Bible:
Filter: String:

NT-GOSPEL.filter - rwp Sim:


rwp@1Corinthians:1:12 @{Now this I mean} (\leg“ de touto\). Explanatory use of \leg“\. Each has his party leader. \Apoll“\ is genitive of \Apoll“s\ (Acts:18:24|), probably abbreviation of \Apoll“nius\ as seen in Codex Bezae for strkjv@Acts:18:24|. See on Acts for discussion of this "eloquent Alexandrian" (Ellicott), whose philosophical and oratorical preaching was in contrast "with the studied plainness" of Paul (1Corinthians:2:1; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:10|). People naturally have different tastes about styles of preaching and that is well, but Apollos refused to be a party to this strife and soon returned to Ephesus and refused to go back to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:12|). \Cˆphƒ\ is the genitive of \Cˆphƒs\, the Aramaic name given Simon by Jesus (John:1:42|), \Petros\ in Greek. Except in strkjv@Galatians:2:7,8| Paul calls him Cephas. He had already taken his stand with Paul in the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:7-11; strkjv@Galatians:2:7-10|). Paul had to rebuke him at Antioch for his timidity because of the Judaizers (Galatians:2:11-14|), but, in spite of Baur's theory, there is no evidence of a schism in doctrine between Paul and Peter. If strkjv@2Peter:3:15f.| be accepted as genuine, as I do, there is proof of cordial relations between them and strkjv@1Corinthians:9:5| points in the same direction. But there is no evidence that Peter himself visited Corinth. Judaizers came and pitted Peter against Paul to the Corinthian Church on the basis of Paul's rebuke of Peter in Antioch. These Judaizers made bitter personal attacks on Paul in return for their defeat at the Jerusalem Conference. Songs:a third faction was formed by the use of Peter's name as the really orthodox wing of the church, the gospel of the circumcision. {And I of Christ} (\eg“ de Christou\). Still a fourth faction in recoil from the partisan use of Paul, Apollos, Cephas, with "a spiritually proud utterance" (Ellicott) that assumes a relation to Christ not true of the others. "Those who used this cry arrogated the common watchword as their _peculium_" (Findlay). This partisan use of the name of Christ may have been made in the name of unity against the other three factions, but it merely added another party to those existing. In scouting the names of the other leaders they lowered the name and rank of Christ to their level.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:3:13 @{The day} (\hˆ hˆmera\). The day of judgment as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:4| (which see), strkjv@Romans:13:12; strkjv@Hebrews:10:25|. The work (\ergon\) of each will be made manifest. There is no escape from this final testing. {It is revealed in fire} (\en puri apokaluptetai\). Apparently "the day" is the subject of the verb, not the work, not the Lord. See strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:8; strkjv@2:8|. This metaphor of fire was employed in the O.T. (Daniel:7:9f.; strkjv@Malachi:4:1|) and by John the Baptist (Matthew:3:12; strkjv@Luke:3:16f.|). It is a metaphor that must not be understood as purgatorial, but simple testing (Ellicott) as every fire tests ({the fire itself will test}, \to pur auto dokimasei\) the quality of the material used in the building, {of what sort it is} (\hopoion estin\), qualitative relative pronoun. Men today find, alas, that some of the fireproof buildings are not fireproof when the fire actually comes.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:5 @{Wherefore} (\h“ste\). As in strkjv@3:21| which see. {Judge nothing} (\mˆ ti krinete\). Stop passing judgment, stop criticizing as they were doing. See the words of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:7:1|. The censorious habit was ruining the Corinthian Church. {Before the time} (\pro kairou\). The day of the Lord in strkjv@3:13|. "Do not therefore anticipate the great judgment (\krisis\) by any preliminary investigation (\anakrisis\) which must be futile and incomplete" (Lightfoot). {Until the Lord come} (\he“s an elthˆi ho kurios\). Common idiom of \he“s\ and the aorist subjunctive with or without \an\ for a future event. Simple futurity, but held forth as a glorious hope, the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus as Judge. {Who will both bring to light} (\hos kai ph“tisei\). Future indicative of this late verb (in papyri also) from \ph“s\ (light), to turn the light on the hidden things of darkness. {And make manifest} (\kai phaner“sei\). (Ionic and late) causative verb \phanero“\ from \phaneros\. By turning on the light the counsels of all hearts stand revealed. {His praise} (\ho epainos\). The praise (note article) due him from God (Romans:2:29|) will come to each then (\tote\) and not till then. Meanwhile Paul will carry on and wait for the praise from God.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:12 @{We toil} (\kopi“men\). Common late verb for weariness in toil (Luke:5:5|), {working with our own hands} (\ergazomenoi tais idiais chersin\) instrumental case \chersin\ and not simply for himself but also for Aquila and Priscilla as he explains in strkjv@Acts:20:34|. This personal touch gives colour to the outline. Paul alludes to this fact often (1Thessalonians:2:9; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:8; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:7|). "Greeks despised manual labour; St. Paul glories in it" (Robertson and Plummer). Cf. Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 317. {Being reviled we bless} (\loidoroumenoi eulogoumen\). Almost the language of Peter about Jesus (1Peter:2:23|) in harmony with the words of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:5:44; strkjv@Luke:6:27|. {Being persecuted we endure} (\di“komenoi anechometha\). We hold back and do not retaliate. Turn to Paul's other picture of his experiences in the vivid contrasts in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:7-10; strkjv@6:3-10| for an interpretation of his language here.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:3 @{Render the due} (\tˆn opheilˆn apodidot“\). Marriage is not simply not wrong, but for many a duty. Both husband and wife have a mutual obligation to the other. "This dictum defends marital intercourse against rigorists, as that of ver. 1| commends celibacy against sensualists" (Findlay).

rwp@1Corinthians:7:12 @{But to the rest say I, not the Lord} (\tois de loipois leg“ eg“, ouch ho Kurios\). Paul has no word about marriage from Jesus beyond the problem of divorce. This is no disclaimer of inspiration. He simply means that here he is not quoting a command of Jesus. {An unbelieving wife} (\gunaika apiston\). This is a new problem, the result of work among the Gentiles, that did not arise in the time of Jesus. The form \apiston\ is the same as the masculine because a compound adjective. Paul has to deal with mixed marriages as missionaries do today in heathen lands. The rest (\hoi loipoi\) for Gentiles (Ephesians:2:3|) we have already had in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13; strkjv@5:6| which see. The Christian husband married his wife when he himself was an unbeliever. The word \apistos\ sometimes means unfaithful (Luke:12:46|), but not here (cf. strkjv@John:20:27|). {She is content} (\suneudokei\). Late compound verb to be pleased together with, agree together. In the papyri. {Let him not leave her} (\mˆ aphiet“ autˆn\). Perhaps here and in verses 11,13| \aphiˆmi\ should be translated "put away" like \apolu“\ in strkjv@Mark:10:1|. Some understand \aphiˆmi\ as separation from bed and board, not divorce.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:14 @{Is sanctified in the wife} (\hˆgiastai en tˆi gunaiki\). Perfect passive indicative of \hagiaz“\, to set apart, to hallow, to sanctify. Paul does not, of course, mean that the unbelieving husband is saved by the faith of the believing wife, though Hodge actually so interprets him. Clearly he only means that the marriage relation is sanctified so that there is no need of a divorce. If either husband or wife is a believer and the other agrees to remain, the marriage is holy and need not be set aside. This is so simple that one wonders at the ability of men to get confused over Paul's language. {Else were your children unclean} (\epei ara ta tekna akatharta\). The common ellipse of the condition with \epei\: "since, accordingly, if it is otherwise, your children are illegitimate (\akatharta\)." If the relations of the parents be holy, the child's birth must be holy also (not illegitimate). "He is not assuming that the child of a Christian parent would be baptized; that would spoil rather than help his argument, for it would imply that the child was not \hagios\ till it was baptized. The verse throws no light on the question of infant baptism" (Robertson and Plummer).

rwp@1Corinthians:7:26 @{I think therefore} (\nomiz“ oun\). Paul proceeds to express therefore the previously mentioned judgment (\gn“mˆn\) and calls it his opinion, not because he is uncertain, but simply because it is not a command, but advice. {By reason of the present distress} (\dia tˆn enest“san anagkˆn\). The participle \enest“san\ is second perfect active of \enistˆmi\ and means "standing on" or "present" (cf. strkjv@Galatians:1:4; strkjv@Hebrews:9:9|). It occurs in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2| of the advent of Christ as not "present." Whether Paul has in mind the hoped for second coming of Jesus in this verse we do not certainly know, though probably so. Jesus had spoken of those calamities which would precede his coming (Matthew:24:8ff.|) though Paul had denied saying that the advent was right at hand (2Thessalonians:2:2|). \Anagkˆ\ is a strong word (old and common), either for external circumstances or inward sense of duty. It occurs elsewhere for the woes preceding the second coming (Luke:21:23|) and also for Paul's persecutions (1Thessalonians:3:7; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:4; strkjv@12:10|). Perhaps there is a mingling of both ideas here. {Namely}. This word is not in the Greek. The infinitive of indirect discourse (\huparchein\) after \nomiz“\ is repeated with recitative \hoti\, "That the being so is good for a man" (\hoti kalon anthr“p“i to hout“s einai\). The use of the article \to\ with \einai\ compels this translation. Probably Paul means for one (\anthr“p“i\, generic term for man or woman) to remain as he is whether married or unmarried. The copula \estin\ is not expressed. He uses \kalon\ (good) as in strkjv@7:1|.

rwp@1Corinthians:13:2 @The ecstatic gifts (verse 1|) are worthless. Equally so are the teaching gifts (prophecy, knowledge of mysteries, all knowledge). Crasis here in \kan=kai ean\. Paul is not condemning these great gifts. He simply places love above them and essential to them. Equally futile is wonder-working faith "so as to remove mountains" (\h“ste orˆ methistanein\) without love. This may have been a proverb or Paul may have known the words of Jesus (Matthew:17:20; strkjv@21:21|). {I am nothing} (\outhen eimi\). Not \outheis\, nobody, but an absolute zero. This form in \th\ rather than \d\ (\ouden\) had a vogue for a while (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 219).

rwp@1Corinthians:15:5 @{And that he appeared to Cephas} (\kai hoti “phthˆ Kˆphƒi\). First aorist passive indicative of the defective verb \hora“\, to see. Paul means not a mere "vision," but actual appearance. John uses \ephaner“thˆ\ (John:21:14|) from \phanero“\, to make manifest, of Christ's appearance to the seven by the Sea of Galilee. Peter was listed first (\pr“tos\) among the Apostles (Matthew:10:2|). Jesus had sent a special message to him (Mark:16:7|) after his resurrection. This special appearance to Peter is made the determining factor in the joyful faith of the disciples (Luke:24:34|), though mentioned incidentally here. Paul had told all these four facts to the Corinthians in his preaching. He gives further proof of the fact of Christ's resurrection. There are ten appearances given besides the one to Paul. Nine are in the Gospels (Mary Magdalene in John and Mark, the other women in Matthew, the two going to Emmaus in Luke, Simon Peter in Luke and I Corinthians, the ten apostles and others in Luke and John and Mark, the eleven and others in John, the seven by the sea in John, to over five hundred in Galilee in Matthew and Paul and Mark, to the apostles in Jerusalem in Luke and Mark and Acts and I Corinthians) and one in I Corinthians above (to James). It will be seen that Paul mentions only five of the ten, one, that to James, not given elsewhere. What he gives is conclusive evidence of the fact, particularly when re-enforced by his own experience (the sixth appearance mentioned by Paul). The way to prove this great fact is to start with Paul's own witness given in this undoubted Epistle. The natural way to understand Paul's adverbs of time here is chronological: {then} (\eita\), {then} (\epeita\), {then} (\epeita\), {then} (\eita\), {last of all} (\eschaton pant“n\). {To the twelve} (\tois d“deka\). The technical name. Only ten were present, for Judas was dead and Thomas was absent (John:20:24|).

rwp@1Corinthians:15:24 @{Then cometh the end} (\eita to telos\). No verb \ginetai\ in the Greek. Supply "at his coming," the end or consummation of the age or world (Matthew:13:39,49; strkjv@1Peter:4:7|), {When he shall deliver up} (\hotan paradid“i\). Present active subjunctive (not optative) of \paradid“mi\ with \hotan\, whenever, and so quite indefinite and uncertain as to time. Present subjunctive rather than aorist \parad“i\ because it pictures a future proceeding. {To God, even the Father} (\t“i the“i kai patri\). Better, "to the God and Father" or to "His God and Father." The Kingdom belongs to the Father. {When he shall have abolished} (\hotan katargˆsˆi\). First aorist active subjunctive with \hotan\, indefinite future time. Simply, "whenever he shall abolish," no use in making it future perfect, merely aorist subjunctive. On \katarge“\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:6:13; strkjv@13:8,10,11|. {Rule} (\archˆn\), {authority} (\exousian\), {power} (\dunamin\). All forms of power opposing the will of God. Constative aorist tense covering the whole period of conflict with final victory as climax.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:27 @{He put} (\hupetaxen\). First aorist active of \hupotass“\, to subject. Supply God (\theos\) as subject (Psalms:8:7|). See strkjv@Hebrews:2:5-9| for similar use. Cf. strkjv@Psalms:8|. {But when he saith} (\hotan de eipˆi\). Here Christ must be supplied as the subject if the reference is to his future and final triumph. The syntax more naturally calls for God as the subject as before. Either way makes sense. But there is no need to take \eipˆi\ (second aorist active subjunctive) as _a futurum exactum_, merely "whenever he shall say." {Are put in subjection} (\hupotetaktai\). Perfect passive indicative, state of completion, final triumph. {It is evident that} (\dˆlon hoti\). Supply \estin\ (is) before \hoti\. {He is excepted who did subject} (\ektos tou hupotaxantos\). "Except the one (God) who did subject (articular aorist active participle) the all things to him (Christ)."

rwp@1Corinthians:15:51 @{A mystery} (\mustˆrion\). He does not claim that he has explained everything. He has drawn a broad parallel which opens the door of hope and confidence. {We shall not all sleep} (\pantes ou koimˆthˆsometha\). Future passive indicative of \koimaomai\, to sleep. Not all of us shall die, Paul means. Some people will be alive when he comes. Paul does not affirm that he or any then living will be alive when Jesus comes again. He simply groups all under the phrase "we all." {But we shall all be changed} (\pantes de allagˆsometha\). Second future passive indicative of \allass“\. Both living and dead shall be changed and so receive the resurrection body. See this same idea at more length in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13-18|.

rwp@1John:3:17 @{Whoso hath} (\hos an echˆi\). Indefinite relative clause with modal \an\ with \hos\ and the present active subjunctive of \ech“\. {The world's goods} (\ton bion tou kosmou\). "The living or livelihood (not \z“ˆ\, the principle of life, and see strkjv@2:16| for \bios\) of the world" (not in the sense of evil or wicked, but simply this mundane sphere). {Beholdeth} (\the“rei\). Present active subjunctive of \the“re“\, like \echei\ just before. {In need} (\chreian echonta\). "Having need" (present active predicate participle of \ech“\, agreeing with \adelphon\). See the vivid picture of a like case in strkjv@James:2:15f|. {Shutteth up} (\kleisˆi\). First aorist (effective) active subjunctive of \klei“\, to close like the door, changed on purpose from present tense to aorist (graphic slamming the door of his compassion, \splagchna\, common in LXX and N.T. for the nobler viscera, the seat of the emotions, as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:11; strkjv@Colossians:3:12|). Only here in John. {How} (\p“s\). Rhetorical question like that in strkjv@James:2:16| (what is the use?). It is practical, not speculative, that counts in the hour of need.

rwp@1John:5:16 @{If any man see} (\ean tis idˆi\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \eidon\ (\hora“\). {Sinning a sin} (\hamartanonta hamartian\). Present active predicate (supplementary) participle agreeing with \adelphon\ and with cognate accusative \hamartian\. {Not unto death} (\mˆ pros thanaton\). Repeated again with \hamartanousin\ and in contrast with \hamartia pros thanaton\ (sin unto death). Most sins are not mortal sins, but clearly John conceives of a sin that is deadly enough to be called "unto death." This distinction is common in the rabbinic writings and in strkjv@Numbers:18:22| the LXX has \labein hamartian thanatˆphoron\ "to incur a death-bearing sin" as many crimes then and now bear the death penalty. There is a distinction in strkjv@Hebrews:10:26| between sinning wilfully after full knowledge and sins of ignorance (Hebrews:5:2|). Jesus spoke of the unpardonable sin (Mark:3:29; strkjv@Matthew:12:32; strkjv@Luke:12:10|), which was attributing to the devil the manifest work of the Holy Spirit. It is possible that John has this idea in mind when he applies it to those who reject Jesus Christ as God's Son and set themselves up as antichrists. {Concerning this} (\peri ekeinˆs\). This sin unto death. {That he should make request} (\hina er“tˆsˆi\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with the first aorist active subjunctive of \er“ta“\, used here as in strkjv@John:17:15,20| (and often) for request rather than for question. John does not forbid praying for such cases; he simply does not command prayer for them. He leaves them to God.

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

rwp@1Peter:1:3 @{Blessed be} (\eulogˆtos\). No copula in the Greek (\est“\, let be, or \estin\, is, or \eiˆ\, may be). The verbal adjective (from \euloge“\) occurs in the N.T. only of God, as in the LXX (Luke:1:68|). See also strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3; strkjv@Ephesians:1:3|. {The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\ho theos kai patˆr tou kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou Christou\). This precise language in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3; Ephesians:I:3|; and part of it in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:31; strkjv@Romans:15:6|. See strkjv@John:20:17| for similar language by Jesus. {Great} (\polu\). Much. {Begat us again} (\anagennˆsas hˆmƒs\). First aorist active articular (\ho\, who) participle of \anagenna“\, late, and rare word to beget again, in Aleph for _Sirach_ (_Prol_. 20), in Philo, in Hermetic writings, in N.T. only here and verse 23|. "It was probably borrowed by the New Paganism from Christianity" (Bigg). The Stoics used \anagennˆsis\ for \palingenesia\ (Titus:3:5|). If \an“then\ in strkjv@John:3:3| be taken to mean "again," the same idea of regeneration is there, and if "from above" it is the new birth, anyhow. {Unto a living hope} (\eis elpida z“san\). Peter is fond of the word "living" (present active participle of \za“\) as in strkjv@1:23; strkjv@2:4,5,24; strkjv@4:5,6|. The Pharisees cherished the hope of the resurrection (Acts:23:6|), but the resurrection of Jesus gave it proof and permanence (1Corinthians:15:14,17|). It is no longer a dead hope like dead faith (James:2:17,26|). This revival of hope was wrought "by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (\dia anastase“s\). Hope rose up with Christ from the dead, though the disciples (Peter included) were slow at first to believe it.

rwp@1Peter:1:5 @{By the power of God} (\en dunamei theou\). No other \dunamis\ (power) like this (Colossians:1:3|). {Are guarded} (\phrouroumenous\). Present (continuous process) passive articular (\tous\) participle of \phroure“\, to garrison, old verb (from \phrouros\ sentinel), a military term (Acts:9:24; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:32|), used of God's love (Phillipians:4:7|) as here. "The inheritance is kept; the heirs are guarded" (Bengel). {Through faith} (\dia piste“s\). Intermediate agency (\dia\), the immediate being (\en\, in, by) God's power. {Unto a salvation} (\eis s“tˆrian\). Deliverance is the goal (\eis\) of the process and final salvation here, consummation as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:8|, from \s“tˆr\ (Saviour, from \s“z“\, to save). {Ready} (\hetoimˆn\). Prepared awaiting God's will (Galatians:3:23; strkjv@Romans:8:18|). {To be revealed} (\apokaluphthˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \apokalupt“\, to unveil. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:3:4| for \phanero“\ (to manifest) in this sense. {In the last time} (\en kair“i eschat“i\). This precise phrase nowhere else, but similar ones in strkjv@John:6:39; strkjv@Acts:2:17; strkjv@James:5:3; strkjv@2Timothy:3:1; strkjv@2Peter:3:3; He strkjv@1:2; strkjv@Jude:1:18; strkjv@1John:2:18|. Hort translates it here "in a season of extremity," but it is usually taken to refer to the Day of Judgment. That day no one knows, Jesus said.

rwp@1Peter:2:3 @{If ye have tasted} (\ei egeusasthe\). Condition of first class with \ei\ and first aorist middle indicative of \geu“\ in figurative sense as in strkjv@Hebrews:6:4f|. "A taste excites the appetite" (Bengel). {Gracious} (\chrˆstos\). Quotation from strkjv@Psalms:34:8|. The Hebrew for the LXX \chrˆstos\ is simply _tobh_ (good). Plato used the word for food also, and Peter carries out the metaphor in \gala\ (milk) as in strkjv@Luke:5:39|.

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

rwp@1Peter:2:23 @{When he was reviled} (\loidoroumenos\). Present passive participle of \loidore“\, old verb (from \loidoros\, reviler, strkjv@1Corinthians:5:11|) as in strkjv@John:9:28|. {Reviled not again} (\ouk anteloidorei\). Imperfect active (for repeated incidents) of \antiloidore“\, late and rare compound (Plutarch, Lucian, one papyrus example with compound following the simplex verb as here, Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_), here only in N.T. Idiomatic use of \anti\ (in turn, return, back). {Threatened not} (\ouk ˆpeilei\). Imperfect again (repeated acts) of \apeile“\, old compound (from \apeilˆ\, threat, strkjv@Acts:9:1|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:4:17|. {But committed himself} (\paredidou de\). Imperfect active again (kept on committing himself) of \paradid“mi\, to hand over, usually of one to a judge, but here not of another (as the Sanhedrin), but himself (supply \heauton\), for Jesus uses this very idea in strkjv@Luke:23:46| as he dies. Jesus thus handed himself and his cause over to the Father who judges righteously (\t“i krinonti dikai“s\, dative of present active articular participle of \krin“\).

rwp@1Peter:3:18 @{Because Christ also died} (\hoti kai Christos apethanen\). Songs:the best MSS.; later ones \epathen\ (suffered). The example of Christ should stir us to patient endurance. {For sins} (\peri hamarti“n\). "Concerning sins" (not his, but ours, strkjv@1:18|). \Peri\ (around, concerning) with \hamartias\ in the regular phrase for the sin offering (Leviticus:5:7; strkjv@6:30|), though \huper hamartias\ does occur (Ezekiel:43:25|). Songs:in the N.T. we find both \peri hamarti“n\ (Hebrews:5:3|) and \huper hamarti“n\ (Hebrews:5:1|). {Once} (\hapax\). Once for all (Hebrews:9:28|), not once upon a time (\pote\). {The righteous for the unrighteous} (\dikaios huper adik“n\). Literally, "just for unjust" (no articles). See strkjv@1Peter:2:19| for the sinlessness of Christ as the one perfect offering for sin. This is what gives Christ's blood value. He has no sin himself. Some men today fail to perceive this point. {That he might bring us to God} (\hina hˆmƒs prosagagˆi t“i the“i\). Purpose clause with \hina\, with second aorist active subjunctive of \prosag“\ and the dative case \t“i the“i\. The MSS. vary between \hˆmƒs\ (us) and \humƒs\ (you). The verb \prosag“\ means to lead or bring to (Matthew:18:24|), to approach God (cf. \prosag“gˆn\ in strkjv@Ephesians:2:18|), to present us to God on the basis of his atoning death for us, which has opened the way (Romans:3:25; strkjv@Hebrews:10:19f|.) {Being put to death in the flesh} (\thanat“theis men sarki\). First aorist passive participle of \thanato“\, old verb (from \thanatos\ death), to put to death. \Sarki\ is locative case of \sarx\. {But quickened in the spirit} (\z“opoiˆtheis de pneumati\). First aorist passive participle of \z“opoie“\ rare (Aristotle) verb (from \z“opoios\ making alive), to make alive. The participles are not antecedent to \apethanen\, but simultaneous with it. There is no such construction as the participle of subsequent action. The spirit of Christ did not die when his flesh did, but "was endued with new and greater powers of life" (Thayer). See strkjv@1Corinthians:15:22| for the use of the verb for the resurrection of the body. But the use of the word \pneumati\ (locative case) in contrast with \sarki\ starts Peter's mind off in a long comparison by way of illustration that runs from verses 19-22|. The following verses have caused more controversy than anything in the Epistle.

rwp@1Peter:3:21 @{Which also} (\ho kai\). Water just mentioned. {After a true likeness} (\antitupon\). Water in baptism now as an anti-type of Noah's deliverance by water. For \baptisma\ see on ¯Matthew:3:7|. For \antitupon\ see on ¯Hebrews:9:24| (only other N.T. example) where the word is used of the earthly tabernacle corresponding (\antitupa\) to the heavenly, which is the pattern (\tupon\ strkjv@Hebrews:8:5|) for the earthly. Songs:here baptism is presented as corresponding to (prefigured by) the deliverance of Noah's family by water. It is only a vague parallel, but not over-fanciful. {Doth now save you} (\humas nun s“zei\). Simplex verb (\s“z“\, not the compound \dias“z“\). The saving by baptism which Peter here mentions is only symbolic (a metaphor or picture as in strkjv@Romans:6:2-6|), not actual as Peter hastens to explain. {Not the putting away of the filth of the flesh} (\ou sarkos apothesis rupou\). \Apothesis\ is old word from \apotithˆmi\ (2:1|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Peter:1:14|. \Rupou\ (genitive of \rupos\) is old word (cf. \ruparos\, filthy, in strkjv@James:2:2; strkjv@Revelation:22:11|), here only in N.T. (cf. strkjv@Isaiah:3:3; strkjv@4:4|). Baptism, Peter explains, does not wash away the filth of the flesh either in a literal sense, as a bath for the body, or in a metaphorical sense of the filth of the soul. No ceremonies really affect the conscience (Hebrews:9:13f.|). Peter here expressly denies baptismal remission of sin. {But the interrogation of a good conscience toward God} (\alla suneidˆse“s agathˆs eper“tˆma eis theon\). Old word from \eper“ta“\ (to question as in strkjv@Mark:9:32; strkjv@Matthew:16:1|), here only in N.T. In ancient Greek it never means answer, but only inquiry. The inscriptions of the age of the Antonines use it of the Senate's approval after inquiry. That may be the sense here, that is, avowal of consecration to God after inquiry, having repented and turned to God and now making this public proclamation of that fact by means of baptism (the symbol of the previous inward change of heart). Thus taken, it matters little whether \eis theon\ (toward God) be taken with \eper“tˆma\ or \suneidˆse“s\. {Through the resurrection of Jesus Christ} (\di' anastase“s Iˆsou Christou\). For baptism is a symbolic picture of the resurrection of Christ as well as of our own spiritual renewal (Romans:6:2-6|). See strkjv@1:3| for regeneration made possible by the resurrection of Jesus.

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:4:1 @{Finally} (\loipon\). Accusative of general reference of \loipos\, as for the rest. It does not mean actual conclusion, but merely a colloquial expression pointing towards the end (Milligan) as in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11; strkjv@2Timothy:4:8|. Songs:\to loipon\ in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:1; strkjv@Phillipians:3:1; strkjv@4:8|. {We beseech} (\er“t“men\). Not "question" as in ancient Greek, but as often in N.T. (1Thessalonians:5:12; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1; strkjv@Phillipians:4:3|) and also in papyri to make urgent request of one. {How ye ought} (\to p“s dei humƒs\). Literally, explanatory articular indirect question (\to p“s\) after \parelabˆte\ according to common classic idiom in Luke (Luke:1:62; strkjv@22:2,4,23,24|) and Paul (Romans:8:26|). {That ye abound} (\hina perisseuˆte\). Loose construction of the \hina\ clause with present subjunctive after two subordinate clauses with \kath“s\ (as, even as) to be connected with "beseech and exhort." {More and more} (\mallon\). Simply {more}, but added to same idea in \perisseuˆte\. See also verse 11|.

rwp@1Timothy:3:15 @{But if I tarry long} (\ean de bradun“\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and the present active subjunctive of \bradun“\, old verb, to be slow (usually intransitive), from \bradus\ (slow, dull, strkjv@Luke:24:25|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Peter:3:9|. {That thou mayest know} (\hina eidˆis\). Final clause with \hina\ and second perfect active subjunctive of \oida\, to know. {How men ought} (\p“s dei\). "How it is necessary for thee" (supply \se\ more naturally than \tina\, any one). Indirect question. {To behave themselves} (\anastrephesthai\). Present middle (direct) infinitive of \anastreph“\, old verb, to turn up and down. See strkjv@2Corinthians:1:12; strkjv@Ephesians:2:3|. {In the house of God} (\en oik“i theou\). Probably here "household of God," that is "the family of God" rather than "the house (or temple) of God." Christians as yet had no separate houses of worship and \oikos\ commonly means "household." Christians are the \naos\ (sanctuary) of God (1Corinthians:3:16f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:16|), and Paul calls them \oikeioi tou theou\ (Ephesians:2:19|) "members of God's family." It is conduct as members of God's family (\oikos\) that Paul has in mind. {Which} (\hˆtis\). "Which very house of God," agreeing (feminine) with the predicate word \ekklˆsia\ (church). {The church of the living God} (\ekklˆsia theou z“ntos\). Probably here the general church or kingdom as in Colossians and Ephesians, though the local church in verse 5|. {The pillar and ground of the truth} (\stulos kai hedrai“ma tˆs alˆtheias\). Paul changes the metaphor again as he often does. Those words are in apposition to \ekklˆsia\ and \oikos\. On \stulos\, old word for pillar, see strkjv@Galatians:2:9; strkjv@Revelation:3:12| (only other N.T. examples). \Hedrai“ma\, late and rare word (from \hedraio“\, to make stable) occurs here first and only in ecclesiastical writers later. Probably it means stay or support rather than foundation or ground. See Co strkjv@1:23; strkjv@2Timothy:2:19| for similar idea. See also strkjv@Matthew:16:18f|.

rwp@2Corinthians:1:17 @{Did I shew fickleness?} (\mˆti ara tˆi elaphriƒi?\). An indignant negative answer is called for by \mˆti\. The instrumental case of \elaphriƒi\ is regular after \echrˆsamˆn\ from \chraomai\, to use. \Elaphria\ is a late word for levity from the old adjective, \elaphros\, light, agile (2Corinthians:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:11:30|). Here only in N.T. {Purpose} (\bouleuomai\). Paul raises the question of fickleness about any of his plans. {Yea yea} (\Nai nai\) {--nay nay} (\ou ou\). See a similar repetition in strkjv@Matthew:5:37|. It is plain in strkjv@James:5:12| where "the yea" is "yea" and "the nay" is "nay." That seems to be Paul's meaning here, "that the Yea may be yea and the Nay may be nay."

rwp@2Corinthians:6:10 @{Always rejoicing} (\aei chairontes\). Even in sorrow (11:9; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:16; strkjv@Romans:5:3-5; strkjv@9:2; strkjv@Phillipians:2:18,27; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@4:4,15|). {Yet making many rich} (\pollous de ploutizontes\). Old word from \ploutos\ (wealth), to enrich. Spiritual riches Paul has in mind as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:5| (cf. strkjv@Matthew:5:37|). {As having nothing and yet possessing all things} (\h“s mˆden echontes kai panta katechontes\). Contrast between \mˆden\ (nothing) and \panta\ (all things, cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:3:22|) and \ech“\ (to have) and \katech“\ (to hold down, to hold fast). Play on words (simple and compound) as in strkjv@3:2; strkjv@4:8|. Climax of Paul's panegyric on the Christian ministry. He now resumes the thread of the story broken off in strkjv@2:14|.

rwp@2Corinthians:8:2 @{Proof} (\dokimˆi\). Tests as of metals as in strkjv@2:9|. {Abundance} (\perisseia\). Late word from \perisseu“\, to overflow. {Their deep poverty} (\hˆ kata bathous pt“cheia aut“n\). \Pt“cheia\ is old word from \pt“cheu“\, to be a beggar, as of Jesus in strkjv@8:9| (from \pt“chos\, cowering in fear and poverty, as in strkjv@Luke:14:13|, but ennobled by Christ as in strkjv@Matthew:5:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9|). Poverty down deep. Strabo (LX 419) has \kata bathous\, down to the bottom. {Liberality} (\haplotˆtos\). From \haplous\, single, simple (Matthew:6:22|). "The passage from single-mindedness or simplicity to liberality is not quite obvious" (Plummer). Perhaps "heartiness" supplies the connecting link. See also strkjv@9:11-13|.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:4 @{Another Jesus} (\allon Iˆsoun\). Not necessarily a different Jesus, but any other "Jesus" is a rival and so wrong. That would deny the identity. {A different spirit} (\pneuma heteron\). This is the obvious meaning of \heteron\ in distinction from \allon\ as seen in strkjv@Acts:4:12; strkjv@Galatians:1:6f|. But this distinction in nature or kind is not always to be insisted on. {A different gospel} (\euaggelion heteron\). Similar use of \heteron\. {Ye do well to bear with him} (\kal“s anechesthe\). Ironical turn again. "Well do you hold yourselves back from him" (the coming one, whoever he is). Some MSS. have the imperfect \aneichesthe\ (did bear with).

rwp@2Corinthians:13:2 @{As when I was present the second time} (\h“s par“n to deuteron\). This translation assumes the second visit as already made. It is a natural way to take the Greek \h“s par“n\. But \h“s\ with \par“n\ can also mean "as if present" the second time (Authorized Version). Probably "as when" is the more natural rendering, but the other cannot be ruled entirely out in view of strkjv@1:15-23|. {If I come again} (\ean elth“ eis to palin\). Condition of third class. The use of \palin\ of itself suits the idea that Paul had not yet made the second visit as it means simply "again" or "back," but in strkjv@Matthew:26:44| we find \palin ek tritou\ (again a third time) and so it is not decisive.

rwp@Info_2Peter @ CLAIMS PETRINE AUTHORSHIP Not only so, but in fuller form than strkjv@1Peter:1:1|, for the writer terms himself "Simon (Symeon in some MSS.) Peter," a fact that has been used against the genuineness. If no claim had been made, that would have been considered decisive against him. Simon (Symeon was the Jewish form as used by James in strkjv@Acts:15:14|) is the real name (John:1:42|) and Peter merely the Greek for Cephas, the nickname given by Christ. There is no reason why both could not properly be employed here. But the claim to Petrine authorship, if not genuine, leaves the Epistle pseudonymous. That was a custom among some Jewish writers and even Christian writers, as the spurious Petrine literature testifies (Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, etc.), works of a heretical or curious nature. Whatever the motive for such a pious fraud, the fact remains that II Peter, if not genuine, has to take its place with this pseudonymous literature and can hardly be deemed worthy of a place in the New Testament. And yet there is no heresy in this Epistle, no startling new ideas that would lead one to use the name of Simon Peter. It is the rather full of edifying and orthodox teaching.

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 (\epichorˆge“\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:10,19, \bebaios\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:12,13,15|, \prophˆteia\ 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 idi“tai\). II Peter and the Apocalypse illustrate this statement. II Peter may have more of Peter's real style than I Peter.

rwp@Info_2Peter @ BOOKS ON II PETER BESIDES THOSE ON I PETER ALSO Abbott, E. A., _The Expositor_ (Jan. to March, 1822). Chase, F. H., _Hastings D B_ (Second Peter). Deuteronomy:Zwaan, _2 Peter en Judas_ (1909). Dietlein, W. O., _Der 2 Brief Petri_ (1851). Grosch, H., _Die Echtheit des zweiten Briefes Petri_ (1889). Henkel, K., _Der zweite Brief des Apostelfursten Petrus_ (1904). Hofmann, J. C., _Der zweite Brief Petri und der Brief Juda (1875) Hundhausen, _Das zweite Pontifkalschreiben des Apostels Petrus_ (1873). James, M. R., _The Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of Jude_ (Cambridge Greek Testament, 1912). Lumby, J. R., _2 Peter and Jude_ (in Bible Commentary). Mayor, J. B., _The Epistle of St. Jude:and the Second Epistle of St. Peter_ (1907). Plummer, A., _The Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of Jude_ (Vol. 3, N.T. Commentary for English Readers by Ellicott). Robson, E. I., _Studies in the Second Epistle of St. Peter_ (1915). Schott, Th., _Der zweite Brief Petri und der Brief Juda_ (1863). Schott, _Der 2 Br. Petri und der Br. Juda Erkl_. (1863). Schweenhorst, H., _Das Verhaltnis des Judasbriefes zum zweiten Petrusbriefe_ (1904). Snyman, D. R., _The Authenticity of the Second Epistle of Peter_ (thesis in 1923 for Th.D. degree at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary). Spitta, F, _Der zweite Brief des Petrus und der Brief des Judas_ (1885). Strachan, R. D., _Expositor's Greek Testament_ (1910), Ullman, C., _Der 2 Brief Petri Krit. untersuch._ (1821). Warfield, B. B., _A Defence of 2 Peter_ (Southern Presbyterian Review, January, 1882).,_Dr. Edwin A. Abbott on the Genuineness of Second Peter (Southern Presbyterian Review_, 1883). Werdermann, _H., Die Irrlehrer des Judasbriefes und 2 Petrusbriefes_ (1913). Wiesinger, J. T. A., _Der zweite Brief des Apostels Petrus und der Brief des Judas_ (1862). strkjv@2Peter:1:1 @{Simon Peter} (\Sim“n Petros\). Aleph A K L P have \Syme“n\ as in strkjv@Acts:15:14|, while B has \Sim“n\. The two forms occur indifferently in I Macc. strkjv@2:3, 65 for the same man. {Servant and apostle} (\doulos kai apostolos\). Like strkjv@Romans:1:1; strkjv@Titus:1:1|. {To them that have obtained} (\tois lachousin\). Dative plural articular participle second aorist active of \lagchan“\, old verb, to obtain by lot (Luke:1:9|), here with the accusative (\pistin\) as in strkjv@Acts:1:17|. {Like precious} (\isotimon\). Late compound adjective (\isos\, equal, \timˆ\, honor, price), here only in N.T. But this adjective (Field) is used in two ways, according to the two ideas in \timˆ\ (value, honor), either like in value or like in honor. This second idea is the usual one with \isotimos\ (inscriptions and papyri, Josephus, Lucian), while \polutimos\ has the notion of price like \timˆ\ in strkjv@1:7,19; strkjv@2:4,6f|. The faith which they have obtained is like in honor and privilege with that of Peter or any of the apostles. {With us} (\hˆmin\). Associative-instrumental case after \isotimon\. Equal to \tˆi hˆm“n\ (the faith of us). {In the righteousness} (\en dikaiosunˆi\). Definite because of the preposition \en\ and the following genitive even though anarthrous. The O.T. sense of \dikaiosunˆ\ applied to God (Romans:1:17|) and here to Christ. {Of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ} (\tou theou hˆm“n kai s“tˆros Iˆsou Christou\). Songs:the one article (\tou\) with \theou\ and \s“tˆros\ requires precisely as with \tou kuriou hˆm“n kai s“tˆros Iˆsou Christou\ (of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ), one person, not two, in strkjv@1:11| as in strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:2,18|. Songs:in strkjv@1Peter:1:3| we have \ho theos kai patˆr\ (the God and Father), one person, not two. The grammar is uniform and inevitable (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 786), as even Schmiedel (Winer-Schmiedel, _Grammatik_, p. 158) admits: "Grammar demands that one person be meant." Moulton (_Prol._, p. 84) cites papyri examples of like usage of \theos\ for the Roman emperors. See the same idiom in strkjv@Titus:2:13|. The use of \theos\ by Peter as a predicate with Jesus Christ no more disproves the Petrine authorship of this Epistle than a like use in strkjv@John:1:1| disproves the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel and the same use in strkjv@Titus:2:13| disproves the genuineness of Titus. Peter had heard Thomas call Jesus God (John:20:28|) and he himself had called him the Son of God (Matthew:16:16|).

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 pseudoprophˆtai\). 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 (\pseudˆs, 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 (\eplanˆthˆsan\, 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 ap“leias\). 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 despotˆn\). 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} (\tachinˆn ap“leian\). See strkjv@1:14| for \tachinˆn\ and note repetition of \ap“leian\. This is always the tragedy of such false prophets, the fate that they bring on (\epagontes\) themselves.

rwp@2Peter:2:4 @{For if God spared not} (\ei gar ho theos ouk epheisato\). First instance (\gar\) of certain doom, that of the fallen angels. Condition of the first class precisely like that in strkjv@Romans:11:21| save that here the normal apodosis (\hum“n ou pheisetai\) is not expressed as there, but is simply implied in verse 9| by \oiden kurios ruesthai\ (the Lord knows how to deliver) after the parenthesis in verse 8|. {Angels when they sinned} (\aggel“n hamartˆsant“n\). Genitive case after \epheisato\ (first aorist middle indicative of \pheidomai\) and anarthrous (so more emphatic, even angels), first aorist active participle of \hamartan“\, "having sinned." {Cast them down to hell} (\tartar“sas\). First aorist active participle of \tartaro“\, late word (from \tartaros\, old word in Homer, Pindar, LXX strkjv@Job:40:15; strkjv@41:23|, Philo, inscriptions, the dark and doleful abode of the wicked dead like the Gehenna of the Jews), found here alone save in a scholion on Homer. \Tartaros\ occurs in Enoch strkjv@20:2 as the place of punishment of the fallen angels, while Gehenna is for apostate Jews. {Committed} (\pared“ken\). First aorist active indicative of \paradid“mi\, the very form solemnly used by Paul in strkjv@Romans:1:21,26,28|. {To pits of darkness} (\seirois zophou\). \Zophos\ (kin to \gnophos, nephos\) is an old word, blackness, gloom of the nether world in Homer, in N.T. only here, verse 17; strkjv@Jude:1:13; strkjv@Hebrews:12:18|. The MSS. vary between \seirais\ (\seira\, chain or rope) and \seirois\ (\seiros\, old word for pit, underground granary). \Seirois\ is right (Aleph A B C), dative case of destination. {To be reserved unto judgment} (\eis krisin tˆroumenous\). Present (linear action) passive participle of \tˆre“\. "Kept for judgment." Cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:4|. Aleph A have \kolazomenous tˆrein\ as in verse 9|. Note \krisis\ (act of judgment).

rwp@2Peter:3:15 @{In his sight} (\aut“i\). Ethical dative. Referring to Christ. {Is salvation} (\s“tˆrian\). Predicate accusative after \hˆgeisthe\ in apposition with \makrothumian\ (long-suffering), an opportunity for repentance (cf. strkjv@1Peter:3:20|). The Lord here is Christ. {Our beloved brother Paul} (\ho agapˆtos adelphos Paulos\). Paul applies the verbal \agapˆtos\ (beloved) to Epaphras (Colossians:1:7|), Onesimus (Colossians:4:9; strkjv@Philemon:1:16|), to Tychicus (Colossians:4:7; strkjv@Ephesians:6:21|), and to four brethren in strkjv@Romans:16| (Epainetus strkjv@Romans:16:5|, Ampliatus strkjv@Romans:16:8|, Stachys strkjv@Romans:16:9|, Persis strkjv@Romans:16:12|). It is not surprising for Peter to use it of Paul in view of Gal strkjv@2:9f.|, in spite of strkjv@Galatians:2:11-14|. {Given to him} (\dotheisan aut“i\). First aorist passive participle of \did“mi\ with dative case. Peter claimed wisdom for himself, but recognises that Paul had the gift also. His language here may have caution in it as well as commendation. "St. Peter speaks of him with affection and respect, yet maintains the right to criticise" (Bigg).

