Bible:
Filter: String:

NT-EPISTLES.filter - rwp master:


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:4:1 @{Ministers of Christ} (\hupˆretas Christou\). Paul and all ministers (\diakonous\) of the New Covenant (1Corinthians:3:5|) are under-rowers, subordinate rowers of Christ, only here in Paul's Epistles, though in the Gospels (Luke:4:20| the attendant in the synagogue) and the Acts (Acts:13:5|) of John Mark. The {so} (\hout“s\) gathers up the preceding argument (3:5-23|) and applies it directly by the {as} (\h“s\) that follows. {Stewards of the mysteries of God} (\oikonomous mustˆri“n theou\). The steward or house manager (\oikos\, house, \nem“\, to manage, old word) was a slave (\doulos\) under his lord (\kurios\, strkjv@Luke:12:42|), but a master (Luke:16:1|) over the other slaves in the house (menservants \paidas\, maidservants \paidiskas\ strkjv@Luke:12:45|), an overseer (\epitropos\) over the rest (Matthew:20:8|). Hence the under-rower (\hupˆretˆs\) of Christ has a position of great dignity as steward (\oikonomos\) of the mysteries of God. Jesus had expressly explained that the mysteries of the kingdom were open to the disciples (Matthew:13:11|). They were entrusted with the knowledge of some of God's secrets though the disciples were not such apt pupils as they claimed to be (Matthew:13:51; strkjv@16:8-12|). As stewards Paul and other ministers are entrusted with the mysteries (see on ¯1Corinthians:2:7| for this word) of God and are expected to teach them. "The church is the \oikos\ (1Timothy:3:15|), God the \oikodespotˆs\ (Matthew:13:52|), the members the \oikeioi\ (Galatians:6:10; strkjv@Ephesians:2:19|)" (Lightfoot). Paul had a vivid sense of the dignity of this stewardship (\oikonomia\) of God given to him (Colossians:1:25; strkjv@Ephesians:1:10|). The ministry is more than a mere profession or trade. It is a calling from God for stewardship.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:15 @{To admonish} (\nouthet“n\). Literally, admonishing (present active participle of \nouthete“\). See on ¯1Thessalonians:5:12,14|. {For though ye should have} (\ean gar echˆte\). Third-class condition undetermined, but with prospect of being determined (\ean\ and present subjunctive), "for if ye have." {Tutors} (\paidag“gous\). This old word (\pais\, boy, \ag“gos\, leader) was used for the guide or attendant of the child who took him to school as in strkjv@Galatians:3:24| (Christ being the schoolmaster) and also as a sort of tutor who had a care for the child when not in school. The papyri examples (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_) illustrate both aspects of the paedagogue. Here it is the "tutor in Christ" who is the Teacher. These are the only two N.T. examples of the common word. {I begot you} (\humas egennˆsa\). Paul is their {spiritual father} in Christ, while Apollos and the rest are their {tutors} in Christ.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:10 @{To the married} (\tois gegamˆkosin\). Perfect active participle of \game“\, old verb, to marry, and still married as the tense shows. {I give charge} (\paraggell“\). Not mere wish as in verses 7,8|. {Not I, but the Lord} (\ouk eg“ alla ho kurios\). Paul had no commands from Jesus to the unmarried (men or women), but Jesus had spoken to the married (husbands and wives) as in strkjv@Matthew:5:31f.; strkjv@19:3-12; strkjv@Mark:10:9-12; strkjv@Luke:16:18|. The Master had spoken plain words about divorce. Paul reenforces his own inspired command by the command of Jesus. In strkjv@Mark:10:9| we have from Christ: "What therefore God joined together let not man put asunder" (\mˆ chorizet“\). {That the wife depart not from her husband} (\gunaika apo andros mˆ choristhˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive (indirect command after \paraggell“\) of \choriz“\, old verb from adverbial preposition \ch“ris\, separately, apart from, from. Here used of divorce by the wife which, though unusual then, yet did happen as in the case of Salome (sister of Herod the Great) and of Herodias before she married Herod Antipas. Jesus also spoke of it (Mark:10:12|). Now most of the divorces are obtained by women. This passive infinitive is almost reflexive in force according to a constant tendency in the _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 817).

rwp@1Corinthians:7:21 @{Wast thou called being a bondservant?} (\doulos eklˆthˆs;\). First aorist passive indicative. Wast thou, a slave, called? {Care not for it} (\mˆ soi melet“\). "Let it not be a care to thee." Third person singular (impersonal) of \melei\, old verb with dative \soi\. It was usually a fixed condition and a slave could be a good servant of Christ (Colossians:3:22; strkjv@Ephesians:6:5; strkjv@Titus:2:9|), even with heathen masters. {Use it rather} (\mallon chrˆsai\). Make use of what? There is no "it" in the Greek. Shall we supply \eleutheriƒi\ (instrumental case after \chrˆsai\ or \douleiƒi\)? Most naturally \eleutheriƒi\, freedom, from \eleutheros\, just before. In that case \ei kai\ is not taken as although, but \kai\ goes with \dunasai\, "But if thou canst also become free, the rather use your opportunity for freedom." On the whole this is probably Paul's idea and is in full harmony with the general principle above about mixed marriages with the heathen. \Chrˆsai\ is second person singular aorist middle imperative of \chraomai\, to use, old and common verb.

rwp@1Corinthians:9:9 @ "Thresh ye yourselves, O oxen, Measures of grain for yourselves, Measures of grain for your masters."

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

rwp@1Corinthians:15:35 @{But some one will say} (\alla erei tis\). Paul knows what the sceptics were saying. He is a master at putting the standpoint of the imaginary adversary. {How} (\p“s\). This is still the great objection to the resurrection of our bodies. Granted that Jesus rose from the dead, for the sake of argument, these sceptics refuse to believe in the possibility of our resurrection. It is the attitude of Matthew Arnold who said, "Miracles do not happen." Scientifically we know the "how" of few things. Paul has an astounding answer to this objection. Death itself is the way of resurrection as in the death of the seed for the new plant (verses 36f.|). {With what manner of body} (\poi“i s“mati\). This is the second question which makes plainer the difficulty of the first. The first body perishes. Will that body be raised? Paul treats this problem more at length (verses 38-54|) and by analogy of nature (Cf. Butler's famous _Analogy_). It is a spiritual, not a natural, body that is raised. \S“ma\ here is an organism. {Flesh} (\sarx\) is the \s“ma\ for the natural man, but there is spiritual (\pneumatikon\) \s“ma\ for the resurrection.

