NT.filter - rwp employed:

rwp@1Corinthians:3:12 @{Gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble} (\chrusion, argurion, lithous timious, xula, chorton, kalamn\). The durable materials are three (gold, silver, marble or precious stones), perishable materials (pieces of wood, hay, stubble), "of a palace on the one hand, of a mud hut on the other" (Lightfoot). Gold was freely used by the ancients in their palaces. Their marble and granite pillars are still the wonder and despair of modern men. The wooden huts had hay (\chortos\, grass, as in strkjv@Mark:6:39|) and stubble (\kalam\, old word for stubble after the grain is cut, here alone in the N.T., though in LXX as strkjv@Exodus:5:12|) which were employed to hold the wood pieces together and to thatch the roof. It is not made clear whether Paul's metaphor refers to the persons as in God's building in verse 9| or to the character of the teaching as in verse 13|. Probably both ideas are involved, for look at the penalty on shoddy work (verse 15|) and shoddy men (verse 17|). The teaching may not always be vicious and harmful. It may only be indifferent and worthless. A co-worker with God in this great temple should put in his very best effort.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:13 @{The day} (\h hmera\). The day of judgment as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:4| (which see), strkjv@Romans:13:12; strkjv@Hebrews:10:25|. The work (\ergon\) of each will be made manifest. There is no escape from this final testing. {It is revealed in fire} (\en puri apokaluptetai\). Apparently "the day" is the subject of the verb, not the work, not the Lord. See strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:8; strkjv@2:8|. This metaphor of fire was employed in the O.T. (Daniel:7:9f.; strkjv@Malachi:4:1|) and by John the Baptist (Matthew:3:12; strkjv@Luke:3:16f.|). It is a metaphor that must not be understood as purgatorial, but simple testing (Ellicott) as every fire tests ({the fire itself will test}, \to pur auto dokimasei\) the quality of the material used in the building, {of what sort it is} (\hopoion estin\), qualitative relative pronoun. Men today find, alas, that some of the fireproof buildings are not fireproof when the fire actually comes.

rwp@1Peter:2:5 @{Ye also as living stones} (\kai autoi hs lithoi zntes\). Peter applies the metaphor about Christ as the living stone to the readers, "ye yourselves also." {Are built up a spiritual house} (\oikodomeisthe oikos pneumatikos\). Present passive indicative second person plural of \oikodome\, the very verb used by Jesus to Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| (\oikodoms\) of building his church on the rock. If the metaphor of a house of living stones seems "violent" (Vincent), it should be remembered that Jesus employed the figure of a house of believers. Peter just carried it a bit farther and Paul uses a temple for believers in one place (1Corinthians:3:16|) and for the kingdom of God in general (Ephesians:2:22|), as does the author of Hebrews (Hebrews:3:6|). This "spiritual house" includes believers in the five Roman provinces of strkjv@1:1| and shows clearly how Peter understood the metaphor of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| to be not a local church, but the church general (the kingdom of Christ). {To be a holy priesthood} (\eis hierateuma hagion\). Late word (from \hierateu\, to serve as priest, strkjv@Luke:1:8| alone in N.T.), in LXX (Exodus:19:6|), in N.T. only here and verse 9|, either the office of priest (Hort) or an order or body of priests. At any rate, Peter has the same idea of Rev strkjv@1:6| (\hiereis\, priests) that all believers are priests (Hebrews:4:16|) and can approach God directly. {To offer up} (\anenegkai\). First aorist active infinitive (of purpose here) of \anapher\, the usual word for offering sacrifices (Hebrews:7:27|). Only these are "spiritual" (\pneumatikas\) as pictured also in strkjv@Hebrews:13:15f|. {Acceptable} (\euprosdektous\). Late (Plutarch) double compound verbal adjective (\eu, pros, dechomai\) as in strkjv@2Corinthians:6:2|.

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 (\epichorge\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:10,19, \bebaios\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:12,13,15|, \prophteia\ 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 iditai\). II Peter and the Apocalypse illustrate this statement. II Peter may have more of Peter's real style than I Peter.

rwp@2Peter:3:10 @{The day of the Lord} (\hmera kuriou\). Songs:Peter in strkjv@Acts:2:20| (from strkjv@Joel:3:4|) and Paul in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:2,4; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:5:5|; and day of Christ in strkjv@Phillipians:2:16| and day of God in strkjv@2:12| and day of judgment already in strkjv@2:9; strkjv@3:7|. This great day will certainly come (\hxei\). Future active of \hk\, old verb, to arrive, but in God's own time. {As a thief} (\hs klepts\). That is suddenly, without notice. This very metaphor Jesus had used (Luke:12:39; strkjv@Matthew:24:43|) and Paul after him (1Thessalonians:5:2|) and John will quote it also (Revelation:3:3; strkjv@16:15|). {In the which} (\en hi\). The day when the Lord comes. {Shall pass away} (\pareleusontai\). Future middle of \parerchomai\, old verb, to pass by. {With a great noise} (\roizdon\). Late and rare adverb (from \roize, roizos\)-- Lycophron, Nicander, here only in N.T., onomatopoetic, whizzing sound of rapid motion through the air like the flight of a bird, thunder, fierce flame. {The elements} (\ta stoicheia\). Old word (from \stoichos\ a row), in Plato in this sense, in other senses also in N.T. as the alphabet, ceremonial regulations (Hebrews:5:12; strkjv@Galatians:4:3; strkjv@5:1; strkjv@Colossians:2:8|). {Shall be dissolved} (\luthsetai\). Future passive of \lu\, to loosen, singular because \stoicheia\ is neuter plural. {With fervent heat} (\kausoumena\). Present passive participle of \kauso\, late verb (from \kausos\, usually medical term for fever) and nearly always employed for fever temperature. Mayor suggests a conflagration from internal heat. Bigg thinks it merely a vernacular (Doric) future for \kausomena\ (from \kai\, to burn). {Shall be burned up} (\katakasetai\). Repeated in verse 12|. Second future passive of the compound verb \katakai\, to burn down (up), according to A L. But Aleph B K P read \heurethsetai\ (future passive of \heurisk\, to find) "shall be found." There are various other readings here. The text seems corrupt.

rwp@2Thessalonians:1:12 @{That} (\hops\). Rare with Paul compared with \hina\ (1Corinthians:1:29; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:14|). Perhaps here for variety (dependent on \hina\ clause in verse 11|). {The name} (\to onoma\). The Old Testament (LXX) uses \onoma\ embodying the revealed character of Jehovah. Songs:here the {Name} of our Lord Jesus means the Messiahship and Lordship of Jesus. The common Greek idiom of \onoma\ for title or dignity as in the papyri (Milligan) is not quite this idiom. The papyri also give examples of \onoma\ for person as in O.T. and strkjv@Acts:1:15| (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 196ff.). {In you, and ye in him} (\en humin, kai humeis en auti\). This reciprocal glorying is Pauline, but it is also like Christ's figure of the vine and the branches in strkjv@John:15:1-11|. {According to the grace} (\kata tn charin\). Not merely standard, but also aim (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 609). {Of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ} (\tou theou hmn kai kuriou Isou Christou\). Here strict syntax requires, since there is only one article with \theou\ and \kuriou\ that one person be meant, Jesus Christ, as is certainly true in strkjv@Titus:2:13; strkjv@2Peter:1:1| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p.786). This otherwise conclusive syntactical argument, admitted by Schmiedel, is weakened a bit by the fact that \Kurios\ is often employed as a proper name without the article, a thing not true of \str\ in strkjv@Titus:2:13; strkjv@2Peter:1:1|. Songs:in strkjv@Ephesians:5:5| \en ti basileii tou Christou kai theou\ the natural meaning is {in the Kingdom of Christ and God} regarded as one, but here again \theos\, like \Kurios\, often occurs as a proper name without the article. Songs:it has to be admitted that here Paul may mean "according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ," though he may also mean "according to the grace of our God and Lord, Jesus Christ."

