Bible:
Filter: String:

NT.filter - rwp Hoti:


rwp@1Corinthians:1:5 @{That} (\hoti\). Explicit specification of this grace of God given to the Corinthians. Paul points out in detail the unusual spiritual gifts which were their glory and became their peril (chapters strkjv@1Corinthians:12-14|). {Ye were enriched in him} (\eploutisthˆte en aut“i\). First aorist passive indicative of \ploutiz“\, old causative verb from \ploutos\, wealth, common in Attic writers, dropped out for centuries, reappeared in LXX. In N.T. only three times and alone in Paul (1Corinthians:1:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:10,11|). The Christian finds his real riches in Christ, one of Paul's pregnant phrases full of the truest mysticism. {In all utterance and all knowledge} (\en panti log“i kai pasˆi gn“sei\). One detail in explanation of the riches in Christ. The outward expression (\log“i\) here is put before the inward knowledge (\gn“sei\) which should precede all speech. But we get at one's knowledge by means of his speech. Chapters strkjv@1Corinthians:12-14| throw much light on this element in the spiritual gifts of the Corinthians (the gift of tongues, interpreting tongues, discernment) as summed up in strkjv@1Corinthians:13:1,2|, the greater gifts of strkjv@12:31|. It was a marvellously endowed church in spite of their perversions.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:26 @{Behold} (\blepete\). Same form for imperative present active plural and indicative. Either makes sense as in strkjv@John:5:39| \eraunate\ and strkjv@14:1| \pisteuete\. {Calling} (\klˆsin\). The act of calling by God, based not on the external condition of those called (\klˆtoi\, verse 2|), but on God's sovereign love. It is a clinching illustration of Paul's argument, an _argumentum ad hominen_. {How that} (\hoti\). Explanatory apposition to \klˆsin\. {After the flesh} (\kata sarka\). According to the standards of the flesh and to be used not only with \sophoi\ (wise, philosophers), but also \dunatoi\ (men of dignity and power), \eugeneis\ (noble, high birth), the three claims to aristocracy (culture, power, birth). {Are called}. Not in the Greek, but probably to be supplied from the idea in \klˆsin\.

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

rwp@1Corinthians: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:10:20 @{But I say that} (\all' hoti\). The verb \phˆmi\ (I say) must be repeated from verse 19| before \hoti\. {To demons, and not to God} (\daimoniois kai ou the“i\). Referring to LXX text of strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:17|. It is probable that by \ou the“i\ Paul means "to a no-god" as also in strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:21| \ep' ouk ethnei\ (by a no-people). This is Paul's reply to the heathen who claimed that they worshipped the gods represented by the images and not the mere wood or stone or metal idols. The word \daimonia\ is an adjective \daimonios\ from \daim“n\, an inferior deity, and with same idea originally, once in this sense in N.T. (Acts:17:18|). Elsewhere in N.T. it has the notion of evil spirits as here, those spiritual forces of wickedness (Ephesians:6:12|) that are under the control of Satan. The word \daimonia\, so common in the Gospels, occurs in Paul's writings only here and strkjv@1Timothy:4:1|. Demonology is a deep and dark subject here pictured by Paul as the explanation of heathenism which is a departure from God (Romans:1:19-23|) and a substitute for the worship of God. It is a terrible indictment which is justified by the licentious worship associated with paganism then and now.

rwp@1Corinthians:13:7 @{Beareth all things} (\panta stegei\). \Steg“\ is old verb from \stegˆ\, roof, already in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:12; strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:1,5| which see. Love covers, protects, forbears (_suffert_, Vulgate). See strkjv@1Peter:4:8| "because love covers a multitude of sins" (\hoti agapˆ kaluptei phˆthos hamarti“n\), throws a veil over. {Believeth all things} (\panta pisteuei\). Not gullible, but has faith in men. {Hopeth all things} (\panta elpizei\). Sees the bright side of things. Does not despair. \Endureth all things\ (\panta hupomenei\). Perseveres. Carries on like a stout-hearted soldier. If one knows Sir Joshua Reynolds's beautiful painting of the Seven Virtues (the four cardinal virtues of the Stoics--temperance, prudence, fortitude, justice--and the three Christian graces--faith, hope, love), he will find them all exemplified here as marks of love (the queen of them all).

rwp@1Corinthians:14:23 @{Will they not say that ye are mad?} (\ouk erousin hoti mainesthe?\). These unbelievers unacquainted (\idi“tai\) with Christianity will say that the Christians are raving mad (see on ¯Acts:12:15; strkjv@26:24|). They will seem like a congregation of lunatics.

rwp@1Corinthians:14:25 @{That God is among you indeed} (\hoti ont“s en humin estin\). Recitative \hoti\ and direct quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:45:15| (Hebrew rather than the LXX). "Really (\ont“s\ strkjv@Luke:24:34|) God is in you."

rwp@1Corinthians:15:4 @{And that he was buried} (\kai hoti etaphˆ\). Note \hoti\ repeated before each of the four verbs as a separate item. Second aorist passive indicative of \thapt“\, old verb, to bury. This item is an important detail as the Gospels show. {And that he hath been raised} (\kai hoti egˆgertai\). Perfect passive indicative, not \ˆgerthˆ\ like {rose} of the King James' Version. There is reason for this sudden change of tense. Paul wishes to emphasize the permanence of the resurrection of Jesus. He is still risen. {On the third day} (\tˆi hˆmerƒi tˆi tritˆi\). Locative case of time. Whether Paul had seen either of the Gospels we do not know, but this item is closely identified with the fact of Christ's resurrection. We have it in Peter's speech (Acts:10:40|) and Jesus points it out as part of prophecy (Luke:24:46|). The other expression occasionally found "after three days" (Mark:10:34|) is merely free vernacular for the same idea and not even strkjv@Matthew:12:40| disturbs it. See on ¯Luke:24:1| for record of the empty tomb on the first day of the week (the third day).

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

rwp@1Corinthians:15:15 @{False witnesses of God} (\pseudomartures tou theou\). Late word, but \pseudomarture“\, to bear false witness, old and common. The genitive (\tou theou\) can be either subjective (in God's service) or objective (concerning God). Either makes good sense. {Because we witnessed of God} (\hoti emarturˆsamen kata tou theou\). Vulgate has _adversus Deum_. This is the more natural way to take \kata\ and genitive, {against God} not as equal to \peri\ (concerning). He would indeed make God play false in that case, {if so be that the dead are not raised} (\eiper ara nekroi ouk egeirontai\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. Note both \per\ intensive particle {indeed} and \ara\ inferential particle {therefore}.

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:16:2 @{Upon the first day of the week} (\kata mian sabbatou\). For the singular \sabbatou\ (sabbath) for week see strkjv@Luke:18:12; strkjv@Mark:16:9|. For the use of the cardinal \mian\ in sense of ordinal \pr“tˆn\ after Hebrew fashion in LXX (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 672) as in strkjv@Mark:16:2; strkjv@Luke:24:1; strkjv@Acts:20:7|. Distributive use of \kata\ also. {Lay by him in store} (\par' heaut“i tithet“ thˆsauriz“n\). By himself, in his home. Treasuring it (cf. strkjv@Matthew:6:19f|. for \thˆsauriz“\). Have the habit of doing it, \tithet“\ (present imperative). {As he may prosper} (\hoti ean euod“tai\). Old verb from \eu\, well, and \hodos\, way or journey, to have a good journey, to prosper in general, common in LXX. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:1:10; strkjv@3John:1:2|. It is uncertain what form \euod“tai\ is, present passive subjunctive, perfect passive indicative, or even perfect passive subjunctive (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 54). The old MSS. had no accents. Some MSS. even have \euod“thˆi\ (first aorist passive subjunctive). But the sense is not altered. \Hoti\ is accusative of general reference and \ean\ can occur either with the subjunctive or indicative. This rule for giving occurs also in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:12|. Paul wishes the collections to be made before he comes.

rwp@1John:2:8 @{Again a new commandment} (\palin entolˆn kainˆn\). Paradox, but truth. Old in teaching (as old as the story of Cain and Abel, strkjv@3:11f.), but new in practice. For this use of \palin\ for a new turn see strkjv@John:16:28|. To walk as Christ walked is to put in practice the old commandment and so make it new (ever new and fresh), as love is as old as man and fresh in every new experience. {True in him and in you} (\alˆthes en aut“i kai en humin\). This newness is shown supremely in Christ and in disciples when they walk as Jesus did (verse 6|). {Because} (\hoti\). Explanation of the paradox. {Is passing away} (\paragetai\). Present middle indicative of \parag“\, old verb, to lead by, to go by (intransitive), as in strkjv@Matthew:20:30|. Night does pass by even if slowly. See this verb in verse 17| of the world passing by like a procession. {True} (\alˆthinon\). Genuine, reliable, no false flicker. {Already shineth} (\ˆdˆ phainei\). Linear present active, "is already shining" and the darkness is already passing by. Dawn is here. Is John thinking of the second coming of Christ or of the victory of truth over error, of light over darkness (cf. strkjv@John:1:5-9|), the slow but sure victory of Christ over Satan as shown in the Apocalypse? See strkjv@1:5|.

rwp@1John:2:19 @{From us} (\ex hˆm“n\) {--of us} (\ex hˆm“n\). The same idiom, \ex\ and the ablative case (\hˆm“n\), but in different senses to correspond with \exˆlthan\ (they went out from our membership) and \ouk ˆsan\ (they were not of us in spirit and life). For \ex\ in the sense of origin see strkjv@John:17:15|, for \ex\ in the sense of likeness, strkjv@John:17:14|. {For if they had been of us} (\ei gar ex hˆm“n ˆsan\). Condition of second class with \ei\ and imperfect tense (no aorist for \eimi\). {They would have continued} (\memenˆkeisan an\). Past perfect of \men“\, to remain, without augment, with \an\ in apodosis of second-class condition. {With us} (\meth' hˆm“n\). In fellowship, for which see \meta\ in strkjv@1:3|. They had lost the inner fellowship and then apparently voluntarily broke the outward. {But they went} (\all'\). Ellipsis of the verb \exˆlthan\ above, a common habit (ellipse) in John s Gospel (1:8; strkjv@9:3; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@15:25|). {That they might be made manifest} (\hina phaner“th“sin\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \phanero“\, for which verb see strkjv@John:21:1; strkjv@Colossians:3:4|. See strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3| for the personal construction with \hoti\ as here. {They all are not} (\ouk eisin pantes\). Not just some, but all, as in strkjv@2:21; strkjv@3:5|. These antichrists are thus revealed in their true light.

rwp@1John:2:21 @{I have not written} (\ouk egrapsa\). Not epistolary aorist (2:14|), but a reference to what he has just said. {And because no lie is of the truth} (\kai hoti pƒn pseudos ek tˆs alˆtheias ouk estin\). Not certain whether \hoti\ here is causal (because) or declarative (that). Either makes sense. Note the idiomatic use of \ek\ and \pƒn--ouk=ouden\ (no) as in verse 19|.

rwp@1John:2:22 @{The liar} (\ho pseustˆs\). The liar (with the article) _par excellence_. Rhetorical question to sharpen the point made already about lying in strkjv@1:6,10; strkjv@2:4,21|. See strkjv@5:5| for a like rhetorical question. {But} (\ei mˆ\). Except, if not. {That denieth that Jesus is the Christ} (\ho arnoumenos hoti Iˆsous ouk estin ho Christos\). Common Greek idiom for \ouk\ to appear after \arneomai\ like redundant \mˆ\ in strkjv@Luke:20:27; strkjv@Hebrews:12:19|. The old Latin retains _non_ here as old English did (Shakespeare, _Comedy of Errors_ IV. ii. 7, "He denied you had in him no right"). The Cerinthian Gnostics denied the identity of the man Jesus and Christ (an \aeon\, they held) like the modern Jesus or Christ controversy. {This is the antichrist} (\houtos estin ho antichristos\). The one just mentioned, Cerinthus himself in particular. {Even he that denieth the Father and the Son} (\ho arnoumenos ton patera kai ton huion\). This is the inevitable logic of such a rejection of the Son of God. Jesus had himself said this very same thing (John:5:23f.|).

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

rwp@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:5:1 @{That Jesus is the Christ} (\hoti Iˆsous estin ho Christos\). The Cerinthian antichrist denies the identity of Jesus and Christ (2:22|). Hence John insists on this form of faith (\pisteu“n\ here in the full sense, stronger than in strkjv@3:23; strkjv@4:16|, seen also in \pistis\ in verse 4|, where English and Latin fall down in having to use another word for the verb) as he does in verse 5| and in accord with the purpose of John's Gospel (20:31|). Nothing less will satisfy John, not merely intellectual conviction, but full surrender to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. "The Divine Begetting is the antecedent, not the consequent of the believing" (Law). For "is begotten of God" (\ek tou theou gegennˆtai\) see strkjv@2:29; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@4:7; strkjv@5:4,18|. John appeals here to family relationship and family love. {Him that begat} (\ton gennˆsanta\). First aorist active articular participle of \genna“\, to beget, the Father (our heavenly Father). {Him also that is begotten of him} (\ton gegennˆmenon ex autou\). Perfect passive articular participle of \genna“\, the brother or sister by the same father. Songs:then we prove our love for the common Father by our conduct towards our brothers and sisters in Christ.

rwp@1John:5:2 @{Hereby} (\en tout“i\). John's usual phrase for the test of the sincerity of our love. "The love of God and the love of the brethren do in fact include each the other" (Westcott). Each is a test of the other. Songs:put strkjv@3:14| with strkjv@5:2|. {When} (\hotan\). "Whenever" indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the present active subjunctive (the same form \agap“men\ as the indicative with \hoti\ (that) just before, "whenever we keep on loving God." {And do} (\kai poi“men\) "and whenever we keep on doing (present active subjunctive of \poie“\) his commandments." See strkjv@1:6| for "doing the truth."

rwp@1John:5:4 @{For} (\hoti\). The reason why God's commandments are not heavy is the power that comes with the new birth from God. {Whatsoever is begotten of God} (\pƒn to gegennˆmenon ek tou theou\). Neuter singular perfect passive participle of \genna“\ rather than the masculine singular (verse 1|) to express sharply the universality of the principle (Rothe) as in strkjv@John:3:6,8; strkjv@6:37,39|. {Overcometh the world} (\nikƒi ton kosmon\). Present active indicative of \nika“\, a continuous victory because a continuous struggle, "keeps on conquering the world" ("the sum of all the forces antagonistic to the spiritual life," D. Smith). {This is the victory} (\hautˆ estin hˆ nikˆ\). For this form of expression see strkjv@1:5; strkjv@John:1:19|. \Nikˆ\ (victory, cf. \nika“\), old word, here alone in N.T., but the later form \nikos\ in strkjv@Matthew:12:20; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:54f.,57|. {That overcometh} (\hˆ nikˆsasa\). First aorist active articular participle of \nika“\. The English cannot reproduce the play on the word here. The aorist tense singles out an individual experience when one believed or when one met temptation with victory. Jesus won the victory over the world (John:16:33|) and God in us (1John:4:4|) gives us the victory. {Even our faith} (\hˆ pistis hˆm“n\). The only instance of \pistis\ in the Johannine Epistles (not in John's Gospel, though in the Apocalypse). It is our faith in Jesus Christ as shown by our confession (verse 1|) and by our life (verse 2|).

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:5:7 @{For there are three who bear witness} (\hoti treis eisin hoi marturountes\). At this point the Latin Vulgate gives the words in the Textus Receptus, found in no Greek MS. save two late cursives (162 in the Vatican Library of the fifteenth century, 34 of the sixteenth century in Trinity College, Dublin). Jerome did not have it. Cyprian applies the language of the Trinity and Priscillian has it. Erasmus did not have it in his first edition, but rashly offered to insert it if a single Greek MS. had it and 34 was produced with the insertion, as if made to order. The spurious addition is: \en t“i ouran“i ho patˆr, ho logos kai to hagion pneuma kai houtoi hoi treis hen eisin kai treis eisin hoi marturountes en tˆi gˆi\ (in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth). The last clause belongs to verse 8|. The fact and the doctrine of the Trinity do not depend on this spurious addition. Some Latin scribe caught up Cyprian's exegesis and wrote it on the margin of his text, and so it got into the Vulgate and finally into the Textus Receptus by the stupidity of Erasmus.

rwp@1John:5:9 @{If we receive} (\ei lambanomen\). Condition of first class with \ei\ and the present active indicative, assumed as true. The conditions for a legally valid witness are laid down in strkjv@Deuteronomy:19:15| (cf. strkjv@Matthew:18:16; strkjv@John:8:17f.; strkjv@10:25; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:1|). {Greater} (\meiz“n\). Comparative of \megas\, because God is always true. {For} (\hoti\). Songs:it applies to this case. {That} (\hoti\). Thus taken in the declarative sense (the fact that) as in strkjv@John:3:19|, though it can be causal (because) or indefinite relative with \memarturˆken\ (what he hath testified, perfect active indicative of \marture“\, as in strkjv@John:1:32; strkjv@4:44|, etc.), a harsh construction here because of \marturia\, though some MSS. do read \hen\ to agree with it (cf. verse 10|). See \hoti ean\ in strkjv@3:20| for that idiom. Westcott notes the Trinity in verses 6-9|: the Son comes, the Spirit witnesses, the Father has witnessed.

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@1John:5:11 @{That God gave} (\hoti ed“ken ho theos\). Declarative \hoti\ in apposition with \marturia\ as in verse 14; strkjv@John:3:19|. Note aorist active indicative \ed“ken\ (from \did“mi\) as in strkjv@3:23f.|, the great historic fact of the Incarnation (John:3:16|), but the perfect \ded“ken\ in strkjv@1John:3:1| to emphasize the abiding presence of God's love. {Eternal life} (\z“ˆn ai“nion\). Anarthrous emphasizing quality, but with the article in strkjv@1:2|. {In his Son} (\en t“i hui“i autou\). This life and the witness also. This is why Jesus who is life (John:14:6|) came to give us abundant life (John:10:10|).

rwp@1John:5:14 @{Toward him} (\pros auton\). Fellowship with (\pros\, face to face) Christ. For boldness see strkjv@2:28|. {That} (\hoti\). Declarative again, as in verse 11|. {If we ask anything} (\ean ti ait“metha\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and present middle (indirect) subjunctive (personal interest as in strkjv@James:4:3|, though the point is not to be pressed too far, for see strkjv@Matthew:20:20,22; strkjv@John:16:24,26|). {According to his will} (\kata to thelˆma autou\). This is the secret in all prayer, even in the case of Jesus himself. For the phrase see strkjv@1Peter:4:19; strkjv@Galatians:1:4; strkjv@Ephesians:1:5,11|. {He heareth us} (\akouei hˆm“n\). Even when God does not give us what we ask, in particular then (Hebrews:5:7f.|).

rwp@1John:5:15 @{And if we know} (\kai ean oidamen\). Condition of first class with \ean\ (usually \ei\) and the perfect active indicative, assumed as true. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:8; strkjv@Acts:8:31| for the indicative with \ean\ as in the papyri. "An amplification of the second limitation" (D. Smith). {Whatsoever we ask} (\ho ean ait“metha\). Indefinite relative clause with modal \ean\ (=\an\) and the present middle (as for ourselves) subjunctive of \aite“\. This clause, like \hˆm“n\, is also the object of \akouei\. {We know that we have} (\oidamen hoti echomen\). Repetition of \oidamen\, the confidence of possession by anticipation. {The petitions} (\ta aitˆmata\). Old word, from \aite“\, requests, here only in John, elsewhere in N.T. strkjv@Luke:23:24; strkjv@Phillipians:4:6|. We have the answer already as in strkjv@Mark:11:24|. {We have asked} (\ˆitˆkamen\). Perfect active indicative of \aite“\, the asking abiding.

rwp@1Peter:1:16 @{Because it is written} (\dioti gegraptai\). "Because (\dioti\ stronger than \hoti\ below) it stands written" (regular formula for O.T. quotation, perfect passive indicative of \graph“\). The quotation is from strkjv@Leviticus:11:44; strkjv@19:2; strkjv@20:7|. Reenforced by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:5:48|. The future \esesthe\ here is volitive like an imperative.

rwp@1Peter:1:24 @24,25| Quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:40:6-8| (partly like the LXX, partly like the Hebrew). {For} (\dioti\). As in verse 16| (\dia\ and \hoti\), "for that." Songs:in strkjv@2:6|. See a free use of this imagery about the life of man as grass and a flower in strkjv@James:1:11|. The best MSS. here read \autˆs\ (thereof) after \doxa\ (glory) rather than \anthr“pou\ (of man). {Withereth} (\exˆranthˆ\). First aorist (gnomic, timeless) passive indicative of \xˆrain“\ (see strkjv@James:1:11|). {Falleth} (\exepesen\). Second aorist (gnomic, timeless) active indicative of \ekpipt“\ (see strkjv@James:1:11|). In verse 25| note \eis humƒs\ (unto you) like \eis humƒs\ in strkjv@1:4| (\humin\ dative).

rwp@1Peter:2:21 @{For hereunto were ye called} (\eis touto gar eklˆthˆte\). First aorist indicative of \kale“\, to call. They were called to suffer without flinching (Hort), if need be. {Because} (\hoti\). The fact that Christ suffered (\epathen\) lifts their suffering to a new plane. {Leaving you an example} (\humin hupolimpan“n hupogrammon\). Present active participle of the late Ionic verb \hupolimpan“\ (in the papyri) for the common \hupoleip“\, to leave behind (under), here only in N.T. \Hupogrammos\ is also a late and rare word (from \hupograph“\, to write under), a writing-copy for one to imitate, in II Macc. strkjv@2:28; Philo, Clement of Rome, here only in N.T. Clement of Alex. (_Strom_. V. 8. 49) uses it of the copy-head at the top of a child's exercise book for the child to imitate, including all the letters of the alphabet. The papyri give many examples of \hupographˆ\ and \hupograph“\ in the sense of copying a letter. {That ye should follow his steps} (\hina epakolouthˆsˆte tois ichnesin autou\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \epakolouthe“\, old verb, to follow closely upon, with the associative-instrumental (1Timothy:5:10,24|) or the locative here. \Ichnos\ is old word (from \hik“\, to go), tracks, footprints, in N.T. only here, strkjv@2Corinthians:12:18; strkjv@Romans:4:12|. Peter does not mean that Christ suffered only as an example (1:18|), but he did leave us his example for our copying (1John:2:6|).

rwp@1Peter:3:9 @{Not rendering evil for evil} (\mˆ apodidontes kakon anti kakou\). \Mˆ\ and the present active participle of \apodid“mi\, to give back. The same phrase in strkjv@Romans:12:17| and the same idea in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:15|. Peter may have obtained it from Paul or both from strkjv@Proverbs:17:13; strkjv@20:22|, "an approximation to Christ's repeal of the \lex talionis\ (Matthew:5:38ff.|) which Plato first opposed among the Greeks" (Hart). Common use of \anti\ for exchange. {Reviling for reviling} (\loidorian anti loidorias\). Allusion to strkjv@2:23| (Christ's own example). {But contrariwise blessing} (\tounantion de eulogountes\). Adverbial accusative and crasis (\to enantion\) of the neuter article and the adjective \enantios\ (\en, antios\, opposite, strkjv@Matthew:14:24|), "on the contrary." For \eulogountes\ (present active participle of \euloge“\) see strkjv@Luke:6:28; strkjv@Romans:12:14| (imperative \eulogeite\). {For hereunto were ye called} (\hoti eis touto eklˆthˆte\). See strkjv@2:21| for this verb and use of \eis touto\ (pointing to the preceding argument). {That ye should inherit a blessing} (\hina eulogian klˆronomˆsˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \klˆronome“\, a plain reference to Esau, who wanted "to inherit the blessing" (Hebrews:12:17|) after he had sold his birthright. Christians are the new Israel (both Gentiles and Jews) and are the spiritual descendants of Isaac (Galatians:4:22ff.|).

