NT.filter - rwp ouk:
rwp@
1Corinthians:1:17 @{For Christ sent me not to baptize} (\ou gar apesteilen me Christos baptizein\). The negative \ou\ goes not with the infinitive, but with \apesteilen\ (from \apostell, apostolos\, apostle). {For Christ did not send me to be a baptizer} (present active infinitive, linear action) like John the Baptist. {But to preach the gospel} (\alla euaggelizesthai\). This is Paul's idea of his mission from Christ, as Christ's apostle, to be {a gospelizer}. This led, of course, to baptism, as a result, but Paul usually had it done by others as Peter at Caesarea ordered the baptism to be done, apparently by the six brethren with him (Acts:10:48|). Paul is fond of this late Greek verb from \euaggelion\ and sometimes uses both verb and substantive as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:1| "the gospel which I gospelized unto you." {Not in wisdom of words} (\ouk en sophii logou\). Note \ou\, not \m\ (the subjective negative), construed with \apesteilen\ rather than the infinitive. Not in wisdom of speech (singular). Preaching was Paul's forte, but it was not as a pretentious philosopher or professional rhetorician that Paul appeared before the Corinthians (1Corinthians:2:1-5|). Some who followed Apollos may have been guilty of a fancy for external show, though Apollos was not a mere performer and juggler with words. But the Alexandrian method as in Philo did run to dialectic subtleties and luxuriant rhetoric (Lightfoot). {Lest the cross of Christ should be made void} (\hina m kenthi ho stauros tou Christou\). Negative purpose (\hina m\) with first aorist passive subjunctive, effective aorist, of \keno\, old verb from \kenos\, to make empty. In Paul's preaching the Cross of Christ is the central theme. Hence Paul did not fall into the snare of too much emphasis on baptism nor into too little on the death of Christ. "This expression shows clearly the stress which St. Paul laid on the death of Christ, not merely as a great moral spectacle, and so the crowning point of a life of self-renunciation, but as in itself the ordained instrument of salvation" (Lightfoot).
rwp@1Corinthians:1:21 @{Seeing that} (\epeid\). Since (\epei\ and \d\) with explanatory \gar\. {Through its wisdom} (\dia ts sophias\). Article here as possessive. The two wisdoms contrasted. {Knew not God} (\ouk egn\). Failed to know, second aorist (effective) active indicative of \ginsk\, solemn dirge of doom on both Greek philosophy and Jewish theology that failed to know God. Has modern philosophy done better? There is today even a godless theology (Humanism). "Now that God's wisdom has reduced the self-wise world to ignorance" (Findlay). {Through the foolishness of the preaching} (\dia ts mrias tou krugmatos\). Perhaps "proclamation" is the idea, for it is not \kruxis\, the act of heralding, but \krugma\, the message heralded or the proclamation as in verse 23|. The metaphor is that of the herald proclaiming the approach of the king (Matthew:3:1; strkjv@4:17|). See also \krugma\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:4; strkjv@2Timothy:4:17|. The proclamation of the Cross seemed foolishness to the wiseacres then (and now), but it is consummate wisdom, God's wisdom and good-pleasure (\eudoksan\). The foolishness of preaching is not the preaching of foolishness. {To save them that believe} (\ssai tous pisteuontas\). This is the heart of God's plan of redemption, the proclamation of salvation for all those who trust Jesus Christ on the basis of his death for sin on the Cross. The mystery-religions all offered salvation by initiation and ritual as the Pharisees did by ceremonialism. Christianity reaches the heart directly by trust in Christ as the Saviour. It is God's wisdom.
rwp@1Corinthians:2:4 @{Not in persuasive words of wisdom} (\ouk en pithois sophias logois\). This looks like a false disclaimer or mock modesty, for surely the preacher desires to be persuasive. This adjective \pithos\ (MSS. \peithos\) has not yet been found elsewhere. It seems to be formed directly from \peith\, to persuade, as \pheidos\ (\phidos\) is from \pheidomai\, to spare. The old Greek form \pithanos\ is common enough and is used by Josephus (_Ant_. VIII. 9. 1) of "the plausible words of the lying prophet" in strkjv@1Kings:13|. The kindred word \pithanologia\ occurs in strkjv@Colossians:2:4| for the specious and plausible Gnostic philosophers. And gullible people are easy marks for these plausible pulpiteers. Corinth put a premium on the veneer of false rhetoric and thin thinking. {But in demonstration} (\all' en apodeixei\). In contrast with the {plausibility} just mentioned. This word, though an old one from \apodeiknumi\, to show forth, occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. {Spirit} (\pneuma\) here can be the Holy Spirit or inward spirit as opposed to superficial expression and {power} (\dunamis\) is moral power rather than intellectual acuteness (cf. strkjv@1:18|).
rwp@1Corinthians:2:8 @{Knoweth} (\egnken\). Has known, has discerned, perfect active indicative of \ginsk\. They have shown amazing ignorance of God's wisdom. {For had they known it} (\ei gar egnsan\). Condition of the second class, determined as unfulfilled, with aorist active indicative in both condition (\egnsan\) and conclusion with \an\ (\ouk an estaursan\). Peter in the great sermon at Pentecost commented on the "ignorance" (\kata agnoian\) of the Jews in crucifying Christ (Acts:3:17|) as the only hope for repentance on their part (Acts:3:19|). {The Lord of glory} (\ton Kurion ts doxs\). Genitive case \doxs\, means characterized by glory, "bringing out the contrast between the indignity of the Cross (Hebrews:12:2|) and the majesty of the Victim (Luke:22:69; strkjv@23:43|)" (Robertson and Plummer). See strkjv@James:2:1; strkjv@Acts:7:2; strkjv@Ephesians:1:17; strkjv@Hebrews:9:5|.
rwp@1Corinthians:4:4 @{For I know nothing against myself} (\ouden gar emauti sunoida\). Not a statement of fact, but an hypothesis to show the unreliability of mere complacent self-satisfaction. Note the use of \sunoida\ (second perfect active indicative with dative (disadvantage) of the reflexive pronoun) for guilty knowledge against oneself (cf. strkjv@Acts:5:2; strkjv@12:12; strkjv@14:6|). {Yet} (\all'\). Adversative use of \alla\. {Amos:I not hereby justified} (\ouk en touti dedikaimai\). Perfect passive indicative of state of completion. Failure to be conscious of one's own sins does not mean that one is innocent. Most prisoners plead "not guilty." Who is the judge of the steward of the mysteries of God? It is the Lord "that judgeth me" (\ho anakrinn me\). Probably, who examines me and then passes on my fidelity (\pistos\ in verse 2|).
rwp@1Corinthians:4:7 @{Maketh thee to differ} (\se diakrinei\). Distinguishes thee, separates thee. \Diakrin\ means to sift or separate between (\dia\) as in strkjv@Acts:15:9| (which see) where \metaxu\ is added to make it plainer. All self-conceit rests on the notion of superiority of gifts and graces as if they were self-bestowed or self-acquired. {Which thou didst not receive} (\ho ouk elabes\). "Another home-thrust" (Robertson and Plummer). Pride of intellect, of blood, of race, of country, of religion, is thus shut out. {Dost thou glory} (\kauchasai\). The original second person singular middle ending \-sai\ is here preserved with variable vowel contraction, \kauchaesai=kauchasai\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 341). Paul is fond of this old and bold verb for boasting. {As if thou hadst not received it} (\hs m labn\). This neat participial clause (second aorist active of \lamban\) with \hs\ (assumption) and negative \m\ punctures effectually the inflated bag of false pride. What pungent questions Paul has asked. Robertson and Plummer say of Augustine, "Ten years before the challenge of Pelagius, the study of St. Paul's writings, and especially of this verse and of strkjv@Romans:9:16|, had crystallized in his mind the distinctively Augustinian doctrines of man's total depravity, of irresistible grace, and of absolute predestination." Human responsibility does exist beyond a doubt, but there is no foundation for pride and conceit.
rwp@1Corinthians:6:5 @{I say this to move you to shame} (\pros entropn humin leg\). Old word \entrop\ from \entrep\, to turn in (1Corinthians:4:14| which see). In N.T. only here and strkjv@15:34|. {One wise man} (\sophos\). From sarcasm to pathos Paul turns. {Does there not exist} (\eni\, short form for \enesti\)? With double negative \ouk--oudeis\, expecting the answer yes. Surely {one} such man exists in the church. {Who} (\hos\). Almost consecutive in idea, of such wisdom that he will be able. {To decide between his brethren} (\diakrinai ana meson tou adelphou autou\). \Krinai\ is to judge or decide (first aorist active infinitive of \krin\ and \dia\ (two) carries on the idea of between. Then \ana meson\ makes it still plainer, in the midst as {arbitrator} between brother and brother like \ana meson emou kai sou\ (Genesis:23:15|). It is even so a condensed expression with part of it unexpressed (\ana meson kai tou adelphou autou\) between brother and his brother. The use of \adelphos\ has a sharp reflection on them for their going to heathen judges to settle disputes between brothers in Christ.
rwp@1Corinthians:6:12 @{Lawful} (\exestin\). Apparently this proverb may have been used by Paul in Corinth (repeated in strkjv@10:23|), but not in the sense now used by Paul's opponents. The "all things" do not include such matters as those condemned in chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:5; strkjv@6:1-11|. Paul limits the proverb to things not immoral, things not wrong _per se_. But even here liberty is not license. {But not all things are expedient} (\all' ou panta sumpherei\). Old word \sumpherei\, bears together for good and so worthwhile. Many things, harmless in themselves in the abstract, do harm to others in the concrete. We live in a world of social relations that circumscribe personal rights and liberties. {But I will not be brought under the power of any} (\all ouk eg exousiasthsomai hupo tinos\). Perhaps a conscious play on the verb \exestin\ for \exousiaz\ is from \exousia\ and that from \exestin\. Verb from Aristotle on, though not common (Dion. of Hal., LXX and inscriptions). In N.T. only here, strkjv@7:4; strkjv@Luke:22:25|. Paul is determined not to be a slave to anything harmless in itself. He will maintain his self-control. He gives a wholesome hint to those who talk so much about personal liberty.
rwp@1Corinthians:6:19 @{Your body is a temple} (\to sma humn naos estin\). A sanctuary as in strkjv@3:16| which see. Our spirits dwell in our bodies and the Holy Spirit dwells in our spirits. Some of the Gnostics split hairs between the sins of the body and fellowship with God in the spirit. Paul will have none of this subterfuge. One's body is the very shrine for the Holy Spirit. In Corinth was the temple to Aphrodite in which fornication was regarded as consecration instead of desecration. Prostitutes were there as priestesses of Aphrodite, to help men worship the goddess by fornication. {Ye are not your own} (\ouk este heautn\). Predicate genitive. Ye do not belong to yourselves, even if you could commit fornication without personal contamination or self-violation. Christianity makes unchastity dishonour in both sexes. There is no double standard of morality. Paul's plea here is primarily to men to be clean as members of Christ's body.
rwp@1Corinthians:7:9 @{But if they have not continency} (\ei de ouk egkrateuontai\). Condition of the first class, assumed as true. Direct middle voice \egkrateuontai\, hold themselves in, control themselves. {Let them marry} (\gamsatsan\). First aorist (ingressive) active imperative. Usual _Koin_ form in \-tsan\ for third plural. {Better} (\kreitton\). Marriage is better than continued sexual passion. Paul has not said that celibacy is {better} than marriage though he has justified it and expressed his own personal preference for it. The metaphorical use of \purousthai\ (present middle infinitive) for sexual passion is common enough as also for grief (2Corinthians:11:29|).
rwp@1Corinthians:7:10 @{To the married} (\tois gegamkosin\). Perfect active participle of \game\, old verb, to marry, and still married as the tense shows. {I give charge} (\paraggell\). Not mere wish as in verses 7,8|. {Not I, but the Lord} (\ouk eg alla ho kurios\). Paul had no commands from Jesus to the unmarried (men or women), but Jesus had spoken to the married (husbands and wives) as in strkjv@Matthew:5:31f.; strkjv@19:3-12; strkjv@Mark:10:9-12; strkjv@Luke:16:18|. The Master had spoken plain words about divorce. Paul reenforces his own inspired command by the command of Jesus. In strkjv@Mark:10:9| we have from Christ: "What therefore God joined together let not man put asunder" (\m chorizet\). {That the wife depart not from her husband} (\gunaika apo andros m choristhnai\). First aorist passive infinitive (indirect command after \paraggell\) of \choriz\, old verb from adverbial preposition \chris\, separately, apart from, from. Here used of divorce by the wife which, though unusual then, yet did happen as in the case of Salome (sister of Herod the Great) and of Herodias before she married Herod Antipas. Jesus also spoke of it (Mark:10:12|). Now most of the divorces are obtained by women. This passive infinitive is almost reflexive in force according to a constant tendency in the _Koin_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 817).
rwp@1Corinthians:7:25 @{I have no commandment of the Lord} (\epitagn Kuriou ouk ech\). A late word from \epitass\, old Greek verb to enjoin, to give orders to. Paul did have (verse 10|) a command from the Lord as we have in Matthew and Mark. It was quite possible for Paul to know this command of Jesus as he did other sayings of Jesus (Acts:20:35|) even if he had as yet no access to a written gospel or had received no direct revelation on the subject from Jesus (1Corinthians:11:23|). Sayings of Jesus were passed on among the believers. But Paul had no specific word from Jesus on the subject of virgins. They call for special treatment, young unmarried women only Paul means (7:25,28,34,36-38|) and not as in strkjv@Revelation:14:4| (metaphor). It is probable that in the letter (7:1|) the Corinthians had asked about this problem. {But I give my judgment} (\gnmn de didmi\). About mixed marriages (12-16|) Paul had the command of Jesus concerning divorce to guide him. Here he has nothing from Jesus at all. Songs:he gives no "command," but only "a judgment," a deliberately formed decision from knowledge (2Corinthians:8:10|), not a mere passing fancy. {As one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful} (\hs lemenos hupo kuriou pistos einai\). Perfect passive participle of \elee\, old verb to receive mercy (\eleos\). \Pistos\ is predicate nominative with infinitive \einai\. This language, so far from being a disclaimer of inspiration, is an express claim to help from the Lord in the forming of this duly considered judgment, which is in no sense a command, but an inspired opinion.
rwp@1Corinthians:8:7 @{Howbeit in all men there is not that knowledge} (\all' ouk en pasin h gnsis\). The knowledge (\h gnsis\) of which Paul is speaking. Knowledge has to overcome inheritance and environment, prejudice, fear, and many other hindrances. {Being used until now to the idol} (\ti suntheii hes arti tou eidlou\). Old word \suntheia\ from \sunths\ (\sun, thos\), accustomed to, like Latin _consuetudo_, intimacy. In N.T. only here and strkjv@John:18:39; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:16|. It is the force of habit that still grips them when they eat such meat. They eat it "as an idol sacrifice" (\hs eidlothuton\), though they no longer believe in idols. The idol-taint clings in their minds to this meat. {Being weak} (\asthens ousa\). "It is defiled, not by the partaking of polluted food, for food cannot pollute (Mark:7:18f.; strkjv@Luke:11:41|), but by the doing of something which the unenlightened conscience does not allow" (Robertson and Plummer). For this great word \suneidsis\ (conscientia, knowing together, conscience) see on ¯Acts:23:1|. It is important in Paul's Epistles, Peter's First Epistle, and Hebrews. Even if unenlightened, one must act according to his conscience, a sensitive gauge to one's spiritual condition. Knowledge breaks down as a guide with the weak or unenlightened conscience. For \asthens\, weak (lack of strength) see on ¯Matthew:26:41|. {Defiled} (\molunetai\). Old word \molun\, to stain, pollute, rare in N.T. (1Timothy:3:9; strkjv@Revelation:3:4|).
rwp@1Corinthians:9:1 @{Amos:I not free?} (\Ouk eimi eleutheros;\). Free as a Christian from Mosaic ceremonialism (cf. strkjv@9:19|) as much as any Christian and yet he adapts his moral independence to the principle of considerate love in strkjv@8:13|. {Amos:I not an apostle?} (\ouk eimi apostolos;\). He has the exceptional privileges as an apostle to support from the churches and yet he foregoes these. {Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?} (\ouchi Isoun ton Kurion hmn heoraka;\). Proof (15:8; strkjv@Acts:9:17,27; strkjv@18:9; strkjv@22:14,17f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:1ff.|) that he has the qualification of an apostle (Acts:1:22|) though not one of the twelve. Note strong form of the negative \ouchi\ here. All these questions expect an affirmative answer. The perfect active \heoraka\ from \hora\, to see, does not here have double reduplication as in strkjv@John:1:18|.
rwp@1Corinthians:9:4 @{Have we no right?} (\M ouk echomen exousian;\). Literary plural here though singular in 1-3|. The \m\ in this double negative expects the answer "No" while \ouk\ goes with the verb \echomen\. "Do we fail to have the right?" Cf. strkjv@Romans:10:18f.| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1173).
rwp@1Corinthians:9:5 @{Have we no right?} (\M ouk echomen exousian;\). Same idiom. {To lead about a wife that is a believer?} (\adelphn gunaika periagein;\). Old verb \periag\, intransitive in strkjv@Acts:13:11|. Two substantives in apposition, a sister a wife, a common Greek idiom. This is a plea for the support of the preacher's wife and children. Plainly Paul has no wife at this time. {And Cephas} (\kai Kphs\). Why is he singled out by name? Perhaps because of his prominence and because of the use of his name in the divisions in Corinth (1:12|). It was well known that Peter was married (Matthew:8:14|). Paul mentions James by name in strkjv@Galatians:1:19| as one of the Lord's brothers. All the other apostles were either married or had the right to be.
rwp@1Corinthians:9:6 @{Have we not a right to forbear working?} (\ouk echomen exousian m ergazesthai;\). By \\ (or) Paul puts the other side about Barnabas (the only allusion since the dispute in strkjv@Acts:15:39|, but in good spirit) and himself. Perhaps (Hofmann) Paul has in mind the fact that in the first great mission tour (Acts:13; 14|), Barnabas and Paul received no help from the church in Antioch, but were left to work their way along at their own charges. It was not till the Philippian Church took hold that Paul had financial aid (Phillipians:4:15|). Here both negatives have their full force. Literally, Do we not have (\ouk echomen\, expecting the affirmative reply) the right not (\m\, negative of the infinitive \ergazesthai\) to do manual labour (usual meaning of \ergazomai\ as in strkjv@4:12|)?" There was no more compulsion on Paul and Barnabas to support themselves than upon the other workers for Christ. They renounced no rights in being voluntarily independent.
rwp@1Corinthians:10:20 @{But I say that} (\all' hoti\). The verb \phmi\ (I say) must be repeated from verse 19| before \hoti\. {To demons, and not to God} (\daimoniois kai ou thei\). Referring to LXX text of strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:17|. It is probable that by \ou thei\ Paul means "to a no-god" as also in strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:21| \ep' ouk ethnei\ (by a no-people). This is Paul's reply to the heathen who claimed that they worshipped the gods represented by the images and not the mere wood or stone or metal idols. The word \daimonia\ is an adjective \daimonios\ from \daimn\, an inferior deity, and with same idea originally, once in this sense in N.T. (Acts:17:18|). Elsewhere in N.T. it has the notion of evil spirits as here, those spiritual forces of wickedness (Ephesians:6:12|) that are under the control of Satan. The word \daimonia\, so common in the Gospels, occurs in Paul's writings only here and strkjv@1Timothy:4:1|. Demonology is a deep and dark subject here pictured by Paul as the explanation of heathenism which is a departure from God (Romans:1:19-23|) and a substitute for the worship of God. It is a terrible indictment which is justified by the licentious worship associated with paganism then and now.
rwp@1Corinthians:10:23 @See on ¯6:12| for {lawful} (\exestin\) and {expedient} (\sumpherei\). {Edify not} (\ouk oikodomei\). Build up. Explanation of {expedient} (\sumpherei\).
rwp@1Corinthians:11:10 @{Ought} (\opheilei\). Moral obligation therefore (\dia touto\, rests on woman in the matter of dress that does not (\ouk opheilei\ in verse 7|) rest on the man. {To have a sign of authority} (\exousian echein\). He means \smeion exousias\ (symbol of authority) by \exousian\, but it is the sign of authority of the man over the woman. The veil on the woman's head is the symbol of the authority that the man with the uncovered head has over her. It is, as we see it, more a sign of subjection (\hypotags\, strkjv@1Timothy:2:10|) than of authority (\exousias\). {Because of the angels} (\dia tous aggelous\). This startling phrase has caused all kinds of conjecture which may be dismissed. It is not preachers that Paul has in mind, nor evil angels who could be tempted (Genesis:6:1f.|), but angels present in worship (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:4:9; strkjv@Psalms:138:1|) who would be shocked at the conduct of the women since the angels themselves veil their faces before Jehovah (Isaiah:6:2|).
rwp@1Corinthians:11:17 @{This} (\touto\). Probably the preceding one about the head-dress of women, and transition to what follows. {I praise you not} (\ouk epain\). In contrast to the praise in strkjv@11:2|. {For the better} (\eis to kreisson\). Neuter articular comparative of \kratus\, but used as comparative of \kalos\, good. Attic form \kreitton\. {For the worse} (\eis to hsson\). Old comparative from \hka\, softly, used as comparative of \kakos\, bad. In N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:12:15|.
rwp@1Corinthians:11:22 @{What? Have ye not houses?} (\M gar oikias ouk echete;\) The double negative (\m--ouk\) in the single question is like the idiom in strkjv@9:4f.| which see. \M\ expects a negative answer while \ouk\ negatives the verb \echete\. "For do you fail to have houses?" Paul is not approving gluttony and drunkenness but only expressing horror at their sacrilege (despising, \kataphroneite\) of the church of God. {That have not} (\tous m echontas\). Not those without houses, but those who have nothing, "the have-nots" (Findlay) like strkjv@2Corinthians:8:12|, in contrast with \hoi echontes\ "the haves" (the men of property). {What shall I say to you?} (\ti eip humin;\) Deliberative subjunctive that well expresses Paul's bewilderment.
rwp@1Corinthians:12:14 @{Is not one member} (\ouk estin hen melos\). The point sounds like a truism, but it is the key to the whole problem of church life both local and general. Vincent refers to the fable of the body and the members by Menenius Agrippa (Livy, II, 32), but it was an old parable. Socrates pointed out how absurd it would be if feet and hands should work against one another when God made them to cooperate (Xen., _Mem_. II. iii. 18). Seneca alludes to it as does Marcus Aurelius and Marcus Antoninus.
rwp@1Corinthians:12:15 @{If the foot shall say} (\ean eipi ho pous\). Condition of third class (\ean\ and second aorist subjunctive \eipi\). In case the foot say. {I am not of the body} (\ouk eimi ek tou smatos\). I am independent of the body, not dependent on the body. {It is not therefore not of the body} (\ou para touto ouk estin ek tou smatos\). Thinking or saying so does not change the fact. \Para touto\ here means "alongside of this" (cf. IV Macc. strkjv@10:19) and so "because of," a rare use (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 616). The two negatives (\ou--ouk\) do not here destroy one another. Each retains its full force.
rwp@1Corinthians:13:5 @{Doth not behave itself unseemly} (\ouk aschmonei\). Old verb from \aschmn\ (12:23|). In N.T. only here and strkjv@7:36|. Not indecent. {Seeketh not its own} (\ou ztei ta heauts\). Its own interests (10:24,33|). {Is not provoked} (\ou paroxunetai\). Old word. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:17:16| which see. Irritation or sharpness of spirit. And yet Paul felt it in Athens (exasperation) and he and Barnabas had \paroxusmos\ (paroxysm) in Antioch (15:39|). See good sense of \paroxusmos\ in strkjv@Hebrews:10:24|. {Taketh not account of evil} (\ou logizetai to kakon\). Old verb from \logos\, to count up, to take account of as in a ledger or note-book, "the evil" (\to kakon\) done to love with a view to settling the account.
rwp@1Corinthians:14:23 @{Will they not say that ye are mad?} (\ouk erousin hoti mainesthe?\). These unbelievers unacquainted (\iditai\) with Christianity will say that the Christians are raving mad (see on ¯Acts:12:15; strkjv@26:24|). They will seem like a congregation of lunatics.
rwp@1Corinthians:15:15 @{False witnesses of God} (\pseudomartures tou theou\). Late word, but \pseudomarture\, to bear false witness, old and common. The genitive (\tou theou\) can be either subjective (in God's service) or objective (concerning God). Either makes good sense. {Because we witnessed of God} (\hoti emartursamen kata tou theou\). Vulgate has _adversus Deum_. This is the more natural way to take \kata\ and genitive, {against God} not as equal to \peri\ (concerning). He would indeed make God play false in that case, {if so be that the dead are not raised} (\eiper ara nekroi ouk egeirontai\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. Note both \per\ intensive particle {indeed} and \ara\ inferential particle {therefore}.
rwp@1Corinthians:16:12 @{And it was not at all his will to come now} (\kai pants ouk n thelma hina nun elthi\). Adversative use of \kai\ = "but." Apollos had left Corinth in disgust over the strife there which involved him and Paul (1Corinthians:1-4|). He had had enough of partisan strife over preachers.
rwp@1John:2:19 @{From us} (\ex hmn\) {--of us} (\ex hmn\). The same idiom, \ex\ and the ablative case (\hmn\), but in different senses to correspond with \exlthan\ (they went out from our membership) and \ouk san\ (they were not of us in spirit and life). For \ex\ in the sense of origin see strkjv@John:17:15|, for \ex\ in the sense of likeness, strkjv@John:17:14|. {For if they had been of us} (\ei gar ex hmn san\). Condition of second class with \ei\ and imperfect tense (no aorist for \eimi\). {They would have continued} (\memenkeisan an\). Past perfect of \men\, to remain, without augment, with \an\ in apodosis of second-class condition. {With us} (\meth' hmn\). In fellowship, for which see \meta\ in strkjv@1:3|. They had lost the inner fellowship and then apparently voluntarily broke the outward. {But they went} (\all'\). Ellipsis of the verb \exlthan\ above, a common habit (ellipse) in John s Gospel (1:8; strkjv@9:3; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@15:25|). {That they might be made manifest} (\hina phanerthsin\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \phanero\, for which verb see strkjv@John:21:1; strkjv@Colossians:3:4|. See strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3| for the personal construction with \hoti\ as here. {They all are not} (\ouk eisin pantes\). Not just some, but all, as in strkjv@2:21; strkjv@3:5|. These antichrists are thus revealed in their true light.
rwp@1John:2:21 @{I have not written} (\ouk egrapsa\). Not epistolary aorist (2:14|), but a reference to what he has just said. {And because no lie is of the truth} (\kai hoti pn pseudos ek ts altheias ouk estin\). Not certain whether \hoti\ here is causal (because) or declarative (that). Either makes sense. Note the idiomatic use of \ek\ and \pn--ouk=ouden\ (no) as in verse 19|.
rwp@1John:2:22 @{The liar} (\ho pseusts\). The liar (with the article) _par excellence_. Rhetorical question to sharpen the point made already about lying in strkjv@1:6,10; strkjv@2:4,21|. See strkjv@5:5| for a like rhetorical question. {But} (\ei m\). Except, if not. {That denieth that Jesus is the Christ} (\ho arnoumenos hoti Isous ouk estin ho Christos\). Common Greek idiom for \ouk\ to appear after \arneomai\ like redundant \m\ in strkjv@Luke:20:27; strkjv@Hebrews:12:19|. The old Latin retains _non_ here as old English did (Shakespeare, _Comedy of Errors_ IV. ii. 7, "He denied you had in him no right"). The Cerinthian Gnostics denied the identity of the man Jesus and Christ (an \aeon\, they held) like the modern Jesus or Christ controversy. {This is the antichrist} (\houtos estin ho antichristos\). The one just mentioned, Cerinthus himself in particular. {Even he that denieth the Father and the Son} (\ho arnoumenos ton patera kai ton huion\). This is the inevitable logic of such a rejection of the Son of God. Jesus had himself said this very same thing (John:5:23f.|).
