Bible:
Filter: String:

NT-EPISTLES.filter - rwp Merely:


rwp@Info_1Corinthians @ Some good commentaries on I Corinthians are the following: On the Greek Bachmann in the _Zahn Kommentar_, Edwards, Ellicott, Findlay (Expositor's Greek Testament), Godet, Goudge, Lietzmann (_Handbuch zum N.T._), Lightfoot (chs. 1-7), Parry, Robertson and Plummer (_Int. Crit._), Stanley, J. Weiss (_Meyer Kommentar_); on the English Dods (_Exp. Bible_), McFadyen, Parry, Ramsay, Rendall, F. W. Robertson, Walker (_Reader's Comm._). strkjv@1Corinthians:1:1 @{Called to be an apostle} (\klˆtos apostolos\). Verbal adjective \klˆtos\ from \kale“\, without \einai\, to be. Literally, {a called apostle} (Romans:1:1|), not so-called, but one whose apostleship is due not to himself or to men (Galatians:1:1|), but to God, {through the will of God} (\dia thelˆmatos tou theou\). The intermediate (\dia, duo\, two) agent between Paul's not being Christ's apostle and becoming one was God's will (\thelˆma\, something willed of God), God's command (1Timothy:1:1|). Paul knows that he is not one of the twelve apostles, but he is on a par with them because, like them, he is chosen by God. He is an apostle of Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus (MSS. vary here, later epistles usually Christ Jesus). The refusal of the Judaizers to recognize Paul as equal to the twelve made him the more careful to claim his position. Bengel sees here Paul's denial of mere human authority in his position and also of personal merit: _Namque mentione Dei excluditur auctoramentum humanum, mentione Voluntatis Dei, meritum Pauli_. {Our brother} (\ho adelphos\). Literally, the brother, but regular Greek idiom for our brother. This Sosthenes, now with Paul in Ephesus, is probably the same Sosthenes who received the beating meant for Paul in Corinth (Acts:18:17|). If so, the beating did him good for he is now a follower of Christ. He is in no sense a co-author of the Epistle, but merely associated with Paul because they knew him in Corinth. He may have been compelled by the Jews to leave Corinth when he, a ruler of the synagogue, became a Christian. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:1| for the mention of Silas and Timothy in the salutation. Sosthenes could have been Paul's amanuensis for this letter, but there is no proof of it.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:12 @{Now this I mean} (\leg“ de touto\). Explanatory use of \leg“\. Each has his party leader. \Apoll“\ is genitive of \Apoll“s\ (Acts:18:24|), probably abbreviation of \Apoll“nius\ as seen in Codex Bezae for strkjv@Acts:18:24|. See on Acts for discussion of this "eloquent Alexandrian" (Ellicott), whose philosophical and oratorical preaching was in contrast "with the studied plainness" of Paul (1Corinthians:2:1; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:10|). People naturally have different tastes about styles of preaching and that is well, but Apollos refused to be a party to this strife and soon returned to Ephesus and refused to go back to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:12|). \Cˆphƒ\ is the genitive of \Cˆphƒs\, the Aramaic name given Simon by Jesus (John:1:42|), \Petros\ in Greek. Except in strkjv@Galatians:2:7,8| Paul calls him Cephas. He had already taken his stand with Paul in the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:7-11; strkjv@Galatians:2:7-10|). Paul had to rebuke him at Antioch for his timidity because of the Judaizers (Galatians:2:11-14|), but, in spite of Baur's theory, there is no evidence of a schism in doctrine between Paul and Peter. If strkjv@2Peter:3:15f.| be accepted as genuine, as I do, there is proof of cordial relations between them and strkjv@1Corinthians:9:5| points in the same direction. But there is no evidence that Peter himself visited Corinth. Judaizers came and pitted Peter against Paul to the Corinthian Church on the basis of Paul's rebuke of Peter in Antioch. These Judaizers made bitter personal attacks on Paul in return for their defeat at the Jerusalem Conference. Songs:a third faction was formed by the use of Peter's name as the really orthodox wing of the church, the gospel of the circumcision. {And I of Christ} (\eg“ de Christou\). Still a fourth faction in recoil from the partisan use of Paul, Apollos, Cephas, with "a spiritually proud utterance" (Ellicott) that assumes a relation to Christ not true of the others. "Those who used this cry arrogated the common watchword as their _peculium_" (Findlay). This partisan use of the name of Christ may have been made in the name of unity against the other three factions, but it merely added another party to those existing. In scouting the names of the other leaders they lowered the name and rank of Christ to their level.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:13 @{Is Christ divided?} (\memeristai ho Christos;\). Perfect passive indicative, Does Christ stand divided? It is not certain, though probable, that this is interrogative like the following clauses. Hofmann calls the assertory form a "rhetorical impossibility." The absence of \mˆ\ here merely allows an affirmative answer which is true. The fourth or Christ party claimed to possess Christ in a sense not true of the others. Perhaps the leaders of this Christ party with their arrogant assumptions of superiority are the false apostles, ministers of Satan posing as angels of light (2Corinthians:11:12-15|). {Was Paul crucified for you?} (\Mˆ Paulos estaur“thˆ huper hum“n;\). An indignant "No" is demanded by \mˆ\. Paul shows his tact by employing himself as the illustration, rather than Apollos or Cephas. Probably \huper\, over, in behalf of, rather than \peri\ (concerning, around) is genuine, though either makes good sense here. In the _Koin‚_ \huper\ encroaches on \peri\ as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1|. {Were ye baptized into the name of Paul?} (\eis to onoma Paulou ebaptisthˆte;\). It is unnecessary to say {into} for \eis\ rather than {in} since \eis\ is the same preposition originally as \en\ and both are used with \baptiz“\ as in strkjv@Acts:8:16; strkjv@10:48| with no difference in idea (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 592). Paul evidently knows the idea in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| and scouts the notion of being put on a par with Christ or the Trinity. He is no rival of Christ. This use of \onoma\ for the person is not only in the LXX, but the papyri, ostraca, and inscriptions give numerous examples of the name of the king or the god for the power and authority of the king or god (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 146ff., 196ff.; _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 121).

rwp@1Corinthians:1:17 @{For Christ sent me not to baptize} (\ou gar apesteilen me Christos baptizein\). The negative \ou\ goes not with the infinitive, but with \apesteilen\ (from \apostell“, apostolos\, apostle). {For Christ did not send me to be a baptizer} (present active infinitive, linear action) like John the Baptist. {But to preach the gospel} (\alla euaggelizesthai\). This is Paul's idea of his mission from Christ, as Christ's apostle, to be {a gospelizer}. This led, of course, to baptism, as a result, but Paul usually had it done by others as Peter at Caesarea ordered the baptism to be done, apparently by the six brethren with him (Acts:10:48|). Paul is fond of this late Greek verb from \euaggelion\ and sometimes uses both verb and substantive as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:1| "the gospel which I gospelized unto you." {Not in wisdom of words} (\ouk en sophiƒi logou\). Note \ou\, not \mˆ\ (the subjective negative), construed with \apesteilen\ rather than the infinitive. Not in wisdom of speech (singular). Preaching was Paul's forte, but it was not as a pretentious philosopher or professional rhetorician that Paul appeared before the Corinthians (1Corinthians:2:1-5|). Some who followed Apollos may have been guilty of a fancy for external show, though Apollos was not a mere performer and juggler with words. But the Alexandrian method as in Philo did run to dialectic subtleties and luxuriant rhetoric (Lightfoot). {Lest the cross of Christ should be made void} (\hina mˆ ken“thˆi ho stauros tou Christou\). Negative purpose (\hina mˆ\) with first aorist passive subjunctive, effective aorist, of \keno“\, old verb from \kenos\, to make empty. In Paul's preaching the Cross of Christ is the central theme. Hence Paul did not fall into the snare of too much emphasis on baptism nor into too little on the death of Christ. "This expression shows clearly the stress which St. Paul laid on the death of Christ, not merely as a great moral spectacle, and so the crowning point of a life of self-renunciation, but as in itself the ordained instrument of salvation" (Lightfoot).

rwp@1Corinthians:2:5 @{That your faith should not stand} (\hina hˆ pistis hum“n mˆ ˆi\). Purpose of God, but \mˆ ˆi\ is "not be" merely. The only secure place for faith to find a rest is in God's power, not in the wisdom of men. One has only to instance the changing theories of men about science, philosophy, religion, politics to see this. A sure word from God can be depended on.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:10 @{But unto us God revealed them} (\hˆmin gar apekalupsen ho theos\). Songs:with \gar\ B 37 Sah Cop read instead of \de\ of Aleph A C D. "\De\ is superficially easier; \gar\ intrinsically better" (Findlay). Paul explains why this is no longer hidden, "for God revealed unto us" the wonders of grace pictured in verse 9|. We do not have to wait for heaven to see them. Hence we can utter those things hidden from the eye, the ear, the heart of man. This revelation (\apekalupsen\, first aorist active indicative) took place, at "the entry of the Gospel into the world," not "when we were admitted into the Church, when we were baptized" as Lightfoot interprets it. {Through the Spirit} (\dia tou pneumatos\). The Holy Spirit is the agent of this definite revelation of grace, a revelation with a definite beginning or advent (constative aorist), an unveiling by the Spirit where "human ability and research would not have sufficed" (Robertson and Plummer), "according to the revelation of the mystery" (Romans:16:25|), "the revelation given to Christians as an event that began a new epoch in the world's history" (Edwards). {Searcheth all things} (\panta eraunƒi\). This is the usual form from A.D. 1 on rather than the old \ereuna“\. The word occurs (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_) for a professional searcher's report and \eraunˆtai\, searchers for customs officials. "The Spirit is the organ of understanding between man and God" (Findlay). Songs:in strkjv@Romans:8:27| we have this very verb \erauna“\ again of God's searching our hearts. The Holy Spirit not merely investigates us, but he searches "even the deep things of God" (\kai ta bathˆ tou theou\). _Profunda Dei_ (Vulgate). Cf. "the deep things of Satan" (Revelation:2:24|) and Paul's language in strkjv@Romans:11:33| "Oh the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God." Paul's point is simply that the Holy Spirit fully comprehends the depth of God's nature and his plans of grace and so is fully competent to make the revelation here claimed.

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

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

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

rwp@1Corinthians:3:17 @{Destroyeth} (\phtheirei\). The outward temple is merely the symbol of God's presence, the Shechinah (the Glory). God makes his home in the hearts of his people or the church in any given place like Corinth. It is a terrible thing to tear down ruthlessly a church or temple of God like an earthquake that shatters a building in ruins. This old verb \phtheir“\ means to corrupt, to deprave, to destroy. It is a gross sin to be a church-wrecker. There are actually a few preachers who leave behind them ruin like a tornado in their path. {Him shall God destroy} (\phtherei touton ho theos\). There is a solemn repetition of the same verb in the future active indicative. The condition is the first class and is assumed to be true. Then the punishment is certain and equally effective. The church-wrecker God will wreck. What does Paul mean by "will destroy"? Does he mean punishment here or hereafter? May it not be both? Certainly he does not mean annihilation of the man's soul, though it may well include eternal punishment. There is warning enough here to make every pastor pause before he tears a church to pieces in order to vindicate himself. {Holy} (\hagios\). Hence deserves reverential treatment. It is not the building or house of which Paul speaks as "the sanctuary of God" (\ton naon tou theou\), but the spiritual organization or organism of God's people in whom God dwells, "which temple ye are" (\hoitines este humeis\). The qualitative relative pronoun \hoitines\ is plural to agree with \humeis\ (ye) and refers to the holy temple just mentioned. The Corinthians themselves in their angry disputes had forgotten their holy heritage and calling, though this failing was no excuse for the ringleaders who had led them on. In strkjv@6:19| Paul reminds the Corinthians again that the body is the temple (\naos\, sanctuary) of the Holy Spirit, which fact they had forgotten in their immoralities.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:21 @{Wherefore let no one glory in men} (\h“ste mˆdeis kauchasth“ en anthr“pois\). The conclusion (\h“ste\) from the self-conceit condemned. This particle here is merely inferential with no effect on the construction (\h“s+te\ = and so) any more than \oun\ would have, a paratactic conjunction. There are thirty such examples of \h“ste\ in the N.T., eleven with the imperative as here (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 999). The spirit of glorying in party is a species of self-conceit and inconsistent with glorying in the Lord (1:31|).

rwp@1Corinthians:4:6 @{I have in a figure transferred} (\meteschˆmatisa\). First aorist active (not perfect) indicative of \meta-schˆmatiz“\, used by Plato and Aristotle for changing the form of a thing (from \meta\, after, and \schˆma\, form or habit, like Latin _habitus_ from \ech“\ and so different from \morphˆ\ as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:7; strkjv@Romans:12:2|). For the idea of refashioning see Field, _Notes_, p. 169f. and Preisigke, _Fachworter_). Both Greek and Latin writers (Quintilian, Martial) used \schˆma\ for a rhetorical artifice. Paul's use of the word (in Paul only in N.T.) appears also further in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:13-15| where the word occurs three times, twice of the false apostles posing and passing as apostles of Christ and ministers of righteousness, and once of Satan as an angel of light, twice with \eis\ and once with \h“s\. In strkjv@Phillipians:3:21| the word is used for the change in the body of our humiliation to the body of glory. But here it is clearly the rhetorical figure for a veiled allusion to Paul and Apollos "for your sakes" (\dia humas\). {That in us ye may learn} (\hina en hˆmin mathˆte\). Final clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \manthan“\, to learn. As an object lesson in our cases (\en hˆmin\). It is no more true of Paul and Apollos than of other ministers, but the wrangles in Corinth started about them. Songs:Paul boldly puts himself and Apollos to the fore in the discussion of the principles involved. {Not to go beyond the things which are written} (\to Mˆ huper ha gegraptai\). It is difficult to reproduce the Greek idiom in English. The article \to\ is in the accusative case as the object of the verb \mathˆte\ (learn) and points at the words "\Mˆ huper ha gegraptai\," apparently a proverb or rule, and elliptical in form with no principal verb expressed with \mˆ\, whether "think" (Auth.) or "go" (Revised). There was a constant tendency to smooth out Paul's ellipses as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26,31|. Lightfoot thinks that Paul may have in mind O.T. passages quoted in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:19,31; strkjv@3:19,20|. {That ye be not puffed up} (\hina mˆ phusiousthe\). Sub-final use of \hina\ (second use in this sentence) with notion of result. It is not certain whether \phusiousthe\ (late verb form like \phusia“, phusa“\, to blow up, to inflate, to puff up), used only by Paul in the N.T., is present indicative with \hina\ like \zˆloute\ in strkjv@Galatians:4:17| (cf. \hina gin“skomen\ in strkjv@1John:5:20|) or the present subjunctive by irregular contraction (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 203, 342f.), probably the present indicative. \Phusio“\ is from \phusis\ (nature) and so meant to make natural, but it is used by Paul just like \phusa“\ or \phusia“\ (from \phusa\, a pair of bellows), a vivid picture of self-conceit. {One for the one against the other} (\heis huper tou henos kata tou heterou\). This is the precise idea of this idiom of partitive apposition. This is the rule with partisans. They are "for" (\huper\) the one and "against" (\kata\, down on, the genitive case) the other (\tou heterou\, not merely another or a second, but the different sort, \heterodox\).

rwp@1Corinthians:4:13 @{Being defamed we intreat} (\dusphˆmoumenoi parakaloumen\). The participle \dusphˆmoumenoi\ is an old verb (in I Macc. strkjv@7:41) to use ill, from \dusphˆmos\, but occurs here only in the N.T. Paul is opening his very heart now after the keen irony above. {As the filth of the world} (\h“s perikatharmata tou kosmou\). Literally, sweepings, rinsings, cleansings around, dust from the floor, from \perikathair“\, to cleanse all around (Plato and Aristotle) and so the refuse thrown off in cleansing. Here only in the N.T. and only twice elsewhere. \Katharma\ was the refuse of a sacrifice. In strkjv@Proverbs:21:18| \perikatharma\ occurs for the scapegoat. The other example is Epictetus iii. 22,78, in the same sense of an expiatory offering of a worthless fellow. It was the custom in Athens during a plague to throw to the sea some wretch in the hope of appeasing the gods. One hesitates to take it so here in Paul, though Findlay thinks that possibly in Ephesus Paul may have heard some such cry like that in the later martyrdoms _Christiani ad leones_. At any rate in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:32| Paul says "I fought with wild beasts" and in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:9| "I had the answer of death." Some terrible experience may be alluded to here. The word shows the contempt of the Ephesian populace for Paul as is shown in strkjv@Acts:19:23-41| under the influence of Demetrius and the craftsmen. {The offscouring of all things} (\pant“n peripsˆma\). Late word, here only in N.T., though in Tob. strkjv@5:18. The word was used in a formula at Athens when victims were flung into the sea, \peripsˆma hˆm“n genou\ (Became a \peripsˆma\ for us), in the sense of expiation. The word merely means scraping around from \peripsa“\, offscrapings or refuse. That is probably the idea here as in Tob. strkjv@5:18. It came to have a complimentary sense for the Christians who in a plague gave their lives for the sick. But it is a bold figure here with Paul of a piece with \perikatharmata\.

rwp@1Corinthians:5:1 @{Actually} (\hol“s\). Literally, wholly, altogether, like Latin _omnino_ and Greek \pant“s\ (1Corinthians:9:22|). Songs:papyri have it for "really" and also for "generally" or "everywhere" as is possible here. See also strkjv@6:7|. With a negative it has the sense of "not at all" as in strkjv@15:29; strkjv@Matthew:5:34| the only N.T. examples, though a common word. {It is reported} (\akouetai\). Present passive indicative of \akou“\, to hear; so literally, it is heard. "Fornication is heard of among you." Probably the household of Chloe (1:11|) brought this sad news (Ellicott). {And such} (\kai toiautˆ\). Climactic qualitative pronoun showing the revolting character of this particular case of illicit sexual intercourse. \Porneia\ is sometimes used (Acts:15:20,29|) of such sin in general and not merely of the unmarried whereas \moicheia\ is technically adultery on the part of the married (Mark:7:21|). {As is not even among the Gentiles} (\hˆtis oude en tois ethnesin\). Height of scorn. The Corinthian Christians were actually trying to win pagans to Christ and living more loosely than the Corinthian heathen among whom the very word "Corinthianize" meant to live in sexual wantonness and license. See Cicero _pro Cluentio_, v. 14. {That one of you hath his father's wife} (\h“ste gunaika tina tou patros echein\). "Songs:as (usual force of \h“ste\) for one to go on having (\echein\, present infinitive) a wife of the (his) father." It was probably a permanent union (concubine or mistress) of some kind without formal marriage like strkjv@John:4:8|. The woman probably was not the offender's mother (step-mother) and the father may have been dead or divorced. The Jewish law prescribed stoning for this crime (Leviticus:18:8; strkjv@22:11; strkjv@Deuteronomy:22:30|). But the rabbis (Rabbi Akibah) invented a subterfuge in the case of a proselyte to permit such a relation. Perhaps the Corinthians had also learned how to split hairs over moral matters in such an evil atmosphere and so to condone this crime in one of their own members. Expulsion Paul had urged in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:6| for such offenders.

