Bible:
Filter: String:

NT.filter - rwp Reign:


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:4:8 @{Already are ye filled?} (\ˆdˆ kekoresmenoi este?\). Perfect passive indicative, state of completion, of \korennumi\, old Greek verb to satiate, to satisfy. The only other example in N.T. is strkjv@Acts:27:38| which see. Paul may refer to strkjv@Deuteronomy:31:20; strkjv@32:15|. But it is keen irony, even sarcasm. Westcott and Hort make it a question and the rest of the sentence also. {Already ye are become rich} (\ˆdˆ eploutˆsate\). Note change to ingressive aorist indicative of \ploute“\, old verb to be rich (cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9|). "The aorists, used instead of perfects, imply indecent haste" (Lightfoot). "They have got a private millennium of their own" (Robertson & Plummer) with all the blessings of the Messianic Kingdom (Luke:22:29f.; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:12; strkjv@2Timothy:2:12|). {Ye have reigned without us} (\ch“ris hˆm“n ebasileusate\). Withering sarcasm. Ye became kings without our company. Some think that Paul as in strkjv@3:21| is purposely employing Stoic phraseology though with his own meanings. If so, it is hardly consciously done. Paul was certainly familiar with much of the literature of his time, but it did not shape his ideas. {I would that ye did reign} (\kai ophelon ge ebasileusate\). More exactly, "And would at least that ye had come to reign (or become kings)." It is an unfulfilled wish about the past expressed by \ophelon\ and the aorist indicative instead of \ei gar\ and the aorist indicative (the ancient idiom). See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1003, for the construction with particle \ophelon\ (an unaugmented second aorist form). {That we also might reign with you} (\hina kai hˆmeis humin sunbasileus“men\). Ironical contrast to \ch“ris hˆm“n ebasileusate\, just before. Associative instrumental case of \humin\ after \sun-\.

rwp@1Corinthians:11:7 @{The image and glory of God} (\eik“n kai doxa theou\). Anarthrous substantives, but definite. Reference to strkjv@Genesis:1:28; strkjv@2:26| whereby man is made directly in the image (\eik“n\) of God. It is the moral likeness of God, not any bodily resemblance. Ellicott notes that man is the glory (\doxa\) of God as the crown of creation and as endowed with sovereignty like God himself. {The glory of the man} (\doxa andros\). Anarthrous also, man's glory. In strkjv@Genesis:2:26| the LXX has \anthr“pos\ (Greek word for both male and female), not \anˆr\ (male) as here. But the woman (\gunˆ\) was formed from the man (\anˆr\) and this priority of the male (verse 8|) gives a certain superiority to the male. On the other hand, it is equally logical to argue that woman is the crown and climax of all creation, being the last.

rwp@2Corinthians:2:9 @{That I might know the proof of you} (\hina gn“ tˆn dokimˆn hum“n\). Ingressive second aorist active subjunctive, come to know. \Dokimˆ\ is proof by testing. Late word from \dokimos\ and is in Dioscorides, medical writer in reign of Hadrian. Earliest use in Paul and only in him in N.T. (2Corinthians:2:9; strkjv@8:2; strkjv@9:13; strkjv@13:3; strkjv@Romans:5:4; strkjv@Phillipians:2:22|). {Obedient} (\hupˆkooi\). Old word from \hupakou“\, to give ear. In N.T. only in Paul (2Corinthians:2:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:8; strkjv@Acts:7:39|).

rwp@2Corinthians:7:6 @{Cormforteth} (\parakal“n\). See on ¯1:3-7| for this word. {The lowly} (\tous tapeinous\). See on ¯Matthew:11:29|. Literally, low on the ground in old sense (Ezekiel:17:24|). Low in condition as here; strkjv@James:1:9|. In strkjv@2Corinthians:10:1| regarded as abject. In this sense in papyri. "Humility as a sovereign grace is the creation of Christianity" (Gladstone, _Life_, iii, p. 466). {By the coming} (\en tˆi parousiƒi\). Same use of \parousia\ as in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:7| which see. See also strkjv@2Corinthians:7:7; strkjv@10:10|.

rwp@2Peter:1:11 @{Thus} (\hout“s\). As shown in verse 10|. {Shall be supplied} (\epichorˆgˆthˆsetai\). Future passive of \epichorˆge“\, for which see verse 5|. You supply the virtues above and God will supply the entrance (\hˆ eisodos\, old word already in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:9|, etc.). {Richly} (\plousi“s\). See strkjv@Colossians:3:16| for this adverb. {Into the eternal kingdom} (\eis tˆn ai“nion basileian\). The believer's inheritance of strkjv@1Peter:1:4| is here termed kingdom, but "eternal" (\ai“nion\ feminine same as masculine). Curiously again in the Stratonicea inscription we find \tˆs ai“niou archˆs\ (of the eternal rule) applied to "the lords of Rome." But this is the spiritual reign of God in men's hearts here on earth (1Peter:2:9|) and in heaven. {Of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ} (\tou kuriou hˆm“n kai s“tˆros Iˆsou Christou\). For which idiom see on ¯1:1|.

rwp@2Timothy:2:11 @{Faithful is the saying} (\pistos ho logos\). The saying which follows here though it can refer to the preceding as in strkjv@1Timothy:4:9|. See strkjv@1Timothy:1:15|. It is possible that from here to the end of 13| we have the fragment of an early hymn. There are four conditions in these verses (11-13|), all of the first class, assumed to be true. Parallels to the ideas here expressed are found in strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:3; strkjv@Romans:6:3-8; strkjv@Colossians:3:1-4|. Note the compounds with \sun\ (\sunapethanomen\, {we died with}, from \sunapothnesko\ as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:3|; \sunzˆsomen\, {we shall live with}, from \sunza“\ as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:3|; \sumbasileusomen\, {we shall reign with}, from \sumbasileu“\ as in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:8|). For \hupomenomen\ (we endure) see strkjv@1Corinthians:13:7| and for \apistoumen\ (we are faithless) see strkjv@Romans:3:3|. The verb \arneomai\, to deny (\arnˆsometha\, we shall deny, \arnˆsetai\, he will deny, \arnˆsasthai\, deny, first aorist middle infinitive) is an old word, common in the Gospels in the sayings of Jesus (Matthew:10:33; strkjv@Luke:12:9|), used of Peter (Mark:14:70|), and is common in the Pastorals (1Timothy:5:8; strkjv@Titus:2:12; strkjv@2Timothy:3:5|). Here in verse 13| it has the notion of proving false to oneself, a thing that Christ "cannot" (\ou dunatai\) do.