rwp@1John:2:27 @{And as for you} (\kai humeis\). Prolepsis again as in verse 24|. {Which ye received of him} (\ho elabete ap' autou\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban\, a definite experience, this anointing (\chrisma\), from Christ himself as in verse 20|. This Paraclete was promised by Christ (John:14:26; strkjv@16:13ff.|) and came on the great Pentecost, as they knew, and in the experience of all who yielded themselves to the Holy Spirit. {That any one teach you} (\hina tis didaski humas\). Sub-final use of \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \didask\, "that any one keep on teaching you." {Teacheth you} (\didaskei humas\). Present active indicative. The Holy Spirit was to bring all things to their remembrance (John:14:26|) and to bear witness concerning Christ (John:15:26; strkjv@16:12-15|). Yet they need to be reminded of what they already know to be "true" (\althes\) and "no lie" (\ouk estin pseudos\), according to John's habit of positive and negative (1:5|). Songs:he exhorts them to "abide in him" (\menete en auti\, imperative active, though same form as the indicative). Precisely so Jesus had urged that the disciples abide in him (John:15:4f.|).
rwp@1John:3:1 @{What manner of love} (\potapn agapn\). Qualitative interrogative as in strkjv@2Peter:3:11; strkjv@Matthew:8:27|. Only here in John's writings. Originally of what country or race. {Hath bestowed} (\dedken\). Perfect active indicative of \didmi\, state of completion, "the endowment of the receiver" (Vincent). {That we should be called} (\hina klthmen\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with the first aorist passive subjunctive of \kale\, to call or name, as in strkjv@Matthew:2:23|. {Children} (\tekna\). As in strkjv@John:1:12| and with an allusion to \gegenntai\ in strkjv@2:29| in an effort "to restore the waning enthusiasm of his readers, and to recall them to their first love" (Brooke). {And such we are} (\kai esmen\). "And we are." A parenthetical reflection characteristic of John (\kai nun estin\ in strkjv@John:5:25| and \kai ouk eisin\ in strkjv@Revelation:2:2; strkjv@3:9|) omitted by Textus Receptus, though, in the old MSS. {Because it knew him not} (\hoti ouk egn auton\). Second aorist active indicative of \ginsk\, precisely the argument in strkjv@John:15:18f|.
rwp@1John:3:10 @{In this} (\en touti\). As already shown. A life of sin is proof that one is a child of the devil and not of God. This is the line of cleavage that is obvious to all. See strkjv@John:8:33-39| for the claim of the Pharisees to be the children of Abraham, whereas their conduct showed them to be children of the devil. This is not a popular note with an age that wishes to remove all distinctions between Christians and the world. {Doeth not righteousness} (\ho m poin dikaiosunn\). Habit (linear present participle) again of not doing righteousness, as in verse 7| of doing it. Cf. \poiei\ and \m poin\ (doing and not doing) in strkjv@Matthew:7:24,26|. {Neither} (\kai\). Literally, "and," but with the ellipsis of \ouk estin ek tou theou\ (is not of God). The addition here of this one item about not loving (\m agapn\) one's brother is like Paul's summary in strkjv@Romans:13:9|, a striking illustration of the general principle just laid down and in accord with strkjv@2:9-11|.
rwp@1John:5:3 @{This} (\haut\) {--that} (\hina\). Explanatory use of \hina\ with \haut\, as in strkjv@John:17:3|, to show what "the love of God" (4:9,12|) in the objective sense is, not mere declamatory boasting (4:20|), but obedience to God's commands, "that we keep on keeping (present active subjunctive as in strkjv@2:3|) his commandments." This is the supreme test. {Are not grievous} (\bareiai ouk eisin\). "Not heavy," the adjective in strkjv@Matthew:23:4| with \phortia\ (burdens), with \lupoi\ (wolves) in strkjv@Acts:20:29|, of Paul's letters in strkjv@2Corinthians:10:10|, of the charges against Paul in strkjv@Acts:25:7|. Love for God lightens his commands.
rwp@1John:5:6 @{This} (\houtos\). Jesus the Son of God (verse 5|). {He that came} (\ho elthn\). Second aorist active articular participle of \erchomai\, referring to the Incarnation as a definite historic event, the preexistent Son of God "sent from heaven to do God's will" (Brooke). {By water and blood} (\di' hudatos kai haimatos\). Accompanied by (\dia\ used with the genitive both as instrument and accompaniment, as in strkjv@Galatians:5:13|) water (as at the baptism) and blood (as on the Cross). These two incidents in the Incarnation are singled out because at the baptism Jesus was formally set apart to his Messianic work by the coming of the Holy Spirit upon him and by the Father's audible witness, and because at the Cross his work reached its culmination ("It is finished," Jesus said). There are other theories that do not accord with the language and the facts. It is true that at the Cross both water and blood came out of the side of Jesus when pierced by the soldier, as John bore witness (John:19:34|), a complete refutation of the Docetic denial of an actual human body for Jesus and of the Cerinthian distinction between Jesus and Christ. There is thus a threefold witness to the fact of the Incarnation, but he repeats the twofold witness before giving the third. The repetition of both preposition (\en\ this time rather than \dia\) and the article (\ti\ locative case) argues for two separate events with particular emphasis on the blood ("not only" \ouk monon\, "but" \all'\) which the Gnostics made light of or even denied. {It is the Spirit that beareth witness} (\to pneuma estin to marturoun\). Present active articular participle of \marture\ with article with both subject and predicate, and so interchangeable as in strkjv@3:4|. The Holy Spirit is the third and the chief witness at the baptism of Jesus and all through his ministry. {Because} (\hoti\). Or declarative "that." Either makes sense. In strkjv@John:15:26| Jesus spoke of "the Spirit of truth" (whose characteristic is truth). Here John identifies the Spirit with truth as Jesus said of himself (John:14:6|) without denying personality for the Holy Spirit.
rwp@1Peter:1:8 @{Whom} (\hon\). Relative referring to Christ just before and accusative case, object of both \idontes\ and \agapate\ (ye love). {Not having seen} (\ouk idontes\). Second aorist active participle of \hora\, to see, with \ouk\ rather than \m\ because it negatives an actual experience in contrast with \m horntes\ (though not seeing, hypothetical case). On whom (\eis hon\) with \pisteuontes\ common construction for "believing on" (\pisteu eis\). It is possible that Peter here has in mind the words of Jesus to Thomas as recorded in strkjv@John:20:29| ("Happy are those not seeing and yet believing"). Peter was present and heard the words of Jesus to Thomas, and so he could use them before John wrote his Gospel. {Ye rejoice greatly} (\agallite\). Same form as in verse 6|, only active here instead of middle. {With joy} (\chari\). Instrumental case (manner). {Unspeakable} (\aneklalti\). Late and rare double compound verbal (alpha privative and \eklale\), here only in N.T., in Dioscorides and Heliodorus, "unutterable," like Paul's "indescribable" (\anekdigtos\) gift (2Corinthians:9:15|, here alone in N.T.). {Full of glory} (\dedoxasmeni\). Perfect passive participle of \doxaz\, to glorify, "glorified joy," like the glorified face of Moses (Exodus:34:29ff.; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:10|.
rwp@1Peter:1:23 @{Having been begotten again} (\anagegennmenoi\). Perfect passive participle of \anagenna\, which see in verse 2|. {Not of corruptible seed} (\ouk ek spors phtharts\). Ablative with \ek\ as the source, for \phthartos\ see verse 18|, and \spors\ (from \speir\ to sow), old word (sowing, seed) here only in N.T., though \sporos\ in strkjv@Mark:4:26f.|, etc. For "incorruptible" (\aphthartou\) see verse 4; strkjv@3:4|. {Through the word of God} (\dia logou theou\). See strkjv@James:1:18| for "by the word of truth," verse 25| here, and Peter's use of \logos\ in strkjv@Acts:10:36|. It is the gospel message. {Which liveth and abideth} (\zntos kai menontos\). These present active participles (from \za\ and \men\) can be taken with \theou\ (God) or with \logou\ (word). In verse 25| \menei\ is used with \rma\ (word). Still in strkjv@Daniel:6:26| both \menn\ and \zn\ are used with \theos\. Either construction makes sense here.
rwp@1Peter:2:22 @{Who did no sin} (\hos hamartian ouk epoisen\). Quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:53:9|. He has already expressed the sinlessness of Christ in strkjv@1:19|. The next clause is a combination of strkjv@Isaiah:53:9; strkjv@Zephaniah:3:13|. For "guile" (\dolos\) see verse 1|. {Was found} (\heureth\). First aorist passive indicative of \heurisk\. Christ's guilelessness stood the test of scrutiny (Vincent), as Peter knew (Matthew:26:60; strkjv@John:18:38; strkjv@19:4,6|).
rwp@1Peter:2:23 @{When he was reviled} (\loidoroumenos\). Present passive participle of \loidore\, old verb (from \loidoros\, reviler, strkjv@1Corinthians:5:11|) as in strkjv@John:9:28|. {Reviled not again} (\ouk anteloidorei\). Imperfect active (for repeated incidents) of \antiloidore\, late and rare compound (Plutarch, Lucian, one papyrus example with compound following the simplex verb as here, Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_), here only in N.T. Idiomatic use of \anti\ (in turn, return, back). {Threatened not} (\ouk peilei\). Imperfect again (repeated acts) of \apeile\, old compound (from \apeil\, threat, strkjv@Acts:9:1|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:4:17|. {But committed himself} (\paredidou de\). Imperfect active again (kept on committing himself) of \paradidmi\, to hand over, usually of one to a judge, but here not of another (as the Sanhedrin), but himself (supply \heauton\), for Jesus uses this very idea in strkjv@Luke:23:46| as he dies. Jesus thus handed himself and his cause over to the Father who judges righteously (\ti krinonti dikais\, dative of present active articular participle of \krin\).
rwp@1Thessalonians:1:5 @{How that} (\hoti\). It is not certain whether \hoti\ here means "because" (\quia\) as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:7; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:14; strkjv@Romans:8:27| or declarative \hoti\ "how that," knowing the circumstances of your election (Lightfoot) or explanatory, as in strkjv@Acts:16:3; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:1; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:15; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:3f.; strkjv@Romans:13:11|. {Our gospel} (\to euaggelion hmn\). The gospel (see on ¯Matthew:4:23; strkjv@Mark:1:1,15| for \euaggelion\) which we preach, Paul's phrase also in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:14; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:3; strkjv@Romans:2:16; strkjv@16:25; strkjv@2Timothy:2:8|. Paul had a definite, clear-cut message of grace that he preached everywhere including Thessalonica. This message is to be interpreted in the light of Paul's own sermons in Acts and Epistles, not by reading backward into them the later perversions of Gnostics and sacramentarians. This very word was later applied to the books about Jesus, but Paul is not so using the term here or anywhere else. In its origin Paul's gospel is of God (1Thessalonians:2:2,8,9|), in its substance it is Christ's (3:2; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:8|), and Paul is only the bearer of it (1Thessalonians:2:4,9; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:14|) as Milligan points out. Paul and his associates have been entrusted with this gospel (1Thessalonians:2:4|) and preach it (Galatians:2:2|). Elsewhere Paul calls it God's gospel (2Corinthians:11:7; strkjv@Romans:1:1; strkjv@15:16|) or Christs (1Corinthians:9:12; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12; strkjv@9:13; strkjv@10:14; strkjv@Galatians:1:7; strkjv@Romans:15:19; strkjv@Phillipians:1:27|). In both instances it is the subjective genitive. {Came unto you} (\egenth eis hums\). First aorist passive indicative of \ginomai\ in practically same sense as \egeneto\ (second aorist middle indicative as in the late Greek generally). Songs:also \eis hums\ like the _Koin_ is little more than the dative \humin\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 594). {Not only--but also} (\ouk--monon, alla kai\). Sharp contrast, negatively and positively. The contrast between \logos\ (word) and \dunamis\ (power) is seen also in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:4; strkjv@4:20|. Paul does not refer to miracles by \dunamis\. {In the Holy Spirit and much assurance} (\en pneumati hagii kai plrophorii polli\). Preposition \en\ repeated with \logi, dunamei\, but only once here thus uniting closely {Holy Spirit} and {much assurance}. No article with either word. The word \plrophorii\ is not found in ancient Greek or the LXX. It appears once in Clement of Rome and one broken papyrus example. For the verb \plrophore\ see on ¯Luke:1:1|. The substantive in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Colossians:2:2; strkjv@Hebrews:6:11; strkjv@10:22|. It means the full confidence which comes from the Holy Spirit. {Even as ye know} (\kaths oidate\). Paul appeals to the Thessalonians themselves as witnesses to the character of his preaching and life among them. {What manner of men we showed ourselves toward you} (\hoioi egenthmen humin\). Literally, {What sort of men we became to you}. Qualitative relative \hoioi\ and dative \humin\ and first aorist passive indicative \egenthmen\, (not \metha\, we were). An epexegetical comment with {for your sake} (\di' hums\) added. It was all in their interest and for their advantage, however it may have seemed otherwise at the time.
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:3 @{Exhortation} (\paraklsis\). Persuasive discourse, calling to one's side, for admonition, encouragement, or comfort. {Not of error} (\ouk ek plans\). This word is same as \plana\, to lead astray (2Timothy:3:13|) like Latin _errare_. Passive idea of {error} here rather than deceit. That is seen in {nor in guile} (\oude en doli\) from \del\, to catch with bait. Paul is keenly sensitive against charges against the correctness of his message and the purity of his life. {Nor of uncleanness} (\oude ex akatharsias\). "This disclaimer, startling as it may seem, was not unneeded amidst the impurities consecrated by the religions of the day" (Lightfoot). There was no necessary connection in the popular mind between religion and morals. The ecstatic initiations in some of the popular religions were grossly sensual.
rwp@1Thessalonians:3:1 @{When we could no longer forbear} (\mketi stegontes\). \Steg\ is old verb to cover from \steg\, roof (Mark:2:4|), to cover with silence, to conceal, to keep off, to endure as here and strkjv@1Corinthians:9:12; strkjv@13:7|. In the papyri in this sense (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). \Mketi\ usual negative with participle in the _Koin_ rather than \ouketi\. {We thought it good} (\udoksamen\). Either literary plural as in strkjv@2:18| or Paul and Silas as more likely. If so, both Timothy and Silas came to Athens (Acts:17:15f.|), but Timothy was sent ({we sent}, \epempsamen\, verse 2|) right back to Thessalonica and later Paul sent Silas on to Beroea or Thessalonica (verse 5|, {I sent}, \epempsa\). Then both Silas and Timothy came from Macedonia to Corinth (Acts:18:5|). {Alone} (\monoi\). Including Silas. {God's minister} (\diakonon tou theou\). See on ¯Matthew:22:13| for this interesting word, here in general sense not technical sense of deacon. Some MSS. have {fellow-worker} (\sunergon\). Already {apostle} in strkjv@2:7| and now {brother, minister} (and possibly {fellow-worker}).
rwp@1Timothy:2:12 @{I permit not} (\ouk epitrep\). Old word \epitrep\, to permit, to allow (1Corinthians:16:7|). Paul speaks authoritatively. {To teach} (\didaskein\). In the public meeting clearly. And yet all modern Christians allow women to teach Sunday school classes. One feels somehow that something is not expressed here to make it all clear. {Nor to have dominion over a man} (\oude authentein andros\). The word \authente\ is now cleared up by Kretschmer (_Glotta_, 1912, pp. 289ff.) and by Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_. See also Nageli, _Der Wortschatz des Apostels Paulus_ and Deissmann, _Light, etc._, pp. 88f. \Autodike\ was the literary word for playing the master while \authente\ was the vernacular term. It comes from \aut-hentes\, a self-doer, a master, autocrat. It occurs in the papyri (substantive \authents\, master, verb \authente\, to domineer, adjective \authentikos\, authoritative, "authentic"). Modern Greek has \aphentes\ = Effendi = "Mr."
rwp@1Timothy:2:14 @{Being beguiled} (\exapattheisa\). First aorist passive participle of \exapate\, old compound verb, in N.T. only by Paul (2Thessalonians:2:3; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:18; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:3; strkjv@Romans:7:11; strkjv@16:18; strkjv@1Timothy:2:14|). Not certain that \ex-\ here means "completely deceived" in contrast to simplex (\ouk patth\) used of Adam, though possible. {Hath fallen} (\gegonen\). Second perfect indicative active, permanent state. See strkjv@1Corinthians:11:7|.
rwp@1Timothy:3:5 @{If a man knoweth not} (\ei tis ouk oiden\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. {How to rule} (\prostnai\). Second aorist active infinitive of same verb \proistmi\ and with \oiden\ means "know how to rule," not "know that he rules." {How} (\ps\). Rhetorical question expecting negative answer. {Shall he take care of} (\epimelsetai\). Future middle of \epimeleomai\, old compound (\epi\, direction of care towards) verb, in LXX, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:10:34f|. {The church of God} (\ekklsias theou\). Anarthrous as in verse 15|, elsewhere with article (1Corinthians:10:32; strkjv@15:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:1; strkjv@Galatians:1:13|). The local church described as belonging to God. No one in N.T. but Paul (Acts:20:28|) so describes the church. This verse is a parenthesis in the characteristics of the bishop.
rwp@2Corinthians:1:12 @{Glorying} (\kauchsis\). Act of glorying, while in verse 14| \kauchma\ is the thing boasted of. {The testimony of our conscience} (\to marturion ts suneidses hmn\). In apposition with \kauchsis\. {Sincerity of God} (\eilikrineii tou theou\). Like \dikaiosun theou\ (Romans:1:17; strkjv@3:21|), the God-kind of righteousness. Songs:the God-kind (genitive case) of sincerity. Late word from \eilikrins\. See on ¯1Corinthians:5:8|. {Not in fleshly wisdom} (\ouk en sophii sarkiki\). See on ¯1Corinthians:1:17; strkjv@2:4,13f|. Paul uses \sarkikos\ five times and it occurs only twice elsewhere in N.T. See on ¯1Corinthians:3:3|. {We behaved ourselves} (\anestraphmen\). Second aorist passive indicative of \anastreph\, old verb, to turn back, to turn back and forth, to walk. Here the passive is used as in late Greek as if middle. {More abundantly to you-ward} (\perissoters pros humas\). They had more abundant opportunity to observe how scrupulous Paul was (Acts:18:11|).
rwp@2Corinthians:1:18 @{Is not yea and nay} (\ouk estin nai kai ou\). He is not a Yes and No man, saying Yes and meaning or acting No. Paul calls God to witness on this point.
rwp@2Corinthians:1:19 @{Was not Yea and Nay} (\ouk egeneto nai kai ou\). "Did not become Yes and No." {But in him is yea} (\alla Nai en auti gegonen\). Rather, "But in him Yes has become yes," has proved true. Songs:Paul appeals to the life of Christ to sustain his own veracity.
rwp@2Corinthians:2:13 @{I had no relief} (\ouk eschka anesin\). Perfect active indicative like that in strkjv@1:9|, vivid dramatic recital, not to be treated as "for" the aorist (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 896, 898ff.). He still feels the shadow of that restlessness. \Anesis\, from \animi\, to let up, to hold back, is old word for relaxing or release (Acts:24:34|). {For my spirit} (\ti pneumati mou\). Dative of interest. {Because I found not Titus} (\ti m heurein me Titon\). Instrumental case of the articular infinitive with negative \m\ and accusative of general reference \me\, "by the not finding Titus as to me." {Taking my leave of them} (\apotaxamenos autois\). First aorist middle participle of \apotass\, old verb, to set apart, in middle in late Greek to separate oneself, to bid adieu to as in strkjv@Mark:6:46|.
rwp@2Corinthians:4:1 @{We faint not} (\ouk egkakoumen\). Present active indicative of \egkake\, late verb (\en, kakos\) to behave badly in, to give in to evil, to lose courage. In Symmachus (LXX), Polybius, and papyri. It is the faint-hearted coward. Paul speaks of himself (literary plural). Can he not speak for all of us?
rwp@2Corinthians:4:8 @{Pressed} (\thlibomenoi\). From \thlib\, to press as grapes, to contract, to squeeze. Series of present passive participles here through verse 9| that vividly picture Paul's ministerial career. {Yet not straitened} (\all' ou stenochroumenoi\). Each time the exception is stated by \all' ou\. From \stenochre\ (\stenochros\, from \stenos\, narrow, \chros\, space), to be in a narrow place, to keep in a tight place. Late verb, in LXX and papyri. In N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:6:12|. {Yet not unto despair} (\all' ouk exaporoumenoi\). Late perfective compound with \ex-\ of \exapore\. A very effective play on words here, lost, but not lost out.
rwp@2Corinthians:4:16 @{Wherefore we faint not} (\dio ouk egkakoumen\). Repeats from verse 1|. {Our outward man} (\ho ex hmn anthrpos\), {our inward man} (\ho es hmn\). In strkjv@Romans:7:22; strkjv@Colossians:3:9; strkjv@Ephesians:4:22f.|, we have the inward man and the outward for the higher and the lower natures (the spirit and the flesh). "Here the decay (\diaphtheiretai\) of the bodily organism is set over against the growth in grace (\anakainoutai\, is refreshed) of the man himself" (Bernard). Plato (_Republ_. ix, p. 589) has \ho entos anthrpos\. Cf. "the hidden man of the heart" (1Peter:3:4|). {Day by day} (\hmeri kai hmeri\). This precise idiom is not in LXX nor rest of N.T. It may be colloquial use of locative in repetition.
rwp@2Corinthians:8:12 @{Is there} (\prokeitai\). Lies before one. Old word. {Acceptable} (\euprosdektos\). See on ¯6:2|. {According as a man hath} (\katho ean echi\). Indefinite comparative clause with \ean\ and present subjunctive \echei\. Clearly God does not expect us to give what we do not have. {Not according as he hath not} (\ou katho ouk echei\). Note present indicative rather than subjunctive because a specific case is presented. See strkjv@9:7; strkjv@Mark:12:43|.
rwp@2Corinthians:10:8 @{Somewhat abundantly} (\perissoteron ti\). Comparative, "somewhat more abundantly" than I have, in order to show that he is as true a minister of Christ as his accusers are. Concessive (conditional) clause of third class. For \ean te\ see strkjv@Romans:14:8|. {I shall not be put to shame} (\ouk aischunthsomai\). As a convicted impostor or pretentious boaster (Plummer). First future passive, singular number (not literary plural as in verse 7|).
rwp@2Corinthians:12:3 @{I do not know} (\ouk oida\). Paul declines to pass on his precise condition in this trance. We had best leave it as he has told it.
rwp@2Corinthians:12:4 @{Into Paradise} (\eis paradeison\). See on ¯Luke:23:43| for this interesting word. Paul apparently uses paradise as the equivalent of the third heaven in verse 2|. Some Jews (_Book of the Secrets of Enoch_, chapter viii) make Paradise in the third heaven. The rabbis had various ideas (two heavens, three, seven). We need not commit Paul to any "celestial gradation" (Vincent). {Unspeakable words} (\arrta rmata\). Old verbal adjective (\a\ privative, \rtos\ from \re\), only here in N.T. {Not lawful} (\ouk exon\). Copula \estin\ omitted. Hence Paul does {not} give these words.
rwp@2Corinthians:12:6 @{I shall not be foolish} (\ouk esomai aphrn\). Apparent contradiction to strkjv@11:1,16|. But he is here speaking of the Paul "caught up" in case he should tell the things heard (condition of the third class, \ean\ and first aorist subjunctive \thels\). {Of me} (\eis eme\). To my credit, almost like dative (cf. \en emoi\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:11|).
rwp@Info_2John @ SECOND JOHN ABOUT A.D. 85 TO 90 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION There is little to add to what was said about the First Epistle except that here the author terms himself "the elder" (\ho presbuteros\) and writes to "the elect lady" (\eklekti kurii\). There is dispute about both of these titles. Some hold that it is the mythical "presbyter John" of whom Papias may speak, if so understood, but whose very existence is disproved by Dom Chapman in _John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel_ (1911). Peter the apostle (1Peter:1:1|) calls himself "fellow-elder" (\sunpresbuteros\) with the other elders (1Peter:5:1|). The word referred originally to age (Luke:15:25|), then to rank or office as in the Sanhedrin (Matthew:16:21; strkjv@Acts:6:12|) and in the Christian churches (Acts:11:30; strkjv@20:17; strkjv@1Timothy:5:17,19|) as here also. A few even deny that the author is the same as in the First Epistle of John, but just an imitator. But the bulk of modern scholarly opinion agrees that the same man wrote all three Epistles and the Fourth Gospel (the Beloved Disciple, and many still say the Apostle John) whatever is true of the Apocalypse. There is no way of deciding whether "the elect lady" is a woman or a church. The obvious way of taking it is to a woman of distinction in one of the churches, as is true of "the co-elect lady in Babylon" (1Peter:5:13|), Peter's wife, who travelled with him (1Corinthians:9:5|). Some even take \kuria\ to be the name of the lady (Cyria). Some also take it to be "Eklecta the lady." Dr. Findlay (_Fellowship in the Life Eternal_, p. 31) holds that Pergamum is the church to which the letter was sent. The same commentaries treat I, II, and III John as a rule, though Poggel has a book on II, III John (1896) and Bresky (1906) has _Das Verhaltnis des Zweiten Johannesbriefes zum dritten_. Dr. J. Rendel Harris has an interesting article in _The Expositor_ of London for March, 1901, on "The Problem of the Address to the Second Epistle of John," in which he argues from papyri examples that \kuria\ here means "my dear" or "my lady." But Findlay (_Fellowship in the Life Eternal_, p. 26) argues that "the qualifying adjunct 'elect' lifts us into the region of Christian calling and dignity." It is not certain that II John was written after I John, though probable. Origen rejected it and the Peshitta Syriac does not have II and III John. strkjv@2John:1:1 @{And her children} (\kai tois teknois auts\). As with \eklekt kuria\, so here \tekna\ may be understood either literally as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:4|, or spiritually, as in strkjv@Galatians:4:19,25; strkjv@1Timothy:1:2|. For the spiritual sense in \teknia\ see strkjv@1John:2:1,12|. {Whom} (\hous\). Masculine accusative plural, though \teknois\ is neuter plural (dative), construction according to sense, not according to grammatical gender, "embracing the mother and the children of both sexes" (Vincent). See thus \hous\ in strkjv@Galatians:4:19|. {I} (\Eg\). Though \ho presbuteros\ is third person, he passes at once after the Greek idiom to the first and there is also special emphasis here in the use of \agap\ with the addition of \en altheii\ (in truth, in the highest sphere, as in strkjv@John:17:19; strkjv@3John:1:1|) and \ouk eg monos\ (not I only, "not I alone"). Brooke argues that this language is unsuitable if to a single family and not to a church. But Paul employs this very phrase in sending greetings to Prisca and Aquila (Romans:16:4|). {That know} (\hoi egnkotes\). Perfect active articular participle of \ginsk\, "those that have come to know and still know."
rwp@2John:1:12 @{I would not} (\ouk eboulthn\). Epistolary aorist (first passive indicative). {With paper and ink} (\dia chartou kai melanos\). The \charts\ was a leaf of papyrus prepared for writing by cutting the pith into strips and pasting together, old word (Jeremiah:43:23|), here only in N.T. \Melas\ is old adjective for black (Matthew:5:36; strkjv@Revelation:6:5,12|), and for black ink here, strkjv@3John:1:13; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3|. Apparently John wrote this little letter with his own hand. {To come} (\genesthai\). Second aorist middle infinitive of \ginomai\ after \elpiz\, I hope. {Face to face} (\stoma pros stoma\). "Mouth to mouth." Songs:in strkjv@3John:1:14; strkjv@Numbers:12:8|. "Face to face" (\prospon pros prospon\) we have in strkjv@1Corinthians:13:12|. {Your} (\humn\). Or "our" (\hmn\). Both true. {That may be fulfilled} (\hina peplrmen i\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the periphrastic perfect passive subjunctive of \plro\, as in strkjv@1John:1:4|, which see.
