Bible:
Filter: String:

NT-GOSPEL.filter - rwp precise:


rwp@1Corinthians:1:20 @{Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this world?} (\Pou sophos; pou grammateus; pou sunzˆtˆtˆs tou ai“nos toutou;\). Paul makes use of strkjv@Isaiah:33:18| without exact quotation. The sudden retreat of Sennacherib with the annihilation of his officers. "On the tablet of Shalmaneser in the Assyrian Gallery of the British Museum there is a surprisingly exact picture of the scene described by Isaiah" (Robertson and Plummer). Note the absence of the Greek article in each of these rhetorical questions though the idea is clearly definite. Probably \sophos\ refers to the Greek philosopher, \grammateus\ to the Jewish scribe and \sunzˆtˆtˆs\ suits both the Greek and the Jewish disputant and doubter (Acts:6:9; strkjv@9:29; strkjv@17:18; strkjv@28:29|). There is a note of triumph in these questions. The word \sunzˆtˆtˆs\ occurs here alone in the N.T. and elsewhere only in Ignatius, Eph. 18 quoting this passage, but the papyri give the verb \sunzˆte“\ for disputing (questioning together). {Hath not God made foolish?} (\ouchi em“ranen ho theos;\). Strong negative form with aorist active indicative difficult of precise translation, "Did not God make foolish?" The old verb \m“rain“\ from \m“ros\, foolish, was to be foolish, to act foolish, then to prove one foolish as here or to make foolish as in strkjv@Romans:1:22|. In strkjv@Matthew:5:13; strkjv@Luke:14:34| it is used of salt that is tasteless. {World} (\kosmou\). Synonymous with \ai“n\ (age), orderly arrangement, then the non-Christian cosmos.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:7:28 @{But and if thou marry} (\ean de kai gamˆsˆis\). Condition of the third class, undetermined with prospect of being determined, with the ingressive first aorist (late form) active subjunctive with \ean\: "But if thou also commit matrimony or get married," in spite of Paul's advice to the contrary. {Thou hast not sinned} (\ouch hˆmartes\). Second aorist active indicative of \hamartan“\, to sin, to miss a mark. Here either Paul uses the timeless (gnomic) aorist indicative or by a swift transition he changes the standpoint (proleptic) in the conclusion from the future (in the condition) to the past. Such mixed conditions are common (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1020, 1023). Precisely the same construction occurs with the case of the virgin (\parthenos\) except that the old form of the first aorist subjunctive (\gˆmˆi\) occurs in place of the late \gamˆsˆi\ above. The MSS. interchange both examples. There is no special point in the difference in the forms. {Shall have tribulation in the flesh} (\thlipsin tˆi sarki hexousin\). Emphatic position of \thlipsin\ (pressure). See strkjv@2Corinthians:12:7| \skolops tˆi sarki\ (thorn in the flesh). {And I would spare you} (\eg“ de hum“n pheidomai\). Possibly conative present middle indicative, I am trying to spare you like \agei\ in strkjv@Romans:2:4| and \dikaiousthe\ in strkjv@Galatians:5:4|.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:28 @{And when all things have been subjected} (\hotan de hupotagˆi ta panta\). Second aorist passive subjunctive of \hupotass“\, not perfect. Merely, "when the all things are subjected unto him." The aorist subjunctive has given translators a deal of needless trouble in this passage. It is prophecy, of course. {That God may be all in all} (\hina ˆi ho theos panta en pasin\). The final goal of all God's redemptive plans as Paul has so well said in strkjv@Romans:11:36|. Precisely this language Paul will use of Christ (Colossians:3:11|).

rwp@1John:3:1 @{What manner of love} (\potapˆn agapˆn\). Qualitative interrogative as in strkjv@2Peter:3:11; strkjv@Matthew:8:27|. Only here in John's writings. Originally of what country or race. {Hath bestowed} (\ded“ken\). Perfect active indicative of \did“mi\, state of completion, "the endowment of the receiver" (Vincent). {That we should be called} (\hina klˆth“men\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with the first aorist passive subjunctive of \kale“\, to call or name, as in strkjv@Matthew:2:23|. {Children} (\tekna\). As in strkjv@John:1:12| and with an allusion to \gegennˆtai\ in strkjv@2:29| in an effort "to restore the waning enthusiasm of his readers, and to recall them to their first love" (Brooke). {And such we are} (\kai esmen\). "And we are." A parenthetical reflection characteristic of John (\kai nun estin\ in strkjv@John:5:25| and \kai ouk eisin\ in strkjv@Revelation:2:2; strkjv@3:9|) omitted by Textus Receptus, though, in the old MSS. {Because it knew him not} (\hoti ouk egn“ auton\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\, precisely the argument in strkjv@John:15:18f|.

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:1:20 @{Who was foreknown indeed} (\proegn“smenou men\). Perfect passive participle (in genitive singular agreeing with \Christou\) of \progin“sk“\, old verb, to know beforehand (Romans:8:29; strkjv@2Peter:3:17|). See \progn“sin theou\ in verse 2|. {Before the foundation of the world} (\pro katabolˆs kosmou\). This precise curious phrase occurs in strkjv@John:17:24| in the Saviour's mouth of his preincarnate state with the Father as here and in strkjv@Ephesians:1:4|. We have \apo katabolˆs kosmou\ in strkjv@Matthew:25:34| (\kosmou\ omitted in strkjv@Matthew:13:35|); strkjv@Luke:11:50; strkjv@Hebrews:4:3; strkjv@9:26; strkjv@Revelation:13:8; strkjv@17:8|. \Katabolˆ\ (from \kataball“\) was originally laying the foundation of a house (Hebrews:6:1|). The preincarnate Messiah appears in the counsels of God also in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7; strkjv@Colossians:1:26f.; strkjv@Ephesians:1:9f.; strkjv@3:9-11; strkjv@Romans:16:25; strkjv@1Timothy:1:9|. {But was manifested} (\phaner“thentos de\). First aorist (ingressive) passive participle of \phanero“\, referring to the Incarnation in contrast with the preexistence of Christ (cf. strkjv@John:1:31; strkjv@1John:3:5,8|). {At the end of the times} (\ep' eschatou t“n chron“n\). Like \ep' eschatou t“n hˆmer“n\ (Hebrews:1:2|). The plural \chronoi\, doubtless referring to successive periods in human history until the fullness of the time came (Galatians:4:4|). {For your sake} (\di' humƒs\). Proof of God's love, not of their desert or worth (Acts:17:30f.; strkjv@Hebrews:11:39f.|).

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@1Thessalonians:1:3 @{Remembering} (\mnˆmoneuontes\). Present active participle of old verb from adjective \mnˆm“n\ (mindful) and so to call to mind, to be mindful of, used either with the accusative as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:9| or the genitive as here. {Without ceasing} (\adialeipt“s\). Double compound adverb of the _Koin‚_ (Polybius, Diodorus, Strabo, papyri) from the verbal adjective \a-dia-leiptos\ (\a\ privative and \dia-leip“\, to leave off). In the N.T. alone by Paul and always connected with prayer. Milligan prefers to connect this adverb (amphibolous in position) with the preceding participle \poioumenoi\ rather than with \mnˆmoneuontes\ as Revised Version and Westcott and Hort rightly do. {Your work of faith} (\hum“n tou ergou tˆs piste“s\). Note article with both \ergou\ and \piste“s\ (correlation of the article, both abstract substantives). \Ergou\ is genitive case the object of \mnˆmoneuontes\ as is common with verbs of emotion (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 508f.), though the accusative \kopon\ occurs in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:9| according to common Greek idiom allowing either case. \Ergou\ is the general term for work or business, employment, task. Note two genitives with \ergou\. \Hum“n\ is the usual possessive genitive, {your work}, while \tˆs piste“s\ is the descriptive genitive, marked by, characterized by, faith, "the activity that faith inspires" (Frame). It is interesting to note this sharp conjunction of these two words by Paul. We are justified by faith, but faith produces works (Romans:6-8|) as the Baptist taught and as Jesus taught and as James does in strkjv@James:2|. {Labour of love} (\tou kopou tˆs agapˆs\). Note article with both substantives. Here again \tou kopou\ is the genitive the object of \mnˆmoneuontes\ while \tˆs agapˆs\ is the descriptive genitive characterizing the "labour" or "toil" more exactly. \Kopos\ is from \kopt“\, to cut, to lash, to beat the bread, to toil. In strkjv@Revelation:14:13| the distinction is drawn between \kopou\ (toil) from which the saints rest and \erga\ (works, activities) which follow with them into heaven. Songs:here it is the labour that love prompts, assuming gladly the toil. \Agapˆ\ is one of the great words of the N.T. (Milligan) and no certain example has yet been found in the early papyri or the inscriptions. It occurs in the Septuagint in the higher sense as with the sensuous associations. The Epistle of Aristeas calls love (\agapˆ\) God's gift and Philo uses \agapˆ\ in describing love for God. "When Christianity first began to think and speak in Greek, it took up \agapˆ\ and its group of terms more freely, investing them with the new glow with which the N.T. writings make us familiar, a content which is invariably religious" (Moffatt, _Love in the New Testament_, p. 40). The New Testament never uses the word \er“s\ (lust). {Patience of hope} (\tˆs hupomonˆs tˆs elpidos\). Note the two articles again and the descriptive genitive \tˆs elpidos\. It is patience marked by hope, "the endurance inspired by hope" (Frame), yes, and sustained by hope in spite of delays and set-backs. \Hupomonˆ\ is an old word (\hupo, men“\, to remain under), but it "has come like \agapˆ\ to be closely associated with a distinctively Christian virtue" (Milligan). The same order as here (\ergou, kopos, hupomonˆ\) appears in strkjv@Revelation:2:2| and Lightfoot considers it" an ascending scale as practical proofs of self-sacrifice." The church in Thessalonica was not old, but already they were called upon to exercise the sanctifying grace of hope (Denney). {In our Lord Jesus Christ} (\tou Kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou Christou\). The objective genitive with \elpidos\ (hope) and so translated by "in" here (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 499f.). Jesus is the object of this hope, the hope of his second coming which is still open to us. Note "Lord Jesus Christ" as in verse 1|. {Before our God and Father} (\emprosthen tou theou kai patros hˆm“n\). The one article with both substantives precisely as in strkjv@Galatians:1:4|, not "before God and our Father," both article and possessive genitive going with both substantives as in strkjv@2Peter:1:1,11; strkjv@Titus:2:13| (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 785f.). The phrase is probably connected with \elpidos\. \Emprosthen\ in the N.T. occurs only of place, but it is common in the papyri of time. The picture here is the day of judgment when all shall appear before God.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:2 @{But having suffered before} (\alla propathontes\). Strong adversative \alla\, antithesis to \kenˆ\. Appeal to his personal experiences in Thessalonica known to them ({as ye know}, \kath“s oidate\). Second aorist active participle of \propasch“\, old compound verb, but here alone in the N.T. The force of \pro-\ (before) is carried over to the next verb. The participle may be regarded as temporal (Ellicott) or concessive (Moffatt). {And been shamefully entreated in Philippi} (\kai hubristhentes en Philippois\). First aorist passive participle of \hubriz“\, old verb, to treat insolently. "More than the bodily suffering it was the personal indignity that had been offered to him as a Roman citizen" (Milligan), for which account see strkjv@Acts:16:16-40|, an interesting example of how Acts and the Epistles throw light on each other. Luke tells how Paul resented the treatment accorded to him as a Roman citizen and here Paul shows that the memory still rankled in his bosom. {We waxed bold in our God} (\eparrˆsiasametha en t“i the“i hˆm“n\). Ingressive first aorist middle of \parrˆsiazomai\, old deponent verb from \parrˆsia\ (full story, \pan-, rˆsia\). In his reply to Festus (Acts:26:26|) Paul uses \parrˆsiazomenos lal“\, {being bold I speak}, while here he has {we waxed bold to speak} (\eparrˆsiasametha lalˆsai\). The insult in Philippi did not close Paul's mouth, but had precisely the opposite effect "in our God." It was not wild fanaticism, but determined courage and confidence in God that spurred Paul to still greater boldness in Thessalonica, {unto you} (\pros humƒs\), be the consequences what they might, {the gospel of God in much conflict}, (\to euaggelion tou theou en poll“i ag“ni\). This figure of the athletic games (\ag“n\) may refer to outward conflict like strkjv@Phillipians:1:30| or inward anxiety (Colossians:2:1|). He had both in Thessalonica.

rwp@1Timothy:5:18 @{Thou shalt not muzzle} (\ou phim“seis\). Prohibition by \ou\ and future (volitive) indicative of \phimo“\ (from \phimos\, muzzle), old word, quoted also in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:9| as here from strkjv@Deuteronomy:25:4|, and for the same purpose, to show the preacher's right to pay for his work. See strkjv@1Corinthians:9:9| for \alo“nta\ ({when he treadeth out the corn}). {The labourer is worthy of his hire} (\axios ho ergatˆs tou misthou autou\). These words occur in precisely this form in strkjv@Luke:10:7|. It appears also in strkjv@Matthew:10:10| with \tˆs trophˆs\ (food) instead of \tou misthou\. In strkjv@1Corinthians:9:14| Paul has the sense of it and says: "so also the Lord ordained," clearly meaning that Jesus had so said. It only remains to tell whether Paul here is quoting an unwritten saying of Jesus as he did in strkjv@Acts:20:35| or even the Gospel of Luke or Q (the Logia of Jesus). There is no way to decide this question. If Luke wrote his Gospel before A.D. 62 as is quite possible and Acts by A.D. 63, he could refer to the Gospel. It is not clear whether Scripture is here meant to apply to this quotation from the Lord Jesus. For \ergatˆs\ (labourer) see strkjv@Phillipians:3:2|.

