OT-HISTORY.filter - rwp nothing:

rwp@1Corinthians:12:17 @{If the whole body were an eye} (\ei holon to sma ophthalmos\). The eye is the most wonderful organ and supremely useful (Numbers:10:31|), the very light of the body (Luke:11:34|). And yet how grotesque it would be if there were nothing else but a great round rolling eye! A big "I" surely! {The smelling} (\h osphrsis\). Old word from \osphrainomai\, to smell. Here alone in N.T.

rwp@1Corinthians:13:2 @The ecstatic gifts (verse 1|) are worthless. Equally so are the teaching gifts (prophecy, knowledge of mysteries, all knowledge). Crasis here in \kan=kai ean\. Paul is not condemning these great gifts. He simply places love above them and essential to them. Equally futile is wonder-working faith "so as to remove mountains" (\hste or methistanein\) without love. This may have been a proverb or Paul may have known the words of Jesus (Matthew:17:20; strkjv@21:21|). {I am nothing} (\outhen eimi\). Not \outheis\, nobody, but an absolute zero. This form in \th\ rather than \d\ (\ouden\) had a vogue for a while (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 219).

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@2Thessalonians:3:11 @{For we hear} (\akouomen gar\). Fresh news from Thessalonica evidently. For the present tense compare strkjv@1Corinthians:11:18|. The accusative and the participle is a regular idiom for indirect discourse with this verb (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1040-2). Three picturesque present participles, the first a general description, \peripatountas atakts\, the other two specifying with a vivid word-play, {that work not at all, but are busy-bodies} (\mden ergazomenous alla periergazomenous\). Literally, {doing nothing but doing around}. Ellicott suggests, {doing no business but being busy bodies}. "The first persecution at Thessalonica had been fostered by a number of fanatical loungers (Acts:17:5|)" (Moffatt). These theological dead-beats were too pious to work, but perfectly willing to eat at the hands of their neighbours while they piddled and frittered away the time in idleness.

rwp@2Timothy:1:15 @{Are turned away from me} (\apestraphsan me\). Second aorist passive (still transitive here with \me\) of \apostreph\, for which verb see strkjv@Titus:1:14|. For the accusative with these passive deponents see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 484. It is not known to what incident Paul refers, whether the refusal of the Christians in the Roman province of Asia to help Paul on his arrest (or in response to an appeal from Rome) or whether the Asian Christians in Rome deserted Paul in the first stage of the trial (4:16|). Two of these Asian deserters are mentioned by name, perhaps for reasons known to Timothy. Nothing else is known of Phygelus and Hermogenes except this shameful item.

rwp@2Timothy:2:17 @{Will eat} (\nomn hexei\). "Will have (future active of \ech\) pasturage or increase" (\nom\, old word from \nem\, to pasture, in N.T. only here and strkjv@John:10:9|). {As doth gangrene} (\hs gaggraina\). Late word (medical writers and Plutarch), only here in N.T. From \gra\ or \grain\, to gnaw, to eat, an eating, spreading disease. Hymenaeus is probably the one mentioned in strkjv@1Timothy:1:20|. Nothing is known of Philetus.

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} (\mden lambanontes\). Present active participle with the usual negative with participles (1John:2:4|). {Of the Gentiles} (\apo tn ethnikn\). Instead of the usual \ethnn\ (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:1:12 @{Demetrius hath the witness of all men} (\Dmtrii memarturtai hupo pantn\). Perfect passive indicative of \marture\, "it has been witnessed to Demetrius (dative case) by all." We know nothing else about him, unless, as is unlikely, he be identified with Demas as a shortened form (Philemon:1:24; strkjv@Colossians:4:4; strkjv@2Timothy:4:10|), who has come back after his desertion or with the Ephesian silversmith (Acts:19:21ff.|), who may have been converted under John's ministry, which one would like to believe, though there is no evidence for it. He may indeed be the bearer of this letter from Ephesus to Gaius and may also have come under suspicion for some reason and hence John's warm commendation. {And of the truth itself} (\kai hupo auts ts altheias\). A second commendation of Demetrius. It is possible, in view of strkjv@1John:5:6| (the Spirit is the truth), that John means the Holy Spirit and not a mere personification of the truth. {Yea we also} (\kai hmeis de\). A third witness to Demetrius, that is John himself (literary plural). {Thou knowest} (\oidas\). "The words in strkjv@John:21:24| sound like an echo of this sentence" (Westcott). John knew Demetrius well in Ephesus.

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION But for the Acts we should know nothing of the early apostolic period save what is told in the Epistles. There are various apocryphal "Acts," but they are without historical worth. Hence the importance of this book.

rwp@Info_Acts @ SOURCES OF THE ACTS Beyond a doubt Luke employed a variety of sources for this great history as he did for the Gospel (Luke:1:1-4|). In fact, Cadbury argues that this Prologue was meant to apply to the Acts also as Volume II whether he intended to write a third volume or not. Certainly we are entitled to say that Luke used the same historical method for Acts. Some of these sources are easy to see. Luke had his own personal experience for the "we" sections. Then he had the benefit of Paul's own notes or suggestions for all that portion where Paul figures from chapters 8 to 28, since Luke was apparently with Paul in Rome when he finished the Book. This would include Paul's sermons and addresses which Luke gives unless one wishes to say, as some do, that Luke followed the style of Thucydides and composed the kind of addresses that he thought Paul would make. I see no evidence of that for each address differs from the others and suits precisely the occasion when it was delivered. The ancients frequently employed shorthand and Paul may have preserved notes of his addresses. Prof. C. C. Torrey, of Yale University, argues in his _Composition and Date of Acts_ (1916) that Luke used an Aramaic document for the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. There is an Aramaic element in certain portions of these chapters, but nothing like so pronounced as in Luke 1 and 2 after strkjv@Luke:1:1-4|. It cannot be said that Torrey has made out his case for such a single document. Luke may have had several such documents besides access to others familiar with the early days of the work in Jerusalem. There was Simon Peter whom Paul visited for two weeks in Jerusalem (Galatians:1:18|) besides other points of contact with him in Jerusalem and Antioch (Acts:15| and strkjv@Galatians:2|). There was also Barnabas who was early Paul's friend (Acts:9:27|) and who knew the beginnings as few did (Acts:4:36f.|). Besides many others it is to be observed that Paul with Luke made a special visit to Caesarea where he spent a week with the gifted Philip and his daughters with the gift of prophecy (Acts:21:8f.|). But with all the inevitable variety of sources for the information needed to cover the wide field of the Book of Acts the same mind has manifestly worked through it and it is the same style all through that appears in the "we" sections where the writer is confessedly a companion of Paul. No other companion of Paul carries this claim for the authorship and no other was a physician and no author has the external evidence from early writers.

