OT-HISTORY.filter - rwp Sadducee:

rwp@Acts:4:1 @{The captain of the temple} (\ho stratgos tou hierou\). Twenty-four bands of Levites guarded the temple, one guard at a time. They watched the gates. The commander of each band was called captain (\stratgos\). Josephus names this captain of the temple police next to the high priest (_War_. VI. 5, 3). {The Sadducees} (\hoi Saddoukaioi\). Most of the priests were Sadducees now and all the chief priests since John Hyrcanus I deserted the Pharisees (Josephus, _Ant_. XVII. 10, 6; XVIII. 1, 4; XX. 9, 1). The Sadducees were slow to line up with the Pharisees against Jesus, but they now take the lead against Peter and John. {Came upon them} (\epestsan autois\). Second aorist active indicative (intransitive). Burst upon them suddenly or stood by them in a hostile attitude here (Luke:20:1; strkjv@24:4; strkjv@Acts:6:12; strkjv@17:5; strkjv@22:20; strkjv@23:11|).

rwp@Acts:4:2 @{Being sore troubled} (\diaponoumenoi\). Present passive participle of old verb \diapone\ (perfective use of \dia\) to be worked up, indignant. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@16:8|. {Because} (\dia to\). The articular infinitive with two accusatives, one the object (the people), the other ("they") of general reference. {In Jesus} (\en Isou\). In the case of Jesus, an actual instance of resurrection which the Sadducees denied (Matthew:22:23|). This same use of \en\ appears in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:6| (in us). The Sadducees were also aristocrats and political ecclesiastics who disliked popular disturbances. In particular, they resented the claim about Jesus whom they had helped crucify.

rwp@Acts:4:5 @{Rulers and elders and scribes} (\tous archontas kai tous presbuterous kai tous grammateis\). The three classes composing the Sanhedrin (rulers=chief priests who were Sadducees, the scribes usually Pharisees, the elders not in either class: 24 priests, 24 elders, 22 scribes). {Were gathered together} (\sunachthnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \sunag\ with accusative of general reference and the subject of \egeneto\.

rwp@Acts:4:6 @{Annas} (\Hannas\). One of the rulers or chief priests, ex-high priest (A.D. 7-14) and father-in-law of {Caiaphas} (\Kaiaphas\) who was actual high priest at that time, though the title clung to Annas as here (both so called in strkjv@Luke:3:2|), Caiaphas so by Roman law, Annas so in the opinion of the Jews. They with John and Alexander are the leaders among the Sadducees in pressing the case against Peter and John.

rwp@Acts:4:33 @{Gave their witness} (\apedidoun to marturion\). Imperfect active of \apodidmi\, old verb to give back, to pay back a debt (Luke:7:42|), but a late omega form instead of the usual \apedidosan\. They kept on giving their witness with power after the answer to their prayer (verse 31|). {Of the resurrection} (\ts anastases\). It was on this issue that the Sadducees had arrested them (4:1-3|).

rwp@Acts:5:17 @{Which is the sect of the Sadducees} (\h ousa hairesis tn Saddoukain\). Literally, "the existing sect of the Sadducees" or "the sect which is of the Sadducees," \h\ being the article, not the relative. \Hairesis\ means a choosing, from \haireomai\, to take for oneself, to choose, then an opinion chosen or tenet (possibly strkjv@2Peter:2:1|), then parties or factions (Gal strkjv@5:20; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:19|; possibly strkjv@2Peter:2:1|). It is applied here to the Sadducees; to the Pharisees in strkjv@Acts:15:5; strkjv@26:5|; to the Christians in strkjv@24:5-14; strkjv@28:22|. Already Luke has stated that the Sadducees started the persecution of Peter and John (Acts:4:1f.|). Now it is extended to "the apostles" as a whole since Christianity has spread more rapidly in Jerusalem than before it began.

rwp@Acts:5:20 @{And stand} (\kai stathentes\). First aorist passive participle (intransitive, ingressive aorist), take a stand. Bold and pictorial command. {All the words of this life} (\panta ta rhmata ts zs tauts\). Not just a Hebraism for "all these words of life." Probably "this life" which the Sadducees deny and of which the angel is now speaking, this eternal life. (John:6:63,68; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:19|).

