Bible:
Filter: String:

NT-EPISTLES.filter - rwp says:


rwp@1Corinthians:3:1 @{But as unto carnal} (\all' h“s sarkinois\). Latin _carneus_. "As men o' flesh," Braid Scots; "as worldlings," Moffatt. This form in \-inos\ like \lithinos\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3| means the material of flesh, "not on tablets of stone, but on fleshen tablets on hearts." Songs:in strkjv@Hebrews:7:16|. But in strkjv@Romans:7:14| Paul says, "I am fleshen (\sarkinos\) sold under sin," as if \sarkinos\ represented the extreme power of the \sarx\. Which does Paul mean here? He wanted to speak the wisdom of God among the adults (1Corinthians:2:6|), the spiritual (\hoi pneumatikoi\, strkjv@2:15|), but he was unable to treat them as \pneumatikoi\ in reality because of their seditions and immoralities. It is not wrong to be \sarkinos\, for we all live in the flesh (\en sarki\, strkjv@Galatians:2:20|), but we are not to live according to the flesh (\kata sarka\, strkjv@Romans:8:12|). It is not culpable to a babe in Christ (\nˆpios\, strkjv@1Corinthians:13:11|), unless unduly prolonged (1Corinthians:14:20; strkjv@Hebrews:5:13f.|). It is one of the tragedies of the minister's life that he has to keep on speaking to the church members "as unto babes in Christ" (\h“s nˆpiois en Christ“i\), who actually glory in their long babyhood whereas they ought to be teachers of the gospel instead of belonging to the cradle roll. Paul's goal was for all the babes to become adults (Colossians:1:28|).

rwp@1Corinthians:4:13 @{Being defamed we intreat} (\dusphˆmoumenoi parakaloumen\). The participle \dusphˆmoumenoi\ is an old verb (in I Macc. strkjv@7:41) to use ill, from \dusphˆmos\, but occurs here only in the N.T. Paul is opening his very heart now after the keen irony above. {As the filth of the world} (\h“s perikatharmata tou kosmou\). Literally, sweepings, rinsings, cleansings around, dust from the floor, from \perikathair“\, to cleanse all around (Plato and Aristotle) and so the refuse thrown off in cleansing. Here only in the N.T. and only twice elsewhere. \Katharma\ was the refuse of a sacrifice. In strkjv@Proverbs:21:18| \perikatharma\ occurs for the scapegoat. The other example is Epictetus iii. 22,78, in the same sense of an expiatory offering of a worthless fellow. It was the custom in Athens during a plague to throw to the sea some wretch in the hope of appeasing the gods. One hesitates to take it so here in Paul, though Findlay thinks that possibly in Ephesus Paul may have heard some such cry like that in the later martyrdoms _Christiani ad leones_. At any rate in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:32| Paul says "I fought with wild beasts" and in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:9| "I had the answer of death." Some terrible experience may be alluded to here. The word shows the contempt of the Ephesian populace for Paul as is shown in strkjv@Acts:19:23-41| under the influence of Demetrius and the craftsmen. {The offscouring of all things} (\pant“n peripsˆma\). Late word, here only in N.T., though in Tob. strkjv@5:18. The word was used in a formula at Athens when victims were flung into the sea, \peripsˆma hˆm“n genou\ (Became a \peripsˆma\ for us), in the sense of expiation. The word merely means scraping around from \peripsa“\, offscrapings or refuse. That is probably the idea here as in Tob. strkjv@5:18. It came to have a complimentary sense for the Christians who in a plague gave their lives for the sick. But it is a bold figure here with Paul of a piece with \perikatharmata\.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:1 @{Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote} (\peri de h“n egrapsate\). An ellipsis of \peri tout“n\, the antecedent of \peri h“n\, is easily supplied as in papyri. The church had written Paul a letter in which a number of specific problems about marriage were raised. He answers them _seriatim_. The questions must be clearly before one in order intelligently to interpret Paul's replies. The first is whether a single life is wrong. Paul pointedly says that it is not wrong, but good (\kalon\). One will get a one-sided view of Paul's teaching on marriage unless he keeps a proper perspective. One of the marks of certain heretics will be forbidding to marry (1Timothy:4:3|). Paul uses marriage as a metaphor of our relation to Christ (2Corinthians:11:2; strkjv@Romans:7:4; strkjv@Ephesians:5:28-33|). Paul is not here opposing marriage. He is only arguing that celibacy may be good in certain limitations. The genitive case with \haptesthai\ (touch) is the usual construction.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:39 @{For so long time as her husband liveth} (\eph' hoson chronon zˆi ho anˆr autˆs\). While he lives (\t“i z“nti andri\) Paul says in strkjv@Romans:7:2|. This is the ideal and is pertinent today when husbands meet their ex-wives and wives meet their ex-husbands. There is a screw loose somewhere. Paul here treats as a sort of addendum the remarriage of widows. He will discuss it again in strkjv@1Timothy:5:9-13| and then he will advise younger widows to marry. Paul leaves her free here also to be married again, "only in the Lord" (\monon en Kuri“i\). Every marriage ought to be "in the Lord." {To be married} (\gamˆthˆnai\) is first aorist passive infinitive followed by the dative relative \h“i\ with unexpressed antecedent \tout“i\.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:21 @{Ye cannot} (\ou dunasthe\). Morally impossible to drink the Lord's cup and the cup of demons, to partake of the Lord's table and the table of demons. {Of the table of the Lord} (\trapezˆs Kuriou\). No articles, but definite idea. \Trapeza\ is from \tetra\ (four) and \peza\ (a foot), four-footed. Here {table} means, as often, what is on the table. See strkjv@Luke:22:30| where Jesus says "at my table" (\epi tˆs trapezˆs mou\), referring to the spiritual feast hereafter. Here the reference is plainly to the Lord's Supper (\Kuriakon deipnon\, strkjv@1Corinthians:11:20|). See allusions in O.T. to use of the table in heathen idol feasts (Isaiah:65:11; strkjv@Jeremiah:7:18; strkjv@Ezekiel:16:18f.; strkjv@23:41|). The altar of burnt-offering is called the table of the Lord in strkjv@Malachi:1:7| (Vincent).

rwp@1Corinthians:10:25 @{In the shambles} (\en makell“i\). Only here in N.T. A transliterated Latin word _macellum_, possibly akin to \maceria\ and the Hebrew word for enclosure, though occurring in Ionic and Laconian and more frequent in the Latin. It occurs in Dio Cassius and Plutarch and in the papyri and inscriptions for "the provision market." Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 276) says: "In the Macellum at Pompeii we can imagine to ourselves the poor Christians buying their modest pound of meat in the Corinthian Macellum (1Corinthians:10:25|), with the same life-like reality with which the Diocletian maximum tariff called up the picture of the Galilean woman purchasing her five sparrows." {Asking no questions for conscience sake} (\mˆden anakrinontes dia tˆn suneidˆsin\). As to whether a particular piece of meat had been offered to idols before put in the market. Only a part was consumed in the sacrifices to heathen gods. The rest was sold in the market. Do not be over-scrupulous. Paul here champions liberty in the matter as he had done in strkjv@8:4|.

rwp@1Corinthians:11:4 @{Having his head covered} (\kata kephalˆs ech“n\). Literally, having a veil (\kalumma\ understood) down from the head (\kephalˆs\ ablative after \kata\ as with \kata\ in strkjv@Mark:5:13; strkjv@Acts:27:14|). It is not certain whether the Jews at this time used the _tallith_, "a four-corned shawl having fringes consisting of eight threads, each knotted five times" (Vincent) as they did later. Virgil (_Aeneid_ iii., 545) says: "And our heads are shrouded before the altar with a Phrygian vestment." The Greeks (both men and women) remained bareheaded in public prayer and this usage Paul commends for the men.

rwp@1Corinthians:11:6 @{Let her also be shorn} (\kai keirasth“\). Aorist middle imperative of \keir“\, to shear (as sheep). Let her cut her hair close. A single act by the woman. {If it is a shame} (\ei de aischron\). Condition of first class assumed to be true. \Aischron\ is old adjective from \aischos\, bareness, disgrace. Clearly Paul uses such strong language because of the effect on a woman's reputation in Corinth by such conduct that proclaimed her a lewd woman. Social custom varied in the world then as now, but there was no alternative in Corinth. {To be shorn or shaven} (\to keirasthai kai xurasthai\). Articular infinitives subject of copula \estin\ understood, \keirasthai\ first aorist middle, \xurasthai\ present middle. Note change in tense. {Let her be veiled} (\katakaluptesth“\). Present middle imperative of old compound \kata-kalupt“\, here alone in N.T. Let her cover up herself with the veil (down, \kata\, the Greek says, the veil hanging down from the head).

rwp@1Corinthians:12:26 @{Suffer with it} (\sunpaschei\). Medical term in this sense in Hippocrates and Galen. In N.T only here and strkjv@Romans:8:17| (of our suffering with Christ). One of Solon's Laws allowed retaliation by any one for another's injuries. Plato (_Republic_, V, 462) says the body politic "feels the hurt" as the whole body feels a hurt finger. {Rejoice with it} (\sunchairei\). This is fortunately true also. One may tingle with joy all over the body thanks to the wonderful nervous system and to the relation between mind and matter. See strkjv@13:6| for joy of love with truth.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:23 @{Order} (\tagmati\). Old military term from \tass“\, to arrange, here only in N.T. Each in his own division, troop, rank. {At his coming} (\en tˆi parousiƒi\). The word \parousia\ was the technical word "for the arrival or visit of the king or emperor" and can be traced from the Ptolemaic period into the second century A.D. (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 368). "Advent-coins were struck after a parousia of the emperor." Paul is only discussing "those that are Christ's" (3:23; strkjv@Galatians:5:24|) and so says nothing about judgment (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:19; strkjv@3:13; strkjv@4:15; strkjv@5:23|).

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@1Thessalonians:1:6 @{Imitators of us and of the Lord} (\mimˆtai hˆm“n kai tou kuriou\). \Mimˆtˆs\ (\-tˆs\ expresses the agent) is from \mimeomai\, to imitate and that from \mimos\ (\mimic\, actor). Old word, more than "followers," in the N.T. only six times (1Thessalonians:1:6; strkjv@2:14; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:16; strkjv@11:1; strkjv@Ephesians:5:1; strkjv@Hebrews:6:12|). Again Paul uses \ginomai\, to become, not \eimi\, to be. It is a daring thing to expect people to "imitate" the preacher, but Paul adds "and of the Lord," for he only expected or desired "imitation" as he himself imitated the Lord Jesus, as he expressly says in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:1|. The peril of it all is that people so easily and so readily imitate the preacher when he does not imitate the Lord. The fact of the "election" of the Thessalonians was shown by the character of the message given them and by this sincere acceptance of it (Lightfoot). {Having received the word} (\dexamenoi ton logon\). First aorist middle participle of \dechomai\, probably simultaneous action (receiving), not antecedent. {In much affliction} (\en thlipsei pollˆi\). Late word, pressure. Tribulation (Latin _tribulum_) from \thlib“\, to press hard on. Christianity has glorified this word. It occurs in some Christian papyrus letters in this same sense. Runs all through the N.T. (2Thessalonians:1:4; strkjv@Romans:5:3|). Paul had his share of them (Colossians:1:24; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:4|) and so he understands how to sympathize with the Thessalonians (1Thessalonians:3:3f.|). They suffered after Paul left Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:2:14|). {With joy of the Holy Spirit} (\meta charas pneumatos hagiou\). The Holy Spirit gives the joy in the midst of the tribulations as Paul learned (Romans:5:3|). "This paradox of experience" (Moffatt) shines along the pathway of martyrs and saints of Christ.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:1 @{For yourselves know} (\autoi gar oidate\). This explanatory \gar\ takes up in verses 1-12| the allusion in strkjv@1:9| about the "report" concerning the entrance (\eisodon\, way in, \eis, hodon\), {unto you} (\tˆn pros humƒs\). Note repeated article to sharpen the point. This proleptic accusative is common enough. It is expanded by the epexegetic use of the \hoti\ clause {that it hath not been found vain} (\hoti ou kenˆ gegonen\). Literally, {that it has not become empty}. Second perfect active (completed state) of \ginomai\. Every pastor watches wistfully to see what will be the outcome of his work. Bengel says: _Non inanis, sed plena virtutis_. Cf. strkjv@1:5|. \Kenos\ is hollow, empty, while \mataios\ is fruitless, ineffective. In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:14,17| Paul speaks of \kenon to kˆrugma\ ({empty the preaching}) and \mataia hˆ pistis\ ({vain the faith}). One easily leads to the other.

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

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:19 @{Crown of glorying} (\stephanos kauchˆse“s\). When a king or conqueror came on a visit he was given a chaplet of glorying. Paul is answering the insinuation that he did not really wish to come. {At his coming} (\en tˆi autou parousiƒi\). This word \parousia\ is untechnical (just _presence_ from \pareimi\) in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:9; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:17; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:6f.; strkjv@10:10; strkjv@Phillipians:1:26; strkjv@2:12|. But here (also strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:13; strkjv@4:15; strkjv@5:23; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1,8; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:23|) we have the technical sense of the second coming of Christ. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 372ff.) notes that the word in the papyri is almost technical for the arrival of a king or ruler who expects to receive his "crown of coming." The Thessalonians, Paul says, will be his crown, glory, joy when Jesus comes.

rwp@1Timothy:4:15 @{Be diligent in these things} (\tauta meleta\). Old verb from \meletˆ\ (care, practice), present active imperative, "keep on practising these things." In N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:4:25|. {Give thyself wholly to them} (\en toutois isthi\). Present imperative second person singular of \eimi\, "keep on in these things." Note five uses of \en\ in verse 12| and three datives in verse 14|. Plutarch (Pomp. 656 B) says Caesar was \en toutois\ ("in these things"). It is like our "up to his ears" in work (\in medias res\) and sticking to his task. {Thy progress} (\sou hˆ prokopˆ\). _Koin‚_ word from \prokopt“\, to cut forward, to blaze the way, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Phillipians:1:12,25|. Paul's concern (purpose, \hina\ and present subjunctive \ˆi\ of \eimi\) is that Timothy's "progress" may be "manifest to all." It is inspiring to see a young preacher grow for then the church will grow with him.

rwp@2Corinthians:1:8 @{Concerning our affliction} (\huper tˆs thlipse“s hˆm“n\). Manuscripts read also \peri\ for in the _Koin‚_ \huper\ (over) often has the idea of \peri\ (around). Paul has laid down his philosophy of afflictions and now he cites a specific illustration in his own recent experience. {In Asia} (\en Asiƒi\). Probably in Ephesus, but what it was we do not know whether sickness or peril. We do know that the disciples and the Asiarchs would not allow Paul to face the mob in the amphitheatre gathered by Demetrius (Acts:20:30f.|). In strkjv@Romans:16:4| Paul says that Prisca and Aquila laid down their necks for him, risked their very lives for him. It may have been a later plot to kill Paul that hastened his departure from Ephesus (Acts:20:1|). He had a trial so great that "we were weighed down exceedingly beyond our power" (\kath' huperbolˆn huper dunamin ebarˆthˆmen\). Old verb from \baros\, weight, \barus\, weighty. First aorist passive indicative. See on ¯1Corinthians:12:31| for \kath' huperbolˆn\ (cf. our hyperbole). It was beyond Paul's power to endure if left to himself. {Insomuch that we despaired even of life} (\h“ste exaporˆthˆnai hˆmas kai tou zˆin\). Usual clause of result with \h“ste\ and the infinitive. First aorist passive infinitive \exaporˆthˆnai\, late compound for utter despair (perfective use of \ex\ and at a complete loss, \a\ privative and \poros\, way). There seemed no way out. {Of life} (\tou zˆin\). Ablative case of the articular infinitive, of living.

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:3:5 @{Of ourselves} (\aph' heaut“n\). Starting from ourselves (reflexive pronoun). {As from ourselves} (\h“s ex haut“n\). He says it over again with preposition \ex\ (out of). He has no originating power for such confidence. {Sufficiency} (\hikanotˆs\). Old word, only here in N.T.

rwp@2Corinthians:4:10 @{Bearing about} (\peripherontes\). Ignatius was called \Theophoros\, God-bearer. See strkjv@1Corinthians:15:31| where Paul says "I die daily" and strkjv@Phillipians:3:10; strkjv@Colossians:1:24|. {The dying of Jesus} (\tˆn nekr“sin tou Iˆsou\). Late word from \nekro“\, to put to death. In Galen. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:4:19|.

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

rwp@2Corinthians:10:10 @{They say} (\phasin\). Reading of B old Latin Vulgate, but Westcott and Hort prefer \phˆsin\ (says one, the leader). This charge Paul quotes directly. {Weighty and strong} (\bareiai kai ischurai\). These adjectives can be uncomplimentary and mean "severe and violent" instead of "impressive and vigorous." The adjectives bear either sense. {His bodily presence} (\hˆ parousia tou s“matos\). This certainly is uncomplimentary. "The presence of his body." It seems clear that Paul did not have a commanding appearance like that of Barnabas (Acts:14:12|). He had some physical defect of the eyes (Galatians:4:14|) and a thorn in the flesh (2Corinthians:12:7|). In the second century _Acts of Paul and Thecla_ he is pictured as small, short, bow-legged, with eye-brows knit together, and an aquiline nose. A forgery of the fourth century in the name of Lucian describes Paul as "the bald-headed, hook-nosed Galilean." However that may be, his accusers sneered at his personal appearance as "weak" (\asthenˆs\). {His speech of no account} (\ho logos exouthenˆmenos\). Perfect passive participle of \exouthene“\, to treat as nothing (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:1:28|). The Corinthians (some of them) cared more for the brilliant eloquence of Apollos and did not find Paul a trained rhetorician (1Corinthians:1:17; strkjv@2:1,4; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:6|). He made different impressions on different people. "Seldom has any one been at once so ardently hated and so passionately loved as St. Paul" (Deissmann, _St. Paul_, p. 70). "At one time he seemed like a man, and at another he seemed like an angel" (_Acts of Paul and Thecla_). He spoke like a god at Lystra (Acts:14:8-12|), but Eutychus went to sleep on him (Acts:20:9|). Evidently Paul winced under this biting criticism of his looks and speech.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:6 @{That which restraineth} (\to katechon\). {And now you know} (\kai nun oidate\), says Paul in this cryptic apocalyptic passage. Unfortunately we do not know what Paul means by {that which restrains} (holds back, \katechon\), neuter here and masculine in verse 7| \ho katech“n\. "This impersonal principle or power is capable also of manifesting itself under a personal form" (Milligan). "He is Satan's messiah, an infernal caricature of the true Messiah" (Moffatt). Warfield (_Expositor_, III, iv, pp. 30ff.) suggested that the man of lawlessness is the imperial line with its rage for deification and that the Jewish state was the restraining power. But God overrules all human history and his ultimate purpose is wrought out. {To the end that} (\eis to\). Another example of \eis to\ and the infinitive for purpose. {In his own season} (\en t“i autou kair“i\). Note \autou\ (his), not \heautou\ (his own), {revealed in his time}, in the time set him by God.

