Bible:
Filter: String:

NT-EPISTLES.filter - rwp Told:


rwp@1Corinthians:10:9 @{Neither let us tempt the Lord} (\mˆde ekpeiraz“men ton Kurion\). Songs:the best MSS. instead of Christ. This compound occurs in LXX and in N.T. always about Christ (here and strkjv@Matthew:4:7; strkjv@Luke:4:12; strkjv@10:25|). Let us cease sorely (\ek-\) tempting the Lord by such conduct. {And perished by the serpents} (\kai hupo t“n ophe“n ap“llunto\). Vivid imperfect middle (cf. aorist middle \ap“lonto\ in verse 10|), were perishing day by day. The story is told in strkjv@Numbers:21:6|. The use of \hupo\ for agent with the intransitive middle of \apollumi\ is regular. Note the Ionic uncontracted genitive plural \ophe“n\ rather than \oph“n\.

rwp@1Corinthians:11:34 @{At home} (\en oik“i\). If so hungry as all that (verse 22|). {The rest} (\ta loipa\). He has found much fault with this church, but he has not told all. {I will set in order} (\diataxomai\). Not even Timothy and Titus can do it all. {Whensoever I come} (\h“s an elth“\). Common idiom for temporal clause of future time (conjunction like \h“s\ with \an\ and aorist subjunctive \elth“\).

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

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:15 @{Who both killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets} (\t“n kai ton Kurion apokteinant“n Iˆsoun kai tous prophˆtas\). First aorist active participle of \apoktein“\. Vivid justification of his praise of the churches in Judea. The Jews killed the prophets before the Lord Jesus who reminded them of their guilt (Matthew:23:29|). Paul, as Peter (Acts:2:23|), lays the guilt of the death of Christ on the Jews. {And drove us out} (\kai hˆmƒs ekdi“xant“n\). An old verb to drive out or banish, to chase out as if a wild beast. Only here in N.T. It is Paul's vivid description of the scene told in strkjv@Acts:17:5ff.| when the rabbis and the hoodlums from the agora chased him out of Thessalonica by the help of the politarchs. {Please not God} (\The“i mˆ areskont“n\). The rabbis and Jews thought that they were pleasing God by so doing as Paul did when he ravaged the young church in Jerusalem. But Paul knows better now. {And are contrary to all men} (\kai pasin anthr“pois enanti“n\). Dative case with the adjective \enanti“n\ (old and common word, face to face, opposite). It seems like a bitter word about Paul's countrymen whom he really loved (Romans:9:1-5; strkjv@10:1-6|), but Paul knew only too well the middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile as he shows in strkjv@Ephesians:2| and which only the Cross of Christ can break down. Tacitus (_Hist_. V. 5) says that the Jews are _adversus omnes alios hostile odium_.

rwp@1Thessalonians:3:4 @{We told you beforehand} (\proelegomen humin\). Imperfect active, we used to tell you beforehand. Old verb, rare in N.T. (only in Paul). {That we are to suffer persecution} (\hoti mellomen thlibesthai\). \Mell“\ and present passive infinitive. Not mere prediction, but God's appointed will as it turned out in Thessalonica.

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@2Peter:1:14 @{The putting off of my tabernacle} (\hˆ apothesis tou skˆnn“matos mou\). For \apothesis\ see on ¯1Peter:3:21| and for \skˆn“ma\ verse 13|. For the metaphor see strkjv@2Corinthians:5:3f|. {Cometh swiftly} (\tachinˆ estin\). Late adjective (Theocritus, LXX, inscription), in N.T. only here and strkjv@2:1|. It is not clear whether \tachinos\ means soon or speedy as in strkjv@Isaiah:59:7| and like \tachus\ in strkjv@James:1:19|, or sudden, like \tachus\ in Plato (_Republ_. 553 D). Either sense agrees with the urgent tone of Peter here, whether he felt his death to be near or violent or both. {Signified unto me} (\edˆl“sen moi\). First aorist active indicative of \dˆlo“\, old verb (from \delos\), as in strkjv@1Peter:1:11|. Peter refers to the incident told in strkjv@John:21:18f.|, which he knew by personal experience before John wrote it down.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:4 @{He that opposeth and exalteth himself} (\ho antikeimenos kai huperairomenos\). Like John's Antichrist this one opposes (\anti-\) Christ and exalts himself (direct middle of \huperair“\, old verb to lift oneself up {above} others, only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:12:7| in N.T.), but not Satan, but an agent of Satan. This participial clause is in apposition with the two preceding phrases, the man of sin, the son of perdition. Note strkjv@1Corinthians:8:5| about one called God and strkjv@Acts:17:23| for \sebasma\ (from \sebazomai\), object of worship, late word, in N.T. only in these two passages. {Songs:that he sitteth in the temple of God} (\h“ste auton eis ton naon tou theou kathisai\). Another example of the infinitive with \h“ste\ for result. Caius Caligula had made a desperate attempt to have his statue set up for worship in the Temple in Jerusalem. This incident may lie behind Paul's language here. {Setting himself forth as God} (\apodeiknunta heauton hoti estin theos\). Present active participle (\mi\ form) of \apodeiknumi\, agreeing in case with \auton\, {showing himself that he is God}. Caligula claimed to be God. Moffatt doubts if Paul is identifying this deception with the imperial cultus at this stage. Lightfoot thinks that the deification of the Roman emperor supplied Paul's language here. Wetstein notes a coin of Julius with \theos\ on one side and \Thessalonike“n\ on the other. In strkjv@1John:2:18| we are told of "many antichrists" some of whom had already come. Hence it is not clear that Paul has in mind only one individual or even individuals at all rather than evil principles, for in verse 6| he speaks of \to katechon\ (that which restraineth) while in verse 7| it is \ho katech“n\ (the one that restraineth). Frame argues for a combination of Belial and Antichrist as the explanation of Paul's language. But the whole subject is left by Paul in such a vague form that we can hardly hope to clear it up. It is possible that his own preaching while with them gave his readers a clue that we do not possess.

rwp@3John:1:9 @{I wrote somewhat unto the church} (\egrapsa ti tˆi ekklˆsiƒi\). A few MSS. add \an\ to indicate that he had not written (conclusion of second-class condition), clearly spurious. Not epistolary aorist nor a reference to II John as Findlay holds, but an allusion to a brief letter of commendation (Acts:18:27; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:1; strkjv@Colossians:4:10|) sent along with the brethren in verses 5-7| or to some other itinerant brethren. Westcott wrongly thinks that \ti\ is never used of anything important in the N.T. (Acts:8:9; strkjv@Galatians:6:3|), and hence that this lost letter was unimportant. It may have been brief and a mere introduction. \Diotrephes\ (\Dios\ and \treph“\, nourished by Zeus). This ambitious leader and sympathiser with the Gnostics would probably prevent the letter referred to being read to the church, whether it was II John condemning the Gnostics or another letter commending Demetrius and John's missionaries. Hence he sends Gaius this personal letter warning against Diotrephes. {Who loveth to have the preeminence among them} (\ho philopr“teu“n aut“n\). Present active articular participle of a late verb, so far found only here and in ecclesiastical writers (the example cited by Blass being an error, Deissmann, _Light_ etc., p. 76), from \philopr“tos\, fond of being first (Plutarch), and made like \philopone“\ (papyri), to be fond of toil. This ambition of Diotrephes does not prove that he was a bishop over elders, as was true in the second century (as Ignatius shows). He may have been an elder (bishop) or deacon, but clearly desired to rule the whole church. Some forty years ago I wrote an article on Diotrephes for a denominational paper. The editor told me that twenty-five deacons stopped the paper to show their resentment against being personally attacked in the paper. {Receiveth us not} (\ouk epidechetai hˆmƒs\). Present active indicative of this old compound, in N.T. only here and verse 10|. Diotrephes refused to accept John's authority or those who sided with him, John's missionaries or delegates (cf. strkjv@Matthew:10:40|).

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION But for the Acts we should know nothing of the early apostolic period save what is told in the Epistles. There are various apocryphal "Acts," but they are without historical worth. Hence the importance of this book.

