Bible:
Filter: String:

NT-EPISTLES.filter - rwp nature:


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

rwp@1Corinthians:2:14 @{Now the natural man} (\psuchikos de anthr“pos\). Note absence of article here, "A natural man" (an unregenerate man). Paul does not employ modern psychological terms and he exercises variety in his use of all the terms here present as \pneuma\ and \pneumatikos, psuchˆ\ and \psuchikos, sarx\ and \sarkinos\ and \sarkikos\. A helpful discussion of the various uses of these words in the New Testament is given by Burton in his _New Testament Word Studies_, pp. 62-68, and in his {Spirit, Soul, and Flesh}. The papyri furnish so many examples of \sarx, pneuma\, and \psuchˆ\ that Moulton and Milligan make no attempt at an exhaustive treatment, but give a few miscellaneous examples to illustrate the varied uses that parallel the New Testament. \Psuchikos\ is a qualitative adjective from \psuchˆ\ (breath of life like \anima\, life, soul). Here the Vulgate renders it by _animalis_ and the German by _sinnlich_, the original sense of animal life as in strkjv@Jude:1:19; strkjv@James:3:15|. In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:44,46| there is the same contrast between \psuchikos\ and \pneumatikos\ as here. The \psuchikos\ man is the unregenerate man while the \pneumatikos\ man is the renewed man, born again of the Spirit of God. {Receiveth not} (\ou dechetai\). Does not accept, rejects, refuses to accept. In strkjv@Romans:8:7| Paul definitely states the inability (\oude gar dunatai\) of the mind of the flesh to receive the things of the Spirit untouched by the Holy Spirit. Certainly the initiative comes from God whose Holy Spirit makes it possible for us to accept the things of the Spirit of God. They are no longer "foolishness" (\m“ria\) to us as was once the case (1:23|). Today one notes certain of the _intelligentsia_ who sneer at Christ and Christianity in their own blinded ignorance. {He cannot know them} (\ou dunatai gn“nai\). He is not able to get a knowledge (ingressive second aorist active infinitive of \gin“sk“\). His helpless condition calls for pity in place of impatience on our part, though such an one usually poses as a paragon of wisdom and commiserates the deluded followers of Christ. {They are spiritually judged} (\pneumatik“s anakrinetai\). Paul and Luke are fond of this verb, though nowhere else in the N.T. Paul uses it only in I Corinthians. The word means a sifting process to get at the truth by investigation as of a judge. In strkjv@Acts:17:11| the Beroeans scrutinized the Scriptures. These \psuchikoi\ men are incapable of rendering a decision for they are unable to recognize the facts. They judge by the \psuchˆ\ (mere animal nature) rather than by the \pneuma\ (the renewed spirit).

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

rwp@1Corinthians:11:14 @{Nature itself} (\hˆ phusis autˆ\). He reenforces the appeal to custom by the appeal to nature in a question that expects the affirmative answer (\oude\). \Phusis\, from old verb \phu“\, to produce, like our word nature (Latin _natura_), is difficult to define. Here it means native sense of propriety (cf. strkjv@Romans:2:14|) in addition to mere custom, but one that rests on the objective difference in the constitution of things.

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@1Corinthians:16:21 @{Of me Paul with mine own hand} (\tˆi emˆi cheiri Paulou\). Literally, "With the hand of me Paul." The genitive \Paulou\ is in apposition with the possessive pronoun \emˆi\ which is in the instrumental case just as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:17|, the sign in every Epistle. He dictated, but signed at the end. If we only had that signature on that scrap of paper.

rwp@1John:4:7 @{Of God} (\ek tou theou\). Even human love comes from God, "a reflection of something in the Divine nature itself" (Brooke). John repeats the old commandment of strkjv@2:7f|. Persistence in loving (present tense \agap“men\ indicative and \agap“n\ participle) is proof that one "has been begotten of God" (\ek tou theou gegennˆtai\ as in strkjv@2:29|) and is acquainted with God. Otherwise mere claim to loving God accompanied by hating one's brother is a lie (2:9-11|).

rwp@1John:4:9 @{Was manifested} (\ephaner“thˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \phanero“\. The Incarnation as in strkjv@3:5|. Subjective genitive as in strkjv@2:5|. {In us} (\en hˆmin\). In our case, not "among us" nor "to us." Cf. strkjv@Galatians:1:16|. {Hath sent} (\apestalken\). Perfect active indicative of \apostell“\, as again in verse 14|, the permanent mission of the Son, though in verse 10| the aorist \apesteilen\ occurs for the single event. See strkjv@John:3:16| for this great idea. {His only-begotten Son} (\ton huion autou ton monogenˆ\). "His Son the only-begotten" as in strkjv@John:3:16|. John applies \monogenˆs\ to Jesus alone (John:1:14,18|), but Luke (Luke:7:12; strkjv@8:42; strkjv@9:38|) to others. Jesus alone completely reproduces the nature and character of God (Brooke). {That we might live through him} (\hina zˆs“men di' autou\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist (ingressive, get life) active subjunctive of \za“\. "Through him" is through Christ, who is the life (John:14:6|). Christ also lives in us (Galatians:2:20|). This life begins here and now.

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

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

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

rwp@1Thessalonians:1:8 @{From you hath sounded forth} (\aph' hum“n exˆchˆtai\). Perfect passive indicative of \exˆche“\, late compound verb (\ex, ˆchos, ˆch“, ˆchˆ\, our echo) to sound out of a trumpet or of thunder, to reverberate like our echo. Nowhere else in the N.T. Songs:"from you" as a sounding board or radio transmitting station (to use a modern figure). It marks forcibly "both the clear and the persuasive nature of the \logos tou Kuriou\" (Ellicott). This phrase, the word of the Lord, may be subjective with the Lord as its author or objective with the Lord as the object. It is both. It is a graphic picture with a pardonable touch of hyperbole (Moffatt) for Thessalonica was a great commercial and political centre for disseminating the news of salvation (on the Egnation Way). {But in every place} (\all' en panti top“i\). In contrast to Macedonia and Achaia. The sentence would naturally stop here, but Paul is dictating rapidly and earnestly and goes on. {Your faith to God-ward} (\hˆ pistis hum“n hˆ pros ton theon\). Literally, {the faith of you that toward the God}. The repeated article makes clear that their faith is now directed toward the true God and not toward the idols from which they had turned (verse 10|). {Is gone forth} (\exelˆluthen\). Second perfect active indicative of old verb \exerchomai\, to go out, state of completion like \exˆchˆtai\ above. {Songs:that we need not to speak anything} (\h“ste mˆ chreian echein hˆmƒs lalein ti\). \H“ste\ with the infinitive for actual result as in verse 7|. No vital distinction between \lalein\ (originally to chatter as of birds) and \legein\, both being used in the _Koin‚_ for speaking and preaching (in the N.T.).

rwp@1Thessalonians:5:23 @{The God of peace} (\ho theos tˆs eirˆnˆs\). The God characterized by peace in his nature, who gladly bestows it also. Common phrase (Milligan) at close of Paul's Epistles (2Corinthians:13:11; strkjv@Romans:15:33; strkjv@16:20; strkjv@Phillipians:4:9|) and {the Lord of peace} in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:6|. {Sanctify you} (\hagiasai humƒs\). First aorist active optative in a wish for the future. New verb in LXX and N.T. for the old \hagiz“\, to render or to declare holy (\hagios\), to consecrate, to separate from things profane. {Wholly} (\holoteleis\). Predicate adjective in plural (\holos\, whole, \telos\, end), not adverb \holotel“s\. Late word in Plutarch, Hexapla, and in inscription A.D. 67 (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Here alone in N.T. Here it means the whole of each of you, every part of each of you, "through and through" (Luther), qualitatively rather than quantitatively. {Your spirit and soul and body} (\hum“n to pneuma kai hˆ psuchˆ kai to s“ma\). Not necessarily trichotomy as opposed to dichotomy as elsewhere in Paul's Epistles. Both believers and unbelievers have an inner man (soul \psuchˆ\, mind \nous\, heart \kardia\, the inward man \ho es“ anthr“pos\) and the outer man (\s“ma, ho ex“ anthr“pos\). But the believer has the Holy Spirit of God, the renewed spirit of man (1Corinthians:2:11; strkjv@Romans:8:9-11|). {Be preserved entire} (\holoklˆron tˆrˆtheiˆ\). First aorist passive optative in wish for the future. Note singular verb and singular adjective (neuter) showing that Paul conceives of the man as "an undivided whole" (Frame), prayer for the consecration of both body and soul (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:6|). The adjective \holoklˆron\ is in predicate and is an old form and means complete in all its parts (\holos\, whole, \klˆros\, lot or part). There is to be no deficiency in any part. \Teleios\ (from \telos\, end) means final perfection. {Without blame} (\amempt“s\). Old adverb (\a\ privative, \memptos\, verbal of \memphomai\, to blame) only in I Thess. in N.T. (2:10; strkjv@3:13; strkjv@5:23|). Milligan notes it in certain sepulchral inscriptions discovered in Thessalonica. {At the coming} (\en tˆi parousiƒi\). The Second Coming which was a sustaining hope to Paul as it should be to us and mentioned often in this Epistle (see on ¯2:19|).

rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ The occasion of the Epistle is made plain by numerous allusions personal and otherwise. Paul had arrived in Ephesus from Antioch shortly after the departure of Apollos for Corinth with letters of commendation from Priscilla and Aquila (Acts:18:28-19:1|). It is not clear how long Apollos remained in Corinth, but he is back in Ephesus when Paul writes the letter and he has declined Paul's request to go back to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:12|). Some of the household of Chloe had heard or come from Corinth with full details of the factions in the church over Apollos and Paul, clearly the reason why Apollos left (1Corinthians:1:10-12|). Even Cephas nominally was drawn into it, though there is no evidence that Peter himself had come to Corinth. Paul had sent Timothy over to Corinth to put an end to the factions (1Corinthians:4:17|), though he was uneasy over the outcome (1Corinthians:16:10f.|). This disturbance was enough of itself to call forth a letter from Paul. But it was by no means the whole story. Paul had already written a letter, now lost to us, concerning a peculiarly disgusting case of incest in the membership (1Corinthians:5:9|). They were having lawsuits with one another before heathen judges. Members of the church had written Paul a letter about marriage whether any or all should marry (1Corinthians:7:1|). They were troubled also whether it was right to eat meat that had been offered to idols in the heathen temples (1Corinthians:8:1|). Spiritual gifts of an unusual nature were manifested in Corinth and these were the occasion of a deal of trouble (1Corinthians:12:1|). The doctrine of the resurrection gave much trouble in Corinth (1Corinthians:15:12|). Paul was interested in the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem (1Corinthians:16:1|) and in their share in it. The church in Corinth had sent a committee (Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus) to Paul in Ephesus. He hopes to come himself after passing through Macedonia (1Corinthians:16:5f.|). It is possible that he had made a short visit before this letter (2Corinthians:13:1|), though not certain as he may have intended to go one time without going as he certainly once changed his plans on the subject (2Corinthians:1:15-22|). Whether Titus took the letter on his visit or it was sent on after the return of Timothy is not perfectly clear. Probably Timothy returned to Ephesus from Corinth shortly after the epistle was sent on, possibly by the committee who returned to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:17|), for Timothy and Erastus were sent on from Ephesus to Macedonia before the outbreak at the hands of Demetrius (Acts:19:22|). Apparently Timothy had not fully succeeded in reconciling the factions in Corinth for Paul dispatched Titus who was to meet him at Troas as he went on to Macedonia. Paul's hurried departure from Ephesus (Acts:20:1|) took him to Troas before Titus arrived and Paul's impatience there brought him to Macedonia where he did meet Titus on his return from Corinth (2Corinthians:2:12f.|).

