NT.filter - rwp dost:

rwp@1Corinthians:4:7 @{Maketh thee to differ} (\se diakrinei\). Distinguishes thee, separates thee. \Diakrin\ means to sift or separate between (\dia\) as in strkjv@Acts:15:9| (which see) where \metaxu\ is added to make it plainer. All self-conceit rests on the notion of superiority of gifts and graces as if they were self-bestowed or self-acquired. {Which thou didst not receive} (\ho ouk elabes\). "Another home-thrust" (Robertson and Plummer). Pride of intellect, of blood, of race, of country, of religion, is thus shut out. {Dost thou glory} (\kauchasai\). The original second person singular middle ending \-sai\ is here preserved with variable vowel contraction, \kauchaesai=kauchasai\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 341). Paul is fond of this old and bold verb for boasting. {As if thou hadst not received it} (\hs m labn\). This neat participial clause (second aorist active of \lamban\) with \hs\ (assumption) and negative \m\ punctures effectually the inflated bag of false pride. What pungent questions Paul has asked. Robertson and Plummer say of Augustine, "Ten years before the challenge of Pelagius, the study of St. Paul's writings, and especially of this verse and of strkjv@Romans:9:16|, had crystallized in his mind the distinctively Augustinian doctrines of man's total depravity, of irresistible grace, and of absolute predestination." Human responsibility does exist beyond a doubt, but there is no foundation for pride and conceit.

rwp@Acts:1:6 @{They therefore} (\hoi men oun\). Demonstrative use of \hoi\ with \men oun\ without any corresponding \de\ just as in strkjv@1:1| \men\ occurs alone. The combination \men oun\ is common in Acts (27 times). Cf. strkjv@Luke:3:18|. The \oun\ is resumptive and refers to the introductory verses (1:1-5|), which served to connect the Acts with the preceding Gospel. The narrative now begins. {Asked} (\rtn\). Imperfect active, repeatedly asked before Jesus answered. {Lord} (\kurie\). Here not in the sense of "sir" (Matthew:21:30|), but to Jesus as Lord and Master as often in Acts (19:5,10|, etc.) and in prayer to Jesus (7:59|). {Dost thou restore} (\ei apokathistaneis\). The use of \ei\ in an indirect question is common. We have already seen its use in direct questions (Matthew:12:10; strkjv@Luke:13:23| which see for discussion), possibly in imitation of the Hebrew (frequent in the LXX) or as a partial condition without conclusion. See also strkjv@Acts:7:1; strkjv@19:2; strkjv@21:37; strkjv@22:25|. The form of the verb \apokathistan\ is late (also \apokathista\) omega form for the old and common \apokathistmi\, double compound, to restore to its former state. As a matter of fact the Messianic kingdom for which they are asking is a political kingdom that would throw off the hated Roman yoke. It is a futuristic present and they are uneasy that Jesus may yet fail to fulfil their hopes. Surely here is proof that the eleven apostles needed the promise of the Father before they began to spread the message of the Risen Christ. They still yearn for a political kingdom for Israel even after faith and hope have come back. They need the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit (John:14-16|) and the power of the Holy Spirit (Acts:1:4f.|).

rwp@Acts:25:20 @{Being perplexed} (\aporoumenos\). Present middle participle of the common verb \apore\ (\a\ privative and \poros\ way), to be in doubt which way to turn, already in strkjv@Mark:6:20| which see and strkjv@Luke:24:4|. The Textus Receptus has \eis\ after here, but critical text has only the accusative which this verb allows (Mark:6:20|) as in Thucydides and Plato. {How to inquire concerning these things} (\tn peri toutn ztsin\). Literally, "as to the inquiry concerning these things." This is not the reason given by Luke in verse 9| (wanting to curry favour with the Jews), but doubtless this motive also actuated Festus as both could be true. {Whether he would go to Jerusalem} (\ei bouloito poreuesthai eis Ierosoluma\). Optative in indirect question after \elegon\ (asked or said) imperfect active, though the present indicative could have been retained with change of person: "Dost thou wish, etc.," (\ei bouli\, etc.). See Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1031, 1044. This is the question put to Paul in verse 9| though \theleis\ is there used.

