Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-HISTORY.filter - rwp Except:


rwp@1Corinthians:12:4 @{Diversities} (\diaireseis\). Old word for distinctions, differences, distributions, from \diaire“\, to distribute, as \diairoun\ (dividing, distributing) in verse 11|. Only here in the N.T. {Of gifts} (\charismat“n\). Late word and chiefly in Paul (cf. strkjv@Romans:12:6|) in N.T. (except strkjv@1Peter:4:19|), but some examples in papyri. It means a favour (from \charizomai\) bestowed or received without any merit as in strkjv@Romans:1:11|.

rwp@1Corinthians:14:5 @{Except he interpret} (\ektos ei mˆ diermˆneuˆi\). Pleonastic combination of \ektos\ (preposition except) and \ei mˆ\ (if not, unless) as in strkjv@15:2; strkjv@1Timothy:5:19|. For use of \ei\ with subjunctive rather than \ean\ see strkjv@Phillipians:3:12| (common enough in the _Koin‚_, Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1017f., condition of third class). On the verb see on ¯12:30; strkjv@Luke:24:27; strkjv@Acts:9:36|. {Receive} (\labˆi\). Second aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of \lamban“\, may get edification.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:2 @{In what words I preached it unto you} (\tini logoi euˆggelisamˆn humin\). Almost certainly \tis\ (\tini logoi\, locative or instrumental, in or with) here is used like the relative \hos\ as is common in papyri (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 93f.; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 737f.). Even so it is not clear whether the clause depends on \gn“riz“\ like the other relatives, but most likely so. {If we hold it fast} (\ei katechete\). Condition of first class. Paul assumes that they are holding it fast. {Except ye believed in vain} (\ektos ei mˆ eikˆi episteusate\). For \ektos ei mˆ\ see on ¯14:5|. Condition of first class, unless in fact ye did believe to no purpose (\eikˆi\, old adverb, only in Paul in N.T.). Paul holds this peril over them in their temptation to deny the resurrection.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:3 @{Let no man beguile you in any wise} (\mˆ tis humas exapatˆsˆi kata mˆdena tropon\). First aorist active subjunctive of \exapata“\ (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb \apata“\) with double negative (\mˆ tis, mˆdena\) 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| (\mˆ 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 \genˆsetai\) 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 mˆ elthˆi hˆ apostasia pr“ton\). 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 (\hˆ\) 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} (\pr“ton\) 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 apokaluphthˆi ho anthr“pos tˆs anomias, ho huios tˆs ap“leias\). First aorist passive subjunctive after \ean mˆ\ and same condition as with \elthˆi\. 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:2:16 @{And God our Father} (\kai [ho] theos ho patˆr hˆm“n\). It is uncertain whether the first article \ho\ is genuine as it is absent in B D. Usually Paul has the Father before Christ except here, strkjv@2Corinthians:13:13; strkjv@Galatians:1:1|. {Which loved us} (\ho agapˆsas hˆmas\). This singular articular participle refers to \ho patˆr\, "though it is difficult to see how St. Paul could otherwise have expressed his thought, if he had intended to refer to the Son, as well as to the Father. There is probably no instance in St. Paul of a plural adjective or verb, when the two Persons of the Godhead are mentioned" (Lightfoot). {Eternal comfort} (\paraklˆsin ai“nian\). Distinct feminine form of \ai“nios\ here instead of masculine as in strkjv@Matthew:25:46|.

rwp@2Timothy:1:10 @{But hath now been manifested} (\phaner“theisan de nun\). First aorist passive participle of \phanero“\ agreeing with \charin\. See strkjv@Titus:1:3; strkjv@Colossians:1:26; strkjv@3:4| for \phanero“\ and the contrast made. {By the appearing} (\dia tˆs epiphaneias\). Only here of the Incarnation (except the verb, strkjv@Titus:2:11; strkjv@3:4|), but for the second coming see strkjv@Titus:2:13|. {Who abolished death} (\katargˆsantos men ton thanaton\). First aorist active participle of \katarge“\, the very phrase in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:26; strkjv@Hebrews:2:14|. {Brought to light} (\ph“tisantos de\). First aorist active participle of \ph“tiz“\, literary _Koin‚_ word for which see strkjv@1Corinthians:4:5; strkjv@Ephesians:1:18|, to turn the light on. {Life and incorruption} (\z“ˆn kai aphtharsian\). The opposite of \thanatos\, "life and immortality" (unchangeable life).

rwp@2Timothy:1:15 @{Are turned away from me} (\apestraphˆsan me\). Second aorist passive (still transitive here with \me\) of \apostreph“\, for which verb see strkjv@Titus:1:14|. For the accusative with these passive deponents see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 484. It is not known to what incident Paul refers, whether the refusal of the Christians in the Roman province of Asia to help Paul on his arrest (or in response to an appeal from Rome) or whether the Asian Christians in Rome deserted Paul in the first stage of the trial (4:16|). Two of these Asian deserters are mentioned by name, perhaps for reasons known to Timothy. Nothing else is known of Phygelus and Hermogenes except this shameful item.

rwp@2Timothy:2:5 @{If also a man contend in the games} (\ean de kai athlˆi tis\). Condition of third class with present (linear) active subjunctive of \athle“\, old and common verb (from \athlos\, a contest), only this verse in N.T., but \sunathle“\ in strkjv@Phillipians:1:27|. Note sharp distinction between \athlˆi\ (present subjunctive, engage in a contest in general) and \athlˆsˆi\ (first aorist active subjunctive, engage in a particular contest). Not "except he have contended," but simply "unless he contend" (in any given case) "lawfully" (\nomim“s\). Old adverb, agreeably to the law, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Timothy:1:8|. {Is not crowned} (\ou stephanoutai\). Present passive indicative of \stephano“\, old verb (from \stephanos\, crown), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:2:7,9|. One apodosis for two protases. The victor in the athletic contests was crowned with a garland.

rwp@2Timothy:2:14 @{That they strive not about words} (\mˆ logomachein\). Word apparently coined by Paul from \logomachia\ (1Timothy:6:4| which see), a back formation in that case. A mere war of words displeases Paul. (Titus:3:9|). {Useful} (\chrˆsimon\). Late and rare word from \chraomai\, here only in N.T. {To the subverting} (\epi katastrophˆi\). Old word (from \katastreph“\, to turn down or over), here only in N.T. (except strkjv@2Peter:2:6| in some MSS., not in Westcott and Hort)." Because of the overthrow" (result \epi\, not aim), useless for this reason. Such war of words merely upsets the hearers.

rwp@Acts:2:4 @{With other tongues} (\heterais gl“ssais\). Other than their native tongues. Each one began to speak in a language that he had not acquired and yet it was a real language and understood by those from various lands familiar with them. It was not jargon, but intelligible language. Jesus had said that the gospel was to go to all the nations and here the various tongues of earth were spoken. One might conclude that this was the way in which the message was to be carried to the nations, but future developments disprove it. This is a third miracle (the sound, the tongues like fire, the untaught languages). There is no blinking the fact that Luke so pictures them. One need not be surprised if this occasion marks the fulfilment of the Promise of the Father. But one is not to confound these miraculous signs with the Holy Spirit. They are merely proof that he has come to carry on the work of his dispensation. The gift of tongues came also on the house of Cornelius at Caesarea (Acts:10:44-47; strkjv@11:15-17|), the disciples of John at Ephesus (Acts:19:6|), the disciples at Corinth (1Corinthians:14:1-33|). It is possible that the gift appeared also at Samaria (Acts:8:18|). But it was not a general or a permanent gift. Paul explains in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:22| that "tongues" were a sign to unbelievers and were not to be exercised unless one was present who understood them and could translate them. This restriction disposes at once of the modern so-called tongues which are nothing but jargon and hysteria. It so happened that here on this occasion at Pentecost there were Jews from all parts of the world, so that some one would understand one tongue and some another without an interpreter such as was needed at Corinth. The experience is identical in all four instances and they are not for edification or instruction, but for adoration and wonder and worship. {As the Spirit gave them utterance} (\kath“s to pneuma edidou apophtheggesthai autois\). This is precisely what Paul claims in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:10,28|, but all the same without an interpreter the gift was not to be exercised (1Corinthians:14:6-19|). Paul had the gift of tongues, but refused to exercise it except as it would be understood. Note the imperfect tense here (\edidou\). Perhaps they did not all speak at once, but one after another. \Apophtheggesthai\ is a late verb (LXX of prophesying, papyri). Lucian uses it of the ring of a vessel when it strikes a reef. It is used of eager, elevated, impassioned utterance. In the N.T. only here, verse 14; strkjv@26:25|. \Apophthegm\ is from this verb.

rwp@Acts:2:44 @{Were together} (\ˆsan epi to auto\). Some MSS. \ˆsan kai\ (were and). But they were together in the same place as in strkjv@2:1|. {And had} (\kai eichon\). Imperfect active, kept on having, a habit in the present emergency. {Common} (\koina\). It was not actual communism, but they held all their property ready for use for the common good as it was needed (4:32|). This situation appears nowhere else except in Jerusalem and was evidently due to special conditions there which did not survive permanently. Later Paul will take a special collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem.

rwp@Acts:3:13 @{His servant Jesus} (\ton paida Iˆsoun\). This phrase occurs in strkjv@Isaiah:42:1; strkjv@52:13| about the Messiah except the name "Jesus" which Peter adds, the first part of the quotation is from strkjv@Exodus:3:6; strkjv@5:30|. The LXX translated the Hebrew _ebhedh_ by \pais\, the servant of Jehovah being a Messianic designation. But the phrase "servant of God" (\pais theou\) is applied also to Israel (Luke:1:54|) and to David (Luke:1:69; strkjv@Acts:4:25|). Paul terms himself \doulos theou\ (Titus:1:1|). \Pais\ is just child (boy or girl), and it was also used of a slave (Matthew:8:6,8,13|). But it is not here \huios\ (son) that Peter uses, but \pais\. Luke quotes Peter as using it again in this Messianic sense in strkjv@Acts:3:26; strkjv@4:27,30|. {Whom ye delivered up} (\hon humeis men pared“kate\). Note emphatic use of \humeis\ (ye). No \de\ to correspond to \men\. First aorist active (\k\ aorist) plural indicative of \paradid“mi\ (usual form \paredote\, second aorist). {When he} (\ekeinou\). Emphatic pronoun, that one, in contrast with "ye" (\humeis\), genitive absolute with \krinantos\, here the nearest word (Pilate), the latter.