rwp@2Corinthians:1:22 @{Sealed us} (\sphragisamenos hˆmas\). From \sphragiz“\ old verb, common in LXX and papyri for setting a seal to prevent opening (Daniel:6:17|), in place of signature (1Kings:21:18|). Papyri examples show a wide legal use to give validity to documents, to guarantee genuineness of articles as sealing sacks and chests, etc. (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 238; Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). {The earnest of the Spirit} (\ton arrab“na tou pneumatos\). A word of Semitic origin (possibly Phoenician) and spelled both \arab“n\ and \arrab“n\. It is common in the papyri as earnest money in a purchase for a cow or for a wife (a dowry). In N.T. only here; strkjv@5:5; strkjv@Ephesians:1:14|. It is part payment on the total obligation and we use the very expression today, "earnest money." It is God, says Paul, who has done all this for us and God is Paul's pledge that he is sincere. He will come to Corinth in due time. This earnest of the Spirit in our hearts is the witness of the Spirit that we are God's.

rwp@2Corinthians:2:14 @{But thanks be unto God} (\t“i de the“i charis\). Sudden outburst of gratitude in contrast to the previous dejection in Troas. Surely a new paragraph should begin here. In point of fact Paul makes a long digression from here to strkjv@6:10| on the subject of the Glory of the Christian Ministry as Bachmann points out in his _Kommentar_ (p. 124), only he runs it from strkjv@2:12-7:1| (_Aus der Tiefe in die Hohe_, Out of the Depths to the Heights). We can be grateful for this emotional outburst, Paul's rebound of joy on meeting Titus in Macedonia, for it has given the world the finest exposition of all sides of the Christian ministry in existence, one that reveals the wealth of Paul's nature and his mature grasp of the great things in service for Christ. See my _The Glory of the Ministry (An Exposition of II Cor. strkjv@2:12-6:10_). {Always} (\pantote\). The sense of present triumph has blotted out the gloom at Troas. {Leadeth in triumph} (\thriambeuonti\). Late common _Koin‚_ word from \thriambos\ (Latin _triumphus_, a hymn sung in festal processions to Bacchus). Verbs in \-eu“\ (like \mathˆteu“\, to make disciples) may be causative, but no example of \thriambeu“\ has been found with this meaning. It is always to lead in triumph, in papyri sometimes to make a show of. Picture here is of Paul as captive in God's triumphal procession. {The savour} (\tˆn osmˆn\). In a Roman triumph garlands of flowers scattered sweet odour and incense bearers dispensed perfumes. The knowledge of God is here the aroma which Paul had scattered like an incense bearer.

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

rwp@2Peter:1:4 @{Whereby} (\di' h“n\). Probably the "glory and virtue" just mentioned, though it is possible to take it with \panta ta pros\, etc., or with \hˆmin\ (unto us, meaning "through whom"). {He hath granted} (\ded“rˆtai\). Perfect middle indicative of \d“re“\, for which see verse 3|. {His precious and exceeding great promises} (\ta timia kai megista epaggelmata\). \Epaggelma\ is an old word (from \epaggell“\) in place of the common \epaggelia\, in N.T. only here and strkjv@3:13|. \Timios\ (precious, from \timˆ\, value), three times by Peter (1Peter:1:7| of faith; strkjv@1:19| of the blood of Christ; strkjv@2Peter:1:4| of Christ's promises). \Megista\ is the elative superlative used along with a positive adjective (\timia\). {That ye may become} (\hina genˆsthe\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\. {Through these} (\dia tout“n\). The promises. {Partakers} (\koin“noi\). Partners, sharers in, for which word see strkjv@1Peter:5:1|. {Of the divine nature} (\theias phuse“s\). This phrase, like \to theion\ in strkjv@Acts:17:29|, "belongs rather to Hellenism than to the Bible" (Bigg). It is a Stoic phrase, but not with the Stoic meaning. Peter is referring to the new birth as strkjv@1Peter:1:23| (\anagegennˆmenoi\). The same phrase occurs in an inscription possibly under the influence of Mithraism (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). {Having escaped} (\apophugontes\). Second aorist active participle of \apopheug“\, old compound verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@2:18-20|, with the ablative here (\phthorƒs\, old word from \phtheir“\, moral decay as in strkjv@2:12|) and the accusative there. {By lust} (\en epithumiƒi\). Caused by, consisting in, lust. "Man becomes either regenerate or degenerate" (Strachan).

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

rwp@2Peter:2:12 @{But these} (\houtoi de\). The false teachers of verse 1|. {As creatures} (\z“a\). Living creatures, old word, from \z“os\ (alive), strkjv@Jude:1:10; strkjv@Revelation:4:6-9|. {Without reason} (\aloga\). Old adjective, in N.T. only here, strkjv@Jude:1:10; strkjv@Acts:25:27|. Brute beasts like \thˆria\ (wild animals). {Born} (\gegennˆmena\). Perfect passive participle of \genna“\. {Mere animals} (\phusika\). Old adjective in \-ikos\ (from \phusis\, nature), natural animals, here only in N.T. {To be taken} (\eis hal“sin\). "For capture" (old substantive, from \halo“\, here only in N.T.). {And destroyed} (\kai phthoran\). "And for destruction" just like a beast of prey caught. See strkjv@1:4|. {In matters whereof they are ignorant} (\en hois agnoousin\). "In which things they are ignorant." Here \en hois\ = \en toutois ha\ (in those things which), a common Greek idiom. For \agnoe“\ (present active indicative) see strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13; strkjv@1Timothy:1:7| for a like picture of loud ignoramuses posing as professional experts. {Shall in their destroying surely be destroyed} (\en tˆi phthorƒi aut“n phtharˆsontai\). Second future passive of \phtheir“\. Rhetorical Hebraism in the use of \en phthorƒi\ (same root as \phtheir“\), word four times in II Peter. See strkjv@Jude:1:10|.

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

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:14 @{And if any one obeyeth not our word by this epistle} (\ei de tis ouch hupakouei t“i log“i hˆm“n dia tˆs epistolˆs\). Paul sums up the issue bluntly with this ultimatum. Condition of the first class, with negative \ou\, assuming it to be true. {Note that man} (\touton sˆmeiousthe\). Late verb \sˆmeio“\, from \sˆmeion\, sign, mark, token. Put a tag on that man. Here only in N.T. "The verb is regularly used for the signature to a receipt or formal notice in the papyri and the ostraca of the Imperial period" (Moulton & Milligan's _Vocabulary_). How this is to be done (by letter or in public meeting) Paul does not say. {That ye have no company with him} (\mˆ sunanamignusthai aut“i\). The MSS. are divided between the present middle infinitive as above in a command like strkjv@Romans:12:15; strkjv@Phillipians:3:16| or the present middle imperative \sunanamignusthe\ (\-ai\ and \-e\ often being pronounced alike in the _Koin‚_). The infinitive can also be explained as an indirect command. This double compound verb is late, in LXX and Plutarch, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:5:9,11|. \Aut“i\ is in associative instrumental case. {To the end that he may be ashamed} (\hina entrapˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\. Second aorist passive subjunctive of \entrep“\, to turn on, middle to turn on oneself or to put to shame, passive to be made ashamed. The idea is to have one's thoughts turned in on oneself.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:17 @{Of me Paul with mine own hand} (\tˆi emˆi cheiri Paulou\). Instrumental case \cheiri\. Note genitive \Paulou\ in apposition with possessive idea in the possessive pronoun \emˆi\. Paul had dictated the letter, but now wrote the salutation in his hand. {The token in every epistle} (\sˆmeion en pasˆi epistolˆi\). Mark (verse 14|) and proof of the genuineness of each epistle, Paul's signature. Already there were spurious forgeries (2Thessalonians:2:2|). Thus each church was enabled to know that Paul wrote the letter. If only the autograph copy could be found!

rwp@Acts:1:3 @{To whom also} (\hois kai\). He chose them and then also manifested himself to these very same men that they might have personal witness to give. {Shewed himself alive} (\parestˆsen heauton z“nta\). To the disciples the first Sunday evening (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:36-43; strkjv@John:20:19-25|), the second Sunday evening (John:20:26-29|), at the Sea of Tiberias (John:21:1-23|), on the mountain in Galilee (Matthew:28:16-20; strkjv@Mark:16:15-18; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:6|), to the disciples in Jerusalem and Olivet (Luke:24:44-53; strkjv@Mark:16-19f.; strkjv@Acts:1:1-11|). Luke uses this verb \paristˆmi\ 13 times in the Acts both transitively and intransitively. It is rendered by various English words (present, furnish, provide, assist, commend). The early disciples including Paul never doubted the fact of the Resurrection, once they were convinced by personal experience. At first some doubted like Thomas (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:41; strkjv@John:20:24f.; strkjv@Matthew:28:17|). But after that they never wavered in their testimony to their own experience with the Risen Christ, "whereof we are witnesses" Peter said (Acts:3:15|). They doubted at first, that we may believe, but at last they risked life itself in defence of this firm faith. {After his passion} (\meta to pathein auton\). Neat Greek idiom, \meta\ with the articular infinitive (second aorist active of \pasch“\) and the accusative of general reference, "after the suffering as to him." For \pathein\ used absolutely of Christ's suffering see also strkjv@Acts:17:3; strkjv@26:23|. {By many proofs} (\en pollois tekmˆriois\). Literally, "in many proofs." \Tekmˆrion\ is only here in the N.T., though an old and common word in ancient Greek and occurring in the _Koin‚_ (papyri, etc.). The verb \tekmair“\, to prove by sure signs, is from \tekmar\, a sign. Luke does not hesitate to apply the definite word "proofs" to the evidence for the Resurrection of Christ after full investigation on the part of this scientific historian. Aristotle makes a distinction between \tekmˆrion\ (proof) and \sˆmeion\ (sign) as does Galen the medical writer. {Appearing} (\optanomenos\). Present middle participle from late verb \optan“\, late _Koin‚_ verb from root \opt“\ seen in \opsomai, “phthˆn\. In LXX, papyri of second century B.C. (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 83). Only here in the N.T. For \optasia\ for vision see strkjv@Acts:26:19; strkjv@Luke:1:22; strkjv@24:23|. {By the space of forty days} (\di' hˆmer“n tesserakonta\). At intervals (\dia\, between) during the forty days, ten appearances being known to us. Jesus was not with them continually now in bodily presence. The period of forty days is given here alone. The Ascension was thus ten days before Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came. Moses was in the mount forty days (Exodus:24:18|) and Jesus fasted forty days (Matthew:4:2|). In the Gospel of Luke 24 this separation of forty days between the Resurrection and the Ascension is not drawn. {The things concerning the Kingdom of God} (\ta peri tˆs basileias tou theou\). This phrase appears 33 times in Luke's Gospel, 15 times in Mark, 4 times in Matthew who elsewhere has "the kingdom of heaven," once in John, and 6 times in Acts. No essential distinction is to be drawn between the two for the Jews often used "heaven" rather than "God" to avoid using the Tetragrammaton. But it is noticeable how the word kingdom drops out of Acts. Other words like gospel (\euaggelion\) take the place of "kingdom." Jesus was fond of the word "kingdom" and Luke is fond of the idiom "the things concerning" (\ta peri\). Certainly with Jesus the term "kingdom" applies to the present and the future and covers so much that it is not strange that the disciples with their notions of a political Messianic kingdom (Acts:1:6|) were slow to comprehend the spiritual nature of the reign of God.

rwp@Acts:3:21 @{Restoration} (\apokatastase“s\). Double compound (\apo, kata, histˆmi\), here only in the N.T., though common in late writers. In papyri and inscriptions for repairs to temples and this phrase occurs in Jewish apocalyptic writings, something like the new heaven and the new earth of strkjv@Revelation:21:1|. Paul has a mystical allusion also to the agony of nature in strkjv@Romans:8:20-22|. The verb \apokathistˆmi\ is used by Jesus of the spiritual and moral restoration wrought by the Baptist as Elijah (Matthew:17:11; strkjv@Mark:9:12|) and by the disciples to Jesus in strkjv@Acts:1:6|. Josephus uses the word of the return from captivity and Philo of the restitution of inheritances in the year of jubilee. As a technical medical term it means complete restoration to health. See a like idea in \palingenesia\ (renewal, new birth) in strkjv@Matthew:19:28; strkjv@Titus:3:5|. This universalism of Peter will be clearer to him after Joppa and Caesarea.

