Bible:
Filter: String:

NT.filter - rwp allusion:


rwp@1Corinthians:1:18 @{For the word of the cross} (\ho logos gar ho tou staurou\). Literally, "for the preaching (with which I am concerned as the opposite of {wisdom of word} in verse 17|) that (repeated article \ho\, almost demonstrative) of the cross." "Through this incidental allusion to preaching St. Paul passes to a new subject. The discussions in the Corinthian Church are for a time forgotten, and he takes the opportunity of correcting his converts for their undue exaltation of human eloquence and wisdom" (Lightfoot). {To them that are perishing} (\tois men apollumenois\). Dative of disadvantage (personal interest). Present middle participle is here timeless, those in the path to destruction (not annihilation. See strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:10|). Cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:4:3|. {Foolishness} (\m“ria\). Folly. Old word from \m“ros\, foolish. In N.T. only in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:18,21,23; strkjv@2:14; strkjv@3:19|. {But unto us which are being saved} (\tois s“zomenois hˆmin\). Sharp contrast to those that are perishing and same construction with the articular participle. No reason for the change of pronouns in English. This present passive participle is again timeless. Salvation is described by Paul as a thing done in the past, "we were saved" (Romans:8:24|), as a present state, "ye have been saved" (Ep strkjv@2:5|), as a process, "ye are being saved" (1Corinthians:15:2|), as a future result, "thou shalt be saved" (Romans:10:9|). {The power of God} (\dunamis theou\). Songs:in strkjv@Romans:1:16|. No other message has this dynamite of God (1Corinthians:4:20|). God's power is shown in the preaching of the Cross of Christ through all the ages, now as always. No other preaching wins men and women from sin to holiness or can save them. The judgment of Paul here is the verdict of every soul winner through all time.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:6 @{I have in a figure transferred} (\meteschˆmatisa\). First aorist active (not perfect) indicative of \meta-schˆmatiz“\, used by Plato and Aristotle for changing the form of a thing (from \meta\, after, and \schˆma\, form or habit, like Latin _habitus_ from \ech“\ and so different from \morphˆ\ as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:7; strkjv@Romans:12:2|). For the idea of refashioning see Field, _Notes_, p. 169f. and Preisigke, _Fachworter_). Both Greek and Latin writers (Quintilian, Martial) used \schˆma\ for a rhetorical artifice. Paul's use of the word (in Paul only in N.T.) appears also further in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:13-15| where the word occurs three times, twice of the false apostles posing and passing as apostles of Christ and ministers of righteousness, and once of Satan as an angel of light, twice with \eis\ and once with \h“s\. In strkjv@Phillipians:3:21| the word is used for the change in the body of our humiliation to the body of glory. But here it is clearly the rhetorical figure for a veiled allusion to Paul and Apollos "for your sakes" (\dia humas\). {That in us ye may learn} (\hina en hˆmin mathˆte\). Final clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \manthan“\, to learn. As an object lesson in our cases (\en hˆmin\). It is no more true of Paul and Apollos than of other ministers, but the wrangles in Corinth started about them. Songs:Paul boldly puts himself and Apollos to the fore in the discussion of the principles involved. {Not to go beyond the things which are written} (\to Mˆ huper ha gegraptai\). It is difficult to reproduce the Greek idiom in English. The article \to\ is in the accusative case as the object of the verb \mathˆte\ (learn) and points at the words "\Mˆ huper ha gegraptai\," apparently a proverb or rule, and elliptical in form with no principal verb expressed with \mˆ\, whether "think" (Auth.) or "go" (Revised). There was a constant tendency to smooth out Paul's ellipses as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26,31|. Lightfoot thinks that Paul may have in mind O.T. passages quoted in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:19,31; strkjv@3:19,20|. {That ye be not puffed up} (\hina mˆ phusiousthe\). Sub-final use of \hina\ (second use in this sentence) with notion of result. It is not certain whether \phusiousthe\ (late verb form like \phusia“, phusa“\, to blow up, to inflate, to puff up), used only by Paul in the N.T., is present indicative with \hina\ like \zˆloute\ in strkjv@Galatians:4:17| (cf. \hina gin“skomen\ in strkjv@1John:5:20|) or the present subjunctive by irregular contraction (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 203, 342f.), probably the present indicative. \Phusio“\ is from \phusis\ (nature) and so meant to make natural, but it is used by Paul just like \phusa“\ or \phusia“\ (from \phusa\, a pair of bellows), a vivid picture of self-conceit. {One for the one against the other} (\heis huper tou henos kata tou heterou\). This is the precise idea of this idiom of partitive apposition. This is the rule with partisans. They are "for" (\huper\) the one and "against" (\kata\, down on, the genitive case) the other (\tou heterou\, not merely another or a second, but the different sort, \heterodox\).

rwp@1Corinthians:9:6 @{Have we not a right to forbear working?} (\ouk echomen exousian mˆ ergazesthai;\). By \ˆ\ (or) Paul puts the other side about Barnabas (the only allusion since the dispute in strkjv@Acts:15:39|, but in good spirit) and himself. Perhaps (Hofmann) Paul has in mind the fact that in the first great mission tour (Acts:13; 14|), Barnabas and Paul received no help from the church in Antioch, but were left to work their way along at their own charges. It was not till the Philippian Church took hold that Paul had financial aid (Phillipians:4:15|). Here both negatives have their full force. Literally, Do we not have (\ouk echomen\, expecting the affirmative reply) the right not (\mˆ\, negative of the infinitive \ergazesthai\) to do manual labour (usual meaning of \ergazomai\ as in strkjv@4:12|)?" There was no more compulsion on Paul and Barnabas to support themselves than upon the other workers for Christ. They renounced no rights in being voluntarily independent.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:21 @{Ye cannot} (\ou dunasthe\). Morally impossible to drink the Lord's cup and the cup of demons, to partake of the Lord's table and the table of demons. {Of the table of the Lord} (\trapezˆs Kuriou\). No articles, but definite idea. \Trapeza\ is from \tetra\ (four) and \peza\ (a foot), four-footed. Here {table} means, as often, what is on the table. See strkjv@Luke:22:30| where Jesus says "at my table" (\epi tˆs trapezˆs mou\), referring to the spiritual feast hereafter. Here the reference is plainly to the Lord's Supper (\Kuriakon deipnon\, strkjv@1Corinthians:11:20|). See allusions in O.T. to use of the table in heathen idol feasts (Isaiah:65:11; strkjv@Jeremiah:7:18; strkjv@Ezekiel:16:18f.; strkjv@23:41|). The altar of burnt-offering is called the table of the Lord in strkjv@Malachi:1:7| (Vincent).

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

rwp@Info_1Peter @ SOME BOOKS Alford, H., Vol. IV. 1 of his _Greek Testament_ (1870). Baldwin, _The Fisherman of Galilee_ (1923). Barnes, _St. Peter in Rome and His Tomb on the Vatican Hill_. Beck, J. T., _Erklarung der Briefe Petri_ (1895). Bennett, W. H., _New-Century Bible_ (1901). Bigg, C., _Intern. Crit. Comm_. (1901). Birks, _Studies in the Life and Character of St. Peter_ (1887). Blenkin, _The First Ep. General of St. Peter_ (1915). Camerlinck, _Commentarius in epistolas catholicas_ (1909). Cooke and Lumby, _Speaker's Comm_. (1881). Couard, _Commentaire_ (1895). Couard, _Simon Petrus der Apostel des Herrn_. Davidson, _St. Peter and His Training_. Elert, _Die Religiositat des Petrus_ (1911). Erbes, _Die Todestage der Apostels Paulus and Petrus_ (1899). Foakes-Jackson, F. J., _Peter Prince of Apostles_ (1927). Foster, Ora D., _The Literary Relations of the First Epistle of Peter_ (1913). Fouard, C., _St. Peter and the First Years of Christianity_ (1892). Gallagher, M., _Was the Apostle Peter Ever at Rome?_ (1894). Goutard, _Essai critique et historique sur la prem. e'pitre de S. Pierre_ (1905). Green, S. G., _The Apostle Peter: His Life and Letters_ (1880). Guignebert, _Lamentations:Primaute' de Pierre et la Venue de Pierre a Rome_ (1909). Gunkel, H., _Die Schriften d. N.T_. 3 Aufl. (1917). Hart, J. H. A., _Expos. Greek Test_. (1910). Henriott, _Saint Pierre_ (1891). Hort, F. J. A., _The First Epistle of St. Peter strkjv@1:1-2:17_ (1898). Howson, J., _Horae Petrinae_ (1883). Jenkins, R. C., _The Apostle Peter. Claims of Catholics_ (1875). Johnstone, _The First Epistle of Peter_ (1888). Kasteren, Van, _Deuteronomy:Eerste Brief Van d. Ap. Petrus_ (1911). Keil, C. F., _Comm. uber die Briefe des Petrus und Juda_ (1883). Knopf, R., _Die Briefe Petri und Juda_ (1912). Kogel, J., _Die Gedankenheit des Ersten Briefes Petri_ (1902). Kuhl, E., _Die Briefe Petri und Judae_ (Meyer Komm., 6 Aufl., 1897). Lietzmann, _Petrus and Paulus in Rom_. Lumby, J. R., _Expositor's Bible_ (1893). Masterman, J. H. B., _Epistles of St. Peter_ (1900). McInnis, J.M., _Simon Peter Fisherman and Philosopher_ (1928). Meyer, F. B., _Peter: Fisherman, Disciple, Apostle_ (1920). Moffatt, James, _Moffatt Comm. on N.T._ (1930). Monneir, J., _Lamentations:premiere e'pitre de l'apotre Pierre_ (1900). Perdelwitz, _Die Mysterienreligion und das Problem des ersten Petrusbriefes_ (1911). Plumptre, _Cambridge Bible_ (1879). Reagan, _The Preaching of Peter, the Beginning of Christian Apologetics_ (1922). Robinson, C. G., _Simon Peter: His Life and Times_ (1889). Ross, J. M. E., _The First Epistle of Peter_ (1913). Salmond, A. D. F., _Schaff's Comm_. (1883). Scharfe, _Die petrinische Stromung der neut. Literatur_ (1893). Schmid, _Petrus in Rome_ (1879). Seeley, _The Life and Writings of St. Peter_. Soden, Von, H., _Hand-Komm_. (3 Aufl., 1899). Taylor, W. M., _Peter the Apostle_ (1876). Thomas, W. H., Griffith, _The Apostle Peter_ (2nd ed., 1905). Thompson, _Life-Work of Peter the Apostle_. Upham, _Simon Peter Shepherd_ (1910). Usteri, J. M., _Wiss. und prakt. Komm. uber den I Petrus- brief_ (1887). Volter, D., _Der I Petrusbrief_ (1906). Weiss, B., _Die erste Petrusbrief und die Kritik_ (1906). _Der petrinische Lehrbegriff_ (1855). Williams, N. M., _American Comm_. Windisch, H., _Die Katholische Briefe. Handbuch zum N.T._ (2 Aufl., 1930). Wohlenberg, G., _Der erste und zweite Petrusbrief und der Judasbrief_. (Zahn Komm., 2 Aufl., 1915.) strkjv@1Peter:1:1 @{Peter} (\Petros\). Greek form for the Aramaic (Chaldaic) \Cˆphƒs\, the nickname given Simon by Jesus when he first saw him (John:1:42|) and reaffirmed in the Greek form on his great confession (Matthew:16:18|), with an allusion to \petra\, another form for a rock, ledge, or cliff. In strkjv@2Peter:1:1| we have both \Sim“n\ and \Petros\. Paul in his Epistles always terms himself Paul, not Saul. Songs:Peter uses this name, not Cephas or Simon, because he is writing to Christians scattered over Asia Minor. The nominative absolute occurs here as in strkjv@James:1:1|, but without \chairein\ as there, the usual form of greeting in letters (Acts:23:26|) so common in the papyri. {An apostle of Jesus Christ} (\apostolos Iˆsou Christou\). This is his official title, but in strkjv@2Peter:1:1| \doulos\ is added, which occurs alone in strkjv@James:1:1|. In II and III John we have only \ho presbuteros\ (the elder), as Peter terms himself \sunpresbuteros\ in strkjv@1Peter:5:1|. Paul's usage varies greatly: only the names in I and II Thessalonians, the title \apostolos\ added and defended in Galatians and Romans as also in I and II Corinthians and Colossians and Ephesians and II Timothy with "by the will of God" added, and in I Timothy with the addition of "according to the command of God." In Philippians Paul has only "\doulos\ (slave) \Christou Iˆsou\," like James and Jude. In Romans and Titus Paul has both \doulos\ and \apostolos\, like II Peter, while in Philemon he uses only \desmios\ (prisoner) \Iˆsou Christou\. {To the elect} (\eklektois\). Without article (with the article in strkjv@Matthew:24:22,24,31|) and dative case, "to elect persons" (viewed as a group). Bigg takes \eklektois\ (old, but rare verbal adjective from \ekleg“\, to pick out, to select) as an adjective describing the next word, "to elect sojourners." That is possible and is like \genos eklekton\ in strkjv@2:9|. See the distinction between \klˆtoi\ (called) and \eklektoi\ (chosen) in strkjv@Matthew:22:14|. {Who are sojourners} (\parepidˆmois\). Late double compound adjective (\para, epidˆmountes\, strkjv@Acts:2:10|, to sojourn by the side of natives), strangers sojourning for a while in a particular place. Songs:in Polybius, papyri, in LXX only twice (Genesis:23:4|; 38 or 39 12), in N.T. only here, strkjv@2:11; strkjv@Hebrews:11:13|. The picture in the metaphor here is that heaven is our native country and we are only temporary sojourners here on earth. {Of the Dispersion} (\diasporƒs\). See strkjv@John:7:35| for literal sense of the word for scattered (from \diaspeir“\, to scatter abroad, strkjv@Acts:8:1|) Jews outside of Palestine, and strkjv@James:1:1| for the sense here to Jewish Christians, including Gentile Christians (only N T. examples). Note absence of the article, though a definite conception (of the Dispersion). The Christian is a pilgrim on his way to the homeland. These five Roman provinces include what we call Asia Minor north and west of the Taurus mountain range (Hort). Hort suggests that the order here suggests that Silvanus (bearer of the Epistle) was to land in Pontus from the Euxine Sea, proceed through Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, to Bithynia, where he would re-embark for Rome. This, he holds, explains the separation of Pontus and Bithynia, though the same province. Only Galatia and Asia are mentioned elsewhere in the N.T. as having Christian converts, but the N.T. by no means gives a full account of the spread of the Gospel, as can be judged from strkjv@Colossians:1:6,23|.

