in N.T.

rwp@2Corinthians:2:3 @{I wrote this very thing} (\egrapsa touto auto\). Is this (and \egrapsa\ in verses 4,9,12|) the epistolary aorist referring to the present letter? In itself that is possible as the epistolary aorist does occur in the N.T. as in strkjv@8:18; strkjv@9:3| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 854f.). If not epistolary aorist as seems improbable from the context and from strkjv@7:8-12|, to what Epistle does he refer? To strkjv@1Corinthians:5| or to a lost letter? It is possible, of course, that, when Paul decided not to come to Corinth, he sent a letter. The language that follows in verses 3,4; strkjv@7:8-12| can hardly apply to I Corinthians. {Should have sorrow} (\lupˆn sch“\). Second aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of \ech“\, should get sorrow, after \hina mˆ\ negative final particles. {From them of whom} (\aph' h“n\). Antecedent omitted, \apo tout“n aph' h“n\ (from those from whom). {I ought} (\edei me\). Imperfect for unrealized present obligation as often and like English. {Having confidence} (\pepoith“s\). Second perfect active participle of \peith“\ (1:9|).

rwp@2Corinthians:7:12 @{But that your earnest care for us might be made manifest} (\all' heineken tou phaner“thˆnai tˆn spoudˆn hum“n tˆn huper hˆm“n\). Songs:the correct text, not "our care for you." Easy to interchange Greek \hum“n\ (your) and \hˆm“n\ (our). Usual construction with preposition \heneken\ and genitive of articular infinitive with accusative of general reference.

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

rwp@2Corinthians:12:13 @{Wherein ye were made inferior} (\ho hˆss“thˆte\). First aorist passive indicative of \hˆssoomai\, the text of Aleph B D instead of the usual \hˆttˆthˆte\ from the common \hˆttaomai\ to be inferior or less from the comparative \hˆtt“n\. See \hˆss“n\ in verse 15|. \Ho\ is the neuter accusative with the passive verb (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 479). {Forgive me this wrong} (\charisasthe moi tˆn adikian tautˆn\). Consummate irony to the stingy element in this church (cf. strkjv@11:9|).

rwp@2John:1:8 @{Look to yourselves} (\blepete heautous\). Imperative active with reflexive pronoun as in strkjv@Mark:13:9|. The verb often used absolutely (Phillipians:3:2|) like our "look out." {That ye lose not} (\hina mˆ apolesˆte\). Negative purpose with \hina mˆ\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \apollumi\. This is the correct text (B), not \apoles“men\ (we). Likewise \apolabˆte\ (that ye receive), not \apolab“men\ (we). {Which we have wrought} (\ha ˆrgasametha\). This is also correct, first aorist middle indicative of \ergazomai\, to work (John:6:27f.|). John does not wish his labour to be lost. See strkjv@Romans:1:27| for this use of \apolamban“\ for receiving. See strkjv@John:4:36| for \misthos\ in the harvest. The "full reward" (\misthon plˆrˆ\) is the full day's wages which each worker will get (1Corinthians:3:8|). John is anxious that they shall hold on with him to the finish.

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

rwp@2Peter:2:18 @{Great swelling words} (\huperogka\). Old compound adjective (\huper\ and \ogkos\, a swelling, swelling above and beyond), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Jude:1:16|. {Of vanity} (\mataiotˆtos\). Late and rare word (from \mataios\, empty, vain), often in LXX, in N.T. here, strkjv@Romans:8:20; strkjv@Ephesians:4:17|. {By lasciviousness} (\aselgeiais\). Instrumental plural, "by lascivious acts." Note asyndeton as in strkjv@1:9,17|. {Those who are just escaping} (\tous olig“s apopheugontas\). Songs:A B read \olig“s\ (slightly, a little), while Aleph C K L P read \ont“s\ (actually). \Olig“s\ late and rare, only here in N.T. Songs:again the Textus Receptus has \apophugontas\ (second aorist active participle, clean escaped) while the correct text is the present active \apopheugontas\. {From them that live in error} (\tous en planˆi anastrephomenous\). Accusative case after \apopheugontas\ (escaping from) according to regular idiom. Peter often uses \anastreph“\ and \anastrophˆ\.

rwp@2Peter:3:10 @{The day of the Lord} (\hˆmera kuriou\). Songs:Peter in strkjv@Acts:2:20| (from strkjv@Joel:3:4|) and Paul in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:2,4; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:5:5|; and day of Christ in strkjv@Phillipians:2:16| and day of God in strkjv@2:12| and day of judgment already in strkjv@2:9; strkjv@3:7|. This great day will certainly come (\hˆxei\). Future active of \hˆk“\, old verb, to arrive, but in God's own time. {As a thief} (\h“s kleptˆs\). That is suddenly, without notice. This very metaphor Jesus had used (Luke:12:39; strkjv@Matthew:24:43|) and Paul after him (1Thessalonians:5:2|) and John will quote it also (Revelation:3:3; strkjv@16:15|). {In the which} (\en hˆi\). The day when the Lord comes. {Shall pass away} (\pareleusontai\). Future middle of \parerchomai\, old verb, to pass by. {With a great noise} (\roizˆdon\). Late and rare adverb (from \roize“, roizos\)-- Lycophron, Nicander, here only in N.T., onomatopoetic, whizzing sound of rapid motion through the air like the flight of a bird, thunder, fierce flame. {The elements} (\ta stoicheia\). Old word (from \stoichos\ a row), in Plato in this sense, in other senses also in N.T. as the alphabet, ceremonial regulations (Hebrews:5:12; strkjv@Galatians:4:3; strkjv@5:1; strkjv@Colossians:2:8|). {Shall be dissolved} (\luthˆsetai\). Future passive of \lu“\, to loosen, singular because \stoicheia\ is neuter plural. {With fervent heat} (\kausoumena\). Present passive participle of \kauso“\, late verb (from \kausos\, usually medical term for fever) and nearly always employed for fever temperature. Mayor suggests a conflagration from internal heat. Bigg thinks it merely a vernacular (Doric) future for \kausomena\ (from \kai“\, to burn). {Shall be burned up} (\katakaˆsetai\). Repeated in verse 12|. Second future passive of the compound verb \katakai“\, to burn down (up), according to A L. But Aleph B K P read \heurethˆsetai\ (future passive of \heurisk“\, to find) "shall be found." There are various other readings here. The text seems corrupt.

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

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:13 @See strkjv@1:3| for same beginning. {Beloved of the Lord} (\ˆgapˆmenoi hupo kuriou\). Perfect passive participle of \agapa“\ with \hupo\ and the ablative as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:4|, only here \kuriou\ instead of \theou\, the Lord Jesus rather than God the Father. {Because that God chose you} (\hoti heilato humas ho theos\). First aorist middle indicative of \haire“\, to take, old verb, but uncompounded only in N.T. here, strkjv@Phillipians:1:22; strkjv@Hebrews:11:25|, and here only in sense of {choose}, that being usually \exaireomai\ or \prooriz“\. {From the beginning} (\ap' archˆs\). Probably the correct text (Aleph D L) and not \aparchˆn\ (first fruits, B G P), though here alone in Paul's writings and a hard reading, the eternal choice or purpose of God (1Corinthians:2:7; strkjv@Ephesians:1:4; strkjv@2Timothy:1:9|), while \aparchˆn\ is a favourite idea with Paul (1Corinthians:15:20,23; strkjv@16:15; strkjv@Romans:8:23; strkjv@11:16; strkjv@16:5|). {Unto salvation} (\eis s“tˆrian\). The ultimate goal, final salvation. {In sanctification of the Spirit} (\en hagiasm“i pneumatos\). Subjective genitive \pneumatos\, sanctification wrought by the Holy Spirit. {And belief of the truth} (\kai pistei alˆtheias\). Objective genitive \alˆtheias\, belief in the truth.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:6 @{Now we command you} (\paraggellomen de humin\). Paul puts into practice the confidence expressed on their obedience to his commands in verse 4|. {In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ} (\en onomati tou kuriou Iˆsou Christou\). {Name} (\onoma\) here for authority of Jesus Christ with which compare {through the Lord Jesus} (\dia tou kuriou Iˆsou\) in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:2|. For a full discussion of the phrase see the monograph of W. Heitmuller, _Im Namen Jesu_. Paul wishes his readers to realize the responsibility on them for their obedience to his command. {That ye withdraw yourselves} (\stellesthai humas\). Present middle (direct) infinitive of \stell“\, old verb to place, arrange, make compact or shorten as sails, to move oneself from or to withdraw oneself from (with \apo\ and the ablative). In strkjv@2Corinthians:8:20| the middle voice (\stellomenoi\) means taking care. {From every brother that walketh disorderly} (\apo pantos adelphou atakt“s peripatountos\). He calls him "brother" still. The adverb \atakt“s\ is common in Plato and is here and verse 11| alone in the N.T., though the adjective \ataktos\, equally common in Plato we had in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:14| which see. Military term, out of ranks. {And not after the tradition} (\kai mˆ kata tˆn paradosin\). See on ¯2:15| for \paradosin\. {Which they received of us} (\hˆn parelabosan par hˆm“n\). Westcott and Hort put this form of the verb (second aorist indicative third person plural of \paralamban“\, the \-osan\ form instead of \-on\, with slight support from the papyri, but in the LXX and the Boeotian dialect, Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 335f.) in the margin with \parelabete\ (ye received) in the text. There are five different readings of the verb here, the others being \parelabon, parelabe, elabosan\.

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

rwp@2Timothy:3:8 @{Like as} (\hon tropon\). "In which manner." Adverbial accusative and incorporation of the antecedent \tropon\ into the relative clause. {Jannes and Jambres} (\Iannˆs kai Iambrˆs\). Traditional names of the magicians who withstood Moses (_Targum of Jonathan_ on strkjv@Exodus:7:11|). {Withstood} (\antestˆsan\). Second aorist active (intransitive) of \anthistˆmi\, to stand against, "they stood against" (with dative \M“usei\). Same word used of Elymas in strkjv@Acts:13:8| and repeated here \anthistantai\ (present middle indicative). Paul here pictures the seducers of the \gunaikaria\ above. {Corrupted in mind} (\katephtharmenoi ton noun\). Perfect passive participle of \kataphtheir“\, old compound, in N.T. only here in critical text. See strkjv@2Corinthians:11:3; strkjv@1Timothy:6:5| for \diaphtheir“\. The accusative \noun\ is retained in the passive. {Reprobate} (\adokimoi\). See strkjv@1Corinthians:9:27; strkjv@Titus:1:16|. They had renounced their trust (\pistin\) in Christ.

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

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

rwp@Acts:1:2 @{Until the day in which} (\achri hˆs hˆmeras\). Incorporation of the antecedent into the relative clause and the change of case \hˆi\ (locative) to \hˆs\ (genitive). {Was received up} (\anelˆmpthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \analamban“\. Common verb to lift anything up (Acts:10:16|) or person as Paul (Acts:20:13|). Several times of the Ascension of Jesus to heaven (Mark:16:19; strkjv@Acts:1:2,11,22; strkjv@1Timothy:3:16|) with or without "into heaven" (\eis ton ouranon\). This same verb is used of Elijah's translation to heaven in the LXX (2Kings:2:11|). The same idea, though not this word, is in strkjv@Luke:24:51|. See strkjv@Luke:9:51| for \analˆmpsis\ of the Ascension. {Had given commandment} (\enteilamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \entell“\ (from \en\ and \tell“\, to accomplish), usually in the middle, old verb, to enjoin. This special commandment refers directly to what we call the commission given the apostles before Christ ascended on high (John:20:21-23; strkjv@Matthew:28:16-20; strkjv@Mark:16:15-18; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:6; strkjv@Luke:24:44-49|). He had given commands to them when they were first chosen and when they were sent out on the tour of Galilee, but the immediate reference is as above. {Through the Holy Spirit} (\dia pneumatos hagiou\). In his human life Jesus was under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This applies to the choice of the apostles (Luke:6:13|) and to these special commands before the Ascension. {Whom he had chosen} (\hous exelexato\). Aorist middle indicative, not past perfect. The same verb (\eklexamenos\) was used by Luke in describing the choice of the twelve by Jesus (Luke:6:13|). But the aorist does not stand "for" our English pluperfect as Hackett says. That is explaining Greek by English. The Western text here adds: "And ordered to proclaim the gospel."

rwp@Acts:1:8 @{Power} (\dunamin\). Not the "power" about which they were concerned (political organization and equipments for empire on the order of Rome). Their very question was ample proof of their need of this new "power" (\dunamin\), to enable them (from \dunamai\, to be able), to grapple with the spread of the gospel in the world. {When the Holy Ghost is come upon you} (\epelthontos tou hagiou pneumatos eph' humas\). Genitive absolute and is simultaneous in time with the preceding verb "shall receive" (\lˆmpsesthe\). The Holy Spirit will give them the "power" as he comes upon them. This is the baptism of the Holy Spirit referred to in verse 5|. {My witnesses} (\mou martures\). Correct text. "Royal words of magnificent and Divine assurance" (Furneaux). Our word martyrs is this word \martures\. In strkjv@Luke:24:48| Jesus calls the disciples "witnesses to these things" (\martures tout“n\, objective genitive). In strkjv@Acts:1:22| an apostle has to be a "witness to the Resurrection" of Christ and in strkjv@10:39| to the life and work of Jesus. Hence there could be no "apostles" in this sense after the first generation. But here the apostles are called "my witnesses." "His by a direct personal relationship" (Knowling). The expanding sphere of their witness when the Holy Spirit comes upon them is "unto the uttermost part of the earth" (\he“s eschatou tˆs gˆs\). Once they had been commanded to avoid Samaria (Matthew:10:5|), but now it is included in the world program as already outlined on the mountain in Galilee (Matthew:28:19; strkjv@Mark:16:15|). Jesus is on Olivet as he points to Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, the uttermost (last, \eschatou\) part of the earth. The program still beckons us on to world conquest for Christ. "The Acts themselves form the best commentary on these words, and the words themselves might be given as the best summary of the Acts" (Page). The events follow this outline (Jerusalem till the end of chapter 7, with the martyrdom of Stephen, the scattering of the saints through Judea and Samaria in chapter 8, the conversion of Saul, chapter 9, the spread of the gospel to Romans in Caesarea by Peter (chapter 10), to Greeks in Antioch (chapter 11), finally Paul's world tours and arrest and arrival in Rome (chapters 11 to 28).

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

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

rwp@Acts:2:27 @{In Hades} (\eis Hƒidˆn\). Hades is the unseen world, Hebrew Sheol, but here it is viewed as death itself "considered as a rapacious destroyer" (Hackett). It does not mean the place of punishment, though both heaven and the place of torment are in Hades (Luke:16:23|). "Death and Hades are strictly parallel terms: he who is dead is in Hades" (Page). The use of \eis\ here=\en\ is common enough. The Textus Receptus here reads \eis Hƒidou\ (genitive case) like the Attic idiom with \domon\ (abode) understood. "Hades" in English is not translation, but transliteration. The phrase in the Apostles' Creed, "descended into hell" is from this passage in Acts (Hades, not Gehenna). The English word "hell" is Anglo-Saxon from \helan\, to hide, and was used in the Authorized Version to translate both Hades as here and Gehenna as in strkjv@Matthew:5:22|. {Thy Holy One} (\ton hosion sou\). Peter applies these words to the Messiah. {Corruption} (\diaphthoran\). The word can mean destruction or putrefaction from \diaphtheir“\, old word, but in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:13:34-37|. The Hebrew word in strkjv@Psalms:16| can mean also the pit or the deep.

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:3:18 @{Foreshewed} (\prokatˆggeilen\). First aorist active indicative of \prokataggell“\, late compound to announce fully beforehand. Only twice in the N.T. in the critical text (Acts:3:18; strkjv@7:52|). {That his Christ should suffer} (\pathein ton Christon autou\). Accusative of general reference with the aorist active infinitive (\pathein\ of \pasch“\) in indirect discourse (predictive purpose of God). Their crime, though real, was carrying out God's purpose (2:23; strkjv@John:3:16|). See the same idea in strkjv@Acts:17:3; strkjv@26:23|. This "immense paradox" (Page) was a stumbling block to these Jews as it is yet (1Corinthians:1:23|). Peter discusses the sufferings of Christ in strkjv@1Peter:4:13; strkjv@5:1|.

rwp@Acts:3:20 @{And that he may send the Christ who hath been appointed for you, even Jesus} (\kai aposteilˆi ton prokecheirismenon humin Christon Iˆsoun\). First aorist active subjunctive with \hop“s an\ as in strkjv@15:17| and strkjv@Luke:2:35|. There is little real difference in idea between \hop“s an\ and \hina an\. There is a conditional element in all purpose clauses. The reference is naturally to the second coming of Christ as verse 21| shows. Knowling admits "that there is a spiritual presence of the enthroned Jesus which believers enjoy as a foretaste of the visible and glorious Presence of the \Parousia\." Jesus did promise to be with the disciples all the days (Matthew:28:20|), and certainly repentance with accompanying seasons of refreshing help get the world ready for the coming of the King. The word \prokecheirismenon\ (perfect passive participle of \procheiriz“\, from \procheiros\, at hand, to take into one's hands, to choose) is the correct text here, not \prokekˆrugmenon\. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:22:14; strkjv@26:16|. It is not "Jesus Christ" here nor "Christ Jesus," but "the Messiah, Jesus," identifying Jesus with the Messiah. See the Second Epiphany of Jesus foretold also in strkjv@1Timothy:6:15| and the First Epiphany described in strkjv@1Peter:1:20|.

rwp@Acts:4:25 @{By the mouth of our father David} (\tou patros hˆm“n dia pneumatos hagiou stomatos Daueid\). From strkjv@Psalms:2:1f|. here ascribed to David. Baumgarten suggests that the whole company sang the second Psalm and then Peter applied it to this emergency. The Greek MSS. do not have \dia\ (by) here before \stomatos\, but only \dia\ before \pneumatos hagiou\ (the Holy Spirit). Hort calls this a "primitive error" perhaps due to an early scribe who omitted this second \dia\ so close to the first \dia\ (Robertson, _Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the N.T._, p. 238). A small list of such primitive errors is there given as suggested by Dr. Hort. {Why} (\hina ti\). This Greek idiom calls for \genˆtai\ (second aorist middle subjunctive), {That what may happen}. {The Gentiles} (\ethnˆ\). Songs:always in LXX, while \laoi\ (peoples) can include Jews. {Did rage} (\ephruaxan\). First aorist active indicative of \phruass“\, late word, to neigh like a horse, to prance or stamp the ground, to put on lofty airs. Only here in the N.T. in this quotation from strkjv@Psalms:2:1|. {Imagine} (\emeletˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \meleta“\. Old verb from \meletˆ\ (care), to practise, to caution, as orators and rhetoricians. Only here in the N.T. in this quotation.

rwp@Acts:4:36 @{Barnabas} (\Barnabas\). His name was Joseph (correct text, and not Jesus) and he is mentioned as one illustration of those in verse 34| who selling brought the money. The apostles gave him the nickname Barnabas by which later he was known because of this noble deed. This fact argues that all did not actually sell, but were ready to do so if needed. Possibly Joseph had a larger estate than some others also. The meaning of the nickname is given by Luke as "son of consolation or exhortation" (\huios paraklˆse“s\). Doubtless his gifts as a preacher lay along this same line. Rackham thinks that the apostles gave him this name when he was recognized as a prophet. In strkjv@Acts:11:23| the very word \parekalei\ (exhorted) is used of Barnabas up at Antioch. He is the type of preacher described by Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:3|. Encouragement is the chief idea in \paraklˆsis\ though exhortation, comfort, consolation are used to render it (Acts:9:31; strkjv@13:15; strkjv@15:31|). See also strkjv@16:9; strkjv@20:12|. It is not necessary to think that the apostles coined the name Barnabas for Joseph which originally may have come from \Barnebous\ (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 308-10), son of Nebo, or even the Hebrew _Bar Nebi_ (son of a prophet). But, whatever the origin, the popular use is given by Luke. He was even called apostle along with Paul (Acts:14:14|) in the broad sense of that word.

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:5:36 @{Theudas} (\Theudas\). Luke represents Gamaliel here about A.D. 35 as speaking of a man who led a revolt before that of Judas the Galilean in connection with the enrolment under Quirinius (Cyrenius) in A.D. 6. But Josephus (_Ant_. XX. 5, 1) tells of a Theudas who led a similar insurrection in the reign of Claudius about A.D. 44 or 45. Josephus (_Ant_. XVIII. 1, 6; XX. 5, 2; _War_ ii. 8, 1 and 17, 8) also describes Judas the Galilean or Gaulonite and places him about A.D. 6. It is not certain that Josephus and Luke (Gamaliel) refer to the same Theudas as the name is an abbreviation of Theodosus, a common name. "Josephus gives an account of four men named Simon who followed each other within forty years, and of three named Judas within ten years, who were all instigators of rebellion" (Hackett). If the same Theudas is meant, then either Josephus or Luke (Gamaliel) has the wrong historical order. In that case one will credit Luke or Josephus according to his estimate of the two as reliable historians. {To be somebody} (\einai tina\). Indirect assertion with the infinitive and the accusative of general reference (\heauton\) and \tina\, predicate accusative. \Tina\ could be "anybody" or "somebody" according to context, clearly "somebody" of importance here. {Joined themselves} (\proseklithˆ\). Correct text and not \prosekollˆthˆ\ (Textus Receptus). First aorist passive indicative of \prosklin“\, old verb to lean towards, to incline towards. Here only in the N.T. {Was slain} (\anˆirethˆ\). First aorist passive of \anaire“\ (cf. verse 33|). {Obeyed} (\epeithonto\). Imperfect middle, kept on obeying. {Were dispersed} (\dieluthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative (effective aorist) of \dialu“\, old verb to dissolve, to go to pieces. Here only in the N.T.

rwp@Acts:6:3 @{Of good report} (\marturoumenous\). Present passive participle of \marture“\, to bear witness to. Men with a good reputation as well as with spiritual gifts (the Holy Spirit and wisdom). {We may appoint} (\katastˆsomen\). Future active indicative of \kathistˆmi\, we shall appoint. The action of the apostles follows the choice by the church, but it is promised as a certainty, not as a possibility. The Textus Receptus has a first aorist active subjunctive here (\katastˆs“men\).

rwp@Acts:7:16 @{They were carried over unto Shechem} (\metetethˆsan eis Suchem\). First aorist passive of \metatithˆmi\, only here in the N.T. in this sense of changing places. Jacob was buried in the cave of Machpelah (Genesis:50:13|). The O.T. does not say where the sons of Jacob were buried save that Joseph was buried in Shechem (Joshua:24:32|). Possibly only "our fathers" without Jacob is the subject of "were carried." {Which Abraham bought} (\h“i “nˆsato Abraam\). Hackett is sure that our present text is wrong. Hort notes some sixty "primitive errors" in the critical text of the N.T. It is possible that this is also one. If "Jacob" is substituted for "Abraham," the matter is cleared up. "It is quite as likely, judging _a priori_, that the word producing the error escaped from some early copyist as that so glaring an error was committed by Stephen" (Hackett). At any rate Abraham bought a burying-place, the cave of Machpelah, from Ephron the Hittite at Hebron (Genesis:23:16|), while Jacob bought a field from the sons of Hamor at Shechem (Genesis:33:19; strkjv@Joshua:24:32|). Abraham had built an altar at Shechem when he entered Canaan (Genesis:12:6f.|). It is possible, of course, that Abraham also bought the ground on which the altar stood. {In Shechem} (\en Suchem\). This is the reading of Aleph B C instead of the Textus Receptus \tou Suchem\ which makes it "Hamar the father of Sichem." "In Shechem" is the true reading.

rwp@Acts:7:35 @{This Moses} (\Touton ton M“usˆn\). Rhetorical repetition follows this description of Moses (five times, anaphora, besides the use here, six cases of \houtos\ here about Moses: verse 35| twice, 36,37,38,40|). Clearly Stephen means to draw a parallel between Moses and Jesus. They in Egypt {denied} (\ˆrnˆsanto\) Moses as now you the Jews denied (\ˆrnˆsasthe\, strkjv@3:13|) Jesus. Those in Egypt scouted Moses as "ruler and judge" (verses 27,35|, \archonta kai dikastˆn\) and God "hath sent" (\apestalken\, perfect active indicative, state of completion) Moses "both a ruler and a deliverer" (\archonta kai lutr“tˆn\) as Jesus was to be (Luke:1:68; strkjv@2:38; strkjv@Hebrews:9:12; strkjv@Titus:2:14|). "Ransomer" or "Redeemer" (\lutr“tˆs\) is not found elsewhere, \lutron\ (ransom), \lutro“\, to ransom, and \lutr“sis\, ransoming or redemption, are found often. In strkjv@Acts:5:31| Christ is termed "Prince and Saviour." {With the hand} (\sun cheiri\). Songs:the correct text. The Pharisees had accused Stephen of blaspheming "against Moses and God" (6:11|). Stephen here answers that slander by showing how Moses led the people out of Egypt in co-operation (\sun\) with the hand of the Angel of Jehovah.

