OT-HISTORY.filter - rwp foot:

rwp@1Corinthians:12:15 @{If the foot shall say} (\ean eipi ho pous\). Condition of third class (\ean\ and second aorist subjunctive \eipi\). In case the foot say. {I am not of the body} (\ouk eimi ek tou smatos\). I am independent of the body, not dependent on the body. {It is not therefore not of the body} (\ou para touto ouk estin ek tou smatos\). Thinking or saying so does not change the fact. \Para touto\ here means "alongside of this" (cf. IV Macc. strkjv@10:19) and so "because of," a rare use (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 616). The two negatives (\ou--ouk\) do not here destroy one another. Each retains its full force.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:3 @{Let no man beguile you in any wise} (\m tis humas exapatsi kata mdena tropon\). First aorist active subjunctive of \exapata\ (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb \apata\) with double negative (\m tis, mdena\) 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| (\m 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 \gensetai\) 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 m elthi h apostasia prton\). 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 (\h\) 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} (\prton\) 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 apokaluphthi ho anthrpos ts anomias, ho huios ts apleias\). First aorist passive subjunctive after \ean m\ and same condition as with \elthi\. 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:2:4 @{He that opposeth and exalteth himself} (\ho antikeimenos kai huperairomenos\). Like John's Antichrist this one opposes (\anti-\) Christ and exalts himself (direct middle of \huperair\, old verb to lift oneself up {above} others, only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:12:7| in N.T.), but not Satan, but an agent of Satan. This participial clause is in apposition with the two preceding phrases, the man of sin, the son of perdition. Note strkjv@1Corinthians:8:5| about one called God and strkjv@Acts:17:23| for \sebasma\ (from \sebazomai\), object of worship, late word, in N.T. only in these two passages. {Songs:that he sitteth in the temple of God} (\hste auton eis ton naon tou theou kathisai\). Another example of the infinitive with \hste\ for result. Caius Caligula had made a desperate attempt to have his statue set up for worship in the Temple in Jerusalem. This incident may lie behind Paul's language here. {Setting himself forth as God} (\apodeiknunta heauton hoti estin theos\). Present active participle (\mi\ form) of \apodeiknumi\, agreeing in case with \auton\, {showing himself that he is God}. Caligula claimed to be God. Moffatt doubts if Paul is identifying this deception with the imperial cultus at this stage. Lightfoot thinks that the deification of the Roman emperor supplied Paul's language here. Wetstein notes a coin of Julius with \theos\ on one side and \Thessaloniken\ on the other. In strkjv@1John:2:18| we are told of "many antichrists" some of whom had already come. Hence it is not clear that Paul has in mind only one individual or even individuals at all rather than evil principles, for in verse 6| he speaks of \to katechon\ (that which restraineth) while in verse 7| it is \ho katechn\ (the one that restraineth). Frame argues for a combination of Belial and Antichrist as the explanation of Paul's language. But the whole subject is left by Paul in such a vague form that we can hardly hope to clear it up. It is possible that his own preaching while with them gave his readers a clue that we do not possess.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:12 @{That they all might be judged} (\hina krithsin pantes\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \krin\, to sift, to judge, with \hina\. Ultimate purpose, almost result, of the preceding obstinate resistance to the truth and "the judicial infatuation which overtakes them" (Lightfoot), now final punishment. Condemnation is involved in the fatal choice made. These victims of the man of sin did not believe the truth and found pleasure in unrighteousness.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:16 @{And God our Father} (\kai [ho] theos ho patr hmn\). It is uncertain whether the first article \ho\ is genuine as it is absent in B D. Usually Paul has the Father before Christ except here, strkjv@2Corinthians:13:13; strkjv@Galatians:1:1|. {Which loved us} (\ho agapsas hmas\). This singular articular participle refers to \ho patr\, "though it is difficult to see how St. Paul could otherwise have expressed his thought, if he had intended to refer to the Son, as well as to the Father. There is probably no instance in St. Paul of a plural adjective or verb, when the two Persons of the Godhead are mentioned" (Lightfoot). {Eternal comfort} (\paraklsin ainian\). Distinct feminine form of \ainios\ here instead of masculine as in strkjv@Matthew:25:46|.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:1 @{Finally} (\to loipon\). Accusative of general reference. Cf. \loipon\ strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:1|. {Pray} (\proseuchesthe\). Present middle, keep on praying. Note \peri\ as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:25|. {That the word of the Lord may run and be glorified} (\hina ho logos tou kuriou trechi kai doxaztai\). Usual construction of \hina\ after \proseuchomai\, sub-final use, content and purpose combined. Note present subjunctive with both verbs rather than aorist, may keep on running and being glorified, two verbs joined together nowhere else in the N.T. Paul probably derived this metaphor from the stadium as in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:24ff.; strkjv@Galatians:2:2; strkjv@Romans:9:16; strkjv@Phillipians:2:16; strkjv@2Timothy:4:7|. Lightfoot translates "may have a triumphant career." On the word of the Lord see on ¯1Thessalonians:1:8|. Paul recognizes the close relation between himself and the readers. He needs their prayers and sympathy and he rejoices in their reception of the word of the Lord already, {even as also it is with you} (\kaths kai pros humas\). "As it does in your case" (Frame).

