Bible:
Filter: String:

NT-EPISTLES.filter - rwp against:


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

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

rwp@1Corinthians:4:4 @{For I know nothing against myself} (\ouden gar emaut“i sunoida\). Not a statement of fact, but an hypothesis to show the unreliability of mere complacent self-satisfaction. Note the use of \sunoida\ (second perfect active indicative with dative (disadvantage) of the reflexive pronoun) for guilty knowledge against oneself (cf. strkjv@Acts:5:2; strkjv@12:12; strkjv@14:6|). {Yet} (\all'\). Adversative use of \alla\. {Amos:I not hereby justified} (\ouk en tout“i dedikai“mai\). Perfect passive indicative of state of completion. Failure to be conscious of one's own sins does not mean that one is innocent. Most prisoners plead "not guilty." Who is the judge of the steward of the mysteries of God? It is the Lord "that judgeth me" (\ho anakrin“n me\). Probably, who examines me and then passes on my fidelity (\pistos\ in verse 2|).

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

rwp@1Corinthians:4:16 @{Be ye imitators of me} (\mimˆtai mou ginesthe\). "Keep on becoming (present middle imperative) imitators of me (objective genitive)." \Mimˆtˆs\ is an old word from \mimeomai\, to copy, to mimic (\mimos\). Paul stands for his rights as their spiritual father against the pretensions of the Judaizers who have turned them against him by the use of the names of Apollos and Cephas.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:6:1 @{Dare any of you?} (\tolmƒi tis hum“n;\). Does any one of you dare? Rhetorical question with present indicative of \tolma“\, old verb from \tolma\, daring. Bengel: _grandi verbo notatur laesa majestas Christianorum_. "The word is an argument in itself" (Robertson and Plummer). Apparently Paul has an actual case in mind as in chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:5| though no name is called. {Having a matter against his neighbour} (\pragma ech“n pros ton heteron\). Forensic sense of \pragma\ (from \prass“\, to do, to exact, to extort as in strkjv@Luke:3:13|), a case, a suit (Demosthenes 1020, 26), with the other or the neighbour as in strkjv@10:24; strkjv@14:17; strkjv@Galatians:6:4; strkjv@Romans:2:1|. {Go to law} (\krinesthai\). Present middle or passive (ch. strkjv@Romans:3:4|) in the same forensic sense as \krithˆnai\ in strkjv@Matthew:5:40|. \Kritˆs\, judge, is from this verb. {Before the unrighteous} (\epi t“n adik“n\). This use of \epi\ with the genitive for "in the presence of" is idiomatic as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:14|, \epi Titou\, in the case of Titus. The Jews held that to bring a lawsuit before a court of idolaters was blasphemy against the law. But the Greeks were fond of disputatious lawsuits with each other. Probably the Greek Christians brought cases before pagan judges.

rwp@1Corinthians:6:13 @{But God shall bring to nought both it and them} (\ho de theos kai tautˆn kai tauta katargˆsei\). Another proverb about the adaptation of the belly (\koilia\) and food (\br“mata\, not just flesh), which had apparently been used by some in Corinth to justify sexual license (fornication and adultery). These Gentiles mixed up matters not alike at all (questions of food and sensuality). " We have traces of this gross moral confusion in the circumstances which dictated the Apostolic Letter (Acts:15:23-29|), where things wholly diverse are combined, as directions about meats to be avoided and a prohibition of fornication" (Lightfoot). Both the belly (\tautˆn\) and the foods (\tauta\) God will bring to an end by death and change. {But the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body} (\to de s“ma ou tˆi porneiƒi alla t“i kuri“i, kai ho kurios t“i s“mati\). Paul here boldly shows the fallacy in the parallel about appetite of the belly for food. The human body has a higher mission than the mere gratification of sensual appetite. Sex is of God for the propagation of the race, not for prostitution. Paul had already stated that God dwells in us as the sanctuary of the Holy Spirit (3:16f.|). This higher function of the body he here puts forward against the debased Greek philosophy of the time which ignored completely Paul's idea, "the body for the Lord and the Lord for the body" (dative of personal interest in both cases). "The Lord Jesus and \porneia\ contested for the bodies of Christian men; loyal to him they must renounce _that_, yielding to _that_ they renounce him" (Findlay).

rwp@1Corinthians:6:18 @{Flee} (\pheugete\). Present imperative. Have the habit of fleeing without delay or parley. Note abruptness of the asyndeton with no connectives. Fornication violates Christ's rights in our bodies (verses 13-17|) and also ruins the body itself. {Without the body} (\ektos tou s“matos\). Even gluttony and drunkenness and the use of dope are sins wrought on the body, not "within the body" (\entos tou s“matos\) in the same sense as fornication. Perhaps the dominant idea of Paul is that fornication, as already shown, breaks the mystic bond between the body and Christ and hence the fornicator (\ho porneu“n\) {sins against his own body} (\eis to idion s“ma hamartanei\) in a sense not true of other dreadful sins. The fornicator takes his body which belongs to Christ and unites it with a harlot. In fornication the body is the instrument of sin and becomes the subject of the damage wrought. In another sense fornication brings on one's own body the two most terrible bodily diseases that are still incurable (gonorrhea and syphilis) that curse one's own body and transmit the curse to the third and fourth generation. Apart from the high view given here by Paul of the relation of the body to the Lord no possible father or mother has the right to lay the hand of such terrible diseases and disaster on their children and children's children. The moral and physical rottenness wrought by immorality defy one's imagination.

rwp@1Corinthians:6:20 @{For ye were bought with a price} (\ˆgorasthˆte gar timˆs\). First aorist passive indicative of \agoraz“\, old verb to buy in the marketplace (\agora\). With genitive of price. Paul does not here state the price as Peter does in strkjv@1Peter:1:19| (the blood of Christ) and as Jesus does in strkjv@Matthew:20:28| (his life a ransom). The Corinthians understood his meaning. {Glorify God therefore in your body} (\doxasate dˆ ton theon en t“i s“mati hum“n\). Passionate conclusion to his powerful argument against sexual uncleanness. \Dˆ\ is a shortened form of \ˆdˆ\ and is an urgent inferential particle. See on ¯Luke:2:15|. Paul holds to his high ideal of the destiny of the body and urges glorifying God in it. Some of the later Christians felt that Paul's words could be lightened a bit by adding "and in your spirits which are his," but these words are found only in late MSS. and are clearly not genuine. Paul's argument stands four-square for the dignity of the body as the sanctuary of the Holy Spirit united to the Lord Jesus.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:3 @{Render the due} (\tˆn opheilˆn apodidot“\). Marriage is not simply not wrong, but for many a duty. Both husband and wife have a mutual obligation to the other. "This dictum defends marital intercourse against rigorists, as that of ver. 1| commends celibacy against sensualists" (Findlay).

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

rwp@1Corinthians:8:9 @{Take heed} (\blepete\). A warning to the enlightened. {Lest by any means} (\mˆ p“s\). Common construction after verbs of caution or fearing, \mˆ p“s\ with aorist subjunctive \genˆtai\. {This liberty of yours} (\hˆ exousia hum“n hautˆ\). \Exousia\, from \exestin\, means a grant, allowance, authority, power, privilege, right, liberty. It shades off easily. It becomes a battle cry, personal liberty does, to those who wish to indulge their own whims and appetites regardless of the effect upon others. {A stumbling-block to the weak} (\proskomma tois asthenesin\). Late word from \proskopt“\, to cut against, to stumble against. Songs:an obstacle for the foot to strike. In strkjv@Romans:14:13| Paul uses \skandalon\ as parallel with \proskomma\. We do not live alone. This principle applies to all social relations in matters of law, of health, of morals. _Noblesse oblige_. The enlightened must consider the welfare of the unenlightened, else he does not have love.

rwp@1Corinthians:8:12 @{Wounding their conscience} (\tuptontes aut“n tˆn suneidˆsin\). Old verb \tupt“\, to smite with fist, staff, whip. The conscience is sensitive to a blow like that, a slap in the face. {Ye sin against Christ} (\eis Christon hamartanete\). That fact they were overlooking. Jesus had said to Saul that he was persecuting him when he persecuted his disciples (Acts:9:5|). One may wonder if Paul knew the words of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:25:40|, "ye did it unto me."

rwp@1Corinthians:11:27 @{Unworthily} (\anaxi“s\). Old adverb, only here in N.T., not genuine in verse 29|. Paul defines his meaning in verse 29f|. He does not say or imply that we ourselves must be "worthy" (\axioi\) to partake of the Lord's Supper. No one would ever partake on those terms. Many pious souls have abstained from observing the ordinance through false exegesis here. {Shall be guilty} (\enochos estai\). Shall be held guilty as in strkjv@Matthew:5:21f.| which see. Shall be guilty of a crime committed against the body and blood of the Lord by such sacrilege (cf. strkjv@Hebrews:6:6; strkjv@10:29|).

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

rwp@1Corinthians:12:14 @{Is not one member} (\ouk estin hen melos\). The point sounds like a truism, but it is the key to the whole problem of church life both local and general. Vincent refers to the fable of the body and the members by Menenius Agrippa (Livy, II, 32), but it was an old parable. Socrates pointed out how absurd it would be if feet and hands should work against one another when God made them to cooperate (Xen., _Mem_. II. iii. 18). Seneca alludes to it as does Marcus Aurelius and Marcus Antoninus.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:15 @{False witnesses of God} (\pseudomartures tou theou\). Late word, but \pseudomarture“\, to bear false witness, old and common. The genitive (\tou theou\) can be either subjective (in God's service) or objective (concerning God). Either makes good sense. {Because we witnessed of God} (\hoti emarturˆsamen kata tou theou\). Vulgate has _adversus Deum_. This is the more natural way to take \kata\ and genitive, {against God} not as equal to \peri\ (concerning). He would indeed make God play false in that case, {if so be that the dead are not raised} (\eiper ara nekroi ouk egeirontai\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. Note both \per\ intensive particle {indeed} and \ara\ inferential particle {therefore}.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:16:9 @{For a great and effectual door is opened unto me} (\thura gar moi ane“igen megalˆ kai energˆs\). Second perfect active indicative of \anoig“\, to open. Intransitive, stands wide open at last after his years there (Acts:20:31|). A wide open door. What does he mean by \energˆs\? It is a late word in the _Koin‚_. In the papyri a medical receipt has it for "tolerably strong." The form \energos\ in the papyri is used of a mill "in working order," of "tilled land," and of "wrought iron." In the N.T. it occurs in strkjv@Philemon:1:6; strkjv@Hebrews:4:12| of "the word of God" as "\energˆs\" (powerful). Paul means that he has at least a great opportunity for work in Ephesus. {And there are many adversaries} (\kai antikeimenoi polloi\). "And many are lying opposed to me," lined up against me. These Paul mentions as a reason for staying in, not for leaving, Ephesus. Read strkjv@Acts:19| and see the opposition from Jews and Gentiles with the explosion under the lead of Demetrius. And yet Paul suddenly leaves. He hints of much of which we should like to know more (1Corinthians:15:32; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:8f.|).

rwp@1John:5:3 @{This} (\hautˆ\) {--that} (\hina\). Explanatory use of \hina\ with \hautˆ\, as in strkjv@John:17:3|, to show what "the love of God" (4:9,12|) in the objective sense is, not mere declamatory boasting (4:20|), but obedience to God's commands, "that we keep on keeping (present active subjunctive as in strkjv@2:3|) his commandments." This is the supreme test. {Are not grievous} (\bareiai ouk eisin\). "Not heavy," the adjective in strkjv@Matthew:23:4| with \phortia\ (burdens), with \lupoi\ (wolves) in strkjv@Acts:20:29|, of Paul's letters in strkjv@2Corinthians:10:10|, of the charges against Paul in strkjv@Acts:25:7|. Love for God lightens his commands.

rwp@1Peter:2:8 @{And} (\kai\). Peter now quotes strkjv@Isaiah:8:14| and gives a new turn to the previous quotation. To the disbelieving, Christ was indeed "a stone of stumbling (\lithos proskommatos\) and rock of offence (\petra skandalou\)," quoted also by Paul in strkjv@Romans:9:32f.|, which see for discussion. \Proskomma\ (from \proskopt“\, to cut against) is an obstacle against which one strikes by accident, while \skandalon\ is a trap set to trip one, but both make one fall. Too much distinction need not be made between \lithos\ (a loose stone in the path) and \petra\ (a ledge rising out of the ground). {For they} (\hoi\). Causal use of the relative pronoun. {Stumble at the word, being disobedient} (\proskoptousin t“i log“i apeithountes\). Present active indicative of \proskopt“\ with dative case, \log“i\, and present active participle of \apeithe“\ (cf. \apistousin\ in strkjv@2:7|) as in strkjv@3:1|. \T“i log“i\ can be construed with \apeithountes\ (stumble, being disobedient to the word). {Whereunto also they were appointed} (\eis ho kai etethˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \tithˆmi\. See this idiom in strkjv@1Timothy:2:7|. "Their disobedience is not ordained, the penalty of their disobedience is" (Bigg). They rebelled against God and paid the penalty.

rwp@1Peter:2:11 @{As sojourners and pilgrims} (\h“s paroikous kai parepidˆmous\). This combination from the LXX (Genesis:33:4; strkjv@Psalms:39:13|). See strkjv@1:1| for \parepidˆmos\ and strkjv@1:17| for \paroikia\ and strkjv@Ephesians:2:19| for \paroikos\ (only there and here in N.T., Christians whose fatherland is heaven). {To abstain from} (\apechesthai\). Present middle (direct) infinitive of \apech“\, old verb, to hold back from (1Thessalonians:4:3|). In indirect command (to keep on abstaining from) after \parakal“\ (I beseech). With the ablative case \t“n sarkik“n epithumi“n\, the grosser sins of the flesh (for \sarkikos\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:3:3|) like the list in strkjv@4:3|. {Which} (\haitines\). "Which very ones." Like Latin _quippe qui_. {War against the soul} (\strateuontai kata tˆs psuchˆs\). Present middle indicative of \strateu“\, to carry on a campaign (James:4:1|). See this struggle between the flesh and the spirit vividly pictured by Paul in strkjv@Galatians:5:16-24|.

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

rwp@1Peter:3:12 @{Upon} (\epi\). In the case of righteous (\dikaious\, in the O.T. sense like \dikaion Lot\ in strkjv@2Peter:2:7|) for their good, but in the case of men "that do evil" (\epi poiountas kaka\, "upon men doing evil things") "the face of the Lord" (\pros“pon kuriou\) is not for their good, \epi\ here approaching "against" in idea.

rwp@1Peter:3:16 @{Having a good conscience} (\suneidˆsin echontes agathˆn\). Present active participle of \ech“\. See strkjv@2:18| for \suneidˆsin\ and strkjv@3:21| for \suneidˆsis agathˆ\ again ("a quasi-personification," Hart). {That they may be put to shame} (\hina kataischunth“sin\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \kataischun“\, old verb, to put to shame (Luke:13:17; strkjv@1Peter:2:6|). {Wherein ye are spoken against} (\en h“i katalaleisthe\). Present passive indicative of \katalale“\, for which see strkjv@2:12| with \en h“i\ also. Peter may be recalling (Hart) his own experience at Pentecost when the Jews first scoffed and others were cut to the heart (Acts:2:13,37|). {Who revile} (\hoi epˆreazontes\). Articular present active participle of \epˆreaz“\, old verb (from \epˆreia\, spiteful abuse), to insult, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:6:28|. {In Christ} (\en Christ“i\). Paul's common mystical phrase that Peter has three times (here, strkjv@5:10,14|), not in John, though the idea is constantly in John. Peter here gives a new turn (cf. strkjv@2:12|) to \anastrophˆ\ (manner of life). "Constantly the apostle repeats his phrases with new significance and in a new light" (Bigg).

rwp@Info_1Thessalonians @ FIRST THESSALONIANS FROM CORINTH A.D. 50 TO 51 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION We cannot say that this is Paul's first letter to a church, for in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2| he speaks of some as palming off letters as his and in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:17| he says that he appends his own signature to every letter after dictating it to an amanuensis (Romans:16:22|). We know of one lost letter (1Corinthians:5:11|) and perhaps another (2Corinthians:2:3|). But this is the earliest one that has come down to us and it may even be the earliest New Testament book, unless the Epistle of James antedates it or even Mark's Gospel. We know, as already shown, that Paul was in Corinth and that Timothy and Silas had just arrived from Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:3:6; strkjv@Acts:18:5|). They had brought supplies from the Macedonian churches to supply Paul's need (2Corinthians:11:9|), as the church in Philippi did once and again while Paul was in Thessalonica (Phillipians:4:15f.|). Before Timothy and Silas came to Corinth Paul had to work steadily at his trade as tent-maker with Aquila and Priscilla (Acts:18:3|) and could only preach in the synagogue on sabbaths, but the rich stores from Macedonia released his hands and "Paul devoted himself to the word" (\suneicheto t“i log“i Paulos\). He gave himself wholly to preaching now. But Timothy and Silas brought news of serious trouble in the church in Thessalonica. Some of the disciples there had misunderstood Paul's preaching about the second coming of Christ and had quit work and were making a decided disturbance on the subject. Undoubtedly Paul had touched upon eschatological matters while in Thessalonica. The Jewish leaders at Thessalonica charged it against Paul and Silas to the politarchs that they had preached another king, Jesus, in place of Caesar. Paul had preached Jesus as King of the spiritual kingdom which the Jews misrepresented to the politarchs as treason against Caesar as the Sanhedrin had done to Pilate about Jesus. Clearly Paul had said also that Jesus was going to come again according to his own promise before his ascension. Some asserted that Paul said Jesus was going to come right away and drew their own inferences for idleness and fanaticism as some do today. Strange as it may seem, there are scholars today who say that Paul did believe and say that Jesus was going to come back right away. They say this in spite of strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1f.| where Paul denies having ever said it. Undoubtedly Paul hoped for the early return of Jesus as most of the early Christians did, but that is a very different thing from setting a time for his coming. It is open to us all to hope for the speedy return of Christ, but times and seasons are with God and not with us. It is not open to us to excuse our negligence and idleness as Christians because of such a hope. That hope should serve as a spur to increased activity for Christ in order to hasten his coming. Songs:Paul writes this group of Epistles to correct gross misapprehension and misrepresentation of his preaching about last things (eschatology). It is a rare preacher who has never been misunderstood or misrepresented.

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

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:3 @{Exhortation} (\paraklˆsis\). Persuasive discourse, calling to one's side, for admonition, encouragement, or comfort. {Not of error} (\ouk ek planˆs\). This word is same as \plana“\, to lead astray (2Timothy:3:13|) like Latin _errare_. Passive idea of {error} here rather than deceit. That is seen in {nor in guile} (\oude en dol“i\) from \del“\, to catch with bait. Paul is keenly sensitive against charges against the correctness of his message and the purity of his life. {Nor of uncleanness} (\oude ex akatharsias\). "This disclaimer, startling as it may seem, was not unneeded amidst the impurities consecrated by the religions of the day" (Lightfoot). There was no necessary connection in the popular mind between religion and morals. The ecstatic initiations in some of the popular religions were grossly sensual.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:4 @{That each one of you know how} (\eidenai hekaston hum“n\). Further epexegetic infinitive (second perfect active), learn how and so know how (learn the habit of purity). {To possess himself of his own vessel} (\to heautou skeuos ktasthai\). Present middle infinitive of \ktaomai\, to acquire, not \kektˆsthai\, to possess. But what does Paul mean by "his own vessel"? It can only mean his own body or his own wife. Objections are raised against either view, but perhaps he means that the man shall acquire his own wife "in sanctification and honour," words that elevate the wife and make it plain that Paul demands sexual purity on the part of men (married as well as unmarried). There is no double standard here. When the husband comes to the marriage bed, he should come as a chaste man to a chaste wife.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:5 @{Not in the passion of lust} (\mˆ en pathei epithumias\). Plain picture of the wrong way for the husband to come to marriage. {That know not God} (\ta mˆ eidota ton theon\). Second perfect participle of \oida\. The heathen knew gods as licentious as they are themselves, but not God. One of the reasons for the revival of paganism in modern life is professedly this very thing that men wish to get rid of the inhibitions against licentiousness by God.

rwp@1Thessalonians:5:14 @{Admonish the disorderly} (\noutheteite tous ataktous\). Put sense into the unruly mob who break ranks (\a\ privative and \taktos\, verbal adjective of \tass“\, to keep military order). Recall the idlers from the market-place used against Paul (Acts:17:5|). This is a challenging task for any leader. {Encourage the fainthearted} (\paramutheisthe tous oligopsuchous\). Old verb to encourage or console as in strkjv@John:11:31|, though not so common in N.T. as \parakale“\, the compound adjective (\oligos\, little or small, \psuchˆ\, soul), small-souled, little-souled, late word in LXX. The verb \oligopsuche“\ occurs in the papyri. Local conditions often cause some to lose heart and wish to drop out, be quitters. These must be held in line. {Support the weak} (\antechesthe t“n asthen“n\). Middle voice with genitive of \antech“\, old verb, in N.T. only in middle, to cling to, to hold on to (with genitive). The weak are those tempted to sin (immorality, for instance). {Be long-suffering toward all} (\makrothumeite pros pantas\). These disorderly elements try the patience of the leaders. Hold out with them. What a wonderful ideal Paul here holds up for church leaders!

rwp@Info_1Timothy @ FIRST TIMOTHY PROBABLY A.D. 65 FROM MACEDONIA BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION Assuming the Pauline authorship the facts shape up after this fashion. Paul had been in Ephesus (1Timothy:1:3|) after his arrival from Rome, which was certainly before the burning of Rome in A.D. 64. He had left Timothy in charge of the work in Ephesus and has gone on into Macedonia (1Timothy:1:3|), possibly to Philippi as he had hoped (Phillipians:2:24|). He wishes to help Timothy meet the problems of doctrine (against the Gnostics), discipline, and church training which are increasingly urgent. There are personal touches of a natural kind about Timothy's own growth and leadership. There are wise words here from the greatest of all preachers to a young minister whom Paul loved. strkjv@1Timothy:1:1 @{According to the commandment} (\kat' epitagˆn\). A late _Koin‚_ word (Polybius, Diodorus), but a Pauline word also in N.T. This very idiom ("by way of command") in strkjv@1Corinthians:7:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:8; strkjv@Romans:16:26; strkjv@1Timothy:1:1; strkjv@Titus:1:3|. Paul means to say that he is an apostle under orders. {Of God our Saviour} (\theou s“tˆros hˆm“n\). Genitive case with \epitagˆn\. In the LXX \s“tˆr\ (old word from \s“z“\ for agent in saving, applied to deities, princes, kings, etc.) occurs 20 times, all but two to God. The Romans called the emperor "Saviour God." In the N.T. the designation of God as Saviour is peculiar to strkjv@Luke:1:47; strkjv@Jude:1:25; strkjv@1Timothy:1:3; strkjv@2:3; strkjv@4:10; strkjv@Titus:1:3; strkjv@2:10; strkjv@3:4|. In the other Epistles Paul uses it of Christ (Phillipians:3:20; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23|) as in strkjv@2Timothy:1:10|. In strkjv@2Peter:1:1| we have "our God and Saviour Jesus Christ" as in strkjv@Titus:2:13|. {Our hope} (\tˆs elpidos hˆm“n\). Like strkjv@Colossians:1:27|. More than the author and object of hope, "its very substance and foundation" (Ellicott).

rwp@1Timothy:5:1 @{Rebuke not an elder} (\presbuter“i mˆ epiplˆxˆis\). Dative case \presbuter“i\ used in the usual sense of an older man, not a minister (bishop as in strkjv@3:2|) as is shown by "as a father." First aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive with negative \mˆ\ (prohibition against committing the act) of \epiplˆss“\, to strike upon, old verb, but here only in N.T. and in figurative sense with words rather than with fists. Respect for age is what is here commanded, an item appropriate to the present time. {The younger men as brethren} (\ne“terous h“s adelphous\). Comparative adjective \ne“teros\ from \neos\ (young). No article, "younger men." Wise words for the young minister to know how to conduct himself with old men (reverence) and young men (fellowship, but not stooping to folly with them).

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

rwp@2Corinthians:4:16 @{Wherefore we faint not} (\dio ouk egkakoumen\). Repeats from verse 1|. {Our outward man} (\ho ex“ hˆm“n anthr“pos\), {our inward man} (\ho es“ hˆm“n\). In strkjv@Romans:7:22; strkjv@Colossians:3:9; strkjv@Ephesians:4:22f.|, we have the inward man and the outward for the higher and the lower natures (the spirit and the flesh). "Here the decay (\diaphtheiretai\) of the bodily organism is set over against the growth in grace (\anakainoutai\, is refreshed) of the man himself" (Bernard). Plato (_Republ_. ix, p. 589) has \ho entos anthr“pos\. Cf. "the hidden man of the heart" (1Peter:3:4|). {Day by day} (\hˆmerƒi kai hˆmerƒi\). This precise idiom is not in LXX nor rest of N.T. It may be colloquial use of locative in repetition.

rwp@2Corinthians:5:1 @{If--be dissolved} (\ean--kataluthˆi\). Third class condition, \ean\ and first aorist passive subjunctive. The very word used (\katalu“\) for striking down a tent. {The earthly house of our tabernacle} (\hˆ epigeios hˆm“n oikia tou skˆnous\). Rather, "If our earthly (see on ¯1Corinthians:15:40| for \epigeios\) house of the tent (\skˆnos\, another form of \skˆnˆ\, tent, from root \ska\, to cover)." Appositive genitive, the house (\oikia\) is the tent. {We have} (\echomen\). Present indicative. We possess the title to it now by faith. "Faith is the title-deed (\hupostasis\) to things hoped for" (Hebrews:11:7|). {A building from God} (\oikodomˆn ek theou\). This \oikodomˆ\ (found in Aristotle, Plutarch, LXX, etc., and papyri, though condemned by Atticists) is more substantial than the \skˆnos\. {Not made with hands} (\acheiropoiˆton\). Found first in strkjv@Mark:14:58| in charge against Jesus before the Sanhedrin (both the common verbal \cheiropoiˆton\ and the newly made vernacular \acheiropoiˆton\, same verbal with \a\ privative). Elsewhere only here and strkjv@Colossians:2:11|. Spiritual, eternal home.

rwp@2Corinthians:5:12 @{As giving you occasion of glorying} (\aphormˆn didontes humin kauchˆmatos\). An old Greek word (\apo, hormˆ\, onset, rush), a base of operations, material with which to glory, as we say "a tip" only much more. {That ye may have wherewith to answer} (\hina echˆte pros\). Literally, "That ye may have something against (for facing those, etc.)." Paul wishes his champions in Corinth to know the facts. {In appearance, and not in heart} (\en pros“p“i kai mˆ en kardiƒi\). He means the Judaizers who were braggarts about their orthodox Judaism.

rwp@2Corinthians:5:13 @{Whether we are beside ourselves} (\eite exestˆmen\). Second aorist active indicative of \existˆmi\, old verb, here to stand out of oneself (intransitive) from \ekstasis\, ecstasy, comes as in strkjv@Mark:5:42|. It is literary plural, for Paul is referring only to himself. See on ¯1:6| for \eite--eite\. It is a condition of the first class and Paul assumes as true the charge that he was crazy (if I was crazy) for the sake of argument. Festus made it later (Acts:26:24|). He spoke with tongues (1Corinthians:14:18|) and had visions (2Corinthians:12:1-6|) which probably the Judaizers used against him. A like charge was made against Jesus (Mark:3:21|). People often accuse those whom they dislike with being a bit off.

rwp@2Corinthians:5:16 @{Henceforth} (\apo tou nun\). From the time that we gained this view of Christ's death for us. {After the flesh} (\kata sarka\). According to the flesh, the fleshy way of looking at men. He, of course, knows men "in the flesh (\en tˆi sarki\), but Paul is not speaking of that. Worldly standards and distinctions of race, class, cut no figure now with Paul (Galatians:3:28|) as he looks at men from the standpoint of the Cross of Christ. {Even though we have known Christ after the flesh} (\ei kai egn“kamen kata sarka Christon\). Concessive clause (\ei kai\, if even or also) with perfect active indicative. Paul admits that he had once looked at Christ \kata sarka\, but now no longer does it. Obviously he uses \kata sarka\ in precisely the same sense that he did in verse 15| about men. He had before his conversion known Christ \kata sarka\, according to the standards of the men of his time, the Sanhedrin and other Jewish leaders. He had led the persecution against Jesus till Jesus challenged and stopped him (Acts:9:4|). That event turned Paul clean round and he no longer knows Christ in the old way \kata sarka\. Paul may or may not have seen Jesus in the flesh before his death, but he says absolutely nothing on that point here.

rwp@2Corinthians:5:18 @{Who reconciled us to himself through Christ} (\tou katallaxantos hˆmas heaut“i dia Christou\). Here Paul uses one of his great doctrinal words, \katallass“\, old word for exchanging coins. \Diallass“\, to change one's mind, to reconcile, occurs in N.T. only in strkjv@Matthew:5:24| though in papyri (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 187), and common in Attic. \Katallass“\ is old verb, but more frequent in later writers. We find \sunallass“\ in strkjv@Acts:7:26| and \apokatallass“\ in strkjv@Colossians:1:20f.; strkjv@Ephesians:2:16| and the substantive \katallagˆ\ in strkjv@Romans:5:11; strkjv@11:15| as well as here. It is hard to discuss this great theme without apparent contradiction. God's love (John:3:16|) provided the means and basis for man's reconciliation to God against whom he had sinned. It is all God's plan because of his love, but God's own sense of justice had to be satisfied (Romans:3:26|) and so God gave his Son as a propitiation for our sins (Romans:3:25; strkjv@Colossians:1:20; strkjv@1John:2:2; strkjv@4:10|). The point made by Paul here is that God needs no reconciliation, but is engaged in the great business of reconciling us to himself. This has to be done on God's terms and is made possible through (\dia\) Christ. {And gave unto us the ministry of reconciliation} (\kai dontos hˆmin tˆn diakonian tˆs katallagˆs\). It is a ministry marked by reconciliation, that consists in reconciliation. God has made possible through Christ our reconciliation to him, but in each case it has to be made effective by the attitude of each individual. The task of winning the unreconciled to God is committed to us. It is a high and holy one, but supremely difficult, because the offending party (the guilty) is the hardest to win over. We must be loyal to God and yet win sinful men to him.

rwp@2Corinthians:6:3 @{Giving no occasion of stumbling in any thing} (\mˆdemian en mˆdeni didontes proskopˆn\). \Proskopˆ\, late word (Polybius, LXX), from \proskopt“\, to strike against, to stumble. Only here in N.T. Note double negative in the Greek. {That the ministry be not blamed} (\hina mˆ m“mˆthˆi hˆ diakonia\). Negative purpose (\hina mˆ\). First aorist passive subjunctive of old verb \m“maomai\ from \m“mos\, blot, blemish. One can read with profit J. A. Hutton's Warrack Lectures, _That the Ministry Be Not Blamed_.

rwp@2Corinthians:9:3 @{I sent} (\epempsa\). Not literary plural with this epistolary aorist as in 18,22|. {That ye may be prepared} (\hina pareskeuasmenoi ˆte\). Perfect passive subjunctive in the final clause, "that ye may really be prepared," "as I said" (\kath“s elegon\) and not just say that ye are prepared. Paul's very syntax tells against them.

rwp@2Corinthians:10:1 @{Now I Paul myself} (\Autos de eg“ Paulos\). Cf. strkjv@Galatians:5:2|. Paul now turns to the third part of the epistle in chapters 10-13| in which he vigorously defends himself against the accusations of the stubborn minority of Judaizers in Corinth. Great ministers of Christ through the ages have had to pass through fiery trials like these. Paul has shown the way for us all. He speaks of himself now plainly, but under compulsion, as is clear. It may be that at this point he took the pen from the amanuensis and wrote himself as in strkjv@Galatians:6:11|. {By the meekness and gentleness of Christ} (\dia tes prautˆtos kai epieikias tou Christou\). This appeal shows (Plummer) that Paul had spoken to the Corinthians about the character of Christ. Jesus claimed meekness for himself (Matthew:11:29|) and felicitated the meek (Matthew:5:5|) and he exemplified it abundantly (Luke:23:34|). See on ¯Matthew:5:15; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:21| for this great word that has worn thin with us. Plutarch combines \prautˆs\ with \epieikia\ as Paul does here. Matthew Arnold suggested "sweet reasonableness" for \epieikeia\ in Plato, Aristotle, Plutarch. It is in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:24:4| (\to epieikes\ in strkjv@Phillipians:4:5|). In Greek Ethics the equitable man was called \epieikˆs\, a man who does not press for the last farthing of his rights (Bernard). {Lowly among you} (\tapeinos en humin\). The bad use of \tapeinos\, the old use, but here alone in N.T. in that meaning. Socrates and Aristotle used it for littleness of soul. Probably Paul here is quoting one of the sneers of his traducers in Corinth about his humble conduct while with them (1Corinthians:2:23; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:6|) and his boldness (\ap“n tharr“\) when away (1Corinthians:7:16|). "It was easy to satirize and misrepresent a depression of spirits, a humility of demeanour, which were either the direct results of some bodily affliction, or which the consciousness of this affliction had rendered habitual" (Farrar). The words stung Paul to the quick.

rwp@2Corinthians:10:5 @{Casting down imaginations} (\logismous kathairountes\). The same military figure (\kathairesis\) and the present active participle agreeing with \strateuometha\ in verse 3| (verse 4| a parenthesis). The reasonings or imaginations (\logismous\, old word from \logizomai\, to reckon, only here in N.T. and strkjv@Romans:2:15|) are treated as forts or citadels to be conquered. {Every high thing that is exalted} (\pan hups“ma epairomenon\). Same metaphor. \Hups“ma\ from \hupso“\ is late _Koin‚_ word (in LXX, Plutarch, Philo, papyri) for height and that figure carried on by \epairomenon\. Paul aims to pull down the top-most perch of audacity in their reasonings against the knowledge of God. We need Paul's skill and courage today. {Bringing every thought into captivity} (\aichmal“tizontes pƒn noˆma\). Present active participle of \aichmal“tiz“\, common _Koin‚_ verb from \aichmal“tos\, captive in war (\aichmˆ\, spear, \hal“tos\ verbal of \haliskomai\, to be taken). See on ¯Luke:21:24|. Paul is the most daring of thinkers, but he lays all his thoughts at the feet of Jesus. For \noˆma\ (device) see on ¯2:11|. {To the obedience of Christ} (\eis tˆn hupakoˆn tou Christou\). Objective genitive, "to the obedience unto Christ." That is Paul's conception of intellectual liberty, freedom in Christ. Deissmann (_St. Paul_, p. 141) calls this "the mystic genitive."

rwp@2Corinthians:11:12 @{That I may cut off occasion} (\hina ekkops“ tˆn aphormˆn\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \ekkopt“\, old verb to cut out or off (Matthew:3:10; strkjv@5:30|). See strkjv@2Corinthians:5:12| for \aphormˆn\. {From them which desire an occasion} (\t“n thelont“n aphormˆn\). Ablative case after \ekkops“\. There are always some hunting for occasions to start something against preachers. {They may be found} (\heureth“sin\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \heurisk“\, to find with final conjunction \hina\.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:9 @{He hath said} (\eirˆken\). Perfect active indicative, as if a final word. Paul probably still has the thorn in his flesh and needs this word of Christ. {Is sufficient} (\arkei\). Old word of rich meaning, perhaps kin to Latin _arceo_, to ward off against danger. Christ's grace suffices and abides. {Is perfected} (\teleitai\). Present passive indicative of \tele“\, to finish. It is linear in idea. Power is continually increased as the weakness grows. See strkjv@Phillipians:4:13| for this same noble conception. The human weakness opens the way for more of Christ's power and grace. {Most gladly rather} (\hˆdista mallon\). Two adverbs, one superlative (\hˆdista\), one comparative (\mallon\). "Rather" than ask any more (thrice already) for the removal of the thorn or splinter "most gladly will I glory in my weaknesses." Slowly Paul had learned this supreme lesson, but it will never leave him (Romans:5:2; strkjv@2Timothy:4:6-8|). {May rest upon me} (\episkˆn“sˆi ep' eme\). Late and rare verb in first aorist active subjunctive with \hina\ (final clause), to fix a tent upon, here upon Paul himself by a bold metaphor, as if the Shechinah of the Lord was overshadowing him (cf. strkjv@Luke:9:34|), the power (\dunamis\) of the Lord Jesus.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:11 @{I am become foolish} (\gegona aphr“n\). Perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. In spite of what he said in verse 6| that he would not be foolish if he gloried in the other Paul. But he feels that he has dropped back to the mood of strkjv@11:1,16|. He has been swept on by the memory of the ecstasy. {For I ought to have been commended by you} (\eg“ gar “pheilon huph' hum“n sunistasthai\). Explanation of "ye compelled me." Imperfect active \“pheilon\ of \opheil“\, to be under obligation, and the tense here expresses an unfulfilled obligation about the present. But \sunistasthai\ is present passive infinitive, not aorist or perfect passive. He literally means, "I ought now to be commended by you" instead of having to glorify myself. He repeats his boast already made (11:5f.|), that he is no whit behind "the super-extra apostles" (the Judaizers), "though I am nothing" (\ei kai ouden eimi\). Even boasting himself against those false apostles causes a reaction of feeling that he has to express (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:15:9; strkjv@1Timothy:1:15f.|).

rwp@2Corinthians:12:20 @{Lest by any means, when I come, I should find you not such as I would} (\mˆ p“s elth“n ouch hoious thel“ heur“ humas\). An idiomatic construction after the verb of fearing (\phoboumai\) with \mˆ p“s\ as the conjunction and with \ouch\ as the negative of the verb \heur“\ (second aorist active subjunctive of \heurisk“\), \mˆ\ the conjunction, \ouch\ the negative. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 995. {And I be found} (\kag“ heureth“\). Same construction with first aorist passive subjunctive. {Such as ye would not} (\hoion ou thelete\). Neat change in voice just before and position of the negative here. {Lest by any means} (\mˆ p“s\). Still further negative purpose by repeating the conjunction. With graphic pen pictures Paul describes what had been going on against him during his long absence. {Backbitings} (\katalaliai\). Late and rare word. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1Peter:2:1|. If it only existed nowhere else! {Whisperings} (\psithurismoi\). Late word from \psithuriz“\, to whisper into one's ear. An onomatopoetic word for the sibilant murmur of a snake charmer (Ecclesiastes:10:11|). Only here in N.T. {Swellings} (\phusi“seis\). From \phusio“\, to swell up, late word only here and in ecclesiastical writers. Did Paul make up the word for the occasion? See on ¯1Corinthians:4:6| for verb. {Tumults} (\akatastasiai\). See on strkjv@2Corinthians:6:5|.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:8 @{Against the truth} (\kata tˆs alˆtheias\). He means in the long run. We can hinder and hold down the truth by evil deeds (Romans:1:18|), but in the end the truth wins.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:12 @{With a holy kiss} (\en hagi“i philˆmati\). In the Jewish synagogues where the sexes were separated, men kissed men, the women, women. This apparently was the Christian custom also. It is still observed in the Coptic and the Russian churches. It was dropped because of charges made against the Christians by the pagans. In England in 1250 Archbishop Walter of York introduced a "pax-board" which was first kissed by the clergy and then passed around. Think of the germ theory of disease and that kissing tablet!