rwp@Acts:7:48 @{Howbeit} (\all'\). By contrast with what Solomon did and David planned. Note emphatic position of "not" (\all' ouch\), "But not does the Most High dwell." The presence of the Most High is not confined in any building, even one so splendid as Solomon's Temple as Solomon himself foresaw and acknowledged in his prayer (1Kings:8:27; strkjv@2Chronicles:6:18|). {In houses made with hands} (\en cheiropoiˆtois\). No word here for "houses" or "temples" in correct text (\naois\ temples in Textus Receptus). Literally, "In things made with hands" (\cheir\, hand, \poiˆtos\, verbal adjective of \poie“\). It occurs in strkjv@Mark:14:58| of the temple and of the sanctuary of Moab (Isaiah:16:12|). It occurs also in strkjv@Acts:7:24; strkjv@Hebrews:9:11,24; strkjv@Ephesians:2:11|. Common in the old Greek. {The prophet} (\ho prophˆtˆs\). strkjv@Isaiah:66:1|. Isaiah taught plainly that heaven is God's throne.

rwp@Acts:8:7 @{For many} (\polloi gar\). Songs:the correct text of the best MSS., but there is an anacoluthon as this nominative has no verb with it. It was "the unclean spirits" that "came out" (\exˆrchonto\, imperfect middle). The margin of the Revised Version has it "came forth," as if they came out of a house, a rather strained translation. The loud outcry is like the demons cast out by Jesus (Mark:3:11; strkjv@Luke:4:41|). {Palsied} (\paralelumenoi\, perfect passive participle). Luke's usual word, loosened at the side, with no power over the muscles. Furneaux notes that "the servant was reaping where the Master had sown. Samaria was the mission field white for the harvest (John:4:35|)." The Samaritans who had been bewitched by Simon are now carried away by Philip.

rwp@Acts:8:28 @{Was reading} (\anegin“sken\). Imperfect active descriptive, not periphrastic like the two preceding verbs (was returning and sitting). He was reading aloud as Philip "heard him reading" (\ˆkousen auton anagin“skontos\), a common practice among orientals. He had probably purchased this roll of Isaiah in Jerusalem and was reading the LXX Greek text. See imperfect again in verse 32|.

rwp@Acts:8:35 @{Beginning from this scripture} (\arxamenos apo tˆs graphˆs tautˆs\). As a text. Philip needed no better opening than this Messianic passage in Isaiah. {Preached unto him Jesus} (\euˆggelisato aut“i ton Iˆsoun\). Philip had no doubt about the Messianic meaning and he knew that Jesus was the Messiah. There are scholars who do not find Jesus in the Old Testament at all, but Jesus himself did (Luke:24:27|) as Philip does here. Scientific study of the Old Testament (historical research) misses its mark if it fails to find Christ the Center of all history. The knowledge of the individual prophet is not always clear, but after events throw a backward light that illumines it all (1Peter:1:11f.; strkjv@2Peter:1:19-21|).

rwp@Acts:9:6 @The best MSS. do not have "trembling and astonished," and "What wilt thou have me to do, Lord?" The Textus Receptus put these words in here without the authority of a Greek codex. See strkjv@22:10| above for the genuine text. {It shall be told thee} (\lalˆthˆsetai\). Future passive indicative of \lale“\. It is hardly likely that Luke records all that Jesus said to Saul, but more was to come on his arrival in Damascus. Saul had received all that he could bear just now (John:16:12|). {What} (\hoti\). Rare in _Koin‚_ use of this indefinite neuter relative in an indirect question, the only example in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 731). Human agents like Ananias can finish what Jesus by supernatural manifestation has here begun in Saul.

rwp@Acts:9:20 @{He proclaimed Jesus} (\ekˆrussen ton Iˆsoun\). Imperfect indicative, inchoative, began to preach. Jesus, not Christ, is the correct text here. He did this first preaching in the Jewish synagogues, a habit of his life when possible, and following the example of Jesus. {That he is the Son of God} (\hoti houtos estin ho huios tou theou\). This is Paul's platform as a Christian preacher, one that he always occupied to the very end. It was a complete reversal of his previous position. Jesus had turned him completely around. It is the conclusion that Saul now drew from the vision of the Risen Christ and the message through Ananias. By "the Son of God" Saul means the Messiah of promise and hope, the Messianic sense of the Baptist (John:1:34|) and of Nathanael (John:1:49|) for Saul is now proclaiming his faith in Jesus in the very synagogues where he had meant to arrest those who professed their faith in him. Peter laid emphasis on the Resurrection of Jesus as a glorious fact and proclaimed Jesus as Lord and Christ. Paul boldly calls Jesus the Son of God with full acknowledgment of his deity from the very start. Thomas had come to this place slowly (John:20:28|). Saul begins with this truth and never leaves it. With this faith he can shake the world. There is no power in any other preaching.

rwp@Acts:10:19 @{Thought} (\dienthumoumenou\). Genitive absolute of present middle participle of \dienthumeomai\, a double compound (\dia\ and \en-\ with \thumos\) and another \hapax legomenon\ save in ecclesiastical writers, though \enthumeomai\ is common enough and Textus Receptus so reads here. Peter was revolving in his mind, through and through, in and out, to find the meaning of the strange vision.

rwp@Acts:10:37 @{Ye know} (\humeis oidate\). Peter reminds his Gentile audience that the main facts concerning Jesus and the gospel were known to them. Note emphatic expression of \humeis\ (you). {Beginning} (\arxamenos\). The Textus Receptus has \arxamenon\ (accusative), but the nominative is given by Aleph A B C D E H and is certainly correct. But it makes a decided anacoluthon. The accusative would agree with \rhˆma\ used in the sense of message or story as told by the disciples. The nominative does not agree with anything in the sentence. The same phrase occurs in strkjv@Luke:23:5|. Here is this aorist middle participle almost used like an adverb. See a similar loose use of \arxamenos\ in the same sense by Peter in strkjv@Acts:1:22|. The baptism of John is given as the _terminus a quo_. The story began with a skip to Galilee after the baptism just like the Gospel of Mark. This first message of Peter to the Gentiles (10:37-44|) corresponds in broad outline with Mark's Gospel. Mark heard Peter preach many times and evidently planned his Gospel (the Roman Gospel) on this same model. There is in it nothing about the birth and childhood of Jesus nor about the intervening ministry supplied by John's Gospel for the period (a year) between the baptism and the Galilean Ministry. Peter here presents an objective statement of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus with proof from the Scriptures that he is the Messiah. It is a skilful presentation.

rwp@Acts:10:39 @{And we are witnesses} (\kai hˆmeis martures\). Compare "ye yourselves know" (verse 37|). Peter thus appeals to what the audience know and to what the disciples know. He made the same claim about personal witnesses of the Resurrection of Jesus at Pentecost (2:32|). Here Peter affirms full knowledge of the work of Jesus in Judea (for whole country including Galilee and Perea) and Jerusalem (given mainly in John's Gospel). In the Greek \h“n\ (which) is attracted into the genitive case to agree with the antecedent \pant“n\ (all), a common enough idiom. {Whom also they slew} (\hon kai aneilan\). Second aorist active indicative of \anaire“\ with \a\ as often in Acts (2:23; strkjv@5:30|). But note \kai\ (also) in the old MSS., not in the Textus Receptus. They "also" slew him, went that far, "this crowning atrocity" (Vincent), \kai\ could here be "even." {Hanging him on a tree} (\kremasantes epi xulou\). This same expression used by Peter in strkjv@5:30| which see for discussion.

rwp@Acts:12:7 @{Stood by him} (\epestˆ\). Ingressive second aorist active indicative of \ephistˆmi\, intransitive. This very form occurs in strkjv@Luke:2:9| of the sudden appearance of the angel of the Lord to the shepherds. Page notes that this second aorist of \ephistˆmi\ occurs seven times in the Gospel of Luke, eight times in the Acts, and nowhere else in the N.T. Note also the same form \apestˆ\ (departed from, from \aphistˆmi\, stood off from) of the disappearance of the angel in verse 10|. {In the cell} (\en t“i oikˆmati\). Literally, a dwelling place or habitation (from \oike“\, to dwell, \oikos\, house), but here not the prison as a whole as in Thucydides, but the room in the prison (cell) where Peter was chained to the two guards. Old word, but only here in the N.T. {He smote Peter on the side} (\pataxas tˆn pleuran tou Petrou\). More exactly, "smote the side of Peter." Strongly enough to wake Peter up who was sound asleep and yet not rouse the two guards. It was probably between 3 A.M. and 6 A.M., hours when changes in the guards were made. {Rise up} (\anasta\). Short form (_Koin‚_) of \anastˆthi\, second aorist active imperative of \anistˆmi\, intransitive. Songs:also strkjv@Acts:9:11| (Westcott and Hort text); strkjv@Ephesians:5:14|. {Fell off} (\exepesan\). Second aorist active with \a\ ending like first aorist of \expipt“\, old verb. This miracle was necessary if Peter was to escape without rousing the two guards.

rwp@Acts:12:25 @{From Jerusalem} (\ex Ierousalˆm\). Probably correct text, though D has \apo\. Westcott and Hort follow Aleph B in reading \eis\ (to) Jerusalem, an impossible reading contradicted by strkjv@11:29f.; strkjv@13:1|. The ministration (\diakonian\) referred to is that in strkjv@11:29f.| which may have taken place, in point of time, after the death of Herod. {Taking with them} (\sunparalabontes\). Taking along (\para\) with (\sun\) them, John Mark from Jerusalem (12:12|) to Antioch (13:1|). The aorist participle does not express subsequent action as Rackham here argues (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 861-863).

rwp@Acts:13:19 @{When he had destroyed} (\kathel“n\). Second aorist active participle of \kathaire“\, to tear down, old verb. {He gave them for an inheritance} (\kateklˆronomˆsen\). First aorist active indicative of the double compound verb \kata-klˆro-nome“\, late verb in LXX (Numbers:34:18; strkjv@Deuteronomy:3:28; strkjv@Joshua:14:1|) and only here in the N.T., to distribute by lot, to distribute as an inheritance. This is the correct reading and not \kateklˆrodotˆsen\ from \kataklˆrodote“\ of the Textus Receptus. These two verbs were confused in the MSS. of the LXX as well as here. {For about four hundred and fifty years} (\h“s etesin tetrakosiois kai pentˆkonta\). Associative instrumental case with an expression of time as in strkjv@8:11; strkjv@Luke:8:29| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 527). The oldest MSS. (Aleph A B C Vg Sah Boh) place these figures before "after these things" and so in verse 19|. This is the true reading and is in agreement with the notation in strkjv@1Kings:6:1|. The difficulty found in the Textus Receptus (King James Version) thus disappears with the true text. The four hundred and fifty years runs therefore from the birth of Isaac to the actual conquest of Canaan and does not cover the period of the Judges. See on ¯Acts:7:6|.

rwp@Acts:13:24 @{When John had first preached} (\prokˆruxantos I“anou\). Literally, John heralding beforehand, as a herald before the king (Luke:3:3|). Genitive absolute of first aorist active participle of \prokˆruss“\, old verb to herald beforehand, here alone in the N.T., though Textus Receptus has it also in strkjv@Acts:3:20|. {Before his coming} (\pro pros“pou tˆs eisodou autou\). Literally, before the face of his entering in (here act of entrance as strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:9|, not the gate as in strkjv@Hebrews:10:19|). See strkjv@Malachi:3:1| quoted in strkjv@Matthew:11:10| (Luke:7:27|) for this Hebrew phrase and also strkjv@Luke:1:76|. {The baptism of repentance} (\baptisma metanoias\). Baptism marked by, characterized by (genitive case, case of kind or species) repentance (change of mind and life). The very phrase used of John's preaching in strkjv@Mark:1:4; strkjv@Luke:3:3|. It is clear therefore that Paul understood John's ministry and message as did Peter (Acts:2:38; strkjv@10:37|).

rwp@Acts:13:40 @{Beware therefore} (\blepete oun\). The warning is pertinent. Perhaps Paul noticed anger on the faces of some of the rabbis. {Lest there come upon you} (\mˆ epelthˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive with the negative final conjunction \mˆ\. {In the prophets} (\en tois prophˆtais\). The quotation is from the LXX text of strkjv@Habbakkuk:1:5|. The plural here refers to the prophetic collection (Luke:24:44; strkjv@Acts:24:14|). "The Jews of Habakkuk's day had refused to believe in the impending invasion by the Chaldeans, and yet it had come" (Furneaux).

rwp@Acts:13:42 @{And as they went out} (\Exiont“n de aut“n\). Genitive absolute with present active participle of \exeimi\, to go out, old verb, in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:12:42; strkjv@17:15; strkjv@20:7; strkjv@27:43|. As they (Paul and Barnabas) were going out with all the excitement and hubbub created by the sermon. {They besought} (\parekaloun\). Imperfect active, inchoative, began to beseech. The Textus Receptus inserts wrongly \ta ethnˆ\ (the Gentiles) as if the Jews were opposed to Paul from the first as some doubtless were. But both Jews and Gentiles asked for the repetition of the sermon (\lalˆthˆnai\, first aorist passive infinitive object of \parekaloun\ with accusative of general reference). {The next Sabbath} (\eis to metaxu sabbaton\). Late use (Josephus, Plutarch, etc.) of \metaxu\ (\meta\ and \xun\=\sun\) in sense of after or next instead of between (sense of \meta\ prevailing). Note use of \eis\ for "on" or "by."

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:14:2 @{That were disobedient} (\hoi apeithˆsantes\). First aorist active articular participle, not the present \apeithountes\ as the Textus Receptus has it. But the meaning is probably the Jews that disbelieved, rather than that disobeyed. Strictly \apeithe“\ does mean to disobey and \apiste“\ to disbelieve, but that distinction is not observed in strkjv@John:3:36| nor in strkjv@Acts:19:9; strkjv@28:24|. The word \apeithe“\ means to be \apeithˆs\, to be unwilling to be persuaded or to withhold belief and then also to withhold obedience. The two meanings run into one another. To disbelieve the word of God is to disobey God. {Made them evil affected} (\ekak“san\). First aorist active indicative of \kako“\, old verb from \kakos\, to do evil to, to ill-treat, then in later Greek as here to embitter, to exasperate as in strkjv@Psalms:105:32| and in Josephus. In this sense only here in the N.T. Evidently Paul preached the same message as in Antioch for it won both Jews and Gentiles, and displeased the rabbis. Codex Bezae adds here that "the chiefs of the synagogue and the rulers" brought persecution upon Paul and Barnabas just as was argued about Antioch. Outside the synagogue the Jews would poison the minds of the Gentiles against Paul and Barnabas. "The story of Thecla suggests a means, and perhaps the apostles were brought before the magistrates on some charge of interference with family life. The magistrates however must have seen at once that there was no legal case against them; and by a sentence of acquittal or in some other way the Lord gave peace" (Rackham). As we have it, the story of Paul and Thecla undoubtedly has apocryphal features, though Thecla may very well be an historical character here at Iconium where the story is located. Certainly the picture of Paul herein drawn cannot be considered authentic though a true tradition may underlie it: "bald, bowlegged, strongly built, small in stature, with large eyes and meeting eyebrows and longish nose; full of grace; sometimes looking like a man, sometimes having the face of an angel."

rwp@Acts:15:17 @{That the residue of men may seek after the Lord} (\hop“s an ekzˆtˆs“sin hoi kataloipoi t“n anthr“p“n ton kurion\). The use of \hop“s\ with the subjunctive (effective aorist active) to express purpose is common enough and note \an\ for an additional tone of uncertainty. On the rarity of \an\ with \hop“s\ in the _Koin‚_ see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 986. Here the Gentiles are referred to. The Hebrew text is quite different, "that they may possess the remnant of Edom." Certainly the LXX suits best the point that James is making. But the closing words of this verse point definitely to the Gentiles both in the Hebrew and the LXX, "all the Gentiles" (\panta ta ethnˆ\). Another item of similarity between this speech and the Epistle of James is in the phrase "my name is called" (\epikeklˆtai to onoma mou\) and strkjv@James:2:7|. The purpose of God, though future, is expressed by this perfect passive indicative \epikeklˆtai\ from \epi-kale“\, to call on. It is a Jewish way of speaking of those who worship God.

rwp@Acts:15:20 @{But that we write unto them} (\alla episteilai autois\). By way of contrast (\alla\). First aorist active infinitive of \epistell“\, old verb to send to one (message, letter, etc.). Our word \epistle\ (\epistolˆ\ as in verse 30|) comes from this verb. In the N.T. only here, He strkjv@13:22|, and possibly strkjv@Acts:21:25|. {That they abstain from} (\tou apechesthai\). The genitive of the articular infinitive of purpose, present middle (direct) of \apech“\, old verb, to hold oneself back from. The best old MSS. do not have \apo\, but the ablative is clear enough in what follows. James agrees with Peter in his support of Paul and Barnabas in their contention for Gentile freedom from the Mosaic ceremonial law. The restrictions named by James affect the moral code that applies to all (idolatry, fornication, murder). Idolatry, fornication and murder were the outstanding sins of paganism then and now (Revelation:22:15|). Harnack argues ably against the genuineness of the word \pniktou\ (strangled) which is absent from D Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian. It is a nice point, though the best MSS. have it in accord with strkjv@Leviticus:17:10-16|. The problem is whether the words were added because "blood" was understood as not "murder," but a reference to the Mosaic regulation or whether it was omitted to remove the ceremonial aspect and make it all moral and ethical. The Western text omits the word also in verse 29|. But with the word retained here and in verse 29| the solution of James is not a compromise, though there is a wise concession to Jewish feeling. {Pollutions of idols} (\alisgˆmat“n\). From \alisge“\ only in the LXX and this substantive nowhere else. The word refers to idolatrous practices (pollutions) and things sacrificed to idols (\eid“luth“n\) in verse 29|, not to sacrificial meat sold in the market (1Corinthians:10:27|), a matter not referred to here. Cf. strkjv@Leviticus:17:1-9|. All the four items in the position of James (accepting \pniktou\) are mentioned in strkjv@Leviticus:17,18|.

rwp@Acts:15:34 @{But it seemed good unto Silas to abide there} (\edoxe de Silƒi epimeinai autou\). This verse is not in the Revised Version or in the text of Westcott and Hort, being absent from Aleph A B Vulgate, etc. It is clearly an addition to help explain the fact that Silas is back in Antioch in verse 40|. But the "some days" of verse 36| afforded abundant time for him to return from Jerusalem. He and Judas went first to Jerusalem to make a report of their mission.

rwp@Acts:15:37 @{Was minded to take with them} (\ebouleto sunparalabein\). Imperfect middle (\ebouleto\), not aorist middle \ebouleusato\ of the Textus Receptus. Barnabas willed, wished and stuck to it (imperfect tense). \Sunparalabein\ is second aorist active infinitive of the double compound \sunparalamban“\, old verb to take along together with, used already about John Mark in strkjv@12:25| and by Paul in strkjv@Galatians:2:1| about Titus. Nowhere else in the N.T. Barnabas used the ingressive aorist in his suggestion.

rwp@Acts:16:6 @{The region of Phrygia and Galatia} (\tˆn Phrugian kai Galatikˆn ch“ran\). This is probably the correct text with one article and apparently describes one "Region" or District in The Province of Galatia which was also Phrygian (the old-ethnographic name with which compare the use of Lycaonia in strkjv@14:6|). Strictly speaking Derbe and Lystra, though in the Province of Galatia, were not Phrygian, and so Luke would here be not resumptive of the record in verses 1-5|; but a reference to the country around Iconium and Antioch in Pisidia in North Galatia is not included. This verse is hotly disputed at every point by the advocates of the North Galatian theory as represented by Chase and the South Galatian theory by Ramsay. Whatever is true in regard to the language of Luke here and in strkjv@18:23|, it is still possible for Paul in strkjv@Galatians:1:2| to use the term Galatia of the whole province of that name which could, in fact, apply to either South or North Galatia or to both. He could, of course, use it also in the ethnographic sense of the real Gauls or Celts who dwelt in North Galatia. Certainly the first tour of Paul and Barnabas was in the Province of Galatia though touching only the Regions of Pisidia, Phrygia, and Lycaonia, which province included besides the Gauls to the north. In this second tour Lycaonia has been already touched (Derbe and Lystra) and now Phrygia. The question arises why Luke here and in strkjv@18:23| adds the term "of Galatia" (\Galatikˆn\) though not in strkjv@13:14| (Pisidian Antioch) nor in strkjv@14:6| (cities of Lycaonia). Does Luke mean to use "of Galatia" in the same ethnographic sense as "of Phrygia" or does he here add the province (Galatia) to the name of the Region (Phrygia)? In itself either view is possible and it really matters very little except that the question is raised whether Paul went into the North Galatian Region on this occasion or later (18:23|). He could have done so and the Epistle be addressed to the churches of South Galatia, North Galatia, or the province as a whole. But the Greek participle \k“luthentes\ ("having been forbidden") plays a part in the argument that cannot be overlooked whether Luke means to say that Paul went north or not. This aorist passive participle of \k“lu“\, to hinder, can only express simultaneous or antecedent action, not subsequent action as Ramsay argues. No example of the so-called subsequent use of the aorist participle has ever been found in Greek as all Greek grammarians agree (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 860-63, 1112-14). The only natural meaning of \k“luthentes\ is that Paul with Silas and Timothy "passed through the region of Phrygia and Galatia" because they were hindered by the Holy Spirit from speaking the word in Asia (the Province of Asia of which Ephesus was the chief city and west of Derbe and Lystra). This construction implies that the country called "the region of Phrygia and Galatia" is not in the direct line west toward Ephesus. What follows in verse 7| throws further light on the point.

rwp@Acts:16:13 @{By a river side} (\para potamon\). The little river Gangites (or Gargites) was one mile west of the town. Philippi as a military outpost had few Jews. There was evidently no synagogue inside the city, but "without the gates" (\ex“ tˆs pulˆs\) they had noticed an enclosure "where we supposed" (\hou enomizomen\, correct text, imperfect active), probably as they came into the city, "was a place of prayer" (\proscuchˆn einai\). Infinitive with accusative of general reference in indirect discourse. \Proseuchˆ\ is common in the LXX and the N.T. for the act of prayer as in strkjv@Acts:2:42| then for a place of prayer either a synagogue (III Macc. strkjv@7:20) or more often an open air enclosure near the sea or a river where there was water for ceremonial ablutions. The word occurs also in heathen writers for a place of prayer (Schurer, _Jewish People_, Div. II, Vol. II, p. 69, Engl. Tr.). Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 222) quotes an Egyptian inscription of the third century B.C. with this sense of the word and one from Panticapaeum on the Black Sea of the first century A.D. (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 102). Juvenal (III. 296) has a sneering reference to the Jewish \proseucha\. Josephus (_Ant_. XIV. 10, 23) quotes a decree of Halicarnassus which allowed the Jews "to make their prayers (\proseuchas\) on the seashore according to the custom of their fathers." There was a synagogue in Thessalonica, but apparently none in Amphipolis and Apollonia (Acts:17:1|). The rule of the rabbis required ten men to constitute a synagogue, but here were gathered only a group of women at the hour of prayer. In pioneer days in this country it was a common thing to preach under bush arbours in the open air. John Wesley and George Whitfield were great open air preachers. Paul did not have an inspiring beginning for his work in Europe, but he took hold where he could. The conjecture was correct. It was a place of prayer, but only a bunch of women had come together (\tais sunelthousais gunaixin\), excuse enough for not preaching to some preachers, but not to Paul and his party. The "man of Macedonia" turned out to be a group of women (Furneaux). Macedonian inscriptions show greater freedom for women in Macedonia than elsewhere at this time and confirm Luke's story of the activities of women in Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea. {We sat down and spake} (\kathisantes elaloumen\). Having taken our seats (aorist active participle of \kathiz“\) we began to speak or preach (inchoative imperfect of \lale“\, often used for preaching). Sitting was the Jewish attitude for public speaking. It was not mere conversation, but more likely conversational preaching of an historical and expository character. Luke's use of the first person plural implies that each of the four (Paul, Silas, Timothy, Luke) preached in turn, with Paul as chief speaker.

