NT-GOSPEL.filter - rwp quality:

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

rwp@1Corinthians:7:4 @{The wife} (\h gun\). The wife is mentioned first, but the equality of the sexes in marriage is clearly presented as the way to keep marriage undefiled (Hebrews:13:4|). "In wedlock separate ownership of the person ceases" (Robertson and Plummer).

rwp@1Corinthians:7:18 @{Let him not become uncircumcized} (\m epispasth\). Present middle imperative of \epispa\, old verb to draw on. In LXX (I Macc. strkjv@1:15) and Josephus (_Ant_. XII, V. I) in this sense. Here only in N.T. The point is that a Jew is to remain a Jew, a Gentile to be a Gentile. Both stand on an equality in the Christian churches. This freedom about circumcision illustrates the freedom about Gentile mixed marriages.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:48 @{As is the earthly} (\hoios ho choikos\). Masculine gender because of \anthrpos\ and correlative pronouns (\hoios, toioutoi\) of character or quality. All men of dust (\chokoi\) correspond to "the man of dust" (\ho chokos\), the first Adam. {As is the heavenly} (\hoios ho epouranios\). Christ in his ascended state (1Thessalonians:4:16; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:7; strkjv@Ephesians:2:6,20; strkjv@Phillipians:3:20f.|).

rwp@1John:5:11 @{That God gave} (\hoti edken ho theos\). Declarative \hoti\ in apposition with \marturia\ as in verse 14; strkjv@John:3:19|. Note aorist active indicative \edken\ (from \didmi\) as in strkjv@3:23f.|, the great historic fact of the Incarnation (John:3:16|), but the perfect \dedken\ in strkjv@1John:3:1| to emphasize the abiding presence of God's love. {Eternal life} (\zn ainion\). Anarthrous emphasizing quality, but with the article in strkjv@1:2|. {In his Son} (\en ti huii autou\). This life and the witness also. This is why Jesus who is life (John:14:6|) came to give us abundant life (John:10:10|).

rwp@2Corinthians:8:14 @{By equality} (\ex isottos\). Old word from \isos\, fair, equal. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Colossians:4:1|. {Abundancy} (\perisseuma\). Late word from \perisseu\ like \perisseia\ (verse 2|) Cf. strkjv@Matthew:12:34|. {Want} (\husterma\). Late word from \hustere\, to be in want. See also strkjv@9:12; strkjv@Luke:21:4| (cf. \hustersis\ in strkjv@Mark:12:44|).

rwp@2Peter:2:22 @{It has happened} (\sumbebken\). Perfect active indicative of \sumbain\, for which see strkjv@1Peter:4:12|. {According to the true proverb} (\to ts althous paroimias\). "The word (\to\ used absolutely, the matter of, as in strkjv@Matthew:21:21; strkjv@James:4:14|) of the true proverb" (\paroimia\ a wayside saying, for which see strkjv@John:10:6; strkjv@16:25,29|). The first proverb here given comes from strkjv@Proverbs:26:11|. \Exerama\ is a late and rare word (here only in N.T., in Diosc. and Eustath.) from \exera\, to vomit. {The sow that had washed} (\hs lousamen\). \Hs\, old word for hog, here only in N.T. Participle first aorist direct middle of \lou\ shows that it is feminine (anarthrous). This second proverb does not occur in the O.T., probably from a Gentile source because about the habit of hogs. Epictetus and other writers moralize on the habit of hogs, having once bathed in a filthy mud-hole, to delight in it. {To wallowing} (\eis kulismon\). "To rolling." Late and rare word (from \kuli\, strkjv@Mark:9:20|), here only in N.T. {In the mire} (\borborou\). Objective genitive, old word for dung, mire, here only in N.T. J. Rendel Harris (_Story of Ahikar_, p. LXVII) tells of a story about a hog that went to the bath with people of quality, but on coming out saw a stinking drain and went and rolled himself in it.

rwp@Acts:15:1 @{And certain men came down from Judea} (\kai tines katelthontes apo ts 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 peritmthte ti ethei Muses, ou dunasthe sthnai\). 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 (\ti ethei\) is customary. "Saved" (\sthnai\) here is the Messianic salvation. This doctrine denied the efficacy of the work of Christ.