rwp@Acts:4:4 @{Men} (\andr“n\). Strictly, men and not women, for \anthr“pos\ is the term for both men and women. But in strkjv@Luke:11:31| \andres\ seems to include both men and women and that is possible here, though by no means certain, for see strkjv@Matthew:14:21| where the women and children are expressly excepted.

rwp@Acts:6:5 @{Pleased} (\ˆresen\). Aorist active indicative of \aresk“\ like Latin _placuit_ when a vote was taken. The use of \en“pion\ before "the whole multitude" is like the LXX. {They chose} (\exelexanto\). First aorist middle indicative of \ekleg“\, to pick out for oneself. Each one of the seven has a Greek name and was undoubtedly a Hellenist, not an Aramaean Jew. Consummate wisdom is here displayed for the murmuring had come from the Hellenists, seven of whom were chosen to take proper care of the widows of Hellenists. This trouble was settled to stay settled so far as we know. Nothing is here told of any of the seven except Stephen who is "a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit" and Nicolas "a proselyte of Antioch" (who was not then born a Jew, but had come to the Jews from the Greek world).

rwp@Acts:8:1 @{Was consenting} (\ˆn suneudok“n\). Periphrastic imperfect of \suneudoke“\, a late double compound (\sun, eu, doke“\) that well describes Saul's pleasure in the death (\anairesis\, taking off, only here in the N.T., though old word) of Stephen. For the verb see on ¯Luke:23:32|. Paul himself will later confess that he felt so (Acts:22:20|), coolly applauding the murder of Stephen, a heinous sin (Romans:1:32|). It is a gruesome picture. Chapter 7 should have ended here. {On that day} (\en ekeinˆi tˆi hˆmerƒi\). On that definite day, that same day as in strkjv@2:41|. {A great persecution} (\di“gmos megas\). It was at first persecution from the Sadducees, but this attack on Stephen was from the Pharisees so that both parties are now united in a general persecution that deserves the adjective "great." See on ¯Matthew:13:21| for the old word \di“gmos\ from \di“k“\, to chase, hunt, pursue, persecute. {Were all scattered abroad} (\pantes diesparˆsan\). Second aorist passive indicative of \diaspeir“\, to scatter like grain, to disperse, old word, in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:8:1,4; strkjv@11:19|. {Except the apostles} (\plˆn t“n apostol“n\). Preposition \plˆn\ (adverb from \pleon\, more) with the ablative often in Luke. It remains a bit of a puzzle why the Pharisees spared the apostles. Was it due to the advice of Gamaliel in strkjv@Acts:5:34-40|? Or was it the courage of the apostles? Or was it a combination of both with the popularity of the apostles in addition?

rwp@Acts:11:18 @{Held their peace} (\hˆsuchasan\). Ingressive aorist active indicative of \hˆsuchaz“\, old verb to be quiet, to keep quiet. The wrangling (verse 2|) ceased. The critics even "glorified God" (\edoxasan\, ingressive aorist again). {Then to the Gentiles also} (\Ara kai tois ethnesin\). \Ergo\ as in strkjv@Luke:11:20,48| and like \ara oun\ in strkjv@Romans:5:18|. In ancient Greek inferential \ara\ cannot come at the beginning of a clause as here. It was reluctant acquiescence in the undoubted fact that God had "granted repentance unto life" to these Gentiles in Caesarea, but the circumcision party undoubtedly looked on it as an exceptional case and not to be regarded as a precedent to follow with other Gentiles. Peter will see in this incident (Acts:15:8|) the same principle for which Paul contends at the Jerusalem Conference. Furneaux suggests that this conduct of Peter in Caesarea, though grudgingly acquiesced in after his skilful defence, decreased his influence in Jerusalem where he had been leader and helped open the way for the leadership of James the Lord's brother.

rwp@Acts:11:19 @{They therefore that were scattered abroad} (\hoi men oun diasparentes\). Precisely the same words used in strkjv@8:4| about those scattered by Saul (which see) and a direct reference to it is made by the next words, "upon the tribulation that arose about Stephen" (\apo tˆs thlipse“s tˆs genomenˆs epi Stephan“i\). As a result of (\apo\), in the case of (\epi\) Stephen. From that event Luke followed Saul through his conversion and back to Jerusalem and to Tarsus. Then he showed the activity of Peter outside of Jerusalem as a result of the cessation of the persecution from the conversion of Saul with the Gentile Pentecost in Caesarea and the outcome in Jerusalem. Now Luke starts over again from the same persecution by Saul and runs a new line of events up to Antioch parallel to the other, probably partly following. {Except to Jews only} (\ei mˆ monon Ioudaiois\). Clearly these disciples did not know anything about the events in Caesarea and at first their flight preceded that time. But it was a wonderful episode, the eager and loyal preaching of the fleeing disciples. The culmination in Antioch was probably after the report of Peter about Caesarea. This Antioch by the Orontes was founded 300 B.C. by Seleucus Nicator and was one of five cities so named by the Seleucides. It became the metropolis of Syria though the Arabs held Damascus first. Antioch ranked next to Rome and Alexandria in size, wealth, power, and vice. There were many Jews in the cosmopolitan population of half a million. It was destined to supplant Jerusalem as the centre of Christian activity.

rwp@Acts:14:8 @{At Lystra} (\en Lustrois\). Neuter plural as in strkjv@16:2; strkjv@2Timothy:3:11| while feminine singular in strkjv@14:6,21; strkjv@16:1|. There was apparently no synagogue in Lystra and so not many Jews. Paul and Barnabas had to do open-air preaching and probably had difficulty in being understood by the natives though both Greek and Latin inscriptions were discovered here by Professor Sterrett in 1885. The incident narrated here (verses 8-18|) shows how they got a real hearing among these rude heathen. {There sat} (\ekathˆto\). Imperfect middle of \kathˆmai\. Was sitting. This case is very much like that in strkjv@3:1-11|, healed by Peter. Possibly outside the gate (verse 13|) or some public place. {Impotent in his feet} (\adunatos tois posin\). Old verbal, but only here in the N.T. in this sense except figuratively in strkjv@Romans:15:1|. Elsewhere it means "impossible" (Matthew:19:26|). Locative case. Common in medical writers in the sense of "impotent." Songs:Tobit strkjv@2:10; strkjv@5:9. {Had walked} (\periepatˆsen\). Songs:best MSS., first aorist active indicative "walked," not \periepepatˆkei\, "had walked" (past perfect active).

rwp@Acts:14:19 @{But there came thither Jews from Antioch and Iconium} (\Epˆlthan de apo Antiocheias kai Ikoniou Ioudaioi\). Came to or upon them, \epˆlthan\, second aorist (ingressive) indicative of \eperchomai\. Whether news of the miracle had reached those cities we do not know. These may have been travelling grain merchants. At any rate there was an interval in which Paul and Barnabas won some disciples (verse 22|). There would be a natural reaction, even revulsion, in the minds of many who had come so near to worshipping Paul and Barnabas. The pendulum swings easily from one extreme to the other. The hostile Jews from Antioch and Iconium may even have followed Paul and Barnabas along the fine Roman road on purpose to keep them on the run. They had driven them out of Antioch and out of Iconium and now appear at Lystra at an opportune moment for their work. {Having persuaded the multitudes} (\peisantes tous ochlous\). First aorist (effective) active participle of \peith“\. They had complete success with many and struck at the psychological moment. {They stoned Paul} (\lithasantes ton Paulon\). First aorist active participle of \lithaz“\, late verb from \lithos\ for throwing stones (used by Paul referring to this one incident when alone he was stoned, strkjv@2Corinthians:11:25|). The wounds inflicted may have left some of the scars (\stigmata\) mentioned in strkjv@Galatians:6:17|. They stoned Paul as the chief speaker (Mercury) and passed by Barnabas (Jupiter). It was a Jewish mode of punishment as against Stephen and these Jews knew that Paul was the man that they had to deal with. Hackett notes that the Jews with two exceptions incited the persecutions which Paul endured. The exceptions were in Philippi (16:16-40|) and Ephesus (19:23-41|). {Dragged him out of the city} (\esuron ex“ tˆs pole“s\). They hurled Stephen outside of the city before stoning him (\7:58\). It was a hurried and irregular proceeding, but they were dragging (imperfect active of \sur“\, old verb) Paul out now. {Supposing that he were dead} (\nomizontes auton tethnˆkenai\). Present active participle with infinitive (second perfect active of \thnˆsk“\) in indirect discourse with accusative of general reference. The Jews are jubilant this time with memories of Paul's escape at Antioch and Iconium. The pagan mob feel that they have settled accounts for their narrow escape from worshipping two Jewish renegade preachers. It was a good day's work for them all. Luke does not say that Paul was actually dead.