rwp@Acts:1:3 @{To whom also} (\hois kai\). He chose them and then also manifested himself to these very same men that they might have personal witness to give. {Shewed himself alive} (\parestˆsen heauton z“nta\). To the disciples the first Sunday evening (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:36-43; strkjv@John:20:19-25|), the second Sunday evening (John:20:26-29|), at the Sea of Tiberias (John:21:1-23|), on the mountain in Galilee (Matthew:28:16-20; strkjv@Mark:16:15-18; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:6|), to the disciples in Jerusalem and Olivet (Luke:24:44-53; strkjv@Mark:16-19f.; strkjv@Acts:1:1-11|). Luke uses this verb \paristˆmi\ 13 times in the Acts both transitively and intransitively. It is rendered by various English words (present, furnish, provide, assist, commend). The early disciples including Paul never doubted the fact of the Resurrection, once they were convinced by personal experience. At first some doubted like Thomas (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:41; strkjv@John:20:24f.; strkjv@Matthew:28:17|). But after that they never wavered in their testimony to their own experience with the Risen Christ, "whereof we are witnesses" Peter said (Acts:3:15|). They doubted at first, that we may believe, but at last they risked life itself in defence of this firm faith. {After his passion} (\meta to pathein auton\). Neat Greek idiom, \meta\ with the articular infinitive (second aorist active of \pasch“\) and the accusative of general reference, "after the suffering as to him." For \pathein\ used absolutely of Christ's suffering see also strkjv@Acts:17:3; strkjv@26:23|. {By many proofs} (\en pollois tekmˆriois\). Literally, "in many proofs." \Tekmˆrion\ is only here in the N.T., though an old and common word in ancient Greek and occurring in the _Koin‚_ (papyri, etc.). The verb \tekmair“\, to prove by sure signs, is from \tekmar\, a sign. Luke does not hesitate to apply the definite word "proofs" to the evidence for the Resurrection of Christ after full investigation on the part of this scientific historian. Aristotle makes a distinction between \tekmˆrion\ (proof) and \sˆmeion\ (sign) as does Galen the medical writer. {Appearing} (\optanomenos\). Present middle participle from late verb \optan“\, late _Koin‚_ verb from root \opt“\ seen in \opsomai, “phthˆn\. In LXX, papyri of second century B.C. (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 83). Only here in the N.T. For \optasia\ for vision see strkjv@Acts:26:19; strkjv@Luke:1:22; strkjv@24:23|. {By the space of forty days} (\di' hˆmer“n tesserakonta\). At intervals (\dia\, between) during the forty days, ten appearances being known to us. Jesus was not with them continually now in bodily presence. The period of forty days is given here alone. The Ascension was thus ten days before Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came. Moses was in the mount forty days (Exodus:24:18|) and Jesus fasted forty days (Matthew:4:2|). In the Gospel of Luke 24 this separation of forty days between the Resurrection and the Ascension is not drawn. {The things concerning the Kingdom of God} (\ta peri tˆs basileias tou theou\). This phrase appears 33 times in Luke's Gospel, 15 times in Mark, 4 times in Matthew who elsewhere has "the kingdom of heaven," once in John, and 6 times in Acts. No essential distinction is to be drawn between the two for the Jews often used "heaven" rather than "God" to avoid using the Tetragrammaton. But it is noticeable how the word kingdom drops out of Acts. Other words like gospel (\euaggelion\) take the place of "kingdom." Jesus was fond of the word "kingdom" and Luke is fond of the idiom "the things concerning" (\ta peri\). Certainly with Jesus the term "kingdom" applies to the present and the future and covers so much that it is not strange that the disciples with their notions of a political Messianic kingdom (Acts:1:6|) were slow to comprehend the spiritual nature of the reign of God.

rwp@Acts:1:7 @{Times or seasons} (\chronous ˆ kairous\). "Periods" and "points" of time sometimes and probably so here, but such a distinction is not always maintained. See strkjv@Acts:17:26| for \kairous\ in the same sense as \chronous\ for long periods of time. But here some distinction seems to be called for. It is curious how eager people have always been to fix definite dates about the second coming of Christ as the apostles were about the political Messianic kingdom which they were expecting. {Hath set} (\etheto\). Second aorist middle indicative, emphasizing the sovereignty of the Father in keeping all such matters to himself, a gentle hint to people today about the limits of curiosity. Note also "his own" (\idiƒi\) "authority" (\exousiƒi\).

rwp@Acts:5:36 @{Theudas} (\Theudas\). Luke represents Gamaliel here about A.D. 35 as speaking of a man who led a revolt before that of Judas the Galilean in connection with the enrolment under Quirinius (Cyrenius) in A.D. 6. But Josephus (_Ant_. XX. 5, 1) tells of a Theudas who led a similar insurrection in the reign of Claudius about A.D. 44 or 45. Josephus (_Ant_. XVIII. 1, 6; XX. 5, 2; _War_ ii. 8, 1 and 17, 8) also describes Judas the Galilean or Gaulonite and places him about A.D. 6. It is not certain that Josephus and Luke (Gamaliel) refer to the same Theudas as the name is an abbreviation of Theodosus, a common name. "Josephus gives an account of four men named Simon who followed each other within forty years, and of three named Judas within ten years, who were all instigators of rebellion" (Hackett). If the same Theudas is meant, then either Josephus or Luke (Gamaliel) has the wrong historical order. In that case one will credit Luke or Josephus according to his estimate of the two as reliable historians. {To be somebody} (\einai tina\). Indirect assertion with the infinitive and the accusative of general reference (\heauton\) and \tina\, predicate accusative. \Tina\ could be "anybody" or "somebody" according to context, clearly "somebody" of importance here. {Joined themselves} (\proseklithˆ\). Correct text and not \prosekollˆthˆ\ (Textus Receptus). First aorist passive indicative of \prosklin“\, old verb to lean towards, to incline towards. Here only in the N.T. {Was slain} (\anˆirethˆ\). First aorist passive of \anaire“\ (cf. verse 33|). {Obeyed} (\epeithonto\). Imperfect middle, kept on obeying. {Were dispersed} (\dieluthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative (effective aorist) of \dialu“\, old verb to dissolve, to go to pieces. Here only in the N.T.

rwp@Acts:7:6 @{On this wise} (\hout“s\). A free quotation from strkjv@Genesis:15:13|. {Should sojourn} (\estai paroikon\). Shall be a sojourner, \Paroikos\ (\para\, beside, \oikos\, home), one dwelling near one's home, but not of it, so a stranger, foreigner, old word, often in LXX, temporary residence without full rights of citizenship (7:29; strkjv@13:17|), and descriptive of Christians (Ephesians:2:19; strkjv@1Peter:1:17; strkjv@2:11|). {In a strange land} (\en gˆi allotriƒi\). In a land not one's own, that belongs to another, alien as in strkjv@Matthew:17:25f.|, which see. {Four hundred years} (\etˆ tetrakosia\). Accusative of duration of time. As in strkjv@Genesis:15:13|, but a round number as in strkjv@Exodus:12:40| the time is 430 years. But in strkjv@Galatians:3:17| Paul, following the LXX in strkjv@Exodus:12:40|, takes the 430 years to cover the period in Canaan and the stay in Egypt, cutting the sojourn in Egypt to about half. Josephus gives it both ways. Hackett suggests two solutions, one that there were two ways of reckoning the period among the Jews with no way of settling it, the other that by the 430 years in Egypt the writers meant to include Canaan also as merely the preliminary to the period in Egypt.

