Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-HISTORY.filter - rwp against:


rwp@1Corinthians:12:3 @{Wherefore I give you to understand} (\dio gn“riz“ humin\). Causative idea (only in Aeschylus in old Greek) in papyri (also in sense of recognize) and N.T., from root \gn“\ in \gin“sk“\, to know. {Speaking in the Spirit of God} (\en pneumati theou lal“n\). Either sphere or instrumentality. No great distinction here between \lale“\ (utter sounds) and \leg“\ (to say). {Jesus is anathema} (\anathema Iˆsous\). On distinction between \anathema\ (curse) and \anathˆma\ (offering strkjv@Luke:21:5|) see discussion there. In LXX \anathˆma\ means a thing devoted to God without being redeemed, doomed to destruction (Leviticus:27:28f.; strkjv@Joshua:6:17; strkjv@7:12|). See strkjv@1Corinthians:16:22; strkjv@Galatians:1:8f.; strkjv@Romans:9:3|. This blasphemous language against Jesus was mainly by the Jews (Acts:13:45; strkjv@18:6|). It is even possible that Paul had once tried to make Christians say \Anathema Iˆsous\ (Acts:26:11|). {Jesus is Lord} (\Kurios Iˆsous\). The term \Kurios\, as we have seen, is common in the LXX for God. The Romans used it freely for the emperor in the emperor worship. "Most important of all is the early establishment of a polemical parallelism between the cult of Christ and the cult of Caesar in the application of the term \Kurios\, 'lord.' The new texts have here furnished quite astonishing revelations" (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 349). Inscriptions, ostraca, papyri apply the term to Roman emperors, particularly to Nero when Paul wrote this very letter (_ib._, p. 353f.): "One with 'Nero Kurios' quite in the manner of a formula (without article, like the 'Kurios Jesus' in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3|." "The battle-cries of the spirits of error and of truth contending at Corinth" (Findlay). One is reminded of the demand made by Polycarp that he say \Kurios Caesar\ and how each time he replied \Kurios Iˆsous\. He paid the penalty for his loyalty with his life. Lighthearted men today can say "Lord Jesus" in a flippant or even in an irreverent way, but no Jew or Gentile then said it who did not mean it.

rwp@1Corinthians:12:14 @{Is not one member} (\ouk estin hen melos\). The point sounds like a truism, but it is the key to the whole problem of church life both local and general. Vincent refers to the fable of the body and the members by Menenius Agrippa (Livy, II, 32), but it was an old parable. Socrates pointed out how absurd it would be if feet and hands should work against one another when God made them to cooperate (Xen., _Mem_. II. iii. 18). Seneca alludes to it as does Marcus Aurelius and Marcus Antoninus.

rwp@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:2:5 @{When I was yet with you} (\eti “n pros humas\). The present participle takes the time of the verb \elegon\ (imperfect active), {I used to tell you these things}. Songs:Paul recalls their memory of his words and leaves us without the clue to his idea. We know that one of the charges against him was that Jesus was another king, a rival to Caesar (Acts:17:7|). That leads one to wonder how far Paul went when there in contrasting the kingdom of the world of which Rome was ruler and the kingdom of God of which Christ is king. Frame notes Paul's abrupt question here "with an unfinished sentence behind him" (verses 3f.|), even "with a trace of impatience."

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:13 @{But ye, brethren, be not weary in well-doing} (\humeis de, adelphoi, mˆ enkakˆsˆte kalopoiountes\). Emphatic position of \humeis\ in contrast to these piddlers. \Mˆ\ and the aorist subjunctive is a prohibition against beginning an act (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 851-4). It is a late verb and means to behave badly in, to be cowardly, to lose courage, to flag, to faint, (\en, kakos\) and outside of strkjv@Luke:18:1| in the N.T. is only in Paul's Epistles (2Thessalonians:3:13; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:1,16; strkjv@Galatians:6:9; strkjv@Ephesians:3:13|). It occurs in Polybius. The late verb \kalopoie“\, to do the fair (\kalos\) or honourable thing occurs nowhere else in the N.T., but is in the LXX and a late papyrus. Paul uses \to kalon poiein\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:7; strkjv@Galatians:6:9; strkjv@Romans:7:21| with the same idea. He has \agathopoie“\, to do good, in strkjv@1Timothy:6:18|.

rwp@2Timothy:1:12 @{These things} (\tauta\). His imprisonment in Rome. {Yet I am not ashamed} (\all' ouk epaischunomai\). Plain reference to the exhortation to Timothy in verse 8|. {Him whom I have believed} (\h“i pepisteuka\). Dative case of the relative (\h“i\) with the perfect active of \pisteu“\, the antecedent to the relative not expressed. It is not an indirect question. Paul knows Jesus Christ whom he has trusted. {I am persuaded} (\pepeismai\). See verse 5|. {To guard} (\phulaxai\). First aorist active infinitive of \phulass“\, the very word used in strkjv@1Timothy:6:20| with \parathˆkˆn\ as here, to guard against robbery or any loss. {That which I have committed unto him} (\tˆn parathˆkˆn mou\). Literally, "my deposit," as in a bank, the bank of heaven which no burglar can break (Matthew:6:19f.|). See this word also in verse 14|. Some MSS. have the more common \parakatathˆkˆ\ (a sort of double deposit, \para\, beside, down, \kata\). {Against that day} (\eis ekeinˆn tˆn hˆmeran\). The day of Christ's second coming. See also strkjv@1:18; strkjv@4:8; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:10|, and often in the Gospels. Elsewhere, the day of the Lord (1Thessalonians:5:2; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:14|), the day of Christ or Jesus Christ (Phillipians:1:6,10; strkjv@2:16|), the day (1Thessalonians:5:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:13; strkjv@Romans:13:12|), the day of redemption (Ephesians:4:20|), the day of judgment (Romans:2:5,16|).

rwp@2Timothy:2:9 @{Wherein} (\en h“i\). In my gospel. {I suffer hardship} (\kakopath“\). "I suffer evil." Old compound (\kakon, pasch“\), elsewhere in N.T., strkjv@4:5; strkjv@James:5:13|. {Unto bonds} (\mechri desm“n\). "Up to bonds." A common experience with Paul (2Corinthians:11:23; strkjv@Phillipians:1:7,13,14; strkjv@Colossians:4:18|). {As a malefactor} (\h“s kakourgos\), old compound (\kakon, erg“\, doer of evil), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:23:32ff.| (of the robbers). One of the charges made against Paul. {Is not bound} (\ou dedetai\). Perfect passive indicative of \de“\, to bind. Old verb. See strkjv@1Corinthians:7:27,39; strkjv@Romans:7:2|. I am bound with a chain, but no fetters are on the word of God (Pauline phrase; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:13; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:36; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:17; strkjv@Phillipians:1:14; strkjv@Titus:2:5|).

rwp@2Timothy:3:8 @{Like as} (\hon tropon\). "In which manner." Adverbial accusative and incorporation of the antecedent \tropon\ into the relative clause. {Jannes and Jambres} (\Iannˆs kai Iambrˆs\). Traditional names of the magicians who withstood Moses (_Targum of Jonathan_ on strkjv@Exodus:7:11|). {Withstood} (\antestˆsan\). Second aorist active (intransitive) of \anthistˆmi\, to stand against, "they stood against" (with dative \M“usei\). Same word used of Elymas in strkjv@Acts:13:8| and repeated here \anthistantai\ (present middle indicative). Paul here pictures the seducers of the \gunaikaria\ above. {Corrupted in mind} (\katephtharmenoi ton noun\). Perfect passive participle of \kataphtheir“\, old compound, in N.T. only here in critical text. See strkjv@2Corinthians:11:3; strkjv@1Timothy:6:5| for \diaphtheir“\. The accusative \noun\ is retained in the passive. {Reprobate} (\adokimoi\). See strkjv@1Corinthians:9:27; strkjv@Titus:1:16|. They had renounced their trust (\pistin\) in Christ.

rwp@2Timothy:4:15 @{Be thou ware also} (\kai su phulassou\). Present middle (direct) imperative of \phulass“\, "from whom keep thyself away." {Withstood} (\antestˆ\). Second aorist active indicative of \anthistˆmi\, "stood against my words." See strkjv@3:8; strkjv@Galatians:2:11|.

rwp@3John:1:7 @{For the sake of the Name} (\huper tou onomatos\). The name of Jesus. See strkjv@Acts:5:4; strkjv@Romans:1:5| for \huper tou onomatos\ and strkjv@James:2:7| for the absolute use of "the name" as in strkjv@1Peter:4:16|. "This name is in essence the sum of the Christian creed" (Westcott) as in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3; strkjv@Romans:10:9|. It is like the absolute use of "the Way" (Acts:9:2; strkjv@19:9,23; strkjv@24:22|). {Taking nothing} (\mˆden lambanontes\). Present active participle with the usual negative with participles (1John:2:4|). {Of the Gentiles} (\apo t“n ethnik“n\). Instead of the usual \ethn“n\ (Luke:2:32|), late adjective for what is peculiar to a people (\ethnos\) and then for the people themselves (Polybius, Diodorus, not in LXX), in N.T. only here, strkjv@Matthew:5:47; strkjv@6:7; strkjv@18:17|. Like our heathen, pagan. John is anxious that Christian missionaries receive nothing from the heathen, as our missionaries have to watch against the charge of being after money. There were many travelling lecturers out for money. Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:9| defends the right of preachers to pay, but refuses himself to accept it from Corinth because it would be misunderstood (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:6ff.; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:16ff. strkjv@12:16ff.|). Note \apo\ here as in collecting taxes (Matthew:17:25|) rather than \para\, which may be suggestive.

rwp@3John:1:9 @{I wrote somewhat unto the church} (\egrapsa ti tˆi ekklˆsiƒi\). A few MSS. add \an\ to indicate that he had not written (conclusion of second-class condition), clearly spurious. Not epistolary aorist nor a reference to II John as Findlay holds, but an allusion to a brief letter of commendation (Acts:18:27; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:1; strkjv@Colossians:4:10|) sent along with the brethren in verses 5-7| or to some other itinerant brethren. Westcott wrongly thinks that \ti\ is never used of anything important in the N.T. (Acts:8:9; strkjv@Galatians:6:3|), and hence that this lost letter was unimportant. It may have been brief and a mere introduction. \Diotrephes\ (\Dios\ and \treph“\, nourished by Zeus). This ambitious leader and sympathiser with the Gnostics would probably prevent the letter referred to being read to the church, whether it was II John condemning the Gnostics or another letter commending Demetrius and John's missionaries. Hence he sends Gaius this personal letter warning against Diotrephes. {Who loveth to have the preeminence among them} (\ho philopr“teu“n aut“n\). Present active articular participle of a late verb, so far found only here and in ecclesiastical writers (the example cited by Blass being an error, Deissmann, _Light_ etc., p. 76), from \philopr“tos\, fond of being first (Plutarch), and made like \philopone“\ (papyri), to be fond of toil. This ambition of Diotrephes does not prove that he was a bishop over elders, as was true in the second century (as Ignatius shows). He may have been an elder (bishop) or deacon, but clearly desired to rule the whole church. Some forty years ago I wrote an article on Diotrephes for a denominational paper. The editor told me that twenty-five deacons stopped the paper to show their resentment against being personally attacked in the paper. {Receiveth us not} (\ouk epidechetai hˆmƒs\). Present active indicative of this old compound, in N.T. only here and verse 10|. Diotrephes refused to accept John's authority or those who sided with him, John's missionaries or delegates (cf. strkjv@Matthew:10:40|).

rwp@3John:1:10 @{If I come} (\ean elth“\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\. He hopes to come (verse 14|), as he had said in strkjv@2John:1:12| (one argument for identifying II John with the letter in strkjv@3John:1:9|). {I will bring to remembrance} (\hupomnˆs“\). Future active indicative of \hupomimnˆsk“\, old compound (John:14:26; strkjv@2Peter:1:12|). The aged apostle is not afraid of Diotrephes and here defies him. {Which he doeth} (\ha poiei\). Present active indicative, "which he keeps on doing." {Prating against us} (\phluar“n hˆmƒs\). Present active participle of old verb (from \phluaros\, babbling strkjv@1Timothy:5:13|), to accuse idly and so falsely, here only in N.T. with accusative \hˆmƒs\ (us). {With wicked words} (\logois ponˆrois\). Instrumental case. Not simply foolish chatter, but malevolent words. {Not content} (\mˆ arkoumenos\). Present passive participle of \arke“\ with usual negative \mˆ\. For this verb in this sense see strkjv@1Timothy:6:8; strkjv@Hebrews:13:5|, only there \epi\ is absent. John knows that the conduct of Diotrephes will not stand the light. See Paul's threats of exposure (1Corinthians:4:21; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:11; strkjv@13:1-3|). And John is the apostle of love all the same. {He himself} (\autos\). That was bad enough. {Them that would} (\tous boulomenous\). "Those willing or wishing or receive the brethren" from John. {He forbiddeth} (\k“luei\). "He hinders." Present active indicative of \k“lu“\ and means either actual success in one case (punctiliar use of the present indicative) or repetition in several instances (linear action) or conative action attempted, but not successful as in strkjv@Matthew:3:14| (this same verb) and strkjv@John:10:32|. {Casteth them out of the church} (\ek tˆs ekklˆsias ekballei\). Here again \ekballei\ can be understood in various ways, like \k“luei\. This verb occurs in strkjv@John:2:15| for casting out of the temple the profaners of it and for casting the blind man out of the synagogue (John:9:34f.|). If this ancient "church-boss" did not succeed in expelling John's adherents from the church, he certainly tried to do it.

rwp@Info_Acts @ LUKE THE AUTHOR It ought to be possible to assume this as a fact since the work of Ramsay and Harnack on various phases of the problems concerning the Acts. Harnack, in particular, has covered the ground with his accustomed thoroughness and care in his two volumes (_The Acts of the Apostles_, English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1909; _The Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_, English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1911). Ramsay's view may be found in Chapter I of _St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen_, Chapter XII of _Pauline and Other Studies_. A good summary of the matter appears in Part V of _The Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts_ by Dr. D. A. Hayes, in Robertson's _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_, and in the introduction to the various commentaries by Knowling, Rackham, Furneaux, Rendall, Hackett, Meyer-Wendt, Zahn, Blass, Campbell-Morgan, Stokes. In Part I of _The Acts of the Apostles_, Vol. II of _The Beginnings of Christianity_, edited by Foakes-Jackson and Kirsopp Lake both sides are ably presented: _The Case for the Tradition_ by C. W. Emmet, _The Case against the Tradition_ by H. Windisch. _The Internal Evidence of Acts_ is discussed by the Editors, Foakes-Jackson and Lake, with an adverse conclusion against Luke. Henry J. Cadbury surveys _The Tradition_ (the external evidence) and draws a negative conclusion likewise on the ground that the early writers who ascribe Acts to Luke were not critical scholars. A similar position is taken by Cadbury in his more recent volume, _The Making of Luke--Acts_ (1927). But all the same the traditional view that Luke is the author of the Acts holds the field with those who are not prejudiced against it. The view of Baur that Acts is a _Tendenz_ writing for the purpose of healing the breach between Peter and Paul and showing that the two factions came together had great influence for a while. In fact both Ramsay and Harnack at first held it. Ramsay broke away first and he was followed by Harnack. Both were influenced to change their views by the accumulation of evidence to the effect that the author of both the Gospel and Acts is Luke the Physician and Friend of Paul. Part of this evidence has already been given in the Introduction to the Gospel according to Luke.

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE DATE There are three views about the date of the Acts. Baur and his Tubingen School held the second century to be the date of this late pamphlet as they termed it after the fashion of the Clementine Homilies. But that view is now practically abandoned save by the few who still strangely oppose the Lukan authorship. Probably the majority of those who accept the Lukan authorship place it in the latter part of the first century for two reasons. One is that the Gospel according to Luke is dated by them after the destruction of Jerusalem because of the prophecy by Jesus of the encompassing of the city by armies. Predictive prophecy that would be and so it is considered a prophecy _post eventum_. The other reason is the alleged use of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus by Luke. Josephus finished this work A.D. 93 so that, if Luke did use it, he must have written the Acts after that date. Usually this argument is made to show that Luke could not have written it at all, but some hold that he may have lived to an age that would allow it. But it cannot be assumed that Luke used Josephus because of his mention of Theudas and Judas the Galilean. They differ so widely (Acts:5:36f|. and Josephus, _Ant_. XX. v, 1, 2) that Von Dobschutz (_Dictionary of the Apostolic Church_, art. Josephus) argues that the two accounts are entirely independent of each other. Songs:Luke (Luke:13:1f.|) alludes to a Galilean revolt not mentioned by Josephus and Josephus records three revolts under Pilate not referred to by Luke. A comparison of the accounts of the death of Agrippa I in strkjv@Acts:12:20-23| and _Ant_. XIX. viii, 2 redounds to the credit of Luke. The Josephus phase of the argument may be brushed to one side. The third view, held by Harnack and adopted here, is that Luke wrote the Acts while with Paul in Rome and finished the book before Paul's release, that is by A.D. 63. This is the obvious and natural way to take the language of Luke at the close of Acts. Events had gone no farther and so he ends the narrative right there. It is argued against this that Luke contemplated a third volume and for this reason closed with the arrival of Paul in Rome. But the use of \pr“ton\ (first) in strkjv@Acts:1:1| is a common _Koin‚_ idiom and does not imply three volumes any more than first and second stories with us means that the house has three. Of course this date for the Acts puts the date of the Gospel further back either in Caesarea (57 to 59) or in Rome (60 to 62). And that means that Mark's Gospel is still earlier since Luke used it for his Gospel and the Logia (Q) earlier still. But all these dates are probable in the light of all the known facts.

rwp@Acts:1:12 @{Olivet} (\Elai“nos\). Genitive singular. Vulgate _Olivetum_. Made like \ampel“n\. Here only in the N.T., usually \to oros t“n Elai“n\ (the Mount of Olives), though some MSS. have Olivet in strkjv@Luke:19:29; strkjv@21:37|. Josephus (_Ant_. VII. 9, 2) has it also and the papyri (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 170). {A sabbath day's journey off} (\Sabbatou ech“n hodon\). Luke only says here that Olivet is a Sabbath day's journey from Jerusalem, not that Jesus was precisely that distance when he ascended. In the Gospel Luke (24:50|) states that Jesus led them "over against" (\he“s pros\) Bethany (about two miles or fifteen furlongs). The top of Olivet is six furlongs or three-fourths of a mile. The Greek idiom here is "having a journey of a Sabbath" after "which is nigh unto Jerusalem" (\ho estin eggus Ierousalˆm\), note the periphrastic construction. Why Luke mentions this item for Gentile readers in this form is not known, unless it was in his Jewish source. See strkjv@Exodus:16:29; strkjv@Numbers:35:5; strkjv@Joshua:3:4|. But it does not contradict what he says in strkjv@Luke:24:50|, where he does not say that Jesus led them all the way to Bethany.