rwp@Acts:5:34 @{Gamaliel} (\Gamalil\). The grandson of Hillel, teacher of Paul (Acts:22:3|), later president of the Sanhedrin, and the first of the seven rabbis termed "Rabban." It is held by some that he was one of the doctors who heard the Boy Jesus in the temple (Luke:2:47|) and that he was a secret disciple like Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, but there is no evidence of either position. Besides, he appears here as a loyal Pharisee and "a doctor of the law" (\nomodidaskalos\). This word appears already in strkjv@Luke:5:17| of the Pharisaic doctors bent on criticizing Jesus, which see. Paul uses it of Judaizing Christians (1Timothy:1:7|). Like other great rabbis he had a great saying: "Procure thyself a teacher, avoid being in doubt; and do not accustom thyself to give tithes by guess." He was a man of judicial temper and not prone to go off at a tangent, though his brilliant young pupil Saul went to the limit about Stephen without any restraint on the part of Gamaliel so far as the record goes. Gamaliel champions the cause of the apostles as a Pharisee to score a point against the Sadducees. He acts as a theological opportunist, not as a disciple of Christ. He felt that a temporizing policy was best. There are difficulties in this speech of Gamaliel and it is not clear how Luke obtained the data for the address. It is, of course, possible that Saul was present and made notes of it for Luke afterwards. {Had in honour of all the people} (\timios panti ti lai\). Ethical dative. \Timios\ from \tim\, old word meaning precious, dear. {The men} (\tous anthrpous\). Correct text as in verse 35|, not "the apostles" as Textus Receptus.

rwp@Acts:5:40 @{To him they agreed} (\epeisthsan auti\). First aorist passive indicative of \peith\, to persuade, the passive to be persuaded by, to listen to, to obey. Gamaliel's shrewd advice scored as against the Sadducaic contention (verse 17|). {Not to speak} (\m lalein\). The Sanhedrin repeated the prohibition of strkjv@4:18| which the apostles had steadily refused to obey. The Sanhedrin stood by their guns, but refused to shoot. It was a "draw" with Gamaliel as tactical victor over the Sadducees. Clearly now the disciples were set free because only the Sadducees had become enraged while the Pharisees held aloof.

rwp@Acts:6:7 @{Increased} (\uxanen\). Imperfect active, kept on growing all the more because the apostles were now relieved from the daily ministration of the food. {Multiplied} (\eplthuneto\). Imperfect passive. The two imperfects kept pace with each other. {Of the priests} (\tn hiern\). Who were usually Sadducees. It was a sad day for Annas and Caiaphas and all the sect of the Sadducees (5:17|). {Were obedient to} (\hupkouon\). Imperfect active of \hupakou\, repetition, one after another. {The faith} (\ti pistei\). Here meaning the gospel, the faith system as in strkjv@Romans:1:5; strkjv@Galatians:1:23; strkjv@Jude:1:3|, etc. Here the word means more than individual trust in Christ.

rwp@Acts:6:11 @{Then they suborned men} (\tote hupebalon andras\). Second aorist active indicative of \hupoball\, old verb, but here only in the N.T., to put under like a carpet, to bring men under one's control by suggestion or by money. One recalls the plight of Caiaphas in the trial of Jesus when he sought false witnesses. _Subornaverunt_. They put these men forward in an underhand way for fraud. {Blasphemous words against Moses and God} (\blasphma eis Musn kai ton theon\). The punishment for blasphemy was stoning to death. See strkjv@Matthew:12:31| for discussion of the word \blasphmia, blasphme, blasphmos\, all in the N.T. from \blapt\, to harm, and \phm\, speech, harmful speech, or \blax\, stupid, and \phm\. But the charge against Stephen was untrue. Please note that Moses is here placed before God and practically on a par with God in the matter of blasphemy. The purpose of this charge is to stir the prejudices of the people in the matter of Jewish rights and privileges. It is the Pharisees who are conducting this attack on Stephen while the Sadducees had led them against Peter and John. The position of Stephen is critical in the extreme for the Sadducees will not help him as Gamaliel did the apostles.

rwp@Acts:6:12 @{They stirred up the people} (\sunekinsan ton laon\). They shook the people together like an earthquake. First aorist active indicative of \sunkine\, to throw into commotion. Old verb, but here only in the N.T. The elders and the scribes (Pharisees) are reached, but no word about the Sadducees. This is the first record of the hostility of the masses against the disciples (Vincent). {Came upon him} (\epistantes\). Second aorist (ingressive) active participle of \ephistmi\. Rushed at him. {Seized} (\sunrpasan\). Effective aorist active of \sunarpaz\ as if they caught him after pursuit.