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

rwp@1Peter:4:8 @{Above all things} (\pro pant“n\). See this phrase in strkjv@James:5:12|. {Being fervent} (\ektenˆ echontes\). Present active participle of \echontes\ and predicate accusative of adjective \ektenˆs\ (from \ektein“\, to stretch out), stretched out, here only in N.T., "holding intent you love among yourselves." {For love covereth a multitude of sins} (\hoti agapˆ kaluptei plˆthos hamarti“n\). See strkjv@James:5:20| for meaning, sins of the one loved, not of the one loving.

rwp@1Peter:4:17 @{For the time is come} (\hoti ho kairos\). No predicate, probably \estin\ (is) to be supplied. The phrase that follows comes from the vision of Ezekiel (chapter strkjv@Ezekiel:9|). The construction is unusual with \tou arxasthai\ (genitive articular aorist middle infinitive of \arch“\), not exactly purpose or result, and almost in apposition (epexegetic), but note \tou elthein\ used as subject in strkjv@Luke:17:1|. The persecution on hand (1:7|) was a foretaste of more to come. By "house of God" he can mean the same as the "spiritual house" of strkjv@2:5| or a local church. Biggs even takes it to refer to the family. {And if it begin first at us} (\ei de pr“ton aph'hˆm“n\). Condition of first class again, with the verb \archetai\ understood. "From us" (\aph' hˆm“n\) more exactly. {End} (\telos\). Final fate. {Of them that obey not the gospel of God} (\t“n apeithount“n t“i tou theou euaggeli“i\). "Of those disobeying the gospel of God." See the same idea in strkjv@Romans:2:8|. See strkjv@Mark:1:14| for believing in the gospel.

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:2:1 @{For yourselves know} (\autoi gar oidate\). This explanatory \gar\ takes up in verses 1-12| the allusion in strkjv@1:9| about the "report" concerning the entrance (\eisodon\, way in, \eis, hodon\), {unto you} (\tˆn pros humƒs\). Note repeated article to sharpen the point. This proleptic accusative is common enough. It is expanded by the epexegetic use of the \hoti\ clause {that it hath not been found vain} (\hoti ou kenˆ gegonen\). Literally, {that it has not become empty}. Second perfect active (completed state) of \ginomai\. Every pastor watches wistfully to see what will be the outcome of his work. Bengel says: _Non inanis, sed plena virtutis_. Cf. strkjv@1:5|. \Kenos\ is hollow, empty, while \mataios\ is fruitless, ineffective. In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:14,17| Paul speaks of \kenon to kˆrugma\ ({empty the preaching}) and \mataia hˆ pistis\ ({vain the faith}). One easily leads to the other.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:8 @{Even so, being affectionately desirous of you} (\hout“s omeiromenoi hum“n\). Clearly the correct text rather than \himeiromenoi\ from \himeir“\, old verb to long for. But the verb \homeiromai\ (Westcott and Hort _om_., smooth breathing) occurs nowhere else except MSS. in strkjv@Job:3:21; strkjv@Psalms:62:2| (Symmachus) and the Lycaonian sepulchral inscription (4th cent. A.D.) about the sorrowing parents \homeiromenoi peri paidos\, {greatly desiring their son} (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Moulton suggests that it comes from a root \smer\, remember, and that \o-\ is a derelict preposition \o\ like \o-duromai, o-kell“, “-keanos\. Wohlenberg (Zahn, _Kommentar_) calls the word "a term of endearment," "derived from the language of the nursery" (Milligan). {We were well pleased} (\ˆudokoumen\). Imperfect active of \eudoke“\, common verb in later Greek and in N.T. (see on strkjv@Matthew:3:17|), picturing Paul's idea of their attitude while in Thessalonica. Paul often has it with the infinitive as here. {To impart} (\metadounai\). Second aorist active infinitive of \metadid“mi\, old verb to share with (see on strkjv@Luke:3:11|). Possible zeugma with {souls} (\psuchas\), though Lightfoot renders "lives." Paul and his associates held nothing back. {Because ye were become very dear to us} (\dioti agapˆtoi hˆmin egenˆthˆte\). Note \dioti\ (double cause, \dia, hoti\, for that), use of \ginomai\ again for become, and dative \hˆmin\ with verbal \agapˆtoi\, beloved and so dear. A beautiful picture of the growth of Paul's affection for them as should be true with every pastor.

rwp@1Thessalonians:3:4 @{We told you beforehand} (\proelegomen humin\). Imperfect active, we used to tell you beforehand. Old verb, rare in N.T. (only in Paul). {That we are to suffer persecution} (\hoti mellomen thlibesthai\). \Mell“\ and present passive infinitive. Not mere prediction, but God's appointed will as it turned out in Thessalonica.

rwp@1Timothy:1:15 @{Faithful is the saying} (\pistos ho logos\). Five times in the Pastorals (1Timothy:1:15; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@4:9; strkjv@Titus:3:8; strkjv@2Timothy:2:11|). It will pay to note carefully \pistis, pisteu“, pistos\. Same use of \pistos\ (trustworthy) applied to \logos\ in strkjv@Titus:1:9; strkjv@Revelation:21:5; strkjv@22:6|. Here and probably in strkjv@2Timothy:2:11| a definite saying seems to be referred to, possibly a quotation (\hoti\) of a current saying quite like the Johannine type of teaching. This very phrase (Christ coming into the world) occurs in strkjv@John:9:37; strkjv@11:27; strkjv@16:28; strkjv@18:37|. Paul, of course, had no access to the Johannine writings, but such "sayings" were current among the disciples. There is no formal quotation, but "the whole phrase implies a knowledge of Synoptic and Johannine language" (Lock) as in strkjv@Luke:5:32; strkjv@John:12:47|. {Acceptation} (\apodochˆs\). Genitive case with \axios\ (worthy of). Late word (Polybius, Diod., Jos.) in N.T. only here and strkjv@4:9|. {Chief} (\pr“tos\). Not \ˆn\ (I was), but \eimi\ (I am). "It is not easy to think of any one but St. Paul as penning these words" (White). In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:9| he had called himself "the least of the apostles" (\elachistos t“n apostol“n\). In strkjv@Ephesians:3:8| he refers to himself as "the less than the least of all saints" (\t“i elachistoter“i pant“n hagi“n\). On occasion Paul would defend himself as on a par with the twelve apostles (Galatians:2:6-10|) and superior to the Judaizers (2Corinthians:11:5f.; strkjv@12:11|). It is not mock humility here, but sincere appreciation of the sins of his life (cf. strkjv@Romans:7:24|) as a persecutor of the church of God (Galatians:1:13|), of men and even women (Acts:22:4f.; strkjv@26:11|). He had sad memories of those days.

rwp@1Timothy:4:10 @{To this end} (\eis touto\). The godliness (\eusebeia\) of verse 8|. See strkjv@2Corinthians:6:10| as Paul's own commentary. {We labour} (\kopi“men\, strkjv@Colossians:1:29|) {and strive} (\kai ag“nizometha\, strkjv@Colossians:1:29|). Both Pauline words. {Because we have set our hope} (\hoti elpikamen\). Perfect active indicative of \elpiz“\ (Romans:15:12|). {Saviour of all men} (\s“tˆr pant“n anthr“p“n\). See strkjv@1:1| for \s“tˆr\ applied to God as here. Not that all men "are saved" in the full sense, but God gives life (6:13|) to all (Acts:17:28|). {Specially of them that believe} (\malista pist“n\). Making a distinction in the kinds of salvation meant. "While God is potentially Saviour of all, He is actually Saviour of the \pistoi\" (White). Songs:Jesus is termed "Saviour of the World" (John:4:42|). Cf. strkjv@Galatians:6:10|.

rwp@2Corinthians:4:4 @{The god of this world} (\ho theos tou ai“nos toutou\). "Age," more exactly, as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:20|. Satan is "the god of this age," a phrase nowhere else in the N.T., but Jesus uses the same idea in strkjv@John:12:31; strkjv@14:30| and Paul in strkjv@Ephesians:2:2; strkjv@6:12| and John in strkjv@1John:5:19|. Satan claimed the rule over the world in the temptations with Jesus. {Blinded} (\etuphl“sen\). First aorist active of \tuphlo“\, old verb to blind (\tuphlos\, blind). They refused to believe (\apist“n\) and so Satan got the power to blind their thoughts. That happens with wilful disbelievers. {The light} (\ton ph“tismon\). The illumination, the enlightening. Late word from \photiz“\, to give light, in Plutarch and LXX. In N.T. only in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4,6|. Accusative case of general reference here with the articular infinitive (\eis to mˆ augasai\ that should not dawn). That is, if \augasai\ is intransitive as is likely, though it is transitive in the old poets (from \augˆ\, radiance. Cf. German _Auge_=eye). If it is transitive, the idea would be "that they should not see clearly the illumination, etc."

rwp@2Corinthians:5:19 @{To wit, that} (\h“s hoti\). Latin puts it _quoniam quidem_. It is an unclassical idiom, but occurs in the papyri and inscriptions (Moulton, _Prol_., p. 212; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1033). It is in strkjv@Esther:4:14|. See also strkjv@2Corinthians:11:21; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2|. It probably means "how that." {Not reckoning} (\mˆ logizomenos\). What Jesus did (his death for us) stands to our credit (Romans:8:32|) if we make our peace with God. This is our task, "the word of reconciliation," that we may receive "the righteousness of God" and be adopted into the family of God.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:6 @{That ye shall know} (\hoti epign“sesthe\). Such a testing of themselves will give them full knowledge that Paul is not {reprobate} (\adokimos\). The best way for vacillating Christians to stop it is to draw close to Christ.

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

rwp@2Thessalonians:1:3 @{We are bound} (\opheilomen\). Paul feels a sense of obligation to keep on giving thanks to God (\eucharistein t“i the“i\, present infinitive with dative case) because of God's continued blessings on the Thessalonians. He uses the same idiom again in strkjv@2:13| and nowhere else in his thanksgivings. It is not necessity (\dei\) that Paul here notes, but a sense of personal obligation as in strkjv@1John:2:6| (Milligan). {Even as it is meet} (\kath“s axion estin\). \Opheilomen\ points to the divine, \axion\ to the human side of the obligation (Lightfoot), perhaps to cheer the fainthearted in a possible letter to him in reply to Paul's First Thessalonian epistle (Milligan). This adjective \axios\ is from \ag“\, to drag down the scales, and so weighty, worthy, worthwhile, old word and appropriate here. {For that your faith groweth exceedingly} (\hoti huperauxanei hˆ pistis hum“n\). Causal use of \hoti\ referring to the obligation stated in \opheilomen\. The verb \huperauxan“\ is one of Paul's frequent compounds in \huper\ (\huper-bain“\, strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:6|; \huper-ek-tein“\, strkjv@2Corinthians:10:14|; \huper-en-tugchan“\, strkjv@Romans:8:26|; \huper-nika“\, strkjv@Romans:8:37|; \huper-pleonaz“\, strkjv@1Timothy:1:14|) and occurs only here in N.T. and rare elsewhere (Galen, Dio Cass.). Figure of the tree of faith growing above (\huper\) measure. Cf. parable of Jesus about faith-like a grain of mustard seed (Matthew:13:31f.|). {Aboundeth} (\pleonazei\). Same verb in strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:12|, here a fulfilment of the prayer made there. Milligan finds _diffusive_ growth of love in this word because of "each one" (\henos hekastou\). Frame finds in this fulfilment of the prayer of strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:12| one proof that II Thessalonians is later than I Thessalonians.

rwp@2Thessalonians:1:10 @{When he shall come} (\hotan elthˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive with \hotan\, future and indefinite temporal clause (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 971ff.) coincident with \en tˆi apokalupsei\ in verse 7|. {To be glorified} (\endoxasthˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive (purpose) of \endoxaz“\, late verb, in N.T. only here and verse 12|, in LXX and papyri. {In his saints} (\en tois hagiois autou\). The sphere in which Christ will find his glory at the Revelation. {And to be marvelled at} (\kai thaumasthˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive (purpose), common verb \thaumaz“\. {That believed} (\tois pisteusasin\). Why aorist active participle instead of present active \pisteuousin\ (that believe)? Frame thinks that Paul thus reassures those who believed his message when there (1Thessalonians:1:6ff.; strkjv@2:13f.|). The parenthetical clause, though difficult, falls in with this idea: {Because our testimony unto you was believed} (\hoti episteuthˆ to marturion hˆm“n eph' humas\). Moffatt calls it an anti-climax. {On that day} (\en tˆi hˆmerƒi ekeinˆi\). The day of Christ's coming (2Timothy:1:12,18; strkjv@4:8|).

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

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

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:4 @{He that opposeth and exalteth himself} (\ho antikeimenos kai huperairomenos\). Like John's Antichrist this one opposes (\anti-\) Christ and exalts himself (direct middle of \huperair“\, old verb to lift oneself up {above} others, only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:12:7| in N.T.), but not Satan, but an agent of Satan. This participial clause is in apposition with the two preceding phrases, the man of sin, the son of perdition. Note strkjv@1Corinthians:8:5| about one called God and strkjv@Acts:17:23| for \sebasma\ (from \sebazomai\), object of worship, late word, in N.T. only in these two passages. {Songs:that he sitteth in the temple of God} (\h“ste auton eis ton naon tou theou kathisai\). Another example of the infinitive with \h“ste\ for result. Caius Caligula had made a desperate attempt to have his statue set up for worship in the Temple in Jerusalem. This incident may lie behind Paul's language here. {Setting himself forth as God} (\apodeiknunta heauton hoti estin theos\). Present active participle (\mi\ form) of \apodeiknumi\, agreeing in case with \auton\, {showing himself that he is God}. Caligula claimed to be God. Moffatt doubts if Paul is identifying this deception with the imperial cultus at this stage. Lightfoot thinks that the deification of the Roman emperor supplied Paul's language here. Wetstein notes a coin of Julius with \theos\ on one side and \Thessalonike“n\ on the other. In strkjv@1John:2:18| we are told of "many antichrists" some of whom had already come. Hence it is not clear that Paul has in mind only one individual or even individuals at all rather than evil principles, for in verse 6| he speaks of \to katechon\ (that which restraineth) while in verse 7| it is \ho katech“n\ (the one that restraineth). Frame argues for a combination of Belial and Antichrist as the explanation of Paul's language. But the whole subject is left by Paul in such a vague form that we can hardly hope to clear it up. It is possible that his own preaching while with them gave his readers a clue that we do not possess.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:13 @See strkjv@1:3| for same beginning. {Beloved of the Lord} (\ˆgapˆmenoi hupo kuriou\). Perfect passive participle of \agapa“\ with \hupo\ and the ablative as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:4|, only here \kuriou\ instead of \theou\, the Lord Jesus rather than God the Father. {Because that God chose you} (\hoti heilato humas ho theos\). First aorist middle indicative of \haire“\, to take, old verb, but uncompounded only in N.T. here, strkjv@Phillipians:1:22; strkjv@Hebrews:11:25|, and here only in sense of {choose}, that being usually \exaireomai\ or \prooriz“\. {From the beginning} (\ap' archˆs\). Probably the correct text (Aleph D L) and not \aparchˆn\ (first fruits, B G P), though here alone in Paul's writings and a hard reading, the eternal choice or purpose of God (1Corinthians:2:7; strkjv@Ephesians:1:4; strkjv@2Timothy:1:9|), while \aparchˆn\ is a favourite idea with Paul (1Corinthians:15:20,23; strkjv@16:15; strkjv@Romans:8:23; strkjv@11:16; strkjv@16:5|). {Unto salvation} (\eis s“tˆrian\). The ultimate goal, final salvation. {In sanctification of the Spirit} (\en hagiasm“i pneumatos\). Subjective genitive \pneumatos\, sanctification wrought by the Holy Spirit. {And belief of the truth} (\kai pistei alˆtheias\). Objective genitive \alˆtheias\, belief in the truth.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:7 @{How ye ought to imitate us} (\p“s dei mimeisthai hˆmas\). Literally, how it is necessary to imitate us. The infinitive \mimeisthai\ is the old verb \mimeomai\ from \mimos\ (actor, mimic), but in N.T. only here (and verse 9|), strkjv@Hebrews:13:7; strkjv@3John:1:11|. It is a daring thing to say, but Paul knew that he had to set the new Christians in the midst of Jews and Gentiles a model for their imitation (Phillipians:3:17|). {For we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you} (\hoti ouk ˆtaktˆsamen en humin\). First aorist active indicative of old verb \atakte“\, to be out of ranks of soldiers. Specific denial on Paul's part in contrast to verse 6,17|.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:9 @{Not because we have not the right} (\ouch hoti ouk echomen exousian\). Paul is sensitive on his {right} to receive adequate support (1Thessalonians:2:6; 1 Co strkjv@9:4| where he uses the same word \exousian\ in the long defence of this {right}, strkjv@1Corinthians:9:1-27|). Songs:he here puts in this limitation to avoid misapprehension. He did allow churches to help him where he would not be misunderstood (2Corinthians:11:7-11; strkjv@Phillipians:4:45f.|). Paul uses \ouch hoti\ elsewhere to avoid misunderstanding (2Corinthians:1:24; strkjv@3:5; strkjv@Phillipians:4:17|). {But to make ourselves an ensample unto you} (\all' hina heautous tupon d“men humin\). Literally, {but that we might give ourselves a type to you}. Purpose with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \did“mi\. On \tupon\ see on ¯1Thessalonians:1:7|.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:10 @{This} (\touto\). What he proceeds to give. {If any will not work, neither let him eat} (\hoti ei tis ou thelei ergazesthai mˆde esthiet“\). Recitative \hoti\ here not to be translated, like our modern quotation marks. Apparently a Jewish proverb based on strkjv@Genesis:3:19|. Wetstein quotes several parallels. Moffatt gives this from Carlyle's _Chartism_: "He that will not work according to his faculty, let him perish according to his necessity." Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 314) sees Paul borrowing a piece of workshop morality. It was needed, as is plain. This is a condition of the first class (note negative \ou\) with the negative imperative in the conclusion.

rwp@2Timothy:1:16 @{Grant mercy} (\d“iˆ eleos\). The phrase nowhere else in the N.T. Second aorist active optative of \did“mi\, the usual form being \doiˆ\. This is the usual construction in a wish about the future. {Unto the house of Onesiphorus} (\t“i Onˆsiphorou oik“i\). The same phrase in strkjv@4:19|. Apparently Onesiphorus is now dead as is implied by the wish in strkjv@1:18|. {For he oft refreshed me} (\hoti pollakis me anepsuxen\). First aorist active indicative of \anapsuch“\, old verb, to cool again, in LXX and _Koin‚_ often, here only in N.T., but \anapsuxis\ in strkjv@Acts:3:20|. In the first imprisonment or the second. If he lost his life for coming to see Paul, it was probably recently during this imprisonment. {Was not ashamed of my chain} (\halusin mou ouk epaischunthˆ\). Passive deponent again (first aorist indicative) with accusative as in strkjv@1:8|. For \halusin\ (chain) see strkjv@Ephesians:6:20|. Note absence of augment in \epaischunthˆ\.

rwp@Acts:2:24 @{God raised up} (\ho theos anestˆsen\). _Est hoc summum orationis_ (Blass). Apparently this is the first public proclamation to others than believers of the fact of the Resurrection of Jesus. "At a time it was still possible to test the statement, to examine witnesses, to expose fraud, the Apostle openly proclaimed the Resurrection as a fact, needing no evidence, but known to his hearers" (Furneaux). {The pangs of death} (\tas “dinas tou thanatou\). Codex Bezae has "Hades" instead of death. The LXX has \“dinas thanatou\ in strkjv@Psalms:18:4|, but the Hebrew original means "snares" or "traps" or "cords" of death where sheol and death are personified as hunters laying snares for prey. How Peter or Luke came to use the old Greek word \“dinas\ (birth pangs) we do not know. Early Christian writers interpreted the Resurrection of Christ as a birth out of death. "Loosing" (\lusas\) suits better the notion of "snares" held a prisoner by death, but birth pangs do bring deliverance to the mother also. {Because} (\kathoti\). This old conjunction (\kata, hoti\) occurs in the N.T. only in Luke's writings. {That he should be holden} (\krateisthai auton\). Infinitive present passive with accusative of general reference and subject of \ˆn adunaton\. The figure goes with "loosed" (\lusas\) above.

rwp@Acts:2:45 @{Sold} (\epipraskon\). Imperfect active, a habit or custom from time to time. Old and common verb, \piprask“\. {Parted} (\diemerizon\). Imperfect again of \diameriz“\, old verb for dividing or distributing between (\dia\) people. {According as any man had need} (\kathoti an tis chreian eichen\). Regular Greek idiom for comparative clause with \an\ and imperfect indicative corresponding precisely with the three preceding imperfects (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 967).

rwp@Acts:5:38 @{Refrain from} (\apostˆte apo\). Second aorist (ingressive) active imperative of \aphistˆmi\ of verse 37|. Do ye stand off from these men. "Hands off" was the policy of Gamaliel. {For if--be} (\hoti ean--ˆi\). \Hoti\ gives the reason for the advice. Gamaliel presents two alternatives in terms of two conditional clauses. The first one is stated as a condition of the third class, \ean\ with the present subjunctive \ˆi\, undetermined with prospect of determination. Assuming that it is from men, "it will be overthrown" (\kataluthˆsetai\, first future passive of \katalu“\, to loosen down like a falling house) as was true of the following of Theudas and Judas the Galilean.

rwp@Acts:8:14 @{That Samaria had received} (\hoti dedektai hˆ Samaria\). The district here, not the city as in verse 5|. Perfect middle indicative of \dechomai\ retained in indirect discourse. It was a major event for the apostles for now the gospel was going into Samaria as Jesus had predicted (1:8|). Though the Samaritans were nominally Jews, they were not held so by the people. The sending of Peter and John was no reflection on Philip, but was an appropriate mission since "many Christian Jews would be scandalized by the admission of Samaritans" (Furneaux). If Peter and John sanctioned it, the situation would be improved. John had once wanted to call down fire from heaven on a Samaritan village (Luke:9:54|).

rwp@Acts:9:6 @The best MSS. do not have "trembling and astonished," and "What wilt thou have me to do, Lord?" The Textus Receptus put these words in here without the authority of a Greek codex. See strkjv@22:10| above for the genuine text. {It shall be told thee} (\lalˆthˆsetai\). Future passive indicative of \lale“\. It is hardly likely that Luke records all that Jesus said to Saul, but more was to come on his arrival in Damascus. Saul had received all that he could bear just now (John:16:12|). {What} (\hoti\). Rare in _Koin‚_ use of this indefinite neuter relative in an indirect question, the only example in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 731). Human agents like Ananias can finish what Jesus by supernatural manifestation has here begun in Saul.