rwp@Acts:2:38 @{Repent ye} (\metanoˆsate\). First aorist (ingressive) active imperative. Change your mind and your life. Turn right about and do it now. You _crucified_ this Jesus. Now _crown_ him in your hearts as Lord and Christ. This first. {And be baptized every one of you} (\kai baptisthˆt“ hekastos h–m“n\). Rather, "And let each one of you be baptized." Change of number from plural to singular and of person from second to third. This change marks a break in the thought here that the English translation does not preserve. The first thing to do is make a radical and complete change of heart and life. Then let each one be baptized after this change has taken place, and the act of baptism be performed "in the name of Jesus Christ" (\en t“i onomati Iˆsou Christou\). In accordance with the command of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| (\eis to onoma\). No distinction is to be insisted on between \eis to onoma\ and \en t“i onomati\ with \baptiz“\ since \eis\ and \en\ are really the same word in origin. In strkjv@Acts:10:48| \en t“i onomati Iˆsou Christou\ occurs, but \eis\ to \onoma\ in strkjv@8:16; strkjv@19:5|. The use of \onoma\ means in the name or with the authority of one as \eis onoma prophˆtou\ (Matthew:10:41|) as a prophet, in the name of a prophet. In the Acts the full name of the Trinity does not occur in baptism as in strkjv@Matthew:28:19|, but this does not show that it was not used. The name of Jesus Christ is the distinctive one in Christian baptism and really involves the Father and the Spirit. See on ¯Matthew:28:19| for discussion of this point. "Luke does not give the form of words used in baptism by the Apostles, but merely states the fact that they baptized those who acknowledged Jesus as Messiah or as Lord" (Page). {Unto the remission of your sins} (\eis aphesin t“n hamarti“n h–m“n\). This phrase is the subject of endless controversy as men look at it from the standpoint of sacramental or of evangelical theology. In themselves the words can express aim or purpose for that use of \eis\ does exist as in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7| \eis doxan hˆm“n\ (for our glory). But then another usage exists which is just as good Greek as the use of \eis\ for aim or purpose. It is seen in strkjv@Matthew:10:41| in three examples \eis onoma prophˆtou, dikaiou, mathˆtou\ where it cannot be purpose or aim, but rather the basis or ground, on the basis of the name of prophet, righteous man, disciple, because one is, etc. It is seen again in strkjv@Matthew:12:41| about the preaching of Jonah (\eis to kˆrugma I“na\). They repented because of (or at) the preaching of Jonah. The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the _Koin‚_ generally (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 592). One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. Songs:I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received. {The gift of the Holy Ghost} (\tˆn d“rean tou hagiou pneumatos\). The gift consists (Acts:8:17|) in the Holy Spirit (genitive of identification).

rwp@Acts:4:1 @{The captain of the temple} (\ho stratˆgos 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 (\stratˆgos\). 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} (\epestˆsan 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:4:6 @{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:4:14 @{They could say nothing against it} (\ouden eichon anteipein\). Imperfect again, they kept on having nothing to say against it. The lame man was standing there before their eyes in proof of what Peter had said.

rwp@Acts:4:26 @{Set themselves in array} (\parestˆsan\). Literally, stood by. {Against his Anointed} (\kata tou Christou autou\). Against his Messiah, his Christ.

rwp@Acts:5:16 @{Came together} (\sunˆrcheto\). Imperfect middle, kept on coming. {Round about} (\perix\). Old adverb, strengthened form of \peri\, only here in the N.T. {Vexed} (\ochloumenous\). Present passive participle of \ochle“\, to excite a mob (\ochlos\) against one, to trouble, annoy. Old word, only here in the N.T., though \enochle“\ in strkjv@Luke:6:18|. {Were healed every one} (\etherapeuonto hapantes\). Imperfect passive, were healed one at a time, repetition.

rwp@Acts:5:34 @{Gamaliel} (\Gamaliˆl\). 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 t“i la“i\). Ethical dative. \Timios\ from \timˆ\, old word meaning precious, dear. {The men} (\tous anthr“pous\). Correct text as in verse 35|, not "the apostles" as Textus Receptus.

rwp@Acts:5:39 @{But if it is of God} (\ei de ek theou estin\). The second alternative is a condition of the first class, determined as fulfilled, \ei\ with the present indicative. By the use of this idiom Gamaliel does put the case more strongly in favor of the apostles than against them. This condition _assumes_ that the thing is so without _affirming_ it to be true. On the basis of this alternative Gamaliel warns the Sanhedrin that they cannot "overthrow" (\katalusai\) these men for they in that case must "overthrow" God, {lest haply ye be found} (\mˆ pote--hurethˆte\, negative purpose with first aorist passive subjunctive) {even to be fighting against God} (\kai theomachoi\, late adjective from \theos\ and \machomai\, in LXX and here only in the N.T.).

rwp@Acts:5:40 @{To him they agreed} (\epeisthˆsan aut“i\). 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} (\mˆ 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:6:1 @{When the number of the disciples was multiplying} (\plˆthunont“n t“n mathˆt“n\). Genitive absolute of \plˆthun“\, old verb from \plˆthos\, fulness, to increase. The new freedom from the intercession of Gamaliel was bearing rich fruit. {A murmuring of the Grecian Jews} (\goggusmos t“n Hellˆnist“n\). Late onomatopoetic word (LXX) from the late verb \gogguz“\, to mutter, to murmur. The substantive occurs also in strkjv@John:7:12; strkjv@Phillipians:2:14; strkjv@1Peter:4:9|. It is the secret grumblings that buzz away till they are heard. These "Grecian Jews" or Hellenists are members of the church in Jerusalem who are Jews from outside of Palestine like Barnabas from Cyprus. These Hellenists had points of contact with the Gentile world without having gone over to the habits of the Gentiles, the Jews of the Western Dispersion. They spoke Greek. {Against the Hebrews} (\pros tous Ebraious\). The Jewish Christians from Jerusalem and Palestine. The Aramaean Jews of the Eastern Dispersion are usually classed with the Hebrew (speaking Aramaic) as distinct from the Grecian Jews or Hellenists. {Were neglected} (\parethe“rounto\). Imperfect passive of \parathe“re“\, old verb, to examine things placed beside (\para\) each other, to look beyond (\para\ also), to overlook, to neglect. Here only in the N.T. These widows may receive daily (\kathˆmerinˆi\, late adjective from \kath' hˆmeran\, only here in the N.T.) help from the common fund provided for all who need it (Acts:4:32-37|). The temple funds for widows were probably not available for those who have now become Christians. Though they were all Christians here concerned, yet the same line of cleavage existed as among the other Jews (Hebrew or Aramaean Jews and Hellenists). It is not here said that the murmuring arose among the widows, but because of them. Women and money occasion the first serious disturbance in the church life. There was evident sensitiveness that called for wisdom.

rwp@Acts:6:10 @{They were not able to withstand} (\ouk ischuon antistˆnai\). Imperfect active of \ischu“\, to have strength, and ingressive second aorist active (intransitive) infinitive of \anthistˆmi\. They continued unable (without strength enough) to take a stand against. Stephen knocked them down, Saul included, as fast as they got up. Stephen was like a battery charged and in action. {The wisdom and spirit} (\tˆi sophiƒi kai pneumati\). Dative case. They stood up against Stephen's wisdom and the Holy Spirit "by whom he spoke" (\h“i elalei\). Instrumental case and the relative agrees with "Spirit." He kept on speaking so (\elalei\, imperfect active). It was a desperate situation.

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} (\blasphˆma eis M“usˆn kai ton theon\). The punishment for blasphemy was stoning to death. See strkjv@Matthew:12:31| for discussion of the word \blasphˆmia, blasphˆme“, blasphˆmos\, all in the N.T. from \blapt“\, to harm, and \phˆmˆ\, speech, harmful speech, or \blax\, stupid, and \phˆmˆ\. 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} (\sunekinˆsan 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 \ephistˆmi\. Rushed at him. {Seized} (\sunˆrpasan\). Effective aorist active of \sunarpaz“\ as if they caught him after pursuit.

rwp@Acts:6:13 @{False witnesses} (\marturas pseudeis\). Just as Caiaphas did with Jesus. {Ceaseth not} (\ou pauetai\). Wild charge just like a false witness that Stephen talks in the synagogues against the law and the holy temple.

rwp@Acts:6:14 @{We have heard him say} (\akˆkoamen autou legontos\). The only direct testimony and evidently wrong. Curiously like the charge brought against Jesus before Caiaphas that he would destroy the temple and build it again in three days. Undoubtedly Stephen had said something about Christianity before as meant for others besides Jews. He had caught the spirit of Jesus about worship as shown to the woman at Sychar in strkjv@John:4| that God is spirit and to be worshipped by men anywhere and everywhere without having to come to the temple in Jerusalem. It was inflammable material surely and it was easy to misrepresent and hard to clear up. {This Jesus of Nazareth} (\Iˆsous ho Naz“raios houtos\). With contempt.

rwp@Acts:6:15 @{As if the face of an angel} (\h“sei pros“pon aggelou\). Even his enemies saw that, wicked as they were. See strkjv@Exodus:34:30| for the face of Moses when he came down from Sinai (2Corinthians:3:7|). Page quotes Tennyson: "God's glory smote him on the face." Where were Peter and John at this crisis? Apparently Stephen stands alone before the Sanhedrin as Jesus did. But he was not alone for he saw Jesus standing at the right hand of God (Acts:7:56|). There was little that Peter and John could have done if they had been present. Gamaliel did not interpose this time for the Pharisees were behind the charges against Stephen, false though they were as Gamaliel could have found out.

rwp@Acts:7:1 @{Are these things so?} (\ei tauta hout“s 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:7:2 @{Brethren and fathers} (\andres adelphoi kai pateres\). The spectators (brethren) and members of the Sanhedrin (fathers) as Paul in strkjv@Acts:22:1|. {Hearken} (\akousate\). First aorist (ingressive) active imperative, Give me your attention now. {The God of glory} (\Hosea:theos tˆs doxˆs\). The God characterized by glory (genitive case, genus or kind) as seen in the Shekinah, the visible radiance of God. Jesus is also called "the Glory"=the Shekinah in strkjv@James:2:1|. Cf. strkjv@Exodus:25:22; strkjv@40:34; strkjv@Leviticus:9:6; strkjv@Hebrews:9:5|. By these words Stephen refutes the charge of blasphemy against God in strkjv@Acts:6:11|. {Appeared} (\“phthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \hora“\. See on ¯Luke:23:43|. Before there was temple or tabernacle and away over in Mesopotamia (Ur of the Chaldees, strkjv@Genesis:11:31|), even before (\prin ˆ\ with the infinitive) he dwelt in Haran (\Charran\, or Carrae not far from Edessa, where Crassus met death after his defeat by the Parthians B.C. 53).

rwp@Acts:7:19 @{Dealt subtilly} (\katasophisamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \katasophizomai\, late compound (\kata\ and \sophiz“\, old verb, to make wise, to become wise, then to play the sophist), perfective use of \kata\. In the LXX, but here only in the N.T. To use fraud, craft, deceit. {That they should cast out their babes} (\tou poiein ta brephˆ ektheta\). \Tou poiein\ (genitive of the articular present infinitive) can be either design or result. The Revised Version here takes it as purpose while the Authorized as result. In either case Pharaoh required the Israelites to expose their children to death, a possible practice done voluntarily in heathen China and by heathen in so-called Christian lands. But the Israelites fought against such an iniquity. The word \ektheta\ (exposed, cast out) is a verbal adjective from \ektithˆmi\. It is an old word, but here only in the N.T. and not in the LXX. {To the end they might not live} (\eis to mˆ z“ogoneisthai\). Purpose with \eis\ and the articular infinitive (present middle). This compound verb is from \z“ogonos\ (from \z“os\, alive, and \gen“\, to bear) and is used by late writers and the LXX. It is three times in the N.T. (here, strkjv@Luke:17:33; strkjv@1Timothy:6:13|) in the sense to preserve alive.

rwp@Acts:7:35 @{This Moses} (\Touton ton M“usˆn\). Rhetorical repetition follows this description of Moses (five times, anaphora, besides the use here, six cases of \houtos\ here about Moses: verse 35| twice, 36,37,38,40|). Clearly Stephen means to draw a parallel between Moses and Jesus. They in Egypt {denied} (\ˆrnˆsanto\) Moses as now you the Jews denied (\ˆrnˆsasthe\, strkjv@3:13|) Jesus. Those in Egypt scouted Moses as "ruler and judge" (verses 27,35|, \archonta kai dikastˆn\) and God "hath sent" (\apestalken\, perfect active indicative, state of completion) Moses "both a ruler and a deliverer" (\archonta kai lutr“tˆn\) as Jesus was to be (Luke:1:68; strkjv@2:38; strkjv@Hebrews:9:12; strkjv@Titus:2:14|). "Ransomer" or "Redeemer" (\lutr“tˆs\) is not found elsewhere, \lutron\ (ransom), \lutro“\, to ransom, and \lutr“sis\, ransoming or redemption, are found often. In strkjv@Acts:5:31| Christ is termed "Prince and Saviour." {With the hand} (\sun cheiri\). Songs:the correct text. The Pharisees had accused Stephen of blaspheming "against Moses and God" (6:11|). Stephen here answers that slander by showing how Moses led the people out of Egypt in co-operation (\sun\) with the hand of the Angel of Jehovah.

rwp@Acts:7:51 @{Stiffnecked} (\sklˆrotrachˆloi\). From \sklˆros\ (hard) and \trachˆlos\, neck, both old words, but this compound only in the LXX and here alone in the N.T. Critics assume that Stephen was interrupted at this point because of the sharp tone of the speech. That may be true, but the natural climax is sufficient explanation. {Uncircumcised in heart} (\aperitmˆtoi kardiais\). Late adjective common in LXX and here only in the N.T. Verbal of \peritemn“\, to cut around and \a\ privative. Both of these epithets are applied to the Jews in the O.T. (Exodus:32:9; strkjv@33:3,5; strkjv@34:9; strkjv@Leviticus:26:41; strkjv@Deuteronomy:9:6; strkjv@Jeremiah:6:10|). \Kardiais\ is locative plural like \“sin\ (ears), but some MSS. have genitive singular \kardias\ (objective genitive). No epithet could have been more galling to these Pharisees than to be turned "uncircumcised in heart" (Romans:2:29|). They had only the physical circumcision which was useless. {Ye always} (\humeis aei\). Emphatic position of humeis and "always" looks backward over the history of their forefathers which Stephen had reviewed. {Resist} (\antipiptete\). Old word to fall against, to rush against. Only here in the N.T., but used in the O.T. which is here quoted (Numbers:27:14|). Their fathers had made "external worship a substitute for spiritual obedience" (Furneaux). Stephen has shown how God had revealed himself gradually, the revelation sloping upward to Christ Jesus. "And as he saw his countrymen repeating the old mistake--clinging to the present and the material, while God was calling them to higher spiritual levels--and still, as ever, resisting the Holy Spirit, treating the Messiah as the patriarchs had treated Joseph, and the Hebrews Moses--the pity of it overwhelmed him, and his mingled grief and indignation broke out in words of fire, such as burned of old on the lips of the prophets" (Furneaux). Stephen, the accused, is now the accuser, and the situation becomes intolerable to the Sanhedrin.

rwp@Acts:7:57 @{Stopped their ears} (\suneschon ta “ta aut“n\). Second aorist active of \sunech“\, to hold together. They held their ears together with their hands and affected to believe Stephen guilty of blasphemy (cf. strkjv@Matthew:26:65|). {Rushed upon him with one accord} (\h“rmˆsan homothumadon ep' auton\). Ingressive aorist active indicative of \horma“\, to rush impetuously as the hogs did down the cliff when the demons entered them (Luke:8:33|). No vote was taken by the Sanhedrin. No scruple was raised about not having the right to put him to death (John:8:31|). It may have taken place after Pilate's recall and before his successor came or Pilate, if there, just connived at such an incident that did not concern Rome. At any rate it was mob violence like modern lynching that took the law into the hands of the Sanhedrin without further formalities. {Out of the city} (\ek tˆs pole“s\). To keep from defiling the place with blood. But they sought to kill Paul as soon as they got him out of the temple area (Acts:21:30f.|). {Stoned} (\elithoboloun\). Imperfect active indicative of \lithobole“\, began to stone, from \lithobolos\ (\lithos\, stone, \ball“\, to throw), late Greek verb, several times in the N.T. as strkjv@Luke:13:34|. Stoning was the Jewish punishment for blasphemy (Leviticus:24:14-16|). {The witnesses} (\hoi martures\). The false testifiers against Stephen suborned by the Pharisees (Acts:6:11,13|). These witnesses had the privilege of casting the first stones (Deuteronomy:13:10; strkjv@17:7|) against the first witness for Christ with death (_martyr_ in our modern sense of the word). {At the feet of a young man named Saul} (\para tous podas neaniou kaloumenou Saulou\). Beside (\para\) the feet. Our first introduction to the man who became the greatest of all followers of Jesus Christ. Evidently he was not one of the "witnesses" against Stephen, for he was throwing no stones at him. But evidently he was already a leader in the group of Pharisees. We know from later hints from Saul (Paul) himself that he had been a pupil of Gamaliel (Acts:22:3|). Gamaliel, as the Pharisaic leader in the Sanhedrin, was probably on hand to hear the accusations against Stephen by the Pharisees. But, if so, he does not raise his voice against this mob violence. Saul does not seem to be aware that he is going contrary to the views of his master, though pupils often go further than their teachers.

rwp@Acts:7:60 @{Kneeled down} (\theis ta gonata\). Second aorist active participle of \tithˆmi\, placing the knees (on the ground). This idiom is not in the old Greek for kneeling, but Luke has it five times (Luke:22:41; strkjv@Acts:7:60; strkjv@9:40; strkjv@22:36; strkjv@21:5|) and Mark once (15:19|). Jesus was standing at the right hand of God and Stephen knelt before him in worship and called on him in prayer. {Lay not this sin to their charge} (\mˆ stˆsˆis autois tautˆn tˆn hamartian\). First aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive with \mˆ\, regular Greek idiom, Place not to them or against them (dative \autois\) this sin. The very spirit of Jesus towards his enemies as he died upon the Cross (Luke:23:34|). {He fell asleep} (\ekoimˆthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \koima“\, to put to sleep. Old verb and the metaphor of sleep for death is common in all languages, but it is peculiarly appropriate here as Jesus used it of Lazarus. See also strkjv@Acts:13:36; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:18|, etc. Our word cemetery (\koimˆtˆrion\) is the sleeping place of the dead. Knowling calls \ekoimˆthˆ\ here "a picture word of rest and calmness which stands in dramatic contrast to the rage and violence of the scene."

rwp@Acts:8:4 @{They therefore} (\hoi men oun\). Demonstrative \hoi\ as often (1:6|, etc.) though it will make sense as the article with the participle \diasparentes\. The general statement is made here by \men\ and a particular instance (\de\) follows in verse 5|. The inferential particle (\oun\) points back to verse 3|, the persecution by young Saul and the Pharisees. Jesus had commanded the disciples not to depart from Jerusalem till they received the Promise of the Father (1:4|), but they had remained long after that and were not carrying the gospel to the other peoples (1:8|). Now they were pushed out by Saul and began as a result to carry out the Great Commission for world conquest, that is those "scattered abroad" (\diasparentes\, second aorist passive participle of \diaspeir“\). This verb means disperse, to sow in separate or scattered places (\dia\) and so to drive people hither and thither. Old and very common verb, especially in the LXX, but in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:8:1,4; strkjv@11:19|. {Went about} (\diˆlthon\). Constative second aorist active of \dierchomai\, to go through (from place to place, \dia\). Old and common verb, frequent for missionary journeys in the Acts (5:40; strkjv@8:40; strkjv@9:32; strkjv@11:19; strkjv@13:6|). {Preaching the word} (\euaggelizomenoi ton logon\). Evangelizing or gospelizing the word (the truth about Christ). In strkjv@11:19| Luke explains more fully the extent of the labours of these new preachers of the gospel. They were emergency preachers, not ordained clergymen, but men stirred to activity by the zeal of Saul against them. The blood of the martyrs (Stephen) was already becoming the seed of the church. "The violent dispersion of these earnest disciples resulted in a rapid diffusion of the gospel" (Alvah Hovey).