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:5 @{Direct} (\kateuthunai\). First aorist active optative of wish for the future as in strkjv@2:17; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:23| from \kateuthun\, old verb, as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:11| (there {way}, here {hearts}) and strkjv@Luke:1:79| of {feet} (\podas\). Perfective use of \kata\. Bold figure for making smooth and direct road. The Lord here is the Lord Jesus. {Into the love of God} (\eis tn agapn tou theou\). Either subjective or objective genitive makes sense and Lightfoot pleads for both, "not only as an objective attribute of deity, but as a ruling principle in our hearts," holding that it is "seldom possible to separate the one from the other." Most scholars take it here as subjective, the characteristic of God. {Into the patience of Christ} (\eis tn hupomnn tou Christou\). There is the same ambiguity here, though the subjective idea, the patience shown by Christ, is the one usually accepted rather than "the patient waiting for Christ" (objective genitive).

rwp@Acts:7:5 @{Not so much as to set his foot on} (\oude bma podos\). From strkjv@Deuteronomy:2:5|. Old word from \bain\, to go, to step. "Stepping of a foot," only instance of this original meaning in the N.T. From this it comes to mean a platform reached by steps, official seat of a judge (Matthew:27:19|). The field purchased by Abraham (Genesis:23:9-17|) was not a gift from God. {Promised} (\epggeilato\). First aorist middle indicative of \epaggell\, common verb. See strkjv@Genesis:12:7; strkjv@17:8; strkjv@48:4| for this promise. Songs:God appeared again to Abraham in a strange land. {In possession} (\eis kataschesin\). Late word, in LXX, and in N.T. only here and verse 45|. From \katech\, to hold back, then to hold fast (or down), to possess. It was fulfilled in the descendants of Abraham. {When as yet he had no child} (\ouk ontos auti teknou\). Genitive absolute with negative \ouk\ rather than \m\ to emphasize actual absence of a child. He had only the promise of God about the land and the child.

rwp@Acts:7:8 @{The covenant of circumcision} (\diathkn peritoms\). A covenant marked by (genitive) circumcision (no article) of which circumcision is the sign (Romans:4:11|) as set forth in strkjv@Genesis:17:9-14|. In the ancient Greek \diathk\ was usually will (Latin, _testamentum_) and \sunthk\ was used for covenant (\sun\, together, rather than \dia\, between). But the LXX and the N.T. use \diathk\ for covenant (will in strkjv@Hebrews:9:15f.|) as Lightfoot on strkjv@Galatians:3:16| says: "The LXX translation and New Testament writers probably preferred \diathk\ as better expressing the {free grace} of God than \sunthk\." {And so} (\kai houts\). After the covenant was made and as a sign and seal of it.

rwp@Acts:7:33 @{Holy ground} (\g hagia\). The priests were barefooted when they ministered in the temple. Moslems enter their mosques barefooted today. Cf. strkjv@Joshua:5:15|. {Sandal} (\hupodma\, bound under) is here "a distributive singular" (Hackett). Even the ground near the bush was "holy," a fine example for Stephen's argument.

rwp@Acts:8:9 @{Simon} (\Simn\). One of the common names (Josephus, _Ant_. XX. 7, 2) and a number of messianic pretenders had this name. A large number of traditions in the second and third centuries gathered round this man and Baur actually proposed that the Simon of the Clementine Homilies is really the apostle Paul though Paul triumphed over the powers of magic repeatedly (Acts:13:6-12; strkjv@19:11-19|), "a perfect absurdity" (Spitta, _Apostelgeschichte_, p. 149). One of the legends is that this Simon Magus of Acts is the father of heresy and went to Rome and was worshipped as a god (so Justin Martyr). But a stone found in the Tiber A.D. 1574 has an inscription to _Semoni Sanco Deo Fidio Sacrum_ which is (Page) clearly to Hercules, Sancus being a Sabine name for Hercules. This Simon in Samaria is simply one of the many magicians of the time before the later gnosticism had gained a foothold. "In his person Christianity was for the first time confronted with superstition and religious imposture, of which the ancient world was at this period full" (Furneaux). {Which beforetime used sorcery} (\prouprchen mageun\). An ancient idiom (periphrastic), the present active participle \mageun\ with the imperfect active verb from \prouparch\, the idiom only here and strkjv@Luke:23:12| in the N.T. Literally "Simon was existing previously practising magic." This old verb \mageu\ is from \magos\ (a \magus\, seer, prophet, false prophet, sorcerer) and occurs here alone in the N.T. {Amazed} (existann). Present active participle of the verb \existan\, later form of \existmi\, to throw out of position, displace, upset, astonish, chiefly in the Gospels in the N.T. Same construction as \mageun\. {Some great one} (\tina megan\). Predicate accusative of general reference (infinitive in indirect discourse). It is amazing how gullible people are in the presence of a manifest impostor like Simon. The Magi were the priestly order in the Median and Persian empires and were supposed to have been founded by Zoroaster. The word \magoi\ (magi) has a good sense in strkjv@Matthew:2:1|, but here and in strkjv@Acts:13:6| it has the bad sense like our "magic."

rwp@Acts:12:8 @{Gird thyself} (\zsai\). Direct middle first aorist (ingressive) imperative (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 806f.) from \znnumi\ (\znnu\). Old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@John:21:18| (twice to Peter) where the active voice and the reflexive pronoun occur in the first example. The girdle was worn round the \chitn\ or undergarment. {Bind on} (\hupodsai\). Indirect middle (by yourself or for yourself) first aorist imperative of \hupode\, to bind under, old verb, only three times in the N.T. (Mark:6:9; strkjv@Acts:12:8; strkjv@Ephesians:6:15| (middle)). {Sandals} (\sandalia\). Persian word common from Herodotus on, a sole made of wood or leather covering the bottom of the foot and bound on with thongs. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:6:9|. In the LXX used indiscriminately with \hupodma\. {Cast about thee} (\peribalou\). Second aorist middle (indirect) imperative of \periball\, old and common verb to throw around, especially clothing around the body as here. The \himation\ (outer garment) was put over the \chitn\. It was not a hurried flight. {Follow me} (\akolouthei moi\). Present (linear) active imperative, keep on following me (associative instrumental case).

