NT.filter - rwp Matthew:26:6:

rwp@1Corinthians:4:11 @{Even unto this present hour} (\achri ts arti hras\). \Arti\ (just now, this very minute) accents the continuity of the contrast as applied to Paul. Ten verbs and four participles from 11-13| give a graphic picture of Paul's condition in Ephesus when he is writing this epistle. {We hunger} (\peinmen\), {we thirst} (\dipsmen\), {are naked} (\gumniteuomen\), late verb for scant clothing from \gumnts\, {are buffeted} (\kolaphizometha\), to strike a blow with the fist from \kolaphos\ and one of the few N.T. and ecclesiastical words and see on ¯Matthew:26:67|, {have no certain dwelling place} (\astatoumen\) from \astatos\, strolling about and only here save Anthol. Pal. and Aquila in strkjv@Isaiah:58:7|. Field in _Notes_, p. 170 renders strkjv@1Corinthians:4:11| "and are vagabonds" or spiritual hobos.

rwp@1Peter:2:20 @{For what glory} (\poion gar kleos\). Qualitative interrogative (what kind of glory). "What price glory?" \Kleos\ is old word from \kle\ (\kale\, to call), report, praise, glory, here only in N.T. {If ye shall take it patiently} (\ei hupomeneite\). First-class condition with \ei\ and future active indicative of \hupomen\, for which see strkjv@James:1:12|. Same condition also in next sentence (\all' ei\, etc.). {When ye sin} (\hamartanontes\). Present active participle of \hamartan\ (continued repetition). {And are buffeted for it} (\kai kolaphizomenoi\). Present passive participle of \kolaphiz\, late word (from \kolaphos\ fist), only in N.T. (cf. strkjv@Matthew:26:67|) and ecclesiastical writers. Repeated action again. No posing as a martyr allowed here. Christians do sometimes deserve persecution, as Jesus implied (Matthew:5:10-12|). {When ye do well} (\agathopoiountes\). Present active participle of \agathopoie\ as in verse 15|. {And suffer for it} (\kai paschontes\). Present active participle of \pasch\ (verse 19|). No "for it" in the Greek here or in the previous sentence. {This is acceptable with God} (\touto charis para thei\). "This thing (neuter) is thanks (verse 19|) by the side of (\para\) God (as God looks at it)."

rwp@1Peter:2:22 @{Who did no sin} (\hos hamartian ouk epoisen\). Quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:53:9|. He has already expressed the sinlessness of Christ in strkjv@1:19|. The next clause is a combination of strkjv@Isaiah:53:9; strkjv@Zephaniah:3:13|. For "guile" (\dolos\) see verse 1|. {Was found} (\heureth\). First aorist passive indicative of \heurisk\. Christ's guilelessness stood the test of scrutiny (Vincent), as Peter knew (Matthew:26:60; strkjv@John:18:38; strkjv@19:4,6|).

rwp@2Corinthians:12:7 @{By reason of the exceeding greatness} (\ti huperboli\). Instrumental case, "by the excess." {That I should not be exalted overmuch} (\hina m huperairmai\). Present passive subjunctive in final clause of \huperair\, old verb to lift up beyond, only here in N.T. This clause is repeated at the end of the sentence. {A thorn in the flesh} (\skolops ti sarki\). This old word is used for splinter, stake, thorn. In the papyri and inscriptions examples occur both for splinter and thorn as the meaning. In the LXX it is usually thorn. The case of \ti sarki\ can be either locative (in) or dative (for). What was it? Certainly it was some physical malady that persisted. All sorts of theories are held (malaria, eye-trouble, epilepsy, insomnia, migraine or sick-headache, etc.). It is a blessing to the rest of us that we do not know the particular affliction that so beset Paul. Each of us has some such splinter or thorn in the flesh, perhaps several at once. {Messenger of Satan} (\aggelos Satana\). Angel of Satan, the affliction personified. {Buffet} (\kolaphizi\). See on ¯Matthew:26:67; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:11| for this late and rare word from \kolaphos\, fist. The messenger of Satan kept slapping Paul in the face and Paul now sees that it was God's will for it to be so.

rwp@Acts:7:55 @{And Jesus standing} (\kai Isoun hestta\). Full of the Holy Spirit, gazing steadfastly into heaven, he saw God's glory and Jesus "standing" as if he had risen to cheer the brave Stephen. Elsewhere (save verse 56| also) he is pictured as sitting at the right hand of God (the Session of Christ) as in strkjv@Matthew:26:64; strkjv@Mark:16:19; strkjv@Acts:2:34; strkjv@Ephesians:1:20; strkjv@Colossians:3:1; strkjv@Hebrews:1:3|.