rwp@Acts:7:1 @{Are these things so?} (\ei tauta houts echei\). On this use of \ei\ in a direct question see on ¯1:6|. Literally "Do these things hold thus?" A formal question by the high priest like our "Do you plead guilty, or not guilty?" (Furneaux). The abrupt question of the high priest would serve to break the evident spell of the angelic look on Stephen's face. Two charges had been made against Stephen (1) speaking against the holy temple, (2) changing the customs which Moses had delivered. Stephen could not give a yes or no answer to these two charges. There was an element of truth in each of them and a large amount of error all mixed together. Songs:he undertakes to explain his real position by the historical method, that is to say, by a rapid survey of God's dealing with the people of Israel and the Gentiles. It is the same method adopted by Paul in Pisidian Antioch (Acts:13:16ff.|) after he had become the successor of Stephen in his interpretation of the universal mission of Christianity. If one is disposed to say that Luke made up this speech to suit Stephen's predicament, he has to explain how the style is less Lukan than the narrative portions of Acts with knowledge of Jewish traditions that a Greek would not be likely to know. Precisely how Luke obtained the data for the speech we do not know, but Saul heard it and Philip, one of the seven, almost certainly. Both could have given Luke help about it. It is even possible that some one took notes of this important address. We are to remember also that the speech was interrupted at the end and may not include all that Stephen meant to say. But enough is given to give us a good idea of how Stephen met the first charge "by showing that the worship of God is not confined to Jerusalem or the Jewish temple" (Page). Then he answers the second charge by proving that God had many dealings with their fathers before Moses came and that Moses foretold the coming of the Messiah who is now known to be Jesus. It is at this point (verse 51|) that Stephen becomes passionate and so powerful that the wolves in the Sanhedrin lose all self-control. It is a great and masterful exposition of the worldwide mission of the gospel of Christ in full harmony with the Great Commission of Christ. The apostles had been so busy answering the Sadducees concerning the Resurrection of Christ and maintaining their freedom to teach and preach that they had not pushed the world-wide propaganda of the gospel as Jesus had commanded after they had received the Promise of the Father. But Stephen had proclaimed the same message of Christ and was now facing the same fate. Peter's mind had been enlightened by the Holy Spirit so that he could rightly interpret Joel and David in the light of Pentecost. "Songs:Stephen read the history of the Old Testament with new eyes in the light of the life and death of Jesus" (Furneaux).

rwp@Acts:7:31 @{The sight} (\to horama\). Used of visions in the N.T. as in strkjv@Matthew:17:9|. {As he drew near} (\proserchomenou autou\). Genitive absolute with present middle participle of \proserchomai\. {A voice of the Lord} (\phn kuriou\). Here the angel of Jehovah of verse 30| is termed Jehovah himself. Jesus makes powerful use of these words in his reply to the Sadducees in defence of the doctrine of the resurrection and the future life (Mark:12:26; strkjv@Matthew:22:32; strkjv@Luke:20:37f.|) that God here describes himself as the God of the living. {Trembled} (\entromos genomenos\). Literally, becoming tremulous or terrified. The adjective \entromos\ (\en, tromos\ from \trem\, to tremble, to quake) occurs in Plutarch and the LXX. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:16:29|. {Durst not} (\ouk etolma\). Imperfect active, was not daring, negative conative imperfect.

rwp@Acts:7:54 @{When they heard} (\akouontes\). Present active participle of \akou\, while hearing. {They were cut to the heart} (\dieprionto tais kardiais\). See strkjv@5:33| where the same word and form (imperfect passive of \diapri\) is used of the effect of Peter's speech on the Sadducees. Here Stephen had sent a saw through the hearts of the Pharisees that rasped them to the bone. {They gnashed on him with their teeth} (\ebruchon tous odontas ep' auton\). Imperfect (inchoative) active of \bruch\ (Attic \bruk\), to bite with loud noise, to grind or gnash the teeth. Literally, They began to gnash their teeth at (\ep'\) him (just like a pack of hungry, snarling wolves). Stephen knew that it meant death for him.