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

rwp@2Peter:2:7 @{And delivered} (\kai erusato\). First aorist middle of \ruomai\ as in strkjv@Matthew:6:13|, still part of the protasis with \ei\. {Righteous Lot} (\dikaion Lot\). This adjective \dikaios\ occurs three times in verses 7,8|. See Wisdom strkjv@10:6. {Sore distressed} (\kataponoumenon\). Present passive participle of \katapone“\, late and common verb, to work down, to exhaust with labor, to distress, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:7:24|. {By the lascivious life of the wicked} (\hupo tˆs t“n athesm“n en aselgeiƒi anastrophˆs\). "By the life in lasciviousness of the lawless." \Athesmos\ (alpha privative and \thesmos\), late and common adjective (cf. \athemitos\ strkjv@1Peter:4:3|) for rebels against law (of nature and conscience here). \Anastrophˆ\ is frequent in I Peter.

rwp@2Peter:2:11 @{Whereas} (\hopou\). Loose use of \hopou\ (in Xenophon) = "wherein." {Though greater} (\meizones ontes\). Than the evil \doxai\. Concessive participle and comparative adjective. {In might and strength} (\ischui kai dunamei\). Locative case. Both indwelling strength (\ischus\, strkjv@Mark:12:30|) and ability (\dunamis\, strkjv@Matthew:25:15|). {Railing judgment} (\blasphemon krisin\). "Blasphemous accusation." {Against them} (\kat' aut“n\). The evil angels (\doxai\). {Before the Lord} (\para kuri“i\). In God's presence. See strkjv@Jude:1:9| and possibly Enoch 9.

rwp@2Peter:3:6 @{By which means} (\di' h“n\). The two waters above or the water and the word of God. Mayor against the MSS. reads \di' hou\ (singular) and refers it to \log“i\ alone. {Being overshadowed} (\kataklustheis\). First aorist passive participle of \katakluz“\, old compound, here only in N.T., but see \kataklusmos\ in strkjv@2:5|. {With water} (\hudati\). Instrumental case of \hud“r\. {Perished} (\ap“leto\). Second aorist middle indicative of \apollumi\.

rwp@2Peter:3:7 @{That now are} (\nun\). "The now heavens" over against "the then world" (\ho tote kosmos\ verse 6|). {By the same word} (\t“i aut“i log“i\). Instrumental case again referring to \log“i\ in verse 6|. {Have been stored up} (\tethˆsaurismenoi eisin\). Perfect passive indicative of \thˆsauriz“\, for which verb see strkjv@Matthew:6:19; strkjv@Luke:12:21|. {For fire} (\puri\). Dative case of \pur\, not with fire (instrumental case). The destruction of the world by fire is here pictured as in strkjv@Joel:2:30f.; strkjv@Psalms:50:3|. {Being reserved} (\tˆroumenoi\). Present passive participle of \tˆre“\, for which see strkjv@2:4|. {Against} (\eis\). Unto. As in strkjv@2:4,9| and see strkjv@1Peter:1:4| for the inheritance reserved for the saints of God.

rwp@Info_1Thessalonians @ SECOND THESSALONIANS FROM CORINTH A.D. 50 OR 51 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION It is plain that First Thessalonians did not settle all the difficulties in Thessalonica. With some there was precisely the opposite result. There was some opposition to Paul's authority and even defiance. Songs:Paul repeats his "command" for discipline (2Thessalonians:3:6|) as he had done when with them (3:10|). He makes this Epistle a test of obedience (3:14|) and finds it necessary to warn the Thessalonians against the zeal of some deceivers who even invent epistles in Paul's name to carry their point in the church (2:1f.|), an early instance of pseudepigraphic "Pauline" epistles, but not for a "pious" purpose. Paul's keen resentment against the practise should make us slow to accept the pseudepigraphic theory about other Pauline Epistles. He calls attention to his own signature at the close of each genuine letter. As a rule he dictated the epistle, but signed it with his own hand (3:17|). Paul writes to calm excitement (Ellicott) and to make it plain that he had not said that the Second Coming was to be right away.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:3 @{Let no man beguile you in any wise} (\mˆ tis humas exapatˆsˆi kata mˆdena tropon\). First aorist active subjunctive of \exapata“\ (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb \apata“\) with double negative (\mˆ tis, mˆdena\) in accord with regular Greek idiom as in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:11| rather than the aorist imperative which does occur sometimes in the third person as in strkjv@Mark:13:15| (\mˆ katabat“\). Paul broadens the warning to go beyond conversation and letter. He includes "tricks" of any kind. It is amazing how gullible some of the saints are when a new deceiver pulls off some stunts in religion. {For it will not be} (\hoti\). There is an ellipse here of \ouk estai\ (or \genˆsetai\) to be supplied after \hoti\. Westcott and Hort make an anacoluthon at the end of verse 4|. The meaning is clear. \Hoti\ is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not "imminent," but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of verse 2|. {Except the falling away come first} (\ean mˆ elthˆi hˆ apostasia pr“ton\). Negative condition of the third class, undetermined with prospect of determination and the aorist subjunctive. \Apostasia\ is the late form of \apostasis\ and is our word apostasy. Plutarch uses it of political revolt and it occurs in I Macc. strkjv@2:15 about Antiochus Epiphanes who was enforcing the apostasy from Judaism to Hellenism. In strkjv@Joshua:22:22| it occurs for rebellion against the Lord. It seems clear that the word here means a religious revolt and the use of the definite article (\hˆ\) seems to mean that Paul had spoken to the Thessalonians about it. The only other New Testament use of the word is in strkjv@Acts:21:21| where it means apostasy from Moses. It is not clear whether Paul means revolt of the Jews from God, of Gentiles from God, of Christians from God, or of the apostasy that includes all classes within and without the body of Christians. But it is to be {first} (\pr“ton\) before Christ comes again. Note this adverb when only two events are compared (cf. strkjv@Acts:1:1|). {And the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition} (\kai apokaluphthˆi ho anthr“pos tˆs anomias, ho huios tˆs ap“leias\). First aorist passive subjunctive after \ean mˆ\ and same condition as with \elthˆi\. The use of this verb \apokalupt“\, like \apokalupsin\ of the second coming in strkjv@1:7|, seems to note the superhuman character (Milligan) of the event and the same verb is repeated in verses 6,8|. The implication is that {the man of sin} is hidden somewhere who will be suddenly manifested just as false apostles pose as angels of light (2Corinthians:11:13ff.|), whether the crowning event of the apostasy or another name for the same event. Lightfoot notes the parallel between the man of sin, of whom sin is the special characteristic (genitive case, a Hebraism for the lawless one in verse 8|) and Christ. Both Christ and the adversary of Christ are revealed, there is mystery about each, both make divine claims (verse 4|). He seems to be the Antichrist of strkjv@1John:2:18|. The terrible phrase, the son of perdition, is applied to Judas in strkjv@John:17:12| (like Judas doomed to perdition), but here to the lawless one (\ho anomos\, verse 8|), who is not Satan, but some one definite person who is doing the work of Satan. Note the definite article each time.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:5 @{When I was yet with you} (\eti “n pros humas\). The present participle takes the time of the verb \elegon\ (imperfect active), {I used to tell you these things}. Songs:Paul recalls their memory of his words and leaves us without the clue to his idea. We know that one of the charges against him was that Jesus was another king, a rival to Caesar (Acts:17:7|). That leads one to wonder how far Paul went when there in contrasting the kingdom of the world of which Rome was ruler and the kingdom of God of which Christ is king. Frame notes Paul's abrupt question here "with an unfinished sentence behind him" (verses 3f.|), even "with a trace of impatience."

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:13 @{But ye, brethren, be not weary in well-doing} (\humeis de, adelphoi, mˆ enkakˆsˆte kalopoiountes\). Emphatic position of \humeis\ in contrast to these piddlers. \Mˆ\ and the aorist subjunctive is a prohibition against beginning an act (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 851-4). It is a late verb and means to behave badly in, to be cowardly, to lose courage, to flag, to faint, (\en, kakos\) and outside of strkjv@Luke:18:1| in the N.T. is only in Paul's Epistles (2Thessalonians:3:13; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:1,16; strkjv@Galatians:6:9; strkjv@Ephesians:3:13|). It occurs in Polybius. The late verb \kalopoie“\, to do the fair (\kalos\) or honourable thing occurs nowhere else in the N.T., but is in the LXX and a late papyrus. Paul uses \to kalon poiein\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:7; strkjv@Galatians:6:9; strkjv@Romans:7:21| with the same idea. He has \agathopoie“\, to do good, in strkjv@1Timothy:6:18|.

rwp@2Timothy:1:12 @{These things} (\tauta\). His imprisonment in Rome. {Yet I am not ashamed} (\all' ouk epaischunomai\). Plain reference to the exhortation to Timothy in verse 8|. {Him whom I have believed} (\h“i pepisteuka\). Dative case of the relative (\h“i\) with the perfect active of \pisteu“\, the antecedent to the relative not expressed. It is not an indirect question. Paul knows Jesus Christ whom he has trusted. {I am persuaded} (\pepeismai\). See verse 5|. {To guard} (\phulaxai\). First aorist active infinitive of \phulass“\, the very word used in strkjv@1Timothy:6:20| with \parathˆkˆn\ as here, to guard against robbery or any loss. {That which I have committed unto him} (\tˆn parathˆkˆn mou\). Literally, "my deposit," as in a bank, the bank of heaven which no burglar can break (Matthew:6:19f.|). See this word also in verse 14|. Some MSS. have the more common \parakatathˆkˆ\ (a sort of double deposit, \para\, beside, down, \kata\). {Against that day} (\eis ekeinˆn tˆn hˆmeran\). The day of Christ's second coming. See also strkjv@1:18; strkjv@4:8; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:10|, and often in the Gospels. Elsewhere, the day of the Lord (1Thessalonians:5:2; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:14|), the day of Christ or Jesus Christ (Phillipians:1:6,10; strkjv@2:16|), the day (1Thessalonians:5:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:13; strkjv@Romans:13:12|), the day of redemption (Ephesians:4:20|), the day of judgment (Romans:2:5,16|).

rwp@2Timothy:2:9 @{Wherein} (\en h“i\). In my gospel. {I suffer hardship} (\kakopath“\). "I suffer evil." Old compound (\kakon, pasch“\), elsewhere in N.T., strkjv@4:5; strkjv@James:5:13|. {Unto bonds} (\mechri desm“n\). "Up to bonds." A common experience with Paul (2Corinthians:11:23; strkjv@Phillipians:1:7,13,14; strkjv@Colossians:4:18|). {As a malefactor} (\h“s kakourgos\), old compound (\kakon, erg“\, doer of evil), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:23:32ff.| (of the robbers). One of the charges made against Paul. {Is not bound} (\ou dedetai\). Perfect passive indicative of \de“\, to bind. Old verb. See strkjv@1Corinthians:7:27,39; strkjv@Romans:7:2|. I am bound with a chain, but no fetters are on the word of God (Pauline phrase; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:13; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:36; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:17; strkjv@Phillipians:1:14; strkjv@Titus:2:5|).

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

rwp@2Timothy:4:15 @{Be thou ware also} (\kai su phulassou\). Present middle (direct) imperative of \phulass“\, "from whom keep thyself away." {Withstood} (\antestˆ\). Second aorist active indicative of \anthistˆmi\, "stood against my words." See strkjv@3:8; strkjv@Galatians:2:11|.

rwp@3John:1:7 @{For the sake of the Name} (\huper tou onomatos\). The name of Jesus. See strkjv@Acts:5:4; strkjv@Romans:1:5| for \huper tou onomatos\ and strkjv@James:2:7| for the absolute use of "the name" as in strkjv@1Peter:4:16|. "This name is in essence the sum of the Christian creed" (Westcott) as in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3; strkjv@Romans:10:9|. It is like the absolute use of "the Way" (Acts:9:2; strkjv@19:9,23; strkjv@24:22|). {Taking nothing} (\mˆden lambanontes\). Present active participle with the usual negative with participles (1John:2:4|). {Of the Gentiles} (\apo t“n ethnik“n\). Instead of the usual \ethn“n\ (Luke:2:32|), late adjective for what is peculiar to a people (\ethnos\) and then for the people themselves (Polybius, Diodorus, not in LXX), in N.T. only here, strkjv@Matthew:5:47; strkjv@6:7; strkjv@18:17|. Like our heathen, pagan. John is anxious that Christian missionaries receive nothing from the heathen, as our missionaries have to watch against the charge of being after money. There were many travelling lecturers out for money. Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:9| defends the right of preachers to pay, but refuses himself to accept it from Corinth because it would be misunderstood (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:6ff.; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:16ff. strkjv@12:16ff.|). Note \apo\ here as in collecting taxes (Matthew:17:25|) rather than \para\, which may be suggestive.

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@3John:1:10 @{If I come} (\ean elth“\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\. He hopes to come (verse 14|), as he had said in strkjv@2John:1:12| (one argument for identifying II John with the letter in strkjv@3John:1:9|). {I will bring to remembrance} (\hupomnˆs“\). Future active indicative of \hupomimnˆsk“\, old compound (John:14:26; strkjv@2Peter:1:12|). The aged apostle is not afraid of Diotrephes and here defies him. {Which he doeth} (\ha poiei\). Present active indicative, "which he keeps on doing." {Prating against us} (\phluar“n hˆmƒs\). Present active participle of old verb (from \phluaros\, babbling strkjv@1Timothy:5:13|), to accuse idly and so falsely, here only in N.T. with accusative \hˆmƒs\ (us). {With wicked words} (\logois ponˆrois\). Instrumental case. Not simply foolish chatter, but malevolent words. {Not content} (\mˆ arkoumenos\). Present passive participle of \arke“\ with usual negative \mˆ\. For this verb in this sense see strkjv@1Timothy:6:8; strkjv@Hebrews:13:5|, only there \epi\ is absent. John knows that the conduct of Diotrephes will not stand the light. See Paul's threats of exposure (1Corinthians:4:21; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:11; strkjv@13:1-3|). And John is the apostle of love all the same. {He himself} (\autos\). That was bad enough. {Them that would} (\tous boulomenous\). "Those willing or wishing or receive the brethren" from John. {He forbiddeth} (\k“luei\). "He hinders." Present active indicative of \k“lu“\ and means either actual success in one case (punctiliar use of the present indicative) or repetition in several instances (linear action) or conative action attempted, but not successful as in strkjv@Matthew:3:14| (this same verb) and strkjv@John:10:32|. {Casteth them out of the church} (\ek tˆs ekklˆsias ekballei\). Here again \ekballei\ can be understood in various ways, like \k“luei\. This verb occurs in strkjv@John:2:15| for casting out of the temple the profaners of it and for casting the blind man out of the synagogue (John:9:34f.|). If this ancient "church-boss" did not succeed in expelling John's adherents from the church, he certainly tried to do it.

rwp@Info_Acts @ LUKE THE AUTHOR It ought to be possible to assume this as a fact since the work of Ramsay and Harnack on various phases of the problems concerning the Acts. Harnack, in particular, has covered the ground with his accustomed thoroughness and care in his two volumes (_The Acts of the Apostles_, English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1909; _The Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_, English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1911). Ramsay's view may be found in Chapter I of _St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen_, Chapter XII of _Pauline and Other Studies_. A good summary of the matter appears in Part V of _The Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts_ by Dr. D. A. Hayes, in Robertson's _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_, and in the introduction to the various commentaries by Knowling, Rackham, Furneaux, Rendall, Hackett, Meyer-Wendt, Zahn, Blass, Campbell-Morgan, Stokes. In Part I of _The Acts of the Apostles_, Vol. II of _The Beginnings of Christianity_, edited by Foakes-Jackson and Kirsopp Lake both sides are ably presented: _The Case for the Tradition_ by C. W. Emmet, _The Case against the Tradition_ by H. Windisch. _The Internal Evidence of Acts_ is discussed by the Editors, Foakes-Jackson and Lake, with an adverse conclusion against Luke. Henry J. Cadbury surveys _The Tradition_ (the external evidence) and draws a negative conclusion likewise on the ground that the early writers who ascribe Acts to Luke were not critical scholars. A similar position is taken by Cadbury in his more recent volume, _The Making of Luke--Acts_ (1927). But all the same the traditional view that Luke is the author of the Acts holds the field with those who are not prejudiced against it. The view of Baur that Acts is a _Tendenz_ writing for the purpose of healing the breach between Peter and Paul and showing that the two factions came together had great influence for a while. In fact both Ramsay and Harnack at first held it. Ramsay broke away first and he was followed by Harnack. Both were influenced to change their views by the accumulation of evidence to the effect that the author of both the Gospel and Acts is Luke the Physician and Friend of Paul. Part of this evidence has already been given in the Introduction to the Gospel according to Luke.

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE DATE There are three views about the date of the Acts. Baur and his Tubingen School held the second century to be the date of this late pamphlet as they termed it after the fashion of the Clementine Homilies. But that view is now practically abandoned save by the few who still strangely oppose the Lukan authorship. Probably the majority of those who accept the Lukan authorship place it in the latter part of the first century for two reasons. One is that the Gospel according to Luke is dated by them after the destruction of Jerusalem because of the prophecy by Jesus of the encompassing of the city by armies. Predictive prophecy that would be and so it is considered a prophecy _post eventum_. The other reason is the alleged use of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus by Luke. Josephus finished this work A.D. 93 so that, if Luke did use it, he must have written the Acts after that date. Usually this argument is made to show that Luke could not have written it at all, but some hold that he may have lived to an age that would allow it. But it cannot be assumed that Luke used Josephus because of his mention of Theudas and Judas the Galilean. They differ so widely (Acts:5:36f|. and Josephus, _Ant_. XX. v, 1, 2) that Von Dobschutz (_Dictionary of the Apostolic Church_, art. Josephus) argues that the two accounts are entirely independent of each other. Songs:Luke (Luke:13:1f.|) alludes to a Galilean revolt not mentioned by Josephus and Josephus records three revolts under Pilate not referred to by Luke. A comparison of the accounts of the death of Agrippa I in strkjv@Acts:12:20-23| and _Ant_. XIX. viii, 2 redounds to the credit of Luke. The Josephus phase of the argument may be brushed to one side. The third view, held by Harnack and adopted here, is that Luke wrote the Acts while with Paul in Rome and finished the book before Paul's release, that is by A.D. 63. This is the obvious and natural way to take the language of Luke at the close of Acts. Events had gone no farther and so he ends the narrative right there. It is argued against this that Luke contemplated a third volume and for this reason closed with the arrival of Paul in Rome. But the use of \pr“ton\ (first) in strkjv@Acts:1:1| is a common _Koin‚_ idiom and does not imply three volumes any more than first and second stories with us means that the house has three. Of course this date for the Acts puts the date of the Gospel further back either in Caesarea (57 to 59) or in Rome (60 to 62). And that means that Mark's Gospel is still earlier since Luke used it for his Gospel and the Logia (Q) earlier still. But all these dates are probable in the light of all the known facts.

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

rwp@Acts:6:10 @{They were not able to withstand} (\ouk ischuon antistˆnai\). Imperfect active of \ischu“\, to have strength, and ingressive second aorist active (intransitive) infinitive of \anthistˆmi\. They continued unable (without strength enough) to take a stand against. Stephen knocked them down, Saul included, as fast as they got up. Stephen was like a battery charged and in action. {The wisdom and spirit} (\tˆi sophiƒi kai pneumati\). Dative case. They stood up against Stephen's wisdom and the Holy Spirit "by whom he spoke" (\h“i elalei\). Instrumental case and the relative agrees with "Spirit." He kept on speaking so (\elalei\, imperfect active). It was a desperate situation.

rwp@Acts:6:11 @{Then they suborned men} (\tote hupebalon andras\). Second aorist active indicative of \hupoball“\, old verb, but here only in the N.T., to put under like a carpet, to bring men under one's control by suggestion or by money. One recalls the plight of Caiaphas in the trial of Jesus when he sought false witnesses. _Subornaverunt_. They put these men forward in an underhand way for fraud. {Blasphemous words against Moses and God} (\blasphˆma eis M“usˆn kai ton theon\). The punishment for blasphemy was stoning to death. See strkjv@Matthew:12:31| for discussion of the word \blasphˆmia, blasphˆme“, blasphˆmos\, all in the N.T. from \blapt“\, to harm, and \phˆmˆ\, speech, harmful speech, or \blax\, stupid, and \phˆmˆ\. But the charge against Stephen was untrue. Please note that Moses is here placed before God and practically on a par with God in the matter of blasphemy. The purpose of this charge is to stir the prejudices of the people in the matter of Jewish rights and privileges. It is the Pharisees who are conducting this attack on Stephen while the Sadducees had led them against Peter and John. The position of Stephen is critical in the extreme for the Sadducees will not help him as Gamaliel did the apostles.

rwp@Acts:6:12 @{They stirred up the people} (\sunekinˆsan ton laon\). They shook the people together like an earthquake. First aorist active indicative of \sunkine“\, to throw into commotion. Old verb, but here only in the N.T. The elders and the scribes (Pharisees) are reached, but no word about the Sadducees. This is the first record of the hostility of the masses against the disciples (Vincent). {Came upon him} (\epistantes\). Second aorist (ingressive) active participle of \ephistˆmi\. Rushed at him. {Seized} (\sunˆrpasan\). Effective aorist active of \sunarpaz“\ as if they caught him after pursuit.

rwp@Acts:6:13 @{False witnesses} (\marturas pseudeis\). Just as Caiaphas did with Jesus. {Ceaseth not} (\ou pauetai\). Wild charge just like a false witness that Stephen talks in the synagogues against the law and the holy temple.

rwp@Acts:6:14 @{We have heard him say} (\akˆkoamen autou legontos\). The only direct testimony and evidently wrong. Curiously like the charge brought against Jesus before Caiaphas that he would destroy the temple and build it again in three days. Undoubtedly Stephen had said something about Christianity before as meant for others besides Jews. He had caught the spirit of Jesus about worship as shown to the woman at Sychar in strkjv@John:4| that God is spirit and to be worshipped by men anywhere and everywhere without having to come to the temple in Jerusalem. It was inflammable material surely and it was easy to misrepresent and hard to clear up. {This Jesus of Nazareth} (\Iˆsous ho Naz“raios houtos\). With contempt.

rwp@Acts:6:15 @{As if the face of an angel} (\h“sei pros“pon aggelou\). Even his enemies saw that, wicked as they were. See strkjv@Exodus:34:30| for the face of Moses when he came down from Sinai (2Corinthians:3:7|). Page quotes Tennyson: "God's glory smote him on the face." Where were Peter and John at this crisis? Apparently Stephen stands alone before the Sanhedrin as Jesus did. But he was not alone for he saw Jesus standing at the right hand of God (Acts:7:56|). There was little that Peter and John could have done if they had been present. Gamaliel did not interpose this time for the Pharisees were behind the charges against Stephen, false though they were as Gamaliel could have found out.

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:7:2 @{Brethren and fathers} (\andres adelphoi kai pateres\). The spectators (brethren) and members of the Sanhedrin (fathers) as Paul in strkjv@Acts:22:1|. {Hearken} (\akousate\). First aorist (ingressive) active imperative, Give me your attention now. {The God of glory} (\Hosea:theos tˆs doxˆs\). The God characterized by glory (genitive case, genus or kind) as seen in the Shekinah, the visible radiance of God. Jesus is also called "the Glory"=the Shekinah in strkjv@James:2:1|. Cf. strkjv@Exodus:25:22; strkjv@40:34; strkjv@Leviticus:9:6; strkjv@Hebrews:9:5|. By these words Stephen refutes the charge of blasphemy against God in strkjv@Acts:6:11|. {Appeared} (\“phthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \hora“\. See on ¯Luke:23:43|. Before there was temple or tabernacle and away over in Mesopotamia (Ur of the Chaldees, strkjv@Genesis:11:31|), even before (\prin ˆ\ with the infinitive) he dwelt in Haran (\Charran\, or Carrae not far from Edessa, where Crassus met death after his defeat by the Parthians B.C. 53).

rwp@Acts:7:19 @{Dealt subtilly} (\katasophisamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \katasophizomai\, late compound (\kata\ and \sophiz“\, old verb, to make wise, to become wise, then to play the sophist), perfective use of \kata\. In the LXX, but here only in the N.T. To use fraud, craft, deceit. {That they should cast out their babes} (\tou poiein ta brephˆ ektheta\). \Tou poiein\ (genitive of the articular present infinitive) can be either design or result. The Revised Version here takes it as purpose while the Authorized as result. In either case Pharaoh required the Israelites to expose their children to death, a possible practice done voluntarily in heathen China and by heathen in so-called Christian lands. But the Israelites fought against such an iniquity. The word \ektheta\ (exposed, cast out) is a verbal adjective from \ektithˆmi\. It is an old word, but here only in the N.T. and not in the LXX. {To the end they might not live} (\eis to mˆ z“ogoneisthai\). Purpose with \eis\ and the articular infinitive (present middle). This compound verb is from \z“ogonos\ (from \z“os\, alive, and \gen“\, to bear) and is used by late writers and the LXX. It is three times in the N.T. (here, strkjv@Luke:17:33; strkjv@1Timothy:6:13|) in the sense to preserve alive.

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

rwp@Acts:7:51 @{Stiffnecked} (\sklˆrotrachˆloi\). From \sklˆros\ (hard) and \trachˆlos\, neck, both old words, but this compound only in the LXX and here alone in the N.T. Critics assume that Stephen was interrupted at this point because of the sharp tone of the speech. That may be true, but the natural climax is sufficient explanation. {Uncircumcised in heart} (\aperitmˆtoi kardiais\). Late adjective common in LXX and here only in the N.T. Verbal of \peritemn“\, to cut around and \a\ privative. Both of these epithets are applied to the Jews in the O.T. (Exodus:32:9; strkjv@33:3,5; strkjv@34:9; strkjv@Leviticus:26:41; strkjv@Deuteronomy:9:6; strkjv@Jeremiah:6:10|). \Kardiais\ is locative plural like \“sin\ (ears), but some MSS. have genitive singular \kardias\ (objective genitive). No epithet could have been more galling to these Pharisees than to be turned "uncircumcised in heart" (Romans:2:29|). They had only the physical circumcision which was useless. {Ye always} (\humeis aei\). Emphatic position of humeis and "always" looks backward over the history of their forefathers which Stephen had reviewed. {Resist} (\antipiptete\). Old word to fall against, to rush against. Only here in the N.T., but used in the O.T. which is here quoted (Numbers:27:14|). Their fathers had made "external worship a substitute for spiritual obedience" (Furneaux). Stephen has shown how God had revealed himself gradually, the revelation sloping upward to Christ Jesus. "And as he saw his countrymen repeating the old mistake--clinging to the present and the material, while God was calling them to higher spiritual levels--and still, as ever, resisting the Holy Spirit, treating the Messiah as the patriarchs had treated Joseph, and the Hebrews Moses--the pity of it overwhelmed him, and his mingled grief and indignation broke out in words of fire, such as burned of old on the lips of the prophets" (Furneaux). Stephen, the accused, is now the accuser, and the situation becomes intolerable to the Sanhedrin.

rwp@Acts:7:57 @{Stopped their ears} (\suneschon ta “ta aut“n\). Second aorist active of \sunech“\, to hold together. They held their ears together with their hands and affected to believe Stephen guilty of blasphemy (cf. strkjv@Matthew:26:65|). {Rushed upon him with one accord} (\h“rmˆsan homothumadon ep' auton\). Ingressive aorist active indicative of \horma“\, to rush impetuously as the hogs did down the cliff when the demons entered them (Luke:8:33|). No vote was taken by the Sanhedrin. No scruple was raised about not having the right to put him to death (John:8:31|). It may have taken place after Pilate's recall and before his successor came or Pilate, if there, just connived at such an incident that did not concern Rome. At any rate it was mob violence like modern lynching that took the law into the hands of the Sanhedrin without further formalities. {Out of the city} (\ek tˆs pole“s\). To keep from defiling the place with blood. But they sought to kill Paul as soon as they got him out of the temple area (Acts:21:30f.|). {Stoned} (\elithoboloun\). Imperfect active indicative of \lithobole“\, began to stone, from \lithobolos\ (\lithos\, stone, \ball“\, to throw), late Greek verb, several times in the N.T. as strkjv@Luke:13:34|. Stoning was the Jewish punishment for blasphemy (Leviticus:24:14-16|). {The witnesses} (\hoi martures\). The false testifiers against Stephen suborned by the Pharisees (Acts:6:11,13|). These witnesses had the privilege of casting the first stones (Deuteronomy:13:10; strkjv@17:7|) against the first witness for Christ with death (_martyr_ in our modern sense of the word). {At the feet of a young man named Saul} (\para tous podas neaniou kaloumenou Saulou\). Beside (\para\) the feet. Our first introduction to the man who became the greatest of all followers of Jesus Christ. Evidently he was not one of the "witnesses" against Stephen, for he was throwing no stones at him. But evidently he was already a leader in the group of Pharisees. We know from later hints from Saul (Paul) himself that he had been a pupil of Gamaliel (Acts:22:3|). Gamaliel, as the Pharisaic leader in the Sanhedrin, was probably on hand to hear the accusations against Stephen by the Pharisees. But, if so, he does not raise his voice against this mob violence. Saul does not seem to be aware that he is going contrary to the views of his master, though pupils often go further than their teachers.

rwp@Acts:7:60 @{Kneeled down} (\theis ta gonata\). Second aorist active participle of \tithˆmi\, placing the knees (on the ground). This idiom is not in the old Greek for kneeling, but Luke has it five times (Luke:22:41; strkjv@Acts:7:60; strkjv@9:40; strkjv@22:36; strkjv@21:5|) and Mark once (15:19|). Jesus was standing at the right hand of God and Stephen knelt before him in worship and called on him in prayer. {Lay not this sin to their charge} (\mˆ stˆsˆis autois tautˆn tˆn hamartian\). First aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive with \mˆ\, regular Greek idiom, Place not to them or against them (dative \autois\) this sin. The very spirit of Jesus towards his enemies as he died upon the Cross (Luke:23:34|). {He fell asleep} (\ekoimˆthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \koima“\, to put to sleep. Old verb and the metaphor of sleep for death is common in all languages, but it is peculiarly appropriate here as Jesus used it of Lazarus. See also strkjv@Acts:13:36; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:18|, etc. Our word cemetery (\koimˆtˆrion\) is the sleeping place of the dead. Knowling calls \ekoimˆthˆ\ here "a picture word of rest and calmness which stands in dramatic contrast to the rage and violence of the scene."

rwp@Acts:8:4 @{They therefore} (\hoi men oun\). Demonstrative \hoi\ as often (1:6|, etc.) though it will make sense as the article with the participle \diasparentes\. The general statement is made here by \men\ and a particular instance (\de\) follows in verse 5|. The inferential particle (\oun\) points back to verse 3|, the persecution by young Saul and the Pharisees. Jesus had commanded the disciples not to depart from Jerusalem till they received the Promise of the Father (1:4|), but they had remained long after that and were not carrying the gospel to the other peoples (1:8|). Now they were pushed out by Saul and began as a result to carry out the Great Commission for world conquest, that is those "scattered abroad" (\diasparentes\, second aorist passive participle of \diaspeir“\). This verb means disperse, to sow in separate or scattered places (\dia\) and so to drive people hither and thither. Old and very common verb, especially in the LXX, but in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:8:1,4; strkjv@11:19|. {Went about} (\diˆlthon\). Constative second aorist active of \dierchomai\, to go through (from place to place, \dia\). Old and common verb, frequent for missionary journeys in the Acts (5:40; strkjv@8:40; strkjv@9:32; strkjv@11:19; strkjv@13:6|). {Preaching the word} (\euaggelizomenoi ton logon\). Evangelizing or gospelizing the word (the truth about Christ). In strkjv@11:19| Luke explains more fully the extent of the labours of these new preachers of the gospel. They were emergency preachers, not ordained clergymen, but men stirred to activity by the zeal of Saul against them. The blood of the martyrs (Stephen) was already becoming the seed of the church. "The violent dispersion of these earnest disciples resulted in a rapid diffusion of the gospel" (Alvah Hovey).

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

rwp@Acts:9:4 @{He fell upon the earth} (\pes“n epi tˆn gˆn\). Second aorist active participle. Songs:in strkjv@22:7| Paul says: "I fell unto the ground" (\epesa eis to edaphos\) using an old word rather than the common \gˆn\. In strkjv@26:14| Paul states that "we were all fallen to the earth" (\pant“n katapesont“n hˆm“n eis tˆn gˆn\, genitive absolute construction). But here in verse 7| "the men that journeyed with him stood speechless" (\histˆkeisan eneoi\). But surely the points of time are different. In strkjv@26:14| Paul refers to the first appearance of the vision when all fell to the earth. Here in verse 7| Luke refers to what occurred after the vision when both Saul and the men had risen from the ground. {Saul, Saul} (\Saoul, Saoul\). The Hebrew form occurs also in strkjv@22:7; strkjv@26:14| where it is expressly stated that the voice was in the Hebrew (Aramaic) tongue as also in strkjv@9:17| (Ananias). Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 316) terms this use of \Saoul\ "the historian's sense of liturgical rhythm." For the repetition of names by Jesus note strkjv@Luke:10:41| (Martha, Martha), strkjv@Luke:22:31| (Simon, Simon). {Me} (\me\). In persecuting the disciples, Saul was persecuting Jesus, as the words of Jesus in verse 5| made plain. Christ had already spoken of the mystic union between himself and his followers (Matthew:10:40; strkjv@25:40,45; strkjv@John:15:1-5|). The proverb (Pindar) that Jesus quotes to Saul about kicking against the goad is genuine in strkjv@26:14|, but not here.

rwp@Acts:9:14 @{Hath authority} (\echei exousian\). Probably Ananias had received letters from the Christians left in Jerusalem warning him of the coming of Saul. The protest of Ananias to Jesus against any dealing with Saul is a fine illustration of our own narrow ignorance in our rebellious moods against the will of God.

rwp@Acts:9:24 @{Plot} (\epiboulˆ\). Old word for a plan (\boulˆ\) against (\epi\) one. In the N.T. only in Acts (9:24; strkjv@20:3,19; strkjv@23:30|). {They watched} (\paretˆrounto\). Imperfect middle indicative of \paratˆre“\, common verb in late Greek for watching beside (\para\) or insidiously or on the sly as in strkjv@Luke:6:7|, they kept on watching by day and night to kill him. In strkjv@2Corinthians:11:32| Paul says that the Ethnarch of Aretas "kept guard" (\ephrourei\, imperfect active of \phroure“\) to seize him. Probably the Jews obtained the consent of the Ethnarch and had him appoint some of them as guards or watchers at the gate of the city.

rwp@Acts:9:27 @{Took him} (\epilabomenos\). Second aorist middle (indirect) participle of \epilamban“\, common verb to lay hold of. Barnabas saw the situation and took Saul to himself and listened to his story and believed it. It is to the credit of Barnabas that he had the insight and the courage to stand by Saul at the crucial moment in his life when the evidence seemed to be against him. It is a pleasing hypothesis that this influential disciple from Cyprus had gone to the University of Tarsus where he met Saul. If so, he would know more of him than those who only knew his record as a persecutor of Christians. That fact Barnabas knew also, but he was convinced that Jesus had changed the heart of Saul and he used his great influence (Acts:4:36; strkjv@11:22|) to win the favour of the apostles, Peter in particular (Galatians:1:19|) and James the half-brother of Jesus. The other apostles were probably out of the city as Paul says that he did not see them. {To the apostles} (\pros tous apostolous\). Both Barnabas and James are termed apostles in the general sense, though not belonging to the twelve, as Paul did not, though himself later a real apostle. Songs:Barnabas introduced Saul to Peter and vouched for his story, declared it fully (\diˆgˆsato\, in detail) including Saul's vision of Jesus (\eiden ton kurion\) as the vital thing and Christ's message to Saul (\elalˆsen aut“i\) and Saul's bold preaching (\ˆparrˆsiasato\, first aorist middle indicative of \parrˆsiaz“\ from \pan--rˆsia\ telling it all as in strkjv@Acts:2:29|). Peter was convinced and Saul was his guest for two weeks (Galatians:1:18|) with delightful fellowship (\historˆsai\). He had really come to Jerusalem mainly "to visit" (to see) Peter, but not to receive a commission from him. He had that from the Lord (Galatians:1:1f.|). Both Peter and James could tell Saul of their special experiences with the Risen Christ. Furneaux thinks that Peter was himself staying at the home of Mary the mother of John Mark (Acts:12:12|) who was a cousin of Barnabas (Colossians:4:10|). This is quite possible. At any rate Saul is now taken into the inner circle of the disciples in Jerusalem.

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

rwp@Acts:10:29 @{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:11:2 @{They that were of the circumcision} (\hoi ek peritomˆs\). Literally, those of circumcision (on the side of circumcision, of the circumcision party). The phrase in strkjv@10:46| is confined to the six brethren with Peter in Caesarea (11:12|). That can hardly be the meaning here for it would mean that they were the ones who brought the charge against Peter though Hort takes this view. All the disciples in Jerusalem were Jews so that it can hardly mean the whole body. In strkjv@Galatians:2:12| the phrase has the narrower sense of the Judaizing or Pharisaic wing of the disciples (Acts:15:5|) who made circumcision necessary for all Gentile converts. Probably here by anticipation Luke so describes the beginning of that great controversy. The objectors probably did not know of Peter's vision at Joppa, but only of the revolutionary conduct of Peter in Caesarea. These extremists who spoke probably had abundant sympathy in their protest. The apostles are mentioned in verse 1|, but are not referred to in verse 2|. Apparently they are in contrast with the circumcision party in the church. {Contended} (\diekrinonto\). Imperfect middle of the common verb \diakrin“\, to {separate}. Here to separate oneself apart (\dia\), to take sides against, to make a cleavage (\dia\, two, in two) as in strkjv@Jude:1:9|. Songs:Peter is at once put on the defensive as the contention went on. It is plain that Peter was not regarded as any kind of pope or overlord.

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

rwp@Acts:11:24 @{For} (\hoti\). Because. This is the explanation of the conduct of Barnabas. The facts were opposed to the natural prejudices of a Jew like Barnabas, but he rose above such racial narrowness. He was a really good man (\agathos\). See strkjv@Romans:5:7| for distinction between \agathos\ and \dikaios\, righteous, where \agathos\ ranks higher than \dikaios\. Besides, Barnabas was full of the Holy Spirit (like Peter) and of faith and so willing to follow the leading of God's Spirit and take some risks. This is a noble tribute paid by Luke. One wonders if Barnabas was still living when he wrote this. Certainly he was not prejudiced against Barnabas though he will follow the fortunes of Paul after the separation (15:36; 41|). {Was added unto the Lord} (\prosetethˆ t“i kuri“i\). First aorist passive indicative of \prostithˆmi\, common verb to add to. These people were added to the Lord Jesus before they were added to the church. If that were always true, what a difference it would make in our churches.

rwp@Acts:12:1 @{About that time} (\kat' ekeinon ton kairon\). Same phrase in strkjv@Romans:9:9|. That is, the early part of A.D. 44 since that is the date of Herod's death. As already suggested, Barnabas and Saul came down from Antioch to Jerusalem after the persecution by Herod at the end of 44 or the beginning of 45. {Herod the king} (\Hˆr“idˆs ho basileus\). Accurate title at this particular time. Herod Agrippa I, grandson of Herod the Great, was King of Palestine A.D. 42 to 44; only for these three years was a Herod king over Palestine since the death of Herod the Great and never afterwards. Archelaus never actually became king though he had the popular title at first (Matthew:2:22|). {Put forth his hands} (\epebalen tas cheiras\). Second aorist active indicative of \epiball“\, old verb, to cast upon or against. The same idiom with \tas cheiras\ (the hands, common Greek idiom with article rather than possessive pronoun) in strkjv@4:3; strkjv@5:18|. {To afflict} (\kak“sai\). First aorist active infinitive of \kako“\, old word to do harm or evil to (\kakos\), already in strkjv@7:6,19|. Outside of Acts in the N.T. only strkjv@1Peter:5:13|. Infinitive of purpose. Probably the first who were afflicted were scourged or imprisoned, not put to death. It had been eight years or more since the persecution over the death of Stephen ceased with the conversion of Saul. But the disciples were not popular in Jerusalem with either Sadducees or Pharisees. The overtures to the Gentiles in Caesarea and Antioch may have stirred up the Pharisees afresh (cf. strkjv@6:14|). Herod Agrippa I was an Idumean through his grandfather Herod the Great and a grandson of Mariamne the Maccabean princess. He was a favourite of Caligula the Roman Emperor and was anxious to placate his Jewish subjects while retaining the favour of the Romans. Songs:he built theatres and held games for the Romans and Greeks and slew the Christians to please the Jews. Josephus (_Ant_. XIX. 7, 3) calls him a pleasant vain man scrupulously observing Jewish rites. Here we have for the first time political power (after Pilate) used against the disciples.

