OT-HISTORY.filter - rwp Intellectual:

rwp@1Corinthians:14:20 @{Be not children in mind} (\m paidia ginesthe tais phresin\). "Cease becoming children in your intellects," as some of them evidently were. Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:5:11-14| for a like complaint of intellectual dulness for being old babies. {In malice be ye babes} (\ti kakii npiazete\). {Be men} (\teleioi ginesthe\). Keep on becoming adults in your minds. A noble and a needed command, pertinent today.

rwp@2Timothy:3:7 @{Never able to come to the knowledge of the truth} (\mdepote eis epignsin altheias elthein dunamena\). Pathetic picture of these hypnotized women without intellectual power to cut through the fog of words and, though always learning scraps of things, they never come into the full knowledge (\epignsin\) of the truth in Christ. And yet they even pride themselves on belonging to the intelligentsia!

rwp@3John:1:3 @{I rejoiced greatly} (\echarn lian\). As in strkjv@2John:1:4; strkjv@Phillipians:4:10|, not epistolary aorist, but reference to his emotions at the good tidings about Gaius. {When brethren came} (\erchomenn adelphn\). Genitive absolute with present middle participle of \erchomai\, and so with \marturountn\ (bare witness, present active participle of \marture\). Present participle here denotes repetition, from time to time. {To the truth} (\ti altheii\). Dative case. "As always in the Johannine writings, 'truth' covers every sphere of life, moral, intellectual, spiritual" (Brooke). {Even as thou walkest in truth} (\kaths su en altheii peripateis\). "Thou" in contrast to Diotrephes (verse 9|) and others like him. On \peripate\ see strkjv@1John:1:6| and on \en altheii\ see strkjv@2John:1:4|.

rwp@Acts:10:14 @{Not so, Lord} (\Mdams, kurie\). The negative \mdams\ calls for the optative \ei\ (may it not be) or the imperative \est\ (let it be). It is not \oudams\, a blunt refusal (I shall not do it). And yet it is more than a mild protest as Page and Furneaux argue. It is a polite refusal with a reason given. Peter recognizes the invitation to slay (\thuson\) the unclean animals as from the Lord (\kurie\) but declines it three times. {For I have never eaten anything} (\hoti oudepote ephagon pan\). Second aorist active indicative, I never did anything like this and I shall not do it now. The use of \pan\ (everything) with \oudepote\ (never) is like the Hebrew (_lo--kl_) though a like idiom appears in the vernacular _Koin_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 752). {Common and unclean} (\koinon kai akatharton\). \Koinos\ from epic \xunos\ (\xun, sun\, together with) originally meant common to several (Latin _communis_) as in strkjv@Acts:2:44; strkjv@4:32; strkjv@Titus:1:4; strkjv@Jude:1:3|. The use seen here (also strkjv@Mark:7:2,5; strkjv@Romans:14:14; strkjv@Hebrews:10:29; strkjv@Revelation:21:27; strkjv@Acts:10:28; strkjv@11:8|), like Latin _vulgaris_ is unknown in ancient Greek. Here the idea is made plain by the addition of \akatharton\ (unclean), ceremonially unclean, of course. We have the same double use in our word "common." See on ¯Mark:7:18f.| where Mark adds the remarkable participle \katharizn\ (making all meats clean), evidently from Peter who recalls this vision. Peter had been reared from childhood to make the distinction between clean and unclean food and this new proposal even from the Lord runs against all his previous training. He did not see that some of God's plans for the Jews could be temporary. This symbol of the sheet was to show Peter ultimately that Gentiles could be saved without becoming Jews. At this moment he is in spiritual and intellectual turmoil.

