Bible:
Filter: String:

NT-GOSPEL.filter - rwp subject:


rwp@1Corinthians:2:9 @{But as it is written} (\alla kath“s gegraptai\). Elliptical sentence like Rom strkjv@15:3| where \gegonen\ (it has happened) can be supplied. It is not certain where Paul derives this quotation as Scripture. Origen thought it a quotation from the _Apocalypse of Elias_ and Jerome finds it also in the _Ascension of Isaiah_. But these books appear to be post-Pauline, and Jerome denies that Paul obtained it from these late apocryphal books. Clement of Rome finds it in the LXX text of strkjv@Isaiah:64:4| and cites it as a Christian saying. It is likely that Paul here combines freely strkjv@Isaiah:64:4; strkjv@65:17; strkjv@52:15| in a sort of catena or free chain of quotations as he does in strkjv@Romans:3:10-18|. There is also an anacoluthon for \ha\ (which things) occurs as the direct object (accusative) with \eiden\ (saw) and \ˆkousan\ (heard), but as the subject (nominative) with \anebˆ\ (entered, second aorist active indicative of \anabain“\, to go up). {Whatsoever} (\hosa\). A climax to the preceding relative clause (Findlay). {Prepared} (\hˆtoimasen\). First aorist active indicative of \hetoimaz“\. The only instance where Paul uses this verb of God, though it occurs of final glory (Luke:2:31; strkjv@Matthew:20:23; strkjv@25:34; strkjv@Mark:10:40; strkjv@Hebrews:11:16|) and of final misery (Matthew:25:41|). But here undoubtedly the dominant idea is the present blessing to these who love God (1Corinthians:1:5-7|). {Heart} (\kardian\) here as in strkjv@Romans:1:21| is more than emotion. The Gnostics used this passage to support their teaching of esoteric doctrine as Hegesippus shows. Lightfoot thinks that probably the apocryphal _Ascension of Isaiah_ and _Apocalypse of Elias_ were Gnostic and so quoted this passage of Paul to support their position. But the next verse shows that Paul uses it of what is now {revealed} and made plain, not of mysteries still unknown.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:11 @{Other foundation} (\themelion allon\). The gender of the adjective is here masculine as is shown by \allon\. If neuter, it would be \allo\. It is masculine because Paul has Christ in mind. It is not here \heteron\ a different kind of gospel (\heteron euaggelion\, strkjv@Galatians:1:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:4|) which is not another (\allo\, strkjv@Galatians:1:7|) in reality. But another Jesus (2Corinthians:11:4|, \allon Iˆsoun\) is a reflection on the one Lord Jesus. Hence there is no room on the platform with Jesus for another Saviour, whether Buddha, Mahomet, Dowie, Eddy, or what not. Jesus Christ is the one foundation and it is gratuitous impudence for another to assume the role of Foundation. {Than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus} (\para ton keimenon, hos estin Iˆsous Christos\). Literally, "alongside (\para\) the one laid (\keimenon\)," already laid (present middle participle of \keimai\, used here as often as the perfect passive of \tithˆmi\ in place of \tetheimenon\). Paul scouts the suggestion that one even in the interest of so-called "new thought" will dare to lay beside Jesus another foundation for religion. And yet I have seen an article by a professor in a theological seminary in which he advocates regarding Jesus as a landmark, not as a goal, not as a foundation. Clearly Paul means that on this one true foundation, Jesus Christ, one must build only what is in full harmony with the Foundation which is Jesus Christ. If one accuses Paul of narrowness, it can be replied that the architect has to be narrow in the sense of building here and not there. A broad foundation will be too thin and unstable for a solid and abiding structure. It can be said also that Paul is here merely repeating the claim of Jesus himself on this very subject when he quoted strkjv@Psalms:118:22f.| to the members of the Sanhedrin who challenged his authority (Mark:11:10f.; strkjv@Matthew:21:42-45; strkjv@Luke:20:17f.|). Apostles and prophets go into this temple of God, but Christ Jesus is the chief corner stone (\akrog“naios\, strkjv@Ephesians:2:20|). All believers are living stones in this temple (1Peter:2:5|). But there is only one foundation possible.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:6:18 @{Flee} (\pheugete\). Present imperative. Have the habit of fleeing without delay or parley. Note abruptness of the asyndeton with no connectives. Fornication violates Christ's rights in our bodies (verses 13-17|) and also ruins the body itself. {Without the body} (\ektos tou s“matos\). Even gluttony and drunkenness and the use of dope are sins wrought on the body, not "within the body" (\entos tou s“matos\) in the same sense as fornication. Perhaps the dominant idea of Paul is that fornication, as already shown, breaks the mystic bond between the body and Christ and hence the fornicator (\ho porneu“n\) {sins against his own body} (\eis to idion s“ma hamartanei\) in a sense not true of other dreadful sins. The fornicator takes his body which belongs to Christ and unites it with a harlot. In fornication the body is the instrument of sin and becomes the subject of the damage wrought. In another sense fornication brings on one's own body the two most terrible bodily diseases that are still incurable (gonorrhea and syphilis) that curse one's own body and transmit the curse to the third and fourth generation. Apart from the high view given here by Paul of the relation of the body to the Lord no possible father or mother has the right to lay the hand of such terrible diseases and disaster on their children and children's children. The moral and physical rottenness wrought by immorality defy one's imagination.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:25 @{I have no commandment of the Lord} (\epitagˆn Kuriou ouk ech“\). A late word from \epitass“\, old Greek verb to enjoin, to give orders to. Paul did have (verse 10|) a command from the Lord as we have in Matthew and Mark. It was quite possible for Paul to know this command of Jesus as he did other sayings of Jesus (Acts:20:35|) even if he had as yet no access to a written gospel or had received no direct revelation on the subject from Jesus (1Corinthians:11:23|). Sayings of Jesus were passed on among the believers. But Paul had no specific word from Jesus on the subject of virgins. They call for special treatment, young unmarried women only Paul means (7:25,28,34,36-38|) and not as in strkjv@Revelation:14:4| (metaphor). It is probable that in the letter (7:1|) the Corinthians had asked about this problem. {But I give my judgment} (\gn“mˆn de did“mi\). About mixed marriages (12-16|) Paul had the command of Jesus concerning divorce to guide him. Here he has nothing from Jesus at all. Songs:he gives no "command," but only "a judgment," a deliberately formed decision from knowledge (2Corinthians:8:10|), not a mere passing fancy. {As one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful} (\h“s ˆleˆmenos hupo kuriou pistos einai\). Perfect passive participle of \elee“\, old verb to receive mercy (\eleos\). \Pistos\ is predicate nominative with infinitive \einai\. This language, so far from being a disclaimer of inspiration, is an express claim to help from the Lord in the forming of this duly considered judgment, which is in no sense a command, but an inspired opinion.

rwp@1Corinthians:8:1 @{Now concerning things sacrificed to idols} (\peri de t“n eid“lothut“n\). Plainly the Corinthians had asked also about this problem in their letter to Paul (7:1|). This compound adjective (\eid“lon\, idol, \thutos\, verbal adjective from \thu“\, to sacrifice) is still found only in the N.T. and ecclesiastical writers, not so far in the papyri. We have seen this problem mentioned in the decision of the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:29; strkjv@21:25|). The connection between idolatry and impurity was very close, especially in Corinth. See both topics connected in strkjv@Revelation:2:14,20|. By \eid“lothuta\ was meant the portion of the flesh left over after the heathen sacrifices. The heathen called it \hierothuton\ (1Corinthians:10:28|). This leftover part "was either eaten sacrificially, or taken home for private meals, or sold in the markets" (Robertson and Plummer). What were Christians to do about eating such portions either buying in the market or eating in the home of another or at the feast to the idol? Three questions are thus involved and Paul discusses them all. There was evidently difference of opinion on the subject among the Corinthian Christians. Aspects of the matter come forward not touched on in the Jerusalem Conference to which Paul does not here allude, though he does treat it in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10|. There was the more enlightened group who acted on the basis of their superior knowledge about the non-existence of the gods represented by the idols. {Ye know that we all have knowledge} (\oidamen hoti pantes gn“sin echomen\). This may be a quotation from the letter (Moffatt, _Lit. of N.T._, p. 112). Since their conversion to Christ, they know the emptiness of idol-worship. Paul admits that all Christians have this knowledge (personal experience, \gn“sis\), but this problem cannot be solved by knowledge.

rwp@1Corinthians:9:15 @{For it were good for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void} (\kalon gar moi mallon apothanein ˆ to kauchˆma mou oudeis ken“sei\). The tangled syntax of this sentence reflects the intensity of Paul's feeling on the subject. He repeats his refusal to use his privileges and rights to a salary by use of the present perfect middle indicative (\kechrˆmai\). By the epistolary aorist (\egrapsa\) he explains that he is not now hinting for a change on their part towards him in the matter, "in my case" (\en emoi\). Then he gives his reason in vigorous language without a copula (\ˆn\, were): "For good for me to die rather than," but here he changes the construction by a violent anacoluthon. Instead of another infinitive (\ken“sai\) after \ˆ\ (than) he changes to the future indicative without \hoti\ or \hina\, "No one shall make my glorying void," viz., his independence of help from them. \Keno“\ is an old verb, from \kenos\, empty, only in Paul in N.T. See on ¯1Corinthians:1:17|.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:6 @{Were our examples} (\tupoi hˆm“n egenˆthˆsan\). More exactly, examples for us (objective genitive \hˆm“n\, not subjective genitive, of us). The word \tupoi\ (our types) comes from \tupt“\, to strike, and meant originally the mark of a blow as the print of the nails (John:20:25|), then a figure formed by a blow like images of the gods (Acts:7:43|), then an example to be imitated (1Peter:5:3; strkjv@1Timothy:4:12; strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:7; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:9|), or to be avoided as here, and finally a type in a doctrinal sense (Romans:5:14; strkjv@Hebrews:9:24|). {To the intent we should not lust after} (\eis to mˆ einai hˆmas epithumˆtas\). Purpose expressed by \eis\ with the articular infinitive \to einai\ and the accusative of general reference with \epithumˆtas\ (lusters) in the predicate.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:26 @{The last enemy that shall be abolished is death} (\eschatos echthros katargeitai ho thanatos\). A rather free translation. Literally, "death (note article, and so subject) is done away (prophetic or futuristic use of present tense of same verb as in verse 24|), the last enemy" (predicate and only one "last" and so no article as in strkjv@1John:2:18|).

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

rwp@1Corinthians:15:28 @{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:2:16 @{All that} (\pƒn to\). Collective use of the neuter singular as in strkjv@5:4|, like \pƒn ho\ in strkjv@John:6:37,39|. Three examples, not necessarily covering all sins, are given in the nominative in apposition with \pƒn to\. "The lust of the flesh" (\hˆ epithumia tˆs sarkos\, subjective genitive, lust felt by the flesh) may be illustrated by strkjv@Mark:4:19; strkjv@Galatians:5:17|. Songs:the genitive with \hˆ epithumia t“n ophthalm“n\ (the lust of the eyes) is subjective, lust with the eyes as organs as shown by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:5:28|. The use of the "movies" today for gain by lustful exhibitions is a case in point. For \alazoneia\ see on ¯James:4:16|, the only other N.T. example. \Alaz“n\ (a boaster) occurs in strkjv@Romans:1:30; strkjv@2Timothy:3:2|. \Bios\ (life) as in strkjv@3:17| is the external aspect (Luke:8:14|), not the inward principle (\z“ˆ\). David Smith thinks that, as in the case of Eve (Genesis:3:1-6|) and the temptations of Jesus (Matthew:4:1-11|), these three sins include all possible sins. But they are all "of the world" (\ek tou kosmou\) in origin, in no sense "of the Father" (\ek tou patros\). The problem for the believer is always how to be in the world and yet not of it (John:17:11,14ff.|).

rwp@1John:2:24 @{As for you} (\humeis\). Emphatic proleptic position before the relative \ho\ and subject of \ˆkousate\, a familiar idiom in strkjv@John:8:45; strkjv@10:29|, etc. Here for emphatic contrast with the antichrists. See strkjv@1:1| for \ap' archˆs\ (from the beginning). {Let abide in you} (\en humin menet“\). Present active imperative of \men“\, to remain. Do not be carried away by the new-fangled Gnostic teaching.

rwp@1John:3:2 @{Now} (\nun\). Without waiting for the \parousia\ or second coming. We have a present dignity and duty, though there is greater glory to come. {It is not yet made manifest} (\oup“ ephaner“thˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \phanero“\. For the aorist indicative with \oup“\ with a future outlook Brooke notes strkjv@Mark:11:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@Hebrews:12:4; strkjv@Revelation:17:10,12|. {What we shall be} (\ti esometha\). Not \tines\ (who), but \ti\ (what) neuter singular predicate nominative. "This _what_ suggests something unspeakable, contained in the likeness of God" (Bengel). {If he shall be manifested} (\ean phaner“thˆi\). As in strkjv@2:28|, which see. The subject may be Christ as in verse 9|, or the future manifestation just mentioned. Either makes sense, probably "it" here better than "he." {Like him} (\homoioi aut“i\). \Aut“i\ is associative instrumental case after \homoioi\. This is our destiny and glory (Romans:8:29|), to be like Jesus who is like God (2Corinthians:4:6|). {We shall see him even as he is} (\opsometha auton kath“s estin\). Future middle indicative of \hora“\. The transforming power of this vision of Christ (1Corinthians:13:12|) is the consummation of the glorious process begun at the new birth (2Corinthians:3:18|).

rwp@1John:3:22 @{Whatsoever we ask} (\ho ean ait“men\). Indefinite relative clause with modal \an\ and the present active subjunctive, like \hoti ean katagin“skˆi\ in verse 20|. In form no limitations are placed here save that of complete fellowship with God, which means complete surrender of our will to that of God our Father. See the clear teaching of Jesus on this subject in strkjv@Mark:11:24; strkjv@Luke:11:9; strkjv@John:14:12f.; strkjv@16:23| and his example (Mark:14:36; strkjv@Matthew:26:39; strkjv@Luke:22:42|). The answer may not always be in the form that we expect, but it will be better. {We receive of him} (\lambanomen ap' autou\). See strkjv@1:5| for \ap' autou\ (from him). {Because} (\hoti\). Twofold reason why we receive regularly (\lambanomen\) the answer to our prayers (1) "we keep" (\tˆroumen\, for which see strkjv@2:3|) his commandments and (2) "we do" (\poioumen\, we practise regularly) "the things that are pleasing" (\ta aresta\, old verbal adjective from \aresk“\, to please, with dative in strkjv@John:8:29| with same phrase; strkjv@Acts:12:3| and infinitive in strkjv@Acts:6:2|, only other N.T. examples) "in his sight" (\en“pion autou\, common late vernacular preposition in papyri, LXX, and in N.T., except Matthew and Mark, chiefly by Luke and in the Apocalypse), in God's eye, as in strkjv@Hebrews:13:21|.

rwp@1John:5:6 @{This} (\houtos\). Jesus the Son of God (verse 5|). {He that came} (\ho elth“n\). Second aorist active articular participle of \erchomai\, referring to the Incarnation as a definite historic event, the preexistent Son of God "sent from heaven to do God's will" (Brooke). {By water and blood} (\di' hudatos kai haimatos\). Accompanied by (\dia\ used with the genitive both as instrument and accompaniment, as in strkjv@Galatians:5:13|) water (as at the baptism) and blood (as on the Cross). These two incidents in the Incarnation are singled out because at the baptism Jesus was formally set apart to his Messianic work by the coming of the Holy Spirit upon him and by the Father's audible witness, and because at the Cross his work reached its culmination ("It is finished," Jesus said). There are other theories that do not accord with the language and the facts. It is true that at the Cross both water and blood came out of the side of Jesus when pierced by the soldier, as John bore witness (John:19:34|), a complete refutation of the Docetic denial of an actual human body for Jesus and of the Cerinthian distinction between Jesus and Christ. There is thus a threefold witness to the fact of the Incarnation, but he repeats the twofold witness before giving the third. The repetition of both preposition (\en\ this time rather than \dia\) and the article (\t“i\ locative case) argues for two separate events with particular emphasis on the blood ("not only" \ouk monon\, "but" \all'\) which the Gnostics made light of or even denied. {It is the Spirit that beareth witness} (\to pneuma estin to marturoun\). Present active articular participle of \marture“\ with article with both subject and predicate, and so interchangeable as in strkjv@3:4|. The Holy Spirit is the third and the chief witness at the baptism of Jesus and all through his ministry. {Because} (\hoti\). Or declarative "that." Either makes sense. In strkjv@John:15:26| Jesus spoke of "the Spirit of truth" (whose characteristic is truth). Here John identifies the Spirit with truth as Jesus said of himself (John:14:6|) without denying personality for the Holy Spirit.

rwp@1John:5:10 @{Believeth on} (\pisteu“n eis\). John draws a distinction between "not believing God" (\mˆ pisteu“n t“i the“i\) in next clause, the testimony of God about his Son, and surrender to and reliance on the Son as here (\eis\ and the accusative). See the same distinction less clearly drawn in strkjv@John:6:30f|. See also \eis tˆn marturian\ after \pepisteuken\ in this same verse and strkjv@John:2:23|. {In him} (\en haut“i\). "In himself," though the evidence is not decisive between \haut“i\ and \aut“i\. {Hath made} (\pepoiˆken\). Perfect active indicative of \poie“\ like \memarturˆken\ and \pepisteuken\, permanent state. {A liar} (\pseustˆn\). As in strkjv@1:10|, which see. {Because he hath not believed} (\hoti ou pepisteuken\). Actual negative reason with negative \ou\, not the subjective reason as in strkjv@John:3:18|, where we have \hoti mˆ pepisteuken\). The subjective negative is regular with \ho mˆ pisteu“n\. Relative clause here repeats close of verse 9|.

rwp@1Peter:1:2 @{According to} (\kata\). Probably to be connected with \eklektois\ rather than with \apostolos\ in spite of a rather loose arrangement of words and the absence of articles in verses 1,2|. {The foreknowledge} (\progn“sin\). Late substantive (Plutarch, Lucian, papyri) from \progin“sk“\ (1:20|), to know beforehand, only twice in N.T. (here and strkjv@Acts:2:23| in Peter's sermon). In this Epistle Peter often uses substantives rather than verbs (cf. strkjv@Romans:8:29|). {Of God the Father} (\theou patros\). Anarthous again and genitive case. See \patˆr\ applied to God also in strkjv@1:3,17| as often by Paul (Romans:1:7|, etc.). Peter here presents the Trinity (God the Father, the Spirit, Jesus Christ). {In sanctification of the Spirit} (\en hagiasm“i pneumatos\). Clearly the Holy Spirit, though anarthrous like \theou patros\. Late word from \hagiaz“\, to render holy (\hagios\), to consecrate, as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:7|. The subjective genitive here, sanctification wrought by the Spirit as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:13| (where the Trinity mentioned as here). {Unto obedience} (\eis hupakoˆn\). Obedience (from \hupakou“\, to hear under, to hearken) to the Lord Jesus as in strkjv@1:22| "to the truth," result of "the sanctification." {And sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ} (\rantismon haimatos Iˆsou Christou\). Late substantive from \rantiz“\, to sprinkle (Hebrews:9:13|), a word used in the LXX of the sacrifices (Numbers:19:9,13,20|, etc.), but not in any non-biblical source so far as known, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:12:24| (of the sprinkling of blood). Reference to the death of Christ on the Cross and to the ratification of the New Covenant by the blood of Christ as given in strkjv@Hebrews:9:19f.; strkjv@12:24| with allusion to strkjv@Exodus:24:3-8|. Paul does not mention this ritual use of the blood of Christ, but Jesus does (Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Mark:14:24|). Hence it is not surprising to find the use of it by Peter and the author of Hebrews. Hort suggests that Peter may also have an ulterior reference to the blood of the martyrs as in strkjv@Revelation:7:14f.; strkjv@12:11|, but only as illustration of what Jesus did for us, not as having any value. The whole Epistle is a commentary upon \progn“sis theou, hagiasmos pneumatos, haima Christou\ (Bigg). Peter is not ashamed of the blood of Christ. {Be multiplied} (\plˆthuntheiˆ\). First aorist passive optative (volitive) of \plˆthun“\, old verb (from \plˆthus\, fulness), in a wish. Songs:in strkjv@2Peter:1:2; strkjv@Jude:1:2|, but nowhere else in N.T. salutations. Grace and peace (\charis kai eirˆnˆ\) occur together in strkjv@2Peter:1:2|, in strkjv@2John:1:2| (with \eleos\), and in all Paul's Epistles (with \eleos\ added in I and II Timothy).

rwp@1Peter:2:4 @{Unto whom} (\pros hon\). The Lord, carrying on the imagery and language of the Psalm. {Coming} (\proserchomenoi\). Present middle participle masculine plural of \proserchomai\ (\proselthate\ in the Psalm) agreeing with the subject of \oikodomeisthe\. {A living stone} (\lithon z“nta\). Accusative case in apposition with \hon\ (whom, the Lord Christ). There is apparent an intentional contradiction between "living" and "stone." Cf. "living hope" in strkjv@1:3| and "living word" in strkjv@1:23|. {Rejected indeed of men} (\hupo anthr“p“n men apodedokimasmenon\). Perfect passive participle of \apodokimaz“\, old verb to repudiate after test (Luke:9:22|), in the accusative case agreeing with \lithon\. {But with God} (\para de the“i\). "By the side of God," as he looks at it, in contrast with the rejection "by men" (\hupo anthr“p“n\). {Elect} (\eklekton\). From strkjv@Isaiah:28:6| as in \entimon\ (precious, for which see strkjv@Luke:7:2|) rather than \dokimon\ (proved) expected after \apodedokimasmenon\ as meaning far more in God's sight, "a pre-eminence of position with" (Hort).

rwp@1Peter:2:13 @{Be subject to} (\hupotagˆte\). Second aorist passive imperative second person plural of \hupotass“\, to subject to, as in strkjv@3:22|. {Every ordinance of man} (\pasˆi anthr“pinˆi ktisei\). Dative case of old and common word \ktisis\ (from \ktiz“\, to create, to found), act of creation (Romans:1:20|), a creature or creation (Romans:1:25|), all creation (Colossians:1:15|), an institution as here (in Pindar so). For \anthr“pinos\ (human) see strkjv@James:3:7|. Peter here approves no special kind of government, but he supports law and order as Paul does (Romans:13:1-8|) unless it steps in between God and man (Acts:4:20|). {For the Lord's sake} (\dia ton kurion\). For Jesus' sake. That is reason enough for the Christian not to be an anarchist (Matthew:22:21|). The heathen were keen to charge the Christians with any crime after Nero set the fashion. "It should not be forgotten that, in spite of the fine language of the philosophers, the really popular religions in Greece and Rome were forms of devil-worship, intimately blended with magic in all its grades" (Bigg). {As supreme} (\h“s huperechonti\). Dative singular of present active participle of \huperech“\, old verb (intransitive), to stand out above (to have it over), as in strkjv@Romans:13:1|. It is not the divine right of kings, but the fact of the king as the outstanding ruler.