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

rwp@1Peter:1:15 @{But like as he which called you is holy} (\alla kata ton kalesanta humas hagion\). This use of \kata\ is a regular Greek idiom (here in contrast with \sunschˆmatizomenoi\). "But according to the holy one calling you or who called you" (first aorist articular participle of \kale“\, to call). God is our standard or pattern (\kata\), not our lusts. {Be ye yourselves also holy} (\kai autoi hagioi genˆthˆte\). First aorist (ingressive) passive imperative of \ginomai\, to become with allusion (\kai\ also) to \kata\ (God as our example), "Do ye also become holy." For \anastrophˆ\ (manner of life) see verse 18; strkjv@2:12; strkjv@3:1-16; strkjv@James:3:13; strkjv@2Peter:2:7|. Peter uses \anastrophˆ\ eight times. The original meaning (turning up and down, back and forth) suited the Latin word _conversatio_ (_converto_), but not our modern "conversation" (talk, not walk).

rwp@1Peter:2:2 @{As newborn babes} (\h“s artigennˆta brephˆ\). \Brephos\, old word, originally unborn child (Luke:1:41-44|), then infant (Luke:2:12|), here figuratively, like \nˆpioi\. \Artigennˆta\ is a late and rare compound (Lucian, imperial inscription) from \arti\ and \genna“\, with evident allusion to \anagegennˆmenoi\ in strkjv@1:23|, probably meaning that they were recent converts, possibly slight proof that the Epistle written before Romans by Paul (Kuhl). {Long for} (\epipothˆsate\). First aorist (constative) active imperative of \epipothe“\, old verb for intense yearning (Phillipians:2:26|). {The spiritual milk which is without guile} (\to logikon adolon gala\). \Gala\ is old word for milk as in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:7| and as metaphor in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:2|. \Adolos\ is an old compound (here alone in N.T.) adjective (alpha privative and \dolos\ deceit), unadulterated milk which, alas, is so hard to get. \Logikon\ is an old adjective in \-ikos\, from \logos\ (reason, speech), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:12:1|, used here with allusion to \logou\ (1:23|) and \rˆma\ (1:25|), "the sincere milk of the word" ("the milk belonging to the word," either the milk which is the word or the milk contained in the word, that is Christ). Songs:Bigg holds. But in strkjv@Romans:12:1| Paul uses \logikon\ in the sense of "rational" or "spiritual," and that idea is possible here as Hort holds. In the Pelagia legend (Usener) we have the phrase \t“n logik“n probat“n tou Christou\ (the spiritual or rational sheep of Christ). {That ye may grow thereby} (\hina en aut“i auxˆthˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \auxan“\, old and common verb to grow. See this same metaphor in strkjv@Colossians:2:19; strkjv@Ephesians:4:15|. Peter uses the word of God as the food for growth, especially for babes in Christ, not emphasizing the distinction from solid food (\br“ma\) made in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:2; strkjv@Hebrews:5:13|. Salvation (\s“tˆrian\) here is final salvation.

rwp@1Peter:2:7 @{The preciousness} (\hˆ timˆ\). Or "the honour." Explanation of \entimon\ and \ou mˆ kataischunthˆi\ and only true "for you which believe" (\tois pisteuousin\ ethical dative of articular present active participle of \pisteu“\ to believe). {But for such as disbelieve} (\apistousin de\). Dative present active participle again of \apiste“\, opposite of \pisteu“\ (Luke:24:11|). {Was made the head of the corner} (\egenˆthˆ eis kephalˆn g“nias\). This verse is from strkjv@Psalms:118:22| with evident allusion to strkjv@Isaiah:28:16| (\kephalˆn g“nias=akrog“niaion\). See strkjv@Matthew:21:42; strkjv@Mark:12:10; strkjv@Luke:20:17|, where Jesus himself quotes strkjv@Psalms:118:22| and applies the rejection of the stone by the builders (\hoi oikodomountes\, the experts) to the Sanhedrin's conduct toward him. Peter quoted it also (and applied it as Jesus had done) in his speech at the Beautiful Gate (Acts:4:11|). Here he quotes it again to the same purpose.

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

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

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

rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ The occasion of the Epistle is made plain by numerous allusions personal and otherwise. Paul had arrived in Ephesus from Antioch shortly after the departure of Apollos for Corinth with letters of commendation from Priscilla and Aquila (Acts:18:28-19:1|). It is not clear how long Apollos remained in Corinth, but he is back in Ephesus when Paul writes the letter and he has declined Paul's request to go back to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:12|). Some of the household of Chloe had heard or come from Corinth with full details of the factions in the church over Apollos and Paul, clearly the reason why Apollos left (1Corinthians:1:10-12|). Even Cephas nominally was drawn into it, though there is no evidence that Peter himself had come to Corinth. Paul had sent Timothy over to Corinth to put an end to the factions (1Corinthians:4:17|), though he was uneasy over the outcome (1Corinthians:16:10f.|). This disturbance was enough of itself to call forth a letter from Paul. But it was by no means the whole story. Paul had already written a letter, now lost to us, concerning a peculiarly disgusting case of incest in the membership (1Corinthians:5:9|). They were having lawsuits with one another before heathen judges. Members of the church had written Paul a letter about marriage whether any or all should marry (1Corinthians:7:1|). They were troubled also whether it was right to eat meat that had been offered to idols in the heathen temples (1Corinthians:8:1|). Spiritual gifts of an unusual nature were manifested in Corinth and these were the occasion of a deal of trouble (1Corinthians:12:1|). The doctrine of the resurrection gave much trouble in Corinth (1Corinthians:15:12|). Paul was interested in the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem (1Corinthians:16:1|) and in their share in it. The church in Corinth had sent a committee (Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus) to Paul in Ephesus. He hopes to come himself after passing through Macedonia (1Corinthians:16:5f.|). It is possible that he had made a short visit before this letter (2Corinthians:13:1|), though not certain as he may have intended to go one time without going as he certainly once changed his plans on the subject (2Corinthians:1:15-22|). Whether Titus took the letter on his visit or it was sent on after the return of Timothy is not perfectly clear. Probably Timothy returned to Ephesus from Corinth shortly after the epistle was sent on, possibly by the committee who returned to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:17|), for Timothy and Erastus were sent on from Ephesus to Macedonia before the outbreak at the hands of Demetrius (Acts:19:22|). Apparently Timothy had not fully succeeded in reconciling the factions in Corinth for Paul dispatched Titus who was to meet him at Troas as he went on to Macedonia. Paul's hurried departure from Ephesus (Acts:20:1|) took him to Troas before Titus arrived and Paul's impatience there brought him to Macedonia where he did meet Titus on his return from Corinth (2Corinthians:2:12f.|).

rwp@2Corinthians:8:7 @{In this grace also} (\kai en tautˆi tˆi chariti\). This gifted church (1Corinthians:12-14|) had fallen behind in the grace of giving. Kindly irony in this allusion.

rwp@2John:1:7 @{Deceivers} (\planoi\). Late adjective (Diodorus, Josephus) meaning wandering, roving (1Timothy:4:1|). As a substantive in N.T. of Jesus (Matthew:27:63|), of Paul (2Corinthians:6:8|), and here. See the verb (\t“n planont“n humƒs\) in strkjv@1John:2:26| of the Gnostic deceivers as here and also of Jesus (John:7:12|). Cf. strkjv@1John:1:8|. {Are gone forth} (\exˆlthan\, alpha ending). Second aorist active indicative of \exerchomai\, perhaps an allusion to the crisis when they left the churches (1John:2:19|, same form). {Even they that confess not} (\hoi mˆ homologountes\). "The ones not confessing" (\mˆ\ regular negative with the participle). The articular participle describes the deceivers (\planoi\). {That Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh} (\Iˆsoun Christon erchomenon en sarki\). "Jesus Christ coming in the flesh." Present middle participle of \erchomai\ treating the Incarnation as a continuing fact which the Docetic Gnostics flatly denied. In strkjv@1John:4:2| we have \elˆluthota\ (perfect active participle) in this same construction with \homologe“\, because there the reference is to the definite historical fact of the Incarnation. There is no allusion here to the second coming of Christ. {This} (\houtos\). See strkjv@1John:2:18,22; strkjv@5:6,20|. {The deceiver and the antichrist} (\ho planos kai ho antichristos\). Article with each word, as in strkjv@Revelation:1:17|, to bring out sharply each separate phrase, though one individual is referred to. The one _par excellence_ in popular expectation (1John:2:22|), though many in reality (1John:2:18; strkjv@3John:1:7|).

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

rwp@2Peter:2:1 @{But there arose} (\egenonto de\). Second aorist middle indicative of \ginomai\ (cf. \ginetai\ in strkjv@1:20|). {False prophets also} (\kai pseudoprophˆtai\). In contrast with the true prophets just pictured in strkjv@1:20f|. Late compound in LXX and Philo, common in N.T. (Matthew:7:15|). Allusion to the O.T. times like Balaam and others (Jeremiah:6:13; strkjv@28:9; strkjv@Ezekiel:13:9|). {False teachers} (\pseudodidaskaloi\). Late and rare compound (\pseudˆs, didaskalos\) here alone in N.T. Peter pictures them as in the future here (\esontai\, shall be) and again as already present (\eisin\, are, verse 17|), or in the past (\eplanˆthˆsan\, they went astray, verse 15|). {Shall privily bring in} (\pareisaxousin\). Future active of \pareisag“\, late double compound \pareisag“\, to bring in (\eisag“\), by the side (\para\), as if secretly, here alone in N.T., but see \pareisaktous\ in strkjv@Galatians:2:4| (verbal adjective of this same verb). {Destructive heresies} (\haireseis ap“leias\). Descriptive genitive, "heresies of destruction" (marked by destruction) as in strkjv@Luke:16:8|. \Hairesis\ (from \haire“\) is simply a choosing, a school, a sect like that of the Sadducees (Acts:5:17|), of the Pharisees (Acts:15:5|), and of Christians as Paul admitted (Acts:24:5|). These "tenets" (Galatians:5:20|) led to destruction. {Denying} (\arnoumenoi\). Present middle participle of \arneomai\. This the Gnostics did, the very thing that Peter did, alas (Matthew:26:70|) even after Christ's words (Matthew:10:33|). {Even the Master} (\kai ton despotˆn\). Old word for absolute master, here of Christ as in strkjv@Jude:1:4|, and also of God (Acts:4:24|). Without the evil sense in our "despot." {That bought them} (\ton agorasanta autous\). First aorist active articular participle of \agoraz“\, same idea with \lutro“\ in strkjv@1Peter:1:18f|. These were professing Christians, at any rate, these heretics. {Swift destruction} (\tachinˆn ap“leian\). See strkjv@1:14| for \tachinˆn\ and note repetition of \ap“leian\. This is always the tragedy of such false prophets, the fate that they bring on (\epagontes\) themselves.