rwp@Acts:7:56 @{Opened} (\dinoigmenous\). Perfect passive predicate participle of \dianoignumi\ (cf. strkjv@Matthew:3:16; strkjv@Luke:3:21|). {The son of man} (\ton huion tou anthrpou\). Elsewhere in the N.T. in Christ's own words. Here Stephen may refer to the words of Jesus as preserved in strkjv@Matthew:26:64|.

rwp@Acts:7:57 @{Stopped their ears} (\suneschon ta ta autn\). Second aorist active of \sunech\, to hold together. They held their ears together with their hands and affected to believe Stephen guilty of blasphemy (cf. strkjv@Matthew:26:65|). {Rushed upon him with one accord} (\hrmsan homothumadon ep' auton\). Ingressive aorist active indicative of \horma\, to rush impetuously as the hogs did down the cliff when the demons entered them (Luke:8:33|). No vote was taken by the Sanhedrin. No scruple was raised about not having the right to put him to death (John:8:31|). It may have taken place after Pilate's recall and before his successor came or Pilate, if there, just connived at such an incident that did not concern Rome. At any rate it was mob violence like modern lynching that took the law into the hands of the Sanhedrin without further formalities. {Out of the city} (\ek ts poles\). To keep from defiling the place with blood. But they sought to kill Paul as soon as they got him out of the temple area (Acts:21:30f.|). {Stoned} (\elithoboloun\). Imperfect active indicative of \lithobole\, began to stone, from \lithobolos\ (\lithos\, stone, \ball\, to throw), late Greek verb, several times in the N.T. as strkjv@Luke:13:34|. Stoning was the Jewish punishment for blasphemy (Leviticus:24:14-16|). {The witnesses} (\hoi martures\). The false testifiers against Stephen suborned by the Pharisees (Acts:6:11,13|). These witnesses had the privilege of casting the first stones (Deuteronomy:13:10; strkjv@17:7|) against the first witness for Christ with death (_martyr_ in our modern sense of the word). {At the feet of a young man named Saul} (\para tous podas neaniou kaloumenou Saulou\). Beside (\para\) the feet. Our first introduction to the man who became the greatest of all followers of Jesus Christ. Evidently he was not one of the "witnesses" against Stephen, for he was throwing no stones at him. But evidently he was already a leader in the group of Pharisees. We know from later hints from Saul (Paul) himself that he had been a pupil of Gamaliel (Acts:22:3|). Gamaliel, as the Pharisaic leader in the Sanhedrin, was probably on hand to hear the accusations against Stephen by the Pharisees. But, if so, he does not raise his voice against this mob violence. Saul does not seem to be aware that he is going contrary to the views of his master, though pupils often go further than their teachers.

rwp@Acts:13:28 @{Though they found no cause of death} (\mdemian aitian thanatou heurontes\). Second aorist active with usual negative of the participle. As a matter of fact the Sanhedrin did charge Jesus with blasphemy, but could not prove it (Matthew:26:65; strkjv@27:24; strkjv@Luke:23:22|). At this time no Gospel had probably been written, but Paul knew that Jesus was innocent. He uses this same idiom about his own innocence (Acts:28:18|). {That he should be slain} (\anairethnai auton\). First aorist passive infinitive, the accusative case, the direct object of \itsanto\ (first aorist middle indicative, asked as a favour to themselves).

rwp@Acts:14:14 @{Having heard} (\akousantes\). Such elaborate preparation "with the multitudes" (\sun tois ochlois\) spread rumours and some who spoke Greek told Paul and Barnabas. It is possible that the priest of Jupiter may have sent a formal request that the visiting "gods" might come out to the statue by the temple gates to make it a grand occasion. They rent their garments (\diarrxantes\). First aorist active participle from \diarrgnumi\, old verb to rend in two. Like the high priest in strkjv@Matthew:26:65| as if an act of sacrilege was about to be committed. It was strange conduct for the supposed gods! {Sprang forth} (\exepdsan\). First aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \ekpda\ (note \ek\), old verb, here only in the N.T. It was all a sign of grief and horror with loud outcries (\krazontes\).