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

rwp@1Peter:3:1 @{In like manner} (\homoi“s\). Adverb closely connected with \hupotassomenoi\, for which see strkjv@2:18|. {Ye wives} (\gunaikes\). Without article. About wives see also strkjv@Colossians:3:18; strkjv@Ephesians:5:22; strkjv@Titus:2:4|. {To your own husbands} (\tois idiois andrasin\). \Idiois\ occurs also in Ephesians and Titus, but not in Colossians. It strengthens the idea of possession in the article \tois\. Wives are not enjoined to be in subjection to the husbands of other women, as some think it fine to be (affinities!) {Even if any obey not the word} (\kai ei tines apeithousin t“i log“i\). Condition of first class and dative case of \logos\ (1:23,25; strkjv@2:8|), that is, remain heathen. {That they be gained} (\hina kerdˆthˆsontai\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and first future passive indicative of \kerdain“\, old verb, to gain (from \kerdos\, gain, interest) as in strkjv@Matthew:18:15|. See the future with \hina\ also in strkjv@Luke:20:10; strkjv@Revelation:3:9|. {Without the word} (\aneu logou\). Probably here "word from their wives" (Hart), the other sense of \logos\ (talk, not technical "word of God"). {By the behaviour of their wives} (\dia tˆs t“n gunaik“n anastrophˆs\). Won by pious living, not by nagging. Many a wife has had this blessed victory of grace.

rwp@1Peter:3:22 @{Having gone} (\poreutheis\). First aorist (deponent) participle (not periphrastic) of \poreuomai\. {Being made subject} (\hupotagent“n\). Second aorist passive participle of \hupotass“\ (see strkjv@2:18; strkjv@3:1|) in the genitive absolute construction. {Unto him} (\aut“i\). Christ. See strkjv@1Corinthians:15:28|.

rwp@1Thessalonians:1:5 @{How that} (\hoti\). It is not certain whether \hoti\ here means "because" (\quia\) as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:7; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:14; strkjv@Romans:8:27| or declarative \hoti\ "how that," knowing the circumstances of your election (Lightfoot) or explanatory, as in strkjv@Acts:16:3; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:1; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:15; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:3f.; strkjv@Romans:13:11|. {Our gospel} (\to euaggelion hˆm“n\). The gospel (see on ¯Matthew:4:23; strkjv@Mark:1:1,15| for \euaggelion\) which we preach, Paul's phrase also in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:14; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:3; strkjv@Romans:2:16; strkjv@16:25; strkjv@2Timothy:2:8|. Paul had a definite, clear-cut message of grace that he preached everywhere including Thessalonica. This message is to be interpreted in the light of Paul's own sermons in Acts and Epistles, not by reading backward into them the later perversions of Gnostics and sacramentarians. This very word was later applied to the books about Jesus, but Paul is not so using the term here or anywhere else. In its origin Paul's gospel is of God (1Thessalonians:2:2,8,9|), in its substance it is Christ's (3:2; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:8|), and Paul is only the bearer of it (1Thessalonians:2:4,9; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:14|) as Milligan points out. Paul and his associates have been entrusted with this gospel (1Thessalonians:2:4|) and preach it (Galatians:2:2|). Elsewhere Paul calls it God's gospel (2Corinthians:11:7; strkjv@Romans:1:1; strkjv@15:16|) or Christs (1Corinthians:9:12; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12; strkjv@9:13; strkjv@10:14; strkjv@Galatians:1:7; strkjv@Romans:15:19; strkjv@Phillipians:1:27|). In both instances it is the subjective genitive. {Came unto you} (\egenˆthˆ eis humƒs\). First aorist passive indicative of \ginomai\ in practically same sense as \egeneto\ (second aorist middle indicative as in the late Greek generally). Songs:also \eis humƒs\ like the _Koin‚_ is little more than the dative \humin\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 594). {Not only--but also} (\ouk--monon, alla kai\). Sharp contrast, negatively and positively. The contrast between \logos\ (word) and \dunamis\ (power) is seen also in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:4; strkjv@4:20|. Paul does not refer to miracles by \dunamis\. {In the Holy Spirit and much assurance} (\en pneumati hagi“i kai plˆrophoriƒi pollˆi\). Preposition \en\ repeated with \log“i, dunamei\, but only once here thus uniting closely {Holy Spirit} and {much assurance}. No article with either word. The word \plˆrophoriƒi\ is not found in ancient Greek or the LXX. It appears once in Clement of Rome and one broken papyrus example. For the verb \plˆrophore“\ see on ¯Luke:1:1|. The substantive in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Colossians:2:2; strkjv@Hebrews:6:11; strkjv@10:22|. It means the full confidence which comes from the Holy Spirit. {Even as ye know} (\kath“s oidate\). Paul appeals to the Thessalonians themselves as witnesses to the character of his preaching and life among them. {What manner of men we showed ourselves toward you} (\hoioi egenˆthˆmen humin\). Literally, {What sort of men we became to you}. Qualitative relative \hoioi\ and dative \humin\ and first aorist passive indicative \egenˆthˆmen\, (not \ˆmetha\, we were). An epexegetical comment with {for your sake} (\di' humƒs\) added. It was all in their interest and for their advantage, however it may have seemed otherwise at the time.

rwp@1Thessalonians:1:10 @{To wait for his Son from heaven} (\anamenein ton huion autou ek t“n ouran“n\). Present infinitive, like \douleuein\, and so linear, to keep on waiting for. The hope of the second coming of Christ was real and powerful with Paul as it should be with us. It was subject to abuse then as now as Paul will have to show in this very letter. He alludes to this hope at the close of each chapter in this Epistle. {Whom he raised from the dead} (\hon ˆgeiren ek [t“n] nekr“n\). Paul gloried in the fact of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead of which fact he was himself a personal witness. This fact is the foundation stone for all his theology and it comes out in this first chapter. {Jesus which delivereth us from the wrath to come} (\Iˆsoun ton ruomenon hˆmƒs ek tˆs orgˆs tˆs erchomenˆs\). It is the historic, crucified, risen, and ascended Jesus Christ, God's Son, who delivers from the coming wrath. He is our Saviour (Matthew:1:21|) true to his name Jesus. He is our Rescuer (Romans:11:26|, \ho ruomenos\, from strkjv@Isaiah:59:20|). It is eschatological language, this coming wrath of God for sin (1Thessalonians:2:16; strkjv@Romans:3:5; strkjv@5:9; strkjv@9:22; strkjv@13:5|). It was Paul's allusion to the day of judgment with Jesus as Judge whom God had raised from the dead that made the Athenians mock and leave him (Acts:17:31f.|). But Paul did not change his belief or his preaching because of the conduct of the Athenians. He is certain that God's wrath in due time will punish sin. Surely this is a needed lesson for our day. It was coming then and it is coming now.

rwp@1Thessalonians:3:11 @{Our God and Father himself} (\autos ho theos kai patˆr hˆm“n\). Note one article with both substantives for one person. {And our Lord Jesus} (\kai ho Kurios hˆm“n Iˆsous\). Separate article here with \Iˆsous\. In strkjv@Titus:2:13; strkjv@2Peter:1:1| only one article (not two) treating "our God and Saviour Jesus Christ" as one just like "our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ" in strkjv@2Peter:1:11; strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:18|. {Direct our way} (\kateuthunai tˆn hodon hˆm“n\). First aorist optative (acute accent on penult, not circumflex first aorist active infinitive) of \kateuthun“\, old verb to make straight path. Singular verb also, though both God and Christ mentioned as subject (unity in the Godhead). Apart from \mˆ genoito\ ({may it not come to pass}) the optative in a wish of the third person is found in N.T. only in strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:11,12; strkjv@5:23; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:17; strkjv@3:5,16; strkjv@Romans:15:5,13|.

rwp@1Timothy:3:6 @{Not a novice} (\mˆ neophuton\). Our "neophyte." Vernacular word from Aristophanes on, in LXX, and in papyri in the original sense of "newly-planted" (\neos, phu“\). Only here in N.T. {Lest} (\hina mˆ\). "That not." {Being puffed up} (\tuph“theis\). First aorist passive participle of \tupho“\, old word (from \tuphos\, smoke, pride), to raise a smoke or mist (a smoke-screen of pride). In N.T. only here; strkjv@6:4; strkjv@2Timothy:3:4|. {He fall into} (\empesˆi eis\). Second aorist active subjunctive with \hina mˆ\, negative purpose, of \empipt“\, old verb, to fall into. Note both \en\ and \eis\ as in strkjv@Matthew:12:11; strkjv@Luke:10:36|. {The condemnation of the devil} (\krima tou diabolou\). See strkjv@Romans:3:8| for \krima\. Best to take \tou diabolou\ as objective genitive, though subjective in verse 7|, "the condemnation passed on or received by the devil" (not just "the slanderer," any slanderer).

rwp@1Timothy:3:7 @{From them that are without} (\apo t“n ex“then\). "From the outside (of the church) ones." Paul's care for the witness of outsiders is seen in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:10:32; strkjv@Colossians:4:5|. There are, of course, two sides to this matter. {Reproach} (\oneidismon\). Late word from \oneidiz“\. See strkjv@Romans:15:3|. {The snare of the devil} (\pagida tou diabolou\). Here subjective genitive, snare set by the devil. \Pagis\, old word from \pˆgnumi\, to make fast. Songs:a snare for birds (Luke:21:35|), any sudden trap (Romans:11:9|), of sin (1Timothy:6:9|), of the devil (1Timothy:3:7; strkjv@2Timothy:2:26|). Ancients used it of the snares of love. The devil sets special snares for preachers (conceit verse 6|, money strkjv@6:9|, women, ambition).

rwp@2Corinthians:1:5 @{The sufferings of Christ} (\ta pathˆmata tou Christou\). Subjective genitive, Christ's own sufferings. {Abound unto us} (\perisseuei eis hˆmas\). Overflow unto us so that we suffer like sufferings and become fellow sufferers with Christ (4:10f.; strkjv@Romans:8:17; strkjv@Phillipians:3:10; strkjv@Colossians:1:24|). {Through Christ} (\dia tou Christou\). The overflow (\perisseuei\) of comfort comes also through Christ. Is Paul thinking of how some of the Jewish Christians in Corinth have become reconciled with him through Christ? Partnership with Christ in suffering brings partnership in glory also (Romans:8:17; strkjv@1Peter:4:13|).

rwp@2Corinthians:3:7 @{Of death} (\tou thanatou\). Subjective genitive, marked by death in its outcome (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:15:56; strkjv@Galatians:3:10|). The letter kills. {Engraven on stones} (\entetup“menˆ lithois\). Perfect passive participle of \entupo“\, late verb, to imprint a figure (\tupos\). Used by Aristias (67) of the "inlaid" work on the table sent by Ptolemy Philadelphus to Jerusalem. \Lithois\ in locative case. {Came with glory} (\egenˆthˆ en doxˆi\). In glory. As it did, condition of first class, assumed as true. See strkjv@Exodus:34:29,35|. {Look steadfastly} (\atenisai\). Late verb from \atenˆs\ (stretched, intent, \tein“\ and \a\ intensive) as in strkjv@Luke:4:20; strkjv@Acts:3:4|. {Was passing away} (\katargoumenˆn\). Late verb, to render of no effect, and present passive participle here as in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:6|.

rwp@2Corinthians:7:11 @{This selfsame thing} (\auto touto\). "This very thing," "the being made sorry according to God" (\to kata theon lupˆthˆnai\, articular first aorist passive infinitive with which \auto touto\ agrees and the proleptic subject of the verb \kateirgasato\. {Earnest care} (\spoudˆn\). Diligence, from \speud“\, to hasten. Cf. strkjv@Romans:12:11|. {Yea} (\alla\). Not adversative use of \alla\, but copulative as is common (half dozen examples here). {Clearing of yourselves} (\apologia\). In the old notion of \apologia\ (self-vindication, self-defence) as in strkjv@1Peter:3:15|. {Indignation} (\aganaktˆsin\). Old word, only here in N.T. From \aganakteo\ (Mark:10:14|, etc.). {Avenging} (\ekdikˆsin\). Late word from \ekdike“\, to avenge, to do justice (Luke:18:5; strkjv@21:22|), vindication from wrong as in strkjv@Luke:18:7|, to secure punishment (1Peter:2:14|). {Pure} (\hagnous\). Kin to \hagios\ (\haz“\, to reverence), immaculate.

rwp@2Corinthians:10:2 @{I beseech} (\deomai\). Songs:here, but \parakal“\ in verse 1|. Perhaps, "I beg" suits the new turn here. {That I may not when present show courage} (\to mˆ par“n tharrˆsai\). Articular infinitive (aorist active of \tharre“\) in the accusative case with negative \mˆ\ the direct object of \deomai\. Literally, "I beg the not when present (\par“n\ nominative present participle agreeing with subject of \tharr“\ in spite of being in the accusative infinitive clause, \to mˆ tharrˆsai\) showing courage." The example of humility in Christ makes Paul drop "from magisterial exhortation to earnest entreaty" (Plummer). {As if we walked according to the flesh} (\h“s kata sarka peripatountas\). Another sneering charge as made plain by the use of \h“s\ with the participle for the alleged reason.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:26 @{In journeyings} (\hodoiporiais\). Locative case of old word, only here in N.T. and strkjv@John:4:6|, from \hodoiporos\, wayfarer. {In perils} (\kindunois\). Locative case of \kindunos\, old word for danger or peril. In N.T. only this verse and strkjv@Romans:8:35|. The repetition here is very effective without the preposition \en\ (in) and without conjunctions (asyndeton). They are in contrasted pairs. The rivers of Asia Minor are still subject to sudden swellings from floods in the mountains. Cicero and Pompey won fame fighting the Cilician pirates and robbers (note \lˆist“n\, not \klept“n\, thieves, brigands or bandits on which see ¯Matthew:26:55|). The Jewish perils (\ek genous\, from my race) can be illustrated in strkjv@Acts:9:23,29; strkjv@13:50; strkjv@14:5; strkjv@17:5,13; strkjv@18:12; strkjv@23:12; strkjv@24:27|, and they were all perils in the city also. Perils from the Gentiles (\ex ethn“n\) we know in Philippi (Acts:16:20|) and in Ephesus (Acts:19:23f.|). Travel in the mountains and in the wilderness was perilous in spite of the great Roman highways. {Among false brethren} (\en pseudadelphois\). Chapters strkjv@2Corinthians:10; 11| throw a lurid light on this aspect of the subject.

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

rwp@2Peter:2:20 @{After they have escaped} (\apophugontes\). Second aorist active participle here (see verse 18|). {The defilements} (\ta miasmata\). Old word miasma, from \miain“\, here only in N.T. Our "miasma." The body is sacred to God. Cf. \miasmou\ in verse 10|. {They are again entangled} (\palin emplakentes\). Second aorist passive participle of \emplek“\, old verb, to inweave (noosed, fettered), in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Timothy:2:4|. {Overcome} (\hˆtt“ntai\). Present passive indicative of \hˆttao“\, for which see verse 19|, "are repeatedly worsted." Predicate in the condition of first class with \ei\. It is not clear whether the subject here is "the deluded victims" (Bigg) or the false teachers themselves (Mayor). See strkjv@Hebrews:10:26| for a parallel. {Therein} (\toutois\). Songs:locative case (in these "defilements"), but it can be instrumental case ("by these," Strachan). {With them} (\autois\). Dative of disadvantage, "for them." {Than the first} (\t“n pr“t“n\). Ablative case after the comparative \cheirona\. See this moral drawn by Jesus (Matthew:12:45; strkjv@Luke:11:26|).

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:3:5 @{For this they wilfully forget} (\lanthanei gar autous touto thelontas\). Literally, "for this escapes them being willing." See this use of \lanthan“\ (old verb, to escape notice of, to be hidden from) in strkjv@Acts:26:26|. The present active participle \thelontas\ (from \thel“\, to wish) has almost an adverbial sense here. {Compacted} (\sunest“sa\). See Paul's \sunestˆken\ (Colossians:1:17|) "consist." Second perfect active (intransitive) participle of \sunistˆmi\, feminine singular agreeing with \gˆ\ (nearest to it) rather than with \ouranoi\ (subject of \ˆsan\ imperfect plural). There is no need to make Peter mean the Jewish mystical "seven heavens" because of the plural which was used interchangeably with the singular (Matthew:5:9f.|). {Out of water and amidst water} (\ex hudatos kai di' hudatos\). Out of the primeval watery chaos (Genesis:1:2|), but it is not plain what is meant by \di' hudatos\, which naturally means "by means of water," though \dia\ with the genitive is used for a condition or state (Hebrews:12:1|). The reference may be to strkjv@Genesis:1:9|, the gathering together of the waters. {By the word of God} (\t“i tou theou log“i\). Instrumental case \log“i\, "by the fiat of God" (Genesis:1:3; strkjv@Hebrews:11:3| \rˆmati theou\).

rwp@2Peter:3:16 @{As also in all his epistles} (\h“s kai en pasais epistolais\). We do not know to how many Peter here refers. There is no difficulty in supposing that Peter "received every one of St. Paul's Epistles within a month or two of its publication" (Bigg). And yet Peter does not here assert the formation of a canon of Paul's Epistles. {Speaking in them of these things} (\lal“n en autais peri tout“n\). Present active participle of \lale“\. That is to say, Paul also wrote about the second coming of Christ, as is obviously true. {Hard to be understood} (\dusnoˆta\). Late verbal from \dus\ and \noe“\ (in Aristotle, Lucian, Diog. Laert.), here only in N.T. We know that the Thessalonians persisted in misrepresenting Paul on this very subject of the second coming as Hymenaeus and Philetus did about the resurrection (2Timothy:2:17|) and Spitta holds that Paul's teaching about grace was twisted to mean moral laxity like strkjv@Galatians:3:10; strkjv@Romans:3:20,28; strkjv@5:20| (with which cf. strkjv@6:1| as a case in point), etc. Peter does not say that he himself did not understand Paul on the subject of faith and freedom. {Unlearned} (\amatheis\). Old word (alpha privative and \manthan“\ to learn), ignorant, here only in N.T. {Unsteadfast} (\astˆriktoi\). See on ¯2:14|. {Wrest} (\streblousin\). Present active indicative of \streblo“\, old verb (from \streblos\ twisted, \streph“\, to turn), here only in N.T. {The other scriptures} (\tas loipas graphas\). There is no doubt that the apostles claimed to speak by the help of the Holy Spirit (1Thessalonians:5:27; strkjv@Colossians:4:16|) just as the prophets of old did (2Peter:1:20f.|). Note \loipas\ (rest) here rather than \allas\ (other). Peter thus puts Paul's Epistles on the same plane with the O.T., which was also misused (Matthew:5:21-44; strkjv@15:3-6; strkjv@19:3-10|).

rwp@2Peter:3:17 @{Knowing these things beforehand} (\progin“skontes\). Present active participle of \progin“sk“\ as in strkjv@1Peter:1:20|. Cf. \pr“ton gin“sk“\ (1:20; strkjv@3:1|). Hence they are without excuse for misunderstanding Peter or Paul on this subject. {Beware} (\phulassesthe\). Present middle imperative of \phulass“\, common verb, to guard. {Lest} (\hina mˆ\). Negative purpose, "that not." {Being carried away} (\sunapachthentes\). First aorist passive participle of \sunapag“\, old verb double compound, to carry away together with, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Galatians:2:13|. {With the error} (\tˆi planˆi\). Instrumental case, "by the error" (the wandering). {Of the wicked} (\t“n athesm“n\). See on strkjv@2:7|. {Ye fall from} (\ekpesˆte\). Second aorist active subjunctive with \hina mˆ\ of \ekpipt“\, old verb, to fall out of, with the ablative here (\stˆrigmou\, steadfastness, late word from \stˆriz“\, here alone in N.T.) as in strkjv@Galatians:5:4| (\tˆs charitos exepesate\, ye fell out of grace).