rwp@2Timothy:1:4 @{Night and day} (\nuktos kai hˆmeras\). Genitive of time, "by night and by day." As in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:9; strkjv@3:10|. {Longing} (\epipoth“n\). Present active participle of \epipothe“\, old word, eight times in Paul (1Thessalonians:3:6; strkjv@Phillipians:1:8|, etc.). {Remembering thy tears} (\memnˆmenos sou t“n dakru“n\). Perfect middle participle of \mimnˆsk“\, old and common verb with the genitive, only here in the Pastorals and elsewhere by Paul only in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:2|. Probably an allusion to the scene at Miletus (Acts:20:37|). Cf. strkjv@Acts:20:19|. {That I may be filled with joy} (\hina charas plˆr“th“\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \plˆro“\ (with genitive case \charas\), a verb common with Paul (Romans:8:4; strkjv@13:8|).

rwp@3John:1:9 @{I wrote somewhat unto the church} (\egrapsa ti tˆi ekklˆsiƒi\). A few MSS. add \an\ to indicate that he had not written (conclusion of second-class condition), clearly spurious. Not epistolary aorist nor a reference to II John as Findlay holds, but an allusion to a brief letter of commendation (Acts:18:27; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:1; strkjv@Colossians:4:10|) sent along with the brethren in verses 5-7| or to some other itinerant brethren. Westcott wrongly thinks that \ti\ is never used of anything important in the N.T. (Acts:8:9; strkjv@Galatians:6:3|), and hence that this lost letter was unimportant. It may have been brief and a mere introduction. \Diotrephes\ (\Dios\ and \treph“\, nourished by Zeus). This ambitious leader and sympathiser with the Gnostics would probably prevent the letter referred to being read to the church, whether it was II John condemning the Gnostics or another letter commending Demetrius and John's missionaries. Hence he sends Gaius this personal letter warning against Diotrephes. {Who loveth to have the preeminence among them} (\ho philopr“teu“n aut“n\). Present active articular participle of a late verb, so far found only here and in ecclesiastical writers (the example cited by Blass being an error, Deissmann, _Light_ etc., p. 76), from \philopr“tos\, fond of being first (Plutarch), and made like \philopone“\ (papyri), to be fond of toil. This ambition of Diotrephes does not prove that he was a bishop over elders, as was true in the second century (as Ignatius shows). He may have been an elder (bishop) or deacon, but clearly desired to rule the whole church. Some forty years ago I wrote an article on Diotrephes for a denominational paper. The editor told me that twenty-five deacons stopped the paper to show their resentment against being personally attacked in the paper. {Receiveth us not} (\ouk epidechetai hˆmƒs\). Present active indicative of this old compound, in N.T. only here and verse 10|. Diotrephes refused to accept John's authority or those who sided with him, John's missionaries or delegates (cf. strkjv@Matthew:10:40|).

rwp@Acts:3:21 @{Restoration} (\apokatastase“s\). Double compound (\apo, kata, histˆmi\), here only in the N.T., though common in late writers. In papyri and inscriptions for repairs to temples and this phrase occurs in Jewish apocalyptic writings, something like the new heaven and the new earth of strkjv@Revelation:21:1|. Paul has a mystical allusion also to the agony of nature in strkjv@Romans:8:20-22|. The verb \apokathistˆmi\ is used by Jesus of the spiritual and moral restoration wrought by the Baptist as Elijah (Matthew:17:11; strkjv@Mark:9:12|) and by the disciples to Jesus in strkjv@Acts:1:6|. Josephus uses the word of the return from captivity and Philo of the restitution of inheritances in the year of jubilee. As a technical medical term it means complete restoration to health. See a like idea in \palingenesia\ (renewal, new birth) in strkjv@Matthew:19:28; strkjv@Titus:3:5|. This universalism of Peter will be clearer to him after Joppa and Caesarea.

rwp@Acts:7:40 @{Gods which shall go before us} (\theous hoi proporeusontai hˆm“n\). strkjv@Exodus:32:1|. As guides and protectors, perhaps with some allusion to the pillar of fire and of cloud that had gone before them (Exodus:13:21|). The future indicative here with \hoi\ (relative) expresses purpose. {Ye wot not} (\ouk oidamen\). We do not know. How quickly they had forgotten both God and Moses while Moses was absent in the mount with God. {Become of him} (\egeneto aut“i\). Happened to him. "This" (\houtos\) here is a contemptuous allusion to Moses by the people.

rwp@Acts:17:16 @{Now while Paul waited for them in Athens} (\En de tais Athˆnais ekdechomenou autous tou Paulou\). Genitive absolute with present middle participle of \ekdechomai\, old verb to receive, but only with the sense of looking out for, expecting found here and elsewhere in N.T We know that Timothy did come to Paul in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1,6|) from Thessalonica and was sent back to them from Athens. If Silas also came to Athens, he was also sent away, possibly to Philippi, for that church was deeply interested in Paul. At any rate both Timothy and Silas came from Macedonia to Corinth with messages and relief for Paul (Acts:18:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:8f.|). Before they came and after they left, Paul felt lonely in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1|), the first time on this tour or the first that he has been completely without fellow workers. Athens had been captured by Sulla B.C. 86. After various changes Achaia, of which Corinth is the capital, is a separate province from Macedonia and A.D. 44 was restored by Claudius to the Senate with the Proconsul at Corinth. Paul is probably here about A.D. 50. Politically Athens is no longer of importance when Paul comes though it is still the university seat of the world with all its rich environment and traditions. Rackham grows eloquent over Paul the Jew of Tarsus being in the city of Pericles and Demosthenes, Socrates and Plato and Aristotle, Sophocles and Euripides. In its Agora Socrates had taught, here was the Academy of Plato, the Lyceum of Aristotle, the Porch of Zeno, the Garden of Epicurus. Here men still talked about philosophy, poetry, politics, religion, anything and everything. It was the art centre of the world. The Parthenon, the most beautiful of temples, crowned the Acropolis. Was Paul insensible to all this cultural environment? It is hard to think so for he was a university man of Tarsus and he makes a number of allusions to Greek writers. Probably it had not been in Paul's original plan to evangelize Athens, difficult as all university seats are, but he cannot be idle though here apparently by chance because driven out of Macedonia. {Was provoked} (\par“xuneto\). Imperfect passive of \paroxun“\, old verb to sharpen, to stimulate, to irritate (from \para, oxus\), from \paroxusmos\ (Acts:15:39|), common in old Greek, but in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:13:5|. It was a continual challenge to Paul's spirit when he beheld (\the“rountos\, genitive of present participle agreeing with \autou\ (his), though late MSS. have locative \the“rounti\ agreeing with \en aut“i\). {The city full of idols} (\kateid“lon ousan tˆn polin\). Note the participle \ousan\ not preserved in the English (either the city being full of idols or that the city was full of idols, sort of indirect discourse). Paul, like any stranger was looking at the sights as he walked around. This adjective \kateid“lon\ (perfective use of \kata\ and \eid“lon\ is found nowhere else, but it is formed after the analogy of \katampelos, katadendron\), full of idols. Xenophon (_de Republ. Ath_.) calls the city \holˆ bomos, holˆ thuma theois kai anathˆma\ (all altar, all sacrifice and offering to the gods). These statues were beautiful, but Paul was not deceived by the mere art for art's sake. The idolatry and sensualism of it all glared at him (Romans:1:18-32|). Renan ridicules Paul's ignorance in taking these statues for idols, but Paul knew paganism better than Renan. The superstition of this centre of Greek culture was depressing to Paul. One has only to recall how superstitious cults today flourish in the atmosphere of Boston and Los Angeles to understand conditions in Athens. Pausanias says that Athens had more images than all the rest of Greece put together. Pliny states that in the time of Nero Athens had over 30,000 public statues besides countless private ones in the homes. Petronius sneers that it was easier to find a god than a man in Athens. Every gateway or porch had its protecting god. They lined the street from the Piraeus and caught the eye at every place of prominence on wall or in the agora.

rwp@Acts:17:28 @{For in him} (\en aut“i gar\). Proof of God's nearness, not stoic pantheism, but real immanence in God as God dwells in us. The three verbs (\z“men, kinoumetha, esmen\) form an ascending scale and reach a climax in God (life, movement, existence). \Kinoumetha\ is either direct middle present indicative (we move ourselves) or passive (we are moved). {As certain even of your own poets} (\h“s kai tines t“n kath' humƒs poiˆt“n\). "As also some of the poets among you." Aratus of Soli in Cilicia (ab. B.C. 270) has these very words in his _Ta Phainomena_ and Cleanthes, Stoic philosopher (300-220 B.C.) in his _Hymn to Zeus_ has \Ek sou gar genos esmen\. In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:32| Paul quotes from Menander and in strkjv@Titus:1:12| from Epimenides. J. Rendel Harris claims that he finds allusions in Paul's Epistles to Pindar, Aristophanes, and other Greek writers. There is no reason in the world why Paul should not have acquaintance with Greek literature, though one need not strain a point to prove it. Paul, of course, knew that the words were written of Zeus (Jupiter), not of Jehovah, but he applies the idea in them to his point just made that all men are the offspring of God.

rwp@Acts:20:19 @[After what manner I was with you} (\p“s meth' h–m“n egenomˆn\). Literally, "How I came (from Asia and so was) with you." Cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:5; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1-10| where Paul likewise dares to refer boldly to his life while with them "all the time" (\ton panta chronon\). Accusative of duration of time. Songs:far as we know, Paul stuck to Ephesus the whole period. He had devoted himself consecratedly to the task in Ephesus. Each pastor is bishop of his field and has a golden opportunity to work it for Christ. One of the saddest things about the present situation is the restlessness of preachers to go elsewhere instead of devoting themselves wholly to the task where they are. 19|. {Serving the Lord} (\douleu“n t“i kuri“i\). It was Paul's glory to be the \doulos\ (bond-slave) as in strkjv@Romans:1:1; strkjv@Phillipians:1:1|. Paul alone, save Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:6:24; strkjv@Luke:16:13|, uses \douleu“\ six times for serving God (Page). {With all lowliness of mind} (\meta pasˆs tapeinophrosunˆs\). Lightfoot notes that heathen writers use this word for a grovelling, abject state of mind, but Paul follows Christ in using it for humility, humble-mindedness that should mark every Christian and in particular the preacher. {With tears} (\dakru“n\). Construed with \meta\. Paul was a man of the deepest emotion along with his high intellectuality. He mentions his tears again in verse 31|, tears of sorrow and of anxiety. He refers to his tears in writing the sharp letter to the church in Corinth (2Corinthians:2:4|) and in denouncing the sensual apostates in strkjv@Phillipians:3:18|. Adolphe Monod has a wonderful sermon on the tears of Paul. Consider also the tears of Jesus. {Trials which befell me} (\peirasm“n t“n sumbant“n moi\). Construed also with \meta\. Second aorist active participle of \sunbain“\, to walk with, to go with, to come together, to happen, to befall. Very common in this sense in the old Greek (cf. strkjv@Acts:3:10|). {By the plots of the Jews} (\en tais epiboulais t“n Ioudai“n\). Like the plot (\epiboulˆ\) against him in Corinth (20:3|) as well as the earlier trial before Gallio and the attacks in Thessalonica. In strkjv@Acts:19:9| Luke shows the hostile attitude of the Jews in Ephesus that drove Paul out of the synagogue to the school of Tyrannus. He does not describe in detail these "plots" which may easily be imagined from Paul's own letters and may be even referred to in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:10; strkjv@15:30ff.; strkjv@16:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:4-10; strkjv@7:5; strkjv@11:23|. In fact, one has only to dwell on the allusions in strkjv@2Corinthians:11| to picture what Paul's life was in Ephesus during these three years. Luke gives in strkjv@Acts:19| the outbreak of Demetrius, but Paul had already fought with "wild-beasts" there.

rwp@Acts:21:10 @{As we tarried} (\epimenont“n hˆm“n\). Genitive absolute. Note \epi\ (additional) with \men“\ as in strkjv@12:16|. {Many days} (\hˆmeras pleious\). More days (than we expected), accusative of time. {A certain prophet named Agabus} (\prophˆtˆs onomati Agabos\). A prophet like the daughters of Philip, mentioned already in connection with the famine predicted by him (Acts:11:28|), but apparently not a man of prominence like Barnabas, and so no allusion to that former prophecy.

