NT.filter - rwp apokteinai:

rwp@John:5:18 @{Sought the more} (\mallon eztoun\). Imperfect active of \zte\, graphic picture of increased and untiring effort "to kill him" (\auton apokteinai\, first aorist active, to kill him off and be done with him). John repeats this clause "they sought to kill him" in strkjv@7:1,19,25; strkjv@8:37,40|. Their own blood was up on this Sabbath issue and they bend every energy to put Jesus to death. If this is a passover, this bitter anger, murderous wrath, will go on and grow for two years. {Not only brake the Sabbath} (\ou monon elue to sabbaton\). Imperfect active of \lu\. He was now a common and regular Sabbath-breaker. \Lu\ means to loosen, to set at naught. The papyri give examples of \lu\ in this sense like \luein ta penth\ (to break the period of mourning). This was the first grudge against Jesus, but his defence had made the offence worse and had given them a far graver charge. {But also called God his own Father} (\alla kai patera idion elege ton theon\). "His own" (\idion\) in a sense not true of others. That is precisely what Jesus meant by "My Father." See strkjv@Romans:8:32| for \ho idios huios\, "his own Son." {Making himself equal with God} (\ison heauton poin ti thei\). \Isos\ is an old common adjective (in papyri also) and means {equal}. In strkjv@Phillipians:2:6| Paul calls the Pre-incarnate Christ \isa thei\, "equal to God" (plural \isa\, attributes of God). Bernard thinks that Jesus would not claim to be \isos thei\ because in strkjv@John:14:28| he says: "The Father is greater than I." And yet he says in strkjv@14:7| that the one who sees him sees in him the Father. Certainly the Jews understood Jesus to claim equality with the Father in nature and privilege and power as also in strkjv@10:33; strkjv@19:7|. Besides, if the Jews misunderstood Jesus on this point, it was open and easy for him to deny it and to clear up the misapprehension. This is precisely what he does not do. On the contrary Jesus gives a powerful apologetic in defence of his claim to equality with the Father (verses 19-47|).

rwp@John:7:1 @{After these things} (\meta tauta\). John's favourite general note of the order of events. Bernard conceives that the events in strkjv@7:1-14| follow strkjv@7:15-24| and both follow chapter 5, not chapter 6, a wholly needless readjustment of the narrative to suit a preconceived theory. John simply supplements the narrative in the Synoptics at points deemed important. He now skips the period of withdrawal from Galilee of about six months (from passover to tabernacles). {Walked} (\periepatei\). Imperfect active, a literal picture of the itinerant ministry of Jesus. He has returned to Galilee from the region of Caesarea Philippi. He had been avoiding Galilee as well as Judea for six months. {For he would not walk in Judea} (\ou gar thelen en ti Ioudaii\). Imperfect active of \thel\ picturing the attitude of refusal to work in Judea after the events in chapter 5 (perhaps a year and a half before). {Sought to kill} (\eztoun apokteinai\). Imperfect active again, progressive attitude, had been seeking to kill him as shown in strkjv@5:18| where the same words occur.

rwp@John:7:19 @{And yet} (\kai\). Clear use of \kai\ in the adversative sense of "and yet" or "but." They marvelled at Christ's "ignorance" and boasted of their own knowledge of the law of Moses. And yet they violated that law by not practising it. {Why seek ye to kill me?} (\Ti me zteite apokteinai;\). A sudden and startling question as an illustration of their failure to do the law of Moses. Jesus had previously known (5:39,45-47|) that the Jews really rejected the teaching of Moses while professing to believe it. On that very occasion they had sought to kill him (5:18|), the very language used here. Apparently he had not been to Jerusalem since then. He undoubtedly alludes to their conduct then and charges them with the same purpose now.

rwp@John:8:37 @{Yet ye seek to kill me} (\alla zteite me apokteinai\). As at the recent feast (7:20,25,30,32; strkjv@8:20|). Some of these very professed believers were even now glowering with murderous vengeance. {Hath not free course in you} (\ou chrei en humin\). Intransitive use of \chre\, old verb from \chros\ (space, place), to have space or room for. They would not abide in Christ's word (verse 31|). They had no longer room for his word when once they understood the spiritual aspect of his message. Jerusalem was now just like Galilee once before (6:60-66|).

rwp@Luke:12:5 @{Whom ye shall fear} (\tina phobthte\). First aorist passive subjunctive deliberative retained in the indirect question. \Tina\ is the accusative, the direct object of this transitive passive verb (note \apo\ in verse 4|). {Fear him who} (\phobthte ton\). First aorist passive imperative, differing from the preceding form only in the accent and governing the accusative also. {After he hath killed} (\meta to apokteinai\). Preposition \meta\ with the articular infinitive. Literally, "After the killing" (first aorist active infinitive of the common verb \apoktein\, to kill. {Into hell} (\eis tn geennan\). See on ¯Matthew:5:22|. Gehenna is a transliteration of _Ge-Hinnom_, Valley of Hinnon where the children were thrown on to the red-hot arms of Molech. Josiah (2Kings:23:10|) abolished these abominations and then it was a place for all kinds of refuse which burned ceaselessly and became a symbol of punishment in the other world. {This one fear} (\touton phobthte\). As above.

rwp@Mark:3:4 @{But they held their peace} (\hoi de esipn\). Imperfect tense. In sullen silence and helplessness before the merciless questions of Jesus as the poor man stood there before them all. Jesus by his pitiless alternatives between doing good (\agathopoie\, late Greek word in LXX and N.T.) and doing evil (\kakopoie\, ancient Greek word), to this man, for instance, {to save a life or to kill} (\psuchn ssai apokteinai\), as in this case. It was a terrible exposure.

rwp@Mark:6:19 @{And Herodias set herself against him} (\H de Hridias eneichen auti\). Dative of disadvantage. Literally, {had it in for him}. This is modern slang, but is in exact accord with this piece of vernacular _Koin_. No object of \eichen\ is expressed, though \orgn\ or \cholon\ may be implied. The tense is imperfect and aptly described the feelings of Herodias towards this upstart prophet of the wilderness who had dared to denounce her private relations with Herod Antipas. Gould suggests that she "kept her eye on him" or kept up her hostility towards him. She never let up, but bided her time which, she felt sure, would come. See the same idiom in strkjv@Genesis:49:23|. She {desired to kill him} (\thelen auton apokteinai\). Imperfect again. {And she could not} (\kai ouk dunato\). \Kai\ here has an adversative sense, but she could not. That is, not yet. "The power was wanting, not the will" (Swete).

rwp@Matthew:14:9 @{Grieved} (\luptheis\). Not to hurt, for in verse 5| we read that he wanted (\theln\) to put him to death (\apokteinai\). Herod, however, shrank from so dastardly a deed as this public display of brutality and bloodthirstiness. Men who do wrong always have some flimsy excuses for their sins. A man here orders a judicial murder of the most revolting type "for the sake of his oath" (\dia tous horkous\). "More like profane swearing than deliberate utterance once for all of a solemn oath" (Bruce). He was probably maudlin with wine and befuddled by the presence of the guests.