rwp@Acts:2:4 @{With other tongues} (\heterais glssais\). Other than their native tongues. Each one began to speak in a language that he had not acquired and yet it was a real language and understood by those from various lands familiar with them. It was not jargon, but intelligible language. Jesus had said that the gospel was to go to all the nations and here the various tongues of earth were spoken. One might conclude that this was the way in which the message was to be carried to the nations, but future developments disprove it. This is a third miracle (the sound, the tongues like fire, the untaught languages). There is no blinking the fact that Luke so pictures them. One need not be surprised if this occasion marks the fulfilment of the Promise of the Father. But one is not to confound these miraculous signs with the Holy Spirit. They are merely proof that he has come to carry on the work of his dispensation. The gift of tongues came also on the house of Cornelius at Caesarea (Acts:10:44-47; strkjv@11:15-17|), the disciples of John at Ephesus (Acts:19:6|), the disciples at Corinth (1Corinthians:14:1-33|). It is possible that the gift appeared also at Samaria (Acts:8:18|). But it was not a general or a permanent gift. Paul explains in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:22| that "tongues" were a sign to unbelievers and were not to be exercised unless one was present who understood them and could translate them. This restriction disposes at once of the modern so-called tongues which are nothing but jargon and hysteria. It so happened that here on this occasion at Pentecost there were Jews from all parts of the world, so that some one would understand one tongue and some another without an interpreter such as was needed at Corinth. The experience is identical in all four instances and they are not for edification or instruction, but for adoration and wonder and worship. {As the Spirit gave them utterance} (\kaths to pneuma edidou apophtheggesthai autois\). This is precisely what Paul claims in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:10,28|, but all the same without an interpreter the gift was not to be exercised (1Corinthians:14:6-19|). Paul had the gift of tongues, but refused to exercise it except as it would be understood. Note the imperfect tense here (\edidou\). Perhaps they did not all speak at once, but one after another. \Apophtheggesthai\ is a late verb (LXX of prophesying, papyri). Lucian uses it of the ring of a vessel when it strikes a reef. It is used of eager, elevated, impassioned utterance. In the N.T. only here, verse 14; strkjv@26:25|. \Apophthegm\ is from this verb.

rwp@Acts:4:13 @{The boldness} (\tn parrsian\). Telling it all (\pan, rsia\). See also verses 29,31|. Actually Peter had turned the table on the Sanhedrin and had arraigned them before the bar of God. {Had perceived} (\katalabomenoi\). Second aorist middle participle of \katalamban\, common verb to grasp strongly (\kata\), literally or with the mind (especially middle voice), to comprehend. The rulers recalled Peter and John from having seen them often with Jesus, probably during the temple teaching, etc. {They were unlearned} (\agrammatoi eisin\). Present indicative retained in indirect discourse. Unlettered men without technical training in the professional rabbinical schools of Hillel or Shammai. Jesus himself was so regarded (John:7:15|, "not having learned letters"). {And ignorant} (\kai iditai\). Old word, only here in the N.T. and strkjv@1Corinthians:14:24; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:6|. It does not mean "ignorant," but a layman, a man not in office (a private person), a common soldier and not an officer, a man not skilled in the schools, very much like \agrammatos\. It is from \idios\ (one's own) and our "idiosyncracy" is one with an excess of such a trait, while "idiot" (this very word) is one who has nothing but his idiosyncracy. Peter and John were men of ability and of courage, but they did not belong to the set of the rabbis. {They marvelled} (\ethaumazon\). Imperfect (inchoative) active, began to wonder and kept it up. {Took knowledge of them} (\epeginskon autous\). Imperfect (inchoative) active again, they began to recognize them as men that they had seen with Jesus.

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:4:21 @{When they had further threatened them} (\prosapeilsamenoi\). The "further" is in "pros" (in addition), {Finding nothing how they might punish them} (\mden heuriskontes to ps kolasntai autous\). Note the article "to" before \ps\ (how), "the how." Aorist middle deliberative subjunctive \kolasntai\ in indirect question after \ps\ from \kolaz\, to lop (\kolos\, lopped), to curb, to prune, to correct, to punish. Old verb, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@2Peter:2:9|. {Glorified God} (\edoxazon ton theon\). Imperfect active, kept on glorifying God while the Sanhedrin were threatening Peter and John. It was to laugh at the helplessness of the Sanhedrin.

rwp@Acts:6:5 @{Pleased} (\resen\). Aorist active indicative of \aresk\ like Latin _placuit_ when a vote was taken. The use of \enpion\ before "the whole multitude" is like the LXX. {They chose} (\exelexanto\). First aorist middle indicative of \ekleg\, to pick out for oneself. Each one of the seven has a Greek name and was undoubtedly a Hellenist, not an Aramaean Jew. Consummate wisdom is here displayed for the murmuring had come from the Hellenists, seven of whom were chosen to take proper care of the widows of Hellenists. This trouble was settled to stay settled so far as we know. Nothing is here told of any of the seven except Stephen who is "a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit" and Nicolas "a proselyte of Antioch" (who was not then born a Jew, but had come to the Jews from the Greek world).

rwp@Acts:7:18 @{Another king} (\basileus heteros\). A different kind of king also, probably a king of the new dynasty after the shepherd kings had been expelled from Egypt. {Who knew not Joseph} (\hos ouk idei ton Isph\). Second past perfect of \oida\ used like an imperfect. Joseph's history and services meant nothing to the new king. "The previous dynasty had been that of the Hyksos: the new king was Ahmes who drove out the Hyksos" (Knobel).

rwp@Acts:9:36 @{At Joppa} (\En Ioppi\). The modern Jaffa, the port of Jerusalem (2Chronicles:2:16|). {Disciple} (\mathtria\). Feminine form of \mathts\, a learner from \manthan\, to learn, a late word and only here in the N.T. {Tabitha} (\Tabeitha\). Aramaic form of the Hebrew _Tsebi_ and, like the Greek word {Dorcas} (\Dorkas\), means Gazelle, "the creature with the beautiful look" (or eyes), from \derkomai\. The gazelle was a favourite type for beauty in the orient (Song of Solomon strkjv@2:9,17; strkjv@4:5; strkjv@7:3|). She may have had both the Aramaic and the Greek name, Tabitha Dorcas like John Mark. There is nothing said about a husband and so she was probably unmarried. She is the second woman mentioned by name after Pentecost (Sapphira the other). She did her beautiful deeds by herself. She did not have a Dorcas society. {Did} (\epoiei\). Imperfect active, her habit.

rwp@Acts:10:20 @{But} (\alla\). Songs:usually, though it is open to question whether \alla\ is adversative here and not rather, "Now then." {Get thee down} (\katabthi\). Second aorist active imperative, at once. {Go} (\poreuou\). Present middle imperative, go on. {Nothing doubting} (\mden diakrinomenos\). Another compound of \dia\, old and common verb for a divided mind (\dia\ like \duo\, two). Note usual negative of the present middle participle, the subjective \mden\. The notion of wavering (James:1:6|) is common with this verb in the middle voice. In strkjv@Acts:11:12| the aorist active (\mden diakrinanta\) is used perhaps with the idea of conduct towards others rather than his own internal doubt as here (Page). {For I} (\hoti eg\). The Holy Spirit assumes responsibility for the messengers from Cornelius and thus connects their mission with the vision which was still troubling Peter. Peter had heard his name called by the man (verse 19|).