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:17:2 @{As his custom was} (\kata to ei“thos t“i Paul“i\). The same construction in strkjv@Luke:4:16| about Jesus in Nazareth (\kata to ei“thos aut“i\) with the second perfect active participle neuter singular from \eth“\. Paul's habit was to go to the Jewish synagogue to use the Jews and the God-fearers as a springboard for his work among the Gentiles. {For three Sabbaths} (\epi sabbata tria\). Probably the reference is to the first three Sabbaths when Paul had a free hand in the synagogue as at first in Antioch in Pisidia. Luke does not say that Paul was in Thessalonica only three weeks. He may have spoken there also during the week, though the Sabbath was the great day. Paul makes it plain, as Furneaux shows, that he was in Thessalonica a much longer period than three weeks. The rest of the time he spoke, of course, outside of the synagogue. Paul implies an extended stay by his language in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:8|. The church consisted mainly of Gentile converts (2Thessalonians:3:4,7,8|) and seems to have been well organized (1Thessalonians:5:12|). He received help while there several times from Philippi (Phillipians:4:16|) and even so worked night and day to support himself (1Thessalonians:2:9|). His preaching was misunderstood there in spite of careful instruction concerning the second coming of Christ (1Thessalonians:4:13-5:5; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1-12|). {Reasoned} (\dielexato\). First aorist middle indicative of \dialegomai\, old verb in the active to select, distinguish, then to revolve in the mind, to converse (interchange of ideas), then to teach in the Socratic ("dialectic") method of question and answer (cf. \dielegeto\ in verse 17|), then simply to discourse, but always with the idea of intellectual stimulus. With these Jews and God-fearers Paul appealed to the Scriptures as text and basis (\apo\) of his ideas.

rwp@Acts:17:23 @{For} (\gar\). Paul gives an illustration of their religiousness from his own experiences in their city. {The objects of your worship} (\ta sebasmata hum“n\). Late word from \sebazomai\, to worship. In N T. only here and strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:4|. The use of this word for temples, altars, statues, shows the conciliatory tone in the use of \deisidaimonesterous\ in verse 22|. {An altar} (\b“mon\). Old word, only here in the N.T. and the only mention of a heathen altar in the N.T {With this inscription} (\en h“i epegegrapto\). On which had been written (stood written), past perfect passive indicative of \epigraph“\, old and common verb for writing on inscriptions (\epigraphˆ\, strkjv@Luke:23:38|). {To an Unknown God} (\AGNOSTO THEO\). Dative case, dedicated to. Pausanias (I. 1, 4) says that in Athens there are "altars to gods unknown" (\b“moi the“n agn“st“n\). Epimenides in a pestilence advised the sacrifice of a sheep to the befitting god whoever he might be. If an altar was dedicated to the wrong deity, the Athenians feared the anger of the other gods. The only use in the N.T. of \agn“stos\, old and common adjective (from \a\ privative and \gn“stos\ verbal of \gin“sk“\, to know). Our word agnostic comes from it. Here it has an ambiguous meaning, but Paul uses it though to a stern Christian philosopher it may be the "confession at once of a bastard philosophy and of a bastard religion" (Hort, _Hulsean Lectures_, p. 64). Paul was quick to use this confession on the part of the Athenians of a higher power than yet known to them. Songs:he gets his theme from this evidence of a deeper religious sense in them and makes a most clever use of it with consummate skill. {In ignorance} (\agnoountes\). Present active participle of \agnoe“\, old verb from same root as \agn“stos\ to which Paul refers by using it. {This set I forth unto you} (\touto ego kataggell“ humin\). He is a \kataggeleus\ (verse 18|) as they suspected of a God, both old and new, old in that they already worship him, new in that Paul knows who he is. By this master stroke he has brushed to one side any notion of violation of Roman law or suspicion of heresy and claims their endorsement of his new gospel, a shrewd and consummate turn. He has their attention now and proceeds to describe this God left out of their list as the one true and Supreme God. The later MSS. here read \hon--touton\ (whom--this one) rather than \ho--touto\ (what--this), but the late text is plainly an effort to introduce too soon the personal nature of God which comes out clearly in verse 24|.

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

rwp@Acts:18:21 @{I shall return} (\anakamps“\). Future active indicative of \anakampt“\, old verb to bend back, turn back (Matthew:2:2|). {If God will} (\tou theou thelontos\). Genitive absolute of present active participle. This expression (\ean\ with subjunctive) occurs also in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:19; strkjv@16:7; strkjv@James:4:15|. Such phrases were common among Jews, Greeks, and Romans, and are today. It is simply a recognition that we are in God's hands. The Textus Receptus has here a sentence not in the best MSS.: "I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem." This addition by D and other documents may have been due to a desire to give a reason for the language in verse 22| about "going up" to Jerusalem. Whether Paul said it or not, it was in the spring when he made this journey with a company of pilgrims probably going to the feast of Pentecost in Jerusalem. We know that later Paul did try to reach Jerusalem for Pentecost (20:16|) and succeeded. As the ship was leaving, Paul had to go, but with the hope of returning soon to Ephesus as he did.

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

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

rwp@Acts:20:4 @{Accompanied him} (\suneipeto aut“i\). Imperfect of \sunepomai\, old and common verb, but only here in the N.T. The singular is used agreeing with the first name mentioned \S“patros\ and to be supplied with each of the others. Textus Receptus adds here "into Asia" (\achri tˆs Asias\, as far as Asia), but the best documents (Aleph B Vulg. Sah Boh) do not have it. As a matter of fact, Trophimus went as far as Jerusalem (Acts:21:29|) and Aristarchus as far as Rome (27:2; strkjv@Colossians:4:10|), The phrase could apply only to Sopatros. It is not clear though probable that Luke means to say that these seven brethren, delegates of the various churches (2Corinthians:8:19-23|) started from Corinth with Paul. Luke notes the fact that they accompanied Paul, but the party may really have been made up at Philippi where Luke himself joined Paul, the rest of the party having gone on to Troas (20:5f.|). These were from Roman provinces that shared in the collection (Galatia, Asia, Macedonia, Achaia). In this list three were from Macedonia, Sopater of Beroea, Aristarchus and Secundus of Thessalonica; two from Galatia, Gaius of Derbe and Timothy of Lystra; two from Asia, Tychicus and Trophimus. It is a bit curious that none are named from Achaia. Had Corinth failed after all (2Corinthians:8; 9|) to raise its share of the collection after such eager pledging? Rackham suggests that they may have turned their part over directly to Paul. Luke joined Paul in Philippi and could have handled the money from Achaia. It was an important event and Paul took the utmost pains to remove any opportunity for scandal in the handling of the funds.

rwp@Acts:20:15 @{We came over against Chios} (\katˆntˆsamen antikrus Chiou\). Luke uses this _Koin‚_ verb several times (16:1; strkjv@18:19|), meaning to come right down in front of and the notion of \anta\ is made plainer by \antikrus\, face to face with, common "improper" preposition only here in the N.T. They probably lay off the coast (anchoring) during the night instead of putting into the harbour. The Island of Chios is about eight miles from the mainland. {The next day} (\tˆi heterƒi\). The third day in reality from Assos (the fourth from Troas), in contrast with \tˆi epiousˆi\ just before for Chios. {We touched at Samos} (\parebalomen eis Samon\). Second aorist active of \paraball“\, to throw alongside, to cross over, to put in by. Songs:Thucydides III. 32. Only here in the N.T. though in Textus Receptus in strkjv@Mark:4:30|. The word parable (\parabolˆ\) is from this verb. The Textus Receptus adds here \kai meinantes en Trogulli“i\ (and remaining at Trogyllium), but clearly not genuine. In passing from Chios to Samos they sailed past Ephesus to save time for Pentecost in Jerusalem (verse 16|), if in control of the ship, or because the captain allowed Paul to have his way. The island of Samos is still further down the coast below Chios. It is not stated whether a stop was made here or not. {The day after} (\tˆi echomenˆi\). The day holding itself next to the one before. Note Luke's three terms in this verse (\tˆi epiousˆi, tˆi heterƒi, tˆi echomenˆi\). This would be the fourth from Assos. {To Miletus} (\eis Milˆton\). About 28 miles south of Ephesus and now the site is several miles from the sea due to the silt from the Maeander. This city, once the chief city of the Ionian Greeks, was now quite eclipsed by Ephesus.

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

rwp@Acts:20:28 @{Take heed unto yourselves} (\prosechete heautois\). The full phrase had \ton noun\, hold your mind on yourselves (or other object in the dative), as often in old writers and in strkjv@Job:7:17|. But the ancients often used the idiom with \noun\ understood, but not expressed as here and strkjv@Acts:5:35; strkjv@Luke:12:1; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@21:34; strkjv@1Timothy:1:4; strkjv@3:8; strkjv@4:13|. \Epeche\ is so used in strkjv@1Timothy:4:16|. {To all the flock} (\panti t“i poimni“i\). Contracted form of \poimenion = poimnˆ\ (John:10:16|) already in strkjv@Luke:12:32| and also in strkjv@Acts:20:29; strkjv@1Peter:5:2,3|. Common in old Greek. {Hath made} (\etheto\). Did make, second aorist middle indicative of \tithˆmi\, did appoint. Paul evidently believed that the Holy Spirit calls and appoints ministers. {Bishops} (\episkopous\). The same men termed elders in verse 17| which see. {To shepherd} (\poimainein\). Present active infinitive of purpose of \poimain“\, old verb to feed or tend the flock (\poimnˆ, poimnion\), to act as shepherd (\poimˆn\). These ministers are thus in Paul's speech called elders (verse 17|), bishops (verse 28|), and shepherds (verse 28|). Jesus had used this very word to Peter (John:21:16|, twice \boske\, feed, strkjv@21:15,17|) and Peter will use it in addressing fellow-elders (1Peter:5:2|) with memories, no doubt of the words of Jesus to him. The "elders" were to watch over as "bishops" and "tend and feed as shepherds" the flock. Jesus is termed "the shepherd and bishop of your souls" in strkjv@1Peter:2:25| and "the great Shepherd of the sheep" in strkjv@Hebrews:13:20|. Jesus called himself "the good Shepherd" in strkjv@John:10:11|. {The church of God} (\tˆn ekklˆsian tou theou\). The correct text, not "the church of the Lord" or "the church of the Lord and God" (Robertson, _Introduction to Textual Criticism of the N.T._, p. 189). {He purchased} (\periepoiˆsato\). First aorist middle of \peripoie“\, old verb to reserve, to preserve (for or by oneself, in the middle). In the N.T. only in Luke strkjv@17:33; strkjv@Acts:20:28; strkjv@1Timothy:3:13|. The substantive \peripoiˆsin\ (preservation, possession) occurs in strkjv@1Peter:2:9| ("a peculiar people" = a people for a possession) and in strkjv@Ephesians:1:14|. {With his own blood} (\dia tou haimatos tou idiou\). Through the agency of (\dia\) his own blood. Whose blood? If \tou theou\ (Aleph B Vulg.) is correct, as it is, then Jesus is here called "God" who shed his own blood for the flock. It will not do to say that Paul did not call Jesus God, for we have strkjv@Romans:9:5; strkjv@Colossians:2:9; strkjv@Titus:2:13| where he does that very thing, besides strkjv@Colossians:1:15-20; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|.

rwp@Acts:22:9 @{But they heard not the voice} (\tˆn de ph“nˆn ouk ˆkousan\). The accusative here may be used rather than the genitive as in verse 7| to indicate that those with Paul did not understand what they heard (9:7|) just as they beheld the light (22:9|), but did not see Jesus (9:7|). The difference in cases allows this distinction, though it is not always observed as just noticed about strkjv@22:14; strkjv@26:14|. The verb \akou“\ is used in the sense of understand (Mark:4:33; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:2|). It is one of the evidences of the genuineness of this report of Paul's speech that Luke did not try to smooth out apparent discrepancies in details between the words of Paul and his own record already in ch. 9. The Textus Receptus adds in this verse: "And they became afraid" (\kai emphoboi egenonto\). Clearly not genuine.

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

rwp@Acts:24:7 @This whole verse with some words at the end of verse 6| and the beginning of verse 8| in the Textus Receptus ("And would have judged according to our law. But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands, commanding his accusers to come unto thee") is absent from Aleph A B H L P 61 (many other cursives) Sahidic Bohairic. It is beyond doubt a later addition to the incomplete report of the speech of Tertullus. As the Revised Version stands, verse 8| connects with verse 6|. The motive of the added words is clearly to prejudice Felix against Lysias and they contradict the record in strkjv@Acts:21|. Furneaux holds them to be genuine and omitted because contradictory to strkjv@Acts:21|. More likely they are a clumsy attempt to complete the speech of Tertullus.

rwp@Acts:24:8 @{From whom} (\par' hou\). Referring to Paul, but in the Textus Receptus referring to Lysias. {By examining him thyself} (\autos anakrinas\). Not by torture, since Paul was a Roman citizen, but by hearing what Paul has to say in defence of himself. \Anakrin“\ is to examine thoroughly up and down as in strkjv@Luke:23:14|.

rwp@Acts:24:22 @{Having more exact knowledge} (\akribesteron eid“s\). "Knowing" (second perfect active participle of \oida\) "more accurately" (comparative of adverb \akrib“s\). More accurately than what? Than the Sanhedrin supposed he had "concerning the Way" (\ta peri tˆs hodou\, the things concerning the Way, common in Acts for Christianity). How Felix had gained this knowledge of Christianity is not stated. Philip the Evangelist lived here in Caesarea and there was a church also. Drusilla was a Jewess and may have told him something. Besides, it is wholly possible that Felix knew of the decision of Gallio in Corinth that Christianity was a _religio licita_ as a form of Judaism. As a Roman official he knew perfectly well that the Sanhedrin with the help of Tertullus had failed utterly to make out a case against Paul. He could have released Paul and probably would have done so but for fear of offending the Jews whose ruler he was and the hope that Paul (note "alms" in verse 17|) might offer him bribes for his liberty. {Deferred them} (\anebaleto autous\). Second aorist middle indicative of \anaball“\, old verb (only here in N.T.) to throw or toss up, to put back or off, in middle to put off from one, to delay, to adjourn. Felix adjourned the case without a decision under a plausible pretext, that he required the presence of Lysias in person, which was not the case. Lysias had already said that Paul was innocent and was never summoned to Caesarea, so far as we know. Since Paul was a Roman citizen, Lysias could have thrown some light on the riot, if he had any. {Shall come down} (\katabˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \katabain“\. {I will determine your matter} (\diagn“somai ta kath' humƒs\). Future middle of \diagin“sk“\, old and common verb to know accurately or thoroughly (\dia\). In the N.T. only here (legal sense) and strkjv@23:15|. "The things according to you" (plural, the matters between Paul and the Sanhedrin).

rwp@Acts:25:13 @{When certain days were passed} (\Hˆmer“n diagenomenon\). Genitive absolute of \diaginomai\, to come between, "days intervening." {Agrippa the King} (\Agrippas ho basileus\). Agrippa II son of Agrippa I of strkjv@Acts:12:20-23|. On the death of Herod King of Chalcis A.D. 48, Claudius A.D. 50 gave this Herod Agrippa II the throne of Chalcis so that Luke is correct in calling him king, though he is not king of Judea. But he was also given by Claudius the government of the temple and the right of appointing the high priest. Later he was given also the tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias. He was the last Jewish king in Palestine, though not king of Judea. He angered the Jews by building his palace so as to overlook the temple and by frequent changes in the high priesthood. He made his capital at Caesarea Philippi which he called Neronias in honour of Nero. Titus visited it after the fall of Jerusalem. {Bernice} (\Bernikˆ\). He was her brother and yet she lived with him in shameful intimacy in spite of her marriage to her uncle Herod King of Chalcis and to Polemon King of Cilicia whom she left. Schuerer calls her both a Jewish bigot and a wanton. She afterwards became the mistress of Titus. {Arrived at Caesarea} (\katˆntˆsan eis Kaisarian\). Came down (first aorist active of \katanta“\) to Caesarea from Jerusalem. {And saluted Festus} (\aspasamenoi ton Phˆston\). The Textus Receptus has \aspasomenoi\ the future participle, but the correct text is the aorist middle participle \aspasamenoi\ which cannot possibly mean subsequent action as given in the Canterbury Revision "and saluted." It can only mean contemporaneous (simultaneous) action "saluting" or antecedent action like the margin "having saluted." But antecedent action is not possible here, so that simultaneous action is the only alternative. It is to be noted that the salutation synchronized with the arrival in Caesarea (note \kata\, down, the effective aorist tense), not with the departure from Jerusalem, nor with the whole journey. Rightly understood the aorist participle here gives no trouble at all (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 861-3).

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

rwp@Acts:27:14 @{After no long time} (\met' ou polu\). Litotes again. {Beat down from it} (\ebalen kat' autˆs\). Second aorist active indicative of \ball“\, to throw. Here "dashed" (intransitive). \Autˆs\ is in the ablative, not genitive case, beat "down from it" (Crete), not "against it or on it." (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 606). \Autˆs\ cannot refer to \ploion\ (boat) which is neuter. Songs:the ablative case with \kata\ as in strkjv@Mark:5:13|, Homer also. The Cretan mountains are over 7,000 feet high. {A tempestuous wind which is called Euraquilo} (\anemos tuph“nikos ho kaloumenos Eurakul“n\). \Tuph“n=Tuph“s\ was used for the typhoon, a violent whirlwind (\turbo\) or squall. This word gives the character of the wind. The \Eurakul“n\ (reading of Aleph A B against the Textus Receptus \Euroklud“n\) has not been found elsewhere. Blass calls it a hybrid word compounded of the Greek \euros\ (east wind) and the Latin \aquilo\ (northeast). It is made like \euronotos\ (southeast). The Vulgate has _euroaquilo_. It is thus the east north east wind. Page considers Euroclydon to be a corruption of Euraquilo. Here the name gives the direction of the wind.

rwp@Acts:27:18 @{As we laboured exceedingly with the storm} (\sphodr“s cheimazomen“n hˆm“n\). Genitive absolute with present passive participle of \cheimaz“\, old verb to afflict with a tempest (\cheima\, stormy weather), to toss upon the waves, here alone in N.T. {They began to throw overboard} (\ekbalˆn epoiounto\). Literally, "They began to make (inchoative imperfect middle of \poie“\) a casting out" (\ekbolˆn\ from \ekball“\, to cast out, old word, only here in N.T.). Cf. Latin _jacturam facere_. This to lighten the ship by throwing overboard the cargo. The grain in the ship would shift and make it list and so added to the danger. {They cast out} (\eripsan\). Third person plural aorist active of \ript“\, not \eripsamen\ as Textus Receptus. {With their own hands} (\autocheires\). Old word (\autos, cheir\) but here alone in N.T. Vivid and graphic touch by Luke who, of course, watched every movement day by day. {The tackling} (\tˆn skeuˆn\). The furniture of the ship that could be spared. It was becoming desperate.

rwp@Acts:27:30 @{The sailors} (\t“n naut“n\). Old word from \naus\ (ship), in N.T. only here, verse 30; strkjv@Revelation:18:17|. {Were seeking} (\zˆtount“n\). Genitive absolute again with present active participle of \zˆte“\ to seek. {Had lowered} (\chalasant“n\). Aorist active participle of \chalaz“\. {Under colour} (\prophasei\). Possibly the same word as "prophecy" (from \pro-phˆmi\, to speak forth), but here pretence, pretext, although it may come from \prophain“\, to show forth. The use here is an old one and appears also in strkjv@Mark:12:40; strkjv@Luke:20:47; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:5; strkjv@Phillipians:1:18|. {As though} (\h“s\). The alleged reason, a common Greek idiom with \h“s\ and the participle (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 966). Here with \mellont“n\. {From the foreship} (\ek pr“irˆs\). Old word for prow of the ship. In the N.T. only here and verse 41|. Note here \ekteinein\ (lay out, stretch out) rather than \rhipsantes\ (casting) in verse 29|, for they pretended to need the small boat to stretch out or lay out the anchors in front.

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

rwp@Acts:28:1 @{Then we knew} (\tote epegn“men\). Second aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \epigin“sk“\. Then we recognized. See strkjv@27:39|. {Was called} (\kaleitai\). Present passive indicative retained in indirect discourse. {Melita} (\Melitˆ\). Not \Miletenˆ\ as only B reads, a clerical error, but retained in the text of Westcott and Hort because of B. Page notes that the island was Malta as is shown from the name, the location, the presence of a ship from Alexandria bound for Rome wintering there (verse 11|), and the mention of Syracuse as the next stop after leaving (verse 12|).

rwp@Acts:28:16 @{Paul was suffered to abide by himself} (\epetrapˆ t“i Paul“i menein kath' heauton\). Second aorist passive of \epitrepo\, to permit or allow. Literally, "It was permitted to Paul to abide by himself." Some late documents (Textus Receptus) here add: "The centurion delivered the prisoners to the captain of the guard" (or the \stratopedarch\). This officer used to be considered Burrus who was Prefect of the Praetorian Guard A.D. 51-62. But it is by no means certain that Julius turned the prisoners over to this officer. It seems more likely that Julius would report to the captain of the Peregrini. If so, we may be sure that Julius would give a good report of Paul to this officer who would be kindly disposed and would allow Paul comparative freedom (living by himself, in his lodging, verse 23|, his own hired house verse 30|, though still chained to a soldier). {With the soldier that guarded him} (\sun t“i phulassonti auton strati“tˆi\). Probably a new soldier every day or night, but always with this soldier chained to his right hand day and night. Now that Paul is in Rome what can he do for Christ while he awaits the outcome of his own appeal to Nero?

rwp@Colossians:1:3 @{God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\t“i the“i patri tou kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou Christou\). Correct text without \kai\ (and) as in strkjv@3:17|, though usually "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" (2Corinthians:1:3; strkjv@11:31; strkjv@Romans:15:6; strkjv@1Peter:1:3; strkjv@Revelation:1:6|). In verse 2| we have the only instance in the opening benediction of an epistle when the name of "Jesus Christ" is not joined with "God our Father." {Always} (\pantote\). Amphibolous position between \eucharistoumen\ (we give thanks) and \proseuchomenoi\ (praying). Can go with either.

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

rwp@Colossians:4:8 @{I have sent} (\epempsa\). Epistolary aorist active indicative of \pemp“\ as in strkjv@Ephesians:6:22|. {That ye may know} (\hina gn“te\). Second aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of \gin“sk“\, "that ye may come to know." This the correct text, not \gn“i\ (third singular). {Our estate} (\ta peri hˆm“n\). "The things concerning us." {May comfort} (\parakalesˆi\). First aorist active subjunctive. Proper rendering here and not "may exhort."

rwp@1Corinthians:7:17 Changed the word "believer" to "unbeliver" Based on the context

rwp@Ephesians:1:15 @{And which ye shew toward all the saints} (\kai tˆn eis pantas tous hagious\). The words "ye show" do not occur in the Greek. The Textus Receptus has \ten agapˆn\ (the love) before \tˆn\ supported by D G K L Syr., Lat., Copt., but Aleph A B P Origen do not have the word \agapˆn\. It could have been omitted, but is probably not genuine. The use of the article referring to \pistin\ and the change from \en\ to \eis\ probably justifies the translation "which ye shew toward."

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

rwp@Ephesians:5:5 @{Ye know of a surety} (\iste gin“skontes\). The correct text has \iste\, not \este\. It is the same form for present indicative (second person plural) and imperative, probably indicative here, "ye know." But why \gin“skontes\ added? Probably, "ye know recognizing by your own experience." {No} (\pƒs--ou\). Common idiom in the N.T. like the Hebrew= _oudeis_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 732). {Covetous man} (\pleonektˆs, pleon ech“\). Old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:5:10f.; strkjv@6:10|. {Which is} (\ho estin\). Songs:Aleph B. A D K L have \hos\ (who), but \ho\ is right. See strkjv@Colossians:3:14| for this use of \ho\ (which thing is). On \eid“lolatrˆs\ (idolater) see strkjv@1Corinthians:5:10f|. {In the Kingdom of Christ and God} (\en tˆi basileiƒi tou Christou kai theou\). Certainly the same kingdom and Paul may here mean to affirm the deity of Christ by the use of the one article with \Christou kai theou\. But Sharp's rule cannot be insisted on here because \theos\ is often definite without the article like a proper name. Paul did teach the deity of Christ and may do it here.

rwp@Ephesians:5:15 @{Carefully} (\akrib“s\). Aleph B 17 put \akrib“s\ before \p“s\ (how) instead of \p“s akrib“s\ (how exactly ye walk) as the Textus Receptus has it. On \akrib“s\ (from \akribˆs\) see strkjv@Matthew:2:8; strkjv@Luke:1:3|. {Unwise} (\asophoi\). Old adjective, only here in N.T.

rwp@Ephesians:5:22 @{Be in subjection}. Not in the Greek text of B and Jerome knew of no MS. with it. K L and most MSS. have \hupotassesthe\ like strkjv@Colossians:3:18|, while Aleph A P have \hupotassesth“san\ (let them be subject to). But the case of \andrasin\ (dative) shows that the verb is understood from verse 21| if not written originally. \Idiois\ (own) is genuine here, though not in strkjv@Colossians:3:18|. {As unto the Lord} (\h“s t“i Kuri“i\). Songs:here instead of \h“s anˆken en Kuri“i\ of strkjv@Colossians:3:18|.

rwp@Ephesians:5:30 @{Of his flesh and of his bones} (\ek tˆs sarkos autou kai ek t“n oste“n autou\). These words are in the Textus Receptus (Authorized Version) supported by D G L P cursives Syriac, etc., though wanting in Aleph A B 17 Bohairic. Certainly not genuine.

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

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

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

rwp@Galatians:2:3 @{Being a Greek} (\Hellˆn “n\). Concessive participle, though he was a Greek. {Was compelled to be circumcised} (\ˆnagkasthˆ peritmˆthˆnai\). First aorist passive indicative of \anagkaz“\ and first aorist passive infinitive of \peritemn“\. Curiously enough some scholars interpret this language to mean that Paul voluntarily had Titus circumcised, instead of being compelled to do it, an impossible view in my opinion in the light of verse 5| and wholly inconsistent with the whole context. Paul means that he stood his ground against compulsion and all force.

