NT.filter - rwp edict:

rwp@1Corinthians:12:10 @{Workings of miracles} (\energmata dunamen\). Workings of powers. Cf. \energn dunameis\ in strkjv@Galatians:3:5; strkjv@Hebrews:2:4| where all three words are used (\smeia\, signs, \terata\, wonders, \dunameis\, powers). Some of the miracles were not healings as the blindness on Elymas the sorcerer. {Prophecy} (\prophteia\). Late word from \prophts\ and \prophmi\, to speak forth. Common in papyri. This gift Paul will praise most (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:14|). Not always prediction, but a speaking forth of God's message under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. {Discernings of spirits} (\diakriseis pneumatn\). \Diakrisis\ is old word from \diakrin\ (see strkjv@11:29|) and in N.T. only here; strkjv@Romans:14:1; strkjv@Hebrews:5:14|. A most needed gift to tell whether the gifts were really of the Holy Spirit and supernatural (cf. so-called "gifts" today) or merely strange though natural or even diabolical (1Timothy:4:1; strkjv@1John:4:1f.|). {Divers kinds of tongues} (\gen glssn\). No word for "divers" in the Greek. There has arisen a great deal of confusion concerning the gift of tongues as found in Corinth. They prided themselves chiefly on this gift which had become a source of confusion and disorder. There were varieties (kinds, \gen\) in this gift, but the gift was essentially an ecstatic utterance of highly wrought emotion that edified the speaker (14:4|) and was intelligible to God (14:2,28|). It was not always true that the speaker in tongues could make clear what he had said to those who did not know the tongue (14:13|): It was not mere gibberish or jargon like the modern "tongues," but in a real language that could be understood by one familiar with that tongue as was seen on the great Day of Pentecost when people who spoke different languages were present. In Corinth, where no such variety of people existed, it required an interpreter to explain the tongue to those who knew it not. Hence Paul placed this gift lowest of all. It created wonder, but did little real good. This is the error of the Irvingites and others who have tried to reproduce this early gift of the Holy Spirit which was clearly for a special emergency and which was not designed to help spread the gospel among men. See on ¯Acts:2:13-21; strkjv@10:44-46; strkjv@19:6|. {The interpretation of tongues} (\hermneia glssn\). Old word, here only and strkjv@14:26| in N.T., from \hermneu\ from \Herms\ (the god of speech). Cf. on \diermneu\ in strkjv@Luke:24:27; strkjv@Acts:9:36|. In case there was no one present who understood the particular tongue it required a special gift of the Spirit to some one to interpret it if any one was to receive benefit from it.

rwp@1Peter:1:11 @{Searching} (\eraunntes\). Present active participle of \erauna\, late form for older \ereuna\ (both in the papyri), uncompounded verb (John:7:52|), the compound occurring in verse 10| above. {What time or what manner of time} (\eis tina poion kairon\). Proper sense of \poios\ (qualitative interrogative) kept here as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:35, strkjv@Romans:3:27|, though it is losing its distinctive sense from \tis\ (Acts:23:34|). The prophets knew what they prophesied, but not at what time the Messianic prophecies would be fulfilled. {The Spirit of Christ which was in them} (\to en autois pneuma Christou\). Peter definitely asserts here that the Spirit of Jesus Christ (the Messiah) was in the Old Testament prophets, the Holy Spirit called the Spirit of Christ and the Spirit of God (Romans:8:9|), who spoke to the prophets as he would speak to the apostles (John:16:14|). {Did point unto} (\edlou\). Imperfect active of \dlo\, to make plain, "did keep on pointing to," though they did not clearly perceive the time. {When it testified beforehand} (\promarturomenon\). Present middle participle of \promarturomai\, a late compound unknown elsewhere save in a writer of the fourteenth century (Theodorus Mech.) and now in a papyrus of the eighth. It is neuter here because \pneuma\ is neuter, but this grammatical gender should not be retained as "it" in English, but should be rendered "he" (and so as to strkjv@Acts:8:15|). Here we have predictive prophecy concerning the Messiah, though some modern critics fail to find predictions of the Messiah in the Old Testament. {The sufferings of Christ} (\ta eis Christon pathmata\). "The sufferings for (destined for) Christ" like the use of \eis\ in verse 10| (\eis humas\ for you). {The glories that should follow them} (\tas meta tauta doxas\). "The after these things (sufferings) glories." The plural of \doxa\ is rare, but occurs in strkjv@Exodus:15:11; strkjv@Hosea:9:11|. The glories of Christ followed the sufferings as in strkjv@4:13; strkjv@5:1,6|.

rwp@1Thessalonians:3:4 @{We told you beforehand} (\proelegomen humin\). Imperfect active, we used to tell you beforehand. Old verb, rare in N.T. (only in Paul). {That we are to suffer persecution} (\hoti mellomen thlibesthai\). \Mell\ and present passive infinitive. Not mere prediction, but God's appointed will as it turned out in Thessalonica.

rwp@1Thessalonians:5:28 @{The grace} (\h charis\). Paul prefers this noble word to the customary \errsthe\ (Farewell, Be strong). See strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:18| for identical close save added \pantn\ (all). A bit shorter form in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:23; strkjv@Romans:16:20| and still shorter in strkjv@Colossians:4:18; strkjv@1Timothy:6:21; strkjv@Titus:3:15; strkjv@2Timothy:4:22|. The full Trinitarian benediction we find in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:13|.