rwp@Info_Acts @ SOURCES OF THE ACTS Beyond a doubt Luke employed a variety of sources for this great history as he did for the Gospel (Luke:1:1-4|). In fact, Cadbury argues that this Prologue was meant to apply to the Acts also as Volume II whether he intended to write a third volume or not. Certainly we are entitled to say that Luke used the same historical method for Acts. Some of these sources are easy to see. Luke had his own personal experience for the "we" sections. Then he had the benefit of Paul's own notes or suggestions for all that portion where Paul figures from chapters 8 to 28, since Luke was apparently with Paul in Rome when he finished the Book. This would include Paul's sermons and addresses which Luke gives unless one wishes to say, as some do, that Luke followed the style of Thucydides and composed the kind of addresses that he thought Paul would make. I see no evidence of that for each address differs from the others and suits precisely the occasion when it was delivered. The ancients frequently employed shorthand and Paul may have preserved notes of his addresses. Prof. C. C. Torrey, of Yale University, argues in his _Composition and Date of Acts_ (1916) that Luke used an Aramaic document for the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. There is an Aramaic element in certain portions of these chapters, but nothing like so pronounced as in Luke 1 and 2 after strkjv@Luke:1:1-4|. It cannot be said that Torrey has made out his case for such a single document. Luke may have had several such documents besides access to others familiar with the early days of the work in Jerusalem. There was Simon Peter whom Paul visited for two weeks in Jerusalem (Galatians:1:18|) besides other points of contact with him in Jerusalem and Antioch (Acts:15| and strkjv@Galatians:2|). There was also Barnabas who was early Paul's friend (Acts:9:27|) and who knew the beginnings as few did (Acts:4:36f.|). Besides many others it is to be observed that Paul with Luke made a special visit to Caesarea where he spent a week with the gifted Philip and his daughters with the gift of prophecy (Acts:21:8f.|). But with all the inevitable variety of sources for the information needed to cover the wide field of the Book of Acts the same mind has manifestly worked through it and it is the same style all through that appears in the "we" sections where the writer is confessedly a companion of Paul. No other companion of Paul carries this claim for the authorship and no other was a physician and no author has the external evidence from early writers.

rwp@Acts:6:4 @{But we} (\hemeis de\). In contrast to the work given the seven. {The ministry of the word} (\ti diakonii tou logou\). The same word \diakonii\ employed in verse 1|, but here about preaching as the special ministry with which the apostles were concerned. For "continue steadfastly" (\proskartersomen\) see on ¯2:42|.

rwp@Acts:7:22 @{Was instructed} (\epaideuth\). First aorist passive indicative of \paideu\, to train a child (\pais\), the usual idea in ancient Greek as here. The notion of chastisement (Hebrews:12:6|) is also in the old Greek and especially in the LXX and the N.T. Here with instrumental case (\pasi sophii\) or the locative. The accusative would usually be retained after this verb. The priestly caste in Egypt was noted for their knowledge of science, astronomy, medicine, and mathematics. This reputation was proverbial (1Kings:4:30|). Modern discoveries have thrown much light on the ancient civilization of Egypt. Moses, like Paul, was a man of the schools. {Mighty in his words and works} (\dunatos en logois kai ergois autou\). The same phrase used of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:24:19|. The adjective \dunatos\ is employed of Apollos as an interpreter of the Scriptures (Acts:18:24|). Moses did not have the rhetorical skill or eloquence of Aaron (Exodus:4:10|), but his words like his deeds carried weight and power.

rwp@Acts:8:27 @{A eunuch of great authority} (\eunouchos dunasts\). Eunuchs were often employed by oriental rulers in high posts. _Dynasty_ comes from this old word \dunasts\ used of princes in strkjv@Luke:1:52| and of God in strkjv@1Timothy:6:15|. Eunuchs were not allowed to be Jews in the full sense (Deuteronomy:23:1|), but only proselytes of the gate. But Christianity is spreading to Samaritans and to eunuchs. {Candace} (\Kandaks\). Not a personal name, but like Pharaoh and Ptolemy, the title of the queens of Ethiopia. This eunuch apparently brought the gospel to Ethiopia. {Treasure} (\gazs\). Persian word, common in late Greek and Latin for the royal treasure, here only in the N.T. {For to worship} (\proskunsn\). Future active participle expressing purpose, a common idiom in the ancient Greek, but rare in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1128).

rwp@Acts:9:29 @{Preaching boldly} (\parrsiazomenos\). For a while. Evidently Saul did not extend his preaching outside of Jerusalem (Galatians:1:22|) and in the city preached mainly in the synagogues of the Hellenists (\pros tous Hellenistas\) as Stephen had done (Acts:8:9|). As a Cilician Jew he knew how to speak to the Hellenists. {Disputed} (\suneztei\). Imperfect active of \sunzte\, the very verb used in strkjv@6:9| of the disputes with Stephen in these very synagogues in one of which (Cilicia) Saul had probably joined issue with Stephen to his own discomfort. It was intolerable to these Hellenistic Jews now to hear Saul taking the place of Stephen and using the very arguments that Stephen had employed. {But they went about to kill him} (\Hoi de epecheiroun anelein auton\). Demonstrative \hoi\ with \de\ and the conative imperfect of \epicheire\, to put the hand to, to try, an old verb used in the N.T. only three times (Luke:1:1; strkjv@Acts:9:29; strkjv@19:3|). They offer to Saul the same conclusive answer that he gave to Stephen, death. Paul tells how the Lord Jesus appeared to him at this juncture in a vision in the temple (Acts:22:17-21|) with the distinct command to leave Jerusalem and how Paul protested that he was willing to meet the fate of Stephen in whose death he had a shameful part. That is to Saul's credit, but the Lord did not want Saul to be put to death yet. His crown of martyrdom will come later.

rwp@Acts:10:48 @{Commanded} (\prosetaxen\). First aorist active indicative. Peter himself abstained from baptizing on this occasion (cf. Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:14|). Evidently it was done by the six Jewish brethren. {Them to be baptized} (\autous baptisthnai\). Accusative of general reference with the first aorist passive infinitive. {In the name of Jesus Christ} (\en ti onomati Isou Christou\). The essential name in Christian baptism as in strkjv@2:38; strkjv@19:5|. But these passages give the authority for the act, not the formula that was employed (Alvah Hovey in Hackett's _Commentary_. See also chapter on the Baptismal Formula in my _The Christ of the Logia_). "Golden days" (\aurei dies\, Bengel) were these for the whole group.

rwp@Acts:13:43 @{When the synagogue broke up} (\lutheiss ts sunaggs\). Genitive absolute of first aorist passive participle of \lu\. Apparently Paul and Barnabas had gone out before the synagogue was formally dismissed. {Of the devout proselytes} (\tn sebomenn proslutn\). Of the worshipping proselytes described in verses 16,25| as "those who fear God" (cf. strkjv@16:14|) employed usually of the uncircumcised Gentiles who yet attended the synagogue worship, but the word \proslutoi\ (\pros, lutos\ verbal from \erchomai\, a new-comer) means usually those who had become circumcised (proselytes of righteousness). Yet the rabbis used it also of proselytes of the gate who had not yet become circumcised, probably the idea here. In the N.T. the word occurs only in strkjv@Matthew:23:15; strkjv@Acts:2:10; strkjv@6:5; strkjv@13:43|. Many (both Jews and proselytes) followed (\kolouthsan\, ingressive aorist active indicative of \akolouthe\) Paul and Barnabas to hear more without waiting till the next Sabbath. Songs:we are to picture Paul and Barnabas speaking (\proslalountes\, late compound, in N.T. only here and strkjv@28:20|) to eager groups. {Urged} (\epeithon\). Imperfect active of \peith\, either descriptive (were persuading) or conative (were trying to persuade). Paul had great powers of persuasion (18:4; strkjv@19:8,26; strkjv@26:28; strkjv@28:23; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:11; strkjv@Galatians:1:10|). These Jews "were beginning to understand for the first time the true meaning of their national history" (Furneaux), "the grace of God" to them.