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

rwp@Acts:2:35 @{Till I make} (\he“s an th“\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \tithˆmi\ with \an\ after \he“s\ for the future, a common Greek idiom. This dominion of Christ as Mediator will last till the plan of the kingdom is carried out (1Corinthians:15:23-28|). Complete subjugation will come, perhaps referring to the custom of victorious kings placing their feet upon the necks of their enemies (Joshua:10:24|). {Therefore assuredly} (\Asphal“s oun\). Assuredly therefore, without any slip or trip (\asphalˆs\ from \a\ privative and \sphall“\, to trip, to slip. Peter draws a powerfully pungent conclusion by the use of the adverb \asphal“s\ and the inferential conjunction \oun\. Peter's closing sentence drives home the point of his sermon: "This very Jesus whom ye crucified (note \humeis\, strongly emphatic {ye}), him God made both Lord and Messiah" (\kai kurion kai Christon\), as David foretold in strkjv@Psalms:110| and as the events of this day have confirmed. The critics are disturbed over how Luke could have gotten the substance of this masterful address spoken on the spur of the moment with passion and power. They even say that Luke composed it for Peter and put the words in his mouth. If so, he made a good job of it. But Peter could have written out the notes of the address afterwards. Luke had plenty of chances to get hold of it from Peter or from others.

rwp@Acts:2:39 @{The promise} (\hˆ epaggelia\). The promise made by Jesus (1:4|) and foretold by Joel (verse 18|). {To you} (\humin\). You Jews. To your descendants, sons and daughters of verse 17|. {To all that are afar off} (\pƒsin tois eis makran\. The horizon widens and includes the Gentiles. Those "afar off" from the Jews were the heathen (Isaiah:49:1; strkjv@57:19; strkjv@Ephesians:2:13,17|). The rabbis so used it. {Shall call} (\an proskalesˆtai\). First aorist middle subjunctive with \an\ in an indefinite relative clause, a perfectly regular construction. The Lord God calls men of every nation anywhere whether Jews or Gentiles. It may be doubted how clearly Peter grasped the significance of these words for he will have trouble over this very matter on the housetop in Joppa and in Caesarea, but he will see before long the full sweep of the great truth that he here proclaims under the impulse of the Holy Spirit. It was a great moment that Peter here reaches.

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

rwp@Acts:7:1 @{Are these things so?} (\ei tauta hout“s echei\). On this use of \ei\ in a direct question see on ¯1:6|. Literally "Do these things hold thus?" A formal question by the high priest like our "Do you plead guilty, or not guilty?" (Furneaux). The abrupt question of the high priest would serve to break the evident spell of the angelic look on Stephen's face. Two charges had been made against Stephen (1) speaking against the holy temple, (2) changing the customs which Moses had delivered. Stephen could not give a yes or no answer to these two charges. There was an element of truth in each of them and a large amount of error all mixed together. Songs:he undertakes to explain his real position by the historical method, that is to say, by a rapid survey of God's dealing with the people of Israel and the Gentiles. It is the same method adopted by Paul in Pisidian Antioch (Acts:13:16ff.|) after he had become the successor of Stephen in his interpretation of the universal mission of Christianity. If one is disposed to say that Luke made up this speech to suit Stephen's predicament, he has to explain how the style is less Lukan than the narrative portions of Acts with knowledge of Jewish traditions that a Greek would not be likely to know. Precisely how Luke obtained the data for the speech we do not know, but Saul heard it and Philip, one of the seven, almost certainly. Both could have given Luke help about it. It is even possible that some one took notes of this important address. We are to remember also that the speech was interrupted at the end and may not include all that Stephen meant to say. But enough is given to give us a good idea of how Stephen met the first charge "by showing that the worship of God is not confined to Jerusalem or the Jewish temple" (Page). Then he answers the second charge by proving that God had many dealings with their fathers before Moses came and that Moses foretold the coming of the Messiah who is now known to be Jesus. It is at this point (verse 51|) that Stephen becomes passionate and so powerful that the wolves in the Sanhedrin lose all self-control. It is a great and masterful exposition of the worldwide mission of the gospel of Christ in full harmony with the Great Commission of Christ. The apostles had been so busy answering the Sadducees concerning the Resurrection of Christ and maintaining their freedom to teach and preach that they had not pushed the world-wide propaganda of the gospel as Jesus had commanded after they had received the Promise of the Father. But Stephen had proclaimed the same message of Christ and was now facing the same fate. Peter's mind had been enlightened by the Holy Spirit so that he could rightly interpret Joel and David in the light of Pentecost. "Songs:Stephen read the history of the Old Testament with new eyes in the light of the life and death of Jesus" (Furneaux).

rwp@Acts:7:52 @{Which of the prophets} (\tina t“n prophˆt“n\). Jesus (Luke:11:47; strkjv@Matthew:23:29-37|) had charged them with this very thing. Cf. strkjv@2Chronicles:36:16|. {Which shewed before} (\prokataggeilantas\). The very prophets who foretold the coming of the Messiah their fathers killed. {The coming} (\tˆs eleuse“s\). Not in ancient Greek or LXX and only here in the N.T. (in a few late writers). {Betrayers} (\prodotai\). Just like Judas Iscariot. He hurled this old biting word at them. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:6:16; strkjv@2Timothy:3:4|. It cut like a knife. It is blunter than Peter in strkjv@Acts:3:13|. {Murderers} (\phoneis\). The climax with this sharp word used of Barabbas (3:14|).

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

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

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

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

rwp@Acts:10:41 @{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:10:43 @{Every one that believeth} (\panta ton pisteuonta\). This accusative active participle of general reference with the infinitive in indirect discourse is the usual idiom. Only \labein\ (second aorist active infinitive of \lamban“\) is not indirect statement so much as indirect command or arrangement. The prophets bear witness to Jesus Christ to this effect. It is God's plan and no race distinctions are drawn. Peter had already said the same thing at Pentecost (2:38|), but now he sees himself that Gentiles do not have to become Jews, but have only to believe in Jesus as Messiah and Judge as foretold by the prophets. It was glorious news to Cornelius and his group. {Through his name} (\dia tou onomatos autou\), not as a _title_ or magic formula (Acts:18:13|), but the power of Christ himself represented by his name.

rwp@Acts:12:12 @{When he had considered} (\sunid“n\). Second aorist active participle of \suneidon\ (for the defective verb \sunora“\), to see together, to grasp as a whole, old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@14:6|, save the perfect indicative \sunoida\ (1Corinthians:4:4|) and participle (Acts:5:2|). It is the word from which \suneidˆsis\ (conscience) comes (Romans:2:15|). Peter's mind worked rapidly and he decided what to do. He took in his situation clearly. {To the house of Mary} (\epi tˆn oikian tˆs Marias\). Another Mary (the others were Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary of Bethany, Mary Magdalene, Mary wife of Cleopas, Mary the mother of James and Joses). She may have been a widow and was possessed of some means since her house was large enough to hold the large group of disciples there. Barnabas, cousin of John Mark her son (Colossians:4:10|), was also a man of property or had been (Acts:4:36f.|). It is probable that the disciples had been in the habit of meeting in her house, a fact known to Peter and he was evidently fond of John Mark whom he afterwards calls "my son" (1Peter:5:13|) and whom he had met here. The upper room of strkjv@Acts:1:13| may have been in Mary's house and Mark may have been the man bearing a pitcher of water (Luke:22:10|) and the young man who fled in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mark:14:51f.|). There was a gate and portress here as in the house of the highpriest (John:18:16|). Peter knew where to go and even at this early hour hoped to find some of the disciples. Mary is one of the many mothers who have become famous by reason of their sons, though she was undoubtedly a woman of high character herself. {Were gathered together and were praying} (\ˆsan sunˆthroismenoi kai proseuchomenoi\). Note difference in the tenses, one periphrastic past perfect passive (\sunathroiz“\ old verb, in the N.T. here only and strkjv@19:25| and the uncompounded \throiz“\ in strkjv@Luke:24:33|) and the periphrastic imperfect. The praying apparently had been going on all night and a large number (many, \hikanoi\) of the disciples were there. One recalls the time when they had gathered to pray (4:31|) after Peter had told the disciples of the threats of the Sanhedrin (4:23|). God had rescued Peter then. Would he let him be put to death now as James had been?