rwp@Acts:7:23 @{When he was well-nigh forty years old} (\H“s eplˆrouto aut“i tessarakontaetˆs chronos\). A rather awkward Greek idiom for the English: "When a forty year old time (same idiom in strkjv@Acts:13:18| and only twice in the N.T.) was being fulfilled (\eplˆrouto\, imperfect passive) for him (dative case)." The life of Moses is divided into three periods of forty years each (in Egypt 40 years, in Midian 40, governed Israel 40, 120 when he died, strkjv@Deuteronomy:34:7|). {It came into his heart} (\anebˆ epi tˆn kardian autou\). Second aorist active indicative of \anabain“\, common verb. Came up as if from the lower deeps of his nature. This Hebrew image occurs in strkjv@Jeremiah:3:16; strkjv@Isaiah:65:17; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:9|. {To visit} (\episkepsasthai\). First aorist middle infinitive of \episkeptomai\, old verb to go to see for oneself, with his own eyes, to help if possible. Used of God visiting his people (Luke:7:16|). Our "visit" is from Latin _video_, to see, _visito_, to go to see. During the Welsh mining troubles the Prince of Wales made a sympathetic visit to see for himself the actual condition of the coal miners. Moses desired to know first hand how his kinsmen were faring.

rwp@Acts:14:15 @{Sirs} (\andres\). Literally, Men. Abrupt, but courteous. {We also are men of like passions with you} (\kai hˆmeis homoiopatheis esmen humin anthr“poi\). Old adjective from \homoios\ (like) and \pasch“\, to experience. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@James:5:17|. It means "of like nature" more exactly and affected by like sensations, not "gods" at all. Their conduct was more serious than the obeisance of Cornelius to Peter (10:25f.|). \Humin\ is associative instrumental case. {And bring you good tidings} (\euaggelizomenoi\). No "and" in the Greek, just the present middle participle, "gospelizing you." They are not gods, but evangelists. Here we have Paul's message to a pagan audience without the Jewish environment and he makes the same line of argument seen in strkjv@Acts:17:21-32; strkjv@Romans:1:18-23|. At Antioch in Pisidia we saw Paul's line of approach to Jews and proselytes (Acts:13:16-41|). {That ye should turn from these vain things} (\apo tout“n t“n matai“n epistrephein\). He boldly calls the worship of Jupiter and Mercury and all idols "vain" or empty things, pointing to the statues and the temple. {Unto the living God} (\epi theon z“nta\). They must go the whole way. Our God is a live God, not a dead statue. Paul is fond of this phrase (2Corinthians:6:16; strkjv@Romans:9:26|). {Who made} (\hos epoiˆsen\). The one God is alive and is the Creator of the Universe just as Paul will argue in Athens (Acts:17:24|). Paul here quotes strkjv@Psalms:146:6| and has strkjv@Genesis:1:1| in mind. See also strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:9| where a new allegiance is also claimed as here.

rwp@Acts:14:17 @{And yet} (\kaitoi\). Old Greek compound particle (\kai toi\). In the N.T. twice only, once with finite verb as here, once with the participle (Hebrews:4:3|). {Without witness} (\amarturon\). Old adjective (\a\ privative and \martus\, witness), only here in the N.T. {Left} (\aphˆken\). First aorist active (\k\ aorist indicative of \aphiˆmi\). {In that he did good} (\agathourg“n\). Present active causal participle of \agathourge“\, late and rare verb (also \agathoerge“\ strkjv@1Timothy:6:18|), reading of the oldest MSS. here for \agathopoie“\, to do good. Note two other causal participles here parallel with \agathourg“n\, viz., \didous\ ("giving you") present active of \did“mi, empipl“n\ ("filling") present active of \empimpla“\ (late form of \empimplˆmi\). This witness to God (his doing good, giving rains and fruitful seasons, filling your hearts with food and gladness) they could receive without the help of the Old Testament revelation (Romans:1:20|). Zeus was regarded as the god of rain (Jupiter Pluvius) and Paul claims the rain and the fruitful (\karpophorous, karpos\, and \pher“\, fruit bearing, old word, here alone in N.T.) seasons as coming from God. Lycaonia was often dry and it would be an appropriate item. "Mercury, as the God of merchandise, was also the dispenser of food" (Vincent). Paul does not talk about laws of nature as if they governed themselves, but he sees the living God "behind the drama of the physical world" (Furneaux). These simple country people could grasp his ideas as he claims everything for the one true God. {Gladness} (\euphrosunˆs\). Old word from \euphr“n\ (\eu\ and \phrˆn\), good cheer. In the N.T. only strkjv@Acts:2:28| and here. Cheerfulness should be our normal attitude when we consider God's goodness. Paul does not here mention Christ because he had the single definite purpose to dissuade them from worshipping Barnabas and himself.

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:17:29 @{We ought not to think} (\ouk opheilomen nomizein\). It is a logical conclusion (\oun\, therefore) from the very language of Aratus and Cleanthes. {That the Godhead is like} (\to theion einai homoion\). Infinitive with accusative of general reference in indirect discourse. \To theion\ is strictly "the divine" nature like \theiotˆs\ (Romans:1:20|) rather than like \theotˆs\ (Colossians:2:9|). Paul may have used \to theion\ here to get back behind all their notions of various gods to the real nature of God. The Athenians may even have used the term themselves. After \homoios\ (like) the associative instrumental case is used as with \chrus“i, argur“i, lith“i\. {Graven by art and device of man} (\charagmati technˆs kai enthumˆse“s anthr“pou\). Apposition with preceding and so \charagmati\ in associative instrumental case. Literally, graven work or sculpture from \charass“\, to engrave, old word, but here alone in N.T. outside of Revelation (the mark of the beast). Graven work of art (\technˆs\) or external craft, and of thought or device (\enthumˆse“s\) or internal conception of man.

rwp@Colossians:1:13 @{Delivered} (\erusato\). First aorist middle indicative of \ruomai\, old verb, to rescue. This appositional relative clause further describes God the Father's redemptive work and marks the transition to the wonderful picture of the person and work of Christ in nature and grace in verses 14-20|, a full and final answer to the Gnostic depreciation of Jesus Christ by speculative philosophy and to all modern efforts after a "reduced" picture of Christ. God rescued us out from (\ek\) the power (\exousias\) of the kingdom of darkness (\skotous\) in which we were held as slaves. {Translated} (\metestˆsen\). First aorist active indicative of \methistˆmi\ and transitive (not intransitive like second aorist \metestˆ\). Old word. See strkjv@1Corinthians:13:2|. Changed us from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light. {Of the Son of his love} (\tou huiou tˆs agapˆs autou\). Probably objective genitive (\agapˆs\), the Son who is the object of the Father's love like \agapˆtos\ (beloved) in strkjv@Matthew:3:17|. Others would take it as describing love as the origin of the Son which is true, but hardly pertinent here. But Paul here rules out the whole system of aeons and angels that the Gnostics placed above Christ. It is Christ's Kingdom in which he is King. He has moral and spiritual sovereignty.

rwp@Colossians:1:17 @{Before all things} (\pro pant“n\). \Pro\ with the ablative case. This phrase makes Paul's meaning plain. The precedence of Christ in time and the preeminence as Creator are both stated sharply. See the claim of Jesus to eternal timeless existence in strkjv@John:8:58; strkjv@17:5|. See also strkjv@Revelation:23:13| where Christ calls himself the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning (\archˆ\) and the End (\telos\). Paul states it also in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f|. {Consist} (\sunestˆken\). Perfect active indicative (intransitive) of \sunistˆmi\, old verb, to place together and here to cohere, to hold together. The word repeats the statements in verse 16|, especially that in the form \ektistai\. Christ is the controlling and unifying force in nature. The Gnostic philosophy that matter is evil and was created by a remote aeon is thus swept away. The Son of God's love is the Creator and the Sustainer of the universe which is not evil.

rwp@Colossians:1:18 @{The head of the body} (\hˆ kephalˆ tou s“matos\). Jesus is first also in the spiritual realm as he is in nature (verses 18-20|). Paul is fond of the metaphor of the body (\s“ma\) for believers of which body Christ is the head (\kephalˆ\) as seen already in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:3; strkjv@12:12,27; strkjv@Romans:12:5|. See further strkjv@Colossians:1:24: strkjv@2:19; strkjv@Ephesians:1:22f.; strkjv@4:2,15; strkjv@5:30|. {The church} (\tˆs ekklˆsias\) Genitive case in explanatory apposition with \tou s“matos\. This is the general sense of \ekklˆsia\, not of a local body, assembly, or organization. Here the contrast is between the realm of nature (\ta panta\) in verses 15-17| and the realm of spirit or grace in verses 18-20|. A like general sense of \ekklˆsia\ occurs in strkjv@Ephesians:1:22f.; strkjv@5:24-32; strkjv@Hebrews:12:23|. In strkjv@Ephesians:2:11-22| Paul uses various figures for the kingdom of Christ (commonwealth \politeia\, verse 12|, one new man \eis hena kainon anthr“pon\, verse 15|, one body \en heni s“mati\, verse 16|, family of God \oikeioi tou theou\, verse 19|, building or temple \oikodomˆ\ and \naos\, verses 20-22|). {Who} (\hos\). Causal use of the relative, "in that he is." {The beginning} (\hˆ archˆ\). It is uncertain if the article (\hˆ\) is genuine. It is absolute without it. Christ has priority in time and in power. See strkjv@Revelation:3:14| for his relation as \archˆ\ to creation and strkjv@1Corinthians:15:20,23| for \aparchˆ\ used of Christ and the resurrection and strkjv@Acts:3:14| for \archˆgos\ used of him as the author of life and strkjv@Hebrews:2:10| of Jesus and salvation and strkjv@Hebrews:12-2| of Jesus as the pioneer of faith. {That in all things he might have the preeminence} (\hina genˆtai en pƒsin autos pr“teu“n\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\, "that he himself in all things (material and spiritual) may come to (\genˆtai\, not \ˆi\, be) hold the first place" (\pr“teu“n\, present active participle of \pr“teu“\, old verb, to hold the first place, here only in the N.T.). Christ is first with Paul in time and in rank. See strkjv@Revelation:1:5| for this same use of \pr“totokos\ with \t“n nekr“n\ (the dead).

