NT-GOSPEL.filter - rwp Matthew:10:3:

rwp@1John:2:23 @{Hath not the Father} (\oude ton patera echei\). "Not even does he have the Father" or God (2John:1:9|). {He that confesseth the Son} (\ho homologn ton huion\). Because the Son reveals the Father (John:1:18; strkjv@14:9|). Our only approach to the Father is by the Son (John:14:6|). Confession of Christ before men is a prerequisite for confession by Christ before the Father (Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:8|).

rwp@Info_2Peter @ AND YET THE EPISTLE DIFFERS IN STYLE FROM FIRST PETER This is a fact, though one greatly exaggerated by some scholars. There are many points of similarity, for one thing, like the habit of repeating words (\epichorge\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:10,19, \bebaios\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:12,13,15|, \prophteia\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:20; strkjv@3:3|, etc.). These repetitions occur all through the Epistle as in I Peter. "This is a matter of very high importance" (Bigg). Again in both Epistles there is a certain dignity of style with a tendency to iambic rhythm. There is more quotation of the Old Testament in I Peter, but frequent allusion to words and phrases in II Peter. There are more allusions to words and facts in the Gospels in I Peter than in II Peter, though some do occur in II Peter. Besides those already given, note strkjv@2Peter:1:8| (Luke:13:7f.|), strkjv@2Peter:2:1| (Matthew:10:33|), strkjv@2Peter:2:20| (Matthew:12:45; strkjv@Luke:11:26|), strkjv@2Peter:3:4| (Matthew:24:1ff.|), and possibly strkjv@2Peter:1:3| to Christ's calling the apostles. Both appear to know and use the O.T. Apocrypha. Both are fond of the plural of abstract substantives. Both make sparing use of Greek particles. Both use the article similarly, idiomatically, and sometimes not using it. There are some 361 words in 1 Peter not in II Peter, 231 in II Peter not in I Peter. There are 686 \hapax legomena\ in N.T., 54 in II Peter instead of the average of 62, a large number when the brevity of the Epistle is considered. There are several ways of explaining these variations. One way is to say that they are written by different men, but difference of subject has to be borne in mind. All writers and artists have an early and a later manner. Another solution is that Peter employed different amanuenses. Silvanus was the one for I Peter (1Peter:5:12|). Mark was Peter's usual interpreter, but we do not know who was the amanuensis for II Peter, if indeed one was used. We know from strkjv@Acts:4:13| that Peter and John were considered unlettered men (\agrammatoi kai iditai\). II Peter and the Apocalypse illustrate this statement. II Peter may have more of Peter's real style than I Peter.

rwp@2Peter:2:1 @{But there arose} (\egenonto de\). Second aorist middle indicative of \ginomai\ (cf. \ginetai\ in strkjv@1:20|). {False prophets also} (\kai pseudoprophtai\). In contrast with the true prophets just pictured in strkjv@1:20f|. Late compound in LXX and Philo, common in N.T. (Matthew:7:15|). Allusion to the O.T. times like Balaam and others (Jeremiah:6:13; strkjv@28:9; strkjv@Ezekiel:13:9|). {False teachers} (\pseudodidaskaloi\). Late and rare compound (\pseuds, didaskalos\) here alone in N.T. Peter pictures them as in the future here (\esontai\, shall be) and again as already present (\eisin\, are, verse 17|), or in the past (\eplanthsan\, they went astray, verse 15|). {Shall privily bring in} (\pareisaxousin\). Future active of \pareisag\, late double compound \pareisag\, to bring in (\eisag\), by the side (\para\), as if secretly, here alone in N.T., but see \pareisaktous\ in strkjv@Galatians:2:4| (verbal adjective of this same verb). {Destructive heresies} (\haireseis apleias\). Descriptive genitive, "heresies of destruction" (marked by destruction) as in strkjv@Luke:16:8|. \Hairesis\ (from \haire\) is simply a choosing, a school, a sect like that of the Sadducees (Acts:5:17|), of the Pharisees (Acts:15:5|), and of Christians as Paul admitted (Acts:24:5|). These "tenets" (Galatians:5:20|) led to destruction. {Denying} (\arnoumenoi\). Present middle participle of \arneomai\. This the Gnostics did, the very thing that Peter did, alas (Matthew:26:70|) even after Christ's words (Matthew:10:33|). {Even the Master} (\kai ton despotn\). Old word for absolute master, here of Christ as in strkjv@Jude:1:4|, and also of God (Acts:4:24|). Without the evil sense in our "despot." {That bought them} (\ton agorasanta autous\). First aorist active articular participle of \agoraz\, same idea with \lutro\ in strkjv@1Peter:1:18f|. These were professing Christians, at any rate, these heretics. {Swift destruction} (\tachinn apleian\). See strkjv@1:14| for \tachinn\ and note repetition of \apleian\. This is always the tragedy of such false prophets, the fate that they bring on (\epagontes\) themselves.