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:5 @{Direct} (\kateuthunai\). First aorist active optative of wish for the future as in strkjv@2:17; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:23| from \kateuthun“\, old verb, as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:11| (there {way}, here {hearts}) and strkjv@Luke:1:79| of {feet} (\podas\). Perfective use of \kata\. Bold figure for making smooth and direct road. The Lord here is the Lord Jesus. {Into the love of God} (\eis tˆn agapˆn tou theou\). Either subjective or objective genitive makes sense and Lightfoot pleads for both, "not only as an objective attribute of deity, but as a ruling principle in our hearts," holding that it is "seldom possible to separate the one from the other." Most scholars take it here as subjective, the characteristic of God. {Into the patience of Christ} (\eis tˆn hupomnˆn tou Christou\). There is the same ambiguity here, though the subjective idea, the patience shown by Christ, is the one usually accepted rather than "the patient waiting for Christ" (objective genitive).

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:1:4 @{Being assembled together with them} (\sunalizomenos\). Present passive participle from \sunaliz“\, an old verb in Herodotus, Xenophon, etc., from sun, with, and \haliz“\, from \halˆs\, crowded. The margin of both the Authorized and the Revised Versions has "eating with them" as if from \sun\ and \hals\ (salt). Salt was the mark of hospitality. There is the verb \halisthˆte en aut“i\ used by Ignatius _Ad Magnes_. X, "Be ye salted in him." But it is more than doubtful if that is the idea here though the Vulgate does have _convescens illis_ "eating with them," as if that was the common habit of Jesus during the forty days (Wendt, Feine, etc.). Jesus did on occasion eat with the disciples (Luke:24:41-43; strkjv@Mark:16:14|). {To wait for the promise of the Father} (\perimenein tˆn epaggelian tou patros\). Note present active infinitive, to keep on waiting for (around, \peri\). In the Great Commission on the mountain in Galilee this item was not given (Matthew:28:16-20|). It is the subjective genitive, the promise given by the Father (note this Johannine use of the word), that is the Holy Spirit ("the promise of the Holy Spirit," objective genitive). {Which ye heard from me} (\hˆn ˆkousate mou\). Change from indirect discourse (command), infinitives \ch“rizesthai\ and \perimenein\ after \parˆggeilen\ to direct discourse without any \ephˆ\ (said he) as the English (Italics). Luke often does this (_oratior ariata_). Note also the ablative case of \mou\ (from me). Luke continues in verse 5| with the direct discourse giving the words of Jesus.

rwp@Acts:1:16 @{Brethren} (\andres adelphoi\). Literally, men, brethren or brother men. More dignified and respectful than just "brethren." Demosthenes sometimes said \Andres Athˆnaioi\. Cf. our "gentlemen and fellow-citizens." Women are included in this address though \andres\ refers only to men. {It was needful} (\edei\). Imperfect tense of the impersonal \dei\ with the infinitive clause (first aorist passive) and the accusative of general reference as a loose subject. Peter here assumes that Jesus is the Messiah and finds scripture illustrative of the treachery of Judas. He applies it to Judas and quotes the two passages in verse 20| (Psalms:69:25; strkjv@109:8|). The Holy Spirit has not yet come upon them, but Peter feels moved to interpret the situation. He feels that his mind is opened by Jesus (Luke:24:45|). It is a logical, not a moral, necessity that Peter points out. Peter here claims the Holy Spirit as speaking in the scriptures as he does in strkjv@2Peter:1:21|. His description of Judas as "guide" (\hodˆgou\) to those who seized (\sullabousin\) Jesus is that of the base traitor that he was. This very verb occurs in strkjv@Luke:22:54| of the arrest of Jesus.

rwp@Acts:2:38 @{Repent ye} (\metanoˆsate\). First aorist (ingressive) active imperative. Change your mind and your life. Turn right about and do it now. You _crucified_ this Jesus. Now _crown_ him in your hearts as Lord and Christ. This first. {And be baptized every one of you} (\kai baptisthˆt“ hekastos h–m“n\). Rather, "And let each one of you be baptized." Change of number from plural to singular and of person from second to third. This change marks a break in the thought here that the English translation does not preserve. The first thing to do is make a radical and complete change of heart and life. Then let each one be baptized after this change has taken place, and the act of baptism be performed "in the name of Jesus Christ" (\en t“i onomati Iˆsou Christou\). In accordance with the command of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| (\eis to onoma\). No distinction is to be insisted on between \eis to onoma\ and \en t“i onomati\ with \baptiz“\ since \eis\ and \en\ are really the same word in origin. In strkjv@Acts:10:48| \en t“i onomati Iˆsou Christou\ occurs, but \eis\ to \onoma\ in strkjv@8:16; strkjv@19:5|. The use of \onoma\ means in the name or with the authority of one as \eis onoma prophˆtou\ (Matthew:10:41|) as a prophet, in the name of a prophet. In the Acts the full name of the Trinity does not occur in baptism as in strkjv@Matthew:28:19|, but this does not show that it was not used. The name of Jesus Christ is the distinctive one in Christian baptism and really involves the Father and the Spirit. See on ¯Matthew:28:19| for discussion of this point. "Luke does not give the form of words used in baptism by the Apostles, but merely states the fact that they baptized those who acknowledged Jesus as Messiah or as Lord" (Page). {Unto the remission of your sins} (\eis aphesin t“n hamarti“n h–m“n\). This phrase is the subject of endless controversy as men look at it from the standpoint of sacramental or of evangelical theology. In themselves the words can express aim or purpose for that use of \eis\ does exist as in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7| \eis doxan hˆm“n\ (for our glory). But then another usage exists which is just as good Greek as the use of \eis\ for aim or purpose. It is seen in strkjv@Matthew:10:41| in three examples \eis onoma prophˆtou, dikaiou, mathˆtou\ where it cannot be purpose or aim, but rather the basis or ground, on the basis of the name of prophet, righteous man, disciple, because one is, etc. It is seen again in strkjv@Matthew:12:41| about the preaching of Jonah (\eis to kˆrugma I“na\). They repented because of (or at) the preaching of Jonah. The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the _Koin‚_ generally (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 592). One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. Songs:I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received. {The gift of the Holy Ghost} (\tˆn d“rean tou hagiou pneumatos\). The gift consists (Acts:8:17|) in the Holy Spirit (genitive of identification).

rwp@Acts:4:5 @{Rulers and elders and scribes} (\tous archontas kai tous presbuterous kai tous grammateis\). The three classes composing the Sanhedrin (rulers=chief priests who were Sadducees, the scribes usually Pharisees, the elders not in either class: 24 priests, 24 elders, 22 scribes). {Were gathered together} (\sunachthˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \sunag“\ with accusative of general reference and the subject of \egeneto\.

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

rwp@Acts:12:1 @{About that time} (\kat' ekeinon ton kairon\). Same phrase in strkjv@Romans:9:9|. That is, the early part of A.D. 44 since that is the date of Herod's death. As already suggested, Barnabas and Saul came down from Antioch to Jerusalem after the persecution by Herod at the end of 44 or the beginning of 45. {Herod the king} (\Hˆr“idˆs ho basileus\). Accurate title at this particular time. Herod Agrippa I, grandson of Herod the Great, was King of Palestine A.D. 42 to 44; only for these three years was a Herod king over Palestine since the death of Herod the Great and never afterwards. Archelaus never actually became king though he had the popular title at first (Matthew:2:22|). {Put forth his hands} (\epebalen tas cheiras\). Second aorist active indicative of \epiball“\, old verb, to cast upon or against. The same idiom with \tas cheiras\ (the hands, common Greek idiom with article rather than possessive pronoun) in strkjv@4:3; strkjv@5:18|. {To afflict} (\kak“sai\). First aorist active infinitive of \kako“\, old word to do harm or evil to (\kakos\), already in strkjv@7:6,19|. Outside of Acts in the N.T. only strkjv@1Peter:5:13|. Infinitive of purpose. Probably the first who were afflicted were scourged or imprisoned, not put to death. It had been eight years or more since the persecution over the death of Stephen ceased with the conversion of Saul. But the disciples were not popular in Jerusalem with either Sadducees or Pharisees. The overtures to the Gentiles in Caesarea and Antioch may have stirred up the Pharisees afresh (cf. strkjv@6:14|). Herod Agrippa I was an Idumean through his grandfather Herod the Great and a grandson of Mariamne the Maccabean princess. He was a favourite of Caligula the Roman Emperor and was anxious to placate his Jewish subjects while retaining the favour of the Romans. Songs:he built theatres and held games for the Romans and Greeks and slew the Christians to please the Jews. Josephus (_Ant_. XIX. 7, 3) calls him a pleasant vain man scrupulously observing Jewish rites. Here we have for the first time political power (after Pilate) used against the disciples.

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:23:25 @{And he wrote} (\grapsas\). First aorist active participle of \graph“\, agreeing with the subject (Lysias) of \eipen\ (said) back in verse 23| (beginning). {After this form} (\echousan ton tupon touton\). Textus Receptus has \periechousan\. The use of \tupon\ (type or form) like _exemplum_ in Latin (Page who quotes Cicero _Ad Att_. IX. 6. 3) may give merely the purport or substantial contents of the letter. But there is no reason for thinking that it is not a genuine copy since the letter may have been read in open court before Felix, and Luke was probably with Paul. The Roman law required that a subordinate officer like Lysias in reporting a case to his superior should send a written statement of the case and it was termed _elogium_. A copy of the letter may have been given Paul after his appeal to Caesar. It was probably written in Latin. The letter is a "dexterous mixture of truth and falsehood" (Furneaux) with the stamp of genuineness. It puts things in a favourable light for Lysias and makes no mention of his order to scourge Paul.

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

rwp@Colossians:1:19 @{For it was the good pleasure of the Father} (\hoti eudokˆsen\). No word in the Greek for "the Father," though the verb calls for either \ho theos\ or \ho patˆr\ as the subject. This verb \eudoke“\ is common in the N.T. for God's will and pleasure (Matthew:3:17; strkjv@1Corinthians:10:5|). {All the fulness} (\pƒn to plˆr“ma\). The same idea as in strkjv@2:9| \pƒn to plˆr“ma tˆs theotˆtos\ (all the fulness of the Godhead). "A recognized technical term in theology, denoting the totality of the Divine powers and attributes" (Lightfoot). It is an old word from \plˆro“\, to fill full, used in various senses as in strkjv@Mark:8:20| of the baskets, strkjv@Galatians:4:10| of time, etc. The Gnostics distributed the divine powers among various aeons. Paul gathers them all up in Christ, a full and flat statement of the deity of Christ. {Should dwell} (\katoikˆsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \katoike“\, to make abode or home. All the divine attributes are at home in Christ (\en aut“i\).

rwp@Colossians:1:20 @{Through him} (\di' autou\). As the sufficient and chosen agent in the work of reconciliation (\apokatallaxai\, first aorist active infinitive of \apokatallass“\, further addition to \eudokˆsen\, was pleased). This double compound (\apo, kata\ with \allass“\) occurs only here, verse 22; strkjv@Ephesians:2:16|, and nowhere else so far as known. Paul's usual word for "reconcile" is \katallass“\ (2Corinthians:5:18-20; strkjv@Romans:5:10|), though \diallass“\ (Matthew:5:24|) is more common in Attic. The addition of \apo\ here is clearly for the idea of complete reconciliation. See on ¯2Corinthians:5:18-20| for discussion of \katallass“\, Paul's great word. The use of \ta panta\ (the all things, the universe) as if the universe were somehow out of harmony reminds us of the mystical passage in strkjv@Romans:8:19-23| which see for discussion. Sin somehow has put the universe out of joint. Christ will set it right. {Unto himself} (\eis auton\). Unto God, though \auton\ is not reflexive unless written \hauton\. {Having made peace} (\eirˆnopoiˆsas\). Late and rare compound (Proverbs:10:10| and here only in N.T.) from \eirˆnopoios\, peacemaker (Matthew:5:9|; here only in N.T.). In strkjv@Ephesians:2:15| we have \poi“n eirˆnˆn\ (separate words) {making peace}. Not the masculine gender, though agreeing with the idea of Christ involved even if \plˆr“ma\ be taken as the subject of \eudokˆsen\, a participial anacoluthon (construction according to sense as in strkjv@2:19|). If \theos\ be taken as the subject of \eudokˆsen\ the participle \eirˆnopoiˆsas\ refers to Christ, not to \theos\ (God). {Through the blood of his cross} (\dia tou haimatos tou staurou autou\). This for the benefit of the Docetic Gnostics who denied the real humanity of Jesus and as clearly stating the _causa medians_ (Ellicott) of the work of reconciliation to be the Cross of Christ, a doctrine needed today. {Or things in the heavens} (\eite ta en tois ouranois\). Much needless trouble has been made over this phrase as if things in heaven were not exactly right. It is rather a hypothetical statement like verse 16| not put in categorical form (Abbott), _universitas rerum_ (Ellicott).

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

rwp@Colossians:2:14 @{Having blotted out} (\exaleipsas\). And so "cancelled." First aorist active participle of old verb \exaleiph“\, to rub out, wipe off, erase. In N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:3:19| (LXX); strkjv@Revelation:3:5; strkjv@Colossians:2:14|. Here the word explains \charisamenos\ and is simultaneous with it. Plato used it of blotting out a writing. Often MSS. were rubbed or scraped and written over again (palimpsests, like Codex C). {The bond written in ordinances that was against us} (\to kath' hˆm“n cheirographon tois dogmasin\). The late compound \cheirographon\ (\cheir\, hand, \graph“\) is very common in the papyri for a certificate of debt or bond, many of the original \cheirographa\ (handwriting, "chirography"). See Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 247. The signature made a legal debt or bond as Paul says in strkjv@Philemon:1:18f.|: "I Paul have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it." Many of the papyri examples have been "crossed out" thus X as we do today and so cancelled. One decree is described as "neither washed out nor written over" (Milligan, N. T. _Documents_, p. 16). Undoubtedly "the handwriting in decrees" (\dogmasin\, the Mosaic law, strkjv@Ephesians:2:15|) was against the Jews (Exodus:24:3; strkjv@Deuteronomy:27:14-26|) for they accepted it, but the Gentiles also gave moral assent to God's law written in their hearts (Romans:2:14f.|). Songs:Paul says "against us" (\kath' hˆm“n\) and adds "which was contrary to us" (\ho ˆn hupenantion hˆmin\) because we (neither Jew nor Gentile) could not keep it. \Hupenantios\ is an old double compound adjective (\hupo, en, antios\) set over against, only here in N.T. except strkjv@Hebrews:10:27| when it is used as a substantive. It is striking that Paul has connected the common word \cheirographon\ for bond or debt with the Cross of Christ (Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 332). {And he hath taken it out of the way} (\kai ˆrken ek tou mesou\). Perfect active indicative of \air“\, old and common verb, to lift up, to bear, to take away. The word used by the Baptist of Jesus as "the Lamb of God that bears away (\air“n\) the sin of the world" (John:1:29|). The perfect tense emphasizes the permanence of the removal of the bond which has been paid and cancelled and cannot be presented again. Lightfoot argues for Christ as the subject of \ˆrken\, but that is not necessary, though Paul does use sudden anacolutha. God has taken the bond against us "out of the midst" (\ek tou mesou\). Nailing it to the cross (\prosˆl“sas auto t“i staur“i\). First aorist active participle of old and common verb \prosˆlo“\, to fasten with nails to a thing (with dative \staur“i\). Here alone in N.T., but in III Macc. strkjv@4:9 with the very word \staur“i\. The victim was nailed to the cross as was Christ. "When Christ was crucified, God nailed the Law to His cross" (Peake). Hence the "bond" is cancelled for us. Business men today sometimes file cancelled accounts. No evidence exists that Paul alluded to such a custom here.

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

rwp@Colossians:2:20 @{If ye died} (\ei apethanete\). Condition of the first class, assumed as true, \ei\ and second aorist active indicative of \apothnˆsk“\, to die. He is alluding to the picture of burial in baptism (2:12|). {From the rudiments of the world} (\apo t“n stoichei“n tou kosmou\). See strkjv@2:8|. {As though living in the world} (\h“s z“ntes en kosm“i\). Concessive use of the participle with \h“s\. The picture is that of baptism, having come out (F. B. Meyer) on the other side of the grave, we are not to act as though we had not done so. We are in the Land of Beulah. {Why do ye subject yourselves to ordinances?} (\ti dogmatizesthe?\). Late and rare verb (three examples in inscriptions and often in LXX) made from \dogma\, decree or ordinance. Here it makes good sense either as middle or passive. In either case they are to blame since the bond of decrees (2:14|) was removed on the Cross of Christ. Paul still has in mind the rules of the ascetic wing of the Gnostics (2:16ff.|).