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

rwp@Acts:12:3 @{That it pleased the Jews} (\hoti areston estin tois Ioudaiois\). Indirect assertion with the present tense \estin\ retained. \Areston\ is the verbal adjective from \aresk“\ followed by the dative as in strkjv@John:8:29|. {Proceeded to seize} (\prosetheto sullabein\). A patent Hebraism in strkjv@Luke:20:11f.| already, and nowhere else in the N.T. It occurs in the LXX (Genesis:4:2; strkjv@8:12; strkjv@18:29|, etc.). Second aorist middle indicative of \prostithˆmi\ and the second aorist active infinitive of \sullamban“\. Literally, he added to seize, he seized Peter in addition to James. {The days of unleavened bread} (\hˆmerai t“n azum“n\). By this parenthesis Luke locates the time of the year when Peter was arrested, the passover. It was a fine occasion for Agrippa to increase his favour among the crowds of Jews there by extra zeal against the Christians. It is possible that Luke obtained his information about this incident from John Mark for at his Mother's house the disciples gathered (12:12|).

rwp@Acts:13:8 @{Withstood them} (\anthistato autois\). Imperfect middle of \anthistˆmi\, to stand against (face to face). Dative case (\autois\). He persisted in his opposition and was unwilling to lose his great prize. There may have been a public discussion between Elymas and Saul. {To turn aside} (\diastrepsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \diastreph“\, old verb to turn or twist in two, to distort, to pervert (cf. strkjv@Matthew:17:17; strkjv@Luke:23:2|).

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

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

rwp@Acts:13:51 @{But they shook off the dust of their feet against them} (\Hoi de ektinaxamenoi ton koniorton t“n pod“n ep' autous\). First aorist middle (indirect) participle of \ektinass“\, to shake out or off. Homer uses it for knocking out teeth. In the papyri. The middle aorist participle occurs again in strkjv@18:6| and the active imperative with the dust of the feet in strkjv@Mark:6:11| (Luke:10:11| has \apomassometha\). and strkjv@Matthew:10:14| (command of Jesus). It is a dramatic gesture that forbids further intercourse. "As a protest against the injustice which cast them out. The sandal was taken off and the dust shaken out as a symbolic token that the very soil of the country was defiling" (Furneaux). {Unto Iconium} (\eis Ikonion\). About 45 miles southeast from Antioch in Pisidia, at the foot of the Taurus mountains. At various times it was reckoned also in Pisidia or Phrygia as well as Lycaonia, Phrygian in population and distinguished by Luke (Acts:14:6|) from Lystra and Derbe, cities of Lycaonia. As compared with Antioch (a Roman colony) it was a native Phrygian town. When the province of Galatia was divided, Iconium became the capital of Lycaonia and eclipsed Antioch in Pisidia. Strictly speaking at this time Lystra and Derbe were cities of Lycaonia-Galatica while Iconium was in Phrygia-Galatica (all three in the Roman Province of Galatia). It was at the meeting place of several Roman roads and on the highway from east to west. It is still a large town Konieh with 30,000 population.

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

rwp@Acts:14:19 @{But there came thither Jews from Antioch and Iconium} (\Epˆlthan de apo Antiocheias kai Ikoniou Ioudaioi\). Came to or upon them, \epˆlthan\, second aorist (ingressive) indicative of \eperchomai\. Whether news of the miracle had reached those cities we do not know. These may have been travelling grain merchants. At any rate there was an interval in which Paul and Barnabas won some disciples (verse 22|). There would be a natural reaction, even revulsion, in the minds of many who had come so near to worshipping Paul and Barnabas. The pendulum swings easily from one extreme to the other. The hostile Jews from Antioch and Iconium may even have followed Paul and Barnabas along the fine Roman road on purpose to keep them on the run. They had driven them out of Antioch and out of Iconium and now appear at Lystra at an opportune moment for their work. {Having persuaded the multitudes} (\peisantes tous ochlous\). First aorist (effective) active participle of \peith“\. They had complete success with many and struck at the psychological moment. {They stoned Paul} (\lithasantes ton Paulon\). First aorist active participle of \lithaz“\, late verb from \lithos\ for throwing stones (used by Paul referring to this one incident when alone he was stoned, strkjv@2Corinthians:11:25|). The wounds inflicted may have left some of the scars (\stigmata\) mentioned in strkjv@Galatians:6:17|. They stoned Paul as the chief speaker (Mercury) and passed by Barnabas (Jupiter). It was a Jewish mode of punishment as against Stephen and these Jews knew that Paul was the man that they had to deal with. Hackett notes that the Jews with two exceptions incited the persecutions which Paul endured. The exceptions were in Philippi (16:16-40|) and Ephesus (19:23-41|). {Dragged him out of the city} (\esuron ex“ tˆs pole“s\). They hurled Stephen outside of the city before stoning him (\7:58\). It was a hurried and irregular proceeding, but they were dragging (imperfect active of \sur“\, old verb) Paul out now. {Supposing that he were dead} (\nomizontes auton tethnˆkenai\). Present active participle with infinitive (second perfect active of \thnˆsk“\) in indirect discourse with accusative of general reference. The Jews are jubilant this time with memories of Paul's escape at Antioch and Iconium. The pagan mob feel that they have settled accounts for their narrow escape from worshipping two Jewish renegade preachers. It was a good day's work for them all. Luke does not say that Paul was actually dead.

rwp@Acts:14:21 @{When they had preached the gospel to that city} (\euaggelisamenoi tˆn polin ekeinˆn\). Having evangelized (first aorist middle participle) that city, a smaller city and apparently with no trouble from the Jews. {Had made many disciples} (\mathˆteusantes hikanous\). First aorist active participle of \mathˆteu“\ from \mathˆtˆs\, a learner or disciple. Late verb in Plutarch, to be a disciple (Matthew:27:57| like strkjv@John:19:38|) and then to disciple (old English, Spenser), to make a disciple as in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| and here. Paul and Barnabas were literally here obeying the command of Jesus in discipling people in this heathen city. {They returned to Lystra and to Iconium, and to Antioch} (\hupestrepsan eis tˆn Lustran kai eis Ikonion kai eis Antiocheian\). Derbe was the frontier city of the Roman empire. The quickest way to return to Antioch in Syria would have been by the Cilician Gates or by the pass over Mt. Taurus by which Paul and Silas will come to Derbe in the second tour (Acts:15:41-16:1|), but difficult to travel in winter. But it was necessary to revisit the churches in Lystra, Iconium, Antioch in Pisidia and to see that they were able to withstand persecution. Paul was a Roman citizen though he had not made use of this privilege as yet for his own protection. Against mob violence it would count for little, but he did not hesitate. Paul had been stoned in Lystra, threatened in Iconium, expelled in Antioch. He shows his wisdom in conserving his work.

rwp@Acts:14:23 @{And when they had appointed for them elders in every church} (\cheirotonˆsantes de autois kat' ekklˆsian presbuterous\). They needed also some form of organization, though already churches. Note distributive use of \kata\ with \ekklˆsian\ (2:46; strkjv@5:42; strkjv@Titus:1:5|). \Cheirotone“\ (from \cheirotonos\, extending the hand, \cheir\, hand, and \tein“\, to stretch) is an old verb that originally meant to vote by show of the hands, finally to appoint with the approval of an assembly that chooses as in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:19|, and then to appoint without regard to choice as in Josephus (_Ant_. XIII. 2, 2) of the appointment of Jonathan as high priest by Alexander. Songs:in strkjv@Acts:10:41| the compound \procheiratone“\ is used of witnesses appointed by God. But the seven (deacons) were first selected by the Jerusalem church and then appointed (\katastˆsomen\) by the apostles. That is probably the plan contemplated by Paul in his directions to Titus (Titus:1:5|) about the choice of elders. It is most likely that this plan was the one pursued by Paul and Barnabas with these churches. They selected the elders in each instance and Paul and Barnabas "ordained" them as we say, though the word \cheirotone“\ does not mean that. "Elders" were mentioned first in strkjv@11:30|. Later Paul will give the requirements expected in these "elders" or "bishops" (Phillipians:1:1|) as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:1-7; strkjv@Titus:1:5-9|. It is fairly certain that these elders were chosen to correspond in a general way with the elders in the Jewish synagogue after which the local church was largely copied as to organization and worship. Paul, like Jesus, constantly worshipped and spoke in the synagogues. Already it is plain, as at Antioch in Syria (11:26|), that the Christians can no longer count on the use of the Jewish synagogue. They must have an organization of their own. The use of the plural here implies what was true at Philippi (Phillipians:1:1|) and Ephesus (Acts:20:17,28|) that each church (one in each city) "had its college of elders" (Hackett) as in Jerusalem (21:18|). Elder (\presbuteros\) was the Jewish name and bishop (\episkopos\) the Greek name for the same office. "Those who are called elders in speaking of Jewish communities are called bishops in speaking of Gentile communities" (Hackett). Hovey rightly holds against Hackett that teaching was a normal function of these elders, pastors or bishops as they were variously called (1Timothy:3:2; strkjv@Titus:1:9; strkjv@1Corinthians:12:28,30; strkjv@Ephesians:4:11|). {Had prayed with fasting} (\proseuxamenoi meta nˆstei“n\). It was a serious matter, this formal setting apart of these "elders" in the churches. Songs:it was done in a public meeting with prayer and fasting as when Paul and Barnabas were sent forth from Antioch in Syria (13:3|) on this mission tour. {They commended them to the Lord} (\parethento autous t“i kuri“i\). Second aorist middle indicative of \paratithˆmi\. Old and solemn word, to entrust, to deposit as in a bank (1Timothy:1:18; strkjv@2Timothy:2:2|). Cf. \parathˆkˆ\ in strkjv@1Timothy:6:20; strkjv@2Timothy:1:12,14|. It was all that they could now do, to commit them to the Lord Jesus. Jesus used this word on the cross (Luke:22:32|). {On whom they had believed} (\eis hon pepisteukeisan\). Past perfect indicative (without augment) of \pisteu“\. They had "trusted" in Jesus (2Timothy:1:12|) and Paul now "entrusts" them to him with confidence. It was a solemn and serious occasion in each instance as it always is to set apart men for the ministry. These men may not have been ideal men for this service, but they were the only ones available and they were chosen from the actual membership in each instance, men who knew local conditions and problems.

rwp@Acts:15:11 @{That we shall be saved} (\s“thˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive in indirect discourse after \pisteuomen\. More exactly, "We believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus in like manner as they also." This thoroughly Pauline note shows that whatever hopes the Judaizers had about Peter were false. His doctrine of grace is as clear as a bell. He has lifted his voice against salvation by ceremony and ritualism. It was a great deliverance.

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

rwp@Acts:16:7 @{Over against Mysia} (\kata tˆn Musian\). This was an ill-defined region rather north and west of Phrygia. The Romans finally absorbed most of it in the Province of Asia. {They assayed to go into Bithynia} (\epeirazon eis tˆn Bithunian poreuthˆnai\). Conative imperfect of \peiraz“\ and ingressive aorist passive infinitive of \poreuomai\. Now Bithynia is northeast of Mysia and north of Galatia (province). Clearly Luke means to say that Paul had, when hindered by the Holy Spirit from going west into Asia, gone north so as to come in front of Bithynia. This journey would take him directly through Phrygia and the North Galatian country (the real Gauls or Celts). This is, to my mind, the strongest argument for the North Galatian view in these verses 6,7|. The grammar and the topography bring Paul right up to Bithynia (north of the old Galatia). It is verses 6,7| that make me pause before accepting the plausible arguments of Ramsay for the South Galatian theory. In itself the problem is nothing like so important or so determinative as he makes it. But shall we smash Luke's grammar to pieces to bolster up a theory of criticism? {And the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not} (\kai ouk eiasen autous to pneuma Iˆsou\). The same Spirit who in verse 6| had forbidden going into Asia now closed the door into Bithynia. This expression occurs nowhere else, but we have the spirit of Christ (Romans:8:9|) and the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Phillipians:1:19|). \Eiasen\ is first aorist active indicative of \ea“\, old verb to allow.

rwp@Acts:17:17 @{Songs:he reasoned} (\dielegeto men oun\). Accordingly therefore, with his spirit stirred by the proof of idolatry. Imperfect middle of \dialeg“\, same verb used in verse 2| which see. First he reasoned in the synagogue at the services to the Jews and the God-fearers, then daily in the agora or marketplace (southwest of the Acropolis, between it and the Areopagus and the Pnyx) to the chance-comers, "them that met him" (\pros tous paratugchanontas\). Simultaneously with the synagogue preaching at other hours Paul took his stand like Socrates before him and engaged in conversation with (\pros\) those who happened by. This old verb, \paratugchan“\, occurs here alone in the N.T. and accurately pictures the life in the agora. The listeners to Paul in the agora would be more casual than those who stop for street preaching, a Salvation Army meeting, a harangue from a box in Hyde Park. It was a slim chance either in synagogue or in agora, but Paul could not remain still with all the reeking idolatry around him. The boundaries of the agora varied, but there was always the \Poikilˆ Stoa\ (the Painted Porch), over against the Acropolis on the west. In this \Stoa\ (Porch) Zeno and other philosophers and rhetoricians held forth from time to time. Paul may have stood near this spot.

rwp@Acts:17:18 @{And certain also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him} (\tines de kai t“n Epikouri“n kai St“ik“n philosoph“n suneballon aut“i\). Imperfect active of \sunball“\, old verb, in the N.T. only by Luke, to bring or put together in one's mind (Luke:2:19|), to meet together (Acts:20:14|), to bring together aid (18:27|), to confer or converse or dispute as here and already strkjv@4:15| which see. These professional philosophers were always ready for an argument and so they frequented the agora for that purpose. Luke uses one article and so groups the two sects together in their attitude toward Paul, but they were very different in fact. Both sects were eager for argument and both had disdain for Paul, but they were the two rival practical philosophies of the day, succeeding the more abstruse theories of Plato and Aristotle. Socrates had turned men's thought inward (\Gn“thi Seauton\, Know Thyself) away from the mere study of physics. Plato followed with a profound development of the inner self (metaphysics). Aristotle with his cyclopaedic grasp sought to unify and relate both physics and metaphysics. Both Zeno and Epicurus (340-272 B.C.) took a more practical turn in all this intellectual turmoil and raised the issues of everyday life. Zeno (360-260 B.C.) taught in the \Stoa\ (Porch) and so his teaching was called Stoicism. He advanced many noble ideas that found their chief illustration in the Roman philosophers (Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius). He taught self-mastery and hardness with an austerity that ministered to pride or suicide in case of failure, a distinctly selfish and unloving view of life and with a pantheistic philosophy. Epicurus considered practical atheism the true view of the universe and denied a future life and claimed pleasure as the chief thing to be gotten out of life. He did not deny the existence of gods, but regarded them as unconcerned with the life of men. The Stoics called Epicurus an atheist. Lucretius and Horace give the Epicurean view of life in their great poems. This low view of life led to sensualism and does today, for both Stoicism and Epicureanism are widely influential with people now. "Eat and drink for tomorrow we die," they preached. Paul had doubtless become acquainted with both of these philosophies for they were widely prevalent over the world. Here he confronts them in their very home. He is challenged by past-masters in the art of appealing to the senses, men as skilled in their dialectic as the Pharisaic rabbis with whom Paul had been trained and whose subtleties he had learned how to expose. But, so far as we know, this is a new experience for Paul to have a public dispute with these philosophical experts who had a natural contempt for all Jews and for rabbis in particular, though they found Paul a new type at any rate and so with some interest in him. "In Epicureanism, it was man's sensual nature which arrayed itself against the claims of the gospel; in Stoicism it was his self-righteousness and pride of intellect" (Hackett). Knowling calls the Stoic the Pharisee of philosophy and the Epicurean the Sadducee of philosophy. Socrates in this very agora used to try to interest the passers-by in some desire for better things. That was 450 years before Paul is challenged by these superficial sophistical Epicureans and Stoics. It is doubtful if Paul had ever met a more difficult situation. {What would this babbler say?} (\Ti an theloi ho spermologos houtos legein?\). The word for "babbler" means "seed-picker" or picker up of seeds (\sperma\, seed, \leg“\, to collect) like a bird in the agora hopping about after chance seeds. Plutarch applies the word to crows that pick up grain in the fields. Demosthenes called Aeschines a \spermologos\. Eustathius uses it of a man hanging around in the markets picking up scraps of food that fell from the carts and so also of mere rhetoricians and plagiarists who picked up scraps of wisdom from others. Ramsay considers it here a piece of Athenian slang used to describe the picture of Paul seen by these philosophers who use it, for not all of them had it ("some," \tines\). Note the use of \an\ and the present active optative \theloi\, conclusion of a fourth-class condition in a rhetorical question (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). It means, What would this picker up of seeds wish to say, if he should get off an idea? It is a contemptuous tone of supreme ridicule and doubtless Paul heard this comment. Probably the Epicureans made this sneer that Paul was a charlatan or quack. {Other some} (\hoi de\). But others, in contrast with the "some" just before. Perhaps the Stoics take this more serious view of Paul. {He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods} (\zen“n daimoni“n dokei kataggeleus einai\). This view is put cautiously by \dokei\ (seems). \Kataggeleus\ does not occur in the old Greek, though in ecclesiastical writers, but Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 99) gives an example of the word "on a marble stele recording a decree of the Mitylenaens in honour of the Emperor Augustus," where it is the herald of the games. Here alone in the N.T. \Daimonion\ is used in the old Greek sense of deity or divinity whether good or bad, not in the N.T. sense of demons. Both this word and \kataggeleus\ are used from the Athenian standpoint. \Xenos\ is an old word for a guest-friend (Latin _hospes_) and then host (Romans:16:23|), then for foreigner or stranger (Matthew:25:31; strkjv@Acts:17:21|), new and so strange as here and strkjv@Hebrews:13:9; strkjv@1Peter:4:12|, and then aliens (Ephesians:2:12|). This view of Paul is the first count against Socrates: Socrates does wrong, introducing new deities (\adikei S“kratˆs, kaina daimonia eispher“n\, Xen. _Mem_. I). On this charge the Athenians voted the hemlock for their greatest citizen. What will they do to Paul? This Athens was more sceptical and more tolerant than the old Athens. But Roman law did not allow the introduction of a new religion (_religio illicita_). Paul was walking on thin ice though he was the real master philosopher and these Epicureans and Stoics were quacks. Paul had the only true philosophy of the universe and life with Jesus Christ as the centre (Colossians:1:12-20|), the greatest of all philosophers as Ramsay justly terms him. But these men are mocking him. {Because he preached Jesus and the resurrection} (\hoti ton Iˆsoun kai tˆn anastasin euˆggelizato\). Reason for the view just stated. Imperfect middle indicative of \euaggeliz“\, to "gospelize." Apparently these critics considered \anastasis\ (Resurrection) another deity on a par with Jesus. The Athenians worshipped all sorts of abstract truths and virtues and they misunderstood Paul on this subject. They will leave him as soon as he mentions the resurrection (verse 32|). It is objected that Luke would not use the word in this sense here for his readers would not under stand him. But Luke is describing the misapprehension of this group of philosophers and this interpretation fits in precisely.

rwp@Acts:17:19 @{And they took hold of him} (\epilabomenoi de autou\). Second aorist middle participle of \epilamban“\, old verb, but in the N.T. only in the middle, here with the genitive \autou\ to lay hold of, but with no necessary sense of violence (Acts:9:27; strkjv@23:27; strkjv@Mark:8:23|), unless the idea is that Paul was to be tried before the Court of Areopagus for the crime of bringing in strange gods. But the day for that had passed in Athens. Even so it is not clear whether "{unto the Areopagus} (\epi ton Areion Pagon\") means the Hill of Mars (west of the Acropolis, north of the agora and reached by a flight of steps in the rock) or the court itself which met elsewhere as well as on the hills, usually in fact in the Stoa Basilica opening on the agora and near to the place where the dispute had gone on. Raphael's cartoon with Paul standing on Mars Hill has made us all familiar with the common view, but it is quite uncertain if it is true. There was not room on the summit for a large gathering. If Paul was brought before the Court of Areopagus (commonly called the Areopagus as here), it was not for trial as a criminal, but simply for examination concerning his new teaching in this university city whether it was strictly legal or not. Paul was really engaged in proselytism to turn the Athenians away from their old gods to Jesus Christ. But "the court of refined and polished Athenians was very different from the rough provincial magistrates of Philippi, and the philosophers who presented Paul to their cognizance very different from the mob of Thessalonians" (Rackham). It was all very polite. {May we know?} (\Dunametha gn“nai\). Can we come to know (ingressive second aorist active infinitive). {This new teaching} (\hˆ kainˆ hautˆ didachˆ\). On the position of \hautˆ\ see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 700f. The question was prompted by courtesy, sarcasm, or irony. Evidently no definite charge was laid against Paul.

rwp@Acts:17:31 @{Inasmuch as} (\kathoti\). According as (\kata, hoti\). Old causal conjunction, but in N.T. only used in Luke's writings (Luke:1:7; strkjv@19:9; strkjv@Acts:2:45; strkjv@4:35; strkjv@17:31|). {Hath appointed a day} (\estˆsen hˆmeran\) First aorist active indicative of \histˆmi\, to place, set. God did set the day in his counsel and he will fulfil it in his own time. {Will judge} (\mellei krinein\). Rather, is going to judge, \mell“\ and the present active infinitive of \krin“\. Paul here quotes strkjv@Psalms:9:8| where \krinei\ occurs. {By the man whom he hath ordained} (\en andri h“i h“risen\). Here he adds to the Psalm the place and function of Jesus Christ, a passage in harmony with Christ's own words in strkjv@Matthew:25|. \H“i\ (whom) is attracted from the accusative, object of \h“risen\ (first aorist active indicative of \horiz“\) to the case of the antecedent \andri\. It has been said that Paul left the simple gospel in this address to the council of the Areopagus for philosophy. But did he? He skilfully caught their attention by reference to an altar to an Unknown God whom he interprets to be the Creator of all things and all men who overrules the whole world and who now commands repentance of all and has revealed his will about a day of reckoning when Jesus Christ will be Judge. He has preached the unity of God, the one and only God, has proclaimed repentance, a judgment day, Jesus as the Judge as shown by his Resurrection, great fundamental doctrines, and doubtless had much more to say when they interrupted his address. There is no room here for such a charge against Paul. He rose to a great occasion and made a masterful exposition of God's place and power in human history. {Whereof he hath given assurance} (\pistin parasch“n\). Second aorist active participle of \parech“\, old verb to furnish, used regularly by Demosthenes for bringing forward evidence. Note this old use of \pistis\ as conviction or ground of confidence (Hebrews:11:1|) like a note or title-deed, a conviction resting on solid basis of fact. All the other uses of \pistis\ grow out of this one from \peith“\, to persuade. {In that he hath raised him from the dead} (\anastˆsas auton ek nekr“n\). First aorist active participle of \anistˆmi\, causal participle, but literally, "having raised him from the dead." This Paul knew to be a fact because he himself had seen the Risen Christ. Paul has here come to the heart of his message and could now throw light on their misapprehension about "Jesus and the Resurrection" (verse 18|). Here Paul has given the proof of all his claims in the address that seemed new and strange to them.

rwp@Acts:18:6 @{When they opposed themselves} (\antitassomen“n aut“n\). Genitive absolute with present middle (direct middle again) of \antitass“\, old verb to range in battle array (\tass“\) face to face with or against (\anti\). In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:13:2; strkjv@James:4:6; strkjv@1Peter:5:5|. Paul's fresh activity roused the rabbis as at Antioch in Pisidia and at Thessalonica in concerted opposition and railing (blasphemy). {He shook out his raiment} (\ektinaxamenos ta himatia\). First aorist middle of \ektinass“\, old verb, in the N.T. only here as in strkjv@13:51| (middle) and strkjv@Mark:6:11; strkjv@Matthew:10:15| where active voice occurs of shaking out dust also. Vivid and dramatic picture here like that in strkjv@Nehemiah:5:13|, "undoubtedly a very exasperating gesture" (Ramsay), but Paul was deeply stirred. {Your blood be upon your own heads} (\To haima hum“n epi tˆn kephalˆn hum“n\). As in strkjv@Ezekiel:3:18f., strkjv@33:4,8f.; strkjv@2Samuel:1:16|. Not as a curse, but "a solemn disclaimer of responsibility" by Paul (Page) as in strkjv@Acts:20:26|. The Jews used this very phrase in assuming responsibility for the blood of Jesus (Matthew:27:25|). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:23:35|. {I am clean} (\katharos eg“\). Pure from your blood. Repeats the claim made in previous sentence. Paul had done his duty. {From henceforth} (\apo tou nun\). Turning point reached in Corinth. He will devote himself to the Gentiles, though Jews will be converted there also. Elsewhere as in Ephesus (19:1-10|) and in Rome (Acts:28:23-28|) Paul will preach also to Jews.

rwp@Acts:18:12 @{When Gallio was proconsul of Achaia} (\Galli“nos de anthupatou ontos tˆs Achaias\). Genitive absolute of present participle \ontos\. Brother of Seneca the Stoic (Nero's tutor) and uncle of Lucan the author of the \Pharsalia\. His original name was M. Annaeus Novatus till he was adopted by Gallio the rhetorician. The family was Spanish. Gallio was a man of culture and refinement and may have been chosen proconsul of Achaia for this reason. Statius calls him "_dulcis Gallio_." Seneca says of him: _Nemo enim mortalium uni tam dulcis quam hic omnibus_ (No one of mortals is so pleasant to one person as he is to all). Luke alone among writers says that he was proconsul, but Seneca speaks of his being in Achaia where he caught fever, a corroboration of Luke. But now a whitish grey limestone inscription from the Hagios Elias quarries near Delphi (a letter of Claudius to Delphi) has been found which definitely names Gallio as proconsul of Achaia (\authupatos tˆs Achaias\). The province of Achaia after various shifts (first senatorial, then imperial) back and forth with Macedonia, in A.D. 44 Claudius gave back to the Senate with proconsul as the title of the governor. It is amazing how Luke is confirmed whenever a new discovery is made. The discovery of this inscription has thrown light also on the date of Paul's work in Corinth as it says that Gallio came in the 26th acclamation of Claudius as Emperor in A.D. 51, that would definitely fix the time of Paul in Corinth as A.D. 50 and 51 (or 51 and 52). Deissmann has a full and able discussion of the whole matter in Appendix I to his _St. Paul_. {Rose up} (\katepestˆsan\). Second aorist active of \kat-eph-istˆmi\, intransitive, to take a stand against, a double compound verb found nowhere else. They took a stand (\estˆsan\) against (\kata\, down on, \epi\, upon), they made a dash or rush at Paul as if they would stand it no longer. {Before the judgment seat} (\epi to bˆma\). See on ¯12:21|. The proconsul was sitting in the basilica in the forum or agora. The Jews had probably heard of his reputation for moderation and sought to make an impression as they had on the praetors of Philippi by their rush (\sunepestˆ\, strkjv@16:22|). The new proconsul was a good chance also (25:2|). Songs:for the second time Paul faces a Roman proconsul (Sergius Paulus, strkjv@13:7|) though under very different circumstances.

rwp@Acts:18:14 @{When Paul was about to open his mouth} (\mellontos tou Paulou anoigein to stoma\). Genitive absolute again. Before Paul could speak, Gallio cut in and ended the whole matter. According to their own statement Paul needed no defence. {Wrong} (\adikˆma\). _Injuria_. Old word, a wrong done one. In N.T. only here, strkjv@Acts:24:20; strkjv@Revelation:18:5|. Here it may mean a legal wrong to the state. {Wicked villainy} (\rhƒidiourgˆma\). A crime, act of a criminal, from \rhƒidiourgos\ (\rhƒidios\, easy, \ergon\, work), one who does a thing with ease, adroitly, a "slick citizen." {Reason would that I should bear with you} (\kata logon an aneschomˆn hum“n\). Literally, "according to reason I should have put up with you (or held myself back from you)." This condition is the second class (determined as unfulfilled) and means that the Jews had no case against Paul in a Roman court. The verb in the conclusion (\aneschomˆn\) is second aorist middle indicative and means with the ablative \hum“n\ "I should have held myself back (direct middle) from you (ablative). The use of \an\ makes the form of the condition plain.

rwp@Acts:18:17 @{They all laid hold on Sosthenes} (\epilabomenoi pantes S“sthenˆn\). See strkjv@16:19; strkjv@17:19| for the same form. Here is violent hostile reaction against their leader who had failed so miserably. {Beat him} (\etupton\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to beat him, even if they could not beat Paul. Sosthenes succeeded Crispus (verse 8|) when he went over to Paul. The beating did Sosthenes good for he too finally is a Christian (1Corinthians:1:1|), a co-worker with Paul whom he had sought to persecute. {And Gallio cared for none of these things} (\kai ouden tout“n t“i Galli“ni emelen\). Literally, "no one of these things was a care to Gallio." The usually impersonal verb (\melei, emelen\, imperfect active) here has the nominative as in strkjv@Luke:10:40|. These words have been often misunderstood as a description of Gallio's lack of interest in Christianity, a religious indifferentist. But that is quite beside the mark. Gallio looked the other way with a blind eye while Sosthenes got the beating which he richly deserved. That was a small detail for the police court, not for the proconsul's concern. Gallio shows up well in Luke's narrative as a clear headed judge who would not be led astray by Jewish subterfuges and with the courage to dismiss a mob.

rwp@Acts:19:9 @{But when some were hardened} (\h“s de tines esklˆrunonto\). Imperfect passive of \sklˆrun“\, causative like _hiphil_ in Hebrew, to make hard (\sklˆros\) or rough or harsh (Matthew:25:24|). In LXX and Hippocrates and Galen (in medical writings). In N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:9:18| and 4 times in strkjv@Hebrews:3:8,13,15; strkjv@4:7,8| quoting and referring to strkjv@Psalms:95:8| about hardening the heart like a gristle. The inevitable reaction against Paul went on even in Ephesus though slowly. {Disobedient} (\epeithoun\). Imperfect again, showing the growing disbelief and disobedience (\apeithˆs\), both ideas as in strkjv@14:2; strkjv@17:5|, first refusal to believe and then refusal to obey. Both \sklˆrun“\ and \apeithe“\ occur together, as here, in Ecclus. strkjv@30:12. {Speaking evil of the Way} (\kakologountes tˆn hodon\). Late verb from \kakologos\ (speaker of evil) for the old \kak“s leg“\. Already in strkjv@Mark:7:10; strkjv@9:39; strkjv@Matthew:15:4|. Now these Jews are aggressive opponents of Paul and seek to injure his influence with the crowd. Note "the Way" as in strkjv@9:2| for Christianity. {He departed from them} (\apostas ap' aut“n\). Second aorist active participle of \aphistˆmi\, made an "apostasy" (standing off, cleavage) as he did at Corinth (18:7|, \metabas\, making a change). {Separated the disciples} (\aph“risen tous mathˆtas\). First aorist active indicative of \aphoriz“\, old verb to mark limits (horizon) as already in strkjv@13:2|. Paul himself was a spiritual Pharisee "separated" to Christ (Romans:1:1|). The Jews regarded this withdrawal as apostasy, like separating the sheep from the goats (Matthew:25:32|). Paul now made a separate church as he had done at Thessalonica and Corinth. {In the school of Tyrannus} (\en tˆi scholˆi Turannou\). \Scholˆ\ (our school) is an old word from \schein\ (\ech“\) to hold on, leisure and then in later Greek (Plutarch, etc.) a place where there is leisure as here. Only this example in the N.T. This is the Greek notion of "school," the Jewish being that of "yoke" as in strkjv@Matthew:11:29|. The name Tyrannus (our tyrant) is a common one. It is an inscription in the Columbarium of the Empress Livia as that of a physician in the court. Furneaux suggests the possibility that a relative of this physician was lecturing on medicine in Ephesus and so as a friend of Luke, the physician, would be glad to help Paul about a place to preach. It was probably a public building or lecture hall with this name whether hired by Paul or loaned to him. The pagan sophists often spoke in such halls. The Codex Bezae adds "from the fifth hour to the tenth" as the time allotted Paul for his work in this hall, which is quite possible, from just before midday till the close of the afternoon (from before the noon meal till two hours before sunset) each day. Here Paul had great freedom and a great hearing. As the church grows there will be other places of meeting as the church in the house of Aquila and Priscilla (1Corinthians:16:19|).

rwp@Acts:19:25 @{Whom he gathered together} (\hous sunathroisas\). First aorist active participle of \sunathroiz“\, old verb to assemble together (\athroos\, a crowd), in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:12:12|. {With the workmen of like occupation} (\kai tous peri ta toiauta ergatas\). "And the workmen concerning such things," apparently those who made the marble and terra-cotta shrines who would also be affected in the same way. It was a gathering of the associated trades, not for a strike, for employer and employees met together, but in protest against the preaching of Paul. {We have our wealth} (\hˆ euporia hˆmin estin\). The wealth is to us (dative of possession). This old word for wealth occurs here alone in the N.T. It is from \eu\ and \poros\, easy to pass through, easy to accomplish, to be well off, wealthy, welfare, weal, well-being, rich. Demetrius appeals to this knowledge and self-interest of the artisans as the basis for their zeal for Artemis, piety for revenue.

rwp@Acts:19:26 @{At Ephesus} (\Ephesou\). Genitive of place as also with \Asias\ (Asia). Cf. Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 494f. {This Paul} (\ho Paulos houtos\). Contemptuous use of \houtos\. {Hath turned away} (\metestˆsen\). Changed, transposed. First aorist active indicative, did change. Tribute to Paul's powers as a preacher borne out by Luke's record in strkjv@19:10|. There may be an element of exaggeration on the part of Demetrius to incite the workmen to action, for the worship of Artemis was their wealth. Paul had cut the nerve of their business. There had long been a Jewish colony in Ephesus, but their protest against idolatry was as nothing compared with Paul's preaching (Furneaux). {Which are made with hands} (\hoi dia cheir“n ginomenoi\). Note the present tense, made from time to time. No doubt Paul had put the point sharply as in Athens (Acts:17:29|). Isaiah (Isaiah:44:9-17|) had pictured graphically the absurdity of worshipping stocks and stones, flatly forbidden by the Old Testament (Exodus:20:4; strkjv@Psalms:135:15-18|). The people identified their gods with the images of them and Demetrius reflects that point of view. He was jealous of the brand of gods turned out by his factory. The artisans would stand by him on this point. It was a reflection on their work.

rwp@Acts:19:28 @{They were filled with wrath} (\genomenoi plereis thumou\). Having become full of wrath. {Cried out} (\ekrazon\). Inchoative imperfect, began to cry out and kept it up continuously. Reiteration was characteristic of the orgiastic exercises. The Codex Bezae adds after \thumou\ (wrath): \Dramontes eis tˆn amphodon\ (running into the street), which they certainly did after the speech of Demetrius. {Great is Artemis of the Ephesians} (\Megalˆ hˆ Artemis Ephesi“n\). D (Codex Bezae) omits \hˆ\ (the) and makes it read: "Great Artemis of the Ephesians." This was the usual cry of the votaries in their orgies as the inscriptions show, an ejaculatory outcry or prayer instead of an argument as the other MSS. have it. That is vivid and natural (Ramsay, _Church in the Roman Empire_, pp. 135ff.). Yet on this occasion the artisans were making an argumentative protest and plea against Paul. An inscription at Dionysopolis has "Great is Apollo."

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

rwp@Acts:19:37 @{Neither robbers of temples} (\oute hierosulous\). Common word in Greek writers from \hieron\, temple, and \sula“\, to rob, be guilty of sacrilege. The word is found also on inscriptions in Ephesus. The Jews were sometimes guilty of this crime (Romans:2:22|), since the heathen temples often had vast treasures like banks. The ancients felt as strongly about temple-robbing as westerners used to feel about a horse-thief. {Nor blasphemers of our goddess} (\oute blasphˆmountas tˆn theon hˆm“n\). Nor those who blasphemed our goddess. That is to say, these men (Gaius and Aristarchus) as Christians had so conducted themselves (Colossians:4:5|) that no charge could be placed against them either in act (temple-robbery) or word (blasphemy). They had done a rash thing since these men are innocent. Paul had used tact in Ephesus as in Athens in avoiding illegalities.

rwp@Acts:19:38 @{Have a matter against any one} (\echousin pros tina logon\). For this use of \ech“ logon\ with \pros\ see strkjv@Matthew:5:32; strkjv@Colossians:3:13|. The town-clerk names Demetrius and the craftsmen (\technitai\) as the parties responsible for the riot. {The courts are open} (\agoraioi agontai\). Supply \hˆmerai\ (days), court days are kept, or \sunodoi\, court-meetings are now going on, Vulgate _conventus forenses aguntur_. Old adjective from \agora\ (forum) marketplace where trials were held. Cf. strkjv@Acts:17:4|. There were regular court days whether they were in session then or not. {And there are proconsuls} (\kai anthupatoi eisin\). Asia was a senatorial province and so had proconsuls (general phrase) though only one at a time, "a rhetorical plural" (Lightfoot). Page quotes from an inscription of the age of Trajan on an aqueduct at Ephesus in which some of Luke's very words occur (\ne“koros, anthupatos, grammateus, dˆmos\). {Let them accuse one another} (\egkaleit“san allˆlois\). Present active imperative of \egkale“\ (\en, kale“\), old verb to call in one's case, to bring a charge against, with the dative. Luke uses the verb six times in Acts for judicial proceedings (19:38,40; strkjv@23:28,29; strkjv@26:2,7|). The town-clerk makes a definite appeal to the mob for orderly legal procedure as opposed to mob violence in a matter where money and religious prejudice unite, a striking rebuke to so-called lynch-law proceedings in lands today where Christianity is supposed to prevail.

rwp@Acts:19:41 @{Dismissed the assembly} (\apelusen tˆn ekklˆsian\). The town-clerk thus gave a semblance of law and order to the mob by formally dismissing them, this much to protect them against the charge to which they were liable. This vivid, graphic picture given by Luke has all the earmarks of historical accuracy. Paul does not describe the incidents in his letters, was not in the theatre in fact, but Luke evidently obtained the details from one who was there. Aristarchus, we know, was with Luke in Caesarea and in Rome and could have supplied all the data necessary. Certainly both Gaius and Aristarchus were lively witnesses of these events since their own lives were involved.

rwp@Acts:20:3 @{When he had spent three months there} (\poiˆsas mˆnas treis\). Literally, "having done three months," the same idiom in strkjv@Acts:14:33; strkjv@18:23; strkjv@James:5:13|. During this period Paul may have written Galatians as Lightfoot argued and certainly did Romans. We do not have to say that Luke was ignorant of Paul's work during this period, only that he did not choose to enlarge upon it. {And a plot was laid against him by the Jews} (\genomenˆs epiboulˆs aut“i hupo t“n Ioudai“n\). Genitive absolute, "a plot by the Jews having come against him." \Epiboulˆ\ is an old word for a plot against one. In the N.T. only in Acts (9:24; strkjv@20:3,19; strkjv@23:30|). Please note that this plot is by the Jews, not the Judaizers whom Paul discusses so vehemently in strkjv@2Corinthians:10-13|. They had given Paul much anguish of heart as is shown in I Cor. and in strkjv@2Corinthians:1-7|, but that trouble seems now past. It is Paul's old enemies in Corinth who had cherished all these years their defeat at the hands of Gallio (Acts:18:5-17|) who now took advantage of Paul's plans for departure to compass his death if possible. {As he was about to set sail for Syria} (\mellonti anagesthai eis tˆn Surian\). The participle \mellonti\ agrees in case (dative) with \aut“i\. For the sense of intending see also verse 13|. \Anagesthai\ (present middle infinitive) is the common word for putting out to sea (going up, they said, from land) as in strkjv@13:13|. {He determined} (\egeneto gn“mˆs\). The best MSS. here read \gn“mˆs\ (predicate ablative of source like \epiluse“s\, strkjv@2Peter:1:20|, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 514), not \gn“mˆ\ (nominative). "He became of opinion." The Jews had heard of Paul's plan to sail for Syria and intended in the hurly-burly either to kill him at the docks in Cenchreae or to push him overboard from the crowded pilgrim ship bound for the passover. Fortunately Paul learned of their plot and so eluded them by going through Macedonia. The Codex Bezae adds here that "the Spirit bade him return into Macedonia."