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

rwp@2Corinthians:7:5 @{When we had come} (\elthont“n hˆm“n\). Genitive absolute with second aorist active participle of \erchomai\. Paul now returns to the incident mentioned in strkjv@2:12| before the long digression on the glory of the ministry. {Had no relief} (\oudemian eschˆken anesin\). Perfect active indicative precisely as in strkjv@2:13| which see, "has had no relief" (dramatic perfect). {Afflicted} (\thlibomenoi\). Present passive participle of \thlib“\ as in strkjv@4:8|, but with anacoluthon, for the nominative case agrees not with the genitive \hˆm“n\ nor with the accusative \hˆmas\ in verse 6|. It is used as if a principal verb as in strkjv@9:11; strkjv@11:6; strkjv@Romans:12:16| (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 182; Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1132-35). {Without were fightings} (\ex“then machai\). Asyndeton and no copula, a parenthesis also in structure. Perhaps pagan adversaries in Macedonia (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:15:32|). {Within were fears} (\es“then phoboi\). Same construction. "Mental perturbations" (Augustine) as in strkjv@11:28|.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:3 @{I do not know} (\ouk oida\). Paul declines to pass on his precise condition in this trance. We had best leave it as he has told it.

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:2:4 @{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:2:14 @{Of adultery} (\moichalidos\). Rather, "of an adulteress," like strkjv@James:4:4|. Vivid picture of a man who cannot see a woman without lascivious thoughts toward her (Mayor). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:5:28|. {That cannot cease} (\akatapastous\). Reading of A B in place of \akatapaustous\ (alpha privative and verbal of \katapau“\, to cease). "Unable to stop." This a late verbal, only here in N.T. It is probable that \akatapastous\ is merely a misspelling of \akatapaustous\. {From sin} (\hamartias\). Ablative case as in strkjv@1Peter:4:1| (\hamartias\). Insatiable lust. {Enticing} (\deleazontes\). Present active participle of \deleaz“\, to catch by bait as in verse 18; strkjv@James:1:14|. {Unsteadfast} (\astˆriktous\). Late verbal adjective (alpha privative and \stˆriz“\), in Longinus and Vettius Valens, here alone in N.T. {Exercised} (\gegumnasmenˆn\). Perfect passive predicate participle with \echontes\, from \gumnaz“\ precisely as in strkjv@Hebrews:5:14|. Rhetorical metaphor from the gymnasium. {In covetousness} (\pleonexias\). Genitive case after the participle. {Children of cursing} (\kataras tekna\). Hebraism like \tekna hupakoˆs\ in strkjv@1Peter:1:14| = accursed (\kataratoi\).

rwp@2Peter:3:4 @{Where is the promise of his coming?} (\pou estin hˆ epaggelia tˆs parousias autou;\). This is the only sample of the questions raised by these mockers. Peter had mentioned this subject of the \parousia\ in strkjv@1:16|. Now he faces it squarely. Peter, like Paul (1Thessalonians:5:1f.; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1f.|), preached about the second coming (1:16; strkjv@Acts:3:20f.|), as Jesus himself did repeatedly (Matthew:24:34|) and as the angels promised at the Ascension (Acts:1:11|). Both Jesus and Paul (2Thessalonians:2:1f.|) were misunderstood on the subject of the time and the parables of Jesus urged readiness and forbade setting dates for his coming, though his language in strkjv@Matthew:24:34| probably led some to believe that he would certainly come while they were alive. {From the day that} (\aph' hˆs\). "From which day." See strkjv@Luke:7:45|. {Fell asleep} (\ekoimˆthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \koima“\, old verb, to put sleep, classic euphemism for death (John:11:11|) like our cemetery (sleeping-place). {Continue} (\diamenei\). Present active indicative of \diamen“\, to remain through (Luke:1:22|). _In statu quo_. {As they were} (\hout“s\). "Thus." {From the beginning of creation} (\ap' archˆs ktise“s\). Precisely so in strkjv@Mark:10:6|, which see.

rwp@2Peter:3:8 @{Forget not this one thing} (\hen touto mˆ lanthanet“ humas\). Rather, "let not this one thing escape you." For \lanthanet“\ (present active imperative of \lanthan“\) see verse 5|. The "one thing" (\hen\) is explained by the \hoti\ (that) clause following. Peter applies the language of strkjv@Psalms:90:4| about the eternity of God and shortness of human life to "the impatience of human expectations" (Bigg) about the second coming of Christ. "The day of judgment is at hand (1Peter:4:7|). It may come tomorrow; but what is tomorrow? What does God mean by a day? It may be a thousand years" (Bigg). Precisely the same argument applies to those who argue for a literal interpretation of the thousand years in strkjv@Revelation:20:4-6|. It may be a day or a day may be a thousand years. God's clock (\para kuri“i\, beside the Lord) does not run by our timepieces. The scoffers scoff ignorantly.

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

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:8 @{For nought} (\d“rean\). Adverbial accusative, as a gift, gift-wise (\d“rea\, gift, from \did“mi\). Same claim made to the Corinthians (2Corinthians:11:7|), old word, in LXX, and papyri. He lodged with Jason, but did not receive his meals _gratis_, for he paid for them. Apparently he received no invitations to meals. Paul had to make his financial independence clear to avoid false charges which were made in spite of all his efforts. To eat bread is merely a Hebraism for eat (verse 10|). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:9| for labour and travail, and night and day (\nuktos kai hˆmeras\, genitive of time, by night and by day). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:9| for rest of the verse in precisely the same words.

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@Acts:2:4 @{With other tongues} (\heterais gl“ssais\). Other than their native tongues. Each one began to speak in a language that he had not acquired and yet it was a real language and understood by those from various lands familiar with them. It was not jargon, but intelligible language. Jesus had said that the gospel was to go to all the nations and here the various tongues of earth were spoken. One might conclude that this was the way in which the message was to be carried to the nations, but future developments disprove it. This is a third miracle (the sound, the tongues like fire, the untaught languages). There is no blinking the fact that Luke so pictures them. One need not be surprised if this occasion marks the fulfilment of the Promise of the Father. But one is not to confound these miraculous signs with the Holy Spirit. They are merely proof that he has come to carry on the work of his dispensation. The gift of tongues came also on the house of Cornelius at Caesarea (Acts:10:44-47; strkjv@11:15-17|), the disciples of John at Ephesus (Acts:19:6|), the disciples at Corinth (1Corinthians:14:1-33|). It is possible that the gift appeared also at Samaria (Acts:8:18|). But it was not a general or a permanent gift. Paul explains in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:22| that "tongues" were a sign to unbelievers and were not to be exercised unless one was present who understood them and could translate them. This restriction disposes at once of the modern so-called tongues which are nothing but jargon and hysteria. It so happened that here on this occasion at Pentecost there were Jews from all parts of the world, so that some one would understand one tongue and some another without an interpreter such as was needed at Corinth. The experience is identical in all four instances and they are not for edification or instruction, but for adoration and wonder and worship. {As the Spirit gave them utterance} (\kath“s to pneuma edidou apophtheggesthai autois\). This is precisely what Paul claims in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:10,28|, but all the same without an interpreter the gift was not to be exercised (1Corinthians:14:6-19|). Paul had the gift of tongues, but refused to exercise it except as it would be understood. Note the imperfect tense here (\edidou\). Perhaps they did not all speak at once, but one after another. \Apophtheggesthai\ is a late verb (LXX of prophesying, papyri). Lucian uses it of the ring of a vessel when it strikes a reef. It is used of eager, elevated, impassioned utterance. In the N.T. only here, verse 14; strkjv@26:25|. \Apophthegm\ is from this verb.

rwp@Acts:5:29 @{We must} (\dei\). Moral necessity left them no choice. They stood precisely where Peter and John were when before the Sanhedrin before (Acts:4:20|). {Obey} (\peitharchein\). Old verb from \peithomai\ and \archˆ\, to obey a ruler. Only by Luke and Paul in the N.T.

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:10:35 @{Acceptable to him} (\dektos aut“i\). Verbal adjective from \dechomai\. _Acceptabilis_. That is to say, a Gentile would not have to become a Jew in order to become a Christian. Evidently Peter had not before perceived this fact. On the great Day of Pentecost when he spoke of the promise "to all those afar off" (2:39|) Peter understood that they must first become Jews and then Christians. The new idea that now makes a revolution in Peter's outlook is precisely this that Christ can and will save Gentiles like this Cornelius group without their becoming Jews at all.

rwp@Acts:13:11 @{Upon thee} (\epi se\). The use of \epi\ with the accusative is rich and varied, the precise shade of meaning depending on the content. The "hand of the Lord" might be kindly (Acts:11:21|) or hostile (Hebrews:10:31|), but when God's hand touches one's life (Job:19:21|) it may be in judgment as here with Elymas. He has not humbled himself under the mighty hand of God (1Peter:5:6|). {Not seeing} (\mˆ blep“n\). Repeating with negative participle the negative idea in "blind" (\tuphlos\). "It was a judicial infliction; blindness for blindness, darkness without for wilful darkness within" (Furneaux). He was an example of the blind leading the blind that was to cease and Sergius Paulus was to be led into the light. The blindness was to be "for a season" (\achri kairou\, strkjv@Luke:4:13|), if it should please God to restore his sight. Paul apparently recalls his own blindness as he entered Damascus. {A mist} (\achlus\). Especially a dimness of the eyes, old poetic word and late prose, in LXX, only here in N.T. Galen uses it of the opacity of the eye caused by a wound. {He went about seeking some one to lead him by the hand} (\periag“n ezˆtei cheirag“gous\). A rather free rendering. Literally, "going about (\periag“n\, present active participle of \periag“\) he was seeking (\ezˆtei\, imperfect active of \zˆte“\) guides (\cheirag“gous\, from \cheir\, hand, and \ag“gos\, guide, from \ag“\, one who leads by the hand)." The very verb \cheirag“ge“\, to lead by the hand, Luke uses of Paul in strkjv@9:8|, as he entered Damascus.

rwp@Acts:13:25 @{As John was fulfilling his course} (\h“s eplˆrou I“anˆs ton dromon\). Imperfect active of \plˆro“\, describing his vivid ministry without defining the precise period when John asked the question. Paul uses this word \dromos\ (course) of his own race (Acts:20:24; strkjv@2Timothy:4:7|). {What suppose ye that I am?} (\Ti eme huponoeite einai?\) Note \ti\ (neuter), not \tina\ (masculine), {what} not {who}, character, not identity. It is indirect discourse (the infinitive \einai\ and the accusative of general reference). {Huponoe“} (\hupo, noe“\) is to think secretly, to suspect, to conjecture. {I am not he} (\ouk eimi eg“\). These precise words are not given in the Gospels, but the idea is the same as the disclaimers by the Baptist in strkjv@John:1:19-27| (cf. also strkjv@Matthew:3:11; strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Luke:3:16|). Paul had a true grasp of the message of the Baptist. He uses the very form \l–sai\ (first aorist active infinitive of \lu“\) found in strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Luke:3:16| and the word for shoes (\hupodˆma\, singular) in all three. His quotation is remarkably true to the words in the Synoptic Gospels. How did Paul get hold of the words of the Baptist so clearly?

rwp@Acts:13:52 @{And the disciples} (\hoi te\ or \hoi de mathˆtai\). The Gentile Christians in Antioch in Pisidia. Persecution had precisely the opposite effect to the intention of the Jews for they "were filled with joy and the Holy Spirit" (\eplˆrounto charas kai pneumatos hagiou\). Imperfect passive, they kept on being filled. It had been so before (Acts:4:31; strkjv@8:4; strkjv@9:31; strkjv@12:24|). The blood of the martyrs is still the seed of the church.

rwp@Acts:15:1 @{And certain men came down from Judea} (\kai tines katelthontes apo tˆs Ioudaias\). Evidently the party of the circumcision in the church in Jerusalem (11:2|) had heard of the spread of the gospel among the Gentiles in Cyprus, Pamphylia, and South Galatia (Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycaonia). Possibly John Mark after his desertion at Perga (13:13|) told of this as one of his reasons for coming home. At any rate echoes of the jubilation in Antioch in Syria would be certain to reach Jerusalem. The Judaizers in Jerusalem, who insisted that all the Gentile Christians must become Jews also, had acquiesced in the case of Cornelius and his group (11:1-18|) after plain proof by Peter that it was the Lord's doing. But they had not agreed to a formal campaign to turn the exception into the rule and to make Christianity mainly Gentile with a few Jews instead of mainly Jewish with a few Gentiles. Since Paul and Barnabas did not come up to Jerusalem, the leaders among the Judaizers decided to go down to Antioch and attack Paul and Barnabas there. They had volunteered to go without church action in Jerusalem for their activity is disclaimed by the conference (Acts:15:24|). In strkjv@Galatians:2:4| Paul with some heat describes these Judaizers as "false brethren, secretly introduced who sneaked in to spy out our liberty." It is reasonably certain that this visit to Jerusalem described in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| is the same one as the Jerusalem Conference in Acts strkjv@15:5-29| in spite of the effort of Ramsay to identify it with that in strkjv@11:29f|. Paul in Galatians is not giving a list of his visits to Jerusalem. He is showing his independence of the twelve apostles and his equality with them. He did not see them in strkjv@11:29f.|, but only "the elders." In strkjv@Acts:15| Luke gives the outward narrative of events, in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| Paul shows us the private interview with the apostles when they agreed on their line of conduct toward the Judaizers. In strkjv@Galatians:2:2| by the use of "them" (\autois\) Paul seems to refer to the first public meeting in Acts before the private interview that came in between verses strkjv@15:5-6|. If we recall the difficulty that Peter had on the subject of preaching the gospel to the heathen (10:1-11:18|), we can the better understand the attitude of the Judaizers. They were men of sincere convictions without a doubt, but they were obscurantists and unable and unwilling to receive new light from the Lord on a matter that involved their racial and social prejudices. They recalled that Jesus himself had been circumcised and that he had said to the Syro-Phoenician woman that he had come only save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew:15:24ff.|). They argued that Christ had not repealed circumcision. Songs:one of the great religious controversies of all time was begun, that between spiritual religion and ritualistic or ceremonial religion. It is with us yet with baptism taking the place of circumcision. These self-appointed champions of circumcision for Gentile Christians were deeply in earnest. {Taught the brethren} (\edidaskon tous adelphous\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to teach and kept it up. Their attitude was one of supercilious superiority. They probably resented the conduct of Barnabas, who, when sent by the Church in Jerusalem to investigate the conversion of the Greeks in Antioch (11:20-26|), did not return and report till a strong church had been established there with the help of Saul and only then with a big collection to confuse the issue. Paul and Barnabas were on hand, but the Judaizers persisted in their efforts to force their views on the church in Antioch. It was a crisis. {Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved} (\ean me peritmˆthˆte t“i ethei M“use“s, ou dunasthe s“thˆnai\). There was the dictum of the Judaizers to the Gentiles. Paul and Barnabas had been circumcised. This is probably the precise language employed, for they spoke in Greek to these Greeks. It is a condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of being determined, \ean\ plus the first aorist passive subjunctive of \peritemn“\). There was thus hope held out for them, but only on condition that they be circumcised. The issue was sharply drawn. The associative instrumental case (\t“i ethei\) is customary. "Saved" (\s“thˆnai\) here is the Messianic salvation. This doctrine denied the efficacy of the work of Christ.