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:3:18 @{Wives} (\kai gunaikes\). The article here distinguishes class from class and with the vocative case can be best rendered "Ye wives." Songs:with each group. {Be in subjection to your husbands} (\hupotassesthe tois andrasin\). "Own" (\idiois\) is genuine in strkjv@Ephesians:5:22|, but not here. The verb \hupotassomai\ has a military air, common in the _Koin‚_ for such obedience. Obedience in government is essential as the same word shows in strkjv@Romans:13:1,5|. {As is fitting in the Lord} (\h“s anˆken en Kuri“i\). This is an idiomatic use of the imperfect indicative with verbs of propriety in present time (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 919). Wives have rights and privileges, but recognition of the husband's leadership is essential to a well-ordered home, only the assumption is that the husband has a head and a wise one.

rwp@Info_Ephesians @ THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS FROM ROME A.D. 63 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION There are some problems of a special nature that confront us about the so-called Epistle to the Ephesians. THE AUTHORSHIP It is not admitted by all that Paul wrote it, though no other adequate explanation of its origin has ever been given. Songs:far as subject matter and vocabulary and style are concerned, if Colossians is Pauline, there is little or nothing to be said against the Pauline authorship of this Epistle.

rwp@Ephesians:1:22 @{He put all things in subjection} (\panta hupetaxen\). First aorist active indicative of \hupotass“\, quoted from strkjv@Psalms:8:7| as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:27|. {Gave him to be head} (\auton ed“ken kephalˆn\). {Gave} (\ed“ken\, first aorist active indicative of \did“mi\) to the church (the universal spiritual church or kingdom as in strkjv@Colossians:1:18,24|) Christ as Head (\kephalˆn\, predicate accusative). This conception of \ekklˆsia\ runs all through Ephesians (3:10,21; strkjv@5:23,24,25,27,29,32|).

rwp@Ephesians:2:12 @{Separate from Christ} (\ch“ris Christou\). Ablative case with adverbial preposition \ch“ris\, describing their former condition as heathen. {Alienated from the commonwealth of Israel} (\apˆllotri“menoi tˆs politeias tou Israˆl\). Perfect passive participle of \apallotrio“\, for which see strkjv@Colossians:1:21|. Here followed by ablative case \politeias\, old word from \politeu“\, to be a citizen (Phillipians:1:27|) from \politˆs\ and that from \polis\ (city). Only twice in N.T., here as commonwealth (the spiritual Israel or Kingdom of God) and strkjv@Acts:22:28| as citizenship. {Strangers from the covenants of the promise} (\xenoi t“n diathˆk“n tˆs epaggelias\). For \xenos\ (Latin _hospes_), as stranger see strkjv@Matthew:25:35,38,43f.|, as guest-friend see strkjv@Romans:16:23|. Here it is followed by the ablative case \diathˆk“n\. {Having no hope} (\elpida mˆ echontes\). No hope of any kind. In strkjv@Galatians:4:8| \ouk\ (strong negative) occurs with \eidotes theon\, but here \mˆ\ gives a more subjective picture (1Thessalonians:4:5|). {Without God} (\atheoi\). Old Greek word, not in LXX, only here in N.T. Atheists in the original sense of being without God and also in the sense of hostility to God from failure to worship him. See Paul's words in strkjv@Romans:1:18-32|. "In the world" (\en t“i kosm“i\) goes with both phrases. It is a terrible picture that Paul gives, but a true one.

rwp@Ephesians:4:8 @{Wherefore he saith} (\dio legei\). As a confirmation of what Paul has said. No subject is expressed in the Greek and commentators argue whether it should be \ho theos\ (God) or \hˆ graphˆ\ (Scripture). But it comes to God after all. See strkjv@Acts:2:17|. The quotation is from strkjv@Psalms:68:18|, a Messianic Psalm of victory which Paul adapts and interprets for Christ's triumph over death. {He led captivity captive} (\ˆichmal“teusen aichmal“sian\). Cognate accusative of \aichmal“sian\, late word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:13:10|. The verb also (\aichmal“teu“\) is from the old word \aichmal“tos\, captive in war (in N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:4:18|), in LXX and only here in N.T.

rwp@Ephesians:5:21 @{Subjecting yourselves to one another} (\hupotassomenoi allˆlois\). Present middle participle of \hupotass“\, old military figure to line up under (Colossians:3:18|). The construction here is rather loose, coordinate with the preceding participles of praise and prayer. It is possible to start a new paragraph here and regard \hupotassomenoi\ as an independent participle like an imperative.

rwp@Ephesians:5:22 @{Be in subjection}. Not in the Greek text of B and Jerome knew of no MS. with it. K L and most MSS. have \hupotassesthe\ like strkjv@Colossians:3:18|, while Aleph A P have \hupotassesth“san\ (let them be subject to). But the case of \andrasin\ (dative) shows that the verb is understood from verse 21| if not written originally. \Idiois\ (own) is genuine here, though not in strkjv@Colossians:3:18|. {As unto the Lord} (\h“s t“i Kuri“i\). Songs:here instead of \h“s anˆken en Kuri“i\ of strkjv@Colossians:3:18|.

rwp@Galatians:6:14 @{Far be it from me} (\emoi mˆ genoito\). Second aorist middle optative of \ginomai\ in a negative (\mˆ\) wish about the future with dative case: "May it not happen to me." See strkjv@2:17|. The infinitive \kauchƒsthai\ (to glory) is the subject of \genoito\ as is common in the LXX, though not elsewhere in the N.T. {Hath been crucified unto me} (\emoi estaur“tai\). Perfect passive indicative of \stauro“\, stands crucified, with the ethical dative again (\emoi\). This is one of the great sayings of Paul concerning his relation to Christ and the world in contrast with the Judaizers. Cf. strkjv@2:19f.; strkjv@3:13; strkjv@4:4f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:23f.; strkjv@Romans:1:16; strkjv@3:21ff.; strkjv@4:25; strkjv@5:18|. {World} (\kosmos\) has no article, but is definite as in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:19|. Paul's old world of Jewish descent and environment is dead to him (Phillipians:3:3f.|).

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE STYLE It is called an epistle and so it is, but of a peculiar kind. In fact, as has been said, it begins like a treatise, proceeds like a sermon, and concludes like a letter. It is, in fact, more like a literary composition than any other New Testament book as Deissmann shows: "It points to the fact that the Epistle to the Hebrews, with its more definitely artistic, more literary language (corresponding to its more theological subject matter), constituted an epoch in the history of the new religion. Christianity is beginning to lay hands on the instruments of culture; the literary and theological period has begun" (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 70f.). But Blass (_Die Rhythmen der asianischen und romischen Kunstprosa_, 1905) argues that the author of Hebrews certainly and Paul probably were students of Greek oratory and rhetoric. He is clearly wrong about Paul and probably so about the author of Hebrews. There is in Hebrews more of "a studied rhetorical periodicity" (Thayer), but with many "parenthetical involutions" (Westcott) and with less of "the impetuous eloquence of Paul." The eleventh chapter reveals a studied style and as a whole the Epistle belongs to the literary _Koin‚_ rather than to the vernacular. Moulton (_Cambridge Biblical Essays_, p. 483) thinks that the author did not know Hebrew but follows the Septuagint throughout in his abundant use of the Old Testament.

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

rwp@Hebrews:2:15 @{And might deliver} (\kai apallaxˆi\). Further purpose with the first aorist active subjunctive of \appallass“\, old verb to change from, to set free from, in N.T. only here, strkjv@Luke:12:58; strkjv@Acts:19:12|. {Through fear of death} (\phob“i thanatou\). Instrumental case of \phobos\. The ancients had great fear of death though the philosophers like Seneca argued against it. There is today a flippant attitude towards death with denial of the future life and rejection of God. But the author of Hebrews saw judgement after death (9:27f.|). Hence our need of Christ to break the power of sin and Satan in death. {All their lifetime} (\dia pantos tou zˆin\). Present active infinitive with \pas\ and the article in the genitive case with \dia\, "through all the living." {Subject to bondage} (\enochoi douleias\). Old adjective from \enech“\, "held in," "bound to," with genitive, bond-slaves of fear, a graphic picture. Jesus has the keys of life and death and said: "I am the life." Thank God for that.

rwp@Hebrews:2:17 @{Wherefore} (\hothen\). Old relative adverb (\ho\ and enclitic \then\, whence of place (Matthew:12:44|), of source (1John:2:18|), of cause as here and often in Hebrews (3:1; strkjv@7:25; strkjv@8:3; strkjv@9:18; strkjv@11:19|). {It behoved him} (\“pheilen\). Imperfect active of \opheil“\, old verb to owe, money (Matthew:18:28|), service and love (Romans:13:8|), duty or obligation as here and often in N.T. (Luke:17:10|). Jesus is here the subject and the reference is to the incarnation. Having undertaken the work of redemption (John:3:16|), voluntarily (John:10:17|), Jesus was under obligation to be properly equipped for that priestly service and sacrifice. {In all things} (\kata panta\). Except yielding to sin (Hebrews:4:15|) and yet he knew what temptation was, difficult as it may be for us to comprehend that in the Son of God who is also the Son of man (Mark:1:13|). Jesus fought through to victory over Satan. {To be made like unto his brethren} (\tois adelphois homoi“thˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \homoio“\, old and common verb from \homoios\ (like), as in strkjv@Matthew:6:8|, with the associative instrumental case as here. Christ, our Elder Brother, resembles us in reality (Phillipians:2:7| "in the likeness of men") as we shall resemble him in the end (Romans:8:29| "first-born among many brethren"; strkjv@1John:3:2| "like him"), where the same root is used as here (\hoi“ma, homoios\). That he might be (\hina genˆtai\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\, to become, "that he might become." That was only possible by being like his brethren in actual human nature. {Merciful and faithful high priest} (\eleˆm“n kai pistos archiereus\). The sudden use of \archiereus\ here for Jesus has been anticipated by strkjv@1:3; strkjv@2:9| and see strkjv@3:1|. Jesus as the priest-victim is the chief topic of the Epistle. These two adjectives (\eleˆm“n\ and \pistos\) touch the chief points in the function of the high priest (5:1-10|), sympathy and fidelity to God. The Sadducean high priests (Annas and Caiaphas) were political and ecclesiastical tools and puppets out of sympathy with the people and chosen by Rome. {In things pertaining to God} (\ta pros ton theon\). The adverbial accusative of the article is a common idiom. See the very idiom \ta pros ton theon\ in strkjv@Exodus:18:19; strkjv@Romans:15:17|. This use of \pros\ we had already in strkjv@Hebrews:1:7f|. On the day of atonement the high priest entered the holy of holies and officiated in behalf of the people. {To make propitiation for} (\eis to hilaskesthai\). Purpose clause with \eis to\ and the infinitive (common Greek idiom), here present indirect middle of \hilaskomai\, to render propitious to oneself (from \hilaos\, Attic \hile“s\, gracious). This idea occurs in the LXX (Psalms:65:3|), but only here in N.T., though in strkjv@Luke:18:13| the passive form (\hilasthˆti\) occurs as in strkjv@2Kings:5:18|. In strkjv@1John:2:2| we have \hilasmos\ used of Christ (cf. strkjv@Hebrews:7:25|). The inscriptions illustrate the meaning in strkjv@Hebrews:2:17| as well as the LXX.

rwp@Hebrews:4:6 @{It remaineth} (\apoleipetai\). Present passive indicative of \apoleip“\, old verb to leave behind, to remain over. Songs:again in strkjv@4:9; strkjv@10:26|. Here the infinitive clause (\tinas eiselthein eis autˆn\) is the subject of \apoleipetai\. This left-over promise is not repeated, though not utilized by the Israelites under Moses nor in the highest sense by Joshua and David. {Failed to enter in} (\ouk eisˆlthon\). "Did not enter in" (second aorist active indicative of \eiserchomai\). It is a rabbinical argument all along here, but the author is writing to Jews.

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@Hebrews:12:9 @{Furthermore} (\eita\). The next step in the argument (Mark:4:17|). {We had} (\eichomen\). Imperfect indicative of customary action, "we used to have." {To chasten us} (\paideutas\). Predicate accusative after \eichomen\, "as chasteners." Old word from \paideu“\, as agent (\-tˆs\). Only once in LXX (Hosea:5:2|) and twice in N.T. (here and strkjv@Romans:2:20|). {We gave them reverence} (\enetrepometha\). Imperfect middle of old word \entrep“\, to turn in or at. Here "we turned ourselves to" as in strkjv@Matthew:21:37|, habitual attitude of reverence. {Shall we be in subjection} (\hupotagˆsometha\). Second future passive of \hupotass“\. There is no \de\ here to correspond to \men\ in the first part of the verse. {Unto the father of spirits} (\t“i patri t“n pneumat“n\). Rather, "Unto the Father of our spirits" (note article \ton\). As God is.

rwp@Hebrews:13:7 @{Remember} (\mnˆmoneuete\). Present active imperative of \mnˆmoneu“\, old verb to be _mindful_ of (from \mnˆm“n\, mindful) with genitive (John:15:20|) or accusative (Matthew:16:9|). "Keep in mind." Cf. strkjv@11:22|. {Them that had the rule over you} (\t“n hˆgoumen“n hum“n\). Present middle participle of \hˆgeomai\ with genitive of the person (\hum“n\) as in verses 17,24|. The author reminds them of the founders of their church in addition to the long list of heroes in chapter strkjv@Acts:11|. See a like exhortation to respect and follow their leaders in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:12f|. Few lessons are harder for the average Christian to learn, viz., good following. {The word of God} (\ton logon tou theou\). The preaching of these early disciples, apostles, and prophets (1Corinthians:1:17|). {And considering the issue of their life} (\h“n anathe“rountes tˆn ekbasin tˆs anastrophˆs\). No "and" in the Greek, but the relative \h“n\ (whose) in the genitive case after \anastrophˆs\, "considering the issue of whose life." Present active participle of \anathe“re“\, late compound, to look up a subject, to investigate, to observe accurately, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:17:23|. \Ekbasis\ is an old word from \ekbain“\, to go out (Hebrews:11:15|, here only in N.T.), originally way out (1Corinthians:10:13|), but here (only other N.T. example) in sense of end or issue as in several papyri examples (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). {Imitate their faith} (\mimeisthe tˆn pistin\). Present middle imperative of \mimeomai\, old verb (from \mimos\, actor, mimic), in N.T. only here, strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:7,9; strkjv@3John:1:11|. Keep on imitating the faith of the leaders.

rwp@James:1:12 @{Endureth} (\hupomenei\). Present active indicative of \hupomen“\. Cf. verse 3|. {Temptation} (\peirasmon\). Real temptation here. See verse 2| for "trials." {When he hath been approved} (\dokimos genomenos\). "Having become approved," with direct reference to \to dokimion\ in verse 3|. See also strkjv@Romans:5:4| for \dokimˆ\ (approval after test as of gold or silver). This beatitude (\makarios\) is for the one who has come out unscathed. See strkjv@1Timothy:6:9|. {The crown of life} (\ton stephanon tˆs z“ˆs\). The same phrase occurs in strkjv@Revelation:2:10|. It is the genitive of apposition, life itself being the crown as in strkjv@1Peter:5:4|. This crown is "an honourable ornament" (Ropes), with possibly no reference to the victor's crown (garland of leaves) as with Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:25; strkjv@2Timothy:4:8|, nor to the linen fillet (\diadˆma\) of royalty (Psalms:20:3|, where \stephanos\ is used like \diadˆma\, the kingly crown). \Stephanos\ has a variety of uses. Cf. the thorn chaplet on Jesus (Matthew:27:29|). {The Lord}. Not in the oldest Greek MSS., but clearly implied as the subject of \epˆggeilato\ ({he promised}, first aorist middle indicative).

rwp@James:1:26 @{Thinketh himself to be religious} (\dokei thrˆskos einai\). Condition of first class (\ei-dokei\). \Thrˆskos\ (of uncertain etymology, perhaps from \threomai\, to mutter forms of prayer) is predicate nominative after \einai\, agreeing with the subject of \dokei\ (either "he seems" or "he thinks"). This source of self-deception is in saying and doing. The word \thrˆskos\ is found nowhere else except in lexicons. Hatch (_Essays in Biblical Greek_, pp. 55-57) shows that it refers to the external observances of public worship, such as church attendance, almsgiving, prayer, fasting (Matthew:6:1-18|). It is the Pharisaic element in Christian worship. {While he bridleth not his tongue} (\mˆ chalinag“g“n gl“ssan heautou\). "Not bridling his own tongue." A reference to verse 19| and the metaphor is repeated in strkjv@3:12|. This is the earliest known example of the compound \chalinag“ge“\ (\chalinos\, bridle \ago\, to lead). It occurs also in Lucian. The picture is that of a man putting the bridle in his own mouth, not in that of another. See the similar metaphor of muzzling (\phimo“\) one's mouth (Matthew:22:12| \ephim“thˆ\). {Deceiveth} (\apat“n\). Present active participle from \apatˆ\ (deceit). He plays a trick on himself. {Religion} (\thrˆskeia\). Later form of \thrˆskiˆ\ (Herodotus) from \thrˆskos\ above. It means religious worship in its external observances, religious exercise or discipline, but not to the exclusion of reverence. In the N.T. we have it also in strkjv@Acts:26:5| of Judaism and in strkjv@Colossians:2:18| of worshipping angels. It is vain (\mataios\, feminine form same as masculine) or empty. Comes to nothing.

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

rwp@James: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:4:7 @{Be subject therefore unto God} (\hupotagˆte oun t“i the“i\). Second aorist (ingressive) passive imperative of \hupotass“\, old verb, to range under (military term also). Same form in strkjv@1Peter:2:23; strkjv@5:5|. With the dative case \the“i\ (unto God). The aorist has the note of urgency in the imperative. Note the ten aorist imperatives in verses 7-10| (\hupotagˆte, antistˆte, eggisate, katharisate, hagnisate, talaip“rˆsate, penthˆsate, klausate, metatrapˆt“, tapein“thˆte\). {But resist the devil} (\antistˆte de t“i diabol“i\). Second aorist (ingressive) active (intransitive) imperative of \anthistˆmi\, "take a stand against." Dative case \diabol“i\. Result of such a stand is that the devil will flee (\pheuxetai\, future middle of \pheug“\). See strkjv@1Peter:5:8f.; strkjv@Ephesians:6:11f.; strkjv@Luke:10:17|.

rwp@James:4:11 @{Speak not one against another} (\mˆ katalaleite allˆl“n\). Prohibition against such a habit or a command to quit doing it, with \mˆ\ and the present imperative of \katalale“\, old compound usually with the accusative in ancient Greek, in N.T. only with the genitive (here, strkjv@1Peter:2:12; strkjv@3:16|). Often harsh words about the absent. James returns to the subject of the tongue as he does again in strkjv@5:12| (twice before, strkjv@1:26; strkjv@3:1-12|). {Judgeth} (\krin“n\). In the sense of harsh judgment as in strkjv@Matthew:7:1; strkjv@Luke:6:37| (explained by \katadikaz“\). {Not a doer of the law, but a judge} (\ouk poiˆtˆs nomou, alla kritˆs\). This tone of superiority to law is here sharply condemned. James has in mind God's law, of course, but the point is the same for all laws under which we live. We cannot select the laws which we will obey unless some contravene God's law, and so our own conscience (Acts:4:20|). Then we are willing to give our lives for our rebellion if need be.

rwp@James:5:6 @{Ye have condemned} (\katedikasate\). First aorist active indicative of \katadikaz“\, old verb (from \katadikˆ\, condemnation, strkjv@Acts:25:15|). The rich controlled the courts of justice. {Ye have killed the righteous one} (\ephoneusate ton dikaion\). First aorist active indicative of \phoneu“\ (2:11; strkjv@4:2|). "The righteous one" (\t“n dikaion\) is the generic use of the singular with article for the class. There is probably no direct reference to one individual, though it does picture well the death of Christ and also the coming death of James himself, who was called the Just (Eus. _H.E_. ii. 23). Stephen (Acts:7:52|) directly accuses the Sanhedrin with being betrayers and murderers (\prodotai kai phoneis\) of the righteous one (\tou dikaiou\). {He doth not resist you} (\ouk antitassetai humin\). It is possible to treat this as a question. Present middle indicative of \antitass“\, for which see strkjv@James:4:6|. Without a question the unresisting end of the victim (\ton dikaion\) is pictured. With a question (\ouk\, expecting an affirmative answer) God or Lord is the subject, with the final judgment in view. There is no way to decide definitely.

rwp@John:1:14 @{And the Word became flesh} (\kai ho logos sarx egeneto\). See verse 3| for this verb and note its use for the historic event of the Incarnation rather than \ˆn\ of verse 1|. Note also the absence of the article with the predicate substantive \sarx\, so that it cannot mean "the flesh became the Word." The Pre-existence of the Logos has already been plainly stated and argued. John does not here say that the Logos entered into a man or dwelt in a man or filled a man. One is at liberty to see an allusion to the birth narratives in strkjv@Matthew:1:16-25; strkjv@Luke:1:28-38|, if he wishes, since John clearly had the Synoptics before him and chiefly supplemented them in his narrative. In fact, one is also at liberty to ask what intelligent meaning can one give to John's language here apart from the Virgin Birth? What ordinary mother or father ever speaks of a child "becoming flesh"? For the Incarnation see also strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Galatians:4:4; strkjv@Romans:1:3; strkjv@8:3; strkjv@Phillipians:2:7f.; strkjv@1Timothy:3:16; strkjv@Hebrews:2:14|. "To explain the exact significance of \egeneto\ in this sentence is beyond the powers of any interpreter" (Bernard). Unless, indeed, as seems plain, John is referring to the Virgin Birth as recorded in Matthew and Luke. "The Logos of philosophy is, John declares, the Jesus of history" (Bernard). Thus John asserts the deity and the real humanity of Christ. He answers the Docetic Gnostics who denied his humanity. {Dwelt among us} (\eskˆn“sen en hˆmin\). First aorist ingressive aorist active indicative of \skˆno“\, old verb, to pitch one's tent or tabernacle (\skˆnos\ or \skˆnˆ\), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:7-15; strkjv@12:12; strkjv@13:6; strkjv@21:3|. In Revelation it is used of God tabernacling with men and here of the Logos tabernacling, God's Shekinah glory here among us in the person of his Son. {We beheld his glory} (\etheasametha tˆn doxan autou\). First aorist middle indicative of \theaomai\ (from \thea\, spectacle). The personal experience of John and of others who did recognize Jesus as the Shekinah glory (\doxa\) of God as James, the brother of Jesus, so describes him (James:2:1|). John employs \theaomai\ again in strkjv@1:32| (the Baptist beholding the Spirit coming down as a dove) and strkjv@1:38| of the Baptist gazing in rapture at Jesus. Songs:also strkjv@4:35; strkjv@11:45; strkjv@1John:1:1f.; strkjv@4:12,14|. By this word John insists that in the human Jesus he beheld the Shekinah glory of God who was and is the Logos who existed before with God. By this plural John speaks for himself and all those who saw in Jesus what he did. {As of the only begotten from the Father} (\h“s monogenous para patros\). Strictly, "as of an only born from a father," since there is no article with \monogenous\ or with \patros\. In strkjv@John:3:16; strkjv@1John:4:9| we have \ton monogenˆ\ referring to Christ. This is the first use in the Gospel of \patˆr\ of God in relation to the Logos. \Monogenˆs\ (only born rather than only begotten) here refers to the eternal relationship of the Logos (as in strkjv@1:18|) rather than to the Incarnation. It distinguishes thus between the Logos and the believers as children (\tekna\) of God. The word is used of human relationships as in strkjv@Luke:7:12; strkjv@8:42; strkjv@9:38|. It occurs also in the LXX and strkjv@Hebrews:11:17|, but elsewhere in N.T. only in John's writings. It is an old word in Greek literature. It is not clear whether the words \para patros\ (from the Father) are to be connected with \monogenous\ (cf. strkjv@6:46; strkjv@7:29|, etc.) or with \doxan\ (cf. strkjv@5:41,44|). John clearly means to say that "the manifested glory of the Word was as it were the glory of the Eternal Father shared with His only Son" (Bernard). Cf. strkjv@8:54; strkjv@14:9; strkjv@17:5|. {Full} (\plˆrˆs\). Probably indeclinable accusative adjective agreeing with \doxan\ (or genitive with \monogenous\) of which we have papyri examples (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 275). As nominative \plˆrˆs\ can agree with the subject of \eskˆn“sen\. {Of grace and truth} (\charitos kai alˆtheias\). Curiously this great word \charis\ (grace), so common with Paul, does not occur in John's Gospel save in strkjv@1:14,16,17|, though \alˆtheia\ (truth) is one of the keywords in the Fourth Gospel and in 1John, occurring 25 times in the Gospel and 20 in the Johannine Epistles, 7 times in the Synoptics and not at all in Revelation (Bernard). In strkjv@1:17| these two words picture the Gospel in Christ in contrast with the law of Moses. See Epistles of Paul for origin and use of both words.