rwp@James:2:11 @{He that said} (\ho eipn\) {--said also} (\eipen kai\). The unity of the law lies in the Lawgiver who spoke both prohibitions (\m\ and the aorist active subjunctive in each one, \moicheusis, phoneusis\). The order here is that of B in strkjv@Exodus:20| (Luke:18:20; strkjv@Romans:13:9|), but not in strkjv@Matthew:5:21,27| (with \ou\ and future indicative). {Now if thou dost not commit adultery, but killest} (\ei de ou moicheueis, phoneueis de\). Condition of first class with \ou\ (not \m\) because of the contrast with \de\, whereas \ei m\ would mean "unless," a different idea. Songs:\ou\ in strkjv@1:23|. {A transgressor of the law} (\parabats nomou\) as in verse 9|. Murder springs out of anger (Matthew:5:21-26|). People free from fleshly sins have often "made their condemnation of fleshly sins an excuse for indulgence towards spiritual sins" (Hort).

rwp@James:2:20 @{But wilt thou know?} (\theleis de gnnai?\). "But dost thou wish to know?" Ingressive aorist active infinitive of \ginosk\ (come to know). James here introduces a new argument like strkjv@Romans:13:3|. {O vain man} (\ anthrpe kene\). Goes on with the singular objector and demolishes him. For "empty" (deficient) Paul uses \aphrn\ (fool) in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:36| and just \anthrpe\ in strkjv@Romans:2:1; strkjv@9:20|. {Barren} (\arge\). See strkjv@2Peter:1:8| (not idle nor unfruitful) and strkjv@Matthew:12:36|, but Hort urges "inactive" as the idea here, like money with no interest and land with no crops.

rwp@John:5:6 @{Knew that he had been a long time} (\gnous hoti polun d chronon echei\). How Jesus "knew" (\gnous\, second aorist active participle of \ginsk\) we are not told, whether supernatural knowledge (2:24f.|) or observation or overhearing people's comments. In \d echei\ we have a progressive present active indicative, "he has already been having much time" (\chronon\, accusative of extent of time). {Wouldest thou be made whole?} (\Theleis hugis genesthai;\). "Dost thou wish to become whole?" Predicate nominative \hugis\ with \genesthai\ (second aorist middle infinitive). It was a pertinent and sympathetic question.

rwp@John:8:5 @{Commanded} (\eneteilato\). First aorist middle indicative of \entell\, old verb to enjoin (Matthew:4:6|). {To stone such} (\tas toiautas lithazein\). Present active infinitive of \lithaz\ (from \lithos\), from Aristotle on. Stoning was specified for the case of a betrothed woman guilty of adultery (Deuteronomy:22:23f.|) and for a priest's daughter if guilty. In other cases just death was commanded (Leviticus:20:10; strkjv@Deuteronomy:22:22|). The Talmud prescribes strangulation. This case may have strictly come within the regulation as a betrothed virgin. {What then sayest thou of her?} (\su oun ti legeis;\). "Thou then, what dost thou say?" This was the whole point, to catch Jesus, not to punish the woman.

rwp@John:9:34 @{Thou wast altogether born in sin} (\en hamartiais su egennths holos\). First aorist passive indicative of \genna\. "In sins thou wast begotten (or born) all of thee." \Holos\ is predicate nominative and teaches total depravity in this case beyond controversy, the Pharisees being judges. {And dost thou teach us?} (\kai su didaskeis hmas;\). The audacity of it all. Note emphasis on \su\ (thou). It was insufferable. He had not only taught the rabbis, but had utterly routed them in argument. {And they cast him out} (\kai exebalon auton ex\). Effective second aorist active indicative of \ekball\ intensified by the addition of \ex\. Probably not yet expulsion from the synagogue (9:22|) which required a formal meeting of the Sanhedrin, but certainly forcible driving of the gifted upstart from their presence. See strkjv@6:37| for another use of \ekball ex\ besides strkjv@9:35|.

rwp@John:9:35 @{Finding him} (\heurn auton\). Second aorist active participle of \heurisk\, after search because of what he had heard (\kousen\). {Dost thou believe on the Son of God?} (\Su pisteueis eis ton huion tou theou;\). Songs:A L Theta and most versions, but Aleph B D W Syr-sin read \tou anthrpou\ (the Son of Man), almost certainly correct. In either case it is a distinct Messianic claim quite beyond the range of this man's limited knowledge, keen as he is.