rwp@Acts:9:27 @{Took him} (\epilabomenos\). Second aorist middle (indirect) participle of \epilamban“\, common verb to lay hold of. Barnabas saw the situation and took Saul to himself and listened to his story and believed it. It is to the credit of Barnabas that he had the insight and the courage to stand by Saul at the crucial moment in his life when the evidence seemed to be against him. It is a pleasing hypothesis that this influential disciple from Cyprus had gone to the University of Tarsus where he met Saul. If so, he would know more of him than those who only knew his record as a persecutor of Christians. That fact Barnabas knew also, but he was convinced that Jesus had changed the heart of Saul and he used his great influence (Acts:4:36; strkjv@11:22|) to win the favour of the apostles, Peter in particular (Galatians:1:19|) and James the half-brother of Jesus. The other apostles were probably out of the city as Paul says that he did not see them. {To the apostles} (\pros tous apostolous\). Both Barnabas and James are termed apostles in the general sense, though not belonging to the twelve, as Paul did not, though himself later a real apostle. Songs:Barnabas introduced Saul to Peter and vouched for his story, declared it fully (\diˆgˆsato\, in detail) including Saul's vision of Jesus (\eiden ton kurion\) as the vital thing and Christ's message to Saul (\elalˆsen aut“i\) and Saul's bold preaching (\ˆparrˆsiasato\, first aorist middle indicative of \parrˆsiaz“\ from \pan--rˆsia\ telling it all as in strkjv@Acts:2:29|). Peter was convinced and Saul was his guest for two weeks (Galatians:1:18|) with delightful fellowship (\historˆsai\). He had really come to Jerusalem mainly "to visit" (to see) Peter, but not to receive a commission from him. He had that from the Lord (Galatians:1:1f.|). Both Peter and James could tell Saul of their special experiences with the Risen Christ. Furneaux thinks that Peter was himself staying at the home of Mary the mother of John Mark (Acts:12:12|) who was a cousin of Barnabas (Colossians:4:10|). This is quite possible. At any rate Saul is now taken into the inner circle of the disciples in Jerusalem.

rwp@Acts:10:14 @{Not so, Lord} (\Mˆdam“s, kurie\). The negative \mˆdam“s\ calls for the optative \eiˆ\ (may it not be) or the imperative \est“\ (let it be). It is not \oudam“s\, 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--k“l_) 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 \kathariz“n\ (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:10:29 @{Without gainsaying} (\anantirrhˆt“s\). \A\ privative with compound adverb from \anti\ (back, in return, against) and verbal \rhˆtos\ (from \errhˆthˆn\, to speak). Late and rare and here only in the N.T., but the adjective in strkjv@19:36|. Without answering back. That is true after the Holy Spirit expressly told Peter to go with the messengers of Cornelius (10:19-23|). Peter's objections were made to the Lord in the vision which he did not understand. But that vision prepared him for this great step which he had now taken. He had stepped over the line of Jewish custom. {With what intent} (\tini log“i\). More exactly, "for what reason" as in Plato, _Gorgias_ 512 C.

rwp@Acts:11:2 @{They that were of the circumcision} (\hoi ek peritomˆs\). Literally, those of circumcision (on the side of circumcision, of the circumcision party). The phrase in strkjv@10:46| is confined to the six brethren with Peter in Caesarea (11:12|). That can hardly be the meaning here for it would mean that they were the ones who brought the charge against Peter though Hort takes this view. All the disciples in Jerusalem were Jews so that it can hardly mean the whole body. In strkjv@Galatians:2:12| the phrase has the narrower sense of the Judaizing or Pharisaic wing of the disciples (Acts:15:5|) who made circumcision necessary for all Gentile converts. Probably here by anticipation Luke so describes the beginning of that great controversy. The objectors probably did not know of Peter's vision at Joppa, but only of the revolutionary conduct of Peter in Caesarea. These extremists who spoke probably had abundant sympathy in their protest. The apostles are mentioned in verse 1|, but are not referred to in verse 2|. Apparently they are in contrast with the circumcision party in the church. {Contended} (\diekrinonto\). Imperfect middle of the common verb \diakrin“\, to {separate}. Here to separate oneself apart (\dia\), to take sides against, to make a cleavage (\dia\, two, in two) as in strkjv@Jude:1:9|. Songs:Peter is at once put on the defensive as the contention went on. It is plain that Peter was not regarded as any kind of pope or overlord.

rwp@Acts:11:3 @{Thou wentest in} (\eisˆlthes\). Direct form, but Westcott and Hort have it \eisˆlthen\ (he went in), indirect form. Songs:with \sunephages\ (didst eat) and \sunephagen\ (did eat). The direct is more vivid. {Men uncircumcised} (\andras akrobustian echontas\). "Men having uncircumcision." It is a contemptuous expression. They did not object to Peter's preaching to the Gentiles, but to his going into the house of Cornelius and eating with them, violating his supposed obligations as a Jew (Hackett). It was the same complaint in principle that the Pharisees had made against Jesus when he ate with publicans and sinners (Luke:15:12|). The Jews had not merely the Mosaic regulations about clean and unclean food, but also the fact that at a Gentile table some of the meat may have been an idol sacrifice. And Peter himself had similar scruples when the vision came to him at Joppa and when he entered the house of Cornelius in Caesarea strkjv@10:28|). Peter had been led beyond the circumcision party.

rwp@Acts:11:24 @{For} (\hoti\). Because. This is the explanation of the conduct of Barnabas. The facts were opposed to the natural prejudices of a Jew like Barnabas, but he rose above such racial narrowness. He was a really good man (\agathos\). See strkjv@Romans:5:7| for distinction between \agathos\ and \dikaios\, righteous, where \agathos\ ranks higher than \dikaios\. Besides, Barnabas was full of the Holy Spirit (like Peter) and of faith and so willing to follow the leading of God's Spirit and take some risks. This is a noble tribute paid by Luke. One wonders if Barnabas was still living when he wrote this. Certainly he was not prejudiced against Barnabas though he will follow the fortunes of Paul after the separation (15:36; 41|). {Was added unto the Lord} (\prosetethˆ t“i kuri“i\). First aorist passive indicative of \prostithˆmi\, common verb to add to. These people were added to the Lord Jesus before they were added to the church. If that were always true, what a difference it would make in our churches.

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} (\Hˆr“idˆs 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} (\kak“sai\). 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:12:2 @{James the brother of John} (\Iak“bon ton adelphon I“anou\). He had been called by Jesus a son of thunder along with his brother John. Jesus had predicted a bloody death for both of them (Mark:10:38ff.; strkjv@Matthew:20:23|). James is the first of the apostles to die and John probably the last. He is not James the Lord's brother (Galatians:1:19|). We do not know why Luke tells so little about the death of James and so much about the death of Stephen nor do we know why Herod selected him as a victim. Eusebius (_H.E_. ii. 9) quotes Clement of Alexandria as saying that a Jew made accusations against James and was converted and beheaded at the same time with him. {Killed with the sword} (\aneilen machairˆi\). The verb is a favourite one with Luke (Acts:2:33; strkjv@5:33,36; strkjv@7:28; strkjv@9:23-29; strkjv@10:39|, etc.). Instrumental case and Ionic form of \machaira\. The Jews considered beheading a shameful death as in the case of the Baptist (Matthew:14:10|).

rwp@Acts:12:3 @{That it pleased the Jews} (\hoti areston estin tois Ioudaiois\). Indirect assertion with the present tense \estin\ retained. \Areston\ is the verbal adjective from \aresk“\ followed by the dative as in strkjv@John:8:29|. {Proceeded to seize} (\prosetheto sullabein\). A patent Hebraism in strkjv@Luke:20:11f.| already, and nowhere else in the N.T. It occurs in the LXX (Genesis:4:2; strkjv@8:12; strkjv@18:29|, etc.). Second aorist middle indicative of \prostithˆmi\ and the second aorist active infinitive of \sullamban“\. Literally, he added to seize, he seized Peter in addition to James. {The days of unleavened bread} (\hˆmerai t“n azum“n\). By this parenthesis Luke locates the time of the year when Peter was arrested, the passover. It was a fine occasion for Agrippa to increase his favour among the crowds of Jews there by extra zeal against the Christians. It is possible that Luke obtained his information about this incident from John Mark for at his Mother's house the disciples gathered (12:12|).

rwp@Acts:13:8 @{Withstood them} (\anthistato autois\). Imperfect middle of \anthistˆmi\, to stand against (face to face). Dative case (\autois\). He persisted in his opposition and was unwilling to lose his great prize. There may have been a public discussion between Elymas and Saul. {To turn aside} (\diastrepsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \diastreph“\, old verb to turn or twist in two, to distort, to pervert (cf. strkjv@Matthew:17:17; strkjv@Luke:23:2|).

rwp@Acts:13:45 @{The Jews} (\hoi Ioudaioi\). Certainly not the proselytes of verse 43|. Probably many of the Jews that were then favourably disposed to Paul's message had reacted against him under the influence of the rabbis during the week and evidently on this Sabbath very many Gentiles ("almost the whole city," "the multitudes" \tous ochlous\) had gathered, to the disgust of the stricter Jews. Nothing is specifically stated here about the rabbis, but they were beyond doubt the instigators of, and the ringleaders in, the opposition as in Thessalonica (17:5|). No such crowds (\ochlous\) came to the synagogue when they were the speakers. {With jealousy} (\zˆlou\). Genitive case of \zˆlos\ (from \ze“\, to boil) after \eplˆsthˆsan\ (effective first aorist passive indicative of \pimplˆmi\). Envy and jealousy arise between people of the same calling (doctors towards doctors, lawyers towards lawyers, preachers towards preachers). Songs:these rabbis boiled with jealousy when they saw the crowds gathered to hear Paul and Barnabas. {Contradicted} (\antelegon\). Imperfect active of \antileg“\, old verb to speak against, to say a word in opposition to (\anti\, face to face). It was interruption of the service and open opposition in the public meeting. Paul and Barnabas were guests by courtesy and, of course, could not proceed further, when denied that privilege. {Blasphemed} (\blasphˆmountes\). Blaspheming. Songs:the correct text without the addition \antilegontes\ (repeated from \antelegon\ above). Common verb in the Gospels for saying injurious and harmful things. Doubtless these rabbis indulged in unkind personalities and made it plain that Paul and Barnabas were going beyond the limitations of pure Judaism in their contacts with Gentiles.

rwp@Acts:13:51 @{But they shook off the dust of their feet against them} (\Hoi de ektinaxamenoi ton koniorton t“n pod“n ep' autous\). First aorist middle (indirect) participle of \ektinass“\, to shake out or off. Homer uses it for knocking out teeth. In the papyri. The middle aorist participle occurs again in strkjv@18:6| and the active imperative with the dust of the feet in strkjv@Mark:6:11| (Luke:10:11| has \apomassometha\). and strkjv@Matthew:10:14| (command of Jesus). It is a dramatic gesture that forbids further intercourse. "As a protest against the injustice which cast them out. The sandal was taken off and the dust shaken out as a symbolic token that the very soil of the country was defiling" (Furneaux). {Unto Iconium} (\eis Ikonion\). About 45 miles southeast from Antioch in Pisidia, at the foot of the Taurus mountains. At various times it was reckoned also in Pisidia or Phrygia as well as Lycaonia, Phrygian in population and distinguished by Luke (Acts:14:6|) from Lystra and Derbe, cities of Lycaonia. As compared with Antioch (a Roman colony) it was a native Phrygian town. When the province of Galatia was divided, Iconium became the capital of Lycaonia and eclipsed Antioch in Pisidia. Strictly speaking at this time Lystra and Derbe were cities of Lycaonia-Galatica while Iconium was in Phrygia-Galatica (all three in the Roman Province of Galatia). It was at the meeting place of several Roman roads and on the highway from east to west. It is still a large town Konieh with 30,000 population.

rwp@Acts:14:2 @{That were disobedient} (\hoi apeithˆsantes\). First aorist active articular participle, not the present \apeithountes\ as the Textus Receptus has it. But the meaning is probably the Jews that disbelieved, rather than that disobeyed. Strictly \apeithe“\ does mean to disobey and \apiste“\ to disbelieve, but that distinction is not observed in strkjv@John:3:36| nor in strkjv@Acts:19:9; strkjv@28:24|. The word \apeithe“\ means to be \apeithˆs\, to be unwilling to be persuaded or to withhold belief and then also to withhold obedience. The two meanings run into one another. To disbelieve the word of God is to disobey God. {Made them evil affected} (\ekak“san\). First aorist active indicative of \kako“\, old verb from \kakos\, to do evil to, to ill-treat, then in later Greek as here to embitter, to exasperate as in strkjv@Psalms:105:32| and in Josephus. In this sense only here in the N.T. Evidently Paul preached the same message as in Antioch for it won both Jews and Gentiles, and displeased the rabbis. Codex Bezae adds here that "the chiefs of the synagogue and the rulers" brought persecution upon Paul and Barnabas just as was argued about Antioch. Outside the synagogue the Jews would poison the minds of the Gentiles against Paul and Barnabas. "The story of Thecla suggests a means, and perhaps the apostles were brought before the magistrates on some charge of interference with family life. The magistrates however must have seen at once that there was no legal case against them; and by a sentence of acquittal or in some other way the Lord gave peace" (Rackham). As we have it, the story of Paul and Thecla undoubtedly has apocryphal features, though Thecla may very well be an historical character here at Iconium where the story is located. Certainly the picture of Paul herein drawn cannot be considered authentic though a true tradition may underlie it: "bald, bowlegged, strongly built, small in stature, with large eyes and meeting eyebrows and longish nose; full of grace; sometimes looking like a man, sometimes having the face of an angel."

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:14:21 @{When they had preached the gospel to that city} (\euaggelisamenoi tˆn polin ekeinˆn\). Having evangelized (first aorist middle participle) that city, a smaller city and apparently with no trouble from the Jews. {Had made many disciples} (\mathˆteusantes hikanous\). First aorist active participle of \mathˆteu“\ from \mathˆtˆs\, a learner or disciple. Late verb in Plutarch, to be a disciple (Matthew:27:57| like strkjv@John:19:38|) and then to disciple (old English, Spenser), to make a disciple as in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| and here. Paul and Barnabas were literally here obeying the command of Jesus in discipling people in this heathen city. {They returned to Lystra and to Iconium, and to Antioch} (\hupestrepsan eis tˆn Lustran kai eis Ikonion kai eis Antiocheian\). Derbe was the frontier city of the Roman empire. The quickest way to return to Antioch in Syria would have been by the Cilician Gates or by the pass over Mt. Taurus by which Paul and Silas will come to Derbe in the second tour (Acts:15:41-16:1|), but difficult to travel in winter. But it was necessary to revisit the churches in Lystra, Iconium, Antioch in Pisidia and to see that they were able to withstand persecution. Paul was a Roman citizen though he had not made use of this privilege as yet for his own protection. Against mob violence it would count for little, but he did not hesitate. Paul had been stoned in Lystra, threatened in Iconium, expelled in Antioch. He shows his wisdom in conserving his work.

rwp@Acts:14:23 @{And when they had appointed for them elders in every church} (\cheirotonˆsantes de autois kat' ekklˆsian presbuterous\). They needed also some form of organization, though already churches. Note distributive use of \kata\ with \ekklˆsian\ (2:46; strkjv@5:42; strkjv@Titus:1:5|). \Cheirotone“\ (from \cheirotonos\, extending the hand, \cheir\, hand, and \tein“\, to stretch) is an old verb that originally meant to vote by show of the hands, finally to appoint with the approval of an assembly that chooses as in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:19|, and then to appoint without regard to choice as in Josephus (_Ant_. XIII. 2, 2) of the appointment of Jonathan as high priest by Alexander. Songs:in strkjv@Acts:10:41| the compound \procheiratone“\ is used of witnesses appointed by God. But the seven (deacons) were first selected by the Jerusalem church and then appointed (\katastˆsomen\) by the apostles. That is probably the plan contemplated by Paul in his directions to Titus (Titus:1:5|) about the choice of elders. It is most likely that this plan was the one pursued by Paul and Barnabas with these churches. They selected the elders in each instance and Paul and Barnabas "ordained" them as we say, though the word \cheirotone“\ does not mean that. "Elders" were mentioned first in strkjv@11:30|. Later Paul will give the requirements expected in these "elders" or "bishops" (Phillipians:1:1|) as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:1-7; strkjv@Titus:1:5-9|. It is fairly certain that these elders were chosen to correspond in a general way with the elders in the Jewish synagogue after which the local church was largely copied as to organization and worship. Paul, like Jesus, constantly worshipped and spoke in the synagogues. Already it is plain, as at Antioch in Syria (11:26|), that the Christians can no longer count on the use of the Jewish synagogue. They must have an organization of their own. The use of the plural here implies what was true at Philippi (Phillipians:1:1|) and Ephesus (Acts:20:17,28|) that each church (one in each city) "had its college of elders" (Hackett) as in Jerusalem (21:18|). Elder (\presbuteros\) was the Jewish name and bishop (\episkopos\) the Greek name for the same office. "Those who are called elders in speaking of Jewish communities are called bishops in speaking of Gentile communities" (Hackett). Hovey rightly holds against Hackett that teaching was a normal function of these elders, pastors or bishops as they were variously called (1Timothy:3:2; strkjv@Titus:1:9; strkjv@1Corinthians:12:28,30; strkjv@Ephesians:4:11|). {Had prayed with fasting} (\proseuxamenoi meta nˆstei“n\). It was a serious matter, this formal setting apart of these "elders" in the churches. Songs:it was done in a public meeting with prayer and fasting as when Paul and Barnabas were sent forth from Antioch in Syria (13:3|) on this mission tour. {They commended them to the Lord} (\parethento autous t“i kuri“i\). Second aorist middle indicative of \paratithˆmi\. Old and solemn word, to entrust, to deposit as in a bank (1Timothy:1:18; strkjv@2Timothy:2:2|). Cf. \parathˆkˆ\ in strkjv@1Timothy:6:20; strkjv@2Timothy:1:12,14|. It was all that they could now do, to commit them to the Lord Jesus. Jesus used this word on the cross (Luke:22:32|). {On whom they had believed} (\eis hon pepisteukeisan\). Past perfect indicative (without augment) of \pisteu“\. They had "trusted" in Jesus (2Timothy:1:12|) and Paul now "entrusts" them to him with confidence. It was a solemn and serious occasion in each instance as it always is to set apart men for the ministry. These men may not have been ideal men for this service, but they were the only ones available and they were chosen from the actual membership in each instance, men who knew local conditions and problems.

rwp@Acts:15:11 @{That we shall be saved} (\s“thˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive in indirect discourse after \pisteuomen\. More exactly, "We believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus in like manner as they also." This thoroughly Pauline note shows that whatever hopes the Judaizers had about Peter were false. His doctrine of grace is as clear as a bell. He has lifted his voice against salvation by ceremony and ritualism. It was a great deliverance.