rwp@Acts:17:18 @{And certain also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him} (\tines de kai tn Epikourin kai Stikn philosophn suneballon auti\). Imperfect active of \sunball\, old verb, in the N.T. only by Luke, to bring or put together in one's mind (Luke:2:19|), to meet together (Acts:20:14|), to bring together aid (18:27|), to confer or converse or dispute as here and already strkjv@4:15| which see. These professional philosophers were always ready for an argument and so they frequented the agora for that purpose. Luke uses one article and so groups the two sects together in their attitude toward Paul, but they were very different in fact. Both sects were eager for argument and both had disdain for Paul, but they were the two rival practical philosophies of the day, succeeding the more abstruse theories of Plato and Aristotle. Socrates had turned men's thought inward (\Gnthi Seauton\, Know Thyself) away from the mere study of physics. Plato followed with a profound development of the inner self (metaphysics). Aristotle with his cyclopaedic grasp sought to unify and relate both physics and metaphysics. Both Zeno and Epicurus (340-272 B.C.) took a more practical turn in all this intellectual turmoil and raised the issues of everyday life. Zeno (360-260 B.C.) taught in the \Stoa\ (Porch) and so his teaching was called Stoicism. He advanced many noble ideas that found their chief illustration in the Roman philosophers (Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius). He taught self-mastery and hardness with an austerity that ministered to pride or suicide in case of failure, a distinctly selfish and unloving view of life and with a pantheistic philosophy. Epicurus considered practical atheism the true view of the universe and denied a future life and claimed pleasure as the chief thing to be gotten out of life. He did not deny the existence of gods, but regarded them as unconcerned with the life of men. The Stoics called Epicurus an atheist. Lucretius and Horace give the Epicurean view of life in their great poems. This low view of life led to sensualism and does today, for both Stoicism and Epicureanism are widely influential with people now. "Eat and drink for tomorrow we die," they preached. Paul had doubtless become acquainted with both of these philosophies for they were widely prevalent over the world. Here he confronts them in their very home. He is challenged by past-masters in the art of appealing to the senses, men as skilled in their dialectic as the Pharisaic rabbis with whom Paul had been trained and whose subtleties he had learned how to expose. But, so far as we know, this is a new experience for Paul to have a public dispute with these philosophical experts who had a natural contempt for all Jews and for rabbis in particular, though they found Paul a new type at any rate and so with some interest in him. "In Epicureanism, it was man's sensual nature which arrayed itself against the claims of the gospel; in Stoicism it was his self-righteousness and pride of intellect" (Hackett). Knowling calls the Stoic the Pharisee of philosophy and the Epicurean the Sadducee of philosophy. Socrates in this very agora used to try to interest the passers-by in some desire for better things. That was 450 years before Paul is challenged by these superficial sophistical Epicureans and Stoics. It is doubtful if Paul had ever met a more difficult situation. {What would this babbler say?} (\Ti an theloi ho spermologos houtos legein?\). The word for "babbler" means "seed-picker" or picker up of seeds (\sperma\, seed, \leg\, to collect) like a bird in the agora hopping about after chance seeds. Plutarch applies the word to crows that pick up grain in the fields. Demosthenes called Aeschines a \spermologos\. Eustathius uses it of a man hanging around in the markets picking up scraps of food that fell from the carts and so also of mere rhetoricians and plagiarists who picked up scraps of wisdom from others. Ramsay considers it here a piece of Athenian slang used to describe the picture of Paul seen by these philosophers who use it, for not all of them had it ("some," \tines\). Note the use of \an\ and the present active optative \theloi\, conclusion of a fourth-class condition in a rhetorical question (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). It means, What would this picker up of seeds wish to say, if he should get off an idea? It is a contemptuous tone of supreme ridicule and doubtless Paul heard this comment. Probably the Epicureans made this sneer that Paul was a charlatan or quack. {Other some} (\hoi de\). But others, in contrast with the "some" just before. Perhaps the Stoics take this more serious view of Paul. {He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods} (\zenn daimonin dokei kataggeleus einai\). This view is put cautiously by \dokei\ (seems). \Kataggeleus\ does not occur in the old Greek, though in ecclesiastical writers, but Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 99) gives an example of the word "on a marble stele recording a decree of the Mitylenaens in honour of the Emperor Augustus," where it is the herald of the games. Here alone in the N.T. \Daimonion\ is used in the old Greek sense of deity or divinity whether good or bad, not in the N.T. sense of demons. Both this word and \kataggeleus\ are used from the Athenian standpoint. \Xenos\ is an old word for a guest-friend (Latin _hospes_) and then host (Romans:16:23|), then for foreigner or stranger (Matthew:25:31; strkjv@Acts:17:21|), new and so strange as here and strkjv@Hebrews:13:9; strkjv@1Peter:4:12|, and then aliens (Ephesians:2:12|). This view of Paul is the first count against Socrates: Socrates does wrong, introducing new deities (\adikei Skrats, kaina daimonia eisphern\, Xen. _Mem_. I). On this charge the Athenians voted the hemlock for their greatest citizen. What will they do to Paul? This Athens was more sceptical and more tolerant than the old Athens. But Roman law did not allow the introduction of a new religion (_religio illicita_). Paul was walking on thin ice though he was the real master philosopher and these Epicureans and Stoics were quacks. Paul had the only true philosophy of the universe and life with Jesus Christ as the centre (Colossians:1:12-20|), the greatest of all philosophers as Ramsay justly terms him. But these men are mocking him. {Because he preached Jesus and the resurrection} (\hoti ton Isoun kai tn anastasin euggelizato\). Reason for the view just stated. Imperfect middle indicative of \euaggeliz\, to "gospelize." Apparently these critics considered \anastasis\ (Resurrection) another deity on a par with Jesus. The Athenians worshipped all sorts of abstract truths and virtues and they misunderstood Paul on this subject. They will leave him as soon as he mentions the resurrection (verse 32|). It is objected that Luke would not use the word in this sense here for his readers would not under stand him. But Luke is describing the misapprehension of this group of philosophers and this interpretation fits in precisely.