rwp@Acts:9:2 @{Asked} (\ˆitˆsato\). First aorist middle indicative, the indirect middle, asked for himself (as a favour to himself). Felten notes that "Saul as a Pharisee makes request of a Sadducee" (the high priest) either Caiaphas if before A.D. 35, but if in 36 Jonathan, son of Caiaphas or if in 37 Theophilus, another son of Caiaphas. {Letters} (\epistolas\). Julius Ceasar and Augustus had granted the high priest and Sanhedrin jurisdiction over Jews in foreign cities, but this central ecclesiastical authority was not always recognized in every local community outside of Judea. Paul says that he received his authority to go to Damascus from the priests (Acts strkjv@26:10|) and "the estate of the elders" (22:5|), that is the Sanhedrin. {To Damascus} (\eis Damaskon\). As if no disciples of importance (outside the apostles in Jerusalem) were left in Judea. Damascus at this time may have been under the rule of Aretas of Arabia (tributary to Rome) as it certainly was a couple of years later when Saul escaped in a basket (2Corinthians:11:32|). This old city is the most enduring in the history of the world (Knowling). It is some 150 miles Northeast from Jerusalem and watered by the river Abana from Anti-Lebanon. Here the Jews were strong in numbers (10,000 butchered by Nero later) and here some disciples had found refuge from Saul's persecution in Judea and still worshipped in the synagogues. Paul's language in strkjv@Acts:26:11| seems to mean that Damascus is merely one of other "foreign cities" to which he carried the persecution. {If he found} (\ean heurˆi\). Third class condition with aorist subjunctive retained after secondary tense (asked). {The Way} (\tˆs hodou\). A common method in the Acts for describing Christianity as the Way of life, absolutely as also in strkjv@19:9,23; strkjv@22:4; strkjv@24:14,22| or the way of salvation (16:17|) or the way of the Lord (18:25|). It is a Jewish definition of life as in strkjv@Isaiah:40:3| "the way of the Lord," strkjv@Psalms:1:6| "the way of the righteous," "the way of the wicked." Jesus called himself "the way" (John:14:6|), the only way to the Father. The so-called Epistle of Barnabas presents the Two Ways. The North American Indians call Christianity the Jesus Road. {That he might bring them bound} (\hop“s dedemenous agagˆi\). Final clause with \hop“s\ (less common than \hina\) and aorist (effective) subjunctive (\agagˆi\, reduplicated aorist of \ag“\, common verb) and perfect passive participle (\dedemenous\) of \de“\, in a state of sheer helplessness like his other victims both men and women. Three times (8:3; strkjv@9:2; strkjv@22:4|) this fact of persecuting women is mentioned as a special blot in Paul's cruelty (the third time by Paul himself) and one of the items in his being chief of sinners (1Timothy:1:15|).

rwp@Acts:11:28 @{Signified} (\esˆmainen\). Imperfect active in Westcott and Hort, but aorist active \esˆmƒnen\ in the margin. The verb is an old one from \sˆma\ (\sˆmeion\) a sign (cf. the symbolic sign in strkjv@21:11|). Here Agabus (also in strkjv@21:10|) does predict a famine through the Holy Spirit. {Should be} (\mellein esesthai\). \Mell“\ occurs either with the present infinitive (16:27|), the aorist infinitive (12:6|), or the future as here and strkjv@24:15; strkjv@27:10|. {Over all the world} (\eph' holˆn tˆn oikoumenˆn\). Over all the inhabited earth (\gˆn\, understood). Probably a common hyperbole for the Roman empire as in strkjv@Luke:2:1|. Josephus (_Ant_. VIII. 13, 4) appears to restrict it to Palestine. {In the days of Claudius} (\epi Klaudiou\). He was Roman Emperor A.D. 41-44. The Roman writers (Suetonius, Dio Cassius, Tacitus) all tell of dearths (_assiduae sterilitates_) during the brief reign of Claudius who was preceded by Caligula and followed by Nero.

rwp@Acts:13:9 @{But Saul, who is also called Paul} (\Saulos de, ho kai Paulos\). By this remarkably brief phrase Luke presents this epoch in the life of Saul Paul. The "also" (\kai\) does not mean that the name Paul was given now for the first time, rather than he had always had it. As a Jew and a Roman citizen, he undoubtedly had both names all the time (cf. John Mark, Symeon Niger, Barsabbas Justus). Jerome held that the name of Sergius Paulus was adopted by Saul because of his conversion at this time, but this is a wholly unlikely explanation, "an element of vulgarity impossible to St. Paul " (Farrar). Augustine thought that the meaning of the Latin _paulus_ (little) would incline Saul to adopt, "but as a proper name the word rather suggested the glories of the Aemilian family, and even to us recalls the name of another Paulus, who was 'lavish of his noble life'" (Page). Among the Jews the name Saul was naturally used up to this point, but from now on Luke employs Paul save when there is a reference to his previous life (Acts:22:7; strkjv@26:14|). His real career is work among the Gentiles and Paul is the name used by them. There is a striking similarity in sound between the Hebrew Saul and the Roman Paul. Paul was proud of his tribe of Benjamin and so of King Saul (Phillipians:3:5|). {Filled with the Holy Spirit} (\plˆstheis pneumatos hagiou\). First aorist (ingressive) passive participle of \pimplˆmi\ with the genitive case. A special influx of power to meet this emergency. Here was a cultured heathen, typical of the best in Roman life, who called forth all the powers of Paul plus the special help of the Holy Spirit to expose the wickedness of Elymas Barjesus. If one wonders why the Holy Spirit filled Paul for this emergency rather than Barnabas, when Barnabas was named first in strkjv@13:2|, he can recall the sovereignty of the Holy Spirit in his choice of agents (1Corinthians:12:4-11|) and also the special call of Paul by Christ (Acts:9:15; strkjv@26:17f.|). {Fastened his eyes} (\atenisas\). As already in strkjv@Luke:4:20; strkjv@22:56; strkjv@Acts:3:4,12; strkjv@6:15; strkjv@10:4|.