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

rwp@Galatians:4:15 @{That gratulation of yourselves} (\ho makarismos hum“n\). "Your felicitation." Rare word from \makariz“\, to pronounce happy, in Plato, Aristotle, Plutarch. See also strkjv@Romans:4:6,9|. You no longer felicitate yourselves on my presence with you. {Ye would have plucked out your eves and given them to me} (\tous ophthalmous hum“n exoruxantes ed“kate moi\). This is the conclusion of a condition of the second class without \an\ expressed which would have made it clearer. But see strkjv@John:16:22,24; strkjv@Romans:7:7| for similar examples where the context makes it plain without \an\. It is strong language and is saved from hyperbole by "if possible" (\ei dunaton\). Did Paul not have at this time serious eye trouble?

rwp@Galatians:6:8 @{Corruption} (\phthoran\). For this old word from \phtheir“\, see on ¯1Corinthians:15:42|. The precise meaning turns on the context, here plainly the physical and moral decay or rottenness that follows sins of the flesh as all men know. Nature writes in one's body the penalty of sin as every doctor knows. {Eternal life} (\z“ˆn ai“nion\). See on ¯Matthew:25:46| for this interesting phrase so common in the Johannine writings. Plato used \ai“nios\ for perpetual. See also strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:9|. It comes as nearly meaning "eternal" as the Greek can express that idea.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE AUTHOR Origen bluntly wrote: "Who wrote the Epistle God only knows certainly" as quoted by Eusebius. Origen held that the thoughts were Paul's while Clement of Rome or Luke may have written the book. Clement of Alexandria (Eusebius says) thought that Paul wrote it in Hebrew and that Luke translated it into Greek. No early writer apparently attributed the Greek text to Paul. Eusebius thought it was originally written in Hebrew whether by Paul or not and translated by Clement of Rome. But there is no certainty anywhere in the early centuries. It was accepted first in the east and later in the west which first rejected it. But Jerome and Augustine accepted it. When the Renaissance came Erasmus had doubts, Luther attributed it to Apollos, Calvin denied the Pauline authorship. In North Africa it was attributed to Barnabas. In modern times Harnack has suggested Priscilla, but the masculine participle in strkjv@Hebrews:11:32| (\me diˆgoumenon\) disposes of that theory. The oldest Greek MSS. (Aleph A B) have simply \Pros Hebraious\ as the title, but they place it before the Pastoral Epistles, while the Textus Receptus puts it after the Pastoral Epistles and Philemon. In the light of all the facts one can only make a guess without a sense of certainty. For myself I should with Luther guess Apollos as the most likely author of this book which is full of the Spirit of God.

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

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

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

rwp@Hebrews:9:10 @{Only with meats and drinks and divers washings} (\monon epi br“masin kai pomasin kai diaphorois baptismois\). The parenthesis of the Revised Version here is unnecessary. The use of \epi\ here with the locative case is regular, "in the matter of" (Luke:12:52; strkjv@John:12:16; strkjv@Acts:21:24|). What ritual value these Levitical sacrifices had was confined to minute regulations about diet and ceremonial cleansing (clean and unclean). For "divers" (\diaphorois\, late adjective, in N.T. only in strkjv@Hebrews:1:4; strkjv@8:6; strkjv@9:10; strkjv@Romans:12:6|) say "different" or "various." \Baptismois\ is, of course, the Jewish ceremonial immersions (cf. strkjv@Mark:7:4; strkjv@Exodus:29:4; strkjv@Leviticus:11:25,28f.; strkjv@Numbers:8:7; strkjv@Revelation:6:2|). {Carnal ordinances} (\dikai“masin sarkos\). But the correct text is undoubtedly simply \dikai“mata sarkos\ (nominative case), in apposition with \d“ra te kai thusiai\ (gifts and sacrifices). See strkjv@9:1| for \dikai“mata\. {Imposed} (\epikeimena\). Present middle or passive participle of \epikeimai\, old verb to lie upon (be laid upon). Cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:9:16|. {Until a time of reformation} (\mechri kairou diorth“se“s\). Definite statement of the temporary nature of the Levitical system already stated in strkjv@7:10-17; strkjv@8:13| and argued clearly by Paul in strkjv@Galatians:3:15-22|. \Diorth“sis\ is a late word, here alone in N.T. (from \diortho“\, to set right or straight), used by Hippocrates for making straight misshapen limbs like \anortho“\ in strkjv@Hebrews:12:12|. Here for reformation like \diorth“ma\ (reform) in strkjv@Acts:24:2f|. Christianity itself is the great Reformation of the current Judaism (Pharisaism) and the spiritual Judaism foreshadowed by the old Abrahamic promise (see strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9|).

rwp@Hebrews:9:11 @{Having come} (\paragenomenos\). Second aorist middle participle of \paraginomai\. This is the great historic event that is the crux of history. "Christ came on the scene, and all was changed" (Moffatt). {Of the good things to come} (\t“n mellont“n agath“n\). But B D read \genomen“n\ (that are come). It is a nice question which is the true text. Both aspects are true, for Christ is High Priest of good things that have already come as well as of the glorious future of hope. Westcott prefers \genomen“n\, Moffatt \mellont“n\. {Through the greater and more perfect tabernacle} (\dia tˆs meizonos kai teleioteras skˆnˆs\). Probably the instrumental use of \dia\ (2Corinthians:2:4; strkjv@Romans:2:27; strkjv@14:20|) as accompaniment, not the local idea (4:14; strkjv@10:20|). Christ as High Priest employed in his work the heavenly tabernacle (8:2|) after which the earthly was patterned (9:24|). {Not made with hands} (\ou cheiropoiˆtou\). Old compound verbal for which see strkjv@Mark:14:58; strkjv@Acts:7:48; strkjv@17:24|. Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:8:2|. Here in the predicate position. {Not of this creation} (\ou tautˆs tˆs ktise“s\). Explanation of \ou chieropoiˆtou\. For \ktisis\ see strkjv@2Corinthians:5:17; strkjv@Romans:8:19|. For the idea see strkjv@2Corinthians:4:18; strkjv@Hebrews:8:2|. This greater and more perfect tabernacle is heaven itself (9:24|).

rwp@Hebrews:10:5 @{When he cometh into the world} (\eiserchomenos eis ton kosmon\). Reference to the Incarnation of Christ who is represented as quoting strkjv@Psalms:40:7-9| which is quoted. The text of the LXX is followed in the main which differs from the Hebrew chiefly in having \s“ma\ (body) rather than \“tia\ (ears). The LXX translation has not altered the sense of the Psalm, "that there was a sacrifice which answered to the will of God as no animal sacrifice could" (Moffatt). Songs:the writer of Hebrews "argues that the Son's offering of himself is the true and final offering for sin, because it is the sacrifice, which, according to prophecy, God desired to be made" (Davidson). {A body didst thou prepare for me} (\s“ma katˆrtis“ moi\). First aorist middle indicative second person singular of \katartiz“\, to make ready, equip. Using \s“ma\ (body) for \“tia\ (ears) does not change the sense, for the ears were the point of contact with God's will.

rwp@Hebrews:11:1 @{Now faith is} (\estin de pistis\). He has just said that "we are of faith" (10:39|), not of apostasy. Now he proceeds in a chapter of great eloquence and passion to illustrate his point by a recital of the heroes of faith whose example should spur them to like loyalty now. {The assurance of things hoped for} (\elpizomen“n hupostasis\). {Hupostasis} is a very common word from Aristotle on and comes from \huphistˆmi\ (\hupo\, under, \histˆmi\, intransitive), what stands under anything (a building, a contract, a promise). See the philosophical use of it in strkjv@1:3|, the sense of assurance (une assurance certaine, M‚n‚goz) in strkjv@3:14|, that steadiness of mind which holds one firm (2Corinthians:9:4|). It is common in the papyri in business documents as the basis or guarantee of transactions. "And as this is the essential meaning in strkjv@Hebrews:11:1| we venture to suggest the translation 'Faith is the _title-deed_ of things hoped for'" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_, etc.). {The proving of things not seen} (\pragmat“n elegchos ou blepomen“n\). The only N.T. example of \elegchos\ (except Textus Receptus in strkjv@2Timothy:3:16| for \elegmon\). Old and common word from \elegch“\ (Matthew:18:15|) for "proof" and then for "conviction." Both uses occur in the papyri and either makes sense here, perhaps "conviction" suiting better though not in the older Greek.

rwp@Hebrews:11:7 @{Being warned of God} (\chrˆmatistheis\). First aorist passive participle of \chrˆmatiz“\, old word for oracular or divine communications as already in strkjv@8:5| (cf. strkjv@Matthew:2:12,22|, etc.). {Moved with godly fear} (\eulabˆthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \eulabeomai\, old verb from \eulabˆs\ (from \eu\ and \labein\, to take hold well or carefully), to show oneself \eulabˆs\, to act circumspectly or with reverence, here only in N.T. (save Textus Receptus in strkjv@Acts:23:10|), often in LXX. {An ark} (\kib“ton\). strkjv@Genesis:6:15; strkjv@Matthew:24:38|. Shaped like a box (cf. strkjv@Hebrews:9:4|). {Through which} (\di' hˆs\). Through his faith as shown in building the ark. {The world} (\ton kosmon\). Sinful humanity as in verse 38|. {Heir} (\klˆronomos\). In strkjv@2Peter:2:5| Noah is called "a preacher of righteousness" as here "heir of righteousness." He himself believed his message about the flood. Like Enoch he walked with God (Genesis:6:9|).

rwp@Hebrews:11:37 @{They were stoned} (\elithasthˆsan\). Like Zechariah son of Jehoiada (2Chronicles:24:20|). "A characteristic Jewish punishment" (Vincent). First aorist passive indicative of \lithaz“\ (John:10:31|). {They were sawn asunder} (\epristhˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \pri“\ or \priz“\, old verb (\prion\, a saw). Cruel Jewish punishment (Amos:1:3|) said to have been inflicted on Isaiah. {They were tempted} (\epeirasthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \peiraz“\. The MSS. vary greatly in the text here and the order of these two items. This mild word seems an anticlimax after \epristhˆsan\. One of the seven brothers was fried (II Macc. strkjv@7:4) and so \eprˆsthesan\ (were burned) from \pimpra“\ (Acts:28:6|) has been suggested. {With the sword} (\en phon“i machairˆs\). "In (by) slaughter of the sword" (Ionic form of the genitive \machaires\ as in strkjv@Exodus:17:13; strkjv@Numbers:21:24|). The fate of unpopular prophets (1Kings:10:10; strkjv@Jeremiah:26:23|). {They went about} (\periˆlthon\). Constative aorist active indicative of \perierchomai\ (picturesque compound verb). Here the sufferings of the living. {In sheep skins} (\en mˆl“tais\). Late word from \mˆlon\ (sheep), rough garment of prophets as Elijah (1Kings:19:13,19|), here only in N.T. In Byzantine Greek a monk's garb. {In goatskins} (\en aigeiois dermasin\). \Derma\, old word from \der“\, to flay (Matthew:21:35|), here only in N.T. \Aigeios\, old adjective (from \aix\, goat), here only in N.T. {Being destitute} (\husteroumenoi\). Present passive participle of \hustere“\, old verb to be left behind, used by Paul of himself (2Corinthians:11:9|). {Afflicted} (\thlibomenoi\). Present passive participle of \thlib“\, common verb to oppress. {Evil entreated} (\kakouchoumenoi\). Present passive participle of \kakouche“\, late compound verb from obsolete \kakouchos\ (\kakos\ and \ech“\), in LXX (1Kings:2:26|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@13:3|. See \sunkakoucheisthai\ in strkjv@11:25|.

rwp@James:1:13 @{Let no one say} (\mˆdeis leget“\). Present active imperative, prohibiting such a habit. {When he is tempted} (\peirazomenos\). Present passive participle of \peiraz“\, here in evil sense of tempt, not test, as in strkjv@Matthew:4:1|. Verses 12-18| give a vivid picture of temptation. {I am tempted of God} (\apo theou peirazomai\). The use of \apo\ shows origin (\apo\ with ablative case), not agency (\hupo\), as in strkjv@Mark:1:13|, of Satan. It is contemptible, but I have heard wicked and weak men blame God for their sins. Cf. strkjv@Proverbs:19:3|; Sirach strkjv@15:11f. Temptation does not spring "from God." {Cannot be tempted with evil} (\apeirastos kak“n\). Verbal compound adjective (alpha privative and \peiraz“\), probably with the ablative case, as is common with alpha privative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516), though Moulton (_Prolegomena_, p. 74) treats it as the genitive of definition. The ancient Greek has \apeiratos\ (from \peira“\), but this is the earliest example of \apeirastos\ (from \peiraz“\) made on the same model. Only here in the N.T. Hort notes \apeiratos kak“n\ as a proverb (Diodorus, Plutarch, Josephus) "free from evils." That is possible here, but the context calls for "untemptable" rather than "untempted." {And he himself tempteth no man} (\peirazei de autos oudena\). Because "untemptable."

rwp@James:1:17 @{Gift} (\dosis\) {--boon} (\d“rˆma\). Both old substantives from the same original verb (\did“mi\), to give. \Dosis\ is the act of giving (ending \-sis\), but sometimes by metonymy for the thing given like \ktisis\ for \ktisma\ (Colossians:1:15|). But \d“rˆma\ (from \d“re“\, from \d“ron\ a gift) only means a gift, a benefaction (Romans:5:16|). The contrast here argues for "giving" as the idea in \dosis\. Curiously enough there is a perfect hexameter line here: \pƒsa do / sis aga / thˆ kai / pƒn d“ / rˆma te / leion\. Such accidental rhythm occurs occasionally in many writers. Ropes (like Ewald and Mayor) argues for a quotation from an unknown source because of the poetical word \d“rˆma\, but that is not conclusive. {From above} (\an“then\). That is, from heaven. Cf. strkjv@John:3:31; strkjv@19:11|. {Coming down} (\katabainon\). Present active neuter singular participle of \katabain“\ agreeing with \d“rˆma\, expanding and explaining \an“then\ (from above). {From the Father of lights} (\apo tou patros t“n ph“t“n\). "Of the lights" (the heavenly bodies). For this use of \patˆr\ see strkjv@Job:38:28| (Father of rain); strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3; strkjv@Ephesians:1:17|. God is the Author of light and lights. {With whom} (\par' h“i\). For \para\ (beside) with locative sense for standpoint of God see \para t“i the“i\ (Mark:10:27; strkjv@Romans:2:11; strkjv@9:14; strkjv@Ephesians:6:9|. {Can be no} (\ouk eni\). This old idiom (also in strkjv@Galatians:3:28; strkjv@Colossians:3:11|) may be merely the original form of \en\ with recessive accent (Winer, Mayor) or a shortened form of \enesti\. The use of \eni en\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:5| argues for this view, as does the use of \eine\ (\einai\) in Modern Greek (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 313). {Variation} (\parallagˆ\). Old word from \parallass“\, to make things alternate, here only in N.T. In Aristeas in sense of alternate stones in pavements. Dio Cassius has \parallaxis\ without reference to the modern astronomical parallax, though James here is comparing God (Father of the lights) to the sun (Malachi:4:2|), which does have periodic variations. {Shadow that is cast by turning} (\tropˆs aposkiasma\). \Tropˆ\ is an old word for "turning" (from \trep“\ to turn), here only in N.T. \Aposkiasma\ is a late and rare word (\aposkiasmos\ in Plutarch) from \aposkiaz“\ (\apo, skia\) a shade cast by one object on another. It is not clear what the precise metaphor is, whether the shadow thrown on the dial (\aposkiaz“\ in Plato) or the borrowed light of the moon lost to us as it goes behind the earth. In fact, the text is by no means certain, for Aleph B papyrus of fourth century actually read \hˆ tropˆs aposkiasmatos\ (the variation of the turning of the shadow). Ropes argues strongly for this reading, and rather convincingly. At any rate there is no such periodic variation in God like that we see in the heavenly bodies.

rwp@James:1:19 @{Ye know this} (\iste\). Or "know this." Probably the perfect active indicative (literary form as in strkjv@Ephesians:5:5; strkjv@Hebrews:12:17|, unless both are imperative, while in strkjv@James:4:4| we have \oidate\, the usual vernacular _Koin‚_ perfect indicative). The imperative uses only \iste\ and only the context can decide which it is. \Esto\ (let be) is imperative. {Swift to hear} (\tachus eis to akousai\). For this use of \eis to\ with the infinitive after an adjective see strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:9|. For \eis to\ after adjectives see strkjv@Romans:16:19|. The picture points to listening to the word of truth (verse 18|) and is aimed against violent and disputatious speech (chapter strkjv@3:1-12|). The Greek moralists often urge a quick and attentive ear. {Slow to speak} (\bradus eis to lalˆsai\). Same construction and same ingressive aorist active infinitive, slow to begin speaking, not slow while speaking. {Slow to anger} (\bradus eis orgˆn\). He drops the infinitive here, but he probably means that slowness to speak up when angry will tend to curb the anger.

rwp@James:2:1 @{My brethren} (\adelphoi mou\). Transition to a new topic as in strkjv@1:19; strkjv@2:5,14; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@5:7|. {Hold not} (\mˆ echete\). Present active imperative of \ech“\ with negative \mˆ\, exhortation to stop holding or not to have the habit of holding in the fashion condemned. {The faith of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\tˆn pistin tou kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou Christou\). Clearly objective genitive, not subjective (faith of), but "faith in our Lord Jesus Christ," like \echete pistin theou\ (Mark:11:22|), "have faith in God." See the same objective genitive with \pistis\ in strkjv@Acts:3:6; strkjv@Galatians:2:16; strkjv@Romans:3:22; strkjv@Revelation:14:12|. Note also the same combination as in strkjv@1:1| "our Lord Jesus Christ" (there on a par with God). {The Lord of Glory} (\tˆs doxˆs\). Simply "the Glory." No word for "Lord" (\kuriou\) in the Greek text. \Tˆs doxˆs\ clearly in apposition with \tou kuriou Iˆsou Christou\. James thus terms "our Lord Jesus Christ" the Shekinah Glory of God. See strkjv@Hebrews:9:5| for "the cherubim of Glory." Other New Testament passages where Jesus is pictured as the Glory are strkjv@Romans:9:4; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:6; strkjv@Ephesians:1:17; strkjv@Hebrews:1:3|. Cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|. {With respect of persons} (\en pros“polˆmpsiais\). A Christian word, like \pros“polˆmptˆs\ (Acts:10:34|) and \pros“polˆmpteite\ (James:2:9|), not in LXX or any previous Greek, but made from \pros“pon lambanein\ (Luke:20:21; strkjv@Galatians:2:6|), which is \a\ Hebrew idiom for _panim nasa_, "to lift up the face on a person," to be favorable and so partial to him. See \pros“polˆmpsia\ in this sense of partiality (respect of persons) in strkjv@Romans:2:11; strkjv@Colossians:3:25; strkjv@Ephesians:6:9| (nowhere else in N.T.). Do not show partiality.

rwp@James:4:4 @{Ye adulteresses} (\moichalides\). \Moichoi kai\ (ye adulterers) is spurious (Syrian text only). The feminine form here is a common late word from the masculine \moichoi\. It is not clear whether the word is to be taken literally here as in strkjv@Romans:7:3|, or figuratively for all unfaithful followers of Christ (like an unfaithful bride), as in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:1f.; strkjv@Ephesians:5:24-28| (the Bride of Christ). Either view makes sense in this context, probably the literal view being more in harmony with the language of verses 2f|. In that case James may include more than Christians in his view, though Paul talks plainly to church members about unchastity (Ephesians:5:3-5|). {Enmity with God} (\echthra tou theou\). Objective genitive \theou\ with \echthra\ (predicate and so without article), old word from \echthros\, enemy (Romans:5:10|), with \eis theon\ (below and strkjv@Romans:8:7|). {Whosoever therefore would be} (\hos ean oun boulˆthˆi\). Indefinite relative clause with \hos\ and modal \ean\ and the first aorist passive (deponent) subjunctive of \boulomai\, to will (purpose). {A friend of the world} (\philos tou kosmou\). Predicate nominative with infinitive \einai\ agreeing with \hos\. See strkjv@2:23| for \philos theou\ (friend of God). {Maketh himself} (\kathistatai\). Present passive (not middle) indicative as in strkjv@3:6|, "is constituted," "is rendered." {An enemy of God} (\echthros tou theou\). Predicate nominative and anarthrous and objective genitive (\theou\).

rwp@James:4:13 @{Go to now} (\age nun\). Interjectional use of \age\ (from \ag“\) as in strkjv@5:1| (only N.T. instances) with a plural verb (\hoi legontes\, present active articular participle, ye that say) as is common in ancient Greek like \ide nun ˆkousate\ (Matthew:26:65|). {Today or tomorrow} (\sˆmeron ˆ aurion\). Correct text (Aleph B), not \kai\ (and). {Into this city} (\eis tˆnde tˆn polin\). Old demonstrative \hode\, rare in N.T. (Luke:10:39|) save in neuter plural \tade\ (these things strkjv@Acts:21:11|). One would point out the city on the map (Mayor) as he made the proposal (we will go, \poreusometha\). {And spend a year there} (\kai poiˆsomen ekei eniauton\). Another future (active of \poie“\). "We will do a year there." {And trade} (\kai emporeusometha\). Future middle of \emporeuomai\ (\en, poreuomai\, to go in), old verb from \emporos\ (a merchant or trader, a drummer, one going in and getting the trade, strkjv@Matthew:13:45|), a vivid picture of the Jewish merchants of the time. {And get gain} (\kai kerdˆsomen\). Future (Ionic form) active of \kerdain“\, old verb from \kerdos\ (gain, strkjv@Phillipians:1:21|), as in strkjv@Matthew:16:26|.

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

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

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

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

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

rwp@John:1:28 @{In Bethany beyond Jordan} (\en Bˆthaniƒi peran tou Iordanou\). Undoubtedly the correct text, not "in Bethabara" as Origen suggested instead of "in Bethany" of all the known Greek manuscripts under the mistaken notion that the only Bethany was that near Jerusalem. {Was baptizing} (\ˆn baptiz“n\). Periphrastic imperfect, common idiom in John.

rwp@John:1:39 @{Come and ye shall see} (\erchesthe kai opsesthe\). Polite invitation and definite promise (future middle indicative \opsesthe\ from \hora“\, correct text, not imperative \idete\). {Where he abode} (\pou menei\). Indirect question preserving the present active indicative after secondary tense (\eidan\, saw) according to regular Greek idiom. Same verb \men“\ as in 38|. {With him} (\par' aut“i\). "By his side," "beside him." {That day} (\tˆn hˆmeran ekeinˆn\). Accusative of extent of time, all during that day. {About the tenth hour} (\h“ra h“s dekatˆ\). Roman time and so ten o'clock in the morning. John in Ephesus at the close of the century naturally uses Roman time. See strkjv@20:19| "evening on that day," clearly Roman time. Thus also strkjv@John:19:14| (sixth hour, morning) and strkjv@Mark:15:25| (third hour, nine A.M.) suit. To his latest day John never forgot the hour when first he met Jesus.