rwp@2Peter:1:8 @{For if these things are yours and abound} (\tauta gar humin huparchonta kai pleonazonta\). Present active circumstantial (conditional) participles neuter plural of \huparch\ and \pleonaz\ (see strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:12|) with dative case \humin\, "these things existing for you (or in you) and abounding." {They make you to be} (\kathistsin\). "Render" (present active indicative of \kathistmi\, old verb, strkjv@James:3:6|), singular because \tauta\ neuter plural. {Not idle nor unfruitful} (\ouk argous oude akarpous\). Accusative predicative plural with \humas\ understood, both adjectives with alpha privative, for \argos\ see strkjv@James:2:20| and for \akarpos\ strkjv@Matthew:13:22|. {Knowledge} (\epignsin\). "Full (additional) knowledge" as in strkjv@1:2|.
rwp@2Peter:1:16 @{We did not follow} (\ouk exakolouthsantes\). First aorist active participle of \exakolouthe\, late compound verb, to follow out (Polybius, Plutarch, LXX, papyri, inscriptions as of death following for any Gentile in the temple violating the barrier), with emphatic negative \ouk\, "not having followed." See also strkjv@2:2| for this verb. {Cunningly devised fables} (\sesophismenois muthois\). Associative instrumental case of \muthos\ (old term for word, narrative, story, fiction, fable, falsehood). In N.T. only here and the Pastoral Epistles (1Timothy:1:4|, etc.). Perfect passive participle of \sophiz\, old word (from \sophos\), only twice in N.T., in causative sense to make wise (2Timothy:3:15|), to play the sophist, to invent cleverly (here) and so also in the old writers and in the papyri. Some of the false teachers apparently taught that the Gospel miracles were only allegories and not facts (Bigg). Cf. strkjv@2:3| for "feigned words." {When we made known unto you} (\egnrisamen humin\). First aorist active indicative of \gnriz\, to make known unto you. Possibly by Peter himself. {The power and coming} (\tn dunamin kai parousian\). These words can refer (Chase) to the Incarnation, just as is true of \epiphaneia\ in strkjv@2Timothy:1:10| (second coming in strkjv@1Timothy:6:14|), and is true of \parousia\ (2Corinthians:7:6| of Titus). But elsewhere in the N.T. \parousia\ (technical term in the papyri for the coming of a king or other high dignitary), when used of Christ, refers to his second coming (2Peter:3:4,12|). {But we were eye-witnesses} (\all' epoptai genthentes\). First aorist passive participle of \ginomai\, "but having become eye-witnesses." \Epoptai\, old word (from \epopt\ like \epopteu\ in strkjv@1Peter:2:12; strkjv@3:2|), used of those who attained the third or highest degree of initiates in the Eleusinian mysteries (common in the inscriptions). Cf. \autopts\ in strkjv@Luke:1:2|. {Of his majesty} (\ts ekeinou megaleiottos\). Late and rare word (LXX and papyri) from \megaleios\ (Acts:2:11|), in N.T. only here, strkjv@Luke:9:43| (of God); strkjv@Acts:19:27| (of Artemis). Peter clearly felt that he and James and John were lifted to the highest stage of initiation at the Transfiguration of Christ. Emphatic \ekeinou\ as in strkjv@2Timothy:2:26|.
rwp@2Peter:2:3 @{In covetousness} (\en pleonexii\). As did Balaam (verse 15|). These licentious Gnostics made money out of their dupes. A merely intellectual Gnosticism had its fruit in immorality and fraud. {With feigned words} (\plastois logois\). Instrumental case. \Plastos\ is verbal adjective (from \plass\, to mould as from clay, for which see strkjv@Romans:9:20|), here only in N.T. "With forged words." See sample in strkjv@3:4|. {Shall make merchandise of you} (\humas emporeusontai\). Future middle of \emporeuomai\ (from \emporos\, a travelling merchant), old word, to go in for trade, in N.T. only here and strkjv@James:4:13|, which see. Cf. our emporium (John:2:16|, market house). {Whose sentence} (\hois to krima\). "For whom (dative case) the sentence" (verdict, not process \krisis\). {Now from of old} (\ekpalai\). Late and common compound adverb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@3:5|. {Lingereth not} (\ouk argei\). "Is not idle," old verb, \arge\ (from \argos\ not working, alpha privative and \ergon\), here only in N.T. {Slumbereth not} (\ou nustazei\). Old and common verb (from \nu\ to nod), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:25:5|. Note \apleia\ (destruction) three times in verses 1-3|.
rwp@2Peter:2:4 @{For if God spared not} (\ei gar ho theos ouk epheisato\). First instance (\gar\) of certain doom, that of the fallen angels. Condition of the first class precisely like that in strkjv@Romans:11:21| save that here the normal apodosis (\humn ou pheisetai\) is not expressed as there, but is simply implied in verse 9| by \oiden kurios ruesthai\ (the Lord knows how to deliver) after the parenthesis in verse 8|. {Angels when they sinned} (\aggeln hamartsantn\). Genitive case after \epheisato\ (first aorist middle indicative of \pheidomai\) and anarthrous (so more emphatic, even angels), first aorist active participle of \hamartan\, "having sinned." {Cast them down to hell} (\tartarsas\). First aorist active participle of \tartaro\, late word (from \tartaros\, old word in Homer, Pindar, LXX strkjv@Job:40:15; strkjv@41:23|, Philo, inscriptions, the dark and doleful abode of the wicked dead like the Gehenna of the Jews), found here alone save in a scholion on Homer. \Tartaros\ occurs in Enoch strkjv@20:2 as the place of punishment of the fallen angels, while Gehenna is for apostate Jews. {Committed} (\paredken\). First aorist active indicative of \paradidmi\, the very form solemnly used by Paul in strkjv@Romans:1:21,26,28|. {To pits of darkness} (\seirois zophou\). \Zophos\ (kin to \gnophos, nephos\) is an old word, blackness, gloom of the nether world in Homer, in N.T. only here, verse 17; strkjv@Jude:1:13; strkjv@Hebrews:12:18|. The MSS. vary between \seirais\ (\seira\, chain or rope) and \seirois\ (\seiros\, old word for pit, underground granary). \Seirois\ is right (Aleph A B C), dative case of destination. {To be reserved unto judgment} (\eis krisin troumenous\). Present (linear action) passive participle of \tre\. "Kept for judgment." Cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:4|. Aleph A have \kolazomenous trein\ as in verse 9|. Note \krisis\ (act of judgment).
rwp@2Thessalonians:2:3 @{Let no man beguile you in any wise} (\m tis humas exapatsi kata mdena tropon\). First aorist active subjunctive of \exapata\ (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb \apata\) with double negative (\m tis, mdena\) in accord with regular Greek idiom as in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:11| rather than the aorist imperative which does occur sometimes in the third person as in strkjv@Mark:13:15| (\m katabat\). Paul broadens the warning to go beyond conversation and letter. He includes "tricks" of any kind. It is amazing how gullible some of the saints are when a new deceiver pulls off some stunts in religion. {For it will not be} (\hoti\). There is an ellipse here of \ouk estai\ (or \gensetai\) to be supplied after \hoti\. Westcott and Hort make an anacoluthon at the end of verse 4|. The meaning is clear. \Hoti\ is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not "imminent," but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of verse 2|. {Except the falling away come first} (\ean m elthi h apostasia prton\). Negative condition of the third class, undetermined with prospect of determination and the aorist subjunctive. \Apostasia\ is the late form of \apostasis\ and is our word apostasy. Plutarch uses it of political revolt and it occurs in I Macc. strkjv@2:15 about Antiochus Epiphanes who was enforcing the apostasy from Judaism to Hellenism. In strkjv@Joshua:22:22| it occurs for rebellion against the Lord. It seems clear that the word here means a religious revolt and the use of the definite article (\h\) seems to mean that Paul had spoken to the Thessalonians about it. The only other New Testament use of the word is in strkjv@Acts:21:21| where it means apostasy from Moses. It is not clear whether Paul means revolt of the Jews from God, of Gentiles from God, of Christians from God, or of the apostasy that includes all classes within and without the body of Christians. But it is to be {first} (\prton\) before Christ comes again. Note this adverb when only two events are compared (cf. strkjv@Acts:1:1|). {And the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition} (\kai apokaluphthi ho anthrpos ts anomias, ho huios ts apleias\). First aorist passive subjunctive after \ean m\ and same condition as with \elthi\. The use of this verb \apokalupt\, like \apokalupsin\ of the second coming in strkjv@1:7|, seems to note the superhuman character (Milligan) of the event and the same verb is repeated in verses 6,8|. The implication is that {the man of sin} is hidden somewhere who will be suddenly manifested just as false apostles pose as angels of light (2Corinthians:11:13ff.|), whether the crowning event of the apostasy or another name for the same event. Lightfoot notes the parallel between the man of sin, of whom sin is the special characteristic (genitive case, a Hebraism for the lawless one in verse 8|) and Christ. Both Christ and the adversary of Christ are revealed, there is mystery about each, both make divine claims (verse 4|). He seems to be the Antichrist of strkjv@1John:2:18|. The terrible phrase, the son of perdition, is applied to Judas in strkjv@John:17:12| (like Judas doomed to perdition), but here to the lawless one (\ho anomos\, verse 8|), who is not Satan, but some one definite person who is doing the work of Satan. Note the definite article each time.
rwp@2Thessalonians:3:7 @{How ye ought to imitate us} (\ps dei mimeisthai hmas\). Literally, how it is necessary to imitate us. The infinitive \mimeisthai\ is the old verb \mimeomai\ from \mimos\ (actor, mimic), but in N.T. only here (and verse 9|), strkjv@Hebrews:13:7; strkjv@3John:1:11|. It is a daring thing to say, but Paul knew that he had to set the new Christians in the midst of Jews and Gentiles a model for their imitation (Phillipians:3:17|). {For we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you} (\hoti ouk taktsamen en humin\). First aorist active indicative of old verb \atakte\, to be out of ranks of soldiers. Specific denial on Paul's part in contrast to verse 6,17|.
rwp@2Thessalonians:3:9 @{Not because we have not the right} (\ouch hoti ouk echomen exousian\). Paul is sensitive on his {right} to receive adequate support (1Thessalonians:2:6; 1 Co strkjv@9:4| where he uses the same word \exousian\ in the long defence of this {right}, strkjv@1Corinthians:9:1-27|). Songs:he here puts in this limitation to avoid misapprehension. He did allow churches to help him where he would not be misunderstood (2Corinthians:11:7-11; strkjv@Phillipians:4:45f.|). Paul uses \ouch hoti\ elsewhere to avoid misunderstanding (2Corinthians:1:24; strkjv@3:5; strkjv@Phillipians:4:17|). {But to make ourselves an ensample unto you} (\all' hina heautous tupon dmen humin\). Literally, {but that we might give ourselves a type to you}. Purpose with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \didmi\. On \tupon\ see on ¯1Thessalonians:1:7|.
rwp@2Timothy:1:12 @{These things} (\tauta\). His imprisonment in Rome. {Yet I am not ashamed} (\all' ouk epaischunomai\). Plain reference to the exhortation to Timothy in verse 8|. {Him whom I have believed} (\hi pepisteuka\). Dative case of the relative (\hi\) with the perfect active of \pisteu\, the antecedent to the relative not expressed. It is not an indirect question. Paul knows Jesus Christ whom he has trusted. {I am persuaded} (\pepeismai\). See verse 5|. {To guard} (\phulaxai\). First aorist active infinitive of \phulass\, the very word used in strkjv@1Timothy:6:20| with \parathkn\ as here, to guard against robbery or any loss. {That which I have committed unto him} (\tn parathkn mou\). Literally, "my deposit," as in a bank, the bank of heaven which no burglar can break (Matthew:6:19f.|). See this word also in verse 14|. Some MSS. have the more common \parakatathk\ (a sort of double deposit, \para\, beside, down, \kata\). {Against that day} (\eis ekeinn tn hmeran\). The day of Christ's second coming. See also strkjv@1:18; strkjv@4:8; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:10|, and often in the Gospels. Elsewhere, the day of the Lord (1Thessalonians:5:2; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:14|), the day of Christ or Jesus Christ (Phillipians:1:6,10; strkjv@2:16|), the day (1Thessalonians:5:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:13; strkjv@Romans:13:12|), the day of redemption (Ephesians:4:20|), the day of judgment (Romans:2:5,16|).
rwp@2Timothy:1:16 @{Grant mercy} (\di eleos\). The phrase nowhere else in the N.T. Second aorist active optative of \didmi\, the usual form being \doi\. This is the usual construction in a wish about the future. {Unto the house of Onesiphorus} (\ti Onsiphorou oiki\). The same phrase in strkjv@4:19|. Apparently Onesiphorus is now dead as is implied by the wish in strkjv@1:18|. {For he oft refreshed me} (\hoti pollakis me anepsuxen\). First aorist active indicative of \anapsuch\, old verb, to cool again, in LXX and _Koin_ often, here only in N.T., but \anapsuxis\ in strkjv@Acts:3:20|. In the first imprisonment or the second. If he lost his life for coming to see Paul, it was probably recently during this imprisonment. {Was not ashamed of my chain} (\halusin mou ouk epaischunth\). Passive deponent again (first aorist indicative) with accusative as in strkjv@1:8|. For \halusin\ (chain) see strkjv@Ephesians:6:20|. Note absence of augment in \epaischunth\.
rwp@3John:1:9 @{I wrote somewhat unto the church} (\egrapsa ti ti ekklsii\). A few MSS. add \an\ to indicate that he had not written (conclusion of second-class condition), clearly spurious. Not epistolary aorist nor a reference to II John as Findlay holds, but an allusion to a brief letter of commendation (Acts:18:27; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:1; strkjv@Colossians:4:10|) sent along with the brethren in verses 5-7| or to some other itinerant brethren. Westcott wrongly thinks that \ti\ is never used of anything important in the N.T. (Acts:8:9; strkjv@Galatians:6:3|), and hence that this lost letter was unimportant. It may have been brief and a mere introduction. \Diotrephes\ (\Dios\ and \treph\, nourished by Zeus). This ambitious leader and sympathiser with the Gnostics would probably prevent the letter referred to being read to the church, whether it was II John condemning the Gnostics or another letter commending Demetrius and John's missionaries. Hence he sends Gaius this personal letter warning against Diotrephes. {Who loveth to have the preeminence among them} (\ho philoprteun autn\). Present active articular participle of a late verb, so far found only here and in ecclesiastical writers (the example cited by Blass being an error, Deissmann, _Light_ etc., p. 76), from \philoprtos\, fond of being first (Plutarch), and made like \philopone\ (papyri), to be fond of toil. This ambition of Diotrephes does not prove that he was a bishop over elders, as was true in the second century (as Ignatius shows). He may have been an elder (bishop) or deacon, but clearly desired to rule the whole church. Some forty years ago I wrote an article on Diotrephes for a denominational paper. The editor told me that twenty-five deacons stopped the paper to show their resentment against being personally attacked in the paper. {Receiveth us not} (\ouk epidechetai hms\). Present active indicative of this old compound, in N.T. only here and verse 10|. Diotrephes refused to accept John's authority or those who sided with him, John's missionaries or delegates (cf. strkjv@Matthew:10:40|).
rwp@Acts:4:1 @{The captain of the temple} (\ho stratgos tou hierou\). Twenty-four bands of Levites guarded the temple, one guard at a time. They watched the gates. The commander of each band was called captain (\stratgos\). Josephus names this captain of the temple police next to the high priest (_War_. VI. 5, 3). {The Sadducees} (\hoi Saddoukaioi\). Most of the priests were Sadducees now and all the chief priests since John Hyrcanus I deserted the Pharisees (Josephus, _Ant_. XVII. 10, 6; XVIII. 1, 4; XX. 9, 1). The Sadducees were slow to line up with the Pharisees against Jesus, but they now take the lead against Peter and John. {Came upon them} (\epestsan autois\). Second aorist active indicative (intransitive). Burst upon them suddenly or stood by them in a hostile attitude here (Luke:20:1; strkjv@24:4; strkjv@Acts:6:12; strkjv@17:5; strkjv@22:20; strkjv@23:11|).
rwp@Acts:5:17 @{Which is the sect of the Sadducees} (\h ousa hairesis tn Saddoukain\). Literally, "the existing sect of the Sadducees" or "the sect which is of the Sadducees," \h\ being the article, not the relative. \Hairesis\ means a choosing, from \haireomai\, to take for oneself, to choose, then an opinion chosen or tenet (possibly strkjv@2Peter:2:1|), then parties or factions (Gal strkjv@5:20; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:19|; possibly strkjv@2Peter:2:1|). It is applied here to the Sadducees; to the Pharisees in strkjv@Acts:15:5; strkjv@26:5|; to the Christians in strkjv@24:5-14; strkjv@28:22|. Already Luke has stated that the Sadducees started the persecution of Peter and John (Acts:4:1f.|). Now it is extended to "the apostles" as a whole since Christianity has spread more rapidly in Jerusalem than before it began.
rwp@Acts:5:42 @{Every day} (\psan hmeran\). Accusative of extent of time, all through every day. {In the temple and at home} (\en ti hieri kai kat' oikon\). This was a distinct triumph to go back to the temple where they had been arrested (verse 25|) and at home or from house to house, as it probably means (cf. strkjv@2:46|). It was a great day for the disciples in Jerusalem. {They ceased not} (\ouk epauonto\). Imperfect middle. They kept it up. {Jesus as the Christ} (\ton Christon Isoun\). Jesus is the direct object of the participles \didaskontes\ (teaching) and \euaggelizomenoi\ (preaching or evangelizing) while "the Christ" (\ton Christon\) is the predicate accusative. These words give the substance of the early apostolic preaching as these opening chapters of Acts show, that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah of promise. Gamaliel had opened the prison doors for them and they took full advantage of the opportunity that now was theirs.
rwp@Acts:6:10 @{They were not able to withstand} (\ouk ischuon antistnai\). Imperfect active of \ischu\, to have strength, and ingressive second aorist active (intransitive) infinitive of \anthistmi\. They continued unable (without strength enough) to take a stand against. Stephen knocked them down, Saul included, as fast as they got up. Stephen was like a battery charged and in action. {The wisdom and spirit} (\ti sophii kai pneumati\). Dative case. They stood up against Stephen's wisdom and the Holy Spirit "by whom he spoke" (\hi elalei\). Instrumental case and the relative agrees with "Spirit." He kept on speaking so (\elalei\, imperfect active). It was a desperate situation.
rwp@Acts:7:5 @{Not so much as to set his foot on} (\oude bma podos\). From strkjv@Deuteronomy:2:5|. Old word from \bain\, to go, to step. "Stepping of a foot," only instance of this original meaning in the N.T. From this it comes to mean a platform reached by steps, official seat of a judge (Matthew:27:19|). The field purchased by Abraham (Genesis:23:9-17|) was not a gift from God. {Promised} (\epggeilato\). First aorist middle indicative of \epaggell\, common verb. See strkjv@Genesis:12:7; strkjv@17:8; strkjv@48:4| for this promise. Songs:God appeared again to Abraham in a strange land. {In possession} (\eis kataschesin\). Late word, in LXX, and in N.T. only here and verse 45|. From \katech\, to hold back, then to hold fast (or down), to possess. It was fulfilled in the descendants of Abraham. {When as yet he had no child} (\ouk ontos auti teknou\). Genitive absolute with negative \ouk\ rather than \m\ to emphasize actual absence of a child. He had only the promise of God about the land and the child.
rwp@Acts:7:18 @{Another king} (\basileus heteros\). A different kind of king also, probably a king of the new dynasty after the shepherd kings had been expelled from Egypt. {Who knew not Joseph} (\hos ouk idei ton Isph\). Second past perfect of \oida\ used like an imperfect. Joseph's history and services meant nothing to the new king. "The previous dynasty had been that of the Hyksos: the new king was Ahmes who drove out the Hyksos" (Knobel).
rwp@Acts:7:31 @{The sight} (\to horama\). Used of visions in the N.T. as in strkjv@Matthew:17:9|. {As he drew near} (\proserchomenou autou\). Genitive absolute with present middle participle of \proserchomai\. {A voice of the Lord} (\phn kuriou\). Here the angel of Jehovah of verse 30| is termed Jehovah himself. Jesus makes powerful use of these words in his reply to the Sadducees in defence of the doctrine of the resurrection and the future life (Mark:12:26; strkjv@Matthew:22:32; strkjv@Luke:20:37f.|) that God here describes himself as the God of the living. {Trembled} (\entromos genomenos\). Literally, becoming tremulous or terrified. The adjective \entromos\ (\en, tromos\ from \trem\, to tremble, to quake) occurs in Plutarch and the LXX. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:16:29|. {Durst not} (\ouk etolma\). Imperfect active, was not daring, negative conative imperfect.
rwp@Acts:7:39 @{To whom} (\hi\). That is Moses, this Moses. {Would not be} (\ouk thelsan genesthai\). Aorist active, negative aorist, were unwilling to become (\genesthai\) obedient. {Thrust him from them} (\apsanto\). Indirect middle of the very verb used of the man (verse 27|) who "thrust" Moses away from him. {Turned back} (\estraphsan\). Second aorist passive indicative of \streph\, to turn. They yearned after the fleshpots of Egypt and even the gods of Egypt. It is easy now to see why Stephen has patiently led his hearers through this story. He is getting ready for the home-thrust.
rwp@Acts:7:40 @{Gods which shall go before us} (\theous hoi proporeusontai hmn\). strkjv@Exodus:32:1|. As guides and protectors, perhaps with some allusion to the pillar of fire and of cloud that had gone before them (Exodus:13:21|). The future indicative here with \hoi\ (relative) expresses purpose. {Ye wot not} (\ouk oidamen\). We do not know. How quickly they had forgotten both God and Moses while Moses was absent in the mount with God. {Become of him} (\egeneto auti\). Happened to him. "This" (\houtos\) here is a contemptuous allusion to Moses by the people.
rwp@Acts:7:53 @{Ye who} (\hoitines\). The very ones who, _quippe qui_, often in Acts when the persons are enlarged upon (8:15; strkjv@9:35; strkjv@10:41,47|). {As it was ordained by angels} (\eis diatagas aggeln\). About angels see on ¯7:38|. \Diatag\ (from \diatass\, to arrange, appoint) occurs in late Greek, LXX, inscriptions, papyri, Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 89ff., and in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:13:2|. At (or as) the appointment of angels (cf. strkjv@Matthew:10:41; strkjv@12:41| for this use of \eis\). {And kept it not} (\kai ouk ephulaxate\). Like a whipcracker these words cut to the quick. They gloried in possessing the law and openly violated it (Romans:2:23|).
rwp@Acts:8:30 @{Understandest thou what thou readest?} (\Ara ge ginskeis ha anaginskeis?\) The interrogative particle \ara\ and the intensive particle \ge\ indicate doubt on Philip's part. The play (\paranomasia\) upon the words in the Greek is very neat: {Do you know what you know again (read)?} The verb for read (\anaginsko\) means to know the letters again, recognize, read. The famous comment of Julian about the Christian writings is often quoted: \Anegnn, egnn, kategnn\ (I read, I understood, I condemned). The keen retort was: \Anegns, all'ouk egns, ei gar egns, ouk an kategns\ (You read, but did not understand; for if you had understood, you would not have condemned).
rwp@Acts:9:7 @{That journeyed with him} (\hoi sunodeuontes auti\). Not in the older Greek, but in the _Koin_, with the associative instrumental. {Speechless} (\eneoi\). Mute. Only here in N.T., though old word. {Hearing the voice, but beholding no man} (\akouontes men ts phns, mdena de therountes\). Two present active participles in contrast (\men, de\). In strkjv@22:9| Paul says that the men "beheld the light" (\to men phs etheasanto\), but evidently did not discern the person. Paul also says there, "but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me" (\tn de phnn ouk kousan tou lalountos moi\). Instead of this being a flat contradiction of what Luke says in strkjv@9:7| it is natural to take it as being likewise (as with the "light" and "no one") a distinction between the "sound" (original sense of \phn\ as in strkjv@John:3:8|) and the separate words spoken. It so happens that \akou\ is used either with the accusative (the extent of the hearing) or the genitive (the specifying). It is possible that such a distinction here coincides with the two senses of \phn\. They heard the sound (9:7|), but did not understand the words (22:9|). However, this distinction in case with \akou\, though possible and even probable here, is by no means a necessary one for in strkjv@John:3:8| where \phnn\ undoubtedly means "sound" the accusative occurs as Luke uses \kousen phnn\ about Saul in strkjv@Acts:9:4|. Besides in strkjv@22:7| Paul uses \kousa phns\ about himself, but \kousa phnn\ about himself in strkjv@76:14|, interchangeably.
rwp@Acts:12:9 @{Wist not} (\ouk idei\). Past perfect of \oida\ used as imperfect, did not know. {Followed} (\kolouthei\). Imperfect active, kept on following as the angel had directed (verse 8|). That it was true (\hoti althes estin\). Indirect assertion and so present tense retained. Note "true" (\althes\) in the sense of reality or actuality. {Which was done} (\to ginomenon\). Present middle participle, that which was happening. {Thought he saw a vision} (\edokei horama blepein\). Imperfect active, kept on thinking, puzzled as he was. \Blepein\ is the infinitive in indirect assertion without the pronoun (he) expressed which could be either nominative in apposition with the subject as in strkjv@Romans:1:22| or accusative of general reference as in strkjv@Acts:5:36; strkjv@8:9| (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1036-40). Peter had had a vision in Joppa (10:10|) which Luke describes as an "ecstasy," but here is objective fact, at least Luke thought so and makes that distinction. Peter will soon know whether he is still in the cell or not as we find out that a dream is only a dream when we wake up.
rwp@Acts:12:14 @{When she knew} (\epignousa\). Second aorist (ingressive) active participle of \epiginsk\, to know fully or in addition (\epi\), to recognize. She knew Peter and his voice from his frequent visits there. {For joy} (\apo ts chars\). From her joy (ablative case), life-like picture of the maid who left Peter standing outside with the door to the passageway unopened. Note the aorist tenses for quick action (\ouk noixen\), \eisdramousa\ (from \eistrech\, defective verb, only here in the N.T.), \apggeilen\. {Stood} (\hestanai\). Second perfect active infinitive of \histmi\, intransitive, in indirect assertion with \ton Petron\ (Peter) accusative of general reference. The slave girl acted as if she were a member of the family (Furneaux), but she left Peter in peril.
rwp@Acts:12:18 @{As soon as it was day} (\Genomens hmeras\). Genitive absolute, day having come. {No small stir} (\tarachos ouk oligos\). Litotes (\ouk oligos\), occurs eight times in the Acts as in strkjv@15:2|, and nowhere else in the N.T. \Tarachos\ (stir) is an old word from \tarass\, to agitate. In the N.T only here and strkjv@19:23|. Probably all sixteen soldiers were agitated over this remarkable escape. They were responsible for the prisoner with their lives (cf. strkjv@Acts:16:27; strkjv@27:42|). Furneaux suggests that Manaen, the king's foster-brother and a Christian (13:1|), was the "angel" who rescued Peter from the prison. That is not the way that Peter looked at it. {What was become of Peter} (\ti ara ho Petros egeneto\). An indirect question with the aorist indicative retained. \Ara\ adds a syllogism (therefore) to the problem as in strkjv@Luke:1:66|. The use of the neuter \ti\ (as in strkjv@Acts:13:25|) is different from \tis\, though nominative like \Petros\, literally, "what then Peter had become," "what had happened to Peter" (in one idiom). See the same idiom in strkjv@John:21:21| (\houtos de ti\). {But this one what} (verb \gensetai\ not used).