rwp@Acts:13:48 @{As the Gentiles heard this they were glad} (\akouonta ta ethnˆ echairon\). Present active participle of \akou“\ and imperfect active of \chair“\, linear action descriptive of the joy of the Gentiles. {Glorified the word of God} (\edoxazon ton logon tou theou\). Imperfect active again. The joy of the Gentiles increased the fury of the Jews. "The synagogue became a scene of excitement which must have been something like the original speaking with tongues" (Rackham). The joy of the Gentiles was to see how they could receive the higher blessing of Judaism without circumcision and other repellent features of Jewish ceremonialism. It was the gospel of grace and liberty from legalism that Paul had proclaimed. Whether strkjv@Galatians:4:13| describes this incident or not (the South Galatian theory), it illustrates it when Gentiles received Paul as if he were Christ Jesus himself. It was triumph with the Gentiles, but defeat with the Jews. {As many as were ordained to eternal life} (\hosoi ˆsan tetagmenoi eis z“ˆn ai“nion\). Periphrastic past perfect passive indicative of \tass“\, a military term to place in orderly arrangement. The word "ordain" is not the best translation here. "Appointed," as Hackett shows, is better. The Jews here had voluntarily rejected the word of God. On the other side were those Gentiles who gladly accepted what the Jews had rejected, not all the Gentiles. Why these Gentiles here ranged themselves on God's side as opposed to the Jews Luke does not tell us. This verse does not solve the vexed problem of divine sovereignty and human free agency. There is no evidence that Luke had in mind an _absolutum decretum_ of personal salvation. Paul had shown that God's plan extended to and included Gentiles. Certainly the Spirit of God does move upon the human heart to which some respond, as here, while others push him away. {Believed} (\episteusan\). Summary or constative first aorist active indicative of \pisteu“\. The subject of this verb is the relative clause. By no manner of legerdemain can it be made to mean "those who believe were appointed." It was saving faith that was exercised only by those who were appointed unto eternal life, who were ranged on the side of eternal life, who were thus revealed as the subjects of God's grace by the stand that they took on this day for the Lord. It was a great day for the kingdom of God.

rwp@Acts:17:7 @{Whom Jason hath received} (\hous hupodedektai Ias“n\). Present perfect middle indicative of \hupodechomai\, to entertain, old verb, but in N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:10:38; strkjv@19:6; strkjv@Acts:17:7; strkjv@James:2:25|. This is Jason's crime and he is the prisoner before the politarchs. {These all} (\houtoi pantes\). Jason, the "brethren" of verse 6|, Paul and Silas, and all Christians everywhere. {Contrary} (\apenanti\). Late compound preposition (\apo, en, anti\) found in Polybius, LXX, here only in the N.T. {The decrees of Caesar} (\t“n dogmat“n Kaisaros\). This was a charge of treason and was a sure way to get a conviction. Probably the Julian _Leges Majestatis_ are in mind rather than the definite decree of Claudius about the Jews (Acts:18:2|). {Saying that there is another king, one Jesus} (\Basilea heteron legontes einai Iˆsoun\). Note the very order of the words in the Greek indirect discourse with the accusative and infinitive after \legontes\. \Basilea heteron\ comes first, a different king, another emperor than Caesar. This was the very charge that the smart student of the Pharisees and Herodians had tried to catch Jesus on (Mark:12:14|). The Sanhedrin made it anyhow against Jesus to Pilate (Luke:23:2|) and Pilate had to notice it. "Although the emperors never ventured to assume the title _rex_ at Rome, in the Eastern provinces they were regularly termed _basileus_" (Page). The Jews here, as before Pilate (John:19:15|), renounce their dearest hope of a Messianic king. It is plain that Paul had preached about Jesus as the Messiah, King of the Kingdom of God over against the Roman Empire, a spiritual kingdom, to be sure, but the Jews here turn his language to his hurt as they did with Jesus. As a matter of fact Paul's preaching about the kingdom and the second coming of Christ was gravely misunderstood by the Christians at Thessalonica after his departure (1Thessalonians:4:13-5:4; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2|). The Jews were quick to seize upon his language about Jesus Christ to his own injury. Clearly here in Thessalonica Paul had faced the power of the Roman Empire in a new way and pictured over against it the grandeur of the reign of Christ.

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

rwp@Acts:21:20 @{Glorified} (\edoxazon\). Inchoative imperfect, began to glorify God, though without special praise of Paul. {How many thousands} (\posai muriades\). Old word for ten thousand (Acts:19:19|) and then an indefinite number like our "myriads" (this very word) as strkjv@Luke:12:1; strkjv@Acts:21:20; strkjv@Jude:1:14; strkjv@Revelation:5:11; strkjv@9:16|. But it is a surprising statement even with allowable hyperbole, but one may recall strkjv@Acts:4:4| (number of the men--not women--about five thousand); strkjv@5:14| (multitudes both of men and women); strkjv@6:7|. There were undoubtedly a great many thousands of believers in Jerusalem and all Jewish Christians, some, alas, Judaizers (Acts:11:2; strkjv@15:1,5|). This list may include the Christians from neighbouring towns in Palestine and even some from foreign countries here at the Feast of Pentecost, for it is probable that Paul arrived in time for it as he had hoped. But we do not have to count the hostile Jews from Asia (verse 27|) who were clearly not Christians at all. {All zealous for the law} (\pantes zˆl“tai tou nomou\). Zealots (substantive) rather than zealous (adjective) with objective genitive (\tou nomou\). The word zealot is from \zˆlo“\, to burn with zeal, to boil. The Greek used \zˆl“tˆs\ for an imitator or admirer. There was a party of Zealots (developed from the Pharisees), a group of what would be called "hot-heads," who brought on the war with Rome. One of this party, Simon Zelotes (Acts:1:13|), was in the number of the twelve apostles. It is important to understand the issues in Jerusalem. It was settled at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15; strkjv@Galatians:2|) that the Mosaic ceremonial law was not to be imposed upon Gentile Christians. Paul won freedom for them, but it was not said that it was wrong for Jewish Christians to go on observing it if they wished. We have seen Paul observing the passover in Philippi (Acts:20:6|) and planning to reach Jerusalem for Pentecost (20:16|). The Judaizers rankled under Paul's victory and power in spreading the gospel among the Gentiles and gave him great trouble in Galatia and Corinth. They were busy against him in Jerusalem also and it was to undo the harm done by them in Jerusalem that Paul gathered the great collection from the Gentile Christians and brought it with him and the delegates from the churches. Clearly then Paul had real ground for his apprehension of trouble in Jerusalem while still in Corinth (Romans:15:25|) when he asked for the prayers of the Roman Christians (verses 30-32|). The repeated warnings along the way were amply justified.

rwp@Acts:26:11 @{Punishing} (\tim“r“n\). Old word \tim“re“\ originally to render help, to succor (\tim“ros\, from \timˆ\ and \ouros\), then to avenge (for honour). In N.T. only here and strkjv@22:5|. {I strove to make them blaspheme} (\ˆnagkazon blasphˆmein\). Conative imperfect active of \anagkaz“\, old verb from \anagkˆ\ (necessity, compulsion). The tense, like the imperfect in strkjv@Matthew:3:14; strkjv@Luke:1:59|, leaves room to hope that Paul was not successful in this effort, for he had already said that he brought many "unto death" (22:4|). {I persecuted} (\edi“kon\). Imperfect active again, repeated attempts. The old verb \di“k“\ was used to run after or chase game and then to chase enemies. The word "persecute" is the Latin _persequor_, to follow through or after. It is a vivid picture that Paul here paints of his success in hunting big game, a grand heresy hunt. {Even unto foreign cities} (\kai eis ex“ poleis\). We know of Damascus, and Paul evidently planned to go to other cities outside of Palestine and may even have done so before the fateful journey to Damascus.