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

rwp@2Timothy:1:6 @{For the which cause} (\di' hˆn aitian\). "For which cause," stronger than \dio\. Songs:in verse 12; strkjv@Titus:1:13|. Only example of \aitia\ by Paul save in strkjv@Acts:28:20|. {I put thee in remembrance} (\anamimnˆsk“\). Old compound to remind (1Corinthians:4:17; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:15|). {That thou stir up} (\se anaz“purein\). Present active infinitive of \anaz“pure“\, old double compound (\ana\ and \z“puron\, live coal, \z“os\ and \pur\, then the bellows for kindling), to rekindle, to stir into flame, to keep blazing (continuous action, present time), only here in N.T. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:19| for the figure of fire concerning the Holy Spirit. See \anapt“\ in strkjv@Luke:12:49|. {The gift of God} (\to charisma tou theou\). See strkjv@1Timothy:4:14|. Here Paul says \mou\ (my), there he mentions the presbytery. Paul felt a deep personal interest in Timothy. See strkjv@1Corinthians:7:7; strkjv@Romans:6:23; strkjv@11:29| for the gift of God.

rwp@2Timothy:4:7 @{I have fought the good fight} (\ton kalon ag“na ˆg“nismai\). Perfect middle indicative of \ag“nizomai\, a favourite figure with Paul (1Corinthians:9:25; strkjv@Colossians:1:29|), with the cognate accusative \ag“na\ (Phillipians:1:27,30|, etc.). The "fight" is the athletic contest of his struggle for Christ. {I have finished the course} (\ton dromon teteleka\). Perfect active indicative of \tele“\. He had used this metaphor also of himself to the elders at Ephesus (Acts:20:24|). Then the "course" was ahead of him. Now it is behind him. {I have kept the faith} (\tˆn pistin tetˆrˆka\). Perfect active indicative again of \tˆre“\. Paul has not deserted. He has kept faith with Christ. For this phrase, see strkjv@Revelation:14:12|. Deissmann (_Light, etc._, p. 309) gives inscriptions in Ephesus of a man who says: "I have kept faith" (\tˆn pistin etˆrˆsa\) and another of a man of whom it is said: "He fought three fights, and twice was crowned."

rwp@2Timothy:4:9 @{Shortly} (\tache“s\). In verse 21| he more definitely says "before winter." Apparently the trial might drag on through its various stages.

rwp@Acts:1:2 @{Until the day in which} (\achri hˆs hˆmeras\). Incorporation of the antecedent into the relative clause and the change of case \hˆi\ (locative) to \hˆs\ (genitive). {Was received up} (\anelˆmpthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \analamban“\. Common verb to lift anything up (Acts:10:16|) or person as Paul (Acts:20:13|). Several times of the Ascension of Jesus to heaven (Mark:16:19; strkjv@Acts:1:2,11,22; strkjv@1Timothy:3:16|) with or without "into heaven" (\eis ton ouranon\). This same verb is used of Elijah's translation to heaven in the LXX (2Kings:2:11|). The same idea, though not this word, is in strkjv@Luke:24:51|. See strkjv@Luke:9:51| for \analˆmpsis\ of the Ascension. {Had given commandment} (\enteilamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \entell“\ (from \en\ and \tell“\, to accomplish), usually in the middle, old verb, to enjoin. This special commandment refers directly to what we call the commission given the apostles before Christ ascended on high (John:20:21-23; strkjv@Matthew:28:16-20; strkjv@Mark:16:15-18; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:6; strkjv@Luke:24:44-49|). He had given commands to them when they were first chosen and when they were sent out on the tour of Galilee, but the immediate reference is as above. {Through the Holy Spirit} (\dia pneumatos hagiou\). In his human life Jesus was under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This applies to the choice of the apostles (Luke:6:13|) and to these special commands before the Ascension. {Whom he had chosen} (\hous exelexato\). Aorist middle indicative, not past perfect. The same verb (\eklexamenos\) was used by Luke in describing the choice of the twelve by Jesus (Luke:6:13|). But the aorist does not stand "for" our English pluperfect as Hackett says. That is explaining Greek by English. The Western text here adds: "And ordered to proclaim the gospel."

rwp@Acts:3:6 @{In the name} (\en t“i onomati\). The healing power is in that name (Page) and Peter says so. Cf. strkjv@Luke:9:49; strkjv@10:17; strkjv@Acts:4:7,10; strkjv@19:27; strkjv@16:18|. {Walk} (\peripatei\). Present imperative, inchoative idea, begin to walk and then go on walking. But the beggar does not budge. He knows that he cannot walk.

rwp@Acts:7:8 @{The covenant of circumcision} (\diathˆkˆn peritomˆs\). A covenant marked by (genitive) circumcision (no article) of which circumcision is the sign (Romans:4:11|) as set forth in strkjv@Genesis:17:9-14|. In the ancient Greek \diathˆkˆ\ was usually will (Latin, _testamentum_) and \sunthˆkˆ\ was used for covenant (\sun\, together, rather than \dia\, between). But the LXX and the N.T. use \diathˆkˆ\ for covenant (will in strkjv@Hebrews:9:15f.|) as Lightfoot on strkjv@Galatians:3:16| says: "The LXX translation and New Testament writers probably preferred \diathˆkˆ\ as better expressing the {free grace} of God than \sunthˆkˆ\." {And so} (\kai hout“s\). After the covenant was made and as a sign and seal of it.

rwp@Acts:9:2 @{Asked} (\ˆitˆsato\). First aorist middle indicative, the indirect middle, asked for himself (as a favour to himself). Felten notes that "Saul as a Pharisee makes request of a Sadducee" (the high priest) either Caiaphas if before A.D. 35, but if in 36 Jonathan, son of Caiaphas or if in 37 Theophilus, another son of Caiaphas. {Letters} (\epistolas\). Julius Ceasar and Augustus had granted the high priest and Sanhedrin jurisdiction over Jews in foreign cities, but this central ecclesiastical authority was not always recognized in every local community outside of Judea. Paul says that he received his authority to go to Damascus from the priests (Acts strkjv@26:10|) and "the estate of the elders" (22:5|), that is the Sanhedrin. {To Damascus} (\eis Damaskon\). As if no disciples of importance (outside the apostles in Jerusalem) were left in Judea. Damascus at this time may have been under the rule of Aretas of Arabia (tributary to Rome) as it certainly was a couple of years later when Saul escaped in a basket (2Corinthians:11:32|). This old city is the most enduring in the history of the world (Knowling). It is some 150 miles Northeast from Jerusalem and watered by the river Abana from Anti-Lebanon. Here the Jews were strong in numbers (10,000 butchered by Nero later) and here some disciples had found refuge from Saul's persecution in Judea and still worshipped in the synagogues. Paul's language in strkjv@Acts:26:11| seems to mean that Damascus is merely one of other "foreign cities" to which he carried the persecution. {If he found} (\ean heurˆi\). Third class condition with aorist subjunctive retained after secondary tense (asked). {The Way} (\tˆs hodou\). A common method in the Acts for describing Christianity as the Way of life, absolutely as also in strkjv@19:9,23; strkjv@22:4; strkjv@24:14,22| or the way of salvation (16:17|) or the way of the Lord (18:25|). It is a Jewish definition of life as in strkjv@Isaiah:40:3| "the way of the Lord," strkjv@Psalms:1:6| "the way of the righteous," "the way of the wicked." Jesus called himself "the way" (John:14:6|), the only way to the Father. The so-called Epistle of Barnabas presents the Two Ways. The North American Indians call Christianity the Jesus Road. {That he might bring them bound} (\hop“s dedemenous agagˆi\). Final clause with \hop“s\ (less common than \hina\) and aorist (effective) subjunctive (\agagˆi\, reduplicated aorist of \ag“\, common verb) and perfect passive participle (\dedemenous\) of \de“\, in a state of sheer helplessness like his other victims both men and women. Three times (8:3; strkjv@9:2; strkjv@22:4|) this fact of persecuting women is mentioned as a special blot in Paul's cruelty (the third time by Paul himself) and one of the items in his being chief of sinners (1Timothy:1:15|).

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

rwp@Acts:9:5 @{Lord} (\kurie\). It is open to question if \kurie\ should not here be translated "Sir" as in strkjv@16:30| and in strkjv@Matthew:21:29,30; strkjv@John:5:7; strkjv@12:21; strkjv@20:15|; and should be so in strkjv@John:9:36|. It is hardly likely that at this stage Saul recognized Jesus as Lord, though he does so greet him in strkjv@22:10| "What shall I do, Lord?" Saul may have recognized the vision as from God as Cornelius says "Lord" in strkjv@10:4|. Saul surrendered instantly as Thomas did (John:20:28|) and as little Samuel (1Samuel:3:9|). This surrender of the will to Christ was the conversion of Saul. He saw a real Person, the Risen Christ, to whom he surrendered his life. On this point he never wavered for a moment to the end.

rwp@Acts:9:7 @{That journeyed with him} (\hoi sunodeuontes aut“i\). Not in the older Greek, but in the _Koin‚_, with the associative instrumental. {Speechless} (\eneoi\). Mute. Only here in N.T., though old word. {Hearing the voice, but beholding no man} (\akouontes men tˆs ph“nˆs, mˆdena de the“rountes\). Two present active participles in contrast (\men, de\). In strkjv@22:9| Paul says that the men "beheld the light" (\to men ph“s etheasanto\), but evidently did not discern the person. Paul also says there, "but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me" (\tˆn de ph“nˆn ouk ˆkousan tou lalountos moi\). Instead of this being a flat contradiction of what Luke says in strkjv@9:7| it is natural to take it as being likewise (as with the "light" and "no one") a distinction between the "sound" (original sense of \ph“nˆ\ as in strkjv@John:3:8|) and the separate words spoken. It so happens that \akou“\ is used either with the accusative (the extent of the hearing) or the genitive (the specifying). It is possible that such a distinction here coincides with the two senses of \ph“nˆ\. They heard the sound (9:7|), but did not understand the words (22:9|). However, this distinction in case with \akou“\, though possible and even probable here, is by no means a necessary one for in strkjv@John:3:8| where \ph“nˆn\ undoubtedly means "sound" the accusative occurs as Luke uses \ˆkousen ph“nˆn\ about Saul in strkjv@Acts:9:4|. Besides in strkjv@22:7| Paul uses \ˆkousa ph“nˆs\ about himself, but \ˆkousa ph“nˆn\ about himself in strkjv@76:14|, interchangeably.

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

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

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

rwp@Acts:12:21 @{Upon a set day} (\taktˆi hˆmerƒi\). Locative case and the verbal adjective of \tass“\, to arrange, appoint, old word, here only in the N.T. Josephus (_Ant_. XVII. 6, 8; XIX. 8, 2) gives a full account of the occasion and the death of Herod Agrippa. It was the second day of the festival in honour of the Emperor Claudius, possibly his birthday rather than the _Quinquennalia_. The two accounts of Luke and Josephus supplement each other with no contradiction. Josephus does not mention the name of Blastus. {Arrayed himself in royal apparel} (\endusamenos esthˆta basilikˆn\). First aorist middle (indirect) participle of \endun“\ or \endu“\, common verb to put on. Literally, having put royal apparel on himself (a robe of silver tissue, Josephus says). The rays of the sun shone on this brilliant apparel and the vast crowd in the open amphitheatre became excited as Herod began to speak. {Made an oration} (\edˆmˆgorei\). Imperfect active of \dˆmˆgore“\, old verb from \dˆmˆgoros\ (haranguer of the people), and that from \dˆmos\ (people) and \agoreu“\, to harangue or address the people. Only here in the N.T. He kept it up.

rwp@Acts:12:23 @{Smote him} (\epataxen auton\). Effective aorist active indicative of \patass“\, old verb, used already in verse 7| of gentle smiting of the angel of the Lord, here of a severe stroke of affliction. Like Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel:4:30|) pride went before a fall. He was struck down in the very zenith of his glory. {Because} (\anth' h“n\). \Anti\ with the genitive of the relative pronoun, "in return for which things." He accepted the impious flattery (Hackett) instead of giving God the glory. He was a nominal Jew. {He was eaten of worms} (\genomenos sk“lˆkobr“tos\). Ingressive aorist middle participle, "becoming worm-eaten." The compound verbal adjective (\sk“lˆx\, worm, \br“tos\, eaten, from \bibr“sk“\) is a late word (II Macc. strkjv@9:9) of the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, used also of a tree (Theophrastus), here only in the N.T. The word \sk“lˆx\ was used of intestinal worms and Herodotus (IV. 205) describes Pheretima, Queen of Cyrene, as having swarms of worms which ate her flesh while still alive. Josephus (_Ant_. XIX. 8, 2) says that Herod Agrippa lingered for five days and says that the rotting of his flesh produced worms, an item in harmony with the narrative in Luke. Josephus gives further details, one a superstitious sight of an owl sitting on one of the ropes of the awning of the theatre while the people flattered him, an omen of his death to him. Luke puts it simply that God smote him. {Gave up the ghost} (\exepsuxen\). Effective aorist active of \ekpsuch“\, to breathe out, late verb, medical term in Hippocrates, in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:5:5,10; strkjv@12:23|. Herod was carried out of the theatre a dying man and lingered only five days.

rwp@Acts:13:6 @{Unto Paphos} (\achri Paphou\). The new Paphos at the other end of the island, reached by a fine Roman road, some eight miles north of the old Paphos famous for the worship of Venus. {A certain sorcerer, a false prophet, a Jew} (\andra tina magon pseudoprophˆtˆn Ioudaion\). Literally, "a certain man" (\andra tina\) with various descriptive epithets. The word \magon\ does not necessarily mean "sorcerer," but only a \magus\ (Matthew:2:1,7,10| which see). The bad sense occurs in strkjv@Acts:8:9,11| (Simon Magus) and is made plain here by "false prophet." In verse 8| here Barjesus (Son of Jesus) is called "Elymas the sorcerer (or Magian)," probably his professional title, as Luke interprets the Arabic or Aramaic word Elymas. These Jewish mountebanks were numerous and had great influence with the uneducated. In strkjv@Acts:19:13| the seven sons of Sceva, Jewish exorcists, tried to imitate Paul. If one is surprised that a man like Sergius Paulus should fall under the influence of this fraud, he should recall what Juvenal says of the Emperor Tiberius "sitting on the rock of Capri with his flock of Chaldaeans around him."

rwp@Acts:13:14 @{Passing through} (\dielthontes\). It is not clear why Paul and Barnabas left Perga so soon nor why they went to Antioch in Pisidia. Ramsay suggests malaria that spurred them on to the hills after the desertion of John Mark. They preached at Perga on the return (14:25|) and apparently hurried away now. Farrar thinks that the hot weather had driven the population to the hills. At any rate it is not difficult to imagine the perils of this climb over the rough mountain way from Perga to Pisidian Antioch to which Paul apparently refers in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:26|. {Sat down} (\ekathisan\). Ingressive aorist active indicative, took their seats as visiting Jews, possibly in the seats of the rabbis (J. Lightfoot). Whether they expected to be called on or not, they were given the opportunity as prominent visitors. The Pisidian Antioch was really in Phrygia, but towards Pisidia to distinguish it from Antioch on the Maeander (Ramsay, _Church in the Roman Empire_, p. 25). It was a colony like Philippi and so a free city. If Paul is referring to South Galatia and not North Galatia in strkjv@Galatians:4:13| when he says that his preaching in Galatia at first was due to illness, then it was probably here at Pisidian Antioch. What it was we have no means of knowing, though it was a temptation in his flesh to them so severe that they were willing to pluck out their eyes for him (Galatians:4:14f.|). Opthalmia, malaria, epilepsy have all been suggested as this stake in the flesh (2Corinthians:12:7|). But Paul was able to preach with power whatever his actual physical condition was.

rwp@Acts:13:50 @{Urged on} (\par“trunan\). First aorist (effective) active of \par-otrun“\, old verb, but here alone in the N.T., to incite, to stir up. The Jews were apparently not numerous in this city as they had only one synagogue, but they had influence with people of prominence, like "the devout women of honourable estate" (\tas sebomenas gunaikas tas euschˆmonas\), the female proselytes of high station, a late use of an old word used about Joseph of Arimathea (Mark:15:43|). The rabbis went after these Gentile women who had embraced Judaism (cf. strkjv@Acts:17:4| in Thessalonica) as Paul had made an appeal to them. The prominence of women in public life here at Antioch is quite in accord with what we know of conditions in the cities of Asia Minor. "Thus women were appointed under the empire as magistrates, as presidents of the games, and even the Jews elected a woman as Archisynagogos, at least in one instance at Smyrna" (Knowling). In Damascus Josephus (_War_ II. 20, 21) says that a majority of the married women were proselytes. Strabo (VIII. 2) and Juvenal (VI. 542) speak of the addiction of women to the Jewish religion. {The chief men of the city} (\tous pr“tous tˆs pole“s\). Probably city officials (the Duumviri, the Praetors, the First Ten in the Greek Cities of the east) or other "foremost" men, not officials. The rabbis were shrewd enough to reach these men (not proselytes) through the women who were proselytes of distinction. {Stirred up a persecution} (\epˆgeiran di“gmon\). First aorist active indicative of \epegeir“\, old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@14:2|. Paul seems to allude to this persecution in strkjv@2Timothy:3:11| "persecutions, sufferings, what things befell me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra, what persecutions I endured." Here Paul had perils from his own countrymen and perils from the Gentiles after the perils of rivers and perils of robbers on the way from Perga (2Corinthians:11:26|). He was thrice beaten with rods (\tris erhabdisthˆn\, strkjv@2Corinthians:11:25|) by Roman lictors in some Roman colony. If that was here, then Paul and Barnabas were publicly scourged by the lictors before they left. Probably the Jews succeeded in making the Roman officials look on Paul and Barnabas as disturbers of the public peace. Songs:"they cast them out of their borders" (\exebalon autous apo t“n hori“n aut“n\). Second aorist active indicative of \ekball“\, forcible expulsion plainly as public nuisances. Just a few days before they were the heroes of the city and now!