rwp@Acts:12:17 @There were probably loud exclamations of astonishment and joy. {Beckoning with the hand} (\kataseisas tˆi cheiri\). First aorist active participle of \katasei“\, old verb to signal or shake down with the hand (instrumental case \cheiri\). In the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:12:17; strkjv@13:16; strkjv@19:33; strkjv@21:40|. The speaker indicates by a downward movement of the hand his desire for silence (to hold their peace, \sigƒin\, present active infinitive, to keep silent). Peter was anxious for every precaution and he wanted their instant attention. {Declared} (\diˆgˆsato\). First aorist middle of \diˆgeomai\, old verb to carry through a narrative, give a full story. See also strkjv@Acts:9:27| of Barnabas in his defence of Saul. Peter told them the wonderful story. {Unto James and the brethren} (\Iak“b“i kai tois adelphois\). Dative case after \apaggeilate\ (first aorist active imperative). Evidently "James and the brethren" were not at this meeting, probably meeting elsewhere. There was no place where all the thousands of disciples in Jerusalem could meet. This gathering in the house of Mary may have been of women only or a meeting of the Hellenists. It is plain that this James the Lord's brother, is now the leading presbyter or elder in Jerusalem though there were a number (11:30; strkjv@21:18|). Paul even terms him apostle (Gal strkjv@1:19|), though certainly not one of the twelve. The twelve apostles probably were engaged elsewhere in mission work save James now dead (Acts:12:2|) and Peter. The leadership of James is here recognized by Peter and is due, partly to the absence of the twelve, but mainly to his own force of character. He will preside over the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:13|). {To another place} (\eis heteron topon\). Probably Luke did not know the place and certainly it was prudent for Peter to conceal it from Herod Agrippa. Probably Peter left the city. He is back in Jerusalem at the Conference a few years later (Acts:15:7|) and after the death of Herod Agrippa. Whether Peter went to Rome during these years we do not know. He was recognized later as the apostle to the circumcision (Gal strkjv@2:7; strkjv@1Peter:1:1|) and apparently was in Rome with John Mark when he wrote the First Epistle (1Peter:5:13|), unless it is the real Babylon. But, even if Peter went to Rome during this early period, there is no evidence that he founded the church there. If he had done so, in the light of strkjv@2Corinthians:10:16| it would be strange that Paul had not mentioned it in writing to Rome, for he was anxious not to build on another man's foundation (Romans:15:20|). Paul felt sure that he himself had a work to do in Rome. Unfortunately Luke has not followed the ministry of Peter after this period as he does Paul (appearing again only in chapter strkjv@Acts:15|). If Peter really left Jerusalem at this time instead of hiding in the city, he probably did some mission work as Paul says that he did (1Corinthians:9:5|).

rwp@Acts:14:14 @{Having heard} (\akousantes\). Such elaborate preparation "with the multitudes" (\sun tois ochlois\) spread rumours and some who spoke Greek told Paul and Barnabas. It is possible that the priest of Jupiter may have sent a formal request that the visiting "gods" might come out to the statue by the temple gates to make it a grand occasion. They rent their garments (\diarrˆxantes\). First aorist active participle from \diarrˆgnumi\, old verb to rend in two. Like the high priest in strkjv@Matthew:26:65| as if an act of sacrilege was about to be committed. It was strange conduct for the supposed gods! {Sprang forth} (\exepˆdˆsan\). First aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \ekpˆda“\ (note \ek\), old verb, here only in the N.T. It was all a sign of grief and horror with loud outcries (\krazontes\).

rwp@Acts:14:22 @{Confirming} (\epistˆrizontes\). Late verb (in LXX), in N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:14:22; strkjv@15:32,41|, to make more firm, to give additional (\epi\) strength. Each time in Acts the word is used concerning these churches. {To continue in the faith} (\emmenein tˆi pistei\). To remain in with locative, old verb. It is possible that \pistis\ here has the notion of creed as Paul uses it later (Colossians:1:23| with \epimen“\; strkjv@1Timothy:5:8|). It seems to be here more than trust or belief. These recent converts from heathenism were ill-informed, were persecuted, had broken family and social ties, greatly needed encouragement if they were to hold out. {We must} (\dei hˆmƒs\). It does not follow from this use of "we" that Luke was present, since it is a general proposition applying to all Christians at all times (2Timothy:3:12|). Luke, of course, approved this principle. Knowling asks why Timothy may not have told Luke about Paul's work. It all sounds like quotation of Paul's very language. Note the change of construction here after \parakalountes\ (infinitive of indirect command, \emmenein\, but \hoti dei\, indirect assertion). They needed the right understanding of persecution as we all do. Paul frankly warned these new converts in this heathen environment of the many tribulations through which they must enter the Kingdom of God (the culmination at last) as he did at Ephesus (Acts:20:20|) and as Jesus had done (John:16:33|). These saints were already converted.

rwp@Acts:15:1 @{And certain men came down from Judea} (\kai tines katelthontes apo tˆs Ioudaias\). Evidently the party of the circumcision in the church in Jerusalem (11:2|) had heard of the spread of the gospel among the Gentiles in Cyprus, Pamphylia, and South Galatia (Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycaonia). Possibly John Mark after his desertion at Perga (13:13|) told of this as one of his reasons for coming home. At any rate echoes of the jubilation in Antioch in Syria would be certain to reach Jerusalem. The Judaizers in Jerusalem, who insisted that all the Gentile Christians must become Jews also, had acquiesced in the case of Cornelius and his group (11:1-18|) after plain proof by Peter that it was the Lord's doing. But they had not agreed to a formal campaign to turn the exception into the rule and to make Christianity mainly Gentile with a few Jews instead of mainly Jewish with a few Gentiles. Since Paul and Barnabas did not come up to Jerusalem, the leaders among the Judaizers decided to go down to Antioch and attack Paul and Barnabas there. They had volunteered to go without church action in Jerusalem for their activity is disclaimed by the conference (Acts:15:24|). In strkjv@Galatians:2:4| Paul with some heat describes these Judaizers as "false brethren, secretly introduced who sneaked in to spy out our liberty." It is reasonably certain that this visit to Jerusalem described in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| is the same one as the Jerusalem Conference in Acts strkjv@15:5-29| in spite of the effort of Ramsay to identify it with that in strkjv@11:29f|. Paul in Galatians is not giving a list of his visits to Jerusalem. He is showing his independence of the twelve apostles and his equality with them. He did not see them in strkjv@11:29f.|, but only "the elders." In strkjv@Acts:15| Luke gives the outward narrative of events, in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| Paul shows us the private interview with the apostles when they agreed on their line of conduct toward the Judaizers. In strkjv@Galatians:2:2| by the use of "them" (\autois\) Paul seems to refer to the first public meeting in Acts before the private interview that came in between verses strkjv@15:5-6|. If we recall the difficulty that Peter had on the subject of preaching the gospel to the heathen (10:1-11:18|), we can the better understand the attitude of the Judaizers. They were men of sincere convictions without a doubt, but they were obscurantists and unable and unwilling to receive new light from the Lord on a matter that involved their racial and social prejudices. They recalled that Jesus himself had been circumcised and that he had said to the Syro-Phoenician woman that he had come only save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew:15:24ff.|). They argued that Christ had not repealed circumcision. Songs:one of the great religious controversies of all time was begun, that between spiritual religion and ritualistic or ceremonial religion. It is with us yet with baptism taking the place of circumcision. These self-appointed champions of circumcision for Gentile Christians were deeply in earnest. {Taught the brethren} (\edidaskon tous adelphous\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to teach and kept it up. Their attitude was one of supercilious superiority. They probably resented the conduct of Barnabas, who, when sent by the Church in Jerusalem to investigate the conversion of the Greeks in Antioch (11:20-26|), did not return and report till a strong church had been established there with the help of Saul and only then with a big collection to confuse the issue. Paul and Barnabas were on hand, but the Judaizers persisted in their efforts to force their views on the church in Antioch. It was a crisis. {Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved} (\ean me peritmˆthˆte t“i ethei M“use“s, ou dunasthe s“thˆnai\). There was the dictum of the Judaizers to the Gentiles. Paul and Barnabas had been circumcised. This is probably the precise language employed, for they spoke in Greek to these Greeks. It is a condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of being determined, \ean\ plus the first aorist passive subjunctive of \peritemn“\). There was thus hope held out for them, but only on condition that they be circumcised. The issue was sharply drawn. The associative instrumental case (\t“i ethei\) is customary. "Saved" (\s“thˆnai\) here is the Messianic salvation. This doctrine denied the efficacy of the work of Christ.

rwp@Acts:15:14 @{Hearken unto me} (\akousate mou\). Usual appeal for attention. James was termed James the Just and was considered a representative of the Hebraic as opposed to the Hellenistic wing of the Jewish Christians (Acts:6:1|). The Judaizers had doubtless counted on him as a champion of their view and did later wrongfully make use of his name against Peter at Antioch (Galatians:2:12|). There was instant attention when James began to speak. {Symeon} (\Sume“n\). The Aramaic form of Simon as in strkjv@2Peter:2:1|. This little touch would show his affinities with the Jewish Christians (not the Judaizers). This Aramaic form is used also in strkjv@Luke:2:25,34| of the old prophet in the temple. Possibly both forms (Symeon, Aramaic, and Simon, Greek) were current in Jerusalem. {How} (\kath“s\). Strictly, "according as," here like \hos\ in indirect discourse somewhat like the epexegetic or explanatory use in strkjv@3John:1:3|. {First} (\pr“ton\). Told by Peter in verse 7|. James notes, as Peter did, that this experience of Barnabas and Paul is not the beginning of work among the Gentiles. {Did visit} (\epeskepsato\). First aorist middle indicative of \episkeptomai\, old verb to look upon, to look after, provide for. This same verb occurs in strkjv@James:1:27| and is one of various points of similarity between this speech of James in Acts and the Epistle of James as shown by Mayor in his _Commentary on James_. Somehow Luke may have obtained notes of these various addresses. {To take from the Gentiles a people for his name} (\labein ex ethn“n laon t“i onomati autou\). Bengel calls this _egregium paradoxon_, a chosen people (\laon\) out of the Gentiles (\ethn“n\). This is what is really involved in what took place at Caesarea at the hands of Peter and the campaign of Barnabas and Paul from Antioch. But such a claim of God's purpose called for proof from Scripture to convince Jews and this is precisely what James undertakes to give. This new Israel from among the Gentiles is one of Paul's great doctrines as set forth in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11|. Note the use of God's "name" here for "the Israel of God" (Galatians:6:16|).