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

rwp@Ephesians:1:10 @{Unto a dispensation of the fulness of the times} (\eis oikonomian tou plˆr“matos t“n kair“n\). See strkjv@Colossians:1:25| for \oikonomian\. In strkjv@Galatians:4:4| "the fulness of the time" (\to plˆr“ma tou chronou\) the time before Christ is treated as a unit, here as a series of epochs (\kair“n\). Cf. strkjv@Mark:1:15; strkjv@Hebrews:1:1|. On \plˆr“ma\ see also strkjv@Romans:11:26; strkjv@Ephesians:3:19; strkjv@4:13|. {To sum up} (\anakephalai“sasthai\). Purpose clause (amounting to result) with first aorist middle infinitive of \anakephalaio“\, late compound verb \ana\ and \kephalaio“\ (from \kephalaion\, strkjv@Hebrews:8:1|, and that from \kephalˆ\, head), to head up all things in Christ, a literary word. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:13:9|. For the headship of Christ in nature and grace see strkjv@Colossians:1:15-20|.

rwp@Ephesians:2:3 @{We also all} (\kai hˆmeis pantes\). We Jews. {Once lived} (\anestraphˆmen pote\). Second aorist passive indicative of \anastreph“\, old verb, to turn back and forth, to live (2Corinthians:1:12|). Cf. \pote periepatˆsate\, of the Gentiles in verse 2|. {The desires} (\ta thelˆmata\). Late and rare word except in LXX and N.T., from \thel“\, to will, to wish. Plural here "the wishes," "the wills" of the flesh like \tais epithumiais tˆs sarkos\ just before. Gentiles had no monopoly of such sinful impulses. {Of the mind} (\t“n dianoi“n\). Plural again, "of the thoughts or purposes." {Were by nature children of wrath} (\ˆmetha tekna phusei orgˆs\). This is the proper order of these words which have been the occasion of much controversy. There is no article with \tekna\. Paul is insisting that Jews as well as Gentiles ("even as the rest") are the objects of God's wrath (\orgˆs\) because of their lives of sin. See strkjv@Romans:2:1-3:20| for the full discussion of this to Jews unpalatable truth. The use of \phusei\ (associative instrumental case of manner) is but the application of Paul's use of "all" (\pantes\) as shown also in strkjv@Romans:3:20; strkjv@5:12|. See \phusei\ of Gentiles in strkjv@Romans:2:14|. The implication of original sin is here, but not in the form that God's wrath rests upon little children before they have committed acts of sin. The salvation of children dying before the age of responsibility is clearly involved in strkjv@Romans:5:13f|.

rwp@Info_Epistles-General @ ORDER AND DATES The oldest Greek manuscripts give these General Epistles immediately after the Acts, and Westcott and Hort so print them in their Greek New Testament. But the English Versions follow the Textus Receptus and put them just before the Apocalypse. The order of the seven letters varies greatly in the different manuscripts, though usually James comes first and Jude:last (as the last accepted and the least known of the four authors). It is possible that the order of James, Peter, and John (omitting Jude) represented a sort of chronological precedence in some minds. It is possible also that no importance is to be attached to this order. Certainly John wrote last and after the destruction of Jerusalem, while the others come before that great event if they are genuine, as I believe, though there are difficulties of a serious nature concerning II Peter. James may be very early. If so, these seven Epistles are scattered all the way from A.D. 45 to 90. They have no connection with one another save in the case of the Epistles of Peter and Jude.

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@Galatians:3:20 @{Is not a mediator of one} (\henos ouk estin\). That is, a middleman comes in between two. The law is in the nature of a contract between God and the Jewish people with Moses as the mediator or middleman. {But God is one} (\ho de theos heis estin\). There was no middleman between God and Abraham. He made the promise directly to Abraham. Over 400 interpretations of this verse have been made!

rwp@Galatians:4:8 @{To them which by nature are not gods} (\tois phusei mˆ ousi theois\). In strkjv@1Corinthians:10:20| he terms them "demons," the "so-called gods" (1Corinthians:8:5|), worshipping images made by hands (Acts:17:29|).

rwp@Galatians:6:11 @{With how large letters} (\pˆlikois grammasin\). Paul now takes the pen from the amanuensis (cf. strkjv@Romans:16:22|) and writes the rest of the Epistle (verses 11-18|) himself instead of the mere farewell greeting (2Thessalonians:3:17; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:21; strkjv@Colossians:4:18|). But what does he mean by "with how large letters"? Certainly not "how large a letter." It has been suggested that he employed large letters because of defective eyesight or because he could only write ill-formed letters because of his poor handwriting (like the print letters of children) or because he wished to call particular attention to this closing paragraph by placarding it in big letters (Ramsay). This latter is the most likely reason. Deissmann, (_St. Paul_, p. 51) argues that artisans write clumsy letters, yes, and scholars also. Milligan (_Documents_, p. 24; _Vocabulary_, etc.) suggests the contrast seen in papyri often between the neat hand of the scribe and the big sprawling hand of the signature. {I have written} (\egrapsa\). Epistolary aorist. {With mine own hand} (\tˆi emˆi cheiri\). Instrumental case as in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:21|.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE PICTURE OF CHRIST At once we are challenged by the bold stand taken by the author concerning the Person of Christ as superior to the prophets of the Old Testament because he is the Son of God through whom God has spoken in the new dispensation (Hebrews:1:1-3|), this Son who is God's Agent in the work of creation and of grace as we see it stated in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11; strkjv@Colossians:1:13-20; strkjv@John:1:1-18|. This high doctrine of Jesus as God's Son with the glory and stamp of God's nature is never lowered, for as God's Son he is superior to angels (Hebrews:1:4-2:4|), though the humanity of Jesus is recognized as one proof of the glory of Jesus (Hebrews:2:5-18|). Jesus is shown to be superior to Moses as God's Son over God's house (Hebrews:3:1-4:13|), But the chief portion of the Epistle is devoted to the superiority of Jesus Christ as priest to the work of Aaron and the whole Levitical line (Hebrews:4:14-12:3|). Here the author with consummate skill, though with rabbinical refinements at times, shows that Jesus is like Melchizedek and so superior to Aaron (Hebrews:4:14-7:28|), works under a better covenant of grace (Hebrews:8:1-13|), works in a better sanctuary which is in heaven (Hebrews:9:1-12|), offers a better sacrifice which is his own blood (Hebrews:9:13-10:18|), and gives us better promises for the fulfilment of his task (Hebrews:10:19-12:3|). Hence this Epistle deserves to be called the Epistle of the Priesthood of Christ. Songs:W. P. Du Bose calls his exposition of the book, _High Priesthood and Sacrifice_ (1908). This conception of Christ as our Priest who offered himself on the Cross and as our Advocate with the Father runs all through the New Testament (Mark:10:46; strkjv@Matthew:20:28; strkjv@John:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Romans:8:32; strkjv@1Peter:1:18f.; strkjv@1John:2:1f.; strkjv@Revelation:5:9|, etc.). But it is in Hebrews that we have the full-length portrait of Jesus Christ as our Priest and Redeemer. The Glory of Jesus runs through the whole book.

rwp@Hebrews:1:12 @{A mantle} (\peribolaion\). Old word for covering from \pariball“\, to fling around, as a veil in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:15|, nowhere else in N.T. {Shalt thou roll up} (\helixeis\). Future active of \heliss“\, late form for \heiliss“\, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:6:14|, to fold together. {As a garment} (\h“s himation\). LXX repeats from 11|. {They shall be changed} (\allagˆsontai\). Second future passive of \allass“\, old verb, to change. {Shall not fail} (\ouk ekleipsousin\). Future active of \ekleip“\, to leave out, to fail, used of the sun in strkjv@Luke:23:45|. "Nature is at his mercy, not he at nature's" (Moffatt).

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:2:8 @{In that he subjected} (\en t“i hupotaxai\). First aorist active articular infinitive of \hupatass“\ in the locative case, "in the subjecting." {He left} (\aphˆken\). First aorist active indicative (kappa aorist) of \aphiˆmi\. {Nothing that is not subject to him} (\ouden aut“i anupotakton\). Later verbal of \hupotass“\ with \a\ privative. Here in passive sense, active sense in strkjv@1Timothy:1:9|. Man's sovereignty was meant to be all-inclusive including the administration of "the world to come." "He is crowned king of nature, invested with a divine authority over creation" (Moffatt). But how far short of this destiny has man come! {But now we see not yet} (\nun de oup“ hor“men\). Not even today in the wonderful twentieth century with man's triumphs over nature has he reached that goal, wonderful as are the researches by the help of telescope and microscope, the mechanism of the airplane, the submarine, steam, electricity, radio.

rwp@Hebrews:2:17 @{Wherefore} (\hothen\). Old relative adverb (\ho\ and enclitic \then\, whence of place (Matthew:12:44|), of source (1John:2:18|), of cause as here and often in Hebrews (3:1; strkjv@7:25; strkjv@8:3; strkjv@9:18; strkjv@11:19|). {It behoved him} (\“pheilen\). Imperfect active of \opheil“\, old verb to owe, money (Matthew:18:28|), service and love (Romans:13:8|), duty or obligation as here and often in N.T. (Luke:17:10|). Jesus is here the subject and the reference is to the incarnation. Having undertaken the work of redemption (John:3:16|), voluntarily (John:10:17|), Jesus was under obligation to be properly equipped for that priestly service and sacrifice. {In all things} (\kata panta\). Except yielding to sin (Hebrews:4:15|) and yet he knew what temptation was, difficult as it may be for us to comprehend that in the Son of God who is also the Son of man (Mark:1:13|). Jesus fought through to victory over Satan. {To be made like unto his brethren} (\tois adelphois homoi“thˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \homoio“\, old and common verb from \homoios\ (like), as in strkjv@Matthew:6:8|, with the associative instrumental case as here. Christ, our Elder Brother, resembles us in reality (Phillipians:2:7| "in the likeness of men") as we shall resemble him in the end (Romans:8:29| "first-born among many brethren"; strkjv@1John:3:2| "like him"), where the same root is used as here (\hoi“ma, homoios\). That he might be (\hina genˆtai\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\, to become, "that he might become." That was only possible by being like his brethren in actual human nature. {Merciful and faithful high priest} (\eleˆm“n kai pistos archiereus\). The sudden use of \archiereus\ here for Jesus has been anticipated by strkjv@1:3; strkjv@2:9| and see strkjv@3:1|. Jesus as the priest-victim is the chief topic of the Epistle. These two adjectives (\eleˆm“n\ and \pistos\) touch the chief points in the function of the high priest (5:1-10|), sympathy and fidelity to God. The Sadducean high priests (Annas and Caiaphas) were political and ecclesiastical tools and puppets out of sympathy with the people and chosen by Rome. {In things pertaining to God} (\ta pros ton theon\). The adverbial accusative of the article is a common idiom. See the very idiom \ta pros ton theon\ in strkjv@Exodus:18:19; strkjv@Romans:15:17|. This use of \pros\ we had already in strkjv@Hebrews:1:7f|. On the day of atonement the high priest entered the holy of holies and officiated in behalf of the people. {To make propitiation for} (\eis to hilaskesthai\). Purpose clause with \eis to\ and the infinitive (common Greek idiom), here present indirect middle of \hilaskomai\, to render propitious to oneself (from \hilaos\, Attic \hile“s\, gracious). This idea occurs in the LXX (Psalms:65:3|), but only here in N.T., though in strkjv@Luke:18:13| the passive form (\hilasthˆti\) occurs as in strkjv@2Kings:5:18|. In strkjv@1John:2:2| we have \hilasmos\ used of Christ (cf. strkjv@Hebrews:7:25|). The inscriptions illustrate the meaning in strkjv@Hebrews:2:17| as well as the LXX.