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:2 @{To the end that} (\eis to\). One of Paul's favourite idioms for purpose, \eis to\ and the infinitive. {Ye be not quickly shaken} (\mˆ tache“s saleuthˆnai humas\). First aorist passive infinitive of \saleu“\, old verb to agitate, to cause to totter like a reed (Matthew:11:7|), the earth (Hebrews:12:26|). Usual negative \mˆ\ and accusative of general reference \humas\ with the infinitive. {From your mind} (\apo tou noos\). Ablative case of nous, mind, reason, sober sense, "from your witte" (Wyclif), to "keep their heads." {Nor yet be troubled} (\mˆde throeisthai\). Old verb \throe“\, to cry aloud (from \throos\, clamour, tumult), to be in a state of nervous excitement (present passive infinitive, as if it were going on), "a continued state of agitation following the definite shock received (\saleuthˆnai\)" (Milligan). {Either by spirit} (\mˆte dia pneumatos\). By ecstatic utterance (1Thessalonians:5:10|). The nervous fear that the coming was to be at once prohibited by \mˆde\ Paul divides into three sources by \mˆte, mˆte, mˆte\. No individual claim to divine revelation (the gift of prophecy) can justify the statement. {Or by word} (\mˆte dia logou\). Oral statement of a conversation with Paul (Lightfoot) to this effect {as from us}. An easy way to set aside Paul's first Epistle by report of a private remark from Paul. {Or by epistle as from us} (\mˆte di' epistolˆs h“s di' hˆm“n\). In strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13-5:3| Paul had plainly said that Jesus would come as a thief in the night and had shown that the dead would not be left out in the rapture. But evidently some one claimed to have a private epistle from Paul which supported the view that Jesus was coming at once, {as that the day of the Lord is now present} (\h“s hoti enestˆken hˆ hˆmera tou kuriou\). Perfect active indicative of \enistˆmi\, old verb, to place in, but intransitive in this tense to stand in or at or near. Songs:"is imminent" (Lightfoot). The verb is common in the papyri. In strkjv@1Corinthians:3:22; strkjv@Romans:8:38| we have a contrast between \ta enest“ta\, the things present, and \ta mellonta\, the things future (to come). The use of \h“s hoti\ may be disparaging here, though that is not true in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:19|. In the _Koin‚_ it comes in the vernacular to mean simply "that" (Moulton, _Proleg_., p. 212), but that hardly seems the case in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1033). Here it means "to wit that," though "as that" or "as if" does not miss it much. Certainly it flatly denies that by conversation or by letter he had stated that the second coming was immediately at hand. "It is this misleading assertion that accounts both for the increased discouragement of the faint-hearted to encourage whom Paul writes strkjv@1:3-2:17|, and for the increased meddlesomeness of the idle brethren to warn whom Paul writes strkjv@3:1-18|" (Frame). It is enough to give one pause to note Paul's indignation over this use of his name by one of the over-zealous advocates of the view that Christ was coming at once. It is true that Paul was still alive, but, if such a "pious fraud" was so common and easily condoned as some today argue, it is difficult to explain Paul's evident anger. Moreover, Paul's words should make us hesitate to affirm that Paul definitely proclaimed the early return of Jesus. He hoped for it undoubtedly, but he did not specifically proclaim it as so many today assert and accuse him of misleading the early Christians with a false presentation.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:3 @{Let no man beguile you in any wise} (\mˆ tis humas exapatˆsˆi kata mˆdena tropon\). First aorist active subjunctive of \exapata“\ (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb \apata“\) with double negative (\mˆ tis, mˆdena\) in accord with regular Greek idiom as in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:11| rather than the aorist imperative which does occur sometimes in the third person as in strkjv@Mark:13:15| (\mˆ katabat“\). Paul broadens the warning to go beyond conversation and letter. He includes "tricks" of any kind. It is amazing how gullible some of the saints are when a new deceiver pulls off some stunts in religion. {For it will not be} (\hoti\). There is an ellipse here of \ouk estai\ (or \genˆsetai\) to be supplied after \hoti\. Westcott and Hort make an anacoluthon at the end of verse 4|. The meaning is clear. \Hoti\ is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not "imminent," but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of verse 2|. {Except the falling away come first} (\ean mˆ elthˆi hˆ apostasia pr“ton\). Negative condition of the third class, undetermined with prospect of determination and the aorist subjunctive. \Apostasia\ is the late form of \apostasis\ and is our word apostasy. Plutarch uses it of political revolt and it occurs in I Macc. strkjv@2:15 about Antiochus Epiphanes who was enforcing the apostasy from Judaism to Hellenism. In strkjv@Joshua:22:22| it occurs for rebellion against the Lord. It seems clear that the word here means a religious revolt and the use of the definite article (\hˆ\) seems to mean that Paul had spoken to the Thessalonians about it. The only other New Testament use of the word is in strkjv@Acts:21:21| where it means apostasy from Moses. It is not clear whether Paul means revolt of the Jews from God, of Gentiles from God, of Christians from God, or of the apostasy that includes all classes within and without the body of Christians. But it is to be {first} (\pr“ton\) before Christ comes again. Note this adverb when only two events are compared (cf. strkjv@Acts:1:1|). {And the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition} (\kai apokaluphthˆi ho anthr“pos tˆs anomias, ho huios tˆs ap“leias\). First aorist passive subjunctive after \ean mˆ\ and same condition as with \elthˆi\. The use of this verb \apokalupt“\, like \apokalupsin\ of the second coming in strkjv@1:7|, seems to note the superhuman character (Milligan) of the event and the same verb is repeated in verses 6,8|. The implication is that {the man of sin} is hidden somewhere who will be suddenly manifested just as false apostles pose as angels of light (2Corinthians:11:13ff.|), whether the crowning event of the apostasy or another name for the same event. Lightfoot notes the parallel between the man of sin, of whom sin is the special characteristic (genitive case, a Hebraism for the lawless one in verse 8|) and Christ. Both Christ and the adversary of Christ are revealed, there is mystery about each, both make divine claims (verse 4|). He seems to be the Antichrist of strkjv@1John:2:18|. The terrible phrase, the son of perdition, is applied to Judas in strkjv@John:17:12| (like Judas doomed to perdition), but here to the lawless one (\ho anomos\, verse 8|), who is not Satan, but some one definite person who is doing the work of Satan. Note the definite article each time.

rwp@2Timothy:1:14 @{That good thing which was committed unto thee} (\tˆn kalˆn parathˆkˆn\). Simply, "the good deposit." {Guard} (\phulaxon\). As in strkjv@1Timothy:6:20|. God has also made an investment in Timothy (cf. verse 12|). Timothy must not let that fail. {Which dwelleth in us} (\tou enoikountos en hˆmin\). It is only through the Holy Spirit that Timothy or any of us can guard God's deposit with us.

rwp@2Timothy:2:5 @{If also a man contend in the games} (\ean de kai athlˆi tis\). Condition of third class with present (linear) active subjunctive of \athle“\, old and common verb (from \athlos\, a contest), only this verse in N.T., but \sunathle“\ in strkjv@Phillipians:1:27|. Note sharp distinction between \athlˆi\ (present subjunctive, engage in a contest in general) and \athlˆsˆi\ (first aorist active subjunctive, engage in a particular contest). Not "except he have contended," but simply "unless he contend" (in any given case) "lawfully" (\nomim“s\). Old adverb, agreeably to the law, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Timothy:1:8|. {Is not crowned} (\ou stephanoutai\). Present passive indicative of \stephano“\, old verb (from \stephanos\, crown), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:2:7,9|. One apodosis for two protases. The victor in the athletic contests was crowned with a garland.

rwp@2Timothy:2:14 @{That they strive not about words} (\mˆ logomachein\). Word apparently coined by Paul from \logomachia\ (1Timothy:6:4| which see), a back formation in that case. A mere war of words displeases Paul. (Titus:3:9|). {Useful} (\chrˆsimon\). Late and rare word from \chraomai\, here only in N.T. {To the subverting} (\epi katastrophˆi\). Old word (from \katastreph“\, to turn down or over), here only in N.T. (except strkjv@2Peter:2:6| in some MSS., not in Westcott and Hort)." Because of the overthrow" (result \epi\, not aim), useless for this reason. Such war of words merely upsets the hearers.

rwp@3John:1:6 @{Before the church} (\en“pion ekklˆsias\). Public meeting as the anarthrous use of \ekklˆsia\ indicates, like \en ekklˆsiƒi\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:19,35|. {Thou wilt do well} (\kal“s poiˆseis\). Future active of \poie“\ with adverb \kal“s\, a common polite phrase in letters (papyri) like our "please." See also strkjv@Acts:10:33; strkjv@James:2:19; strkjv@1Corinthians:7:37f.; strkjv@Phillipians:4:14; strkjv@2Peter:1:19|. {To set forward on their journey} (\propempsas\). First aorist active participle (simultaneous action) of \propemp“\, to send forward, "sending forward," old word, in N.T. in strkjv@Acts:15:3; strkjv@20:38; strkjv@21:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:6,11; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:16; strkjv@Romans:15:24; strkjv@Titus:3:13|. {Worthily of God} (\axi“s tou theou\). Precisely this phrase in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:12| and the genitive with \axi“s\ also in strkjv@Romans:16:2; strkjv@Phillipians:1:27; strkjv@Colossians:1:10; strkjv@Ephesians:4:1|. See strkjv@John:13:20| for Christ's words on the subject. "Since they are God's representatives, treat them as you would God" (Holtzmann). From Homer's time (_Od_. XV. 74) it was customary to speed the parting guest, sometimes accompanying him, sometimes providing money and food. Rabbis were so escorted and Paul alludes to the same gracious custom in strkjv@Romans:15:24; strkjv@Titus:3:13|.

rwp@3John:1:10 @{If I come} (\ean elth“\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\. He hopes to come (verse 14|), as he had said in strkjv@2John:1:12| (one argument for identifying II John with the letter in strkjv@3John:1:9|). {I will bring to remembrance} (\hupomnˆs“\). Future active indicative of \hupomimnˆsk“\, old compound (John:14:26; strkjv@2Peter:1:12|). The aged apostle is not afraid of Diotrephes and here defies him. {Which he doeth} (\ha poiei\). Present active indicative, "which he keeps on doing." {Prating against us} (\phluar“n hˆmƒs\). Present active participle of old verb (from \phluaros\, babbling strkjv@1Timothy:5:13|), to accuse idly and so falsely, here only in N.T. with accusative \hˆmƒs\ (us). {With wicked words} (\logois ponˆrois\). Instrumental case. Not simply foolish chatter, but malevolent words. {Not content} (\mˆ arkoumenos\). Present passive participle of \arke“\ with usual negative \mˆ\. For this verb in this sense see strkjv@1Timothy:6:8; strkjv@Hebrews:13:5|, only there \epi\ is absent. John knows that the conduct of Diotrephes will not stand the light. See Paul's threats of exposure (1Corinthians:4:21; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:11; strkjv@13:1-3|). And John is the apostle of love all the same. {He himself} (\autos\). That was bad enough. {Them that would} (\tous boulomenous\). "Those willing or wishing or receive the brethren" from John. {He forbiddeth} (\k“luei\). "He hinders." Present active indicative of \k“lu“\ and means either actual success in one case (punctiliar use of the present indicative) or repetition in several instances (linear action) or conative action attempted, but not successful as in strkjv@Matthew:3:14| (this same verb) and strkjv@John:10:32|. {Casteth them out of the church} (\ek tˆs ekklˆsias ekballei\). Here again \ekballei\ can be understood in various ways, like \k“luei\. This verb occurs in strkjv@John:2:15| for casting out of the temple the profaners of it and for casting the blind man out of the synagogue (John:9:34f.|). If this ancient "church-boss" did not succeed in expelling John's adherents from the church, he certainly tried to do it.

rwp@Info_Acts @ LUKE THE AUTHOR It ought to be possible to assume this as a fact since the work of Ramsay and Harnack on various phases of the problems concerning the Acts. Harnack, in particular, has covered the ground with his accustomed thoroughness and care in his two volumes (_The Acts of the Apostles_, English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1909; _The Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_, English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1911). Ramsay's view may be found in Chapter I of _St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen_, Chapter XII of _Pauline and Other Studies_. A good summary of the matter appears in Part V of _The Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts_ by Dr. D. A. Hayes, in Robertson's _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_, and in the introduction to the various commentaries by Knowling, Rackham, Furneaux, Rendall, Hackett, Meyer-Wendt, Zahn, Blass, Campbell-Morgan, Stokes. In Part I of _The Acts of the Apostles_, Vol. II of _The Beginnings of Christianity_, edited by Foakes-Jackson and Kirsopp Lake both sides are ably presented: _The Case for the Tradition_ by C. W. Emmet, _The Case against the Tradition_ by H. Windisch. _The Internal Evidence of Acts_ is discussed by the Editors, Foakes-Jackson and Lake, with an adverse conclusion against Luke. Henry J. Cadbury surveys _The Tradition_ (the external evidence) and draws a negative conclusion likewise on the ground that the early writers who ascribe Acts to Luke were not critical scholars. A similar position is taken by Cadbury in his more recent volume, _The Making of Luke--Acts_ (1927). But all the same the traditional view that Luke is the author of the Acts holds the field with those who are not prejudiced against it. The view of Baur that Acts is a _Tendenz_ writing for the purpose of healing the breach between Peter and Paul and showing that the two factions came together had great influence for a while. In fact both Ramsay and Harnack at first held it. Ramsay broke away first and he was followed by Harnack. Both were influenced to change their views by the accumulation of evidence to the effect that the author of both the Gospel and Acts is Luke the Physician and Friend of Paul. Part of this evidence has already been given in the Introduction to the Gospel according to Luke.

rwp@Acts:1:8 @{Power} (\dunamin\). Not the "power" about which they were concerned (political organization and equipments for empire on the order of Rome). Their very question was ample proof of their need of this new "power" (\dunamin\), to enable them (from \dunamai\, to be able), to grapple with the spread of the gospel in the world. {When the Holy Ghost is come upon you} (\epelthontos tou hagiou pneumatos eph' humas\). Genitive absolute and is simultaneous in time with the preceding verb "shall receive" (\lˆmpsesthe\). The Holy Spirit will give them the "power" as he comes upon them. This is the baptism of the Holy Spirit referred to in verse 5|. {My witnesses} (\mou martures\). Correct text. "Royal words of magnificent and Divine assurance" (Furneaux). Our word martyrs is this word \martures\. In strkjv@Luke:24:48| Jesus calls the disciples "witnesses to these things" (\martures tout“n\, objective genitive). In strkjv@Acts:1:22| an apostle has to be a "witness to the Resurrection" of Christ and in strkjv@10:39| to the life and work of Jesus. Hence there could be no "apostles" in this sense after the first generation. But here the apostles are called "my witnesses." "His by a direct personal relationship" (Knowling). The expanding sphere of their witness when the Holy Spirit comes upon them is "unto the uttermost part of the earth" (\he“s eschatou tˆs gˆs\). Once they had been commanded to avoid Samaria (Matthew:10:5|), but now it is included in the world program as already outlined on the mountain in Galilee (Matthew:28:19; strkjv@Mark:16:15|). Jesus is on Olivet as he points to Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, the uttermost (last, \eschatou\) part of the earth. The program still beckons us on to world conquest for Christ. "The Acts themselves form the best commentary on these words, and the words themselves might be given as the best summary of the Acts" (Page). The events follow this outline (Jerusalem till the end of chapter 7, with the martyrdom of Stephen, the scattering of the saints through Judea and Samaria in chapter 8, the conversion of Saul, chapter 9, the spread of the gospel to Romans in Caesarea by Peter (chapter 10), to Greeks in Antioch (chapter 11), finally Paul's world tours and arrest and arrival in Rome (chapters 11 to 28).

rwp@Acts:1:13 @{Into the upper chamber} (\eis to huper“ion\). The upstairs or upper room (\huper\ is upper or over, the adjective \huper“ios\), the room upstairs where the women staid in Homer, then a room up under the flat roof for retirement or prayer (Acts:9:37,39|), sometimes a large third story room suitable for gatherings (Acts:20:9|). It is possible, even probable, that this is the "large upper room" (\an“geon mega\) of strkjv@Mark:14:15; strkjv@Luke:22:12|. The Vulgate has _coenaculum_ for both words. The word is used in the N.T. only in Acts. It was in a private house as in strkjv@Luke:22:11| and not in the temple as strkjv@Luke:24:53| might imply, "continually" (\dia pantos\) these words probably meaning on proper occasions. {They were abiding} (\ˆsan katamenontes\). Periphrastic imperfect active. Perfective use of \kata\, to abide permanently. It is possible that this is the house of Mary the mother of John Mark where the disciples later met for prayer (Acts:12:12|). Here alone in the N.T., though old compound. Some MSS. here read \paramenontes\. This could mean constant residence, but most likely frequent resort for prayer during these days, some being on hand all the time as they came and went. {Simon the Zealot} (\Simon ho Zˆl“tˆs\). Called Simon the Cananaean (\ho Cananaios\) in strkjv@Matthew:10:4, strkjv@Mark:3:18|, but Zealot in strkjv@Luke:6:16| as here giving the Greek equivalent of the Aramaic word because Luke has Gentiles in mind. The epithet (member of the party of Zealots) clung to him after he became an apostle and distinguishes him from Simon Peter. See Vol. I on the Gospel of Matthew for discussion of the four lists of the apostles. {Judas the son of James} (\Joudas Iak“bou\). Literally, Judas of James, whether son or brother (cf. strkjv@Jude:1:1|) we do not really know. "Of James" is added to distinguish him from Judas Iscariot (John:14:22|). However we take it, he must be identified with the Thaddaeus (=Lebbaeus) of Mark and Matthew to make the list in the third group identical. No name appears in Acts for that of Judas Iscariot.

rwp@Acts:1:14 @{With one accord} (\homothumadon\). Old adverb in \-don\ from adjective \homothumos\ and that from \homos\, same, and \thumos\, mind or spirit, with the same mind or spirit. Common in ancient Greek and papyri. In the N.T. eleven times in Acts and nowhere else save strkjv@Romans:15:6|. See strkjv@Matthew:18:19|. {Continued} (\ˆsan proskarterountes\). Periphrastic imperfect active of \proskartere“\, old verb from \pros\ (perfective use) and \kartere“\ from \karteros\, strong, steadfast, like the English "carry on." Already in strkjv@Mark:3:9| which see and several times in Acts and Paul's Epistles. They "stuck to" the praying (\tˆi proseuchˆi\, note article) for the promise of the Father till the answer came. {With the women} (\sun gunaixin\). Associative instrumental case plural of \gunˆ\ after \sun\. As one would expect when praying was the chief work on hand. More women certainly included than in strkjv@Luke:8:2; strkjv@Mark:15:40f.; strkjv@Matthew:27:55f.; strkjv@Luke:23:49; strkjv@Mark:15:47; strkjv@Matthew:27:61; strkjv@Luke:23:55f.; strkjv@Mark:16:1; strkjv@Matthew:28:1; strkjv@Luke:24:1f.; strkjv@John:20:1, 11-18; strkjv@Matthew:28:9f|. There were probably other women also whose testimony was no longer scouted as it had been at first. Codex Bezae adds here "and children." {And Mary the mother of Jesus} (\kai Mariam tˆi mˆtri tou Iˆsou\). A delicate touch by Luke that shows Mary with her crown of glory at last. She had come out of the shadow of death with the song in her heart and with the realization of the angel's promise and the prophecy of Simeon. It was a blessed time for Mary. {With his brethren} (\sun tois adelphois autou\). With his brothers, it should be translated. They had once disbelieved in him (John:7:5|). Jesus had appeared to James (1Corinthians:15:7|) and now it is a happy family of believers including the mother and brothers (half-brothers, literally) of Jesus. They continue in prayer for the power from on high.

rwp@Acts:5:15 @{Insomuch that} (\h“ste\). With the present infinitive \ekpherein\ and \tithenai\, regular Greek idiom for result. {Into the streets} (\eis tas plateias\). Supply \hodous\ (ways), into the broad ways. {On beds and couches} (\epi klinari“n kai krabatt“n\). Little beds (\klinaria\ diminutive of \klinˆ\) and camp beds or pallets (see on ¯Mark:2:4,9,11|). {As Peter came by} (\erchomenou Petrou\). Genitive absolute with present middle participle. {At the least his shadow might overshadow} (\kan hˆ skia episkiasei\). Future active indicative with \hina\ (common with \hop“s\ in ancient Greek) and \kan\ (crasis for \kai ean\=even if), even if only the shadow. The word for shadow (\skia\, like our "sky") is repeated in the verb and preserved in our "overshadow." There was, of course, no virtue or power in Peter's shadow. That was faith with superstition, of course, just as similar cases in the Gospels occur (Matthew:9:20; strkjv@Mark:6:56; strkjv@John:9:5|) and the use of Paul's handkerchief (Acts:19:12|). God honours even superstitious faith if it is real faith in him. Few people are wholly devoid of superstition.

rwp@Acts:5:24 @{They were much perplexed} (\diˆporoun\). Imperfect active of \diapore“\ old verb by Luke only in the N.T. See already on strkjv@Acts:2:12|. They continued puzzled. {Whereunto this would grow} (\ti an genoito touto\). More exactly, {As to what this would become}. Second aorist middle optative of \ginomai\ with \an\, the conclusion of a condition of the fourth class (undetermined with less likelihood of determination), the unexpressed condition being "if the thing should be allowed to go on." The indirect question simply retains the optative with \an\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1021, 1044). If they had only known how this grain of mustard seed would grow into the greatest tree on earth and how dwarfed the tree of Judaism would be beside it!

rwp@Acts:8:6 @{Gave heed} (\proseichon\). Imperfect active as in verses 10,11|, there with dative of the person (\aut“i\), here with the dative of the thing (\tois legomenois\). There is an ellipse of \noun\ (mind). They kept on giving heed or holding the mind on the things said by Philip, spell-bound, in a word. {When they heard} (\en t“i akouein autous\). Favourite Lukan idiom, \en\ and the locative case of the articlar infinitive with the accusative of general reference "in the hearing as to them." {Which he did} (\ha epoiei\). Imperfect active again, which he kept on doing from time to time. Philip wrought real miracles which upset the schemes of Simon Magus.

rwp@Acts:8:9 @{Simon} (\Sim“n\). One of the common names (Josephus, _Ant_. XX. 7, 2) and a number of messianic pretenders had this name. A large number of traditions in the second and third centuries gathered round this man and Baur actually proposed that the Simon of the Clementine Homilies is really the apostle Paul though Paul triumphed over the powers of magic repeatedly (Acts:13:6-12; strkjv@19:11-19|), "a perfect absurdity" (Spitta, _Apostelgeschichte_, p. 149). One of the legends is that this Simon Magus of Acts is the father of heresy and went to Rome and was worshipped as a god (so Justin Martyr). But a stone found in the Tiber A.D. 1574 has an inscription to _Semoni Sanco Deo Fidio Sacrum_ which is (Page) clearly to Hercules, Sancus being a Sabine name for Hercules. This Simon in Samaria is simply one of the many magicians of the time before the later gnosticism had gained a foothold. "In his person Christianity was for the first time confronted with superstition and religious imposture, of which the ancient world was at this period full" (Furneaux). {Which beforetime used sorcery} (\proupˆrchen mageu“n\). An ancient idiom (periphrastic), the present active participle \mageu“n\ with the imperfect active verb from \prouparch“\, the idiom only here and strkjv@Luke:23:12| in the N.T. Literally "Simon was existing previously practising magic." This old verb \mageu“\ is from \magos\ (a \magus\, seer, prophet, false prophet, sorcerer) and occurs here alone in the N.T. {Amazed} (existan“n). Present active participle of the verb \existan“\, later form of \existˆmi\, to throw out of position, displace, upset, astonish, chiefly in the Gospels in the N.T. Same construction as \mageu“n\. {Some great one} (\tina megan\). Predicate accusative of general reference (infinitive in indirect discourse). It is amazing how gullible people are in the presence of a manifest impostor like Simon. The Magi were the priestly order in the Median and Persian empires and were supposed to have been founded by Zoroaster. The word \magoi\ (magi) has a good sense in strkjv@Matthew:2:1|, but here and in strkjv@Acts:13:6| it has the bad sense like our "magic."

rwp@Acts:8:10 @{That power of God which is called Great} (\hˆ Dunamis tou theou hˆ kaloumenˆ Megalˆ\). Apparently here already the oriental doctrine of emanations or aeons so rampant in the second century. This "power" was considered a spark of God himself and Jerome (in strkjv@Matthew:24|) quotes Simon (Page) as saying: _Ego sum sermo Dei,... ego omnipotens, ego omnia Dei_. Simon claimed to _impersonate God_.

rwp@Acts:8:23 @{That thou art} (\se onta\). Participle in indirect discourse after \hor“\ (I see). {In the gall of bitterness} (\eis cholˆn pikrias\). Old word from \cholas\ either from \che“\, to pour, or \chloˆ\, yellowish green, bile or gall. In the N.T. only in strkjv@Matthew:27:34| and here. In LXX in sense of wormwood as well as bile. See strkjv@Deuteronomy:29:18; strkjv@32:32; strkjv@Lamentations:3:15; strkjv@Job:16:14|. "Gall and bitterness" in strkjv@Deuteronomy:29:18|. Here the gall is described by the genitive \pikrias\ as consisting in "bitterness." In strkjv@Hebrews:12:15| "a root of bitterness," a bitter root. This word \pikria\ in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:12:15; strkjv@Romans:3:14; strkjv@Ephesians:4:31|. The "bond of iniquity" (\sundesmon adikias\) is from strkjv@Isaiah:58:6|. Paul uses this word of peace (Ephesians:4:3|), of love (Colossians:3:14|), of the body (Colossians:2:19|). Peter describes Simon's offer as poison and a chain.

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:10:25 @{That Peter entered} (\tou eiselthein ton Petron\). This is a difficult construction, for the subject of \egeneto\ (it happened) has to be the articular genitive infinitive \tou eiselthein\ with the accusative of general reference \ton Petron\. Most commentators consider it inexplicable. It is probably an extension of the ordinary articular infinitive under the influence of the Hebrew infinitive construct without regard to the case, regarding it as a fixed case form and so using it as nominative. Precisely this construction of \tou\ and the infinitive as the subject of a verb occurs in the LXX (2Chronicles:6:7|, etc.). See Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1067f. for full discussion of this obvious Hebraism. Somewhat similar examples appear in strkjv@Acts:20:3; strkjv@27:1|. But the Codex Bezae avoids this awkward idiom by the genitive absolute (\proseggizontos tou Petrou\) and some additional details (one of the servants ran forward and announced that he was come). {Worshipped him} (\prosekunˆsen\). "Cornelius was not an idolator and would not have honoured Peter as a god" (Furneaux). The word probably means here reverence like old English usage (Wycliff) and not actual worship, though Peter took it that way (verse 26|). Jesus accepted such worship (Matthew:8:2; strkjv@Luke:5:8| by Peter).

rwp@Acts:10:34 @{Opened his mouth} (\anoixas to stoma\). Solemn formula for beginning his address (8:35; strkjv@18:14; strkjv@Matthew:5:2; strkjv@13:35|). But also good elocution for the speaker. {I perceive} (\katalambanomai\). Aoristic present middle of \katalamban“\, to take hold of, the middle noting mental action, to lay hold with the mind (Acts:4:13; strkjv@10:34; strkjv@25:25; strkjv@Ephesians:3:18|). It had been a difficult thing for Peter to grasp, but now "of a truth" (\ep' alˆtheias\) the light has cleared away the fogs. It was not until Peter had crossed the threshold of the house of Cornelius in the new environment and standpoint that he sees this new and great truth. {Respecter of persons} (\pros“polˆmptˆs\). This compound occurs only here and in Chrysostom. It is composed of \pros“pon\ face or person (\pros\ and \ops\, before the eye or face) and \lamban“\. The abstract form \pros“polˆmpsia\ occurs in strkjv@James:2:1| (also strkjv@Romans:2:11; strkjv@Ephesians:6:9; strkjv@Colossians:3:25|) and the verb \pros“polempte“\ in strkjv@James:2:9|. The separate phrase (\lambanein pros“pon\) occurs in strkjv@Luke:20:21; strkjv@Galatians:2:6|. The phrase was already in the LXX (Deuteronomy:10:17; strkjv@2Chronicles:19:7; strkjv@Psalms:82:6|). Luke has simply combined the two words into one compound one. The idea is to pay regard to one's looks or circumstances rather than to his intrinsic character. The Jews had come to feel that they were the favourites of God and actually sons of the kingdom of heaven because they were descendants of Abraham. John the Baptist rebuked them for this fallacy.

rwp@Acts:10:47 @{Can any man forbid the water?} (\Mˆti to hud“r dunatai k“l–sai tis?\). The negative \mˆti\ expects the answer _No_. The evidence was indisputable that these Gentiles were converted and so were entitled to be baptized. See the similar idiom in strkjv@Luke:6:39|. Note the article with "water." Here the baptism of the Holy Spirit had preceded the baptism of water (Acts:1:5; strkjv@11:16|). "The greater had been bestowed; could the lesser be withheld?" (Knowling). {That these should not be baptized} (\tou mˆ baptisthˆnai toutous\). Ablative case of the articular first aorist passive infinitive of \baptiz“\ with the redundant negative after the verb of hindering (\k“l–sai\) and the accusative of general reference (\toutous\). The redundant negative after the verb of hindering is not necessary though often used in ancient Greek and in the _Koin‚_ (papyri). Without it see strkjv@Matthew:19:14; strkjv@Acts:8:36| and with it see strkjv@Luke:4:42; strkjv@24:16; strkjv@Acts:14:18|. Cf. Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1061, 1094, 1171. The triple negatives here are a bit confusing to the modern mind (\mˆti\ in the question, \k“l–sai\, to hinder or to cut off, \mˆ\ with \baptisthˆnai\). Literally, Can any one cut off the water from the being baptized as to these? Meyer: "The water is in this animated language conceived as the element offering itself for the baptism." {As well as we} (\h“s kai hˆmeis\). The argument was conclusive. God had spoken. Note the query of the eunuch to Philip (Acts:8:36|).

rwp@Acts:11:26 @{Even for a whole year} (\kai eniauton holon\). Accusative of extent of time, probably the year A.D. 44, the year preceding the visit to Jerusalem (11:30|), the year of the famine. The preceding years with Tarsus as headquarters covered A.D. 37 (39) to 44. {They were gathered together with the church} (\sunachthˆnai en tˆi ekklˆsiƒi\). First aorist passive infinitive of \sunag“\, old verb, probably here to meet together as in strkjv@Matthew:28:12|. In strkjv@Acts:14:27| the verb is used of gathering together the church, but here \en tˆi ekklˆsiƒi\ excludes that idea. Barnabas met together "in the church" (note first use of the word for the disciples at Antioch). This peculiar phrase accents the leadership and co-operation of Barnabas and Saul in teaching (\didaxai\, first aorist active infinitive) much people. Both infinitives are in the nominative case, the subject of \egeneto\ (it came to pass). {And that the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch} (\chrˆmatisai te pr“t“s en Antiocheiƒi tous mathˆtas Christianous\). This first active infinitive \chrˆmatisai\ is also a subject of \egeneto\ and is added as a separate item by the use of \te\ rather than \kai\. For the word itself in the sense of divine command see on ¯Matthew:2:12,22; strkjv@Luke:2:26; strkjv@Acts:10:22|. Here and in strkjv@Romans:7:3| it means to be called or named (assuming a name from one's business, \chrˆma\, from \chraomai\, to use or to do business). Polybius uses it in this sense as here. \Tous mathˆtas\ (the disciples) is in the accusative of general reference with the infinitive. \Christianous\ (Christians) is simply predicate accusative. This word is made after the pattern of \Herodianus\ (Matthew:22:16|, \Her“idianoi\, followers of Herod), \Caesarianus\, a follower of Caesar (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 377, gives papyri examples of the genitive \Kaisaros\ meaning also "belonging to Caesar" like the common adjective \Caesarianus\). It is made thus like a Latin adjective, though it is a Greek word, and it refers to the Hebrew belief in a Messiah (Page). The name was evidently given to the followers of Christ by the Gentiles to distinguish them from the Jews since they were Greeks, not Grecian Jews. The Jews would not call them Christians because of their own use of \Christos\ the Messiah. The Jews termed them Galileans or Nazarenes. The followers of Christ called themselves disciples (learners), believers, brethren, saints, those of the Way. The three uses of Christian in the N.T. are from the heathen standpoint (here), strkjv@Acts:26:28| (a term of contempt in the mouth of Agrippa), and strkjv@1Peter:4:16| (persecution from the Roman government). It is a clear distinction from both Jews and Gentiles and it is not strange that it came into use first here in Antioch when the large Greek church gave occasion for it. Later Ignatius was bishop in Antioch and was given to the lions in Rome, and John Chrysostom preached here his wonderful sermons.

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:13:9 @{But Saul, who is also called Paul} (\Saulos de, ho kai Paulos\). By this remarkably brief phrase Luke presents this epoch in the life of Saul Paul. The "also" (\kai\) does not mean that the name Paul was given now for the first time, rather than he had always had it. As a Jew and a Roman citizen, he undoubtedly had both names all the time (cf. John Mark, Symeon Niger, Barsabbas Justus). Jerome held that the name of Sergius Paulus was adopted by Saul because of his conversion at this time, but this is a wholly unlikely explanation, "an element of vulgarity impossible to St. Paul " (Farrar). Augustine thought that the meaning of the Latin _paulus_ (little) would incline Saul to adopt, "but as a proper name the word rather suggested the glories of the Aemilian family, and even to us recalls the name of another Paulus, who was 'lavish of his noble life'" (Page). Among the Jews the name Saul was naturally used up to this point, but from now on Luke employs Paul save when there is a reference to his previous life (Acts:22:7; strkjv@26:14|). His real career is work among the Gentiles and Paul is the name used by them. There is a striking similarity in sound between the Hebrew Saul and the Roman Paul. Paul was proud of his tribe of Benjamin and so of King Saul (Phillipians:3:5|). {Filled with the Holy Spirit} (\plˆstheis pneumatos hagiou\). First aorist (ingressive) passive participle of \pimplˆmi\ with the genitive case. A special influx of power to meet this emergency. Here was a cultured heathen, typical of the best in Roman life, who called forth all the powers of Paul plus the special help of the Holy Spirit to expose the wickedness of Elymas Barjesus. If one wonders why the Holy Spirit filled Paul for this emergency rather than Barnabas, when Barnabas was named first in strkjv@13:2|, he can recall the sovereignty of the Holy Spirit in his choice of agents (1Corinthians:12:4-11|) and also the special call of Paul by Christ (Acts:9:15; strkjv@26:17f.|). {Fastened his eyes} (\atenisas\). As already in strkjv@Luke:4:20; strkjv@22:56; strkjv@Acts:3:4,12; strkjv@6:15; strkjv@10:4|.

rwp@Acts:13:12 @{Believed} (\episteusen\). Ingressive aorist active indicative. Renan considers it impossible that a Roman proconsul could be converted by a miracle. But it was the teaching about the Lord (\tou kuriou\, objective genitive) by which he was astonished (\ekplˆssomenos\, present passive participle of \ekplˆss“\, see on ¯Matthew:7:28|) or struck out as well as by the miracle. The blindness came "immediately" (\paraehrˆma\) upon the judgment pronounced by Paul. It is possible that Sergius Paulus was converted to Christ without openly identifying himself with the Christians as his baptism is not mentioned as in the case of Cornelius. But, even if he was baptized, he need not have been deposed from his proconsulship as Furneaux and Rackham argue because his office called for "official patronage of idolatrous worship." But that could have been merely perfunctory as it probably was already. He had been a disciple of the Jewish magician, Elymas Barjesus, without losing his position. Imperial persecution against Christianity had not yet begun. Furneaux even suggests that the conversion of a proconsul to Christianity at this stage would have called for mention by the Roman and Greek historians. There is the name Sergia Paullina in a Christian cemetery in Rome which shows that one of his family was a Christian later. One will believe what he wills about Sergius Paulus, but I do not see that Luke leaves him in the category of Simon Magus who "believed" (8:13|) for revenue only.

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:16:25 @{About midnight} (\kata de mesonuktion\). Middle of the night, old adjective seen already in strkjv@Mark:13:35; strkjv@Luke:11:5| which see. {Were praying and singing} (\proseuchomenoi humnoun\). Present middle participle and imperfect active indicative: Praying they were singing (simultaneously, blending together petition and praise). \Humne“\ is an old verb from \humnos\ (cf. strkjv@Isaiah:12:4; strkjv@Daniel:3:23|). Paul and Silas probably used portions of the Psalms (cf. strkjv@Luke:1:39f.,67f.; strkjv@2:28f.|) with occasional original outbursts of praise. {Were listening to them} (\epˆkro“nto aut“n\). Imperfect middle of \epakroaomai\. Rare verb to listen with pleasure as to a recitation or music (Page). It was a new experience for the prisoners and wondrously attractive entertainment to them.

rwp@Acts:17:19 @{And they took hold of him} (\epilabomenoi de autou\). Second aorist middle participle of \epilamban“\, old verb, but in the N.T. only in the middle, here with the genitive \autou\ to lay hold of, but with no necessary sense of violence (Acts:9:27; strkjv@23:27; strkjv@Mark:8:23|), unless the idea is that Paul was to be tried before the Court of Areopagus for the crime of bringing in strange gods. But the day for that had passed in Athens. Even so it is not clear whether "{unto the Areopagus} (\epi ton Areion Pagon\") means the Hill of Mars (west of the Acropolis, north of the agora and reached by a flight of steps in the rock) or the court itself which met elsewhere as well as on the hills, usually in fact in the Stoa Basilica opening on the agora and near to the place where the dispute had gone on. Raphael's cartoon with Paul standing on Mars Hill has made us all familiar with the common view, but it is quite uncertain if it is true. There was not room on the summit for a large gathering. If Paul was brought before the Court of Areopagus (commonly called the Areopagus as here), it was not for trial as a criminal, but simply for examination concerning his new teaching in this university city whether it was strictly legal or not. Paul was really engaged in proselytism to turn the Athenians away from their old gods to Jesus Christ. But "the court of refined and polished Athenians was very different from the rough provincial magistrates of Philippi, and the philosophers who presented Paul to their cognizance very different from the mob of Thessalonians" (Rackham). It was all very polite. {May we know?} (\Dunametha gn“nai\). Can we come to know (ingressive second aorist active infinitive). {This new teaching} (\hˆ kainˆ hautˆ didachˆ\). On the position of \hautˆ\ see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 700f. The question was prompted by courtesy, sarcasm, or irony. Evidently no definite charge was laid against Paul.

rwp@Acts:17:31 @{Inasmuch as} (\kathoti\). According as (\kata, hoti\). Old causal conjunction, but in N.T. only used in Luke's writings (Luke:1:7; strkjv@19:9; strkjv@Acts:2:45; strkjv@4:35; strkjv@17:31|). {Hath appointed a day} (\estˆsen hˆmeran\) First aorist active indicative of \histˆmi\, to place, set. God did set the day in his counsel and he will fulfil it in his own time. {Will judge} (\mellei krinein\). Rather, is going to judge, \mell“\ and the present active infinitive of \krin“\. Paul here quotes strkjv@Psalms:9:8| where \krinei\ occurs. {By the man whom he hath ordained} (\en andri h“i h“risen\). Here he adds to the Psalm the place and function of Jesus Christ, a passage in harmony with Christ's own words in strkjv@Matthew:25|. \H“i\ (whom) is attracted from the accusative, object of \h“risen\ (first aorist active indicative of \horiz“\) to the case of the antecedent \andri\. It has been said that Paul left the simple gospel in this address to the council of the Areopagus for philosophy. But did he? He skilfully caught their attention by reference to an altar to an Unknown God whom he interprets to be the Creator of all things and all men who overrules the whole world and who now commands repentance of all and has revealed his will about a day of reckoning when Jesus Christ will be Judge. He has preached the unity of God, the one and only God, has proclaimed repentance, a judgment day, Jesus as the Judge as shown by his Resurrection, great fundamental doctrines, and doubtless had much more to say when they interrupted his address. There is no room here for such a charge against Paul. He rose to a great occasion and made a masterful exposition of God's place and power in human history. {Whereof he hath given assurance} (\pistin parasch“n\). Second aorist active participle of \parech“\, old verb to furnish, used regularly by Demosthenes for bringing forward evidence. Note this old use of \pistis\ as conviction or ground of confidence (Hebrews:11:1|) like a note or title-deed, a conviction resting on solid basis of fact. All the other uses of \pistis\ grow out of this one from \peith“\, to persuade. {In that he hath raised him from the dead} (\anastˆsas auton ek nekr“n\). First aorist active participle of \anistˆmi\, causal participle, but literally, "having raised him from the dead." This Paul knew to be a fact because he himself had seen the Risen Christ. Paul has here come to the heart of his message and could now throw light on their misapprehension about "Jesus and the Resurrection" (verse 18|). Here Paul has given the proof of all his claims in the address that seemed new and strange to them.

rwp@Acts:18:15 @{Questions} (\zˆtˆmata\). Plural, contemptuous, "a parcel of questions" (Knowling). {About words} (\peri logou\). Word, singular, talk, not deed or fact (\ergon, factum\). {And names} (\kai onomat“n\). As to whether "Jesus" should also be called "Christ" or "Messiah." The Jews, Gallio knew, split hairs over words and names. {And your own law} (\kai nomou tou kath' humƒs\) Literally, "And law that according to you." Gallio had not been caught in the trap set for him. What they had said concerned Jewish law, not Roman law at all. {Look to it yourselves} (\opsesthe autoi\). The volitive future middle indicative of \hora“\ often used (cf. strkjv@Matthew:27:4|) where an imperative could be employed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 874). The use of \autoi\ (yourselves) turns it all over to them. {I am not minded} (\ou boulomai\). I am not willing, I do not wish. An absolute refusal to allow a religious question to be brought before a Roman civil court. This decision of Gallio does not establish Christianity in preference to Judaism. It simply means that the case was plainly that Christianity was a form of Judaism and as such was not opposed to Roman law. This decision opened the door for Paul's preaching all over the Roman Empire. Later Paul himself argues (Romans:9-11|) that in fact Christianity is the true, the spiritual Judaism.

rwp@Acts:18:21 @{I shall return} (\anakamps“\). Future active indicative of \anakampt“\, old verb to bend back, turn back (Matthew:2:2|). {If God will} (\tou theou thelontos\). Genitive absolute of present active participle. This expression (\ean\ with subjunctive) occurs also in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:19; strkjv@16:7; strkjv@James:4:15|. Such phrases were common among Jews, Greeks, and Romans, and are today. It is simply a recognition that we are in God's hands. The Textus Receptus has here a sentence not in the best MSS.: "I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem." This addition by D and other documents may have been due to a desire to give a reason for the language in verse 22| about "going up" to Jerusalem. Whether Paul said it or not, it was in the spring when he made this journey with a company of pilgrims probably going to the feast of Pentecost in Jerusalem. We know that later Paul did try to reach Jerusalem for Pentecost (20:16|) and succeeded. As the ship was leaving, Paul had to go, but with the hope of returning soon to Ephesus as he did.

rwp@Acts:19:2 @{Did ye receive the Holy Spirit when ye believed?} (\ei pneuma hagion elabete pisteusantes?\). This use of \Pi\ in a direct question occurs in strkjv@1:6|, is not according to the old Greek idiom, but is common in the LXX and the N.T. as in strkjv@Luke:13:23| which see (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 916). Apparently Paul was suspicious of the looks or conduct of these professed disciples. The first aorist active participle \pisteusantes\ is simultaneous with the second aorist active indicative \elabete\ and refers to the same event. {Nay, we did not so much as hear whether the Holy Spirit was} (\All' oude ei pneuma hagion estin ˆkousamen\). The reply of these ignorant disciples is amazing. They probably refer to the time of their baptism and mean that, when baptized, they did not hear whether (\ei\ in indirect question) the Holy Spirit was (\estin\ retained as in strkjv@John:7:39|). Plain proof that they knew John's message poorly.

rwp@Acts:19:4 @{With the baptism of repentance} (\baptisma metanoias\). Cognate accusative with \ebaptisen\ and the genitive \metanoias\ describing the baptism as marked by (case of species or genus), not as conveying, repentance just as in strkjv@Mark:1:4| and that was the work of the Holy Spirit. But John preached also the baptism of the Holy Spirit which the Messiah was to bring (Mark:1:7f.; strkjv@Matthew:3:11f.; strkjv@Luke:3:16|). If they did not know of the Holy Spirit, they had missed the point of John's baptism. {That they should believe on him that should come after him, that is on Jesus} (\eis ton erchomenon met' auton hina pisteus“sin, tout' estin eis ton Iˆsoun\). Note the emphatic prolepsis of \eis ton erchomenon met' auton\ before \hina pisteus“sin\ with which it is construed. This is John's identical phrase, "the one coming after me" as seen in strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Matthew:3:11; strkjv@Luke:3:16; strkjv@John:1:15|. It is not clear that these "disciples" believed in a Messiah, least of all in Jesus. They were wholly unprepared for the baptism of John. Paul does not mean to say that John's baptism was inadequate, but he simply explains what John really taught and so what his baptism signified.

rwp@Acts:19:5 @{The name of the Lord Jesus} (\to onoma ton kuriou Iˆsou\). Apollos was not rebaptized. The twelve apostles were not rebaptized. Jesus received no other baptism than that of John. The point here is simply that these twelve men were grossly ignorant of the meaning of John's baptism as regards repentance, the Messiahship of Jesus, the Holy Spirit. Hence Paul had them baptized, not so much again, as really baptized this time, in the name or on the authority of the Lord Jesus as he had himself commanded (Matthew:28:19|) and as was the universal apostolic custom. Proper understanding of "Jesus" involved all the rest including the Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). Luke does not give a formula, but simply explains that now these men had a proper object of faith (Jesus) and were now really baptized.

rwp@Acts:19:12 @{Handkerchiefs} (\soudaria\). Latin word for \sudor\ (sweat). Used in strkjv@Luke:19:20; strkjv@John:11:44; strkjv@20:7|. In two papyri marriage-contracts this word occurs among the toilet articles in the dowry (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 223). {Aprons} (\simikinthia\). Latin word also, _semicinctilum_ (\semi, cingo\). Only here in the N.T. Linen aprons used by servants or artisans (Martial XIV. 153). Paul did manual work at Ephesus (20:34|) and so wore these aprons. {Departed} (\apallalsethai\). Present passive infinitive with \h“ste\ for actual result as in verse 10|. If one wonders how God could honour such superstitious faith, he should remember that there is no power in superstition or in magic, but in God. If God never honoured any faith save that entirely free from superstition, how about Christian people who are troubled over the number 13, over the moon, the rabbit's foot? The poor woman with an issue of blood touched the hem of Christ's garment and was healed (Luke:8:44-46|) as others sought to do (Matthew:14:36|). God condescends to meet us in our ignorance and weakness where he can reach us. Elisha had a notion that some of the power of Elijah resided in his mantle (2Kings:2:13|). Some even sought help from Peter's shadow (Acts:5:15|).

rwp@Acts:19:13 @{Of the strolling Jews, exorcists} (\t“n perierchomen“n Ioudai“n exorkist“n\). These exorcists travelled around (\peri\) from place to place like modern Gypsy fortune-tellers. The Jews were especially addicted to such practices with spells of sorcery connected with the name of Solomon (Josephus, _Ant_. VIII. 2.5). See also Tobit strkjv@8:1-3. Jesus alludes to those in Palestine (Matthew:12:27; strkjv@Luke:11:19|). The exorcists were originally those who administered an oath (from \exorkiz“\, to exact an oath), then to use an oath as a spell or charm. Only instance here in the N.T. These men regarded Paul as one of their own number just as Simon Magus treated Simon Peter. Only here these exorcists paid Paul the compliment of imitation instead of offering money as Magus did. {To name over} (\onomazein epi\). They heard what Paul said and treated his words as a magic charm or spell to drive the evil spirits out. {I adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth} (\Horkiz“ humas ton Iˆsoun hon Paulos kˆrussei\). Note two accusatives with the verb of swearing (cf. strkjv@Mark:5:7|) as a causative verb (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 483). The papyri furnish numerous instances of \horkiz“\ in such constructions (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 281). Note also the article with Jesus, "the Jesus," as if to identify the magic word to the demons with the addition "whom Paul preaches." They thought that success turned on the correct use of the magical formula. The Ephesian mysteries included Christianity, so they supposed.

rwp@Acts:20:13 @{To the ship} (\epi to ploion\). Note article. It is possible that Paul's party had chartered a coasting vessel from Philippi or Troas to take them to Patara in Lycia. Hence the boat stopped when and where Paul wished. That is possible, but not certain, for Paul could simply have accommodated himself to the plans of the ship's managers. {To take in Paul} (\analambanein ton Paulon\). Songs:in verse 14|. Same use in strkjv@2Timothy:4:11|: "Picking up Mark" (\Markon analab“n\). Assos was a seaport south of Troas in Mysia in the province of Asia. {He had appointed} (\diatetagmenos ˆn\). Past perfect periphrastic middle of \diatass“\, old verb to give orders (military in particular). {To go by land} (\pezeuein\). Present active infinitive of \pezeu“\, old verb to go on foot, not on horse back or in a carriage or by ship. Here only in the N.T. It was about twenty miles over a paved Roman road, much shorter (less than half) than the sea voyage around Cape Lectum. It was a beautiful walk in the spring-time and no doubt Paul enjoyed it whatever his reason was for going thus to Assos while the rest went by sea. Certainly he was entitled to a little time alone, this one day, as Jesus sought the Father in the night watches (Matthew:14:23|).

rwp@Acts:20:30 @{From among your own selves} (\ex hum“n aut“n\). In sheep's clothing just as Jesus had foretold. The outcome fully justified Paul's apprehensions as we see in Colossians, Ephesians, I and II Timothy, Revelation. False philosophy, immorality, asceticism will lead some astray (Colossians:2:8,18; strkjv@Ephesians:4:14; strkjv@5:6|). John will picture "antichrists" who went out from us because they were not of us (1John:2:18f.|). There is a false optimism that is complacently blind as well as a despondent pessimism that gives up the fight. {Perverse things} (\diestrammena\). Perfect passive participle of \diastreph“\, old verb to turn aside, twist, distort as in strkjv@Acts:13:8,10|. {To draw away} (\tou apospƒin\). Articular genitive present active participle of purpose from \apospa“\, old verb used to draw the sword (Matthew:26:51|), to separate (Luke:22:41; strkjv@Acts:21:1|). The pity of it is that such leaders of dissension can always gain a certain following. Paul's long residence in Ephesus enabled him to judge clearly of conditions there.