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

rwp@Acts:15:5 @{But there rose up} (\exanestˆsan de\). Second aorist active indicative (intransitive). Note both \ex\ and \an\. These men rose up out of the crowd at a critical moment. They were believers in Christ (\pepisteukotes\, having believed), but were still members of "the sect of the Pharisees" (\tˆs hairese“s t“n Pharisai“n\). Evidently they still held to the Pharisaic narrowness shown in the attack on Peter (11:2f.|). Note the dogmatism of their "must" (\dei\) after the opposition of Paul and Barnabas to their "except" (\ean me\) at Antioch (15:1|). They are unconvinced and expected to carry the elders with them. Codex Bezae says that they had appealed to the elders (15:2,5|). At any rate they have made the issue in open meeting at the height of the jubilation. It is plain from verse 6| that this meeting was adjourned, for another gathering came together then. It is here that the private conference of which Paul speaks in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| took place. It was Paul's chance to see the leaders in Jerusalem (Peter, James, and John) and he won them over to his view of Gentile liberty from the Mosaic law so that the next public conference (Acts:15:6-29|) ratified heartily the views of Paul, Barnabas, Peter, James, and John. It was a diplomatic triumph of the first order and saved Christianity from the bondage of Jewish ceremonial sacramentalism. Songs:far as we know this is the only time that Paul and John met face to face, the great spirits in Christian history after Jesus our Lord. It is a bit curious to see men saying today that Paul surrendered about Titus and had him circumcised for the sake of peace, the very opposite of what he says in Galatians, "to whom I yielded, no not for an hour." Titus as a Greek was a red flag to the Judaizers and to the compromisers, but Paul stood his ground.

rwp@Acts:16:6 @{The region of Phrygia and Galatia} (\tˆn Phrugian kai Galatikˆn ch“ran\). This is probably the correct text with one article and apparently describes one "Region" or District in The Province of Galatia which was also Phrygian (the old-ethnographic name with which compare the use of Lycaonia in strkjv@14:6|). Strictly speaking Derbe and Lystra, though in the Province of Galatia, were not Phrygian, and so Luke would here be not resumptive of the record in verses 1-5|; but a reference to the country around Iconium and Antioch in Pisidia in North Galatia is not included. This verse is hotly disputed at every point by the advocates of the North Galatian theory as represented by Chase and the South Galatian theory by Ramsay. Whatever is true in regard to the language of Luke here and in strkjv@18:23|, it is still possible for Paul in strkjv@Galatians:1:2| to use the term Galatia of the whole province of that name which could, in fact, apply to either South or North Galatia or to both. He could, of course, use it also in the ethnographic sense of the real Gauls or Celts who dwelt in North Galatia. Certainly the first tour of Paul and Barnabas was in the Province of Galatia though touching only the Regions of Pisidia, Phrygia, and Lycaonia, which province included besides the Gauls to the north. In this second tour Lycaonia has been already touched (Derbe and Lystra) and now Phrygia. The question arises why Luke here and in strkjv@18:23| adds the term "of Galatia" (\Galatikˆn\) though not in strkjv@13:14| (Pisidian Antioch) nor in strkjv@14:6| (cities of Lycaonia). Does Luke mean to use "of Galatia" in the same ethnographic sense as "of Phrygia" or does he here add the province (Galatia) to the name of the Region (Phrygia)? In itself either view is possible and it really matters very little except that the question is raised whether Paul went into the North Galatian Region on this occasion or later (18:23|). He could have done so and the Epistle be addressed to the churches of South Galatia, North Galatia, or the province as a whole. But the Greek participle \k“luthentes\ ("having been forbidden") plays a part in the argument that cannot be overlooked whether Luke means to say that Paul went north or not. This aorist passive participle of \k“lu“\, to hinder, can only express simultaneous or antecedent action, not subsequent action as Ramsay argues. No example of the so-called subsequent use of the aorist participle has ever been found in Greek as all Greek grammarians agree (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 860-63, 1112-14). The only natural meaning of \k“luthentes\ is that Paul with Silas and Timothy "passed through the region of Phrygia and Galatia" because they were hindered by the Holy Spirit from speaking the word in Asia (the Province of Asia of which Ephesus was the chief city and west of Derbe and Lystra). This construction implies that the country called "the region of Phrygia and Galatia" is not in the direct line west toward Ephesus. What follows in verse 7| throws further light on the point.

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} (\prokekur“menˆn 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 etˆ\). 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 \katargˆsai\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:1:28; strkjv@2:6; strkjv@15:24,26|.

rwp@Galatians:3:19 @{What then is the law?} (\ti oun ho nomos?\). Or, why then the law? A pertinent question if the Abrahamic promise antedates it and holds on afterwards. {It was added because of transgressions} (\t“n parabase“n charin prosetethˆ\). First aorist passive of \prostithˆmi\, old verb to add to. It is only in apparent contradiction to verses 15ff.|, because in Paul's mind the law is no part of the covenant, but a thing apart "in no way modifying its provisions" (Burton). \Charin\ is the adverbial accusative of \charis\ which was used as a preposition with the genitive as early as Homer, in favour of, for the sake of. Except in strkjv@1John:3:12| it is post-positive in the N.T. as in ancient Greek. It may be causal (Luke:7:47; strkjv@1John:3:12|) or telic (Titus:1:5,11; strkjv@Jude:1:16|). It is probably also telic here, not in order to create transgressions, but rather "to make transgressions palpable" (Ellicott), "thereby pronouncing them to be from that time forward transgressions of the law" (Rendall). \Parabasis\, from \parabain“\, is in this sense a late word (Plutarch on), originally a slight deviation, then a wilful disregarding of known regulations or prohibitions as in strkjv@Romans:2:23|. {Till the seed should come} (\achris an elthˆi to sperma\). Future time with \achris an\ and aorist subjunctive (usual construction). Christ he means by \to sperma\ as in verse 16|. {The promise hath been made} (\epˆggeltai\). Probably impersonal perfect passive rather than middle of \epaggellomai\ as in II Macc. strkjv@4:27. {Ordained through angels} (\diatageis di' aggel“n\). Second aorist passive participle of \diatass“\ (see on ¯Matthew:11:1|). About angels and the giving of the law see on strkjv@Deuteronomy:33:2| (LXX); strkjv@Acts:7:38,52; strkjv@Hebrews:2:2|; Josephus (_Ant_. XV. 5. 3). {By the hand of a mediator} (\en cheiri mesitou\). \En cheiri\ is a manifest Aramaism or Hebraism and only here in the N.T. It is common in the LXX. \Mesitˆs\, from \mesos\ is middle or midst, is a late word (Polybius, Diodorus, Philo, Josephus) and common in the papyri in legal transactions for arbiter, surety, etc. Here of Moses, but also of Christ (1Timothy:2:5; strkjv@Hebrews:8:6; strkjv@9:15; strkjv@12:24|).

rwp@Galatians:4:2 @{Under guardians} (\hupo epitropous\). Old word from \epitrep“\, to commit, to intrust. Songs:either an overseer (Matthew:20:8|) or one in charge of children as here. It is common as the guardian of an orphan minor. Frequent in the papyri as guardian of minors. {Stewards} (\oikonomous\). Old word for manager of a household whether freeborn or slave. See strkjv@Luke:12:42; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:2|. Papyri show it as manager of an estate and also as treasurer like strkjv@Romans:16:23|. No example is known where this word is used of one in charge of a minor and no other where both occur together. {Until the time appointed of the father} (\achri tˆs prothesmias tou patros\). Supply \hˆmeras\ (day), for \prothesmios\ is an old adjective "appointed beforehand" (\pro, thesmos\, from \tithˆmi\). Under Roman law the _tutor_ had charge of the child till he was fourteen when the curator took charge of him till he was twenty-five. Ramsay notes that in Graeco-Phrygia cities the same law existed except that the father in Syria appointed both tutor and curator whereas the Roman father appointed only the tutor. Burton argues plausibly that no such legal distinction is meant by Paul, but that the terms here designate two functions of one person. The point does not disturb Paul's illustration at all.

rwp@Hebrews:7:1 @{This Melchizedek} (\houtos ho Melchisedek\). The one already mentioned several times with whose priesthood that of Christ is compared and which is older and of a higher type than that of Aaron. See strkjv@Genesis:14:18-20; strkjv@Psalms:110| for the only account of Melchizedek in the Old Testament. It is a daring thing to put Melchizedek above Aaron, but the author does it. Moffatt calls verses 1-3| "a little sermon" on strkjv@6:20|. It is "for ever" (\eis ton ai“na\) that he explains. Melchizedek is the only one in his line and stands alone in the record in Genesis. The interpretation is rabbinical in method, but well adapted to Jewish readers. The description is taken verbatim from Genesis except that "who met" (\ho sunantˆsas\) is here applied to Melchizedek from strkjv@Genesis:14:17| instead of to the King of Sodom. They both met Abraham as a matter of fact. For this verb (first aorist active participle of \sunanta“\) see strkjv@Luke:9:37|. {Slaughter} (\kopˆs\). Old word for cutting (\kopt“\, to cut), here only in N.T. These kings were Amraphel, Arioch, Chedorlaomer, Tidal. Amraphel is usually taken to be Khammurabi. {Priest of God Most High} (\hiereus tou theou tou hupsistou\). He is called "priest" and note \tou hupsistou\ applied to God as the Canaanites, Phoenicians, Hebrews did. It is used also of Zeus and the Maccabean priest-kings. The demons apply it to God (Mark:5:7; strkjv@Luke:8:28|).

rwp@Hebrews:9:4 @{Having a golden censer} (\chrusoun echousa thumiatˆrion\). The present active participle \echousa\ (feminine singular) agrees with \skˆnˆ\ (the Holy of Holies). It is not certain whether \thumiatˆrion\ here means censer or altar of incense. In the LXX (2Chronicles:26:19; strkjv@Exodus:8:11|; IV Macc. strkjv@7:11) it means censer and apparently so in the inscriptions and papyri. But in Philo and Josephus it means altar of incense for which the LXX has \thusiastˆrion tou thumiatos\ (Exodus:30:1-10|). Apparently the altar of incense was in the Holy Place, though in strkjv@Exodus:30:1-10| it is left quite vague. B puts it in verse 2|. Songs:we leave the discrepancy unsettled. At any rate the altar of incense was used for the Holy of Holies ("its ritual associations," Dods). {The ark of the covenant} (\tˆn kib“ton tˆs diathˆkˆs\). A box or chest four feet long, two and a half broad and high (Exodus:25:10f.|). The Scotch have a "meal-ark." {Wherein} (\en hˆi\). In the ark. There were three treasures in the ark of the covenant (a pot of manna, Aaron's rod, the tables of the covenant). For the pot of manna (golden added in the LXX) see strkjv@Exodus:16:32-34|. For Aaron's rod that budded (\hˆ blastˆsasa\, first aorist active participle of \blastan“\) see strkjv@Numbers:17:1-11|. For the tables of the covenant see strkjv@Exodus:25:16f.; strkjv@31:18; strkjv@Deuteronomy:9:9; strkjv@10:5|. Not definitely clear about these items in the ark, but on front, except that strkjv@1Kings:8:9| states that it did contain the tables of the covenant. For \plakes\ (tables) see strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3| (only other N.T. example).