rwp@Acts:15:18 @{From the beginning of the world} (\ap' ai“nos\). Or, "from of old." James adds these words, perhaps with a reminiscence of strkjv@Isaiah:45:21|. His point is that this purpose of God, as set forth in Amos, is an old one. God has an Israel outside of and beyond the Jewish race, whom he will make his true "Israel" and so there is no occasion for surprise in the story of God's dealings with the Gentiles as told by Barnabas and Paul. God's eternal purpose of grace includes all who call upon his name in every land and people (Isaiah:2:1; strkjv@Micah:4:1|). This larger and richer purpose and plan of God was one of the mysteries which Paul will unfold in the future (Romans:16:25; strkjv@Ephesians:3:9|). James sees it clearly now. God is making it known (\poi“n tauta gn“sta\), if they will only be willing to see and understand. It was a great deliverance that James had made and it exerted a profound influence on the assembly.

rwp@Acts:16:10 @{We sought} (\ezˆtˆsamen\). This sudden use of the plural, dropped in strkjv@17:1| when Paul leaves Philippi, and resumed in strkjv@20:5| when Paul rejoins Luke in Philippi, argues conclusively that Luke, the author, is in the party ("we" portions of Acts) and shows in a writer of such literary skill as Luke that he is not copying a document in a blundering sort of way. Paul told his vision to the party and they were all ready to respond to the call. {Concluding} (\sunbibazontes\). A very striking word, present active participle of \sunbibaz“\, old verb to make go together, to coalesce or knit together, to make this and that agree and so to conclude. Already in strkjv@9:22| of Paul's preaching. This word here gives a good illustration of the proper use of the reason in connection with revelation, to decide whether it is a revelation from God, to find out what it means for us, and to see that we obey the revelation when understood. God had called them to preach to the Macedonians. They had to go.

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

rwp@Acts:23:11 @{The night following} (\tˆi epiousˆi nukti\). Locative case, on the next (following) night. {The Lord} (\ho kurios\). Jesus. Paul never needed Jesus more than now. On a previous occasion the whole church prayed for Peter's release (12:5|), but Paul clearly had no such grip on the church as that, though he had been kindly welcomed (21:18|). In every crisis Jesus appears to him (cf. strkjv@Acts:18:9|). It looked dark for Paul till Jesus spoke. Once before in Jerusalem Jesus spoke words of cheer (22:18|). Then he was told to leave Jerusalem. Now he is to have "cheer" or "courage" (\tharsei\). Jesus used this very word to others (Matthew:9:2,22; strkjv@Mark:10:49|). It is a brave word. {Thou hast testified} (\diemartur“\). First aorist middle indicative second person singular of \diamarturomai\, strong word (see on ¯22:18|). {Must thou} (\se dei\). That is the needed word and on this Paul leans. His hopes (19:21|) of going to Rome will not be in vain. He can bide Christ's time now. And Jesus has approved his witness in Jerusalem.

rwp@Acts:23:14 @{Came to the chief priests and the elders} (\proselthontes tois archiereusin kai tois presbuterois\). The Sanhedrin, just as Judas did (Luke:22:4|). {With a great curse} (\anathemati\). This use of the same word as the verb repeated in the instrumental case is in imitation of the Hebrew absolute infinitive and common in the LXX, the very idiom and words of strkjv@Deuteronomy:13:15; strkjv@20:17|, an example of translation Greek, though found in other languages (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 531). See on ¯Luke:21:5| for the distinction between \anathema\ and \anathˆma\. Jesus had foretold: "Whoso killeth you will think that he doeth God service" (John:16:2|).

rwp@Acts:23:16 @{Their lying in wait} (\tˆn enedran\). Old word from \en\ (in) and \hedra\ (seat), ambush. In N.T. only here and strkjv@25:3|. Accusative object of \akousas\. {He came} (\paragenomenos\). Second aorist middle participle of \paraginomai\. It may mean, "having come upon them" and so discount their plot, a graphic touch. Vincent thinks that some Pharisee, since Paul was a Pharisee and so a member of the "guild," told his nephew of the plot. Perhaps, and perhaps not. {Told Paul} (\apˆggeilen t“i Paul“i\). This nephew is not known otherwise. He may be a student here from Tarsus as Paul once was. Anyhow he knows what to do when he catches on to the conspirators. He had enough address to get into the barracks where Paul was. He ran the risk of death if discovered.

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

rwp@Acts:27:22 @{And now} (\kai ta nun\). Accusative plural neuter article of general reference in contrast with \men\ in verse 21|. Paul shows modesty (Bengel) in the mild contrast. {No loss of life} (\apobolˆ psuchˆs oudemia\). Old word from \apoball“\, to throw away, only twice in N.T. strkjv@Romans:11:15| (rejection) and here. He had foretold such loss of life as likely (verse 10|), but he now gives his reason for his changed view.

rwp@Info_Colossians @ THE DATE Clearly it was sent at the same time with the Epistle to Philemon and the one to the Ephesians since Tychicus the bearer of the letter to Ephesus (Ephesians:6:21f.|) and the one to Colossae (Colossians:4:7f.|) was a companion of Onesimus (Colossians:4:9|) the bearer of that to Philemon (Philemon:1:10-12|). If Paul is a prisoner (Colossians:4:3; strkjv@Ephesians:6:20; strkjv@Philemon:1:9|) in Rome, as most scholars hold, and not in Ephesus as Deissmann and Duncan argue, the probable date would be A.D. 63. I still believe that Paul is in Rome when he sends out these epistles. If so, the time would be after the arrival in Rome from Jerusalem as told in strkjv@Acts:28| and before the burning of Rome by Nero in A.D. 64. If Philippians was already sent, A.D. 63 marks the last probable year for the writing of this group of letters.

rwp@Colossians:1:8 @{Who also declared} (\ho kai dˆl“sas\). Articular first aorist active participle of \dˆlo“\, old verb, to make manifest. Epaphras told Paul about their "love in the Spirit," grounded in the Holy Spirit.

rwp@Ephesians:5:20 @{In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\en onomati tou Kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou Christou\). Jesus had told the disciples to use his name in prayer (John:16:23f.|). {To God, even the Father} (\t“i the“i kai patri\). Rather, "the God and Father."

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ SOME BOOKS ON THE PAULINE EPISTLES Bate, _As a Whole Guide to the Epistles of St. Paul_ (1927). Bonnet-Schroeder, _Epitres de Paul_ (4 ed. 1912). Champlain, _The Epistles of Paul_ (1906). Clemen, _Einheitlichkeit d. paul. Briefe_ (1894). Conybeare and Howson, _Life and Epistles of St. Paul_. Drummond, _The Epistles of Paul the Apostle_ (1899). Hayes, _Paul and His Epistles_ (1915). Heinrici, _Die Forschungen uber die paul. Briefe_ (1886). Lake, _The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul_ (1915). Lewin, _Life and Epistles of St. Paul_. (1875). Neil, _The Pauline Epistles_ (1906). Scott, _The Pauline Epistles_ (1909). Shaw, _The Pauline Epistles_ (1903). Vischer, _Die Paulusbriefe_ (1910). Voelter, _Die Composition der paul. Haupt Briefe_ (1890). Voelter, _Paulus und seine Briefe_ (1905). Way, _The Letters of Paul to Seven Churches and Three Friends_ (1906) Weinel, _Die Echtheit der paul. Hauptbriefe_ (1920). Weiss, B., _Present Status of the Inquiry Concerning the Genuineness of the Pauline Epistles_ (1901). Weiss, B., _Die Paulinische Briefe_ (1902). Wood, _Life, Letters, and Religion of St. Paul_ (1925). strkjv@Galatians:1:1 @{Not from men, neither through men} (\ouk ap' anthr“p“n oude di' anthr“pou\). The bluntness of Paul's denial is due to the charge made by the Judaizers that Paul was not a genuine apostle because not one of the twelve. This charge had been made in Corinth and called forth the keenest irony of Paul (2Corinthians:10-12|). In strkjv@Galatians:1; 2| Paul proves his independence of the twelve and his equality with them as recognized by them. Paul denies that his apostleship had a human source (\ouk ap' anthr“p“n\) and that it had come to him through (\di' anthr“pou\) a human channel (Burton). {But through Jesus Christ and God the Father} (\alla dia Iˆsou Christou kai theou patros\). The call to be an apostle came to Paul through Jesus Christ as he claimed in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:1| and as told in strkjv@Acts:9:4-6; strkjv@22:7ff.; strkjv@26:16ff|. He is apostle also by the will of God. {Who raised him from the dead} (\tou egeirantos auton ek nekr“n\). And therefore Paul was qualified to be an apostle since he had seen the Risen Christ (1Corinthians:9:1; strkjv@15:8f.|). This verb \egeir“\ is often used in N.T. for raising from the sleep of death, to wake up the dead.