rwp@Colossians:2:9 @{For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily} (\hoti en auti katoikei pn to plrma ts theottos smatiks\). In this sentence, given as the reason (\hoti\, because) for the preceding claim for Christ as the measure of human knowledge Paul states the heart of his message about the Person of Christ. There dwells (at home) in Christ not one or more aspects of the Godhead (the very \essence\ of God, from \theos, deitas\) and not to be confused with \theiotes\ in strkjv@Romans:1:20| (from \theios\, the {quality} of God, _divinitas_), here only in N.T. as \theiots\ only in strkjv@Romans:1:20|. The distinction is observed in Lucian and Plutarch. \Theiots\ occurs in the papyri and inscriptions. Paul here asserts that "all the \plrma\ of the Godhead," not just certain aspects, dwells in Christ and in bodily form (\smatiks\, late and rare adverb, in Plutarch, inscription, here only in N.T.), dwells now in Christ in his glorified humanity (Phillipians:2:9-11|), "the body of his glory" (\ti smati ts doxs\). The fulness of the God-head was in Christ before the Incarnation (John:1:1,18; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6|), during the Incarnation (John:1:14,18; strkjv@1John:1:1-3|). It was the Son of God who came in the likeness of men (Phillipians:2:7|). Paul here disposes of the Docetic theory that Jesus had no human body as well as the Cerinthian separation between the man Jesus and the aeon Christ. He asserts plainly the deity and the humanity of Jesus Christ in corporeal form.

rwp@Hebrews:7:18 @{A disannulling} (\athetsis\). Late word from \athete\ (alpha privative and \tithmi\), to set aside (Mark:6:26|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@9:26|. Common in the papyri in a legal sense of making void. Involved in \metathesis\ (change in verse 12|). {Foregoing} (\proagouss\). Present active participle of \proag\, to go before (1Timothy:1:18|). {Because of its weakness} (\dia to auts asthenes\). Neuter abstract adjective with article for quality as in verse 7| with \dia\ and accusative case for reason. {Unprofitableness} (\anpheles\). Old compound (alpha privative and \ophelos\) useless, and neuter singular like \asthenes\. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Titus:3:9|.

rwp@Hebrews:9:14 @{How much more} (\posi mallon\). Instrumental case, "by how much more," by the measure of the superiority of Christ's blood to that of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer. {Through the eternal Spirit} (\dia pneumatos ainiou\). Not the Holy Spirit, but Christ's own spirit which is eternal as he is. There is thus a moral quality in the blood of Christ not in that of other sacrifices. {Offered himself} (\heauton prosnegken\). Second aorist active indicative of \prospher\ (used so often as in strkjv@5:1,3; strkjv@8:3|). The voluntary character of Christ's death is again emphasized. {Without blemish} (\ammon\). Old compound adjective (Colossians:1:22; strkjv@1Peter:1:19|) as the sacrifice had to be (Exodus:29:1; strkjv@Leviticus:1:3,10|). {Shall cleanse from conscience} (\kathariei tn suneidsin humn\). Future active indicative of \kathariz\. Some MSS. have \hmn\ (our). The old Greek used \kathair\, not \kathariz\ (in inscriptions for ceremonial cleansing, Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 216f.), for cleansing. {From dead works} (\apo nekrn ergn\). As in strkjv@6:1|. "A pause might be made before \ergn\, from dead--(not bodies but) works."