rwp@1Corinthians:5:3 @{For I verily} (\eg“ men gar\). Emphatic statement of Paul's own attitude of indignation, \eg“\ in contrast with \humeis\. He justifies his demand for the expulsion of the man. {Being absent} (\ap“n\) Although absent (concessive participle) and so of \par“n\ though present. Each with locative case (\t“i s“mati, t“i pneumati\). {Have already judged} (\ˆdˆ kekrika\). Perfect active indicative of \krin“\. I have already decided or judged, as though present (\h“s par“n\). Paul felt compelled to reach a conclusion about the case and in a sentence of much difficulty seems to conceive an imaginary church court where the culprit has been tried and condemned. There are various ways of punctuating the clauses in this sentence in verses 3-5|. It is not merely Paul's individual judgment. The genitive absolute clause in verse 4|, {ye being gathered together} (\sunachthent“n hum“n\, first aorist passive participle of \sunag“\, in regular assembly) {and my spirit} (\kai tou emou pneumatos\) with the assembly (he means) {and meeting in the name of our Lord Jesus} (\en t“i onomati tou Kuriou [hˆm“n] Iˆsou\) with the power of the Lord Jesus (\sun tˆi dunamei tou Kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou\), though this clause can be taken with the infinitive to deliver (\paradounai\). It makes good syntax and sense taken either way. The chief difference is that, if taken with "gathered together" (\sunachthent“n\) Paul assumes less apostolic prerogative to himself. But he did have such power and used it against Elymas (Acts:13:8ff.|) as Peter did against Ananias and Sapphira (Acts:5:1ff.|).

rwp@1Corinthians:5:5 @{To deliver such an one unto Satan} (\paradounai ton toiouton t“i Satanƒi\). We have the same idiom in strkjv@1Timothy:1:20| used of Hymenius and Alexander. In strkjv@2Corinthians:12:7| Paul speaks of his own physical suffering as a messenger (\aggelos\) of Satan. Paul certainly means expulsion from the church (verse 2|) and regarding him as outside of the commonwealth of Israel (Ephesians:2:11f.|). But we are not to infer that expulsion from the local church means the damnation of the offender. The wilful offenders have to be expelled and not regarded as enemies, but admonished as brothers (2Thessalonians:3:14f.|). {For the destruction of the flesh} (\eis olethron tˆs sarkos\). Both for physical suffering as in the case of Job:(Job:2:6|) and for conquest of the fleshly sins, remedial punishment. {That the spirit may be saved} (\hina to pneuma s“thˆi\). The ultimate purpose of the expulsion as discipline. Note the use of \to pneuma\ in contrast with \sarx\ as the seat of personality (cf. strkjv@3:15|). Paul's motive is not merely vindictive, but the reformation of the offender who is not named here nor in strkjv@2Corinthians:2:5-11| if the same man is meant, which is very doubtful. The final salvation of the man in the day of Christ is the goal and this is to be attained not by condoning his sin.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:7:2 @{Because of fornications} (\dia tas porneias\). This is not the only reason for marriage, but it is a true one. The main purpose of marriage is children. Mutual love is another. The family is the basis of all civilization. Paul does not give a low view of marriage, but is merely answering questions put to him about life in Corinth.

rwp@1Corinthians:8:13 @{Meat} (\br“ma\). Food it should be, not flesh (\krea\). {Maketh my brother to stumble} (\skandalizei ton adelphon mou\). Late verb (LXX and N.T.) to set a trap-stick (Matthew:5:29|) or stumbling-block like \proskomma\ in verse 9| (cf. strkjv@Romans:14:13,21|). Small boys sometimes set snares for other boys, not merely for animals to see them caught. {I will eat no flesh for evermore} (\ou mˆ phag“ krea eis ton ai“na\). The strong double negative \ou mˆ\ with the second aorist subjunctive. Here Paul has {flesh} (\krea\) with direct reference to the flesh offered to idols. Old word, but in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:14:21|. This is Paul's principle of love (verse 2|) applied to the matter of eating meats offered to idols. Paul had rather be a vegetarian than to lead his weak brother to do what he considered sin. There are many questions of casuistry today that can only be handled wisely by Paul's ideal of love.

rwp@1Corinthians:9:27 @{But I buffet my body} (\alla hup“piaz“ mou to s“ma\). In Aristophanes, Aristotle, Plutarch, from \hup“pion\, and that from \hupo\ and \ops\ (in papyri), the part of the face under the eyes, a blow in the face, to beat black and blue. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:18:5| which see. Paul does not, like the Gnostics, consider his \sarx\ or his \s“ma\ sinful and evil. But "it is like the horses in a chariot race, which must be kept well in hand by whip and rein if the prize is to be secured" (Robertson and Plummer). The boxers often used boxing gloves (\cestus\, of ox-hide bands) which gave telling blows. Paul was not willing for his body to be his master. He found good as the outcome of this self-discipline (2Corinthians:12:7; strkjv@Romans:8:13; strkjv@Colossians:2:23; strkjv@3:5|). {And bring it into bondage} (\kai doulag“g“\). Late compound verb from \doulag“gos\, in Diodorus Siculus, Epictetus and substantive in papyri. It is the metaphor of the victor leading the vanquished as captive and slave. {Lest by any means} (\mˆ p“s\). Common conjunction for negative purpose with subjunctive as here (\gen“mai\, second aorist middle). {After that I have preached to others} (\allois kˆr–xas\). First aorist active participle of \kˆruss“\ (see on ¯1:23|), common verb to preach, from word \kˆrux\ (herald) and that is probably the idea here. A \kˆrux\ at the games announced the rules of the game and called out the competitors. Songs:Paul is not merely a herald, but a competitor also. {I myself should be rejected} (\autos adokimos gen“mai\). Literally, "I myself should become rejected." \Adokimos\ is an old adjective used of metals, coin, soil (Hebrews:6:8|) and in a moral sense only by Paul in N.T. (1Corinthians:9:27; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:5-7; strkjv@Romans:1:28; strkjv@Titus:1:16; strkjv@2Timothy:3:8|). It means not standing the test (\dokimos\ from \dokimaz“\). Paul means rejected for the {prize}, not for the entrance to the race. He will fail to win if he breaks the rules of the game (Matthew:7:22f.|). What is the prize before Paul? Is it that {reward} (\misthos\) of which he spoke in verse 18|, his glorying of preaching a free gospel? Songs:Edwards argues. Most writers take Paul to refer to the possibility of his rejection in his personal salvation at the end of the race. He does not claim absolute perfection (Phillipians:3:12|) and so he presses on. At the end he has serene confidence (2Timothy:4:7|) with the race run and won. It is a humbling thought for us all to see this wholesome fear instead of smug complacency in this greatest of all heralds of Christ.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:12:10 @{Workings of miracles} (\energˆmata duname“n\). Workings of powers. Cf. \energ“n dunameis\ in strkjv@Galatians:3:5; strkjv@Hebrews:2:4| where all three words are used (\sˆmeia\, signs, \terata\, wonders, \dunameis\, powers). Some of the miracles were not healings as the blindness on Elymas the sorcerer. {Prophecy} (\prophˆteia\). Late word from \prophˆtˆs\ and \prophˆmi\, to speak forth. Common in papyri. This gift Paul will praise most (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:14|). Not always prediction, but a speaking forth of God's message under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. {Discernings of spirits} (\diakriseis pneumat“n\). \Diakrisis\ is old word from \diakrin“\ (see strkjv@11:29|) and in N.T. only here; strkjv@Romans:14:1; strkjv@Hebrews:5:14|. A most needed gift to tell whether the gifts were really of the Holy Spirit and supernatural (cf. so-called "gifts" today) or merely strange though natural or even diabolical (1Timothy:4:1; strkjv@1John:4:1f.|). {Divers kinds of tongues} (\genˆ gl“ss“n\). No word for "divers" in the Greek. There has arisen a great deal of confusion concerning the gift of tongues as found in Corinth. They prided themselves chiefly on this gift which had become a source of confusion and disorder. There were varieties (kinds, \genˆ\) in this gift, but the gift was essentially an ecstatic utterance of highly wrought emotion that edified the speaker (14:4|) and was intelligible to God (14:2,28|). It was not always true that the speaker in tongues could make clear what he had said to those who did not know the tongue (14:13|): It was not mere gibberish or jargon like the modern "tongues," but in a real language that could be understood by one familiar with that tongue as was seen on the great Day of Pentecost when people who spoke different languages were present. In Corinth, where no such variety of people existed, it required an interpreter to explain the tongue to those who knew it not. Hence Paul placed this gift lowest of all. It created wonder, but did little real good. This is the error of the Irvingites and others who have tried to reproduce this early gift of the Holy Spirit which was clearly for a special emergency and which was not designed to help spread the gospel among men. See on ¯Acts:2:13-21; strkjv@10:44-46; strkjv@19:6|. {The interpretation of tongues} (\hermˆneia gl“ss“n\). Old word, here only and strkjv@14:26| in N.T., from \hermˆneu“\ from \Hermˆs\ (the god of speech). Cf. on \diermˆneu“\ in strkjv@Luke:24:27; strkjv@Acts:9:36|. In case there was no one present who understood the particular tongue it required a special gift of the Spirit to some one to interpret it if any one was to receive benefit from it.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:4 @{And that he was buried} (\kai hoti etaphˆ\). Note \hoti\ repeated before each of the four verbs as a separate item. Second aorist passive indicative of \thapt“\, old verb, to bury. This item is an important detail as the Gospels show. {And that he hath been raised} (\kai hoti egˆgertai\). Perfect passive indicative, not \ˆgerthˆ\ like {rose} of the King James' Version. There is reason for this sudden change of tense. Paul wishes to emphasize the permanence of the resurrection of Jesus. He is still risen. {On the third day} (\tˆi hˆmerƒi tˆi tritˆi\). Locative case of time. Whether Paul had seen either of the Gospels we do not know, but this item is closely identified with the fact of Christ's resurrection. We have it in Peter's speech (Acts:10:40|) and Jesus points it out as part of prophecy (Luke:24:46|). The other expression occasionally found "after three days" (Mark:10:34|) is merely free vernacular for the same idea and not even strkjv@Matthew:12:40| disturbs it. See on ¯Luke:24:1| for record of the empty tomb on the first day of the week (the third day).

rwp@1Corinthians:15:19 @{We have hoped} (\ˆlpikotes esmen\). Periphrastic perfect active indicative. Hope limited to this life even if "in Christ." {Only} (\monon\) qualifies the whole clause. {Most pitiable} (\eleeinoteroi\). Comparative form, not superlative, of old adjective \eleeinos\, to be pitied, pitiable. If our hope is limited to this life, we have denied ourselves what people call pleasures and have no happiness beyond. The Epicureans have the argument on us. Paul makes morality turn on the hope of immortality. Is he not right? Witness the breaking of moral ties today when people take a merely animal view of life.

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

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

rwp@1Corinthians:15:27 @{He put} (\hupetaxen\). First aorist active of \hupotass“\, to subject. Supply God (\theos\) as subject (Psalms:8:7|). See strkjv@Hebrews:2:5-9| for similar use. Cf. strkjv@Psalms:8|. {But when he saith} (\hotan de eipˆi\). Here Christ must be supplied as the subject if the reference is to his future and final triumph. The syntax more naturally calls for God as the subject as before. Either way makes sense. But there is no need to take \eipˆi\ (second aorist active subjunctive) as _a futurum exactum_, merely "whenever he shall say." {Are put in subjection} (\hupotetaktai\). Perfect passive indicative, state of completion, final triumph. {It is evident that} (\dˆlon hoti\). Supply \estin\ (is) before \hoti\. {He is excepted who did subject} (\ektos tou hupotaxantos\). "Except the one (God) who did subject (articular aorist active participle) the all things to him (Christ)."

rwp@1Corinthians:15:28 @{And when all things have been subjected} (\hotan de hupotagˆi ta panta\). Second aorist passive subjunctive of \hupotass“\, not perfect. Merely, "when the all things are subjected unto him." The aorist subjunctive has given translators a deal of needless trouble in this passage. It is prophecy, of course. {That God may be all in all} (\hina ˆi ho theos panta en pasin\). The final goal of all God's redemptive plans as Paul has so well said in strkjv@Romans:11:36|. Precisely this language Paul will use of Christ (Colossians:3:11|).

rwp@1Corinthians:15:40 @{Celestial} (\epourania\). Old word, from \epi\, upon, \ouranos\, heaven, existing in heaven. Paul now rises higher in the range of his argument, above the merely {terrestrial} (\epigeia\, upon earth, \epi, ge\) bodies. He has shown differences in the bodies here on earth in plants and in the animal kingdom and now he indicates like differences to be seen in the heavens above us. {Is one} (\hetera men\) {--is another} (\hetera de\). Antithesis that admits glory for bodies on earth and bodies in the heavens. Experience does not argue against a glory for the spiritual body (Phillipians:3:21|).

rwp@1Corinthians:15:49 @{We shall also bear} (\phoresomen kai\). Old MSS. (so Westcott and Hort) read \phores“men kai\. Volitive aorist active subjunctive, Let us also bear. Ellicott strongly opposes the subjunctive. It may be merely the failure of scribes to distinguish between long o and short o. Paul hardly means to say that our attaining the resurrection body depends on our own efforts! A late frequentative form of \pher“\.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:54 @{Shall have put on} (\endusˆtai\). First aorist middle subjunctive with \hotan\ whenever, merely indefinite future, no _futurum exactum_, merely meaning, "whenever shall put on," not "shall have put on." {Is swallowed up} (\katepothˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \katapin“\, old verb to drink down, swallow down. Perfective use of \kata-\ where we say "up," "swallow up." Timeless use of the aorist tense. Paul changes the active voice \katepien\ in strkjv@Isaiah:25:8| to the passive. Death is no longer victory. Theodotion reads the Hebrew verb (_bulla_, for _billa_,) as passive like Paul. It is the "final overthrow of the king of Terrors" (Findlay) as shown in strkjv@Hebrews:2:15|.

rwp@1John:4:10 @{Not that} (\ouch hoti\) {--but that} (\all' hoti\). Sharp contrast as in strkjv@John:7:22; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:9; strkjv@Phillipians:4:17|. {We loved} (\ˆgapˆsamen\). First aorist active indicative, but B reads \ˆgapˆkamen\ (perfect active, we have loved). {He} (\autos\). Emphatic nominative (God). {To be the propitiation} (\hilasmon\). Merely predicate accusative in apposition with \huion\ (Son). For the word see strkjv@2:2; strkjv@Romans:3:25| for \hilastˆrion\, and for \peri\ see also strkjv@2:2|.

rwp@1John:4:12 @{No one hath beheld God at any time} (\theon oudeis p“pote tetheƒtai\). Perfect middle indicative of \theaomai\ (John:1:14|). Almost the very words of strkjv@John:1:18| \theon oudeis p“pote he“raken\ (instead of \tetheƒtai\). {If we love one another} (\ean agap“men allˆlous\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and the present active subjunctive, "if we keep on loving one another." {God abideth in us} (\ho theos en hˆmin menei\). Else we cannot go on loving one another. {His love} (\hˆ agapˆ autou\). More than merely subjective or objective (2:5; strkjv@4:9|). "Mutual love is a sign of the indwelling of God in men" (Brooke). {Is perfected} (\tetelei“menˆ estin\). Periphrastic (see usual form \tetelei“tai\ in strkjv@2:5; strkjv@4:17|) perfect passive indicative of \teleio“\ (cf. strkjv@1:4|). See verse 18| for "perfect love."

rwp@1John:5:1 @{That Jesus is the Christ} (\hoti Iˆsous estin ho Christos\). The Cerinthian antichrist denies the identity of Jesus and Christ (2:22|). Hence John insists on this form of faith (\pisteu“n\ here in the full sense, stronger than in strkjv@3:23; strkjv@4:16|, seen also in \pistis\ in verse 4|, where English and Latin fall down in having to use another word for the verb) as he does in verse 5| and in accord with the purpose of John's Gospel (20:31|). Nothing less will satisfy John, not merely intellectual conviction, but full surrender to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. "The Divine Begetting is the antecedent, not the consequent of the believing" (Law). For "is begotten of God" (\ek tou theou gegennˆtai\) see strkjv@2:29; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@4:7; strkjv@5:4,18|. John appeals here to family relationship and family love. {Him that begat} (\ton gennˆsanta\). First aorist active articular participle of \genna“\, to beget, the Father (our heavenly Father). {Him also that is begotten of him} (\ton gegennˆmenon ex autou\). Perfect passive articular participle of \genna“\, the brother or sister by the same father. Songs:then we prove our love for the common Father by our conduct towards our brothers and sisters in Christ.

rwp@1Peter:3:7 @{Ye husbands likewise} (\hoi andres homoi“s\). Probably "likewise" here refers to honouring all men (2:17|), not "likewise" of strkjv@3:1|. {Dwell with} (\sunoikountes\). Present active participle of \sunoike“\, old verb for domestic association, here only in N.T. Used as imperative here like the participle in strkjv@2:18; strkjv@3:1|. {According to knowledge} (\kata gn“sin\). "With an intelligent recognition of the nature of the marriage relation" (Vincent). {Giving honour unto the woman as unto the weaker vessel} (\h“s asthenester“i skeuei t“i gunaikei“i aponemontes timˆn\). Present active participle of \aponem“\, old verb, to assign, to portion out (or off), here only in N.T. \Skeuos\ is an old and common word for vessel, furniture, utensil (Matthew:12:29; strkjv@2Timothy:2:20|). Here both husband and wife are termed vessels or "parts of the furniture of God's house" (Bigg). See Paul's use of \skeuos\ for ministers (2Corinthians:4:7|). \Gunaikei“i\ here is an adjective (female, feminine) from \gunˆ\ (woman, wife). She is termed "the weaker" (\t“i asthenester“i\), not for intellectual or moral weakness, but purely for physical reasons, which the husband must recognize with due consideration for marital happiness. {Joint-heirs of the grace of life} (\sunklˆronomoi charitos z“ˆs\). Late double compound found in an Ephesian inscription and the papyri, in N.T. only here, strkjv@Romans:8:17; strkjv@Ephesians:3:6; strkjv@Hebrews:11:9|. God's gift of life eternal belongs to woman as well as to man. In the eyes of God the wife may be superior to the husband, not merely equal. {To the end that your prayers be not hindered} (\eis to mˆ egkoptesthai tas proseuchas hum“n\). Purpose clause with \eis to\ and the present passive infinitive (with negative \mˆ\) of \egkopt“\, to cut in, to interrupt, late verb (Polybius), as in strkjv@Romans:15:22|, etc. Very vivid to us now with our telephones and radios when people cut in on us. \Proseuchas\ (prayers) is the accusative of general reference. Husbands surely have here cause to consider why their prayers are not answered.