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

rwp@John:11:22 @{And even now I know} (\kai nun oida\). Rather just, "Even now I know." \Alla\ (but) of the Textus Receptus is not genuine. {Whatsoever thou shalt ask of God} (\hosa an aitsi ton theon\). Indefinite relative (\hosa\, as many things as) with \an\ and the first aorist middle (indirect middle, thou thyself asking) subjunctive of \aite\. Martha uses \aite\ (usual word of prayer of men to God) rather than \erta\ (usual word of Jesus praying to the Father), but in strkjv@16:23| we have \erta\ used of prayer to Jesus and \aite\ of prayer to God. But the distinction is not to be pressed. "As many things as thou dost ask of God." {God will give} (\dsei soi ho theos\). Repetition of \ho theos\ for emphasis. Martha still has courageous faith in the power of God through Jesus and Jesus in verse 41| says practically what she has said here.

rwp@John:13:6 @{Songs:he cometh} (\erchetai oun\). Transitional use of \oun\ and dramatic present again (\erchetai\). {Lord, dost thou wash my feet?} (\Kurie, su mou nipteis tous podas;\). Emphatic contrast in position of \su mou\ (away from \podas\), "Dost thou my feet wash?" "Peter, we may suppose, drew his feet up, as he spoke, in his impulsive humility" (Bernard).

rwp@Luke:9:54 @{Saw this} (\idontes\). Second aorist active participle of \hora\. Saw the messengers returning. {We bid} (\theleis eipmen\). Deliberative subjunctive \eipmen\ after \theleis\ without \hina\, probably two questions, Dost thou wish? Shall we bid? Perhaps the recent appearance of Elijah on the Mount of Transfiguration reminded James and John of the incident in strkjv@2Kings:1:10-12|. Some MSS. add here "as Elijah did." The language of the LXX is quoted by James and John, these fiery Sons of Thunder. Note the two aorist active infinitives (\katabnai, analsai\, the first ingressive, the second effective).

rwp@Luke:20:21 @{Rightly} (\orths\). Matthew (Matthew:22:16|) notes that these "spies" were "disciples" (students) of the Pharisees and Mark (Mark:12:13|) adds that the Herodians are also involved in the plot. These bright theologues are full of palaver and flattery and openly endorse the teaching of Jesus as part of their scheme. {Acceptest not the person of any} (\ou lambaneis prospon\). Dost not take the face (or personal appearance) as the test. It is a Hebraism from which the word \prospolempsia\ (James:2:1|) comes. Originally it meant to lift the face, to lift the countenance, to regard the face, to accept the face value. See strkjv@Mark:12:13-17; strkjv@Matthew:22:15-22| for discussion of details here. They both have \blepeis\ here.

rwp@Luke:23:40 @{Rebuking} (\epitimn\). From what Mark and Matthew say both robbers sneered at Jesus at first, but this one came to himself and turned on his fellow robber in a rage. {Dost thou not even fear God?} (\Oude phobi ton theon;\). \Oude\ here goes with the verb. \Phobi\ (second person singular present indicative middle of \phobeomai\. Both of you will soon appear before God. Jesus has nothing to answer for and you have added this to your other sins.

rwp@Luke:24:18 @{Dost thou alone sojourn?} (\su monos paroikeis;\). \Monos\ is predicate adjective. "Hast thou been dwelling alone (all by thyself)?" {And not know?} (\kai ouk egns;\). Second aorist active indicative and difficult to put into English as the aorist often is. The verb \paroike\ means to dwell beside one, then as a stranger like \paroikoi\ (Ephesians:2:19|). In Jerusalem everybody was talking about Jesus.