rwp@Hebrews:3:12 @{Take heed} (\blepete\). Present active imperative as in strkjv@Phillipians:3:2| (three times) of \blep“\ in place of the more usual \horate\. Solemn warning to the Jewish Christians from the experience of the Israelites as told in strkjv@Psalms:95|. {Lest haply there shall be} (\mˆ pote estai\). Negative purpose with \mˆ pote\ and the future indicative as in strkjv@Mark:14:2|. But we have in strkjv@Colossians:2:8| \mˆ tis estai\ as in strkjv@Hebrews:12:25|; \mˆ\ occurs with the aorist subjunctive, and \mˆ pote\ with present subjunctive (Hebrews:4:1|) or aorist subjunctive (Acts:5:39|). {In any one of you} (\en tini hum“n\). The application is personal and pointed. {An evil heart of unbelief} (\kardia ponˆra apistias\). A remarkable combination. {Heart} (\kardia\) is common in the LXX (about 1,000 times), but "evil heart" only twice in the O.T. (Jeremiah:16:12; strkjv@18:12|). \Apistias\ is more than mere unbelief, here rather disbelief, refusal to believe, genitive case describing the evil heart marked by disbelief which is no mark of intelligence then or now. {In falling away from the living God} (\en t“i apostˆnai apo theou z“ntos\). "In the falling away" (locative case with \en\ of the second aorist active (intransitive) infinitive of \aphistˆmi\, to stand off from, to step aside from (\apo\ with the ablative case \theou\) the living God (common phrase in the O.T. and the N.T. for God as opposed to lifeless idols)). "Remember that to apostatize from Christ in whom you have found God is to apostatize from God" (Dods). That is true today. See strkjv@Ezekiel:20:8| for this use of the verb.

rwp@Hebrews:11:20 @{Even concerning things to come} (\kai peri mellont“n\). As told in strkjv@Genesis:27:28-40| when Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau.

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

rwp@Info_John @ THE FOURTH GOSPEL BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION GREATEST OF BOOKS The test of time has given the palm to the Fourth Gospel over all the books of the world. If Luke's Gospel is the most beautiful, John's Gospel is supreme in its height and depth and reach of thought. The picture of Christ here given is the one that has captured the mind and heart of mankind. It is not possible for a believer in Jesus Christ as the Son of God to be indifferent to modern critical views concerning the authorship and historical value of this Holy of Holies of the New Testament. Here we find _The Heart of Christ_ (E. H. Sears), especially in chapters strkjv@John:14-17|. If Jesus did not do or say these things, it is small consolation to be told that the book at least has symbolic and artistic value for the believer. The language of the Fourth Gospel has the clarity of a spring, but we are not able to sound the bottom of the depths. Lucidity and profundity challenge and charm us as we linger over it.

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

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

rwp@John:1:41 @{He findeth first} (\heuriskei houtos pr“ton\). "This one finds (vivid dramatic present) first" (\prot“n\). \Prot“n\ (adverb supported by Aleph A B fam. 13) means that Andrew sought "his own brother Simon" (\ton adelphon ton idion Sim“na\) before he did anything else. But Aleph L W read \pr“tos\ (nominative adjective) which means that Andrew was the first who went after his brother implying that John also went after his brother James. Some old Latin manuscripts (b, e, r apparently), have \mane\ for Greek \pr“i\ (early in the morning). Bernard thinks that this is the true reading as it allows more time for Andrew to bring Simon to Jesus. Probably \pr“ton\ is correct, but even so John likely brought also his brother James after Andrew's example. {We have found the Messiah} (\Heurˆkamen ton Messian\). First aorist active indicative of \heurisk“\. Andrew and John had made the greatest discovery of the ages, far beyond gold or diamond mines. The Baptist had told about him. "We have seen him." {Which is} (\ho estin\). Same explanatory neuter relative as in verse 38|, "which word is." This Aramaic title Messiah is preserved in the N.T. only here and strkjv@4:25|, elsewhere translated into \Christos\, Anointed One, from \chri“\, to anoint. See on ¯Matthew:1:1| for discussion.

rwp@John:2:3 @{When the wine failed} (\husterˆsantos oinou\). Genitive absolute with first aorist active participle of \hustere“\, old verb from \husteros\, late or lacking. See same use in strkjv@Mark:10:21|. A longer Western paraphrase occurs in some manuscripts. It was an embarrassing circumstance, especially to Mary, if partly due to the arrival of the seven guests. {They have no wine} (\Oinon ouk echousin\). The statement of the fact was in itself a hint and a request. But why made by the mother of Jesus and why to Jesus? She would not, of course, make it to the host. Mary feels some kind of responsibility and exercises some kind of authority for reasons not known to us. Mary had treasured in her heart the wonders connected with the birth of Jesus (Luke:2:19,51|). The ministry of the Baptist had stirred her hopes afresh. Had she not told Jesus all that she knew before he went to the Jordan to be baptized of John? This group of disciples meant to her that Jesus had begun his Messianic work. Songs:she dares propose the miracle to him.

rwp@John:3:26 @{Rabbi} (\Rabbei\). Greeting John just like Jesus (1:38; strkjv@3:2|). {Beyond Jordan} (\peran tou Iordanou\). Evident reference to John's witness to Jesus told in strkjv@1:29-34|. {To whom thou hast borne witness} (\h“i su memarturˆkas\). Note avoidance of calling the name of Jesus. Perfect active indicative of \marture“\ so common in John (1:7|, etc.). These disciples of John are clearly jealous of Jesus as a rival of John and they distinctly blame John for his endorsement of one who is already eclipsing him in popularity. {The same baptizeth} (\houtos baptizei\). "This one is baptizing." Not personally (4:2|), as John did, but through his six disciples. {And all men come to him} (\kai pantes erchontai pros auton\). Linear present middle indicative, "are coming." The sight of the growing crowds with Jesus and the dwindling crowds with John stirred John's followers to keenest jealousy. What a life-like picture of ministerial jealousy in all ages.

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

rwp@John:4:42 @{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:8:40 @{But now} (\nun de\). Clear statement that they are not doing "the works of Abraham" in seeking to kill him. See this use of \nun de\ after a condition of second class without \an\ in strkjv@John:16:22,24|. {This did not Abraham} (\touto Abraam ouk epoiˆsen\). Blunt and pointed of their unlikeness to Abraham. {A man that hath told you the truth} (\anthr“pon hos ten alˆtheian humin lelalˆka\). \Anthr“pon\ (here=person, one) is accusative case in apposition with {me} (\me\) just before. The perfect active indicative \lelalˆka\ from \lale“\ is in the first person singular because the relative \hos\ has the person of \me\, an idiom not retained in the English {that hath} (that have or who have) though it is retained in the English of strkjv@1Corinthians:15:9| "that am" for \hos eimi\. {Which I heard from God} (\hˆn ˆkousa para tou theou\). Here we have "I" in the English. "God" here is equal to "My Father" in verse 38|. The only crime of Jesus is telling the truth directly from God.

rwp@John:9:17 @{Unto the blind man again} (\t“i tuphl“i palin\). The doctors disagree and they ask the patient whose story they had already heard (verse 15|). {In that he opened thine eyes} (\hoti ˆne“ixen sou tous ophthalmous\). Causal use of \hoti\ and triple augment in the first aorist active indicative of \anoig“\. They offer the excuse that the man's experience particularly qualified him to explain the "how," overlooking the fact he had already told his story and also trying to conceal their own hopeless division of opinion. {He is a prophet} (\prophˆtˆs estin\). The man will go that far anyhow.