rwp@Acts:13:51 @{But they shook off the dust of their feet against them} (\Hoi de ektinaxamenoi ton koniorton tn podn 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:15:29 @{Than these necessary things} (\pln toutn tn epanagkes\). This old adverb (from \epi\ and \anagk\) means on compulsion, of necessity. Here only in the N.T. For discussion of these items see on verses 20,21|. In comparison with the freedom won this "burden" is light and not to be regarded as a compromise in spite of the arguments of Lightfoot and Ramsay. It was such a concession as any converted Gentile would be glad to make even if "things strangled" be included. This "necessity" was not a matter of salvation but only for fellowship between Jews and Gentiles. The Judaizers made the law of Moses essential to salvation (15:16|). {It shall be well with you} (\eu praxete\). Ye shall fare well. A classical idiom used here effectively. The peace and concord in the fellowship of Jews and Gentiles will justify any slight concession on the part of the Gentiles. This letter is not laid down as a law, but it is the judgment of the Jerusalem Christians for the guidance of the Gentiles (16:4|) and it had a fine effect at once (15:30-35|). Trouble did come later from the Judaizers who were really hostile to the agreement in Jerusalem, but that opposition in no way discredits the worth of the work of this Conference. No sane agreement will silence perpetual and professional disturbers like these Judaizers who will seek to unsettle Paul's work in Antioch, in Corinth, in Galatia, in Jerusalem, in Rome. {Fare ye well} (\Errsthe\). _Valete_. Perfect passive imperative of \rhnnumi\, to make strong. Common at the close of letters. Be made strong, keep well, fare well. Here alone in the N.T. though some MSS. have it in strkjv@23:30|.

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:4:3 @{When we were children} (\hote men npioi\). Before the epoch of faith came and we (Jews and Gentiles) were under the law as paedagogue, guardian, steward, to use all of Paul's metaphors. {We were held in bondage} (\hmeis metha dedoulmenoi\). Periphrastic past perfect of \doulo\, to enslave, in a permanent state of bondage. {Under the rudiments of the world} (\hupo ta stoicheia tou kosmou\). \Stoichos\ is row or rank, a series. Songs:\stoicheion\ is any first thing in a \stoichos\ like the letters of the alphabet, the material elements in the universe (2Peter:3:10|), the heavenly bodies (some argue for that here), the rudiments of any act (Hebrews:5:12; strkjv@Acts:15:10; strkjv@Galatians:5:1; strkjv@4:3,9; strkjv@Colossians:2:8,20|). The papyri illustrate all the varieties in meaning of this word. Burton has a valuable excursus on the word in his commentary. Probably here (Lightfoot) Paul has in mind the rudimentary character of the law as it applies to both Jews and Gentiles, to all the knowledge of the world (\kosmos\ as the orderly material universe as in strkjv@Colossians:2:8,20|). See on ¯Matthew:13:38; strkjv@Acts:17:24; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:22|. All were in the elementary stage before Christ came.

rwp@Galatians:4:25 @{This Hagar} (\to Hagar\). Neuter article and so referring to the word Hagar (not to the woman, \h\ Hagar) as applied to the mountain. There is great variety in the MSS. here. The Arabians are descendants of Abraham and Hagar (her name meaning wanderer or fugitive). {Answereth to} (\suntoichei\). Late word in Polybius for keeping step in line (military term) and in papyri in figurative sense as here. Lightfoot refers to the Pythagorean parallels of opposing principles (\sunstoichiai\) as shown here by Paul (Hagar and Sarah, Ishmael and Isaac, the old covenant and the new covenant, the earthly Jerusalem and the heavenly Jerusalem). That is true, and there is a correlative correspondence as the line is carried on.

rwp@Galatians:4:30 @{Cast out} (\ekbale\). Second aorist active imperative of \ekball\. Quotation from strkjv@Genesis:21:10| (Sarah to Abraham) and confirmed in strkjv@21:12| by God's command to Abraham. Paul gives allegorical warning thus to the persecuting Jews and Judaizers. {Shall not inherit} (\ou m klronomsei\). Strong negative (\ou m\ and future indicative). "The law and the gospel cannot co-exist. The law must disappear before the gospel" (Lightfoot). See strkjv@3:18,29| for the word "inherit."

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} (\alllois antikeitai\). Are lined up in conflict, face to face (\anti-\), a spiritual duel (cf. Christ's temptations), with dative case of personal interest (\alllois\). {That ye may not do} (\hina m poite\). "That ye may not keep on doing" (present active subjunctive of \poie\). {That ye would} (\ha ean thelte\). "Whatever ye wish" (indefinite relative with \ean\ and present subjunctive).