rwp@1Timothy:4:1 @{Expressly} (\rts\). Late adverb, here alone in N.T., from verbal adjective \rtos\ (from root \re\). The reference is to the Holy Spirit, but whether to O.T. prophecy (Acts:1:16|) or to some Christian utterance (2Thessalonians:2:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:1ff.|) we do not know. Parry recalls the words of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:24:10,24|. {In later times} (\en husterois kairois\). Old adjective (Matthew:21:31|) usually as adverb, \husteron\ (Matthew:4:2|). Relative time from the prediction, now coming true (a present danger). {Some shall fall away} (\apostsontai tines\). Future middle of \aphistmi\, intransitive use, shall stand off from, to fall away, apostatize (2Corinthians:12:8|). {From the faith} (\ts pistes\). Ablative case (separation). Not creed, but faith in God through Christ. {Giving heed} (\prosechontes\). Supply \ton noun\ (the mind) as in strkjv@3:8|. {Seducing spirits} (\pneumasin planois\). Old adjective (\plan\, wandering), here active sense (deceiving). As substantive in strkjv@2Corinthians:6:8|. Probably some heathen or the worst of the Gnostics. {Doctrines of devils} (\didaskaliais daimonin\). "Teachings of \daimons\." Definite explanation of the preceding. Cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:10:20f|.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:13 @{The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all} (\h charis tou Kuriou Isou Christou kai h agap tou theou kai h koinnia tou hagiou pneumatos meta pantn humn\). This benediction is the most complete of them all. It presents the persons of the Trinity in full form. From strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:17| it appears that Paul wrote the greeting or benediction with his own hand. We know from strkjv@Romans:15:19| that Paul went round about unto Illyricum before, apparently, he came on to Corinth. When he did arrive (Acts:20:1-3|) the troubles from the Judaizers had disappeared. Probably the leaders left after the coming of Titus and the brethren with this Epistle. The reading of it in the church would make a stir of no small proportions. But it did the work.

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE DATE There are three views about the date of the Acts. Baur and his Tubingen School held the second century to be the date of this late pamphlet as they termed it after the fashion of the Clementine Homilies. But that view is now practically abandoned save by the few who still strangely oppose the Lukan authorship. Probably the majority of those who accept the Lukan authorship place it in the latter part of the first century for two reasons. One is that the Gospel according to Luke is dated by them after the destruction of Jerusalem because of the prophecy by Jesus of the encompassing of the city by armies. Predictive prophecy that would be and so it is considered a prophecy _post eventum_. The other reason is the alleged use of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus by Luke. Josephus finished this work A.D. 93 so that, if Luke did use it, he must have written the Acts after that date. Usually this argument is made to show that Luke could not have written it at all, but some hold that he may have lived to an age that would allow it. But it cannot be assumed that Luke used Josephus because of his mention of Theudas and Judas the Galilean. They differ so widely (Acts:5:36f|. and Josephus, _Ant_. XX. v, 1, 2) that Von Dobschutz (_Dictionary of the Apostolic Church_, art. Josephus) argues that the two accounts are entirely independent of each other. Songs:Luke (Luke:13:1f.|) alludes to a Galilean revolt not mentioned by Josephus and Josephus records three revolts under Pilate not referred to by Luke. A comparison of the accounts of the death of Agrippa I in strkjv@Acts:12:20-23| and _Ant_. XIX. viii, 2 redounds to the credit of Luke. The Josephus phase of the argument may be brushed to one side. The third view, held by Harnack and adopted here, is that Luke wrote the Acts while with Paul in Rome and finished the book before Paul's release, that is by A.D. 63. This is the obvious and natural way to take the language of Luke at the close of Acts. Events had gone no farther and so he ends the narrative right there. It is argued against this that Luke contemplated a third volume and for this reason closed with the arrival of Paul in Rome. But the use of \prton\ (first) in strkjv@Acts:1:1| is a common _Koin_ idiom and does not imply three volumes any more than first and second stories with us means that the house has three. Of course this date for the Acts puts the date of the Gospel further back either in Caesarea (57 to 59) or in Rome (60 to 62). And that means that Mark's Gospel is still earlier since Luke used it for his Gospel and the Logia (Q) earlier still. But all these dates are probable in the light of all the known facts.

rwp@Acts:1:5 @{Baptized with water} (\ebaptisen hudati\) {and with the Holy Ghost} (\en pneumati baptisthsesthe hagii\). The margin has "in the Holy Ghost" (Spirit, it should be). The American Standard Version renders "in" both with "water" and "Holy Spirit" as do Goodspeed (American Translation) and Mrs. Montgomery (Centenary Translation). John's own words (Matthew:3:11|) to which Jesus apparently refers use \en\ (in) both with water and Spirit. There is a so-called instrumental use of \en\ where we in English have to say "with" (Revelation:13:10| \en machairi\, like \machairi\, strkjv@Acts:12:2|). That is to say \en\ with the locative presents the act as located in a certain instrument like a sword (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 589f.). But the instrumental case is more common without \en\ (the locative and instrumental cases having the same form). Songs:it is often a matter of indifference which idiom is used as in strkjv@John:21:8| we have \ti ploiarii\ (locative without \en\). They came {in} (locative case without \en\) the boat. Songs:in strkjv@John:1:31| \en hudati baptizn\ baptizing in water. No distinction therefore can be insisted on here between the construction \hudati\ and \en pneumati\ (both being in the locative case, one without, one with \en\). Note unusual position of the verb \baptisthsesthe\ (future passive indicative) between \pneumati\ and \hagii\. This baptism of the Holy Spirit was predicted by John (Matthew:3:11|) as the characteristic of the Messiah's work. Now the Messiah himself in his last message before his Ascension proclaims that in a few days the fulfilment of that prophecy will come to pass. The Codex Bezae adds here "which ye are about to receive" and "until the Pentecost" to verse 5|. {Not many days hence} (\ou meta pollas tautas hmeras\). A neat Greek idiom difficult to render smoothly into English: "Not after many days these." The litotes (not many=few) is common in Luke (Luke:7:6; strkjv@15:13; strkjv@Acts:17:27; strkjv@19:11; strkjv@20:12; strkjv@21:39; strkjv@28:14; strkjv@28:2|). The predicate use of \tautas\ (without article) is to be noted. "These" really means as a starting point, "from these" (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 702). It was ten days hence. This idiom occurs several times in Luke (Luke:24:21; strkjv@Acts:24:21|), as elsewhere (John:4:18; strkjv@2Peter:3:1|). In strkjv@Luke:2:12| the copula is easily supplied as it exists in strkjv@Luke:1:36; strkjv@2:2|.