rwp@Acts:15:14 @{Hearken unto me} (\akousate mou\). Usual appeal for attention. James was termed James the Just and was considered a representative of the Hebraic as opposed to the Hellenistic wing of the Jewish Christians (Acts:6:1|). The Judaizers had doubtless counted on him as a champion of their view and did later wrongfully make use of his name against Peter at Antioch (Galatians:2:12|). There was instant attention when James began to speak. {Symeon} (\Sume“n\). The Aramaic form of Simon as in strkjv@2Peter:2:1|. This little touch would show his affinities with the Jewish Christians (not the Judaizers). This Aramaic form is used also in strkjv@Luke:2:25,34| of the old prophet in the temple. Possibly both forms (Symeon, Aramaic, and Simon, Greek) were current in Jerusalem. {How} (\kath“s\). Strictly, "according as," here like \hos\ in indirect discourse somewhat like the epexegetic or explanatory use in strkjv@3John:1:3|. {First} (\pr“ton\). Told by Peter in verse 7|. James notes, as Peter did, that this experience of Barnabas and Paul is not the beginning of work among the Gentiles. {Did visit} (\epeskepsato\). First aorist middle indicative of \episkeptomai\, old verb to look upon, to look after, provide for. This same verb occurs in strkjv@James:1:27| and is one of various points of similarity between this speech of James in Acts and the Epistle of James as shown by Mayor in his _Commentary on James_. Somehow Luke may have obtained notes of these various addresses. {To take from the Gentiles a people for his name} (\labein ex ethn“n laon t“i onomati autou\). Bengel calls this _egregium paradoxon_, a chosen people (\laon\) out of the Gentiles (\ethn“n\). This is what is really involved in what took place at Caesarea at the hands of Peter and the campaign of Barnabas and Paul from Antioch. But such a claim of God's purpose called for proof from Scripture to convince Jews and this is precisely what James undertakes to give. This new Israel from among the Gentiles is one of Paul's great doctrines as set forth in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11|. Note the use of God's "name" here for "the Israel of God" (Galatians:6:16|).

rwp@Acts:15:20 @{But that we write unto them} (\alla episteilai autois\). By way of contrast (\alla\). First aorist active infinitive of \epistell“\, old verb to send to one (message, letter, etc.). Our word \epistle\ (\epistolˆ\ as in verse 30|) comes from this verb. In the N.T. only here, He strkjv@13:22|, and possibly strkjv@Acts:21:25|. {That they abstain from} (\tou apechesthai\). The genitive of the articular infinitive of purpose, present middle (direct) of \apech“\, old verb, to hold oneself back from. The best old MSS. do not have \apo\, but the ablative is clear enough in what follows. James agrees with Peter in his support of Paul and Barnabas in their contention for Gentile freedom from the Mosaic ceremonial law. The restrictions named by James affect the moral code that applies to all (idolatry, fornication, murder). Idolatry, fornication and murder were the outstanding sins of paganism then and now (Revelation:22:15|). Harnack argues ably against the genuineness of the word \pniktou\ (strangled) which is absent from D Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian. It is a nice point, though the best MSS. have it in accord with strkjv@Leviticus:17:10-16|. The problem is whether the words were added because "blood" was understood as not "murder," but a reference to the Mosaic regulation or whether it was omitted to remove the ceremonial aspect and make it all moral and ethical. The Western text omits the word also in verse 29|. But with the word retained here and in verse 29| the solution of James is not a compromise, though there is a wise concession to Jewish feeling. {Pollutions of idols} (\alisgˆmat“n\). From \alisge“\ only in the LXX and this substantive nowhere else. The word refers to idolatrous practices (pollutions) and things sacrificed to idols (\eid“luth“n\) in verse 29|, not to sacrificial meat sold in the market (1Corinthians:10:27|), a matter not referred to here. Cf. strkjv@Leviticus:17:1-9|. All the four items in the position of James (accepting \pniktou\) are mentioned in strkjv@Leviticus:17,18|.

rwp@Acts:15:25 @{It seemed good unto us} (\edoxen hˆmin\). See statement by Luke in verse 22|, and now this definite decision is in the epistle itself. It is repeated in verse 28|. {Having come to one accord} (\genomenois homothumadon\). On this adverb, common in Acts, see on ¯1:14|. But \genomenois\ clearly means that the final unity was the result of the Conference (private and public talks). The Judaizers are here brushed to one side as the defeated disturbers that they really were who had lacked the courage to vote against the majority. {To choose out men and send them} (\eklexamenois andras pempsai\ A B L, though Aleph C D read \eklexamenous\ as in verse 22|). Precisely the same idiom as in verse 22|, "having chosen out to send." {With our beloved Barnabas and Paul} (\sun tois agapˆtois hˆm“n Barnabƒi kai Paul“i\). The verbal adjective \agapˆtois\ (common in the N.T.) definitely sets the seal of warm approval on Barnabas and Paul. Paul (Galatians:2:9|) confirms this by his statement concerning the right hand of fellowship given.

rwp@Acts:15:28 @{To the Holy Spirit and to us} (\t“i pneumati t“i hagi“i kai hˆmin\). Dative case after \edoxen\ (third example, verses 22,25,28|). Definite claim that the church in this action had the guidance of the Holy Spirit. That fact was plain to the church from what had taken place in Caesarea and in this campaign of Paul and Barnabas (verse 8|). Jesus had promised that the Holy Spirit would guide them into all truth (John:16:13|). Even so the church deliberated carefully before deciding. What a blessing it would be if this were always true! But even so the Judaizers are only silenced for the present, not convinced and only waiting for a better day to start over again. {No greater burden} (\mˆden pleon baros\). The restrictions named did constitute some burden (cf. strkjv@Matthew:20:12|), for the old word \baros\ means weight or heaviness. Morality itself is a restraint upon one's impulses as is all law a prohibition against license.

rwp@Acts:15:40 @{Chose} (\epilexamenos\). First aorist middle (indirect) participle of \epileg“\, choosing for himself, as the successor of Barnabas, not of Mark who had no place in Paul's plans at this time. {Commended} (\paradotheis\). First aorist passive of \paradid“mi\, the same verb employed about Paul and Barnabas (14:26|) on their return from the first tour. It is clear now that the sympathy of the church at Antioch is with Paul rather than with Barnabas in the cleavage that has come. The church probably recalled how in the pinch Barnabas flickered and went to the side of Peter and that it was Paul who for the moment stood _Paulus contra mundum_ for Gentile liberty in Christ against the threat of the Judaizers from Jerusalem. Silas had influence in the church in Jerusalem (verse 22|) and was apparently a Roman citizen (16:37|) also. He is the Silas or Silvanus of the epistles (1Thessalonians:1:1; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:1; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:19; strkjv@1Peter:5:12|). It is remarkable that Peter mentions both Mark and Silas as with him (1Peter:5:12f.|) at the same time.

rwp@Acts:16:7 @{Over against Mysia} (\kata tˆn Musian\). This was an ill-defined region rather north and west of Phrygia. The Romans finally absorbed most of it in the Province of Asia. {They assayed to go into Bithynia} (\epeirazon eis tˆn Bithunian poreuthˆnai\). Conative imperfect of \peiraz“\ and ingressive aorist passive infinitive of \poreuomai\. Now Bithynia is northeast of Mysia and north of Galatia (province). Clearly Luke means to say that Paul had, when hindered by the Holy Spirit from going west into Asia, gone north so as to come in front of Bithynia. This journey would take him directly through Phrygia and the North Galatian country (the real Gauls or Celts). This is, to my mind, the strongest argument for the North Galatian view in these verses 6,7|. The grammar and the topography bring Paul right up to Bithynia (north of the old Galatia). It is verses 6,7| that make me pause before accepting the plausible arguments of Ramsay for the South Galatian theory. In itself the problem is nothing like so important or so determinative as he makes it. But shall we smash Luke's grammar to pieces to bolster up a theory of criticism? {And the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not} (\kai ouk eiasen autous to pneuma Iˆsou\). The same Spirit who in verse 6| had forbidden going into Asia now closed the door into Bithynia. This expression occurs nowhere else, but we have the spirit of Christ (Romans:8:9|) and the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Phillipians:1:19|). \Eiasen\ is first aorist active indicative of \ea“\, old verb to allow.

rwp@Acts:16:21 @{Customs which it is not lawful for us to receive, or to observe, being Romans} (\ethˆ ha ouk estin hˆmin paradechesthai oude poiein R“maiois ousin\). Note the sharp contrast between "being Jews" in verse 20| and "being Romans" here. This pose of patriotism is all sound and fury. It is love of money that moves these "masters" far more than zeal for Rome. As Roman citizens in a colony they make full use of all their rights of protest. Judaism was a _religio licita_ in the Roman empire, only they were not allowed to make proselytes of the Romans themselves. No Roman magistrate would pass on abstract theological questions (18:15|), but only if a breach of the peace was made (\ektarassousin hˆm“n tˆn polin\) or the formation of secret sects and organizations. Evidently both of these last points are involved by the charges of "unlawful customs" by the masters who are silent about their real ground of grievance against Paul and Silas. \Ethos\ (kin to \ˆthos\, strkjv@1Corinthians:15:33|) is from \eth“\, to be accustomed or used to a thing. The Romans granted toleration to conquered nations to follow their religious customs provided they did not try to win the Romans. But the Jews had made great headway to favour (the God-fearers) with increasing hatred also. Emperor worship had in store grave peril for both Jews and Christians. The Romans will care more for this than for the old gods and goddesses. It will combine patriotism and piety.

rwp@Acts:17:17 @{Songs:he reasoned} (\dielegeto men oun\). Accordingly therefore, with his spirit stirred by the proof of idolatry. Imperfect middle of \dialeg“\, same verb used in verse 2| which see. First he reasoned in the synagogue at the services to the Jews and the God-fearers, then daily in the agora or marketplace (southwest of the Acropolis, between it and the Areopagus and the Pnyx) to the chance-comers, "them that met him" (\pros tous paratugchanontas\). Simultaneously with the synagogue preaching at other hours Paul took his stand like Socrates before him and engaged in conversation with (\pros\) those who happened by. This old verb, \paratugchan“\, occurs here alone in the N.T. and accurately pictures the life in the agora. The listeners to Paul in the agora would be more casual than those who stop for street preaching, a Salvation Army meeting, a harangue from a box in Hyde Park. It was a slim chance either in synagogue or in agora, but Paul could not remain still with all the reeking idolatry around him. The boundaries of the agora varied, but there was always the \Poikilˆ Stoa\ (the Painted Porch), over against the Acropolis on the west. In this \Stoa\ (Porch) Zeno and other philosophers and rhetoricians held forth from time to time. Paul may have stood near this spot.

rwp@Acts:17:18 @{And certain also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him} (\tines de kai t“n Epikouri“n kai St“ik“n philosoph“n suneballon aut“i\). 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 (\Gn“thi 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} (\zen“n daimoni“n 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 S“kratˆs, kaina daimonia eispher“n\, 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 Iˆsoun kai tˆn anastasin euˆggelizato\). 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@Acts:17:19 @{And they took hold of him} (\epilabomenoi de autou\). Second aorist middle participle of \epilamban“\, old verb, but in the N.T. only in the middle, here with the genitive \autou\ to lay hold of, but with no necessary sense of violence (Acts:9:27; strkjv@23:27; strkjv@Mark:8:23|), unless the idea is that Paul was to be tried before the Court of Areopagus for the crime of bringing in strange gods. But the day for that had passed in Athens. Even so it is not clear whether "{unto the Areopagus} (\epi ton Areion Pagon\") means the Hill of Mars (west of the Acropolis, north of the agora and reached by a flight of steps in the rock) or the court itself which met elsewhere as well as on the hills, usually in fact in the Stoa Basilica opening on the agora and near to the place where the dispute had gone on. Raphael's cartoon with Paul standing on Mars Hill has made us all familiar with the common view, but it is quite uncertain if it is true. There was not room on the summit for a large gathering. If Paul was brought before the Court of Areopagus (commonly called the Areopagus as here), it was not for trial as a criminal, but simply for examination concerning his new teaching in this university city whether it was strictly legal or not. Paul was really engaged in proselytism to turn the Athenians away from their old gods to Jesus Christ. But "the court of refined and polished Athenians was very different from the rough provincial magistrates of Philippi, and the philosophers who presented Paul to their cognizance very different from the mob of Thessalonians" (Rackham). It was all very polite. {May we know?} (\Dunametha gn“nai\). Can we come to know (ingressive second aorist active infinitive). {This new teaching} (\hˆ kainˆ hautˆ didachˆ\). On the position of \hautˆ\ see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 700f. The question was prompted by courtesy, sarcasm, or irony. Evidently no definite charge was laid against Paul.

rwp@Galatians:3:21 @{Against the promises} (\kata t“n epaggeli“n\). A pertinent question again. Far from it (\mˆ genoito\). {Which could make alive} (\ho dunamenos z“opoiˆsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \z“opoie“\, late compound (\z“os\, alive, \poie“\, to make) verb for which see strkjv@1Corinthians:15:22|. Spiritual life, he means, here and hereafter. {Verily} (\ont“s\). "Really" (cf. strkjv@Mark:11:32; strkjv@Luke:24:34|). Condition and conclusion (\an ˆn\) of second class, determined as unfulfilled. He had already said that Christ died to no purpose in that case (2:21|).

rwp@Galatians:3:28 @{There can be neither} (\ouk eni\). Not a shortened form of \enesti\, but the old lengthened form of \en\ with recessive accent. Songs:\ouk eni\ means "there is not" rather than "there cannot be," a statement of a fact rather than a possibility, as Burton rightly shows against Lightfoot. {One man} (\heis\). No word for "man" in the Greek, and yet \heis\ is masculine, not neuter \hen\. "One moral personality" (Vincent). The point is that "in Christ Jesus" race or national distinctions ("neither Jew nor Greek") do not exist, class differences ("neither bond nor free," no proletarianism and no capitalism) vanish, sex rivalry ("no male and female") disappears. This radical statement marks out the path along which Christianity was to come in the sphere (\en\) and spirit and power of Christ. Candour compels one to confess that this goal has not yet been fully attained. But we are on the road and there is no hope on any way than on "the Jesus Road."

rwp@Galatians:4:14 @{A temptation to you in my flesh} (\ton peirasmon hum“n en tˆi sarki mou\). "Your temptation (or trial) in my flesh." Peirasmon can be either as we see in strkjv@James:1:2,12ff|. If trial here, it was a severe one. {Nor rejected} (\oude exeptusate\). First aorist active indicative of \ekptu“\, old word to spit out (Homer), to spurn, to loathe. Here only in N.T. Clemen (_Primitive Christianity_, p. 342) thinks it should be taken literally here since people spat out as a prophylactic custom at the sight of invalids especially epileptics. But Plutarch uses it of mere rejection. {As an angel of God} (\h“s aggelon theou\), {as Christ Jesus} (\h“s Christon Iˆsoun\). In spite of his illness and repulsive appearance, whatever it was. Not a mere "messenger" of God, but a very angel, even as Christ Jesus. We know that at Lystra Paul was at first welcomed as Hermes the god of oratory (Acts:14:12f.|). But that narrative hardly applies to these words, for they turned against Paul and Barnabas then and there at the instigation of Jews from Antioch in Pisidia and Iconium.

rwp@Galatians:5:14 @{Even in this} (\en t“i\). Just the article with \en\, "in the," but it points at the quotation from strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|. Jews (Luke:10:29|) confined "neighbour" (\plˆsion\) to Jews. Paul uses here a striking paradox by urging obedience to the law against which he has been arguing, but this is the moral law as proof of the new love and life. See also strkjv@Romans:13:8|, precisely as Jesus did (Matthew:22:40|).

rwp@Galatians:5:17 @{Lusteth against} (\epithumei kata\). Like a tug of war. This use of \sarx\ as opposed to the Spirit (Holy Spirit) personifies \sarx\. Lightfoot argues that \epithumei\ cannot be used with the Spirit and so some other verb must be supplied for it. But that is wholly needless, for the verb, like \epithumia\, does not mean evil desire, but simply to long for. Christ and Satan long for the possession of the city of Man Soul as Bunyan shows. {Are contrary the one to the other} (\allˆlois antikeitai\). Are lined up in conflict, face to face (\anti-\), a spiritual duel (cf. Christ's temptations), with dative case of personal interest (\allˆlois\). {That ye may not do} (\hina mˆ poiˆte\). "That ye may not keep on doing" (present active subjunctive of \poie“\). {That ye would} (\ha ean thelˆte\). "Whatever ye wish" (indefinite relative with \ean\ and present subjunctive).

rwp@Hebrews:11:33 @{Through faith} (\dia piste“s\). Change thus from the routine \pistei\ used so far. {Subdued kingdoms} (\katˆg“nisanto basileias\). First aorist middle indicative of \katag“nizomai\, _Koin‚_ verb to struggle against, to overcome, here alone in the N.T. Used by Josephus of David's conquests. The author has here (verses 33,34|), "nine terse clauses" (Moffatt) with no connective (asyndeton) with great rhetorical and oratorical force (sledge-hammer style). For "wrought righteousness" (\ˆrgasanto dikaiosunˆn\, first aorist middle indicative of \ergazomai\) see strkjv@Acts:10:35|. {Obtained promises} (\epetuchon epaggeli“n\). Second aorist active indicative of \epitugchan“\, old verb (already in strkjv@6:15|) with genitive. But they did not see the fulfilment of the Messianic promise (11:39f.|). {Stopped the mouths of lions} (\ephraxan stomata leont“n\). First aorist active indicative of \phrass“\, old verb to fence in, to block up. See strkjv@Daniel:6:18-23|.

rwp@Hebrews:12:3 @{Consider} (\analogisasthe\). First aorist middle imperative of \analogizomai\, old word to reckon up, to compare, to weigh, only here in the N.T. See \katanoˆsate\ in strkjv@3:1|. Understanding Jesus is the key to the whole problem, the cure for doubt and hesitation. {Endured} (\hupomemenˆkota\). Perfect active participle of the same verb \hupomen“\ used in verse 2|. {Gainsaying} (\antilogian\). Old word from \antilogos\ (from \antileg“\), already in strkjv@6:16; strkjv@7:7|. {Of sinners} (\hupo t“n hamart“l“n\). "By sinners." {Against themselves} (\eis heautous\). Against their better selves if a genuine reading. But \eis heauton\ (against himself), against Christ, is far more likely correct. {That ye wax not weary} (\hina mˆ kamˆte\). Negative final clause with \hina mˆ\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \kamn“\, old verb to be weary as here or sick as in strkjv@James:5:15|. {Fainting in your souls} (\tais psuchais hum“n ekluomenoi\). Present passive participle of \eklu“\, old verb to loosen out, to set free, and in passive to be enfeebled, to be tired out (here in soul with locative case), as in verse 5|. The rest of the Epistle drives home the argument.

rwp@Hebrews:12:4 @{Resisted} (\antikatestˆte\). Second aorist active indicative (intransitive) of the double compound \antikathistˆmi\, old verb to stand in opposition against in line of battle, intransitively to stand face to face (\anti\) against (\kata\), here only in the N.T. {Unto blood} (\mechris haimatos\). "Up to blood." As was true of Jesus and many of the other heroes of faith in chapter strkjv@Hebrews:11|. {Striving} (\antag“nizomenoi\). Present middle participle of \antag“nizomai\, old verb with the same figure in \antikatestˆte\. {Against sin} (\pros hamartian\). Face to face with sin as in verse 1|.