rwp@Acts:10:28 @{How that it is an unlawful thing} (\hs athemiton estin\). The conjunction \hs\ is sometimes equivalent to \hoti\ (that). The old form of \athemitos\ was \athemistos\ from \themisto\ (\themiz, themis\, law custom) and \a\ privative. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@1Peter:4:3| (Peter both times). But there is no O.T. regulation forbidding such social contact with Gentiles, though the rabbis had added it and had made it binding by custom. There is nothing more binding on the average person than social custom. On coming from the market an orthodox Jew was expected to immerse to avoid defilement (Edersheim, _Jewish Social Life_, pp. 26-28; Taylor's _Sayings of the Jewish Fathers_, pp. 15, 26, 137, second edition). See also strkjv@Acts:11:3; strkjv@Galatians:2:12|. It is that middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile (Ephesians:2:14|) which Jesus broke down. {One of another nation} (\allophuli\). Dative case of an old adjective, but only here in the N.T. (\allos\, another, \phulon\, race). Both Juvenal (_Sat_. XIV. 104, 105) and Tacitus (_History_, V. 5) speak of the Jewish exclusiveness and separation from Gentiles. {And yet unto} (\kamoi\). Dative of the emphatic pronoun (note position of prominence) with \kai\ (\crasis\) meaning here "and yet" or adversative "but" as often with \kai\ which is by no means always merely the connective "and" (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1182f.). Now Peter takes back both the adjectives used in his protest to the Lord (verse 14|) "common and unclean." It is a long journey that Peter has made. He here refers to "no one" (\mdena\), not to "things," but that is great progress.

rwp@Acts:10:37 @{Ye know} (\humeis oidate\). Peter reminds his Gentile audience that the main facts concerning Jesus and the gospel were known to them. Note emphatic expression of \humeis\ (you). {Beginning} (\arxamenos\). The Textus Receptus has \arxamenon\ (accusative), but the nominative is given by Aleph A B C D E H and is certainly correct. But it makes a decided anacoluthon. The accusative would agree with \rhma\ used in the sense of message or story as told by the disciples. The nominative does not agree with anything in the sentence. The same phrase occurs in strkjv@Luke:23:5|. Here is this aorist middle participle almost used like an adverb. See a similar loose use of \arxamenos\ in the same sense by Peter in strkjv@Acts:1:22|. The baptism of John is given as the _terminus a quo_. The story began with a skip to Galilee after the baptism just like the Gospel of Mark. This first message of Peter to the Gentiles (10:37-44|) corresponds in broad outline with Mark's Gospel. Mark heard Peter preach many times and evidently planned his Gospel (the Roman Gospel) on this same model. There is in it nothing about the birth and childhood of Jesus nor about the intervening ministry supplied by John's Gospel for the period (a year) between the baptism and the Galilean Ministry. Peter here presents an objective statement of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus with proof from the Scriptures that he is the Messiah. It is a skilful presentation.

rwp@Acts:11:12 @{Making no distinction} (\mden diakrinanta\). Songs:Westcott and Hort (first aorist active participle) instead of \mden diakrinomenon\ "nothing doubting" (present middle participle) like strkjv@10:20|. The difference in voice shows the distinction in meaning. {We entered into the man's house} (\eislthomen eis ton oikon tou andros\). Peter confesses it, but shows that the other six went in also. He avoids mention of Cornelius's name and office.

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} (\zlou\). Genitive case of \zlos\ (from \ze\, to boil) after \eplsthsan\ (effective first aorist passive indicative of \pimplmi\). 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} (\blasphmountes\). 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:15:7 @{When there had been much questioning} (\polls ztses genomens\). Genitive absolute with second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\. Evidently the Judaizers were given full opportunity to air all their grievances and objections. They were allowed plenty of time and there was no effort to shut off debate or to rush anything through the meeting. {Peter rose up} (\anastas Petros\). The wonder was that he had waited so long. Probably Paul asked him to do so. He was the usual spokesman for the apostles and his activities in Jerusalem were well-known. In particular his experience at Caesarea (Acts:10|) had caused trouble here in Jerusalem from this very same party of the circumcism (Acts:11:1-18|). It was fitting that Peter should speak. This is the last time that Peter appears in the Acts. {A good while ago} (\aph' hmern archain\). From ancient days. The adjective \archaios\ is from \arch\, beginning, and its actual age is a matter of relativity. Songs:Mnason (Acts:21:16|) is termed "an ancient disciple." It was probably a dozen years since God "made choice" (\exelexato\) to speak by Peter's mouth to Cornelius and the other Gentiles in Caesarea. His point is that what Paul and Barnabas have reported is nothing new. The Judaizers made objection then as they are doing now.

rwp@Acts:15:9 @{He made no distinction between us and them} (\outhen diekrinen metaxu hmn te kai autn\). He distinguished nothing (first aorist active ind.) between (both \dia\ and \metaxu\) both (\te kai\) us and them. In the matter of faith and conversion God treated us Jews as heathen and the heathen as Jews. {Cleansing their hearts by faith} (\ti pistei katharisas tas kardias autn\). Not by works nor by ceremonies. Peter here has a thoroughly Pauline and Johannine idea of salvation for all both Jew and Greek. Cf. strkjv@10:15|.

rwp@Acts:16:7 @{Over against Mysia} (\kata tn 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 tn Bithunian poreuthnai\). 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 Isou\). 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:16:15 @{And when she was baptized} (\hs de ebaptisth\). First aorist passive indicative of \baptiz\. The river Gangites was handy for the ordinance and she had now been converted and was ready to make this public declaration of her faith in Jesus Christ. {And her household} (\kai ho oikos auts\). Who constituted her "household"? The term \oikos\, originally means the building as below, "into my house" and then it includes the inmates of a house. There is nothing here to show whether Lydia's "household" went beyond "the women" employed by her who like her had heard the preaching of Paul and had believed. "Possibly Euodia and Syntyche and the other women, strkjv@Phillipians:4:2,3|, may have been included in the family of Lydia, who may have employed many slaves and freed women in her trade" (Knowling). "This statement cannot be claimed as any argument for infant baptism, since the Greek word may mean her servants or her work-people" (Furneaux). In the household baptisms (Cornelius, Lydia, the jailor, Crispus) one sees "infants" or not according to his predilections or preferences. {If ye have judged me} (\ei kekrikate me\). Condition of the first class, assumed to be true (\ei\ and the indicative, here perfect active of \krin\). She had confessed her faith and submitted to baptism as proof that she was "faithful to the Lord" (\pistn ti kurii\), believing on the Lord. "If she was fit for that, surely she was fit to be their hostess" (Furneaux). And Paul and his party had clearly no comfortable place to stay while in Philippi. The ancient hotels or inns were abominable. Evidently Paul demurred for there were four of them and he did not wish to sacrifice his independence or be a burden even to a woman of wealth. {And she constrained us} (\kai parebiasato hmas\). Effective first aorist middle of \parabiazomai\, late word, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:24:29|. Some moral force (\bia\) or hospitable persuasion was required (cf. strkjv@1Samuel:28:23|), but Lydia had her way as women usually do. Songs:he accepted Lydia's hospitality in Philippi, though he worked for his own living in Thessalonica (2Thessalonians:3:8|) and elsewhere (2Corinthians:11:9|). Songs:far only women have been won to Christ in Philippi. The use of "us" shows that Luke was not a householder in Philippi.