rwp@Acts:2:3 @{Parting asunder} (\diamerizomenai\). Present middle (or passive) participle of \diameriz\, old verb, to cleave asunder, to cut in pieces as a butcher does meat (aorist passive in strkjv@Luke:11:17f.|). Songs:middle here would mean, parting themselves asunder or distributing themselves. The passive voice would be "being distributed." The middle is probably correct and means that "the fire-like appearance presented itself at first, as it were, in a single body, and then suddenly parted in this direction and that; so that a portion of it rested on each of those present" (Hackett). The idea is not that each tongue was cloven, but each separate tongue looked like fire, not real fire, but looking like (\hsei\, as if) fire. The audible sign is followed by a visible one (Knowling). "Fire had always been, with the Jews, the symbol of the Divine presence (cf. strkjv@Exodus:3:2; strkjv@Deuteronomy:5:4|). No symbol could be more fitting to express the Spirit's purifying energy and refining energy" (Furneaux). The Baptist had predicted a baptizing by the Messiah in the Holy Spirit and in fire (Matthew:3:11|). {It sat} (\ekathisen\). Singular verb here, though plural \pthsan\ with tongues (\glssai\). A tongue that looked like fire sat upon each one.

rwp@Acts:3:18 @{Foreshewed} (\prokatggeilen\). First aorist active indicative of \prokataggell\, late compound to announce fully beforehand. Only twice in the N.T. in the critical text (Acts:3:18; strkjv@7:52|). {That his Christ should suffer} (\pathein ton Christon autou\). Accusative of general reference with the aorist active infinitive (\pathein\ of \pasch\) in indirect discourse (predictive purpose of God). Their crime, though real, was carrying out God's purpose (2:23; strkjv@John:3:16|). See the same idea in strkjv@Acts:17:3; strkjv@26:23|. This "immense paradox" (Page) was a stumbling block to these Jews as it is yet (1Corinthians:1:23|). Peter discusses the sufferings of Christ in strkjv@1Peter:4:13; strkjv@5:1|.

rwp@Acts:7:37 @{Like unto me} (\hs eme\). This same passage Peter quoted to the crowd in Solomon's Porch (Acts:3:22|). Stephen undoubtedly means to argue that Moses was predicting the Messiah as a prophet like himself who is no other than Jesus so that these Pharisees are in reality opposing Moses. It was a neat turn.

rwp@Acts:8:14 @{That Samaria had received} (\hoti dedektai h Samaria\). The district here, not the city as in verse 5|. Perfect middle indicative of \dechomai\ retained in indirect discourse. It was a major event for the apostles for now the gospel was going into Samaria as Jesus had predicted (1:8|). Though the Samaritans were nominally Jews, they were not held so by the people. The sending of Peter and John was no reflection on Philip, but was an appropriate mission since "many Christian Jews would be scandalized by the admission of Samaritans" (Furneaux). If Peter and John sanctioned it, the situation would be improved. John had once wanted to call down fire from heaven on a Samaritan village (Luke:9:54|).

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

rwp@Acts:12:2 @{James the brother of John} (\Iakbon ton adelphon Ianou\). He had been called by Jesus a son of thunder along with his brother John. Jesus had predicted a bloody death for both of them (Mark:10:38ff.; strkjv@Matthew:20:23|). James is the first of the apostles to die and John probably the last. He is not James the Lord's brother (Galatians:1:19|). We do not know why Luke tells so little about the death of James and so much about the death of Stephen nor do we know why Herod selected him as a victim. Eusebius (_H.E_. ii. 9) quotes Clement of Alexandria as saying that a Jew made accusations against James and was converted and beheaded at the same time with him. {Killed with the sword} (\aneilen machairi\). The verb is a favourite one with Luke (Acts:2:33; strkjv@5:33,36; strkjv@7:28; strkjv@9:23-29; strkjv@10:39|, etc.). Instrumental case and Ionic form of \machaira\. The Jews considered beheading a shameful death as in the case of the Baptist (Matthew:14:10|).

rwp@Acts:14:27 @{Gathered the church together} (\sunagagontes tn ekklsian\). Second aorist active participle of \sunag\. It "was the first missionary meeting in history" (Furneaux). It was not hard to get the church together when the news spread that Paul and Barnabas had returned. "The suitability of the Gospel to become the religion of the world had not before been put to the test" (Furneaux). Doubtless many "wise-acres" had predicted failure as they did for William Carey and for Adoniram Judson and Luther Rice. {Rehearsed} (\anggellon\). Imperfect active. It was a long story for they had many things to tell of God's dealings "with them" (\met' autn\) for God had been "with them" all the while as Jesus had said he would be (Matthew:28:20|, \meth' hmn\). Paul could recount some of the details given later in strkjv@2Corinthians:11|. {And how} (\kai hoti\). Or "and that" in particular, as the upshot of it all. {He had opened a door of faith unto the Gentiles} (\noixen tois ethnesin thuran pistes\). Three times in Paul's Epistles (1Corinthians:16:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12; strkjv@Colossians:4:3|) he employed the metaphor of "door," perhaps a reminiscence of the very language of Paul here. This work in Galatia gained a large place in Paul's heart (Galatians:4:14f.|). The Gentiles now, it was plain, could enter the kingdom of God (verse 22|) through the door of faith, not by law or by circumcision or by heathen philosophy or mythology.