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

rwp@Acts:20:19 @[After what manner I was with you} (\p“s meth' h–m“n egenomˆn\). Literally, "How I came (from Asia and so was) with you." Cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:5; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1-10| where Paul likewise dares to refer boldly to his life while with them "all the time" (\ton panta chronon\). Accusative of duration of time. Songs:far as we know, Paul stuck to Ephesus the whole period. He had devoted himself consecratedly to the task in Ephesus. Each pastor is bishop of his field and has a golden opportunity to work it for Christ. One of the saddest things about the present situation is the restlessness of preachers to go elsewhere instead of devoting themselves wholly to the task where they are. 19|. {Serving the Lord} (\douleu“n t“i kuri“i\). It was Paul's glory to be the \doulos\ (bond-slave) as in strkjv@Romans:1:1; strkjv@Phillipians:1:1|. Paul alone, save Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:6:24; strkjv@Luke:16:13|, uses \douleu“\ six times for serving God (Page). {With all lowliness of mind} (\meta pasˆs tapeinophrosunˆs\). Lightfoot notes that heathen writers use this word for a grovelling, abject state of mind, but Paul follows Christ in using it for humility, humble-mindedness that should mark every Christian and in particular the preacher. {With tears} (\dakru“n\). Construed with \meta\. Paul was a man of the deepest emotion along with his high intellectuality. He mentions his tears again in verse 31|, tears of sorrow and of anxiety. He refers to his tears in writing the sharp letter to the church in Corinth (2Corinthians:2:4|) and in denouncing the sensual apostates in strkjv@Phillipians:3:18|. Adolphe Monod has a wonderful sermon on the tears of Paul. Consider also the tears of Jesus. {Trials which befell me} (\peirasm“n t“n sumbant“n moi\). Construed also with \meta\. Second aorist active participle of \sunbain“\, to walk with, to go with, to come together, to happen, to befall. Very common in this sense in the old Greek (cf. strkjv@Acts:3:10|). {By the plots of the Jews} (\en tais epiboulais t“n Ioudai“n\). Like the plot (\epiboulˆ\) against him in Corinth (20:3|) as well as the earlier trial before Gallio and the attacks in Thessalonica. In strkjv@Acts:19:9| Luke shows the hostile attitude of the Jews in Ephesus that drove Paul out of the synagogue to the school of Tyrannus. He does not describe in detail these "plots" which may easily be imagined from Paul's own letters and may be even referred to in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:10; strkjv@15:30ff.; strkjv@16:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:4-10; strkjv@7:5; strkjv@11:23|. In fact, one has only to dwell on the allusions in strkjv@2Corinthians:11| to picture what Paul's life was in Ephesus during these three years. Luke gives in strkjv@Acts:19| the outbreak of Demetrius, but Paul had already fought with "wild-beasts" there.

rwp@Acts:20:29 @{After my departing} (\meta tˆn aphixin mou\). Not his death, but his departure from them. From \aphikneomai\ and usually meant arrival, but departure in Herodotus IX. 17, 76 as here. {Grievous wolves} (\lukoi bareis\). \Bareis\ is heavy, rapacious, harsh. Jesus had already so described false teachers who would raven the fold (John:10:12|). Whether Paul had in mind the Judaizers who had given him so much trouble in Antioch, Jerusalem, Galatia, Corinth or the Gnostics the shadow of whose coming he already foresaw is not perfectly clear. But it will not be many years before Epaphras will come to Rome from Colossae with news of the new peril there (Epistle to the Colossians). In writing to Timothy (1Timothy:1:20|) Paul will warn him against some who have already made shipwreck of their faith. In strkjv@Revelation:2:2| John will represent Jesus as describing false apostles in Ephesus. {Not sparing the flock} (\mˆ pheidomenoi tou poimniou\). Litotes again as so often in Acts. Sparing the flock was not the fashion of wolves. Jesus sent the seventy as lambs in the midst of wolves (Luke:10:3|). In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus had pictured the false prophets who would come as ravening wolves in sheep's clothing (Matthew:7:15|).

rwp@Acts:21:19 @{He rehearsed} (\exˆgeito\). Imperfect middle of \exˆgeomai\, old verb to lead out, to draw out in narrative, to recount. Songs:Paul is pictured as taking his time for he had a great story to tell of what had happened since they saw him last. {One by one} (\kath' hena hekaston\). According to each one (item) and the adverbial phrase used as an accusative after the verb \exˆgeito\ as Demosthenes does (1265), though it could be like \kath' hena hekastos\ in strkjv@Ephesians:5:33|. {Which} (\h“n\). Genitive attracted from \ha\ (accusative) into the case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\. {God had wrought} (\epoiˆsen ho theos\). Summary constative aorist active indicative that gathers up all that God did and he takes pains to give God the glory. It is possible that at this formal meeting Paul observed an absence of warmth and enthusiasm in contrast with the welcome accorded by his friends the day before (verse 17|). Furneaux thinks that Paul was coldly received on this day in spite of the generous offering brought from the Gentile Christians. "It looks as though his misgiving as to its reception (Romans:15:31|) was confirmed. Nor do we hear that the Christians of Jerusalem later put in so much as a word on his behalf with either the Jewish or the Roman authorities, or expressed any sympathy with him during his long imprisonment at Caesarea" (Furneaux). The most that can be said is that the Judaizers referred to by James do not appear actively against him. The collection and the plan proposed by James accomplished that much at any rate. It stopped the mouths of those lions.

rwp@Acts:21:20 @{Glorified} (\edoxazon\). Inchoative imperfect, began to glorify God, though without special praise of Paul. {How many thousands} (\posai muriades\). Old word for ten thousand (Acts:19:19|) and then an indefinite number like our "myriads" (this very word) as strkjv@Luke:12:1; strkjv@Acts:21:20; strkjv@Jude:1:14; strkjv@Revelation:5:11; strkjv@9:16|. But it is a surprising statement even with allowable hyperbole, but one may recall strkjv@Acts:4:4| (number of the men--not women--about five thousand); strkjv@5:14| (multitudes both of men and women); strkjv@6:7|. There were undoubtedly a great many thousands of believers in Jerusalem and all Jewish Christians, some, alas, Judaizers (Acts:11:2; strkjv@15:1,5|). This list may include the Christians from neighbouring towns in Palestine and even some from foreign countries here at the Feast of Pentecost, for it is probable that Paul arrived in time for it as he had hoped. But we do not have to count the hostile Jews from Asia (verse 27|) who were clearly not Christians at all. {All zealous for the law} (\pantes zˆl“tai tou nomou\). Zealots (substantive) rather than zealous (adjective) with objective genitive (\tou nomou\). The word zealot is from \zˆlo“\, to burn with zeal, to boil. The Greek used \zˆl“tˆs\ for an imitator or admirer. There was a party of Zealots (developed from the Pharisees), a group of what would be called "hot-heads," who brought on the war with Rome. One of this party, Simon Zelotes (Acts:1:13|), was in the number of the twelve apostles. It is important to understand the issues in Jerusalem. It was settled at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15; strkjv@Galatians:2|) that the Mosaic ceremonial law was not to be imposed upon Gentile Christians. Paul won freedom for them, but it was not said that it was wrong for Jewish Christians to go on observing it if they wished. We have seen Paul observing the passover in Philippi (Acts:20:6|) and planning to reach Jerusalem for Pentecost (20:16|). The Judaizers rankled under Paul's victory and power in spreading the gospel among the Gentiles and gave him great trouble in Galatia and Corinth. They were busy against him in Jerusalem also and it was to undo the harm done by them in Jerusalem that Paul gathered the great collection from the Gentile Christians and brought it with him and the delegates from the churches. Clearly then Paul had real ground for his apprehension of trouble in Jerusalem while still in Corinth (Romans:15:25|) when he asked for the prayers of the Roman Christians (verses 30-32|). The repeated warnings along the way were amply justified.

rwp@Acts:21:21 @{They have been informed concerning thee} (\katˆchˆthˆsan peri sou\). First aorist passive indicative of \katˆche“\. A word in the ancient Greek, but a few examples survive in the papyri. It means to sound (echo, from \ˆch“\, our word) down (\kata\), to resound, re-echo, to teach orally. Oriental students today (Arabs learning the Koran) often study aloud. In the N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:1:4| which see; strkjv@Acts:18:25; strkjv@21:21; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:19; strkjv@Galatians:6:6; strkjv@Romans:2:18|. This oral teaching about Paul was done diligently by the Judaizers who had raised trouble against Peter (Acts:11:2|) and Paul (15:1,5|). They had failed in their attacks on Paul's world campaigns. Now they try to undermine him at home. In Paul's long absence from Jerusalem, since strkjv@18:22|, they have had a free hand, save what opposition James would give, and have had great success in prejudicing the Jerusalem Christians against Paul. Songs:James, in the presence of the other elders and probably at their suggestion, feels called upon to tell Paul the actual situation. {That thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses} (\hoti apostasian didaskeis apo M“use“s tous kata ta ethnˆ pantas Ioudaious\). Two accusatives with \didaskeis\ (verb of teaching) according to rule. Literally, "That thou art teaching all the Jews among (\kata\) the Gentiles (the Jews of the dispersion as in strkjv@2:9|) apostasy from Moses." That is the point, the dreadful word \apostasian\ (our apostasy), a late form (I Macc. strkjv@2:15) for the earlier \apostasis\ (cf. strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3| for \apostasia\). "In the eyes of the church at Jerusalem this was a far more serious matter than the previous question at the Conference about the status of Gentile converts" (Furneaux). Paul had brought that issue to the Jerusalem Conference because of the contention of the Judaizers. But here it is not the Judaizers, but the elders of the church with James as their spokesman on behalf of the church as a whole. They do not believe this false charge, but they wish Paul to set it straight. Paul had made his position clear in his Epistles (I Corinthians, Galatians, Romans) for all who cared to know. {Telling them not to circumcise their children} (\leg“n mˆ peritemnein autous ta tekna\). The participle \leg“n\ agrees with "thou" (Paul), the subject of \didaskeis\. This is not indirect assertion, but indirect command, hence the negative \mˆ\ instead of \ou\ with the infinitive (Robertson, _Grammar_, p.1046). The point is not that Paul stated what the Jewish Christians in the dispersion do, but that he says that they (\autous\ accusative of general reference) are not to go on circumcising (\peritemnein\, present active infinitive) their children. Paul taught the very opposite (1Corinthians:7:18|) and had Timothy circumcised (Acts:16:3|) because he was half Jew and half Greek. His own practice is stated in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:19| ("to the Jews as a Jew"). {Neither to walk after the customs} (\mˆde tois ethesin peripatein\). Locative case with infinitive \peripatein\. The charge was here enlarged to cover it all and to make Paul out an enemy of Jewish life and teachings. That same charge had been made against Stephen when young Saul (Paul) was the leader (6:14|): "Will change the customs (\ethˆ\ the very word used here) which Moses delivered unto us." It actually seemed that some of the Jews cared more for Moses than for God (Acts:6:11|). Songs:much for the charge of the Judaizers.

rwp@Acts:21:27 @{The seven days} (\hai hepta hˆmerai\). For which Paul had taken the vow, though there may be an allusion to the pentecostal week for which Paul had desired to be present (20:16|). There is no necessary connexion with the vow in strkjv@18:15|. In strkjv@24:17| Paul makes a general reference to his purpose in coming to Jerusalem to bring alms and offerings (\prosphoras\, sacrifices). Paul spent seven days in Troas (20:6|), Tyre (21:4|), and had planned for seven here if not more. It was on the last of the seven days when Paul was completing his offerings about the vows on all five that the incident occurred that was to make him a prisoner for five years. {When they saw him in the temple} (\theasamenoi auton en t“i hier“i\). First aorist middle participle of \theaomai\ (from \thea\, a view, cf. theatre) to behold. In the very act of honouring the temple these Jews from Asia raise a hue and cry that he is dishonouring it. Paul was not known by face now to many of the Jerusalem Jews, though once the leader of the persecution after the death of Stephen and the outstanding young Jew of the day. But the Jews in Ephesus knew him only too well, some of whom are here at the pentecostal feast. They had plotted against him in Ephesus to no purpose (Acts:19:23-41; strkjv@20:19|), but now a new opportunity had come. It is possible that the cry was led by Alexander put forward by the Jews in Ephesus (19:33|) who may be the same as Alexander the coppersmith who did Paul so much harm (2Timothy:4:14|). Paul was not in the inner sanctuary (\ho naos\), but only in the outer courts (\to hieron\). {Stirred up all the multitude} (\sunecheon panta ton ochlon\). Imperfect (kept on) active of \sunche“\ or \sunchun“\ (\-unn“\), to pour together, to confuse as in strkjv@Acts:2:6; strkjv@9:22; strkjv@19:31,32; strkjv@21:31| and here to stir up by the same sort of confusion created by Demetrius in Ephesus where the same word is used twice (19:31,32|). The Jews from Ephesus had learned it from Demetrius the silversmith. {Laid hands on him} (\epebalan ep' auton tas cheiras\). Second aorist (ingressive, with endings of the first aorist, \-an\) active indicative of \epiball“\, old verb to lay upon, to attack (note repetition of \epi\). They attacked and seized Paul before the charge was made.

rwp@Acts:21:28 @{Help} (\boˆtheite\). Present active imperative of \boˆthe“\, to run (\the“\) at a cry (\boˆ\), as if an outrage had been committed like murder or assault. {All men everywhere} (\panta pantachˆi\). Alliterative. \Pantachˆi\ is a variation in MSS., often \pantachou\, and here only in the N.T. The charges against Paul remind one of those against Stephen (Acts:6:13|) in which Paul had participated according to his confession (22:20|). Like the charges against Stephen and Jesus before him truth and falsehood are mixed. Paul had said that being a Jew would not save a man. He had taught the law of Moses was not binding on Gentiles. He did hold, like Jesus and Stephen, that the temple was not the only place to worship God. But Paul gloried himself in being a Jew, considered the Mosaic law righteous for Jews, and was honouring the temple at this very moment. {And moreover also he brought Greeks also into the temple} (\eti te kai Hellˆnas eisˆgagen eis to hieron\). Note the three particles (\eti te kai\), {and} (\te\) {still more} (\eti\) {also} or {even} (\kai\). Worse than his teaching (\didask“n\) is his dreadful deed: he actually brought (\eisˆgagen\, second aorist active indicative of \eisag“\). This he had a right to do if they only went into the court of the Gentiles. But these Jews mean to imply that Paul had brought Greeks beyond this court into the court of Israel. An inscription was found by Clermont-Ganneau in Greek built into the walls of a mosque on the Via Dolorosa that was on the wall dividing the court of Israel from the court of the Gentiles. Death was the penalty to any Gentile who crossed over into the Court of Israel (_The Athenaeum_, July, 1871). {Hath defiled this holy place} (\kekoin“ken ton hagion topon touton\). Present perfect active of \koino“\, to make common (see on ¯10:14|). Note vivid change of tense, the defilement lasts (state of completion). All this is the substance of the call of these shrewd conspirators from Ephesus, Jews (not Jewish Christians, not even Judaizers) who hated him for his work there and who probably "spoke evil of the Way before the multitude" there so that Paul had to separate the disciples from the synagogue and go to the School of Tyrannus (19:9f.|). These enemies of Paul had now raised the cry of "fire" and vanish from the scene completely (24:19|). This charge was absolutely false as we shall see, made out of inferences of hate and suspicion.

rwp@Acts:21:29 @{For} (\gar\). Luke adds the reason for the wild charges made against Paul. {They had before seen} (\ˆsan proe“rakotes\). Periphrastic past perfect of \proora“\, old verb to see before, whether time or place. Only twice in the N.T., here and strkjv@Acts:2:25| quoted from strkjv@Psalms:15:8|. Note the double reduplication in \-e“-\ as in Attic (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 364). {With him in the city Trophimus the Ephesian} (\Trophimon ton Ephesion en tˆi polei sun aut“i\). The Jews from Asia (Ephesus) knew Trophimus by sight as well as Paul. One day they saw both of them together (\sun\) in the city. That was a fact. They had just seized Paul in the temple (\hieron\). That was another fact. {They supposed} (\enomizon\). Imperfect active of \nomiz“\, common to think or suppose. Perfectly harmless word, but they did, as so many people do, put their supposed inference on the same basis with the facts. They did not see Trophimus with Paul now in the temple, nor had they ever seen him there. They simply argued that, if Paul was willing to be seen down street with a Greek Christian, he would not hesitate to bring him (therefore, did bring him, \eisˆgagen\ as in verse 28|) into the temple, that is into the court of Israel and therefore both Paul and Trophimus were entitled to death, especially Paul who had brought him in (if he had) and, besides, they now had Paul. This is the way of the mob-mind in all ages. Many an innocent man has been rushed to his death by the fury of a lynching party.

rwp@Acts:22:1 @{Brethren and fathers} (\Andres adelphoi kai pateres\) Men, brethren, and fathers. The very language used by Stephen (7:2|) when arraigned before the Sanhedrin with Paul then present. Now Paul faces a Jewish mob on the same charges brought against Stephen. These words are those of courtesy and dignity (_amoris et honoris nomina_, Page). These men were Paul's brother Jews and were (many of them) official representatives of the people (Sanhedrists, priests, rabbis). Paul's purpose is conciliatory, he employs "his ready tact" (Rackham). {The defence which I now make unto you} (\mou tˆs pros humas nuni apologias\). Literally, My defence to you at this time. \Nuni\ is a sharpened form (by \-i\) of \nun\ (now), just now. The term \apologia\ (apology) is not our use of the word for apologizing for an offence, but the original sense of defence for his conduct, his life. It is an old word from \apologeomai\, to talk oneself off a charge, to make defence. It occurs also in strkjv@Acts:25:16| and then also in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:11; strkjv@Phillipians:1:7,16; strkjv@2Timothy:4:16; strkjv@1Peter:3:15|. Paul uses it again in strkjv@Acts:25:16| as here about his defence against the charges made by the Jews from Asia. He is suspected of being a renegade from the Mosaic law and charged with specific acts connected with the alleged profanation of the temple. Songs:Paul speaks in Aramaic and recites the actual facts connected with his change from Judaism to Christianity. The facts make the strongest argument. He first recounts the well-known story of his zeal for Judaism in the persecution of the Christians and shows why the change came. Then he gives a summary of his work among the Gentiles and why he came to Jerusalem this time. He answers the charge of enmity to the people and the law and of desecration of the temple. It is a speech of great skill and force, delivered under remarkable conditions. The one in chapter strkjv@Acts:26| covers some of the same ground, but for a slightly different purpose as we shall see. For a discussion of the three reports in Acts of Paul's conversion see chapter strkjv@Acts:9|. Luke has not been careful to make every detail correspond, though there is essential agreement in all three.

rwp@Acts:23:1 @{Looking steadfastly} (\atenisas\). See on this word strkjv@1:10; strkjv@3:12; strkjv@6:15; strkjv@7:55; strkjv@13:9|. Paul may have had weak eyes, but probably the earnest gaze was to see if he recognized any faces that were in the body that tried Stephen and to which he apparently once belonged. {I have lived before God} (\pepoliteumai t“i the“i\). Perfect middle indicative of \politeu“\, old verb to manage affairs of city (\polis\) or state, to be a citizen, behave as a citizen. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Phillipians:1:27|. The idea of citizenship was Greek and Roman, not Jewish. "He had lived as God's citizen, as a member of God's commonwealth" (Rackham). God (\the“i\) is the dative of personal interest. As God looked at it and in his relation to God. {In all good conscience unto this day} (\pasˆi suneidˆsei agathˆi achri tautˆs tˆs hˆmeras\). This claim seems to lack tact, but for brevity's sake Paul sums up a whole speech in it. He may have said much more than Luke here reports along the line of his speech the day before, but Paul did not make this claim without consideration. It appears to contradict his confession as the chief of sinners (1Timothy:1:13-16|). But that depends on one's interpretation of "good conscience." The word \suneidˆsis\ is literally "joint-knowledge" in Greek, Latin (_conscientia_) and English "conscience" from the Latin. It is a late word from \sunoida\, to know together, common in O.T., Apocrypha, Philo, Plutarch, New Testament, Stoics, ecclesiastical writers. In itself the word simply means consciousness of one's own thoughts (Hebrews:10:2|), or of one's own self, then consciousness of the distinction between right and wrong (Romans:2:15|) with approval or disapproval. But the conscience is not an infallible guide and acts according to the light that it has (1Corinthians:8:7,10; strkjv@1Peter:2:19|). The conscience can be contaminated (Hebrews:10:22|, evil \ponˆrƒs\). All this and more must be borne in mind in trying to understand Paul's description of his motives as a persecutor. Alleviation of his guilt comes thereby, but not removal of guilt as he himself felt (1Timothy:1:13-16|). He means to say to the Sanhedrin that he persecuted Christians as a conscientious (though mistaken) Jew (Pharisee) just as he followed his conscience in turning from Judaism to Christianity. It is a pointed disclaimer against the charge that he is a renegade Jew, an opposer of the law, the people, the temple. Paul addresses the Sanhedrin as an equal and has no "apologies" (in our sense) to make for his career as a whole. The golden thread of consistency runs through, as a good citizen in God's commonwealth. He had the consolation of a good conscience (1Peter:3:16|). The word does not occur in the Gospels and chiefly in Paul's Epistles, but we see it at work in strkjv@John:8:9| (the interpolation strkjv@7:53-8:11|).

rwp@Acts:23:2 @{Ananias} (\Hananias\). Not the one in strkjv@Luke:3:2; strkjv@John:18:13; strkjv@Acts:4:7|, but the son of Nebedaeus, nominated high priest by Herod, King of Chalcis, A.D. 48 and till A.D. 59. He was called to Rome A.D. 52 to answer "a charge of rapine and cruelty made against him by the Samaritans, but honourably acquitted" (Page). Though high priest, he was a man of bad character. {Them that stood by him} (\tois parest“sin aut“i\). Dative case of second perfect participle of \paristˆmi\, to place, and intransitive. See the same form in verse 4| (\parest“tes\). {To smite him on the mouth} (\tuptein autou to stoma\). See on ¯12:45; strkjv@18:17|. Cf. the treatment of Jesus (John:18:22|). Ananias was provoked by Paul's self-assertion while on trial before his judges. "The act was illegal and peculiarly offensive to a Jew at the hands of a Jew" (Knowling). More self-control might have served Paul better. Smiting the mouth or cheek is a peculiarly irritating offence and one not uncommon among the Jews and this fact gives point to the command of Jesus to turn the other check (Luke:6:29| where \tupt“\ is also used).

rwp@Acts:23:5 @{I wist not} (\ouk ˆidein\). Second past perfect of \oida\ used as an imperfect. The Greek naturally means that Paul did not know that it was the high priest who gave the order to smite his mouth. If this view is taken, several things may be said by way of explanation. The high priest may not have had on his official dress as the meeting was called hurriedly by Lysias. Paul had been away so long that he may not have known Ananias on sight. And then Paul may have had poor eyesight or the high priest may not have been sitting in the official seat. Another way of explaining it is to say that Paul was so indignant, even angry, at the command that he spoke without considering who it was that gave the order. The Greek allows this idea also. At any rate Paul at once recognizes the justice of the point made against him. He had been guilty of irreverence against the office of high priest as the passage from strkjv@Exodus:22:18| (LXX) shows and confesses his fault, but the rebuke was deserved. Jesus did not threaten (1Peter:2:23|) when smitten on the cheek (John:18:22|), but he did protest against the act and did not turn the other cheek.

rwp@Acts:23:6 @{But when Paul perceived} (\gnous de ho Paulos\). Perceiving (second aorist ingressive of \gin“sk“\). Paul quickly saw that his cause was ruined before the Sanhedrin by his unwitting attack on the high priest. It was impossible to get a fair hearing. Hence, Vincent says, "Paul, with great tact, seeks to bring the two parties of the council into collision with each other." Songs:Alford argues with the motto "divide and conquer." Farrar condemns Paul and takes strkjv@24:21| as a confession of error here, but that is reading into Paul's word about the resurrection more than he says. Page considers Luke's report meagre and unsatisfactory. Rackham thinks that the trial was already started and that Paul repeated part of his speech of the day before when "the Sadducees received his words with ostentatious scepticism and ridicule: this provoked counter-expressions of sympathy and credulity among the Pharisees." But all this is inference. We do not have to adopt the Jesuitical principle that the end justifies the means in order to see shrewdness and hard sense in what Paul said and did. Paul knew, of course, that the Sanhedrin was nearly evenly divided between Pharisees and Sadducees, for he himself had been a Pharisee. {I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees} (\Eg“ Pharisaios eimi huios Pharisai“n\). This was strictly true as we know from his Epistles (Phillipians:3:5|). {Touching the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question} (\peri elpidos kai anastase“s nekr“n krinomai\). This was true also and this is the point that Paul mentions in strkjv@24:21|. His failure to mention again the fact that he was a Pharisee throws no discredit on Luke's report here. The chief point of difference between Pharisees and Sadducees was precisely this matter of the resurrection. And this was Paul's cardinal doctrine as a Christian minister. It was this fact that convinced him that Jesus was the Messiah and was "the very centre of his faith" (Page) and of his preaching. It was not a mere trick for Paul to proclaim this fact here and so divide the Sanhedrin. As a matter of fact, the Pharisees held aloof when the Sadducees persecuted Peter and the other apostles for preaching resurrection in the case of Jesus and even Gamaliel threw cold water on the effort to punish them for it (Acts:5:34-39|). Songs:then Paul was really recurring to the original cleavage on this point and was able to score a point against the Sadducees as Gamaliel, his great teacher, had done before him. Besides, "Paul and Pharisaism seem to us such opposite ideas that we often forget that to Paul Christianity was the natural development of Judaism" (Page). Paul shows this in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11|.

rwp@Acts:23:21 @{Do not therefore yield unto them} (\Su oun mˆ peisthˆis autois\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \peith“\, common verb, here to be persuaded by, to listen to, to obey, to yield to. With negative and rightly. Do not yield to them (dative) at all. On the aorist subjunctive with \mˆ\ in prohibitions against committing an act see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 851-4. {For there lie in wait} (\enedreuousin gar\). Present active indicative of \enedreu“\, old verb from \enedra\ (verse 16|), in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:11:54| which see. {Till they have slain him} (\he“s hou anel“sin auton\). Same idiom as in verse 12| save that here we have \anel“sin\ (second aorist active subjunctive) instead of \apoktein“sin\ (another word for kill), "till they slay him." {Looking for the promise from thee} (\prosdechomenoi tˆn apo sou epaggelian\). This item is all that is needed to put the scheme through, the young man shrewdly adds.

rwp@Acts:24:1 @{And with an Orator, one Tertullus} (\kai rhˆtoros Tertullou tinos\). A deputation of elders along with the high priest Ananias, not the whole Sanhedrin, but no hint of the forty conspirators or of the Asian Jews. The Sanhedrin had become divided so that now it is probably Ananias (mortally offended) and the Sadducees who take the lead in the prosecution of Paul. It is not clear whether after five days is from Paul's departure from Jerusalem or his arrival in Caesarea. If he spent nine days in Jerusalem, then the five days would be counted from then (verse 11|). The employment of a Roman lawyer (Latin _orator_) was necessary since the Jews were not familiar with Roman legal procedure and it was the custom in the provinces (Cicero _pro Cael_. 30). The speech was probably in Latin which Paul may have understood also. \Rhˆt“r\ is a common old Greek word meaning a forensic orator or advocate but here only in the N.T. The Latin _rhetor_ was a teacher of rhetoric, a very different thing. Tertullus is a diminutive of Tertius (Romans:16:22|). {Informed} (\enephanisan\). Same verb as in strkjv@23:15,22|, somewhat like our modern "indictment," certainly accusations "against Paul" (\kata tou Paulou\). They were down on Paul and the hired barrister was prosecuting attorney. For the legal form see _Oxyrhynchus Papyri_, Vol. II., p. 162, line 19.

rwp@Acts:24:5 @{For we have found} (\heurontes gar\). Second aorist active participle of \heurisk“\, but without a principal verb in the sentence. Probably we have here only a "summary of the charges against Paul" (Page). {A pestilent fellow} (\loimon\). An old word for pest, plague, pestilence, Paul the pest. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:21:11| (\loimoi kai limoi\, pestilences and famines) which see. Latin _pestis_. Think of the greatest preacher of the ages being branded a pest by a contemporary hired lawyer. {A mover of insurrections} (\kinounta staseis\). This was an offence against Roman law if it could be proven. "Plotted against at Damascus, plotted against at Jerusalem, expelled from Pisidian Antioch, stoned at Lystra, scourged and imprisoned at Philippi, accused of treason at Thessalonica, haled before the proconsul at Corinth, cause of a serious riot at Ephesus, and now finally of a riot at Jerusalem" (Furneaux). Specious proof could have been produced, but was not. Tertullus went on to other charges with which a Roman court had no concern (instance Gallio in Corinth). {Throughout the world} (\kata tˆn oikoumenˆn\). The Roman inhabited earth (\gˆn\) as in strkjv@17:6|. {A ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes} (\pr“tostatˆn tˆs t“n Naz“rai“n hairese“s\). \Pr“tostatˆs\ is an old word in common use from \pr“tos\ and \histˆmi\, a front-rank man, a chief, a champion. Here only in the N.T. This charge is certainly true. About "sect" (\hairesis\) see on ¯5:17|. \Naz“raioi\ here only in the plural in the N.T., elsewhere of Jesus (Matthew:2:23; strkjv@26:71; strkjv@Luke:18:37; strkjv@John:18:5,7; strkjv@19:19; strkjv@Acts:2:22; strkjv@3:6; strkjv@4:10; strkjv@6:14; strkjv@22:8; strkjv@26:9|). The disciple is not above his Master. There was a sneer in the term as applied to Jesus and here to his followers.

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

rwp@Acts:24:16 @{Herein} (\en tout“i\). His whole confession of belief in verses 14,15|. {Do I also exercise myself} (\kai autos ask“\). "Do I also myself take exercise," take pains, labour, strive. Old word in Homer to work as raw materials, to adorn by art, then to drill. Our word ascetic comes from this root, one who seeks to gain piety by rules and severe hardship. Paul claims to be equal to his accusers in efforts to please God. {Void of offence} (\aproskopon\). This word belongs to the papyri and N.T. (only in Paul), not in the ancient writers. The papyri examples (Moulton Milligan, _Vocabulary_) use the word to mean "free from hurt or harm." It is a privative and \proskopt“\ (to cut or stumble against). Page likes "void of offence" since that can be either active "not stumbling" as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:10| or passive "not stumbled against" as in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:32| (the first toward God and the second toward men), the only other N.T. examples. Hence the word here appears in both senses (the first towards God, the second towards men). Paul adds "alway" (\dia pantos\), a bold claim for a consistent aim in life. "Certainly his conscience acquitted him of having caused any offence to his countrymen" (Rackham). Furneaux thinks that it must have been wormwood and gall to Ananias to hear Paul repeat here the same words because of which he had ordered Paul to be smitten on the mouth (23:1f.|).

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

rwp@Acts:25:12 @{When he had conferred with the council} (\sunlalˆsas meta tou sumbouliou\). The word \sumboulion\ in the N.T. usually means "counsel" as in strkjv@Matthew:12:14|, but here alone as an assembly of counsellors or council. But the papyri (Milligan and Moulton's _Vocabulary_) furnish a number of instances of this sense of the word as "council." Here it apparently means the chief officers and personal retinue of the procurator, his assessors (\assessores consiliarii\). These local advisers were a necessity. Some discretion was allowed the governor about granting the appeal. If the prisoner were a well-known robber or pirate, it could be refused. {Thou hast appealed unto Caesar} (\Kaisara epikeklˆsai\). The same technical word, but the perfect tense of the indicative. {Unto Caesar thou shalt go} (\epi Kaisara poreusˆi\). Perhaps the volitive future (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 874). Bengel thinks that Festus sought to frighten Paul with these words. Knowling suggests that "they may have been uttered, if not with a sneer, yet with the implication 'thou little knowest what an appeal to Caesar means.'" But embarrassment will come to Festus. He has refused to acquit this prisoner. Hence he must formulate charges against him to go before Caesar.

rwp@Acts:25:15 @{Informed} (\enephanisan\). Same word as in strkjv@23:15,22; strkjv@25:2| which see. {Asking for sentence against him} (\aitoumenoi kat' autou katadikˆn\). Only N.T. example of this old word (penalty, fine, condemnation) from \kata\ and \dikˆ\ (justice against).

rwp@Acts:25:16 @{It is not the custom of the Romans} (\hoti ouk estin ethos R“maiois\). If a direct quotation, \hoti\ is recitative as in Authorized Version. Canterbury Revision takes it as indirect discourse after \apekrithˆn\ (I answered), itself in a relative clause (\pros hous\) with the present tense (\estin\, is) preserved as is usual. There is a touch of disdain (Furneaux) in the tone of Festus. He may refer to a demand of the Jews before they asked that Paul be brought to Jerusalem (25:3|). At any rate there is a tone of scorn towards the Jews. {Before that the accused have} (\prin ˆ ho katˆgoroumenos echoi\). This use of the optative in this temporal clause with \prin ˆ\ instead of the subjunctive \an echˆi\ is in conformity with literary Greek and occurs only in Luke's writings in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 970). This sequence of modes is a mark of the literary style occasionally seen in Luke. It is interesting here to note the succession of dependent clauses in verses 14-16|. {The accusers face to face} (\kata pros“pon tous katˆgorous\). Same word \katˆgoros\ as in strkjv@23:30,35; strkjv@25:18|. This all sounds fair enough. {And have had opportunity to make his defence concerning the matter laid against him} (\topon te apologias laboi peri tou egklˆmatos\). Literally, "And should receive (\laboi\ optative for same reason as \echoi\ above, second aorist active of \lamban“\) opportunity for defence (objective genitive) concerning the charge" (\egklˆmatos\ in N.T. only here and strkjv@23:19| which see).

rwp@Acts:26:1 @{Thou art permitted} (\epitrepetai soi\). Literally, It is permitted thee. As if Agrippa were master of ceremonies instead of Festus. Agrippa as a king and guest presides at the grand display while Festus has simply introduced Paul. {For thyself} (\huper seautou\). Some MSS. have \peri\ (concerning). Paul is allowed to speak in his own behalf. No charges are made against him. In fact, Festus has admitted that he has no real proof of any charges. {Stretched forth his hand} (\ekteinas tˆn cheira\). Dramatic oratorical gesture (not for silence as in strkjv@12:17; strkjv@13:16|) with the chain still upon it (verse 29|) linking him to the guard. First aorist active participle of \ektein“\, to stretch out. {Made his defence} (\apelogeito\). Inchoative imperfect of \apologeomai\ (middle), "began to make his defence." This is the fullest of all Paul's defences. He has no word of censure of his enemies or of resentment, but seizes the opportunity to preach Christ to such a distinguished company which he does with "singular dignity" (Furneaux). He is now bearing the name of Christ "before kings" (Acts:9:15|). In general Paul follows the line of argument of the speech on the stairs (chapter strkjv@Acts:22|).

rwp@Acts:26:9 @{I verily thought with myself} (\eg“ men oun edoxa emaut“i\). Personal construction instead of the impersonal, a touch of the literary style. Paul's "egoism" is deceived as so often happens. {I ought} (\dein\). Infinitive the usual construction with \doke“\. Necessity and a sense of duty drove Paul on even in this great sin (see on ¯23:1|), a common failing with persecutors. {Contrary} (\enantia\). Old word (adjective), over against, opposite (Acts:27:4|), then hostile to as here.

rwp@Acts:26:10 @{I both shut up many} (\pollous te katekleisa\). Effective aorist active of \kataklei“\, old word to shut down like a trap door, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:3:20|. Double use of \te\ (both--and). {Having received authority from the chief priests} (\tˆn para t“n archiere“n exousian lab“n\). "The authority," he says. Paul was the official persecutor of the saints under the direction of the Sanhedrin. He mentions "chief priests" (Sadducees), though a Pharisee himself. Both parties were co-operating against the saints. {And when they were put to death} (\anairoumen“n te aut“n\). Genitive absolute with present passive participle of \anaire“\. {I gave my vote against them} (\katˆnegka psˆphon\). "I cast down my pebble" (a black one). The ancient Greeks used white pebbles for acquittal (Revelation:2:17|), black ones for condemnation as here (the only two uses of the word in the N.T.). Paul's phrase (not found elsewhere) is more vivid than the usual \katapsˆphiz“\ for voting. They literally cast the pebbles into the urn. Cf. \sumpsˆphiz“\ in strkjv@Acts:19:19|, \sugkatapsephizo\ in strkjv@Acts:1:26|. If Paul's language is taken literally here, he was a member of the Sanhedrin and so married when he led the persecution. That is quite possible, though he was not married when he wrote strkjv@1Corinthians:7:7f.|, but a widower. It is possible to take the language figuratively for approval, but not so natural.

rwp@Acts:27:7 @{When we had sailed slowly} (\braduploountes\). Present active participle of \braduploe“\ (\bradus\, slow, \plous\, voyage). Literally, "sailing slowly," not "having or had sailed slowly." Only here and in Artemidorus (sec. cent. A.D.). It may mean "tacking" before the wind. Polybius uses \tachuploe“\, to sail swiftly. {Many days} (\en hikanais hˆmerais\). See on ¯Luke:7:6| for \hikanos\. Literally, "in considerable days." {With difficulty} (\molis\). Used in old Greek, like \mogis\ (Luke:9:39|) from \molos\, toil (see strkjv@Acts:14:18|). {Over against Cnidus} (\kata tˆn Knidon\). "Down along Cnidus." A hundred and thirty miles from Myra, the southwest point of Asia Minor and the western coast. Here the protection of the land from the northwest wind ceased. {The wind not further suffering us} (\mˆ prose“ntos hˆmƒs tou anemou\). Genitive absolute with present active participle of \prosea“\, one of the few words still "not found elsewhere" (Thayer). Regular negative \mˆ\ with participles. They could not go on west as they had been doing since leaving Myra. {We sailed under the lee of Crete} (\hupepleusamen tˆn Krˆtˆn\). See under verse ¯4|. Instead of going to the right of Crete as the straight course would have been they sailed southwest with Crete to their right and got some protection against the wind there. {Over against Salmone} (\kata Salm“nˆn\). Off Cape Salmone, a promontory on the east of the island.