rwp@2Timothy:2:11 @{Faithful is the saying} (\pistos ho logos\). The saying which follows here though it can refer to the preceding as in strkjv@1Timothy:4:9|. See strkjv@1Timothy:1:15|. It is possible that from here to the end of 13| we have the fragment of an early hymn. There are four conditions in these verses (11-13|), all of the first class, assumed to be true. Parallels to the ideas here expressed are found in strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:3; strkjv@Romans:6:3-8; strkjv@Colossians:3:1-4|. Note the compounds with \sun\ (\sunapethanomen\, {we died with}, from \sunapothnesko\ as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:3|; \sunzsomen\, {we shall live with}, from \sunza\ as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:3|; \sumbasileusomen\, {we shall reign with}, from \sumbasileu\ as in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:8|). For \hupomenomen\ (we endure) see strkjv@1Corinthians:13:7| and for \apistoumen\ (we are faithless) see strkjv@Romans:3:3|. The verb \arneomai\, to deny (\arnsometha\, we shall deny, \arnsetai\, he will deny, \arnsasthai\, deny, first aorist middle infinitive) is an old word, common in the Gospels in the sayings of Jesus (Matthew:10:33; strkjv@Luke:12:9|), used of Peter (Mark:14:70|), and is common in the Pastorals (1Timothy:5:8; strkjv@Titus:2:12; strkjv@2Timothy:3:5|). Here in verse 13| it has the notion of proving false to oneself, a thing that Christ "cannot" (\ou dunatai\) do.

rwp@Colossians:3:17 @{Whatsoever ye do} (\pn hoti ean poite\). Indefinite relative (everything whatever) with \ean\ and the present active subjunctive, a common idiom in such clauses. {Do all} (\panta\). The imperative \poieite\ has to be supplied from \poite\ in the relative clause. \Panta\ is repeated from \pn\ (singular), but in the plural (all things). \Pn\ is left as a nominative absolute as in strkjv@Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:10|. This is a sort of Golden Rule for Christians "in the name of the Lord Jesus" (\en onomati Kuriou Isou\), in the spirit of the Lord Jesus (Ephesians:5:20|). What follows (directions to the various groups) is in this same vein. Sociological problems have always existed. Paul puts his finger on the sore spot in each group with unerring skill like a true diagnostician.

rwp@John:1:20 @{And he confessed} (\kai hmologsen\). The continued paratactic use of \kai\ (and) and the first aorist active indicative of \homologe\, old verb from \homologos\ (\homon, leg\, to say the same thing), to confess, in the Synoptics (Matthew:10:32|) as here. {And denied not} (\kai ouk rnsato\). Negative statement of same thing in Johannine fashion, first aorist middle indicative of \arneomai\, another Synoptic and Pauline word (Matthew:10:33; strkjv@2Timothy:2:12|). He did not contradict or refuse to say who he was. {And he confessed} (\kai hmologsen\). Thoroughly Johannine again in the paratactic repetition. {I am not the Christ} (\Eg ouk eimi ho Christos\). Direct quotation again with recitative \hoti\ before it like our modern quotation marks. "I am not the Messiah," he means by \ho Christos\ (the Anointed One). Evidently it was not a new question as Luke had already shown (Luke:3:15|).

rwp@John:9:22 @{Because they feared the Jews} (\hoti ephobounto tous Ioudaious\). Imperfect middle, a continuing fear and not without reason. See already the whispers about Jesus because of fear of the Jews (7:13|). {Had agreed already} (\d sunetetheinto\). Past perfect middle of \suntithmi\, to put together, to form a compact (7:32,47-49|). {If any man should confess him to be Christ} (\ean tis auton homologsi Christon\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \homologe\ and predicate accusative \Christon\. Jesus had made confession of himself before men the test of discipleship and denial the disproof (Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:8|). We know that many of the rulers nominally believed on Jesus (12:42|) and yet "did not confess him because of the Pharisees" (\alla dia tous Pharisaious ouch hmologoun\), for the very reason given here, "that they might not be put out of the synagogue" (\hina m aposunaggoi genntai\). Small wonder then that here the parents cowered a bit. {That he should be put out of the synagogue} (\hina aposunaggos gentai\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\. \Aposunaggos\ (\apo\ and \sunagg\) is found in N.T. only here and strkjv@12:42; strkjv@16:2|. A purely Jewish word naturally. There were three kinds of excommunication (for thirty days, for thirty more, indefinitely).

