NT-EPISTLES.filter - rwp ellipse:

rwp@1Corinthians:1:31 @{That} (\hina\). Probably ellipse (\gentai\ to be supplied) as is common in Paul's Epistles (2Thessalonians:2:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:13; strkjv@Galatians:1:20; strkjv@2:9; strkjv@Romans:4:16; strkjv@13:1; strkjv@15:3|). Some explain the imperative \kauchasth\ as an anacoluthon. The shortened quotation is from strkjv@Jeremiah:9:24|. Deissmann notes the importance of these closing verses concerning the origin of Paul's congregations from the lower classes in the large towns as "one of the most important historical witnesses to Primitive Christianity" (_New Light on the N.T._, p. 7; _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 7, 14, 60, 142).

rwp@1Corinthians:4:6 @{I have in a figure transferred} (\meteschmatisa\). First aorist active (not perfect) indicative of \meta-schmatiz\, used by Plato and Aristotle for changing the form of a thing (from \meta\, after, and \schma\, form or habit, like Latin _habitus_ from \ech\ and so different from \morph\ 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 \schma\ 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 \hs\. 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 hmin mathte\). Final clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \manthan\, to learn. As an object lesson in our cases (\en hmin\). 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 M 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 \mathte\ (learn) and points at the words "\M huper ha gegraptai\," apparently a proverb or rule, and elliptical in form with no principal verb expressed with \m\, 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 m 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 \zloute\ in strkjv@Galatians:4:17| (cf. \hina ginskomen\ 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:7:14 @{Is sanctified in the wife} (\hgiastai en ti gunaiki\). Perfect passive indicative of \hagiaz\, to set apart, to hallow, to sanctify. Paul does not, of course, mean that the unbelieving husband is saved by the faith of the believing wife, though Hodge actually so interprets him. Clearly he only means that the marriage relation is sanctified so that there is no need of a divorce. If either husband or wife is a believer and the other agrees to remain, the marriage is holy and need not be set aside. This is so simple that one wonders at the ability of men to get confused over Paul's language. {Else were your children unclean} (\epei ara ta tekna akatharta\). The common ellipse of the condition with \epei\: "since, accordingly, if it is otherwise, your children are illegitimate (\akatharta\)." If the relations of the parents be holy, the child's birth must be holy also (not illegitimate). "He is not assuming that the child of a Christian parent would be baptized; that would spoil rather than help his argument, for it would imply that the child was not \hagios\ till it was baptized. The verse throws no light on the question of infant baptism" (Robertson and Plummer).

rwp@1John:2:19 @{From us} (\ex hmn\) {--of us} (\ex hmn\). The same idiom, \ex\ and the ablative case (\hmn\), but in different senses to correspond with \exlthan\ (they went out from our membership) and \ouk san\ (they were not of us in spirit and life). For \ex\ in the sense of origin see strkjv@John:17:15|, for \ex\ in the sense of likeness, strkjv@John:17:14|. {For if they had been of us} (\ei gar ex hmn san\). Condition of second class with \ei\ and imperfect tense (no aorist for \eimi\). {They would have continued} (\memenkeisan an\). Past perfect of \men\, to remain, without augment, with \an\ in apodosis of second-class condition. {With us} (\meth' hmn\). In fellowship, for which see \meta\ in strkjv@1:3|. They had lost the inner fellowship and then apparently voluntarily broke the outward. {But they went} (\all'\). Ellipsis of the verb \exlthan\ above, a common habit (ellipse) in John s Gospel (1:8; strkjv@9:3; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@15:25|). {That they might be made manifest} (\hina phanerthsin\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \phanero\, for which verb see strkjv@John:21:1; strkjv@Colossians:3:4|. See strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3| for the personal construction with \hoti\ as here. {They all are not} (\ouk eisin pantes\). Not just some, but all, as in strkjv@2:21; strkjv@3:5|. These antichrists are thus revealed in their true light.

