Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-HISTORY.filter - rwp what:


rwp@1Corinthians:12:10 @{Workings of miracles} (\energˆmata duname“n\). Workings of powers. Cf. \energ“n dunameis\ in strkjv@Galatians:3:5; strkjv@Hebrews:2:4| where all three words are used (\sˆmeia\, signs, \terata\, wonders, \dunameis\, powers). Some of the miracles were not healings as the blindness on Elymas the sorcerer. {Prophecy} (\prophˆteia\). Late word from \prophˆtˆs\ and \prophˆmi\, to speak forth. Common in papyri. This gift Paul will praise most (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:14|). Not always prediction, but a speaking forth of God's message under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. {Discernings of spirits} (\diakriseis pneumat“n\). \Diakrisis\ is old word from \diakrin“\ (see strkjv@11:29|) and in N.T. only here; strkjv@Romans:14:1; strkjv@Hebrews:5:14|. A most needed gift to tell whether the gifts were really of the Holy Spirit and supernatural (cf. so-called "gifts" today) or merely strange though natural or even diabolical (1Timothy:4:1; strkjv@1John:4:1f.|). {Divers kinds of tongues} (\genˆ gl“ss“n\). No word for "divers" in the Greek. There has arisen a great deal of confusion concerning the gift of tongues as found in Corinth. They prided themselves chiefly on this gift which had become a source of confusion and disorder. There were varieties (kinds, \genˆ\) in this gift, but the gift was essentially an ecstatic utterance of highly wrought emotion that edified the speaker (14:4|) and was intelligible to God (14:2,28|). It was not always true that the speaker in tongues could make clear what he had said to those who did not know the tongue (14:13|): It was not mere gibberish or jargon like the modern "tongues," but in a real language that could be understood by one familiar with that tongue as was seen on the great Day of Pentecost when people who spoke different languages were present. In Corinth, where no such variety of people existed, it required an interpreter to explain the tongue to those who knew it not. Hence Paul placed this gift lowest of all. It created wonder, but did little real good. This is the error of the Irvingites and others who have tried to reproduce this early gift of the Holy Spirit which was clearly for a special emergency and which was not designed to help spread the gospel among men. See on ¯Acts:2:13-21; strkjv@10:44-46; strkjv@19:6|. {The interpretation of tongues} (\hermˆneia gl“ss“n\). Old word, here only and strkjv@14:26| in N.T., from \hermˆneu“\ from \Hermˆs\ (the god of speech). Cf. on \diermˆneu“\ in strkjv@Luke:24:27; strkjv@Acts:9:36|. In case there was no one present who understood the particular tongue it required a special gift of the Spirit to some one to interpret it if any one was to receive benefit from it.

rwp@1Corinthians:12:12 @{Songs:also is Christ} (\hout“s kai ho Christos\). One would naturally expect Paul here to say \hout“s kai to s“ma tou Christou\ (so also is the body of Christ). He will later call Christ the Head of the Body the Church as in strkjv@Colossians:1:18,24; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23,30|. Aristotle had used \s“ma\ of the state as the body politic. What Paul here means is Christ as the Head of the Church has a body composed of the members who have varied gifts and functions like the different members of the human body. They are all vitally connected with the Head of the body and with each other. This idea he now elaborates in a remarkable manner.

rwp@1Corinthians:12:22 @{Nay, much rather} (\alla poll“i mallon\). Adversative sense of \alla\, on the contrary. Songs:far from the more dignified members like the eye and the head being independent of the subordinate ones like the hands and feet, they are "much more" (_argumentum a fortiori_, "by much more" \poll“i mallon\, instrumental case) in need of therm. {Those members of the body which seem to be more feeble are necessary} (\ta dokounta melˆ tou s“matos asthenestera huparchein anagkaia estin\). Things are not always what they seem. The vital organs (heart, lungs, liver, kidneys) are not visible, but life cannot exist without them.

rwp@1Corinthians:14:6 @{If I come} (\ean elth“\). Third class condition, supposable case (aorist subjunctive). {What shall I profit you} (\ti humas “phelˆs“\). Two accusatives with this verb (see strkjv@13:3|). {Unless I speak} (\ean mˆ lalˆs“\). Second condition (also third class) with the one conclusion (cf. strkjv@1Timothy:2:5|).

rwp@1Corinthians:14:29 @{By two or three} (\duo ˆ treis\). No \kata\ here as in verse 27|. Let two or three prophets speak. {Let the others discern} (\hoi alloi diakrinet“san\). Whether what is said is really of the Spirit. Cf. strkjv@12:10| \diakriseis pneumat“n\.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:2 @{In what words I preached it unto you} (\tini logoi euˆggelisamˆn humin\). Almost certainly \tis\ (\tini logoi\, locative or instrumental, in or with) here is used like the relative \hos\ as is common in papyri (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 93f.; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 737f.). Even so it is not clear whether the clause depends on \gn“riz“\ like the other relatives, but most likely so. {If we hold it fast} (\ei katechete\). Condition of first class. Paul assumes that they are holding it fast. {Except ye believed in vain} (\ektos ei mˆ eikˆi episteusate\). For \ektos ei mˆ\ see on ¯14:5|. Condition of first class, unless in fact ye did believe to no purpose (\eikˆi\, old adverb, only in Paul in N.T.). Paul holds this peril over them in their temptation to deny the resurrection.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:5 @{And that he appeared to Cephas} (\kai hoti “phthˆ Kˆphƒi\). First aorist passive indicative of the defective verb \hora“\, to see. Paul means not a mere "vision," but actual appearance. John uses \ephaner“thˆ\ (John:21:14|) from \phanero“\, to make manifest, of Christ's appearance to the seven by the Sea of Galilee. Peter was listed first (\pr“tos\) among the Apostles (Matthew:10:2|). Jesus had sent a special message to him (Mark:16:7|) after his resurrection. This special appearance to Peter is made the determining factor in the joyful faith of the disciples (Luke:24:34|), though mentioned incidentally here. Paul had told all these four facts to the Corinthians in his preaching. He gives further proof of the fact of Christ's resurrection. There are ten appearances given besides the one to Paul. Nine are in the Gospels (Mary Magdalene in John and Mark, the other women in Matthew, the two going to Emmaus in Luke, Simon Peter in Luke and I Corinthians, the ten apostles and others in Luke and John and Mark, the eleven and others in John, the seven by the sea in John, to over five hundred in Galilee in Matthew and Paul and Mark, to the apostles in Jerusalem in Luke and Mark and Acts and I Corinthians) and one in I Corinthians above (to James). It will be seen that Paul mentions only five of the ten, one, that to James, not given elsewhere. What he gives is conclusive evidence of the fact, particularly when re-enforced by his own experience (the sixth appearance mentioned by Paul). The way to prove this great fact is to start with Paul's own witness given in this undoubted Epistle. The natural way to understand Paul's adverbs of time here is chronological: {then} (\eita\), {then} (\epeita\), {then} (\epeita\), {then} (\eita\), {last of all} (\eschaton pant“n\). {To the twelve} (\tois d“deka\). The technical name. Only ten were present, for Judas was dead and Thomas was absent (John:20:24|).

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:6 @{That which restraineth} (\to katechon\). {And now you know} (\kai nun oidate\), says Paul in this cryptic apocalyptic passage. Unfortunately we do not know what Paul means by {that which restrains} (holds back, \katechon\), neuter here and masculine in verse 7| \ho katech“n\. "This impersonal principle or power is capable also of manifesting itself under a personal form" (Milligan). "He is Satan's messiah, an infernal caricature of the true Messiah" (Moffatt). Warfield (_Expositor_, III, iv, pp. 30ff.) suggested that the man of lawlessness is the imperial line with its rage for deification and that the Jewish state was the restraining power. But God overrules all human history and his ultimate purpose is wrought out. {To the end that} (\eis to\). Another example of \eis to\ and the infinitive for purpose. {In his own season} (\en t“i autou kair“i\). Note \autou\ (his), not \heautou\ (his own), {revealed in his time}, in the time set him by God.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:7 @{For the mystery of lawlessness doth already work} (\to gar mustˆrion ˆdˆ energeitai tˆs anomias\). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:13| for \energeitai\. The genitive \tˆs anomias\ (lawlessness) describes \to mustˆrion\ (note emphatic position of both). This mystery (\mustˆrion\ secret, from \mustˆs\, an initiate, \mue“\, to wink or blink) means here the secret purpose of lawlessness already at work, the only instance of this usage in the N.T. where it is used of the kingdom of God (Matthew:13:11|), of God (1Corinthians:2:1|) and God's will (Ephesians:1:9|), of Christ (Ephesians:3:4|), of the gospel (Ephesians:6:9|), of faith (1Timothy:3:9|), of godliness (1Timothy:3:16|), of the seven stars (Revelation:1:20|), of the woman (Revelation:17:7|). But this secret will be "revealed" and then we shall understand clearly what Paul's meaning is here. {Until he be taken out of the way} (\he“s ek mesou genˆtai\). Usual construction with \he“s\ for the future (aorist middle subjunctive, \genˆtai\). Note absence of \an\ as often in N.T. and the \Koin‚\. Paul uses \he“s\ only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:4:5|. When the obstacle is removed then the mystery of lawlessness will be revealed in plain outline.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:15 @{Songs:then} (\ara oun\). Accordingly then. The illative \ara\ is supported (Ellicott) by the collective \oun\ as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:6; strkjv@Galatians:6:10|, etc. Here is the practical conclusion from God's elective purpose in such a world crisis. {Stand fast} (\stˆkete\). Present imperative active of the late present \stˆko\ from \hestˆka\ (perfect active of \histˆmi\). See on ¯1Thessalonians:3:8|. {Hold the traditions} (\krateite tas paradoseis\). Present imperative of \krate“\, old verb, to have masterful grip on a thing, either with genitive (Mark:1:31|) or usually the accusative as here. \Paradosis\ (tradition) is an old word for what is handed over to one. Dibelius thinks that Paul reveals his Jewish training in the use of this word (Galatians:1:14|), but the word is a perfectly legitimate one for teaching whether oral, {by word} (\dia logou\), or written, {by epistle of ours} (\di' epistolˆs hˆm“n\). Paul draws here no distinction between oral tradition and written tradition as was done later. The worth of the tradition lies not in the form but in the source and the quality of the content. Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:23| says: "I received from the Lord what I also handed over (\pared“ka\) unto you." He praises them because ye "hold fast the traditions even as I delivered them unto you." The {tradition} may be merely that of men and so worthless and harmful in place of the word of God (Mark:7:8; strkjv@Colossians:2:6-8|). It all depends. It is easy to scoff at truth as mere tradition. But human progress in all fields is made by use of the old, found to be true, in connection with the new if found to be true. In Thessalonica the saints were already the victims of theological charlatans with their half-baked theories about the second coming of Christ and about social duties and relations. {Which ye were taught} (\has edidachthˆte\). First aorist passive indicative of \didask“\, to teach, retaining the accusative of the thing in the passive as is common with this verb like _doce“_ in Latin and teach in English.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:10 @{This} (\touto\). What he proceeds to give. {If any will not work, neither let him eat} (\hoti ei tis ou thelei ergazesthai mˆde esthiet“\). Recitative \hoti\ here not to be translated, like our modern quotation marks. Apparently a Jewish proverb based on strkjv@Genesis:3:19|. Wetstein quotes several parallels. Moffatt gives this from Carlyle's _Chartism_: "He that will not work according to his faculty, let him perish according to his necessity." Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 314) sees Paul borrowing a piece of workshop morality. It was needed, as is plain. This is a condition of the first class (note negative \ou\) with the negative imperative in the conclusion.

rwp@2Timothy:1:15 @{Are turned away from me} (\apestraphˆsan 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:3:11 @{What things befell me} (\hoia moi egeneto\). Qualitative relative (\hoia\) referring to actual experiences of Paul (\egeneto\, second aorist middle indicative of \ginomai\) more fully described in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:30-33|. The Acts of the Apostles tell of his experiences in Antioch in Pisidia (Acts:13:14,45,50|), in Iconium (Acts:14:1-5|), in Lystra (Acts:14:6-19|). See also strkjv@Galatians:2:11|. {What persecutions I endured} (\hoious di“gmous hupˆnegka\). Qualitative relative again with \di“gmous\. The verb is first aorist active indicative of \hupopher“\, old verb, to bear under as in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:13|. {Delivered me} (\me erusato\). First aorist middle of \ruomai\, old verb, with \ek\ here as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:10|. Used again of the Lord Jesus in strkjv@4:18|.

rwp@2Timothy:4:6 @{I am already being offered} (\ˆdˆ spendomai\). Present (progressive) passive indicative of \spend“\, old verb, to pour out a libation or drink offering. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Phillipians:2:17|. "What was then a possibility is now a certainty" (Parry). The sacrifice of Paul's life-blood has begun. {Of my departure} (\tˆs analuse“s mou\). Our very word "analysis." Old word from \analu“\, to loosen up or back, to unloose. Only here in N.T., though \analusai\ for death is used by Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:1:23| which see for the metaphor. {Is come} (\ephestˆken\). Perfect active indicative of \ephistˆmi\ (intransitive use). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:3; strkjv@Luke:21:34|. The hour has struck. The time has come.

rwp@2Timothy:4:13 @{The cloke} (\tˆn phelonˆn\). More common form \pheilonˆ\. By metathesis for \phainolˆ\, Latin _paenula_, though which language transliterated the word into the other is not known. The meaning is also uncertain, though probably "cloke" as there are so many papyri examples in that sense (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Milligan (N.T. _Documents_, p. 20) had previously urged "book wrap" as probable but he changed his mind and rightly so. {With Carpus} (\para Karp“i\). "Beside Carpus," at his house. Not mentioned elsewhere. Probably a visit to Troas after Paul's return from Crete. {The books} (\ta biblia\). Probably papyrus rolls. One can only guess what rolls the old preacher longs to have with him, probably copies of Old Testament books, possibly copies of his own letters, and other books used and loved. The old preacher can be happy with his books. {Especially the parchments} (\malista tas membranas\). Latin _membrana_. The dressed skins were first made at Pergamum and so termed "parchments." These in particular would likely be copies of Old Testament books, parchment being more expensive than papyrus, possibly even copies of Christ's sayings (Luke:1:1-4|). We recall that in strkjv@Acts:26:24| Festus referred to Paul's learning (\ta grammata\). He would not waste his time in prison.

rwp@2Timothy:4:17 @{But the Lord stood by me} (\ho de kurios moi parestˆ\). Second aorist active of \paristˆmi\ (intransitive use), "took his stand by my side." See strkjv@Romans:16:2|. Clearly Jesus appeared to Paul now at this crisis and climax as he had done so many times before. {Strengthened me} (\enedunam“sen me\). "Poured power into me." See strkjv@Phillipians:4:13|. {That through me the message might be fully proclaimed} (\hina di' emou to kˆrugma plˆrophorˆthˆi\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \plˆrophore“\ (see verse 5|). Either to the rulers in Rome now or, if the first imprisonment, by his release and going to Spain. {And that all the Gentiles might hear} (\kai akous“sin panta ta ethnˆ\). Continuation of the purpose with the aorist active subjunctive of \akou“\. {I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion} (\erusthˆn ek stomatos leontos\). First aorist passive indicative of \ruomai\ (1Thessalonians:1:10|). A proverb, but not certain what the application is whether to Nero or to Satan (1Thessalonians:2:18|) or to the lion in the arena where Paul could not be sent because a Roman citizen.

rwp@3John:1:5 @{A faithful work} (\piston\). Either thus or "thou makest sure," after an example in Xenophon quoted by Wettstein (\poiein pista\) and parallel to \kaina poie“\ in strkjv@Revelation:21:5|. But it is not certain. {In whatsoever thou doest} (\ho ean ergasˆi\). Indefinite relative with modal \ean\ (=\an\) and the first aorist middle subjunctive of \ergazomai\. See strkjv@Colossians:3:23| for both \poie“\ and \ergazomai\ in the same sentence. {And strangers withal} (\kai touto xenous\). "And that too" (accusative of general reference as in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:6; strkjv@Phillipians:1:28; strkjv@Ephesians:2:8|). This praise of hospitality (Romans:12:13; strkjv@1Peter:4:9; strkjv@1Timothy:3:2; strkjv@5:10; strkjv@Titus:1:8; strkjv@Hebrews:13:2|) shows that in strkjv@2John:1:10| John has a peculiar case in mind.

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

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

rwp@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 @ THE AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL ALSO The author of the Acts expressly states that he wrote "the first treatise (\ton pr“ton logon\) concerning all things, O Theophilus, that Jesus began both to do and to teach until which day he gave command through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen and was received up" (Acts:1:1f.|). There is no room for dispute that the reference is directly to the Gospel according to Luke as we have it now. Like the Gospel the book is dedicated to Theophilus. And, what is even more important, the same style appears in both Gospel and Acts. This fact Harnack has shown with great pains and conclusiveness. There is the same interest in medical matters and even Cadbury, who denies by implication the Lukan authorship, admits identity of authorship for both books.

rwp@Acts:1:2 @{Until the day in which} (\achri hˆs hˆmeras\). Incorporation of the antecedent into the relative clause and the change of case \hˆi\ (locative) to \hˆs\ (genitive). {Was received up} (\anelˆmpthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \analamban“\. Common verb to lift anything up (Acts:10:16|) or person as Paul (Acts:20:13|). Several times of the Ascension of Jesus to heaven (Mark:16:19; strkjv@Acts:1:2,11,22; strkjv@1Timothy:3:16|) with or without "into heaven" (\eis ton ouranon\). This same verb is used of Elijah's translation to heaven in the LXX (2Kings:2:11|). The same idea, though not this word, is in strkjv@Luke:24:51|. See strkjv@Luke:9:51| for \analˆmpsis\ of the Ascension. {Had given commandment} (\enteilamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \entell“\ (from \en\ and \tell“\, to accomplish), usually in the middle, old verb, to enjoin. This special commandment refers directly to what we call the commission given the apostles before Christ ascended on high (John:20:21-23; strkjv@Matthew:28:16-20; strkjv@Mark:16:15-18; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:6; strkjv@Luke:24:44-49|). He had given commands to them when they were first chosen and when they were sent out on the tour of Galilee, but the immediate reference is as above. {Through the Holy Spirit} (\dia pneumatos hagiou\). In his human life Jesus was under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This applies to the choice of the apostles (Luke:6:13|) and to these special commands before the Ascension. {Whom he had chosen} (\hous exelexato\). Aorist middle indicative, not past perfect. The same verb (\eklexamenos\) was used by Luke in describing the choice of the twelve by Jesus (Luke:6:13|). But the aorist does not stand "for" our English pluperfect as Hackett says. That is explaining Greek by English. The Western text here adds: "And ordered to proclaim the gospel."

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

rwp@Acts:1:17 @{Was numbered} (\katˆrithmenos ˆn\). Periphrastic past perfect passive indicative of \katarithme“\, old verb, but here only in the N.T. (perfective use of \kata\). {Received his portion} (\elachen ton klˆron\). Second aorist active indicative of \lagchan“\, old verb, to obtain by lot as in strkjv@Luke:1:9; strkjv@John:19:24|, especially by divine appointment as here and strkjv@2Peter:2:1|. \Klˆros\ also means lot, an object used in casting lots (Acts:1:26|), or what is obtained by lot as here and strkjv@8:21|, of eternal salvation (Acts:26:18; strkjv@Colossians:1:12|), of persons chosen by divine appointment (1Peter:5:3|). From this latter usage the Latin _cleros, clericus_, our clergy, one chosen by divine lot. Songs:Peter says that Judas "obtained by lot the lot of this ministry" (\diakonias\) which he had when he betrayed Jesus. The Master chose him and gave him his opportunity.

rwp@Acts:2:4 @{With other tongues} (\heterais gl“ssais\). 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} (\kath“s 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:2:12 @{Were perplexed} (\diˆporounto\). Imperfect middle of \diapore“\ (\dia\, \a\ privative, \poros\) to be wholly at a loss. Old verb, but in N.T. only in Luke and Acts. They continued amazed (\existanto\) and puzzled. {What meaneth this?} (\Ti thelei touto einai\). Literally, what does this wish to be?

rwp@Acts:2:37 @{They were pricked in their heart} (\katenugˆsan tˆn kardian\). Second aorist indicative of \katanuss“\, a rare verb (LXX) to pierce, to sting sharply, to stun, to smite. Homer used it of horses dinting the earth with their hoofs. The substantive \katanuxis\ occurs in strkjv@Romans:11:8|. Here only in the N.T. It is followed here by the accusative of the part affected, the heart. {What shall we do?} (\Ti poiˆs“men\). Deliberative subjunctive first aorist active. The sermon went home, they felt the sting of Peter's words, compunction (\compungo\). Codex Bezae adds: "Show us."

rwp@Acts:2:41 @{They then} (\Hoi men oun\). A common phrase in Acts either without antithesis as in strkjv@1:6; strkjv@5:41; strkjv@8:4,25; strkjv@9:31; strkjv@11:19; strkjv@16:5|; or with it as here, strkjv@8:25; strkjv@13:4; strkjv@14:3; strkjv@17:17; strkjv@23:31; strkjv@25:4|. \Oun\ connects with what precedes as the result of Peter's sermon while \men\ points forward to what is to follow. {Were baptized} (\ebaptisthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative, constative aorist. Note that only those who had already received the word and were converted were baptized. {There were added} (\prosetethˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \prostithˆmi\, old verb to add, to join to. Luke means that the 3,000 were added to the 120 already enlisted. It is not stated they were all baptized by Peter or the twelve or all on the same day, though that is the natural implication of the language. The numerous pools in Jerusalem afforded ample opportunity for such wholesale baptizing and Hackett notes that the habit of orientals would place no obstacle in the way of the use of the public reservoirs. Furneaux warns us that all the 3,000 may not have been genuine converts and that many of them were pilgrims at the passover who returned home. {Souls} (\psuchai\). Persons as in verse 43|.

rwp@Acts:2:42 @{They continued steadfastly} (\ˆsan proskarturountes\). Periphrastic active imperfect of \proskarture“\ as in strkjv@Acts:1:14| (same participle in verse 46|). {Fellowship} (\koin“niƒi\). Old word from \koin“nos\ (partner, sharer in common interest) and this from \koinos\ what is common to all. This partnership involves participation in, as the blood of Christ (Phillipians:2:1|) or co-operation in the work of the gospel (Phillipians:1:5|) or contribution for those in need (2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@9:13|). Hence there is wide diversity of opinion concerning the precise meaning of \koin“nia\ in this verse. It may refer to the distribution of funds in verse 44| or to the oneness of spirit in the community of believers or to the Lord's Supper (as in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:16|) in the sense of communion or to the fellowship in the common meals or \agapae\ (love-feasts). {The breaking of bread} (\tˆi klasei tou artou\). The word \klasis\ is an old word, but used only by Luke in the N.T. (Luke:24:35; strkjv@Acts:2:42|), though the verb \kla“\ occurs in other parts of the N.T. as in verse 46|. The problem here is whether Luke refers to the ordinary meal as in strkjv@Luke:24:35| or to the Lord's Supper. The same verb \kla“\ is used of breaking bread at the ordinary meal (Luke:24:30|) or the Lord's Supper (Luke:22:19|). It is generally supposed that the early disciples attached so much significance to the breaking of bread at the ordinary meals, more than our saying grace, that they followed the meal with the Lord's Supper at first, a combination called \agapai\ or love-feasts. "There can be no doubt that the Eucharist at this period was preceded uniformly by a common repast, as was the case when the ordinance was instituted" (Hackett). This led to some abuses as in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:20|. Hence it is possible that what is referred to here is the Lord's Supper following the ordinary meal. "To simply explain \tˆi klasei tou artou\ as='The Holy Communion' is to pervert the plain meaning of words, and to mar the picture of family life, which the text places before us as the ideal of the early believers" (Page). But in strkjv@Acts:20:7| they seem to have come together especially for the observance of the Lord's Supper. Perhaps there is no way to settle the point conclusively here. {The prayers} (\tais proseuchais\). Services where they prayed as in strkjv@1:14|, in the temple (Acts:3:1|), in their homes (4:23|).

rwp@Acts:3:15 @{But the Prince of life ye killed} (\ton de archˆgon tˆs z“ˆs apekteinate\). "The magnificent antithesis" (Bengel) Peter here draws between their asking for a murderer and killing the Prince (or Author) of life. Peter pictures Jesus as the source of all life as is done in strkjv@John:1:1-18; strkjv@Colossians:1:14-20; strkjv@Hebrews:1:2f|. \Archˆgos\ (\archˆ\, beginning, \ag“\, to lead) is an adjective "furnishing the first cause or occasion" in Euripides, Plato. Thence substantive, the originator, the leader, the pioneer as of Jesus both Beginner and Finisher (Hebrews:12:2|). See also strkjv@Hebrews:2:10; strkjv@Acts:5:31| where it is applied to Jesus as "Prince and Saviour." But God raised him from the dead in contrast to what they had done. {Whereof we are witnesses} (\hou hˆmeis martures esmen\). Of which fact (the resurrection) or of whom as risen, \hou\ having the same form in the genitive singular for masculine or neuter. Peter had boldly claimed that all the 120 have seen the Risen Christ. There is no denial of that claim.

rwp@Acts:3:17 @{And now} (\kai nun\). Luke is fond of these particles of transition (7:34; strkjv@10:5; strkjv@20:25; strkjv@22:16|) and also \kai ta nun\ (4:29; strkjv@5:38; strkjv@22:32; strkjv@27:22|), and even \kai nun idou\ (13:11; strkjv@20:22|). {I wot} (\oida\). Old English for "I know." {In ignorance} (\kata agnoian\). This use of \kata\ occurs in the _Koin‚_. See also strkjv@Philemon:1:14|. One may see strkjv@Luke:23:34| for the words of the Saviour on the Cross. "They had sinned, but their sin was not of so deep a dye that it could not have been still more heinous" (Hackett). If they had known what they were doing, they would not knowingly have crucified the Messiah (1Corinthians:2:8|).

rwp@Acts:4:7 @{In the midst} (\en t“i mes“i\). The Sanhedrin sat in a semicircle. {They inquired} (\epunthanonto\). Imperfect middle, began to inquire. {Or in what name} (\ˆ en poi“i onomati\). As if by some magical formula such as exorcists practised (Acts:19:13|) as if to catch them by (Deuteronomy:13:1|). {Have ye done this} (\epoiˆsate touto humeis\). Note emphatic use of \humeis\ (ye).