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

rwp@John:14:22 @{Not Iscariot} (\ouch ho Iskarits\). Judas Iscariot had gone (13:30|), but John is anxious to make it clear that this Judas (common name, two apostles also named James) was not the infamous traitor. He is also called Thaddaeus or Lebbaeus (Mark:3:17; strkjv@Matthew:10:3|) and the brother (or son) of James (6:15; strkjv@Acts:1:13|). This is the fourth interruption of the talk of Jesus (by Peter, strkjv@13:36|; by Thomas, strkjv@14:5|; by Philip, strkjv@14:8|; by Judas, strkjv@14:22|). {And not to the world} (\kai ouchi ti kosmi\). Judas caught at the word \emphaniz\ in verse 21| as perhaps a Messianic theophany visible to all the world as at the judgment (5:27f.|). He seems to suspect a change of plan on the part of Jesus (\ti gegonen hoti\=how has it happened that).

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

rwp@Luke:12:7 @{Numbered} (\rithmntai\). Perfect passive indicative. Periphrastic form in strkjv@Matthew:10:30| which see for details about sparrows, etc.

rwp@Luke:12:8 @{Everyone who shall confess me} (\pas hos an homologsei en emoi\). Just like strkjv@Matthew:10:32| except the use of \an\ here which adds nothing. The Hebraistic use of \en\ after \homologe\ both here and in Matthew is admitted by even Moulton (_Prolegomena_, p. 104). {The Son of man} (\ho huios tou anthrpou\). Here strkjv@Matthew:10:32| has \k'ag\ (I also) as the equivalent.

rwp@Luke:12:9 @{Shall be denied} (\aparnthsetai\). First future passive of the compound verb \aparneomai\. Here strkjv@Matthew:10:33| has \arnsomai\ simply. Instead of "in the presence of the angels of God" (\emprosthen tn aggeln tou theou\) strkjv@Matthew:10:33| has "before my Father who is in heaven."

rwp@Luke:12:49 @{I came to cast fire} (\Pur lthon balein\). Suddenly Jesus lets the volcano in his own heart burst forth. The fire was already burning. "Christ came to set the world on fire, and the conflagration had already begun" (Plummer). The very passion in Christ's heart would set his friends on fire and his foes in opposition as we have just seen (Luke:11:53f.|). It is like the saying of Jesus that he came to bring not peace, but a sword, to bring cleavage among men (Matthew:10:34-36|). {And what will I, if it is already kindled?} (\kai ti thel ei d anphth;\). It is not clear what this passage means. Probably \ti\ is be taken in the sense of "how" (\ps\). How I wish. Then \ei\ can be taken as equal to \hoti\. How I wish that it were already kindled. \Anphth\ is first aorist passive of \anapt\, to set fire to, to kindle, to make blaze. Probably Luke means the conflagration to come by his death on the Cross for he changes the figure and refers to that more plainly.

rwp@Luke:12:51 @{But rather division} (\all' diamerismon\). Peace at any price is not the purpose of Christ. It is a pity for family jars to come, but loyalty to Christ counts more than all else. These ringing words (Luke:12:51-53|) occur in strkjv@Matthew:10:34-36| in the address to the Twelve for the Galilean tour. See discussion of details there. These family feuds are inevitable where only part cleave to Christ. In Matthew we have \kata\ with the genitive whereas in Luke it is \epi\ with the dative (and accusative once).