rwp@John:3:18 @{Is not judged} (\ou krinetai\). Present passive indicative. Trust in Christ prevents condemnation, for he takes our place and pays the penalty for sin for all who put their case in his hands (Romans:8:32f.|). The believer in Christ as Saviour does not come into judgment (John:5:24|). {Hath been judged already} (\ˆdˆ kekritai\). Perfect passive indicative of \krin“\. Judgment has already been passed on the one who refuses to believe in Christ as the Saviour sent by the Father, the man who is not willing to come to Christ for life (5:40|). {Because he hath not believed} (\hoti mˆ pepisteuken\). Perfect active indicative of \pisteu“\, has taken a permanent attitude of refusal. Here \hoti mˆ\ states the reason subjectively as the judgment of the Judge in any such case (\ho mˆ pisteu“n\ already mentioned) while in strkjv@1John:5:10| \hoti ou pepisteuken\ gives the reason objectively (\ou\ instead of \mˆ\) conceived as an actual case and no longer hypothetical. See strkjv@1:12| for \eis to onoma\ with \pisteu“\ (believing on the name) and strkjv@1:14| for \monogenous\ (only begotten) and also strkjv@3:16|.

rwp@John:5:35 @{He} (\ekeinos\). "That one" (John of 33|). Common demonstrative (that one) in John to point out the subject. Used in strkjv@1:8| of the Baptist as here. John was now in prison and so Christ uses \ˆn\ (was). His active ministry is over. {The lamp} (\ho luchnos\). The lamp in the room (Mark:4:21|). Old word for lamp or candle as in strkjv@Matthew:5:15|. Used of Christ (the Lamb) as the Lamp of the New Jerusalem (Revelation:21:23|). \Lampas\ (Matthew:25:1,3|, etc.) is a torch whose wick is fed with oil. The Baptist was not the Light (\to ph“s\, strkjv@1:8|), but a lamp shining in the darkness. "When the Light comes, the lamp is no longer needed" (Bernard). "_Non Lux iste, sed lucerna_." Jesus by his own claim is the Light of the World (8:12; strkjv@9:5; strkjv@12:46|). And yet all believers are in a sense "the light of the world" (Matthew:5:14|) since the world gets the Light of Christ through us. {That burneth} (\ho kaiomenos\). See strkjv@Matthew:5:15| for this verb used with \luchnos\ (lighting a candle or lamp). The lamp that is lit and is burning (present passive participle of \kai“\, and so is consumed). {And shineth} (\kai phain“n\). See strkjv@1:4| for this verb used of the Logos shining in the darkness. Cf. strkjv@1John:2:8|. John was giving light as he burned for those in darkness like these Jews. {And ye were willing} (\humeis de ˆthelˆsate\). "But ye became willing." Ingressive aorist active indicative of \thel“\. Reference again to strkjv@1:19|. Cf. also for the temporary popularity of the Baptist strkjv@Mark:1:5; strkjv@Matthew:3:5; strkjv@11:7; strkjv@21:26|. The Jews were attracted to John "like moths to a candle" (Bernard). {To rejoice} (\agalliathˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \agalliaomai\, late word for \agallomai\ for which see strkjv@Matthew:5:12|. "They were attracted by his brightness, not by his warmth" (Bengel). Even so the brightness of John's shining did not really enlighten their minds. "The interest in the Baptist was a frivolous, superficial, and short-lived excitement" (Vincent). It was only "for an hour" (\pros h“ran\) when they turned against him.

rwp@John:7:30 @{They sought therefore} (\ezˆtoun oun\). Imperfect active of \zˆte“\, inchoative or conative, they began to seek. Either makes sense. The subject is naturally some of the Jerusalemites (Westcott) rather than some of the leaders (Bernard). {To take him} (\auton piasai\). First aorist active infinitive, Doric form from \piaz“\, from the usual \piez“\, occasionally so in the papyri, but \piaz“\ always in N.T. except strkjv@Luke:6:38|. {And} (\kai\). Here = "but." {Laid his hand} (\epebalen tˆn cheira\). Second aorist active indicative of \epiball“\, to cast upon. Old and common idiom for arresting one to make him a prisoner (Matthew:26:50|). See repetition in verse 44|. {His hour} (\hˆ h“ra autou\). In strkjv@13:1| we read that "the hour" had come, but that was "not yet" (\oup“\). "John is at pains to point out at every point that the persecution and death of Jesus followed a predestined course" (Bernard), as in strkjv@2:4; strkjv@7:6,8; strkjv@8:10; strkjv@10:39; strkjv@13:1|, etc. {Was not yet come} (\oup“ elˆluthei\). Past perfect active of \erchomai\, as John looks back on the story.

rwp@John:8:6 @{Tempting him} (\peirazontes auton\). Evil sense of this present active participle of \peiraz“\, as so often (Mark:8:11; strkjv@10:2|, etc.). {That they might have whereof to accuse him} (\hina ech“sin katˆgorein autou\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \ech“\. This laying of traps for Jesus was a common practice of his enemies (Luke:11:16|, etc.). Note present active infinitive of \katˆgore“\ (see strkjv@Matthew:12:10| for the verb) to go on accusing (with genitive \autou\). It was now a habit with these rabbis. {Stooped down} (\kat“ kupsas\). First aorist active participle of \kupt“\, old verb to bow the head, to bend forward, in N.T. only here and verse 8; strkjv@Mark:1:7|. The use of \kat“\ (down) gives a vivid touch to the picture. {With his finger} (\t“i daktul“i\). Instrumental case of \daktulos\ for which see strkjv@Matthew:23:4|. {Wrote on the ground} (\kategraphen eis tˆn gˆn\). Imperfect active of \katagraph“\, old compound, here only in N.T., to draw, to delineate, to write down, apparently inchoative, began to write on the sand as every one has done sometimes. The only mention of writing by Jesus and the use of \katagraph“\ leaves it uncertain whether he was writing words or drawing pictures or making signs. If we only knew what he wrote! Certainly Jesus knew how to write. And yet more books have been written about this one who wrote nothing that is preserved than any other person or subject in human history. There is a tradition that Jesus wrote down the names and sins of these accusers. That is not likely. They were written on their hearts. Jesus alone on this occasion showed embarrassment over this woman's sin.

rwp@John:8:43 @{My speech} (\tˆn lalian tˆn emˆn\) and {my word} (\ton logon ton emon\). Perhaps \lalia\, old word from \lalos\ (talk), means here more manner of speech than just story (4:42|), while \logos\ refers rather to the subject matter. They will not listen (\ou dunasthe akouein\) to the substance of Christ's teaching and hence they are impatient with the way that he talks. How often that is true.

rwp@John:8:44 @{Ye are of your father the devil} (\humeis ek tou patros tou diabolou\). Certainly they can "understand" (\gin“skete\ in 43|) this "talk" (\lalian\) though they will be greatly angered. But they had to hear it (\akouein\ in 43|). It was like a bombshell in spite of the preliminary preparation. {Your will to do} (\thelete poiein\). Present active indicative of \thel“\ and present active infinitive, "Ye wish to go on doing." This same idea Jesus presents in strkjv@Matthew:13:38| (the sons of the evil one, the devil) and strkjv@23:15| (twofold more a son of Gehenna than you). See also strkjv@1John:3:8| for "of the devil" (\ek tou diabolou\) for the one who persists in sinning. In strkjv@Revelation:12:9| the devil is one who leads all the world astray. The Gnostic view that Jesus means "the father of the devil" is grotesque. Jesus does not, of course, here deny that the Jews, like all men, are children of God the Creator, like Paul's offspring of God for all men in strkjv@Acts:17:28|. What he denies to these Pharisees is that they are spiritual children of God who do his will. They do the lusts and will of the devil. The Baptist had denied this same spiritual fatherhood to the merely physical descendants of Abraham (Matthew:3:9|). He even called them "broods of vipers" as Jesus did later (Matthew:12:34|). {A murderer} (\anthr“poktonos\). Old and rare word (Euripides) from \anthr“pos\, man, and \ktein“\, to kill. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1John:3:15|. The Jews were seeking to kill Jesus and so like their father the devil. {Stood not in the truth} (\en tˆi alˆtheiƒi ouk estˆken\). Since \ouk\, not \ouch\, is genuine, the form of the verb is \esteken\ the imperfect of the late present stem \stˆk“\ (Mark:11:25|) from the perfect active \hestˆka\ (intransitive) of \histˆmi\, to place. {No truth in him} (\ouk estin alˆtheia en aut“i\). Inside him or outside (environment). The devil and truth have no contact. {When he speaketh a lie} (\hotan lalˆi to pseudos\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the present active subjunctive of \lale“\. But note the article \to\: "Whenever he speaks the lie," as he is sure to do because it is his nature. Hence "he speaks out of his own" (\ek t“n idi“n lalei\) like a fountain bubbling up (cf. strkjv@Matthew:12:34|). {For he is a liar} (\hoti pseustˆs estin\). Old word for the agent in a conscious falsehood (\pseudos\). See strkjv@1John:1:10; strkjv@Romans:3:4|. Common word in John because of the emphasis on \alˆtheia\ (truth). {And the father thereof} (\kai ho patˆr autou\). Either the father of the lie or of the liar, both of which are true as already shown by Jesus. {Autou} in the genitive can be either neuter or masculine. Westcott takes it thus, "because he is a liar and his father (the devil) is a liar," making "one," not the devil, the subject of "whenever he speaks," a very doubtful expression.

rwp@John:10:29 @{Which} (\hos\). Who. If \ho\ (which) is correct, we have to take \ho patˆr\ as nominative absolute or independent, "As for my Father." {Is greater than all} (\pant“n meiz“n estin\). If we read \hos\. But Aleph B L W read \ho\ and A B Theta have \meizon\. The neuter seems to be correct (Westcott and Hort). But is it? If so, the meaning is: "As for my Father, that which he hath given me is greater than all." But the context calls for \hos... meiz“n\ with \ho patˆr\ as the subject of \estin\. The greatness of the Father, not of the flock, is the ground of the safety of the flock. Hence the conclusion that "no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand."

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

rwp@John:12:36 @{Believe in the light} (\pisteuete eis to ph“s\). That is, "believe in me as the Messiah" (8:12; strkjv@9:5|). {That ye may become sons of light} (\hina huioi ph“tos genˆsthe\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist subject of \ginomai\, to become. They were not "sons of light," a Hebrew idiom (cf. strkjv@17:12; strkjv@Luke:16:8| with the contrast), an idiom used by Paul in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:5; strkjv@Ephesians:5:8|. It is equivalent to "enlightened men" (Bernard) and Jesus called his disciples the light of the world (Matthew:5:14|). {Hid himself from them} (\ekrubˆ ap' aut“n\). Second aorist passive indicative of \krupt“\, late form (in LXX) for old \ekruphˆ\, "was hidden from them," as in strkjv@8:59|. This part of verse 36| begins a new paragraph.

rwp@John:15:6 @{He is cast forth} (\eblˆthˆ ex“\). Timeless or gnomic use of the first aorist passive indicative of \ball“\ as the conclusion of a third-class condition (see also verses 4,7| for the same condition, only constative aorist subjunctive \meinˆte\ and \meinˆi\ in verse 7|). The apostles are thus vividly warned against presumption. Jesus as the vine will fulfil his part of the relation as long as the branches keep in vital union with him. {As a branch} (\h“s to klˆma\). {And is withered} (\exˆranthˆ\). Another timeless first aorist passive indicative, this time of \xˆrain“\, same timeless use in strkjv@James:1:11| of grass, old and common verb. They gather (\sunagousin\). Plural though subject not expressed, the servants of the vine-dresser gather up the broken off branches. {Are burned} (\kaietai\). Present passive singular of \kai“\, to burn, because \klˆmata\ (branches) is neuter plural. See this vivid picture also in strkjv@Matthew:13:41f.,49f|.

rwp@John:15:12 @{That ye love one another} (\hina agapƒte allˆlous\). Non-final use of \hina\, introducing a subject clause in apposition with \entolˆ\ (commandment) and the present active subjunctive of \agapa“\, "that ye keep on loving one another." See strkjv@13:34|.

rwp@John:17:3 @{Should know} (\gin“sk“sin\). Present active subjunctive with \hina\ (subject clause), "should keep on knowing." {Even Jesus Christ} (\Iˆsoun Christon\). See strkjv@1:17| for the only other place in John's Gospel where the words occur together. Coming here in the Lord's own prayer about himself they create difficulty, unless, as Westcott suggests, \Christon\ be regarded as a predicate accusative, "Jesus as the Christ" (Messiah). Otherwise the words would seem to be John's parenthetical interpretation of the idea of Jesus. Lucke thinks that the solemnity of this occasion explains Jesus referring to himself in the third person. The knowledge of "the only true God" is through Jesus Christ (14:6-9|).

rwp@John:18:12 @{The chief captain} (\ho chiliarchos\). They actually had the Roman commander of the cohort along (cf. strkjv@Acts:21:31|), not mentioned before. {Seized} (\sunelabon\). Second aorist active of \sullamban“\, old verb to grasp together, to arrest (technical word) in the Synoptics in this context (Mark:14:48; strkjv@Matthew:26:55|), here alone in John. {Bound} (\edˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \de“\, to bind. As a matter of course, with the hands behind his back, but with no warrant in law and with no charge against him. {To Annas first} (\pros Annan pr“ton\). Ex-high priest and father-in-law (\pentheros\, old word, only here in N.T.) of Caiaphas the actual high priest. Then Jesus was subjected to a preliminary and superfluous inquiry by Annas (given only by John) while the Sanhedrin were gathering before Caiaphas. Bernard curiously thinks that the night trial actually took place here before Annas and only the early morning ratification was before Caiaphas. Songs:he calmly says that "Matthew inserts the name _Caiaphas_ at this point (the night trial) in which he seems to have been mistaken." But why "mistaken"? {That year} (\tou eniautou ekeinou\). Genitive of time.

rwp@John:18:14 @{He which gave command} (\ho sumbouleusas\). First aorist active articular participle of \sumbouleu“\, old verb (Matthew:26:4|). The reference is to strkjv@John:11:50|. {It was expedient} (\sumpherei\). Present active indicative retained in indirect assertion after secondary tense (\ˆn\, was). Here we have the second aorist active infinitive \apothanein\ as the subject of \sumpherei\, both good idioms in the _Koin‚_.

rwp@John:18:39 @{A custom} (\sunˆtheia\). Old word for intimacy, intercourse, from \sunˆthˆs\ (\sun, ˆthos\), in N.T. only here, strkjv@1Corinthians:8:7; strkjv@11:16|. This custom, alluded to in strkjv@Mark:15:6; strkjv@Matthew:27:15|, is termed necessity (\anagkˆ\) in strkjv@Luke:23:17| (late MSS., not in older MSS.). All the Gospels use the verb \apolu“\ (release, set free). Then \hina apolus“\ is a subject clause (\hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive) in apposition with \sunˆtheia\. {Will ye therefore that I release?} (\boulesthe oun apolus“;\). Without the usual \hina\ before \apolus“\, asyndeton, as in strkjv@Mark:10:36|, to be explained either as parataxis or two questions (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 430) or as mere omission of \hina\ (_ibid_., p. 994). There is contempt and irony in Pilate's use of the phrase "the king of the Jews."

rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE RELATION TO II PETER Beyond a doubt one of these Epistles was used by the other, as one can see by comparing particularly strkjv@Jude:1:3-18| and strkjv@2Peter:2:1-18|. As already said concerning II Peter, scholars are greatly divided on this point, and in our present state of knowledge it does not seem possible to reach a solid conclusion. The probability is that not much time elapsed between them. Mayor devotes a whole chapter to the discussion of the relation between II Peter and Jude:and reaches the conclusion "that in Jude:we have the first thought, in Peter the second thought." That is my own feeling, but it is all so subjective that I have no desire to urge the point unduly. Bigg is equally positive that II Peter comes before Jude.

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE GOSPEL OF LUKE BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION There is not room here for a full discussion of all the interesting problems raised by Luke as the author of the Gospel and Acts. One can find them ably handled in the Introduction to Plummer's volume on Luke's Gospel in the _International and Critical Commentary_, in the Introduction to Ragg's volume on Luke's Gospel in the _Westminster Commentaries_, in the Introduction to Easton's _Gospel According to St. Luke_, Hayes' _Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts_, Ramsay's _Luke the Physician_, Harnack's _Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_, Foakes-Jackson and Kirsopp Lake's _Beginnings of Christianity_, Carpenter's _Christianity According to St. Luke_, Cadbury's _The Making of Luke-Acts_, McLachlan's _St. Luke: The Man and His Work_, Robertson's _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_, to go no further. It is a fascinating subject that appeals to scholars of all shades of opinion.

rwp@Luke:1:3 @{It seemed good to me also} (\edoxe kamoi\). A natural conclusion and justification of Luke's decision to write his narrative. They had ample reason to draw up their narratives. Luke has more reason to do so because of his fuller knowledge and wider scope. {Having traced the course of all things} (\parˆkolouthˆkoti pƒsin\). The perfect active participle of a common verb of the ancient Greek. Literally it means to follow along a thing in mind, to trace carefully. Both meanings occur abundantly in the ancient Greek. Cadbury (Appendix C to _Beginnings of Christianity_, Vol. II, pp. 489ff.) objects to the translation "having traced" here as implying research which the word does not here mean. Milligan (_Vocabulary_) is somewhat impressed by this argument. See my discussion of the point in Chapter XVI of _Studies in the Text of the N.T._ (The Implications in Luke's Preface) where the point is made that Luke here claims fulness of knowledge before he began to write his book. He had the traditions of the eyewitnesses and ministers of the word and the narratives previously drawn up. Whether he was a personal contemporary with any or all of these events we do not know and it is not particularly pertinent. He had _mentally_ followed along by the side of these events. Galen used this verb for the investigation of symptoms. Luke got himself ready to write before he began by full and accurate knowledge of the subject. \Akrib“s\ (accurately) means going into minute details, from \akron\, the topmost point. And he did it {from the first} (\an“then\). He seems to refer to the matters in Chapters strkjv@1:5-2:52|, the Gospel of the Infancy. {In order} (\kathexˆs\). Chronological order in the main following Mark's general outline. But in strkjv@9:51-18:10| the order is often topical. He has made careful investigation and his work deserves serious consideration. {Most excellent Theophilus} (\kratiste Theophile\). The name means god-lover or god-beloved. He may have been a believer already. He was probably a Gentile. Ramsay holds that "most excellent" was a title like "Your Excellency" and shows that he held office, perhaps a Knight. Songs:of Felix (Acts:23:26|) and Festus (Acts:26:25|). The adjective does not occur in the dedication in strkjv@Acts:1:1|.

rwp@Luke:2:14 @{Among men in whom he is well pleased} (\en anthr“pois eudokias\). The Textus Receptus (Authorized Version also has \eudokia\, but the genitive \eudokias\ is undoubtedly correct, supported by the oldest and best uncials. (Aleph, A B D W). C has a lacuna here. Plummer justly notes how in this angelic hymn Glory and Peace correspond, in the highest and on earth, to God and among men of goodwill. It would be possible to connect "on earth" with "the highest" and also to have a triple division. There has been much objection raised to the genitive \eudokias\, the correct text. But it makes perfectly good sense and better sense. As a matter of fact real peace on earth exists only among those who are the subjects of God's goodwill, who are characterized by goodwill toward God and man. This word \eudokia\ we have already had in strkjv@Matthew:11:26|. It does not occur in the ancient Greek. The word is confined to Jewish and Christian writings, though the papyri furnish instances of \eudokˆsis\. Wycliff has it "to men of goodwill."

rwp@Luke:2:28 @{Then he} (\kai autos\). \Kai\ as in strkjv@2:21|. \Autos\, emphatic subject, he after the parents. {Arms} (\agkalas\). Old Greek word, here only in the N.T. It means the curve or inner angle of the arm.

rwp@Luke:2:51 @{He was subject unto them} (\ˆn hupotassomenos autois\). Periphrastic imperfect passive. He continued subject unto them, this wondrous boy who really knew more than parents and rabbis, this gentle, obedient, affectionate boy. The next eighteen years at Nazareth (Luke:3:23|) he remained growing into manhood and becoming the carpenter of Nazareth (Mark:6:3|) in succession to Joseph (Matthew:13:55|) who is mentioned here for the last time. Who can tell the wistful days when Jesus waited at Nazareth for the Father to call him to his Messianic task? {Kept} (\dietˆrei\). Imperfect active. Ancient Greek word (\diatˆre“\), but only here and strkjv@Acts:15:29| in the N.T. though in strkjv@Genesis:37:11|. She kept thoroughly (\dia\) all these recent sayings (or things, \rhˆmata\). In strkjv@2:19| \sunetˆrei\ is the word used of Mary after the shepherds left. These she kept pondering and comparing all the things. Surely she has a full heart now. Could she foresee how destiny would take Jesus out beyond her mother's reach?