rwp@James:4:13 @{Go to now} (\age nun\). Interjectional use of \age\ (from \ag\) as in strkjv@5:1| (only N.T. instances) with a plural verb (\hoi legontes\, present active articular participle, ye that say) as is common in ancient Greek like \ide nun kousate\ (Matthew:26:65|). {Today or tomorrow} (\smeron aurion\). Correct text (Aleph B), not \kai\ (and). {Into this city} (\eis tnde tn polin\). Old demonstrative \hode\, rare in N.T. (Luke:10:39|) save in neuter plural \tade\ (these things strkjv@Acts:21:11|). One would point out the city on the map (Mayor) as he made the proposal (we will go, \poreusometha\). {And spend a year there} (\kai poisomen ekei eniauton\). Another future (active of \poie\). "We will do a year there." {And trade} (\kai emporeusometha\). Future middle of \emporeuomai\ (\en, poreuomai\, to go in), old verb from \emporos\ (a merchant or trader, a drummer, one going in and getting the trade, strkjv@Matthew:13:45|), a vivid picture of the Jewish merchants of the time. {And get gain} (\kai kerdsomen\). Future (Ionic form) active of \kerdain\, old verb from \kerdos\ (gain, strkjv@Phillipians:1:21|), as in strkjv@Matthew:16:26|.

rwp@John:1:34 @{I have seen} (\heraka\). Present perfect active of \hora\. John repeats the statement of verse 32| (\tetheamai\). {Have borne witness} (\memarturka\). Perfect active indicative of \marture\ for which verb see 32|. {This is the Son of God} (\ho huios tou theou\). The Baptist saw the Spirit come on Jesus at his baptism and undoubtedly heard the Father's voice hail him as "My Beloved Son" (Mark:1:11; strkjv@Matthew:3:17; strkjv@Luke:3:22|). Nathanael uses it as a Messianic title (John:1:49|) as does Martha (11:27|). The Synoptics use it also of Christ (Mark:3:11; strkjv@Matthew:14:33; strkjv@Luke:22:70|). Caiaphas employs it to Christ as a Messianic title (Matthew:26:63|) and Jesus confessed under oath that he was (verse strkjv@Matthew:26:64|), thus applying the term to himself as he does in John's Gospel (5:25; strkjv@10:36; strkjv@11:4|) and by implication (the Father, the Son) in strkjv@Matthew:11:27| (Luke:10:22|). Hence in the Synoptics also Jesus calls himself the Son of God. The phrase means more than just Messiah and expresses the peculiar relation of the Son to the Father (John:3:18; strkjv@5:25; strkjv@17:5; strkjv@19:7; strkjv@20:31|) like that of the Logos with God in strkjv@1:1|.

rwp@John:2:22 @{When therefore he was raised from the dead} (\Hote oun gerth ek nekrn\). First aorist passive indicative of \egeir\, to raise up. And not at first then, but only slowly after the disciples themselves were convinced. Then "they believed the Scripture" (\episteusan ti graphi\). They "believed" again. Dative case \graphi\. Probably strkjv@Psalms:16:10| is meant (Acts:2:31; strkjv@13:35|). {And the word which Jesus had said} (\kai ti logi hon eipen\). Dative case \logi\ also, but \hon\ (relative) is not attracted to the dative. Clearly then John interprets Jesus to have a parabolic reference to his death and resurrection by his language in strkjv@2:19|. There are those who bluntly say that John was mistaken. I prefer to say that these scholars are mistaken. Even Bernard considers it "hardly possible" that John interprets Jesus rightly in strkjv@1:21|. "Had he meant that, He would have spoken with less ambiguity." But how do we know that Jesus wished to be understood clearly at this time? Certainly no one understood Christ when he spoke the words. The language of Jesus is recalled and perverted at his trial as "I will destroy" (Mark:14:58|), "I can destroy" (Matthew:26:61|), neither of which he said.