rwp@Revelation:2:13 @{Where} (\pou--hopou\). \Pou\ is interrogative adverb used here in an indirect question as in strkjv@John:1:39|. \Hopou\ is relative adverb referring to \pou\. Satan's throne (\ho thronos tou Satan\). Satan not simply resided in Pergamum, but his "throne" or seat of power of king or judge (Matthew:19:28; strkjv@Luke:1:32,52|). The symbol of Asklepios was the serpent as it is of Satan (12:9; strkjv@20:2|). There was, besides, a great throne altar to Zeus cut on the Acropolis rock, symbol of "rampant paganism" (Swete) and the new Caesar-worship with the recent martyrdom of Antipas made Pergamum indeed a very throne of Satan. {Holdest fast my name} (\krateis to onoma sou\). Present active indicative of \krate\, "dost keep on holding," as in strkjv@2:25, strkjv@3:11|. This church refused to say \Kurios Kaisar\ (_Martyrd. Polyc_. 8f.) and continued to say \Kurios Isous\ (1Corinthians:12:3|). They stood true against the emperor-worship. {Didst not deny} (\ouk rns\). First aorist middle second person singular of \arneomai\. Reference to a specific incident not known to us. {My faith} (\tn pistin mou\). Objective genitive, "thy faith in me." {Of Antipas} (\Antipas\). Indeclinable in this form. It is possible that \Antipa\ (genitive) was really written, though unimportant as the nominative follows in apposition. Nothing is really known of this early martyr in Pergamum before the writing of the Apocalypse. One legend is that he was burnt to death in a brazen bull. Other martyrs followed him at Pergamum (Agathonice, Attalus, Carpus, Polybus). {My witness} (\ho martus mou\). Nominative in apposition with a genitive as in strkjv@1:5| (with ablative), common solecism in the Apocalypse. "Witness" as Jesus had said they should be (Acts:1:8|) and Stephen was (Acts:22:20|) and others were (Revelation:17:6|). The word later (by third century) took on the modern meaning of martyr. {My faithful one} (\ho pistos mou\). Nominative also, with \mou\ also. Jesus gives Antipas his own title (Swete) as in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@3:14|. Faithful unto death. {Was killed} (\apektanth\). First aorist passive indicative of \apoktein\, this passive form common in the Apocalypse (?2:13; strkjv@6:11; strkjv@5:9,13; strkjv@13:10,15; 18, 20; strkjv@19:21?). {Among you} (\par humin\). By your side. Proof of the throne of Satan, "where Satan dwells" (\hopou ho Satans katoikei\), repeated for emphasis.

rwp@Romans:2:22 @{That abhorrest} (\ho bdelussomenos\). Old word to make foul, to stink, to have abhorrence for. In LXX, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:21:8|. The very word used by Jesus to express their horror of idols (\eidla\, see on ¯Acts:7:41; strkjv@1Corinthians:12:2|). See strkjv@Matthew:24:15| for "abomination." {Dost thou rob temples?} (\hierosuleis?\). Old verb from \hierosulos\ (Acts:19:37|) and that from \hieron\, temple, and \sula\, to rob. The town clerk (Acts:19:37|) said that these Jews (Paul and his companions) were "not robbers of temples," proof that the charge was sometimes made against Jews, though expressly forbidden the Jews (Josephus, _Ant_. IV. 8, 10). Paul refers to the crime of robbing idol temples in spite of the defilement of contact with idolatry.

rwp@Romans:11:22 @{The goodness and the severity of God} (\chrstotta kai apotomian theou\). See on strkjv@Romans:2:2| for \chrstots\, kindness of God. \Apotomia\ (here alone in the N.T.) is from \apotomos\, cut off, abrupt, and this adjective from \apotemn\, to cut off. This late word occurs several times in the papyri. {If thou continue} (\ean epimenis\). Third class condition, \ean\ and present active subjunctive. {Otherwise} (\epei\). Ellipse after \epei\, "since if thou dost not continue." {Thou also} (\kai su\). Precisely as the Jewish branches of verse 17| were. {Shalt be cut off} (\ekkopsi\). Second future passive of \ekkopt\, to cut out.

rwp@Romans:14:10 @{But thou, why dost thou judge?} (\su de ti su krineis?\). Referring to the conduct of the "weak" brother in verse 3|. {Or thou again} (\ kai su\). Referring to the "strong" brother. {Shall stand before} (\parastsometha\). Future middle of \paristmi\ and intransitive, to stand beside (\para\) with the locative case (\ti bemati\, the judgment seat) as in strkjv@Acts:27:24|. See the same figure of God in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:10|.