OT-HISTORY.filter - rwp tina:

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@Acts:5:36 @{Theudas} (\Theudas\). Luke represents Gamaliel here about A.D. 35 as speaking of a man who led a revolt before that of Judas the Galilean in connection with the enrolment under Quirinius (Cyrenius) in A.D. 6. But Josephus (_Ant_. XX. 5, 1) tells of a Theudas who led a similar insurrection in the reign of Claudius about A.D. 44 or 45. Josephus (_Ant_. XVIII. 1, 6; XX. 5, 2; _War_ ii. 8, 1 and 17, 8) also describes Judas the Galilean or Gaulonite and places him about A.D. 6. It is not certain that Josephus and Luke (Gamaliel) refer to the same Theudas as the name is an abbreviation of Theodosus, a common name. "Josephus gives an account of four men named Simon who followed each other within forty years, and of three named Judas within ten years, who were all instigators of rebellion" (Hackett). If the same Theudas is meant, then either Josephus or Luke (Gamaliel) has the wrong historical order. In that case one will credit Luke or Josephus according to his estimate of the two as reliable historians. {To be somebody} (\einai tina\). Indirect assertion with the infinitive and the accusative of general reference (\heauton\) and \tina\, predicate accusative. \Tina\ could be "anybody" or "somebody" according to context, clearly "somebody" of importance here. {Joined themselves} (\proseklith\). Correct text and not \prosekollth\ (Textus Receptus). First aorist passive indicative of \prosklin\, old verb to lean towards, to incline towards. Here only in the N.T. {Was slain} (\anireth\). First aorist passive of \anaire\ (cf. verse 33|). {Obeyed} (\epeithonto\). Imperfect middle, kept on obeying. {Were dispersed} (\dieluthsan\). First aorist passive indicative (effective aorist) of \dialu\, old verb to dissolve, to go to pieces. Here only in the N.T.

rwp@Acts:7:52 @{Which of the prophets} (\tina tn prophtn\). Jesus (Luke:11:47; strkjv@Matthew:23:29-37|) had charged them with this very thing. Cf. strkjv@2Chronicles:36:16|. {Which shewed before} (\prokataggeilantas\). The very prophets who foretold the coming of the Messiah their fathers killed. {The coming} (\ts eleuses\). Not in ancient Greek or LXX and only here in the N.T. (in a few late writers). {Betrayers} (\prodotai\). Just like Judas Iscariot. He hurled this old biting word at them. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:6:16; strkjv@2Timothy:3:4|. It cut like a knife. It is blunter than Peter in strkjv@Acts:3:13|. {Murderers} (\phoneis\). The climax with this sharp word used of Barabbas (3:14|).

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:10:16 @{Thrice} (\epitris\). For three times. Peter remained unconvinced even by the prohibition of God. Here is a striking illustration of obstinacy on the part of one who acknowledges the voice of God to him when the command of the Lord crosses one's preferences and prejudices. There are abundant examples today of precisely this thing. In a real sense Peter was maintaining a pose of piety beyond the will of the Lord. Peter was defiling what God had cleansed. {Was received up} (\anelmphth\). First aorist passive indicative of \analamban\, to take up. The word used of the Ascension (1:22|).

rwp@Acts:12:23 @{Smote him} (\epataxen auton\). Effective aorist active indicative of \patass\, old verb, used already in verse 7| of gentle smiting of the angel of the Lord, here of a severe stroke of affliction. Like Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel:4:30|) pride went before a fall. He was struck down in the very zenith of his glory. {Because} (\anth' hn\). \Anti\ with the genitive of the relative pronoun, "in return for which things." He accepted the impious flattery (Hackett) instead of giving God the glory. He was a nominal Jew. {He was eaten of worms} (\genomenos sklkobrtos\). Ingressive aorist middle participle, "becoming worm-eaten." The compound verbal adjective (\sklx\, worm, \brtos\, eaten, from \bibrsk\) is a late word (II Macc. strkjv@9:9) of the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, used also of a tree (Theophrastus), here only in the N.T. The word \sklx\ was used of intestinal worms and Herodotus (IV. 205) describes Pheretima, Queen of Cyrene, as having swarms of worms which ate her flesh while still alive. Josephus (_Ant_. XIX. 8, 2) says that Herod Agrippa lingered for five days and says that the rotting of his flesh produced worms, an item in harmony with the narrative in Luke. Josephus gives further details, one a superstitious sight of an owl sitting on one of the ropes of the awning of the theatre while the people flattered him, an omen of his death to him. Luke puts it simply that God smote him. {Gave up the ghost} (\exepsuxen\). Effective aorist active of \ekpsuch\, to breathe out, late verb, medical term in Hippocrates, in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:5:5,10; strkjv@12:23|. Herod was carried out of the theatre a dying man and lingered only five days.