rwp@Hebrews:10:29 @{How much} (\posi\). Instrumental case of degree or measure. An argument from the less to the greater, "the first of Hillel's seven rules for exegesis" (Moffatt). {Think ye} (\dokeite\). An appeal to their own sense of justice about apostates from Christ. {Sorer} (\cheironos\). "Worse," comparative of \kakos\ (bad). {Punishment} (\timrias\). Genitive case with \axithsetai\ (first future passive of \axio\, to deem worthy). The word \timria\ originally meant vengeance. Old word, in LXX, only here in N.T. {Who hath trodden under foot the Son of God} (\ho ton huion tou theou katapatsas\). First aorist active articular participle of \katapate\, old verb (Matthew:5:13|) for scornful neglect like strkjv@Zechariah:12:3|. See same idea in strkjv@Hebrews:6:6|. {Wherewith he was sanctified} (\en hi hgiasth\). First aorist passive indicative of \hagiaz\. It is an unspeakable tragedy that should warn every follower of Christ not to play with treachery to Christ (cf. strkjv@6:4-8|). {An unholy thing} (\koinon\). Common in the sense of uncleanness as Peter used it in strkjv@Acts:10:14|. Think of one who thus despises "the blood of Christ wherewith he was sanctified." And yet there are a few today who sneer at the blood of Christ and the gospel based on his atoning sacrifice as "a slaughter house" religion! {Hath done despite} (\enubrisas\). First aorist active participle of \enubriz\, old verb to treat with contumely, to give insult to, here only in the N.T. It is a powerful word for insulting the Holy Spirit after receiving his blessings (6:4|).

rwp@Hebrews:12:16 @{Profane} (\beblos\). Trodden under foot, unhallowed (1Timothy:1:9|). {For one mess of meat} (\anti brses mias\). Idea of exchange, "for one act of eating" (1Corinthians:8:4|). {Sold} (\apedeto\). Second aorist middle indicative from strkjv@Genesis:25:31,33|, and with irregular form for \apedoto\ (regular \mi\ form). {His own birthright} (\ta prtotokia heautou\). From Genesis also and in Philo, only here in N.T. From \prtotokos\ (first born, strkjv@Hebrews:1:6|).

rwp@John:6:2 @{Followed} (\kolouthei\). Descriptive imperfect active, picturing the crowd, but without the details of the boat for Christ and the rapid race of the crowd on foot (Mark:6:32f.; strkjv@Matthew:14:13f.|). {They beheld} (\etheroun\). Imperfect active of \there\. They had been beholding the signs which Jesus had been doing (\epoiei\, imperfect again) for a long time (2:23|), most of which John has not given (Mark:1:29f.; strkjv@2:1; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@6:5|). The people were eager to hear Jesus again (Luke:9:11|) and to get the benefit of his healing power "on them that were sick" (\epi tn asthenountn\, the weak or feeble, without strength, \a\ privative and \sthenos\, strength).

rwp@John:6:31 @{Ate the manna} (\to manna ephagon\). The rabbis quoted strkjv@Psalms:72:16| to prove that the Messiah, when he comes, will outdo Moses with manna from heaven. Jesus was claiming to be the Messiah and able to give bread for eternal life (verse 27|). Lightfoot (_Biblical Essays_, p. 152) says: "The key to the understanding of the whole situation is an acquaintance with the national expectation of the greater Moses." They quote to Jesus strkjv@Exodus:16:15| (of. strkjv@Numbers:11:7; strkjv@21:5; strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:3|). Their plea is that Moses gave us bread "from heaven" (\ek tou ouranou\). Can Jesus equal that deed of Moses?

rwp@John:8:35 @{The bondservant} (\ho doulos\)... {the son} (\ho huios\). There is a change in the metaphor by this contrast between the positions of the son and the slave in the house. The slave has no footing or tenure and may be cast out at any moment while the son is the heir and has a permanent place. Cf. Ishmael and Isaac (Genesis:21:10|) and Paul's use of it in strkjv@Galatians:4:30|. We do not know that there is any reference here to Hagar and Ishmael. See also strkjv@Hebrews:3:5| (Numbers:12:7|) for a like contrast between Moses as servant (\therapn\) in God's house and Christ as Son (\huios\) over God's house.

rwp@John:13:8 @{Thou shalt never wash my feet} (\ou m nipsis mou tous podas eis ton aina\). Strong double negative \ou m\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \nipt\ with \eis ton aina\ (for ever) added and \mou\ (my) made emphatic by position. Peter's sudden humility should settle the issue, he felt. {If I wash thee not} (\ean m nips se\). Third-class condition with \ean m\ (negative). Jesus picks up the challenge of Peter whose act amounted to irreverence and want of confidence. "The first condition of discipleship is self-surrender" (Westcott). Songs:"Jesus, waiting with the basin" (Dods), concludes. {Thou hast no part with me} (\ouk echeis meros met' emou\). Not simply here at the supper with its fellowship, but in the deeper sense of mystic fellowship as Peter was quick to see. Jesus does not make foot-washing essential to spiritual fellowship, but simply tests Peter's real pride and mock-humility by this symbol of fellowship.

rwp@Luke:2:38 @{Coming up} (\epistsa\). Second aorist active participle. The word often has the notion of coming suddenly or bursting in as of Martha in strkjv@Luke:10:40|. But here it probably means coming up and standing by and so hearing Simeon's wonderful words so that her words form a kind of footnote to his. {Gave thanks} (\anthmologeito\). Imperfect middle of a verb (\anthomologe\) in common use in Greek writers and in the LXX though here alone in the N.T. It had the idea of a mutual agreement or of saying something before one (\anti\). Anna was evidently deeply moved and repeated her thanksgiving and kept speaking (\elalei\, imperfect again) "to all them that were looking for (\prosdechomenois\, as in strkjv@1:35| of Simeon) the redemption of Jerusalem (\lutrsin Ierousalm\)." There was evidently a group of such spirits that gathered in the temple either men around her and Simeon or whom she met from time to time. There was thus a nucleus of old saints in Jerusalem prepared for the coming of the Messiah when he at last appears as the Messiah in Jerusalem (John 2 and 3). These probably all passed away. But they had a happy hour of hope and joy. The late MSS. have "in Jerusalem" but "of Jerusalem" is correct. What they meant by the "redemption of Jerusalem" is not clear, whether political or spiritual or both. Simeon was looking for the consolation of Israel (2:25|) and Zacharias (1:68|) sang of redemption for Israel (Isaiah:40:2|).