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:15:1 @{And certain men came down from Judea} (\kai tines katelthontes apo ts Ioudaias\). Evidently the party of the circumcision in the church in Jerusalem (11:2|) had heard of the spread of the gospel among the Gentiles in Cyprus, Pamphylia, and South Galatia (Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycaonia). Possibly John Mark after his desertion at Perga (13:13|) told of this as one of his reasons for coming home. At any rate echoes of the jubilation in Antioch in Syria would be certain to reach Jerusalem. The Judaizers in Jerusalem, who insisted that all the Gentile Christians must become Jews also, had acquiesced in the case of Cornelius and his group (11:1-18|) after plain proof by Peter that it was the Lord's doing. But they had not agreed to a formal campaign to turn the exception into the rule and to make Christianity mainly Gentile with a few Jews instead of mainly Jewish with a few Gentiles. Since Paul and Barnabas did not come up to Jerusalem, the leaders among the Judaizers decided to go down to Antioch and attack Paul and Barnabas there. They had volunteered to go without church action in Jerusalem for their activity is disclaimed by the conference (Acts:15:24|). In strkjv@Galatians:2:4| Paul with some heat describes these Judaizers as "false brethren, secretly introduced who sneaked in to spy out our liberty." It is reasonably certain that this visit to Jerusalem described in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| is the same one as the Jerusalem Conference in Acts strkjv@15:5-29| in spite of the effort of Ramsay to identify it with that in strkjv@11:29f|. Paul in Galatians is not giving a list of his visits to Jerusalem. He is showing his independence of the twelve apostles and his equality with them. He did not see them in strkjv@11:29f.|, but only "the elders." In strkjv@Acts:15| Luke gives the outward narrative of events, in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| Paul shows us the private interview with the apostles when they agreed on their line of conduct toward the Judaizers. In strkjv@Galatians:2:2| by the use of "them" (\autois\) Paul seems to refer to the first public meeting in Acts before the private interview that came in between verses strkjv@15:5-6|. If we recall the difficulty that Peter had on the subject of preaching the gospel to the heathen (10:1-11:18|), we can the better understand the attitude of the Judaizers. They were men of sincere convictions without a doubt, but they were obscurantists and unable and unwilling to receive new light from the Lord on a matter that involved their racial and social prejudices. They recalled that Jesus himself had been circumcised and that he had said to the Syro-Phoenician woman that he had come only save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew:15:24ff.|). They argued that Christ had not repealed circumcision. Songs:one of the great religious controversies of all time was begun, that between spiritual religion and ritualistic or ceremonial religion. It is with us yet with baptism taking the place of circumcision. These self-appointed champions of circumcision for Gentile Christians were deeply in earnest. {Taught the brethren} (\edidaskon tous adelphous\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to teach and kept it up. Their attitude was one of supercilious superiority. They probably resented the conduct of Barnabas, who, when sent by the Church in Jerusalem to investigate the conversion of the Greeks in Antioch (11:20-26|), did not return and report till a strong church had been established there with the help of Saul and only then with a big collection to confuse the issue. Paul and Barnabas were on hand, but the Judaizers persisted in their efforts to force their views on the church in Antioch. It was a crisis. {Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved} (\ean me peritmthte ti ethei Muses, ou dunasthe sthnai\). There was the dictum of the Judaizers to the Gentiles. Paul and Barnabas had been circumcised. This is probably the precise language employed, for they spoke in Greek to these Greeks. It is a condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of being determined, \ean\ plus the first aorist passive subjunctive of \peritemn\). There was thus hope held out for them, but only on condition that they be circumcised. The issue was sharply drawn. The associative instrumental case (\ti ethei\) is customary. "Saved" (\sthnai\) here is the Messianic salvation. This doctrine denied the efficacy of the work of Christ.

rwp@Acts:17:30 @{The times of ignorance} (\tous chronous ts agnoias\). The times before full knowledge of God came in Jesus Christ. Paul uses the very word for their ignorance (\agnoountes\) employed in verse 23|. {Overlooked} (\huperidn\). Second aorist active participle of \huperora\ or \hupereid\, old verb to see beyond, not to see, to overlook, not "to wink at" of the Authorized Version with the notion of condoning. Here only in the N.T. It occurs in the LXX in the sense of overlooking or neglecting (Psalms:18:62; strkjv@55:1|). But it has here only a negative force. God has all the time objected to the polytheism of the heathen, and now he has made it plain. In Wisdom strkjv@11:23 we have these words: "Thou overlookest the sins of men to the end they may repent." {But now} (\ta nun\). Accusative of general reference, "as to the now things or situation." All is changed now that Christ has come with the full knowledge of God. See also strkjv@27:22|. {All everywhere} (\pantas pantachou\). No exceptions anywhere. {Repent} (\metanoein\). Present active infinitive of \metanoe\ in indirect command, a permanent command of perpetual force. See on \metanoe\ ¯Acts:2:38| and the Synoptic Gospels. This word was the message of the Baptist, of Jesus, of Peter, of Paul, this radical change of attitude and life.

rwp@Acts:18:15 @{Questions} (\ztmata\). Plural, contemptuous, "a parcel of questions" (Knowling). {About words} (\peri logou\). Word, singular, talk, not deed or fact (\ergon, factum\). {And names} (\kai onomatn\). As to whether "Jesus" should also be called "Christ" or "Messiah." The Jews, Gallio knew, split hairs over words and names. {And your own law} (\kai nomou tou kath' hums\) Literally, "And law that according to you." Gallio had not been caught in the trap set for him. What they had said concerned Jewish law, not Roman law at all. {Look to it yourselves} (\opsesthe autoi\). The volitive future middle indicative of \hora\ often used (cf. strkjv@Matthew:27:4|) where an imperative could be employed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 874). The use of \autoi\ (yourselves) turns it all over to them. {I am not minded} (\ou boulomai\). I am not willing, I do not wish. An absolute refusal to allow a religious question to be brought before a Roman civil court. This decision of Gallio does not establish Christianity in preference to Judaism. It simply means that the case was plainly that Christianity was a form of Judaism and as such was not opposed to Roman law. This decision opened the door for Paul's preaching all over the Roman Empire. Later Paul himself argues (Romans:9-11|) that in fact Christianity is the true, the spiritual Judaism.

rwp@Acts:20:32 @{And now} (\kai ta nun\). Same phrase as in verses 22,25| save that \idou\ (behold) is wanting and the article \ta\ occurs before \nun\, accusative of general reference. And as to the present things (or situation) as in strkjv@4:29|. {I commend} (\paratithemai\). Present middle indicative of \paratithmi\, old verb to place beside, middle, to deposit with one, to interest as in strkjv@1Timothy:1:18; strkjv@2Timothy:2:2|. Paul can now only do this, but he does it hopefully. Cf. strkjv@1Peter:4:19|. {The word of his grace} (\ti logi ts charitos autou\). The instrumentality through preaching and the Holy Spirit employed by God. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:4:6; strkjv@Ephesians:4:29|. {Which is able to build up} (\ti dunameni oikodomsai\). God works through the word of his grace and so it is able to build up (edify); a favourite Pauline word (1Corinthians:3:10-14; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1; strkjv@Ephesians:2:20-22; strkjv@2Timothy:3:15|; etc.), and strkjv@James:1:21|. The very words "build" and "inheritance among the sanctified" will occur in strkjv@Ephesians:1:11; strkjv@2:30; strkjv@3:18| and which some may recall on reading. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:1:12|. Stephen in strkjv@Acts:7:5| used the word "inheritance" (\klronomian\), nowhere else in Acts, but in strkjv@Ephesians:1:14,18; strkjv@5:5|. In strkjv@Ephesians:1:18| the very expression occurs "his inheritance among the saints " (\tn klronomian autou en tois hagiois\).

rwp@Acts:21:11 @{Coming} (\elthn\, second aorist active participle of \erchomai\), taking (\aras\, first aorist active participle of \air\, to take up), {binding} (\dsas\, first aorist active participle of \de\, to bind). Vivid use of three successive participles describing the dramatic action of Agabus. {Paul's girdle} (\tn znn tou Paulou\). Old word from \znnumi\, to gird. See on ¯12:8|. {His own feet and hands} (\heautou tous podas kai tas cheiras\). Basis for the interpretation. Old Testament prophets often employed symbolic deeds (1Kings:22:11; strkjv@James:2:2; strkjv@Jeremiah:13:1-7; strkjv@Ezekiel:4:1-6|). Jesus interpreted the symbolism of Peter's girding himself (John:21:18|). {So} (\houts\). As Agabus had bound himself. Agabus was just from Jerusalem and probably knew the feeling there against Paul. At any rate the Holy Spirit revealed it to him as he claims. {Shall deliver} (\paradsousin\). Like the words of Jesus about himself (Matthew:20:19|). He was "delivered" into the hands of the Gentiles and it took five years to get out of those hands.

rwp@Acts:23:12 @{Banded together} (\poisantes sustrophn\). See on strkjv@19:40| (riot), but here conspiracy, secret combination, binding together like twisted cords. {Bound themselves under a curse} (\anethematisan heautous\). First aorist active indicative of \anathematiz\, a late word, said by Cremer and Thayer to be wholly Biblical or ecclesiastical. But Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 95) quotes several examples of the verb in an Attic cursing tablet from Megara of the first or second century A.D. This proof shows that the word, as well as \anathema\ (substantive) from which the verb is derived, was employed by pagans as well as by Jews. Deissmann suggests that Greek Jews like the seven sons of Sceva may have been the first to coin it. It occurs in the LXX as well as strkjv@Mark:14:71| (which see and Luke strkjv@21:5|); strkjv@Acts:23:12,14,21|. They placed themselves under an anathema or curse, devoted themselves to God (cf. strkjv@Leviticus:27:28f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:22|). {Drink} (\pein=piein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \pin\. For this shortened form see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 343. {Till they had killed} (\hes hou apokteinsin\). First aorist active subjunctive of \apoktein\, common verb. No reason to translate "had killed," simply "till they should kill," the aorist merely punctiliar action, the subjunctive retained instead of the optative for vividness as usual in the _Koin_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 974-6). Same construction in verse 14|. King Saul took an "anathema" that imperilled Jonathan (1Samuel:14:24|). Perhaps the forty felt that the rabbis could find some way to absolve the curse if they failed. See this verse repeated in verse 21|.