rwp@Hebrews:9:22 @{I may almost say} (\schedon\). Old adverb, only three times in the N.T., here, strkjv@Acts:13:44; strkjv@19:26|. Here it qualifies the entire clause, not just \panta\. {With blood} (\en haimati\). In blood. There were exceptions (Exodus:19:10; strkjv@32:30f.; strkjv@Leviticus:5:11f.; strkjv@15:5; strkjv@Numbers:16:46f.; strkjv@31:23f.|, etc.). {Apart from shedding of blood} (\ch“ris haimatekchusias\). A double compound first found here (coined by the writer) and later in ecclesiastical writers (\haima\, blood, \ek\, out, \che“\, to pour, like \ekchusis haimatos\ strkjv@1Kings:18:28|). "Pouring out of blood." The author seems to have in mind Christ's words in strkjv@Matthew:26:28|: "This is my blood of the covenant which is shed for many for the forgiveness of sins." The blood is the vital principle and is efficacious as an atonement. The blood of Christ sets aside all other plans for pardon.

rwp@Hebrews:11:1 @{Now faith is} (\estin de pistis\). He has just said that "we are of faith" (10:39|), not of apostasy. Now he proceeds in a chapter of great eloquence and passion to illustrate his point by a recital of the heroes of faith whose example should spur them to like loyalty now. {The assurance of things hoped for} (\elpizomen“n hupostasis\). {Hupostasis} is a very common word from Aristotle on and comes from \huphistˆmi\ (\hupo\, under, \histˆmi\, intransitive), what stands under anything (a building, a contract, a promise). See the philosophical use of it in strkjv@1:3|, the sense of assurance (une assurance certaine, M‚n‚goz) in strkjv@3:14|, that steadiness of mind which holds one firm (2Corinthians:9:4|). It is common in the papyri in business documents as the basis or guarantee of transactions. "And as this is the essential meaning in strkjv@Hebrews:11:1| we venture to suggest the translation 'Faith is the _title-deed_ of things hoped for'" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_, etc.). {The proving of things not seen} (\pragmat“n elegchos ou blepomen“n\). The only N.T. example of \elegchos\ (except Textus Receptus in strkjv@2Timothy:3:16| for \elegmon\). Old and common word from \elegch“\ (Matthew:18:15|) for "proof" and then for "conviction." Both uses occur in the papyri and either makes sense here, perhaps "conviction" suiting better though not in the older Greek.

rwp@Hebrews:13:20 @{The God of peace} (\ho theos tˆs eirˆnˆs\). God is the author and giver of peace, a Pauline phrase (6 times) as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:23|. {Who brought again from the dead} (\ho anagag“n ek nekr“n\). Second aorist active articular participle of \anag“\ (cf. strkjv@Romans:10:7|), the only direct mention of the resurrection of Jesus in the Epistle, though implied often (1:3|, etc.). {That great shepherd of the sheep} (\ton poimena t“n probat“n ton megan\). This phrase occurs in strkjv@Isaiah:63:11| except \ton megan\ which the author adds as in strkjv@4:14; strkjv@10:21|. Songs:here, "the shepherd of the sheep the great one." {With the blood of the eternal covenant} (\en haimati diathˆkˆs ai“niou\). This language is from strkjv@Zechariah:9:11|. The language reminds us of Christ's own words in strkjv@Mark:14:24| (Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Luke:22:20; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:25|) about "my blood of the covenant."

rwp@James:1:2 @{Count it} (\hˆgˆsasthe\). First aorist middle imperative of \hˆgeomai\, old verb to consider. Do it now and once for all. {All joy} (\pƒsan charan\). "Whole joy," " unmixed joy," as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:29|. Not just "some joy" along with much grief. {When} (\hotan\). "Whenever," indefinite temporal conjunction. {Ye fall into} (\peripesˆte\). Second aorist active subjunctive (with the indefinite \hotan\) from \peripipt“\, literally to fall around (into the midst of), to fall among as in strkjv@Luke:10:30| \lˆistais periepesen\ (he fell among robbers). Only other N.T. example of this old compound is in strkjv@Acts:27:41|. Thucydides uses it of falling into affliction. It is the picture of being surrounded (\peri\) by trials. {Manifold temptations} (\peirasmois poikilois\). Associative instrumental case. The English word temptation is Latin and originally meant trials whether good or bad, but the evil sense has monopolized the word in our modern English, though we still say "attempt." The word \peirasmos\ (from \peiraz“\, late form for the old \peira“\ as in strkjv@Acts:26:21|, both in good sense as in strkjv@John:6:6|, and in bad sense as in strkjv@Matthew:16:1|) does not occur outside of the LXX and the N.T. except in Dioscorides (A.D. 100?) of experiments on diseases. "Trials" is clearly the meaning here, but the evil sense appears in verse 12| (clearly in \peiraz“\ in verse 13|) and so in strkjv@Hebrews:3:8|. Trials rightly faced are harmless, but wrongly met become temptations to evil. The adjective \poikilos\ (manifold) is as old as Homer and means variegated, many coloured as in strkjv@Matthew:4:24; strkjv@2Timothy:3:6; strkjv@Hebrews:2:4|. In strkjv@1Peter:1:6| we have this same phrase. It is a bold demand that James here makes.

rwp@James:3:3 @{If we put} (\ei ballomen\). Condition of the first class assumed as true. {The horses' bridles} (\t“n hipp“n tous chalinous\). \Hipp“n\ (genitive plural of \hippos\, horse, old word, in N.T. only here except in the Apocalypse), put first because the first of the several illustrations of the power and the peril of the tongue. This is the only N.T. example of \chalinos\, old word for bridle (from \chala“\ to slacken, let down), except strkjv@Revelation:14:20|. {That they may obey us} (\eis to peithesthai autous hˆmin\). Present middle infinitive of \peith“\ with \eis to\ as a purpose clause with the dative \hˆmin\ after \peithesthai\ and \autous\ the accusative of general reference. {We turn about} (\metagomen\). Present active indicative of \metag“\, late compound to change the direction (\meta\, \ag“\), to guide, in N.T. only here and verse 4|. The body of the horse follows his mouth, guided by the bridle.

rwp@James:3:5 @{A little member} (\mikron melos\). \Melos\ is old and common word for members of the human body (1Corinthians:12:12, etc.; strkjv@Romans:6:13|, etc.). {Boasteth great things} (\megala auchei\). Present active indicative of \auche“\, old verb, here only in N.T. The best MSS. here separate \megala\ from \auche“\, though \megalauche“\ does occur in Aeschylus, Plato, etc. \Megala\ is in contrast with \mikron\. {How much--how small} (\hˆlikon--hˆlikˆn\). The same relative form for two indirect questions together, "What-sized fire kindles what-sized forest?" For double interrogatives see strkjv@Mark:15:24|. The verb \anaptei\ is present active indicative of \anapt“\, to set fire to, to kindle (Luke:12:49|, only other N.T. example except some MSS. in strkjv@Acts:28:2|). \Hulˆn\ is accusative case, object of \anaptei\, and occurs here only in N.T., though old word for forest, wood. Forest fires were common in ancient times as now, and were usually caused by small sparks carelessly thrown.

rwp@John:4:48 @{Except ye see} (\ean mˆ idˆte\). Condition of the third class (\ean mˆ\, negative, with second aorist active subjunctive of \hora“\). Jesus is not discounting his "signs and wonders" (\sˆmeia kai terata\, both words together here only in John, though common in N.T. as in strkjv@Matthew:24:24; strkjv@Mark:13:22; strkjv@Acts:2:19,22,43; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:9; strkjv@Hebrews:2:4|), though he does seem disappointed that he is in Galilee regarded as a mere miracle worker. {Ye will in no wise believe} (\ou mˆ pisteusˆte\). Strong double negative with aorist active subjunctive of \pisteu“\, picturing the stubborn refusal of people to believe in Christ without miracles.

rwp@John:5:2 @{There is} (\estin\). Bengel argues that this proves a date before the destruction of Jerusalem, but it is probably only John's vivid memory. {By the sheep gate} (\epi tˆi probatikˆi\). Supply \pulˆi\ (gate) which occurs with the adjective \probatikˆ\ (pertaining to sheep, \probata\) in strkjv@Nehemiah:3:1,22|. {A pool} (\kolumbˆthra\). A diving or swimming pool (from \kolumba“\, to swim, strkjv@Acts:27:43|), old word, only here in N.T. {Which is called} (\hˆ epilegomenˆ\). "The surnamed" (present passive participle, only N.T. example except strkjv@Acts:15:40| first aorist middle participle \epilexamenos\). {In Hebrew} (\Ebraisti\). "In Aramaic" strictly as in strkjv@19:13,17,20; strkjv@20:16; strkjv@Revelation:9:11; strkjv@16:16|. {Bethesda} (\Bethesda\, or House of Mercy. Songs:A C Syr cu). Aleph D L 33 have \Bethzatha\ or House of the Olive, while B W Vulg. Memph. have \Bethsaida\. {Having five porches} (\pente stoas echousa\). \Stoa\ was a covered colonnade where people can gather from which Stoic comes (Acts:17:18|). See strkjv@John:10:23; strkjv@Acts:3:11|. Schick in 1888 found twin pools north of the temple near the fortress of Antonia one of which has five porches. It is not, however, certain that this pool existed before A.D. 70 when the temple was destroyed (Sanday, _Sacred Sites of the Gospels_, p. 55). Some have identified it with the Pool of Siloam (9:7|), though John distinguishes them. There is also the Virgin's Well, called the Gusher, because it periodically bubbles over from a natural spring, a kind of natural siphon. This is south of the temple in the Valley of Kedron and quite possibly the real site.