rwp@Acts:17:18 @{And certain also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him} (\tines de kai t“n Epikouri“n kai St“ik“n philosoph“n suneballon aut“i\). Imperfect active of \sunball“\, old verb, in the N.T. only by Luke, to bring or put together in one's mind (Luke:2:19|), to meet together (Acts:20:14|), to bring together aid (18:27|), to confer or converse or dispute as here and already strkjv@4:15| which see. These professional philosophers were always ready for an argument and so they frequented the agora for that purpose. Luke uses one article and so groups the two sects together in their attitude toward Paul, but they were very different in fact. Both sects were eager for argument and both had disdain for Paul, but they were the two rival practical philosophies of the day, succeeding the more abstruse theories of Plato and Aristotle. Socrates had turned men's thought inward (\Gn“thi Seauton\, Know Thyself) away from the mere study of physics. Plato followed with a profound development of the inner self (metaphysics). Aristotle with his cyclopaedic grasp sought to unify and relate both physics and metaphysics. Both Zeno and Epicurus (340-272 B.C.) took a more practical turn in all this intellectual turmoil and raised the issues of everyday life. Zeno (360-260 B.C.) taught in the \Stoa\ (Porch) and so his teaching was called Stoicism. He advanced many noble ideas that found their chief illustration in the Roman philosophers (Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius). He taught self-mastery and hardness with an austerity that ministered to pride or suicide in case of failure, a distinctly selfish and unloving view of life and with a pantheistic philosophy. Epicurus considered practical atheism the true view of the universe and denied a future life and claimed pleasure as the chief thing to be gotten out of life. He did not deny the existence of gods, but regarded them as unconcerned with the life of men. The Stoics called Epicurus an atheist. Lucretius and Horace give the Epicurean view of life in their great poems. This low view of life led to sensualism and does today, for both Stoicism and Epicureanism are widely influential with people now. "Eat and drink for tomorrow we die," they preached. Paul had doubtless become acquainted with both of these philosophies for they were widely prevalent over the world. Here he confronts them in their very home. He is challenged by past-masters in the art of appealing to the senses, men as skilled in their dialectic as the Pharisaic rabbis with whom Paul had been trained and whose subtleties he had learned how to expose. But, so far as we know, this is a new experience for Paul to have a public dispute with these philosophical experts who had a natural contempt for all Jews and for rabbis in particular, though they found Paul a new type at any rate and so with some interest in him. "In Epicureanism, it was man's sensual nature which arrayed itself against the claims of the gospel; in Stoicism it was his self-righteousness and pride of intellect" (Hackett). Knowling calls the Stoic the Pharisee of philosophy and the Epicurean the Sadducee of philosophy. Socrates in this very agora used to try to interest the passers-by in some desire for better things. That was 450 years before Paul is challenged by these superficial sophistical Epicureans and Stoics. It is doubtful if Paul had ever met a more difficult situation. {What would this babbler say?} (\Ti an theloi ho spermologos houtos legein?\). The word for "babbler" means "seed-picker" or picker up of seeds (\sperma\, seed, \leg“\, to collect) like a bird in the agora hopping about after chance seeds. Plutarch applies the word to crows that pick up grain in the fields. Demosthenes called Aeschines a \spermologos\. Eustathius uses it of a man hanging around in the markets picking up scraps of food that fell from the carts and so also of mere rhetoricians and plagiarists who picked up scraps of wisdom from others. Ramsay considers it here a piece of Athenian slang used to describe the picture of Paul seen by these philosophers who use it, for not all of them had it ("some," \tines\). Note the use of \an\ and the present active optative \theloi\, conclusion of a fourth-class condition in a rhetorical question (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). It means, What would this picker up of seeds wish to say, if he should get off an idea? It is a contemptuous tone of supreme ridicule and doubtless Paul heard this comment. Probably the Epicureans made this sneer that Paul was a charlatan or quack. {Other some} (\hoi de\). But others, in contrast with the "some" just before. Perhaps the Stoics take this more serious view of Paul. {He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods} (\zen“n daimoni“n dokei kataggeleus einai\). This view is put cautiously by \dokei\ (seems). \Kataggeleus\ does not occur in the old Greek, though in ecclesiastical writers, but Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 99) gives an example of the word "on a marble stele recording a decree of the Mitylenaens in honour of the Emperor Augustus," where it is the herald of the games. Here alone in the N.T. \Daimonion\ is used in the old Greek sense of deity or divinity whether good or bad, not in the N.T. sense of demons. Both this word and \kataggeleus\ are used from the Athenian standpoint. \Xenos\ is an old word for a guest-friend (Latin _hospes_) and then host (Romans:16:23|), then for foreigner or stranger (Matthew:25:31; strkjv@Acts:17:21|), new and so strange as here and strkjv@Hebrews:13:9; strkjv@1Peter:4:12|, and then aliens (Ephesians:2:12|). This view of Paul is the first count against Socrates: Socrates does wrong, introducing new deities (\adikei S“kratˆs, kaina daimonia eispher“n\, Xen. _Mem_. I). On this charge the Athenians voted the hemlock for their greatest citizen. What will they do to Paul? This Athens was more sceptical and more tolerant than the old Athens. But Roman law did not allow the introduction of a new religion (_religio illicita_). Paul was walking on thin ice though he was the real master philosopher and these Epicureans and Stoics were quacks. Paul had the only true philosophy of the universe and life with Jesus Christ as the centre (Colossians:1:12-20|), the greatest of all philosophers as Ramsay justly terms him. But these men are mocking him. {Because he preached Jesus and the resurrection} (\hoti ton Iˆsoun kai tˆn anastasin euˆggelizato\). Reason for the view just stated. Imperfect middle indicative of \euaggeliz“\, to "gospelize." Apparently these critics considered \anastasis\ (Resurrection) another deity on a par with Jesus. The Athenians worshipped all sorts of abstract truths and virtues and they misunderstood Paul on this subject. They will leave him as soon as he mentions the resurrection (verse 32|). It is objected that Luke would not use the word in this sense here for his readers would not under stand him. But Luke is describing the misapprehension of this group of philosophers and this interpretation fits in precisely.

rwp@Acts:27:9 @{Where much time was spent} (\Hikanou chronou diagenomenou\). Genitive absolute again with second aorist middle participle of \diaginomai\, to come in between (\dia\). "Considerable time intervening," since they became weatherbound in this harbour, though some take it since they left Caesarea. {And the voyage was now dangerous} (\kai ontos ˆdˆ episphalous\). Genitive absolute, "and the voyage being already (\ˆdˆ\=Latin _jam_) dangerous" (old word from \epi\ and \sphall“\, to trip, to fall, and so prone to fall, here only in N.T.). {Because the Fast was now already gone by} (\dia to kai tˆn nˆsteian ˆdˆ parelˆluthenai\). Accusative (after \dia\) of the articular infinitive perfect active of \parerchomai\, to pass by, with the accusative of general reference (\nˆsteian\, the great day of atonement of the Jews, strkjv@Leviticus:16:29ff.|) occurring about the end of September. The ancients considered navigation on the Mediterranean unsafe from early October till the middle of March. In A.D. 59 the Fast occurred on Oct. 5. There is nothing strange in Luke using this Jewish note of time as in strkjv@20:6| though a Gentile Christian. Paul did it also (1Corinthians:16:8|). It is no proof that Luke was a Jewish proselyte. We do not know precisely when the party left Caesarea (possibly in August), but in ample time to arrive in Rome before October if conditions had been more favourable. But the contrary winds had made the voyage very slow and difficult all the way (verse 7|) besides the long delay here in this harbour of Fair Havens. {Paul admonished them} (\parˆinˆi ho Paulos\). Imperfect active of \paraine“\, old word to exhort from \para\ and \aine“\, to praise (3:8|), only here and verse 22| in N.T. It is remarkable that a prisoner like Paul should venture to give advice at all and to keep on doing it (imperfect tense inchoative, began to admonish and kept on at it). Paul had clearly won the respect of the centurion and officers and also felt it to be his duty to give this unasked for warning. {I perceive} (\the“r“\). Old word from \the“ros\, a spectator. See strkjv@Luke:10:18|. Paul does not here claim prophecy, but he had plenty of experience with three shipwrecks already (2Corinthians:11:25|) to justify his apprehension. {Will be} (\mellein esesthai\). Infinitive in indirect assertion followed by future infinitive after \mellein\ in spite of \hoti\ which would naturally call for present indicative \mellei\, an anacoluthon due to the long sentence (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 478). {With injury} (\meta hubre“s\). An old word from \huper\ (above, upper, like our "uppishness") and so pride, insult, personal injury, the legal word for personal assault (Page). Josephus (_Ant_. III. 6, 4) uses it of the injury of the elements. {Loss} (\zˆmian\). Old word, opposite of \kerdos\, gain or profit (Phillipians:3:7f.|). Nowhere else in N.T. {Lading} (\phortiou\). Diminutive of \phortos\ (from \pher“\, to bear) only in form. Common word, but in N.T. only here in literal sense, as metaphor in strkjv@Matthew:11:30; strkjv@23:4; strkjv@Luke:11:46; strkjv@Galatians:6:5|. {But also of our lives} (\alla kai t“n psuch“n\). Common use of \psuchˆ\ for life, originally "breath of life" (Acts:20:10|), and also "soul" (14:2|). Fortunately no lives were lost, though all else was. But this outcome was due to the special mercy of God for the sake of Paul (verse 24|), not to the wisdom of the officers in rejecting Paul's advice. Paul begins now to occupy the leading role in this marvellous voyage.

rwp@Colossians:3:16 @{The word of Christ} (\ho logos tou Christou\). This precise phrase only here, though "the word of the Lord" in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:8; strkjv@4:15; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:1|. Elsewhere "the word of God." Paul is exalting Christ in this Epistle. \Christou\ can be either the subjective genitive (the word delivered by Christ) or the objective genitive (the word about Christ). See strkjv@1John:2:14|. {Dwell} (\enoikeit“\). Present active imperative of \enoike“\, to make one's home, to be at home. {In you} (\en humin\). Not "among you." {Richly} (\plousi“s\). Old adverb from \plousios\ (rich). See strkjv@1Timothy:6:17|. The following words explain \plousi“s\. {In all wisdom} (\en pasˆi sophiƒi\). It is not clear whether this phrase goes with \plousi“s\ (richly) or with the participles following (\didaskontes kai nouthetountes\, see strkjv@1:28|). Either punctuation makes good sense. The older Greek MSS. had no punctuation. There is an anacoluthon here. The participles may be used as imperatives as in strkjv@Romans:12:11f.,16|. {With psalms} (\psalmois\, the Psalms in the Old Testament originally with musical accompaniment), {hymns} (\humnois\, praises to God composed by the Christians like strkjv@1Timothy:3:16|), {spiritual songs} (\“idais pneumatikais\, general description of all whether with or without instrumental accompaniment). The same song can have all three words applied to it. {Singing with grace} (\en chariti ƒidontes\). In God's grace (2Corinthians:1:12|). The phrase can be taken with the preceding words. The verb \ƒid“\ is an old one (Ephesians:5:19|) for lyrical emotion in a devout soul. {In your hearts} (\en tais kardiais hum“n\). Without this there is no real worship "to God" (\t“i the“i\). How can a Jew or Unitarian in the choir lead in the worship of Christ as Saviour? Whether with instrument or with voice or with both it is all for naught if the adoration is not in the heart.

rwp@Colossians:3:19 @{Love your wives} (\agapƒte tas gunaikas\). Present active imperative, "keep on loving." That is precisely the point. {Be not bitter} (\mˆ pikrainesthe\). Present middle imperative in prohibition: "Stop being bitter" or "do not have the habit of being bitter." This is the sin of husbands. \Pikrain“\ is an old verb from \pikros\ (bitter). In N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:8:11; strkjv@10:9f|. The bitter word rankles in the soul.