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

rwp@Hebrews:8:10 @{This} (\hautˆ\). The "new" one of verse 8|. {That I will make} (\hˆn diathˆsomai\). Future middle of \diatithˆmi\, "that I will covenant," cognate accusative (\hˆn\), using the same root in the verb as in \diathˆkˆ\. {I will put} (\didous\). "Giving," present active participle of \did“mi\, to give. {Into their mind} (\eis tˆn dianoian aut“n\). Their intellect, their moral understanding, all the intellect as in Aristotle (Colossians:1:21; strkjv@Ephesians:4:18|). {On their heart} (\epi kardias aut“n\). Either genitive singular or accusative plural. \Kardia\ is the seat of man's personal life (Westcott), the two terms covering the whole of man's inward nature. {A god} (\eis theon\). Note the Hebraistic use of \eis\ in the predicate instead of the usual nominative \theos\ as in "a people" (\eis laon\). This was the ideal of the old covenant (Exodus:6:7|), now at last to be a fact.

rwp@Hebrews:9:10 @{Only with meats and drinks and divers washings} (\monon epi br“masin kai pomasin kai diaphorois baptismois\). The parenthesis of the Revised Version here is unnecessary. The use of \epi\ here with the locative case is regular, "in the matter of" (Luke:12:52; strkjv@John:12:16; strkjv@Acts:21:24|). What ritual value these Levitical sacrifices had was confined to minute regulations about diet and ceremonial cleansing (clean and unclean). For "divers" (\diaphorois\, late adjective, in N.T. only in strkjv@Hebrews:1:4; strkjv@8:6; strkjv@9:10; strkjv@Romans:12:6|) say "different" or "various." \Baptismois\ is, of course, the Jewish ceremonial immersions (cf. strkjv@Mark:7:4; strkjv@Exodus:29:4; strkjv@Leviticus:11:25,28f.; strkjv@Numbers:8:7; strkjv@Revelation:6:2|). {Carnal ordinances} (\dikai“masin sarkos\). But the correct text is undoubtedly simply \dikai“mata sarkos\ (nominative case), in apposition with \d“ra te kai thusiai\ (gifts and sacrifices). See strkjv@9:1| for \dikai“mata\. {Imposed} (\epikeimena\). Present middle or passive participle of \epikeimai\, old verb to lie upon (be laid upon). Cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:9:16|. {Until a time of reformation} (\mechri kairou diorth“se“s\). Definite statement of the temporary nature of the Levitical system already stated in strkjv@7:10-17; strkjv@8:13| and argued clearly by Paul in strkjv@Galatians:3:15-22|. \Diorth“sis\ is a late word, here alone in N.T. (from \diortho“\, to set right or straight), used by Hippocrates for making straight misshapen limbs like \anortho“\ in strkjv@Hebrews:12:12|. Here for reformation like \diorth“ma\ (reform) in strkjv@Acts:24:2f|. Christianity itself is the great Reformation of the current Judaism (Pharisaism) and the spiritual Judaism foreshadowed by the old Abrahamic promise (see strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9|).

rwp@Hebrews:10:32 @{Call to remembrance} (\anamimnˆskesthe\). Present middle imperative of \anamimnˆsk“\, as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:15| "remind yourselves." The former days were some distance in the past (5:12|), some years at any rate. It is a definite experience of people in a certain place. Jerusalem Christians had had experiences of this nature, but so had others. {After ye were enlightened} (\ph“tisthentes\). First aorist passive participle of \ph“tiz“\ in the same sense as in strkjv@6:4| (regeneration) and like "the full knowledge of the truth" in strkjv@10:26|. {Conflict} (\athlˆsin\). Late word from \athle“\, to engage in a public contest in the games (2Timothy:2:5|), only here in the N.T. It occurs in the inscriptions. Cf. strkjv@2:10| for the benefit of "sufferings" in training.

rwp@Hebrews:11:28 @{He kept} (\pepoiˆken\). Perfect active indicative of \poie“\, to make, "he has made," emphasizing the permanent nature of the feast. {The sprinkling of the blood} (\tˆn proschusin tou haimatos\). Rather, "the pouring of the blood" (\proschusis\ from \prosche“\, to pour upon), only here in the N.T. (earliest known example). An allusion to the command in strkjv@Exodus:12:7,22| but in the LXX \prosche“\ is the usual term for the act (Exodus:24:6; strkjv@29:16; strkjv@Leviticus:1:5,11; strkjv@Deuteronomy:16:6|). {That the destroyer of the first-born should not touch them} (\hina mˆ ho olothreu“n ta pr“totoka thigˆi aut“n\). Negative final clause with \hina mˆ\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \thiggan“\, old verb to touch with genitive, in the N.T. only here, strkjv@12:20; strkjv@Colossians:2:21|. The articular participle \ho olothreu“n\ is from strkjv@Exodus:11:23|. For \pr“totoka\ see strkjv@Luke:2:7; strkjv@Exodus:12:29|.

rwp@James:3:6 @{The tongue is a fire} (\hˆ gl“ssa pur\). Songs:necessarily since there is no article with \pur\ (apparently same word as German _feuer_, Latin _purus_, English _pure, fire_). This metaphor of fire is applied to the tongue in strkjv@Proverbs:16:27; strkjv@26:18-22|; Sirach strkjv@28:22. {The world of iniquity} (\ho kosmos tˆs adikias\). A difficult phrase, impossible to understand according to Ropes as it stands. If the comma is put after \pur\ instead of after \adikias\, then the phrase may be the predicate with \kathistatai\ (present passive indicative of \kathistˆmi\, "is constituted," or the present middle "presents itself"). Even so, \kosmos\ remains a difficulty, whether it means the "ornament" (1Peter:3:3|) or "evil world" (James:1:27|) or just "world" in the sense of widespread power for evil. The genitive \adikias\ is probably descriptive (or qualitative). Clearly James means to say that the tongue can play havoc in the members of the human body. {Which defileth the whole body} (\hˆ spilousa holon to s“ma\). Present active participle of \spilo“\ late _Koin‚_, verb, to stain from \spilos\ (spot, also late word, in N.T. only in strkjv@Ephesians:5:27; strkjv@2Peter:2:13|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Judges:1:23|. Cf. strkjv@1:27| \aspilon\ (unspotted). {Setteth on fire} (\phlogizousa\). Present active participle of \phlogiz“\, old verb, to set on fire, to ignite, from \phlox\ (flame), in N.T. only in this verse. See \anaptei\ (verse 5|). {The wheel of nature} (\ton trochon genese“s\). Old word for wheel (from \trech“\, to run), only here in N.T. "One of the hardest passages in the Bible" (Hort). To what does \trochon\ refer? For \genese“s\ see strkjv@1:23| apparently in the same sense. Vincent suggests "the wheel of birth" (cf. strkjv@Matthew:1:1,18|). The ancient writers often use this same phrase (or \kuklos\, cycle, in place of \trochos\), but either in a physiological or a philosophical sense. James may have caught the metaphor from the current use, but certainly he has no such Orphic or Pythagorean doctrine of the transmigration of souls, "the unending round of death and rebirth" (Ropes). The wheel of life may be considered either in motion or standing still, though setting on fire implies motion. There is no reference to the zodiac. {And is set on fire by hell} (\kai phlogizomenˆ hupo gehennˆs\). Present passive participle of \phlogiz“\, giving the continual source of the fire in the tongue. For the metaphor of fire with \gehenna\ see strkjv@Matthew:5:22|.

rwp@James:3:7 @{Kind} (\phusis\). Old word from \phu“\, order of nature (Romans:1:26|), here of all animals and man, in strkjv@2Peter:1:4| of God and redeemed men. {Of beasts} (\thˆri“n\). Old word diminutive from \thˆr\ and so "little beasts" originally, then wild animals in general (Mark:1:13|), or quadrupeds as here. These four classes of animals come from strkjv@Genesis:9:2f|. {Birds} (\petein“n\). Old word for flying animals (from \petomai\, to word from \herp“\, to crawl (Latin _serpo_), hence serpents. {Things in the sea} (\enali“n\). Old adjective (\en, hals\, sea, salt) in the sea, here only in N.T. The four groups are put in two pairs here by the use of \te kai\ with the first two and the second two. See a different classification in strkjv@Acts:10:12; strkjv@11:6|. {Is tamed} (\damazetai\). Present passive indicative of \damaz“\, old verb kin to Latin _dominus_ and English tame, in N.T. only in this passage and strkjv@Mark:5:4|. The present tense gives the general picture of the continuous process through the ages of man's lordship over the animals as stated in strkjv@Genesis:1:28|. {Hath been tamed} (\dedamastai\). Perfect passive indicative of the same verb, repeated to present the state of conquest in some cases (domestic animals, for instance). {By mankind} (\tˆi phusei tˆi anthr“pinˆi\). Instrumental case with repeated article and repetition also of \phusis\, "by the nature the human." For \anthr“pinos\ see strkjv@Acts:17:25|.

rwp@James:5:15 @{The prayer of faith} (\hˆ euchˆ tˆs piste“s\). Cf. strkjv@1:6| for prayer marked by faith. {Shall save} (\s“sei\). Future active of \s“z“\, to make well. As in strkjv@Matthew:9:21f.; strkjv@Mark:6:56|. No reference here to salvation of the soul. The medicine does not heal the sick, but it helps nature (God) do it. The doctor cooperates with God in nature. {The sick} (\ton kamnonta\). Present active articular participle of \kamn“\, old verb, to grow weary (Hebrews:12:3|), to be sick (here), only N.T. examples. {The Lord shall raise him up} (\egerei auton ho kurios\). Future active of \egeir“\. Precious promise, but not for a professional "faith-healer" who scoffs at medicine and makes merchandise out of prayer. {And if he have committed sins} (\kan hamartias ˆi pepoiˆk“s\). Periphrastic perfect active subjunctive (unusual idiom) with \kai ean\ (crasis \kan\) in condition of third class. Supposing that he has committed sins as many sick people have (Mark:2:5ff.; strkjv@John:5:14; strkjv@9:2f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:30|). {It shall be forgiven him} (\aphethˆsetai aut“i\). Future passive of \aphiˆmi\ (impersonal passive as in strkjv@Matthew:7:2,7; strkjv@Romans:10:10|). Not in any magical way, not because his sickness has been healed, not without change of heart and turning to God through Christ. Much is assumed here that is not expressed.

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

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

rwp@John:10:30 @{One} (\hen\). Neuter, not masculine (\heis\). Not one person (cf. \heis\ in strkjv@Galatians:3:28|), but one essence or nature. By the plural \sumus\ (separate persons) Sabellius is refuted, by \unum\ Arius. Songs:Bengel rightly argues, though Jesus is not referring, of course, to either Sabellius or Arius. The Pharisees had accused Jesus of making himself equal with God as his own special Father (John:5:18|). Jesus then admitted and proved this claim (5:19-30|). Now he states it tersely in this great saying repeated later (17:11, 21|). Note \hen\ used in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:3| of the oneness in work of the planter and the waterer and in strkjv@17:11,23| of the hoped for unity of Christ's disciples. This crisp statement is the climax of Christ's claims concerning the relation between the Father and himself (the Son). They stir the Pharisees to uncontrollable anger.

rwp@John:14:28 @{I go away, and I come} (\hupag“ kai erchomai\), both futuristic presents (7:33; strkjv@14:3,18|). {If ye loved me} (\ei ˆgapƒte me\). Second-class condition with the imperfect active of \agapa“\ referring to present time, implying that the disciples are not loving Jesus as they should. {Ye would have rejoiced} (\echarˆte an\). Second aorist passive indicative of \chair“\ with \an\, conclusion of second-class condition referring to past time, "Ye would already have rejoiced before this" at Christ's going to the Father (verse 12|). {Greater than I} (\meiz“n mou\). Ablative case \mou\ after the comparative \meiz“n\ (from positive \megas\). The filial relation makes this necessary. Not a distinction in nature or essence (cf. strkjv@10:30|), but in rank in the Trinity. No Arianism or Unitarianism here. The very explanation here is proof of the deity of the Son (Dods).

rwp@John:16:12 @{But ye cannot bear them now} (\all' ou dunasthe bastazein arti\). The literal sense of \bastaz“\, to bear, occurs in strkjv@12:6|. For the figurative as here see strkjv@Acts:15:10|. The untaught cannot get the full benefit of teaching (1Corinthians:3:1; strkjv@Hebrews:5:11-14|). The progressive nature of revelation is a necessity.

rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE STYLE It is terse and picturesque, with a fondness for triplets. The use of the O.T. is very much like that in II Peter. Alford notes that it is impassioned invective with epithet on epithet, image on image. Bigg remarks on the stern and unbending nature of the author, with no pathos and a harsh view of things and with frequent use of Pauline phraseology. There are some fifteen words not in the rest of the N.T. The grammar is less irregular than that of II Peter. There is often a poetic ring in his words.