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

rwp@John:3:25 @{A questioning} (\zˆtˆsis\). Old word from \zˆte“\. See strkjv@Acts:15:2| for the word where also \zˆtˆma\ (question) occurs. \Zˆtˆsis\ (process of inquiry) means a meticulous dispute (1Timothy:6:4|). {With a Jew} (\meta Ioudaiou\). Songs:correct text, not \Ioudai“n\ (Jews). Probably some Jew resented John's baptism of Jesus as implying impurity or that they were like Gentiles (cf. proselyte baptism). {About purifying} (\peri katharismou\). See strkjv@2:6| for the word. The committee from the Sanhedrin had challenged John's right to baptize (1:25|). The Jews had various kinds of baptisms or dippings (Hebrews:6:2|), "baptisms of cups and pots and brazen vessels" (Mark:6:4|). The disciples of John came to him with the dispute (the first known baptismal controversy, on the meaning of the ceremony) and with a complaint.

rwp@John:4:21 @{Believe me} (\pisteue moi\). Correct text. Present active imperative. Unique phrase in place of the common \amˆn amˆn\ (verily, verily). {The hour cometh} (\erchetai h“ra\). "There is coming an hour." The same idiom occurs also in John strkjv@4:34; strkjv@5:25,28; strkjv@16:2,25,32|. {Neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem} (\oute en t“i orei tout“i oute en Ierosolumois\). The worship of God will be emancipated from bondage to place. Both Jews and Samaritans are wrong as to the "necessity" (\dei\). "These ancient rivalries will disappear when the spirituality of true religion is fully realized." Jesus told this sinful woman one of his greatest truths.

rwp@John:5:3 @{In these} (\en tautais\). In these five porches. {Lay} (\katekeito\). Imperfect middle of \katakeimai\, to lie down, singular number because \plˆthos\ (multitude) is a collective substantive. {Withered} (\xˆr“n\). Old adjective \xˆros\ for dry, wasted as the hand (Matthew:12:10|). The oldest and best manuscripts omit what the Textus Receptus adds here "waiting for the moving of the water" (\ekdechomenon tˆn tou hudatos kinˆsin\), a Western and Syrian addition to throw light on the word \tarachthˆi\ (is troubled) in verse 7|.

rwp@John:5:39 @{Ye search} (\eraunƒte\). Proper spelling as the papyri show rather than \ereunƒte\, the old form (from \ereuna\, search) as in strkjv@7:52|. The form here can be either present active indicative second person plural or the present active imperative second person plural. Only the context can decide. Either makes sense here, but the reason given "because ye think" (\hoti humeis dokeite\, clearly indicative), supports the indicative rather than the imperative. Besides, Jesus is arguing on the basis of their use of "the Scriptures" (\tas graphas\). The plural with the article refers to the well-known collection in the Old Testament (Matthew:21:42; strkjv@Luke:24:27|). Elsewhere in John the singular refers to a particular passage (2:22; strkjv@7:38; strkjv@10:35|). {In them ye have eternal life} (\en autais z“ˆn ai“nion echein\). Indirect assertion after \dokeite\ without "ye" expressed either as nominative (\humeis\) or accusative (\humas\). Bernard holds that in John \doke“\ always indicates a mistaken opinion (5:45; strkjv@11:13,31; strkjv@13:29; strkjv@16:20; strkjv@20:15|). Certainly the rabbis did make a mechanical use of the letter of Scripture as a means of salvation. {These are they} (\ekeinai eisin hai\). The true value of the Scriptures is in their witness to Christ (of me, \peri emou\). Luke (24:27,45|) gives this same claim of Jesus, and yet some critics fail to find the Messiah in the Old Testament. But Jesus did.

rwp@John:6:55 @{Meat indeed} (\alˆthˆs br“sis\). Songs:the best MSS., "true food." See on ¯4:32| for \br“sis\ as equal to \br“ma\ (a thing eaten). {Drink indeed} (\alˆthˆs posis\). Correct text, "true drink." For \posis\ see strkjv@Romans:14:17; strkjv@Colossians:2:16| (only N.T. examples).

rwp@John:7:9 @{He abode still in Galilee} (\emeinen en tˆi Galilaiƒi\). No "still" (\eti\) in the Greek text. The constative aorist active indicative \emeinen\ covers a period of some days.

rwp@John:7:53 @This verse and through strkjv@8:12| (the passage concerning the woman taken in adultery) is certainly not a genuine part of John's Gospel. The oldest and best MSS. (Aleph A B C L W) do not have it. It first appears in Codex Bezae. Some MSS. put it at the close of John's Gospel and some place it in Luke. It is probably a true story for it is like Jesus, but it does not belong to John's Gospel. The Canterbury Version on which we are commenting puts the passage in brackets. Westcott and Hort place it at the end of the Gospel. With this explanation we shall proceed. {They went} (\eporeuthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \poreuomai\ used as a deponent verb without passive idea. In this context the verb has to refer to the Sanhedrin with a rather pointless contrast to Jesus.

rwp@John:9:4 @{We must work the works of him that sent me} (\hˆmas dei ergazesthai ta erga tou pempsantos me\). This is undoubtedly the correct text (supported by the Neutral and Western classes) and not \eme\ (I) and \me\ (me) of the Syrian class nor \hˆmas\ (we) and \hˆmas\ (us) of the Alexandrian class. Jesus associates us with him in the task committed to him by the Father. Bernard argues vigorously, but vainly, for \eme\ me. We are not able to fathom the depth of the necessity (\dei\) here involved in each life as in this poor blind man and in each of us. {While it is day} (\he“s hˆmera estin\). This clause gives the note of urgency upon us all. {The night cometh} (\erchetai nux\). "Night is coming on," and rapidly. Night was coming for Jesus (7:33|) and for each of us. Cf. strkjv@11:9; strkjv@12:35|. Even electric lights do not turn night into day. \He“s\ with the present indicative (21:22f.|) means "while," not until as in strkjv@13:38|.

rwp@John:10:24 @{Came round about him} (\ekukl“san auton\). Aorist active indicative of \kuklo“\, old verb from \kuklos\ (cycle, circle). See strkjv@Acts:14:20| for the circle of disciples around Paul when stoned. Evidently the hostile Jews cherished the memory of the stinging rebuke given them by Jesus when here last, particularly the allegory of the Good Shepherd (10:1-19|), in which he drew so sharply their own picture. {How long dost thou hold us in suspense?} (\he“s pote tˆn psuchˆn hˆm“n aireis;\). Literally, "Until when dost thou lift up our soul?" But what do they mean by this metaphor? \Air“\ is common enough to lift up the eyes (John:11:41|), the voice (Luke:17:13|), and in strkjv@Psalms:25:1; strkjv@86:4| (Josephus, _Ant_. III. ii. 3) we have "to lift up the soul." We are left to the context to judge the precise meaning. Clearly the Jews mean to imply doubt and suspense. The next remark makes it clear. {If thou art the Christ} (\ei su ei ho Christos\). Condition of first class assumed to be true for the sake of argument. {Tell us plainly} (\eipon hˆmin parrˆsiƒi\). Conclusion with \eipon\ rather than the usual \eipe\ as if first aorist active imperative like \luson\. The point is in "plainly" (\parrˆsiƒi\), adverb as in strkjv@7:13,26| which see. That is to say "I am the Christ" in so many words. See strkjv@11:14; strkjv@16:29| for the same use of \parrˆsiƒi\. The demand seemed fair enough on the surface. They had made it before when here at the feast of tabernacles (8:25|). Jesus declined to use the word \Christos\ (Messiah) then as now because of the political bearing of the word in their minds. The populace in Galilee had once tried to make him king in opposition to Pilate (John:6:14f.|). When Jesus does confess on oath before Caiaphas that he is the Christ the Son of God (Mark:14:61f.; strkjv@Matthew:26:63f.|), the Sanhedrin instantly vote him guilty of blasphemy and then bring him to Pilate with the charge of claiming to be king as a rival to Caesar. Jesus knew their minds too well to be caught now.

rwp@John:10:29 @{Which} (\hos\). Who. If \ho\ (which) is correct, we have to take \ho patˆr\ as nominative absolute or independent, "As for my Father." {Is greater than all} (\pant“n meiz“n estin\). If we read \hos\. But Aleph B L W read \ho\ and A B Theta have \meizon\. The neuter seems to be correct (Westcott and Hort). But is it? If so, the meaning is: "As for my Father, that which he hath given me is greater than all." But the context calls for \hos... meiz“n\ with \ho patˆr\ as the subject of \estin\. The greatness of the Father, not of the flock, is the ground of the safety of the flock. Hence the conclusion that "no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand."

rwp@John:11:19 @{Had come} (\elˆlutheisan\). Past perfect of \erchomai\. These Jews were probably not hostile to Jesus. There were seven days of solemn mourning (1Samuel:31:13|). The presence of so many indicates the prominence of the family. {To Martha and Mary} (\pros tˆn Marthan kai Mariam\). Correct text, not the Textus Receptus \pros tas peri Marthan kai Mariam\ (to the women about Martha and Mary). {To console them} (\hina paramuthˆs“ntai\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist middle subjunctive of \paramutheomai\, old verb (\para\, beside, \muthos\, word), to put in a word beside, to offer consolation. Again in verse 31|. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:11; strkjv@5:14|. See strkjv@Job:2:13| for these visits of consolation, often deplorable enough, though kindly meant.

rwp@John:11:22 @{And even now I know} (\kai nun oida\). Rather just, "Even now I know." \Alla\ (but) of the Textus Receptus is not genuine. {Whatsoever thou shalt ask of God} (\hosa an aitˆsˆi ton theon\). Indefinite relative (\hosa\, as many things as) with \an\ and the first aorist middle (indirect middle, thou thyself asking) subjunctive of \aite“\. Martha uses \aite“\ (usual word of prayer of men to God) rather than \er“ta“\ (usual word of Jesus praying to the Father), but in strkjv@16:23| we have \er“ta“\ used of prayer to Jesus and \aite“\ of prayer to God. But the distinction is not to be pressed. "As many things as thou dost ask of God." {God will give} (\d“sei soi ho theos\). Repetition of \ho theos\ for emphasis. Martha still has courageous faith in the power of God through Jesus and Jesus in verse 41| says practically what she has said here.

rwp@John:11:41 @{Songs:they took away the stone} (\ˆran oun ton lithon\). First aorist active indicative of \air“\, but without the explanatory gloss of the Textus Receptus "from the place where the dead was laid" (not genuine). {I thank thee that thou heardest me} (\eucharist“ soi hoti ˆkousas mou\). See strkjv@6:11| for \euchariste“\. Clearly Jesus had prayed to the Father concerning the raising of Lazarus. He has the answer before he acts. "No pomp of incantation, no wrestling in prayer even; but simple words of thanksgiving, as if already Lazarus was restored" (Dods). Jesus well knew the issues involved on this occasion. If he failed, his own claims to be the Son of God (the Messiah), would be hopelessly discredited with all. If he succeeded, the rulers would be so embittered as to compass his own death.

rwp@John:11:50 @{That it is expedient for you} (\hoti sumpherei humin\). Indirect discourse with present active indicative of \sumpher“\ used with the \hina\ clause as subject. It means to bear together, to be profitable, with the dative case as here (\humin\, for you). It is to your interest and that is what they cared most for. {That one man die} (\hina heis anthr“pos apothanˆi\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist active subjunctive of \apothnˆsk“\ as subject clause with \sumpherei\. See strkjv@16:7; strkjv@18:7| for the same construction. {For the people} (\huper tou laou\). \Huper\ simply means _over_, but can be in behalf of as often, and in proper context the resultant idea is "instead of" as the succeeding clause shows and as is clearly so in strkjv@Galatians:3:13| of the death of Christ and naturally so in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14f.; strkjv@Romans:5:6|. In the papyri \huper\ is the usual preposition used of one who writes a letter for one unable to write. {And that the whole nation perish not} (\kai mˆ holon to ethnos apolˆtai\). Continuation of the \hina\ construction with \mˆ\ and the second aorist subjunctive of \apollumi\. What Caiaphas has in mind is the giving of Jesus to death to keep the nation from perishing at the hands of the Romans. Politicians are often willing to make a sacrifice of the other fellow.

rwp@John:12:6 @{Not because he cared for the poor} (\ouch hoti peri t“n pt“ch“n emelen aut“i\). Literally, "not because it was a care to him concerning the poor" (impersonal imperfect of \melei\, it was a care). John often makes explanatory comments of this kind as in strkjv@2:21f.; strkjv@7:22,39|. {But because he was a thief} (\alle hoti kleptˆs ˆn\). Clearly the disciples did not know then that Judas was a petty thief. That knowledge came later after he took the bribe of thirty pieces of silver for betraying Jesus (Matthew:26:15|), for the disciples did not suspect Judas of treachery (13:28f.|), let alone small peculations. There is no reason for thinking that John is unfair to Judas. "Temptation commonly comes through that for which we are naturally fitted" (Westcott). In this case Judas himself was "the poor beggar" who wanted this money. {And having the bag took away what was put therein} (\kai to gl“ssokomon ech“n ta ballomena ebastazen\). This is the correct text. This compound for the earlier \gl“ssokomeion\ (from \gl“ssa\, tongue, and \kome“\, to tend) was originally a receptacle for the tongues or mouth-pieces of wind instruments. The shorter form is already in the Doric inscriptions and is common in the papyri for "money-box" as here. It occurs also in Josephus, Plutarch, etc. In N.T. only here and strkjv@13:29| in same sense about Judas. \Ballomena\ is present passive participle (repeatedly put in) of \ball“\, to cast or fling. The imperfect active (custom) of \bastaz“\, old verb to pick up (John:10:31|), to carry (19:17|), but here and strkjv@20:15| with the sense to bear away as in Polybius, Josephus, Diogenes Laertes, and often so in the papyri.

rwp@John:12:7 @{Suffer her to keep it against the day of my burying} (\Aphes autˆn, hina eis tˆn hˆmeran tou entaphiasmou mou tˆrˆsˆi auto\). This reading (\hina tˆrˆsˆi\, purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \tˆre“\) rather than that of the Textus Receptus (just \tetˆreken\, perfect active indicative) is correct. It is supported by Aleph B D L W Theta. The \hina\ can be rendered as above after \aphes\ according to _Koin‚_ idiom or more probably: "Let her alone: it was that," etc. (supplying "it was"). Either makes good sense. The word \entaphiasmos\ is a later and rare substantive from the late verb \entaphiaz“\, to prepare for burial (Matthew:26:12; strkjv@John:19:40|), and means preparation for burial. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:14:8|. "Preparation for my burial" is the idea here and in Mark. The idea of Jesus is that Mary had saved this money to use in preparing his body for burial. She is giving him the flowers before the funeral. We can hardly take it that Mary did not use all of the ointment for Mark (Mark:14:3|) says that she broke it and yet he adds (Mark:14:8|) what John has here. It is a paradox, but Jesus is fond of paradoxes. Mary has kept this precious gift by giving it now beforehand as a preparation for my burial. We really keep what we give to Christ. This is Mary's glory that she had some glimmering comprehension of Christ's death which none of the disciples possessed.

rwp@John:12:20 @{Certain Greeks} (\Hellˆnes tines\). Real Greeks, not Greek-speaking Jews (Hellenists, strkjv@Acts:6:1|), but Greeks like those in Antioch (Acts:11:20|, correct text \pros tous Hellˆnas\) to whom Barnabas was sent. These were probably proselytes of the gate or God-fearers like those worshipping Greeks in Thessalonica whom Paul won to Christ (Acts:17:4|). {To worship at the feast} (\hina proskunˆs“sin en tˆi heortˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \proskune“\, old and common verb to kiss the hand in reverence, to bow the knee in reverence and worship. We do not know whence they came, whether from Decapolis, Galilee, or further away. They found the pilgrims and the city ringing with talk about Jesus. They may even have witnessed the triumphal entry.

rwp@John:13:2 @{During supper} (\deipnou ginomenou\). Correct text, present middle participle of \ginomai\ (not \genomenou\, second aorist middle participle, "being ended") genitive absolute. Verse 4| shows plainly that the meal was still going on. {The devil having already put} (\tou diabolou ˆdˆ beblˆkotos\). Another genitive absolute without a connective (asyndeton), perfect active participle of \ball“\, to cast, to put. Luke (Luke:22:3|) says that Satan entered Judas when he offered to betray Jesus. Hence John's "already" (\ˆdˆ\) is pertinent. John repeats his statement in verse 27|. In strkjv@John:6:70| Jesus a year ago had seen that Judas was a devil. {To betray him} (\hina paradoi auton\). Cf. strkjv@Acts:5:3|. Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \paradid“mi\ (form in \-oi\ as in strkjv@Mark:14:10| rather than the usual \-“i\ in strkjv@Luke:22:4|). Satan had an open door by now into the heart of Judas.

rwp@John:13:23 @{Was at the table reclining in Jesus' bosom} (\ˆn anakeimenos en t“i kolp“i tou Iˆsou\). No word for "table" in the text. Periphrastic imperfect of \anakeimai\, to lie back, to recline. \Kolpos\ usual word for bosom (1:18|). {Whom Jesus loved} (\hon ˆgapa Iˆsous\). Imperfect active of \agapa“\, John's description of himself of which he was proud (19:26; strkjv@20:2; strkjv@21:7,20|), identified in strkjv@21:24| as the author of the book and necessarily one of the twelve because of the "explicit" (Bernard) language of Mark (Mark:14:17; strkjv@Luke:22:14|). John son of Zebedee and brother of James. At the table John was on the right of Jesus lying obliquely so that his head lay on the bosom of Jesus. The centre, the place of honour, Jesus occupied. The next place in rank was to the left of Jesus, held by Peter (Westcott) or by Judas (Bernard) which one doubts.

rwp@John:15:8 @{Herein} (\en tout“i\). That is in the vital union and the much fruit bearing. It points here backwards and forwards. {Is glorified} (\edoxasthˆ\). Another gnomic or timeless first aorist passive indicative. {Bear} (\pherete\). Present active subjunctive, "keep on bearing" much fruit. {And so shall ye be} (\kai genˆsesthe\). Rather "become." Future middle indicative of \ginomai\, though B D L read \genˆsthe\ (after \hina\ like \pherˆte\). "Become" my disciples (learners) in the fullest sense of rich fruit-bearing according to the text in

rwp@John:15:21 @{Unto you} (\eis humas\). Like the dative \humin\ (Textus Receptus) as in the papyri and modern Greek (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 594). {For my name's sake} (\dia to onoma mou\). See verse 20|. See this same warning and language in strkjv@Matthew:10:22; strkjv@Mark:13:13; strkjv@Matthew:24:9; strkjv@Luke:21:17|). There is little difference in meaning from \heneken mou\ (Mark:13:9; strkjv@Luke:21:12|). Loyalty to the name of Christ will bring persecution as they will soon know (Acts:5:41; strkjv@Phillipians:1:29; strkjv@1Peter:4:14|). About the world's ignorance of God see strkjv@Luke:23:34; strkjv@Acts:3:17; strkjv@John:16:3|.

rwp@John:15:22 @{They had not had sin} (\hamartian ouk eichosan\). Conclusion of condition of second class without \an\ because context makes it clear (\nun de\) without it (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1013). The imperfect active indicative with \-osan\ instead of \-on\ (also in verse 24|) as common in the LXX, and occurs in the papyri and the inscriptions and the Boeotian dialect. {Excuse} (\prophasin\). Old word (1Thessalonians:2:5|) either from \prophain“\, to show forth, or \prophˆmi\, to speak forth. Mere pretence, in John only here and verse 24|.

rwp@John:16:25 @{In proverbs} (\en paroimiais\). See on ¯10:6| for this word. {Shall tell} (\apaggel“\). Future active of \apaggell“\, to report, correct text and not \anaggel“\ (verses 13,14,15|), as in strkjv@1John:1:2f|. {Plainly} (\parrˆsiƒi\). See on ¯7:13| for this word.

rwp@John:18:1 @{With} (\sun\). See strkjv@12:2| for another example of \sun\ in John (common in Paul). The usual \meta\ reappears in verse 2|. {Over} (\peran\). "Beyond," preposition with the ablative as in strkjv@6:22,25|. {Brook} (\cheimarrou\). Old word, flowing (\roos, re“\) in winter (\cheima\), only here in N.T. {Kidron} (\ton Kedr“n\). Literally, "of the Cedars," "Brook of the Cedars." Only here in N.T. strkjv@Songs:2Samuel:15:23|. Textus Receptus like Josephus (_Ant_. VIII, 1, 5) has the singular \tou Kedr“n\ (indeclinable). As a matter of fact it was always dry save after a heavy rain. {A garden} (\kˆpos\). Old word, in N.T. only here, verse 26; strkjv@19:41| (Joseph's); strkjv@Luke:13:19|. John, like Luke, does not give the name Gethsemane (only in strkjv@Mark:14:32; strkjv@Matthew:26:36|). The brook of the cedars had many unhallowed associations (1Kings:2:37; strkjv@15:13; strkjv@2Kings:23:4ff.; strkjv@2Chronicles:29:16; strkjv@Jeremiah:31:40|).

rwp@John:18:12 @{The chief captain} (\ho chiliarchos\). They actually had the Roman commander of the cohort along (cf. strkjv@Acts:21:31|), not mentioned before. {Seized} (\sunelabon\). Second aorist active of \sullamban“\, old verb to grasp together, to arrest (technical word) in the Synoptics in this context (Mark:14:48; strkjv@Matthew:26:55|), here alone in John. {Bound} (\edˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \de“\, to bind. As a matter of course, with the hands behind his back, but with no warrant in law and with no charge against him. {To Annas first} (\pros Annan pr“ton\). Ex-high priest and father-in-law (\pentheros\, old word, only here in N.T.) of Caiaphas the actual high priest. Then Jesus was subjected to a preliminary and superfluous inquiry by Annas (given only by John) while the Sanhedrin were gathering before Caiaphas. Bernard curiously thinks that the night trial actually took place here before Annas and only the early morning ratification was before Caiaphas. Songs:he calmly says that "Matthew inserts the name _Caiaphas_ at this point (the night trial) in which he seems to have been mistaken." But why "mistaken"? {That year} (\tou eniautou ekeinou\). Genitive of time.

rwp@John:18:15 @{Followed} (\ˆkolouthei\). Imperfect active of \akolouthe“\, "was following," picturesque and vivid tense, with associative instrumental case \t“i Iˆsou\. {Another disciple} (\allos mathˆtˆs\). Correct text without article \ho\ (genuine in verse 16|). Peter's companion was the Beloved Disciple, the author of the book (John:21:24|). {Was known unto the high priest} (\ˆn gn“stos t“i archierei\). Verbal adjective from \gin“sk“\, to know (Acts:1:19|) with dative case. How well known the word does not say, not necessarily a personal friend, well enough known for the portress to admit John. "The account of what happened to Peter might well seem to be told from the point of view of the servants' hall" (Sanday, _Criticism of the Fourth Gospel_, p. 101). {Entered in with Jesus} (\suneisˆlthen t“i Iˆsou\). Second aorist active indicative of the double compound \suneiserchomai\, old verb, in N.T. here and strkjv@6:22|. With associative instrumental case. {Into the court} (\eis tˆn aulˆn\). It is not clear that this word ever means the palace itself instead of the courtyard (uncovered enclosure) as always in the papyri (very common). Clearly courtyard in strkjv@Mark:14:66| (Matthew:26:69; strkjv@Luke:22:55|). Apparently Annas had rooms in the official residence of Caiaphas.

rwp@John:18:37 @{Art thou a king then?} (\oukoun basileus ei su;\). Compound of \ouk\ and \oun\ and is clearly ironical expecting an affirmative answer, only here in the N.T., and in LXX only in A text in strkjv@2Kings:5:23|. {Thou sayest that} (\su legeis hoti\). In strkjv@Matthew:27:11; strkjv@Mark:15:2; strkjv@Luke:23:3|, \su legeis\ clearly means "yes," as \su eipas\ (thou saidst) does in strkjv@Matthew:26:64| (= "I am," \eg“ eimi\, in strkjv@Mark:41:62|). Hence here \hoti\ had best be taken to mean "because": "Yes, because I am a king." {Have I been born} (\eg“ gegennˆmai\). Perfect passive indicative of \genna“\. The Incarnation was for this purpose. Note repetition of \eis touto\ (for this purpose), explained by \hina marturˆs“ tˆi alˆtheiƒi\ (that I may bear witness to the truth), \hina\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \marture“\. Paul (1Timothy:6:13|) alludes to this good confession when Christ bore witness (\marturˆsantos\) before Pilate. Jesus bore such witness always (John:3:11,32; strkjv@7:7; strkjv@8:14; strkjv@Revelation:1:5|).

rwp@Jude:1:12 @{Hidden rocks} (\spilades\). Old word for rocks in the sea (covered by the water), as in Homer, here only in N.T. strkjv@2Peter:2:13| has \spiloi\. {Love-feasts} (\agapais\). Undoubtedly the correct text here, though A C have \apatais\ as in strkjv@2Peter:2:14|. For disorder at the Lord's Supper (and love-feasts?) see strkjv@1Corinthians:11:17-34|. The Gnostics made it worse, so that the love-feasts were discontinued. {When they feast with you} (\suneu“choumenoi\). See strkjv@2Peter:2:13| for this very word and form. Masculine gender with \houtoi hoi\ rather than with the feminine \spilades\. Cf. strkjv@Revelation:11:4|. Construction according to sense. {Shepherds that feed themselves} (\heautous poimainontes\). "Shepherding themselves." Cf. strkjv@Revelation:7:17| for this use of \poimain“\. Clouds without water (\nephelai anudroi\). \Nephelˆ\ common word for cloud (Matthew:24:30|). strkjv@2Peter:2:17| has \pˆgai anudroi\ (springs without water) and then \homichlai\ (mists) and \elaunomenai\ (driven) rather than \peripheromenai\ here (borne around, whirled around, present passive participle of \peripher“\ to bear around), a powerful picture of disappointed hopes. {Autumn trees} (\dendra phthinop“rina\). Late adjective (Aristotle, Polybius, Strabo) from \phthin“\, to waste away, and \op“ra\, autumn, here only in N.T. For \akarpa\ (without fruit) see strkjv@2Peter:1:8|. {Twice dead} (\dis apothanonta\). Second aorist active participle of \apothnˆsk“\. Fruitless and having died. Having died and also "uprooted" (\ekriz“thenta\). First aorist passive participle of \ekrizo“\, late compound, to root out, to pluck up by the roots, as in strkjv@Matthew:13:29|.

rwp@Jude:1:22 @{And on some} (\kai hous men\). Demonstrative plural of \hos men--hos de\ (\hous de\, below), not the relative \hous\, but by contrast (\men, de\). Songs:Matthew:13:8|. {Have mercy} (\eleƒte\). Present active imperative of \elea“\ (rare form in strkjv@Romans:9:16| also for the usual \elee“\ strkjv@Matthew:9:27|). But A C read \elegchete\, refute, in place of \eleate\. The text of this verse is in much confusion. {Who are in doubt} (\diakrinomenous\). Present middle participle of \diakrin“\, in the accusative case agreeing with \hous men\, though K L P have the nominative. If the accusative and \eleate\ is read, see strkjv@James:1:6| for the idea (doubters). If \elegchete\ is read, see strkjv@Jude:1:9| for the idea (disputers).