rwp@Ephesians:1:3 @{Blessed} (\eulogˆtos\). Verbal of \euloge“\, common in the LXX for Hebrew _baruk_ (Vulgate _benedictus_) and applied usually to God, sometimes to men (Genesis:24:31|), but in N.T. always to God (Luke:1:68|), while \eulogˆmenos\ (perfect passive participle) is applied to men (Luke:1:42|). "While \eulogˆmenos\ points to an isolated act or acts, \eulogˆtos\ describes the intrinsic character" (Lightfoot). Instead of the usual \eucharistoumen\ (Colossians:1:3|) Paul here uses \eulogˆtos\, elsewhere only in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3| in opening, though in a doxology in strkjv@Romans:1:25; strkjv@9:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:31|. The copula here is probably \estin\ (is), though either \est“\ (imperative) or \eiˆ\ (optative as wish) will make sense. {The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\ho theos kai patˆr tou Kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou Christou\). \Kai\ is genuine here, though not in strkjv@Colossians:1:3|. The one article (\ho\) with \theos kai patˆr\ links them together as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:3; strkjv@3:11,13; strkjv@Galatians:1:4|. See also the one article in strkjv@2Peter:1:1,11|. In strkjv@Ephesians:1:17| we have \ho theos tou Kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou Christou\, and the words of Jesus in strkjv@John:20:17|. {Who hath blessed us} (\ho eulogˆsas humƒs\). First aorist active participle of \euloge“\, the same word, antecedent action to the doxology (\eulogˆtos\). {With} (\en\). So-called instrumental use of \en\ though {in} is clear. {Every spiritual blessing} (\pasˆi eulogiƒi pneumatikˆi\). Third use of the root \eulog\ (verbal, verb, substantive). Paul lovingly plays with the idea. The believer is a citizen of heaven and the spiritual blessings count for most to him. {In the heavenly places in Christ} (\en tois epouraniois en Christ“i\). In four other places in Eph. (1:20; strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:10; strkjv@6:12|). This precise phrase (with \en\) occurs nowhere else in the N.T. and has a clearly local meaning in strkjv@1:20; strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:10|, doubtful in strkjv@6:12|, but probably so here. In strkjv@2:6| the believer is conceived as already seated with Christ. Heaven is the real abode of the citizen of Christ's kingdom (Phillipians:3:20|) who is a stranger on earth (Phillipians:1:27; strkjv@Ephesians:2:19|). The word \epouranios\ (heavenly) occurs in various passages in the N.T. in contrast with \ta epigeia\ (the earthly) as in strkjv@John:3:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:40,48,49; strkjv@Phillipians:2:10|, with \patris\ (country) in strkjv@Hebrews:11:16|, with \klˆsis\ (calling) in strkjv@Hebrews:3:1|, with \d“rea\ (gift) in strkjv@Hebrews:6:4|, with \basileia\ (kingdom) in strkjv@2Timothy:4:18|.

rwp@Ephesians:2:21 @{Each several building} (\pƒsa oikodomˆ\). Songs:without article Aleph B D G K L. \Oikodomˆ\ is a late word from \oikos\ and \dem“\, to build for building up (edification) as in strkjv@Ephesians:4:29|, then for the building itself as here (Mark:13:1f.|). Ordinary Greek idiom here calls for "every building," not for "all the building" (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 772), though it is not perfectly clear what that means. Each believer is called a \naos theou\ (1Corinthians:3:16|). One may note the plural in strkjv@Mark:13:1| (\oikodomai\) of the various parts of the temple. Perhaps that is the idea here without precise definition of each \oikodomˆ\. But there are examples of \pƒs\ without the article where "all" is the idea as in \pƒsˆs ktise“s\ (all creation) in strkjv@Colossians:1:15|. {Fitly framed together} (\sunarmologoumenˆ\). Double compound from \sun\ and \harmologos\ (binding, \harmos\, joint and \leg“\), apparently made by Paul and in N.T. only here and strkjv@Ephesians:4:16|. Architectural metaphor. {Into a holy temple} (\eis naon hagion\). The whole structure with all the \oikodomai\. Another metaphor for the Kingdom of God with which compare Peter's "spiritual house" (\oikos pneumatikos\) in which each is a living stone being built in (1Peter:2:5|).

rwp@Galatians:5:10 @{Whosoever he be} (\hostis ean ˆi\). Indefinite relative clause with \ean\ and subjunctive. It seems unlikely that Paul knew precisely who the leader was. In strkjv@1:6| he uses the plural of the same verb \tarass“\ and see also \anastatountes\ in verse 12|.

rwp@Galatians:5:14 @{Even in this} (\en t“i\). Just the article with \en\, "in the," but it points at the quotation from strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|. Jews (Luke:10:29|) confined "neighbour" (\plˆsion\) to Jews. Paul uses here a striking paradox by urging obedience to the law against which he has been arguing, but this is the moral law as proof of the new love and life. See also strkjv@Romans:13:8|, precisely as Jesus did (Matthew:22:40|).

rwp@Galatians:6:8 @{Corruption} (\phthoran\). For this old word from \phtheir“\, see on ¯1Corinthians:15:42|. The precise meaning turns on the context, here plainly the physical and moral decay or rottenness that follows sins of the flesh as all men know. Nature writes in one's body the penalty of sin as every doctor knows. {Eternal life} (\z“ˆn ai“nion\). See on ¯Matthew:25:46| for this interesting phrase so common in the Johannine writings. Plato used \ai“nios\ for perpetual. See also strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:9|. It comes as nearly meaning "eternal" as the Greek can express that idea.

rwp@Hebrews:6:1 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). Because of the argument already made about the difficulty of the subject and the dulness of the readers. {Let us cease to speak} (\aphentes ton logon\). Second aorist active participle of \aphiˆmi\, to leave off or behind. {Of the first principles of Christ} (\tˆs archˆs tou Christou\). Objective genitive \Christou\ (about Christ). "Leaving behind the discussion of the beginning about Christ," another way of saying again \ta stoicheia tˆs archˆs t“n logi“n tou theou\ of strkjv@5:12|. {And press on} (\kai pher“metha\). Volitive present subjunctive passive, "Let us be borne on" (both the writer and the readers). The Pythagorean Schools use \pher“metha\ in precisely this sense of being borne on to a higher stage of instruction. Bleek quotes several instances of Greek writers using together as here of \aphentes pher“metha\ (Eurip., _Androm_. 393, for instance). {Unto perfection} (\epi tˆn teleiotˆta\). Old word from \teleios\ mature, adults as in strkjv@5:14|. Only twice in N.T. (here and strkjv@Colossians:3:14|). Let us go on to the stage of adults, not babes, able to masticate solid spiritual food. The writer will assume that the readers are adults in his discussion of the topic. {Not laying again the foundation} (\mˆ palin themelion kataballomenoi\). The regular idiom for laying down the foundation of a building (\themelion\, strkjv@Luke:6:48f.|). The metaphor is common (1Corinthians:3:11|) and the foundation is important, but one cannot be laying the foundation always if he is to build the house. There are six items mentioned here as part of the "foundation," though the accusative \didachˆn\ in apposition with \themelion\ may mean that there are only four included in the \themelion\. Two are qualitative genitives after \themelion\ (\metanoias\ and \piste“s\). What is meant by "dead works" (\apo nekr“n erg“n\) is not clear (9:14|), though the reference may be to touching a corpse (Numbers:19:1f.; strkjv@31:19|). There are frequent allusions to the deadening power of sin (James:2:17,26; strkjv@John:7:25; Rom strkjv@6:1,11; strkjv@7:8; strkjv@Colossians:2:13; strkjv@Ephesians:2:1,5|). The use of repentance and faith together occurs also elsewhere (Mark:1:15; strkjv@Acts:20:21; strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:9|).

rwp@Hebrews:11:4 @{A more excellent sacrifice} (\pleiona thusian\). Literally, "more sacrifice" (comparative of \polus\, much). For this rather free use of \plei“n\ with the point implied rather than stated see strkjv@Matthew:6:25; strkjv@Luke:10:31; strkjv@12:23; strkjv@Hebrews:3:3|. {Than Cain} (\para Kain\). For this use of \para\ after comparative see strkjv@1:4,9|. For the incident see strkjv@Genesis:4:4|. {Through which} (\di' hˆs\). The sacrifice (\thusia\). {He had Witness borne to him} (\emarturˆthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \marture“\ as in verse 2|, "he was witnessed to." {That he was righteous} (\einai dikaios\). Infinitive in indirect discourse after \emarturˆthˆ\, personal construction of \dikaios\ (predicate nominative after \einai\) agreeing with the subject of \emarturˆthˆ\ (cf. strkjv@Romans:1:22|, \einai sophoi\). {God bearing witness} (\marturountos tou theou\). Genitive absolute with present active participle of \marture“\. {Through it} (\di' autˆs\). Through his faith (as shown by his sacrifice). Precisely why Abel's sacrifice was better than that of Cain apart from his faith is not shown. {Being dead} (\apothan“n\). Second aorist active participle of \apothnˆsk“\, "having died." {Yet speaketh} (\eti lalei\). Cf. strkjv@Genesis:4:10; strkjv@Hebrews:12:24|. Speaks still through his faith.

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

rwp@James:4:14 @{Whereas ye know not} (\hoitines ouk epistasthe\). The longer relative \hostis\ defines here more precisely (like Latin _qui_) \hoi legontes\ (ye who say) of verse 13| in a causal sense, as in strkjv@Acts:10:47|, "who indeed do not know" (present middle indicative of \epistamai\). {What shall be on the morrow} (\tˆs aurion\). Supply \hˆmeras\ (day) after \aurion\. This is the reading of B (Westcott) "on the morrow" (genitive of time), but Aleph K L cursives have \to tˆs aurion\ ("the matter of tomorrow"), while A P cursives have \ta tˆs aurion\ ("the things of tomorrow"). The sense is practically the same, though \to tˆs aurion\ is likely correct. {What is your life?} (\poia hˆ z“ˆ hum“n\). Thus Westcott and Hort punctuate it as an indirect question, not direct. \Poia\ is a qualitative interrogative (of what character). {As vapour} (\atmis\). This is the answer. Old word for mist (like \atmos\, from which our "atmosphere"), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:2:19| with \kapnou\ (vapour of smoke (from strkjv@Joel:2:30|). {For a little time} (\pros oligon\). See same phrase in strkjv@1Timothy:4:8|, \pros kairon\ in strkjv@Luke:8:13|, \pros h“ran\ in strkjv@John:5:35|. {That appeareth and then vanisheth away} (\phainomenˆ epeita kai aphanizomenˆ\). Present middle participles agreeing with \atmis\, "appearing, then also disappearing," with play on the two verbs (\phainomai, aphaniz“\ as in strkjv@Matthew:6:19|, from \aphanˆs\ hidden strkjv@Hebrews:4:13|) with the same root \phan\ (\phain“, a-phan-ˆs\).

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 @ THE BELOVED DISCIPLE The book claims to be written by "the disciple whom Jesus loved" (John:21:20|) who is pointedly identified by a group of believers (apparently in Ephesus) as the writer: "This is the disciple which beareth witness of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his witness is true" (John:21:24|). This is the first criticism of the Fourth Gospel of which we have any record, made at the time when the book was first sent forth, made in a postscript to the epilogue or appendix. Possibly the book closed first with strkjv@John:20:31|, but chapter 21 is in precisely the same style and was probably added before publication by the author. The natural and obvious meaning of the language in strkjv@John:21:24| is that the Beloved Disciple wrote the whole book. He is apparently still alive when this testimony to his authorship is given. There are scholars who interpret it to mean that the Beloved Disciple is responsible for the facts in the book and not the actual writer, but that is a manifest straining of the language. There is in this verse no provision made for a redactor as distinct from the witness as is plausibly set forth by Dr. A. E. Garvie in _The Beloved Disciple_ (1922).

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

rwp@John:1:15 @{Beareth witness} (\marturei\). Historical (dramatic) present indicative of this characteristic word in John (cf. strkjv@1:17f.|). See strkjv@1:32,34| for historical examples of John's witness to Christ. This sentence is a parenthesis in Westcott and Hort's text, though the Revised Version makes a parenthesis of most of verse 14|. The witness of John is adduced in proof of the glory full of grace and truth already claimed for the Incarnate Logos. {Crieth} (\kekragen\). Second perfect active indicative of \kraz“\, old verb for loud crying, repeated in dramatic form again for emphasis recalling the wonderful Voice in the wilderness which the Beloved Disciple can still hear echoing through the years. {This was} (\houtos ˆn\). Imperfect indicative where John throws the tense back in past time when he looked forward to the coming of the Messiah as in strkjv@Acts:3:10| where we should prefer "is" (\estin\). Gildersleeve (_Syntax_, p. 96) calls this the "imperfect of sudden appreciation of the real state of things." {Of whom I said} (\hon eipon\). But B C and a corrector of Aleph (Westcott and Hort) have \ho eip“n\ "the one who said," a parenthetical explanation about the Baptist, not the words of the Baptist about Christ. {After me} (\opis“ mou\). See also strkjv@1:27|. Later in time John means. He described "the Coming One" (\ho erchomenos\) before he saw Jesus. The language of John here is precisely that in strkjv@Matthew:3:11| \ho opis“ mou erchomenos\ (cf. strkjv@Mark:1:7|). The Beloved Disciple had heard the Baptist say these very words, but he also had the Synoptic Gospels. {Is become} (\gegonen\). Second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. It is already an actual fact when the Baptist is speaking. {Before me} (\emprosthen mou\). In rank and dignity, the Baptist means, \ho ischuroteros mou\ "the one mightier than I" (Mark:1:7|) and \ischuroteros mou\ "mightier than I" (Matthew:3:11|). In strkjv@John:3:28| \emprosthen ekeinou\ (before him, the Christ) does mean priority in time, but not here. This superior dignity of the Messiah John proudly recognizes always (John:3:25-30|). {For he was before me} (\hoti pr“tos mou ˆn\). Paradox, but clear. He had always been (\ˆn imperfect\) before John in his Pre-incarnate state, but "after" John in time of the Incarnation, but always ahead of John in rank immediately on his Incarnation. \Pr“tos mou\ (superlative with ablative) occurs here when only two are compared as is common in the vernacular _Koin‚_. Songs:the Beloved Disciple came first (\pr“tos\) to the tomb, ahead of Peter (20:4|). Songs:also \pr“ton hum“n\ in strkjv@15:18| means "before you" as if it were \proteron hum“n\. Verse 30| repeats these words almost exactly.