rwp@Acts:28:8 @{Lay} (\katakeisthai\). Common verb for the sick (Mark:1:30; strkjv@John:5:6|). {Sick} (\sunechomenon\). "Held together." Common verb again for the sick as in strkjv@Luke:4:38|. {Of fever} (\puretois\). Instrumental case, and plural "fevers," medical term for intermittent attacks of fever (Demosthenes, Lucian, medical writers). {Dysentery} (\dusenterii\). Instrumental case also. Late form of the older \dusenteria\ and only here in N.T. Our very word _dysentery_. Another medical term of which Luke uses so many. Hippocrates often mentions these two diseases together. {Laying his hands on him healed him} (\epitheis tas cheiras auti iasato auton\). Either like the laying on of hands in strkjv@James:5:14|, the gift of healing (1Corinthians:12:9f.|), or the tender interest of Jesus when he took hold of the hand of Peter's mother-in-law (Mark:1:31|). Ramsay argues that \iaomai\ is employed here of the miraculous healing by Paul while \therapeu\ is used of the cures by Luke the physician (verse 9|). This is a general distinction and it is probably observed here, but in strkjv@Luke:6:18| (which see) both verbs are employed of the healings by Jesus. {Came and were healed} (\prosrchonto kai etherapeuonto\). Imperfect middle and imperfect passive. A regular stream of patients came during these months. Luke had his share in the honours, "us" (\hms\), and no doubt his share in the cures. {With many honours} (\pollais timais\). Instrumental case. The word was often applied to payment for professional services as we today speak of an honorarium. {They put on board} (\epethento\). Second aorist middle indicative of \epitithmi\, to put on. The idea of "on board" is merely suggested by \anagomenois\ (when we sailed) "the things for our needs" (\ta pros tas chreias\).

rwp@Colossians:2:8 @{Take heed} (\blepete\). Present active imperative second person plural of \blep\, common verb for warning like our "look out," "beware," "see to it." {Lest there shall be any one} (\m tis estai\). Negative purpose with the future indicative, though the aorist subjunctive also occurs as in strkjv@2Corinthians:12:6|. {That maketh spoil of you} (\ho sulaggn\). Articular present active participle of \sulagge\, late and rare (found here first) verb (from \sul\, booty, and \ag\, to lead, to carry), to carry off as booty a captive, slave, maiden. Only here in N.T. Note the singular here. There was some one outstanding leader who was doing most of the damage in leading the people astray. {Through his philosophy} (\dia ts philosophias\). The only use of the word in the N.T. and employed by Paul because the Gnostics were fond of it. Old word from \philosophos\ (\philos, sophos\, one devoted to the pursuit of wisdom) and in N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:17:18|. Paul does not condemn knowledge and wisdom (see verse 2|), but only this false philosophy, "knowledge falsely named" (\pseudnumos gnsis\, strkjv@1Timothy:6:20|), and explained here by the next words. {And vain deceit} (\kai kens apats\). Old word for trick, guile, like riches (Matthew:13:22|). Descriptive of the philosophy of the Gnostics. {Tradition} (\paradosin\). Old word from \paradidmi\, a giving over, a passing on. The word is colourless in itself. The tradition may be good (2Thessalonians:2:15; strkjv@3:6|) or bad (Mark:7:3|). Here it is worthless and harmful, merely the foolish theories of the Gnostics. {Rudiments} (\stoicheia\). Old word for anything in a \stoichos\ (row, series) like the letters of the alphabet, the materials of the universe (2Peter:3:10,12|), elementary teaching (Hebrews:5:12|), elements of Jewish ceremonial training (Acts:15:10; Gal strkjv@4:3,9|), the specious arguments of the Gnostic philosophers as here with all their aeons and rules of life. {And not after Christ} (\kai ou kata Christon\). Christ is the yardstick by which to measure philosophy and all phases of human knowledge. The Gnostics were measuring Christ by their philosophy as many men are doing today. They have it backwards. Christ is the measure for all human knowledge since he is the Creator and the Sustainer of the universe.

rwp@Galatians:2:16 @{Is not justified} (\ou dikaioutai\). Present passive indicative of \dikaio\, an old causative verb from \dikaios\, righteous (from \dike\, right), to make righteous, to declare righteous. It is made like \axio\, to deem worthy, and \koino\, to consider common. It is one of the great Pauline words along with \dikaiosun\, righteousness. The two ways of getting right with God are here set forth: by faith in Christ Jesus (objective genitive), by the works of the law (by keeping all the law in the most minute fashion, the way of the Pharisees). Paul knew them both (see strkjv@Romans:7|). In his first recorded sermon the same contrast is made that we have here (Acts:13:39|) with the same word \dikaio\, employed. It is the heart of his message in all his Epistles. The terms faith (\pistis\), righteousness (\dikaiosun\), law (\nomos\), works (\erga\) occur more frequently in Galatians and Romans because Paul is dealing directly with the problem in opposition to the Judaizers who contended that Gentiles had to become Jews to be saved. The whole issue is here in an acute form. {Save} (\ean m\). Except. {Even we} (\kai hmeis\). We Jews believed, had to believe, were not saved or justified till we did believe. This very point Peter had made at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:10f.|). He quotes strkjv@Psalms:143:2|. Paul uses \dikaiosun\ in two senses (1) Justification, on the basis of what Christ has done and obtained by faith. Thus we are set right with God. strkjv@Romans:1-5|. (2) Sanctification. Actual goodness as the result of living with and for Christ. strkjv@Romans:6-8|. The same plan exists for Jew and Gentile.

rwp@Galatians:3:24 @{Our tutor unto Christ} (\paidaggos humn eis Christon\). See strkjv@1Corinthians:4:15| for the only other N.T. example of this old and common word for the slave employed in Greek and Roman families of the better class in charge of the boy from about six to sixteen. The paedagogue watched his behaviour at home and attended him when he went away from home as to school. Christ is our Schoolmaster and the law as paedagogue kept watch over us till we came to Christ. {That we might be justified by faith} (\hina ek pistes dikaithmen\). This is the ultimate purpose of the law as paedagogue. {Now that faith is come} (\elthouss ts pistes\). Genitive absolute, "the faith (the time of the faith spoken of in verse 23|) having come." {Under a tutor} (\hupo paidaggon\). The pedagogue is dismissed. We are in the school of the Master.

rwp@Galatians:6:11 @{With how large letters} (\plikois grammasin\). Paul now takes the pen from the amanuensis (cf. strkjv@Romans:16:22|) and writes the rest of the Epistle (verses 11-18|) himself instead of the mere farewell greeting (2Thessalonians:3:17; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:21; strkjv@Colossians:4:18|). But what does he mean by "with how large letters"? Certainly not "how large a letter." It has been suggested that he employed large letters because of defective eyesight or because he could only write ill-formed letters because of his poor handwriting (like the print letters of children) or because he wished to call particular attention to this closing paragraph by placarding it in big letters (Ramsay). This latter is the most likely reason. Deissmann, (_St. Paul_, p. 51) argues that artisans write clumsy letters, yes, and scholars also. Milligan (_Documents_, p. 24; _Vocabulary_, etc.) suggests the contrast seen in papyri often between the neat hand of the scribe and the big sprawling hand of the signature. {I have written} (\egrapsa\). Epistolary aorist. {With mine own hand} (\ti emi cheiri\). Instrumental case as in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:21|.