rwp@Acts:9:20 @{He proclaimed Jesus} (\ekˆrussen ton Iˆsoun\). Imperfect indicative, inchoative, began to preach. Jesus, not Christ, is the correct text here. He did this first preaching in the Jewish synagogues, a habit of his life when possible, and following the example of Jesus. {That he is the Son of God} (\hoti houtos estin ho huios tou theou\). This is Paul's platform as a Christian preacher, one that he always occupied to the very end. It was a complete reversal of his previous position. Jesus had turned him completely around. It is the conclusion that Saul now drew from the vision of the Risen Christ and the message through Ananias. By "the Son of God" Saul means the Messiah of promise and hope, the Messianic sense of the Baptist (John:1:34|) and of Nathanael (John:1:49|) for Saul is now proclaiming his faith in Jesus in the very synagogues where he had meant to arrest those who professed their faith in him. Peter laid emphasis on the Resurrection of Jesus as a glorious fact and proclaimed Jesus as Lord and Christ. Paul boldly calls Jesus the Son of God with full acknowledgment of his deity from the very start. Thomas had come to this place slowly (John:20:28|). Saul begins with this truth and never leaves it. With this faith he can shake the world. There is no power in any other preaching.

rwp@Acts:10:14 @{Not so, Lord} (\Mˆdam“s, kurie\). The negative \mˆdam“s\ calls for the optative \eiˆ\ (may it not be) or the imperative \est“\ (let it be). It is not \oudam“s\, a blunt refusal (I shall not do it). And yet it is more than a mild protest as Page and Furneaux argue. It is a polite refusal with a reason given. Peter recognizes the invitation to slay (\thuson\) the unclean animals as from the Lord (\kurie\) but declines it three times. {For I have never eaten anything} (\hoti oudepote ephagon pan\). Second aorist active indicative, I never did anything like this and I shall not do it now. The use of \pan\ (everything) with \oudepote\ (never) is like the Hebrew (_lo--k“l_) though a like idiom appears in the vernacular _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 752). {Common and unclean} (\koinon kai akatharton\). \Koinos\ from epic \xunos\ (\xun, sun\, together with) originally meant common to several (Latin _communis_) as in strkjv@Acts:2:44; strkjv@4:32; strkjv@Titus:1:4; strkjv@Jude:1:3|. The use seen here (also strkjv@Mark:7:2,5; strkjv@Romans:14:14; strkjv@Hebrews:10:29; strkjv@Revelation:21:27; strkjv@Acts:10:28; strkjv@11:8|), like Latin _vulgaris_ is unknown in ancient Greek. Here the idea is made plain by the addition of \akatharton\ (unclean), ceremonially unclean, of course. We have the same double use in our word "common." See on ¯Mark:7:18f.| where Mark adds the remarkable participle \kathariz“n\ (making all meats clean), evidently from Peter who recalls this vision. Peter had been reared from childhood to make the distinction between clean and unclean food and this new proposal even from the Lord runs against all his previous training. He did not see that some of God's plans for the Jews could be temporary. This symbol of the sheet was to show Peter ultimately that Gentiles could be saved without becoming Jews. At this moment he is in spiritual and intellectual turmoil.

rwp@Acts:10:28 @{How that it is an unlawful thing} (\h“s athemiton estin\). The conjunction \h“s\ is sometimes equivalent to \hoti\ (that). The old form of \athemitos\ was \athemistos\ from \themisto\ (\themiz“, themis\, law custom) and \a\ privative. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@1Peter:4:3| (Peter both times). But there is no O.T. regulation forbidding such social contact with Gentiles, though the rabbis had added it and had made it binding by custom. There is nothing more binding on the average person than social custom. On coming from the market an orthodox Jew was expected to immerse to avoid defilement (Edersheim, _Jewish Social Life_, pp. 26-28; Taylor's _Sayings of the Jewish Fathers_, pp. 15, 26, 137, second edition). See also strkjv@Acts:11:3; strkjv@Galatians:2:12|. It is that middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile (Ephesians:2:14|) which Jesus broke down. {One of another nation} (\allophul“i\). Dative case of an old adjective, but only here in the N.T. (\allos\, another, \phulon\, race). Both Juvenal (_Sat_. XIV. 104, 105) and Tacitus (_History_, V. 5) speak of the Jewish exclusiveness and separation from Gentiles. {And yet unto} (\kamoi\). Dative of the emphatic pronoun (note position of prominence) with \kai\ (\crasis\) meaning here "and yet" or adversative "but" as often with \kai\ which is by no means always merely the connective "and" (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1182f.). Now Peter takes back both the adjectives used in his protest to the Lord (verse 14|) "common and unclean." It is a long journey that Peter has made. He here refers to "no one" (\mˆdena\), not to "things," but that is great progress.

rwp@Acts:10:38 @{Jesus of Nazareth} (\Iˆsoun ton apo Nazareth\). Jesus the one from Nazareth, the article before the city identifying him clearly. The accusative case is here by \prolepsis\, Jesus being expressed for emphasis before the verb "anointed" and the pronoun repeated pleonastically after it. "Jesus transfers the mind from the gospel-history to the personal subject of it" (Hackett). {God anointed him} (\echrisen, auton, ho theos\). First aorist active of the verb \chri“\, to anoint, from which the verbal \Christos\ is formed (Acts:2:36|). The precise event referred to by Peter could be the Incarnation (Luke:1:35f.|), the Baptism (Luke:3:22|), the Ministry at Nazareth (Luke:4:14|). Why not to the life and work of Jesus as a whole? {Went about doing good} (\diˆlthen euerget“n\). Beautiful description of Jesus. Summary (constative) aorist active of \dierehomai\, to go through (\dia\) or from place to place. The present active participle \euerget“n\ is from the old verb \euergete“\ (\eu\, well, \ergon\, work) and occurs only here in the N.T. The substantive \euergetˆs\ (benefactor) was often applied to kings like Ptolemy Euergetes and that is the sense in strkjv@Luke:22:25| the only N.T. example. But the term applies to Jesus far more than to Ptolemy or any earthly king (Cornelius a Lapide). {And healing} (\kai i“menos\). And in particular healing. Luke does not exclude other diseases (cf. strkjv@Luke:13:11,16|), but he lays special emphasis on demoniacal possession (cf. strkjv@Mark:1:23|). {That were oppressed} (\tous katadunasteuomenous\). Present passive articular participle of \katadunasteu“\. A late verb in LXX and papyri. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@James:2:6| (best MSS.). One of the compounds of \kata\ made transitive. The reality of the devil (the slanderer, \diabolos\) is recognized by Peter. {For God was with him} (\hoti ho theos ˆn met' autou\). Surely this reason does not reveal "a low Christology" as some charge. Peter had used the same language in strkjv@Acts:7:9| and earlier in strkjv@Luke:1:28,66| as Nicodemus does in strkjv@John:3:2|.

rwp@Acts:11:24 @{For} (\hoti\). Because. This is the explanation of the conduct of Barnabas. The facts were opposed to the natural prejudices of a Jew like Barnabas, but he rose above such racial narrowness. He was a really good man (\agathos\). See strkjv@Romans:5:7| for distinction between \agathos\ and \dikaios\, righteous, where \agathos\ ranks higher than \dikaios\. Besides, Barnabas was full of the Holy Spirit (like Peter) and of faith and so willing to follow the leading of God's Spirit and take some risks. This is a noble tribute paid by Luke. One wonders if Barnabas was still living when he wrote this. Certainly he was not prejudiced against Barnabas though he will follow the fortunes of Paul after the separation (15:36; 41|). {Was added unto the Lord} (\prosetethˆ t“i kuri“i\). First aorist passive indicative of \prostithˆmi\, common verb to add to. These people were added to the Lord Jesus before they were added to the church. If that were always true, what a difference it would make in our churches.

rwp@Acts:12:3 @{That it pleased the Jews} (\hoti areston estin tois Ioudaiois\). Indirect assertion with the present tense \estin\ retained. \Areston\ is the verbal adjective from \aresk“\ followed by the dative as in strkjv@John:8:29|. {Proceeded to seize} (\prosetheto sullabein\). A patent Hebraism in strkjv@Luke:20:11f.| already, and nowhere else in the N.T. It occurs in the LXX (Genesis:4:2; strkjv@8:12; strkjv@18:29|, etc.). Second aorist middle indicative of \prostithˆmi\ and the second aorist active infinitive of \sullamban“\. Literally, he added to seize, he seized Peter in addition to James. {The days of unleavened bread} (\hˆmerai t“n azum“n\). By this parenthesis Luke locates the time of the year when Peter was arrested, the passover. It was a fine occasion for Agrippa to increase his favour among the crowds of Jews there by extra zeal against the Christians. It is possible that Luke obtained his information about this incident from John Mark for at his Mother's house the disciples gathered (12:12|).

rwp@Acts:12:9 @{Wist not} (\ouk ˆidei\). Past perfect of \oida\ used as imperfect, did not know. {Followed} (\ˆkolouthei\). Imperfect active, kept on following as the angel had directed (verse 8|). That it was true (\hoti alˆthes estin\). Indirect assertion and so present tense retained. Note "true" (\alˆthes\) in the sense of reality or actuality. {Which was done} (\to ginomenon\). Present middle participle, that which was happening. {Thought he saw a vision} (\edokei horama blepein\). Imperfect active, kept on thinking, puzzled as he was. \Blepein\ is the infinitive in indirect assertion without the pronoun (he) expressed which could be either nominative in apposition with the subject as in strkjv@Romans:1:22| or accusative of general reference as in strkjv@Acts:5:36; strkjv@8:9| (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1036-40). Peter had had a vision in Joppa (10:10|) which Luke describes as an "ecstasy," but here is objective fact, at least Luke thought so and makes that distinction. Peter will soon know whether he is still in the cell or not as we find out that a dream is only a dream when we wake up.

rwp@Acts:13:35 @{Because} (\dioti\). Compound conjunction (\dia, hoti\) like our "because that." The reason for the previous statement about "the holy things." {Thou wilt not give thy holy one to see corruption} (\ou d“seis ton hosion sou idein diaphthoran\). Quotation from strkjv@Psalms:16:10| to show that Jesus did not see corruption in his body, a flat contradiction for those who deny the bodily resurrection of Jesus.

rwp@Acts:14:22 @{Confirming} (\epistˆrizontes\). Late verb (in LXX), in N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:14:22; strkjv@15:32,41|, to make more firm, to give additional (\epi\) strength. Each time in Acts the word is used concerning these churches. {To continue in the faith} (\emmenein tˆi pistei\). To remain in with locative, old verb. It is possible that \pistis\ here has the notion of creed as Paul uses it later (Colossians:1:23| with \epimen“\; strkjv@1Timothy:5:8|). It seems to be here more than trust or belief. These recent converts from heathenism were ill-informed, were persecuted, had broken family and social ties, greatly needed encouragement if they were to hold out. {We must} (\dei hˆmƒs\). It does not follow from this use of "we" that Luke was present, since it is a general proposition applying to all Christians at all times (2Timothy:3:12|). Luke, of course, approved this principle. Knowling asks why Timothy may not have told Luke about Paul's work. It all sounds like quotation of Paul's very language. Note the change of construction here after \parakalountes\ (infinitive of indirect command, \emmenein\, but \hoti dei\, indirect assertion). They needed the right understanding of persecution as we all do. Paul frankly warned these new converts in this heathen environment of the many tribulations through which they must enter the Kingdom of God (the culmination at last) as he did at Ephesus (Acts:20:20|) and as Jesus had done (John:16:33|). These saints were already converted.

rwp@Acts:14:27 @{Gathered the church together} (\sunagagontes tˆn ekklˆsian\). Second aorist active participle of \sunag“\. It "was the first missionary meeting in history" (Furneaux). It was not hard to get the church together when the news spread that Paul and Barnabas had returned. "The suitability of the Gospel to become the religion of the world had not before been put to the test" (Furneaux). Doubtless many "wise-acres" had predicted failure as they did for William Carey and for Adoniram Judson and Luther Rice. {Rehearsed} (\anˆggellon\). Imperfect active. It was a long story for they had many things to tell of God's dealings "with them" (\met' aut“n\) for God had been "with them" all the while as Jesus had said he would be (Matthew:28:20|, \meth' h–m“n\). Paul could recount some of the details given later in strkjv@2Corinthians:11|. {And how} (\kai hoti\). Or "and that" in particular, as the upshot of it all. {He had opened a door of faith unto the Gentiles} (\ˆnoixen tois ethnesin thuran piste“s\). Three times in Paul's Epistles (1Corinthians:16:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12; strkjv@Colossians:4:3|) he employed the metaphor of "door," perhaps a reminiscence of the very language of Paul here. This work in Galatia gained a large place in Paul's heart (Galatians:4:14f.|). The Gentiles now, it was plain, could enter the kingdom of God (verse 22|) through the door of faith, not by law or by circumcision or by heathen philosophy or mythology.

rwp@Acts:17:3 @{Opening and alleging} (\dianoig“n kai paratithemenos\). Opening the Scriptures, Luke means, as made plain by the mission and message of Jesus, the same word (\dianoig“\) used by him of the interpretation of the Scriptures by Jesus (Luke:24:32|) and of the opening of the mind of the disciples also by Jesus (Luke:24:45|) and of the opening of Lydia's heart by the Lord (16:14|). One cannot refrain from saying that such exposition of the Scriptures as Jesus and Paul gave would lead to more opening of mind and heart. Paul was not only "expounding" the Scriptures, he was also "propounding" (the old meaning of "allege") his doctrine or setting forth alongside the Scriptures (\para-tithemenos\), quoting the Scripture to prove his contention which was made in much conflict (1Thessalonians:2:2|), probably in the midst of heated discussion by the opposing rabbis who were anything but convinced by Paul's powerful arguments, for the Cross was a stumbling-block to the Jews (1Corinthians:1:23|). {That it behoved the Christ to suffer} (\hoti ton Christon edei pathein\). The second aorist active infinitive is the subject of \edei\ with \ton Christon\, the accusative of general reference. This is Paul's major premise in his argument from the Scriptures about the Messiah, the necessity of his sufferings according to the Scriptures, the very argument made by the Risen Jesus to the two on the way to Emmaus (Luke:24:25-27|). The fifty-third chapter of Isaiah was a passage in point that the rabbis had overlooked. Peter made the same point in strkjv@Acts:3:18| and Paul again in strkjv@Acts:26:23|. The minor premise is the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. {To rise again from the dead} (\anastˆnai ek nekr“n\). This second aorist active infinitive \anastˆnai\ is also the subject of \edei\. The actual resurrection of Jesus was also a necessity as Paul says he preached to them (1Thessalonians:4:14|) and argued always from Scripture (1Corinthians:15:3-4|) and from his own experience (Acts:9:22; strkjv@22:7; strkjv@26:8,14; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:8|). {This Jesus is the Christ} (\houtos estin ho Christos, ho Iˆsous\). More precisely, "This is the Messiah, viz., Jesus whom I am proclaiming unto you." This is the conclusion of Paul's line of argument and it is logical and overwhelming. It is his method everywhere as in Damascus, in Antioch in Pisidia, here, in Corinth. He spoke as an eye-witness.

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

rwp@Acts:20:23 @{Save that} (\plˆn hoti\). The \hoti\ clause is really in the ablative case after \plˆn\, here a preposition as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:18|, this idiom \plˆn hoti\ occasionally in ancient Greek. {In every city} (\kata polin\). Singular here though plural in \kat' oikous\ (verse 20|). {Bonds and afflictions} (\desma kai thlipseis\). Both together as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:17; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:8|. Literal bonds and actual pressures. {Abide me} (\me menousin\). With the accusative as in verse 5| (\emenon hˆmas\) and nowhere else in the N.T.

rwp@Acts:22:10 @{Into Damascus} (\eis Damaskon\). In strkjv@9:6| simply "into the city" (\eis tˆn polin\). {Of all things which} (\peri pant“n h“n\). \H“n\, relative plural attracted to genitive of antecedent from accusative \ha\, object of \poiˆsai\ (do). {Are appointed for thee} (\tetaktai soi\). Perfect passive indicative of \tass“\, to appoint, to order, with dative \soi\. Compare with \hoti se dei\ of strkjv@9:6|. The words were spoken to Paul, of course, in the Aramaic, Saoul, Saoul.

rwp@Acts:22:18 @{Saw him saying} (\idein auton legonta\). The first visit after his conversion when they tried to kill him in Jerusalem (9:29|). {Because} (\dioti, dia\ and \hoti\), {for that}.

rwp@Acts:22:29 @{Departed from him} (\apestˆsan ap' autou\). Second aorist active indicative (intransitive) of \aphistˆmi\, stood off from him at once. {Was afraid} (\ephobˆthˆ\). Ingressive aorist passive indicative of \phobeomai\, became afraid. He had reason to be. {That he was a Roman} (\hoti Romaios estin\). Indirect assertion with tense of \estin\ retained. {Because he had bound him} (\hoti auton ˆn dedek“s\). Causal \hoti\ here after declarative \hoti\ just before. Periphrastic past perfect active of \de“\, to bind.

rwp@Acts:23:22 @{Tell no man} (\mˆdeni eklalˆsai\). Indirect command (_oratio obliqua_) after \paraggeilas\ (charging) with first aorist active infinitive of \eklale“\ (in ancient Greek, but here only in N.T.), but construction changed to direct in rest of the sentence (_oratio recta_) as in strkjv@1:4|, "that thou hast signified these things to me" (\hoti tauta enephanisas pros eme\). Same verb here as in verse 15|. This change is common in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1047).

rwp@Acts:23:27 @{Was seized} (\sullˆmphthenta\). First aorist passive participle of \sullamban“\. {Rescued him having learned that he was a Roman} (\exeilamen math“n hoti Romaios estin\). Wendt, Zoeckler, and Furneaux try to defend this record of two facts by Lysias in the wrong order from being an actual lie as Bengel rightly says. Lysias did rescue Paul and he did learn that he was a Roman, but in this order. He did not first learn that he was a Roman and then rescue him as his letter states. The use of the aorist participle (\math“n\ from \manthan“\) after the principal verb \exeilamen\ (second aorist middle of \exaire“\, to take out to oneself, to rescue) can be either simultaneous action or antecedent. There is in Greek no such idiom as the aorist participle of subsequent action (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1112-14). Lysias simply reversed the order of the facts and omitted the order for scourging Paul to put himself in proper light with Felix his superior officer and actually poses as the protector of a fellow Roman citizen.

rwp@Acts:25:16 @{It is not the custom of the Romans} (\hoti ouk estin ethos R“maiois\). If a direct quotation, \hoti\ is recitative as in Authorized Version. Canterbury Revision takes it as indirect discourse after \apekrithˆn\ (I answered), itself in a relative clause (\pros hous\) with the present tense (\estin\, is) preserved as is usual. There is a touch of disdain (Furneaux) in the tone of Festus. He may refer to a demand of the Jews before they asked that Paul be brought to Jerusalem (25:3|). At any rate there is a tone of scorn towards the Jews. {Before that the accused have} (\prin ˆ ho katˆgoroumenos echoi\). This use of the optative in this temporal clause with \prin ˆ\ instead of the subjunctive \an echˆi\ is in conformity with literary Greek and occurs only in Luke's writings in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 970). This sequence of modes is a mark of the literary style occasionally seen in Luke. It is interesting here to note the succession of dependent clauses in verses 14-16|. {The accusers face to face} (\kata pros“pon tous katˆgorous\). Same word \katˆgoros\ as in strkjv@23:30,35; strkjv@25:18|. This all sounds fair enough. {And have had opportunity to make his defence concerning the matter laid against him} (\topon te apologias laboi peri tou egklˆmatos\). Literally, "And should receive (\laboi\ optative for same reason as \echoi\ above, second aorist active of \lamban“\) opportunity for defence (objective genitive) concerning the charge" (\egklˆmatos\ in N.T. only here and strkjv@23:19| which see).

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

rwp@Colossians:1:14 @{In whom} (\en h“i\). In Christ as in strkjv@Ephesians:1:7|. This great sentence about Christ carries on by means of three relatives (\en h“i\ 14|, \hos\ 15|, \hos\ 18|) and repeated personal pronoun (\autos\), twice with \hoti\ (15,19|), thrice with \kai\ (17,18,20|), twice alone (16,20|). {Our redemption} (\tˆn apolutr“sin\). See on ¯Romans:3:24| for this great word (_Koin‚_), a release on payment of a ransom for slave or debtor (Hebrews:9:15|) as the inscriptions show (Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 327). {The forgiveness of our sins} (\tˆn aphesin t“n hamarti“n\). Accusative case in apposition with \apolutr“sin\ as in strkjv@Ephesians:1:7| ({remission}, sending away, \aphesis\, after the {redemption} \apolutr“sis\, buying back). Only here we have \hamarti“n\ (sins, from \hamartan“\, to miss) while in strkjv@Ephesians:1:7| we find \parapt“mat“n\ (slips, fallings aside, from \parapipt“\).