rwp@John:5:18 @{Sought the more} (\mallon eztoun\). Imperfect active of \zte\, 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 penth\ (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 poin ti thei\). \Isos\ is an old common adjective (in papyri also) and means {equal}. In strkjv@Phillipians:2:6| Paul calls the Pre-incarnate Christ \isa thei\, "equal to God" (plural \isa\, attributes of God). Bernard thinks that Jesus would not claim to be \isos thei\ 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:5:19 @{The Son} (\ho huios\). The absolute use of the Son in relation to the Father admitting the charge in verse 18| and defending his equality with the Father. {Can do nothing by himself} (\ou dunatai poiein aph'heautou ouden\). True in a sense of every man, but in a much deeper sense of Christ because of the intimate relation between him and the Father. See this same point in strkjv@5:30; strkjv@7:28; strkjv@8:28; strkjv@14:10|. Jesus had already made it in strkjv@5:17|. Now he repeats and defends it. {But what he seeth the Father doing} (\an m ti blepi ton patera poiounta\). Rather, "unless he sees the Father doing something." Negative condition (\an m\=\ean m\, if not, unless) of third class with present (habit) subjunctive (\blepi\) and present active participle (\poiounta\). It is a supreme example of a son copying the spirit and work of a father. In his work on earth the Son sees continually what the Father is doing. In healing this poor man he was doing what the Father wishes him to do. {For what things soever he doeth, these the Son also doeth in like manner} (\ha gar an ekeinos poii tauta kai ho huios homois poiei\). Indefinite relative clause with \an\ and the present active subjunctive (\poii\). Note \ekeinos\, emphatic demonstrative, that one, referring to the Father. This sublime claim on the part of Jesus will exasperate his enemies still more.

rwp@John:14:12 @{Shall he do also} (\kakeinos poisei\). Emphatic pronoun \ekeinos\, "that one also." {Greater works than these} (\meizona toutn\). Comparative adjective neuter plural from \megas\ with ablative case \toutn\. Not necessarily greater miracles and not greater spiritual works in quality, but greater in quantity. Cf. Peter at Pentecost and Paul's mission tours. "Because I go" (\hoti eg poreuornai\). Reason for this expansion made possible by the Holy Spirit as Paraclete (16:7|).

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

rwp@Luke:22:69 @{The Son of man} (\ho huios tou anthrpou\). Jesus really answers their demand about "the Messiah" by asserting that he is "the Son of man" and they so understand him. He makes claims of equality with God also which they take up.

rwp@Mark:2:12 @{Before them all} (\emprosthen pantn\). strkjv@Luke:5:25| follows Mark in this detail. He picked up (\aras\) his pallet and walked and went home as Jesus had commanded him to do (Mark:2:11|). It was an amazing proceeding and made it unnecessary for Jesus to refute the scribes further on this occasion. The amazement (\existasthai\, our _ecstasy_, as strkjv@Luke:5:26| has it), was too general and great for words. The people could only say: "We never saw it on this fashion" (\Houts oudepote eidamen\). Jesus had acted with the power of God and claimed equality with God and had made good his claim. They all marvelled at the {paradoxes} (\paradoxa\, strkjv@Luke:5:26|) of that day. For it all they glorified God.

rwp@Mark:12:25 @{When they shall rise from the dead} (\hotan ek nekrn anastsin\). Second aorist active subjunctive with \hotan\ (\hote\ plus \an\). strkjv@Matthew:22:30| has it "in the resurrection," strkjv@Luke:20:35| "to attain to the resurrection." The Pharisees regarded the future resurrection body as performing marriage functions, as Mohammedans do today. The Pharisees were in error on this point. The Sadducees made this one of their objections to belief in the resurrection body, revealing thus their own ignorance of the true resurrection body and the future life where marriage functions do not exist. {As angels in heaven} (\hs aggeloi en ti ourani\). Songs:Matthew:22:30|. strkjv@Luke:20:36| has "equal unto the angels" (\isaggeloi\). "Their equality with angels consists in their deliverance from mortality and its consequences" (Swete). The angels are directly created, not procreated.