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@James:1:6 @{In faith} (\en pistei\). Faith here "is the fundamental religious attitude" (Ropes), belief in God's beneficent activity and personal reliance on him (Oesterley). {Nothing doubting} (\mˆden diakrinomenos\). Negative way of saying \en pistei\ (in faith), present passive participle of \diakrin“\, old verb to separate (\krin“\) between (\dia\), to discriminate as shown clearly in strkjv@Acts:11:12, strkjv@15:9|, but no example of the sense of divided against oneself has been found earlier than the N.T., though it appears in later Christian writings. It is like the use of \diamerizomai\ in strkjv@Luke:11:18| and occurs in strkjv@Matthew:21:21; strkjv@Mark:11:23; strkjv@Acts:10:20; strkjv@Romans:2:4; strkjv@4:20; strkjv@14:23|. It is a vivid picture of internal doubt. {Is like} (\eoiken\). Second perfect active indicative with the linear force alone from \eik“\ to be like. Old form, but in N.T. only here and verse 23| (a literary touch, not in LXX). {The surge of the sea} (\klud“ni thalassˆs\). Old word (from \kluz“\ to wash against) for a dashing or surging wave in contrast with \kuma\ (successive waves), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:8:24|. In associative instrumental case after \eoiken\. In strkjv@Ephesians:4:14| we have \kludoniz“\ (from \klud“n\), to toss by waves. {Driven by the wind} (\anemizomen“i\). Present passive participle (agreeing in case with \klud“ni\) of \anemiz“\, earliest known example and probably coined by James (from \anemos\), who is fond of verbs in \-iz“\ (Mayor). The old Greek used \anemo“\. In strkjv@Ephesians:4:14| Paul uses both \kludoniz“\ and \peripher“ anem“i\. It is a vivid picture of the sea whipped into white-caps by the winds. {Tossed} (\ripizomen“i\). Present passive participle also in agreement with \klud“ni\ from \ripiz“\, rare verb (Aristophanes, Plutarch, Philo) from \ripis\ (a bellows or fire-fan), here only in N.T. It is a picture of "the restless swaying to and fro of the surface of the water, blown upon by shifting breezes" (Hort), the waverer with slight rufflement.

rwp@James:3:14 @{Bitter jealousy} (\zˆlon pikron\). \Zˆlos\ occurs in N.T. in good sense (John:2:17|) and bad sense (Acts:5:17|). Pride of knowledge is evil (1Corinthians:8:1|) and leaves a bitter taste. See "root of bitterness" in strkjv@Hebrews:12:14| (cf. strkjv@Ephesians:4:31|). This is a condition of the first class. {Faction} (\erithian\). Late word, from \erithos\ (hireling, from \eritheu“\ to spin wool), a pushing forward for personal ends, partisanship, as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:16|. {In your heart} (\en tˆi kardiƒi hum“n\). The real fountain (\pˆgˆ\, verse 11|). {Glory not} (\mˆ katakauchƒsthe\). Present middle imperative of \katakauchaomai\, for which see strkjv@2:13|. Wisdom is essential for the teacher. Boasting arrogance disproves the possession of wisdom. {Lie not against the truth} (\pseudesthe kata tˆs alˆtheias\). Present middle imperative of \pseudomai\, old verb, to play false, with \mˆ\ carried over. Lying against the truth is futile. By your conduct do not belie the truth which you teach; a solemn and needed lesson. Cf. strkjv@Romans:1:18f., strkjv@2:18,20|.

rwp@James:4:6 @{More grace} (\meizona charin\). "Greater grace." Greater than what? "Greater grace in view of the greater requirement" (Ropes), like strkjv@Romans:5:20f|. God does this. {Wherefore} (\dio\). To prove this point James quotes strkjv@Proverbs:3:34|. {God resisteth the proud} (\ho theos huperˆphanois antitassetai\). Present middle (direct) indicative of \antitass“\, old military term, to range in battle against, with dative case (Romans:13:2|) as in strkjv@5:6|. \Huperˆphanois\ (\huper, phainomai\) is like our vernacular "stuck-up folks" (Romans:1:30|), "haughty persons." {But giveth grace to the humble} (\tapeinois de did“sin charin\). Anarthrous adjective again, "to humble or lowly persons," for which word see strkjv@1:9f|. Cf. strkjv@2:5-7; strkjv@5:1-6|.

rwp@James:4:7 @{Be subject therefore unto God} (\hupotagˆte oun t“i the“i\). Second aorist (ingressive) passive imperative of \hupotass“\, old verb, to range under (military term also). Same form in strkjv@1Peter:2:23; strkjv@5:5|. With the dative case \the“i\ (unto God). The aorist has the note of urgency in the imperative. Note the ten aorist imperatives in verses 7-10| (\hupotagˆte, antistˆte, eggisate, katharisate, hagnisate, talaip“rˆsate, penthˆsate, klausate, metatrapˆt“, tapein“thˆte\). {But resist the devil} (\antistˆte de t“i diabol“i\). Second aorist (ingressive) active (intransitive) imperative of \anthistˆmi\, "take a stand against." Dative case \diabol“i\. Result of such a stand is that the devil will flee (\pheuxetai\, future middle of \pheug“\). See strkjv@1Peter:5:8f.; strkjv@Ephesians:6:11f.; strkjv@Luke:10:17|.

rwp@James:4:11 @{Speak not one against another} (\mˆ katalaleite allˆl“n\). Prohibition against such a habit or a command to quit doing it, with \mˆ\ and the present imperative of \katalale“\, old compound usually with the accusative in ancient Greek, in N.T. only with the genitive (here, strkjv@1Peter:2:12; strkjv@3:16|). Often harsh words about the absent. James returns to the subject of the tongue as he does again in strkjv@5:12| (twice before, strkjv@1:26; strkjv@3:1-12|). {Judgeth} (\krin“n\). In the sense of harsh judgment as in strkjv@Matthew:7:1; strkjv@Luke:6:37| (explained by \katadikaz“\). {Not a doer of the law, but a judge} (\ouk poiˆtˆs nomou, alla kritˆs\). This tone of superiority to law is here sharply condemned. James has in mind God's law, of course, but the point is the same for all laws under which we live. We cannot select the laws which we will obey unless some contravene God's law, and so our own conscience (Acts:4:20|). Then we are willing to give our lives for our rebellion if need be.

rwp@John:5:14 @{Findeth him} (\heuriskei auton\). Dramatic present as in strkjv@1:45|, possibly after search as in strkjv@9:35|. {Sin no more} (\mˆketi hamartane\). "No longer go on sinning." Present active imperative with \mˆketi\, a clear implication that disease was due to personal sin as is so often the case. Jesus used the same words to the woman taken in adultery in the spurious passage (John:8:11|). He had suffered for 38 years. All sickness is not due to personal sin (9:3|), but much is and nature is a hard paymaster. Jesus is here living up to his name (Matthew:1:21|). {Lest a worse thing befall thee} (\hina mˆ cheiron soi ti genˆtai\). Negative final clause with second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\. \Cheiron\ is comparative of \kakos\, bad. Worse than the illness of 38 years, bad as that is. He will now be sinning against knowledge.

rwp@John:5:18 @{Sought the more} (\mallon ezˆtoun\). Imperfect active of \zˆte“\, graphic picture of increased and untiring effort "to kill him" (\auton apokteinai\, first aorist active, to kill him off and be done with him). John repeats this clause "they sought to kill him" in strkjv@7:1,19,25; strkjv@8:37,40|. Their own blood was up on this Sabbath issue and they bend every energy to put Jesus to death. If this is a passover, this bitter anger, murderous wrath, will go on and grow for two years. {Not only brake the Sabbath} (\ou monon elue to sabbaton\). Imperfect active of \lu“\. He was now a common and regular Sabbath-breaker. \Lu“\ means to loosen, to set at naught. The papyri give examples of \lu“\ in this sense like \luein ta penthˆ\ (to break the period of mourning). This was the first grudge against Jesus, but his defence had made the offence worse and had given them a far graver charge. {But also called God his own Father} (\alla kai patera idion elege ton theon\). "His own" (\idion\) in a sense not true of others. That is precisely what Jesus meant by "My Father." See strkjv@Romans:8:32| for \ho idios huios\, "his own Son." {Making himself equal with God} (\ison heauton poi“n t“i the“i\). \Isos\ is an old common adjective (in papyri also) and means {equal}. In strkjv@Phillipians:2:6| Paul calls the Pre-incarnate Christ \isa the“i\, "equal to God" (plural \isa\, attributes of God). Bernard thinks that Jesus would not claim to be \isos the“i\ because in strkjv@John:14:28| he says: "The Father is greater than I." And yet he says in strkjv@14:7| that the one who sees him sees in him the Father. Certainly the Jews understood Jesus to claim equality with the Father in nature and privilege and power as also in strkjv@10:33; strkjv@19:7|. Besides, if the Jews misunderstood Jesus on this point, it was open and easy for him to deny it and to clear up the misapprehension. This is precisely what he does not do. On the contrary Jesus gives a powerful apologetic in defence of his claim to equality with the Father (verses 19-47|).

rwp@John:5:35 @{He} (\ekeinos\). "That one" (John of 33|). Common demonstrative (that one) in John to point out the subject. Used in strkjv@1:8| of the Baptist as here. John was now in prison and so Christ uses \ˆn\ (was). His active ministry is over. {The lamp} (\ho luchnos\). The lamp in the room (Mark:4:21|). Old word for lamp or candle as in strkjv@Matthew:5:15|. Used of Christ (the Lamb) as the Lamp of the New Jerusalem (Revelation:21:23|). \Lampas\ (Matthew:25:1,3|, etc.) is a torch whose wick is fed with oil. The Baptist was not the Light (\to ph“s\, strkjv@1:8|), but a lamp shining in the darkness. "When the Light comes, the lamp is no longer needed" (Bernard). "_Non Lux iste, sed lucerna_." Jesus by his own claim is the Light of the World (8:12; strkjv@9:5; strkjv@12:46|). And yet all believers are in a sense "the light of the world" (Matthew:5:14|) since the world gets the Light of Christ through us. {That burneth} (\ho kaiomenos\). See strkjv@Matthew:5:15| for this verb used with \luchnos\ (lighting a candle or lamp). The lamp that is lit and is burning (present passive participle of \kai“\, and so is consumed). {And shineth} (\kai phain“n\). See strkjv@1:4| for this verb used of the Logos shining in the darkness. Cf. strkjv@1John:2:8|. John was giving light as he burned for those in darkness like these Jews. {And ye were willing} (\humeis de ˆthelˆsate\). "But ye became willing." Ingressive aorist active indicative of \thel“\. Reference again to strkjv@1:19|. Cf. also for the temporary popularity of the Baptist strkjv@Mark:1:5; strkjv@Matthew:3:5; strkjv@11:7; strkjv@21:26|. The Jews were attracted to John "like moths to a candle" (Bernard). {To rejoice} (\agalliathˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \agalliaomai\, late word for \agallomai\ for which see strkjv@Matthew:5:12|. "They were attracted by his brightness, not by his warmth" (Bengel). Even so the brightness of John's shining did not really enlighten their minds. "The interest in the Baptist was a frivolous, superficial, and short-lived excitement" (Vincent). It was only "for an hour" (\pros h“ran\) when they turned against him.

rwp@John:5:45 @{Think not} (\mˆ dokeite\). Prohibition with \mˆ\ and the present imperative. See on verse 39| for \doke“\ for mistaken opinions in John. {I will accuse you} (\eg“ katˆgorˆs“ hum“n\). Emphasis on \eg“\ (I). Future active indicative of \katˆgore“\ (\kata\, against, \agoreu“\, to speak in the assembly \agora\, to bring an accusation in court, a public accusation). See strkjv@Romans:3:9| for \proaitiaomai\ for making previous charge and strkjv@Luke:16:1| for \diaball“\, a secret malicious accusation, and strkjv@Romans:8:33| for \egkale“\, for public charge, not necessarily before tribunal. {Even Moses} (\M“usˆs\). No "even" in the Greek. {On whom ye have set your hope} (\eis hon humeis ˆlpikate\). Perfect active indicative of \elpiz“\, state of repose in Moses. Only example of \elpiz“\ in John. See strkjv@2Corinthians:1:10| for use of \eis\ with \elpiz“\ instead of the usual \epi\ (1Timothy:4:10|).

rwp@John:6:15 @{Perceiving} (\gnous\). Second aorist active participle of \gin“sk“\. It was not hard for Christ to read the mind of this excited mob. {They were about} (\mellousin\). Present active indicative of \mell“\. Probably the leaders were already starting. {Take him by force} (\harpazein\). Present active infinitive of \harpaz“\, old verb for violent seizing (Matthew:11:12; strkjv@13:19|). There was a movement to start a revolution against Roman rule in Palestine by proclaiming Jesus King and driving away Pilate. {To make him king} (\hina poiˆs“sin basilea\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \poie“\ with \basilea\ as predicate accusative. It was a crisis that called for quick action. {Himself alone} (\autos monos\). At first he had the disciples with him (verse 3|). But he sent them hurriedly by boat to the western side (Mark:6:45f.; strkjv@Matthew:14:22f.|) because clearly the apostles were sympathetic with the revolutionary impulse of the crowd. Then Jesus sent the multitudes away also and went up into the mountain alone. He was alone in every sense, for no one but the Father understood him at this stage, not even his own disciples. He went up to pray (Mark:6:46; strkjv@Matthew:14:23|).

rwp@John:6:41 @{Murmured} (\egogguzon\). Imperfect active of the onomatopoetic verb \gogguz“\, late verb in LXX (murmuring against Moses), papyri (vernacular), like the cooing of doves or the buzzing of bees. These Galilean Jews are puzzled over what Jesus had said (verses 33,35|) about his being the bread of God come down from heaven.

rwp@John:6:52 @{Strove} (\emachonto\). Imperfect (inchoative) middle of \machomai\, to fight in armed combat (Acts:7:26|), then to wage a war of words as here and strkjv@2Timothy:2:24|. They were already murmuring (41|), now they began bitter strife with one another over the last words of Jesus (43-51|), some probably seeing a spiritual meaning in them. There was division of opinion about Jesus in Jerusalem also later (7:12,40; strkjv@9:16; strkjv@10:19|). {How can?} (\P“s dunatai;\). The very idiom used by Nicodemus in strkjv@3:4,9|. Here scornful disbelief. {This man} (\houtos\). Contemptuous use pictured in verse 42|. {His flesh to eat} (\tˆn sarka autou phagein\). As if we were cannibals! Some MSS. do not have \autou\, but the meaning is clear. The mystical appropriation of Christ by the believer (Galatians:2:20; strkjv@Ephesians:3:17|) they could not comprehend, though some apparently were against this literal interpretation of "flesh" (\sarx\).

rwp@John:7:10 @{Were gone up} (\anebˆsan\). Second aorist active indicative of \anabain“\, not past perfect though the action is antecedent in fact to the following \tote anebˆ\. The Greek does not always draw the precise distinction between the merely punctiliar (aorist) antecedent action and the past perfect (2:9; strkjv@4:45|). {He also} (\tote autos\). As well as the brothers. {Not publicly} (\ou phaner“s\). Against their advice in verse 4|, using \phaner“son\ (the very same word stem). {But as it were in secret} (\alla h“s en krupt“i\). "Not with the usual caravan of pilgrims" (Bernard). Just the opposite of their advice in verse 4| with the same phrase \en phaner“i\. Plainly Jesus purposely went contrary to the insincere counsel of his brothers as to the manner of his Messianic manifestation. This secrecy concerned solely the journey to Jerusalem, not his public teaching there after his arrival (7:26,28; strkjv@18:20|).

rwp@John:7:15 @{Marvelled} (\ethaumazon\). Picturesque imperfect active of \thaumaz“\, "were wondering." After all the bluster of the rulers (verse 13|) here was Jesus teaching without interruption. {Knoweth letters} (\grammata oiden\). Second perfect active indicative used as present. \Grammata\, old word from \graph“\, to write, is originally the letters formed (Galatians:6:11|), then a letter or epistle (Acts:28:21|), then the sacred Scriptures (John:5:47; strkjv@2Timothy:3:15|), then learning like Latin _litterae_ and English letters (Acts:26:24; strkjv@John:7:15|). "The marvel was that Jesus showed Himself familiar with the literary methods of the time, which were supposed to be confined to the scholars of the popular teachers" (Westcott). {Having never learned} (\mˆ memathˆk“s\). Perfect active participle of \manthan“\ with \mˆ\, the usual negative (subjective) with the participle. It is not the wisdom of Jesus that disconcerted the Jewish leaders, but his learning (Marcus Dods). And yet Jesus had not attended either of the rabbinical theological schools in Jerusalem (Hillel, Shammai). He was not a rabbi in the technical sense, only a carpenter, and yet he surpassed the professional rabbis in the use of their own methods of debate. It is sometimes true today that unschooled men in various walks of life forge ahead of men of lesser gifts with school training. See the like puzzle of the Sanhedrin concerning Peter and John (Acts:4:13|). This is not an argument against education, but it takes more than education to make a real man. Probably this sneer at Jesus came from some of the teachers in the Jerusalem seminaries. "Christ was in the eyes of the Jews a merely self-taught enthusiast" (Westcott).

rwp@John:7:20 @{The multitude} (\ho ochlos\). Outside of Jerusalem (the Galilean crowd as in verses 11f.|) and so unfamiliar with the effort to kill Jesus recorded in strkjv@5:18|. It is important in this chapter to distinguish clearly the several groups like the Jewish leaders (7:13,15,25,26,30,32|, etc.), the multitude from Galilee and elsewhere (10-13,20,31,40,49|), the common people of Jerusalem (25|), the Roman soldiers (45f.|). {Thou hast a devil} (\daimonion echeis\). "Demon," of course, as always in the Gospels. These pilgrims make the same charge against Jesus made long ago by the Pharisees in Jerusalem in explanation of the difference between John and Jesus (Matthew:11:18; strkjv@Luke:7:33|). It is an easy way to make a fling like that. "He is a monomaniac labouring under a hallucination that people wish to kill him" (Dods).

rwp@John:7:22 @{For this cause} (\dia touto\). Some would take this phrase with the preceding verb \thaumazete\ (ye marvel for this cause). {Hath given} (\ded“ken\). Present active indicative of \did“mi\ (permanent state). {Not that it is of Moses, but of the fathers} (\ouch hoti ek tou M“use“s estin all' ek t“n pater“n\). A parenthesis to explain that circumcision is older in origin than Moses. {And on the sabbath ye circumcise} (\kai en sabbat“i peritemnete\). Adversative use of \kai\=and yet as in 19|. That is to say, the Jews keep one law (circumcision) by violating another (on the Sabbath, the charge against him in chapter 5, healing on the Sabbath).

rwp@John:7:23 @{That the law of Moses may not be broken} (\hina mˆ luthˆi ho nomos M“use“s\). Purpose clause with negative \mˆ\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \lu“\. They are punctilious about their Sabbath rules and about circumcision on the eighth day. When they clash, they drop the Sabbath rule and circumcise. {Are ye wroth with me?} (\emoi cholƒte;\). Old word from \cholˆ\ (bile, gall), possibly from \chloˆ\ or \chl“ros\ (yellowish green). Only here in N.T. Songs:to be mad. With dative. Vivid picture of bitter spleen against Jesus for healing a man on the sabbath when they circumcise on the Sabbath. {A man every whit whole} (\holon anthr“pon hugiˆ\). Literally, "a whole (\holon\) man (all the man) sound (\hugiˆ\, well)," not just one member of the body mended.