rwp@Luke:6:17 @{He came down with them} (\katabas met' autn\). Second aorist active participle of \katabain\, common verb. This was the night of prayer up in the mountain (Mark:31:3; strkjv@Luke:6:12|) and the choice of the Twelve next morning. The going up into the mountain of strkjv@Matthew:5:1| may simply be a summary statement with no mention of what Luke has explained or may be a reference to the elevation, where he "sat down" (Matthew:5:1|), above the plain or "level place" (\epi topou pedinou\) on the mountain side where Jesus "stood" or "stopped" (\est\). It may be a level place towards the foot of the mountain. He stopped his descent at this level place and then found a slight elevation on the mountain side and began to speak. There is not the slightest reason for making Matthew locate this sermon on the mountain and Luke in the valley as if the places, audiences, and topics were different. For the unity of the sermon see discussion on ¯Matthew:5:1f|. The reports in Matthew and Luke begin alike, cover the same general ground and end alike. The report in Matthew is longer chiefly because in Chapter 5, he gives the argument showing the contrast between Christ's conception of righteousness and that of the Jewish rabbis. Undoubtedly, Jesus repeated many of the crisp sayings here at other times as in Luke 12, but it is quite gratuitous to argue that Matthew and Luke have made up this sermon out of isolated sayings of Christ at various times. Both Matthew and Luke give too much that is local of place and audience for that idea. strkjv@Matthew:5:1| speaks of "the multitudes" and "his disciples." strkjv@Luke:6:17| notes "a great multitude of his disciples, and a great number of the people from all Judea and Jerusalem, and the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon." They agree in the presence of disciples and crowds besides the disciples from whom the twelve apostles were chosen. It is important to note how already people were coming from "the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon" "to hear him and to be healed (\iathnai\, first aorist passive of \iaomai\) of their diseases."

rwp@Matthew:14:13 @{In a boat} (\en ploii\) "on foot" (\pezi\, some MSS. \pezi\). Contrast between the lake and the land route.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ RELATION TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL Here scholars divide again. Many who deny the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel and the Epistles accept the apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse, Baur, for instance. Hort, Lightfoot, and Westcott argued for the Johannine authorship on the ground that the Apocalypse was written early (time of Nero or Vespasian) when John did not know Greek so well as when the Epistles and the Gospel were written. There are numerous grammatical laxities in the Apocalypse, termed by Charles a veritable grammar of its own. They are chiefly retention of the nominative case in appositional words or phrases, particularly participles, many of them sheer Hebraisms, many of them clearly intentional (as in strkjv@Revelation:1:4|), all of them on purpose according to Milligan (_Revelation_ in Schaff's Pop. Comm.) and Heinrici (_Der Litterarische Charakter der neutest. Schriften_, p. 85). Radermacher (_Neutestamentliche Grammatik_, p. 3) calls it "the most uncultured literary production that has come down to us from antiquity," and one finds frequent parallels to the linguistic peculiarities in later illiterate papyri. J. H. Moulton (_Grammar_, Vol. II, Part I, p. 3) says: "Its grammar is perpetually stumbling, its idiom is that of a foreign language, its whole style that of a writer who neither knows nor cares for literary form." But we shall see that the best evidence is for a date in Domitian's reign and not much later than the Fourth Gospel. It is worth noting that in strkjv@Acts:4:13| Peter and John are both termed by the Sanhedrin \agrammatoi kai iditai\ (unlettered and unofficial men). We have seen the possibility that II Peter represents Peter's real style or at least that of a different amanuensis from Silvanus in strkjv@1Peter:5:12|. It seems clear that the Fourth Gospel underwent careful scrutiny and possibly by the elders in Ephesus (John:21:24|). If John wrote the Apocalypse while in Patmos and so away from Ephesus, it seems quite possible that here we have John's own uncorrected style more than in the Gospel and Epistles. There is also the added consideration that the excitement of the visions played a part along with a certain element of intentional variations from normal grammatical sequence. An old man's excitement would bring back his early style. There are numerous coincidences in vocabulary and style between the Fourth Gospel and the Apocalypse.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE DATE There are two chief theories, the Neronic, soon after Nero's death, the other in the reign of Domitian. Irenaeus is quoted by Eusebius as saying expressly that the Apocalypse of John was written at the close of the reign of Domitian. This testimony is concurred in by Clement of Alexandria, by Origen, by Eusebius, by Jerome. In harmony with this clear testimony the severity of the persecutions suit the later date better than the earlier one. There is, besides, in strkjv@Revelation:17:11f.| an apparent reference to the story that Nero would return again. The fifth king who is one of the seven is an eighth. There was a Nero legend, to be sure, that Nero either was not dead but was in Parthia, or would be _redivivus_ after death. Juvenal termed Domitian "a bald Nero" and others called Domitian "a second Nero." But in spite of all this Hort, Lightfoot, Sanday, Westcott have argued strongly for the Neronic era. Peake is willing to admit allusions to the Neronic period as Swete is also, but both consider the Domitianic date the best supported. Moffatt considers any earlier date than Domitian "almost impossible."