rwp@Matthew:1:1 @{The Son of David, the son of Abraham} (\huiou Daueid huiou Abraam\). Matthew proposes to show that Jesus Christ is on the human side the son of David, as the Messiah was to be, and the son of Abraham, not merely a real Jew and the heir of the promises, but the promise made to Abraham. Songs:Matthew begins his line with Abraham while Luke traces his line back to Adam. The Hebrew and Aramaic often used the word son (\bn\) for the quality or character, but here the idea is descent. Christians are called sons of God because Christ has bestowed this dignity upon us (Romans:8:14; strkjv@9:26; strkjv@Galatians:3:26; strkjv@4:5-7|). Verse 1 is the description of the list in verses 2-17|. The names are given in three groups, Abraham to David (2-6|), David to Babylon Removal (6-11|), Jechoniah to Jesus (12-16|). The removal to Babylon (\metoikesias Babulnos\) occurs at the end of verse 11|, the beginning of verse 12|, and twice in the resume in verse 17|. This great event is used to mark off the two last divisions from each other. It is a good illustration of the genitive as the case of genus or kind. The Babylon removal could mean either to Babylon or from Babylon or, indeed, the removal of Babylon. But the readers would know the facts from the Old Testament, the removal of the Jews to Babylon. Then verse 17| makes a summary of the three lists, fourteen in each by counting David twice and omitting several, a sort of mnemonic device that is common enough. Matthew does not mean to say that there were only fourteen in actual genealogy. The names of the women (Thamar, Rahab, Ruth, Bathsheba the wife of Uriah) are likewise not counted. But it is a most interesting list.

rwp@Matthew:5:3 @{Blessed} (\makarioi\). The English word "blessed" is more exactly represented by the Greek verbal \eulogtoi\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:68| of God by Zacharias, or the perfect passive participle \eulogmenos\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:42| of Mary by Elizabeth and in strkjv@Matthew:21:9|. Both forms come from \euloge\, to speak well of (\eu, logos\). The Greek word here (\makarioi\) is an adjective that means "happy" which in English etymology goes back to hap, chance, good-luck as seen in our words haply, hapless, happily, happiness. "Blessedness is, of course, an infinitely higher and better thing than mere happiness" (Weymouth). English has thus ennobled "blessed" to a higher rank than "happy." But "happy" is what Jesus said and the _Braid Scots New Testament_ dares to say "Happy" each time here as does the _Improved Edition of the American Bible Union Version_. The Greek word is as old as Homer and Pindar and was used of the Greek gods and also of men, but largely of outward prosperity. Then it is applied to the dead who died in the Lord as in strkjv@Revelation:14:13|. Already in the Old Testament the Septuagint uses it of moral quality. "Shaking itself loose from all thoughts of outward good, it becomes the express symbol of a happiness identified with pure character. Behind it lies the clear cognition of sin as the fountain-head of all misery, and of holiness as the final and effectual cure for every woe. For knowledge as the basis of virtue, and therefore of happiness, it substitutes faith and love" (Vincent). Jesus takes this word "happy" and puts it in this rich environment. "This is one of the words which have been transformed and ennobled by New Testament use; by association, as in the Beatitudes, with unusual conditions, accounted by the world miserable, or with rare and difficult" (Bruce). It is a pity that we have not kept the word "happy" to the high and holy plane where Jesus placed it. "If you know these things, happy (\makarioi\) are you if you do them" (John:13:17|). "Happy (\makarioi\) are those who have not seen and yet have believed" (John:20:29|). And Paul applies this adjective to God, "according to the gospel of the glory of the happy (\makariou\) God" (1Timothy:1:11|. Cf. also strkjv@Titus:2:13|). The term "Beatitudes" (Latin _beatus_) comes close to the meaning of Christ here by \makarioi\. It will repay one to make a careful study of all the "beatitudes" in the New Testament where this word is employed. It occurs nine times here (3-11|), though the beatitudes in verses 10 and 11 are very much alike. The copula is not expressed in either of these nine beatitudes. In each case a reason is given for the beatitude, "for" (\hoti\), that shows the spiritual quality involved. Some of the phrases employed by Jesus here occur in the Psalms, some even in the Talmud (itself later than the New Testament, though of separate origin). That is of small moment. "The originality of Jesus lies in putting the due value on these thoughts, collecting them, and making them as prominent as the Ten Commandments. No greater service can be rendered to mankind than to rescue from obscurity neglected moral commonplaces " (Bruce). Jesus repeated his sayings many times as all great teachers and preachers do, but this sermon has unity, progress, and consummation. It does not contain all that Jesus taught by any means, but it stands out as the greatest single sermon of all time, in its penetration, pungency, and power. {The poor in spirit} (\hoi ptchoi ti pneumati\). Luke has only "the poor," but he means the same by it as this form in Matthew, "the pious in Israel, for the most part poor, whom the worldly rich despised and persecuted" (McNeile). The word used here (\ptchoi\) is applied to the beggar Lazarus in strkjv@Luke:16:20,22| and suggests spiritual destitution (from \ptss\ to crouch, to cower). The other word \pens\ is from \penomai\, to work for one's daily bread and so means one who works for his living. The word \ptchos\ is more frequent in the New Testament and implies deeper poverty than \pens\. "The kingdom of heaven" here means the reign of God in the heart and life. This is the _summum bonum_ and is what matters most.