rwp@Acts:8:1 @{Was consenting} (\n suneudokn\). 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 ekeini ti hmeri\). On that definite day, that same day as in strkjv@2:41|. {A great persecution} (\digmos 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 \digmos\ from \dik\, to chase, hunt, pursue, persecute. {Were all scattered abroad} (\pantes diesparsan\). 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} (\pln tn apostoln\). Preposition \pln\ (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:12:1 @{About that time} (\kat' ekeinon ton kairon\). Same phrase in strkjv@Romans:9:9|. That is, the early part of A.D. 44 since that is the date of Herod's death. As already suggested, Barnabas and Saul came down from Antioch to Jerusalem after the persecution by Herod at the end of 44 or the beginning of 45. {Herod the king} (\Hrids ho basileus\). Accurate title at this particular time. Herod Agrippa I, grandson of Herod the Great, was King of Palestine A.D. 42 to 44; only for these three years was a Herod king over Palestine since the death of Herod the Great and never afterwards. Archelaus never actually became king though he had the popular title at first (Matthew:2:22|). {Put forth his hands} (\epebalen tas cheiras\). Second aorist active indicative of \epiball\, old verb, to cast upon or against. The same idiom with \tas cheiras\ (the hands, common Greek idiom with article rather than possessive pronoun) in strkjv@4:3; strkjv@5:18|. {To afflict} (\kaksai\). First aorist active infinitive of \kako\, old word to do harm or evil to (\kakos\), already in strkjv@7:6,19|. Outside of Acts in the N.T. only strkjv@1Peter:5:13|. Infinitive of purpose. Probably the first who were afflicted were scourged or imprisoned, not put to death. It had been eight years or more since the persecution over the death of Stephen ceased with the conversion of Saul. But the disciples were not popular in Jerusalem with either Sadducees or Pharisees. The overtures to the Gentiles in Caesarea and Antioch may have stirred up the Pharisees afresh (cf. strkjv@6:14|). Herod Agrippa I was an Idumean through his grandfather Herod the Great and a grandson of Mariamne the Maccabean princess. He was a favourite of Caligula the Roman Emperor and was anxious to placate his Jewish subjects while retaining the favour of the Romans. Songs:he built theatres and held games for the Romans and Greeks and slew the Christians to please the Jews. Josephus (_Ant_. XIX. 7, 3) calls him a pleasant vain man scrupulously observing Jewish rites. Here we have for the first time political power (after Pilate) used against the disciples.

rwp@Acts:14:4 @{But the multitude of the city was divided} (\eschisth de to plthos ts poles\). First aorist passive indicative of \schiz\, old verb to split, to make a schism or factions as Sadducees and Pharisees (23:7|). This division was within the Gentile populace. Part held (\hoi men san\), literally "some were with the Jews" (\sun tois Ioudaiois\), part with the apostles (\hoi de sun tois apostolois\). Common demonstrative of contrast (\hoi men, hoi de\, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 694). The Jewish leaders made some impression on the Gentiles as at Antioch in Pisidia and later at Thessalonica (17:4f.|). This is the first time in the Acts that Paul and Barnabas are termed "apostles" (see also verse 14|). Elsewhere in the Acts the word is restricted to the twelve. Certainly Luke does not here employ it in that technical sense. To have followed Jesus in his ministry and to have seen the Risen Christ was essential to the technical use (1:22f.|). Whether Barnabas had seen the Risen Christ we do not know, but certainly Paul had (1Corinthians:9:1f.; strkjv@15:8|). Paul claimed to be an apostle on a par with the twelve (Galatians:1:1,16-18|). The word originally means simply one sent (John:13:16|) like messengers of the churches with the collection (2Corinthians:8:23|). The Jews used it of those sent from Jerusalem to collect the temple tribute. Paul applies the word to James the Lord's brother (Galatians:1:19|), to Epaphroditus (Phillipians:2:25|) as the messenger of the church in Philippi, to Silvanus and Timothy (1Thessalonians:2:6; strkjv@Acts:18:5|), apparently to Apollos (1Corinthians:4:9|), and to Andronicus and Junias (Romans:16:6f.|). He even calls the Judaizers "false apostles" (2Corinthians:11:13|).

rwp@Acts:16:18 @{She did} (\epoiei\). Imperfect active, kept it up for many days. The strange conduct gave Paul and the rest an unpleasant prominence in the community. {Being sore troubled} (\diapontheis\). First aorist passive of \diapone\, old verb, to work laboriously, then in passive to be "worked up," displeased, worn out. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@4:2| which see (there of the Sadducees about Peter's preaching). Paul was grieved, annoyed, indignant. He wanted no testimony from a source like this any more than he did the homage of the people of Lystra (14:14|). {That very hour} (\auti ti hri\). Locative case of time and familiar Lukan idiom in his Gospel, "at the hour itself." The cure was instantaneous. Paul, like Jesus, distinguished between the demon and the individual.