rwp@Colossians:2:7 @{Rooted} (\erriz“menoi\). Perfect passive participle of old verb \rizo“\ from \riza\, root. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Ephesians:3:17|. Paul changes the figure from walk to growing tree. {Builded up in him} (\epoikodomoumenoi en aut“i\). Present passive participle (rooted to stay so) of \epoikodome“\, old verb, to build upon as in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:10,12|. The metaphor is changed again to a building as continually going up (present tense). {Stablished} (\bebaioumenoi\). Present passive participle of \bebaio“\, old verb from \bebaios\ (from \bain“, bai“\), to make firm or stable. {In your faith} (\tˆi pistei\). Locative case, though the instrumental case, {by your faith}, makes good sense also. {Even as ye were taught} (\kath“s edidachthˆte\). First aorist passive indicative of \didask“\, an allusion to \parelabete\ in verse 6| and to \emathete\ in strkjv@1:7|. {In thanksgiving} (\en eucharistiƒi\). Hence they had no occasion to yield to the blandishments of the Gnostic teachers.

rwp@Colossians:2:12 @{Having been buried with him in baptism} (\suntaphentes aut“i en t“i baptismati\). Second aorist passive participle of \sunthapt“\, old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:6:4|, followed by associative instrumental case (\aut“i\). Thayer's Lexicon says: "For all who in the rite of baptism are plunged under the water, thereby declare that they put faith in the expiatory death of Christ for the pardon of their past sins." Yes, and for all future sins also. This word gives Paul's vivid picture of baptism as a symbolic burial with Christ and resurrection also to newness of life in him as Paul shows by the addition "wherein ye were also raised with him" (\en h“i kai sunˆgerthˆte\). "In which baptism" (\baptismati\, he means). First aorist passive indicative of \sunegeir“\, late and rare verb (Plutarch for waking up together), in LXX, in N.T. only in strkjv@Colossians:2:12; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@Ephesians:2:6|. In the symbol of baptism the resurrection to new life in Christ is pictured with an allusion to Christ's own resurrection and to our final resurrection. Paul does not mean to say that the new life in Christ is caused or created by the act of baptism. That is grossly to misunderstand him. The Gnostics and the Judaizers were sacramentalists, but not so Paul the champion of spiritual Christianity. He has just given the spiritual interpretation to circumcision which itself followed Abraham's faith (Romans:4:10-12|). Cf. strkjv@Galatians:3:27|. Baptism gives a picture of the change already wrought in the heart "through faith" (\dia tˆs piste“s\). {In the working of God} (\tˆs energeias tou theou\). Objective genitive after \piste“s\. See strkjv@1:29| for \energeia\. God had power to raise Christ from the dead (\tou egeirantos\, first aorist active participle of \egeir“\, the fact here stated) and he has power (energy) to give us new life in Christ by faith.

rwp@Colossians:3:10 @{And have put on} (\kai endusamenoi\). First aorist middle participle (in causal sense as before) of \endun“\, old and common verb (Latin _induo_, English endue) for putting on a garment. Used of putting on Christ (Galatians:3:27; strkjv@Romans:13:14|). {The new man} (\ton neon\). "The new (young as opposed to old \palaion\) man" (though \anthr“pon\ is not here expressed, but understood from the preceding phrase). In strkjv@Ephesians:4:24| Paul has \endusasthai ton kainon\ (fresh as opposed to worn out) \anthr“pon\. {Which is being renewed} (\ton anakainoumenon\). Present passive articular participle of \anakaino“\. Paul apparently coined this word on the analogy of \ananeomai\. \Anakainiz“\ already existed (Hebrews:6:6|). Paul also uses \anakain“sis\ (Romans:12:2; strkjv@Titus:3:5|) found nowhere before him. By this word Paul adds the meaning of \kainos\ to that of \neos\ just before. It is a continual refreshment (\kainos\) of the new (\neos\, young) man in Christ Jesus. {Unto knowledge} (\eis epign“sin\). "Unto full (additional) knowledge," one of the keywords in this Epistle. {After the image} (\kat' eikona\). An allusion to strkjv@Genesis:1:26,28|. The restoration of the image of God in us is gradual and progressive (2Corinthians:3:18|), but will be complete in the final result (Romans:8:29; strkjv@1John:3:2|).

rwp@Galatians:3:13 @{Redeemed us} (\hˆmas exˆgorasen\). First aorist active of the compound verb \exagoraz“\ (Polybius, Plutarch, Diodorus), to buy from, to buy back, to ransom. The simple verb \agoraz“\ (1Corinthians:6:20; strkjv@7:23|) is used in an inscription for the purchase of slaves in a will (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 324). See also strkjv@Galatians:4:5; strkjv@Colossians:4:5; strkjv@Ephesians:5:16|. Christ purchased us {from the curse of the law} (\ek tˆs kataras tou nomou\). "Out from (\ek\ repeated) under (\hupo\ in verse 10|) the curse of the law." {Having become a curse for us} (\genomenos huper hˆm“n katara\). Here the graphic picture is completed. We were under (\hupo\) a curse, Christ became a curse {over} (\huper\) us and so between us and the overhanging curse which fell on him instead of on us. Thus he bought us out (\ek\) and we are free from the curse which he took on himself. This use of \huper\ for substitution is common in the papyri and in ancient Greek as in the N.T. (John:11:50; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14f.|). {That hangeth on a tree} (\ho kremamenos epi xulou\). Quotation from strkjv@Deuteronomy:21:23| with the omission of \hupo theou\ (by God). Since Christ was not cursed by God. The allusion was to exposure of dead bodies on stakes or crosses (Joshua:10:26|). \Xulon\ means wood, not usually tree, though so in strkjv@Luke:23:31| and in later Greek. It was used of gallows, crosses, etc. See strkjv@Acts:5:30; strkjv@10:39; strkjv@1Peter:2:24|. On the present middle participle from the old verb \kremannumi\, to hang, see on ¯Matthew:18:6; strkjv@Acts:5:30|.

rwp@Galatians:4:13 @{Because of an infirmity of the flesh} (\di' astheneian tˆs sarkos\). All that we can get from this statement is the fact that Paul's preaching to the Galatians "the first time" or "the former time" (\to proteron\, adverbial accusative) was due to sickness of some kind whether it was eye trouble (4:15|) which was a trial to them or to the thorn in the flesh (2Corinthians:12:7|) we do not know. It can be interpreted as applying to North Galatia or to South Galatia if he had an attack of malaria on coming up from Perga. But the narrative in strkjv@Acts:13; 14| does not read as if Paul had planned to pass by Pisidia and by Lycaonia but for the attack of illness. The Galatians understood the allusion for Paul says "Ye know" (\oidate\).

rwp@Hebrews:1:2 @{At the end of these days} (\ep' eschatou t“n hˆmer“n tout“n\). In contrast with \palai\ above. {Hath spoken} (\elalˆsen\). First aorist indicative of \lale“\, the same verb as above, "did speak" in a final and full revelation. {In his Son} (\en hui“i\). In sharp contrast to \en tois prophˆtais\. "The Old Testament slopes upward to Christ" (J. R. Sampey). No article or pronoun here with the preposition \en\, giving the absolute sense of "Son." Here the idea is not merely what Jesus said, but what he is (Dods), God's Son who reveals the Father (John:1:18|). "The revelation was a _son-revelation_" (Vincent). {Hath appointed} (\ethˆken\). First aorist (kappa aorist) active of \tithˆmi\, a timeless aorist. {Heir of all things} (\klˆronomon pant“n\). See strkjv@Mark:12:6| for \ho klˆronomos\ in Christ's parable, perhaps an allusion here to this parable (Moffatt). The idea of sonship easily passes into that of heirship (Galatians:4:7; strkjv@Romans:8:17|). See the claim of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:11:27; strkjv@28:18| even before the Ascension. {Through whom} (\di' hou\). The Son as Heir is also the Intermediate Agent (\dia\) in the work of creation as we have it in strkjv@Colossians:1:16f.; strkjv@John:1:3|. {The worlds} (\tous ai“nas\). "The ages" (_secula_, Vulgate). See strkjv@11:3| also where \tous ai“nas=ton kosmon\ (the world) or the universe like \ta panta\ (the all things) in strkjv@1:3; strkjv@Romans:11:36; strkjv@Colossians:1:16|. The original sense of \ai“n\ (from \aei\, always) occurs in strkjv@Hebrews:5:20|, but here "by metonomy of the container for the contained" (Thayer) for "the worlds" (the universe) as in LXX, Philo, Josephus.

rwp@Hebrews:2:2 @{For if... proved steadfast} (\ei gar... egeneto bebaios\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. {Through angels} (\di' aggel“n\). Allusion to the use of angels by God at Sinai as in strkjv@Acts:7:38,53; Gal strkjv@3:19|, though not in the O.T., but in Josephus (_Ant_. XV. 156). {Transgression and disobedience} (\parabasis kai parakoˆ\). Both words use \para\ as in \pararu“men\, refused to obey (stepping aside, \para-basis\ as in strkjv@Romans:2:23|), neglect to obey (\par-akoˆ\ as in strkjv@Romans:5:19|), more than a mere hendiadys. {Recompense of reward} (\misthapodosian\). Late double compound, like \misthapodotˆs\ (Hebrews:11:6|), from \misthos\ (reward) and \apodid“mi\, to give back. The old Greeks used \misthodosia\. {Just} (\endikon\). Old compound adjective, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:3:8|.

rwp@Hebrews:3:2 @{Who was faithful} (\piston onta\). Present active participle with predicate accusative agreeing with \Iˆsoun\, "as being faithful." {That appointed him} (\t“i poiˆsanti auton\). See strkjv@1Samuel:12:6|. Dative case of the articular participle (aorist active) of \poie“\ and the reference is to God. Note \pistos\ as in strkjv@2:17|. {As also was Moses} (\h“s kai M“usˆs\). The author makes no depreciatory remarks about Moses as he did not about the prophets and the angels. He cheerfully admits that Moses was faithful "in all his house" (\en hol“i t“i oik“i autou\), an allusion to strkjv@Numbers:12:7| (\ean hol“i t“i oik“i mou\) about Moses. The "his" is God's. The use of \oikos\ for the people (family) of God, not the building, but the group (1Timothy:3:15|) in which God is the Father. But wherein is Jesus superior to Moses? The argument is keen and skilful.

rwp@Hebrews:4:4 @{Somewhere on this wise} (\pou hout“s\). See strkjv@2:6| for \pou tis\ for a like indefinite allusion to an Old Testament quotation. Here it is strkjv@Genesis:2:2| (cf. strkjv@Exodus:20:11; strkjv@31:17|). Moffatt notes that Philo quotes strkjv@Genesis:2:2| with the same "literary mannerism." {Rested} (\katepausen\). First aorist active indicative of \katapau“\, intransitive here, but transitive in verse 8|. It is not, of course, absolute rest from all creative activity as Jesus shows in strkjv@John:5:17|. But the seventh day of God's rest was still going on (clearly not a twenty-four hour day).

rwp@Hebrews:5:7 @{In the days of his flesh} (\en tais hˆmerais tˆs sarkos autou\). Here (verses 7-9|) the author turns to the other requirement of a high priest (human sympathy). Since Jesus was "without sin" (4:15|) he did not have to offer sacrifices "for himself," yet in all other points he felt the sympathy of the human high priest, even more so by reason of his victory over sin. {Having offered up} (\prosenegkas\). Second aorist active (\-a\ form) participle of \prospher“\ (cf. verse 3|). An allusion to the Agony of Christ in Gethsemane. {Supplications} (\hiketˆrias\). Socrates, Polybius, Job:(Job:40:22|) combine this word with \deˆseis\ (prayers) as here. The older form was \hikesia\. The word \hiketˆrios\ is an adjective from \hiketˆs\ (a suppliant from \hik“\, to come to one) and suggests one coming with an olive-branch (\elaia\). Here only in the N.T. {With strong crying and tears} (\meta kraugˆs ischuras kai dakru“n\). See strkjv@Luke:22:44f|. for a picture of the scene in Gethsemane (anguish and pathos). No doubt the writer has in mind other times when Jesus shed tears (John:11:35; strkjv@Luke:19:41|), but Gethsemane chiefly. {To save him from death} (\s“zein ek thanatou\). A reference to the cry of Jesus in Gethsemane (Matthew:26:39|). {Having been heard for his godly fear} (\eisakoustheis apo tˆs eulabeias\). Old word from \eulabˆs\ (taking hold well, strkjv@Luke:2:25| from \eu, lamban“\, the verb \eulabeomai\ in N.T. only in strkjv@Hebrews:11:7|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@12:28|. Fine picture of Christ's attitude toward the Father in the prayer in Gethsemane and in all his prayers. Jesus in Gethsemane at once surrendered his will to that of the Father who heard his plea and enabled him to acquiesce in the Father's will.