rwp@Acts:21:9 @{Virgins which did prophesy} (\parthenoi prophteusai\). Not necessarily an "order" of virgins, but Philip had the honour of having in his home four virgin daughters with the gift of prophecy which was not necessarily predicting events, though that was done as by Agabus here. It was more than ordinary preaching (cf. strkjv@19:6|) and was put by Paul above the other gifts like tongues (1Corinthians:14:1-33|). The prophecy of Joel (2:28f.|) about their sons and daughters prophesying is quoted by Peter and applied to the events on the day of Pentecost (Acts:2:17|). Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:5| gives directions about praying and prophesying by the women (apparently in public worship) with the head uncovered and sharply requires the head covering, though not forbidding the praying and prophesying. With this must be compared his demand for silence by the women in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:34-40; strkjv@1Timothy:2:8-15| which it is not easy to reconcile. One wonders if there was not something known to Paul about special conditions in Corinth and Ephesus that he has not told. There was also Anna the prophetess in the temple (Luke:2:36|) besides the inspired hymns of Elizabeth (Luke:1:42-45|) and of Mary (Luke:1:46-55|). At any rate there was no order of women prophets or official ministers. There were Old Testament prophetesses like Miriam, Deborah, Huldah. Today in our Sunday schools the women do most of the actual teaching. The whole problem is difficult and calls for restraint and reverence. One thing is certain and that is that Luke appreciated the services of women for Christ as is shown often in his writings (Luke:8:1-3|, for instance) before this incident.

rwp@Acts:21:10 @{As we tarried} (\epimenontn hmn\). Genitive absolute. Note \epi\ (additional) with \men\ as in strkjv@12:16|. {Many days} (\hmeras pleious\). More days (than we expected), accusative of time. {A certain prophet named Agabus} (\prophts 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@Acts:28:22 @{But we desire} (\axioumen de\). Old verb \axio\, to deem worthy, to think right or proper as in strkjv@15:38| which see. They think it only fair to hear Paul's side of his case. {Concerning this sect} (\peri ts haireses tauts\). Paul had identified Christianity with Judaism (verse 20|) in its Messianic hope. The language seems to imply that the number of Christians in Rome was comparatively small and mainly Gentile. If the edict of Claudius for the expulsion of the Jews from Rome (Acts:18:2|) was due to disturbance over Christ (\Chrstus\), then even in Rome the Jews had special reason for hostility towards Christians. {Everywhere spoken against} (\pantachou antilegetai\). Cf. verse 19|. The line of cleavage between Jew and Christian was now sharply drawn everywhere.

rwp@Colossians:1:3 @{God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\ti thei patri tou kuriou hmn Isou Christou\). Correct text without \kai\ (and) as in strkjv@3:17|, though usually "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" (2Corinthians:1:3; strkjv@11:31; strkjv@Romans:15:6; strkjv@1Peter:1:3; strkjv@Revelation:1:6|). In verse 2| we have the only instance in the opening benediction of an epistle when the name of "Jesus Christ" is not joined with "God our Father." {Always} (\pantote\). Amphibolous position between \eucharistoumen\ (we give thanks) and \proseuchomenoi\ (praying). Can go with either.

rwp@Ephesians:1:3 @{Blessed} (\eulogtos\). Verbal of \euloge\, common in the LXX for Hebrew _baruk_ (Vulgate _benedictus_) and applied usually to God, sometimes to men (Genesis:24:31|), but in N.T. always to God (Luke:1:68|), while \eulogmenos\ (perfect passive participle) is applied to men (Luke:1:42|). "While \eulogmenos\ points to an isolated act or acts, \eulogtos\ describes the intrinsic character" (Lightfoot). Instead of the usual \eucharistoumen\ (Colossians:1:3|) Paul here uses \eulogtos\, elsewhere only in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3| in opening, though in a doxology in strkjv@Romans:1:25; strkjv@9:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:31|. The copula here is probably \estin\ (is), though either \est\ (imperative) or \ei\ (optative as wish) will make sense. {The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\ho theos kai patr tou Kuriou hmn Isou Christou\). \Kai\ is genuine here, though not in strkjv@Colossians:1:3|. The one article (\ho\) with \theos kai patr\ links them together as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:3; strkjv@3:11,13; strkjv@Galatians:1:4|. See also the one article in strkjv@2Peter:1:1,11|. In strkjv@Ephesians:1:17| we have \ho theos tou Kuriou hmn Isou Christou\, and the words of Jesus in strkjv@John:20:17|. {Who hath blessed us} (\ho eulogsas hums\). First aorist active participle of \euloge\, the same word, antecedent action to the doxology (\eulogtos\). {With} (\en\). So-called instrumental use of \en\ though {in} is clear. {Every spiritual blessing} (\pasi eulogii pneumatiki\). Third use of the root \eulog\ (verbal, verb, substantive). Paul lovingly plays with the idea. The believer is a citizen of heaven and the spiritual blessings count for most to him. {In the heavenly places in Christ} (\en tois epouraniois en Christi\). In four other places in Eph. (1:20; strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:10; strkjv@6:12|). This precise phrase (with \en\) occurs nowhere else in the N.T. and has a clearly local meaning in strkjv@1:20; strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:10|, doubtful in strkjv@6:12|, but probably so here. In strkjv@2:6| the believer is conceived as already seated with Christ. Heaven is the real abode of the citizen of Christ's kingdom (Phillipians:3:20|) who is a stranger on earth (Phillipians:1:27; strkjv@Ephesians:2:19|). The word \epouranios\ (heavenly) occurs in various passages in the N.T. in contrast with \ta epigeia\ (the earthly) as in strkjv@John:3:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:40,48,49; strkjv@Phillipians:2:10|, with \patris\ (country) in strkjv@Hebrews:11:16|, with \klsis\ (calling) in strkjv@Hebrews:3:1|, with \drea\ (gift) in strkjv@Hebrews:6:4|, with \basileia\ (kingdom) in strkjv@2Timothy:4:18|.