rwp@Luke:14:26 @{Hateth not} (\ou misei\). An old and very strong verb \mise\, to hate, detest. The orientals use strong language where cooler spirits would speak of preference or indifference. But even so Jesus does not here mean that one must hate his father or mother of necessity or as such, for strkjv@Matthew:15:4| proves the opposite. It is only where the element of choice comes in (cf. strkjv@Matthew:6:24|) as it sometimes does, when father or mother opposes Christ. Then one must not hesitate. The language here is more sharply put than in strkjv@Matthew:10:37|. The \ou\ here coalesces with the verb \misei\ in this conditional clause of the first class determined as fulfilled. It is the language of exaggerated contrast, it is true, but it must not be watered down till the point is gone. In mentioning "and wife" Jesus has really made a comment on the excuse given in verse 20| (I married a wife and so I am not able to come). {And his own life also} (\eti te kai tn psuchn heautou\). Note \te kai\, both--and. "The \te\ (B L) binds all the particulars into one bundle of _renuncianda_" (Bruce). Note this same triple group of conjunctions (\eti te kai\) in strkjv@Acts:21:28|, "And moreover also," "even going as far as his own life." Martyrdom should be an ever-present possibility to the Christian, not to be courted, but not to be shunned. Love for Christ takes precedence "over even the elemental instinct of self-preservation" (Ragg).

rwp@Luke:14:27 @{His own cross} (\ton stauron heauto\). This familiar figure we have had already (Luke:9:23; strkjv@Mark:8:34; strkjv@Matthew:10:38; strkjv@16:24|). Each follower has a cross which he must bear as Jesus did his. \Bastaz\ is used of cross bearing in the N.T. only here (figuratively) and strkjv@John:19:17| literally of Jesus. Crucifixion was common enough in Palestine since the days of Antiochus Epiphanes and Alexander Jannaeus.

rwp@Matthew:7:22 @{Did we not prophesy in thy name?} (\ou ti si onomati eprophteusamen;\). The use of \ou\ in the question expects the affirmative answer. They claim to have prophesied (preached) in Christ's name and to have done many miracles. But Jesus will tear off the sheepskin and lay bare the ravening wolf. "I never knew you" (\oudepote egnn hms\). "I was never acquainted with you" (experimental knowledge). Success, as the world counts it, is not a criterion of one's knowledge of Christ and relation to him. "I will profess unto them" (\homologs autois\), the very word used of profession of Christ before men (Matthew:10:32|). This word Jesus will use for public and open announcement of their doom.

rwp@Matthew:10:31 @{Than many sparrows} (\polln strouthin\). Ablative case of comparison with \diapherete\ (our differ).

rwp@Matthew:10:32 @{Shall confess me} (\homologsei en emoi\). An Aramaic idiom, not Hebrew, see also strkjv@Luke:12:8|. Songs:also here, "him will I also confess" (\homologs k'ag en auti\). Literally this Aramaic idiom reproduced in the Greek means "confess in me," indicating a sense of unity with Christ and of Christ with the man who takes the open stand for him.

rwp@Matthew:10:33 @{Shall deny me} (\arnstai me\). Aorist subjunctive here with \hostis\, though future indicative \homologsei\ above. Note accusative here (case of extension), saying "no" to Christ, complete breach. This is a solemn law, not a mere social breach, this cleavage by Christ of the man who repudiates him, public and final.

rwp@Matthew:10:34 @{I came not to send peace, but a sword} (\ouk lthon balein eirnn, alla machairan\). A bold and dramatic climax. The aorist infinitive means a sudden hurling of the sword where peace was expected. Christ does bring peace, not as the world gives, but it is not the force of compromise with evil, but of conquest over wrong, over Satan, the triumph of the cross. Meanwhile there will be inevitably division in families, in communities, in states. It is no namby-pamby sentimentalism that Christ preaches, no peace at any price. The Cross is Christ's answer to the devil's offer of compromise in world dominion. For Christ the kingdom of God is virile righteousness, not mere emotionalism.

rwp@Matthew:10:35 @{Set at variance} (\dichasai\). Literally divide in two, \dicha\. Jesus uses strkjv@Micah:7:1-6| to describe the rottenness of the age as Micah had done. Family ties and social ties cannot stand in the way of loyalty to Christ and righteous living. {The daughter-in-law} (\numphn\). Literally bride, the young wife who is possibly living with the mother-in-law. It is a tragedy to see a father or mother step between the child and Christ.

rwp@Matthew:10:38 @{Doth not take his cross} (\ou lambanei ton stauron autou\). The first mention of cross in Matthew. Criminals were crucified in Jerusalem. It was the custom for the condemned person to carry his own cross as Jesus did till Simon of Cyrene was impressed for that purpose. The Jews had become familiar with crucifixion since the days of Antiochus Epiphanes and one of the Maccabean rulers (Alexander Jannaeus) had crucified 800 Pharisees. It is not certain whether Jesus was thinking of his own coming crucifixion when he used this figure, though possible, perhaps probable. The disciples would hardly think of that outcome unless some of them had remarkable insight.