rwp@Hebrews:1:3 @{Being} (\n\). Absolute and timeless existence (present active participle of \eimi\) in contrast with \genomenos\ in verse 4| like \n\ in strkjv@John:1:1| (in contrast with \egeneto\ in strkjv@1:14|) and like \huparchn\ and \genomenos\ in strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f|. {The effulgence of his glory} (\apaugasma ts doxs\). The word \apaugasma\, late substantive from \apaugaz\, to emit brightness (\aug, augaz\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4|), here only in the N.T., but in Wisdom strkjv@7:26 and in Philo. It can mean either reflected brightness, refulgence (Calvin, Thayer) or effulgence (ray from an original light body) as the Greek fathers hold. Both senses are true of Christ in his relation to God as Jesus shows in plain language in strkjv@John:12:45; strkjv@14:9|. "The writer is using metaphors which had already been applied to Wisdom and the Logos" (Moffatt). The meaning "effulgence" suits the context better, though it gives the idea of eternal generation of the Son (John:1:1|), the term Father applied to God necessarily involving Son. See this same metaphor in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:6|. {The very image of his substance} (\charaktr ts hupostases\). \Charaktr\ is an old word from \charass\, to cut, to scratch, to mark. It first was the agent (note ending \=tr\) or tool that did the marking, then the mark or impress made, the exact reproduction, a meaning clearly expressed by \charagma\ (Acts:17:29; strkjv@Revelation:13:16f.|). Menander had already used (Moffatt) \charaktr\ in the sense of our "character." The word occurs in the inscriptions for "person" as well as for "exact reproduction" of a person. The word \hupostasis\ for the being or essence of God "is a philosophical rather than a religious term" (Moffatt). Etymologically it is the sediment or foundation under a building (for instance). In strkjv@11:1| \hypostasis\ is like the "title-deed" idea found in the papyri. Athanasius rightly used strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4| in his controversy with Arius. Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11| pictures the real and eternal deity of Christ free from the philosophical language here employed. But even Paul's simpler phrase \morph theou\ (the form of God) has difficulties of its own. The use of \Logos\ in strkjv@John:1:1-18| is parallel to strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4|. {And upholding} (\phern te\). Present active participle of \pher\ closely connected with \n\ (being) by \te\ and like strkjv@Colossians:1:17| in idea. The newer science as expounded by Eddington and Jeans is in harmony with the spiritual and personal conception of creation here presented. {By the word of his power} (\ti rmati ts dunames autou\). Instrumental case of \rma\ (word). See strkjv@11:3| for \rmati theou\ (by the word of God) as the explanation of creation like Genesis, but here \autou\ refers to God's Son as in strkjv@1:2|. {Purification of sins} (\katharismon tn hamartin\). \Katharismos\ is from \kathariz\, to cleanse (Matthew:8:3; strkjv@Hebrews:9:14|), here only in Hebrews, but in same sense of cleansing from sins, strkjv@2Peter:1:9; strkjv@Job:7:21|. Note middle participle \poisamenos\ like \heuramenos\ in strkjv@9:12|. This is the first mention of the priestly work of Christ, the keynote of this Epistle. {Sat down} (\ekathisen\). First aorist active of \kathiz\, "took his seat," a formal and dignified act. {Of the Majesty on high} (\ts megalosuns en hupslois\). Late word from \megas\, only in LXX (Deuteronomy:32:3; strkjv@2Samuel:7:23|, etc.), Aristeas, strkjv@Hebrews:1:3; strkjv@8:1; strkjv@Jude:1:25|. Christ resumed his original dignity and glory (John:17:5|). The phrase \en hupslois\ occurs in the Psalms (Psalms:93:4|), here only in N.T., elsewhere \en hupsistois\ in the highest (Matthew:21:9; strkjv@Luke:2:14|) or \en tois epouraniois\ in the heavenlies (Ephesians:1:3,20|). Jesus is here pictured as King (Prophet and Priest also) Messiah seated at the right hand of God.

rwp@Hebrews:13:12 @{Wherefore Jesus also} (\dio kai Isous\). The parallel is drawn between the O.T. ritual and the better sacrifice of Jesus already discussed (9:13-10:18|). The purpose of Jesus is shown (\hina hagiasi\, \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \hagiaz\, to sanctify), the means employed (\dia tou idiou haimatos\, by his own blood), the place of his suffering (\epathen\, as in strkjv@5:8|) is also given (\ex ts puls\, outside the gate, implied in strkjv@John:19:17|) which phrase corresponds to "outside the camp" of verse 11|.

rwp@John:4:42 @{Not because of thy speaking} (\ouketi dia tn sn lalian\). "No longer because of thy talk," good and effective as that was. \Lalia\ (cf. \lale\) is talk, talkativeness, mode of speech, one's vernacular, used by Jesus of his own speech (John:8:43|). {We have heard} (\akkoamen\). Perfect active indicative of \akou\, their abiding experience. {For ourselves} (\autoi\). Just "ourselves." {The Saviour of the world} (\ho str tou kosmou\). See strkjv@Matthew:1:21| for ssei used of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term \str\ to Jesus again in strkjv@1John:4:14|. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (verse 22|). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (verse 26|) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: "At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah." But why "merely"? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their "Saviour," Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on strkjv@John:4:42|: "That in the first century Messiah was given the title str is not proven." The use of "saviour and god" for Ptolemy in the third century B.C. is well known. "The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East" (Deissmann, _Light_, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke:2:11; strkjv@John:4:42; strkjv@Acts:5:31; strkjv@3:23; strkjv@Phillipians:3:20; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23; strkjv@Titus:1:4; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@3:6; strkjv@2Timothy:1:10; strkjv@2Peter:1:1,11; strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:2,18|). All these are writings of the first century A.D. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world.

rwp@John:7:48 @{Hath any of the rulers believed on him?} (\M tis ek tn archontn episteusen eis auton;\). Negative answer sharply expected. First aorist active indicative of \pisteu\. "Did any one of the rulers believe on him?" "What right have subordinates to have a mind of their own?" (Dods). These police were employed by the temple authorities (rulers). "Power was slipping through their fingers" (Dods) and that was the secret of their hostility to Jesus. {Or of the Pharisees} (\ ek tn Pharisain\). A wider circle and the most orthodox of all.

rwp@Luke:5:1 @{Pressed upon him} (\epikeisthai\). Luke in this paragraph (5:1-11; strkjv@Mark:1:16-20; strkjv@Matthew:4:18-22|) does not follow the chronology of Mark as he usually does. It seems reasonably clear that the renewed call of the four fishermen came before the first tour of Galilee in strkjv@Luke:4:42-44|. It is here assumed that Luke is describing in his own way the incident given in Mark and Matthew above. Luke singles out Simon in a graphic way. This verb \epikeisthai\ is an old one and means to \lie upon\, rest upon as of a stone on the tomb (John:11:38|) or of fish on the burning coals (John:21:9|). Songs:it is used of a tempest (Acts:27:20|) and of the urgent demands for Christ's crucifixion (Luke:23:23|). Here it vividly pictures the eager crowds around Jesus. \En ti epikeisthai\ is a favourite idiom with Luke as we have already seen, \en\ with the articular infinitive in the locative case. {That} (\kai\). \Kai\ does not technically mean the declarative conjunction "that," but it is a fair rendering of the somewhat awkward idiom of Luke to a certain extent imitating the Hebrew use of _wav_. {Was standing} (\n hests\). Periphrastic second past perfect of \histmi\ which here is equal to a practical imperfect. {By the lake} (\para tn limnn\). The use of the accusative with \para\, alongside, after a verb of rest used to be called the pregnant use, came and was standing. But that is no longer necessary, for the accusative as the case of extension is the oldest of the cases and in later Greek regains many of the earlier uses of the other cases employed for more precise distinctions. See the same idiom in verse 2|. We need not here stress the notion of extension. "With characteristic accuracy Luke never calls it a sea, while the others never call it a lake" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:5:7 @{They beckoned} (\kateneusan\). Possibly they were too far away for a call to be understood. Simon alone had been ordered to put out into the deep. Songs:they used signs. {Unto their partners} (\tois metechois\). This word \metochos\, from \metech\, to have with, means participation with one in common blessings (Hebrews:3:1,14; strkjv@6:4; strkjv@12:8|). While \koinnos\ (verse 10| here of James and John also) has the notion of personal fellowship, partnership. Both terms are here employed of the two pairs of brothers who have a business company under Simon's lead. {Help them} (\sullabesthai\). Second aorist middle infinitive. Take hold together with and so to help. Paul uses it in strkjv@Phillipians:4:3|. It is an old word that was sometimes employed for seizing a prisoner (Luke:22:54|) and for conception (_con-capio_) by a woman (Luke:1:24|). {Songs:that they began to sink} (\hste buthizesthai auta\). Consecutive use of \hste\ and the infinitive (present tense, inchoative use, beginning to sink). An old verb from \buthos\. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@1Timothy:6:9|.

rwp@Luke:6:18 @{With unclean spirits} (\apo pneumatn akathartn\). In an amphibolous position for it can be construed with "troubled," (present passive participle \enochloumenoi\) or with "were healed" (imperfect passive, \etherapeuonto\). The healings were repeated as often as they came. Note here both verbs, \iaomai\ and \therapeu\, used of the miraculous cures of Jesus. \Therapeu\ is the verb more commonly employed of regular professional cures, but no such distinction is made here.