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

rwp@Luke:4:3 @{The Son of God} (\huios tou theou\). No article as in strkjv@Matthew:4:3|. Songs:refers to the relationship as Son of God rather than to the office of Messiah. Manifest reference to the words of the Father in strkjv@Luke:3:22|. Condition of the first class as in Matthew. The devil assumes that Jesus is Son of God. {This stone} (\t“i lith“i tout“i\). Perhaps pointing to a particular round stone that looked in shape and size like a loaf of bread. Stanley (_Sinai and Palestine_, p. 154) on Mt. Carmel found crystallizations of stones called "Elijah's melons." The hunger of Jesus opened the way for the diabolic suggestion designed to inspire doubt in Jesus toward his Father. Matthew has "these stones." {Bread} (\artos\). Better "loaf." For discussion of this first temptation see on ¯Matthew:4:3f|. Jesus felt the force of each of the temptations without yielding at all to the sin involved. See discussion on Matthew also for reality of the devil and the objective and subjective elements in the temptations. Jesus quotes strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:3| in reply to the devil.

rwp@Luke:8:11 @{Is this} (\estin de hautˆ\). Means this. Jesus now proceeds to interpret his own parable. {The seed is the word of God} (\ho sporos estin ho logos tou theou\). The article with both subject and predicate as here means that they are interchangeable and can be turned round: The word of God is the seed. The phrase "the word of God" does not appear in Matthew and only once in Mark (Mark:7:13|) and John (John:10:35|), but four times in Luke (5:1; strkjv@8:11,21; strkjv@11:28|) and twelve times in Acts. In strkjv@Mark:4:14| we have only "the word." In strkjv@Mark:3:31| we have "the will of God," and in strkjv@Matthew:12:46| "the will of my Father" where strkjv@Luke:8:21| has "the word of God." This seems to show that Luke has the subjective genitive here and means the word that comes from God.

rwp@Luke:9:31 @{There talked with him} (\sunelaloun aut“i\). Imperfect active, were talking with him. {Who appeared in glory} (\hoi ophthentes en doxˆi\). First aorist passive participle of \hora“\. This item peculiar to Luke. Compare verse 26|. {Spake of his decease} (\elegon tˆn exodon\). Imperfect active, were talking about his \exodus\ (departure from earth to heaven) very much like our English word "decease" (Latin _decessus_, a going away). The glorious light graphically revealed Moses and Elijah talking with Jesus about the very subject concerning which Peter had dared to rebuke Jesus for mentioning (Mark:8:32; strkjv@Matthew:16:22|). This very word \exodus\ (way out) in the sense of death occurs in strkjv@2Peter:1:15| and is followed by a brief description of the Transfiguration glory. Other words for death (\thanatos\) in the N.T. are \ekbasis\, going out as departure (Hebrews:13:7|), \aphixis\, departing (Acts:20:29|), \analusis\, loosening anchor (2Timothy:4:6|) and \analusai\ (Phillipians:1:23|). {To accomplish} (\plˆroun\). To fulfil. Moses had led the Exodus from Egypt. Jesus will accomplish the exodus of God's people into the Promised Land on high. See on Mark and Matthew for discussion of significance of the appearance of Moses and Elijah as representatives of law and prophecy and with a peculiar death. The purpose of the Transfiguration was to strengthen the heart of Jesus as he was praying long about his approaching death and to give these chosen three disciples a glimpse of his glory for the hour of darkness coming. No one on earth understood the heart of Jesus and so Moses and Elijah came. The poor disciples utterly failed to grasp the significance of it all.

rwp@Luke:9:46 @{A reasoning} (\dialogismos\). A dispute. The word is from \dialogizomai\, the verb used in strkjv@Mark:9:33| about this incident. In Luke this dispute follows immediately after the words of Jesus about his death. They were afraid to ask Jesus about that subject, but strkjv@Matthew:18:1| states that they came to Jesus to settle it. {Which of them should be greatest} (\to tis an eiˆ meiz“n aut“n\). Note the article with the indirect question, the clause being in the accusative of general reference. The optative with \an\ is here because it was so in the direct question (potential optative with \an\ retained in the indirect). But Luke makes it plain that it was not an abstract problem about greatness in the kingdom of heaven as they put it to Jesus (Matthew:18:1|), but a personal problem in their own group. Rivalries and jealousies had already come and now sharp words. By and by James and John will be bold enough to ask for the first places for themselves in this political kingdom which they expect (Mark:10:35; strkjv@Matthew:20:20|). It is a sad spectacle.

rwp@Luke:9:49 @{And John answered} (\apokritheis de I“anˆs\). As if John wanted to change the subject after the embarrassment of the rebuke for their dispute concerning greatness (Luke:9:46-48|). {Master} (\epistata\). Only in Luke in the N.T. as already four times (5:5; strkjv@8:24,45; strkjv@9:33|). {We forbade him} (\ek“luomen auton\). Conative imperfect as in strkjv@Mark:9:38|, We tried to hinder him. {Because he followeth not with us} (\hoti ouk akolouthei meth hˆm“n\). Present tense preserved for vividness where Mark has imperfect {ˆkolouthei}. Note also here "with us" (\meth' hˆm“n\) where Mark has associative instrumental \hˆmin\. It is a pitiful specimen of partisan narrowness and pride even in the Beloved Disciple, one of the Sons of Thunder. The man was doing the Master's work in the Master's name and with the Master's power, but did not run with the group of the Twelve.

rwp@Luke:10:17 @{Returned with joy} (\hupestrepsan meta charas\). They had profited by the directions of Jesus. Joy overflows their faces and their words. {Even the demons} (\kai ta daimonia\). This was a real test. The Twelve had been expressly endowed with this power when they were sent out (Luke:9:1|), but the Seventy were only told to heal the sick (10:9|). It was better than they expected. The Gospel worked wonders and they were happy. The demons were merely one sign of the conflict between Christ and Satan. Every preacher has to grapple with demons in his work. {Are subject} (\hupotassetai\). Present passive indicative (repetition).

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

rwp@Luke:11:11 @{Of which of you that is a father} (\tina de ex hum“n ton patera\). There is a decided anacoluthon here. The MSS. differ a great deal. The text of Westcott and Hort makes \ton patera\ (the father) in apposition with \tina\ (of whom) and in the accusative the object of \aitˆsei\ (shall ask) which has also another accusative (both person and thing) "a loaf." Songs:far so good. But the rest of the sentence is, {will ye give him a stone?} (\mˆ lithon epid“sei aut“i;\). \Mˆ\ shows that the answer No is expected, but the trouble is that the interrogative \tina\ in the first clause is in the accusative the object of \aitˆsei\ while here the same man (he) is the subject of \epid“sei\. It is a very awkward piece of Greek and yet it is intelligible. Some of the old MSS. do not have the part about "loaf" and "stone," but only the two remaining parts about "fish" and "serpent," "egg" and "scorpion." The same difficult construction is carried over into these questions also.

rwp@Luke:12:26 @{Not able to do even that which is least} (\oude elachiston dunasthe\). Negative \oude\ in the condition of the first class. Elative superlative, very small. This verse not in Matthew and omitted in D. Verse 27| as in strkjv@Matthew:6:28|, save that the verbs for toil and spin are plural in Matthew and singular here (neuter plural subject, \ta krina\).

rwp@Luke:13:7 @{The vinedresser} (\ton ampelourgon\). Old word, but here only in the N.T., from \ampelos\, vine, and \ergon\, work. {These three years I come} (\tria etˆ aph' hou erchomai\). Literally, "three years since (from which time) I come." These three years, of course, have nothing to do with the three years of Christ's public ministry. The three years are counted from the time when the fig tree would normally be expected to bear, not from the time of planting. The Jewish nation is meant by this parable of the barren fig tree. In the withering of the barren fig tree later at Jerusalem we see parable changed to object lesson or fact (Mark:11:12-14; strkjv@Matthew:21:18f.|). {Cut it down} (\ekkopson\). "Cut it out," the Greek has it, out of the vineyard, perfective use of \ek\ with the effective aorist active imperative of \kopt“\, where we prefer "down." {Why?} (\hina ti\). Ellipsis here of \genˆtai\ of which \ti\ is subject (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 739,916). {Also} (\kai\). Besides bearing no fruit. {Doth cumber the ground} (\tˆn gˆn katargei\). Makes the ground completely idle, of no use (\kata, arge“\, from \argos\, \a\ privative and \ergon\, work). Late verb, here only in the N.T. except in Paul's Epistles.

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

rwp@Luke:22:19 @{Which is given for you} (\to huper hum“n didomenon\). Some MSS. omit these verses though probably genuine. The correct text in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:24| has "which is for you," not "which is broken for you." It is curious to find the word "broken" here preserved and justified so often, even by Easton in his commentary on Luke, p. 320. {In remembrance of me} (\eis tˆn emˆn anamnˆsin\). Objective use of the possessive pronoun \emˆn\, not the subjective. {This do} (\touto poieite\). Present active indicative, repetition, keep on doing this.

rwp@Luke:22:38 @{Lord, behold, here are two swords} (\kurie idou machairai h“de duo\). They took his words literally. And before this very night is over Peter will use one of these very swords to try to cut off the head of Malchus only to be sternly rebuked by Jesus (Mark:14:47; strkjv@Matthew:26:51f.; strkjv@Luke:22:50f.; strkjv@John:18:10f.|). Then Jesus will say: "For all that take the sword shall perish with the sword" (Matthew:26:52|). Clearly Jesus did not mean his language even about the sword to be pressed too literally. Songs:he said: "It is enough" (\Hikanon estin\). It is with sad irony and sorrow that Jesus thus dismisses the subject. They were in no humour now to understand the various sides of this complicated problem. Every preacher and teacher understands this mood, not of impatience, but of closing the subject for the present.

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:1:14 @{Jesus came into Galilee} (\ˆlthen ho Iˆsous eis tˆn Galilaian\). Here Mark begins the narrative of the active ministry of Jesus and he is followed by Matthew and Luke. Mark undoubtedly follows the preaching of Peter. But for the Fourth Gospel we should not know of the year of work in various parts of the land (Perea, Galilee, Judea, Samaria) preceding the Galilean ministry. John supplements the Synoptic Gospels at this point as often. The arrest of John had much to do with the departure of Jesus from Judea to Galilee (John:4:1-4|). {Preaching the gospel of God} (\kˆruss“n to euaggelion tou theou\). It is the subjective genitive, the gospel that comes from God. Swete observes that repentance (\metanoia\) is the keynote in the message of the Baptist as gospel (\euaggelion\) is with Jesus. But Jesus took the same line as John and proclaimed both repentance and the arrival of the kingdom of God. Mark adds to Matthew's report the words "the time is fulfilled" (\peplˆr“tai ho kairos\). It is a significant fact that John looks backward to the promise of the coming of the Messiah and signalizes the fulfilment as near at hand (perfect passive indicative). It is like Paul's fulness of time (\plˆr“ma tou chronou\) in strkjv@Galatians:4:4| and fulness of the times (\plˆr“ma ton kair“n\) in strkjv@Ephesians:1:10| when he employs the word \kairos\, opportunity or crisis as here in Mark rather than the more general term \chronos\. Mark adds here also: "and believe in the gospel" (\kai pisteuete en t“i euaggeli“i\). Both repent and believe in the gospel. Usually faith in Jesus (or God) is expected as in John strkjv@14:1|. But this crisis called for faith in the message of Jesus that the Messiah had come. He did not use here the term Messiah, for it had come to have political connotations that made its use at present unwise. But the kingdom of God had arrived with the presence of the King. It does make a difference what one believes. Belief or disbelief in the message of Jesus made a sharp cleavage in those who heard him. "Faith in the message was the first step; a creed of some kind lies at the basis of confidence in the Person of Christ, and the occurrence of the phrase \pistuete en t“i euaggeli“i\ in the oldest record of the teaching of our Lord is a valuable witness to this fact" (Swete).

rwp@Mark:1:23 @{With an unclean spirit} (\en pneumati akathart“i\). This use of \en\ "with" is common in the Septuagint like the Hebrew _be_, but it occurs also in the papyri. It is the same idiom as "in Christ," "in the Lord" so common with Paul. In English we speak of our being in love, in drink, in his cups, etc. The unclean spirit was in the man and the man in the unclean spirit, a man in the power of the unclean spirit. Luke has "having," the usual construction. See on ¯Matthew:22:43|. Unclean spirit is used as synonymous with {demon} (\daimonion\). It is the idea of estrangement from God (Zechariah:13:2|). The whole subject of demonology is difficult, but no more so than the problem of the devil. Jesus distinguishes between the man and the unclean spirit. Usually physical or mental disease accompanied the possession by demons. One wonders today if the degenerates and confirmed criminals so common now are not under the power of demons. The only cure for confirmed criminals seems to be conversion (a new heart).

rwp@Mark:9:32 @{But they understood not the saying} (\hoi de ˆgnooun to rhˆma\). An old word. Chiefly in Paul's Epistles in the N.T. Imperfect tense. They continued not to understand. They were agnostics on the subject of the death and resurrection even after the Transfiguration experience. As they came down from the mountain they were puzzled again over the Master's allusion to his resurrection (Mark:9:10|). strkjv@Matthew:17:23| notes that "they were exceeding sorry" to hear Jesus talk this way again, but Mark adds that they "were afraid to ask him" (\ephobounto auton eper“tˆsai\). Continued to be afraid (imperfect tense), perhaps with a bitter memory of the term "Satan" hurled at Peter when he protested the other time when Jesus spoke of his death (Mark:8:33; strkjv@Matthew:16:23|). strkjv@Luke:9:45| explains that "it was concealed from them," probably partly by their own preconceived ideas and prejudices.

rwp@Mark:9:38 @{Because he followed not us} (\hoti ouk ˆkolouthei hˆmin\). Note vivid imperfect tense again. John evidently thought to change the subject from the constraint and embarrassment caused by their dispute. Songs:he told about a case of extra zeal on his part expecting praise from Jesus. Perhaps what Jesus had just said in verse 37| raised a doubt in John's mind as to the propriety of his excessive narrowness. One needs to know the difference between loyalty to Jesus and stickling over one's own narrow prejudices.

rwp@Mark:10:2 @{Tempting him} (\peirazontes\). As soon as Jesus appears in Galilee the Pharisees attack him again (cf. strkjv@7:5; strkjv@8:11|). Gould thinks that this is a test, not a temptation. The word means either (see on ¯Matthew:4:1|), but their motive was evil. They had once involved the Baptist with Herod Antipas and Herodias on this subject. They may have some such hopes about Jesus, or their purpose may have been to see if Jesus will be stricter than Moses taught. They knew that he had already spoken in Galilee on the subject (Matthew:5:31f.|).

rwp@Mark:13:4 @{Tell us, when shall these things be?} (\Eipon hˆmin pote tauta estai;\). The Revised Version punctuates it as a direct question, but Westcott and Hort as an indirect inquiry. They asked about the {when} (\pote\) and the {what sign} (\ti sˆmeion\). strkjv@Matthew:24:3| includes "the sign of thy coming and the end of the world," showing that these tragic events are brought before Jesus by the disciples. See discussion of the interpretation of this discourse on ¯Matthew:24:3|. This chapter in Mark is often called "The Little Apocalypse" with the notion that a Jewish apocalypse has been here adapted by Mark and attributed to Jesus. Many of the theories attribute grave error to Jesus or to the Gospels on this subject. The view adopted in the discussion in Matthew is the one suggested here, that Jesus blended in one picture his death, the destruction of Jerusalem within that generation, the second coming and end of the world typified by the destruction of the city. The lines between these topics are not sharply drawn in the report and it is not possible for us to separate the topics clearly. This great discourse is the longest preserved in Mark and may be due to Peter. Mark may have given it in order "to forewarn and forearm" (Bruce) the readers against the coming catastrophe of the destruction of Jerusalem. Both Matthew (Matthew:24|) and Luke (Luke:21:5-36|) follow the general line of Mark 13 though strkjv@Matthew:24:43-25:46| presents new material (parables).