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

rwp@Acts:28:17 @{Those that were the chief of the Jews} (\tous ontas t“n Ioudai“n pr“tous\). This use of \pr“tos\ for the leading men of a city or among the Jews we have already had in strkjv@13:50; strkjv@25:2; strkjv@Luke:19:47|. Literally, "Those that were first among the Jews." The position of the participle \ontas\ between the article and the adjective \pr“tous\ is regular (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 777). {When they were come together} (\sunelthont“n aut“n\). Genitive absolute again. Paul could not go to the synagogue, as his custom was, being a bound prisoner. Songs:he invited the Jewish leaders to come to his lodging and hear his explanation of his presence in Rome as a prisoner with an appeal to Caesar. He is anxious that they may understand that this appeal was forced upon him by Festus following Felix and lot because he has come to make an attack on the Jewish people. He was sure that false reports had come to Rome. These non-Christian Jews accepted Paul's invitation. {Nothing against} (\ouden enantion\). Adjective here as in strkjv@26:9|, not preposition as in strkjv@7:10; strkjv@8:32|. From \en\ and \antios\ (\anti\), face to face. Concessive participle \poiˆsas\ as in verse 4| (\dias“thenta\) which see. {Yet was I delivered prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans} (\desmios ex Ierosolum“n paredothˆn eis tas cheiras t“n Romai“n\). This condensed statement does not explain how he "was delivered," for in fact the Jews were trying to kill him when Lysias rescued him from the mob (22:27-36|). The Jews were responsible for his being in the hands of the Romans, though they had hoped to kill him first.

rwp@Acts:28:19 @{When the Jews spake against it} (\antilegont“n t“n Ioudai“n\). Genitive absolute again, \antilegont“n\ (\antileg“\) common verb for speaking against as in strkjv@13:45|. _Clementer dicit_ (Bengel). "The word is a mild one to describe the bitter enmity of the Jews" (Knowling). {I was constrained} (\ˆnagkasthˆn\). "I was compelled," first aorist passive indicative of \anagkaz“\, the very word used of Paul's efforts to get the Christians to blaspheme (26:11|) which see. Paul was compelled to appeal to Caesar (see strkjv@25:11,12| for this phrase), unless Paul was willing to be the victim of Jewish hate when he had done no wrong. {Not that I had aught to accuse my nation of} (\ouch h“s tou ethnous mou ech“n ti katˆgorein\). This use of \h“s\ with a participle (\ech“n\) is common in Greek for the alleged reason. The genitive case with the infinitive \katˆgorein\ is regular. Paul says \ethnos\ instead of \laos\ as in strkjv@24:17; strkjv@26:4|.

rwp@Acts:28:21 @{Letters} (\grammata\). Official documents from the Sanhedrin about the charges against Paul. {Any harm of thee} (\ti peri sou ponˆron\). {Evil} (\ponˆron\). The three aorists (\edexametha, apˆggeilen, elalˆsen\) cover the past. These Jews do not mean to say that they had never heard of Paul. It is hardly likely that they had heard of his appeal to Caesar, "for how could the news have reached Rome before Paul?" (Page).

rwp@Acts:28:22 @{But we desire} (\axioumen de\). Old verb \axio“\, to deem worthy, to think right or proper as in strkjv@15:38| which see. They think it only fair to hear Paul's side of his case. {Concerning this sect} (\peri tˆs hairese“s tautˆs\). Paul had identified Christianity with Judaism (verse 20|) in its Messianic hope. The language seems to imply that the number of Christians in Rome was comparatively small and mainly Gentile. If the edict of Claudius for the expulsion of the Jews from Rome (Acts:18:2|) was due to disturbance over Christ (\Chrˆstus\), then even in Rome the Jews had special reason for hostility towards Christians. {Everywhere spoken against} (\pantachou antilegetai\). Cf. verse 19|. The line of cleavage between Jew and Christian was now sharply drawn everywhere.

rwp@Info_Colossians @ PURPOSE OF THE EPISTLE Epaphras did not come in vain, for Paul was tremendously stirred by the peril to Christianity from the Gnostics (\hoi gn“stikoi\, the knowing ones). He had won his fight for freedom in Christ against the Judaizers who tried to fasten Jewish sacramentarianism upon spiritual Christianity. Now there is an equal danger of the dissipation of vital Christianity in philosophic speculation. In particular, the peril was keen concerning the Person of Christ when the Gnostics embraced Christianity and applied their theory of the universe to him. They split into factions on the subject of Christ. The Docetic (from \doke“\, to seem) Gnostics held that Jesus did not have a real human body, but only a phantom body. He was, in fact, an aeon and had no real humanity. The Cerinthian (followers of Cerinthus) Gnostics admitted the humanity of the man Jesus, but claimed that the Christ was an aeon that came on Jesus at his baptism in the form of a dove and left him on the Cross so that only the man Jesus died. At once this heresy sharpened the issue concerning the Person of Christ already set forth in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|. Paul met the issue squarely and powerfully portrayed his full-length portrait of Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Son of Man (both deity and humanity) in opposition to both types of Gnostics. Songs:then Colossians seems written expressly for our own day when so many are trying to rob Jesus Christ of his deity. The Gnostics took varying views of moral issues also as men do now. There were the ascetics with rigorous rules and the licentious element that let down all the bars for the flesh while the spirit communed with God. One cannot understand Colossians without some knowledge of Gnosticism such as may be obtained in such books as Angus's _The Mystery-Religions and Christianity_, Glover's _The Conflict of Religion in the Early Roman Empire_, Kennedy's St. _Paul and the Mystery-Religions_, Lightfoot's _Commentary on Colossians_.

rwp@Colossians:1:21 @{And you} (\kai humƒs\). Accusative case in a rather loose sentence, to be explained as the object of the infinitive \parastˆsai\ in verse 22| (note repeated \humƒs\ there) or as the anticipated object of \apokatˆllaxen\ if that be the genuine form in verse 22|. It can be the accusative of general reference followed by anacoluthon. See similar idiom in strkjv@Ephesians:2:1,12|. {Being in time past alienated} (\pote ontas apˆllotri“menous\). Periphrastic perfect passive participle (continuing state of alienation) of \apallotrio“\, old word from Plato on, to estrange, to render \allotrios\ (belonging to another), alienated from God, a vivid picture of heathenism as in strkjv@Romans:1:20-23|. Only other N.T. examples in strkjv@Ephesians:2:12; strkjv@4:18|. \Enemies\ (\exthrous\). Old word from \echthos\ (hatred). Active sense here, {hostile} as in strkjv@Matthew:13:28; strkjv@Romans:8:7|, not passive {hateful} (Romans:11:28|). {In your mind} (\tˆi dianoiƒi\). Locative case. \Dianoia\ (\dia, nous\), mind, intent, purpose. Old word. It is always a tragedy to see men use their minds actively against God. {In your evil works} (\en tois ergois tois ponˆrois\). Hostile purpose finds natural expression in evil deeds.

rwp@Colossians:1:22 @{Yet now} (\nuni de\). Sharpened contrast with emphatic form of \nun\, "now" being not at the present moment, but in the present order of things in the new dispensation of grace in Christ. {Hath he reconciled} (\apokatˆllaxen\). First aorist (effective, timeless) active indicative (a sort of parenthetical anacoluthon). Here B reads \apokatallagˆte\, be ye reconciled like \katallagˆte\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:20| while D has \apokatallagentes\. Lightfoot prefers to follow B here (the hard reading), though Westcott and Hort only put it in the margin. On the word see verse 20|. {In the body of his flesh} (\en t“i s“mati tˆs sarkos autou\). See the same combination in strkjv@2:11| though in strkjv@Ephesians:2:14| only \sarki\ (flesh). Apparently Paul combines both \s“ma\ and \sarx\ to make plain the actual humanity of Jesus against incipient Docetic Gnostics who denied it. {Through death} (\dia tou thanatou\). The reconciliation was accomplished by means of Christ's death on the cross (verse 20|) and not just by the Incarnation (the body of his flesh) in which the death took place. {To present} (\parastˆsai\). First aorist active (transitive) infinitive (of purpose) of \paristˆmi\, old verb, to place beside in many connections. See it used of presenting Paul and the letter from Lysias to Felix (Acts:23:33|). Repeated in strkjv@Colossians:2:28|. See also strkjv@2Corinthians:11:2; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:14|. Paul has the same idea of his responsibility in rendering an account for those under his influence seen in strkjv@Hebrews:13:17|. See strkjv@Romans:12:1| for use of living sacrifice. {Holy} (\hagious\). Positively consecrated, separated unto God. Common in N.T. for believers. Haupt holds that all these terms have a religious and forensic sense here. {Without blemish} (\am“mous\). Without spot (Phillipians:2:15|). Old word \a\ privative and \m“mos\ (blemish). Common in the LXX for ceremonial purifications. {Unreproveable} (\anegklˆtous\). Old verbal adjective from \a\ privative and \egkale“\, to call to account, to pick flaws in. These three adjectives give a marvellous picture of complete purity (positive and negative, internal and external). This is Paul's ideal when he presents the Colossians "before him" (\katen“pion autou\), right down in the eye of Christ the Judge of all.

rwp@Colossians:1:28 @{Whom} (\hon\). That is, "Christ in you, the hope of glory." {We proclaim} (\kataggellomen\). Paul, Timothy and all like-minded preachers against the Gnostic depreciation of Christ. This verb originally (Xenophon) meant to denounce, but in N.T. it means to announce (\aggell“\) throughout (\kata\), to proclaim far and wide (Acts:13:5|). {Admonishing} (\nouthetountes\). Old verb from \nouthetˆs\, admonisher (from \nous, tithˆmi\). See already strkjv@Acts:20:31; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:12,14; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:15|, etc. Warning about practice and teaching (\didaskontes\) about doctrine. Such teaching calls for "all wisdom" {Every man} (\panta anthr“pon\). Repeated three times. "In opposition to the doctrine of an intellectual exclusiveness taught by the false teachers" (Abbott). {That we may present} (\hina parastˆs“men\). Final use of \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \paristˆmi\, for which see strkjv@1:22|, the final presentation to Christ. {Perfect} (\teleion\). Spiritual adults in Christ, no longer babes in Christ (Hebrews:5:14|), mature and ripened Christians (4:22|), the full-grown man in Christ (Ephesians:4:13|). The relatively perfect (Phillipians:3:15|) will on that day of the presentation be fully developed as here (Colossians:4:12; strkjv@Ephesians:4:13|). The Gnostics used \teleios\ of the one fully initiated into their mysteries and it is quite possible that Paul here has also a sidewise reference to their use of the term.

rwp@Colossians:2:14 @{Having blotted out} (\exaleipsas\). And so "cancelled." First aorist active participle of old verb \exaleiph“\, to rub out, wipe off, erase. In N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:3:19| (LXX); strkjv@Revelation:3:5; strkjv@Colossians:2:14|. Here the word explains \charisamenos\ and is simultaneous with it. Plato used it of blotting out a writing. Often MSS. were rubbed or scraped and written over again (palimpsests, like Codex C). {The bond written in ordinances that was against us} (\to kath' hˆm“n cheirographon tois dogmasin\). The late compound \cheirographon\ (\cheir\, hand, \graph“\) is very common in the papyri for a certificate of debt or bond, many of the original \cheirographa\ (handwriting, "chirography"). See Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 247. The signature made a legal debt or bond as Paul says in strkjv@Philemon:1:18f.|: "I Paul have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it." Many of the papyri examples have been "crossed out" thus X as we do today and so cancelled. One decree is described as "neither washed out nor written over" (Milligan, N. T. _Documents_, p. 16). Undoubtedly "the handwriting in decrees" (\dogmasin\, the Mosaic law, strkjv@Ephesians:2:15|) was against the Jews (Exodus:24:3; strkjv@Deuteronomy:27:14-26|) for they accepted it, but the Gentiles also gave moral assent to God's law written in their hearts (Romans:2:14f.|). Songs:Paul says "against us" (\kath' hˆm“n\) and adds "which was contrary to us" (\ho ˆn hupenantion hˆmin\) because we (neither Jew nor Gentile) could not keep it. \Hupenantios\ is an old double compound adjective (\hupo, en, antios\) set over against, only here in N.T. except strkjv@Hebrews:10:27| when it is used as a substantive. It is striking that Paul has connected the common word \cheirographon\ for bond or debt with the Cross of Christ (Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 332). {And he hath taken it out of the way} (\kai ˆrken ek tou mesou\). Perfect active indicative of \air“\, old and common verb, to lift up, to bear, to take away. The word used by the Baptist of Jesus as "the Lamb of God that bears away (\air“n\) the sin of the world" (John:1:29|). The perfect tense emphasizes the permanence of the removal of the bond which has been paid and cancelled and cannot be presented again. Lightfoot argues for Christ as the subject of \ˆrken\, but that is not necessary, though Paul does use sudden anacolutha. God has taken the bond against us "out of the midst" (\ek tou mesou\). Nailing it to the cross (\prosˆl“sas auto t“i staur“i\). First aorist active participle of old and common verb \prosˆlo“\, to fasten with nails to a thing (with dative \staur“i\). Here alone in N.T., but in III Macc. strkjv@4:9 with the very word \staur“i\. The victim was nailed to the cross as was Christ. "When Christ was crucified, God nailed the Law to His cross" (Peake). Hence the "bond" is cancelled for us. Business men today sometimes file cancelled accounts. No evidence exists that Paul alluded to such a custom here.

rwp@Colossians:2:18 @{Rob you of your prize} (\katabrabeuet“\). Late and rare compound (\kata, brabeu“\, strkjv@Colossians:3:15|) to act as umpire against one, perhaps because of bribery in Demosthenes and Eustathius (two other examples in Preisigke's _Worterbuch_), here only in the N.T. Songs:here it means to decide or give judgment against. The judge at the games is called \brabeus\ and the prize \brabeion\ (1Corinthians:9:24; strkjv@Phillipians:3:14|). It is thus parallel to, but stronger than, \krinet“\ in verse 16|. {By a voluntary humility} (\thel“n en tapeinophrosunˆi\). Present active participle of \thel“\, to wish, to will, but a difficult idiom. Some take it as like an adverb for "wilfully" somewhat like \thelontas\ in strkjv@2Peter:3:5|. Others make it a Hebraism from the LXX usage, "finding pleasure in humility." The Revised Version margin has "of his own mere will, by humility." Hort suggested \en ethelotapeinophrosunˆi\ (in gratuitous humility), a word that occurs in Basil and made like \ethelothrˆskia\ in verse 23|. {And worshipping of the angels} (\kai thrˆskeiƒi t“n aggel“n\). In strkjv@3:12| humility (\tapeinophrosunˆn\) is a virtue, but it is linked with worship of the angels which is idolatry and so is probably false humility as in verse 23|. They may have argued for angel worship on the plea that God is high and far removed and so took angels as mediators as some men do today with angels and saints in place of Christ. {Dwelling in the things which he hath seen} (\ha heoraken embateu“n\). Some MSS. have "not," but not genuine. This verb \embateu“\ (from \embatˆs\, stepping in, going in) has given much trouble. Lightfoot has actually proposed \kenembateu“n\ (a verb that does not exist, though \kenembate“\ does occur) with \ai“ra\, to tread on empty air, an ingenious suggestion, but now unnecessary. It is an old word for going in to take possession (papyri examples also). W. M. Ramsay (_Teaching of Paul_, pp. 287ff.) shows from inscriptions in Klaros that the word is used of an initiate in the mysteries who "set foot in" (\enebateusen\) and performed the rest of the rites. Paul is here quoting the very work used of these initiates who "take their stand on" these imagined revelations in the mysteries. {Vainly puffed up} (\eikˆi phusioumenos\). Present passive participle of \phusio“\, late and vivid verb from \phusa\, pair of bellows, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:4:6,18f.; strkjv@8:1|. Powerful picture of the self-conceit of these bombastic Gnostics.

rwp@Colossians:2:21 @{Handle not, nor taste, nor touch} (\mˆ hapsˆi mˆde geusˆi mˆde thigˆis\). Specimens of Gnostic rules. The Essenes took the Mosaic regulations and carried them much further and the Pharisees demanded ceremonially clean hands for all food. Later ascetics (the Latin commentators Ambrose, Hilary, Pelagius) regard these prohibitions as Paul's own instead of those of the Gnostics condemned by him. Even today men are finding that the noble prohibition law needs enlightened instruction to make it effective. That is true of all law. The Pharisees, Essenes, Gnostics made piety hinge on outward observances and rules instead of inward conviction and principle. These three verbs are all in the aorist subjunctive second person singular with \mˆ\, a prohibition against handling or touching these forbidden things. Two of them do not differ greatly in meaning. \Hapsˆi\ is aorist middle subjunctive of \hapt“\, to fasten to, middle, to cling to, to handle. \Thigˆis\ is second aorist active subjunctive of \thiggan“\, old verb, to touch, to handle. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:11:28; strkjv@12:20|. \Geusˆi\ is second aorist middle subjunctive of \geu“\, to give taste of, only middle in N.T. to taste as here.

rwp@Colossians:2:23 @{Which things} (\hatina\). "Which very things," these ascetic regulations. {Have indeed a show of wisdom} (\estin logon men echonta sophias\). Periphrastic present indicative with \estin\ in the singular, but present indicative \echonta\ in the plural (\hatina\). \Logon sophias\ is probably "the repute of wisdom" (Abbott) like Plato and Herodotus. \Men\ (in deed) has no corresponding \de\. {In will-worship} (\en ethelothrˆskiƒi\). This word occurs nowhere else and was probably coined by Paul after the pattern of \ethelodouleia\, to describe the voluntary worship of angels (see strkjv@2:18|). {And humility} (\kai tapeinophrosunˆi\). Clearly here the bad sense, "in mock humility." {And severity to the body} (\kai apheidiƒi s“matos\). Old word (Plato) from \apheidˆs\, unsparing (\a\ privative, \pheidomai\, to spare). Here alone in N.T. Ascetics often practice flagellations and other hardnesses to the body. {Not of any value} (\ouk en timˆi tini\). \Timˆ\ usually means honour or price. {Against the indulgence of the flesh} (\pros plˆsmonˆn tˆs sarkos\). These words are sharply debated along with \timˆ\ just before. It is not unusual for \pros\ to be found in the sense of "against" rather than "with" or "for." See \pros\ in sense of {against} in strkjv@3:13; strkjv@Ephesians:6:11f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:6:1|. \Plˆsmonˆ\ is an old word from \pimplˆmi\, to fill and means satiety. It occurs here only in the N.T. Peake is inclined to agree with Hort and Haupt that there is a primitive corruption here. But the translation in the Revised Version is possible and it is true that mere rules do not carry us very far in human conduct as every father or mother knows, though we must have some regulations in family and state and church. But they are not enough of themselves.

rwp@Colossians:3:13 @{Forbearing one another} (\anechomenoi allˆl“n\). Present middle (direct) participle of \anech“\ with the ablative case (\allˆl“n\), "holding yourselves back from one another." {Forgiving each other} (\charizomenoi heautois\). Present middle participle also of \charizomai\ with the dative case of the reflexive pronoun (\heautois\) instead of the reciprocal just before (\allˆl“n\). {If any man have} (\ean tis echˆi\). Third class condition (\ean\ and present active subjunctive of \ech“\). {Complaint} (\momphˆn\). Old word from \memphomai\, to blame. Only here in N.T. Note \pros\ here with \tina\ in the sense of against for comparison with \pros\ in strkjv@2:31|. {Even as the Lord} (\kath“s kai ho Kurios\). Some MSS. read \Christos\ for \Kurios\. But Christ's forgiveness of us is here made the reason for our forgiveness of others. See strkjv@Matthew:6:12,14f.| where our forgiveness of others is made by Jesus a prerequisite to our obtaining forgiveness from God.

rwp@Ephesians:4:26 @{Be ye angry and sin not} (\orgizesthe kai mˆ hamartanete\). Permissive imperative, not a command to be angry. Prohibition against sinning as the peril in anger. Quotation from strkjv@Psalms:4:4|. {Let not the sun go down upon your wrath} (\ho hˆlios mˆ epiduet“ epi parorgism“i\). Danger in settled mood of anger. \Parorgismos\ (provocation), from \parorgiz“\, to exasperate to anger, occurs only in LXX and here in N.T.

rwp@Ephesians:6:11 @{Put on} (\endusasthe\). Like strkjv@3:12|. See also strkjv@4:24|. {The whole armour} (\tˆn panoplian\). Old word from \panoplos\ (wholly armed, from \pan, hoplon\). In N.T. only strkjv@Luke:11:22; strkjv@Ephesians:6:11,13|. Complete armour in this period included "shield, sword, lance, helmet, greaves, and breastplate" (Thayer). Our "panoply." Polybius gives this list of Thayer. Paul omits the lance (spear). Our museums preserve specimens of this armour as well as the medieval coat-of-mail. Paul adds girdle and shoes to the list of Polybius, not armour but necessary for the soldier. Certainly Paul could claim knowledge of the Roman soldier's armour, being chained to one for some three years. {That ye may be able to stand} (\pros to dunasthai humƒs stˆnai\). Purpose clause with \pros to\ and the infinitive (\dunasthai\) with the accusative of general reference (\humƒs\) and the second aorist active infinitive \stˆnai\ (from \histˆmi\) dependent on \dunasthai\. Against (\pros\). Facing. Another instance of \pros\ meaning "against" (Colossians:2:23|). {The wiles of the devil} (\tas methodias tou diabolou\). See already strkjv@4:14| for this word. He is a crafty foe and knows the weak spots in the Christian's armour.

rwp@Ephesians:6:12 @{Our wrestling is not} (\ouk estin hˆmin hˆ palˆ\). "To us the wrestling is not." \Palˆ\ is an old word from \pall“\, to throw, to swing (from Homer to the papyri, though here only in N.T.), a contest between two till one hurls the other down and holds him down (\katech“\). Note \pros\ again (five times) in sense of "against," face to face conflict to the finish. {The world-rulers of this darkness} (\tous kosmokratoras tou skotous toutou\). This phrase occurs here alone. In strkjv@John:14:30| Satan is called "the ruler of this world" (\ho arch“n tou kosmou toutou\). In strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4| he is termed "the god of this age" (\ho theos tou ai“nos toutou\). The word \kosmokrat“r\ is found in the Orphic Hymns of Satan, in Gnostic writings of the devil, in rabbinical writings (transliterated) of the angel of death, in inscriptions of the Emperor Caracalla. These "world-rulers" are limited to "this darkness" here on earth. {The spiritual hosts of wickedness} (\ta pneumatika tˆs ponˆrias\). No word for "hosts" in the Greek. Probably simply, "the spiritual things (or elements) of wickedness." \Ponˆria\ (from \ponˆros\) is depravity (Matthew:22:18; strkjv@1Corinthians:5:8|). {In the heavenly places} (\en tois epouraniois\). Clearly so here. Our "wrestling" is with foes of evil natural and supernatural. We sorely need "the panoply of God" (furnished by God).

rwp@Ephesians:6:13 @{Take up} (\analabete\). Second aorist active imperative of \analamban“\, old word and used (\analab“n\) of "picking up" Mark in strkjv@2Timothy:4:11|. {That ye may be able to withstand} (\hina dunˆthˆte antistˆnai\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \dunamai\ with \antistˆnai\ (second aorist active infinitive of \anthistˆmi\, to stand face to face, against). {And having done all to stand} (\kai hapanta katergasa menoi stˆnai\). After the fight (wrestle) is over to stand (\stˆnai\) as victor in the contest. Effective aorist here.

rwp@Ephesians:6:16 @{Taking up} (\analabontes\). See verse 13|. {The shield of faith} (\ton thureon tˆs piste“s\). Late word in this sense a large stone against the door in Homer, from \thura\, door, large and oblong (Latin _scutum_), \aspis\ being smaller and circular, only here in N.T. {To quench} (\sbesai\). First aorist active infinitive of \sbennumi\, old word, to extinguish (Matthew:12:20|). {All the fiery darts} (\panta ta belˆ ta pepur“mena\). \Belos\ is an old word for missile, dart (from \ball“\, to throw), only here in N.T. \Pepur“mena\ is perfect passive participle of \puro“\, old verb, to set on fire, from \pur\ (fire). These darts were sometimes ablaze in order to set fire to the enemies' clothing or camp or homes just as the American Indians used to shoot poisoned arrows.

rwp@Info_Epistles-Pastorial @ The conclusion of Lock is that "either they are genuine 'letters' or artificial 'Epistles'" (_Int. Crit. Comm._, p. XXV). If not genuine, they are forgeries in Paul's name (pseudepigraphic). "The argument from style is in favour of the Pauline authorship, that from vocabulary strongly, though not quite conclusively, against it" (Lock, _Op. Cit._, p. XXIX). I should put the case for the Pauline authorship more strongly than that and shall treat them as Paul's own. Parry (_Comm._, p. CXIII) well says: "It is not reasonable to expect that a private letter, addressed to a personal friend, for his own instruction and consideration, should exhibit the same features as a letter addressed to a community for public, oral communication."

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ FOUR GROUPS OF PAULINE EPISTLES I. First Thessalonians. | Second Thessalonians. | A.D. 50 to 51. Chief topic Eschatology. To correct misconceptions in Thessalonica. II. First Corinthians. | Second Corinthians | Galatians | A.D. 54 to 57. Romans. | Chief topic Justification by Faith. Defence against the Judaizers. III. Philippians. | Philemon. | Colossians. | A.D. 61 to 63. Ephesians (Laodiceans). Chief topic Christology. Defence against the Gnostic perversions of the Person of Christ. IV. First Timothy. | Titus. | A.D. 65 to 68. Second Timothy. | Ecclesiastical Problems to the fore. DEVELOPMENT IN PAUL'S THEOLOGY

rwp@Galatians:2:2 @{By revelation} (\kata apokalupsin\). In strkjv@Acts:15:2| the church sent them. But surely there is no inconsistency here. {I laid before them} (\anethemˆn autois\). Second aorist middle indicative of old word \anatithˆmi\, to put up, to place before, with the dative case. But who were the "them" (\autois\)? Evidently not the private conference for he distinguishes this address from that, "but privately" (\kat' idian\). Just place strkjv@Acts:15:4f.| beside the first clause and it is clear: "I laid before them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles," precisely as Luke has recorded. Then came the private conference after the uproar caused by the Judaizers (Acts:15:5|). {Before them who were of repute} (\tois dokousin\). He names three of them (Cephas, James, and John). James the Lord's brother, for the other James is now dead (Acts:12:1f.|). But there were others also, a select group of real leaders. The decision reached by this group would shape the decision of the public conference in the adjourned meeting. Songs:far as we know Paul had not met John before, though he had met Peter and James at the other visit. Lightfoot has much to say about the Big Four (St. Paul and the Three) who here discuss the problems of mission work among Jews and Gentiles. It was of the utmost importance that they should see eye to eye. The Judaizers were assuming that the twelve apostles and James the Lord's brother would side with them against Paul and Barnabas. Peter had already been before the Jerusalem Church for his work in Caesarea (Acts:11:1-18|). James was considered a very loyal Jew. {Lest by any means I should be running or had run in vain} (\mˆ p“s eis kenon trech“ ˆ edramon\). Negative purpose with the present subjunctive (\trech“\) and then by a sudden change the aorist indicative (\edramon\), as a sort of afterthought or retrospect (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 201; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 988). There are plenty of classical parallels. See also strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:5| for both together again.

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

rwp@Galatians:3:21 @{Against the promises} (\kata t“n epaggeli“n\). A pertinent question again. Far from it (\mˆ genoito\). {Which could make alive} (\ho dunamenos z“opoiˆsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \z“opoie“\, late compound (\z“os\, alive, \poie“\, to make) verb for which see strkjv@1Corinthians:15:22|. Spiritual life, he means, here and hereafter. {Verily} (\ont“s\). "Really" (cf. strkjv@Mark:11:32; strkjv@Luke:24:34|). Condition and conclusion (\an ˆn\) of second class, determined as unfulfilled. He had already said that Christ died to no purpose in that case (2:21|).

rwp@Galatians:3:28 @{There can be neither} (\ouk eni\). Not a shortened form of \enesti\, but the old lengthened form of \en\ with recessive accent. Songs:\ouk eni\ means "there is not" rather than "there cannot be," a statement of a fact rather than a possibility, as Burton rightly shows against Lightfoot. {One man} (\heis\). No word for "man" in the Greek, and yet \heis\ is masculine, not neuter \hen\. "One moral personality" (Vincent). The point is that "in Christ Jesus" race or national distinctions ("neither Jew nor Greek") do not exist, class differences ("neither bond nor free," no proletarianism and no capitalism) vanish, sex rivalry ("no male and female") disappears. This radical statement marks out the path along which Christianity was to come in the sphere (\en\) and spirit and power of Christ. Candour compels one to confess that this goal has not yet been fully attained. But we are on the road and there is no hope on any way than on "the Jesus Road."

rwp@Galatians:4:14 @{A temptation to you in my flesh} (\ton peirasmon hum“n en tˆi sarki mou\). "Your temptation (or trial) in my flesh." Peirasmon can be either as we see in strkjv@James:1:2,12ff|. If trial here, it was a severe one. {Nor rejected} (\oude exeptusate\). First aorist active indicative of \ekptu“\, old word to spit out (Homer), to spurn, to loathe. Here only in N.T. Clemen (_Primitive Christianity_, p. 342) thinks it should be taken literally here since people spat out as a prophylactic custom at the sight of invalids especially epileptics. But Plutarch uses it of mere rejection. {As an angel of God} (\h“s aggelon theou\), {as Christ Jesus} (\h“s Christon Iˆsoun\). In spite of his illness and repulsive appearance, whatever it was. Not a mere "messenger" of God, but a very angel, even as Christ Jesus. We know that at Lystra Paul was at first welcomed as Hermes the god of oratory (Acts:14:12f.|). But that narrative hardly applies to these words, for they turned against Paul and Barnabas then and there at the instigation of Jews from Antioch in Pisidia and Iconium.

rwp@Galatians:5:14 @{Even in this} (\en t“i\). Just the article with \en\, "in the," but it points at the quotation from strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|. Jews (Luke:10:29|) confined "neighbour" (\plˆsion\) to Jews. Paul uses here a striking paradox by urging obedience to the law against which he has been arguing, but this is the moral law as proof of the new love and life. See also strkjv@Romans:13:8|, precisely as Jesus did (Matthew:22:40|).

rwp@Galatians:5:17 @{Lusteth against} (\epithumei kata\). Like a tug of war. This use of \sarx\ as opposed to the Spirit (Holy Spirit) personifies \sarx\. Lightfoot argues that \epithumei\ cannot be used with the Spirit and so some other verb must be supplied for it. But that is wholly needless, for the verb, like \epithumia\, does not mean evil desire, but simply to long for. Christ and Satan long for the possession of the city of Man Soul as Bunyan shows. {Are contrary the one to the other} (\allˆlois antikeitai\). Are lined up in conflict, face to face (\anti-\), a spiritual duel (cf. Christ's temptations), with dative case of personal interest (\allˆlois\). {That ye may not do} (\hina mˆ poiˆte\). "That ye may not keep on doing" (present active subjunctive of \poie“\). {That ye would} (\ha ean thelˆte\). "Whatever ye wish" (indefinite relative with \ean\ and present subjunctive).

rwp@Hebrews:3:5 @{And Moses} (\kai M“usˆs men\). "Now Moses indeed on his part" (\men\ contrasted with \de\). {In} (\en\). Moses was in "God's house" "as a servant" (\h“s therap“n\). Old word, in LXX, only here in N.T. and quoted from strkjv@Numbers:12:7f|. Kin to the verb \therapeu“\, to serve, to heal, and \therapeia\, service (Luke:9:11|) and a group of servants (Luke:12:42|). {For a testimony of those things which were afterward to be spoken} (\eis marturion t“n lalˆthˆsomen“n\). Objective genitive of the articular future passive participle of \lale“\. It is not certain what it means whether the "testimony" (\marturion\) is to Moses or to God and whether it points on to Christ. In strkjv@9:9| see \parabolˆ\ applied to the old dispensation as a symbol pointing to Christ and Christianity. {But Christ} (\Christos de\). In contrast with Moses (\men\ in verse 5|). {As a son} (\h“s huios\). Instead of a \therap“n\ (servant). {Over his house} (\epi ton oikon autou\). The difference between \epi\ and \en\ added to that between \huios\ and \therap“n\. It is very neat and quite conclusive, especially when we recall the high place occupied by Moses in Jewish thought. In strkjv@Acts:7:11| the Jews accused Stephen of speaking "blasphemous words against Moses and God" (putting Moses on a par with God).

rwp@Hebrews:4:15 @{That cannot be touched with the feeling} (\mˆ dunamenon sunpathˆsai\). "Not able to sympathize with." First aorist passive infinitive of \sunpathe“\, late compound verb from the late adjective \sunpathos\ (Romans:12:15|), both from \sunpasch“\, to suffer with (1Corinthians:12:26; strkjv@Romans:8:17|), occurring in Aristotle and Plutarch, in N.T. only in Hebrews (here and strkjv@10:34|). {One that hath been tempted} (\pepeirasmenon\). Perfect passive participle of \peiraz“\, as already shown in strkjv@2:17f|. {Without sin} (\ch“ris hamartias\). This is the outstanding difference that must never be overlooked in considering the actual humanity of Jesus. He did not yield to sin. But more than this is true. There was no latent sin in Jesus to be stirred by temptation and no habits of sin to be overcome. But he did have "weaknesses" (\astheneiai\) common to our human nature (hunger, thirst, weariness, etc.). Satan used his strongest weapons against Jesus, did it repeatedly, and failed. Jesus remained "undefiled" (\amiantos\) in a world of sin (John:8:46|). This is our ground of hope, the sinlessness of Jesus and his real sympathy.

rwp@Hebrews:11:33 @{Through faith} (\dia piste“s\). Change thus from the routine \pistei\ used so far. {Subdued kingdoms} (\katˆg“nisanto basileias\). First aorist middle indicative of \katag“nizomai\, _Koin‚_ verb to struggle against, to overcome, here alone in the N.T. Used by Josephus of David's conquests. The author has here (verses 33,34|), "nine terse clauses" (Moffatt) with no connective (asyndeton) with great rhetorical and oratorical force (sledge-hammer style). For "wrought righteousness" (\ˆrgasanto dikaiosunˆn\, first aorist middle indicative of \ergazomai\) see strkjv@Acts:10:35|. {Obtained promises} (\epetuchon epaggeli“n\). Second aorist active indicative of \epitugchan“\, old verb (already in strkjv@6:15|) with genitive. But they did not see the fulfilment of the Messianic promise (11:39f.|). {Stopped the mouths of lions} (\ephraxan stomata leont“n\). First aorist active indicative of \phrass“\, old verb to fence in, to block up. See strkjv@Daniel:6:18-23|.

rwp@Info_James @ THE EPISTLE OF JAMES BEFORE A.D. 50 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION THE AUTHOR He claims to be James, and so the book is not anonymous. It is either genuine or pseudonymous. He does not claim to be the brother of the Lord Jesus, as one might expect. James the brother of John was put to death by Herod Agrippa I about A.D. 44 (Acts:12:2|). But James the brother of Jesus (Galatians:1:19|) was still alive and became a leader of the church in Jerusalem (Acts:12:17|), presiding over the Conference in Jerusalem (Acts:15:13-21|) and apparently writing the message from the Conference to the Gentile churches (Acts:15:22-29|), and was still the leading elder in Jerusalem on Paul's last visit (Acts:21:18-25|). James does not claim here to be an apostle and he was not one of the twelve apostles, and the dispute about accepting it of which Eusebius spoke was about its apostolicity since James was only an apostle by implication (Galatians:1:19|) in the general sense of that term like Barnabas (Acts:14:14|), perhaps Silas and Timothy (1Thessalonians:2:7|), certainly not on a par with Paul, who claimed equality with the twelve. James, like the other brothers of Jesus, had once disbelieved his claims to be the Messiah (John:7:6f.|), but he was won by a special vision of the Risen Christ (1Corinthians:15:7|) and was in the upper room before the great pentecost (Acts:1:14|). It is plain that he had much to overcome as a zealous Jew to become a Christian, though he was not a mere cousin of Jesus or a son of Joseph by a former marriage. He was strictly the half-brother of Jesus, since Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. There is no reason to believe that he was a Nazirite. We know that he was married (1Corinthians:9:5|). He came to be called James the Just and was considered very devout. The Judaizers had counted on him to agree with them against Paul and Barnabas, but he boldly stood for Gentile freedom from the ceremonial law. The Judaizers still claimed him at Antioch and used his name wrongly to frighten Peter thereby (Galatians:2:12|). But to the end he remained the loyal friend to Paul and his gospel rightly understood (Acts:21:18-25|). Clement of Alexandria (_Hypot_. vii) says that, when he bore strong testimony to Jesus as the Son of man, they flung him down from the gable of the temple, stoned him, and beat him to death with a club. But Josephus (_Ant_. XX. ix. I) says that the Sadducees about A.D. 62 had James and some others brought before the Sanhedrin (Ananus presiding) and had them stoned as transgressors of the law. At any rate he won a martyr's crown like Stephen and James the brother of John.