rwp@Luke:16:2 @{What is this that I hear?} (\ti touto akou;\). There are several ways of understanding this terse Greek idiom. The Revised Version (above) takes \ti\ to be equal to \ti estin touto ho akou\; That is a possible use of the predicate \touto\. Another way is to take \ti\ to be exclamatory, which is less likely. Still another view is that \ti\ is " Why": "Why do I hear this about thee?" See strkjv@Acts:14:15| where that is the idiom employed. {Render} (\apodos\). Second aorist active imperative of \apodidmi\, Give back (and at once). {The account} (\ton logon\). The reckoning or report. Common use of \logos\. {Stewardship} (\oikonomias\). Same root as \oikonomos\ (steward). This demand does not necessarily mean dismissal if investigation proved him innocent of the charges. But the reason given implies that he is to be dismissed: {Thou canst no longer} (\ou gar duni\).

rwp@Mark:1:12 @{Driveth him forth} (\auton ekballei\). Vivid word, bolder than Matthew's "was led up" (\anchth\) and Luke's "was led" (\geto\). It is the same word employed in the driving out of demons (Mark:1:34,39|). Mark has here "straightway" where Matthew has "then" (see on verse ¯9|). The forty days in the wilderness were under the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit. The entire earthly life of Jesus was bound up with the Holy Spirit from his birth to his death and resurrection.

rwp@Mark:6:13 @{They cast out many demons and they anointed with oil} (\exeballon kai leiphon elaii\). Imperfect tenses, continued repetition. Alone in Mark. This is the only example in the N.T. of \aleiph elaii\ used in connection with healing save in strkjv@James:5:14|. In both cases it is possible that the use of oil (olive oil) as a medicine is the basis of the practice. See strkjv@Luke:10:34| for pouring oil and wine upon the wounds. It was the best medicine of the ancients and was used internally and externally. It was employed often after bathing. The papyri give a number of examples of it. The only problem is whether \aleiph\ in Mark and James is used wholly in a ritualistic and ceremonial sense or partly as medicine and partly as a symbol of divine healing. The very word \aleiph\ can be translated rub or anoint without any ceremony. "Traces of a ritual use of the unction of the sick appear first among Gnostic practices of the second century" (Swete). We have today, as in the first century, God and medicine. God through nature does the real healing when we use medicine and the doctor.

rwp@Matthew:5:3 @{Blessed} (\makarioi\). The English word "blessed" is more exactly represented by the Greek verbal \eulogtoi\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:68| of God by Zacharias, or the perfect passive participle \eulogmenos\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:42| of Mary by Elizabeth and in strkjv@Matthew:21:9|. Both forms come from \euloge\, to speak well of (\eu, logos\). The Greek word here (\makarioi\) is an adjective that means "happy" which in English etymology goes back to hap, chance, good-luck as seen in our words haply, hapless, happily, happiness. "Blessedness is, of course, an infinitely higher and better thing than mere happiness" (Weymouth). English has thus ennobled "blessed" to a higher rank than "happy." But "happy" is what Jesus said and the _Braid Scots New Testament_ dares to say "Happy" each time here as does the _Improved Edition of the American Bible Union Version_. The Greek word is as old as Homer and Pindar and was used of the Greek gods and also of men, but largely of outward prosperity. Then it is applied to the dead who died in the Lord as in strkjv@Revelation:14:13|. Already in the Old Testament the Septuagint uses it of moral quality. "Shaking itself loose from all thoughts of outward good, it becomes the express symbol of a happiness identified with pure character. Behind it lies the clear cognition of sin as the fountain-head of all misery, and of holiness as the final and effectual cure for every woe. For knowledge as the basis of virtue, and therefore of happiness, it substitutes faith and love" (Vincent). Jesus takes this word "happy" and puts it in this rich environment. "This is one of the words which have been transformed and ennobled by New Testament use; by association, as in the Beatitudes, with unusual conditions, accounted by the world miserable, or with rare and difficult" (Bruce). It is a pity that we have not kept the word "happy" to the high and holy plane where Jesus placed it. "If you know these things, happy (\makarioi\) are you if you do them" (John:13:17|). "Happy (\makarioi\) are those who have not seen and yet have believed" (John:20:29|). And Paul applies this adjective to God, "according to the gospel of the glory of the happy (\makariou\) God" (1Timothy:1:11|. Cf. also strkjv@Titus:2:13|). The term "Beatitudes" (Latin _beatus_) comes close to the meaning of Christ here by \makarioi\. It will repay one to make a careful study of all the "beatitudes" in the New Testament where this word is employed. It occurs nine times here (3-11|), though the beatitudes in verses 10 and 11 are very much alike. The copula is not expressed in either of these nine beatitudes. In each case a reason is given for the beatitude, "for" (\hoti\), that shows the spiritual quality involved. Some of the phrases employed by Jesus here occur in the Psalms, some even in the Talmud (itself later than the New Testament, though of separate origin). That is of small moment. "The originality of Jesus lies in putting the due value on these thoughts, collecting them, and making them as prominent as the Ten Commandments. No greater service can be rendered to mankind than to rescue from obscurity neglected moral commonplaces " (Bruce). Jesus repeated his sayings many times as all great teachers and preachers do, but this sermon has unity, progress, and consummation. It does not contain all that Jesus taught by any means, but it stands out as the greatest single sermon of all time, in its penetration, pungency, and power. {The poor in spirit} (\hoi ptchoi ti pneumati\). Luke has only "the poor," but he means the same by it as this form in Matthew, "the pious in Israel, for the most part poor, whom the worldly rich despised and persecuted" (McNeile). The word used here (\ptchoi\) is applied to the beggar Lazarus in strkjv@Luke:16:20,22| and suggests spiritual destitution (from \ptss\ to crouch, to cower). The other word \pens\ is from \penomai\, to work for one's daily bread and so means one who works for his living. The word \ptchos\ is more frequent in the New Testament and implies deeper poverty than \pens\. "The kingdom of heaven" here means the reign of God in the heart and life. This is the _summum bonum_ and is what matters most.

rwp@Matthew:6:25 @Vincent quotes Bacon (Henry VII): "Harris, an alderman of London, was put in trouble and died with thought and anguish." But words change with time and now this passage is actually quoted (Lightfoot) "as an objection to the moral teaching of the Sermon on the Mount, on the ground that it encouraged, nay, commanded, a reckless neglect of the future." We have narrowed the word to mere planning without any notion of anxiety which is in the Greek word. The verb \merimna\ is from \meris, meriz\, because care or anxiety distracts and divides. It occurs in Christ's rebuke to Martha for her excessive solicitude about something to eat (Luke:10:41|). The notion of proper care and forethought appears in strkjv@1Corinthians:7:32; strkjv@12:25; strkjv@Phillipians:2:20|. It is here the present imperative with the negative, a command not to have the habit of petulant worry about food and clothing, a source of anxiety to many housewives, a word for women especially as the command not to worship mammon may be called a word for men. The command can mean that they must stop such worry if already indulging in it. In verse 31| Jesus repeats the prohibition with the ingressive aorist subjunctive: "Do not become anxious," "Do not grow anxious." Here the direct question with the deliberative subjunctive occurs with each verb (\phagmen, pimen, peribalmetha\). This deliberative subjunctive of the direct question is retained in the indirect question employed in verse 25|. A different verb for clothing occurs, both in the indirect middle (\peribalmetha\, fling round ourselves in 31|, \endussthe\, put on yourselves in 25|).

rwp@Matthew:8:29 @{Thou Son of God} (\huie tou theou\). The recognition of Jesus by the demons is surprising. The whole subject of demonology is difficult. Some hold that it is merely the ancient way of describing disease. But that does not explain the situation here. Jesus is represented as treating the demons as real existences separate from the human personality. Missionaries in China today claim that they have seen demons cast out. The devil knew Jesus clearly and it is not strange that Jesus was recognized by the devil's agents. They know that there is nothing in common between them and the Son of God (\hmin kai soi\, ethical dative) and they fear torment "before the time" (\pro kairou\). Usually \ta daimonia\ is the word in the New Testament for demons, but in strkjv@8:31| we have \hoi daimones\ (the only example in the N.T.). \Daimonion\ is a diminutive of \daimn\. In Homer \daimn\ is used synonymously with \theos\ and \thea\. Hesiod employed \daimn\ of men of the golden age as tutelary deities. Homer has the adjective \daimonios\ usually in an evil sense. Empedocles considered the demons both bad and good. They were thus used to relieve the gods and goddesses of much rascality. Grote (_History of Greece_) notes that the Christians were thus by pagan usage justified in calling idolatry the worship of demons. See strkjv@1Corinthians:10:20f.; strkjv@1Timothy:4:1; strkjv@Revelation:9:20; strkjv@16:13f|. In the Gospels demons are the same as unclean spirits (Mark:5:12,15; strkjv@3:22,30; strkjv@Luke:4:33|). The demons are disturbers (Vincent) of the whole life of man (Mark:5:2f.; strkjv@7:25; strkjv@Matthew:12:45; strkjv@Luke:13:11,16|).