rwp@Info_Romans @ THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS SPRING OF A.D. 57 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION INTEGRITY OF THE EPISTLE The genuineness of the Epistle is so generally admitted by scholars that it is unnecessary to prove it here, for Loman, Steck, and the Dutch scholars (Van Manen, etc.) who deny it as Pauline are no longer taken seriously. He wrote it from Corinth because he sent it to Rome by Phoebe of Cenchreae (Romans:16:2|) if chapter 16 is acknowledged to be a part of the Epistle. Chapter 16 is held by some to be really a short epistle to Ephesus because of the long list of names in it, because of Paul's long stay in Ephesus, because he had not yet been to Rome, and because, in particular, Aquila and Priscilla are named (Romans:16:3-5|) who had been with Paul in Ephesus. But they had come from Rome before going to Corinth and there is no reason for thinking that they did not return to Rome. It was quite possible for Paul to have many friends in Rome whom he had met elsewhere. People naturally drifted to Rome from all over the empire. The old MSS. (Aleph A B C D) give chapter 16 as an integral part of the Epistle. Marcion rejected it and chapter 15 also for reasons of his own. Renan's theory that Romans was a circular letter like Ephesians sent in different forms to different churches (Rome, Ephesus, Thessalonica, etc.) has appealed to some scholars as explaining the several doxologies in the Epistle, but they cause no real difficulty since Paul interjected them in his other epistles according to his moods (2Corinthians:1:20|, for instance). That theory raises more problems than it solves as, for example, Paul's remarks about going to Rome (Romans:1:9-16|) which apply to Rome. Lightfoot suggests the possibility that Paul added strkjv@Romans:16:25-27| some years after the original date so as to turn it into a circular letter. But the MSS. do not support that theory and that leaves strkjv@Romans:15:22-33 in the Epistle quite unsuitable to a circular letter. Modern knowledge leaves the Epistle intact with occasional variations in the MSS. on particular points as is true of all the N.T.

rwp@Info_Romans @ COMMENTARIES No one of Paul's Epistles has more helpful modern commentaries on it than this one, such as those by Barth (1919), Beet (9th ed., 1901), Cook (1930), Denney (1901), Feine (1903), Garvie (1901), Gifford (1881), Godet (Tr., 1883), Gore (Expos.), Grey (1910), Griffith-Thomas (1913), Hodge (1856), Hort (Intr., 1895), Jowett (3rd ed., 1894), Julicher (2 Aufl., 1907), Kuhl (1913), Lagrange (1916), Lard (1875), Liddon (Anal., 1893), Lietzmann (2 Aufl., 1919), Lightfoot (chapters 1-7, 1895), Luetgert (1913), Monk (1893), Plummer, Richter (1908), Sanday and Headlam (1895), Shedd (1893), Stifler (1897), Vaughan (1890), Weiss, B. (Meyer Komm., g Aufl., 1899), Westcott, F. B. (1913), Zahn (1910). strkjv@Romans:1:1 @{To the Romans} (\pros Rmaious\). This is the title in Aleph A B C, our oldest Greek MSS. for the Epistle. We do not know whether Paul gave any title at all. Later MSS. add other words up to the Textus Receptus: The Epistle of Paul to the Romans. The Epistle is put first in the MSS. because it is the most important of Paul's Epistles.

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:1:22 @{Professing themselves to be wise} (\phaskontes einai sophoi\). \Sophoi\ is predicate nominative with \einai\ in indirect discourse agreeing with \phaskontes\ (old verb, from \phmi\, to say, rare in N.T.) in case and number according to regular Greek idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1038). {Became vain} (\emataithsan\). Ingressive first aorist passive indicative of \mataio\ from \mataios\ (empty). Empty reasonings as often today. {Became fools} (\emranthsan\). Ingressive first aorist passive of \mrain\, to be a fool, old word from \mros\, a fool. An oxymoron or sharp saying, true and one that cuts to the bone. {For the likeness of an image} (\en homoimati eikonos\). Both words, "a likeness which consists in an image or copy" (Lightfoot). See strkjv@Phillipians:2:7| for "likeness of men" and strkjv@Colossians:1:15| for "image of God." Paul shows indignant contempt for these grotesque efforts to present pictures of a deity that had been lost (Denney). Why is it that heathen images of gods in the form of men and beasts are so horrible to look upon?

rwp@Romans:2:1 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). See strkjv@1:24,26| for this relative conjunction, "because of which thing." {Without excuse} (\anapologtos\). See on ¯1:21|. {Whosoever thou art that judgest} (\pas ho krinn\). Literally, "every one that judgest," vocative case in apposition with \anthrpe\. Paul begins his discussion of the failure of the Jew to attain to the God-kind of righteousness (2:1-3:20|) with a general statement applicable to all as he did (1:18|) in the discussion of the failure of the Gentiles (Lightfoot). The Gentile is readily condemned by the Jew when he sins and equally so is the Jew condemned by the Gentile in like case. \Krin\ does not of itself mean to condemn, but to pick out, separate, approve, determine, pronounce judgment, condemn (if proper). {Another} (\ton heteron\). Literally, "the other man." The notion of two in the word, one criticizing the other. {Thou condemnest thyself} (\seauton katakrineis\). Note \kata\ here with \krin\, to make plain the adverse judgment. {For} (\gar\). Explanatory reason for the preceding statement. The critic {practises} (\prasseis\, not single acts \poie\, but the habit \prass\) the same things that he condemns.