rwp@Galatians:4:1 @{Songs:long as} (\eph' hoson chronon\). "For how long a time," incorporation of the antecedent (\chronon\) into the relative clause. {The heir} (\ho klronomos\). Old word (\klros\, lot, \nemomai\, to possess). Illustration from the law of inheritance carrying on the last thought in strkjv@3:29|. {A child} (\npios\). One that does not talk (\n, epos\, word). That is a minor, an infant, immature intellectually and morally in contrast with \teleioi\, full grown (1Corinthians:3:1; strkjv@14:20; strkjv@Phillipians:3:15; strkjv@Ephesians:4:13|). {From a bondservant} (\doulou\). Slave. Ablative case of comparison after \diapherei\ for which verb see on ¯Matthew:6:26|. {Though he is lord of all} (\Kurios pantn n\). Concessive participle \n\, "being legally owner of all" (one who has the power, \ho echn kuros\).

rwp@James:1:8 @{Man} (\anr\). Instead of \anthrpos\ (general term) in verse 7|, perhaps for variety (Ropes), but often in James (1:12,23; strkjv@2:2; strkjv@3:2|), though in other Epistles usually in distinction from \gun\ (woman). {Double-minded} (\dipsuchos\). First appearance of this compound known and in N.T. only here and strkjv@4:8|. Apparently coined by James, but copied often in early Christian writings and so an argument for the early date of James' Epistle (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). From \dis\ twice and \psuch\ soul, double-souled, double-minded, Bunyan's "Mr. Facing-both-ways." Cf. the rebuke to Peter (\edistasas\) in strkjv@Matthew:14:31|. {Unstable} (\akatastatos\). Late double compound (alpha privative and \katastatos\ verbal from \kathistmi\), in LXX once (Is strkjv@54:11|) and in Polybius, in N.T. only here and strkjv@3:8|. It means unsteady, fickle, staggering, reeling like a drunken man. Surely to James such "doubt" is no mark of intellectuality.

rwp@John:8:32 @{And ye shall know the truth} (\kai gnsesthe tn altheian\). Truth is one of the marks of Christ (1:14|) and Jesus will claim to Thomas to be the personification of truth (14:6|). But it will be for them knowledge to be learned by doing God's will (7:17|). The word is from \alths\ (\a\ privative and \lth\, to conceal, unsealed, open). See also verses 40,44,45|. {And the truth shall make you free} (\kai h altheia eleuthersei humas\). Future active indicative of \eleuthero\, old verb from \eleutheros\ (from \erchomai\, to go where one wishes and so free). One of Paul's great words for freedom from the bondage of the law (Romans:6:18; strkjv@Galatians:5:1|). The freedom of which Jesus here speaks is freedom from the slavery of sin as Paul in strkjv@Romans:8:2|. See strkjv@John:8:36|. This freedom is won alone by Christ (8:36|) and we are sanctified in truth (17:19|). In strkjv@1:17| truth is mentioned with grace as one of the marks of the gospel through Christ. Freedom (intellectual, moral, spiritual) is only attainable when we are set free from darkness, sin, ignorance, superstition and let the Light of the World shine on us and in us.