rwp@Acts:15:2 @{When Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and questioning with them} (\Genomenˆs stase“s kai zˆtˆse“s ouk oligˆs t“i Paul“i kai Barnabƒi pros autous\). Genitive absolute of second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\, genitive singular agreeing with first substantive \stase“s\. Literally, "No little (litotes for much) strife and questioning coming to Paul and Barnabas (dative case) with them " (\pros autous\, face to face with them). Paul and Barnabas were not willing to see this Gentile church brow-beaten and treated as heretics by these self-appointed regulators of Christian orthodoxy from Jerusalem. The work had developed under the leadership of Paul and Barnabas and they accepted full responsibility for it and stoutly resisted these Judaizers to the point of sedition (riot, outbreak in strkjv@Luke:23:25; strkjv@Acts:19:40|) as in strkjv@23:7|. There is no evidence that the Judaizers had any supporters in the Antioch church so that they failed utterly to make any impression. Probably these Judaizers compelled Paul to think through afresh his whole gospel of grace and so they did Paul and the world a real service. If the Jews like Paul had to believe, it was plain that there was no virtue in circumcision (Galatians:2:15-21|). It is not true that the early Christians had no disagreements. They had selfish avarice with Ananias and Sapphira, murmuring over the gifts to the widows, simony in the case of Simon Magus, violent objection to work in Caesarea, and now open strife over a great doctrine (grace vs. legalism). {The brethren appointed} (\etaxan\). "The brethren" can be supplied from verse 1| and means the church in Antioch. The church clearly saw that the way to remove this deadlock between the Judaizers and Paul and Barnabas was to consult the church in Jerusalem to which the Judaizers belonged. Paul and Barnabas had won in Antioch. If they can win in Jerusalem, that will settle the matter. The Judaizers will be answered in their own church for which they are presuming to speak. The verb \etaxan\ (\tass“\, to arrange) suggests a formal appointment by the church in regular assembly. Paul (Galatians:2:2|) says that he went up by revelation (\kat' apokalupsin\), but surely that is not contradictory to the action of the church. {Certain others of them} (\tinas allous\). Certainly Titus (Galatians:2:1,3|), a Greek and probably a brother of Luke who is not mentioned in Acts. Rackham thinks that Luke was in the number. {The apostles and elders} (\tous apostolous kai presbuterous\). Note one article for both (cf. "the apostles and the brethren" in strkjv@11:1|). "Elders" now (11:30|) in full force. The apostles have evidently returned now to the city after the death of Herod Agrippa I stopped the persecution.

rwp@Acts:15:5 @{But there rose up} (\exanestˆsan de\). Second aorist active indicative (intransitive). Note both \ex\ and \an\. These men rose up out of the crowd at a critical moment. They were believers in Christ (\pepisteukotes\, having believed), but were still members of "the sect of the Pharisees" (\tˆs hairese“s t“n Pharisai“n\). Evidently they still held to the Pharisaic narrowness shown in the attack on Peter (11:2f.|). Note the dogmatism of their "must" (\dei\) after the opposition of Paul and Barnabas to their "except" (\ean me\) at Antioch (15:1|). They are unconvinced and expected to carry the elders with them. Codex Bezae says that they had appealed to the elders (15:2,5|). At any rate they have made the issue in open meeting at the height of the jubilation. It is plain from verse 6| that this meeting was adjourned, for another gathering came together then. It is here that the private conference of which Paul speaks in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| took place. It was Paul's chance to see the leaders in Jerusalem (Peter, James, and John) and he won them over to his view of Gentile liberty from the Mosaic law so that the next public conference (Acts:15:6-29|) ratified heartily the views of Paul, Barnabas, Peter, James, and John. It was a diplomatic triumph of the first order and saved Christianity from the bondage of Jewish ceremonial sacramentalism. Songs:far as we know this is the only time that Paul and John met face to face, the great spirits in Christian history after Jesus our Lord. It is a bit curious to see men saying today that Paul surrendered about Titus and had him circumcised for the sake of peace, the very opposite of what he says in Galatians, "to whom I yielded, no not for an hour." Titus as a Greek was a red flag to the Judaizers and to the compromisers, but Paul stood his ground.

rwp@Acts:17:16 @{Now while Paul waited for them in Athens} (\En de tais Athˆnais ekdechomenou autous tou Paulou\). Genitive absolute with present middle participle of \ekdechomai\, old verb to receive, but only with the sense of looking out for, expecting found here and elsewhere in N.T We know that Timothy did come to Paul in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1,6|) from Thessalonica and was sent back to them from Athens. If Silas also came to Athens, he was also sent away, possibly to Philippi, for that church was deeply interested in Paul. At any rate both Timothy and Silas came from Macedonia to Corinth with messages and relief for Paul (Acts:18:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:8f.|). Before they came and after they left, Paul felt lonely in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1|), the first time on this tour or the first that he has been completely without fellow workers. Athens had been captured by Sulla B.C. 86. After various changes Achaia, of which Corinth is the capital, is a separate province from Macedonia and A.D. 44 was restored by Claudius to the Senate with the Proconsul at Corinth. Paul is probably here about A.D. 50. Politically Athens is no longer of importance when Paul comes though it is still the university seat of the world with all its rich environment and traditions. Rackham grows eloquent over Paul the Jew of Tarsus being in the city of Pericles and Demosthenes, Socrates and Plato and Aristotle, Sophocles and Euripides. In its Agora Socrates had taught, here was the Academy of Plato, the Lyceum of Aristotle, the Porch of Zeno, the Garden of Epicurus. Here men still talked about philosophy, poetry, politics, religion, anything and everything. It was the art centre of the world. The Parthenon, the most beautiful of temples, crowned the Acropolis. Was Paul insensible to all this cultural environment? It is hard to think so for he was a university man of Tarsus and he makes a number of allusions to Greek writers. Probably it had not been in Paul's original plan to evangelize Athens, difficult as all university seats are, but he cannot be idle though here apparently by chance because driven out of Macedonia. {Was provoked} (\par“xuneto\). Imperfect passive of \paroxun“\, old verb to sharpen, to stimulate, to irritate (from \para, oxus\), from \paroxusmos\ (Acts:15:39|), common in old Greek, but in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:13:5|. It was a continual challenge to Paul's spirit when he beheld (\the“rountos\, genitive of present participle agreeing with \autou\ (his), though late MSS. have locative \the“rounti\ agreeing with \en aut“i\). {The city full of idols} (\kateid“lon ousan tˆn polin\). Note the participle \ousan\ not preserved in the English (either the city being full of idols or that the city was full of idols, sort of indirect discourse). Paul, like any stranger was looking at the sights as he walked around. This adjective \kateid“lon\ (perfective use of \kata\ and \eid“lon\ is found nowhere else, but it is formed after the analogy of \katampelos, katadendron\), full of idols. Xenophon (_de Republ. Ath_.) calls the city \holˆ bomos, holˆ thuma theois kai anathˆma\ (all altar, all sacrifice and offering to the gods). These statues were beautiful, but Paul was not deceived by the mere art for art's sake. The idolatry and sensualism of it all glared at him (Romans:1:18-32|). Renan ridicules Paul's ignorance in taking these statues for idols, but Paul knew paganism better than Renan. The superstition of this centre of Greek culture was depressing to Paul. One has only to recall how superstitious cults today flourish in the atmosphere of Boston and Los Angeles to understand conditions in Athens. Pausanias says that Athens had more images than all the rest of Greece put together. Pliny states that in the time of Nero Athens had over 30,000 public statues besides countless private ones in the homes. Petronius sneers that it was easier to find a god than a man in Athens. Every gateway or porch had its protecting god. They lined the street from the Piraeus and caught the eye at every place of prominence on wall or in the agora.

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:17:34 @{Clave unto him and believed} (\kollˆthentes aut“i episteusan\). First aorist passive of this strong word \kolla“\, to glue to, common in Acts (5:13; strkjv@8:29; strkjv@9:26; strkjv@10:28|) No sermon is a failure which leads a group of men (\andres\) to believe (ingressive aorist of \pisteu“\) in Jesus Christ. Many so-called great or grand sermons reap no such harvest. {Dionysius the Areopagite} (\Dionusios ho Areopagitˆs\). One of the judges of the Court of the Areopagus. That of itself was no small victory. He was one of this college of twelve judges who had helped to make Athens famous. Eusebius says that he became afterwards bishop of the Church at Athens and died a martyr. {A woman named Damaris} (\gunˆ onomati Damaris\). A woman by name Damaris. Not the wife of Dionysius as some have thought, but an aristocratic woman, not necessarily an educated courtezan as Furneaux holds. And there were "others" (\heteroi\) with them, a group strong enough to keep the fire burning in Athens. It is common to say that Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:1-5| alludes to his failure with philosophy in Athens when he failed to preach Christ crucified and he determined never to make that mistake again. On the other hand Paul determined to stick to the Cross of Christ in spite of the fact that the intellectual pride and superficial culture of Athens had prevented the largest success. As he faced Corinth with its veneer of culture and imitation of philosophy and sudden wealth he would go on with the same gospel of the Cross, the only gospel that Paul knew or preached. And it was a great thing to give the world a sermon like that preached in Athens.

rwp@Acts:18:2 @{Aquila} (\Akulan\). Luke calls him a Jew from Pontus, apparently not yet a disciple, though there were Jews from Pontus at the great Pentecost who were converted (2:9|). Aquila who made the famous A.D. translation of the O.T. was also from Pontus. Paul "found" (\heur“n\, second aorist active participle of \heurisk“\) though we do not know how. Edersheim says that a Jewish guild always kept together whether in street or synagogue so that by this bond they probably met. {Lately come from Italy} (\prosphat“s elˆluthota apo tˆs Italias\). Second perfect participle of \erchomai\. _Koin‚_ adverb, here only in the N.T., from adjective \prosphatos\ (\pro, spha“\ or \sphaz“\, to kill), lately slaughtered and so fresh or recent (Hebrews:10:20|). {With his wife Priscilla} (\kai Priskillan gunaika autou\). Diminutive of \Priska\ (Romans:16:3; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:19|). Prisca is a name in the Acilian family and the Prisci was the name of another noble clan. Aquila may have been a freedman like many Jews in Rome. Her name comes before his in verses 18,26; strkjv@Romans:16:3; strkjv@2Timothy:4:9|. {Because Claudius had commanded} (\dia to diatetachenai Klaudion\). Perfect active articular infinitive of \diatass“\, old verb to dispose, arrange, here with accusative of general reference. \Dia\ here is causal sense, "because of the having ordered as to Claudius." This was about A.D. 49, done, Suetonius says (_Claudius_ C. 25), because "the Jews were in a state of constant tumult at the instigation of one Chrestus" (probably among the Jews about Christ so pronounced). At any rate Jews were unpopular in Rome for Tiberius had deported 4,000 to Sardinia. There were 20,000 Jews in Rome. Probably mainly those implicated in the riots actually left.

rwp@Acts:18:3 @{Because he was of the same trade} (\dia to homotechnon einai\). Same construction with \dia\ as above. \Homotechnon\ is an old word (\homos, technˆ\), though here alone in N.T. Rabbi Judah says: "He that teacheth not his son a trade, doth the same as if he taught him to be a thief." Songs:it was easy for Paul to find a home with these "tentmakers by trade" (\skˆnoipoioi tˆi technˆi\). Late word from \skˆnˆ\ and \poie“\, here only in the N.T. They made portable tents of leather or of cloth of goat's hair. Songs:Paul lived in this home with this noble man and his wife, all the more congenial if already Christians which they soon became at any rate. They worked as partners in the common trade. Paul worked for his support elsewhere, already in Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:2:9; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:8|) and later at Ephesus with Aquila and Priscilla (Acts:18:18,26; strkjv@20:34; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:19|). They moved again to Rome (Romans:16:3|) and were evidently a couple of considerable wealth and generosity. It was a blessing to Paul to find himself with these people. Songs:he "abode" (\emenen\, imperfect active) with them and "they wrought" (\ˆrgazonto\, imperfect middle), happy and busy during week days.

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

rwp@Acts:19:1 @{While Apollos was at Corinth} (\en t“i ton Apoll“ einai en Korinth“i\). Favourite idiom with Luke, \en\ with the locative of the articular infinitive and the accusative of general reference (Luke:1:8; strkjv@2:27|, etc.). {Having passed through the upper country} (\dielthonta ta an“terika merˆ\). Second aorist active participle of \dierchomai\, accusative case agreeing with \Paulon\, accusative of general reference with the infinitive \elthein\, idiomatic construction with \egeneto\. The word for "upper" (\an“terika\) is a late form for \an“tera\ (Luke:14:10|) and occurs in Hippocrates and Galen. It refers to the highlands (cf. Xenophon's _Anabasis_) and means that Paul did not travel the usual Roman road west by Colossae and Laodicea in the Lycus Valley, cities that he did not visit (Colossians:2:1|). Instead he took the more direct road through the Cayster Valley to Ephesus. Codex Bezae says here that Paul wanted to go back to Jerusalem, but that the Holy Spirit bade him to go into Asia where he had been forbidden to go in the second tour (16:6|). Whether the upper "parts" (\merˆ\) here points to North Galatia is still a point of dispute among scholars. Songs:he came again to Ephesus as he had promised to do (18:21|). The province of Asia included the western part of Asia Minor. The Romans took this country B.C. 130. Finally the name was extended to the whole continent. It was a jewel in the Roman empire along with Africa and was a senatorial province. It was full of great cities like Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicea (the seven churches of strkjv@Revelation:2;3|), Colossae, Hierapolis, Apamea, to go no further. Hellenism had full sway here. Ephesus was the capital and chief city and was a richer and larger city than Corinth. It was located at the entrance to the valley of the Maeander to the east. Here was the power of Rome and the splendour of Greek culture and the full tide of oriental superstition and magic. The Temple of Artemis was one of the seven wonders of the world. While in Ephesus some hold that Paul at this time wrote the Epistle to the Galatians after his recent visit there, some that he did it before his recent visit to Jerusalem. But it is still possible that he wrote it from Corinth just before writing to Rome, a point to discuss later. {Certain disciples} (\tinas mathˆtas\). Who were they? Apollos had already gone to Corinth. They show no connection with Priscilla and Aquila. Luke calls them "disciples" or "learners" (\mathˆtas\) because they were evidently sincere though crude and ignorant. There is no reason at all for connecting these uninformed disciples of the Baptist with Apollos. They were floating followers of the Baptist who drifted into Ephesus and whom Paul found. Some of John's disciples clung to him till his death (John:3:22-25; strkjv@Luke:7:19; strkjv@Matthew:14:12|). Some of them left Palestine without the further knowledge of Jesus that came after his death and some did not even know that, as turned out to be the case with the group in Ephesus.

rwp@Acts:19:21 @{Purposed in the spirit} (\etheto en t“i pneumati\). Second aorist middle indicative for mental action and "spirit" expressed also. A new stage in Paul's career begins here, a new division of the Acts. {Passed through} (\dielth“n\). Word (\dierchomai\) used ten times in Acts (cf. strkjv@19:1|) of missionary journeys (Ramsay). {Macedonia and Achaia} (\tˆn Makedonian kai Achaian\). This was the way that he actually went, but originally he had planned to go to Achaia (Corinth) and then to Macedonia, as he says in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:15f.|, but he had now changed that purpose, perhaps because of the bad news from Corinth. Already when he wrote I Corinthians he proposed to go first to Macedonia (1Corinthians:16:5-7|). He even hoped to spend the winter in Corinth "if the Lord permit" and to remain in Ephesus till Pentecost, neither of which things he did. {I must also see Rome} (\dei me kai R“mˆn idein\). This section of Acts begins with Rome in the horizon of Paul's plans and the book closes with Paul in Rome (Rackham). Here he feels the necessity of going as in strkjv@Romans:1:15| he feels himself "debtor" to all including "those in Rome" (Romans:1:16|). Paul had long desired to go to Rome (Rom strkjv@1:10|), but had been frequently hindered (Romans:1:13|), but he has definitely set his face to go to Rome and on to Spain (Romans:15:23-29|). Paley calls sharp attention to this parallel between strkjv@Acts:19:21| and strkjv@Romans:1:10-15; strkjv@15:23-29|. Rome had a fascination for Paul as the home of Aquila and Priscilla and numerous other friends (Romans:16|), but chiefly as the capital of the Roman Empire and a necessary goal in Paul's ambition to win it to Jesus Christ. His great work in Asia had stirred afresh in him the desire to do his part for Rome. He wrote to Rome from Corinth not long after this and in Jerusalem Jesus in vision will confirm the necessity (\dei\) that Paul see Rome (Acts strkjv@23:11|).

rwp@Acts:19:27 @{This our trade} (\touto to meros\). Part, share, task, job, trade. {Come into disrepute} (\eis apelegmon elthein\). Not in the old writers, but in LXX and _Koin‚_. Literally, reputation, exposure, censure, rejection after examination, and so disrepute. Their business of making gods would lose caste as the liquor trade (still called the trade in England) has done in our day. They felt this keenly and so Demetrius names it first. They felt it in their pockets. {Of the great goddess Artemis} (\tˆs megalˆs theas Artemidos\). She was generally known as the Great (\hˆ Megalˆ\). An inscription found at Ephesus calls her "the greatest god" (\hˆ megistˆ theos\). The priests were eunuchs and there were virgin priestesses and a lower order of slaves known as temple-sweepers (\ne“koroi\, verse 35|). They had wild orgiastic exercises that were disgraceful with their Corybantic processions and revelries. {Be made of no account} (\eis outhen logisthˆnai\). Be reckoned as nothing, first aorist passive infinitive of \logizomai\ and \eis\. {Should even be deposed of her magnificence} (\mellein te kai kathaireisthai tˆs megaleiotˆtos autˆs\). Note the present infinitive after \mellein\, ablative case (so best MSS.) after \kathaire“\, to take down, to depose, to deprive of. The word \megaleiotˆs\ occurs also in strkjv@Luke:9:43| (the majesty of God) and in strkjv@2Peter:1:16| of the transfiguration of Christ. It is already in the LXX and Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 363) thinks that the word runs parallel with terms used in the emperor-cult. {All Asia and the world} \holˆ (hˆ) Asia kai (hˆ) oikoumenˆ\. See strkjv@11:28| for same use of \oikoumenˆ\. An exaggeration, to be sure, but Pausanias says that no deity was more widely worshipped. Temples of Artemis have been found in Spain and Gaul. _Multitudo errantium non efficit veritatem_ (Bengel). Even today heathenism has more followers than Christianity. To think that all this splendour was being set at naught by one man and a despised Jew at that!

rwp@Acts:19:40 @{For indeed we are in danger to be accused concerning this day's riot} (\kai gar kinduneuomen egkaleisthai stase“s peri tˆs sˆmeron\). The text is uncertain. The text of Westcott and Hort means "to be accused of insurrection concerning today's assembly." The peril was real. \Kinduneuomen\, from \kindunos\, danger, peril. Old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:8:23; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:30|. {There being no cause for it} (\mˆdenos aitiou huparchontos\). Genitive absolute with \aitios\, common adjective (cf. \aitia\, cause) though in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:5:9; strkjv@Luke:23:4,14,22|. {And as touching it} (\peri hou\). "Concerning which." But what? No clear antecedent, only the general idea. {Give an account of this concourse} (\apodounai logon peri tˆs sustrophˆs tautˆs\). _Rationem reddere_. They will have to explain matters to the proconsul. \Sustrophˆ\ (from \sun\, together, \streph“\, to turn) is a late word for a conspiracy (Acts:23:12|) and a disorderly riot as here (Polybius). In strkjv@Acts:28:12| \sustreph“\ is used of gathering up a bundle of sticks and of men combining in strkjv@Matthew:17:22|. Seneca says that there was nothing on which the Romans looked with such jealousy as a tumultuous meeting.