rwp@Matthew:13:3 @{Many things in parables} (\polla en parabolais\). It was not the first time that Jesus had used parables, but the first time that he had spoken so many and some of such length. He will use a great many in the future as in Luke 12 to 18 and Matt. 24 and 25. The parables already mentioned in Matthew include the salt and the light (5:13-16|), the birds and the lilies (6:26-30|), the splinter and the beam in the eye (7:3-5|), the two gates (7:13f.|), the wolves in sheep's clothing (7:15|), the good and bad trees (7:17-19|), the wise and foolish builders (7:24-27|), the garment and the wineskins (9:16f.|), the children in the market places (11:16f.|). It is not certain how many he spoke on this occasion. Matthew mentions eight in this chapter (the Sower, the Tares, the Mustard Seed, the Leaven, the Hid Treasure, the Pearl of Great Price, the Net, the Householder). Mark adds the Parable of the Lamp (Mark:4:21; strkjv@Luke:8:16|), the Parable of the Seed Growing of Itself (Mark:4:26-29|), making ten of which we know. But both Mark (Mark:4:33|) and Matthew (13:34|) imply that there were many others. "Without a parable spake he nothing unto them" (Matthew:13:34|), on this occasion, we may suppose. The word parable (\parabol\ from \paraball\, to place alongside for measurement or comparison like a yardstick) is an objective illustration for spiritual or moral truth. The word is employed in a variety of ways (a) as for sententious sayings or proverbs (Matthew:15:15; strkjv@Mark:3:23; strkjv@Luke:4:23; strkjv@5:36-39; strkjv@6:39|), for a figure or type (Heb. strkjv@9:9; strkjv@11:19|); (b) a comparison in the form of a narrative, the common use in the Synoptic Gospels like the Sower; (c) "A narrative illustration not involving a comparison" (Broadus), like the Rich Fool, the Good Samaritan, etc. "The oriental genius for picturesque speech found expression in a multitude of such utterances" (McNeile). There are parables in the Old Testament, in the Talmud, in sermons in all ages. But no one has spoken such parables as these of Jesus. They hold the mirror up to nature and, as all illustrations should do, throw light on the truth presented. The fable puts things as they are not in nature, Aesop's Fables, for instance. The parable may not be actual fact, but it could be so. It is harmony with the nature of the case. The allegory (\allgoria\) is a speaking parable that is self-explanatory all along like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_. All allegories are parables, but not all parables are allegories. The Prodigal Son is an allegory, as is the story of the Vine and Branches (John:15|). John does not use the word parable, but only \paroimia\, a saying by the way (John:10:6; strkjv@16:25,29|). As a rule the parables of Jesus illustrate one main point and the details are more or less incidental, though sometimes Jesus himself explains these. When he does not do so, we should be slow to interpret the minor details. Much heresy has come from fantastic interpretations of the parables. In the case of the Parable of the Sower (13:3-8|) we have also the careful exposition of the story by Jesus (18-23|) as well as the reason for the use of parables on this occasion by Jesus (9-17|).

rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{I will build my church} (\oikodoms mou tn ekklsian\). It is the figure of a building and he uses the word \ekklsian\ which occurs in the New Testament usually of a local organization, but sometimes in a more general sense. What is the sense here in which Jesus uses it? The word originally meant "assembly" (Acts:19:39|), but it came to be applied to an "unassembled assembly" as in strkjv@Acts:8:3| for the Christians persecuted by Saul from house to house. "And the name for the new Israel, \ekklsia\, in His mouth is not an anachronism. It is an old familiar name for the congregation of Israel found in Deut. (Deuteronomy:18:26; strkjv@23:2|) and Psalms (Psalms:22:36|), both books well known to Jesus" (Bruce). It is interesting to observe that in strkjv@Psalms:89| most of the important words employed by Jesus on this occasion occur in the LXX text. Songs:\oikodoms\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:5|; \ekklsia\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:6|; \katischu\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:22|; \Christos\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:39,52|; \hids\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:49| (\ek cheiros hidou\). If one is puzzled over the use of "building" with the word \ekklsia\ it will be helpful to turn to strkjv@1Peter:2:5|. Peter, the very one to whom Jesus is here speaking, writing to the Christians in the five Roman provinces in Asia (1Peter:1:1|), says: "You are built a spiritual house" (\oikodomeisthe oikos pneumatikos\). It is difficult to resist the impression that Peter recalls the words of Jesus to him on this memorable occasion. Further on (1Peter:2:9|) he speaks of them as an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, showing beyond controversy that Peter's use of building a spiritual house is general, not local. This is undoubtedly the picture in the mind of Christ here in strkjv@16:18|. It is a great spiritual house, Christ's Israel, not the Jewish nation, which he describes. What is the rock on which Christ will build his vast temple? Not on Peter alone or mainly or primarily. Peter by his confession was furnished with the illustration for the rock on which His church will rest. It is the same kind of faith that Peter has just confessed. The perpetuity of this church general is guaranteed.

rwp@Matthew:16:19 @{The Keys of the kingdom} (\tas kleidas ts basileias\). Here again we have the figure of a building with keys to open from the outside. The question is raised at once if Jesus does not here mean the same thing by "kingdom" that he did by "church" in verse 18|. In strkjv@Revelation:1:18; strkjv@3:7| Christ the Risen Lord has "the keys of death and of Hades." He has also "the keys of the kingdom of heaven" which he here hands over to Peter as "gatekeeper" or "steward" (\oikonomos\) provided we do not understand it as a special and peculiar prerogative belonging to Peter. The same power here given to Peter belongs to every disciple of Jesus in all the ages. Advocates of papal supremacy insist on the primacy of Peter here and the power of Peter to pass on this supposed sovereignty to others. But this is all quite beside the mark. We shall soon see the disciples actually disputing again (Matthew:18:1|) as to which of them is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven as they will again (20:21|) and even on the night before Christ's death. Clearly neither Peter nor the rest understood Jesus to say here that Peter was to have supreme authority. What is added shows that Peter held the keys precisely as every preacher and teacher does. To "bind" (\dsis\) in rabbinical language is to forbid, to "loose" (\lusis\) is to permit. Peter would be like a rabbi who passes on many points. Rabbis of the school of Hillel "loosed" many things that the school of Schammai "bound." The teaching of Jesus is the standard for Peter and for all preachers of Christ. Note the future perfect indicative (\estai dedemenon, estai lelumenon\), a state of completion. All this assumes, of course, that Peter's use of the keys will be in accord with the teaching and mind of Christ. The binding and loosing is repeated by Jesus to all the disciples (18:18|). Later after the Resurrection Christ will use this same language to all the disciples (John:20:23|), showing that it was not a special prerogative of Peter. He is simply first among equals, _primus inter pares_, because on this occasion he was spokesman for the faith of all. It is a violent leap in logic to claim power to forgive sins, to pronounce absolution, by reason of the technical rabbinical language that Jesus employed about binding and loosing. Every preacher uses the keys of the kingdom when he proclaims the terms of salvation in Christ. The proclamation of these terms when accepted by faith in Christ has the sanction and approval of God the Father. The more personal we make these great words the nearer we come to the mind of Christ. The more ecclesiastical we make them the further we drift away from him.

rwp@Matthew:16:28 @{Some of them that stand here} (\tines tn hode hesttn\). A _crux interpretum_ in reality. Does Jesus refer to the Transfiguration, the Resurrection of Jesus, the great Day of Pentecost, the Destruction of Jerusalem, the Second Coming and Judgment? We do not know, only that Jesus was certain of his final victory which would be typified and symbolized in various ways. The apocalyptic eschatological symbolism employed by Jesus here does not dominate his teaching. He used it at times to picture the triumph of the kingdom, not to set forth the full teaching about it. The kingdom of God was already in the hearts of men. There would be climaxes and consummations.

rwp@Matthew:20:6 @{All the day idle} (\holn tn hmeran argoi\). Extent of time (accusative) again. \Argoi\ is \a\ privative and \ergon\, work, no work. The problem of the unemployed.