rwp@Info_1Peter @ SOME BOOKS Alford, H., Vol. IV. 1 of his _Greek Testament_ (1870). Baldwin, _The Fisherman of Galilee_ (1923). Barnes, _St. Peter in Rome and His Tomb on the Vatican Hill_. Beck, J. T., _Erklarung der Briefe Petri_ (1895). Bennett, W. H., _New-Century Bible_ (1901). Bigg, C., _Intern. Crit. Comm_. (1901). Birks, _Studies in the Life and Character of St. Peter_ (1887). Blenkin, _The First Ep. General of St. Peter_ (1915). Camerlinck, _Commentarius in epistolas catholicas_ (1909). Cooke and Lumby, _Speaker's Comm_. (1881). Couard, _Commentaire_ (1895). Couard, _Simon Petrus der Apostel des Herrn_. Davidson, _St. Peter and His Training_. Elert, _Die Religiositat des Petrus_ (1911). Erbes, _Die Todestage der Apostels Paulus and Petrus_ (1899). Foakes-Jackson, F. J., _Peter Prince of Apostles_ (1927). Foster, Ora D., _The Literary Relations of the First Epistle of Peter_ (1913). Fouard, C., _St. Peter and the First Years of Christianity_ (1892). Gallagher, M., _Was the Apostle Peter Ever at Rome?_ (1894). Goutard, _Essai critique et historique sur la prem. e'pitre de S. Pierre_ (1905). Green, S. G., _The Apostle Peter: His Life and Letters_ (1880). Guignebert, _Lamentations:Primaute' de Pierre et la Venue de Pierre a Rome_ (1909). Gunkel, H., _Die Schriften d. N.T_. 3 Aufl. (1917). Hart, J. H. A., _Expos. Greek Test_. (1910). Henriott, _Saint Pierre_ (1891). Hort, F. J. A., _The First Epistle of St. Peter strkjv@1:1-2:17_ (1898). Howson, J., _Horae Petrinae_ (1883). Jenkins, R. C., _The Apostle Peter. Claims of Catholics_ (1875). Johnstone, _The First Epistle of Peter_ (1888). Kasteren, Van, _Deuteronomy:Eerste Brief Van d. Ap. Petrus_ (1911). Keil, C. F., _Comm. uber die Briefe des Petrus und Juda_ (1883). Knopf, R., _Die Briefe Petri und Juda_ (1912). Kogel, J., _Die Gedankenheit des Ersten Briefes Petri_ (1902). Kuhl, E., _Die Briefe Petri und Judae_ (Meyer Komm., 6 Aufl., 1897). Lietzmann, _Petrus and Paulus in Rom_. Lumby, J. R., _Expositor's Bible_ (1893). Masterman, J. H. B., _Epistles of St. Peter_ (1900). McInnis, J.M., _Simon Peter Fisherman and Philosopher_ (1928). Meyer, F. B., _Peter: Fisherman, Disciple, Apostle_ (1920). Moffatt, James, _Moffatt Comm. on N.T._ (1930). Monneir, J., _Lamentations:premiere e'pitre de l'apotre Pierre_ (1900). Perdelwitz, _Die Mysterienreligion und das Problem des ersten Petrusbriefes_ (1911). Plumptre, _Cambridge Bible_ (1879). Reagan, _The Preaching of Peter, the Beginning of Christian Apologetics_ (1922). Robinson, C. G., _Simon Peter: His Life and Times_ (1889). Ross, J. M. E., _The First Epistle of Peter_ (1913). Salmond, A. D. F., _Schaff's Comm_. (1883). Scharfe, _Die petrinische Stromung der neut. Literatur_ (1893). Schmid, _Petrus in Rome_ (1879). Seeley, _The Life and Writings of St. Peter_. Soden, Von, H., _Hand-Komm_. (3 Aufl., 1899). Taylor, W. M., _Peter the Apostle_ (1876). Thomas, W. H., Griffith, _The Apostle Peter_ (2nd ed., 1905). Thompson, _Life-Work of Peter the Apostle_. Upham, _Simon Peter Shepherd_ (1910). Usteri, J. M., _Wiss. und prakt. Komm. uber den I Petrus- brief_ (1887). Volter, D., _Der I Petrusbrief_ (1906). Weiss, B., _Die erste Petrusbrief und die Kritik_ (1906). _Der petrinische Lehrbegriff_ (1855). Williams, N. M., _American Comm_. Windisch, H., _Die Katholische Briefe. Handbuch zum N.T._ (2 Aufl., 1930). Wohlenberg, G., _Der erste und zweite Petrusbrief und der Judasbrief_. (Zahn Komm., 2 Aufl., 1915.) strkjv@1Peter:1:1 @{Peter} (\Petros\). Greek form for the Aramaic (Chaldaic) \Cˆphƒs\, the nickname given Simon by Jesus when he first saw him (John:1:42|) and reaffirmed in the Greek form on his great confession (Matthew:16:18|), with an allusion to \petra\, another form for a rock, ledge, or cliff. In strkjv@2Peter:1:1| we have both \Sim“n\ and \Petros\. Paul in his Epistles always terms himself Paul, not Saul. Songs:Peter uses this name, not Cephas or Simon, because he is writing to Christians scattered over Asia Minor. The nominative absolute occurs here as in strkjv@James:1:1|, but without \chairein\ as there, the usual form of greeting in letters (Acts:23:26|) so common in the papyri. {An apostle of Jesus Christ} (\apostolos Iˆsou Christou\). This is his official title, but in strkjv@2Peter:1:1| \doulos\ is added, which occurs alone in strkjv@James:1:1|. In II and III John we have only \ho presbuteros\ (the elder), as Peter terms himself \sunpresbuteros\ in strkjv@1Peter:5:1|. Paul's usage varies greatly: only the names in I and II Thessalonians, the title \apostolos\ added and defended in Galatians and Romans as also in I and II Corinthians and Colossians and Ephesians and II Timothy with "by the will of God" added, and in I Timothy with the addition of "according to the command of God." In Philippians Paul has only "\doulos\ (slave) \Christou Iˆsou\," like James and Jude. In Romans and Titus Paul has both \doulos\ and \apostolos\, like II Peter, while in Philemon he uses only \desmios\ (prisoner) \Iˆsou Christou\. {To the elect} (\eklektois\). Without article (with the article in strkjv@Matthew:24:22,24,31|) and dative case, "to elect persons" (viewed as a group). Bigg takes \eklektois\ (old, but rare verbal adjective from \ekleg“\, to pick out, to select) as an adjective describing the next word, "to elect sojourners." That is possible and is like \genos eklekton\ in strkjv@2:9|. See the distinction between \klˆtoi\ (called) and \eklektoi\ (chosen) in strkjv@Matthew:22:14|. {Who are sojourners} (\parepidˆmois\). Late double compound adjective (\para, epidˆmountes\, strkjv@Acts:2:10|, to sojourn by the side of natives), strangers sojourning for a while in a particular place. Songs:in Polybius, papyri, in LXX only twice (Genesis:23:4|; 38 or 39 12), in N.T. only here, strkjv@2:11; strkjv@Hebrews:11:13|. The picture in the metaphor here is that heaven is our native country and we are only temporary sojourners here on earth. {Of the Dispersion} (\diasporƒs\). See strkjv@John:7:35| for literal sense of the word for scattered (from \diaspeir“\, to scatter abroad, strkjv@Acts:8:1|) Jews outside of Palestine, and strkjv@James:1:1| for the sense here to Jewish Christians, including Gentile Christians (only N T. examples). Note absence of the article, though a definite conception (of the Dispersion). The Christian is a pilgrim on his way to the homeland. These five Roman provinces include what we call Asia Minor north and west of the Taurus mountain range (Hort). Hort suggests that the order here suggests that Silvanus (bearer of the Epistle) was to land in Pontus from the Euxine Sea, proceed through Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, to Bithynia, where he would re-embark for Rome. This, he holds, explains the separation of Pontus and Bithynia, though the same province. Only Galatia and Asia are mentioned elsewhere in the N.T. as having Christian converts, but the N.T. by no means gives a full account of the spread of the Gospel, as can be judged from strkjv@Colossians:1:6,23|.

rwp@1Peter:2:18 @{Servants} (\hoi oiketai\). Note article with the class as with \andres\ (3:7|), though not with \gunaikes\ (3:1|). \Oiketˆs\, old word from \oikos\ (house), means one in the same house with another (Latin _domesticus_), particularly house servants (slaves) in distinction from the general term \doulos\ (slave). "Ye domestics." See similar directions to Christian servants (slaves) in strkjv@Colossians:3:22-25; strkjv@Ephesians:6:5-7; strkjv@1Timothy:6:1f.; strkjv@Titus:2:9f|. \Oiketˆs\ in N.T. occurs only here, strkjv@Luke:16:13; strkjv@Acts:10:7; strkjv@Romans:14:4|. {Be in subjection} (\hupotassomenoi\). Present middle participle of \hupotass“\, common late compound to subject oneself to one (Luke:2:51|). Either the participle is here used as an imperative (so in strkjv@3:1,7|) as in strkjv@Romans:12:16f.|, or the imperative \este\ has to be supplied (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 945). {To your masters} (\tois despotais\). Dative case of \despotˆs\, old word for absolute owner in contrast with \doulos\. It is used also of God (Luke:2:29; strkjv@Acts:4:24,29|) and of Christ (2Peter:2:1; strkjv@Jude:1:4|). \Kurios\ has a wider meaning and not necessarily suggesting absolute power. {To the good and gentle} (\tois agathois kai epieikesin\). Dative case also with the article with class. For \epieikˆs\ see on ¯James:3:17|. There were slave-owners (masters) like this as there are housekeepers and employers of workmen today. This is no argument for slavery, but only a sidelight on a condition bad enough at its best. {To the froward} (\tois skoliois\). "To the crooked." Old word, also in strkjv@Luke:3:5; strkjv@Acts:2:40; strkjv@Phillipians:2:15|. Unfortunately there were slave-holders as there are employers today, like this group. The test of obedience comes precisely toward this group.

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

rwp@1Timothy:2:12 @{I permit not} (\ouk epitrep“\). Old word \epitrep“\, to permit, to allow (1Corinthians:16:7|). Paul speaks authoritatively. {To teach} (\didaskein\). In the public meeting clearly. And yet all modern Christians allow women to teach Sunday school classes. One feels somehow that something is not expressed here to make it all clear. {Nor to have dominion over a man} (\oude authentein andros\). The word \authente“\ is now cleared up by Kretschmer (_Glotta_, 1912, pp. 289ff.) and by Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_. See also Nageli, _Der Wortschatz des Apostels Paulus_ and Deissmann, _Light, etc._, pp. 88f. \Autodike“\ was the literary word for playing the master while \authente“\ was the vernacular term. It comes from \aut-hentes\, a self-doer, a master, autocrat. It occurs in the papyri (substantive \authentˆs\, master, verb \authente“\, to domineer, adjective \authentikos\, authoritative, "authentic"). Modern Greek has \aphentes\ = Effendi = "Mr."

rwp@1Timothy:6:1 @{Under the yoke} (\hupo zugon\). As slaves (\douloi\, bondsmen). Perhaps under heathen masters (1Peter:2:18|). For the slave problem, see also strkjv@Philemon:1; strkjv@Colossians:3:22; strkjv@Ephesians:6:5; strkjv@Titus:2:9|. See strkjv@Matthew:11:29| for Christ's "yoke" (\zugon\, from \zeugnumi\, to join). {Their own masters} (\tous idious despotas\). That is always where the shoe pinches. Our "despot" is this very Greek word, the strict correlative of slave (\doulos\), while \kurios\ has a wider outlook. Old word only here, strkjv@Titus:2:9; strkjv@2Timothy:2:21; strkjv@1Peter:2:18| for human masters. Applied to God in strkjv@Luke:2:29; strkjv@Acts:4:24,29| and to Christ in strkjv@2Peter:2:1|. {The name of God} (\to onoma tou theou\). See strkjv@Romans:2:24|. If the heathen could say that Christian slaves were not as dependable as non-Christian slaves. Negative purpose with \hina mˆ\ and present passive subjunctive (\blasphˆmˆtai\).

rwp@1Timothy:6:2 @{Let not despise them} (\mˆ kataphroneit“san\). Negative imperative active third plural of \kataphrone“\, to think down on. See strkjv@4:12|. He must not presume on the equality of Christian brotherhood not allowed by the state's laws. Some of these Christian slaves might be pastors of churches to which the master belonged. For the difficulty of the Christian master's position, see strkjv@1Corinthians:7:22; strkjv@Philemon:1:16|. {But rather} (\alla mallon\). Render the Christian Master better service. {They that partake of the benefit} (\hoi tˆs energesias antilambanomenoi\). For \euergesias\ (genitive case after participle) see strkjv@Acts:4:9|, only other N.T. example of this old word. Present middle participle of \antilamban“\, old verb, to take in turn, to lay fast hold of, in N.T. only here, strkjv@Luke:1:54; strkjv@Acts:20:35|.