rwp@Acts:20:17 @{Called to him} (\metekalesato\). Aorist middle (indirect) indicative of \metakale“\, old verb to call from one place to another (\meta\ for "change"), middle to call to oneself, only in Acts in the N.T. (7:14; strkjv@10:32; strkjv@20:17; strkjv@24:25|). Ephesus was some thirty miles, a stiff day's journey each way. They would be with Paul the third day of the stay in Miletus. {The elders of the church} (\tous presbuterous tˆs ekklˆsias\). The very men whom Paul terms "bishops" (\episkopous\) in verse 28| just as in strkjv@Titus:1:5,7| where both terms (\presbuterous, ton episkopon\) describe the same office. The term "elder" applied to Christian ministers first appears in strkjv@Acts:11:30| in Jerusalem and reappears in strkjv@15:4,6,22| in connection with the apostles and the church. The "elders" are not "apostles" but are "bishops" (cf. strkjv@Phillipians:1:1|) and with "deacons" constitute the two classes of officers in the early churches. Ignatius shows that in the early second century the office of bishop over the elders had developed, but Lightfoot has shown that it was not so in the first century. Each church, as in Jerusalem, Philippi, Ephesus, had a number of "elders" ("bishops") in the one great city church. Hackett thinks that other ministers from the neighbourhood also came. It was a noble group of preachers and Paul, the greatest preacher of the ages, makes a remarkable talk to preachers with all the earmarks of Pauline originality (Spitta, _Apostelgeschichte_, p. 252) as shown by the characteristic Pauline words, phrases, ideas current in all his Epistles including the Pastoral (testify, course, pure, take heed, presbyter, bishop, acquire, apparel). Luke heard this address as he may and probably did hear those in Jerusalem and Caesarea (Acts:21-26|). Furneaux suggests that Luke probably took shorthand notes of the address since Galen says that his students took down his medical lectures in shorthand: "At any rate, of all the speeches in the Acts this contains most of Paul and least of Luke.... It reveals Paul as nothing else does. The man who spoke it is no longer a man of eighteen centuries ago: he is of yesterday; of today. He speaks as we speak and feels as we feel; or rather as we fain would speak and feel." We have seen and listened to Paul speak to the Jews in Antioch in Pisidia as Luke pictures the scene, to the uneducated pagans at Lystra, to the cultured Greeks in Athens. We shall hear him plead for his life to the Jewish mob in Jerusalem, to the Roman governor Felix in Caesarea, to the Jewish "King" Herod Agrippa II in Caesarea, and at last to the Jews in Rome. But here Paul unbosoms himself to the ministers of the church in Ephesus where he had spent three years (longer than with any other church) and where he had such varied experiences of prowess and persecution. He opens his heart to these men as he does not to the average crowd even of believers. It is Paul's _Apologia pro sua Vita_. He will probably not see them again and so the outlook and attitude is similar to the farewell discourse of Jesus to the disciples in the upper room (John:13-17|). He warns them about future perils as Jesus had done. Paul's words here will repay any preacher's study today. There is the same high conception of the ministry here that Paul had already elaborated in strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12-6:10| (see my _Glory of the Ministry_). It is a fitting time and occasion for Paul to take stock of his ministry at the close of the third mission tour. What wonders had God wrought already.

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

rwp@Acts:21:37 @{May I say something unto thee?} (\Ei exestin moi eipein ti pros se?\). On this use of \ei\ in a direct question see on ¯1:6|. The calm self-control of Paul in the presence of this mob is amazing. His courteous request to Lysias was in Greek to the chiliarch's amazement. {Dost thou know Greek?} (\Hellˆnisti gin“skeis?\). Old Greek adverb in \-i\ from \Hellˆniz“\, meaning "in Greek." "Do you know it in Greek?" In the N.T. only here and strkjv@John:19:20|. {Art thou not then the Egyptian?} (\Ouk ara su ei ho Aiguptios?\). Expects the answer _Yes_ and \ara\ argues the matter (therefore). The well-known (\ho\) Egyptian who had given the Romans so much trouble. {Stirred up to sedition} (\anastat“sas\). First aorist active participle of \anastato“\, a late verb from \anastatos\, outcast, and so to unsettle, to stir up, to excite, once known only in LXX and strkjv@Acts:17:6| (which see); strkjv@21:38; strkjv@Galatians:5:12|, but now found in several papyri examples with precisely this sense to upset. {Of the Assassins} (\t“n sikari“n\). Latin word _sicarius_, one who carried a short sword \sica\ under his cloak, a cutthroat. Josephus uses this very word for bands of robbers under this Egyptian (_War_ II. 17,6 and 13,5; _Ant_. XX. 8,10). Josephus says that there were 30,000 who gathered on the Mount of Olives to see the walls of Jerusalem fall down and not merely 4,000 as Lysias does here. But Lysias may refer to the group that were armed thus (banditti) the core of the mob of 30,000. Lysias at once saw by Paul's knowledge of Greek that he was not the famous Egyptian who led the Assassins and escaped himself when Felix attacked and slew the most of them.

rwp@Acts:21:40 @{When he had given him leave} (\epitrepsantos autou\). Genitive absolute of aorist active participle of the same verb \epitrep“\. {Standing on the stairs} (\hest“s epi t“n anabathm“n\). Second perfect active participle of \histˆmi\, to place, but intransitive to stand. Dramatic scene. Paul had faced many audiences and crowds, but never one quite like this. Most men would have feared to speak, but not so Paul. He will speak about himself only as it gives him a chance to put Christ before this angry Jewish mob who look on Paul as a renegade Jew, a turncoat, a deserter, who went back on Gamaliel and all the traditions of his people, who not only turned from Judaism to Christianity, but who went after Gentiles and treated Gentiles as if they were on a par with Jews. Paul knows only too well what this mob thinks of him. {Beckoned with the hand} (\kateseise tˆi cheiri\). He shook down to the multitude with the hand (instrumental case \cheiri\), while Alexander, Luke says (19:33|), "shook down the hand" (accusative with the same verb, which see). In strkjv@26:1| Paul reached out the hand (\ekteinas tˆn cheira\). {When there was made a great silence} (\pollˆs sigˆs genomenˆs\). Genitive absolute again with second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\, "much silence having come." Paul waited till silence had come. {In the Hebrew language} (\tˆi Ebraidi dialekt“i\). The Aramaean which the people in Jerusalem knew better than the Greek. Paul could use either tongue at will. His enemies had said in Corinth that "his bodily presence was weak and his speech contemptible" (2Corinthians:10:10|). But surely even they would have to admit that Paul's stature and words reach heroic proportions on this occasion. Self-possessed with majestic poise Paul faces the outraged mob beneath the stairs.

rwp@Acts:22:25 @{When they had tied him up} (\hos proeteinan auton\). First aorist active indicative of \protein“\, old verb to stretch forward, only here in the N.T. Literally, "When they stretched him forward." {With the thongs} (\tois himasin\). If the instrumental case of \himas\, old word for strap or thong (for sandals as strkjv@Mark:1:7|, or for binding criminals as here), then Paul was bent forward and tied by the thongs to a post in front to expose his back the better to the scourges. But \tois himasin\ may be dative case and then it would mean "for the lashes." In either case it is a dreadful scene of terrorizing by the chiliarch. {Unto the centurion that stood by} (\pros ton hest“ta hekatontarchon\). He was simply carrying out the orders of the chiliarch (cf. strkjv@Matthew:27:54|). Why had not Paul made protest before this? {Is it lawful?} (\ei exestin?\). This use of \ei\ in indirect questions we have had before (1:6|). {A Roman and uncondemned} (\Romaion kai akatakriton\). Just as in strkjv@16:37| which see. Blass says of Paul's question: _Interrogatio subironica est confidentiae plena_.

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

rwp@Acts:23:24 @{Provide beasts} (\ktenˆ parastˆsai\). Change from direct to indirect discourse just the opposite of that in verse 22|. {Beasts} (\ktˆnˆ\). For riding as here or for baggage. See on ¯Luke:10:34|. Asses or horses, but not war-horses. Since Paul was chained to a soldier, another animal would be required for baggage. It was also seventy miles and a change of horses might be needed. The extreme precaution of Lysias is explained in some Latin MSS. as due to fear of a night attack with the result that he might be accused to Felix of bribery. Luke also probably accompanied Paul. {To bring safe} (\hina dias“s“sin\). Final clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \dias“z“\, old verb, to save through (\dia\) to a finish. Eight times in the N.T. (Matthew:14:36; strkjv@Luke:7:3; strkjv@Acts:23:24; strkjv@27:43,44; strkjv@28:1,4; strkjv@1Peter:3:20|). {Unto Felix the governor} (\pros Phˆlika ton hˆgemona\). Felix was a brother of Pallas, the notorious favourite of Claudius. Both had been slaves and were now freedmen. Felix was made procurator of Judea by Claudius A.D. 52. He held the position till Festus succeeded him after complaints by the Jews to Nero. He married Drusilla the daughter of Herod Agrippa I with the hope of winning the favour of the Jews. He was one of the most depraved men of his time. Tacitus says of him that "with all cruelty and lust he exercised the power of a king with the spirit of a slave." The term "governor" (\hˆgem“n\) means "leader" from \hˆgeomai\, to lead, and was applied to leaders of all sorts (emperors, kings, procurators). In the N.T. it is used of Pilate (Matthew:27:2|), of Felix, (Acts:23:24,26,33; strkjv@24:1|), of Festus (26:30|).

rwp@Acts:23:27 @{Was seized} (\sullˆmphthenta\). First aorist passive participle of \sullamban“\. {Rescued him having learned that he was a Roman} (\exeilamen math“n hoti Romaios estin\). Wendt, Zoeckler, and Furneaux try to defend this record of two facts by Lysias in the wrong order from being an actual lie as Bengel rightly says. Lysias did rescue Paul and he did learn that he was a Roman, but in this order. He did not first learn that he was a Roman and then rescue him as his letter states. The use of the aorist participle (\math“n\ from \manthan“\) after the principal verb \exeilamen\ (second aorist middle of \exaire“\, to take out to oneself, to rescue) can be either simultaneous action or antecedent. There is in Greek no such idiom as the aorist participle of subsequent action (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1112-14). Lysias simply reversed the order of the facts and omitted the order for scourging Paul to put himself in proper light with Felix his superior officer and actually poses as the protector of a fellow Roman citizen.

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

rwp@Acts:25:11 @{If I am a wrong-doer} (\ei men oun adik“\). Condition of the first class with \ei\ and the present active indicative of \adike“\ (\a\ privative and \dikˆ\): "If I am in the habit of doing injustice," assuming it to be true for the sake of argument. {And have committed anything worthy of death} (\kai axion thanatou pepracha\). Same condition with the difference in tense (\pepracha\, perfect active indicative) of a single case instead of a general habit. Assuming either or both Paul draws his conclusion. {I refuse not to die} (\ou paraitoumai to apothanein\). Old verb to ask alongside, to beg from, to deprecate, to refuse, to decline. See on ¯Luke:14:18f|. Josephus (_Life_, 29) has \thanein ou paraitoumai\. Here the articular second aorist active infinitive is in the accusative case the object of \paraitoumai\: "I do not beg off dying from myself." {But if none of these things is} (\ei de ouden estin\). \De\ here is contrasted with \men\ just before. No word for "true" in the Greek. \Estin\ ("is") in the Greek here means "exists." Same condition (first class, assumed as true). {Whereof these accuse me} (\h“n houtoi katˆgorousin mou\). Genitive of relative \hon\ by attraction from \ha\ (accusative with \katˆgorousin\) to case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\ ("of these things"). \Mou\ is genitive of person after \katˆgorousin\. {No man can give me up to them} (\oudeis me dunatai autois charisasthai\). "Can" legally. Paul is a Roman citizen and not even Festus can make a free gift (\charisasthai\) of Paul to the Sanhedrin. {I appeal unto Caesar} (\Kaisara epikaloumai\). Technical phrase like Latin _Caesarem appello_. Originally the Roman law allowed an appeal from the magistrate to the people (_provocatio ad populum_), but the emperor represented the people and so the appeal to Caesar was the right of every Roman citizen. Paul had crossed the Rubicon on this point and so took his case out of the hands of dilatory provincial justice (really injustice). Roman citizens could make this appeal in capital offences. There would be expense connected with it, but better that with some hope than delay and certain death in Jerusalem. Festus was no better than Felix in his vacillation and desire to curry favour with the Jews at Paul's expense. No doubt Paul's long desire to see Rome (19:21; strkjv@Romans:15:22-28|) and the promise of Jesus that he would see Rome (Acts:23:11|) played some part in Paul's decision. But he made it reluctantly for he says in Rome (Acts:28:19|): "I was constrained to appeal." But acquittal at the hands of Festus with the hope of going to Rome as a free man had vanished.

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

rwp@Acts:26:2 @{I think myself happy} (\hˆgˆmai emauton makarion\). See on ¯Matthew:5:3| for \makarios\. Blass notes that Paul, like Tertullus, begins with _captatio benevolentiae_, but _absque adulatione_. He says only what he can truthfully speak. For \hˆgˆmai\ see strkjv@Phillipians:3:7; strkjv@1Timothy:6:1| (perfect middle indicative of \hˆgeomai\), I have considered. {That I am to make my defence} (\mell“n apologeisthai\). Literally, "being about to make my defence." {Whereof I am accused} (\h“n egkaloumai\). Genitive with \egkaloumai\ as in strkjv@19:40| or by attraction from accusative of relative (\ha\) to case of antecedent (\pant“n\).

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

rwp@Acts:27:28 @{They sounded} (\bolisantes\). First aorist active participle of \boliz“\ rare verb only here and in Eustathius who says it was familiar in ancient Greek. Apparently from \bolis\, a missile or dart, and so to throw down the lead into the sea, to heave the lead, to take soundings. The inscriptions give \bolimos\ for "leaden." {Twenty fathoms} (\orguias eikosi\). This old word, from \oreg“\, to stretch, means the distance from one outstretched middle finger tip to the other likewise out-stretched. {After a little space} (\brachu diastˆsantes\). Literally, "standing apart a little" (second aorist active participle of \diistˆmi\), that is, the ship going a short distance further on. A ship today approaching St. Paul's Bay by the rocky point of Koura would pass first twenty, then fifteen fathoms (Furneaux).

rwp@Acts:28:2 @{The barbarians} (\hoi barbaroi\). The Greeks called all men "barbarians" who did not speak Greek (Romans:1:14|), not "barbarians" in our sense of rude and uncivilized, but simply "foreign folk." Diodorus Siculus (V. 12) says that it was a colony of the Phoenicians and so their language was Punic (Page). The word originally meant an uncouth repetition (\barbar\) not understood by others (1Corinthians:14:11|). In strkjv@Colossians:3:11| Paul couples it with Scythian as certainly not Christian. These are (with verse 4| below) the only N.T. instances. {Showed us} (\pareichan\). Imperfect active of \parech“\ with \-an\ instead of \-on\ as \eichan\ in strkjv@Mark:8:7| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 339). It was their habit on this occasion, Luke means, they kept on showing. {No common kindness} (\ou tˆn tuchousan philanthr“pian\). The old word \philanthr“pia\ (\philos\, \anthr“pos\), love of mankind, occurs in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Titus:3:4| (adverb in strkjv@27:3|). See on ¯19:11| for this use of \ou tˆn tuchousan\, "not the kindness that happens every day." They were not "wreckers" to take advantage of the calamity. {They kindled a fire} (\hapsantes puran\). The only N.T. example and verse 3| of the old word \pura\ (from \pur\, fire), a pile of burning fuel (sticks). First aorist active participle of \hapt“\, to set fire to, to kindle. Cf. \anapt“\ in strkjv@Luke:12:49|. {Received us all} (\proselabonto pantas hˆmƒs\). Second aorist middle (indirect indicative of \proslamban“\. They took us all to themselves (cf. strkjv@Acts:18:26|). {The present} (\ton ephest“ta\). Second perfect active participle (intransitive) of \ephistˆmi\, "the rain that stood upon them" (the pouring rain). Only in Luke and Paul in N.T.

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

rwp@Colossians:2:12 @{Having been buried with him in baptism} (\suntaphentes aut“i en t“i baptismati\). Second aorist passive participle of \sunthapt“\, old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:6:4|, followed by associative instrumental case (\aut“i\). Thayer's Lexicon says: "For all who in the rite of baptism are plunged under the water, thereby declare that they put faith in the expiatory death of Christ for the pardon of their past sins." Yes, and for all future sins also. This word gives Paul's vivid picture of baptism as a symbolic burial with Christ and resurrection also to newness of life in him as Paul shows by the addition "wherein ye were also raised with him" (\en h“i kai sunˆgerthˆte\). "In which baptism" (\baptismati\, he means). First aorist passive indicative of \sunegeir“\, late and rare verb (Plutarch for waking up together), in LXX, in N.T. only in strkjv@Colossians:2:12; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@Ephesians:2:6|. In the symbol of baptism the resurrection to new life in Christ is pictured with an allusion to Christ's own resurrection and to our final resurrection. Paul does not mean to say that the new life in Christ is caused or created by the act of baptism. That is grossly to misunderstand him. The Gnostics and the Judaizers were sacramentalists, but not so Paul the champion of spiritual Christianity. He has just given the spiritual interpretation to circumcision which itself followed Abraham's faith (Romans:4:10-12|). Cf. strkjv@Galatians:3:27|. Baptism gives a picture of the change already wrought in the heart "through faith" (\dia tˆs piste“s\). {In the working of God} (\tˆs energeias tou theou\). Objective genitive after \piste“s\. See strkjv@1:29| for \energeia\. God had power to raise Christ from the dead (\tou egeirantos\, first aorist active participle of \egeir“\, the fact here stated) and he has power (energy) to give us new life in Christ by faith.