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@Info_James @ THE EPISTLE OF JAMES BEFORE A.D. 50 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION THE AUTHOR He claims to be James, and so the book is not anonymous. It is either genuine or pseudonymous. He does not claim to be the brother of the Lord Jesus, as one might expect. James the brother of John was put to death by Herod Agrippa I about A.D. 44 (Acts:12:2|). But James the brother of Jesus (Galatians:1:19|) was still alive and became a leader of the church in Jerusalem (Acts:12:17|), presiding over the Conference in Jerusalem (Acts:15:13-21|) and apparently writing the message from the Conference to the Gentile churches (Acts:15:22-29|), and was still the leading elder in Jerusalem on Paul's last visit (Acts:21:18-25|). James does not claim here to be an apostle and he was not one of the twelve apostles, and the dispute about accepting it of which Eusebius spoke was about its apostolicity since James was only an apostle by implication (Galatians:1:19|) in the general sense of that term like Barnabas (Acts:14:14|), perhaps Silas and Timothy (1Thessalonians:2:7|), certainly not on a par with Paul, who claimed equality with the twelve. James, like the other brothers of Jesus, had once disbelieved his claims to be the Messiah (John:7:6f.|), but he was won by a special vision of the Risen Christ (1Corinthians:15:7|) and was in the upper room before the great pentecost (Acts:1:14|). It is plain that he had much to overcome as a zealous Jew to become a Christian, though he was not a mere cousin of Jesus or a son of Joseph by a former marriage. He was strictly the half-brother of Jesus, since Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. There is no reason to believe that he was a Nazirite. We know that he was married (1Corinthians:9:5|). He came to be called James the Just and was considered very devout. The Judaizers had counted on him to agree with them against Paul and Barnabas, but he boldly stood for Gentile freedom from the ceremonial law. The Judaizers still claimed him at Antioch and used his name wrongly to frighten Peter thereby (Galatians:2:12|). But to the end he remained the loyal friend to Paul and his gospel rightly understood (Acts:21:18-25|). Clement of Alexandria (_Hypot_. vii) says that, when he bore strong testimony to Jesus as the Son of man, they flung him down from the gable of the temple, stoned him, and beat him to death with a club. But Josephus (_Ant_. XX. ix. I) says that the Sadducees about A.D. 62 had James and some others brought before the Sanhedrin (Ananus presiding) and had them stoned as transgressors of the law. At any rate he won a martyr's crown like Stephen and James the brother of John.

rwp@John:7:32 @{The Pharisees} (\hoi Pharisaioi\). This group of the Jewish rulers (7:11,15,25f.|) was particularly hostile to Christ, though already the Sadducees had become critical (Matthew:16:6|) and they join here (\hoi archiereis\, the chief priests being Sadducees) in determining to silence Jesus by bringing him before the Sanhedrin. They had heard the whispered talk about Jesus before he arrived (7:12f.|) and still more now. {Heard the multitude murmuring} (\kousan tou ochlou gogguzontos\). First aorist active indicative of \akou\ with the genitive case and the descriptive participle of the vivid onomatopoetic verb \gogguz\ (verse 12|) now grown louder like the hum of bees. It was the defence of Jesus by a portion of the crowd (7:31|) that irritated the Pharisees. Here the Pharisees take the initiative and enlist the Sadducees in the Sanhedrin (for this combination see strkjv@7:45; strkjv@11:47,57; strkjv@Matthew:21:45; strkjv@27:62|, the organized court) to send "officers" (\hupretas\) "to take him" (\hina piassin auton\, final clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \piaz\ for which verb see verse 30|). For \hupretas\ (temple police here) see verse 45; strkjv@18:3,12,22; strkjv@19:6; strkjv@Acts:5:22,26|. For the word see strkjv@Matthew:5:25; strkjv@Luke:1:2|, "an under rower" (\hupo, erets\), any assistant.