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:4:16 @{What shall we do?} (\Ti poiˆs“men\). Deliberative aorist active subjunctive (ingressive and urgent aorist). {Notable miracle} (\gn“ston sˆmeion\). Or sign. It was useless to deny it with the man there. {We cannot deny it} (\ou dunametha arneisthai\). That is, it will do no good.

rwp@Acts:4:20 @{For we cannot but speak} (\ou dunametha gar hˆmeis--mˆ lalein\). Both negatives hold here, "For we (note emphatic \hˆmeis\) are not able not to speak" (what we saw and heard). This is defiance of the civil and ecclesiastical authorities that was justified, for the temple authorities stepped in between the conscience and God. Peter and John were willing to pay the price of this defiance with their lives. This is the courage of martyrs through all the ages.

rwp@Acts:4:25 @{By the mouth of our father David} (\tou patros hˆm“n dia pneumatos hagiou stomatos Daueid\). From strkjv@Psalms:2:1f|. here ascribed to David. Baumgarten suggests that the whole company sang the second Psalm and then Peter applied it to this emergency. The Greek MSS. do not have \dia\ (by) here before \stomatos\, but only \dia\ before \pneumatos hagiou\ (the Holy Spirit). Hort calls this a "primitive error" perhaps due to an early scribe who omitted this second \dia\ so close to the first \dia\ (Robertson, _Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the N.T._, p. 238). A small list of such primitive errors is there given as suggested by Dr. Hort. {Why} (\hina ti\). This Greek idiom calls for \genˆtai\ (second aorist middle subjunctive), {That what may happen}. {The Gentiles} (\ethnˆ\). Songs:always in LXX, while \laoi\ (peoples) can include Jews. {Did rage} (\ephruaxan\). First aorist active indicative of \phruass“\, late word, to neigh like a horse, to prance or stamp the ground, to put on lofty airs. Only here in the N.T. in this quotation from strkjv@Psalms:2:1|. {Imagine} (\emeletˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \meleta“\. Old verb from \meletˆ\ (care), to practise, to caution, as orators and rhetoricians. Only here in the N.T. in this quotation.

rwp@Acts:4:36 @{Barnabas} (\Barnabas\). His name was Joseph (correct text, and not Jesus) and he is mentioned as one illustration of those in verse 34| who selling brought the money. The apostles gave him the nickname Barnabas by which later he was known because of this noble deed. This fact argues that all did not actually sell, but were ready to do so if needed. Possibly Joseph had a larger estate than some others also. The meaning of the nickname is given by Luke as "son of consolation or exhortation" (\huios paraklˆse“s\). Doubtless his gifts as a preacher lay along this same line. Rackham thinks that the apostles gave him this name when he was recognized as a prophet. In strkjv@Acts:11:23| the very word \parekalei\ (exhorted) is used of Barnabas up at Antioch. He is the type of preacher described by Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:3|. Encouragement is the chief idea in \paraklˆsis\ though exhortation, comfort, consolation are used to render it (Acts:9:31; strkjv@13:15; strkjv@15:31|). See also strkjv@16:9; strkjv@20:12|. It is not necessary to think that the apostles coined the name Barnabas for Joseph which originally may have come from \Barnebous\ (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 308-10), son of Nebo, or even the Hebrew _Bar Nebi_ (son of a prophet). But, whatever the origin, the popular use is given by Luke. He was even called apostle along with Paul (Acts:14:14|) in the broad sense of that word.

rwp@Acts:5:24 @{They were much perplexed} (\diˆporoun\). Imperfect active of \diapore“\ old verb by Luke only in the N.T. See already on strkjv@Acts:2:12|. They continued puzzled. {Whereunto this would grow} (\ti an genoito touto\). More exactly, {As to what this would become}. Second aorist middle optative of \ginomai\ with \an\, the conclusion of a condition of the fourth class (undetermined with less likelihood of determination), the unexpressed condition being "if the thing should be allowed to go on." The indirect question simply retains the optative with \an\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1021, 1044). If they had only known how this grain of mustard seed would grow into the greatest tree on earth and how dwarfed the tree of Judaism would be beside it!

rwp@Acts:5:28 @{We straitly charged} (\Paraggeliƒi parˆggeilamen\). Like the Hebrew idiom (common in the LXX), though found in Greek, with charging (instrumental case) we charged (cf. same idiom in strkjv@Luke:22:15|). Somewhat like the cognate accusative. The command referred to occurs in strkjv@Acts:4:17,18| and the refusal of Peter and John in strkjv@4:20|. {To bring upon us} (\epagagein eph' hˆmƒs\). Note repetition of \epi\. Second aorist active infinitive of \epag“\, old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@2Peter:2:1,5|. The Sanhedrin gladly took the blood of Christ on their heads and their children to Pilate (Matthew:27:25|). Paul tried to save the Jews (Acts:18:6; strkjv@22:20|). "{This man}" (\tou anthr“pou toutou\). Contemptuous slur and refusal to call the name of Jesus as in the Talmud later.

rwp@Acts:7:48 @{Howbeit} (\all'\). By contrast with what Solomon did and David planned. Note emphatic position of "not" (\all' ouch\), "But not does the Most High dwell." The presence of the Most High is not confined in any building, even one so splendid as Solomon's Temple as Solomon himself foresaw and acknowledged in his prayer (1Kings:8:27; strkjv@2Chronicles:6:18|). {In houses made with hands} (\en cheiropoiˆtois\). No word here for "houses" or "temples" in correct text (\naois\ temples in Textus Receptus). Literally, "In things made with hands" (\cheir\, hand, \poiˆtos\, verbal adjective of \poie“\). It occurs in strkjv@Mark:14:58| of the temple and of the sanctuary of Moab (Isaiah:16:12|). It occurs also in strkjv@Acts:7:24; strkjv@Hebrews:9:11,24; strkjv@Ephesians:2:11|. Common in the old Greek. {The prophet} (\ho prophˆtˆs\). strkjv@Isaiah:66:1|. Isaiah taught plainly that heaven is God's throne.

rwp@Acts:7:49 @{What manner of house} (\Poion oikon\). What sort of a house? This interrogative is sometimes scornful as in strkjv@4:7; strkjv@Luke:6:32ff.| (Page). Songs:Stephen shows by Isaiah that Solomon was right that the temple was not meant to "confine" God's presence and that Jesus had rightly shown that God is a spirit and can be worshipped anywhere by any individual of any race or land. It is a tremendous argument for the universality and spirituality of Christianity free from the shackles of Jewish racial and national limitations, but its very strength only angered the Sanhedrin to desperation.

rwp@Acts:8:13 @{And Simon also himself believed} (\Hosea:de Sim“n kai autos episteusen\). Note the same verb in the aorist tense \episteusen\. What did he believe? Evidently that Jesus was this "power of God" not himself (Simon). He saw that the miracles wrought by Philip in the name of Christ were genuine while he knew that his own were frauds. He wanted this power that Philip had to add to his own pretensions. "He was probably half victim of self-delusion, half conscious impostor" (Furneaux). He was determined to get this new "power," but had no sense of personal need of Jesus as Saviour for his sins. Songs:he submitted to baptism (\baptistheis\, first aorist passive participle of \baptiz“\), clear proof that baptism does not convey salvation. {He continued with Philip} (\ˆn proskarter“n t“i Philipp“i\). Periphrastic imperfect of the verb \proskartere“\ (see on ¯2:46|). He stuck to Philip (dative case) to find out the secret of his power. {Beholding} (\the“r“n\). Watching the signs and miracles (powers, \dunameis\ that threw his "power" in the shade) as they were wrought (\ginomenas\, present middle participle of \ginomai\). The more he watched the more the wonder grew (\existato\). He had "amazed" (verse 9|) the people by his tricks and he was himself more "amazed" than they by Philip's deeds.

rwp@Acts:9:26 @{He assayed} (\epeirazen\). Imperfect active of conative action. {To join himself} (\kollasthai\). Present middle (direct) infinitive of conative action again. Same word \kolla“\ in strkjv@Luke:15:15; strkjv@Acts:10:28|. See on ¯Matthew:19:5| for discussion. {Were all afraid of him} (\pantes ephobounto auton\). They were fearing him. Imperfect middle picturing the state of mind of the disciples who had vivid recollections of his conduct when last here. What memories Saul had on this return journey to Jerusalem after three years. He had left a conquering hero of Pharisaism. He returns distrusted by the disciples and regarded by the Pharisees as a renegade and a turncoat. He made no effort to get in touch with the Sanhedrin who had sent him to Damascus. He had escaped the plots of the Jews in Damascus only to find himself the object of suspicion by the disciples in Jerusalem who had no proof of his sincerity in his alleged conversion. {Not believing} (\mˆ pisteuontes\). They had probably heard of his conversion, but they frankly disbelieved the reports and regarded him as a hypocrite or a spy in a new role to ruin them. {Was} (\estin\). The present tense is here retained in indirect discourse according to the common Greek idiom.

rwp@Acts:9:30 @{Knew it} (\epignontes\). Second aorist active participle of \epigin“sk“\, to know fully. The disciples saw it clearly, so they {conducted} (\katˆgagon\, effective second aorist active indicative of \katag“\). {Sent forth} (\exapesteilan\). Double compound (\ex\, out, \apo\, away or off). Sent him out and off {to Tarsus} (\eis Tarson\). Silence is preserved by Luke. But it takes little imagination to picture the scene at home when this brilliant young rabbi, the pride of Gamaliel, returns home a preacher of the despised Jesus of Nazareth whose disciples he had so relentlessly persecuted. What will father, mother, sister think of him now?

rwp@Acts:9:34 @{Healeth} (\iƒtai\). Aoristic present middle indicative, heals here and now. {Make thy bed} (\str“son seaut“i\). First aorist (ingressive) active imperative of \str“nnumi\ (\-u“\). Old word with "bed" (\krabatton\) understood as the object. Literally, spread thy bed for thyself (dative case), what others for eight years have done for thee.

rwp@Acts:10:15 @{Make not thou common} (\su mˆ koinou\). Note emphatic position of \su\ (thou). Do thou stop making common what God cleansed (\ekatharisen\). The idiom of \mˆ\ with the present active imperative \koinou\ means precisely this. Peter had just called "common" what God had invited him to slay and eat.

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} (\anelˆmphthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \analamban“\, to take up. The word used of the Ascension (1:22|).

rwp@Acts:10:17 @{Was much perplexed in himself} (\en heaut“i diˆporei\). Imperfect active of \diapore“\, intensive compound (\dia\, thoroughly, and \a\ privative and \poros\, way), to be completely at a loss to know what road to take. Old verb, but in N.T. only in Luke and Acts. Page notes that Luke is singularly fond of verbs compounded with \dia\. See on ¯Luke:9:7| and strkjv@Acts:2:12|. When out of the ecstasy he was more puzzled than ever. {Might be} (\an eiˆ\). Optative with \an\ in indirect question simply retained from the direct (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1021, 1044). See strkjv@Acts:17:18|, for the direct and strkjv@Luke:1:62| for the indirect (\an theloi\ both times). It is the conclusion of a fourth class condition. {Having made inquiry} (\dier“tˆsantes\). First aorist active participle of \dier“ta“\, another compound of \dia\, to ask one after another, to ask through, old verb, but only here in the N.T. It took diligent inquiry to find the obscure house of Simon the tanner. {Stood before the gate} (\epestˆsan epi ton pul“na\). Second aorist active indicative of \ephistˆmi\, intransitive. Note repetition of \epi\. The messengers stopped right at the folding gates of the passage (\pul“na\) which led from the street to the inner court or house.

rwp@Acts:10:24 @{Was waiting} (\ˆn prosdok“n\). Periphrastic imperfect active, in eager expectation and hope, directing the mind (\doka“\) towards (\pros\) anything. Old and common verb. {Near} (\anagkaious\). Only instance in the N.T. of this sense of \anagkaios\ from \anagkˆ\, necessity, what one cannot do without, necessary (1Corinthians:12:22|), duty (Acts:13:46|), or blood relations as here. The ancient Greek writers combined these two words (\suggeneis\, kinsmen, \anagkaious\, necessary friends) as here. It was a homogeneous group of Gentiles close to Cornelius and predisposed to hear Peter favourably.

rwp@Acts:10:25 @{That Peter entered} (\tou eiselthein ton Petron\). This is a difficult construction, for the subject of \egeneto\ (it happened) has to be the articular genitive infinitive \tou eiselthein\ with the accusative of general reference \ton Petron\. Most commentators consider it inexplicable. It is probably an extension of the ordinary articular infinitive under the influence of the Hebrew infinitive construct without regard to the case, regarding it as a fixed case form and so using it as nominative. Precisely this construction of \tou\ and the infinitive as the subject of a verb occurs in the LXX (2Chronicles:6:7|, etc.). See Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1067f. for full discussion of this obvious Hebraism. Somewhat similar examples appear in strkjv@Acts:20:3; strkjv@27:1|. But the Codex Bezae avoids this awkward idiom by the genitive absolute (\proseggizontos tou Petrou\) and some additional details (one of the servants ran forward and announced that he was come). {Worshipped him} (\prosekunˆsen\). "Cornelius was not an idolator and would not have honoured Peter as a god" (Furneaux). The word probably means here reverence like old English usage (Wycliff) and not actual worship, though Peter took it that way (verse 26|). Jesus accepted such worship (Matthew:8:2; strkjv@Luke:5:8| by Peter).

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

rwp@Acts:10:36 @{The word which he sent} (\ton logon hon apesteilen\). Many ancient MSS. (so Westcott and Hort) read merely \ton logon apesteilen\ (he sent the word). This reading avoids the anacoluthon and inverse attraction of \logon\ to the case of the relative \hon\ (which). {Preaching good tidings of peace through Jesus Christ} (\euaggelizomenos eirˆnˆn dia Iˆsou Christou\). Gospelizing peace through Jesus Christ. There is no other way to have real peace between individuals and God, between races and nations, than by Jesus Christ. Almost this very language occurs in strkjv@Ephesians:2:17| where Paul states that Jesus on the cross "preached (gospelized) peace to you who are afar off and peace to you who are near." Peter here sees what Paul will see later with great clearness. {He is Lord of all} (\houtos estin pant“n kurios\). A triumphant parenthesis that Peter throws in as the reason for his new truth. Jesus Christ is Lord of all, both Jews and Gentiles.

rwp@Acts:10:39 @{And we are witnesses} (\kai hˆmeis martures\). Compare "ye yourselves know" (verse 37|). Peter thus appeals to what the audience know and to what the disciples know. He made the same claim about personal witnesses of the Resurrection of Jesus at Pentecost (2:32|). Here Peter affirms full knowledge of the work of Jesus in Judea (for whole country including Galilee and Perea) and Jerusalem (given mainly in John's Gospel). In the Greek \h“n\ (which) is attracted into the genitive case to agree with the antecedent \pant“n\ (all), a common enough idiom. {Whom also they slew} (\hon kai aneilan\). Second aorist active indicative of \anaire“\ with \a\ as often in Acts (2:23; strkjv@5:30|). But note \kai\ (also) in the old MSS., not in the Textus Receptus. They "also" slew him, went that far, "this crowning atrocity" (Vincent), \kai\ could here be "even." {Hanging him on a tree} (\kremasantes epi xulou\). This same expression used by Peter in strkjv@5:30| which see for discussion.

rwp@Acts:11:15 @{As I began to speak} (\en t“i arxasthai me lalein\). \En\ with the locative of the articular aorist infinitive \arxasthai\ (punctiliar action simply) and the accusative of general reference. The second infinitive \lalein\ (to speak) is dependent on \arxasthai\, "In the beginning to speak as to me." {Even as on us at the beginning} (\h“sper kai eph' hˆmƒs en archˆi\). Peter recalls vividly the events at Pentecost, the speaking with tongues and all. It is noteworthy that Peter does not here repeat his sermon. "He rests his defence, not on what he said, but on what God did" (Furneaux).

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

rwp@Acts:12:10 @{When they were past} (\dielthontes\). Second aorist active participle of \dierchomai\, transitive with \dia\ in composition. {The first and the second ward} (\pr“tˆn phulakˆn kai deuteran\). It is not clear to what this language refers. Some take it to mean single soldiers, using \phulakˆn\ in the sense of a guard (one before the door, one at the iron gate). But it seems hardly likely that the two soldiers with whom Peter had been stationed are meant. Probably the "first ward" means the two soldiers of the quaternion stationed by the door and the second ward some other soldiers, not part of the sixteen, further on in the prison by the iron gate. However understood, the difficulties of escape are made plain. {Unto the iron gate that leadeth into the city} (\epi tˆn pulˆn tˆn sidˆrƒn tˆn pherousan eis tˆn polin\). Note the triple use of the article (the gate the iron one the one leading into the city). For this resumptive use of the article see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 762, 764. This iron gate may have opened from a court out into the street and effectually barred escape. {Opened to them} (\ˆnoigˆ autois\). Second aorist passive indicative of \anoig“\, the usual later form though \ˆnoichthˆ\ (first aorist passive) occurs also, was opened. {Of its own accord} (\automatˆ\). Old compound adjective (\autos\, self, obsolete \ma“\, to desire eagerly, feminine form though masculine \automatos\ also used as feminine). In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:4:28|. It was a strange experience for Peter. The Codex Bezae adds here "went down the seven steps" (\katebˆsan tous hepta bathmous\), an interesting detail that adds to the picture. {One street} (\rhumˆn mian\). The angel saw Peter through one of the narrow streets and then left him. We have no means of knowing precisely the location of the prison in the city. On "departed" (\apestˆ\) see on verse ¯7|.

rwp@Acts:12:12 @{When he had considered} (\sunid“n\). Second aorist active participle of \suneidon\ (for the defective verb \sunora“\), to see together, to grasp as a whole, old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@14:6|, save the perfect indicative \sunoida\ (1Corinthians:4:4|) and participle (Acts:5:2|). It is the word from which \suneidˆsis\ (conscience) comes (Romans:2:15|). Peter's mind worked rapidly and he decided what to do. He took in his situation clearly. {To the house of Mary} (\epi tˆn oikian tˆs Marias\). Another Mary (the others were Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary of Bethany, Mary Magdalene, Mary wife of Cleopas, Mary the mother of James and Joses). She may have been a widow and was possessed of some means since her house was large enough to hold the large group of disciples there. Barnabas, cousin of John Mark her son (Colossians:4:10|), was also a man of property or had been (Acts:4:36f.|). It is probable that the disciples had been in the habit of meeting in her house, a fact known to Peter and he was evidently fond of John Mark whom he afterwards calls "my son" (1Peter:5:13|) and whom he had met here. The upper room of strkjv@Acts:1:13| may have been in Mary's house and Mark may have been the man bearing a pitcher of water (Luke:22:10|) and the young man who fled in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mark:14:51f.|). There was a gate and portress here as in the house of the highpriest (John:18:16|). Peter knew where to go and even at this early hour hoped to find some of the disciples. Mary is one of the many mothers who have become famous by reason of their sons, though she was undoubtedly a woman of high character herself. {Were gathered together and were praying} (\ˆsan sunˆthroismenoi kai proseuchomenoi\). Note difference in the tenses, one periphrastic past perfect passive (\sunathroiz“\ old verb, in the N.T. here only and strkjv@19:25| and the uncompounded \throiz“\ in strkjv@Luke:24:33|) and the periphrastic imperfect. The praying apparently had been going on all night and a large number (many, \hikanoi\) of the disciples were there. One recalls the time when they had gathered to pray (4:31|) after Peter had told the disciples of the threats of the Sanhedrin (4:23|). God had rescued Peter then. Would he let him be put to death now as James had been?

rwp@Acts:12:18 @{As soon as it was day} (\Genomenˆs hˆmeras\). Genitive absolute, day having come. {No small stir} (\tarachos ouk oligos\). Litotes (\ouk oligos\), occurs eight times in the Acts as in strkjv@15:2|, and nowhere else in the N.T. \Tarachos\ (stir) is an old word from \tarass“\, to agitate. In the N.T only here and strkjv@19:23|. Probably all sixteen soldiers were agitated over this remarkable escape. They were responsible for the prisoner with their lives (cf. strkjv@Acts:16:27; strkjv@27:42|). Furneaux suggests that Manaen, the king's foster-brother and a Christian (13:1|), was the "angel" who rescued Peter from the prison. That is not the way that Peter looked at it. {What was become of Peter} (\ti ara ho Petros egeneto\). An indirect question with the aorist indicative retained. \Ara\ adds a syllogism (therefore) to the problem as in strkjv@Luke:1:66|. The use of the neuter \ti\ (as in strkjv@Acts:13:25|) is different from \tis\, though nominative like \Petros\, literally, "what then Peter had become," "what had happened to Peter" (in one idiom). See the same idiom in strkjv@John:21:21| (\houtos de ti\). {But this one what} (verb \genˆsetai\ not used).

rwp@Acts:13:5 @{Proclaimed} (\katˆggellon\). Imperfect active of \kataggell“\, inchoative, began to proclaim. This was Paul's rule of procedure, "to the Jew first" (Romans:1:16; strkjv@Acts:13:46; strkjv@17:2; strkjv@18:4,19; strkjv@19:8|). {They had also} (\eichon de kai\). Imperfect active, descriptive. {As their attendant} (\hupˆretˆn\). Literally, "under-rower" (\hupo, ˆretˆs\) in the trireme. Probably here minister (\chazzan\) or assistant in the synagogue as in strkjv@Luke:4:20|. Cf. strkjv@Matthew:5:25|. It is not clear what John Mark did, though he was evidently selected by Barnabas as his cousin. He may have helped in the baptizing. There were probably others also in the company (verse 13|). The "also" may mean that Mark did some preaching. Barnabas was probably the leader in the work in these Jewish synagogues.

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 pseudoprophˆtˆn 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} (\h“s eplˆrou I“anˆs ton dromon\). Imperfect active of \plˆro“\, 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 \l–sai\ (first aorist active infinitive of \lu“\) found in strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Luke:3:16| and the word for shoes (\hupodˆma\, 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:13:48 @{As the Gentiles heard this they were glad} (\akouonta ta ethnˆ echairon\). Present active participle of \akou“\ and imperfect active of \chair“\, linear action descriptive of the joy of the Gentiles. {Glorified the word of God} (\edoxazon ton logon tou theou\). Imperfect active again. The joy of the Gentiles increased the fury of the Jews. "The synagogue became a scene of excitement which must have been something like the original speaking with tongues" (Rackham). The joy of the Gentiles was to see how they could receive the higher blessing of Judaism without circumcision and other repellent features of Jewish ceremonialism. It was the gospel of grace and liberty from legalism that Paul had proclaimed. Whether strkjv@Galatians:4:13| describes this incident or not (the South Galatian theory), it illustrates it when Gentiles received Paul as if he were Christ Jesus himself. It was triumph with the Gentiles, but defeat with the Jews. {As many as were ordained to eternal life} (\hosoi ˆsan tetagmenoi eis z“ˆn ai“nion\). Periphrastic past perfect passive indicative of \tass“\, a military term to place in orderly arrangement. The word "ordain" is not the best translation here. "Appointed," as Hackett shows, is better. The Jews here had voluntarily rejected the word of God. On the other side were those Gentiles who gladly accepted what the Jews had rejected, not all the Gentiles. Why these Gentiles here ranged themselves on God's side as opposed to the Jews Luke does not tell us. This verse does not solve the vexed problem of divine sovereignty and human free agency. There is no evidence that Luke had in mind an _absolutum decretum_ of personal salvation. Paul had shown that God's plan extended to and included Gentiles. Certainly the Spirit of God does move upon the human heart to which some respond, as here, while others push him away. {Believed} (\episteusan\). Summary or constative first aorist active indicative of \pisteu“\. The subject of this verb is the relative clause. By no manner of legerdemain can it be made to mean "those who believe were appointed." It was saving faith that was exercised only by those who were appointed unto eternal life, who were ranged on the side of eternal life, who were thus revealed as the subjects of God's grace by the stand that they took on this day for the Lord. It was a great day for the kingdom of God.

rwp@Acts:13:50 @{Urged on} (\par“trunan\). First aorist (effective) active of \par-otrun“\, old verb, but here alone in the N.T., to incite, to stir up. The Jews were apparently not numerous in this city as they had only one synagogue, but they had influence with people of prominence, like "the devout women of honourable estate" (\tas sebomenas gunaikas tas euschˆmonas\), the female proselytes of high station, a late use of an old word used about Joseph of Arimathea (Mark:15:43|). The rabbis went after these Gentile women who had embraced Judaism (cf. strkjv@Acts:17:4| in Thessalonica) as Paul had made an appeal to them. The prominence of women in public life here at Antioch is quite in accord with what we know of conditions in the cities of Asia Minor. "Thus women were appointed under the empire as magistrates, as presidents of the games, and even the Jews elected a woman as Archisynagogos, at least in one instance at Smyrna" (Knowling). In Damascus Josephus (_War_ II. 20, 21) says that a majority of the married women were proselytes. Strabo (VIII. 2) and Juvenal (VI. 542) speak of the addiction of women to the Jewish religion. {The chief men of the city} (\tous pr“tous tˆs pole“s\). Probably city officials (the Duumviri, the Praetors, the First Ten in the Greek Cities of the east) or other "foremost" men, not officials. The rabbis were shrewd enough to reach these men (not proselytes) through the women who were proselytes of distinction. {Stirred up a persecution} (\epˆgeiran di“gmon\). First aorist active indicative of \epegeir“\, old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@14:2|. Paul seems to allude to this persecution in strkjv@2Timothy:3:11| "persecutions, sufferings, what things befell me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra, what persecutions I endured." Here Paul had perils from his own countrymen and perils from the Gentiles after the perils of rivers and perils of robbers on the way from Perga (2Corinthians:11:26|). He was thrice beaten with rods (\tris erhabdisthˆn\, strkjv@2Corinthians:11:25|) by Roman lictors in some Roman colony. If that was here, then Paul and Barnabas were publicly scourged by the lictors before they left. Probably the Jews succeeded in making the Roman officials look on Paul and Barnabas as disturbers of the public peace. Songs:"they cast them out of their borders" (\exebalon autous apo t“n hori“n aut“n\). Second aorist active indicative of \ekball“\, forcible expulsion plainly as public nuisances. Just a few days before they were the heroes of the city and now!

rwp@Acts:14:12 @{They called} (\ekaloun\). Inchoative imperfect began to call. {Barnabas, Jupiter} (\ton Barnaban Dia\). Because Barnabas was the older and the more imposing in appearance. Paul admits that he was not impressive in looks (2Corinthians:10:10|). {And Paul, Mercury} (\ton de Paulon Hermˆn\). Mercury (\Hermˆs\) was the messenger of the gods, and the spokesman of Zeus. \Hermˆs\ was of beautiful appearance and eloquent in speech, the inventor of speech in legend. Our word hermeneutics or science of interpretation comes from this word (Hebrews:7:2; strkjv@John:1:38|). {Because he was the chief speaker} (\epeidˆ autos ˆn ho hˆgoumenos tou logou\). Paul was clearly "the leader of the talk." Songs:it seemed a clear case to the natives. If preachers always knew what people really think of them! Whether Paul was alluding to his experience in Lystra or not in strkjv@Galatians:4:14|, certainly they did receive him as an angel of God, as if "Mercury" in reality.

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

rwp@Acts:14:28 @{And they tarried no little time} (\dietribon de chronon ouk oligon\). Imperfect active of \diatrib“\, old verb to rub hard, to consume, with accusative of extent of time. It was a happy time of fellowship. The experiment entered upon by the church of Antioch was now a pronounced success. It was at the direct command of the Holy Spirit, but they had prayed for the absent missionaries and rejoiced at their signal success. There is no sign of jealousy on the part of Barnabas when Paul returns as the chief hero of the expedition. A new corner has been turned in the history of Christianity. There is a new centre of Christian activity. What will Jerusalem think of the new developments at Antioch? Paul and Barnabas made no report to Jerusalem.

rwp@Acts:15:5 @{But there rose up} (\exanestˆsan de\). Second aorist active indicative (intransitive). Note both \ex\ and \an\. These men rose up out of the crowd at a critical moment. They were believers in Christ (\pepisteukotes\, having believed), but were still members of "the sect of the Pharisees" (\tˆs hairese“s t“n Pharisai“n\). Evidently they still held to the Pharisaic narrowness shown in the attack on Peter (11:2f.|). Note the dogmatism of their "must" (\dei\) after the opposition of Paul and Barnabas to their "except" (\ean me\) at Antioch (15:1|). They are unconvinced and expected to carry the elders with them. Codex Bezae says that they had appealed to the elders (15:2,5|). At any rate they have made the issue in open meeting at the height of the jubilation. It is plain from verse 6| that this meeting was adjourned, for another gathering came together then. It is here that the private conference of which Paul speaks in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| took place. It was Paul's chance to see the leaders in Jerusalem (Peter, James, and John) and he won them over to his view of Gentile liberty from the Mosaic law so that the next public conference (Acts:15:6-29|) ratified heartily the views of Paul, Barnabas, Peter, James, and John. It was a diplomatic triumph of the first order and saved Christianity from the bondage of Jewish ceremonial sacramentalism. Songs:far as we know this is the only time that Paul and John met face to face, the great spirits in Christian history after Jesus our Lord. It is a bit curious to see men saying today that Paul surrendered about Titus and had him circumcised for the sake of peace, the very opposite of what he says in Galatians, "to whom I yielded, no not for an hour." Titus as a Greek was a red flag to the Judaizers and to the compromisers, but Paul stood his ground.

rwp@Acts:15:7 @{When there had been much questioning} (\pollˆs zˆtˆse“s genomenˆs\). 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' hˆmer“n archai“n\). From ancient days. The adjective \archaios\ is from \archˆ\, 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:15:11 @{That we shall be saved} (\s“thˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive in indirect discourse after \pisteuomen\. More exactly, "We believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus in like manner as they also." This thoroughly Pauline note shows that whatever hopes the Judaizers had about Peter were false. His doctrine of grace is as clear as a bell. He has lifted his voice against salvation by ceremony and ritualism. It was a great deliverance.

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

rwp@Acts:15:15 @{To this agree} (\tout“i sumph“nousin\). Associative instrumental case (\tout“i\) after \sumph“nousin\ (voice together with, symphony with, harmonize with), from \sumph“ne“\, old verb seen already in strkjv@Matthew:18:19; strkjv@Luke:5:36; strkjv@Acts:5:9| which see. James cites only strkjv@Amos:9:11,12| from the LXX as an example of "the words of the prophets" (\hoi logoi t“n prophˆt“n\) to which he refers on this point. The somewhat free quotation runs here through verses 16-18| of strkjv@Acts:15| and is exceedingly pertinent. The Jewish rabbis often failed to understand the prophets as Jesus showed. The passage in Amos refers primarily to the restoration of the Davidic empire, but also the Messiah's Kingdom (the throne of David his father," strkjv@Luke:1:32|).

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

rwp@Acts:15:24 @{Certain which went from us} (\tines ex hˆm“n\, Aleph B omit \exelthontes\). A direct blow at the Judaizers, put in delicate language (we heard \ˆkousamen\) as if only at Antioch (15:1|), and not also in Jerusalem in open meeting (15:5|). {Have troubled you with words} (\etaraxan humas logois\). What a picture of turmoil in the church in Antioch, words, words, words. Aorist tense of the common verb \tarass“\, to agitate, to make the heart palpitate (John:14:1,27|) and instrumental case of \logois\. {Subverting your souls} (\anaskeuazontes tas psuchas hum“n\). Present active participle of \anaskeuaz“\, old verb (\ana\ and \skeuos\, baggage) to pack up baggage, to plunder, to ravage. Powerful picture of the havoc wrought by the Judaizers among the simple-minded Greek Christians in Antioch. {To whom we gave no commandment} (\hois ou diesteilametha\). First aorist middle indicative of \diastell“\, old verb to draw asunder, to distinguish, to set forth distinctly, to command. This is a flat disclaimer of the whole conduct of the Judaizers in Antioch and in Jerusalem, a complete repudiation of their effort to impose the Mosaic ceremonial law upon the Gentile Christians.