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:23:12 @{Banded together} (\poiˆsantes sustrophˆn\). See on strkjv@19:40| (riot), but here conspiracy, secret combination, binding together like twisted cords. {Bound themselves under a curse} (\anethematisan heautous\). First aorist active indicative of \anathematiz“\, a late word, said by Cremer and Thayer to be wholly Biblical or ecclesiastical. But Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 95) quotes several examples of the verb in an Attic cursing tablet from Megara of the first or second century A.D. This proof shows that the word, as well as \anathema\ (substantive) from which the verb is derived, was employed by pagans as well as by Jews. Deissmann suggests that Greek Jews like the seven sons of Sceva may have been the first to coin it. It occurs in the LXX as well as strkjv@Mark:14:71| (which see and Luke strkjv@21:5|); strkjv@Acts:23:12,14,21|. They placed themselves under an anathema or curse, devoted themselves to God (cf. strkjv@Leviticus:27:28f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:22|). {Drink} (\pein=piein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \pin“\. For this shortened form see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 343. {Till they had killed} (\he“s hou apoktein“sin\). First aorist active subjunctive of \apoktein“\, common verb. No reason to translate "had killed," simply "till they should kill," the aorist merely punctiliar action, the subjunctive retained instead of the optative for vividness as usual in the _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 974-6). Same construction in verse 14|. King Saul took an "anathema" that imperilled Jonathan (1Samuel:14:24|). Perhaps the forty felt that the rabbis could find some way to absolve the curse if they failed. See this verse repeated in verse 21|.

rwp@Acts:25:13 @{When certain days were passed} (\Hˆmer“n diagenomenon\). Genitive absolute of \diaginomai\, to come between, "days intervening." {Agrippa the King} (\Agrippas ho basileus\). Agrippa II son of Agrippa I of strkjv@Acts:12:20-23|. On the death of Herod King of Chalcis A.D. 48, Claudius A.D. 50 gave this Herod Agrippa II the throne of Chalcis so that Luke is correct in calling him king, though he is not king of Judea. But he was also given by Claudius the government of the temple and the right of appointing the high priest. Later he was given also the tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias. He was the last Jewish king in Palestine, though not king of Judea. He angered the Jews by building his palace so as to overlook the temple and by frequent changes in the high priesthood. He made his capital at Caesarea Philippi which he called Neronias in honour of Nero. Titus visited it after the fall of Jerusalem. {Bernice} (\Bernikˆ\). He was her brother and yet she lived with him in shameful intimacy in spite of her marriage to her uncle Herod King of Chalcis and to Polemon King of Cilicia whom she left. Schuerer calls her both a Jewish bigot and a wanton. She afterwards became the mistress of Titus. {Arrived at Caesarea} (\katˆntˆsan eis Kaisarian\). Came down (first aorist active of \katanta“\) to Caesarea from Jerusalem. {And saluted Festus} (\aspasamenoi ton Phˆston\). The Textus Receptus has \aspasomenoi\ the future participle, but the correct text is the aorist middle participle \aspasamenoi\ which cannot possibly mean subsequent action as given in the Canterbury Revision "and saluted." It can only mean contemporaneous (simultaneous) action "saluting" or antecedent action like the margin "having saluted." But antecedent action is not possible here, so that simultaneous action is the only alternative. It is to be noted that the salutation synchronized with the arrival in Caesarea (note \kata\, down, the effective aorist tense), not with the departure from Jerusalem, nor with the whole journey. Rightly understood the aorist participle here gives no trouble at all (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 861-3).

rwp@Acts:26:16 @{Arise and stand} (\anastˆthi kai stˆthi\). "Emphatic assonance" (Page). Second aorist active imperative of compound verb (\anistˆmi\) and simplex (\histˆmi\). "Stand up and take a stand." {Have I appeared unto thee} (\“phthˆn soi\). First aorist passive indicative of \hora“\. See on ¯Luke:22:43|. {To appoint thee} (\procheirisasthai se\). See strkjv@3:30; strkjv@22:14| for this verb. {Both of the things wherein thou hast seen me} (\h“n te eides me\). The reading \me\ (not in all MSS.) makes it the object of \eides\ (didst see) and \h“n\ is genitive of \ha\ (accusative of general reference) attracted to the case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\. Paul is thus a personal eyewitness of the Risen Christ (Luke:1:1; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:1; strkjv@9:1|). {And of the things wherein I will appear unto thee} (\h“n te ophthˆsomai soi\). Here again \h“n\ is genitive of the accusative (general reference) relative \ha\ attracted to the case of the antecedent \tout“n\ or \ekein“n\ as before. But \ophthˆsomai\ is first future passive of \hora“\ and cannot be treated as active or middle. Page takes it to mean "the visions in which I shall be seen by you," the passive form bringing out the agency of God. See those in strkjv@Acts:18:9; strkjv@23:11; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:2|. The passive voice, however, like \apekrithˆn\ and \ephobˆthˆn\, did become sometimes transitive in the _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 819).

rwp@Acts:26:20 @{But declared} (\alla apˆggellon\). Imperfect active of \apaggell“\, repeatedly. {Throughout all the country of Judea} (\pƒsan te tˆn ch“ran tˆs Ioudaias\). The accusative here in the midst of the datives (\tois en Damask“i, Ierosolumois, tois ethnesin\) seems strange and Page feels certain that \eis\ should be here even though absent in Aleph A B. But the accusative of extent of space will explain it (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 469). {Doing works worthy of repentance} (\axia tˆs metanoias erga prassontas\). Accusative case of present active participle \prassontas\ because of the implied \autous\ with the present infinitive \metanoein\ (repent) and \epistrephein\ (turn), though the dative \prassousin\ could have been used to agree with \ethnesin\ (Gentiles). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:3:8| for similar language used of the Baptist. Paul, the greatest of theologians, was an interesting practical preacher.

rwp@Acts:27:1 @{That we should sail} (\tou apoplein hˆmas\). This genitive articular infinitive with \ekrithˆ\ like the LXX construction translating the Hebrew infinitive construct is awkward in Greek. Several similar examples in strkjv@Luke:17:1; strkjv@Acts:10:25; strkjv@20:3| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1068). Luke alone uses this old verb in N.T. He uses nine compounds of \ple“\, to sail. Note the reappearance of "we" in the narrative. It is possible, of course, that Luke was not with Paul during the series of trials at Caesarea, or at least, not all the time. But it is natural for Luke to use "we" again because he and Aristarchus are travelling with Paul. In Caesarea Paul was the centre of the action all the time whether Luke was present or not. The great detail and minute accuracy of Luke's account of this voyage and shipwreck throw more light upon ancient seafaring than everything else put together. Smith's _Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul_ is still a classic on the subject. Though so accurate in his use of sea terms, yet Luke writes like a landsman, not like a sailor. Besides, the character of Paul is here revealed in a remarkable fashion. {They delivered} (\paredidoun\). Imperfect active \“mega\ form rather than the old \-mi\ form \paredidosan\ as in strkjv@4:33|, from \paradid“mi\. Perhaps the imperfect notes the continuance of the handing over. {Certain other prisoners} (\tinas heterous desm“tas\). Bound (\desm“tas\) like Paul, but not necessarily appellants to Caesar, perhaps some of them condemned criminals to amuse the Roman populace in the gladiatorial shows, most likely pagans though \heterous\ does not have to mean different kind of prisoners from Paul. {Of the Augustan band} (\speirˆs Sebastˆs\). Note Ionic genitive \speirˆs\, not \speiras\. See on ¯Matthew:27:1; strkjv@Acts:10:1|. \Cohortis Augustae\. We do not really know why this cohort is called "Augustan." It may be that it is part of the imperial commissariat (_frumentarii_) since Julius assumes chief authority in the grain ship (verse 11|). These legionary centurions when in Rome were called _peregrini_ (foreigners) because their work was chiefly in the provinces. This man Julius may have been one of them.

rwp@Colossians:1:6 @{In all the world} (\en panti t“i kosm“i\). A legitimate hyperbole, for the gospel was spreading all over the Roman Empire. {Is bearing fruit} (\estin karpophoroumenon\). Periphrastic present middle indicative of the old compound \karpophore“\, from \karpophoros\ (Acts:14:17|) and that from \karpos\ and \pher“\. The periphrastic present emphasizes the continuity of the process. See the active participle \karpophorountes\ in verse 10|. {Increasing} (\auxanomenon\). Periphrastic present middle of \auxan“\. Repeated in verse 10|. The growing and the fruit-bearing go on simultaneously as always with Christians (inward growth and outward expression). {Ye heard and knew} (\ˆkousate kai epegn“te\). Definite aorist indicative. They heard the gospel from Epaphras and at once recognized and accepted (ingressive second aorist active of \epigin“sk“\, to know fully or in addition). They fully apprehended the grace of God and should be immune to the shallow vagaries of the Gnostics.

rwp@Colossians:1:16 @{All things} (\ta panta\). The universe as in strkjv@Romans:11:35|, a well-known philosophical phrase. It is repeated at the end of the verse. {In him were created} (\en aut“i ektisthˆ\). Paul now gives the reason (\hoti\, for) for the primacy of Christ in the work of creation (16f.|). It is the constative aorist passive indicative \ektisthˆ\ (from \ktiz“\, old verb, to found, to create (Romans:1:25|). This central activity of Christ in the work of creation is presented also in strkjv@John:1:3; strkjv@Hebrews:1:2| and is a complete denial of the Gnostic philosophy. The whole of creative activity is summed up in Christ including the angels in heaven and everything on earth. God wrought through "the Son of his love." All earthly dignities are included. {Have been created} (\ektistai\). Perfect passive indicative of \ktiz“\, "stand created," "remain created." The permanence of the universe rests, then, on Christ far more than on gravity. It is a Christo-centric universe. {Through him} (\di' autou\). As the intermediate and sustaining agent. He had already used \en aut“i\ (in him) as the sphere of activity. {And unto him} (\kai eis auton\). This is the only remaining step to take and Paul takes it (1Corinthians:15:28|) See strkjv@Ephesians:1:10| for similar use of \en aut“i\ of Christ and in strkjv@Colossians:1:19; 20| again we have \en aut“i, di' autou, eis auton\ used of Christ. See strkjv@Hebrews:2:10| for \di' hon\ (because of whom) and \di' hou\ (by means of whom) applied to God concerning the universe (\ta panta\). In strkjv@Romans:11:35| we find \ex autou kai di' autou kai eis auton ta panta\ referring to God. But Paul does not use \ex\ in this connection of Christ, but only \en\, \dia\, and \eis\. See the same distinction preserved in strkjv@1Corinthians:8:6| (\ex\ of God, \dia\, of Christ).

rwp@Colossians:1:21 @{And you} (\kai humƒs\). Accusative case in a rather loose sentence, to be explained as the object of the infinitive \parastˆsai\ in verse 22| (note repeated \humƒs\ there) or as the anticipated object of \apokatˆllaxen\ if that be the genuine form in verse 22|. It can be the accusative of general reference followed by anacoluthon. See similar idiom in strkjv@Ephesians:2:1,12|. {Being in time past alienated} (\pote ontas apˆllotri“menous\). Periphrastic perfect passive participle (continuing state of alienation) of \apallotrio“\, old word from Plato on, to estrange, to render \allotrios\ (belonging to another), alienated from God, a vivid picture of heathenism as in strkjv@Romans:1:20-23|. Only other N.T. examples in strkjv@Ephesians:2:12; strkjv@4:18|. \Enemies\ (\exthrous\). Old word from \echthos\ (hatred). Active sense here, {hostile} as in strkjv@Matthew:13:28; strkjv@Romans:8:7|, not passive {hateful} (Romans:11:28|). {In your mind} (\tˆi dianoiƒi\). Locative case. \Dianoia\ (\dia, nous\), mind, intent, purpose. Old word. It is always a tragedy to see men use their minds actively against God. {In your evil works} (\en tois ergois tois ponˆrois\). Hostile purpose finds natural expression in evil deeds.

rwp@Colossians:1:27 @{God was pleased} (\ˆthelˆsen ho theos\). First aorist active indicative of \thel“\, to will, to wish. "God willed" this change from hidden mystery to manifestation. {To make known} (\gn“risai\). First aorist active infinitive of \gn“riz“\ (from \gin“sk“\). Among the Gentiles (\en tois ethnesin\). This is the crowning wonder to Paul that God had included the Gentiles in his redemptive grace, "the riches of the glory of this mystery" (\to ploutos tˆs doxˆs tou mustˆriou toutou\) and that Paul himself has been made the minister of this grace among the Gentiles (Ephesians:3:1-2|). He feels the high honour keenly and meets the responsibility humbly. {Which} (\ho\). Grammatical gender (neuter) agreeing with \mustˆriou\ (mystery), supported by A B P Vulg., though \hos\ (who) agreeing with \Christos\ in the predicate is read by Aleph C D L. At any rate the idea is simply that the personal aspect of "this mystery" is "Christ in you the hope of glory" (\Christos en humin hˆ elpis tˆs doxˆs\). He is addressing Gentiles, but the idea of \en\ here is in, not among. It is the personal experience and presence of Christ in the individual life of all believers that Paul has in mind, the indwelling Christ in the heart as in strkjv@Ephesians:3:17|. He constitutes also the hope of glory for he is the \Shekinah\ of God. Christ is our hope now (1Timothy:1:1|) and the consummation will come (Romans:8:18|).

rwp@Colossians:2:13 @{And you} (\kai humas\). Emphatic position, object of the verb \sunez“opoiˆsen\ (did he quicken) and repeated (second \humƒs\). You Gentiles as he explains. {Being dead through your trespasses} (\nekrous ontas tois parapt“masin\). Moral death, of course, as in strkjv@Romans:6:11; strkjv@Ephesians:2:1,5|. Correct text does not have \en\, but even so \parapt“masin\ (from \parapipt“\, to fall beside or to lapse, strkjv@Hebrews:6:6|), a lapse or misstep as in strkjv@Matthew:6:14; strkjv@Romans:5:15-18; strkjv@Galatians:6:1|, can be still in the locative, though the instrumental makes good sense also. {And the uncircumcision of your flesh} (\kai tˆi akroboustiƒi tˆs sarkos hum“n\). "Dead in your trespasses and your alienation from God, of which the uncircumcision of your flesh was a symbol" (Abbott). Clearly so, "the uncircumcision" used merely in a metaphorical sense. {Did he quicken together with him} (\sunez“opoiˆsen sun aut“i\). First aorist active indicative of the double compound verb \sunz“opoie“\, to make alive (\z“os, poie“\) with (\sun\, repeated also with \aut“i\, associative instrumental), found only here and in strkjv@Ephesians:2:5|, apparently coined by Paul for this passage. Probably \theos\ (God) is the subject because expressly so stated in strkjv@Ephesians:2:4f.| and because demanded by \sun aut“i\ here referring to Christ. This can be true even if Christ be the subject of \ˆrken\ in verse 14|. {Having forgiven us} (\charisamenos hˆmin\). First aorist middle participle of \charizomai\, common verb from \charis\ (favour, grace). Dative of the person common as in strkjv@3:13|. The act of forgiving is simultaneous with the quickening, though logically antecedent.

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@Colossians:2:15 @{Having put off from himself} (\apekdusamenos\). Only here and strkjv@3:9| and one MS. of Josephus (\apekdus\). Both \apodu“\ and \ekdu“\ occur in ancient writers. Paul simply combines the two for expression of complete removal. But two serious problems arise here. Is God or Christ referred to by \apekdusamenos\? What is meant by "the principalities and the powers" (\tas archas kai tas exousias\)? Modern scholars differ radically and no full discussion can be attempted here as one finds in Lightfoot, Haupt, Abbott, Peake. On the whole I am inclined to look on God as still the subject and the powers to be angels such as the Gnostics worshipped and the verb to mean "despoil" (American Standard Version) rather than "having put off from himself." In the Cross of Christ God showed his power openly without aid or help of angels. {He made a show of them} (\edeigmatisen\). First aorist active indicative of \deigmatiz“\, late and rare verb from \deigma\ (Jude:1:7|), an example, and so to make an example of. Frequent in the papyri though later than \paradeigmatiz“\ and in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:1:19| of Joseph's conduct toward Mary. No idea of disgrace is necessarily involved in the word. The publicity is made plain by "openly" (\en parrˆsiƒi\). {Triumphing over them on it} (\thriambeusas autous en aut“i\). On the Cross the triumph was won. This late, though common verb in _Koin‚_ writers (\ekthriambeu“\ in the papyri) occurs only twice in the N.T., once "to lead in triumph" (2Corinthians:2:14|), here to celebrate a triumph (the usual sense). It is derived from \thriambos\, a hymn sung in festal procession and is kin to the Latin _triumphus_ (our triumph), a triumphal procession of victorious Roman generals. God won a complete triumph over all the angelic agencies (\autous\, masculine regarded as personal agencies). Lightfoot adds, applying \thriambeusas\ to Christ: "The convict's gibbet is the victor's car." It is possible, of course, to take \aut“i\ as referring to \cheirographon\ (bond) or even to Christ.

rwp@Colossians:3:8 @{But now} (\nuni de\). Emphatic form of \nun\ in decided contrast (to \pote\ in verse 7|) in the resurrection life of strkjv@2:12; strkjv@3:1|. {Put ye also away} (\apothesthe kai humeis\). Second aorist middle imperative of old verb \apotithˆmi\, to put away, lay aside like old clothes. This metaphor of clothing Paul now uses with several verbs (\apothesthe\ here, \apekdusamenoi\ in verse 9|, \endusamenoi\ in verse 10|, \endusasthe\ in verse 12|). {All these} (\ta panta\). The whole bunch of filthy rags (anger \orgˆn\, wrath \thumon\, malice \kakian\, railing \blasphˆmian\, shameful speaking \aischrologian\). See somewhat similar lists of vices in strkjv@Colossians:3:5; strkjv@Galatians:5:20; strkjv@Ephesians:4:29-31|. These words have all been discussed except \aischrologian\, an old word for low and obscene speech which occurs here only in the N.T. It is made from \aischrologos\ (\aischros\ as in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:6| and that from \aischos\, disgrace). Note also the addition of "out of your mouth" (\ek tou stomatos hum“n\). The word was used for both abusive and filthy talk and Lightfoot combines both ideas as often happens. Such language should never come out of the mouth of a Christian living the new life in Christ.

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

rwp@Colossians:3:14 @{And above all these things} (\epi pƒsin de toutois\). "And upon all these things." {Put on love} (\tˆn agapˆn\). See strkjv@Luke:3:20|. The verb has to be supplied (\endusasthe\) from verse 12| as the accusative case \agapˆn\ shows. {Which is} (\ho estin\). Neuter singular of the relative and not feminine like \agapˆ\ (the antecedent) nor masculine like \sundesmos\ in the predicate. However, there are similar examples of \ho estin\ in the sense of _quod est_ (_id est_), "that is," in strkjv@Mark:14:42; strkjv@15:42|, without agreement in gender and number. Songs:also strkjv@Ephesians:5:5| where \ho estin\ = "which thing." {The bond of perfectness} (\sundesmos tˆs teleiotˆtos\). See strkjv@2:19| for \sundesmos\. Here it is apparently the girdle that holds the various garments together. The genitive (\teleiotˆtos\) is probably that of apposition with the girdle of love. In a succinct way Paul has here put the idea about love set forth so wonderfully in strkjv@1Corinthians:13|.

rwp@Colossians:3:22 @{Your masters according to the flesh} (\tois kata sarka kuriois\). "Lords" really, but these Christian slaves (\douloi\) had Christ as lord, but even so they were to obey their lords in the flesh. {Not with eye-service} (\mˆ en ophthalmodouliais\). Another Pauline word (here only and strkjv@Ephesians:6:6|), elsewhere only in Christian writers after Paul, an easy and expressive compound, service while the master's eye was on the slave and no longer. {Men-pleasers} (\anthr“pareskoi\). Late compound only in LXX and Paul (here and strkjv@Ephesians:6:6|). {In singleness of heart} (\en haplotˆti kardias\). Songs:in strkjv@Ephesians:6:5|. Old and expressive word from \haplous\ (simple, without folds). See strkjv@2Corinthians:11:3|. {Fearing the Lord} (\phoboumenoi ton Kurion\). Rather than the lords according to the flesh.

rwp@Ephesians:1:5 @{Having foreordained us} (\Proorisas hˆmƒs\). First aorist active participle of \prooriz“\, late and rare compound to define or decide beforehand. Already in strkjv@Acts:4:28; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7; strkjv@Romans:8:29|. See also verse 11|. Only other N.T. example in verse 11|. To be taken with \exelexato\ either simultaneous or antecedent (causal). {Unto adoption as sons} (\eis huiothesian\). For this interesting word see strkjv@Galatians:4:5; strkjv@Romans:8:15; strkjv@9:4|. {Unto himself} (\eis auton\). Unto God. {According to the good pleasure of his will} (\kata tˆn eudokian tou thelˆmatos autou\). Here \eudokian\ means {purpose} like \boulˆn\ in verse 11| rather than {benevolence} (good pleasure). Note the preposition \kata\ here for standard.

rwp@Ephesians:3:20 @{That is able to do} (\t“i dunamen“i poiˆsai\). Dative case of the articular participle (present middle of \dunamai\). Paul is fully aware of the greatness of the blessings asked for, but the Doxology ascribes to God the power to do them for us. {Above all} (\huper panta\). Not simply \panta\, but \huper\ beyond and above all. {Exceedingly abundantly} (\huperekperissou\). Late and rare double compound (\huper, ek, perissou\) adverb (LXX, strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:10; strkjv@5:13; strkjv@Ephesians:3:20|). It suits well Paul's effort to pile Pelion on Ossa. {That we ask} (\h“n aitoumetha\). Ablative of the relative pronoun attracted from the accusative \ha\ to the case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\. Middle voice (\aitoumetha\) "we ask for ourselves." {Or think} (\ˆ nooumen\). The highest aspiration is not beyond God's "power" (\dunamin\) to bestow.

rwp@Ephesians:5:26 @{That he might sanctify it} (\hina autˆn hagiasˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \hagiaz“\. Jesus stated this as his longing and his prayer (John:17:17-19|). This was the purpose of Christ's death (verse 25|). {Having cleansed it} (\katharisas\). First aorist active participle of \kathariz“\, to cleanse, either simultaneous action or antecedent. {By the washing of water} (\t“i loutr“i tou hudatos\). If \loutron\ only means bath or bathing-place ( = \loutron\), then \loutr“i\ is in the locative. If it can mean bathing or washing, it is in the instrumental case. The usual meaning from Homer to the papyri is the bath or bathing-place, though some examples seem to mean bathing or washing. Salmond doubts if there are any clear instances. The only other N.T. example of \loutron\ is in strkjv@Titus:3:5|. The reference here seems to be to the baptismal bath (immersion) of water, "in the bath of water." See strkjv@1Corinthians:6:11| for the bringing together of \apelousasthe\ and \hˆgiasthˆte\. Neither there nor here does Paul mean that the cleansing or sanctification took place in the bath save in a symbolic fashion as in strkjv@Romans:6:4-6|. Some think that Paul has also a reference to the bath of the bride before marriage. Still more difficult is the phrase "with the word" (\en rˆmati\). In strkjv@John:17:17| Jesus connected "truth" with "sanctify." That is possible here, though it may also be connected with \katharisas\ (having cleansed). Some take it to mean the baptismal formula.

rwp@Ephesians:6:12 @{Our wrestling is not} (\ouk estin hˆmin hˆ palˆ\). "To us the wrestling is not." \Palˆ\ is an old word from \pall“\, to throw, to swing (from Homer to the papyri, though here only in N.T.), a contest between two till one hurls the other down and holds him down (\katech“\). Note \pros\ again (five times) in sense of "against," face to face conflict to the finish. {The world-rulers of this darkness} (\tous kosmokratoras tou skotous toutou\). This phrase occurs here alone. In strkjv@John:14:30| Satan is called "the ruler of this world" (\ho arch“n tou kosmou toutou\). In strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4| he is termed "the god of this age" (\ho theos tou ai“nos toutou\). The word \kosmokrat“r\ is found in the Orphic Hymns of Satan, in Gnostic writings of the devil, in rabbinical writings (transliterated) of the angel of death, in inscriptions of the Emperor Caracalla. These "world-rulers" are limited to "this darkness" here on earth. {The spiritual hosts of wickedness} (\ta pneumatika tˆs ponˆrias\). No word for "hosts" in the Greek. Probably simply, "the spiritual things (or elements) of wickedness." \Ponˆria\ (from \ponˆros\) is depravity (Matthew:22:18; strkjv@1Corinthians:5:8|). {In the heavenly places} (\en tois epouraniois\). Clearly so here. Our "wrestling" is with foes of evil natural and supernatural. We sorely need "the panoply of God" (furnished by God).

rwp@Galatians:2:13 @{Dissembled likewise with him} (\sunupekrithˆsan aut“i kai\). First aorist passive indicative of the double compound verb \sunupokrinomai\, a late word often in Polybius, only here in N.T. One example in Polybius means to pretend to act a part with. That idea here would help the case of the rest of the Jews, but does not accord with Paul's presentation. {Insomuch that even Barnabas} (\h“ste kai Barnabas\). Actual result expressed by \h“ste\ and the indicative and \kai\ clearly means "even." {Was carried away with their dissimulation} (\sunapˆchthˆ aut“n tˆi hupokrisei\). First aorist passive indicative of \sunapag“\, old verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Peter:3:17|. \Hupokrisei\ is in the instrumental case and can only mean hypocrisy in the bad sense (Matthew:23:28|), not merely acting a part. It was a solemn moment when Paul saw the Jerusalem victory vanish and even Barnabas desert him as they followed the timid cowardice of Peter. It was _Paulus contra mundum_ in the cause of spiritual freedom in Christ.

rwp@Galatians:2:15 @{Not sinners of the Gentiles} (\ouk ex ethn“n hamart“loi\). The Jews regarded all Gentiles as "sinners" in contrast with themselves (cf. strkjv@Matthew:26:45| "sinners" and strkjv@Luke:18:32| "Gentiles"). It is not clear whether verses 15-21| were spoken by Paul to Peter or whether Paul is now simply addressing the Galatians in the light of the controversy with Peter. Burton thinks that he is "mentally addressing Peter, if not quoting from what he said to him."

rwp@Galatians:3:13 @{Redeemed us} (\hˆmas exˆgorasen\). First aorist active of the compound verb \exagoraz“\ (Polybius, Plutarch, Diodorus), to buy from, to buy back, to ransom. The simple verb \agoraz“\ (1Corinthians:6:20; strkjv@7:23|) is used in an inscription for the purchase of slaves in a will (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 324). See also strkjv@Galatians:4:5; strkjv@Colossians:4:5; strkjv@Ephesians:5:16|. Christ purchased us {from the curse of the law} (\ek tˆs kataras tou nomou\). "Out from (\ek\ repeated) under (\hupo\ in verse 10|) the curse of the law." {Having become a curse for us} (\genomenos huper hˆm“n katara\). Here the graphic picture is completed. We were under (\hupo\) a curse, Christ became a curse {over} (\huper\) us and so between us and the overhanging curse which fell on him instead of on us. Thus he bought us out (\ek\) and we are free from the curse which he took on himself. This use of \huper\ for substitution is common in the papyri and in ancient Greek as in the N.T. (John:11:50; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14f.|). {That hangeth on a tree} (\ho kremamenos epi xulou\). Quotation from strkjv@Deuteronomy:21:23| with the omission of \hupo theou\ (by God). Since Christ was not cursed by God. The allusion was to exposure of dead bodies on stakes or crosses (Joshua:10:26|). \Xulon\ means wood, not usually tree, though so in strkjv@Luke:23:31| and in later Greek. It was used of gallows, crosses, etc. See strkjv@Acts:5:30; strkjv@10:39; strkjv@1Peter:2:24|. On the present middle participle from the old verb \kremannumi\, to hang, see on ¯Matthew:18:6; strkjv@Acts:5:30|.

rwp@Galatians:4:24 @{Which things contain an allegory} (\hatina estin allˆgoroumena\). Literally, "Which things are allegorized" (periphrastic present passive indicative of \allˆgore“\). Late word (Strabo, Plutarch, Philo, Josephus, ecclesiastical writers), only here in N.T. The ancient writers used \ainittomai\ to speak in riddles. It is compounded of \allo\, another, and \agoreu“\, to speak, and so means speaking something else than what the language means, what Philo, the past-master in the use of allegory, calls the deeper spiritual sense. Paul does not deny the actual historical narrative, but he simply uses it in an allegorical sense to illustrate his point for the benefit of his readers who are tempted to go under the burden of the law. He puts a secondary meaning on the narrative just as he uses \tupik“s\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:11| of the narrative. We need not press unduly the difference between allegory and type, for each is used in a variety of ways. The allegory in one sense is a speaking parable like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_, the Prodigal Son in strkjv@Luke:15|, the Good Shepherd in strkjv@John:10|. But allegory was also used by Philo and by Paul here for a secret meaning not obvious at first, one not in the mind of the writer, like our illustration which throws light on the point. Paul was familiar with this rabbinical method of exegesis (Rabbi Akiba, for instance, who found a mystical sense in every hook and crook of the Hebrew letters) and makes skilful use of that knowledge here. Christian preachers in Alexandria early fell victims to Philo's allegorical method and carried it to excess without regard to the plain sense of the narrative. That startling style of preaching survives yet to the discredit of sound preaching. Please observe that Paul says here that he is using allegory, not ordinary interpretation. It is not necessary to say that Paul intended his readers to believe that this allegory was designed by the narrative. He illustrates his point by it. {For these are} (\hautai gar eisin\). Allegorically interpreted, he means. {From Mount Sinai} (\apo orous Sinƒ\). Spoken from Mount Sinai. {Bearing} (\genn“sa\). Present active participle of \genna“\, to beget of the male (Matthew:1:1-16|), more rarely as here to bear of the female (Luke:1:13,57|). {Which is Hagar} (\hˆtis estin Hagar\). Allegorically interpreted.

rwp@Galatians:5:17 @{Lusteth against} (\epithumei kata\). Like a tug of war. This use of \sarx\ as opposed to the Spirit (Holy Spirit) personifies \sarx\. Lightfoot argues that \epithumei\ cannot be used with the Spirit and so some other verb must be supplied for it. But that is wholly needless, for the verb, like \epithumia\, does not mean evil desire, but simply to long for. Christ and Satan long for the possession of the city of Man Soul as Bunyan shows. {Are contrary the one to the other} (\allˆlois antikeitai\). Are lined up in conflict, face to face (\anti-\), a spiritual duel (cf. Christ's temptations), with dative case of personal interest (\allˆlois\). {That ye may not do} (\hina mˆ poiˆte\). "That ye may not keep on doing" (present active subjunctive of \poie“\). {That ye would} (\ha ean thelˆte\). "Whatever ye wish" (indefinite relative with \ean\ and present subjunctive).

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE AUTHOR Origen bluntly wrote: "Who wrote the Epistle God only knows certainly" as quoted by Eusebius. Origen held that the thoughts were Paul's while Clement of Rome or Luke may have written the book. Clement of Alexandria (Eusebius says) thought that Paul wrote it in Hebrew and that Luke translated it into Greek. No early writer apparently attributed the Greek text to Paul. Eusebius thought it was originally written in Hebrew whether by Paul or not and translated by Clement of Rome. But there is no certainty anywhere in the early centuries. It was accepted first in the east and later in the west which first rejected it. But Jerome and Augustine accepted it. When the Renaissance came Erasmus had doubts, Luther attributed it to Apollos, Calvin denied the Pauline authorship. In North Africa it was attributed to Barnabas. In modern times Harnack has suggested Priscilla, but the masculine participle in strkjv@Hebrews:11:32| (\me diˆgoumenon\) disposes of that theory. The oldest Greek MSS. (Aleph A B) have simply \Pros Hebraious\ as the title, but they place it before the Pastoral Epistles, while the Textus Receptus puts it after the Pastoral Epistles and Philemon. In the light of all the facts one can only make a guess without a sense of certainty. For myself I should with Luther guess Apollos as the most likely author of this book which is full of the Spirit of God.

rwp@Hebrews:1:3 @{Being} (\“n\). Absolute and timeless existence (present active participle of \eimi\) in contrast with \genomenos\ in verse 4| like \ˆn\ in strkjv@John:1:1| (in contrast with \egeneto\ in strkjv@1:14|) and like \huparch“n\ and \genomenos\ in strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f|. {The effulgence of his glory} (\apaugasma tˆs doxˆs\). The word \apaugasma\, late substantive from \apaugaz“\, to emit brightness (\augˆ, augaz“\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4|), here only in the N.T., but in Wisdom strkjv@7:26 and in Philo. It can mean either reflected brightness, refulgence (Calvin, Thayer) or effulgence (ray from an original light body) as the Greek fathers hold. Both senses are true of Christ in his relation to God as Jesus shows in plain language in strkjv@John:12:45; strkjv@14:9|. "The writer is using metaphors which had already been applied to Wisdom and the Logos" (Moffatt). The meaning "effulgence" suits the context better, though it gives the idea of eternal generation of the Son (John:1:1|), the term Father applied to God necessarily involving Son. See this same metaphor in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:6|. {The very image of his substance} (\charaktˆr tˆs hupostase“s\). \Charaktˆr\ is an old word from \charass“\, to cut, to scratch, to mark. It first was the agent (note ending \=tˆr\) or tool that did the marking, then the mark or impress made, the exact reproduction, a meaning clearly expressed by \charagma\ (Acts:17:29; strkjv@Revelation:13:16f.|). Menander had already used (Moffatt) \charaktˆr\ in the sense of our "character." The word occurs in the inscriptions for "person" as well as for "exact reproduction" of a person. The word \hupostasis\ for the being or essence of God "is a philosophical rather than a religious term" (Moffatt). Etymologically it is the sediment or foundation under a building (for instance). In strkjv@11:1| \hypostasis\ is like the "title-deed" idea found in the papyri. Athanasius rightly used strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4| in his controversy with Arius. Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11| pictures the real and eternal deity of Christ free from the philosophical language here employed. But even Paul's simpler phrase \morphˆ theou\ (the form of God) has difficulties of its own. The use of \Logos\ in strkjv@John:1:1-18| is parallel to strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4|. {And upholding} (\pher“n te\). Present active participle of \pher“\ closely connected with \“n\ (being) by \te\ and like strkjv@Colossians:1:17| in idea. The newer science as expounded by Eddington and Jeans is in harmony with the spiritual and personal conception of creation here presented. {By the word of his power} (\t“i rˆmati tˆs duname“s autou\). Instrumental case of \rˆma\ (word). See strkjv@11:3| for \rˆmati theou\ (by the word of God) as the explanation of creation like Genesis, but here \autou\ refers to God's Son as in strkjv@1:2|. {Purification of sins} (\katharismon t“n hamarti“n\). \Katharismos\ is from \kathariz“\, to cleanse (Matthew:8:3; strkjv@Hebrews:9:14|), here only in Hebrews, but in same sense of cleansing from sins, strkjv@2Peter:1:9; strkjv@Job:7:21|. Note middle participle \poiˆsamenos\ like \heuramenos\ in strkjv@9:12|. This is the first mention of the priestly work of Christ, the keynote of this Epistle. {Sat down} (\ekathisen\). First aorist active of \kathiz“\, "took his seat," a formal and dignified act. {Of the Majesty on high} (\tˆs megalosunˆs en hupsˆlois\). Late word from \megas\, only in LXX (Deuteronomy:32:3; strkjv@2Samuel:7:23|, etc.), Aristeas, strkjv@Hebrews:1:3; strkjv@8:1; strkjv@Jude:1:25|. Christ resumed his original dignity and glory (John:17:5|). The phrase \en hupsˆlois\ occurs in the Psalms (Psalms:93:4|), here only in N.T., elsewhere \en hupsistois\ in the highest (Matthew:21:9; strkjv@Luke:2:14|) or \en tois epouraniois\ in the heavenlies (Ephesians:1:3,20|). Jesus is here pictured as King (Prophet and Priest also) Messiah seated at the right hand of God.

rwp@Hebrews:1:14 @{Ministering spirits} (\leitourgika pneumata\). Thayer says that \leitourgikos\ was not found in profane authors, but it occurs in the papyri for "work tax" (money in place of service) and for religious service also. The word is made from \leitourgia\ (Luke:1:23; strkjv@Hebrews:8:6; strkjv@9:21|). {Sent forth} (\apostellomena\). Present passive participle of \apostell“\, sent forth repeatedly, from time to time as occasion requires. {For the sake of} (\dia\). With the accusative, the usual causal meaning of \dia\. {That shall inherit} (\tous mellontas klˆronomein\). "That are going to inherit," common idiom of \mell“\ (present active participle) with the infinitive (present active here), "destined to inherit" (Matthew:11:14|). {Salvation} (\s“tˆrian\). Here used of the final salvation in its consummation. Only here in the N.T. do we have "inherent salvation," but see strkjv@6:12; strkjv@12:17|. We do not have here the doctrine of special guardian angels for each of us, but simply the fact that angels are used for our good. "And if so, may we not be aided, inspired, guided by a cloud of witnesses--not witnesses only, but helpers, agents like ourselves of the immanent God?" (Sir Oliver Lodge, _The Hibbert Journal_, Jan., 1903, p. 223).

rwp@Hebrews:2:10 @{It became him} (\eprepen aut“i\). Imperfect active of \prep“\, old verb to stand out, to be becoming or seemly. Here it is impersonal with \telei“sai\ as subject, though personal in strkjv@Hebrews:7:26|. \Aut“i\ (him) is in the dative case and refers to God, not to Christ as is made plain by \ton archˆgon\ (author). One has only to recall strkjv@John:3:16| to get the idea here. The voluntary humiliation or incarnation of Christ the Son a little lower than the angels was a seemly thing to God the Father as the writer now shows in a great passage (2:10-18|) worthy to go beside strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|. {For whom} (\di' hon\). Referring to \aut“i\ (God) as the reason (cause) for the universe (\ta panta\). {Through whom} (\di' hou\). With the genitive \dia\ expresses the agent by whom the universe came into existence, a direct repudiation of the Gnostic view of intermediate agencies (aeons) between God and the creation of the universe. Paul puts it succinctly in strkjv@Romans:11:36| by his \ex autou kai di' autou kai eis auton ta panta\. The universe comes out of God, by means of God, for God. This writer has already said that God used his Son as the Agent (\di' hou\) in creation (1:2|), a doctrine in harmony with strkjv@Colossians:1:15f.| (\en aut“i, di' autou eis auton\) and strkjv@John:1:3|. {In bringing} (\agagonta\). Second aorist active participle of \ag“\ in the accusative case in spite of the dative \aut“i\ just before to which it refers. {The author} (\ton archˆgon\). Old compound word (\archˆ\ and \ag“\) one leading off, leader or prince as in strkjv@Acts:5:31|, one blazing the way, a pioneer (Dods) in faith (Hebrews:12:2|), author (Acts:3:15|). Either sense suits here, though author best (verse 9|). Jesus is the author of salvation, the leader of the sons of God, the Elder Brother of us all (Romans:8:29|). {To make perfect} (\telei“sai\). First aorist active infinitive of \teleio“\ (from \teleios\). If one recoils at the idea of God making Christ perfect, he should bear in mind that it is the humanity of Jesus that is under discussion. The writer does not say that Jesus was sinful (see the opposite in strkjv@4:15|), but simply that "by means of sufferings" God perfected his Son in his human life and death for his task as Redeemer and Saviour. One cannot know human life without living it. There was no moral imperfection in Jesus, but he lived his human life in order to be able to be a sympathizing and effective leader in the work of salvation.

rwp@Hebrews:6:6 @{It is impossible to renew them again} (\adunaton palin anakainizein\). The \adunaton\ (impossible) comes first in verse 4| without \estin\ (is) and there is no "them" in the Greek. There are three other instances of \adunaton\ in Hebrews (6:18; strkjv@10:4; strkjv@11:6|). The present active infinitive of \anakainiz“\ (late verb, \ana, kainos\, here only in the N.T., but \anakaino“\, strkjv@2Corinthians:4:16; strkjv@Colossians:3:10|) with \adunaton\ bluntly denies the possibility of renewal for apostates from Christ (cf. strkjv@3:12-4:2|). It is a terrible picture and cannot be toned down. The one ray of light comes in verses 8-12|, not here. {Seeing they crucify to themselves afresh} (\anastraurountas heautois\). Present active participle (accusative plural agreeing with \tous... parapesontas\) of \anastauro“\, the usual verb for crucify in the old Greek so that \ana-\ here does not mean "again" or "afresh," but "up," _sursum_, not _rursum_ (Vulgate). This is the reason why renewal for such apostates is impossible. They crucify Christ. {And put him to an open shame} (\kai paradeigmatizontas\). Present active participle of \paradeigmatiz“\, late verb from \paradeigma\ (example), to make an example of, and in bad sense to expose to disgrace. Simplex verb \deigmatisai\ in this sense in strkjv@Matthew:1:19|.

rwp@Hebrews:7:23 @{Many in number} (\pleiones\). Comparative predicate adjective, "more than one," in succession, not simultaneously. {Because they are hindered} (\dia to k“luesthai\). Articular infinitive (present passive) with \dia\ and the accusative case, "because of the being hindered." {By death} (\thanat“i\). Instrumental case. {From continuing} (\paramenein\). Present active infinitive of the compound (remain beside) as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:25| and in the ablative case.