rwp@Hebrews:10:7 @{Then} (\tote\). When it was plain that God could not be propitiated by such sacrifices. {Lo, I am come} (\Idou hk\). The Messiah is represented as offering himself to do God's will (\tou poisai to thelma sou\, the genitive articular infinitive of purpose). {In the roll of the book it is written of me} (\en kephalidi bibliou gegraptai peri emou\). Stands written (\gegraptai\, perfect passive indicative). \Kephalis\ is a diminutive of \kephal\ (head), a little head, then roll only here in N.T., but in the papyri. Here it refers "to the O.T. as a prediction of Christ's higher sacrifice" (Moffatt).

rwp@John:1:31 @{And I knew him not} (\kag ouk idein auton\). Repeated in verse 33|. Second past perfect of \oida\ as imperfect. He had predicted the Messiah and described him before he met him and baptized him. See the Synoptics for that story. Whether John knew Jesus personally before the baptism we do not know. {But that he should be made manifest to Israel} (\all' hina phanerthi ti Isral\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \phanero\. The purpose of John's ministry was to manifest to Israel with their spiritual privileges (1:49|) the presence of the Messiah. Hence he was baptizing in water those who confessed their sins, he means, as in strkjv@Mark:1:5|. The Synoptic account is presupposed all along here.

rwp@John:1:37 @{Heard him speak} (\kousan autou lalountos\). First active indicative of \akou\ and present active participle of \lale\ in genitive case agreeing with \autou\, object of \akou\. "Heard him speaking" (kind of indirect discourse). John had disciples (\mathtai\, learners, from \manthan\, to learn). {They followed Jesus} (\kolouthsan ti Isou\). Associative instrumental case after verb (first aorist active indicative, ingressive aorist, of \akolouthe\). These two disciples of the Baptist (Andrew and John) took him at his word and acted on it. John the Baptist had predicted and portrayed the Messiah, had baptized him, had interpreted him, and now for the second time had identified him.

rwp@John:10:8 @{Before me} (\pro emou\). Aleph with the Latin, Syriac, and Sahidic versions omit these words (supported by A B D L W). But with or without \pro emou\ Jesus refers to the false Messiahs and self-appointed leaders who made havoc of the flock. These are the thieves and robbers, not the prophets and sincere teachers of old. The reference is to verse 1|. There had been numerous such impostors already (Josephus, _Ant_. XVIII. i. 6; _War_ II. viii. I) and Jesus will predict many more (Matthew:24:23f.|). They keep on coming, these wolves in sheep's clothing (Matthew:7:15|) who grow rich by fooling the credulous sheep. In this case "the sheep did not hear them" (\ouk kousan autn ta probata\). First aorist active indicative with genitive. Fortunate sheep who knew the Shepherd's voice.

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:1:66 @{What then} (\ti ara\). With all these supernatural happenings they predicted the marvellous career of this child. Note \Ti\, {what}, not \Tis\, {who}. Cf. strkjv@Acts:12:18|. {They laid them up} (\ethento\, second aorist middle indicative) as Mary did (2:19|). {The hand of the Lord} (\cheir Kuriou\). Luke's explanation in addition to the supernatural events. The expression occurs only in Luke's writing (Acts:11:21; strkjv@13:11|).

rwp@Luke:1:67 @{Prophesied} (\eprophteusen\). Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This _Benedictus_ (\Eulogtos\, {Blessed}) of Zacharias (68-79|) may be what is referred to in verse 64| "he began to speak blessing God" (\eulogn\). Nearly every phrase here is found in the O.T. (Psalms and Prophets). He, like Mary, was full of the Holy Spirit and had caught the Messianic message in its highest meaning.

rwp@Luke:9:22 @{Rejected} (\apodokimasthnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \apodokimaz\, to reject after trial. {The third day} (\ti triti hmeri\). Locative case of time as in strkjv@Matthew:16:21|. Here in the parallel passage strkjv@Mark:8:31| has "after three days" (\meta treis hmeras\) in precisely the same sense. That is to say, "after three days" is just a free way of saying "on the third day" and cannot mean "on the fourth day" if taken too literally. For discussion of this plain prediction of the death of Christ with various details see discussion on strkjv@Matthew:16:21; strkjv@Mark:8:31|. It was a melancholy outlook that depressed the disciples as Mark and Matthew show in the protest of Peter and his rebuke.