rwp@John:7:50 @{Nicodemus} (\Nikodˆmos\). Not heard from since chapter 3 when he timidly came to Jesus by night. Now he boldly protests against the injustice of condemning Jesus unheard. He appears once more (and only in John) in strkjv@19:39| with Joseph of Arimathea as a secret disciple of Jesus. He is a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin and his present act is courageous. {Saith} (\legei\). Dramatic present active indicative as in strkjv@2:3|. {Before} (\proteron\). This is genuine, a reference to the visit in chapter 3, but \nuktos\ (by night) is not genuine here. {Being one of them} (\heis “n ex aut“n\). As a member of the Sanhedrin he takes up the challenge in verse 48|. He is both ruler and Pharisee.

rwp@John:7:52 @{Art thou also of Galilee?} (\Mˆ kai su ek tˆs Galilaias ei;\). Formally negative answer expected by \mˆ\, but really they mean to imply that Nicodemus from local feeling or prejudice has lined himself up with this Galilean mob (\ochlos\) of sympathizers with Jesus and is like Jesus himself a Galilean. "These aristocrats of Jerusalem had a scornful contempt for the rural Galileans" (Bernard). {That out of Galilee ariseth no prophet} (\hoti ek tˆs Galilaias prophˆtˆs ouk egeiretai\). As a matter of fact Jonah, Hosea, Nahum, possibly also Elijah, Elisha, and Amos were from Galilee. It was simply the rage of the Sanhedrin against Jesus regardless of the facts. Westcott suggests that they may have reference to the future, but that is a mere excuse for them.

rwp@John:8:10 @{Lifted up himself} (\anakupsas\). First aorist active participle of \anakupt“\ as in verse 7|. {Where are they?} (\Pou eisin;\). Jesus had kept on writing on the ground as the accusers had slipped away one by one. {Did no man condemn thee?} (\oudeis se katekrinen;\). First aorist active indicative of \katakrin“\, old and common verb to give judgment against (down on) one, but not in John. No one dared to cast a stone at the woman on Christ's terms.

rwp@John:8:20 @{In the treasury} (\en t“i gazophulaki“i\). See already strkjv@Mark:12:41; strkjv@Luke:21:1| for this word for the treasure-chambers of the temple. "It abutted on the Court of the Women, and against its walls were placed chests, trumpet-like in form, as receptacles for the offerings of the worshippers" (Bernard). The Persian word _gaza_ (treasure) occurs only once in the N.T. (Acts:8:27|) and the compound (\phulakˆ\, guard) only here in John. Jesus hardly taught within a treasure-chamber. It probably means "at the treasury in the temple." This court was probably the most public part of the temple (Vincent). {And} (\kai\)="and yet" as in strkjv@1:10|, etc. {Because his hour was not yet come} (\hoti oup“ elˆluthei hˆ h“ra autou\). {Reason} (\hoti\) given why no one seized (\epiasen\, cf. strkjv@7:30|) him. \Elˆluthei\ is past perfect active of \erchomai\, "had not yet come." This very use of \h“ra\ appears in strkjv@2:4| and the very clause in strkjv@7:30| which see.

rwp@John:8:22 @{Will he kill himself?} (\mˆti apoktenei heauton;\). Negative answer formally expected, but there is a manifest sneer in the query. "The mockery in these words is alike subtle and bitter" (Vincent). It was a different group of Jews in strkjv@7:31| who cynically suggested that he was going to work among the Greeks in the Dispersion. Here they infer that Jesus refers to the next world. They suggest the depths of Gehenna for him as the abode of suicides (Josephus, _War_ III. viii. 5). Of course the rabbis could not join Jesus there! Edersheim argues against this view.

rwp@John:8:27 @{They perceived not} (\ouk egn“san\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. "Preoccupied as they were with thoughts of an earthly deliverer" (Westcott) and prejudiced against recognizing Jesus as the one sent from God. {That he spake to them of the Father} (\hoti ton patera autois elegen\). Indirect assertion, but with the present indicative (\legei\) changed to the imperfect (\elegen\) as was sometimes done (2:25|) after a secondary tense.

rwp@John:8:54 @{If I glorify myself} (\ean eg“ doxas“ emauton\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and first aorist active subjunctive (or future active indicative) of \doxaz“\. {It is my Father that glorifieth me} (\estin ho patˆr mou ho doxaz“n me\). The position and accent of \estin\ mean: "Actually my Father is the one," etc. {Of whom ye say} (\hon humeis legete\). The accusative of the person (\hon\) with \legete\ is regular (cf. strkjv@10:36|). {Your God} (\theos hum“n\). Songs:Aleph B D and apparently correct, though A C L W Delta Theta have \hˆm“n\ (our God). The \hoti\ can be taken as recitative (direct quotation, \hˆm“n\, our) or declarative (indirect, that, and so \hum“n\). The Jews claimed God as their peculiar national God as they had said in 41|. Songs:Jesus turns this confession and claim against them.

rwp@John:12:5 @{Sold} (\eprathˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \piprask“\, old verb to sell (Matthew:13:46|). {For three hundred pence} (\triakosi“n dˆnari“n\). Genitive of price. Same item in strkjv@Mark:14:5|, while in strkjv@Matthew:26:9| it is simply "for much" (\pollou\). But all three have "given to the poor" (\edothˆ pt“chois\). First aorist passive indicative of \did“mi\ with dative case \pt“chois\ (note absence of the article, poor people), real beggars, mendicants (Matthew:19:21; strkjv@Luke:14:13|). But only John singles out Judas as the one who made the protest against this waste of money while Mark says that "some" had indignation and Matthew has it that "the disciples" had indignation. Clearly Judas was the spokesman for the group who chimed in and agreed with his protest. The amount here spent by Mary (ten guineas) would equal a day labourer's wages for a year (Dods).

rwp@John:12:7 @{Suffer her to keep it against the day of my burying} (\Aphes autˆn, hina eis tˆn hˆmeran tou entaphiasmou mou tˆrˆsˆi auto\). This reading (\hina tˆrˆsˆi\, purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \tˆre“\) rather than that of the Textus Receptus (just \tetˆreken\, perfect active indicative) is correct. It is supported by Aleph B D L W Theta. The \hina\ can be rendered as above after \aphes\ according to _Koin‚_ idiom or more probably: "Let her alone: it was that," etc. (supplying "it was"). Either makes good sense. The word \entaphiasmos\ is a later and rare substantive from the late verb \entaphiaz“\, to prepare for burial (Matthew:26:12; strkjv@John:19:40|), and means preparation for burial. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:14:8|. "Preparation for my burial" is the idea here and in Mark. The idea of Jesus is that Mary had saved this money to use in preparing his body for burial. She is giving him the flowers before the funeral. We can hardly take it that Mary did not use all of the ointment for Mark (Mark:14:3|) says that she broke it and yet he adds (Mark:14:8|) what John has here. It is a paradox, but Jesus is fond of paradoxes. Mary has kept this precious gift by giving it now beforehand as a preparation for my burial. We really keep what we give to Christ. This is Mary's glory that she had some glimmering comprehension of Christ's death which none of the disciples possessed.

rwp@John:12:13 @{Took} (\elabon\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\. {The branches of the palm-trees} (\ta baia t“n phoinik“n\). \Phoinix\ is an old word for palm-tree (Revelation:7:9| for the branches) and in strkjv@Acts:27:12| the name of a city. \Baion\ is apparently a word of Egyptian origin, palm branches, here only in N.T., but in the papyri and I Macc. strkjv@13:51. Here we have "the palm branches of the palm-trees." The use in 1 Macc. strkjv@13:51 (cf. II Macc. strkjv@10:7) is in the account of Simon's triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Bernard notes that to carry palms was a mark of triumphant homage to a victor or a king (Revelation:7:9|). Palm-trees grew on the Mount of Olives (Mark:11:8|) on the road from Bethany to Jerusalem. The crowds (one in front and one behind, strkjv@Mark:11:9; strkjv@Matthew:21:9; strkjv@John:2:18|) cut the branches as they came (Matthew:21:8|). {To meet him} (\eis hupantˆsin aut“i\). Literally, {for a meeting} (\hupantˆsis\, late word from the verb \hupanta“\, strkjv@Matthew:8:28; strkjv@John:11:20,30; strkjv@12:18|, in the papyri, but only here in the N.T.) with him" (\aut“i\, associative instrumental case after \hupantˆsin\ as after the verb in verse 18|). It was a scene of growing excitement. {And cried out} (\kai ekraugazon\). Imperfect active of \kraugaz“\, old and rare verb (from \kraugˆ\) as in strkjv@Matthew:12:19; strkjv@John:19:15|. {Hosannah} (\H“sannah\). Transliteration of the Hebrew word meaning "Save now." The LXX renders it by \S“son dˆ\ (Save now). {Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord} (\eulogˆmenos ho erchomenos en onomati kuriou\). Perfect passive participle of \euloge“\. Quotation from strkjv@Psalms:118:25f.|, written, some think, for the dedication of the second temple, or, as others think, for the feast of tabernacles after the return (Ezra:3:1f.|). It was sung in the processional recitation then as a welcome to the worshippers. Here the words are addressed to the Messiah as is made plain by the addition of the words, "even the king of Israel" (\kai ho basileus tou Israˆl\) as Nathanael called him (1:49|). Jesus is here hailed by the multitudes as the long-looked for Messiah of Jewish hope and he allows them so to greet him (Luke:19:38-40|), a thing that he prevented a year before in Galilee (John:6:14f.|). It is probable that "in the name of the Lord" should be taken with "blessed" as in strkjv@Deuteronomy:21:5; strkjv@2Samuel:6:18; strkjv@1Kings:22:16; strkjv@2Kings:2:24|. The Messiah was recognized by Martha as the Coming One (John:11:27|) and is so described by the Baptist (Matthew:11:3|). Mark (Mark:11:10|) adds "the kingdom that cometh" while Luke (19:38|) has "the king that cometh." "It was this public acclamation of Jesus as King of Israel or King of the Jews which was the foundation of the charge made against him before Pilate (18:33|)" (Bernard).

rwp@John:12:19 @{The Pharisees therefore laid among themselves} (\hoi oun Pharisaioi eipan pros heautous\). Graphic picture of the predicament of the Pharisees standing off and watching the enthusiastic crowds sweep by. As people usually do, they blame each other for the defeat of their plots against Jesus and for his final victory, as it seemed. {Behold how ye prevail nothing} (\the“reite hoti ouk “pheleite ouden\). It was a pathetic confession of failure because the rest of the plotters had bungled the whole thing. "Ye help nothing at all" by your plots and plans. {Lo, the world is gone after him} (\ide ho kosmos opis“ autou apˆlthen\). Exclamatory use of \ide\ and timeless aorist active indicative of \aperchomai\. The "world" is a bunch of fools, they feel, but see for yourselves. And the Sanhedrin had advertised to "find" Jesus! They can find him now!

rwp@John:12:48 @{Rejecteth} (\athet“n\). Present active participle of \athete“\, late _Koin‚_ verb (from \athetos\, \a\ privative, and \tithˆmi\), to render null and void, only here in John, but see strkjv@Mark:6:26; strkjv@7:9|. {One that judgeth him} (\ton krinonta auton\). Articular present active participle of \krin“\. See same idea in strkjv@5:45; strkjv@9:50|. {The same} (\ekeinos\). "That" very word of Christ which one rejects will confront him and accuse him to the Father "at the last day" (\en tˆi eschatˆi hˆmerai\, this phrase peculiar to John). There is no escaping it. And yet Jesus himself will bear witness for or against the one whose conduct has already revealed his attitude towards the message of God (Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:8f.|).

rwp@John:13:18 @{Not of you all} (\ou peri pant“n\). As in verse 11|, he here refers to Judas whose treachery is no surprise to Jesus (6:64,70|). {Whom I have chosen} (\tinas exelexamˆn\). Indirect question, unless \tinas\ is here used as a relative like \hous\. The first aorist middle indicative of \ekleg“\ is the same form used in strkjv@6:70|. Jesus refers to the choice (Luke:6:13| \eklexamenos\, this very word again) of the twelve from among the large group of disciples. \That the scripture might be fulfilled\ (\all' hina hˆ graphˆ plˆr“thˆi\). See the same clause in strkjv@17:12|. Purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \plˆro“\. This treachery of Judas was according to the eternal counsels of God (12:4|), but none the less Judas is responsible for his guilt. For a like elliptical clause see strkjv@9:3; strkjv@15:25|. The quotation is from the Hebrew of strkjv@Psalms:41:9|. {He that eateth} (\ho tr“g“n\). Present active participle of old verb to gnaw, to chew, to eat, in N.T. only in John (6:54,56,57,58; strkjv@13:18|) and strkjv@Matthew:26:38|. LXX has here \ho esthi“n\. {Lifted up his heel against me} (\epˆren ep' eme tˆn pternan autou\). First aorist active indicative of \epair“\. \Pterna\, old word for heel, only here in N.T. The metaphor is that of kicking with the heel or tripping with the heel like a wrestler. It was a gross breach of hospitality to eat bread with any one and then turn against him so. The Arabs hold to it yet.

rwp@John:15:6 @{He is cast forth} (\eblˆthˆ ex“\). Timeless or gnomic use of the first aorist passive indicative of \ball“\ as the conclusion of a third-class condition (see also verses 4,7| for the same condition, only constative aorist subjunctive \meinˆte\ and \meinˆi\ in verse 7|). The apostles are thus vividly warned against presumption. Jesus as the vine will fulfil his part of the relation as long as the branches keep in vital union with him. {As a branch} (\h“s to klˆma\). {And is withered} (\exˆranthˆ\). Another timeless first aorist passive indicative, this time of \xˆrain“\, same timeless use in strkjv@James:1:11| of grass, old and common verb. They gather (\sunagousin\). Plural though subject not expressed, the servants of the vine-dresser gather up the broken off branches. {Are burned} (\kaietai\). Present passive singular of \kai“\, to burn, because \klˆmata\ (branches) is neuter plural. See this vivid picture also in strkjv@Matthew:13:41f.,49f|.

rwp@John:18:12 @{The chief captain} (\ho chiliarchos\). They actually had the Roman commander of the cohort along (cf. strkjv@Acts:21:31|), not mentioned before. {Seized} (\sunelabon\). Second aorist active of \sullamban“\, old verb to grasp together, to arrest (technical word) in the Synoptics in this context (Mark:14:48; strkjv@Matthew:26:55|), here alone in John. {Bound} (\edˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \de“\, to bind. As a matter of course, with the hands behind his back, but with no warrant in law and with no charge against him. {To Annas first} (\pros Annan pr“ton\). Ex-high priest and father-in-law (\pentheros\, old word, only here in N.T.) of Caiaphas the actual high priest. Then Jesus was subjected to a preliminary and superfluous inquiry by Annas (given only by John) while the Sanhedrin were gathering before Caiaphas. Bernard curiously thinks that the night trial actually took place here before Annas and only the early morning ratification was before Caiaphas. Songs:he calmly says that "Matthew inserts the name _Caiaphas_ at this point (the night trial) in which he seems to have been mistaken." But why "mistaken"? {That year} (\tou eniautou ekeinou\). Genitive of time.

rwp@John:18:29 @{Went out} (\exˆlthen ex“\). Note both \ex\ and \ex“\ (went out outside), since the Sanhedrin would not come into Pilate's palace. Apparently on a gallery over the pavement in front of the palace (John:19:13|). {Accusation} (\katˆgorian\). Old word for formal charge, in N.T. only here, strkjv@1Timothy:5:19; strkjv@Titus:1:6|. {Against this man} (\tou anthr“pou toutou\). Objective genitive after \katˆgorian\. A proper legal inquiry.

rwp@John:18:36 @{My kingdom} (\hˆ basileia hˆ emˆ\). Christ claims to be king to Pilate, but of a peculiar kingdom. For "world" (\kosmou\) see strkjv@17:13-18|. {My servants} (\hoi hupˆretai hoi emoi\). For the word see verse 3| where it means the temple police or guards (literally, under-rowers). In the LXX always (Proverbs:14:35; strkjv@Isaiah:32:5; strkjv@Daniel:3:46|) officers of a king as here. Christ then had only a small band of despised followers who could not fight against Caesar. Was he alluding also to legions of angels on his side? (Matthew:26:56|). {Would fight} (\ˆg“nizonto an\). Imperfect middle of \ag“nizomai\ common verb (only here in John, but see strkjv@1Corinthians:9:25|) from \ag“n\ (contest) with \an\, a conclusion of the second-class condition (assumed as untrue). Christians should never forget the profound truth stated here by Jesus. {That I should not be delivered} (\hina mˆ paradoth“\). Negative final clause with \hina mˆ\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \paradid“mi\ (see verses 28,36|). Jesus expects Pilate to surrender to the Jews. {But now} (\nun de\). In contrast to the condition already stated as in strkjv@8:40; strkjv@9:41; strkjv@15:22,24|.

rwp@John:19:12 @{Sought} (\ezˆtei\). Imperfect active, "kept on seeking," "made renewed efforts to release him." He was afraid to act boldly against the will of the Jews. {If thou release this man} (\ean touton apolusˆis\). Condition of third class, a direct threat to Pilate. He knew all the time that the Sanhedrin might tell Caesar on him. {Thou art not Caesar's friend} (\ouk ei philos tou kaisaros\). Later to Vespasian this was an official title, here simply a daring threat to Pilate. {Speaketh against Caesar} (\antilegei t“i kaisari\). Caesar brooks no rival. Jesus had allowed himself to be acclaimed king of Israel in the Triumphal Entry (John:12:13; strkjv@Mark:11:10; strkjv@Luke:19:38|). The Sanhedrin have caught Pilate in their toils.

rwp@John:19:15 @{Away with him, away with him} (\ƒron, ƒron\). 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 hum“n staur“s“;\). {But Caesar} (\ei mˆ 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@John:19:35 @{He that hath seen} (\ho he“rak“s\). Perfect active articular participle of \hora“\. John the Apostle was there and saw this fact (still sees it, in fact). This personal witness disproves the theory of the Docetic Gnostics that Jesus did not have a real human body. {He knoweth} (\ekeinos oiden\). That is John does like strkjv@9:37|. It is possible that \ekeinos\ may be a solemn appeal to God as in strkjv@1:33| or Christ as in strkjv@1John:3:5|. Bernard argues that the final editor is distinguishing the Beloved Disciple from himself and is endorsing him. But the example of Josephus (_War_. III. 7, 16) is against this use of \ekeinos\. John is rather referring to himself as still alive.

rwp@John:20:20 @{Showed} (\edeixen\). First aorist active indicative of \deiknumi\. This body, not yet glorified, retained the marks of the nails and of the soldier's spear, ample proof of the bodily resurrection against the modern view that only Christ's "spirit" arose and against the Docetic notion that Jesus had no actual human body. Luke (Luke:24:39f.|) adds feet to hands and side. {Were glad} (\echarˆsan\). Second aorist passive indicative of \chair“\. Jesus had said (16:22|) that it would be so. Luke adds (Luke:24:41|) that they "disbelieved for joy." It was too good to be true, though terror had first seized them when Jesus appeared (Luke:24:37|) because of the suddenness of Christ's appearance and their highly wrought state.

rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE PURPOSE The author undoubtedly has the Gnostics in mind and is seeking to warn his readers against them, as is true of II Peter. This same purpose appears in the Johannine Epistles, as was true also of Colossians, Ephesians, the Pastoral Epistles.