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@1John:1:6 says '... fellowship with God involves walking in the

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

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

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

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

rwp@Galatians:1:12 @{Nor was I taught it} (\oute edidachthˆn\). He did not receive it "from man" (\para anthr“p“n\, which shuts out both \apo\ and \dia\ of verse 1|), whether Peter or any other apostle, nor was he taught it in the school of Gamaliel in Jerusalem or at the University of Tarsus. He "received" his gospel in one way, "through revelation of Jesus Christ" (\di' apokalupse“s Iˆsou Christou\). He used \parelabon\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:3| about the reception of his message from Christ. It is not necessary to say that he had only one (because of the aorist active \parelabon\, from \paralamban“\, for it can very well be constative aorist) revelation (unveiling) from Christ. In fact, we know that he had numerous visions of Christ and in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:23| he expressly says concerning the origin of the Lord's Supper: "I received (\parelabon\, again) from the Lord." The Lord Jesus revealed his will to Paul.

rwp@Galatians:3:8 @{Foreseeing} (\proidousa\). Second aorist active participle of \proora“\. The Scripture is here personified. Alone in this sense of "sight," but common with \legei\ or \eipen\ (says, said) and really in verse 22| "hath shut up" (\sunekleisen\). {Would justify} (\dikaioi\). Present active indicative, "does justify." {Preached the gospel beforehand} (\proeuˆggelisato\). First aorist middle indicative of \proeuaggelizomai\ with augment on \a\ though both \pro\ and \eu\ before it in composition. Only instance in N.T. It occurs in Philo. and Schol. Soph. This Scripture announced beforehand the gospel on this point of justification by faith. He quotes the promise to Abraham in strkjv@Genesis:12:3; strkjv@18:18|, putting \panta ta ethnˆ\ (all the nations) in strkjv@18:18| for \pƒsai hai phulai\ (all the tribes) of the earth. It is a crucial passage for Paul's point, showing that the promise to Abraham included all the nations of the earth. The verb \eneuloge“\ (future passive here) occurs in the LXX and here only in N.T. (not strkjv@Acts:3:25| in correct text). {In thee} (\en soi\). "As their spiritual progenitor" (Lightfoot).

rwp@Galatians:4:13 @{Because of an infirmity of the flesh} (\di' astheneian tˆs sarkos\). All that we can get from this statement is the fact that Paul's preaching to the Galatians "the first time" or "the former time" (\to proteron\, adverbial accusative) was due to sickness of some kind whether it was eye trouble (4:15|) which was a trial to them or to the thorn in the flesh (2Corinthians:12:7|) we do not know. It can be interpreted as applying to North Galatia or to South Galatia if he had an attack of malaria on coming up from Perga. But the narrative in strkjv@Acts:13; 14| does not read as if Paul had planned to pass by Pisidia and by Lycaonia but for the attack of illness. The Galatians understood the allusion for Paul says "Ye know" (\oidate\).

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

rwp@James:1:26 @{Thinketh himself to be religious} (\dokei thrˆskos einai\). Condition of first class (\ei-dokei\). \Thrˆskos\ (of uncertain etymology, perhaps from \threomai\, to mutter forms of prayer) is predicate nominative after \einai\, agreeing with the subject of \dokei\ (either "he seems" or "he thinks"). This source of self-deception is in saying and doing. The word \thrˆskos\ is found nowhere else except in lexicons. Hatch (_Essays in Biblical Greek_, pp. 55-57) shows that it refers to the external observances of public worship, such as church attendance, almsgiving, prayer, fasting (Matthew:6:1-18|). It is the Pharisaic element in Christian worship. {While he bridleth not his tongue} (\mˆ chalinag“g“n gl“ssan heautou\). "Not bridling his own tongue." A reference to verse 19| and the metaphor is repeated in strkjv@3:12|. This is the earliest known example of the compound \chalinag“ge“\ (\chalinos\, bridle \ago\, to lead). It occurs also in Lucian. The picture is that of a man putting the bridle in his own mouth, not in that of another. See the similar metaphor of muzzling (\phimo“\) one's mouth (Matthew:22:12| \ephim“thˆ\). {Deceiveth} (\apat“n\). Present active participle from \apatˆ\ (deceit). He plays a trick on himself. {Religion} (\thrˆskeia\). Later form of \thrˆskiˆ\ (Herodotus) from \thrˆskos\ above. It means religious worship in its external observances, religious exercise or discipline, but not to the exclusion of reverence. In the N.T. we have it also in strkjv@Acts:26:5| of Judaism and in strkjv@Colossians:2:18| of worshipping angels. It is vain (\mataios\, feminine form same as masculine) or empty. Comes to nothing.

rwp@James:2:21 @{Justified by works} (\ex erg“n edikai“thˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \dikaio“\ (see Galatians and Romans for this verb, to declare righteous, to set right) in a question with \ouk\ expecting an affirmative answer. This is the phrase that is often held to be flatly opposed to Paul's statement in strkjv@Romans:4:1-5|, where Paul pointedly says that it was the faith of Abraham (Romans:4:9|) that was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness, not his works. But Paul is talking about the faith of Abraham before his circumcision (4:10|) as the basis of his being set right with God, which faith is symbolized in the circumcision. James makes plain his meaning also. {In that he offered up Isaac his son upon the altar} (\anenegkas Isaak ton huion autou epi to thusiastˆrion\). They use the same words, but they are talking of different acts. James points to the offering (\anenegkas\ second aorist--with first aorist ending--active participle of \anapher“\) of Isaac on the altar (Genesis:22:16f.|) as _proof_ of the faith that Abraham already had. Paul discusses Abraham's faith as the basis of his justification, that and not his circumcision. There is no contradiction at all between James and Paul. Neither is answering the other. Paul may or may not have seen the Epistle of James, who stood by him loyally in the Conference in Jerusalem (Acts:15; strkjv@Galatians:2|).

rwp@James:4:5 @{The Scripture} (\hˆ graphˆ\). Personification as in strkjv@Galatians:3:8; strkjv@James:2:23|. But no O.T. passage is precisely like this, though it is "a poetical rendering" (Ropes) of strkjv@Exodus:20:5|. The general thought occurs also in strkjv@Genesis:6:3-5; strkjv@Isaiah:63:8-16|, etc. Paul has the same idea also (Galatians:5:17,21; strkjv@Romans:8:6,8|). It is possible that the reference is really to the quotation in verse 6| from strkjv@Proverbs:3:34| and treating all before as a parenthesis. There is no way to decide positively. {In vain} (\ken“s\). Old adverb (Aristotle) from \ken“s\ (2:20|), here alone in N.T. "Emptily," not meaning what it says. {Made to dwell} (\kat“ikisen\). First aorist active of \katoikiz“\, old verb, to give a dwelling to, only here in N.T. {Long unto envying} (\pros phthonon epipothei\). A difficult phrase. Some even take \pros phthonon\ with \legei\ rather than with \epipothei\, as it naturally does go, meaning "jealously." But even so, with God presented as a jealous lover, does \to pneuma\ refer to the Holy Spirit as the subject of \epipothei\ or to man's spirit as the object of \epipothei\? Probably the former and \epipothei\ then means to yearn after in the good sense as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:8|.

rwp@James:5:14 @{Is any among you sick?} (\asthenei tis en humin;\). Present active indicative of \asthene“\, old verb, to be weak (without strength), often in N.T. (Matthew:10:8|). {Let him call for} (\proskalesasth“\). First aorist (ingressive) middle imperative of \proskale“\. Note change of tense (aorist) and middle (indirect) voice. Care for the sick is urged in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:14| ("help the sick"). Note the plural here, "elders of the church, as in strkjv@Acts:20:17; strkjv@15:6,22; strkjv@21:18; strkjv@Phillipians:1:1| (bishops). {Let them pray over him} (\proseuxasth“san ep' auton\). First aorist middle imperative of \proseuchomai\. Prayer for the sick is clearly enjoined. {Anointing him with oil} (\aleipsantes elai“i\). First aorist active participle of \aleiph“\, old verb, to anoint, and the instrumental case of \elaion\ (oil). The aorist participle can be either simultaneous or antecedent with \proseuxasth“san\ (pray). See the same use of \aleiph“ elai“i\ in strkjv@Mark:6:13|. The use of olive oil was one of the best remedial agencies known to the ancients. They used it internally and externally. Some physicians prescribe it today. It is clear both in strkjv@Mark:6:13| and here that medicinal value is attached to the use of the oil and emphasis is placed on the worth of prayer. There is nothing here of the pagan magic or of the later practice of "extreme unction" (after the eighth century). It is by no means certain that \aleiph“\ here and in strkjv@Mark:6:13| means "anoint" in a ceremonial fashion rather than "rub" as it commonly does in medical treatises. Trench (N.T. Synonyms) says: "\Aleiphein\ is the mundane and profane, \chriein\ the sacred and religious, word." At bottom in James we have God and medicine, God and the doctor, and that is precisely where we are today. The best physicians believe in God and want the help of prayer.

rwp@Info_John @ A PERSONAL WITNESS It is manifest all through the book that the writer is the witness who is making the contribution of his personal knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ during his earthly ministry. In strkjv@John:1:14| he plainly says that "the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory" (\etheasametha tˆn doxan autou\). He here associates others with him in this witness to the glory of the Word, but in strkjv@John:21:25| he employs the singular "I suppose" (\oimai\) in sharp dis- tinction from the plural "we know" (\oidamen\) just before. The writer is present in nearly all the scenes described. The word witness (\marture“, marturia\) so common in this Gospel (John:1:7,8,19; strkjv@3:11,26,33; strkjv@5:31; strkjv@12:17; strkjv@21:24|, etc.) illustrates well this point of view. In the Gospel of Luke we have the work of one who was not a personal witness of Christ (Luke:1:1-4|). In the Gospel of Matthew we possess either the whole work of a personal follower and apostle or at least the Logia of Matthew according to Papias preserved in it. In Mark's Gospel we have as the basis the preaching of Simon Peter as preserved by his interpreter John Mark. John's Gospel claims to be the personal witness of "the disciple whom Jesus loved" and as such deserves and has received exceptional esteem. One may note all through the book evidences of an eye-witness in the vivid details.

rwp@Info_John @ NO EARLY MARTYRDOM FOR THE APOSTLE JOHN In 1862 a fragment of the Chronicle of Georgius Hamartolus, a Byzantine monk of the ninth century, was published. It is the _Codex Coislinianus_, Paris, 305, which differs from the other manuscripts of this author in saying that John according to Papias was slain by the Jews (\hupo Ioudai“n anˆirethˆ\) while the other manuscripts say that John rested in peace (\en eirˆnˆi anepausato\). The passage also quotes Eusebius to the effect that John received Asia as his sphere of work and lived and died in Ephesus. This same George the Sinner misquotes Origen about the death of John for Origen really says that the Roman king condemned him to the Isle of Patmos, not to death. Another fragment of Philip of Side, apparently used by Georgius, makes the same erroneous reference to Papias. It is therefore a worthless legend growing out of the martyrdom promised James and John by Jesus (Mark:10:39; strkjv@Matthew:20:23|) and realized by James first of all (Acts:12:1f.|). John drank the cup in the exile to Patmos. The correction to Peter in strkjv@John:21:20-23| would have no meaning if the Apostle John had already been put to death.

rwp@Info_John @ THE AUTHOR THE APOSTLE JOHN Loisy (_Leviticus:Quatr. Evangile_, p. 132) says that if one takes literally what is given in the body of the Gospel of the Beloved Disciple he is bound to be one of the twelve. Loisy does not take it "literally." But why not? Are we to assume that the author of this greatest of books is playing a part or using a deliberate artifice to deceive? It may be asked why John does not use his own name instead of a _nom de plume_. Reference can be made to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, no one of which gives the author's name. One can see a reason for the turn here given since the book consists so largely of personal experiences of the author with Christ. He thus avoids the too frequent use of the personal pronoun and preserves the element of witness which marks the whole book. One by one the other twelve apostles disappear if we test their claims for the authorship. In the list of seven in chapter strkjv@John:21| it is easy to drop the names of Simon Peter, Thomas, and Nathanael. There are left two unnamed disciples and the sons of Zebedee (here alone mentioned, not even named, in the book). John in this Gospel always means the Baptist. Why does the author so uniformly slight the sons of Zebedee if not one of them himself? In the Acts Luke does not mention his own name nor that of Titus his brother, though so many other friends of Paul are named. If the Beloved Disciple is John the Apostle, the silence about James and himself is easily understood. James is ruled out because of his early death (Acts:12:1|). The evidence in the Gospel points directly to the Apostle John as the author.

rwp@Info_John @ EARLY AND CLEAR WITNESS TO THE APOSTLE JOHN Ignatius (_ad Philad_. vii. 1) about A.D. 110 says of the Spirit that "he knows whence he comes and whither he is going," a clear allusion to strkjv@John:3:8|. Polycarp (_ad Phil_. S 7) quotes strkjv@1John:4:2,3|. Eusebius states that Papias quoted First John. Irenaeus is quoted by Eusebius (H.E. V, 20) as saying that he used as a boy to hear Polycarp tell "of his intercourse with John and the others who had seen the Lord." Irenaeus accepted all our Four Gospels. Tatian made his _Diatessaron_ out of the Four Gospels alone. Theophilus of Antioch (_Ad Autol_. ii. 22) calls John the author of the Fourth Gospel. This was about A.D. 180. The Muratorian Canon near the close of the second century names John as the author of the Fourth Gospel. Till after the time of Origen no opposition to the Johannine authorship appears outside of Marcion and the Alogi. No other New Testament book has stronger external evidence.

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

rwp@John:1:36 @{He looked} (\emblepsas\). First aorist active participle of \emblep“\, antecedent action before \legei\ (says). {As he walked} (\peripatounti\). Present active participle in dative case after \emblepsas\ and like \erchomenon\ in verse 29| vividly pictures the rapture of John in this vision of Jesus, so far as we know the third and last glimpse of Jesus by John (the baptism, verse 29|, and here). {Saith} (\legei\). Historical present, change from \histˆkei\ before. He repeats part of the tribute in verse 29|.

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

rwp@John:2:16 @{Take these things hence} (\Arate tauta enteuthen\). First aorist active imperative of \air“\. Probably the doves were in baskets or cages and so had to be taken out by the traders. {Make not my Father's house a house of merchandise} (\mˆ poieite ton oikon tou patros mou oikon emporiou\). "Stop making," it means, \mˆ\ and the present active imperative. They had made it a market-house (\emporiou\, here only in N.T., old word from \emporos\, merchant, one who goes on a journey for traffic, a drummer). Note the clear-cut Messianic claim here (My Father as in strkjv@Luke:2:49|). Jerome says: "A certain fiery and starry light shone from his eyes and the majesty of Godhead gleamed in His face."

rwp@John:3:27 @{Except it have been given him from heaven} (\ean mˆ ˆi dedomenon aut“i ek tou ouranou\). See the same idiom in strkjv@John:6:65| (cf. strkjv@19:11|). Condition of third class, undetermined with prospect of determination, \ean mˆ\ with the periphrastic perfect passive subjunctive of \did“mi\. The perfect tense is rare in the subjunctive and an exact rendering into English is awkward, "unless it be granted him from heaven." See strkjv@1Corinthians:4:7| where Paul says the same thing.

rwp@John:4:28 @{Left her waterpot} (\aphˆken tˆn hudrian\). First aorist active indicative of \aphiˆmi\, ingressive aorist, in her excitement and embarrassment. It was too large for speed anyhow (2:6|). And says (\kai legei\). Graphic historic present indicative again.

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:6:31 @{Ate the manna} (\to manna ephagon\). The rabbis quoted strkjv@Psalms:72:16| to prove that the Messiah, when he comes, will outdo Moses with manna from heaven. Jesus was claiming to be the Messiah and able to give bread for eternal life (verse 27|). Lightfoot (_Biblical Essays_, p. 152) says: "The key to the understanding of the whole situation is an acquaintance with the national expectation of the greater Moses." They quote to Jesus strkjv@Exodus:16:15| (of. strkjv@Numbers:11:7; strkjv@21:5; strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:3|). Their plea is that Moses gave us bread "from heaven" (\ek tou ouranou\). Can Jesus equal that deed of Moses?

rwp@John:7:28 @{And I am not come of myself} (\kai ap' emautou ouk elˆlutha\). \Kai\ here="and yet." Jesus repeats the claim of verse 17| and also in strkjv@5:30; strkjv@8:28; strkjv@12:49; strkjv@14:10|. {Whom ye know not} (\hon humeis ouk oidate\). Jesus passes by a controversy over the piece of popular theology to point out their ignorance of God the Father who sent him. He tersely agrees that they know something of him. Jesus says of these Jews that they know not God as in strkjv@8:19,55|.

rwp@John:8:17 @{Yea and in your law} (\kai en t“i nom“i de t“i humeter“i\). Same use of \kai--de\ as in verse 16|. They claimed possession of the law (7:49|) and so Jesus takes this turn in answer to the charge of single witness in verse 13|. He will use similar language (your law) in strkjv@10:34| in an _argumentum ad hominem_ as here in controversy with the Jews. In strkjv@15:24| to the apostles Jesus even says "in their law" in speaking of the hostile Jews plotting his death. He does not mean in either case to separate himself wholly from the Jews and the law, though in Matthew 5 he does show the superiority of his teaching to that of the law. For the Mosaic regulation about two witnesses see strkjv@Deuteronomy:17:6; strkjv@19:15|. This combined witness of two is not true just because they agree, unless true in fact separately. But if they disagree, the testimony falls to the ground. In this case the Father confirms the witness of the Son as Jesus had already shown (5:37|).

rwp@John:9:24 @{A second time} (\ek deuterou\). He had given the Pharisees the facts the first time (9:15|). It was really the third time (see \palin\ in strkjv@9:17|). Now it was like a joke unless the Pharisees meant to imply that his previous story was untrue. {Give glory to God} (\dos doxan t“i the“i\). Second aorist active imperative of \did“mi\ (cf. \sches, hes\). This phrase does not mean gratitude to God as in strkjv@Luke:17:18|. It is rather an adjuration to speak the truth (Joshua:7:19; strkjv@1Samuel:6:5|) as if he had not done it before. Augustine says: "_Quid est Daniel:gloriam Deo? Nega quod accepisti._" Is a sinner (\hamart“los estin\). They can no longer deny the fact of the cure since the testimony of the parents (9:19|) and now wish the man to admit that he was lying in saying that Jesus healed him. He must accept their ecclesiastical authority as proving that Jesus had nothing to do with the cure since Jesus is a sinner. They wish to decide the fact by logic and authority like all persecutors through the ages. Recall the Pharisaic distinction between \dikaios\ (righteous) and \hamart“los\ (sinner).

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

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

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

rwp@John:12:41 @{Because he saw his glory} (\hoti eiden tˆn doxan autou\). Correct reading here \hoti\ (because), not \hote\ (when). Isaiah with spiritual vision saw the glory of the Messiah and spoke (\elalˆsen\) of him, John says, whatever modern critics may think or say. Songs:Jesus said that Abraham saw his day (8:56|). Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:11:13|.

rwp@John:12:50 @{Life eternal} (\z“ˆ ai“nios\). See strkjv@3:15; strkjv@Matthew:25:46| for this great phrase. In strkjv@6:68| Peter says to Jesus, "Thou hast the words of eternal life." Jesus had just said (6:63|) that his words were spirit and life. The secret lies in the source, "as the Father hath said to me" (\eirˆken\).

rwp@John:13:2 @{During supper} (\deipnou ginomenou\). Correct text, present middle participle of \ginomai\ (not \genomenou\, second aorist middle participle, "being ended") genitive absolute. Verse 4| shows plainly that the meal was still going on. {The devil having already put} (\tou diabolou ˆdˆ beblˆkotos\). Another genitive absolute without a connective (asyndeton), perfect active participle of \ball“\, to cast, to put. Luke (Luke:22:3|) says that Satan entered Judas when he offered to betray Jesus. Hence John's "already" (\ˆdˆ\) is pertinent. John repeats his statement in verse 27|. In strkjv@John:6:70| Jesus a year ago had seen that Judas was a devil. {To betray him} (\hina paradoi auton\). Cf. strkjv@Acts:5:3|. Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \paradid“mi\ (form in \-oi\ as in strkjv@Mark:14:10| rather than the usual \-“i\ in strkjv@Luke:22:4|). Satan had an open door by now into the heart of Judas.