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:4:1 @{Finally} (\loipon\). Accusative of general reference of \loipos\, as for the rest. It does not mean actual conclusion, but merely a colloquial expression pointing towards the end (Milligan) as in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11; strkjv@2Timothy:4:8|. Songs:\to loipon\ in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:1; strkjv@Phillipians:3:1; strkjv@4:8|. {We beseech} (\er“t“men\). Not "question" as in ancient Greek, but as often in N.T. (1Thessalonians:5:12; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1; strkjv@Phillipians:4:3|) and also in papyri to make urgent request of one. {How ye ought} (\to p“s dei humƒs\). Literally, explanatory articular indirect question (\to p“s\) after \parelabˆte\ according to common classic idiom in Luke (Luke:1:62; strkjv@22:2,4,23,24|) and Paul (Romans:8:26|). {That ye abound} (\hina perisseuˆte\). Loose construction of the \hina\ clause with present subjunctive after two subordinate clauses with \kath“s\ (as, even as) to be connected with "beseech and exhort." {More and more} (\mallon\). Simply {more}, but added to same idea in \perisseuˆte\. See also verse 11|.

rwp@1Timothy:4:14 @{Neglect not} (\mˆ amelei\). Present active imperative in prohibition of \amele“\, old verb, rare in N.T. (Matthew:22:5; strkjv@1Timothy:4:14; strkjv@Hebrews:2:3; strkjv@8:9|). From \amelˆs\ (\a\ privative and \melei\, not to care). Use with genitive. {The gift that is in thee} (\tou en soi charismatos\). Late word of result from \charizomai\, in papyri (Preisigke), a regular Pauline word in N.T. (1Corinthians:1:7; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:11; strkjv@Romans:1:11|; etc.). Here it is God's gift to Timothy as in strkjv@2Timothy:1:6|. {By prophecy} (\dia prophˆteias\). Accompanied by prophecy (1:18|), not bestowed by prophecy. {With the laying on of the hands of the presbytery} (\meta epithese“s t“n cheir“n tou presbuteriou\). In strkjv@Acts:13:2f.|, when Barnabas and Saul were formally set apart to the mission campaign (not then ordained as ministers, for they were already that), there was the call of the Spirit and the laying on of hands with prayer. Here again \meta\ does not express instrument or means, but merely accompaniment. In strkjv@2Timothy:1:6| Paul speaks only of his own laying on of hands, but the rest of the presbytery no doubt did so at the same time and the reference is to this incident. There is no way to tell when and where it was done, whether at Lystra when Timothy joined Paul's party or at Ephesus just before Paul left Timothy there (1:3|). \Epithesis\ (\from epitithˆmi\, to lay upon) is an old word, in LXX, etc. In the N.T. we find it only here, strkjv@2Timothy:1:16; strkjv@Acts:8:18; strkjv@Hebrews:6:2|, but the verb \epitithˆmi\ with \tas cheiras\ more frequently (Acts:6:6| of the deacons; strkjv@8:19; strkjv@13:3; strkjv@1Timothy:5:22|, etc.). \Presbuterion\ is a late word (ecclesiastical use also), first for the Jewish Sanhedrin (Luke:22:66; strkjv@Acts:22:5|), then (here only in N.T.) of Christian elders (common in Ignatius), though \presbuteros\ (elder) for preachers (bishops) is common (Acts:11:30; strkjv@15:2; strkjv@20:17|, etc.).

rwp@1Timothy:6:19 @{Laying up in store} (\apothˆsaurizontas\). Late literary word (\apo\ and \thˆsauriz“\), only here in N.T. Same paradox as in strkjv@Matthew:6:19f.|, "laying up in store" by giving it away. {Which is life indeed} (\tˆs ont“s z“ˆs\). See strkjv@5:3| for \ont“s\. This life is merely the shadow of the eternal reality to come.

rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ Some good commentaries on I Corinthians are the following: On the Greek Bachmann in the _Zahn Kommentar_, Edwards, Ellicott, Findlay (Expositor's Greek Testament), Godet, Goudge, Lietzmann (_Handbuch zum N.T._), Lightfoot (chs. 1-7), Parry, Robertson and Plummer (_Int. Crit._), Stanley, J. Weiss (_Meyer Kommentar_); on the English Dods (_Exp. Bible_), McFadyen, Parry, Ramsay, Rendall, F. W. Robertson, Walker (_Reader's Comm._). strkjv@2Corinthians:1:1 @{And Timothy} (\kai Timotheos\). Timothy is with Paul, having been sent on to Macedonia from Ephesus (Acts:19:22|). He is in no sense co-author any more than Sosthenes was in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:1|. {In all Achaia} (\en holˆi tˆi Achaiƒi\). The Romans divided Greece into two provinces (Achaia and Macedonia). Macedonia included also Illyricum, Epirus, and Thessaly. Achaia was all of Greece south of this (both Attica and the Peloponnesus). The restored Corinth was made the capital of Achaia where the pro-consul resided (Acts:18:12|). He does not mention other churches in Achaia outside of the one in Corinth, but only "saints" (\hagiois\). Athens was in Achaia, but it is not clear that there was as yet a church there, though some converts had been won (Acts:17:34|), and there was a church in Cenchreae, the eastern port of Corinth (Romans:16:1|). Paul in strkjv@2Corinthians:9:2| speaks of Achaia and Macedonia together. His language here would seem to cover the whole (\holˆi\, all) of Achaia in his scope and not merely the environment around Corinth.

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

rwp@2Corinthians:7:1 @{These promises} (\tautas tas epaggelias\). Songs:many and so precious (2Peter:2:4| \epaggelmata\; strkjv@Hebrews:11:39f.|). {Let us cleanse ourselves} (\katharis“men heautous\). Old Greek used \kathair“\ (in N.T. only in strkjv@John:15:2|, to prune). In _Koin‚_ \kathariz“\ occurs in inscriptions for ceremonial cleansing (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 216f.). Paul includes himself in this volitive aorist subjunctive. {From all defilement} (\apo pantos molusmou\). Ablative alone would have done, but with \apo\ it is plainer as in strkjv@Hebrews:9:14|. \Molusmos\ is a late word from \molun“\, to stain (see on ¯1Corinthians:8:7|), to pollute. In the LXX, Plutarch, Josephus. It includes all sorts of filthiness, physical, moral, mental, ceremonial, "of flesh and spirit." Missionaries in China and India can appreciate the atmosphere of pollution in Corinth, for instance. {Perfecting holiness} (\epitelountes hagiosunˆn\). Not merely negative goodness (cleansing), but aggressive and progressive (present tense of \epitele“\) holiness, not a sudden attainment of complete holiness, but a continuous process (1Thessalonians:3:13; strkjv@Romans:1:4; strkjv@1:6|).

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

rwp@2John:1:9 @{Whosoever goeth onward} (\pƒs ho proag“n\). "Every one who goes ahead. \Proag“\ literally means to go on before (Mark:11:9|). That in itself is often the thing to do, but here the bad sense comes out by the parallel clause. {And abideth not in the teaching of Christ} (\kai mˆ men“n en tˆi didachˆi tou Christou\). Not the teaching about Christ, but that of Christ which is the standard of Christian teaching as the walk of Christ is the standard for the Christian's walk (1John:2:6|). See strkjv@John:7:16; strkjv@18:19|. These Gnostics claimed to be the progressives, the advanced thinkers, and were anxious to relegate Christ to the past in their onward march. This struggle goes on always among those who approach the study of Christ. Is he a "landmark" merely or is he our goal and pattern? Progress we all desire, but progress toward Christ, not away from him. Reactionary obscurantists wish no progress toward Christ, but desire to stop and camp where they are. "True progress includes the past" (Westcott). Jesus Christ is still ahead of us all calling us to come on to him.

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

rwp@2Peter: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:1:4 @{Songs:that} (\h“ste\). Another example of \h“ste\ and the infinitive (\enkauchƒsthai\) for result as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:7| which see. {We ourselves} (\autous hˆmas\). Accusative of general reference with the infinitive, but not merely \hˆmƒs\ (or \heautous\), perhaps in contrast with \en humin\ (in you), as much as to say, "so that we ourselves, contrary to your expectations, are boasting" (Frame). \Enkauchaomai\ occurs here alone in N.T., but is found in the LXX and in _Aesop's Fables_, proof enough of its vernacular use. Paul was not above praising one church to other churches, to provoke them to good works. Here he is boasting of Thessalonica in Macedonia to the Corinthians as he did later to the Corinthians about the collection (2Corinthians:8:1-15|) after having first boasted to the Macedonians about the Corinthians (2Corinthians:9:1-5|). There were other churches in Achaia besides Corinth (2Corinthians:1:1|). {For} (\huper\). Over, about, like \peri\ (1Thessalonians:1:2|). {In all your persecutions} (\en pasin tois di“gmois hum“n\). Their patience and faith had already attracted Paul's attention (1Thessalonians:1:3|) and their tribulations \thlipsesin\ (1Thessalonians:1:6|). Here Paul adds the more specific term \di“gmos\, old word from \di“k“\, to chase, to pursue, a word used by Paul of his treatment in Corinth (2Corinthians:12:10|). {Which ye endure} (\hais anechesthe\). B here reads \enechesthe\, to be entangled in, to be held in as in strkjv@Galatians:5:1|, but \anechesthe\ is probably correct and the \hais\ is probably attracted to locative case of \thlipsesin\ from the ablative \h“n\ after \anechesthe\, {from which ye hold yourselves back} (cf. strkjv@Colossians:3:13|).

rwp@2Thessalonians:1:12 @{That} (\hop“s\). Rare with Paul compared with \hina\ (1Corinthians:1:29; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:14|). Perhaps here for variety (dependent on \hina\ clause in verse 11|). {The name} (\to onoma\). The Old Testament (LXX) uses \onoma\ embodying the revealed character of Jehovah. Songs:here the {Name} of our Lord Jesus means the Messiahship and Lordship of Jesus. The common Greek idiom of \onoma\ for title or dignity as in the papyri (Milligan) is not quite this idiom. The papyri also give examples of \onoma\ for person as in O.T. and strkjv@Acts:1:15| (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 196ff.). {In you, and ye in him} (\en humin, kai humeis en aut“i\). This reciprocal glorying is Pauline, but it is also like Christ's figure of the vine and the branches in strkjv@John:15:1-11|. {According to the grace} (\kata tˆn charin\). Not merely standard, but also aim (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 609). {Of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ} (\tou theou hˆm“n kai kuriou Iˆsou Christou\). Here strict syntax requires, since there is only one article with \theou\ and \kuriou\ that one person be meant, Jesus Christ, as is certainly true in strkjv@Titus:2:13; strkjv@2Peter:1:1| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p.786). This otherwise conclusive syntactical argument, admitted by Schmiedel, is weakened a bit by the fact that \Kurios\ is often employed as a proper name without the article, a thing not true of \s“tˆr\ in strkjv@Titus:2:13; strkjv@2Peter:1:1|. Songs:in strkjv@Ephesians:5:5| \en tˆi basileiƒi tou Christou kai theou\ the natural meaning is {in the Kingdom of Christ and God} regarded as one, but here again \theos\, like \Kurios\, often occurs as a proper name without the article. Songs:it has to be admitted that here Paul may mean "according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ," though he may also mean "according to the grace of our God and Lord, Jesus Christ."

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

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:3 @{But the Lord is faithful} (\pistos de estin ho kurios\). {But faithful is the Lord} (correct rendition), with a play (paronomasia) on \pistis\ by \pistos\ as in strkjv@Romans:3:3| we have a word-play on \apiste“\ and \apistia\. The Lord can be counted on, however perverse men may be. {From the evil one} (\apo tou ponˆrou\). Apparently a reminiscence of the Lord's Prayer in strkjv@Matthew:6:13| \rusai hˆmas apo tou ponˆrou\. But here as there it is not certain whether \tou ponˆrou\ is neuter (evil) like to \ponˆron\ in strkjv@Romans:12:9| or masculine (the evil one). But we have \ho ponˆros\ (the evil one) in strkjv@1John:5:18| and \tou ponˆrou\ is clearly masculine in strkjv@Ephesians:6:16|. If masculine here, as is probable, is it "the Evil One" (Ellicott) or merely the evil man like those mentioned in verse 2|? Perhaps Paul has in mind the representative of Satan, the man of sin, pictured in strkjv@2:1-12|, by the phrase here without trying to be too definite.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:8 @{For nought} (\d“rean\). Adverbial accusative, as a gift, gift-wise (\d“rea\, gift, from \did“mi\). Same claim made to the Corinthians (2Corinthians:11:7|), old word, in LXX, and papyri. He lodged with Jason, but did not receive his meals _gratis_, for he paid for them. Apparently he received no invitations to meals. Paul had to make his financial independence clear to avoid false charges which were made in spite of all his efforts. To eat bread is merely a Hebraism for eat (verse 10|). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:9| for labour and travail, and night and day (\nuktos kai hˆmeras\, genitive of time, by night and by day). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:9| for rest of the verse in precisely the same words.

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

rwp@2Timothy:4:3 @{A time when} (\kairos hote\). One of the \akair“s\ (out of season) times. {Will not endure} (\ouk anexontai\). Future middle (direct) of \anech“\. "Will not hold themselves back from" (Col. strkjv@3:13|). Having itching ears (\knˆthomenoi tˆn akoˆn\). Present middle (causative) participle of \knˆth“\, late and rare form of the Attic \kna“\, to scratch, to tickle, here only in N.T. "Getting the ears (the hearing, \tˆn akoˆn\) tickled." The Vulgate has \prurientes\. Cf. the Athenians (Acts:17:21|). Clement of Alexandria tells of speakers tickling (\knˆthontes\) the ears of those who want to be tickled. This is the temptation of the merely "popular" preacher, to furnish the latest tickle.

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

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

rwp@Acts:7:6 @{On this wise} (\hout“s\). A free quotation from strkjv@Genesis:15:13|. {Should sojourn} (\estai paroikon\). Shall be a sojourner, \Paroikos\ (\para\, beside, \oikos\, home), one dwelling near one's home, but not of it, so a stranger, foreigner, old word, often in LXX, temporary residence without full rights of citizenship (7:29; strkjv@13:17|), and descriptive of Christians (Ephesians:2:19; strkjv@1Peter:1:17; strkjv@2:11|). {In a strange land} (\en gˆi allotriƒi\). In a land not one's own, that belongs to another, alien as in strkjv@Matthew:17:25f.|, which see. {Four hundred years} (\etˆ tetrakosia\). Accusative of duration of time. As in strkjv@Genesis:15:13|, but a round number as in strkjv@Exodus:12:40| the time is 430 years. But in strkjv@Galatians:3:17| Paul, following the LXX in strkjv@Exodus:12:40|, takes the 430 years to cover the period in Canaan and the stay in Egypt, cutting the sojourn in Egypt to about half. Josephus gives it both ways. Hackett suggests two solutions, one that there were two ways of reckoning the period among the Jews with no way of settling it, the other that by the 430 years in Egypt the writers meant to include Canaan also as merely the preliminary to the period in Egypt.

rwp@Acts:9:2 @{Asked} (\ˆitˆsato\). First aorist middle indicative, the indirect middle, asked for himself (as a favour to himself). Felten notes that "Saul as a Pharisee makes request of a Sadducee" (the high priest) either Caiaphas if before A.D. 35, but if in 36 Jonathan, son of Caiaphas or if in 37 Theophilus, another son of Caiaphas. {Letters} (\epistolas\). Julius Ceasar and Augustus had granted the high priest and Sanhedrin jurisdiction over Jews in foreign cities, but this central ecclesiastical authority was not always recognized in every local community outside of Judea. Paul says that he received his authority to go to Damascus from the priests (Acts strkjv@26:10|) and "the estate of the elders" (22:5|), that is the Sanhedrin. {To Damascus} (\eis Damaskon\). As if no disciples of importance (outside the apostles in Jerusalem) were left in Judea. Damascus at this time may have been under the rule of Aretas of Arabia (tributary to Rome) as it certainly was a couple of years later when Saul escaped in a basket (2Corinthians:11:32|). This old city is the most enduring in the history of the world (Knowling). It is some 150 miles Northeast from Jerusalem and watered by the river Abana from Anti-Lebanon. Here the Jews were strong in numbers (10,000 butchered by Nero later) and here some disciples had found refuge from Saul's persecution in Judea and still worshipped in the synagogues. Paul's language in strkjv@Acts:26:11| seems to mean that Damascus is merely one of other "foreign cities" to which he carried the persecution. {If he found} (\ean heurˆi\). Third class condition with aorist subjunctive retained after secondary tense (asked). {The Way} (\tˆs hodou\). A common method in the Acts for describing Christianity as the Way of life, absolutely as also in strkjv@19:9,23; strkjv@22:4; strkjv@24:14,22| or the way of salvation (16:17|) or the way of the Lord (18:25|). It is a Jewish definition of life as in strkjv@Isaiah:40:3| "the way of the Lord," strkjv@Psalms:1:6| "the way of the righteous," "the way of the wicked." Jesus called himself "the way" (John:14:6|), the only way to the Father. The so-called Epistle of Barnabas presents the Two Ways. The North American Indians call Christianity the Jesus Road. {That he might bring them bound} (\hop“s dedemenous agagˆi\). Final clause with \hop“s\ (less common than \hina\) and aorist (effective) subjunctive (\agagˆi\, reduplicated aorist of \ag“\, common verb) and perfect passive participle (\dedemenous\) of \de“\, in a state of sheer helplessness like his other victims both men and women. Three times (8:3; strkjv@9:2; strkjv@22:4|) this fact of persecuting women is mentioned as a special blot in Paul's cruelty (the third time by Paul himself) and one of the items in his being chief of sinners (1Timothy:1:15|).

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

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

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

rwp@Acts:11:3 @{Thou wentest in} (\eisˆlthes\). Direct form, but Westcott and Hort have it \eisˆlthen\ (he went in), indirect form. Songs:with \sunephages\ (didst eat) and \sunephagen\ (did eat). The direct is more vivid. {Men uncircumcised} (\andras akrobustian echontas\). "Men having uncircumcision." It is a contemptuous expression. They did not object to Peter's preaching to the Gentiles, but to his going into the house of Cornelius and eating with them, violating his supposed obligations as a Jew (Hackett). It was the same complaint in principle that the Pharisees had made against Jesus when he ate with publicans and sinners (Luke:15:12|). The Jews had not merely the Mosaic regulations about clean and unclean food, but also the fact that at a Gentile table some of the meat may have been an idol sacrifice. And Peter himself had similar scruples when the vision came to him at Joppa and when he entered the house of Cornelius in Caesarea strkjv@10:28|). Peter had been led beyond the circumcision party.