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

rwp@Hebrews:11:40 @{God having provided} (\tou theou problepsamenou\). Genitive absolute with first aorist middle participle of \problep“\, late compound to foresee, here only in the N.T. {Some better thing} (\kreitton ti\). "Something better," "the better promises" of strkjv@8:6|. {That apart from us they should not be made perfect} (\hina mˆ ch“ris hˆm“n telei“th“sin\). Negative purpose clause with \hina mˆ\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \teleio“\. But this glorious and gracious purpose (foresight) of God is not due to any special merit in us. It is simply the fulness of the time in God's dispensation of grace of which we are the beneficiaries. But all the same and all the more (_noblesse oblige_), we should prove worthy of our heritage and of God's goodness to us and be loyal to Christ.

rwp@James:1:5 @{Lacketh wisdom} (\leipetai sophias\). Condition of first class, assumed as true, \ei\ and present passive indicative of \leip“\ to be destitute of, with ablative case \sophias\. "If any one falls short of wisdom." A banking figure, to have a shortage of wisdom (not just knowledge, \gn“se“s\, but wisdom \sophias\, the practical use of knowledge). {Let him ask} (\aiteit“\). Present active imperative of \aite“\, "let him keep on asking." {Of God} (\para tou theou\). "From (from beside) God," ablative case with \para\. Liberally (\hapl“s\). This old adverb occurs here only in the N.T. (from \haplous\, single-fold, strkjv@Matthew:6:22|, and \haplotˆs\, simplicity, generosity, is common-- strkjv@2Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@Romans:12:8|). But the adverb is common in the papyri by way of emphasis as simply or at all (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). Mayor argues for the sense of "unconditionally" (the logical moral sense) while Hort and Ropes agree and suggest "graciously." The other sense of "abundantly" or "liberally" suits the idea in \haplotˆs\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@Romans:12:8|, but no example of the adverb in this sense has been found unless this is one here. See strkjv@Isaiah:55:1| for the idea of God's gracious giving and the case of Solomon (1Kings:3:9-12; strkjv@Proverbs:2:3|). {Upbraideth not} (\mˆ oneidizontos\). Present active participle of \oneidiz“\ (old verb to reproach, to cast in one's teeth, strkjv@Matthew:5:11|) in the ablative case like \didontos\ agreeing with \theou\ and with the usual negative of the participle (\me\). This is the negative statement of \didontos hapl“s\ (giving graciously). The evil habit of giving stinging words along with the money is illustrated in Sirach strkjv@41:22 and Plutarch (_Deuteronomy:adulat._, p. 64A). ] Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:4:16|. {And it shall be given him} (\kai dothˆsetai aut“i\). First future passive of \did“mi\, a blessed promise in accord with the words of Jesus (Matthew:7:7,11; strkjv@Luke:11:13|), meaning here not only "wisdom," but all good gifts, including the Holy Spirit. There are frequent reminiscences of the words of Jesus in this Epistle.

rwp@James:1:25 @{He that looketh into} (\ho parakupsas\). First aorist active articular participle of \parakupt“\, old verb, to stoop and look into (John:20:5,11|), to gaze carefully by the side of, to peer into or to peep into (1Peter:1:12|). Here the notion of beside (\para\) or of stooping (\kupt“\) is not strong. Sometimes, as Hort shows, the word means only a cursory glance, but the contrast with verse 24| seems to preclude that here. {The perfect law} (\nomon teleion\). For \teleion\ see strkjv@1:17|. See strkjv@Romans:7:12| for Paul's idea of the law of God. James here refers to the word of truth (1:18|), the gospel of grace (Galatians:6:2; strkjv@Romans:12:2|). {The law of liberty} (\ton tˆs eleutherias\). "That of liberty," explaining why it is "perfect" (2:12| also), rests on the work of Christ, whose truth sets us free (John:8:32; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:16; strkjv@Romans:8:2|). {And so continueth} (\kai parameinas\). First aorist active articular participle again of \paramen“\, parallel with \parakupsas\. \Paramen“\ is to stay beside, and see strkjv@Phillipians:1:25| for contrast with the simplex \men“\. {Being} (\genomenos\). Rather, "having become" (second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\ to become). {Not a hearer that forgetteth} (\ouk akroatˆs epilˆsmonˆs\). "Not a hearer of forgetfulness" (descriptive genitive, marked by forgetfulness). \Epilˆsmonˆ\ is a late and rare word (from \epilˆsm“n\, forgetful, from \epilanthomai\, to forget, as in verse 24|), here only in N.T. {But a doer that worketh} (\alla poiˆtˆs ergou\). "But a doer of work," a doer marked by work (descriptive genitive \ergou\), not by mere listening or mere talk. {In his doing} (\en tˆi poiˆsei autou\). Another beatitude with \makarios\ as in strkjv@1:12|, like the Beatitudes in strkjv@Matthew:5:3-12|. \Poiˆsis\ is an old word (from \poie“\ for the act of doing), only here in N.T.

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:2:1 @{My brethren} (\adelphoi mou\). Transition to a new topic as in strkjv@1:19; strkjv@2:5,14; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@5:7|. {Hold not} (\mˆ echete\). Present active imperative of \ech“\ with negative \mˆ\, exhortation to stop holding or not to have the habit of holding in the fashion condemned. {The faith of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\tˆn pistin tou kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou Christou\). Clearly objective genitive, not subjective (faith of), but "faith in our Lord Jesus Christ," like \echete pistin theou\ (Mark:11:22|), "have faith in God." See the same objective genitive with \pistis\ in strkjv@Acts:3:6; strkjv@Galatians:2:16; strkjv@Romans:3:22; strkjv@Revelation:14:12|. Note also the same combination as in strkjv@1:1| "our Lord Jesus Christ" (there on a par with God). {The Lord of Glory} (\tˆs doxˆs\). Simply "the Glory." No word for "Lord" (\kuriou\) in the Greek text. \Tˆs doxˆs\ clearly in apposition with \tou kuriou Iˆsou Christou\. James thus terms "our Lord Jesus Christ" the Shekinah Glory of God. See strkjv@Hebrews:9:5| for "the cherubim of Glory." Other New Testament passages where Jesus is pictured as the Glory are strkjv@Romans:9:4; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:6; strkjv@Ephesians:1:17; strkjv@Hebrews:1:3|. Cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|. {With respect of persons} (\en pros“polˆmpsiais\). A Christian word, like \pros“polˆmptˆs\ (Acts:10:34|) and \pros“polˆmpteite\ (James:2:9|), not in LXX or any previous Greek, but made from \pros“pon lambanein\ (Luke:20:21; strkjv@Galatians:2:6|), which is \a\ Hebrew idiom for _panim nasa_, "to lift up the face on a person," to be favorable and so partial to him. See \pros“polˆmpsia\ in this sense of partiality (respect of persons) in strkjv@Romans:2:11; strkjv@Colossians:3:25; strkjv@Ephesians:6:9| (nowhere else in N.T.). Do not show partiality.

rwp@James:2:8 @{Howbeit} (\mentoi\). Probably not adversative here, but simply confirmatory, "if now," "if indeed," "if really." Common in Xenophon in this sense. See the contrast (\de\) in verse 9|. {If ye fulfil} (\ei teleite\). Condition of first class, assumed as true with \ei\ and present active indicative of \tele“\, old verb, to bring to completion, occurring in strkjv@Romans:2:27| also with \nomos\ (law). Jesus used \plˆro“\ in strkjv@Matthew:4:17|. James has \tˆre“\ in strkjv@2:10|. {The royal law} (\nomon basilikon\). Old adjective for royal, regal (from \basileus\ king), as of an officer (John:4:46|). But why applied to \nomos\? The Romans had a phrase, _lex regia_, which came from the king when they had kings. The absence of the article is common with \nomos\ (4:11|). It can mean a law fit to guide a king, or such as a king would choose, or even the king of laws. Jesus had said that on the law of love hang all the law and the prophets (Matthew:22:40|), and he had given the Golden Rule as the substance of the Law and the prophets (Matthew:7:12|). This is probably the royal law which is violated by partiality (James:2:3|). It is in accord with the Scripture quoted here (Leviticus:19:18|) and ratified by Jesus (Luke:10:28|).

rwp@James:5:4 @{The hire} (\ho misthos\). Old word for wages (Matthew:20:8|). {Labourers} (\ergat“n\). Any one who works (\ergazomai\), especially agricultural workers (Matthew:9:37|). {Who mowed} (\t“n amˆsant“n\). Genitive plural of the articular first aorist active participle of \ama“\ (from \hama\, together), old verb, to gather together, to reap, here only in N.T. {Fields} (\ch“ras\). Estates or farms (Luke:12:16|). {Which is of you kept back by fraud} (\ho aphusterˆmenos aph' hum“n\). Perfect passive articular participle of \aphustere“\, late compound (simplex \hustere“\ common as strkjv@Matthew:19:20|), to be behindhand from, to fail of, to cause to withdraw, to defraud. Pitiful picture of earned wages kept back by rich Jews, old problem of capital and labour that is with us yet in acute form. {The cries} (\hai boai\). Old word from which \boa“\ comes (Matthew:3:3|), here only in N.T. The stolen money "cries out" (\krazei\), the workers cry out for vengeance. {That reaped} (\t“n therisant“n\). Genitive plural of the articular participle first aorist active of \theriz“\ (old verb from \theros\, summer, strkjv@Matthew:24:32|), to reap, to harvest while summer allows (Matthew:6:26|). {Have entered} (\eiselˆluthan\). Perfect active third person plural indicative of \eiserchomai\, old and common compound, to go or come into. This late form is by analogy of the aorist for the usual form in \-asi\. {Of the Lord of Sabaoth} (\Kuriou Saba“th\). "Of the Lord of Hosts," quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:5:9| as in strkjv@Romans:9:29|, transliterating the Hebrew word for "Hosts," an expression for the omnipotence of God like \Pantokrat“r\ (Revelation:4:8|). God hears the cries of the oppressed workmen even if the employers are deaf.

rwp@James:5:7 @{Be patient therefore} (\makrothumˆsate oun\). A direct corollary (\oun\, therefore) from the coming judgment on the wicked rich (5:1-6|). First aorist (constative) active imperative of \makrothume“\, late compound (Plutarch, LXX) from \makrothumos\ (\makros, thumos\, of long spirit, not losing heart), as in strkjv@Matthew:18:26|. The appeal is to the oppressed brethren. Catch your wind for a long race (long-tempered as opposed to short-tempered). See already the exhortation to patience (\hupomonˆ\) in strkjv@1:3f.,12| and repeated in strkjv@5:11|. They will need both submission (\hupomen“\ strkjv@5:11|) and steadfastness (\makrothumia\ strkjv@5:10|). {Until the coming of the Lord} (\he“s tˆs parousias\). The second coming of Christ he means, the regular phrase here and in verse 8| for that idea (Matthew:24:3,37,39; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:19|, etc.). {The husbandman} (\ho ge“rgos\). The worker in the ground (\gˆ, erg“\) as in strkjv@Matthew:21:33f|. {Waiteth for} (\ekdechetai\). Present middle indicative of \ekdechomai\, old verb for eager expectation as in strkjv@Acts:17:16|. {Precious} (\timion\). Old adjective from \timˆ\ (honor, price), dear to the farmer because of his toil for it. See strkjv@1Peter:1:19|. {Being patient over it} (\makrothum“n ep' aut“i\). Present active participle of \makrothume“\ just used in the exhortation, picturing the farmer longing and hoping over his precious crop (cf. strkjv@Luke:18:7| of God). {Until it receive} (\he“s labˆi\). Temporal clause of the future with \he“s\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \lamban“\, vividly describing the farmer's hopes and patience. {The early and latter rain} (\pro‹mon kai opsimon\). The word for rain (\hueton\ strkjv@Acts:14:17|) is absent from the best MSS. The adjective \pro‹mos\ (from \pr“‹\, early) occurs here only in N.T., though old in the form \pro‹mos\ and \pr“‹s\. See strkjv@Deuteronomy:11:14; strkjv@Jeremiah:5:24|, etc. for these terms for the early rain in October or November for the germination of the grain, and the latter rain (\opsimon\, from \opse\, late, here only in N.T.) in April and May for maturing the grain.

rwp@James:5:11 @{We call blessed} (\makarizomen\). Old word (present active indicative of \makariz“\), from \makarios\ (happy), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:1:48|. "We felicitate." As in strkjv@1:3,12; strkjv@Daniel:12:12|. {Ye have heard} (\ˆkousate\). First aorist (constative) active indicative of \akou“\. As in strkjv@Matthew:5:21,27,33,38,43|. Ropes suggests in the synagogues. {Of Job} (\I“b\). Job:did complain, but he refused to renounce God (Job:1:21; strkjv@2:10; strkjv@13:15; strkjv@16:19; strkjv@19:25f.|). He had become a stock illustration of loyal endurance. {Ye have seen} (\eidete\). Second aorist (constative) active indicative of \hora“\. In Job's case. {The end of the Lord} (\to telos kuriou\). The conclusion wrought by the Lord in Job's case (Job:42:12|). {Full of pity} (\polusplagchnos\). Late and rare compound (\polus, splagchnon\), only here in N.T. It occurs also in Hermas (_Sim_. v. 7. 4; _Mand_. iv, 3). "Very kind." {Merciful} (\oiktirm“n\). Late and rare adjective (from \oikteir“\ to pity), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:6:36|.

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 @ A DIFFERENT STYLE OF TEACHING Songs:different is it in fact that some men bluntly assert that Jesus could not have spoken in the same fashion as presented in the Synoptics and in the Fourth Gospel. Such critics need to recall the Socrates of Xenophon's _Memorabilia_ and of Plato's _Dialogues_. There is a difference beyond a doubt, but there is also some difference in the reports in the Synoptics. Jesus for the most part spoke in Aramaic, sometimes in Greek, as to the great crowds from around Palestine (the Sermon on the Mount, for instance). There is the Logia of Jesus (Q of criticism) preserved in the non-Markan portions of Matthew and Luke besides Mark, and the rest of Matthew and Luke. Certain natural individualities are preserved. The difference is greater in the Fourth Gospel, because John writes in the ripeness of age and in the richness of his long experience. He gives his reminiscences mellowed by long reflection and yet with rare dramatic power. The simplicity of the language leads many to think that they understand this Gospel when they fail to see the graphic pictures as in chapters strkjv@John:7-11|. The book fairly throbs with life. There is, no doubt, a Johannine style here, but curiously enough there exists in the Logia (Q) a genuine Johannine passage written long before the Fourth Gospel (Matthew:11:25-30; strkjv@Luke:10:21-24|). The use of "the Father" and "the Son" is thoroughly Johannine. It is clear that Jesus used the Johannine type of teaching also. Perhaps critics do not make enough allowance for the versatility and variety in Jesus.

rwp@Info_John @ HISTORICAL VALUE OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL It is just here that the chief attack is made on the Fourth Gospel even by some who admit the Johannine authorship. It is now assumed by some that the Fourth Gospel is not on a par with the Synoptics in historical reliability and some harmonies omit it entirely or place it separately at the close, though certainly Tatian used it with the Synoptics in his _Diatessaron_, the first harmony of the Gospels. Some even follow Schmiedel in seeing only a symbolic or parabolic character in the miracles in the Fourth Gospel, particularly in the narrative of the raising of Lazarus in chapter strkjv@John:11| which occurs here alone. But John makes this miracle play quite an important part in the culmination of events at the end. Clearly the author professes to be giving actual data largely out of his own experience and knowledge. It is objected by some that the Fourth Gospel gives an unnatural picture of Christ with Messianic claims at the very start. But the Synoptics give that same claim at the baptism and temptation, not to mention Luke's account of the Boy Jesus in the temple. The picture of the Jews as hostile to Jesus is said to be overdrawn in the Fourth Gospel. The answer to that appears in the Sermon on the Mount, the Sabbath miracles, the efforts of the Pharisees and lawyers to catch Jesus in his talk, the final denunciation in strkjv@Matthew:23|, all in the Synoptics. The opposition to Jesus grew steadily as he revealed himself more clearly. Some of the difficulties raised are gratuitous as in the early cleansing of the temple as if it could not have happened twice, confounding the draught of fishes in chapter strkjv@John:21| with that in strkjv@Luke:5|, making Mary of Bethany at the feast of a Simon in chapter strkjv@John:12| the same as the sinful woman at the feast of another Simon in strkjv@Luke:7|, making John's Gospel locate the last passover meal a day ahead instead of at the regular time as the Synoptics have it. Rightly interpreted these difficulties disappear. In simple truth, if one takes the Fourth Gospel at its face value, the personal recollections of the aged John phrased in his own way to supplement the narratives in the Synoptics, there is little left to give serious trouble. The Jerusalem ministry with the feasts is a case in point. The narrative of the call of the first disciples in chapter strkjv@John:1| is another. The author followed Simon in bringing also his own brother James to Jesus. John was present in the appearance of Christ before Annas, and Pilate. He was at the Cross when no other apostles were there. He took the mother of Jesus to his home and then returned to the Cross. He saw the piercing of the side of Jesus. He knew and saw the deed of Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus. E. H. Askwith has a most helpful discussion of this whole problem in _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1910).

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

rwp@John:1:40 @{Andrew} (\Andreas\). Explained by John as one of the two disciples of the Baptist and identified as the brother of the famous Simon Peter (cf. also strkjv@6:8; strkjv@12:22|). The more formal call of Andrew and Simon, James and John, comes later (Mark:1:16ff.; strkjv@Matthew:4:18ff.; strkjv@Luke:3:1-11|). {That heard John speak} (\t“n akousant“n para I“anou\). "That heard from John," a classical idiom (\para\ with ablative after \akou“\) seen also in strkjv@6:45; strkjv@7:51; strkjv@8:26,40; strkjv@15:15|.

rwp@John:1:41 @{He findeth first} (\heuriskei houtos pr“ton\). "This one finds (vivid dramatic present) first" (\prot“n\). \Prot“n\ (adverb supported by Aleph A B fam. 13) means that Andrew sought "his own brother Simon" (\ton adelphon ton idion Sim“na\) before he did anything else. But Aleph L W read \pr“tos\ (nominative adjective) which means that Andrew was the first who went after his brother implying that John also went after his brother James. Some old Latin manuscripts (b, e, r apparently), have \mane\ for Greek \pr“i\ (early in the morning). Bernard thinks that this is the true reading as it allows more time for Andrew to bring Simon to Jesus. Probably \pr“ton\ is correct, but even so John likely brought also his brother James after Andrew's example. {We have found the Messiah} (\Heurˆkamen ton Messian\). First aorist active indicative of \heurisk“\. Andrew and John had made the greatest discovery of the ages, far beyond gold or diamond mines. The Baptist had told about him. "We have seen him." {Which is} (\ho estin\). Same explanatory neuter relative as in verse 38|, "which word is." This Aramaic title Messiah is preserved in the N.T. only here and strkjv@4:25|, elsewhere translated into \Christos\, Anointed One, from \chri“\, to anoint. See on ¯Matthew:1:1| for discussion.

rwp@John:1:42 @{Looked upon him} (\emblepsas aut“i\). See verse 36| for same word and form of John's eager gaze at Jesus. Luke uses this word of Jesus when Peter denied him (Luke:22:61|). {He brought him} (\ˆgagen auton\). Effective second aorist active indicative of \ago\ as if Andrew had to overcome some resistance on Simon's part. {Thou shalt be called Cephas} (\su klˆthˆsˆi Kˆphƒs\). Apparently before Simon spoke. We do not know whether Jesus had seen Simon before or not, but he at once gives him a nickname that will characterize him some day, though not yet, when he makes the noble confession (Matthew:16:17f.|), and Jesus will say, "Thou art Peter." Here the future passive indicative of \kale“\ is only prophecy. The Aramaic \Cˆphƒs\ (rock) is only applied to Simon in John except by Paul (1Corinthians:1:12; strkjv@Galatians:1:18|, etc.). But the Greek \Petros\ is used by all. In the ancient Greek \petra\ was used for the massive ledge of rock like Stone Mountain while \petros\ was a detached fragment of the ledge, though itself large. This distinction may exist in strkjv@Matthew:16:17f.|, except that Jesus probably used Aramaic which would not have such a distinction.

rwp@John:1:43 @{On the morrow} (\tˆi epaurion\). The fourth of the days from verse 19|. {He findeth Philip} (\heuriskei Philippon\). Vivid dramatic present as in 41|, though \ˆthelˆsen\ (was minded, wished) is aorist active indicative. Apparently not an accidental finding, possibly due to the efforts of Andrew and Peter. Both Andrew and Philip have Greek names. {Follow me} (\akolouthei moi\). Present active imperative, a direct challenge to Philip. Often Jesus uses this verb to win disciples (Mark:2:14; strkjv@Matthew:8:22; strkjv@9:21; strkjv@19:21; strkjv@Luke:9:59; strkjv@John:21:19|). Already Jesus had four personal followers (Andrew and Simon, John and James). He has begun his work.

rwp@John:2:6 @{Waterpots} (\hudriai\). Old word from \hud“r\ (water) and used in papyri for pots or pans for holding money or bread as well as water. These stone (\lithinai\ as in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3|) jars full of water were kept handy ({set there}, \keimenai\, present middle participle of \keimai\) at a feast for ceremonial cleansing of the hands (2Kings:3:11; strkjv@Mark:7:3|), "after the Jews' manner of purifying" (\kata ton katharismon t“n Ioudai“n\). See strkjv@Mark:1:44; strkjv@Luke:2:22| for the word \katharismos\ (from \kathariz“\) which fact also raised a controversy with disciples of John because of his baptizing (John:3:25|). {Containing} (\ch“rousai\). Present active participle feminine plural of \ch“re“\, old verb from \ch“ros\, place, space, having space or room for. {Two or three firkins apiece} (\ana metrˆtas duo ˆ treis\). The word \metrˆtˆs\, from \metre“\, to measure, simply means "measurer," an amphora for measuring liquids (in Demosthenes, Aristotle, Polybius), the Hebrew _bath_ (2Chronicles:4:5|), here only in N.T., about 8 1/2 English gallons. Each \hudria\ thus held about 20 gallons. This common distributive use of \ana\ occurs here only in this Gospel, but is in strkjv@Revelation:4:8|. In strkjv@John:4:28| a much smaller \hudria\ was used for carrying water.

rwp@John:2:14 @{Those that sold} (\tous p“lountas\). Present active articular participle of \p“le“\, to sell. They were in the Court of the Gentiles within the temple precinct (\en t“i hier“i\), but not in the \naos\ or temple proper. The sacrifices required animals (oxen, \boas\, sheep, \probata\, doves, \peristeras\) and "changers of money" (\kermatistas\, from \kermatiz“\, to cut into small pieces, to change money, only here in N.T., late and rare). Probably their very presence in his Father's house angered Jesus. The Synoptics (Mark:11:15-17; strkjv@Matthew:21:12f.; strkjv@Luke:10:45f.|) record a similar incident the day after the Triumphal Entry. If there was only one, it would seem more natural at the close. But why could it not occur at the beginning also? Here it is an obvious protest by Christ at the beginning of his ministry as in the Synoptics it is an indignant outcry against the desecration. The cessation was only temporary in both instances.

rwp@John:2:24 @{But Jesus did not trust himself to them} (\autos de Iˆsous ouk episteuen hauton autois\). "But Jesus himself kept on refusing (negative imperfect) to trust himself to them." The double use of \pisteu“\ here is shown by strkjv@Acts:8:13| where Simon Magus "believed" (\episteusen\) and was baptized, but was unsaved. He merely believed that he wanted what Philip had. {For that he knew all men} (\dia to auton gin“skein pantas\). Causal use of \dia\ and the accusative case of the articular infinitive \to gin“skein\ (because of the knowing) with the object of the infinitive (\pantas\, all men) and the accusative of general reference (\auton\, as to himself).

rwp@John:3:36 @{Hath eternal life} (\echei z“ˆn ai“nion\). Has it here and now and for eternity. {That obeyeth not} (\ho apeith“n\). "He that is disobedient to the Son." Jesus is the test of human life as Simeon said he would be (Luke:2:34f.|). This verb does not occur again in John's Gospel.

rwp@John:4:25 @{Messiah cometh} (\Messias erchetai\). Hebrew word in N.T. only here and strkjv@1:41| and explained by \Christos\ in both places. The Samaritans looked for a Messiah, a prophet like Moses (Deuteronomy:18:18|). Simon Magus gave himself out in Samaria as some great one and had a large following (Acts:8:9|). Pilate quelled an uprising in Samaria over a fanatical Messianic claimant (Josephus, _Ant_. XVIII. iv. 1). {When he is come} (\hotan elthˆi ekeinos\). "Whenever that one comes." Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ (\hote\, \an\) and the second aorist active subjunctive. Wistfully she turns to this dim hope as a bare possibility about this strange "prophet." {He will declare unto us all things} (\anaggelei hˆmin hapanta\). Future active indicative of \anaggell“\, old and common verb to announce fully (\ana\, up and down). See also strkjv@16:13|. Perhaps here is light on the knowledge of her life by Jesus as well as about the way to worship God.

rwp@John:4:36 @{Already he that reapeth receiveth wages} (\ˆdˆ ho theriz“n misthon lambanei\). The spiritual harvester can gather his harvest without waiting four months. Jesus is reaping a harvest right now by the conversion of this woman. The labourer is worthy of his hire (Luke:10:7; strkjv@2Timothy:2:6|). John does not use \misthos\ (reward) again, but \karpos\ (15:2-16|), "fruit for life eternal" (cf. strkjv@4:14|). {That he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together} (\hina ho speir“n homou chairˆi kai ho theriz“n\). Final use of \hina\ with present active subjunctive of \chair“\, to rejoice, in the singular with \ho speir“n\ (the sower) and to be repeated with \ho theriz“n\ (the reaper). The adverb \homou\ (together) elsewhere in N.T. only strkjv@20:4; strkjv@21:2; strkjv@Acts:2:1|. Usually considerable time passes between the sowing and the reaping as in verse 35|. Amos (Amos:9:13|) spoke of the time when "the ploughman shall overtake the reaper" and that has happened here with the joy of the harvest time (Isaiah:9:3|). Jesus the Sower and the disciples as the reapers are here rejoicing simultaneously.

rwp@John:4:44 @{For Jesus himself testified} (\autos gar Iˆsous emarturˆsen\). John's explanation of the conduct of Jesus by quoting a proverb often used by Jesus (Mark:6:4; strkjv@Matthew:13:57; strkjv@Luke:4:24| in reference to Nazareth), but not necessarily used by Jesus on this occasion. A similar proverb has been found in Plutarch, Pliny, Seneca. {A prophet hath no honour in his own country} (\prophˆtˆs en tˆi idiƒi patridi timˆn ouk echei\). What is meant by \patridi\? In the Synoptics (Luke:4:24; strkjv@Mark:6:4; strkjv@Matthew:13:57|) the reference is to Nazareth where he was twice rejected. But what has John in mind in quoting it here? He probably knew the quotations in the Synoptics. Does John refer to Judea by "his own country"? If so, the application hardly fits for he had already explained that Jesus was leaving Judea because he was too popular there (4:1-3|). If he means Galilee, he immediately mentions the cordial welcome accorded Jesus there (verse 45|). But even so this is probably John's meaning for he is speaking of the motive of Jesus in going into Galilee where he had not yet laboured and where he apparently had no such fame as in Judea and now in Samaria.

rwp@John:4:52 @{Inquired} (\eputheto\). Second aorist middle indicative of \punthanomai\. {Began to mend} (\kompsoteron eschen\). Second aorist ingressive active indicative of \ech“\ (took a turn, got better) and comparative of adverb \komps“s\. Arrian (_Epictetus iii. 10.13) has \komps“s echeis\ from a physician, "Thou hast it fine," "Thou art doing finely." The papyri give several similar examples. \Komps“s\ (neat) is from \kome“\, to take care of. {At the seventh hour} (\h“ran hebdomˆn\). The accusative case without a preposition as in strkjv@Revelation:3:3|, though we have \peri h“ran enatˆn\ (about the ninth hour) in strkjv@Acts:10:3|. See the accusative also in strkjv@Exodus:9:18| \tautˆn tˆn h“ran aurion\ (tomorrow about this hour). The accusative has the notion of extension and can be thus loosely used. It can even mean here "during the seventh hour." In verse 53| the locative is more exact, "at that hour" (\en ekeinˆi tˆi h“rƒi\). The seventh hour would be (Roman time) seven P.M.

rwp@John:5:13 @{He that was healed} (\ho iatheis\). First aorist passive articular participle of \iaomai\ (John's usual word). {Who it was} (\tis estin\). Present tense preserved in indirect question. {Had conveyed himself away} (\exeneusen\). First aorist active indicative of \ekne“\, old verb to swim out, to slip out, or from \ekneu“\, to turn out, to turn the head to one side (to one side with which compare \eneneuon\, they nodded, strkjv@Luke:1:62|). Either of these verbs can explain the form here. The aorist tense simply states an antecedent action without being a pastperfect. {A multitude being in the place} (\ochlou ontos en t“i top“i\). Genitive absolute and the reason for Christ's departure.

rwp@John:5:30 @{I} (\Eg“\). The discourse returns to the first person after using "the Son" since verse 19|. Here Jesus repeats in the first person (as in strkjv@8:28|) the statement made in verse 19| about the Son. In John \emautou\ is used by Jesus 16 times and not at all by Jesus in the Synoptics. It occurs in the Synoptics only in strkjv@Matthew:8:8; strkjv@Luke:7:7f|. {Righteous} (\dikaia\). As all judgements should be. The reason is plain (\hoti\, because), the guiding principle with the Son being the will of the Father who sent him and made him Judge. Judges often have difficulty in knowing what is law and what is right, but the Son's task as Judge is simple enough, the will of the Father which he knows (verse 20|).

rwp@John:5:34 @{But the witness which I receive} (\Eg“ de ou tˆn marturian lamban“\). "But I do not receive the witness" simply from a man (like John). The \eg“\ (I) in sharp contrast with \humeis\ (ye) of verse 33|. Jesus complained of Nicodemus for not accepting his witness (3:11|). Cf. also strkjv@3:32|. In strkjv@1John:5:9| the witness of God is greater than that of men and this Jesus has. {That ye may be saved} (\hina humeis s“thˆte\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \s“z“\. This was the purpose of Christ's coming, that the world might be saved (3:17|).

rwp@John:5:40 @{And ye will not come to me} (\kai ou thelete elthein pros me\). "And yet" (\kai\) as often in John. "This is the tragedy of the rejection of Messiah by the Messianic race" (Bernard). See strkjv@John:1:11; strkjv@Matthew:23:37| (\kai ouk ˆthelˆsate\, and ye would not). Men loved darkness rather than light (John:3:19|). {That ye may have life} (\hina z“ˆn echˆte\). Life in its simplest form as in strkjv@3:36| (cf. strkjv@3:16|). This is the purpose of John in writing the Fourth Gospel (20:31|). There is life only in Christ Jesus.

rwp@John:5:43 @{In my Father's name} (\en t“i onomati tou patros mou\). Seven times Jesus in John speaks of the "Name" of the Father (5:43; strkjv@10:25; strkjv@12:28; strkjv@17:6,11,12,26|). See strkjv@1:12| for use of \onoma\ (Luke:1:49|). {And ye receive me not} (\kai ou lambanete me\). "And yet ye do not receive me," as in verse 40|, "the Gospel of the Rejection" (1:11; strkjv@3:11,32; strkjv@12:37|) often applied to the Fourth Gospel. {If another come} (\ean allos elthˆi\). Condition of third class (\ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\). Note \allos\, not \heteros\, like \allon Iˆsoun\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:4|. Similar prophecies occur in strkjv@Mark:13:6,22| (Matthew:24:5,24|), all general in character like Antichrist in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:8-12|. There is no occasion for a reference to any individual like Barcochba (about A.D. 134) as Pfleiderer and Schmiedel hold. These Messianic upstarts all come "in their own name" and always find a following. {Him ye will receive} (\ekeinon lˆmpsesthe\). "That one," whoever he is, as Jesus said. Future active indicative of \lamban“\. Credulous about the false Messiahs, incredulous about Christ.

rwp@John:6:8 @{One of} (\heis ek\). Songs:in strkjv@12:4|; strkjv@13:23; strkjv@Mark:13:1| without \ek\. {Simon Peter's brother} (\ho adelphos Sim“nos Petrou\). Songs:described in strkjv@1:40|. The great distinction of Andrew was precisely this that he brought Simon to Christ. Philip and Andrew appear together again in strkjv@12:20-22|, but in the Synoptics he is distinguished only in strkjv@Mark:13:3|. In the Muratorian Fragment Andrew received the revelation for John to write the Fourth Gospel.

rwp@John:6:29 @{The work of God that ye believe} (\to ergon tou theou hina pisteuˆte\). In strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:3| Paul speaks of "your work of faith" (\hum“n tou ergou tˆs piste“s\). Songs:here Jesus terms belief in him as the work of God. These Jews were thinking of various deeds of the Pharisaic type and rules. Jesus turns their minds to the central fact. "This simple formula contains the complete solution of the relation of faith and works" (Westcott). Note the present active subjunctive \pisteuˆte\, "that ye may keep on believing." {On him whom he hath sent} (\eis hon apesteilen ekeinos\). The pronominal antecedent (\eis touton hon\) is omitted and the preposition \eis\ is retained with the relative \hon\ really the direct object of \apesteilen\ (sent). Note \ekeinos\ for God (emphatic he).

rwp@John:6:30 @{For a sign} (\sˆmeion\). Predicate accusative, as a sign, with \ti\ (what). As if the sign of the day before was without value. Jesus had said that they did not understand his signs (verse 26|). {That we may see, and believe thee} (\hina id“men kai pisteus“men\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of \hora“\ and the first aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of \pisteu“\, "that we may come to see and come to have faith in thee." It is hard to have patience with this superficial and almost sneering mob. {What workest thou?} (\Ti ergazˆi;\). They not simply depreciate the miracle of the day before, but set up a standard for Jesus.

rwp@John:6:56 @{Abideth in me and I in him} (\en emoi menei kag“ en aut“i\). Added to the phrase in 54| in the place of \echei z“ˆn ai“nion\ (has eternal life). The verb \men“\ (to abide) expresses continual mystical fellowship between Christ and the believer as in strkjv@15:4-7; strkjv@1John:2:6,27,28; strkjv@3:6,24; strkjv@4:12,16|. There is, of course, no reference to the Lord's Supper (Eucharist), but simply to mystical fellowship with Christ.

rwp@John:6:71 @{Of Simon Iscariot} (\Sim“nos Iskari“tou\). Songs:his father was named Iscariot also, a man of Kerioth (possibly in Judah, strkjv@Joshua:15:25|, possibly in Moab, strkjv@Jeremiah:48:24|), not in Galilee. Judas was the only one of the twelve not a Galilean. The rest of the verse is like strkjv@12:4|. {One of the twelve} (\heis ek t“n d“deka\). The eternal horror of the thing.

rwp@John:7:1 @{After these things} (\meta tauta\). John's favourite general note of the order of events. Bernard conceives that the events in strkjv@7:1-14| follow strkjv@7:15-24| and both follow chapter 5, not chapter 6, a wholly needless readjustment of the narrative to suit a preconceived theory. John simply supplements the narrative in the Synoptics at points deemed important. He now skips the period of withdrawal from Galilee of about six months (from passover to tabernacles). {Walked} (\periepatei\). Imperfect active, a literal picture of the itinerant ministry of Jesus. He has returned to Galilee from the region of Caesarea Philippi. He had been avoiding Galilee as well as Judea for six months. {For he would not walk in Judea} (\ou gar ˆthelen en tˆi Ioudaiƒi\). Imperfect active of \thel“\ picturing the attitude of refusal to work in Judea after the events in chapter 5 (perhaps a year and a half before). {Sought to kill} (\ezˆtoun apokteinai\). Imperfect active again, progressive attitude, had been seeking to kill him as shown in strkjv@5:18| where the same words occur.

rwp@John:7:8 @{Go ye up to the feast} (\humeis anabˆte eis tˆn heortˆn\). The emphatic word by position is \humeis\ (ye) in contrast with \eg“\ (I). Second aorist active imperative of \anabain“\, old and common verb for going up to the feast (2:13|) or anywhere. Take your own advice (7:3|). {I go not up yet} (\eg“ oup“ anabain“\). Songs:Westcott and Hort after B W L (Neutral) while \ou\ (not) is read by Aleph D, African Latin, Vulgate, Coptic (Western). Some of the early Greek Fathers were puzzled over the reading \ouk\ (I go not up) as contradictory to verse 10| wherein it is stated that Jesus did go up. Almost certainly \ouk\ (not) is correct and is not really contradictory when one notes in verse 10| that the manner of Christ's going up is precisely the opposite of the advice of the brothers in verses 3,4|. "Not yet" (\oup“\) is genuine before "fulfilled" (\peplˆr“tai\, perfect passive indicative of \plˆro“\). One may think, if he will, that Jesus changed his plans after these words, but that is unnecessary. He simply refused to fall in with his brothers' sneering proposal for a grand Messianic procession with the caravan on the way to the feast. He will do that on the journey to the last passover.

rwp@John:7:44 @{Would have taken him} (\ˆthelon piƒsai auton\). Imperfect active of \thel“\ and first aorist active infinitive of \piaz“\, "were wishing to seize him." See verse 30| for a like impulse and restraint, there \epebalen ep' auton\, here \ebalen ep' auton\ (simple verb, not compound).

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:9:13 @{They bring him} (\agousin auton\). Vivid dramatic present active of \ag“\. These neighbours bring him. {To the Pharisees} (\pros tous Pharisaious\). The accepted professional teachers who posed as knowing everything. The scribes were usually Pharisees. {Him that aforetime was blind} (\ton pote tuphlon\). Simply, "the once blind man."

rwp@John:10:2 @{The shepherd of the sheep} (\poimˆn estin t“n probat“n\). No article with \poimˆn\, "a shepherd to the sheep." He comes in by the door with the sheep whom he leads. Old word is \poimˆn\, root meaning to protect. Jesus applies it to himself in verse 16| and implies it here. It is used of Christ in strkjv@1Peter:2:25; strkjv@Hebrews:13:20|. Paul applies it to ministers in strkjv@Ephesians:4:11|. Jesus uses the verb \poimain“\, to shepherd, to Peter (John:21:16|) and Peter uses it to other preachers (1Peter:5:2|) and Paul uses it for bishops (elders) in strkjv@Acts:20:28|. Our word pastor is simply Latin for shepherd. Christ is drawing a sharp contrast after the conduct of the Pharisees towards the blind man between himself and them.

rwp@John:10:35 @{If he called them gods} (\ei ekeinous eipen theous\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. The conclusion (verse 36|) is \humeis legete\; ({Do ye say?}). As Jews (and rabbis) they are shut out from charging Jesus with blasphemy because of this usage in the O.T. It is a complete _ad hominem_ argument. To be sure, it is in strkjv@Psalms:82:6| a lower use of the term \theos\, but Jesus did not call himself "Son of Jahweh," but "\huios theou\" which can mean only "Son of _Elohim_." It must not be argued, as some modern men do, that Jesus thus disclaims his own deity. He does nothing of the kind. He is simply stopping the mouths of the rabbis from the charge of blasphemy and he does it effectually. The sentence is quite involved, but can be cleared up. {To whom the word of God came} (\pros hous ho logos tou theou egeneto\). The relative points to \ekeinous\, before. These judges had no other claim to the term \theoi\ (_elohim_). {And the scripture cannot be broken} (\kai ou dunatai luthˆnai hˆ graphˆ\). A parenthesis that drives home the pertinency of the appeal, one that the Pharisees had to accept. \Luthˆnai\ is first aorist passive infinitive of \lu“\, to loosen, to break.

rwp@John:11:2 @{And it was that Mary which anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet with her hair} (\ˆn de Mariam hˆ aleipsasa ton kurion mur“i kai ekmaxasa tous podas autou tais thrixin autˆs\). This description is added to make plainer who Mary is "whose brother Lazarus was sick" (\hˆs ho adelphos Lazaros ˆsthenei\). There is an evident proleptic allusion to the incident described by John in strkjv@12:1-8| just after chapter 11. As John looks back from the end of the century it was all behind him, though the anointing (\hˆ aleipsasa\, first aorist active articular participle of \aleiph“\, old verb for which see strkjv@Mark:6:13|) took place after the events in chapter 11. The aorist participle is timeless and merely pictures the punctiliar act. The same remark applies to \ekmaxasa\, old verb \ekmass“\, to wipe off or away (Isaiah:12:3; strkjv@13:5; strkjv@Luke:7:38,44|). Note the Aramaic form \Mariam\ as usual in John, but \Marias\ in verse 1|. When John wrote, it was as Jesus had foretold (Matthew:26:13|), for the fame of Mary of Bethany rested on the incident of the anointing of Jesus. The effort to link Mary of Bethany with Mary Magdalene and then both names with the sinful woman of strkjv@Luke:7:36-50| is gratuitous and to my mind grotesque and cruel to the memory of both Mary of Bethany and Mary Magdalene. Bernard may be taken as a specimen: "The conclusion is inevitable that John (or his editor) regarded Mary of Bethany as the same person who is described by Luke as \hamart“los\." This critical and artistic heresy has already been discussed in Vol. II on Luke's Gospel. Suffice it here to say that Luke introduces Mary Magdalene as an entirely new character in strkjv@8:2| and that the details in strkjv@Luke:7:36-50; strkjv@John:12:1-8| have only superficial resemblances and serious disagreements. John is not here alluding to Luke's record, but preparing for his own in chapter 12. What earthly difficulty is there in two different women under wholly different circumstances doing a similar act for utterly different purposes?

rwp@John:11:16 @{Didymus} (\Didumos\). The word means twin. Clearly Thomas had a twin brother or sister. Applied two other times to him (20:24; strkjv@21:2|). The Aramaic word for Thomas means Twin and Didymus is just the Greek equivalent of Thomas. He may even in Greek circles have been called Didymus. {His fellow disciples} (\tois sunmathˆtais\). Dative case and article use like "his." Only use of \sunmathˆtes\ in the N.T., rare word (in Plato). {Us also} (\kai hˆmeis\). As well as Jesus, since he is bent on going. {That we may die with him} (\hina apothan“men met' autou\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \apothnˆsk“\. Die with Jesus, Thomas means. Lazarus is already dead and they will kill Jesus (verse 8|). Pessimistic courage surely.

rwp@John:11:34 @{Where have ye laid him?} (\Pou tetheikate auton;\). Perfect active indicative of \tithˆmi\. A simple question for information. The only other like it in John is in strkjv@6:6| where it is expressly stated that Jesus knew what he was going to do. Songs:it was here, only he politely asked for direction to the tomb of Lazarus. The people invite him to come and see, the very language used by Philip to Nathanael (1:46|). It was a natural and polite reply as they would show Jesus the way, but they had no idea of his purpose.

rwp@John:11:39 @{Take ye away the stone} (\arate ton lithon\). First aorist active imperative of \air“\. They could do this much without the exercise of Christ's divine power. It was a startling command to them. {By this time he stinketh} (\ˆdˆ ozei\). Present active indicative of old verb, here only in N.T. (cf. strkjv@Exodus:8:14|). It means to give out an odour, either good or bad. {For he hath been dead four days} (\tetartaios gar estin\). The Greek simply says, "For he is a fourth-day man." It is an old ordinal numeral from \tetartos\ (fourth). Herodotus (ii. 89) has \tetartaios genesthai\ of one four days dead as here. The word is only here in the N.T. The same idiom occurs in strkjv@Acts:28:13| with \deuteraioi\ (second-day men). Lightfoot (_Hor. Hebr._) quotes a Jewish tradition (_Beresh. Rabba_) to the effect that the soul hovers around the tomb for three days hoping to return to the body, but on the fourth day leaves it. But there is no suggestion here that Martha held that notion. Her protest is a natural one in spite of her strong faith in verses 22-27|.

rwp@John:11:43 @{He cried with a loud voice} (\ph“nˆi megalˆi ekraugasen\). First aorist active indicative of \kraugaz“\, old and rare word from \kraugˆ\ (Matthew:25:6|). See strkjv@Matthew:12:19|. Occurs again in strkjv@John:18:40; strkjv@19:6,12|. Only once in the LXX (Ezra:3:13|) and with \ph“nˆi megalˆi\ (either locative or instrumental case makes sense) as here. For this "elevated (great) voice" see also strkjv@Matthew:24:31; strkjv@Mark:15:34,37; strkjv@Revelation:1:10; strkjv@21:3|. The loud voice was not for the benefit of Lazarus, but for the sake of the crowd standing around that they might see that Lazarus came forth simultaneously with the command of Jesus. {Lazarus, come forth} (\Lazare, deuro ex“\). "Hither out." No verb, only the two adverbs, \deuro\ here alone in John. Lazarus heard and obeyed the summons.

rwp@John:11:50 @{That it is expedient for you} (\hoti sumpherei humin\). Indirect discourse with present active indicative of \sumpher“\ used with the \hina\ clause as subject. It means to bear together, to be profitable, with the dative case as here (\humin\, for you). It is to your interest and that is what they cared most for. {That one man die} (\hina heis anthr“pos apothanˆi\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist active subjunctive of \apothnˆsk“\ as subject clause with \sumpherei\. See strkjv@16:7; strkjv@18:7| for the same construction. {For the people} (\huper tou laou\). \Huper\ simply means _over_, but can be in behalf of as often, and in proper context the resultant idea is "instead of" as the succeeding clause shows and as is clearly so in strkjv@Galatians:3:13| of the death of Christ and naturally so in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14f.; strkjv@Romans:5:6|. In the papyri \huper\ is the usual preposition used of one who writes a letter for one unable to write. {And that the whole nation perish not} (\kai mˆ holon to ethnos apolˆtai\). Continuation of the \hina\ construction with \mˆ\ and the second aorist subjunctive of \apollumi\. What Caiaphas has in mind is the giving of Jesus to death to keep the nation from perishing at the hands of the Romans. Politicians are often willing to make a sacrifice of the other fellow.

rwp@John:11:55 @{Was near} (\ˆn eggus\). See strkjv@2:13| for the same phrase. This last passover was the time of destiny for Jesus. {Before the passover to purify themselves} (\pro tou pascha hina hagnis“sin heautous\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \hagniz“\, old verb from \hagnos\ (pure), ceremonial purification here, of course. All this took time. These came "from the country" (\ek tˆs ch“ras\), from all over Palestine, from all parts of the world, in fact. John shifts the scene to Jerusalem just before the passover with no record of the way that Jesus came to Jerusalem from Ephraim. The Synoptic Gospels tell this last journey up through Samaria into Galilee to join the great caravan that crossed over into Perea and came down on the eastern side of the Jordan opposite Jericho and then marched up the mountain road to Bethany and Bethphage just beside Jerusalem. This story is found in strkjv@Luke:17:11-19:28; strkjv@Mark:10:1-52; strkjv@Matthew:19:1-20:34|. John simply assumes the Synoptic narrative and gives the picture of things in and around Jerusalem just before the passover (11:56,57|).

rwp@John:12:2 @{Songs:they made him a supper there} (\epoiˆsan oun aut“i deipnon ekei\). Here again \oun\ is not inferential, but merely transitional. This supper is given by Mark (Mark:14:3-9|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6-13|) just two days (Mark:14:1|) before the passover, that is on our Tuesday evening (beginning of Jewish Wednesday), while John mentions (12:2-9|) it immediately after the arrival of Jesus in Bethany (12:1|). One must decide which date to follow. Mark and Matthew and Luke follow it with the visit of Judas to the Sanhedrin with an offer to betray Jesus as if exasperated by the rebuke by Jesus at the feast. Bernard considers that John "is here more probably accurate." It all turns on John's purpose in putting it here. This is the last mention of Jesus in Bethany and he may have mentioned it proleptically for that reason as seems to me quite reasonable. Westcott notes that in chapter 12 John closes his record of the public ministry of the Lord relative to the disciples at this feast (1-11|), to the multitude in the triumphal entry (12-19|), to the world outside in the visit of the Greeks (20-36a|), and with two summary judgements (36b-50|). There is no further reason to refer to the feast in the house of another Simon when a sinful woman anointed Jesus (Luke:7:36-50|). It is no credit to Luke or to John with Mark and Matthew to have them all making a jumble like that. There were two anointings by two absolutely different women for wholly different purposes. See the discussion on Luke for further details. {And Martha served} (\kai hˆ Martha diˆkonei\). Imperfect active of \diakone“\, picturing Martha true to the account of her in strkjv@Luke:10:40| (\pollˆn diakonian\, \diakonein\ as here). But this fact does not show that Martha was the wife of this Simon at all. They were friends and neighbours and Martha was following her bent. It is Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6|) who mention the name of the host. It is not Simon the Pharisee (Luke:7:36|), but Simon the leper (Mark:14:3; strkjv@Matthew:26:6|) in whose house they meet. The name is common enough. The Simon in Luke was sharply critical of Jesus; this one is full of gratitude for what Jesus has done for him. {That sat at meat} (\t“n anakeimen“n\). "That lay back," reclined as they did, articular participle (ablative case after \ek\) of the common verb \anakeimai\. Perhaps Simon gave the feast partly in honour of Lazarus as well as of Jesus since all were now talking of both (John:12:9|). It was a gracious occasion. The guests were Jesus, the twelve apostles, and Martha, Mary, and Lazarus.

rwp@John:12:4 @{Judas Iscariot} (\Ioudas ho Iskari“tˆs\). See \ho Iskari“tˆs\ in strkjv@14:22|. See strkjv@6:71; strkjv@13:1| for like description of Judas save that in strkjv@6:71| the father's name is given in the genitive, \Sim“nos\ and \Iskari“tou\ (agreeing with the father), but in strkjv@13:1| \Iskari“tˆs\ agrees with \Ioudas\, not with \Sim“nos\. Clearly then both father and son were called "Iscariot" or man of Kerioth in the tribe of Judah (Joshua:15:25|). Judas is the only one of the twelve not a Galilean. {One of his disciples} (\heis t“n mathˆt“n autou\). Likewise in strkjv@6:71|, only there \ek\ is used after \heis\ as some MSS. have here. This is the shameful fact that clung to the name of Judas. {Which should betray him} (\ho mell“n auton paradidonai\). John does not say in strkjv@6:71| (\emellen paradidonai auton\) or here that Judas "was predestined to betray Jesus" as Bernard suggests. He had his own responsibility for his guilt as Jesus said (Matthew:26:24|). \Mell“\ here simply points to the act as future, not as necessary. Note the contrast between Mary and Judas. "Mary in her devotion unconsciously provides for the honour of the dead. Judas in his selfishness unconsciously brings about the death itself" (Westcott).