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

rwp@John:18:28 @{They lead} (\agousin\). Dramatic historical present of \ag“\, plural "they" for the Sanhedrists (Luke:23:1|). John gives no details of the trial before the Sanhedrin (only the fact, strkjv@John:18:24,28|) when Caiaphas presided, either the informal meeting at night (Mark:14:53,55-65; strkjv@Matthew:26:57,59-68; strkjv@Luke:22:54,63-65|) or the formal ratification meeting after dawn (Mark:15:1; strkjv@Matthew:27:1; strkjv@Luke:22:66-71|), but he gives much new material of the trial before Pilate (18:28-38|). {Into the palace} (\eis to prait“rion\). For the history and meaning of this interesting Latin word, _praetorium_, see on ¯Matthew:27:27; strkjv@Acts:23:35; strkjv@Phillipians:1:13|. Here it is probably the magnificent palace in Jerusalem built by Herod the Great for himself and occupied by the Roman Procurator (governor) when in the city. There was also one in Caesarea (Acts:23:35|). Herod's palace in Jerusalem was on the Hill of Zion in the western part of the upper city. There is something to be said for the Castle of Antonia, north of the temple area, as the location of Pilate's residence in Jerusalem. {Early} (\pr“i\). Technically the fourth watch (3 A.M. to 6 A.M.). There were two violations of Jewish legal procedure (holding the trial for a capital case at night, passing condemnation on the same day of the trial). Besides, the Sanhedrin no longer had the power of death. A Roman court could meet any time after sunrise. John (19:14|) says it was "about the sixth hour" when Pilate condemned Jesus. {That they might not be defiled} (\hina mˆ mianth“sin\). Purpose clause with \hina mˆ\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \miain“\, to stain, to defile. For Jewish scruples about entering the house of a Gentile see strkjv@Acts:10:28; strkjv@11:3|. {But might eat the passover} (\alla phag“sin to pascha\). Second aorist active subjunctive of the defective verb \esthi“\, to eat. This phrase may mean to eat the passover meal as in strkjv@Matthew:27:17| (Mark:14:12,14; strkjv@Luke:22:11,15|), but it does not have to mean that. In strkjv@2Chronicles:30:22| we read: "And they did eat the festival seven days" when the paschal festival is meant, not the paschal lamb or the paschal supper. There are eight other examples of \pascha\ in John's Gospel and in all of them the feast is meant, not the supper. If we follow John's use of the word, it is the feast here, not the meal of strkjv@John:13:2| which was the regular passover meal. This interpretation keeps John in harmony with the Synoptics.

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

rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE USE OF APOCRYPHAL BOOKS Jude:(verse strkjv@Jude:1:14|) quotes from "Enoch" by name and says that he "prophesied." What he quotes is a combination of various passages in the Book of Enoch as we have it now. It used to be held that part of Enoch was later than Jude, but Charles seems to have disproved that, though the book as we have it has many interpolations. Tertullian wanted to canonise Enoch because of what Jude:says, whereas Chrysostom says that the authenticity of Jude:was doubted because of the use of Enoch. In verse strkjv@Jude:1:9| there seems to be an allusion to the _Assumption of Moses_, another apocryphal book, but it is the use of "prophesied" in verse strkjv@Jude:1:14| about Enoch that gave most offence. It is possible, of course, that Jude:did not attach the full sense to that term.

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

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE SAME AUTHOR FOR GOSPEL AND ACTS The author of Acts refers to the Gospel specifically as "the first treatise," \ton pr“ton logon\, (Acts:1:1|) and both are addressed to Theophilus (Luke:1:3; strkjv@Acts:1:1|). He speaks of himself in both books as "me" (\kamoi\, strkjv@Luke:1:3|) and {I made} (\epoiˆsamˆn\, strkjv@Acts:1:1|). He refers to himself with others as "we" and "us" as in strkjv@Acts:16:10|, the "we" sections of Acts. The unity of Acts is here assumed until the authorship of Acts is discussed in Volume III. The same style appears in Gospel and Acts, so that the presumption is strongly in support of the author's statement. It is quite possible that the formal Introduction to the Gospel (Luke:1:1-4|) was intended to apply to the Acts also which has only an introductory clause. Plummer argues that to suppose that the author of Acts imitated the Gospel purposely is to suppose a literary miracle. Even Cadbury, who is not convinced of the Lucan authorship, says: "In my study of Luke and Acts, their unity is a fundamental and illuminating axiom." He adds: "They are not merely two independent writings from the same pen; they are a single continuous work. Acts is neither an appendix nor an afterthought. It is probably an integral part of the author's original plan and purpose."

rwp@Info_Luke @ THIS COMPANION AND AUTHOR LUKE All the Greek manuscripts credit the Gospel to Luke in the title. We should know that Luke wrote these two books if there was no evidence from early writers. Irenaeus definitely ascribes the Gospel to Luke as does Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, the Muratorian Fragment. Plummer holds that the authorship of the four great Epistles of Paul (I and II Corinthians, Galatians, Romans) which even Baur accepted, is scarcely more certain than the Lukan authorship of the Gospel. Even Renan says: "There is no very strong reason for supposing that Luke was not the author of the Gospel which bears his name."

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE SOURCES OF THE GOSPEL In his Preface or Prologue (Luke:1:1-4|) the author tells us that he had two kinds of sources, oral and written, and that they were many, how many we have no way of telling. It is now generally accepted that we know two of his written sources, Mark's Gospel and Q or the Logia of Jesus (written by Matthew, Papias says). Mark is still preserved and it is not difficult for any one by the use of a harmony of the Gospels to note how Luke made use of Mark, incorporating what he chose, adapting it in various ways, not using what did not suit his purposes. The other source we only know in the non-Markan portions of Matthew and Luke, that is the material common to both, but not in Mark. This also can be noted by any one in a harmony. Only it is probable that this source was more extensive than just the portions used by both Matthew and Luke. It is probable that both Matthew and Luke each used portions of the Logia not used by the other. But there is a large portion of Luke's Gospel which is different from Mark and Matthew. Some scholars call this source L. There is little doubt that Luke had another document for the material peculiar to him, but it is also probable that he had several others. He spoke of "many." This applies especially to chapters 9 to 21. But Luke expressly says that he had received help from "eye-witnesses and ministers of the word," in oral form this means. It is, then, probable that Luke made numerous notes of such data and used them along with the written sources at his command. This remark applies particularly to chapters 1 and 2 which have a very distinct Semitic (Aramaic) colouring due to the sources used. It is possible, of course, that Mary the mother of Jesus may have written a statement concerning these important matters or that Luke may have had converse with her or with one of her circle. Ramsay, in his volume, _Was Christ Born at Bethlehem?_ shows the likelihood of Luke's contact with Mary or her circle during these two years at Caesarea. Luke handles the data acquired with care and skill as he claims in his Prologue and as the result shows. The outcome is what Renan called the most beautiful book in the world.

rwp@Luke:2:5 @{To enrol himself with Mary} (\apograpsasthai sun Mariam\). Direct middle. "With Mary" is naturally taken with the infinitive as here. If so, that means that Mary's family register was in Bethlehem also and that she also belonged to the house of David. It is possible to connect "with Mary" far back with "went up" (\anebˆ\) in verse 4|, but it is unnatural to do so. There is no real reason for doubting that Mary herself was a descendant of David and that is the obvious way to understand Luke's genealogy of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:3:23-38|). The Syriac Sinaitic expressly says that both Joseph and Mary were of the house and city of David. {Betrothed} (\emnˆsteumenˆn\). Same verb as in strkjv@1:27|, but here it really means "married" or "espoused" as strkjv@Matthew:1:24f.| shows. Otherwise she could not have travelled with Joseph. {Great with child} (\enku“i\). Only here in N.T. Common Greek word.

rwp@Luke:2:13 @{Host} (\stratias\). A military term for a band of soldiers common in the ancient Greek. Bengel says: "Here the army announces peace." {Praising} (\ainount“n\). Construction according to sense (plural, though \stratias\ is singular).

rwp@Luke:3:23 @{Jesus Himself} (\autos Iˆsous\). Emphatic intensive pronoun calling attention to the personality of Jesus at this juncture. When he entered upon his Messianic work. {When he began to teach} (\archomenos\). The words "to teach" are not in the Greek text. The Authorized Version "began to be about thirty years of age," is an impossible translation. The Revised Version rightly supplies "to teach" (\didaskein\) after the present participle \archomenos\. Either the infinitive or the participle can follow \archomai\, usually the infinitive in the _Koin‚_. It is not necessary to supply anything (Acts:1:22|). {Was about thirty years of age} (\ˆn h“sei et“n triakonta\). Tyndale has it right "Jesus was about thirty yere of age when he beganne." Luke does not commit himself definitely to precisely thirty years as the age of Christ. The Levites entered upon full service at that age, but that proves nothing about Jesus. God's prophets enter upon their task when the word of God comes to them. Jesus may have been a few months under or over thirty or a year or two less or more. {Being Son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli} (\“n huios h“s enomizeto I“sˆph tou Helei\). For the discussion of the genealogy of Jesus see on ¯Matthew:1:1-17|. The two genealogies differ very widely and many theories have been proposed about them. At once one notices that Luke begins with Jesus and goes back to Adam, the Son of God, while Matthew begins with Abraham and comes to "Joseph the husband of Mary of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ" (Matthew:1:16|). Matthew employs the word "begot" each time, while Luke has the article \tou\ repeating \huiou\ (Son) except before Joseph. They agree in the mention of Joseph, but Matthew says that "Jacob begat Joseph" while Luke calls "Joseph the son of Heli." There are other differences, but this one makes one pause. Joseph, of course, did not have two fathers. If we understand Luke to be giving the real genealogy of Jesus through Mary, the matter is simple enough. The two genealogies differ from Joseph to David except in the cases of Zorobabel and Salathiel. Luke evidently means to suggest something unusual in his genealogy by the use of the phrase "as was supposed" (\h“s enomizeto\). His own narrative in strkjv@Luke:1:26-38| has shown that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. Plummer objects that, if Luke is giving the genealogy of Jesus through Mary, \huios\ must be used in two senses here (son as was supposed of Joseph, and grandson through Mary of Heli). But that is not an unheard of thing. In neither list does Matthew or Luke give a complete genealogy. Just as Matthew uses "begat" for descent, so does Luke employ "son" in the same way for descendant. It was natural for Matthew, writing for Jews, to give the legal genealogy through Joseph, though he took pains to show in strkjv@Matthew:1:16,18-25| that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. It was equally natural for Luke, a Greek himself and writing for the whole world, to give the actual genealogy of Jesus through Mary. It is in harmony with Pauline universality (Plummer) that Luke carries the genealogy back to Adam and does not stop with Abraham. It is not clear why Luke adds "the Son of God" after Adam (3:38|). Certainly he does not mean that Jesus is the Son of God only in the sense that Adam is. Possibly he wishes to dispose of the heathen myths about the origin of man and to show that God is the Creator of the whole human race, Father of all men in that sense. No mere animal origin of man is in harmony with this conception.

rwp@Luke:4:1 @{Full of the Holy Spirit} (\plˆrˆs pneumatos hagiou\). An evident allusion to the descent of the Holy Spirit on Jesus at his baptism (Luke:3:21f.|). The distinctness of the Persons in the Trinity is shown there, but with evident unity. One recalls also Luke's account of the overshadowing of Mary by the Holy Spirit (1:35|). strkjv@Matthew:4:1| says that "Jesus was led of the Spirit" while strkjv@Mark:1:12| states that "the Spirit driveth him forth" which see for discussion. "Jesus had been endowed with supernatural power; and He was tempted to make use of it in furthering his own interests without regard to the Father's will" (Plummer). {Was led by the Spirit} (\ˆgeto en toi pneumati\). Imperfect passive, continuously led. \En\ may be the instrumental use as often, for strkjv@Matthew:4:1| has here \hupo\ of direct agency. But Matthew has the aorist passive \anˆchthˆ\ which may be ingressive as he has \eis tˆn erˆmon\ (into the wilderness) while Luke has \en t“i erˆm“i\ (in the wilderness). At any rate Luke affirms that Jesus was now continuously under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Hence in this same sentence he mentions the Spirit twice. {During the forty days} (\hˆmerƒs tesserakonta\). Accusative of duration of time, to be connected with "led" not with "tempted." He was led in the Spirit during these forty days (cf. strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:2|, forty years). The words are amphibolous also in strkjv@Mark:1:13|. strkjv@Matthew:4:2| seems to imply that the three recorded temptations came at the close of the fasting for forty days. That can be true and yet what Luke states be true also. These three may be merely specimens and so "representative of the struggle which continued throughout the whole period" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:9:28 @{About eight days} (\h“sei hˆmerai okt“\). A _nominativus pendens_ without connexion or construction. strkjv@Mark:9:2| (Matthew:17:1|) has "after six days" which agrees with the general statement. {Into the mountain} (\eis to oros\). Probably Mount Hermon because we know that Jesus was near Caesarea Philippi when Peter made the confession (Mark:8:27; strkjv@Matthew:16:13|). Hermon is still the glory of Palestine from whose heights one can view the whole of the land. It was a fit place for the Transfiguration. {To pray} (\proseuxasthai\). Peculiar to Luke who so often mentions Christ's habit of prayer (cf. strkjv@3:21|). See also verse 29| "as he was praying" (\en t“i proseuchesthai\, one of Luke's favourite idioms). {His countenance was altered} (\egeneto to eidos tou pros“pou autou heteron\). Literally, "the appearance of his face became different." strkjv@Matthew:17:2| says that "his face did shine as the sun." Luke does not use the word "transfigured" (\metemorph“thˆ\) in strkjv@Mark:9:2; strkjv@Matthew:17:2|. He may have avoided this word because of the pagan associations with this word as Ovid's \Metamorphoses\. {And his raiment became white and dazzling} (\kai ho himatismos autou leukos exastrapt“n\). Literally, {And his raiment white radiant}. There is no _and_ between "white" and "dazzling." The participle \exastrapt“n\ is from the compound verb meaning to flash (\astrapt“\) out or forth (\ex\). The simple verb is common for lightning flashes and bolts, but the compound in the LXX and here alone in the N.T. See strkjv@Mark:9:3| "exceeding white" and strkjv@Matthew:17:2| "white as the light."

rwp@Luke:9:45 @{It was concealed from them} (\ˆn parakekalummenon ap' aut“n\). Periphrastic past perfect of \parakalupt“\, a common verb, but only here in the N.T., to cover up, to hide from. This item only in Luke. {That they should not perceive it} (\hina mˆ aisth“ntai auto\). Second aorist middle subjunctive of the common verb \aisthanomai\ used with \hina mˆ\, negative purpose. This explanation at least relieves the disciples to some extent of full responsibility for their ignorance about the death of Jesus as strkjv@Mark:9:32| observes, as does Luke here that they were afraid to ask him. Plummer says, "They were not allowed to understand the saying then, in order that they might remember it afterwards, and see that Jesus had met His sufferings with full knowledge and free will." Perhaps also, if they had fully understood, they might have lacked courage to hold on to the end. But it is a hard problem.

rwp@Luke:9:47 @{Took a little child} (\epilabomenos paidion\). Second aorist middle participle of the common verb \epilamban“\. Strictly, Taking a little child to himself (indirect middle). strkjv@Mark:9:36| has merely the active \lab“n\ of the simple verb \lamban“\. Set him by his side (\estˆsen auto par' heaut“i\). "In his arms" strkjv@Mark:9:36| has it, "in the midst of them" strkjv@Matthew:18:3| says. All three attitudes following one another (the disciples probably in a circle around Jesus anyhow) and now the little child (Peter's child?) was slipped down by the side of Jesus as he gave the disciples an object lesson in humility which they sorely needed.

rwp@Luke:14:17 @{His servant} (\ton doulon autou\). His bondservant. _Vocator_ or Summoner (Esther:5:8; strkjv@6:14|). This second summons was the custom then as now with wealthy Arabs. Tristram (_Eastern Customs_, p. 82) says: "To refuse the second summons would be an insult, which is equivalent among the Arab tribes to a declaration of war."

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

rwp@Luke:14:33 @{Renounceth not} (\ouk apotassetai\). Old Greek word to set apart as in a military camp, then in the middle voice to separate oneself from, say good-bye to (Luke:9:61|), to renounce, forsake, as here. {All that he hath} (\pasin tois heautou huparchousin\). Dative case, says good-bye to all his property, "all his own belongings" (neuter plural participle used as substantive) as named in verse 26|. This verse gives the principle in the two parables of the rash builder and of the rash king. The minor details do not matter. The spirit of self-sacrifice is the point.

rwp@Luke:15:8 @{Ten pieces of silver} (\drachmas deka\). The only instance in the N.T. of this old word for a coin of 65.5 grains about the value of the common \dˆnarius\ (about eighteen cents), a quarter of a Jewish shekel. The double drachma (\didrachmon\) occurs in the N.T. only in strkjv@Matthew:17:24|. The root is from \drassomai\, to grasp with the hand (1Corinthians:3:19|), and so a handful of coin. Ten drachmas would be equal to nearly two dollars, but in purchasing power much more. {Sweep} (\saroi\). A late colloquial verb \saro“\ for the earlier \sair“\, to clear by sweeping. Three times in the N.T. (Luke:11:25; strkjv@15:8; strkjv@Matthew:12:44|). The house was probably with out windows (only the door for light and hence the lamp lit) and probably also a dirt floor. Hence Bengel says: _non sine pulvere_. This parable is peculiar to Luke.

rwp@Luke:17:21 @{Within you} (\entos hum“n\). This is the obvious, and, as I think, the necessary meaning of \entos\. The examples cited of the use of \entos\ in Xenophon and Plato where \entos\ means "among" do not bear that out when investigated. Field (_Ot. Norv_.) "contends that there is no clear instance of \entos\ in the sense of among" (Bruce), and rightly so. What Jesus says to the Pharisees is that they, as others, are to look for the kingdom of God within themselves, not in outward displays and supernatural manifestations. It is not a localized display "Here" or "There." It is in this sense that in strkjv@Luke:11:20| Jesus spoke of the kingdom of God as "come upon you" (\ephthasen eph' humƒs\), speaking to Pharisees. The only other instance of \entos\ in the N.T. (Matthew:23:26|) necessarily means "within" ("the inside of the cup"). There is, beside, the use of \entos\ meaning "within" in the Oxyrhynchus Papyrus saying of Jesus of the Third Century (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 426) which is interesting: "The kingdom of heaven is within you" (\entos hum“n\ as here in strkjv@Luke:17:21|).

rwp@Luke:22:41 @{About a stone's throw} (\h“sei lithou bolˆn\). Accusative of extent of space. Luke does not tell of leaving eight disciples by the entrance to Gethsemane nor about taking Peter, James, and John further in with him. {Kneeled down} (\theis ta gonata\). Second aorist active participle from \tithˆmi\. strkjv@Mark:14:35| says "fell on the ground" and strkjv@Matthew:26:39| "fell on his face." All could be true at different moments. {Prayed} (\prosˆucheto\). Imperfect middle, was praying, kept on praying.

rwp@Mark:1:24 @{What have we to do with thee?} (\ti hˆmin kai soi?\) The same idiom in strkjv@Matthew:8:29|. Ethical dative. Nothing in common between the demon and Jesus. Note "we." The man speaks for the demon and himself, double personality. The recognition of Jesus by the demons may surprise us since the rabbis (the ecclesiastics) failed to do so. They call Jesus "The Holy One of God" (\ho hagios tou theou\). Hence the demon feared that Jesus was come to destroy him and the man in his power. In strkjv@Matthew:8:29| the demon calls Jesus "Son of God." Later the disciples will call Jesus "The Holy One of God" (John:6:69|). The demon cried out aloud (\anekraxen\, late first aorist form, \anekragen\, common second aorist) so that all heard the strange testimony to Jesus. The man says "I know" (\oida\), correct text, some manuscripts "we know" (\oidamen\), including the demon.