rwp@Jude:1:9 @{Michael the archangel} (\ho Michael ho archaggelos\). Michael is mentioned also in strkjv@Daniel:10:13,21; strkjv@12:1; strkjv@Revelation:12:7|. \Archaggelos\ in N.T. occurs only here and strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:16|, but in strkjv@Daniel:10:13,20; strkjv@12:1|. {Contending with the devil} (\t“i diabol“i diakrinomenos\). Present middle participle of \diakrin“\, to separate, to strive with as in strkjv@Acts:11:2|. Dative case \diabol“i\. {When he disputed} (\hote dielegeto\). Imperfect middle of \dialegomai\ as in strkjv@Mark:9:34|. {Concerning the body of Moses} (\peri tou M“use“s s“matos\). Some refer this to strkjv@Zechariah:3:1|, others to a rabbinical comment on strkjv@Deuteronomy:34:6|. There is a similar reference to traditions in strkjv@Acts:7:22; strkjv@Galatians:3:19; strkjv@Hebrews:2:2; strkjv@2Timothy:3:8|. But this explanation hardly meets the facts. {Durst not bring} (\ouk etolmˆsen epenegkein\). "Did not dare (first aorist active indicative of \tolma“\), to bring against him" (second aorist active infinitive of \epipher“\). {A railing accusation} (\krisin blasphˆmias\). "Charge of blasphemy" where strkjv@2Peter:2:11| has "\blasphˆmon krisin\." Peter also has \para kuri“i\ (with the Lord), not in Jude. {The Lord rebuke thee} (\epitimˆsai soi kurios\). First aorist active optative of \epitima“\, a wish about the future. These words occur in strkjv@Zechariah:3:1-10| where the angel of the Lord replies to the charges of Satan. Clement of Alex. (_Adumb. in Ep. Judae_) says that Jude:quoted here the _Assumption of Moses_, one of the apocryphal books. Origen says the same thing. Mayor thinks that the author of the _Assumption of Moses_ took these words from Zechariah and put them in the mouth of the Archangel Michael. There is a Latin version of the _Assumption_. Some date it as early as B.C. 2, others after A.D. 44.

rwp@Luke:1:39 @{Arose} (\anastƒsa\). Luke is very fond of this word, sixty times against twenty-two in the rest of the N.T. {Into the hill country} (\eis tˆn orinˆn\). Luke uses this adjective twice in this context (here and strkjv@1:65|) instead of \to oros\, the mountains. It is an old word and is in the LXX, but nowhere else in the N.T. The name of the city where Zacharias lived is not given unless Judah here means Juttah (Joshua:15:55|). Hebron was the chief city of this part of Judea.

rwp@Luke:2:34 @{Is set for the falling and the rising up of many in Israel} (\Keitai eis pt“sin kai anastasin poll“n en t“i Israˆl\). Present indicative of the old defective verb appearing only in present and imperfect in the N.T. Sometimes it is used as the passive of \tithˆmi\ as here. The falling of some and the rising up of others is what is meant. He will be a stumbling-block to some (Isaiah:8:14; strkjv@Matthew:21:42,44; strkjv@Romans:9:33; strkjv@1Peter:2:16f.|) who love darkness rather than light (John:3:19|), he will be the cause of rising for others (Romans:6:4,9; strkjv@Ephesians:2:6|). "Judas despairs, Peter repents: one robber blasphemes, the other confesses" (Plummer). Jesus is the magnet of the ages. He draws some, he repels others. This is true of all epoch-making men to some extent. {Spoken against} (\antilegomenon\). Present passive participle, continuous action. It is going on today. Nietzsche regarded Jesus Christ as the curse of the race because he spared the weak.

rwp@Luke:2:35 @{A sword} (\rhomphaia\). A large sword, properly a long Thracian javelin. It occurs in the LXX of Goliath's sword (1Samuel:17:51|). How little Mary understood the meaning of Simeon's words that seemed so out of place in the midst of the glorious things already spoken, a sharp thorn in their roses, a veritable bitter-sweet. But one day Mary will stand by the Cross of Christ with this Thracian javelin clean through her soul, \stabat Mater Dolorosa\ (John:19:25|). It is only a parenthesis here, and a passing cloud perhaps passed over Mary's heart already puzzled with rapture and ecstasy. {May be revealed} (\apokaluphth“sin\). Unveiled. First aorist passive subjunctive after \hop“s an\ and expresses God's purpose in the mission of the Messiah. He is to test men's thoughts (\dialogismoi\) and purposes. They will be compelled to take a stand for Christ or against him. That is true today.

rwp@Luke:3:14 @{Soldiers also} (\kai strateuomenoi\). Men on service, _militantes_ rather than _milites_ (Plummer). Songs:Paul in strkjv@2Timothy:2:4|. An old word like \strati“tˆs\, soldier. Some of these soldiers acted as police to help the publicans. But they were often rough and cruel. {Do violence to no man} (\mˆdena diaseisˆte\). Here only in the N.T., but in the LXX and common in ancient Greek. It means to shake (seismic disturbance, earthquake) thoroughly (\dia\) and so thoroughly to terrify, to extort money or property by intimidating (3Macc. strkjv@7:21). The Latin employs _concutere_, so. It was a process of blackmail to which Socrates refers (Xenophon, _Memorabilia_, ii. 9,1). This was a constant temptation to soldiers. Might does not make right with Jesus. {Neither exact anything wrongfully} (\mˆde sukophantˆsˆte\). In Athens those whose business it was to inform against any one whom they might find exporting figs out of Attica were called fig-showers or sycophants (\sukophantai\). From \sukon\, fig, and \phain“\, show. Some modern scholars reject this explanation since no actual examples of the word meaning merely a fig-shower have been found. But without this view it is all conjectural. From the time of Aristophanes on it was used for any malignant informer or calumniator. These soldiers were tempted to obtain money by informing against the rich, blackmail again. Songs:the word comes to mean to accuse falsely. The sycophants came to be a regular class of informers or slanderers in Athens. Socrates is quoted by Xenophon as actually advising Crito to employ one in self-defence, like the modern way of using one gunman against another. Demosthenes pictures a sycophant as one who "glides about the market like a scorpion, with his venomous sting all ready, spying out whom he may surprise with misfortune and ruin and from whom he can most easily extort money, by threatening him with an action dangerous in its consequences" (quoted by Vincent). The word occurs only in Luke in the N.T., here and in strkjv@Luke:19:8| in the confession of Zaccheus. It occurs in the LXX and often in the old Greek. {Be content with your wages} (\arkeisthe tois ops“niois hum“n\). Discontent with wages was a complaint of mercenary soldiers. This word for wages was originally anything cooked (\opson\, cooked food), and bought (from \“neomai\, to buy). Hence, "rations," "pay," wages. \Opsarion\, diminutive of \opson\, was anything eaten with bread like broiled fish. Songs:\ops“nion\ comes to mean whatever is bought to be eaten with bread and then a soldier's pay or allowance (Polybius, and other late Greek writers) as in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:7|. Paul uses the singular of a preacher's pay (2Corinthians:11:8|) and the plural of the wages of sin (Romans:6:23|) = death (death is the diet of sin).

rwp@Luke:4:8 @{Thou shalt worship} (\proskunˆseis\). Satan used this verb to Jesus who turns it against him by the quotation from strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:13|. Jesus clearly perceived that one could not worship both Satan and God. He had to choose whom he would serve. Luke does not give the words, "Get thee hence, Satan" (Matthew:4:10|), for he has another temptation to narrate.

rwp@Luke:4:12 @{It is said} (\eirˆtai\). Perfect passive indicative, stands said, a favourite way of quoting Scripture in the N.T. In strkjv@Matthew:4:7| we have the usual "it is written" (\gegraptai\). Here Jesus quotes strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:16|. Each time he uses Deuteronomy against the devil. The LXX is quoted. It is the volitive future indicative with \ouk\, a common prohibition. Jesus points out to the devil that testing God is not trusting God (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:5:17 @{That} (\kai\). Use of \kai\ = \hoti\ (that) like the Hebrew _wav_, though found in Greek also. {He} (\autos\). Luke sometimes has \autos\ in the nominative as unemphatic "he" as here, not "he himself." {Was teaching} (\ˆn didask“n\). Periphrastic imperfect again like our English idiom. {Were sitting by} (\ˆsan kathˆmenoi\). Periphrastic imperfect again. There is no "by" in the Greek. {Doctors of the law} (\nomodidaskaloi\). A compound word formed after analogy of \hierodidaskalos\, but not found outside of the N.T. and ecclesiastical writers, one of the very few words apparently N.T. in usage. It appears here and strkjv@Acts:5:34; strkjv@1Timothy:1:7|. It is not likely that Luke and Paul made the word, but they simply used the term already in current use to describe teachers and interpreters of the law. Our word "doctor" is Latin for "teacher." These "teachers of the law" are called elsewhere in the Gospels "scribes" (\grammateis\) as in Matthew and Mark (see on ¯Matthew:5:20; strkjv@23:34|) and strkjv@Luke:5:21; strkjv@19:47; strkjv@21:1; strkjv@22:2|. Luke also employs \nomikos\ (one skilled in the law, \nomos\) as in strkjv@10:25|. One thinks of our LL.D. (Doctors of Civil and Canon Law), for both were combined in Jewish law. They were usually Pharisees (mentioned here for the first time in Luke) for which see on ¯Matthew:3:7,20|. Luke will often speak of the Pharisees hereafter. Not all the "Pharisees" were "teachers of the law" so that both terms often occur together as in verse 21| where Luke has separate articles (\hoi grammateis kai hoi Pharisaioi\), distinguishing between them, though one article may occur as in strkjv@Matthew:5:20| or no article as here in verse 17|. Luke alone mentions the presence here of these Pharisees and doctors of the law "which were come" (\hoi ˆsan elˆluthotes\, periphrastic past perfect active, {had come}). {Out of every village of Galilee and Judea and Jerusalem} (\ek pasˆs k“mˆs tˆs Galilaias kai Ioudaias kai Ierousalˆm\). Edersheim (_Jewish Social Life_) observes that the Jews distinguished Jerusalem as a separate district in Judea. Plummer considers it hyperbole in Luke to use "every village." But one must recall that Jesus had already made one tour of Galilee which stirred the Pharisees and rabbis to active opposition. Judea had already been aroused and Jerusalem was the headquarters of the definite campaign now organized against Jesus. One must bear in mind that strkjv@John:4:1-4| shows that Jesus had already left Jerusalem and Judea because of the jealousy of the Pharisees. They are here on purpose to find fault and to make charges against Jesus. One must not forget that there were many kinds of Pharisees and that not all of them were as bad as these legalistic and punctilious hypocrites who deserved the indictment and exposure of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:23|. Paul himself is a specimen of the finer type of Pharisee which, however, developed into the persecuting fanatic till Jesus changed his whole life. {The power of the Lord was with him to heal} (\dunamis Kuriou ˆn eis to iƒsthai auton\). Songs:the best texts. It is neat Greek, but awkward English: "Then was the power of the Lord for the healing as to him (Jesus)." Here \Kuriou\ refers to Jehovah. {Dunamis} (dynamite) is one of the common words for "miracles" (\dunameis\). What Luke means is that Jesus had the power of the Lord God to heal with. He does not mean that this power was intermittent. He simply calls attention to its presence with Jesus on this occasion.

rwp@Luke:6:7 @{The scribes and the Pharisees} (\hoi grammateis kai hoi Pharisaioi\). Only Luke here though Pharisees named in strkjv@Matthew:12:14| and Pharisees and Herodians in strkjv@Mark:3:6|. {Watched him} (\paretˆrounto auton\). Imperfect middle, were watching for themselves on the side (\para\). strkjv@Mark:3:2| has the imperfect active \paretˆroun\. Common verb, but the proposition \para\ gave an extra touch, watching either assiduously like the physician at the bedside or insidiously with evil intent as here. {Would heal} (\therapeusei\). But the present active indicative (\therapeuei\) may be the correct text here. Songs:Westcott and Hort. {That they might find out how to accuse him} (\hina heur“sin katˆgorein autou\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \heurisk“\ and the infinitive with it means to find out how to do a thing. They were determined to make a case against Jesus. They felt sure that their presence would prevent any spurious work on the part of Jesus.

rwp@Luke:6:11 @{They were filled with madness} (\eplˆsthˆsan anoias\) First aorist passive (effective) with genitive: In strkjv@5:26| we saw the people filled with fear. Here is rage that is kin to insanity, for \anoias\ is lack of sense (\a\ privative and \nous\, mind). An old word, but only here and strkjv@2Timothy:3:9| in the N.T. {Communed} (\dielaloun\), imperfect active, picturing their excited counsellings with one another. strkjv@Mark:3:6| notes that they bolted out of the synagogue and outside plotted even with the Herodians how to destroy Jesus, strange co-conspirators these against the common enemy. {What they might do to Jesus} (\ti an poiˆsaien Iˆsou\). Luke puts it in a less damaging way than strkjv@Mark:3:6; strkjv@Matthew:12:14|. This aorist optative with \an\ is the deliberative question like that in strkjv@Acts:17:18| retained in the indirect form here. Perhaps Luke means, not that they were undecided about killing Jesus, but only as to the best way of doing it. Already nearly two years before the end we see the set determination to destroy Jesus. We see it here in Galilee. We have already seen it at the feast in Jerusalem (John:5:18|) where "the Jews sought the more to kill him." John and the Synoptics are in perfect agreement as to the Pharisaic attitude toward Jesus.

rwp@Luke:6:29 @{On the cheek} (\epi tˆn siagona\). strkjv@Matthew:5:39| has "right." Old word meaning jaw or jawbone, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:5:39|, which see for discussion. It seems an act of violence rather than contempt. Sticklers for extreme literalism find trouble with the conduct of Jesus in strkjv@John:18:22f.| where Jesus, on receiving a slap in the face, protested against it. {Thy cloke} (\to himation\), {thy coat} (\ton chit“na\). Here the upper and more valuable garment (\himation\) is first taken, the under and less valuable \chit“n\ last. In strkjv@Matthew:5:40| the process (apparently a legal one) is reversed. {Withhold not} (\mˆ k“lusˆis\). Aorist subjunctive in prohibition against committing an act. Do not hinder him in his robbing. It is usually useless anyhow with modern armed bandits.

rwp@Luke:6:37 @{And judge not} (\kai mˆ krinete\). \Mˆ\ and the present active imperative, forbidding the habit of criticism. The common verb \krin“\, to separate, we have in our English words critic, criticism, criticize, discriminate. Jesus does not mean that we are not to form opinions, but not to form them rashly, unfairly, like our prejudice. {Ye shall not be judged} (\ou mˆ krithˆte\). First aorist passive subjunctive with double negative ou \mˆ\, strong negative. {Condemn not} (\mˆ katadikazete\). To give judgment (\dikˆ, dixaz“\) against (\kata\) one. \Mˆ\ and present imperative. Either cease doing or do not have the habit of doing it. Old verb. {Ye shall not be condemned} (\ou mˆ katadikasthˆte\). First aorist passive indicative again with the double negative. Censoriousness is a bad habit. {Release} (\apoluete\). Positive command the opposite of the censoriousness condemned.

rwp@Luke:6:48 @{Digged and went deep} (\eskapsen kai ebathunen\). Two first aorist indicatives. Not a _hendiadys_ for dug deep. \Skapt“\, to dig, is as old as Homer, as is \bathun“\, to make deep. {And laid a foundation} (\kai ethˆken themelion\). That is the whole point. This wise builder struck the rock before he laid the foundation. {When a flood arose} (\plˆmmurˆs genomenˆs\). Genitive absolute. Late word for flood, \plˆmmura\, only here in the N.T., though in strkjv@Job:40:18|. {Brake against} (\proserˆxen\). First aorist active indicative from \prosrˆgnumi\ and in late writers \prosrˆss“\, to break against. Only here in the N.T. strkjv@Matthew:7:25| has \prosepesan\, from \prospipt“\, to fall against. {Could not shake it} (\ouk ischusen saleusai autˆn\). Did not have strength enough to shake it. {Because it had been well builded} (\dia to kal“s oikodomˆsthai autˆn\). Perfect passive articular infinitive after \dia\ and with accusative of general reference.

rwp@Matthew:10:5 @{These twelve Jesus sent forth} (\toutous tous d“deka apesteilen ho Iˆsous\). The word "sent forth" (\apesteilen\) is the same root as "apostles." The same word reappears in strkjv@10:16|. {Way of the Gentiles} (\hodon ethn“n\). Objective genitive, way leading to the Gentiles. This prohibition against going among the Gentiles and the Samaritans was for this special tour. They were to give the Jews the first opportunity and not to prejudice the cause at this stage. Later Jesus will order them to go and disciple all the Gentiles (Matthew:28:19|).

rwp@Matthew:10:14 @{Shake off the dust} (\ektinaxate ton koniorton\). Shake out, a rather violent gesture of disfavour. The Jews had violent prejudices against the smallest particles of Gentile dust, not as a purveyor of disease of which they did not know, but because it was regarded as the putrescence of death. If the apostles were mistreated by a host or hostess, they were to be treated as if they were Gentiles (cf. strkjv@Matthew:18:17; strkjv@Acts:18:6|). Here again we have a restriction that was for this special tour with its peculiar perils.

rwp@Matthew:12:3 @{What David did} (\ti epoiˆsen Daueid\). From the necessity of hunger. The first defence made by Christ appeals to the conduct of David (2Samuel:21:6|). David and those with him did "what was not lawful" (\ho ouk exon ˆn\) precisely the charge made against the disciples (\ho ouk exestin\ in verse 2|).

rwp@Matthew:12:7 @{The guiltless} (\tous anaitious\). Songs:in verse 5|. Common in ancient Greek. No real ground against, it means \an\ + \aitios\. Jesus quotes strkjv@Hosea:6:6| here as he did in strkjv@Matthew:9:13|. A pertinent prophecy that had escaped the notice of the sticklers for ceremonial literalness and the letter of the law.

rwp@Matthew:12:14 @{Took counsel against him} (\sumboulion elabon kat' autou\). An imitation of the Latin _concilium capere_ and found in papyri of the second century A.D. (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 238.) This incident marks a crisis in the hatred of the Pharisees toward Jesus. They bolted out of the synagogue and actually conspired with their hated rivals, the Herodians, how to put Jesus to death (Mark:3:6; strkjv@Matthew:12:14; strkjv@Luke:6:11|). By "destroy" (\apoles“sin\) they meant "kill."

rwp@Matthew:12:31 @{But the blasphemy against the Spirit} (\hˆ de tou pneumatos blasphˆmia\). Objective genitive. This is the unpardonable sin. In 32| we have \kata tou pneumatos tou hagiou\ to make it plainer. What is the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? These Pharisees had already committed it. They had attributed the works of the Holy Spirit by whose power Jesus wrought his miracles (12:28|) to the devil. That sin was without excuse and would not be forgiven in their age or in the coming one (12:32|). People often ask if they can commit the unpardonable sin. Probably some do who ridicule the manifest work of God's Spirit in men's lives and attribute the Spirit's work to the devil.

rwp@Matthew:12:34 @{Ye offspring of vipers} (\gennˆmata echidn“n\). 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, \thˆsaurou\) within. Verse 33| is like strkjv@Matthew:7:17-19|. Jesus often repeated his crisp pungent sayings as every teacher does.

rwp@Matthew:13:57 @{And they were offended in him} (\kai eskandalizonto en aut“i\). Graphic imperfect passive. Literally, "They stumbled at him," "They were repelled by him" (Moffatt), "They turned against him" (Weymouth). It was unpardonable for Jesus not to be commonplace like themselves. {Not without honour} (\ouk estin atimos\). This is a proverb found in Jewish, Greek, and Roman writers. Seen also in the _Logia of Jesus_ (_Oxyr. Papyri_ i. 3).

rwp@Matthew:15:1 @{From Jerusalem} (\apo Ierosolum“n\). 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:15:12 @{Were offended} (\eskandalisthˆsan\). First aorist passive. "Were caused to stumble," "have taken offence" (Moffatt), "have turned against you" (Weymouth), "were shocked" (Goodspeed), "War ill-pleased" (Braid Scots). They took umbrage at the public rebuke and at such a scorpion sting in it all. It cut to the quick because it was true. It showed in the glowering countenances of the Pharisees so plainly that the disciples were uneasy. See on ¯5:29|.