rwp@Acts:13:25 @{As John was fulfilling his course} (\hs eplrou Ians ton dromon\). Imperfect active of \plro\, describing his vivid ministry without defining the precise period when John asked the question. Paul uses this word \dromos\ (course) of his own race (Acts:20:24; strkjv@2Timothy:4:7|). {What suppose ye that I am?} (\Ti eme huponoeite einai?\) Note \ti\ (neuter), not \tina\ (masculine), {what} not {who}, character, not identity. It is indirect discourse (the infinitive \einai\ and the accusative of general reference). {Huponoe} (\hupo, noe\) is to think secretly, to suspect, to conjecture. {I am not he} (\ouk eimi eg\). These precise words are not given in the Gospels, but the idea is the same as the disclaimers by the Baptist in strkjv@John:1:19-27| (cf. also strkjv@Matthew:3:11; strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Luke:3:16|). Paul had a true grasp of the message of the Baptist. He uses the very form \lsai\ (first aorist active infinitive of \lu\) found in strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Luke:3:16| and the word for shoes (\hupodma\, singular) in all three. His quotation is remarkably true to the words in the Synoptic Gospels. How did Paul get hold of the words of the Baptist so clearly?
rwp@Acts:13:39 @{And by him every one that believeth is justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses} (\kai apo pantn hn ouk dunthte en nomi Muses dikaiothnai en touti ps ho pisteun dikaioutai\). This is a characteristic Greek sentence with the principal clause at the end and Pauline to the core. A literal rendering as to the order would be: "And from all the things from (\apo\ not repeated in the Greek, but understood, the ablative case being repeated) which ye were not able to be justified in this one every one who believes is justified." The climax is at the close and gives us the heart of Paul's teaching about Christ. "We have here the germ of all that is most characteristic in Paul's later teaching. It is the argument of the Epistle to Galatians and Romans in a sentence" (Furneaux). The failure of the Mosaic law to bring the kind of righteousness that God demands is stated. This is made possible in and by (\en\) Christ alone. Paul's favourite words occur here, \pisteu\, believe, with which \pistis\, faith, is allied, \dikaio\, to set right with God on the basis of faith. In strkjv@Romans:6:7| Paul uses \apo\ also after \dikaio\. These are key words (\pisteu\ and \dikaio\) in Paul's theology and call for prolonged and careful study if one is to grasp the Pauline teaching. \Dikaio\ primarily means to make righteous, to declare righteous like \axio\, to deem worthy (\axios\). But in the end Paul holds that real righteousness will come (Romans:6-8|) to those whom God treats as righteous (Romans:3-5|) though both Gentile and Jew fall short without Christ (Romans:1-3|). This is the doctrine of grace that will prove a stumbling block to the Jews with their ceremonial works and foolishness to the Greeks with their abstract philosophical ethics (1Corinthians:1:23-25|). It is a new and strange doctrine to the people of Antioch.
rwp@Acts:13:46 @{Spake out boldly} (\parrsiasamenoi\). First aorist middle participle of \parrsiazomai\, to use freedom in speaking, to assume boldness. Both Paul and Barnabas accepted the challenge of the rabbis. They would leave their synagogue, but not without a word of explanation. {It was necessary to you first} (\Humin n anagkaion prton\). They had done their duty and had followed the command of Jesus (1:8|). They use the very language of Peter in strkjv@3:26| (\humin prton\) "to you first." This position Paul as the apostle to the Gentiles will always hold, the Jew first in privilege and penalty (Romans:1:16; strkjv@2:9,10|). {Ye thrust it from you} (\aptheisthe auton\). Present middle (indirect, from yourselves) indicative of \apthe\, to push from. Vigorous verb seen already in strkjv@Acts:7:27,39| which see. {Judge yourselves unworthy} (\ouk axious krinete heautous\). Present active indicative of the common verb \krin\, to judge or decide with the reflexive pronoun expressed. Literally, Do not judge yourselves worthy. By their action and their words they had taken a violent and definite stand. {Lo, we turn to the Gentiles} (\idou strephometha eis ta ethn\). It is a crisis (\idou\, lo): "Lo, we turn ourselves to the Gentiles." Probably also aoristic present, we now turn (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 864-70). \Strephometha\ is probably the direct middle (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 806-08) though the aorist passive \estraphn\ is so used also (7:39|). It is a dramatic moment as Paul and Barnabas turn from the Jews to the Gentiles, a prophecy of the future history of Christianity. In strkjv@Romans:9-11| Paul will discuss at length the rejection of Christ by the Jews and the calling of the Gentiles to be the real (the spiritual) Israel.
rwp@Acts:14:28 @{And they tarried no little time} (\dietribon de chronon ouk oligon\). Imperfect active of \diatrib\, old verb to rub hard, to consume, with accusative of extent of time. It was a happy time of fellowship. The experiment entered upon by the church of Antioch was now a pronounced success. It was at the direct command of the Holy Spirit, but they had prayed for the absent missionaries and rejoiced at their signal success. There is no sign of jealousy on the part of Barnabas when Paul returns as the chief hero of the expedition. A new corner has been turned in the history of Christianity. There is a new centre of Christian activity. What will Jerusalem think of the new developments at Antioch? Paul and Barnabas made no report to Jerusalem.
rwp@Acts:15:2 @{When Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and questioning with them} (\Genomens stases kai ztses ouk oligs ti Pauli kai Barnabi pros autous\). Genitive absolute of second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\, genitive singular agreeing with first substantive \stases\. Literally, "No little (litotes for much) strife and questioning coming to Paul and Barnabas (dative case) with them " (\pros autous\, face to face with them). Paul and Barnabas were not willing to see this Gentile church brow-beaten and treated as heretics by these self-appointed regulators of Christian orthodoxy from Jerusalem. The work had developed under the leadership of Paul and Barnabas and they accepted full responsibility for it and stoutly resisted these Judaizers to the point of sedition (riot, outbreak in strkjv@Luke:23:25; strkjv@Acts:19:40|) as in strkjv@23:7|. There is no evidence that the Judaizers had any supporters in the Antioch church so that they failed utterly to make any impression. Probably these Judaizers compelled Paul to think through afresh his whole gospel of grace and so they did Paul and the world a real service. If the Jews like Paul had to believe, it was plain that there was no virtue in circumcision (Galatians:2:15-21|). It is not true that the early Christians had no disagreements. They had selfish avarice with Ananias and Sapphira, murmuring over the gifts to the widows, simony in the case of Simon Magus, violent objection to work in Caesarea, and now open strife over a great doctrine (grace vs. legalism). {The brethren appointed} (\etaxan\). "The brethren" can be supplied from verse 1| and means the church in Antioch. The church clearly saw that the way to remove this deadlock between the Judaizers and Paul and Barnabas was to consult the church in Jerusalem to which the Judaizers belonged. Paul and Barnabas had won in Antioch. If they can win in Jerusalem, that will settle the matter. The Judaizers will be answered in their own church for which they are presuming to speak. The verb \etaxan\ (\tass\, to arrange) suggests a formal appointment by the church in regular assembly. Paul (Galatians:2:2|) says that he went up by revelation (\kat' apokalupsin\), but surely that is not contradictory to the action of the church. {Certain others of them} (\tinas allous\). Certainly Titus (Galatians:2:1,3|), a Greek and probably a brother of Luke who is not mentioned in Acts. Rackham thinks that Luke was in the number. {The apostles and elders} (\tous apostolous kai presbuterous\). Note one article for both (cf. "the apostles and the brethren" in strkjv@11:1|). "Elders" now (11:30|) in full force. The apostles have evidently returned now to the city after the death of Herod Agrippa I stopped the persecution.
rwp@Acts:16:21 @{Customs which it is not lawful for us to receive, or to observe, being Romans} (\eth ha ouk estin hmin paradechesthai oude poiein Rmaiois ousin\). Note the sharp contrast between "being Jews" in verse 20| and "being Romans" here. This pose of patriotism is all sound and fury. It is love of money that moves these "masters" far more than zeal for Rome. As Roman citizens in a colony they make full use of all their rights of protest. Judaism was a _religio licita_ in the Roman empire, only they were not allowed to make proselytes of the Romans themselves. No Roman magistrate would pass on abstract theological questions (18:15|), but only if a breach of the peace was made (\ektarassousin hmn tn polin\) or the formation of secret sects and organizations. Evidently both of these last points are involved by the charges of "unlawful customs" by the masters who are silent about their real ground of grievance against Paul and Silas. \Ethos\ (kin to \thos\, strkjv@1Corinthians:15:33|) is from \eth\, to be accustomed or used to a thing. The Romans granted toleration to conquered nations to follow their religious customs provided they did not try to win the Romans. But the Jews had made great headway to favour (the God-fearers) with increasing hatred also. Emperor worship had in store grave peril for both Jews and Christians. The Romans will care more for this than for the old gods and goddesses. It will combine patriotism and piety.
rwp@Acts:17:4 @{Some of them} (\tines ex autn\). That is of the Jews who were evidently largely afraid of the rabbis. Still "some" were persuaded (\epeisthsan\, effective first aorist passive indicative) and "consorted with" (\proseklrthsan\). This latter verb is also first aorist passive indicative of \prosklro\, a common verb in late Greek (Plutarch, Lucian), but only here in the N.T., from \pros\ and \klros\, to assign by lot. Songs:then this small group of Jews were given Paul and Silas by God's grace. {And of the devout Greeks a great multitude} (\tn te sebomenn Hellnn plthos polu\). These "God-fearers" among the Gentiles were less under the control of the jealous rabbis and so responded more readily to Paul's appeal. In strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:9| Paul expressly says that they had "turned to God from idols," proof that this church was mainly Gentile (cf. also strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:14|). {And of the chief women not a few} (\gunaikn te tn prtn ouk oligai\). Literally, "And of women the first not a few." That is, a large number of women of the very first rank in the city, probably devout women also like the men just before and like those in strkjv@13:50| in Antioch in Pisidia who along with "the first men of the city" were stirred up against Paul. Here these women were openly friendly to Paul's message, whether proselytes or Gentiles or Jewish wives of Gentiles as Hort holds. It is noteworthy that here, as in Philippi, leading women take a bold stand for Christ. In Macedonia women had more freedom than elsewhere. It is not to be inferred that all those converted belonged to the higher classes, for the industrial element was clearly large (1Thessalonians:4:11|). In strkjv@2Corinthians:8:2| Paul speaks of the deep poverty of the Macedonian churches, but with Philippi mainly in mind. Ramsay thinks that Paul won many of the heathen not affiliated at all with the synagogue. Certain it is that we must allow a considerable interval of time between verses 4,5| to understand what Paul says in his Thessalonian Epistles.
rwp@Acts:17:12 @{Many therefore} (\Polloi men oun\). As a result of this Bible study. {Also of the Greek women of honourable estate}. The word \Hellnis\ means Greek woman, but the word \gun\ is added. In particular women of rank (\euschmonn\, from \eu\ and \ech\, graceful figure and the honourable standing) as in strkjv@13:50| (Mark:15:43|). Probably Luke means by implication that the "men" (\andrn\) were also noble Greeks though he does not expressly say so. Songs:then the Jews were more open to the message, the proselytes or God-fearers followed suit, with "not a few" (\ouk oligoi\) real Greeks (both men and women) believing. It was quick and fine work.
rwp@Acts:17:24 @{The God that made the world} (\Hosea:theos ho poisas ton kosmon\). Not a god for this and a god for that like the 30,000 gods of the Athenians, but the one God who made the Universe (\kosmos\ on the old Greek sense of orderly arrangement of the whole universe). {And all things therein} (\kai panta ta en auti\). All the details in the universe were created by this one God. Paul is using the words of strkjv@Isaiah:42:5|. The Epicureans held that matter was eternal. Paul sets them aside. This one God was not to be confounded with any of their numerous gods save with this "Unknown God." {Being Lord of heaven and earth} (\ouranou kai gs huparchn kurios\). \Kurios\ here owner, absolute possessor of both heaven and earth (Isaiah:45:7|), not of just parts. {Dwelleth not in temples made with hands} (\ouken cheiropoitois naois katoikei\). The old adjective \cheiropoitos\ (\cheir, poie\) already in Stephen's speech (7:48|). No doubt Paul pointed to the wonderful Parthenon, supposed to be the home of Athene as Stephen denied that God dwelt alone in the temple in Jerusalem.
rwp@Acts:17:29 @{We ought not to think} (\ouk opheilomen nomizein\). It is a logical conclusion (\oun\, therefore) from the very language of Aratus and Cleanthes. {That the Godhead is like} (\to theion einai homoion\). Infinitive with accusative of general reference in indirect discourse. \To theion\ is strictly "the divine" nature like \theiots\ (Romans:1:20|) rather than like \theots\ (Colossians:2:9|). Paul may have used \to theion\ here to get back behind all their notions of various gods to the real nature of God. The Athenians may even have used the term themselves. After \homoios\ (like) the associative instrumental case is used as with \chrusi, arguri, lithi\. {Graven by art and device of man} (\charagmati techns kai enthumses anthrpou\). Apposition with preceding and so \charagmati\ in associative instrumental case. Literally, graven work or sculpture from \charass\, to engrave, old word, but here alone in N.T. outside of Revelation (the mark of the beast). Graven work of art (\techns\) or external craft, and of thought or device (\enthumses\) or internal conception of man.
rwp@Acts:18:20 @{When they asked him} (\ertntn autn\). Genitive absolute of present participle of \erta\, old verb to ask a question, common in _Koin_ to make a request as here. {He consented not} (\ouk epeneusen\). First aorist active indicative of \epineu\, old verb to express approval by a nod, only here in the N.T.
rwp@Acts:19:23 @{No small stir} (\tarachos ouk oligos\). Same phrase in strkjv@12:18| and nowhere else in the N.T. Litotes. {Concerning the Way} (\peri ts hodou\). See this phrase for Christianity in strkjv@9:2; strkjv@19:9; strkjv@24:22| which see, like the "Jesus Way" of the Indians. There had already been opposition and "stir" before this stage (cf. strkjv@19:11-20|). The fight with wild beasts in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:32| (whatever it was) was before that Epistle was written and so before this new uproar. Paul as a Roman citizen could not be thrown to wild beasts, but he so pictured the violent opponents of Christ in Ephesus.
rwp@Acts:19:24 @{Demetrius, a silversmith} (\Dmtrios argurokopos\). The name is common enough and may or may not be the man mentioned in strkjv@3John:1:12| who was also from the neighbourhood of Ephesus. There is on an inscription at Ephesus near the close of the century a Demetrius called \neopoios Artemidos\ a temple warden of Artemis (Diana). Zoeckler suggests that Luke misunderstood this word \neopoios\ and translated it into \argurokopos\, a beater (\kopt\, to beat) of silver (\arguros\, silver), "which made silver shrines of Artemis" (\poin naous\ (\argurous\) \Artemidos\). It is true that no silver shrines of the temple have been found in Ephesus, but only numerous terra-cotta ones. Ramsay suggests that the silver ones would naturally be melted down. The date is too late anyhow to identify the Demetrius who was \neopoios\ with the Demetrius \argurokopos\ who made little silver temples of Artemis, though B does not have the word \argurous\. The poor votaries would buy the terra-cotta ones, the rich the silver shrines (Ramsay, _Paul the Traveller_, p. 278). These small models of the temple with the statue of Artemis inside would be set up in the houses or even worn as amulets. It is a pity that the Revised Version renders Artemis here. Diana as the Ephesian Artemis is quite distinct from the Greek Artemis, the sister of Apollo, the Diana of the Romans. This temple, built in the 6th century B.C., was burnt by Herostratus Oct. 13 B.C. 356, the night when Alexander the Great was born. It was restored and was considered one of the seven wonders of the world. Artemis was worshipped as the goddess of fertility, like the Lydian Cybele, a figure with many breasts. The great festival in May would offer Demetrius a golden opportunity for the sale of the shrines. {Brought no little business} (\pareicheto ouk olign ergasian\). Imperfect middle, continued to bring (furnish, provide). The middle accents the part that Demetrius played as the leader of the guild of silversmiths, work for himself and for them. {Unto the craftsmen} (\tais technitais\). The artisans from \techn\ (craft, art). Trade guilds were common in the ancient world. Demetrius had probably organized this guild and provided the capital for the enterprise.
rwp@Acts:19:30 @{And when Paul was minded to enter in unto the people} (\Paulou de boulomenou eiselthein eis ton dmon\). Genitive absolute. Plainly Paul wanted to face the howling mob, whether it was the occasion pictured in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:9| or not. "St. Paul was not the man to leave his comrades in the lurch" (Knowling). {Suffered him not} (\ouk ein auton\). Imperfect of \ea\, common verb to allow, what Gildersleeve called the negative imperfect (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 885), denoting resistance to pressure. The more Paul insisted on going the more the disciples refused to agree to it and they won.
rwp@Acts:20:31 @{Wherefore watch ye} (\dio grgoreite\). Paul has concluded his defence of himself and his warning. Now he exhorts on the basis of it (\dio\) because of which thing. The very command of Jesus concerning the perils before his return as in strkjv@Mark:13:35| (\grgoreite\), the very form (late present imperative from the second perfect \egrgora\ of \egeir\, to arouse). Stay awake. {I ceased not to admonish} (\ouk epausamn nouthetn\). Participle describes Paul, I did not cease admonishing, night and day (\nukta kai hmeran\, accusative of extent of time, for three years \trietian\, accusative of extent of time also). \Nouthetn\ is from \nouthete\, to put sense into one. Songs:Paul kept it up with tears (verse 19|) if so be he could save the Ephesians from the impending perils. Forewarned is to be forearmed. Paul did his duty by them.
rwp@Acts:22:9 @{But they heard not the voice} (\tn de phnn ouk kousan\). The accusative here may be used rather than the genitive as in verse 7| to indicate that those with Paul did not understand what they heard (9:7|) just as they beheld the light (22:9|), but did not see Jesus (9:7|). The difference in cases allows this distinction, though it is not always observed as just noticed about strkjv@22:14; strkjv@26:14|. The verb \akou\ is used in the sense of understand (Mark:4:33; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:2|). It is one of the evidences of the genuineness of this report of Paul's speech that Luke did not try to smooth out apparent discrepancies in details between the words of Paul and his own record already in ch. 9. The Textus Receptus adds in this verse: "And they became afraid" (\kai emphoboi egenonto\). Clearly not genuine.
rwp@Acts:22:11 @{I could not see} (\ouk eneblepon\). Imperfect active of \emblep\, I was not seeing, same fact stated in strkjv@9:8|. Here the reason as "for the glory of that light" (\apo ts doxs tou phtos ekeinou\). {Being led by the hand} (\cheiraggoumenos\). Present passive participle of \cheiragge\, the same verb used in strkjv@9:8| (\cheiraggountes\) which see. Late verb, in the N.T. only in these two places. In LXX.
rwp@Acts:23:5 @{I wist not} (\ouk idein\). Second past perfect of \oida\ used as an imperfect. The Greek naturally means that Paul did not know that it was the high priest who gave the order to smite his mouth. If this view is taken, several things may be said by way of explanation. The high priest may not have had on his official dress as the meeting was called hurriedly by Lysias. Paul had been away so long that he may not have known Ananias on sight. And then Paul may have had poor eyesight or the high priest may not have been sitting in the official seat. Another way of explaining it is to say that Paul was so indignant, even angry, at the command that he spoke without considering who it was that gave the order. The Greek allows this idea also. At any rate Paul at once recognizes the justice of the point made against him. He had been guilty of irreverence against the office of high priest as the passage from strkjv@Exodus:22:18| (LXX) shows and confesses his fault, but the rebuke was deserved. Jesus did not threaten (1Peter:2:23|) when smitten on the cheek (John:18:22|), but he did protest against the act and did not turn the other cheek.
rwp@Acts:25:16 @{It is not the custom of the Romans} (\hoti ouk estin ethos Rmaiois\). If a direct quotation, \hoti\ is recitative as in Authorized Version. Canterbury Revision takes it as indirect discourse after \apekrithn\ (I answered), itself in a relative clause (\pros hous\) with the present tense (\estin\, is) preserved as is usual. There is a touch of disdain (Furneaux) in the tone of Festus. He may refer to a demand of the Jews before they asked that Paul be brought to Jerusalem (25:3|). At any rate there is a tone of scorn towards the Jews. {Before that the accused have} (\prin ho katgoroumenos echoi\). This use of the optative in this temporal clause with \prin \ instead of the subjunctive \an echi\ is in conformity with literary Greek and occurs only in Luke's writings in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 970). This sequence of modes is a mark of the literary style occasionally seen in Luke. It is interesting here to note the succession of dependent clauses in verses 14-16|. {The accusers face to face} (\kata prospon tous katgorous\). Same word \katgoros\ as in strkjv@23:30,35; strkjv@25:18|. This all sounds fair enough. {And have had opportunity to make his defence concerning the matter laid against him} (\topon te apologias laboi peri tou egklmatos\). Literally, "And should receive (\laboi\ optative for same reason as \echoi\ above, second aorist active of \lamban\) opportunity for defence (objective genitive) concerning the charge" (\egklmatos\ in N.T. only here and strkjv@23:19| which see).
rwp@Acts:26:19 @{Wherefore} (\hothen\). This relatival adverb (cf. strkjv@14:26; strkjv@28:13|) gathers up all that Paul has said. {I was not disobedient} (\ouk egenomn apeiths\). Litotes again, "I did not become (second aorist middle indicative of \ginomai\) disobedient" (\apeiths\, old word already in strkjv@Luke:1:17|). {Unto the heavenly vision} (\ti ouranii optasii\). A later form of \opsis\, from \optaz\, in LXX, and in N.T. (Luke:1:22; strkjv@24:23; strkjv@Acts:26:19; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:1|). Only time that Paul uses it about seeing Christ on the Damascus road, but no reflection on the reality of the event.
rwp@Acts:28:4 @{The beast} (\to thrion\). Diminutive of \thr\ and so little beast. See on ¯Mark:1:13|. Aristotle and the medical writers apply the word to venomous serpents, the viper in particular (Knowling), as Luke does here. Vincent calls attention to the curious history of our word "_treacle_" for molasses (Latin _theriaca_) from \thriak\, an antidote made from the flesh of vipers. Coverdale translates strkjv@Jeremiah:8:22|: "There is no more treacle in Gilead." Jeremy Taylor: "We kill the viper and make treacle of him." {Hanging from his hand} (\kremamenon ek ts cheiros autou\). Vivid picture of the snake dangling from Paul's hand. Present middle participle of \kremamai\, late form for \kremannumi\, to hang up, to suspend (cf. strkjv@Galatians:3:13|). {No doubt} (\pants\). Literally, By all means, old adverb. Cf. strkjv@21:22; strkjv@Luke:4:23; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:22|. Only by Luke and Paul in the N.T. "They _knew_ that he was a prisoner being taken to Rome on some grave charge, and _inferred_ that the charge was murder" (Page). {Though he hath escaped} (\diasthenta\). First aorist passive participle of \diasz\ (same verb used in strkjv@24:43,44; strkjv@28:1|), so-called concessive use of the participle (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1129). {Yet Justice} (\dik\). An abstraction personified like the Latin _Justitia_ (Page). The natives speak of \Dik\ as a goddess, but we know nothing of such actual worship in Malta, though the Greeks worshipped abstractions as in Athens. {Hath not suffered} (\ouk eiasen\). Did not suffer. They look on Paul as a doomed man as good as dead. These people thought that calamity was proof of guilt, poor philosophy and worse theology.
rwp@Colossians:2:4 @{This I say} (\touto leg\). Paul explains why he has made this great claim for Christ at this point in his discussion. {May delude} (\paralogiztai\). Present middle subjunctive of \paralogizomai\, old verb, only here in N.T., from \para\ and \logizomai\, to count aside and so wrong, to cheat by false reckoning, to deceive by false reasoning (Epictetus). {With persuasiveness of speech} (\en pithanologii\). Rare word (Plato) from \pithanos\ and \logos\, speech, adapted to persuade, then speciously leading astray. Only here in N.T. One papyrus example. The art of persuasion is the height of oratory, but it easily degenerates into trickery and momentary and flashy deceit such as Paul disclaimed in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:4| (\ouk en pithois sophias logois\) where he uses the very adjective \pithos\ (persuasive) of which \pithanos\ (both from \peith\) is another form. It is curious how winning champions of error, like the Gnostics and modern faddists, can be with plausibility that catches the gullible.
rwp@Colossians:2:23 @{Which things} (\hatina\). "Which very things," these ascetic regulations. {Have indeed a show of wisdom} (\estin logon men echonta sophias\). Periphrastic present indicative with \estin\ in the singular, but present indicative \echonta\ in the plural (\hatina\). \Logon sophias\ is probably "the repute of wisdom" (Abbott) like Plato and Herodotus. \Men\ (in deed) has no corresponding \de\. {In will-worship} (\en ethelothrskii\). This word occurs nowhere else and was probably coined by Paul after the pattern of \ethelodouleia\, to describe the voluntary worship of angels (see strkjv@2:18|). {And humility} (\kai tapeinophrosuni\). Clearly here the bad sense, "in mock humility." {And severity to the body} (\kai apheidii smatos\). Old word (Plato) from \apheids\, unsparing (\a\ privative, \pheidomai\, to spare). Here alone in N.T. Ascetics often practice flagellations and other hardnesses to the body. {Not of any value} (\ouk en timi tini\). \Tim\ usually means honour or price. {Against the indulgence of the flesh} (\pros plsmonn ts sarkos\). These words are sharply debated along with \tim\ just before. It is not unusual for \pros\ to be found in the sense of "against" rather than "with" or "for." See \pros\ in sense of {against} in strkjv@3:13; strkjv@Ephesians:6:11f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:6:1|. \Plsmon\ is an old word from \pimplmi\, to fill and means satiety. It occurs here only in the N.T. Peake is inclined to agree with Hort and Haupt that there is a primitive corruption here. But the translation in the Revised Version is possible and it is true that mere rules do not carry us very far in human conduct as every father or mother knows, though we must have some regulations in family and state and church. But they are not enough of themselves.
rwp@Colossians:3:11 @{Where} (\hopou\). In this "new man" in Christ. Cf. strkjv@Galatians:3:28|. {There cannot be} (\ouk eni\). \Eni\ is the long (original) form of \en\ and \estin\ is to be understood. "There does not exist." This is the ideal which is still a long way ahead of modern Christians as the Great War proved. Race distinctions (Greek \Helln\ and Jew \Ioudaios\) disappear in Christ and in the new man in Christ. The Jews looked on all others as Greeks (Gentiles). Circumcision (\peritom\) and uncircumcision (\akrobustia\) put the Jewish picture with the cleavage made plainer (cf. strkjv@Ephesians:2|). The Greeks and Romans regarded all others as barbarians (\barbaroi\, strkjv@Romans:1:14|), users of outlandish jargon or gibberish, onomatopoetic repetition (\bar-bar\). {A Scythian} (\Skuths\) was simply the climax of barbarity, _bar-baris barbariores_ (Bengel), used for any rough person like our "Goths and Vandals." {Bondman} (\doulos\, from \de\, to bind), {freeman} (\eleutheros\, from \erchomai\, to go). Class distinctions vanish in Christ. In the Christian churches were found slaves, freedmen, freemen, masters. Perhaps Paul has Philemon and Onesimus in mind. But labour and capital still furnish a problem for modern Christianity. {But Christ is all} (\alla panta Christos\). Demosthenes and Lucian use the neuter plural to describe persons as Paul does here of Christ. The plural \panta\ is more inclusive than the singular \pn\ would be. {And in all} (\kai en psin\). Locative plural and neuter also. "Christ occupies the whole sphere of human life and permeates all its developments" (Lightfoot). Christ has obliterated the words barbarian, master, slave, all of them and has substituted the word \adelphos\ (brother).
rwp@Colossians:4:14 @{Luke, the beloved physician} (\Loukas ho iatros ho agaptos\). Mentioned also in strkjv@Philemon:1:24; strkjv@2Timothy:4:11|. The author of the Gospel and the Acts. Both Mark and Luke are with Paul at this time, possibly also with copies of their Gospels with them. The article here (repeated) may mean "my beloved physician." It would seem certain that Luke looked after Paul's health and that Paul loved him. Paul was Luke's hero, but it was not a one-sided affection. It is beautiful to see preacher and physician warm friends in the community. {Demas} (\Dmas\). Just his name here (a contraction of Demetrius), but in strkjv@2Timothy:4:10| he is mentioned as one who deserted Paul.