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

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

rwp@Acts: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:7:57 @{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:8:7 @{For many} (\polloi gar\). Songs:the correct text of the best MSS., but there is an anacoluthon as this nominative has no verb with it. It was "the unclean spirits" that "came out" (\exˆrchonto\, imperfect middle). The margin of the Revised Version has it "came forth," as if they came out of a house, a rather strained translation. The loud outcry is like the demons cast out by Jesus (Mark:3:11; strkjv@Luke:4:41|). {Palsied} (\paralelumenoi\, perfect passive participle). Luke's usual word, loosened at the side, with no power over the muscles. Furneaux notes that "the servant was reaping where the Master had sown. Samaria was the mission field white for the harvest (John:4:35|)." The Samaritans who had been bewitched by Simon are now carried away by Philip.

rwp@Acts:9:8 @{He saw nothing} (\ouden eblepen\). Imperfect active indicative, was seeing nothing. "The glory of that light" (22:11|) when he saw Jesus had blinded his eyes now wide open (\ane“igmen“n\, perfect passive participle of \anoig“\ with double reduplication). The blindness was proof that something had happened to him and that it was no hallucination that he had seen the Risen Christ. Saul arose after the others were on their feet. {They led him by the hand} (\cheirag“gountes\). From \cheirag“gos\ (\cheir\, hand and \ag“\, to lead). Only here in the N.T., but in LXX and late writers though not in the old Greek. It was a pathetic picture to see the masterful Saul, victorious persecutor and conqueror of the disciples, now helpless as a child.

rwp@Acts:15:19 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). "Because of which," this plain purpose of God as shown by Amos and Isaiah. {My judgment is} (\eg“ krin“\). Note expression of \eg“\. {I give my judgment}. (\Ego censeo\). James sums up the case as President of the Conference in a masterly fashion and with that consummate wisdom for which he is noted. It amounts to a resolution for the adoption by the assembly as happened (verse 33|). {That we trouble not} (\mˆ parenochlein\). Present active infinitive with \mˆ\ in an indirect command (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1046) of \parenochle“\, a common late verb, occurring here alone in the N.T. This double compound (\para, en\) is from the old compound \enochle“\ (\en\ and \ochlos\, crowd, annoyance) seen in strkjv@Luke:6:18; strkjv@Hebrews:12:15|, and means to cause trouble beside (\para\) one or in a matter. This is the general point of James which he explains further concerning "those who are turning from the Gentiles unto God," the very kind of people referred to in Amos.

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

rwp@Acts: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:22:2 @{He spake} (\proseph“nei\). Imperfect active, was speaking. See aorist active \proseph“nˆsen\ in strkjv@21:40|. {They were the more quiet} (\mƒllon pareschon hˆsuchian\). Literally, The more (\mƒllon\) they furnished or supplied (second aorist active indicative of \parech“\) quietness (\hˆsuchian\, old word, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:12; strkjv@1Timothy:2:11ff.|). Precisely this idiom occurs in Plutarch (_Cor_. 18) and the LXX (Job:34:29|). Knowling notes the fondness of Luke for words of silence (\sigˆ, siga“, hˆsuchaz“\) as in strkjv@Luke:14:4; strkjv@15:26; strkjv@Acts:11:18; strkjv@12:17; strkjv@15:12; strkjv@21:14,40|. It is a vivid picture of the sudden hush that swept over the vast mob under the spell of the Aramaic. They would have understood Paul's _Koin‚_ Greek, but they much preferred the Aramaic. It was a masterstroke.

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:24:13 @{Prove} (\parastˆsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \paristˆmi\, to place beside. They have made "charges," mere assertions. They have not backed up these charges with proof, "nor can they," says Paul. {Now} (\nuni\). As if they had changed their charges from the cries of the mob in Jerusalem which is true. Paul has no hired lawyer to plead for him, but he has made a masterly plea for his freedom.

rwp@Acts:25:26 @{No certain thing} (\asphales ti--ou\). Nothing definite or reliable (\a\ privative, \sphall“\, to trip). All the charges of the Sanhedrin slipped away or were tripped up by Paul. Festus confesses that he had nothing left and thereby convicts himself of gross insincerity in his proposal to Paul in verse 9| about going up to Jerusalem. By his own statement he should have set Paul free. The various details here bear the marks of the eyewitness. Luke was surely present and witnessed this grand spectacle with Paul as chief performer. {Unto my lord} (\t“i kuri“i\). Augustus (Octavius) and Tiberius refused the title of \kurios\ (lord) as too much like _rex_ (king) and like master and slave, but the servility of the subjects gave it to the other emperors who accepted it (Nero among them). Antoninus Pius put it on his coins. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 105) gives an ostracon dated Aug. 4, A.D. 63 with the words "in the year nine of Nero the lord" (\enatou Ner“nos tou kuriou\). Deissmann (_op. cit._, pp. 349ff.) runs a most interesting parallel "between the cult of Christ and the cult of Caesar in the application of the term \kurios\, lord" in ostraca, papyri, inscriptions. Beyond a doubt Paul has all this fully in mind when he says in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3| that "no one is able to say \Kurios Iˆsous\ except in the Holy Spirit" (cf. also strkjv@Phillipians:2:11|). The Christians claimed this word for Christ and it became the test in the Roman persecutions as when Polycarp steadily refused to say " Lord Caesar" and insisted on saying "Lord Jesus" when it meant his certain death. {Before you} (\eph' hum“n\). The whole company. In no sense a new trial, but an examination in the presence of these prominent men to secure data and to furnish entertainment and pleasure to Agrippa (verse 22|). {Especially before thee} (\malista epi sou\). Out of courtesy. It was the main reason as verse 22| shows. Agrippa was a Jew and Festus was glad of the chance to see what he thought of Paul's case. {After examination had} (\tˆs anakrise“s genomenˆs\). Genitive absolute, "the examination having taken place." \Anakrisis\ from \anakrin“\ (cf. strkjv@12:19; strkjv@24:8; strkjv@28:18|) is a legal term for preliminary examination. Only here in the N.T. Inscriptions and papyri give it as examination of slaves or other property. {That I may have somewhat to write} (\hop“s sch“ ti graps“\). Ingressive aorist subjunctive \sch“\ (may get) with \hop“s\ (final particle like \hina\). \Ti graps“\ in indirect question after \sch“\ is either future indicative or aorist subjunctive (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1045). Festus makes it plain that this is not a "trial," but an examination for his convenience to help him out of a predicament.

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:26:3 @{Especially because thou art expert} (\malista gn“stˆn onta se\). Or like the margin, "because thou art especially expert," according as \malista\ is construed. \Gn“stˆn\ is from \gin“sk“\ and means a knower, expert, connoisseur. Plutarch uses it and Deissmann (_Light_, etc., p. 367) restores it in a papyrus. Agrippa had the care of the temple, the appointment of the high priest, and the care of the sacred vestments. But the accusative \onta se\ gives trouble here coming so soon after \sou\ (genitive with \epi\). Some MSS. insert \epistamenos\ or \eid“s\ (knowing) but neither is genuine. Page takes it as "governed by the sense of thinking or considering." Knowling considers it an anacoluthon. Buttmann held it to be an accusative absolute after the old Greek idiom. \Tuchon\ is such an instance though used as an adverb (1Corinthians:16:6|). It is possible that one exists in strkjv@Ephesians:1:18|. See other examples discussed in Robertson's _Grammar_, pp. 490f. {Customs and questions} (\eth“n te kai zˆtˆmat“n\). Both _consuetudinum in practicis_ and _quaestionum in theoreticis_ (Bengel). Agrippa was qualified to give Paul an understanding and a sympathetic hearing. Paul understands perfectly the grand-stand play of the whole performance, but he refused to be silent and chose to use this opportunity, slim as it seemed, to get a fresh hearing for his own case and to present the claims of Christ to this influential man. His address is a masterpiece of noble apologetic. {Patiently} (\makrothum“s\). Adverb from \makrothumos\. Only here in the N.T., though \makrothumia\ occurs several times. Vulgate has _longanimiter_. Long spirit, endurance, opposite of impatience. Songs:Paul takes his time.

rwp@Acts:27:11 @{Gave more heed} (\mƒllon epeitheto\). Imperfect middle of \peith“\, to yield to (with the dative case). The "Frumentarian" centurion ranked above the captain and owner. As a military officer the centurion was responsible for the soldiers, the prisoners, and the cargo of wheat. It was a government ship. Though the season was not advanced, the centurion probably feared to risk criticism in Rome for timidity when the wheat was so much needed in Rome (Knowling). {To the master} (\t“i kubernˆtˆi\). Old word from \kuberna“\, to steer, and so steersman, pilot, sailing-master. Common in this sense in the papyri. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:18:17|. {And to the owner of the ship} (\kai t“i nauklˆr“i\). Old word compounded of \naus\ and \klˆros\ and used for owner of the ship who acted as his own skipper or captain. The papyri examples (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_) all have the meaning "captain" rather than "owner."

rwp@Colossians:3:2 @{Set your mind on} (\phroneite\). "Keep on thinking about." It does matter what we think and we are responsible for our thoughts. {Not on the things that are upon the earth} (\mˆ ta epi tˆs gˆs\). Paul does not mean that we should never think the things upon the earth, but that these should not be our aim, our goal, our master. The Christian has to keep his feet upon the earth, but his head in the heavens. He must be heavenly-minded here on earth and so help to make earth like heaven.

rwp@Colossians:3:11 @{Where} (\hopou\). In this "new man" in Christ. Cf. strkjv@Galatians:3:28|. {There cannot be} (\ouk eni\). \Eni\ is the long (original) form of \en\ and \estin\ is to be understood. "There does not exist." This is the ideal which is still a long way ahead of modern Christians as the Great War proved. Race distinctions (Greek \Hellˆn\ and Jew \Ioudaios\) disappear in Christ and in the new man in Christ. The Jews looked on all others as Greeks (Gentiles). Circumcision (\peritomˆ\) and uncircumcision (\akrobustia\) put the Jewish picture with the cleavage made plainer (cf. strkjv@Ephesians:2|). The Greeks and Romans regarded all others as barbarians (\barbaroi\, strkjv@Romans:1:14|), users of outlandish jargon or gibberish, onomatopoetic repetition (\bar-bar\). {A Scythian} (\Skuthˆs\) was simply the climax of barbarity, _bar-baris barbariores_ (Bengel), used for any rough person like our "Goths and Vandals." {Bondman} (\doulos\, from \de“\, to bind), {freeman} (\eleutheros\, from \erchomai\, to go). Class distinctions vanish in Christ. In the Christian churches were found slaves, freedmen, freemen, masters. Perhaps Paul has Philemon and Onesimus in mind. But labour and capital still furnish a problem for modern Christianity. {But Christ is all} (\alla panta Christos\). Demosthenes and Lucian use the neuter plural to describe persons as Paul does here of Christ. The plural \panta\ is more inclusive than the singular \pƒn\ would be. {And in all} (\kai en pƒsin\). Locative plural and neuter also. "Christ occupies the whole sphere of human life and permeates all its developments" (Lightfoot). Christ has obliterated the words barbarian, master, slave, all of them and has substituted the word \adelphos\ (brother).

rwp@Colossians:3:25 @{Shall receive again for the wrong that he hath done} (\komisetai ho ˆdikˆsen\). It is not clear whether \ho adik“n\ (he that doeth wrong) is the master or the slave. It is true of either and Lightfoot interprets it of both, "shall receive back the wrong which he did." This is a general law of life and of God and it is fair and square. {There is no respect of persons} (\ouk estin pros“polˆmpsia\). There is with men, but not with God. For this word patterned after the Hebrew see strkjv@Romans:2:11; strkjv@Ephesians:6:9; strkjv@James:2:1| The next verse should be in this chapter also.

rwp@Colossians:4:1 @{That which is just and equal} (\to dikaion kai tˆn isotˆta\). Paul changes from \to ison\ (like \to dikaion\, neuter singular adjective with article for abstract idea) to the abstract substantive \isotˆs\, old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:8:13f|. If employers always did this, there would be no labour problem. {A Master in heaven} (\Kurion en ouran“i\). A wholesome reminder to the effect that he keeps his eye on the conduct of masters of men here towards their employees.

rwp@Ephesians:6:9 @{And forbear threatening} (\anientes tˆn apeilˆn\). Present active participle of \aniˆmi\, old verb, to loosen up, to relax. "Letting up on threatening." \Apeilˆ\ is old word for threat, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:4:29; strkjv@9:1|. {Both their Master and yours} (\kai aut“n kai hum“n ho kurios\). He says to "the lords" (\hoi kurioi\) of the slaves. Paul is not afraid of capital nor of labour. {With him} (\par' aut“i\). "By the side of him (God)."