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

rwp@John:9:27 @{I told you even now} (\eipon humin ˆdˆ\). In verses 15,17,25|. {Would ye also become his disciples?} (\Mˆ kai humeis thelete autou mathˆtai genesthai;\). Negative answer formally expected, but the keenest irony in this gibe. Clearly the healed man knew from the use of "also" (\kai\) that Jesus had some "disciples" (\mathˆtai\, predicate nominative with the infinitive \genesthai\) and that the Pharisees knew that fact. "Do ye also (like the Galilean mob) wish, etc." See strkjv@7:45-52|. It cut to the bone.

rwp@John:10:16 @{Other sheep} (\alla probata\). Sheep, not goats, but "not of this fold" (\ek tˆs aulˆs tautˆs\). See verse 1| for \aulˆ\. Clearly "his flock is not confined to those enclosed in the Jewish fold, whether in Palestine or elsewhere" (Westcott). Christ's horizon takes in all men of all races and times (John:11:52; strkjv@12:32|). The world mission of Christ for all nations is no new idea with him (Matthew:8:11; strkjv@Luke:13:28|). God loved the world and gave his Son for the race (\John strkjv@3:16\), {Them also I must bring} (\kakeina dei me agagein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \ag“\ with \dei\ expressing the moral urgency of Christ's passion for God's people in all lands and ages. Missions in Christ's mind takes in the whole world. This is according to prophecy (Isaiah:42:6; strkjv@49:6; strkjv@56:8|) for the Messiah is to be a Light also to the Gentiles. It was typified by the brazen serpent (John:3:14|). Christ died for every man. The Pharisees doubtless listened in amazement and even the disciples with slow comprehension. {And they shall hear my voice} (\kai tˆs ph“nˆs mou akousontai\). Future middle indicative of \akou“\ with the genitive \ph“nˆs\. These words read like a transcript from the Acts and the Epistles of Paul (Romans:9-11| in particular). See especially Paul's words in strkjv@Acts:28:28|. Present-day Christianity is here foretold. Only do we really listen to the voice of the Shepherd as we should? Jesus means that the Gentiles will hearken if the Jews turn away from him. {And they shall become one flock, one shepherd} (\kai genˆsontai mia poimnˆ, heis poimˆn\). Future middle indicative of \ginomai\, plural, not singular \genˆsetai\ as some MSS. have it. All (Jews and Gentiles) will form one flock under one Shepherd. Note the distinction here by Jesus between \poimnˆ\ (old word, contraction of \poimenˆ\ from \poimˆn\, shepherd), as in strkjv@Matthew:26:31|, and \aulˆ\ (fold) just before. There may be many folds of the one flock. Jerome in his Vulgate confused this distinction, but he is wrong. His use of _ovile_ for both \aulˆ\ and \pomnion\ has helped Roman Catholic assumptions. Christ's use of "flock" (\poimnˆ\) here is just another metaphor for kingdom (\basileia\) in strkjv@Matthew:8:11| where the children of the kingdom come from all climes and nations. See also the various metaphors in strkjv@Ephesians:2| for this same idea. There is only the one Great Shepherd of the sheep (Hebrews:13:20|), Jesus Christ our Lord.

rwp@John:10:25 @{I told you, and you believe not} (\eipon humin kai ou pisteuete\). It was useless to say more. In strkjv@7:14-10:18| Jesus had shown that he was the Son of the Father as he had previously claimed (5:17-47|), but it was all to no purpose save to increase their rage towards him. {These bear witness of me} (\tauta marturei peri emou\). His works confirm his words as he had shown before (5:36|). They believe neither his words nor his works.

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:12:8 @{Ye have always} (\pantote echete\). Jesus does not discredit gifts to the poor at all. But there is relativity in one's duties. {But me ye have not always} (\eme de ou pantote echete\). This is what Mary perceived with her delicate woman's intuition and what the apostles failed to understand though repeatedly and plainly told by Jesus. John does not mention the precious promise of praise for Mary preserved in strkjv@Mark:14:9; strkjv@Matthew:26:13|, but he does show her keen sympathetic insight and Christ's genuine appreciation of her noble deed. It is curiously \mal-a-propos\ surely to put alongside this incident the other incident told long before by Luke (Luke:7:35ff.|) of the sinful woman. Let Mary alone in her glorious act of love.

rwp@John:13:9 @{Not my feet only, but also my hands and my head} (\mˆ tous podas mou monon alla kai tas cheiras kai tˆn kephalˆn\). Nouns in the accusative case object of \nipson\ understood. Peter's characteristic impulsiveness that does not really understand the Master's act. "A moment ago he told his Master He was doing too much: now he tells Him He is doing too little" (Dods).

rwp@John:14:2 @{Mansions} (\monai\). Old word from \men“\, to abide, abiding places, in N.T. only here and verse 23|. There are many resting-places in the Father's house (\oikia\). Christ's picture of heaven here is the most precious one that we possess. It is our heavenly home with the Father and with Jesus. {If it were not so} (\ei de mˆ\). Ellipsis of the verb (Mark:2:21; strkjv@Revelation:2:5,16; strkjv@John:14:11|). Here a suppressed condition of the second class (determined as unfulfilled) as the conclusion shows. {I would have told you} (\eipon an humin\). Regular construction for this apodosis (\an\ and aorist--second active--indicative). {For I go} (\hoti poreuomai\). Reason for the consolation given, futuristic present middle indicative, and explanation of his words in strkjv@13:33| that puzzled Peter so (13:36f.|). {To prepare a place for you} (\hetoimasai topon humin\). First aorist active infinitive of purpose of \hetoimaz“\, to make ready, old verb from \hetoimos\. Here only in John, but in strkjv@Mark:10:40| (Matthew:20:23|). It was customary to send one forward for such a purpose (Numbers:10:33|). Songs:Jesus had sent Peter and John to make ready (this very verb) for the passover meal (Mark:14:12; strkjv@Matthew:26:17|). Jesus is thus our Forerunner (\prodromos\) in heaven (Hebrews:6:20|).

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

rwp@John:18:35 @{Amos:I a Jew?} (\mˆti eg“ Ioudaios eimi;\). Proud and fine scorn on Pilate's part at the idea that he had a personal interest in the question. Vehement negation implied. Cf. strkjv@4:29| for \mˆti\ in a question. The gulf between Jew and Gentile yawns wide here. {Nation} (\ethnos\ as in strkjv@11:48-52|, rather than \laos\, while both in strkjv@11:50|). For \pared“kan\ see verse 30|. {What hast thou done?} (\ti epoiˆsas;\). First aorist active indicative of \poie“\. Blunt and curt question. "What didst thou do?" "What is thy real crime?" John's picture of this private interview between Pilate and Jesus is told with graphic power.

rwp@John:20:25 @{We have seen the Lord} (\he“rakamen ton kurion\). The very language in the plural that Mary Magdalene had used (20:18|) when no one believed her. {Except I shall see} (\ean mˆ id“\). Negative condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive and so as to \bal“\ (from \ball“\) "and put." {The print} (\ton tupon\). The mark or stamp made by the nails, here the original idea. Various terms as in strkjv@Acts:7:44; strkjv@1Timothy:4:12|. Finally our "type" as in strkjv@Romans:5:14|. Clearly the disciples had told Thomas that they had seen the \tupon\ of the nails in his hands and the spear in his side. {I will not believe} (\ou mˆ pisteus“\). Strong refusal with \ou mˆ\ (doubtful negative) and first aorist active subjunctive (or future indicative).

rwp@John:21:14 @{Now the third time} (\to ˆdˆ triton\). "To the disciples" (apostles) John says, the two others being told by him (20:19,26|) on the two Sunday evenings. There were four other appearances already (to Mary Magdalene, to the group of women, to the two on the way to Emmaus, to Peter).

rwp@Luke:4:14 @{Returned} (\hupestrepsen\). Luke does not fill in the gap between the temptations in the wilderness of Judea and the Galilean Ministry. He follows the outline of Mark. It is John's Gospel alone that tells of the year of obscurity (Stalker) in various parts of the Holy Land. {In the power of the Spirit} (\en tˆi dunamei tou pneumatos\). Luke in these two verses (14,15|) gives a description of the Galilean Ministry with three marked characteristics (Plummer): the power of the spirit, rapid spread of Christ's fame, use of the Jewish synagogues. Luke often notes the power of the Holy Spirit in the work of Christ. Our word dynamite is this same word \dunamis\ (power). {A fame} (\phˆmˆ\). An old Greek word found in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:9:26|. It is from \phˆmi\, to say. Talk ran rapidly in every direction. It assumes the previous ministry as told by John.

rwp@Luke:6:22 @{When they shall separate you} (\hotan aphoris“sin humƒs\). First aorist active subjunctive, from \aphoriz“\, common verb for marking off a boundary. Songs:either in good sense or bad sense as here. The reference is to excommunication from the congregation as well as from social intercourse. {Cast out your name as evil} (\exbal“sin to onoma hum“n h“s ponˆron\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \ekball“\, common verb. The verb is used in Aristophanes, Sophocles, and Plato of hissing an actor off the stage. The name of Christian or disciple or Nazarene came to be a byword of contempt as shown in the Acts. It was even unlawful in the Neronian persecution when Christianity was not a _religio licita_. {For the Son of man's sake} (\heneka tou huiou tou anthr“pou\). Jesus foretold what will befall those who are loyal to him. The Acts of the Apostles is a commentary on this prophecy. This is Christ's common designation of himself, never of others save by Stephen (Acts:7:56|) and in the Apocalypse (Revelation:1:13; strkjv@14:14|). But both Son of God and Son of man apply to him (John:1:50,52; strkjv@Matthew:26:63f.|). Christ was a real man though the Son of God. He is also the representative man and has authority over all men.