rwp@Acts:16:24 @{Into the inner prison} (\eis tn esteran phulakn\). The comparative form from the adverb \es\ (within), Ionic and old Attic for \eis\. In the LXX, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:6:19|. The Roman public prisons had a vestibule and outer prison and behind this the inner prison, a veritable dungeon with no light or air save what came through the door when open. One has only to picture modern cells in our jails, the dungeons in feudal castles, London prisons before the time of Howard, to appreciate the horrors of an inner prison cell in a Roman provincial town of the first century A.D. {Made their feet fast} (\tous podas sphalisato autn\). First aorist (effective) middle of \asphaliz\, from \asphals\ (safe), common verb in late Greek, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:24:64ff|. The inner prison was safe enough without this refinement of cruelty. {In the stocks} (\eis to xulon\). \Xulon\, from \xu\, to scrape or plane, is used for a piece of wood whether a cross or gibbet (Acts:5:30; strkjv@10:39; strkjv@13:29; strkjv@Galatians:3:13; strkjv@1Peter:2:24|) or a log or timber with five holes (four for the wrists and ankles and one for the neck) or two for the feet as here, \xuloped\, Latin _vervus_, to shackle the feet stretched apart (Job:33:11|). This torment was practiced in Sparta, Athens, Rome, and Adonirom Judson suffered it in Burmah. \Xulon\ is also used in the N.T. for stick or staff (Matthew:26:47|) and even a tree (Luke:23:31|). Tertullian said of Christians in the stocks: _Nihil crus sentit in vervo, quum animus in caelo est_ (Nothing the limb feels in the stocks when the mind is in heaven).

rwp@Galatians:6:3 @{Something when he is nothing} (\ti mden n\). Thinks he is a big number being nothing at all (neuter singular pronouns). He is really zero. {He deceiveth himself} (\phrenapati heauton\). Late compound word (\phrn\, mind, \apata\, lead astray), leads his own mind astray. Here for first time. Afterwards in Galen, ecclesiastical and Byzantine writers. He deceives no one else.

rwp@Hebrews:7:3 @{Without father, without mother, without genealogy} (\apatr, amtr, agenealogtos\). Alliteration like strkjv@Romans:1:30|, the first two old words, the third coined by the author (found nowhere else) and meaning simply "devoid of any genealogy." The argument is that from silence, made much of by Philo, but not to be pressed. The record in Genesis tells nothing of any genealogy. Melchizedek stands alone. He is not to be understood as a miraculous being without birth or death. Melchizedek has been made more mysterious than he is by reading into this interpretation what is not there. {Made like} (\aphmoimenos\). Perfect passive participle of \aphomoio\, old verb, to produce a facsimile or copy, only here in N.T. The likeness is in the picture drawn in Genesis, not in the man himself. Such artificial interpretation does not amount to proof, but only serves as a parallel or illustration. {Unto the Son of God} (\ti huii tou theou\). Associative instrumental case of \huios\. {Abideth a priest} (\menei hiereus\). According to the record in Genesis, the only one in his line just as Jesus stands alone, but with the difference that Jesus continues priest in fact in heaven. {Continually} (\eis to dinekes\). Old phrase (for the continuity) like \eis ton aina\, in N.T. only in Hebrews (7:3; strkjv@10:1,14,21|).

rwp@Hebrews:7:8 @{Here} (\hde\). In the Levitical system. {There} (\ekei\). In the case of Melchizedek. {Of whom it is witnessed} (\marturoumenos\). "Being witnessed," present passive participle of \marture\ (personal construction, not impersonal). {That he lives} (\hoti zi\). Present active indicative of \za\). The Genesis record tells nothing of his death.

rwp@Hebrews:7:19 @{Made nothing perfect} (\ouden eteleisen\). Another parenthesis. First aorist active indicative of \teleio\. See verse 11|. And yet law is necessary. {A bringing in thereupon} (\epeisagg\). An old double compound (\epi\, additional, \eisagg\, bringing in from \eisag\). Here only in N.T. Used by Josephus (_Ant_. XI. 6, 2) for the introduction of a new wife in place of the repudiated one. {Of a better hope} (\kreittonos elpidos\). This better hope (6:18-20|) does bring us near to God (\eggizomen ti thei\) as we come close to God's throne through Christ (4:16|).

rwp@Hebrews:9:19 @{When every commandment had been spoken} (\laltheiss\). Genitive absolute with first aorist passive participle feminine singular of \lale\. The author uses the account in strkjv@Exodus:24:3f.| "with characteristic freedom" (Moffatt). There is nothing there about the water, the scarlet wool (\erion\, diminutive of \eros, eiros\, old word, here and in strkjv@Revelation:1:14|; for \kokkinos\ see on ¯Matthew:27:6,28|), and hyssop (\husspou\, a plant mentioned in strkjv@John:19:29|). It had become the custom to mingle water with the blood and to use a wisp of wool or a stem of hyssop for sprinkling (Numbers:10:2-10|). {Both the book itself} (\auto te to biblion\). There is nothing in Exodus about sprinkling the book of the covenant, though it may very well have been done. He omits the use of oil in strkjv@Exodus:40:9f.; strkjv@Leviticus:8:10f.| and applies blood to all the details. {Sprinkled} (\erantisen\). First aorist active indicative from \rantiz\ (from \rantos\ and this from \rain\), like \baptiz\ from \bapt\. Cf. strkjv@Mark:7:4; strkjv@Hebrews:10:22; strkjv@Revelation:19:13|.

rwp@Hebrews:12:24 @{To Jesus} (\Isou\). This great fact is not to be overlooked (Phillipians:2:10f.|). He is there as Lord and Saviour and still "Jesus." {The mediator of a new covenant} (\diathks neas mesiti\). As already shown (7:22; strkjv@8:6,8,9,10; strkjv@9:15|) and now gloriously consummated. {To the blood of sprinkling} (\haimati rantismou\). As in strkjv@9:19-28|. {Than Abel} (\para ton Abel\). Accusative as in strkjv@1:4|. {Better} (\kreitton\). Comparative of \kalos\. Abel's blood still speaks (11:4|), but it is as nothing compared to that of Jesus.