rwp@Luke:9:35 @If \ekeinous\ be accepted here instead of \autous\, the three disciples would be outside of the cloud. {Out of the cloud} (\ek ts nephels\). This voice was the voice of the Father like that at the baptism of Jesus (Luke:3:22; strkjv@Mark:1:11; strkjv@Matthew:3:17|) and like that near the end (John:12:28-30|) when the people thought it was a clap of thunder or an angel. {My son, my chosen} (\Hosea:huios mou, ho eklelegmenos\). Songs:the best documents (Aleph B L Syriac Sinaitic). The others make it "My Beloved" as in strkjv@Mark:9:7; strkjv@Matthew:17:5|. These disciples are commanded to hear Jesus, God's Son, even when he predicts his death, a pointed rebuke to Simon Peter as to all.

rwp@Luke:9:44 @{Sink into your ears} (\Thesthe humeis eis ta ta humn\). Second aorist imperative middle of \tithmi\, common verb. "Do you (note emphatic position) yourselves (whatever others do) put into your ears." No word like "sink" here. The same prediction here as in strkjv@Mark:9:31; strkjv@Matthew:17:22| about the Son of man only without mention of death and resurrection as there, which see for discussion.

rwp@Luke:19:44 @{Shall dash to the ground} (\edaphiousin\). Attic future of \edaphiz\, to beat level, to raze to the ground, a rare verb from \edaphos\, bottom, base, ground (Acts:22:7|), here alone in the N.T. {Because} (\anth' hn\). "In return for which things." {Thou knewest not} (\ouk egns\). Applying the very words of the lament in the condition in verse 42|. This vivid prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem is used by those who deny predictive prophecy even for Jesus as proof that Luke wrote the Gospel after the destruction of Jerusalem. But it is no proof at all to those who concede to Jesus adequate knowledge of his mission and claims.

rwp@Luke:21:20 @{Compassed with armies} (\kukloumenn hupo stratopedn\). Present passive participle of \kuklo\, to circle, encircle, from \kuklos\, circle. Old verb, but only four times in N.T. The point of this warning is the present tense, being encircled. It will be too late after the city is surrounded. It is objected by some that Jesus, not to say Luke, could not have spoken (or written) these words before the Roman armies came. One may ask why not, if such a thing as predictive prophecy can exist and especially in the case of the Lord Jesus. The word \stratopedn\ (\stratos\, army, \pedon\, plain) is a military camp and then an army in camp. Old word, but only here in the N.T. {Then know} (\tote gnte\). Second aorist active imperative of \ginsk\. Christians did flee from Jerusalem to Pella before it was too late as directed in strkjv@Luke:21:21; strkjv@Mark:13:14f.; strkjv@Matthew:24:16f|.

rwp@Luke:21:33 @{My words shall not pass away} (\hoi logoi mou ou m pareleusontai\). Future middle indicative with \ou m\, a bit stronger statement than the subjunctive. It is noteworthy that Jesus utters these words just after the difficult prediction in verse 32|.

rwp@Luke:22:57 @{I know him not} (\ouk oida auton\). Just as Jesus had predicted that he would do (Luke:22:34|).

rwp@Luke:24:5 @{As they were affrighted} (\emphobn genomenn autn\). Genitive absolute with second aorist middle of \ginomai\, to become. Hence, {when they became affrighted}. They had utterly forgotten the prediction of Jesus that he would rise on the third day.

rwp@Mark:8:38 @{For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and my words} (\hos gar ean epaischunthi me kai tous emous logous\). More exactly, {whosoever is ashamed} (first aorist passive subjunctive with indefinite relative and \ean = an\. See Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 957-9. It is not a statement about the future conduct of one, but about his present attitude toward Jesus. The conduct of men toward Christ now determines Christ's conduct then (\epaischunthsetai\, first future passive indicative). This passive verb is transitive and uses the accusative (\me, auton\). {In this adulterous and sinful generation} (\en ti genei tauti ti moichalidi kai hamartli\). Only in Mark. {When he cometh} (\hotan elthi\). Aorist active subjunctive with reference to the future second coming of Christ with the glory of the Father with his holy angels (cf. strkjv@Matthew:16:27|). This is a clear prediction of the final eschatological coming of Christ. This verse could not be separated from strkjv@Mark:9:1| as the chapter division does. These two verses in strkjv@Mark:8:38; strkjv@9:1| form one paragraph and should go together.

rwp@Mark:9:31 @{For he taught} (\edidasken gar\). Imperfect tense, and the reason given for secrecy. He was renewing again definitely the prediction of his death in Jerusalem some six months ahead as he had done before (Mark:8:31; strkjv@Matthew:16:21; strkjv@Luke:9:22|). Now as then Jesus foretells his resurrection "after three days" ("the third day," strkjv@Matthew:17:23|).

rwp@Mark:11:7 @{They bring the colt unto Jesus} (\pherousin ton plon pros ton Isoun\). Vivid historical present. The owners acquiesced as Jesus had predicted. Evidently friends of Jesus.

rwp@Mark:11:14 @{No man eat fruit from thee henceforward forever} (\Mketi eis ton aina ek sou mdeis karpon phagoi\). The verb \phagoi\ is in the second aorist active optative. It is a wish for the future that in its negative form constitutes a curse upon the tree. strkjv@Matthew:21:19| has the aorist subjunctive with double negative \ou mketi gentai\, a very strong negative prediction that amounts to a prohibition. See on Matthew. Jesus probably spoke in the Aramaic on this occasion. {And his disciples heard it} (\kai kouon hoi mathtai autou\). Imperfect tense, "were listening to it," and evidently in amazement, for, after all, it was not the fault of the poor fig tree that it had put out leaves. One often sees peach blossoms nipped by the frost when they are too precocious in the changeable weather. But Jesus offered no explanation at this time.