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:12:13 @{Took} (\elabon\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\. {The branches of the palm-trees} (\ta baia t“n phoinik“n\). \Phoinix\ is an old word for palm-tree (Revelation:7:9| for the branches) and in strkjv@Acts:27:12| the name of a city. \Baion\ is apparently a word of Egyptian origin, palm branches, here only in N.T., but in the papyri and I Macc. strkjv@13:51. Here we have "the palm branches of the palm-trees." The use in 1 Macc. strkjv@13:51 (cf. II Macc. strkjv@10:7) is in the account of Simon's triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Bernard notes that to carry palms was a mark of triumphant homage to a victor or a king (Revelation:7:9|). Palm-trees grew on the Mount of Olives (Mark:11:8|) on the road from Bethany to Jerusalem. The crowds (one in front and one behind, strkjv@Mark:11:9; strkjv@Matthew:21:9; strkjv@John:2:18|) cut the branches as they came (Matthew:21:8|). {To meet him} (\eis hupantˆsin aut“i\). Literally, {for a meeting} (\hupantˆsis\, late word from the verb \hupanta“\, strkjv@Matthew:8:28; strkjv@John:11:20,30; strkjv@12:18|, in the papyri, but only here in the N.T.) with him" (\aut“i\, associative instrumental case after \hupantˆsin\ as after the verb in verse 18|). It was a scene of growing excitement. {And cried out} (\kai ekraugazon\). Imperfect active of \kraugaz“\, old and rare verb (from \kraugˆ\) as in strkjv@Matthew:12:19; strkjv@John:19:15|. {Hosannah} (\H“sannah\). Transliteration of the Hebrew word meaning "Save now." The LXX renders it by \S“son dˆ\ (Save now). {Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord} (\eulogˆmenos ho erchomenos en onomati kuriou\). Perfect passive participle of \euloge“\. Quotation from strkjv@Psalms:118:25f.|, written, some think, for the dedication of the second temple, or, as others think, for the feast of tabernacles after the return (Ezra:3:1f.|). It was sung in the processional recitation then as a welcome to the worshippers. Here the words are addressed to the Messiah as is made plain by the addition of the words, "even the king of Israel" (\kai ho basileus tou Israˆl\) as Nathanael called him (1:49|). Jesus is here hailed by the multitudes as the long-looked for Messiah of Jewish hope and he allows them so to greet him (Luke:19:38-40|), a thing that he prevented a year before in Galilee (John:6:14f.|). It is probable that "in the name of the Lord" should be taken with "blessed" as in strkjv@Deuteronomy:21:5; strkjv@2Samuel:6:18; strkjv@1Kings:22:16; strkjv@2Kings:2:24|. The Messiah was recognized by Martha as the Coming One (John:11:27|) and is so described by the Baptist (Matthew:11:3|). Mark (Mark:11:10|) adds "the kingdom that cometh" while Luke (19:38|) has "the king that cometh." "It was this public acclamation of Jesus as King of Israel or King of the Jews which was the foundation of the charge made against him before Pilate (18:33|)" (Bernard).

rwp@John:12:16 @{Understood not} (\ouk egn“san\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. Another comment by John concerning the failure of the disciples to know what was happening (cf. strkjv@2:22; strkjv@7:39|). {At the first} (\to pr“ton\). Adverbial accusative, as in strkjv@10:40; strkjv@19:39|. {Was glorified} (\edoxasthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \doxaz“\, to glorify, used of his death already in strkjv@7:39| and by Jesus himself of his death, resurrection, and ascension in strkjv@12:23; strkjv@13:31|. {Then remembered they} (\tote emnˆsthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \mimnˆsk“\. It was easier to understand then and they had the Holy Spirit to help them (16:13-15|). {Were written of him} (\ˆn ep' aut“i gegrammena\). Periphrastic past perfect passive of \graph“\ with neuter plural participle agreeing with \tauta\ (these things) and singular verb, though the plural \ˆsan\ could have been used. Note the threefold repetition of \tauta\ in this verse, "clumsy" Bernard calls it, but making for clarity. The use of \ep' aut“i\ for "of him" rather than \peri autou\ is unusual, but occurs in strkjv@Revelation:10:11; strkjv@22:16|. {They had done} (\epoiˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \poie“\, simply, "they did."

rwp@John:12:32 @{And I, if I be lifted from the earth} (\kag“ an hups“th“ ek tˆs gˆs\). Note proleptic position of \eg“\ (I). Condition of third class (undetermined with prospect) with \an\ (=\ean\ here) with first aorist passive subjunctive of \hupso“\, the verb used in strkjv@3:14| of the brazen serpent and of the Cross of Christ as here and also in strkjv@8:28|. Westcott again presses \ek\ instead of \apo\ to make it refer to the ascension rather than to the Cross, a wrong interpretation surely. {Will draw all men unto myself} (\pantas helkus“ pros emauton\). Future active of \helku“\, late form of \helk“\, to draw, to attract. Jesus had already used this verb of the Father's drawing power (6:44|). The magnetism of the Cross is now known of all men, however little they understand the mystery of the Cross. By "all men" (\pantas\) Jesus does not mean every individual man, for some, as Simeon said (Luke:2:34|) are repelled by Christ, but this is the way that Greeks (verse 22|) can and will come to Christ, by the way of the Cross, the only way to the Father (14:6|).

rwp@John:13:3 @{Knowing} (\eid“s\). Repeated from verse 1|, accenting the full consciousness of Jesus. {Had given} (\ed“ken\). Songs:Aleph B L W, aorist active instead of \ded“ken\ (perfect active) of \did“mi\. Cf. strkjv@3:31| for a similar statement with \en\ instead of \eis\. See strkjv@Matthew:11:27| (Luke:10:22|) and strkjv@28:18| for like claim by Jesus to complete power. {And that he came forth from God, and goeth unto God} (\kai hoti apo theou exˆlthen kai pros ton theon hupagei\). See plain statement by Jesus on this point in strkjv@16:28|. The use of \pros ton theon\ recalls the same words in strkjv@1:1|. Jesus is fully conscious of his deity and Messianic dignity when he performs this humble act.

rwp@John:13:7 @{I... thou} (\eg“... su\). Jesus repeats the pronouns used by Peter in similar contrast. {Not now} (\ouk arti\). Just now \arti\ means (9:19,25|). Used again by Jesus (verse 33|) and Peter (verse 37|). {But thou shalt understand hereafter} (\gn“sˆi de meta tauta\). Future middle of \gin“sk“\ (instead of the verb \oida\) to know by experience. "Thou shalt learn after these things," even if slowly.

rwp@John:13:8 @{Thou shalt never wash my feet} (\ou mˆ nipsˆis mou tous podas eis ton ai“na\). Strong double negative \ou mˆ\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \nipt“\ with \eis ton ai“na\ (for ever) added and \mou\ (my) made emphatic by position. Peter's sudden humility should settle the issue, he felt. {If I wash thee not} (\ean mˆ nips“ se\). Third-class condition with \ean mˆ\ (negative). Jesus picks up the challenge of Peter whose act amounted to irreverence and want of confidence. "The first condition of discipleship is self-surrender" (Westcott). Songs:"Jesus, waiting with the basin" (Dods), concludes. {Thou hast no part with me} (\ouk echeis meros met' emou\). Not simply here at the supper with its fellowship, but in the deeper sense of mystic fellowship as Peter was quick to see. Jesus does not make foot-washing essential to spiritual fellowship, but simply tests Peter's real pride and mock-humility by this symbol of fellowship.

rwp@John:17:1 @{Lifting up} (\eparas\). First aorist active participle of \epair“\, old and common verb with \ophthalmous\ (eyes) as in strkjv@4:35; strkjv@6:5; strkjv@11:41|. {Father} (\Pater\). Vocative form as in verses 5,11; strkjv@11:41|, Christ's usual way of beginning his prayers. It is inconceivable that this real _Lord's Prayer_ is the free composition of a disciple put into the mouth of Jesus. It is rather "the tenacious memory of an old man recalling the greatest days of his life" (Bernard), aided by the Holy Spirit promised for this very purpose (John:14:26; strkjv@16:13f.|). Jesus had the habit of prayer (Mark:1:35; strkjv@6:46; strkjv@Matthew:11:25f.; strkjv@Luke:3:21; strkjv@5:16; strkjv@6:12; strkjv@9:18,28; strkjv@11:22,42; strkjv@23:34,46; strkjv@John:11:41; strkjv@12:27|). He prayed here for himself (1-5|), for the disciples (6-19|), for all believers (20-26|). The prayer is similar in spirit to the Model Prayer for us in strkjv@Matthew:6:9-13|. The hour for his glorification has come as he had already told the disciples (13:31f.; strkjv@12:23|). {Glorify thy Son} (\doxason sou ton huion\). First aorist active imperative of \doxaz“\, the only personal petition in this prayer. Jesus had already used this word \doxaz“\ for his death (13:31f.|). Here it carries us into the very depths of Christ's own consciousness. It is not merely for strength to meet the Cross, but for the power to glorify the Father by his death and resurrection and ascension, "that the Son may glorify thee" (\hina ho huios doxasˆi se\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive.

rwp@John:18:40 @{Cried out} (\ekraugasan\). First aorist active of \kraugaz“\, old and rare verb from \kraugˆ\, outcry (Matthew:25:6|), as in strkjv@Matthew:12:19|. {Not this man} (\mˆ touton\). Contemptuous use of \houtos\. The priests put the crowd up to this choice (Mark:15:11|) and Pilate offered the alternative (Matthew:27:17|, one MS. actually gives Jesus as the name of Barabbas also). The name \Barabbas\ in Aramaic simply means son of a father. {A robber} (\lˆistˆs\). Old word from \lˆizomai\, to plunder, and so a brigand and possibly the leader of the band to which the two robbers belonged who were crucified with Jesus. Luke terms him an insurgent and murderer (Luke:23:19,25|). They chose Barabbas in preference to Jesus and apparently Jesus died on the very cross planned for Barabbas.

rwp@John:19:1 @{Took and scourged} (\elaben kai emastig“sen\). First aorist active indicative of \lamban“\ and \mastigo“\ (from \mastix\, whip). For this redundant use of \lamban“\ see also verse 6|. It is the causative use of \mastigo“\, for Pilate did not actually scourge Jesus. He simply ordered it done, perhaps to see if the mob would be satisfied with this penalty on the alleged pretender to royalty (Luke:23:22|) whom Pilate had pronounced innocent (John:18:38|), an illegal act therefore. It was a preliminary to crucifixion, but Jesus was not yet condemned. The Sanhedrin had previously mocked Jesus (Mark:14:65; strkjv@Matthew:26:67f.; strkjv@Luke:22:63ff.|) as the soldiers will do later (Mark:15:16-19; strkjv@Matthew:27:27-30|). This later mock coronation (Mark and Matthew) was after the condemnation. {Plaited a crown of thorns} (\plexantes stephanon ex akanth“n\). Old verb \plek“\, to weave, in the N.T. only here, strkjv@Mark:15:17; strkjv@Matthew:27:19|. Not impossible for the mock coronation to be repeated. {Arrayed him} (\periebalon auton\). "Placed around him" (second aorist active indicative of \periball“\). {In a purple garment} (\himation porphuroun\). Old adjective \porphureos\ from \porphura\, purple cloth (Mark:15:17,20|), dyed in purple, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:18:16|. Jesus had been stripped of his outer garment \himation\ (Matthew:27:28|) and the scarlet cloak of one of the soldiers may have been put on him (Matthew:27:28|).

rwp@John:19:12 @{Sought} (\ezˆtei\). Imperfect active, "kept on seeking," "made renewed efforts to release him." He was afraid to act boldly against the will of the Jews. {If thou release this man} (\ean touton apolusˆis\). Condition of third class, a direct threat to Pilate. He knew all the time that the Sanhedrin might tell Caesar on him. {Thou art not Caesar's friend} (\ouk ei philos tou kaisaros\). Later to Vespasian this was an official title, here simply a daring threat to Pilate. {Speaketh against Caesar} (\antilegei t“i kaisari\). Caesar brooks no rival. Jesus had allowed himself to be acclaimed king of Israel in the Triumphal Entry (John:12:13; strkjv@Mark:11:10; strkjv@Luke:19:38|). The Sanhedrin have caught Pilate in their toils.

rwp@John:19:17 @{Bearing the cross for himself} (\bastaz“n haut“i ton stauron\). Cf. strkjv@Luke:14:27| for this very picture in the words of Jesus. The dative case of the reflexive pronoun \haut“i\ "for himself" is in strict accord with Roman custom. "A criminal condemned to be crucified was required to carry his own cross" (Bernard). But apparently Jesus under the strain of the night before and the anguish of heart within him gave out so that Simon of Cyrene was impressed to carry it for Jesus (Mark:15:21f.; strkjv@Matthew:27:32f.; strkjv@Luke:23:26|). See strkjv@Mark:15:22f.; strkjv@Matthew:27:33f.; strkjv@Luke:23:33| for the meaning of "place of a skull" or Calvary and Golgotha in Hebrew (Aramaic). Luke has simply \Kranion\ (Skull), a skull-looking place.

rwp@John:19:19 @{Pilate wrote a title also} (\egrapsen kai titlon ho Peilatos\). Only John tells us that Pilate himself wrote it and John alone uses the technical Latin word _titlon_ (several times in inscriptions), for the board with the name of the criminal and the crime in which he is condemned; Mark (Mark:15:26|) and Luke (Luke:23:28|) use \epigraphˆ\ (superscription). Matthew (Matthew:27:37|) has simply \aitian\ (accusation). The inscription in John is the fullest of the four and has all in any of them save the words "this is" (\houtos estin\) in strkjv@Matthew:27:37|.

rwp@John:20:2 @{Runneth} (\trechei\). Vivid dramatic present indicative of \trech“\. John deals only with Mary Magdalene. She left the tomb at once before the rest and without seeing the angels as told in the Synoptics (Mark:16:2-8; strkjv@Matthew:28:5-8; strkjv@Luke:24:1-8|). Luke (Luke:24:9-12|) does not distinguish between the separate report of Mary Magdalene and that of the other women. {To Simon Peter} (\pros Sim“na Petron\). Full name as usual in John and back with John and the other disciples. The association of Peter and the other disciple in strkjv@John:18-21| is like that between Peter and John in strkjv@Acts:1-5|. {Loved} (\ephilei\). Imperfect of \phile“\ for which see strkjv@5:20; strkjv@11:3| and for distinction from \agapa“\ see strkjv@11:5; strkjv@13:23; strkjv@21:7,15,17|. {They have taken away} (\ˆran\). First aorist active indicative of \air“\, indefinite plural. {We know not} (\ouk oidamen\). Mary associates the other women with her in her ignorance. For \ethˆkan\ (have laid) see strkjv@19:42|. Mary fears a grave robbery. She has no idea of the resurrection of Jesus.

rwp@John:20:16 @{Mary} (\Mariam\). Aramaic form in Aleph B W, though \Maria\ in strkjv@19:25|. Clearly the old familiar tone of Jesus was in the pronunciation of her name. {Rabboni} (\Rabbounei\). Aramaic again for \Didaskale\ (Teacher), "my Teacher." In N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:10:51| though practically the same as \Rabbi\. See strkjv@11:28| for "the Teacher" (Rabbi). These two simple words tell the great fact that Christ is risen and Mary has seen him. One says little in really great moments.

rwp@John:20:23 @{Whosesoever sins ye forgive} (\an tin“n aphˆte tas hamartias\). "If the sins of any ye forgive" (\aphˆte\, second aorist active subjunctive with \an\ in the sense of \ean\), a condition of the third class. Precisely so with "retain" (\kratˆte\, present active subjunctive of \krate“\). {They are forgiven} (\aphe“ntai\). Perfect passive indicative of \aphiˆmi\, Doric perfect for \apheintai\. {Are retained} (\kekratˆntai\). Perfect passive indicative of \krate“\. The power to forgive sin belongs only to God, but Jesus claimed to have this power and right (Mark:2:5-7|). What he commits to the disciples and to us is the power and privilege of giving assurance of the forgiveness of sins by God by correctly announcing the terms of forgiveness. There is no proof that he actually transferred to the apostles or their successors the power in and of themselves to forgive sins. In strkjv@Matthew:16:19; strkjv@18:18| we have a similar use of the rabbinical metaphor of binding and loosing by proclaiming and teaching. Jesus put into the hands of Peter and of all believers the keys of the Kingdom which we should use to open the door for those who wish to enter. This glorious promise applies to all believers who will tell the story of Christ's love for men.

rwp@John:20:24 @{Didymus} (\Didumos\). The same expression applied to Thomas in strkjv@11:16; strkjv@21:2|, but nowhere else in N.T. Old word for twin (double), "the pessimist of the apostolic band" (Bernard). The term twelve is still applied to the group, though Judas, the traitor, is dead.

rwp@John:21:2 @{There were together} (\ˆsan homou\). These seven (Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, the sons of Zebedee, and two others). We know that the sons of Zebedee were James and John (Matthew:4:21|), mentioned by name nowhere in John's Gospel, apparently because John is the author. We do not know who the "two others of his disciples" were, possibly Andrew and Philip. It seems to me to be crass criticism in spite of Harnack and Bernard to identify the incident here with that in strkjv@Luke:5:1-11|. There are a few points of similarity, but the differences are too great for such identification even with a hypothetical common source.

rwp@Jude:1:7 @{Even as} (\h“s\). Just "as." The third instance (Jude:passes by the deluge) in Jude, the cities of the plain. {The cities about them} (\hai peri autas poleis\). These were also included, Admah and Zeboiim (Deuteronomy:29:23; strkjv@Hosea:11:8|). Zoar, the other city, was spared. {In like manner} (\ton homoion tropon\). Adverbial accusative (cf. \h“s\). Like the fallen angels. {Having given themselves over to fornication} (\ekporneusasai\). First aorist active participle feminine plural of \ekporneu“\, late and rare compound (perfective use of \ek\, outside the moral law), only here in N.T., but in LXX (Genesis:38:24; strkjv@Exodus:34:15f.|, etc.). Cf. \aselgeian\ in verse 4|. {Strange flesh} (\sarkos heteras\). Horrible licentiousness, not simply with women not their wives or in other nations, but even unnatural uses (Romans:1:27|) for which the very word "sodomy" is used (Genesis:19:4-11|). The pronoun \heteras\ (other, strange) is not in strkjv@2Peter:2:10|. {Are set forth} (\prokeintai\). Present middle indicative of \prokeimai\, old verb, to lie before, as in strkjv@Hebrews:12:1f|. {As an example} (\deigma\). Predicate nominative of \deigma\, old word (from \deiknumi\ to show), here only in N.T., sample, specimen. strkjv@2Peter:2:6| has \hupodeigma\ (pattern). {Suffering} (\hupechousai\). Present active participle of \hupech“\, old compound, to hold under, often with \dikˆn\ (right, justice, sentence strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:9|) to suffer sentence (punishment), here only in N.T. {Of eternal fire} (\puros ai“niou\). Like \desmois aidiois\ in verse 7|. Cf. the hell of fire (Matthew:5:22|) and also strkjv@Matthew:25:46|. Jude:has no mention of Lot.

rwp@Jude:1:16 @{Murmurers} (\goggustai\). Late onomatopoetic word for agent, from \gogguz“\ (Matthew:20:11; strkjv@1Corinthians:10:10|) in the LXX (Exodus:16:8; strkjv@Numbers:11:1,14-29|). {Complainers} (\mempsimoiroi\). Rare word (Isocrates, Aristotle, Plutarch) from \memphomai\ to complain and \moira\ lot or fate. Here alone in N.T. {Lusts} (\epithumias\). As in strkjv@2Peter:3:3|. {Swelling} (\huperogka\). Songs:in strkjv@2Peter:2:18| (big words). {Showing respect of persons} (\thaumazontes pros“pa\). Present active participle of \thaumaz“\ to admire, to wonder at. Nowhere else in N.T. with \pros“pa\, but a Hebraism (in strkjv@Leviticus:19:15; strkjv@Job:13:10|) like \lambanein pros“pon\ (Luke:20:21|) and \blepein pros“pon\ (Matthew:22:16|) and \prosop“lempte“\ (James:2:9|). Cf. strkjv@James:2:1|. {For the sake of advantage} (\“pheleias charin\). To themselves. See also verse 11|. The covetousness of these Gnostic leaders is plainly shown in strkjv@2Peter:2:3,14|. For \charin\ as preposition with genitive see strkjv@Ephesians:3:1,14|.

rwp@Jude:1:17 @{Remember ye} (\humeis mnˆsthˆte\). First aorist passive (deponent) imperative of \mimnˆsk“\ with genitive \rˆmat“n\ (words). In strkjv@2Peter:3:2| we have the indirect form (infinitive \mnˆsthˆnai\). The rest as in II Peter, but in simpler and more exact structure and with the absence of \t“n hagi“n prophˆt“n\ (the holy prophets).

rwp@Luke:1:62 @{Made signs} (\eneneuon\). Imperfect tense, repeated action as usual when making signs. In strkjv@1:22| the verb used of Zacharias is \dianeu“n\. {What he would have him called} (\to ti an theloi kaleisthai auto\). Note article \to\ with the indirect question, accusative of general reference. The optative with \an\ is here because it was used in the direct question (cf. strkjv@Acts:17:18|), and is simply retained in the indirect. {What would he wish him to be called?} ({if he could speak}), a conclusion of the fourth-class condition.

rwp@Luke:2:16 @{With haste} (\speusantes\). Aorist active participle of simultaneous action. {Found} (\aneuran\). Second aorist active indicative of a common Greek verb \aneurisk“\, but only in Luke in the N.T. The compound \ana\ suggests a search before finding.

rwp@Luke:2:25 @{Devout} (\eulabˆs\). Used only by Luke (Acts:2:5; strkjv@8:2; strkjv@22:12|) in the N.T. Common in ancient Greek from Plato on. It means taking hold well or carefully (\eu\ and \labein\) and so reverently, circumspectly. {Looking for the consolation of Israel} (\prosdechomenos paraklˆsin tou Israel\). Old Greek verb to admit to one's presence (Luke:15:2|) and then to expect as here and of Anna in verse 38|. {Paraklˆsin} here means the Messianic hope (Isaiah:11:10; strkjv@40:1|), calling to one's side for cheer. {Upon him} (\ep' auton\). This is the explanation of his lively Messianic hope. It was due to the Holy Spirit. Simeon and Anna are representatives of real piety in this time of spiritual dearth and deadness.

rwp@Luke:2:29 @{Now lettest thou} (\nun apolueis\). Present active indicative, {Thou art letting}. The _Nunc Dimittis_, adoration and praise. It is full of rapture and vivid intensity (Plummer) like the best of the Psalms. The verb \apolu“\ was common for the manumission of slaves and Simeon here calls himself "thy slave (\doulon sou\), Lord (\Despota\, our despot)." See strkjv@2Peter:2:1|.

rwp@Luke:2:31 @{Of all the peoples} (\pant“n t“n la“n\). Not merely Jews. Another illustration of the universality of Luke's Gospel seen already in strkjv@1:70| in the hymn of Zacharias. The second strophe of the song according to Plummer showing what the Messiah will be to the world after having shown what the Messiah is to Simeon.

rwp@Luke:2:33 @{His father and his mother} (\ho patˆr autou kai hˆ mˆtˆr\). Luke had already used "parents" in strkjv@2:27|. He by no means intends to deny the Virgin Birth of Jesus so plainly stated in strkjv@1:34-38|. He merely employs here the language of ordinary custom. The late MSS. wrongly read "and Joseph" instead of "his father." {Were marvelling} (\ˆn thaumazontes\). The masculine gender includes the feminine when both are referred to. But \ˆn\ is singular, not \ˆsan\, the normal imperfect plural in this periphrastic imperfect. This is due to the wide space between copula and participle. The copula \ˆn\ agrees in number with \ho patˆr\ while the participle coming last agrees with both \ho pater kai hˆ mˆtˆr\ (cf. strkjv@Matthew:17:3; strkjv@22:40|). If one wonders why they marvelled at Simeon's words after what they had heard from Gabriel, Elisabeth, and the Shepherds, he should bear in mind that every parent is astonished and pleased at the fine things others see in the child. It is a mark of unusual insight for others to see so much that is obvious to the parent. Simeon's prophecy had gone beyond the angel's outline and it was surprising that he should know anything about the child's destiny.

rwp@Luke:2:35 @{A sword} (\rhomphaia\). A large sword, properly a long Thracian javelin. It occurs in the LXX of Goliath's sword (1Samuel:17:51|). How little Mary understood the meaning of Simeon's words that seemed so out of place in the midst of the glorious things already spoken, a sharp thorn in their roses, a veritable bitter-sweet. But one day Mary will stand by the Cross of Christ with this Thracian javelin clean through her soul, \stabat Mater Dolorosa\ (John:19:25|). It is only a parenthesis here, and a passing cloud perhaps passed over Mary's heart already puzzled with rapture and ecstasy. {May be revealed} (\apokaluphth“sin\). Unveiled. First aorist passive subjunctive after \hop“s an\ and expresses God's purpose in the mission of the Messiah. He is to test men's thoughts (\dialogismoi\) and purposes. They will be compelled to take a stand for Christ or against him. That is true today.

rwp@Luke:2:37 @{Which departed not} (\hˆ ouk aphistato\). Imperfect indicative middle. She kept on not leaving. The Spirit kept her in the temple as he led Simon to the temple (Plummer). The case of "the temple" (\tou hierou\) is ablative. {Night and day} (\nukta kai hˆmeran\). Accusative of duration of time, all night and all day. She never missed a service in the temple.

rwp@Luke:2:38 @{Coming up} (\epistƒsa\). Second aorist active participle. The word often has the notion of coming suddenly or bursting in as of Martha in strkjv@Luke:10:40|. But here it probably means coming up and standing by and so hearing Simeon's wonderful words so that her words form a kind of footnote to his. {Gave thanks} (\anth“mologeito\). Imperfect middle of a verb (\anthomologe“\) in common use in Greek writers and in the LXX though here alone in the N.T. It had the idea of a mutual agreement or of saying something before one (\anti\). Anna was evidently deeply moved and repeated her thanksgiving and kept speaking (\elalei\, imperfect again) "to all them that were looking for (\prosdechomenois\, as in strkjv@1:35| of Simeon) the redemption of Jerusalem (\lutr“sin Ierousalˆm\)." There was evidently a group of such spirits that gathered in the temple either men around her and Simeon or whom she met from time to time. There was thus a nucleus of old saints in Jerusalem prepared for the coming of the Messiah when he at last appears as the Messiah in Jerusalem (John 2 and 3). These probably all passed away. But they had a happy hour of hope and joy. The late MSS. have "in Jerusalem" but "of Jerusalem" is correct. What they meant by the "redemption of Jerusalem" is not clear, whether political or spiritual or both. Simeon was looking for the consolation of Israel (2:25|) and Zacharias (1:68|) sang of redemption for Israel (Isaiah:40:2|).

rwp@Luke:2:39 @{To their own city Nazareth} (\eis polin heaut“n Nazaret\). See on strkjv@Matthew:2:23| about Nazareth. Luke tells nothing of the flight to Egypt and the reason for the return to Nazareth instead of Bethlehem, the place of the birth of Jesus as told in strkjv@Matthew:2:13-23|. But then neither Gospel gives all the details of this period. Luke has also nothing about the visit of the wise men (Matthew:2:1-12|) as Matthew tells nothing of the shepherds and of Simeon and Anna (Luke:2:8-28|). The two Gospels supplement each other.

rwp@Luke:3:7 @{To the multitude that went out} (\tois exporeuomenois ochlois\). Plural, {Multitudes}. The present participle also notes the repetition of the crowds as does \elegen\ (imperfect), he used to say. strkjv@Matthew:3:7-10| singles out the message of John to the Pharisees and Sadducees, which see for discussion of details. Luke gives a summary of his preaching to the crowds with special replies to these inquiries: the multitudes, 10,11|, the publicans 12,13|, the soldiers 14|. {To be baptized of him} (\baptisthˆnai hup' autou\). This is the purpose of their coming. strkjv@Matthew:3:7| has simply "to his baptism." John's metaphors are from the wilderness (vipers, fruits, axe, slave boy loosing sandals, fire, fan, thrashing-floor, garner, chaff, stones). {Who warned you?} (\tis hepedeixen humin;\). The verb is like our "suggest" by proof to eye, ear, or brain (Luke:6:47; strkjv@12:5; strkjv@Acts:9:16; strkjv@20:35; strkjv@Matthew:3:7|). Nowhere else in the N.T. though common ancient word (\hupodeiknumi\, show under, point out, give a tip or private hint).

rwp@Luke:3:21 @{When all the people were baptised} (\en t“i baptisthˆnai hapanta ton laon\). The use of the articular aorist infinitive here with \en\ bothers some grammarians and commentators. There is no element of time in the aorist infinitive. It is simply punctiliar action, literally "in the being baptized as to all the people." Luke does not say that all the people were baptized before Jesus came or were baptized at the same time. It is merely a general statement that Jesus was baptized in connexion with or at the time of the baptizing of the people as a whole. {Jesus also having been baptized} (\kai Iˆsou baptisthentos\). Genitive absolute construction, first aorist passive participle. In Luke's sentence the baptism of Jesus is merely introductory to the descent of the Holy Spirit and the voice of the Father. For the narrative of the baptism see strkjv@Mark:1:9; strkjv@Matthew:3:13-16|. {And praying} (\kai proseuchomenou\). Alone in Luke who so often mentions the praying of Jesus. Present participle and so naturally meaning that the heaven was opened while Jesus was praying though not necessarily in answer to his prayer. {The heaven was opened} (\ane“ichthˆnai ton ouranon\). First aorist passive infinitive with double augment, whereas the infinitive is not supposed to have any augment. The regular form would be \anoichthˆnai\ as in D (Codex Bezae). Songs:the augment appears in the future indicative \kateaxei\ (Matthew:12:20|) and the second aorist passive subjunctive \kateag“sin\ (John:19:31|). Such unusual forms appear in the _Koin‚_. This infinitive here with the accusative of general reference is the subject of \egeneto\ (it came to pass). strkjv@Matthew:3:16| uses the same verb, but strkjv@Mark:1:10| has \schizomenous\, rent asunder.

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:4:36 @{Amazement came} (\egeneto thambos\). Mark has \ethambˆthˆsan\. {They spake together one with another} (\sunelaloun pros allˆlous\). Imperfect indicative active and the reciprocal pronoun. Mark has simply the infinitive \sunzˆtein\ (question). {For} (\hoti\). We have here an ambiguous \hoti\ as in strkjv@1:45|, which can be either the relative "that" or the casual \hoti\ "because" or "for," as the Revised Version has it. Either makes good sense. Luke adds here \dunamei\ (with power) to Mark's "authority" (\exousian\). {And they come out} (\exerchontai\). Songs:Luke where Mark has "and they obey him" (\kai upakouousin aut“i\).

rwp@Luke:4:38 @{He rose up} (\anastas\). Second aorist active participle of \anistˆmi\, a common verb. B. Weiss adds here "from the teacher's seat." Either from his seat or merely leaving the synagogue. This incident of the healing of Peter's mother-in-law is given in strkjv@Mark:1:29-34| and strkjv@Matthew:8:14-17|, which see for details. {Into the house of Simon} (\eis tˆn oikian Sim“nos\). "Peter's house" (Matthew:8:14|). "The house of Simon and Andrew" (Mark:1:29|). Paul's reference to Peter's wife (1Corinthians:9:5|) is pertinent. They lived together in Capernaum. This house came also to be the Capernaum home of Jesus. {Simon's wife's mother} (\penthera tou Sim“nos\). The word \penthera\ for mother-in-law is old and well established in usage. Besides the parallel passages (Mark:1:30; strkjv@Matthew:8:14; strkjv@Luke:4:38|) it occurs in the N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:12:53|. The corresponding word \pentheros\, father-in-law, occurs in strkjv@John:18:13| alone in the N.T. {Was holden with a great fever} (\ˆn sunechomenˆ puret“i megal“i\). Periphrastic imperfect passive, the analytical tense accenting the continuous fever, perhaps chronic and certainly severe. Luke employs this verb nine times and only three others in the N.T. (Matthew:4:24| passive with diseases here; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14| active; strkjv@Phillipians:1:23| passive). In strkjv@Acts:28:8| the passive "with dysentery" is like the construction here and is a common one in Greek medical writers as in Greek literature generally. Luke uses the passive with "fear," strkjv@Luke:8:37|, the active for holding the hands over the ears (Acts:7:57|) and for pressing one or holding together (Luke:8:45; strkjv@19:43; strkjv@22:63|), the direct middle for holding oneself to preaching (Acts:18:5|). It is followed here by the instrumental case. Hobart (_Medical Language of Luke_, p. 3) quotes Galen as dividing fevers into "great" (\megaloi\) and "small" (\smikroi\).

rwp@Luke:5:1 @{Pressed upon him} (\epikeisthai\). Luke in this paragraph (5:1-11; strkjv@Mark:1:16-20; strkjv@Matthew:4:18-22|) does not follow the chronology of Mark as he usually does. It seems reasonably clear that the renewed call of the four fishermen came before the first tour of Galilee in strkjv@Luke:4:42-44|. It is here assumed that Luke is describing in his own way the incident given in Mark and Matthew above. Luke singles out Simon in a graphic way. This verb \epikeisthai\ is an old one and means to \lie upon\, rest upon as of a stone on the tomb (John:11:38|) or of fish on the burning coals (John:21:9|). Songs:it is used of a tempest (Acts:27:20|) and of the urgent demands for Christ's crucifixion (Luke:23:23|). Here it vividly pictures the eager crowds around Jesus. \En t“i epikeisthai\ is a favourite idiom with Luke as we have already seen, \en\ with the articular infinitive in the locative case. {That} (\kai\). \Kai\ does not technically mean the declarative conjunction "that," but it is a fair rendering of the somewhat awkward idiom of Luke to a certain extent imitating the Hebrew use of _wav_. {Was standing} (\ˆn hest“s\). Periphrastic second past perfect of \histˆmi\ which here is equal to a practical imperfect. {By the lake} (\para tˆn limnˆn\). The use of the accusative with \para\, alongside, after a verb of rest used to be called the pregnant use, came and was standing. But that is no longer necessary, for the accusative as the case of extension is the oldest of the cases and in later Greek regains many of the earlier uses of the other cases employed for more precise distinctions. See the same idiom in verse 2|. We need not here stress the notion of extension. "With characteristic accuracy Luke never calls it a sea, while the others never call it a lake" (Plummer).