rwp@Info_James @ THE READERS The author addresses himself "to the twelve tribes which are of the Dispersion" (Jam strkjv@1:1|). Clearly, then, he is not writing to Gentiles, unless he includes the spiritual children of Abraham in the term \Diaspora\ as Paul does for believers (Galatians:3:29; strkjv@Romans:9:6f.|). The word \diaspora\ occurs elsewhere in the N.T. only in strkjv@John:7:35; strkjv@1Peter:1:1|. It apparently has the spiritual significance in strkjv@1Peter:1:1|, but in strkjv@John:7:35| the usual meaning of Jews scattered over the world. The use here of "the twelve tribes" makes the literal sense probable here. Clearly also James knew nothing of any "lost" tribes, for the Jews of the Dispersion were a blend of all the twelve tribes. It is probable also that James is addressing chiefly the Eastern Dispersion in Syria, Mesopotamia, and Babylonia as Peter writes to five provinces in the Western Dispersion in Asia Minor. It is possible that James has in mind Christian and non-Christian Jews, not wholly non-Christian Jews as some hold. He may have in mind merely Christian Jews outside of Palestine, of whom there were already many scattered since the great pentecost. The use of synagogue as a place of worship (James:2:2|) like church (James:5:14|) argues somewhat for this view. He presents the Mosaic law as still binding (James:2:9-11; strkjv@4:11|). As the leading elder of the great church in Jerusalem and as a devout Jew and half-brother of Jesus, the message of James had a special appeal to these widely scattered Jewish Christians.

rwp@James:1:4 @{Let have} (\echet\). Present active imperative of \ech\, let it keep on having. {Perfect} (\teleion\). See strkjv@Romans:5:3f.| for a like chain of blessings. Carry on the work to the end or completion (from \telos\, end) as in strkjv@John:17:4| (\to ergon teleisas\, having finished the work). {That ye may be} (\hina te\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \eimi\. This is the goal of patience. {Perfect and entire} (\teleioi kai holoklroi\). Perfected at the end of the task (\telos\) and complete in all parts (\holoklroi\, \holos\ whole and \klros\ lot or part). "Perfected all over." These two adjectives often occur together in Philo, Plutarch, etc. See strkjv@Acts:3:16| for \holoklrian\ (perfect soundness). {Lacking in nothing} (\en mdeni leipomenoi\). Present passive participle of \leip\ to leave. Negative statement of the preceding positive as often in James (cf. strkjv@1:6|). There is now a digression (verses 5-8|) from the discussion of \peirasmos\, which is taken up again in verse 9|. The word \leipomenoi\ (lacking) suggests the digression.

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} (\mden 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} (\kludni thalasss\). 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 \kludn\), to toss by waves. {Driven by the wind} (\anemizomeni\). Present passive participle (agreeing in case with \kludni\) 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 anemi\. It is a vivid picture of the sea whipped into white-caps by the winds. {Tossed} (\ripizomeni\). Present passive participle also in agreement with \kludni\ 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@John:5:19 @{The Son} (\ho huios\). The absolute use of the Son in relation to the Father admitting the charge in verse 18| and defending his equality with the Father. {Can do nothing by himself} (\ou dunatai poiein aph'heautou ouden\). True in a sense of every man, but in a much deeper sense of Christ because of the intimate relation between him and the Father. See this same point in strkjv@5:30; strkjv@7:28; strkjv@8:28; strkjv@14:10|. Jesus had already made it in strkjv@5:17|. Now he repeats and defends it. {But what he seeth the Father doing} (\an m ti blepi ton patera poiounta\). Rather, "unless he sees the Father doing something." Negative condition (\an m\=\ean m\, if not, unless) of third class with present (habit) subjunctive (\blepi\) and present active participle (\poiounta\). It is a supreme example of a son copying the spirit and work of a father. In his work on earth the Son sees continually what the Father is doing. In healing this poor man he was doing what the Father wishes him to do. {For what things soever he doeth, these the Son also doeth in like manner} (\ha gar an ekeinos poii tauta kai ho huios homois poiei\). Indefinite relative clause with \an\ and the present active subjunctive (\poii\). Note \ekeinos\, emphatic demonstrative, that one, referring to the Father. This sublime claim on the part of Jesus will exasperate his enemies still more.

rwp@John:6:39 @{That of all that which} (\hina pn ho\). Literally, "That all which" (see verse 37| for \pan ho\), but there is a sharp anacoluthon with \pn\ left as _nominativus pendens_. {I should lose nothing} (\m apoles ex autou\). Construed with \hina\, "that I shall not lose anything of it." \Apoles\, from \apollumi\, can be either future active indicative or first aorist active subjunctive as is true also of \anasts\ (from \anistmi\), "I shall raise up." {At the last day} (\ti eschati hemeri\). Locative case without \en\. Only in John, but four times here (39,40,44,54|) "with the majesty of a solemn refrain." In strkjv@7:37| it is the last day of the feast of tabernacles, but in strkjv@11:24; strkjv@12:48| of the day of judgment as here. Christ is the Agent of the general resurrection in strkjv@5:28| as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:22| while here only the resurrection of the righteous is mentioned.

rwp@John:7:26 @{They say nothing unto him} (\ouden autoi legousin\). But only make sneering comments about him (7:16|) in spite of his speaking "openly" (\parrsii\, for which word see strkjv@7:13; strkjv@18:20|) before all. lt was sarcasm about the leaders, though an element of surprise on the part of "these shrewd townsmen" (Bernard) may have existed also. {Can it be that the rulers indeed know} (\m pote alths egnsin hoi archontes\). Negative answer expected by \m pote\ and yet there is ridicule of the rulers in the form of the question. See a like use of \m pote\ in strkjv@Luke:3:15|, though nowhere else in John. \Egnsan\ (second aorist ingressive active indicative of \ginsk\) may refer to the examination of Jesus by these rulers in strkjv@5:19ff.| and means, "Did they come to know or find out" (and so hold now)? {That this is the Christ} (\hoti houtos estin ho Christos\). The Messiah of Jewish hope.

rwp@John:8:6 @{Tempting him} (\peirazontes auton\). Evil sense of this present active participle of \peiraz\, as so often (Mark:8:11; strkjv@10:2|, etc.). {That they might have whereof to accuse him} (\hina echsin katgorein autou\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \ech\. This laying of traps for Jesus was a common practice of his enemies (Luke:11:16|, etc.). Note present active infinitive of \katgore\ (see strkjv@Matthew:12:10| for the verb) to go on accusing (with genitive \autou\). It was now a habit with these rabbis. {Stooped down} (\kat kupsas\). First aorist active participle of \kupt\, old verb to bow the head, to bend forward, in N.T. only here and verse 8; strkjv@Mark:1:7|. The use of \kat\ (down) gives a vivid touch to the picture. {With his finger} (\ti daktuli\). Instrumental case of \daktulos\ for which see strkjv@Matthew:23:4|. {Wrote on the ground} (\kategraphen eis tn gn\). Imperfect active of \katagraph\, old compound, here only in N.T., to draw, to delineate, to write down, apparently inchoative, began to write on the sand as every one has done sometimes. The only mention of writing by Jesus and the use of \katagraph\ leaves it uncertain whether he was writing words or drawing pictures or making signs. If we only knew what he wrote! Certainly Jesus knew how to write. And yet more books have been written about this one who wrote nothing that is preserved than any other person or subject in human history. There is a tradition that Jesus wrote down the names and sins of these accusers. That is not likely. They were written on their hearts. Jesus alone on this occasion showed embarrassment over this woman's sin.