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

rwp@Colossians:1:13 @{Delivered} (\erusato\). First aorist middle indicative of \ruomai\, old verb, to rescue. This appositional relative clause further describes God the Father's redemptive work and marks the transition to the wonderful picture of the person and work of Christ in nature and grace in verses 14-20|, a full and final answer to the Gnostic depreciation of Jesus Christ by speculative philosophy and to all modern efforts after a "reduced" picture of Christ. God rescued us out from (\ek\) the power (\exousias\) of the kingdom of darkness (\skotous\) in which we were held as slaves. {Translated} (\metestˆsen\). First aorist active indicative of \methistˆmi\ and transitive (not intransitive like second aorist \metestˆ\). Old word. See strkjv@1Corinthians:13:2|. Changed us from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light. {Of the Son of his love} (\tou huiou tˆs agapˆs autou\). Probably objective genitive (\agapˆs\), the Son who is the object of the Father's love like \agapˆtos\ (beloved) in strkjv@Matthew:3:17|. Others would take it as describing love as the origin of the Son which is true, but hardly pertinent here. But Paul here rules out the whole system of aeons and angels that the Gnostics placed above Christ. It is Christ's Kingdom in which he is King. He has moral and spiritual sovereignty.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION UNSETTLED PROBLEMS Probably no book in the New Testament presents more unsettled problems than does the Epistle to the Hebrews. On that score it ranks with the Fourth Gospel, the Apocalypse of John, and Second Peter. But, in spite of these unsolved matters, the book takes high rank for its intellectual grasp, spiritual power, and its masterful portrayal of Christ as High Priest. It is much briefer than the Fourth Gospel, but in a sense it carries on further the exalted picture of the Risen Christ as the King-Priest who reigns and pleads for us now.

rwp@Hebrews:2:8 @{In that he subjected} (\en t“i hupotaxai\). First aorist active articular infinitive of \hupatass“\ in the locative case, "in the subjecting." {He left} (\aphˆken\). First aorist active indicative (kappa aorist) of \aphiˆmi\. {Nothing that is not subject to him} (\ouden aut“i anupotakton\). Later verbal of \hupotass“\ with \a\ privative. Here in passive sense, active sense in strkjv@1Timothy:1:9|. Man's sovereignty was meant to be all-inclusive including the administration of "the world to come." "He is crowned king of nature, invested with a divine authority over creation" (Moffatt). But how far short of this destiny has man come! {But now we see not yet} (\nun de oup“ hor“men\). Not even today in the wonderful twentieth century with man's triumphs over nature has he reached that goal, wonderful as are the researches by the help of telescope and microscope, the mechanism of the airplane, the submarine, steam, electricity, radio.

rwp@Hebrews:11:13 @{In faith} (\kata pistin\). Here a break in the routine \pistei\ (by faith), "according to faith," either for literary variety "or to suggest \pistis\ as the sphere and standard of their characters" (Moffatt). {These all} (\houtoi pantes\). Those in verses 9-12| (Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Jacob). {Not having the promises} (\mˆ komisamenoi tas epaggelias\). First aorist middle participle of \komiz“\, to obtain, as in strkjv@10:36; strkjv@11:39|. And yet the author mentions Abraham (6:15|) as having obtained the promise. He received the promise of the Messiah, but did not live to see the Messiah come as we have done. It is in this sense that we have "better promises." {Greeted them} (\aspasamenoi\). First aorist middle participle of \aspazomai\, to salute (Matthew:5:47|). Abraham rejoiced to see Christ's day in the dim distance (John:8:56|). {Strangers} (\zenoi\). Foreigners. "To reside abroad carried with it a certain stigma" (Moffatt). But they "confessed" it (Genesis:23:4; strkjv@47:9|). {Pilgrims} (\parepidˆmoi\). Late double compound (\para, epi, dˆmos\), a sojourner from another land, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Peter:1:1; strkjv@2:11|.

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

rwp@John:5:20 @{Loveth} (\philei\). In strkjv@3:35| we have \agapƒi\ from \agapa“\, evidently one verb expressing as noble a love as the other. Sometimes a distinction (21:17|) is made, but not here, unless \phile“\ presents the notion of intimate friendship (\philos\, friend), fellowship, the affectionate side, while \agapa“\ (Latin _diligo_) is more the intelligent choice. But John uses both verbs for the mystery of love of the Father for the Son. {Greater works than these} (\meizona tout“n erga\). \Tout“n\ is ablative case after the comparative \meizona\ (from \megas\, great). John often uses \erga\ for the miracles of Christ (5:36; strkjv@7:3,21; strkjv@10:25,32,38|, etc.). It is the Father who does these works (14:10|). There is more to follow. Even the disciples will surpass what Christ is doing in the extent of the work (14:12|). \Deixei\ is future active indicative of \deiknumi\, to show. See also strkjv@10:32|. {That ye may marvel} (\hina humeis thaumazˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \thaumaz“\. Wonder belongs to childhood and to men of knowledge. Modern science has increased the occasion for wonder. Clement of Alexandria has a saying of Jesus: "He that wonders shall reign, and he that reigns shall rest."

rwp@Jude:1:21 @{Keep yourselves} (\heautous tˆrˆsate\). First aorist active imperative (of urgency) of \tˆre“\. In verse 1| they are said to be kept, but note the warning in verse 5| from the angels who did not keep their dominion. See also strkjv@James:1:27|. In strkjv@Phillipians:2:12| both sides (human responsibility and divine sovereignty are presented side by side). {Looking for} (\prosdechomenoi\). Present middle participle of \prosdechomai\, the very form in strkjv@Titus:2:13|. The same idea in \prosdok“ntes\ in strkjv@2Peter:3:14|.