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

rwp@Luke:5:12 @{Behold} (\kai idou\). Quite a Hebraistic idiom, this use of \kai\ after \egeneto\ (almost like \hoti\) with \idou\ (interjection) and no verb. {Full of leprosy} (\plˆrˆs lepras\). strkjv@Mark:1:40| and strkjv@Matthew:8:2| have simply "a leper" which see. Evidently a bad case full of sores and far advanced as Luke the physician notes. The law (Leviticus:13:12f.|) curiously treated advanced cases as less unclean than the earlier stages. {Fell on his face} (\pes“n epi pros“pon\). Second aorist active participle of \pipt“\, common verb. strkjv@Mark:1:40| has "kneeling" (\gonupet“n\) and strkjv@Matthew:8:40| "worshipped" (\prosekunei\). All three attitudes were possible one after the other. All three Synoptics quote the identical language of the leper and the identical answer of Jesus. His condition of the third class turned on the "will" (\thelˆis\) of Jesus who at once asserts his will (\thˆl“\) and cleanses him. All three likewise mention the touch (\hˆpsato\, verse 13|) of Christ's hand on the unclean leper and the instantaneous cure.

rwp@Luke:5:17 @{That} (\kai\). Use of \kai\ = \hoti\ (that) like the Hebrew _wav_, though found in Greek also. {He} (\autos\). Luke sometimes has \autos\ in the nominative as unemphatic "he" as here, not "he himself." {Was teaching} (\ˆn didask“n\). Periphrastic imperfect again like our English idiom. {Were sitting by} (\ˆsan kathˆmenoi\). Periphrastic imperfect again. There is no "by" in the Greek. {Doctors of the law} (\nomodidaskaloi\). A compound word formed after analogy of \hierodidaskalos\, but not found outside of the N.T. and ecclesiastical writers, one of the very few words apparently N.T. in usage. It appears here and strkjv@Acts:5:34; strkjv@1Timothy:1:7|. It is not likely that Luke and Paul made the word, but they simply used the term already in current use to describe teachers and interpreters of the law. Our word "doctor" is Latin for "teacher." These "teachers of the law" are called elsewhere in the Gospels "scribes" (\grammateis\) as in Matthew and Mark (see on ¯Matthew:5:20; strkjv@23:34|) and strkjv@Luke:5:21; strkjv@19:47; strkjv@21:1; strkjv@22:2|. Luke also employs \nomikos\ (one skilled in the law, \nomos\) as in strkjv@10:25|. One thinks of our LL.D. (Doctors of Civil and Canon Law), for both were combined in Jewish law. They were usually Pharisees (mentioned here for the first time in Luke) for which see on ¯Matthew:3:7,20|. Luke will often speak of the Pharisees hereafter. Not all the "Pharisees" were "teachers of the law" so that both terms often occur together as in verse 21| where Luke has separate articles (\hoi grammateis kai hoi Pharisaioi\), distinguishing between them, though one article may occur as in strkjv@Matthew:5:20| or no article as here in verse 17|. Luke alone mentions the presence here of these Pharisees and doctors of the law "which were come" (\hoi ˆsan elˆluthotes\, periphrastic past perfect active, {had come}). {Out of every village of Galilee and Judea and Jerusalem} (\ek pasˆs k“mˆs tˆs Galilaias kai Ioudaias kai Ierousalˆm\). Edersheim (_Jewish Social Life_) observes that the Jews distinguished Jerusalem as a separate district in Judea. Plummer considers it hyperbole in Luke to use "every village." But one must recall that Jesus had already made one tour of Galilee which stirred the Pharisees and rabbis to active opposition. Judea had already been aroused and Jerusalem was the headquarters of the definite campaign now organized against Jesus. One must bear in mind that strkjv@John:4:1-4| shows that Jesus had already left Jerusalem and Judea because of the jealousy of the Pharisees. They are here on purpose to find fault and to make charges against Jesus. One must not forget that there were many kinds of Pharisees and that not all of them were as bad as these legalistic and punctilious hypocrites who deserved the indictment and exposure of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:23|. Paul himself is a specimen of the finer type of Pharisee which, however, developed into the persecuting fanatic till Jesus changed his whole life. {The power of the Lord was with him to heal} (\dunamis Kuriou ˆn eis to iƒsthai auton\). Songs:the best texts. It is neat Greek, but awkward English: "Then was the power of the Lord for the healing as to him (Jesus)." Here \Kuriou\ refers to Jehovah. {Dunamis} (dynamite) is one of the common words for "miracles" (\dunameis\). What Luke means is that Jesus had the power of the Lord God to heal with. He does not mean that this power was intermittent. He simply calls attention to its presence with Jesus on this occasion.

rwp@Luke:6:17 @{He came down with them} (\katabas met' aut“n\). Second aorist active participle of \katabain“\, common verb. This was the night of prayer up in the mountain (Mark:31:3; strkjv@Luke:6:12|) and the choice of the Twelve next morning. The going up into the mountain of strkjv@Matthew:5:1| may simply be a summary statement with no mention of what Luke has explained or may be a reference to the elevation, where he "sat down" (Matthew:5:1|), above the plain or "level place" (\epi topou pedinou\) on the mountain side where Jesus "stood" or "stopped" (\estˆ\). It may be a level place towards the foot of the mountain. He stopped his descent at this level place and then found a slight elevation on the mountain side and began to speak. There is not the slightest reason for making Matthew locate this sermon on the mountain and Luke in the valley as if the places, audiences, and topics were different. For the unity of the sermon see discussion on ¯Matthew:5:1f|. The reports in Matthew and Luke begin alike, cover the same general ground and end alike. The report in Matthew is longer chiefly because in Chapter 5, he gives the argument showing the contrast between Christ's conception of righteousness and that of the Jewish rabbis. Undoubtedly, Jesus repeated many of the crisp sayings here at other times as in Luke 12, but it is quite gratuitous to argue that Matthew and Luke have made up this sermon out of isolated sayings of Christ at various times. Both Matthew and Luke give too much that is local of place and audience for that idea. strkjv@Matthew:5:1| speaks of "the multitudes" and "his disciples." strkjv@Luke:6:17| notes "a great multitude of his disciples, and a great number of the people from all Judea and Jerusalem, and the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon." They agree in the presence of disciples and crowds besides the disciples from whom the twelve apostles were chosen. It is important to note how already people were coming from "the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon" "to hear him and to be healed (\iathˆnai\, first aorist passive of \iaomai\) of their diseases."

rwp@Luke:6:45 @{Bringeth forth} (\propherei\). In a similar saying repeated later. strkjv@Matthew:12:34f.| has the verb \ekballei\ (throws out, casts out), a bolder figure. "When men are natural, heart and mouth act in concert. But otherwise the mouth sometimes professes what the heart does not feel" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:7:1 @{After} (\epeidˆ, epei and dˆ\). This conjunction was written \epei dˆ\ in Homer and is simple \epei\ with the intensive \dˆ\ added and even \epei dˆ per\ once in N.T. (Luke:1:1|). This is the only instance of the temporal use of \epeidˆ\ in the N.T. The causal sense occurs only in Luke and Paul, for \epei\ is the correct text in strkjv@Matthew:21:46|. {Had ended} (\eplˆr“sen\). First aorist active indicative. There is here a reference to the conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount, but with nothing concerning the impression produced by the discourse such as is seen in strkjv@Matthew:7:28|. This verse really belongs as the conclusion of Chapter 6, not as the beginning of Chapter 7. {In the ears of the people} (\eis tas akoas tou laou\). \Akoˆ\ from \akou“\, to hear, is used of the sense of hearing (1Corinthians:12:17|), the ear with which one hears (Mark:7:35; strkjv@Hebrews:5:11|), the thing heard or the report (Rom strkjv@10:16|) or oral instruction (Galatians:3:2,5|). Both strkjv@Matthew:8:5-13; strkjv@Luke:7:1-10| locate the healing of the centurion's servant in Capernaum where Jesus was after the Sermon on the Mount.

rwp@Luke:7:3 @{Sent unto him elders of the Jews} (\apesteilen pros auton presbouterous t“n Ioudai“n\). strkjv@Matthew:8:5| says "the centurion came unto him." For discussion of this famous case of apparent discrepancy see discussion on Matthew. One possible solution is that Luke tells the story as it happened with the details, whereas Matthew simply presents a summary statement without the details. What one does through another he does himself. {Asking him} (\er“t“n auton\). Present active participle, masculine singular nominative, of the verb \er“ta“\ common for asking a question as in the old Greek (Luke:22:68|). But more frequently in the N.T. the verb has the idea of making a request as here. This is not a Hebraism or an Aramaism, but is a common meaning of the verb in the papyri (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 168). It is to be noted here that Luke represents the centurion himself as "asking" through the elders of the Jews (leading citizens). In strkjv@Matthew:8:6| the verb is \parakal“n\ (beseeching). {That he would come and save} (\hop“s elth“n dias“sˆi\). \Hina\ is the more common final or sub-final (as here) conjunction, but \hop“s\ still occurs. \Dias“sˆi\ is effective aorist active subjunctive, to bring safe through as in a storm (Acts:28:1,4|). Common word.

rwp@Luke:7:37 @{A woman which was in the city, a sinner} (\gunˆ hˆtis en tˆi polei hamart“los\). Probably in Capernaum. The use of \hˆtis\ means "Who was of such a character as to be" (cf. strkjv@8:3|) and so more than merely the relative \hˆ\, who, that is, "who was a sinner in the city," a woman of the town, in other words, and known to be such. \Hamart“los\, from \hamartan“\, to sin, means devoted to sin and uses the same form for feminine and masculine. It is false and unjust to Mary Magdalene, introduced as a new character in strkjv@Luke:8:2|, to identify this woman with her. Luke would have no motive in concealing her name here and the life of a courtesan would be incompatible with the sevenfold possession of demons. Still worse is it to identify this courtesan not only with Mary Magdalene, but also with Mary of Bethany simply because it is a Simon who gives there a feast to Jesus when Mary of Bethany does a beautiful deed somewhat like this one here (Mark:14:3-9; strkjv@Matthew:26:6-13; strkjv@John:12:2-8|). Certainly Luke knew full well the real character of Mary of Bethany (10:38-42|) so beautifully pictured by him. But a falsehood, once started, seems to have more lives than the cat's proverbial nine. The very name Magdalene has come to mean a repentant courtesan. But we can at least refuse to countenance such a slander on Mary Magdalene and on Mary of Bethany. This sinful woman had undoubtedly repented and changed her life and wished to show her gratitude to Jesus who had rescued her. Her bad reputation as a harlot clung to her and made her an unwelcome visitor in the Pharisee's house. {When she knew} (\epignousa\). Second aorist active participle from \epigin“sk“\, to know fully, to recognize. She came in by a curious custom of the time that allowed strangers to enter a house uninvited at a feast, especially beggars seeking a gift. This woman was an intruder whereas Mary of Bethany was an invited guest. "Many came in and took their places on the side seats, uninvited and yet unchallenged. They spoke to those at table on business or the news of the day, and our host spoke freely to them" (Trench in his _Parables_, describing a dinner at a Consul's house at Damietta). {He was sitting at meat} (\katakeitai\). Literally, he is reclining (present tense retained in indirect discourse in Greek). {An alabaster cruse of ointment} (\alabastron murou\). See on ¯Matthew:26:7| for discussion of \alabastron\ and \murou\.

rwp@Luke:7:38 @{Standing behind at his feet} (\stƒsa opis“ para tous podas autou\). Second aorist active participle from \histˆmi\ and intransitive, first aorist \estˆsa\ being transitive. The guest removed his sandals before the meal and he reclined on the left side with the feet outward. She was standing beside (\para\) his feet {weeping} (\klaiousa\). She was drawn irresistibly by gratitude to Jesus and is overcome with emotion before she can use the ointment; her tears (\tois dakrusin\, instrumental case of \dakru\) take the place of the ointment. {Wiped them with the hair of her head} (\tais thrixin tˆs kephalˆs autˆs exemassen\). Inchoative imperfect of an old verb \ekmass“\, to rub out or off, began to wipe off, an act of impulse evidently and of embarrassment. "Among the Jews it was a shameful thing for a woman to let down her hair in public; but she makes this sacrifice" (Plummer). Songs:Mary of Bethany wiped the feet of Jesus with her hair (John:12:3|) with a similar sacrifice out of her great love for Jesus. This fact is relied on by some to prove that Mary of Bethany had been a woman of bad character, surely an utter failure to recognize Mary's motive and act. {Kissed} (\katephilei\). Imperfect active of \kataphile“\, to kiss repeatedly (force of \kata\), and accented by the tense of continued action here. The word in the N.T. occurs here, of the prodigal's father (15:20|), of the kiss of Judas (Mark:14:45; strkjv@Matthew:26:49|), of the Ephesian elders (Acts:20:37|). " Kissing the feet was a common mark of deep reverence, especially to leading rabbis" (Plummer). {Anointed them with the ointment} (\ˆleiphen t“i mur“i\). Imperfect active again of \aleiph“\, a very common verb. \Chri“\ has a more religious sense. The anointing came after the burst of emotional excitement.

rwp@Luke:8:27 @{And for a long time} (\kai chron“i hikan“i\). The use of the associative instrumental case in expressions of time is a very old Greek idiom that still appears in the papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 527). {He had worn no clothes} (\ouk enedusato himation\). First aorist middle indicative, constative aorist, viewing the "long time" as a point. Not pluperfect as English has it and not for the pluperfect, simply "and for a long time he did not put on himself (indirect middle) any clothing." The physician would naturally note this item. Common verb \endu“\ or \endun“\. This item in Luke alone, though implied by strkjv@Mark:5:15| "clothed" (\himatismenon\). {And abode not in any house} (\kai en oikiƒi ouk emenen\). Imperfect active. Peculiar to Luke, though implied by the mention of tombs in all three (Mark:5:3; strkjv@Matthew:8:28; strkjv@Luke:8:27|).

rwp@Luke:8:29 @{For he commanded} (\parˆggellen gar\). Imperfect active, correct text, for he was commanding. {Often times} (\pollois chronois\). Or "for a long time" like \chron“i poll“i\ of verse 27| (see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 537, for the plural here). {It had seized} (\sunˆrpakei\). Past perfect active of \sunarpaz“\, to lay hold by force. An old verb, but only in Luke in the N.T. (Luke:8:29; strkjv@Acts:6:12; strkjv@19:29; strkjv@27:15|). {Was kept under guard} (\edesmeueto\). Imperfect passive of \desmeu“\ to put in chains, from \desmos\, bond, and that from \de“\ to bind. Old, but rather rare verb. Only here and strkjv@Acts:22:4| in this sense. In strkjv@Matthew:23:4| it means to bind together. Some MSS. read \desme“\ in strkjv@Luke:8:29|. {Breaking the bands asunder} (\diarˆss“n ta desma\). Old verb, the preposition \dia\ (in two) intensifying the meaning of the simple verb \rˆss“\ or \rˆgnumi\, to rend. {Was driven} (\ˆlauneto\). Imperfect passive of \elaun“\, to drive, to row, to march (Xenophon). Only five times in the N.T. Here alone in Luke and peculiar to Luke in this incident.

rwp@Luke:8:37 @{Were holden with great fear} (\phob“i megal“i suneichonto\). Imperfect passive of \sunech“\ with the instrumental case of \phobos\. See a similar use of this vigorous verb in strkjv@Luke:12:50| of Jesus and in strkjv@Phillipians:1:23| of Paul.

rwp@Luke:8:43 @{Had spent all her living upon physicians} (\eis iatrous prosanal“sasa holon ton bion\). First aorist active participle of an old verb \prosanalisk“\, only here in the N.T. But Westcott and Hort reject this clause because it is not in B D Syriac Sinaitic. Whether genuine or not, the other clause in strkjv@Mark:5:26| certainly is not in Luke: "had suffered many things of many physicians." Probably both are not genuine in Luke who takes care of the physicians by the simple statement that it was a chronic case: {could not be healed of any} (\ouk ischusen ap' oudenos therapeuthˆnai\). He omitted also what Mark has: "and was nothing bettered but rather grew worse."

rwp@Luke:9:5 @{As many as receive you not} (\hosoi an mˆ dech“ntai humas\). Indefinite relative plural with \an\ and present middle subjunctive and the negative \mˆ\. Here strkjv@Matthew:10:14| has the singular (whosoever) and strkjv@Mark:6:11| has "whatsoever place." {For a testimony against them} (\eis marturion ep' autous\). Note use of \ep' autous\ where strkjv@Mark:6:11| has simply the dative \autois\ (disadvantage), really the same idea.

rwp@Luke:9:20 @{But who say ye?} (\Humeis de tina legete;\). Note the emphatic proleptical position of \humeis\: "But _ye_ who do ye say? This is really what mattered now with Jesus. {The Christ of God} (\Ton christon tou theou\). The accusative though the infinitive is not expressed. The Anointed of God, the Messiah of God. See on ¯2:26| for "the Anointed of the Lord." See on ¯Matthew:16:17| for discussion of Peter's testimony in full. strkjv@Mark:6:29| has simply "the Christ." It is clear from the previous narrative that this is not a new discovery from Simon Peter, but simply the settled conviction of the disciples after all the defections of the Galilean masses and the hostility of the Jerusalem ecclesiastics. The disciples still believed in Jesus as the Messiah of Jewish hope and prophecy. It will become plain that they do not grasp the spiritual conception of the Messiah and his kingdom that Jesus taught, but they are clear that he is the Messiah however faulty their view of the Messiah may be. There was comfort in this for Jesus. They were loyal to him.

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:9:32 @{Were heavy with sleep} (\ˆsan bebarˆmenoi hupn“i\). Periphrastic past perfect of \bare“\, a late form for the ancient \barun“\ (not in N.T. save Textus Receptus in strkjv@Luke:21:34|). This form, rare and only in passive (present, aorist, perfect) in the N.T., is like \barun“\, from \barus\, and that from \baros\, weight, burden (Galatians:6:2|). \Hupn“i\ is in the instrumental case. They had apparently climbed the mountain in the early part of the night and were now overcome with sleep as Jesus prolonged his prayer. Luke alone tells of their sleep. The same word is used of the eyes of these three disciples in the Garden of Gethsemane (Matthew:26:43|) and of the hearts of many (Luke:21:34|). {But when they were fully awake} (\diagrˆgorˆsantes de\). First aorist active participle of this late (Herodian) and rare compound verb (here alone in the N.T.), \diagrˆgore“\ (Luke is fond of compounds with \dia\). The simple verb \grˆgore“\ (from the second perfect active \egrˆgora\) is also late, but common in the LXX and the N.T. The effect of \dia\ can be either to remain awake in spite of desire to sleep (margin of Revised Version) or to become thoroughly awake (ingressive aorist tense also) as Revised Version has it. This is most likely correct. The Syriac Sinaitic has it "When they awoke." Certainly they had been through a strain. {His glory} (\tˆn doxan autou\). See also verse 26| in the words of Jesus.

rwp@Luke:9:35 @If \ekeinous\ be accepted here instead of \autous\, the three disciples would be outside of the cloud. {Out of the cloud} (\ek tˆs nephelˆs\). This voice was the voice of the Father like that at the baptism of Jesus (Luke:3:22; strkjv@Mark:1:11; strkjv@Matthew:3:17|) and like that near the end (John:12:28-30|) when the people thought it was a clap of thunder or an angel. {My son, my chosen} (\Hosea:huios mou, ho eklelegmenos\). Songs:the best documents (Aleph B L Syriac Sinaitic). The others make it "My Beloved" as in strkjv@Mark:9:7; strkjv@Matthew:17:5|. These disciples are commanded to hear Jesus, God's Son, even when he predicts his death, a pointed rebuke to Simon Peter as to all.

rwp@Luke:9:36 @{When the voice came} (\en toi genesthai tˆn ph“nˆn\). Another example of Luke's idiom, this time with the second aorist middle infinitive. Literally, "on the coming as to the voice" (accusative of general reference). It does not mean that it was "after" the voice was past that Jesus was found alone, but simultaneously with it (ingressive aorist tense). {Alone} (\monos\). Same adjective in strkjv@Mark:9:8; strkjv@Matthew:17:8| translated "only." Should be rendered "alone" there also. {They held their peace} (\esigˆsan\). Ingressive aorist active of common verb \siga“\, became silent. In strkjv@Mark:9:9; strkjv@Matthew:17:9|, Jesus commanded them not to tell till His Resurrection from the dead. Luke notes that they in awe obeyed that command and it turns out that they finally forgot the lesson of this night's great experience. By and by they will be able to tell them, but not "in those days." {Which they had seen} (\h“n he“rakan\). Attraction of the relative \ha\ into the case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\. Perfect active indicative \he“rakan\ with _Koin‚_ (papyri) form for the ancient \he“rakƒsin\ changed by analogy to the first aorist ending in \-an\ instead of \-asin\.

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:9:50 @{"Against you is for you"} (\kath' h–m“n huper h–m“n\). strkjv@Mark:9:40| has "against us is for us" (\hˆm“n... hˆm“n\). The _Koin‚_ Greek \ˆ\ and \–\ were often pronounced alike and it was easy to interchange them. Songs:many MSS. here read just as in Mark. The point is precisely the same as it is a proverbial saying. See a similar saying in strkjv@Luke:11:23|: "He that is not with me is against me." The prohibition here as in strkjv@Mark:9:39| is general: "Stop hindering him" (\mˆ k“luete, mˆ\ and the present imperative, not \mˆ\ and the aorist subjunctive). The lesson of toleration in methods of work for Christ is needed today.

rwp@Luke:9:60 @{Leave the dead to bury their own dead} (\aphes tous nekrous thapsai tous heaut“n nekrous\). This paradox occurs so in strkjv@Matthew:8:22|. The explanation is that the spiritually dead can bury the literally dead. For such a quick change in the use of the same words see strkjv@John:5:21-29| (spiritual resurrection from sin in strkjv@John:5:21-27|, bodily resurrection from the grave, strkjv@John:5:28,29|) and strkjv@John:11:25f|. The harshness of this proverb to the scribe probably is due to the fact that he was manifestly using his aged father as an excuse for not giving Christ active service. {But go thou and publish abroad the kingdom of God} (\su de apelth“n diaggelle tˆn basileian tou theou\). The scribe's duty is put sharply (\But do thou, su de\). Christ called him to preach, and he was using pious phrases about his father as a pretext. Many a preacher has had to face a similar delicate problem of duty to father, mother, brothers, sisters and the call to preach. This was a clear case. Jesus will help any man called to preach to see his duty. Certainly Jesus does not advocate renunciation of family duties on the part of preachers.

rwp@Luke:10:4 @{Purse} (\ballantion\). Old word for money-bag, sometimes a javelin as if from \ball“\. Only in Luke in the N.T. (10:4; strkjv@12:33; strkjv@22:35ff.|). See strkjv@Luke:9:3; strkjv@Mark:6:7f.; strkjv@Matthew:10:9f.| for the other similar items. {Salute no man on the way} (\mˆdena kata tˆn hodon aspasˆsthe\). First aorist (ingressive) middle subjunctive with \mˆdena\. The peril of such wayside salutations was palaver and delay. The King's business required haste. Elisha's servant was not to tarry for salutations or salaams (2Kings:4:29|). These oriental greetings were tedious, complicated, and often meddlesome if others were present or engaged in a bargain.

rwp@Luke:10:22 @{Knoweth who the Son is} (\gin“skei tis estin ho huios\). Knows by experience, \gin“skei\. Here strkjv@Matthew:11:27| has \epigin“skei\ (fully knows) and simply \ton huion\ (the Son) instead of the "who" (\tis\) clause. Songs:also in "who the Father is" (\tis estin ho pater\). But the same use and contrast of "the Father," "the Son." in both Matthew and Luke, "an aerolite from the Johannean heaven" (Hase). No sane criticism can get rid of this Johannine bit in these Gospels written long before the Fourth Gospel was composed. We are dealing here with the oldest known document about Christ (the Logia) and the picture is that drawn in the Fourth Gospel (see my _The Christ of the Logia_). It is idle to try to whittle away by fantastic exegesis the high claims made by Jesus in this passage. It is an ecstatic prayer in the presence of the Seventy under the rapture of the Holy Spirit on terms of perfect equality and understanding between the Father and the Son in the tone of the priestly prayer in strkjv@John:17|. We are justified in saying that this prayer of supreme Fellowship with the Father in contemplation of final victory over Satan gives us a glimpse of the prayers with the Father when the Son spent whole nights on the mountain alone with the Father. Here is the Messianic consciousness in complete control and with perfect confidence in the outcome. Here as in strkjv@Matthew:11:27| by the use of {willeth to reveal him} (\boulˆtai apokalupsai\). The Son claims the power to reveal the Father "to whomsoever he wills" (\h“i an boulˆtai\, indefinite relative and present subjunctive of \boulomai\, to will, not the future indicative). This is divine sovereignty most assuredly. Human free agency is also true, but it is full divine sovereignty in salvation that is here claimed along with possession (\paredothˆ\, timeless aorist passive indicative) of all power from the Father. Let that supreme claim stand.

rwp@Luke:11:1 @{As he was praying in a certain place} (\en t“i einai auton en top“i tini proseuchomenon\). Characteristically Lukan idiom: \en\ with articular periphrastic infinitive (\einai proseuchomenon\) with accusative of general reference (\auton\). {That}. Not in the Greek, asyndeton (\kai egeneto eipen\). {When he ceased} (\h“s epausato\). Supply \proseuchomenos\ (praying), complementary or supplementary participle. {Teach us} (\didaxon hˆmas\). Jesus had taught them by precept (Matthew:6:7-15|) and example (Luke:9:29|). Somehow the example of Jesus on this occasion stirred them to fresh interest in the subject and to revival of interest in John's teachings (Luke:5:33|). Songs:Jesus gave them the substance of the Model Prayer in Matthew, but in shorter form. Some of the MSS. have one or all of the phrases in Matthew, but the oldest documents have it in the simplest form. See on ¯Matthew:6:7-15| for discussion of these details (Father, hallowed, kingdom, daily bread, forgiveness, bringing us into temptation). In strkjv@Matthew:6:11| "give" is \dos\ (second aorist active imperative second singular, a single act) while here strkjv@Luke:11:3| "give" is \didou\ (present active imperative, both from \did“mi\) and means, "keep on giving." Songs:in strkjv@Luke:11:4| we have "For we ourselves also forgive" (\kai gar autoi aphiomen\), present active indicative of the late \“\ verb \aphi“\ while strkjv@Matthew:6:12| has "as we also forgave" (\h“s kai hˆmeis aphˆkamen\), first aorist (\k\ aorist) active of \aphiˆmi\. Songs:also where strkjv@Matthew:6:12| has "debts" (\ta opheilˆmata\) strkjv@Luke:11:4| has "sins" (\tas hamartias\). But the spirit of each prayer is the same. There is no evidence that Jesus meant either form to be a ritual. In both strkjv@Matthew:6:13; strkjv@Luke:11:4| \mˆ eisenegkˆis\ occurs (second aorist subjunctive with \mˆ\ in prohibition, ingressive aorist). "Bring us not" is a better translation than "lead us not." There is no such thing as God enticing one to sin (James:1:13|). Jesus urges us to pray not to be tempted as in strkjv@Luke:22:40| in Gethsemane.

rwp@Luke:11:20 @{By the finger of God} (\en daktul“i theou\). In distinction from the Jewish exorcists. strkjv@Matthew:12:28| has "by the Spirit of God." {Then is come} (\ara ephthasen\). \Phthan“\ in late Greek comes to mean simply to come, not to come before. The aorist indicative tense here is timeless. Note \ara\ (accordingly) in the conclusion (\apodosis\).

rwp@Luke:11:31 @{With the men of this generation} (\meta t“n andr“n tˆs geneƒs tautˆs\). Here strkjv@Matthew:12:42| has simply "with this generation," which see.

rwp@Luke:11:37 @{Now as he spake} (\en de t“i lalˆsai\). Luke's common idiom, \en\ with the articular infinitive (aorist active infinitive) but it does not mean "after he had spoken" as Plummer argues, but simply "in the speaking," no time in the aorist infinitive. See strkjv@3:21| for similar use of aorist infinitive with \en\. {Asketh} (\er“tƒi\). Present active indicative, dramatic present. Request, not question. {To dine} (\hop“s aristˆsˆi\). Note \hop“s\ rather than the common \hina\. Aorist active subjunctive rather than present, for a single meal. The verb is from \ariston\ (breakfast). See distinction between \ariston\ and \deipnon\ (dinner or supper) in strkjv@Luke:14:12|. It is the morning meal (breakfast or lunch) after the return from morning prayers in the synagogue (Matthew:22:4|), not the very early meal called \akratisma\. The verb is, however, used for the early meal on the seashore in strkjv@John:21:12,15|. {With him} (\par' aut“i\). By his side. {Sat down to meat} (\anepesen\). Second aorist active indicative of \anapipt“\, old verb, to recline, to fall back on the sofa or lounge. No word here for "to meat."

rwp@Luke:11:42 @{Tithe} (\apodekatoute\). Late verb for the more common \dekateu“\. Songs:in strkjv@Matthew:23:23|. Take a tenth off (\apo-\). Rue (\pˆganon\). Botanical term in late writers from \pˆgnumi\, to make fast because of its thick leaves. Here strkjv@Matthew:23:23| has "anise." {Every herb} (\pƒn lachanon\). General term as in strkjv@Mark:4:32|. Matthew has "cummin." {Pass by} (\parerchesthe\). Present middle indicative of \parerchomai\, common verb, to go by or beside. strkjv@Matthew:23:23| has "ye have left undone" (\aphˆkate\). Luke here has "love" (\agapˆn\), not in Matthew. {Ought} (\edei\). As in Matthew. Imperfect of a present obligation, not lived up to just like our "ought" (\owed\, not paid). \Pareinai\, as in Matthew, the second aorist active infinitive of \aphiˆmi\. to leave off. Common verb. Luke does not have the remark about straining out the gnat and swallowing the camel (Matthew:23:34|). It is plain that the terrible exposure of the scribes and Pharisees in strkjv@Matthew:23| in the temple was simply the culmination of previous conflicts such as this one.

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

rwp@Luke:12:11 @{Be not anxious} (\mˆ merimnˆsˆte\). First aorist active subjunctive with \mˆ\ in prohibition. Do not become anxious. See a similar command to the Twelve on their Galilean tour (Matthew:10:19f.|) and in the great discourse on the Mount of Olives at the end (Mark:13:11; strkjv@Luke:21:14f.|), given twice by Luke as we see. {How or what ye shall answer} (\p“s ˆ ti apologˆsˆsthe\). Indirect question and retaining the deliberative subjunctive \apologˆsˆsthe\ and also \eipˆte\ (say).

rwp@Luke:12:12 @{What ye ought to say} (\hƒ dei eipein\). Literally, what things it is necessary (\dei\) to say. This is no excuse for neglect in pulpit preparation. It is simply a word for courage in a crisis to play the man for Christ and to trust the issue with God without fear.

rwp@Luke:12:24 @{The ravens} (\tous korakas\). Nowhere else in the N.T. The name includes the whole crow group of birds (rooks and jackdaws). Like the vultures they are scavengers. strkjv@Matthew:6:26| has simply "the birds" (\ta peteina\). {Storechamber} (tameion). Not in strkjv@Matthew:6:26|. Means secret chamber in strkjv@Luke:12:3|. {Of how much more} (\pos“i mƒllon\). strkjv@Matthew:6:26| has question, \ouch mƒllon\.

rwp@Luke:12:34 @{Will be} (\estai\). Last word in the sentence in Luke. Otherwise like strkjv@Matthew:6:21|. See strkjv@1Corinthians:7:32-34| for similar principle.

rwp@Luke:12:54 @{To the multitudes also} (\kai tois ochlois\). After the strong and stirring words just before with flash and force Jesus turns finally in this series of discourses to the multitudes again as in verse 15|. There are similar sayings to these verses 54-59| in strkjv@Matthew:16:1f; strkjv@5:25f|. There is a good deal of difference in phraseology whether that is due to difference of source or different use of the same source (Q or Logia) we do not know. Not all the old MSS. give strkjv@Matthew:16:2,3|. In Matthew the Pharisees and Sadducees were asking for a sign from heaven as they often did. These signs of the weather, "a shower" (\ombros\, strkjv@Luke:12:54|) due to clouds in the west, "a hot wave" (\kaus“n\, verse 55) due to a south wind (\noton\) blowing, "fair weather" (\eudia\, strkjv@Matthew:16:2|) when the sky is red, are appealed to today. They have a more or less general application due to atmospheric and climatic conditions.

rwp@Luke:13:34 @{O Jerusalem, Jerusalem} (\Ierousalˆm, Ierousalˆm\). In strkjv@Matthew:23:37f.| Jesus utters a similar lament over Jerusalem. The connection suits both there and here, but Plummer considers it "rather a violent hypothesis" to suppose that Jesus spoke these words twice. It is possible, of course, though not like Luke's usual method, that he put the words here because of the mention of Jerusalem. In itself it is not easy to see why Jesus could not have made the lament both here and in Jerusalem. The language of the apostrophe is almost identical in both places (Luke:13:34f.; strkjv@Matthew:23:37-39|). For details see on Matthew. In Luke we have \episunaxai\ (late first aorist active infinitive) and in Matthew \episunagagein\ (second aorist active infinitive), both from \episunag“\, a double compound of late Greek (Polybius). Both have "How often would I" (\posakis ˆthelˆsa\). How often did I wish. Clearly showing that Jesus made repeated visits to Jerusalem as we know otherwise only from John's Gospel. {Even as} (\hon tropon\). Accusative of general reference and in strkjv@Matthew:23:37| also. Incorporation of antecedent into the relative clause. {Brood} (\nossian\) is in Luke while Matthew has {chickens} (\nossia\), both late forms for the older \neossia\. The adjective {desolate} (\erˆmos\) is wanting in strkjv@Luke:13:35| and is doubtful in strkjv@Matthew:23:39|.

rwp@Luke:14:18 @{With one consent} (\apo mias\). Some feminine substantive like \gn“mˆs\ or \psuchˆs\ has to be supplied. This precise idiom occurs nowhere else. It looked like a conspiracy for each one in his turn did the same thing. {To make excuse} (\paraiteisthai\). This common Greek verb is used in various ways, to ask something from one (Mark:15:6|), to deprecate or ask to avert (Hebrews:12:19|), to refuse or decline (Acts:25:11|), to shun or to avoid (2Timothy:2:23|), to beg pardon or to make excuses for not doing or to beg (Luke:14:18ff.|). All these ideas are variations of \aite“\, to ask in the middle voice with \para\ in composition. {The first} (\ho pr“tos\). In order of time. There are three of the "many" ("all"), whose excuses are given, each more flimsy than the other. {I must needs} (\ech“ anagkˆn\). I have necessity. The land would still be there, a strange "necessity." {Have me excused} (\eche me parˆitˆmenon\). An unusual idiom somewhat like the English perfect with the auxiliary "have" and the modern Greek idiom with \ech“\, but certainly not here a Greek periphrasis for \parˆitˆso\. This perfect passive participle is predicate and agrees with \me\. See a like idiom in strkjv@Mark:3:1; strkjv@Luke:12:19| (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 902f.). The Latin had a similar idiom, _habe me excusatum_. Same language in verse 19|.

rwp@Luke:15:3 @{This parable} (\tˆn parabolˆn tautˆn\). The Parable of the Lost Sheep (15:3-7|). This is Christ's way of answering the cavilling of these chronic complainers. Jesus gave this same parable for another purpose in another connection (Matthew:18:12-14|). The figure of the Good Shepherd appears also in strkjv@John:10:1-18|. "No simile has taken more hold upon the mind of Christendom" (Plummer). Jesus champions the lost and accepts the challenge and justifies his conduct by these superb stories. "The three Episodes form a climax: The Pasture--the House--the Home; the Herdsman--the Housewife--the Father; the Sheep--the Treasure--the Beloved Son" (Ragg).

rwp@Luke:16:14 @{Who were lovers of money} (\philarguroi huparchontes\). Literally, being lovers of money. \Philarguroi\ is an old word, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@2Timothy:3:2|. It is from \philos\ and \arguros\. {Heard} (\ˆkouon\). Imperfect active, were listening (all the while Jesus was talking to the disciples (verses 1-13|). {And they scoffed at him} (\kai exemuktˆrizon\). Imperfect active again of \ekmuktˆriz“\. LXX where late writers use simple verb. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:23:35|. It means to turn out or up the nose at one, to sneer, to scoff. The Romans had a phrase, _naso adunco suspendere_, to hang on the hooked nose (the subject of ridicule). These money-loving Pharisees were quick to see that the words of Jesus about the wise use of money applied to them. They had stood without comment the three parables aimed directly at them (the lost sheep, the lost coin, the lost son). But now they do not remain quiet while they hear the fourth parable spoken to the disciples. No words were apparently spoken, but their eyes, noses, faces were eloquent with a fine disdain.

rwp@Luke:17:1 @{It is impossible} (\anendekton estin\). See \ouk endechetai\ in strkjv@13:33|. Alpha privative (\an-\) and \endektos\, verbal adjective, from \endechomai\. The word occurs only in late Greek and only here in the N.T. The meaning is inadmissible, unallowable. {But that occasions of stumbling should come} (\tou ta skandala mˆ elthein\). This genitive articular infinitive is not easy to explain. In strkjv@Acts:10:25| there is another example where the genitive articular infinitive seems to be used as a nominative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1040). The loose Hebrew infinitive construction may have a bearing here, but one may recall that the original infinitives were either locatives (\-eni\) or datives (\-ai\). \Ta skandala\ is simply the accusative of general reference. Literally, the not coming as to occasions of stumbling. For \skandalon\ (a trap) see on ¯Matthew:5:29; strkjv@16:23|. It is here only in Luke. The positive form of this saying appears in strkjv@Matthew:18:7|, which see.

rwp@Luke:17:2 @{It were well for him} (\lusitelei aut“i\). An old word, but only here in the N.T., from \lusitelˆs\ and this from \lu“\, to pay, and \ta telˆ\, the taxes. Songs:it pays the taxes, it returns expenses, it is profitable. Literally here, "It is profitable for him" (dative case, \aut“i\). Matthew has \sumpherei\ (it is advantageous, bears together for). {If a millstone were hanged} (\ei lithos mulikos perikeitai\). Literally, "if a millstone is hanged." Present passive indicative from \perikeimai\ (to lie or be placed around). It is used as a perfect passive of \peritithˆmi\. Songs:it is a first-class condition, determined as fulfilled, not second-class as the English translations imply. \Mulikos\ is simply a stone (\lithos\), belonging to a mill. Here only in the text of Westcott and Hort, not in strkjv@Mark:9:42| which is like strkjv@Matthew:18:6| \mulos onikos\ where the upper millstone is turned by an ass, which see. {Were thrown} (\erriptai\). Perfect passive indicative from \rhipt“\, old verb. Literally, is thrown or has been thrown or cast or hurled. Mark has \beblˆtai\ and Matthew \katapontisthˆi\, which see, all three verbs vivid and expressive. Rather than (\ˆ\). The comparative is not here expressed before \ˆ\ as one would expect. It is implied in \lusitelei\. See the same idiom in strkjv@Luke:15:7|.

rwp@Luke:17:8 @{And will not rather say} (\all' ouk erei\). {But will not say?} \Ouk\ in a question expects the affirmative answer. {Gird thyself} (\periz“samenos\). Direct middle first aorist participle of \periz“nnumi\, to gird around. {Till I have eaten and drunken} (\he“s phag“ kai pi“\). More exactly, till I eat and drink. The second aorist subjunctives are not future perfects in any sense, simply punctiliar action, effective aorist. {Thou shalt eat and drink} (\phagesai kai piesai\). Future middle indicative second person singular, the uncontracted forms \-esai\ as often in the _Koin‚_. These futures are from the aorist stems \ephagon\ and \epion\ without _sigma_.

rwp@Luke:17:12 @{Which stood afar off} (\hoi anestˆsan porr“then\). The margin of Westcott and Hort reads simply \estˆsan\. The compound read by B means "rose up," but they stood at a distance (Leviticus:13:45f.|). The first healing of a leper (5:12-16|) like this is given by Luke only.

rwp@Luke:18:22 @{One thing thou lackest yet} (\eti hen soi leipei\). Literally, one thing still fails thee or is wanting to thee. An old verb with the dative of personal interest. strkjv@Mark:10:21| has here \husterei se\, which see. It was an amazing compliment for one who was aiming at perfection (Matthew:19:21|). The youth evidently had great charm and was sincere in his claims. {Distribute} (\diados\). Second aorist active imperative of \diadid“mi\ (give to various ones, \dia-\). Here Mark and Matthew simply have \dos\ (give). The rest the same in all three Gospels.

rwp@Luke:18:36 @{Inquired} (\epunthaneto\). Imperfect middle. Repeatedly inquired as he heard the tramp of the passing crowd going by (\diaporeuomenou\). {What this meant} (\Ti eiˆ touto\). Literally, What it was. Without \an\ the optative is due to indirect discourse, changed from \estin\. With \an\ (margin of Westcott and Hort) the potential optative of the direct discourse is simply retained.

rwp@Luke:19:5 @{Make haste and come down} (\speusas katabˆthi\). Simultaneous aorist active participle (\speusas\) with the second aorist active imperative. "Come down in a hurry."

rwp@Luke:19:7 @{Murmured} (\diegogguzonto\). Imperfect middle of this compound onomatopoetic word \dia-gogguz“\. In strkjv@Luke:5:30| we have the simple \gogguz“\, a late word like the cooing doves or the hum of bees. This compound with \dia-\ is still rarer, but more expressive. {To lodge} (\katalusai\). Jesus was the hero of this crowd from Galilee on their way to the passover. But here he had shocked their sensibilities and those of the people of Jericho by inviting himself to be the guest of this chief publican and notorious sinner who had robbed nearly everybody in the city by exorbitant taxes.

rwp@Luke:19:45 @{Began to cast out} (\ˆrxato ekballein\). Songs:Mark:11:15| whereas strkjv@Matthew:21:12| has simply "he cast out." See Mark and Matthew for discussion of this second cleansing of the temple at the close of the public ministry in relation to the one at the beginning in strkjv@John:2:14-22|. There is nothing gained by accusing John or the Synoptics of a gross chronological blunder. There was abundant time in these three years for all the abuses to be revived.

rwp@Luke:22:3 @{Satan entered into Judas} (\eisˆlthen eis Ioudan\). Ingressive aorist active indicative. Satan was now renewing his attack on Jesus suspended temporarily (Luke:4:13|) "until a good chance." He had come back by the use of Simon Peter (Mark:8:33; strkjv@Matthew:16:23|). The conflict went on and Jesus won ultimate victory (Luke:10:18|). Now Satan uses Judas and has success with him for Judas allowed him to come again and again (John:13:27|). Judas evidently opened the door to his heart and let Satan in. Then Satan took charge and he became a devil as Jesus said (John:6:70|). This surrender to Satan in no way relieves Judas of his moral responsibility.

rwp@Luke:22:4 @{Went away} (\apelth“n\). Second aorist active participle of \aperchomai\. He went off under the impulse of Satan and after the indignation over the rebuke of Jesus at the feast in Simon's house (John:12:4-6|). {Captains} (\stratˆgois\). Leaders of the temple guards (Acts:4:1|), the full title, "captains of the temple," occurs in verse 52|. {How he might deliver him unto them} (\to p“s autois parad“i auton\). The same construction as in verse 2|, the article \to\ with the indirect question and deliberative subjunctive second aorist active (\parad“i\).

rwp@Luke:22:6 @{Consented} (\ex“mologˆsen\). Old verb, but the ancients usually used the simple form for promise or consent rather than the compound. This is the only instance of this sense in the N.T. It is from \homologos\ (\homos\, same, and \leg“\, to say), to say the same thing with another and so agree. {Opportunity} (\eukarian\). From \eukairos\ (\eu, kairos\), a good chance. Old word, but in the N.T. only here and parallel passage strkjv@Matthew:26:16|. {In the absence of the multitude} (\ater ochlou\). \Ater\ is an old preposition, common in the poets, but rare in prose. Also in verse 35|. It means "without," "apart from," like \ch“ris\. The point of Judas was just this. He would get Jesus into the hands of the Sanhedrin during the feast in spite of the crowd. It was necessary to avoid tumult (Matthew:26:5|) because of the popularity of Jesus.

rwp@Luke:22:7 @{The day of unleavened bread came} (\ˆlthen hˆ hˆmera t“n azum“n\). The day itself came, not simply was drawing nigh (verse 1|). {Must be sacrificed} (\edei thuesthai\). This was Nisan 14 which began at sunset. Luke is a Gentile and this fact must be borne in mind. The lamb must be slain by the head of the family (Exodus:12:6|). The controversy about the day when Christ ate the last passover meal has already been discussed (Matthew:26:17; strkjv@Mark:14:12|). The Synoptics clearly present this as a fact. Jesus was then crucified on Friday at the passover or Thursday (our time) at the regular hour 6 P.M. (beginning of Friday). The five passages in John (13:1f.; strkjv@13:27; strkjv@18:28; strkjv@19:14; strkjv@19:31|) rightly interpreted teach the same thing as shown in my _Harmony of the Gospels for Students of the Life of Christ_ (pp.279-284).

rwp@Luke:24:4 @{While they were perplexed thereabout} (\en t“i aporeisthai autas peri toutou\). Luke's common Hebraistic idiom, \en\ with the articular infinitive (present passive \aporeisthai\ from \apore“\, to lose one's way) and the accusative of general reference. {Two men} (\andres duo\). Men, not women. strkjv@Mark:16:5| speaks of a young man (\neaniskon\) while strkjv@Matthew:28:5| has "an angel." We need not try to reconcile these varying accounts which agree in the main thing. The angel looked like a man and some remembered two. In verse 23| Cleopas and his companion call them "angels." {Stood by} (\epestˆsan\). Second aorist active indicative of \ephistˆmi\. This common verb usually means to step up suddenly, to burst upon one. {In dazzling apparel} (\en esthˆti astraptousˆi\). This is the correct text. This common simplex verb occurs only twice in the N.T., here and strkjv@Luke:17:24| (the Transfiguration). It has the same root as \astrapˆ\ (lightning). The "men" had the garments of "angels."

rwp@Mark:1:20 @{With the hired servants} (\meta t“n misth“t“n\). One hired for wages (\misthos\), a very old Greek word. Zebedee and his two sons evidently had an extensive business in co-operation with Andrew and Simon (Luke:5:7,10|). Mark alone has this detail of the hired servants left with Zebedee. They left the boat and their father (Matthew:4:22|) with the hired servants. The business would go on while they left all (Luke:5:11|) and became permanent followers of Jesus. Many a young man has faced precisely this problem when he entered the ministry. Could he leave father and mother, brothers and sisters, while he went forth to college and seminary to become a fisher of men? Not the least of the sacrifices made in the education of young preachers is that made by the home folks who have additional burdens to bear because the young preacher is no longer a bread-winner at home. Most young preachers joyfully carry on such burdens after entering the ministry.

rwp@Mark:1:27 @{They questioned among themselves} (\sunzˆtein autous\). By look and word. {A new teaching} (\didachˆ kainˆ\). One surprise had followed another this day. The teaching was fresh (\kainˆ\), original as the dew of the morning on the blossoms just blown. That was a novelty in that synagogue where only staid and stilted rabbinical rules had been heretofore droned out. This new teaching charmed the people, but soon will be rated as heresy by the rabbis. And it was with authority (\kat' exousian\). It is not certain whether the phrase is to be taken with "new teaching," "It's new teaching with authority behind it," as Moffatt has it, or with the verb; "with authority commandeth even the unclean spirits" (\kai tois pneumasin tois akathartois epitassei\). The position is equivocal and may be due to the fact that "Mark gives the incoherent and excited remarks of the crowd in this natural form" (Swete). But the most astonishing thing of all is that the demons "obey him" (\hupakouousin aut“i\). The people were accustomed to the use of magical formulae by the Jewish exorcists (Matthew:12:27; strkjv@Acts:19:13|), but here was something utterly different. Simon Magus could not understand how Simon Peter could do his miracles without some secret trick and even offered to buy it (Acts:8:19|).

rwp@Mark:1:29 @{The house of Simon and Andrew} (\tˆn oikian Sim“nos kai Andreou\). Peter was married and both he and Andrew lived together in "Peter's house" (Matthew:8:14|) with Peter's wife and mother-in-law. Peter was evidently married before he began to follow Jesus. Later his wife accompanied him on his apostolic journeys (1Corinthians:9:5|). This incident followed immediately after the service in the synagogue on the sabbath. All the Synoptics give it. Mark heard Peter tell it as it occurred in his own house where Jesus made his home while in Capernaum. Each Gospel gives touches of its own to the story. Mark has "lay sick of a fever " (\katekeito puressousa\), lay prostrate burning with fever. Matthew puts it "stretched out (\beblˆmenˆn\) with a fever." Luke has it "holden with a great fever" (\ˆn sunechomenˆ puret“i megal“i\), a technical medical phrase. They all mention the instant recovery and ministry without any convalescence. Mark and Matthew speak of the touch of Jesus on her hand and Luke speaks of Jesus standing over her like a doctor. It was a tender scene.