rwp@John:6:44 @{Except the Father draw him} (\ean mˆ helkusˆi auton\). Negative condition of third class with \ean mˆ\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \helku“\, older form \helk“\, to drag like a net (John:21:6|), or sword (18:10|), or men (Acts:16:19|), to draw by moral power (12:32|), as in strkjv@Jeremiah:31:3|. \Sur“\, the other word to drag (Acts:8:3; strkjv@14:19|) is not used of Christ's drawing power. The same point is repeated in verse 65|. The approach of the soul to God is initiated by God, the other side of verse 37|. See strkjv@Romans:8:7| for the same doctrine and use of \oude dunatai\ like \oudeis dunatai\ here.

rwp@John:6:53 @{Except ye eat} (\ean mˆ phagˆte\). Negative condition of third class with second aorist active subjunctive of \esthi“\. Jesus repeats the statement in verses 50,51|. Note change of \mou\ (my) in verse 51| to \tou huiou tou anthr“pou\ with same idea. {And drink his blood} (\kai piˆte autou to haima\). Same condition with second aorist active subjunctive of \pin“\. This addition makes the demand of Jesus seem to these Jews more impossible than before if taken in a baldly literal sense. The only possible meaning is the spiritual appropriation of Jesus Christ by faith (verse 47|), for "ye have not life in yourselves" (\ouk echete z“ˆn en heautois\). Life is found only in Christ.

rwp@John:6:59 @{In the synagogue} (\en sunag“gˆi\). Definite like our in church, though article absent. Only use of the word in John except strkjv@18:20|. "Among the ruins at _Tell Hum_, the probable site of Capernaum, have been found among the remains of a synagogue a block of stone perhaps the lintel, carved with a pot of manna, and with a pattern of vine leaves and clusters of grapes" (Vincent).

rwp@John:6:65 @{Except it be given him of the Father} (\ean mˆ ˆi dedomenon aut“i ek tou patros\). Condition of third class with \ean mˆ\ and periphrastic perfect passive subjunctive of \did“mi\. Precisely the same point as in verse 44| where we have \helkusˆi\ instead of \ˆi dedomenon\. The impulse to faith comes from God. Jesus does not expect all to believe and seems to imply that Judas did not truly believe.

rwp@John:7:13 @{Howbeit} (\mentoi\). See strkjv@4:27| for this compound particle (\men, toi\), by way of exception, but yet. {Spake} (\elalei\). Imperfect active of \lale“\, "was speaking," picturing the whispering or secret talk ({no man openly}, \oudeis parrˆsiƒi\). Best MSS. do not have \en\ here with \parrˆsiƒi\ (locative or instrumental case of manner) as in strkjv@7:26; strkjv@10:24; strkjv@11:54|, but \en\ genuine in strkjv@7:4; strkjv@Colossians:2:15|. This adverbial use of \parrˆsiƒi\ is common enough (Mark:8:37|). {For fear of the Jews} (\dia ton phobon t“n Ioudai“n\). Objective genitive. The crowds really feared the Jewish leaders and evidently did not wish to involve Jesus or themselves. See the same phrase and attitude on the part of the disciples in strkjv@19:38; strkjv@20:19|.

rwp@John:7:30 @{They sought therefore} (\ezˆtoun oun\). Imperfect active of \zˆte“\, inchoative or conative, they began to seek. Either makes sense. The subject is naturally some of the Jerusalemites (Westcott) rather than some of the leaders (Bernard). {To take him} (\auton piasai\). First aorist active infinitive, Doric form from \piaz“\, from the usual \piez“\, occasionally so in the papyri, but \piaz“\ always in N.T. except strkjv@Luke:6:38|. {And} (\kai\). Here = "but." {Laid his hand} (\epebalen tˆn cheira\). Second aorist active indicative of \epiball“\, to cast upon. Old and common idiom for arresting one to make him a prisoner (Matthew:26:50|). See repetition in verse 44|. {His hour} (\hˆ h“ra autou\). In strkjv@13:1| we read that "the hour" had come, but that was "not yet" (\oup“\). "John is at pains to point out at every point that the persecution and death of Jesus followed a predestined course" (Bernard), as in strkjv@2:4; strkjv@7:6,8; strkjv@8:10; strkjv@10:39; strkjv@13:1|, etc. {Was not yet come} (\oup“ elˆluthei\). Past perfect active of \erchomai\, as John looks back on the story.

rwp@John:7:51 @{Doth our law judge a man?} (\mˆ ho nomos hˆm“n krinei ton anthr“pon;\). Negative answer expected and "the man," not "a man." These exponents of the law (verse 49|) were really violating the law of criminal procedure (Exodus:23:1; strkjv@Deuteronomy:1:16|). Probably Nicodemus knew that his protest was useless, but he could at least show his colours and score the point of justice in Christ's behalf. {Except it first hear from himself} (\ean mˆ akousˆi pr“ton par' autou\). Third-class negative condition with \ean mˆ\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \akou“\. That is common justice in all law, to hear a man's side of the case ("from him," \par' autou\). {And know what he doeth} (\kai gn“i ti poiei\). Continuation of the same condition with second aorist active subjunctive of \gin“sk“\ with indirect question and present active indicative (\ti poiei\). There was no legal answer to the point of Nicodemus.

rwp@John:8:23 @{Ye are from beneath} (\humeis ek t“n kat“\). This language, peculiar to John, could take up the idea in Josephus that these rabbis came from Gehenna whence they will go as children of the devil (8:44|), but the use of \ek tou kosmou toutou\ ("of this world" in origin) as parallel to what we have here seems to prove that the contrast between \kat“\ and \an“\ here is between the earthly (sensual) and the heavenly as in strkjv@James:3:15-17|. See also strkjv@Colossians:3:1|. This is the only use of \kat“\ in John (except strkjv@8:6|). These proud rabbis had their origin in this world of darkness (1:9|) with all its limitations. {I am from above} (\eg“ ek t“n an“ eimi\). The contrast is complete in origin and character, already stated in strkjv@3:31|, and calculated to intensify their anger.

rwp@John:8:24 @{For except ye believe} (\ean gar mˆ pisteusˆte\). Negative condition of third class with \ean mˆ\ and ingressive aorist active subjunctive of \pisteu“\, "For unless ye come to believe." {That I am he} (\hoti eg“ eimi\). Indirect discourse, but with no word in the predicate after the copula \eimi\. Jesus can mean either "that I am from above" (verse 23|), "that I am the one sent from the Father or the Messiah" (7:18,28|), "that I am the Light of the World" (8:12|), "that I am the Deliverer from the bondage of sin" (8:28,31f.,36|), "that I am" without supplying a predicate in the absolute sense as the Jews (Deuteronomy:32:39|) used the language of Jehovah (cf. strkjv@Isaiah:43:10| where the very words occur \hina pisteusˆte--hoti eg“ eimi\). The phrase \eg“ eimi\ occurs three times here (8:24,28,58|) and also in strkjv@13:19|. Jesus seems to claim absolute divine being as in strkjv@8:58|.

rwp@John:12:24 @{Except} (\ean mˆ\). Negative condition of third class (undetermined, supposable case) with second aorist active participle \pes“n\ (from \pipt“\, to fall) and the second aorist active subjunctive of \apothnˆsk“\, to die. {A grain of wheat} (\ho kokkos tou sitou\). Rather, "the grain of wheat." {By itself alone} (\autos monos\). Both predicate nominatives after \menei\. It is not necessary to think (nor likely) that Jesus has in mind the Eleusinian mysteries which became a symbol of the mystery of spring. Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:36| uses the same illustration of the resurrection that Jesus does here. Jesus shows here the paradox that life comes through death. Whether the Greeks heard him or not we do not know. If so, they heard something not in Greek philosophy, the Christian ideal of sacrifice, "and this was foreign to the philosophy of Greece" (Bernard). Jesus had already spoken of himself as the bread of life (6:35-65|). {But if it die} (\ean de apothanˆi\). Parallel condition of the third class. Grains of wheat have been found in Egyptian tombs three or four thousand years old, but they are now dead. They bore no fruit.

rwp@John:13:10 @{He that is bathed} (\ho leloumenos\). Perfect passive articular participle of \lou“\, to bathe the whole body (Acts:9:37|). {Save to wash his feet} (\ei mˆ tous podas nipsasthai\). Aleph and some old Latin MSS. have only \nipsasthai\, but the other words are genuine and are really involved by the use of \nipsasthai\ (first aorist middle infinitive of \nipt“\, to wash parts of the body) instead of \lousasthai\, to bathe the whole body (just used before). The guest was supposed to bathe (\lou“\) before coming to a feast and so only the feet had to be washed (\nipt“\) on removing the sandals. {Clean} (\katharos\). Because of the bath. For \katharos\ meaning external cleanliness see strkjv@Matthew:23:26; strkjv@27:59;| but in strkjv@John:15:3| it is used for spiritual purity as here in "ye are clean" (\katharoi\). {Every whit} (\holos\). All of the body because of the bath. For this same predicate use of \holos\ see strkjv@9:34|. {But not all} (\all' ouchi pantes\). Strongly put exception (\ouchi\). Plain hint of the treachery of Judas who is reclining at the table after having made the bargain with the Sanhedrin (Mark:14:11|). A year ago Jesus knew that Judas was a devil and said to the apostles: "One of you is a devil" (6:64,70|). But it did not hurt them then nor did they suspect each other then or now. It is far-fetched to make Jesus here refer to the cleansing power of his blood or to baptism as some do.

rwp@John:14:6 @{I am the way, and the truth, and the life} (\Eg“ eimi hˆ hodos kai hˆ alˆtheia kai hˆ z“ˆ\). Either of these statements is profound enough to stagger any one, but here all three together overwhelm Thomas. Jesus had called himself "the life" to Martha (11:25|) and "the door" to the Pharisees (10:7|) and "the light of the world" (8:12|). He spoke "the way of God in truth" (Mark:12:14|). He is the way to God and the only way (verse 6|), the personification of truth, the centre of life. {Except by me} (\ei mˆ di' emou\). There is no use for the Christian to wince at these words of Jesus. If he is really the Incarnate Son of God (1:1,14,18|, they are necessarily true.