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

rwp@Acts:16:4 @{They delivered them} (\paredidosan autois\). Imperfect active, kept on delivering to them in city after city. This is a proof of Paul's loyalty to the Jerusalem compact (Knowling). The circumcision of Timothy would indicate also that the points involved were under discussion and that Paul felt no inconsistency in what he did. {The decrees} (\ta dogmata\). Old word from \doke“\, to give an opinion. It is used of public decrees of rulers (Luke:2:1; strkjv@Acts:17:7|), of the requirements of the Mosaic law (Colossians:2:14|), and here of the regulations or conclusions of the Jerusalem Conference. Silas was with Paul and his presence gave added dignity to the passing out of the decrees, a charter of Gentile freedom, since he was one of the committee from Jerusalem to Antioch (15:22,27,32|). {Which had been ordained} (\ta kekrimena\). Perfect passive articular participle of \krin“\, to judge, emphasizing the permanence of the conclusions reached by the apostles and elders in Jerusalem. {For to keep} (\phulassein\). This present active infinitive likewise accents that it is a charter of liberty for continual living, not a temporary compromise.

rwp@Acts:16:6 @{The region of Phrygia and Galatia} (\tˆn Phrugian kai Galatikˆn ch“ran\). This is probably the correct text with one article and apparently describes one "Region" or District in The Province of Galatia which was also Phrygian (the old-ethnographic name with which compare the use of Lycaonia in strkjv@14:6|). Strictly speaking Derbe and Lystra, though in the Province of Galatia, were not Phrygian, and so Luke would here be not resumptive of the record in verses 1-5|; but a reference to the country around Iconium and Antioch in Pisidia in North Galatia is not included. This verse is hotly disputed at every point by the advocates of the North Galatian theory as represented by Chase and the South Galatian theory by Ramsay. Whatever is true in regard to the language of Luke here and in strkjv@18:23|, it is still possible for Paul in strkjv@Galatians:1:2| to use the term Galatia of the whole province of that name which could, in fact, apply to either South or North Galatia or to both. He could, of course, use it also in the ethnographic sense of the real Gauls or Celts who dwelt in North Galatia. Certainly the first tour of Paul and Barnabas was in the Province of Galatia though touching only the Regions of Pisidia, Phrygia, and Lycaonia, which province included besides the Gauls to the north. In this second tour Lycaonia has been already touched (Derbe and Lystra) and now Phrygia. The question arises why Luke here and in strkjv@18:23| adds the term "of Galatia" (\Galatikˆn\) though not in strkjv@13:14| (Pisidian Antioch) nor in strkjv@14:6| (cities of Lycaonia). Does Luke mean to use "of Galatia" in the same ethnographic sense as "of Phrygia" or does he here add the province (Galatia) to the name of the Region (Phrygia)? In itself either view is possible and it really matters very little except that the question is raised whether Paul went into the North Galatian Region on this occasion or later (18:23|). He could have done so and the Epistle be addressed to the churches of South Galatia, North Galatia, or the province as a whole. But the Greek participle \k“luthentes\ ("having been forbidden") plays a part in the argument that cannot be overlooked whether Luke means to say that Paul went north or not. This aorist passive participle of \k“lu“\, to hinder, can only express simultaneous or antecedent action, not subsequent action as Ramsay argues. No example of the so-called subsequent use of the aorist participle has ever been found in Greek as all Greek grammarians agree (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 860-63, 1112-14). The only natural meaning of \k“luthentes\ is that Paul with Silas and Timothy "passed through the region of Phrygia and Galatia" because they were hindered by the Holy Spirit from speaking the word in Asia (the Province of Asia of which Ephesus was the chief city and west of Derbe and Lystra). This construction implies that the country called "the region of Phrygia and Galatia" is not in the direct line west toward Ephesus. What follows in verse 7| throws further light on the point.

rwp@Acts:16:9 @{A vision} (\horama\). Old word, eleven times in Acts, once in strkjv@Matthew:17:9|. Twice Paul had been hindered by the Holy Spirit from going where he wanted to go. Most men would have gone back home with such rebuffs, but not so Paul. Now the call is positive and not negative, to go "far hence to the Gentiles" (22:21|). He had little dreamed of such a call when he left Antioch. Paul's frequent visions always came at real crises in his life. {A man of Macedonia} (\anˆr Maked“n\). Ramsay follows Renan in the view that this was Luke with whom Paul had conversed about conditions in Macedonia. Verse 10| makes it plain that Luke was now in the party, but when he joined them we do not know. Some hold that Luke lived at Antioch in Syria and came on with Paul and Silas, others that he joined them later in Galatia, others that he appeared now either as Paul's physician or new convert. Ramsay thinks that Philippi was his home at this time. But, whatever is true about Luke, the narrative must not be robbed of its supernatural aspect (10:10; strkjv@22:17|). {Was standing} (\ˆn hest“s\). Second perfect active participle of \histˆmi\, intransitive, periphrastic imperfect. Vivid picture. {Help us} (\boˆthˆson hˆmin\). Ingressive first aorist active imperative of \boˆthe“\ (\boˆ, the“\), to run at a cry, to help. The man uses the plural for all including himself. It was the cry of Europe for Christ.

rwp@Acts:16:10 @{We sought} (\ezˆtˆsamen\). This sudden use of the plural, dropped in strkjv@17:1| when Paul leaves Philippi, and resumed in strkjv@20:5| when Paul rejoins Luke in Philippi, argues conclusively that Luke, the author, is in the party ("we" portions of Acts) and shows in a writer of such literary skill as Luke that he is not copying a document in a blundering sort of way. Paul told his vision to the party and they were all ready to respond to the call. {Concluding} (\sunbibazontes\). A very striking word, present active participle of \sunbibaz“\, old verb to make go together, to coalesce or knit together, to make this and that agree and so to conclude. Already in strkjv@9:22| of Paul's preaching. This word here gives a good illustration of the proper use of the reason in connection with revelation, to decide whether it is a revelation from God, to find out what it means for us, and to see that we obey the revelation when understood. God had called them to preach to the Macedonians. They had to go.

rwp@Acts:16:16 @{A spirit of divination} (\pneuma puth“na\). Songs:the correct text with accusative (apparition, a spirit, a python), not the genitive (\puth“nos\). Hesychius defines it as \daimonion manikon\ (a spirit of divination). The etymology of the word is unknown. Bengel suggests \puthesthai\ from \punthanomai\, to inquire. Python was the name given to the serpent that kept guard at Delphi, slain by Apollo, who was called \Puthios Apollo\ and the prophetess at Delphi was termed Pythia. Certainly Luke does not mean to credit Apollo with a real existence (1Corinthians:8:4|). But Plutarch (A.D. 50-100) says that the term \puth“nes\ was applied to ventriloquists (\eggastrimuthoi\). In the LXX those with familiar spirits are called by this word ventriloquists (Leviticus:19:31; strkjv@20:6,27|, including the witch of Endor strkjv@1Samuel:28:7|). It is possible that this slave girl had this gift of prophecy "by soothsaying" (\manteuomenˆ\). Present middle participle of \manteuomai\, old heathen word (in contrast with \prophˆteu“\) for acting the seer (\mantis\) and this kin to \mainomai\, to be mad, like the howling dervishes of later times. This is the so-called instrumental use of the circumstantial participles. {Brought} (\pareichen\). Imperfect active of \parech“\, a steady source of income. {Much gain} (\ergasian pollˆn\). Work, business, from \ergazomai\, to work. {Her masters} (\tois kuriois autˆs\). Dative case. Joint owners of this poor slave girl who were exploiting her calamity, whatever it was, for selfish gain, just as men and women today exploit girls and women in the "white slave" trade. As a fortune-teller she was a valuable asset for all the credulous dupes of the community. Simon Magus in Samaria and Elymas Barjesus in Cyprus had won power and wealth as soothsayers.

rwp@Acts:16:24 @{Into the inner prison} (\eis tˆn es“teran phulakˆn\). 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 ˆsphalisato aut“n\). First aorist (effective) middle of \asphaliz“\, from \asphalˆs\ (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, \xulopedˆ\, 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@Acts:17:18 @{And certain also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him} (\tines de kai t“n Epikouri“n kai St“ik“n philosoph“n suneballon aut“i\). Imperfect active of \sunball“\, old verb, in the N.T. only by Luke, to bring or put together in one's mind (Luke:2:19|), to meet together (Acts:20:14|), to bring together aid (18:27|), to confer or converse or dispute as here and already strkjv@4:15| which see. These professional philosophers were always ready for an argument and so they frequented the agora for that purpose. Luke uses one article and so groups the two sects together in their attitude toward Paul, but they were very different in fact. Both sects were eager for argument and both had disdain for Paul, but they were the two rival practical philosophies of the day, succeeding the more abstruse theories of Plato and Aristotle. Socrates had turned men's thought inward (\Gn“thi Seauton\, Know Thyself) away from the mere study of physics. Plato followed with a profound development of the inner self (metaphysics). Aristotle with his cyclopaedic grasp sought to unify and relate both physics and metaphysics. Both Zeno and Epicurus (340-272 B.C.) took a more practical turn in all this intellectual turmoil and raised the issues of everyday life. Zeno (360-260 B.C.) taught in the \Stoa\ (Porch) and so his teaching was called Stoicism. He advanced many noble ideas that found their chief illustration in the Roman philosophers (Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius). He taught self-mastery and hardness with an austerity that ministered to pride or suicide in case of failure, a distinctly selfish and unloving view of life and with a pantheistic philosophy. Epicurus considered practical atheism the true view of the universe and denied a future life and claimed pleasure as the chief thing to be gotten out of life. He did not deny the existence of gods, but regarded them as unconcerned with the life of men. The Stoics called Epicurus an atheist. Lucretius and Horace give the Epicurean view of life in their great poems. This low view of life led to sensualism and does today, for both Stoicism and Epicureanism are widely influential with people now. "Eat and drink for tomorrow we die," they preached. Paul had doubtless become acquainted with both of these philosophies for they were widely prevalent over the world. Here he confronts them in their very home. He is challenged by past-masters in the art of appealing to the senses, men as skilled in their dialectic as the Pharisaic rabbis with whom Paul had been trained and whose subtleties he had learned how to expose. But, so far as we know, this is a new experience for Paul to have a public dispute with these philosophical experts who had a natural contempt for all Jews and for rabbis in particular, though they found Paul a new type at any rate and so with some interest in him. "In Epicureanism, it was man's sensual nature which arrayed itself against the claims of the gospel; in Stoicism it was his self-righteousness and pride of intellect" (Hackett). Knowling calls the Stoic the Pharisee of philosophy and the Epicurean the Sadducee of philosophy. Socrates in this very agora used to try to interest the passers-by in some desire for better things. That was 450 years before Paul is challenged by these superficial sophistical Epicureans and Stoics. It is doubtful if Paul had ever met a more difficult situation. {What would this babbler say?} (\Ti an theloi ho spermologos houtos legein?\). The word for "babbler" means "seed-picker" or picker up of seeds (\sperma\, seed, \leg“\, to collect) like a bird in the agora hopping about after chance seeds. Plutarch applies the word to crows that pick up grain in the fields. Demosthenes called Aeschines a \spermologos\. Eustathius uses it of a man hanging around in the markets picking up scraps of food that fell from the carts and so also of mere rhetoricians and plagiarists who picked up scraps of wisdom from others. Ramsay considers it here a piece of Athenian slang used to describe the picture of Paul seen by these philosophers who use it, for not all of them had it ("some," \tines\). Note the use of \an\ and the present active optative \theloi\, conclusion of a fourth-class condition in a rhetorical question (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). It means, What would this picker up of seeds wish to say, if he should get off an idea? It is a contemptuous tone of supreme ridicule and doubtless Paul heard this comment. Probably the Epicureans made this sneer that Paul was a charlatan or quack. {Other some} (\hoi de\). But others, in contrast with the "some" just before. Perhaps the Stoics take this more serious view of Paul. {He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods} (\zen“n daimoni“n dokei kataggeleus einai\). This view is put cautiously by \dokei\ (seems). \Kataggeleus\ does not occur in the old Greek, though in ecclesiastical writers, but Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 99) gives an example of the word "on a marble stele recording a decree of the Mitylenaens in honour of the Emperor Augustus," where it is the herald of the games. Here alone in the N.T. \Daimonion\ is used in the old Greek sense of deity or divinity whether good or bad, not in the N.T. sense of demons. Both this word and \kataggeleus\ are used from the Athenian standpoint. \Xenos\ is an old word for a guest-friend (Latin _hospes_) and then host (Romans:16:23|), then for foreigner or stranger (Matthew:25:31; strkjv@Acts:17:21|), new and so strange as here and strkjv@Hebrews:13:9; strkjv@1Peter:4:12|, and then aliens (Ephesians:2:12|). This view of Paul is the first count against Socrates: Socrates does wrong, introducing new deities (\adikei S“kratˆs, kaina daimonia eispher“n\, Xen. _Mem_. I). On this charge the Athenians voted the hemlock for their greatest citizen. What will they do to Paul? This Athens was more sceptical and more tolerant than the old Athens. But Roman law did not allow the introduction of a new religion (_religio illicita_). Paul was walking on thin ice though he was the real master philosopher and these Epicureans and Stoics were quacks. Paul had the only true philosophy of the universe and life with Jesus Christ as the centre (Colossians:1:12-20|), the greatest of all philosophers as Ramsay justly terms him. But these men are mocking him. {Because he preached Jesus and the resurrection} (\hoti ton Iˆsoun kai tˆn anastasin euˆggelizato\). Reason for the view just stated. Imperfect middle indicative of \euaggeliz“\, to "gospelize." Apparently these critics considered \anastasis\ (Resurrection) another deity on a par with Jesus. The Athenians worshipped all sorts of abstract truths and virtues and they misunderstood Paul on this subject. They will leave him as soon as he mentions the resurrection (verse 32|). It is objected that Luke would not use the word in this sense here for his readers would not under stand him. But Luke is describing the misapprehension of this group of philosophers and this interpretation fits in precisely.

rwp@Acts:17:22 @{Stood in the midst of the Areopagus} (\statheis en mes“i tou Areiou Pagou\). First aorist passive of \histˆmi\ used of Peter in strkjv@2:14|. Majestic figure whether on Mars Hill or in the Stoa Basilica before the Areopagus Court. There would be a crowd of spectators and philosophers in either case and Paul seized the opportunity to preach Christ to this strange audience as he did in Caesarea before Herod Agrippa and the crowd of prominent people gathered by Festus for the entertainment. Paul does not speak as a man on trial, but as one trying to get a hearing for the gospel of Christ. {Somewhat superstitious} (\h“s deisidaimonesterous\). The Authorized Version has "too superstitious," the American Standard "very religious." \Deisidaim“n\ is a neutral word (from \deid“\, to fear, and \daim“n\, deity). The Greeks used it either in the good sense of pious or religious or the bad sense of superstitious. Thayer suggests that Paul uses it "with kindly ambiguity." Page thinks that Luke uses the word to represent the religious feeling of the Athenians (_religiosus_) which bordered on superstition. The Vulgate has _superstitiosiores_. In strkjv@25:19| Festus uses the term \deisidaimonia\ for "religion." It seems unlikely that Paul should give this audience a slap in the face at the very start. The way one takes this adjective here colours Paul's whole speech before the Council of Areopagus. The comparative here as in verse 21| means more religions than usual (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 664f.), the object of the comparison not being expressed. The Athenians had a tremendous reputation for their devotion to religion, "full of idols" (verse 16|).

rwp@Acts:17:23 @{For} (\gar\). Paul gives an illustration of their religiousness from his own experiences in their city. {The objects of your worship} (\ta sebasmata hum“n\). Late word from \sebazomai\, to worship. In N T. only here and strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:4|. The use of this word for temples, altars, statues, shows the conciliatory tone in the use of \deisidaimonesterous\ in verse 22|. {An altar} (\b“mon\). Old word, only here in the N.T. and the only mention of a heathen altar in the N.T {With this inscription} (\en h“i epegegrapto\). On which had been written (stood written), past perfect passive indicative of \epigraph“\, old and common verb for writing on inscriptions (\epigraphˆ\, strkjv@Luke:23:38|). {To an Unknown God} (\AGNOSTO THEO\). Dative case, dedicated to. Pausanias (I. 1, 4) says that in Athens there are "altars to gods unknown" (\b“moi the“n agn“st“n\). Epimenides in a pestilence advised the sacrifice of a sheep to the befitting god whoever he might be. If an altar was dedicated to the wrong deity, the Athenians feared the anger of the other gods. The only use in the N.T. of \agn“stos\, old and common adjective (from \a\ privative and \gn“stos\ verbal of \gin“sk“\, to know). Our word agnostic comes from it. Here it has an ambiguous meaning, but Paul uses it though to a stern Christian philosopher it may be the "confession at once of a bastard philosophy and of a bastard religion" (Hort, _Hulsean Lectures_, p. 64). Paul was quick to use this confession on the part of the Athenians of a higher power than yet known to them. Songs:he gets his theme from this evidence of a deeper religious sense in them and makes a most clever use of it with consummate skill. {In ignorance} (\agnoountes\). Present active participle of \agnoe“\, old verb from same root as \agn“stos\ to which Paul refers by using it. {This set I forth unto you} (\touto ego kataggell“ humin\). He is a \kataggeleus\ (verse 18|) as they suspected of a God, both old and new, old in that they already worship him, new in that Paul knows who he is. By this master stroke he has brushed to one side any notion of violation of Roman law or suspicion of heresy and claims their endorsement of his new gospel, a shrewd and consummate turn. He has their attention now and proceeds to describe this God left out of their list as the one true and Supreme God. The later MSS. here read \hon--touton\ (whom--this one) rather than \ho--touto\ (what--this), but the late text is plainly an effort to introduce too soon the personal nature of God which comes out clearly in verse 24|.

rwp@Acts:17:26 @{And he made of one} (\epoiˆsen te ex henos\). The word \haimatos\ (blood) is absent from Aleph A B and is a later explanatory addition. What Paul affirms is the unity of the human race with a common origin and with God as the Creator. This view runs counter to Greek exclusiveness which treated other races as barbarians and to Jewish pride which treated other nations as heathen or pagan (the Jews were \laos\, the Gentiles \ethnˆ\). The cosmopolitanism of Paul here rises above Jew and Greek and claims the one God as the Creator of the one race of men. The Athenians themselves claimed to be \antochthonous\ (indigenous) and a special creation. Zeno and Seneca did teach a kind of cosmopolitanism (really pantheism) far different from the personal God of Paul. It was Rome, not Greece, that carried out the moral ideas of Zeno. Man is part of the universe (verse 24|) and God created (\epoiˆsen\) man as he created (\poiˆsas\) the all. {For to dwell} (\katoikein\). Infinitive (present active) of purpose, so as to dwell. {Having determined} (\horisas\). First aorist active participle of \horiz“\, old verb to make a horizon as already in strkjv@19:42| which see. Paul here touches God's Providence. God has revealed himself in history as in creation. His hand appears in the history of all men as well as in that of the Chosen People of Israel. {Appointed seasons} (\prostetagmenous kairous\). Not the weather as in strkjv@14:17|, but "the times of the Gentiles" (\kairoi ethn“n\) of which Jesus spoke (Luke:21:24|). The perfect passive participle of \prostass“\, old verb to enjoin, emphasizes God's control of human history without any denial of human free agency as was involved in the Stoic Fate (\Heirmarmenˆ\). {Bounds} (\horothesias\). Limits? Same idea in strkjv@Job:12:23|. Nations rise and fall, but it is not blind chance or hard fate. Thus there is an interplay between God's will and man's activities, difficult as it is for us to see with our shortened vision.

rwp@Galatians:3:19 @{What then is the law?} (\ti oun ho nomos?\). Or, why then the law? A pertinent question if the Abrahamic promise antedates it and holds on afterwards. {It was added because of transgressions} (\t“n parabase“n charin prosetethˆ\). First aorist passive of \prostithˆmi\, old verb to add to. It is only in apparent contradiction to verses 15ff.|, because in Paul's mind the law is no part of the covenant, but a thing apart "in no way modifying its provisions" (Burton). \Charin\ is the adverbial accusative of \charis\ which was used as a preposition with the genitive as early as Homer, in favour of, for the sake of. Except in strkjv@1John:3:12| it is post-positive in the N.T. as in ancient Greek. It may be causal (Luke:7:47; strkjv@1John:3:12|) or telic (Titus:1:5,11; strkjv@Jude:1:16|). It is probably also telic here, not in order to create transgressions, but rather "to make transgressions palpable" (Ellicott), "thereby pronouncing them to be from that time forward transgressions of the law" (Rendall). \Parabasis\, from \parabain“\, is in this sense a late word (Plutarch on), originally a slight deviation, then a wilful disregarding of known regulations or prohibitions as in strkjv@Romans:2:23|. {Till the seed should come} (\achris an elthˆi to sperma\). Future time with \achris an\ and aorist subjunctive (usual construction). Christ he means by \to sperma\ as in verse 16|. {The promise hath been made} (\epˆggeltai\). Probably impersonal perfect passive rather than middle of \epaggellomai\ as in II Macc. strkjv@4:27. {Ordained through angels} (\diatageis di' aggel“n\). Second aorist passive participle of \diatass“\ (see on ¯Matthew:11:1|). About angels and the giving of the law see on strkjv@Deuteronomy:33:2| (LXX); strkjv@Acts:7:38,52; strkjv@Hebrews:2:2|; Josephus (_Ant_. XV. 5. 3). {By the hand of a mediator} (\en cheiri mesitou\). \En cheiri\ is a manifest Aramaism or Hebraism and only here in the N.T. It is common in the LXX. \Mesitˆs\, from \mesos\ is middle or midst, is a late word (Polybius, Diodorus, Philo, Josephus) and common in the papyri in legal transactions for arbiter, surety, etc. Here of Moses, but also of Christ (1Timothy:2:5; strkjv@Hebrews:8:6; strkjv@9:15; strkjv@12:24|).

rwp@Galatians:4:4 @{The fulness of the time} (\to plˆr“ma tou chronou\). Old word from \plˆro“\, to fill. Here the complement of the preceding time as in strkjv@Ephesians:1:10|. Some examples in the papyri in the sense of complement, to accompany. God sent forth his preexisting Son (Phillipians:2:6|) when the time for his purpose had come like the \prothesmia\ of verse 2|. {Born of a woman} (\genomenon ek gunaikos\). As all men are and so true humanity, "coming from a woman." There is, of course, no direct reference here to the Virgin Birth of Jesus, but his deity had just been affirmed by the words "his Son" (\ton huion autou\), so that both his deity and humanity are here stated as in strkjv@Romans:1:3|. Whatever view one holds about Paul's knowledge of the Virgin Birth of Christ one must admit that Paul believed in his actual personal preexistence with God (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|), not a mere existence in idea. The fact of the Virgin Birth agrees perfectly with the language here. {Born under the law} (\genomenon hupo nomon\). He not only became a man, but a Jew. The purpose (\hina\) of God thus was plainly to redeem (\exagorasˆi\, as in strkjv@3:13|) those under the law, and so under the curse. The further purpose (\hina\) was that we (Jew and Gentile) might receive (\apolab“men\, second aorist active subjunctive of \apolamban“\), not get back (Luke:15:27|), but get from (\apo\) God the adoption (\tˆn huiothesian\). Late word common in the inscriptions (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 239) and occurs in the papyri also and in Diogenes Laertes, though not in LXX. Paul adopts this current term to express his idea (he alone in the N.T.) as to how God takes into his spiritual family both Jews and Gentiles who believe. See also strkjv@Romans:8:15,23; strkjv@9:4; strkjv@Ephesians:1:5|. The Vulgate uses _adoptio filiorum_. It is a metaphor like the others above, but a very expressive one.

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

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

rwp@Galatians:4:20 @{I could with} (\ˆthelon\). Imperfect active, I was wishing like Agrippa's use of \eboulomˆn\ in strkjv@Acts:25:22|, "I was just wishing. I was longing to be present with you just now (\arti\)." {To change my voice} (\allaxai tˆn ph“nˆn mou\). Paul could put his heart into his voice. The pen stands between them. He knew the power of his voice on their hearts. He had tried it before. {I am perplexed} (\aporoumai\). I am at a loss and know not what to do. \Apore“\ is from \a\ privative and \poros\, way. I am lost at this distance from you. {About you} (\en humin\). In your cases. For this use of \en\ see strkjv@2Corinthians:7:16; strkjv@Galatians:1:24|.

rwp@Galatians:4:24 @{Which things contain an allegory} (\hatina estin allˆgoroumena\). Literally, "Which things are allegorized" (periphrastic present passive indicative of \allˆgore“\). 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 \tupik“s\ 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 Sinƒ\). Spoken from Mount Sinai. {Bearing} (\genn“sa\). 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} (\hˆtis estin Hagar\). Allegorically interpreted.

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

rwp@Galatians:6:7 @{Be not deceived} (\mˆ planƒsthe\). Present passive imperative with \mˆ\, "stop being led astray" (\plana“\, common verb to wander, to lead astray as in strkjv@Matthew:24:4f.|). {God is not mocked} (\ou muktˆrizetai\). This rare verb (common in LXX) occurs in Lysias. It comes from \muktˆr\ (nose) and means to turn the nose up at one. That is done towards God, but never without punishment, Paul means to say. In particular, he means "an evasion of his laws which men think to accomplish, but, in fact, cannot" (Burton). {Whatsoever a man soweth} (\ho ean speirˆi anthr“pos\). Indefinite relative clause with \ean\ and the active subjunctive (either aorist or present, form same here). One of the most frequent of ancient proverbs (Job:4:8|; Arist., _Rhet_. iii. 3). Already in strkjv@2Corinthians:9:6|. Same point in strkjv@Matthew:7:16; strkjv@Mark:4:26f|. {That} (\touto\). That very thing, not something different. {Reap} (\therisei\). See on ¯Matthew:6:26| for this old verb.

rwp@Hebrews:6:19 @{Which} (\hˆn\). Which hope. What would life be without this blessed hope based on Christ as our Redeemer? {As an anchor of the soul} (\h“s agkuran tˆs psuchˆs\). Old word, literally in strkjv@Acts:27:29|, figuratively here, only N.T. examples. The ancient anchors were much like the modern ones with iron hooks to grapple the rocks and so hold on to prevent shipwreck (1Timothy:1:19|). {Both sure and steadfast} (\asphalˆ te kai bebaian\). This anchor of hope will not slip (alpha privative and \sphall“\, to totter) or lose its grip (\bebaia\, from \bain“\, to go, firm, trusty). {That which is within the veil} (\to es“teron tou katapetasmatos\). The Holy of Holies, "the inner part of the veil" (the space behind the veil), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:16:24| (of the inner prison). The anchor is out of sight, but it holds. That is what matters.

rwp@Hebrews:7:3 @{Without father, without mother, without genealogy} (\apat“r, amˆt“r, agenealogˆtos\). 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} (\aph“moi“menos\). 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} (\t“i hui“i 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 diˆnekes\). Old phrase (for the continuity) like \eis ton ai“na\, in N.T. only in Hebrews (7:3; strkjv@10:1,14,21|).

rwp@Hebrews:7:11 @{Perfection} (\telei“sis\). Abstract substantive of \teleio“\. More the act than the quality or state (\teleiotˆs\, strkjv@6:1|). The condition is of the second class, "if there were perfection, etc." The Levitical priesthood failed to give men "a perfectly adequate relation to God" (Moffatt). {Priesthood} (\hierosunˆs\). Old word, in N.T. only here, verses 12,24|. Cf. \hieretia\ in verse 5|. The adjective \Leueitikˆ\ occurs in Philo. {Received the law} (\nenomothetˆtai\). Perfect passive indicative of \nomothete“\, old compound to enact law (\nomos, tithˆmi\), to furnish with law (as here), only other N.T. example in strkjv@8:6|. {What further need was there?} (\tis eti chreia;\). No copula expressed, but it would normally be \ˆn an\, not just \ˆn\: "What need still would there be?" {Another priest} (\heteron hierea\). Of a different line (\heteron\), not just one more (\allon\). Accusative of general reference with the infinitive \anistasthai\ (present middle of \anistˆmi\ intransitive). {And not to be reckoned} (\kai ou legesthai\). The negative \ou\ belongs rather to the descriptive clause than just to the infinitive.

rwp@Hebrews:8:3 @{Is appointed} (\kathistatai\). As in strkjv@5:1|. {To offer} (\eis to prospherein\). Articular infinitive accusative case with \eis\ as is common while \hina prospherˆi\ (\hina\ with present active subjunctive) for purpose in strkjv@5:1|, with \d“ra te kai thusias\ as there. {It is necessary} (\anagkaion\). A moral and logical necessity (from \anagkˆ\ necessity) as seen in strkjv@Acts:13:46; strkjv@Phillipians:1:24|. {This high priest also} (\kai touton\). "This one also," no word for high priest, accusative of general reference with the infinitive \echein\ (have). {Somewhat to offer} (\ti h“ prosenegkˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \prospher“\ (verse 3|). Vulgate _aliquid quod offerat_. The use of the subjunctive in this relative clause is probably volitive as in strkjv@Acts:21:16; strkjv@Hebrews:12:28| (possibly here merely futuristic), but note \ho prospherei\ (present indicative) in strkjv@9:7|. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 955.