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

rwp@Acts:11:20 @{Spake} (\elaloun\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to speak. For them it was an experiment. {Unto the Greeks also} (\kai pros tous Hellˆnas\). This is undoubtedly the correct reading in spite of Hellenists (\Hellˆnistas\) or Grecian Jews in B E H L P. \Hellˆnas\ is read by A and D and a corrector of Aleph. The presence of "also" or "even" (\kai\) in Aleph A B makes no sense unless "Greeks" is correct. Hellenists or Grecian Jews as Christians were common enough as is seen in strkjv@Acts:2; 6|. Saul also had preached to the Hellenists in Jerusalem (9:29|). Hellenists were merely one kind of Jews in contrast with those who spoke Aramaic (Acts:6|). It is true that the case of Cornelius was first in importance, but it is not clear that it was before the work in Antioch. Probably the report of the work among the Greeks in Antioch reached Jerusalem after Peter's defence in strkjv@11:1-18|. That explains the calm tone about it and also why Barnabas and not Peter was sent to investigate. Peter and John (Acts:8|) had condoned Philip's work in Samaria and Peter was the agent in the work among the Romans in Caesarea. His position was now well-known and his services discounted for this new crisis. These Greeks in Antioch were apparently in part pure heathen and not "God-fearers" like Cornelius. A man of wisdom was called for. These preachers were themselves Hellenists (verse 19|) and open to the lessons from their environment without a vision such as Peter had at Joppa. "It was a departure of startling boldness" (Furneaux) by laymen outside of the circle of official leaders.

rwp@Acts:12:5 @{Therefore} (\men oun\). Because of the preceding situation. {Was kept} (\etˆreito\). Imperfect passive, continuously guarded, waiting for the feast to be over. {But prayer was made earnestly} (\proseuchˆ de ˆn ekten“s ginomenˆ\). Probably \de\ here is not adversative (but), merely parallel (and) as Page argues. It was a crisis for the Jerusalem church. James had been slain and Peter was to be the next victim. Hence "earnestly" (late adverb from \ektenˆs\, strained, from \ektein“\, to stretch. In the N.T. only here, strkjv@Luke:22:44; strkjv@1Peter:1:22|) prayer was {going up} (\ginomenˆ\, present middle participle, periphrastic imperfect with \ˆn\). It looked like a desperate case for Peter. Hence the disciples prayed the more earnestly.

rwp@Acts:13:12 @{Believed} (\episteusen\). Ingressive aorist active indicative. Renan considers it impossible that a Roman proconsul could be converted by a miracle. But it was the teaching about the Lord (\tou kuriou\, objective genitive) by which he was astonished (\ekplˆssomenos\, present passive participle of \ekplˆss“\, see on ¯Matthew:7:28|) or struck out as well as by the miracle. The blindness came "immediately" (\paraehrˆma\) upon the judgment pronounced by Paul. It is possible that Sergius Paulus was converted to Christ without openly identifying himself with the Christians as his baptism is not mentioned as in the case of Cornelius. But, even if he was baptized, he need not have been deposed from his proconsulship as Furneaux and Rackham argue because his office called for "official patronage of idolatrous worship." But that could have been merely perfunctory as it probably was already. He had been a disciple of the Jewish magician, Elymas Barjesus, without losing his position. Imperial persecution against Christianity had not yet begun. Furneaux even suggests that the conversion of a proconsul to Christianity at this stage would have called for mention by the Roman and Greek historians. There is the name Sergia Paullina in a Christian cemetery in Rome which shows that one of his family was a Christian later. One will believe what he wills about Sergius Paulus, but I do not see that Luke leaves him in the category of Simon Magus who "believed" (8:13|) for revenue only.

rwp@Acts:13:33 @{Hath fulfilled} (\ekpeplˆr“ken\). Hath filled out (\ek\). {Unto our children} (\tois teknois hˆm“n\). The MSS. vary greatly here about \hˆm“n\ (our), some have \aut“n\, some \aut“n hˆmin\. Westcott and Hort consider these readings "a primitive error" for \hˆmin\ (to us) taken with \anastˆsas Iˆsoun\ (having for us raised up Jesus). This raising up (from \anistˆmi\, set up) as in strkjv@3:22; strkjv@7:37| refers not to resurrection (verse 34|), but to the sending of Jesus (two raisings up). {In the second psalm} (\en t“i psalm“i t“i deuter“i\). strkjv@Psalms:2:7|. D has \pr“t“i\ because the first psalm was often counted as merely introductory.

rwp@Acts:19:10 @{For two years} (\epi etˆ duo\). Note \epi\ with accusative for extent of time as in verse 8|, \epi mˆnas treis\ and often. But in strkjv@20:31| Paul said to the Ephesian elders at Miletus that he laboured with them for the space of "three years." That may be a general expression and there was probably a longer period after the "two years" in the school of Tyrannus besides the six months in the synagogue. Paul may have preached thereafter in the house of Aquila and Priscilla for some months, the "for a while" of verse 22|. {Songs:that all they which dwelt in Asia heard} (\h“ste pantas tous katoikountas tˆn Asian akousai\). Actual result with \h“ste\ and the infinitive with accusative of general reference as is common (also verse 11|) in the _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 999f.). Paul apparently remained in Ephesus, but the gospel spread all over the province even to the Lycus Valley including the rest of the seven churches of strkjv@Revelation:1:11; 2; 3|. Demetrius in verse 26| will confirm the tremendous influence of Paul's ministry in Ephesus on Asia. Forty years after this Pliny in his famous letter to Trajan from Bithynia will say of Christianity: "For the contagion of this superstition has not only spread through cities, but also through villages and country places." It was during these years in Ephesus that Paul was greatly disturbed over the troubles in the Corinthian Church. He apparently wrote a letter to them now lost to us (1Corinthians:5:9|), received messages from the household of Chloe, a letter from the church, special messengers, sent Timothy, then Titus, may have made a hurried trip himself, wrote our First Corinthians, was planning to go after the return of Titus to Troas where he was to meet him after Pentecost, when all of a sudden the uproar raised by Demetrius hurried Paul away sooner than he had planned. Meanwhile Apollos had returned from Corinth to Ephesus and refused to go back (1Corinthians:16:12|). Paul doubtless had helpers like Epaphras and Philemon who carried the message over the province of Asia, Tychicus, and Trophimus of Asia who were with him on the last visit to Jerusalem (verses 22,29; strkjv@20:4|). Paul's message reached Greeks, not merely Hellenists and God-fearers, but some of the Greeks in the upper circles of life in Ephesus.

rwp@Acts:19:35 @{The town-clerk} (\ho grammateus\). Ephesus was a free city and elected its own officers and the recorder or secretary was the chief magistrate of the city, though the proconsul of the province of Asia resided there. This officer is not a mere secretary of another officer or like the copyists and students of the law among the Jews, but the most influential person in Ephesus who drafted decrees with the aid of the \stratˆgoi\, had charge of the city's money, was the power in control of the assembly, and communicated directly with the proconsul. Inscriptions at Ephesus give frequently this very title for their chief officer and the papyri have it also. The precise function varied in different cities. His name appeared on the coin at Ephesus issued in his year of office. {Had quieted the multitude} (\katasteilas ton ochlon\). First aorist active participle of \katastell“\, to send down, arrange dress (Euripides), lower (Plutarch), restrain (papyrus example), only twice in the N.T. (here and verse 36|, be quiet), but in LXX and Josephus. He evidently took the rostrum and his very presence as the city's chief officer had a quieting effect on the billowy turmoil and a semblance of order came. He waited, however, till the hubbub had nearly exhausted itself (two hours) and did not speak till there was a chance to be heard. {Saith} (\phˆsin\). Historical present for vividness. {How that}. Merely participle \ousan\ and accusative \polin\ in indirect discourse, no conjunction at all (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1040ff.), common idiom after \gin“sk“\, to know. {Temple-keeper} (\ne“koron\). Old word from \ne“s\ (\naos)\, temple, and \kore“\, to sweep. Warden, verger, cleaner of the temple, a sacristan. Songs:in Xenophon and Plato. Inscriptions so describe Ephesus as \ne“koron tˆs Artemidos\ as Luke has it here and also applied to the imperial _cultus_ which finally had several such temples in Ephesus. Other cities claimed the same honour of being \ne“koros\, but it was the peculiar boast of Ephesus because of the great temple of Artemis. A coin of A.D. 65 describes Ephesus as \ne“koros\. There are papyri examples of the term applied to individuals, one to Priene as \ne“koros\ of the temple in Ephesus (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). {And of the image which fell down from Jupiter} (\kai tou diopetous\). Supply \agalma\ (image), "the from heaven-fallen image." From Zeus (\Dios\) and \pet“\ (\pipt“, pipet“\), to fall. Zeus (Jupiter) was considered lord of the sky or heaven and that is the idea in \diopetous\ here. The legend about a statue fallen from heaven occurs concerning the statue of Artemis at Tauris, Minerva at Athens, etc. Thus the recorder soothed the vanity (Rackham) of the crowd by appeal to the world-wide fame of Ephesus as sacristan of Artemis and of her heaven-fallen image.

rwp@Acts:20:6 @{After the days of unleavened bread} (\meta tas hˆmerƒs t“n azum“n\). Paul was a Jew, though a Christian, and observed the Jewish feasts, though he protested against Gentiles being forced to do it (Galatians:4:10; strkjv@Colossians:2:16|). Was Luke a proselyte because he notes the Jewish feasts as here and in strkjv@Acts:27:9|? He may have noted them merely because Paul observed them. But this passover was a year after that in Ephesus when Paul expected to remain there till Pentecost (1Corinthians:16:8|). He was hoping now to reach Jerusalem by Pentecost (Acts:20:16|) as he did. We do not know the precise year, possibly A.D. 56 or 57. {In five days} (\achri hˆmer“n pente\). Up to five days (cf. strkjv@Luke:2:37|). D has \pemptaioi\, "fifth day men," a correct gloss. Cf. \deuteraioi\, second-day men (Acts:28:13|). In strkjv@Acts:16:11| they made the voyage in two days. Probably adverse winds held them back here. {Seven days} (\hepta hˆmeras\). To atone for the short stay in Troas before (2Corinthians:2:12f.|) when Paul was so restless. Now he preaches a week to them.

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

rwp@Acts:20:20 @{How that I shrank not} (\h“s ouden hupesteilamen\). Still indirect discourse (question) after \epistasthe\ (ye know) with \h“s\ like \p“s\ in verse 18|. First aorist middle of \hupostell“\, old verb to draw under or back. It was so used of drawing back or down sails on a ship and, as Paul had so recently been on the sea, that may be the metaphor here. But it is not necessarily so as the direct middle here makes good sense and is frequent, to withdraw oneself, to cower, to shrink, to conceal, to dissemble as in strkjv@Habbakkuk:2:4| (Hebrews:10:38|). Demosthenes so used it to shrink from declaring out of fear for others. This open candour of Paul is supported by his Epistles (1Thessalonians:2:4,11; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:2; strkjv@Galatians:1:10|). {From declaring unto you} (\tou mˆ anaggeilai humin\). Ablative case of the articular first aorist active infinitive of \anaggell“\ with the redundant negative after verbs of hindering, etc. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1094). {Anything that was profitable} (\t“n sumpheront“n\). Partitive genitive after \ouden\ of the articular present active participle of \sumpher“\, to bear together, be profitable. {Publicly} (\dˆmosiƒi\, adverb) {and from house to house} (\kai kat' oikous\). By (according to) houses. It is worth noting that this greatest of preachers preached from house to house and did not make his visits merely social calls. He was doing kingdom business all the while as in the house of Aquila and Priscilla (1Corinthians:16:19|).

rwp@Acts:21:37 @{May I say something unto thee?} (\Ei exestin moi eipein ti pros se?\). On this use of \ei\ in a direct question see on ¯1:6|. The calm self-control of Paul in the presence of this mob is amazing. His courteous request to Lysias was in Greek to the chiliarch's amazement. {Dost thou know Greek?} (\Hellˆnisti gin“skeis?\). Old Greek adverb in \-i\ from \Hellˆniz“\, meaning "in Greek." "Do you know it in Greek?" In the N.T. only here and strkjv@John:19:20|. {Art thou not then the Egyptian?} (\Ouk ara su ei ho Aiguptios?\). Expects the answer _Yes_ and \ara\ argues the matter (therefore). The well-known (\ho\) Egyptian who had given the Romans so much trouble. {Stirred up to sedition} (\anastat“sas\). First aorist active participle of \anastato“\, a late verb from \anastatos\, outcast, and so to unsettle, to stir up, to excite, once known only in LXX and strkjv@Acts:17:6| (which see); strkjv@21:38; strkjv@Galatians:5:12|, but now found in several papyri examples with precisely this sense to upset. {Of the Assassins} (\t“n sikari“n\). Latin word _sicarius_, one who carried a short sword \sica\ under his cloak, a cutthroat. Josephus uses this very word for bands of robbers under this Egyptian (_War_ II. 17,6 and 13,5; _Ant_. XX. 8,10). Josephus says that there were 30,000 who gathered on the Mount of Olives to see the walls of Jerusalem fall down and not merely 4,000 as Lysias does here. But Lysias may refer to the group that were armed thus (banditti) the core of the mob of 30,000. Lysias at once saw by Paul's knowledge of Greek that he was not the famous Egyptian who led the Assassins and escaped himself when Felix attacked and slew the most of them.

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

rwp@Acts: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:25:17 @{When they were come together here} (\sunelthont“n enthade\). Genitive absolute of second aorist active participle of \sunerchomai\, but without \aut“n\ (they), merely understood. {Delay} (\anabolˆn\). Old word from \anaball“\, only here in N.T.

rwp@Acts:28:8 @{Lay} (\katakeisthai\). Common verb for the sick (Mark:1:30; strkjv@John:5:6|). {Sick} (\sunechomenon\). "Held together." Common verb again for the sick as in strkjv@Luke:4:38|. {Of fever} (\puretois\). Instrumental case, and plural "fevers," medical term for intermittent attacks of fever (Demosthenes, Lucian, medical writers). {Dysentery} (\dusenteri“i\). Instrumental case also. Late form of the older \dusenteria\ and only here in N.T. Our very word _dysentery_. Another medical term of which Luke uses so many. Hippocrates often mentions these two diseases together. {Laying his hands on him healed him} (\epitheis tas cheiras aut“i iasato auton\). Either like the laying on of hands in strkjv@James:5:14|, the gift of healing (1Corinthians:12:9f.|), or the tender interest of Jesus when he took hold of the hand of Peter's mother-in-law (Mark:1:31|). Ramsay argues that \iaomai\ is employed here of the miraculous healing by Paul while \therapeu“\ is used of the cures by Luke the physician (verse 9|). This is a general distinction and it is probably observed here, but in strkjv@Luke:6:18| (which see) both verbs are employed of the healings by Jesus. {Came and were healed} (\prosˆrchonto kai etherapeuonto\). Imperfect middle and imperfect passive. A regular stream of patients came during these months. Luke had his share in the honours, "us" (\hˆmƒs\), and no doubt his share in the cures. {With many honours} (\pollais timais\). Instrumental case. The word was often applied to payment for professional services as we today speak of an honorarium. {They put on board} (\epethento\). Second aorist middle indicative of \epitithˆmi\, to put on. The idea of "on board" is merely suggested by \anagomenois\ (when we sailed) "the things for our needs" (\ta pros tas chreias\).

rwp@Colossians:2:11 @{Ye were also circumcised} (\kai perietmˆthˆte\). First aorist passive indicative of \peritemn“\, to circumcise. But used here as a metaphor in a spiritual sense as in strkjv@Romans:2:29| "the circumcision of the heart." {Not made with hands} (\acheiropoiˆt“i\). This late and rare negative compound verbal occurs only in the N.T. (Mark:14:58; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1; strkjv@Colossians:2:11|) by merely adding \a\ privative to the old verbal \cheiropoiˆtos\ (Acts:7:48; strkjv@Ephesians:2:11|), possibly first in strkjv@Mark:14:58| where both words occur concerning the temple. In strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1| the reference is to the resurrection body. The feminine form of this compound adjective is the same as the masculine. {In the putting off} (\en tˆi apekdusei\). As if an old garment (the fleshly body). From \apekduomai\ (Colossians:2:15|, possibly also coined by Paul) and occurring nowhere else so far as known. The word is made in a perfectly normal way by the perfective use of the two Greek prepositions (\apo, ek\), "a resource available for and generally used by any real thinker writing Greek" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Paul had as much right to mint a Greek compound as any one and surely no one ever had more ideas to express and more power in doing it. {Of Christ} (\tou Christou\). Specifying genitive, the kind of circumcision that belongs to Christ, that of the heart.

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:3:1 @{If then ye were raised together with Christ} (\ei oun sunˆgerthˆte t“i Christ“i\). Condition of the first class, assumed as true, like that in strkjv@2:20| and the other half of the picture of baptism in strkjv@2:12| and using the same form \sunˆgerthˆte\ as then which see for the verb \sunegeir“\. Associative instrumental case of \Christ“i\. {The things that are above} (\ta an“\). "The upward things" (cf. strkjv@Phillipians:3:14|), the treasure in heaven (Matthew:6:20|). Paul gives this ideal and goal in place of merely ascetic rules. {Seated on the right hand of God} (\en dexiƒi tou theou kathˆmenos\). Not periphrastic verb, but additional statement. Christ is up there and at God's right hand. Cf. strkjv@2:3|.

rwp@Ephesians:1:18 @{Having the eyes of your heart enlightened} (\peph“tismenous tous ophthalmous tˆs kardias hum“n\). A beautiful figure, the heart regarded as having eyes looking out toward Christ. But the grammar is difficult. There are three possible interpretations. One is an anacoluthon, the case of \peph“tismenous\ being changed from the dative \humin\ (to you) to the accusative because of the following infinitive like \eklexamenous\ (Acts:15:22|) after \apostolois\. Another way of explaining it is to regard it as a tertiary predicate of \d“iˆ\, a loose expansion of \pneuma\. The third way is to regard the construction as the accusative absolute, a rare idiom possible in strkjv@Acts:26:3; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:3; strkjv@1Timothy:2:6|. In this case, the participle merely agrees with \tous ophthalmous\, not with \humin\, "the eyes of your heart having been enlightened." Otherwise \tous ophthalmous\ is the accusative retained after the passive participle. {That ye may know} (\eis to eidenai\). Final use of \eis to\ and the infinitive (second perfect of \oida\) as in verse 12|. Note three indirect questions after \eidenai\ (what the hope \tis hˆ elpis\, what the riches \tis ho ploutos\, and what the surpassing greatness \kai ti to huperballon megethos\). When the Holy Spirit opens the eyes of the heart, one will be able to see all these great truths. {In the saints} (\en tois hagiois\). Our riches is in God, God's is in his saints.

rwp@Ephesians:4:5 @{One Lord} (\heis Kurios\). The Lord Jesus Christ and he alone (no series of aeons). {One faith} (\mia pistis\). One act of trust in Christ, the same for all (Jew or Gentile), one way of being saved. {One baptism} (\hen baptisma\). The result of baptizing (\baptisma\), while \baptismos\ is the act. Only in the N.T. (\baptismos\ in Josephus) and ecclesiastical writers naturally. See strkjv@Mark:10:38|. There is only one act of baptism for all (Jews and Gentiles) who confess Christ by means of this symbol, not that they are made disciples by this one act, but merely so profess him, put Christ on publicly by this ordinance.

rwp@Galatians:2:5 @{No, not for an hour} (\oude pros h“ran\). Pointed denial that he and Barnabas yielded at all "in the way of subjection" (\tˆi hupotagˆi\, in the subjection demanded of them). The compromisers pleaded for the circumcision of Titus "because of the false brethren" in order to have peace. The old verb \eik“\, to yield, occurs here alone in the N.T. See strkjv@2Corinthians:9:13| for \hupotagˆ\. {The truth of the gospel} (\hˆ alˆtheia tou euaggeliou\). It was a grave crisis to call for such language. The whole problem of Gentile Christianity was involved in the case of Titus, whether Christianity was to be merely a modified brand of legalistic Judaism or a spiritual religion, the true Judaism (the children of Abraham by faith). The case of Timothy later was utterly different, for he had a Jewish mother and a Greek father. Titus was pure Greek.