rwp@John:16:9 @{Because they believe not on me} (\hoti ou pisteuousin eis eme\). Without this conviction by the Paraclete such men actually have a pride of intellectual superiority in refusing to believe on Jesus.

rwp@Luke:1:51 @{Showed strength} (\epoisen kratos\). "Made might" (Wycliff). A Hebrew conception as in strkjv@Psalms:118:15|. Plummer notes six aorist indicatives in this sentence (51-63|), neither corresponding to our English idiom, which translates here by "hath" each time. {Imagination} (\dianoii\). Intellectual insight, moral understanding.

rwp@Luke:2:40 @{The child grew} (\uxane\). Imperfect indicative of a very ancient verb (\auxan\). This child grew and waxed strong (\ekrataiouto\, imperfect middle), a hearty vigorous little boy (\paidion\). Both verbs Luke used in strkjv@1:80| of the growth of John the Baptist as a child. Then he used also \pneumati\, in spirit. Here in addition to the bodily development Luke has "filled with wisdom" (\plroumenon sophii\). Present passive participle, showing that the process of filling with wisdom kept pace with the bodily growth. If it were only always true with others! We need not be troubled over this growth in wisdom on the part of Jesus any more than over his bodily growth. "The intellectual, moral, and spiritual growth of the Child, like the physical, was real. His was a perfect humanity developing perfectly, unimpeded by hereditary or acquired defects. It was the first instance of such a growth in history. For the first time a human infant was realizing the ideal of humanity" (Plummer). {The grace of God} (\charis theou\). In full measure.

rwp@Luke:2:46 @{After three days} (\meta hmeras treis\). One day out, one day back, and on the third day finding him. {In the temple} (\en ti hieri\). Probably on the terrace where members of the Sanhedrin gave public instruction on sabbaths and feast-days, so probably while the feast was still going on. The rabbis probably sat on benches in a circle. The listeners on the ground, among whom was Jesus the boy in a rapture of interest. {Both hearing them and asking them questions} (\kai akouonta autn kai epertnta autous\). Paul sat at the feet of Gamaliel (Acts:22:3|). Picture this eager boy alive with interest. It was his one opportunity in a theological school outside of the synagogue to hear the great rabbis expound the problems of life. This was the most unusual of all children, to be sure, in intellectual grasp and power. But it is a mistake to think that children of twelve do not think profoundly concerning the issues of life. What father or mother has ever been able to answer a child's questions?

rwp@Luke:2:47 @{Were amazed} (\existanto\). Imperfect indicative middle, descriptive of their continued and repeated astonishment. Common verb \existmi\ meaning that they stood out of themselves as if their eyes were bulging out. The boy had a holy thirst for knowledge (Plummer), and he used a boy's way of learning. {At his understanding} (\epi ti sunesei\). Based on (\epi\), the grasp and comprehension from \sunimi\, comparing and combining things. Cf. strkjv@Mark:12:33|. {His answers} (\tais apokrisesin autou\). It is not difficult to ask hard questions, but this boy had astounding answers to their questions, revealing his amazing intellectual and spiritual growth.

rwp@Luke:2:52 @{Advanced in wisdom and stature} (\proekopten ti sophii kai hlikii\). Imperfect active, he kept cutting his way forward as through a forest or jungle as pioneers did. He kept growing in stature (\hlikia\ may mean age, as in strkjv@12:25|, but stature here) and in wisdom (more than mere knowledge). His physical, intellectual, moral, spiritual development was perfect. "At each stage he was perfect for that stage" (Plummer). {In favour} (\chariti\). Or grace. This is ideal manhood to have the favour of God and men.

rwp@Luke:6:8 @{But he knew their thoughts} (\autos de idei tous dialogismous autn\). In Luke alone. Imperfect in sense, second past perfect in form \idei\ from \oida\. Jesus, in contrast to these spies (Plummer), read their intellectual processes like an open book. {His hand withered} (\xran tn cheira\). Predicate position of the adjective. Songs:in strkjv@Mark:3:3|. {Stand forth} (\stthi\). Luke alone has this verb, second aorist active imperative. strkjv@Mark:3:3| has {Arise into the midst} (\egeire eis to meson\). Luke has {Arise and step forth into the midst} (\egeire kai stthi eis to meson\). Christ worked right out in the open where all could see. It was a moment of excitement when the man stepped forth (\est\) there before them all.