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

rwp@John:11:27 @{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:12:2 @{Songs:they made him a supper there} (\epoisan oun auti deipnon ekei\). Here again \oun\ is not inferential, but merely transitional. This supper is given by Mark (Mark:14:3-9|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6-13|) just two days (Mark:14:1|) before the passover, that is on our Tuesday evening (beginning of Jewish Wednesday), while John mentions (12:2-9|) it immediately after the arrival of Jesus in Bethany (12:1|). One must decide which date to follow. Mark and Matthew and Luke follow it with the visit of Judas to the Sanhedrin with an offer to betray Jesus as if exasperated by the rebuke by Jesus at the feast. Bernard considers that John "is here more probably accurate." It all turns on John's purpose in putting it here. This is the last mention of Jesus in Bethany and he may have mentioned it proleptically for that reason as seems to me quite reasonable. Westcott notes that in chapter 12 John closes his record of the public ministry of the Lord relative to the disciples at this feast (1-11|), to the multitude in the triumphal entry (12-19|), to the world outside in the visit of the Greeks (20-36a|), and with two summary judgements (36b-50|). There is no further reason to refer to the feast in the house of another Simon when a sinful woman anointed Jesus (Luke:7:36-50|). It is no credit to Luke or to John with Mark and Matthew to have them all making a jumble like that. There were two anointings by two absolutely different women for wholly different purposes. See the discussion on Luke for further details. {And Martha served} (\kai h Martha dikonei\). Imperfect active of \diakone\, picturing Martha true to the account of her in strkjv@Luke:10:40| (\polln diakonian\, \diakonein\ as here). But this fact does not show that Martha was the wife of this Simon at all. They were friends and neighbours and Martha was following her bent. It is Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6|) who mention the name of the host. It is not Simon the Pharisee (Luke:7:36|), but Simon the leper (Mark:14:3; strkjv@Matthew:26:6|) in whose house they meet. The name is common enough. The Simon in Luke was sharply critical of Jesus; this one is full of gratitude for what Jesus has done for him. {That sat at meat} (\tn anakeimenn\). "That lay back," reclined as they did, articular participle (ablative case after \ek\) of the common verb \anakeimai\. Perhaps Simon gave the feast partly in honour of Lazarus as well as of Jesus since all were now talking of both (John:12:9|). It was a gracious occasion. The guests were Jesus, the twelve apostles, and Martha, Mary, and Lazarus.

rwp@John:18:15 @{Followed} (\kolouthei\). Imperfect active of \akolouthe\, "was following," picturesque and vivid tense, with associative instrumental case \ti Isou\. {Another disciple} (\allos mathts\). Correct text without article \ho\ (genuine in verse 16|). Peter's companion was the Beloved Disciple, the author of the book (John:21:24|). {Was known unto the high priest} (\n gnstos ti archierei\). Verbal adjective from \ginsk\, to know (Acts:1:19|) with dative case. How well known the word does not say, not necessarily a personal friend, well enough known for the portress to admit John. "The account of what happened to Peter might well seem to be told from the point of view of the servants' hall" (Sanday, _Criticism of the Fourth Gospel_, p. 101). {Entered in with Jesus} (\suneislthen ti Isou\). Second aorist active indicative of the double compound \suneiserchomai\, old verb, in N.T. here and strkjv@6:22|. With associative instrumental case. {Into the court} (\eis tn auln\). It is not clear that this word ever means the palace itself instead of the courtyard (uncovered enclosure) as always in the papyri (very common). Clearly courtyard in strkjv@Mark:14:66| (Matthew:26:69; strkjv@Luke:22:55|). Apparently Annas had rooms in the official residence of Caiaphas.

rwp@John:18:17 @{The maid} (\h paidisk\). Feminine form of \paidiskos\, diminutive of \pais\. See strkjv@Matthew:26:69|. When "the maid the portress" (apposition). {Art thou also?} (\m kai su ei;\). Expecting the negative answer, though she really believed he was. {This man's} (\tou anthrpou toutou\). Contemptuous use of \houtos\ with a gesture toward Jesus. She made it easy for Peter to say no.

rwp@John:18:22 @{When he had said this} (\tauta autou eipontos\). Genitive absolute of second aorist active participle of \eipon\, to say. {Standing by} (\parestks\). Perfect active (intransitive) participle of \paristmi\ (transitive), to place beside. One of the temple police who felt his importance as protector of Annas. {Struck Jesus with his hand} (\edken rapisma ti Isou\). Late word \rapisma\ is from \rapiz\, to smite with a rod or with the palm of the hand (Matthew:26:67|). It occurs only three times in the N.T. (Mark:14:65; strkjv@John:18:22; strkjv@19:3|), in each of which it is uncertain whether the blow is with a rod or with the palm of the hand (probably this, a most insulting act). The papyri throw no real light on it. "He gave Jesus a slap in the face." Cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:11:20|. {So} (\houts\). As Jesus had done in verse 21|, a dignified protest in fact by Jesus.

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 gegennmai\). Perfect passive indicative of \genna\. The Incarnation was for this purpose. Note repetition of \eis touto\ (for this purpose), explained by \hina marturs ti altheii\ (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 (\martursantos\) before Pilate. Jesus bore such witness always (John:3:11,32; strkjv@7:7; strkjv@8:14; strkjv@Revelation:1:5|).