rwp@John:7:45 @{Why did ye not bring him?} (\Dia ti ouk gagete auton;\). Second aorist active indicative of \ag\. Indignant outburst of the Sanhedrin (both Sadducees and Pharisees) at the failure of the (\tous\, note article here referring to verse 32|) temple police to arrest Jesus. "Apparently they were sitting in expectation of immediately questioning him" (Dods). They were stunned at this outcome.

rwp@John:12:10 @{The chief priests took counsel} (\ebouleusanto hoi archiereis\). First aorist middle indicative of \bouleu\, old verb, seen already in strkjv@11:53| which see. The whole Sanhedrin (7:32|) had decided to put Jesus to death and had asked for information concerning him (11:57|) that might lead to his arrest, but the Sadducees were specially active now to accomplish the death of Lazarus also (\hina\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \apoktein\ as in strkjv@11:53|). Perhaps they argued that, if they should kill both Jesus and Lazarus, then Lazarus would remain dead. The raising of Lazarus has brought matters to a crisis. Incidentally, it may be observed that here we may see the reason why the Synoptics do not tell the story of the raising of Lazarus, if he was still living (cf. the case of Malchus's name in strkjv@John:18:10|).

rwp@John:19:15 @{Away with him, away with him} (\ron, ron\). First aorist active imperative of \air\. See \aire\ in strkjv@Luke:23:18|. This thing has gotten on the nerves of the crowd. Note the repetition. In a second-century papyrus letter (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_) a nervous mother cries "He upsets me; away with him" (\arron auton\). Pilate weakly repeats his sarcasm: "{Your king shall I crucify?} (\Ton basilea humn staurs;\). {But Caesar} (\ei m kaisara\). The chief priests (\hoi archiereis\) were Sadducees, who had no Messianic hope like that of the Pharisees. Songs:to carry their point against Jesus they renounce the principle of the theocracy that God was their King (1Samuel:12:12|).

rwp@Luke:3:7 @{To the multitude that went out} (\tois exporeuomenois ochlois\). Plural, {Multitudes}. The present participle also notes the repetition of the crowds as does \elegen\ (imperfect), he used to say. strkjv@Matthew:3:7-10| singles out the message of John to the Pharisees and Sadducees, which see for discussion of details. Luke gives a summary of his preaching to the crowds with special replies to these inquiries: the multitudes, 10,11|, the publicans 12,13|, the soldiers 14|. {To be baptized of him} (\baptisthnai hup' autou\). This is the purpose of their coming. strkjv@Matthew:3:7| has simply "to his baptism." John's metaphors are from the wilderness (vipers, fruits, axe, slave boy loosing sandals, fire, fan, thrashing-floor, garner, chaff, stones). {Who warned you?} (\tis hepedeixen humin;\). The verb is like our "suggest" by proof to eye, ear, or brain (Luke:6:47; strkjv@12:5; strkjv@Acts:9:16; strkjv@20:35; strkjv@Matthew:3:7|). Nowhere else in the N.T. though common ancient word (\hupodeiknumi\, show under, point out, give a tip or private hint).

rwp@Luke:5:30 @{The Pharisees and their scribes} (\hoi Pharisaioi kai hoi grammateis autn\). Note article with each substantive and the order, not "scribes and Pharisees," but "the Pharisees and the scribes of them" (the Pharisees). Some manuscripts omit "their," but strkjv@Mark:2:16| (the scribes of the Pharisees) shows that it is correct here. Some of the scribes were Sadducees. It is only the Pharisees who find fault here. {Murmured} (\egogguzon\). Imperfect active. Picturesque onomatopoetic word that sounds like its meaning. A late word used of the cooing of doves. It is like the buzzing of bees, like \tonthorruz\ of literary Greek. They were not invited to this feast and would not have come if they had been. But, not being invited, they hang on the outside and criticize the disciples of Jesus for being there. The crowd was so large that the feast may have been served out in the open court at Levi's house, a sort of reclining garden party. {The publicans and sinners} (\tn telnn kai hamartln\). Here Luke is quoting the criticism of the critics. Note one article making one group of all of them.

rwp@Luke:6:24 @{But woe unto you that are rich} (\Pln ouai humin tois plousiois\). Sharp contrast (\pln\). As a matter of fact the rich Pharisees and Sadducees were the chief opposers of Christ as of the early disciples later (James:5:1-6|). {Ye have received} (\apechete\). Receipt in full \apech\ means as the papyri show. {Consolation} (\paraklsin\). From \parakale\, to call to one's side, to encourage, to help, to cheer.