rwp@Luke:6:20 @{And he lifted up his eyes} (\kai autos eparas tous opthalmous autou\). First aorist active participle from \epair“\. Note also Luke's favourite use of \kai autos\ in beginning a paragraph. Vivid detail alone in Luke. Jesus looked the vast audience full in the face. strkjv@Matthew:5:2| mentions that "he opened his mouth and taught them" (began to teach them, inchoative imperfect, \edidasken\). He spoke out so that the great crowd could hear. Some preachers do not open their mouths and do not look up at the people, but down at the manuscript and drawl along while the people lose interest and even go to sleep or slip out. {Ye poor} (\hoi pt“choi\). {The poor}, but "yours" (\humetera\) justifies the translation "ye." Luke's report is direct address in all the four beatitudes and four woes given by him. It is useless to speculate why Luke gives only four of the eight beatitudes in Matthew or why Matthew does not give the four woes in Luke. One can only say that neither professes to give a complete report of the sermon. There is no evidence to show that either saw the report of the other. They may have used a common source like Q (the Logia of Jesus) or they may have had separate sources. Luke's first beatitude corresponds with Matthew's first, but he does not have "in spirit" after "poor." Does Luke represent Jesus as saying that poverty itself is a blessing? It can be made so. Or does Luke represent Jesus as meaning what is in Matthew, poverty of spirit? {The kingdom of God} (\hˆ basileia tou theou\). strkjv@Matthew:5:3| has "the kingdom of heaven" which occurs alone in Matthew though he also has the one here in Luke with no practical difference. The rabbis usually said "the kingdom of heaven." They used it of the political Messianic kingdom when Judaism of the Pharisaic sort would triumph over the world. The idea of Jesus is in the sharpest contrast to that conception here and always. See on ¯Matthew:3:2| for discussion of the meaning of the word "kingdom." It is the favourite word of Jesus for the rule of God in the heart here and now. It is both present and future and will reach a glorious consummation. Some of the sayings of Christ have apocalyptic and eschatological figures, but the heart of the matter is here in the spiritual reality of the reign of God in the hearts of those who serve him. The kingdom parables expand and enlarge upon various phases of this inward life and growth.

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

rwp@Luke:16:9 @{By the mammon of unrighteousness} (\ek tou mam“nƒ tˆs adikias\). By the use of what is so often evil (money). In strkjv@Matthew:6:24| mammon is set over against God as in strkjv@Luke:16:13| below. Jesus knows the evil power in money, but servants of God have to use it for the kingdom of God. They should use it discreetly and it is proper to make friends by the use of it. {When it shall fail} (\hotan eklipˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive with \hotan\, future time. The mammon is sure to fail. {That they may receive you into the eternal tabernacles} (\hina dex“ntai humas eis tas ai“nious skˆnas\). This is the purpose of Christ in giving the advice about their making friends by the use of money. The purpose is that those who have been blessed and helped by the money may give a welcome to their benefactors when they reach heaven. There is no thought here of purchasing an entrance into heaven by the use of money. That idea is wholly foreign to the context. These friends will give a hearty welcome when one gives him mammon here. The wise way to lay up treasure in heaven is to use one's money for God here on earth. That will give a cash account there of joyful welcome, not of purchased entrance.

rwp@Luke:17:18 @{Save this stranger} (\ei mˆ ho allogenˆs\). The old word was \allophulos\ (Acts:10:28|), but \allogenˆs\ occurs in the LXX, Josephus, and inscriptions. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 80) gives the inscription from the limestone block from the Temple of Israel in Jerusalem which uses this very word which may have been read by Jesus: {Let no foreigner enter within the screen and enclosure surrounding the sanctuary} (\Mˆthena allogenˆ eisporeuesthai entos tou peri to hieron truphaktou kai peribolou\).

rwp@Luke:19:27 @{Reign} (\basileusai\). First aorist active infinitive, ingressive aorist, come to rule. {Slay} (\katasphaxate\). First aorist active imperative of \katasphaz“\, to slaughter, an old verb, but only here in the N.T.

rwp@Mark:13:7 @{Must needs come to pass} (\dei genesthai\). Already there were outbreaks against the Jews in Alexandria, at Seleucia with the slaughter of more than fifty thousand, at Jamnia, and elsewhere. Caligula, Claudius, Nero will threaten war before it finally comes with the destruction of the city and temple by Titus in A.D. 70. Vincent notes that between this prophecy by Jesus in A.D. 30 (or 29) and the destruction of Jerusalem there was an earthquake in Crete (A.D. 46 or 47), at Rome (A.D. 51), at Apamaia in Phrygia (A.D. 60), at Campania (A.D. 63). He notes also four famines during the reign of Claudius A.D. 41-54. One of them was in Judea in A.D. 44 and is alluded to in strkjv@Acts:11:28|. Tacitus (_Annals_ xvi. 10-13) describes the hurricanes and storms in Campania in A.D. 65.

rwp@Mark:13:20 @{Whom he chose} (\hous exelexato\). Indirect aorist middle indicative. In Mark alone. Explains the sovereign choice of God in the end by and for himself.

rwp@Matthew:1:21 @{Thou shalt call his name Jesus} (\Kalesies to onoma autou Iˆsoun\). The rabbis named six whose names were given before birth: "Isaac, Ishmael, Moses, Solomon, Josiah, and the name of the Messiah, whom may the Holy One, blessed be His name, bring in our day." The angel puts it up to Joseph as the putative father to name the child. "Jesus is the same as Joshua, a contraction of Jehoshuah (Numbers:13:16; strkjv@1Chronicles:7:27|), signifying in Hebrew, 'Jehovah is helper,' or 'Help of Jehovah'" (Broadus). Songs:Jesus is the Greek form of Joshua (Hebrews:4:8|). He is another Joshua to lead the true people of God into the Promised Land. The name itself was common enough as Josephus shows. Jehovah is Salvation as seen in Joshua for the Hebrews and in Jesus for all believers. "The meaning of the name, therefore, finds expression in the title _Saviour_ applied to our Lord (Luke:1:47; strkjv@2:11; strkjv@John:4:42|)" (Vincent). He will save (\s“sei\) his people from their sins and so be their Saviour (\S“tˆr\). He will be prophet, priest, and king, but "Saviour" sums it all up in one word. The explanation is carried out in the promise, "for he is the one who (\autos\) will save (\s“sei\ with a play on the name Jesus) his people from their sins." Paul will later explain that by the covenant people, the children of promise, God means the spiritual Israel, all who believe whether Jews or Gentiles. This wonderful word touches the very heart of the mission and message of the Messiah. Jesus himself will show that the kingdom of heaven includes all those and only those who have the reign of God in their hearts and lives. {From their sins} (\apo t“n hamarti“n aut“n\). Both sins of omission and of commission. The substantive (\hamartia\) is from the verb (\hamartanein\) and means missing the mark as with an arrow. How often the best of us fall short and fail to score. Jesus will save us away from (\apo\) as well as out of (\ex\) our sins. They will be cast into oblivion and he will cover them up out of sight.