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

rwp@Luke:1:39 @{Arose} (\anastƒsa\). Luke is very fond of this word, sixty times against twenty-two in the rest of the N.T. {Into the hill country} (\eis tˆn orinˆn\). Luke uses this adjective twice in this context (here and strkjv@1:65|) instead of \to oros\, the mountains. It is an old word and is in the LXX, but nowhere else in the N.T. The name of the city where Zacharias lived is not given unless Judah here means Juttah (Joshua:15:55|). Hebron was the chief city of this part of Judea.

rwp@Luke:1:78 @{Tender mercy} (\splagchna eleous\). Bowels of mercy literally (1Peter:3:8; strkjv@James:3:11|). Revised margin has it, hearts of mercy. {The dayspring from on high} (\anatolˆ ex hupsous\). Literally, rising from on high, like the rising sun or stars (Isaiah:60:19|). The word is used also of a sprouting plant or branch (Jeremiah:23:5; strkjv@Zechariah:6:12|), but that does not suit here. {Shall visit} (\epeskepsetai\), correct text, cf. strkjv@1:68|.

rwp@Luke:2:14 @{Among men in whom he is well pleased} (\en anthr“pois eudokias\). The Textus Receptus (Authorized Version also has \eudokia\, but the genitive \eudokias\ is undoubtedly correct, supported by the oldest and best uncials. (Aleph, A B D W). C has a lacuna here. Plummer justly notes how in this angelic hymn Glory and Peace correspond, in the highest and on earth, to God and among men of goodwill. It would be possible to connect "on earth" with "the highest" and also to have a triple division. There has been much objection raised to the genitive \eudokias\, the correct text. But it makes perfectly good sense and better sense. As a matter of fact real peace on earth exists only among those who are the subjects of God's goodwill, who are characterized by goodwill toward God and man. This word \eudokia\ we have already had in strkjv@Matthew:11:26|. It does not occur in the ancient Greek. The word is confined to Jewish and Christian writings, though the papyri furnish instances of \eudokˆsis\. Wycliff has it "to men of goodwill."

rwp@Luke:3:4 @{As it is written} (\h“s gegraptai\). The regular formula for quotation, perfect passive indicative of \graph“\. {Isaiah the prophet} (\Esaiou tou prophˆtou\). The same phrase in strkjv@Mark:1:2| (correct text) and strkjv@Matthew:3:3|. Mark, as we have seen, adds a quotation from strkjv@Malachi:3:1| and Luke gives verses 4 and 5 of Isa. 40| not in Matthew or Mark (Luke:3:5,6|). See strkjv@Matthew:3:3; strkjv@Mark:1:3| for discussion of Luke strkjv@4:4.

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

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

rwp@Luke:5:14 @{To tell no man} (\mˆdeni eipein\). This is an indirect command after the verb "charged" (\parˆggeilen\). But Luke changes (_constructio variata_) to the direct quotation, a common idiom in Greek and often in Luke (Acts:1:4f.|). Here in the direct form he follows strkjv@Mark:1:43; strkjv@Matthew:8:4|. See discussion there about the direction to go to the priest to receive a certificate showing his cleansing, like our release from quarantine (Leviticus:13:39; strkjv@14:2-32|). {For a testimony unto them} (\eis marturion autois\). The use of \autois\ (them) here is "according to sense," as we say, for it has no antecedent in the context, just to people in general. But this identical phrase with absence of direct reference occurs in Mark and Matthew, pretty good proof of the use of one by the other. Both strkjv@Matthew:8:4; strkjv@Luke:5:14| follow strkjv@Mark:1:44|.

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

rwp@Luke:6:7 @{The scribes and the Pharisees} (\hoi grammateis kai hoi Pharisaioi\). Only Luke here though Pharisees named in strkjv@Matthew:12:14| and Pharisees and Herodians in strkjv@Mark:3:6|. {Watched him} (\paretˆrounto auton\). Imperfect middle, were watching for themselves on the side (\para\). strkjv@Mark:3:2| has the imperfect active \paretˆroun\. Common verb, but the proposition \para\ gave an extra touch, watching either assiduously like the physician at the bedside or insidiously with evil intent as here. {Would heal} (\therapeusei\). But the present active indicative (\therapeuei\) may be the correct text here. Songs:Westcott and Hort. {That they might find out how to accuse him} (\hina heur“sin katˆgorein autou\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \heurisk“\ and the infinitive with it means to find out how to do a thing. They were determined to make a case against Jesus. They felt sure that their presence would prevent any spurious work on the part of Jesus.

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:6:30 @{Ask them not again} (\mˆ apaitei\). Here the present active imperative in a prohibition, do not have the habit of asking back. This common verb only here in the N.T., for \aitousin\ is the correct text in strkjv@Luke:12:20|. The literary flavour of Luke's _Koin‚_ style is seen in his frequent use of words common in the literary Greek, but appearing nowhere else in the N.T.

rwp@Luke:6:35 @{But} (\plˆn\). Plain adversative like \plˆn\ in verse 24|. Never despairing (\mˆden apelpizontes\). \Mˆden\ is read by A B L Bohairic and is the reading of Westcott and Hort. The reading \mˆdena\ is translated "despairing of no man." The Authorized Version has it "hoping for nothing again," a meaning for \apelpiz“\ with no parallel elsewhere. Field (_Otium Nor._ iii. 40) insists that all the same the context demands this meaning because of \apelpizein\ in verse 34|, but the correct reading there is \elpizein\, not \apelpizein\. Here Field's argument falls to the ground. The word occurs in Polybius, Diodorus, LXX with the sense of despairing and that is the meaning here. D and Old Latin documents have _nihil desperantes_, but the Vulgate has _nihil inde sperantes_ (hoping for nothing thence) and this false rendering has wrought great havoc in Europe. "On the strength of it Popes and councils have repeatedly condemned the taking of any interest whatever for loans. As loans could not be had without interest, and Christians were forbidden to take it, money lending passed into the hands of the Jews, and added greatly to the unnatural detestation in which Jews were held" (Plummer). By "never despairing" or "giving up nothing in despair" Jesus means that we are not to despair about getting the money back. We are to help the apparently hopeless cases. Medical writers use the word for desperate or hopeless cases. {Sons of the Most High} (\huoi Hupsistou\). In strkjv@1:32| Jesus is called "Son of the Highest" and here all real children or sons of God (Luke:20:36|) are so termed. See also strkjv@1:35,76| for the use of "the Highest" of God. He means the same thing that we see in strkjv@Matthew:5:45,48| by "your Father." {Toward the unthankful and evil} (\epi tous acharistous kai ponˆrous\). God the Father is kind towards the unkind and wicked. Note the one article with both adjectives.

rwp@Luke:7:1 @{After} (\epeidˆ, epei and dˆ\). This conjunction was written \epei dˆ\ in Homer and is simple \epei\ with the intensive \dˆ\ added and even \epei dˆ per\ once in N.T. (Luke:1:1|). This is the only instance of the temporal use of \epeidˆ\ in the N.T. The causal sense occurs only in Luke and Paul, for \epei\ is the correct text in strkjv@Matthew:21:46|. {Had ended} (\eplˆr“sen\). First aorist active indicative. There is here a reference to the conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount, but with nothing concerning the impression produced by the discourse such as is seen in strkjv@Matthew:7:28|. This verse really belongs as the conclusion of Chapter 6, not as the beginning of Chapter 7. {In the ears of the people} (\eis tas akoas tou laou\). \Akoˆ\ from \akou“\, to hear, is used of the sense of hearing (1Corinthians:12:17|), the ear with which one hears (Mark:7:35; strkjv@Hebrews:5:11|), the thing heard or the report (Rom strkjv@10:16|) or oral instruction (Galatians:3:2,5|). Both strkjv@Matthew:8:5-13; strkjv@Luke:7:1-10| locate the healing of the centurion's servant in Capernaum where Jesus was after the Sermon on the Mount.

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:8:26 @{They arrived} (\katepleusan\). First aorist active indicative of \kataple“\, common verb, but here only in the N.T. Literally, {they sailed down} from the sea to the land, the opposite of {launched forth} (\anˆchthˆsan\) of verse 22|. Songs:we today use like nautical terms, to bear up, to bear down. {The Gerasenes} (\ton Gerasˆn“n\). This is the correct text here as in strkjv@Mark:5:1| while Gadarenes is correct in strkjv@Matthew:8:28|. See there for explanation of this famous discrepancy, now cleared up by Thomson's discovery of Khersa (\Gersa\) on the steep eastern bank and in the vicinity of Gadara. {Over against Galilee} (\antipera tˆs Galilaias\). Only here in the N.T. The later Greek form is \antiperan\ (Polybius, etc.). Some MSS. here have \peran\ like strkjv@Mark:5:1; strkjv@Matthew:8:28|.

rwp@Luke:8:29 @{For he commanded} (\parˆggellen gar\). Imperfect active, correct text, for he was commanding. {Often times} (\pollois chronois\). Or "for a long time" like \chron“i poll“i\ of verse 27| (see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 537, for the plural here). {It had seized} (\sunˆrpakei\). Past perfect active of \sunarpaz“\, to lay hold by force. An old verb, but only in Luke in the N.T. (Luke:8:29; strkjv@Acts:6:12; strkjv@19:29; strkjv@27:15|). {Was kept under guard} (\edesmeueto\). Imperfect passive of \desmeu“\ to put in chains, from \desmos\, bond, and that from \de“\ to bind. Old, but rather rare verb. Only here and strkjv@Acts:22:4| in this sense. In strkjv@Matthew:23:4| it means to bind together. Some MSS. read \desme“\ in strkjv@Luke:8:29|. {Breaking the bands asunder} (\diarˆss“n ta desma\). Old verb, the preposition \dia\ (in two) intensifying the meaning of the simple verb \rˆss“\ or \rˆgnumi\, to rend. {Was driven} (\ˆlauneto\). Imperfect passive of \elaun“\, to drive, to row, to march (Xenophon). Only five times in the N.T. Here alone in Luke and peculiar to Luke in this incident.

rwp@Luke:9:32 @{Were heavy with sleep} (\ˆsan bebarˆmenoi hupn“i\). Periphrastic past perfect of \bare“\, a late form for the ancient \barun“\ (not in N.T. save Textus Receptus in strkjv@Luke:21:34|). This form, rare and only in passive (present, aorist, perfect) in the N.T., is like \barun“\, from \barus\, and that from \baros\, weight, burden (Galatians:6:2|). \Hupn“i\ is in the instrumental case. They had apparently climbed the mountain in the early part of the night and were now overcome with sleep as Jesus prolonged his prayer. Luke alone tells of their sleep. The same word is used of the eyes of these three disciples in the Garden of Gethsemane (Matthew:26:43|) and of the hearts of many (Luke:21:34|). {But when they were fully awake} (\diagrˆgorˆsantes de\). First aorist active participle of this late (Herodian) and rare compound verb (here alone in the N.T.), \diagrˆgore“\ (Luke is fond of compounds with \dia\). The simple verb \grˆgore“\ (from the second perfect active \egrˆgora\) is also late, but common in the LXX and the N.T. The effect of \dia\ can be either to remain awake in spite of desire to sleep (margin of Revised Version) or to become thoroughly awake (ingressive aorist tense also) as Revised Version has it. This is most likely correct. The Syriac Sinaitic has it "When they awoke." Certainly they had been through a strain. {His glory} (\tˆn doxan autou\). See also verse 26| in the words of Jesus.

rwp@Luke:9:60 @{Leave the dead to bury their own dead} (\aphes tous nekrous thapsai tous heaut“n nekrous\). This paradox occurs so in strkjv@Matthew:8:22|. The explanation is that the spiritually dead can bury the literally dead. For such a quick change in the use of the same words see strkjv@John:5:21-29| (spiritual resurrection from sin in strkjv@John:5:21-27|, bodily resurrection from the grave, strkjv@John:5:28,29|) and strkjv@John:11:25f|. The harshness of this proverb to the scribe probably is due to the fact that he was manifestly using his aged father as an excuse for not giving Christ active service. {But go thou and publish abroad the kingdom of God} (\su de apelth“n diaggelle tˆn basileian tou theou\). The scribe's duty is put sharply (\But do thou, su de\). Christ called him to preach, and he was using pious phrases about his father as a pretext. Many a preacher has had to face a similar delicate problem of duty to father, mother, brothers, sisters and the call to preach. This was a clear case. Jesus will help any man called to preach to see his duty. Certainly Jesus does not advocate renunciation of family duties on the part of preachers.

rwp@Luke:10:19 @{And over all the power of the enemy} (\kai epi pƒsan tˆn dunamin tou echthrou\). This is the heart of "the authority" (\tˆn exousian\) here given by Jesus which is far beyond their expectations. The victory over demons was one phase of it. The power to tread upon serpents is repeated in strkjv@Mark:16:18| (the Appendix) and exemplified in Paul's case in Malta (Acts:28:3-5|). But protection from physical harm is not the main point in this struggle with Satan "the enemy" (Matthew:13:25; strkjv@Romans:16:20; strkjv@1Peter:5:8|). {Nothing shall in any wise hurt you} (\ouden humƒs ou mˆ adikˆsei\). Text has future active indicative, while some MSS. read \adikˆsˆi\, aorist active subjunctive of \adike“\, common verb from \adikos\ (\a\ privative and \dikos\), to suffer wrong, to do wrong. The triple negative here is very strong. Certainly Jesus does not mean this promise to create presumption or foolhardiness for he repelled the enemy's suggestion on the pinnacle of the temple.

rwp@Luke:10:41 @{Art anxious} (\merimnƒis\). An old verb for worry and anxiety from \meriz“\ (\meris\, part) to be divided, distracted. Jesus had warned against this in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew:6:25,28,31,34|. See also strkjv@Luke:12:11,22,26|). {And troubled} (\kai thorubazˆi\). From \thorubazomai\, a verb found nowhere else so far. Many MSS. here have the usual form \turbazˆi\, from \turbaz“\. Apparently from \thorubos\, a common enough word for tumult. Martha had both inward anxiety and outward agitation. {But one thing is needful} (\henos de estin chreia\). This is the reading of A C and may be correct. A few manuscripts have: "There is need of few things." Aleph B L (and Westcott and Hort) have: "There is need of few things or one," which seems like a conflate reading though the readings are all old. See Robertson, _Introduction to Textual Criticism of the N.T._, p. 190. Jesus seems to say to Martha that only one dish was really necessary for the meal instead of the "many" about which she was so anxious.

rwp@Luke:11:11 @{Of which of you that is a father} (\tina de ex hum“n ton patera\). There is a decided anacoluthon here. The MSS. differ a great deal. The text of Westcott and Hort makes \ton patera\ (the father) in apposition with \tina\ (of whom) and in the accusative the object of \aitˆsei\ (shall ask) which has also another accusative (both person and thing) "a loaf." Songs:far so good. But the rest of the sentence is, {will ye give him a stone?} (\mˆ lithon epid“sei aut“i;\). \Mˆ\ shows that the answer No is expected, but the trouble is that the interrogative \tina\ in the first clause is in the accusative the object of \aitˆsei\ while here the same man (he) is the subject of \epid“sei\. It is a very awkward piece of Greek and yet it is intelligible. Some of the old MSS. do not have the part about "loaf" and "stone," but only the two remaining parts about "fish" and "serpent," "egg" and "scorpion." The same difficult construction is carried over into these questions also.

rwp@Luke:11:46 @{Grievous to be borne} (\dusbastakta\). A late word in LXX and Plutarch (\dus\ and \bastaz“\). Here alone in text of Westcott and Hort who reject it in strkjv@Matthew:23:4| where we have "heavy burdens" (\phortia barea\). In Gal strkjv@6:2| we have \barˆ\ with a distinction drawn. Here we have \phortizete\ (here only in the N.T. and strkjv@Matthew:11:28|) for "lade," \phortia\ as cognate accusative and then \phortiois\ (dative after \ou prospsauete\, touch not). It is a fierce indictment of scribes (lawyers) for their pettifogging interpretations of the written law in their oral teaching (later written down as _Mishna_ and then as _Gemarah_), a terrible load which these lawyers did not pretend to carry themselves, not even "with one of their fingers" to "touch" (\prospsau“\, old verb but only here in the N.T.), touch with the view to remove. strkjv@Matthew:23:4| has \kinˆsai\, to move. A physician would understand the meaning of \prospau“\ for feeling gently a sore spot or the pulse.

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:14:32 @{Or else} (\ei de mˆge\). Same idiom in strkjv@5:36|. Luke is fond of this formula. {An ambassage} (\presbeian\). Old and common word for the office of ambassador, composed of old men (\presbeis\) like Japanese Elder Statesmen who are supposed to possess wisdom. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:19:14|. {Asketh conditions of peace} (\er“tƒi pros eirˆnˆn\). The use of \er“ta“\ in this sense of beg or petition is common in the papyri and _Koin‚_ generally. The original use of asking a question survives also. The text is uncertain concerning \pros eirˆnˆn\ which means with \er“ta“\, to ask negotiations for peace. In B we have \eis\ instead of \pros\ like verse 28|. Most MSS. have \ta\ before \pros\ or \eis\, but not in Aleph and B. It is possible that the \ta\ was omitted because of preceding \tai\ (\homoeoteleuton\), but the sense is the same. See strkjv@Romans:14:19| \ta tˆs eirˆnˆs\, the things of peace, which concern or look towards peace, the preliminaries of peace.

rwp@Luke:15:16 @{He would fain have been filled} (\epethumei chortasthˆnai\). Literally, he was desiring (longing) to be filled. Imperfect indicative and first aorist passive infinitive. \Chortasthˆnai\ is from \chortaz“\ and that from \chortos\ (grass), and so to feed with grass or with anything. Westcott and Hort put \gemisai tˆn koilian autou\ in the margin (the Textus Receptus). {With the husks} (\ek t“n kerati“n\). The word occurs here alone in the N.T. and is a diminutive of \keras\ (horn) and so means little horn. It is used in various senses, but here refers to the pods of the carob tree or locust tree still common in Palestine and around the Mediterannean, so called from the shape of the pods like little horns, _Bockshornbaum_ in German or goat's-horn tree. The gelatinous substance inside has a sweetish taste and is used for feeding swine and even for food by the lower classes. It is sometimes called Saint John's Bread from the notion that the Baptist ate it in the wilderness. {No man gave unto him} (\oudeis edidou aut“i\). Imperfect active. Continued refusal of anyone to allow him even the food of the hogs.

rwp@Luke:16:9 @{By the mammon of unrighteousness} (\ek tou mam“nƒ tˆs adikias\). By the use of what is so often evil (money). In strkjv@Matthew:6:24| mammon is set over against God as in strkjv@Luke:16:13| below. Jesus knows the evil power in money, but servants of God have to use it for the kingdom of God. They should use it discreetly and it is proper to make friends by the use of it. {When it shall fail} (\hotan eklipˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive with \hotan\, future time. The mammon is sure to fail. {That they may receive you into the eternal tabernacles} (\hina dex“ntai humas eis tas ai“nious skˆnas\). This is the purpose of Christ in giving the advice about their making friends by the use of money. The purpose is that those who have been blessed and helped by the money may give a welcome to their benefactors when they reach heaven. There is no thought here of purchasing an entrance into heaven by the use of money. That idea is wholly foreign to the context. These friends will give a hearty welcome when one gives him mammon here. The wise way to lay up treasure in heaven is to use one's money for God here on earth. That will give a cash account there of joyful welcome, not of purchased entrance.

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:17:2 @{It were well for him} (\lusitelei aut“i\). An old word, but only here in the N.T., from \lusitelˆs\ and this from \lu“\, to pay, and \ta telˆ\, the taxes. Songs:it pays the taxes, it returns expenses, it is profitable. Literally here, "It is profitable for him" (dative case, \aut“i\). Matthew has \sumpherei\ (it is advantageous, bears together for). {If a millstone were hanged} (\ei lithos mulikos perikeitai\). Literally, "if a millstone is hanged." Present passive indicative from \perikeimai\ (to lie or be placed around). It is used as a perfect passive of \peritithˆmi\. Songs:it is a first-class condition, determined as fulfilled, not second-class as the English translations imply. \Mulikos\ is simply a stone (\lithos\), belonging to a mill. Here only in the text of Westcott and Hort, not in strkjv@Mark:9:42| which is like strkjv@Matthew:18:6| \mulos onikos\ where the upper millstone is turned by an ass, which see. {Were thrown} (\erriptai\). Perfect passive indicative from \rhipt“\, old verb. Literally, is thrown or has been thrown or cast or hurled. Mark has \beblˆtai\ and Matthew \katapontisthˆi\, which see, all three verbs vivid and expressive. Rather than (\ˆ\). The comparative is not here expressed before \ˆ\ as one would expect. It is implied in \lusitelei\. See the same idiom in strkjv@Luke:15:7|.

rwp@Luke:19:13 @{Trade ye herewith till I come} (\pragmateusasthe en h“i erchomai\). First aorist middle imperative of \pragmateuomai\, an old verb from \prƒgma\, business. Here only in the N.T. Westcott and Hort in their text read \pragmateusasthai\, first aorist middle infinitive (\-ai\ and \-e\ were pronounced alike). The infinitive makes it indirect discourse, the imperative direct. {While I am coming} is what \en h“i erchomai\ really means.

rwp@Luke:22:8 @{Peter and John} (\Petron kai I“anˆn\). strkjv@Mark:14:13| has only "two" while strkjv@Matthew:26:17| makes the disciples take the initiative. The word passover in this context is used either of the meal, the feast day, the whole period (including the unleavened bread). "Eat the passover" can refer to the meal as here or to the whole period of celebration (John:18:28|).

rwp@Luke:22:19 @{Which is given for you} (\to huper hum“n didomenon\). Some MSS. omit these verses though probably genuine. The correct text in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:24| has "which is for you," not "which is broken for you." It is curious to find the word "broken" here preserved and justified so often, even by Easton in his commentary on Luke, p. 320. {In remembrance of me} (\eis tˆn emˆn anamnˆsin\). Objective use of the possessive pronoun \emˆn\, not the subjective. {This do} (\touto poieite\). Present active indicative, repetition, keep on doing this.

rwp@Luke:22:20 @{After the supper} (\meta to deipnˆsai\). Preposition \meta\ and the accusative articular infinitive. The textual situation here is confusing, chiefly because of the two cups (verses 17,20|). Some of the documents omit the latter part of verse 19| and all of verse 20|. It is possible, of course, that this part crept into the text of Luke from strkjv@1Corinthians:11:24f|. But, if this part is omitted, Luke would then have the order reversed, the cup before the bread. Songs:there are difficulties whichever turn one takes here with Luke's text whether one cup or two cups. {The New Covenant} (\he kainˆ diathˆkˆ\). See on ¯Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Mark:14:24| for "covenant." Westcott and Hort reject "new" there, but accept it here and in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:25|. See on ¯Luke:5:38| for difference between \kainˆ\ and \nea\. "The ratification of a covenant was commonly associated with the shedding of blood; and what was written in blood was believed to be indelible" (Plummer). {Poured out} (\ekchunnomenon\). Same word in strkjv@Mark:14:24; strkjv@Matthew:26:28| translated "shed." Late form present passive participle of \ekchunn“\ of \ekche“\, to pour out.

rwp@Luke:22:30 @{And ye shall sit} (\kathˆsesthe\). But Westcott and Hort read in the text \kathˆsthe\ (present middle subjunctive with \hina\). The picture seems to be that given in strkjv@Matthew:19:28| when Jesus replied to Peter's inquiry. It is not clear how literally this imagery is to be taken. But there is the promise of honour for the loyal among these in the end.

rwp@Luke:23:37 @{If} (\ei\). Condition of the first class as is text in verse 35| used by the rulers. The soldiers pick out "the king of the Jews" as the point of their sneer, the point on which Jesus was condemned. But both soldiers and rulers fail to understand that Jesus could not save himself if he was to save others.

rwp@Luke:23:42 @{In thy kingdom} (\eis tˆn basileian sou\, text of Westcott and Hort or \en tei basileiƒi sou\, margin). Probably no difference in sense is to be found, for \eis\ and \en\ are essentially the same preposition. He refers to the Messianic rule of Jesus and begs that Jesus will remember him. It is not clear whether he hopes for immediate blessing or only at the judgment.

rwp@Luke:23:45 @{The sun's light failing} (\tou hˆliou ekleipontos\). Genitive absolute of the present active participle of \ekleip“\, an old verb, to leave out, omit, pass by, to fail, to die. The word was used also of the eclipse of the sun or moon. But this was impossible at this time because the moon was full at the passover. Hence many documents change this correct text to "the sun was darkened" (\eskotisthˆ ho hˆlios\) to obviate the difficulty about the technical eclipse. But the sun can be darkened in other ways. In a London fog at noon the street lights are often turned on. The Revised Version translates it correctly, "the sun's light failing." Leave the darkness unexplained. {In the midst} (\meson\). In the middle. strkjv@Mark:15:38; strkjv@Matthew:27:51| have "in two" (\eis duo\).

rwp@Luke:24:2 @{Rolled away} (\apokekulismenon\). Perfect passive participle of \apokuli“\, late verb and in the N.T. only in this context (Mark:16:3; strkjv@Matthew:28:2|) while strkjv@John:20:1| has \ˆrmenon\ (taken away).

rwp@Luke:24:3 @{Of the Lord Jesus} (\tou kuriou Iˆsou\). The Western family of documents does not have these words and Westcott and Hort bracket them as Western non-interpolations. There are numerous instances of this shorter Western text in this chapter. For a discussion of the subject see my _Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament_, pp. 225-237. This precise combination (the Lord Jesus) is common in the Acts, but nowhere else in the Gospels.

rwp@Luke:24:4 @{While they were perplexed thereabout} (\en t“i aporeisthai autas peri toutou\). Luke's common Hebraistic idiom, \en\ with the articular infinitive (present passive \aporeisthai\ from \apore“\, to lose one's way) and the accusative of general reference. {Two men} (\andres duo\). Men, not women. strkjv@Mark:16:5| speaks of a young man (\neaniskon\) while strkjv@Matthew:28:5| has "an angel." We need not try to reconcile these varying accounts which agree in the main thing. The angel looked like a man and some remembered two. In verse 23| Cleopas and his companion call them "angels." {Stood by} (\epestˆsan\). Second aorist active indicative of \ephistˆmi\. This common verb usually means to step up suddenly, to burst upon one. {In dazzling apparel} (\en esthˆti astraptousˆi\). This is the correct text. This common simplex verb occurs only twice in the N.T., here and strkjv@Luke:17:24| (the Transfiguration). It has the same root as \astrapˆ\ (lightning). The "men" had the garments of "angels."

rwp@Luke:24:17 @{That you have with another} (\hous antiballete pros allˆlous\). \Anti-ball“\ is an old verb and means to throw in turn, back and forth like a ball, from one to another, a beautiful picture of conversation as a game of words. Only here in the N.T. {They stood still} (\estathˆsan\). First aorist passive of \histˆmi\, intransitive. They stopped. {Looking sad} (\skuthr“poi\). This is the correct text. It is an old adjective from \skuthros\, gloomy and \ops\, countenance. Only here in the N.T.