rwp@Hebrews:6:1 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). Because of the argument already made about the difficulty of the subject and the dulness of the readers. {Let us cease to speak} (\aphentes ton logon\). Second aorist active participle of \aphiˆmi\, to leave off or behind. {Of the first principles of Christ} (\tˆs archˆs tou Christou\). Objective genitive \Christou\ (about Christ). "Leaving behind the discussion of the beginning about Christ," another way of saying again \ta stoicheia tˆs archˆs t“n logi“n tou theou\ of strkjv@5:12|. {And press on} (\kai pher“metha\). Volitive present subjunctive passive, "Let us be borne on" (both the writer and the readers). The Pythagorean Schools use \pher“metha\ in precisely this sense of being borne on to a higher stage of instruction. Bleek quotes several instances of Greek writers using together as here of \aphentes pher“metha\ (Eurip., _Androm_. 393, for instance). {Unto perfection} (\epi tˆn teleiotˆta\). Old word from \teleios\ mature, adults as in strkjv@5:14|. Only twice in N.T. (here and strkjv@Colossians:3:14|). Let us go on to the stage of adults, not babes, able to masticate solid spiritual food. The writer will assume that the readers are adults in his discussion of the topic. {Not laying again the foundation} (\mˆ palin themelion kataballomenoi\). The regular idiom for laying down the foundation of a building (\themelion\, strkjv@Luke:6:48f.|). The metaphor is common (1Corinthians:3:11|) and the foundation is important, but one cannot be laying the foundation always if he is to build the house. There are six items mentioned here as part of the "foundation," though the accusative \didachˆn\ in apposition with \themelion\ may mean that there are only four included in the \themelion\. Two are qualitative genitives after \themelion\ (\metanoias\ and \piste“s\). What is meant by "dead works" (\apo nekr“n erg“n\) is not clear (9:14|), though the reference may be to touching a corpse (Numbers:19:1f.; strkjv@31:19|). There are frequent allusions to the deadening power of sin (James:2:17,26; strkjv@John:7:25; Rom strkjv@6:1,11; strkjv@7:8; strkjv@Colossians:2:13; strkjv@Ephesians:2:1,5|). The use of repentance and faith together occurs also elsewhere (Mark:1:15; strkjv@Acts:20:21; strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:9|).

rwp@Hebrews:7:6 @{He whose genealogy is not counted} (\ho mˆ genealogoumenos\). Articular participle with negative \mˆ\ (usual with participles) of the old verb \genealoge“\ trace ancestry (cf. verse 3|) {Hath taken tithes} (\dedekat“ken\). Perfect active indicative of \dekato“\, standing on record in Genesis. {Hath blessed} (\eulogˆken\). Perfect active indicative of \euloge“\, likewise standing on record. Note the frequent perfect tenses in Hebrews. {Him that hath the promises} (\ton echonta tas epaggelias\). Cf. strkjv@6:12,13-15| for allusion to the repeated promises to Abraham (Genesis:12:3,7; strkjv@13:14; strkjv@15:5; strkjv@17:5; strkjv@22:16-18|).

rwp@Hebrews:10:22 @{Let us draw near} (\proserch“metha\). Present middle volitive subjunctive as in strkjv@4:16| with which exhortation the discussion began. There are three exhortations in verses strkjv@22:25| (Let us draw near, \proserch“metha\, let us hold fast, \katech“men\, let us consider one another, \katano“men allˆlous\). Four items are added to this first exhortation. {With a true heart} (\meta alˆthinˆs kardias\). With loyalty and fealty. {In fulness of faith} (\en plˆrophoriƒi piste“s\). See strkjv@6:11| for this very phrase. {Having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience} (\rerantismenoi tas kardias apo suneidˆse“s ponˆras\). Perfect passive participle of \rantiz“\ with the accusative retained in the passive, an evident allusion to the sprinkling of blood in the old tabernacle (9:18-22|) and the shedding of Christ's blood for the cleansing of our consciences (10:1-4|). Cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:2| for "the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ." {Our body washed with pure water} (\lelousmenoi to s“ma hudati kathar“i\). Perfect passive (or middle) of \lou“\, old verb to bathe, to wash. Accusative also retained if passive. \Hudati\ can be either locative (in) or instrumental (with). See strkjv@Ephesians:5:26; strkjv@Titus:3:5| for the use of \loutron\. If the reference here is to baptism (quite doubtful), the meaning is a symbol (Dods) of the previous cleansing by the blood of Christ.

rwp@Hebrews:11:28 @{He kept} (\pepoiˆken\). Perfect active indicative of \poie“\, to make, "he has made," emphasizing the permanent nature of the feast. {The sprinkling of the blood} (\tˆn proschusin tou haimatos\). Rather, "the pouring of the blood" (\proschusis\ from \prosche“\, to pour upon), only here in the N.T. (earliest known example). An allusion to the command in strkjv@Exodus:12:7,22| but in the LXX \prosche“\ is the usual term for the act (Exodus:24:6; strkjv@29:16; strkjv@Leviticus:1:5,11; strkjv@Deuteronomy:16:6|). {That the destroyer of the first-born should not touch them} (\hina mˆ ho olothreu“n ta pr“totoka thigˆi aut“n\). Negative final clause with \hina mˆ\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \thiggan“\, old verb to touch with genitive, in the N.T. only here, strkjv@12:20; strkjv@Colossians:2:21|. The articular participle \ho olothreu“n\ is from strkjv@Exodus:11:23|. For \pr“totoka\ see strkjv@Luke:2:7; strkjv@Exodus:12:29|.

rwp@Info_James @ THE DATE If the Epistle is genuine and James was put to death about A.D. 62, it was clearly written before that date. There are two theories about it, one placing it about A.D. 48, the other about A.D. 58. To my mind the arguments of Mayor for the early date are conclusive. There is no allusion to Gentile Christians, as would be natural after A.D. 50. If written after A.D. 70, the tone would likely be different, with some allusion to that dreadful calamity. The sins condemned are those characteristic of early Jewish Christians. The book itself is more like the Sermon on the Mount than the Epistles. The discussion of faith and works in chapter strkjv@James:2| reveals an absence of the issues faced by Paul in strkjv@Romans:4; strkjv@Galatians:3| after the Jerusalem Conference (A.D. 49). Hence the date before that Conference has decidedly the better of the argument. Ropes in his Commentary denies the genuineness of the Epistle and locates it between A.D. 75 and 125, but Hort holds that the evidence for a late date rests "on very slight and intangible grounds." Songs:we place the book before A.D. 49. It may indeed be the earliest New Testament book.

rwp@Info_James @ THE PURPOSE If James is writing solely to non-Christian Jews, the purpose is to win them to Christ, and so he puts the gospel message in a way to get a hearing from the Jews. That is true, whether he has them in mind or not, though he does not do it by the suppression of the deity of Jesus Christ. In the very first verse he places him on a par with God as "the Lord Jesus Christ." In strkjv@James:2:1| he presents Jesus as the object of faith: "as you believe in our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the Glory" (Moffatt's Translation), where Jesus is termed the Shekinah Glory of God. It is true that there is no discussion in the Epistle of the cross and the resurrection of Jesus, but there is an allusion to the murder of Jesus in strkjv@James:5:6| and the second coming in strkjv@James:5:8|. The chief aim of the Epistle is to strengthen the faith and loyalty of the Jewish Christians in the face of persecution from rich and overbearing Jews who were defrauding and oppressing them. It is a picture of early Christian life in the midst of difficult social conditions between capital and labor which also exist today. Songs:then it is a very modern message even if it is the earliest New Testament book. The glory of the New Testament lies precisely at this point in that the revelation of God in Christ meets our problems today because it did meet those of the first century A.D. Christian principles stand out clearly for our present-day living.

rwp@Info_James @ THE STYLE James assumes the doctrinal features of Christianity, but he is concerned mainly with the ethical and social aspects of the gospel that Jewish followers of Christ may square their lives with the gospel which they believe and profess. But this fact does not justify Luther in calling the Epistle of James "a veritable Epistle of straw." Luther imagined that James contradicted Paul's teaching of justification by faith. That is not true and the criticism of Luther is unjust. We shall see that, though James and Paul use the same words (faith, works, justify), they mean different things by them. It is possible that both Paul and Peter had read the Epistle of James, though by no means certain. M. Jones (_New Testament in the Twentieth Century_, p. 316) thinks that the author was familiar with Stoic philosophy. This is also possible, though he may have learned it only indirectly through the Wisdom of Solomon and Philo. What is true is that the author writes in the easy and accurate _Koin‚_ Greek of a cultivated Jew (the literary _Koin‚_, not the vernacular), though not the artificial or stilted language of a professional stylist. Principal Patrick (_James the Lord's Brother_, p. 298) holds that he "had a wide knowledge of Classical Greek." This does not follow, though he does use the manner "of the Hellenistic diatribe" (Ropes, _Int. and Crit. Comm_., p. 19) so common at that time. Ropes (pp. 10-22) points out numerous parallels between James and the popular moral addresses of the period, familiar since the days of Socrates and at its height in Seneca and Epictetus. The use of an imaginary interlocutor is one instance (James:2:18f.; strkjv@5:13f.|) as is the presence of paradox (James:1:2,10; strkjv@2:5|; etc.). But the style of James is even more kin to that seen in the Jewish wisdom literature like Proverbs, the Wisdom of Solomon, etc. It is thus both tract and Epistle, a brief Christian sermon on a high plane for a noble purpose. But it is all natural and not artificial. The metaphors are many, but brief and remind one constantly of the Master's use of them in the Sermon on the Mount. Did not Mary the mother of Jesus and James make frequent use of such homely parables? The author shows acquaintance with the LXX, but there are few Hebraisms in the language, though the style is Hebraic, as is the whole tone of the book (Hebraic and Christian). "The style is especially remarkable for constant hidden allusions to our Lord's sayings, such as we find in the first three Gospels" (Hort).

rwp@James:5:12 @{Above all things} (\pro pant“n\). No connection with what immediately precedes. Probably an allusion to the words of Jesus (Matthew:5:34-37|). It is not out of place here. See the same phrase in strkjv@1Peter:4:8|. Robinson (_Ephesians_, p. 279) cites like examples from the papyri at the close of letters. Here it means "But especially" (Ropes). {Swear not} (\mˆ omnuete\). Prohibition of the habit (or to quit doing it if guilty) with \mˆ\ and the present active imperative of \omnu“\. The various oaths (profanity) forbidden (\mˆte\, thrice) are in the accusative case after \omnuete\, according to rule (\ouranon, gˆn, horkon\). The Jews were wont to split hairs in their use of profanity, and by avoiding God's name imagine that they were not really guilty of this sin, just as professing Christians today use "pious oaths" which violate the prohibition of Jesus. {Let be} (\ˆt“\). Imperative active third singular of \eimi\, late form (1Corinthians:16:22|) for \est“\. "Your yea be yea" (and no more). A different form from that in strkjv@Matthew:5:37|. {That ye fall not under judgment} (\hina mˆ hupo krisin pesˆte\). Negative purpose with \hina mˆ\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \pipt“\, to fall. See \hina mˆ krithˆte\ in verse 9|. \Krisis\ (from \krin“\) is the act of judging rather than the judgment rendered (\krima\ strkjv@James:3:1|).

rwp@Info_John @ ONLY ONE JOHN OF EPHESUS It is true that an ambiguous statement of Papias (circa A.D. 120) is contained in Eusebius where the phrase "the Elder John " (\ho presbuteros I“annˆs\) occurs. The most natural way to understand Papias is that he is referring to the Apostle John by this phrase as he describes the teachings of the apostles by "the words of the elders" just before. This interpretation of the allusion of Papias has been rendered almost certain by the work of Dom John Chapman, _John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel_ (1911). Not before Eusebius is the error found of two Johns in Ephesus, one the apostle, the other the so-called Presbyter. "Papias is no witness for the admission of two Johns of Asia Minor. Irenaeus, too, in any case, knows of but one John of Asia Minor. And this John was an eye-witness of our Lord's Life" (Bousset, _Die Offenbarumg des Joh._, p. 38, translation of Nolloth, _The Fourth Evangelist_, p. 63, note). Let this be admitted and much becomes clear.