rwp@Galatians:5:9 @This proverb Paul has in strkjv@1Corinthians:5:6|. It is merely the pervasive power of leaven that is involved in the proverb as in strkjv@Matthew:13:33|, not the use of leaven as a symbol of evil.

rwp@Hebrews:1:2 @{At the end of these days} (\ep' eschatou t“n hˆmer“n tout“n\). In contrast with \palai\ above. {Hath spoken} (\elalˆsen\). First aorist indicative of \lale“\, the same verb as above, "did speak" in a final and full revelation. {In his Son} (\en hui“i\). In sharp contrast to \en tois prophˆtais\. "The Old Testament slopes upward to Christ" (J. R. Sampey). No article or pronoun here with the preposition \en\, giving the absolute sense of "Son." Here the idea is not merely what Jesus said, but what he is (Dods), God's Son who reveals the Father (John:1:18|). "The revelation was a _son-revelation_" (Vincent). {Hath appointed} (\ethˆken\). First aorist (kappa aorist) active of \tithˆmi\, a timeless aorist. {Heir of all things} (\klˆronomon pant“n\). See strkjv@Mark:12:6| for \ho klˆronomos\ in Christ's parable, perhaps an allusion here to this parable (Moffatt). The idea of sonship easily passes into that of heirship (Galatians:4:7; strkjv@Romans:8:17|). See the claim of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:11:27; strkjv@28:18| even before the Ascension. {Through whom} (\di' hou\). The Son as Heir is also the Intermediate Agent (\dia\) in the work of creation as we have it in strkjv@Colossians:1:16f.; strkjv@John:1:3|. {The worlds} (\tous ai“nas\). "The ages" (_secula_, Vulgate). See strkjv@11:3| also where \tous ai“nas=ton kosmon\ (the world) or the universe like \ta panta\ (the all things) in strkjv@1:3; strkjv@Romans:11:36; strkjv@Colossians:1:16|. The original sense of \ai“n\ (from \aei\, always) occurs in strkjv@Hebrews:5:20|, but here "by metonomy of the container for the contained" (Thayer) for "the worlds" (the universe) as in LXX, Philo, Josephus.

rwp@Hebrews:1:6 @{And when he again bringeth in} (\hotan de palin eisagagˆi\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \eisag“\. If \palin\ is taken with \eisagagˆi\, the reference is to the Second Coming as in strkjv@9:28|. If \palin\ merely introduces another quotation (Psalms:97:7|) parallel to \kai palin\ in verse 5|, the reference is to the incarnation when the angels did worship the Child Jesus (Luke:2:13f.|). There is no way to decide certainly about it. {The first-born} (\ton pr“totokon\). See strkjv@Psalms:89:28|. For this compound adjective applied to Christ in relation to the universe see strkjv@Colossians:1:15|, to other men, strkjv@Romans:8:29; strkjv@Colossians:1:18|, to the other children of Mary, strkjv@Luke:2:7|; here it is used absolutely. {The world} (\tˆn oikoumenˆn\). "The inhabited earth." See strkjv@Acts:17:6|. {Let worship} (\proskunˆsat“san\). Imperative first aorist active third plural of \proskune“\, here in the full sense of worship, not mere reverence or courtesy. This quotation is from the LXX of strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:43|, but is not in the Hebrew, though most of the LXX MSS. (except F) have \huioi theou\, but the substance does occur also in strkjv@Psalms:97:7| with \hoi aggeloi autou\.

rwp@Hebrews:2:18 @{In that} (\en h“i\). Literally, "In which" (\=en tout“i en h“i\, in that in which), a causal idea, though in strkjv@Romans:14:22| \en h“i\ means "wherein." {Hath suffered} (\peponthen\). Second perfect active indicative of \pasch“\, permanent part of Christ's experience. {Being tempted} (\peirastheis\). First aorist passive participle of \peiraz“\. The temptation to escape the shame of the Cross was early and repeatedly presented to Christ, by Satan in the wilderness (Matthew:4:8-11|), by Peter in the spirit of Satan (Matthew:16:22f.|), in Gethsemane (Matthew:26:39|), and caused intense suffering to Jesus (Luke:22:44; strkjv@Hebrews:5:8|). {He is able} (\dunatai\). This word strikes the heart of it all. Christ's power to help is due not merely to his deity as God's Son, but also to his humanity without which he could not sympathize with us (Hebrews:4:15|). {To succour} (\boˆthˆsai\). First aorist active infinitive of the old compound verb \boˆthe“\ (\boˆ\, a cry, \the“\, to run), to run at a cry or call for help (Matthew:15:25|). {Them that are tempted} (\tois peirazomenois\). Dative plural of the articular participle (present passive) of \peiraz“\. These Jewish Christians were daily tempted to give up Christ, to apostatize from Christianity. Jesus understands himself (\autos\) their predicament and is able to help them to be faithful.

rwp@Hebrews:5:5 @{Songs:Christ also} (\hout“s kai ho Christos\). Just as with Aaron. Jesus had divine appointment as high priest also. {To be made} (\genˆthˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \ginomai\. {High priest} (\archierea\). Predicate accusative agreeing with \heauton\ (himself) object of \edoxasen\. {But he that spake unto him} (\all' ho lalˆsas pros auton\). Ellipsis of \edoxasen\ to be supplied from preceding clause. God did glorify Jesus in appointing him priest as we see in strkjv@Psalms:2:7| quoted already as Messianic (Hebrews:1:5|). Jesus himself repeatedly claimed that the Father sent him on his mission to the world (John:5:30,43; strkjv@8:54; strkjv@17:5|, etc.). Bruce holds that Christ's priesthood is co-eval with his Sonship. Davidson thinks it is merely suitable because he is Son. Clearly the Father nominated (Dods) the Son to the Messianic priesthood (John:3:16|).

rwp@Hebrews:7:16 @{Carnal} (\sarkinˆs\). "Fleshen" as in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:1|, not \sarkikˆs\ (fleshlike, strkjv@1Corinthians:3:3|). The Levitical priests became so merely by birth. {Of an endless life} (\z“ˆs akatalutou\). Late compound (alpha privative and verbal adjective from \katalu“\, to dissolve, as in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:1|), indissoluble. Jesus as priest lives on forever. He is Life.

rwp@Hebrews:7:26 @{Became us} (\hˆmin eprepen\). Imperfect active indicative of \prep“\ as in strkjv@2:10|, only there it was applied to God while here to us. "Such" (\toioutos\) refers to the Melchizedek character of Jesus as high priest and in particular to his power to help and save (2:17f.|) as just explained in strkjv@7:24f.| Moffatt notes that "it is generally misleading to parse a rhapsody" but the adjectives that follow picture in outline the qualities of the high priest needed by us. {Holy} (\hosios\). Saintly, pious, as already noted. Cf. strkjv@Acts:2:24; strkjv@13:35|. {Guileless} (\akakos\). Without malice, innocent. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:16:18|. {Undefiled} (\amiantos\). Untainted, stainless. In the papyri. Not merely ritual purity (Leviticus:21:10-15|), but real ethical cleanness. {Separated from sinners} (\kech“rismenos apo t“n hamart“l“n\). Perfect passive participle. Probably referring to Christ's exaltation (9:28|). {Made higher than the heavens} (\hupsˆloteros t“n ouran“n genomenos\). "Having become higher than the heavens." Ablative case (\ouran“n\) after the comparative adjective (\hupsˆloteros\).

rwp@Hebrews:8:2 @{Minister} (\leitourgos\). See on ¯Romans:13:6; strkjv@Phillipians:2:25|. {Of the sanctuary} (\t“n hagi“n\). "Of the holy places" (\ta hagia\), without any distinction (like strkjv@9:8f.; strkjv@10:19; strkjv@13:11|) between the holy place and the most holy place as in strkjv@9:2f|. {Of the true tabernacle} (\tˆs skˆnˆs tˆs alˆthinˆs\). By way of explanation of \t“n hagi“n\. For \skˆnˆ\ see strkjv@Matthew:17:4| and \skˆnos\ (2Corinthians:5:1|), old word used here for the antitype or archetype of the tabernacle in the wilderness in which Aaron served, the ideal tabernacle in heaven of which the earthly tabernacle was a symbol and reproduced in the temple which merely copied the tabernacle. Hence it is the "genuine" tabernacle and see strkjv@John:1:9| for \alˆthinos\. {Pitched} (\epˆxen\). First aorist active indicative of \pˆgnumi\, old verb to fasten as the pegs of a tent, here only in the N.T. Cf. strkjv@Numbers:24:6|.

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

rwp@Info_James @ THE READERS The author addresses himself "to the twelve tribes which are of the Dispersion" (Jam strkjv@1:1|). Clearly, then, he is not writing to Gentiles, unless he includes the spiritual children of Abraham in the term \Diaspora\ as Paul does for believers (Galatians:3:29; strkjv@Romans:9:6f.|). The word \diaspora\ occurs elsewhere in the N.T. only in strkjv@John:7:35; strkjv@1Peter:1:1|. It apparently has the spiritual significance in strkjv@1Peter:1:1|, but in strkjv@John:7:35| the usual meaning of Jews scattered over the world. The use here of "the twelve tribes" makes the literal sense probable here. Clearly also James knew nothing of any "lost" tribes, for the Jews of the Dispersion were a blend of all the twelve tribes. It is probable also that James is addressing chiefly the Eastern Dispersion in Syria, Mesopotamia, and Babylonia as Peter writes to five provinces in the Western Dispersion in Asia Minor. It is possible that James has in mind Christian and non-Christian Jews, not wholly non-Christian Jews as some hold. He may have in mind merely Christian Jews outside of Palestine, of whom there were already many scattered since the great pentecost. The use of synagogue as a place of worship (James:2:2|) like church (James:5:14|) argues somewhat for this view. He presents the Mosaic law as still binding (James:2:9-11; strkjv@4:11|). As the leading elder of the great church in Jerusalem and as a devout Jew and half-brother of Jesus, the message of James had a special appeal to these widely scattered Jewish Christians.

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:2:10 @{Whosoever shall keep} (\hostis tˆrˆsˆi\). Indefinite relative clause with \hostis\ and aorist active subjunctive of \tˆre“\, old verb, to guard (from \tˆros\ guarding), as in strkjv@Matthew:27:36|, without \an\ (though often used, but only one example of modal \ean=an\ in James, viz., strkjv@4:4|). This modal \an\ (\ean\) merely interprets the sentence as either more indefinite or more definite (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 957f.). {And yet stumble in one point} (\ptaisˆi de en heni\). First aorist active subjunctive also of \ptai“\, old verb, to trip, as in strkjv@3:2; strkjv@Romans:11:11|. "It is incipient falling" (Hort). {He is become} (\gegonen\). Second perfect indicative of \ginomai\, "he has become" by that one stumble. {Guilty of all} (\pant“n enochos\). Genitive of the crime with \enochos\, old adjective from \enech“\ (to hold on or in), held in, as in strkjv@Mark:3:29|. This is law. To be a lawbreaker one does not have to violate all the laws, but he must keep all the law (\holon ton nomon\) to be a law-abiding citizen, even laws that one does not like. See strkjv@Matthew:5:18f.| for this same principle. There is Talmudic parallel: "If a man do all, but omit one, he is guilty for all and each." This is a pertinent principle also for those who try to save themselves. But James is urging obedience to all God's laws.

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

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

rwp@John:1:22 @{They said therefore} (\eipan oun\). Second aorist active indicative of defective verb \eipon\ with \a\ instead of usual \o\. Note \oun\, inferential here as in verse 21| though often merely transitional in John. {Who art thou?} (\Tis ei;\). Same question as at first (verse 19|), but briefer. {That we give answer} (\hina apokrisin d“men\). Final use of \hina\ with second aorist active subjunctive of \did“mi\ with \apokrisin\ from \apokrinomai\, above, old substantive as in strkjv@Luke:2:47|. {To those that sent} (\tois pempsasin\). Dative case plural of the articular participle first aorist active of \pemp“\. {What sayest thou of thyself?} (\Ti legeis peri seautou;\). This time they opened wide the door without giving any hint at all.

rwp@John:1:50 @{Answered and said} (\apekrithˆ kai eipen\). This redundant use of both verbs (cf. strkjv@1:26|) occurs in the Synoptics also and in the LXX also. It is Aramaic also and vernacular. It is not proof of an Aramaic original as Burney argues (_Aramaic Origin_, etc., p. 53). {Because} (\hoti\). Causal use of \hoti\ at beginning of the sentence as in strkjv@14:19; strkjv@15:19; strkjv@16:6|. The second \hoti\ before \eidon\ (I saw) is either declarative (that) or merely recitative (either makes sense here). {Thou shalt see greater things than these} (\meiz“ tout“n opsˆi\). Perhaps volitive future middle indicative of \hora“\ (though merely futuristic is possible as with \opsesthe\ in 51|) ablative case of \tout“n\ after the comparative adjective \meiz“\. The wonder of Nathanael no doubt grew as Jesus went on.

rwp@John:2:24 @{But Jesus did not trust himself to them} (\autos de Iˆsous ouk episteuen hauton autois\). "But Jesus himself kept on refusing (negative imperfect) to trust himself to them." The double use of \pisteu“\ here is shown by strkjv@Acts:8:13| where Simon Magus "believed" (\episteusen\) and was baptized, but was unsaved. He merely believed that he wanted what Philip had. {For that he knew all men} (\dia to auton gin“skein pantas\). Causal use of \dia\ and the accusative case of the articular infinitive \to gin“skein\ (because of the knowing) with the object of the infinitive (\pantas\, all men) and the accusative of general reference (\auton\, as to himself).

rwp@John:4:42 @{Not because of thy speaking} (\ouketi dia tˆn sˆn lalian\). "No longer because of thy talk," good and effective as that was. \Lalia\ (cf. \lale“\) is talk, talkativeness, mode of speech, one's vernacular, used by Jesus of his own speech (John:8:43|). {We have heard} (\akˆkoamen\). Perfect active indicative of \akou“\, their abiding experience. {For ourselves} (\autoi\). Just "ourselves." {The Saviour of the world} (\ho s“tˆr tou kosmou\). See strkjv@Matthew:1:21| for s“sei used of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term \s“tˆr\ to Jesus again in strkjv@1John:4:14|. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (verse 22|). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (verse 26|) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: "At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah." But why "merely"? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their "Saviour," Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on strkjv@John:4:42|: "That in the first century Messiah was given the title s“tˆr is not proven." The use of "saviour and god" for Ptolemy in the third century B.C. is well known. "The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East" (Deissmann, _Light_, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke:2:11; strkjv@John:4:42; strkjv@Acts:5:31; strkjv@3:23; strkjv@Phillipians:3:20; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23; strkjv@Titus:1:4; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@3:6; strkjv@2Timothy:1:10; strkjv@2Peter:1:1,11; strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:2,18|). All these are writings of the first century A.D. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world.

rwp@John:5:47 @{His writings} (\tois ekeinou grammasin\). Dative case with \pistuete\. See strkjv@Luke:16:31| for a like argument. The authority of Moses was the greatest of all for Jews. There is a contrast also between {writings} (\grammasin\, from \graph“\, to write) and {words} (\rˆmasin\, from \eipon\). \Gramma\ may mean the mere letter as opposed to spirit (2Corinthians:3:6; strkjv@Romans:2:27,29; strkjv@7:6|), a debtor's bond (Luke:16:6f.|), letters or learning (John:7:15; strkjv@Acts:26:24|) like \agrammatoi\ for unlearned (Acts:4:13|), merely written characters (Luke:23:38; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:7; strkjv@Galatians:6:11|), official communications (Acts:28:21|), once \hiera grammata\ for the sacred writings (2Timothy:3:15|) instead of the more usual \hai hagiai graphai\. \Graphˆ\ is used also for a single passage (Mark:12:10|), but \biblion\ for a book or roll (Luke:4:17|) or \biblos\ (Luke:20:42|). Jesus clearly states the fact that Moses wrote portions of the Old Testament, what portions he does not say. See also strkjv@Luke:24:27,44| for the same idea. There was no answer from the rabbis to this conclusion of Christ. The scribes (\hoi grammateis\) made copies according to the letter (\kata to gramma\).

rwp@John:6:32 @{It was not Moses that gave you} (\ou M“usˆs ed“ken humin\). "Not Moses gave you." Blunt and pointed denial (aorist active indicative of \did“mi\) that Moses was the giver of the bread from heaven (the manna). Moses was not superior to Christ on this score. {But my Father} (\all ho patˆr mou\). Not "our Father," but same claim as in strkjv@5:17f|. Which caused so much anger in Jerusalem. {Gives} (\did“sin\). Present active indicative, not aorist (\ed“ken\). Continual process. {The true bread out of heaven} (\ton arton ek tou ouranou ton alˆthinon\). "The bread out of heaven" as the manna and more "the genuine bread" of which that was merely a type. On \alˆthinos\ see strkjv@1:9; strkjv@4:23|.

rwp@John:7:10 @{Were gone up} (\anebˆsan\). Second aorist active indicative of \anabain“\, not past perfect though the action is antecedent in fact to the following \tote anebˆ\. The Greek does not always draw the precise distinction between the merely punctiliar (aorist) antecedent action and the past perfect (2:9; strkjv@4:45|). {He also} (\tote autos\). As well as the brothers. {Not publicly} (\ou phaner“s\). Against their advice in verse 4|, using \phaner“son\ (the very same word stem). {But as it were in secret} (\alla h“s en krupt“i\). "Not with the usual caravan of pilgrims" (Bernard). Just the opposite of their advice in verse 4| with the same phrase \en phaner“i\. Plainly Jesus purposely went contrary to the insincere counsel of his brothers as to the manner of his Messianic manifestation. This secrecy concerned solely the journey to Jerusalem, not his public teaching there after his arrival (7:26,28; strkjv@18:20|).