rwp@Luke:1:5 @{There was} (\egeneto\). Not the usual \en\ for "was," but there arose or came into notice. With this verse the literary _Koin‚_ of verses 1 to 4 disappears. To the end of chapter 2 we have the most Hebraistic (Aramaic) passage in Luke's writings, due evidently to the use of documents or notes of oral tradition. Plummer notes a series of such documents ending with strkjv@1:80, strkjv@2:40, strkjv@2:52|. If the mother of Jesus was still alive, Luke could have seen her. She may have written in Aramaic an account of these great events. Natural reserve would keep her from telling too much and from too early publicity. Luke, as a physician, would take special interest in her birth report. The supernatural aspects disturb only those who do not admit the real Incarnation of Jesus Christ and who are unable to believe that God is superior to nature and that the coming of the Son of God to earth justifies such miraculous manifestations of divine power. Luke tells his story from the standpoint of Mary as Matthew gives his from the standpoint of Joseph. The two supplement each other. We have here the earliest documentary evidence of the origins of Christianity that has come down to us (Plummer). {Herod, King of Judea} (\Hˆr“idou basile“s tˆs Ioudaias\). This note of time locates the events before the death of Herod the Great (as he was called later), appointed King of Judea by the Roman Senate B.C. 40 at the suggestion of Octavius and Antony. He died B.C. 4. {Of the course of Abijah} (\ex ephˆmerias Abia\). Not in old Greek, but in LXX and modern Greek. Papyri have a verb derived from it, \ephˆmere“\. Daily service (Nehemiah:13:30; strkjv@1Chronicles:25:8|) and then a course of priests who were on duty for a week (1Chronicles:23:6; strkjv@28:13|). There were 24 such courses and that of Abijah was the eighth (1Chronicles:24:10; strkjv@2Chronicles:8:14|). Only four of these courses (Jedaiah, Immer, Pashur, Harim) returned from Babylon, but these four were divided into twenty-four with the old names. Each of these courses did duty for eight days, sabbath to sabbath, twice a year. On sabbaths the whole course did duty. At the feast of tabernacles all twenty-four courses were present. {Of the daughters of Aaron} (\ek t“n thugater“n Aar“n\). "To be a priest and married to a priest's daughter was a double distinction" (Plummer). Like a preacher married to a preacher's daughter.

rwp@Luke:1:47 @{Hath rejoiced} (\ˆgalliasen\). This is aorist active indicative. Greek tenses do not correspond to those in English. The verb \agallia“\ is a Hellenistic word from the old Greek \agall“\. It means to exult. See the substantive \agalliasis\ in strkjv@Luke:1:14,44|. Mary is not excited like Elisabeth, but breathes a spirit of composed rapture. {My spirit} (\to pneuma mou\). One need not press unduly the difference between "soul" (\psuchˆ\) in verse 46| and "spirit" here. Bruce calls them synonyms in parallel clauses. Vincent argues that the soul is the principle of individuality while the spirit is the point of contact between God and man. It is doubtful, however, if the trichotomous theory of man (body, soul, and spirit) is to be insisted on. It is certain that we have an inner spiritual nature for which various words are used in strkjv@Mark:12:30|. Even the distinction between intellect, emotions, and will is challenged by some psychologists. {God my Saviour} (\t“i the“i t“i sotˆri mou\). Article with each substantive. God is called Saviour in the O.T. (Deuteronomy:32:15, strkjv@Psalms:24:5; strkjv@95:1|).

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

rwp@Luke:4:40 @{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:6:13 @{When it was day} (\hote egeneto hˆmera\). When day came, after the long night of prayer. {He chose from them twelve} (\eklexamenos ap' aut“n d“deka\). The same root (\leg\) was used for picking out, selecting and then for saying. There was a large group of "disciples" or "learners" whom he "called" to him (\proseph“nˆsen\), and from among whom he chose (of himself, and for himself, indirect middle voice (\eklexamenos\). It was a crisis in the work of Christ. Jesus assumed full responsibility even for the choice of Judas who was not forced upon Jesus by the rest of the Twelve. "You did not choose me, but I chose you," (John:15:16|) where Jesus uses \exelexasthe\ and \exelexamˆn\ as here by Luke. {Whom also he named apostles} (\hous kai apostolous “nomasen\). Songs:then Jesus gave the twelve chosen disciples this appellation. Aleph and B have these same words in strkjv@Mark:3:14| besides the support of a few of the best cursives, the Bohairic Coptic Version and the Greek margin of the Harclean Syriac. Westcott and Hort print them in their text in strkjv@Mark:3:14|, but it remains doubtful whether they were not brought into Mark from strkjv@Luke:6:13| where they are undoubtedly genuine. See strkjv@Matthew:10:2| where the connection with sending them out by twos in the third tour of Galilee. The word is derived from \apostell“\, to send (Latin, _mitto_) and apostle is missionary, one sent. Jesus applies the term to himself (\apesteilas\, strkjv@John:17:3|) as does strkjv@Hebrews:3:1|. The word is applied to others, like Barnabas, besides these twelve including the Apostle Paul who is on a par with them in rank and authority, and even to mere messengers of the churches (2Corinthians:8:23|). But these twelve apostles stand apart from all others in that they were all chosen at once by Jesus himself "that they might be with him" (Mark:3:14|), to be trained by Jesus himself and to interpret him and his message to the world. In the nature of the case they could have no successors as they had to be personal witnesses to the life and resurrection of Jesus (Acts:1:22|). The selection of Matthias to succeed Judas cannot be called a mistake, but it automatically ceased. For discussion of the names and groups in the list see discussion on ¯Matthew:10:1-4; strkjv@Mark:3:14-19|.

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:16:29 @{Let them hear them} (\akousat“san aut“n\). Even the heathen have the evidence of nature to show the existence of God as Paul argues in Romans so that they are without excuse (Romans:1:20f.|).

rwp@Luke:19:26 @{That hath not} (\tou mˆ echontos\). The present tense of \ech“\ here, that keeps on not having, probably approaches the idea of acquiring or getting, the one who keeps on not acquiring. This is the law of nature and of grace.

rwp@Luke:19:40 @{If these shall hold their peace} (\ean houtoi si“pˆsousin\). A condition of the first class, determined as fulfilled. The use of \ean\ rather than \ei\ cuts no figure in the case (see strkjv@Acts:8:31; strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:8; strkjv@1John:5:15|). The kind of condition is determined by the mode which is here indicative. The future tense by its very nature does approximate the aorist subjunctive, but after all it is the indicative. {The stones will cry out} (\hoi lithoi kraxousin\). A proverb for the impossible happening.

rwp@Mark:6:13 @{They cast out many demons and they anointed with oil} (\exeballon kai ˆleiphon elai“i\). Imperfect tenses, continued repetition. Alone in Mark. This is the only example in the N.T. of \aleiph“ elai“i\ used in connection with healing save in strkjv@James:5:14|. In both cases it is possible that the use of oil (olive oil) as a medicine is the basis of the practice. See strkjv@Luke:10:34| for pouring oil and wine upon the wounds. It was the best medicine of the ancients and was used internally and externally. It was employed often after bathing. The papyri give a number of examples of it. The only problem is whether \aleiph“\ in Mark and James is used wholly in a ritualistic and ceremonial sense or partly as medicine and partly as a symbol of divine healing. The very word \aleiph“\ can be translated rub or anoint without any ceremony. "Traces of a ritual use of the unction of the sick appear first among Gnostic practices of the second century" (Swete). We have today, as in the first century, God and medicine. God through nature does the real healing when we use medicine and the doctor.

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

rwp@Mark:8:1 @{Had nothing to eat} (\mˆ echont“n ti phag“sin\). Genitive absolute and plural because \ochlou\ a collective substantive. Not having what to eat (deliberative subjunctive retained in indirect question). The repetition of a nature miracle of feeding four thousand in Decapolis disturbs some modern critics who cannot imagine how Jesus could or would perform another miracle elsewhere so similar to the feeding of the five thousand up near Bethsaida Julias. But both Mark and Matthew give both miracles, distinguish the words for baskets (\kophinos, sphuris\), and both make Jesus later refer to both incidents and use these two words with the same distinction (Mark:8:19f.; strkjv@Matthew:16:9f.|). Surely it is easier to conceive that Jesus wrought two such miracles than to hold that Mark and Matthew have made such a jumble of the whole business.

rwp@Matthew:1:18 @{Of the Holy Ghost} (\ek pneumatos hagiou\). The discovery that Mary was pregnant was inevitable and it is plain that she had not told Joseph. She "was found with child" (\heurethˆ en gastri echousa\). This way of putting it, the usual Greek idiom, plainly shows that it was the discovery that shocked Joseph. He did not as yet know what Matthew plainly asserts that the Holy Ghost, not Joseph and not any man, was responsible for the pregnancy of Mary. The problem of the Virgin Birth of Jesus has been a disturbing fact to some through all the ages and is today to those who do not believe in the pre-existence of Christ, the Son of God, before his Incarnation on earth. This is the primal fact about the Birth of Christ. The Incarnation of Christ is clearly stated by Paul (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|; and involved in strkjv@Colossians:1:15-19|) and by John (John:1:14; strkjv@17:5|). If one frankly admits the actual pre-existence of Christ and the real Incarnation, he has taken the longest and most difficult step in the matter of the supernatural Birth of Christ. That being true, no merely human birth without the supernatural element can possibly explain the facts. Incarnation is far more than the Indwelling of God by the Holy Spirit in the human heart. To admit real incarnation and also full human birth, both father and mother, creates a greater difficulty than to admit the Virgin Birth of Jesus begotten by the Holy Spirit, as Matthew here says, and born of the Virgin Mary. It is true that only Matthew and Luke tell the story of the supernatural birth of Jesus, though strkjv@John:1:14| seems to refer to it. Mark has nothing whatever concerning the birth and childhood of Jesus and so cannot be used as a witness on the subject. Both Matthew and Luke present the birth of Jesus as not according to ordinary human birth. Jesus had no human father. There is such a thing in nature as parthenogenesis in the lower orders of life. But that scientific fact has no bearing here. We see here God sending his Son into the world to be the world's Saviour and he gave him a human mother, but not a human father so that Jesus Christ is both Son of God and Son of Man, the God Man. Matthew tells the story of the birth of Jesus from the standpoint of Joseph as Luke gives it from the standpoint of Mary. The two narratives harmonize with each other. One credits these most wonderful of all birth narratives according as he believes in the love and power of Almighty God to do what he wills. There is no miracle with God who has all power and all knowledge. The laws of nature are simply the expression of God's will, but he has not revealed all his will in the laws that we discover. God is Spirit. He is Person. He holds in his own power all life. strkjv@John:3:16| is called the Little Gospel because it puts briefly the love of God for men in sending his own Son to live and die for us.

rwp@Matthew:8:21 @{The Son of man} (\tho huios tou anthr“pou\). This remarkable expression, applied to himself by Jesus so often, appears here for the first time. There is a considerable modern literature devoted to it. "It means much for the Speaker, who has chosen it deliberately, in connection with private reflections, at whose nature we can only guess, by study of the many occasions on which the name is used" (Bruce). Often it means the Representative Man. It may sometimes stand for the Aramaic _barnasha_, the man, but in most instances that idea will not suit. Jesus uses it as a concealed Messianic title. It is possible that this scribe would not understand the phrase at all. Bruce thinks that here Jesus means "the unprivileged Man," worse off than the foxes and the birds. Jesus spoke Greek as well as Aramaic. It is inconceivable that the Gospels should never call Jesus "the Son of man" and always credit it to him as his own words if he did not so term himself, about eighty times in all, thirty-three in Matthew. Jesus in his early ministry, except at the very start in strkjv@John:4|, abstains from calling himself Messiah. This term suited his purpose exactly to get the people used to his special claim as Messiah when he is ready to make it openly.

rwp@Matthew:8:27 @{Even the winds and the sea obey him} (\Kai hoi anˆmoi kai hˆ thalassa aut“i hupakouousin\). A nature miracle. Even a sudden drop in the wind would not at once calm the sea. "J. Weiss explains that by 'an astonishing coincidence' the storm happened to lull at the moment that Jesus spoke!" (McNeile). Some minds are easily satisfied by their own stupidities.

rwp@Matthew:13:22 @{Choke the word} (\sunpnigei ton logon\). We had \apepnixan\ (choked off) in strkjv@13:7|. Here it is \sunpnigei\ (choke together), historical present and singular with both subjects lumped together. "Lust for money and care go together and between them spoil many an earnest religious nature" (Bruce), "thorns" indeed. The thorns flourish and the character sickens and dies, choked to death for lack of spiritual food, air, sunshine.