rwp@John:19:1 @{Took and scourged} (\elaben kai emastigsen\). First aorist active indicative of \lamban\ and \mastigo\ (from \mastix\, whip). For this redundant use of \lamban\ see also verse 6|. It is the causative use of \mastigo\, for Pilate did not actually scourge Jesus. He simply ordered it done, perhaps to see if the mob would be satisfied with this penalty on the alleged pretender to royalty (Luke:23:22|) whom Pilate had pronounced innocent (John:18:38|), an illegal act therefore. It was a preliminary to crucifixion, but Jesus was not yet condemned. The Sanhedrin had previously mocked Jesus (Mark:14:65; strkjv@Matthew:26:67f.; strkjv@Luke:22:63ff.|) as the soldiers will do later (Mark:15:16-19; strkjv@Matthew:27:27-30|). This later mock coronation (Mark and Matthew) was after the condemnation. {Plaited a crown of thorns} (\plexantes stephanon ex akanthn\). Old verb \plek\, to weave, in the N.T. only here, strkjv@Mark:15:17; strkjv@Matthew:27:19|. Not impossible for the mock coronation to be repeated. {Arrayed him} (\periebalon auton\). "Placed around him" (second aorist active indicative of \periball\). {In a purple garment} (\himation porphuroun\). Old adjective \porphureos\ from \porphura\, purple cloth (Mark:15:17,20|), dyed in purple, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:18:16|. Jesus had been stripped of his outer garment \himation\ (Matthew:27:28|) and the scarlet cloak of one of the soldiers may have been put on him (Matthew:27:28|).

rwp@John:19:9 @{Whence art thou?} (\pothen ei su;\). Pilate knew that Jesus was from Galilee (Luke:23:6f.|). He is really alarmed. See a like question by the Jews in strkjv@8:25|. {Gave him no answer} (\apokrisin ouk edken auti\). See same idiom in strkjv@1:22|. \Apokrisis\ (old word from \apokrinomai\) occurs also in strkjv@Luke:2:47; strkjv@20:26|. The silence of Jesus, like that before Caiaphas (Mark:14:61; strkjv@Matthew:26:63|) and Herod (Luke:23:9|), irritates the dignity of Pilate in spite of his fears.

rwp@Luke:6:22 @{When they shall separate you} (\hotan aphorissin hums\). First aorist active subjunctive, from \aphoriz\, common verb for marking off a boundary. Songs:either in good sense or bad sense as here. The reference is to excommunication from the congregation as well as from social intercourse. {Cast out your name as evil} (\exbalsin to onoma humn hs ponron\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \ekball\, common verb. The verb is used in Aristophanes, Sophocles, and Plato of hissing an actor off the stage. The name of Christian or disciple or Nazarene came to be a byword of contempt as shown in the Acts. It was even unlawful in the Neronian persecution when Christianity was not a _religio licita_. {For the Son of man's sake} (\heneka tou huiou tou anthrpou\). Jesus foretold what will befall those who are loyal to him. The Acts of the Apostles is a commentary on this prophecy. This is Christ's common designation of himself, never of others save by Stephen (Acts:7:56|) and in the Apocalypse (Revelation:1:13; strkjv@14:14|). But both Son of God and Son of man apply to him (John:1:50,52; strkjv@Matthew:26:63f.|). Christ was a real man though the Son of God. He is also the representative man and has authority over all men.

rwp@Luke:7:37 @{A woman which was in the city, a sinner} (\gun htis en ti polei hamartlos\). Probably in Capernaum. The use of \htis\ means "Who was of such a character as to be" (cf. strkjv@8:3|) and so more than merely the relative \h\, who, that is, "who was a sinner in the city," a woman of the town, in other words, and known to be such. \Hamartlos\, from \hamartan\, to sin, means devoted to sin and uses the same form for feminine and masculine. It is false and unjust to Mary Magdalene, introduced as a new character in strkjv@Luke:8:2|, to identify this woman with her. Luke would have no motive in concealing her name here and the life of a courtesan would be incompatible with the sevenfold possession of demons. Still worse is it to identify this courtesan not only with Mary Magdalene, but also with Mary of Bethany simply because it is a Simon who gives there a feast to Jesus when Mary of Bethany does a beautiful deed somewhat like this one here (Mark:14:3-9; strkjv@Matthew:26:6-13; strkjv@John:12:2-8|). Certainly Luke knew full well the real character of Mary of Bethany (10:38-42|) so beautifully pictured by him. But a falsehood, once started, seems to have more lives than the cat's proverbial nine. The very name Magdalene has come to mean a repentant courtesan. But we can at least refuse to countenance such a slander on Mary Magdalene and on Mary of Bethany. This sinful woman had undoubtedly repented and changed her life and wished to show her gratitude to Jesus who had rescued her. Her bad reputation as a harlot clung to her and made her an unwelcome visitor in the Pharisee's house. {When she knew} (\epignousa\). Second aorist active participle from \epiginsk\, to know fully, to recognize. She came in by a curious custom of the time that allowed strangers to enter a house uninvited at a feast, especially beggars seeking a gift. This woman was an intruder whereas Mary of Bethany was an invited guest. "Many came in and took their places on the side seats, uninvited and yet unchallenged. They spoke to those at table on business or the news of the day, and our host spoke freely to them" (Trench in his _Parables_, describing a dinner at a Consul's house at Damietta). {He was sitting at meat} (\katakeitai\). Literally, he is reclining (present tense retained in indirect discourse in Greek). {An alabaster cruse of ointment} (\alabastron murou\). See on ¯Matthew:26:7| for discussion of \alabastron\ and \murou\.