rwp@Hebrews:9:10 @{Only with meats and drinks and divers washings} (\monon epi br“masin kai pomasin kai diaphorois baptismois\). The parenthesis of the Revised Version here is unnecessary. The use of \epi\ here with the locative case is regular, "in the matter of" (Luke:12:52; strkjv@John:12:16; strkjv@Acts:21:24|). What ritual value these Levitical sacrifices had was confined to minute regulations about diet and ceremonial cleansing (clean and unclean). For "divers" (\diaphorois\, late adjective, in N.T. only in strkjv@Hebrews:1:4; strkjv@8:6; strkjv@9:10; strkjv@Romans:12:6|) say "different" or "various." \Baptismois\ is, of course, the Jewish ceremonial immersions (cf. strkjv@Mark:7:4; strkjv@Exodus:29:4; strkjv@Leviticus:11:25,28f.; strkjv@Numbers:8:7; strkjv@Revelation:6:2|). {Carnal ordinances} (\dikai“masin sarkos\). But the correct text is undoubtedly simply \dikai“mata sarkos\ (nominative case), in apposition with \d“ra te kai thusiai\ (gifts and sacrifices). See strkjv@9:1| for \dikai“mata\. {Imposed} (\epikeimena\). Present middle or passive participle of \epikeimai\, old verb to lie upon (be laid upon). Cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:9:16|. {Until a time of reformation} (\mechri kairou diorth“se“s\). Definite statement of the temporary nature of the Levitical system already stated in strkjv@7:10-17; strkjv@8:13| and argued clearly by Paul in strkjv@Galatians:3:15-22|. \Diorth“sis\ is a late word, here alone in N.T. (from \diortho“\, to set right or straight), used by Hippocrates for making straight misshapen limbs like \anortho“\ in strkjv@Hebrews:12:12|. Here for reformation like \diorth“ma\ (reform) in strkjv@Acts:24:2f|. Christianity itself is the great Reformation of the current Judaism (Pharisaism) and the spiritual Judaism foreshadowed by the old Abrahamic promise (see strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9|).

rwp@Hebrews:10:14 @{He hath perfected} (\tetelei“ken\). Perfect active indicative of \teleio“\. He has done what the old sacrifices failed to do (verse 1|). {Them that are sanctified} (\tous hagiazomenous\). Articular participle (accusative case) present passive of \hagiaz“\ (note perfect in verse 10|) either because of the process still going on or because of the repetition in so many persons as in strkjv@2:11|.

rwp@Hebrews:10:15 @{And the Holy Ghost also beareth witness to us} (\marturei de hˆmin kai to pneuma to hagion\). \Marture“\ is common in Philo for Scripture quotation. The author confirms his interpretation of strkjv@Psalms:40:7-9| by repeating from Jeremiah (Jeremiah:31:31ff.|) what he had already quoted (8:8-12|). {After he hath said} (\meta to eirˆkenai\). Accusative case after \meta\ of the articular infinitive perfect active, "after the having said."

rwp@Hebrews:11:1 @{Now faith is} (\estin de pistis\). He has just said that "we are of faith" (10:39|), not of apostasy. Now he proceeds in a chapter of great eloquence and passion to illustrate his point by a recital of the heroes of faith whose example should spur them to like loyalty now. {The assurance of things hoped for} (\elpizomen“n hupostasis\). {Hupostasis} is a very common word from Aristotle on and comes from \huphistˆmi\ (\hupo\, under, \histˆmi\, intransitive), what stands under anything (a building, a contract, a promise). See the philosophical use of it in strkjv@1:3|, the sense of assurance (une assurance certaine, M‚n‚goz) in strkjv@3:14|, that steadiness of mind which holds one firm (2Corinthians:9:4|). It is common in the papyri in business documents as the basis or guarantee of transactions. "And as this is the essential meaning in strkjv@Hebrews:11:1| we venture to suggest the translation 'Faith is the _title-deed_ of things hoped for'" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_, etc.). {The proving of things not seen} (\pragmat“n elegchos ou blepomen“n\). The only N.T. example of \elegchos\ (except Textus Receptus in strkjv@2Timothy:3:16| for \elegmon\). Old and common word from \elegch“\ (Matthew:18:15|) for "proof" and then for "conviction." Both uses occur in the papyri and either makes sense here, perhaps "conviction" suiting better though not in the older Greek.

rwp@Hebrews:11:3 @{By faith} (\pistei\). Instrumental case of \pistis\ which he now illustrates in a marvellous way. Each example as far as verse 31| is formally and with rhetorical skill introduced by \pistei\. After that only a summary is given. {We understand} (\nooumen\). Present active indicative of \noe“\, old verb (from \nous\, intellect) as in strkjv@Matthew:15:17; strkjv@Romans:1:20|. The author appeals to our knowledge of the world in which these heroes lived as an illustration of faith. Recent books by great scientists like Eddington and Jeans confirm the position here taken that a Supreme Mind is behind and before the universe. Science can only stand still in God's presence and believe like a little child. {The worlds} (\tous ai“nas\). "The ages" as in strkjv@1:2| (cf. Einstein's fourth dimension, time). Accusative case of general reference. {Have been framed} (\katˆrtisthai\). Perfect passive infinitive of \katartiz“\, to mend, to equip, to perfect (Luke:6:40|), in indirect discourse after \nooumen\. {Songs:that} (\eis to\). As a rule \eis to\ with the infinitive is final, but sometimes as here it expresses result as in strkjv@Romans:12:3| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1003). {Hath been made} (\gegonenai\). Perfect active infinitive of \ginomai\. {What is seen} (\to blepomenon\). Present passive articular participle (accusative case of general reference) of \blep“\. {Of things which do appear} (\ek phainomen“n\). Ablative case with \ek\ (out of) of the present passive participle. The author denies the eternity of matter, a common theory then and now, and places God before the visible universe as many modern scientists now gladly do.

rwp@Hebrews:11:26 @{The reproach of Christ} (\ton oneidismon tou Christou\). See strkjv@Psalms:89:51| for the language where "the Messiah" ("The Anointed One") is what is meant by \tou Christou\, here rightly applied by the writer to Jesus as the Messiah who had his own shame to bear (12:2; strkjv@13:12|). There is today as then (Hebrews:13:13|) a special reproach (\oneidismos\, already, strkjv@10:33|) in being a follower of Jesus Christ. Moses took this obloquy as "greater riches" (\meizona plouton\) than "the treasures of Egypt" (\t“n Aiguptou thˆsaur“n\, ablative case after comparative \meizona\, for which see strkjv@Matthew:6:19f.|). Moses was laying up treasure in heaven. {For he looked unto the recompense of reward} (\apeblepen gar eis tˆn misthapodosian\). In perfect active of \apoblep“\, "for he was looking away (kept on looking away)." For \misthapodosia\ see strkjv@10:35|.

rwp@Hebrews:11:32 @{And what shall I more say?} (\Kai ti eti leg“;\). Deliberative present active subjunctive (same form as indicative, \leg“\). It is both a literary and an oratorical idiom here. He feels helpless to go on in the same style as he has done from Abel to Rahab (11:4-31|). {Will fail me if I tell about} (\epileipsei me diˆgoumenon peri\). Literally, "will leave me telling about." Present middle participle of \diˆgeomai\, to lead through, carry a discussion through, and masculine (disposing of Priscilla as possible author) with \me\. Vivid and picturesque description of the author's embarrassment of riches as he contemplates the long list of the heroes of faith during the long years in Palestine. He mentions six names (Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephtha, David, Samuel) and then summarizes the rest under "the prophets" (\t“n prophˆt“n\, the for-speakers for God) of whom Samuel was the leader.

rwp@Hebrews:12:7 @{That ye endure} (\hupomenete\). Present active indicative or present active imperative and so just "endure for chastening." {Dealeth with you} (\humin prospheretai\). Present middle indicative of \prospher“\, but this sense of bearing oneself towards one with the dative here only in the N.T., though often in the older Greek. {What} (\tis\). Interrogative. {Whom} (\hon\). Relative. Cf. strkjv@Matthew:7:9|.

rwp@Hebrews:13:19 @{That I may be restored to you the sooner} (\hina tacheion apokatastath“ humin\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \apokathistˆmi\, an old double compound as in strkjv@Matthew:12:13|. What is meant by \tacheion\ (John:13:27; strkjv@20:4|) we do not know, possibly sickness. See verse 23| also for \tacheion\.

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@Info_James @ THE STYLE James assumes the doctrinal features of Christianity, but he is concerned mainly with the ethical and social aspects of the gospel that Jewish followers of Christ may square their lives with the gospel which they believe and profess. But this fact does not justify Luther in calling the Epistle of James "a veritable Epistle of straw." Luther imagined that James contradicted Paul's teaching of justification by faith. That is not true and the criticism of Luther is unjust. We shall see that, though James and Paul use the same words (faith, works, justify), they mean different things by them. It is possible that both Paul and Peter had read the Epistle of James, though by no means certain. M. Jones (_New Testament in the Twentieth Century_, p. 316) thinks that the author was familiar with Stoic philosophy. This is also possible, though he may have learned it only indirectly through the Wisdom of Solomon and Philo. What is true is that the author writes in the easy and accurate _Koin‚_ Greek of a cultivated Jew (the literary _Koin‚_, not the vernacular), though not the artificial or stilted language of a professional stylist. Principal Patrick (_James the Lord's Brother_, p. 298) holds that he "had a wide knowledge of Classical Greek." This does not follow, though he does use the manner "of the Hellenistic diatribe" (Ropes, _Int. and Crit. Comm_., p. 19) so common at that time. Ropes (pp. 10-22) points out numerous parallels between James and the popular moral addresses of the period, familiar since the days of Socrates and at its height in Seneca and Epictetus. The use of an imaginary interlocutor is one instance (James:2:18f.; strkjv@5:13f.|) as is the presence of paradox (James:1:2,10; strkjv@2:5|; etc.). But the style of James is even more kin to that seen in the Jewish wisdom literature like Proverbs, the Wisdom of Solomon, etc. It is thus both tract and Epistle, a brief Christian sermon on a high plane for a noble purpose. But it is all natural and not artificial. The metaphors are many, but brief and remind one constantly of the Master's use of them in the Sermon on the Mount. Did not Mary the mother of Jesus and James make frequent use of such homely parables? The author shows acquaintance with the LXX, but there are few Hebraisms in the language, though the style is Hebraic, as is the whole tone of the book (Hebraic and Christian). "The style is especially remarkable for constant hidden allusions to our Lord's sayings, such as we find in the first three Gospels" (Hort).

rwp@James:3:1 @{Be not many teachers} (\mˆ polloi didaskaloi ginesthe\). Prohibition with \mˆ\ and present middle imperative of \ginomai\. "Stop becoming many teachers" (so many of you). There is thus a clear complaint that too many of the Jewish Christians were attempting to teach what they did not clearly comprehend. There was a call for wise teachers (verses 13f.|), not for foolish ones. This soon became an acute question, as one can see in I Cor. 12 to 14. They were not all teachers (1Corinthians:12:28f.; strkjv@14:26|). The teacher is here treated as the wise man (3:13-18|) as he ought to be. The rabbi was the teacher (Matthew:23:7f.; strkjv@John:1:38; strkjv@3:10; strkjv@20:16|). Teachers occupied an honourable position among the Christians (Ephesians:4:11; strkjv@Acts:13:1|). James counts himself a teacher (we shall receive, strkjv@3:1|) and this discussion is linked on with strkjv@1:19-27|. Teachers are necessary, but incompetent and unworthy ones do much harm. {Heavier judgment} (\meizon krima\). "Greater sentence." See strkjv@Mark:12:40; strkjv@Luke:20:47| for \perrisoteron krima\ (the sentence from the judge, strkjv@Romans:13:2|). The reason is obvious. The pretence of knowledge adds to the teacher's responsibility and condemnation.

rwp@James:3:5 @{A little member} (\mikron melos\). \Melos\ is old and common word for members of the human body (1Corinthians:12:12, etc.; strkjv@Romans:6:13|, etc.). {Boasteth great things} (\megala auchei\). Present active indicative of \auche“\, old verb, here only in N.T. The best MSS. here separate \megala\ from \auche“\, though \megalauche“\ does occur in Aeschylus, Plato, etc. \Megala\ is in contrast with \mikron\. {How much--how small} (\hˆlikon--hˆlikˆn\). The same relative form for two indirect questions together, "What-sized fire kindles what-sized forest?" For double interrogatives see strkjv@Mark:15:24|. The verb \anaptei\ is present active indicative of \anapt“\, to set fire to, to kindle (Luke:12:49|, only other N.T. example except some MSS. in strkjv@Acts:28:2|). \Hulˆn\ is accusative case, object of \anaptei\, and occurs here only in N.T., though old word for forest, wood. Forest fires were common in ancient times as now, and were usually caused by small sparks carelessly thrown.

rwp@James:3:6 @{The tongue is a fire} (\hˆ gl“ssa pur\). Songs:necessarily since there is no article with \pur\ (apparently same word as German _feuer_, Latin _purus_, English _pure, fire_). This metaphor of fire is applied to the tongue in strkjv@Proverbs:16:27; strkjv@26:18-22|; Sirach strkjv@28:22. {The world of iniquity} (\ho kosmos tˆs adikias\). A difficult phrase, impossible to understand according to Ropes as it stands. If the comma is put after \pur\ instead of after \adikias\, then the phrase may be the predicate with \kathistatai\ (present passive indicative of \kathistˆmi\, "is constituted," or the present middle "presents itself"). Even so, \kosmos\ remains a difficulty, whether it means the "ornament" (1Peter:3:3|) or "evil world" (James:1:27|) or just "world" in the sense of widespread power for evil. The genitive \adikias\ is probably descriptive (or qualitative). Clearly James means to say that the tongue can play havoc in the members of the human body. {Which defileth the whole body} (\hˆ spilousa holon to s“ma\). Present active participle of \spilo“\ late _Koin‚_, verb, to stain from \spilos\ (spot, also late word, in N.T. only in strkjv@Ephesians:5:27; strkjv@2Peter:2:13|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Judges:1:23|. Cf. strkjv@1:27| \aspilon\ (unspotted). {Setteth on fire} (\phlogizousa\). Present active participle of \phlogiz“\, old verb, to set on fire, to ignite, from \phlox\ (flame), in N.T. only in this verse. See \anaptei\ (verse 5|). {The wheel of nature} (\ton trochon genese“s\). Old word for wheel (from \trech“\, to run), only here in N.T. "One of the hardest passages in the Bible" (Hort). To what does \trochon\ refer? For \genese“s\ see strkjv@1:23| apparently in the same sense. Vincent suggests "the wheel of birth" (cf. strkjv@Matthew:1:1,18|). The ancient writers often use this same phrase (or \kuklos\, cycle, in place of \trochos\), but either in a physiological or a philosophical sense. James may have caught the metaphor from the current use, but certainly he has no such Orphic or Pythagorean doctrine of the transmigration of souls, "the unending round of death and rebirth" (Ropes). The wheel of life may be considered either in motion or standing still, though setting on fire implies motion. There is no reference to the zodiac. {And is set on fire by hell} (\kai phlogizomenˆ hupo gehennˆs\). Present passive participle of \phlogiz“\, giving the continual source of the fire in the tongue. For the metaphor of fire with \gehenna\ see strkjv@Matthew:5:22|.

rwp@James:4:1 @{Whence} (\pothen\). This old interrogative adverb (here twice) asks for the origin of wars and fights. James is full of interrogatives, like all diatribes. {Wars} (\polemoi\) {--fightings} (\machai\). {War} (\polemos\, old word, strkjv@Matthew:24:6|) pictures the chronic state or campaign, while \machˆ\ (also old word, strkjv@2Corinthians:7:5|) presents the separate conflicts or battles in the war. Songs:James covers the whole ground by using both words. The origin of a war or of any quarrel is sometimes hard to find, but James touches the sore spot here. {Of your pleasures} (\ek t“n hˆdon“n hum“n\). Old word from \hˆdomai\. Ablative case here after \ek\, "out of your sinful, sensual lusts," the desire to get what one does not have and greatly desires. {That war} (\t“n strateuomen“n\). Present middle articular participle (ablative case agreeing with \hˆdon“n\) of \strateu“\, to carry on a campaign, here as in strkjv@1Peter:2:11| of the passions in the human body. James seems to be addressing nominal Christians, "among you" (\en humin\). Modern church disturbances are old enough in practice.

rwp@James:4:2 @{Ye lust} (\epithumeite\). Present active indicative of \epithume“\, old word (from \epi, thumos\, yearning passion for), not necessarily evil as clearly not in strkjv@Luke:22:15| of Christ, but usually so in the N.T., as here. Coveting what a man or nation does not have is the cause of war according to James. {Ye kill and covet} (\phoneuete kai zˆloute\). Present active indicatives of \phoneu“\ (old verb from \phoneus\, murderer) and \zˆlo“\, to desire hotly to possess (1Corinthians:12:31|). It is possible (perhaps probable) that a full stop should come after \phoneuete\ (ye kill) as the result of lusting and not having. Then we have the second situation: "Ye covet and cannot obtain (\epituchein\, second aorist active infinitive of \epitugchan“\), and (as a result) ye fight and war." This punctuation makes better sense than any other and is in harmony with verse 1|. Thus also the anticlimax in \phoneuete\ and \zˆloute\ is avoided. Mayor makes the words a hendiadys, "ye murderously envy." {Ye have not, because ye ask not} (\ouk echete dia to mˆ aiteisthai humas\). James refers again to \ouk echete\ (ye do not have) in verse 2|. Such sinful lusting will not obtain. "Make the service of God your supreme end, and then your desires will be such as God can fulfil in answer to your prayer" (Ropes). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:6:31-33|. The reason here is expressed by \dia\ and the accusative of the articular present middle infinitive of \aite“\, used here of prayer to God as in strkjv@Matthew:7:7f|. \Humƒs\ (you) is the accusative of general reference. Note the middle voice here as in \aiteisthe\ in 3|. Mayor argues that the middle here, in contrast with the active, carries more the spirit of prayer, but Moulton (_Prol_., p. 160) regards the distinction between \aite“\ and \aiteomai\ often "an extinct subtlety."

rwp@James:4:5 @{The Scripture} (\hˆ graphˆ\). Personification as in strkjv@Galatians:3:8; strkjv@James:2:23|. But no O.T. passage is precisely like this, though it is "a poetical rendering" (Ropes) of strkjv@Exodus:20:5|. The general thought occurs also in strkjv@Genesis:6:3-5; strkjv@Isaiah:63:8-16|, etc. Paul has the same idea also (Galatians:5:17,21; strkjv@Romans:8:6,8|). It is possible that the reference is really to the quotation in verse 6| from strkjv@Proverbs:3:34| and treating all before as a parenthesis. There is no way to decide positively. {In vain} (\ken“s\). Old adverb (Aristotle) from \ken“s\ (2:20|), here alone in N.T. "Emptily," not meaning what it says. {Made to dwell} (\kat“ikisen\). First aorist active of \katoikiz“\, old verb, to give a dwelling to, only here in N.T. {Long unto envying} (\pros phthonon epipothei\). A difficult phrase. Some even take \pros phthonon\ with \legei\ rather than with \epipothei\, as it naturally does go, meaning "jealously." But even so, with God presented as a jealous lover, does \to pneuma\ refer to the Holy Spirit as the subject of \epipothei\ or to man's spirit as the object of \epipothei\? Probably the former and \epipothei\ then means to yearn after in the good sense as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:8|.

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

rwp@James:4:14 @{Whereas ye know not} (\hoitines ouk epistasthe\). The longer relative \hostis\ defines here more precisely (like Latin _qui_) \hoi legontes\ (ye who say) of verse 13| in a causal sense, as in strkjv@Acts:10:47|, "who indeed do not know" (present middle indicative of \epistamai\). {What shall be on the morrow} (\tˆs aurion\). Supply \hˆmeras\ (day) after \aurion\. This is the reading of B (Westcott) "on the morrow" (genitive of time), but Aleph K L cursives have \to tˆs aurion\ ("the matter of tomorrow"), while A P cursives have \ta tˆs aurion\ ("the things of tomorrow"). The sense is practically the same, though \to tˆs aurion\ is likely correct. {What is your life?} (\poia hˆ z“ˆ hum“n\). Thus Westcott and Hort punctuate it as an indirect question, not direct. \Poia\ is a qualitative interrogative (of what character). {As vapour} (\atmis\). This is the answer. Old word for mist (like \atmos\, from which our "atmosphere"), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:2:19| with \kapnou\ (vapour of smoke (from strkjv@Joel:2:30|). {For a little time} (\pros oligon\). See same phrase in strkjv@1Timothy:4:8|, \pros kairon\ in strkjv@Luke:8:13|, \pros h“ran\ in strkjv@John:5:35|. {That appeareth and then vanisheth away} (\phainomenˆ epeita kai aphanizomenˆ\). Present middle participles agreeing with \atmis\, "appearing, then also disappearing," with play on the two verbs (\phainomai, aphaniz“\ as in strkjv@Matthew:6:19|, from \aphanˆs\ hidden strkjv@Hebrews:4:13|) with the same root \phan\ (\phain“, a-phan-ˆs\).

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

rwp@John:4:44 @{For Jesus himself testified} (\autos gar Iˆsous emarturˆsen\). John's explanation of the conduct of Jesus by quoting a proverb often used by Jesus (Mark:6:4; strkjv@Matthew:13:57; strkjv@Luke:4:24| in reference to Nazareth), but not necessarily used by Jesus on this occasion. A similar proverb has been found in Plutarch, Pliny, Seneca. {A prophet hath no honour in his own country} (\prophˆtˆs en tˆi idiƒi patridi timˆn ouk echei\). What is meant by \patridi\? In the Synoptics (Luke:4:24; strkjv@Mark:6:4; strkjv@Matthew:13:57|) the reference is to Nazareth where he was twice rejected. But what has John in mind in quoting it here? He probably knew the quotations in the Synoptics. Does John refer to Judea by "his own country"? If so, the application hardly fits for he had already explained that Jesus was leaving Judea because he was too popular there (4:1-3|). If he means Galilee, he immediately mentions the cordial welcome accorded Jesus there (verse 45|). But even so this is probably John's meaning for he is speaking of the motive of Jesus in going into Galilee where he had not yet laboured and where he apparently had no such fame as in Judea and now in Samaria.

rwp@John:4:47 @{When he heard} (\akousas\). First aorist active participle of \akou“\. The news spread rapidly about Jesus. {Was come} (\hˆkei\). Present active indicative of \hˆk“\, one of the perfective presents, retained in indirect discourse. He had heard the people talk about the miracles in Jerusalem and the first one in Cana. {Went and besought} (\apˆlthen kai ˆr“ta\). Ingressive aorist indicative (went off at once) and imperfect active (\ˆr“ta\, began to beg and kept it up). {That he would come down} (\hina katabˆi\, \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \katabain“\, come down at once) {and heal his son} (\kai iasˆtai autou ton huion\, \hina\ construction, sub-final use or object clause, with first aorist middle subjunctive of \iaomai\, completely heal). {For he was at the point of death} (\ˆmellen gar apothnˆskein\). Reason (\gar\) for the urgency. Imperfect active of \mell“\ with present active infinitive old and common verb for what is about to be and it is used with the infinitive present as here, the aorist infinitive (Revelation:13:16|), or the future infinitive (Acts:11:28|). The idiom is used of the impending death of Jesus (John:11:51; strkjv@12:33; strkjv@18:32|).

rwp@John:5:1 @{After these things} (\meta tauta\). John is fond of this vague phrase (3:22; strkjv@6:1|). He does not mean that this incident follows immediately. He is supplementing the Synoptic Gospels and does not attempt a full story of the work of Jesus. Some scholars needlessly put chapter 5 after chapter 6 because in chapter 6 Jesus is in Galilee as at the end of chapter 4. But surely it is not incongruous to think of Jesus making a visit to Jerusalem before the events in chapter 6 which undoubtedly come within a year of the end (6:4|). {A feast of the Jews} (\heortˆ t“n Ioudai“n\). Some manuscripts have the article (\hˆ\) "the feast" which would naturally mean the passover. As a matter of fact there is no way of telling what feast it was which Jesus here attended. Even if it was not the passover, there may well be another passover not mentioned besides the three named by John (2:13,23; strkjv@6:4: strkjv@12:1|). {Went up} (\anebˆ\). Second aorist active indicative of \anabain“\. It was up towards Jerusalem from every direction save from Hebron.

rwp@John:5:3 @{In these} (\en tautais\). In these five porches. {Lay} (\katekeito\). Imperfect middle of \katakeimai\, to lie down, singular number because \plˆthos\ (multitude) is a collective substantive. {Withered} (\xˆr“n\). Old adjective \xˆros\ for dry, wasted as the hand (Matthew:12:10|). The oldest and best manuscripts omit what the Textus Receptus adds here "waiting for the moving of the water" (\ekdechomenon tˆn tou hudatos kinˆsin\), a Western and Syrian addition to throw light on the word \tarachthˆi\ (is troubled) in verse 7|.

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

rwp@John:5:19 @{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 mˆ ti blepˆi ton patera poiounta\). Rather, "unless he sees the Father doing something." Negative condition (\an mˆ\=\ean mˆ\, if not, unless) of third class with present (habit) subjunctive (\blepˆi\) 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 poiˆi tauta kai ho huios homoi“s poiei\). Indefinite relative clause with \an\ and the present active subjunctive (\poiˆi\). 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:5:20 @{Loveth} (\philei\). In strkjv@3:35| we have \agapƒi\ from \agapa“\, evidently one verb expressing as noble a love as the other. Sometimes a distinction (21:17|) is made, but not here, unless \phile“\ presents the notion of intimate friendship (\philos\, friend), fellowship, the affectionate side, while \agapa“\ (Latin _diligo_) is more the intelligent choice. But John uses both verbs for the mystery of love of the Father for the Son. {Greater works than these} (\meizona tout“n erga\). \Tout“n\ is ablative case after the comparative \meizona\ (from \megas\, great). John often uses \erga\ for the miracles of Christ (5:36; strkjv@7:3,21; strkjv@10:25,32,38|, etc.). It is the Father who does these works (14:10|). There is more to follow. Even the disciples will surpass what Christ is doing in the extent of the work (14:12|). \Deixei\ is future active indicative of \deiknumi\, to show. See also strkjv@10:32|. {That ye may marvel} (\hina humeis thaumazˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \thaumaz“\. Wonder belongs to childhood and to men of knowledge. Modern science has increased the occasion for wonder. Clement of Alexandria has a saying of Jesus: "He that wonders shall reign, and he that reigns shall rest."

rwp@John:5:30 @{I} (\Eg“\). The discourse returns to the first person after using "the Son" since verse 19|. Here Jesus repeats in the first person (as in strkjv@8:28|) the statement made in verse 19| about the Son. In John \emautou\ is used by Jesus 16 times and not at all by Jesus in the Synoptics. It occurs in the Synoptics only in strkjv@Matthew:8:8; strkjv@Luke:7:7f|. {Righteous} (\dikaia\). As all judgements should be. The reason is plain (\hoti\, because), the guiding principle with the Son being the will of the Father who sent him and made him Judge. Judges often have difficulty in knowing what is law and what is right, but the Son's task as Judge is simple enough, the will of the Father which he knows (verse 20|).

rwp@John:5:44 @{How can ye believe?} (\p“s dunasthe humeis pisteusai;\). Emphasis on "ye" (\humeis\), ye being what ye are. They were not true Jews (Romans:2:29; strkjv@Esther:9:28|) who cared for the glory of God, but they prefer the praise of men (Matthew:6:1f.; strkjv@23:5|) like the Pharisees who feared to confess Christ (John:12:43|). {From the only God} (\para tou monou theou\). B and W omit \theou\ which is certainly meant even if not genuine here. See strkjv@17:3; strkjv@Romans:16:27; strkjv@1Timothy:6:15f|.

rwp@John:5:47 @{His writings} (\tois ekeinou grammasin\). Dative case with \pistuete\. See strkjv@Luke:16:31| for a like argument. The authority of Moses was the greatest of all for Jews. There is a contrast also between {writings} (\grammasin\, from \graph“\, to write) and {words} (\rˆmasin\, from \eipon\). \Gramma\ may mean the mere letter as opposed to spirit (2Corinthians:3:6; strkjv@Romans:2:27,29; strkjv@7:6|), a debtor's bond (Luke:16:6f.|), letters or learning (John:7:15; strkjv@Acts:26:24|) like \agrammatoi\ for unlearned (Acts:4:13|), merely written characters (Luke:23:38; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:7; strkjv@Galatians:6:11|), official communications (Acts:28:21|), once \hiera grammata\ for the sacred writings (2Timothy:3:15|) instead of the more usual \hai hagiai graphai\. \Graphˆ\ is used also for a single passage (Mark:12:10|), but \biblion\ for a book or roll (Luke:4:17|) or \biblos\ (Luke:20:42|). Jesus clearly states the fact that Moses wrote portions of the Old Testament, what portions he does not say. See also strkjv@Luke:24:27,44| for the same idea. There was no answer from the rabbis to this conclusion of Christ. The scribes (\hoi grammateis\) made copies according to the letter (\kata to gramma\).

rwp@John:6:6 @{To prove him} (\peiraz“n auton\). Present active participle of \peiraz“\, testing him, not here in bad sense of tempting as so often (Matthew:4:1|). {What he would do} (\ti ˆmellen poiein\). Indirect question with change of tense to imperfect. As in strkjv@2:25| so here John explains why Jesus put the question to Philip.

rwp@John:6:13 @{Twelve baskets} (\d“deka kophinous\). One for each of the apostles. What about the lad? Stout wicker baskets (coffins, Wycliff) in distinction from the soft and frail \sphurides\ used at the feeding of the four thousand (Mark:8:8; strkjv@Matthew:15:37|). Here all the Gospels (Mark:6:43; strkjv@Matthew:14:20; strkjv@Luke:9:17; strkjv@John:6:13|) use \kophinoi\. The same distinction between \kophinoi\ and \sphurides\ is preserved in the allusion to the incidents by Jesus in strkjv@Mark:8:19,20; strkjv@Matthew:16:9,10|. {Unto them that had eaten} (\tois bebr“kosin\). Articular perfect active participle (dative case) of \bibr“sk“\, old verb to eat, only here in N.T., though often in LXX.

rwp@John:6:27 @{Work not for} (\mˆ ergazesthe\). Prohibition with \mˆ\ and present middle imperative of \ergazomai\, old verb from \ergon\, work. {The meat} (\tˆn br“sin\). The act of eating (Romans:14:17|), corrosion (Matthew:6:19|), the thing eaten as here (2Corinthians:9:10|). See on ¯John:4:32|. {Which perisheth} (\tˆn apollumenˆn\). Present middle participle of \apollumi\. They were already hungry again. {Unto eternal life} (\eis z“ˆn ai“nion\). Mystical metaphor quite beyond this crowd hungry only for more loaves and fishes. Bernard thinks that John has here put together various sayings of Christ to make one discourse, a gratuitous interpretation. {Will give} (\d“sei\). Future active indicative of \did“mi\. The outcome is still future and will be decided by their attitude towards the Son of man (verse 51|). {For him the Father, even God, hath sealed} (\touton gar ho patˆr esphragisen ho theos\). Literally, "For this one the Father sealed, God." First aorist active indicative of \sphragiz“\, to seal. See elsewhere in strkjv@John:3:33| (attestation by man). Sealing by God is rare in N.T. (2Corinthians:1:22; strkjv@Ephesians:1:13; strkjv@4:30|). It is not clear to what item, if any single one, John refers when the Father set his seal of approval on the Son. It was done at his baptism when the Holy Spirit came upon him and the Father spoke to him. Cf. strkjv@5:37|.

rwp@John:6:28 @{What must we do?} (\Ti poi“men;\). Present active deliberative subjunctive of \poie“\, "What are we to do as a habit?" For the aorist subjunctive (\poiˆs“men\) in a like question for a single act see strkjv@Luke:3:10|. For the present indicative (\poioumen\) of inquiry concerning actual conduct see strkjv@John:11:47| (what are we doing?). {That we may work the works of God} (\hina ergaz“metha ta erga tou theou\). Final clause with \hina\ and the present middle subjunctive, "that we may go on working the works of God." There may have been an element of vague sincerity in this question in spite of their supercilious attitude.

rwp@John:6:30 @{For a sign} (\sˆmeion\). Predicate accusative, as a sign, with \ti\ (what). As if the sign of the day before was without value. Jesus had said that they did not understand his signs (verse 26|). {That we may see, and believe thee} (\hina id“men kai pisteus“men\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of \hora“\ and the first aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of \pisteu“\, "that we may come to see and come to have faith in thee." It is hard to have patience with this superficial and almost sneering mob. {What workest thou?} (\Ti ergazˆi;\). They not simply depreciate the miracle of the day before, but set up a standard for Jesus.

rwp@John:6:34 @{Lord} (\Kurie\). Used now instead of _Rabbi_ (25) though how much the people meant by it is not clear. {Evermore give us this bread} (\pantote dos hˆmin ton arton touton\). Second aorist active imperative second singular like \dos\ in strkjv@Matthew:6:11| (urgent petition). What kind of bread do they mean? The Jewish commentaries and Philo speak of the manna as typifying heavenly bread for the soul. Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:3| seems to refer to the manna as "spiritual food." Like the woman at the well (4:15|) they long "always" to have "this bread," a perpetual supply. It is probably to this crowd as the water in strkjv@4:15| was to the woman.

