NT-GOSPEL.filter - rwp changing:

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

rwp@2Corinthians:5:18 @{Who reconciled us to himself through Christ} (\tou katallaxantos hmas heauti dia Christou\). Here Paul uses one of his great doctrinal words, \katallass\, old word for exchanging coins. \Diallass\, to change one's mind, to reconcile, occurs in N.T. only in strkjv@Matthew:5:24| though in papyri (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 187), and common in Attic. \Katallass\ is old verb, but more frequent in later writers. We find \sunallass\ in strkjv@Acts:7:26| and \apokatallass\ in strkjv@Colossians:1:20f.; strkjv@Ephesians:2:16| and the substantive \katallag\ in strkjv@Romans:5:11; strkjv@11:15| as well as here. It is hard to discuss this great theme without apparent contradiction. God's love (John:3:16|) provided the means and basis for man's reconciliation to God against whom he had sinned. It is all God's plan because of his love, but God's own sense of justice had to be satisfied (Romans:3:26|) and so God gave his Son as a propitiation for our sins (Romans:3:25; strkjv@Colossians:1:20; strkjv@1John:2:2; strkjv@4:10|). The point made by Paul here is that God needs no reconciliation, but is engaged in the great business of reconciling us to himself. This has to be done on God's terms and is made possible through (\dia\) Christ. {And gave unto us the ministry of reconciliation} (\kai dontos hmin tn diakonian ts katallags\). It is a ministry marked by reconciliation, that consists in reconciliation. God has made possible through Christ our reconciliation to him, but in each case it has to be made effective by the attitude of each individual. The task of winning the unreconciled to God is committed to us. It is a high and holy one, but supremely difficult, because the offending party (the guilty) is the hardest to win over. We must be loyal to God and yet win sinful men to him.

rwp@2Peter:1:17 @{For he received} (\labn gar\). Second aorist active participle nominative singular of \lamban\, "he having received," but there is no finite verb, anacoluthon, changing in verse 19| (after parenthesis in 18|) to \echomen bebaioteron\ rather than \ebebaisen\. {When there came such a voice to him} (\phns enechtheiss auti toiasde\). Genitive absolute with first aorist passive participle feminine singular of \pher\ (cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:13|), repeated \enechtheisan\ in verse 18|. \Phn\ (voice) is used also of Pentecost (Acts:2:6|). \Toiosde\ (classical demonstrative) occurs here alone in the N.T. {From the excellent glory} (\hupo ts megaloprepous doxs\). "By the majestic glory." \Megalopreps\, old compound (\megas\, great, \prepei\, it is becoming), here only in N.T., several times in O.T., Apocr. (II Macc. strkjv@8:15), adverb in the inscriptions. Probably a reference to \nephel phtein\ (bright cloud, shekinah) in strkjv@Matthew:17:5|. The words given here from the "voice" agree exactly with strkjv@Matthew:17:5| except the order and the use of \eis hon\ rather than \en hi\. Mark (Mark:9:7|) and Luke (Luke:9:35|) have \akouete\. But Peter did not need any Gospel for his report here.

rwp@Hebrews:4:12 @{The word of God} (\ho logos tou theou\). That just quoted about the promise of rest and God's rest, but true of any real word of God. {Living} (\zn\). Cf. the Living God (3:12|). In Philo and the Book of Wisdom the Logos of God is personified, but still more in strkjv@John:1:1-18| where Jesus is pictured as the Logos on a par with God. "Our author is using Philonic language rather than Philonic ideas" (Moffatt). See strkjv@John:6:63|: "The words which I have spoken are spirit and are life." {Active} (\energs\). Energetic, powerful (John:1:12; strkjv@Phillipians:3:21; strkjv@Colossians:1:29|). {Sharper} (\tomteros\). Comparative of \tomos\, cutting (from \temn\, to cut), late adjective, here only in the N.T. {Than} (\huper\). Often so after a comparative (Luke:16:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:13|). {Two-edged} (\distomon\). "Two-mouthed" (\di-, stoma\), double-mouthed like a river (Polybius), branching ways (Sophocles), applied to sword (\xiphos\) by Homer and Euripides. {Piercing} (\diiknoumenos\). Present middle participle of \diikneomai\, old verb to go through, here only in N.T. {Even to the dividing} (\achri merismou\). Old word from \meriz\ (\meros\, part), to partition. {Of soul and spirit} (\psuchs kai pneumatos\). As in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:23; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:45|, but not an argument for trichotomy. Psychology is constantly changing its terminology. {Of both joints and marrow} (\harmn te kai mueln\). From \ar\, to join, comes \harmos\, old word, here only in the N.T. \Muelos\ (from \mu\, to shut), old word, here only in N.T. This surgeon goes into and through the joints and marrow, not cleaving between them. {Quick to discern} (\kritikos\). Verbal adjective in \-ikos\, from \krin\, skilled in judging, as the surgeon has to be and able to decide on the instant what to do. Songs:God's word like his eye sees the secret lurking doubt and unbelief "of the thoughts and intents of the heart" (\enthumsen kai ennoin kardias\). The surgeon carries a bright and powerful light for every dark crevice and a sharp knife for the removal of all the pus revealed by the light. It is a powerful picture here drawn.