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

rwp@Mark:2:16 @{The scribes of the Pharisees} (\hoi grammateis t“n Pharisai“n\). This is the correct text. Cf. "their scribes" in strkjv@Luke:5:30|. Matthew gave a great reception (\dochˆn\, strkjv@Luke:5:29|) in his house (Mark:2:15|). These publicans and sinners not simply accepted Levi's invitation, but they imitated his example "and were following Jesus" (\kai ˆkolouthoun aut“i\). It was a motly crew from the standpoint of these young theologues, scribes of the Pharisees, who were on hand, being invited to pick flaws if they could. It was probably in the long hall of the house where the scribes stood and ridiculed Jesus and the disciples, unless they stood outside, feeling too pious to go into the house of a publican. It was an offence for a Jew to eat with Gentiles as even many of the early Jewish Christians felt (Acts:11:3|) and publicans and sinners were regarded like Gentiles (1Corinthians:5:11|).

rwp@Mark:3:10 @{Pressed upon him} (\epipiptein aut“i\). Were falling upon him to such an extent that it was dangerous. They were not hostile, but simply intensely eager, each to have his own case attended to by Jesus. {That they might touch him} (\hina autou haps“ntai\). If only that much. They hoped for a cure by contact with Christ. Aorist subjunctive. It was a really pathetic scene and a tremendous strain on Jesus. {As many as had plagues} (\hosoi eichon mastigas\). Strokes or scourges, terms used by us today as a paralytic stroke, the influenza scourge. Our word plague is from \plˆgˆ\ (Latin _plaga_), from \plˆgnumi\, to strike a blow. Common in ancient Greek in this sense. See strkjv@Mark:5:29,34; strkjv@Luke:7:21| for the same use of \mastiges\ and also 2Macc. strkjv@9:11.

rwp@Mark:3:14 @{He appointed twelve} (\epoiˆsen d“deka\). This was a second selection out of those invited to the hills and after the night of prayer and after day came (Luke:6:13|). Why he chose twelve we are not told, probably because there were twelve tribes in Israel. It was a good round number at any rate. They were to be princes in the new Israel (cf. strkjv@Matthew:19:28; strkjv@Luke:22:30; strkjv@Revelation:21:14,15|). Luke (Luke:6:13-16|) also gives the list of the twelve at this point while Matthew (Matthew:10:1-4|) postpones giving the names till they are sent out in Galilee. There is a fourth list in strkjv@Acts:1:13|. See discussion of the names of the apostles on ¯Matthew:10:1-4| and pp. 271-3 of my _Harmony of the Gospels for Students of the Life of Christ_. The three groups of four begin alike (Simon, Philip, James). There are some difficulties. {Whom he also named apostles} (\hous kai apostolous “nomasen\). Margin of Revised Version, the text of Westcott and Hort after Aleph, B, C, etc. Genuine in strkjv@Luke:6:13| and probably so here. The meaning is that Jesus himself gave the name apostle or missionary (\apostell“\, to send) to this group of twelve. The word is applied in the New Testament to others besides as delegates or messengers of churches (2Corinthians:8:23; strkjv@Phillipians:2:25|), and messenger (John:13:16|). It is applied also to Paul on a par with the twelve (Galatians:1:1,11f.|, etc.) and also to Barnabas (Acts:14:14|), and perhaps also to Timothy and Silas (1Timothy:2:6f.|). Two purposes of Jesus are mentioned by Mark in the choice of these twelve, {that they might be with him} (\hina “sin met' autou\), {and that he might send them forth} (\kai hina apostellˆi autous\). They were not ready to be sent forth till they had been with Jesus for some time. This is one of the chief tasks of Christ to train this group of men. See Bruce's _The Training of the Twelve_. The very word \apostolos\ is from \apostell“\. There were two purposes in sending them forth expressed by two infinitives, one to preach (\kˆrussein\, from \kˆrux\, herald), the other to have power to cast out demons (\echein exousian ekballein ta daimonia\). This double ministry of preaching and healing was to mark their work. The two things are, however, different, and one does not necessarily involve the other.

rwp@Mark:3:16 @{Simon he surnamed Peter} (\epethˆken onoma t“i Sim“ni Petron\). The Greek idiom seems awkward, but it is not. Peter is in apposition with _name_ or \onoma\ (accusative). This surname Jesus gave in addition (\epethˆken\) to Simon (dative case). Here then is a direct reference to what is told in strkjv@John:1:42| when Jesus met Simon for the first time. Mark here reflects Peter's own words. Luke (Luke:6:14|) simply says "Whom he also surnamed Peter." See strkjv@Matthew:16:18| for the full explanation of the name Peter, a Rock, Cephas.

rwp@Mark:3:17 @{Boanerges, which is Sons of thunder} (\Boanˆrges ho estin huioi brontˆs\). This Hebrew nickname is given only by Mark and the reason for it is not clear. It may refer to the fiery temperament revealed in strkjv@Luke:9:34| when James and John wanted to call down fire on the Samaritan villages that were unfriendly to them. The word literally means {sons of tumult, sons of thunder} in Syriac. No other epithets are given by Mark save descriptions to distinguish as Simon the Cananaean (or Zealot) and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him (verse 19|). Andrew, (from \anˆr\, a man) and Philip (Philippos, fond of horses) are both Greek names. Bartholomew, son of Tolmai, is the Nathanael of John's Gospel (John:21:2|). He probably had both names. Matthew is a Hebrew name meaning gift of God (\Maththaios\). Thomas is Hebrew and means Twin (Didymus, strkjv@John:11:16|). There are two uses of the name of James (\Iac“bos\, Jacob). Thaddeus is another name for Lebbaeus.

rwp@Mark:3:19 @{He cometh into a house} (\erchetai eis oikon\). Historical present again and no article with noun. He comes home from the mountain, probably the house of Simon as in strkjv@1:29|. Mark passes by the Sermon on the Mount given by Matthew and Luke on the mountain (plateau on the mountain in Luke). We have to allow a reasonable interval for Mark's narrative. Mark's Gospel is full of action and does not undertake to tell all that Jesus did and said.

rwp@Mark:4:10 @{When he was alone} (\hote egeneto kata monas\). Only in Mark. Vivid recollection of Peter. Mark has also "they that were about him with the twelve" (\hoi peri auton sun tois d“deka\), Matthew and Luke simply "the disciples." They did not want the multitude to see that they did not understand the teaching of Jesus.

rwp@Mark:4:11 @{Unto you is given the mystery of the kingdom of God} (\Humin to mustˆrion dedotai tˆs basileias tou theou\). See on ¯Matthew:13:11| for word \mustˆrion\. Here (Mark:4:11; strkjv@Matthew:13:11; strkjv@Luke:8:10|) alone in the Gospels, but in Paul 21 times and in the Revelation 4 times. It is frequent in Daniel and O.T. Apocrypha. Matthew and Luke use it here in the plural. Matthew and Luke add the word {to know} (\gn“nai\), but Mark's presentation covers a wider range than growing knowledge, the permanent possession of the mystery even before they understand it. The secret is no longer hidden from the initiated. Discipleship means initiation into the secret of God's kingdom and it will come gradually to these men. {But unto them that are without} (\ekeinois de tois ex“\). Peculiar to Mark, those outside our circle, the uninitiated, the hostile group like the scribes and Pharisees, who were charging Jesus with being in league with Beelzebub. strkjv@Luke:8:10| has "to the rest" (\tois loipois\), strkjv@Matthew:13:11| simply "to them" (\ekeinois\). Without the key the parables are hard to understand, for parables veil the truth of the kingdom being stated in terms of another realm. Without a spiritual truth and insight they are unintelligible and are often today perverted. The parables are thus a condemnation on the wilfully blind and hostile, while a guide and blessing to the enlightened. {That} (\hina\). Mark has the construction of the Hebrew "lest" of strkjv@Isaiah:6:9f|. with the subjunctive and so strkjv@Luke:8:10|, while strkjv@Matthew:13:13| uses causal \hoti\ with the indicative following the LXX. See on ¯Matthew:13:13| for the so-called causal use of \hina\. Gould on strkjv@Mark:4:12| has an intelligent discussion of the differences between Matthew and Mark and Luke. He argues that Mark here probably "preserves the original form of Jesus' saying." God ironically commands Isaiah to harden the hearts of the people. If the notion of purpose is preserved in the use of \hina\ in Mark and Luke, there is probably some irony also in the sad words of Jesus. If \hina\ is given the causative use of \hoti\ in Matthew, the difficulty disappears. What is certain is that the use of parables on this occasion was a penalty for judicial blindness on those who will not see.

rwp@Mark:4:14 @{The sower soweth the word} (\ho speir“n ton logon speirei\). Not put thus clearly and simply in strkjv@Matthew:13:19| or strkjv@Luke:8:11|.

rwp@Mark:5:41 @{Talitha cumi}. These precious Aramaic words, spoken by Jesus to the child, Peter heard and remembered so that Mark gives them to us. Mark interprets the simple words into Greek for those who did not know Aramaic (\to korasion, egeire\), that is, {Damsel, arise}. Mark uses the diminutive \korasi“n\, a little girl, from \korˆ\, girl. _Braid Scots_ has it: "Lassie, wauken." strkjv@Luke:8:5-9| has it \Hˆ pais, egeire\, {Maiden, arise}. All three Gospels mention the fact that Jesus took her by the hand, a touch of life (\kratˆsas tˆs cheiros\), giving confidence and help.

rwp@Mark:6:7 @{By two and two} (\duo duo\). This repetition of the numeral instead of the use of \ana duo\ or \kata duo\ is usually called a Hebraism. The Hebrew does have this idiom, but it appears in Aeschylus and Sophocles, in the vernacular _Koin‚_ (Oxyrhynchus Papyri No. 121), in Byzantine Greek, and in modern Greek (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 122f.). Mark preserves the vernacular _Koin‚_ better than the other Gospels and this detail suits his vivid style. The six pairs of apostles could thus cover Galilee in six different directions. Mark notes that he "began to send them forth" (\ˆrxato autous apostellein\). Aorist tense and present infinitive. This may refer simply to this particular occasion in Mark's picturesque way. But the imperfect tense \edidou\ means he kept on giving them all through the tour, a continuous power (authority) over unclean spirits singled out by Mark as representing "all manner of diseases and all manner of sickness" (Matthew:10:1|), "to cure diseases" (\iasthai\, strkjv@Luke:9:1|), healing power. They were to preach and to heal (Luke:9:1; strkjv@Matthew:10:7|). Mark does not mention preaching as a definite part of the commission to the twelve on this their first preaching tour, but he does state that they did preach (6:12|). They were to be missioners or missionaries (\apostellein\) in harmony with their office (\apostoloi\).

rwp@Mark:6:8 @{Save a staff only} (\ei mˆ rabdon monon\). Every traveller and pilgrim carried his staff. Bruce thinks that Mark has here preserved the meaning of Jesus more clearly than strkjv@Matthew:10:10| (nor staff) and strkjv@Luke:9:3| (neither staff). This discrepancy has given trouble to commentators. Grotius suggests no second staff for Matthew and Luke. Swete considers that Matthew and Luke report "an early exaggeration of the sternness of the command." "Without even a staff is the _ne plus ultra_ of austere simplicity, and self-denial. Men who carry out the spirit of these precepts will not labour in vain" (Bruce).

rwp@Mark:6:24 @{What shall I ask?} (\Ti aitˆs“mai;\). The fact that she went and spoke to her mother proves that she had not been told beforehand what to ask. strkjv@Matthew:14:8| does not necessarily mean that, but he simply condenses the account. The girl's question implies by the middle voice that she is thinking of something for herself. She was no doubt unprepared for her mother's ghastly reply.

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

rwp@Mark:8:12 @{He sighed deeply in his spirit} (\anastenaxas t“i pneumati\). The only instance of this compound in the N.T. though in the LXX. The uncompounded form occurs in strkjv@Mark:7:34| and it is common enough. The preposition \ana-\ intensifies the meaning of the verb (perfective use). "The sigh seemed to come, as we say, from the bottom of his heart, the Lord's human spirit was stirred to its depths" (Swete). Jesus resented the settled prejudice of the Pharisees (and now Sadducees also) against him and his work. {There shall no sign be given unto this generation} (\ei dothˆsetai tˆi geneƒi tautˆi sˆmeion\). strkjv@Matthew:16:4| has simply \ou dothˆsetai\, plain negative with the future passive indicative. Mark has \ei\ instead of \ou\, which is technically a conditional clause with the conclusion unexpressed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1024), really aposiopesis in imitation of the Hebrew use of \im\. This is the only instance in the N.T. except in quotations from the LXX (Hebrews:3:11; strkjv@4:3,5|). It is very common in the LXX. The rabbis were splitting hairs over the miracles of Jesus as having a possible natural explanation (as some critics do today) even if by the power of Beelzebub, and those not of the sky (from heaven) which would be manifested from God. Songs:they put up this fantastic test to Jesus which he deeply resents. strkjv@Matthew:16:4| adds "but the sign of Jonah" mentioned already by Jesus on a previous occasion (Matthew:12:39-41|) at more length and to be mentioned again (Luke:11:32|). But the mention of the sign of Jonah was "an absolute refusal of signs in their sense" (Bruce). And when he did rise from the dead on the third day, the Sanhedrin refused to be convinced (see Acts 3 to 5).

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

rwp@Mark:9:17 @{I brought unto thee my son} (\ˆnegka ton huion mou pros se\). The father stepped out and gave the explanation of the excited dispute in direct and simple pathos.

rwp@Mark:10:15 @{As a little child} (\h“s paidion\). How does a little child receive the kingdom of God? The little child learns to obey its parents simply and uncomplainingly. There are some new psychologists who argue against teaching obedience to children. The results have not been inspiring. Jesus here presents the little child with trusting and simple and loving obedience as the model for adults in coming into the kingdom. Jesus does not here say that children are in the kingdom of God because they are children.

rwp@Mark:10:37 @{In thy glory} (\en tˆi doxˆi\). strkjv@Matthew:20:21| has "in thy kingdom." See on ¯Matthew:20:20| for the literal interpretation of strkjv@Matthew:19:28|. They are looking for a grand Jewish world empire with apocalyptic features in the eschatological culmination of the Messiah's kingdom. That dream brushed aside all the talk of Jesus about his death and resurrection as mere pessimism.

rwp@Mark:11:24 @{Believe that ye have received them} (\pisteuete hoti elabete\). That is the test of faith, the kind that sees the fulfilment before it happens. \Elabete\ is second aorist active indicative, antecedent in time to \pisteuete\, unless it be considered the timeless aorist when it is simultaneous with it. For this aorist of immediate consequence see strkjv@John:15:6|.

rwp@Mark:12:1 @{He began to speak unto them in parables} (\ˆrxato autois en parabolais lalein\). Mark's common idiom again. He does not mean that this was the beginning of Christ's use of parables (see strkjv@4:2|), but simply that his teaching on this occasion took the parabolic turn. "The circumstances called forth the parabolic mood, that of one whose heart is chilled, and whose spirit is saddened by a sense of loneliness, and who, retiring within himself, by a process of reflection, frames for his thoughts forms which half conceal, half reveal them" (Bruce). Mark does not give the Parable of the Two Sons (Matthew:21:28-32|) nor that of the Marriage Feast of the King's Son (Matthew:22:1-14|). He gives here the Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen. Also in strkjv@Matthew:21:33-46| and strkjv@Luke:20:9-19|. See discussion in Matthew. strkjv@Matthew:21:33| calls the man "a householder" (\oikodespotˆs\). {A pit for the winepress} (\hupolˆnion\). Only here in the N.T. Common in the LXX and in late Greek. Matthew had \lˆnon\, winepress. This is the vessel or trough under the winepress on the hillside to catch the juice when the grapes were trodden. The Romans called it _lacus_ (lake) and Wycliff _dalf_ (lake), like delved. See on Matthew for details just alike. {Husbandmen} (\ge“rgois\). Workers in the ground, tillers of the soil (\ergon, gˆ\).

rwp@Mark:14:37 @{Simon, sleepest thou?} (\Sim“n, katheudeis;\). The old name, not the new name, Peter. Already his boasted loyalty was failing in the hour of crisis. Jesus fully knows the weakness of human flesh (see on ¯Matthew:26:41|).

rwp@Mark:14:40 @{Very heavy} (\katabarunomenoi\). Perfective use of \kata-\ with the participle. Matthew has the simple verb. Mark's word is only here in the N.T. and is rare in Greek writers. Mark has the vivid present passive participle, while Matthew has the perfect passive \bebarˆmenoi\. {And they wist not what to answer him} (\kai ouk ˆideisan ti apokrith“sin aut“i\). Deliberative subjunctive retained in the indirect question. Alone in Mark and reminds one of the like embarrassment of these same three disciples on the Mount of Transfiguration (Mark:9:6|). On both occasions weakness of the flesh prevented their real sympathy with Jesus in his highest and deepest experiences. "Both their shame and their drowsiness would make them dumb" (Gould).

rwp@Mark:14:69 @{To them that stood by} (\tois parest“sin\). This talk about Peter was overheard by him. "This fellow (\houtos\) is one of them." Songs:in verse 70| the talk is directly to Peter as in strkjv@Matthew:26:73|, but in strkjv@Luke:22:59| it is about him. Soon the bystanders (\hoi parest“tes\) will join in the accusation to Peter (verse 70; strkjv@Matthew:26:73|), with the specially pungent question in strkjv@John:18:26| which was the climax. See on ¯Matthew:26:69-75| for discussion of similar details.

rwp@Mark:15:21 @{They compel} (\aggareuousin\). Dramatic present indicative again where strkjv@Matthew:27:32| has the aorist. For this Persian word see on ¯Matthew:5:41; strkjv@27:32|. {Coming out of the country} (\erchomenon ap' agrou\). Hence Simon met the procession. Mark adds that he was "the father of Alexander and Rufus." Paul mentions a Rufus in strkjv@Romans:16:13|, but it was a common name and proves nothing. See on ¯Matthew:27:32| for discussion of cross-bearing by criminals. Luke adds "after Jesus" (\opisthen tou Iˆsou\). But Jesus bore his own cross till he was relieved of it, and he walked in front of his own cross for the rest of the way.

rwp@Mark:15:43 @{A councillor of honourable estate} (\euschˆm“n bouleutˆs\). A senator or member of the Sanhedrin of high standing, rich (Matthew:27:57|). {Looking for the Kingdom of God} (\ˆn prosdechomenos tˆn basileian tou theou\). Periphrastic imperfect. Also strkjv@Luke:23:51|. The very verb used by Luke of Simeon and Anna (Luke:2:25,38|). strkjv@Matthew:27:57| calls him "Jesus' disciple" while strkjv@John:19:38| adds "secretly for fear of the Jews." He had evidently taken no public stand for Jesus before now. {Boldly} (\tolmˆsas\). Aorist (ingressive) active participle, becoming bold. It is the glory of Joseph and Nicodemus, secret disciples of Jesus, that they took a bold stand when the rest were in terror and dismay. That is love psychology, paradoxical as it may seem.

rwp@Mark:16:6 @{Be not amazed} (\mˆ ekthambeisthe\). The angel noted their amazement (verse 5|) and urges the cessation of it using this very word. {The Nazarene} (\ton Nazarˆnon\). Only in Mark, to identify "Jesus" to the women. {The crucified one} (\ton estaur“menon\). This also in strkjv@Matthew:28:5|. This description of his shame has become his crown of glory, for Paul (Gal strkjv@6:14|), and for all who look to the Crucified and Risen Christ as Saviour and Lord. He is risen (\ˆgerthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative, the simple fact. In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:4| Paul uses the perfect passive indicative \egˆgertai\ to emphasize the permanent state that Jesus remains risen. {Behold the place} (\ide ho topos\). Here \ide\ is used as an interjection with no effect on the case (nominative). In strkjv@Matthew:28:6| \idete\ is the verb with the accusative. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 302.

rwp@Info_Matthew @ THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION The passing years do not make it any plainer who actually wrote our Greek Matthew. Papias records, as quoted by Eusebius, that Matthew wrote the _Logia_ of Jesus in Hebrew (Aramaic). Is our present Matthew a translation of the Aramaic _Logia_ along with Mark and other sources as most modern scholars think? If so, was the writer the Apostle Matthew or some other disciple? There is at present no way to reach a clear decision in the light of the known facts. There is no real reason why the Apostle Matthew could not have written both the Aramaic _Logia_ and our Greek Matthew, unless one is unwilling to believe that he would make use of Mark's work on a par with his own. But Mark's book rests primarily on the preaching of Simon Peter. Scholfield has recently (1927) published _An Old Hebrew Text of St. Matthew's Gospel_. We know quite too little of the origin of the Synoptic Gospels to say dogmatically that the Apostle Matthew was not in any real sense the author.

rwp@Info_Matthew @ In the Gospel itself we find Matthew the publican (Matthew:9:9; strkjv@10:3|) though Mark (Mark:2:14|) and Luke (Luke:5:27|) call him Levi the publican. Evidently therefore he had two names like John Mark. It is significant that Jesus called this man from so disreputable a business to follow him. He was apparently not a disciple of John the Baptist. He was specially chosen by Jesus to be one of the Twelve Apostles, a business man called into the ministry as was true of the fishermen James and John, Andrew and Simon. In the lists of the Apostles he comes either seventh or eighth. There is nothing definite told about him in the Gospels apart from the circle of the Twelve after the feast which he gave to his fellow publicans in honor of Jesus.

rwp@Info_Matthew @ THE TITLE The Textus Receptus has "The Holy Gospel according to Matthew" (\to kata Matthaion hagion Euaggelion\), though the Elzevirs omit "holy," not agreeing here with Stephanus, Griesbach, and Scholz. Only minuscules (cursive Greek manuscripts) and all late have the adjective. Other minuscules and nine uncials including W (the Washington Codex of the fifth century), C of the fifth century (the palimpsest manuscript) and Delta of the ninth together with most Latin manuscripts have simply "Gospel according to Matthew" (\Euaggelion kata Matthaion\). But Aleph and B the two oldest and best Greek uncials of the fourth century have only "According to Matthew" (\Kata Maththaion\) (note double th) and the Greek uncial D of the fifth or sixth century follows Aleph and B as do some of the earliest Old Latin manuscripts and the Curetonian Syriac. It is clear, therefore, that the earliest form of the title was simply "According to Matthew." It may be doubted if Matthew (or the author, if not Matthew) had any title at all. The use of "according to" makes it plain that the meaning is not "the Gospel of Matthew," but the Gospel as given by Matthew, \secundum Matthaeum\, to distinguish the report by Matthew from that by Mark, by Luke, by John. Least of all is there any authority in the manuscripts for saying "Saint Matthew," a Roman Catholic practice observed by some Protestants.

rwp@Matthew:1:1 @{Jesus Christ}. Both words are used. The first is the name (\Iˆsous\) given by the angel to Mary (Matthew:1:21|) which describes the mission of the child. The second was originally a verbal adjective (\christos\) meaning anointed from the verb to anoint (\chri“\). It was used often in the Septuagint as an adjective like "the anointed priest" (1Kings:2:10|) and then as a substantive to translate the Hebrew word "Messiah" (\Messias\). Songs:Andrew said to Simon: "We have found the Messiah, which is, being interpreted, Christ" (John:1:41|). In the Gospels it is sometimes "the Anointed One," "the Messiah," but finally just a proper name as here, Jesus Christ. Paul in his later Epistles usually has it "Christ Jesus."

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:1:19 @{A Righteous Man} (\dikaios\). Or just, not benignant or merciful. The same adjective is used of Zacharias and Elizabeth (Luke:1:6|) and Simeon (Luke:2:25|). "An upright man," the _Braid Scots_ has it. He had the Jewish conscientiousness for the observance of the law which would have been death by stoning (Deuteronomy:22:23|). Though Joseph was upright, he would not do that. "As a good Jew he would have shown his zeal if he had branded her with public disgrace" (McNeile). {And yet not willing} (\kai mˆ thel“n\). Songs:we must understand \kai\ here, "and yet." Matthew makes a distinction here between "willing" (\thel“n\) and "wishing" (\eboulˆthˆ\), that between purpose (\thel“\) and desire (\boulomai\) a distinction not always drawn, though present here. It was not his purpose to "make her a public example" (\deigmatisai\), from the root (\deiknumi\ to show), a rare word (Colossians:2:15|). The Latin Vulgate has it _traducere_, the Old Latin _divulgare_, Wycliff _pupplische_ (publish), Tyndale _defame_, Moffatt _disgrace_, Braid Scots "Be i the mooth o' the public." The substantive (\deigmatismos\) occurs on the Rosetta Stone in the sense of "verification." There are a few instances of the verb in the papyri though the meaning is not clear (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). The compound form appears (\paradeigmatiz“\) in strkjv@Hebrews:6:6| and there are earlier instances of this compound than of the uncompounded, curiously enough. But new examples of the simple verb, like the substantive, may yet be found. The papyri examples mean to furnish a sample (P Tebt. 5.75), to make trial of (P Ryl. I. 28.32). The substantive means exposure in (P Ryl. I. 28.70). At any rate it is clear that Joseph "was minded to put her away privily." He could give her a bill of divorcement (\apolusai\), the \gˆt\ laid down in the Mishna, without a public trial. He had to give her the writ (\gˆt\) and pay the fine (Deuteronomy:24:1|). Songs:he proposed to do this privately (\lathrai\) to avoid all the scandal possible. One is obliged to respect and sympathize with the motives of Joseph for he evidently loved Mary and was appalled to find her untrue to him as he supposed. It is impossible to think of Joseph as the actual father of Jesus according to the narrative of Matthew without saying that Matthew has tried by legend to cover up the illegitimate birth of Jesus. The Talmud openly charges this sin against Mary. Joseph had "a short but tragic struggle between his legal conscience and his love" (McNeile).

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:2:1 @{Wise men from the east} (\magoi apo anatol“n\). The etymology of \Magi\ is quite uncertain. It may come from the same Indo-European root as _(megas) magnus_, though some find it of Babylonian origin. Herodotus speaks of a tribe of Magi among the Medians. Among the Persians there was a priestly caste of Magi like the Chaldeans in Babylon (Daniel:1:4|). Daniel was head of such an order (Daniel:2:48|). It is the same word as our "magician" and it sometimes carried that idea as in the case of Simon Magus (Acts:8:9,11|) and of Elymas Barjesus (Acts:13:6,8|). But here in Matthew the idea seems to be rather that of astrologers. Babylon was the home of astrology, but we only know that the men were from the east whether Arabia, Babylon, Persia, or elsewhere. The notion that they were kings arose from an interpretation of Is strkjv@60:3; strkjv@Revelation:21:24|. The idea that they were three in number is due to the mention of three kinds of gifts (gold, frankincense, myrrh), but that is no proof at all. Legend has added to the story that the names were Caspar, Balthasar, and Melchior as in _Ben Hur_ and also that they represent Shem, Ham, and Japhet. A casket in the Cologne Cathedral actually is supposed to contain the skulls of these three Magi. The word for east (\apo anatol“n\) means "from the risings" of the sun.

rwp@Matthew:2:8 @{Sent them to Bethlehem and said} (\pempsas autous eis Bˆthleem eipen\). Simultaneous aorist participle, "sending said." They were to "search out accurately" (\exetasate akrib“s\) concerning the child. Then "bring me word, that I also may come and worship him." The deceit of Herod seemed plausible enough and might have succeeded but for God's intervention to protect His Son from the jealous rage of Herod.

rwp@Matthew:3:17 @{A voice out of the heavens} (\ph“nˆ ek t“n ouran“n\). This was the voice of the Father to the Son whom he identifies as His Son, "my beloved Son." Thus each person of the Trinity is represented (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) at this formal entrance of Jesus upon his Messianic ministry. John heard the voice, of course, and saw the dove. It was a momentous occasion for John and for Jesus and for the whole world. The words are similar to strkjv@Psalms:2:7| and the voice at the Transfiguration (Matthew:17:5|). The good pleasure of the Father is expressed by the timeless aorist (\eudokˆsa\).

rwp@Matthew:4:3 @{If thou art the Son of God} (\ei huios ei tou theou\). More exactly, "If thou art Son of God," for there is no article with "Son." The devil is alluding to the words of the Father to Jesus at the baptism: "This is my Son the Beloved." He challenges this address by a condition of the first class which assumes the condition to be true and deftly calls on Jesus to exercise his power as Son of God to appease his hunger and thus prove to himself and all that he really is what the Father called him. {Become bread} (\artoi gen“ntai\). Literally, "that these stones (round smooth stones which possibly the devil pointed to or even picked up and held) become loaves" (each stone a loaf). It was all so simple, obvious, easy. It would satisfy the hunger of Christ and was quite within his power. {It is written} (\gegraptai\). Perfect passive indicative, stands written and is still in force. Each time Jesus quotes Deuteronomy to repel the subtle temptation of the devil. Here it is strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:3| from the Septuagint. Bread is a mere detail (Bruce) in man's dependence upon God.

rwp@Matthew:4:19 @{Fishers of men} (\haleeis anthr“p“n\). Andrew and Simon were fishers by trade. They had already become disciples of Jesus (John:1:35-42|), but now they are called upon to leave their business and to follow Jesus in his travels and work. These two brothers promptly (\euthe“s\) accepted the call and challenge of Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:5:41 @{Shall compel thee} (\aggareusei\). The Vulgate has _angariaverit_. The word is of Persian origin and means public couriers or mounted messengers (\aggaroi\) who were stationed by the King of Persia at fixed localities, with horses ready for use, to send royal messages from one to another. Songs:if a man is passing such a post-station, an official may rush out and compel him to go back to another station to do an errand for the king. This was called impressment into service. This very thing was done to Simon of Cyrene who was thus compelled to carry the cross of Christ (Matthew:27:32|, \ˆggareusan\).

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:10:2 @{The names of the twelve apostles} (\t“n d“deka apostol“n ta onomata\). This is the official name (missionaries) used here by Matthew for the first time. The names are given here, but Matthew does not say that they were chosen at this time. Mark (Mark:3:13-19|) and Luke (Luke:6:12-16|) state that Jesus "chose" them, "appointed" them after a night of prayer in the mountain and came down with them and then delivered the Sermon (Luke:6:17|). Simon heads the list (\pr“tos\) in all four lists including strkjv@Acts:1:13f|. He came to be first and foremost at the great Pentecost (Acts:2| and strkjv@Acts:3|). The apostles disputed a number of times as to which was greatest. Judas Iscariot comes last each time save that he is absent in Acts, being already dead. Matthew calls him the betrayer (\ho paradidous\). Iscariot is usually explained as "man of Kerioth" down near Edom (Joshua:15:25|). Philip comes fifth and James the son of Alphaeus the ninth. Bartholomew is the name for Nathanael. Thaddaeus is Judas the brother of James. Simon Zelotes is also called Simon the Canaanean (Zealous, Hebrew word). This is apparently their first preaching and healing tour without Jesus. He sends them forth by twos (Mark:6:7|). Matthew names them in pairs, probably as they were sent out.

rwp@Matthew:10:16 @{As sheep in the midst of wolves} (\h“s probata en mes“i luk“n\). The presence of wolves on every hand was a fact then and now. Some of these very sheep (10:6|) at the end will turn out to be wolves and cry for Christ's crucifixion. The situation called for consummate wisdom and courage. The serpent was the emblem of wisdom or shrewdness, intellectual keenness (Genesis:3:1; strkjv@Psalms:58:5|), the dove of simplicity (Hosea:7:11|). It was a proverb, this combination, but one difficult of realization. Either without the other is bad (rascality or gullibility). The first clause with \arnas\ for \probata\ is in strkjv@Luke:10:3| and apparently is in a _Fragment of a Lost Gospel_ edited by Grenfell and Hunt. The combination of wariness and innocence is necessary for the protection of the sheep and the discomfiture of the wolves. For "harmless" (\akeraioi\) Moffatt and Goodspeed have "guileless," Weymouth "innocent." The word means "unmixed" (\a\ privative and \kerannumi\), "unadulterated," "simple," "unalloyed."

rwp@Matthew:10:19 @{Be not anxious} (\mˆ merimnˆsˆte\). Ingressive aorist subjunctive in prohibition. "Do not become anxious" (Matthew:6:31|). "Self-defence before Jewish kings and heathen governors would be a terrible ordeal for humble Galileans. The injunction applied to cases when preparation of a speech would be impossible" (McNeile). "It might well alarm the bravest of these simple fishermen to be told that they would have to answer for their doings on Christ's behalf before Jewish councils and heathen courts" (Plummer). Christ is not talking about preparation of sermons. "{In that hour}" (\en ekeinˆi tˆi h“rƒi\), if not before. The Spirit of your Father will speak to you and through you (10:20|). Here is no posing as martyr or courting a martyr's crown, but real heroism with full loyalty to 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 autˆn\). 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 heur“n, ho apolesas\) are timeless in themselves just like \ho dechomenos\ in verses 40| and 41|.

rwp@Matthew:10:41 @{In the name of a prophet} (\eis onoma prophˆtou\). "Because he is a prophet" (Moffatt). In an Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 37 (A.D. 49) we find \onomati eleutherou\ in virtue of being free-born. "He that receiveth a prophet from no ulterior motive, but simply _qua_ prophet (_ut prophetam_, Jer.) would receive a reward in the coming age equal to that of his guest" (McNeile). The use of \eis\ here is to be noted. In reality \eis\ is simply \en\ with the same meaning. It is not proper to say that \eis\ has always to be translated "into." Besides these examples of \eis onoma\ in verses 41| and 43| see strkjv@Matthew:12:41| \eis to kˆrugma I“nƒ\ (see Robertson's _Grammar_, p. 593). {Unto one of these little ones} (\hena t“n mikr“n tout“n\). Simple believers who are neither apostles, prophets, or particularly righteous, just "learners," "in the name of a disciple" (\eis onoma mathˆtou\). Alford thinks that some children were present (cf. strkjv@Matthew:18:2-6|).

rwp@Matthew:12:1 @{On the sabbath day through the cornfields} (\tois sabbasin dia t“n sporim“n\). This paragraph begins exactly like strkjv@11:25| "at that season" (\en ekein“i t“i kair“i\), a general statement with no clear idea of time. Songs:also strkjv@14:1|. The word \kairos\ means a definite and particular time, but we cannot fix it. The word "cornfields" does not mean our maize or Indian corn, but simply fields of grain (wheat or even barley).

rwp@Matthew:12:25 @{Knowing their thoughts} (\eid“s de tas enthumˆseis aut“n\). What they were revolving in their minds. They now find out what a powerful opponent Jesus is. By parables, by a series of conditions (first class), by sarcasm, by rhetorical question, by merciless logic, he lays bare their hollow insincerity and the futility of their arguments. Satan does not cast out Satan. Note timeless aorist passive \emeristhˆ\ in 26|, \ephthasen\ in 28| (simple sense of arriving as in strkjv@Phillipians:3:16| from \phthan“\). Christ is engaged in deathless conflict with Satan the strong man (29|). "Goods" (\skeuˆ\) means house-gear, house furniture, or equipment as in strkjv@Luke:17:36| and strkjv@Acts:27:17|, the tackling of the ship.

rwp@Matthew:12:40 @{The whale} (\tou kˆtous\). Sea-monster, huge fish. In strkjv@Jonah:2:1| the LXX has \kˆtei megal“i\. "Three days and three nights" may simply mean three days in popular speech. Jesus rose "on the third day" (Matthew:16:21|), not "on the fourth day." It is just a fuller form for "after three days" (Mark:8:31; strkjv@10:34|).

rwp@Matthew:13:1 @{On that day} (\en tˆi hˆmerai ekeinˆi\). Songs:this group of parables is placed by Matthew on the same day as the blasphemous accusation and the visit of the mother of Jesus. It is called "the Busy Day," not because it was the only one, but simply that so much is told of this day that it serves as a specimen of many others filled to the full with stress and strain. {Sat by the seaside} (\ekathˆto para tˆn thalassan\). The accusative case need give no difficulty. Jesus came out of the stuffy house and took his seat (\ekathˆto\, imperfect) along the shore with the crowds stretched up and down, a picturesque scene.

rwp@Matthew:13:41 @{Out of his kingdom} (\ek tˆs basileias autou\). Out from the midst of the kingdom, because in every city the good and the bad are scattered and mixed together. Cf. \ek mesou t“n dikai“n\ in strkjv@13:49| "from the midst of the righteous." What this means is that, just as the wheat and the darnel are mixed together in the field till the separation at harvest, so the evil are mixed with the good in the world (the field). Jesus does not mean to say that these "stumbling-blocks" (\ta skandala\) are actually in the Kingdom of heaven and really members of the Kingdom. They are simply mixed in the field with the wheat and God leaves them in the world till the separation comes. Their destiny is "the furnace of fire" (\tˆn kaminon tou puros\).

rwp@Matthew:14:3 @{For the sake of Herodias} (\dia Hˆr“idiada\). The death of John had taken place some time before. The Greek aorists here (\edˆsen, apetheto\) are not used for past perfects. The Greek aorist simply narrates the event without drawing distinctions in past time. This Herodias was the unlawful wife of Herod Antipas. She was herself a descendant of Herod the Great and had married Herod Philip of Rome, not Philip the Tetrarch. She had divorced him in order to marry Herod Antipas after he had divorced his wife, the daughter of Aretas King of Arabia. It was a nasty mess equal to any of our modern divorces. Her first husband was still alive and marriage with a sister-in-law was forbidden to Jews (Leviticus:18:16|). Because of her Herod Antipas had put John in the prison at Machaerus. The bare fact has been mentioned in strkjv@Matthew:4:12| without the name of the place. See strkjv@11:2| also for the discouragement of John \en t“i desm“tˆri“i\ (place of bondage), here \en tˆi phulakˆi\ (the guard-house). Josephus (_Ant_. xviii. 5.2) tells us that Machaerus is the name of the prison. On a high hill an impregnable fortress had been built. Tristram (_Land of Moab_) says that there are now remains of "two dungeons, one of them deep and its sides scarcely broken in" with "small holes still visible in the masonry where staples of wood and iron had once been fixed. One of these must surely have been the prison-house of John the Baptist." "On this high ridge Herod the Great built an extensive and beautiful palace" (Broadus). "The windows commanded a wide and grand prospect, including the Dead Sea, the course of the Jordan, and Jerusalem" (Edersheim, _Life and Times of Jesus_).

rwp@Matthew:14:8 @{Put forward} (\probibastheisa\). See strkjv@Acts:19:33| for a similar verb (\probalont“n\), "pushing forward." Here (Acts) the Textus Receptus uses \probibaz“\. "It should require a good deal of 'educating' to bring a young girl to make such a grim request" (Bruce). {Here} (\h“de\). On the spot. Here and now. {In a charger} (\epi pinaki\). Dish, plate, platter. Why the obsolete "charger"?

rwp@Matthew:14:15 @{When even was come} (\opsias genomenˆs\). Genitive absolute. Not sunset about 6 P.M. as in strkjv@8:16| and as in strkjv@14:23|, but the first of the two "evenings" beginning at 3 P.M. {The place is desert} (\erˆmos estin ho topos\). Not a desolate region, simply lonely, comparatively uninhabited with no large towns near. There were "villages" (\k“mas\) where the people could buy food, but they would need time to go to them. Probably this is the idea of the disciples when they add: {The time is already past} (\hˆ h“ra ˆdˆ parˆlthen\). They must hurry.

rwp@Matthew:14:21 @{Beside women and children} (\ch“ris gunaik“n kai paidi“n\). Perhaps on this occasion there were not so many as usual because of the rush of the crowd around the head of the lake. Matthew adds this item and does not mean that the women and children were not fed, but simply that "the eaters" (\hoi esthiontes\) included five thousand men (\andres\) besides the women and children.

rwp@Matthew:15:33 @{And the disciples say to him} (\kai legousin aut“i hoi mathˆtai\). It seems strange that they should so soon have forgotten the feeding of the five thousand (Matthew:14:13-21|), but they did. Soon Jesus will remind them of both these demonstrations of his power (16:9,10|). They forgot both of them, not just one. Some scholars scout the idea of two miracles so similar as the feeding of the five thousand and the four thousand, though both are narrated in detail by both Mark and Matthew and both are later mentioned by Jesus. Jesus repeated his sayings and wrought multitudes of healings. There is no reason in itself why Jesus should not on occasion repeat a nature miracle like this elsewhere. He is in the region of Decapolis, not in the country of Philip (\Trachonitis\).

rwp@Matthew:16:2 @{Fair weather} (\eudia\). An old poetic word from \eu\ and \Zeus\ as the ruler of the air and giver of fair weather. Songs:men today say "when the sky is red at sunset." It occurs on the Rosetta Stone and in a fourth century A.D. Oxyr. papyrus for "calm weather" that made it impossible to sail the boat. Aleph and B and some other MSS. omit verses 2 and 3. W omits part of verse 2. These verses are similar to strkjv@Luke:12:54-56|. McNeile rejects them here. Westcott and Hort place in brackets. Jesus often repeated his sayings. Zahn suggests that Papias added these words to Matthew.

rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{And I also say unto thee} (\k'ag“ de soi leg“\). "The emphasis is not on 'Thou art Peter' over against 'Thou art the Christ,' but on \Kag“\: 'The Father hath revealed to thee one truth, and I also tell you another" (McNeile). Jesus calls Peter here by the name that he had said he would have (John:1:42|). Peter (\Petros\) is simply the Greek word for Cephas (Aramaic). Then it was prophecy, now it is fact. In verse 17| Jesus addresses him as "Simon Bar-Jonah," his full patronymic (Aramaic) name. But Jesus has a purpose now in using his nickname "Peter" which he had himself given him. Jesus makes a remarkable play on Peter's name, a pun in fact, that has caused volumes of controversy and endless theological strife. {On this rock} (\epi tautˆi tˆi petrƒi\) Jesus says, a ledge or cliff of rock like that in strkjv@7:24| on which the wise man built his house. \Petros\ is usually a smaller detachment of the massive ledge. But too much must not be made of this point since Jesus probably spoke Aramaic to Peter which draws no such distinction (\Kˆphƒ\). What did Jesus mean by this word-play?

rwp@Matthew:16:19 @{The Keys of the kingdom} (\tas kleidas tˆs basileias\). Here again we have the figure of a building with keys to open from the outside. The question is raised at once if Jesus does not here mean the same thing by "kingdom" that he did by "church" in verse 18|. In strkjv@Revelation:1:18; strkjv@3:7| Christ the Risen Lord has "the keys of death and of Hades." He has also "the keys of the kingdom of heaven" which he here hands over to Peter as "gatekeeper" or "steward" (\oikonomos\) provided we do not understand it as a special and peculiar prerogative belonging to Peter. The same power here given to Peter belongs to every disciple of Jesus in all the ages. Advocates of papal supremacy insist on the primacy of Peter here and the power of Peter to pass on this supposed sovereignty to others. But this is all quite beside the mark. We shall soon see the disciples actually disputing again (Matthew:18:1|) as to which of them is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven as they will again (20:21|) and even on the night before Christ's death. Clearly neither Peter nor the rest understood Jesus to say here that Peter was to have supreme authority. What is added shows that Peter held the keys precisely as every preacher and teacher does. To "bind" (\dˆsˆis\) in rabbinical language is to forbid, to "loose" (\lusˆis\) is to permit. Peter would be like a rabbi who passes on many points. Rabbis of the school of Hillel "loosed" many things that the school of Schammai "bound." The teaching of Jesus is the standard for Peter and for all preachers of Christ. Note the future perfect indicative (\estai dedemenon, estai lelumenon\), a state of completion. All this assumes, of course, that Peter's use of the keys will be in accord with the teaching and mind of Christ. The binding and loosing is repeated by Jesus to all the disciples (18:18|). Later after the Resurrection Christ will use this same language to all the disciples (John:20:23|), showing that it was not a special prerogative of Peter. He is simply first among equals, _primus inter pares_, because on this occasion he was spokesman for the faith of all. It is a violent leap in logic to claim power to forgive sins, to pronounce absolution, by reason of the technical rabbinical language that Jesus employed about binding and loosing. Every preacher uses the keys of the kingdom when he proclaims the terms of salvation in Christ. The proclamation of these terms when accepted by faith in Christ has the sanction and approval of God the Father. The more personal we make these great words the nearer we come to the mind of Christ. The more ecclesiastical we make them the further we drift away from him.