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

rwp@John:6:62 @{What then if ye should behold} (\ean oun the“rˆte\). No "what" in the Greek. Condition of third class with \ean\ and present active subjunctive, "if ye then behold." {Ascending} (\anabainonta\). Present active participle picturing the process. {Where he was before} (\hopou ˆn to proteron\). Neuter articular adjective as adverb (accusative of general reference, at the former time as in strkjv@9:8; strkjv@Galatians:3:13|). Clear statement of Christ's pre-existence in his own words as in strkjv@3:13; strkjv@17:5| (cf. strkjv@1:1-18|).

rwp@John:6:64 @{That believe not} (\hoi ou pisteuousin\). Failure to believe kills the life in the words of Jesus. {Knew from the beginning} (\ˆidei ex archˆs\). In the N.T. we have \ex archˆs\ only here and strkjv@16:4|, but \ap' archˆs\ in apparently the same sense as here in strkjv@15:27; strkjv@1John:2:7,24; strkjv@3:11| and see strkjv@Luke:1:2; strkjv@1John:1:1|. From the first Jesus distinguished between real trust in him and mere lip service (2:24; strkjv@8:31|), two senses of \pisteu“\. {Were} (\eisin\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse. {And who it was that should betray him} (\kai tis estin ho parad“s“n\). Same use of \estin\ and note article and future active participle of \paradid“mi\, to hand over, to betray. John does not say here that Jesus knew that Judas would betray him when he chose him as one of the twelve, least of all that he chose him for that purpose. What he does say is that Jesus was not taken by surprise and soon saw signs of treason in Judas. The same verb is used of John's arrest in strkjv@Matthew:4:12|. Once Judas is termed traitor (\prodotˆs\) in strkjv@Luke:6:16|. Judas had gifts and was given his opportunity. He did not have to betray Jesus.

rwp@John:6:69 @{We have believed} (\hˆmeis pepisteukamen\). Perfect active indicative of \pisteu“\, "We have come to believe and still believe" (verse 29|). {And know} (\kai egn“kamen\). Same tense of \gin“sk“\, "We have come to know and still know." {Thou art the Holy One of God} (\su ei ho hagios tou theou\). Bernard follows those who believe that this is John's report of the same confession given by the Synoptics (Mark:8:27f.; strkjv@Matthew:16:13-20; strkjv@Luke:9:18f.|), an utterly unjustifiable conclusion. The details are wholly different. Here in the synagogue in Capernaum, there on Mt. Hermon near Caesarea Philippi. What earthly difficulty is there in supposing that Peter could make a noble confession twice? That is to my mind a wooden conception of the apostles in their growing apprehension of Christ.

rwp@John:7:3 @{His brethren} (\hoi adelphoi autou\). "His brothers" (half-brothers actually), who "were not believing on him" (\oude episteuon eis auton\) as stated in verse 5|. They were hostile to the Messianic assumptions of Jesus, a natural attitude as one can well see, though at first they were friendly (2:12|). {Depart hence} (\metabˆthi enteuthen\). Second aorist active imperative of \metabain“\, to pass to another place (5:24; strkjv@13:1|). It was impertinence on their part. {That thy disciples also may behold} (\hina kai hoi mathˆtai sou the“rˆsousin\). Final clause with \hina\ and the future active indicative of \the“re“\. Jesus had many disciples in Judea at the start (2:23; strkjv@4:1|) and had left it because of the jealousy of the Pharisees over his success (4:3|). The brothers may have heard of the great defection in the synagogue in Capernaum (6:66|), but the advice is clearly ironical. {Which thou doest} (\ha poieis\). To what works they refer by this language we do not know. But Jesus had been away from Galilee for some months and from Judea for a year and a half. Perhaps the brothers of Jesus may actually have been eager to rush Jesus into the hostile atmosphere of Jerusalem again.

rwp@John:7:35 @{Among themselves} (\pros heautous\). These Jewish leaders of verse 32| talk among themselves about what Jesus said in a spirit of contempt (this man or fellow, \houtos\). {That} (\hoti\). Almost result like \hoti\ in strkjv@Matthew:8:27|. {Will he go?} (\mˆ mellei poreuesthai;\). Negative answer expected in an ironical question, "Is he about to go?" {Unto the Dispersion among the Greeks} (\eis tˆn diasporan t“n Hellˆn“n\). Objective genitive \t“n Hellˆn“n\ (of the Greeks) translated here "among," because it is the Dispersion of Jews among the Greeks. \Diaspora\ is from \diaspeir“\, to scatter apart (Acts:8:1,4|). It occurs in Plutarch and is common in the LXX, in the N.T. only here, strkjv@James:1:1; strkjv@1Peter:1:1|. There were millions of these scattered Jews. {And teach the Greeks} (\kai didaskein tous Hellˆnas\). Confessing his failure to teach the Jews in Palestine, "thus ignorantly anticipating the course Christianity took; what seemed unlikely and impossible to them became actual" (Dods).

rwp@John:7:36 @{What is this word?} (\Tis estin ho logos houtos;\). Puzzled and uneasy over this unintelligible saying. Even Peter is distressed over it later (\13:37\).

rwp@John:7:41 @{This is the Christ} (\houtos estin ho Christos\). These went further and dared to call Jesus the Messiah and not merely the prophet who might not be the Messiah. They said it openly. {What} (\gar\). These denied that Jesus was the Messiah and gave as their reason (\gar\, for) the fact that he came from Galilee. The use of \mˆ\ expects a negative answer.

rwp@John:7:48 @{Hath any of the rulers believed on him?} (\Mˆ tis ek t“n archont“n episteusen eis auton;\). Negative answer sharply expected. First aorist active indicative of \pisteu“\. "Did any one of the rulers believe on him?" "What right have subordinates to have a mind of their own?" (Dods). These police were employed by the temple authorities (rulers). "Power was slipping through their fingers" (Dods) and that was the secret of their hostility to Jesus. {Or of the Pharisees} (\ˆ ek t“n Pharisai“n\). A wider circle and the most orthodox of all.

rwp@John:7:51 @{Doth our law judge a man?} (\mˆ ho nomos hˆm“n krinei ton anthr“pon;\). Negative answer expected and "the man," not "a man." These exponents of the law (verse 49|) were really violating the law of criminal procedure (Exodus:23:1; strkjv@Deuteronomy:1:16|). Probably Nicodemus knew that his protest was useless, but he could at least show his colours and score the point of justice in Christ's behalf. {Except it first hear from himself} (\ean mˆ akousˆi pr“ton par' autou\). Third-class negative condition with \ean mˆ\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \akou“\. That is common justice in all law, to hear a man's side of the case ("from him," \par' autou\). {And know what he doeth} (\kai gn“i ti poiei\). Continuation of the same condition with second aorist active subjunctive of \gin“sk“\ with indirect question and present active indicative (\ti poiei\). There was no legal answer to the point of Nicodemus.

rwp@John:8:3 @{The scribes and the Pharisees} (\hoi grammateis kai hoi Pharisaioi\). John does not mention "scribes," though this combination (note two articles) is common enough in the Synoptics (Luke:5:30; strkjv@6:7|, etc.). {Bring} (\agousin\). Vivid dramatic present active indicative of \ag“\. Dods calls this "in itself an unlawful thing to do" since they had a court for the trial of such a case. Their purpose is to entrap Jesus. {Taken in adultery} (\epi moicheiƒi kateilemmenˆn\). Perfect passive participle of \katalamban“\, old compound to seize (Mark:9:18|), to catch, to overtake (John:12:35|), to overcome (or overtake) in strkjv@1:5|. {Having let her in the midst} (\stˆsantes autˆn en mes“i\). First aorist active (transitive) participle of \histˆmi\. Here all could see her and what Jesus did with such a case. They knew his proneness to forgive sinners.

rwp@John:8:5 @{Commanded} (\eneteilato\). First aorist middle indicative of \entell“\, old verb to enjoin (Matthew:4:6|). {To stone such} (\tas toiautas lithazein\). Present active infinitive of \lithaz“\ (from \lithos\), from Aristotle on. Stoning was specified for the case of a betrothed woman guilty of adultery (Deuteronomy:22:23f.|) and for a priest's daughter if guilty. In other cases just death was commanded (Leviticus:20:10; strkjv@Deuteronomy:22:22|). The Talmud prescribes strangulation. This case may have strictly come within the regulation as a betrothed virgin. {What then sayest thou of her?} (\su oun ti legeis;\). "Thou then, what dost thou say?" This was the whole point, to catch Jesus, not to punish the woman.

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 ech“sin katˆgorein 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 \katˆgore“\ (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} (\t“i daktul“i\). Instrumental case of \daktulos\ for which see strkjv@Matthew:23:4|. {Wrote on the ground} (\kategraphen eis tˆn gˆn\). 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:8:23 @{Ye are from beneath} (\humeis ek t“n kat“\). This language, peculiar to John, could take up the idea in Josephus that these rabbis came from Gehenna whence they will go as children of the devil (8:44|), but the use of \ek tou kosmou toutou\ ("of this world" in origin) as parallel to what we have here seems to prove that the contrast between \kat“\ and \an“\ here is between the earthly (sensual) and the heavenly as in strkjv@James:3:15-17|. See also strkjv@Colossians:3:1|. This is the only use of \kat“\ in John (except strkjv@8:6|). These proud rabbis had their origin in this world of darkness (1:9|) with all its limitations. {I am from above} (\eg“ ek t“n an“ eimi\). The contrast is complete in origin and character, already stated in strkjv@3:31|, and calculated to intensify their anger.

rwp@John:8:25 @{Who art thou?} (\Su tis ei;\). Proleptic use of \su\ before \tis\, "Thou, who art thou?" Cf. strkjv@1:19|. He had virtually claimed to be the Messiah and on a par with God as in strkjv@5:15|. They wish to pin him down and to charge him with blasphemy. {Even that which I have also spoken unto you from the beginning} (\tˆn archˆn hoti kai lal“ humin\). A difficult sentence. It is not clear whether it is an affirmation or a question. The Latin and Syriac versions treat it as affirmative. Westcott and Hort follow Meyer and take it as interrogative. The Greek fathers take it as an exclamation. It seems clear that the adverbial accusative \tˆn archˆn\ cannot mean "from the beginning" like \ap' archˆs\ (15:27|) or \ex archˆs\ (16:4|). The LXX has \tˆn archˆn\ for "at the beginning" or "at the first" (Genesis:43:20|). There are examples in Greek, chiefly negative, where \tˆn archˆn\ means "at all," "essentially," "primarily." Vincent and Bernard so take it here, "Primarily what I am telling you." Jesus avoids the term Messiah with its political connotations. He stands by his high claims already made.

rwp@John:8:26 @{I have many things to speak and to judge concerning you} (\polla ech“ peri hum“n lalein kai krinein\). Instead of further talk about his own claims (already plain enough) Jesus turns to speak and to judge concerning them and their attitude towards him (cf. verse 16|). Whatever they think of Jesus the Father who sent him is true (\alˆthˆs\). They cannot evade responsibility for the message heard. Songs:Jesus goes on speaking it from the Father.

rwp@John:8:44 @{Ye are of your father the devil} (\humeis ek tou patros tou diabolou\). Certainly they can "understand" (\gin“skete\ in 43|) this "talk" (\lalian\) though they will be greatly angered. But they had to hear it (\akouein\ in 43|). It was like a bombshell in spite of the preliminary preparation. {Your will to do} (\thelete poiein\). Present active indicative of \thel“\ and present active infinitive, "Ye wish to go on doing." This same idea Jesus presents in strkjv@Matthew:13:38| (the sons of the evil one, the devil) and strkjv@23:15| (twofold more a son of Gehenna than you). See also strkjv@1John:3:8| for "of the devil" (\ek tou diabolou\) for the one who persists in sinning. In strkjv@Revelation:12:9| the devil is one who leads all the world astray. The Gnostic view that Jesus means "the father of the devil" is grotesque. Jesus does not, of course, here deny that the Jews, like all men, are children of God the Creator, like Paul's offspring of God for all men in strkjv@Acts:17:28|. What he denies to these Pharisees is that they are spiritual children of God who do his will. They do the lusts and will of the devil. The Baptist had denied this same spiritual fatherhood to the merely physical descendants of Abraham (Matthew:3:9|). He even called them "broods of vipers" as Jesus did later (Matthew:12:34|). {A murderer} (\anthr“poktonos\). Old and rare word (Euripides) from \anthr“pos\, man, and \ktein“\, to kill. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1John:3:15|. The Jews were seeking to kill Jesus and so like their father the devil. {Stood not in the truth} (\en tˆi alˆtheiƒi ouk estˆken\). Since \ouk\, not \ouch\, is genuine, the form of the verb is \esteken\ the imperfect of the late present stem \stˆk“\ (Mark:11:25|) from the perfect active \hestˆka\ (intransitive) of \histˆmi\, to place. {No truth in him} (\ouk estin alˆtheia en aut“i\). Inside him or outside (environment). The devil and truth have no contact. {When he speaketh a lie} (\hotan lalˆi to pseudos\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the present active subjunctive of \lale“\. But note the article \to\: "Whenever he speaks the lie," as he is sure to do because it is his nature. Hence "he speaks out of his own" (\ek t“n idi“n lalei\) like a fountain bubbling up (cf. strkjv@Matthew:12:34|). {For he is a liar} (\hoti pseustˆs estin\). Old word for the agent in a conscious falsehood (\pseudos\). See strkjv@1John:1:10; strkjv@Romans:3:4|. Common word in John because of the emphasis on \alˆtheia\ (truth). {And the father thereof} (\kai ho patˆr autou\). Either the father of the lie or of the liar, both of which are true as already shown by Jesus. {Autou} in the genitive can be either neuter or masculine. Westcott takes it thus, "because he is a liar and his father (the devil) is a liar," making "one," not the devil, the subject of "whenever he speaks," a very doubtful expression.

rwp@John:9:26 @{What did he do to thee?} (\Ti epoiˆsen soi;\). Another cross-examination, now admitting that Jesus opened his eyes and wishing again (9:15,17|) to know "how."

rwp@John:12:6 @{Not because he cared for the poor} (\ouch hoti peri t“n pt“ch“n emelen aut“i\). Literally, "not because it was a care to him concerning the poor" (impersonal imperfect of \melei\, it was a care). John often makes explanatory comments of this kind as in strkjv@2:21f.; strkjv@7:22,39|. {But because he was a thief} (\alle hoti kleptˆs ˆn\). Clearly the disciples did not know then that Judas was a petty thief. That knowledge came later after he took the bribe of thirty pieces of silver for betraying Jesus (Matthew:26:15|), for the disciples did not suspect Judas of treachery (13:28f.|), let alone small peculations. There is no reason for thinking that John is unfair to Judas. "Temptation commonly comes through that for which we are naturally fitted" (Westcott). In this case Judas himself was "the poor beggar" who wanted this money. {And having the bag took away what was put therein} (\kai to gl“ssokomon ech“n ta ballomena ebastazen\). This is the correct text. This compound for the earlier \gl“ssokomeion\ (from \gl“ssa\, tongue, and \kome“\, to tend) was originally a receptacle for the tongues or mouth-pieces of wind instruments. The shorter form is already in the Doric inscriptions and is common in the papyri for "money-box" as here. It occurs also in Josephus, Plutarch, etc. In N.T. only here and strkjv@13:29| in same sense about Judas. \Ballomena\ is present passive participle (repeatedly put in) of \ball“\, to cast or fling. The imperfect active (custom) of \bastaz“\, old verb to pick up (John:10:31|), to carry (19:17|), but here and strkjv@20:15| with the sense to bear away as in Polybius, Josephus, Diogenes Laertes, and often so in the papyri.

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

rwp@John:12:8 @{Ye have always} (\pantote echete\). Jesus does not discredit gifts to the poor at all. But there is relativity in one's duties. {But me ye have not always} (\eme de ou pantote echete\). This is what Mary perceived with her delicate woman's intuition and what the apostles failed to understand though repeatedly and plainly told by Jesus. John does not mention the precious promise of praise for Mary preserved in strkjv@Mark:14:9; strkjv@Matthew:26:13|, but he does show her keen sympathetic insight and Christ's genuine appreciation of her noble deed. It is curiously \mal-a-propos\ surely to put alongside this incident the other incident told long before by Luke (Luke:7:35ff.|) of the sinful woman. Let Mary alone in her glorious act of love.

rwp@John:12:12 @{On the morrow} (\tˆi epaurion\). Locative case. Supply \hˆmerƒi\ (day) after the adverb \epaurion\ ("on the tomorrow day"). That is on our Sunday, Palm Sunday. {A great multitude} (\ho ochlos polus\). Same idiom rendered "the common people" in verse 9| and should be so translated here. {That had come} (\ho elth“n\). Second aorist active participle, masculine singular of \erchomai\ agreeing with \ochlos\, "that came." {When they heard} (\akousantes\). First aorist active masculine plural participle of \akou“\, construction according to sense (plural, though \ochlos\ singular). {Was coming} (\erchetai\). Present middle indicative of \erchomai\ retained in indirect discourse after a secondary tense. It is a vivid picture. What they heard was: "Jesus is coming into Jerusalem." He is defying the Sanhedrin with all their public advertisement for him.

rwp@John:12:16 @{Understood not} (\ouk egn“san\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. Another comment by John concerning the failure of the disciples to know what was happening (cf. strkjv@2:22; strkjv@7:39|). {At the first} (\to pr“ton\). Adverbial accusative, as in strkjv@10:40; strkjv@19:39|. {Was glorified} (\edoxasthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \doxaz“\, to glorify, used of his death already in strkjv@7:39| and by Jesus himself of his death, resurrection, and ascension in strkjv@12:23; strkjv@13:31|. {Then remembered they} (\tote emnˆsthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \mimnˆsk“\. It was easier to understand then and they had the Holy Spirit to help them (16:13-15|). {Were written of him} (\ˆn ep' aut“i gegrammena\). Periphrastic past perfect passive of \graph“\ with neuter plural participle agreeing with \tauta\ (these things) and singular verb, though the plural \ˆsan\ could have been used. Note the threefold repetition of \tauta\ in this verse, "clumsy" Bernard calls it, but making for clarity. The use of \ep' aut“i\ for "of him" rather than \peri autou\ is unusual, but occurs in strkjv@Revelation:10:11; strkjv@22:16|. {They had done} (\epoiˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \poie“\, simply, "they did."

rwp@John:12:22 @{Andrew} (\t“i Andreƒi\). Another apostle with a Greek name and associated with Philip again (John:6:7f.|), the man who first brought his brother Simon to Jesus (1:41|). Andrew was clearly a man of wisdom for a crisis. Note the vivid dramatic presents here, {cometh} (\erchetai\), {telleth} (\legei\). What was the crisis? These Greeks wish an interview with Jesus. True Jesus had said something about "other sheep" than Jews (10:16|), but he had not explained. Philip and Andrew wrestle with the problem that will puzzle Peter on the housetop in Joppa (Acts:10:9-18|), that middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile that was only broken down by the Cross of Christ (Ephesians:2:11-22|) and that many Christians and Jews still set up between each other. Andrew has no solution for Philip and they bring the problem, but not the Greeks, to Jesus.

rwp@John:12:27 @{My soul} (\hˆ psuchˆ mou\). The soul (\psuchˆ\) here is synonymous with spirit (\pneuma\) in strkjv@13:21|. {Is troubled} (\tetaraktai\). Perfect passive indicative of \tarass“\, used also in strkjv@11:33; strkjv@13:21| of Jesus. While John proves the deity of Jesus in his Gospel, he assumes throughout his real humanity as here (cf. strkjv@4:6|). The language is an echo of that in strkjv@Psalms:6:4; strkjv@42:7|. John does not give the agony in Gethsemane which the Synoptics have (Mark:14:35f.; strkjv@Matthew:26:39; strkjv@Luke:22:42|), but it is quite beside the mark to suggest, as Bernard does, that the account here is John's version of the Gethsemane experience. Why do some critics feel called upon to level down to a dead plane every variety of experience in Christ's life? {And what shall I say?} (\kai ti eip“;\). Deliberative subjunctive which expresses vividly "a genuine, if momentary indecision" (Bernard). The request of the Greeks called up graphically to Jesus the nearness of the Cross. {Father, save me from this hour} (\pater, s“son me ek tˆs h“ras tautˆs\). Jesus began his prayers with "Father" (11:41|). Dods thinks that this should be a question also. Westcott draws a distinction between \ek\ (out of) and \apo\ (from) to show that Jesus does not pray to draw back from the hour, but only to come safely out of it all and so interprets \ek\ in strkjv@Hebrews:5:7|, but that distinction will not stand, for in strkjv@John:1:44| \ek\ and \apo\ are used in the same sense and in the Synoptics (Mark:14:35f.; strkjv@Matthew:26:39; strkjv@Luke:52:42|) we have \apo\. If it holds here, we lose the point there. Here as in Gethsemane the soul of Jesus instinctively and naturally shrinks from the Cross, but he instantly surrenders to the will of God in both experiences. {But for this cause came I unto this hour} (\alla dia touto ˆlthon eis tˆn h“ran tautˆn\). It was only a moment of human weakness as in Gethsemane that quickly passed. Thus understood the language has its natural meaning.

rwp@John:12:39 @{For this cause they could not believe} (\dia touto ouk edunanto pisteuein\). \Touto\ (this) seems to have a double reference (to what precedes and to what follows) as in strkjv@8:47|. The negative imperfect (double augment, \edunanto\) of \dunamai\. John is not absolving these Jews from moral responsibility, but only showing that the words of Isaiah "had to be fulfilled, for they were the expression of Divine foreknowledge " (Bernard).

rwp@John:12:41 @{Because he saw his glory} (\hoti eiden tˆn doxan autou\). Correct reading here \hoti\ (because), not \hote\ (when). Isaiah with spiritual vision saw the glory of the Messiah and spoke (\elalˆsen\) of him, John says, whatever modern critics may think or say. Songs:Jesus said that Abraham saw his day (8:56|). Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:11:13|.

rwp@John:12:42 @{Nevertheless even} (\hom“s mentoi kai\). For the old \hom“s\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:14:7; strkjv@Galatians:3:15| (only other examples in N.T.), here only with \mentoi\, "but yet," and \kai\, "even." In spite of what has just been said "many (\polloi\) even of the rulers" (recall the lonely shyness of Nicodemus in strkjv@3:1ff.|). These actually "believed on him" (\episteusan eis auton\) in their convictions, a remarkable statement as to the effect that Christ had in Jerusalem as the Sanhedrin plotted his death. Cf. Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea. {But because of the Pharisees} (\alla dia tous Pharisaious\). Like the whispered talk in strkjv@7:13| "because of the fear of the Jews." Once the Pharisees sneeringly asked the officers (7:48|): "Hath any one of the rulers believed on him?" And now "many of the rulers have believed on him." {They did not confess} (\ouch h“mologoun\). Negative imperfect in contrast to the punctiliar aorist \episteusan\. "They kept on not confessing." How like the cowardly excuses made today by those under conviction who refuse to step out for Christ. {Lest they should be put out of the synagogue} (\hina mˆ aposunag“goi gen“ntai\). Cf. strkjv@9:22| where this very word occurs in a purpose clause like this. Only once more in the N.T. (16:2|), a Jewish word not in profane authors. This ostracism from the synagogue was dreaded by the Jews and made cowards of these "believing elders." {More than} (\mallon ˆper\). They preferred the glory and praise of men more than the glory and praise of God. How \apropos\ these words are to some suave cowards today.

rwp@John:12:44 @{Cried and said} (\ekraxen kai eipen\). First aorist active indicative of \kraz“\, to cry aloud, and second aorist active of defective verb \er“\, to say. This is probably a summary of what Jesus had already said as in verse 36| John closes the public ministry of Jesus without the Synoptic account of the last day in the temple on our Tuesday (Mark:11:27-12:44; strkjv@Matthew:21:23-23:39; strkjv@Luke:20:1-21:4|). {Not on me, but on him} (\ou eis eme, alla eis ton\). "Not on me only, but also on," another example of exaggerated contrast like that in verse 30|. The idea of Jesus here is a frequent one (believing on Jesus whom the Father has sent) as in strkjv@3:17f.; strkjv@5:23f.,30,43; strkjv@7:16; strkjv@8:42; strkjv@13:20; strkjv@14:1; strkjv@Matthew:10:40; strkjv@Luke:9:48|.

rwp@John:12:49 @{He hath given} (\ded“ken\). Perfect active indicative. Christ has permanent commission. {What I should say and what I should speak} (\ti eip“ kai ti lalˆs“\). Indirect question retaining the deliberative subjunctive (second aorist active \eip“\, first aorist active \lalˆs“\). Meyer and Westcott take \eip“\ to refer to the content and \lalˆs“\ more to the varying manner of delivery. Possibly so.

rwp@John:13:12 @{Sat down again} (\anepesen palin\). Second aorist active indicative of \anapipt“\, old compound verb to fall back, to lie down, to recline. \Palin\ (again) can be taken either with \anepesen\, as here, or with \eipen\ (he said again). {Know ye what I have done to you?} (\gin“skete ti pepoiˆka humin;\). "Do ye understand the meaning of my act?" Perfect active indicative of \poie“\ with dative case (\humin\). It was a searching question, particularly to Simon Peter and Judas.