rwp@Matthew:20:28 @{A ransom for many} (\lutron anti polln\). The Son of man is the outstanding illustration of this principle of self-abnegation in direct contrast to the self-seeking of James and John. The word translated "ransom" is the one commonly employed in the papyri as the price paid for a slave who is then set free by the one who bought him, the purchase money for manumitting slaves. See examples in Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_ and Deissmann's _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 328f. There is the notion of exchange also in the use of \anti\. Jesus gave his own life as the price of freedom for the slaves of sin. There are those who refuse to admit that Jesus held this notion of a substitutionary death because the word in the N.T. occurs only here and the corresponding passage in strkjv@Mark:10:45|. But that is an easy way to get rid of passages that contradict one's theological opinions. Jesus here rises to the full consciousness of the significance of his death for men.

rwp@Matthew:24:31 @{With a great sound of a trumpet} (\meta salpiggos phns megals\). Some MSS. omit (\phns\) "sound." The trumpet was the signal employed to call the hosts of Israel to march as to war and is common in prophetic imagery (Isaiah:27:13|). Cf. the seventh angel (Revelation:11:15|). Clearly "the coming of the son of man is not to be identified with the judgment of Jerusalem but rather forms its preternatural background" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:26:7 @{An alabaster cruse of exceeding precious ointment} (\alabastron murou barutimou\). The flask was of alabaster, a carbonate of lime or sulphate of lime, white or yellow stone, named alabaster from the town in Egypt where it was chiefly found. It was used for a phial employed for precious ointments in ancient writers, inscriptions and papyri just as we speak of a glass for the vessel made of glass. It had a cylindrical form at the top, as a rule, like a closed rosebud (Pliny). Matthew does not say what the ointment (\murou\) was, only saying that it was "exceeding precious" (\barutimou\), of weighty value, selling at a great price. Here only in the N.T. "An alabaster of nard (\murou\) was a present for a king" (Bruce). It was one of five presents sent by Cambyses to the King of Ethiopia (Herodotus, iii. 20). {She poured it upon his head} (\katecheen epi ts kephals autou\). Songs:Mark (Mark:14:3|), while John (John:12:3|) says that she "anointed the feet of Jesus." Why not both? The verb \katecheen\ is literally to pour down. It is the first aorist active indicative, unusual form.

rwp@Matthew:26:17 @{To eat the passover} (\phagein to pascha\). There were two feasts rolled into one, the passover feast and the feast of unleavened bread. Either name was employed. Here the passover meal is meant, though in strkjv@John:18:28| it is probable that the passover feast is referred to as the passover meal (the last supper) had already been observed. There is a famous controversy on the apparent disagreement between the Synoptic Gospels and the Fourth Gospel on the date of this last passover meal. My view is that the five passages in John (John:13:1f.,27; strkjv@18:28; strkjv@19:14,31|) rightly interpreted agree with the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew:26:17,20; strkjv@Mark:14:12,17; strkjv@Luke:22:7,14|) that Jesus ate the passover meal at the regular time about 6 P.M. beginning of 15 Nisan. The passover lamb was slain on the afternoon of 14 Nisan and the meal eaten at sunset the beginning of 15 Nisan. According to this view Jesus ate the passover meal at the regular time and died on the cross the afternoon of 15 Nisan. See my _Harmony of the Gospels for Students of the Life of Christ_, pp.279-284. The question of the disciples here assumes that they are to observe the regular passover meal. Note the deliberative subjunctive (\hetoimasmen\) after \theleis\ with \hina\. For the asyndeton see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 935.

rwp@Matthew:26:29 @{When I drink it new with you} (\hotan auto pin meth' humn kaimon\). This language rather implies that Jesus himself partook of the bread and the wine, though it is not distinctly stated. In the Messianic banquet it is not necessary to suppose that Jesus means the language literally, "the fruit of the vine." Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, pp. 109f.) gives an instance of \genma\ used of the vine in a papyrus 230 B.C. The language here employed does not make it obligatory to employ wine rather than pure grape juice if one wishes the other.

rwp@Matthew:28:19 @{All the nations} (\panta ta ethn\). Not just the Jews scattered among the Gentiles, but the Gentiles themselves in every land. And not by making Jews of them, though this point is not made plain here. It will take time for the disciples to grow into this _Magna Charta_ of the missionary propaganda. But here is the world program of the Risen Christ and it should not be forgotten by those who seek to foreshorten it all by saying that Jesus expected his second coming to be very soon, even within the lifetime of those who heard. He did promise to come, but he has never named the date. Meanwhile we are to be ready for his coming at any time and to look for it joyfully. But we are to leave that to the Father and push on the campaign for world conquest. This program includes making disciples or learners (\mathteusate\) such as they were themselves. That means evangelism in the fullest sense and not merely revival meetings. Baptism in (\eis\, not _into_) the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, in the name of the Trinity. Objection is raised to this language in the mouth of Jesus as too theological and as not a genuine part of the Gospel of Matthew for the same reason. See strkjv@Matthew:11:27|, where Jesus speaks of the Father and the Son as here. But it is all to no purpose. There is a chapter devoted to this subject in my _The Christ of the Logia_ in which the genuineness of these words is proven. The name of Jesus is the essential part of it as is shown in the Acts. Trine immersion is not taught as the Greek Church holds and practices, baptism in the name of the Father, then of the Son, then of the Holy Spirit. The use of name (\onoma\) here is a common one in the Septuagint and the papyri for power or authority. For the use of \eis\ with \onoma\ in the sense here employed, not meaning _into_, see strkjv@Matthew:10:41f.| (cf. also strkjv@12:41|).

rwp@Philippians:1:1 @{Paul} (\Paulos\). He does not mention his apostleship as he usually does. Omitted also in I and II Thess. and Philemon. {Timothy} (\Timotheos\). In no sense the author, but associated with Paul because with him here in Rome as in Corinth when I and II Thessalonians written and in Ephesus when I Corinthians sent and in Macedonia when II Corinthians written. Timothy was with Paul when the Philippian church was founded (Acts:16:1,13; strkjv@17:14|). He had been there twice since (Acts:19:22; strkjv@20:3f.|). {To all the saints} (\psi tois hagiois\). The word saint (\hagios\) here is used for the professing Christians as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:2| which see as well as strkjv@Romans:1:7| for the origin of the word. The word "all" (\psi\) means that all individual believers are included. Paul employs this word frequently in Philippians. {In Christ Jesus} (\en Christi Isou\). The centre for all Christian relations and activities for Paul and for us. {In Philippi} (\en Philippois\). See on ¯Acts:16:12| for discussion of this name. {With the bishops} (\sun episkopois\). "Together with bishops," thus singled out from "all the saints." See strkjv@Acts:20:17,28| for the use of this most interesting word as equivalent to \presbuteros\ (elder). It is an old word from \episkeptomai\, to look upon or after, to inspect, so the overseer or superintendent. In the second century \episcopos\ (Ignatius) came to mean one superior to elders, but not so in the N.T. The two New Testament church officers are here mentioned (bishops or elders and deacons). The plural is here employed because there was usually one church in a city with several pastors (bishops, elders). {And deacons} (\kai diakonois\). Technical sense here of the other church officers as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:8-13|, not the general use as in strkjv@Matthew:22:13|. The origin of the office is probably seen in strkjv@Acts:6:1-6|. The term is often applied to preachers (1Corinthians:3:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:6|). The etymology (\dia, konis\) suggests raising a dust by hastening.

rwp@Romans:7:7 @{Is the law sin?} (\ho nomos hamartia?\). A pertinent query in view of what he had said. Some people today oppose all inhibitions and prohibitions because they stimulate violations. That is half-baked thinking. {I had not known sin} (\tn hamartian ouk egnn\). Second aorist indicative of \ginsk\, to know. It is a conclusion of a second class condition, determined as unfulfilled. Usually \an\ is used in the conclusion to make it plain that it is second class condition instead of first class, but occasionally it is not employed when it is plain enough without as here (John:16:22,24|). See on ¯Galatians:4:15|. Songs:as to {I had not known coveting} (lust), \epithumian ouk idein\. But all the same the law is not itself sin nor the cause of sin. Men with their sinful natures turn law into an occasion for sinful acts.

rwp@Romans:12:9 @{Without hypocrisy} (\anupokritos\). Late double compound adjective for which see strkjv@2Corinthians:6:6|. Hypocritical or pretended love is no love at all as Paul describes \agap\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:13|. {Abhor} (\apostugountes\). Old verb with intensive (\apo\) dislike, only here in N.T. The present active participle is here employed in the sense of the present active indicative as sometimes happens with the independent participle (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1132ff.). This same idiom appears with \kollmenoi\ (cleaving) for which verb see on ¯1Corinthians:6:17|, with \progoumenoi\ (preferring) in verse 10| (old verb here only in N.T.), and with the participles in verses 11-13| and again in verses 16-18|. One can supply \este\ if he prefers.