rwp@Mark:13:13 @{But he that endureth to the end} (\ho de hupomeinas eis telos\). Note this aorist participle with the future verb. The idea here is true to the etymology of the word, remaining under (\hupomen\) until the end. The divisions in families Jesus had predicted before (Luke:12:52f.; strkjv@14:25f.|). {Be saved} (\sthsetai\). Here Jesus means final salvation (effective aorist future passive), not initial salvation.

rwp@Matthew:7:15 @{False prophets} (\tn pseudoprophtn\). There were false prophets in the time of the Old Testament prophets. Jesus will predict "false Messiahs and false prophets" (Matthew:24:24|) who will lead many astray. They came in due time posing as angels of light like Satan, Judaizers (2Corinthians:11:13ff|.) and Gnostics (1John:4:1; strkjv@1Timothy:4:1|). Already false prophets were on hand when Jesus spoke on this occasion (cf. strkjv@Acts:13:6; strkjv@2Peter:2:1|). In outward appearance they look like sheep in the sheep's clothing which they wear, but within they are "ravening wolves" (\lukoi harpages\), greedy for power, gain, self. It is a tragedy that such men and women reappear through the ages and always find victims. Wolves are more dangerous than dogs and hogs.

rwp@Matthew:20:17 @{Apart} (\kat' idian\). This is the prediction in Matthew of the cross (16:21; strkjv@17:22; strkjv@20:17|). "Aside by themselves" (Moffatt). The verb is \parelaben\. Jesus is having his inward struggle (Mark:10:32|) and makes one more effort to get the Twelve to understand him.

rwp@Matthew:20:20 @{Then} (\tote\). Surely an inopportune time for such a request just after the pointed prediction of Christ's crucifixion. Perhaps their minds had been preoccupied with the words of Jesus (19:28|) about their sitting on twelve thrones taking them in a literal sense. The mother of James and John, probably Salome, possibly a sister of the Master's mother (John:19:25|), apparently prompted her two sons because of the family relationship and now speaks for them. {Asking a certain thing} (\aitousa ti\). "Asking something," "plotting perhaps when their Master was predicting" (Bruce). The "something" put forward as a small matter was simply the choice of the two chief thrones promised by Jesus (19:28|).

rwp@Matthew:21:19 @{A fig tree} (\sukn mian\). "A single fig tree" (Margin of Rev. Version). But \heis\ was often used = \tis\ or like our indefinite article. See strkjv@Matthew:8:10; strkjv@26:69|. The Greek has strictly no indefinite article as the Latin has no definite article. {Let there be no fruit from thee henceforward for ever} (\ou mketi sou karpos gentai eis ton aina\). Strictly speaking this is a prediction, not a prohibition or wish as in strkjv@Mark:11:14| (optative \phagoi\). "On you no fruit shall ever grow again" (Weymouth). The double negative \ou m\ with the aorist subjunctive (or future indicative) is the strongest kind of negative prediction. It sometimes amounts to a prohibition like \ou\ and the future indicative (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 926f.). The early figs start in spring before the leaves and develop after the leaves. The main fig crop was early autumn (Mark:11:14|). There should have been figs on the tree with the crop of leaves. It was a vivid object lesson. Matthew does not distinguish between the two mornings as Mark does (Mark:11:13,20|), but says "immediately" (\parachrma\) twice (21:19,20|). This word is really \para to chrma\ like our "on the spot" (Thayer). It occurs in the papyri in monetary transactions for immediate cash payment.

rwp@Matthew:24:2 @{One stone upon another} (\lithos epi lithon\). Stone upon stone. A startling prediction showing that the gloomy current of the thoughts of Jesus were not changed by their words of admiration for the temple.

rwp@Matthew:24:3 @{As he sat} (\kathmenou\). Genitive absolute. Picture of Jesus sitting on the Mount of Olives looking down on Jerusalem and the temple which he had just left. After the climb up the mountain four of the disciples (Peter, James, John, Andrew) come to Jesus with the problem raised by his solemn words. They ask these questions about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, his own second coming (\parousia\, presence, common in the papyri for the visit of the emperor), and the end of the world. Did they think that they were all to take place simultaneously? There is no way to answer. At any rate Jesus treats all three in this great eschatological discourse, the most difficult problem in the Synoptic Gospels. Many theories are advanced that impugn the knowledge of Jesus or of the writers or of both. It is sufficient for our purpose to think of Jesus as using the destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem which did happen in that generation in A.D. 70, as also a symbol of his own second coming and of the end of the world (\sunteleias tou ainos\) or consummation of the age. In a painting the artist by skilful perspective may give on the same surface the inside of a room, the fields outside the window, and the sky far beyond. Certainly in this discourse Jesus blends in apocalyptic language the background of his death on the cross, the coming destruction of Jerusalem, his own second coming and the end of the world. He now touches one, now the other. It is not easy for us to separate clearly the various items. It is enough if we get the picture as a whole as it is here drawn with its lessons of warning to be ready for his coming and the end. The destruction of Jerusalem came as he foretold. There are some who would date the Synoptic Gospels after A.D. 70 in order to avoid the predictive element involved in the earlier date. But that is to limit the fore-knowledge of Jesus to a merely human basis. The word \parousia\ occurs in this chapter alone (3,27,37,39|) in the Gospels, but often in the Epistles, either of presence as opposed to absence (Phillipians:2:12|) or the second coming of Christ (2Thessalonians:2:1|).