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

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

rwp@James:2:7 @{Blaspheme} (\blasphˆmousin\). Present active indicative of common verb \blasphˆme“\ (from \blasphˆmos\, speaking evil, \blax\ or \blapt“\ and \phˆmˆ\), as in strkjv@Luke:22:65|. {The honourable name} (\to kalon onoma\). "The beautiful name." {By the which ye were called} (\to epiklˆthen eph' humƒs\). "The one called upon you" (first aorist passive articular participle of \epikale“\, to put a name upon, to give a surname to, as strkjv@Acts:10:18|). What name is that? Almost certainly the name of Christ as we see it in strkjv@Acts:11:26; strkjv@26:28; strkjv@1Peter:4:14,16|. It was blasphemy to speak against Christ as some Jews and Gentiles were doing (Acts:13:45; strkjv@18:6; strkjv@26:11; strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3; strkjv@1Timothy:1:13|). Cf. strkjv@Acts:15:17|.

rwp@James:2:13 @{Without mercy} (\aneleos\). Found here only save a doubtful papyrus example (\anele“s\) for the vernacular \anile“s\ and the Attic \anˆleˆs\. For this principle of requital see strkjv@Matthew:5:7; strkjv@6:14; strkjv@7:1f.; strkjv@18:33|. {Glorieth against} (\katakauchƒtai\). Present middle indicative of the old compound verb \katakauchaomai\, to exult over (down), in N.T. only here, strkjv@3:14; strkjv@Romans:11:18|. Only mercy can triumph over justice with God and men. "Mercy is clothed with the divine glory and stands by the throne of God" (Chrysostom). See strkjv@Romans:8:31-39; strkjv@Matthew:9:13; strkjv@12:7|.

rwp@James:3:14 @{Bitter jealousy} (\zˆlon pikron\). \Zˆlos\ occurs in N.T. in good sense (John:2:17|) and bad sense (Acts:5:17|). Pride of knowledge is evil (1Corinthians:8:1|) and leaves a bitter taste. See "root of bitterness" in strkjv@Hebrews:12:14| (cf. strkjv@Ephesians:4:31|). This is a condition of the first class. {Faction} (\erithian\). Late word, from \erithos\ (hireling, from \eritheu“\ to spin wool), a pushing forward for personal ends, partisanship, as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:16|. {In your heart} (\en tˆi kardiƒi hum“n\). The real fountain (\pˆgˆ\, verse 11|). {Glory not} (\mˆ katakauchƒsthe\). Present middle imperative of \katakauchaomai\, for which see strkjv@2:13|. Wisdom is essential for the teacher. Boasting arrogance disproves the possession of wisdom. {Lie not against the truth} (\pseudesthe kata tˆs alˆtheias\). Present middle imperative of \pseudomai\, old verb, to play false, with \mˆ\ carried over. Lying against the truth is futile. By your conduct do not belie the truth which you teach; a solemn and needed lesson. Cf. strkjv@Romans:1:18f., strkjv@2:18,20|.

rwp@James:4:6 @{More grace} (\meizona charin\). "Greater grace." Greater than what? "Greater grace in view of the greater requirement" (Ropes), like strkjv@Romans:5:20f|. God does this. {Wherefore} (\dio\). To prove this point James quotes strkjv@Proverbs:3:34|. {God resisteth the proud} (\ho theos huperˆphanois antitassetai\). Present middle (direct) indicative of \antitass“\, old military term, to range in battle against, with dative case (Romans:13:2|) as in strkjv@5:6|. \Huperˆphanois\ (\huper, phainomai\) is like our vernacular "stuck-up folks" (Romans:1:30|), "haughty persons." {But giveth grace to the humble} (\tapeinois de did“sin charin\). Anarthrous adjective again, "to humble or lowly persons," for which word see strkjv@1:9f|. Cf. strkjv@2:5-7; strkjv@5:1-6|.

rwp@James:4:7 @{Be subject therefore unto God} (\hupotagˆte oun t“i the“i\). Second aorist (ingressive) passive imperative of \hupotass“\, old verb, to range under (military term also). Same form in strkjv@1Peter:2:23; strkjv@5:5|. With the dative case \the“i\ (unto God). The aorist has the note of urgency in the imperative. Note the ten aorist imperatives in verses 7-10| (\hupotagˆte, antistˆte, eggisate, katharisate, hagnisate, talaip“rˆsate, penthˆsate, klausate, metatrapˆt“, tapein“thˆte\). {But resist the devil} (\antistˆte de t“i diabol“i\). Second aorist (ingressive) active (intransitive) imperative of \anthistˆmi\, "take a stand against." Dative case \diabol“i\. Result of such a stand is that the devil will flee (\pheuxetai\, future middle of \pheug“\). See strkjv@1Peter:5:8f.; strkjv@Ephesians:6:11f.; strkjv@Luke:10:17|.

rwp@James:4:11 @{Speak not one against another} (\mˆ katalaleite allˆl“n\). Prohibition against such a habit or a command to quit doing it, with \mˆ\ and the present imperative of \katalale“\, old compound usually with the accusative in ancient Greek, in N.T. only with the genitive (here, strkjv@1Peter:2:12; strkjv@3:16|). Often harsh words about the absent. James returns to the subject of the tongue as he does again in strkjv@5:12| (twice before, strkjv@1:26; strkjv@3:1-12|). {Judgeth} (\krin“n\). In the sense of harsh judgment as in strkjv@Matthew:7:1; strkjv@Luke:6:37| (explained by \katadikaz“\). {Not a doer of the law, but a judge} (\ouk poiˆtˆs nomou, alla kritˆs\). This tone of superiority to law is here sharply condemned. James has in mind God's law, of course, but the point is the same for all laws under which we live. We cannot select the laws which we will obey unless some contravene God's law, and so our own conscience (Acts:4:20|). Then we are willing to give our lives for our rebellion if need be.

rwp@James:5:3 @{Are rusted} (\kati“tai\). Perfect passive indicative (singular for \chrusos\ and \arguros\ are grouped as one) of \katio“\, late verb (from \ios\, rust) with perfective sense of \kata\, to rust through (down to the bottom), found only here, Sir. strkjv@12:11, Epictetus (_Diss_. 4, 6, 14). {Rust} (\ios\). Poison in strkjv@James:3:8; strkjv@Romans:3:13| (only N.T. examples of old word). Silver does corrode and gold will tarnish. Dioscorides (V.91) tells about gold being rusted by chemicals. Modern chemists can even transmute metals as the alchemists claimed. {For a testimony} (\eis marturion\). Common idiom as in strkjv@Matthew:8:4| (use of \eis\ with accusative in predicate). {Against you} (\humin\). Dative of disadvantage as in strkjv@Mark:6:11| (\eis marturion autois\) where in the parallel passage (Luke:9:5|) we have \eis marturion ep' autous\. "To you" will make sense, as in strkjv@Matthew:8:4; strkjv@10:18|, but "against" is the idea here as in strkjv@Luke:21:13|. {Shall eat} (\phagetai\). Future middle (late form from \ephagon\) of defective verb \esthi“\, to eat. {Your flesh} (\tas sarkas\). The plural is used for the fleshy parts of the body like pieces of flesh (Revelation:17:16; strkjv@19:18,21|). Rust eats like a canker, like cancer in the body. {As fire} (\h“s pur\). Editors differ here whether to connect this phrase with \phagetai\, just before (as Mayor), for fire eats up more rapidly than rust, or with the following, as Westcott and Hort and Ropes, that is the eternal fire of Gehenna which awaits them (Matthew:25:41; strkjv@Mark:9:44|). This interpretation makes a more vivid picture for \ethˆsaurisate\ (ye have laid up, first aorist active indicative of \thˆsauriz“\, strkjv@Matthew:6:19| and see strkjv@Proverbs:16:27|), but it is more natural to take it with \phagetai\.

rwp@James:5:9 @{Murmur not} (\mˆ stenazete\). Prohibition with \mˆ\ and the present active imperative of \stenaz“\, old verb, to groan. "Stop groaning against one another," as some were already doing in view of their troubles. In view of the hope of the Second Coming lift up your heads. {That ye be not judged} (\hina mˆ krithˆte\). Negative purpose clause with \hina mˆ\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \krin“\. As already indicated (2:12f.; strkjv@4:12|) and repeated in strkjv@5:12|. Reminiscence of the words of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:7:1f|. {Standeth before the doors} (\pro t“n thur“n hestˆken\). Perfect active indicative of \histˆmi\, "is standing now." Again like the language of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:24:33| (\epi thurais\) and strkjv@Mark:13:29|. Jesus the Judge is pictured as ready to enter for the judgment.

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

rwp@John:2:14 @{Those that sold} (\tous p“lountas\). Present active articular participle of \p“le“\, to sell. They were in the Court of the Gentiles within the temple precinct (\en t“i hier“i\), but not in the \naos\ or temple proper. The sacrifices required animals (oxen, \boas\, sheep, \probata\, doves, \peristeras\) and "changers of money" (\kermatistas\, from \kermatiz“\, to cut into small pieces, to change money, only here in N.T., late and rare). Probably their very presence in his Father's house angered Jesus. The Synoptics (Mark:11:15-17; strkjv@Matthew:21:12f.; strkjv@Luke:10:45f.|) record a similar incident the day after the Triumphal Entry. If there was only one, it would seem more natural at the close. But why could it not occur at the beginning also? Here it is an obvious protest by Christ at the beginning of his ministry as in the Synoptics it is an indignant outcry against the desecration. The cessation was only temporary in both instances.

rwp@John:3:19 @{And this is the judgment} (\hautˆ de estin hˆ krisis\). A thoroughly Johannine phrase for sequence of thought (15:12; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@1John:1:5; strkjv@5:11,14; strkjv@3John:1:6|). It is more precisely the process of judging (\kri-sis\) rather than the result (\kri-ma\) of the judgment. "It is no arbitrary sentence, but the working out of a moral law" (Bernard). {The light is come} (\to ph“s elˆluthen\). Second perfect active indicative of \erchomai\, a permanent result as already explained in the Prologue concerning the Incarnation (1:4,5,9,11|). Jesus is the Light of the world. {Loved darkness} (\ˆgapˆsan to skotos\). Job:(Job:24:13|) spoke of men rebelling against the light. Here \to skotos\, common word for moral and spiritual darkness (1Thessalonians:5:5|), though \hˆ skotia\ in strkjv@John:1:5|. "Darkness" is common in John as a metaphor for the state of sinners (8:12; strkjv@12:35, 46; strkjv@1John:1:6; strkjv@2:8,9,11|). Jesus himself is the only moral and spiritual light of the world (8:12|) as he dared claim to his enemies. The pathos of it all is that men fall in love with the darkness of sin and rebel against the light like denizens of the underworld, "for their works were evil (\ponˆra\)." When the light appears, they scatter to their holes and dens. \Ponˆros\ (from \ponos\, toil, \pone“\, to toil) is used of the deeds of the world by Jesus (7:7|). In the end the god of this world blinds men's eyes so that they do not see the light (2Corinthians:4:4|). The fish in the Mammoth Cave have no longer eyes, but only sockets where eyes used to be. The evil one has a powerful grip on the world (1John:5:19|).

rwp@John:3:20 @{That doeth ill} (\ho phaula prass“n\). The word \phaulos\ means first worthless and then wicked (usually so in N.T.) and both senses occur in the papyri. In strkjv@5:29| see contrast between \agatha poie“\ (doing good things) and \phaula prass“\ (practising evil things). {Hateth the light} (\misei to ph“s\). Hence talks against it, ridicules Christ, Christianity, churches, preachers, etc. Does it in talk, magazines, books, in a supercilious tone of sheer ignorance. {Cometh not to the light} (\ouk erchetai pros to ph“s\). The light hurts his eyes, reveals his own wickedness, makes him thoroughly uncomfortable. Hence he does not read the Bible, he does not come to church, he does not pray. He goes on in deeper darkness. {Lest his works should be reproved} (\hina mˆ elegchthˆi ta erga autou\). Negative final clause (\hina mˆ\) with first aorist passive subjunctive of \elegch“\, old word to correct a fault, to reprove, to convict. See also strkjv@8:46; strkjv@16:8|. To escape this unpleasant process the evil man cuts out Christ.

rwp@John:4:1 @{When therefore} (\H“s oun\). Reference to strkjv@3:22f|. the work of the Baptist and the jealousy of his disciples. \Oun\ is very common in John's Gospel in such transitions. {The Lord} (\ho Kurios\). Songs:the best manuscripts (Neutral Alexandrian), though the Western class has \ho Iˆsous\. Mark usually has \ho Iˆsous\ and Luke often \ho Kurios\. In the narrative portion of John we have usually \ho Iˆsous\, but \ho Kurios\ in five passages (4:1; strkjv@6:23; strkjv@11:2; strkjv@20:20; strkjv@21:12|). There is no reason why John should not apply \ho Kurios\ to Jesus in the narrative sections as well as Luke. Bernard argues that these are "explanatory glosses," not in the first draft of the Gospel. But why? When John wrote his Gospel he certainly held Jesus to be \Kurios\ (Lord) as Luke did earlier when he wrote both Gospel and Acts This is hypercriticism. {Knew} (\egn“\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. The Pharisees knew this obvious fact. It was easy for Jesus to know the attitude of the Pharisees about it (2:24|). Already the Pharisees are suspicious of Jesus. {How that} (\hoti\). Declarative \hoti\ (indirect assertion). {Was making and baptizing more disciples than John} (\pleionas mathˆtas poiei kai baptizei ˆ I“anˆs\). Present active indicative in both verbs retained in indirect discourse. Recall the tremendous success of John's early ministry (Mark:1:5; strkjv@Matthew:3:5; strkjv@Luke:3:7,15|) in order to see the significance of this statement that Jesus had forged ahead of him in popular favour. Already the Pharisees had turned violently against John who had called them broods of vipers. It is most likely that they drew John out about the marriage of Herod Antipas and got him involved directly with the tetrarch so as to have him cast into prison (Luke:3:19f.|). Josephus (_Ant_. XVIII. v. 2) gives a public reason for this act of Herod Antipas, the fear that John would "raise a rebellion," probably the public reason for his private vengeance as given by Luke. Apparently John was cast into prison, though recently still free (John:3:24|), before Jesus left for Galilee. The Pharisees, with John out of the way, turn to Jesus with envy and hate.

rwp@John:4:35 @{Say not ye?} (\Ouch humeis legete;\). It is not possible to tell whether Jesus is alluding to a rural proverb of which nothing is known about there being four months from seedtime to harvest (a longer time than four months in fact) or whether he means that it was then actually four months to harvest. In the latter sense, since harvest began about the middle of April, it would be December when Jesus spoke. {There are yet four months} (\eti tetramˆnos estin\). The use of \eti\ (yet) and the fact that the space between seedtime and harvest is longer than four months (\tetra\, Aeolic for \tessara\, and \mˆn\, month) argue against the proverb idea. {And then cometh the harvest} (\kai ho therismos erchetai\). "And the harvest (\therismos\, from \theriz“\, rare in Greek writers) comes." The possible Iambic verse here is purely accidental as in strkjv@5:14|. {Lift up your eyes} (\eparate tous ophthalmous hum“n\). First aorist active imperative of \epair“\. Deliberate looking as in strkjv@John:6:5| where \theaomai\ also is used as here. {Fields} (\ch“ras\). Cultivated or ploughed ground as in strkjv@Luke:21:21|. {White} (\leukai\). Ripened grain like grey hair (Matthew:5:36|). {Already unto harvest} (\pros therismon ˆdˆ\). Probably \ˆdˆ\ (already) goes with verse 36|. The Samaritans could already be seen approaching and they were the field "white for harvest." This is the meaning of Christ's parable. If it is the spring of the year and Christ can point to the ripened grain, the parable is all the plainer, but it is not dependent on this detail. Recall the parable of the sower in strkjv@Matthew:13|.

rwp@John:5:18 @{Sought the more} (\mallon ezˆtoun\). Imperfect active of \zˆte“\, graphic picture of increased and untiring effort "to kill him" (\auton apokteinai\, first aorist active, to kill him off and be done with him). John repeats this clause "they sought to kill him" in strkjv@7:1,19,25; strkjv@8:37,40|. Their own blood was up on this Sabbath issue and they bend every energy to put Jesus to death. If this is a passover, this bitter anger, murderous wrath, will go on and grow for two years. {Not only brake the Sabbath} (\ou monon elue to sabbaton\). Imperfect active of \lu“\. He was now a common and regular Sabbath-breaker. \Lu“\ means to loosen, to set at naught. The papyri give examples of \lu“\ in this sense like \luein ta penthˆ\ (to break the period of mourning). This was the first grudge against Jesus, but his defence had made the offence worse and had given them a far graver charge. {But also called God his own Father} (\alla kai patera idion elege ton theon\). "His own" (\idion\) in a sense not true of others. That is precisely what Jesus meant by "My Father." See strkjv@Romans:8:32| for \ho idios huios\, "his own Son." {Making himself equal with God} (\ison heauton poi“n t“i the“i\). \Isos\ is an old common adjective (in papyri also) and means {equal}. In strkjv@Phillipians:2:6| Paul calls the Pre-incarnate Christ \isa the“i\, "equal to God" (plural \isa\, attributes of God). Bernard thinks that Jesus would not claim to be \isos the“i\ because in strkjv@John:14:28| he says: "The Father is greater than I." And yet he says in strkjv@14:7| that the one who sees him sees in him the Father. Certainly the Jews understood Jesus to claim equality with the Father in nature and privilege and power as also in strkjv@10:33; strkjv@19:7|. Besides, if the Jews misunderstood Jesus on this point, it was open and easy for him to deny it and to clear up the misapprehension. This is precisely what he does not do. On the contrary Jesus gives a powerful apologetic in defence of his claim to equality with the Father (verses 19-47|).

rwp@John:5:45 @{Think not} (\mˆ dokeite\). Prohibition with \mˆ\ and the present imperative. See on verse 39| for \doke“\ for mistaken opinions in John. {I will accuse you} (\eg“ katˆgorˆs“ hum“n\). Emphasis on \eg“\ (I). Future active indicative of \katˆgore“\ (\kata\, against, \agoreu“\, to speak in the assembly \agora\, to bring an accusation in court, a public accusation). See strkjv@Romans:3:9| for \proaitiaomai\ for making previous charge and strkjv@Luke:16:1| for \diaball“\, a secret malicious accusation, and strkjv@Romans:8:33| for \egkale“\, for public charge, not necessarily before tribunal. {Even Moses} (\M“usˆs\). No "even" in the Greek. {On whom ye have set your hope} (\eis hon humeis ˆlpikate\). Perfect active indicative of \elpiz“\, state of repose in Moses. Only example of \elpiz“\ in John. See strkjv@2Corinthians:1:10| for use of \eis\ with \elpiz“\ instead of the usual \epi\ (1Timothy:4:10|).

rwp@John:6:41 @{Murmured} (\egogguzon\). Imperfect active of the onomatopoetic verb \gogguz“\, late verb in LXX (murmuring against Moses), papyri (vernacular), like the cooing of doves or the buzzing of bees. These Galilean Jews are puzzled over what Jesus had said (verses 33,35|) about his being the bread of God come down from heaven.

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

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

rwp@John:7:20 @{The multitude} (\ho ochlos\). Outside of Jerusalem (the Galilean crowd as in verses 11f.|) and so unfamiliar with the effort to kill Jesus recorded in strkjv@5:18|. It is important in this chapter to distinguish clearly the several groups like the Jewish leaders (7:13,15,25,26,30,32|, etc.), the multitude from Galilee and elsewhere (10-13,20,31,40,49|), the common people of Jerusalem (25|), the Roman soldiers (45f.|). {Thou hast a devil} (\daimonion echeis\). "Demon," of course, as always in the Gospels. These pilgrims make the same charge against Jesus made long ago by the Pharisees in Jerusalem in explanation of the difference between John and Jesus (Matthew:11:18; strkjv@Luke:7:33|). It is an easy way to make a fling like that. "He is a monomaniac labouring under a hallucination that people wish to kill him" (Dods).

rwp@John:7:22 @{For this cause} (\dia touto\). Some would take this phrase with the preceding verb \thaumazete\ (ye marvel for this cause). {Hath given} (\ded“ken\). Present active indicative of \did“mi\ (permanent state). {Not that it is of Moses, but of the fathers} (\ouch hoti ek tou M“use“s estin all' ek t“n pater“n\). A parenthesis to explain that circumcision is older in origin than Moses. {And on the sabbath ye circumcise} (\kai en sabbat“i peritemnete\). Adversative use of \kai\=and yet as in 19|. That is to say, the Jews keep one law (circumcision) by violating another (on the Sabbath, the charge against him in chapter 5, healing on the Sabbath).

rwp@John:7:23 @{That the law of Moses may not be broken} (\hina mˆ luthˆi ho nomos M“use“s\). Purpose clause with negative \mˆ\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \lu“\. They are punctilious about their Sabbath rules and about circumcision on the eighth day. When they clash, they drop the Sabbath rule and circumcise. {Are ye wroth with me?} (\emoi cholƒte;\). Old word from \cholˆ\ (bile, gall), possibly from \chloˆ\ or \chl“ros\ (yellowish green). Only here in N.T. Songs:to be mad. With dative. Vivid picture of bitter spleen against Jesus for healing a man on the sabbath when they circumcise on the Sabbath. {A man every whit whole} (\holon anthr“pon hugiˆ\). Literally, "a whole (\holon\) man (all the man) sound (\hugiˆ\, well)," not just one member of the body mended.

rwp@John:7:50 @{Nicodemus} (\Nikodˆmos\). Not heard from since chapter 3 when he timidly came to Jesus by night. Now he boldly protests against the injustice of condemning Jesus unheard. He appears once more (and only in John) in strkjv@19:39| with Joseph of Arimathea as a secret disciple of Jesus. He is a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin and his present act is courageous. {Saith} (\legei\). Dramatic present active indicative as in strkjv@2:3|. {Before} (\proteron\). This is genuine, a reference to the visit in chapter 3, but \nuktos\ (by night) is not genuine here. {Being one of them} (\heis “n ex aut“n\). As a member of the Sanhedrin he takes up the challenge in verse 48|. He is both ruler and Pharisee.

rwp@John:7:52 @{Art thou also of Galilee?} (\Mˆ kai su ek tˆs Galilaias ei;\). Formally negative answer expected by \mˆ\, but really they mean to imply that Nicodemus from local feeling or prejudice has lined himself up with this Galilean mob (\ochlos\) of sympathizers with Jesus and is like Jesus himself a Galilean. "These aristocrats of Jerusalem had a scornful contempt for the rural Galileans" (Bernard). {That out of Galilee ariseth no prophet} (\hoti ek tˆs Galilaias prophˆtˆs ouk egeiretai\). As a matter of fact Jonah, Hosea, Nahum, possibly also Elijah, Elisha, and Amos were from Galilee. It was simply the rage of the Sanhedrin against Jesus regardless of the facts. Westcott suggests that they may have reference to the future, but that is a mere excuse for them.

rwp@John:8:10 @{Lifted up himself} (\anakupsas\). First aorist active participle of \anakupt“\ as in verse 7|. {Where are they?} (\Pou eisin;\). Jesus had kept on writing on the ground as the accusers had slipped away one by one. {Did no man condemn thee?} (\oudeis se katekrinen;\). First aorist active indicative of \katakrin“\, old and common verb to give judgment against (down on) one, but not in John. No one dared to cast a stone at the woman on Christ's terms.

rwp@John:8:20 @{In the treasury} (\en t“i gazophulaki“i\). See already strkjv@Mark:12:41; strkjv@Luke:21:1| for this word for the treasure-chambers of the temple. "It abutted on the Court of the Women, and against its walls were placed chests, trumpet-like in form, as receptacles for the offerings of the worshippers" (Bernard). The Persian word _gaza_ (treasure) occurs only once in the N.T. (Acts:8:27|) and the compound (\phulakˆ\, guard) only here in John. Jesus hardly taught within a treasure-chamber. It probably means "at the treasury in the temple." This court was probably the most public part of the temple (Vincent). {And} (\kai\)="and yet" as in strkjv@1:10|, etc. {Because his hour was not yet come} (\hoti oup“ elˆluthei hˆ h“ra autou\). {Reason} (\hoti\) given why no one seized (\epiasen\, cf. strkjv@7:30|) him. \Elˆluthei\ is past perfect active of \erchomai\, "had not yet come." This very use of \h“ra\ appears in strkjv@2:4| and the very clause in strkjv@7:30| which see.

rwp@John:8:22 @{Will he kill himself?} (\mˆti apoktenei heauton;\). Negative answer formally expected, but there is a manifest sneer in the query. "The mockery in these words is alike subtle and bitter" (Vincent). It was a different group of Jews in strkjv@7:31| who cynically suggested that he was going to work among the Greeks in the Dispersion. Here they infer that Jesus refers to the next world. They suggest the depths of Gehenna for him as the abode of suicides (Josephus, _War_ III. viii. 5). Of course the rabbis could not join Jesus there! Edersheim argues against this view.

rwp@John:8:27 @{They perceived not} (\ouk egn“san\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. "Preoccupied as they were with thoughts of an earthly deliverer" (Westcott) and prejudiced against recognizing Jesus as the one sent from God. {That he spake to them of the Father} (\hoti ton patera autois elegen\). Indirect assertion, but with the present indicative (\legei\) changed to the imperfect (\elegen\) as was sometimes done (2:25|) after a secondary tense.

rwp@John:9:6 @{He spat on the ground} (\eptusen chamai\). First aorist active indicative of the old verb \ptu“\ for which see strkjv@Mark:7:33|. \Chamai\ is an old adverb either in the dative or locative (sense suits locative), in N.T. only here and strkjv@John:18:6|. Jesus was not asked to cure this man. The curative effects of saliva are held in many places. The Jews held saliva efficacious for eye-trouble, but it was forbidden on the Sabbath. "That Jesus supposed some virtue lay in the application of the clay is contradicted by the fact that in other cases of blindness He did not use it" (Dods). Cf. strkjv@Mark:8:23|. Why he here accommodated himself to current belief we do not know unless it was to encourage the man to believe. {He made clay} (\epoiˆsen pˆlon\). Only use of \pˆlos\, old word for clay, in N.T. in this chapter and strkjv@Romans:9:21|. The kneading of the clay and spittle added another offence against the Sabbath rules of the rabbis. {Anointed his eyes with the clay} (\epechrisen autou ton pˆlon epi tous ophthalmous\). First aorist active indicative of \epichri“\, old verb, to spread on, anoint, here only and verse 11| in N.T. "He spread the clay upon his eyes." B C read \epethˆken\ (first aorist active indicative of \epitithˆmi\, to put on).

rwp@John:9:41 @{If ye were blind} (\ei tuphloi ˆte\). Condition of second class with imperfect indicative in the protasis. The old word \tuphlos\ is from \tuph“\, to raise a smoke, to blind by smoke (literally and metaphorically). Here, of course, it is moral blindness. If the Pharisees were born morally blind, they would, like idiots, be without responsibility. {Ye would not have sin} (\ouk an eichete hamartian\). Regular form for conclusion of second-class condition, \an\ with imperfect. {But now ye say} (\nun de legete\). In contrast to the previous condition. See like contrast in strkjv@15:22,24|. They arrogantly asserted superior knowledge. {We see} (\blepomen\). The ignorant mob do not (7:49|). It is sin against light and is hopeless (Mark:3:29; strkjv@Matthew:12:31f.|). "Ye are witnesses against yourselves" (\martureite heautois\, strkjv@Matthew:23:31|).

rwp@John:10:12 @{He that is a hireling} (\ho misth“tos\). Old word from \mistho“\, to hire (Matthew:20:1|) from \misthos\ (hire, wages, strkjv@Luke:10:7|), in N.T. only in this passage. Literally, "the hireling and not being a shepherd" (\ho misth“tos kai ouk “n poimˆn\). Note \ouk\ with the participle \“n\ to emphasize the certainty that he is not a shepherd in contrast with \mˆ eiserchomenos\ in verse 1| (conceived case). See same contrast in strkjv@1Peter:1:8| between \ouk idontes\ and \mˆ hor“ntes\. The hireling here is not necessarily the thief and robber of verses 1,8|. He may conceivably be a nominal shepherd (pastor) of the flock who serves only for the money, a sin against which Peter warned the shepherds of the flock "not for shameful gain" (1Peter:5:2|). {Whose own} (\hou idia\). Every true shepherd considers the sheep in his care "his own" (\idia\) even if he does not actually "own" them. The mere "hireling" does not feel so. {Beholdeth} (\the“rei\). Vivid dramatic present, active indicative of \the“re“\, a graphic picture. {The wolf coming} (\ton lukon erchomenon\). Present middle predicate participle of \erchomai\. {Leaveth the sheep, and fleeth} (\aphiˆsin ta probata kai pheugei\). Graphic present actives again of \aphiˆmi\ and \pheug“\. The cowardly hireling cares naught for the sheep, but only for his own skin. The wolf was the chief peril to sheep in Palestine. See strkjv@Matthew:10:6| where Jesus says: "Behold I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves." {And the wolf snatcheth them and scattereth them} (\kai ho lukos harpazei kai skorpizei\). Vivid parenthesis in the midst of the picture of the conduct of the hireling. Bold verbs these. For the old verb \harpaz“\ see strkjv@John:6:15; strkjv@Matthew:11:12|, and for \skorpiz“\, late word (Plutarch) for the Attic \skedannumi\, see strkjv@Matthew:12:30|. It occurs in the vision of Ezekiel (Ezekiel:34:5|) where because of the careless shepherds "the sheep became meat to all the beasts of the field, and were scattered." Jesus uses \harpaz“\ in strkjv@10:29| where no one is able "to snatch" one out of the Father's hand.

rwp@John:10:33 @{For a good work we stone thee not} (\peri kalou ergou ou lithazomen\). "Concerning a good deed we are not stoning thee." Flat denial that the healing of the blind man on the Sabbath had led them to this attempt (8:59|) in spite of the facts. {But for blasphemy} (\alla peri blasphˆmias\). See strkjv@Acts:26:7| where \peri\ with the genitive is also used with \egkaloumai\ for the charge against Paul. This is the only example in John of the word \blasphˆmia\ (cf. strkjv@Matthew:12:31|). {And because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God} (\kai hoti su anthr“pos “n poieis seauton theon\). In strkjv@5:18| they stated the charge more accurately: "He called God his own Father, making himself equal with God." That is, he made himself the Son of God. This he did beyond a doubt. But was it blasphemy? Only if he was not the Son of God. The penalty for blasphemy was death by stoning (Leviticus:24:16; strkjv@1Kings:21:10,13|).

rwp@John:10:36 @{Of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world} (\hon ho patˆr hˆgiasen kai apesteilen eis ton kosmon\). Another relative clause with the antecedent (\touton\, it would be, object of \legete\) unexpressed. Every word counts heavily here in contrast with the mere judges of strkjv@Psalms:82:6|. {Thou blasphemest} (\hoti blasphˆmeis\). Recitative \hoti\ again before direct quotation. {Because I said} (\hoti eipon\). Causal use of \hoti\ and regular form \eipon\ (cf. \eipa\ in verse 34|). {I am the Son of God} (\huios tou theou eimi\). Direct quotation again after \eipon\. This Jesus had implied long before as in strkjv@2:16| (my Father) and had said in strkjv@5:18-30| (the Father, the Son), in strkjv@9:35| in some MSS., and virtually in strkjv@10:30|. They will make this charge against Jesus before Pilate (19:7|). Jesus does not use the article here with \huios\, perhaps (Westcott) fixing attention on the character of Son rather than on the person as in strkjv@Hebrews:1:2|. There is no answer to this question with its arguments.

rwp@John:11:9 @{In the day} (\tˆs hˆmeras\). Genitive of time, within the day, the twelve-hour day in contrast with night. The words of Jesus here illustrate what he had said in strkjv@9:4|. It is not blind fatalism that Jesus proclaims, but the opposite of cowardice. He has full confidence in the Father s purpose about his "hour" which has not yet come. Jesus has courage to face his enemies again to do the Father's will about Lazarus. {If a man walk in the day} (\ean tis peripatˆi en tˆi hˆmerƒi\). Condition of the third class, a conceived case and it applies to Jesus who walks in the full glare of noonday. See strkjv@8:12| for the contrast between walking in the light and in the dark. {He stumbleth not} (\ou proskoptei\). He does not cut (or bump) against this or that obstacle, for he can see. \Kopt“\ is to cut and pros, against.

rwp@John:12:5 @{Sold} (\eprathˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \piprask“\, old verb to sell (Matthew:13:46|). {For three hundred pence} (\triakosi“n dˆnari“n\). Genitive of price. Same item in strkjv@Mark:14:5|, while in strkjv@Matthew:26:9| it is simply "for much" (\pollou\). But all three have "given to the poor" (\edothˆ pt“chois\). First aorist passive indicative of \did“mi\ with dative case \pt“chois\ (note absence of the article, poor people), real beggars, mendicants (Matthew:19:21; strkjv@Luke:14:13|). But only John singles out Judas as the one who made the protest against this waste of money while Mark says that "some" had indignation and Matthew has it that "the disciples" had indignation. Clearly Judas was the spokesman for the group who chimed in and agreed with his protest. The amount here spent by Mary (ten guineas) would equal a day labourer's wages for a year (Dods).

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

rwp@John:12:13 @{Took} (\elabon\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\. {The branches of the palm-trees} (\ta baia t“n phoinik“n\). \Phoinix\ is an old word for palm-tree (Revelation:7:9| for the branches) and in strkjv@Acts:27:12| the name of a city. \Baion\ is apparently a word of Egyptian origin, palm branches, here only in N.T., but in the papyri and I Macc. strkjv@13:51. Here we have "the palm branches of the palm-trees." The use in 1 Macc. strkjv@13:51 (cf. II Macc. strkjv@10:7) is in the account of Simon's triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Bernard notes that to carry palms was a mark of triumphant homage to a victor or a king (Revelation:7:9|). Palm-trees grew on the Mount of Olives (Mark:11:8|) on the road from Bethany to Jerusalem. The crowds (one in front and one behind, strkjv@Mark:11:9; strkjv@Matthew:21:9; strkjv@John:2:18|) cut the branches as they came (Matthew:21:8|). {To meet him} (\eis hupantˆsin aut“i\). Literally, {for a meeting} (\hupantˆsis\, late word from the verb \hupanta“\, strkjv@Matthew:8:28; strkjv@John:11:20,30; strkjv@12:18|, in the papyri, but only here in the N.T.) with him" (\aut“i\, associative instrumental case after \hupantˆsin\ as after the verb in verse 18|). It was a scene of growing excitement. {And cried out} (\kai ekraugazon\). Imperfect active of \kraugaz“\, old and rare verb (from \kraugˆ\) as in strkjv@Matthew:12:19; strkjv@John:19:15|. {Hosannah} (\H“sannah\). Transliteration of the Hebrew word meaning "Save now." The LXX renders it by \S“son dˆ\ (Save now). {Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord} (\eulogˆmenos ho erchomenos en onomati kuriou\). Perfect passive participle of \euloge“\. Quotation from strkjv@Psalms:118:25f.|, written, some think, for the dedication of the second temple, or, as others think, for the feast of tabernacles after the return (Ezra:3:1f.|). It was sung in the processional recitation then as a welcome to the worshippers. Here the words are addressed to the Messiah as is made plain by the addition of the words, "even the king of Israel" (\kai ho basileus tou Israˆl\) as Nathanael called him (1:49|). Jesus is here hailed by the multitudes as the long-looked for Messiah of Jewish hope and he allows them so to greet him (Luke:19:38-40|), a thing that he prevented a year before in Galilee (John:6:14f.|). It is probable that "in the name of the Lord" should be taken with "blessed" as in strkjv@Deuteronomy:21:5; strkjv@2Samuel:6:18; strkjv@1Kings:22:16; strkjv@2Kings:2:24|. The Messiah was recognized by Martha as the Coming One (John:11:27|) and is so described by the Baptist (Matthew:11:3|). Mark (Mark:11:10|) adds "the kingdom that cometh" while Luke (19:38|) has "the king that cometh." "It was this public acclamation of Jesus as King of Israel or King of the Jews which was the foundation of the charge made against him before Pilate (18:33|)" (Bernard).

rwp@John:12:48 @{Rejecteth} (\athet“n\). Present active participle of \athete“\, late _Koin‚_ verb (from \athetos\, \a\ privative, and \tithˆmi\), to render null and void, only here in John, but see strkjv@Mark:6:26; strkjv@7:9|. {One that judgeth him} (\ton krinonta auton\). Articular present active participle of \krin“\. See same idea in strkjv@5:45; strkjv@9:50|. {The same} (\ekeinos\). "That" very word of Christ which one rejects will confront him and accuse him to the Father "at the last day" (\en tˆi eschatˆi hˆmerai\, this phrase peculiar to John). There is no escaping it. And yet Jesus himself will bear witness for or against the one whose conduct has already revealed his attitude towards the message of God (Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:8f.|).

rwp@John:13:18 @{Not of you all} (\ou peri pant“n\). As in verse 11|, he here refers to Judas whose treachery is no surprise to Jesus (6:64,70|). {Whom I have chosen} (\tinas exelexamˆn\). Indirect question, unless \tinas\ is here used as a relative like \hous\. The first aorist middle indicative of \ekleg“\ is the same form used in strkjv@6:70|. Jesus refers to the choice (Luke:6:13| \eklexamenos\, this very word again) of the twelve from among the large group of disciples. \That the scripture might be fulfilled\ (\all' hina hˆ graphˆ plˆr“thˆi\). See the same clause in strkjv@17:12|. Purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \plˆro“\. This treachery of Judas was according to the eternal counsels of God (12:4|), but none the less Judas is responsible for his guilt. For a like elliptical clause see strkjv@9:3; strkjv@15:25|. The quotation is from the Hebrew of strkjv@Psalms:41:9|. {He that eateth} (\ho tr“g“n\). Present active participle of old verb to gnaw, to chew, to eat, in N.T. only in John (6:54,56,57,58; strkjv@13:18|) and strkjv@Matthew:26:38|. LXX has here \ho esthi“n\. {Lifted up his heel against me} (\epˆren ep' eme tˆn pternan autou\). First aorist active indicative of \epair“\. \Pterna\, old word for heel, only here in N.T. The metaphor is that of kicking with the heel or tripping with the heel like a wrestler. It was a gross breach of hospitality to eat bread with any one and then turn against him so. The Arabs hold to it yet.

rwp@John:15:6 @{He is cast forth} (\eblˆthˆ ex“\). Timeless or gnomic use of the first aorist passive indicative of \ball“\ as the conclusion of a third-class condition (see also verses 4,7| for the same condition, only constative aorist subjunctive \meinˆte\ and \meinˆi\ in verse 7|). The apostles are thus vividly warned against presumption. Jesus as the vine will fulfil his part of the relation as long as the branches keep in vital union with him. {As a branch} (\h“s to klˆma\). {And is withered} (\exˆranthˆ\). Another timeless first aorist passive indicative, this time of \xˆrain“\, same timeless use in strkjv@James:1:11| of grass, old and common verb. They gather (\sunagousin\). Plural though subject not expressed, the servants of the vine-dresser gather up the broken off branches. {Are burned} (\kaietai\). Present passive singular of \kai“\, to burn, because \klˆmata\ (branches) is neuter plural. See this vivid picture also in strkjv@Matthew:13:41f.,49f|.