rwp@Info_John @ EARLY AND CLEAR WITNESS TO THE APOSTLE JOHN Ignatius (_ad Philad_. vii. 1) about A.D. 110 says of the Spirit that "he knows whence he comes and whither he is going," a clear allusion to strkjv@John:3:8|. Polycarp (_ad Phil_. S 7) quotes strkjv@1John:4:2,3|. Eusebius states that Papias quoted First John. Irenaeus is quoted by Eusebius (H.E. V, 20) as saying that he used as a boy to hear Polycarp tell "of his intercourse with John and the others who had seen the Lord." Irenaeus accepted all our Four Gospels. Tatian made his _Diatessaron_ out of the Four Gospels alone. Theophilus of Antioch (_Ad Autol_. ii. 22) calls John the author of the Fourth Gospel. This was about A.D. 180. The Muratorian Canon near the close of the second century names John as the author of the Fourth Gospel. Till after the time of Origen no opposition to the Johannine authorship appears outside of Marcion and the Alogi. No other New Testament book has stronger external evidence.

rwp@Info_John @ THE USE OF THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS As the latest of the Gospels and by the oldest living apostle, it is only natural that there should be an infrequent use of the Synoptic Gospels. Outside of the events of Passion Week and the Resurrection period the Fourth Gospel touches the Synoptic narrative in only one incident, that of the Feeding of the Five Thousand and the walking on the water. The author supplements the Synoptic record in various ways. He mentions two passovers not given by the other Gospels (John:2:23; strkjv@6:4|) and another (John:5:1|) may be implied. Otherwise we could not know certainly that the ministry of Jesus was more than a year in length. He adds greatly to our knowledge of the first year of our Lord's public ministry ("the year of obscurity," Stalker) without which we should know little of this beginning (John:1:19-4:45|). The Synoptics give mainly the Galilean and Perean and Judean ministry, but John adds a considerable Jerusalem ministry which is really demanded by allusions in the Synoptics. The Prologue (John:1:1-18|) relates the Incarnation to God's eternal purpose as in strkjv@Colossians:1:14-20| and strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-3| and employs the language of the intellectuals of the time (\Logos\ -- Word) to interpret Christ as the Incarnate Son of God.

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

rwp@John:1:32 @{Bare witness} (\emarturˆsen\). First aorist active indicative of \marture“\. Another specimen of John's witness to the Messiah (1:7,15,19,29,35,36|). {I have beheld} (\tetheamai\). Perfect middle indicative of \theaomai\, the realization of the promise of the sign (verse 33|) by which he should recognize the Messiah. As a matter of fact, we know that he so recognized Jesus as Messiah when he came for baptism before the Holy Spirit came (Matthew:3:14ff.|). But this sight of the Spirit descending as a dove upon Jesus at his baptism (Mark:1:10; strkjv@Matthew:3:16; strkjv@Luke:3:22|) became permanent proof to him. John's allusion assumes the Synoptic record. The Semites regarded the dove as a symbol of the Spirit.

rwp@John:3:13 @{But he that descended out of heaven} (\ei mˆ ho ek tou ouranou katabas\). The Incarnation of the Pre-existent Son of God who was in heaven before he came down and so knows what he is telling about "the heavenly things." There is no allusion to the Ascension which came later. This high conception of Christ runs all through the Gospel and is often in Christ's own words as here. {Which is in heaven} (\ho “n en t“i ouran“i\). This phrase is added by some manuscripts, not by Aleph B L W 33, and, if genuine, would merely emphasize the timeless existence of God's Son who is in heaven even while on earth. Probably a gloss. But "the Son of man" is genuine. He is the one who has come down out of heaven.

rwp@John:4:10 @{Answered and said} (\apekrithˆ kai eipen\). As often (redundant) in John. The first aorist passive (\apekrithˆ\) is deponent, no longer passive in sense. {If thou knewest} (\ei ˆideis\). Condition of second class, determined as unfulfilled, \ei\ and past perfect \ˆideis\ (used as imperfect) in condition and \an\ and aorist active indicative in conclusion (\an ˆitˆsas kai an ed“ken\, note repetition of \an\, not always done). {The gift of God} (\tˆn d“rean tou theou\). Naturally the gift mentioned in strkjv@3:16| (Westcott), the inexpressible gift (2Corinthians:9:15|). Some take it to refer to the living water below, but that is another allusion (metaphor) to strkjv@3:16|. See strkjv@Ephesians:4:7| for Paul's use of both \charis\ and \d“rea\ (from \did“mi\, to give). {Who it is} (\tis estin\). She only knew that he was a Jew. This Messianic self-consciousness of Jesus is plain in John, but it is early in the Synoptics also. {Living water} (\hud“r z“n\). Running water like a spring or well supplied by springs. This Jacob's Well was filled by water from rains percolating through, a sort of cistern, good water, but not equal to a real spring which was always preferred (Genesis:26:19; strkjv@Leviticus:14:5; strkjv@Numbers:19:17|). Jesus, of course, is symbolically referring to himself as the Living Water though he does not say it in plain words as he does about the Living Bread (6:51|). The phrase "the fountain of life" occurs in strkjv@Proverbs:13:14|. Jesus supplies the water of life (John:7:39|). Cf. strkjv@Revelation:7:17; strkjv@22:1|.

rwp@John:5:31 @{If I bear witness of myself} (\Ean eg“ martur“ peri emautou\). Condition of third class, undetermined with prospect of determination (\ean\ and present active subjunctive of \marture“\). The emphasis is on \eg“\ (I alone with no other witness). {Is not true} (\ouk estin alˆthˆs\). In law the testimony of a witness is not received in his own case (Jewish, Greek, Roman law). See strkjv@Deuteronomy:19:15| and the allusion to it by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:18:16|. See also strkjv@2Corinthians:13:1; strkjv@1Timothy:5:19|. And yet in strkjv@8:12-19| Jesus claims that his witness concerning himself is true because the Father gives confirmation of his message. The Father and the Son are the two witnesses (8:17|). It is a paradox and yet true. But here Jesus yields to the rabbinical demand for proof outside of himself. He has the witness of another (the Father, strkjv@5:32,37|), the witness of the Baptist (5:33|), the witness of the works of Jesus (5:36|), the witness of the Scriptures (5:39|), the witness of Moses in particular (5:45|).

rwp@John:6:13 @{Twelve baskets} (\d“deka kophinous\). One for each of the apostles. What about the lad? Stout wicker baskets (coffins, Wycliff) in distinction from the soft and frail \sphurides\ used at the feeding of the four thousand (Mark:8:8; strkjv@Matthew:15:37|). Here all the Gospels (Mark:6:43; strkjv@Matthew:14:20; strkjv@Luke:9:17; strkjv@John:6:13|) use \kophinoi\. The same distinction between \kophinoi\ and \sphurides\ is preserved in the allusion to the incidents by Jesus in strkjv@Mark:8:19,20; strkjv@Matthew:16:9,10|. {Unto them that had eaten} (\tois bebr“kosin\). Articular perfect active participle (dative case) of \bibr“sk“\, old verb to eat, only here in N.T., though often in LXX.

rwp@John:7:21 @{One work} (\hen ergon\). Direct allusion to the healing of the impotent man when in Jerusalem before (5:1ff.|). He had wrought others before (2:23; strkjv@4:45|), but this one on the Sabbath caused the rulers to try to kill Jesus (5:18|). Some wondered then, others had murder in their hearts. This crowd here is ignorant.

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

rwp@John:7:47 @{Are ye also led astray?} (\Mˆ kai humeis peplanˆsthe;\). The Pharisees took the lead in this scornful sneer at the officers. The use of \mˆ\ formally expects a negative answer as in strkjv@4:29|, but the Pharisees really believed it. See also strkjv@6:67|. The verb form is perfect passive indicative of \plana“\, for which see verse 12| with perhaps an allusion to that phase of opinion.

rwp@John:8:19 @{Where is thy Father?} (\pou estin ho patˆr sou;\). "The testimony of an unseen and unheard witness would not satisfy them" (Vincent). Bernard understands the Pharisees to see that Jesus claims God the Father as his second witness and so ask "where," not "who" he is. Augustine has it: _Patrem Christi carnaliter acceperunt_, Christ's human father, as if the Pharisees were "misled perhaps by the Lord's use of \anthr“pon\ (verse 17|)" (Dods). Cyril even took it to be a coarse allusion to the birth of Jesus as a bastard according to the Talmud. Perhaps the Pharisees used the question with _double entendre_, even with all three ideas dancing in their hostile minds. {Ye would know my Father also} (\kai ton patera mou an ˆideite\). Conclusion of second-class condition determined as unfulfilled with \an\ and second perfect active of \oida\ used as imperfect in both condition and conclusion. See this same point made to Philip in strkjv@14:9|. In strkjv@14:7| Jesus will use \gin“sk“\ in the condition and \oida\ in the conclusion. The ignorance of the Pharisees about Jesus proves it and is due to their ignorance of the Father. See this point more fully stated in strkjv@5:36-38| when Jesus had his previous controversy in Jerusalem. In strkjv@7:28| Jesus said that they knew his home in Nazareth, but he denied then that they knew the Father who sent him. Jesus will again on this occasion (8:55|) deny their knowledge of the Father. Later he will deny their knowledge of the Father and of the Son (16:3|). The Pharisees are silenced for the moment.

rwp@John:11:2 @{And it was that Mary which anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet with her hair} (\ˆn de Mariam hˆ aleipsasa ton kurion mur“i kai ekmaxasa tous podas autou tais thrixin autˆs\). This description is added to make plainer who Mary is "whose brother Lazarus was sick" (\hˆs ho adelphos Lazaros ˆsthenei\). There is an evident proleptic allusion to the incident described by John in strkjv@12:1-8| just after chapter 11. As John looks back from the end of the century it was all behind him, though the anointing (\hˆ aleipsasa\, first aorist active articular participle of \aleiph“\, old verb for which see strkjv@Mark:6:13|) took place after the events in chapter 11. The aorist participle is timeless and merely pictures the punctiliar act. The same remark applies to \ekmaxasa\, old verb \ekmass“\, to wipe off or away (Isaiah:12:3; strkjv@13:5; strkjv@Luke:7:38,44|). Note the Aramaic form \Mariam\ as usual in John, but \Marias\ in verse 1|. When John wrote, it was as Jesus had foretold (Matthew:26:13|), for the fame of Mary of Bethany rested on the incident of the anointing of Jesus. The effort to link Mary of Bethany with Mary Magdalene and then both names with the sinful woman of strkjv@Luke:7:36-50| is gratuitous and to my mind grotesque and cruel to the memory of both Mary of Bethany and Mary Magdalene. Bernard may be taken as a specimen: "The conclusion is inevitable that John (or his editor) regarded Mary of Bethany as the same person who is described by Luke as \hamart“los\." This critical and artistic heresy has already been discussed in Vol. II on Luke's Gospel. Suffice it here to say that Luke introduces Mary Magdalene as an entirely new character in strkjv@8:2| and that the details in strkjv@Luke:7:36-50; strkjv@John:12:1-8| have only superficial resemblances and serious disagreements. John is not here alluding to Luke's record, but preparing for his own in chapter 12. What earthly difficulty is there in two different women under wholly different circumstances doing a similar act for utterly different purposes?

rwp@John:15:25 @{But this cometh to pass} (\all'\). Ellipsis in the Greek (no verb), as in strkjv@9:3; strkjv@13:18|. {In their law} (\en t“i nom“i aut“n\). Cf. strkjv@8:17; strkjv@10:34| for this standpoint. "Law" (\nomos\) here is for the whole of Scripture as in strkjv@12:34|. The allusion is to strkjv@Psalms:69:4| (or strkjv@Psalms:35:19|). The hatred of the Jews toward Jesus the promised Messiah (1:11|) is "part of the mysterious purpose of God" (Bernard) as shown by \hina plˆr“thˆi\ (first aorist passive subjunctive of \plˆro“\, to fulfil). {Without a cause} (\d“rean\). Adverbial accusative of \d“rea\ from \did“mi\, gratuitously, then unnecessarily or _gratis_ (in two _Koin‚_ tablets, Nageli) as here and strkjv@Galatians:2:21|.

rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE USE OF APOCRYPHAL BOOKS Jude:(verse strkjv@Jude:1:14|) quotes from "Enoch" by name and says that he "prophesied." What he quotes is a combination of various passages in the Book of Enoch as we have it now. It used to be held that part of Enoch was later than Jude, but Charles seems to have disproved that, though the book as we have it has many interpolations. Tertullian wanted to canonise Enoch because of what Jude:says, whereas Chrysostom says that the authenticity of Jude:was doubted because of the use of Enoch. In verse strkjv@Jude:1:9| there seems to be an allusion to the _Assumption of Moses_, another apocryphal book, but it is the use of "prophesied" in verse strkjv@Jude:1:14| about Enoch that gave most offence. It is possible, of course, that Jude:did not attach the full sense to that term.

rwp@Jude:1:13 @{Wild waves} (\kumata agria\). Waves (Matthew:8:24|, from \kue“\, to swell) wild (from \agros\, field, wild honey strkjv@Matthew:3:4|) like untamed animals of the forest or the sea. {Foaming out} (\epaphrizonta\). Late and rare present active participle of \epaphriz“\, used in Moschus for the foaming waves as here. Cf. strkjv@Isaiah:57:20|. {Shame} (\aischunas\). Plural "shames" (disgraces). Cf. strkjv@Phillipians:3:19|. {Wandering stars} (\asteres planˆtai\). "Stars wanderers." \Planˆtˆs\, old word (from \plana“\), here alone in N.T. Some refer this to comets or shooting stars. See strkjv@Isaiah:14:12| for an allusion to Babylon as the day-star who fell through pride. {For ever} (\eis ai“na\). The rest of the relative clause exactly as in strkjv@2Peter:2:17|.