rwp@Acts:13:6 @{Unto Paphos} (\achri Paphou\). The new Paphos at the other end of the island, reached by a fine Roman road, some eight miles north of the old Paphos famous for the worship of Venus. {A certain sorcerer, a false prophet, a Jew} (\andra tina magon pseudoprophtn Ioudaion\). Literally, "a certain man" (\andra tina\) with various descriptive epithets. The word \magon\ does not necessarily mean "sorcerer," but only a \magus\ (Matthew:2:1,7,10| which see). The bad sense occurs in strkjv@Acts:8:9,11| (Simon Magus) and is made plain here by "false prophet." In verse 8| here Barjesus (Son of Jesus) is called "Elymas the sorcerer (or Magian)," probably his professional title, as Luke interprets the Arabic or Aramaic word Elymas. These Jewish mountebanks were numerous and had great influence with the uneducated. In strkjv@Acts:19:13| the seven sons of Sceva, Jewish exorcists, tried to imitate Paul. If one is surprised that a man like Sergius Paulus should fall under the influence of this fraud, he should recall what Juvenal says of the Emperor Tiberius "sitting on the rock of Capri with his flock of Chaldaeans around him."

rwp@Acts:13:25 @{As John was fulfilling his course} (\hs eplrou Ians ton dromon\). Imperfect active of \plro\, describing his vivid ministry without defining the precise period when John asked the question. Paul uses this word \dromos\ (course) of his own race (Acts:20:24; strkjv@2Timothy:4:7|). {What suppose ye that I am?} (\Ti eme huponoeite einai?\) Note \ti\ (neuter), not \tina\ (masculine), {what} not {who}, character, not identity. It is indirect discourse (the infinitive \einai\ and the accusative of general reference). {Huponoe} (\hupo, noe\) is to think secretly, to suspect, to conjecture. {I am not he} (\ouk eimi eg\). These precise words are not given in the Gospels, but the idea is the same as the disclaimers by the Baptist in strkjv@John:1:19-27| (cf. also strkjv@Matthew:3:11; strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Luke:3:16|). Paul had a true grasp of the message of the Baptist. He uses the very form \lsai\ (first aorist active infinitive of \lu\) found in strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Luke:3:16| and the word for shoes (\hupodma\, singular) in all three. His quotation is remarkably true to the words in the Synoptic Gospels. How did Paul get hold of the words of the Baptist so clearly?

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:15:2 @{When Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and questioning with them} (\Genomens stases kai ztses ouk oligs ti Pauli kai Barnabi pros autous\). Genitive absolute of second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\, genitive singular agreeing with first substantive \stases\. Literally, "No little (litotes for much) strife and questioning coming to Paul and Barnabas (dative case) with them " (\pros autous\, face to face with them). Paul and Barnabas were not willing to see this Gentile church brow-beaten and treated as heretics by these self-appointed regulators of Christian orthodoxy from Jerusalem. The work had developed under the leadership of Paul and Barnabas and they accepted full responsibility for it and stoutly resisted these Judaizers to the point of sedition (riot, outbreak in strkjv@Luke:23:25; strkjv@Acts:19:40|) as in strkjv@23:7|. There is no evidence that the Judaizers had any supporters in the Antioch church so that they failed utterly to make any impression. Probably these Judaizers compelled Paul to think through afresh his whole gospel of grace and so they did Paul and the world a real service. If the Jews like Paul had to believe, it was plain that there was no virtue in circumcision (Galatians:2:15-21|). It is not true that the early Christians had no disagreements. They had selfish avarice with Ananias and Sapphira, murmuring over the gifts to the widows, simony in the case of Simon Magus, violent objection to work in Caesarea, and now open strife over a great doctrine (grace vs. legalism). {The brethren appointed} (\etaxan\). "The brethren" can be supplied from verse 1| and means the church in Antioch. The church clearly saw that the way to remove this deadlock between the Judaizers and Paul and Barnabas was to consult the church in Jerusalem to which the Judaizers belonged. Paul and Barnabas had won in Antioch. If they can win in Jerusalem, that will settle the matter. The Judaizers will be answered in their own church for which they are presuming to speak. The verb \etaxan\ (\tass\, to arrange) suggests a formal appointment by the church in regular assembly. Paul (Galatians:2:2|) says that he went up by revelation (\kat' apokalupsin\), but surely that is not contradictory to the action of the church. {Certain others of them} (\tinas allous\). Certainly Titus (Galatians:2:1,3|), a Greek and probably a brother of Luke who is not mentioned in Acts. Rackham thinks that Luke was in the number. {The apostles and elders} (\tous apostolous kai presbuterous\). Note one article for both (cf. "the apostles and the brethren" in strkjv@11:1|). "Elders" now (11:30|) in full force. The apostles have evidently returned now to the city after the death of Herod Agrippa I stopped the persecution.

rwp@Acts:17:20 @{For thou bringest certain strange things} (\xenizonta gar tina eisphereis\). The very verb used by Xenophon (_Mem_. I) about Socrates. \Xenizonta\ is present active neuter plural participle of \xeniz\ and from \xenos\ (verse 18|), "things surprising or shocking us." {We would know therefore} (\boulometha oun gnnai\). Very polite still, we wish or desire, and repeating \gnnai\ (the essential point).