rwp@Luke:8:9 @{Asked} (\eprtn\). Imperfect of \eperta\ (\epi\ and \erta\) where strkjv@Mark:4:10| has \rtn\ (uncompounded imperfect), both the tense and the use of \epi\ indicate eager and repeated questions on the part of the disciples, perhaps dimly perceiving a possible reflection on their own growth. {What this parable might be} (\tis haut ei h parabol\). A mistranslation, What this parable was (or meant). The optative \ei\ is merely due to indirect discourse, changing the indicative \estin\ (is) of the direct question to the optative \ei\ of the indirect, a change entirely with the writer or speaker and without any change of meaning (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1043f.).

rwp@Luke:13:3 @{Except ye repent} (\ean m metanote\). Present active subjunctive of \metanoe\, to change mind and conduct, linear action, keep on changing. Condition of third class, undetermined, but with prospect of determination. {Ye shall perish} (\apoleisthe\). Future middle indicative of \apollumi\ and intransitive. Common verb.

rwp@Mark:2:19 @{The sons of the bridechamber} (\hoi huioi tou numphnos\). Not merely the groomsmen, but the guests also, the \paranymphs\ (\paranumphoi\ of the old Greek). Jesus here adopts the Baptist's own metaphor (John:3:29|), changing the friend of the bridegroom (\ho philos tou numphiou\) to sons of the bridechamber. Jesus identifies himself with the bridegroom of the O.T. (Hosea:2:21|), God in his covenant relation with Israel (Swete). Mourning does not suit the wedding feast. Mark, Matthew, and Luke all give the three parables (bridegroom, unfulled cloth, new wineskins) illustrating and defending the conduct of Jesus in feasting with Levi on a Jewish fast-day. strkjv@Luke:5:36| calls these parables. Jesus here seems iconoclastic to the ecclesiastics and revolutionary in emphasis on the spiritual instead of the ritualistic and ceremonial.

rwp@Matthew:1:2 @{Begat} (\egennsen\). This word comes, like some of the early chapters of Genesis, with regularity through verse 16, until the birth of Jesus is reached when there is a sudden change. The word itself does not always mean immediate parentage, but merely direct descent. In verse 16| we have "Joseph the husband of Mary, from whom was begotten Jesus who is called Christ" (\ton Isph ton andra Marias ex hs egennth Isous ho legomenos Christos\). The article occurs here each time with the object of "begat," but not with the subject of the verb to distinguish sharply the proper names. In the case of David the King (1:6|) and Joseph the husband of Mary (1:16|) the article is repeated. The mention of the brethren of Judah (1:2|) and of both Phares and Zara (1:3|) may show that Matthew was not copying a family pedigree but making his own table. All the Greek manuscripts give verse 16| as above save the Ferrar Group of minuscules which are supported by the Sinaitic Syriac Version. Because of this fact Von Soden, whose text Moffatt translates, deliberately prints his text "_Jacob begat Jesus_" (\Isph de egennsen Isoun\). But the Sinaitic Syriac gives the Virgin Birth of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:1:18-25|. Hence it is clear that "begat" here in strkjv@1:16| must merely mean line of descent or the text has been tampered with in order to get rid of the Virgin Birth idea, but it was left untouched in strkjv@1:18-25|. I have a full discussion of the problem in chapter XIV of _Studies in the Text of the New Testament_. The evidence as it now stands does not justify changing the text of the Greek uncials to suit the Sinaitic Syriac. The Virgin Birth of Jesus remains in strkjv@1:16|. The spelling of these Hebrew names in English is usually according to the Hebrew form, not the Greek. In the Greek itself the Hebrew spelling is often observed in violation of the Greek rules for the ending of words with no consonants save _n,r,s_. But the list is not spelled consistently in the Greek, now like the Hebrew as in Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, now like the Greek as in Judah, Solomon, Hezekiah, though the Hebrew style prevails.

rwp@Philippians:3:1 @{Finally} (\to loipon\). Accusative of general reference, literally, "as for the rest." Songs:again in strkjv@4:8|. It (or just \loipon\) is a common phrase towards the close of Paul's Epistles (2Thessalonians:3:1; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11|). In strkjv@Ephesians:6:10| we have \tou loipou\ (genitive case). But Paul uses the idiom elsewhere also as in strkjv@1Corinthians:7:29; strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:1| before the close of the letter is in sight. It is wholly needless to understand Paul as about to finish and then suddenly changing his mind like some preachers who announce the end a half dozen times. {To write the same things} (\ta auta graphein\). Present active articular infinitive, "the going on writing the same things." What things? He has just used \chairete\ (go on rejoicing) again and he will repeat it in strkjv@4:4|. But in verse 2| he uses \blepete\ three times. At any rate Paul, as a true teacher, is not afraid of repetition. {Irksome} (\oknron\). Old adjective from \okne\, to delay, to hesitate. It is not tiresome to me to repeat what is "safe" (\asphales\) for you. Old adjective from \a\ privative and \sphall\, to totter, to reel. See strkjv@Acts:21:34|.

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

rwp@Romans:1:25 @{Exchanged} (\metllaxan\). First aorist active indicative of \metallass\, old word for exchanging trade, only here and verse 26| in N.T. What a bargain they made, "the truth of God for (\en\) the (\ti\) lie." "The price of mythology" (Bengel). {Worshipped} (\esebasthsan\). First aorist passive (used transitively) of \sebazomai\, old verb, used in late Greek like \sebomai\, to worship. {Rather than the Creator} (\para ton ktisanta\). Placed side by side (\para\, the Creator and the creature, \ktisis\) they preferred the creature. {Who is blessed forever. Amen} (\hos estin eulogtos. Amn\). One of Paul's doxologies which may come at any moment when he is greatly stirred, as in strkjv@9:5|. \Eulogtos\ is verbal of \euloge\.