rwp@Philippians:2:6 @{Being} (\huparchn\). Rather, "existing," present active participle of \huparch\. In the form of God (\en morphi theou\). \Morph\ means the essential attributes as shown in the form. In his preincarnate state Christ possessed the attributes of God and so appeared to those in heaven who saw him. Here is a clear statement by Paul of the deity of Christ. {A prize} (\harpagmon\). Predicate accusative with \hgsato\. Originally words in \-mos\ signified the act, not the result (\-ma\). The few examples of \harpagmos\ (Plutarch, etc.) allow it to be understood as equivalent to \harpagma\, like \baptismos\ and \baptisma\. That is to say Paul means a prize to be held on to rather than something to be won ("robbery"). {To be on an equality with God} (\to einai isa theoi\). Accusative articular infinitive object of \hgsato\, "the being equal with God" (associative instrumental case \thei\ after \isa\). \Isa\ is adverbial use of neuter plural with \einai\ as in strkjv@Revelation:21:16|. {Emptied himself} (\heauton ekense\). First aorist active indicative of \keno\, old verb from \kenos\, empty. Of what did Christ empty himself? Not of his divine nature. That was impossible. He continued to be the Son of God. There has arisen a great controversy on this word, a \Kenosis\ doctrine. Undoubtedly Christ gave up his environment of glory. He took upon himself limitations of place (space) and of knowledge and of power, though still on earth retaining more of these than any mere man. It is here that men should show restraint and modesty, though it is hard to believe that Jesus limited himself by error of knowledge and certainly not by error of conduct. He was without sin, though tempted as we are. "He stripped himself of the insignia of majesty" (Lightfoot).

rwp@Philippians:4:18 @{I have all things} (\apech panta\). As a receipt in full in appreciation of their kindness. \Apech\ is common in the papyri and the ostraca for "receipt in full" (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 110). See strkjv@Matthew:6:2,5,16|. {I am filled} (\peplrmai\). Perfect passive indicative of \plro\. "Classical Greek would hardly use the word in this personal sense" (Kennedy). {An odour of a sweet smell} (\osmn eudias\). \Osm\, old word from \oz\, to smell. \Eudia\, old word from \eu\ and \oz\. In strkjv@Ephesians:5:2| both words come together as here and in strkjv@2Corinthians:2:15| we have \eudia\ (only other N.T. example) and in verse strkjv@2Corinthians:2:16| \osm\ twice. \Eudias\ here is genitive of quality. {Sacrifice} (\thusian\). Not the act, but the offering as in strkjv@Romans:12:1|. {Well-pleasing} (\euareston\). As in strkjv@Romans:12:1|.

rwp@Revelation:6:17 @{The great day} (\h hmera h megal\). The phrase occurs in the O.T. prophets (Joel:2:11,31; strkjv@Zephaniah:1:14|. Cf. strkjv@Jude:1:6|) and is here combined with "of their wrath" (\ts orgs autn\) as in strkjv@Zephaniah:1:15,18; strkjv@2:3; Rom strkjv@2:5|. "Their" (\autn\) means the wrath of God and of the Lamb put here on an equality as in strkjv@1:17f., strkjv@22:3,13; strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:11; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:16|. Beckwith holds that this language about the great day having come "is the mistaken cry of men in terror caused by the portents which are bursting upon them." There is something, to be sure, to be said for this view which denies that John commits himself to the position that this is the end of the ages. {And who is able to stand?} (\kai tis dunatai stathnai?\). Very much like the words in strkjv@Nahum:1:6; strkjv@Malachi:3:2|. First aorist passive infinitive of \histmi\. It is a rhetorical question, apparently by the frightened crowds of verse 15|. Swete observes that the only possible answer to that cry is the command of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:21:36|: "Keep awake on every occasion, praying that ye may get strength to stand (\stathnai\, the very form) before the Son of Man."