rwp@Matthew:1:22 @{That it may be fulfilled} (\hina plˆr“thˆi\). Alford says that "it is impossible to interpret \hina\ in any other sense than in order that." That was the old notion, but modern grammarians recognize the non-final use of this particle in the _Koin‚_ and even the consecutive like the Latin _ut_. Some even argue for a causal use. If the context called for result, one need not hesitate to say so as in strkjv@Mark:11:28; strkjv@John:9:36; strkjv@1John:1:9; strkjv@Revelation:9:20; strkjv@13:13|. See discussion in my _Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research_, pp. 997-9. All the same it is purpose here, God's purpose, Matthew reports the angel as saying, spoken "by (\hupo\, immediate agent) the Lord through (\dia\, intermediate agent) the prophet." {"All this has happened"} (\touto de holon gegonen\, present perfect indicative), stands on record as historical fact. But the Virgin Birth of Jesus is not due to this interpretation of strkjv@Isaiah:7:14|. It is not necessary to maintain (Broadus) that Isaiah himself saw anything more in his prophecy than that a woman then a virgin, would bear a son and that in the course of a few years Ahaz would be delivered from the king of Syria and Israel by the coming of the Assyrians. This historical illustration finds its richest fulfilment in the birth of Jesus from Mary. "Words of themselves are empty. They are useful only as vessels to convey things from mind to mind" (Morison). The Hebrew word for young woman is translated by virgin (\parthenos\), but it is not necessary to conclude that Isaiah himself contemplated the supernatural birth of Jesus. We do not have to say that the idea of the Virgin Birth of Jesus came from Jewish sources. Certainly it did not come from the pagan myths so foreign to this environment, atmosphere and spirit. It is far simpler to admit the supernatural fact than try to explain the invention of the idea as a myth to justify the deification of Jesus. The birth, life, and death of Jesus throw a flood of light on the Old Testament narrative and prophecies for the early Christians. In Matthew and John in particular we often see "that the events of Christ's life were divinely ordered for the express purpose of fulfilling the Old Testament" (McNeile). See strkjv@Matthew:2:15,23; strkjv@4:14-17; strkjv@8:17; strkjv@12:17-21; strkjv@13:25; strkjv@21:4f.; strkjv@John:12:38f.; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@19:24,28,36f|.

rwp@Matthew:2:3 @{He was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him} (\etarachthˆ kai pƒsa Ierosoluma met' autou\). Those familiar with the story of Herod the Great in Josephus can well understand the meaning of these words. Herod in his rage over his family rivalries and jealousies put to death the two sons of Mariamne (Aristobulus and Alexander), Mariamne herself, and Antipater, another son and once his heir, besides the brother and mother of Mariamne (Aristobulus, Alexandra) and her grandfather John Hyrcanus. He had made will after will and was now in a fatal illness and fury over the question of the Magi. He showed his excitement and the whole city was upset because the people knew only too well what he could do when in a rage over the disturbance of his plans. "The foreigner and usurper feared a rival, and the tyrant feared the rival would be welcome" (Bruce). Herod was a hated Idumaean.

rwp@Matthew:2:4 @{He inquired of them where the Christ should be born} (\epunthaneto par' aut“n pou ho Christos gennƒtai\). The prophetic present (\gennƒtai\) is given, the very words of Herod retained by Matthew's report. The imperfect tense (epunthaneto) suggests that Herod inquired repeatedly, probably of one and another of the leaders gathered together, both Sadducees (chief priests) and Pharisees (scribes). McNeile doubts, like Holtzmann, if Herod actually called together all the Sanhedrin and probably "he could easily ask the question of a single scribe," because he had begun his reign with a massacre of the Sanhedrin (Josephus, _Ant_. XIV. ix. 4). But that was thirty years ago and Herod was desperately in earnest to learn what the Jews really expected about the coming of "the Messiah." Still Herod probably got together not the Sanhedrin since "elders" are not mentioned, but leaders among the chief priests and scribes, not a formal meeting but a free assembly for conference. He had evidently heard of this expected king and he would swallow plenty of pride to be able to compass the defeat of these hopes.

rwp@Matthew:2:22 @{Warned in a dream} (\chrˆmatistheis kat' onar\). He was already afraid to go to Judea because Archelaus was reigning (ruling, not technically king, \basileuei\). In a fret at last before his death Herod had changed his will again and put Archelaus, the worst of his living sons, in the place of Antipas. Songs:Joseph went to Galilee. Matthew has had nothing about the previous dwelling of Joseph and Mary in Nazareth. We learn that from Luke who tells nothing of the flight into Egypt. The two narratives supplement one another and are in no sense contradictory.

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

rwp@Matthew:3:2 @{For the kingdom of heaven is at hand} (\ˆggiken gar hˆ Basileia t“n ouran“n\). Note the position of the verb and the present perfect tense. It was a startling word that John thundered over the hills and it re-echoed throughout the land. The Old Testament prophets had said that it would come some day in God's own time. John proclaims as the herald of the new day that it has come, has drawn near. How near he does not say, but he evidently means very near, so near that one could see the signs and the proof. The words "the kingdom of heaven" he does not explain. The other Gospels use "the kingdom of God" as Matthew does a few times, but he has "the kingdom of heaven" over thirty times. He means "the reign of God," not the political or ecclesiastical organization which the Pharisees expected. His words would be understood differently by different groups as is always true of popular preachers. The current Jewish apocalypses had numerous eschatological ideas connected with the kingdom of heaven. It is not clear what sympathy John had with these eschatological features. He employs vivid language at times, but we do not have to confine John's intellectual and theological horizon to that of the rabbis of his day. He has been an original student of the Old Testament in his wilderness environment without any necessary contact with the Essenes who dwelt there. His voice is a new one that strikes terror to the perfunctory theologians of the temple and of the synagogue. It is the fashion of some critics to deny to John any conception of the spiritual content of his words, a wholly gratuitous criticism.

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:16:19 @{The Keys of the kingdom} (\tas kleidas tˆs basileias\). Here again we have the figure of a building with keys to open from the outside. The question is raised at once if Jesus does not here mean the same thing by "kingdom" that he did by "church" in verse 18|. In strkjv@Revelation:1:18; strkjv@3:7| Christ the Risen Lord has "the keys of death and of Hades." He has also "the keys of the kingdom of heaven" which he here hands over to Peter as "gatekeeper" or "steward" (\oikonomos\) provided we do not understand it as a special and peculiar prerogative belonging to Peter. The same power here given to Peter belongs to every disciple of Jesus in all the ages. Advocates of papal supremacy insist on the primacy of Peter here and the power of Peter to pass on this supposed sovereignty to others. But this is all quite beside the mark. We shall soon see the disciples actually disputing again (Matthew:18:1|) as to which of them is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven as they will again (20:21|) and even on the night before Christ's death. Clearly neither Peter nor the rest understood Jesus to say here that Peter was to have supreme authority. What is added shows that Peter held the keys precisely as every preacher and teacher does. To "bind" (\dˆsˆis\) in rabbinical language is to forbid, to "loose" (\lusˆis\) is to permit. Peter would be like a rabbi who passes on many points. Rabbis of the school of Hillel "loosed" many things that the school of Schammai "bound." The teaching of Jesus is the standard for Peter and for all preachers of Christ. Note the future perfect indicative (\estai dedemenon, estai lelumenon\), a state of completion. All this assumes, of course, that Peter's use of the keys will be in accord with the teaching and mind of Christ. The binding and loosing is repeated by Jesus to all the disciples (18:18|). Later after the Resurrection Christ will use this same language to all the disciples (John:20:23|), showing that it was not a special prerogative of Peter. He is simply first among equals, _primus inter pares_, because on this occasion he was spokesman for the faith of all. It is a violent leap in logic to claim power to forgive sins, to pronounce absolution, by reason of the technical rabbinical language that Jesus employed about binding and loosing. Every preacher uses the keys of the kingdom when he proclaims the terms of salvation in Christ. The proclamation of these terms when accepted by faith in Christ has the sanction and approval of God the Father. The more personal we make these great words the nearer we come to the mind of Christ. The more ecclesiastical we make them the further we drift away from him.