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ THE EPISTLES OF PAUL BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION IMPORTANCE OF PAUL'S WORK It is impossible to put too much emphasis on the life and work of Paul as the great interpreter of Christ. He has been misunderstood in modern times as he was during his career. Some accuse him of perverting the pure gospel of Christ about the Kingdom of God into a theological and ecclesiastical system. He has been accused of rabbinizing the gospel by carrying over his Pharisaism, while others denounce him for Hellenizing the gospel with Greek philosophy and the Greek mystery-religions. But out of all the welter of attacks Paul's Epistles stand as the marvellous expression of his own conception of Christ and the application of the gospel to the life of the Christians in the Graeco-Roman world in which they lived by eternal principles that apply to us today. In order to understand Paul's Epistles one must know the Acts of the Apostles in which Luke has drawn with graphic power the sudden change of the foremost opponent of Christ into the chief expounder and proclaimer of the gospel of the Risen Christ. The Acts and the Epistles supplement each other in a marvellous way, though chiefly in an incidental fashion. It is by no means certain that Luke had access to any of Paul's Epistles before he wrote the Acts, though that was quite possible for the early Epistles. It does not greatly matter for Luke had access to Paul himself both in Caesarea and in Rome. The best life of Paul one can get comes by combining the Acts with the Epistles if he knows how to do it. Paul is Luke's hero, but he has not overdrawn the picture in the Acts as is made clear by the Epistles themselves which reveal his own grasp and growth. The literature on Paul is vast and constantly growing. He possesses a fascination for students of the New Testament and of Christianity. It is impossible here to allude even to the most important in so vast a field. Conybeare and Howson's _Life and Epistles of St. Paul_ still has value. Sir W. M. Ramsay has a small library on Paul and his Epistles. Stalker's masterful little book on Paul still grips men as does the work of Sabatier. Deissmann's _St. Paul _ continues to throw light on the great Apostle to the Gentiles. Those who wish my own view at greater length will find them in my various books on Paul (_Epochs in the Life of Paul_, _Paul the Interpreter of Christ_, etc.).

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ THE REASON FOR HIS EPISTLES In a real sense Paul's Epistles are tracts for the times, not for the age in general, but to meet real emergencies. He wrote to a particular church or group of churches or persons to meet immediate needs brought to his attention by messengers or letters. Dr. Deissmann contends strongly for the idea of calling Paul's Epistles "letters" rather than "Epistles." He gives a studied literary character to "epistles" as more or less artificial and written for the public eye rather than for definite effect. Four of Paul's Epistles are personal (those to Philemon, Titus, and Timothy) beyond a doubt, but in these which can properly be termed personal letters there are the principles of the gospel applied to personal, social, and ecclesiastical problems in such a pungent fashion that they possess permanent value. In the earliest group of Paul's Epistles, he reminds the Thessalonians of the official character of the Epistle which was meant for the church as a whole (1Thessalonians:5:27|). He says also: "But if any one does not obey our word by the epistle, mark this one, not to associate with him, that he may be put to shame" (2Thessalonians:3:14|). He calls attention to his signature as proof of the genuineness of every epistle (2Thessalonians:3:17|). He gave directions for the public reading of his epistles (Colossians:4:16|). He regarded them as the expression of God's will through the life of the churches and he put his whole heart into them. Two great controversies stirred Paul's life. That with the Judaizers called forth the great doctrinal group (I Corinthians, II Corinthians, Galatians, Romans). That with the Gnostics occasioned the Epistles to the Colossians and the Ephesians (Laodiceans) and this controversy ran on into the Pastoral Epistles. Each Epistle had its particular occasion which will be pointed out in due season. But even in the short ones like Philippians, Colossians and Ephesians Paul deals with the sublimest of all themes, the Person of Christ, with a masterfulness never equalled elsewhere. Even in I Corinthians, which deals so largely with church problems in Corinth, two great chapters rise to the heights of real eloquence (Chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13| on Love and Chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:15| on the Resurrection). Romans, the greatest of his Epistles, has the fullest discussion of Paul's gospel of grace and Chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:8| has a sweep of imagination and a grasp of faith unsurpassed. Hence, while denying to Paul the artificial rules of the rhetoricians attributed to him by Blass, I cannot agree that Paul's church Epistles are mere incidental letters. It is not a question whether Paul was writing for posterity or for the present emergency. He wrote for the present emergency in the most effective possible way. He brought the whole gospel message to bear upon the varied and pressing problems of the early Christians in the power of the Holy Spirit with the eloquence of a mind all ablaze with the truth and with a heart that yearned for their souls for Christ. They are not literary epistles, but they are more than personal letters. They are thunderbolts of passion and power that struck centre and that strike fire now for all who will take the trouble to come to them for the mind of Christ that is here.

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

rwp@Galatians:3:24 @{Our tutor unto Christ} (\paidag“gos hum“n eis Christon\). See strkjv@1Corinthians:4:15| for the only other N.T. example of this old and common word for the slave employed in Greek and Roman families of the better class in charge of the boy from about six to sixteen. The paedagogue watched his behaviour at home and attended him when he went away from home as to school. Christ is our Schoolmaster and the law as paedagogue kept watch over us till we came to Christ. {That we might be justified by faith} (\hina ek piste“s dikai“th“men\). This is the ultimate purpose of the law as paedagogue. {Now that faith is come} (\elthousˆs tˆs piste“s\). Genitive absolute, "the faith (the time of the faith spoken of in verse 23|) having come." {Under a tutor} (\hupo paidag“gon\). The pedagogue is dismissed. We are in the school of the Master.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION UNSETTLED PROBLEMS Probably no book in the New Testament presents more unsettled problems than does the Epistle to the Hebrews. On that score it ranks with the Fourth Gospel, the Apocalypse of John, and Second Peter. But, in spite of these unsolved matters, the book takes high rank for its intellectual grasp, spiritual power, and its masterful portrayal of Christ as High Priest. It is much briefer than the Fourth Gospel, but in a sense it carries on further the exalted picture of the Risen Christ as the King-Priest who reigns and pleads for us now.

rwp@Hebrews:2:7 @{Thou madest him a little lower} (\elatt“sas auton brachu ti\). First aorist active of old verb \elatto“\ from \elatt“n\ (less), causative verb to lessen, to decrease, to make less, only here, and verse 9| and strkjv@John:3:30| in N.T. \Brachu ti\ is accusative neuter of degree like strkjv@2Samuel:16:1|, "some little," but of time in strkjv@Isaiah:57:17| (for a little while). {Than the angels} (\par' aggelous\). "Beside angels" like \para\ with the accusative of comparison in strkjv@1:4,9|. The Hebrew here has _Elohim_ which word is applied to judges in strkjv@Psalms:82:1,6| (John:10:34f.|). Here it is certainly not "God" in our sense. In strkjv@Psalms:29:1| the LXX translates _Elohim_ by \huoi theou\ (sons of God). {Thou crownedst} (\estephan“sas\). First aorist active indicative of old verb, \stephano“\, to crown, in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Timothy:2:5| The Psalmist refers to God's purpose in creating man with such a destiny as mastery over nature. The rest of verse 7| is absent in B.

rwp@Hebrews:11:5 @{Was translated} (\metetethˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \metatithˆmi\, old verb to transpose, to change as in strkjv@7:12; strkjv@Acts:7:16|. {That he should not see death} (\tou mˆ idein thanaton\). Here again \tou\ with the infinitive usually expresses purpose, but in this case result is the idea as in strkjv@Matthew:21:23; strkjv@Romans:1:24; strkjv@7:3|, etc. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1002). {He was not found} (\ouch hˆurisketo\). Imperfect passive of \heurisk“\ from strkjv@Genesis:5:24|. Was still not found. {Translated} (\metethˆken\). First aorist active of same verb as \metetethˆ\ just before. {Translation} (\metathese“s\). Substantive from the same verb \metatithˆmi\, used already in strkjv@7:12| for change. See also strkjv@12:27|. Our very word "metathesis." {He hath had witness borne him} (\memarturˆtai\). Perfect passive indicative of \marture“\, stands on record still, "he has been testified to." {That he had been well-pleasing unto God} (\euarestˆkenai t“i the“i\). Perfect active infinitive of \euareste“\, late compound from \euarestos\ (well-pleasing), in N.T. only in strkjv@Hebrews:11:5f.; strkjv@13:16|. With dative case \the“i\. Quoted here from strkjv@Genesis:5:22,24|. The word is common of a servant pleasing his master.