rwp@John:3:16 @{For so} (\hout“s gar\). This use of \gar\ is quite in John's style in introducing his comments (2:25; strkjv@4:8; strkjv@5:13|, etc.). This "Little Gospel" as it is often called, this "comfortable word" (the Anglican Liturgy), while not a quotation from Jesus is a just and marvellous interpretation of the mission and message of our Lord. In verses 16-21| John recapitulates in summary fashion the teaching of Jesus to Nicodemus. {Loved} (\ˆgapˆsen\). First aorist active indicative of \agapa“\, the noble word so common in the Gospels for the highest form of love, used here as often in John (14:23; strkjv@17:23; strkjv@1John:3:1; strkjv@4:10|) of God's love for man (cf. strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:16; strkjv@Romans:5:8; strkjv@Ephesians:2:4|). In strkjv@21:15| John presents a distinction between \agapa“\ and \phile“\. \Agapa“\ is used also for love of men for men (13:34|), for Jesus (8:42|), for God (1John:4:10|). {The world} (\ton kosmon\). The whole cosmos of men, including Gentiles, the whole human race. This universal aspect of God's love appears also in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:19; strkjv@Romans:5:8|. {That he gave} (\h“ste ed“ken\). The usual classical construction with \h“ste\ and the indicative (first aorist active) practical result, the only example in the N.T. save that in strkjv@Galatians:2:13|. Elsewhere \h“ste\ with the infinitive occurs for actual result (Matthew:13:32|) as well as purpose (Matthew:10:1|), though even this is rare. {His only begotten Son} (\ton huion ton monogenˆ\). "The Son the only begotten." For this word see on ¯1:14,18; strkjv@3:18|. The rest of the sentence, the purpose clause with \hina-echˆi\ precisely reproduces the close of strkjv@3:15| save that \eis auton\ takes the place of \en aut“i\ (see strkjv@1:12|) and goes certainly with \pisteu“n\ (not with \echˆi\ as \en aut“i\ in verse 15|) and the added clause "should not perish but" (\mˆ apolˆtai alla\, second aorist middle subjunctive, intransitive, of \apollumi\, to destroy). The same contrast between "perish" and "eternal life" (for this world and the next) appears also in strkjv@10:28|. On "perish" see also strkjv@17:12|.

rwp@John:3:19 @{And this is the judgment} (\hautˆ de estin hˆ krisis\). A thoroughly Johannine phrase for sequence of thought (15:12; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@1John:1:5; strkjv@5:11,14; strkjv@3John:1:6|). It is more precisely the process of judging (\kri-sis\) rather than the result (\kri-ma\) of the judgment. "It is no arbitrary sentence, but the working out of a moral law" (Bernard). {The light is come} (\to ph“s elˆluthen\). Second perfect active indicative of \erchomai\, a permanent result as already explained in the Prologue concerning the Incarnation (1:4,5,9,11|). Jesus is the Light of the world. {Loved darkness} (\ˆgapˆsan to skotos\). Job:(Job:24:13|) spoke of men rebelling against the light. Here \to skotos\, common word for moral and spiritual darkness (1Thessalonians:5:5|), though \hˆ skotia\ in strkjv@John:1:5|. "Darkness" is common in John as a metaphor for the state of sinners (8:12; strkjv@12:35, 46; strkjv@1John:1:6; strkjv@2:8,9,11|). Jesus himself is the only moral and spiritual light of the world (8:12|) as he dared claim to his enemies. The pathos of it all is that men fall in love with the darkness of sin and rebel against the light like denizens of the underworld, "for their works were evil (\ponˆra\)." When the light appears, they scatter to their holes and dens. \Ponˆros\ (from \ponos\, toil, \pone“\, to toil) is used of the deeds of the world by Jesus (7:7|). In the end the god of this world blinds men's eyes so that they do not see the light (2Corinthians:4:4|). The fish in the Mammoth Cave have no longer eyes, but only sockets where eyes used to be. The evil one has a powerful grip on the world (1John:5:19|).

rwp@John:4:24 @{God is a Spirit} (\pneuma ho theos\). More precisely, "God is Spirit" as "God is Light" (1John:1:5|), "God is Love" (1John:4:8|). In neither case can we read Spirit is God, Light is God, Love is God. The non-corporeality of God is clearly stated and the personality of God also. All this is put in three words for the first time. {Must} (\dei\). Here is the real necessity (\dei\), not the one used by the woman about the right place of worship (verse 20|).

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

rwp@John:6:8 @{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:6:65 @{Except it be given him of the Father} (\ean mˆ ˆi dedomenon aut“i ek tou patros\). Condition of third class with \ean mˆ\ and periphrastic perfect passive subjunctive of \did“mi\. Precisely the same point as in verse 44| where we have \helkusˆi\ instead of \ˆi dedomenon\. The impulse to faith comes from God. Jesus does not expect all to believe and seems to imply that Judas did not truly believe.

rwp@John:7:6 @{My time is not yet come} (\ho kairos ho emos oup“ parestin\). Only use with verse 8| of \kairos\ in this Gospel, elsewhere \chronos\ (John:5:6|) or more often \h“ra\ (2:4|) "the predestined hour" (Bernard). Here \kairos\ is the fitting or proper occasion for Christ's manifesting himself publicly to the authorities as Messiah as in verse 8|. At the feast of tabernacles Jesus did make such public claims (7:29,33; strkjv@8:12,28,38,42,58|). \Parestin\ is present active indicative of \pareimi\, old compound, to be by, to be present. The brothers of Jesus had the regular Jewish obligation to go up to the feast, but the precise day was a matter of indifference to them.

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:7:10 @{Were gone up} (\anebˆsan\). Second aorist active indicative of \anabain“\, not past perfect though the action is antecedent in fact to the following \tote anebˆ\. The Greek does not always draw the precise distinction between the merely punctiliar (aorist) antecedent action and the past perfect (2:9; strkjv@4:45|). {He also} (\tote autos\). As well as the brothers. {Not publicly} (\ou phaner“s\). Against their advice in verse 4|, using \phaner“son\ (the very same word stem). {But as it were in secret} (\alla h“s en krupt“i\). "Not with the usual caravan of pilgrims" (Bernard). Just the opposite of their advice in verse 4| with the same phrase \en phaner“i\. Plainly Jesus purposely went contrary to the insincere counsel of his brothers as to the manner of his Messianic manifestation. This secrecy concerned solely the journey to Jerusalem, not his public teaching there after his arrival (7:26,28; strkjv@18:20|).

rwp@John:8:34 @{Every one that committeth sin is the bondservant of sin} (\pas ho poi“n tˆn hamartian doulos estin [tˆs hamartias]\). The Western class omits \tˆs hamartias\ (sin), but that is the idea anyhow. Note the use of \poi“n\ (present active participle, continuous habit or practice), not \poiˆsas\ (aorist active participle for single act), precisely as in strkjv@1John:3:4-8|. Note also strkjv@3:21| for \ho poi“n tˆn alˆtheian\ (the one who practises the truth). Sin, like the worst narcotic, is habit forming. Hence the problem today for criminologists for paroled or pardoned criminals nearly always go back to crime, sink again into sin, the slaves of sin. Xenophon has this notion of the slavery of sin (_Memor_. IV. 5. 3). Songs:Paul clearly in strkjv@Romans:6:17,20| "slaves of sin" (\douloi tˆs hamartias\).

rwp@John:10:24 @{Came round about him} (\ekukl“san auton\). Aorist active indicative of \kuklo“\, old verb from \kuklos\ (cycle, circle). See strkjv@Acts:14:20| for the circle of disciples around Paul when stoned. Evidently the hostile Jews cherished the memory of the stinging rebuke given them by Jesus when here last, particularly the allegory of the Good Shepherd (10:1-19|), in which he drew so sharply their own picture. {How long dost thou hold us in suspense?} (\he“s pote tˆn psuchˆn hˆm“n aireis;\). Literally, "Until when dost thou lift up our soul?" But what do they mean by this metaphor? \Air“\ is common enough to lift up the eyes (John:11:41|), the voice (Luke:17:13|), and in strkjv@Psalms:25:1; strkjv@86:4| (Josephus, _Ant_. III. ii. 3) we have "to lift up the soul." We are left to the context to judge the precise meaning. Clearly the Jews mean to imply doubt and suspense. The next remark makes it clear. {If thou art the Christ} (\ei su ei ho Christos\). Condition of first class assumed to be true for the sake of argument. {Tell us plainly} (\eipon hˆmin parrˆsiƒi\). Conclusion with \eipon\ rather than the usual \eipe\ as if first aorist active imperative like \luson\. The point is in "plainly" (\parrˆsiƒi\), adverb as in strkjv@7:13,26| which see. That is to say "I am the Christ" in so many words. See strkjv@11:14; strkjv@16:29| for the same use of \parrˆsiƒi\. The demand seemed fair enough on the surface. They had made it before when here at the feast of tabernacles (8:25|). Jesus declined to use the word \Christos\ (Messiah) then as now because of the political bearing of the word in their minds. The populace in Galilee had once tried to make him king in opposition to Pilate (John:6:14f.|). When Jesus does confess on oath before Caiaphas that he is the Christ the Son of God (Mark:14:61f.; strkjv@Matthew:26:63f.|), the Sanhedrin instantly vote him guilty of blasphemy and then bring him to Pilate with the charge of claiming to be king as a rival to Caesar. Jesus knew their minds too well to be caught now.

rwp@John:11:32 @{Fell down at his feet} (\epesen autou pros tous podas\). Second aorist active of \pipt“\, to fall. Note unusual position of \autou\. This impulsive act like Mary. She said precisely what Martha had said to Jesus (verse 21|). But she said no more, only wept (verse 33|).

rwp@John:13:20 @{Whomsoever I send} (\an tina pemps“\). More precisely, "If I send any one" (third-class condition, \an=ean\ and \tina\, indefinite pronoun accusative case, object of \pemps“\, first aorist active subjunctive of \pemp“\, to send). This use of \ei tis\ or \ean tis\ (if any one) is very much like the indefinite relative \hostis\ and \hos an\ (or \ean\), but the idiom is different. In strkjv@Mark:8:34f.| we have both \ei tis thelei\ and \hos ean\ while in strkjv@John:14:13f.| we find \hoti an\ and \ean ti\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 956).

rwp@John:14:7 @{If ye had known me} (\ei egn“keite me\). Past perfect indicative of \gin“sk“\, to know by personal experience, in condition of second class as is made plain by the conclusion (\an ˆidete\) where \oida\, not \gin“sk“\ is used. Thomas and the rest had not really come to know Jesus, much as they loved him. {From henceforth ye know him} (\ap' arti gin“skete auton\). Probably inchoative present active indicative, "ye are beginning to know the Father from now on." {And have seen him} (\kai he“rakate\). Perfect active indicative of \hora“\. Because they had seen Jesus who is the Son of God, the Image of God, and like God (1:18|). Hence God is like Jesus Christ. It is a bold and daring claim to deity. The only intelligible conception of God is precisely what Jesus here says. God is like Christ.

rwp@John:18:25 @{Was standing and warming himself} (\ˆn hest“s kai thermainomenos\). Two periphrastic imperfects precisely as in verse 18|, vivid renewal of the picture drawn there. John alone gives the examination of Jesus by Annas (18:19-24|) which he places between the first and the second denials by Peter. Each of the Four Gospels gives three denials, but it is not possible to make a clear parallel as probably several people joined in each time. This time there was an hour's interval (Luke:22:59|). The question and answer are almost identical with verse 17| and "put in a form which almost _suggested_ that Peter should say 'No'" (Bernard), a favourite device of the devil in making temptation attractive.

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@Info_Jude:@ SPECIAL BOOKS ON JUDE (Apart from those on II Peter or the Catholic Epistles) Chase, F. H., _Jude:in Hastings D B_ (1899). Ermoni, V., _L'epitre de Jude_ (1903, in Vigoroux, Diction- naire de la Bible). Georchin, B., _Der Brief Judas_ (1901). Kasteren, J. P., _Deuteronomy:brief uan den apostel Judas_ (1916). Maier, F., _Der Judasbrief_ (1906). Mayor, J. B., _The Epistle of Jude_ (in Expositor's Greek Testament, 1910). Plummer, A., _St. James and St. Jude_ (Expositor's Bible). Rampf, M. F., _Der Brief Juda_ (1854). Stier, R., _Der Brief Judas, des Bruders des Herrn_ (1850). Wandel, G., _Der Brief des Judas_ (1898). strkjv@Jude:1:1 @{Servant} (\doulos\). Precisely as James (James:1:1|), only James added \kuriou\ (Lord). {Brother of James} (\adelphos Iak“bou\). Thus Jude:identifies himself. But not the "Judas of James" (Luke:6:16; strkjv@Acts:1:13|). {To them that are called} (\tois--klˆtois\). But this translation (treating \klˆtois\ as a substantive like strkjv@Romans:1:6; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:24|) is by no means certain as two participles come in between \tois\ and \klˆtois\. \Klˆtois\ may be in the predicate position (being called), not attributive. But see strkjv@1Peter:1:1|. {Beloved in God the Father} (\en the“i patri ˆgapˆmenois\). Perfect passive participle of \agapa“\, but no precise parallel to this use of \en\ with \agapa“\. {Kept for Jesus Christ} (\Iˆsou Christ“i tetˆrˆmenois\). Perfect passive participle again with dative, unless it is the instrumental, "kept by Jesus Christ," a quite possible interpretation.

