NT.filter - rwp defensive:

rwp@2Corinthians:6:7 @{On the right hand and on the left} (\tn dexin kai aristern\). Offensive weapons (\hopln\) on the right, defensive on the left. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:8; strkjv@Ephesians:6:11| for Paul's description of the panoply of God and strkjv@Romans:6:13| for the phrase "weapons of righteousness," the only kind that will stand the strain. See also Book of Wisdom strkjv@5:18ff.

rwp@Acts:11:2 @{They that were of the circumcision} (\hoi ek peritoms\). Literally, those of circumcision (on the side of circumcision, of the circumcision party). The phrase in strkjv@10:46| is confined to the six brethren with Peter in Caesarea (11:12|). That can hardly be the meaning here for it would mean that they were the ones who brought the charge against Peter though Hort takes this view. All the disciples in Jerusalem were Jews so that it can hardly mean the whole body. In strkjv@Galatians:2:12| the phrase has the narrower sense of the Judaizing or Pharisaic wing of the disciples (Acts:15:5|) who made circumcision necessary for all Gentile converts. Probably here by anticipation Luke so describes the beginning of that great controversy. The objectors probably did not know of Peter's vision at Joppa, but only of the revolutionary conduct of Peter in Caesarea. These extremists who spoke probably had abundant sympathy in their protest. The apostles are mentioned in verse 1|, but are not referred to in verse 2|. Apparently they are in contrast with the circumcision party in the church. {Contended} (\diekrinonto\). Imperfect middle of the common verb \diakrin\, to {separate}. Here to separate oneself apart (\dia\), to take sides against, to make a cleavage (\dia\, two, in two) as in strkjv@Jude:1:9|. Songs:Peter is at once put on the defensive as the contention went on. It is plain that Peter was not regarded as any kind of pope or overlord.

rwp@Ephesians:6:17 @{The helmet of salvation} (\tn perikephalaian tou striou\). Late word (\peri, kephal\, head, around the head), in Polybius, LXX, strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:8; strkjv@Ephesians:6:17| alone in N.T. {Which is the word of God} (\ho estin to rma tou theou\). Explanatory relative (\ho\) referring to the sword (\machairan\). The sword given by the Spirit to be wielded as offensive weapon (the others defensive) by the Christian is the word of God. See strkjv@Hebrews:4:12| where the word of God is called "sharper than any two-edged sword."

rwp@Luke:14:5 @{An ass or an ox} (\onos bous\). But Westcott and Hort \huios bous\ ({a son or an ox}). The manuscripts are much divided between \huios\ (son) and \onos\ (ass) which in the abbreviated uncials looked much alike (TC, OC) and were much alike. The sentence in the Greek reads literally thus: Whose ox or ass of you shall fall (\peseitai\, future middle of \pipto\) into a well and he (the man) will not straightway draw him up (\anaspasei\, future active of \anaspa\) on the sabbath day? The very form of the question is a powerful argument and puts the lawyers and the Pharisees hopelessly on the defensive.

rwp@Matthew:5:39 @{Resist not him that is evil} (\me antistnai ti ponri\). Here again it is the infinitive (second aorist active) in indirect command. But is it "the evil man" or the "evil deed"? The dative case is the same form for masculine and neuter. Weymouth puts it "not to resist a (the) wicked man," Moffatt "not to resist an injury," Goodspeed "not to resist injury." The examples will go with either view. Jesus protested when smitten on the cheek (John:18:22|). And Jesus denounced the Pharisees (Matthew:23|) and fought the devil always. The language of Jesus is bold and picturesque and is not to be pressed too literally. Paradoxes startle and make us think. We are expected to fill in the other side of the picture. One thing certainly is meant by Jesus and that is that personal revenge is taken out of our hands, and that applies to "lynch-law." Aggressive or offensive war by nations is also condemned, but not necessarily defensive war or defence against robbery and murder. Professional pacifism may be mere cowardice.