rwp@1Timothy:1:3 @{As I exhorted} (\kaths parekalesa\). There is an ellipse of the principal clause in verse 4| ({so do I now} not being in the Greek). {To tarry} (\prosmeinai\). First aorist active infinitive of \prosmen\, old verb, attributed by Luke to Paul in strkjv@Acts:13:43|. {That thou mightest charge} (\hina paraggeilis\). Subfinal clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \paraggell\, old verb, to transmit a message along (\para\) from one to another. See strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:4,6,10|. Lock considers this idiom here an elliptical imperative like strkjv@Ephesians:4:29; strkjv@5:33|. {Certain men} (\tisin\). Dative case. Expressly vague (no names as in strkjv@1:20|), though Paul doubtless has certain persons in Ephesus in mind. {Not to teach a different doctrine} (\m heterodidaskalein\). Earliest known use of this compound like \kakodidaskalein\ of Clement of Rome. Only other N.T. example in strkjv@6:3|. Eusebius has \heterodidaskalos\. Same idea in strkjv@Galatians:1:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:4; strkjv@Romans:16:17|. Perhaps coined by Paul.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:3 @{Let no man beguile you in any wise} (\m tis humas exapatsi kata mdena tropon\). First aorist active subjunctive of \exapata\ (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb \apata\) with double negative (\m tis, mdena\) 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| (\m 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 \gensetai\) 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 m elthi h apostasia prton\). 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 (\h\) 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} (\prton\) 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 apokaluphthi ho anthrpos ts anomias, ho huios ts apleias\). First aorist passive subjunctive after \ean m\ and same condition as with \elthi\. 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@Acts:8:6 @{Gave heed} (\proseichon\). Imperfect active as in verses 10,11|, there with dative of the person (\auti\), here with the dative of the thing (\tois legomenois\). There is an ellipse of \noun\ (mind). They kept on giving heed or holding the mind on the things said by Philip, spell-bound, in a word. {When they heard} (\en ti akouein autous\). Favourite Lukan idiom, \en\ and the locative case of the articlar infinitive with the accusative of general reference "in the hearing as to them." {Which he did} (\ha epoiei\). Imperfect active again, which he kept on doing from time to time. Philip wrought real miracles which upset the schemes of Simon Magus.

rwp@John:1:8 @{He} (\ekeinos\). "That one," i.e. John. He was a light (John:5:35|) as all believers are (Matthew:5:14|), but not "the light" (\to phs\). {But came} (\all'\). No verb in the Greek, to be supplied by repeating \lthen\ of verse 7|. See similar ellipses in strkjv@9:3; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@15:25|. In Johannine fashion we have the final \hina\ clause of verse 7| repeated.

rwp@Matthew:27:17 @{Barabbas or Jesus which is called Christ?} (\Barabbn Isoun 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 thelon\). 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 (\epismon\), 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@Romans:2:28 @{Which is one outwardly} (\ho en ti phaneri\). \Ioudaios\ (Jew) has to be repeated (ellipse) with the article, "the in the open Jew" (circumcision, phylacteries, tithes, etc.). Likewise repeat \peritom\ (circumcision).

rwp@Romans:11:6 @{Otherwise} (\epei\). Ellipse after \epei\ (since), "since, in that case." {Is no more} (\ouketi ginetai\). "No longer becomes" grace, loses its character as grace. Augustine: _Gratia nisi gratis sit gratia non est_.

rwp@Romans:11:22 @{The goodness and the severity of God} (\chrstotta kai apotomian theou\). See on strkjv@Romans:2:2| for \chrstots\, kindness of God. \Apotomia\ (here alone in the N.T.) is from \apotomos\, cut off, abrupt, and this adjective from \apotemn\, to cut off. This late word occurs several times in the papyri. {If thou continue} (\ean epimenis\). Third class condition, \ean\ and present active subjunctive. {Otherwise} (\epei\). Ellipse after \epei\, "since if thou dost not continue." {Thou also} (\kai su\). Precisely as the Jewish branches of verse 17| were. {Shalt be cut off} (\ekkopsi\). Second future passive of \ekkopt\, to cut out.