rwp@John:9:24 @{A second time} (\ek deuterou\). He had given the Pharisees the facts the first time (9:15|). It was really the third time (see \palin\ in strkjv@9:17|). Now it was like a joke unless the Pharisees meant to imply that his previous story was untrue. {Give glory to God} (\dos doxan ti thei\). Second aorist active imperative of \didmi\ (cf. \sches, hes\). This phrase does not mean gratitude to God as in strkjv@Luke:17:18|. It is rather an adjuration to speak the truth (Joshua:7:19; strkjv@1Samuel:6:5|) as if he had not done it before. Augustine says: "_Quid est Daniel:gloriam Deo? Nega quod accepisti._" Is a sinner (\hamartlos estin\). They can no longer deny the fact of the cure since the testimony of the parents (9:19|) and now wish the man to admit that he was lying in saying that Jesus healed him. He must accept their ecclesiastical authority as proving that Jesus had nothing to do with the cure since Jesus is a sinner. They wish to decide the fact by logic and authority like all persecutors through the ages. Recall the Pharisaic distinction between \dikaios\ (righteous) and \hamartlos\ (sinner).

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} (\thereite 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 aplthen\). 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:13:22 @{Looked one on another} (\eblepon eis alllous\). Inchoative imperfect of \blep\, "began to glance at one another in bewilderment (doubting, \aporoumenoi\, present passive participle of \apore\, to be at a loss, to lose one's way, \a\ privative and \poros\, way). They recalled their strife about precedence and Judas betrayed nothing. {Concerning whom he spake} (\peri tinos legei\). Indirect question retaining present active indicative \legei\. See same note in ¯Mark:14:19; strkjv@Matthew:26:22; strkjv@Luke:22:23|.

rwp@John:15:5 @{Ye the branches} (\humeis ta klmata\). Jesus repeats and applies the metaphor of verse 1|. {Apart from me} (\chris emou\). See strkjv@Ephesians:2:12| for \chris Christou\. There is nothing for a broken off branch to do but wither and die. For the cosmic relation of Christ see strkjv@John:1:3| (\chris autou\).

rwp@John:15:7 @{Ask whatsoever ye will} (\ho ean thelte aitsasthe\). Indefinite relative with \ean\ and present active subjunctive of \thel\, to wish, to will, and aorist middle imperative of \aite\, to ask. This astounding command and promise (\gensetai\, future middle of \ginomai\, it will come to pass) is not without conditions and limitations. It involves such intimate union and harmony with Christ that nothing will be asked out of accord with the mind of Christ and so of the Father. Christ's name is mentioned in strkjv@15:16|; cf. strkjv@14:13; strkjv@16:23|.

rwp@John:16:23 @{Ye shall ask me nothing} (\eme ouk ertsete\). Either in the sense of question (original meaning of \erta\) as in verses 19,30| since he will be gone or in the sense of request or favours (like \aite\ in this verse) as in strkjv@14:16; strkjv@Acts:3:2|. In verse 26| both \aite\ and \erta\ occur in this sense. Either view makes sense here. {If ye shall ask} (\an ti aitste\). Third-class condition, \an\ like \ean\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \aite\. Note ¯14:26| for "in my name."

rwp@John:18:31 @{Yourselves} (\humeis\). Emphatic. Pilate shrewdly turns the case over to the Sanhedrin in reply to their insolence, who have said nothing whatever about their previous trial and condemnation of Jesus. He drew out at once the admission that they wanted the death of Jesus, not a fair trial for him, but Pilate's approval of their purpose to kill him (John:7:1,25|).

rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE READERS Of this we know nothing at all. Dr. Chase believes that the Epistle was sent to Antioch in Syria. That may be true, though it is mere conjecture. Any place or places in Asia Minor would suit so far as we know. The readers were probably both Jewish and Gentile Christians. Jerusalem and Alexandria are urged as the place of composition, but of that we have no real information.

rwp@Luke:2:39 @{To their own city Nazareth} (\eis polin heautn Nazaret\). See on strkjv@Matthew:2:23| about Nazareth. Luke tells nothing of the flight to Egypt and the reason for the return to Nazareth instead of Bethlehem, the place of the birth of Jesus as told in strkjv@Matthew:2:13-23|. But then neither Gospel gives all the details of this period. Luke has also nothing about the visit of the wise men (Matthew:2:1-12|) as Matthew tells nothing of the shepherds and of Simeon and Anna (Luke:2:8-28|). The two Gospels supplement each other.

rwp@Luke:3:22 @{Descended} (\katabnai\). Same construction as the preceding infinitive. {The Holy Ghost} (\to pneuma to hagion\). The Holy Spirit. strkjv@Mark:1:10| has merely the Spirit (\to pneuma\) while strkjv@Matthew:3:16| has the Spirit of God (\pneuma theou\). {In a bodily form} (\smatiki eidei\). Alone in Luke who has also "as a dove" (\hs peristeran\) like Matthew and Mark. This probably means that the Baptist saw the vision that looked like a dove. Nothing is gained by denying the fact or possibility of the vision that looked like a dove. God manifests his power as he will. The symbolism of the dove for the Holy Spirit is intelligible. We are not to understand that this was the beginning of the Incarnation of Christ as the Cerinthian Gnostics held. But this fresh influx of the Holy Spirit may have deepened the Messianic consciousness of Jesus and certainly revealed him to the Baptist as God's Son. {And a voice came out of heaven} (\kai phnn ex ouranou genesthai\). Same construction of infinitive with accusative of general reference. The voice of the Father to the Son is given here as in strkjv@Mark:1:11|, which see, and strkjv@Matthew:3:17| for discussion of the variation there. The Trinity here manifest themselves at the baptism of Jesus which constitutes the formal entrance of Jesus upon his Messianic ministry. He enters upon it with the Father's blessing and approval and with the power of the Holy Spirit upon him. The deity of Christ here appears in plain form in the Synoptic Gospels. The consciousness of Christ is as clear on this point here as in the Gospel of John where the Baptist describes him after his baptism as the Son of God (John:1:34|).