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

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

rwp@Revelation:20:6 @{Blessed and holy} (\makarios kai hagios\). A fifth beatitude (1:3; strkjv@14:13; strkjv@16:15; strkjv@19:9|) already and two more to come (22:7,14|, seven in all). Here \hagios\ is added to the usual \makarios\. The second death (\ho deuteros thanatos\). The spiritual death of strkjv@2:11; strkjv@20:14; strkjv@21:8| in contrast to the first or physical death. This language raises a question about the interpretation of the first and the second resurrections, whether both are of the body or one of the spirit. There seems no way to reach a solid conception about it. In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:23| there is no mention of the resurrection of any save "those of Christ" (\hoi tou Christou\), though the end follows (verse 24|). However, Paul elsewhere (Acts:24:15|) speaks of the resurrection of the just and of the unjust as if one event. {Priests of God and of Christ} (\hiereis tou theou kai tou Christou\). As in strkjv@1:6; strkjv@5:10; strkjv@22:3,5|. {Shall reign with him} (\basileusousin met' autou\). As promised in the same passages. The servants of God are to be priests with Christ and to reign with him (Matthew:19:28|). In strkjv@5:10| \epi tˆs gˆs\ (upon earth) occurs, but this item does not appear here. "No hint is given as to where this service is to be rendered and this royalty to be exercised" (Swete).

rwp@Revelation:22:2 @{In the midst of the street thereof} (\en mes“i tˆs plateias autˆs\). Connected probably with the river in verse 1|, though many connect it with verse 2|. Only one street mentioned here as in strkjv@21:21|. {On this side of the river and on that} (\tou potamou enteuthen kai ekeithen\). \Enteuthen\ occurs as a preposition in strkjv@Daniel:12:5| (Theodoret) and may be so here (post-positive), purely adverbial in strkjv@John:19:18|. {The tree of life} (\xulon z“ˆs\). For the metaphor see strkjv@Genesis:1:11f.| and strkjv@Revelation:2:7; strkjv@22:14|. \Xulon\ is used for a green tree in strkjv@Luke:23:31; strkjv@Ezekiel:47:12|. {Bearing} (\poioun\). Neuter active participle of \poie“\ (making, producing, as in strkjv@Matthew:7:17|). Some MSS. have \poi“n\ (masculine), though \xulon\ is neuter. {Twelve manner of fruits} (\karpous d“deka\). "Twelve fruits." {Yielding} (\apodidoun\). Neuter active participle of \apodid“mi\, to give back, but some MSS. have \apodidous\ (masculine) like \poi“n\. {For the healing of the nations} (\eis therapeian t“n ethn“n\). Spiritual healing, of course, as leaves (\phulla\) are often used for obtaining medicines. Here again the problem occurs whether this picture is heaven before the judgment or afterwards. Charles distinguishes sharply between the Heavenly City for the millennial reign and the New Jerusalem that descends from heaven after the judgment. Charles rearranges these chapters to suit his theory. But chronology is precarious here.

rwp@Revelation:22:5 @{Shall be night no more} (\nux ouk estai eti\). As in strkjv@21:25|. {They need} (\echousin chreian\). Present active indicative, "They have need," though A has \hexousin\ (shall have), future like \estai\. Here again there is repetition of part of strkjv@21:23|, but for the purpose of showing the delightsomeness of the New Jerusalem with no need of lamp or sun (change to \ph“s\ with \hˆliou\ instead of \ph“tos\, "they have no light of sun"). {Shall give them light} (\ph“tisei\). Future active of \ph“tiz“\, while aorist \eph“tisen\ in strkjv@21:23|. {They shall reign} (\basileusousin\). Future active of \basileu“\. Reign eternally in contrast with the limited millennial reign of strkjv@20:4,6|. This glorious eternal reign with Christ occurs repeatedly in the book (1:6; strkjv@3:21; strkjv@5:10|) as in strkjv@Luke:22:30|. Christ's Kingdom is spiritual (John:18:36f.|). "The visions of the Apocalypse are now ended; they have reached their climax in the New Jerusalem" (Swete). Now John gives the parting utterances of some of the speakers, and it is not always clear who is speaking.

rwp@Romans:5:17 @{Much more} (\poll“i mallon\). Argument _a fortiori_ again. Condition of first class assumed to be true. Note balanced words in the contrast (transgression \parapt“mati\, grace \charitos\; death \thanatos\, life \z“ˆi\; the one or {Adam} \tou henos\, the one {Jesus Christ}; reign \basileu“\ in both).

rwp@Romans:5:21 @{That--even so grace might reign} (\hina--houtos kai hˆ charis basileusˆi\). Final \hina\ here, the purpose of God and the goal for us through Christ. Lightfoot notes the force of the aorist indicative (\ebasileusen\, established its throne) and the aorist subjunctive (\basileusˆi\, might establish its throne), the ingressive aorist both times. "This full rhetorical close has almost the value of a doxology" (Denney).

rwp@Romans:6:12 @{Reign} (\basileuet“\). Present active imperative, "let not sin continue to reign" as it did once (5:12|). {Mortal} (\thnˆtoi\). Verbal adjective from \thnˆsk“\, subject to death. The reign of sin is over with you. Self-indulgence is inconsistent with trust in the vicarious atonement. {That ye should obey} (\eis to hupakouein\). With a view to obeying.

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

rwp@Romans:9:21 @{Or hath not the potter a right over the clay?} (\ˆ ouk echei exousian ho kerameus tou pˆlou?\). This question, expecting an affirmative answer, is Paul's reply to the previous one, "Why didst thou make me thus?" \Pˆlos\, old word for clay, is mud or wet clay in strkjv@John:9:6,11,14f|. The old word for potter (\kerameus\) in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:27:7,10|. {Lump} (\phuramatos\). Late word from \phura“\, to mix (clay, dough, etc.). {One part} (\ho men\) {--another} (\ho de\). Regular idiom for contrast (\men--de\) with the old demonstrative \ho\ (this), "this vessel (\skeuos\, old word as in strkjv@Mark:11:16|) for honour, that for dishonour." Paul thus claims clearly God's sovereign right (\exousian\, power, right, authority, from \exesti\) to use men (already sinners) for his own purpose.

rwp@Romans:14:17 @{The kingdom of God} (\hˆ basileia tou theou\). Not the future kingdom of eschatology, but the present spiritual kingdom, the reign of God in the heart, of which Jesus spoke so often. See strkjv@1Corinthians:4:21|. Paul scores heavily here, for it is not found in externals like food and drink, but in spiritual qualities and graces.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Sat Jun 29 22:08:08 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020