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

rwp@John:7:41 @{This is the Christ} (\houtos estin ho Christos\). These went further and dared to call Jesus the Messiah and not merely the prophet who might not be the Messiah. They said it openly. {What} (\gar\). These denied that Jesus was the Messiah and gave as their reason (\gar\, for) the fact that he came from Galilee. The use of \mˆ\ expects a negative answer.

rwp@John:8:16 @{Yea and if I judge} (\kai ean krin“ de eg“\). "And even if I pass judgment." Condition of third class again. {True} (alˆthinˆ). See strkjv@1:9| for \alˆthinos\, genuine, soundly based (cf. \dikaia\ in strkjv@5:30|), "satisfying our perfect conception" (Westcott), not merely true (\alˆthes\) in the particular facts (verse 14|). {For I am not alone} (\hoti monos ouk eimi\). Jesus now takes up the technical criticism in verse 13| after justifying his right to speak concerning himself. {But I and the Father that sent me} (\all eg“ kai ho pempsas me patˆr\). See strkjv@16:32| for a like statement about the Father being with Christ. It is not certain that \patˆr\ is genuine here (omitted by Aleph D, but in B L W), but the Father is clearly meant as in strkjv@7:18,33|. Jesus gives the Father as the second witness.

rwp@John:8:44 @{Ye are of your father the devil} (\humeis ek tou patros tou diabolou\). Certainly they can "understand" (\gin“skete\ in 43|) this "talk" (\lalian\) though they will be greatly angered. But they had to hear it (\akouein\ in 43|). It was like a bombshell in spite of the preliminary preparation. {Your will to do} (\thelete poiein\). Present active indicative of \thel“\ and present active infinitive, "Ye wish to go on doing." This same idea Jesus presents in strkjv@Matthew:13:38| (the sons of the evil one, the devil) and strkjv@23:15| (twofold more a son of Gehenna than you). See also strkjv@1John:3:8| for "of the devil" (\ek tou diabolou\) for the one who persists in sinning. In strkjv@Revelation:12:9| the devil is one who leads all the world astray. The Gnostic view that Jesus means "the father of the devil" is grotesque. Jesus does not, of course, here deny that the Jews, like all men, are children of God the Creator, like Paul's offspring of God for all men in strkjv@Acts:17:28|. What he denies to these Pharisees is that they are spiritual children of God who do his will. They do the lusts and will of the devil. The Baptist had denied this same spiritual fatherhood to the merely physical descendants of Abraham (Matthew:3:9|). He even called them "broods of vipers" as Jesus did later (Matthew:12:34|). {A murderer} (\anthr“poktonos\). Old and rare word (Euripides) from \anthr“pos\, man, and \ktein“\, to kill. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1John:3:15|. The Jews were seeking to kill Jesus and so like their father the devil. {Stood not in the truth} (\en tˆi alˆtheiƒi ouk estˆken\). Since \ouk\, not \ouch\, is genuine, the form of the verb is \esteken\ the imperfect of the late present stem \stˆk“\ (Mark:11:25|) from the perfect active \hestˆka\ (intransitive) of \histˆmi\, to place. {No truth in him} (\ouk estin alˆtheia en aut“i\). Inside him or outside (environment). The devil and truth have no contact. {When he speaketh a lie} (\hotan lalˆi to pseudos\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the present active subjunctive of \lale“\. But note the article \to\: "Whenever he speaks the lie," as he is sure to do because it is his nature. Hence "he speaks out of his own" (\ek t“n idi“n lalei\) like a fountain bubbling up (cf. strkjv@Matthew:12:34|). {For he is a liar} (\hoti pseustˆs estin\). Old word for the agent in a conscious falsehood (\pseudos\). See strkjv@1John:1:10; strkjv@Romans:3:4|. Common word in John because of the emphasis on \alˆtheia\ (truth). {And the father thereof} (\kai ho patˆr autou\). Either the father of the lie or of the liar, both of which are true as already shown by Jesus. {Autou} in the genitive can be either neuter or masculine. Westcott takes it thus, "because he is a liar and his father (the devil) is a liar," making "one," not the devil, the subject of "whenever he speaks," a very doubtful expression.

rwp@John:9:7 @{Wash} (\nipsai\). First aorist middle imperative second person singular of \nipt“\, later form of \niz“\, to wash, especially parts of the body. Certainly bathing the eyes is good for eye trouble, and yet we are not to infer that the cure was due to the use of the clay or to the washing. {In the pool of Siloam} (\eis tˆn kolumbˆthran tou Sil“am\). The word \kolumbˆthra\ (from \kolumba“\, to swim) is a common word for swimming-pool, in N.T. only here and strkjv@5:2,7|. The name _Siloam_ is Hebrew (Isaiah:8:6|) and means "sent" (\apestalmenos\, perfect passive participle of \apostell“\). It was situated south of the temple area and was apparently connected by a subterranean tunnel with the Virgin's Well (5:2|) according to Bernard. The water was conducted artificially to the pool of Siloam. {Washed} (\enipsato\). First aorist direct middle (cf. \nipsai\), apparently bathing and not merely washing his eyes. {Came seeing} (\ˆlthen blep“n\). Jesus had healed him. He was tested by the demand to bathe his eyes.

rwp@John:10:17 @{For this reason} (\dia touto\). Points to the following \hoti\ clause. The Father's love for the Son is drawn out (John:3:16|) by the voluntary offering of the Son for the sin of the world (Romans:5:8|). Hence the greater exaltation (Phillipians:2:9|). Jesus does for us what any good shepherd does (10:11|) as he has already said (10:15|). The value of the atoning death of Christ lies in the fact that he is the Son of God, the Son of Man, free of sin, and that he makes the offering voluntarily (Hebrews:9:14|). {That I may take it again} (\hina palin lab“ autˆn\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \lamban“\. He looked beyond his death on the Cross to the resurrection. "The purpose of the Passion was not merely to exhibit his unselfish love; it was in order that He might resume His life, now enriched with quickening power as never before" (Bernard). The Father raised Jesus from the dead (Acts:2:32|). There is spontaneity in the surrender to death and in the taking life back again (Dods).

rwp@John:11:2 @{And it was that Mary which anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet with her hair} (\ˆn de Mariam hˆ aleipsasa ton kurion mur“i kai ekmaxasa tous podas autou tais thrixin autˆs\). This description is added to make plainer who Mary is "whose brother Lazarus was sick" (\hˆs ho adelphos Lazaros ˆsthenei\). There is an evident proleptic allusion to the incident described by John in strkjv@12:1-8| just after chapter 11. As John looks back from the end of the century it was all behind him, though the anointing (\hˆ aleipsasa\, first aorist active articular participle of \aleiph“\, old verb for which see strkjv@Mark:6:13|) took place after the events in chapter 11. The aorist participle is timeless and merely pictures the punctiliar act. The same remark applies to \ekmaxasa\, old verb \ekmass“\, to wipe off or away (Isaiah:12:3; strkjv@13:5; strkjv@Luke:7:38,44|). Note the Aramaic form \Mariam\ as usual in John, but \Marias\ in verse 1|. When John wrote, it was as Jesus had foretold (Matthew:26:13|), for the fame of Mary of Bethany rested on the incident of the anointing of Jesus. The effort to link Mary of Bethany with Mary Magdalene and then both names with the sinful woman of strkjv@Luke:7:36-50| is gratuitous and to my mind grotesque and cruel to the memory of both Mary of Bethany and Mary Magdalene. Bernard may be taken as a specimen: "The conclusion is inevitable that John (or his editor) regarded Mary of Bethany as the same person who is described by Luke as \hamart“los\." This critical and artistic heresy has already been discussed in Vol. II on Luke's Gospel. Suffice it here to say that Luke introduces Mary Magdalene as an entirely new character in strkjv@8:2| and that the details in strkjv@Luke:7:36-50; strkjv@John:12:1-8| have only superficial resemblances and serious disagreements. John is not here alluding to Luke's record, but preparing for his own in chapter 12. What earthly difficulty is there in two different women under wholly different circumstances doing a similar act for utterly different purposes?

rwp@John:12:2 @{Songs:they made him a supper there} (\epoiˆsan oun aut“i deipnon ekei\). Here again \oun\ is not inferential, but merely transitional. This supper is given by Mark (Mark:14:3-9|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6-13|) just two days (Mark:14:1|) before the passover, that is on our Tuesday evening (beginning of Jewish Wednesday), while John mentions (12:2-9|) it immediately after the arrival of Jesus in Bethany (12:1|). One must decide which date to follow. Mark and Matthew and Luke follow it with the visit of Judas to the Sanhedrin with an offer to betray Jesus as if exasperated by the rebuke by Jesus at the feast. Bernard considers that John "is here more probably accurate." It all turns on John's purpose in putting it here. This is the last mention of Jesus in Bethany and he may have mentioned it proleptically for that reason as seems to me quite reasonable. Westcott notes that in chapter 12 John closes his record of the public ministry of the Lord relative to the disciples at this feast (1-11|), to the multitude in the triumphal entry (12-19|), to the world outside in the visit of the Greeks (20-36a|), and with two summary judgements (36b-50|). There is no further reason to refer to the feast in the house of another Simon when a sinful woman anointed Jesus (Luke:7:36-50|). It is no credit to Luke or to John with Mark and Matthew to have them all making a jumble like that. There were two anointings by two absolutely different women for wholly different purposes. See the discussion on Luke for further details. {And Martha served} (\kai hˆ Martha diˆkonei\). Imperfect active of \diakone“\, picturing Martha true to the account of her in strkjv@Luke:10:40| (\pollˆn diakonian\, \diakonein\ as here). But this fact does not show that Martha was the wife of this Simon at all. They were friends and neighbours and Martha was following her bent. It is Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6|) who mention the name of the host. It is not Simon the Pharisee (Luke:7:36|), but Simon the leper (Mark:14:3; strkjv@Matthew:26:6|) in whose house they meet. The name is common enough. The Simon in Luke was sharply critical of Jesus; this one is full of gratitude for what Jesus has done for him. {That sat at meat} (\t“n anakeimen“n\). "That lay back," reclined as they did, articular participle (ablative case after \ek\) of the common verb \anakeimai\. Perhaps Simon gave the feast partly in honour of Lazarus as well as of Jesus since all were now talking of both (John:12:9|). It was a gracious occasion. The guests were Jesus, the twelve apostles, and Martha, Mary, and Lazarus.

rwp@John:14:17 @{The Spirit of truth} (\to pneuma tˆs alˆtheias\). Same phrase in strkjv@15:27; strkjv@16:13; strkjv@1John:4:6|, "a most exquisite title" (Bengel). The Holy Spirit is marked by it (genitive case), gives it, defends it (cf. strkjv@1:17|), in contrast to the spirit of error (1John:4:6|). {Whom} (\ho\). Grammatical neuter gender (\ho\) agreeing with \pneuma\ (grammatical), but rightly rendered in English by "whom" and note masculine \ekeinos\ (verse 26|). He is a person, not a mere influence. {Cannot receive} (\ou dunatai labein\). Left to itself the sinful world is helpless (1Corinthians:2:14; strkjv@Romans:8:7f.|), almost Paul's very language on this point. The world lacks spiritual insight (\ou the“rei\) and spiritual knowledge (\oude gin“skei\). It failed to recognize Jesus (1:10|) and likewise the Holy Spirit. {Ye know him} (\humeis gin“skete auto\). Emphatic position of \humeis\ (ye) in contrast with the world (15:19|), because they have seen Jesus the Revealer of the Father (verse 9|). {Abides} (\menei\). Timeless present tense. {With you} (\par' humin\). "By your side," "at home with you," not merely "with you" (\meth' hum“n\) "in the midst of you." {In you} (\en humin\). In your hearts. Songs:note \meta\ (16|), \para, en\.

rwp@John:15:2 @{Branch} (\klˆma\). Old word from \kla“\, to break, common in LXX for offshoots of the vine, in N.T. only here (verses 2-6|), elsewhere in N.T. \klados\ (Mark:4:32|, etc.), also from \kla“\, both words meaning tender and easily broken parts. {In me} (\en emoi\). Two kinds of connexion with Christ as the vine (the merely cosmic which bears no fruit, the spiritual and vital which bears fruit). The fruitless (not bearing fruit, \mˆ pheron karpon\) the vine-dresser "takes away" (\airei\) or prunes away. Probably (Bernard) Jesus here refers to Judas. {Cleanseth} (\kathairei\). Present active indicative of old verb \kathair“\ (clean) as in verse 3|, only use in N.T., common in the inscriptions for ceremonial cleansing, though \kathariz“\ is more frequent (Hebrews:10:2|). {That it may bear more fruit} (\hina karpon pleiona pherˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \pher“\, "that it may keep on bearing more fruit" (more and more). A good test for modern Christians and church members.

rwp@John:17:1 @{Lifting up} (\eparas\). First aorist active participle of \epair“\, old and common verb with \ophthalmous\ (eyes) as in strkjv@4:35; strkjv@6:5; strkjv@11:41|. {Father} (\Pater\). Vocative form as in verses 5,11; strkjv@11:41|, Christ's usual way of beginning his prayers. It is inconceivable that this real _Lord's Prayer_ is the free composition of a disciple put into the mouth of Jesus. It is rather "the tenacious memory of an old man recalling the greatest days of his life" (Bernard), aided by the Holy Spirit promised for this very purpose (John:14:26; strkjv@16:13f.|). Jesus had the habit of prayer (Mark:1:35; strkjv@6:46; strkjv@Matthew:11:25f.; strkjv@Luke:3:21; strkjv@5:16; strkjv@6:12; strkjv@9:18,28; strkjv@11:22,42; strkjv@23:34,46; strkjv@John:11:41; strkjv@12:27|). He prayed here for himself (1-5|), for the disciples (6-19|), for all believers (20-26|). The prayer is similar in spirit to the Model Prayer for us in strkjv@Matthew:6:9-13|. The hour for his glorification has come as he had already told the disciples (13:31f.; strkjv@12:23|). {Glorify thy Son} (\doxason sou ton huion\). First aorist active imperative of \doxaz“\, the only personal petition in this prayer. Jesus had already used this word \doxaz“\ for his death (13:31f.|). Here it carries us into the very depths of Christ's own consciousness. It is not merely for strength to meet the Cross, but for the power to glorify the Father by his death and resurrection and ascension, "that the Son may glorify thee" (\hina ho huios doxasˆi se\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive.

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

rwp@Info_Luke @ THIS COMPANION OF PAUL A PHYSICIAN The argument for this position lies in the use of medical terms throughout the Gospel and the Acts. Hobart in his _Medical Language of St. Luke_ proves that the author of both Gospel and Acts shows a fondness for medical terms best explained by the fact that he was a physician. Like most enthusiasts he overdid it and some of his proof does not stand the actual test of sifting. Harnack and Hawkins in his _Horae Synopticae_ have picked out the most pertinent items which will stand. Cadbury in his _Style and Literary Method of Luke_ denies that Luke uses Greek medical words more frequently in proportion than Josephus, Philo, Plutarch, or Lucian. It is to miss the point about Luke merely to count words. It is mainly the interest in medical things shown in Luke and Acts. The proof that Luke is the author of the books does not turn on this fact. It is merely confirmatory. Paul calls Luke "the beloved physician" (\ho iatros ho agapˆtos\, strkjv@Colossians:4:14|), "my beloved physician." Together they worked in the Island of Malta (Acts:28:8-10|) where many were healed and Luke shared with Paul in the appreciation of the natives who "came and were healed (\etherapeuonto\) who also honoured us with many honours." The implication there is that Paul wrought miracles of healing (\iasato\), while Luke practised his medical art also. Other notes of the physician's interest will be indicated in the discussion of details like his omitting Mark's apparent discredit of physicians (Mark:5:26|) by a milder and more general statement of a chronic case (Luke:8:43|).

rwp@Luke:2:31 @{Of all the peoples} (\pant“n t“n la“n\). Not merely Jews. Another illustration of the universality of Luke's Gospel seen already in strkjv@1:70| in the hymn of Zacharias. The second strophe of the song according to Plummer showing what the Messiah will be to the world after having shown what the Messiah is to Simeon.

rwp@Luke:2:33 @{His father and his mother} (\ho patˆr autou kai hˆ mˆtˆr\). Luke had already used "parents" in strkjv@2:27|. He by no means intends to deny the Virgin Birth of Jesus so plainly stated in strkjv@1:34-38|. He merely employs here the language of ordinary custom. The late MSS. wrongly read "and Joseph" instead of "his father." {Were marvelling} (\ˆn thaumazontes\). The masculine gender includes the feminine when both are referred to. But \ˆn\ is singular, not \ˆsan\, the normal imperfect plural in this periphrastic imperfect. This is due to the wide space between copula and participle. The copula \ˆn\ agrees in number with \ho patˆr\ while the participle coming last agrees with both \ho pater kai hˆ mˆtˆr\ (cf. strkjv@Matthew:17:3; strkjv@22:40|). If one wonders why they marvelled at Simeon's words after what they had heard from Gabriel, Elisabeth, and the Shepherds, he should bear in mind that every parent is astonished and pleased at the fine things others see in the child. It is a mark of unusual insight for others to see so much that is obvious to the parent. Simeon's prophecy had gone beyond the angel's outline and it was surprising that he should know anything about the child's destiny.

rwp@Luke:3:14 @{Soldiers also} (\kai strateuomenoi\). Men on service, _militantes_ rather than _milites_ (Plummer). Songs:Paul in strkjv@2Timothy:2:4|. An old word like \strati“tˆs\, soldier. Some of these soldiers acted as police to help the publicans. But they were often rough and cruel. {Do violence to no man} (\mˆdena diaseisˆte\). Here only in the N.T., but in the LXX and common in ancient Greek. It means to shake (seismic disturbance, earthquake) thoroughly (\dia\) and so thoroughly to terrify, to extort money or property by intimidating (3Macc. strkjv@7:21). The Latin employs _concutere_, so. It was a process of blackmail to which Socrates refers (Xenophon, _Memorabilia_, ii. 9,1). This was a constant temptation to soldiers. Might does not make right with Jesus. {Neither exact anything wrongfully} (\mˆde sukophantˆsˆte\). In Athens those whose business it was to inform against any one whom they might find exporting figs out of Attica were called fig-showers or sycophants (\sukophantai\). From \sukon\, fig, and \phain“\, show. Some modern scholars reject this explanation since no actual examples of the word meaning merely a fig-shower have been found. But without this view it is all conjectural. From the time of Aristophanes on it was used for any malignant informer or calumniator. These soldiers were tempted to obtain money by informing against the rich, blackmail again. Songs:the word comes to mean to accuse falsely. The sycophants came to be a regular class of informers or slanderers in Athens. Socrates is quoted by Xenophon as actually advising Crito to employ one in self-defence, like the modern way of using one gunman against another. Demosthenes pictures a sycophant as one who "glides about the market like a scorpion, with his venomous sting all ready, spying out whom he may surprise with misfortune and ruin and from whom he can most easily extort money, by threatening him with an action dangerous in its consequences" (quoted by Vincent). The word occurs only in Luke in the N.T., here and in strkjv@Luke:19:8| in the confession of Zaccheus. It occurs in the LXX and often in the old Greek. {Be content with your wages} (\arkeisthe tois ops“niois hum“n\). Discontent with wages was a complaint of mercenary soldiers. This word for wages was originally anything cooked (\opson\, cooked food), and bought (from \“neomai\, to buy). Hence, "rations," "pay," wages. \Opsarion\, diminutive of \opson\, was anything eaten with bread like broiled fish. Songs:\ops“nion\ comes to mean whatever is bought to be eaten with bread and then a soldier's pay or allowance (Polybius, and other late Greek writers) as in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:7|. Paul uses the singular of a preacher's pay (2Corinthians:11:8|) and the plural of the wages of sin (Romans:6:23|) = death (death is the diet of sin).