rwp@Ephesians:2:12 @{Separate from Christ} (\chris Christou\). Ablative case with adverbial preposition \chris\, describing their former condition as heathen. {Alienated from the commonwealth of Israel} (\apllotrimenoi ts politeias tou Isral\). Perfect passive participle of \apallotrio\, for which see strkjv@Colossians:1:21|. Here followed by ablative case \politeias\, old word from \politeu\, to be a citizen (Phillipians:1:27|) from \polits\ and that from \polis\ (city). Only twice in N.T., here as commonwealth (the spiritual Israel or Kingdom of God) and strkjv@Acts:22:28| as citizenship. {Strangers from the covenants of the promise} (\xenoi tn diathkn ts epaggelias\). For \xenos\ (Latin _hospes_), as stranger see strkjv@Matthew:25:35,38,43f.|, as guest-friend see strkjv@Romans:16:23|. Here it is followed by the ablative case \diathkn\. {Having no hope} (\elpida m echontes\). No hope of any kind. In strkjv@Galatians:4:8| \ouk\ (strong negative) occurs with \eidotes theon\, but here \m\ gives a more subjective picture (1Thessalonians:4:5|). {Without God} (\atheoi\). Old Greek word, not in LXX, only here in N.T. Atheists in the original sense of being without God and also in the sense of hostility to God from failure to worship him. See Paul's words in strkjv@Romans:1:18-32|. "In the world" (\en ti kosmi\) goes with both phrases. It is a terrible picture that Paul gives, but a true one.
rwp@Ephesians:2:19 @{Songs:then} (\ara oun\). Two inferential particles (accordingly therefore). {No more} (\ouketi\). No longer. {Sojourners} (\paroikoi\). Old word for dweller by (near by, but not in). Songs:Acts:7:6,29; strkjv@1Peter:2:11| (only other N.T. examples). Dwellers just outside the house or family of God. {Fellow-citizens} (\sunpolitai\, old, but rare word, here only in N.T.), members now of the \politeia\ of Israel (verse 12|), the opposite of \xenoi kai paroikoi\. {Of the household of God} (\oikeioi tou theou\). Old word from \oikos\ (house, household), but in N.T. only here, strkjv@Galatians:6:10; strkjv@1Timothy:5:8|. Gentiles now in the family of God (Romans:8:29|).
rwp@Ephesians:5:4 @{Filthiness} (\aischrots\). Old word from \aischros\ (base), here alone in N.T. {Foolish talking} (\mrologia\). Late word from \mrologos\ (\mros, logos\), only here in N.T. {Jesting} (\eutrapelia\). Old word from \eutrapelos\ (\eu, trep\, to turn) nimbleness of wit, quickness in making repartee (so in Plato and Plutarch), but in low sense as here ribaldry, scurrility, only here in N.T. All of these disapproved vices are \hapax legomena\ in the N.T. {Which are not befitting} (\ha ouk anken\). Same idiom (imperfect with word of propriety about the present) in strkjv@Colossians:3:18|. Late MSS. read \ta ouk ankonta\ like \ta m kathkonta\ in strkjv@Romans:1:28|.
rwp@Ephesians:6:12 @{Our wrestling is not} (\ouk estin hmin h pal\). "To us the wrestling is not." \Pal\ is an old word from \pall\, to throw, to swing (from Homer to the papyri, though here only in N.T.), a contest between two till one hurls the other down and holds him down (\katech\). Note \pros\ again (five times) in sense of "against," face to face conflict to the finish. {The world-rulers of this darkness} (\tous kosmokratoras tou skotous toutou\). This phrase occurs here alone. In strkjv@John:14:30| Satan is called "the ruler of this world" (\ho archn tou kosmou toutou\). In strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4| he is termed "the god of this age" (\ho theos tou ainos toutou\). The word \kosmokratr\ is found in the Orphic Hymns of Satan, in Gnostic writings of the devil, in rabbinical writings (transliterated) of the angel of death, in inscriptions of the Emperor Caracalla. These "world-rulers" are limited to "this darkness" here on earth. {The spiritual hosts of wickedness} (\ta pneumatika ts ponrias\). No word for "hosts" in the Greek. Probably simply, "the spiritual things (or elements) of wickedness." \Ponria\ (from \ponros\) is depravity (Matthew:22:18; strkjv@1Corinthians:5:8|). {In the heavenly places} (\en tois epouraniois\). Clearly so here. Our "wrestling" is with foes of evil natural and supernatural. We sorely need "the panoply of God" (furnished by God).
rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ SOME BOOKS ON THE PAULINE EPISTLES Bate, _As a Whole Guide to the Epistles of St. Paul_ (1927). Bonnet-Schroeder, _Epitres de Paul_ (4 ed. 1912). Champlain, _The Epistles of Paul_ (1906). Clemen, _Einheitlichkeit d. paul. Briefe_ (1894). Conybeare and Howson, _Life and Epistles of St. Paul_. Drummond, _The Epistles of Paul the Apostle_ (1899). Hayes, _Paul and His Epistles_ (1915). Heinrici, _Die Forschungen uber die paul. Briefe_ (1886). Lake, _The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul_ (1915). Lewin, _Life and Epistles of St. Paul_. (1875). Neil, _The Pauline Epistles_ (1906). Scott, _The Pauline Epistles_ (1909). Shaw, _The Pauline Epistles_ (1903). Vischer, _Die Paulusbriefe_ (1910). Voelter, _Die Composition der paul. Haupt Briefe_ (1890). Voelter, _Paulus und seine Briefe_ (1905). Way, _The Letters of Paul to Seven Churches and Three Friends_ (1906) Weinel, _Die Echtheit der paul. Hauptbriefe_ (1920). Weiss, B., _Present Status of the Inquiry Concerning the Genuineness of the Pauline Epistles_ (1901). Weiss, B., _Die Paulinische Briefe_ (1902). Wood, _Life, Letters, and Religion of St. Paul_ (1925). strkjv@Galatians:1:1 @{Not from men, neither through men} (\ouk ap' anthrpn oude di' anthrpou\). The bluntness of Paul's denial is due to the charge made by the Judaizers that Paul was not a genuine apostle because not one of the twelve. This charge had been made in Corinth and called forth the keenest irony of Paul (2Corinthians:10-12|). In strkjv@Galatians:1; 2| Paul proves his independence of the twelve and his equality with them as recognized by them. Paul denies that his apostleship had a human source (\ouk ap' anthrpn\) and that it had come to him through (\di' anthrpou\) a human channel (Burton). {But through Jesus Christ and God the Father} (\alla dia Isou Christou kai theou patros\). The call to be an apostle came to Paul through Jesus Christ as he claimed in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:1| and as told in strkjv@Acts:9:4-6; strkjv@22:7ff.; strkjv@26:16ff|. He is apostle also by the will of God. {Who raised him from the dead} (\tou egeirantos auton ek nekrn\). And therefore Paul was qualified to be an apostle since he had seen the Risen Christ (1Corinthians:9:1; strkjv@15:8f.|). This verb \egeir\ is often used in N.T. for raising from the sleep of death, to wake up the dead.
rwp@Galatians:1:7 @{Which is not another} (\ho ouk estin allo\). It is no "gospel" (good news) at all, but a yoke of bondage to the law and the abolition of grace. There is but one gospel and that is of grace, not works. The relative \ho\ (which) refers to \heteron euaggelion\ (a different gospel) "taken as a single term and designating the erroneous teachings of the Judaizers" (Burton). {Only} (\ei m\). Literally, "except," that is, "Except in this sense," "in that it is an attempt to pervert the one true gospel" (Lightfoot). {Who disturb you} (\hoi tarassontes\). The disturbers. This very verb \tarass\ is used in strkjv@Acts:17:8| of the Jews in Thessalonica who "disturbed" the politarchs and the people about Paul. {Would pervert} (\thelontes metastrepsai\). "Wish to turn about," change completely as in strkjv@Acts:2:20; strkjv@James:4:9|. The very existence of the gospel of Christ was at stake.
rwp@Galatians:1:10 @{Amos:I persuading?} (\peith?\). Conative present, trying to persuade like \zt areskein\ (seeking to please) where the effort is stated plainly. See strkjv@2Corinthians:5:11|. {I should not be} (\ouk an mn\). Conclusion of second class condition, determined as unfulfilled. Regular construction here (\ei\ and imperfect indicative in the condition \reskon, ouk an\ and imperfect in the conclusion). About pleasing men see on ¯1Thessalonians:2:4|. In strkjv@Colossians:3:22; Eph. strkjv@6:6| Paul uses the word "men-pleasers" (\anthrpareskoi\).
rwp@Galatians:1:11 @{Which was preached} (\to euaggelisthen\). Play on the word \euaggelion\ by first aorist passive participle of \euaggeliz\, "the gospel which was gospelized by me." {It is not after man} (\ouk estin kata anthrpon\). Not after a human standard and so he does not try to conform to the human ideal. Paul alone (1Corinthians:3:3; strkjv@9:8; strkjv@15:32; strkjv@Romans:3:15|) in the N.T. uses this old and common idiom.
rwp@Galatians:2:15 @{Not sinners of the Gentiles} (\ouk ex ethnn hamartloi\). The Jews regarded all Gentiles as "sinners" in contrast with themselves (cf. strkjv@Matthew:26:45| "sinners" and strkjv@Luke:18:32| "Gentiles"). It is not clear whether verses 15-21| were spoken by Paul to Peter or whether Paul is now simply addressing the Galatians in the light of the controversy with Peter. Burton thinks that he is "mentally addressing Peter, if not quoting from what he said to him."
rwp@Galatians:2:20 @{I have been crucified with Christ} (\Christi sunestaurmai\). One of Paul's greatest mystical sayings. Perfect passive indicative of \sustauro\ with the associative instrumental case (\Christi\). Paul uses the same word in strkjv@Romans:6:6| for the same idea. In the Gospels it occurs of literal crucifixion about the robbers and Christ (Matthew:27:44; strkjv@Mark:15:32; strkjv@John:19:32|). Paul died to the law and was crucified with Christ. He uses often the idea of dying with Christ (Galatians:5:24; strkjv@6:14; strkjv@Romans:6:8; strkjv@Colossians:2:20|) and burial with Christ also (Romans:6:4; strkjv@Colossians:2:12|). {No longer I} (\ouketi eg\). Songs:complete has become Paul's identification with Christ that his separate personality is merged into that of Christ. This language helps one to understand the victorious cry in strkjv@Romans:7:25|. It is the union of the vine and the branch (John:15:1-6|). {Which is in the Son of God} (\ti tou huiou tou theou\). The objective genitive, not the faith of the Son of God. {For me} (\huper emou\). Paul has the closest personal feeling toward Christ. "He appropriates to himself, as Chrysostom observes, the love which belongs equally to the whole world. For Christ is indeed the personal friend of each man individually" (Lightfoot).
rwp@Galatians:2:21 @{I do not make void the grace of God} (\ouk athet tn charin tou theou\). Common word in LXX and Polybius and on, to make ineffective (\a\ privative and \tithmi\, to place or put). Some critic would charge him with that after his claim to such a close mystic union with Christ. {Then Christ died for nought} (\ara Christos drean apethanen\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. If one man apart from grace can win his own righteousness, any man can and should. Hence (\ara\, accordingly) Christ died gratuitously (\drean\), unnecessarily. Adverbial accusative of \drea\, a gift. This verse is a complete answer to those who say that the heathen (or any mere moralist) are saved by doing the best that they know and can. No one, apart from Jesus, ever did the best that he knew or could. To be saved by law (\dia nomou\) one has to keep all the law that he knows. That no one ever did.
rwp@Galatians:3:12 @{The law is not of faith} (\ho nomos ouk estin ek pistes\). Law demands complete obedience and rests not on mercy, faith, grace.
rwp@Galatians:3:17 @{Now this I say} (\touto de leg\). Now I mean this. He comes back to his main point and is not carried afield by the special application of \sperma\ to Christ. {Confirmed beforehand by God} (\prokekurmenn hupo tou theou\). Perfect passive participle of \prokuro\, in Byzantine writers and earliest use here. Nowhere else in N.T. The point is in \pro\ and \hupo tou theou\ (by God) and in \meta\ (after) as Burton shows. {Four hundred and thirty years after} (\meta tetrakosia kai triakonta et\). Literally, "after four hundred and thirty years." This is the date in strkjv@Exodus:12:40| for the sojourn in Egypt (cf. strkjv@Genesis:15:13|). But the LXX adds words to include the time of the patriarchs in Canaan in this number of years which would cut the time in Egypt in two. Cf. strkjv@Acts:7:6|. It is immaterial to Paul's argument which chronology is adopted except that "the longer the covenant had been in force the more impressive is his statement" (Burton). {Doth not disannul} (\ouk akuroi\). Late verb \akuro\, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:15:6; strkjv@Mark:7:13| (from \a\ privative and \kuros\, authority). On \katargsai\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:1:28; strkjv@2:6; strkjv@15:24,26|.
rwp@Galatians:3:20 @{Is not a mediator of one} (\henos ouk estin\). That is, a middleman comes in between two. The law is in the nature of a contract between God and the Jewish people with Moses as the mediator or middleman. {But God is one} (\ho de theos heis estin\). There was no middleman between God and Abraham. He made the promise directly to Abraham. Over 400 interpretations of this verse have been made!
rwp@Galatians:3:28 @{There can be neither} (\ouk eni\). Not a shortened form of \enesti\, but the old lengthened form of \en\ with recessive accent. Songs:\ouk eni\ means "there is not" rather than "there cannot be," a statement of a fact rather than a possibility, as Burton rightly shows against Lightfoot. {One man} (\heis\). No word for "man" in the Greek, and yet \heis\ is masculine, not neuter \hen\. "One moral personality" (Vincent). The point is that "in Christ Jesus" race or national distinctions ("neither Jew nor Greek") do not exist, class differences ("neither bond nor free," no proletarianism and no capitalism) vanish, sex rivalry ("no male and female") disappears. This radical statement marks out the path along which Christianity was to come in the sphere (\en\) and spirit and power of Christ. Candour compels one to confess that this goal has not yet been fully attained. But we are on the road and there is no hope on any way than on "the Jesus Road."
rwp@Galatians:4:7 @{No longer a bondservant} (\ouketi doulos\). Slave. He changes to the singular to drive the point home to each one. The spiritual experience (3:2|) has set each one free. Each is now a son and heir.
rwp@Hebrews:1:12 @{A mantle} (\peribolaion\). Old word for covering from \pariball\, to fling around, as a veil in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:15|, nowhere else in N.T. {Shalt thou roll up} (\helixeis\). Future active of \heliss\, late form for \heiliss\, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:6:14|, to fold together. {As a garment} (\hs himation\). LXX repeats from 11|. {They shall be changed} (\allagsontai\). Second future passive of \allass\, old verb, to change. {Shall not fail} (\ouk ekleipsousin\). Future active of \ekleip\, to leave out, to fail, used of the sun in strkjv@Luke:23:45|. "Nature is at his mercy, not he at nature's" (Moffatt).
rwp@Hebrews:2:11 @{He that sanctifieth} (\ho hagiazn\). Present active articular participle of \hagiaz\. Jesus is the sanctifier (9:13f.; strkjv@13:12|). {They that are sanctified} (\hoi hagiazomenoi\). Present passive articular participle of \hagiaz\. It is a process here as in strkjv@10:14|, not a single act, though in strkjv@10:10| the perfect passive indicative presents a completed state. {Of one} (\ex henos\). Referring to God as the Father of Jesus and of the "many sons" above (verse 10|) and in harmony with verse 14| below. Even before the incarnation Jesus had a kinship with men though we are not sons in the full sense that he is. {He is not ashamed} (\ouk epaischunetai\). Present passive indicative of \epaischunomai\, old compound (Romans:1:16|). Because of the common Father Jesus is not ashamed to own us as "brothers" (\adelphous\), unworthy sons though we be.
rwp@Hebrews:4:6 @{It remaineth} (\apoleipetai\). Present passive indicative of \apoleip\, old verb to leave behind, to remain over. Songs:again in strkjv@4:9; strkjv@10:26|. Here the infinitive clause (\tinas eiselthein eis autn\) is the subject of \apoleipetai\. This left-over promise is not repeated, though not utilized by the Israelites under Moses nor in the highest sense by Joshua and David. {Failed to enter in} (\ouk eislthon\). "Did not enter in" (second aorist active indicative of \eiserchomai\). It is a rabbinical argument all along here, but the author is writing to Jews.
rwp@Hebrews:4:8 @{Joshua} (\Isous\). The Greek form is Jesus. Condition of the second class (determined as unfulfilled) with \ei\ and aorist indicative in the condition and \an\ with the imperfect in the conclusion. {He would not have spoken} (\ouk elalei\). Wrong translation, "he would not speak" (be speaking), in the passage in David. Imperfect tense, not aorist.
rwp@Hebrews:8:9 @{In the day that I took them} (\en hmeri epilabomenou mou\). Genitive absolute (\mou\ and second aorist middle participle of \epilamban\), "a Hellenistic innovation" (Moffatt) in imitation of the Hebrew after \hmeri\ in place of \en hi epelabomen\, occurring also in Barn. strkjv@2:28. {By the hand} (\ts cheiros\). Technical use of the genitive of the part affected. {To lead them forth} (\exagagein autous\). Second aorist active infinitive of \exag\ to denote purpose. {For they continued not} (\hoti autoi ouk enemeinan\). First aorist active indicative of \emmen\, old verb to remain in (Acts:14:22|). The Israelites broke the covenant. Then God annulled it. {I regarded not} (\melsa\). "I neglected" as in strkjv@2:3|. The covenant was void when they broke it.
rwp@Hebrews:10:2 @{Else they would not have ceased?} (\epei ouk an epausanto;\). Ellipsis of condition after \epei\ (since if they really did perfect) with the conclusion of the second-class condition (\an\ and the aorist middle indicative of \pauomai\). {To be offered} (\prospheromenai\). Regular idiom, participle (present passive) with \pauomai\ (Acts:5:42|). {Because} (\dia to\). \Dia\ with the accusative of the articular infinitive, "because of the having" (\echein\) as to the worshippers (\tous latreuontas\, accusative of general reference of the articular participle), not "would have had." {No more conscience of sins} (\mdemian eti suneidsin hamartin\). Rather "consciousness of sins" as in strkjv@9:14|. {Having been once cleansed} (\hapax kekatharismenous\). Perfect passive participle of \kathariz\, "if they had once for all been cleansed."
rwp@Hebrews:10:6 @{Thou hadst no pleasure} (\ouk eudoksas\). First aorist active indicative of \eudoke\, common for God's good pleasure (Matthew:3:17|). God took no pleasure in the animal offering (\thusian\), the meal-offering (\prosphoran\), the burnt-offering (\holokautmata\), the sin-offering (\peri hamartias\, concerning sin).
rwp@Hebrews:10:18 @{There is no more offering for sin} (\ouketi prosphora peri hamartias\). This is the logical and triumphant conclusion concerning the better sacrifice offered by Christ (9:13-10:18|). As Jeremiah had prophesied, there is actually remission (\aphesis\, removal) of sins. Repetition of the sacrifice is needless.
rwp@Hebrews:10:26 @{If we sin wilfully} (\hekousis hamartanontn hmn\). Genitive absolute with the present active participle of \hamartan\, circumstantial participle here in a conditional sense. {After that we have received} (\meta to labein\). "After the receiving" (accusative case of the articular infinitive second aorist active of \lamban\ after \meta\). {Knowledge} (\epignsin\). "Full knowledge," as in strkjv@6:4f|. {There remaineth no more} (\ouketi apoleipetai\). "No longer is there left behind" (present passive indicative as in strkjv@4:9|), for one has renounced the one and only sacrifice for sin that does or can remove sin (10:1-18|).
rwp@Hebrews:11:16 @{They desire} (\oregontai\). Present middle indicative of \oreg\, old word for stretching out after, yearning after as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:1|. {Their God} (\theos autn\). Predicate nominative with the epexegetic infinitive \epikaleisthai\ (to be called) used with \ouk epaischunetai\ (is not ashamed).
rwp@Hebrews:11:38 @{Of whom the world was not worthy} (\hn ouk n axios ho kosmos\) Graphic picture in a short parenthetical relative clause (\hn\, genitive plural with \axios\), a phrase to stir the blood of the readers. {Wandering} (\planmenoi\). Present middle participle of \plana\, like lost sheep, hunted by wolves. {Caves} (\splaiois\). Old word from \speos\ (cavern) as in strkjv@Matthew:21:13|. {Holes} (\opais\). Old word, perhaps from \ops\ (root of \hora\, to see), opening, in N.T. only here and strkjv@James:3:11|. Cf. strkjv@1Kings:18:4|; II Macc. strkjv@5:27; strkjv@10:6 (about Judas Maccabeus and others).
rwp@Hebrews:11:39 @{These all} (\houtoi pantes\). The whole list in verses 5-38|. Cf. verse 13|. {Through their faith} (\dia pistes\). Here rather than \pistei\ as so often. {Received not the promise} (\ouk ekomisanto tn epaggelian\). First aorist middle of \komiz\. The Messianic promise they did not live to see (11:13|), though they had individual special promises fulfilled as already shown (11:33|).
rwp@Hebrews:12:20 @{For they could not endure} (\ouk epheron gar\). Imperfect active of \pher\, "for they were not enduring (bearing)." {That which was enjoined} (\to diastellomenon\). Present passive articular participle of \diastell\, old verb to distinguish, to dispose, to order. The quotation is from strkjv@Exodus:19:12f|. The people appealed to Moses (Exodus:20:19|) and the leaders did so also (Deuteronomy:5:23f.|), both in terror. {If even} (\kan\). "Even if." Condition of third class with second aorist active subjunctive of \thiggan\ as in strkjv@11:28|, followed by genitive \orous\ (mountain). {It shall be stoned} (\lithobolthsetai\). From strkjv@Exodus:19:13|. Late compound verb from \lithobolos\ (from \lithos, ball\) as in strkjv@Matthew:21:35|.
rwp@Hebrews:13:9 @{Be not carried away} (\m parapheresthe\). Prohibition with \m\ and present passive imperative of \parapher\, old verb to lead along (Jude:1:12|), to carry past (Mark:14:36|), to lead astray as here. {By divers and strange teachings} (\didachais poikilais kai xenais\). For \poikilos\ (many coloured) see strkjv@2:4|. \Xenos\ for guest we have had in strkjv@11:13|, but here as adjective meaning unheard of (1Peter:4:12|) as in older Greek also. The new is not always wrong any more than the old is always right (Matthew:13:52|). But the air was already full of new and strange teachings that fascinated many by their very novelty. The warning here is always needed. Cf. strkjv@Galatians:1:6-9; strkjv@2Timothy:3:16|. {That the heart be established by grace} (\chariti bebaiousthai tn kardian\). Present passive infinitive of \bebaio\ (from \bain\) to make stable with the instrumental case \chariti\ (by grace) and the accusative of general reference (\tn kardian\). How true it is that in the atmosphere of so many windy theories only the heart is stable that has an experience of God's grace in Christ. {That occupied themselves} (\hoi peripatountes\). "That walked" in the ritualistic Jewish rules about meats. {Were not profited} (\ouk phelthsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \phele\, to help. Mere Jewish ceremonialism and ritualism failed to build up the spiritual life. It was sheer folly to give up Christ for Pharisaism or for Moses.
rwp@James:1:17 @{Gift} (\dosis\) {--boon} (\drma\). Both old substantives from the same original verb (\didmi\), to give. \Dosis\ is the act of giving (ending \-sis\), but sometimes by metonymy for the thing given like \ktisis\ for \ktisma\ (Colossians:1:15|). But \drma\ (from \dre\, from \dron\ a gift) only means a gift, a benefaction (Romans:5:16|). The contrast here argues for "giving" as the idea in \dosis\. Curiously enough there is a perfect hexameter line here: \psa do / sis aga / th kai / pn d / rma te / leion\. Such accidental rhythm occurs occasionally in many writers. Ropes (like Ewald and Mayor) argues for a quotation from an unknown source because of the poetical word \drma\, but that is not conclusive. {From above} (\anthen\). That is, from heaven. Cf. strkjv@John:3:31; strkjv@19:11|. {Coming down} (\katabainon\). Present active neuter singular participle of \katabain\ agreeing with \drma\, expanding and explaining \anthen\ (from above). {From the Father of lights} (\apo tou patros tn phtn\). "Of the lights" (the heavenly bodies). For this use of \patr\ see strkjv@Job:38:28| (Father of rain); strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3; strkjv@Ephesians:1:17|. God is the Author of light and lights. {With whom} (\par' hi\). For \para\ (beside) with locative sense for standpoint of God see \para ti thei\ (Mark:10:27; strkjv@Romans:2:11; strkjv@9:14; strkjv@Ephesians:6:9|. {Can be no} (\ouk eni\). This old idiom (also in strkjv@Galatians:3:28; strkjv@Colossians:3:11|) may be merely the original form of \en\ with recessive accent (Winer, Mayor) or a shortened form of \enesti\. The use of \eni en\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:5| argues for this view, as does the use of \eine\ (\einai\) in Modern Greek (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 313). {Variation} (\parallag\). Old word from \parallass\, to make things alternate, here only in N.T. In Aristeas in sense of alternate stones in pavements. Dio Cassius has \parallaxis\ without reference to the modern astronomical parallax, though James here is comparing God (Father of the lights) to the sun (Malachi:4:2|), which does have periodic variations. {Shadow that is cast by turning} (\trops aposkiasma\). \Trop\ is an old word for "turning" (from \trep\ to turn), here only in N.T. \Aposkiasma\ is a late and rare word (\aposkiasmos\ in Plutarch) from \aposkiaz\ (\apo, skia\) a shade cast by one object on another. It is not clear what the precise metaphor is, whether the shadow thrown on the dial (\aposkiaz\ in Plato) or the borrowed light of the moon lost to us as it goes behind the earth. In fact, the text is by no means certain, for Aleph B papyrus of fourth century actually read \h trops aposkiasmatos\ (the variation of the turning of the shadow). Ropes argues strongly for this reading, and rather convincingly. At any rate there is no such periodic variation in God like that we see in the heavenly bodies.
rwp@James:1:25 @{He that looketh into} (\ho parakupsas\). First aorist active articular participle of \parakupt\, old verb, to stoop and look into (John:20:5,11|), to gaze carefully by the side of, to peer into or to peep into (1Peter:1:12|). Here the notion of beside (\para\) or of stooping (\kupt\) is not strong. Sometimes, as Hort shows, the word means only a cursory glance, but the contrast with verse 24| seems to preclude that here. {The perfect law} (\nomon teleion\). For \teleion\ see strkjv@1:17|. See strkjv@Romans:7:12| for Paul's idea of the law of God. James here refers to the word of truth (1:18|), the gospel of grace (Galatians:6:2; strkjv@Romans:12:2|). {The law of liberty} (\ton ts eleutherias\). "That of liberty," explaining why it is "perfect" (2:12| also), rests on the work of Christ, whose truth sets us free (John:8:32; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:16; strkjv@Romans:8:2|). {And so continueth} (\kai parameinas\). First aorist active articular participle again of \paramen\, parallel with \parakupsas\. \Paramen\ is to stay beside, and see strkjv@Phillipians:1:25| for contrast with the simplex \men\. {Being} (\genomenos\). Rather, "having become" (second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\ to become). {Not a hearer that forgetteth} (\ouk akroats epilsmons\). "Not a hearer of forgetfulness" (descriptive genitive, marked by forgetfulness). \Epilsmon\ is a late and rare word (from \epilsmn\, forgetful, from \epilanthomai\, to forget, as in verse 24|), here only in N.T. {But a doer that worketh} (\alla poits ergou\). "But a doer of work," a doer marked by work (descriptive genitive \ergou\), not by mere listening or mere talk. {In his doing} (\en ti poisei autou\). Another beatitude with \makarios\ as in strkjv@1:12|, like the Beatitudes in strkjv@Matthew:5:3-12|. \Poisis\ is an old word (from \poie\ for the act of doing), only here in N.T.