rwp@Luke:3:23 @{Jesus Himself} (\autos Isous\). Emphatic intensive pronoun calling attention to the personality of Jesus at this juncture. When he entered upon his Messianic work. {When he began to teach} (\archomenos\). The words "to teach" are not in the Greek text. The Authorized Version "began to be about thirty years of age," is an impossible translation. The Revised Version rightly supplies "to teach" (\didaskein\) after the present participle \archomenos\. Either the infinitive or the participle can follow \archomai\, usually the infinitive in the _Koin_. It is not necessary to supply anything (Acts:1:22|). {Was about thirty years of age} (\n hsei etn triakonta\). Tyndale has it right "Jesus was about thirty yere of age when he beganne." Luke does not commit himself definitely to precisely thirty years as the age of Christ. The Levites entered upon full service at that age, but that proves nothing about Jesus. God's prophets enter upon their task when the word of God comes to them. Jesus may have been a few months under or over thirty or a year or two less or more. {Being Son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli} (\n huios hs enomizeto Isph tou Helei\). For the discussion of the genealogy of Jesus see on ¯Matthew:1:1-17|. The two genealogies differ very widely and many theories have been proposed about them. At once one notices that Luke begins with Jesus and goes back to Adam, the Son of God, while Matthew begins with Abraham and comes to "Joseph the husband of Mary of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ" (Matthew:1:16|). Matthew employs the word "begot" each time, while Luke has the article \tou\ repeating \huiou\ (Son) except before Joseph. They agree in the mention of Joseph, but Matthew says that "Jacob begat Joseph" while Luke calls "Joseph the son of Heli." There are other differences, but this one makes one pause. Joseph, of course, did not have two fathers. If we understand Luke to be giving the real genealogy of Jesus through Mary, the matter is simple enough. The two genealogies differ from Joseph to David except in the cases of Zorobabel and Salathiel. Luke evidently means to suggest something unusual in his genealogy by the use of the phrase "as was supposed" (\hs enomizeto\). His own narrative in strkjv@Luke:1:26-38| has shown that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. Plummer objects that, if Luke is giving the genealogy of Jesus through Mary, \huios\ must be used in two senses here (son as was supposed of Joseph, and grandson through Mary of Heli). But that is not an unheard of thing. In neither list does Matthew or Luke give a complete genealogy. Just as Matthew uses "begat" for descent, so does Luke employ "son" in the same way for descendant. It was natural for Matthew, writing for Jews, to give the legal genealogy through Joseph, though he took pains to show in strkjv@Matthew:1:16,18-25| that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. It was equally natural for Luke, a Greek himself and writing for the whole world, to give the actual genealogy of Jesus through Mary. It is in harmony with Pauline universality (Plummer) that Luke carries the genealogy back to Adam and does not stop with Abraham. It is not clear why Luke adds "the Son of God" after Adam (3:38|). Certainly he does not mean that Jesus is the Son of God only in the sense that Adam is. Possibly he wishes to dispose of the heathen myths about the origin of man and to show that God is the Creator of the whole human race, Father of all men in that sense. No mere animal origin of man is in harmony with this conception.

rwp@Luke:4:2 @{Being tempted} (\peirazomenos\). Present passive participle and naturally parallel with the imperfect passive \geto\ (was led) in verse 1|. This is another instance of poor verse division which should have come at the end of the sentence. See on ¯Matthew:4:1; strkjv@Mark:1:13| for the words "tempt" and "devil." The devil challenged the Son of man though also the Son of God. It was a contest between Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, and the slanderer of men. The devil had won with Adam and Eve. He has hopes of triumph over Jesus. The story of this conflict is given only in strkjv@Matthew:4:1-11; strkjv@Luke:4:1-13|. There is a mere mention of it in strkjv@Mark:1:12f|. Songs:then here is a specimen of the Logia of Jesus (Q), a non-Markan portion of Matthew and Luke, the earliest document about Christ. The narrative could come ultimately only from Christ himself. It is noteworthy that it bears all the marks of the high conception of Jesus as the Son of God found in the Gospel of John and in Paul and Hebrews, the rest of the New Testament in fact, for Mark, Matthew, Luke, Acts, Peter, and Jude:follow in this same strain. The point is that modern criticism has revealed the Messianic consciousness of Jesus as God's Son at his Baptism and in his Temptations at the very beginning of his ministry and in the oldest known documents about Christ (The Logia, Mark's Gospel). {He did eat nothing} (\ouk ephagen ouden\). Second aorist (constative) active indicative of the defective verb \esthi\. Mark does not give the fast. strkjv@Matthew:4:2| has the aorist active participle \nsteusas\ which usually means a religious fast for purposes of devotion. That idea is not excluded by Luke's words. The entrance of Jesus upon his Messianic ministry was a fit time for this solemn and intense consecration. This mental and spiritual strain would naturally take away the appetite and there was probably nothing at hand to eat. The weakness from the absence of food gave the devil his special opportunity to tempt Jesus which he promptly seized. {When they were completed} (\suntelestheisn autn\). Genitive absolute with the first aorist passive participle feminine plural because \hemern\ (days) is feminine. According to Luke the hunger (\epeinasen\, became hungry, ingressive aorist active indicative) came at the close of the forty days as in strkjv@Matthew:4:2|.

rwp@Luke:6:35 @{But} (\pln\). Plain adversative like \pln\ in verse 24|. Never despairing (\mden apelpizontes\). \Mden\ is read by A B L Bohairic and is the reading of Westcott and Hort. The reading \mdena\ is translated "despairing of no man." The Authorized Version has it "hoping for nothing again," a meaning for \apelpiz\ with no parallel elsewhere. Field (_Otium Nor._ iii. 40) insists that all the same the context demands this meaning because of \apelpizein\ in verse 34|, but the correct reading there is \elpizein\, not \apelpizein\. Here Field's argument falls to the ground. The word occurs in Polybius, Diodorus, LXX with the sense of despairing and that is the meaning here. D and Old Latin documents have _nihil desperantes_, but the Vulgate has _nihil inde sperantes_ (hoping for nothing thence) and this false rendering has wrought great havoc in Europe. "On the strength of it Popes and councils have repeatedly condemned the taking of any interest whatever for loans. As loans could not be had without interest, and Christians were forbidden to take it, money lending passed into the hands of the Jews, and added greatly to the unnatural detestation in which Jews were held" (Plummer). By "never despairing" or "giving up nothing in despair" Jesus means that we are not to despair about getting the money back. We are to help the apparently hopeless cases. Medical writers use the word for desperate or hopeless cases. {Sons of the Most High} (\huoi Hupsistou\). In strkjv@1:32| Jesus is called "Son of the Highest" and here all real children or sons of God (Luke:20:36|) are so termed. See also strkjv@1:35,76| for the use of "the Highest" of God. He means the same thing that we see in strkjv@Matthew:5:45,48| by "your Father." {Toward the unthankful and evil} (\epi tous acharistous kai ponrous\). God the Father is kind towards the unkind and wicked. Note the one article with both adjectives.