rwp@John:15:4 @{Abide in me} (\meinate en emoi\). Constative aorist active imperative of \men“\. The only way to continue "clean" (pruned) and to bear fruit is to maintain vital spiritual connexion with Christ (the vine). Judas is gone and Satan will sift the rest of them like wheat (Luke:22:31f.|). Blind complacency is a peril to the preacher. {Of itself} (\aph' heautou\). As source (from itself) and apart from the vine (cf. strkjv@17:17|). {Except it abide} (\ean mˆ menˆi\). Condition of third class with \ean\, negative \mˆ\, and present active (keep on abiding) subjunctive of \men“\. Same condition and tense in the application, "except ye abide in me."

rwp@John:17:6 @{I manifested} (\ephaner“sa\). First aorist active indicative of \phanero“\ (from \phaneros\, manifest). Another word for claiming successful accomplishment of his task as in verse 4| with \edoxasa\ and in verse 26| with \egn“risa\. {Whom} (\hous\). Accusative case after \ed“kas\, not attracted to case of antecedent (\anthr“pois\). Jesus regards the apostles as the Father's gift to him. Recall the night of prayer before he chose them. {They have kept} (\tetˆrˆkan\). Perfect active indicative, late _Koin‚_ form for the third plural instead of the usual \tetˆrˆkasin\. Jesus claims loyalty and fidelity in these men with the one exception of Judas (verse 12|). He does not claim perfection for them, but they have at least held on to the message of the Father in spite of doubt and wavering (6:67-71; strkjv@Matthew:16:15-20|).

rwp@John:17:12 @{I kept} (\etˆroun\). Imperfect active of \tˆre“\, "I continued to keep." {I guarded} (\ephulaxa\). First aorist (constative) active of \phulass“\. Christ was the sentinel (\phulax\, strkjv@Acts:5:23|) for them. Is he our sentinel now? {But the son of perdition} (\ei mˆ ho huios tˆs ap“leias\). The very phrase for antichrist (2Thessalonians:2:3|). Note play on \ap“leto\, perished (second aorist middle indicative of \apollumi\). It means the son marked by final loss, not annihilation, but meeting one's destiny (Acts:2:25|). A sad and terrible exception (Mark:14:21|). {The scripture} (\hˆ graphˆ\). It is not clear whether this is John's own comment or the word of Jesus. Not in strkjv@18:9|. The Scripture referred to is probably strkjv@Psalms:41:9| quoted in strkjv@13:18| with the same formula \hina plˆr“thˆi\ which see there.

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 mˆ ˆn dedomenon\). Periphrastic past perfect indicative of \did“mi\ (a permanent possession). {From above} (\an“then\). 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:20:25 @{We have seen the Lord} (\he“rakamen ton kurion\). The very language in the plural that Mary Magdalene had used (20:18|) when no one believed her. {Except I shall see} (\ean mˆ id“\). Negative condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive and so as to \bal“\ (from \ball“\) "and put." {The print} (\ton tupon\). The mark or stamp made by the nails, here the original idea. Various terms as in strkjv@Acts:7:44; strkjv@1Timothy:4:12|. Finally our "type" as in strkjv@Romans:5:14|. Clearly the disciples had told Thomas that they had seen the \tupon\ of the nails in his hands and the spear in his side. {I will not believe} (\ou mˆ pisteus“\). Strong refusal with \ou mˆ\ (doubtful negative) and first aorist active subjunctive (or future indicative).

rwp@Jude:1:5 @{To put you in remembrance} (\hupomnˆsai\). See strkjv@2Peter:1:12| \hupomimnˆskein\ (present active infinitive there, first aorist active infinitive here). {Though ye know all things once for all} (\eidotas hapax panta\). Concessive perfect (sense of present) active participle as in strkjv@2Peter:1:12|, but without \kaiper\. {The Lord} (\kurios\). Some MSS. add \Iˆsous\. The use of \kurios\ here is usually understood to mean the Lord Jesus Christ, as Clement of Alex. (_Adumbr_. p. 133) explains, strkjv@Exodus:23:20|, by \ho mustikos ekeinos aggelos Iˆsous\ (that mystical angel Jesus). For the mystic reference to Christ see strkjv@1Corinthians:10:4,9; strkjv@Hebrews:11:26|. Some MSS. here add \theos\ instead of \Iˆsous\. {Afterward} (\to deuteron\). Adverbial accusative, "the second time." After having saved the people out of Egypt. {Destroyed} (\ap“lesen\). First aorist active indicative of \apollumi\, old verb, to destroy. {Them that believed not} (\tous mˆ pisteusantas\). First aorist active articular participle of \pisteu“\. The reference is to strkjv@Numbers:14:27-37|, when all the people rescued from Egypt perished except Caleb and Joshua. This first example by Jude:is not in II Peter, but is discussed in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:5-11; strkjv@Hebrews:3:18-4:2|.

rwp@Luke:3:23 @{Jesus Himself} (\autos Iˆsous\). Emphatic intensive pronoun calling attention to the personality of Jesus at this juncture. When he entered upon his Messianic work. {When he began to teach} (\archomenos\). The words "to teach" are not in the Greek text. The Authorized Version "began to be about thirty years of age," is an impossible translation. The Revised Version rightly supplies "to teach" (\didaskein\) after the present participle \archomenos\. Either the infinitive or the participle can follow \archomai\, usually the infinitive in the _Koin‚_. It is not necessary to supply anything (Acts:1:22|). {Was about thirty years of age} (\ˆn h“sei et“n triakonta\). Tyndale has it right "Jesus was about thirty yere of age when he beganne." Luke does not commit himself definitely to precisely thirty years as the age of Christ. The Levites entered upon full service at that age, but that proves nothing about Jesus. God's prophets enter upon their task when the word of God comes to them. Jesus may have been a few months under or over thirty or a year or two less or more. {Being Son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli} (\“n huios h“s enomizeto I“sˆph tou Helei\). For the discussion of the genealogy of Jesus see on ¯Matthew:1:1-17|. The two genealogies differ very widely and many theories have been proposed about them. At once one notices that Luke begins with Jesus and goes back to Adam, the Son of God, while Matthew begins with Abraham and comes to "Joseph the husband of Mary of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ" (Matthew:1:16|). Matthew employs the word "begot" each time, while Luke has the article \tou\ repeating \huiou\ (Son) except before Joseph. They agree in the mention of Joseph, but Matthew says that "Jacob begat Joseph" while Luke calls "Joseph the son of Heli." There are other differences, but this one makes one pause. Joseph, of course, did not have two fathers. If we understand Luke to be giving the real genealogy of Jesus through Mary, the matter is simple enough. The two genealogies differ from Joseph to David except in the cases of Zorobabel and Salathiel. Luke evidently means to suggest something unusual in his genealogy by the use of the phrase "as was supposed" (\h“s enomizeto\). His own narrative in strkjv@Luke:1:26-38| has shown that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. Plummer objects that, if Luke is giving the genealogy of Jesus through Mary, \huios\ must be used in two senses here (son as was supposed of Joseph, and grandson through Mary of Heli). But that is not an unheard of thing. In neither list does Matthew or Luke give a complete genealogy. Just as Matthew uses "begat" for descent, so does Luke employ "son" in the same way for descendant. It was natural for Matthew, writing for Jews, to give the legal genealogy through Joseph, though he took pains to show in strkjv@Matthew:1:16,18-25| that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. It was equally natural for Luke, a Greek himself and writing for the whole world, to give the actual genealogy of Jesus through Mary. It is in harmony with Pauline universality (Plummer) that Luke carries the genealogy back to Adam and does not stop with Abraham. It is not clear why Luke adds "the Son of God" after Adam (3:38|). Certainly he does not mean that Jesus is the Son of God only in the sense that Adam is. Possibly he wishes to dispose of the heathen myths about the origin of man and to show that God is the Creator of the whole human race, Father of all men in that sense. No mere animal origin of man is in harmony with this conception.

rwp@Luke:4:16 @{Where he had been brought up} (\hou ˆn tethrammenos\). Past perfect passive periphrastic indicative, a state of completion in past time, from \treph“\, a common Greek verb. This visit is before that recorded in strkjv@Mark:6:1-6; strkjv@Matthew:13:54-58| which was just before the third tour of Galilee. Here Jesus comes back after a year of public ministry elsewhere and with a wide reputation (Luke:4:15|). Luke may have in mind strkjv@2:51|, but for some time now Nazareth had not been his home and that fact may be implied by the past perfect tense. {As his custom was} (\kata to ei“thos aut“i\). Second perfect active neuter singular participle of an old \eth“\ (Homer), to be accustomed. Literally according to what was customary to him (\aut“i\, dative case). This is one of the flashlights on the early life of Jesus. He had the habit of going to public worship in the synagogue as a boy, a habit that he kept up when a grown man. If the child does not form the habit of going to church, the man is almost certain not to have it. We have already had in Matthew and Mark frequent instances of the word synagogue which played such a large part in Jewish life after the restoration from Babylon. {Stood up} (\anestˆ\). Second aorist active indicative and intransitive. Very common verb. It was the custom for the reader to stand except when the Book of Esther was read at the feast of Purim when he might sit. It is not here stated that Jesus had been in the habit of standing up to read here or elsewhere. It was his habit to go to the synagogue for worship. Since he entered upon his Messianic work his habit was to teach in the synagogues (Luke:4:15|). This was apparently the first time that he had done so in Nazareth. He may have been asked to read as Paul was in Antioch in Pisidia (Acts:13:15|). The ruler of the synagogue for that day may have invited Jesus to read and speak because of his now great reputation as a teacher. Jesus could have stood up voluntarily and appropriately because of his interest in his home town. {To read} (\anagn“nai\). Second aorist active infinitive of \anagin“sk“\, to recognize again the written characters and so to read and then to read aloud. It appears first in Pindar in the sense of read and always so in the N.T. This public reading aloud with occasional comments may explain the parenthesis in strkjv@Matthew:24:15| (Let him that readeth understand).