rwp@Luke:22:56 @{In the light} (\pros to phs\). Facing (\pros\) the light, for the fire gave light as well as heat. strkjv@Mark:14:65| has "warming himself in the light," John (John:18:18,25|) "warming himself." {Looking steadfastly} (\atenisasa\). Favourite word in Luke (4:20|, etc.) for gazing steadily at one. {This man also} (\kai houtos\). As if pointing to Peter and talking about him. The other Gospels (Mark:14:67; strkjv@Matthew:26:69; strkjv@John:18:25|) make a direct address to Peter. Both could be true, as she turned to Peter.

rwp@Luke:22:64 @{Blindfolded} (\perikalupsantes\). First aorist active participle of \perikalupt\, old verb, to put a veil around. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:14:65|. See strkjv@Mark:14:65; strkjv@Matthew:26:67f.| for further discussion.

rwp@Luke:22:67 @{If thou art the Christ} (\Ei su ei ho Christos\). The Messiah, they mean. The condition is the first class, assuming it to be true. {If I tell you} (\Ean humin eip\). Condition of the third class, undetermined, but with likelihood of being determined. This is the second appearance of Jesus before the Sanhedrin merely mentioned by strkjv@Mark:15:1; strkjv@Matthew:27:1| who give in detail the first appearance and trial. Luke merely gives this so-called ratification meeting after daybreak to give the appearance of legality to their vote of condemnation already taken (Mark:14:64; strkjv@Matthew:26:66|). {Ye will not believe} (\ou m pisteuste\). Double negative with the aorist subjunctive, strongest possible negative. Songs:as to verse 68|.

rwp@Luke:22:70 @{Art thou the Son of God?} (\Su oun ei ho huios tou theou;\). Note how these three epithets are used as practical equivalents. They ask about "the Messiah." Jesus affirms that he is the Son of Man and will sit at the right hand of the power of God. They take this to be a claim to be the Son of God (both humanity and deity). Jesus accepts the challenge and admits that he claims to be all three (Messiah, the Son of man, the Son of God). {Ye say} (\Humeis legete\). Just a Greek idiom for "Yes" (compare "I am" in strkjv@Mark:14:62| with "Thou has said" in strkjv@Matthew:26:64|).

rwp@Mark:14:3 @{As he sat at meat} (\katakeimenou autou\). strkjv@Matthew:26:7| uses \anakeimenou\, both words meaning reclining (leaning down or up or back) and in the genitive absolute. See on ¯Matthew:26:6| in proof that this is a different incident from that recorded in strkjv@Luke:7:36-50|. See on ¯Matthew:26:6-13| for discussion of details. {Spikenard} (\nardou pistiks\). This use of \pistikos\ with \nardos\ occurs only here and in strkjv@John:12:3|. The adjective is common enough in the older Greek and appears in the papyri also in the sense of genuine, unadulterated, and that is probably the idea here. The word spikenard is from the Vulgate _nardi spicati_, probably from the Old Latin _nardi pistici_. {Brake} (\suntripsousa\). Only in Mark. She probably broke the narrow neck of the vase holding the ointment.

rwp@Mark:14:62 @{I am} (\ego eimi\). Matthew has it, "Thou hast said," which is the equivalent of the affirmative. But Mark's statement is definite beyond controversy. See on ¯Matthew:26:64-68| for the claims of Jesus and the conduct of Caiaphas.