rwp@James:2:21 @{Justified by works} (\ex ergn edikaith\). First aorist passive indicative of \dikaio\ (see Galatians and Romans for this verb, to declare righteous, to set right) in a question with \ouk\ expecting an affirmative answer. This is the phrase that is often held to be flatly opposed to Paul's statement in strkjv@Romans:4:1-5|, where Paul pointedly says that it was the faith of Abraham (Romans:4:9|) that was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness, not his works. But Paul is talking about the faith of Abraham before his circumcision (4:10|) as the basis of his being set right with God, which faith is symbolized in the circumcision. James makes plain his meaning also. {In that he offered up Isaac his son upon the altar} (\anenegkas Isaak ton huion autou epi to thusiastrion\). They use the same words, but they are talking of different acts. James points to the offering (\anenegkas\ second aorist--with first aorist ending--active participle of \anapher\) of Isaac on the altar (Genesis:22:16f.|) as _proof_ of the faith that Abraham already had. Paul discusses Abraham's faith as the basis of his justification, that and not his circumcision. There is no contradiction at all between James and Paul. Neither is answering the other. Paul may or may not have seen the Epistle of James, who stood by him loyally in the Conference in Jerusalem (Acts:15; strkjv@Galatians:2|).
rwp@James:2:24 @{Ye see} (\horte\). Present indicative active of \hora\. Now he uses the plural again as in strkjv@2:14|. {Is justified} (\dikaioutai\). Present passive indicative of \dikaio\, here not "is made righteous," but "is shown to be righteous." James is discussing the proof of faith, not the initial act of being set right with God (Paul's idea in strkjv@Romans:4:1-10|). {And not only by faith} (\kai ouk ek pistes monon\). This phrase clears up the meaning of James. Faith (live faith) is what we must all have (2:18|), only it must shew itself also in deeds as Abraham's did.
rwp@James:4:2 @{Ye lust} (\epithumeite\). Present active indicative of \epithume\, old word (from \epi, thumos\, yearning passion for), not necessarily evil as clearly not in strkjv@Luke:22:15| of Christ, but usually so in the N.T., as here. Coveting what a man or nation does not have is the cause of war according to James. {Ye kill and covet} (\phoneuete kai zloute\). Present active indicatives of \phoneu\ (old verb from \phoneus\, murderer) and \zlo\, to desire hotly to possess (1Corinthians:12:31|). It is possible (perhaps probable) that a full stop should come after \phoneuete\ (ye kill) as the result of lusting and not having. Then we have the second situation: "Ye covet and cannot obtain (\epituchein\, second aorist active infinitive of \epitugchan\), and (as a result) ye fight and war." This punctuation makes better sense than any other and is in harmony with verse 1|. Thus also the anticlimax in \phoneuete\ and \zloute\ is avoided. Mayor makes the words a hendiadys, "ye murderously envy." {Ye have not, because ye ask not} (\ouk echete dia to m aiteisthai humas\). James refers again to \ouk echete\ (ye do not have) in verse 2|. Such sinful lusting will not obtain. "Make the service of God your supreme end, and then your desires will be such as God can fulfil in answer to your prayer" (Ropes). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:6:31-33|. The reason here is expressed by \dia\ and the accusative of the articular present middle infinitive of \aite\, used here of prayer to God as in strkjv@Matthew:7:7f|. \Hums\ (you) is the accusative of general reference. Note the middle voice here as in \aiteisthe\ in 3|. Mayor argues that the middle here, in contrast with the active, carries more the spirit of prayer, but Moulton (_Prol_., p. 160) regards the distinction between \aite\ and \aiteomai\ often "an extinct subtlety."
rwp@James:4:11 @{Speak not one against another} (\m katalaleite allln\). Prohibition against such a habit or a command to quit doing it, with \m\ and the present imperative of \katalale\, old compound usually with the accusative in ancient Greek, in N.T. only with the genitive (here, strkjv@1Peter:2:12; strkjv@3:16|). Often harsh words about the absent. James returns to the subject of the tongue as he does again in strkjv@5:12| (twice before, strkjv@1:26; strkjv@3:1-12|). {Judgeth} (\krinn\). In the sense of harsh judgment as in strkjv@Matthew:7:1; strkjv@Luke:6:37| (explained by \katadikaz\). {Not a doer of the law, but a judge} (\ouk poits nomou, alla krits\). This tone of superiority to law is here sharply condemned. James has in mind God's law, of course, but the point is the same for all laws under which we live. We cannot select the laws which we will obey unless some contravene God's law, and so our own conscience (Acts:4:20|). Then we are willing to give our lives for our rebellion if need be.
rwp@James:4:14 @{Whereas ye know not} (\hoitines ouk epistasthe\). The longer relative \hostis\ defines here more precisely (like Latin _qui_) \hoi legontes\ (ye who say) of verse 13| in a causal sense, as in strkjv@Acts:10:47|, "who indeed do not know" (present middle indicative of \epistamai\). {What shall be on the morrow} (\ts aurion\). Supply \hmeras\ (day) after \aurion\. This is the reading of B (Westcott) "on the morrow" (genitive of time), but Aleph K L cursives have \to ts aurion\ ("the matter of tomorrow"), while A P cursives have \ta ts aurion\ ("the things of tomorrow"). The sense is practically the same, though \to ts aurion\ is likely correct. {What is your life?} (\poia h z humn\). Thus Westcott and Hort punctuate it as an indirect question, not direct. \Poia\ is a qualitative interrogative (of what character). {As vapour} (\atmis\). This is the answer. Old word for mist (like \atmos\, from which our "atmosphere"), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:2:19| with \kapnou\ (vapour of smoke (from strkjv@Joel:2:30|). {For a little time} (\pros oligon\). See same phrase in strkjv@1Timothy:4:8|, \pros kairon\ in strkjv@Luke:8:13|, \pros hran\ in strkjv@John:5:35|. {That appeareth and then vanisheth away} (\phainomen epeita kai aphanizomen\). Present middle participles agreeing with \atmis\, "appearing, then also disappearing," with play on the two verbs (\phainomai, aphaniz\ as in strkjv@Matthew:6:19|, from \aphans\ hidden strkjv@Hebrews:4:13|) with the same root \phan\ (\phain, a-phan-s\).
rwp@James:5:6 @{Ye have condemned} (\katedikasate\). First aorist active indicative of \katadikaz\, old verb (from \katadik\, condemnation, strkjv@Acts:25:15|). The rich controlled the courts of justice. {Ye have killed the righteous one} (\ephoneusate ton dikaion\). First aorist active indicative of \phoneu\ (2:11; strkjv@4:2|). "The righteous one" (\tn dikaion\) is the generic use of the singular with article for the class. There is probably no direct reference to one individual, though it does picture well the death of Christ and also the coming death of James himself, who was called the Just (Eus. _H.E_. ii. 23). Stephen (Acts:7:52|) directly accuses the Sanhedrin with being betrayers and murderers (\prodotai kai phoneis\) of the righteous one (\tou dikaiou\). {He doth not resist you} (\ouk antitassetai humin\). It is possible to treat this as a question. Present middle indicative of \antitass\, for which see strkjv@James:4:6|. Without a question the unresisting end of the victim (\ton dikaion\) is pictured. With a question (\ouk\, expecting an affirmative answer) God or Lord is the subject, with the final judgment in view. There is no way to decide definitely.
rwp@John:1:20 @{And he confessed} (\kai hmologsen\). The continued paratactic use of \kai\ (and) and the first aorist active indicative of \homologe\, old verb from \homologos\ (\homon, leg\, to say the same thing), to confess, in the Synoptics (Matthew:10:32|) as here. {And denied not} (\kai ouk rnsato\). Negative statement of same thing in Johannine fashion, first aorist middle indicative of \arneomai\, another Synoptic and Pauline word (Matthew:10:33; strkjv@2Timothy:2:12|). He did not contradict or refuse to say who he was. {And he confessed} (\kai hmologsen\). Thoroughly Johannine again in the paratactic repetition. {I am not the Christ} (\Eg ouk eimi ho Christos\). Direct quotation again with recitative \hoti\ before it like our modern quotation marks. "I am not the Messiah," he means by \ho Christos\ (the Anointed One). Evidently it was not a new question as Luke had already shown (Luke:3:15|).
rwp@John:1:21 @{And they asked him} (\kai rtsan auton\). Here the paratactic \kai\ is like the transitional \oun\ (then). {What then?} (\Ti oun;\). Argumentative \oun\ like Paul's \ti oun\ in strkjv@Romans:6:15|. _Quid ergo?_ {Art thou Elijah?} (\Su Elias ei;\). The next inevitable question since Elijah had been understood to be the forerunner of the Messiah from strkjv@Malachi:4:5|. In strkjv@Mark:9:11f.| Jesus will identify John with the Elijah of Malachi's prophecy. Why then does John here flatly deny it? Because the expectation was that Elijah would return in person. This John denies. Jesus only asserts that John was Elijah in spirit. Elijah in person they had just seen on the Mount of Transfiguration. {He saith} (\legei\). Vivid dramatic present. {I am not} (\ouk eimi\). Short and blunt denial. {Art thou the prophet?} (\ho prophts ei su;\). "The prophet art thou?" This question followed naturally the previous denials. Moses (Deuteronomy:18:15|) had spoken of a prophet like unto himself. Christians interpreted this prophet to be the Messiah (Acts:3:22; strkjv@7:37|), but the Jews thought him another forerunner of the Messiah (John:7:40|). It is not clear in strkjv@John:6:15| whether the people identified the expected prophet with the Messiah, though apparently so. Even the Baptist later became puzzled in prison whether Jesus himself was the true Messiah or just one of the forerunners (Luke:7:19|). People wondered about Jesus himself whether he was the Messiah or just one of the looked for prophets (Mark:8:28; strkjv@Matthew:16:14|). {And he answered} (\kai apekrith\). First aorist passive (deponent passive, sense of voice gone) indicative of \apokrinomai\, to give a decision from myself, to reply. {No} (\Ou\). Shortest possible denial.
rwp@John:1:25 @{Why then baptizest thou?} (\Ti oun baptizeis;\). In view of his repeated denials (three here mentioned). {If thou art not} (\ei su ouk ei\). Condition of first class. They did not interpret his claim to be "the voice" to be important enough to justify the ordinance of baptism. Abrahams (_Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels_) shows that proselyte baptism was probably practised before John's time, but its use by John was treating the Jews as if they were themselves Gentiles.
rwp@John:1:26 @{In the midst of you standeth} (\mesos humn stkei\). Adjective as in strkjv@19:18|, not \en mesi humn\. Present active indicative of late verb \stk\ from perfect stem \hestka\. John had already baptized Jesus and recognized him as the Messiah. {Whom ye know not} (\hon humeis ouk oidate\). This was the tragedy of the situation (1:11|). Apparently this startling declaration excited no further inquiry from the committee.
rwp@John:1:27 @{Coming after me} (\opis mou erchomenos\). No article (\ho\) in Aleph B. John as the forerunner of the Messiah has preceded him in time, but not in rank as he instantly adds. {The latchet of whose shoe I am not worthy to unloose} (\hou ouk eimi axios hina lus autou ton himanta tou hupodmatos\). Literally, "of whom I am not worthy that I unloose the latchet (see strkjv@Mark:1:7| for \himas\) of his sandal (see strkjv@Matthew:3:11| for \hupodma\, bound under the foot)." Only use of \axios\ with \hina\ in John, though used by Paul in this saying of the Baptist (Acts:13:25|), \hikanos hina\ in strkjv@Matthew:3:8|, but \hikanos lusai\ (aorist active infinitive instead of \lus\, aorist active subjunctive) in strkjv@Mark:1:7| (Luke:3:16|) and \bastasai\ in strkjv@Matthew:3:11|.
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:2:3 @{When the wine failed} (\hustersantos oinou\). Genitive absolute with first aorist active participle of \hustere\, old verb from \husteros\, late or lacking. See same use in strkjv@Mark:10:21|. A longer Western paraphrase occurs in some manuscripts. It was an embarrassing circumstance, especially to Mary, if partly due to the arrival of the seven guests. {They have no wine} (\Oinon ouk echousin\). The statement of the fact was in itself a hint and a request. But why made by the mother of Jesus and why to Jesus? She would not, of course, make it to the host. Mary feels some kind of responsibility and exercises some kind of authority for reasons not known to us. Mary had treasured in her heart the wonders connected with the birth of Jesus (Luke:2:19,51|). The ministry of the Baptist had stirred her hopes afresh. Had she not told Jesus all that she knew before he went to the Jordan to be baptized of John? This group of disciples meant to her that Jesus had begun his Messianic work. Songs:she dares propose the miracle to him.
rwp@John:2:24 @{But Jesus did not trust himself to them} (\autos de Isous ouk episteuen hauton autois\). "But Jesus himself kept on refusing (negative imperfect) to trust himself to them." The double use of \pisteu\ here is shown by strkjv@Acts:8:13| where Simon Magus "believed" (\episteusen\) and was baptized, but was unsaved. He merely believed that he wanted what Philip had. {For that he knew all men} (\dia to auton ginskein pantas\). Causal use of \dia\ and the accusative case of the articular infinitive \to ginskein\ (because of the knowing) with the object of the infinitive (\pantas\, all men) and the accusative of general reference (\auton\, as to himself).
rwp@John:3:20 @{That doeth ill} (\ho phaula prassn\). The word \phaulos\ means first worthless and then wicked (usually so in N.T.) and both senses occur in the papyri. In strkjv@5:29| see contrast between \agatha poie\ (doing good things) and \phaula prass\ (practising evil things). {Hateth the light} (\misei to phs\). Hence talks against it, ridicules Christ, Christianity, churches, preachers, etc. Does it in talk, magazines, books, in a supercilious tone of sheer ignorance. {Cometh not to the light} (\ouk erchetai pros to phs\). The light hurts his eyes, reveals his own wickedness, makes him thoroughly uncomfortable. Hence he does not read the Bible, he does not come to church, he does not pray. He goes on in deeper darkness. {Lest his works should be reproved} (\hina m elegchthi ta erga autou\). Negative final clause (\hina m\) with first aorist passive subjunctive of \elegch\, old word to correct a fault, to reprove, to convict. See also strkjv@8:46; strkjv@16:8|. To escape this unpleasant process the evil man cuts out Christ.
rwp@John:4:2 @{Although Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples} (\kaitoige Isous autos ouk ebaptizen all' hoi mathtai autou\). Parenthetical explanation that applies also to strkjv@3:22|. Imperfect tense means that it was not the habit of Jesus. This is the only N.T. instance of \kaitoige\ (and yet indeed), compound conjunction (\kaitoi\ in strkjv@Acts:14:17; strkjv@Hebrews:4:3|) with intensive particle \ge\ added. This is the last mention of baptism under the direction of Jesus till the Great Commission (Matthew:28:19|). It is possible that Jesus stopped the baptizing because of the excitement and the issue raised about his Messianic claims till after his resurrection when he enjoined it upon his disciples as a rite of public enlistment in his service.
rwp@John:4:22 @{That which ye know not} (\ho ouk oidate\). Cf. strkjv@Acts:17:23|. "You know whom to worship, but you do not know him" (Westcott). The Samaritans rejected the prophets and the Psalms and so cut themselves off from the fuller knowledge of God. {We} (\hmeis\). We Jews. Jesus is a Jew as he fully recognizes (Matthew:15:24|). {That which we know} (\ho oidamen\). Neuter singular relative as before. The Jews, as the chosen people, had fuller revelations of God (Psalms:147:19f.; strkjv@Romans:9:3-5|). But even so the Jews as a whole failed to recognize God in Christ (1:11,26; strkjv@7:28|). {For salvation is from the Jews} (\hoti h stria ek tn Ioudain estin\). "The salvation," the Messianic salvation which had long been the hope and guiding star of the chosen people (Luke:1:69,71,77; strkjv@Acts:13:26,47|). It was for the whole world (John:3:17|), but it comes "out of" (\ek\) the Jews. This tremendous fact should never be forgotten, however unworthy the Jews may have proved of their privilege. The Messiah, God's Son, was a Jew.
rwp@John:4:29 @{All things that ever I did} (\panta ha epoisa\). {Ha}, not \hosa\ (as many as), no "ever" in the Greek. But a guilty conscience (verse 18f.|) led her to exaggerate a bit. {Can this be the Christ?} (\mti houtos estin ho Christos;\). She is already convinced herself (verses 26f.|), but she puts the question in a hesitant form to avoid arousing opposition. With a woman's intuition she avoided \ouk\ and uses \mti\. She does not take sides, but piques their curiosity.
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:4:44 @{For Jesus himself testified} (\autos gar Isous emartursen\). John's explanation of the conduct of Jesus by quoting a proverb often used by Jesus (Mark:6:4; strkjv@Matthew:13:57; strkjv@Luke:4:24| in reference to Nazareth), but not necessarily used by Jesus on this occasion. A similar proverb has been found in Plutarch, Pliny, Seneca. {A prophet hath no honour in his own country} (\prophts en ti idii patridi timn ouk echei\). What is meant by \patridi\? In the Synoptics (Luke:4:24; strkjv@Mark:6:4; strkjv@Matthew:13:57|) the reference is to Nazareth where he was twice rejected. But what has John in mind in quoting it here? He probably knew the quotations in the Synoptics. Does John refer to Judea by "his own country"? If so, the application hardly fits for he had already explained that Jesus was leaving Judea because he was too popular there (4:1-3|). If he means Galilee, he immediately mentions the cordial welcome accorded Jesus there (verse 45|). But even so this is probably John's meaning for he is speaking of the motive of Jesus in going into Galilee where he had not yet laboured and where he apparently had no such fame as in Judea and now in Samaria.
rwp@John:5:31 @{If I bear witness of myself} (\Ean eg martur peri emautou\). Condition of third class, undetermined with prospect of determination (\ean\ and present active subjunctive of \marture\). The emphasis is on \eg\ (I alone with no other witness). {Is not true} (\ouk estin alths\). In law the testimony of a witness is not received in his own case (Jewish, Greek, Roman law). See strkjv@Deuteronomy:19:15| and the allusion to it by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:18:16|. See also strkjv@2Corinthians:13:1; strkjv@1Timothy:5:19|. And yet in strkjv@8:12-19| Jesus claims that his witness concerning himself is true because the Father gives confirmation of his message. The Father and the Son are the two witnesses (8:17|). It is a paradox and yet true. But here Jesus yields to the rabbinical demand for proof outside of himself. He has the witness of another (the Father, strkjv@5:32,37|), the witness of the Baptist (5:33|), the witness of the works of Jesus (5:36|), the witness of the Scriptures (5:39|), the witness of Moses in particular (5:45|).
rwp@John:5:40 @{And ye will not come to me} (\kai ou thelete elthein pros me\). "And yet" (\kai\) as often in John. "This is the tragedy of the rejection of Messiah by the Messianic race" (Bernard). See strkjv@John:1:11; strkjv@Matthew:23:37| (\kai ouk thelsate\, and ye would not). Men loved darkness rather than light (John:3:19|). {That ye may have life} (\hina zn echte\). Life in its simplest form as in strkjv@3:36| (cf. strkjv@3:16|). This is the purpose of John in writing the Fourth Gospel (20:31|). There is life only in Christ Jesus.
rwp@John:6:17 @{Were going} (\rchonto\). Picturesque imperfect. {It was now dark} (\skotia d egegonei\). Past perfect active of \ginomai\. While they were going, "darkness had already come." {And Jesus had not yet come to them} (\kai ouk elluthei pros autous ho Isous\). Another past perfect active of \erchomai\ with negative \oup\. Darkness had come, but Jesus had not come, while they were going over the sea. The tenses in these verses are very graphic.
rwp@John:6:24 @{When the multitude therefore saw} (\hote oun eiden ho ochlos\). Resumption and clarification of the complicated statements of verse 22|. {That Jesus was not there} (\hoti Isous ouk estin ekei\). Present indicative retained in indirect discourse. They still did not understand how Jesus had crossed over, but they acted on the basis of the plain fact. {They themselves got into} (\enebsan autoi eis\). Second aorist active indicative of \embain\ followed by \eis\ (both \en\ and \eis\ together as often in N.T.). {Seeking Jesus} (\ztountes ton Isoun\). Present active participle of \zte\. They had a double motive apart from the curiosity explained in verse 22|. They had clearly not given up the impulse of the evening before to make Jesus king (6:15|) and they had hopes of still another bountiful repast at the hands of Jesus as he said (6:26|).
rwp@John:6:66 @{Upon this} (\ek toutou\). Same idiom in strkjv@19:12|. "Out of this saying or circumstance." Jesus drew the line of cleavage between the true and the false believers. {Went back} (\aplthon eis ta opis\). Aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \aperchomai\ with \eis ta opis\, "to the rear" (the behind things) as in strkjv@18:6|. {Walked no more with him} (\ouketi met' autou periepatoun\). Imperfect active of \peripate\. The crisis had come. These half-hearted seekers after the loaves and fishes and political power turned abruptly from Jesus, walked out of the synagogue with a deal of bluster and were walking with Jesus no more. Jesus had completely disillusioned these hungry camp-followers who did not care for spiritual manna that consisted in intimate appropriation of the life of Jesus as God's Son.
rwp@John:7:8 @{Go ye up to the feast} (\humeis anabte eis tn heortn\). The emphatic word by position is \humeis\ (ye) in contrast with \eg\ (I). Second aorist active imperative of \anabain\, old and common verb for going up to the feast (2:13|) or anywhere. Take your own advice (7:3|). {I go not up yet} (\eg oup anabain\). Songs:Westcott and Hort after B W L (Neutral) while \ou\ (not) is read by Aleph D, African Latin, Vulgate, Coptic (Western). Some of the early Greek Fathers were puzzled over the reading \ouk\ (I go not up) as contradictory to verse 10| wherein it is stated that Jesus did go up. Almost certainly \ouk\ (not) is correct and is not really contradictory when one notes in verse 10| that the manner of Christ's going up is precisely the opposite of the advice of the brothers in verses 3,4|. "Not yet" (\oup\) is genuine before "fulfilled" (\peplrtai\, perfect passive indicative of \plro\). One may think, if he will, that Jesus changed his plans after these words, but that is unnecessary. He simply refused to fall in with his brothers' sneering proposal for a grand Messianic procession with the caravan on the way to the feast. He will do that on the journey to the last passover.
rwp@John:7:28 @{And I am not come of myself} (\kai ap' emautou ouk ellutha\). \Kai\ here="and yet." Jesus repeats the claim of verse 17| and also in strkjv@5:30; strkjv@8:28; strkjv@12:49; strkjv@14:10|. {Whom ye know not} (\hon humeis ouk oidate\). Jesus passes by a controversy over the piece of popular theology to point out their ignorance of God the Father who sent him. He tersely agrees that they know something of him. Jesus says of these Jews that they know not God as in strkjv@8:19,55|.
rwp@John:7:45 @{Why did ye not bring him?} (\Dia ti ouk gagete auton;\). Second aorist active indicative of \ag\. Indignant outburst of the Sanhedrin (both Sadducees and Pharisees) at the failure of the (\tous\, note article here referring to verse 32|) temple police to arrest Jesus. "Apparently they were sitting in expectation of immediately questioning him" (Dods). They were stunned at this outcome.
rwp@John:7:52 @{Art thou also of Galilee?} (\M kai su ek ts Galilaias ei;\). Formally negative answer expected by \m\, but really they mean to imply that Nicodemus from local feeling or prejudice has lined himself up with this Galilean mob (\ochlos\) of sympathizers with Jesus and is like Jesus himself a Galilean. "These aristocrats of Jerusalem had a scornful contempt for the rural Galileans" (Bernard). {That out of Galilee ariseth no prophet} (\hoti ek ts Galilaias prophts ouk egeiretai\). As a matter of fact Jonah, Hosea, Nahum, possibly also Elijah, Elisha, and Amos were from Galilee. It was simply the rage of the Sanhedrin against Jesus regardless of the facts. Westcott suggests that they may have reference to the future, but that is a mere excuse for them.
rwp@John:8:13 @{Of thyself} (\peri seautou\). This technical objection was according to the rules of evidence among the rabbis. "No man can give witness for himself" (_Mishnah, Ketub_. 11. 9). Hence, they say, "not true" (\ouk althes\), not pertinent. "They were still in the region of pedantic rules and external tests." In strkjv@John:5:31| Jesus acknowledged this technical need of further witness outside of his own claims (John:19-30|) and proceeded to give it (John:32-47|) in the testimony of the Baptist, of the Father, of his works, of the Scriptures, and of Moses in particular.
rwp@John:8:14 @{Even if} (\kan\). That is \kai ean\, a condition of the third class with the present active subjunctive \martur\. Jesus means that his own witness concerning himself is true (\althes\) even if it contravenes their technical rules of evidence. He can and does tell the truth all by himself concerning himself. {For I know whence I came and whither I go} (\hoti oida pothen lthon kai pou hupag\). In this terse sentence with two indirect questions Jesus alludes to his pre-existence with the Father before his Incarnation as in strkjv@17:5| and to the return to the Father after the death and resurrection as in strkjv@13:3; strkjv@14:2f|. He again puts both ideas together in one crisp clause in strkjv@16:28| for the apostles who profess to understand him then. But here these Pharisees are blind to the words of Jesus. "But ye know not whence I come nor whither I go" (\humeis de ouk oidate pothen erchomai pou hupag\). He had spoken of his heavenly destiny (7:33|). Jesus alone knew his personal consciousness of his coming from, fellowship with, and return to the Father. Stier (_Words of the Lord Jesus_) argues that one might as well say to the sun, if claiming to be the sun, that it was night, because it bore witness of itself. The answer is the shining of the sun.
rwp@John:8:16 @{Yea and if I judge} (\kai ean krin de eg\). "And even if I pass judgment." Condition of third class again. {True} (althin). See strkjv@1:9| for \althinos\, genuine, soundly based (cf. \dikaia\ in strkjv@5:30|), "satisfying our perfect conception" (Westcott), not merely true (\althes\) in the particular facts (verse 14|). {For I am not alone} (\hoti monos ouk eimi\). Jesus now takes up the technical criticism in verse 13| after justifying his right to speak concerning himself. {But I and the Father that sent me} (\all eg kai ho pempsas me patr\). See strkjv@16:32| for a like statement about the Father being with Christ. It is not certain that \patr\ is genuine here (omitted by Aleph D, but in B L W), but the Father is clearly meant as in strkjv@7:18,33|. Jesus gives the Father as the second witness.
rwp@John:8:27 @{They perceived not} (\ouk egnsan\). Second aorist active indicative of \ginsk\. "Preoccupied as they were with thoughts of an earthly deliverer" (Westcott) and prejudiced against recognizing Jesus as the one sent from God. {That he spake to them of the Father} (\hoti ton patera autois elegen\). Indirect assertion, but with the present indicative (\legei\) changed to the imperfect (\elegen\) as was sometimes done (2:25|) after a secondary tense.
rwp@John:8:29 @{Is with me} (\met' emou estin\). The Incarnation brought separation from the Father in one sense, but in essence there is complete harmony and fellowship as he had already said (8:16|) and will expand in strkjv@17:21-26|. {He hath not left me alone} (\ouk aphken me monon\). First aorist active indicative of \aphimi\. "He did not leave me alone." However much the crowds and the disciples misunderstood or left Jesus, the Father always comforted and understood him (Mark:6:46; strkjv@Matthew:14:23; strkjv@John:6:15|). {That are pleasing to him} (\ta aresta auti\). This old verbal adjective, from \aresk\, to please, in N.T. only here, strkjv@Acts:6:2; strkjv@12:3; strkjv@1John:3:32|. The joy of Jesus was in doing the will of the Father who sent him (4:34|).