rwp@Matthew:12:34 @{Ye offspring of vipers} (\gennmata echidnn\). These same terrible words the Baptist had used to the Pharisees and Sadducees who came to his baptism (Matthew:3:7|). But these Pharisees had deliberately made their choice and had taken Satan's side. The charge against Jesus of being in league with Satan reveals the evil heart within. The heart "spurts out" (\ekballei\) good or evil according to the supply (treasure, \thsaurou\) within. Verse 33| is like strkjv@Matthew:7:17-19|. Jesus often repeated his crisp pungent sayings as every teacher does.

rwp@Matthew:15:1 @{From Jerusalem} (\apo Ierosolumn\). Jerusalem is the headquarters of the conspiracy against Jesus with the Pharisees as the leaders in it. Already we have seen the Herodians combining with the Pharisees in the purpose to put Jesus to death (Mark:3:6; strkjv@Matthew:12:14; strkjv@Luke:6:11|). Soon Jesus will warn the disciples against the Sadducees also (Matthew:16:6|). Unusual order here, "Pharisees and scribes." "The guardians of tradition in the capital have their evil eye on Jesus and co-operate with the provincial rigorists" (Bruce), if the Pharisees were not all from Jerusalem.

rwp@Matthew:16:1 @{The Pharisees and Sadducees} (\hoi Pharisaioi kai Saddoukaioi\). The first time that we have this combination of the two parties who disliked each other exceedingly. Hate makes strange bedfellows. They hated Jesus more than they did each other. Their hostility has not decreased during the absence of Jesus, but rather increased. {Tempting him} (\peirazontes\). Their motive was bad. {A sign from heaven} (\smeion ek tou ouranou\). The scribes and Pharisees had already asked for a sign (12:38|). Now this new combination adds "from heaven." What did they have in mind? They may not have had any definite idea to embarrass Jesus. The Jewish apocalypses did speak of spectacular displays of power by the Son of Man (the Messiah). The devil had suggested that Jesus let the people see him drop down from the pinnacle of the temple and the people expected the Messiah to come from an unknown source (John:7:27|) who would do great signs (John:7:31|). Chrysostom (_Hom_. liii.) suggests stopping the course of the sun, bridling the moon, a clap of thunder.

rwp@Matthew:16:3 @{Lowring} (\stugnazn\). A sky covered with clouds. Used also of a gloomy countenance as of the rich young ruler in strkjv@Mark:10:22|. Nowhere else in the New Testament. This very sign of a rainy day we use today. The word for "foul weather" (\cheimn\) is the common one for winter and a storm. {The signs of the times} (\ta smeia tn kairn\). How little the Pharisees and Sadducees understood the situation. Soon Jerusalem would be destroyed and the Jewish state overturned. It is not always easy to discern (\diakrinein\, discriminate) the signs of our own time. Men are numerous with patent keys to it all. But we ought not to be blind when others are gullible.

rwp@Matthew:16:7 @{They reasoned} (\dielogizonto\). It was pathetic, the almost jejune inability of the disciples to understand the parabolic warning against "the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees" (verse 6|) after the collision of Christ just before with both parties in Magadan. They kept it up, imperfect tense. It is "loaves" (\artous\) rather than "bread."

rwp@Matthew:16:14 @{And they said} (\hoi de eipan\). They were ready to respond for they knew that popular opinion was divided on that point (14:1f.|). They give four different opinions. It is always a risky thing for a pastor to ask for people's opinions of him. But Jesus was not much concerned by their answers to this question. He knew by now that the Pharisees and Sadducees were bitterly hostile to him. The masses were only superficially following him and they looked for a political Messiah and had vague ideas about him. How much did the disciples understand and how far have they come in their development of faith? Are they still loyal?

rwp@Romans:2:3 @{And doest the same} (\kai poin auta\). "And doest them occasionally." {That thou shalt escape} (\su ekpheuxi\). Emphasis on \su\, "thou conceited Jew expecting to escape God's \krima\ because thou art a Jew." Cf. strkjv@Matthew:3:8f|. Paul justifies the bitter words of the Baptist to the Pharisees and Sadducees. The future middle of the old verb \ekpheug\ (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:3|). The Jew posed as immune to the ordinary laws of ethics because a Jew. Alas, some Christians affect the same immunity.