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

rwp@Colossians:3:17 @{Whatsoever ye do} (\pƒn hoti ean poiˆte\). Indefinite relative (everything whatever) with \ean\ and the present active subjunctive, a common idiom in such clauses. {Do all} (\panta\). The imperative \poieite\ has to be supplied from \poiˆte\ in the relative clause. \Panta\ is repeated from \pƒn\ (singular), but in the plural (all things). \Pƒn\ is left as a nominative absolute as in strkjv@Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:10|. This is a sort of Golden Rule for Christians "in the name of the Lord Jesus" (\en onomati Kuriou Iˆsou\), in the spirit of the Lord Jesus (Ephesians:5:20|). What follows (directions to the various groups) is in this same vein. Sociological problems have always existed. Paul puts his finger on the sore spot in each group with unerring skill like a true diagnostician.

rwp@Ephesians:5:23 @{For the husband is the head of the wife} (\hoti anˆr estin kephalˆ tˆs gunaikos\). "For a husband is head of the (his) wife." No article with \anˆr\ or \kephalˆ\. {As Christ also is the head of the church} (\h“s kai ho Christos kephalˆ tˆs ekklˆsias\). No article with \kephalˆ\, "as also Christ is head of the church." This is the comparison, but with a tremendous difference which Paul hastens to add either in an appositional clause or as a separate sentence. {Himself the saviour of the body} (\autos s“tˆr tou s“matos\). He means the church as the body of which Christ is head and Saviour.

rwp@Galatians:2:7 @{But contrariwise} (\alla tounantion\). But on the contrary (accusative of general reference, \to enantion\). Songs:far from the three championing the cause of the Judaizers as some hoped or even the position of the compromisers in verses 4f.|, they came boldly to Paul's side after hearing the case argued in the private conference. This is the obvious interpretation rather than the view that Peter, James, and John first proposed the circumcision of Titus and afterwards surrendered to Paul's bold stand. {When they saw} (\idontes\). After seeing, after they heard our side of the matter. {That I had been intrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision} (\hoti pepisteumai to euaggelion tˆs akrobustias\). Perfect passive indicative of \pisteu“\, to intrust, which retains the accusative of the thing (\to euaggelion\) in the passive voice. This clear-cut agreement between the leaders "denotes a distinction of sphere, and not a difference of type" (Lightfoot). Both divisions in the work preach the same "gospel" (not like strkjv@1:6f.|, the Judaizers). It seems hardly fair to the Three to suggest that they at first championed the cause of the Judaizers in the face of Paul's strong language in verse 5|.

rwp@Galatians:2:14 @{But when I saw} (\All' hote eidon\). Paul did see and saw it in time to speak. {That they walked not uprightly} (\hoti orthopodousin\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse, "they are not walking straight." \Orthopode“\ (\orthos\, straight, \pous\, foot). Found only here and in later ecclesiastical writers, though \orthopodes bainontes\ does occur. {According to the truth of the gospel} (\pros tˆn alˆtheian tou euaggeliou\). Just as in strkjv@2:5|. Paul brought them to face (\pros\) that. {I said unto Cephas before them all} (\eipon t“i Kˆphƒi emprosthen pant“n\). {Being a Jew} (\Ioudaios huparch“n\, though being a Jew). Condition of first class, assumed as true. It was not a private quarrel, but a matter of public policy. One is a bit curious to know what those who consider Peter the first pope will do with this open rebuke by Paul, who was in no sense afraid of Peter or of all the rest. {As do the Gentiles} (\ethnik“s\). Late adverb, here only in N.T. Like Gentiles. {As do the Jews} (\Ioudaik“s\). Only here in N.T., but in Josephus. {To live as do the Jews} (\Iouda‹zein\). Late verb, only here in the N.T. From \Ioudaios\, Jew. Really Paul charges Peter with trying to compel (conative present, \anagkazeis\) the Gentiles to live all like Jews, to Judaize the Gentile Christians, the very point at issue in the Jerusalem Conference when Peter so loyally supported Paul. It was a bold thrust that allowed no reply. But Paul won Peter back and Barnabas also. If II Peter is genuine, as is still possible, he shows it in strkjv@2Peter:3:15|. Paul and Barnabas remained friends (Acts:15:39f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:6|), though they soon separated over John Mark.

rwp@Galatians:4:6 @{Because ye are sons} (\hoti este huioi\). This is the reason for sending forth the Son (4:4| and here). We were "sons" in God's elective purpose and love. \Hoti\ is causal (1Corinthians:12:15; strkjv@Romans:9:7|). {The Spirit of his Son} (\to pneuma tou huioi autou\). The Holy Spirit, called the Spirit of Christ (Romans:8:9f.|), the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Phillipians:1:19|). The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son (John:15:26|). {Crying, Abba, Father} (\krazon Abba ho patˆr\). The participle agrees with \pneuma\ neuter (grammatical gender), not neuter in fact. An old, though rare in present as here, onomatopoetic word to croak as a raven (Theophrastus, like Poe's _The Raven_), any inarticulate cry like "the unuttered groanings" of strkjv@Romans:8:26| which God understands. This cry comes from the Spirit of Christ in our hearts. \Abba\ is the Aramaic word for father with the article and \ho patˆr\ translates it. The articular form occurs in the vocative as in strkjv@John:20:28|. It is possible that the repetition here and in strkjv@Romans:8:15| may be "a sort of affectionate fondness for the very term that Jesus himself used" (Burton) in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mark:14:36|). The rabbis preserve similar parallels. Most of the Jews knew both Greek and Aramaic. But there remains the question why Jesus used both in his prayer. Was it not natural for both words to come to him in his hour of agony as in his childhood? The same thing may be true here in Paul's case.

rwp@Hebrews:6:4 @{As touching those who were once enlightened} (\tous hapax ph“tisthentas\). First aorist passive articular participle (the once for all enlightened) of \photiz“\, old and common verb (from \ph“s\) as in strkjv@Luke:11:36|. The metaphorical sense here (cf. strkjv@John:1:9; strkjv@Ephesians:1:18; strkjv@Hebrews:10:32|) occurs in Polybius and Epictetus. The accusative case is due to \anakainizein\ in verse 6|. \Hapax\ here is "once for all," not once upon a time (\pote\) and occurs again (9:7,26,27,28; strkjv@12:26,27|). {Tasted of the heavenly gift} (\geusamenous tˆs d“reas tˆs epouraniou\). First aorist middle participle of \geu“\, old verb once with accusative (verse 5|, \kalon rˆma, dunameis\), usually with genitive (Hebrews:2:9|) as here. {Partakers of the Holy Ghost} (\metochous pneumatos hagiou\). See strkjv@3:14| for \metochoi\. These are all given as actual spiritual experiences. {And then fell away} (\kai parapesontas\). No "then" here, though the second aorist (effective) active participle of \parapipt“\, old verb to fall beside (aside), means that. Only here in N.T. In Gal strkjv@5:4| we have \tˆs charitos exepesate\ (ye fell out of grace, to law, Paul means).

rwp@Hebrews:7:8 @{Here} (\h“de\). In the Levitical system. {There} (\ekei\). In the case of Melchizedek. {Of whom it is witnessed} (\marturoumenos\). "Being witnessed," present passive participle of \marture“\ (personal construction, not impersonal). {That he lives} (\hoti zˆi\). Present active indicative of \za“\). The Genesis record tells nothing of his death.

rwp@Hebrews:8:9 @{In the day that I took them} (\en hˆmerƒi epilabomenou mou\). Genitive absolute (\mou\ and second aorist middle participle of \epilamban“\), "a Hellenistic innovation" (Moffatt) in imitation of the Hebrew after \hˆmerƒi\ in place of \en hˆi epelabomen\, occurring also in Barn. strkjv@2:28. {By the hand} (\tˆs cheiros\). Technical use of the genitive of the part affected. {To lead them forth} (\exagagein autous\). Second aorist active infinitive of \exag“\ to denote purpose. {For they continued not} (\hoti autoi ouk enemeinan\). First aorist active indicative of \emmen“\, old verb to remain in (Acts:14:22|). The Israelites broke the covenant. Then God annulled it. {I regarded not} (\ˆmelˆsa\). "I neglected" as in strkjv@2:3|. The covenant was void when they broke it.

rwp@Hebrews:9:16 @{A testament} (\diathˆkˆ\). The same word occurs for covenant (verse 15|) and will (verse 16|). This double sense of the word is played upon also by Paul in strkjv@Galatians:3:15f|. We say today "The New Testament" (_Novum Testamentum_) rather than " The New Covenant." Both terms are pertinent. {That made it} (\tou diathemenou\). Genitive of the articular second aorist middle participle of \diatithˆmi\ from which \diathˆkˆ\ comes. The notion of will here falls in with \klˆronomia\ (inheritance, strkjv@1Peter:1:4|) as well as with \thanatos\ (death). {Of force} (\bebaia\). Stable, firm as in strkjv@3:6,14|. {Where there hath been death} (\epi nekrois\). "In the case of dead people." A will is only operative then. {For doth it ever avail while he that made it liveth?} (\epei mˆ pote ischuei hote zˆi ho diathemenos;\). This is a possible punctuation with \mˆ pote\ in a question (John:7:26|). Without the question mark, it is a positive statement of fact. Aleph and D read \tote\ (then) instead of \pote\. The use of \mˆ\ in a causal sentence is allowable (John:3:18|, \hoti mˆ\).

rwp@Hebrews:11:6 @{Impossible} (\adunaton\). Strong word as in strkjv@6:4,18|. See strkjv@Romans:8:8| for same idea with \aresai\ (\aresk“\, strkjv@Galatians:1:10|). {Must believe} (\pisteusai dei\). Moral necessity to have faith (trust, \pisteu“\). This is true in business also (banks, for instance). {That he is} (\hoti estin\). The very existence of God is a matter of intelligent faith (Romans:1:19ff.|) Songs:that men are left without excuse. {He is a rewarder} (\misthapodotˆs ginetai\). Rather, "becomes a rewarder" (present middle indicative of \ginomai\, not of \eimi\). Only N.T. example of \misthapodotˆs\, late and rare double compound (one papyrus example, from \misthos\ (reward) and \apodid“mi\ (to pay back) like \misthapodosia\ (10:35; strkjv@11:26|). {Seek after} (\ekzˆtousin\). That seek out God.

rwp@James:2:19 @{Thou believest that God is one} (\su pisteueis hoti heis theos estin\). James goes on with his reply and takes up mere creed apart from works, belief that God exists (there is one God), a fundamental doctrine, but that is not belief or trust in God. It may be mere creed. {Thou doest well} (\kal“s poieis\). That is good as far as it goes, which is not far. {The demons also believe} (\kai ta daimonia pisteuousin\). They go that far (the same verb \pisteu“\). They never doubt the fact of God's existence. {And shudder} (\kai phrissousin\). Present active indicative of \phriss“\, old onomatopoetic verb to bristle up, to shudder, only here in N.T. Like Latin _horreo_ (horror, standing of the hair on end with terror). The demons do more than believe a fact. They shudder at it.

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

rwp@John:1:16 @{For} (\hoti\). Correct text (Aleph B C D L) and not \kai\ (and) of the Textus Receptus. Explanatory reason for verse 14|. {Of his fulness} (\ek tou plˆr“matos\). The only instance of \plˆr“ma\ in John's writings, though five times of Christ in Paul's Epistles (Colossians:1:19; strkjv@2:9; strkjv@Ephesians:1:23; strkjv@3:19; strkjv@4:13|). See strkjv@Colossians:1:19| for discussion of these terms of the Gnostics that Paul employs for all the attributes of God summed up in Christ (Colossians:2:9|) and so used here by John of the Incarnate Logos. {We all} (\hˆmeis pantes\). John is facing the same Gnostic depreciation of Christ of which Paul writes in Colossians. Songs:here John appeals to all his own contemporaries as participants with him in the fulness of the Logos. {Received} (\elabomen\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\, a wider experience than beholding (\etheasametha\, verse 14|) and one that all believers may have. {Grace for grace} (\charin anti charitos\). The point is in \anti\, a preposition disappearing in the _Koin‚_ and here only in John. It is in the locative case of \anta\ (end), "at the end," and was used of exchange in sale. See strkjv@Luke:11:11|, \anti ichthuos ophin\, "a serpent for a fish," strkjv@Hebrews:12:2| where "joy" and "cross" are balanced against each other. Here the picture is "grace" taking the place of "grace" like the manna fresh each morning, new grace for the new day and the new service.

rwp@John:1:20 @{And he confessed} (\kai h“mologˆsen\). The continued paratactic use of \kai\ (and) and the first aorist active indicative of \homologe“\, old verb from \homologos\ (\homon, leg“\, to say the same thing), to confess, in the Synoptics (Matthew:10:32|) as here. {And denied not} (\kai ouk ˆrnˆsato\). Negative statement of same thing in Johannine fashion, first aorist middle indicative of \arneomai\, another Synoptic and Pauline word (Matthew:10:33; strkjv@2Timothy:2:12|). He did not contradict or refuse to say who he was. {And he confessed} (\kai h“mologˆsen\). Thoroughly Johannine again in the paratactic repetition. {I am not the Christ} (\Eg“ ouk eimi ho Christos\). Direct quotation again with recitative \hoti\ before it like our modern quotation marks. "I am not the Messiah," he means by \ho Christos\ (the Anointed One). Evidently it was not a new question as Luke had already shown (Luke:3:15|).

rwp@John:1:50 @{Answered and said} (\apekrithˆ kai eipen\). This redundant use of both verbs (cf. strkjv@1:26|) occurs in the Synoptics also and in the LXX also. It is Aramaic also and vernacular. It is not proof of an Aramaic original as Burney argues (_Aramaic Origin_, etc., p. 53). {Because} (\hoti\). Causal use of \hoti\ at beginning of the sentence as in strkjv@14:19; strkjv@15:19; strkjv@16:6|. The second \hoti\ before \eidon\ (I saw) is either declarative (that) or merely recitative (either makes sense here). {Thou shalt see greater things than these} (\meiz“ tout“n opsˆi\). Perhaps volitive future middle indicative of \hora“\ (though merely futuristic is possible as with \opsesthe\ in 51|) ablative case of \tout“n\ after the comparative adjective \meiz“\. The wonder of Nathanael no doubt grew as Jesus went on.

rwp@John:2:5 @{Unto the servants} (\tois diakonois\). See on ¯Matthew:20:26| for this word (our "deacon," but not that sense here). {Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it} (\Hoti an legˆi humin poiˆsate\). Indefinite relative sentence (\hoti an\ and present active subjunctive, general statement) with aorist active imperative of \poie“\ for instant execution. Mary took comfort in the "not yet" (\oup“\) and recognized the right of Jesus as Messiah to independence of her, but evidently expected him to carry out her suggestion ultimately as he did. This mother knew her Son.

rwp@John:2:17 @{Remembered} (\emnˆsthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \mimnˆsk“\, to remind, "were reminded." Westcott notes the double effect of this act as is true of Christ's words and deeds all through John's Gospel. The disciples are helped, the traders are angered. {That it is written} (\hoti gegrammenon estin\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \graph“\ retained in indirect discourse (assertion). {The zeal of thine house} (\ho zˆlos tou oikou sou\). Objective genitive. "The zeal for thy house." {Shall eat me up} (\kataphagetai me\). Future middle indicative of \katesthi“\, defective verb, to eat down ("up" we say), perfective use of \kata-\. This future \phagomai\ is from the second aorist \ephagon\. It is a quotation from strkjv@Psalms:69:9|, frequently quoted in the N.T.

rwp@John:2:25 @{And because he needed not} (\kai hoti chreian eichen\). Imperfect active, "and because he did not have need." {That any one should bear witness concerning man} (\hina tis marturˆsˆi peri tou anthr“pou\). Non-final use of \hina\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \marture“\ and the generic article (\peri tou anthr“pou\) concerning mankind as in the next clause also. {For he himself knew} (\autos gar egin“sken\). Imperfect active, "for he himself kept on knowing" as he did from the start. {What was in man} (\ti ˆn en t“i anthr“p“i\). Indirect question with \estin\ of the direct changed to the imperfect \ˆn\, a rare idiom in the _Koin‚_. This supernatural knowledge of man is a mark of deity. Some men of genius can read men better than others, but not in the sense meant here.

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:3:23 @{John was also baptizing} (\ˆn de kai ho I“anˆs baptiz“n\). Periphrastic imperfect picturing the continued activity of the Baptist simultaneous with the growing work of Jesus. There was no real rivalry except in people's minds. {In Aenon near to Salim} (\en Ain“n eggus tou Saleim\). It is not clearly known where this place was. Eusebius locates it in the Jordan valley south of Beisan west of the river where are many springs (fountains, eyes). There is a place called Salim east of Shechem in Samaria with a village called 'Aimen, but with no water there. There may have been water there then, of course. {Because there was much water there} (\hoti hudata polla ˆn ekei\). "Because many waters were there." Not for drinking, but for baptizing. "Therefore even in summer baptism by immersion could be continued" (Marcus Dods). {And they came, and were baptized} (\kai pareginonto kai ebaptizonto\). Imperfects both, one middle and the other passive, graphically picturing the long procession of pilgrims who came to John confessing their sins and receiving baptism at his hands.

rwp@John:4:1 @{When therefore} (\H“s oun\). Reference to strkjv@3:22f|. the work of the Baptist and the jealousy of his disciples. \Oun\ is very common in John's Gospel in such transitions. {The Lord} (\ho Kurios\). Songs:the best manuscripts (Neutral Alexandrian), though the Western class has \ho Iˆsous\. Mark usually has \ho Iˆsous\ and Luke often \ho Kurios\. In the narrative portion of John we have usually \ho Iˆsous\, but \ho Kurios\ in five passages (4:1; strkjv@6:23; strkjv@11:2; strkjv@20:20; strkjv@21:12|). There is no reason why John should not apply \ho Kurios\ to Jesus in the narrative sections as well as Luke. Bernard argues that these are "explanatory glosses," not in the first draft of the Gospel. But why? When John wrote his Gospel he certainly held Jesus to be \Kurios\ (Lord) as Luke did earlier when he wrote both Gospel and Acts This is hypercriticism. {Knew} (\egn“\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. The Pharisees knew this obvious fact. It was easy for Jesus to know the attitude of the Pharisees about it (2:24|). Already the Pharisees are suspicious of Jesus. {How that} (\hoti\). Declarative \hoti\ (indirect assertion). {Was making and baptizing more disciples than John} (\pleionas mathˆtas poiei kai baptizei ˆ I“anˆs\). Present active indicative in both verbs retained in indirect discourse. Recall the tremendous success of John's early ministry (Mark:1:5; strkjv@Matthew:3:5; strkjv@Luke:3:7,15|) in order to see the significance of this statement that Jesus had forged ahead of him in popular favour. Already the Pharisees had turned violently against John who had called them broods of vipers. It is most likely that they drew John out about the marriage of Herod Antipas and got him involved directly with the tetrarch so as to have him cast into prison (Luke:3:19f.|). Josephus (_Ant_. XVIII. v. 2) gives a public reason for this act of Herod Antipas, the fear that John would "raise a rebellion," probably the public reason for his private vengeance as given by Luke. Apparently John was cast into prison, though recently still free (John:3:24|), before Jesus left for Galilee. The Pharisees, with John out of the way, turn to Jesus with envy and hate.

rwp@John:4:22 @{That which ye know not} (\ho ouk oidate\). Cf. strkjv@Acts:17:23|. "You know whom to worship, but you do not know him" (Westcott). The Samaritans rejected the prophets and the Psalms and so cut themselves off from the fuller knowledge of God. {We} (\hˆmeis\). We Jews. Jesus is a Jew as he fully recognizes (Matthew:15:24|). {That which we know} (\ho oidamen\). Neuter singular relative as before. The Jews, as the chosen people, had fuller revelations of God (Psalms:147:19f.; strkjv@Romans:9:3-5|). But even so the Jews as a whole failed to recognize God in Christ (1:11,26; strkjv@7:28|). {For salvation is from the Jews} (\hoti hˆ s“tˆria ek t“n Ioudai“n estin\). "The salvation," the Messianic salvation which had long been the hope and guiding star of the chosen people (Luke:1:69,71,77; strkjv@Acts:13:26,47|). It was for the whole world (John:3:17|), but it comes "out of" (\ek\) the Jews. This tremendous fact should never be forgotten, however unworthy the Jews may have proved of their privilege. The Messiah, God's Son, was a Jew.

rwp@John:4:27 @{Upon this} (\epi tout“i\). This idiom only here in N.T. At this juncture. Apparently the woman left at once when the disciples came. {They marvelled} (\ethaumazon\). Imperfect active describing the astonishment of the disciples as they watched Jesus talking with a woman. {Was speaking} (\elalei\). As in strkjv@2:25|, so here the tense is changed in indirect discourse from \lalei\ to \elalei\, an unusual idiom in Greek. However, \hoti\ here may be "because" and then the imperfect is regular. It is not "with the woman" (\meta tˆs gunaikos\), but simply "with a woman" (\meta gunaikos\). There was a rabbinical precept: "Let no one talk with a woman in the street, no, not with his own wife" (Lightfoot, _Hor, Hebr_. iii. 287). The disciples held Jesus to be a rabbi and felt that he was acting in a way beneath his dignity. {Yet no man said} (\oudeis mentoi eipen\). John remembers through the years their amazement and also their reverence for Jesus and unwillingness to reflect upon him.

rwp@John:4:51 @{As he was now going down} (\ˆdˆ autou katabainontos\). Genitive absolute in-spite of the fact that \aut“i\ (associative instrumental case with \hupˆntˆsan\ aorist active indicative of \hupanta“\) is near. {That his son lived} (\hoti ho pais autou zˆi\). Present active indicative preserved in indirect discourse (cf. the words of Jesus in verse 50|). Note \pais\ here (only example in John), \huios\ in 50|, \paidion\ (diminutive of tenderness) in 49|.

rwp@John:5:6 @{Knew that he had been a long time} (\gnous hoti polun ˆdˆ chronon echei\). How Jesus "knew" (\gnous\, second aorist active participle of \gin“sk“\) we are not told, whether supernatural knowledge (2:24f.|) or observation or overhearing people's comments. In \ˆdˆ echei\ we have a progressive present active indicative, "he has already been having much time" (\chronon\, accusative of extent of time). {Wouldest thou be made whole?} (\Theleis hugiˆs genesthai;\). "Dost thou wish to become whole?" Predicate nominative \hugiˆs\ with \genesthai\ (second aorist middle infinitive). It was a pertinent and sympathetic question.

rwp@John:5:15 @{Went away and told} (\apˆlthen kai eipen\). Both aorist active indicatives. Instead of giving heed to the warning of Jesus about his own sins he went off and told the Jews that now he knew who the man was who had commanded him to take up his bed on the Sabbath Day, to clear himself with the ecclesiastics and escape a possible stoning. {That it was Jesus} (\hoti Iˆsous estin\). Present indicative preserved in indirect discourse. The man was either ungrateful and wilfully betrayed Jesus or he was incompetent and did not know that he was bringing trouble on his benefactor. In either case one has small respect for him.

rwp@John:5:16 @{Persecute} (\edi“kon\). Inchoative imperfect, "began to persecute" and kept it up. They took this occasion as one excuse (\dia touto\, because of this). They disliked Jesus when here first (2:18|) and were suspicious of his popularity (4:1|). Now they have cause for an open breach. {Because he did} (\hoti epoiei\). Imperfect active, not just this one act, but he was becoming a regular Sabbath-breaker. The Pharisees will watch his conduct on the Sabbath henceforth (Mark:2:23; strkjv@3:2|).