rwp@Matthew:10:39 @{Shall lose it} (\apolesei autn\). This paradox appears in four forms according to Allen (I) strkjv@Matthew:10:39| (2) strkjv@Mark:8:35; strkjv@Matthew:16:25; strkjv@Luke:9:24| (3) strkjv@Luke:17:33| (4) strkjv@John:12:25|. _The Wisdom of Sirach_ (Hebrew text) in strkjv@51:26 has: "He that giveth his life findeth her (wisdom)." It is one of the profound sayings of Christ that he repeated many times. Plato (_Gorgias_ 512) has language somewhat similar though not so sharply put. The article and aorist participles here (\ho heurn, ho apolesas\) are timeless in themselves just like \ho dechomenos\ in verses 40| and 41|.

rwp@Matthew:26:75 @{Peter remembered} (\emnsth ho Petros\). A small thing, but _magna circumstantia_ (Bengel). In a flash of lightning rapidity he recalled the words of Jesus a few hours before (Matthew:26:34|) which he had then scouted with the proud boast that "even if I must die with thee, yet will I not deny thee" (26:35|). And now this triple denial was a fact. There is no extenuation for the base denials of Peter. He had incurred the dread penalty involved in the words of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:10:33| of denial by Jesus before the Father in heaven. But Peter's revulsion of feeling was as sudden as his sin. {He went out and wept bitterly} (\exelthn ex eklausen pikrs\). Luke adds that the Lord turned and looked upon Peter (Luke:22:61|). That look brought Peter back to his senses. He could not stay where he now was with the revilers of Jesus. He did not feel worthy or able to go openly into the hall where Jesus was. Songs:outside he went with a broken heart. The constative aorist here does not emphasize as Mark's imperfect does (Mark:14:72|, \eklaien\) the continued weeping that was now Peter's only consolation. The tears were bitter, all the more so by reason of that look of understanding pity that Jesus gave him. One of the tragedies of the Cross is the bleeding heart of Peter. Judas was a total wreck and Peter was a near derelict. Satan had sifted them all as wheat, but Jesus had prayed specially for Peter (Luke:22:31f.|). Will Satan show Peter to be all chaff as Judas was?

rwp@Matthew:27:42 @{He saved others; himself he cannot save} (\allous essen; heauton ou dunatai ssai\). The sarcasm is true, though they do not know its full significance. If he had saved himself now, he could not have saved any one. The paradox is precisely the philosophy of life proclaimed by Jesus himself (Matthew:10:39|). {Let him now come down} (\katabat nun\). Now that he is a condemned criminal nailed to the Cross with the claim of being "the King of Israel" (the Jews) over his head. Their spiteful assertion that they would then believe upon Jesus (\ep' auton\) is plainly untrue. They would have shifted their ground and invented some other excuse. When Jesus wrought his greatest miracles, they wanted "a sign from heaven." These "pious scoffers" (Bruce) are like many today who make factitious and arbitrary demands of Christ whose character and power and deity are plain to all whose eyes are not blinded by the god of this world. Christ will not give new proofs to the blind in heart.

rwp@Revelation:3:5 @{Shall be arrayed} (\peribaleitai\). Future middle indicative of \periball\, to fling around one, here and in strkjv@4:4| with \en\ and the locative, but usually in this book with the accusative of the thing, retained in the passive or with the middle (7:9,13; strkjv@10:1; strkjv@11:3; strkjv@12:1; strkjv@17:4; strkjv@18:16; strkjv@19:8,13|). {In white garments} (\en himatiois leukois\). Apparently the spiritual bodies in the risen life as in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1,4| and often in Revelation (3:4,5; strkjv@6:11; strkjv@7:9,13f.; strkjv@19:8|). {I will in no wise blot out} (\ou m exaleips\). Strong double negative \ou m\ and the first aorist active (or future) of \exaleiph\, old word, to wipe out (Acts:3:19|). {Of the book of life} (\ek ts biblou ts zs\). Ablative case with \ek\. This divine register first occurs in strkjv@Exodus:32:32f.| and often in the O.T. See strkjv@Luke:10:20; strkjv@Phillipians:4:3; strkjv@Revelation:13:8; strkjv@20:15; strkjv@21:27|. The book is in Christ's hands (13:8; strkjv@21:27|). {His name} (\to onoma autou\). The name of the one who overcomes (\ho nikn\). Clear reminiscence of the words of Christ about confessing to the Father those who confess him here (Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Mark:8:38; strkjv@Luke:9:26; strkjv@12:8|). Whether John knew the Synoptic Gospels (and why not?) he certainly knew such sayings of Jesus.