rwp@Luke:4:23 @{Doubtless} (\pant“s\). Adverb. Literally, at any rate, certainly, assuredly. Cf. strkjv@Acts:21:22; strkjv@28:4|. {This parable} (\tˆn parabolˆn tautˆn\). See discussion on ¯Matthew:13|. Here the word has a special application to a crisp proverb which involves a comparison. The word physician is the point of comparison. Luke the physician alone gives this saying of Jesus. The proverb means that the physician was expected to take his own medicine and to heal himself. The word \parabolˆ\ in the N.T. is confined to the Synoptic Gospels except strkjv@Hebrews:9:9; strkjv@11:19|. This use for a proverb occurs also in strkjv@Luke:5:36; strkjv@6:39|. This proverb in various forms appears not only among the Jews, but in Euripides and Aeschylus among the Greeks, and in Cicero's _Letters_. Hobart quotes the same idea from Galen, and the Chinese used to demand it of their physicians. The point of the parable seems to be that the people were expecting him to make good his claim to the Messiahship by doing here in Nazareth what they had heard of his doing in Capernaum and elsewhere. "Establish your claims by direct evidence" (Easton). This same appeal (Vincent) was addressed to Christ on the Cross (Matthew:27:40,42|). There is a tone of sarcasm towards Jesus in both cases. {Heard done} (\ˆkousamen genomena\). The use of this second aorist middle participle \genomena\ after \ˆkousamen\ is a neat Greek idiom. It is punctiliar action in indirect discourse after this verb of sensation or emotion (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1040-42, 1122-24). {Do also here} (\poiˆson kai h“de\). Ingressive aorist active imperative. Do it here in thy own country and town and do it now. Jesus applies the proverb to himself as an interpretation of their real attitude towards himself.

rwp@Luke:4:32 @Rest of the sentence as in Mark, which see, except that Luke omits "and not as their scribes" and uses \hoti ˆn\ instead of \h“s ech“n\.

rwp@Luke:6:21 @{Now} (\nun\). Luke adds this adverb here and in the next sentence after "weep." This sharpens the contrast between present sufferings and the future blessings. {Filled} (\chortasthˆsesthe\). Future passive indicative. The same verb in strkjv@Matthew:5:6|. Originally it was used for giving fodder (\chortos\) to animals, but here it is spiritual fodder or food except in strkjv@Luke:15:16; strkjv@16:21|. Luke here omits "and thirst after righteousness." {Weep} (\klaiontes\). Audible weeping. Where strkjv@Matthew:5:4| has "mourn" (\penthountes\). {Shall laugh} (\gelasete\). Here strkjv@Matthew:5:4| has "shall be comforted." Luke's words are terse.

rwp@Matthew:12:41 @{In the judgment} (\en tˆi krisei\). Except here and in the next verse Matthew has "day of judgment" (\hˆmera krise“s\) as in strkjv@10:15; strkjv@11:22,24; strkjv@12:36|. Luke (Luke:10:14|) has \en tˆi krisei\. {They repented at the preaching of Jonah} (\metenoˆson eis to kˆrugma I“na\). Note this use of \eis\ just like \en\. Note also \pleion\ (neuter), not \plei“n\ (masc.). See the same idiom in strkjv@12:6| and strkjv@12:48|. Jesus is something greater than the temple, than Jonah, than Solomon. "You will continue to disbelieve in spite of all I can say or do, and at last you will put me to death. But I will rise again, a sign for your confusion, if not for your conversion" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:13:6 @{The sun was risen} (\hˆliou anateilantos\). Genitive absolute. "The sun having sprung up" also, same verb except the absence of \ex\ (\anatell“, exanatell“\).

rwp@Matthew:13:25 @{While men slept} (\en t“i katheudein tous anthr“pous\). Same use of the articular present infinitive with \en\ and the accusative as in strkjv@13:4|. {Sowed tares also} (\epespeiren ta zizania\). Literally "sowed upon," "resowed" (Moffatt). The enemy deliberately sowed "the darnel" (\zizania\ is not "tares," but "darnel," a bastard wheat) over (\epi\) the wheat, "in the midst of the wheat." This bearded darnel, _lolium temulentum_, is common in Palestine and resembles wheat except that the grains are black. In its earlier stages it is indistinguishable from the wheat stalks so that it has to remain till near the harvest. Modern farmers are gaining more skill in weeding it out.

rwp@Matthew:16:4 @Same words in strkjv@12:39| except \tou prophˆtou\, a real doublet.

rwp@Revelation:8:11 @{Wormwood} (\ho Apsinthos\). Absinthe. Usually feminine (\hˆ\), but masculine here probably because \astˆr\ is masculine. Only here in N.T. and not in LXX (\pikria\, bitterness, \cholˆ\, gall, etc.) except by Aquila in strkjv@Proverbs:5:4; strkjv@Jeremiah:9:15; strkjv@23:15|. There are several varieties of the plant in Palestine. {Became wormwood} (\egeneto eis apsinthon\). This use of \eis\ in the predicate with \ginomai\ is common in the LXX and the N.T. (16:19; strkjv@John:16:20; strkjv@Acts:5:36|). {Of the waters} (\ek t“n hudat“n\). As a result of (\ek\) the use of the poisoned waters. {Were made bitter} (\epikranthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \pikrain“\. Old verb (from \pikros\, bitter), as in strkjv@10:9f|. In a metaphorical sense to embitter in strkjv@Colossians:3:19|.

rwp@Revelation:9:4 @{It was said} (\errethˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \eipon\. {That they should not hurt} (\hina mˆ adikˆsousin\). Sub-final (object clause subject of \errethˆ\) with \hina mˆ\ and the future active of \adike“\ as in strkjv@3:9; strkjv@8:3|. Vegetation had been hurt sufficiently by the hail (8:7|). {But only such men as} (\ei mˆ tous anthr“pous hoitines\). "Except (elliptical use of \ei mˆ\, if not, unless) the men who (the very ones who)." For this use of \hostis\ see strkjv@1:7; strkjv@2:24; strkjv@20:4|. {The seal of God upon their foreheads} (\tˆn sphragida tou theou epi t“n met“p“n\). Provided for in strkjv@7:3ff|. "As Israel in Egypt escaped the plagues which punished their neighbours, so the new Israel is exempted from the attack of the locusts of the Abyss" (Swete).

rwp@Revelation:18:10 @{Standing afar off} (\apo makrothen hestˆkotes\). Perfect active (intransitive) participle of \histˆmi\. Vivid picture of the terrible scene, fascinated by the lurid blaze (cf. Nero's delight in the burning of Rome in A.D. 64), and yet afraid to draw near. On \apo makrothen\ see strkjv@Mark:5:6|. There is a weird charm in a burning city. They feared the same fate (cf. verse 7| for \basanismou\, torment). {Woe, woe, the great city} (\ouai, ouai, hˆ polis hˆ megalˆ\). Only example in the Apocalypse of the nominative with \ouai\ except verses 16,19|, though in strkjv@Luke:6:25| and common in LXX (Isaiah:5:7,11|, etc.). For the dative see strkjv@Revelation:8:13|, once so "strong" (\hˆ ischura\)! {In one hour} (\miƒi h“rƒi\). Repeated in verses 16,19|, and like \miƒi hˆmerƒi\ (in one day) in verse 8|. Some MSS. have here \mian h“ran\, like \poian h“ran\ (accusative of extent of time) in strkjv@3:3|. See verse 8| (\ho krinas\) for \hˆ krisis sou\ (thy judgment). This is the dirge of the kings.

rwp@Revelation:19:7 @{Let us rejoice and be exceeding glad} (\chair“men kai agalli“men\). Present active subjunctive (volitive) of \chair“\ and \agallia“\ (elsewhere in N.T. in the middle except strkjv@Luke:1:47; strkjv@1Peter:1:8|). For both verbs together see strkjv@Matthew:5:12|. {Let us give} (\d“men\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \did“mi\, but A reads \d“somen\ (future active) and P \d“s“men\. If the future indicative is read, the tone is changed from exhortation to declaration (we shall give glory unto him). {The marriage of the Lamb} (\ho gamos tou arniou\). In the O.T. God is the Bridegroom of Israel (Hosea:2:16; strkjv@Isaiah:54:6; strkjv@Ezekiel:16:7ff.|). In the N.T. Christ is the Bridegroom of the Kingdom (the universal spiritual church as seen by Paul, strkjv@2Corinthians:11:2; strkjv@Ephesians:5:25ff.|, and by John in strkjv@Revelation:3:20; strkjv@19:7,9; strkjv@21:2,9; strkjv@22:17|. In the Gospels Christ appears as the Bridegroom (Mark:2:19f.; strkjv@Matthew:9:15; strkjv@Luke:5:34f.; strkjv@John:3:29|). The figure of \gamos\ occurs in strkjv@Matthew:22:2-14|. Three metaphors of women appear in the Apocalypse (the Mother in chapter strkjv@Revelation:12|, the Harlot in strkjv@Revelation:17-19|, and the Bride of Christ here to the end). "The first and third present the Church under two different aspects of her life, while the second answers to her great rival and enemy" (Swete). {Is come} (\ˆlthen\). Prophetic aorist, come at last. {Made herself ready} (\hˆtoimasen heautˆn\). First aorist active indicative of \hetoimaz“\ and the reflexive pronoun. See strkjv@22:2| for \hˆtoimasmenˆn h“s numphˆn\ (prepared as a bride). There is something for her to do (1John:3:3; strkjv@Jude:1:21; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:1|), but the chief preparation is the act of Christ (Ephesians:5:25ff.|).

rwp@Revelation:19:12 @{A flame of fire} (\phlox puros\). As in the opening vision of Christ in strkjv@1:14| (2:18|). {Many diadems} (\diadˆmata polla\). A new feature, but the dragon has a diadem on each of his seven heads (12:3|) and the first beast one upon each of his ten horns (13:1|). Songs:the victorious Messiah will wear many royal diadems and not mere crowns, because he is King of kings (19:16|). {And he hath} (\kai ech“n\). Nominative active present participle of \ech“\ either used absolutely as an independent verb (like indicative) or in an anacoluthon, though \autou\ (his) is genitive. {A name written} (\onoma gegrammenon\). Perfect passive participle of \graph“\ as in strkjv@2:17| (cf. strkjv@3:12|). {But he himself} (\ei mˆ autos\). "Except himself" (common ellipsis of the verb after \ei mˆ\, "if not"). See strkjv@2:17; strkjv@3:12| for the new name there described. See strkjv@14:1| for the name of Christ on the forehead of the 144,000, and strkjv@17:5| for the name on the forehead of the harlot. This word here supplements what Jesus says in strkjv@Matthew:11:27|.