rwp@John:8:40 @{But now} (\nun de\). Clear statement that they are not doing "the works of Abraham" in seeking to kill him. See this use of \nun de\ after a condition of second class without \an\ in strkjv@John:16:22,24|. {This did not Abraham} (\touto Abraam ouk epoisen\). Blunt and pointed of their unlikeness to Abraham. {A man that hath told you the truth} (\anthrpon hos ten altheian humin lelalka\). \Anthrpon\ (here=person, one) is accusative case in apposition with {me} (\me\) just before. The perfect active indicative \lelalka\ from \lale\ is in the first person singular because the relative \hos\ has the person of \me\, an idiom not retained in the English {that hath} (that have or who have) though it is retained in the English of strkjv@1Corinthians:15:9| "that am" for \hos eimi\. {Which I heard from God} (\hn kousa para tou theou\). Here we have "I" in the English. "God" here is equal to "My Father" in verse 38|. The only crime of Jesus is telling the truth directly from God.
rwp@John:8:44 @{Ye are of your father the devil} (\humeis ek tou patros tou diabolou\). Certainly they can "understand" (\ginskete\ in 43|) this "talk" (\lalian\) though they will be greatly angered. But they had to hear it (\akouein\ in 43|). It was like a bombshell in spite of the preliminary preparation. {Your will to do} (\thelete poiein\). Present active indicative of \thel\ and present active infinitive, "Ye wish to go on doing." This same idea Jesus presents in strkjv@Matthew:13:38| (the sons of the evil one, the devil) and strkjv@23:15| (twofold more a son of Gehenna than you). See also strkjv@1John:3:8| for "of the devil" (\ek tou diabolou\) for the one who persists in sinning. In strkjv@Revelation:12:9| the devil is one who leads all the world astray. The Gnostic view that Jesus means "the father of the devil" is grotesque. Jesus does not, of course, here deny that the Jews, like all men, are children of God the Creator, like Paul's offspring of God for all men in strkjv@Acts:17:28|. What he denies to these Pharisees is that they are spiritual children of God who do his will. They do the lusts and will of the devil. The Baptist had denied this same spiritual fatherhood to the merely physical descendants of Abraham (Matthew:3:9|). He even called them "broods of vipers" as Jesus did later (Matthew:12:34|). {A murderer} (\anthrpoktonos\). Old and rare word (Euripides) from \anthrpos\, man, and \ktein\, to kill. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1John:3:15|. The Jews were seeking to kill Jesus and so like their father the devil. {Stood not in the truth} (\en ti altheii ouk estken\). Since \ouk\, not \ouch\, is genuine, the form of the verb is \esteken\ the imperfect of the late present stem \stk\ (Mark:11:25|) from the perfect active \hestka\ (intransitive) of \histmi\, to place. {No truth in him} (\ouk estin altheia en auti\). Inside him or outside (environment). The devil and truth have no contact. {When he speaketh a lie} (\hotan lali to pseudos\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the present active subjunctive of \lale\. But note the article \to\: "Whenever he speaks the lie," as he is sure to do because it is his nature. Hence "he speaks out of his own" (\ek tn idin lalei\) like a fountain bubbling up (cf. strkjv@Matthew:12:34|). {For he is a liar} (\hoti pseusts estin\). Old word for the agent in a conscious falsehood (\pseudos\). See strkjv@1John:1:10; strkjv@Romans:3:4|. Common word in John because of the emphasis on \altheia\ (truth). {And the father thereof} (\kai ho patr autou\). Either the father of the lie or of the liar, both of which are true as already shown by Jesus. {Autou} in the genitive can be either neuter or masculine. Westcott takes it thus, "because he is a liar and his father (the devil) is a liar," making "one," not the devil, the subject of "whenever he speaks," a very doubtful expression.
rwp@John:8:49 @{I have not a demon} (\eg daimonion ouk ech\). This Jesus says calmly, passing by the reference to the Samaritans as beneath notice. {My Father} (\ton patera mou\). As in strkjv@2:16|. He is not mad in claiming to honour God (cf. strkjv@7:18|). They were insulting the Father in insulting him (cf. strkjv@5:23|). On \atimaz\ (\a\ privative and \tima\, to dishonour) see strkjv@Luke:20:11|.
rwp@John:8:55 @{And ye have not known him} (\kai ouk egnkate auton\). Adversative use again of \kai\="and yet." Perfect active indicative of \ginsk\, the verb for experiential knowledge. This was true of the \kosmos\ (1:10; strkjv@17:25|) and of the hostile Jews (16:3|). Jesus prays that the world may know (17:23|) and the handful of disciples had come to know (17:25|). {But I know him} (\eg de oida auton\). Equipped by eternal fellowship to reveal the Father (1:1-18|). This peculiar intimate knowledge Jesus had already claimed (7:29|). Jesus used \oida\ (8:19; strkjv@15:21|) or \ginsk\ (17:23,25|) for the knowledge of the Father. No undue distinction can be drawn here. {And if I should say} (\kan eip\). Third-class condition (concession), "even if I say," with \kai ean\ (\kan\) and second aorist active subjunctive. "Suppose I say." {I shall be like you a liar} (\esomai homoios humin pseusts\). Apodosis of the condition. \Homoios\ (like) is followed by the associative-instrumental case \humin\. The word \pseusts\ (liar), in spite of the statement that they are the children of the devil, the father of lying (8:44|), comes with a sudden jolt because it is a direct charge. This word liar is not considered polite today in public speech when hurled at definite individuals. There is a rather free use of the word in strkjv@1John:2:4,22; strkjv@4:20; strkjv@5:10|. It is not hard to imagine the quick anger of these Pharisees.
rwp@John:9:18 @{The Jews} (\hoi Ioudaioi\). Probably the incredulous and hostile section of the Pharisees in verse 16| (cf. strkjv@5:10|). {Did not believe} (\ouk episteusan\). The facts told by the man, "that he had been blind and had received his sight" (\hoti n tuphlos kai aneblepsen\), conflicted with their theological views of God and the Sabbath. Songs:they refused belief "until they called the parents" (\hes hotou ephnsan tous goneis\). Usual construction of \hes hotou\ ( = until which time, like \hes\ alone) with aorist active indicative of \phne\, old verb from \phn\ (voice, sound). They called out loud for his parents to throw light on this grave problem to cover up their own stupidity.
rwp@John:9:21 @{But how he now seeth we know not} (\ps de nun blepei ouk oidamen\). Concerning the third question they profess ignorance both as to the "how" (\ps\) and the "who" (\tis\). {Opened} (\noixen\). First aorist active indicative with single augment of \anoig\, same form as \neixen\ (triple augment) in verse 17|. They were not witnesses of the cure and had the story only from the son as the Pharisees had. {He is of age} (\hlikian echei\). "He has maturity of age." He is an adult. A regular classical phrase in Plato, etc. The parents were wholly right and within their rights.
rwp@John:9:29 @{We know that God hath spoken unto Moses} (\hmeis oidamen hoti Musei lelalken ho theos\). Perfect active indicative of \lale\, so still on record. See strkjv@Exodus:33:11|. For \lale\ used of God speaking see strkjv@Hebrews:1:1|. They are proud to be disciples of Moses. {But as for this man, we do not know whence he is} (\touton de ouk oidamen pothen estin\). "This fellow" they mean by "\touton\" in emphatic position, we do not even know whence he is. Some of the people did (7:27|), but in the higher sense none of the Jews knew (8:14|). These Pharisees neither knew nor cared.
rwp@John:9:31 @{God does not hear sinners} (\ho theos hamartln ouk akouei\). Note genitive case with \akouei\. This was the argument of the Pharisees in strkjv@9:16|. It is frequent in the O.T. (Job:27:9; strkjv@Psalms:66:18; strkjv@Isaiah:1:15; strkjv@59:2|, etc.). The conclusion is inevitable from this premise. Jesus is not \hamartlos\. {If any man be a worshipper of God} (\ean tis theosebs i\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and present active subjunctive \i\. \Theosebs\ (\theos\, God, \sebomai\, to worship) is an old compound adjective, here alone in the N.T. {And do his will} (\kai to thelma autou poiei\). Same condition with present active subjunctive of \poie\, "keep on doing his will."
rwp@John:9:33 @{If this man were not from God} (\ei m n houtos para theou\). Negative condition of second class with imperfect indicative. Assuming that Jesus is not "from God" (\para theou\) as some argued in strkjv@9:16|, "he could do nothing" (\ouk dunato poiein ouden\). Conclusion of the second-class condition with imperfect indicative (double augment in \dunato\) without \an\ as is usual in conditions of possibility, propriety, obligation (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 920,1014). The man has scored with terrific power in his use of Scripture and logic.
rwp@John:9:41 @{If ye were blind} (\ei tuphloi te\). Condition of second class with imperfect indicative in the protasis. The old word \tuphlos\ is from \tuph\, to raise a smoke, to blind by smoke (literally and metaphorically). Here, of course, it is moral blindness. If the Pharisees were born morally blind, they would, like idiots, be without responsibility. {Ye would not have sin} (\ouk an eichete hamartian\). Regular form for conclusion of second-class condition, \an\ with imperfect. {But now ye say} (\nun de legete\). In contrast to the previous condition. See like contrast in strkjv@15:22,24|. They arrogantly asserted superior knowledge. {We see} (\blepomen\). The ignorant mob do not (7:49|). It is sin against light and is hopeless (Mark:3:29; strkjv@Matthew:12:31f.|). "Ye are witnesses against yourselves" (\martureite heautois\, strkjv@Matthew:23:31|).
rwp@John:10:6 @{This parable} (\tautn tn paroimian\). Old word for proverb from \para\ (beside) and \oimos\, way, a wayside saying or saying by the way. As a proverb in N.T. in strkjv@2Peter:2:22| (quotation from strkjv@Proverbs:26:11|), as a symbolic or figurative saying in strkjv@John:16:25,29|, as an allegory in strkjv@John:10:6|. Nowhere else in the N.T. Curiously enough in the N.T. \parabol\ occurs only in the Synoptics outside of strkjv@Hebrews:9:9; strkjv@11:19|. Both are in the LXX. \Parabol\ is used as a proverb (Luke:4:23|) just as \paroimia\ is in strkjv@2Peter:2:22|. Here clearly \paroimia\ means an allegory which is one form of the parable. Songs:there you are. Jesus spoke this \paroimia\ to the Pharisees, "but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them" (\ekeinoi de ouk egnsan tina n ha elalei autois\). Second aorist active indicative of \ginsk\ and note \n\ in indirect question as in strkjv@2:25| and both the interrogative \tina\ and the relative \ha\. "Spake" (imperfect \elalei\) should be "Was speaking or had been speaking."
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@John:10:12 @{He that is a hireling} (\ho misthtos\). Old word from \mistho\, to hire (Matthew:20:1|) from \misthos\ (hire, wages, strkjv@Luke:10:7|), in N.T. only in this passage. Literally, "the hireling and not being a shepherd" (\ho misthtos kai ouk n poimn\). Note \ouk\ with the participle \n\ to emphasize the certainty that he is not a shepherd in contrast with \m eiserchomenos\ in verse 1| (conceived case). See same contrast in strkjv@1Peter:1:8| between \ouk idontes\ and \m horntes\. The hireling here is not necessarily the thief and robber of verses 1,8|. He may conceivably be a nominal shepherd (pastor) of the flock who serves only for the money, a sin against which Peter warned the shepherds of the flock "not for shameful gain" (1Peter:5:2|). {Whose own} (\hou idia\). Every true shepherd considers the sheep in his care "his own" (\idia\) even if he does not actually "own" them. The mere "hireling" does not feel so. {Beholdeth} (\therei\). Vivid dramatic present, active indicative of \there\, a graphic picture. {The wolf coming} (\ton lukon erchomenon\). Present middle predicate participle of \erchomai\. {Leaveth the sheep, and fleeth} (\aphisin ta probata kai pheugei\). Graphic present actives again of \aphimi\ and \pheug\. The cowardly hireling cares naught for the sheep, but only for his own skin. The wolf was the chief peril to sheep in Palestine. See strkjv@Matthew:10:6| where Jesus says: "Behold I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves." {And the wolf snatcheth them and scattereth them} (\kai ho lukos harpazei kai skorpizei\). Vivid parenthesis in the midst of the picture of the conduct of the hireling. Bold verbs these. For the old verb \harpaz\ see strkjv@John:6:15; strkjv@Matthew:11:12|, and for \skorpiz\, late word (Plutarch) for the Attic \skedannumi\, see strkjv@Matthew:12:30|. It occurs in the vision of Ezekiel (Ezekiel:34:5|) where because of the careless shepherds "the sheep became meat to all the beasts of the field, and were scattered." Jesus uses \harpaz\ in strkjv@10:29| where no one is able "to snatch" one out of the Father's hand.
rwp@John:10:34 @{Is it not written?} (\ouk estin gegrammenon;\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \graph\ (as in strkjv@2:17|) in place of the usual \gegraptai\. "Does it not stand written?" {In your law} (\en ti nomi humn\). From strkjv@Psalms:82:6|. The term \nomos\ (law) applying here to the entire O.T. as in strkjv@12:34; strkjv@15:25; strkjv@Romans:3:19; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:21|. Aleph D Syr-sin. omit \humn\, but needlessly. We have it already so from Jesus in strkjv@8:17|. They posed as the special custodians of the O.T. {I said} (\hoti eg eipa\). Recitative \hoti\ before a direct quotation like our quotation marks. \Eipa\ is a late second aorist form of indicative with \-a\ instead of \-on\. {Ye are gods} (\theoi este\). Another direct quotation after \eipa\ but without \hoti\. The judges of Israel abused their office and God is represented in strkjv@Psalms:82:6| as calling them "gods" (\theoi\, _elohim_) because they were God's representatives. See the same use of _elohim_ in strkjv@Exodus:21:6; strkjv@22:9,28|. Jesus meets the rabbis on their own ground in a thoroughly Jewish way.
rwp@John:11:4 @{Heard it} (\akousas\). The messenger delivered the message of the sisters. The reply of Jesus is for him and for the apostles. {Is not unto death} (\ouk estin pros thanaton\). Death in the final issue, to remain dead. Lazarus did die, but he did not remain dead. See \hamartia pros thanaton\ in strkjv@1John:5:16|, "sin unto death" (final death). {But for the glory of God} (\all' huper ts doxs tou theou\). In behalf of God's glory, as the sequel shows. Cf. strkjv@9:3| about the man born blind. The death of Lazarus will illustrate God's glory. In some humble sense those who suffer the loss of loved ones are entitled to some comfort from this point made by Jesus about Lazarus. In a supreme way it is true of the death of Christ which he himself calls glorification of himself and God (13:31|). In strkjv@7:39| John had already used \doxaz\ of the death of Christ. {That the Son of God may be glorified thereby} (\hina doxasthi ho huios tou theou di' auts\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \doxaz\. Here Jesus calls himself "the Son of God." In strkjv@8:54| Jesus had said: "It is my Father that glorifieth me." The raising of Lazarus from the tomb will bring glory to the Son of God. See strkjv@17:1| for this idea in Christ's prayer. The raising of Lazarus will also bring to an issue his own death and all this involves the glorification of the Father (7:39; strkjv@12:16; strkjv@13:31; strkjv@14:13|). The death of Lazarus brings Jesus face to face with his own death.
rwp@John:11:15 @{For your sakes} (\di' humas\). That they may witness his raising from the grave. {That I was not there} (\hoti ouk mn ekei\). Imperfect middle \mn\ of the later Greek instead of the common active \n\ in indirect discourse in place of the usual present retained as in verse 13|. {To the intent ye may believe} (\hina pisteuste\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the ingressive aorist active subjunctive, "that ye may come to believe" (more than you do). See the same use of the ingressive aorist in \episteusan\ (2:11|) where the disciples gained in belief. {Nevertheless let us go to him} (\alla agmen pros auton\). Volitive subjunctive, repeating the proposal of verse 7|. He is dead, but no matter, yea all the more let us go on to him.
rwp@John:11:21 @{Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died} (\Kurie, ei s hde ouk an apethanen ho adelphos mou\). Condition of the second class with \ei\ and the imperfect \s\ (no aorist of \eimi\, to be) in the condition and \an\ with the second aorist active indicative of \apothnsk\. Mary (verse 32|) uses these identical words to Jesus. Clearly they had said so to each other with wistful longing if not with a bit of reproach for his delay. But they used \s\, not \lthes\ or \egenou\. But busy, practical Martha comes to the point.
rwp@John:11:37 @{Could not this man} (\ouk edunato houtos\). Imperfect middle of \dunamai\. They do not say \dunatai\ (can, present middle indicative). But clearly the opening of the blind man's eyes (chapter 9) had made a lasting impression on some of these Jews, for it was done three months ago. {Have caused that this man also should not die} (\poisai hina kai houtos m apothani\). First aorist active infinitive of \poie\ with \hina\, like the Latin _facere ut_ (sub-final use, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 985), with the second aorist active subjunctive \apothani\ and negative \m\. These Jews share the view expressed by Martha (verse 21|) and Mary (verse 32|) that Jesus could have {prevented} the death of Lazarus.
rwp@John:11:40 @{Said I not unto thee?} (\Ouk eipon soi;\). Jesus pointedly reminds Martha of his promise to raise Lazarus (verses 25f.|). {That if thou believedst} (\hoti ean pisteusis\). Indirect discourse with \ean\ and the first aorist active subjunctive (condition of third class) retained after the secondary tense \eipon\. He had not said this very phrase, \ean pisteusis\, to Martha, but he did say to her: \Pisteueis touto\; (Believest thou this?). He meant to test Martha as to her faith already hinted at (verse 22|) on this very point. Jesus had also spoken of increase of faith on the part of the disciples (verse 15|). {Thou shouldest see the glory of God} (\opsi tn doxan tou theou\). Future middle indicative of the old defective verb \hora\ retained in the conclusion of this condition in indirect discourse. Jesus means the glory of God as shown in the resurrection of Lazarus as he had already said to the disciples (verse 4|) and as he meant Martha to understand (verse 25|) and may in fact have said to her (the report of the conversation is clearly abridged). Hence Bernard's difficulty in seeing how Martha could understand the words of Jesus about the resurrection of Lazarus here and now seems fanciful and far-fetched.
rwp@John:11:49 @{Caiaphas} (\Kaiaphas\). Son-in-law of Annas and successor and high priest for 18 years (A.D. 18 to 36). {That year} (\tou eniautou ekeinou\). Genitive of time; his high-priesthood included that year (A.D. 29 or 30). Songs:he took the lead at this meeting. {Ye know nothing at all} (\humeis ouk oidate ouden\). In this he is correct, for no solution of their problem had been offered.
rwp@John:11:51 @{Not of himself} (\aph' heautou ouk\). Not wholly of himself, John means. There was more in what Caiaphas said than he understood. His language is repeated in strkjv@18:14|. {Prophesied} (\eprophteusen\). Aorist active indicative of \prophteu\. But certainly unconscious prophecy on his part and purely accidental. Caiaphas meant only what was mean and selfish. {That Jesus should die} (\hoti emellen Isous apothnskein\). Imperfect active of \mell\ in indirect discourse instead of the usual present retained after a secondary tense (\eprophteusen\) as sometimes occurs (see strkjv@2:25|).
rwp@John:11:54 @{Therefore walked no more openly} (\oun ouketi parrsii periepatei\). Imperfect active of \peripate\, to walk around. Jesus saw clearly that to do so would bring on the end now instead of his "hour" which was to be at the passover a month ahead. {Into the country near to the wilderness} (\eis tn chran eggus ts ermou\). It was now in Jerusalem as it had become once in Galilee (7:1|) because of the plots of the hostile Jews. The hill country northeast of Jerusalem was thinly populated. {Into a city called Ephraim} (\eis Ephraim legomenn polin\). \Polis\ here means no more than town or village (\km\). The place is not certainly known, not mentioned elsewhere in the N.T. Josephus mentions (_War_, IV. ix. 9) a small fort near Bethel in the hill country and in strkjv@2Chronicles:13:19| Ephron is named in connexion with Bethel. Up here Jesus would at least be free for the moment from the machinations of the Sanhedrin while he faced the coming catastrophe at the passover. He is not far from the mount of temptation where the devil showed and offered him the kingdoms of the world for the bending of the knee before him. Is it mere fancy to imagine that the devil came to see Jesus again here at this juncture with a reminder of his previous offer and of the present plight of the Son of God with the religious leaders conspiring his death? At any rate Jesus has the fellowship of his disciples this time (\meta tn mathtn\). But what were they thinking?
rwp@John:12:16 @{Understood not} (\ouk egnsan\). Second aorist active indicative of \ginsk\. Another comment by John concerning the failure of the disciples to know what was happening (cf. strkjv@2:22; strkjv@7:39|). {At the first} (\to prton\). Adverbial accusative, as in strkjv@10:40; strkjv@19:39|. {Was glorified} (\edoxasth\). First aorist passive indicative of \doxaz\, to glorify, used of his death already in strkjv@7:39| and by Jesus himself of his death, resurrection, and ascension in strkjv@12:23; strkjv@13:31|. {Then remembered they} (\tote emnsthsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \mimnsk\. It was easier to understand then and they had the Holy Spirit to help them (16:13-15|). {Were written of him} (\n ep' auti gegrammena\). Periphrastic past perfect passive of \graph\ with neuter plural participle agreeing with \tauta\ (these things) and singular verb, though the plural \san\ could have been used. Note the threefold repetition of \tauta\ in this verse, "clumsy" Bernard calls it, but making for clarity. The use of \ep' auti\ for "of him" rather than \peri autou\ is unusual, but occurs in strkjv@Revelation:10:11; strkjv@22:16|. {They had done} (\epoisan\). First aorist active indicative of \poie\, simply, "they did."
rwp@John:12:35 @{Yet a little while is the light among you} (\eti mikron chronon to phs en humin estin\). \Chronon\ is the accusative of extent of time. Jesus does not argue the point of theology with the crowd who would not understand. He turns to the metaphor used before when he claimed to be the light of the world (8:12|) and urges that they take advantage of their privilege "while ye have the light" (\hs to phs echete\). {That darkness overtake you not} (\hina m skotia humas katalabi\). Purpose (negative) with \hina m\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \katalamban\. See this verb in strkjv@1:5|. In strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:4| this verb occurs with \hmera\ (day) overtaking one like a thief. {Knoweth not whither he goeth} (\ouk oiden pou hupagei\). See strkjv@11:10| for this idea and the same language in strkjv@1John:2:11|. The ancients did not have our electric street lights. The dark streets were a terror to travellers.
rwp@John:12:37 @{Though he had done so many signs before them} (\tosauta autou smeia pepoikotos emprosthen autn\). Genitive absolute with perfect active participle in concessive sense of \poie\. {Yet they believed not on him} (\ouk episteuon eis auton\). No "yet" in the Greek. Negative imperfect active of \pisteu\, "they kept on not believing on him," stubborn refusal in face of the light (verse 35|).
rwp@John:12:39 @{For this cause they could not believe} (\dia touto ouk edunanto pisteuein\). \Touto\ (this) seems to have a double reference (to what precedes and to what follows) as in strkjv@8:47|. The negative imperfect (double augment, \edunanto\) of \dunamai\. John is not absolving these Jews from moral responsibility, but only showing that the words of Isaiah "had to be fulfilled, for they were the expression of Divine foreknowledge " (Bernard).
rwp@John:13:7 @{I... thou} (\eg... su\). Jesus repeats the pronouns used by Peter in similar contrast. {Not now} (\ouk arti\). Just now \arti\ means (9:19,25|). Used again by Jesus (verse 33|) and Peter (verse 37|). {But thou shalt understand hereafter} (\gnsi de meta tauta\). Future middle of \ginsk\ (instead of the verb \oida\) to know by experience. "Thou shalt learn after these things," even if slowly.
rwp@John:13:8 @{Thou shalt never wash my feet} (\ou m nipsis mou tous podas eis ton aina\). Strong double negative \ou m\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \nipt\ with \eis ton aina\ (for ever) added and \mou\ (my) made emphatic by position. Peter's sudden humility should settle the issue, he felt. {If I wash thee not} (\ean m nips se\). Third-class condition with \ean m\ (negative). Jesus picks up the challenge of Peter whose act amounted to irreverence and want of confidence. "The first condition of discipleship is self-surrender" (Westcott). Songs:"Jesus, waiting with the basin" (Dods), concludes. {Thou hast no part with me} (\ouk echeis meros met' emou\). Not simply here at the supper with its fellowship, but in the deeper sense of mystic fellowship as Peter was quick to see. Jesus does not make foot-washing essential to spiritual fellowship, but simply tests Peter's real pride and mock-humility by this symbol of fellowship.
rwp@John:13:16 @{Is not greater} (\ouk estin meizn\). Comparative adjective of \megas\ (greater) followed by the ablative case \kuriou\ (contrast between slave, lord) and \tou pempsantos\ (articular participle of \pemp\, to send, with contrast with apostle, "one sent" (\apostolos\) from \apostell\). Jesus here enforces the dignity of service. In strkjv@Luke:22:27| Jesus argues this point a bit. In strkjv@Luke:6:40| the contrast is between the pupil and the teacher, though some pupils consider themselves superior to the teacher. In strkjv@Matthew:10:24| Jesus uses both forms of the saying (pupil and slave). He clearly repeated this \logion\ often.
rwp@John:14:18 @{I will not leave} (\ouk aphs\). Future active of \aphimi\, to send away, to leave behind. {Desolate} (\orphanous\). Old word (\orphos\, Latin _orbus_), bereft of parents, and of parents bereft of children. Common in papyri of orphan children. In strkjv@13:33| Jesus called the disciples \teknia\ (little children), and so naturally the word means "orphans" here, but the meaning may be "helpless" (without the other Paraclete, the Holy Spirit). The only other N.T. example is in strkjv@James:1:27| where it means "fatherless." {I come} (\erchomai\). Futuristic present as in verse 3|.
rwp@John:14:24 @{He that loveth me not} (\ho m agapn me\). Present active articular participle of \agapa\ with negative \m\, "the one who keeps on not loving me." {Is not mine, but the Father's} (\ouk estin emos, alla tou patros\). Predicative possessive pronoun \emos\ and the predicate genitive of possession \patros\.
rwp@John:15:15 @{No longer} (\ouketi\). As he had done in strkjv@13:16|. He was their Rabbi (1:38; strkjv@13:13|) and Lord (13:13|). Paul gloried in calling himself Christ's \doulos\ (bond-slave). {Servants} (\doulous\). Bond-servants, slaves. {I have called you friends} (\humas eirka philous\). Perfect active indicative, permanent state of new dignity. They will prove worthy of it by continued obedience to Christ as Lord, by being good \douloi\. Abraham was called the Friend of God (James:2:23|). Are we friends of Christ?
rwp@John:15:19 @{The world would love its own} (\ho kosmos an to idion ephilei\). Conclusion of second-class condition (determined as unfulfilled), regular idiom with \an\ and imperfect indicative in present time. {But because ye are not of the world} (\hoti de ek tou kosmou ouk este\). Definite and specific reason for the world's hatred of real Christians whose very existence is a reproach to the sinful world. Cf. strkjv@7:7; strkjv@17:14; strkjv@1John:3:13|. Does the world hate us? If not, why not? Has the world become more Christian or Christians more worldly?
rwp@John:15:22 @{They had not had sin} (\hamartian ouk eichosan\). Conclusion of condition of second class without \an\ because context makes it clear (\nun de\) without it (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1013). The imperfect active indicative with \-osan\ instead of \-on\ (also in verse 24|) as common in the LXX, and occurs in the papyri and the inscriptions and the Boeotian dialect. {Excuse} (\prophasin\). Old word (1Thessalonians:2:5|) either from \prophain\, to show forth, or \prophmi\, to speak forth. Mere pretence, in John only here and verse 24|.