rwp@Matthew:24:6 @{See that ye be not troubled} (\horate m throeisthe\). Asyndeton here with these two imperatives as strkjv@Mark:8:15| \orate blepete\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 949). Look out for the wars and rumours of wars, but do not be scared out of your wits by them. \Throe\ means to cry aloud, to scream, and in the passive to be terrified by an outcry. Paul uses this very verb (\mde throeisthai\) in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2| as a warning against excitement over false reports that he had predicted the immediate second coming of Christ. {But the end is not yet} (\all' oup estin to telos\). It is curious how people overlook these words of Jesus and proceed to set dates for the immediate end. That happened during the Great War and it has happened since.

rwp@Matthew:26:2 @{Cometh} (\ginetai\). Futuristic use of the present middle indicative. This was probably our Tuesday evening (beginning of Jewish Wednesday). The passover began on our Thursday evening (beginning of Jewish Friday). {After two days} (\meta duo hmeras\) is just the familiar popular mode of speech. The passover came technically on the second day from this time. {Is delivered up} (\paradidotai\). Another instance of the futuristic present passive indicative. The same form occurs in verse 24|. Thus Jesus sets a definite date for the coming crucifixion which he has been predicting for six months.

rwp@Matthew:27:63 @{Sir, we remember} (\kurie, emnesthmen\). This was the next day, on our Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath, the day after the Preparation (Matthew:27:62|). Ingressive aorist indicative, we have just recalled. It is objected that the Jewish rulers would know nothing of such a prediction, but in strkjv@Matthew:12:40| he expressly made it to them. Meyer scouts as unhistorical legend the whole story that Christ definitely foretold his resurrection on the third day. But that is to make legendary much of the Gospels and to limit Jesus to a mere man. The problem remains why the disciples forgot and the Jewish leaders remembered. But that is probably due on the one hand to the overwhelming grief of the disciples coupled with the blighting of all their hopes of a political Messiah in Jesus, and on the other hand to the keen nervous fear of the leaders who dreaded the power of Jesus though dead. They wanted to make sure of their victory and prevent any possible revival of this pernicious heresy. {That deceiver} (\ekeinos ho planos\) they call him, a vagabond wanderer (\planos\) with a slur in the use of {that} (\ekeinos\), a picturesque sidelight on their intense hatred of and fear of Jesus.

rwp@Revelation:1:3 @{Blessed} (\makarios\). As in strkjv@Matthew:5:3ff|. This endorses the book as a whole. {He that readeth} (\ho anaginskn\). Present active singular articular participle of \anaginsk\ (as in strkjv@Luke:4:16|). Christians in their public worship followed the Jewish custom of public reading of the Scriptures (2Corinthians:3:14f.|). The church reader (\anagnsts\, lector) gradually acquired an official position. John expects this book to be read in each of the seven churches mentioned (1:4|) and elsewhere. Today the public reading of the Bible is an important part of worship that is often poorly done. {They that hear} (\hoi akouontes\). Present active plural articular participle of \akou\ (the audience). {And keep} (\kai trountes\). Present active participle of \tre\, a common Johannine word (1John:2:4|, etc.). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:7:24|. "The content of the Apocalypse is not merely prediction; moral counsel and religious instruction are the primary burdens of its pages" (Moffatt). {Written} (\gegrammena\). Perfect passive participle of \graph\. {For the time is at hand} (\ho gar kairos eggus\). Reason for listening and keeping. On \kairos\ see strkjv@Matthew:12:1|, time of crisis as in strkjv@1Corinthians:7:29|. How near \eggus\ (at hand) is we do not know any more than we do about \en tachei\ (shortly) in strkjv@1:1|.

rwp@Revelation:19:11 @{The heaven opened} (\ton ouranon neigmenon\). Perfect passive participle (triple reduplication) of \anoig\. Accusative case after \eidon\. Songs:Ezekiel (1:1|) begins his prophecy. See also the baptism of Jesus (Matthew:3:16; strkjv@Luke:3:21|, but \schizomenous\ in strkjv@Mark:1:10|). Jesus predicted the opened heavens to Nathanael (John:1:51|). In strkjv@Revelation:4:1| a door is opened in heaven, the sanctuary is opened (11:19; strkjv@15:5|), angels come out of heaven (10:1; strkjv@14:17; strkjv@18:1|), and sounds come from heaven (19:1|). {Behold, a white horse} (\idou hippos leukos\). Nominative case because of \idou\, not \eidon\. Cf. strkjv@6:2| for \hippos leukos\. The emblem of victory in both cases, but the riders are very different. Here it is the Messiah who is the Warrior, as is made plain by "Faithful and True" (\pistos kai althinos\), epithets already applied to Christ (1:5; strkjv@3:7,14|). Cf. also strkjv@22:6|. {In righteousness he doth judge and make war} (\en dikaiosuni krinei kai polemei\). See strkjv@Isaiah:11:3ff|. The Messiah is both Judge and Warrior, but he does both in righteousness (15:3; strkjv@16:5,7; strkjv@19:2|). He passes judgment on the beast (antichrist) and makes war on him. Satan had offered Christ a victory of compromise which was rejected.

rwp@Romans:15:33 @{The God of peace} (\ho theos ts eirns\). One of the characteristics of God that Paul often mentions in benedictions (1Thessalonians:5:23; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:16; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11; strkjv@Phillipians:4:9; strkjv@Romans:16:20|). Because of the "amen" here some scholars would make this the close of the Epistle and make chapter 16 a separate Epistle to the Ephesians. But the MSS. are against it. There is nothing strange at all in Paul's having so many friends in Rome though he had not yet been there himself. Rome was the centre of the world's life as Paul realized (1:15|). All men sooner or later hoped to see Rome.