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

rwp@Matthew:1:18 @{Of the Holy Ghost} (\ek pneumatos hagiou\). The discovery that Mary was pregnant was inevitable and it is plain that she had not told Joseph. She "was found with child" (\heurethˆ en gastri echousa\). This way of putting it, the usual Greek idiom, plainly shows that it was the discovery that shocked Joseph. He did not as yet know what Matthew plainly asserts that the Holy Ghost, not Joseph and not any man, was responsible for the pregnancy of Mary. The problem of the Virgin Birth of Jesus has been a disturbing fact to some through all the ages and is today to those who do not believe in the pre-existence of Christ, the Son of God, before his Incarnation on earth. This is the primal fact about the Birth of Christ. The Incarnation of Christ is clearly stated by Paul (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|; and involved in strkjv@Colossians:1:15-19|) and by John (John:1:14; strkjv@17:5|). If one frankly admits the actual pre-existence of Christ and the real Incarnation, he has taken the longest and most difficult step in the matter of the supernatural Birth of Christ. That being true, no merely human birth without the supernatural element can possibly explain the facts. Incarnation is far more than the Indwelling of God by the Holy Spirit in the human heart. To admit real incarnation and also full human birth, both father and mother, creates a greater difficulty than to admit the Virgin Birth of Jesus begotten by the Holy Spirit, as Matthew here says, and born of the Virgin Mary. It is true that only Matthew and Luke tell the story of the supernatural birth of Jesus, though strkjv@John:1:14| seems to refer to it. Mark has nothing whatever concerning the birth and childhood of Jesus and so cannot be used as a witness on the subject. Both Matthew and Luke present the birth of Jesus as not according to ordinary human birth. Jesus had no human father. There is such a thing in nature as parthenogenesis in the lower orders of life. But that scientific fact has no bearing here. We see here God sending his Son into the world to be the world's Saviour and he gave him a human mother, but not a human father so that Jesus Christ is both Son of God and Son of Man, the God Man. Matthew tells the story of the birth of Jesus from the standpoint of Joseph as Luke gives it from the standpoint of Mary. The two narratives harmonize with each other. One credits these most wonderful of all birth narratives according as he believes in the love and power of Almighty God to do what he wills. There is no miracle with God who has all power and all knowledge. The laws of nature are simply the expression of God's will, but he has not revealed all his will in the laws that we discover. God is Spirit. He is Person. He holds in his own power all life. strkjv@John:3:16| is called the Little Gospel because it puts briefly the love of God for men in sending his own Son to live and die for us.

rwp@Matthew:4:8 @{And showeth him} (\kai deiknusin aut“i\). This wonderful panorama had to be partially mental and imaginative, since the devil caused to pass in review "all the kingdoms of the world and the glory of them." But this fact does not prove that all phases of the temptations were subjective without any objective presence of the devil. Both could be true. Here again we have the vivid historical present (\deiknusin\). The devil now has Christ upon a very high mountain whether the traditional Quarantania or not. It was from Nebo's summit that Moses caught the vision of the land of Canaan (Deuteronomy:34:1-3|). Luke (Luke:4:5|) says that the whole panorama was "in a moment of time" and clearly psychological and instantaneous.

rwp@Matthew:6:13 @{And bring us not into temptation} (\kai mˆ eisenegkˆis eis peirasmon\). "Bring" or "lead" bothers many people. It seems to present God as an active agent in subjecting us to temptation, a thing specifically denied in strkjv@James:1:13|. The word here translated "temptation" (\peirasmon\) means originally "trial" or "test" as in strkjv@James:1:2| and Vincent so takes it here. _Braid Scots_ has it: "And lat us no be siftit." But God does test or sift us, though he does not tempt us to evil. No one understood temptation so well as Jesus for the devil tempted him by every avenue of approach to all kinds of sin, but without success. In the Garden of Gethsemane Jesus will say to Peter, James, and John: "Pray that ye enter not into temptation" (Luke:22:40|). That is the idea here. Here we have a "Permissive imperative" as grammarians term it. The idea is then: "Do not allow us to be led into temptation." There is a way out (1Corinthians:10:13|), but it is a terrible risk.

rwp@Matthew:8:29 @{Thou Son of God} (\huie tou theou\). The recognition of Jesus by the demons is surprising. The whole subject of demonology is difficult. Some hold that it is merely the ancient way of describing disease. But that does not explain the situation here. Jesus is represented as treating the demons as real existences separate from the human personality. Missionaries in China today claim that they have seen demons cast out. The devil knew Jesus clearly and it is not strange that Jesus was recognized by the devil's agents. They know that there is nothing in common between them and the Son of God (\hˆmin kai soi\, ethical dative) and they fear torment "before the time" (\pro kairou\). Usually \ta daimonia\ is the word in the New Testament for demons, but in strkjv@8:31| we have \hoi daimones\ (the only example in the N.T.). \Daimonion\ is a diminutive of \daim“n\. In Homer \daim“n\ is used synonymously with \theos\ and \thea\. Hesiod employed \daim“n\ of men of the golden age as tutelary deities. Homer has the adjective \daimonios\ usually in an evil sense. Empedocles considered the demons both bad and good. They were thus used to relieve the gods and goddesses of much rascality. Grote (_History of Greece_) notes that the Christians were thus by pagan usage justified in calling idolatry the worship of demons. See strkjv@1Corinthians:10:20f.; strkjv@1Timothy:4:1; strkjv@Revelation:9:20; strkjv@16:13f|. In the Gospels demons are the same as unclean spirits (Mark:5:12,15; strkjv@3:22,30; strkjv@Luke:4:33|). The demons are disturbers (Vincent) of the whole life of man (Mark:5:2f.; strkjv@7:25; strkjv@Matthew:12:45; strkjv@Luke:13:11,16|).

rwp@Matthew:10:10 @{No wallet} (\mˆ pˆran\). Better than "scrip." It can be either a travelling or bread bag. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 108f.) shows that it can mean the beggar's collecting bag as in an inscription on a monument at Kefr Hanar in Syria: "While Christianity was still young the beggar priest was making his rounds in the land of Syria on behalf of the national goddess." Deissmann also quotes a pun in the _Didaskalia=Const. Apost_. 3, 6 about some itinerant widows who said that they were not so much \chˆrai\ (spouseless) as \pˆrai\ (pouchless). He cites also Shakespeare, _Troilus and Cressida_ III. iii. 145: "Time hath, my lord, a wallet at his back, wherein he puts alms for oblivion." {For the labourer is worthy of his food} (\axios gar ho ergatˆs tˆs trophˆs autou\). The sermon is worth the dinner, in other words. Luke in the charge to the seventy (Luke:10:7|) has the same words with \misthou\ (reward) instead of \trophˆs\ (food). In strkjv@1Timothy:5:18| Paul quotes Luke's form as scripture (\hˆ graphˆ\) or as a well-known saying if confined to the first quotation. The word for workman here (\ergatˆs\) is that used by Jesus in the prayer for labourers (Matthew:9:38|). The well-known _Didachˆ_ or _Teaching of the Twelve_ (xiii) shows that in the second century there was still a felt need for care on the subject of receiving pay for preaching. The travelling sophists added also to the embarrassment of the situation. The wisdom of these restrictions was justified in Galilee at this time. Mark (Mark:6:6-13|) and Luke (Luke:9:1-6|) vary slightly from Matthew in some of the details of the instructions of Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:12:9 @{Lord of the Sabbath} (\kurios tou sabbatou\). This claim that he as the Son of Man is master of the Sabbath and so above the Pharisaic regulations angered them extremely. By the phrase "the Son of man" here Jesus involves the claim of Messiahship, but as the Representative Man he affirms his solidarity with mankind, "standing for the human interest" (Bruce) on this subject.

rwp@Matthew:13:22 @{Choke the word} (\sunpnigei ton logon\). We had \apepnixan\ (choked off) in strkjv@13:7|. Here it is \sunpnigei\ (choke together), historical present and singular with both subjects lumped together. "Lust for money and care go together and between them spoil many an earnest religious nature" (Bruce), "thorns" indeed. The thorns flourish and the character sickens and dies, choked to death for lack of spiritual food, air, sunshine.

rwp@Matthew:13:38 @{The field is the world} (\ho de agros estin ho kosmos\). The article with both "field" and "world" in Greek means that subject and predicate are coextensive and so interchangeable. It is extremely important to understand that both the good seed and the darnel (tares) are sown in the world, not in the Kingdom, not in the church. The separation comes at the consummation of the age (\sunteleia ai“nos\, 39|), the harvest time. They all grow together in the field (the world).

rwp@Matthew:15:3 @{Ye also} (\kai h–meis\). Jesus admits that the disciples had transgressed the rabbinical traditions. Jesus treats it as a matter of no great importance in itself save as they had put the tradition of the elders in the place of the commandment of God. When the two clashed, as was often the case, the rabbis transgress the commandment of God "because of your tradition" (\dia tˆn paradosin h–m“n\). The accusative with \dia\ means that, not "by means of." Tradition is not good or bad in itself. It is merely what is handed on from one to another. Custom tended to make these traditions binding like law. The Talmud is a monument of their struggle with tradition. There could be no compromise on this subject and Jesus accepts the issue. He stands for real righteousness and spiritual freedom, not for bondage to mere ceremonialism and tradition. The rabbis placed tradition (the oral law) above the law of God.

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

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

rwp@Matthew:22:12 @{Not having a wedding-garment} (\mˆ ech“n enduma gamou\). \Mˆ\ is in the _Koin‚_ the usual negative with participles unless special emphasis on the negative is desired as in \ouk endedumenon\. There is a subtle distinction between \mˆ\ and \ou\ like our subjective and objective notions. Some hold that the wedding-garment here is a portion of a lost parable separate from that of the Wedding Feast, but there is no evidence for that idea. Wunsche does report a parable by a rabbi of a king who set no time for his feast and the guests arrived, some properly dressed waiting at the door; others in their working clothes did not wait, but went off to work and, when the summons suddenly came, they had no time to dress properly and were made to stand and watch while the others partook of the feast.

rwp@Matthew:23:13 @{Hypocrites} (\hupokritai\). This terrible word of Jesus appears first from him in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew:6:2,5,16; strkjv@7:5|), then in strkjv@15:7| and strkjv@22:18|. Here it appears "with terrific iteration" (Bruce) save in the third of the seven woes (23:13,15,23,25,27,29|). The verb in the active (\hupokrin“\) meant to separate slowly or slightly subject to gradual inquiry. Then the middle was to make answer, to take up a part on the stage, to act a part. It was an easy step to mean to feign, to pretend, to wear a masque, to act the hypocrite, to play a part. This hardest word from the lips of Jesus falls on those who were the religious leaders of the Jews (Scribes and Pharisees), who had justified this thunderbolt of wrath by their conduct toward Jesus and their treatment of things high and holy. The _Textus Receptus has eight woes, adding verse 14| which the Revised Version places in the margin (called verse 13| by Westcott and Hort and rejected on the authority of Aleph B D as a manifest gloss from strkjv@Mark:12:40| and strkjv@Luke:20:47|). The MSS. that insert it put it either before 13 or after 13. Plummer cites these seven woes as another example of Matthew's fondness for the number seven, more fancy than fact for Matthew's Gospel is not the Apocalypse of John. These are all illustrations of Pharisaic saying and not doing (Allen). {Ye shut the kingdom of heaven} (\kleiete tˆn basileian t“n ouran“n\). In strkjv@Luke:11:52| the lawyers are accused of keeping the door to the house of knowledge locked and with flinging away the keys so as to keep themselves and the people in ignorance. These custodians of the kingdom by their teaching obscured the way to life. It is a tragedy to think how preachers and teachers of the kingdom of God may block the door for those who try to enter in (\tous eiserchomenous\, conative present middle participle). {Against} (\emprosthen\). Literally, before. These door-keepers of the kingdom slam it shut in men's faces and they themselves are on the outside where they will remain. They hide the key to keep others from going in.

rwp@Matthew:27:25 @{His blood be upon us and upon our children} (\to haima autou kai epi ta tekna hˆm“n\). These solemn words do show a consciousness that the Jewish people recognized their guilt and were even proud of it. But Pilate could not wash away his own guilt that easily. The water did not wash away the blood of Jesus from his hands any more than Lady Macbeth could wash away the blood-stains from her lily-white hands. One legend tells that in storms on Mt. Pilatus in Switzerland his ghost comes out and still washes his hands in the storm-clouds. There was guilt enough for Judas, for Caiaphas and for all the Sanhedrin both Sadducees and Pharisees, for the Jewish people as a whole (\pas ho laos\), and for Pilate. At bottom the sins of all of us nailed Jesus to the Cross. This language is no excuse for race hatred today, but it helps explain the sensitiveness between Jew and Christians on this subject. And Jews today approach the subject of the Cross with a certain amount of prejudice.

rwp@Matthew:28:6 @{Risen from the dead} (\ˆgerthˆ apo t“n nekr“n\). {Jesus the Risen}. This is the heart of the testimony of the angel to the women. It is what Paul wishes Timothy never to forget (2Timothy:2:8|), "Jesus Christ risen from the dead" (\Iˆsoun Christon egˆgermenon ek nekr“n\). They were afraid and dazzled by the glory of the scene, but the angel said, "Come, see the place where the Lord lay" (\deute idete ton topon hopou ekeito ho Kurios\). Some MSS. do not have \ho Kurios\, but he is the subject of \ekeito\. His body was not there. It will not do to say that Jesus arose in spirit and appeared alive though his body remained in the tomb. The empty tomb is the first great fact confronting the women and later the men. Various theories were offered then as now. But none of them satisfy the evidence and explain the survival of faith and hope in the disciples that do not rest upon the fact of the Risen Christ whose body was no longer in the tomb.

rwp@Matthew:28:19 @{All the nations} (\panta ta ethnˆ\). Not just the Jews scattered among the Gentiles, but the Gentiles themselves in every land. And not by making Jews of them, though this point is not made plain here. It will take time for the disciples to grow into this _Magna Charta_ of the missionary propaganda. But here is the world program of the Risen Christ and it should not be forgotten by those who seek to foreshorten it all by saying that Jesus expected his second coming to be very soon, even within the lifetime of those who heard. He did promise to come, but he has never named the date. Meanwhile we are to be ready for his coming at any time and to look for it joyfully. But we are to leave that to the Father and push on the campaign for world conquest. This program includes making disciples or learners (\mathˆteusate\) such as they were themselves. That means evangelism in the fullest sense and not merely revival meetings. Baptism in (\eis\, not _into_) the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, in the name of the Trinity. Objection is raised to this language in the mouth of Jesus as too theological and as not a genuine part of the Gospel of Matthew for the same reason. See strkjv@Matthew:11:27|, where Jesus speaks of the Father and the Son as here. But it is all to no purpose. There is a chapter devoted to this subject in my _The Christ of the Logia_ in which the genuineness of these words is proven. The name of Jesus is the essential part of it as is shown in the Acts. Trine immersion is not taught as the Greek Church holds and practices, baptism in the name of the Father, then of the Son, then of the Holy Spirit. The use of name (\onoma\) here is a common one in the Septuagint and the papyri for power or authority. For the use of \eis\ with \onoma\ in the sense here employed, not meaning _into_, see strkjv@Matthew:10:41f.| (cf. also strkjv@12:41|).

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:3:7 @{In Philadelphia} (\en Philadelphiƒi\). Some twenty-eight miles south-east of Sardis, in Lydia, subject to earthquakes, rebuilt by Tiberius after the great earthquake of A.D. 17, for a time called in coins Neo-Caesarea, in wine-growing district with Bacchus (Dionysos) as the chief deity, on fine Roman roads and of commercial importance, though not a large city, called by Ramsay (_op. cit._, p. 392) "the Missionary City" to promote the spread of the Graeco-Roman civilization and then of Christianity, later offering stubborn resistance to the Turks (1379-90 A.D.) and now called Ala-Sheher (reddish city, Charles, from the red hills behind it). The chief opposition to the faithful little church is from the Jews (cf. strkjv@Romans:9-11|). There are some 1,000 Christians there today. {The holy, he that is true} (\ho hagios, ho alˆthinos\). Separate articles (four in all) for each item in this description. "The holy, the genuine." Asyndeton in the Greek. Latin Vulgate, _Sanctus et Verus_. \Hosea:hagios\ is ascribed to God in strkjv@4:8; strkjv@6:10| (both \hagios\ and \alˆthinos\ as here), but to Christ in strkjv@Mark:1:24; strkjv@Luke:4:34; strkjv@John:6:69; strkjv@Acts:4:27,30; strkjv@1John:2:20|, a recognized title of the Messiah as the consecrated one set apart. Swete notes that \alˆthinos\ is _verus_ as distinguished from _verax_ (\alˆthˆs\). Songs:it is applied to God in strkjv@6:10| and to Christ in strkjv@3:14; strkjv@19:11| as in strkjv@John:1:9; strkjv@6:32; strkjv@15:1|. {He that hath the key of David} (\ho ech“n tˆn klein Daueid\). This epithet comes from strkjv@Isaiah:22:22|, where Eliakim as the chief steward of the royal household holds the keys of power. Christ as the Messiah (Revelation:5:5; strkjv@22:16|) has exclusive power in heaven, on earth, and in Hades (Matthew:16:19; strkjv@28:18; strkjv@Romans:14:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:9f.; strkjv@Revelation:1:18|). Christ has power to admit and exclude of his own will (Matthew:25:10f.; strkjv@Ephesians:1:22; strkjv@Revelation:3:21; strkjv@19:11-16; strkjv@20:4; strkjv@22:16|). {And none shall shut} (\kai oudeis kleisei\). Charles calls the structure Hebrew (future active indicative of \klei“\), and not Greek because it does not correspond to the present articular participle just before \ho anoig“n\ (the one opening), but it occurs often in this book as in the very next clause, "and none openeth" (\kai oudeis anoigei\) over against \klei“n\ (present active participle, opening) though here some MSS. read \kleiei\ (present active indicative, open).

rwp@Revelation:3:12 @{He that overcometh} (\ho nik“n\). Nominative absolute as in strkjv@2:26|, resumed by the accusative \auton\ (him). {A pillar} (\stulon\). Old word for column, in N.T. only here, strkjv@10:1; strkjv@Galatians:2:9; strkjv@1Timothy:3:15|. Metaphorical and personal use with a double significance of being firmly fixed and giving stability to the building. Philadelphia was a city of earthquakes. "Temple" (\naos\) here is also metaphorical (7:15|), as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:15| for the people of God. In strkjv@21:22| we read that there is no temple in the heavenly Jerusalem (21:10-22:5|) descending as the new Jerusalem with God himself as the temple, though the metaphorical temple is mentioned in strkjv@7:15|. {He shall go out thence no more} (\ex“ ou mˆ elthˆi\). Strong double negative \ou mˆ\ with the second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\. The subject is \ho nik“n\ (the one overcoming). "Fixity of character is at last achieved" (Charles). He, like the \stulos\ (pillar), remains in place. {Upon him} (\ep' auton\). Upon \ho nik“n\ (the victor), not upon the pillar (\stulos\). He receives this triple name (of God, of the city of God, of Christ) on his forehead (14:1; strkjv@7:3; strkjv@17:5; strkjv@22:4|) just as the high-priest wore the name of Jehovah upon his forehead (Exodus:28:36,38|), the new name (2:17|), without any magical or talismanic power, but as proof of ownership by God, as a citizen of the New Jerusalem, with the new symbol of the glorious personality of Christ (Revelation:19:12|), in contrast with the mark of the beast on others (13:17; strkjv@14:17|). For citizenship in God's city see strkjv@Galatians:4:26; strkjv@Phillipians:3:20; strkjv@Hebrews:11:10; strkjv@12:22; strkjv@13:14|. {The new Jerusalem} (\tˆs kainˆs Ierousalˆm\). Not \neas\ (young), but \kainˆs\ (fresh). See also strkjv@21:2,10| and already strkjv@Galatians:4:26; strkjv@Hebrews:12:22|. Charles distinguishes between the Jerusalem before the final judgment and this new Jerusalem after that event. Perhaps so! In the Apocalypse always this form \Ierousalˆm\ (3:12; strkjv@21:2,10|), but in John's Gospel \Hierosoluma\ (1:19|, etc.). {Which cometh down} (\hˆ katabainousa\). Nominative case in apposition with the preceding genitive \pole“s\ as in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@2:20|, etc. {Mine own new name} (\to onoma mou to kainon\). For which see strkjv@2:17; strkjv@19:12,16|. Christ himself will receive a new name along with all else in the future world (Gressmann).

rwp@Revelation:6:4 @{A red horse} (\hippos purros\). Old adjective from \pur\ (fire), flame-coloured, blood-red (2Kings:3:22|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@12:3|, like strkjv@Zechariah:1:8; strkjv@6:2| (roan horse). {To take peace from the earth} (\labein tˆn eirˆnˆn ek tˆs gˆs\). Second aorist active infinitive of \lamban“\, and here the nominative case, the subject of \edothˆ\ (see verse 2|), "to take peace out of the earth." Alas, how many red horses have been ridden through the ages. {And that they should slay one another} (\kai hina allˆlous sphaxousin\). Epexegetical explanatory purpose clause with \hina\ and the future active of \sphaz“\ (5:6|) instead of the more usual subjunctive (verse 2|). Cf. Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 998f. This is what war does to perfection, makes cannon fodder (cf. strkjv@John:14:27|) of men. {A great sword} (\machaira megalˆ\). \Machaira\ may be a knife carried in a sheath at the girdle (John:18:10|) or a long sword in battle as here. \Romphaia\, also a large sword, is the only other word for sword in the N.T. (Revelation:1:16; strkjv@2:12,16; strkjv@6:8; strkjv@19:15,21|).

rwp@Revelation:7:2 @{Ascend} (\anabainonta\). Present active participle of \anabain“\, "ascending," "going up," picturing the process. {From the sun-rising} (\apo anatolˆs hˆliou\). Same phrase in strkjv@16:12|. From the east, though why is not told. Swete suggests it is because Palestine is east of Patmos. The plural \apo anatol“n\ occurs in strkjv@Matthew:2:1| without \hˆliou\ (sun). {The seal of the living God} (\sphragida theou z“ntos\). Here the signet ring, like that used by an Oriental monarch, to give validity to the official documents. The use of \z“ntos\ with \theou\ accents the eternal life of God (1:18; strkjv@10:6; strkjv@15:7|) as opposed to the ephemeral pagan gods. {To whom it was given} (\hois edothˆ autois\). For \edothˆ\ see on ¯6:2,4|, etc. The repetition of \autois\ in addition to \hois\ (both dative) is a redundant Hebraism (in vernacular _Koin‚_ to some extent) often in the Apocalypse (3:8|). The angels are here identified with the winds as the angels of the churches with the churches (1:20|). {To hurt} (\adikˆsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \adike“\, subject of \edothˆ\, common use of \adike“\ in this sense of to hurt in the Apocalypse (2:11; strkjv@6:6| already), in strkjv@Luke:10:19| also. The injury is to come by letting loose the winds, not by withholding them.