rwp@Matthew:10:16 @{As sheep in the midst of wolves} (\hs probata en mesi lukn\). The presence of wolves on every hand was a fact then and now. Some of these very sheep (10:6|) at the end will turn out to be wolves and cry for Christ's crucifixion. The situation called for consummate wisdom and courage. The serpent was the emblem of wisdom or shrewdness, intellectual keenness (Genesis:3:1; strkjv@Psalms:58:5|), the dove of simplicity (Hosea:7:11|). It was a proverb, this combination, but one difficult of realization. Either without the other is bad (rascality or gullibility). The first clause with \arnas\ for \probata\ is in strkjv@Luke:10:3| and apparently is in a _Fragment of a Lost Gospel_ edited by Grenfell and Hunt. The combination of wariness and innocence is necessary for the protection of the sheep and the discomfiture of the wolves. For "harmless" (\akeraioi\) Moffatt and Goodspeed have "guileless," Weymouth "innocent." The word means "unmixed" (\a\ privative and \kerannumi\), "unadulterated," "simple," "unalloyed."

rwp@Matthew:15:17 @{Perceive ye not?} (\ou noeite\). Christ expects us to make use of our \nous\, intellect, not for pride, but for insight. The mind does not work infallibly, but we should use it for its God-given purpose. Intellectual laziness or flabbiness is no credit to a devout soul.

rwp@Matthew:16:8 @Jesus asks four pungent questions about the intellectual dulness, refers to the feeding of the five thousand and uses the word \kophinous\ (14:20|) for it and \sphuridas\ for the four thousand (15:37|), and repeats his warning (16:11|). Every teacher understands this strain upon the patience of this Teacher of teachers.

rwp@Romans:11:25 @{This mystery} (\to mustrion touto\). Not in the pagan sense of an esoteric doctrine for the initiated (from \mue\, to blink, to wink), unknown secrets (2Thessalonians:2:7|), or like the mystery religions of the time, but the revealed will of God now made known to all (1Corinthians:2:1,7; strkjv@4:1|) which includes Gentiles also (Romans:16:25; strkjv@Colossians:1:26f.; strkjv@Ephesians:3:3f.|) and so far superior to man's wisdom (Colossians:2:2; strkjv@4:13; strkjv@Ephesians:3:9; strkjv@5:32; strkjv@6:19; strkjv@Matthew:13:11; strkjv@Mark:4:11|). Paul has covered every point of difficulty concerning the failure of the Jews to accept Jesus as the Messiah and has shown how God has overruled it for the blessing of the Gentiles with a ray of hope still held out for the Jews. "In early ecclesiastical Latin \mustrion\ was rendered by _sacramentum_, which in classical Latin means _the military oath_. The explanation of the word _sacrament_, which is so often founded on this etymology, is therefore mistaken, since the meaning of sacrament belongs to \mustrion\ and not to _sacramentum_ in the classical sense" (Vincent). {Wise in your own conceits} (\en heautois phronimoi\). "Wise in yourselves." Some MSS. read \par' heautois\ (by yourselves). Negative purpose here (\hina m te\), to prevent self-conceit on the part of the Gentiles who have believed. They had no merit in themselves {A hardening} (\prsis\). Late word from \pro\ (11:7|). Occurs in Hippocrates as a medical term, only here in N.T. save strkjv@Mark:3:5; strkjv@Ephesians:4:18|. It means obtuseness of intellectual discernment, mental dulness. {In part} (\apo merous\). Goes with the verb \gegonen\ (has happened in part). For \apo merous\, see strkjv@2Corinthians:1:14; strkjv@2:5; strkjv@Romans:15:24|; for \ana meros\, see strkjv@1Corinthians:14:27|; for \ek merous\, see strkjv@1Corinthians:12:27; strkjv@13:9|; for \kata meros\, see strkjv@Hebrews:9:5|; for \meros ti\ (adverbial accusative) partly see strkjv@1Corinthians:11:18|. Paul refuses to believe that no more Jews will be saved. {Until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in} (\achri hou to plrma tn ethnn eiselthi\). Temporal clause with \achri hou\ (until which time) and the second aorist active subjunctive of \eiserchomai\, to come in (Matthew:7:13,21|). {For fulness of the Gentiles} (\to plrma tn ethnn\) see on verse ¯12|, the complement of the Gentiles.