rwp@Revelation:20:5 @{The rest of the dead} (\hoi loipoi t“n nekr“n\). "All except the martyrs, both the righteous and the unrighteous" (Beckwith). But some take this to mean only the wicked. {Lived not until the thousand years should be finished} (\ouk ezˆsan achri telesthˆi ta chilia etˆ\). See verse 4| for the items here. "To infer from this statement, as many expositors have done, that the \ezˆsan\ of v. 4| must be understood of bodily resuscitation, is to interpret apocalyptic prophecy by methods of exegesis which are proper to ordinary narrative" (Swete). I sympathize wholly with that comment and confess my own ignorance therefore as to the meaning of the symbolism without any predilections for post-millennialism or premillennialism. {This is the first resurrection} (\hautˆ hˆ anastasis hˆ pr“tˆ\). Scholars differ as to the genuineness of this phrase. Accepting it as genuine, Swete applies it to "the return of the martyrs and confessors to life at the beginning of the Thousand Years." According to this view the first resurrection is a special incident in the present life before the Parousia. It has no parallel with strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:16|, where the dead in Christ are raised before those living are changed. Some think that John here pictures the "Regeneration" (\palingenesia\) of strkjv@Matthew:19:28| and the "Restoration" (\apokatastasis\) of strkjv@Acts:3:21|. No effort is here made to solve this problem, save to call attention to the general judgment out of the books in strkjv@20:12| and to the general resurrection in strkjv@John:5:29; strkjv@Acts:24:15|.

rwp@Revelation:21:27 @{There shall in no wise enter into it} (\ou mˆ eiselthˆi eis autˆn\). Double negative again with the second aorist active subjunctive of \eiserchomai\ with \eis\ repeated. Like strkjv@Isaiah:52:1; strkjv@Ezekiel:44:9|. {Anything unclean} (\pƒn koinon\). Common use of \pƒn\ with negative like \ouden\, and the use of \koinos\ for defiled or profane as in strkjv@Mark:7:2; strkjv@Acts:10:14|, not just what is common to all (Titus:1:4|). {Or he that} (\kai ho\). "And he that." {Maketh an abomination and a lie} (\poi“n bdelugma kai pseudos\). Like Babylon (17:4| which see for \bdelugma\) and strkjv@21:8| for those in the lake of fire and brimstone, and strkjv@22:15| for "every one loving and doing a lie." These recurrent glimpses of pagan life on earth and of hell in contrast to heaven in this picture raise the question already mentioned whether John is just running parallel pictures of heaven and hell after the judgment or whether, as Charles says: "The unclean and the abominable and the liars are still on earth, but, though the gates are open day and night, they cannot enter." In apocalyptic writing literalism and chronology cannot be insisted on as in ordinary books. The series of panoramas continue to the end. {But only they which are written} (\ei mˆ hoi gegrammenoi\). "Except those written." For "the book of life" see strkjv@3:5; strkjv@13:8; strkjv@20:15|. Cf. strkjv@Daniel:12:1|.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ EMPEROR WORSHIP AS THE OCCASION FOR JOHN'S APOCALYPSE There is no doubt at all that the emperor cult (emperor worship) played a main part in the persecution of the Christians that was the occasion for this great Christian apocalypse. The book itself bears ample witness to this fact, if the two beasts refer to the Roman power as the agent of Satan. It is not possible to single out each individual emperor in the graphic picture. Most would take the dragon to be Satan and the first and the second beasts to be the imperial and provincial Roman power. The Roman emperors posed as gods and did the work of Satan. In particular there were two persecuting emperors (Nero and Domitian) who were responsible for many martyrs for Christ. But emperor worship began before Nero. Julius Caesar was worshipped in the provinces. Octavius was called Augustus (\Sebastos\, Reverend). The crazy Emperor Caius Caligula not simply claimed to be divine, but actually demanded that his statue be set up for worship in the Holy of Holies in the Temple in Jerusalem. He was killed in January A.D. 41 before he could execute his dire purpose. But the madcap Nero likewise demanded worship and blamed in A.D. 64 the burning of Rome on the Christians, though guilty of it himself. He set the style for persecuting Christians, which slumbered on and burst into flames again under Domitian, who had himself commonly termed _Dominus ac Deus noster_ (Our Lord and God). The worship of the emperor did not disturb the worshippers of other gods save the Jews and the Christians, and in particular the Christians were persecuted after the burning of Rome when they were distinguished from the Jews. Up till then Christians were regarded (as by Gallio in Corinth) as a variety of Jews and so entitled to tolerance as a _religio licita_, but they had no standing in law by themselves and their refusal to worship the emperor early gave offence, as Paul indicates in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3|. It was \Kurios Iˆsous\ or \Kurios Kaisar\. On this very issue Polycarp lost his life. The emperors as a rule were tolerant about it, save Nero and Domitian, who was called Nero _redivivus_, or Nero back again. Trajan in his famous letter to Pliny advised tolerance except in stubborn cases, when the Christians had to be put to death. After Nero it was a crime to be a Christian and all sorts of slanders about them were circulated. We have seen already in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3ff.|, the man of sin who sets himself above God as the object of worship. We have seen also in strkjv@1John:2:18,22; strkjv@4:3; strkjv@2John:1:7| the term antichrist applied apparently to Gnostic heretics. One may wonder if, as Beckwith argues, in the Apocalypse the man of sin and the antichrist are united in the beast.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE AUTHOR The writer calls himself John (Revelation:1:1,4,9; strkjv@22:8|). But what John? The book can hardly be pseudonymous, though, with the exception of the Shepherd of Hermas, that is the rule with apocalypses. There would have been a clearer claim than just the name. The traditional and obvious way to understand the name is the Apostle John, though Dionysius of Alexandria mentions John Mark as held by some and he himself suggests another John, like the so-called Presbyter John of Papias as quoted by Eusebius. The uncertain language of Papias has raised a deal of questioning. Swete thinks that the majority of modern critics ascribe the Apocalypse to this Presbyter John, to whom Moffatt assigns probably II and III John. Irenaeus represents the Apostle John as having lived to the time of Trajan, at least to A.D. 98. Most ancient writers agree with this extreme old age of John. Justin Martyr states expressly that the Apostle John wrote the Apocalypse. Irenaeus called it the work of a disciple of Jesus. In the ninth century lived Georgius Hamartolus, and a MS. of his alleges that Papias says that John the son of Zebedee was beheaded by the Jews and there is an extract in an Oxford MS. of the seventh century which alleges that Papias says John and James were put to death by the Jews. On the basis of this slim evidence some today argue that John did not live to the end of the century and so did not write any of the Johannine books. But a respectable number of modern scholars still hold to the ancient view that the Apocalypse of John is the work of the Apostle and Beloved Disciple, the son of Zebedee.

rwp@Romans:1:30 @Paul changes the construction again to twelve substantives and adjectives that give vivid touches to this composite photograph of the God abandoned soul. {Whisperers} (\psithuristas\). Old word from \psithuriz“\, to speak into the ear, to speak secretly, an onomatopoetic word like \psithurismos\ (2Corinthians:12:20|) and only here in N.T. {Backbiters} (\katalalous\). Found nowhere else except in Hermas, compound like \katalale“\, to talk back (James:4:11|), and \katalalia\, talking back (2Corinthians:12:20|), talkers back whether secretly or openly. {Hateful to God} (\theostugeis\). Old word from \theos\ and \stuge“\. All the ancient examples take it in the passive sense and so probably here. Songs:\stugˆtos\ (Titus:3:13|). Vulgate has _deo odibiles_. {Insolent} (\hubristas\). Old word for agent from \hubriz“\, to give insult to, here alone in N.T. save strkjv@1Timothy:1:13|. {Haughty} (\huperˆphanous\). From \huper\ and \phainomai\, to appear above others, arrogant in thought and conduct, "stuck up." {Boastful} (\alazonas\). From \alˆ\, wandering. Empty pretenders, swaggerers, braggarts. {Inventors of evil things} (\epheuretas kak“n\). Inventors of new forms of vice as Nero was. Tacitus (_Ann_. IV. ii) describes Sejanus as _facinorum omnium repertor_ and Virgil (_Aen_. ii. 163) _scelerum inventor_. {Disobedient to parents} (\goneusin apeitheis\). Cf. strkjv@1Timothy:1:9; strkjv@2Timothy:3:2|. An ancient and a modern trait.

rwp@Romans:10:14 @{How then shall they call?} (\p“s oun epikales“ntai?\). Deliberative subjunctive (first aorist middle) of \epikaleomai\ (see verses 12,13|). The antecedent of \eis hon\ (in whom) is not expressed. {How shall they believe?} (\pos pisteus“sin?\). Deliberative subjunctive again (first aorist active of \pisteu“\ just used). Each time Paul picks up the preceding verb and challenges that. Here again the antecedent \eis touton\ before \hon\ is not expressed. {How shall they hear?} (\pos akous“sin?\). Deliberative subjunctive (first aorist active of \akou“\). {Without a preacher?} (\ch“ris kˆrussontos?\). Preposition \ch“ris\ with ablative singular masculine present active participle of \kˆruss“\, "without one preaching." {How shall they preach?} (\p“s kˆrux“sin?\). Deliberative subjunctive again (first aorist active \kˆruss“\, to preach). {Except they be sent?} (\ean mˆ apostal“sin?\). Second aorist passive deliberative subjunctive of \apostell“\, to send, from which verb \apostolos\ apostle comes. Negative condition of third class. In graphic style Paul has made a powerful plea for missions. It is just as true today as then.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Sun Jun 30 22:21:37 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020