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:16:18 @{And I also say unto thee} (\k'ag“ de soi leg“\). "The emphasis is not on 'Thou art Peter' over against 'Thou art the Christ,' but on \Kag“\: 'The Father hath revealed to thee one truth, and I also tell you another" (McNeile). Jesus calls Peter here by the name that he had said he would have (John:1:42|). Peter (\Petros\) is simply the Greek word for Cephas (Aramaic). Then it was prophecy, now it is fact. In verse 17| Jesus addresses him as "Simon Bar-Jonah," his full patronymic (Aramaic) name. But Jesus has a purpose now in using his nickname "Peter" which he had himself given him. Jesus makes a remarkable play on Peter's name, a pun in fact, that has caused volumes of controversy and endless theological strife. {On this rock} (\epi tautˆi tˆi petrƒi\) Jesus says, a ledge or cliff of rock like that in strkjv@7:24| on which the wise man built his house. \Petros\ is usually a smaller detachment of the massive ledge. But too much must not be made of this point since Jesus probably spoke Aramaic to Peter which draws no such distinction (\Kˆphƒ\). What did Jesus mean by this word-play?

rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{The gates of Hades} (\pulai hƒidou\) {shall not prevail against it} (\ou katischusousin autˆs\). Each word here creates difficulty. Hades is technically the unseen world, the Hebrew Sheol, the land of the departed, that is death. Paul uses \thanate\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:55| in quoting strkjv@Hosea:13:14| for \hƒidˆ\. It is not common in the papyri, but it is common on tombstones in Asia Minor, "doubtless a survival of its use in the old Greek religion" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). The ancient pagans divided Hades (\a\ privative and \idein\, to see, abode of the unseen) into Elysium and Tartarus as the Jews put both Abraham's bosom and Gehenna in Sheol or Hades (cf. strkjv@Luke:16:25|). Christ was in Hades (Acts:2:27,31|), not in Gehenna. We have here the figure of two buildings, the Church of Christ on the Rock, the House of Death (Hades). "In the Old Testament the 'gates of Hades' (Sheol) never bears any other meaning (Isaiah:38:10|; Wisd. strkjv@16:3; 3Macc. strkjv@5:51) than death," McNeile claims. See also strkjv@Psalms:9:13; strkjv@107:18; strkjv@Job:38:17| (\pulai thanatou pul“roi hƒidou\). It is not the picture of Hades _attacking_ Christ's church, but of death's possible victory over the church. "The \ekklˆsia\ is built upon the Messiahship of her master, and death, the gates of Hades, will not prevail against her by keeping Him imprisoned. It was a mysterious truth, which He will soon tell them in plain words (verse 21|); it is echoed in strkjv@Acts:2:24,31|" (McNeile). Christ's church will prevail and survive because He will burst the gates of Hades and come forth conqueror. He will ever live and be the guarantor of the perpetuity of His people or church. The verb \katischu“\ (literally have strength against, \ischu“\ from \ischus\ and \kat-\) occurs also in strkjv@Luke:21:36; strkjv@23:23|. It appears in the ancient Greek, the LXX, and in the papyri with the accusative and is used in the modern Greek with the sense of gaining the mastery over. The wealth of imagery in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| makes it difficult to decide each detail, but the main point is clear. The \ekklˆsia\ which consists of those confessing Christ as Peter has just done will not cease. The gates of Hades or bars of Sheol will not close down on it. Christ will rise and will keep his church alive. _Sublime Porte_ used to be the title of Turkish power in Constantinople.

rwp@Revelation:17:14 @{These} (\houtoi\). These ten kings. {Shall war against the Lamb} (\meta tou thˆriou polemˆsousin\). Future active of \polemeo\, to war. As allies of the beast (the servant of the dragon, strkjv@12:7|) they will wage war with the Lamb (the enemy of the dragon). These kings gather for battle as in strkjv@16:13f|. {And the Lamb shall overcome them} (\kai to arnion nikˆsei autous\). Future active of \nika“\. This is the glorious outcome, victory by the Lamb over the coalition of kings as against the beast before. {For he is Lord of lords and King of kings} (\hoti Kurios kuri“n estin kai Basileus basile“n\). The same words are again descriptive of Christ in strkjv@19:16|, as of God in strkjv@Deuteronomy:10:17| (God of gods and Lord of lords) and strkjv@Daniel:10:17| (God of gods and Lord of kings). Cf. also strkjv@1Timothy:6:15; strkjv@Revelation:1:5|. Crowned heads are Christ's subjects. {And they also shall overcome that are with him} (\kai hoi met' autou\). "And those with him shall also overcome" (supply \nikˆsousin\, not \eisin\). They will share in the triumph of the Lamb, as they shared in the conflict. Cf. \meta tou thˆriou\ in verse 12|. {Called and chosen and faithful} (\klˆtoi kai eklektoi kai pistoi\). These are the three notes of those who share in the victory. For \klˆtos\ and \eklektos\ see strkjv@Matthew:22:14| (contrasted); strkjv@Romans:8:28ff.; strkjv@2Peter:1:10; strkjv@Revelation:2:10,13|. The elect are called and prove faithful.

rwp@Revelation:19:19 @{Gathered together} (\sunˆgmena\). Perfect passive participle of \sunag“\. In battle array. {To make war against} (\poiˆsai polemon meta\). First aorist active infinitive of \poie“\, to express purpose. See \poleme“ meta\ in strkjv@12:7| and the use of \sunag“ eis polemon\ in strkjv@16:14; strkjv@20:8|. The beast (for his army see strkjv@16:13f.|) led a league of ten kings against Babylon in strkjv@17:16f.|, but with the purpose also of fighting the Lamb (17:14|).

rwp@Revelation:20:8 @{To deceive the nations} (\planˆsai ta ethnˆ\). First aorist active infinitive of purpose of \plana“\, Satan's chief task (chapters 12 to 18, in particular strkjv@12:9; strkjv@13:14; strkjv@19:20; strkjv@20:3,10|). {Which are in the four corners of the earth} (\ta en tais tessarsi g“niais tˆs gˆs\). Clearly the reign with Christ, if on earth, was not shared in by all on earth, for Satan finds a large and ready following on his release. See strkjv@7:1| (Isaiah:11:12|) for "the four corners of the earth." {Gog and Magog} (\ton G“g kai Mag“g\). Accusative in explanatory apposition with \ta ethnˆ\ (the nations). Magog is first mentioned in strkjv@Genesis:10:2|. The reference here seems to be strkjv@Ezekiel:38:2|, where both are mentioned. Josephus (_Ant_. I. 6. 1) identifies Magog with the Scythians, with Gog as their prince. In the rabbinical writings Gog and Magog appear as the enemies of the Messiah. Some early Christian writers thought of the Goths and Huns, but Augustine refuses to narrow the imagery and sees only the final protest of the world against Christianity. {To gather them together to the war} (\sunagagein autous eis ton polemon\). Second aorist active infinitive of purpose of \sunag“\, a congenial task for Satan after his confinement. See strkjv@16:14| for this very phrase and also strkjv@17:14; strkjv@19:19|. {Of whom} (\h“n--aut“n\). Pleonasm or redundant pronoun as in strkjv@3:8| and often (of whom--of them). {As the sand of the sea} (\h“s hˆ ammos tˆs thalassˆs\). Already in strkjv@12:18|. Clearly then the millennium, whatever it is, does not mean a period when Satan has no following on earth, for this vast host rallies at once to his standard.

rwp@Revelation:22:17 @{The Spirit and the bride} (\to pneuma kai hˆ numphˆ\). The Holy Spirit, speaking through the prophets or the Spirit of prophecy (2:7; strkjv@16:4; strkjv@18:24|), joins with the bride (21:2|), the people of God, in a response to the voice of Jesus just heard. After the picture of heaven in strkjv@22:1-5| there is intense longing (19:7|) of God's people for the consummation of the marriage of the Lamb and the Bride. Songs:now "the prophets and the saints" (Swete) make a common plea to the Lord Jesus to "come" (\Erchou\, present middle imperative of \erchomai\, Come on) as he has just said twice that he would do (22:1,12|). The call for Christ is to be repeated by every hearer (\ho akou“n\) as in strkjv@1:3|. {Let him come} (\erchesth“\). Change of person and this verb applied not to Christ as just before, but to the one who wishes to greet Christ. The thirsty man is bidden to come himself before it is too late. See strkjv@5:6| for \dipsa“\, used for spiritual thirst, and in particular strkjv@John:6:35; strkjv@7:37| for one thirsting for the water of life (21:6; strkjv@22:1|). Cf. strkjv@Isaiah:55:1|. {He that will} (\ho thel“n\). Even if not yet eagerly thirsting. This one is welcome also. For this use of \thel“\ see strkjv@Phillipians:2:13|. {Let him take} (\labet“\). Second ingressive aorist active imperative of \lamban“\. In accordance with the free promise in strkjv@21:6|, "freely" (\d“rean\) here as there. This gracious and wide invitation is cheering after the gloomy picture of the doomed and the damned. The warnings against the dragon and the two beasts with all their dreadful consequences are meant to deter men from falling victims to all the devil's devices then and now. The door of mercy still stands wide open today, for the end has not yet come. The series of panoramas is over, with the consummation pictured as a reality. Now we drop back to the standpoint before we saw the visions through John's eyes. In verse 17| we hear the voice of the Spirit of God inviting all who hear and see to heed and to come and drink of the water of life freely offered by the Lamb of God.

rwp@Revelation:22:18 @{I testify} (\Eg“ martur“\). Commentators disagree keenly about the words in verses 18,19|. Charles rejects them as an interpolation and out of harmony with the rest of the book. Beckwith takes them to be John's own warning, drawn from strkjv@Deuteronomy:4:2| "to every man that heareth" (\panti t“i akouonti\, dative of the articular present active participle of \akou“\, which compare strkjv@1:3|). Swete properly holds these verses to be from Jesus himself, still bearing solemn witness to this book, with warning against wilful perversion of its teachings. {If any man shall add} (\ean tis epithˆi\). Condition of the third class with \ean\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \epitithˆmi\, with \epi\ added with \auta\, as also in the conclusion \epithˆsei ep' auton\ (future active). This warning is directed against perversions of this book, not about the New Testament or the Bible as a whole, though it may be true there also. Surely no warning was more needed when we consider the treatment accorded the Apocalypse, so that Dr. Robert South said that the Apocalypse either found one crazy or left him so.

rwp@Romans:1:26 @{Unto vile passions} (\eis pathˆ atimias\). Unto passions of dishonour. \Pathos\, old word from \pasch“\, to experience, originally meant any feeling whether good or bad, but in N.T. always in bad sense as here, strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:5; strkjv@Colossians:3:5| (only N.T. examples). {That which is against nature} (\tˆn para phusin\). The degradation of sex is what Paul here notes as one of the results of heathenism (the loss of God in the life of man). They passed by the Creator.

rwp@Romans:2:22 @{That abhorrest} (\ho bdelussomenos\). Old word to make foul, to stink, to have abhorrence for. In LXX, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:21:8|. The very word used by Jesus to express their horror of idols (\eid“la\, see on ¯Acts:7:41; strkjv@1Corinthians:12:2|). See strkjv@Matthew:24:15| for "abomination." {Dost thou rob temples?} (\hierosuleis?\). Old verb from \hierosulos\ (Acts:19:37|) and that from \hieron\, temple, and \sula“\, to rob. The town clerk (Acts:19:37|) said that these Jews (Paul and his companions) were "not robbers of temples," proof that the charge was sometimes made against Jews, though expressly forbidden the Jews (Josephus, _Ant_. IV. 8, 10). Paul refers to the crime of robbing idol temples in spite of the defilement of contact with idolatry.

rwp@Romans:3:19 @{That every mouth may be stopped} (\hina pƒn stoma phragˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist passive subjunctive of \phrass“\, old verb to fence in, to block up. See strkjv@2Corinthians:11:10|. Stopping mouths is a difficult business. See strkjv@Titus:1:11| where Paul uses \epistomizein\ (to stop up the mouth) for the same idea. Paul seems here to be speaking directly to Jews (\tois en t“i nom“i\), the hardest to convince. With the previous proof on that point he covers the whole ground for he made the case against the Gentiles in strkjv@1:18-32|. {May be brought under the judgement of God} (\hupodikos genˆtai t“i the“i\). "That all the world (Jew as well as Gentile) may become (\genˆtai\) answerable (\hupodikos\, old forensic word, here only in N.T.) to God (dative case \t“i the“i\)." Every one is "liable to God," in God's court.

rwp@Romans:4:13 @{That he should be the heir of the world} (\to klˆronomon auton einai kosmou\). The articular infinitive (\to einai\) with the accusative of general reference in loose apposition with \hˆ epaggelia\ (the promise). But where is that promise? Not just strkjv@Genesis:12:7|, but the whole chain of promises about his son, his descendants like the stars in heaven, the Messiah and the blessing to the world through him. In these verses (13-17|) Paul employs (Sanday and Headlam) the keywords of his gospel (faith, promise, grace) and arrays them against the current Jewish theology (law, works, merit).

rwp@Romans:4:18 @{In hope believed against hope} (\par' elpida ep' elpidi episteusen\). "Past hope in (upon) hope he trusted." Graphic picture. {To the end that he might become} (\eis to genesthai auton\). Purpose clause again with \eis\ to and the infinitive as in verses 11-16|.

rwp@Romans:5:15 @{But not as the trespass} (\all' ouch h“s\). It is more contrast than parallel: "the trespass" (\to parapt“ma\, the slip, fall to one side) over against the free gift (\to charisma\, of grace \charis\). {Much more} (\poll“i mallon\). Another _a fortiori_ argument. Why so? As a God of love he delights {much more} in showing mercy and pardon than in giving just punishment (Lightfoot). The gift surpasses the sin. It is not necessary to Paul's argument to make "the many" in each case correspond, one relates to Adam, the other to Christ.

rwp@Romans:6:13 @{Neither present} (\mˆde paristanete\). Present active imperative in prohibition of \paristan“\, late form of \paristˆmi\, to place beside. Stop presenting your members or do not have the habit of doing so, "do not go on putting your members to sin as weapons of unrighteousness." {Instruments} (\hopla\). Old word for tools of any kind for shop or war (John:18:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:7; strkjv@10:4; strkjv@Romans:13:12|). Possibly here figure of two armies arrayed against each other (Galatians:5:16-24|), and see \hopla dikaiosunˆs\ below. The two sets of \hopla\ clash. {But present yourselves unto God} (\alla parastˆsate heautous t“i the“i\). First aorist active imperative of \paristˆmi\, same verb, but different tense, do it now and completely. Our "members" (\melˆ\) should be at the call of God "as alive from the dead."

rwp@Romans:6:16 @{His servants ye are whom ye obey} (\douloi este h“i hupakouete\). Bondservants, slaves of the one whom ye obey, whatever one's profession may be, traitors, spies sometimes they are called. As Paul used the figure to illustrate death to sin and resurrection to new life in Christ and not in sin, so now he uses slavery against the idea of occasional lapses into sin. Loyalty to Christ will not permit occasional crossing over to the other side to Satan's line.

rwp@Romans:7:12 @{Holy, and righteous, and good} (\hagia kai dikaia kai agathˆ\). This is the conclusion (wherefore, \h“ste\) to the query in verse 7|. The commandment is God's and so holy like Him, just in its requirements and designed for our good. The modern revolt against law needs these words.

rwp@Romans:7:23 @{A different law} (\heteron nomon\). For the distinction between \heteros\ and \allos\, see strkjv@Galatians:1:6f|. {Warring against} (\antistrateuomenon\). Rare verb (_Xenophon_) to carry on a campaign against. Only here in N.T. {The law of my mind} (\t“i nom“i tou noos\). The reflective intelligence Paul means by \noos\, "the inward man" of verse 22|. It is this higher self that agrees that the law of God is good (12,16,22|). {Bringing me into captivity} (\aichmal“tizonta\). See on this late and vivid verb for capture and slavery strkjv@Luke:21:24; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:5|. Surely it is a tragic picture drawn by Paul with this outcome, "sold under sin" (14|), "captivity to the law of sin" (23|). The ancient writers (Plato, Ovid, Seneca, Epictetus) describe the same dual struggle in man between his conscience and his deeds.

rwp@Romans:8:31 @{For these things} (\pros tauta\). From strkjv@8:12| on Paul has made a triumphant presentation of the reasons for the certainty of final sanctification of the sons of God. He has reached the climax with glorification (\edoxasen\ in verse 30|). But Paul lets the objector have his say as he usually does so that in verses 31-39| he considers the objections. {If God is for us, who is against us?} (\ei ho theos huper hˆm“n, tis kath' hˆm“n?\). This condition of the first class carries Paul's challenge to all doubters. There is no one on a par with God. Note the two prepositions in contrast (\huper\, over, \kata\, down or against).

rwp@Romans:9:32 @We must supply the omitted verb \edi“xa\ (pursued) from verse 31|. That explains the rest. {They stumbled at the stone of stumbling} (\prosekopsan t“i lith“i tou proskommatos\). The quotation is from strkjv@Isaiah:8:14|. \Proskopt“\ means to cut (\kopt“\) against (\pros\) as in strkjv@Matthew:4:6; strkjv@John:11:9f|. The Jews found Christ a \skandalon\ (1Corinthians:1:23|).

rwp@Romans:10:20 @{Is very bold} (\apotolmƒi\). Present active indicative of \apotolma“\, old word, to assume boldness (\apo\, off) and only here in N.T. Isaiah "breaks out boldly" (Gifford). Paul cites strkjv@Isaiah:65:1| in support of his own courage against the prejudice of the Jews. See strkjv@9:30-33| for illustration of this point. {I was found} (\heurethˆn\). First aorist passive indicative of \heurisk“\.

rwp@Romans:11:2 @{Whom he foreknew} (\hon proegn“\). The same form and sense as in strkjv@8:29|, which see. Probably the Hebrew sense of choice beforehand. The nation of Israel was God's chosen people and so all the individuals in it could not be cast off. {Wot ye not?} (\ouk oidate?\). "Know ye not?" Why keep the old English "wot"? {Of Elijah} (\en Eleiƒi\). "In the case of Elijah." Cf. "in the bush" (Mark:12:26|). {He pleadeth} (\entugchanei\). See on ¯8:27|. \Entugchan“\ means to happen on one and so to converse with (Acts:25:24|), to plead for (Romans:8:27,34|), to plead against as here with \kata\, but the "against" is in \kata\.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Mon Jun 3 03:10:50 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020