rwp@Mark:14:65 @{Cover his face} (\perikaluptein autou to prospon\). Put a veil around his face. Not in Matthew, but in strkjv@Luke:22:64| where Revised Version translates \perikalupsantes\ by "blind-folded." All three Gospels give the jeering demand of the Sanhedrin: "Prophesy" (\prophteuson\), meaning, as Matthew and Luke add, thereby telling who struck him while he was blindfolded. Mark adds "the officers" (same as in verse 54|) of the Sanhedrin, Roman lictors or sergeants-at-arms who had arrested Jesus in Gethsemane and who still held Jesus (\hoi sunechontes auton\, strkjv@Luke:22:63|). strkjv@Matthew:26:67| alludes to their treatment of Jesus without clearly indicating who they were. {With blows of their hands} (\rapismasin\). The verb \rapiz\ in strkjv@Matthew:26:67| originally meant to smite with a rod. In late writers it comes to mean to slap the face with the palm of the hands. The same thing is true of the substantive \rapisma\ used here. A papyrus of the sixth century A.D. uses it in the sense of a scar on the face as the result of a blow. It is in the instrumental case here. "They caught him with blows," Swete suggests for the unusual \elabon\ in this sense. "With rods" is, of course, possible as the lictors carried rods. At any rate it was a gross indignity.

rwp@Mark:14:67 @{Warming himself} (\thermainomenon\). Mark mentions this fact about Peter twice (14:54,67|) as does John (John:18:18,25|). He was twice beside the fire. It is quite difficult to relate clearly the three denials as told in the Four Gospels. Each time several may have joined in, both maids and men. {The Nazarene} (\tou Nazarnou\). In strkjv@Matthew:26:69| it is "the Galilean." A number were probably speaking, one saying one thing, another another.

rwp@Mark:14:69 @{To them that stood by} (\tois parestsin\). This talk about Peter was overheard by him. "This fellow (\houtos\) is one of them." Songs:in verse 70| the talk is directly to Peter as in strkjv@Matthew:26:73|, but in strkjv@Luke:22:59| it is about him. Soon the bystanders (\hoi paresttes\) will join in the accusation to Peter (verse 70; strkjv@Matthew:26:73|), with the specially pungent question in strkjv@John:18:26| which was the climax. See on ¯Matthew:26:69-75| for discussion of similar details.

rwp@Matthew:26:6 @{In the house of Simon the leper} (\en oikii Simnos tou leprou\). Evidently a man who had been healed of his leprosy by Jesus who gave the feast in honour of Jesus. All sorts of fantastic theories have arisen about it. Some even identify this Simon with the one in strkjv@Luke:7:36ff.|, but Simon was a very common name and the details are very different. Some hold that it was Martha's house because she served (John:12:2|) and that Simon was either the father or husband of Martha, but Martha loved to serve and that proves nothing. Some identify Mary of Bethany with the sinful woman in strkjv@Luke:7| and even with Mary Magdalene, both gratuitous and groundless propositions. For the proof that Mary of Bethany, Mary Magdalene, and the sinful woman of strkjv@Luke:7| are all distinct see my _Some Minor Characters in the New Testament_. John (John:12:1|) apparently locates the feast six days before the passover, while Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (26:6|) seem to place it on the Tuesday evening (Jewish Wednesday) just two days before the passover meal. It is possible that John anticipates the date and notes the feast at Bethany at this time because he does not refer to Bethany again. If not, the order of Mark must be followed. According to the order of Mark and Matthew, this feast took place at the very time that the Sanhedrin was plotting about the death of Jesus (Mark:14:1f.|).

rwp@Matthew:26:60 @{They found it not} (\kai ouch heuron\). They found false witnesses in plenty, but not the false witness that would stand any sort of test.

rwp@Matthew:26:61 @{I am able to destroy the temple of God} (\dunamai katalusai ton naon tou theou\). What he had said (John:2:19|) referred to the temple of his body which they were to destroy (and did) and which he would raise again in three days as he did. It was a pitiful perversion of what Jesus had said and even so the two witnesses disagreed in their misrepresentation (Mark:14:59|).

rwp@Matthew:26:63 @{Held his peace} (\esipa\). Kept silent, imperfect tense. Jesus refused to answer the bluster of Caiaphas. {I adjure thee by the living God} (\exorkiz se kata tou theou tou zntos\). Songs:Caiaphas put Jesus on oath in order to make him incriminate himself, a thing unlawful in Jewish jurisprudence. He had failed to secure any accusation against Jesus that would stand at all. But Jesus did not refuse to answer under solemn oath, clearly showing that he was not thinking of oaths in courts of justice when he prohibited profanity. The charge that Caiaphas makes is that Jesus claims to be the Messiah, the Son of God. To refuse to answer would be tantamount to a denial. Songs:Jesus answered knowing full well the use that would be made of his confession and claim.

rwp@Matthew:26:64 @{Thou hast said} (\su eipas\). This is a Greek affirmative reply. Mark (Mark:14:62|) has it plainly, "I am" (\eimi\). But this is not all that Jesus said to Caiaphas. He claims that the day will come when Jesus will be the Judge and Caiaphas the culprit using the prophetic language in strkjv@Daniel:7:13| and strkjv@Psalms:109:1|. It was all that Caiaphas wanted.