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

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

rwp@Mark:1:24 @{What have we to do with thee?} (\ti hˆmin kai soi?\) The same idiom in strkjv@Matthew:8:29|. Ethical dative. Nothing in common between the demon and Jesus. Note "we." The man speaks for the demon and himself, double personality. The recognition of Jesus by the demons may surprise us since the rabbis (the ecclesiastics) failed to do so. They call Jesus "The Holy One of God" (\ho hagios tou theou\). Hence the demon feared that Jesus was come to destroy him and the man in his power. In strkjv@Matthew:8:29| the demon calls Jesus "Son of God." Later the disciples will call Jesus "The Holy One of God" (John:6:69|). The demon cried out aloud (\anekraxen\, late first aorist form, \anekragen\, common second aorist) so that all heard the strange testimony to Jesus. The man says "I know" (\oida\), correct text, some manuscripts "we know" (\oidamen\), including the demon.

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

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

rwp@Mark:2:26 @{The house of God} (\ton oikon tou theou\). The tent or tabernacle at Nob, not the temple in Jerusalem built by Solomon. {When Abiathar was high priest} (\epi Abiathar archiere“s\). Neat Greek idiom, in the time of Abiathar as high priest. There was confusion in the Massoretic text and in the LXX about the difference between Ahimelech (Abimelech) and Abiathar (2Samuel:8:17|), Ahimelech's son and successor (1Samuel:21:2; strkjv@22:20|). Apparently Ahimelech, not Abiathar was high priest at this time. It is possible that both father and son bore both names (1Samuel:22:20; strkjv@2Samuel:8:17; strkjv@1Chronicles:18:16|), Abiathar mentioned though both involved. \Epi\ may so mean in the passage about Abiathar. Or we may leave it unexplained. They had the most elaborate rules for the preparation of the shewbread (\tous artous tˆs prothese“s\), the loaves of presentation, the loaves of the face or presence of God. It was renewed on the commencement of the sabbath and the old bread deposited on the golden table in the porch of the Sanctuary. This old bread was eaten by the priests as they came and went. This is what David ate.

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

rwp@Mark: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:4:21 @{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:4:26 @{As if a man should cast} (\h“s anthr“pos balˆi\). Note \h“s\ with the aorist subjunctive without \an\. It is a supposable case and so the subjunctive and the aorist tense because a single instance. Blass considers this idiom "quite impossible," but it is the true text here and makes good sense (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 968). The more common idiom would have been \h“s ean\ (or \an\).

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:6:9 @{Shod with sandals} (\hupodedemenous sandalia\). Perfect passive participle in the accusative case as if with the infinitive \poreuesthai\ or \poreuthˆnai\, (to go). Note the aorist infinitive middle, \endusasthai\ (text of Westcott and Hort), but \endusˆsthe\ (aorist middle subjunctive) in the margin. Change from indirect to direct discourse common enough, not necessarily due to "disjointed notes on which the Evangelist depended" (Swete). strkjv@Matthew:10:10| has "nor shoes" (\mˆde hupodˆmata\), possibly preserving the distinction between "shoes" and "sandals" (worn by women in Greece and by men in the east, especially in travelling). But here again extra shoes may be the prohibition. See on ¯Matthew:10:10| for this. {Two coats} (\duo chit“nas\). Two was a sign of comparative wealth (Swete). The mention of "two" here in all three Gospels probably helps us to understand that the same thing applies to shoes and staff. "In general, these directions are against luxury in equipment, and also against their providing themselves with what they could procure from the hospitality of others" (Gould).

rwp@Mark:6:20 @{Feared John} (\ephobeito ton I“anˆn\). Imperfect tense, continual state of fear. He feared John and also Herodias. Between the two Herod vacillated. He knew him to be righteous and holy (\dikaion kai hagion\) and so innocent of any wrong. Songs:he {kept him safe} (\sunetˆrei\). Imperfect tense again. Late Greek verb. From the plots and schemes of Herodias. She was another Jezebel towards John and with Herod. {Much perplexed} (\polla ˆporei\). This the correct text not \polla epoiei\, did many things. Imperfect tense again. {He heard him gladly} (\hˆde“s ˆkouen\). Imperfect tense again. This is the way that Herod really felt when he could slip away from the meshes of Herodias. These interviews with the Baptist down in the prison at Machaerus during his occasional visits there braced "his jaded mind as with a whiff of fresh air" (Swete). But then he saw Herodias again and he was at his wits' end (\ˆporei\, lose one's way, \a\ privative and \poros\, way), for he knew that he had to live with Herodias with whom he was hopelessly entangled.

rwp@Mark:6:34 @{They were as sheep not having a shepherd} (\ˆsan h“s probata mˆ echonta poimena\). Matthew has these words in another context (Matthew:9:26|), but Mark alone has them here. \Mˆ\ is the usual negative for the participle in the _Koin‚_. These excited and exciting people (Bruce) greatly needed teaching. strkjv@Matthew:14:14| mentions healing as does strkjv@Luke:9:11| (both preaching and healing). But a vigorous crowd of runners would not have many sick. The people had plenty of official leaders but these rabbis were for spiritual matters blind leaders of the blind. Jesus had come over for rest, but his heart was touched by the pathos of this situation. Songs:"he began to teach them many things" (\ˆrxato didaskein autous polla\). Two accusatives with the verb of teaching and the present tense of the infinitive. He kept it up.

rwp@Mark:7:4 @{From the marketplace} (\ap' agoras\). Ceremonial defilement was inevitable in the mixing with men in public. This \agora\ from \ageir“\ to collect or gather, was a public forum in every town where the people gathered like the courthouse square in American towns. The disciples were already ceremonially defiled. {Wash themselves} (\baptis“ntai\). First aorist middle subjunctive of \baptiz“\, dip or immerse. Westcott and Hort put \rantis“ntai\ in the text translated "sprinkle themselves" in the margin of the Revised Version, because Aleph, B, and some of the best cursives have it. Gould terms \rantis“ntai\ "a manifest emendation," to get rid of the difficulty of dipping or bathing the whole body. Meyer says: "The statement proceeds by way of climax: before eating they wash the hands always. When they come from market they take a bath before eating." This is not the place to enter into any controversy about the meaning of \baptiz“\, to dip, \rantiz“\, to sprinkle, and \ecche“\, to pour, all used in the New Testament. The words have their distinctive meanings here as elsewhere. Some scribes felt a difficulty about the use of \baptis“ntai\ here. The Western and Syrian classes of manuscripts add "and couches" (\kai klin“n\) at the end of the sentence. Swete considers the immersions of beds (\baptismous klin“n\) "an incongruous combination." But Gould says: "Edersheim shows that the Jewish ordinance required immersions, \baptismous\, of these vessels." We must let the Jewish scrupulosity stand for itself, though "and couches" is not supported by Aleph, B L D Bohairic, probably not genuine.

rwp@Mark:8:2 @{Now three days} (\ˆdˆ hˆmerai treis\). This text preserves a curious parenthetic nominative of time (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 460). See on ¯Matthew:15:32|.

rwp@Mark:10:21 @{Looking upon him loved him} (\emblepsas aut“i ˆgapˆsen\). Mark alone mentions this glance of affection, ingressive aorist participle and verb. Jesus fell in love with this charming youth. {One thing thou lackest} (\Hen se husterei\). strkjv@Luke:18:22| has it: "One thing thou lackest yet" (\Eti hen soi leipei\). Possibly two translations of the same Aramaic phrase. strkjv@Matthew:19:20| represents the youth as asking "What lack I yet?" (\Ti eti huster“;\). The answer of Jesus meets that inquiry after more than mere outward obedience to laws and regulations. The verb \huster“\ is from the adjective \husteros\ (behind) and means to be too late, to come short, to fail of, to lack. It is used either with the accusative, as here, or with the ablative as in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:5|, or the dative as in Textus Receptus here, \soi\.

rwp@Mark:10:24 @{Were amazed} (\ethambounto\). Imperfect passive. A look of blank astonishment was on their faces at this statement of Jesus. They in common with other Jews regarded wealth as a token of God's special favour. {Children} (\tekna\). Here alone to the Twelve and this tender note is due to their growing perplexity. {For them that trust in riches} (\tous pepoithotas epi tois chrˆmasin\). These words do not occur in Aleph B Delta Memphitic and one Old Latin manuscript. Westcott and Hort omit them from their text as an evident addition to explain the difficult words of Jesus.

rwp@Mark:11:8 @{Branches} (\stibadas\). A litter of leaves and rushes from the fields. Textus Receptus spells this word \stoibadas\. strkjv@Matthew:21:8| has \kladous\, from \kla“\, to break, branches broken or cut from trees. strkjv@John:12:13| uses the branches of the palm trees (\ta baia t“n phoinik“n\), "the feathery fronds forming the tufted crown of the tree" (Vincent). That is to say, some of the crowd did one of these things, some another. See on ¯Matthew:21:4-9| for discussion of other details. The deliberate conduct of Jesus on this occasion could have but one meaning. It was the public proclamation of himself as the Messiah, now at last for his "hour" has come. The excited crowds in front (\hoi proagontes\) and behind (\hoi akolouthountes\) fully realize the significance of it all. Hence their unrestrained enthusiasm. They expect Jesus, of course, now to set up his rule in opposition to that of Caesar, to drive Rome out of Palestine, to conquer the world for the Jews.

rwp@Mark:12:40 @{Devour widows' houses} (\hoi katesthontes tƒs oikias t“n chˆr“n\). New sentence in the nominative. Terrible pictures of civil wrong by graft grabbing the homes of helpless widows. They inveigled widows into giving their homes to the temple and took it for themselves. {For a pretence make long prayers} (\prophasei makra proseuchomenoi\). \Prophasei\ instrumental case of the same word (\prophˆmi\) from which prophet comes, but here pretext, pretence of extra piety while robbing the widows and pushing themselves to the fore. Some derive it from \prophain“\, to show forth. {Greater} (\perissoteron\). More abundant condemnation. Some comfort in that at any rate.

rwp@Mark:15:1 @{In the morning} (\pr“i\). The ratification meeting after day. See on ¯Matthew:26:1-5| for details. {Held a consultation} (\sumboulion poiˆsantes\). Songs:text of Westcott and Hort (Vulgate _consilium facientes_), though they give \hetoimasantes\ in the margin. The late and rare word \sumboulion\ is like the Latin _consilium_. If \hetoimasantes\ is the correct text, the idea would be rather to prepare a concerted plan of action (Gould). But their action was illegal on the night before and they felt the need of this ratification after dawn which is described in strkjv@Luke:22:66-71|, who does not give the illegal night trial. {Bound Jesus} (\dˆsantes ton Iˆsoun\). He was bound on his arrest (John:18:12|) when brought before Annas who sent him on bound to Caiaphas (John:18:24|) and now he is bound again as he is sent to Pilate (Mark:15:1; strkjv@Matthew:27:2|). It is implied that he was unbound while before Annas and then before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin.

rwp@Mark:16:8 @{Had come upon them} (\eichen autas\). Imperfect tense, more exactly, {held them, was holding them fast}. {Trembling and astonishment} (\tromos kai ekstasis\, trembling and ecstasy), Mark has it, while strkjv@Matthew:28:8| has "with fear and great joy" which see for discussion. Clearly and naturally their emotions were mixed. {They said nothing to any one} (\oudeni ouden eipan\). This excitement was too great for ordinary conversation. strkjv@Matthew:28:8| notes that they "ran to bring his disciples word." Hushed to silence their feet had wings as they flew on. {For they were afraid} (\ephobounto gar\). Imperfect tense. The continued fear explains their continued silence. At this point Aleph and B, the two oldest and best Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, stop with this verse. Three Armenian MSS. also end here. Some documents (cursive 274 and Old Latin k) have a shorter ending than the usual long one. The great mass of the documents have the long ending seen in the English versions. Some have both the long and the short endings, like L, Psi, 0112, 099, 579, two Bohairic MSS; the Harklean Syriac (long one in the text, short one in the Greek margin). One Armenian MS. (at Edschmiadzin) gives the long ending and attributes it to Ariston (possibly the Aristion of Papias). W (the Washington Codex) has an additional verse in the long ending. Songs:the facts are very complicated, but argue strongly against the genuineness of verses 9-20| of Mark 16. There is little in these verses not in strkjv@Matthew:28|. It is difficult to believe that Mark ended his Gospel with verse 8| unless he was interrupted. A leaf or column may have been torn off at the end of the papyrus roll. The loss of the ending was treated in various ways. Some documents left it alone. Some added one ending, some another, some added both. A full discussion of the facts is found in the last chapter of my _Studies in Mark's Gospel_ and also in my _Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament_, pp. 214-16.

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

rwp@Info_Matthew @ 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:1:2 @{Begat} (\egennˆsen\). This word comes, like some of the early chapters of Genesis, with regularity through verse 16, until the birth of Jesus is reached when there is a sudden change. The word itself does not always mean immediate parentage, but merely direct descent. In verse 16| we have "Joseph the husband of Mary, from whom was begotten Jesus who is called Christ" (\ton I“sˆph ton andra Marias ex hˆs egennˆthˆ Iˆsous ho legomenos Christos\). The article occurs here each time with the object of "begat," but not with the subject of the verb to distinguish sharply the proper names. In the case of David the King (1:6|) and Joseph the husband of Mary (1:16|) the article is repeated. The mention of the brethren of Judah (1:2|) and of both Phares and Zara (1:3|) may show that Matthew was not copying a family pedigree but making his own table. All the Greek manuscripts give verse 16| as above save the Ferrar Group of minuscules which are supported by the Sinaitic Syriac Version. Because of this fact Von Soden, whose text Moffatt translates, deliberately prints his text "_Jacob begat Jesus_" (\I“sˆph de egennˆsen Iˆsoun\). But the Sinaitic Syriac gives the Virgin Birth of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:1:18-25|. Hence it is clear that "begat" here in strkjv@1:16| must merely mean line of descent or the text has been tampered with in order to get rid of the Virgin Birth idea, but it was left untouched in strkjv@1:18-25|. I have a full discussion of the problem in chapter XIV of _Studies in the Text of the New Testament_. The evidence as it now stands does not justify changing the text of the Greek uncials to suit the Sinaitic Syriac. The Virgin Birth of Jesus remains in strkjv@1:16|. The spelling of these Hebrew names in English is usually according to the Hebrew form, not the Greek. In the Greek itself the Hebrew spelling is often observed in violation of the Greek rules for the ending of words with no consonants save _n,r,s_. But the list is not spelled consistently in the Greek, now like the Hebrew as in Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, now like the Greek as in Judah, Solomon, Hezekiah, though the Hebrew style prevails.

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

rwp@Matthew: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:1:25 @{And knew her not} (\kai ouk egin“sken autˆn\). Note the imperfect tense, continuous or linear action. Joseph lived in continence with Mary till the birth of Jesus. Matthew does not say that Mary bore no other children than Jesus. "Her firstborn" is not genuine here, but is a part of the text in strkjv@Luke:2:7|. The perpetual virginity of Mary is not taught here. Jesus had brothers and sisters and the natural meaning is that they were younger children of Joseph and Mary and not children of Joseph by a previous marriage. Songs:Joseph "called his name Jesus" as the angel had directed and the child was born in wedlock. Joseph showed that he was an upright man in a most difficult situation.

rwp@Matthew:2:5 @{And they said unto him} (\hoi de eipan aut“i\). Whether the ecclesiastics had to search their scriptures or not, they give the answer that is in accord with the common Jewish opinion that the Messiah was to come from Bethlehem and of the seed of David (John:7:42|). Songs:they quote strkjv@Micah:5:2|, "a free paraphrase" Alford calls it, for it is not precisely like the Hebrew text or like the Septuagint. It may have come from a collection of _testimonia_ with which J. Rendel Harris has made the world familiar. He had consulted the experts and now he has their answer. Bethlehem of Judah is the place. The use of the perfect passive indicative (\gegraptai\) is the common form in quoting scripture. It stands written. {Shall be shepherd} (\poimanei\). The Authorized Version had "shall rule," but "shepherd" is correct. "Homer calls kings 'the shepherds of the people'" (Vincent). In strkjv@Hebrews:13:20| Jesus is called "the great shepherd of the sheep." Jesus calls himself "the good shepherd" (John:10:11|). Peter calls Christ "the chief shepherd" (1Peter:2:25|). "The Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall be their shepherd" (Revelation:7:17|). Jesus told Peter to "shepherd" the lambs (John:21:16|). Our word pastor means shepherd.

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

rwp@Matthew:5:48 @{Perfect} (\teleioi\). The word comes from \telos\, end, goal, limit. Here it is the goal set before us, the absolute standard of our Heavenly Father. The word is used also for relative perfection as of adults compared with children. strkjv@Matthew:6:1 @{Take heed} (\prosechete\). The Greek idiom includes "mind" (\noun\) which is often expressed in ancient Greek and once in the Septuagint (Job:7:17|). In the New Testament the substantive \nous\ is understood. It means to "hold the mind on a matter," take pains, take heed. "Righteousness" (\dikaiosunˆn\) is the correct text in this verse. Three specimens of the Pharisaic "righteousness" are given (alms, prayer, fasting). {To be seen} (\theathˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of purpose. Our word _theatrical_ is this very word, spectacular performance. {With your Father} (\para t“i patri hum“n\). Literally "beside your Father," standing by his side, as he looks at it.

rwp@Matthew:6:4 @{In secret} (\t“i krupt“i\). The Textus Receptus added the words \en t“i phaner“i\ (openly) here and in strkjv@6:6|, but they are not genuine. Jesus does not promise a _public_ reward for private piety.

rwp@Matthew:6:18 @{In secret} (\en t“i kruphai“i\). Here as in strkjv@6:4,6| the Textus Receptus adds \en t“i phaner“i\ (openly), but it is not genuine. The word \kruphaios\ is here alone in the New Testament, but occurs four times in the Septuagint.

rwp@Matthew:6:27 @{Unto his stature} (\epi tˆn hˆlikian autou\). The word \hˆlikian\ is used either of height (stature) or length of life (age). Either makes good sense here, though probably "stature" suits the context best. Certainly anxiety will not help either kind of growth, but rather hinder by auto-intoxication if nothing more. This is no plea for idleness, for even the birds are diligent and the flowers grow.

rwp@Matthew:8:9 @{For I also am a man under authority} (\kai gar eg“ anthr“pos hupo exousian\). "Also" is in the text, though the \kai\ here may mean "even," even I in my subordinate position have soldiers under me. As a military man he had learned obedience to his superiors and so expected obedience to his commands, instant obedience (aorist imperatives and aoristic present indicatives). Hence his faith in Christ's power over the illness of the boy even without coming. Jesus had only to speak with a word (8:8|), say the word, and it would be done.

rwp@Matthew:8:28 @{The country of the Gadarenes} (\ten ch“ran t“n Gadarˆn“n\). This is the correct text in Matthew while in strkjv@Mark:5:1| and strkjv@Luke:8:26| it is "the country of the Gerasenes." Dr. Thomson discovered by the lake the ruins of Khersa (Gerasa). This village is in the district of the city of Gadara some miles southeastward so that it can be called after Gerasa or Gadara. Songs:Matthew speaks of "two demoniacs" while Mark and Luke mention only one, the leading one. "{The tombs}" (\t“n mnˆmei“n\) were chambers cut into the mountain side common enough in Palestine then and now. On the eastern side of the lake the precipitous cliffs are of limestone formation and full of caves. It is one of the proofs that one is a maniac that he haunts the tombs. People shunned the region as dangerous because of the madmen.

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:10:39 @{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:11:5 @{And the dead are raised up} (\kai nekroi egeirontai\). Like that of the son of the widow of Nain. Did he raise the dead also on this occasion? "Tell John your story over again and remind him of these prophetic texts, strkjv@Isaiah:35:5; strkjv@61:1|" (Bruce). The items were convincing enough and clearer than mere eschatological symbolism. "The poor" in particular have the gospel, a climax.

rwp@Matthew:12:6 @{One greater than the temple} (\tou hierou meizon\). Ablative of comparison, \tou hierou\. The Textus Receptus has \meiz“n\, but the neuter is correct. Literally, "something greater than the temple." What is that? It may still be Christ, or it may be: "The work and His disciples were of more account than the temple" (Plummer). "If the temple was not subservient to Sabbath rules, how much less the Messiah!" (Allen).

rwp@Matthew:14:8 @{Put forward} (\probibastheisa\). See strkjv@Acts:19:33| for a similar verb (\probalont“n\), "pushing forward." Here (Acts) the Textus Receptus uses \probibaz“\. "It should require a good deal of 'educating' to bring a young girl to make such a grim request" (Bruce). {Here} (\h“de\). On the spot. Here and now. {In a charger} (\epi pinaki\). Dish, plate, platter. Why the obsolete "charger"?

rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{I will build my church} (\oikodomˆs“ mou tˆn ekklˆsian\). It is the figure of a building and he uses the word \ekklˆsian\ which occurs in the New Testament usually of a local organization, but sometimes in a more general sense. What is the sense here in which Jesus uses it? The word originally meant "assembly" (Acts:19:39|), but it came to be applied to an "unassembled assembly" as in strkjv@Acts:8:3| for the Christians persecuted by Saul from house to house. "And the name for the new Israel, \ekklˆsia\, in His mouth is not an anachronism. It is an old familiar name for the congregation of Israel found in Deut. (Deuteronomy:18:26; strkjv@23:2|) and Psalms (Psalms:22:36|), both books well known to Jesus" (Bruce). It is interesting to observe that in strkjv@Psalms:89| most of the important words employed by Jesus on this occasion occur in the LXX text. Songs:\oikodomˆs“\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:5|; \ekklˆsia\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:6|; \katischu“\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:22|; \Christos\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:39,52|; \hƒidˆs\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:49| (\ek cheiros hƒidou\). If one is puzzled over the use of "building" with the word \ekklˆsia\ it will be helpful to turn to strkjv@1Peter:2:5|. Peter, the very one to whom Jesus is here speaking, writing to the Christians in the five Roman provinces in Asia (1Peter:1:1|), says: "You are built a spiritual house" (\oikodomeisthe oikos pneumatikos\). It is difficult to resist the impression that Peter recalls the words of Jesus to him on this memorable occasion. Further on (1Peter:2:9|) he speaks of them as an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, showing beyond controversy that Peter's use of building a spiritual house is general, not local. This is undoubtedly the picture in the mind of Christ here in strkjv@16:18|. It is a great spiritual house, Christ's Israel, not the Jewish nation, which he describes. What is the rock on which Christ will build his vast temple? Not on Peter alone or mainly or primarily. Peter by his confession was furnished with the illustration for the rock on which His church will rest. It is the same kind of faith that Peter has just confessed. The perpetuity of this church general is guaranteed.

rwp@Matthew:18:12 @{Leave the ninety and nine} (\aphˆsei ta enenˆkonta ennea epi ta orˆ kai poreutheis zˆtei to plan“menon?\). This is the text of Westcott and Hort after BL, etc. This text means: "Will he not leave the ninety and nine upon the mountains and going does he not seek (change to present tense) the wandering one?" On the high pastures where the sheep graze at will one has wandered afield. See this parable later in strkjv@Luke:15:4-7|. Our word "planet" is from \planaomai\, wandering (moving) stars they were called as opposed to fixed stars. But now we know that no stars are fixed. They are all moving and rapidly.

rwp@Matthew:18:22 @{Until seventy times seven} (\he“s hebdomˆkontakis hepta\). It is not clear whether this idiom means seventy-seven or as the Revised Version has it (490 times). If \heptakis\ were written it would clearly be 490 times. The same ambiguity is seen in strkjv@Genesis:4:24|, the LXX text by omitting \kai\. In the _Test. of the Twelve Patriarchs, Benj._ vii. 4, it is used in the sense of seventy times seven. But it really makes little difference because Jesus clearly means unlimited forgiveness in either case. "The unlimited revenge of primitive man has given place to the unlimited forgiveness of Christians" (McNeile).