rwp@Luke:3:19 @{Reproved} (\elegchomenos\). Present passive participle of \elegch“\, an old verb meaning in Homer to treat with contempt, then to convict (Matthew:18:15|), to expose (Ephesians:5:11|), to reprove as here. The substantive \elegchos\ means proof (Hebrews:11:1|) and \elegmos\, censure (2Timothy:3:16|). Josephus (_Ant_. XVIII. V.4) shows how repulsive this marriage was to Jewish feeling. {Evil things} (\ponˆr“n\). Incorporated into the relative sentence. The word is from \ponos, pone“\, toil, work, and gives the active side of evil, possibly with the notion of work itself as evil or at least an annoyance. The "evil eye" (\ophthalmos ponˆros\ in strkjv@Mark:7:22|) was a "mischief working eye" (Vincent). In strkjv@Matthew:6:23| it is a diseased eye. Songs:Satan is "the evil one" (Matthew:5:37; strkjv@6:13|, etc.). It is a very common adjective in the N.T. as in the older Greek. {Had done} (\epoiˆsen\). Aorist active indicative, not past perfect, merely a summary constative aorist, {he did}.

rwp@Luke:3:21 @{When all the people were baptised} (\en t“i baptisthˆnai hapanta ton laon\). The use of the articular aorist infinitive here with \en\ bothers some grammarians and commentators. There is no element of time in the aorist infinitive. It is simply punctiliar action, literally "in the being baptized as to all the people." Luke does not say that all the people were baptized before Jesus came or were baptized at the same time. It is merely a general statement that Jesus was baptized in connexion with or at the time of the baptizing of the people as a whole. {Jesus also having been baptized} (\kai Iˆsou baptisthentos\). Genitive absolute construction, first aorist passive participle. In Luke's sentence the baptism of Jesus is merely introductory to the descent of the Holy Spirit and the voice of the Father. For the narrative of the baptism see strkjv@Mark:1:9; strkjv@Matthew:3:13-16|. {And praying} (\kai proseuchomenou\). Alone in Luke who so often mentions the praying of Jesus. Present participle and so naturally meaning that the heaven was opened while Jesus was praying though not necessarily in answer to his prayer. {The heaven was opened} (\ane“ichthˆnai ton ouranon\). First aorist passive infinitive with double augment, whereas the infinitive is not supposed to have any augment. The regular form would be \anoichthˆnai\ as in D (Codex Bezae). Songs:the augment appears in the future indicative \kateaxei\ (Matthew:12:20|) and the second aorist passive subjunctive \kateag“sin\ (John:19:31|). Such unusual forms appear in the _Koin‚_. This infinitive here with the accusative of general reference is the subject of \egeneto\ (it came to pass). strkjv@Matthew:3:16| uses the same verb, but strkjv@Mark:1:10| has \schizomenous\, rent asunder.

rwp@Luke:3:22 @{Descended} (\katabˆnai\). Same construction as the preceding infinitive. {The Holy Ghost} (\to pneuma to hagion\). The Holy Spirit. strkjv@Mark:1:10| has merely the Spirit (\to pneuma\) while strkjv@Matthew:3:16| has the Spirit of God (\pneuma theou\). {In a bodily form} (\s“matik“i eidei\). Alone in Luke who has also "as a dove" (\h“s peristeran\) like Matthew and Mark. This probably means that the Baptist saw the vision that looked like a dove. Nothing is gained by denying the fact or possibility of the vision that looked like a dove. God manifests his power as he will. The symbolism of the dove for the Holy Spirit is intelligible. We are not to understand that this was the beginning of the Incarnation of Christ as the Cerinthian Gnostics held. But this fresh influx of the Holy Spirit may have deepened the Messianic consciousness of Jesus and certainly revealed him to the Baptist as God's Son. {And a voice came out of heaven} (\kai ph“nˆn ex ouranou genesthai\). Same construction of infinitive with accusative of general reference. The voice of the Father to the Son is given here as in strkjv@Mark:1:11|, which see, and strkjv@Matthew:3:17| for discussion of the variation there. The Trinity here manifest themselves at the baptism of Jesus which constitutes the formal entrance of Jesus upon his Messianic ministry. He enters upon it with the Father's blessing and approval and with the power of the Holy Spirit upon him. The deity of Christ here appears in plain form in the Synoptic Gospels. The consciousness of Christ is as clear on this point here as in the Gospel of John where the Baptist describes him after his baptism as the Son of God (John:1:34|).

rwp@Luke:4:1 @{Full of the Holy Spirit} (\plˆrˆs pneumatos hagiou\). An evident allusion to the descent of the Holy Spirit on Jesus at his baptism (Luke:3:21f.|). The distinctness of the Persons in the Trinity is shown there, but with evident unity. One recalls also Luke's account of the overshadowing of Mary by the Holy Spirit (1:35|). strkjv@Matthew:4:1| says that "Jesus was led of the Spirit" while strkjv@Mark:1:12| states that "the Spirit driveth him forth" which see for discussion. "Jesus had been endowed with supernatural power; and He was tempted to make use of it in furthering his own interests without regard to the Father's will" (Plummer). {Was led by the Spirit} (\ˆgeto en toi pneumati\). Imperfect passive, continuously led. \En\ may be the instrumental use as often, for strkjv@Matthew:4:1| has here \hupo\ of direct agency. But Matthew has the aorist passive \anˆchthˆ\ which may be ingressive as he has \eis tˆn erˆmon\ (into the wilderness) while Luke has \en t“i erˆm“i\ (in the wilderness). At any rate Luke affirms that Jesus was now continuously under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Hence in this same sentence he mentions the Spirit twice. {During the forty days} (\hˆmerƒs tesserakonta\). Accusative of duration of time, to be connected with "led" not with "tempted." He was led in the Spirit during these forty days (cf. strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:2|, forty years). The words are amphibolous also in strkjv@Mark:1:13|. strkjv@Matthew:4:2| seems to imply that the three recorded temptations came at the close of the fasting for forty days. That can be true and yet what Luke states be true also. These three may be merely specimens and so "representative of the struggle which continued throughout the whole period" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:4:7 @{Wilt worship before me} (\proskunˆsˆis en“pion emou\). strkjv@Matthew:4:9| has it more bluntly "worship me." That is what it really comes to, though in Luke the matter is more delicately put. It is a condition of the third class (\ean\ and the subjunctive). Luke has it "thou therefore if" (\su oun ean\), in a very emphatic and subtle way. It is the ingressive aorist (\proskunˆsˆis\), just bow the knee once up here in my presence. The temptation was for Jesus to admit Satan's authority by this act of prostration (fall down and worship), a recognition of authority rather than of personal merit. {It shall all be thine} (\estai sou pƒsa\). Satan offers to turn over all the keys of world power to Jesus. It was a tremendous grand-stand play, but Jesus saw at once that in that case he would be the agent of Satan in the rule of the world by bargain and graft instead of the Son of God by nature and world ruler by conquest over Satan. The heart of Satan's program is here laid bare. Jesus here rejected the Jewish idea of the Messiah as an earthly ruler merely. "He rejects Satan as an ally, and thereby has him as an implacable enemy" (Plummer.)

rwp@Luke:4:38 @{He rose up} (\anastas\). Second aorist active participle of \anistˆmi\, a common verb. B. Weiss adds here "from the teacher's seat." Either from his seat or merely leaving the synagogue. This incident of the healing of Peter's mother-in-law is given in strkjv@Mark:1:29-34| and strkjv@Matthew:8:14-17|, which see for details. {Into the house of Simon} (\eis tˆn oikian Sim“nos\). "Peter's house" (Matthew:8:14|). "The house of Simon and Andrew" (Mark:1:29|). Paul's reference to Peter's wife (1Corinthians:9:5|) is pertinent. They lived together in Capernaum. This house came also to be the Capernaum home of Jesus. {Simon's wife's mother} (\penthera tou Sim“nos\). The word \penthera\ for mother-in-law is old and well established in usage. Besides the parallel passages (Mark:1:30; strkjv@Matthew:8:14; strkjv@Luke:4:38|) it occurs in the N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:12:53|. The corresponding word \pentheros\, father-in-law, occurs in strkjv@John:18:13| alone in the N.T. {Was holden with a great fever} (\ˆn sunechomenˆ puret“i megal“i\). Periphrastic imperfect passive, the analytical tense accenting the continuous fever, perhaps chronic and certainly severe. Luke employs this verb nine times and only three others in the N.T. (Matthew:4:24| passive with diseases here; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14| active; strkjv@Phillipians:1:23| passive). In strkjv@Acts:28:8| the passive "with dysentery" is like the construction here and is a common one in Greek medical writers as in Greek literature generally. Luke uses the passive with "fear," strkjv@Luke:8:37|, the active for holding the hands over the ears (Acts:7:57|) and for pressing one or holding together (Luke:8:45; strkjv@19:43; strkjv@22:63|), the direct middle for holding oneself to preaching (Acts:18:5|). It is followed here by the instrumental case. Hobart (_Medical Language of Luke_, p. 3) quotes Galen as dividing fevers into "great" (\megaloi\) and "small" (\smikroi\).

rwp@Luke:9:47 @{Took a little child} (\epilabomenos paidion\). Second aorist middle participle of the common verb \epilamban“\. Strictly, Taking a little child to himself (indirect middle). strkjv@Mark:9:36| has merely the active \lab“n\ of the simple verb \lamban“\. Set him by his side (\estˆsen auto par' heaut“i\). "In his arms" strkjv@Mark:9:36| has it, "in the midst of them" strkjv@Matthew:18:3| says. All three attitudes following one another (the disciples probably in a circle around Jesus anyhow) and now the little child (Peter's child?) was slipped down by the side of Jesus as he gave the disciples an object lesson in humility which they sorely needed.

rwp@Luke:9:51 @{When the days were well-nigh come} (\en t“i sumplˆrousthai tas hˆmeras\). Luke's common idiom \en\ with the articular infinitive, "in the being fulfilled as to the days." This common compound occurs in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:8:23; strkjv@Acts:2:1|. The language here makes it plain that Jesus was fully conscious of the time of his death as near as already stated (Luke:9:22,27,31|). {That he should be received up} (\tˆs analˆmpse“s autou\). Literally, "of his taking up." It is an old word (from Hippocrates on), but here alone in the N.T. It is derived from \analamban“\ (the verb used of the Ascension, strkjv@Acts:1:2,11,22; strkjv@1Timothy:3:16|) and refers here to the Ascension of Jesus after His Resurrection. Not only in John's Gospel (John:17:5|) does Jesus reveal a yearning for a return to the Father, but it is in the mind of Christ here as evidently at the Transfiguration (9:31|) and later in strkjv@Luke:12:49f|. {He steadfastly set his face} (\autos to pros“pon estˆrisen\). Note emphatic \autos\, {he himself}, with fixedness of purpose in the face of difficulty and danger. This look on Christ's face as he went to his doom is noted later in strkjv@Mark:10:32|. It is a Hebraistic idiom (nine times in Ezekiel), this use of face here, but the verb (effective aorist active) is an old one from \stˆriz“\ (from \stˆrigx\, a support), to set fast, to fix. {To go to Jerusalem} (\tou poreuesthai eis Ierousalˆm\). Genitive infinitive of purpose. Luke three times mentions Christ making his way to Jerusalem (9:51; strkjv@13:22; strkjv@17:11|) and John mentions three journeys to Jerusalem during the later ministry (John:7:10; strkjv@11:17; strkjv@12:1|). It is natural to take these journeys to be the same in each of these Gospels. Luke does not make definite location of each incident and John merely supplements here and there. But in a broad general way they seem to correspond.

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

rwp@Luke:10:17 @{Returned with joy} (\hupestrepsan meta charas\). They had profited by the directions of Jesus. Joy overflows their faces and their words. {Even the demons} (\kai ta daimonia\). This was a real test. The Twelve had been expressly endowed with this power when they were sent out (Luke:9:1|), but the Seventy were only told to heal the sick (10:9|). It was better than they expected. The Gospel worked wonders and they were happy. The demons were merely one sign of the conflict between Christ and Satan. Every preacher has to grapple with demons in his work. {Are subject} (\hupotassetai\). Present passive indicative (repetition).

rwp@Luke:18:18 @{Ruler} (\arch“n\). Not in strkjv@Mark:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:19:16|. {What shall I do to inherit?} (\Ti poiˆsas klˆronomˆs“;\). "By doing what shall I inherit?" Aorist active participle and future active indicative. Precisely the same question is asked by the lawyer in strkjv@Luke:10:25|. This young man probably thought that by some one act he could obtain eternal life. He was ready to make a large expenditure for it. {Good} (\agathon\). See on ¯Mark:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:19:16| for discussion of this adjective for absolute goodness. Plummer observes that no Jewish rabbi was called "good" in direct address. The question of Jesus will show whether it was merely fulsome flattery on the part of the young man or whether he really put Jesus on a par with God. He must at any rate define his attitude towards Christ.

rwp@Luke:22:67 @{If thou art the Christ} (\Ei su ei ho Christos\). The Messiah, they mean. The condition is the first class, assuming it to be true. {If I tell you} (\Ean humin eip“\). Condition of the third class, undetermined, but with likelihood of being determined. This is the second appearance of Jesus before the Sanhedrin merely mentioned by strkjv@Mark:15:1; strkjv@Matthew:27:1| who give in detail the first appearance and trial. Luke merely gives this so-called ratification meeting after daybreak to give the appearance of legality to their vote of condemnation already taken (Mark:14:64; strkjv@Matthew:26:66|). {Ye will not believe} (\ou mˆ pisteusˆte\). Double negative with the aorist subjunctive, strongest possible negative. Songs:as to verse 68|.

rwp@Mark:2:19 @{The sons of the bridechamber} (\hoi huioi tou numph“nos\). Not merely the groomsmen, but the guests also, the \paranymphs\ (\paranumphoi\ of the old Greek). Jesus here adopts the Baptist's own metaphor (John:3:29|), changing the friend of the bridegroom (\ho philos tou numphiou\) to sons of the bridechamber. Jesus identifies himself with the bridegroom of the O.T. (Hosea:2:21|), God in his covenant relation with Israel (Swete). Mourning does not suit the wedding feast. Mark, Matthew, and Luke all give the three parables (bridegroom, unfulled cloth, new wineskins) illustrating and defending the conduct of Jesus in feasting with Levi on a Jewish fast-day. strkjv@Luke:5:36| calls these parables. Jesus here seems iconoclastic to the ecclesiastics and revolutionary in emphasis on the spiritual instead of the ritualistic and ceremonial.

rwp@Mark:6:6 @{And he marvelled because of their unbelief} (\kai ethaumasen dia tˆn apistian aut“n\). Aorist tense, but Westcott and Hort put the imperfect in the margin. Jesus had divine knowledge and accurate insight into the human heart, but he had human limitations in certain things that are not clear to us. He marvelled at the faith of the Roman centurion where one would not expect faith (Matthew:8:10; strkjv@Luke:7:9|). Here he marvels at the lack of faith where he had a right to expect it, not merely among the Jews, but in his own home town, among his kinspeople, even in his own home. One may excuse Mary, the mother of Jesus, from this unbelief, puzzled, as she probably was, by his recent conduct (Mark:3:21,31|). There is no proof that she ever lost faith in her wonderful Son. {He went round about the villages teaching} (\periˆgen tƒs k“mas kukl“i didask“n\). A good illustration of the frequent poor verse division. An entirely new paragraph begins with these words, the third tour of Galilee. They should certainly be placed with verse 7|. The Revised Version would be justified if it had done nothing else than give us paragraphs according to the sense and connection. "Jesus resumes the role of a wandering preacher in Galilee" (Bruce). Imperfect tense, \periˆgen\.

rwp@Mark:8:27 @{Into the villages of Caesarea Philippi} (\eis tƒs k“mas Kaisariƒs tˆs Philippou\). Parts (\merˆ\) strkjv@Matthew:16:13| has, the Caesarea of Philippi in contrast to the one down on the Mediterranean Sea. Mark means the villages belonging to the district around Caesarea Philippi. This region is on a spur of Mount Hermon in Iturea ruled by Herod Philip so that Jesus is safe from annoyance by Herod Antipas or the Pharisees and Sadducees. Up here on this mountain slope Jesus will have his best opportunity to give the disciples special teaching concerning the crucifixion just a little over six months ahead. Songs:Jesus asked (\epˆr“tƒ\, descriptive imperfect) {Who do men say that I am?} (\Tina me legousin hoi anthr“poi einai;\). strkjv@Matthew:16:13| has "the Son of Man" in place of "I" here in Mark and in strkjv@Luke:9:18|. He often described himself as "the Son of Man." Certainly here the phrase could not mean merely "a man." They knew the various popular opinions about Jesus of which Herod Antipas had heard (Mark:3:21,31|). It was time that the disciples reveal how much they had been influenced by their environment as well as by the direct instruction of Jesus.

rwp@Mark:9:9 @{Save when} (\ei mˆ hotan\). Matthew has "until" (\he“s hou\). {Should have risen} (\anastˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive. More exactly, "should rise" (punctiliar aorist and futuristic, not with any idea of perfect tense). strkjv@Luke:9:36| merely says that they told no man any of these things. It was a high and holy secret experience that the chosen three had had for their future good and for the good of all.

rwp@Mark:9:25 @{A multitude came running together} (\episuntrechei ochlos\). A double compound here alone in the N.T. and not in the old Greek writers. \Epitrech“\ occurs in the papyri, but not \episuntrech“\. The double compound vividly describes the rapid gathering of the crowd to Jesus and the epileptic boy to see the outcome. {Come out of him} (\exelthe ex autou\). Jesus addresses the demon as a separate being from the boy as he often does. This makes it difficult to believe that Jesus was merely indulging popular belief in a superstition. He evidently regards the demon as the cause in this case of the boy's misfortune.

rwp@Mark:12:23 @{To wife} (\gunaika\). Predicate accusative in apposition with "her" (\autˆn\). Songs:Luke, but Matthew merely has "had her" (\eschon autˆn\), constative aorist indicative active.

rwp@Mark:14:11 @{And they, when they heard it, were glad} (\hoi de akousantes echarˆsan\). No doubt the rabbis looked on the treachery of Judas as a veritable dispensation of Providence amply justifying their plots against Jesus. {Conveniently} (\eukair“s\). This was the whole point of the offer of Judas. He claimed that he knew enough of the habits of Jesus to enable them to catch him "in the absence of the multitude" (Luke:22:6|) without waiting for the passover to be over, when the crowds would leave. For discussion of the motives of Judas, see on ¯Matthew:26:15|. Mark merely notes the promise of "money" while Matthew mentions "thirty pieces of silver" (Zechariah:11:12|), the price of a slave.

rwp@Mark:16:2 @{When the sun was risen} (\anateilantos tou hˆliou\). Genitive absolute, aorist participle, though some manuscripts read \anatellontos\, present participle. strkjv@Luke:24:1| has it "at early dawn" (\orthrou batheos\) and strkjv@John:20:1| "while it was yet dark." It was some two miles from Bethany to the tomb. Mark himself gives both notes of time, "very early" (\lian pr“i\), "when the sun was risen." Probably they started while it was still dark and the sun was coming up when they arrived at the tomb. All three mention that it was on the first day of the week, our Sunday morning when the women arrive. The body of Jesus was buried late on Friday before the sabbath (our Saturday) which began at sunset. This is made clear as a bell by strkjv@Luke:23:54| "and the sabbath drew on." The women rested on the sabbath (Luke strkjv@23:56|). This visit of the women was in the early morning of our Sunday, the first day of the week. Some people are greatly disturbed over the fact that Jesus did not remain in the grave full seventy-two hours. But he repeatedly said that he would rise on the third day and that is precisely what happened. He was buried on Friday afternoon. He was risen on Sunday morning. If he had really remained in the tomb full three days and then had risen after that, it would have been on the fourth day, not on the third day. The occasional phrase "after three days" is merely a vernacular idiom common in all languages and not meant to be exact and precise like "on the third day." We can readily understand "after three days" in the sense of "on the third day." It is impossible to understand "on the third day" to be "on the fourth day." See my _Harmony of the Gospels_, pp. 289-91.

rwp@Mark:16:16 @{And is baptized} (\kai baptistheis\). The omission of {baptized} with "disbelieveth" would seem to show that Jesus does not make baptism essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on disbelief, not on baptism. Songs:salvation rests on belief. Baptism is merely the picture of the new life not the means of securing it. Songs:serious a sacramental doctrine would need stronger support anyhow than this disputed portion of Mark.