rwp@Romans:1:17 @{For therein} (\gar en auti\). In the gospel (verse 16|) of which Paul is not ashamed. {A righteousness of God} (\dikaiosun theou\). Subjective genitive, "a God kind of righteousness," one that each must have and can obtain in no other way save "from faith unto faith" (\ek pistes eis pistin\), faith the starting point and faith the goal (Lightfoot). {Is revealed} (\apokaluptetai\). It is a revelation from God, this God kind of righteousness, that man unaided could never have conceived or still less attained. In these words we have Paul's statement in his own way of the theme of the Epistle, the content of the gospel as Paul understands it. Every word is important: \strian\ (salvation), \euaggelion\ (gospel), \apokaluptetai\ (is revealed), \dikaiosun theou\ (righteousness of God), \pistis\ (faith) and \pisteuonti\ (believing). He grounds his position on strkjv@Habbakkuk:2:4| (quoted also in strkjv@Galatians:3:11|). By "righteousness" we shall see that Paul means both "justification" and "sanctification." It is important to get a clear idea of Paul's use of \dikaiosun\ here for it controls the thought throughout the Epistle. Jesus set up a higher standard of righteousness (\dikaiosun\) in the Sermon on the Mount than the Scribes and Pharisees taught and practised (Matthew:5:20|) and proves it in various items. Here Paul claims that in the gospel, taught by Jesus and by himself there is revealed a God kind of righteousness with two ideas in it (the righteousness that God has and that he bestows). It is an old word for quality from \dikaios\, a righteous man, and that from \dik\, right or justice (called a goddess in strkjv@Acts:28:4|), and that allied with \deiknumi\, to show, to point out. Other allied words are \dikaio\, to declare or make \dikaios\ (Romans:3:24,26|), \dikaima\, that which is deemed \dikaios\ (sentence or ordinance as in strkjv@1:32; strkjv@2:26; strkjv@8:4|), \dikaisis\, the act of declaring \dikaios\ (only twice in N.T., strkjv@4:25; strkjv@5:18|). \Dikaiosun\ and \dikaio\ are easy to render into English, though we use justice in distinction from righteousness and sanctification for the result that comes after justification (the setting one right with God). Paul is consistent and usually clear in his use of these great words.

rwp@Romans:2:4 @{Or despiseth thou?} (\ kataphroneis?\). Another alternative, that of scorn of God's kindness (\chrstottos\, strkjv@2Corinthians:6:6|) and forbearance (\anochs\, old word, holding back from \anech\, only here in N.T.) and longsuffering (\makrothumias\, late word for which see strkjv@2Corinthians:6:4,6|). \Kataphrone\ is old verb to think down on (\kata, phrone\) as in strkjv@Matthew:6:24; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:22|. This upstart Jew actually thinks down on God. And then "the riches" (\tou ploutou\) of all that comes from God. {Leadeth thee to repentance} (\eis metanoian se agei\). The very kindness (\to chrston\, the kindly quality) of God is trying to lead (conative present \agei\) thee to a right-about face, a change of mind and attitude (\metanoian\) instead of a complacent self-satisfaction and pride of race and privilege.

rwp@Romans:9:16 @{Songs:then} (\ara oun\). In view of this quotation. {It is not of} (\ou\). We must supply \estin eleos\ with \ou\. "Mercy is not of." The articular participles (\tou thelontos, tou trechontos, tou elentos\) can be understood as in the genitive with \eleos\ understood (mercy is not a quality of) or as the predicate ablative of source like \epiluses\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:20|. Paul is fond of the metaphor of running.