rwp@Romans:2:17 @{Bearest the name} (\eponomazi\). Present passive indicative in condition of first class of \eponomaz\, old word, to put a name upon (\epi\), only here in N.T. "Thou art surnamed Jew" (Lightfoot). Jew as opposed to Greek denoted nationality while Hebrew accented the idea of language. {Restest upon the law} (\epanapaui nomi\). Late and rare double compound, in LXX and once in the Didache. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:10:6| which see. It means to lean upon, to refresh oneself back upon anything, here with locative case (\nomi\). It is the picture of blind and mechanical reliance on the Mosaic law. {Gloriest in God} (\kauchsai en thei\). _Koin_ vernacular form for \kauchi\ (\kauchaesai, kauchsai\) of \kauchaomai\ as in verse 23; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:7| and \katakauchsai\ in strkjv@Romans:11:18|. The Jew gloried in God as a national asset and private prerogative (2Corinthians:10:15; strkjv@Galatians:6:13|). {Approvest the things that are excellent} (\dokimazeis ta diapheronta\). Originally, "Thou testest the things that differ," and then as a result comes the approval for the excellent things. As in strkjv@Phillipians:1:10| it is difficult to tell which stage of the process Paul has in mind. {Instructed out of the law} (\katchoumenos ek tou nomou\). Present passive participle of \katche\, a rare verb to instruct, though occurring in the papyri for legal instruction. See on ¯Luke:1:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:19|. The Jew's "ethical discernment was the fruit of catechetical and synagogical instruction in the Old Testament" (Shedd).

rwp@Romans:2:20 @{A corrector of the foolish} (\paideutn aphronn\). Old word (from \paideu\) for instructor, in Plato, and probably so here, though corrector or chastiser in strkjv@Hebrews:12:9| (the only N.T. instances). See strkjv@Luke:23:16|. Late inscriptions give it as instructor (Preisigke). \Aphronn\ is a hard word for Gentiles, but it is the Jewish standpoint that Paul gives. Each termed the other "dogs." {Of babes} (\npin\). Novitiates or proselytes to Judaism just as in strkjv@Galatians:4:1|. Paul used it of those not of legal age. {The form} (\tn morphsin\). Rare word only in Theophrastus and Paul (here and strkjv@2Timothy:3:5|). Pallis regards it as a Stoical term for education. Lightfoot considers the \morphsis\ as "the rough-sketch, the pencilling of the \morph\," the outline or framework, and in strkjv@2Timothy:3:5| "the outline without the substance." This is Paul's picture of the Jew as he sees himself drawn with consummate skill and subtle irony.

rwp@Romans:3:3 @{For what if?} (\ti gar ei?\). But Westcott and Hort print it, \Ti gar? ei\. See strkjv@Phillipians:1:18| for this exclamatory use of \ti gar\ (for how? How stands the case?). {Some were without faith} (\pistsan\). First aorist active indicative of \apiste\, old verb, to disbelieve. This is the common N.T. meaning (Luke:24:11,41; strkjv@Acts:28:24; strkjv@Romans:4:20|). Some of them "disbelieved," these "depositaries and guardians of revelation" (Denney). But the word also means to be unfaithful to one's trust and Lightfoot argues for that idea here and in strkjv@2Timothy:2:13|. The Revised Version renders it "faithless" there. Either makes sense here and both ideas are true of some of the Jews, especially concerning the Messianic promises and Jesus. {The faithfulness of God} (\tn pistin tou theou\). Undoubtedly \pistis\ has this sense here and not "faith." God has been faithful (2Timothy:2:13|) whether the Jews (some of them) were simply disbelievers or untrue to their trust. Paul can use the words in two senses in verse 3|, but there is no real objection to taking \pistsan, apistian, pistin\, all to refer to faithfulness rather than just faith.

rwp@Romans:3:8 @{And why not} (\kai m\). We have a tangled sentence which can be cleared up in two ways. One is (Lightfoot) to supply \gentai\ after \m\ and repeat \ti\ (\kai ti m gentai\, deliberative subjunctive in a question): And why should it not happen? The other way (Sanday and Headlam) is to take \m\ with \poismen\ and make a long parenthesis of all in between. Even so it is confusing because \hoti\ also (recitative \hoti\) comes just before \poismen\. The parenthesis is necessary anyhow, for there are two lines of thought, one the excuse brought forward by the unbeliever, the other the accusation that Paul affirms that very excuse that we may do evil that good may come. Note the double indirect assertion (the accusative and the infinitive \hms legein\ after \phasin\ and then the direct quotation with recitative \hoti\ after \legein\, a direct quotation dependent on the infinitive in indirect quotation. {Let us do evil that good may come} (\poismen ta kaka hina elthi ta agatha\). The volitive aorist subjunctive (\poismen\) and the clause of purpose (\hina\ and the aorist subjunctive \elthi\). It sounds almost uncanny to find this maxim of the Jesuits attributed to Paul in the first century by Jews. It was undoubtedly the accusation of Antinomianism because Paul preached justification by faith and not by works.