rwp@Revelation:8:3 @{Another angel} (\allos aggelos\). Not one of the seven of verse 2| and before they began to sound the trumpets. This preliminary incident of the offering of incense on the altar covers verses 3-6|. {Stood} (\estathˆ\). Ingressive first aorist passive of \histˆmi\ (intransitive), "took his place." {Over the altar} (\epi tou thusiastˆriou\). See strkjv@6:9| for the word for the burnt-offering, here apparently the altar of incense (clearly so in strkjv@Luke:1:11|; possibly also strkjv@Revelation:9:13|), but it is not clear that in apocalyptic the distinction between the two altars of the tabernacle and temple is preserved. Aleph C Q have the genitive, while A P have the accusative \epi to thusiastˆrion\. {A golden censer} (\liban“ton chrusoun\). Old word for frankincense (from \libanos\, strkjv@Matthew:2:11; strkjv@Revelation:18:13|), but here alone in N.T. and for censer, as is plain by the use of \chrusoun\ (golden) with it. Cf. strkjv@1Kings:7:50|. {Much incense} (\thumiamata polla\). See strkjv@5:8| for \thumiama\ (the aromatic substance burnt, also in strkjv@18:13|), but here for the live coals on which the incense falls. {That he should add} (\hina d“sei\). Sub-final clause (subject of \edothˆ\, was given, singular because \thumiamata\ neuter plural) with \hina\ and the future active indicative of \did“mi\, to give, instead of \d“i\, the second aorist subjunctive. {Unto the prayers} (\tais proseuchais\). Dative case. In strkjv@5:18| the \thumiamata\ are the prayers. {Upon the golden altar} (\epi to thusiastˆrion to chrusoun to\). Accusative case here, not genitive as above, and apparently the altar of incense as indicated by the word golden (Exodus:30:1ff.; strkjv@Leviticus:4:17|). Note triple article here \to\ (once before the substantive, once before the adjective, once before the adjunct "the one before the throne").

rwp@Revelation:9:4 @{It was said} (\errethˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \eipon\. {That they should not hurt} (\hina mˆ adikˆsousin\). Sub-final (object clause subject of \errethˆ\) with \hina mˆ\ and the future active of \adike“\ as in strkjv@3:9; strkjv@8:3|. Vegetation had been hurt sufficiently by the hail (8:7|). {But only such men as} (\ei mˆ tous anthr“pous hoitines\). "Except (elliptical use of \ei mˆ\, if not, unless) the men who (the very ones who)." For this use of \hostis\ see strkjv@1:7; strkjv@2:24; strkjv@20:4|. {The seal of God upon their foreheads} (\tˆn sphragida tou theou epi t“n met“p“n\). Provided for in strkjv@7:3ff|. "As Israel in Egypt escaped the plagues which punished their neighbours, so the new Israel is exempted from the attack of the locusts of the Abyss" (Swete).

rwp@Revelation:9:5 @{That they should not kill them} (\hina mˆ apoktein“sin autous\). Sub-final object clause (subject of \edothˆ\) with \hina mˆ\ and the subjunctive of \apoktein“\ either present (continued action) or aorist (constative, form the same), the usual construction with \hina\. The locusts are charged to injure men, but not to kill them. {But that they should be tormented} (\all' hina basanisthˆsontai\). Sub-final clause again with \hina\, but this time with the first future passive indicative (like strkjv@3:9; strkjv@6:4; strkjv@8:3; strkjv@13:12|) of \basaniz“\, old verb, to test metals (from \basanos\, strkjv@Matthew:4:24|) by touchstone, then to torture like strkjv@Matthew:8:29|, further in strkjv@Revelation:11:10; strkjv@12:2; strkjv@14:10; strkjv@20:10|. {Five months} (\mˆnas pente\). Accusative of extent of time. The actual locust is born in the spring and dies at the end of summer (about five months). {Torment} (\basanismos\). Late word for torture, from \basaniz“\, in N.T. only in strkjv@Revelation:9:5; strkjv@14:11; strkjv@18:7,10,15|. The wound of the scorpion was not usually fatal, though exceedingly painful. {When it striketh a man} (\hotan paisˆi anthr“pon\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \pai“\ (Matthew:26:51|), old verb, to smite, "whenever it smites a man."

rwp@Revelation:9:17 @{And thus I saw in the vision} (\kai hout“s eidon en tˆi horasei\). Nowhere else does John allude to his own vision, though often in Dan. (Daniel:7:2; strkjv@8:2,15; strkjv@9:21|). {Having} (\echontas\). Accusative masculine plural of \ech“\, probably referring to the riders (\tous kathˆmenous ep' aut“n\) rather than to the horses (\tous hippous\). {Breastplates as of fire and of hyacinth and of brimstone} (\th“rakas purinous kai huakinthinous kai thei“deis\). There is no \h“s\ (as) in the Greek, but that is the idea of these three adjectives which are only metaphors. \Purinos\ is an old adjective (from \pur\, fire), here only in N.T. \Huakinthos\ is also an old word (from \huakinthos\, hyacinth, then of a sapphire stone strkjv@Revelation:21:20|), of a red color bordering on black, here only in the N.T. \Thei“dˆs\ is a late word (from \theion\, brimstone), sulphurous, here only in N.T. {As the heads of lions} (\h“s kephalai leont“n\). This of the horses, war-horses as always in the Bible except in strkjv@Isaiah:28:28|. These horses likewise have "fire and smoke and brimstone" (\theion\, brimstone, is old word, in N.T. only in Rev. and strkjv@Luke:17:29|) proceeding (\ekporeuetai\, singular because it comes first and the subjects afterwards) out of their mouths. Both rider and horse are terrible.

rwp@Revelation:11:6 @{To shut the heaven} (\kleisai ton ouranon\). First aorist active infinitive of \klei“\. As Elijah did by prayer (1Kings:17:1; strkjv@Luke:4:25; strkjv@James:5:17|). {That it rain not} (\hina mˆ huetos brechˆi\). Sub-final use of \hina mˆ\ with the present active subjunctive of \brech“\, old verb to rain (Matthew:5:45|), here with \huetos\ as subject. {During the days} (\tas hˆmeras\). Accusative of extent of time. In strkjv@Luke:4:25; strkjv@James:5:17| the period of the drouth in Elijah's time was three and a half years, just the period here. {Of their prophecy} (\tˆs prophˆteias aut“n\). Not here the gift of prophecy (1Corinthians:12:10|) or a particular prophecy or collection of prophecies (Revelation:1:3; strkjv@22:7f.|), but "the execution of the prophetic office" (Swete). {Over the waters} (\epi t“n hudat“n\). "Upon the waters." As Moses had (Exodus:7:20|). {Into blood} (\eis haima\). As already stated in strkjv@8:8| about the third trumpet and now again here. {To smite} (\pataxai\). First aorist active infinitive of \patass“\, used here with \exousian echousin\ (they have power), as is \strephein\ (to turn). {With every plague} (\en pasˆi plˆgˆi\). In strkjv@1Kings:4:8|, but with reference to the plagues in Egypt. {As often as they shall desire} (\hosakis ean thelˆs“sin\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hosakis\ and modal \ean\ (= \an\) and the first aorist active subjunctive of \thel“\, "as often as they will."

rwp@Revelation:13:5 @{There was given to him} (\edothˆ aut“i\). First aorist passive indicative of \did“mi\, to give, as in next line and verse 7|. Perhaps a reference to \ed“ken\ (he gave) in verse 4|, where the dragon (Satan) gave the beast his power. The ultimate source of power is God, but the reference seems to be Satan here. {Speaking great things and blasphemies} (\laloun megala kai blasphˆmias\). Present active participle of \lale“\, agreeing with \stoma\ (nominative neuter singular and subject of \edothˆ\). The words are like Daniel's description of the Little Horn (7:8,20,25|) and like the description of Antiochus Epiphanes (I Macc. strkjv@1:24). Cf. strkjv@2Peter:2:11|. {To continue} (\poiˆsai\). First aorist active infinitive (epexegetic use) of \poie“\, either in the sense of working (signs), as in strkjv@Daniel:8:12-14|, with the accusative of duration of time (\mˆnas\ months), or more likely in the sense of doing time, with \mˆnas\ as the direct object as in strkjv@Matthew:20:12; strkjv@Acts:20:3; strkjv@James:4:13|.

rwp@Revelation:17:14 @{These} (\houtoi\). These ten kings. {Shall war against the Lamb} (\meta tou thˆriou polemˆsousin\). Future active of \polemeo\, to war. As allies of the beast (the servant of the dragon, strkjv@12:7|) they will wage war with the Lamb (the enemy of the dragon). These kings gather for battle as in strkjv@16:13f|. {And the Lamb shall overcome them} (\kai to arnion nikˆsei autous\). Future active of \nika“\. This is the glorious outcome, victory by the Lamb over the coalition of kings as against the beast before. {For he is Lord of lords and King of kings} (\hoti Kurios kuri“n estin kai Basileus basile“n\). The same words are again descriptive of Christ in strkjv@19:16|, as of God in strkjv@Deuteronomy:10:17| (God of gods and Lord of lords) and strkjv@Daniel:10:17| (God of gods and Lord of kings). Cf. also strkjv@1Timothy:6:15; strkjv@Revelation:1:5|. Crowned heads are Christ's subjects. {And they also shall overcome that are with him} (\kai hoi met' autou\). "And those with him shall also overcome" (supply \nikˆsousin\, not \eisin\). They will share in the triumph of the Lamb, as they shared in the conflict. Cf. \meta tou thˆriou\ in verse 12|. {Called and chosen and faithful} (\klˆtoi kai eklektoi kai pistoi\). These are the three notes of those who share in the victory. For \klˆtos\ and \eklektos\ see strkjv@Matthew:22:14| (contrasted); strkjv@Romans:8:28ff.; strkjv@2Peter:1:10; strkjv@Revelation:2:10,13|. The elect are called and prove faithful.

rwp@Revelation:17:16 @{These shall hate the harlot} (\houtoi misˆsousin tˆn pornˆn\). Future active of \mise“\. \Houtoi\ is resumptive demonstrative pronoun (masculine) referring to the ten horns and the beast (neuter); construction according to sense. The downfall of Rome will come from the sudden change in subject peoples. {Shall make her desolate and naked} (\ˆrˆm“menˆn poiˆsousin autˆn kai gumnˆn\). Future active of \poie“\ and perfect passive predicate accusative participle of \erˆmo“\, old verb (from \erˆmos\ desolate), again in strkjv@18:16,19|. \Gumnˆn\ (naked) is predicate adjective. {Shall eat her flesh} (\tas sarkas autˆs phagontai\). Future middle of the defective verb \esthi“\, to eat. Note plural \sarkas\, portions of flesh (James:5:3|) as in strkjv@Psalms:27:2; strkjv@Micah:3:3|. {Shall burn her utterly with fire} (\autˆn katakausousin en puri\). Future active of \katakai“\, to burn down (perfective use of \kai“\). John wrote before the days of Alaric, Genseric, Ricimer, Totila, with their hordes which devastated Rome and the west in the fifth and sixth centuries. "No reader of the _Decline and Fall_ can be at a loss for materials which will at once illustrate and justify the general trend of St. John's prophecy" (Swete).

rwp@Revelation:19:8 @{That she should array herself} (\hina peribalˆtai\). Sub-final object clause subject of \edothˆ\ (was given to her) with \hina\ and the second aorist middle (direct) of \periball“\ to fling around. This bridal dress is a gift from Christ. This form, \edothˆ\ (it was given), occurs some 20 times in this book. {In fine linen, bright and pure} (\bussinon lampron katharon\). See strkjv@19:14| for the same raiment on those accompanying "The Word of God" and for the seven angels in strkjv@15:6|. See by contrast the garments of the harlot (17:4; strkjv@18:16|). For \bussinon\ see strkjv@18:16|. {The righteous acts of the saints} (\ta dikai“mata t“n hagi“n\). This is the explanation (\gar\) of the bridal dress and explains why there is work for the Bride as well as for Christ (Phillipians:2:12f.|). See strkjv@15:4| for \dikai“ma\ (also strkjv@Romans:5:18|).

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@Romans:1:17 @{For therein} (\gar en aut“i\). In the gospel (verse 16|) of which Paul is not ashamed. {A righteousness of God} (\dikaiosunˆ 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 piste“s 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: \s“tˆrian\ (salvation), \euaggelion\ (gospel), \apokaluptetai\ (is revealed), \dikaiosunˆ 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 \dikaiosunˆ\ here for it controls the thought throughout the Epistle. Jesus set up a higher standard of righteousness (\dikaiosunˆ\) 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 \dikˆ\, 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|), \dikai“ma\, that which is deemed \dikaios\ (sentence or ordinance as in strkjv@1:32; strkjv@2:26; strkjv@8:4|), \dikai“sis\, the act of declaring \dikaios\ (only twice in N.T., strkjv@4:25; strkjv@5:18|). \Dikaiosunˆ\ 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:3:22 @{Even} (\de\). Not adversative here. It defines here. {Through faith in Jesus Christ} (\dia piste“s [Iˆsou] Christou\). Intermediate agency (\dia\) is faith and objective genitive, "in Jesus Christ," not subjective "of Jesus Christ," in spite of Haussleiter's contention for that idea. The objective nature of faith in Christ is shown in strkjv@Galatians:2:16| by the addition \eis Christon Iˆsoun episteusamen\ (we believed in Christ), by \tˆs eis Christon piste“s hum“n\ (of your faith in Christ) in strkjv@Colossians:2:5|, by \en pistei tˆi en Christ“i Iˆsou\ (in faith that in Christ Jesus) in strkjv@1Timothy:3:13|, as well as here by the added words "unto all them that believe" (\eis pantas tous pisteuontas\) in Jesus, Paul means. {Distinction} (\diastolˆ\). See on ¯1Corinthians:14:7| for the difference of sounds in musical instruments. Also in strkjv@Romans:10:12|. The Jew was first in privilege as in penalty (2:9f.|), but justification or setting right with God is offered to both on the same terms.

rwp@Romans:7:5 @{In the flesh} (\en tˆi sarki\). Same sense as in strkjv@6:19| and strkjv@7:18,25|. The "flesh" is not inherently sinful, but is subject to sin. It is what Paul means by being "under the law." He uses \sarx\ in a good many senses. {Sinful passions} (\ta pathˆmata t“n hamarti“n\). "Passions of sins" or marked by sins. {Wrought} (\energeito\). Imperfect middle of \energe“\, "were active." {To bring forth fruit unto death} (\eis to karpophorˆsai t“i thanat“i\). Purpose clause again. Vivid picture of the seeds of sin working for death.

rwp@Romans:8:7 @{Is not subject} (\ouch hupotassetai\). Present passive indicative of \hupotass“\, late verb, military term for subjection to orders. Present tense here means continued insubordination. {Neither indeed can it be} (\oude gar dunatai\). "For it is not even able to do otherwise." This helpless state of the unregenerate man Paul has shown above apart from Christ. Hope lies in Christ (7:25|) and the Spirit of life (8:2|).

rwp@Romans:8:28 @{All things work together} (\panta sunergei\). A B have \ho theos\ as the subject of \sunergei\ (old verb, see on ¯1Corinthians:16:16; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:1|). That is the idea anyhow. It is God who makes "all things work together" in our lives "for good" (\eis agathon\), ultimate good. {According to his purpose} (\kata prothesin\). Old word, seen already in strkjv@Acts:27:13| and for "shewbread" in strkjv@Matthew:12:4|. The verb \protithˆmi\ Paul uses in strkjv@3:24| for God's purpose. Paul accepts fully human free agency but behind it all and through it all runs God's sovereignty as here and on its gracious side (9:11; strkjv@3:11; strkjv@2Timothy:1:9|).

rwp@Romans:10:3 @{Being ignorant of God's righteousness} (\agnoountes tˆn tou theou dikaiosunˆn\). A blunt thing to say, but true as Paul has shown in strkjv@2:1-3:20|. They did not understand the God-kind of righteousness by faith (1:17|). They misconceived it (2:4|). {They did not subject themselves} (\ouch hupetagˆsan\). Second aorist passive indicative of \hupotass“\, common _Koin‚_ verb, to put oneself under orders, to obey, here the passive in sense of the middle (James:4:7|) like \apekrithˆn\, I answered.

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

rwp@Romans:13:7 @{Dues} (\opheilas\). Debts, from \opheil“\, to owe. Often so in the papyri, though not in Greek authors. In N.T. only here, strkjv@Matthew:18:32; strkjv@1Corinthians:7:3|. Paying debts needs emphasis today, even for ministers. {To whom tribute is due} (\t“i ton phoron\). We must supply a participle with the article \t“i\ like \apaitounti\ ("to the one asking tribute"). Songs:with the other words (to whom custom, \t“i to telos apaitounti\; to whom fear, \t“i ton phobon apaitounti\; to whom honour, \t“i tˆn timˆn apaitounti\). \Phoros\ is the tribute paid to a subject nation (Luke:20:22|), while \telos\ is tax for support of civil government (Matthew:17:25|).

rwp@Romans:13:8 @{Save to love one another} (\ei mˆ to allˆlous agapƒin\). "Except the loving one another." This articular infinitive is in the accusative case the object of \opheilete\ and partitive apposition with \mˆden\ (nothing). This debt can never be paid off, but we should keep the interest paid up. {His neighbour} (\ton heteron\). "The other man," "the second man." "Just as in the relations of man and God \pistis\ has been substituted for \nomos\, so between man and man \agapˆ\ takes the place of definite legal relations" (Sanday and Headlam). See strkjv@Matthew:22:37-40| for the words of Jesus on this subject. Love is the only solution of our social relations and national problems.

rwp@Romans:14:21 @{Not to eat} (\to mˆ phagein\). "The not eating." Articular infinitive (second aorist active of \esthi“\) and subject of \kalon estin\ (copula, understood). {Flesh} (\kreas\). Old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:8:13|. {To drink} (\pein\). Shortened form for \piein\ (second aorist active infinitive of \pin“\). {Whereby} (\en h“i\). "On which thy brother stumbleth" (\proskoptei\).

rwp@Romans:14:23 @{He that doubteth} (\ho diakrinomenos\). Present middle participle of \diakrin“\, to judge between (\dia\), to hesitate. See strkjv@James:1:6f.| for this same picture of the double-minded man. Cf. strkjv@Romans:4:20; strkjv@Mark:11:23|. {Is condemned} (\katakekritai\). Perfect passive indicative of \katakrin“\ (note \kata-\), "stands condemned." {If he eat} (\ean phagˆi\). Third class condition, \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive. If in spite of his doubt, he eat. {Whatsoever is not of faith is sin} (\pan ho ouk ek piste“s hamartia estin\). {Faith} (\pistis\) here is subjective, one's strong conviction in the light of his relation to Christ and his enlightened conscience. To go against this combination is sin beyond a doubt. Some MSS. (A L etc.) put the doxology here which most place in strkjv@16:25-27|. But they all give chapters 15 and 16. Some have supposed that the Epistle originally ended here, but that is pure speculation. Some even suggest two editions of the Epistle. But chapter 15 goes right on with the topic discussed in chapter 14.

rwp@Titus:3:5 @{Done} (not in the Greek, only the article \t“n\), "not as a result of works those in righteousness which we did." Same idea as in strkjv@Romans:3:20f|. {According to his mercy he saved us} (\kata to autou eleos es“sen\). See strkjv@Psalms:109:26; strkjv@1Peter:1:3; strkjv@Ephesians:2:4|. Effective aorist active indicative of \s“z“\. {Through the washing of regeneration} (\dia loutrou palingenesias\). Late and common word with the Stoics (Dibelius) and in the Mystery-religions (Angus), also in the papyri and Philo. Only twice in the N.T. (Matthew:19:28| with which compare \apokatastasia\ in strkjv@Acts:3:21|, and here in personal sense of new birth). For \loutron\, see strkjv@Ephesians:5:26|, here as there the laver or the bath. Probably in both cases there is a reference to baptism, but, as in strkjv@Romans:6:3-6|, the immersion is the picture or the symbol of the new birth, not the means of securing it. {And renewing of the Holy Spirit} (\kai anakain“se“s pneumatos hagiou\). "And renewal by the Holy Spirit" (subjective genitive). For the late word \anakain“sis\, see strkjv@Romans:12:2|. Here, as often, Paul has put the objective symbol before the reality. The Holy Spirit does the renewing, man submits to the baptism after the new birth to picture it forth to men.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Mon Jun 3 00:34:32 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020