rwp@Matthew:11:3 @{He that cometh} (\ho erchomenos\). This phrase refers to the Messiah (Mark:11:9; strkjv@Luke:13:35; strkjv@19:38; strkjv@Hebrews:10:37; strkjv@Psalms:118:26; strkjv@Daniel:7:13|). Some rabbis applied the phrase to some forerunner of the kingdom (McNeile). Was there to be "another" (\heteron\) after Jesus? John had been in prison "long enough to develop a _prison mood_" (Bruce). It was once clear enough to him, but his environment was depressing and Jesus had done nothing to get him out of Machaerus (see chapter IX in my _John the Loyal_). John longed for reassurance.

rwp@Matthew:13:3 @{Many things in parables} (\polla en parabolais\). It was not the first time that Jesus had used parables, but the first time that he had spoken so many and some of such length. He will use a great many in the future as in Luke 12 to 18 and Matt. 24 and 25. The parables already mentioned in Matthew include the salt and the light (5:13-16|), the birds and the lilies (6:26-30|), the splinter and the beam in the eye (7:3-5|), the two gates (7:13f.|), the wolves in sheep's clothing (7:15|), the good and bad trees (7:17-19|), the wise and foolish builders (7:24-27|), the garment and the wineskins (9:16f.|), the children in the market places (11:16f.|). It is not certain how many he spoke on this occasion. Matthew mentions eight in this chapter (the Sower, the Tares, the Mustard Seed, the Leaven, the Hid Treasure, the Pearl of Great Price, the Net, the Householder). Mark adds the Parable of the Lamp (Mark:4:21; strkjv@Luke:8:16|), the Parable of the Seed Growing of Itself (Mark:4:26-29|), making ten of which we know. But both Mark (Mark:4:33|) and Matthew (13:34|) imply that there were many others. "Without a parable spake he nothing unto them" (Matthew:13:34|), on this occasion, we may suppose. The word parable (\parabol\ from \paraball\, to place alongside for measurement or comparison like a yardstick) is an objective illustration for spiritual or moral truth. The word is employed in a variety of ways (a) as for sententious sayings or proverbs (Matthew:15:15; strkjv@Mark:3:23; strkjv@Luke:4:23; strkjv@5:36-39; strkjv@6:39|), for a figure or type (Heb. strkjv@9:9; strkjv@11:19|); (b) a comparison in the form of a narrative, the common use in the Synoptic Gospels like the Sower; (c) "A narrative illustration not involving a comparison" (Broadus), like the Rich Fool, the Good Samaritan, etc. "The oriental genius for picturesque speech found expression in a multitude of such utterances" (McNeile). There are parables in the Old Testament, in the Talmud, in sermons in all ages. But no one has spoken such parables as these of Jesus. They hold the mirror up to nature and, as all illustrations should do, throw light on the truth presented. The fable puts things as they are not in nature, Aesop's Fables, for instance. The parable may not be actual fact, but it could be so. It is harmony with the nature of the case. The allegory (\allgoria\) is a speaking parable that is self-explanatory all along like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_. All allegories are parables, but not all parables are allegories. The Prodigal Son is an allegory, as is the story of the Vine and Branches (John:15|). John does not use the word parable, but only \paroimia\, a saying by the way (John:10:6; strkjv@16:25,29|). As a rule the parables of Jesus illustrate one main point and the details are more or less incidental, though sometimes Jesus himself explains these. When he does not do so, we should be slow to interpret the minor details. Much heresy has come from fantastic interpretations of the parables. In the case of the Parable of the Sower (13:3-8|) we have also the careful exposition of the story by Jesus (18-23|) as well as the reason for the use of parables on this occasion by Jesus (9-17|).

rwp@Matthew:13:33 @{Is like unto leaven} (\homoia estin zumi\). In its pervasive power. Curiously enough some people deny that Jesus here likens the expanding power of the Kingdom of heaven to leaven, because, they say, leaven is the symbol of corruption. But the language of Jesus is not to be explained away by such exegetical jugglery. The devil is called like a lion by Peter (1Peter:5:8|) and Jesus in Revelation is called the Lion of the Tribe of Judah (Revelation:5:5|). The leaven permeates all the "wheaten meal" (\aleurou\) till the whole is leavened. There is nothing in the "three measures," merely a common amount to bake. Dr. T.R. Glover in his _Jesus of History_ suggests that Jesus used to notice his mother using that amount of wheat flour in baking bread. To find the Trinity here is, of course, quite beside the mark. The word for leaven, \zum\, is from \ze\, to boil, to seethe, and so pervasive fermentation.

rwp@Matthew:14:18 @{And he said} (\ho de eipen\). Here is the contrast between the helpless doubt of the disciples and the confident courage of Jesus. He used "_the_ five loaves and two fishes" which they had mentioned as a reason for doing nothing. "Bring them hither unto me." They had overlooked the power of Jesus in this emergency.

rwp@Revelation:20:13 @{Gave up} (\edken\). Just "gave" (first aorist active indicative of \didmi\), but for the sea to give is to give up (effective aorist). Sea as well as land delivers its dead (all kinds of dead, good and bad). Swete notes that accidental deaths will not prevent any from appearing. Milligan is sure that the sea here means "the sea of the troubled and sinful world." {Death and Hades} (\ho thanatos kai ho hids\). "An inseparable pair" (Swete) as in strkjv@1:18; strkjv@6:8; strkjv@20:14|. Songs:in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| "the gates of Hades" means the power of death. Etymologically Hades is the unseen world where all who die are as opposed to this visible world, but in actual use Hades is sometimes treated as the abode of the unrighteous (Luke:16:23|). Charles thinks that this is true here, though there is nothing to show it apart from the personification of death and Hades and the casting of both into the lake of fire in verse 14|. Here again "each man" (\hekastos\) receives judgment according to his deeds (Matthew:16:27; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:13; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:10; strkjv@Romans:2:6; strkjv@14:12; strkjv@1Peter:1:17; strkjv@Revelation:2:23|).

rwp@Romans:3:24 @{Being justified} (\dikaioumenoi\). Present passive participle of \dikaio\, to set right, repeated action in each case, each being set right. {Freely} (\drean\). As in strkjv@Galatians:2:21|. {By his grace} (\ti autou chariti\). Instrumental case of this wonderful word \charis\ which so richly expresses Paul's idea of salvation as God's free gift. {Through the redemption} (\dia ts apolutrses\). A releasing by ransom (\apo, lutrsis\ from \lutro\ and that from \lutron\, ransom). God did not set men right out of hand with nothing done about men's sins. We have the words of Jesus that he came to give his life a ransom (\lutron\) for many (Mark:10:45; strkjv@Matthew:20:28|). \Lutron\ is common in the papyri as the purchase-money in freeing slaves (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 327f.). {That is in Christ Jesus} (\ti en Christi Isou\). There can be no mistake about this redemption. It is like strkjv@John:3:16|.