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

rwp@Mark:9:6 @{For he wist not what to answer} (\ou gar ˆidei ti apokrithˆi\). Deliberative subjunctive retained in indirect question. But why did Peter say anything? Luke says that he spoke, "not knowing what he said," as an excuse for the inappropriateness of his remarks. Perhaps Peter felt embarrassed at having been asleep (Luke:9:32|) and the feast of tabernacles or booths (\skˆnai\) was near. See on ¯Matthew:17:4|. Peter and the others apparently had not heard the talk of Moses and Elijah with Jesus about his decease (\exodon\, exodus, departure) and little knew the special comfort that Jesus had found in this understanding of the great approaching tragedy concerning which Peter had shown absolute stupidity (Mark:8:32f.|) so recently. See on ¯Matthew:17:5| about the overshadowing and the voice.

rwp@Mark:9:9 @{Save when} (\ei mˆ hotan\). Matthew has "until" (\he“s hou\). {Should have risen} (\anastˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive. More exactly, "should rise" (punctiliar aorist and futuristic, not with any idea of perfect tense). strkjv@Luke:9:36| merely says that they told no man any of these things. It was a high and holy secret experience that the chosen three had had for their future good and for the good of all.

rwp@Mark:9:22 @{But if thou canst} (\all 'ei ti dunˆi\). Jesus had asked (verse 21|) the history of the case like a modern physician. The father gave it and added further pathetic details about the fire and the water. The failure of the disciples had not wholly destroyed his faith in the power of Jesus, though the conditional form (first class, assuming it to be true) does suggest doubt whether the boy can be cured at all. It was a chronic and desperate case of epilepsy with the demon possession added. {Help us} (\boethˆson hemin\). Ingressive aorist imperative. Do it now. With touching tenderness he makes the boy's case his own as the Syrophoenician woman had said, "Have mercy on me" (Matthew:15:21|). The leper had said: "If thou wilt" (Mark:1:40|). This father says: "If thou canst."

rwp@Mark:9:35 @{He sat down and called the twelve} (\kathisas eph“nˆsen tous d“deka\). Deliberate action of Jesus to handle this delicate situation. Jesus gives them the rule of greatness: "If any man would be first (\pr“tos\) he shall be last (\eschatos\) of all, and minister (\diakonos\) of all." This saying of Christ, like many others, he repeated at other times (Mark:10:43f.; strkjv@Matthew:23:8ff.; strkjv@Luke:22:24f.|). strkjv@Matthew:18:2| says that he called a little child, one there in the house, perhaps Peter's child. strkjv@Luke:9:47| notes that he "set him by his side." Then Jesus {taking him in his arms} (\enagkalisamenos\, aorist middle participle, late Greek word from \agkalˆ\ as in strkjv@Luke:2:28|) spoke again to the disciples.

rwp@Mark:10:1 @{Into the border of Judea and beyond Jordan} (\eis ta horia tˆs Ioudaias kai peran tou Iordanou\). See on ¯Matthew:19:1| for discussion of this curious expression. Matthew adds "from Galilee" and strkjv@Luke:17:11| says that Jesus "was passing through the midst of Samaria and Galilee" after leaving Ephraim (John:11:54|). A great deal has intervened between the events at the close of Mark 9 and those in the beginning of Mark 10. For these events see strkjv@Matthew:18; strkjv@John:7-11; strkjv@Luke:9:57-18:14| (one-third of Luke's Gospel comes in here). It was a little over six months to the end at the close of Mark 9. It is just a few weeks now in Mark 10. Jesus has begun his last journey to Jerusalem going north through Samaria, Galilee, across the Jordan into Perea, and back into Judea near Jericho to go up with the passover pilgrims from Galilee. {Multitudes} (\ochloi\). Caravans and caravans journeying to Jerusalem. Many of them are followers of Jesus from Galilee or at least kindly disposed towards him. They go together (\sunporeuontai\) with Jesus. Note dramatic historical present. {As he was wont} (\h“s ei“thei\). Second past perfect used like an imperfect from \ei“tha\, second perfect active. Jesus {was teaching} (\edidasken\, imperfect, no longer present tense) this moving caravan.

rwp@Mark:10:28 @{Peter began to say} (\ˆrxato legein ho Petros\). It was hard for Peter to hold in till now. strkjv@Matthew:19:27| says that "Peter answered" as if the remark was addressed to him in particular. At any rate Peter reminds Jesus of what they had left to follow him, four of them that day by the sea (Mark:1:20; strkjv@Matthew:4:22; strkjv@Luke:5:11|). It was to claim obedience to this high ideal on their part in contrast with the conduct of the rich young ruler.

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

rwp@Mark:12:15 @{Knowing their hypocrisy} (\eid“s aut“n tˆn hupocrisin\). strkjv@Matthew:22:18| has "perceived their wickedness" (\gnous tˆn ponˆrian aut“n\) while strkjv@Luke:20:23| says, "perceived their craftiness" (\katanoˆsas aut“n tˆn panourgian\). Each of these words throws a flash-light on the spirit and attitude of these young men. They were sly, shrewd, slick, but they did not deceive Jesus with their pious palaver. See on Matthew for further details.

rwp@Mark:12:28 @{Heard them questioning together} (\akousas aut“n sunzˆtount“n\). The victory of Christ over the Sadducees pleased the Pharisees who now had come back with mixed emotions over the new turn of things (Matthew:22:34|). strkjv@Luke:20:39| represents one of the scribes as commending Jesus for his skilful reply to the Sadducees. Mark here puts this scribe in a favourable light, "knowing that he had answered them well" (\eid“s hoti kal“s apekrithˆ autois\). "Them" here means the Sadducees. But strkjv@Matthew:22:35| says that this lawyer (\nomikos\) was "tempting" (\peiraz“n\) by his question. "A few, among whom was the scribe, were constrained to admire, even if they were willing to criticize, the Rabbi who though not himself a Pharisee, surpassed the Pharisees as a champion of the truth." That is a just picture of this lawyer. {The first of all} (\pr“tˆ pant“n\). First in rank and importance. strkjv@Matthew:22:36| has "great" (\megalˆ\). See discussion there. Probably Jesus spoke in Aramaic. "First" and "great" in Greek do not differ essentially here. Mark quotes strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:4f.| as it stands in the LXX and also strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|. strkjv@Matthew:22:40| adds the summary: "On these two commandments hangeth (\krematai\) the whole law and the prophets."

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

rwp@Matthew:1:22 @{That it may be fulfilled} (\hina plˆr“thˆi\). Alford says that "it is impossible to interpret \hina\ in any other sense than in order that." That was the old notion, but modern grammarians recognize the non-final use of this particle in the _Koin‚_ and even the consecutive like the Latin _ut_. Some even argue for a causal use. If the context called for result, one need not hesitate to say so as in strkjv@Mark:11:28; strkjv@John:9:36; strkjv@1John:1:9; strkjv@Revelation:9:20; strkjv@13:13|. See discussion in my _Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research_, pp. 997-9. All the same it is purpose here, God's purpose, Matthew reports the angel as saying, spoken "by (\hupo\, immediate agent) the Lord through (\dia\, intermediate agent) the prophet." {"All this has happened"} (\touto de holon gegonen\, present perfect indicative), stands on record as historical fact. But the Virgin Birth of Jesus is not due to this interpretation of strkjv@Isaiah:7:14|. It is not necessary to maintain (Broadus) that Isaiah himself saw anything more in his prophecy than that a woman then a virgin, would bear a son and that in the course of a few years Ahaz would be delivered from the king of Syria and Israel by the coming of the Assyrians. This historical illustration finds its richest fulfilment in the birth of Jesus from Mary. "Words of themselves are empty. They are useful only as vessels to convey things from mind to mind" (Morison). The Hebrew word for young woman is translated by virgin (\parthenos\), but it is not necessary to conclude that Isaiah himself contemplated the supernatural birth of Jesus. We do not have to say that the idea of the Virgin Birth of Jesus came from Jewish sources. Certainly it did not come from the pagan myths so foreign to this environment, atmosphere and spirit. It is far simpler to admit the supernatural fact than try to explain the invention of the idea as a myth to justify the deification of Jesus. The birth, life, and death of Jesus throw a flood of light on the Old Testament narrative and prophecies for the early Christians. In Matthew and John in particular we often see "that the events of Christ's life were divinely ordered for the express purpose of fulfilling the Old Testament" (McNeile). See strkjv@Matthew:2:15,23; strkjv@4:14-17; strkjv@8:17; strkjv@12:17-21; strkjv@13:25; strkjv@21:4f.; strkjv@John:12:38f.; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@19:24,28,36f|.

rwp@Matthew:5:1 @{He went up into the mountain} (\anebˆ eis to oros\). Not "a" mountain as the Authorized Version has it. The Greek article is poorly handled in most English versions. We do not know what mountain it was. It was the one there where Jesus and the crowds were. "Delitzsch calls the Mount of Beatitudes the Sinai of the New Testament" (Vincent). He apparently went up to get in closer contact with the disciples, "seeing the multitudes." Luke (Luke:6:12|) says that he went out into the mountain to pray, Mark (Mark:3:13|) that he went up and called the twelve. All three purposes are true. Luke adds that after a whole night in prayer and after the choice of the twelve Jesus came down to a level place on the mountain and spoke to the multitudes from Judea to Phoenicia. The crowds are great in both Matthew and in Luke and include disciples and the other crowds. There is no real difficulty in considering the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew and the Sermon on the Plain in Luke as one and the same. See full discussion in my _Harmony of the Gospels_.

rwp@Matthew:5:43 @{And hate thine enemy} (\kai misˆseis\). This phrase is not in strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|, but is a rabbinical inference which Jesus repudiates bluntly. The Talmud says nothing of love to enemies. Paul in strkjv@Romans:12:20| quotes strkjv@Proverbs:25:22| to prove that we ought to treat our enemies kindly. Jesus taught us to pray for our enemies and did it himself even when he hung upon the cross. Our word "neighbour" is "nigh-bor," one who is nigh or near like the Greek word \plˆsion\ here. But proximity often means strife and not love. Those who have adjoining farms or homes may be positively hostile in spirit. The Jews came to look on members of the same tribe as neighbours as even Jews everywhere. But they hated the Samaritans who were half Jews and lived between Judea and Galilee. Jesus taught men how to act as neighbours by the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke:10:29ff.|).

rwp@Matthew:6:2 @{Sound not a trumpet} (\mˆ salpisˆis\). Is this literal or metaphorical? No actual instance of such conduct has been found in the Jewish writings. McNeile suggests that it may refer to the blowing of trumpets in the streets on the occasion of public fasts. Vincent suggests the thirteen trumpet-shaped chests of the temple treasury to receive contributions (Luke:21:2|). But at Winona Lake one summer a missionary from India named Levering stated to me that he had seen Hindu priests do precisely this very thing to get a crowd to see their beneficences. Songs:it looks as if the rabbis could do it also. Certainly it was in keeping with their love of praise. And Jesus expressly says that "the hypocrites" (\hoi hupokritai\) do this very thing. This is an old word for actor, interpreter, one who personates another, from \hupokrinomai\ to answer in reply like the Attic \apokrinomai\. Then to pretend, to feign, to dissemble, to act the hypocrite, to wear a mask. This is the hardest word that Jesus has for any class of people and he employs it for these pious pretenders who pose as perfect. {They have received their reward} (\apechousin ton misthon aut“n\). This verb is common in the papyri for receiving a receipt, "they have their receipt in full," all the reward that they will get, this public notoriety. "They can sign the receipt of their reward" (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 229). Songs:_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 110f. \Apochˆ\ means "receipt." Songs:also in strkjv@6:5|.

rwp@Matthew:6:7 @{Use not vain repetitions} (\mˆ battalogˆsˆte\). Used of stammerers who repeat the words, then mere babbling or chattering, empty repetition. The etymology is uncertain, but it is probably onomatopoetic like "babble." The worshippers of Baal on Mount Carmel (1Kings:8:26|) and of Diana in the amphitheatre at Ephesus who yelled for two hours (Acts:19:34|) are examples. The Mohammedans may also be cited who seem to think that they "will be heard for their much speaking" (\en tˆi polulogiƒi\). Vincent adds "and the Romanists with their _paternosters_ and _avast_." The Syriac Sinaitic has it: "Do not be saying idle things." Certainly Jesus does not mean to condemn all repetition in prayer since he himself prayed three times in Gethsemane "saying the same words again" (Matthew:26:44|). "As the Gentiles do," says Jesus. "The Pagans thought that by endless repetitions and many words they would inform their gods as to their needs and weary them ('_fatigare deos_') into granting their requests" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:6:22 @{Single} (\haplous\). Used of a marriage contract when the husband is to repay the dowry "pure and simple" (\tˆn phernˆn haplˆn\), if she is set free; but in case he does not do so promptly, he is to add interest also (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_, etc.). There are various other instances of such usage. Here and in strkjv@Luke:11:34| the eye is called "single" in a moral sense. The word means "without folds" like a piece of cloth unfolded, _simplex_ in Latin. Bruce considers this parable of the eye difficult. "The figure and the ethical meaning seem to be mixed up, moral attributes ascribed to the physical eye which with them still gives light to the body. This confusion may be due to the fact that the eye, besides being the organ of vision, is the seat of expression, revealing inward dispositions." The "evil" eye (\ponˆros\) may be diseased and is used of stinginess in the LXX and so \haplous\ may refer to liberality as Hatch argues (_Essays in Biblical Greek_, p. 80). The passage may be elliptical with something to be supplied. If our eyes are healthy we see clearly and with a single focus (without astigmatism). If the eyes are diseased (bad, evil), they may even be cross-eyed or cock-eyed. We see double and confuse our vision. We keep one eye on the hoarded treasures of earth and roll the other proudly up to heaven. Seeing double is double-mindedness as is shown in verse 24|.

rwp@Matthew:6:25 @{Be not anxious for your life} (\mˆ merimnate tˆi psuchˆi h–m“n\). This is as good a translation as the Authorized Version was poor; "Take no thought for your life." The old English word "thought" meant anxiety or worry as Shakespeare says:

rwp@Matthew:7:6 @{That which is holy unto the dogs} (\to hagion tois kusin\). It is not clear to what "the holy" refers, to ear-rings or to amulets, but that would not appeal to dogs. Trench (_Sermon on the Mount_, p. 136) says that the reference is to meat offered in sacrifice that must not be flung to dogs: "It is not that the dogs would not eat it, for it would be welcome to them; but that it would be a profanation to give it to them, thus to make it a _skubalon_, strkjv@Exodus:22:31|." The yelping dogs would jump at it. Dogs are kin to wolves and infest the streets of oriental cities. {Your pearls before the swine} (\tous margaritas h–m“n emprosthen t“n choir“n\). The word pearl we have in the name Margarita (Margaret). Pearls look a bit like peas or acorns and would deceive the hogs until they discovered the deception. The wild boars haunt the Jordan Valley still and are not far removed from bears as they trample with their feet and rend with their tusks those who have angered them.

rwp@Matthew:8:7 @{I will come and heal him} (\eg“ elth“n therapeus“ auton\). Future indicative, not deliberative subjunctive in question (McNeile). The word here for heal (\therapeus“\) means first to serve, give medical attention, then cure, restore to health. The centurion uses the more definite word for healing (\iathˆsetai\ strkjv@8:8|) as Matthew does in strkjv@8:13| (\iathˆ\). Luke (Luke:9:11|), like a physician, says that Jesus healed (\iato\) those in need of treatment (\therapeias\), but the distinction is not always observed. In strkjv@Acts:28:8| Luke uses \iasato\ of the miraculous healings in Malta by Paul while he employs \etherapeuonto\ (Acts:28:9|) apparently of the practice of Luke the physician (so W. M. Ramsay). Matthew represents the centurion himself as speaking to Jesus while Luke has it that two committees from the centurion brought the messages, apparently a more detailed narrative. What one does through others he does himself as Pilate "scourged Jesus" (had him scourged).

rwp@Matthew:8:22 @{Leave the dead to bury their own dead} (\aphes tous nekrous thapsai tous heaut“n nekrous\). The spiritually dead are always on hand to bury the physically dead, if one's real duty is with Jesus. Chrysostom says that, while it is a good deed to bury the dead, it is a better one to preach Christ.

rwp@Matthew:13:11 @{To know the mysteries} (\gn“nai ta mustˆria\). Second aorist active infinitive of \gin“sk“\. The word \mustˆrion\ is from \mustˆs\, one initiated, and that from \mue“\ (\mu“\), to close or shut (Latin, _mutus_). The mystery-religions of the east had all sorts of secrets and signs as secret societies do today. But those initiated knew them. Songs:the disciples have been initiated into the secrets of the kingdom of heaven. Paul will use it freely of the mystery once hidden, but now revealed, now made known in Christ (Romans:16:25; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7|, etc.). In strkjv@Phillipians:4:12| Paul says: "I have learned the secret or been initiated" (\memuˆmai\). Songs:Jesus here explains that his parables are open to the disciples, but shut to the Pharisees with their hostile minds. In the Gospels \mustˆrion\ is used only here and in the parallel passages (Mark:4:11; strkjv@Luke:8:10|).

rwp@Matthew:20:26 @{Would become great} (\hos an thelˆi megas genesthai\). Jesus does not condemn the desire to become great. It is a laudable ambition. There are "great ones" (\megaloi\) among Christians as among pagans, but they do not "lord it over" one another (\katakurieuousin\), a LXX word and very expressive, or "play the tyrant" (\katexousiazousin\), another suggestive word. {Your minister} (\h–m“n diakonos\). This word may come from \dia\ and \konis\ (dust), to raise a dust by one's hurry, and so to minister. It is a general word for servant and is used in a variety of ways including the technical sense of our "deacon" in Php. strkjv@1:1|. But it more frequently is applied to ministers of the Gospel (1Corinthians:3:5|). The way to be "first" (\pr“tos\), says Jesus, is to be your "servant" (\doulos\), "bond-servant" (verse 27|). This is a complete reversal of popular opinion then and now.

rwp@Matthew:21:19 @{A fig tree} (\sukˆn mian\). "A single fig tree" (Margin of Rev. Version). But \heis\ was often used = \tis\ or like our indefinite article. See strkjv@Matthew:8:10; strkjv@26:69|. The Greek has strictly no indefinite article as the Latin has no definite article. {Let there be no fruit from thee henceforward for ever} (\ou mˆketi sou karpos genˆtai eis ton ai“na\). Strictly speaking this is a prediction, not a prohibition or wish as in strkjv@Mark:11:14| (optative \phagoi\). "On you no fruit shall ever grow again" (Weymouth). The double negative \ou mˆ\ with the aorist subjunctive (or future indicative) is the strongest kind of negative prediction. It sometimes amounts to a prohibition like \ou\ and the future indicative (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 926f.). The early figs start in spring before the leaves and develop after the leaves. The main fig crop was early autumn (Mark:11:14|). There should have been figs on the tree with the crop of leaves. It was a vivid object lesson. Matthew does not distinguish between the two mornings as Mark does (Mark:11:13,20|), but says "immediately" (\parachrˆma\) twice (21:19,20|). This word is really \para to chrˆma\ like our "on the spot" (Thayer). It occurs in the papyri in monetary transactions for immediate cash payment.