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE DATE OF THE GOSPEL There are two outstanding facts to mark off the date of this Gospel by Luke. It was later than the Gospel of Mark since Luke makes abundant use of it. It was before the Acts of the Apostles since he definitely refers to it in strkjv@Acts:1:1|. Unfortunately the precise date of both _termini_ is uncertain. There are still some scholars who hold that the author of the Acts shows knowledge of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus and so is after A.D. 85, a mistaken position, in my opinion, but a point to be discussed when Acts is reached. Still others more plausibly hold that the Acts was written after the destruction of Jerusalem and that the Gospel of Luke has a definite allusion to that event (Luke:21:20f.|), which is interpreted as a prophecy _post eventum_ instead of a prediction by Christ a generation beforehand. Many who accept this view hold to authorship of both Acts and Gospel by Luke. I have long held the view, now so ably defended by Harnack, that the Acts of the Apostles closes as it does for the simple and obvious reason that Paul was still a prisoner in Rome. Whether Luke meant the Acts to be used in the trial in Rome, which may or may not have come to pass, is not the point. Some argue that Luke contemplated a third book which would cover the events of the trial and Paul's later career. There is no proof of that view. The outstanding fact is that the book closes with Paul already a prisoner for two years in Rome. If the Acts was written about A.D. 63, as I believe to be the case, then obviously the Gospel comes earlier. How much before we do not know. It so happens that Paul was a prisoner a little over two years in Caesarea. That period gave Luke abundant opportunity for the kind of research of which he speaks in strkjv@Luke:1:1-4|. In Palestine he could have access to persons familiar with the earthly life and teachings of Jesus and to whatever documents were already produced concerning such matters. Luke may have produced the Gospel towards the close of the stay of Paul in Caesarea or during the early part of the first Roman imprisonment, somewhere between A.D. 59 and 62. The other testimony concerns the date of Mark's Gospel which has already been discussed in volume I. There is no real difficulty in the way of the early date of Mark's Gospel. All the facts that are known admit, even argue for a date by A.D. 60. If Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome, as is possible, it would certainly be before A.D. 64, the date of the burning of Rome by Nero. There are scholars, however, who argue for a much earlier date for his gospel, even as early as A.D. 50. The various aspects of the Synoptic problem are ably discussed by Hawkins in his _Horae Synopticae_, by Sanday and others in _Oxford Studies in the Synoptic Problem_, by Streeter in his _The Four Gospels_, by Hayes in his _The Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts_, by Harnack in his _Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_, by Stanton in his _The Gospels as Historical Documents_, and by many others. My own views are given at length in my _Studies in Mark's Gospel_ and in _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_.

rwp@Luke:2:2 @{The first enrolment} (\apographˆ pr“tˆ\). A definite allusion by Luke to a series of censuses instituted by Augustus, the second of which is mentioned by him in strkjv@Acts:5:37|. This second one is described by Josephus and it was supposed by some that Luke confused the two. But Ramsay has shown that a periodical fourteen-year census in Egypt is given in dated papyri back to A.D. 20. The one in strkjv@Acts:5:37| would then be A.D. 6. This is in the time of Augustus. The first would then be B.C. 8 in Egypt. If it was delayed a couple of years in Palestine by Herod the Great for obvious reasons, that would make the birth of Christ about B.C. 6 which agrees with the other known data {When Quirinius} (\Kurˆniou\). Genitive absolute. Here again Luke has been attacked on the ground that Quirinius was only governor of Syria once and that was A.D. 6 as shown by Josephus (_Ant_. XVIII. I.I). But Ramsay has proven by inscriptions that Quirinius was twice in Syria and that Luke is correct here also. See summary of the facts in my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_, pp. 118-29.

rwp@Luke:4:1 @{Full of the Holy Spirit} (\plˆrˆs pneumatos hagiou\). An evident allusion to the descent of the Holy Spirit on Jesus at his baptism (Luke:3:21f.|). The distinctness of the Persons in the Trinity is shown there, but with evident unity. One recalls also Luke's account of the overshadowing of Mary by the Holy Spirit (1:35|). strkjv@Matthew:4:1| says that "Jesus was led of the Spirit" while strkjv@Mark:1:12| states that "the Spirit driveth him forth" which see for discussion. "Jesus had been endowed with supernatural power; and He was tempted to make use of it in furthering his own interests without regard to the Father's will" (Plummer). {Was led by the Spirit} (\ˆgeto en toi pneumati\). Imperfect passive, continuously led. \En\ may be the instrumental use as often, for strkjv@Matthew:4:1| has here \hupo\ of direct agency. But Matthew has the aorist passive \anˆchthˆ\ which may be ingressive as he has \eis tˆn erˆmon\ (into the wilderness) while Luke has \en t“i erˆm“i\ (in the wilderness). At any rate Luke affirms that Jesus was now continuously under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Hence in this same sentence he mentions the Spirit twice. {During the forty days} (\hˆmerƒs tesserakonta\). Accusative of duration of time, to be connected with "led" not with "tempted." He was led in the Spirit during these forty days (cf. strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:2|, forty years). The words are amphibolous also in strkjv@Mark:1:13|. strkjv@Matthew:4:2| seems to imply that the three recorded temptations came at the close of the fasting for forty days. That can be true and yet what Luke states be true also. These three may be merely specimens and so "representative of the struggle which continued throughout the whole period" (Plummer).

rwp@Mark:9:10 @{They kept the saying} (\ton logon ekratˆsan\) to themselves as Jesus had directed, but {questioning among themselves} (\pros heautous sunzˆtountes\). Now they notice his allusion to rising from the dead which had escaped them before (Mark:8:31|).

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

rwp@Mark:12:32 @{And the scribe said} (\eipen aut“i ho grammateus\). Mark alone gives the reply of the scribe to Jesus which is a mere repetition of what Jesus had said about the first and the second commandments with the additional allusion to strkjv@1Samuel:15:22| about love as superior to whole burnt offerings. {Well} (\kal“s\). Not to be taken with "saidst" (\eipes\) as the Revised Version has it following Wycliff. Probably \kal“s\ (well) is exclamatory. "Fine, Teacher. Of a truth (\ep' alˆtheias\) didst thou say."

rwp@Matthew:19:3 @{Pharisees tempting him} (\Pharisaioi peirazontes auton\). They "could not ask a question of Jesus without sinister motives" (Bruce). See strkjv@4:1| for the word (\peiraz“\). {For every cause} (\kata pasan aitian\). This clause is an allusion to the dispute between the two theological schools over the meaning of strkjv@Deuteronomy:24:1|. The school of Shammai took the strict and unpopular view of divorce for unchastity alone while the school of Hillel took the liberal and popular view of easy divorce for any passing whim if the husband saw a prettier woman (modern enough surely) or burnt his biscuits for breakfast. It was a pretty dilemma and meant to do Jesus harm with the people. There is no real trouble about the use of \kata\ here in the sense of \propter\ or because of (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 509).

rwp@Matthew:24:15 @{The abomination of desolation} (\to bdelugma tˆs erem“se“s\). An allusion to strkjv@Daniel:9:27; strkjv@11:31; strkjv@12:11|. Antiochus Epiphanes erected an altar to Zeus on the altar of Jehovah (1Macc. strkjv@1:54,59; strkjv@6:7; 2Macc. strkjv@6:1-5). The desolation in the mind of Jesus is apparently the Roman army (Luke:21:20|) in the temple, an application of the words of Daniel to this dread event. The verb \bdelussomai\ is to feel nausea because of stench, to abhor, to detest. Idolatry was a stench to God (Luke:16:15; strkjv@Revelation:17:4|). Josephus tells us that the Romans burned the temple and offered sacrifices to their ensigns placed by the eastern gate when they proclaimed Titus as Emperor.

rwp@Matthew:27:40 @{If thou art the Son of God} (\ei huios ei tou theou\). More exactly, "If thou art a son of God," the very language of the devil to Jesus (Matthew:4:3|) in the early temptations, now hurled at Jesus under the devil's prompting as he hung upon the Cross. There is allusion, of course, to the claim of Jesus under oath before the Sanhedrin "the Son of God" (\ho huios tou theou\) and a repetition of the misrepresentation of his words about the temple of his body. It is a pitiful picture of human depravity and failure in the presence of Christ dying for sinners.

rwp@Revelation:2:1 @{In Ephesus} (\en Ephes“i\). Near the sea on the river Cayster, the foremost city of Asia Minor, the temple-keeper of Artemis and her wonderful temple (Acts:19:35|), the home of the magic arts (Ephesian letters, strkjv@Acts:19:19|) and of the mystery-cults, place of Paul's three years' stay (Acts:19:1-10; strkjv@20:17-38|), where Aquila and Priscilla and Apollos laboured (Acts:18:24-28|), where Timothy wrought (I and II Tim.), where the Apostle John preached in his old age. Surely it was a place of great privilege, of great preaching. It was about sixty miles from Patmos and the messenger would reach Ephesus first. It is a free city, a seat of proconsular government (Acts:19:38|), the end of the great road from the Euphrates. The port was a place of shifting sands, due to the silting up of the mouth of the Cayster. Ramsay (_Letters to the Seven Churches_, p. 210) calls it "the City of Change." {These things} (\tade\). This demonstrative seven times here, once with the message to each church (2:1,8,12,18; strkjv@2:1,7,14|), only once elsewhere in N.T. (Acts:21:11|). {He that holdeth} (\ho krat“n\). Present active articular participle of \krate“\, a stronger word than \ech“n\ in strkjv@1:16|, to which it refers. {He that walketh} (\ho peripat“n\). Present active articular participle of \peripate“\, an allusion to strkjv@1:13|. These two epithets are drawn from the picture of Christ in strkjv@1:13-18|, and appropriately to conditions in Ephesus describe Christ's power over the churches as he moves among them.

rwp@Revelation:2:21 @{I gave her time} (\ed“ka autˆi chronon\). First aorist active indicative of \did“mi\, allusion to a definite visit or message of warning to this woman. {That she should repent} (\hina metanoˆsˆi\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \metanoe“\. {And she willeth not} (\kai ou thelei\). "And she is not willing." Blunt and final like strkjv@Matthew:23:37|. {To repent of} (\metanoˆsai ek\). First aorist (ingressive) active infinitive with \ek\, "to make a change out of," the usual construction with \metanoe“\ in this book (2:22; strkjv@9:20ff.; strkjv@16:11|), with \apo\ in strkjv@Acts:8:22|. \Porneia\ (fornication) here, but \moicheu“\ (to commit adultery) in verse 22|.

rwp@Revelation:2:22 @{I do cast} (\ball“\). Futuristic present active indicative rather than the future \bal“\, since judgment is imminent. {Into a bed} (\eis klinˆn\). "A bed of sickness in contrast with the bed of adultery" (Beckwith). {Them that commit adultery with her} (\tous moicheuontas met' autˆs\). Present active articular participle accusative plural of \moicheu“\. The actual paramours of the woman Jezebel, guilty of both \porneia\ (fornication, verse 21|) and \moicheia\ (adultery), works of Jezebel of old and of this Jezebel. There may be also an allusion to the spiritual adultery (2Corinthians:11:2|) towards God and Christ as of old (Jeremiah:3:8; strkjv@5:7; strkjv@Ezekiel:16:22|). {Except they repent} (\ean mˆ metanoˆsousin\). Condition of first class with \ean mˆ\ and the future active indicative of \metanoe“\, put in this vivid form rather than the aorist subjunctive (\-“sin\) third-class condition. {Of her works} (\ek t“n erg“n autˆs\). \Autˆs\ (her) correct rather than \aut“n\ (their). Jezebel was chiefly responsible.