rwp@Matthew:26:65 @{He hath spoken blasphemy} (\eblasphmsen\). There was no need of witnesses now, for Jesus had incriminated himself by claiming under oath to be the Messiah, the Son of God. Now it would not be blasphemy for the real Messiah to make such a claim, but it was intolerable to admit that Jesus could be the Messiah of Jewish hope. At the beginning of Christ's ministry he occasionally used the word Messiah of himself, but he soon ceased, for it was plain that it would create trouble. The people would take it in the sense of a political revolutionist who would throw off the Roman yoke. If he declined that role, the Pharisees would have none of him for that was the kind of a Messiah that they desired. But the hour has now come. At the Triumphal Entry Jesus let the Galilean crowds hail him as Messiah, knowing what the effect would be. Now the hour has struck. He has made his claim and has defied the High Priest.

rwp@Matthew:26:66 @{He is worthy of death} (\enochos thanatou estin\). Held in the bonds of death (\en, ech\) as actually guilty with the genitive (\thanatou\). The dative expresses liability as in strkjv@Matthew:5:21| (\ti krisei\) and as \eis\ and the accusative (Matthew:5:22|). They took the vote though it was at night and they no longer had the power of death since the Romans took it away from them. Death was the penalty of blasphemy (Leviticus:24:15|). But they enjoyed taking it as their answer to his unanswerable speeches in the temple that dreadful Tuesday a few days before. It was unanimous save that Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus did not agree. They were probably absent and not even invited as being under suspicion for being secret disciples of Christ.

rwp@Matthew:26:68 @{Thou Christ} (\Christe\). With definite sneer at his claims under oath in strkjv@26:63|. With uncontrolled glee and abandon like a lot of hoodlums these doctors of divinity insulted Jesus. They actually spat in his face, buffeted him on the neck (\ekolaphisan\, from \kolaphos\ the fist), and struck him in the face with the palms of their hands (\erapisan\, from \rapis\, a rod), all personal indignities after the legal injustice already done. They thus gave vent to their spite and hatred.

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

rwp@Matthew:27:29 @{A crown of thorns} (\stephanon ex akanthn\). They wove a crown out of thorns which would grow even in the palace grounds. It is immaterial whether they were young and tender thorn bushes, as probable in the spring, or hard bushes with sharp prongs. The soldiers would not care, for they were after ridicule and mockery even if it caused pain. It was more like a victor's garland (\stephanon\) than a royal diadem (\diadma\), but it served the purpose. Songs:with the reed (\kalamon\), a stalk of common cane grass which served as sceptre. The soldiers were familiar with the _Ave Caesar_ and copy it in their mockery of Jesus: {Hail, King of the Jews} (\chaire, Basileu tn Ioudain\). The soldiers added the insults used by the Sanhedrin (Matthew:26:67|), spitting on him and smiting him with the reed. Probably Jesus had been unbound already. At any rate the garments of mockery were removed before the _via dolorosa_ to the cross (verse 31|).

rwp@Matthew:27:41 @{The chief priests mocking} (\hoi archiereis empaizontes\). The Sanhedrin in fact, for "the scribes and elders" are included. The word for mocking (\empaizontes, en,\ and \paiz\, from \pais\, child) means acting like silly children who love to guy one another. These grave and reverend seniors had already given vent to their glee at the condemnation of Jesus by themselves (Matthew:26:67f.|).

rwp@Revelation:2:18 @{In Thyatira} (\en Thuateirois\). Some forty miles south-east of Pergamum, a Lydian city on the edge of Mysia, under Rome since B.C. 190, a centre of trade, especially for the royal purple, home of Lydia of Philippi (Acts:16:14f.|), shown by inscriptions to be full of trade guilds, Apollo the chief deity with no emperor-worship, centre of activity by the Nicolaitans with their idolatry and licentiousness under a "prophetess" who defied the church there. Ramsay calls it "Weakness Made Strong" (_op. cit._, p. 316). {The Son of God} (\ho huios tou theou\). Here Jesus is represented as calling himself by this title as in strkjv@John:11:4| and as he affirms on oath in strkjv@Matthew:26:63f|. "The Word of God" occurs in strkjv@19:13|. {His eyes like a flame of fire} (\tous ophthalmous autou hs phloga puros\). As in strkjv@1:14|. {His feet like burnished brass} (\hoi podes autou homoioi chalkolibani\). As in strkjv@1:15|.