rwp@Info_James @ THE STYLE James assumes the doctrinal features of Christianity, but he is concerned mainly with the ethical and social aspects of the gospel that Jewish followers of Christ may square their lives with the gospel which they believe and profess. But this fact does not justify Luther in calling the Epistle of James "a veritable Epistle of straw." Luther imagined that James contradicted Paul's teaching of justification by faith. That is not true and the criticism of Luther is unjust. We shall see that, though James and Paul use the same words (faith, works, justify), they mean different things by them. It is possible that both Paul and Peter had read the Epistle of James, though by no means certain. M. Jones (_New Testament in the Twentieth Century_, p. 316) thinks that the author was familiar with Stoic philosophy. This is also possible, though he may have learned it only indirectly through the Wisdom of Solomon and Philo. What is true is that the author writes in the easy and accurate _Koin‚_ Greek of a cultivated Jew (the literary _Koin‚_, not the vernacular), though not the artificial or stilted language of a professional stylist. Principal Patrick (_James the Lord's Brother_, p. 298) holds that he "had a wide knowledge of Classical Greek." This does not follow, though he does use the manner "of the Hellenistic diatribe" (Ropes, _Int. and Crit. Comm_., p. 19) so common at that time. Ropes (pp. 10-22) points out numerous parallels between James and the popular moral addresses of the period, familiar since the days of Socrates and at its height in Seneca and Epictetus. The use of an imaginary interlocutor is one instance (James:2:18f.; strkjv@5:13f.|) as is the presence of paradox (James:1:2,10; strkjv@2:5|; etc.). But the style of James is even more kin to that seen in the Jewish wisdom literature like Proverbs, the Wisdom of Solomon, etc. It is thus both tract and Epistle, a brief Christian sermon on a high plane for a noble purpose. But it is all natural and not artificial. The metaphors are many, but brief and remind one constantly of the Master's use of them in the Sermon on the Mount. Did not Mary the mother of Jesus and James make frequent use of such homely parables? The author shows acquaintance with the LXX, but there are few Hebraisms in the language, though the style is Hebraic, as is the whole tone of the book (Hebraic and Christian). "The style is especially remarkable for constant hidden allusions to our Lord's sayings, such as we find in the first three Gospels" (Hort).

rwp@James:1:16 @{Be not deceived} (\mˆ planƒsthe\). Prohibition with \mˆ\ and the present passive imperative of \plana“\, common verb to lead astray. This is the way of sin to deceive and to kill (Romans:7:7-14|). The devil is a pastmaster at blinding men's eyes about sin (2Corinthians:4:4; strkjv@Romans:1:27; strkjv@Ephesians:4:14|; etc.).

rwp@Info_John @ BUT DIFFERENT FROM THE APOCALYPSE It should be said at once that the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel does not depend on that of the Apocalypse. In fact, some men hold to the Johannine authorship of the Apocalypse who deny that of the Gospel while some hold directly the opposite view. Some deny the Johannine authorship of both Gospel and Apocalypse, while the majority hold to the Johannine authorship of Gospel, Epistles, and Apocalypse as was the general rule till after the time of Origen. The author of the Apocalypse claims to be John (Revelation:1:4,9; strkjv@22:8|), though what John he does not say. Denial of the existence of a "Presbyter John" naturally leads one to think of the Apostle John. Origen says that John, the brother of James, was banished to the Isle of Patmos where he saw the Apocalypse. There is undoubted radical difference in language between the Apocalypse and the other Johannine books which will receive discussion when the Apocalypse is reached. Westcott explained these differences as due to the early date of the Apocalypse in the reign of Vespasian before John had become master of the Greek language. Even J. H. Moulton (_Prolegomena_, p. 9, note 4) says bluntly: "If its date was 95 A.D., the author cannot have written the fourth Gospel only a short time after." Or before, he would say. But the date of the Apocalypse seems definitely to belong to the reign of Domitian. Songs:one ventures to call attention to the statement in strkjv@Acts:4:13| where Peter and John are described as \agrammatoi kai idi“tai\ (unlettered and private or unschooled men). It is curious also that it is precisely in 2Peter and the Apocalypse that we have so many grammatical solecisms and peculiarities. We know that the Fourth Gospel was reviewed by a group of John's friends in Ephesus, while he was apparently alone in the Isle of Patmos. The excitement of the visions would naturally increase the uncouth vernacular of the Apocalypse so much like that in the Greek papyri as seen in Milligan's _Greek Papyri_, for instance. This being true, one is able, in spite of Moulton's dictum, to hold to the Johannine authorship of both Gospel and Apocalypse and not far apart in date.

rwp@John:1:38 @{Turned} (\strapheis\). Second aorist passive participle of \streph“\, vividly picturing the sudden act of Jesus on hearing their steps behind him. {Beheld} (\theasamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \theaomai\ (verse 32|). Both participles here express antecedent action to \legei\ (saith). {Following} (\akolothountas\). Present active participle of \akolouthe“\ (verse 37|). It was Christ's first experience of this kind and the two came from the Baptist to Jesus. {What seek ye?} (\Ti zˆteite;\). Not "whom" (\tina\ strkjv@18:4; strkjv@20:15|), but "what purpose have you." The first words of Jesus preserved in this Gospel. See strkjv@Luke:2:49; strkjv@Matthew:3:15| for words spoken before this and strkjv@Mark:1:15| for Mark's first report in the Galilean ministry. {Rabbi} (\Rabbei\). Aramaic title for "Teacher" which John here translates by \Didaskale\ as he is writing late and for general readers. Luke, a Greek Christian, does not use it, but John recalls his first use of this term to Jesus and explains it. Matthew has it only in the greeting of Judas to the Master (Matthew:26:25,49|) and Mark once by Judas (Mark:14:45|) and twice by Peter (Mark:9:5; strkjv@11:21|). John's Gospel has the disciples at first addressing Jesus by Rabbi while others address him by \Kurie\ (Lord or Sir) as in strkjv@4:11,49; strkjv@5:7|. Peter uses \Kurie\ in strkjv@6:68|. In the end the disciples usually say \Kurie\ (13:6,25|, etc.), but Mary Magdalene says \Rabbounei\ (20:16|). {Being interpreted} (\methermˆmeuomenon\). Present passive participle of \methermˆneu“\, late compound of \meta\ and \hermˆneu“\, to explain (John:1:42|), old word from \Hermes\, the god of speech (hermeneutics). John often explains Aramaic words (1:38,41,42; strkjv@4:25; strkjv@9:7|, etc.). {Where abidest thou?} (\Pou meneis;\). They wished a place for quiet converse with Jesus.

rwp@John:2:9 @{Tasted} (\egeusato\). First aorist middle indicative of \geuomai\. As it was his function to do. {The water now become wine} (\to hud“r oinon gegenˆmenon\). Accusative case, though the genitive also occurs with \geuomai\. Perfect passive participle of \ginomai\ and \oinon\, predicative accusative. The tablemaster knew nothing of the miracle, "whence it was" (\pothen estin\, indirect question retaining present indicative). The servants knew the source of the water, but not the power that made the wine. {Calleth the bridegroom} (\ph“nei ton numphion\). As apparently responsible for the supply of the wine ({thou hast kept} \tetˆrˆkas\). See strkjv@Matthew:9:15| for \numphios\. When men have drunk freely (\hotan methusth“sin\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \methusk“\. The verb does not mean that these guests are now drunk, but that this is a common custom to put "the worse" (\ton elass“\, the less, the inferior) wine last. It is real wine that is meant by \oinos\ here. Unlike the Baptist Jesus mingled in the social life of the time, was even abused for it (Matthew:11:19; strkjv@Luke:7:34|). But this fact does not mean that today Jesus would approve the modern liquor trade with its damnable influences. The law of love expounded by Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:8-10| and in strkjv@Romans:14,15| teaches modern Christians to be willing gladly to give up what they see causes so many to stumble into sin.

rwp@John:4:37 @{For herein} (\en gar tout“i\). In this relation between the sower and the reaper. {The saying} (\ho logos\). Like strkjv@1Timothy:1:15; strkjv@3:1|, etc. Probably a proverb that is particularly true (\alˆthinos\ for which see strkjv@1:9|) in the spiritual realm. {One soweth, and another reapeth} (\allos estin ho speir“n kai allos ho theriz“n\). "One is the sower and another the reaper." It is sad when the sower misses the joy of reaping (Job:31:8|) and has only the sowing in tears (Psalms:126:5f.|). This may be the punishment for sin (Deuteronomy:28:30; strkjv@Micah:6:15|). Sometimes one reaps where he has not sown (Deuteronomy:6:11; strkjv@Joshua:24:13|). It is the prerogative of the Master to reap (Matthew:25:26f.|), but Jesus here lets the disciples share his joy.

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

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

rwp@John:13:13 @{Ye} (\humeis\). Emphatic. {Call me} (\ph“neite me\). "Address me." \Ph“ne“\ regular for addressing one with his title (1:48|). {Master} (\Hosea:didaskalos\). Nominative form (not in apposition with \me\ accusative after \ph“neite\), but really vocative in address with the article (called titular nominative sometimes) like \Hosea:Kurios kai ho theos mou\ in strkjv@20:28|. "Teacher." See strkjv@11:28| for Martha's title for Jesus to Mary. {Lord} (\Hosea:Kurios\). Another and separate title. In strkjv@1:38| we have \Didaskale\ (vocative form) for the Jewish \Rabbei\ and in strkjv@9:36,38| \Kurie\ for the Jewish _Mari_. It is significant that Jesus approves (\kal“s\, well) the application of both titles to himself as he accepts from Thomas the terms \kurios\ and \theos\. {For I am} (\eimi gar\). Jesus distinctly claims here to be both Teacher and Lord in the full sense, at the very moment when he has rendered this menial, but symbolic, service to them. Here is a hint for those who talk lightly about "the peril of worshipping Jesus!"

rwp@John:17:14 @{Not of the world} (\ouk ek tou kosmou\). They are "in the world" (\en t“i kosm“i\, verse 13|) still and Christ sends them "into the world" (\eis ton kosmon\, verse 18|), but they must not be like the world nor get their spirit, standards, and message "out of the world," else they can do the world no good. These verses (14-19|) picture the Master's ideal for believers and go far towards explaining the failure of Christians in winning the world to Christ. Too often the world fails to see the difference or the gain by the change.

rwp@John:21:23 @{That that disciple should not die} (\hoti ho mathˆtˆs ekeinos ouk apothnˆskei\) (present active indicative), because Peter or others misunderstood what Jesus meant as John now carefully explains. He was rebuking Peter's curiosity, not affirming that John would live on till the Master returned. John is anxious to set this matter right.