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

rwp@John:5:39 @{Ye search} (\eraunƒte\). Proper spelling as the papyri show rather than \ereunƒte\, the old form (from \ereuna\, search) as in strkjv@7:52|. The form here can be either present active indicative second person plural or the present active imperative second person plural. Only the context can decide. Either makes sense here, but the reason given "because ye think" (\hoti humeis dokeite\, clearly indicative), supports the indicative rather than the imperative. Besides, Jesus is arguing on the basis of their use of "the Scriptures" (\tas graphas\). The plural with the article refers to the well-known collection in the Old Testament (Matthew:21:42; strkjv@Luke:24:27|). Elsewhere in John the singular refers to a particular passage (2:22; strkjv@7:38; strkjv@10:35|). {In them ye have eternal life} (\en autais z“ˆn ai“nion echein\). Indirect assertion after \dokeite\ without "ye" expressed either as nominative (\humeis\) or accusative (\humas\). Bernard holds that in John \doke“\ always indicates a mistaken opinion (5:45; strkjv@11:13,31; strkjv@13:29; strkjv@16:20; strkjv@20:15|). Certainly the rabbis did make a mechanical use of the letter of Scripture as a means of salvation. {These are they} (\ekeinai eisin hai\). The true value of the Scriptures is in their witness to Christ (of me, \peri emou\). Luke (24:27,45|) gives this same claim of Jesus, and yet some critics fail to find the Messiah in the Old Testament. But Jesus did.

rwp@John:6:24 @{When the multitude therefore saw} (\hote oun eiden ho ochlos\). Resumption and clarification of the complicated statements of verse 22|. {That Jesus was not there} (\hoti Iˆsous ouk estin ekei\). Present indicative retained in indirect discourse. They still did not understand how Jesus had crossed over, but they acted on the basis of the plain fact. {They themselves got into} (\enebˆsan autoi eis\). Second aorist active indicative of \embain“\ followed by \eis\ (both \en\ and \eis\ together as often in N.T.). {Seeking Jesus} (\zˆtountes ton Iˆsoun\). Present active participle of \zˆte“\. They had a double motive apart from the curiosity explained in verse 22|. They had clearly not given up the impulse of the evening before to make Jesus king (6:15|) and they had hopes of still another bountiful repast at the hands of Jesus as he said (6:26|).

rwp@John:6:26 @{Not because ye saw signs} (\ouch hoti eidete sˆmeia\). Second aorist active indicative of the defective verb \hora“\. They had seen the "signs" wrought by Jesus (verse 2|), but this one had led to wild fanaticism (verse 14|) and complete failure to grasp the spiritual lessons. {But because ye ate of the loaves} (\all' hoti ephagete ek t“n art“n\). Second aorist active indicative of \esthi“\, defective verb. {Ye were filled} (\echortasthˆte\). First aorist passive indicative of \chortaz“\, from \chortos\ (grass) as in verse 10|, to eat grass, then to eat anything, to satisfy hunger. They were more concerned with hungry stomachs than with hungry souls. It was a sharp and deserved rebuke.

rwp@John:6:36 @{That ye have seen me} (\hoti kai he“rakate me\). It is not certain that \me\ is genuine. If not, Jesus may refer to verse 26|. If genuine, some other saying is referred to that we do not have. Note \kai\ (also or even). {And yet believe not} (\kai ou pisteuete\). Use of \kai\ = and yet.

rwp@John:7:22 @{For this cause} (\dia touto\). Some would take this phrase with the preceding verb \thaumazete\ (ye marvel for this cause). {Hath given} (\ded“ken\). Present active indicative of \did“mi\ (permanent state). {Not that it is of Moses, but of the fathers} (\ouch hoti ek tou M“use“s estin all' ek t“n pater“n\). A parenthesis to explain that circumcision is older in origin than Moses. {And on the sabbath ye circumcise} (\kai en sabbat“i peritemnete\). Adversative use of \kai\=and yet as in 19|. That is to say, the Jews keep one law (circumcision) by violating another (on the Sabbath, the charge against him in chapter 5, healing on the Sabbath).

rwp@John:7:26 @{They say nothing unto him} (\ouden autoi legousin\). But only make sneering comments about him (7:16|) in spite of his speaking "openly" (\parrˆsiƒi\, for which word see strkjv@7:13; strkjv@18:20|) before all. lt was sarcasm about the leaders, though an element of surprise on the part of "these shrewd townsmen" (Bernard) may have existed also. {Can it be that the rulers indeed know} (\mˆ pote alˆth“s egn“sin hoi archontes\). Negative answer expected by \mˆ pote\ and yet there is ridicule of the rulers in the form of the question. See a like use of \mˆ pote\ in strkjv@Luke:3:15|, though nowhere else in John. \Egn“san\ (second aorist ingressive active indicative of \gin“sk“\) may refer to the examination of Jesus by these rulers in strkjv@5:19ff.| and means, "Did they come to know or find out" (and so hold now)? {That this is the Christ} (\hoti houtos estin ho Christos\). The Messiah of Jewish hope.

rwp@John:7:35 @{Among themselves} (\pros heautous\). These Jewish leaders of verse 32| talk among themselves about what Jesus said in a spirit of contempt (this man or fellow, \houtos\). {That} (\hoti\). Almost result like \hoti\ in strkjv@Matthew:8:27|. {Will he go?} (\mˆ mellei poreuesthai;\). Negative answer expected in an ironical question, "Is he about to go?" {Unto the Dispersion among the Greeks} (\eis tˆn diasporan t“n Hellˆn“n\). Objective genitive \t“n Hellˆn“n\ (of the Greeks) translated here "among," because it is the Dispersion of Jews among the Greeks. \Diaspora\ is from \diaspeir“\, to scatter apart (Acts:8:1,4|). It occurs in Plutarch and is common in the LXX, in the N.T. only here, strkjv@James:1:1; strkjv@1Peter:1:1|. There were millions of these scattered Jews. {And teach the Greeks} (\kai didaskein tous Hellˆnas\). Confessing his failure to teach the Jews in Palestine, "thus ignorantly anticipating the course Christianity took; what seemed unlikely and impossible to them became actual" (Dods).

rwp@John:7:39 @{Which} (\hou\). Genitive by attraction of the relative \ho\ (accusative singular object of \lambanein\) to the case of \tou pneumatos\ (the Spirit) the antecedent. But it is purely grammatical gender (neuter \ho\ because of \pneuma\) which we do not have in English. Even here one should say "whom," not which, of the Spirit of God. {Were to receive} (\emellon lambanein\). Imperfect active of \mell“\ with the present active infinitive \lambanein\, to receive, one of the three constructions with \mell“\ (present, aorist, or future infinitive). Literally, "whom they were about to receive," a clear reference to the great pentecost. {For the Spirit was not yet given} (\oup“ gar ˆn pneuma\). No verb for "given" in the Greek. The reference is not to the existence of the Spirit, but to the dispensation of the Spirit. This same use of \eimi\ like \pareimi\ (to be present) appears in strkjv@Acts:19:2| of the Spirit's activity. John, writing at the close of the century, inserts this comment and interpretation of the language of Jesus as an allusion to the coming of the Holy Spirit at pentecost (the Promise of the Father). {Because Jesus was not yet glorified} (\hoti Iˆsous oup“ edoxasthˆ\). Reason for the previous statement, the pentecostal outpouring following the death of Jesus here called "glorified" (\edoxasthˆ\, first aorist passive indicative of \doxaz“\), used later of the death of Jesus (12:16|), even by Jesus himself (12:23; strkjv@13:31|).

rwp@John:7:52 @{Art thou also of Galilee?} (\Mˆ kai su ek tˆs Galilaias ei;\). Formally negative answer expected by \mˆ\, but really they mean to imply that Nicodemus from local feeling or prejudice has lined himself up with this Galilean mob (\ochlos\) of sympathizers with Jesus and is like Jesus himself a Galilean. "These aristocrats of Jerusalem had a scornful contempt for the rural Galileans" (Bernard). {That out of Galilee ariseth no prophet} (\hoti ek tˆs Galilaias prophˆtˆs ouk egeiretai\). As a matter of fact Jonah, Hosea, Nahum, possibly also Elijah, Elisha, and Amos were from Galilee. It was simply the rage of the Sanhedrin against Jesus regardless of the facts. Westcott suggests that they may have reference to the future, but that is a mere excuse for them.

rwp@John:8:14 @{Even if} (\kan\). That is \kai ean\, a condition of the third class with the present active subjunctive \martur“\. Jesus means that his own witness concerning himself is true (\alˆthes\) even if it contravenes their technical rules of evidence. He can and does tell the truth all by himself concerning himself. {For I know whence I came and whither I go} (\hoti oida pothen ˆlthon kai pou hupag“\). In this terse sentence with two indirect questions Jesus alludes to his pre-existence with the Father before his Incarnation as in strkjv@17:5| and to the return to the Father after the death and resurrection as in strkjv@13:3; strkjv@14:2f|. He again puts both ideas together in one crisp clause in strkjv@16:28| for the apostles who profess to understand him then. But here these Pharisees are blind to the words of Jesus. "But ye know not whence I come nor whither I go" (\humeis de ouk oidate pothen erchomai ˆ pou hupag“\). He had spoken of his heavenly destiny (7:33|). Jesus alone knew his personal consciousness of his coming from, fellowship with, and return to the Father. Stier (_Words of the Lord Jesus_) argues that one might as well say to the sun, if claiming to be the sun, that it was night, because it bore witness of itself. The answer is the shining of the sun.

rwp@John:8:16 @{Yea and if I judge} (\kai ean krin“ de eg“\). "And even if I pass judgment." Condition of third class again. {True} (alˆthinˆ). See strkjv@1:9| for \alˆthinos\, genuine, soundly based (cf. \dikaia\ in strkjv@5:30|), "satisfying our perfect conception" (Westcott), not merely true (\alˆthes\) in the particular facts (verse 14|). {For I am not alone} (\hoti monos ouk eimi\). Jesus now takes up the technical criticism in verse 13| after justifying his right to speak concerning himself. {But I and the Father that sent me} (\all eg“ kai ho pempsas me patˆr\). See strkjv@16:32| for a like statement about the Father being with Christ. It is not certain that \patˆr\ is genuine here (omitted by Aleph D, but in B L W), but the Father is clearly meant as in strkjv@7:18,33|. Jesus gives the Father as the second witness.

rwp@John:8:20 @{In the treasury} (\en t“i gazophulaki“i\). See already strkjv@Mark:12:41; strkjv@Luke:21:1| for this word for the treasure-chambers of the temple. "It abutted on the Court of the Women, and against its walls were placed chests, trumpet-like in form, as receptacles for the offerings of the worshippers" (Bernard). The Persian word _gaza_ (treasure) occurs only once in the N.T. (Acts:8:27|) and the compound (\phulakˆ\, guard) only here in John. Jesus hardly taught within a treasure-chamber. It probably means "at the treasury in the temple." This court was probably the most public part of the temple (Vincent). {And} (\kai\)="and yet" as in strkjv@1:10|, etc. {Because his hour was not yet come} (\hoti oup“ elˆluthei hˆ h“ra autou\). {Reason} (\hoti\) given why no one seized (\epiasen\, cf. strkjv@7:30|) him. \Elˆluthei\ is past perfect active of \erchomai\, "had not yet come." This very use of \h“ra\ appears in strkjv@2:4| and the very clause in strkjv@7:30| which see.

rwp@John:8:24 @{For except ye believe} (\ean gar mˆ pisteusˆte\). Negative condition of third class with \ean mˆ\ and ingressive aorist active subjunctive of \pisteu“\, "For unless ye come to believe." {That I am he} (\hoti eg“ eimi\). Indirect discourse, but with no word in the predicate after the copula \eimi\. Jesus can mean either "that I am from above" (verse 23|), "that I am the one sent from the Father or the Messiah" (7:18,28|), "that I am the Light of the World" (8:12|), "that I am the Deliverer from the bondage of sin" (8:28,31f.,36|), "that I am" without supplying a predicate in the absolute sense as the Jews (Deuteronomy:32:39|) used the language of Jehovah (cf. strkjv@Isaiah:43:10| where the very words occur \hina pisteusˆte--hoti eg“ eimi\). The phrase \eg“ eimi\ occurs three times here (8:24,28,58|) and also in strkjv@13:19|. Jesus seems to claim absolute divine being as in strkjv@8:58|.

rwp@John:8:25 @{Who art thou?} (\Su tis ei;\). Proleptic use of \su\ before \tis\, "Thou, who art thou?" Cf. strkjv@1:19|. He had virtually claimed to be the Messiah and on a par with God as in strkjv@5:15|. They wish to pin him down and to charge him with blasphemy. {Even that which I have also spoken unto you from the beginning} (\tˆn archˆn hoti kai lal“ humin\). A difficult sentence. It is not clear whether it is an affirmation or a question. The Latin and Syriac versions treat it as affirmative. Westcott and Hort follow Meyer and take it as interrogative. The Greek fathers take it as an exclamation. It seems clear that the adverbial accusative \tˆn archˆn\ cannot mean "from the beginning" like \ap' archˆs\ (15:27|) or \ex archˆs\ (16:4|). The LXX has \tˆn archˆn\ for "at the beginning" or "at the first" (Genesis:43:20|). There are examples in Greek, chiefly negative, where \tˆn archˆn\ means "at all," "essentially," "primarily." Vincent and Bernard so take it here, "Primarily what I am telling you." Jesus avoids the term Messiah with its political connotations. He stands by his high claims already made.

rwp@John:8:27 @{They perceived not} (\ouk egn“san\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. "Preoccupied as they were with thoughts of an earthly deliverer" (Westcott) and prejudiced against recognizing Jesus as the one sent from God. {That he spake to them of the Father} (\hoti ton patera autois elegen\). Indirect assertion, but with the present indicative (\legei\) changed to the imperfect (\elegen\) as was sometimes done (2:25|) after a secondary tense.

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:8:54 @{If I glorify myself} (\ean eg“ doxas“ emauton\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and first aorist active subjunctive (or future active indicative) of \doxaz“\. {It is my Father that glorifieth me} (\estin ho patˆr mou ho doxaz“n me\). The position and accent of \estin\ mean: "Actually my Father is the one," etc. {Of whom ye say} (\hon humeis legete\). The accusative of the person (\hon\) with \legete\ is regular (cf. strkjv@10:36|). {Your God} (\theos hum“n\). Songs:Aleph B D and apparently correct, though A C L W Delta Theta have \hˆm“n\ (our God). The \hoti\ can be taken as recitative (direct quotation, \hˆm“n\, our) or declarative (indirect, that, and so \hum“n\). The Jews claimed God as their peculiar national God as they had said in 41|. Songs:Jesus turns this confession and claim against them.

rwp@John:9:8 @{Neighbours} (\geitones\). From \gˆ\ (land), of the same land, old word. See strkjv@Luke:14:2|. {Saw him} (\the“rountes\). Present active participle of \the“re“\, who used to observe him. {Aforetime} (\to proteron\). Adverbial accusative, "the former time," formerly. {That he was a beggar} (\hoti prosaitˆs ˆn\). See strkjv@4:19; strkjv@12:19| for declarative \hoti\ after \the“re“\. But it is entirely possible that \hoti\ here is "because" (Westcott). \Prosaitˆs\ is a late word for beggar, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:10:46|. It is from \prosaite“\, to ask in addition (see \prosait“n\ below), a thing that beggars know how to do. {Is not this he that sat and begged?} (\Ouch houtos estin ho kathˆmenos kai prosait“n;\). He had his regular place and was a familiar figure. But now his eyes are wide open.

rwp@John:9:16 @{Because he keepeth not the sabbath} (\hoti to sabbaton ou tˆrei\). This is reason (causal \hoti\) enough. He violates our rules about the Sabbath and therefore is a Sabbath-breaker as charged when here before (5:10,16,18|). Hence he is not "from God" (\para theou\). Songs:some. {How can a man that is a sinner do such signs?} (\P“s dunatai anthr“pos hamart“los toiauta sˆmeia poiein;\). This was the argument of Nicodemus, himself a Pharisee and one of the Sanhedrin, long ago (3:2|). It was a conundrum for the Pharisees. No wonder there was "a division" (\schisma\, schism, split, from \schiz“\) as in strkjv@7:43; strkjv@10:19|.

rwp@John:9:17 @{Unto the blind man again} (\t“i tuphl“i palin\). The doctors disagree and they ask the patient whose story they had already heard (verse 15|). {In that he opened thine eyes} (\hoti ˆne“ixen sou tous ophthalmous\). Causal use of \hoti\ and triple augment in the first aorist active indicative of \anoig“\. They offer the excuse that the man's experience particularly qualified him to explain the "how," overlooking the fact he had already told his story and also trying to conceal their own hopeless division of opinion. {He is a prophet} (\prophˆtˆs estin\). The man will go that far anyhow.

rwp@John:9:18 @{The Jews} (\hoi Ioudaioi\). Probably the incredulous and hostile section of the Pharisees in verse 16| (cf. strkjv@5:10|). {Did not believe} (\ouk episteusan\). The facts told by the man, "that he had been blind and had received his sight" (\hoti ˆn tuphlos kai aneblepsen\), conflicted with their theological views of God and the Sabbath. Songs:they refused belief "until they called the parents" (\he“s hotou eph“nˆsan tous goneis\). Usual construction of \he“s hotou\ ( = until which time, like \he“s\ alone) with aorist active indicative of \ph“ne“\, old verb from \ph“nˆ\ (voice, sound). They called out loud for his parents to throw light on this grave problem to cover up their own stupidity.

rwp@John:9:19 @{Is this your son who ye say was born blind? how doth he now see?} (\Houtos estin ho huios hum“n, hon humeis lˆgete hoti tuphlos egennˆthˆ; p“s oun blepei arti;\). It was shrewdly put with three questions in one in order to confuse the parents if possible and give the hostile Pharisees a handle.

rwp@John:9:20 @{We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind} (\Oidamen hoti houtos estin ho huios hˆm“n kai hoti tuphlos egennˆthˆ\). These two questions the parents answer clearly and thus cut the ground from under the disbelief of these Pharisees as to the fact of the cure (verse 18|). Songs:these Pharisees made a failure here.

rwp@John:9:22 @{Because they feared the Jews} (\hoti ephobounto tous Ioudaious\). Imperfect middle, a continuing fear and not without reason. See already the whispers about Jesus because of fear of the Jews (7:13|). {Had agreed already} (\ˆdˆ sunetetheinto\). Past perfect middle of \suntithˆmi\, to put together, to form a compact (7:32,47-49|). {If any man should confess him to be Christ} (\ean tis auton homologˆsˆi Christon\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \homologe“\ and predicate accusative \Christon\. Jesus had made confession of himself before men the test of discipleship and denial the disproof (Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:8|). We know that many of the rulers nominally believed on Jesus (12:42|) and yet "did not confess him because of the Pharisees" (\alla dia tous Pharisaious ouch h“mologoun\), for the very reason given here, "that they might not be put out of the synagogue" (\hina mˆ aposunag“goi gen“ntai\). Small wonder then that here the parents cowered a bit. {That he should be put out of the synagogue} (\hina aposunag“gos genˆtai\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\. \Aposunag“gos\ (\apo\ and \sunag“gˆ\) is found in N.T. only here and strkjv@12:42; strkjv@16:2|. A purely Jewish word naturally. There were three kinds of excommunication (for thirty days, for thirty more, indefinitely).

rwp@John:9:29 @{We know that God hath spoken unto Moses} (\hˆmeis oidamen hoti M“usei lelalˆken ho theos\). Perfect active indicative of \lale“\, so still on record. See strkjv@Exodus:33:11|. For \lale“\ used of God speaking see strkjv@Hebrews:1:1|. They are proud to be disciples of Moses. {But as for this man, we do not know whence he is} (\touton de ouk oidamen pothen estin\). "This fellow" they mean by "\touton\" in emphatic position, we do not even know whence he is. Some of the people did (7:27|), but in the higher sense none of the Jews knew (8:14|). These Pharisees neither knew nor cared.

rwp@John:10:10 @{But that he may steal, and kill, and destroy} (\ei mˆ hina klepsˆi kai thusˆi kai apolesˆi\). Literally, "except that" (\ei mˆ\) common without (Matthew:12:4|) and with verb (Galatians:1:7|), "if not" (literally), followed here by final \hina\ and three aorist active subjunctives as sometimes by \hotan\ (Mark:9:9|) or \hoti\ (2Corinthians:12:13|). Note the order of the verbs. Stealing is the purpose of the thief, but he will kill and destroy if necessary just like the modern bandit or gangster. {I came that they may have life} (\eg“ ˆlthon hina z“ˆn ech“sin\). In sharp contrast (\eg“\) as the good shepherd with the thieves and robbers of verse 1| came Jesus. Note present active subjunctive (\ech“sin\), "that they (people) may keep on having life (eternal, he means)" as he shows in strkjv@10:28|. He is "the life" (14:6|). {And may have it abundantly} (\kai perisson ech“sin\). Repetition of \ech“sin\ (may keep on having) abundance (\perisson\, neuter singular of \perissos\). Xenophon (_Anab_. VII. vi. 31) uses \perisson echein\, "to have a surplus," true to the meaning of overflow from \peri\ (around) seen in Paul's picture of the overplus (\hupereperisseusen\ in strkjv@Romans:5:20|) of grace. Abundance of life and all that sustains life, Jesus gives.

rwp@John:10:13 @{Because he is a hireling} (\hoti misth“tos estin\). And only that, without the shepherd heart that loves the sheep. Reason given for the conduct of the hireling after the parenthesis about the wolf. {And careth not for the sheep} (\kai ou melei aut“i peri t“n probat“n\). Literally, "and it is no care to him about the sheep." This use of the impersonal \melei\ (present active indicative) is quite common, as in strkjv@Matthew:22:16|. But God does care (1Peter:5:7|).

rwp@John:10:17 @{For this reason} (\dia touto\). Points to the following \hoti\ clause. The Father's love for the Son is drawn out (John:3:16|) by the voluntary offering of the Son for the sin of the world (Romans:5:8|). Hence the greater exaltation (Phillipians:2:9|). Jesus does for us what any good shepherd does (10:11|) as he has already said (10:15|). The value of the atoning death of Christ lies in the fact that he is the Son of God, the Son of Man, free of sin, and that he makes the offering voluntarily (Hebrews:9:14|). {That I may take it again} (\hina palin lab“ autˆn\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \lamban“\. He looked beyond his death on the Cross to the resurrection. "The purpose of the Passion was not merely to exhibit his unselfish love; it was in order that He might resume His life, now enriched with quickening power as never before" (Bernard). The Father raised Jesus from the dead (Acts:2:32|). There is spontaneity in the surrender to death and in the taking life back again (Dods).

rwp@John:10:26 @{Because ye are not of my sheep} (\hoti ek t“n probat“n mou\). This had been the point in the allegory of the Good Shepherd. In fact, they were the children of the devil in spirit and conduct (8:43|), pious ecclesiastics though they seemed, veritable wolves in sheep's clothing (Matthew:7:15|).

rwp@John:10:33 @{For a good work we stone thee not} (\peri kalou ergou ou lithazomen\). "Concerning a good deed we are not stoning thee." Flat denial that the healing of the blind man on the Sabbath had led them to this attempt (8:59|) in spite of the facts. {But for blasphemy} (\alla peri blasphˆmias\). See strkjv@Acts:26:7| where \peri\ with the genitive is also used with \egkaloumai\ for the charge against Paul. This is the only example in John of the word \blasphˆmia\ (cf. strkjv@Matthew:12:31|). {And because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God} (\kai hoti su anthr“pos “n poieis seauton theon\). In strkjv@5:18| they stated the charge more accurately: "He called God his own Father, making himself equal with God." That is, he made himself the Son of God. This he did beyond a doubt. But was it blasphemy? Only if he was not the Son of God. The penalty for blasphemy was death by stoning (Leviticus:24:16; strkjv@1Kings:21:10,13|).

rwp@John:10:34 @{Is it not written?} (\ouk estin gegrammenon;\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \graph“\ (as in strkjv@2:17|) in place of the usual \gegraptai\. "Does it not stand written?" {In your law} (\en t“i nom“i hum“n\). From strkjv@Psalms:82:6|. The term \nomos\ (law) applying here to the entire O.T. as in strkjv@12:34; strkjv@15:25; strkjv@Romans:3:19; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:21|. Aleph D Syr-sin. omit \hum“n\, but needlessly. We have it already so from Jesus in strkjv@8:17|. They posed as the special custodians of the O.T. {I said} (\hoti eg“ eipa\). Recitative \hoti\ before a direct quotation like our quotation marks. \Eipa\ is a late second aorist form of indicative with \-a\ instead of \-on\. {Ye are gods} (\theoi este\). Another direct quotation after \eipa\ but without \hoti\. The judges of Israel abused their office and God is represented in strkjv@Psalms:82:6| as calling them "gods" (\theoi\, _elohim_) because they were God's representatives. See the same use of _elohim_ in strkjv@Exodus:21:6; strkjv@22:9,28|. Jesus meets the rabbis on their own ground in a thoroughly Jewish way.