rwp@Luke:8:39 @{Throughout the whole city} (\kath' holˆn tˆn polin\). strkjv@Mark:5:20| has it "in Decapolis." He had a great story to tell and he told it with power. The rescue missions in our cities can match this incident with cases of great sinners who have made witnesses for Christ.

rwp@Luke:9:42 @{As he was yet a coming} (\eti proserchomenou autou\). Genitive absolute. While he was yet coming (the boy, that is, not Jesus). Note quaint English "a coming" retained in the Revised Version. {Dashed him} (\errˆxen auton\). First aorist active indicative of \rˆgnumi\ or \rˆss“\, to rend or convulse, a common verb, used sometimes of boxers giving knockout blows. {Tare grievously} (\sunesparaxen\). Rare word as only here and strkjv@Mark:9:20| in the N.T., which see. {Gave him back to his father} (\aped“ken auton t“i patri autou\). Tender touch alone in Luke as in strkjv@7:15|. {They were all astonished} (\exeplˆssonto de pantes\). Imperfect passive of the common verb \ekplˆss“\ or \ekplˆgnumi\, to strike out, a picturesque description of the amazement of all at the easy victory of Jesus where the nine disciples had failed. {At the majesty of God} (\epi tˆi megaleiotˆti tou theou\). A late word from the adjective \megaleios\ and that from \megas\ (great). In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:19:27| of Artemis and in strkjv@2Peter:1:16| of the Transfiguration. It came to be used by the emperors like our word "Majesty." {Which he did} (\hois epoiei\). This is one of the numerous poor verse divisions. This sentence has nothing to do with the first part of the verse. The imperfect active \epoiei\ covers a good deal not told by Luke (see strkjv@Mark:9:30; strkjv@Matthew:17:22|). Note the attraction of the relative {hois} into the case of {pƒsin}, its antecedent.

rwp@Luke:10:13 @{Would have repented} (\an metenoˆsan\). Conclusion (apodosis) of second-class condition, determined as unfulfilled. {Long ago} (\palai\). Implies a considerable ministry in these cities of which we are not told. Chorazin not mentioned save here and strkjv@Matthew:11:21|. Perhaps \Karƒzeh\ near Tell Hum (Capernaum). {Sitting in sackcloth and ashes} (\en sakk“i kai spodoi kathˆmenoi\). Pictorial and graphic. The \sakkos\ (sackcloth) was dark coarse cloth made of goat's hair and worn by penitents, mourners, suppliants. It is a Hebrew word, _sag_. The rough cloth was used for sacks or bags. To cover oneself with ashes was a mode of punishment as well as of voluntary humiliation.

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:11:53 @{From thence} (\k'akeithen\). Out of the Pharisee's house. What became of the breakfast we are not told, but the rage of both Pharisees and lawyers knew no bounds. {To press upon him} (\enechein\). An old Greek verb to hold in, to be enraged at, to have it in for one. It is the same verb used of the relentless hatred of Herodias for John the Baptist (Mark:6:19|). {To provoke him to speak} (\apostomatizein\). From \apo\ and \stoma\ (mouth). Plato uses it of repeating to a pupil for him to recite from memory, then to recite by heart (Plutarch). Here (alone in the N.T.) the verb means to ply with questions, to entice to answers, to catechize. {Of many things} (\peri pleion“n\). "Concerning more (comparative) things." They were stung to the quick by these woes which laid bare their hollow hypocrisy.

rwp@Mark:1:34 @{Devils} (\daimonia\). Demons it should be translated always. {Suffered not} (\ouk ˆphien\). Would not allow, imperfect tense of continued refusal. The reason given is "because they knew him" (\hoti ˆideisan auton\). Whether "to be Christ" (\Christon einai\) is genuine or not, that is the meaning and is a direct reference to strkjv@1:24| when in the synagogue the demon recognized and addressed Jesus as the Holy One of God. Testimony from such a source was not calculated to help the cause of Christ with the people. He had told the other demon to be silent. See on ¯Matthew:8:29| for discussion of the word demon.

rwp@Mark:1:39 @{Throughout all Galilee} (\Eis holˆn tˆn Galilaian\). The first tour of Galilee by Jesus. We are told little about this great preaching tour.

rwp@Mark:3:9 @{That a little boat should wait on him} (\hina ploiarion proskarterˆi aut“i\). The boat was to keep close (note present tense subjunctive of \proskartere“\) to the shore in constant readiness and move as Jesus did. Whether he needed it or not is not told, but it was there at hand. {Lest they should throng him} (\hina mˆ thlib“sin auton\). Press or crush him. Jesus stayed with the crowds for they needed him. Present subjunctive again.

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

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

rwp@Mark:7:36 @{Songs:much the more a great deal they published it} (\autoi mƒllon perissoteron ekˆrusson\). Imperfect tense, continued action. Double comparative as occurs elsewhere for emphasis as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:23| "much more better" (\poll“i mƒllon kreisson\). See Robertson's _Grammar_, pp. 663f. Human nature is a peculiar thing. The command not to tell provoked these people to tell just as the leper had done (Mark:1:44f.|). The more Jesus commanded (\hoson autois diestelleto\) them not to tell the more they told. It was a continuous performance. Prohibitions always affect some people that way, especially superficial and light-headed folks. But we have to have prohibitions or anarchy.

rwp@Mark:8:28 @{And they told him} (\hoi de eipan\). They knew only too well. See on ¯Matthew:16:14,28| for discussion.

rwp@Mark:8:31 @{He began to teach them} (\ˆrxato didaskein autous\). Mark is fond of this idiom, but it is not a mere rhetorical device. strkjv@Matthew:16:21| expressly says "from that time." They had to be told soon about the approaching death of Jesus. The confession of faith in Jesus indicated that it was a good time to begin. Death at the hands of the Sanhedrin (elders, chief priests, and scribes) in which Pharisees and Sadducees had about equal strength. The resurrection on the third day is mentioned, but it made no impression on their minds. This rainbow on the cloud was not seen. {After three days} (\meta treis hˆmeras\). strkjv@Matthew:16:21| has "the third day" (\tˆi tritˆi hˆmerƒi\) in the locative case of point of time (so also strkjv@Luke:9:22|). There are some people who stickle for a strict interpretation of "after three days" which would be "on the fourth day," not "on the third day." Evidently Mark's phrase here has the same sense as that in Matthew and Luke else they are hopelessly contradictory. In popular language "after three days" can and often does mean "on the third day," but the fourth day is impossible.

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

rwp@Mark:9:9 @{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:9:38 @{Because he followed not us} (\hoti ouk ˆkolouthei hˆmin\). Note vivid imperfect tense again. John evidently thought to change the subject from the constraint and embarrassment caused by their dispute. Songs:he told about a case of extra zeal on his part expecting praise from Jesus. Perhaps what Jesus had just said in verse 37| raised a doubt in John's mind as to the propriety of his excessive narrowness. One needs to know the difference between loyalty to Jesus and stickling over one's own narrow prejudices.

rwp@Mark:10:35 @{There come near unto him James and John} (\kai prosporeuontai Iak“bos kai I“anˆs\). Dramatic present tense. Matthew has \tote\, then, showing that the request of the two brothers with their mother (Matthew:20:20|) comes immediately after the talk about Christ's death. {We would} (\thelomen\). We wish, we want, bluntly told. {She came worshipping} (\proskunousa\) Matthew says. The mother spoke for the sons. But they try to commit Jesus to their desires before they tell what they are, just like spoiled children.

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

rwp@Mark:15:32 @{Now come down} (\katabat“ nun\). Now that he is nailed to the cross. {That we may see and believe} (\hina id“men kai pisteus“men\). Aorist subjunctive of purpose with \hina\. They use almost the very language of Jesus in their ridicule, words that they had heard him use in his appeals to men to see and believe. {Reproached him} (\“neidizon auton\). Imperfect tense. They did it several times. Mark and Matthew both fail to give the story of the robber who turned to Christ on the Cross as told in strkjv@Luke:23:39-43|.

rwp@Mark:16:5 @{Entering into the tomb} (\eiselthousai eis to mnˆmeion\). Told also by strkjv@Luke:24:3|, though not by Matthew. {A young man} (\neaniskon\). An angel in strkjv@Matthew:28:5|, two men in strkjv@Luke:24|. These and like variations in details show the independence of the narrative and strengthen the evidence for the general fact of the resurrection. The angel sat upon the stone (Matthew:28:2|), probably at first. Mark here speaks of the young man {sitting on the right side} (\kathˆmenon en tois dexiois\) inside the tomb. Luke has the two men standing by them on the inside (Luke strkjv@24:4|). Possibly different aspects and stages of the incident. {Arrayed in a white robe} (\peribeblˆmenon stolˆn leukˆn\). Perfect passive participle with the accusative case of the thing retained (verb of clothing). strkjv@Luke:24:4| has "in dazzling apparel." {They were amazed} (\exethambˆthˆsan\). They were utterly (\ex\ in composition) amazed. strkjv@Luke:24:5| has it "affrighted." strkjv@Matthew:28:3f.| tells more of the raiment white as snow which made the watchers quake and become as dead men. But this was before the arrival of the women. Mark, like Matthew and Luke, does not mention the sudden departure of Mary Magdalene to tell Peter and John of the grave robbery as she supposed (John:20:1-10|).