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:4:9 @{Led him} (\ˆgagen\). Aorist active indicative of \ag“\. strkjv@Matthew:4:5| has \paralambanei\ (dramatic present). {The wing of the temple} (\to pterugion tou hierou\). See on ¯Matthew:4:5|. It is not easy to determine precisely what it was. {From hence} (\enteuthen\). This Luke adds to the words in Matthew, which see. {To guard thee} (\tou diaphulaxai se\). Not in strkjv@Matthew:4:6| quoted by Satan from strkjv@Psalms:91:11,12|. Satan does not misquote this Psalm, but he misapplies it and makes it mean presumptuous reliance on God. This compound verb is very old, but occurs here alone in the N.T. and that from the LXX. Luke repeats \hoti\ (recitative \hoti\ after \gegraptai\, is written) after this part of the quotation.

rwp@Luke:4:39 @{He stood over her} (\epistas epan“ autˆs\). Second aorist active participle. Only in Luke. Surely we are not to take Luke to mean that Jesus here took the exorcist's position and was rebuking a malignant personality. The attitude of Jesus is precisely that of any kindly sympathetic physician. strkjv@Mark:1:31; strkjv@Matthew:8:15| mention the touch of her hand rather than the tender look over her head. {Rebuked} (\epetimˆsen\). Only in Luke. Jesus bade the fever leave her as he spoke to the wind and the waves and Luke uses this same verb (8:24|). {Rose up and ministered} (\anastƒsa diˆkonei\). Second aorist active participle as in verse 38|, but inchoative imperfect tense \diˆkonei\, from \diakone“\ (note augment of compound verb). She rose up immediately, though a long high fever usually leaves one very weak. The cure was instantaneous and complete. She began to minister at once and kept it up.

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:6:40 @{The disciple is not above his master} (\ouk estin mathˆtˆs huper ton didaskalon\). Literally, a learner (or pupil) is not above the teacher. Precisely so in strkjv@Matthew:10:24| where "slave" is added with "lord." But here Luke adds: "But everyone when he is perfected shall be as his master" (\katˆrtismenos de pƒs estai h“s ho didaskalos autou\). The state of completion, perfect passive participle, is noted in \katˆrtismenos\. The word is common for mending broken things or nets (Matthew:4:21|) or men (Galatians:6:1|). Songs:it is a long process to get the pupil patched up to the plane of his teacher.

rwp@Luke:6:49 @{He that heareth and doeth not} (\ho de akousas kai mˆ poiˆsas\). Aorist active participle with article. Particular case singled out (punctiliar, aorist). {Like a man} (\homoios estin anthr“p“i\). Associative instrumental case after \homoios\ as in verse 47|. {Upon the earth} (\epi tˆn gˆn\). strkjv@Matthew:7:26| has "upon the sand" (\epi tˆn ammon\), more precise and worse than mere earth. But not on the rock. {Without a foundation} (\ch“ris themeliou\). The foundation on the rock after deep digging as in verse 48|. {It fell in} (\sunepesen\). Second aorist active of \sunpipt“\, to fall together, to collapse. An old verb from Homer on, but only here in the N.T. {The ruin} (\to rˆgma\). The crash like a giant oak in the forest resounded far and wide. An old word for a rent or fracture as in medicine for laceration of a wound. Only here in the N.T.

rwp@Luke:7:19 @{Calling unto him} (\proskalesamenos\). First aorist middle (indirect) participle. {Two} (\duo tinas\). Certain two. Not in strkjv@Matthew:11:2|. {Saying} (\leg“n\). John saying by the two messengers. The message is given precisely alike in strkjv@Matthew:11:3|, which see. In both we have \heteron\ for "another," either a second or a different kind. In verse 20| Westcott and Hort read \allon\ in the text, \heteron\ in the margin. \Prosdok“men\, may be present indicative or present subjunctive (deliberative), the same contract form (\ao= “, a“ “\).

rwp@Luke:7:24 @{When the messengers of John were departed} (\apelthont“n t“n aggel“n I“anou\). Genitive absolute of aorist active participle. strkjv@Matthew:11:7| has the present middle participle \poreuomen“n\, suggesting that Jesus began his eulogy of John as soon as the messengers (angels, Luke calls them) were on their way. The vivid questions about the people's interest in John are precisely alike in both Matthew and Luke.

rwp@Luke:7:25 @{Gorgeously apparelled} (\en himatism“i endox“i\). In splendid clothing. Here alone in this sense in the N.T. {And live delicately} (\truphˆi\). From \thrupt“\ to break down, to enervate, an old word for luxurious living. See the verb \trupha“\ in strkjv@James:5:5|. {In kings' courts} (\en tois basileiois\). Only here in the N.T. strkjv@Matthew:11:8| has it "in kings' houses." Verses 26,27| are precisely alike in strkjv@Matthew:11:9,10|, which see for discussion.

rwp@Luke:8:23 @{He fell asleep} (\aphupn“sen\). First aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \aphupno“\, to put to sleep, to fall off to sleep, a late verb for which the older Greek used \kathupno“\. Originally \aphupno“\ meant to waken from sleep, then to fall off to sleep (possibly a medical use). This is the only passage which speaks of the sleep of Jesus. Here only in the N.T. {Came down} (\katebˆ\). Second aorist active indicative of \katabain“\, common verb. It was literally true. These wind storms (\lailaps\. Songs:also strkjv@Mark:4:37|) rushed from Hermon down through the Jordan gorge upon the Sea of Galilee and shook it like a tempest (Matthew:8:24|). Mark's (Mark:4:37|) vivid use of the dramatic present \ginetai\ (ariseth) is not so precise as Luke's "came down." See on ¯Matthew:8:24|. These sudden squalls were dangerous on this small lake. {They were filling} (\suneplˆrounto\). Imperfect passive. It was the boat that was being filled (Mark:4:37|) and it is here applied to the navigators as sailors sometimes spoke. An old verb, but in the N.T. used only by Luke (8:23; strkjv@9:51; strkjv@Acts:2:1|). {Were in jeopardy} (\ekinduneuon\). Imperfect active, vivid description. Old verb, but in the N.T. only here, strkjv@Acts:19:27; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:30|.

rwp@Luke:9:22 @{Rejected} (\apodokimasthˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \apodokimaz“\, to reject after trial. {The third day} (\tˆi tritˆi hˆmerƒi\). Locative case of time as in strkjv@Matthew:16:21|. Here in the parallel passage strkjv@Mark:8:31| has "after three days" (\meta treis hˆmeras\) in precisely the same sense. That is to say, "after three days" is just a free way of saying "on the third day" and cannot mean "on the fourth day" if taken too literally. For discussion of this plain prediction of the death of Christ with various details see discussion on strkjv@Matthew:16:21; strkjv@Mark:8:31|. It was a melancholy outlook that depressed the disciples as Mark and Matthew show in the protest of Peter and his rebuke.

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:10:21 @{In that same hour} (\en autˆi tˆi h“rƒi\). Literally, "at the hour itself," almost a demonstrative use of \autos\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 686) and in Luke alone in the N.T. (2:38; strkjv@10:21; strkjv@12:12; strkjv@20:19|). strkjv@Matthew:11:25| uses the demonstrative here, "at that time" (\en ekein“i t“i kair“i\). {Rejoiced in the Holy Spirit} (\ˆgalliasato t“i pneumati t“i hagi“i\). First aorist middle of the late verb \agallia“\ for \agall“\, to exult. Always in the middle in the N.T. save strkjv@Luke:1:47| in Mary's _Magnificat_. This holy joy of Jesus was directly due to the Holy Spirit. It is joy in the work of his followers, their victories over Satan, and is akin to the joy felt by Jesus in strkjv@John:4:32-38| when the vision of the harvest of the world stirred his heart. The rest of this verse is precisely like strkjv@Matthew:11:25f.|, a peculiarly Johannine passage in Matthew and Luke, but not in Mark, and so from Q (the Logia of Jesus). It has disturbed critics who are unwilling to admit the Johannine style and type of teaching as genuine, but here it is. See on Matthew for discussion. "That God had proved his independence of the human intellect is a matter for thankfulness. Intellectual gifts, so far from being necessary, are often a hindrance" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:11:40 @{Howbeit} (\plˆn\). See strkjv@Luke:6:24|. Instead of devoting so much attention to the outside. {Those things which are within} (\ta enonta\). Articular neuter plural participle from \eneimi\, to be in, common verb. This precise phrase only here in the N.T. though in the papyri, and it is not clear what it means. Probably, give as alms the things within the dishes, that is have inward righteousness with a brotherly spirit and the outward becomes "clean" (\kathara\). Properly understood, this is not irony and is not Ebionism, but good Christianity (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:12:22 @{Unto his disciples} (\pros tous mathˆtas autou\). Songs:Jesus turns from the crowd to the disciples (verses 22-40|, when Peter interrupts the discourse). From here to the end of the chapter Luke gives material that appears in Matthew, but not in one connection as here. In Matthew part of it is in the charge to the Twelve on their tour in Galilee, part in the eschatological discourse on the Mount of Olives. None of it is in Mark. Hence Q or the Logia seems to be the source of it. The question recurs again whether Jesus repeated on other occasions what is given here or whether Luke has here put together separate discourses as Matthew is held by many to have done in the Sermon on the Mount. We have no way of deciding these points. We can only say again that Jesus would naturally repeat his favourite sayings like other popular preachers and teachers. Songs:Luke:12:22-31| corresponds to strkjv@Matthew:6:25-33|, which see for detailed discussion. The parable of the rich fool was spoken to the crowd, but this exhortation to freedom from care (22-31|) is to the disciples. Songs:the language in strkjv@Luke:12:22| is precisely that in strkjv@Matthew:6:25|. See there for \mˆ merimnƒte\ (stop being anxious) and the deliberative subjunctive retained in the indirect question (\phagˆte, endusˆsthe\). Songs:verse 23| here is the same in strkjv@Matthew:6:25| except that there it is a question with \ouch\ expecting the affirmative answer, whereas here it is given as a reason (\gar\, for) for the preceding command.

rwp@Luke:13:20 @{Whereunto shall I liken?} (\Tini homoi“s“;\). This question alone in Luke here as in verse 18|. But the parable is precisely like that in strkjv@Matthew:13:33|, which see for details.

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:16:13 @{Servant} (\oiketˆs\). Household (\oikos\) servant. This is the only addition to strkjv@Matthew:6:24| where otherwise the language is precisely the same, which see. Either Matthew or Luke has put the \logion\ in the wrong place or Jesus spoke it twice. It suits perfectly each context. There is no real reason for objecting to repetition of favourite sayings by Jesus.

rwp@Luke:18:16 @{Called} (\prosekalesato\). Indirect middle aorist indicative, called the children with their parents to himself and then rebuked the disciples for their rebuke of the parents. The language of Jesus is precisely that of strkjv@Mark:10:14| which see, and nearly that of strkjv@Matthew:19:14| which see also. The plea of Jesus that children be allowed to come to him is one that many parents need to heed. It is a tragedy to think of parents "forbidding" their children or of preachers doing the same or of both being stumbling-blocks to children.

rwp@Luke:18:18 @{Ruler} (\arch“n\). Not in strkjv@Mark:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:19:16|. {What shall I do to inherit?} (\Ti poiˆsas klˆronomˆs“;\). "By doing what shall I inherit?" Aorist active participle and future active indicative. Precisely the same question is asked by the lawyer in strkjv@Luke:10:25|. This young man probably thought that by some one act he could obtain eternal life. He was ready to make a large expenditure for it. {Good} (\agathon\). See on ¯Mark:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:19:16| for discussion of this adjective for absolute goodness. Plummer observes that no Jewish rabbi was called "good" in direct address. The question of Jesus will show whether it was merely fulsome flattery on the part of the young man or whether he really put Jesus on a par with God. He must at any rate define his attitude towards Christ.

rwp@Luke:20:45 @{In the hearing of all the people} (\akouontos pantos tou laou\). Genitive absolute, "while all the people were listening" (present active participle). That is the time to speak. The details in this verse and verse 47| are precisely those given in strkjv@Mark:12:38f.|, which see for discussion of details. strkjv@Matthew:23:1-39| has a very full and rich description of this last phase of the debate in the temple where Jesus drew a full-length portrait of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees and scribes in their presence. It was a solemn climax to this last public appearance of Christ in the temple when Jesus poured out the vials of his indignation as he had done before (Matthew:16:2; strkjv@Luke:11:37-54; 12-1|).

rwp@Luke:23:3 @{Thou sayest} (\su legeis\). A real affirmative as in strkjv@22:70|. The Gospels all give Pilate's question about Jesus asking of the Jews in precisely the same words (Mark:15:2; strkjv@Matthew:27:11; strkjv@Luke:23:3; strkjv@John:18:33|).

rwp@Luke:24:3 @{Of the Lord Jesus} (\tou kuriou Iˆsou\). The Western family of documents does not have these words and Westcott and Hort bracket them as Western non-interpolations. There are numerous instances of this shorter Western text in this chapter. For a discussion of the subject see my _Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament_, pp. 225-237. This precise combination (the Lord Jesus) is common in the Acts, but nowhere else in the Gospels.

