OT-HISTORY.filter - rwp bestow:

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

rwp@1Corinthians:12:23 @{We bestow} (\peritithemen\). Literally, We place around as if a garland (Mark:15:17|) or a garment (Matthew:27:28|). {More abundant comeliness} (\euschmosunn perissoteran\). One need only mention the mother's womb and the mother's breast to see the force of Paul's argument here. The word, common in old Greek, from \euschmn\ (\eu\, well, \schma\, figure), here only in N.T. One may think of the coal-miner who digs under the earth for the coal to keep us warm in winter. Songs:\aschmn\ (deformed, uncomely), old word, here only in N.T., but see strkjv@7:36| for \aschmone\.

rwp@1Corinthians:13:3 @{Bestow to feed} (\Psmis\). First aorist active subjunctive of \psmiz\, to feed, to nourish, from \psmos\, morsel or bit, and so to feed, by putting a morsel into the mouth like infant (or bird). Old word, but only here in N.T. {To be burned} (\hina kauthsmai\). First future passive subjunctive (Textus Receptus), but D \kauthsomai\ (future passive indicative of \kai\, old word to burn). There were even some who courted martyrdom in later years (time of Diocletian). This Byzantine future subjunctive does not occur in the old MSS. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 876). Aleph A B here read \kauchsmai\, first aorist middle subjunctive of \kauchaomai\ (so Westcott and Hort), "that I may glory." This is correct. {It profiteth me nothing} (\ouden pheloumai\). Literally, I am helped nothing. \Ouden\ in the accusative case retained with passive verb. See two accusatives with \phele\ in strkjv@14:6|. Verb is old and from \ophelos\ (profit).

rwp@Acts:6:6 @{They laid their hands on them} (\epethkan autois tas cheiras\). First aorist active indicative of \epitithmi\. Probably by the apostles who ratified the choice (verse 3|). The laying on of hands "was a symbol of the impartation of the gifts and graces which they needed to qualify them for the office. It was of the nature of a prayer that God would bestow the necessary gifts, rather than a pledge that they were actually conferred" (Hackett).

rwp@Acts:10:47 @{Can any man forbid the water?} (\Mti to hudr dunatai klsai tis?\). The negative \mti\ expects the answer _No_. The evidence was indisputable that these Gentiles were converted and so were entitled to be baptized. See the similar idiom in strkjv@Luke:6:39|. Note the article with "water." Here the baptism of the Holy Spirit had preceded the baptism of water (Acts:1:5; strkjv@11:16|). "The greater had been bestowed; could the lesser be withheld?" (Knowling). {That these should not be baptized} (\tou m baptisthnai toutous\). Ablative case of the articular first aorist passive infinitive of \baptiz\ with the redundant negative after the verb of hindering (\klsai\) and the accusative of general reference (\toutous\). The redundant negative after the verb of hindering is not necessary though often used in ancient Greek and in the _Koin_ (papyri). Without it see strkjv@Matthew:19:14; strkjv@Acts:8:36| and with it see strkjv@Luke:4:42; strkjv@24:16; strkjv@Acts:14:18|. Cf. Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1061, 1094, 1171. The triple negatives here are a bit confusing to the modern mind (\mti\ in the question, \klsai\, to hinder or to cut off, \m\ with \baptisthnai\). Literally, Can any one cut off the water from the being baptized as to these? Meyer: "The water is in this animated language conceived as the element offering itself for the baptism." {As well as we} (\hs kai hmeis\). The argument was conclusive. God had spoken. Note the query of the eunuch to Philip (Acts:8:36|).

rwp@Galatians:4:11 @{I am afraid of you} (\phoboumai humas\). He shudders to think of it. {Lest by any means I have bestowed labour upon you in vain} (\m ps eiki kekopiaka eis humas\). Usual construction after a verb of fearing about what has actually happened (\m ps\ and the perfect active indicative of \kopia\, to toil wearily). A fear about the future would be expressed by the subjunctive. Paul fears that the worst has happened.