rwp@John:10:36 @{Of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world} (\hon ho patˆr hˆgiasen kai apesteilen eis ton kosmon\). Another relative clause with the antecedent (\touton\, it would be, object of \legete\) unexpressed. Every word counts heavily here in contrast with the mere judges of strkjv@Psalms:82:6|. {Thou blasphemest} (\hoti blasphˆmeis\). Recitative \hoti\ again before direct quotation. {Because I said} (\hoti eipon\). Causal use of \hoti\ and regular form \eipon\ (cf. \eipa\ in verse 34|). {I am the Son of God} (\huios tou theou eimi\). Direct quotation again after \eipon\. This Jesus had implied long before as in strkjv@2:16| (my Father) and had said in strkjv@5:18-30| (the Father, the Son), in strkjv@9:35| in some MSS., and virtually in strkjv@10:30|. They will make this charge against Jesus before Pilate (19:7|). Jesus does not use the article here with \huios\, perhaps (Westcott) fixing attention on the character of Son rather than on the person as in strkjv@Hebrews:1:2|. There is no answer to this question with its arguments.

rwp@John:10:38 @{But if I do} (\ei de poi“\). Condition again of the first class, assumed as true, but with the opposite results. {Though ye believe not me} (\kan emoi mˆ pisteuˆte\). Condition now of third class, undetermined (but with prospect), "Even if you keep on (present active subjunctive of \pisteuo\) not believing me." {Believe the works} (\tois ergois pisteuete\). These stand irrefutable. The claims, character, words, and works of Jesus challenge the world today as then. {That ye may know and understand} (\hina gn“te kai gin“skˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the same verb \gin“sk“\ repeated in different tenses (first \gn“te\, the second ingressive aorist active subjunctive, that ye may come to know; then the present active subjunctive, "that ye may keep on knowing"). This is Christ's deepest wish about his enemies who stand with stones in their uplifted hands to fling at him. {That the Father is in me, and I in the Father} (\hoti en emoi ho patˆr kag“ en t“i patri\). Thus he repeats (verse 30|) sharply his real claim to oneness with the Father as his Son, to actual deity. It was a hopeless wish.

rwp@John:11:6 @{That he was sick} (\hoti asthenei\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse after a secondary tense (\ˆkousen\). {Two days} (\duo hˆmeras\). Accusative of extent of time. {In the place where he was} (\en h“i ˆn top“i\). Incorporation of the antecedent \top“i\ into the relative clause, "in which place he was." It was long enough for Lazarus to die and seemed unlike Jesus to the sisters.

rwp@John:11:13 @{Had spoken} (\eirˆkei\). Past perfect of \eipon\ (\er“\). The disciples had misunderstood Christ's metaphor for death. {That he spake} (\hoti legei\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse after the secondary tense (\edoxan\). {Of taking rest in sleep} (\peri tˆs koimˆse“s tou hupou\). Only use of \koimˆsis\ (from \koima“\) in the N.T., but it also was used of death (Sirach strkjv@46:19). \Hupnou\ (in sleep) is objective genitive of \hupnos\ (sleep, strkjv@Matthew:1:24|).

rwp@John:11:15 @{For your sakes} (\di' humas\). That they may witness his raising from the grave. {That I was not there} (\hoti ouk ˆmˆn ekei\). Imperfect middle \ˆmˆn\ of the later Greek instead of the common active \ˆn\ in indirect discourse in place of the usual present retained as in verse 13|. {To the intent ye may believe} (\hina pisteusˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the ingressive aorist active subjunctive, "that ye may come to believe" (more than you do). See the same use of the ingressive aorist in \episteusan\ (2:11|) where the disciples gained in belief. {Nevertheless let us go to him} (\alla ag“men pros auton\). Volitive subjunctive, repeating the proposal of verse 7|. He is dead, but no matter, yea all the more let us go on to him.

rwp@John:11:20 @{That Jesus was coming} (\hoti Iˆsous erchetai\). Present middle indicative retained in indirect discourse after the secondary tense \ˆkousen\ (first aorist active). {Went and met him} (\hupˆntˆsen aut“i\). First aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \hupanta“\, old compound verb, to go to meet (Matthew:8:28|) with the associative instrumental case \aut“i\. {But Mary still sat in the house} (\Mariam de en t“i oik“i ekathezeto\). Imperfect middle of \kathezomai\, old verb to sit down, graphic picture of Mary, "while Mary was sitting in the house." Both Martha and Mary act true to form here as in strkjv@Luke:10:38-42|.

rwp@John:11:27 @{Yea, Lord} (\Nai, kurie\). Martha probably did not understand all that Jesus said and meant, but she did believe in the future resurrection, in eternal life for believers in Christ, in the power of Christ to raise even the dead here and now. She had heroic faith and makes now her own confession of faith in words that outrank those of Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:16| because she makes hers with her brother dead now four days and with the hope that Jesus will raise him up now. {I have believed} (\pepisteuka\). Perfect active indicative of \pisteu“\. It is my settled and firm faith. Peter uses this same tense in strkjv@6:69|. {That thou art the Son of God} (\hoti su ei ho Christos ho huios tou theou\). The Messiah or the Christ (1:41|) was to be also "the Son of God" as the Baptist said he had found Jesus to be (1:34|), as Peter confessed on Hermon for the apostles (Matthew:16:16|), as Jesus claimed to be (John:11:41|) and confessed on oath before Caiaphas that he was (Matthew:26:63f.|), and as John stated that it was his purpose to prove in his Gospel (20:31|). But no one said it under more trying circumstances than Martha. {Even he that cometh into the world} (\ho eis ton kosmon erchomenos\). No "even" in the Greek. This was a popular way of putting the people's expectation (6:14; strkjv@Matthew:11:3|). Jesus himself spoke of his coming into the world (9:39; strkjv@16:28; strkjv@8:37|).

rwp@John:11:31 @{Followed her} (\ˆkolouthˆsan autˆi\). First aorist active indicative of \akolouthe“\ with associative instrumental case (\autˆi\). This crowd of consolers (\paramuthoumenoi\) meant kindly enough, but did the one wrong thing for Mary wished to see Jesus alone. People with kind notions often so act. The secrecy of Martha (verse 28|) was of no avail. {Supposing that she was going unto the tomb} (\doxantes hoti hupagei eis to mnˆmeion\). First aorist active participle of \doke“\, justifying their conduct by a wrong inference. Note retention of present tense \hupagei\ in indirect discourse after the secondary tense \ˆkolouthˆsan\. {To weep there} (\hina klausˆi ekei\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \klai“\, old verb to weep. Sometimes to wail or howl in oriental style of grief, but surely not that here. At any rate this supposed purpose of Mary was a real reason for this crowd {not} to go with her.

rwp@John:11:40 @{Said I not unto thee?} (\Ouk eipon soi;\). Jesus pointedly reminds Martha of his promise to raise Lazarus (verses 25f.|). {That if thou believedst} (\hoti ean pisteusˆis\). Indirect discourse with \ean\ and the first aorist active subjunctive (condition of third class) retained after the secondary tense \eipon\. He had not said this very phrase, \ean pisteusˆis\, to Martha, but he did say to her: \Pisteueis touto\; (Believest thou this?). He meant to test Martha as to her faith already hinted at (verse 22|) on this very point. Jesus had also spoken of increase of faith on the part of the disciples (verse 15|). {Thou shouldest see the glory of God} (\opsˆi tˆn doxan tou theou\). Future middle indicative of the old defective verb \hora“\ retained in the conclusion of this condition in indirect discourse. Jesus means the glory of God as shown in the resurrection of Lazarus as he had already said to the disciples (verse 4|) and as he meant Martha to understand (verse 25|) and may in fact have said to her (the report of the conversation is clearly abridged). Hence Bernard's difficulty in seeing how Martha could understand the words of Jesus about the resurrection of Lazarus here and now seems fanciful and far-fetched.

rwp@John:11:41 @{Songs:they took away the stone} (\ˆran oun ton lithon\). First aorist active indicative of \air“\, but without the explanatory gloss of the Textus Receptus "from the place where the dead was laid" (not genuine). {I thank thee that thou heardest me} (\eucharist“ soi hoti ˆkousas mou\). See strkjv@6:11| for \euchariste“\. Clearly Jesus had prayed to the Father concerning the raising of Lazarus. He has the answer before he acts. "No pomp of incantation, no wrestling in prayer even; but simple words of thanksgiving, as if already Lazarus was restored" (Dods). Jesus well knew the issues involved on this occasion. If he failed, his own claims to be the Son of God (the Messiah), would be hopelessly discredited with all. If he succeeded, the rulers would be so embittered as to compass his own death.

rwp@John:11:42 @{And I knew} (\eg“ de ˆidein\). Past perfect of \oida\ used as imperfect. This confident knowledge is no new experience with Jesus. It has "always" (\pantote\) been so. {Which standeth around} (\ton periest“ta\). Second perfect active (intransitive) articular participle of \periistˆmi\. It was a picturesque and perilous scene. {That they may believe} (\hina pisteus“sin\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and first ingressive aorist active subjunctive of \pisteu“\, "that they may come to believe." {That thou didst send me} (\hoti su me apesteilas\). First aorist active indicative of \apostell“\ and note position of \su me\ side by side. This claim Jesus had long ago made (5:36|) and had repeatedly urged (10:25,38|). Here was a supreme opportunity and Jesus opens his heart about it.

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

rwp@John:11:51 @{Not of himself} (\aph' heautou ouk\). Not wholly of himself, John means. There was more in what Caiaphas said than he understood. His language is repeated in strkjv@18:14|. {Prophesied} (\eprophˆteusen\). Aorist active indicative of \prophˆteu“\. But certainly unconscious prophecy on his part and purely accidental. Caiaphas meant only what was mean and selfish. {That Jesus should die} (\hoti emellen Iˆsous apothnˆskein\). Imperfect active of \mell“\ in indirect discourse instead of the usual present retained after a secondary tense (\eprophˆteusen\) as sometimes occurs (see strkjv@2:25|).

rwp@John:11:56 @{They sought therefore for Jesus} (\ezˆtoun oun ton Iˆsoun\). Imperfect active of \zˆte“\ and common \oun\ of which John is so fond. They were seeking Jesus six months before at the feast of tabernacles (7:11|), but now they really mean to kill him. {As they stood in the temple} (\en t“i hier“i hestˆkotes\). Perfect active participle (intransitive) of \histˆmi\, a graphic picture of the various groups of leaders in Jerusalem and from other lands, "the knots of people in the Temple precincts" (Bernard). They had done this at the tabernacles (7:11-13|), but now there is new excitement due to the recent raising of Lazarus and to the public order for the arrest of Jesus. {That he will not come to the feast?} (\hoti ou mˆ elthˆi eis tˆn heortˆn;\). The form of the question (indirect discourse after \dokeite\) assumes strongly that Jesus will not (\ou mˆ\, double negative with second aorist active \elthˆi\ from \erchomai\) dare to come this time for the reason given in verse 57|.

rwp@John:12:6 @{Not because he cared for the poor} (\ouch hoti peri t“n pt“ch“n emelen aut“i\). Literally, "not because it was a care to him concerning the poor" (impersonal imperfect of \melei\, it was a care). John often makes explanatory comments of this kind as in strkjv@2:21f.; strkjv@7:22,39|. {But because he was a thief} (\alle hoti kleptˆs ˆn\). Clearly the disciples did not know then that Judas was a petty thief. That knowledge came later after he took the bribe of thirty pieces of silver for betraying Jesus (Matthew:26:15|), for the disciples did not suspect Judas of treachery (13:28f.|), let alone small peculations. There is no reason for thinking that John is unfair to Judas. "Temptation commonly comes through that for which we are naturally fitted" (Westcott). In this case Judas himself was "the poor beggar" who wanted this money. {And having the bag took away what was put therein} (\kai to gl“ssokomon ech“n ta ballomena ebastazen\). This is the correct text. This compound for the earlier \gl“ssokomeion\ (from \gl“ssa\, tongue, and \kome“\, to tend) was originally a receptacle for the tongues or mouth-pieces of wind instruments. The shorter form is already in the Doric inscriptions and is common in the papyri for "money-box" as here. It occurs also in Josephus, Plutarch, etc. In N.T. only here and strkjv@13:29| in same sense about Judas. \Ballomena\ is present passive participle (repeatedly put in) of \ball“\, to cast or fling. The imperfect active (custom) of \bastaz“\, old verb to pick up (John:10:31|), to carry (19:17|), but here and strkjv@20:15| with the sense to bear away as in Polybius, Josephus, Diogenes Laertes, and often so in the papyri.

rwp@John:12:9 @{The common people} (\ho ochlos polus\). This is the right reading with the article \ho\, literally, "the people much or in large numbers." One is reminded of the French idiom. Gildersleeve (_Syntax_, p. 284) gives a few rare examples of the idiom \ho anˆr agathos\. Westcott suggests that \ochlos polus\ came to be regarded as a compound noun. This is the usual order in the N.T. rather than \polus ochlos\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 774). Mark (Mark:12:37|) has \ho polus ochlos\. Moulton (_Proleg_., p. 84) terms \ho ochlos polus\ here and in verse 12| "a curious misplacement of the article." John's use of \ochlos\ is usually the common crowd as "riff-raff." {That he was} (\hoti estin\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse after the secondary tense (\egn“\, second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\). These "Jews" are not all hostile to Jesus as in strkjv@5:10; strkjv@6:41|, etc., but included some who were friendly (verse 11|). {But that they might see Lazarus also} (\all' hina kai ton Lazaron id“sin\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \hora“\. Motive enough to gather a great crowd, to see one raised from the dead (cf. verse 1| for the same phrase, "whom he had raised from the dead"). Some of the very witnesses of the raising of Lazarus will bear witness later (verse 17|). It was a tense situation.

rwp@John:12:11 @{Because that} (\hoti\). Causal use of \hoti\. {By reason of him} (\di' auton\). "Because of him," regular idiom, accusative case with \dia\. {Went away} (\hupˆgon\). Cf. strkjv@6:67| for this verb. Inchoative imperfect active of \hupag“\, "began to withdraw" as happened at the time of the raising of Lazarus (11:45f.|) and the secession was still going on. {And believed on Jesus} (\kai episteuon eis ton Iˆsoun\). Imperfect active of \pisteu“\ (note aorist in strkjv@11:45|). There was danger of a mass movement of the people to Jesus.

rwp@John:12:41 @{Because he saw his glory} (\hoti eiden tˆn doxan autou\). Correct reading here \hoti\ (because), not \hote\ (when). Isaiah with spiritual vision saw the glory of the Messiah and spoke (\elalˆsen\) of him, John says, whatever modern critics may think or say. Songs:Jesus said that Abraham saw his day (8:56|). Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:11:13|.

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

rwp@John:13:19 @{From henceforth} (\ap' arti\). "From now on," as in strkjv@14:7; strkjv@Matthew:23:39; strkjv@Revelation:14:13|. {Before it come to pass} (\pro tou genesthai\). \Pro\ with ablative of the articular second aorist middle infinitive \ginomai\ (before the coming to pass). {When it is come to pass} (\hotan genˆtai\). Indefinite relative clause with \hotan\ and the second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\, "whenever it does come to pass." {That ye may believe} (\hina pisteuˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \pisteu“\, "that ye may keep on believing." Cf. strkjv@Isaiah:48:5|. {That I am he} (\hoti eg“ eimi\). As Jesus has repeatedly claimed to be the Messiah (8:24,58|, etc.). Cf. also strkjv@14:29| (\pisteusˆte\ here); strkjv@16:4|.

rwp@John:14:2 @{Mansions} (\monai\). Old word from \men“\, to abide, abiding places, in N.T. only here and verse 23|. There are many resting-places in the Father's house (\oikia\). Christ's picture of heaven here is the most precious one that we possess. It is our heavenly home with the Father and with Jesus. {If it were not so} (\ei de mˆ\). Ellipsis of the verb (Mark:2:21; strkjv@Revelation:2:5,16; strkjv@John:14:11|). Here a suppressed condition of the second class (determined as unfulfilled) as the conclusion shows. {I would have told you} (\eipon an humin\). Regular construction for this apodosis (\an\ and aorist--second active--indicative). {For I go} (\hoti poreuomai\). Reason for the consolation given, futuristic present middle indicative, and explanation of his words in strkjv@13:33| that puzzled Peter so (13:36f.|). {To prepare a place for you} (\hetoimasai topon humin\). First aorist active infinitive of purpose of \hetoimaz“\, to make ready, old verb from \hetoimos\. Here only in John, but in strkjv@Mark:10:40| (Matthew:20:23|). It was customary to send one forward for such a purpose (Numbers:10:33|). Songs:Jesus had sent Peter and John to make ready (this very verb) for the passover meal (Mark:14:12; strkjv@Matthew:26:17|). Jesus is thus our Forerunner (\prodromos\) in heaven (Hebrews:6:20|).

rwp@John:14:19 @{But ye behold me} (\humeis de the“reite me\). Emphatic position of \humeis\ (ye) in contrast to the blind, unseeing world. Cf. strkjv@13:33; strkjv@16:10,16|. {Because I live, ye shall live also} (\hoti eg“ z“ kai humeis zˆsete\). This is our blessed guarantee of immortal, eternal life, the continued living of Jesus. He is the surety of a better covenant (Hebrews:7:22|), the Risen Christ Jesus. He had said it before (6:57|).

rwp@John:14:22 @{Not Iscariot} (\ouch ho Iskari“tˆs\). Judas Iscariot had gone (13:30|), but John is anxious to make it clear that this Judas (common name, two apostles also named James) was not the infamous traitor. He is also called Thaddaeus or Lebbaeus (Mark:3:17; strkjv@Matthew:10:3|) and the brother (or son) of James (6:15; strkjv@Acts:1:13|). This is the fourth interruption of the talk of Jesus (by Peter, strkjv@13:36|; by Thomas, strkjv@14:5|; by Philip, strkjv@14:8|; by Judas, strkjv@14:22|). {And not to the world} (\kai ouchi t“i kosm“i\). Judas caught at the word \emphaniz“\ in verse 21| as perhaps a Messianic theophany visible to all the world as at the judgment (5:27f.|). He seems to suspect a change of plan on the part of Jesus (\ti gegonen hoti\=how has it happened that).

rwp@John:15:19 @{The world would love its own} (\ho kosmos an to idion ephilei\). Conclusion of second-class condition (determined as unfulfilled), regular idiom with \an\ and imperfect indicative in present time. {But because ye are not of the world} (\hoti de ek tou kosmou ouk este\). Definite and specific reason for the world's hatred of real Christians whose very existence is a reproach to the sinful world. Cf. strkjv@7:7; strkjv@17:14; strkjv@1John:3:13|. Does the world hate us? If not, why not? Has the world become more Christian or Christians more worldly?

rwp@John:16:3 @{Because} (\hoti\). Definite reason for the religious hatred is ignorance of God and Christ as in strkjv@15:21|.

rwp@John:16:4 @{Have I spoken} (\lelalˆka\). Perfect active indicative as in strkjv@15:11; strkjv@16:1|. Solemn repetition. {When their hour is come} (\hotan elthˆi hˆ h“ra aut“n\). Indefinite temporal clause, \hotan\ with the second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\, "whenever their hour comes." The time appointed for these things. {Now that} (\hoti\). Simply "that" (declarative conjunction in indirect discourse. Forewarned is to be forearmed. Cf. strkjv@13:19|. {From the beginning} (\ex archˆs\). As in strkjv@6:64| but practically like \ap' archˆs\ in strkjv@15:27|. While Christ was with them, he was the object of attack (15:18|).

rwp@John:16:9 @{Because they believe not on me} (\hoti ou pisteuousin eis eme\). Without this conviction by the Paraclete such men actually have a pride of intellectual superiority in refusing to believe on Jesus.

rwp@John:16:11 @{Because the prince of this world hath been judged} (\hoti ho arch“n tou kosmou toutou kekritai\). Cf. strkjv@12:31; strkjv@14:31| for the title. Perfect passive indicative of \krin“\. He stands condemned. The sinful world is in his grip, but he will be cast out (12:31|).

rwp@John:16:14 @{He shall glorify me} (\ekeinos eme doxasei\). This is the glory of the Holy Spirit, to glorify Jesus Christ. {For he shall take of mine} (\hoti ek tou emou lˆmpsetai\). Future middle of \lamban“\ and a definite promise of the Spirit's guidance in interpreting Christ. One need only refer to Peter's sermon at pentecost after the coming of the Holy Spirit, to Peter's Epistles, to Paul's Epistles, to Hebrews, to John's Epistles, to see how under the tutelage of the Holy Spirit the disciples grew into the fulness of the knowledge of God in the face of Christ (2Corinthians:6:4|).

rwp@John:16:19 @{Jesus perceived} (\egn“ Iˆsous\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. {That they were desirous to ask him} (\hoti ˆthelon auton er“tƒin\). Imperfect active tense of \thel“\ in indirect discourse instead of the retention of the present \thelousin\ (the usual idiom), just like our English. Their embarrassment was manifest after four inquiries already (Peter, Thomas, Philip, Judas). Songs:Jesus takes the initiative.

rwp@John:18:37 @{Art thou a king then?} (\oukoun basileus ei su;\). Compound of \ouk\ and \oun\ and is clearly ironical expecting an affirmative answer, only here in the N.T., and in LXX only in A text in strkjv@2Kings:5:23|. {Thou sayest that} (\su legeis hoti\). In strkjv@Matthew:27:11; strkjv@Mark:15:2; strkjv@Luke:23:3|, \su legeis\ clearly means "yes," as \su eipas\ (thou saidst) does in strkjv@Matthew:26:64| (= "I am," \eg“ eimi\, in strkjv@Mark:41:62|). Hence here \hoti\ had best be taken to mean "because": "Yes, because I am a king." {Have I been born} (\eg“ gegennˆmai\). Perfect passive indicative of \genna“\. The Incarnation was for this purpose. Note repetition of \eis touto\ (for this purpose), explained by \hina marturˆs“ tˆi alˆtheiƒi\ (that I may bear witness to the truth), \hina\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \marture“\. Paul (1Timothy:6:13|) alludes to this good confession when Christ bore witness (\marturˆsantos\) before Pilate. Jesus bore such witness always (John:3:11,32; strkjv@7:7; strkjv@8:14; strkjv@Revelation:1:5|).

rwp@John:19:7 @{Because he made himself the Son of God} (\hoti huion theou heauton epoiˆsen\). Here at last the Sanhedrin give the real ground for their hostility to Jesus, one of long standing for probably three years (John:5:18|) and the one on which the Sanhedrin voted the condemnation of Jesus (Mark:14:61-64; strkjv@Matthew:27:23-66|), but even now they do not mention their own decision to Pilate, for they had no legal right to vote Christ's death before Pilate's consent which they now have secured.