rwp@Matthew:13:32 @{A tree} (\dendron\). "Not in nature, but in size" (Bruce). "An excusable exaggeration in popular discourse."

rwp@Matthew:18:4 @{This little child} (\to paidion touto\). This saying about humbling oneself Jesus repeated a number of times as for instance in strkjv@Matthew:23:12|. Probably Jesus pointed to the child by his side. The ninth-century story that the child was Ignatius is worthless. It is not that the child humbled himself, but that the child is humble from the nature of the case in relation to older persons. That is true, however "bumptious" the child himself may be. Bruce observes that to humble oneself is "the most difficult thing in the world for saint as for sinner."

rwp@Matthew:27:45 @{From the sixth hour} (\apo hektˆs h“ras\). Curiously enough McNeile takes this to mean the trial before Pilate (John:18:14|). But clearly John uses Roman time, writing at the close of the century when Jewish time was no longer in vogue. It was six o'clock in the morning Roman time when the trial occurred before Pilate. The crucifixion began at the third hour (Mark:15:25|) Jewish time or nine A.M. The darkness began at noon, the sixth hour Jewish time and lasted till 3 P.M. Roman time, the ninth hour Jewish time (Mark:15:33; strkjv@Matthew:27:45; strkjv@Luke:23:44|). The dense darkness for three hours could not be an eclipse of the sun and Luke (Luke:23:45|) does not so say, only "the sun's light failing." Darkness sometimes precedes earthquakes and one came at this time or dense masses of clouds may have obscured the sun's light. One need not be disturbed if nature showed its sympathy with the tragedy of the dying of the Creator on the Cross (Romans:8:22|), groaning and travailing until now.

rwp@Philemon:1:7 @{I had} (\eschon\). Ingressive second aorist active indicative of \ech“\, not \eichomˆn\ as the Textus Receptus has it. Paul refers to his joy when he first heard the good news about Philemon's activity (verse 5|). {The hearts} (\ta splagchna\). See strkjv@Phillipians:1:8| for this use of this word for the nobler viscera (heart, lungs, liver) and here for the emotional nature. {Have been refreshed} (\anapepautai\). Perfect passive indicative of old compound verb \anapau“\ as in strkjv@Matthew:11:28|, a relief and refreshment whether temporary (Mark:6:31|) or eternal (Revelation:14:13|).

rwp@Philippians:2:6 @{Being} (\huparch“n\). Rather, "existing," present active participle of \huparch“\. In the form of God (\en morphˆi theou\). \Morphˆ\ means the essential attributes as shown in the form. In his preincarnate state Christ possessed the attributes of God and so appeared to those in heaven who saw him. Here is a clear statement by Paul of the deity of Christ. {A prize} (\harpagmon\). Predicate accusative with \hˆgˆsato\. Originally words in \-mos\ signified the act, not the result (\-ma\). The few examples of \harpagmos\ (Plutarch, etc.) allow it to be understood as equivalent to \harpagma\, like \baptismos\ and \baptisma\. That is to say Paul means a prize to be held on to rather than something to be won ("robbery"). {To be on an equality with God} (\to einai isa theoi\). Accusative articular infinitive object of \hˆgˆsato\, "the being equal with God" (associative instrumental case \the“i\ after \isa\). \Isa\ is adverbial use of neuter plural with \einai\ as in strkjv@Revelation:21:16|. {Emptied himself} (\heauton eken“se\). First aorist active indicative of \keno“\, old verb from \kenos\, empty. Of what did Christ empty himself? Not of his divine nature. That was impossible. He continued to be the Son of God. There has arisen a great controversy on this word, a \Kenosis\ doctrine. Undoubtedly Christ gave up his environment of glory. He took upon himself limitations of place (space) and of knowledge and of power, though still on earth retaining more of these than any mere man. It is here that men should show restraint and modesty, though it is hard to believe that Jesus limited himself by error of knowledge and certainly not by error of conduct. He was without sin, though tempted as we are. "He stripped himself of the insignia of majesty" (Lightfoot).

rwp@Philippians:2:10 @{That in the name of Jesus every knee should bow} (\hina en t“i onomati Iˆsou pan gonu kampsˆi\). First aorist active subjunctive of \kampt“\, old verb, to bend, to bow, in purpose clause with \hina\. Not perfunctory genuflections whenever the name of Jesus is mentioned, but universal acknowledgment of the majesty and power of Jesus who carries his human name and nature to heaven. This universal homage to Jesus is seen in strkjv@Romans:8:22; strkjv@Ephesians:1:20-22| and in particular strkjv@Revelation:5:13|. {Under the earth} (\katachthoni“n\). Homeric adjective for departed souls, subterranean, simply the dead. Here only in the N.T.

rwp@Philippians:2:13 @{Which worketh in you} (\ho energ“n en humin\). Articular present active participle of \energe“\ from \energos\ (\en, ergon\) one at work, common verb from Aristotle on, to be at work, to energize. God is the Energy and the Energizer of the universe. Modern scientists, like Eddington, Jeans, and Whitney, are not afraid to agree with Paul and to put God back of all activity in nature. {Both to will and to work} (\kai to thelein kai to energein\). "Both the willing and the working (the energizing)." God does it all, then. Yes, but he puts us to work also and our part is essential, as he has shown in verse 12|, though secondary to that of God. {For his good-pleasure} (\huper tˆs eudokias\). Songs:Whitney puts "the will of God" behind gravitation and all the laws of nature.

rwp@Philippians:4:11 @{In respect of want} (\kath' husterˆsin\). Late and rare word from \hustere“\, to be behind or too late, only here and strkjv@Mark:12:44| in N.T. {I have learned} (\emathon\). Simply, "I did learn" (constative second aorist active indicative of \manthan“\, to learn, looking at his long experience as a unit. {In whatsoever state I am} (\en hois eimi\). "In what things (circumstances) I am." {To be content} (\autarkˆs einai\). Predicate nominative with the infinitive of the old adjective \autarkˆs\ (from \autos\ and \arke“\, to be self-sufficient), self-sufficing. Favourite word with the Stoics, only here in N.T., though \autarkeia\ occurs in strkjv@2Corinthians:9:8; strkjv@1Timothy:6:6|. Paul is contented with his lot and he learned that lesson long ago. Socrates said as to who is wealthiest: "He that is content with least, for \autarkeia\ is nature's wealth."

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

rwp@Revelation:4:7 @{Like a lion} (\homoion leonti\). Associative-instrumental case again. In Ezekiel:(1:6,10|) each \z“on\ has four faces, but here each has a different face. "The four forms represent whatever is noblest, strongest, wisest, and swiftest in nature" (Swete). But it is not necessary to try to find a symbolism in each face here like the early baseless identification with the Four Evangelists (the lion for Mark, the man for Matthew, the calf for Luke, the eagle for John). \Moschos\ is first a sprout, then the young of animals, then a calf (bullock or heifer) as in strkjv@Luke:15:23, 27,30|, or a full-grown ox (Ezekiel:1:10|). {Had} (\ech“n\). Masculine singular (some MSS. \echon\ neuter singular agreeing with \z“on\) present active participle of \ech“\, changing the construction with the \triton z“on\ almost like a finite verb as in verse 8|. {A face as of a man} (\pros“pon h“s anthr“pou\). Shows that the likeness in each instance extended only to the face. {Like an eagle flying} (\homoion aet“i petomen“i\). Present middle participle of \petomai\, to fly, old verb, in N.T. only in strkjv@Revelation:4:7; strkjv@8:13; strkjv@12:14; strkjv@14:6; strkjv@19:17|. The \aetos\ in strkjv@Matthew:24:28; strkjv@Luke:17:37| may be a form of vulture going after carrion, but not in strkjv@Revelation:8:13; strkjv@12:14|.

rwp@Romans:1:4 @{Who was declared} (\tou horisthentos\). Articular participle (first aorist passive) of \horiz“\ for which verb see on ¯Luke:22:22; strkjv@Acts:2:23|. He was the Son of God in his preincarnate state (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6|) and still so after his Incarnation (verse 3|, "of the seed of David"), but it was the Resurrection of the dead (\ex anastase“s nekr“n\, the general resurrection implied by that of Christ) that definitely marked Jesus off as God's Son because of his claims about himself as God's Son and his prophecy that he would rise on the third day. This event (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:15|) gave God's seal "with power" (\en dunamei\), "in power," declared so in power (2Corinthians:13:4|). The Resurrection of Christ is the miracle of miracles. "The resurrection only declared him to be what he truly was" (Denney). {According to the spirit of holiness} (\kata pneuma hagi“sunˆs\). Not the Holy Spirit, but a description of Christ ethically as \kata sarka\ describes him physically (Denney). \Hagi“sunˆ\ is rare (1Thessalonians:3:13; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:1| in N.T.), three times in LXX, each time as the attribute of God. "The \pneuma hagi“sunˆs\, though not the Divine nature, is that in which the Divinity or Divine Personality Resided " (Sanday and Headlam). {Jesus Christ our Lord} (\Iˆsou Christou tou kuriou hˆm“n\). These words gather up the total personality of Jesus (his deity and his humanity).

rwp@Romans:1:18 @{For the wrath of God is revealed} (\apokaluptetai gar orgˆ theou\). Note in Romans Paul's use of \gar\, now argumentative, now explanatory, now both as here. There is a parallel and antecedent revelation (see verse 17|) of God's wrath corresponding to the revelation of God's righteousness, this an unwritten revelation, but plainly made known. \Orgˆ\ is from \orga“\, to teem, to swell. It is the temper of God towards sin, not rage, but the wrath of reason and law (Shedd). The revelation of God's righteousness in the gospel was necessary because of the failure of men to attain it without it, for God's wrath justly rested upon all both Gentiles (1:18-32|) and Jews (2:1-3:20|). {Ungodliness} (\asebeian\). Irreligion, want of reverence toward God, old word (cf. strkjv@2Timothy:2:16|). {Unrighteousness} (\adikian\). Lack (\a\ privative and \dikˆ\) of right conduct toward men, injustice (Romans:9:14; strkjv@Luke:18:6|). This follows naturally from irreverence. The basis of ethical conduct rests on the nature of God and our attitude toward him, otherwise the law of the jungle (cf. Nietzsche, "might makes right"). {Hold down the truth} (\tˆn alˆtheian katechont“n\). Truth (\alˆtheia, alˆthˆs\, from \a\ privative and \lˆth“\ or \lanthan“\, to conceal) is out in the open, but wicked men, so to speak, put it in a box and sit on the lid and "hold it down in unrighteousness." Their evil deeds conceal the open truth of God from men. Cf. strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:6f.| for this use of \katech“\, to hinder.

rwp@Romans:1:20 @{The invisible things of him} (\ta aorata autou\). Another verbal adjective (\a\ privative and \hora“\, to see), old word, either unseen or invisible as here and elsewhere in N.T. (Colossians:1:15f.|, etc.). The attributes of God's nature defined here as "his everlasting power and divinity" (\hˆ te aidios autou dunamis kai theiotˆs\). \Aidios\ is for \aeidios\ from \aei\ (always), old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Jude:1:6|, common in Philo (\z“ˆ aidios\), elsewhere \ai“nios\. \Theiotˆs\ is from \theios\ (from \theos\) quality of \theos\ and corresponds more to Latin _divinitas_ from _divus_, divine. In strkjv@Colossians:2:9| Paul uses \theotˆs\ (Latin _deitas_ from _deus_) {deity}, both old words and nowhere else in the N.T. \Theotˆs\ is Divine Personality, \theiotˆs\, Divine Nature and properties (Sanday and Headlam). {Since the creation of the world} (\apo ktise“s kosmou\). He means by God and unto God as antecedent to and superior to the world (cf. strkjv@Colossians:1:15f|. about Christ). {Are clearly seen} (\kathoratai\). Present passive indicative of \kathora“\ (perfective use of \kata-\), old word, only here in N.T., with direct reference to \aorata\. {Being perceived} (\nooumena\). Present passive participle of \noe“\, to use the \nous\ (intellect). {That they may be without excuse} (\eis to einai autous anapologˆtous\). More likely, "so that they are without excuse." The use of \eis to\ and the infinitive (with accusative of general reference) for result like \h“ste\ is reasonably clear in the N.T. (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 219; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1003). \Anapologˆtous\ is another verbal with \an\ from \apologeomai\. Old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:2:1| ("inexcusable" here).