rwp@John:16:10 @{And ye behold me no more} (\kai ouketi thereite me\). With the bodily eyes and without the Holy Spirit they are unable to behold Jesus with the spiritual vision (14:19|). Without Christ they lose the sense of righteousness as is seen in the "new morals" (immorality, loose views of marriage, etc.).
rwp@John:16:18 @{We know not what he saith} (\ouk oidamen ti lalei\). The questions to Jesus cease and the disciples frankly confess to each other their own ignorance.
rwp@John:16:23 @{Ye shall ask me nothing} (\eme ouk ertsete\). Either in the sense of question (original meaning of \erta\) as in verses 19,30| since he will be gone or in the sense of request or favours (like \aite\ in this verse) as in strkjv@14:16; strkjv@Acts:3:2|. In verse 26| both \aite\ and \erta\ occur in this sense. Either view makes sense here. {If ye shall ask} (\an ti aitste\). Third-class condition, \an\ like \ean\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \aite\. Note ¯14:26| for "in my name."
rwp@John:17:14 @{Not of the world} (\ouk ek tou kosmou\). They are "in the world" (\en ti kosmi\, verse 13|) still and Christ sends them "into the world" (\eis ton kosmon\, verse 18|), but they must not be like the world nor get their spirit, standards, and message "out of the world," else they can do the world no good. These verses (14-19|) picture the Master's ideal for believers and go far towards explaining the failure of Christians in winning the world to Christ. Too often the world fails to see the difference or the gain by the change.
rwp@John:18:26 @{Did not I see thee in the garden with him?} (\ouk eg se eidon en ti kpi met' autou;\). This staggering and sudden thrust expects an affirmative answer by the use of \ouk\, not \m\ as in verses 17,25|, but Peter's previous denials with the knowledge that he was observed by a kinsman of Malchus whom he had tried to kill (verse 10|) drove him to the third flat denial that he knew Jesus, this time with cursing and swearing (Mark:14:71; strkjv@Matthew:26:73|). Peter was in dire peril now of arrest himself for attempt to kill. {Straightway} (\euthes\). As in strkjv@Matthew:26:74| while Luke has \parachrma\ (Luke:22:60|). Mark (Mark:14:68,72|) speaks of two crowings as often happens when one cock crows. See strkjv@Matthew:26:34| for \alektr\ (cock). That was usually the close of the third watch of the night (Mark:13:35|), about 3 A.M. Luke (Luke:22:61|) notes that Jesus turned and looked on Peter probably as he passed from the rooms of Annas to the trial before Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin (the ecclesiastical court). See Mrs. Browning's beautiful sonnets on "The Look".
rwp@John:18:37 @{Art thou a king then?} (\oukoun basileus ei su;\). Compound of \ouk\ and \oun\ and is clearly ironical expecting an affirmative answer, only here in the N.T., and in LXX only in A text in strkjv@2Kings:5:23|. {Thou sayest that} (\su legeis hoti\). In strkjv@Matthew:27:11; strkjv@Mark:15:2; strkjv@Luke:23:3|, \su legeis\ clearly means "yes," as \su eipas\ (thou saidst) does in strkjv@Matthew:26:64| (= "I am," \eg eimi\, in strkjv@Mark:41:62|). Hence here \hoti\ had best be taken to mean "because": "Yes, because I am a king." {Have I been born} (\eg gegennmai\). Perfect passive indicative of \genna\. The Incarnation was for this purpose. Note repetition of \eis touto\ (for this purpose), explained by \hina marturs ti altheii\ (that I may bear witness to the truth), \hina\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \marture\. Paul (1Timothy:6:13|) alludes to this good confession when Christ bore witness (\martursantos\) before Pilate. Jesus bore such witness always (John:3:11,32; strkjv@7:7; strkjv@8:14; strkjv@Revelation:1:5|).
rwp@John:19:9 @{Whence art thou?} (\pothen ei su;\). Pilate knew that Jesus was from Galilee (Luke:23:6f.|). He is really alarmed. See a like question by the Jews in strkjv@8:25|. {Gave him no answer} (\apokrisin ouk edken auti\). See same idiom in strkjv@1:22|. \Apokrisis\ (old word from \apokrinomai\) occurs also in strkjv@Luke:2:47; strkjv@20:26|. The silence of Jesus, like that before Caiaphas (Mark:14:61; strkjv@Matthew:26:63|) and Herod (Luke:23:9|), irritates the dignity of Pilate in spite of his fears.
rwp@John:19:11 @{Thou wouldest have} (\ouk eiches\). Imperfect active indicative without \an\, but apodosis of second-class condition as in strkjv@15:22,24|. {Except it were given thee} (\ei m n dedomenon\). Periphrastic past perfect indicative of \didmi\ (a permanent possession). {From above} (\anthen\). From God (cf. strkjv@3:3|), the same doctrine of government stated by Paul in strkjv@Romans:13:1f|. Pilate did not get his "authority" from the Sanhedrin, but from Caesar. Jesus makes God the source of all real "authority." {Hath greater sin} (\meizona hamartian echei\). The same idiom in strkjv@9:41|. Caiaphas has his authority from God also and has used Pilate for his own base end.
rwp@John:19:12 @{Sought} (\eztei\). Imperfect active, "kept on seeking," "made renewed efforts to release him." He was afraid to act boldly against the will of the Jews. {If thou release this man} (\ean touton apolusis\). Condition of third class, a direct threat to Pilate. He knew all the time that the Sanhedrin might tell Caesar on him. {Thou art not Caesar's friend} (\ouk ei philos tou kaisaros\). Later to Vespasian this was an official title, here simply a daring threat to Pilate. {Speaketh against Caesar} (\antilegei ti kaisari\). Caesar brooks no rival. Jesus had allowed himself to be acclaimed king of Israel in the Triumphal Entry (John:12:13; strkjv@Mark:11:10; strkjv@Luke:19:38|). The Sanhedrin have caught Pilate in their toils.
rwp@John:20:2 @{Runneth} (\trechei\). Vivid dramatic present indicative of \trech\. John deals only with Mary Magdalene. She left the tomb at once before the rest and without seeing the angels as told in the Synoptics (Mark:16:2-8; strkjv@Matthew:28:5-8; strkjv@Luke:24:1-8|). Luke (Luke:24:9-12|) does not distinguish between the separate report of Mary Magdalene and that of the other women. {To Simon Peter} (\pros Simna Petron\). Full name as usual in John and back with John and the other disciples. The association of Peter and the other disciple in strkjv@John:18-21| is like that between Peter and John in strkjv@Acts:1-5|. {Loved} (\ephilei\). Imperfect of \phile\ for which see strkjv@5:20; strkjv@11:3| and for distinction from \agapa\ see strkjv@11:5; strkjv@13:23; strkjv@21:7,15,17|. {They have taken away} (\ran\). First aorist active indicative of \air\, indefinite plural. {We know not} (\ouk oidamen\). Mary associates the other women with her in her ignorance. For \ethkan\ (have laid) see strkjv@19:42|. Mary fears a grave robbery. She has no idea of the resurrection of Jesus.
rwp@John:20:13 @{I do not know} (\ouk oida\). Singular here, not plural as in verse 2|, because clearly Mary is alone here. But the problem is the same. She did not see Peter and John at the tomb.
rwp@John:20:30 @{Many other signs} (\polla alla smeia\). Not only those described in the Synoptic Gospels or referred to in general statements, but many alluded to in John's Gospel (2:23; strkjv@4:45; strkjv@12:37|). {Are not written} (\ouk estin gegrammena\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \graph\, do not stand written, are not described "in this book." John has made a selection of the vast number wrought by Jesus "in the presence of the disciples" (\enpion tn mathtn\), common idiom in Luke, not in Mark and Matthew, and by John elsewhere only in strkjv@1John:3:22|. John's book is written with a purpose which he states.
rwp@John:21:6 @{The right side} (\eis ta dexia mer\). Jesus knew where the fish were. For "net" (\diktuon\) see strkjv@Matthew:4:20|, here alone in John. {Were now not able to draw it} (\ouketi auto helkusai ischuon\). Imperfect active picturing the disciples tugging at the net.
rwp@John:21:11 @{Went up} (\aneb\). Into the little boat or dinghy. {Drew} (\heilkusen\). Same verb as \helkusai\ in verse 6|. Peter now did what they had failed to do. {Three} (\trin\). The addition "three" to the "hundred and fifty" looks as if they were actually counted these "large" (\megaln\) fish. It was a great fish story that John recalls vividly. {Was not rent} (\ouk eschisth\). First aorist passive indicative of \schiz\, to split (our word "schism").
rwp@John:21:23 @{That that disciple should not die} (\hoti ho mathts ekeinos ouk apothnskei\) (present active indicative), because Peter or others misunderstood what Jesus meant as John now carefully explains. He was rebuking Peter's curiosity, not affirming that John would live on till the Master returned. John is anxious to set this matter right.
rwp@Jude:1:9 @{Michael the archangel} (\ho Michael ho archaggelos\). Michael is mentioned also in strkjv@Daniel:10:13,21; strkjv@12:1; strkjv@Revelation:12:7|. \Archaggelos\ in N.T. occurs only here and strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:16|, but in strkjv@Daniel:10:13,20; strkjv@12:1|. {Contending with the devil} (\ti diaboli diakrinomenos\). Present middle participle of \diakrin\, to separate, to strive with as in strkjv@Acts:11:2|. Dative case \diaboli\. {When he disputed} (\hote dielegeto\). Imperfect middle of \dialegomai\ as in strkjv@Mark:9:34|. {Concerning the body of Moses} (\peri tou Muses smatos\). Some refer this to strkjv@Zechariah:3:1|, others to a rabbinical comment on strkjv@Deuteronomy:34:6|. There is a similar reference to traditions in strkjv@Acts:7:22; strkjv@Galatians:3:19; strkjv@Hebrews:2:2; strkjv@2Timothy:3:8|. But this explanation hardly meets the facts. {Durst not bring} (\ouk etolmsen epenegkein\). "Did not dare (first aorist active indicative of \tolma\), to bring against him" (second aorist active infinitive of \epipher\). {A railing accusation} (\krisin blasphmias\). "Charge of blasphemy" where strkjv@2Peter:2:11| has "\blasphmon krisin\." Peter also has \para kurii\ (with the Lord), not in Jude. {The Lord rebuke thee} (\epitimsai soi kurios\). First aorist active optative of \epitima\, a wish about the future. These words occur in strkjv@Zechariah:3:1-10| where the angel of the Lord replies to the charges of Satan. Clement of Alex. (_Adumb. in Ep. Judae_) says that Jude:quoted here the _Assumption of Moses_, one of the apocryphal books. Origen says the same thing. Mayor thinks that the author of the _Assumption of Moses_ took these words from Zechariah and put them in the mouth of the Archangel Michael. There is a Latin version of the _Assumption_. Some date it as early as B.C. 2, others after A.D. 44.
rwp@Luke:1:33 @{Shall be no end} (\ouk estai telos\). Luke reports the perpetuity of this Davidic kingdom over the house of Jacob with no Pauline interpretation of the spiritual Israel though that was the true meaning as Luke knew. Joseph was of the house of David (Luke:1:27|) and Mary also apparently (Luke:2:5|).
rwp@Luke:1:37 @{No word} (\ouk rhma\). \Rhma\ brings out the single item rather than the whole content (\logos\). Songs:in verse 38|.
rwp@Luke:4:2 @{Being tempted} (\peirazomenos\). Present passive participle and naturally parallel with the imperfect passive \geto\ (was led) in verse 1|. This is another instance of poor verse division which should have come at the end of the sentence. See on ¯Matthew:4:1; strkjv@Mark:1:13| for the words "tempt" and "devil." The devil challenged the Son of man though also the Son of God. It was a contest between Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, and the slanderer of men. The devil had won with Adam and Eve. He has hopes of triumph over Jesus. The story of this conflict is given only in strkjv@Matthew:4:1-11; strkjv@Luke:4:1-13|. There is a mere mention of it in strkjv@Mark:1:12f|. Songs:then here is a specimen of the Logia of Jesus (Q), a non-Markan portion of Matthew and Luke, the earliest document about Christ. The narrative could come ultimately only from Christ himself. It is noteworthy that it bears all the marks of the high conception of Jesus as the Son of God found in the Gospel of John and in Paul and Hebrews, the rest of the New Testament in fact, for Mark, Matthew, Luke, Acts, Peter, and Jude:follow in this same strain. The point is that modern criticism has revealed the Messianic consciousness of Jesus as God's Son at his Baptism and in his Temptations at the very beginning of his ministry and in the oldest known documents about Christ (The Logia, Mark's Gospel). {He did eat nothing} (\ouk ephagen ouden\). Second aorist (constative) active indicative of the defective verb \esthi\. Mark does not give the fast. strkjv@Matthew:4:2| has the aorist active participle \nsteusas\ which usually means a religious fast for purposes of devotion. That idea is not excluded by Luke's words. The entrance of Jesus upon his Messianic ministry was a fit time for this solemn and intense consecration. This mental and spiritual strain would naturally take away the appetite and there was probably nothing at hand to eat. The weakness from the absence of food gave the devil his special opportunity to tempt Jesus which he promptly seized. {When they were completed} (\suntelestheisn autn\). Genitive absolute with the first aorist passive participle feminine plural because \hemern\ (days) is feminine. According to Luke the hunger (\epeinasen\, became hungry, ingressive aorist active indicative) came at the close of the forty days as in strkjv@Matthew:4:2|.
rwp@Luke:4:12 @{It is said} (\eirtai\). Perfect passive indicative, stands said, a favourite way of quoting Scripture in the N.T. In strkjv@Matthew:4:7| we have the usual "it is written" (\gegraptai\). Here Jesus quotes strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:16|. Each time he uses Deuteronomy against the devil. The LXX is quoted. It is the volitive future indicative with \ouk\, a common prohibition. Jesus points out to the devil that testing God is not trusting God (Plummer).
rwp@Luke:4:22 @{Bare him witness} (\emarturoun\). Imperfect active, perhaps inchoative. They all began to bear witness that the rumours were not exaggerations (4:14|) as they had supposed, but had foundation in fact if this discourse or its start was a fair sample of his teaching. The verb \marture\ is a very old and common one. It is frequent in Acts, Paul's Epistles, and the Johannine books. The substantive \martur\ is seen in our English \martyr\, one who witnesses even by his death to his faith in Christ. {And wondered} (\kai ethaumazon\). Imperfect active also, perhaps inchoative also. They began to marvel as he proceeded with his address. This verb is an old one and common in the Gospels for the attitude of the people towards Jesus. {At the words of grace} (\epi tois logois ts charitos\). See on ¯Luke:1:30; strkjv@2:52| for this wonderful word \charis\ so full of meaning and so often in the N.T. The genitive case (case of genus or kind) here means that the words that came out of the mouth of Jesus in a steady stream (present tense, \ekporeuomenois\) were marked by fascination and charm. They were "winning words" as the context makes plain, though they were also "gracious" in the Pauline sense of "grace." There is no necessary antithesis in the ideas of graceful and gracious in these words of Jesus. {Is not this Joseph's son?} (\Ouchi huios estin Isph houtos;\). Witness and wonder gave way to bewilderment as they began to explain to themselves the situation. The use of \ouchi\ intensive form of \ouk\ in a question expects the answer "yes." Jesus passed in Nazareth as the son of Joseph as Luke presents him in strkjv@3:23|. He does not stop here to correct this misconception because the truth has been already amply presented in strkjv@1:28-38; strkjv@2:49|. This popular conception of Jesus as the son of Joseph appears also in strkjv@John:1:45|. The puzzle of the people was due to their previous knowledge of Jesus as the carpenter (Mark:6:3|; the carpenter's son, strkjv@Matthew:13:55|). For him now to appear as the Messiah in Nazareth where he had lived and laboured as the carpenter was a phenomenon impossible to credit on sober reflection. Songs:the mood of wonder and praise quickly turned with whispers and nods and even scowls to doubt and hostility, a rapid and radical transformation of emotion in the audience.
rwp@Luke:4:41 @{Came out} (\exrcheto\, singular, or \exrchonto\, plural). Imperfect tense, repetition, from one after another. {Thou art the Son of God} (\Su ei ho huios tou theou\). More definite statement of the deity of Jesus than the witness of the demoniac in the synagogue (Luke:4:34; strkjv@Mark:1:24|), like the words of the Father (Luke:3:22|) and more so than the condition of the devil (Luke:4:3,9|). In the Canterbury Revision "devils" should always be "demons" (\daimonia\) as here. {Suffered them not to speak} (\ouk eia auta lalein\). Imperfect third singular active of \ea\, very old and common verb with syllabic augment \ei\. The tense accents the continued refusal of Jesus to receive testimony to his person and work from demons. Cf. strkjv@Matthew:8:4| to the lepers. {Because they knew} (\hoti ideisan\). Causal, not declarative, \hoti\. Past perfect of the second perfect \oida\. {That he was the Christ} (\ton Christon auton einai\). Infinitive in indirect assertion with the accusative of general reference. \Ton Christon\ = {the Anointed}, the Messiah.
rwp@Luke:6:39 @{Also a parable} (\kai paraboln\). Plummer thinks that the second half of the sermon begins here as indicated by Luke's insertion of "And he spake (\eipen de\) at this point. Luke has the word parable some fifteen times both for crisp proverbs and for the longer narrative comparisons. This is the only use of the term parable concerning the metaphors in the Sermon on the Mount. But in both Matthew and Luke's report of the discourse there are some sixteen possible applications of the word. Two come right together: The blind leading the blind, the mote and the beam. Matthew gives the parabolic proverb of the blind leading the blind later (Matthew:15:14|). Jesus repeated these sayings on various occasions as every teacher does his characteristic ideas. Songs:Luke strkjv@6:40; strkjv@Matthew:10:24|, strkjv@Luke:6:45; strkjv@Matthew:12:34f.| {Can} (\Mti dunatai\). The use of \mti\ in the question shows that a negative answer is expected. {Guide} (\hodgein\). Common verb from \hodgos\ (guide) and this from \hodos\ (way) and \hgeomai\, to lead or guide. {Shall they not both fall?} (\ouchi amphoteroi empesountai;\). \Ouchi\, a sharpened negative from \ouk\, in a question expecting the answer Yes. Future middle indicative of the common verb \empipt\. {Into a pit} (\eis bothunon\). Late word for older \bothros\.
rwp@Luke:6:40 @{The disciple is not above his master} (\ouk estin mathts huper ton didaskalon\). Literally, a learner (or pupil) is not above the teacher. Precisely so in strkjv@Matthew:10:24| where "slave" is added with "lord." But here Luke adds: "But everyone when he is perfected shall be as his master" (\katrtismenos de ps estai hs ho didaskalos autou\). The state of completion, perfect passive participle, is noted in \katrtismenos\. The word is common for mending broken things or nets (Matthew:4:21|) or men (Galatians:6:1|). Songs:it is a long process to get the pupil patched up to the plane of his teacher.
rwp@Luke:6:48 @{Digged and went deep} (\eskapsen kai ebathunen\). Two first aorist indicatives. Not a _hendiadys_ for dug deep. \Skapt\, to dig, is as old as Homer, as is \bathun\, to make deep. {And laid a foundation} (\kai ethken themelion\). That is the whole point. This wise builder struck the rock before he laid the foundation. {When a flood arose} (\plmmurs genomens\). Genitive absolute. Late word for flood, \plmmura\, only here in the N.T., though in strkjv@Job:40:18|. {Brake against} (\proserxen\). First aorist active indicative from \prosrgnumi\ and in late writers \prosrss\, to break against. Only here in the N.T. strkjv@Matthew:7:25| has \prosepesan\, from \prospipt\, to fall against. {Could not shake it} (\ouk ischusen saleusai autn\). Did not have strength enough to shake it. {Because it had been well builded} (\dia to kals oikodomsthai autn\). Perfect passive articular infinitive after \dia\ and with accusative of general reference.
rwp@Luke:7:28 @{There is none} (\oudeis estin\). No one exists, this means. strkjv@Matthew:11:11| has \ouk eggertai\ (hath not arisen). See Matthew for discussion of "but little" and "greater."
rwp@Luke:7:32 @{And ye did not weep} (\kai ouk eklausate\). Here strkjv@Matthew:1:17| has "and ye did not mourn (or beat your breast, \ouk ekopsasthe\). They all did it at funerals. These children would not play wedding or funeral.
rwp@Luke:8:27 @{And for a long time} (\kai chroni hikani\). The use of the associative instrumental case in expressions of time is a very old Greek idiom that still appears in the papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 527). {He had worn no clothes} (\ouk enedusato himation\). First aorist middle indicative, constative aorist, viewing the "long time" as a point. Not pluperfect as English has it and not for the pluperfect, simply "and for a long time he did not put on himself (indirect middle) any clothing." The physician would naturally note this item. Common verb \endu\ or \endun\. This item in Luke alone, though implied by strkjv@Mark:5:15| "clothed" (\himatismenon\). {And abode not in any house} (\kai en oikii ouk emenen\). Imperfect active. Peculiar to Luke, though implied by the mention of tombs in all three (Mark:5:3; strkjv@Matthew:8:28; strkjv@Luke:8:27|).
rwp@Luke:8:43 @{Had spent all her living upon physicians} (\eis iatrous prosanalsasa holon ton bion\). First aorist active participle of an old verb \prosanalisk\, only here in the N.T. But Westcott and Hort reject this clause because it is not in B D Syriac Sinaitic. Whether genuine or not, the other clause in strkjv@Mark:5:26| certainly is not in Luke: "had suffered many things of many physicians." Probably both are not genuine in Luke who takes care of the physicians by the simple statement that it was a chronic case: {could not be healed of any} (\ouk ischusen ap' oudenos therapeuthnai\). He omitted also what Mark has: "and was nothing bettered but rather grew worse."
rwp@Luke:9:49 @{And John answered} (\apokritheis de Ians\). As if John wanted to change the subject after the embarrassment of the rebuke for their dispute concerning greatness (Luke:9:46-48|). {Master} (\epistata\). Only in Luke in the N.T. as already four times (5:5; strkjv@8:24,45; strkjv@9:33|). {We forbade him} (\ekluomen auton\). Conative imperfect as in strkjv@Mark:9:38|, We tried to hinder him. {Because he followeth not with us} (\hoti ouk akolouthei meth hmn\). Present tense preserved for vividness where Mark has imperfect {kolouthei}. Note also here "with us" (\meth' hmn\) where Mark has associative instrumental \hmin\. It is a pitiful specimen of partisan narrowness and pride even in the Beloved Disciple, one of the Sons of Thunder. The man was doing the Master's work in the Master's name and with the Master's power, but did not run with the group of the Twelve.
rwp@Luke:9:53 @{And they did not receive him} (\kai ouk edexanto auton\). Adversative use of \kai\ = But. {Because his face was going to Jerusalem} (\hoti to prospon autou n poreuomenon eis Ierousalm\). Periphrastic imperfect middle. It was reason enough to the churlish Samaritans.
rwp@Luke:9:55 @{But he turned} (\strapheis de\). Second aorist passive participle of \streph\, common verb, to turn round. Dramatic act. Some ancient MSS. have here: {Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of} (\ouk oidate poiou pneumatos este\). This sounds like Christ and may be a genuine saying though not a part of Luke's Gospel. A smaller number of MSS. add also: {For the Son of Man came not to destroy men's lives, but to save them} (\Hosea:gar huios tou anthrpou ouk lthen psuchas anthrpn apolesai alla ssai\), a saying reminding us of strkjv@Matthew:5:17; strkjv@Luke:19:10|. Certain it is that here Jesus rebuked the bitterness of James and John toward Samaritans as he had already chided John for his narrowness towards a fellow-worker in the kingdom.
rwp@Luke:12:39 @{The thief} (\ho klepts\). The change here almost makes a new parable to illustrate the other, the parable of the housebreaking (verses 39,40|) to illustrate the parable of the waiting servants (35-38|). This same language appears in strkjv@Matthew:24:43f|. "The Master returning from a wedding is replaced by a thief whose study it is to come to the house he means to plunder at an unexpected time" (Bruce). The parallel in strkjv@Matthew:24:43-51| with strkjv@Luke:12:39-46| does not have the interruption by Peter. {He would have watched} (\egrgorsen an\). Apodosis of second-class condition, determined as unfulfilled, made plain by use of \an\ with aorist indicative which is not repeated with \ouk aphken\ (first aorist active indicative of \aphimi\, \k\ aorist), though it is sometimes repeated (Matthew:24:43|).
rwp@Luke:13:16 @{Daughter of Abraham} (\thugatera Abraam\). Triple argument, human being and not an ox or ass, woman, daughter of Abraham (Jewess), besides being old and ill. {Ought not} (\ouk edei\). Imperfect active. Of necessity. Jesus simply had to heal her even if on the sabbath. {Whom Stan bound} (\hn edsen ho Satanas\). Definite statement that her disease was due to Satan.
rwp@Luke:13:27 @{I know not whence ye are} (\ouk oida pothen este\). This blunt statement cuts the matter short and sweeps away the flimsy cobwebs. Acquaintance with Christ in the flesh does not open the door. Jesus quotes strkjv@Psalms:8:9| as in strkjv@Matthew:7:23|, there as in the LXX, here with \pantes ergatai adikias\, there with \hoi ergazomenoi tn anomian\. But \apostte\ (second aorist active imperative) here, and there \apochreite\ (present active imperative).
rwp@Luke:13:33 @{The day following} (\ti echomeni\). See strkjv@Acts:20:15|. The same as the third day in verse 32|. A proverb. {It cannot be} (\ouk endechetai\). It is not accepted, it is inadmissible. A severely ironical indictment of Jerusalem. The shadow of the Cross reaches Perea where Jesus now is as he starts toward Jerusalem.
rwp@Luke:14:6 @{Could not answer again} (\ouk ischusan antapokrithnai\). Did not have strength to answer back or in turn (\anti-\) as in strkjv@Romans:9:20|. They could not take up the argument and were helpless. They hated to admit that they cared more for an ox or ass or even a son than for this poor dropsical man.
rwp@Luke:15:19 @{No longer worthy} (\ouketi axios\). Confession of the facts. He sees his own pitiful plight and is humble. {As one} (\hs hena\). The hired servants in his father's house are high above him now.
rwp@Luke:15:28 @{But he was angry} (\rgisth\). First aorist (ingressive) passive indicative. But he became angry, he flew into a rage (\org\). This was the explosion as the result of long resentment towards the wayward brother and suspicion of the father's partiality for the erring son. {Would not go in} (\ouk thelen eiselthein\). Imperfect tense (was not willing, refused) and aorist active (ingressive) infinitive. {Entreated} (\parekalei\). Imperfect tense, he kept on beseeching him.
rwp@Luke:16:11 @{Faithful in the unrighteous mammon} (\en ti adiki mamni\). In the use of what is considered "unrighteous" as it so often is. Condition of the first class, "if ye did not prove to be" (\ei ouk egenesthe\). Failure here forfeits confidence in "the true riches" (\to althinon\). There is no sadder story than to see a preacher go down by the wrong use of money, caught in this snare of the devil.
rwp@Luke:17:1 @{It is impossible} (\anendekton estin\). See \ouk endechetai\ in strkjv@13:33|. Alpha privative (\an-\) and \endektos\, verbal adjective, from \endechomai\. The word occurs only in late Greek and only here in the N.T. The meaning is inadmissible, unallowable. {But that occasions of stumbling should come} (\tou ta skandala m elthein\). This genitive articular infinitive is not easy to explain. In strkjv@Acts:10:25| there is another example where the genitive articular infinitive seems to be used as a nominative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1040). The loose Hebrew infinitive construction may have a bearing here, but one may recall that the original infinitives were either locatives (\-eni\) or datives (\-ai\). \Ta skandala\ is simply the accusative of general reference. Literally, the not coming as to occasions of stumbling. For \skandalon\ (a trap) see on ¯Matthew:5:29; strkjv@16:23|. It is here only in Luke. The positive form of this saying appears in strkjv@Matthew:18:7|, which see.
rwp@Luke:17:8 @{And will not rather say} (\all'