rwp@John:19:21 @{But that he said} (\all' hoti ekeinos eipen\). The chief priests were uneasy for fear that the joke in the mock title was on them instead of on Jesus. They were right in their fear.

rwp@John:21:23 @{That that disciple should not die} (\hoti ho mathˆtˆs ekeinos ouk apothnˆskei\) (present active indicative), because Peter or others misunderstood what Jesus meant as John now carefully explains. He was rebuking Peter's curiosity, not affirming that John would live on till the Master returned. John is anxious to set this matter right.

rwp@Jude:1:18 @{How that} (\hoti\). Declarative \hoti\ as in verse 5|. See discussion of strkjv@2Peter:3:3| for differences, no \en empaigmonˆi\ here and no \t“n asebei“n\ there.

rwp@Luke:1:7 @{Because that} (\kathoti\). Good Attic word, according to what. Only in Luke and Acts in the N.T. In the papyri. {Well stricken in years} (\probebˆkotes en tais hˆmerais aut“n\). Wycliff has it right: "Had gone far in their days." Perfect active participle. See also verse 18|.

rwp@Luke:1:45 @{For} (\hoti\). It is not certain whether \hoti\ here is "that" or "because." It makes good sense either way. See also strkjv@7:16|. This is the first beatitude in the New Testament and it is similar to the last one in the Gospels spoken to Thomas to discourage his doubt (John:20:29|). Elisabeth wishes Mary to have full faith in the prophecy of the angel. This song of Elisabeth is as real poetry as is that of Mary (1:47-55|) and Zacharias (1:68-70|). All three spoke under the power of the Holy Spirit. These are the first New Testament hymns and they are very beautiful. Plummer notes four strophes in Mary's Magnificat (46-48|,49,50|,51-53|,54,55|). Every idea here occurs in the Old Testament, showing that Mary's mind was full of the spiritual message of God's word.

rwp@Luke:2:49 @{Son} (\teknon\). Child, literally. It was natural for Mary to be the first to speak. {Why} (\Ti\). The mother's reproach of the boy is followed by a confession of negligence on her part and of Joseph ({sorrowing}, \odun“menoi\). {Thy father} (\ho pater sou\). No contradiction in this. Alford says: "Up to this time Joseph had been so called by the holy child himself, but from this time never." {Sought} (\ezˆtoumen\). Imperfect tense describing the long drawn out search for three days. {How is it that} (\Ti hoti\). The first words of Jesus preserved to us. This crisp Greek idiom without copula expresses the boy's amazement that his parents should not know that there was only one possible place in Jerusalem for him. {I must be} (\dei einai me\). Messianic consciousness of the necessity laid on him. Jesus often uses \dei\ (must) about his work. Of all the golden dreams of any boy of twelve here is the greatest. {In my Father's house} (\en tois tou patros mou\). Not "about my Father's business," but "in my Father's house" (cf. strkjv@Genesis:41:51|). Common Greek idiom. And note "my," not "our." When the boy first became conscious of his peculiar relation to the Father in heaven we do not know. But he has it now at twelve and it will grow within him through the years ahead in Nazareth.

rwp@Luke:3:20 @{Added} (\prosethˆken\). First aorist active indicative (kappa aorist). Common verb (\prostithˆmi\) in all Greek. In N.T. chiefly in Luke and Acts. Hippocrates used it of applying wet sponges to the head and Galen of applying a decoction of acorns. There is no evidence that Luke has a medical turn to the word here. The absence of the conjunction \hoti\ (that) before the next verb \katekleisen\ (shut up) is asyndeton. This verb literally means {shut down}, possibly with a reference to closing down the door of the dungeon, though it makes sense as a perfective use of the preposition, like our "shut up" without a strict regard to the idea of "down." It is an old and common verb, though here and strkjv@Acts:26:10| only in the N.T. See strkjv@Matthew:14:3| for further statement about the prison.

rwp@Luke:4:6 @{All this authority} (\tˆn exousian tautˆn hapasan\). strkjv@Matthew:4:9| has "all these things." Luke's report is more specific. {And the glory of them} (\kai tˆn doxan aut“n\). strkjv@Matthew:4:8| has this in the statement of what the devil did, not what he said. {For it hath been delivered unto me} (\hoti emoi paradedotai\). Perfect passive indicative. Satan here claims possession of world power and Jesus does not deny it. It may be due to man's sin and by God's permission. Jesus calls Satan the ruler of this world (John:12:31; strkjv@14:30; strkjv@16:11|). {To whomsoever I will} (\hoi an thel“\). Present subjunctive with \an\ in an indefinite relative sentence. This audacious claim, if allowed, makes one wonder whether some of the world rulers are not, consciously or unconsciously, agents of the devil. In several American cities there has been proven a definite compact between the police and the underworld of crime. But the tone of Satan here is one of superiority to Jesus in world power. He offers him a share in it on one condition.

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

rwp@Luke:4:32 @Rest of the sentence as in Mark, which see, except that Luke omits "and not as their scribes" and uses \hoti ˆn\ instead of \h“s ech“n\.

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

rwp@Luke:4:41 @{Came out} (\exˆrcheto\, singular, or \exˆrchonto\, plural). Imperfect tense, repetition, from one after another. {Thou art the Son of God} (\Su ei ho huios tou theou\). More definite statement of the deity of Jesus than the witness of the demoniac in the synagogue (Luke:4:34; strkjv@Mark:1:24|), like the words of the Father (Luke:3:22|) and more so than the condition of the devil (Luke:4:3,9|). In the Canterbury Revision "devils" should always be "demons" (\daimonia\) as here. {Suffered them not to speak} (\ouk eia auta lalein\). Imperfect third singular active of \ea“\, very old and common verb with syllabic augment \ei\. The tense accents the continued refusal of Jesus to receive testimony to his person and work from demons. Cf. strkjv@Matthew:8:4| to the lepers. {Because they knew} (\hoti ˆideisan\). Causal, not declarative, \hoti\. Past perfect of the second perfect \oida\. {That he was the Christ} (\ton Christon auton einai\). Infinitive in indirect assertion with the accusative of general reference. \Ton Christon\ = {the Anointed}, the Messiah.

rwp@Luke:4:43 @{I must} (\me dei\). Jesus felt the urge to go with the work of evangelism "to the other cities also," to all, not to a favoured few. {For therefore was I sent} (\hoti epi touto apestalˆn\). "A phrase of Johannine ring" (Ragg). Second aorist passive indicative of \apostell“\. Christ is the great Apostle of God to men.

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

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

rwp@Luke:6:19 @{Sought to touch him} (\ezˆtoun haptesthai autou\). Imperfect active. One can see the surging, eager crowd pressing up to Jesus. Probably some of them felt that there was a sort of virtue or magic in touching his garments like the poor woman in strkjv@Luke:8:43f|. (Mark:5:23; strkjv@Matthew:9:21|). {For power came forth from him} (\hoti dunamis par' autou exˆrcheto\). Imperfect middle, {power was coming out from him}. This is the reason for the continual approach to Jesus. {And healed them all} (\kai iƒto pantas\). Imperfect middle again. Was healing all, kept on healing all. The preacher today who is not a vehicle of power from Christ to men may well question why that is true. Undoubtedly the failure to get a blessing is one reason why many people stop going to church. One may turn to Paul's tremendous words in strkjv@Phillipians:4:13|: "I have strength for all things in him who keeps on pouring power into me" (\panta ischu“ en t“i endunamounti me\). It was at a time of surpassing dynamic spiritual energy when Jesus delivered this greatest of all sermons so far as they are reported to us. The very air was electric with spiritual power. There are such times as all preachers know.

rwp@Luke:7:11 @{Soon afterwards} (\en toi hexˆs\). According to this reading supply \chron“i\, time. Other MSS. read \tˆi hexˆs\ (supply \hˆmerƒi\, day). \Hexˆs\ occurs in Luke and Acts in the N.T. though old adverb of time. {That} (\Hoti\). Not in the Greek, the two verbs \egeneto\ and \eporeuthˆ\ having no connective (asyndeton). {Went with him} (\suneporeuonto aut“i\). Imperfect middle picturing the procession of disciples and the crowd with Jesus. Nain is not mentioned elsewhere in the N.T. There is today a hamlet about two miles west of Endor on the north slope of Little Hermon. There is a burying-place still in use. Robinson and Stanley think that the very road on which the crowd with Jesus met the funeral procession can be identified.

rwp@Luke:7:47 @{Are forgiven} (\aphe“ntai\). Doric perfect passive form. See strkjv@Luke:5:21,23|. {For she loved much} (\hoti ˆgapˆsen polu\). Illustration or proof, not reason for the forgiveness. Her sins had been already forgiven and remained forgiven. {But to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little} (\H“i de oligon aphietai oligon agapƒi\). This explanation proves that the meaning of \hoti\ preceding is proof, not cause.

rwp@Luke:8:10 @{The mysteries} (\ta mustˆria\). See for this word on ¯Matthew:13:11; strkjv@Mark:4:11|. Part of the mystery here explained is how so many people who have the opportunity to enter the kingdom fail to do so because of manifest unfitness. {That} (\hina\). Here strkjv@Mark:4:11| also has \hina\ while strkjv@Matthew:13:13| has \hoti\ (because). On the so-called causal use of \hina\ as here equal to \hoti\ see discussion on ¯Matthew:13:13; strkjv@Mark:4:11|. Plummer sensibly argues that there is truth both in the causal \hoti\ of Matthew and the final \hina\ of Mark and Matthew. "But the principle that he who hath shall receive more, while he who hath not shall be deprived of what he seemeth to have, explains both the \hina\ and the \hoti\. Jesus speaks in parables because the multitudes see without seeing and hear without hearing. But He also speaks in parable {in order that} they may see without seeing and hear without hearing." Only for "hearing" Luke has "understand" \suni“sin\, present subjunctive from a late omega form \suni“\ instead of the \-mi\ verb \suniˆmi\.

rwp@Luke:8:24 @{Master, Master} (\Epistata, epistata\). See on ¯Luke:5:5| for discussion. strkjv@Mark:4:38| has {Teacher} (\Didaskale\), strkjv@Matthew:8:25| has {Lord} (\Kurie\). The repetition here shows the uneasiness of the disciples. {We perish} (\apollumetha\). Songs:in strkjv@Mark:4:38; strkjv@Matthew:8:25|. Linear present middle indicative, we are perishing. {The raging of the water} (\t“i kludoni tou hudatos\). \Klud“n\, common Greek word, is a boisterous surge, a violent agitation. Here only in the N.T. save strkjv@James:1:6|. \Kuma\ (Mark:4:37|) is the regular swell or wave. A {calm} (\galˆnˆ\). Only in the parallels in the N.T., though common word. Here strkjv@Mark:4:39; strkjv@Matthew:8:26| add {great} (\megalˆ\). {That} (\hoti\). This use of \hoti\ as explanatory of the demonstrative pronoun \houtos\ occurs in the parallels strkjv@Mark:4:36; strkjv@Matthew:8:27| and also in strkjv@Luke:4:36|. It is almost result. {He commandeth} (\epitassei\). Peculiar to Luke.

rwp@Luke:8:53 @{Knowing that she was dead} (\eidotes hoti apethanen\). That she died (\apethanen\), second aorist active indicative of \apothnˆsk“\.

rwp@Luke:9:7 @{All that was done} (\ta ginomena panta\). Present middle participle, "all that was coming to pass." {He was much perplexed} (\diˆporei\). Imperfect active of \diapore“\, to be thoroughly at a loss, unable to find a way out (\dia, a\ privative, \poros\, way), common ancient verb, but only in Luke's writings in the N.T. {Because it was said} (\dia to legesthai\). Neat Greek idiom, the articular passive infinitive after \dia\. Three reports came to the ears of Herod as Luke has it, each introduced by \hoti\ (that) in indirect discourse: "By some" (\hupo tin“n\), "by some" (\hupo tin“n de\), "by others" (\all“n de, hupo\ not here expressed, but carried over). The verbs in the indirect discourse here (verses 7,8|) are all three aorists (\ˆgerthˆ\ first passive; \ephanˆ\ second passive; \anestˆ\ second active), not past perfects as the English has them.

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:9:53 @{And they did not receive him} (\kai ouk edexanto auton\). Adversative use of \kai\ = But. {Because his face was going to Jerusalem} (\hoti to pros“pon autou ˆn poreuomenon eis Ierousalˆm\). Periphrastic imperfect middle. It was reason enough to the churlish Samaritans.

rwp@Luke:11:14 @{When} (\tou daimoniou exelthontos\). Genitive absolute ana asyndeton between \kai egeneto\ and \elalˆsen\ as often in Luke (no \hoti\ or \kai\).

rwp@Luke:11:18 @{Because ye say} (\hoti legete\). Jesus here repeats in indirect discourse (accusative and infinitive) the charge made against him in verse 15|. The condition is of the first class, determined as fulfilled.

rwp@Luke:11:38 @{That he had not first washed before dinner} (\hoti ou pr“ton ebaptisthˆ pro tou aristou\). The verb is first aorist passive indicative of \baptiz“\, to dip or to immerse. Here it is applied to the hands. It was the Jewish custom to dip the hands in water before eating and often between courses for ceremonial purification. In Galilee the Pharisees and scribes had sharply criticized the disciples for eating with unwashed hands (Mark:7:1-23; strkjv@Matthew:15:1-20|) when Jesus had defended their liberty and had opposed making a necessity of such a custom (tradition) in opposition to the command of God. Apparently Jesus on this occasion had himself reclined at the breakfast (not dinner) without this ceremonial dipping of the hands in water. The Greek has "first before" (\pr“ton pro\), a tautology not preserved in the translation.

rwp@Luke:12:32 @{Little flock} (\to mikron poimnion\). Vocative with the article as used in Hebrew and often in the _Koin‚_ and so in the N.T. See both \pater\ and \ho patˆr\ in the vocative in strkjv@Luke:10:21|. See Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 465f. \Poimnion\ (flock) is a contraction from \poimenion\ from \poimˆn\ (shepherd) instead of the usual \poimnˆ\ (flock). Songs:it is not a diminutive and \mikron\ is not superfluous, though it is pathetic. {For it is your Father's good pleasure} (\hoti eudokˆsen ho patˆr hum“n\). First aorist active indicative of \eudoke“\. Timeless aorist as in strkjv@Luke:3:22|. This verse has no parallel in Matthew.

rwp@Luke:12:49 @{I came to cast fire} (\Pur ˆlthon balein\). Suddenly Jesus lets the volcano in his own heart burst forth. The fire was already burning. "Christ came to set the world on fire, and the conflagration had already begun" (Plummer). The very passion in Christ's heart would set his friends on fire and his foes in opposition as we have just seen (Luke:11:53f.|). It is like the saying of Jesus that he came to bring not peace, but a sword, to bring cleavage among men (Matthew:10:34-36|). {And what will I, if it is already kindled?} (\kai ti thel“ ei ˆdˆ anˆphthˆ;\). It is not clear what this passage means. Probably \ti\ is be taken in the sense of "how" (\p“s\). How I wish. Then \ei\ can be taken as equal to \hoti\. How I wish that it were already kindled. \Anˆphthˆ\ is first aorist passive of \anapt“\, to set fire to, to kindle, to make blaze. Probably Luke means the conflagration to come by his death on the Cross for he changes the figure and refers to that more plainly.

rwp@Luke:14:1 @{When he went} (\en t“i elthein auton\). Luke's favourite temporal clause = "on the going as to him." {That} (\kai\). Another common Lukan idiom, \kai=hoti\ after \egeneto\, like Hebrew _wav_. {They} (\autoi\). Emphatic. {Were watching} (\ˆsan paratˆroumenoi\). Periphrastic imperfect middle. Note force of \autoi\, middle voice, and \para-\. They were themselves watching on the side (on the sly), watching insidiously, with evil intent as in strkjv@Mark:3:2| (active).

rwp@Luke:16:8 @{His lord commended} (\epˆinesen ho kurios\). The steward's lord praised him though he himself had been wronged again (see verse 1| "wasting his goods"). {The unrighteous steward} (\ton oikonomon tˆs adikias\). Literally, the steward of unrighteousness. The genitive is the case of genus, species, the steward distinguished by unrighteousness as his characteristic. See "the mammon of unrighteousness" in verse 9|. See "the forgetful hearer" in strkjv@James:1:25|. It is a vernacular idiom common to Hebrew, Aramaic, and the _Koin‚_. {Wisely} (\phronim“s\). An old adverb, though here alone in the N.T. But the adjective \phronimos\ from which it comes occurs a dozen times as in strkjv@Matthew:10:16|. It is from \phrone“\ and that from \phrˆn\, the mind (1Corinthians:14:20|), the discerning intellect. Perhaps "shrewdly" or "discreetly" is better here than "wisely." The lord does not absolve the steward from guilt and he was apparently dismissed from his service. His shrewdness consisted in finding a place to go by his shrewdness. He remained the steward of unrighteousness even though his shrewdness was commended. {For} (\hoti\). Probably by this second \hoti\ Jesus means to say that he cites this example of shrewdness because it illustrates the point. "This is the moral of the whole parable. Men of the world in their dealings with men like themselves are more prudent than the children of light in their intercourse with one another" (Plummer). We all know how stupid Christians can be in their co-operative work in the kingdom of God, to go no further. {Wiser than} (\phronim“teroi huper\). Shrewder beyond, a common Greek idiom.

rwp@Luke:16:24 @{That he may dip} (\hina bapsˆi\). First aorist active subjunctive of \bapt“\, common verb, to dip. {In water} (\hudatos\). Genitive, the specifying case, water and not something else. {Cool} (\katapsuxˆi\). First aorist active subjunctive of \katapsuch“\, a late Greek compound, to cool off, to make cool. Only here in the N.T. but common in medical books. Note perfective use of \kata-\ (down). A small service that will be welcome. {For I am in anguish} (\hoti odun“mai\). The active has a causative sense to cause intense pain, the middle to torment oneself (Luke:2:48; strkjv@Acts:20:38|), the passive to be translated as here. Common verb, but no other examples in the N.T.

rwp@Luke:18:14 @{This man} (\houtos\). This despised publican referred to contemptuously in verse 11| as "this" (\houtos\) publican. {Rather than the other} (\par' ekeinon\). In comparison with (placed beside) that one. A neat Greek idiom after the perfect passive participle \dedikaiomenos\. {For} (\hoti\). This moral maxim Christ had already used in strkjv@14:11|. Plummer pertinently asks: "Why is it assumed that Jesus did not repeat his sayings?"

rwp@Luke:21:5 @{As some spake} (\tin“n legont“n\). Genitive absolute. The disciples we know from strkjv@Mark:13:1; strkjv@Matthew:24:1|. {How} (\hoti\). Literally, "that." {It was adorned} (\kekosmˆtai\). Perfect passive indicative, state of completion, stands adorned, tense retained in indirect discourse, though English has to change it. \Kosme“\, old and common verb for orderly arrangement and adorning. {With goodly stones and offerings} (\lithois kalois kai anathˆmasin\). Instrumental case. Some of these stones in the substructure were enormous. "The columns of the cloister or portico were monoliths of marble over forty feet high" (Plummer). Cf. Josephus, _War_, V.5. The word \anathˆma\ (here only in the N.T.) is not to be confused with \anathema\ from the same verb \anatithˆmi\, but which came to mean a curse (Galatians:1:8; strkjv@Acts:23:14|). Songs:\anathema\ came to mean devoted in a bad sense, \anathˆma\ in a good sense. "Thus _knave_, lad, becomes a _rascal; villain_, a _farmer_, becomes a _scoundrel; cunning_, _skilful_, becomes _crafty_" (Vincent). These offerings in the temple were very numerous and costly (2Macc. strkjv@3:2-7) like the golden vine of Herod with branches as tall as a man (Josephus, _Ant_. XV. ii.3).

rwp@Mark:1:34 @{Devils} (\daimonia\). Demons it should be translated always. {Suffered not} (\ouk ˆphien\). Would not allow, imperfect tense of continued refusal. The reason given is "because they knew him" (\hoti ˆideisan auton\). Whether "to be Christ" (\Christon einai\) is genuine or not, that is the meaning and is a direct reference to strkjv@1:24| when in the synagogue the demon recognized and addressed Jesus as the Holy One of God. Testimony from such a source was not calculated to help the cause of Christ with the people. He had told the other demon to be silent. See on ¯Matthew:8:29| for discussion of the word demon.

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

rwp@Mark:4:12 @{Lest haply they should turn again, and it should be forgiven them} (\mˆpote epistreps“sin kai aphethˆi autois\). Luke does not have these difficult words that seem in Isaiah to have an ironical turn, though strkjv@Matthew:13:15| does retain them even after using \hoti\ for the first part of the quotation. There is no way to make \mˆpote\ in strkjv@Mark:4:12| and strkjv@Matthew:13:15| have a causal sense. It is the purpose of condemnation for wilful blindness and rejection such as suits the Pharisees after their blasphemous accusation against Jesus. Bengel says: _iam ante non videbant, nunc accedit iudicium divinum_. Jesus is pronouncing their doom in the language of Isaiah. It sounds like the dirge of the damned.

rwp@Mark:6:55 @{Ran about} (\periedramon\). Vivid constative aorist picturing the excited pursuit of Jesus as the news spread that he was in Gennesaret. {On their beds} (\epi tois krabattois\). Pallets like that of the man let down through the roof (Mark:2:4|). {Where they heard he was} (\hopou ˆkouon hoti estin\). Imperfect tense of \akou“\ (repetition), present indicative \estin\ retained in indirect discourse.

rwp@Mark:8:24 @{I see men, for I behold them as trees walking} (\Blep“ tous anthr“pous hoti h“s dendra hor“ peripatountas\). A vivid description of dawning sight. His vision was incomplete though he could tell that they were men because they were walking. This is the single case of a gradual cure in the healings wrought by Jesus. The reason for this method in this case is not given.

rwp@Mark:9:28 @{Privately, saying} (\kat' idian hoti\). Indoors the nine disciples seek an explanation for their colossal failure. They had cast out demons and wrought cures before. The Revisers are here puzzled over Mark's use of \hoti\ as an interrogative particle meaning {why} where strkjv@Matthew:17:19| has \dia ti\. Some of the manuscripts have \dia ti\ here in strkjv@Mark:9:28| as all do in strkjv@Matthew:17:19|. See also strkjv@Mark:2:16| and strkjv@9:11|. It is probable that in these examples \hoti\ really means {why}. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 730. The use of \hos\ as interrogative "is by no means rare in the late Greek" (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 126).

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:9:41 @{Because ye are Christ's} (\hoti Christou este\). Predicate genitive, belong to Christ. See strkjv@Romans:8:9; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:12; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:7|. That is the bond of universal brotherhood of the redeemed. It breaks over the lines of nation, race, class, sex, everything. No service is too small, even a cup of cold water, if done for Christ's sake. See on ¯Matthew:18:6f.| for discussion on stumbling-blocks for these little ones that believe on Jesus (Mark:9:42|), a loving term of all believers, not just children.