rwp@Jude:1:4 @{Are crept in} (\pareiseduˆsan\). Second aorist passive indicative of \pareisdu“\ (\-n“\), late (Hippocrates, Plutarch, etc.) compound of \para\ (beside) and \eis\ (in) and \du“\ to sink or plunge, so to slip in secretly as if by a side door, here only in N.T. {Set forth} (\progegrammenoi\). Perfect passive participle of \prograph“\, to write of beforehand, for which verb see strkjv@Galatians:3:1; strkjv@Romans:15:4|. {Unto this condemnation} (\eis touto to krima\). See strkjv@2Peter:2:3| for \krima\ and \ekpalai\. \Palai\ here apparently alludes to verses 14,15| (Enoch). {Ungodly men} (\asebeis\). Keynote of the Epistle (Mayor), in 15| again as in strkjv@2Peter:2:5; strkjv@3:7|. {Turning} (\metatithentes\). Present active participle of \metatithˆmi\, to change, for which verb see strkjv@Galatians:1:6|. For the change of "grace" (\charita\) into "lasciviousness (\eis aselgeian\) see strkjv@1Peter:2:16; strkjv@4:3; strkjv@2Peter:2:19; strkjv@3:16|. {Our only Master and Lord} (\ton monon despotˆn kai kurion hˆm“n\). For the force of the one article for one person see on ¯2Peter:1:1|. For \despotˆn\ of Christ see strkjv@2Peter:2:1|. {Denying} (\arnoumenoi\). strkjv@Songs:2Peter:2:1|. See also strkjv@Matthew:10:33; strkjv@1Timothy:5:8; strkjv@Titus:1:16; strkjv@1John:2:22|.

rwp@Luke:4:40 @{When the sun was setting} (\dunontos tou hˆliou\). Genitive absolute and present participle (\dun“\, late form of \du“\) picturing the sunset scene. Even strkjv@Mark:1:32| has here the aorist indicative \edusen\ (punctiliar active). It was not only cooler, but it was the end of the sabbath when it was not regarded as work (Vincent) to carry a sick person (John:5:10|). And also by now the news of the cure of the demoniac of Peter's mother-in-law had spread all over the town. {Had} (\eichon\). Imperfect tense including all the chronic cases. {With divers diseases} (\nosois poikilais\). Instrumental case. For "divers" say "many coloured" or "variegated." See on ¯Matthew:4:24; strkjv@Mark:1:34|. {Brought} (\ˆgagon\). Constative summary second aorist active indicative like strkjv@Matthew:8:16|, \prosenegkan\, where strkjv@Mark:1:32| has the imperfect \epheron\, brought one after another. {He laid his hands on every one of them and healed them} (\ho de heni hekast“i aut“n tas cheiras epititheis etherapeuen autous\). Note the present active participle \epititheis\ and the imperfect active \etherapeuen\, picturing the healing one by one with the tender touch upon each one. Luke alone gives this graphic detail which was more than a mere ceremonial laying on of hands. Clearly the cures of Jesus reached the physical, mental, and spiritual planes of human nature. He is Lord of life and acted here as Master of each case as it came.

rwp@Luke:5:4 @{Had left speaking} (\epausato lal“n\). He ceased speaking (aorist middle indicative and present active participle, regular Greek idiom). {Put out into the deep} (\epanagage eis to bathos\). The same double compound verb as in verse 3|, only here second aorist active imperative second person singular. {Let down} (\chalasate\). Peter was master of the craft and so he was addressed first. First aorist active imperative second person plural. Here the whole crew are addressed. The verb is the regular nautical term for lowering cargo or boats (Acts:27:17,30|). But it was used for lowering anything from a higher place (Mark:2:4; strkjv@Acts:9:25; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:33|). For a catch (\eis agran\). This purpose was the startling thing that stirred up Simon.

rwp@Luke:5:5 @{Master} (\epistata\). Used only by Luke in the N.T. and always in addresses to Christ (8:24,45; strkjv@9:33,49; strkjv@17:13|). Common in the older writers for superintendent or overseer (one standing over another). This word recognizes Christ's authority. {We toiled} (\kopiasantes\). This verb is from \kopos\ (\work, toil\) and occurs from Aristophanes on. It used to be said that the notion of weariness in toil appears only in the LXX and the N.T. But Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 312f.) cites examples from inscriptions on tombstones quite in harmony with the use in the N.T. Peter's protest calls attention also to the whole night of fruitless toil. {But at thy word} (\epi de t“i rhˆmati sou\). On the base of \epi\. Acquiescence to show his obedience to Christ as "Master," but with no confidence whatsoever in the wisdom of this particular command. Besides, fishing in this lake was Peter's business and he really claimed superior knowledge on this occasion to that of Jesus.

rwp@Luke:9:33 @{As they were departing from him} (\en t“i diach“rizesthai autous ap' autou\). Peculiar to Luke and another instance of Luke's common idiom of \en\ with the articular infinitive in a temporal clause. This common verb occurs here only in the N.T. The present middle voice means to separate oneself fully (direct middle). This departing of Moses and Elijah apparently accompanied Peter's remark as given in all three Gospels. See for details on Mark and Matthew. {Master} (\Epistata\) here, {Rabbi} (Mark:9:5|), {Lord} (\Kurie\, strkjv@Matthew:17:4|). {Let us make} (\poiˆs“men\, first aorist active subjunctive) as in strkjv@Mark:9:5|, but strkjv@Matthew:17:4| has "I will make" (\poiˆs“\). It was near the time of the feast of the tabernacles. Songs:Peter proposes that they celebrate it up here instead of going to Jerusalem for it as they did a bit later (John:7|). {Not knowing what he said} (\mˆ eid“s ho legei\). Literally, {not understanding what he was saying} (\mˆ\, regular negative with participle and \legei\, present indicative retained in relative clause in indirect discourse). Luke puts it more bluntly than Mark (Peter's account), "For he wist not what to answer; for they became sore afraid" (Mark:9:6|). Peter acted according to his impulsive nature and spoke up even though he did not know what to say or even what he was saying when he spoke. He was only half awake as Luke explains and he was sore afraid as Mark (Peter) explains. He had bewilderment enough beyond a doubt, but it was Peter who spoke, not James and John.

rwp@Luke:9:38 @{Master} (\Didaskale\). Teacher as in strkjv@Mark:9:17|. {Lord} (\kurie\, strkjv@Matthew:17:15|). {To look upon} (\epiblepsai\). Aorist active infinitive of \epiblep“\ (\epi\, upon, \blep“\, look), common verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@James:2:3| except strkjv@Luke:1:48| in quotation from LXX. This compound verb is common in medical writers for examining carefully the patient. {Mine only child} (\monogenˆs moi\). Only in Luke as already about an only child in strkjv@7:12; strkjv@8:42|.

rwp@Luke:9:49 @{And John answered} (\apokritheis de I“anˆs\). As if John wanted to change the subject after the embarrassment of the rebuke for their dispute concerning greatness (Luke:9:46-48|). {Master} (\epistata\). Only in Luke in the N.T. as already four times (5:5; strkjv@8:24,45; strkjv@9:33|). {We forbade him} (\ek“luomen auton\). Conative imperfect as in strkjv@Mark:9:38|, We tried to hinder him. {Because he followeth not with us} (\hoti ouk akolouthei meth hˆm“n\). Present tense preserved for vividness where Mark has imperfect {ˆkolouthei}. Note also here "with us" (\meth' hˆm“n\) where Mark has associative instrumental \hˆmin\. It is a pitiful specimen of partisan narrowness and pride even in the Beloved Disciple, one of the Sons of Thunder. The man was doing the Master's work in the Master's name and with the Master's power, but did not run with the group of the Twelve.

rwp@Luke:12:39 @{The thief} (\ho kleptˆs\). The change here almost makes a new parable to illustrate the other, the parable of the housebreaking (verses 39,40|) to illustrate the parable of the waiting servants (35-38|). This same language appears in strkjv@Matthew:24:43f|. "The Master returning from a wedding is replaced by a thief whose study it is to come to the house he means to plunder at an unexpected time" (Bruce). The parallel in strkjv@Matthew:24:43-51| with strkjv@Luke:12:39-46| does not have the interruption by Peter. {He would have watched} (\egrˆgorˆsen an\). Apodosis of second-class condition, determined as unfulfilled, made plain by use of \an\ with aorist indicative which is not repeated with \ouk aphˆken\ (first aorist active indicative of \aphiˆmi\, \k\ aorist), though it is sometimes repeated (Matthew:24:43|).

rwp@Luke:13:26 @{Shall ye begin} (\arxesthe\). Future middle, though Westcott and Hort put \arxˆsthe\ (aorist middle subjunctive of \archomai\) and in that case a continuation of the \aph' hou\ construction. It is a difficult passage and the copyists had trouble with it. {In thy presence} (\en“pion sou\). As guests or hosts or neighbours some claim, or the master of the house. It is grotesque to claim credit because Christ taught in their streets, but they are hard run for excuses and claims.

rwp@Luke:14:22 @{And yet there is room} (\kai eti topos estin\). The Master had invited "many" (verse 16|) who had all declined. The servant knew the Master wished the places to be filled.

rwp@Luke:14:24 @{My supper} (\mou tou deipnou\). Here it is still the Master of the feast who is summing up his reasons for his conduct. We do not have to say that Jesus shuts the door now in the face of the Jews who may turn to him.

rwp@Luke:16:3 @{Within himself} (\en heaut“i\). As soon as he had time to think the thing over carefully. He knew that he was guilty of embezzlement of the Master's funds. {Taketh away} (\aphaireitai\). Present (linear) middle indicative of \aphaire“\, old verb to take away. Here the middle present means, He is taking away for himself. {To beg I am not ashamed} (\epaitein aischunomai\). The infinitive with \aischunomai\ means ashamed to begin to beg. The participle, \epait“n aischunomai\ would mean, ashamed while begging, ashamed of begging while doing it.

rwp@Luke:16:15 @{That justify yourselves} (\hoi dikaiountes heautous\). They were past-masters at that and were doing it now by upturned noses. {An abomination in the sight of God} (\bdelugma en“pion tou theou\). See on ¯Matthew:24:15; strkjv@Mark:13:14| for this LXX word for a detestable thing as when Antiochus Epiphanes set up an altar to Zeus in place of that to Jehovah. There is withering scorn in the use of this phrase by Jesus to these pious pretenders.