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

rwp@Matthew:1:18 @{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:1:20 @{An angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream} (\aggelos kuriou kat' onar ephanˆ aut“i\). This expression (\aggelos kuriou\) is without the article in the New Testament except when, as in strkjv@1:24|, there is reference to the angel previously mentioned. Sometimes in the Old Testament Jehovah Himself is represented by this phrase. Surely Joseph needed God's help if ever man did. If Jesus was really God's Son, Joseph was entitled to know this supreme fact that he might be just to both Mary and her Child. It was in a dream, but the message was distinct and decisive for Joseph. He is called "Son of David" as had been shown by Matthew in strkjv@Matthew:1:16|. Mary is called his "wife" (\tˆn gunaika sou\). He is told "not to become afraid" (ingressive first aorist passive subjunctive in prohibition, (\mˆ phobˆthˆis\), "to take to his side" (\paralabein\, ingressive aorist active infinitive) her whom he had planned (\enthumˆthentos\, genitive absolute again, from \en\ and \thumos\) to send away with a writ of divorce. He had pondered and had planned as best he knew, but now God had called a halt and he had to decide whether he was willing to shelter Mary by marrying her and, if necessary, take upon himself whatever stigma might attach to her. Joseph was told that the child was begotten of the Holy Spirit and thus that Mary was innocent of any sin. But who would believe it now if he told it of her? Mary knew the truth and had not told him because she could not expect him to believe it.

rwp@Matthew:8:14 @{Lying sick of a fever} (\biblˆmenˆn kai puressousan\). Two participles, bedridden (perfect passive of \ball“\) and burning with fever (present active). How long the fever had had her we have no means of knowing, possibly a sudden and severe attack (Mark:1:30|), as they tell Jesus about her on reaching the house of Peter. We are not told what kind of fever it was. Fever itself was considered a disease. "Fever" is from German feuer (fire) like the Greek \pur\.

rwp@Matthew:23:35 @{Zachariah son of Barachiah} (\Zachariou huiou Barachiou\). Broadus gives well the various alternatives in understanding and explaining the presence of "son of Barachiah" here which is not in strkjv@Luke:11:51|. The usual explanation is that the reference is to Zachariah the son of Jehoiada the priest who was slain in the court of the temple (2Chronicles:24:20ff.|). How the words, "son of Barachiah," got into Matthew we do not know. A half-dozen possibilities can be suggested. In the case of Abel a reckoning for the shedding of his blood was foretold (Genesis:4:10|) and the same thing was true of the slaying of Zachariah (2Chronicles:24:22|).

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:26:55 @{As against a robber} (\h“s epi lˆistˆn\). As a robber, not as a thief, but a robber hiding from justice. He will be crucified between two robbers and on the very cross planned for their leader, Barabbas. They have come with no warrant for any crime, but with an armed force to seize Jesus as if a highway robber. Jesus reminds them that he used to sit (imperfect, \ekathezomˆn\) in the temple and teach. But he sees God's purpose in it all for the prophets had foretold his "cup." The desertion of Jesus by the disciples followed this rebuke of the effort of Peter. Jesus had surrendered. Songs:they fled.

rwp@Matthew:27:32 @{Compelled} (\ˆggareusan\). This word of Persian origin was used in strkjv@Matthew:5:41|, which see. There are numerous papyri examples of Ptolemaic date and it survives in modern Greek vernacular. Songs:the soldiers treat Simon of Cyrene (a town of Libya) as a Persian courier (\aggaros\) and impress him into service, probably because Jesus was showing signs of physical weakness in bearing his own Cross as the victims had to do, and not as a mere jest on Simon. "Gethsemane, betrayal, the ordeal of the past sleepless night, scourging, have made the flesh weak" (Bruce). Yes, and the burden of sin of the world that was breaking his heart. {His cross} (\ton stauron autou\). Jesus had used the term cross about himself (16:24|). It was a familiar enough picture under Roman rule. Jesus had long foreseen and foretold this horrible form of death for himself (Matthew:20:19; strkjv@23:24; strkjv@26:2|). He had heard the cry of the mob to Pilate that he be crucified (27:22|) and Pilate's surrender (27:26|) and he was on the way to the Cross (27:31|). There were various kinds of crosses and we do not know precisely the shape of the Cross on which Jesus was crucified, though probably the one usually presented is correct. Usually the victim was nailed (hands and feet) to the cross before it was raised and it was not very high. The crucifixion was done by the soldiers (27:35|) in charge and two robbers were crucified on each side of Jesus, three crosses standing in a row (27:38|).

rwp@Matthew:27:37 @{His accusation} (\tˆn aitian autou\). The title (\titlos\, strkjv@John:19:19|) or placard of the crime (the inscription, \he epigraphˆ\) which was carried before the victim or hung around his neck as he walked to execution was now placed above (\ep' an“\) the head of Jesus on the projecting piece (\crux immurus\). This inscription gave the name and home, {Jesus of Nazareth}, and the charge on which he was convicted, {the King of the Jews} and the identification, {This is}. The four reports all give the charge and vary in the others. The inscription in full was: This is Jesus of Nazareth the King of the Jews. The three languages are mentioned only by John (John:19:20|), Latin for law, Hebrew (Aramaic) for the Jews, Greek for everybody. The accusation (charge, cause, \aitia\) correctly told the facts of the condemnation.

rwp@Matthew:27:63 @{Sir, we remember} (\kurie, emnesthˆmen\). This was the next day, on our Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath, the day after the Preparation (Matthew:27:62|). Ingressive aorist indicative, we have just recalled. It is objected that the Jewish rulers would know nothing of such a prediction, but in strkjv@Matthew:12:40| he expressly made it to them. Meyer scouts as unhistorical legend the whole story that Christ definitely foretold his resurrection on the third day. But that is to make legendary much of the Gospels and to limit Jesus to a mere man. The problem remains why the disciples forgot and the Jewish leaders remembered. But that is probably due on the one hand to the overwhelming grief of the disciples coupled with the blighting of all their hopes of a political Messiah in Jesus, and on the other hand to the keen nervous fear of the leaders who dreaded the power of Jesus though dead. They wanted to make sure of their victory and prevent any possible revival of this pernicious heresy. {That deceiver} (\ekeinos ho planos\) they call him, a vagabond wanderer (\planos\) with a slur in the use of {that} (\ekeinos\), a picturesque sidelight on their intense hatred of and fear of Jesus.

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

rwp@Matthew:28:11 @{Told unto the chief priests} (\apˆggeilan tois archiereusin\). These Roman soldiers had been placed at the disposal of the Sanhedrin. They were probably afraid also to report to Pilate and tell him what had happened. They apparently told a truthful account as far as they understood it. But were the Sanhedrin convinced of the resurrection of Jesus?

rwp@Philippians:3:18 @{I told you often} (\pollakis elegon\). Imperfect active, repetition in Paul s warnings to them. {Even weeping} (\kai klai“n\). Deep emotion as he dictated the letter and recalled these recreant followers of Christ (cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:2:4|). {The enemies of the cross of Christ} (\tous echthrous tou staurou tou Christou\). Either the Judaizers who denied the value of the cross of Christ (Galatians:5:11; strkjv@6:12,14|) or Epicurean antinomians whose loose living gave the lie to the cross of Christ (1John:2:4|).

rwp@Titus:3:6 @{Which} (\hou\). Genitive case by attraction from \ho\ (grammatical gender) to the case of \pneumatos hagiou\. We do not have grammatical gender (only natural) in English. Hence here we should say "whom," even if it does not go smoothly with \execheen\ (he poured out, second aorist active indicative of \ekche“\). The reference is to the great Pentecost (Acts:2:33|) as foretold by Joel (Joel:2:28|). {Richly} (\plousi“s\). Then and to each one in his own experience. See strkjv@Romans:10:12; strkjv@1Timothy:6:17|.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Thu Jul 4 00:07:59 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020