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:4:38 @{Asleep on the cushion} (\epi to proskephalaion katheud“n\). Mark also mentions the cushion or bolster and the stern of the boat (\en tˆi prumnˆi\). strkjv@Matthew:8:24| notes that Jesus was sleeping (\ekatheuden\), Luke that {he fell asleep} (\aphupn“sen\, ingressive aorist indicative). He was worn out from the toil of this day. {They awake him} (\egeirousin auton\). Songs:Mark's graphic present. Matthew and Luke both have "awoke him." Mark has also what the others do not: "Carest thou not?" (\ou melei soi;\). It was a rebuke to Jesus for sleeping in such a storm. We are perishing (\apollumetha\, linear present middle). Precisely this same form also in strkjv@Matthew:8:25| and strkjv@Luke:8:24|.

rwp@Mark:13:1 @{Master, behold, what manner of stones and what manner of buildings} (\didaskale, ide potapoi lithoi kai potapai oikodomai\). strkjv@Matthew:24:1| and strkjv@Luke:21:5| tell of the fact of the comment, but Mark alone gives the precise words. Perhaps Peter himself (Swete) was the one who sought thus by a pleasant platitude to divert the Teacher's attention from the serious topics of recent hours in the temple. It was not a new observation, but the merest commonplace might serve at this crisis. Josephus (_Ant_. xv. II, 3) speaks of the great size of these stones and the beauty of the buildings. Some of these stones at the southeastern and southwestern angles survive today and measure from twenty to forty feet long and weigh a hundred tons. Jesus had, of course, often observed them.

rwp@Mark:14:58 @{Made with hands} (\cheiropoiˆton\). In Mark alone. An old Greek word. The negative form \acheiropoiˆton\ here occurs elsewhere only in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1; strkjv@Colossians:2:11|. In strkjv@Hebrews:9:11| the negative \ou\ is used with the positive form. It is possible that a real \logion\ of Jesus underlies the perversion of it here. Mark and Matthew do not quote the witnesses precisely alike. Perhaps they quoted Jesus differently and therein is shown part of the disagreement, for Mark adds verse 59| (not in Matthew). "And not even so did their witness agree together," repeating the point of verse 57|. Swete observes that Jesus, as a matter of fact, did do what he is quoted as saying in Mark: "He said what the event has proved to be true; His death destroyed the old order, and His resurrection created the new." But these witnesses did not mean that by what they said. The only saying of Jesus at all like this preserved to us is that in strkjv@John:2:19|, when he referred not to the temple in Jerusalem, but to the temple of his body, though no one understood it at the time.

rwp@Info_Matthew @ The style is free from Hebraisms and has few individual peculiarities. The author is fond of the phrase the kingdom of heaven and pictures Jesus as the Son of man, but also as the Son of God. He sometimes abbreviates Mark's statements and sometimes expands them to be more precise.

rwp@Matthew:2:1 @{In the days of Herod the King} (\en hˆmerais Hˆr“idou tou Basile“s\). This is the only date for the birth of Christ given by Matthew. Luke gives a more precise date in his Gospel (Luke:2:1-3|), the time of the first enrolment by Augustus and while Cyrenius was ruler of Syria. More will be said of Luke's date when we come to his Gospel. We know from Matthew that Jesus was born while Herod was king, the Herod sometimes called Herod the Great. Josephus makes it plain that Herod died B.C. 4. He was first Governor of Galilee, but had been king of Judaea since B.C. 40 (by Antony and Octavius). I call him "Herod the Great Pervert" in _Some Minor Characters in the New Testament_. He was great in sin and in cruelty and had won the favour of the Emperor. The story in Josephus is a tragedy. It is not made plain by Matthew how long before the death of Herod Jesus was born. Our traditional date A.D. 1, is certainly wrong as Matthew shows. It seems plain that the birth of Jesus cannot be put later than B.C. 5. The data supplied by Luke probably call for B.C. 6 or 7.

rwp@Matthew:2:5 @{And they said unto him} (\hoi de eipan aut“i\). Whether the ecclesiastics had to search their scriptures or not, they give the answer that is in accord with the common Jewish opinion that the Messiah was to come from Bethlehem and of the seed of David (John:7:42|). Songs:they quote strkjv@Micah:5:2|, "a free paraphrase" Alford calls it, for it is not precisely like the Hebrew text or like the Septuagint. It may have come from a collection of _testimonia_ with which J. Rendel Harris has made the world familiar. He had consulted the experts and now he has their answer. Bethlehem of Judah is the place. The use of the perfect passive indicative (\gegraptai\) is the common form in quoting scripture. It stands written. {Shall be shepherd} (\poimanei\). The Authorized Version had "shall rule," but "shepherd" is correct. "Homer calls kings 'the shepherds of the people'" (Vincent). In strkjv@Hebrews:13:20| Jesus is called "the great shepherd of the sheep." Jesus calls himself "the good shepherd" (John:10:11|). Peter calls Christ "the chief shepherd" (1Peter:2:25|). "The Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall be their shepherd" (Revelation:7:17|). Jesus told Peter to "shepherd" the lambs (John:21:16|). Our word pastor means shepherd.

rwp@Matthew:3:1 @{And in those days cometh John the Baptist} (\en de tais hˆmerais paraginetai I“anˆs ho Baptistˆs\). Here the synoptic narrative begins with the baptism of John (Mt. strkjv@3:1; strkjv@Mark:1:2; strkjv@Luke:3:1|) as given by Peter in strkjv@Acts:1:22|, "from the baptism of John, unto the day that he was received up from us" (cf. also strkjv@Acts:10:37-43|, Peter's summary to Cornelius very much like the outline of Mark's Gospel). Matthew does not indicate the date when John appeared as Luke does in ch. 3 (the fifteenth year of Tiberius's reign). It was some thirty years after the birth of John, precisely how long after the return of Joseph and Mary to Nazareth we do not know. Moffatt translates the verb (\paraginetai\) "came on the scene," but it is the historical present and calls for a vivid imagination on the part of the reader. There he is as he comes forward, makes his appearance. His name John means "Gift of Jehovah" (cf. German _Gotthold_) and is a shortened form of Johanan. He is described as "the Baptist," "the Baptizer" for that is the rite that distinguishes him. The Jews probably had proselyte baptism as I. Abrahams shows (_Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels_, p. 37). But this rite was meant for the Gentiles who accepted Judaism. John is treating the Jews as Gentiles in demanding baptism at their hands on the basis of repentance.

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

rwp@Matthew:8:17 @{Himself took our infirmities and bare our diseases} (\autos tas astheneias elaben kai tas nosous ebastasen\). A quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:53:4|. It is not clear in what sense Matthew applies the words in Isaiah whether in the precise sense of the Hebrew or in an independent manner. Moffatt translates it: "He took away our sicknesses, and bore the burden of our diseases." Goodspeed puts it: "He took our sickness and carried away our diseases." Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, pp. 102f.) thinks that Matthew has made a free interpretation of the Hebrew, has discarded the translation of the Septuagint, and has transposed the two Hebrew verbs so that Matthew means: "He took upon himself our pains, and bore our diseases." Plummer holds that "It is impossible, and also unnecessary, to understand what the Evangelist understood by 'took ' (\elaben\) and 'bare' (\ebastasen\). It at least must mean that Christ removed their sufferings from the sufferers. He can hardly have meant that the diseases were transferred to Christ." \Bastaz“\ occurs freely in the papyri with the sense of lift, carry, endure, carry away (the commonest meaning, Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_), pilfer. In strkjv@Matthew:3:11| we have the common vernacular use to take off sandals. The Attic Greek did not use it in the sense of carrying off. "This passage is the cornerstone of the faith-cure theory, which claims that the atonement of Christ includes provision for _bodily_ no less than for spiritual healing, and therefore insists on translating 'took away'" (Vincent). We have seen that the word \bastaz“\ will possibly allow that meaning, but I agree with McNeile: "The passage, _as Mt. employs it_, has no bearing on the doctrine of the atonement." But Jesus does show his sympathy with us. "Christ's sympathy with the sufferers was so intense that he really felt their weaknesses and pains." In our burdens Jesus steps under the load with us and helps us to carry on.

rwp@Matthew:9:6 @{That ye may know} (\hina eidˆte\). Jesus accepts the challenge in the thoughts of the scribes and performs the miracle of healing the paralytic, who so far only had his sins forgiven, to prove his Messianic power on earth to forgive sins even as God does. The word \exousia\ may mean either power or authority. He had both as a matter of fact. Note same word in strkjv@9:8|. {Then saith he to the sick of the palsy} (\tote legei t“i paralutik“i\). These words of course, were not spoken by Jesus. Curiously enough Matthew interjects them right in the midst of the sayings of Jesus in reply to the scorn of the scribes. Still more remarkable is the fact that Mark (Mark:2:10|) has precisely the same words in the same place save that Matthew has added \tote\, of which he is fond, to what Mark already had. Mark, as we know, largely reports Peter's words and sees with Peter's eyes. Luke has the same idea in the same place without the vivid historical present \legei (eipen t“i paralelumen“i)\ with the participle in place of the adjective. This is one of the many proofs that both Matthew and Luke made use of Mark's Gospel each in his own way. {Take up thy bed} (\ƒron sou tˆn klinˆn\). Pack up at once (aorist active imperative) the rolled-up pallet.

rwp@Matthew:11:25 @{At that season Jesus answered and said} (\en ekein“i t“i kair“i apokritheis eipen\). Spoke to his Father in audible voice. The time and place we do not know. But here we catch a glimpse of Jesus in one of his moods of worship. "It is usual to call this golden utterance a prayer, but it is at once prayer, praise, and self-communing in a devout spirit" (Bruce). Critics are disturbed because this passage from the Logia of Jesus or Q of Synoptic criticism (Matthew:11:25-30; strkjv@Luke:10:21-24|) is so manifestly Johannine in spirit and very language, "the Father" (\ho patˆr\), "the son" (\ho huios\), whereas the Fourth Gospel was not written till the close of the first century and the Logia was written before the Synoptic Gospels. The only satisfying explanation lies in the fact that Jesus did have this strain of teaching that is preserved in John's Gospel. Here he is in precisely the same mood of elevated communion with the Father that we have reflected in John 14 to 17. Even Harnack is disposed to accept this Logion as a genuine saying of Jesus. The word "thank" (\homologoumai\) is better rendered "praise" (Moffatt). Jesus praises the Father "not that the \sophoi\ were ignorant, but that the \nˆpioi\ knew" (McNeile).

rwp@Matthew:12:3 @{What David did} (\ti epoiˆsen Daueid\). From the necessity of hunger. The first defence made by Christ appeals to the conduct of David (2Samuel:21:6|). David and those with him did "what was not lawful" (\ho ouk exon ˆn\) precisely the charge made against the disciples (\ho ouk exestin\ in verse 2|).

rwp@Matthew:13:23 @{Verily beareth fruit} (\dˆ karpophorei\). Who in reality (\dˆ\) does bear fruit (cf. strkjv@Matthew:7:16-20|). The fruit reveals the character of the tree and the value of the straw for wheat. Some grain must come else it is only chaff, straw, worthless. The first three classes have no fruit and so show that they are unfruitful soil, unsaved souls and lives. There is variety in those who do bear fruit, but they have some fruit. The lesson of the parable as explained by Jesus is precisely this, the variety in the results of the seed sown according to the soil on which it falls. Every teacher and preacher knows how true this is. It is the teacher's task as the sower to sow the right seed, the word of the kingdom. The soil determines the outcome. There are critics today who scout this interpretation of the parable by Jesus as too allegorical with too much detail and probably not that really given by Jesus since modern scholars are not agreed on the main point of the parable. But the average Christian sees the point all right. This parable was not meant to explain all the problems of human life.

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:26:28 @{The Covenant} (\tˆs diathˆkˆs\). The adjective \kainˆs\ in Textus Receptus is not genuine. The covenant is an agreement or contract between two (\dia, duo, thˆke\, from \tithˆmi\). It is used also for will (Latin, _testamentum_) which becomes operative at death (Hebrews:9:15-17|). Hence our _New Testament_. Either covenant or will makes sense here. Covenant is the idea in strkjv@Hebrews:7:22; strkjv@8:8| and often. In the Hebrew to make a covenant was to cut up the sacrifice and so ratify the agreement (Genesis:15:9-18|). Lightfoot argues that the word \diathˆke\ means covenant in the N.T. except in strkjv@Hebrews:9:15-17|. Jesus here uses the solemn words of strkjv@Exodus:24:8| "the blood of the covenant" at Sinai. "My blood of the covenant" is in contrast with that. This is the New Covenant of strkjv@Jeremiah:31; strkjv@Hebrews:8|. {Which is shed for many} (\to peri poll“n ekchunnomenon\). A prophetic present passive participle. The act is symbolized by the ordinance. Cf. the purpose of Christ expressed in strkjv@20:28|. There \anti\ and here \peri\. {Unto remission of sins} (\eis aphesin hamarti“n\). This clause is in Matthew alone but it is not to be restricted for that reason. It is the truth. This passage answers all the modern sentimentalism that finds in the teaching of Jesus only pious ethical remarks or eschatological dreamings. He had the definite conception of his death on the cross as the basis of forgiveness of sin. The purpose of the shedding of his blood of the New Covenant was precisely to remove (forgive) sins.

rwp@Matthew:26:69 @{Thou also} (\kai su\). Peter had gone within (\es“\) the palace (26:58|), but was sitting {without} (\ex“\) the hall where the trial was going on in the open central court with the servants or officers (\hupˆret“n\, under rowers, literally, strkjv@26:58|) of the Sanhedrin. But he could possibly see through the open door above what was going on inside. It is not plain at what stage of the Jewish trial the denials of Peter took place nor the precise order in which they came as the Gospels give them variously. This maid (\paidiskˆ\, slave girl) stepped up to Peter as he was sitting in the court and pointedly said: "Thou also wast with Jesus the Galilean." Peter was warming himself by the fire and the light shone in his face. She probably had noticed Peter come in with John the Beloved Disciple who went on up into the hall of trial. Or she may have seen Peter with Jesus on the streets of Jerusalem.

rwp@Matthew:27:14 @{And he gave him no answer, not even to one word} (\kai ouk apekrithˆ aut“i pros oude hen rhˆma\). Jesus refused to answer the charges of the Jews (verse 12|). Now he continued silent under the direct question of Pilate. The Greek is very precise besides the double negative. "He did not reply to him up to not even one word." This silent dignity amazed Pilate and yet he was strangely impressed.