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

rwp@Matthew:23:9 @{Call no man your father} (\patera mˆ kalesˆte h–m“n\). Jesus meant the full sense of this noble word for our heavenly Father. "Abba was not commonly a mode of address to a living person, but a title of honour for Rabbis and great men of the past" (McNeile). In Gethsemane Jesus said: "Abba, Father" (Mark:14:36|). Certainly the ascription of "Father" to pope and priest seems out of harmony with what Jesus here says. He should not be understood to be condemning the title to one's real earthly father. Jesus often leaves the exceptions to be supplied.

rwp@Matthew:23:15 @{Twofold more a son of hell than yourselves} (\huion geennˆs diploteron h–m“n\). It is a convert to Pharisaism rather than Judaism that is meant by "one proselyte" (\hena prosˆluton\), from \proserchomai\, newcomers, aliens. There were two kinds of proselytes: of the gate (not actual Jews, but God-fearers and well-wishers of Judaism, like Cornelius), of righteousness who received circumcision and became actual Jews. But a very small per cent of the latter became Pharisees. There was a Hellenistic Jewish literature (Philo, Sibylline Oracles, etc.) designed to attract Gentiles to Judaism. But the Pharisaic missionary zeal (compass, \periagˆte\, go around) was a comparative failure. And success was even worse, Jesus says with pitiless plainness. The "son of Gehenna" means one fitted for and so destined for Gehenna. "The more converted the more perverted" (H.J. Holtzmann). The Pharisees claimed to be in a special sense sons of the kingdom (Matthew:8:12|). They were more partisan than pious. \Diplous\ (twofold, double) is common in the papyri. The comparative here used, as if from \diplos\, appears also in Appian. Note the ablative of comparison h–m“n. It was a withering thrust.

rwp@Matthew:24:8 @{The beginning of travail} (\archˆ odin“n\). The word means birth-pangs and the Jews used the very phrase for the sufferings of the Messiah which were to come before the coming of the Messiah (Book of Jubilees, strkjv@23:18; Apoc. of Baruch 27-29). But the word occurs with no idea of birth as the pains of death (Psalms:18:5; strkjv@Acts:2:24|). These woes, says Jesus, are not a proof of the end, but of the beginning.

rwp@Matthew:27:24 @{Washed his hands} (\apenipsato tas cheiras\). As a last resort since the hubbub (\thorubos\) increased because of his vacillation. The verb \aponipt“\ means to wash off and the middle voice means that he washed off his hands for himself as a common symbol of cleanliness and added his pious claim with a slap at them. {I am innocent of the blood of this righteous man} (or {this blood}); {see ye to it}. (\Ath“ios eimi apo tou haimatos tou dikaiou toutou\ or \tou haimatos toutou\ as some manuscripts have it, \humeis opsesthe\.) The Jews used this symbol (Deuteronomy:21:6; strkjv@Psalms:26:6; strkjv@73:13|). Plummer doubts if Pilate said these words with a direct reference to his wife's message (26:19|), but I fail to see the ground for that scepticism. The so-called _Gospel of Peter_ says that Pilate washed his hands because the Jews refused to do so.

rwp@Matthew:27:26 @{Scourged} (\phragell“sas\). The Latin verb _flagellare_. Pilate apparently lost interest in Jesus when he discovered that he had no friends in the crowd. The religious leaders had been eager to get Jesus condemned before many of the Galilean crowd friendly to Jesus came into the city. They had apparently succeeded. The scourging before the crucifixion was a brutal Roman custom. The scourging was part of the capital punishment. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 269) quotes a Florentine papyrus of the year 85 A.D. wherein G. Septimius Vegetus, governor of Egypt, says of a certain Phibion: "Thou hadst been worthy of scourging... but I will give thee to the people."

rwp@Matthew:27:55 @{Many women} (\gunaikes pollai\). We have come to expect the women from Galilee to be faithful, last at the Cross and first at the tomb. Luke (Luke:23:49|) says that "all his acquaintance" (\pantes hoi gn“stoi aut“i\) stood at a distance and saw the end. One may hope that the apostles were in that sad group. But certainly many women were there. The Mother of Jesus had been taken away from the side of the Cross by the Beloved Disciple to his own home (John:19:27|). Matthew names three of the group by name. Mary Magdalene is mentioned as a well-known person though not previously named in Matthew's Gospel. Certainly she is not the sinful woman of strkjv@Luke:7| nor Mary of Bethany. There is another Mary, the mother of James and Joseph (Joses) not otherwise known to us. And then there is the mother of the sons of Zebedee (James and John), usually identified with Salome (Mark:15:40|). These noble and faithful women were "beholding from afar" (\apo makrothen the“rousai\). These three women may have drawn nearer to the Cross for Mary the Mother of Jesus stood beside the Cross (\para t“i staur“i\) with Mary of Clopas and Mary Magdalene (John:19:25|) before she left. They had once ministered unto Jesus (\diakonousai aut“i\) and now he is dead. Matthew does not try to picture the anguish of heart of these noble women nor does he say as Luke (Luke:23:48|) does that "they returned smiting their breasts." He drops the curtain on that saddest of all tragedies as the loyal band stood and looked at the dead Christ on Golgotha. What hope did life now hold for them?

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

rwp@Info_Philipians @ The Epistle is a beautiful expression of gratitude for the love and gifts of the Philippian saints. He is a prisoner of hope in Rome with possible death before him, but with the note of joy running through all that Paul says. He hopes to be set free and to see them again.

rwp@Revelation:5:14 @{Amen} (\Amˆn\). The four living creatures give their approval to the doxology after the antiphonal songs. {Fell down and worshipped} (\epesan kai prosekunˆsan\). In silent adoration that closes the whole service of praise to the One upon the throne and to the Lamb. As in strkjv@4:10| so here the representatives of the redeemed bow in silent worship. Pliny says that the Christians sing a song to Christ as to God. He is here worshipped by the universe (Phillipians:2:10f.|).

rwp@Revelation:21:6 @{They are come to pass} (\Gegonan\). Second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\ with \-an\ for \-asi\. See strkjv@16:17| for a like use of \gegonen\, "They have come to pass." Here again it is the voice of God because, as in strkjv@1:8|, He says: {I am the Alpha and the Omega} (\Eg“ to Alpha kai to O\) with the addition "the beginning and the end" (\hˆ archˆ kai to telos\), the whole used in strkjv@22:13| of Christ. In strkjv@Isaiah:44:6| there is something like the addition, and in strkjv@Colossians:1:18; strkjv@Revelation:3:14| \hˆ archˆ\ is applied to Christ, while here God is the First Cause (\archˆ\) and the Finality (\telos\) as in strkjv@Romans:11:36; strkjv@Ephesians:4:6|. But God works through Christ (John:1:3; strkjv@Hebrews:1:2f.; strkjv@Colossians:1:12-20|). God is the bountiful Giver (James:1:5,17|) of the Water of Life. See strkjv@7:17; strkjv@22:1,17| for this metaphor, which is based on strkjv@Isaiah:55:1|. It is God's own promise (\Eg“ d“s“\), "I will give." {Of the fountain} (\ek tˆs pˆgˆs\). For this partitive use of \ek\ see strkjv@Matthew:25:8|, without \ek\ strkjv@Revelation:2:17|. {Freely} (\d“rean\). See strkjv@Matthew:10:8; strkjv@John:4:10; strkjv@Romans:3:24; strkjv@Acts:8:20; strkjv@Revelation:22:17|.

rwp@Info_Romans @ THE TIME AND PLACE The place is settled if we accept strkjv@Romans:16:1|. The time of the year is in the spring if we combine statements in the Acts and the Epistle. He says: "I am now going to Jerusalem ministering to the saints" (Romans:15:25|). In strkjv@Acts:20:3| we read that Paul spent three months in Corinth. In II Corinthians we have a full account of the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem. The account of the journey from Corinth to Jerusalem is given in strkjv@Acts:20:3-21:17|. It was in the spring between passover at Philippi (Acts:20:6|) and pentecost in Jerusalem (20:16; strkjv@21:17|). The precise year is not quite so certain, but we may suggest A.D. 57 or 58 with reasonable confidence.

rwp@Romans:2:15 @{In that they} (\hoitines\). "The very ones who," qualitative relative. {Written in their hearts} (\grapton en tais kardiais aut“n\). Verbal adjective of \graph“\, to write. When their conduct corresponds on any point with the Mosaic law they practise the unwritten law in their hearts. {Their conscience bearing witness therewith} (\sunmarturousˆs aut“n tˆs suneidˆse“s\). On conscience (\suneidˆsis\) see on ¯1Corinthians:8:7; strkjv@10:25f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:12|. Genitive absolute here with present active participle \sunmarturousˆs\ as in strkjv@9:1|. The word \suneidˆsis\ means co-knowledge by the side of the original consciousness of the act. This second knowledge is personified as confronting the first (Sanday and Headlam). The Stoics used the word a great deal and Paul has it twenty times. It is not in the O.T., but first in this sense in Wisdom strkjv@17:10. All men have this faculty of passing judgment on their actions. It can be over-scrupulous (1Corinthians:10:25|) or "seared" by abuse (1Timothy:4:12|). It acts according to the light it has. {Their thoughts one with another accusing or also excusing them} (\metaxu allˆl“n t“n logism“n katˆgorount“n ˆ kai apologoumen“n\). Genitive absolute again showing the alternative action of the conscience, now accusing, now excusing. Paul does not say that a heathen's conscience always commends everything that he thinks, says, or does. In order for one to be set right with God by his own life he must always act in accord with his conscience and never have its disapproval. That, of course, is impossible else Christ died for naught (Galatians:2:21|). Jesus alone lived a sinless life. For one to be saved without Christ he must also live a sinless life.

rwp@Romans:3:5 @{What shall we say?} (\ti eroumen?\). Rhetorical question, common with Paul as he surveys the argument. {Commendeth} (\sunistˆsin\). This common verb \sunistˆmi\, to send together, occurs in the N.T. in two senses, either to introduce, to commend (2Corinthians:3:1; strkjv@4:2|) or to prove, to establish (2Corinthians:7:11; strkjv@Galatians:2:18; strkjv@Romans:5:8|). Either makes good sense here. {Who visiteth the wrath} (\ho epipher“n tˆn orgˆn\). "Who brings on the wrath," "the inflicter of the anger" (Vaughan). {I speak as a man} (\kata anthr“pon\). See strkjv@Galatians:3:15| for same phrase. As if to say, "pardon me for this line of argument." Tholuck says that the rabbis often used \kata anthr“pon\ and \ti eroumen\. Paul had not forgotten his rabbinical training.

rwp@Romans:5:1 @{Being therefore justified by faith} (\dikai“thentes oun ek piste“s\). First aorist passive participle of \dikaio“\, to set right and expressing antecedent action to the verb \ech“men\. The \oun\ refers to the preceding conclusive argument (chapters 1 to 4) that this is done by faith. {Let us have peace with God} (\eirˆnˆn ech“men pros ton theon\). This is the correct text beyond a doubt, the present active subjunctive, not \echomen\ (present active indicative) of the Textus Receptus which even the American Standard Bible accepts. It is curious how perverse many real scholars have been on this word and phrase here. Godet, for instance. Vincent says that "it is difficult if not impossible to explain it." One has only to observe the force of the _tense_ to see Paul's meaning clearly. The mode is the volitive subjunctive and the present tense expresses linear action and so does not mean "make peace" as the ingressive aorist subjunctive \eirˆnˆn sch“men\ would mean. A good example of \sch“men\ occurs in strkjv@Matthew:21:38| (\sch“men tˆn klˆronomian autou\) where it means: "Let us get hold of his inheritance." Here \eirˆnˆn ech“men\ can only mean: "Let us enjoy peace with God" or "Let us retain peace with God." We have in strkjv@Acts:9:31| \eichen eirˆnˆn\ (imperfect and so linear), the church "enjoyed peace," not "made peace." The preceding justification (\dikai“thentes\) "made peace with God." Observe \pros\ (face to face) with \ton theon\ and \dia\ (intermediate agent) with \tou kuriou\.

rwp@Romans:6:15 @{What then?} (\ti oun?\). Another turn in the argument about the excess of grace. {Shall we sin?} (\hamartes“men?\). First aorist active deliberative subjunctive of \hamartan“\. "Shall we commit sin" (occasional acts of sin as opposed to the life of sin as raised by \epimen“men tˆi hamartiƒi\ in verse 1|)? {Because} (\hoti\). The same reason as in verse 1| and taken up from the very words in verse 14|. Surely, the objector says, we may take a night off now and then and sin a little bit "since we are under grace."

rwp@Romans:9:15 @{For he says to Moses} (\t“i M“usei gar legei\). He has an Old Testament illustration of God's election in the case of Pharaoh (Exodus:33:19|). {On whom I have mercy} (\hon an ele“\). Indefinite relative with \an\ and the present active subjunctive of \elea“\, late verb only here and strkjv@Jude:1:23| in N.T. "On whomsoever I have mercy." The same construction in \hon an oikteir“\, "on whomsoever I have compassion."

rwp@Romans:10:1 @{Desire} (\eudokia\). No papyri examples of this word, though \eudokˆsis\ occurs, only in LXX and N.T., but no example for "desire" unless this is one, though the verb \eudoke“\ is common in Polybius, Diodorus, Dion, Hal. It means will, pleasure, satisfaction (Matthew:11:26; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:11; strkjv@Phillipians:1:15; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@Ephesians:1:5,9|). {Supplication} (\deˆsis\). Late word from \deomai\, to want, to beg, to pray. In the papyri. See strkjv@Luke:1:13|. It is noteworthy that, immediately after the discussion of the rejection of Christ by the Jews, Paul prays so earnestly for the Jews "that they may be saved" (\eis s“tˆrian\), literally "unto salvation." Clearly Paul did not feel that the case was hopeless for them in spite of their conduct. Bengel says: _Non orasset Paul si absolute reprobati essent_ (Paul would not have prayed if they had been absolutely reprobate). Paul leaves God's problem to him and pours out his prayer for the Jews in accordance with his strong words in strkjv@9:1-5|.

rwp@Romans:11:9 @{David says} (\Daueid legei\). From strkjv@Psalms:69:23f|; (68:23f| LXX); strkjv@34:8; strkjv@28:4| (combined quotation). {Table} (\trapeza\). For what is on the table, "a feast." {A snare} (\eis pagida\). From \pˆgnumi\, to make fast, old word for snares for birds and beasts. See on ¯Luke:21:35|. \Eis\ in predicate with \ginomai\ is a translation-Hebraism. {A trap} (\eis thˆran\). Old word for hunting of wild beasts, then a trap. Only here in N.T. {A stumbling-block} (\eis skandalon\). A third word for trap, snare, trap-stick or trigger over which they fall. See on ¯1Corinthians:1:23; strkjv@Romans:9:33|. {A recompense} (\eis antapodoma\). Late word from double compound verb \antapodid“mi\, to repay (both \anti\ and \apo\). Ancient Greeks used \antapodosis\. In LXX and Didache. In N.T. only here (bad sense) and strkjv@Luke:14:12| (good sense).

rwp@Romans:14:22 @{Have thou to thyself before God} (\su--kata seauton eche en“pion tou theou\). Very emphatic position of \su\ at the beginning of the sentence, "Thou there." The old MSS. put \hˆn\ (relative "which") after \pistin\ and before \echeis\. This principle applies to both the "strong" and the "weak." He is within his rights to act "according to thyself," but it must be "before God" and with due regard to the rights of the other brethren. {In that which he approveth} (\en hoi dokimazei\). This beatitude cuts both ways. After testing and then approving (1:28; strkjv@2:18|) one takes his stand which very act may condemn himself by what he says or does. "It is a rare felicity to have a conscience untroubled by scruples" (Denney).

rwp@Romans:15:19 @{In power of signs and wonders} (\en dunamei sˆmei“n kai terat“n\). Note all three words as in strkjv@Hebrews:2:4|, only here \dunamis\ is connected with \sˆmeia\ and \terata\. See all three words used of Paul's own work in strkjv@2Corinthians:12:12| and in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:9| of the Man of Sin. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:4| for the "power" of the Holy Spirit in Paul's preaching. Note repetition of \en dunamei\ here with \pneumatos hagiou\. {Songs:that} (\h“ste\). Result expressed by the perfect active infinitive \peplˆr“kenai\ (from \plˆro“\) with the accusative \me\ (general reference). {Round about even unto Illyricum} (\kukl“i mechri tou Illurikou\). "In a ring" (\kukl“i\, locative case of \kuklos\). Probably a journey during the time when Paul left Macedonia and waited for II Corinthians to have its effect before coming to Corinth. If so, see strkjv@2Corinthians:13; strkjv@Acts:20:1-3|. When he did come, the trouble with the Judaizers was over. Illyricum seems to be the name for the region west of Macedonia (Dalmatia). Strabo says that the Egnatian Way passed through it. Arabia and Illyricum would thus be the extreme limits of Paul's mission journeys so far.

rwp@Titus:2:5 @{Workers at home} (\oikourgous\). Songs:the oldest MSS. (from \oikos, ergou\) instead of \oikourous\, keepers at home (from \koiso, ouros\, keeper). Rare word, found in Soranus, a medical writer, Field says. Cf. strkjv@1Timothy:5:13|. "Keepers at home" are usually "workers at home." {Kind} (\agathas\). See strkjv@Romans:5:7|. See strkjv@Colossians:3:18; strkjv@Ephesians:5:22| for the same use of \hupotassomai\, to be in subjection. Note \idiois\ (their own). See strkjv@1Timothy:6:1| for the same negative purpose clause (\hina mˆ blasphˆmˆtai\).

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Sun Jun 2 22:10:20 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020