rwp@Luke:17:10 @{Unprofitable} (\achreioi\). The Syriac Sinaitic omits "unprofitable." The word is common in Greek literature, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:25:30| where it means "useless" (\a\ privative and \chreios\ from \chraomai\, to use). The slave who only does what he is commanded by his master to do has gained no merit or credit. "In point of fact it is not commands, but demands we have to deal with, arising out of special emergencies" (Bruce). The slavish spirit gains no promotion in business life or in the kingdom of God.

rwp@Luke:22:11 @{Goodman of the house} (\oikodespotˆi\). Master of the house as in strkjv@Mark:14:14; strkjv@Matthew:10:25|. A late word for the earlier \despotˆs oikou\. {I shall eat} (\phag“\). Second aorist futuristic (or deliberative) subjunctive as in strkjv@Mark:14:14|.

rwp@Luke:23:11 @{Set him at nought} (\exouthenˆsas\). First aorist active participle from \exouthene“\, to count as nothing, to treat with utter contempt, as zero. {Arraying him in gorgeous apparel} (\peribal“n esthˆta lampran\). Second aorist active participle of \periball“\, to fling around one. \Lampran\ is brilliant, shining as in strkjv@James:2:2|, so different from the modest dress of the Master. This was part of the shame.

rwp@Mark:1:36 @{Followed after him} (\katedi“xen auton\). Hunted him out (Moffatt). Perfective use of the preposition \kata\ (down to the finish). The verb \di“k“\ is used for the hunt or chase, pursuit. Vulgate has _persecutus est_. The personal story of Peter comes in here. "Simon's intention at least was good; the Master seemed to be losing precious opportunities and must be brought back" (Swete). Peter and those with him kept up the search till they found him. The message that they brought would surely bring Jesus back to Peter's house.

rwp@Mark:2:6 @{Sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts} (\ekei kathˆmenoi kai dialogizomenoi en tais kardiais aut“n\). Another of Mark's pictures through Peter's eyes. These scribes (and Pharisees, strkjv@Luke:5:21|) were there to cause trouble, to pick flaws in the teaching and conduct of Jesus. His popularity and power had aroused their jealousy. There is no evidence that they spoke aloud the murmur in their hearts, "within themselves" (Matthew:9:3|). It was not necessary, for their looks gave them away and Jesus knew their thoughts (Matthew:9:4|) and perceived their reasoning (Luke:5:22|). {Instantly Jesus recognized it in his own spirit} (\euthus epignous ho Iˆsous t“i pneumati autou\, strkjv@Mark:2:8|). The Master at once recognizes the hostile atmosphere in the house. The debate (\dialogizomenoi\) in their hearts was written on their faces. No sound had come, but feeling did.

rwp@Mark:2:28 @{Even of the sabbath} (\kai tou sabbatou\). Mark, Matthew (Matthew:12:8|), and Luke (Luke:6:5|) all give this as a climax in the five reasons given by Christ on the occasion for the conduct of the disciples, but Mark has the little word "even" (\kai\) not in the others, showing that Jesus knew that he was making a great claim as the Son of Man, the Representative Man, the Messiah looked at from his human interest, to lordship (\kurios\) even of the sabbath. He was not the slave of the sabbath, but the master of it. "Even of the sabbath, so invaluable in your eyes. Lord, not to abolish, but to interpret and keep in its own place, and give it a new name" (Bruce).

rwp@Mark:3:13 @{He goeth up into the mountain} (\anabainei eis to oros\). Songs:Matthew (Matthew:5:1|) and Luke (Luke:6:12|), "to pray" Luke adds. Historical present so common in Mark's vivid narrative. Neither Gospel gives the name of the mountain, assuming it as well known, probably not far from the lake. {Whom he himself would} (\hous ˆthelen autos\). Emphatic use of \autos\ (himself) at end of sentence. Whether by personal imitation or through the disciples Jesus invites or calls to himself (\proskaleitai\, historical middle present indicative) a select number out of the vast crowds by the sea, those whom he really wished to be with him. {They went off to him} (\apˆlthon pros auton\). Luke states that Jesus "continued all night in prayer, to God." It was a crisis in the ministry of Christ. This select group up in the hills probably respected the long agony of Jesus though they did not comprehend his motive. They formed a sort of spiritual body-guard around the Master during his night vigil in the mountain.

rwp@Mark:8:33 @{He turning about and seeing his disciples} (\epistrapheis kai id“n tous mathˆtƒs autou\). Peter had called Jesus off to himself (\proskalesamenos\), but Jesus quickly wheeled round on Peter (\epistrapheis\, only \strapheis\ in Matthew). In doing that the other disciples were in plain view also (this touch only in Mark). Hence Jesus rebukes Peter in the full presence of the whole group. Peter no doubt felt that it was his duty as a leader of the Twelve to remonstrate with the Master for this pessimistic utterance (Swete). It is even possible that the others shared Peter's views and were watching the effect of his daring rebuke of Jesus. It was more than mere officiousness on the part of Peter. He had not risen above the level of ordinary men and deserves the name of Satan whose role he was now acting. It was withering, but it was needed. The temptation of the devil on the mountain was here offered by Peter. It was Satan over again. See on ¯Matthew:16:23|.

rwp@Mark:9:1 @{Till they see the kingdom of God come with power} (\he“s an id“sin tˆn basileian tou theou elˆluthuian en dunamei\). In strkjv@8:38| Jesus clearly is speaking of the second coming. To what is he referring in strkjv@9:1|? One is reminded of strkjv@Mark:13:32; strkjv@Matthew:24:36| where Jesus expressly denies that anyone save the Father himself (not even the Son) knows the day or the hour. Does he contradict that here? It may be observed that Luke has only "see the kingdom of God," while Matthew has "see the Son of man coming" (\erchomenon\, present participle, a process). Mark has "see the kingdom of God come" (\elˆluthuian\, perfect active participle, already come) and adds "with power." Certainly the second coming did not take place while some of those standing there still lived. Did Jesus mean that? The very next incident in the Synoptic Gospels is the Transfiguration on Mount Hermon. Does not Jesus have that in mind here? The language will apply also to the coming of the Holy Spirit on the great Day of Pentecost. Some see in it a reference to the destruction of the temple. It is at least open to question whether the Master is speaking of the same event in strkjv@Mark:8:38; strkjv@9:1|.

rwp@Mark:9:32 @{But they understood not the saying} (\hoi de ˆgnooun to rhˆma\). An old word. Chiefly in Paul's Epistles in the N.T. Imperfect tense. They continued not to understand. They were agnostics on the subject of the death and resurrection even after the Transfiguration experience. As they came down from the mountain they were puzzled again over the Master's allusion to his resurrection (Mark:9:10|). strkjv@Matthew:17:23| notes that "they were exceeding sorry" to hear Jesus talk this way again, but Mark adds that they "were afraid to ask him" (\ephobounto auton eper“tˆsai\). Continued to be afraid (imperfect tense), perhaps with a bitter memory of the term "Satan" hurled at Peter when he protested the other time when Jesus spoke of his death (Mark:8:33; strkjv@Matthew:16:23|). strkjv@Luke:9:45| explains that "it was concealed from them," probably partly by their own preconceived ideas and prejudices.

rwp@Mark:9:33 @{In the house} (\en tˆi oikiƒi\). Probably Peter's house in Capernaum which was the home of Jesus when in the city. {What were ye reasoning in the way?} (\Ti en tˆi hod“i dielogiszethe;\). Imperfect tense. They had been disputing (verse 34|), not about the coming death of the Master, but about the relative rank of each of them in the political kingdom which they were expecting him to establish. Jesus had suspected the truth about them and they had apparently kept it up in the house. See on ¯Matthew:18:1| where the disciples are represented as bringing the dispute to Jesus while here Jesus asks them about it. Probably they asked Jesus first and then he pushed the matter further and deeper to see if this had not been the occasion of the somewhat heated discussion on the way in.

rwp@Mark:9:34 @{But they held their peace} (\Hoi de esi“p“n\). Imperfect tense. Put thus to them, they felt ashamed that the Master had discovered their jealous rivalry. It was not a mere abstract query, as they put it to Jesus, but it was a canker in their hearts.

rwp@Mark:10:39 @See on ¯Matthew:20:23-28| for discussion on these memorable verses (39-45|) identical in both Matthew and Mark. In particular in verse 45| note the language of Jesus concerning his death as "a ransom for many" (\lutron anti poll“n\), words of the Master that were not understood by the apostles when spoken by Jesus and which have been preserved for us by Peter through Mark. Some today seek to empty these words of all real meaning as if Jesus could not have or hold such a conception concerning his death for sinners.

rwp@Mark:11:5 @{Certain of those that stood there} (\tines t“n ekei hestˆkot“n\). Perfect active participle, genitive plural. Bystanders. strkjv@Luke:19:33| terms them "the owners thereof" (\hoi kurioi autou\). The lords or masters of the colt. They make a natural protest.

rwp@Mark:13:1 @{Master, behold, what manner of stones and what manner of buildings} (\didaskale, ide potapoi lithoi kai potapai oikodomai\). strkjv@Matthew:24:1| and strkjv@Luke:21:5| tell of the fact of the comment, but Mark alone gives the precise words. Perhaps Peter himself (Swete) was the one who sought thus by a pleasant platitude to divert the Teacher's attention from the serious topics of recent hours in the temple. It was not a new observation, but the merest commonplace might serve at this crisis. Josephus (_Ant_. xv. II, 3) speaks of the great size of these stones and the beauty of the buildings. Some of these stones at the southeastern and southwestern angles survive today and measure from twenty to forty feet long and weigh a hundred tons. Jesus had, of course, often observed them.

rwp@Mark:13:34 @{Commanded also the porter to watch} (\kai t“i thur“r“i eneteilato hina grˆgorˆi\). The porter or door-keeper (\thur“ros\), as well as all the rest, to keep a watch (present subjunctive, \grˆgorˆi\). This Parable of the Porter is only in Mark. Our ignorance of the time of the Master's return is an argument not for indifference nor for fanaticism, but for alertness and eager readiness for his coming.

rwp@Mark:14:14 @{The goodman of the house} (\t“i oikodespotˆi\). A non-classical word, but in late papyri. It means master (\despot\) of the house, householder. The usual Greek has two separate words, \oikou despotˆs\ (master of the house). {My guest-chamber} (\to kataluma mou\). In LXX, papyri, and modern Greek for lodging-place (inn, as in strkjv@Luke:2:7| or guest-chamber as here). It was used for \khan\ or \caravanserai\. {I shall eat} (\phag“\). Futuristic aorist subjunctive with \hopou\.