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

rwp@Romans:1:27 @{Turned} (\exekauthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative, causative aorist, of \ekkai“\, old verb, to burn out, to set on fire, to inflame with anger or lust. Here only in N.T. {Lust} (\orexei\). Only here in N.T. {Unseemliness} (\aschˆmosunˆn\). Old word from \aschˆmon\ (deformed). In N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:16:15|. {Recompense} (\antimisthian\). See on ¯2Corinthians:6:13| for only other N.T. instance of this late Pauline word, there in good sense, here in bad. {Which was due} (\hˆn edei\). Imperfect active for obligation still on them coming down from the past. This debt will be paid in full (\apolambanontes\, pay back as in strkjv@Luke:6:34|, and due as in strkjv@Luke:23:41|). Nature will attend to that in their own bodies and souls.

rwp@Romans:2:14 @{That have no law} (\ta mˆ nomon echonta\). Better, "that have not the law" (the Mosaic law). {By nature} (\phusei\). Instrumental case of \phusis\, old word from \phu“\, to beget. The Gentiles are without the Mosaic law, but not without some knowledge of God in conscience and when they do right "they are a law to themselves" (\heautois eisin nomos\). This is an obvious reply to the Jewish critic.

rwp@Romans:3:21 @{But now apart from the law} (\nuni de ch“ris nomou\). He now (\nuni\ emphatic logical transition) proceeds carefully in verses 21-31| the {nature} of the God-kind of righteousness which stands manifested (\dikaiosunˆ theou pephaner“tai\, perfect passive indicative of \phanero“\, to make manifest), the {necessity} of which he has shown in strkjv@1:18-3:20|. This God kind of righteousness is "apart from law" of any kind and all of grace (\chariti\) as he will show in verse 24|. But it is not a new discovery on the part of Paul, but "witnessed by the law and the prophets" (\marturoumenˆ\, present passive participle, \hupo tou nomou kai t“n prophˆt“n\), made plain continuously by God himself.

rwp@Romans:3:22 @{Even} (\de\). Not adversative here. It defines here. {Through faith in Jesus Christ} (\dia piste“s [Iˆsou] Christou\). Intermediate agency (\dia\) is faith and objective genitive, "in Jesus Christ," not subjective "of Jesus Christ," in spite of Haussleiter's contention for that idea. The objective nature of faith in Christ is shown in strkjv@Galatians:2:16| by the addition \eis Christon Iˆsoun episteusamen\ (we believed in Christ), by \tˆs eis Christon piste“s hum“n\ (of your faith in Christ) in strkjv@Colossians:2:5|, by \en pistei tˆi en Christ“i Iˆsou\ (in faith that in Christ Jesus) in strkjv@1Timothy:3:13|, as well as here by the added words "unto all them that believe" (\eis pantas tous pisteuontas\) in Jesus, Paul means. {Distinction} (\diastolˆ\). See on ¯1Corinthians:14:7| for the difference of sounds in musical instruments. Also in strkjv@Romans:10:12|. The Jew was first in privilege as in penalty (2:9f.|), but justification or setting right with God is offered to both on the same terms.

rwp@Romans:5:13 @{Until the law} (\achri nomou\). Until the Mosaic law. Sin was there before the Mosaic law, for the Jews were like Gentiles who had the law of reason and conscience (2:12-16|), but the coming of the law increased their responsibility and their guilt (2:9|). {Sin is not imputed} (\hamartia de ouk ellogeitai\). Present passive indicative of late verb \elloga“\ (\-e“\) from \en\ and \logos\, to put down in the ledger to one's account, examples in inscription and papyri. {When there is no law} (\mˆ ontos nomou\). Genitive absolute, no law of any kind, he means. There was law _before_ the Mosaic law. But what about infants and idiots in case of death? Do they have responsibility? Surely not. The sinful nature which they inherit is met by Christ's atoning death and grace. No longer do men speak of "elect infants."

rwp@Romans:7:7 @{Is the law sin?} (\ho nomos hamartia?\). A pertinent query in view of what he had said. Some people today oppose all inhibitions and prohibitions because they stimulate violations. That is half-baked thinking. {I had not known sin} (\tˆn hamartian ouk egn“n\). Second aorist indicative of \gin“sk“\, to know. It is a conclusion of a second class condition, determined as unfulfilled. Usually \an\ is used in the conclusion to make it plain that it is second class condition instead of first class, but occasionally it is not employed when it is plain enough without as here (John:16:22,24|). See on ¯Galatians:4:15|. Songs:as to {I had not known coveting} (lust), \epithumian ouk ˆidein\. But all the same the law is not itself sin nor the cause of sin. Men with their sinful natures turn law into an occasion for sinful acts.

rwp@Romans:7:13 @{Become death unto me?} (\emoi egeneto thanatos?\). Ethical dative \emoi\ again. New turn to the problem. Admitting the goodness of God's law, did it issue in death for me? Paul repels (\mˆ genoito\) this suggestion. It was sin that (But sin, \alla hˆ hamartia\) "became death for me." {That it might be shown} (\hina phanˆi\). Final clause, \hina\ and second aorist passive subjunctive of \phain“\, to show. The sinfulness of sin is revealed in its violations of God's law. {By working death to me} (\moi katergazomenˆ thanaton\). Present middle participle, as an incidental result. {Might become exceedingly sinful} (\genˆtai kath' huperbolˆn hamart“los\). Second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\ with \hina\ in final clause. On \kath' huperbolˆn\, see on ¯1Corinthians:12:31|. Our _hyperbole_ is the Greek \huperbolˆ\. The excesses of sin reveal its real nature. Only then do some people get their eyes opened.

rwp@Romans:7:15 @{I know not} (\ou gin“sk“\). "I do not recognize" in its true nature. My spiritual perceptions are dulled, blinded by sin (2Corinthians:4:4|). The dual life pictured here by Paul finds an echo in us all, the struggle after the highest in us ("what I really wish," \ho thel“\, to practise it steadily, \prass“\) and the slipping into doing (\poi“\) "what I really hate" (\ho mis“\) and yet sometimes do. There is a deal of controversy as to whether Paul is describing his struggle with sin before conversion or after it. The words "sold under sin" in verse 14| seem to turn the scale for the pre-conversion period. "It is the unregenerate man's experience, surviving at least in memory into regenerate days, and read with regenerate eyes" (Denney).

rwp@Romans:8:19 @{The earnest expectation of creation} (\hˆ apokaradokia tˆs ktise“s\). This substantive has so far been found nowhere save here and strkjv@Phillipians:1:20|, though the verb \apokaradoke“\ is common in Polybius and Plutarch. Milligan (_Vocabulary_) thinks that Paul may have made the substantive from the verb. It is a double compound (\apo\, off from, \kara\, head, \doke“\, Ionic verb, to watch), hence to watch eagerly with outstretched head. {Waiteth for} (\apekdechetai\). See on ¯1Corinthians:1:7; strkjv@Galatians:5:5| for this rare word (possibly formed by Paul, Milligan). "To wait it out" (Thayer). {The revealing of the sons of God} (\tˆn apokalupsin t“n hui“n tou theou\). Cf. strkjv@1John:3:2; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:8; strkjv@Colossians:3:4|. This mystical sympathy of physical nature with the work of grace is beyond the comprehension of most of us. But who can disprove it?

rwp@Romans:8:21 @{The creation itself} (\autˆ hˆ ktisis\). It is the hope of creation, not of the Creator. Nature "possesses in the feeling of her unmerited suffering a sort of presentiment of her future deliverance" (Godet).

rwp@Romans:8:22 @{Groaneth and travaileth in pain} (\sunstenazei kai sun“dinei\). Two more compounds with \sun\. Both rare and both here alone in N.T. Nature is pictured in the pangs of childbirth.

rwp@Romans:8:23 @{The first fruits} (\tˆn aparchˆn\). Old and common metaphor. {Of the Spirit} (\tou pneumatos\). The genitive of apposition. The Holy Spirit came on the great Pentecost and his blessings continue as seen in the "gifts" in strkjv@1Corinthians:12-14|, in the moral and spiritual gifts of strkjv@Galatians:5:22f|. And greater ones are to come (1Corinthians:15:44ff.|). {Even we ourselves} (\kai autoi\). He repeats for emphasis. We have our "groaning" (\stenazomen\) as well as nature. {Waiting for} (\apekdechomenoi\). The same verb used of nature in verse 19|. {Our adoption} (\huiothesian\). Our full "adoption" (see verse 15|), "the redemption of our body" (\tˆn apolutr“sin tou s“matos hˆm“n\). That is to come also. Then we shall have complete redemption of both soul and body.

rwp@Romans:11:17 @{Branches} (\klad“n\). From \kla“\, to break. {Were broken off} (\exeklasthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \ekkla“\. Play on the word \klados\ (branch) and \ekkla“\, to break off. Condition of first class, assumed as true. Some of the individual Jews (natural Israel) were broken off the stock of the tree (spiritual Israel). {And thou} (\kai su\). An individual Gentile. {Being a wild olive} (\agrielaios “n\). This word, used by Aristotle, occurs in an inscription. Ramsay (_Pauline Studies_, pp. 219ff.) shows that the ancients used the wild-olive graft upon an old olive tree to reinvigorate the tree precisely as Paul uses the figure here and that both the olive tree and the graft were influenced by each other, though the wild olive graft did not produce as good olives as the original stock. But it should be noted that in verse 24| Paul expressly states that the grafting of Gentiles on to the stock of the spiritual Israel was "contrary to nature" (\para phusin\). {Wast grafted in} (\enekentristhˆs\). First aorist passive indicative of \enkentriz“\, to cut in, to graft, used by Aristotle. Belongs "to the higher _Koin‚_" (literary _Koin‚_) according to Milligan. {Partaker} (\sunkoin“nos\). Co-partner. {Fatness} (\piotˆtos\). Old word from \pi“n\ (fat), only here in N.T. Note three genitives here "of the root of the fatness of the olive."

rwp@Romans:11:24 @{Contrary to nature} (\para phusin\). This is the gist of the argument, the power of God to do what is contrary to natural processes. He put the wild olive (Gentile) into the good olive tree (the spiritual Israel) and made the wild olive (contrary to nature) become the good olive (\kallielaios\, the garden olive, \kallos\ and \elaia\ in Aristotle and a papyrus). {Into their own olive tree} (\tˆi idiƒi elaiƒi\). Dative case. Another argument _a fortiori_, "how much more" (\poll“i mallon\). God can graft the natural Israel back upon the spiritual Israel, if they become willing.

rwp@Romans:14:14 @{I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus} (\oida kai pepeismai en kuri“i Iˆsou\). He knows it and stands persuaded (perfect passive indicative of \peith“\, to persuade), but in the sphere of the Lord Jesus (cf. strkjv@9:1|), not by mere rational processes. {Unclean of itself} (\kainon di' heautou\). Songs:Paul takes his stand with the "strong" as in strkjv@1Corinthians:8:4f.|, but he is not a libertine. Paul's liberty as to food is regulated by his life in the Lord. For this use of \koinos\, not as common to all (Acts:2:44; strkjv@4:32|), but unhallowed, impure, see on ¯Mark:7:2,5; strkjv@Acts:10:14,28|. God made all things for their own uses. {Save that} (\ei mˆ\). The exception lies not in the nature of the food (\di' heautou\), but in the man's view of it (to him, \ekein“i\, dative case).

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Sat Jun 29 22:10:32 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020