rwp@John:4:42 @{Not because of thy speaking} (\ouketi dia tn sn lalian\). "No longer because of thy talk," good and effective as that was. \Lalia\ (cf. \lale\) is talk, talkativeness, mode of speech, one's vernacular, used by Jesus of his own speech (John:8:43|). {We have heard} (\akkoamen\). Perfect active indicative of \akou\, their abiding experience. {For ourselves} (\autoi\). Just "ourselves." {The Saviour of the world} (\ho str tou kosmou\). See strkjv@Matthew:1:21| for ssei used of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term \str\ to Jesus again in strkjv@1John:4:14|. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (verse 22|). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (verse 26|) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: "At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah." But why "merely"? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their "Saviour," Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on strkjv@John:4:42|: "That in the first century Messiah was given the title str is not proven." The use of "saviour and god" for Ptolemy in the third century B.C. is well known. "The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East" (Deissmann, _Light_, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke:2:11; strkjv@John:4:42; strkjv@Acts:5:31; strkjv@3:23; strkjv@Phillipians:3:20; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23; strkjv@Titus:1:4; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@3:6; strkjv@2Timothy:1:10; strkjv@2Peter:1:1,11; strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:2,18|). All these are writings of the first century A.D. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world.

rwp@John:5:26 @{In himself} (\en heauti\). The Living God possesses life wholly in himself and so he has bestowed this power of life to the Son as already stated in the Prologue of the Logos (1:3|). For "gave" (\edken\, timeless aorist active indicative) see also strkjv@3:35; strkjv@17:2,24|. The particles "as" (\hsper\) and "so" (\houts\) mark here the fact, not the degree (Westcott).

rwp@Romans:1:17 @{For therein} (\gar en auti\). In the gospel (verse 16|) of which Paul is not ashamed. {A righteousness of God} (\dikaiosun theou\). Subjective genitive, "a God kind of righteousness," one that each must have and can obtain in no other way save "from faith unto faith" (\ek pistes eis pistin\), faith the starting point and faith the goal (Lightfoot). {Is revealed} (\apokaluptetai\). It is a revelation from God, this God kind of righteousness, that man unaided could never have conceived or still less attained. In these words we have Paul's statement in his own way of the theme of the Epistle, the content of the gospel as Paul understands it. Every word is important: \strian\ (salvation), \euaggelion\ (gospel), \apokaluptetai\ (is revealed), \dikaiosun theou\ (righteousness of God), \pistis\ (faith) and \pisteuonti\ (believing). He grounds his position on strkjv@Habbakkuk:2:4| (quoted also in strkjv@Galatians:3:11|). By "righteousness" we shall see that Paul means both "justification" and "sanctification." It is important to get a clear idea of Paul's use of \dikaiosun\ here for it controls the thought throughout the Epistle. Jesus set up a higher standard of righteousness (\dikaiosun\) in the Sermon on the Mount than the Scribes and Pharisees taught and practised (Matthew:5:20|) and proves it in various items. Here Paul claims that in the gospel, taught by Jesus and by himself there is revealed a God kind of righteousness with two ideas in it (the righteousness that God has and that he bestows). It is an old word for quality from \dikaios\, a righteous man, and that from \dik\, right or justice (called a goddess in strkjv@Acts:28:4|), and that allied with \deiknumi\, to show, to point out. Other allied words are \dikaio\, to declare or make \dikaios\ (Romans:3:24,26|), \dikaima\, that which is deemed \dikaios\ (sentence or ordinance as in strkjv@1:32; strkjv@2:26; strkjv@8:4|), \dikaisis\, the act of declaring \dikaios\ (only twice in N.T., strkjv@4:25; strkjv@5:18|). \Dikaiosun\ and \dikaio\ are easy to render into English, though we use justice in distinction from righteousness and sanctification for the result that comes after justification (the setting one right with God). Paul is consistent and usually clear in his use of these great words.

rwp@Romans:8:2 @{The law of the Spirit of life} (\ho nomos tou pneumatos ts zs\). The principle or authority exercised by the Holy Spirit which bestows life and which rests "in Christ Jesus." {Made me free} (\leuthersen me\). First aorist active indicative of the old verb \eleuthero\ for which see strkjv@Galatians:5:1|. Aleph B have \se\ (thee) instead of \me\. It matters little. We are pardoned, we are free from the old law of sin and death (7:7-24|), we are able by the help of the Holy Spirit to live the new life in Christ.