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

rwp@Matthew:21:12 @{Cast out} (\exebalen\). Drove out, assumed authority over "the temple of God" (probably correct text with \tou theou\, though only example of the phrase). John (John:2:14|) has a similar incident at the beginning of the ministry of Jesus. It is not impossible that he should repeat it at the close after three years with the same abuses in existence again. It is amazing how short a time the work of reformers lasts. The traffic went on in the court of the Gentiles and to a certain extent was necessary. Here the tables of {the money-changers} (\t“n kollubist“n\, from \kollubos\, a small coin) were overturned. See on ¯17:24| for the need of the change for the temple tax. The doves were the poor man's offering.

rwp@Matthew:21:16 @{Thou hast perfected} (\katˆrtis“\). The quotation is from strkjv@Psalms:8:3| (LXX text). See strkjv@4:21| where the same verb is used for mending nets. Here it is the timeless aorist middle indicative with the perfective use of \kata-\. It was a stinging rebuke.

rwp@Matthew:23:12 @{Exalt himself} (\hups“sei heauton\). Somewhat like strkjv@18:4; strkjv@20:26|. Given by Luke in other contexts (14:11; strkjv@18:14|). Characteristic of Christ.

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:24:41 @{At the mill} (\en t“i mul“i\). Songs:Westcott and Hort and not \mul“ni\ (millhouse) Textus Receptus. The millstone and then hand-mill which was turned by two women (\alˆthousai\) as in strkjv@Exodus:11:5|. This verb is a late form for \ale“\. There was a handle near the edge of the upper stone.

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

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

rwp@Matthew:27:49 @{Whether Elijah cometh to save him} (\ei erchetai Eleias s“s“n auton\). The excuse had a pious sound as they misunderstood the words of Jesus in his outcry of soul anguish. We have here one of the rare instances (\s“s“n\) of the future participle to express purpose in the N.T. though a common Greek idiom. Some ancient MSS. add here what is genuine in strkjv@John:19:34|, but what makes complete wreck of the context for in verse 50| Jesus cried with a loud voice and was not yet dead in verse 49|. It was a crass mechanical copying by some scribe from strkjv@John:19:34|. See full discussion in my _Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the N.T._

rwp@Matthew:28:8 @{With fear and great joy} (\meta phobou kai charas megalˆs\). A touch of life was this as the excited women ran quickly (\tachu edramon\) as they had been told "to bring his disciples word" (\apaggeilai tois mathˆtais autou\). They had the greatest piece of news that it was possible to have. Mark calls it fear and ecstasy. Anything seemed possible now. Mark even says that at first they told no one anything for they were afraid (Mark:16:9|), the tragic close of the text of Mark in Aleph and B, our two oldest manuscripts. But these mingled emotions of ecstasy and dread need cause no surprise when all things are considered.

rwp@Philemon:1:7 @{I had} (\eschon\). Ingressive second aorist active indicative of \ech“\, not \eichomˆn\ as the Textus Receptus has it. Paul refers to his joy when he first heard the good news about Philemon's activity (verse 5|). {The hearts} (\ta splagchna\). See strkjv@Phillipians:1:8| for this use of this word for the nobler viscera (heart, lungs, liver) and here for the emotional nature. {Have been refreshed} (\anapepautai\). Perfect passive indicative of old compound verb \anapau“\ as in strkjv@Matthew:11:28|, a relief and refreshment whether temporary (Mark:6:31|) or eternal (Revelation:14:13|).

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@Philippians:2:16 @{As lights in the world} (\h“s ph“stˆres en kosm“i\). As luminaries like the heavenly bodies. Christians are the light of the world (Matthew:5:14|) as they reflect the light from Christ (John:1:4; strkjv@8:12|), but here the word is not \ph“s\ (light), but \ph“stˆres\ (luminaries, stars). The place for light is the darkness where it is needed. {Holding forth} (\epechontes\). Present active participle of \epech“\. Probably not connected with the preceding metaphor in \ph“stˆres\. The old meaning of the verb \epech“\ is to hold forth or to hold out (the word of life as here). The context seems to call for "holding fast." It occurs also with the sense of attending to (Acts:3:5|). {That I may have} (\emoi\). Ethical dative, "to me as a ground of boasting."

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

rwp@Revelation:4:4 @{Round about the throne} (\kuklothen tou thronou\). Here as a preposition with the genitive, though only adverb in strkjv@4:8| (only N.T. examples save Textus Rec. in strkjv@5:11|). {Four and twenty thrones} (\thronoi eikosi tessares\). Songs:P Q, but Aleph A have accusative \thronous\ (supply \eidon\ from strkjv@4:1|) and \tessares\ (late accusative in \-es\). This further circle of thrones beyond the great throne. {I saw four and twenty elders} (\eikosi tessaras presbuterous\). No \eidon\ in the text, but the accusative case calls for it. Twenty-four as a symbolic number occurs only in this book and only for these elders (4:4,10; strkjv@5:8; strkjv@11:16; strkjv@19:4|). We do not really know why this number is chosen, perhaps two elders for each tribe, perhaps the twelve tribes and the twelve apostles (Judaism and Christianity), perhaps the twenty-four courses of the sons of Aaron (1Chronicles:24:1-19|), perhaps some angelic rank (Colossians:1:16|) of which we know nothing. Cf. strkjv@Ephesians:2:6|. {Sitting} (\kathˆmenous\). Upon their thrones. {Arrayed} (\peribeblˆmenous\). Perfect passive participle of \periball“\ (to throw around). {In white garments} (\himatiois leukois\). Locative case here as in strkjv@3:5| (with \en\), though accusative in strkjv@7:9,13|. {Crowns of gold} (\stephanous chrusous\). Accusative case again like \presbuterous\ after \eidon\ (4:1|), not \idou\. In strkjv@19:14| \ech“n\ (having) is added. John uses \diadˆma\ (diadem) for the kingly crown in strkjv@12:3; strkjv@13:1; strkjv@19:12|, but it is not certain that the old distinction between \diadem\ as the kingly crown and \stephanos\ as the victor's wreath is always observed in late Greek.

rwp@Revelation:5:10 @{Madest} (\epoiˆsas\). First aorist active indicative of \poie“\, a prophetic use anticipating the final result. {A kingdom and priests} (\basileian kai hiereis\). As the correct text in strkjv@1:6|. {They reign} (\basileuousin\). Present active indicative, futuristic use, though Aleph P have the future \basileusousin\ (shall reign) as in strkjv@20:6|.

rwp@Revelation:6:1 @{And I saw} (\kai eidon\). As in strkjv@4:1; strkjv@5:1|. The vision unfolds without anything being said about opening the book and reading from it. In a more vivid and dramatic fashion the Lamb breaks the seals one by one and reveals the contents and the symbolism. The first four seals have a common note from one of the four \z“a\ and the appearance of a horse. No effort will be made here to interpret these seals as referring to persons or historical events in the past, present, or future, but simply to relate the symbolism to the other symbols in the book. It is possible that there is some allusion here to the symbolism in the so-called "Little Apocalypse" of strkjv@Mark:13; strkjv@Matthew:24f.; strkjv@Luke:21|. The imagery of the four horses is similar to that in strkjv@Zechariah:1:7-11; strkjv@6:1-8| (cf. strkjv@Jeremiah:14:12; strkjv@24:10; strkjv@42:17|). In the Old Testament the horse is often the emblem of war (Job:39:25; strkjv@Psalms:76:6; strkjv@Proverbs:21:31; strkjv@Ezekiel:26:10|). "Homer pictures the horses of Rhesus as whiter than snow, and swift as the wind" (Vincent). {When the Lamb opened} (\hote ˆnoixen to arnion\). First aorist active indicative of \anoig“\. This same phrase recurs in rhythmical order at the opening of each seal (6:1,3,5,7,9,12|) till the last (8:1|), where we have \hotan ˆnoixen\ (\hotan\ rather than \hote\ calling particular attention to it). {One} (\mian\). Probably used here as an ordinal (the first) as in strkjv@Matthew:28:1|. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 671f. {Of} (\ek\). This use of \ek\ with the ablative in the partitive sense is common in the Apocalypse, as twice in this verse (\ek t“n\, etc.). Songs:\henos ek t“n\ (one of the four living creatures) is "the first of," etc. {In a voice of thunder} (\en ph“nˆi brontˆs\). Old word used of John and James (Mark:3:17|) and elsewhere in N.T. only strkjv@John:12:29| and a dozen times in the Apocalypse. {Come} (\Erchou\). Present middle imperative of \erchomai\, but with exclamatory force (not strictly linear). The command is not addressed to the Lamb nor to John (the correct text omits \kai ide\ "and see") as in strkjv@17:1; strkjv@21:9|, but to one of the four horsemen each time. Swete takes it as a call to Christ because \erchou\ is so used in strkjv@22:17,20|, but that is not conclusive.

rwp@Revelation:13:10 @{If any man is for captivity} (\ei tis eis aichmal“sian\). Condition of first class, but with no copula (\estin\) expressed. For \aichmal“sian\ (from \aichmal“tos\ captive) see strkjv@Ephesians:4:8|, only other N.T. example. Apparently John means this as a warning to the Christians not to resist force with force, but to accept captivity as he had done as a means of grace. Cf. strkjv@Jeremiah:15:2|. The text is not certain, however. {If any man shall kill with the sword} (\ei tis en machairˆi apoktenei\). First-class condition with future active of \apoktein“\, not future passive, for it is a picture of the persecutor drawn here like that by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:26:52|. {Must he be killed} (\dei auton en machairˆi apoktanthˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \apoktein“\. The inevitable conclusion (\dei\) of such conduct. The killer is killed. {Here} (\h“de\). In this attitude of submission to the inevitable. For \h“de\ see strkjv@13:18; strkjv@14:12; strkjv@17:9|. "Faith" (\pistis\) here is more like faithfulness, fidelity.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ POOR STATE OF THE TEXT There are only five uncials that give the text of John's Apocalypse (Aleph A C P Q). Of these Aleph belongs to the fourth century, A and C to the fifth, Q (really B2, B ending with strkjv@Hebrews:9:13|, both in the Vatican Library) to the eighth, P to the ninth. Only Aleph A Q (=B2) are complete, C lacking strkjv@Revelation:1:1, strkjv@3:19-5:14, strkjv@7:14-17, strkjv@8:5-9:16, strkjv@10:10-11:3,14:13-18:2, strkjv@19:5-21|, P lacking strkjv@Revelation:16:12--17:1, strkjv@19:21-20:9,22:6-21|. Both C and P are palimpsests. In the 400 verses of the book "over 1,600 variants have been counted" (Moffatt). Erasmus had only one cursive (of the twelfth century numbered Ir) for his first edition, and the last six verses of the Apocalypse, save verse 20, were a translation from the Vulgate. The result is that the versions are of special importance for the text of the book, since in no single MS. or group of MSS. do we have a fairly accurate text, though Aleph A C and A C Vulgate are the best two groups.

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

rwp@Info_Romans @ COMMENTARIES No one of Paul's Epistles has more helpful modern commentaries on it than this one, such as those by Barth (1919), Beet (9th ed., 1901), Cook (1930), Denney (1901), Feine (1903), Garvie (1901), Gifford (1881), Godet (Tr., 1883), Gore (Expos.), Grey (1910), Griffith-Thomas (1913), Hodge (1856), Hort (Intr., 1895), Jowett (3rd ed., 1894), Julicher (2 Aufl., 1907), Kuhl (1913), Lagrange (1916), Lard (1875), Liddon (Anal., 1893), Lietzmann (2 Aufl., 1919), Lightfoot (chapters 1-7, 1895), Luetgert (1913), Monk (1893), Plummer, Richter (1908), Sanday and Headlam (1895), Shedd (1893), Stifler (1897), Vaughan (1890), Weiss, B. (Meyer Komm., g Aufl., 1899), Westcott, F. B. (1913), Zahn (1910). strkjv@Romans:1:1 @{To the Romans} (\pros R“maious\). This is the title in Aleph A B C, our oldest Greek MSS. for the Epistle. We do not know whether Paul gave any title at all. Later MSS. add other words up to the Textus Receptus: The Epistle of Paul to the Romans. The Epistle is put first in the MSS. because it is the most important of Paul's Epistles.

rwp@Romans:3:9 @{What then?} (\ti oun?\). Paul's frequent query, to be taken with verses 1,2|. {Are we in worse case than they?} (\proechometha?\). The American Revisers render it: "Are we in better case than they?" There is still no fresh light on this difficult and common word though it occurs alone in the N.T. In the active it means to have before, to excel. But here it is either middle or passive. Thayer takes it to be middle and to mean to excel to one's advantage and argues that the context demands this. But no example of the middle in this sense has been found. If it is taken as passive, Lightfoot takes it to mean, "Are we excelled" and finds that sense in Plutarch. Vaughan takes it as passive but meaning, "Are we preferred?" This suits the context, but no other example has been found. Songs:the point remains unsettled. The papyri throw no light on it. {No, in no wise} (\ou pant“s\). "Not at all." See strkjv@1Corinthians:5:10|. {We before laid to the charge} (\proˆitiasametha\). First aorist middle indicative of \proaitiaomai\, to make a prior accusation, a word not yet found anywhere else. Paul refers to strkjv@1:18-32| for the Greeks and strkjv@2:1-29| for the Jews. The infinitive \einai\ with the accusative \pantas\ is in indirect discourse. {Under sin} (\hupo hamartian\). See strkjv@Galatians:3:22; strkjv@Romans:7:14|.

rwp@Romans:3:10 @{As it is written} (\kath“s gegraptai hoti\). Usual formula of quotation as in verse 4| with recitative \hoti\ added as in verse 8|. Paul here uses a catena or chain of quotations to prove his point in verse 9| that Jews are in no better fix than the Greeks for all are under sin. Dr. J. Rendel Harris has shown that the Jews and early Christians had _Testimonia_ (quotations from the Old Testament) strung together for certain purposes as proof-texts. Paul may have used one of them or he may have put these passages together himself. Verses 10-12| come from strkjv@Psalms:14:1-3|; first half of 13| as far as \edoliousan\ from strkjv@Psalms:4:9|, the second half from strkjv@Psalms:140:3|; verse 14| from strkjv@Psalms:10:7|; 15-17| from an abridgment of strkjv@Isaiah:59:7f.|; verse 18| from strkjv@Psalms:35:1|. Paul has given compounded quotations elsewhere (2Corinthians:6:16; strkjv@Romans:9:25f.,27f; strkjv@11:26f.,34f.; strkjv@12:19f.|). Curiously enough this compounded quotation was imported bodily into the text (LXX) of strkjv@Psalms:14| after verse 4 in Aleph B, etc. {There is none righteous, no, not one} (\ouk estin dikaios oude heis\). "There is not a righteous man, not even one." This sentence is like a motto for all the rest, a summary for what follows.

rwp@Romans:3:30 @{If so be that God is one} (\eiper heis ho theos\). Correct text rather than \epeiper\. It means "if on the whole." "By a species of rhetorical politeness it is used of that about which there is no doubt" (Thayer. Cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:8:5; strkjv@15:15; strkjv@Romans:8:9|. {By faith} (\ek piste“s\). "Out of faith," springing out of. {Through faith} (\dia tˆs piste“s\). "By means of the faith" (just mentioned). \Ek\ denotes source, \dia\ intermediate agency or attendant circumstance.

rwp@Romans:5:1 @{Being therefore justified by faith} (\dikai“thentes oun ek piste“s\). First aorist passive participle of \dikaio“\, to set right and expressing antecedent action to the verb \ech“men\. The \oun\ refers to the preceding conclusive argument (chapters 1 to 4) that this is done by faith. {Let us have peace with God} (\eirˆnˆn ech“men pros ton theon\). This is the correct text beyond a doubt, the present active subjunctive, not \echomen\ (present active indicative) of the Textus Receptus which even the American Standard Bible accepts. It is curious how perverse many real scholars have been on this word and phrase here. Godet, for instance. Vincent says that "it is difficult if not impossible to explain it." One has only to observe the force of the _tense_ to see Paul's meaning clearly. The mode is the volitive subjunctive and the present tense expresses linear action and so does not mean "make peace" as the ingressive aorist subjunctive \eirˆnˆn sch“men\ would mean. A good example of \sch“men\ occurs in strkjv@Matthew:21:38| (\sch“men tˆn klˆronomian autou\) where it means: "Let us get hold of his inheritance." Here \eirˆnˆn ech“men\ can only mean: "Let us enjoy peace with God" or "Let us retain peace with God." We have in strkjv@Acts:9:31| \eichen eirˆnˆn\ (imperfect and so linear), the church "enjoyed peace," not "made peace." The preceding justification (\dikai“thentes\) "made peace with God." Observe \pros\ (face to face) with \ton theon\ and \dia\ (intermediate agent) with \tou kuriou\.

rwp@Romans:5:6 @{For} (\eti gar\). Songs:most documents, but B reads \ei ge\ which Westcott and Hort use in place of \gar\. {While we were yet weak} (\ont“n hˆm“n asthen“n eti\). Genitive absolute. The second \eti\ (yet) here probably gave rise to the confusion of text over \eti gar\ above. {In due season} (\kata kairon\). Christ came into the world at the proper time, the fulness of the time (Galatians:4:4; strkjv@Ephesians:1:10; strkjv@Titus:1:3|). {I or the ungodly} (\huper aseb“n\). In behalf, instead of. See about \huper\ on strkjv@Galatians:3:13| and also verse 7| here.

rwp@Romans:8:24 @{For by hope were we saved} (\tˆi gar elpidi es“thˆmen\). First aorist passive indicative of \s“z“\. The case of \elpidi\ is not certain, the form being the same for locative, instrumental and dative. Curiously enough either makes good sense in this context: "We were saved in hope, by hope, for hope" (of the redemption of the body).

rwp@Romans:9:27 @{Isaiah} (\Esaias\). Shortened quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:10:22| (LXX). {It is the remnant that shall be saved} (\to hupoleimma s“thˆsetai\). First future passive of \s“z“\. Literally, "the remnant will be saved." Late word from \hupoleip“\, to leave behind (11:3|), here only in N.T. Textus Receptus has \kataleimma\, but Aleph A B have \hupoleimma\. Isaiah cries in anguish over the outlook for Israel, but sees hope for the remnant.

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

rwp@Romans:11:26 @{And so} (\kai hout“s\). By the complement of the Gentiles stirring up the complement of the Jews (verses 11f.|). {All Israel} (\pƒs Israˆl\). What does Paul mean? The immediate context (use of \pƒs\ in contrast with \apo merous, plˆr“ma\ here in contrast with \plˆr“ma\ in verse 12|) argues for the Jewish people "as a whole." But the spiritual Israel (both Jews and Gentiles) may be his idea in accord with strkjv@9:6| (Galatians:6:16|) as the climax of the argument. At any rate we should strive for and pray for the conversion of Jews as a whole. Paul here quotes from strkjv@Isaiah:59:20f.; strkjv@27:9|. {The Deliverer} (\ho ruomenos\). Present middle articular participle of \ruomai\, to rescue, to deliver. See on ¯1Thessalonians:1:10; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:10|. The Hebrew _Goel_, the Avenger, the Messiah, the Redeemer (Deuteronomy:25:5-10; strkjv@Job:19:25; strkjv@Ruth:3:12f.|). Paul interprets it of Jesus as Messiah.

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

rwp@Romans:12:20 @{Feed him} (\ps“mize auton\). Quotation from LXX text of strkjv@Proverbs:25:21f|. Present active imperative of verb from \ps“mos\, a morsel, and so to feed crumbs to babies, then to feed in general. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:13:3|. {Thou shalt heap} (\s“reuseis\). Future active of old verb \s“reu“\ from \s“ros\, a heap. In N.T. only here and strkjv@2Timothy:3:6|. {Coals of fire} (\anthrakas puros\). That is, burning or live coals. {Anthrax} (our "anthracite") is an old word, only here in N.T. It is a metaphor for keen anguish. The Arabs have a proverb "coals in the heart," "fire in the liver." Such kindness may lead to repentance also.

rwp@Romans:14:6 @{Regardeth} (\phronei\). "Thinks of," "esteems," "observes," "puts his mind on" (from \phrˆn\, mind). The Textus Receptus has also "he that regardeth not," but it is not genuine. {Unto the Lord} (\kuri“i\). Dative case. Songs:as to \t“i the“i\ (unto God). He eats unto the Lord, he eats not unto the Lord. Paul's principle of freedom in non-essentials is most important. The Jewish Christians still observed the Seventh day (the Sabbath). The Gentile Christians were observing the first day of the week in honour of Christ's Resurrection on that day. Paul pleads for liberty.

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

rwp@Romans:14:13 @{Let us not therefore judge one another any more} (\mˆketi oun allˆlous krin“men\). Present active subjunctive (volitive). "Let us no longer have the habit of criticizing one another." A wonderfully fine text for modern Christians and in harmony with what the Master said (Matthew:7:1|). {That no man put a stumbling block in his brother's way or an occasion of falling} (\to mˆ tithenai proskomma t“i adelph“i ˆ skandalon\). Articular present active infinitive of \tithˆmi\ in apposition with \touto\, accusative case after \krinate\: "Judge this rather, the not putting a stumbling block (see strkjv@9:32| for \proskomma\) or a trap (\skandalon\, strkjv@9:33|) for his brother" (\adelph“i\, dative of disadvantage).

rwp@Romans:15:11 @{All the Gentiles} (\panta ta ethnˆ\). From strkjv@Psalms:117:1| with slight variations from the LXX text.

rwp@Romans:15:16 @{That I should be} (\eis to einai me\). The \eis to\ idiom with the infinitive again (verses 8,13|). {Minister} (\leitourgon\). Predicate accusative in apposition with \me\ and see strkjv@13:6| for the word. "The word here derives from the context the priestly associations which often attach to it in the LXX" (Denney). But this purely metaphorical use does not show that Paul attached a "sacerdotal" character to the ministry. {Ministering} (\hierourgounta\). Present active participle of \hierourge“\, late verb from \hierourgos\ (\hieros, erg“\), in LXX, Philo, and Josephus, only here in N.T. It means to work in sacred things, to minister as a priest. Paul had as high a conception of his work as a preacher of the gospel as any priest did. {The offering up of the Gentiles} (\hˆ prosphora t“n ethn“n\). Genitive of apposition, the Gentiles being the offering. They are Paul's offering. See strkjv@Acts:21:26|. {Acceptable} (\euprosdektos\). See strkjv@2Corinthians:6:2; strkjv@8:12|. Because "sanctified in the Holy Spirit" (\hˆgiasmenˆ en pneumati hagi“i\, perfect passive participle of \hagiaz“\).

rwp@Romans:15:24 @{Whensoever I go} (\h“s an poreu“mai\). Indefinite temporal clause with \h“s an\ and the present middle subjunctive (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:11:34; strkjv@Phillipians:2:23| with aorist subjunctive). {Into Spain} (\eis tˆn Spanian\). It was a Roman province with many Jews in it. The Greek name was \Iberia\, the Latin _Hispania_. The Textus Receptus adds here \eleusomai pros humas\ (I shall come to you), but it is not in Aleph A B C D and is not genuine. Without it we have a parenthesis (or anacoluthon) through the rest of verse 24|. {In my journey} (\diaporeuomenos\). Present middle participle, "passing through." Paul planned only a brief stay in Rome since a strong church already existed there. {To be brought on my way thitherward} (\propemphthˆnai ekei\). "To be sent forward there." First aorist passive infinitive of \propemp“\, common word for escorting one on a journey (1Corinthians:16:6,11; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:16; strkjv@Titus:3:13; strkjv@2John:1:6|). {If first in some measure I shall have been satisfied with your company} (\ean hum“n prot“n apo merous emplˆsth“\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \empimplˆmi\, old verb, to fill up, to satisfy, to take one's fill. See strkjv@Luke:6:25|. Literally, "if I first in part be filled with you" (get my fill of you). delicate compliment for the Roman church.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Sun Jun 2 19:35:51 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020