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@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:17:25 @{Jesus spake first to him} (\proephthasen auton ho Iˆsous leg“n\). Here only in the N.T. One example in a papyrus B.C. 161 (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). The old idiomatic use of \phthan“\ with the participle survives in this example of \prophthan“\ in strkjv@Matthew:17:25|, meaning to anticipate, to get before one in doing a thing. The _Koin‚_ uses the infinitive thus with \phthan“\ which has come to mean simply to arrive. Here the anticipation is made plain by the use of \pro-\. See Robertson's _Grammar_, p. 1120. The "prevent" of the Authorized Version was the original idea of _praevenire_, to go before, to anticipate. Peter felt obliged to take the matter up with Jesus. But the Master had observed what was going on and spoke to Peter first. {Toll or tribute} (\telˆ ˆ kˆnson\). Customs or wares collected by the publicans (like \phoros\, strkjv@Romans:13:7|) and also the capitation tax on persons, indirect and direct taxation. \Kˆnsos\ is the Latin _census_, a registration for the purpose of the appraisement of property like \hˆ apographˆ\ in strkjv@Luke:2:2; strkjv@Acts:5:37|. By this parable Jesus as the Son of God claims exemption from the temple tax as the temple of his Father just as royal families do not pay taxes, but get tribute from the foreigners or aliens, subjects in reality.

rwp@Matthew:18:1 @{Who then is greatest} (\tis ara meiz“n estin\). The \ara\ seems to point back to the tax-collection incident when Jesus had claimed exemption for them all as "sons" of the Father. But it was not a new dispute, for jealousy had been growing in their hearts. The wonderful words of Jesus to Peter on Mount Hermon (Matthew:16:17-19|) had evidently made Peter feel a fresh sense of leadership on the basis of which he had dared even to rebuke Jesus for speaking of his death (16:22|). And then Peter was one of the three (James and John also) taken with the Master up on the Mount of Transfiguration. Peter on that occasion had spoken up promptly. And just now the tax-collectors had singled out Peter as the one who seemed to represent the group. Mark (Mark:9:33|) represents Jesus as asking them about their dispute on the way into the house, perhaps just after their question in strkjv@Matthew:18:1|. Jesus had noticed the wrangling. It will break out again and again (Matthew:20:20-28; strkjv@Luke:22:24|). Plainly the primacy of Peter was not yet admitted by the others. The use of the comparative \meiz“n\ (so \ho meiz“n\ in verse 4|) rather than the superlative \megistos\ is quite in accord with the _Koin‚_ idiom where the comparative is displacing the superlative (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 667ff.). But it is a sad discovery to find the disciples chiefly concerned about their own places (offices) in the political kingdom which they were expecting.

rwp@Matthew:20:20 @{Then} (\tote\). Surely an inopportune time for such a request just after the pointed prediction of Christ's crucifixion. Perhaps their minds had been preoccupied with the words of Jesus (19:28|) about their sitting on twelve thrones taking them in a literal sense. The mother of James and John, probably Salome, possibly a sister of the Master's mother (John:19:25|), apparently prompted her two sons because of the family relationship and now speaks for them. {Asking a certain thing} (\aitousa ti\). "Asking something," "plotting perhaps when their Master was predicting" (Bruce). The "something" put forward as a small matter was simply the choice of the two chief thrones promised by Jesus (19:28|).

rwp@Matthew:21:3 @{The Lord} (\ho kurios\). It is not clear how the word would be understood here by those who heard the message though it is plain that Jesus applies it to himself. The word is from \kuros\, power or authority. In the LXX it is common in a variety of uses which appear in the N.T. as master of the slave (Matthew:10:24|), of the harvest (9:38|), of the vineyard (20:8|), of the emperor (Acts:13:27|), of God (Matthew:11:20; strkjv@11:25|), and often of Jesus as the Messiah (Acts:10:36|). Note strkjv@Matthew:8:25|. This is the only time in Matthew where the words \ho kurios\ are applied to Jesus except the doubtful passage in strkjv@28:6|. A similar usage is shown by Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_ and Deissmann's _Light from the Ancient East_. Particularly in Egypt it was applied to "the Lord Serapis" and Ptolemy and Cleopatra are called "the lords, the most great gods" (\hoi kurioi theoi megistoi\). Even Herod the Great and Herod Agrippa I are addressed as "Lord King." In the west the Roman emperors are not so termed till the time of Domitian. But the Christians boldly claimed the word for Christ as Jesus is here represented as using it with reference to himself. It seems as if already the disciples were calling Jesus "Lord" and that he accepted the appellative and used it as here.

rwp@Matthew:23:4 @{With their finger} (\t“i daktul“i aut“n\). A picturesque proverb. They are taskmasters, not burden-bearers, not sympathetic helpers.

rwp@Matthew:23:8 @{But be not ye called Rabbi} (\humeis de mˆ klˆthˆte Rabbei\). An apparent aside to the disciples. Note the emphatic position of \humeis\. Some even regard verses 8-10| as a later addition and not part of this address to the Pharisees, but the apostles were present. Euthymius Zigabenus says: "Do not seek to be called (ingressive aorist subjunctive), if others call you this it will not be your fault." This is not far from the Master's meaning. Rabbi means "my great one," "my Master," apparently a comparatively new title in Christ's time.

rwp@Matthew:23:10 @{Masters} (\kathˆgˆtai\). This word occurs here only in the N.T. It is found in the papyri for teacher (Latin, _doctor_). It is the modern Greek word for professor. "While \didaskalos\ represents \Rab\, \kathˆgˆtes\ stands for the more honourable \Rabban, -b“n\" (McNeile). Dalman (_Words of Jesus_, p. 340) suggests that the same Aramaic word may be translated by either \didaskalos\ or \kathˆgˆtes\. {The Christ} (\ho Christos\). The use of these words here by Jesus like "Jesus Christ" in his Prayer (John:17:3|) is held by some to show that they were added by the evangelist to what Jesus actually said, since the Master would not have so described himself. But he commended Peter for calling him "the Christ the Son of the living God" (Matthew:16:16f.|). We must not empty the consciousness of Jesus too much.

rwp@Matthew:24:1 @{Went out from the temple} (\exelth“n apo tou hierou\). All the discourses since strkjv@Matthew:21:23| have been in the temple courts (\hieron\, the sacred enclosure). But now Jesus leaves it for good after the powerful denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees in chapter 23. His public teaching is over. It was a tragic moment. As he was going out (\eporeueto\, descriptive imperfect) the disciples, as if to relieve the thought of the Master came to him (\prosˆlthon\) to show (\epideixai\, ingressive aorist infinitive) the buildings of the temple (\tas oikodomas tou hierou\). They were familiar to Jesus and the disciples, but beautiful like a snow mountain (Josephus, _Wars_ V,5,6), the monument that Herod the Great had begun and that was not yet complete (John:2:20|). Great stones were there of polished marble.

rwp@Matthew:26:45 @{Sleep on now and take your rest} (\katheudete loipon kai anapauesthe\). This makes it "mournful irony" (Plummer) or reproachful concession: "Ye may sleep and rest indefinitely so far as I am concerned; I need no longer your watchful interest" (Bruce). It may be a sad query as Goodspeed: "Are you still sleeping and taking your rest?" Songs:Moffatt. This use of \loipon\ for now or henceforth is common in the papyri. {The hour is at hand} (\ˆggiken hˆ h“ra\). Time for action has now come. They have missed their chance for sympathy with Jesus. He has now won the victory without their aid. "The Master's time of weakness is past; He is prepared to face the worst" (Bruce). {Is betrayed} (\paradidotai\). Futuristic present or inchoative present, the first act in the betrayal is at hand. Jesus had foreseen his "hour" for long and now he faces it bravely.

rwp@Matthew:27:2 @{Delivered him up to Pilate the governor} (\pared“kan Peilat“i t“i hˆgemoni\). What they had done was all a form and a farce. Pilate had the power of death, but they had greatly enjoyed the condemnation and the buffeting of Jesus now in their power bound as a condemned criminal. He was no longer the master of assemblies in the temple, able to make the Sanhedrin cower before him. He had been bound in the garden and was bound before Annas (John:18:12,24|), but may have been unbound before Caiaphas.

rwp@Philemon:1:16 @{No longer as a servant} (\ouketi h“s doulon\). "No longer as a slave." Songs:it has to be here. Songs:it should be always. Paul sends Onesimus, the converted runaway slave, back to his legal master, but shows that he expects Philemon the Christian to treat Onesimus as a brother in Christ, not as a slave. {But more than a servant} (\all' huper doulon\). "But beyond a slave." {A brother beloved} (\adelphon agapˆton\). A brother in Christ. {How much rather to thee} (\pos“i de mƒllon soi\). "By how much more to thee," because of Philemon's legal ownership of this now Christian slave. "In the flesh Philemon had the brother for a slave; in the Lord he had the slave for a brother" (Meyer).

rwp@Philippians:3:19 @{Whose god is the belly} (\hou to theos hˆ koilia\). The comic poet Eupolis uses the rare word \Koiliodaim“n\ for one who makes a god of his belly and Seneca speaks of one who _abdomini servit_. Sensuality in food, drink, sex then as now mastered some men. These men posed as Christians and gloried in their shame. {Who mind earthly things} (\hoi ta epigeia phronountes\). Anacoluthon. The nominative does not refer to \polloi\ at the beginning, but with the accusative \tous echthrous\ in between. See strkjv@Mark:12:40|.

rwp@Romans:6:18 @{Ye became servants of righteousness} (\edoul“thˆte tˆi dikaiosunˆi\). First aorist passive indicative of \doulo“\, to enslave. "Ye were made slaves to righteousness." You have simply changed masters, no longer slaves of sin (set free from that tyrant), but ye are slaves of righteousness. There is no middle ground, no "no man's land" in this war.

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

rwp@Titus:2:9 @{Servants} (\doulous\). "Slaves." Supply "exhort" (\parakalei\). See strkjv@1Timothy:6:1| for "masters" (\despotais\). {Well-pleasing} (\euarestous\). See on ¯2Corinthians:5:9|. {Not gainsaying} (\mˆ antilegontas\). "Not answer back." See strkjv@Romans:10:21|.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Sat Jun 29 23:37:11 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020