rwp@Romans:3:9 @{What then?} (\ti oun?\). Paul's frequent query, to be taken with verses 1,2|. {Are we in worse case than they?} (\proechometha?\). The American Revisers render it: "Are we in better case than they?" There is still no fresh light on this difficult and common word though it occurs alone in the N.T. In the active it means to have before, to excel. But here it is either middle or passive. Thayer takes it to be middle and to mean to excel to one's advantage and argues that the context demands this. But no example of the middle in this sense has been found. If it is taken as passive, Lightfoot takes it to mean, "Are we excelled" and finds that sense in Plutarch. Vaughan takes it as passive but meaning, "Are we preferred?" This suits the context, but no other example has been found. Songs:the point remains unsettled. The papyri throw no light on it. {No, in no wise} (\ou pants\). "Not at all." See strkjv@1Corinthians:5:10|. {We before laid to the charge} (\proitiasametha\). First aorist middle indicative of \proaitiaomai\, to make a prior accusation, a word not yet found anywhere else. Paul refers to strkjv@1:18-32| for the Greeks and strkjv@2:1-29| for the Jews. The infinitive \einai\ with the accusative \pantas\ is in indirect discourse. {Under sin} (\hupo hamartian\). See strkjv@Galatians:3:22; strkjv@Romans:7:14|.

rwp@Romans:3:12 @{They are together become unprofitable} (\hama chrethsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \achreo\. Late word in Polybius and Cilician inscription of first century A.D. Some MSS. read \chreithsan\ from \achreios\, useless (\a\ privative and \chreios\, useful) as in strkjv@Luke:17:10; strkjv@Matthew:25:30|, but Westcott and Hort print as above from the rarer spelling \achreos\. Only here in N.T. The Hebrew word means to go bad, become sour like milk (Lightfoot). {No, not so much as one} (\ouk estin hes henos\). "There is not up to one."

rwp@Romans:4:12 @{The father of circumcision} (\patera peritoms\). The accusative with \eis to einai\ to be repeated from verse 11|. Lightfoot takes it to mean, not "a father of a circumcised progeny," but "a father belonging to circumcision," a less natural interpretation. {But who also walk} (\alla kai tois stoichousin\). The use of \tois\ here is hard to explain, for \ou monon\ and \alla kai\ both come after the preceding \tois\. All the MSS. have it thus. A primitive error in a copyist is suggested by Hort who would omit the second \tois\. Lightfoot regards it less seriously and would repeat the second \tois\ in the English: "To those who are, I do not say of circumcision only, but also to those who walk." {In the steps} (\tois ichnesin\). Locative case. See on ¯2Corinthians:12:18|. \Stoiche\ is military term, to walk in file as in strkjv@Galatians:5:25; strkjv@Phillipians:3:16|.

rwp@Romans:5:7 @{Scarcely} (\molis\). Common adverb from \molos\, toil. See on strkjv@Acts:14:18|. As between \dikaios\, righteous, and \agathos\, good, Lightfoot notes "all the difference in the world" which he shows by quotations from Plato and Christian writers, a difference of sympathy mainly, the \dikaios\ man being "absolutely without sympathy" while the \agathos\ man "is beneficent and kind." {Would even dare} (\kai tolmi\). Present active indicative of \tolma\, to have courage. "Even dares to." Even so in the case of the kindly sympathetic man courage is called for to make the supreme sacrifice. {Perhaps} (\tacha\). Common adverb (perhaps instrumental case) from \tachus\ (swift). Only here in N.T.

rwp@Romans:5:15 @{But not as the trespass} (\all' ouch hs\). It is more contrast than parallel: "the trespass" (\to paraptma\, the slip, fall to one side) over against the free gift (\to charisma\, of grace \charis\). {Much more} (\polli 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:5:20 @{Came in beside} (\pareislthen\). Second aorist active indicative of double compound \pareiserchomai\, late verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Galatians:2:4| which see. See also \eislthen\ in verse 12|. The Mosaic law came into this state of things, in between Adam and Christ. {That the trespass might abound} (\hina pleonasi to paraptma\). It is usual to explain \hina\ here as final, as God's ultimate purpose. Songs:Denney who refers to strkjv@Galatians:3:19ff.; strkjv@Romans:7:7f|. But Chrysostom explains \hina\ here as \ekbasis\ (result). This is a proper use of \hina\ in the _Koin_ as we have seen. If we take it so here, the meaning is "so that the trespass abounded" (aorist active subjunctive of \pleonas\, late verb, see on ¯2Thessalonians:1:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:15|). This was the actual effect of the Mosaic law for the Jews, the necessary result of all prohibitions. {Did abound more exceedingly} (\hupereperisseusen\). First aorist active indicative of \huperperisseu\. Late verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:7:4| which see. A strong word. If \pleonaz\ is comparative (\pleon\) \perisseu\ is superlative (Lightfoot) and then \huperperisseu\ goes the superlative one better. See \huperpleonaz\ in strkjv@1Timothy:1:14|. The flood of grace surpassed the flood of sin, great as that was (and is).

rwp@Romans:5:21 @{That--even so grace might reign} (\hina--houtos kai h charis basileusi\). Final \hina\ here, the purpose of God and the goal for us through Christ. Lightfoot notes the force of the aorist indicative (\ebasileusen\, established its throne) and the aorist subjunctive (\basileusi\, might establish its throne), the ingressive aorist both times. "This full rhetorical close has almost the value of a doxology" (Denney).

rwp@Romans:7:24 @{O wretched man that I am} (\talaipros eg anthrpos\). "Wretched man I." Old adjective from \tla\, to bear, and \pros\, a callus. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:3:17|. "A heart-rending cry from the depths of despair" (Sanday and Headlam). {Out of the body of this death} (\ek tou smatos tou thanatou toutou\). Songs:the order of words demands. See verse 13| for "death" which finds a lodgment in the body (Lightfoot). If one feels that Paul has exaggerated his own condition, he has only to recall strkjv@1Timothy:1:15| when he describes himself a chief of sinners. He dealt too honestly with himself for Pharisaic complacency to live long.