rwp@Galatians:4:24 @{Which things contain an allegory} (\hatina estin allgoroumena\). Literally, "Which things are allegorized" (periphrastic present passive indicative of \allgore\). Late word (Strabo, Plutarch, Philo, Josephus, ecclesiastical writers), only here in N.T. The ancient writers used \ainittomai\ to speak in riddles. It is compounded of \allo\, another, and \agoreu\, to speak, and so means speaking something else than what the language means, what Philo, the past-master in the use of allegory, calls the deeper spiritual sense. Paul does not deny the actual historical narrative, but he simply uses it in an allegorical sense to illustrate his point for the benefit of his readers who are tempted to go under the burden of the law. He puts a secondary meaning on the narrative just as he uses \tupiks\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:11| of the narrative. We need not press unduly the difference between allegory and type, for each is used in a variety of ways. The allegory in one sense is a speaking parable like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_, the Prodigal Son in strkjv@Luke:15|, the Good Shepherd in strkjv@John:10|. But allegory was also used by Philo and by Paul here for a secret meaning not obvious at first, one not in the mind of the writer, like our illustration which throws light on the point. Paul was familiar with this rabbinical method of exegesis (Rabbi Akiba, for instance, who found a mystical sense in every hook and crook of the Hebrew letters) and makes skilful use of that knowledge here. Christian preachers in Alexandria early fell victims to Philo's allegorical method and carried it to excess without regard to the plain sense of the narrative. That startling style of preaching survives yet to the discredit of sound preaching. Please observe that Paul says here that he is using allegory, not ordinary interpretation. It is not necessary to say that Paul intended his readers to believe that this allegory was designed by the narrative. He illustrates his point by it. {For these are} (\hautai gar eisin\). Allegorically interpreted, he means. {From Mount Sinai} (\apo orous Sin\). Spoken from Mount Sinai. {Bearing} (\gennsa\). Present active participle of \genna\, to beget of the male (Matthew:1:1-16|), more rarely as here to bear of the female (Luke:1:13,57|). {Which is Hagar} (\htis estin Hagar\). Allegorically interpreted.

rwp@John:6:68 @{Lord, to whom shall we go?} (\Kurie, pros tina apeleusometha;\). Peter is the spokesman as usual and his words mean that, if such a thought as desertion crossed their minds when the crowd left, they dismissed it instantly. They had made their choice. They accepted these very words of Jesus that had caused the defection as "the words of eternal life."

rwp@John:8:53 @{Art thou greater than our father Abraham?} (\M su meizn ei tou patros hmn Abraam;\). Negative answer expected by \m\ with ablative case of comparison in \patros\ after \meizn\. The question was designed to put Jesus in a difficult position, for Abraham and the prophets all "died." They do not see that Jesus uses death in a different sense. {Whom makest thou thyself?} (\tina seauton poieis;\). \Seauton\ is predicate accusative with \poieis\. They suspect that Jesus is guilty of blasphemy as they charged in strkjv@5:18| in making himself equal with God. Later they will make it specifically (10:33; strkjv@19:7|). They set a trap for Jesus for this purpose.

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

rwp@John:13:20 @{Whomsoever I send} (\an tina pemps\). More precisely, "If I send any one" (third-class condition, \an=ean\ and \tina\, indefinite pronoun accusative case, object of \pemps\, first aorist active subjunctive of \pemp\, to send). This use of \ei tis\ or \ean tis\ (if any one) is very much like the indefinite relative \hostis\ and \hos an\ (or \ean\), but the idiom is different. In strkjv@Mark:8:34f.| we have both \ei tis thelei\ and \hos ean\ while in strkjv@John:14:13f.| we find \hoti an\ and \ean ti\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 956).

rwp@John:14:5 @{Whither} (\pou\)--{how} (\ps\). It is Thomas, not Peter (13:36f.|) who renews the doubt about the destination of Jesus including the path or way thither (\tn hodon\). Thomas is the spokesman for the materialistic conception then and now.

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

rwp@Matthew:16:15 @{But who say ye that I am?} (\hmeis de tina me legete einai?\). This is what matters and what Jesus wanted to hear. Note emphatic position of {hmeis}, "But _you_, who say ye that I am?"

rwp@Romans:1:13 @{Oftentimes I purposed} (\pollakis proethemn\). Second aorist middle of \protithmi\, old verb to place, to propose to oneself, in N.T. only here, strkjv@3:25; strkjv@Ephesians:1:9|. See strkjv@Acts:19:21| for this purpose. {And was hindered} (\kai ekluthn\). "But was hindered," adversative use of \kai\. {That I might have some fruit} (\hina tina karpon sch\). Second aorist (ingressive), active of \ech\, to have, and here means "might get (ingressive aorist) some fruit."

rwp@Romans:6:21 @{What fruit then had ye at that time?} (\tina oun karpon eichete tote?\). Imperfect active, used to have. A pertinent question. Ashes in their hands now. They are ashamed now of the memory of them. The end of them is death.