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

rwp@Matthew:1:2 @{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 @{Of the Holy Ghost} (\ek pneumatos hagiou\). The discovery that Mary was pregnant was inevitable and it is plain that she had not told Joseph. She "was found with child" (\heurethˆ en gastri echousa\). This way of putting it, the usual Greek idiom, plainly shows that it was the discovery that shocked Joseph. He did not as yet know what Matthew plainly asserts that the Holy Ghost, not Joseph and not any man, was responsible for the pregnancy of Mary. The problem of the Virgin Birth of Jesus has been a disturbing fact to some through all the ages and is today to those who do not believe in the pre-existence of Christ, the Son of God, before his Incarnation on earth. This is the primal fact about the Birth of Christ. The Incarnation of Christ is clearly stated by Paul (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|; and involved in strkjv@Colossians:1:15-19|) and by John (John:1:14; strkjv@17:5|). If one frankly admits the actual pre-existence of Christ and the real Incarnation, he has taken the longest and most difficult step in the matter of the supernatural Birth of Christ. That being true, no merely human birth without the supernatural element can possibly explain the facts. Incarnation is far more than the Indwelling of God by the Holy Spirit in the human heart. To admit real incarnation and also full human birth, both father and mother, creates a greater difficulty than to admit the Virgin Birth of Jesus begotten by the Holy Spirit, as Matthew here says, and born of the Virgin Mary. It is true that only Matthew and Luke tell the story of the supernatural birth of Jesus, though strkjv@John:1:14| seems to refer to it. Mark has nothing whatever concerning the birth and childhood of Jesus and so cannot be used as a witness on the subject. Both Matthew and Luke present the birth of Jesus as not according to ordinary human birth. Jesus had no human father. There is such a thing in nature as parthenogenesis in the lower orders of life. But that scientific fact has no bearing here. We see here God sending his Son into the world to be the world's Saviour and he gave him a human mother, but not a human father so that Jesus Christ is both Son of God and Son of Man, the God Man. Matthew tells the story of the birth of Jesus from the standpoint of Joseph as Luke gives it from the standpoint of Mary. The two narratives harmonize with each other. One credits these most wonderful of all birth narratives according as he believes in the love and power of Almighty God to do what he wills. There is no miracle with God who has all power and all knowledge. The laws of nature are simply the expression of God's will, but he has not revealed all his will in the laws that we discover. God is Spirit. He is Person. He holds in his own power all life. strkjv@John:3:16| is called the Little Gospel because it puts briefly the love of God for men in sending his own Son to live and die for us.

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

rwp@Matthew:13:33 @{Is like unto leaven} (\homoia estin zumˆi\). In its pervasive power. Curiously enough some people deny that Jesus here likens the expanding power of the Kingdom of heaven to leaven, because, they say, leaven is the symbol of corruption. But the language of Jesus is not to be explained away by such exegetical jugglery. The devil is called like a lion by Peter (1Peter:5:8|) and Jesus in Revelation is called the Lion of the Tribe of Judah (Revelation:5:5|). The leaven permeates all the "wheaten meal" (\aleurou\) till the whole is leavened. There is nothing in the "three measures," merely a common amount to bake. Dr. T.R. Glover in his _Jesus of History_ suggests that Jesus used to notice his mother using that amount of wheat flour in baking bread. To find the Trinity here is, of course, quite beside the mark. The word for leaven, \zumˆ\, is from \ze“\, to boil, to seethe, and so pervasive fermentation.

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

rwp@Matthew:23:29 @{The tombs of the prophets} (\tous taphous t“n prophˆt“n\). Cf. strkjv@Luke:11:48-52|. They were bearing witness against themselves (\heautois\, verse 31|) to "the murder-taint in your blood" (Allen). "These men who professed to be so distressed at the murdering of the Prophets, were themselves compassing the death of Him who was far greater than any Prophet" (Plummer). There are four monuments called Tombs of the Prophets (Zechariah, Absalom, Jehoshaphat, St. James) at the base of the Mount of Olives. Some of these may have been going up at the very time that Jesus spoke. In this seventh and last woe Jesus addresses the Jewish nation and not merely the Pharisees.

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

rwp@Matthew:27:54 @{Truly this was the Son of God} (\alˆth“s theou huios ˆn houtos\). There is no article with God or Son in the Greek so that it means "God's Son," either "the Son of God" or "a Son of God." There is no way to tell. Evidently the centurion (\hekatontarchos\ here, ruler of a hundred, Latin word _kenturi“n_ in strkjv@Mark:15:39|) was deeply moved by the portents which he had witnessed. He had heard the several flings at Jesus for claiming to be the Son of God and may even have heard of his claim before the Sanhedrin and Pilate. How much he meant by his words we do not know, but probably he meant more than merely "a righteous man" (Luke:23:47|). Petronius is the name given this centurion by tradition. If he was won now to trust in Christ, he came as a pagan and, like the robber who believed, was saved as Jesus hung upon the Cross. All who are ever saved in truth are saved because of the death of Jesus on the Cross. Songs:the Cross began to do its work at once.

rwp@Matthew:28:7 @{He goeth before you into Galilee} (\proagei humas eis tˆn Galilaian\). Jesus did appear to the disciples in Galilee on two notable occasions (by the beloved lake, strkjv@John:21|, and on the mountain, strkjv@Matthew:28:16-20|). Probably before the women were permitted to tell this story in full to the disciples who scouted as idle talk (John:24:11|) their first accounts, Jesus appeared to various disciples in Jerusalem on this first great Sunday. Jesus did not say that he would not see any of them in Jerusalem. He merely made a definite appointment in Galilee which he kept.

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

rwp@Philippians:3:3 @{For we} (\hˆmeis gar\). We believers in Christ, the children of Abraham by faith, whether Jew or Gentile, the spiritual circumcision in contrast to the merely physical (Romans:2:25-29; strkjv@Colossians:2:11; strkjv@Ephesians:2:11|). See strkjv@Galatians:5:12| for \apotemnein\ (to cut off) in sense of mutilation also. {By the Spirit of God} (\pneumati theou\). Instrumental case, though the dative case as the object of \latreu“\ makes good sense also (worshipping the Spirit of God) or even the locative (worshipping in the Spirit of God). {No} (\ouk\). Actual condition rather than \mˆ\ with the participle. {In the flesh} (\en sarki\). Technical term in Paul's controversy with the Judaizers (2Corinthians:11:18; Gal strkjv@6:13f.|). External privileges beyond mere flesh.

rwp@Revelation:1:9 @{I John} (\Eg“ I“anˆs\). strkjv@Songs:22:8|. In apocalyptic literature the personality of the writer is always prominent to guarantee the visions (Daniel:8:1; strkjv@10:2|). {Partaker with you} (\sunkoin“nos\). See already strkjv@1Corinthians:9:23|. "Co-partner with you" (Romans:11:17|). One article with \adelphos\ and \sunkoin“nos\ unifying the picture. The absence of \apostolos\ here does not show that he is not an apostle, but merely his self-effacement, as in the Fourth Gospel, and still more his oneness with his readers. Songs:there is only one article (\tˆi\) with \thlipsei\ (tribulation), \basileiƒi\ (kingdom), \hupomonˆi\ (patience), ideas running all through the book. Both the tribulation (see strkjv@Matthew:13:21| for \thlipsis\) and the kingdom (see strkjv@Matthew:3:2| for \basileia\) were present realities and called for patience (\hupomonˆ\ being "the spiritual alchemy" according to Charles for those in the kingdom, for which see strkjv@Luke:8:15; strkjv@James:5:7|). All this is possible only "in Jesus" (\en Iˆsou\), a phrase on a par with Paul's common \en Christ“i\ (in Christ), repeated in strkjv@14:13|. Cf. strkjv@3:20; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:5|. {Was} (\egenomˆn\). Rather, "I came to be," second aorist middle indicative of \ginomai\. {In the isle that is called Patmos} (\en tˆi nˆs“i tˆi kaloumenˆi Patm“i\). Patmos is a rocky sparsely settled island some ten miles long and half that wide, one of the Sporades group in the Aegean Sea, south of Miletus. The present condition of the island is well described by W. E. Geil in _The Isle That Is Called Patmos_ (1905). Here John saw the visions described in the book, apparently written while still a prisoner there in exile. {For the word of God and the testimony of Jesus} (\dia ton logon tou theou kai tˆn marturian Iˆsou\). The reason for (\dia\ and the accusative) John's presence in Patmos, naturally as a result of persecution already alluded to, not for the purpose of preaching there or of receiving the visions. See verse 2| for the phrase.

rwp@Revelation:4:6 @{As it were a glassy sea} (\h“s thalassa hualinˆ\). Old adjective (from \hualos\, glass, strkjv@21:18,21|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@15:2|. Possibly from \huei\ (it rains), like a raindrop. At any rate here it is the appearance, not the material. Glass was made in Egypt 4,000 years ago. In strkjv@Exodus:24:10| the elders see under the feet of God in the theophany a paved work of sapphire stone (cf. strkjv@Ezekiel:1:26|). The likeness of the appearance of sky to sea suggests the metaphor here (Beckwith). {Like crystal} (\homoia krustall“i\). Associative-instrumental case after \homoia\. Old word, from \kruos\ (ice and sometimes used for ice), in N.T. only here and strkjv@22:1|, not semi-opaque, but clear like rock-crystal. {In the midst of the throne} (\en mes“i tou thronou\). As one looks from the front, really before. {Round about the throne} (\kukl“i tou thronou\). Merely an adverb in the locative case (Romans:15:19|), as a preposition in N.T. only here, strkjv@5:11; strkjv@7:11|. This seems to mean that on each of the four sides of the throne was one of the four living creatures either stationary or moving rapidly round (Ezekiel:1:12f.|). {Four living creatures} (\tessera z“a\). Not \thˆria\ (beasts), but living creatures. Certainly kin to the \z“a\ of strkjv@Ezekiel:1; 2| which are cherubim (Ezekiel:10:2,20|), though here the details vary as to faces and wings with a significance of John's own, probably representing creation in contrast with the redeemed (the elders). {Full of eyes} (\gemonta ophthalm“n\). Present active participle of \gem“\, to be full of, with the genitive, signifying here unlimited intelligence (Beckwith), the ceaseless vigilance of nature (Swete).

rwp@Revelation:5:1 @{In the right hand} (\epi tˆn dexian\). "Upon the right hand" (\epi\, not \en\), the open palm. Anthropomorphic language drawn from strkjv@Ezekiel:2:9f|. {A book} (\biblion\). Diminutive of \biblos\, but no longer so used, \biblaridion\ occurring instead (10:2|). {Written} (\gegrammenon\). Perfect passive predicate participle of \graph“\. {Within and on the back} (\es“then kai opisthen\). "Within and behind." Description of a roll like that in strkjv@Luke:4:17|, not a codex as some scholars think. Usually these papyrus rolls were written only on the inside, but this one was so full of matter that it was written also on the back side (\opisthen\), and so was an \opisthographon\ like that in strkjv@Ezekiel:2:10|. There are many allegorical interpretations of this fact which are all beside the point. {Sealed} (\katesphragismenon\). Perfect passive predicate participle of \katasphragiz“\, old compound (perfective use of \kata\), to seal up (down), here only in N.T. {With seven seals} (\sphragisin hepta\). Instrumental case of \sphragis\, old word used in various senses, proof or authentication (1Corinthians:9:2; strkjv@Romans:4:11|), signet-ring (Revelation:7:2|), impression made by the seal (Revelation:9:4; strkjv@2Timothy:2:19|), the seal on books closing the book (Revelation:5:1,2,5,9; strkjv@6:1,3,5,7,9,12; strkjv@8:1|). "A will in Roman law bore the seven seals of the seven witnesses" (Charles). But this sealed book of doom calls for no witnesses beyond God's own will. Alford sees in the number seven merely the completeness of God's purposes.

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

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

rwp@Romans:5:12 @{Therefore} (\dia touto\). "For this reason." What reason? Probably the argument made in verses 1-11|, assuming our justification and urging exultant joy in Christ because of the present reconciliation by Christ's death and the certainty of future final salvation by his life. {As through one man} (\h“sper di' henos anthr“pou\). Paul begins a comparison between the effects of Adam's sin and the effects of the redemptive work of Christ, but he does not give the second member of the comparison. Instead of that he discusses some problems about sin and death and starts over again in verse 15|. The general point is plain that the effects of Adam's sin are transmitted to his descendants, though he does not say how it was done whether by the natural or the federal headship of Adam. It is important to note that Paul does not say that the whole race receives the full benefit of Christ's atoning death, but only those who do. Christ is the head of all believers as Adam is the head of the race. In this sense Adam "is a figure of him that was to come." {Sin entered into the world} (\hˆ hamartia eis ton kosmon eisˆlthen\). Personification of sin and represented as coming from the outside into the world of humanity. Paul does not discuss the origin of evil beyond this fact. There are some today who deny the fact of sin at all and who call it merely "an error of mortal mind" (a notion) while others regard it as merely an animal inheritance devoid of ethical quality. {And so death passed unto all men} (\kai hout“s eis pantas anthr“pous diˆlthen\). Note use of \dierchomai\ rather than \eiserchomai\, just before, second aorist active indicative in both instances. By "death" in strkjv@Genesis:2:17; strkjv@3:19| physical death is meant, but in verses 17,21| eternal death is Paul's idea and that lurks constantly behind physical death with Paul. {For that all sinned} (\eph' h“i pantes hˆmarton\). Constative (summary) aorist active indicative of \hamartan“\, gathering up in this one tense the history of the race (committed sin). The transmission from Adam became facts of experience. In the old Greek \eph' h“i\ usually meant "on condition that," but "because" in N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 963).

rwp@Romans:8:29 @{Foreknew} (\proegn“\). Second aorist active indicative of \progin“sk“\, old verb as in strkjv@Acts:26:5|. See strkjv@Psalms:1:6| (LXX) and strkjv@Matthew:7:23|. This fore-knowledge and choice is placed in eternity in strkjv@Ephesians:1:4|. {He foreordained} (\pro“risen\). First aorist active indicative of \prooriz“\, late verb to appoint beforehand as in strkjv@Acts:4:28; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7|. Another compound with \pro-\ (for eternity). {Conformed to the image} (\summorphous tˆs eikonos\). Late adjective from \sun\ and \morphˆ\ and so an inward and not merely superficial conformity. \Eik“n\ is used of Christ as the very image of the Father (2Corinthians:4:4; strkjv@Colossians:1:15|). See strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f.| for \morphˆ\. Here we have both \morphˆ\ and \eik“n\ to express the gradual change in us till we acquire the likeness of Christ the Son of God so that we ourselves shall ultimately have the family likeness of sons of God. Glorious destiny. {That he might be} (\eis to einai auton\). Common idiom for purpose. {First born among many brethren} (\pr“totokon en pollois adelphois\). Christ is "first born" of all creation (Colossians:1:15|), but here he is "first born from the dead" (Colossians:1:18|), the Eldest Brother in this family of God's sons, though "Son" in a sense not true of us.

rwp@Romans:11:11 @{Did they stumble that they might fall?} (\mˆ eptaisan hina pes“sin?\). Negative answer expected by \mˆ\ as in verse 1|. First aorist active indicative of \ptai“\, old verb, to stumble, only here in Paul (see strkjv@James:3:2|), suggested perhaps by \skandalon\ in verse 9|. If \hina\ is final, then we must add "merely" to the idea, "merely that they might fall" or make a sharp distinction between \ptai“\, to stumble, and \pipt“\, to fall, and take \pes“sin\ as effective aorist active subjunctive to fall completely and for good. \Hina\, as we know, can be either final, sub-final, or even result. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:7:29; strkjv@Galatians:5:17|. Paul rejects this query in verse 11| as vehemently as he did that in verse 1|. {By their fall} (\t“i aut“n parapt“mati\). Instrumental case. For the word, a falling aside or a false step from \parapipt“\, see strkjv@5:15-20|. {Is come}. No verb in the Greek, but \ginetai\ or \gegonen\ is understood. {For to provoke them to jealousy} (\eis to parazˆl“sai\). Purpose expressed by \eis\ and the articular infinitive, first aorist active, of \parazˆlo“\, for which verb see strkjv@1Corinthians:10:22|. As an historical fact Paul turned to the Gentiles when the Jews rejected his message (Acts:13:45ff.; strkjv@28:28|, etc.). {The riches of the world} (\ploutos kosmou\). See strkjv@10:12|. {Their loss} (\to hˆttˆma aut“n\). Songs:perhaps in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:7|, but in strkjv@Isaiah:31:8| defeat is the idea. Perhaps so here. {Fulness} (\plˆr“ma\). Perhaps "completion," though the word from \plˆro“\, to fill, has a variety of senses, that with which anything is filled (1Corinthians:10:26,28|), that which is filled (Ephesians:1:23|). {How much more?} (\pos“i mallon\). Argument _a fortiori_ as in verse 24|. Verse 25| illustrates the point.

rwp@Romans:11:15 @{The casting away of them} (\hˆ apobolˆ aut“n\). Objective genitive (\aut“n\) with \apobolˆ\, old word from \apoball“\, to throw off (Mark:10:50|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:27:22|. {The reconciling of the world} (\katallagˆ kosmou\). See strkjv@5:10f.| for \katallagˆ\ (reconciling). It explains verse 12|. {The receiving} (\hˆ proslˆmpsis\). Old word from \proslamban“\, to take to oneself, only here in N.T. {Life from the dead} (\z“ˆ ek nekr“n\). Already the conversion of Jews had become so difficult. It is like a miracle of grace today, though it does happen. Many think that Paul means that the general resurrection and the end will come when the Jews are converted. Possibly so, but it is by no means certain. His language may be merely figurative.

rwp@Romans:16:11 @{Herodion} (\Her“idi“na\). Probably one belonging to the Herod family like that above. {Kinsman} (\suggenˆ\). Merely fellow-countryman. {Them of the household of Narcissus} (\tous ek t“n Narkissou\). "Narcissiani." There was a famous freedman of this name who was put to death by Agrippa. Perhaps members of his household.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Sun Jun 30 13:02:54 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020