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

rwp@Mark:12:28 @{Heard them questioning together} (\akousas aut“n sunzˆtount“n\). The victory of Christ over the Sadducees pleased the Pharisees who now had come back with mixed emotions over the new turn of things (Matthew:22:34|). strkjv@Luke:20:39| represents one of the scribes as commending Jesus for his skilful reply to the Sadducees. Mark here puts this scribe in a favourable light, "knowing that he had answered them well" (\eid“s hoti kal“s apekrithˆ autois\). "Them" here means the Sadducees. But strkjv@Matthew:22:35| says that this lawyer (\nomikos\) was "tempting" (\peiraz“n\) by his question. "A few, among whom was the scribe, were constrained to admire, even if they were willing to criticize, the Rabbi who though not himself a Pharisee, surpassed the Pharisees as a champion of the truth." That is a just picture of this lawyer. {The first of all} (\pr“tˆ pant“n\). First in rank and importance. strkjv@Matthew:22:36| has "great" (\megalˆ\). See discussion there. Probably Jesus spoke in Aramaic. "First" and "great" in Greek do not differ essentially here. Mark quotes strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:4f.| as it stands in the LXX and also strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|. strkjv@Matthew:22:40| adds the summary: "On these two commandments hangeth (\krematai\) the whole law and the prophets."

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

rwp@Matthew:13:13 @{Because seeing} (\hoti blepontes\). In the parallel passages in strkjv@Mark:4:12| and strkjv@Luke:8:10| we find \hina\ with the subjunctive. This does not necessarily mean that in Mark and Luke \hina=hoti\ with the causal sense, though a few rare instances of such usage may be found in late Greek. For a discussion of the problem see my chapter on "The Causal Use of _Hina_" in _Studies in Early Christianity_ (1928) edited by Prof. S.J. Case. Here in Matthew we have first "an adaptation of strkjv@Isaiah:6:9f.| which is quoted in full in v. 14f.|" (McNeile). Thus Matthew presents "a striking paradox, 'though they see, they do not (really) see'" (McNeile). Cf. strkjv@John:9:41|. The idiom here in Matthew gives no trouble save in comparison with Mark and Luke which will be discussed in due turn. The form \suniousin\ is an omega verb form (\suni“\) rather than the \mi\ verb (\suniˆmi\) as is common in the _Koin‚_.

rwp@Matthew:15:23 @{For she crieth after us} (\hoti krazei opisthen hˆm“n\). The disciples greatly disliked this form of public attention, a strange woman crying after them. They disliked a sensation. Did they wish the woman sent away with her daughter healed or unhealed?

rwp@Matthew:19:1 @{He departed} (\metˆren\). Literally, to lift up, change something to another place. Transitive in the LXX and in a Cilician rock inscription. Intransitive in strkjv@13:53| and here, the only N.T. instances. Absence of \hoti\ or \kai\ after \kai egeneto\, one of the clear Hebraisms in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1042f.). This verse is a sort of formula in Matthew at the close of important groups of \logia\ as in strkjv@7:28; strkjv@11:1; strkjv@13:53|. {The borders of Judea beyond Jordan} (\eis ta horia tˆs Ioudaias peran tou Iordanou\). This is a curious expression. It apparently means that Jesus left Galilee to go to Judea by way of Perea as the Galileans often did to avoid Samaria. Luke (Luke:17:11|) expressly says that he passed through Samaria and Galilee when he left Ephraim in Northern Judea (John:11:54|). He was not afraid to pass through the edge of Galilee and down the Jordan Valley in Perea on this last journey to Jerusalem. McNeile is needlessly opposed to the trans-Jordanic or Perean aspect of this phase of Christ's work.

rwp@Matthew:20:30 @{That Jesus was passing by} (\hoti Iˆsous paragei\). These men "were sitting by the wayside" (\kathˆmenoi para ten hodon\) at their regular stand. They heard the crowd yelling that Jesus of Nazareth was passing by (\paragei\, present indicative of direct discourse retained in the indirect). It was their one opportunity, now or never. They had heard of what he had done for other blind men. They hail him as "the son of David" (the Messiah). It is just one of many such incidents when Jesus stood still and opened their eyes, so many that even the multitude was impatient with the cries of these poor men that their eyes be opened (\anoig“sin\, second aorist passive subjunctive).

rwp@Philippians:1:18 @{What then?} (\ti gar?\). Sharp problem put up to Paul by the conduct of the Judaizers. {Only that} (\plˆn hoti\). Same idiom in strkjv@Acts:20:23|. \Plˆn\ is adverb \pleon\ (more besides). As a preposition \plˆn\ means "except." This essential thing Paul sees in spite of all their envy and selfishness that Christ is preached. {Whether in pretence} (\eite prophasei\). Either from \prophain“\, to shew forth, or \prophˆmi\, to speak forth, the ostensible presentation often untrue. See strkjv@Acts:27:30|. Paul sees clearly through the pious pretence of these Judaizers and rejoices that people get some knowledge of Christ. Some Christ is better than no Christ. {Yea, and will rejoice} (\alla kai charˆsomai\). Note affirmative, not adversative, use of \alla\. Volitive use of the future (second future passive) indicative (\charˆsomai\) of \chair“\. Paul is determined to rejoice in spite of the efforts of the Judaizers to prod him to anger.

rwp@Philippians:2:26 @{He longed after} (\epipoth“n ˆn\). Periphrastic imperfect of \epipothe“\ (Phillipians:1:8|), "he was yearning after." {You all} (\pantas humas\). Songs:again (1:5,7,8|). {Was sore troubled} (\adˆmon“n\). Periphrastic imperfect again (repeat \ˆn\) of the old word \adˆmone“\ either from an unused \adˆm“n\ (\a\ privative and \dˆmos\, away from home, homesick) or from \adˆm“n, adˆsai\ (discontent, bewilderment). The _Vocabulary_ of Moulton and Milligan gives one papyrus example in line with the latter etymology. See already strkjv@Matthew:26:37; strkjv@Mark:14:33|. In any case the distress of Epaphroditus was greatly increased when he knew that the Philippians (the home-folks) had learned of his illness, "because ye had heard that he was sick" (\dioti ˆkousate hoti ˆsthenˆse\), "because ye heard that he fell sick" (ingressive aorist). {He was sick} (\ˆsthenˆse\). Ingressive aorist, "he did become sick." {Nigh unto death} (\paraplˆsion thanat“i\). Only example in N.T. of this compound adverbial preposition (from the adjective \paraplˆsios\) with the dative case.

rwp@Philippians:3:12 @{Not that} (\ouch hoti\). To guard against a misunderstanding as in strkjv@John:6:26; strkjv@12:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:24; strkjv@Phillipians:4:11,17|. {I have already obtained} (\ˆdˆ elabon\). Rather, "I did already obtain," constative second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\, summing up all his previous experiences as a single event. {Or am already made perfect} (\ˆ ˆdˆ tetelei“mai\). Perfect passive indicative (state of completion) of \teleio“\, old verb from \teleios\ and that from \telos\ (end). Paul pointedly denies that he has reached a spiritual impasse of non- development. Certainly he knew nothing of so-called sudden absolute perfection by any single experience. Paul has made great progress in Christlikeness, but the goal is still before him, not behind him. {But I press on} (\di“k“ de\). He is not discouraged, but encouraged. He keeps up the chase (real idea in \di“k“\, as in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:1; strkjv@Romans:9:30; strkjv@1Timothy:6:11|). {If so be that} (\ei kai\). "I follow after." The condition (third class, \ei--katalab“\, second aorist active subjunctive of \katalamban“\) is really a sort of purpose clause or aim. There are plenty of examples in the _Koin‚_ of the use of \ei\ and the subjunctive as here (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1017), "if I also may lay hold of that for which (\eph' h“i\, purpose expressed by \epi\) I was laid hold of (\katelˆmphthˆn\, first aorist passive of the same verb \katalamban“\) by Christ Jesus." His conversion was the beginning, not the end of the chase.

rwp@Revelation:2:2 @{I know} (\oida\). Rather than \gin“sk“\ and so "emphasizes better the absolute clearness of mental vision which photographs all the facts of life as they pass" (Swete). Songs:also in strkjv@2:9,13,19; strkjv@3:1,8,15|. For the distinction see strkjv@John:21:17|, "where the universal knowledge passes into the field of special observation." {Works} (\erga\). The whole life and conduct as in strkjv@John:6:29|. {And thy toil and patience} (\kai ton kopon kai tˆn hupomonˆn sou\). "Both thy toil and patience," in explanation of \erga\, and see strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:3|, where all three words (\ergon, kopos, hupomonˆ\) occur together as here. See strkjv@14:13| for sharp distinction between \erga\ (activities) and \kopoi\ (toils, with weariness). Endurance (\hupomonˆ\) in hard toil (\kopos\). {And that} (\kai hoti\). Further explanation of \kopos\ (hard toil). {Not able} (\ou dunˆi\). This _Koin‚_ form for the Attic \dunasai\ (second person singular indicative middle) occurs also in strkjv@Mark:9:22; strkjv@Luke:16:2|. {Bear} (\bastasai\). First aorist active infinitive of \bastaz“\, for which verb see strkjv@John:10:31; strkjv@12:6; strkjv@Galatians:6:2|. These evil men were indeed a heavy burden. {And didst try} (\kai epeirasas\). First aorist active indicative of \peiraz“\, to test, a reference to a recent crisis when these Nicolaitans (verse 6|) were condemned. The present tenses (\dunˆi, echeis\) indicate the continuance of this attitude. Cf. strkjv@1John:4:1|. {Which call themselves apostles} (\tous legontas heautous apostolous\). Perhaps itinerant missionaries of these Nicolaitans who posed as equal to or even superior to the original apostles, like the Judaizers so described by Paul (2Corinthians:11:5,13; strkjv@12:11|). Paul had foretold such false teachers (Gnostics), grievous wolves, in strkjv@Acts:20:29|; in sheep's clothing, Jesus had said (Matthew:7:15|). {And they are not} (\kai ouk eisin\). A parenthesis in Johannine style (John:2:9; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@1John:3:1|) for \kai ouk ontas\ to correspond to \legontas\. {And didst find} (\kai heures\). Second aorist active indicative of \heurisk“\. Dropping back to the regular structure parallel with \epeirasas\. {False} (\pseudeis\). Predicate accusative plural of \pseudˆs\, self-deceived deceivers as in strkjv@21:8|.

rwp@Revelation:2:4 @{This against thee, that} (\kata sou hoti\). For the phrase "have against" see strkjv@Matthew:5:23|. The \hoti\ clause is the object of \ech“\. {Thou didst leave} (\aphˆkes\). First aorist active (kappa aorist, but with \-es\ instead of \-as\) of \aphiˆmi\, a definite and sad departure. {Thy first love} (\tˆn agapˆn sou tˆn pr“tˆn\). "Thy love the first." This early love, proof of the new life in Christ (1John:3:13f.|), had cooled off in spite of their doctrinal purity. They had remained orthodox, but had become unloving partly because of the controversies with the Nicolaitans.

rwp@Revelation:3:4 @{A few names} (\oliga onomata\). This use of \onoma\ for persons is seen in the _Koin‚_ (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 196f.) as in strkjv@Acts:1:15; strkjv@Revelation:11:13|. {Did not defile} (\ouk emolunan\). First aorist active indicative of \molun“\ (1Corinthians:8:7; strkjv@1Peter:1:4|), pollution. {They shall walk} (\peripatˆsousin\). Future active of \peripate“\, promise of fellowship with Christ (\met' emou\, with me) "in white" (\en leukois\), as symbols of purity (7:9,13|) like the angel (Matthew:28:3|), with possibly a reference to Enoch (Genesis:5:22|). For they are worthy (\hoti axioi eisin\). To walk with Christ, not worthy in the same sense as God and Christ (4:11; strkjv@5:9|), but in a relative sense. See strkjv@Revelation:16:6| for bad sense of \axios\.

rwp@Revelation:3:8 @{I have set} (\ded“ka\). Perfect active indicative of \did“mi\, "I have given" (a gift of Christ, this open door). See strkjv@Luke:12:51| for a like use of \did“mi\. {A door opened} (\thuran ˆne“igmenˆn\). Perfect (triple reduplication) passive predicate participle of \anoig“\ (verse 7|) accusative feminine singular. The metaphor of the open door was a common one (John:10:7-9; strkjv@Acts:14:27; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12; strkjv@Colossians:4:3; strkjv@Revelation:3:20; strkjv@4:1|). Probably it means here a good opportunity for missionary effort in spite of the Jewish hostility. {Which} (\hˆn--autˆn\). Pleonastic vernacular and Hebrew repetition of the personal pronoun \autˆn\ (it) after the relative \hˆn\ (which). Direct reference to the statement in verse 7|. {That} (\hoti\). This conjunction resumes the construction of \oida sou ta erga\ (I know thy works) after the parenthesis (\idou--autˆn\, Behold--shut). {A little power} (\mikran dunamin\). Probably "little power," little influence or weight in Philadelphia, the members probably from the lower classes (1Corinthians:1:26f.|). {And didst keep} (\kai etˆrˆsas\). "And yet (adversative use of \kai\) didst keep" (first aorist active indicative of \tˆre“\) my word in some crisis of trial. See strkjv@John:17:6| for the phrase "keeping the word." {Didst not deny} (\ouk ˆrnˆs“\). First aorist middle indicative second person singular of \arneomai\. The issue was probably forced by the Jews (cf. strkjv@2:9|), but they stood true.

rwp@Revelation:3:17 @{I am rich} (\hoti plousios eimi\). Recitative \hoti\ like quotation marks before direct quotation. Old adjective from \ploutos\, riches, wealth. Laodicea was a wealthy city and the church "carried the pride of wealth into its spiritual life" (Swete). {Have gotten riches} (\peploutˆka\). Perfect active indicative of \ploute“\, old verb from \ploutos\, used here of imagined spiritual riches which the church did not possess, just the opposite of church in Smyrna (poor in wealth, rich in grace). This church was in a rich city and was rich in pride and conceit, but poor in grace and ignorant of its spiritual poverty (\ouk oidas\, knowest not). {The wretched one} (\ho talaip“ros\). Old adjective from \tla“\, to endure, and \p“ros\, a callus, afflicted, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:7:24|. Note the one article in the predicate with all these five adjectives unifying the picture of sharp emphasis on "thou" (\su\), "thou that boastest." {Miserable} (\eleeinos\). Pitiable as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:19|. {Poor} (\pt“chos\). See strkjv@2:9| for spiritual poverty. Perhaps some local example of self-complacency is in mind. {Blind} (\tuphlos\). Spiritual blindness as often (Matthew:23:17|), and note "eye-salve" in verse 18|. {Naked} (\gumnos\). "The figure completes the picture of actual poverty" (Beckwith). See 15,16|.

rwp@Revelation:10:6 @{Sware} (\“mosen\). First aorist indicative of \omnu“\ to swear. {By him that liveth} (\en t“i z“nti\). This use of \en\ after \omnu“\ instead of the usual accusative (James:5:12|) is like the Hebrew (Matthew:5:34,36|). "The living one for ages of ages" is a common phrase in the Apocalypse for God as eternally existing (1:18; strkjv@4:9,10; strkjv@15:7|). This oath proves that this angel is not Christ. {Who created} (\hos ektisen\). First aorist active indicative of \ktiz“\, a reference to God's creative activity as seen in strkjv@Genesis:1:1ff.; strkjv@Exodus:20:11; strkjv@Isaiah:37:16; strkjv@42:5; strkjv@Psalms:33:6; strkjv@145:6|, etc. {That there shall be time no longer} (\hoti chronos ouketi estai\). Future indicative indirect discourse with \hoti\. But this does not mean that \chronos\ (time), Einstein's "fourth dimension" (added to length, breadth, height), will cease to exist, but only that there will be no more delay in the fulfillment of the seventh trumpet (verse 7|), in answer to the question, "How long?" (6:10|).

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@Romans:1:8 @{First} (\pr“ton men\). Adverb in the accusative case, but no \epeita de\ (in the next place) as in strkjv@Hebrews:7:2| or \epeita\ as in strkjv@James:3:17| follows. The rush of thoughts crowds out the balanced phraseology as in strkjv@Romans:3:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:18|. {Through} (\dia\). As the mediator or medium of thanksgiving as in strkjv@7:25|. {For} (\peri\). Concerning, about. {That} (\hoti\). Or because. Either declarative or causal \hoti\ makes sense here. {Your faith} (\hˆ pistis hum“n\). "Your Christianity" (Sanday and Headlam). {Is proclaimed} (\kataggelletai\). Present passive indicative of \kataggell“\, to announce (\aggell“\) up and down (\kata\). See also \anaggell“\, to bring back news (John:5:15|), \apaggell“\, to announce from one as the source (Matthew:2:8|), \prokataggell“\, to announce far and wide beforehand (Acts:3:18|). {Throughout all the world} (\en hol“i t“i kosm“i\). Natural hyperbole as in strkjv@Colossians:1:6; strkjv@Acts:17:6|. But widely known because the church was in the central city of the empire.

rwp@Romans:1:19 @{Because} (\dioti\). Gives the reason (\dia, hoti\ like our "for that") for the revelation of God's wrath. {That which may be known of God} (\to gn“ston tou theou\). Verbal adjective from \gin“sk“\, either "the known" as elsewhere in N.T. (Acts:1:19; strkjv@15:18|, etc.) or "the knowable" as usual in ancient Greek, that is "the knowledge" (\hˆ gn“sis\) of God. See strkjv@Phillipians:3:8|. Cf. same use of the verbal \chrˆston\ in strkjv@Romans:2:4|, \ametatheton\ in strkjv@Hebrews:6:17|. {Manifest in them} (\phaneron en autois\). In their hearts and consciences. {God manifested} (\ho theos ephaner“sen\). First aorist active indicative of \phanero“\. Not mere tautology. See strkjv@2:14-16|.

rwp@Romans:3:8 @{And why not} (\kai mˆ\). We have a tangled sentence which can be cleared up in two ways. One is (Lightfoot) to supply \genˆtai\ after \mˆ\ and repeat \ti\ (\kai ti mˆ genˆtai\, deliberative subjunctive in a question): And why should it not happen? The other way (Sanday and Headlam) is to take \mˆ\ with \poiˆs“men\ and make a long parenthesis of all in between. Even so it is confusing because \hoti\ also (recitative \hoti\) comes just before \poiˆs“men\. The parenthesis is necessary anyhow, for there are two lines of thought, one the excuse brought forward by the unbeliever, the other the accusation that Paul affirms that very excuse that we may do evil that good may come. Note the double indirect assertion (the accusative and the infinitive \hˆmƒs legein\ after \phasin\ and then the direct quotation with recitative \hoti\ after \legein\, a direct quotation dependent on the infinitive in indirect quotation. {Let us do evil that good may come} (\poiˆs“men ta kaka hina elthˆi ta agatha\). The volitive aorist subjunctive (\poiˆs“men\) and the clause of purpose (\hina\ and the aorist subjunctive \elthˆi\). It sounds almost uncanny to find this maxim of the Jesuits attributed to Paul in the first century by Jews. It was undoubtedly the accusation of Antinomianism because Paul preached justification by faith and not by works.

rwp@Romans:3:10 @{As it is written} (\kath“s gegraptai hoti\). Usual formula of quotation as in verse 4| with recitative \hoti\ added as in verse 8|. Paul here uses a catena or chain of quotations to prove his point in verse 9| that Jews are in no better fix than the Greeks for all are under sin. Dr. J. Rendel Harris has shown that the Jews and early Christians had _Testimonia_ (quotations from the Old Testament) strung together for certain purposes as proof-texts. Paul may have used one of them or he may have put these passages together himself. Verses 10-12| come from strkjv@Psalms:14:1-3|; first half of 13| as far as \edoliousan\ from strkjv@Psalms:4:9|, the second half from strkjv@Psalms:140:3|; verse 14| from strkjv@Psalms:10:7|; 15-17| from an abridgment of strkjv@Isaiah:59:7f.|; verse 18| from strkjv@Psalms:35:1|. Paul has given compounded quotations elsewhere (2Corinthians:6:16; strkjv@Romans:9:25f.,27f; strkjv@11:26f.,34f.; strkjv@12:19f.|). Curiously enough this compounded quotation was imported bodily into the text (LXX) of strkjv@Psalms:14| after verse 4 in Aleph B, etc. {There is none righteous, no, not one} (\ouk estin dikaios oude heis\). "There is not a righteous man, not even one." This sentence is like a motto for all the rest, a summary for what follows.

rwp@Romans:3:20 @{Because} (\dioti\, again, \dia, hoti\). {By the works of the law} (\ex erg“n nomou\). "Out of works of law." Mosaic law and any law as the source of being set right with God. Paul quotes strkjv@Psalms:43:2| as he did in strkjv@Galatians:2:16| to prove his point. {The knowledge of sin} (\epign“sis hamartias\). The effect of law universally is rebellion to it (1Corinthians:15:56|). Paul has shown this carefully in strkjv@Galatians:3:19-22|. Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:10:3|. He has now proven the guilt of both Gentile and Jew.

rwp@Romans:4:23 @{That} (\hoti\). Either recitative or declarative \hoti\. It makes sense either way.

rwp@Romans:6:15 @{What then?} (\ti oun?\). Another turn in the argument about the excess of grace. {Shall we sin?} (\hamartes“men?\). First aorist active deliberative subjunctive of \hamartan“\. "Shall we commit sin" (occasional acts of sin as opposed to the life of sin as raised by \epimen“men tˆi hamartiƒi\ in verse 1|)? {Because} (\hoti\). The same reason as in verse 1| and taken up from the very words in verse 14|. Surely, the objector says, we may take a night off now and then and sin a little bit "since we are under grace."

rwp@Romans:8:20 @{Was subjected} (\hupetagˆ\). Second aorist passive indicative of \hupatass“\ (cf. verse 7|). {To vanity} (\tˆi mataiotˆti\). Dative case. Rare and late word, common in LXX. From \mataios\, empty, vain. strkjv@Ephesians:4:17; strkjv@2Peter:2:18|. {Not of its own will} (\ouch hekousa\). Common adjective, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:9:27|. It was due to the effect of man's sin. {But by reason of him} (\alla dia ton\). Because of God. {In hope that} (\eph' helpidi hoti\). Note the form \helpidi\ rather than the usual \elpidi\ and so \eph'\. \Hoti\ can be causal "because" instead of declarative "that."

rwp@Romans:9:6 @{But it is not as though} (\ouch hoion de hoti\). Supply \estin\ after \ouch\: "But it is not such as that," an old idiom, here alone in N.T. {Hath come to nought} (\ekpept“ken\). Perfect active indicative of \ekpipt“\, old verb, to fall out. {For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel} (\ou gar pantes hoi ex Israˆl houtoi Israˆl\). "For not all those out of Israel (the literal Jewish nation), these are Israel (the spiritual Israel)." This startling paradox is not a new idea with Paul. He had already shown (Galatians:3:7-9|) that those of faith are the true sons of Abraham. He has amplified that idea also in strkjv@Romans:4|. Songs:he is not making a clever dodge here to escape a difficulty. He now shows how this was the original purpose of God to include only those who believed. {Seed of Abraham} (\sperma Abraam\). Physical descent here, but spiritual seed by promise in verse 8|. He quotes strkjv@Genesis:21:12f|.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Tue Jul 2 20:12:05 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020