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

rwp@John:18:29 @{Went out} (\exˆlthen ex“\). Note both \ex\ and \ex“\ (went out outside), since the Sanhedrin would not come into Pilate's palace. Apparently on a gallery over the pavement in front of the palace (John:19:13|). {Accusation} (\katˆgorian\). Old word for formal charge, in N.T. only here, strkjv@1Timothy:5:19; strkjv@Titus:1:6|. {Against this man} (\tou anthr“pou toutou\). Objective genitive after \katˆgorian\. A proper legal inquiry.

rwp@John:18:36 @{My kingdom} (\hˆ basileia hˆ emˆ\). Christ claims to be king to Pilate, but of a peculiar kingdom. For "world" (\kosmou\) see strkjv@17:13-18|. {My servants} (\hoi hupˆretai hoi emoi\). For the word see verse 3| where it means the temple police or guards (literally, under-rowers). In the LXX always (Proverbs:14:35; strkjv@Isaiah:32:5; strkjv@Daniel:3:46|) officers of a king as here. Christ then had only a small band of despised followers who could not fight against Caesar. Was he alluding also to legions of angels on his side? (Matthew:26:56|). {Would fight} (\ˆg“nizonto an\). Imperfect middle of \ag“nizomai\ common verb (only here in John, but see strkjv@1Corinthians:9:25|) from \ag“n\ (contest) with \an\, a conclusion of the second-class condition (assumed as untrue). Christians should never forget the profound truth stated here by Jesus. {That I should not be delivered} (\hina mˆ paradoth“\). Negative final clause with \hina mˆ\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \paradid“mi\ (see verses 28,36|). Jesus expects Pilate to surrender to the Jews. {But now} (\nun de\). In contrast to the condition already stated as in strkjv@8:40; strkjv@9:41; strkjv@15:22,24|.

rwp@John:19:12 @{Sought} (\ezˆtei\). Imperfect active, "kept on seeking," "made renewed efforts to release him." He was afraid to act boldly against the will of the Jews. {If thou release this man} (\ean touton apolusˆis\). Condition of third class, a direct threat to Pilate. He knew all the time that the Sanhedrin might tell Caesar on him. {Thou art not Caesar's friend} (\ouk ei philos tou kaisaros\). Later to Vespasian this was an official title, here simply a daring threat to Pilate. {Speaketh against Caesar} (\antilegei t“i kaisari\). Caesar brooks no rival. Jesus had allowed himself to be acclaimed king of Israel in the Triumphal Entry (John:12:13; strkjv@Mark:11:10; strkjv@Luke:19:38|). The Sanhedrin have caught Pilate in their toils.

rwp@John:19:15 @{Away with him, away with him} (\ƒron, ƒron\). First aorist active imperative of \air“\. See \aire\ in strkjv@Luke:23:18|. This thing has gotten on the nerves of the crowd. Note the repetition. In a second-century papyrus letter (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_) a nervous mother cries "He upsets me; away with him" (\arron auton\). Pilate weakly repeats his sarcasm: "{Your king shall I crucify?} (\Ton basilea hum“n staur“s“;\). {But Caesar} (\ei mˆ kaisara\). The chief priests (\hoi archiereis\) were Sadducees, who had no Messianic hope like that of the Pharisees. Songs:to carry their point against Jesus they renounce the principle of the theocracy that God was their King (1Samuel:12:12|).

rwp@John:19:35 @{He that hath seen} (\ho he“rak“s\). Perfect active articular participle of \hora“\. John the Apostle was there and saw this fact (still sees it, in fact). This personal witness disproves the theory of the Docetic Gnostics that Jesus did not have a real human body. {He knoweth} (\ekeinos oiden\). That is John does like strkjv@9:37|. It is possible that \ekeinos\ may be a solemn appeal to God as in strkjv@1:33| or Christ as in strkjv@1John:3:5|. Bernard argues that the final editor is distinguishing the Beloved Disciple from himself and is endorsing him. But the example of Josephus (_War_. III. 7, 16) is against this use of \ekeinos\. John is rather referring to himself as still alive.

rwp@John:20:20 @{Showed} (\edeixen\). First aorist active indicative of \deiknumi\. This body, not yet glorified, retained the marks of the nails and of the soldier's spear, ample proof of the bodily resurrection against the modern view that only Christ's "spirit" arose and against the Docetic notion that Jesus had no actual human body. Luke (Luke:24:39f.|) adds feet to hands and side. {Were glad} (\echarˆsan\). Second aorist passive indicative of \chair“\. Jesus had said (16:22|) that it would be so. Luke adds (Luke:24:41|) that they "disbelieved for joy." It was too good to be true, though terror had first seized them when Jesus appeared (Luke:24:37|) because of the suddenness of Christ's appearance and their highly wrought state.

rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE PURPOSE The author undoubtedly has the Gnostics in mind and is seeking to warn his readers against them, as is true of II Peter. This same purpose appears in the Johannine Epistles, as was true also of Colossians, Ephesians, the Pastoral Epistles.

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

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

rwp@Luke:2:34 @{Is set for the falling and the rising up of many in Israel} (\Keitai eis pt“sin kai anastasin poll“n en t“i Israˆl\). Present indicative of the old defective verb appearing only in present and imperfect in the N.T. Sometimes it is used as the passive of \tithˆmi\ as here. The falling of some and the rising up of others is what is meant. He will be a stumbling-block to some (Isaiah:8:14; strkjv@Matthew:21:42,44; strkjv@Romans:9:33; strkjv@1Peter:2:16f.|) who love darkness rather than light (John:3:19|), he will be the cause of rising for others (Romans:6:4,9; strkjv@Ephesians:2:6|). "Judas despairs, Peter repents: one robber blasphemes, the other confesses" (Plummer). Jesus is the magnet of the ages. He draws some, he repels others. This is true of all epoch-making men to some extent. {Spoken against} (\antilegomenon\). Present passive participle, continuous action. It is going on today. Nietzsche regarded Jesus Christ as the curse of the race because he spared the weak.

rwp@Luke:2:35 @{A sword} (\rhomphaia\). A large sword, properly a long Thracian javelin. It occurs in the LXX of Goliath's sword (1Samuel:17:51|). How little Mary understood the meaning of Simeon's words that seemed so out of place in the midst of the glorious things already spoken, a sharp thorn in their roses, a veritable bitter-sweet. But one day Mary will stand by the Cross of Christ with this Thracian javelin clean through her soul, \stabat Mater Dolorosa\ (John:19:25|). It is only a parenthesis here, and a passing cloud perhaps passed over Mary's heart already puzzled with rapture and ecstasy. {May be revealed} (\apokaluphth“sin\). Unveiled. First aorist passive subjunctive after \hop“s an\ and expresses God's purpose in the mission of the Messiah. He is to test men's thoughts (\dialogismoi\) and purposes. They will be compelled to take a stand for Christ or against him. That is true today.

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

rwp@Luke:4:8 @{Thou shalt worship} (\proskunˆseis\). Satan used this verb to Jesus who turns it against him by the quotation from strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:13|. Jesus clearly perceived that one could not worship both Satan and God. He had to choose whom he would serve. Luke does not give the words, "Get thee hence, Satan" (Matthew:4:10|), for he has another temptation to narrate.

rwp@Luke:4:12 @{It is said} (\eirˆtai\). Perfect passive indicative, stands said, a favourite way of quoting Scripture in the N.T. In strkjv@Matthew:4:7| we have the usual "it is written" (\gegraptai\). Here Jesus quotes strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:16|. Each time he uses Deuteronomy against the devil. The LXX is quoted. It is the volitive future indicative with \ouk\, a common prohibition. Jesus points out to the devil that testing God is not trusting God (Plummer).

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

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

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

rwp@Luke:9:5 @{As many as receive you not} (\hosoi an mˆ dech“ntai humas\). Indefinite relative plural with \an\ and present middle subjunctive and the negative \mˆ\. Here strkjv@Matthew:10:14| has the singular (whosoever) and strkjv@Mark:6:11| has "whatsoever place." {For a testimony against them} (\eis marturion ep' autous\). Note use of \ep' autous\ where strkjv@Mark:6:11| has simply the dative \autois\ (disadvantage), really the same idea.

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

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

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

rwp@Luke:10:11 @{Even the dust} (\kai ton koniorton\). Old word from \konis\, dust, and \ornumi\, to stir up. We have seen it already in strkjv@Matthew:10:14; strkjv@Luke:9:5|. Dust is a plague in the east. Shake off even that. {Cleaveth} (\kollˆthenta\). First aorist passive participle of \kolla“\, to cling as dust and mud do to shoes. Hence the orientals took off the sandals on entering a house. {We wipe off} (\apomassometha\). Middle voice of an old verb \apomass“\, to rub off with the hands. Nowhere else in the N.T. But \ekmass“\, occurs in strkjv@Luke:7:38,44|. {Against you} (\Humin\). Fine example of the dative of disadvantage (the case of personal interest, the dative).

rwp@Luke:10:25 @{And tempted him} (\ekpeiraz“n auton\). Present active participle, conative idea, trying to tempt him. There is no "and" in the Greek. He "stood up (\anestˆ\, ingressive second aorist active) trying to tempt him." \Peiraz“\ is a late form of \peira“\ and \ekpeiraz“\ apparently only in the LXX, and N.T. (quoted by Jesus from strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:16| in strkjv@Matthew:4:7; strkjv@Luke:4:12| against Satan). Here and strkjv@1Corinthians:10:9|. The spirit of this lawyer was evil. He wanted to entrap Jesus if possible. {What shall I do to inherit eternal life?} (\Ti poiˆsas z“ˆn ai“niou klˆronomˆs“;\). Literally, "By doing what shall I inherit eternal life?" Note the emphasis on "doing" (\poiˆsas\). The form of his question shows a wrong idea as to how to get it. {Eternal life} (\z“ˆn ai“nion\) is endless life as in John's Gospel (John:16:9; strkjv@18:18,30|) and in strkjv@Matthew:25:46|, which see.

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

rwp@Luke:10:42 @{The good portion} (\tˆn agathˆn merida\). The best dish on the table, fellowship with Jesus. This is the spiritual application of the metaphor of the dishes on the table. Salvation is not "the good portion" for Martha had that also. {From her} (\autˆs\). Ablative case after \aphairˆthˆsetai\ (future passive indicative). Jesus pointedly takes Mary's side against Martha's fussiness.

rwp@Luke:11:15 @{Dumb} (\k“phon\). See on ¯Matthew:9:32|. {By Beelzebub} (\en Beezeboul\). Blasphemous accusation here in Judea as in Galilee (Mark:3:22; strkjv@Matthew:12:24,27|). See on Matthew for discussion of the form of this name and the various items in the sin against the Holy Spirit involved in the charge. It was useless to deny the fact of the miracles. Songs:they were explained as wrought by Satan himself, a most absurd explanation.

rwp@Luke:11:17 @{But he} (\autos de\). In contrast with them. {Knowing their thoughts} (\eid“s aut“n ta dianoˆmata\). From \dianoe“\, to think through or distinguish. This substantive is common in Plato, but occurs nowhere else in the N.T. It means intent, purpose. Jesus knew that they were trying to tempt him. {And a house divided against a house falleth} (\kai oikos epi oikon piptei\). It is not certain that \diameristheisa\ (divided) is to be repeated here as in strkjv@Matthew:12:25; strkjv@Mark:3:25|. It may mean, {and house falls upon house}, "one tumbling house knocking down its neighbour, a graphic picture of what happens when a kingdom is divided against itself" (Bruce).

rwp@Luke:11:18 @{Because ye say} (\hoti legete\). Jesus here repeats in indirect discourse (accusative and infinitive) the charge made against him in verse 15|. The condition is of the first class, determined as fulfilled.

rwp@Luke:11:19 @{And if I by Beelzebub} (\ei de eg“ en Beezeboul\). Also a condition of the first class, determined as fulfilled. A Greek condition deals only with the _statement_, not with the actual facts. For sake of argument, Jesus here assumes that he casts out demons by Beelzebub. The conclusion is a _reductio ad absurdum_. The Jewish exorcists practiced incantations against demons (Acts:19:13|).

rwp@Luke:11:48 @{Consent} (\suneudokeite\). Double compound (\sun, eu, doke“\), to think well along with others, to give full approval. A late verb, several times in the N.T., in strkjv@Acts:8:1| of Saul's consenting to and agreeing to Stephen's death. It is a somewhat subtle, but just, argument made here. Outwardly the lawyers build tombs for the prophets whom their fathers (forefathers) killed as if they disapproved what their fathers did. But in reality they neglect and oppose what the prophets teach just as their fathers did. Songs:they are "witnesses" (\martures\) against themselves (Matthew:23:31|).

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

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

rwp@Luke:12:13 @{Bid my brother} (\eipe t“i adelph“i mou\). This volunteer from the crowd draws attention to the multitude (verses 13-21|). He does not ask for arbitration and there is no evidence that his brother was willing for that. He wants a decision by Jesus against his brother. The law (Deuteronomy:21:17|) was two-thirds to the elder, one-third to the younger.

rwp@Luke:13:1 @{At that very season} (\en aut“i t“i kair“i\). Luke's frequent idiom, "at the season itself." Apparently in close connexion with the preceding discourses. Probably "were present" (\parˆsan\, imperfect of \pareimi\) means "came," "stepped to his side," as often (Matthew:26:50; strkjv@Acts:12:20; strkjv@John:11:28|). These people had a piece of news for Jesus. {Whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices} (\h“n to haima Peilatos emixen meta t“n thusi“n aut“n\). The verb \emixen\ is first aorist active (not past perfect) of \mignumi\, a common verb. The incident is recorded nowhere else, but is in entire harmony with Pilate's record for outrages. These Galileans at a feast in Jerusalem may have been involved in some insurrection against the Roman government, the leaders of whom Pilate had slain right in the temple courts where the sacrifices were going on. Jesus comments on the incident, but not as the reporters had expected. Instead of denunciation of Pilate he turned it into a parable for their own conduct in the uncertainty of life.

rwp@Luke:13:31 @{In that very hour} (\en autˆi tˆi h“rƒi\). Luke's favourite notation of time. {Pharisees} (\Pharisaioi\). Here we see the Pharisees in a new role, warning Jesus against the machinations of Herod, when they are plotting themselves.

rwp@Luke:14:23 @{The highways and hedges} (\tas hodous kai phragmous\). The public roads outside the city of Judaism just as the streets and lanes were inside the city. The heathen are to be invited this time. {Hedges} is fenced in places from \phrass“\, to fence in (Romans:3:19|). {Compel} (\anagkason\). First aorist active imperative of \anagkaz“\, from \anagkˆ\ (verse 18|). By persuasion of course. There is no thought of compulsory salvation. "Not to use force, but to constrain them against the reluctance which such poor creatures would feel at accepting the invitation of a great lord" (Vincent). As examples of such "constraint" in this verb see strkjv@Matthew:14:22; strkjv@Acts:26:11; strkjv@Galatians:6:12|. {That my house may be filled} (\hina gemisthˆi mou ho oikos\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \gemiz“\, to fill full, old verb from \gem“\, to be full. Effective aorist. Subjunctive with \hina\ in final clause. The Gentiles are to take the place that the Jews might have had (Romans:11:25|). Bengel says: _Nec natura nec gratia patitur vacuum_.

rwp@Luke:15:7 @{Over one sinner that repenteth} (\epi heni hamart“l“i metanoounti\). The word sinner points to verse 1|. Repenting is what these sinners were doing, these lost sheep brought to the fold. The joy in heaven is in contrast with the grumbling Pharisees and scribes. {More than over} (\ˆ epi\). There is no comparative in the Greek. It is only implied by a common idiom like our "rather than." {Which need no repentance} (\hoitines ou chreian echousin metanoias\). Jesus does not mean to say that the Pharisees and the scribes do not need repentance or are perfect. He for the sake of argument accepts their claims about themselves and by their own words condemns them for their criticism of his efforts to save the lost sheep. It is the same point that he made against them when they criticized Jesus and the disciples for being at Levi's feast (Luke:5:31f.|). They posed as "righteous." Very well, then. That shuts their mouths on the point of Christ's saving the publicans and sinners.

rwp@Luke:16:1 @{Unto the disciples} (\kai pros tous mathˆtas\). The three preceding parables in chapter 15 exposed the special faults of the Pharisees, "their hard exclusiveness, self-righteousness, and contempt for others" (Plummer). This parable is given by Luke alone. The \kai\ (also) is not translated in the Revised Version. It seems to mean that at this same time, after speaking to the Pharisees (chapter 15), Jesus proceeds to speak a parable to the disciples (16:1-13|), the parable of the Unjust Steward. It is a hard parable to explain, but Jesus opens the door by the key in verse 9|. {Which had a steward} (\hos ˆichen oikonomon\). Imperfect active, continued to have. Steward is house-manager or overseer of an estate as already seen in strkjv@Luke:12:42|. {Was accused} (\dieblˆthˆ\). First aorist indicative passive, of \diaball“\, an old verb, but here only in the N.T. It means to throw across or back and forth, rocks or words and so to slander by gossip. The word implies malice even if the thing said is true. The word \diabolos\ (slanderer) is this same root and it is used even of women, she-devils (1Timothy:3:11|). {That he was wasting} (\h“s diaskorpiz“n\). For the verb see on ¯15:13|. The use of \h“s\ with the participle is a fine Greek idiom for giving the alleged ground of a charge against one. {His goods} (\ta huparchonta autou\). "His belongings," a Lukan idiom.

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

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

rwp@Luke:17:32 @{Remember Lot's wife} (\mnˆmoneuete tˆs gunaikos L“t\). Here only in the N.T. A pertinent illustration to warn against looking back with yearning after what has been left behind (Genesis:19:26|).

rwp@Luke:20:1 @{On one of the days} (\en miƒi t“n hˆmer“n\). Luke's favourite way of indicating time. It was the last day of the temple teaching (Tuesday). strkjv@Luke:20:1-19| is to be compared with strkjv@Mark:11:27-12:12; strkjv@Matthew:21:23-46|. {There came upon him} (\epestˆsan\). Second aorist active indicative, ingressive aorist of \ephistˆmi\, old and common verb, stood up against him, with the notion of sudden appearance. These leaders (cf. strkjv@19:47|) had determined to attack Jesus on this morning, both Sadducees (chief priests) and Pharisees (scribes), a formal delegation from the Sanhedrin.

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

rwp@Luke:20:19 @{To lay hands on him} (\epibalein ep' auton tas cheiras\). Second aorist active infinitive of \epiball“\, an old verb and either transitively as here or intransitively as in strkjv@Mark:4:37|. Vivid picture here where strkjv@Mark:12:12; strkjv@Matthew:21:46| has "to seize" (\kratˆsai\). {In that very hour} (\en autˆi tˆi h“rƒi\). Luke's favourite idiom, in the hour itself. Not in Mark or Matthew and shows that the Sanhedrin were angry enough to force the climax then. {And they feared} (\kai ephobˆthˆsan\). Adversative use of \kai\ = but they feared. Hence they refrained. {For they perceived} (\egn“san gar\). The reason for their rage. Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. {Against them} (\pros autous\). As in strkjv@Mark:12:12|. The cap fitted them and they saw it.

rwp@Luke:20:39 @{Certain of the scribes} (\tines t“n grammate“n\). Pharisees who greatly enjoyed this use by Jesus of a portion of the Pentateuch against the position of the Sadducees. Songs:they praise the reply of Jesus, hostile though they are to him.

rwp@Luke:21:1 @{And he looked up} (\Anablepsas de\). He had taken his seat, after the debate was over and the Sanhedrin had slunk away in sheer defeat, "over against the treasury" (Mark:12:41|). The word for "treasury" (\gazophulakion\) is a compound of \gaza\ (Persian word for royal treasury) and \phulakˆ\ guard or protection. It is common in the LXX, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:12:41,43; strkjv@John:8:20|. Jesus was watching (Mark:12:41|) the rich put in their gifts as a slight diversion from the intense strain of the hours before.

rwp@Luke:21:15 @{Your adversaries} (\hoi antikeimenoi humin\). Those who stand against, line up face to face with (note \anti-\). {To withstand or to gainsay} (\antistˆnai ˆ anteipein\). Two second aorist active infinitives with \anti-\ in composition again. But these "antis" will go down before the power of Christ.

rwp@Luke:21:36 @{But watch ye} (\agrupneite de\). \Agrupne“\ is a late verb to be sleepless (\a\ privative and \hupnos\, sleep). Keep awake and be ready is the pith of Christ's warning. {That ye may prevail to escape} (\hina katischusˆte ekphugein\). First aorist active subjunctive with \hina\ of purpose. The verb \katischu“\ means to have strength against (cf. strkjv@Matthew:16:18|). Common in later writers. \Ekphugein\ is second aorist active infinitive, to escape out. {To stand before the Son of man} (\stathˆnai emprosthen tou huiou tou anthr“pou\). That is the goal. There will be no dread of the Son then if one is ready. \Stathˆnai\ is first aorist passive infinitive of \histˆmi\.

rwp@Luke:22:36 @{Buy a sword} (\agorasat“ machairan\). This is for defence clearly. The reference is to the special mission in Galilee (Luke:9:1-6; strkjv@Mark:6:6-13; strkjv@Matthew:9:35-11:1|). They are to expect persecution and bitter hostility (John:15:18-21|). Jesus does not mean that his disciples are to repel force by force, but that they are to be ready to defend his cause against attack. Changed conditions bring changed needs. This language can be misunderstood as it was then.

rwp@Luke:22:51 @{Suffer us thus far} (\eƒte he“s toutou\). Present active imperative of \ea“\, to allow. But the meaning is not clear. If addressed to Peter and the other disciples it means that they are to suffer this much of violence against Jesus. This is probably the idea. If it is addressed to the crowd, it means that they are to excuse Peter for his rash act. {He touched his ear and healed him} (\hapsamenos tou otiou iasato auton\). Whether Jesus picked up the piece of the ear and put it back is not said. He could have healed the wound without that. This miracle of surgery is given alone by Luke.

rwp@Luke:22:52 @{As against a robber?} (\h“s epi lˆistˆn;\). They were treating Jesus as if he were a bandit like Barabbas.

rwp@Luke:23:14 @{As one that perverteth the people} (\h“s apostrephonta ton laon\). Pilate here condenses the three charges in verse 2| into one (Plummer). He uses a more common compound of \streph“\ here, \apostreph“\, to turn away from, to seduce, to mislead, whereas \diastreph“\ in verse 2| has more the notion of disturbing (turning this way and that). Note the use of \h“s\ with the particle, the alleged reason. Pilate understands the charge against Jesus to be that he is a revolutionary agitator and a dangerous rival to Caesar, treason in plain words. {Having examined him before you} (\en“pion hum“n anakrinas\). Right before your eyes I have given him a careful examination (\ana\) up and down, \krin“\, to judge, sift. Old and common verb in the general sense and in the forensic sense as here and which Luke alone has in the N.T. (Luke:23:14; strkjv@4:9; strkjv@12:19; strkjv@28:18; strkjv@Acts:24:8|) except strkjv@1Corinthians:9:3|. {Whereof} (\h“n\). Attraction of the relative \ha\ to the case (genitive) of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\.

rwp@Luke:23:19 @{Insurrection} (\stasin\). An old word for sedition, standing off, the very charge made against Jesus (and untrue). If Jesus had raised insurrection against Caesar, these accusers would have rallied to his standard. {And for murder} (\kai phonon\). They cared nought for this. In fact, the murderer was counted a hero like bandits and gangsters today with some sentimentalists. {Was cast} (\ˆn blˆtheis\). Periphrastic aorist passive indicative of \ball“\, a quite unusual form.

rwp@Mark:1:43 @{Strictly charged} (\embrimˆsamenos\). Only in Mark. strkjv@Luke:5:14| has \parˆggeilen\ (commanded). Mark's word occurs also in strkjv@14:5| and in strkjv@Matthew:9:30| and strkjv@John:11:38|. See on ¯Matthew:9:30|. It is a strong word for the snorting of a horse and expresses powerful emotion as Jesus stood here face to face with leprosy, itself a symbol of sin and all its train of evils. The command to report to the priests was in accord with the Mosaic regulations and the prohibition against talking about it was to allay excitement and to avoid needless opposition to Christ.

rwp@Mark:2:17 @{The righteous} (\dikaious\). Jesus for the sake of argument accepts the claim of the Pharisees to be righteous, though, as a matter of fact, they fell very far short of it. Elsewhere (Matthew:23|) Jesus shows that the Pharisees were extortionate and devoured widows' houses and wore a cloak of pride and hypocritical respectability. The words "unto repentance" (\eis metanoian\) are not genuine in Mark, but are in strkjv@Luke:5:32|. Jesus called men to new spiritual life and away from sin and so to repentance. But this claim stopped their mouths against what Jesus was doing. The well or the strong (\ischuontes\) are not those who need the physician in an epidemic.

rwp@Mark:2:18 @{John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting} (\ˆsan hoi mathˆtai I“anou kai hoi Pharisaioi nˆsteuontes\). The periphrastic imperfect, so common in Mark's vivid description. Probably Levi's feast happened on one of the weekly fast-days (second and fifth days of the week for the stricter Jews). Songs:there was a clash of standpoints. The disciples of John sided with the Pharisees in the Jewish ceremonial ritualistic observances. John was still a prisoner in Machaerus. John was more of an ascetic than Jesus (Matthew:18f.; strkjv@Luke:7:33-35|), but neither one pleased all the popular critics. These learners (\mathˆtai\) or disciples of John had missed the spirit of their leader when they here lined up with the Pharisees against Jesus. But there was no real congeniality between the formalism of the Pharisees and the asceticism of John the Baptist. The Pharisees hated John who had denounced them as broods of vipers. Here the disciples of John and the disciples of the Pharisees (\hoi mathˆtai I“anou kai hoi mathˆtai t“n Pharisai“n\) join in criticizing Jesus and his disciples. Later we shall see Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians, who bitterly detested each other, making com- mon cause against Jesus Christ. Songs:today we find various hostile groups combining against our Lord and Saviour. See on ¯Matthew:9:14-17| for comments. Matthew has here followed Mark closely.

rwp@Mark:3:5 @{When he had looked round on them with anger} (\periblepsamenos autous met' orgˆs\). Mark has a good deal to say about the looks of Jesus with this word (3:5,34; strkjv@5:37; strkjv@9:8; strkjv@10:23; strkjv@11:11|) as here. Songs:Luke only once, strkjv@Luke:6:10|. The eyes of Jesus swept the room all round and each rabbinical hypocrite felt the cut of that condemnatory glance. This indignant anger was not inconsistent with the love and pity of Jesus. Murder was in their hearts and Jesus knew it. Anger against wrong as wrong is a sign of moral health (Gould). {Being grieved at the hardness of their hearts} (\sunlupoumenos epi tˆi p“r“sei tˆs kardias aut“n\). Mark alone gives this point. The anger was tempered by grief (Swete). Jesus is the Man of Sorrows and this present participle brings out the continuous state of grief whereas the momentary angry look is expressed by the aorist participle above. Their own heart or attitude was in a state of moral ossification (\p“r“sis\) like hardened hands or feet. \P“ros\ was used of a kind of marble and then of the _callus_ on fractured bones. "They were hardened by previous conceptions against this new truth" (Gould). See also on ¯Matthew:12:9-14|.

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

rwp@Mark:6:10 @{There abide} (\ekei menete\). Songs:also strkjv@Matthew:10:11; strkjv@Luke:9:4|. Only Matthew has city or village (10:11|), but he mentions house in verse 12|. They were to avoid a restless and dissatisfied manner and to take pains in choosing a home. It is not a prohibition against accepting invitations.

rwp@Mark:6:11 @{For a testimony unto them} (\eis marturion autois\). Not in Matthew. strkjv@Luke:9:5| has "for a testimony against them" (\eis marturion epi autous\). The dative \autois\ in Mark is the dative of disadvantage and really carries the same idea as \epi\ in Luke. The dramatic figure of {shaking out} (\ektinaxate\, effective aorist imperative, Mark and Matthew), {shaking off} (\apotinassete\, present imperative, Luke).

rwp@Mark:6:19 @{And Herodias set herself against him} (\Hˆ de Hˆr“idias eneichen aut“i\). Dative of disadvantage. Literally, {had it in for him}. This is modern slang, but is in exact accord with this piece of vernacular _Koin‚_. No object of \eichen\ is expressed, though \orgˆn\ or \cholon\ may be implied. The tense is imperfect and aptly described the feelings of Herodias towards this upstart prophet of the wilderness who had dared to denounce her private relations with Herod Antipas. Gould suggests that she "kept her eye on him" or kept up her hostility towards him. She never let up, but bided her time which, she felt sure, would come. See the same idiom in strkjv@Genesis:49:23|. She {desired to kill him} (\ˆthelen auton apokteinai\). Imperfect again. {And she could not} (\kai ouk ˆdunato\). \Kai\ here has an adversative sense, but she could not. That is, not yet. "The power was wanting, not the will" (Swete).

rwp@Mark:8:11 @{And the Pharisees came forth} (\kai exˆlthon hoi Pharisaioi\). At once they met Jesus and opened a controversy. strkjv@Matthew:16:1| adds "and Sadducees," the first time these two parties appear together against Jesus. See discussion on ¯Matthew:16:1|. The Pharisees and Herodians had already joined hands against Jesus in the sabbath controversy (Mark:3:6|). They {began to question with him} (\ˆrxanto sunzˆtein aut“i\). Dispute, not mere inquiry, associative instrumental case of \autoi\. They began at once and kept it up (present infinitive).

rwp@Mark:8:12 @{He sighed deeply in his spirit} (\anastenaxas t“i pneumati\). The only instance of this compound in the N.T. though in the LXX. The uncompounded form occurs in strkjv@Mark:7:34| and it is common enough. The preposition \ana-\ intensifies the meaning of the verb (perfective use). "The sigh seemed to come, as we say, from the bottom of his heart, the Lord's human spirit was stirred to its depths" (Swete). Jesus resented the settled prejudice of the Pharisees (and now Sadducees also) against him and his work. {There shall no sign be given unto this generation} (\ei dothˆsetai tˆi geneƒi tautˆi sˆmeion\). strkjv@Matthew:16:4| has simply \ou dothˆsetai\, plain negative with the future passive indicative. Mark has \ei\ instead of \ou\, which is technically a conditional clause with the conclusion unexpressed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1024), really aposiopesis in imitation of the Hebrew use of \im\. This is the only instance in the N.T. except in quotations from the LXX (Hebrews:3:11; strkjv@4:3,5|). It is very common in the LXX. The rabbis were splitting hairs over the miracles of Jesus as having a possible natural explanation (as some critics do today) even if by the power of Beelzebub, and those not of the sky (from heaven) which would be manifested from God. Songs:they put up this fantastic test to Jesus which he deeply resents. strkjv@Matthew:16:4| adds "but the sign of Jonah" mentioned already by Jesus on a previous occasion (Matthew:12:39-41|) at more length and to be mentioned again (Luke:11:32|). But the mention of the sign of Jonah was "an absolute refusal of signs in their sense" (Bruce). And when he did rise from the dead on the third day, the Sanhedrin refused to be convinced (see Acts 3 to 5).

rwp@Mark:8:15 @{Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and the leaven of Herod} (\Horƒte, blepete apo tˆs zumˆs t“n Pharisai“n kai tˆs zumˆs Hˆr“idou\). Present imperatives. Note \apo\ and the ablative case. \Zumˆ\ is from \zumo“\ and occurs already in strkjv@Matthew:13:33| in a good sense. For the bad sense see strkjv@1Corinthians:5:6|. He repeatedly charged (\diestelleto\, imperfect indicative), showing that the warning was needed. The disciples came out of a Pharisaic atmosphere and they had just met it again at Dalmanutha. It was insidious. Note the combination of Herod here with the Pharisees. This is after the agitation of Herod because of the death of the Baptist and the ministry of Jesus (Mark:6:14-29; strkjv@Matthew:14:1-12; strkjv@Luke:9:7-9|). Jesus definitely warns the disciples against "the leaven of Herod" (bad politics) and the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees (bad theology and also bad politics).

rwp@Mark:9:40 @{He that is not against us is with us} (\hos ouk estin kath' hˆm“n huper hˆm“n estin\). This profound saying throws a flood of light in every direction. The complement of this logion is that in strkjv@Matthew:12:30|: "He that is not with me is against me." Both are needed. Some people imagine that they are really for Christ who refuse to take a stand in the open with him and for him.

rwp@Mark:9:50 @{Have salt in yourselves} (\echete en heautois hala\). Jesus had once called them the salt of the earth (Matthew:5:13|) and had warned them against losing the saltness of the salt. If it is \analon\, nothing can {season} (\artu“\) it and it is of no use to season anything else. It is like an exploded shell, a burnt-out crater, a spent force. This is a warning for all Christians.

rwp@Mark:10:15 @{As a little child} (\h“s paidion\). How does a little child receive the kingdom of God? The little child learns to obey its parents simply and uncomplainingly. There are some new psychologists who argue against teaching obedience to children. The results have not been inspiring. Jesus here presents the little child with trusting and simple and loving obedience as the model for adults in coming into the kingdom. Jesus does not here say that children are in the kingdom of God because they are children.

rwp@Mark:11:18 @{Sought how they might destroy him} (\ezˆtoun p“s auton apoles“sin\). Imperfect indicative, a continuous attitude and endeavour. Note deliberative subjunctive with \p“s\ retained in indirect question. Here both Sadducees (chief priests) and Pharisees (scribes) combine in their resentment against the claims of Jesus and in the determination to kill him. Long ago the Pharisees and the Herodians had plotted for his death (Mark:3:6|). Now in Jerusalem the climax has come right in the temple. {For they feared him} (\ephobounto gar\). Imperfect middle indicative. Hence in wrath they planned his death and yet they had to be cautious. The Triumphal Entry had shown his power with the people. And now right in the temple itself "all the multitude was astonished at his teaching" (\pƒs ho ochlos exeplˆsseto epi tˆi didachˆi autou\). Imperfect passive. The people looked on Jesus as a hero, as the Messiah. This verse aptly describes the crisis that has now come between Christ and the Sanhedrin.

rwp@Mark:12:12 @{Against them} (\pros autous\). Songs:Luke. It was a straight shot, this parable of the Rejected Stone (12:10f.|) and the longer one of the Wicked Husbandmen. There was no mistaking the application, for he had specifically explained the application (Matthew:21:43-45|). The Sanhedrin were so angry that they actually started or sought to seize him, but fear of the populace now more enthusiastic for Jesus than ever held them back. They went off in disgust, but they had to listen to the Parable of the King's Son before going (Matthew:22:1-14|).

rwp@Mark:12:18 @{There come unto him Sadducees} (\erchontai Saddoukaioi pros auton\). Dramatic present. The Pharisees and Herodians had had their turn after the formal committee of the Sanhedrin had been so completely routed. It was inevitable that they should feel called upon to show their intellectual superiority to these raw Pharisaic and Herodian theologians. See on ¯Matthew:22:23-33| for discussion of details. It was a good time to air their disbelief in the resurrection at the expense of the Pharisees and to score against Jesus where the Sanhedrin and then the Pharisees and Herodians had failed so ignominiously.

rwp@Mark:12:38 @{Beware of the scribes} (\blepete apo t“n grammate“n\). Jesus now turns to the multitudes and to his disciples (Matthew:23:1|) and warns them against the scribes and the Pharisees while they are still there to hear his denunciation. The scribes were the professional teachers of the current Judaism and were nearly all Pharisees. Mark (Mark:14:38-40|) gives a mere summary sketch of this bold and terrific indictment as preserved in strkjv@Matthew:23| in words that fairly blister today. strkjv@Luke:20:45-47| follows Mark closely. See strkjv@Matthew:8:15| for this same use of \blepete apo\ with the ablative. It is usually called a translation-Hebraism, a usage not found with \blep“\ in the older Greek. But the papyri give it, a vivid vernacular idiom. "Beware of the Jews" (\blepe saton apo t“n Ioudai“n\, Berl. G. U. 1079. A.D. 41). See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 577. The pride of the pompous scribes is itemized by Mark: {To walk in long robes} (\stolais\), {stoles}, the dress of dignitaries like kings and priests. {Salutations in the marketplaces} (\aspasmous en tais agorais\), where the people could see their dignity recognized.

rwp@Mark:12:41 @{Sat down over against the treasury} (\kathisas katenanti tou gazophulakiou\). The storm is over. The Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, scribes, have all slunk away in terror ere the closing words. Mark draws this immortal picture of the weary Christ sitting by the treasury (compound word in the LXX from \gaza\, Persian word for treasure, and \phulakˆ\, guard, so safe for gifts to be deposited). {Beheld} (\ethe“rei\). Imperfect tense. He was watching {how the multitude cast money} (\p“s ho ochlos ballei\) into the treasury. The rich were casting in (\eballon\, imperfect tense) as he watched.

rwp@Mark:13:3 @{Over against the temple} (\katenanti tou hierou\). In full view of the temple about which they had been speaking. {Privately} (\kat' idian\). Peter and James and John and Andrew (named only in Mark) had evidently been discussing the strange comment of Jesus as they were coming out of the temple. In their bewilderment they ask Jesus a bit to one side, though probably all the rest drew up as Jesus began to speak this great eschatological discourse.

rwp@Mark:13:4 @{Tell us, when shall these things be?} (\Eipon hˆmin pote tauta estai;\). The Revised Version punctuates it as a direct question, but Westcott and Hort as an indirect inquiry. They asked about the {when} (\pote\) and the {what sign} (\ti sˆmeion\). strkjv@Matthew:24:3| includes "the sign of thy coming and the end of the world," showing that these tragic events are brought before Jesus by the disciples. See discussion of the interpretation of this discourse on ¯Matthew:24:3|. This chapter in Mark is often called "The Little Apocalypse" with the notion that a Jewish apocalypse has been here adapted by Mark and attributed to Jesus. Many of the theories attribute grave error to Jesus or to the Gospels on this subject. The view adopted in the discussion in Matthew is the one suggested here, that Jesus blended in one picture his death, the destruction of Jerusalem within that generation, the second coming and end of the world typified by the destruction of the city. The lines between these topics are not sharply drawn in the report and it is not possible for us to separate the topics clearly. This great discourse is the longest preserved in Mark and may be due to Peter. Mark may have given it in order "to forewarn and forearm" (Bruce) the readers against the coming catastrophe of the destruction of Jerusalem. Both Matthew (Matthew:24|) and Luke (Luke:21:5-36|) follow the general line of Mark 13 though strkjv@Matthew:24:43-25:46| presents new material (parables).

rwp@Mark:13:7 @{Must needs come to pass} (\dei genesthai\). Already there were outbreaks against the Jews in Alexandria, at Seleucia with the slaughter of more than fifty thousand, at Jamnia, and elsewhere. Caligula, Claudius, Nero will threaten war before it finally comes with the destruction of the city and temple by Titus in A.D. 70. Vincent notes that between this prophecy by Jesus in A.D. 30 (or 29) and the destruction of Jerusalem there was an earthquake in Crete (A.D. 46 or 47), at Rome (A.D. 51), at Apamaia in Phrygia (A.D. 60), at Campania (A.D. 63). He notes also four famines during the reign of Claudius A.D. 41-54. One of them was in Judea in A.D. 44 and is alluded to in strkjv@Acts:11:28|. Tacitus (_Annals_ xvi. 10-13) describes the hurricanes and storms in Campania in A.D. 65.

rwp@Mark:14:5 @{Above three hundred pence} (\epan“ dˆnari“n triakosi“n\). Matthew has "for much" while strkjv@John:12:5| has "for three hundred pence." The use of "far above" may be a detail from Peter's memory of Judas' objection whose name in this connection is preserved in strkjv@John:12:4|. {And they murmured against her} (\kai enebrim“nto autˆi\). Imperfect tense of this striking word used of the snorting of horses and seen already in strkjv@Mark:1:43; strkjv@11:38|. It occurs in the LXX in the sense of anger as here (Daniel:11:30|). Judas made the complaint against Mary of Bethany, but all the apostles joined in the chorus of criticism of the wasteful extravagance.