rwp@Revelation:6:1 @{And I saw} (\kai eidon\). As in strkjv@4:1; strkjv@5:1|. The vision unfolds without anything being said about opening the book and reading from it. In a more vivid and dramatic fashion the Lamb breaks the seals one by one and reveals the contents and the symbolism. The first four seals have a common note from one of the four \z“a\ and the appearance of a horse. No effort will be made here to interpret these seals as referring to persons or historical events in the past, present, or future, but simply to relate the symbolism to the other symbols in the book. It is possible that there is some allusion here to the symbolism in the so-called "Little Apocalypse" of strkjv@Mark:13; strkjv@Matthew:24f.; strkjv@Luke:21|. The imagery of the four horses is similar to that in strkjv@Zechariah:1:7-11; strkjv@6:1-8| (cf. strkjv@Jeremiah:14:12; strkjv@24:10; strkjv@42:17|). In the Old Testament the horse is often the emblem of war (Job:39:25; strkjv@Psalms:76:6; strkjv@Proverbs:21:31; strkjv@Ezekiel:26:10|). "Homer pictures the horses of Rhesus as whiter than snow, and swift as the wind" (Vincent). {When the Lamb opened} (\hote ˆnoixen to arnion\). First aorist active indicative of \anoig“\. This same phrase recurs in rhythmical order at the opening of each seal (6:1,3,5,7,9,12|) till the last (8:1|), where we have \hotan ˆnoixen\ (\hotan\ rather than \hote\ calling particular attention to it). {One} (\mian\). Probably used here as an ordinal (the first) as in strkjv@Matthew:28:1|. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 671f. {Of} (\ek\). This use of \ek\ with the ablative in the partitive sense is common in the Apocalypse, as twice in this verse (\ek t“n\, etc.). Songs:\henos ek t“n\ (one of the four living creatures) is "the first of," etc. {In a voice of thunder} (\en ph“nˆi brontˆs\). Old word used of John and James (Mark:3:17|) and elsewhere in N.T. only strkjv@John:12:29| and a dozen times in the Apocalypse. {Come} (\Erchou\). Present middle imperative of \erchomai\, but with exclamatory force (not strictly linear). The command is not addressed to the Lamb nor to John (the correct text omits \kai ide\ "and see") as in strkjv@17:1; strkjv@21:9|, but to one of the four horsemen each time. Swete takes it as a call to Christ because \erchou\ is so used in strkjv@22:17,20|, but that is not conclusive.

rwp@Revelation:7:15 @{Therefore} (\dia touto\). Because of the washing described in verse 14|. {They serve him} (\latreuousin aut“i\). Dative case with \latreu“\ (present active indicative, old verb, originally to serve for hire \latron\, then service in general, then religious service to God, strkjv@Matthew:4:10|, then in particular ritual worship of the priests, strkjv@Hebrews:8:5|). All the redeemed are priests (Revelation:16:5,10|) in the heavenly temple (6:9|) as here. But this service is that of spiritual worship, not of external rites (Romans:12:1; strkjv@Phillipians:3:3|). {Day and night} (\hˆmeras kai nuktos\). Genitive of time, "by day and night," as in strkjv@4:8| of the praise of the four living creatures. {Shall spread his tabernacle over them} (\skˆn“sei ep' autous\). Future (change of tense from present in \latreuousin\) active of \skˆno“\, old verb from \skˆnos\ (tent, tabernacle), used in strkjv@John:1:14| of the earthly life of Christ, elsewhere in N.T. only in Rev. (7:14; strkjv@12:12; strkjv@13:6; strkjv@21:3|). In strkjv@12:12; strkjv@13:6| of those who dwell in tents, here of God spreading his tent "over" (\ep' autous\) the redeemed in heaven, in strkjv@21:3| of God tabernacling "with" (\met' aut“n\) the redeemed, in both instances a picture of sacred fellowship, and "the further idea of God's Presence as a protection from all fear of evil" (Swete) like the overshadowing of Israel by the Shekinah and a possible allusion also to the tents (\skˆnai\) of the feast of tabernacles and to the tent of meeting where God met Moses (Exodus:33:7-11|).

rwp@Revelation:9:11 @{As king} (\basilea\). Predicate accusative and anarthrous. In strkjv@Proverbs:30:27| it is stated that the locust has no king, but this is not true of these demonic locusts. Their king is "the angel of the abyss (verse 1|) whose orders they obey." {His name is} (\onoma aut“i\). "Name to him" (nominative absolute and dative, as in strkjv@6:8|). {In Hebrew} (\Ebraisti\). Adverb as in strkjv@16:16; strkjv@John:5:2; strkjv@19:13,17,20; strkjv@20:16|. \Abadd“n\. A word almost confined to the Wisdom books (Job:26:6; strkjv@Psalms:88:11; strkjv@Proverbs:15:11|). It is rendered in the LXX by \Ap“leia\, destruction. {In the Greek tongue} (\en tˆi Hellˆnikˆi\). With \gl“ssˆi\ or \dialekt“i\ understood. As usual, John gives both the Hebrew and the Greek. {Apollyon} (\Apollu“n\). Present active masculine singular participle of \apollu“\, meaning "destroying," used here as a name and so "Destroyer," with the nominative case retained though in apposition with the accusative \onoma\. The personification of Abaddon occurs in the Talmud also. It is not clear whether by Apollyon John means Death or Satan. Bousset even finds in the name Apollyon an indirect allusion to Apollo, one of whose symbols was the locust, a doubtful point assuredly.

rwp@Revelation:11:1 @{A reed} (\kalamos\). Old word for a growing reed (Matthew:11:7|) which grew in immense brakes in the Jordan valley, a writer's reed (3John:1:7|), a measuring-rod (here, strkjv@21:15f.; strkjv@Ezekiel:40:3-6; strkjv@42:16-19|). {Like a rod} (\homoios rabd“i\). See strkjv@2:27; strkjv@Mark:6:8| for \rabdos\. {And one said} (\leg“n\). "Saying" (present active masculine participle of \leg“\) is all that the Greek has. The participle implies \ed“ken\ (he gave), not \edothˆ\, a harsh construction seen in strkjv@Genesis:22:20; strkjv@38:24|, etc. {Rise and measure} (\egeire kai metrˆson\). Present active imperative of \egeir“\ (intransitive, exclamatory use as in strkjv@Mark:2:11|) and first aorist active imperative of \metre“\. In strkjv@Ezekiel:42:2ff.| the prophet measures the temple and that passage is probably in mind here. But modern scholars do not know how to interpret this interlude (11:1-13|) before the seventh trumpet (11:15|). Some (Wellhausen) take it to be a scrap from the Zealot party before the destruction of Jerusalem, which event Christ also foretold (Mark:13:2; strkjv@Matthew:24:2; strkjv@Luke:21:6|) and which was also attributed to Stephen (Acts:6:14|). Charles denies any possible literal interpretation and takes the language in a wholly eschatological sense. There are three points in the interlude, however understood: the chastisement of Jerusalem or Israel (verses 1,2|), the mission of the two witnesses (3-12|), the rescue of the remnant (13|). There is a heavenly sanctuary (7:15; strkjv@11:19; strkjv@14:15|, etc.), but here \naos\ is on earth and yet not the actual temple in Jerusalem (unless so interpreted). Perhaps here it is the spiritual (3:12; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:16f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:16; strkjv@Ephesians:2:19ff.|). For altar (\thusiastˆrion\) see strkjv@8:3|. Perhaps measuring as applied to "them that worship therein" (\tous proskunountas en aut“i\) implies a word like numbering, with an allusion to the 144,000 in chapter 7 (a zeugma).

rwp@Revelation:12:1 @{A great sign} (\sˆmeion mega\). The first of the visions to be so described (13:3; strkjv@15:1|), and it is introduced by \“phthˆ\ as in strkjv@11:19; strkjv@12:3|, not by \meta tauto\ or by \eidon\ or by \eidon kai idou\ as heretofore. This "sign" is really a \teras\ (wonder), as it is so by association in strkjv@Matthew:24:24; strkjv@John:4:48; strkjv@Acts:2:22; strkjv@5:12|. The element of wonder is not in the word \sˆmeion\ as in \teras\, but often in the thing itself as in strkjv@Luke:21:11; strkjv@John:9:16; strkjv@Revelation:13:13ff.; strkjv@15:1; strkjv@16:14; strkjv@19:20|. {A woman} (\gunˆ\). Nominative case in apposition with \sˆmeion\. "The first 'sign in heaven' is a Woman--the earliest appearance of a female figure in the Apocalyptic vision" (Swete). {Arrayed with the sun} (\peribeblˆmenˆ ton hˆlion\). Perfect passive participle of \periball“\, with the accusative retained as so often (9 times) in the Apocalypse. Both Charles and Moffatt see mythological ideas and sources behind the bold imagery here that leave us all at sea. Swete understands the Woman to be "the church of the Old Testament" as "the Mother of whom Christ came after the flesh. But here, as everywhere in the Book, no sharp dividing line is drawn between the Church of the Old Testament and the Christian Society." Certainly she is not the Virgin Mary, as verse 17| makes clear. Beckwith takes her to be "the heavenly representative of the people of God, the _ideal_ Zion, which, so far as it is embodied in concrete realities, is represented alike by the people of the Old and the New Covenants." John may have in mind strkjv@Isaiah:7:14| (Matthew:1:23; strkjv@Luke:1:31|) as well as strkjv@Micah:4:10; strkjv@Isaiah:26:17f.; strkjv@66:7| without a definite picture of Mary. The metaphor of childbirth is common enough (John:16:21; strkjv@Galatians:4:19|). The figure is a bold one with the moon "under her feet" (\hupokat“ t“n pod“n autˆs\) and "a crown of twelve stars" (\stephanos aster“n d“deka\), a possible allusion to the twelve tribes (James:1:1; strkjv@Revelation:21:12|) or to the twelve apostles (Revelation:21:14|).

rwp@Romans:6:17 @{Whereas ye were} (\ˆte\). Imperfect but no "whereas" in the Greek. Paul is not grateful that they were once slaves of sin, but only that, though they once were, they turned from that state. {To that form of doctrine whereunto ye were delivered} (\eis hon paredothˆte tupon didachˆs\). Incorporation of the antecedent (\tupon didachˆs\) into the relative clause: "to which form of doctrine ye were delivered." See on ¯5:14| for \tupon\. It is hardly proper to take "form" here to refer to Paul's gospel (2:16|), possibly an allusion to the symbolism of baptism which was the outward sign of the separation.

rwp@Romans:16:1 @{I commend} (\sunistˆmi\). The regular word for letters of commendation as in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:1| (\sustatik“n epistol“n\). See also strkjv@Romans:3:5|. Songs:here verses 1,2| constitute Paul's recommendation of Phoebe, the bearer of the Epistle. Nothing else is known of her, though her name (\Phoibˆ\) means bright or radiant. {Sister} (\adelphˆn\). In Christ, not in the flesh. {Who is a servant of the church} (\ousan diakonon tˆs ekklˆsias\). The etymology of \diakonos\ we have had repeatedly. The only question here is whether it is used in a general sense or in a technical sense as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:1; strkjv@1Timothy:3:8-13|. In favour of the technical sense of "deacon" or "deaconess" is the addition of "\tˆs ekklˆsias\" (of the church). In some sense Phoebe was a servant or minister of the church in Cenchreae. Besides, right in the midst of the discussion in strkjv@1Timothy:3:8-13| Paul has a discussion of \gunaikas\ (verse 11|) either as women as deaconesses or as the wives of deacons (less likely though possible). The _Apostolic Constitutions_ has numerous allusions to deaconesses. The strict separation of the sexes made something like deaconesses necessary for baptism, visiting the women, etc. Cenchreae, as the eastern port of Corinth, called for much service of this kind. Whether the deaconesses were a separate organization on a par with the deacons we do not know nor whether they were the widows alluded to in strkjv@1Timothy:5:9f|.

rwp@Titus:3:10 @{Heretical} (\hairetikon\). Old adjective from \hairesis\ (\haireomai\, to choose), a choosing of a party (sect, strkjv@Acts:5:17|) or of teaching (2Peter:2:1|). Possibly a schism had been started here in Crete. {Refuse} (\paraitou\). Present middle imperative of \paraite“\, to ask from, to beg off from. See same form in strkjv@1Timothy:4:7; strkjv@5:11|. Possibly an allusion here to Christ's directions in strkjv@Matthew:18:15-17|.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Sat Jun 29 23:20:11 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020