rwp@John:13:14 @{If I then} (\ei oun eg“\). Argumentative sense of \oun\ (therefore). Condition of first class, assumed to be true, with first aorist active indicative of \nipt“\, "If I, being what I am, washed your feet" (as I did). {Ye also ought} (\kai humeis opheilete\). The obligation rests on you _a fortiori_. Present active indicative of the old verb \opheil“\, to owe a debt (Matthew:18:30|). The mutual obligation is to do this or any other needed service. The widows who washed the saints' feet in strkjv@1Timothy:5:10| did it "as an incident-of their hospitable ministrations" (Bernard). Up to 1731 the Lord High Almoner in England washed the feet of poor saints (_pedilavium_) on Thursday before Easter, a custom that arose in the fourth century, and one still practised by the Pope of Rome.

rwp@John:13:15 @{An example} (\hupodeigma\). For the old \paradeigma\ (not in N.T.), from \hupodeiknumi\, to show under the eyes as an illustration or warning (Matthew:3:7|), common in the papyri for illustration, example, warning, here only in John, but in strkjv@James:5:10; strkjv@2Peter:2:6; strkjv@Hebrews:4:11; strkjv@8:5; strkjv@9:26|. Peter uses \tupoi\ (1Peter:5:3|) with this incident in mind. In strkjv@Jude:1:7| \deigma\ (without \hupo\) occurs in the sense of example. {That ye also should do} (\hina kai humeis poiˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \poie“\ (keep on doing). Doing what? Does Jesus here institute a new church ordinance as some good people today hold? If so, it is curious that there is no record of it in the N.T. Jesus has given the disciples an object lesson in humility to rebuke their jealousy, pride, and strife exhibited at this very meal. The lesson of the "example" applies to all the relations of believers with each other. It is one that is continually needed.

rwp@John:13:27 @{Then entered Satan into him} (\tote eisˆlthen eis ekeinon ho Satanas\). The only time the word Satan occurs in the Gospel. As he had done before (13:2; strkjv@Luke:22:3|) until Christ considered him a devil (6:70|). This is the natural outcome of one who plays with the devil. {That thou doest, do quickly} (\Hosea:poieis poiˆson tacheion\). Aorist active imperative of \poie“\. "Do more quickly what thou art doing." \Tacheion\ is comparative of \tache“s\ (John:11:31|) and in N.T. only here, strkjv@20:4; strkjv@Hebrews:13:19,23|. See the eagerness of Jesus for the passion in strkjv@Luke:12:50|.

rwp@John:13:29 @{Some thought} (\tines edokoun\). Imperfect active of \doke“\. Mere inference in their ignorance. {The bag} (\to gl“ssokomon\). See on ¯12:6| for this word. {What things we have need of} (\h“n chreian echomen\). Antecedent (\tauta\) of the relative (\hon\) not expressed. {For the feast} (\eis tˆn heortˆn\). The feast of unleavened bread beginning after the passover meal and lasting eight days. If this was twenty-four hours ahead of the passover meal, there was no hurry for next day would be in ample time. {Or that he should give something to the poor} (\ˆ tois pt“chois hina ti d“i\). Another alternative in their speculation on the point. Note prolepsis of \tois pt“chois\ (dative case) before \hina d“i\ (final clause with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \did“mi\).

rwp@John:13:30 @{Having received the sop} (\lab“n to ps“mion\). Second aorist active participle of \lamban“\. Judas knew what Jesus meant, however ignorant the disciples. Songs:he acted "straightway" (\euthus\). {And it was night} (\ˆn de nux\). Darkness falls suddenly in the orient. Out into the terror and the mystery of this dreadful night (symbol of his devilish work) Judas went.

rwp@John:14:1 @{Let not your heart be troubled} (\mˆ tarassesth“ hum“n hˆ kardia\). Not here the physical organ of life (Luke:21:34|), but the seat of spiritual life (\pneuma, psuchˆ\), the centre of feeling and faith (Romans:10:10|), "the focus of the religious life" (Vincent) as in strkjv@Matthew:22:37|. See these words repeated in strkjv@14:27|. Jesus knew what it was to have a "troubled" heart (11:33; strkjv@13:31|) where \tarass“\ is used of him. Plainly the hearts of the disciples were tossed like waves in the wind by the words of Jesus in strkjv@13:38|. {Ye believe... believe also} (\pisteuete... kai pisteuete\). Songs:translated as present active indicative plural second person and present active imperative of \pisteu“\. The form is the same. Both may be indicative (ye believe... and ye believe), both may be imperative (believe... and believe or believe also), the first may be indicative (ye believe) and the second imperative (believe also), the first may be imperative (keep on believing) and the second indicative (and ye do believe, this less likely). Probably both are imperatives (Mark:11:22|), "keep on believing in God and in me."

rwp@John:14:7 @{If ye had known me} (\ei egn“keite me\). Past perfect indicative of \gin“sk“\, to know by personal experience, in condition of second class as is made plain by the conclusion (\an ˆidete\) where \oida\, not \gin“sk“\ is used. Thomas and the rest had not really come to know Jesus, much as they loved him. {From henceforth ye know him} (\ap' arti gin“skete auton\). Probably inchoative present active indicative, "ye are beginning to know the Father from now on." {And have seen him} (\kai he“rakate\). Perfect active indicative of \hora“\. Because they had seen Jesus who is the Son of God, the Image of God, and like God (1:18|). Hence God is like Jesus Christ. It is a bold and daring claim to deity. The only intelligible conception of God is precisely what Jesus here says. God is like Christ.

rwp@John:14:13 @{Whatsoever ye shall ask} (\hoti an aitˆsˆte\). Indefinite relative clause with \hoti\ (neuter accusative singular of \hostis\), \an\ and the aorist active subjunctive of \aite“\. This is an advance thought over verse 12|. {In my name} (\en t“i onomati mou\). First mention of his "name" as the open sesame to the Father's will. See also strkjv@14:26; strkjv@15:16; strkjv@16:23,24,26|. {That will I do} (\touto poiˆs“\). The Father answers prayers (15:16; strkjv@16:23|), but so does the Son (here and verse 14|). The purpose (\hina\ clause with first aorist passive subjunctive of \doxaz“\) is "that the Father may be glorified in the Son." Plead Christ's name in prayer to the Father.

rwp@John:14:26 @{Whom} (\ho\). Grammatical neuter, but "whom" is correct translation. The Father will send the Holy Spirit (14:16; strkjv@Luke:24:49; strkjv@Acts:2:33|), but so will the Son (John:15:26; strkjv@16:7|) as Jesus breathes the Holy Spirit upon the disciples (20:22|). There is no contradiction in this relation of the Persons in the Trinity (the Procession of the Holy Spirit). Here the Holy Spirit (full title as in strkjv@Mark:3:29; strkjv@Matthew:12:32; strkjv@Luke:12:10|) is identified with the Paraclete. {He} (\ekeinos\). Emphatic demonstrative pronoun and masculine like \paraklˆtos\. {Shall teach you all things} (\humas didaxei panta\). The Holy Spirit knows "the deep things of God" (1Corinthians:2:10|) and he is our Teacher in the Dispensation of the Holy Spirit of both new truth (verse 25|) and old. {Bring to your remembrance} (\hupomnˆsei humas\). Future active indicative of \hupomimnˆsk“\, old verb to remind, to recall, here only in this Gospel (cf. strkjv@3John:1:10; strkjv@2Timothy:2:14|) and with two accusatives (person and thing). After pentecost the disciples will be able better to recall and to understand what Jesus had said (how dull they had been at times) and to be open to new revelations from God (cf. Peter at Joppa and Caesarea).

rwp@John:15:7 @{Ask whatsoever ye will} (\ho ean thelˆte aitˆsasthe\). 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 (\genˆsetai\, 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:15:14 @{If ye do} (\ean poiˆte\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and the present active subjunctive, "if ye keep on doing," not just spasmodic obedience. Just a different way of saying what is in verse 10|. Obedience to Christ's commands is a prerequisite to discipleship and fellowship (spiritual friendship with Christ). He repeats it in the Great Commission (Matthew:28:20|, \eneteilamˆn\, I commanded) with the very word used here (\entellomai\, I command).

rwp@John:16:15 @{Therefore said I} (\dia touto eipon\). Jesus explains how and why the Holy Spirit can and will reveal to the disciples what they need to know further concerning him. They had failed so far to understand Christ's words about his death and resurrection. The Holy Spirit as Guide and Teacher will teach them what they can only receive and understand after the resurrection and ascension of Jesus.

rwp@John:16:18 @{We know not what he saith} (\ouk oidamen ti lalei\). The questions to Jesus cease and the disciples frankly confess to each other their own ignorance.

rwp@John:17:2 @{Authority over all flesh} (\exousian pasˆs sarkos\). \Sarkos\ is objective genitive. Stupendous claim impossible for a mere man to make. Made already in strkjv@Matthew:11:27; strkjv@Luke:10:22| (Q, the Logia of Jesus, our earliest known document about Jesus) and repeated in strkjv@Matthew:28:18| after his resurrection. {That} (\hina\). Secondary purpose with \hina d“sei\ (future active indicative) carrying on the idea of \hina doxasˆi\. See strkjv@13:34; strkjv@17:21| for \hina, kath“s, hina\. {Whatsoever} (\pƒn ho\). A peculiar classical Greek idiom, the collective use of the singular \pƒn ho\ as in strkjv@6:37,39| and \ho\ in strkjv@17:24| and the nominative absolute (_nom. pendens_) with \autois\ (to them), the dative plural explaining the construction. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 653.

rwp@John:17:5 @{With thine own self} (\para seaut“i\). "By the side of thyself." Jesus prays for full restoration to the pre-incarnate glory and fellowship (cf. strkjv@1:1|) enjoyed before the Incarnation (John:1:14|). This is not just ideal pre-existence, but actual and conscious existence at the Father's side (\para soi\, with thee) "which I had" (\hˆi eichon\, imperfect active of \ech“\, I used to have, with attraction of case of \hˆn\ to \hˆi\ because of \doxˆi\), "before the world was" (\pro tou ton kosmon einai\), "before the being as to the world" (cf. verse 24|). It is small wonder that those who deny or reject the deity of Jesus Christ have trouble with the Johannine authorship of this book and with the genuineness of these words. But even Harnack admits that the words here and in verse 24| are "undoubtedly the reflection of the certainty with which Jesus himself spoke" (_What Is Christianity_, Engl. Tr., p. 132). But Paul, as clearly as John, believes in the actual pre-existence and deity of Jesus Christ (Phillipians:2:5-11|).

rwp@John:18:15 @{Followed} (\ˆkolouthei\). Imperfect active of \akolouthe“\, "was following," picturesque and vivid tense, with associative instrumental case \t“i Iˆsou\. {Another disciple} (\allos mathˆtˆs\). Correct text without article \ho\ (genuine in verse 16|). Peter's companion was the Beloved Disciple, the author of the book (John:21:24|). {Was known unto the high priest} (\ˆn gn“stos t“i archierei\). Verbal adjective from \gin“sk“\, to know (Acts:1:19|) with dative case. How well known the word does not say, not necessarily a personal friend, well enough known for the portress to admit John. "The account of what happened to Peter might well seem to be told from the point of view of the servants' hall" (Sanday, _Criticism of the Fourth Gospel_, p. 101). {Entered in with Jesus} (\suneisˆlthen t“i Iˆsou\). Second aorist active indicative of the double compound \suneiserchomai\, old verb, in N.T. here and strkjv@6:22|. With associative instrumental case. {Into the court} (\eis tˆn aulˆn\). It is not clear that this word ever means the palace itself instead of the courtyard (uncovered enclosure) as always in the papyri (very common). Clearly courtyard in strkjv@Mark:14:66| (Matthew:26:69; strkjv@Luke:22:55|). Apparently Annas had rooms in the official residence of Caiaphas.

rwp@John:18:19 @{Asked} (\ˆr“tˆsen\). First aorist active indicative of \er“ta“\, to question, usual meaning. This was Annas making a preliminary examination of Jesus probably to see on what terms Jesus made disciples whether as a mere rabbi or as Messiah.

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@John:18:32 @{By what manner of death} (\poi“i thanat“i\). Instrumental case of the qualitative interrogative \poios\ in an indirect question, the very idiom used in strkjv@John:12:32| concerning the Cross and here treated as prophecy (Scripture) with \hina plˆr“thˆi\ like the saying of Jesus in verse 9| which see.

rwp@John:18:35 @{Amos:I a Jew?} (\mˆti eg“ Ioudaios eimi;\). Proud and fine scorn on Pilate's part at the idea that he had a personal interest in the question. Vehement negation implied. Cf. strkjv@4:29| for \mˆti\ in a question. The gulf between Jew and Gentile yawns wide here. {Nation} (\ethnos\ as in strkjv@11:48-52|, rather than \laos\, while both in strkjv@11:50|). For \pared“kan\ see verse 30|. {What hast thou done?} (\ti epoiˆsas;\). First aorist active indicative of \poie“\. Blunt and curt question. "What didst thou do?" "What is thy real crime?" John's picture of this private interview between Pilate and Jesus is told with graphic power.

rwp@John:18:38 @{What is truth?} (\ti estin alˆtheia;\). This famous sneer of Pilate reveals his own ignorance of truth, as he stood before Incarnate Truth (John:14:6|). _Quid est veritas?_ The answer in Latin is _Vir est qui adest_ as has been succinctly said by the use of the same letters. Pilate turned with indifference from his own great question and rendered his verdict: "I find no crime in him" (\eg“ oudemian heurisk“ en aut“i aitian\). For this use of \aitia\ see strkjv@Matthew:27:37; strkjv@Mark:15:26|. Pilate therefore should have set Jesus free at once.

rwp@John:19:22 @{What I have written I have written} (\ho gegrapha gegrapha\). With emphasis on the permanence of the accusation on the board. Pilate has a sudden spirit of stubbornness in this detail to the surprise of the chief priests. Technically he was correct, for he had condemned Jesus on this charge made by the chief priests.

rwp@John:20:23 @{Whosesoever sins ye forgive} (\an tin“n aphˆte tas hamartias\). "If the sins of any ye forgive" (\aphˆte\, second aorist active subjunctive with \an\ in the sense of \ean\), a condition of the third class. Precisely so with "retain" (\kratˆte\, present active subjunctive of \krate“\). {They are forgiven} (\aphe“ntai\). Perfect passive indicative of \aphiˆmi\, Doric perfect for \apheintai\. {Are retained} (\kekratˆntai\). Perfect passive indicative of \krate“\. The power to forgive sin belongs only to God, but Jesus claimed to have this power and right (Mark:2:5-7|). What he commits to the disciples and to us is the power and privilege of giving assurance of the forgiveness of sins by God by correctly announcing the terms of forgiveness. There is no proof that he actually transferred to the apostles or their successors the power in and of themselves to forgive sins. In strkjv@Matthew:16:19; strkjv@18:18| we have a similar use of the rabbinical metaphor of binding and loosing by proclaiming and teaching. Jesus put into the hands of Peter and of all believers the keys of the Kingdom which we should use to open the door for those who wish to enter. This glorious promise applies to all believers who will tell the story of Christ's love for men.

rwp@John:21:11 @{Went up} (\anebˆ\). Into the little boat or dinghy. {Drew} (\heilkusen\). Same verb as \helkusai\ in verse 6|. Peter now did what they had failed to do. {Three} (\tri“n\). The addition "three" to the "hundred and fifty" looks as if they were actually counted these "large" (\megal“n\) fish. It was a great fish story that John recalls vividly. {Was not rent} (\ouk eschisthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \schiz“\, to split (our word "schism").

rwp@John:21:12 @{Break your fast} (\aristˆsate\). First aorist active imperative of \arista“\ from \ariston\, first to breakfast, as here and then later to dine as in strkjv@Luke:11:37|. What a delightful breakfast of fresh broiled fish just caught (verse 10|) with the hush of joyful surprise in the presence of the Risen Lord. {Durst} (\etolma\) Imperfect active of \tolma“\. The restraint of silence continued.

rwp@John:21:15 @{Lovest thou me more than these?} (\agapƒis me pleon tout“n;\). Ablative case of comparison \tout“n\ (disciples) after \pleon\. Peter had even boasted that he would stand by Christ though all men forsook him (Mark:14:29|). We do not know what passed between Jesus and Peter when Jesus first appeared to him (Luke:24:34|). But here Christ probes the inmost recesses of Peter's heart to secure the humility necessary for service. {I love thee} (\phil“ su\). Peter makes no claim here to superior love and passes by the "more than these" and does not even use Christ's word \agapa“\ for high and devoted love, but the humbler word \phile“\ for love as a friend. He insists that Christ knows this in spite of his conduct. {Feed my lambs} (\Boske ta arnia mou\). For the old word \bosk“\ (to feed as a herdsman) see strkjv@Matthew:8:33|. Present active imperative here. \Arnia\ is a diminutive of \arnos\ (lamb).

rwp@John:21:19 @{By what manner of death} (\poi“i thanat“i\). Undoubtedly John, who is writing long after Peter's death, seems to mean that Peter was to die (and did die) a martyr's death. "Whither thou wouldest not." There is a tradition that Peter met death by crucifixion and asked to be crucified head downwards, but that is not made plain here.

rwp@John:21:21 @{And what shall this man do?} (\houtos de ti;\). Literally, "But this one... what?" The abrupt ellipsis is intelligible.

rwp@John:21:22 @{If I will} (\ean thel“\). Condition of the third class with \ean\ and the present active subjunctive of \thel“\. {Till I come} (\he“s erchomai\). Literally, "while I am coming" (\he“s\ and the present indicative, not \he“s elth“\ (second aorist active subjunctive). {What is that to thee?} (\ti pros se;\). A sharp rebuke to Peter's keen curiosity. {Follow thou me} (\su moi akolouthei\). "Do thou me keep on following." That lesson Peter needed.

rwp@John:21:23 @{That that disciple should not die} (\hoti ho mathˆtˆs ekeinos ouk apothnˆskei\) (present active indicative), because Peter or others misunderstood what Jesus meant as John now carefully explains. He was rebuking Peter's curiosity, not affirming that John would live on till the Master returned. John is anxious to set this matter right.

rwp@John:21:25 @{If they should be written every one} (\ean graphˆtai kath' hen\). Condition of the third class with \ean\ and present passive subjunctive of \graph“\, "If they should be written one by one" (in full detail). {I suppose} (\oimai\). Note change back to the first person singular by the author. {Would not contain} (\oud' auton ton kosmon ch“rˆsein\). Future active infinitive in indirect discourse after \oimai\. This is, of course, natural hyperbole, but graphically pictures for us the vastness of the work and words of Jesus from which the author has made a small selection (20:30f.|) and by which he has produced what is, all things considered, the greatest of all the books produced by man, the eternal gospel from the eagle who soars to the very heavens and gives us a glimpse of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE USE OF APOCRYPHAL BOOKS Jude:(verse strkjv@Jude:1:14|) quotes from "Enoch" by name and says that he "prophesied." What he quotes is a combination of various passages in the Book of Enoch as we have it now. It used to be held that part of Enoch was later than Jude, but Charles seems to have disproved that, though the book as we have it has many interpolations. Tertullian wanted to canonise Enoch because of what Jude:says, whereas Chrysostom says that the authenticity of Jude:was doubted because of the use of Enoch. In verse strkjv@Jude:1:9| there seems to be an allusion to the _Assumption of Moses_, another apocryphal book, but it is the use of "prophesied" in verse strkjv@Jude:1:14| about Enoch that gave most offence. It is possible, of course, that Jude:did not attach the full sense to that term.

rwp@Jude:1:10 @{Whatsoever things they know not} (\hosa ouk oidasin\). Here strkjv@2Peter:2:12| has \en hois agnoousin\. The rest of the sentence is smoother than strkjv@2Peter:2:12|. {Naturally} (\phusik“s\). Here only in N.T. strkjv@2Peter:2:12| has \gegennˆmena phusika\. Jude:has the article \ta\ with \aloga z“a\ and the present passive \phtheirontai\ instead of the future passive \phtharˆsontai\.

rwp@Luke:1:41 @{Leaped} (\eskirtˆsen\). A common enough incident with unborn children (Genesis:25:22|), but Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit to understand what had happened to Mary.

rwp@Luke:1:62 @{Made signs} (\eneneuon\). Imperfect tense, repeated action as usual when making signs. In strkjv@1:22| the verb used of Zacharias is \dianeu“n\. {What he would have him called} (\to ti an theloi kaleisthai auto\). Note article \to\ with the indirect question, accusative of general reference. The optative with \an\ is here because it was used in the direct question (cf. strkjv@Acts:17:18|), and is simply retained in the indirect. {What would he wish him to be called?} ({if he could speak}), a conclusion of the fourth-class condition.

rwp@Luke:1:66 @{What then} (\ti ara\). With all these supernatural happenings they predicted the marvellous career of this child. Note \Ti\, {what}, not \Tis\, {who}. Cf. strkjv@Acts:12:18|. {They laid them up} (\ethento\, second aorist middle indicative) as Mary did (2:19|). {The hand of the Lord} (\cheir Kuriou\). Luke's explanation in addition to the supernatural events. The expression occurs only in Luke's writing (Acts:11:21; strkjv@13:11|).

rwp@Luke:1:67 @{Prophesied} (\eprophˆteusen\). Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This _Benedictus_ (\Eulogˆtos\, {Blessed}) of Zacharias (68-79|) may be what is referred to in verse 64| "he began to speak blessing God" (\eulog“n\). Nearly every phrase here is found in the O.T. (Psalms and Prophets). He, like Mary, was full of the Holy Spirit and had caught the Messianic message in its highest meaning.

rwp@Luke:2:11 @\Is born\ (\etechthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative from \tikt“\. Was born. {Saviour} (\s“tˆr\). This great word is common in Luke and Paul and seldom elsewhere in the N.T. (Bruce). The people under Rome's rule came to call the emperor "Saviour" and Christians took the word and used it of Christ. See inscriptions (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 344). {Christ the Lord} (\Christos Kurios\). This combination occurs nowhere else in the N.T. and it is not clear what it really means. Luke is very fond of \Kurios\ ({Lord}) where the other Gospels have Jesus. It may mean "Christ the Lord," "Anointed Lord," "Messiah, Lord," "The Messiah, the Lord," "An Anointed One, a Lord," or "Lord Messiah." It occurs once in the LXX (Lamentations:4:20|) and is in Ps. of Sol. strkjv@17:36. Ragg suggests that our phrase "the Lord Jesus Christ" is really involved in "A Saviour (Jesus) which is Christ the Lord." See on ¯Matthew:1:1| for Christ and ¯Matthew:21:3| for Lord.

rwp@Luke:2:31 @{Of all the peoples} (\pant“n t“n la“n\). Not merely Jews. Another illustration of the universality of Luke's Gospel seen already in strkjv@1:70| in the hymn of Zacharias. The second strophe of the song according to Plummer showing what the Messiah will be to the world after having shown what the Messiah is to Simeon.

rwp@Luke:2:33 @{His father and his mother} (\ho patˆr autou kai hˆ mˆtˆr\). Luke had already used "parents" in strkjv@2:27|. He by no means intends to deny the Virgin Birth of Jesus so plainly stated in strkjv@1:34-38|. He merely employs here the language of ordinary custom. The late MSS. wrongly read "and Joseph" instead of "his father." {Were marvelling} (\ˆn thaumazontes\). The masculine gender includes the feminine when both are referred to. But \ˆn\ is singular, not \ˆsan\, the normal imperfect plural in this periphrastic imperfect. This is due to the wide space between copula and participle. The copula \ˆn\ agrees in number with \ho patˆr\ while the participle coming last agrees with both \ho pater kai hˆ mˆtˆr\ (cf. strkjv@Matthew:17:3; strkjv@22:40|). If one wonders why they marvelled at Simeon's words after what they had heard from Gabriel, Elisabeth, and the Shepherds, he should bear in mind that every parent is astonished and pleased at the fine things others see in the child. It is a mark of unusual insight for others to see so much that is obvious to the parent. Simeon's prophecy had gone beyond the angel's outline and it was surprising that he should know anything about the child's destiny.

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

rwp@Luke:2:38 @{Coming up} (\epistƒsa\). 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} (\anth“mologeito\). 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 (\lutr“sin Ierousalˆm\)." 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:2:46 @{After three days} (\meta hˆmeras treis\). One day out, one day back, and on the third day finding him. {In the temple} (\en t“i hier“i\). Probably on the terrace where members of the Sanhedrin gave public instruction on sabbaths and feast-days, so probably while the feast was still going on. The rabbis probably sat on benches in a circle. The listeners on the ground, among whom was Jesus the boy in a rapture of interest. {Both hearing them and asking them questions} (\kai akouonta aut“n kai eper“t“nta autous\). Paul sat at the feet of Gamaliel (Acts:22:3|). Picture this eager boy alive with interest. It was his one opportunity in a theological school outside of the synagogue to hear the great rabbis expound the problems of life. This was the most unusual of all children, to be sure, in intellectual grasp and power. But it is a mistake to think that children of twelve do not think profoundly concerning the issues of life. What father or mother has ever been able to answer a child's questions?

rwp@Luke:2:48 @{They were astonished} (\exeplagˆsan\). Second aorist passive indicative of an old Greek word (\ekplˆss“\), to strike out, drive out by a blow. Joseph and Mary "were struck out" by what they saw and heard. Even they had not fully realized the power in this wonderful boy. Parents often fail to perceive the wealth of nature in their children.

rwp@Luke:2:50 @{They understood not} (\ou sunˆkan\). First aorist active indicative (one of the k aorists). Even Mary with all her previous preparation and brooding was not equal to the dawning of the Messianic consciousness in her boy. "My Father is God," Jesus had virtually said, "and I must be in His house." Bruce observes that a new era has come when Jesus calls God "Father," not \Despotes\. "Even we do not yet fully understand" (Bruce) what Jesus the boy here said.

rwp@Luke:3:10 @{Asked} (\epˆr“t“n\). Imperfect tense, repeatedly asked. {What then must we do?} (\ti oun poiˆs“men;\). Deliberative aorist subjunctive. More exactly, {What then are we to do}, {What then shall we do?} Same construction in verses 12,14|. The \oun\ refers to the severe things already said by John (Luke:3:7-9|).