rwp@Revelation:7:9 @{Which no man could number} (\hon arithmsai auton oudeis edunato\). Redundant repetition of the pronoun \auton\ after the relative \hon\ as in strkjv@7:5; strkjv@3:8|. \Edunato\ imperfect indicative and \arithmsai\ first aorist active infinitive of \arithme\, old verb, in N.T. only here, strkjv@Matthew:10:30; strkjv@Luke:12:7|. See strkjv@5:9| (also strkjv@11:9; strkjv@13:7; strkjv@14:10; strkjv@17:15|) for the list of words after \ek\ (the spiritual Israel carried on all over the world), "a polyglott cosmopolitan crowd" (Swete). {Standing} (\hesttes\). Same form in strkjv@7:1|, only nominative masculine plural referring to \ochlos\ (masculine singular), construction according to sense like the plural \legontn\ with \ochlou\ in strkjv@19:1|. {Arrayed} (\peribeblmenous\). Perfect passive participle of \periball\, but in the accusative plural (not nominative like \hesttes\), a common variation in this book when preceded by \eidon\ and \idou\ as in strkjv@4:4| (\thronoi, presbuterous\). Charles regards this as a mere slip which would have been changed to \peribeblmenoi\ if John had read the MS. over. {In white robes} (\stolas leukas\). Predicate accusative retained with this passive verb of clothing as in strkjv@7:13; strkjv@10:1; strkjv@11:3; strkjv@12:1; strkjv@17:4; strkjv@18:16; strkjv@19:13|. {Palms} (\phoinikes\). Nominative again, back to construction with \idou\, not \eidon\. Old word, in N.T. only here for palm branches and strkjv@John:12:13| for palm trees. Both these and the white robes are signs of victory and joy.

rwp@Revelation:12:11 @{They overcame him} (\autoi eniksan\). First aorist active indicative of \nika\, the verb used by Jesus of his own victory (John:16:33|) and about him (Revelation:3:21; strkjv@5:5|). "The victory of the martyrs marks the failure of Satan's endeavours" (Swete). {Because of the blood of the Lamb} (\dia to haima tou arniou\). As in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@5:6,9; strkjv@7:14|. The blood of Christ is here presented by \dia\ as the ground for the victory and not the means, as by \en\ in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@5:9|. Both ideas are true, but \dia\ with the accusative gives only the reason. The blood of Christ does cleanse us from sin (John:1:29; strkjv@1John:1:7|). Christ conquered Satan, and so makes our victory possible (Luke:11:21f.; strkjv@Hebrews:2:18|). "Thus the Lamb is the true \sungoros\ (like Michael) of the New Israel, its \parakltos pros ton patera\ (1John:2:1|)" (Swete). {Because of the Word of their testimony} (\dia ton logon ts marturias autn\). The same use of \dia\, "because of their testimony to Jesus" as in John's own case in strkjv@1:9|. These martyrs have been true to their part. {They loved not their life even unto death} (\ouk gapsan ten psuchn autn achri thanatou\). First aorist active indicative of \agapa\. They did resist "unto blood" (\mechris haimatos\ strkjv@Hebrews:12:4|) and did not put their own lives before loyalty to Christ. There is a direct reference to the words of Jesus in strkjv@John:12:25| as illustrated also in strkjv@Mark:8:35; strkjv@Matthew:10:39; strkjv@16:25; strkjv@Luke:9:24; strkjv@17:33|. Paul's own example is pertinent (Acts:21:13; strkjv@Phillipians:1:20ff.|). Jesus himself had been "obedient unto death" (Phillipians:2:8|). These martyrs seem to be still alive on earth, but their heroism is proleptically pictured.

rwp@Revelation:14:16 @{Cast} (\ebalen\). Second aorist active indicative of \ball\. No violence by the use of \ebalen\ as is seen in strkjv@Matthew:10:34| (\balein eirnn\, to bring peace). {Was reaped} (\etheristh\). First aorist passive indicative of \theriz\. Both prophetic aorists again. Christ puts in the sickle as he wills with his own agents (Matthew:9:37f.; strkjv@13:39,41|).