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

rwp@Matthew:28:2 @{There was a great earthquake} (\seismos egeneto megas\). Clearly not the earthquake of strkjv@27:51|. The precise time of this earthquake is not given. It was before sunrise on the first day of the week when the women made the next visit. Matthew alone relates the coming of the angel of the Lord who rolled away the stone and was sitting upon it (\apekulise ton lithon kai ekathˆto epan“ autou\). If one is querulous about these supernatural phenomena, he should reflect that the Resurrection of Jesus is one of the great supernatural events of all time. Cornelius … Lapide dares to say: "The earth, which trembled with sorrow at the Death of Christ as it were leaped for joy at His Resurrection." The Angel of the Lord announced the Incarnation of the Son of God and also His Resurrection from the grave. There are apparent inconsistencies in the various narratives of the Resurrection and the appearances of the Risen Christ. We do not know enough of the details to be able to reconcile them. But the very variations strengthen the independent witness to the essential fact that Jesus rose from the grave. Let each writer give his own account in his own way. The stone was rolled away not to let the Lord out, but to let the women in to prove the fact of the empty tomb (McNeile).

rwp@Revelation:1:1 @{The Revelation} (\apokalupsis\). Late and rare word outside of N.T. (once in Plutarch and so in the vernacular _Koin‚_), only once in the Gospels (Luke:2:32|), but in LXX and common in the Epistles (2Thessalonians:1:7|), though only here in this book besides the title, from \apokalupt“\, old verb, to uncover, to unveil. In the Epistles \apokalupsis\ is used for insight into truth (Ephesians:1:17|) or for the revelation of God or Christ at the second coming of Christ (2Thessalonians:1:7; strkjv@1Peter:1:7|). It is interesting to compare \apokalupsis\ with \epiphaneia\ (2Thessalonians:2:8|) and \phaner“sis\ (1Corinthians:12:7|). The precise meaning here turns on the genitive following. {Of Jesus Christ} (\Iˆsou Christou\). Hort takes it as objective genitive (revelation about Jesus Christ), but Swete rightly argues for the subjective genitive because of the next clause. {Gave him} (\ed“ken autoi\). It is the Son who received the revelation from the Father, as is usual (John:5:20f.,26|, etc.). {To shew} (\deixai\). First aorist active infinitive of \deiknumi\, purpose of God in giving the revelation to Christ. {Unto his servants} (\tois doulois autou\). Believers in general and not just to officials. Dative case. God's servants (or Christ's). {Must shortly come to pass} (\dei genesthai en tachei\). Second aorist middle infinitive of \ginomai\ with \dei\. See this same adjunct (\en tachei\) in strkjv@Luke:18:8; strkjv@Romans:16:20; strkjv@Revelation:22:6|. It is a relative term to be judged in the light of strkjv@2Peter:3:8| according to God's clock, not ours. And yet undoubtedly the hopes of the early Christians looked for a speedy return of the Lord Jesus. This vivid panorama must be read in the light of that glorious hope and of the blazing fires of persecution from Rome. {Sent and signified} (\esˆmanen aposteilas\). "Having sent (first aorist active participle of \apostell“\, strkjv@Matthew:10:16| and again in strkjv@Revelation:22:6| of God sending his angel) signified" (first aorist active indicative of \sˆmain“\, from \sˆma\, sign or token, for which see strkjv@John:12:33; strkjv@Acts:11:28|). See strkjv@12:1| for \sˆmeion\, though \sˆmain“\ (only here in the Apocalypse) suits admirably the symbolic character of the book. {By his angel} (\dia tou aggelou autou\). Christ's angel as Christ is the subject of the verb \esˆmanen\, as in strkjv@22:16 Christ sends his angel, though in strkjv@22:6| God sends. {Unto his servant John} (\t“i doul“i autou I“anei\). Dative case. John gives his name here, though not in Gospel or Epistles, because "prophecy requires the guarantee of the individual who is inspired to utter it" (Milligan). "The genesis of the Apocalypse has now been traced from its origin in the Mind of God to the moment when it reached its human interpreter" (Swete). "Jesus is the medium of all revelation" (Moffatt).

rwp@Revelation:2:9 @{Thy tribulation and thy poverty} (\sou tˆn thlipsin kai pt“cheian\). Separate articles of same gender, emphasizing each item. The tribulation was probably persecution, which helped to intensify the poverty of the Christians (James:2:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:10; strkjv@8:2|). In contrast with the wealthy church in Laodicea (3:17|). {But thou art rich} (\alla plousios ei\). Parenthesis to show the spiritual riches of this church in contrast with the spiritual poverty in Laodicea (3:17|), this a rich poor church, that a poor rich church. Rich in grace toward God (Luke:12:21|) and in good deeds (1Timothy:6:18|). Perhaps Jews and pagans had pillaged their property (Hebrews:10:34|), poor as they already were. {Blasphemy} (\blasphˆmian\). Reviling believers in Christ. See strkjv@Mark:7:22|. The precise charge by these Jews is not indicated, but see strkjv@Acts:13:45|. {Of them which say} (\ek t“n legont“n\). "From those saying" (\ek\ with the ablative plural of the present active articular participle of \leg“\). {They are Jews} (\Ioudaious einai heautous\). This is the accusative of general reference and the infinitive in indirect discourse after \leg“\ (Acts:5:36; strkjv@8:9|) even though \legont“n\ is here ablative (cf. strkjv@3:9|), common idiom. These are actual Jews and only Jews, not Christians. {And they are not} (\kai ouk eisin\). Another parenthesis like that in strkjv@2:2|. These are Jews in name only, not spiritual Jews (Galatians:6:15f., strkjv@Romans:2:28|). {A synagogue of Satan} (\sunag“gˆ tou Satanƒ\). In strkjv@3:9| again and note strkjv@2:13,24|, serving the devil (John:8:44|) instead of the Lord (Numbers:16:3; strkjv@20:4|).

rwp@Revelation:8:2 @{Stand} (\hestˆkasin\). Perfect active of \histˆmi\ (intransitive). Another "hebdomad" so frequent in the Apocalypse. The article (the seven angels) seems to point to seven well-known angels. In Enoch strkjv@20:7 the names of seven archangels are given (Uriel, Raphael, Raguel, Michael, Sariel, Gabriel, Remiel) and "angels of the Presence" is an idea like that in strkjv@Isaiah:63:9|. We do not know precisely what is John's idea here. {Seven trumpets} (\hepta salpigges\). We see trumpets assigned to angels in strkjv@Matthew:24:31; strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:16; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:52; strkjv@Revelation:4:1,4|. See also the use of trumpets in strkjv@Joshua:6:13; strkjv@Joel:2:1|. These seven trumpets are soon to break the half hour of silence. Thus the seven trumpets grow out of the opening of the seventh seal, however that fact is to be interpreted.

rwp@Revelation:12:4 @{His tail} (\hˆ oura autou\). See strkjv@9:10,19|. {Draweth} (\surei\). Present active indicative of \sur“\, old verb, to drag, here alone in the Apocalypse, but see strkjv@John:21:8|. {The third part of the stars} (\to triton t“n aster“n\). Like a great comet is this monster. See strkjv@Daniel:8:10|. Perhaps only the third is meant to soften the picture as in strkjv@Revelation:8:7f|. {Did cast them} (\ebalen autous\). Second aorist active indicative. Charles takes this to refer to a war in heaven between the good angels and Satan, with the fall of some angels (Jude:1:6|). But John may have in mind the martyrs before Christ (Hebrews:11:32f.|) and after Christ's ascension (Matthew:23:35|). {Stood} (\estˆken\). Imperfect active of a late verb, \stˆk“\, from the perfect \hestˆka\ of \histˆmi\, graphic picture of the dragon's challenge of the woman who is about to give birth. {When she was delivered} (\hotan tekˆi\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \tikt“\, "whenever she gives birth." {That he might devour} (\hina kataphagˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \katesthi“\, to eat up (down). Cf. strkjv@Jeremiah:28:34|. This is what Pharaoh did to Israel (Exodus:1:15-22; strkjv@Psalms:85:13; strkjv@Isaiah:27:1; strkjv@51:9; strkjv@Ezekiel:29:3|). Precisely so the devil tried to destroy the child Jesus on his birth.

rwp@Revelation:16:11 @{They blasphemed} (\eblasphˆmˆsan\) {and they repented not} (\kai ou metenoˆsan\). Precisely as in verse 9|, which see. Not just because of the supernatural darkness, but also "because of their pains" (\ek t“n pon“n aut“n\, plural here and same use of \ek\) and their sores (\kai ek t“n helk“n aut“n\, as in verse 2|, only plural, and same use of \ek\). {Of their works} (\ek t“n erg“n aut“n\). "Out of their deeds," and addition to verse 9|. {The God of heaven} (\ton theon tou ouranou\). As in strkjv@Daniel:2:44|. Like the pride of Nebuchadrezzar against Jehovah.

rwp@Revelation:19:4 @{Fell down and worshipped God} (\epesan kai prosekunˆsan t“i the“i\). Precisely as in strkjv@7:11|, which see. The twenty-four elders and the four living creatures take up the antiphonal chorus of the angels.

rwp@Revelation:20:4 @{And they sat upon them} (\kai ekathisan ep' autous\). First aorist active indicative of \kathiz“\. Another period here apparently synchronous (verse 7|) with the confinement of Satan in the abyss. No subject is given for this plural verb. Apparently Christ and the Apostles (Matthew:19:28; strkjv@Luke:22:30|) and some of the saints (1Corinthians:6:3|), martyrs some hold. {Judgment was given unto them} (\krima edothˆ autois\). First aorist passive of \did“mi\. Picture of the heavenly court of assizes. {The souls} (\tas psuchas\). Accusative after \eidon\ at the beginning of the verse. {Of them that had been beheaded} (\t“n pepelekismen“n\). Genitive of the articular perfect passive participle of \pelekiz“\, old word (from \pelekus\ an axe, the traditional instrument for execution in republican Rome, but later supplanted by the sword), to cut off with an axe, here only in N.T. See strkjv@6:9; strkjv@18:24; strkjv@19:2| for previous mention of these martyrs for the witness of Jesus (1:9; strkjv@12:17; strkjv@19:10|). Others also besides martyrs shared in Christ's victory, those who refused to worship the beast or wear his mark as in strkjv@13:15; strkjv@14:9ff.; strkjv@16:2; strkjv@19:20|. {And they lived} (\kai ezˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \za“\. If the ingressive aorist, it means "came to life" or "lived again" as in strkjv@2:8| and so as to verse 5|. If it is the constative aorist here and in verse 5|, then it could mean increased spiritual life. See strkjv@John:5:21-29| for the double sense of life and death (now literal, now spiritual) precisely as we have the second death in strkjv@Revelation:2:11; strkjv@20:6,14|. {And reigned with Christ} (\kai ebasileusan meta tou Christou\). Same use of the first aorist active indicative of \basileu“\, but more clearly constative. Beckwith and Swete take this to apply solely to the martyrs, the martyrs' reign with Christ.

rwp@Revelation:21:5 @{Behold, I make all things new} (\Idou kaina poi“ panta\). The first time since strkjv@1:8| that God has been represented as speaking directly, though voices have come out of the throne before (21:3|) and out of the sanctuary (16:1,17|), which may be from God himself, though more likely from one of the angels of the Presence. This message is not addressed to John (7:14; strkjv@17:7; strkjv@21:6; strkjv@22:6|), but to the entire world of the blessed. See strkjv@Isaiah:43:18f.| for the words (\Idou eg“ poi“ kaina\). The idea of a new heaven and a new earth is in strkjv@Isaiah:65:17; strkjv@66:22; strkjv@Psalms:102:25f|. For the locative here with \epi\ (\epi t“i thron“i\) see strkjv@7:10; strkjv@19:4| (genitive more usual, strkjv@4:9f.; strkjv@5:1,7,13|, etc.). See strkjv@20:11| for the picture. {And he saith} (\kai legei\). Probably this means a change of speakers, made plain by \moi\ (to me) in many MSS. An angel apparently (as in strkjv@14:13; strkjv@19:9f.|) assures John and urges him to write (\grapson\ as in strkjv@1:11; strkjv@2:1,8,12,18; strkjv@3:1,7,14; strkjv@14:3|). The reason given (\hoti\, for) is precisely the saying in strkjv@22:6| and he uses the two adjectives (\pistoi kai alˆthinoi\) employed in strkjv@19:11| about God himself, and strkjv@3:14| about Christ. In strkjv@19:9| \alˆthinoi\ occurs also about "the words of God" as here. They are reliable and genuine.

rwp@Revelation:21:10 @{He carried me away in the Spirit} (\apˆnegken me en pneumati\). See same language in strkjv@17:7| when John received a vision of the Harlot City in a wilderness. Here it is "to a mountain great and high" (\epi oros mega kai hupsˆlon\). Songs:it was with Ezekiel (Ezekiel:40:2|) and so the devil took Jesus (Matthew:4:8|). It was apparently not Mount Zion (14:1|), for the New Jerusalem is seen from this mountain. "The Seer is carried thither 'in spirit' (cf. strkjv@1:10; strkjv@4:1|); the Angel's \deuro\ is a _sursum cor_ to which his spirit under the influence of the 'Spirit of revelation' (Ephesians:1:17|) at once responds" (Swete). {And he shewed me} (\kai edeixen moi\). First aorist active indicative of \deiknumi\, just as he had said he would do in verse 9| (\deix“ soi\, I will shew thee). Precisely the same words about Jerusalem as in verse 2|, save the absence of \kainˆn\ (New).

rwp@Romans:10:7 @{Into the abyss} (\eis tˆn abusson\). See strkjv@Luke:8:31| for this old Greek word (\a\ privative and \bussos\) bottomless like sea (Psalms:106:26|), our abyss. In strkjv@Revelation:9:1| it is the place of torment. Paul seems to refer to Hades or Sheol (Acts:2:27,31|), the other world to which Christ went after death. {To bring Christ up} (\Christon anagagein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \anag“\ and dependent on \katabˆsetai\ (shall descend). Christ has already risen from the dead. The deity and resurrection of Christ are precisely the two chief points of attack today on the part of sceptics.

rwp@Romans:15:1 @{We the strong} (\hˆmeis hoi dunatoi\). Paul identifies himself with this wing in the controversy. He means the morally strong as in strkjv@2Corinthians:12:10; strkjv@13:9|, not the mighty as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26|. {The infirmities} (\ta asthenˆmata\). "The weaknesses" (cf. \asthen“n\ in strkjv@14:1,2|), the scruples "of the not strong" (\t“n adunat“n\). See strkjv@Acts:14:8| where it is used of the man weak in his feet (impotent). {To bear} (\bastazein\). As in strkjv@Galatians:6:2|, common in the figurative sense. {Not to please ourselves} (\mˆ heautois areskein\). Precisely Paul's picture of his own conduct in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:33|.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Sat Jun 29 23:07:29 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020