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

rwp@Luke:4:1 @{Full of the Holy Spirit} (\plˆrˆs pneumatos hagiou\). An evident allusion to the descent of the Holy Spirit on Jesus at his baptism (Luke:3:21f.|). The distinctness of the Persons in the Trinity is shown there, but with evident unity. One recalls also Luke's account of the overshadowing of Mary by the Holy Spirit (1:35|). strkjv@Matthew:4:1| says that "Jesus was led of the Spirit" while strkjv@Mark:1:12| states that "the Spirit driveth him forth" which see for discussion. "Jesus had been endowed with supernatural power; and He was tempted to make use of it in furthering his own interests without regard to the Father's will" (Plummer). {Was led by the Spirit} (\ˆgeto en toi pneumati\). Imperfect passive, continuously led. \En\ may be the instrumental use as often, for strkjv@Matthew:4:1| has here \hupo\ of direct agency. But Matthew has the aorist passive \anˆchthˆ\ which may be ingressive as he has \eis tˆn erˆmon\ (into the wilderness) while Luke has \en t“i erˆm“i\ (in the wilderness). At any rate Luke affirms that Jesus was now continuously under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Hence in this same sentence he mentions the Spirit twice. {During the forty days} (\hˆmerƒs tesserakonta\). Accusative of duration of time, to be connected with "led" not with "tempted." He was led in the Spirit during these forty days (cf. strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:2|, forty years). The words are amphibolous also in strkjv@Mark:1:13|. strkjv@Matthew:4:2| seems to imply that the three recorded temptations came at the close of the fasting for forty days. That can be true and yet what Luke states be true also. These three may be merely specimens and so "representative of the struggle which continued throughout the whole period" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:4:6 @{All this authority} (\tˆn exousian tautˆn hapasan\). strkjv@Matthew:4:9| has "all these things." Luke's report is more specific. {And the glory of them} (\kai tˆn doxan aut“n\). strkjv@Matthew:4:8| has this in the statement of what the devil did, not what he said. {For it hath been delivered unto me} (\hoti emoi paradedotai\). Perfect passive indicative. Satan here claims possession of world power and Jesus does not deny it. It may be due to man's sin and by God's permission. Jesus calls Satan the ruler of this world (John:12:31; strkjv@14:30; strkjv@16:11|). {To whomsoever I will} (\hoi an thel“\). Present subjunctive with \an\ in an indefinite relative sentence. This audacious claim, if allowed, makes one wonder whether some of the world rulers are not, consciously or unconsciously, agents of the devil. In several American cities there has been proven a definite compact between the police and the underworld of crime. But the tone of Satan here is one of superiority to Jesus in world power. He offers him a share in it on one condition.

rwp@Luke:4:7 @{Wilt worship before me} (\proskunˆsˆis en“pion emou\). strkjv@Matthew:4:9| has it more bluntly "worship me." That is what it really comes to, though in Luke the matter is more delicately put. It is a condition of the third class (\ean\ and the subjunctive). Luke has it "thou therefore if" (\su oun ean\), in a very emphatic and subtle way. It is the ingressive aorist (\proskunˆsˆis\), just bow the knee once up here in my presence. The temptation was for Jesus to admit Satan's authority by this act of prostration (fall down and worship), a recognition of authority rather than of personal merit. {It shall all be thine} (\estai sou pƒsa\). Satan offers to turn over all the keys of world power to Jesus. It was a tremendous grand-stand play, but Jesus saw at once that in that case he would be the agent of Satan in the rule of the world by bargain and graft instead of the Son of God by nature and world ruler by conquest over Satan. The heart of Satan's program is here laid bare. Jesus here rejected the Jewish idea of the Messiah as an earthly ruler merely. "He rejects Satan as an ally, and thereby has him as an implacable enemy" (Plummer.)

rwp@Luke:4:9 @{Led him} (\ˆgagen\). Aorist active indicative of \ag“\. strkjv@Matthew:4:5| has \paralambanei\ (dramatic present). {The wing of the temple} (\to pterugion tou hierou\). See on ¯Matthew:4:5|. It is not easy to determine precisely what it was. {From hence} (\enteuthen\). This Luke adds to the words in Matthew, which see. {To guard thee} (\tou diaphulaxai se\). Not in strkjv@Matthew:4:6| quoted by Satan from strkjv@Psalms:91:11,12|. Satan does not misquote this Psalm, but he misapplies it and makes it mean presumptuous reliance on God. This compound verb is very old, but occurs here alone in the N.T. and that from the LXX. Luke repeats \hoti\ (recitative \hoti\ after \gegraptai\, is written) after this part of the quotation.

rwp@Luke:4:16 @{Where he had been brought up} (\hou ˆn tethrammenos\). Past perfect passive periphrastic indicative, a state of completion in past time, from \treph“\, a common Greek verb. This visit is before that recorded in strkjv@Mark:6:1-6; strkjv@Matthew:13:54-58| which was just before the third tour of Galilee. Here Jesus comes back after a year of public ministry elsewhere and with a wide reputation (Luke:4:15|). Luke may have in mind strkjv@2:51|, but for some time now Nazareth had not been his home and that fact may be implied by the past perfect tense. {As his custom was} (\kata to ei“thos aut“i\). Second perfect active neuter singular participle of an old \eth“\ (Homer), to be accustomed. Literally according to what was customary to him (\aut“i\, dative case). This is one of the flashlights on the early life of Jesus. He had the habit of going to public worship in the synagogue as a boy, a habit that he kept up when a grown man. If the child does not form the habit of going to church, the man is almost certain not to have it. We have already had in Matthew and Mark frequent instances of the word synagogue which played such a large part in Jewish life after the restoration from Babylon. {Stood up} (\anestˆ\). Second aorist active indicative and intransitive. Very common verb. It was the custom for the reader to stand except when the Book of Esther was read at the feast of Purim when he might sit. It is not here stated that Jesus had been in the habit of standing up to read here or elsewhere. It was his habit to go to the synagogue for worship. Since he entered upon his Messianic work his habit was to teach in the synagogues (Luke:4:15|). This was apparently the first time that he had done so in Nazareth. He may have been asked to read as Paul was in Antioch in Pisidia (Acts:13:15|). The ruler of the synagogue for that day may have invited Jesus to read and speak because of his now great reputation as a teacher. Jesus could have stood up voluntarily and appropriately because of his interest in his home town. {To read} (\anagn“nai\). Second aorist active infinitive of \anagin“sk“\, to recognize again the written characters and so to read and then to read aloud. It appears first in Pindar in the sense of read and always so in the N.T. This public reading aloud with occasional comments may explain the parenthesis in strkjv@Matthew:24:15| (Let him that readeth understand).

rwp@Luke:4:17 @{Was delivered} (\epedothˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \epidid“mi\, to give over to, a common verb. At the proper stage of the service "the attendant" or "minister" (\hupˆretˆs\, under rower) or "beadle" took out a roll of the law from the ark, unwrapped it, and gave it to some one to read. On sabbath days some seven persons were asked to read small portions of the law. This was the first lesson or _Parashah_. This was followed by a reading from the prophets and a discourse, the second lesson or _Haphtarah_. This last is what Jesus did. {The book of the prophet Isaiah} (\biblion tou prophˆtou Esaiou\). Literally, "a roll of the prophet Isaiah." Apparently Isaiah was handed to Jesus without his asking for it. But certainly Jesus cared more for the prophets than for the ceremonial law. It was a congenial service that he was asked to perform. Jesus used Deuteronomy in his temptations and now Isaiah for this sermon. The Syriac Sinaitic manuscript has it that Jesus stood up after the attendant handed him the roll. {Opened} (\anoixas\). Really it was {unrolled} (\anaptuxas\) as Aleph D have it. But the more general term \anoixas\ (from \anoig“\, common verb) is probably genuine. \Anaptuss“\ does not occur in the N.T. outside of this passage if genuine. {Found the place} (\heuren ton topon\). Second aorist active indicative. He continued to unroll (rolling up the other side) till he found the passage desired. It may have been a fixed lesson for the day or it may have been his own choosing. At any rate it was a marvellously appropriate passage (Isaiah:61:1,2| with one clause omitted and some words from strkjv@Isaiah:58:6|). It is a free quotation from the Septuagint. {Where it was written} (\hou ˆn gegrammenon\). Periphrastic pluperfect passive again as in strkjv@4:16|.

rwp@Luke:4:20 @{He closed the book} (\ptuxas to biblion\). Aorist active participle of \ptuss“\. Rolled up the roll and gave it back to the attendant who had given it to him and who put it away again in its case. {Sat down} (\ekathisen\). Took his seat there as a sign that he was going to speak instead of going back to his former seat. This was the usual Jewish attitude for public speaking and teaching (Luke:5:3; strkjv@Matthew:5:1; strkjv@Mark:4:1; strkjv@Acts:16:13|). {Were fastened on him} (\ˆsan atenizontes aut“i\). Periphrastic imperfect active and so a vivid description. Literally, the eyes of all in the synagogue were gazing fixedly upon him. The verb \ateniz“\ occurs in Aristotle and the Septuagint. It is from the adjective \atenˆs\ and that from \tein“\, to stretch, and copulative or intensive \a\, not \a\ privative. The word occurs in the N.T. here and in strkjv@22:56|, ten times in Acts, and in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:7,13|. Paul uses it of the steady eager gaze of the people at Moses when he came down from the mountain when he had been communing with God. There was something in the look of Jesus here that held the people spellbound for the moment, apart from the great reputation with which he came to them. In small measure every effective speaker knows what it is to meet the eager expectations of an audience.

rwp@Luke:4:23 @{Doubtless} (\pant“s\). Adverb. Literally, at any rate, certainly, assuredly. Cf. strkjv@Acts:21:22; strkjv@28:4|. {This parable} (\tˆn parabolˆn tautˆn\). See discussion on ¯Matthew:13|. Here the word has a special application to a crisp proverb which involves a comparison. The word physician is the point of comparison. Luke the physician alone gives this saying of Jesus. The proverb means that the physician was expected to take his own medicine and to heal himself. The word \parabolˆ\ in the N.T. is confined to the Synoptic Gospels except strkjv@Hebrews:9:9; strkjv@11:19|. This use for a proverb occurs also in strkjv@Luke:5:36; strkjv@6:39|. This proverb in various forms appears not only among the Jews, but in Euripides and Aeschylus among the Greeks, and in Cicero's _Letters_. Hobart quotes the same idea from Galen, and the Chinese used to demand it of their physicians. The point of the parable seems to be that the people were expecting him to make good his claim to the Messiahship by doing here in Nazareth what they had heard of his doing in Capernaum and elsewhere. "Establish your claims by direct evidence" (Easton). This same appeal (Vincent) was addressed to Christ on the Cross (Matthew:27:40,42|). There is a tone of sarcasm towards Jesus in both cases. {Heard done} (\ˆkousamen genomena\). The use of this second aorist middle participle \genomena\ after \ˆkousamen\ is a neat Greek idiom. It is punctiliar action in indirect discourse after this verb of sensation or emotion (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1040-42, 1122-24). {Do also here} (\poiˆson kai h“de\). Ingressive aorist active imperative. Do it here in thy own country and town and do it now. Jesus applies the proverb to himself as an interpretation of their real attitude towards himself.

rwp@Luke:5:1 @{Pressed upon him} (\epikeisthai\). Luke in this paragraph (5:1-11; strkjv@Mark:1:16-20; strkjv@Matthew:4:18-22|) does not follow the chronology of Mark as he usually does. It seems reasonably clear that the renewed call of the four fishermen came before the first tour of Galilee in strkjv@Luke:4:42-44|. It is here assumed that Luke is describing in his own way the incident given in Mark and Matthew above. Luke singles out Simon in a graphic way. This verb \epikeisthai\ is an old one and means to \lie upon\, rest upon as of a stone on the tomb (John:11:38|) or of fish on the burning coals (John:21:9|). Songs:it is used of a tempest (Acts:27:20|) and of the urgent demands for Christ's crucifixion (Luke:23:23|). Here it vividly pictures the eager crowds around Jesus. \En t“i epikeisthai\ is a favourite idiom with Luke as we have already seen, \en\ with the articular infinitive in the locative case. {That} (\kai\). \Kai\ does not technically mean the declarative conjunction "that," but it is a fair rendering of the somewhat awkward idiom of Luke to a certain extent imitating the Hebrew use of _wav_. {Was standing} (\ˆn hest“s\). Periphrastic second past perfect of \histˆmi\ which here is equal to a practical imperfect. {By the lake} (\para tˆn limnˆn\). The use of the accusative with \para\, alongside, after a verb of rest used to be called the pregnant use, came and was standing. But that is no longer necessary, for the accusative as the case of extension is the oldest of the cases and in later Greek regains many of the earlier uses of the other cases employed for more precise distinctions. See the same idiom in verse 2|. We need not here stress the notion of extension. "With characteristic accuracy Luke never calls it a sea, while the others never call it a lake" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:5:5 @{Master} (\epistata\). Used only by Luke in the N.T. and always in addresses to Christ (8:24,45; strkjv@9:33,49; strkjv@17:13|). Common in the older writers for superintendent or overseer (one standing over another). This word recognizes Christ's authority. {We toiled} (\kopiasantes\). This verb is from \kopos\ (\work, toil\) and occurs from Aristophanes on. It used to be said that the notion of weariness in toil appears only in the LXX and the N.T. But Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 312f.) cites examples from inscriptions on tombstones quite in harmony with the use in the N.T. Peter's protest calls attention also to the whole night of fruitless toil. {But at thy word} (\epi de t“i rhˆmati sou\). On the base of \epi\. Acquiescence to show his obedience to Christ as "Master," but with no confidence whatsoever in the wisdom of this particular command. Besides, fishing in this lake was Peter's business and he really claimed superior knowledge on this occasion to that of Jesus.

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

rwp@Luke:5:19 @{By what way they might bring him in} (\poias eis enegk“sin auton\). Deliberative subjunctive of the direct question retained in the indirect. {The housetop} (\to d“ma\). Very old word. The flat roof of Jewish houses was usually reached by outside stairway. Cf. strkjv@Acts:10:9| where Peter went for meditation. {Through the tiles} (\dia t“n keram“n\). Common and old word for the tile roof. strkjv@Mark:2:4| speaks of digging a hole in this tile roof. {Let him down} (\kathˆkan auton\). First aorist (k aorist) effective active of \kathiˆmi\, common verb. strkjv@Mark:2:4| has historical present \chal“si\, the verb used by Jesus to Peter and in Peter's reply (Luke:5:4f.|). {With his couch} (\sun t“i klinidi“i\). Also in verse 24|. Diminutive of \klinˆ\ (verse 18|) occurring in Plutarch and _Koin‚_ writers. strkjv@Mark:2:4| has \krabatton\ (pallet). It doubtless was a pallet on which the paralytic lay. {Into the midst before Jesus} (\eis to meson emprosthen tou Iˆsou\). The four friends had succeeded, probably each holding a rope to a corner of the pallet. It was a moment of triumph over difficulties and surprise to all in the house (Peter's apparently, strkjv@Mark:2:1|).

rwp@Luke:6:1 @{On a sabbath} (\en sabbat“i\). This is the second sabbath on which Jesus is noted by Luke. The first was strkjv@Luke:4:31-41|. There was another in strkjv@John:5:1-47|. There is Western and Syrian (Byzantine) evidence for a very curious reading here which calls this sabbath "secondfirst" (\deuteropr“t“i\). It is undoubtedly spurious, though Westcott and Hort print it in the margin. A possible explanation is that a scribe wrote "first" (\pr“t“i\) on the margin because of the sabbath miracle in strkjv@Luke:6:6-11|. Then another scribe recalled strkjv@Luke:4:31| where a sabbath is mentioned and wrote "second" (\deuter“i\) also on the margin. Finally a third scribe combined the two in the word \deuteropr“t“i\ that is not found elsewhere. If it were genuine, we should not know what it means. {Plucked} (\etillon\). Imperfect active. They were plucking as they went on through (\diaporeuesthai\). Whether wheat or barley, we do not know, not our "corn" (maize). {Did eat} (\ˆsthion\). Imperfect again. See on ¯Matthew:12:1f.; strkjv@Mark:2:23f.| for the separate acts in supposed violence of the sabbath laws. {Rubbing them in their hands} (\ps“chontes tais chersin\). Only in Luke and only here in the N.T. This was one of the chief offences. "According to Rabbinical notions, it was reaping, threshing, winnowing, and preparing food all at once" (Plummer). These Pharisees were straining out gnats and swallowing camels! This verb \ps“ch“\ is a late one for \psa“\, to rub.

rwp@Luke:6:3 @{Not even this} (\oude touto\). This small point only in Luke. {What} (\ho\). Literally, {which}. strkjv@Mark:2:25; strkjv@Matthew:12:3| have \ti\ (what).

rwp@Luke:6:4 @{Did take} (\lab“n\). Second aorist active participle of \lamban“\. Not in Mark and Matthew. See strkjv@Matthew:12:1-8; strkjv@Mark:2:23-28| for discussion of details about the shewbread and the five arguments in defence of his conduct on the sabbath (example of David, work of the priests on the sabbath, prophecy of strkjv@Hosea:6:6|, purpose of the sabbath for man, the Son of Man lord of the sabbath). It was an overwhelming and crushing reply to these pettifogging ceremonialists to which they could not reply, but which increased their anger. Codex D transfers verse 5| to after verse 10| and puts here the following: "On the same day beholding one working on the sabbath he said to him: Man, if you know what you are doing, happy are you; but if you do not know, cursed are you and a transgressor of the law."

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

rwp@Luke:6:17 @{He came down with them} (\katabas met' aut“n\). 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" (\estˆ\). 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 (\iathˆnai\, first aorist passive of \iaomai\) of their diseases."

rwp@Luke:6:20 @{And he lifted up his eyes} (\kai autos eparas tous opthalmous autou\). First aorist active participle from \epair“\. Note also Luke's favourite use of \kai autos\ in beginning a paragraph. Vivid detail alone in Luke. Jesus looked the vast audience full in the face. strkjv@Matthew:5:2| mentions that "he opened his mouth and taught them" (began to teach them, inchoative imperfect, \edidasken\). He spoke out so that the great crowd could hear. Some preachers do not open their mouths and do not look up at the people, but down at the manuscript and drawl along while the people lose interest and even go to sleep or slip out. {Ye poor} (\hoi pt“choi\). {The poor}, but "yours" (\humetera\) justifies the translation "ye." Luke's report is direct address in all the four beatitudes and four woes given by him. It is useless to speculate why Luke gives only four of the eight beatitudes in Matthew or why Matthew does not give the four woes in Luke. One can only say that neither professes to give a complete report of the sermon. There is no evidence to show that either saw the report of the other. They may have used a common source like Q (the Logia of Jesus) or they may have had separate sources. Luke's first beatitude corresponds with Matthew's first, but he does not have "in spirit" after "poor." Does Luke represent Jesus as saying that poverty itself is a blessing? It can be made so. Or does Luke represent Jesus as meaning what is in Matthew, poverty of spirit? {The kingdom of God} (\hˆ basileia tou theou\). strkjv@Matthew:5:3| has "the kingdom of heaven" which occurs alone in Matthew though he also has the one here in Luke with no practical difference. The rabbis usually said "the kingdom of heaven." They used it of the political Messianic kingdom when Judaism of the Pharisaic sort would triumph over the world. The idea of Jesus is in the sharpest contrast to that conception here and always. See on ¯Matthew:3:2| for discussion of the meaning of the word "kingdom." It is the favourite word of Jesus for the rule of God in the heart here and now. It is both present and future and will reach a glorious consummation. Some of the sayings of Christ have apocalyptic and eschatological figures, but the heart of the matter is here in the spiritual reality of the reign of God in the hearts of those who serve him. The kingdom parables expand and enlarge upon various phases of this inward life and growth.

rwp@Luke:6:22 @{When they shall separate you} (\hotan aphoris“sin humƒs\). First aorist active subjunctive, from \aphoriz“\, common verb for marking off a boundary. Songs:either in good sense or bad sense as here. The reference is to excommunication from the congregation as well as from social intercourse. {Cast out your name as evil} (\exbal“sin to onoma hum“n h“s ponˆron\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \ekball“\, common verb. The verb is used in Aristophanes, Sophocles, and Plato of hissing an actor off the stage. The name of Christian or disciple or Nazarene came to be a byword of contempt as shown in the Acts. It was even unlawful in the Neronian persecution when Christianity was not a _religio licita_. {For the Son of man's sake} (\heneka tou huiou tou anthr“pou\). Jesus foretold what will befall those who are loyal to him. The Acts of the Apostles is a commentary on this prophecy. This is Christ's common designation of himself, never of others save by Stephen (Acts:7:56|) and in the Apocalypse (Revelation:1:13; strkjv@14:14|). But both Son of God and Son of man apply to him (John:1:50,52; strkjv@Matthew:26:63f.|). Christ was a real man though the Son of God. He is also the representative man and has authority over all men.

rwp@Luke:6:27 @{But I say unto you that hear} (\Alla humin leg“ tois akouousin\). There is a contrast in this use of \alla\ like that in strkjv@Matthew:5:44|. This is the only one of the many examples given by strkjv@Matthew:5| of the sharp antithesis between what the rabbis taught and what Jesus said. Perhaps that contrast is referred to by Luke. If necessary, \alla\ could be coordinating or paratactic conjunction as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:11| rather than adversative as apparently here. See strkjv@Matthew:5:43f.| Love of enemies is in the O.T., but Jesus ennobles the word, \agapa“\, and uses it of love for one's enemies.

rwp@Luke:6:32 @{What thank have ye?} (\poia h–min charis estin;\). What grace or gratitude is there to you? strkjv@Matthew:5:46| has \misthon\ (reward).

rwp@Luke:6:35 @{But} (\plˆn\). Plain adversative like \plˆn\ in verse 24|. Never despairing (\mˆden apelpizontes\). \Mˆden\ is read by A B L Bohairic and is the reading of Westcott and Hort. The reading \mˆdena\ 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 ponˆrous\). God the Father is kind towards the unkind and wicked. Note the one article with both adjectives.

rwp@Luke:6:45 @{Bringeth forth} (\propherei\). In a similar saying repeated later. strkjv@Matthew:12:34f.| has the verb \ekballei\ (throws out, casts out), a bolder figure. "When men are natural, heart and mouth act in concert. But otherwise the mouth sometimes professes what the heart does not feel" (Plummer).

rwp@Matthew:10:13 @{If the house be worthy} (\ean ˆi hˆ oikia axia\). Third class condition. What makes a house worthy? "It would naturally be readiness to receive the preachers and their message" (McNeile). Hospitality is one of the noblest graces and preachers receive their share of it. The apostles are not to be burdensome as guests.

rwp@Matthew:10:39 @{Shall lose it} (\apolesei autˆn\). This paradox appears in four forms according to Allen (I) strkjv@Matthew:10:39| (2) strkjv@Mark:8:35; strkjv@Matthew:16:25; strkjv@Luke:9:24| (3) strkjv@Luke:17:33| (4) strkjv@John:12:25|. _The Wisdom of Sirach_ (Hebrew text) in strkjv@51:26 has: "He that giveth his life findeth her (wisdom)." It is one of the profound sayings of Christ that he repeated many times. Plato (_Gorgias_ 512) has language somewhat similar though not so sharply put. The article and aorist participles here (\ho heur“n, ho apolesas\) are timeless in themselves just like \ho dechomenos\ in verses 40| and 41|.

rwp@Matthew:11:1 @{He departed thence to teach and preach} (\metebˆ ekeithen tou didaskein kai kˆrussein\). In five instances (7:28; strkjv@11:1; strkjv@13:53; strkjv@19:1; strkjv@26:1|) after great discourses by Jesus "the transition to what follows is made with the formula, 'And it came to pass when Jesus had ended'" (McNeile). This is a wrong chapter division, for strkjv@11:1| belongs with the preceding section. "{Commanding}" (\diatass“n\, complementary participle with \etelesen\), means giving orders in detail (\dia-\) for each of them. Note both "teach and preach" as in strkjv@4:23|. Where did Jesus go? Did he follow behind the twelve as he did with the seventy "whither he himself was about to come" (Luke:10:1|)? Bruce holds with Chrysostom that Jesus avoided the places where they were, giving them room and time to do their work. But, if Jesus himself went to the chief cities of Galilee on this tour, he would be compelled to touch many of the same points. Jesus would naturally follow behind at some distance. At the end of the tour the apostles come together in Capernaum and tell Jesus all that they had done and that they had taught (Mark:6:30|). Matthew follows the general outline of Mark, but the events are not grouped in chronological order here.

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

rwp@Matthew:12:6 @{One greater than the temple} (\tou hierou meizon\). Ablative of comparison, \tou hierou\. The Textus Receptus has \meiz“n\, but the neuter is correct. Literally, "something greater than the temple." What is that? It may still be Christ, or it may be: "The work and His disciples were of more account than the temple" (Plummer). "If the temple was not subservient to Sabbath rules, how much less the Messiah!" (Allen).

rwp@Matthew:12:25 @{Knowing their thoughts} (\eid“s de tas enthumˆseis aut“n\). What they were revolving in their minds. They now find out what a powerful opponent Jesus is. By parables, by a series of conditions (first class), by sarcasm, by rhetorical question, by merciless logic, he lays bare their hollow insincerity and the futility of their arguments. Satan does not cast out Satan. Note timeless aorist passive \emeristhˆ\ in 26|, \ephthasen\ in 28| (simple sense of arriving as in strkjv@Phillipians:3:16| from \phthan“\). Christ is engaged in deathless conflict with Satan the strong man (29|). "Goods" (\skeuˆ\) means house-gear, house furniture, or equipment as in strkjv@Luke:17:36| and strkjv@Acts:27:17|, the tackling of the ship.

rwp@Matthew:12:30 @{He that is not with me} (\ho mˆ “n met' emou\). With these solemn words Jesus draws the line of cleavage between himself and his enemies then and now. Jesus still has his enemies who hate him and all noble words and deeds because they sting what conscience they have into fury. But we may have our choice. We either gather with (\sunag“n\) Christ or scatter (\skorpizei\) to the four winds. Christ is the magnet of the ages. He draws or drives away. "Satan is the arch-waster, Christ the collector, Saviour" (Bruce).

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

rwp@Matthew:12:39 @{An evil and adulterous generation} (\genea ponˆra kai moichalis\). They had broken the marriage tie which bound them to Jehovah (Plummer). See strkjv@Psalms:73:27; strkjv@Isaiah:57:3ff.; strkjv@62:5; strkjv@Ezekiel:23:27; strkjv@James:4:4; strkjv@Revelation:2:20|. What is "the sign of Jonah?"

rwp@Matthew:13:14 @{Is fulfilled} (\anaplˆroutai\). Aoristic present passive indicative. Here Jesus points out the fulfilment and not with Matthew's usual formula (\hina\ or \hop“s pl“rˆthˆi to rhˆthen\ (see strkjv@1:22|). The verb \anaplˆro“\ occurs nowhere else in the Gospels, but occurs in the Pauline Epistles. It means to fill up like a cup, to fill another's place (1Corinthians:14:16|), to fill up what is lacking (Phillipians:2:30|). Here it means that the prophecy of Isaiah is fully satisfied in the conduct of the Pharisees and Jesus himself points it out. Note two ways of reproducing the Hebrew idiom (infinitive absolute), one by \akoˆi\ the other by \blepontes\. Note also the strong negative \ou mˆ\ with aorist subjunctive.

rwp@Matthew:13:18 @{Hear then ye the parable} (\humeis oun akousate tˆn parabolˆn\). Jesus has given in strkjv@13:13| one reason for his use of parables, the condemnation which the Pharisees have brought on themselves by their spiritual dulness: "Therefore I speak to them in parables" (\dia touto en parab“lais antois lal“\). He can go on preaching the mysteries of the kingdom without their comprehending what he is saying, but he is anxious that the disciples really get personal knowledge (\gn“nai\, verse 11|) of these same mysteries. Songs:he explains in detail what he means to teach by the Parable of the Sower. He appeals to them (note position of \h–meis\) to listen as he explains.

rwp@Matthew:13:19 @{Cometh the evil one and snatcheth away} (\erchetai ho ponˆros kai harpazei\). The birds pick up the seeds while the sower sows. The devil is busy with his job of snatching or seizing like a bandit or rogue the word of the kingdom before it has time even to sprout. How quickly after the sermon the impression is gone. "This is he" (\houtos estin\). Matthew, like Mark, speaks of the people who hear the words as the seed itself. That creates some confusion in this condensed form of what Jesus actually said, but the real point is clear. {The seed sown in his heart} (\to esparmenon en tˆi kardiƒi autou\, perfect passive participle of \speir“\, to sow) and "the man sown by the wayside" (\ho para tˆn hodon spareis\, aorist passive participle, along the wayside) are identified. The seed in the heart is not of itself responsible, but the man who lets the devil snatch it away.

rwp@Matthew:13:21 @{Yet hath he not root in himself} (\ouk echei de rhizan en heaut“i\). Cf. strkjv@Colossians:2:7| and strkjv@Ephesians:3:18| \erriz“memoi\. Stability like a tree. Here the man has a mushroom growth and "endureth for a while" (\proskairos\), temporary, quick to sprout, quick to stumble (\skandalizetai\). What a picture of some converts in our modern revivals. They drop away overnight because they did not have the root of the matter in them. This man does not last or hold out.

rwp@Matthew:13:41 @{Out of his kingdom} (\ek tˆs basileias autou\). Out from the midst of the kingdom, because in every city the good and the bad are scattered and mixed together. Cf. \ek mesou t“n dikai“n\ in strkjv@13:49| "from the midst of the righteous." What this means is that, just as the wheat and the darnel are mixed together in the field till the separation at harvest, so the evil are mixed with the good in the world (the field). Jesus does not mean to say that these "stumbling-blocks" (\ta skandala\) are actually in the Kingdom of heaven and really members of the Kingdom. They are simply mixed in the field with the wheat and God leaves them in the world till the separation comes. Their destiny is "the furnace of fire" (\tˆn kaminon tou puros\).

rwp@Matthew:13:54 @{Is not this the carpenter's son?} (\ouch houtos estin ho tou tekt“nos huios?\). The well-known, the leading, or even for a time the only carpenter in Nazareth till Jesus took the place of Joseph as the carpenter. What the people of Nazareth could not comprehend was how one with the origin and environment of Jesus here in Nazareth could possess the wisdom which he appeared to have in his teaching (\edidasken\). That has often puzzled people how a boy whom they knew could become the man he apparently is after leaving them. They knew Joseph, Mary, the brothers (four of them named) and sisters (names not given). Jesus passed here as the son of Joseph and these were younger brothers and sisters (half brothers and sisters technically).

rwp@Matthew:14:12 @{And they went and told Jesus} (\kai elthontes apˆggeilan t“i Iˆsou\). As was meet after they had given his body decent burial. It was a shock to the Master who alone knew how great John really was. The fate of John was a prophecy of what was before Jesus. According to strkjv@Matthew:14:13| the news of the fate of John led to the withdrawal of Jesus to the desert privately, an additional motive besides the need for rest after the strain of the recent tour.

rwp@Matthew:14:19 @{To sit down on the grass} (\anaklithˆnai epi tou chortou\). "Recline," of course, the word means, first aorist passive infinitive. A beautiful picture in the afternoon sun on the grass on the mountain side that sloped westward. The orderly arrangement (Mark) made it easy to count them and to feed them. Jesus stood where all could see him "break" (\klasas\) the thin Jewish cakes of bread and give to the disciples and they to the multitudes. This is a nature miracle that some men find it hard to believe, but it is recorded by all four Gospels and the only one told by all four. It was impossible for the crowds to misunderstand and to be deceived. If Jesus is in reality Lord of the universe as John tells us (John:1:1-18|) and Paul holds (Colossians:1:15-20|), why should we balk at this miracle? He who created the universe surely has power to go on creating what he wills to do.

rwp@Matthew:15:3 @{Ye also} (\kai h–meis\). Jesus admits that the disciples had transgressed the rabbinical traditions. Jesus treats it as a matter of no great importance in itself save as they had put the tradition of the elders in the place of the commandment of God. When the two clashed, as was often the case, the rabbis transgress the commandment of God "because of your tradition" (\dia tˆn paradosin h–m“n\). The accusative with \dia\ means that, not "by means of." Tradition is not good or bad in itself. It is merely what is handed on from one to another. Custom tended to make these traditions binding like law. The Talmud is a monument of their struggle with tradition. There could be no compromise on this subject and Jesus accepts the issue. He stands for real righteousness and spiritual freedom, not for bondage to mere ceremonialism and tradition. The rabbis placed tradition (the oral law) above the law of God.

rwp@Matthew:15:11 @{This defileth the man} (\touto koinoi ton anthr“pon\). This word is from \koinos\ which is used in two senses, either what is "common" to all and general like the _Koin‚_ Greek, or what is unclean and "common" either ceremonially or in reality. The ceremonial "commonness" disturbed Peter on the housetop in Joppa (Acts:10:14|). See also strkjv@Acts:21:28; strkjv@Hebrews:9:13|. One who is thus religiously common or unclean is cut off from doing his religious acts. "Defilement" was a grave issue with the rabbinical ceremonialists. Jesus appeals to the crowd here: {Hear and understand} (\akouete kai suniete\). He has a profound distinction to draw. Moral uncleanness is what makes a man common, defiles him. That is what is to be dreaded, not to be glossed over. "This goes beyond the tradition of the elders and virtually abrogates the Levitical distinctions between clean and unclean" (Bruce). One can see the pettifogging pretenders shrivel up under these withering words.

rwp@Matthew:15:32 @{Three days} (\hˆmerai treis\). A parenthetic nominative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 460). {What to eat} (\ti phag“sin\). Indirect question with the deliberative subjunctive retained. In the feeding of the five thousand Jesus took compassion on the people and healed their sick (14:14|). Here the hunger of the multitude moves him to compassion (\splagchnizomai\, in both instances). Songs:he is unwilling (\ou thel“\) to send them away hungry. {Faint} (\ekluth“sin\). Unloosed, (\eklu“\) exhausted.

rwp@Matthew:16:1 @{The Pharisees and Sadducees} (\hoi Pharisaioi kai Saddoukaioi\). The first time that we have this combination of the two parties who disliked each other exceedingly. Hate makes strange bedfellows. They hated Jesus more than they did each other. Their hostility has not decreased during the absence of Jesus, but rather increased. {Tempting him} (\peirazontes\). Their motive was bad. {A sign from heaven} (\sˆmeion ek tou ouranou\). The scribes and Pharisees had already asked for a sign (12:38|). Now this new combination adds "from heaven." What did they have in mind? They may not have had any definite idea to embarrass Jesus. The Jewish apocalypses did speak of spectacular displays of power by the Son of Man (the Messiah). The devil had suggested that Jesus let the people see him drop down from the pinnacle of the temple and the people expected the Messiah to come from an unknown source (John:7:27|) who would do great signs (John:7:31|). Chrysostom (_Hom_. liii.) suggests stopping the course of the sun, bridling the moon, a clap of thunder.