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

rwp@Matthew:18:10 @{Despise} (\kataphronˆsˆte\). Literally, "think down on," with the assumption of superiority. {Their angels} (\hoi aggeloi aut“n\). The Jews believed that each nation had a guardian angel (Daniel:10:13,20f.; strkjv@12:1|). The seven churches in Revelation (Revelation:1:20|) have angels, each of them, whatsoever the meaning is. Does Jesus mean to teach here that each little child or child of faith had a special angel who appears in God's presence, "see the face of my Father" (\blepousin to pros“pon tou patros mou\) in special intimacy? Or does he simply mean that the angels do take an interest in the welfare of God's people (Hebrews:1:14|)? There is comfort to us in that thought. Certainly Jesus means that the Father takes special care of his "little ones" who believe in Him. There are angels in God's presence (Luke:1:19|).

rwp@Matthew:18:28 @{A hundred pence} (\hekaton dˆnaria\). A denarius was worth about eight and a half pence. The hundred denarii here were equal to some "fifty shillings" (Bruce), "about 4 pounds" (McNeile), "twenty pounds" (Moffatt), "twenty dollars" (Goodspeed), "100 shillings" (Weymouth). These are various efforts to represent in modern language the small amount of this debt compared with the big one. {Took him by the throat} (\epnigen\). "Held him by the throat" (Allen). It is imperfect, probably inchoative, "began to choke or throttle him." The Roman law allowed this indignity. Vincent quotes Livy (iv. 53) who tells how the necks were twisted (_collum torsisset_) and how Cicero (_Pro Cluentio_, xxi.) says: "Lead him to the judgment seat with twisted neck (_collo obtorto_)." {What thou owest} (\ei ti opheileis\). Literally, "if thou owest anything," however little. He did not even know how much it was, only that he owed him something. "The 'if' is simply the expression of a pitiless logic" (Meyer).

rwp@Matthew:18:34 @{The tormentors} (\tois basanistais\). Not to prison simply, but to terrible punishment. The papyri give various instances of the verb \basaniz“\, to torture, used of slaves and others. "Livy (ii. 23) pictures an old centurion complaining that he was taken by his creditor, not into servitude, but to a workhouse and torture, and showing his back scarred with fresh wounds" (Vincent). {Till he should pay all} (\he“s [hou] apod“i pan\). Just as in verse 30|, his very words. But this is not purgatorial, but punitive, for he could never pay back that vast debt.

rwp@Matthew:19:9 @{Except for fornication} (\parektos logou porneias\). This is the marginal reading in Westcott and Hort which also adds "maketh her an adulteress" (\poiei autˆn moicheuthˆnai\) and also these words: "and he that marrieth her when she is put away committeth adultery" (\kai ho apolelumenˆn gamˆsas moichatai\). There seems to be a certain amount of assimilation in various manuscripts between this verse and the words in strkjv@5:32|. But, whatever reading is accepted here, even the short one in Westcott and Hort (\mˆ epi porneiƒi\, not for fornication), it is plain that Matthew represents Jesus in both places as allowing divorce for fornication as a general term (\porneia\) which is technically adultery (\moicheia\ from \moicha“ or moicheu“\). Here, as in strkjv@5:31f.|, a group of scholars deny the genuineness of the exception given by Matthew alone. McNeile holds that "the addition of the saving clause is, in fact, opposed to the spirit of the whole context, and must have been made at a time when the practice of divorce for adultery had already grown up." That in my opinion is gratuitous criticism which is unwilling to accept Matthew's report because it disagrees with one's views on the subject of divorce. He adds: "It cannot be supposed that Matthew wished to represent Jesus as siding with the school of Shammai." Why not, if Shammai on this point agreed with Jesus? Those who deny Matthew's report are those who are opposed to remarriage at all. Jesus by implication, as in strkjv@5:31|, does allow remarriage of the innocent party, but not of the guilty one. Certainly Jesus has lifted the whole subject of marriage and divorce to a new level, far beyond the petty contentions of the schools of Hillel and Shammai.

rwp@Matthew:20:11 @{They murmured} (\egogguzon\). Onomatopoetic word, the meaning suiting the sound. Our words murmur and grumble are similar. Probably here inchoative imperfect, began to grumble. It occurs in old Ionic and in the papyri.

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

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

rwp@Matthew:21:4 @{By the prophet} (\dia tou prophˆtou\). The first line is from strkjv@Isaiah:62:11|, the rest from strkjv@Zechariah:9:9|. John (John:12:14f.|) makes it clear that Jesus did not quote the passage himself. In Matthew it is not so plain, but probably it is his own comment about the incident. It is not Christ's intention to fulfil the prophecy, simply that his conduct did fulfil it.

rwp@Matthew:21:12 @{Cast out} (\exebalen\). Drove out, assumed authority over "the temple of God" (probably correct text with \tou theou\, though only example of the phrase). John (John:2:14|) has a similar incident at the beginning of the ministry of Jesus. It is not impossible that he should repeat it at the close after three years with the same abuses in existence again. It is amazing how short a time the work of reformers lasts. The traffic went on in the court of the Gentiles and to a certain extent was necessary. Here the tables of {the money-changers} (\t“n kollubist“n\, from \kollubos\, a small coin) were overturned. See on ¯17:24| for the need of the change for the temple tax. The doves were the poor man's offering.

rwp@Matthew:22:1 @{Again in parables} (\palin en parabolais\). Matthew has already given two on this occasion (The Two Sons, The Wicked Husbandmen). He alone gives this Parable of the Marriage Feast of the King's Son. It is somewhat similar to that of The Supper in strkjv@Luke:14:16-23| given on another occasion. Hence some scholars consider this merely Matthew's version of the Lucan parable in the wrong place because of Matthew's habit of grouping the sayings of Jesus. But that is a gratuitous indictment of Matthew's report which definitely locates the parable here by \palin\. Some regard it as not spoken by Jesus at all, but an effort on the part of the writer to cover the sin and fate of the Jews, the calling of the Gentiles, and God's demand for righteousness. But here again it is like Jesus and suits the present occasion.

rwp@Matthew:22:13 @{Was speechless} (\epsim“thˆ\). Was muzzled, dumb from confusion and embarrassment. It is used of the ox (1Timothy:5:18|). {The outer darkness} (\to skotos to ex“teron\). See strkjv@Matthew:8:12|. All the blacker from the standpoint of the brilliantly lighted banquet hall. {There shall be} (\ekei estai\). Out there in the outer darkness.

rwp@Matthew:22:16 @{Their disciples} (\tous mathˆtas aut“n\). Students, pupils, of the Pharisees as in strkjv@Mark:2:18|. There were two Pharisaic theological seminaries in Jerusalem (Hillel, Shammai). {The Herodians} (\t“n Her“idian“n\). Not members of Herod's family or Herod's soldiers, but partisans or followers of Herod. The form in \-ianos\ is a Latin termination like that in \Christianos\ (Acts:11:26|). Mentioned also in strkjv@Mark:3:6| combining with the Pharisees against Jesus. {The person of men} (\pros“pon anthr“p“n\). Literally, face of men. Paying regard to appearance is the sin of partiality condemned by James (James:2:1,9|) when \pros“polˆmpsia, pros“polˆmptein\ are used, in imitation of the Hebrew idiom. This suave flattery to Jesus implied "that Jesus was a reckless simpleton" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:24:3 @{As he sat} (\kathˆmenou\). Genitive absolute. Picture of Jesus sitting on the Mount of Olives looking down on Jerusalem and the temple which he had just left. After the climb up the mountain four of the disciples (Peter, James, John, Andrew) come to Jesus with the problem raised by his solemn words. They ask these questions about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, his own second coming (\parousia\, presence, common in the papyri for the visit of the emperor), and the end of the world. Did they think that they were all to take place simultaneously? There is no way to answer. At any rate Jesus treats all three in this great eschatological discourse, the most difficult problem in the Synoptic Gospels. Many theories are advanced that impugn the knowledge of Jesus or of the writers or of both. It is sufficient for our purpose to think of Jesus as using the destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem which did happen in that generation in A.D. 70, as also a symbol of his own second coming and of the end of the world (\sunteleias tou ai“nos\) or consummation of the age. In a painting the artist by skilful perspective may give on the same surface the inside of a room, the fields outside the window, and the sky far beyond. Certainly in this discourse Jesus blends in apocalyptic language the background of his death on the cross, the coming destruction of Jerusalem, his own second coming and the end of the world. He now touches one, now the other. It is not easy for us to separate clearly the various items. It is enough if we get the picture as a whole as it is here drawn with its lessons of warning to be ready for his coming and the end. The destruction of Jerusalem came as he foretold. There are some who would date the Synoptic Gospels after A.D. 70 in order to avoid the predictive element involved in the earlier date. But that is to limit the fore-knowledge of Jesus to a merely human basis. The word \parousia\ occurs in this chapter alone (3,27,37,39|) in the Gospels, but often in the Epistles, either of presence as opposed to absence (Phillipians:2:12|) or the second coming of Christ (2Thessalonians:2:1|).

rwp@Matthew:24:26 @{In the wilderness} (\en tˆi erˆm“i\). Like Simon son of Gioras (Josephus, _War_, IV,9,5,&7). {In the inner chambers} (\en tois tameiois\). Like John of Giscala (Josephus, _War_, V,6,1). False Messiahs act the role of the Great Unseen and Unknown.

rwp@Matthew:25:14 @{Going into another country} (\apodˆm“n\). About to go away from one's people (\dˆmos\), on the point of going abroad. This word in ancient use in this sense. There is an ellipse here that has to be supplied, {It is as when} or {The kingdom of heaven is as when}. This Parable of the Talents is quite similar to the Parable of the Pounds in strkjv@Luke:19:11-28|, but they are not variations of the same story. Some scholars credit Jesus with very little versatility. {His goods} (\ta huparchonta autou\). His belongings, neuter participle used as a substantive.

rwp@Matthew:26:6 @{In the house of Simon the leper} (\en oikiƒi Sim“nos tou leprou\). Evidently a man who had been healed of his leprosy by Jesus who gave the feast in honour of Jesus. All sorts of fantastic theories have arisen about it. Some even identify this Simon with the one in strkjv@Luke:7:36ff.|, but Simon was a very common name and the details are very different. Some hold that it was Martha's house because she served (John:12:2|) and that Simon was either the father or husband of Martha, but Martha loved to serve and that proves nothing. Some identify Mary of Bethany with the sinful woman in strkjv@Luke:7| and even with Mary Magdalene, both gratuitous and groundless propositions. For the proof that Mary of Bethany, Mary Magdalene, and the sinful woman of strkjv@Luke:7| are all distinct see my _Some Minor Characters in the New Testament_. John (John:12:1|) apparently locates the feast six days before the passover, while Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (26:6|) seem to place it on the Tuesday evening (Jewish Wednesday) just two days before the passover meal. It is possible that John anticipates the date and notes the feast at Bethany at this time because he does not refer to Bethany again. If not, the order of Mark must be followed. According to the order of Mark and Matthew, this feast took place at the very time that the Sanhedrin was plotting about the death of Jesus (Mark:14:1f.|).

rwp@Matthew:26:23 @{He that dipped} (\ho embapsas\). They all dipped their hands, having no knives, forks, or spoons. The aorist participle with the article simply means that the betrayer is the one who dips his hand in the dish (\en t“i trubli“i\) or platter with the broth of nuts and raisins and figs into which the bread was dipped before eating. It is plain that Judas was not recognized by the rest as indicated by what Jesus has said. This language means that one of those who had eaten bread with him had violated the rights of hospitality by betraying him. The Arabs today are punctilious on this point. Eating one's bread ties your hands and compels friendship. But Judas knew full well as is shown in verse 25| though the rest apparently did not grasp it.

rwp@Matthew:26:26 @{And blessed and brake it} (\eulogˆsas eklasen\). Special "Grace" in the middle of the passover meal, "as they were eating," for the institution of the Supper. Jesus broke one of the passover wafers or cakes that each might have a piece, not as a symbol of the breaking of his body as the Textus Receptus has it in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:24|. The correct text there has only to \huper hum“n\ without \kl“menon\. As a matter of fact the body of Jesus was not "broken" (John:19:33|) as John expressly states. {This is my body} (\touto estin to s“ma mou\). The bread as a symbol _represents_ the body of Jesus offered for us, "a beautifully simple, pathetic, and poetic symbol of his death" (Bruce). But some have made it "run into fetish worship" (Bruce). Jesus, of course, does not mean that the bread actually becomes his body and is to be worshipped. The purpose of the memorial is to remind us of his death for our sins.

rwp@Matthew:26:73 @{They that stood by} (\hoi hest“tes\). The talk about Peter continued. Luke (Luke:22:59|) states that the little while was about an hour. The bystanders came up to Peter and bluntly assert that he was "of a truth" (\alˆth“s\) one of the followers of Jesus for his speech betrayed him. Even the Revised Version retains "bewrayeth," quaint old English for "betrayeth." The Greek has it simply "makes thee evident" (\dˆlon se poiei\). His dialect (\lalia\) clearly revealed that he was a Galilean. The Galileans had difficulty with the gutterals and Peter's second denial had exposed him to the tormenting raillery of the loungers who continued to nag him.

rwp@Matthew:27:32 @{Compelled} (\ˆggareusan\). This word of Persian origin was used in strkjv@Matthew:5:41|, which see. There are numerous papyri examples of Ptolemaic date and it survives in modern Greek vernacular. Songs:the soldiers treat Simon of Cyrene (a town of Libya) as a Persian courier (\aggaros\) and impress him into service, probably because Jesus was showing signs of physical weakness in bearing his own Cross as the victims had to do, and not as a mere jest on Simon. "Gethsemane, betrayal, the ordeal of the past sleepless night, scourging, have made the flesh weak" (Bruce). Yes, and the burden of sin of the world that was breaking his heart. {His cross} (\ton stauron autou\). Jesus had used the term cross about himself (16:24|). It was a familiar enough picture under Roman rule. Jesus had long foreseen and foretold this horrible form of death for himself (Matthew:20:19; strkjv@23:24; strkjv@26:2|). He had heard the cry of the mob to Pilate that he be crucified (27:22|) and Pilate's surrender (27:26|) and he was on the way to the Cross (27:31|). There were various kinds of crosses and we do not know precisely the shape of the Cross on which Jesus was crucified, though probably the one usually presented is correct. Usually the victim was nailed (hands and feet) to the cross before it was raised and it was not very high. The crucifixion was done by the soldiers (27:35|) in charge and two robbers were crucified on each side of Jesus, three crosses standing in a row (27:38|).

rwp@Info_Philemon @ THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON FROM ROME A.D. 63 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION This little letter was sent to Philemon by Onesimus, a converted runaway slave of Philemon, along with Tychicus who is going to Colossae with Onesimus (Colossians:4:7-9|) as the bearer also of the so-called Epistle to the Ephesians (Ephesians:6:21f.|). Hence it is clear that these three Epistles were carried to the Province of Asia at the same time. Colossians was probably written before Ephesians which appears to be a general treatment of the same theme. Whether Philemon was actually penned before the other two there is no way of knowing. But it is put first here as standing apart. Probably Paul wrote it himself without dictation because in verse 19| it constitutes a note in his own hand to Philemon for what Onesimus may owe him. Paul applies the spirit of Christianity to the problem of slavery in words that have ultimately set the slaves free from bondage to men. strkjv@Philemon:1:1 @{A prisoner of Christ Jesus} (\desmios Christou Iˆsou\). As verse 9| and in strkjv@Ephesians:3:1; strkjv@4:1|. Old adjective from \desmos\ (bond, \de“\, to bind). Apparently used here on purpose rather than \apostolos\ as more effective with Philemon and a more touching occasion of pride as Paul writes with his manacled right hand. {Timothy} (\Timotheos\). With Paul in Ephesus (Acts:19:22|) and probably known to Philemon. Associated with Paul also in I and II Thess., II Cor., Philipp., Col. {To Philemon} (\Philˆmoni\). A resident of Colossae and a convert of Paul's (verse 19|), perhaps coming to Ephesus while Paul was there when his ministry had so much influence over the province of Asia (Acts:19:9f., 26; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:19|). The name Philemon occurs in the legend of Baucis and Philemon (Ovid's _Metamorphoses_), but with no connection with the brother here. He was active in the church in Colossae ("our co-worker," \sunerg“i hˆm“n\) and was beloved (\agapˆt“i\) by Paul.

rwp@Philippians:2:8 @{In fashion} (\schˆmati\). Locative case of \schˆma\, from \ech“\, to have, to hold. Bengel explains \morphˆ\ by _forma_, \homoi“ma\ by _similitudo_, \schˆma\ by _habitus_. Here with \schˆma\ the contrast "is between what He is in Himself, and what He _appeared_ in the eyes of men" (Lightfoot). {He humbled himself} (\etapein“sen heauton\). First aorist active of \tapeino“\, old verb from \tapeinos\. It is a voluntary humiliation on the part of Christ and for this reason Paul is pressing the example of Christ upon the Philippians, this supreme example of renunciation. See Bruce's masterpiece, _The Humiliation of Christ_. {Obedient} (\hupˆkoos\). Old adjective, giving ear to. See strkjv@Acts:7:39; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:9|. {Unto death} (\mechri thanatou\). "Until death." See "until blood" (\mechris haimatos\, strkjv@Hebrews:12:4|). {Yea, the death of the cross} (\thanatou de staurou\). The bottom rung in the ladder from the Throne of God. Jesus came all the way down to the most despised death of all, a condemned criminal on the accursed cross.

rwp@Revelation:1:7 @{Behold, he cometh with the clouds} (\idou erchetai meta t“n nephel“n\). Futuristic present middle indicative of \erchomai\, a reminiscence of strkjv@Daniel:7:13| (Theodotion). "It becomes a common eschatological refrain" (Beckwith) as in strkjv@Mark:13:26; strkjv@14:62; strkjv@Matthew:24:30; strkjv@26:64; strkjv@Luke:21:27|. Compare the manifestation of God in the clouds at Sinai, in the cloudy pillar, the Shekinah, at the transfiguration" (Vincent). {Shall see} (\opsetai\). Future middle of \hora“\, a reminiscence of strkjv@Zechariah:12:10| according to the text of Theodotion (Aquila and Symmachus) rather than the LXX and like that of strkjv@Matthew:24:30| (similar combination of Daniel and Zechariah) and strkjv@26:64|. This picture of the victorious Christ in his return occurs also in strkjv@14:14, 18-20; strkjv@19:11-21; strkjv@20:7-10|. {And they which} (\kai hoitines\). "And the very ones who," Romans and Jews, all who shared in this act. {Pierced} (\exekentˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \ekkente“\, late compound (Aristotle, Polybius, LXX), from \ek\ and \kente“\ (to stab, to pierce), in N.T., only here and strkjv@John:19:37|, in both cases from strkjv@Zechariah:12:10|, but not the LXX text (apparently proof that John used the original Hebrew or the translation of Theodotion and Aquila). {Shall mourn} (\kopsontai\). Future middle (direct) of \kopt“\, old verb, to cut, "they shall cut themselves," as was common for mourners (Matthew:11:17; strkjv@Luke:8:52; strkjv@23:27|). From strkjv@Zechariah:12:12|. See also strkjv@Revelation:18:9|. {Tribes} (\phulai\). Not just the Jewish tribes, but the spiritual Israel of Jews and Gentiles as in strkjv@7:4-8|. No nation had then accepted Christ as Lord and Saviour, nor has any yet done so.

rwp@Revelation:1:20 @{The mystery of the seven stars} (\to mustˆrion t“n hepta aster“n\). On the word \mustˆrion\ see on ¯Matthew:13:11; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:7; strkjv@Colossians:1:26|. Here it means the inner meaning (the secret symbol) of a symbolic vision (Swete) as in strkjv@10:7; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@17:7,9; strkjv@Daniel:2:47|. Probably the accusative absolute (Charles), "as for the mystery" (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 490, 1130), as in strkjv@Romans:8:3|. This item is picked out of the previous vision (1:16|) as needing explanation at once and as affording a clue to what follows (2:1,5|). {Which} (\hous\). Masculine accusative retained without attraction to case of \aster“n\ (genitive, \h“n\). {In my right hand} (\epi tˆs dexias mou\). Or "upon," but \en tˆi\, etc., in verse 16|. {And the seven golden candlesticks} (\kai tas hepta luchnias tas chrusƒs\). "The seven lampstands the golden," identifying the stars of verse 16| with the lampstands of verse 12|. The accusative case here is even more peculiar than the accusative absolute \mustˆrion\, since the genitive \luchni“n\ after \mustˆrion\ is what one would expect. Charles suggests that John did not revise his work. {The angels of the seven churches} (\aggeloi t“n hepta ekklˆsi“n\). Anarthrous in the predicate (angels of, etc.). "The seven churches" mentioned in strkjv@1:4,11|. Various views of \aggelos\ here exist. The simplest is the etymological meaning of the word as messenger from \aggell“\ (Matthew:11:10|) as messengers from the seven churches to Patmos or by John from Patmos to the churches (or both). Another view is that \aggelos\ is the pastor of the church, the reading \tˆn gunaika sou\ (thy wife) in strkjv@2:20| (if genuine) confirming this view. Some would even take it to be the bishop over the elders as \episcopos\ in Ignatius, but a separate \aggelos\ in each church is against this idea. Some take it to be a symbol for the church itself or the spirit and genius of the church, though distinguished in this very verse from the churches themselves (the lampstands). Others take it to be the guardian angel of each church assuming angelic patrons to be taught in strkjv@Matthew:18:10; strkjv@Acts:12:15|. Each view is encompassed with difficulties, perhaps fewer belonging to the view that the "angel" is the pastor. {Are seven churches} (\hepta ekklˆsiai eisin\). These seven churches (1:4,11|) are themselves lampstands (1:12|) reflecting the light of Christ to the world (Matthew:5:14-16; strkjv@John:8:12|) in the midst of which Christ walks (1:13|).

rwp@Revelation:2:13 @{Where} (\pou--hopou\). \Pou\ is interrogative adverb used here in an indirect question as in strkjv@John:1:39|. \Hopou\ is relative adverb referring to \pou\. Satan's throne (\ho thronos tou Satanƒ\). Satan not simply resided in Pergamum, but his "throne" or seat of power of king or judge (Matthew:19:28; strkjv@Luke:1:32,52|). The symbol of Asklepios was the serpent as it is of Satan (12:9; strkjv@20:2|). There was, besides, a great throne altar to Zeus cut on the Acropolis rock, symbol of "rampant paganism" (Swete) and the new Caesar-worship with the recent martyrdom of Antipas made Pergamum indeed a very throne of Satan. {Holdest fast my name} (\krateis to onoma sou\). Present active indicative of \krate“\, "dost keep on holding," as in strkjv@2:25, strkjv@3:11|. This church refused to say \Kurios Kaisar\ (_Martyrd. Polyc_. 8f.) and continued to say \Kurios Iˆsous\ (1Corinthians:12:3|). They stood true against the emperor-worship. {Didst not deny} (\ouk ˆrnˆs“\). First aorist middle second person singular of \arneomai\. Reference to a specific incident not known to us. {My faith} (\tˆn pistin mou\). Objective genitive, "thy faith in me." {Of Antipas} (\Antipas\). Indeclinable in this form. It is possible that \Antipa\ (genitive) was really written, though unimportant as the nominative follows in apposition. Nothing is really known of this early martyr in Pergamum before the writing of the Apocalypse. One legend is that he was burnt to death in a brazen bull. Other martyrs followed him at Pergamum (Agathonice, Attalus, Carpus, Polybus). {My witness} (\ho martus mou\). Nominative in apposition with a genitive as in strkjv@1:5| (with ablative), common solecism in the Apocalypse. "Witness" as Jesus had said they should be (Acts:1:8|) and Stephen was (Acts:22:20|) and others were (Revelation:17:6|). The word later (by third century) took on the modern meaning of martyr. {My faithful one} (\ho pistos mou\). Nominative also, with \mou\ also. Jesus gives Antipas his own title (Swete) as in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@3:14|. Faithful unto death. {Was killed} (\apektanthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \apoktein“\, this passive form common in the Apocalypse (?2:13; strkjv@6:11; strkjv@5:9,13; strkjv@13:10,15; 18, 20; strkjv@19:21?). {Among you} (\par humin\). By your side. Proof of the throne of Satan, "where Satan dwells" (\hopou ho Satanƒs katoikei\), repeated for emphasis.

rwp@Revelation:4:10 @{Shall fall down} (\pesountai\, future middle of \pipt“\), {shall worship} (\proskunˆsousin\, future active of \proskune“\), {shall cast their crowns} (\balousin tous stephanous\, future active of \ball“\). The two actions by the two groups (living creatures, elders) are coordinated (simultaneous in the repetition). They thus acknowledge that all this kingly dignity comes from God, who is King of kings and Lord of lords. Charles takes the elders, however, to be angels, not redeemed men.

rwp@Revelation:6:1 @{And I saw} (\kai eidon\). As in strkjv@4:1; strkjv@5:1|. The vision unfolds without anything being said about opening the book and reading from it. In a more vivid and dramatic fashion the Lamb breaks the seals one by one and reveals the contents and the symbolism. The first four seals have a common note from one of the four \z“a\ and the appearance of a horse. No effort will be made here to interpret these seals as referring to persons or historical events in the past, present, or future, but simply to relate the symbolism to the other symbols in the book. It is possible that there is some allusion here to the symbolism in the so-called "Little Apocalypse" of strkjv@Mark:13; strkjv@Matthew:24f.; strkjv@Luke:21|. The imagery of the four horses is similar to that in strkjv@Zechariah:1:7-11; strkjv@6:1-8| (cf. strkjv@Jeremiah:14:12; strkjv@24:10; strkjv@42:17|). In the Old Testament the horse is often the emblem of war (Job:39:25; strkjv@Psalms:76:6; strkjv@Proverbs:21:31; strkjv@Ezekiel:26:10|). "Homer pictures the horses of Rhesus as whiter than snow, and swift as the wind" (Vincent). {When the Lamb opened} (\hote ˆnoixen to arnion\). First aorist active indicative of \anoig“\. This same phrase recurs in rhythmical order at the opening of each seal (6:1,3,5,7,9,12|) till the last (8:1|), where we have \hotan ˆnoixen\ (\hotan\ rather than \hote\ calling particular attention to it). {One} (\mian\). Probably used here as an ordinal (the first) as in strkjv@Matthew:28:1|. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 671f. {Of} (\ek\). This use of \ek\ with the ablative in the partitive sense is common in the Apocalypse, as twice in this verse (\ek t“n\, etc.). Songs:\henos ek t“n\ (one of the four living creatures) is "the first of," etc. {In a voice of thunder} (\en ph“nˆi brontˆs\). Old word used of John and James (Mark:3:17|) and elsewhere in N.T. only strkjv@John:12:29| and a dozen times in the Apocalypse. {Come} (\Erchou\). Present middle imperative of \erchomai\, but with exclamatory force (not strictly linear). The command is not addressed to the Lamb nor to John (the correct text omits \kai ide\ "and see") as in strkjv@17:1; strkjv@21:9|, but to one of the four horsemen each time. Swete takes it as a call to Christ because \erchou\ is so used in strkjv@22:17,20|, but that is not conclusive.

rwp@Revelation:7:3 @{Hurt not} (\mˆ adikˆsˆte\). Prohibition with \mˆ\ and the ingressive aorist active subjunctive of \adike“\, not to begin to hurt. {Till we shall have sealed} (\achri sphragis“men\). Temporal clause of indefinite action for the future with \achri\ (sometimes \achris hou\ or \achris hou an\) and the aorist subjunctive as in strkjv@15:8; strkjv@20:3,5| or the future indicative (17:7|), usually with the notion of ascent (up to) rather than extent like \mechri\. {An} (modal) sometimes occurs, but it is not necessary. But there is no _futurum exactum_ idea in the aorist subjunctive, simply "till we seal," not "till we shall have sealed." {Upon their foreheads} (\epi t“n met“p“n\). From strkjv@Ezekiel:9:4|. Old word (\meta, “ps\, after the eye, above the eye, the space above or between the eyes), in N.T. only in the Apocalypse (7:3; strkjv@9:4; strkjv@13:16; strkjv@14:1,9; strkjv@17:5; strkjv@20:4; strkjv@22:4|). For "the servants of God" (\tous doulous tou theou\) who are to be thus marked linked with angels in the service of God see strkjv@Revelation:1:1; strkjv@2:20; strkjv@19:2,5; strkjv@22:3,6|.

rwp@Revelation:12:5 @{She was delivered of a son} (\eteken huion\). Literally, "she bore a son" (second aorist active indicative of \tikt“\). {A man child} (\arsen\). Songs:A C with the neuter \teknon\ or \paidion\ in mind, as often in O.T. (\eteken arsen\, strkjv@Exodus:1:16ff.; strkjv@2:2; strkjv@Leviticus:12:2,7; strkjv@Isaiah:66:7; strkjv@Jeremiah:20:15|, etc.), but P and some cursives read \arsena\ (masculine accusative), as in verse 13| (\ton arsena\), while Aleph Q have \arrena\. The word is old (either \arsˆn\ or \arrˆn\), as in strkjv@Matthew:19:4|, only in this chapter in the Apocalypse. It is really redundant after \huion\ (son), as in Tob. strkjv@6:12 (Aleph). {Who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron} (\hos mellei poimainein panta ta ethnˆ en rabd“i sidˆrƒi\). See strkjv@2:27| for these words (from strkjv@Psalms:2:9|) applied there to victorious Christians also, and in strkjv@19:15| to the triumphant Christian. His rule will go beyond the Jews (Matthew:2:6|). There is here, of course, direct reference to the birth of Jesus from Mary, who thus represented in her person this "ideal woman" (God's people). {Was caught unto God} (\hˆrpasthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \harpaz“\, old verb for seizing or snatching away, as in strkjv@John:10:12|, here alone in the Apocalypse. Reference to the ascension of Christ, with omission of the ministry, crucifixion, and resurrection of Christ because he is here simply showing that "the Dragon's vigilance was futile" (Swete). "The Messiah, so far from being destroyed, is caught up to a share in God's throne" (Beckwith).

rwp@Revelation:12:15 @{Water as a flood} (\hud“r h“s potamon\). "Water as a river," accusative case after \ebalen\ (cast). The serpent could not follow the woman or stop her flight and so sought to drown her. {That he might cause her to be carried away by the stream} (\hina autˆn potamophorˆton poiˆsˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \poie“\. For this use of \poie“\ see strkjv@17:16|. This compound verbal \potamophorˆton\ in the predicate accusative (\potamos\, river, \phorˆton\ from \phore“\, to bear) was not coined by John, but occurs in a papyrus of B.C. 110 and in several others after N.T. times. It means simply "carried away by the river."

rwp@Revelation:13:2 @{Like unto a leopard} (\homoion pardalei\). Associative-instrumental case of \pardalis\, old word for panther, leopard, here only in N.T. The leopard (\leo, pard\) was considered a cross between a panther and a lioness. {As the feet of a bear} (\h“s arkou\). Old word, also spelled \arktos\, here only in N.T. From strkjv@Daniel:7:4|. No word in the Greek for "feet" before "bear." {As the mouth of a lion} (\h“s stoma leontos\). From strkjv@Daniel:7:4|. This beast combines features of the first three beasts in strkjv@Daniel:7:2ff|. The strength and brutality of the Babylonian, Median, and Persian empires appeared in the Roman Empire. The catlike vigilance of the leopard, the slow and crushing power of the bear, and the roar of the lion were all familiar features to the shepherds in Palestine (Swete). {The dragon gave him} (\ed“ken aut“i ho drak“n\). First aorist active indicative of \did“mi\ (to give) and dative case \aut“i\ (the beast). The dragon works through this beast. The beast is simply Satan's agent. Satan claimed this power to Christ (Matthew:4:9; strkjv@Luke:4:6|) and Christ called Satan the prince of this world (John:12:31; strkjv@14:30; strkjv@16:11|). Songs:the war is on.

rwp@Revelation:13:12 @{He exerciseth} (\poiei\). Present active dramatic present of \poie“\. In his sight (\en“pion autou\). In the eye of the first beast who gets his authority from the dragon (13:2|). The second beast carries on the succession of authority from the dragon and the first beast. It has been a common Protestant interpretation since the Reformation of Luther to see in the first beast Pagan Rome and in the second beast Papal Rome. There is undoubted verisimilitude in this interpretation, but it is more than doubtful if any such view comes within the horizon of the imagery here. Ramsay takes the first beast to be the power of imperial Rome and the second beast to be the provincial power which imitated Rome in the persecutions. {To worship the first beast} (\hina proskunˆsousin to thˆrion to pr“ton\). Sub-final clause with \hina\ after \poiei\ seen in strkjv@John:11:37; strkjv@Colossians:4:16; strkjv@Revelation:3:9|, usually with the subjunctive, but here with the future indicative as in strkjv@3:9|. Note the accusative after \proskune“\ as in verse 8|. Here the death-stroke of one of the heads (verse 3|) is ascribed to the beast. Clearly the delegated authority of the provincial priests of the emperor-worship is rigorously enforced, if this is the correct interpretation.

rwp@Revelation:18:6 @{Render as she rendered} (\apodote h“s aped“ken\). Second aorist (effective) active imperative and first aorist (effective) active of \apodid“mi\, old and common verb for requital, to give back, the _lex talionis_ which is in the O.T. (Jeremiah:50:15,29; strkjv@51:24,56; strkjv@Psalms:137:8|), and in the N.T. also (Matthew:7:2|). Here the reference is to persecutions by Rome, particularly the martyrdom of the saints (18:24; strkjv@19:2|). {Double the double} (\dipl“sate ta dipla\). First aorist imperative of \diplo“\, old verb (from \diploos\, double, strkjv@Matthew:23:15|), here only in N.T. \Diplƒ\ is simply the neuter plural accusative (cognate) contract form for \diploa\ (not \dipl“\). Requite here in double measure, a full requital (Exodus:22:4,7,9; strkjv@Isaiah:40:2; strkjv@Jeremiah:16:18; strkjv@17:18; strkjv@Zechariah:9:12|). The double recompense was according to the Levitical law. {Which she mingled} (\h“i ekerasen\). First aorist active indicative of \kerannumi\. The relative \h“i\ is attracted to the locative case of its antecedent \potˆri“i\ (cup), for which see strkjv@14:8,10; strkjv@17:4; strkjv@18:3|. {Mingle unto her double} (\kerasate autˆi diploun\). First aorist active imperative of the same verb \kerannumi\, with the same idea of double punishment.

rwp@Revelation:21:19 @{Were adorned} (\kekosmˆmenoi\). Perfect passive participle of \kosme“\ as in verse 2|, but without the copula \ˆsan\ (were), followed by instrumental case \lith“i\ (stone). {With all manner of precious stones} (\panti lith“i timi“i\). "With every precious stone." The list of the twelve stones in verses 19,20| has no necessary mystical meaning. "The writer is simply trying to convey the impression of a radiant and superb structure" (Moffatt). The twelve gems do correspond closely (only eight in common) with the twelve stones on the high priest's breastplate (Exodus:28:17-20; strkjv@39:10ff.; strkjv@Ezekiel:28:13; strkjv@Isaiah:54:11f.|). Charles identifies them with the signs of zodiac in reverse order, a needless performance here. See the stones in strkjv@Revelation:4:3|. These foundation stones are visible. For jasper (\iaspis\) see strkjv@4:3; strkjv@21:11,18; strkjv@Isaiah:54:12|; sapphire (\sappheiros\) see strkjv@Exodus:24:10;. strkjv@Isaiah:54:11| (possibly the \lapis lazuli\ of Turkestan); chalcedony (\chalkˆd“n\) we have no other reference in N.T. or LXX (described by Pliny, H.N. XXXIII.21), possibly a green silicate of copper from near Chalcedon; emerald (\smaragdos\) here only in N.T., see strkjv@4:3| \smaragdinos\, and like it a green stone.

rwp@Revelation:21:23 @{To shine upon it} (\hina phain“sin autˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \phain“\, to keep on shining. Light is always a problem in our cities. See strkjv@Isaiah:60:19ff|. {Did lighten it} (\eph“tisen autˆn\). First aorist active indicative of \ph“tiz“\, to illumine, old verb from \ph“s\ (Luke:11:36|). If the sun and moon did shine, they would give no added light in the presence of the Shekinah Glory of God. See verse 11| for "the glory of God." Cf. strkjv@18:1; strkjv@21:3|. "Their splendour is simply put to shame by the glory of God Himself" (Charles). {And the lamp thereof is the Lamb} (\kai ho luchnos autˆs to arnion\). Charles takes \ho luchnos\ as predicate, "and the Lamb is the lamp thereof." Bousset thinks that John means to compare Christ to the moon the lesser light (Genesis:1:16|), but that contrast is not necessary. Swete sees Christ as the one lamp for all in contrast with the many \luchniai\ of the churches on earth (1:12,20|). "No words could more clearly demonstrate the purely spiritual character of St. John's conception of the New Jerusalem" (Swete).

rwp@Info_Revelation @ EMPEROR WORSHIP AS THE OCCASION FOR JOHN'S APOCALYPSE There is no doubt at all that the emperor cult (emperor worship) played a main part in the persecution of the Christians that was the occasion for this great Christian apocalypse. The book itself bears ample witness to this fact, if the two beasts refer to the Roman power as the agent of Satan. It is not possible to single out each individual emperor in the graphic picture. Most would take the dragon to be Satan and the first and the second beasts to be the imperial and provincial Roman power. The Roman emperors posed as gods and did the work of Satan. In particular there were two persecuting emperors (Nero and Domitian) who were responsible for many martyrs for Christ. But emperor worship began before Nero. Julius Caesar was worshipped in the provinces. Octavius was called Augustus (\Sebastos\, Reverend). The crazy Emperor Caius Caligula not simply claimed to be divine, but actually demanded that his statue be set up for worship in the Holy of Holies in the Temple in Jerusalem. He was killed in January A.D. 41 before he could execute his dire purpose. But the madcap Nero likewise demanded worship and blamed in A.D. 64 the burning of Rome on the Christians, though guilty of it himself. He set the style for persecuting Christians, which slumbered on and burst into flames again under Domitian, who had himself commonly termed _Dominus ac Deus noster_ (Our Lord and God). The worship of the emperor did not disturb the worshippers of other gods save the Jews and the Christians, and in particular the Christians were persecuted after the burning of Rome when they were distinguished from the Jews. Up till then Christians were regarded (as by Gallio in Corinth) as a variety of Jews and so entitled to tolerance as a _religio licita_, but they had no standing in law by themselves and their refusal to worship the emperor early gave offence, as Paul indicates in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3|. It was \Kurios Iˆsous\ or \Kurios Kaisar\. On this very issue Polycarp lost his life. The emperors as a rule were tolerant about it, save Nero and Domitian, who was called Nero _redivivus_, or Nero back again. Trajan in his famous letter to Pliny advised tolerance except in stubborn cases, when the Christians had to be put to death. After Nero it was a crime to be a Christian and all sorts of slanders about them were circulated. We have seen already in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3ff.|, the man of sin who sets himself above God as the object of worship. We have seen also in strkjv@1John:2:18,22; strkjv@4:3; strkjv@2John:1:7| the term antichrist applied apparently to Gnostic heretics. One may wonder if, as Beckwith argues, in the Apocalypse the man of sin and the antichrist are united in the beast.

rwp@Romans:2:25 @{If thou be a doer of the law} (\ean nomon prasseis\). Condition of third class and the present (continued action) subjunctive of \prass“\, a verb meaning to do as a habit. {Is become uncircumcision} (\akrobustia gegonen\). The Jew is then like the Gentile, with no privilege at all. Circumcision was simply the seal of the covenant relation of Israel with God.

rwp@Romans:4:11 @{The sign of circumcision} (\sˆmeion peritomˆs\). It is the genitive of apposition, circumcision being the sign. {A seal of the righteousness of the faith} (\sphragida tˆs dikaiosunˆs tˆs piste“s\). \Sphragis\ is old word for the seal placed on books (Revelation:5:1|), for a signet-ring (Revelation:7:2|), the stamp made by the seal (2Timothy:2:19|), that by which anything is confirmed (1Corinthians:9:2|) as here. The circumcision did not convey the righteousness, but only gave outward confirmation. It came by faith and "the faith which he had while in uncircumcision" (\tˆs en tˆi akrobustiƒi\), "the in the state of uncircumcision faith." Whatever parallel exists between baptism and circumcision as here stated by Paul argues for faith before baptism and for baptism as the sign and seal of the faith already had before baptism. {That he might be} (\eis to einai auton\). This idiom may be God's purpose (contemplated result) as in \eis to logisthˆnai\ below, or even actual result (so that he was) as in strkjv@1:20|. {Though they be in uncircumcision} (\di' akrobustias\). Simply, "of those who believe while in the condition of uncircumcision."

rwp@Romans:12:7 @{Let us give ourselves}. There is no verb in the Greek. We must supply \d“men heautous\ or some such phrase. {Or he that teacheth} (\eite ho didask“n\). Here the construction changes and no longer do we have the accusative case like \diakonian\ (general word for Christian service of all kinds including ministers and deacons) as the object of \echontes\, but the nominative articular participle. A new verb must be supplied of which \ho didask“n\ is the subject as with the succeeding participles through verse 8|. Perhaps in each instance the verb is to be repeated from the participle like \didasket“\ here (let him teach) or a general term \poieit“\ (let him do it) can be used for all of them as seems necessary before "with liberality" in verse 8| (\en haplotˆti\, in simplicity, for which word, see strkjv@Matthew:6:22; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@9:11,13|). {He that ruleth} (\ho proistamenos\). "The one standing in front" for which see strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:12|. {With diligence} (\en spoudˆi\). "In haste" as if in earnest (Mark:6:25; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:11f., strkjv@8:8,16|), from \speud“\, to hasten. Again verse 11|. {With cheerfulness} (\en hilarotˆti\). Late word, only here in N.T., from \hilaros\ (2Corinthians:9:7|) cheerful, hilarious.

rwp@Romans:15:30 @{By} (\dia\). The intermediate agents of the exhortation (the Lord Jesus and the love of the Spirit) as \dia\ is used after \parakal“\ in strkjv@12:1|. {That ye strive together with me} (\sunag“nisasthai moi\). First aorist middle infinitive of \sunag“ni zomai\, old compound verb, only here in N.T., direct object of \parakal“\, and with associative instrumental case \moi\, the simplex \ag“nizomenos\, occurring in strkjv@Colossians:4:12| of the prayers of Epaphras. For Christ's agony in prayer see strkjv@Matthew:26:42; strkjv@Luke:22:44|.

rwp@Romans:16:7 @{Andronicus and Junias} (\Andronicou kai Iounian\). The first is a Greek name found even in the imperial household. The second name can be either masculine or feminine. {Kinsmen} (\suggeneis\). Probably only fellow-countrymen as in strkjv@9:13|. {Fellow-prisoners} (\sunaichmal“tus\). Late word and rare (in Lucian). One of Paul's frequent compounds with \sun\. Literally, fellow captives in war. Perhaps they had shared one of Paul's numerous imprisonments (2Corinthians:11:23|). In N.T. only here, strkjv@Philemon:1:23; strkjv@Colossians:4:10|. {Of note} (\episˆmoi\). Stamped, marked (\epi sˆma\). Old word, only here and strkjv@Matthew:27:16| (bad sense) in N.T. {Among the apostles} (\en tois apostolois\). Naturally this means that they are counted among the apostles in the general sense true of Barnabas, James, the brother of Christ, Silas, and others. But it can mean simply that they were famous in the circle of the apostles in the technical sense. {Who have been in Christ before me} (\hoi kai pro emou gegonan en Christ“i\). Andronicus and Junias were converted before Paul was. Note \gegonan\ (_Koin‚_ form by analogy) instead of the usual second perfect active indicative form \gegonasin\, which some MSS. have. The perfect tense notes that they are still in Christ.

rwp@Romans:16:19 @{Is come abroad} (\aphiketo\). Second aorist middle indicative of \aphikneomai\, old verb, to come from, then to arrive at, only here in N.T. {Over you} (\eph' humin\). "Upon you." Simple unto that which is evil (\akeraious eis to kakon\). Old adjective from \a\ privative and \kerannumi\, to mix. Unmixed with evil, unadulterated.

rwp@Romans:16:25 @Verses 25-27| conclude the noble Epistle with the finest of Paul's doxologies. {To him that is able} (\t“i dunamen“i\). Dative of the articular participle of \dunamai\. See similar idiom in strkjv@Ephesians:3:20|. {To stablish} (\stˆrixai\). First aorist active infinitive of \stˆriz“\, to make stable. {According to my gospel} (\kata to euaggelion mou\). Same phrase in strkjv@2:16; strkjv@2Timothy:2:8|. Not a book, but Paul's message as here set forth. {The preaching} (\to kˆrugma\). The proclamation, the heralding. {Of Jesus Christ} (\Iˆsou Christou\). Objective genitive, "about Jesus Christ." {Revelation} (\apokalupsin\). "Unveiling." {Of the mystery} (\mustˆriou\). Once unknown, but now revealed. {Kept in silence} (\sesigˆmenou\). Perfect passive participle of \siga“\, to be silent, state of silence. {Through times eternal} (\chronois ai“niois\). Associative instrumental case, "along with times eternal" (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 527). See strkjv@1Corinthians:2:6,7,10|.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Tue Jul 2 20:03:30 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020