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

rwp@Mark:14:48 @{Against a robber} (\epi lˆistˆn\). Highway robbers like Barabbas were common and were often regarded as heroes. Jesus will be crucified between two robbers in the very place that Barabbas would have occupied.

rwp@Mark:14:56 @{Their witness agreed not together} (\isai hai marturiai ouk ˆsan\). Literally, the testimonies were not equal. They did not correspond with each other on essential points. {Many were bearing false witness} (\epseudomarturoun\, imperfect, repeated action) {against him}. No two witnesses bore joint testimony to justify a capital sentence according to the law (Deuteronomy:19:15|). Note imperfects in these verses (55-57|) to indicate repeated failures.

rwp@Mark:15:2 @{Art thou the King of the Jews?} (\Su ei ho basileus t“n Ioudai“n;\). This is the only one of the charges made by the Sanhedrin to Pilate (Luke:23:2|) that he notices. He does not believe this one to be true, but he has to pay attention to it or be liable to charges himself of passing over a man accused of rivalry and revolution against Caesar. strkjv@John:18:28-32| gives the interview with Jesus that convinces Pilate that he is a harmless religious fanatic. See on ¯Matthew:26:11|. {Thou sayest} (\su legeis\). An affirmation, though in strkjv@John:18:34-37| there is a second and fuller interview between Pilate and Jesus. "Here, as in the trial before the Sanhedrin, this is the one question that Jesus answers. It is the only question on which his own testimony is important and necessary" (Gould). The Jews were out on the pavement or sidewalk outside the palace while Pilate came out to them from above on the balcony (John:18:28f.|) and had his interviews with Jesus on the inside, calling Jesus thither (John:18:33|).

rwp@Mark:15:3 @{Accused him of many things} (\katˆgoroun autou polla\). Imperfect tense, repeated accusations besides those already made. They let loose their venom against Jesus. One of the common verbs for speaking against in court (\kata\ and \agoreu“\). It is used with the genitive of the person and the accusative of the thing.

rwp@Mark:15:7 @{Bound with them that had made insurrection} (\meta t“n stasiast“n dedemenos\). A desperate criminal, leader in the insurrection, sedition (\en tˆi stasei\), or revolution against Rome, the very thing that the Jews up at Bethsaida Julias had wanted Jesus to lead (John:6:15|). Barabbas was the leader of these rioters and was bound with them. {Had committed murder} (\phonon pepoiˆkeisan\). Past perfect indicative without augment. Murder usually goes with such rioters and the priests and people actually chose a murderer in preference to Jesus.

rwp@Mark:15:11 @{Stirred up} (\aneseisan\). {Shook up} like an earthquake (\seismos\). strkjv@Matthew:27:20| has a weaker word, "persuaded" (\epeisan\). Effective aorist indicative. The priests and scribes had amazing success. If one wonders why the crowd was fickle, he may recall that this was not yet the same people who followed him in triumphal entry and in the temple. That was the plan of Judas to get the thing over before those Galilean sympathizers waked up. "It was a case of regulars against an irregular, of priests against prophet" (Gould). "But Barabbas, as described by Mark, represented a popular passion, which was stronger than any sympathy they might have for so unworldly a character as Jesus--the passion for _political liberty_" (Bruce). "What unprincipled characters they were! They accuse Jesus to Pilate of political ambition, and they recommend Barabbas to the people for the same reason" (Bruce). The Sanhedrin would say to the people that Jesus had already abdicated his kingly claims while to Pilate they went on accusing him of treason to Caesar. {Rather} (_mƒllon_). Rather than Jesus. It was a gambler's choice.

rwp@Mark:15:39 @{The centurion} (\ho kenturi“n\). A Latin word (_centurio_) used also in verse 44| and here only in the N.T. {Which stood by over against him} (\ho parestˆk“s ex enantias autou\). This description alone in Mark, picturing the centurion "watching Jesus" (Matthew:27:54|). {So} (\hout“s\). With the darkness and the earthquake. See on ¯Matthew:27:54| for discussion of "the Son of God," more probably "a Son of God."

rwp@Mark:15:46 @{Wound} (\eneilˆsen\). This word is only here in the N.T. As \entuliss“\ is only in strkjv@Matthew:27:59; strkjv@Luke:23:53; strkjv@John:20:7|. Both verbs occur in the papyri, Plutarch, etc. They both mean to wrap, wind, roll in. The body of Jesus was wound in the linen cloth bought by Joseph and the hundred pounds of spices brought by Nicodemus (John:19:39|) for burying were placed in the folds of the linen and the linen was bound around the body by strips of cloth (John:19:40|). The time was short before the sabbath began and these two reverently laid the body of the Master in Joseph's new tomb, hewn out of a rock. The perfect passive participle (\lelatomˆmenon\) is from \latomos\, a stonecutter (\l“s\, stone, \temn“\, to cut). For further details see on ¯Matthew:27:57-60|. strkjv@Luke:23:53| and strkjv@John:19:41| also tell of the new tomb of Joseph. Some modern scholars think that this very tomb has been identified in Gordon's Calvary north of the city. {Against the door} (\epi tˆn thuran\). Matthew has the dative \tˆi thurƒi\ without \epi\ and adds the adjective "great" (\megan\).

rwp@Mark:15:47 @{Beheld} (\ethe“roun\). Imperfect tense picturing the two Marys "sitting over against the sepulchre" (Matthew:27:61|) and watching in silence as the shadows fell upon all their hopes and dreams. Apparently these two remained after the other women who had been beholding from afar the melancholy end (Mark:15:40|) had left and "were watching the actions of Joseph and Nicodemus" (Swete). Probably also they saw the body of Jesus carried and hence they knew where it was laid and saw that it remained there (\tetheitai\, perfect passive indicative, state of completion). "It is evident that they constituted themselves a party of observation" (Gould).

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

rwp@Mark:16:18 @{They shall take up serpents} (\opheis arousin\). Jesus had said something like this in strkjv@Luke:10:19| and Paul was unharmed by the serpent in Malta (Acts:28:3f.|). {If they drink any deadly thing} (\k'an thanasimon ti pi“sin\). This is the only N.T. instance of the old Greek word \thanasimos\ (deadly). strkjv@James:3:8| has \thanatˆphoros\, deathbearing. Bruce considers these verses in Mark "a great lapse from the high level of Matthew's version of the farewell words of Jesus" and holds that "taking up venomous serpents and drinking deadly poison seem to introduce us into the twilight of apocryphal story." The great doubt concerning the genuineness of these verses (fairly conclusive proof against them in my opinion) renders it unwise to take these verses as the foundation for doctrine or practice unless supported by other and genuine portions of the N.T.

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

rwp@Matthew:6:24 @{No man can serve two masters} (\oudeis dunatai dusi kuriois douleuein\). Many try it, but failure awaits them all. Men even try "to be slaves to God and mammon" (\The“i douleuein kai mam“nƒi\). Mammon is a Chaldee, Syriac, and Punic word like _Plutus_ for the money-god (or devil). The slave of mammon will obey mammon while pretending to obey God. The United States has had a terrible revelation of the power of the money-god in public life in the Sinclair-Fall-Teapot-Air-Dome-Oil case. When the guide is blind and leads the blind, both fall into the ditch. The man who cannot tell road from ditch sees falsely as Ruskin shows in _Modern Painters_. He will hold to one (\henos anthexetai\). The word means to line up face to face (\anti\) with one man and so against the other.

rwp@Matthew:17:2 @{He was transfigured before them} (\metemorph“thˆ emprosthen aut“n\). The word is the same as the metamorphoses (cf. Ovid) of pagan mythology. Luke does not use it. The idea is change (\meta-\) of form (\morphˆ\). It really presents the essence of a thing as separate from the \schˆma\ (fashion), the outward accident. Songs:in strkjv@Romans:12:2| Paul uses both verbs, \sunschematizesthe\ (be not fashioned) and \metamorphousthe\ (be ye transformed in your inner life). Songs:in strkjv@1Corinthians:7:31| \schˆma\ is used for the fashion of the world while in strkjv@Mark:16:12| \morphˆ\ is used of the form of Jesus after his resurrection. The false apostles are described by \metaschˆmatisomai\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:13-15|. In strkjv@Phillipians:2:6| we have \en morphˆi\ used of the Preincarnate state of Christ and \morphˆn doulou\ of the Incarnate state (Phillipians:2:7|), while \schˆmati h“s anthr“pos\ emphasizes his being found "in fashion as a man." But it will not do in strkjv@Matthew:17:2| to use the English transliteration \metamorph“sis\ because of its pagan associations. Songs:the Latin _transfigured_ (Vulgate _transfiguratus est_) is better. "The deeper force of \metamorphousthai\ is seen in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:18| (with reference to the shining on Moses' face), strkjv@Romans:12:2|" (McNeile). The word occurs in a second-century papyrus of the pagan gods who are invisible. Matthew guards against the pagan idea by adding and explaining about the face of Christ "as the sun" and his garments "as the light."

rwp@Matthew:21:2 @{Into the village that is over against you} (\eis tˆn k“mˆn tˆn katenanti h–m“n\). Another use of \eis\. If it means "into" as translated, it could be Bethany right across the valley and this is probably the idea. {And a colt with her} (\kai p“lon met' autˆs\). The young of any animal. Here to come with the mother and the more readily so.

rwp@Matthew:21:33 @{A hedge} (\phragmon\). Or fence as a protection against wild beasts. {Digged a winepress} (\“ruxen lˆnon\). Out of the solid rock to hold the grapes and wine as they were crushed. Such wine-vats are to be seen today in Palestine. {Built a tower} (\“ikodomˆsen purgon\). This for the vinedressers and watchmen (2Chronicles:26:10|). Utmost care was thus taken. Note "a booth in a vineyard" (Isaiah:1:8|). See also strkjv@Isaiah:24:20; strkjv@Job:27:18|. Let it out (\exedeto, exedoto\ the usual form). For hire, the terms not being given. The lease allowed three forms, money-rent, a proportion of the crop, or a definite amount of the produce whether it was a good or bad year. Probably the last form is that contemplated here.

rwp@Matthew:21:44 @{Shall be broken to pieces} (\sunthlasthˆsetai\). Some ancient manuscripts do not have this verse. But it graphically pictures the fate of the man who rejects Christ. The verb means to shatter. We are familiar with an automobile that dashes against a stone wall, a tree, or a train and the ruin that follows. {Will scatter him as dust} (\likmˆsei\). The verb was used of winnowing out the chaff and then of grinding to powder. This is the fate of him on whom this Rejected Stone falls.

rwp@Matthew:22:16 @{Their disciples} (\tous mathˆtas aut“n\). Students, pupils, of the Pharisees as in strkjv@Mark:2:18|. There were two Pharisaic theological seminaries in Jerusalem (Hillel, Shammai). {The Herodians} (\t“n Her“idian“n\). Not members of Herod's family or Herod's soldiers, but partisans or followers of Herod. The form in \-ianos\ is a Latin termination like that in \Christianos\ (Acts:11:26|). Mentioned also in strkjv@Mark:3:6| combining with the Pharisees against Jesus. {The person of men} (\pros“pon anthr“p“n\). Literally, face of men. Paying regard to appearance is the sin of partiality condemned by James (James:2:1,9|) when \pros“polˆmpsia, pros“polˆmptein\ are used, in imitation of the Hebrew idiom. This suave flattery to Jesus implied "that Jesus was a reckless simpleton" (Bruce).

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

rwp@Matthew:23:17 @{Ye fools} (\m“roi\). In strkjv@5:22| Jesus had warned against calling a man \m“ros\ in a rage, but here he so terms the blind Pharisees for their stupidity, description of the class. "It shows that not the word but the spirit in which it is uttered is what matters" (McNeile).

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

rwp@Matthew:24:5 @{In my name} (\epi t“i onomati mou\). They will arrogate to themselves false claims of Messiahship in (on the basis of) the name of Christ himself. Josephus (_Wars_ VI, 54) gives there false Christs as one of the reasons for the explosion against Rome that led to the city's destruction. Each new hero was welcomed by the masses including Barcochba. "I am the Messiah," each would say. Forty odd years ago two men in Illinois claimed to be Messiah, each with followers (Schlatter, Schweinfurth). In more recent years Mrs. Annie Besant has introduced a theosophical Messiah and Mrs. Eddy made claims about herself on a par with those of Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:24:6 @{See that ye be not troubled} (\horate mˆ throeisthe\). Asyndeton here with these two imperatives as strkjv@Mark:8:15| \orate blepete\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 949). Look out for the wars and rumours of wars, but do not be scared out of your wits by them. \Throe“\ means to cry aloud, to scream, and in the passive to be terrified by an outcry. Paul uses this very verb (\mˆde throeisthai\) in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2| as a warning against excitement over false reports that he had predicted the immediate second coming of Christ. {But the end is not yet} (\all' oup“ estin to telos\). It is curious how people overlook these words of Jesus and proceed to set dates for the immediate end. That happened during the Great War and it has happened since.

rwp@Matthew:24:11 @{False prophets} (\pseudoprophˆtai\). Jesus had warned against them in the Sermon on the Mount (7:15|). They are still coming.

rwp@Matthew:26:41 @{Watch and pray} (\grˆgoreite kai proseuchesthe\). Jesus repeats the command of verse 38| with the addition of prayer and with the warning against the peril of temptation. He himself was feeling the worst of all temptations of his earthly life just then. He did not wish then to enter such temptation (\peirasmon\, here in this sense, not mere trial). Thus we are to understand the prayer in strkjv@Matthew:6:13| about leading (being led) into temptation. Their failure was due to weakness of the flesh as is often the case. {Spirit} (\pneuma\) here is the moral life (\intellect, will, emotions\) as opposed to the flesh (cf. strkjv@Isaiah:31:3; strkjv@Romans:7:25|). {Except I drink it} (\ean mˆ auto pi“\). Condition of the third class undetermined, but with likelihood of determination, whereas {if this cannot pass away} (\ei ou dunatai touto parelthein\) is first-class condition, determined as fulfilled, assumed to be true. This delicate distinction accurately presents the real attitude of Jesus towards this subtle temptation.

rwp@Matthew:26:50 @{Do that for which thou art come} (\eph' ho parei\). Moffatt and Goodspeed take it: "Do your errand." There has been a deal of trouble over this phrase. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 125 to 131) has proven conclusively that it is a question, \eph' ho\ in late Greek having the interrogative sense of \epi ti\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 725). The use of \eph' ho\ for "why here" occurs on a Syrian tablet of the first century A.D. 50 that it "was current coin in the language of the people" (Deissmann). Most of the early translations (Old Latin, Old Syriac) took it as a question. Songs:the Vulgate has _ad quid venisti_. In this instance the Authorized Version is correct against the Revised. Jesus exposes the pretence of Judas and shows that he does not believe in his paraded affection (Bruce).

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:26:59 @{Sought false witness against Jesus} (\ezˆtoun pseudomarturian\). Imperfect tense, kept on seeking. Judges have no right to be prosecutors and least of all to seek after false witness and even to offer bribes to get it.

rwp@Matthew:26:63 @{Held his peace} (\esi“pa\). Kept silent, imperfect tense. Jesus refused to answer the bluster of Caiaphas. {I adjure thee by the living God} (\exorkiz“ se kata tou theou tou z“ntos\). Songs:Caiaphas put Jesus on oath in order to make him incriminate himself, a thing unlawful in Jewish jurisprudence. He had failed to secure any accusation against Jesus that would stand at all. But Jesus did not refuse to answer under solemn oath, clearly showing that he was not thinking of oaths in courts of justice when he prohibited profanity. The charge that Caiaphas makes is that Jesus claims to be the Messiah, the Son of God. To refuse to answer would be tantamount to a denial. Songs:Jesus answered knowing full well the use that would be made of his confession and claim.

rwp@Matthew:27:17 @{Barabbas or Jesus which is called Christ?} (\Barabbƒn ˆ Iˆsoun ton legomenon Christon;\). Pilate was catching at straws or seeking any loophole to escape condemning a harmless lunatic or exponent of a superstitious cult such as he deemed Jesus to be, certainly in no political sense a rival of Caesar. The Jews interpreted "Christ" for Pilate to be a claim to be King of the Jews in opposition to Caesar, "a most unprincipled proceeding" (Bruce). Songs:he bethought him of the time-honoured custom at the passover of releasing to the people "a prisoner whom they wished" (\desmion hon ˆthelon\). No parallel case has been found, but Josephus mentions the custom (_Ant_. xx. 9,3). Barabbas was for some reason a popular hero, a notable (\episˆmon\), if not notorious, prisoner, leader of an insurrection or revolution (Mark:15:7|) probably against Rome, and so guilty of the very crime that they tried to fasten on Jesus who only claimed to be king in the spiritual sense of the spiritual kingdom. Songs:Pilate unwittingly pitted against each other two prisoners who represented the antagonistic forces of all time. It is an elliptical structure in the question, "whom do you wish that I release?" (\tina thelete apolus“;\), either two questions in one (asyndeton) or the ellipse of \hina\ before \apolus“\. See the same idiom in verse 21|. But Pilate's question tested the Jews as well as himself. It tests all men today. Some manuscripts add the name Jesus to Barabbas and that makes it all the sharper. Jesus Barabbas or Jesus Christ?

rwp@Matthew:27:19 @{His wife} (\hˆ gunˆ autou\). Poor Pilate was getting more entangled every moment as he hesitated to set Jesus free whom he knew to be free of any crime against Caesar. Just at the moment when he was trying to enlist the people in behalf of Jesus against the schemes of the Jewish leaders, his wife sent a message about her dream concerning Jesus. She calls Jesus "that righteous man" (\t“i dikai“i ekein“i\) and her psychical sufferings increased Pilate's superstitious fears. Tradition names her Procla and even calls her a Christian which is not probable. But it was enough to unnerve the weak Pilate as he sat on the judgment-seat (\epi tou bˆmatos\) up over the pavement.

rwp@Matthew:27:22 @{What then shall I do unto Jesus which is called Christ?} (\ti oun poiˆs“ Iˆsoun ton legomenon Christon;\). They had asked for Barabbas under the tutelage of the Sanhedrin, but Pilate pressed home the problem of Jesus with the dim hope that they might ask for Jesus also. But they had learned their lesson. Some of the very people who shouted "Hosannah" on the Sunday morning of the Triumphal Entry now shout {Let him be crucified} (\staur“thˆt“\). The tide has now turned against Jesus, the hero of Sunday, now the condemned criminal of Friday. Such is popular favour. But all the while Pilate is shirking his own fearful responsibility and trying to hide his own weakness and injustice behind popular clamour and prejudice.

rwp@Philemon:1:23 @{Epaphras} (\Epaphrƒs\). The Colossian preacher who apparently started the work in Colossae, Hierapolis, and Laodicea, and who had come to Rome to enlist Paul's help in the fight against incipient Gnosticism in the Lycus Valley. {My fellow-prisoner} (\ho sunaichmal“tos mou\). See on ¯Romans:16:7| for this word, also in strkjv@Colossians:4:10|. Used metaphorically like the verb \aichmal“tiz“\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:10:5|, though some hold that Epaphras became a prisoner with Paul in Rome.

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

rwp@Philippians:1:15 @{Even of envy and strife} (\kai dia phthonon kai erin\). "Even because of" (accusative after \dia\). Surely the lowest of motives for preaching Christ. Envy is an old word and an old sin and strife (\eris\) is more rivalry than schism. It is petty and personal jealousy of Paul's power and prowess by the Judaizers in Rome whom Paul has routed in the east, but who now exult at the opportunity of annoying their great antagonist by their interpretation of Christ. Jealousy is always against those of one's own class or profession as preachers with preachers, doctors with doctors. {Of goodwill} (\di' eudokian\). Because of goodwill toward Paul.

rwp@Philippians:1:28 @{Affrighted} (\pturomenoi\). Present passive participle of \ptur“\, old verb, to frighten. The metaphor is of a timid or scared horse and from \ptoe“\ (\ptoa\, terror). "Not startled in anything." {By the adversaries} (\hupo t“n antikeimen“n\). These men who were lined up against (present middle participle of \antikeimai\) may have been Jews or Gentiles or both. See strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:4| for this late verb. Any preacher who attacks evil will have opposition. {Evident token} (\endeixis\). Old word for proof. See strkjv@2Corinthians:8:24; strkjv@Romans:3:25f|. "An Attic law term" (Kennedy) and only in Paul in N.T. {Perdition} (\ap“leias\). "Loss" in contrast with "salvation" (\s“tˆrias\). {And that} (\kai touto\). Idiomatic adverbial accusative. "It is a direct indication from God. The Christian gladiator does not anxiously await the signal of life or death from the fickle crowd" (Lightfoot).

rwp@Philippians:3:6 @{As touching zeal} (\kata zˆlos\). Songs:the old MSS. treating \zˆlos\ as neuter, not masculine. He was a zealot against Christianity, "persecuting the church" (\di“k“n tˆn ekklˆsian\). He was the ringleader in the persecution from the death of Stephen till his own conversion (Acts:8:1-9:9|). {Found blameless} (\genomenos amemptos\). "Having become blameless" (Galatians:1:14|). He knew and practised all the rules of the rabbis. A marvellous record, scoring a hundred in Judaism.

rwp@Philippians:3:12 @{Not that} (\ouch hoti\). To guard against a misunderstanding as in strkjv@John:6:26; strkjv@12:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:24; strkjv@Phillipians:4:11,17|. {I have already obtained} (\ˆdˆ elabon\). Rather, "I did already obtain," constative second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\, summing up all his previous experiences as a single event. {Or am already made perfect} (\ˆ ˆdˆ tetelei“mai\). Perfect passive indicative (state of completion) of \teleio“\, old verb from \teleios\ and that from \telos\ (end). Paul pointedly denies that he has reached a spiritual impasse of non- development. Certainly he knew nothing of so-called sudden absolute perfection by any single experience. Paul has made great progress in Christlikeness, but the goal is still before him, not behind him. {But I press on} (\di“k“ de\). He is not discouraged, but encouraged. He keeps up the chase (real idea in \di“k“\, as in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:1; strkjv@Romans:9:30; strkjv@1Timothy:6:11|). {If so be that} (\ei kai\). "I follow after." The condition (third class, \ei--katalab“\, second aorist active subjunctive of \katalamban“\) is really a sort of purpose clause or aim. There are plenty of examples in the _Koin‚_ of the use of \ei\ and the subjunctive as here (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1017), "if I also may lay hold of that for which (\eph' h“i\, purpose expressed by \epi\) I was laid hold of (\katelˆmphthˆn\, first aorist passive of the same verb \katalamban“\) by Christ Jesus." His conversion was the beginning, not the end of the chase.

rwp@Revelation:1:20 @{The mystery of the seven stars} (\to mustˆrion t“n hepta aster“n\). On the word \mustˆrion\ see on ¯Matthew:13:11; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:7; strkjv@Colossians:1:26|. Here it means the inner meaning (the secret symbol) of a symbolic vision (Swete) as in strkjv@10:7; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@17:7,9; strkjv@Daniel:2:47|. Probably the accusative absolute (Charles), "as for the mystery" (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 490, 1130), as in strkjv@Romans:8:3|. This item is picked out of the previous vision (1:16|) as needing explanation at once and as affording a clue to what follows (2:1,5|). {Which} (\hous\). Masculine accusative retained without attraction to case of \aster“n\ (genitive, \h“n\). {In my right hand} (\epi tˆs dexias mou\). Or "upon," but \en tˆi\, etc., in verse 16|. {And the seven golden candlesticks} (\kai tas hepta luchnias tas chrusƒs\). "The seven lampstands the golden," identifying the stars of verse 16| with the lampstands of verse 12|. The accusative case here is even more peculiar than the accusative absolute \mustˆrion\, since the genitive \luchni“n\ after \mustˆrion\ is what one would expect. Charles suggests that John did not revise his work. {The angels of the seven churches} (\aggeloi t“n hepta ekklˆsi“n\). Anarthrous in the predicate (angels of, etc.). "The seven churches" mentioned in strkjv@1:4,11|. Various views of \aggelos\ here exist. The simplest is the etymological meaning of the word as messenger from \aggell“\ (Matthew:11:10|) as messengers from the seven churches to Patmos or by John from Patmos to the churches (or both). Another view is that \aggelos\ is the pastor of the church, the reading \tˆn gunaika sou\ (thy wife) in strkjv@2:20| (if genuine) confirming this view. Some would even take it to be the bishop over the elders as \episcopos\ in Ignatius, but a separate \aggelos\ in each church is against this idea. Some take it to be a symbol for the church itself or the spirit and genius of the church, though distinguished in this very verse from the churches themselves (the lampstands). Others take it to be the guardian angel of each church assuming angelic patrons to be taught in strkjv@Matthew:18:10; strkjv@Acts:12:15|. Each view is encompassed with difficulties, perhaps fewer belonging to the view that the "angel" is the pastor. {Are seven churches} (\hepta ekklˆsiai eisin\). These seven churches (1:4,11|) are themselves lampstands (1:12|) reflecting the light of Christ to the world (Matthew:5:14-16; strkjv@John:8:12|) in the midst of which Christ walks (1:13|).

rwp@Revelation:3:7 @{In Philadelphia} (\en Philadelphiƒi\). Some twenty-eight miles south-east of Sardis, in Lydia, subject to earthquakes, rebuilt by Tiberius after the great earthquake of A.D. 17, for a time called in coins Neo-Caesarea, in wine-growing district with Bacchus (Dionysos) as the chief deity, on fine Roman roads and of commercial importance, though not a large city, called by Ramsay (_op. cit._, p. 392) "the Missionary City" to promote the spread of the Graeco-Roman civilization and then of Christianity, later offering stubborn resistance to the Turks (1379-90 A.D.) and now called Ala-Sheher (reddish city, Charles, from the red hills behind it). The chief opposition to the faithful little church is from the Jews (cf. strkjv@Romans:9-11|). There are some 1,000 Christians there today. {The holy, he that is true} (\ho hagios, ho alˆthinos\). Separate articles (four in all) for each item in this description. "The holy, the genuine." Asyndeton in the Greek. Latin Vulgate, _Sanctus et Verus_. \Hosea:hagios\ is ascribed to God in strkjv@4:8; strkjv@6:10| (both \hagios\ and \alˆthinos\ as here), but to Christ in strkjv@Mark:1:24; strkjv@Luke:4:34; strkjv@John:6:69; strkjv@Acts:4:27,30; strkjv@1John:2:20|, a recognized title of the Messiah as the consecrated one set apart. Swete notes that \alˆthinos\ is _verus_ as distinguished from _verax_ (\alˆthˆs\). Songs:it is applied to God in strkjv@6:10| and to Christ in strkjv@3:14; strkjv@19:11| as in strkjv@John:1:9; strkjv@6:32; strkjv@15:1|. {He that hath the key of David} (\ho ech“n tˆn klein Daueid\). This epithet comes from strkjv@Isaiah:22:22|, where Eliakim as the chief steward of the royal household holds the keys of power. Christ as the Messiah (Revelation:5:5; strkjv@22:16|) has exclusive power in heaven, on earth, and in Hades (Matthew:16:19; strkjv@28:18; strkjv@Romans:14:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:9f.; strkjv@Revelation:1:18|). Christ has power to admit and exclude of his own will (Matthew:25:10f.; strkjv@Ephesians:1:22; strkjv@Revelation:3:21; strkjv@19:11-16; strkjv@20:4; strkjv@22:16|). {And none shall shut} (\kai oudeis kleisei\). Charles calls the structure Hebrew (future active indicative of \klei“\), and not Greek because it does not correspond to the present articular participle just before \ho anoig“n\ (the one opening), but it occurs often in this book as in the very next clause, "and none openeth" (\kai oudeis anoigei\) over against \klei“n\ (present active participle, opening) though here some MSS. read \kleiei\ (present active indicative, open).

rwp@Revelation:14:12 @{Here is the patience of the saints} (\H“de hˆ hupomonˆ t“n hagi“n estin\). John's own comment as in strkjv@13:10; strkjv@17:9|. In this struggle against emperor worship lay their opportunity (Romans:5:3|). It was a test of loyalty to Christ. {They that keep} (\hoi tˆrountes\). In apposition with \t“n hagi“n\ (genitive), though nominative, a frequent anacoluthon in this book (2:20|, etc.). Cf. strkjv@12:17|. {The faith of Jesus} (\tˆn pistin Iˆsou\). "The faith in Jesus" (objective genitive) as in strkjv@2:13; strkjv@Mark:11:22; strkjv@James:2:1|.

rwp@Revelation:17:14 @{These} (\houtoi\). These ten kings. {Shall war against the Lamb} (\meta tou thˆriou polemˆsousin\). Future active of \polemeo\, to war. As allies of the beast (the servant of the dragon, strkjv@12:7|) they will wage war with the Lamb (the enemy of the dragon). These kings gather for battle as in strkjv@16:13f|. {And the Lamb shall overcome them} (\kai to arnion nikˆsei autous\). Future active of \nika“\. This is the glorious outcome, victory by the Lamb over the coalition of kings as against the beast before. {For he is Lord of lords and King of kings} (\hoti Kurios kuri“n estin kai Basileus basile“n\). The same words are again descriptive of Christ in strkjv@19:16|, as of God in strkjv@Deuteronomy:10:17| (God of gods and Lord of lords) and strkjv@Daniel:10:17| (God of gods and Lord of kings). Cf. also strkjv@1Timothy:6:15; strkjv@Revelation:1:5|. Crowned heads are Christ's subjects. {And they also shall overcome that are with him} (\kai hoi met' autou\). "And those with him shall also overcome" (supply \nikˆsousin\, not \eisin\). They will share in the triumph of the Lamb, as they shared in the conflict. Cf. \meta tou thˆriou\ in verse 12|. {Called and chosen and faithful} (\klˆtoi kai eklektoi kai pistoi\). These are the three notes of those who share in the victory. For \klˆtos\ and \eklektos\ see strkjv@Matthew:22:14| (contrasted); strkjv@Romans:8:28ff.; strkjv@2Peter:1:10; strkjv@Revelation:2:10,13|. The elect are called and prove faithful.

rwp@Romans:1:26 @{Unto vile passions} (\eis pathˆ atimias\). Unto passions of dishonour. \Pathos\, old word from \pasch“\, to experience, originally meant any feeling whether good or bad, but in N.T. always in bad sense as here, strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:5; strkjv@Colossians:3:5| (only N.T. examples). {That which is against nature} (\tˆn para phusin\). The degradation of sex is what Paul here notes as one of the results of heathenism (the loss of God in the life of man). They passed by the Creator.

rwp@Romans:2:22 @{That abhorrest} (\ho bdelussomenos\). Old word to make foul, to stink, to have abhorrence for. In LXX, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:21:8|. The very word used by Jesus to express their horror of idols (\eid“la\, see on ¯Acts:7:41; strkjv@1Corinthians:12:2|). See strkjv@Matthew:24:15| for "abomination." {Dost thou rob temples?} (\hierosuleis?\). Old verb from \hierosulos\ (Acts:19:37|) and that from \hieron\, temple, and \sula“\, to rob. The town clerk (Acts:19:37|) said that these Jews (Paul and his companions) were "not robbers of temples," proof that the charge was sometimes made against Jews, though expressly forbidden the Jews (Josephus, _Ant_. IV. 8, 10). Paul refers to the crime of robbing idol temples in spite of the defilement of contact with idolatry.

rwp@Romans:3:19 @{That every mouth may be stopped} (\hina pƒn stoma phragˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist passive subjunctive of \phrass“\, old verb to fence in, to block up. See strkjv@2Corinthians:11:10|. Stopping mouths is a difficult business. See strkjv@Titus:1:11| where Paul uses \epistomizein\ (to stop up the mouth) for the same idea. Paul seems here to be speaking directly to Jews (\tois en t“i nom“i\), the hardest to convince. With the previous proof on that point he covers the whole ground for he made the case against the Gentiles in strkjv@1:18-32|. {May be brought under the judgement of God} (\hupodikos genˆtai t“i the“i\). "That all the world (Jew as well as Gentile) may become (\genˆtai\) answerable (\hupodikos\, old forensic word, here only in N.T.) to God (dative case \t“i the“i\)." Every one is "liable to God," in God's court.

rwp@Romans:4:13 @{That he should be the heir of the world} (\to klˆronomon auton einai kosmou\). The articular infinitive (\to einai\) with the accusative of general reference in loose apposition with \hˆ epaggelia\ (the promise). But where is that promise? Not just strkjv@Genesis:12:7|, but the whole chain of promises about his son, his descendants like the stars in heaven, the Messiah and the blessing to the world through him. In these verses (13-17|) Paul employs (Sanday and Headlam) the keywords of his gospel (faith, promise, grace) and arrays them against the current Jewish theology (law, works, merit).

rwp@Romans:4:18 @{In hope believed against hope} (\par' elpida ep' elpidi episteusen\). "Past hope in (upon) hope he trusted." Graphic picture. {To the end that he might become} (\eis to genesthai auton\). Purpose clause again with \eis\ to and the infinitive as in verses 11-16|.

rwp@Romans:5:15 @{But not as the trespass} (\all' ouch h“s\). It is more contrast than parallel: "the trespass" (\to parapt“ma\, the slip, fall to one side) over against the free gift (\to charisma\, of grace \charis\). {Much more} (\poll“i mallon\). Another _a fortiori_ argument. Why so? As a God of love he delights {much more} in showing mercy and pardon than in giving just punishment (Lightfoot). The gift surpasses the sin. It is not necessary to Paul's argument to make "the many" in each case correspond, one relates to Adam, the other to Christ.

rwp@Romans:6:13 @{Neither present} (\mˆde paristanete\). Present active imperative in prohibition of \paristan“\, late form of \paristˆmi\, to place beside. Stop presenting your members or do not have the habit of doing so, "do not go on putting your members to sin as weapons of unrighteousness." {Instruments} (\hopla\). Old word for tools of any kind for shop or war (John:18:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:7; strkjv@10:4; strkjv@Romans:13:12|). Possibly here figure of two armies arrayed against each other (Galatians:5:16-24|), and see \hopla dikaiosunˆs\ below. The two sets of \hopla\ clash. {But present yourselves unto God} (\alla parastˆsate heautous t“i the“i\). First aorist active imperative of \paristˆmi\, same verb, but different tense, do it now and completely. Our "members" (\melˆ\) should be at the call of God "as alive from the dead."

rwp@Romans:6:16 @{His servants ye are whom ye obey} (\douloi este h“i hupakouete\). Bondservants, slaves of the one whom ye obey, whatever one's profession may be, traitors, spies sometimes they are called. As Paul used the figure to illustrate death to sin and resurrection to new life in Christ and not in sin, so now he uses slavery against the idea of occasional lapses into sin. Loyalty to Christ will not permit occasional crossing over to the other side to Satan's line.

rwp@Romans:7:12 @{Holy, and righteous, and good} (\hagia kai dikaia kai agathˆ\). This is the conclusion (wherefore, \h“ste\) to the query in verse 7|. The commandment is God's and so holy like Him, just in its requirements and designed for our good. The modern revolt against law needs these words.

rwp@Romans:7:23 @{A different law} (\heteron nomon\). For the distinction between \heteros\ and \allos\, see strkjv@Galatians:1:6f|. {Warring against} (\antistrateuomenon\). Rare verb (_Xenophon_) to carry on a campaign against. Only here in N.T. {The law of my mind} (\t“i nom“i tou noos\). The reflective intelligence Paul means by \noos\, "the inward man" of verse 22|. It is this higher self that agrees that the law of God is good (12,16,22|). {Bringing me into captivity} (\aichmal“tizonta\). See on this late and vivid verb for capture and slavery strkjv@Luke:21:24; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:5|. Surely it is a tragic picture drawn by Paul with this outcome, "sold under sin" (14|), "captivity to the law of sin" (23|). The ancient writers (Plato, Ovid, Seneca, Epictetus) describe the same dual struggle in man between his conscience and his deeds.

rwp@Romans:8:31 @{For these things} (\pros tauta\). From strkjv@8:12| on Paul has made a triumphant presentation of the reasons for the certainty of final sanctification of the sons of God. He has reached the climax with glorification (\edoxasen\ in verse 30|). But Paul lets the objector have his say as he usually does so that in verses 31-39| he considers the objections. {If God is for us, who is against us?} (\ei ho theos huper hˆm“n, tis kath' hˆm“n?\). This condition of the first class carries Paul's challenge to all doubters. There is no one on a par with God. Note the two prepositions in contrast (\huper\, over, \kata\, down or against).

rwp@Romans:9:32 @We must supply the omitted verb \edi“xa\ (pursued) from verse 31|. That explains the rest. {They stumbled at the stone of stumbling} (\prosekopsan t“i lith“i tou proskommatos\). The quotation is from strkjv@Isaiah:8:14|. \Proskopt“\ means to cut (\kopt“\) against (\pros\) as in strkjv@Matthew:4:6; strkjv@John:11:9f|. The Jews found Christ a \skandalon\ (1Corinthians:1:23|).

rwp@Romans:10:20 @{Is very bold} (\apotolmƒi\). Present active indicative of \apotolma“\, old word, to assume boldness (\apo\, off) and only here in N.T. Isaiah "breaks out boldly" (Gifford). Paul cites strkjv@Isaiah:65:1| in support of his own courage against the prejudice of the Jews. See strkjv@9:30-33| for illustration of this point. {I was found} (\heurethˆn\). First aorist passive indicative of \heurisk“\.

rwp@Romans:11:2 @{Whom he foreknew} (\hon proegn“\). The same form and sense as in strkjv@8:29|, which see. Probably the Hebrew sense of choice beforehand. The nation of Israel was God's chosen people and so all the individuals in it could not be cast off. {Wot ye not?} (\ouk oidate?\). "Know ye not?" Why keep the old English "wot"? {Of Elijah} (\en Eleiƒi\). "In the case of Elijah." Cf. "in the bush" (Mark:12:26|). {He pleadeth} (\entugchanei\). See on ¯8:27|. \Entugchan“\ means to happen on one and so to converse with (Acts:25:24|), to plead for (Romans:8:27,34|), to plead against as here with \kata\, but the "against" is in \kata\.

rwp@Romans:13:2 @{He that resisteth} (\ho antitassomenos\). Present middle articular participle of \antitass“\, old verb to range in battle against as in strkjv@Acts:18:6|, "he that lines himself up against." {Withstandeth} (\anthestˆken\). Perfect active indicative of \anthistˆmi\ and intransitive, "has taken his stand against." {The ordinance of God} (\tˆi tou theou diatagˆi\). Late word, but common in papyri (Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 89), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:7:53|. Note repetition of root of \tass“\. {To themselves} (\heautois\). Dative of disadvantage. See strkjv@Mark:12:40| for "shall receive a judgment" (\krina lˆmpsontai\). Future middle of \lamban“\.

rwp@Romans:14:23 @{He that doubteth} (\ho diakrinomenos\). Present middle participle of \diakrin“\, to judge between (\dia\), to hesitate. See strkjv@James:1:6f.| for this same picture of the double-minded man. Cf. strkjv@Romans:4:20; strkjv@Mark:11:23|. {Is condemned} (\katakekritai\). Perfect passive indicative of \katakrin“\ (note \kata-\), "stands condemned." {If he eat} (\ean phagˆi\). Third class condition, \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive. If in spite of his doubt, he eat. {Whatsoever is not of faith is sin} (\pan ho ouk ek piste“s hamartia estin\). {Faith} (\pistis\) here is subjective, one's strong conviction in the light of his relation to Christ and his enlightened conscience. To go against this combination is sin beyond a doubt. Some MSS. (A L etc.) put the doxology here which most place in strkjv@16:25-27|. But they all give chapters 15 and 16. Some have supposed that the Epistle originally ended here, but that is pure speculation. Some even suggest two editions of the Epistle. But chapter 15 goes right on with the topic discussed in chapter 14.

rwp@Romans:15:21 @{As it is written} (\kath“s gegraptai\). From strkjv@Isaiah:52:15|. Paul finds an illustration of his word about his own ambition in the words of Isaiah. Fritzsche actually argues that Paul understood Isaiah to be predicting his (Paul's) ministry! Some scholars have argued against the genuineness of verses 9-21| on wholly subjective and insufficient grounds.

rwp@Romans:15:33 @{The God of peace} (\ho theos tˆs eirˆnˆs\). One of the characteristics of God that Paul often mentions in benedictions (1Thessalonians:5:23; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:16; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11; strkjv@Phillipians:4:9; strkjv@Romans:16:20|). Because of the "amen" here some scholars would make this the close of the Epistle and make chapter 16 a separate Epistle to the Ephesians. But the MSS. are against it. There is nothing strange at all in Paul's having so many friends in Rome though he had not yet been there himself. Rome was the centre of the world's life as Paul realized (1:15|). All men sooner or later hoped to see Rome.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Mon Jun 3 02:25:23 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020