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

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

rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{I will build my church} (\oikodomˆs“ mou tˆn ekklˆsian\). It is the figure of a building and he uses the word \ekklˆsian\ which occurs in the New Testament usually of a local organization, but sometimes in a more general sense. What is the sense here in which Jesus uses it? The word originally meant "assembly" (Acts:19:39|), but it came to be applied to an "unassembled assembly" as in strkjv@Acts:8:3| for the Christians persecuted by Saul from house to house. "And the name for the new Israel, \ekklˆsia\, in His mouth is not an anachronism. It is an old familiar name for the congregation of Israel found in Deut. (Deuteronomy:18:26; strkjv@23:2|) and Psalms (Psalms:22:36|), both books well known to Jesus" (Bruce). It is interesting to observe that in strkjv@Psalms:89| most of the important words employed by Jesus on this occasion occur in the LXX text. Songs:\oikodomˆs“\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:5|; \ekklˆsia\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:6|; \katischu“\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:22|; \Christos\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:39,52|; \hƒidˆs\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:49| (\ek cheiros hƒidou\). If one is puzzled over the use of "building" with the word \ekklˆsia\ it will be helpful to turn to strkjv@1Peter:2:5|. Peter, the very one to whom Jesus is here speaking, writing to the Christians in the five Roman provinces in Asia (1Peter:1:1|), says: "You are built a spiritual house" (\oikodomeisthe oikos pneumatikos\). It is difficult to resist the impression that Peter recalls the words of Jesus to him on this memorable occasion. Further on (1Peter:2:9|) he speaks of them as an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, showing beyond controversy that Peter's use of building a spiritual house is general, not local. This is undoubtedly the picture in the mind of Christ here in strkjv@16:18|. It is a great spiritual house, Christ's Israel, not the Jewish nation, which he describes. What is the rock on which Christ will build his vast temple? Not on Peter alone or mainly or primarily. Peter by his confession was furnished with the illustration for the rock on which His church will rest. It is the same kind of faith that Peter has just confessed. The perpetuity of this church general is guaranteed.

rwp@Revelation:8:2 @{Stand} (\hestˆkasin\). Perfect active of \histˆmi\ (intransitive). Another "hebdomad" so frequent in the Apocalypse. The article (the seven angels) seems to point to seven well-known angels. In Enoch strkjv@20:7 the names of seven archangels are given (Uriel, Raphael, Raguel, Michael, Sariel, Gabriel, Remiel) and "angels of the Presence" is an idea like that in strkjv@Isaiah:63:9|. We do not know precisely what is John's idea here. {Seven trumpets} (\hepta salpigges\). We see trumpets assigned to angels in strkjv@Matthew:24:31; strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:16; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:52; strkjv@Revelation:4:1,4|. See also the use of trumpets in strkjv@Joshua:6:13; strkjv@Joel:2:1|. These seven trumpets are soon to break the half hour of silence. Thus the seven trumpets grow out of the opening of the seventh seal, however that fact is to be interpreted.

rwp@Revelation:8:8 @{As it were} (\h“s\). "As if," not a great mountain, but a blazing mass as large as a mountain. {Burning with fire} (\puri kaiomenon\). Present middle participle of \kai“\. Somewhat like Enoch strkjv@18:13, but perhaps with the picture of a great volcanic eruption like that of Vesuvius in A.D. 79. Strabo tells of an eruption B.C. 196 which made a new island (Palaea Kaumene). {Became blood} (\egeneto haima\). Like the Nile in the first plague (Exodus:7:20ff.|). Cf. also strkjv@16:3|.

rwp@Revelation:9:3 @{Locusts} (\akrides\). Also verse 7| and already in strkjv@Matthew:3:4; strkjv@Mark:1:6| (diet of the Baptist). The Israelites were permitted to eat them, but when the swarms came like the eighth Egyptian plague (Exodus:10:13ff.|) they devoured every green thing. The smoke was worse than the fallen star and the locusts that came out of the smoke were worse still, "a swarm of hellish locusts" (Swete). {The scorpions} (\hoi skorpioi\). Old name for a little animal somewhat like a lobster that lurks in stone walls in warm regions, with a venomous sting in its tail, in N.T. in strkjv@Luke:10:19; strkjv@11:12; strkjv@Revelation:9:3,5,10|. The scorpion ranks with the snake as hostile to man.

rwp@Revelation:9:6 @{Men} (\hoi anthr“poi\). Generic use of the article (men as a class). {Shall not find it} (\ou mˆ heurˆsousin auton\). Strong double negative \ou mˆ\ with the future active indicative according to Aleph Q, but \heur“sin\ (second aorist active subjunctive) according to A P (either construction regular). The idea here is found in strkjv@Job:3:21; strkjv@Jeremiah:8:3|. "Such a death as they desire, a death which will end their sufferings, is impossible; physical death is no remedy for the \basanismos\ of an evil conscience" (Swete). {They shall desire to die} (\epithumˆsousin apothanein\). Future active of \epithume“\, a climax to \zˆtˆsousin\ (they shall seek), to desire vehemently. Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:1:23| shows a preference for death if his work is done, in order to be with Christ, a very different feeling from what we have here. {Fleeth} (\pheugei\). Vivid futuristic present active indicative of \pheug“\. Even death does not come to their relief.

rwp@Revelation:17:8 @{Was and is not} (\ˆn kai ouk estin\). Imperfect and present of \eimi\, an apparent antithesis to \ho ˆn kai ho “n\ of strkjv@1:4|. This is a picture of the beast of strkjv@13:1ff.| which the woman is riding, but no longer just the empire, but one of the emperors who died (\ouk estin\, is not). {And is about to come up out of the abyss} (\kai mellei anabainein ek tˆs abussou\). That is, he is going to come to life again. {And to go into perdition} (\kai eis ap“leian hupagei\). Songs:(and he goes into perdition) the best MSS. read rather than the infinitive \hupagein\. Most interpreters see here an allusion to the "Nero _redivivus_" expectancy realized in Domitian, who was ruling when John wrote and who was called Nero _redivivus_. {Shall wonder} (\thaumasthˆsontai\). First future passive (deponent) of \thaumaz“\, with which compare \ethaumasthˆ\ in strkjv@13:3|. John had wondered (\ethaumasa\) in verse 6| "with the amazement of a horrible surprise; the world will wonder and admire" (Swete). {Whose name} (\h“n onoma\). Singular \onoma\, like \pt“ma\ in strkjv@11:8|. See strkjv@13:8| for the same description of those who worship the beast and for discussion of details. {When they behold} (\blepont“n\). Genitive plural of the present active participle of \blep“\, agreeing with \h“n\ (genitive relative) rather than with \hoi katoikountes\ (nominative just before \h“n\). {How that} (\hoti\). "Namely that." {He was, and is not, and shall come} (\ˆn kai ouk estin kai parestai\). Repetition of what is in verse 7| with \parestai\ (future of \pareimi\, from which \parousia\ comes) in place of \mellei\, "parody of the divine name" (Charles) in strkjv@1:4,8; strkjv@4:8|, "as the hellish antitype of Christ." The Neronic Antichrist has also a \parousia\.

rwp@Revelation:18:18 @{As they looked} (\blepontes\). Present active participle of \blep“\. See \hotan blep“sin\ in verse 10|. {What city is like the great city?} (\tis homoia tˆi polei tˆi megalˆi;\). No \polis\ with \tis\, but implied. Associative instrumental case, as usual, with \homoia\. "The eternal city" is eternal no longer.

rwp@Revelation:18:22 @{The voice} (\ph“nˆ\). Cf. strkjv@Ezekiel:26:13|. Or "sound" as in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:8| with \salpigx\ (trumpet). For this song of judgment see strkjv@Jeremiah:25:10|. {Of harpers} (\kithar“id“n\). Old word (from \kithara\, harp, and \“idos\, singer) as in strkjv@14:2|. {Of minstrels} (\mousik“n\). Old word (from \mousa\, music), here only in N.T., one playing on musical instruments. {Of flute-players} (\aulˆt“n\). Old word (from \aule“\, to play on a flute, strkjv@Matthew:11:17|, \aulos\, flute, strkjv@1Corinthians:14:7|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:9:23|. {Of trumpeters} (\salpist“n\). Late form for the earlier \salpigktˆs\ (from \salpiz“\), here only in N.T. {Shall be heard no more at all} (\ou mˆ akousthˆi\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \akou“\ with the double negative as below, with \ph“nˆ mulou\ (sound of the millstone), and as in verse 21| with \ou me heurethˆi\ and again with \pƒs technitˆs\ (craftsman). This old word is from \technˆ\, art, as here in some MSS. ("of whatsoever craft," \pasˆs technˆs\). \Technitˆs\ occurs also in this sense in strkjv@Acts:19:24,38|; and in strkjv@Hebrews:11:10| of God as the Architect. There is power in this four-fold sonorous repetition of \ou mˆ\ and the subjunctive with two more examples in verse 23|.

rwp@Revelation:19:12 @{A flame of fire} (\phlox puros\). As in the opening vision of Christ in strkjv@1:14| (2:18|). {Many diadems} (\diadˆmata polla\). A new feature, but the dragon has a diadem on each of his seven heads (12:3|) and the first beast one upon each of his ten horns (13:1|). Songs:the victorious Messiah will wear many royal diadems and not mere crowns, because he is King of kings (19:16|). {And he hath} (\kai ech“n\). Nominative active present participle of \ech“\ either used absolutely as an independent verb (like indicative) or in an anacoluthon, though \autou\ (his) is genitive. {A name written} (\onoma gegrammenon\). Perfect passive participle of \graph“\ as in strkjv@2:17| (cf. strkjv@3:12|). {But he himself} (\ei mˆ autos\). "Except himself" (common ellipsis of the verb after \ei mˆ\, "if not"). See strkjv@2:17; strkjv@3:12| for the new name there described. See strkjv@14:1| for the name of Christ on the forehead of the 144,000, and strkjv@17:5| for the name on the forehead of the harlot. This word here supplements what Jesus says in strkjv@Matthew:11:27|.

rwp@Revelation:20:3 @{Into the abyss} (\eis tˆn abusson\). The one in strkjv@9:1f.| and the one spoken of by the legion of demons in strkjv@Luke:8:31| under the charge of the angel of the abyss (Apollyon, strkjv@Revelation:9:11|) who is either Satan himself or a kindred power. "Already he has been cast out of Heaven (12:9|), now he is cast out of the earth, and returns to his own place" (Swete). {Shut it and sealed it} (\ekleisen kai esphragisen\). Effective first aorists active indicative of \klei“\ and \sphragiz“\. {That he should deceive no more} (\hina mˆ planˆsˆi\). Negative purpose clause with \hina mˆ\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \plana“\. Glorious relief after the strain of the previous visions of conflict. Small wonder that Christians today cherish this blessed hope whatever the actual meaning may be. {Until should be finished} (\achri telesthˆi\). Temporal clause of future purpose with \achri\ (as a conjunction like \he“s\) and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \tele“\. Repeated in verse 5| and see \achri\ and the subjunctive in strkjv@7:3; strkjv@15:8|. {He must be loosed} (\dei luthˆnai\). Sad necessity, alas, with \dei\ and the first aorist passive infinitive of \lu“\. {For a little time} (\mikron chronon\). Accusative of time. Whatever the thousand years means, it is here said plainly that after it is over the devil will again have power on earth "for a little time."

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

rwp@Revelation:21:27 @{There shall in no wise enter into it} (\ou mˆ eiselthˆi eis autˆn\). Double negative again with the second aorist active subjunctive of \eiserchomai\ with \eis\ repeated. Like strkjv@Isaiah:52:1; strkjv@Ezekiel:44:9|. {Anything unclean} (\pƒn koinon\). Common use of \pƒn\ with negative like \ouden\, and the use of \koinos\ for defiled or profane as in strkjv@Mark:7:2; strkjv@Acts:10:14|, not just what is common to all (Titus:1:4|). {Or he that} (\kai ho\). "And he that." {Maketh an abomination and a lie} (\poi“n bdelugma kai pseudos\). Like Babylon (17:4| which see for \bdelugma\) and strkjv@21:8| for those in the lake of fire and brimstone, and strkjv@22:15| for "every one loving and doing a lie." These recurrent glimpses of pagan life on earth and of hell in contrast to heaven in this picture raise the question already mentioned whether John is just running parallel pictures of heaven and hell after the judgment or whether, as Charles says: "The unclean and the abominable and the liars are still on earth, but, though the gates are open day and night, they cannot enter." In apocalyptic writing literalism and chronology cannot be insisted on as in ordinary books. The series of panoramas continue to the end. {But only they which are written} (\ei mˆ hoi gegrammenoi\). "Except those written." For "the book of life" see strkjv@3:5; strkjv@13:8; strkjv@20:15|. Cf. strkjv@Daniel:12:1|.

rwp@Revelation:22:6 @{He said unto me} (\eipen moi\). Apparently the same angel as in strkjv@22:1| (21:9,15|). {These words} (\houtoi hoi logoi\). The same words used in strkjv@21:5| by the angel there. Whatever the application there, here the angel seems to endorse as "faithful and true" (\pistoi kai alˆthinoi\) not merely the preceding vision (21:9-22:5|), but the revelations of the entire book. The language added proves this: "Sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly come to pass" (\apesteilen ton aggelon autou deixai tois doulois autou ha dei genesthai en tachei\), a direct reference to strkjv@1:1| concerning the purpose of Christ's revelation to John in this book. For "the God of the spirits of the prophets" (\ho theos t“n pneumat“n t“n prophˆt“n\) see strkjv@19:10; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:32|. Probably the prophets' own spirits enlightened by the Holy Spirit (10:7; strkjv@11:8; strkjv@22:9|).

rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE AUTHOR The writer calls himself John (Revelation:1:1,4,9; strkjv@22:8|). But what John? The book can hardly be pseudonymous, though, with the exception of the Shepherd of Hermas, that is the rule with apocalypses. There would have been a clearer claim than just the name. The traditional and obvious way to understand the name is the Apostle John, though Dionysius of Alexandria mentions John Mark as held by some and he himself suggests another John, like the so-called Presbyter John of Papias as quoted by Eusebius. The uncertain language of Papias has raised a deal of questioning. Swete thinks that the majority of modern critics ascribe the Apocalypse to this Presbyter John, to whom Moffatt assigns probably II and III John. Irenaeus represents the Apostle John as having lived to the time of Trajan, at least to A.D. 98. Most ancient writers agree with this extreme old age of John. Justin Martyr states expressly that the Apostle John wrote the Apocalypse. Irenaeus called it the work of a disciple of Jesus. In the ninth century lived Georgius Hamartolus, and a MS. of his alleges that Papias says that John the son of Zebedee was beheaded by the Jews and there is an extract in an Oxford MS. of the seventh century which alleges that Papias says John and James were put to death by the Jews. On the basis of this slim evidence some today argue that John did not live to the end of the century and so did not write any of the Johannine books. But a respectable number of modern scholars still hold to the ancient view that the Apocalypse of John is the work of the Apostle and Beloved Disciple, the son of Zebedee.

rwp@Info_Romans @ THE PURPOSE Paul tells this himself. He had long cherished a desire to come to Rome (Acts:19:21|) and had often made his plans to do so (Romans:1:13|) which were interrupted (Romans:15:22|), but now he definitely plans to go from Jerusalem, after taking the contribution there (Romans:15:26|), to Rome and then on to Spain (Romans:15:24,28|). Meanwhile he sends this Epistle that the Romans may know what Paul's gospel really is (Romans:1:15; strkjv@2:16|). He is full of the issues raised by the Judaizing controversy as set forth in the Epistles to Corinth and to Galatia. Songs:in a calmer mood and more at length he presents his conception of the Righteousness demanded by God (Romans:1:17|) of both Gentile (Romans:1:18-32|) and Jew (Romans:2:1-3:20|) and only to be obtained by faith in Christ who by his atoning death (justification) has made it possible (Romans:3:21-5:21|). This new life of faith in Christ should lead to holiness of life (sanctification, chapters strkjv@Romans:6-8|). This is Paul's gospel and the remaining chapters deal with corollaries growing out of the doctrine of grace as applied to practical matters. It is a cause for gratitude that Paul did write out so full a statement of his message. He had a message for the whole world and was anxious to win the Roman Empire to Christ. It was important that he go to Rome for it was the centre of the world's life. Nowhere does Paul's Christian statesmanship show to better advantage than in this greatest of his Epistles. It is not a book of formal theology though Paul is the greatest of theologians. Here Paul is seen in the plenitude of his powers with all the wealth of his knowledge of Christ and his rich experience in mission work. The church in Rome is plainly composed of both Jews and Greeks, though who started the work there we have no way of knowing. Paul's ambition was to preach where no one else had been (Romans:15:20|), but he has no hesitation in going on to Rome.

rwp@Romans:1:4 @{Who was declared} (\tou horisthentos\). Articular participle (first aorist passive) of \horiz“\ for which verb see on ¯Luke:22:22; strkjv@Acts:2:23|. He was the Son of God in his preincarnate state (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6|) and still so after his Incarnation (verse 3|, "of the seed of David"), but it was the Resurrection of the dead (\ex anastase“s nekr“n\, the general resurrection implied by that of Christ) that definitely marked Jesus off as God's Son because of his claims about himself as God's Son and his prophecy that he would rise on the third day. This event (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:15|) gave God's seal "with power" (\en dunamei\), "in power," declared so in power (2Corinthians:13:4|). The Resurrection of Christ is the miracle of miracles. "The resurrection only declared him to be what he truly was" (Denney). {According to the spirit of holiness} (\kata pneuma hagi“sunˆs\). Not the Holy Spirit, but a description of Christ ethically as \kata sarka\ describes him physically (Denney). \Hagi“sunˆ\ is rare (1Thessalonians:3:13; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:1| in N.T.), three times in LXX, each time as the attribute of God. "The \pneuma hagi“sunˆs\, though not the Divine nature, is that in which the Divinity or Divine Personality Resided " (Sanday and Headlam). {Jesus Christ our Lord} (\Iˆsou Christou tou kuriou hˆm“n\). These words gather up the total personality of Jesus (his deity and his humanity).

rwp@Romans:1:21 @{Because that} (\dioti\). As in verse 19|. {Knowing God} (\gnontes ton theon\). Second aorist active participle of \gin“sk“\, to know by personal experience. Definite statement that originally men had some knowledge of God. No people, however degraded, have yet been found without some yearning after a god, a seeking to find the true God and get back to him as Paul said in Athens (Acts:17:27|). {Glorified not as God} (\ouch h“s theon edoxasan\). They knew more than they did. This is the reason for the condemnation of the heathen (2:12-16|), the failure to do what they know. {Their senseless heart} (\hˆ asunetos aut“n kardia\). \Kardia\ is the most comprehensive term for all our faculties whether feeling (Romans:9:2|), will (1Corinthians:4:5|), intellect (Romans:10:6|). It may be the home of the Holy Spirit (Romans:5:5|) or of evil desires (1:24|). See strkjv@Mark:7:21f.| for list of vices that come "out of the heart." \Asunetos\ is a verbal adjective from \suniˆmi\, to put together, and \a\ privative, unintelligent, not able to put together the manifest evidence about God (verse 20|). Songs:darkness settled down on their hearts (\eskotisthˆ\, first aorist ingressive passive of \skotiz“\, to darken).

rwp@Romans:1:25 @{Exchanged} (\metˆllaxan\). First aorist active indicative of \metallass“\, old word for exchanging trade, only here and verse 26| in N.T. What a bargain they made, "the truth of God for (\en\) the (\t“i\) lie." "The price of mythology" (Bengel). {Worshipped} (\esebasthˆsan\). First aorist passive (used transitively) of \sebazomai\, old verb, used in late Greek like \sebomai\, to worship. {Rather than the Creator} (\para ton ktisanta\). Placed side by side (\para\, the Creator and the creature, \ktisis\) they preferred the creature. {Who is blessed forever. Amen} (\hos estin eulogˆtos. Amˆn\). One of Paul's doxologies which may come at any moment when he is greatly stirred, as in strkjv@9:5|. \Eulogˆtos\ is verbal of \euloge“\.

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

rwp@Romans:2:16 @{According to my gospel} (\kata to euaggelion mou\). What Paul preaches (1Corinthians:15:1|) and which is the true gospel

rwp@Romans:3:1 @{What advantage then hath the Jew?} (\ti oun to perisson tou Ioudaiou?\). Literally, "What then is the overplus of the Jew?" What does the Jew have over and above the Gentile? It is a pertinent question after the stinging indictment of the Jew in chapter 2. {The profit} (\hˆ “phelia\). The help. Old word, only here in N.T. See strkjv@Mark:8:36| for \“phelei\, the verb to profit.

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} (\ˆpistˆsan\). 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} (\tˆn 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 \ˆpistˆsan, apistian, pistin\, all to refer to faithfulness rather than just faith.

rwp@Romans:3:5 @{What shall we say?} (\ti eroumen?\). Rhetorical question, common with Paul as he surveys the argument. {Commendeth} (\sunistˆsin\). This common verb \sunistˆmi\, to send together, occurs in the N.T. in two senses, either to introduce, to commend (2Corinthians:3:1; strkjv@4:2|) or to prove, to establish (2Corinthians:7:11; strkjv@Galatians:2:18; strkjv@Romans:5:8|). Either makes good sense here. {Who visiteth the wrath} (\ho epipher“n tˆn orgˆn\). "Who brings on the wrath," "the inflicter of the anger" (Vaughan). {I speak as a man} (\kata anthr“pon\). See strkjv@Galatians:3:15| for same phrase. As if to say, "pardon me for this line of argument." Tholuck says that the rabbis often used \kata anthr“pon\ and \ti eroumen\. Paul had not forgotten his rabbinical training.

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 pant“s\). "Not at all." See strkjv@1Corinthians:5:10|. {We before laid to the charge} (\proˆitiasametha\). 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:3:10 @{As it is written} (\kath“s gegraptai hoti\). Usual formula of quotation as in verse 4| with recitative \hoti\ added as in verse 8|. Paul here uses a catena or chain of quotations to prove his point in verse 9| that Jews are in no better fix than the Greeks for all are under sin. Dr. J. Rendel Harris has shown that the Jews and early Christians had _Testimonia_ (quotations from the Old Testament) strung together for certain purposes as proof-texts. Paul may have used one of them or he may have put these passages together himself. Verses 10-12| come from strkjv@Psalms:14:1-3|; first half of 13| as far as \edoliousan\ from strkjv@Psalms:4:9|, the second half from strkjv@Psalms:140:3|; verse 14| from strkjv@Psalms:10:7|; 15-17| from an abridgment of strkjv@Isaiah:59:7f.|; verse 18| from strkjv@Psalms:35:1|. Paul has given compounded quotations elsewhere (2Corinthians:6:16; strkjv@Romans:9:25f.,27f; strkjv@11:26f.,34f.; strkjv@12:19f.|). Curiously enough this compounded quotation was imported bodily into the text (LXX) of strkjv@Psalms:14| after verse 4 in Aleph B, etc. {There is none righteous, no, not one} (\ouk estin dikaios oude heis\). "There is not a righteous man, not even one." This sentence is like a motto for all the rest, a summary for what follows.

rwp@Romans:4:1 @{What then shall we say?} (\ti oun eroumen?\). Paul is fond of this rhetorical question (4:1; strkjv@6:1; strkjv@7:7; strkjv@8:31; strkjv@9:14,30|). {Forefather} (\propatora\). Old word, only here in N.T. Accusative case in apposition with \Abraam\ (accusative of general reference with the infinitive). {Hath found} (\heurˆkenai\). Westcott and Hort put \heurˆkenai\ in the margin because B omits it, a needless precaution. It is the perfect active infinitive of \heurisk“\ in indirect discourse after \eroumen\. The MSS. differ in the position of \kata sarka\.

rwp@Romans:4:3 @{It was reckoned unto him for righteousness} (\elogisthˆ eis dikaiosunˆn\). First aorist passive indicative of \logizomai\, old and common verb to set down accounts (literally or metaphorically). It was set down on the credit side of the ledger "for" (\eis\ as often) righteousness. What was set down? His believing God (\episteusen t“i the“i\).

rwp@Romans:4:11 @{The sign of circumcision} (\sˆmeion peritomˆs\). It is the genitive of apposition, circumcision being the sign. {A seal of the righteousness of the faith} (\sphragida tˆs dikaiosunˆs tˆs piste“s\). \Sphragis\ is old word for the seal placed on books (Revelation:5:1|), for a signet-ring (Revelation:7:2|), the stamp made by the seal (2Timothy:2:19|), that by which anything is confirmed (1Corinthians:9:2|) as here. The circumcision did not convey the righteousness, but only gave outward confirmation. It came by faith and "the faith which he had while in uncircumcision" (\tˆs en tˆi akrobustiƒi\), "the in the state of uncircumcision faith." Whatever parallel exists between baptism and circumcision as here stated by Paul argues for faith before baptism and for baptism as the sign and seal of the faith already had before baptism. {That he might be} (\eis to einai auton\). This idiom may be God's purpose (contemplated result) as in \eis to logisthˆnai\ below, or even actual result (so that he was) as in strkjv@1:20|. {Though they be in uncircumcision} (\di' akrobustias\). Simply, "of those who believe while in the condition of uncircumcision."

rwp@Romans:4:21 @{Being fully assured} (\plˆrophorˆtheis\). First aorist passive participle of \plˆrophore“\, from \plˆrophoros\ and this from \plˆrˆs\ and \pher“\, to bear or bring full (full measure), to settle fully. Late word, first in LXX but frequent in papyri in sense of finishing off or paying off. See on ¯Luke:1:1; strkjv@Romans:14:5|. {What he had promised} (\ho epˆggeltai\). Perfect middle indicative of \epaggellomai\, to promise, retained in indirect discourse according to usual Greek idiom. {He was able} (\dunatos estin\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse. The verbal adjective \dunatos\ with \estin\ is here used in sense of the verb \dunatai\ (Luke:14:31; strkjv@Acts:11:17|).

rwp@Romans:5:12 @{Therefore} (\dia touto\). "For this reason." What reason? Probably the argument made in verses 1-11|, assuming our justification and urging exultant joy in Christ because of the present reconciliation by Christ's death and the certainty of future final salvation by his life. {As through one man} (\h“sper di' henos anthr“pou\). Paul begins a comparison between the effects of Adam's sin and the effects of the redemptive work of Christ, but he does not give the second member of the comparison. Instead of that he discusses some problems about sin and death and starts over again in verse 15|. The general point is plain that the effects of Adam's sin are transmitted to his descendants, though he does not say how it was done whether by the natural or the federal headship of Adam. It is important to note that Paul does not say that the whole race receives the full benefit of Christ's atoning death, but only those who do. Christ is the head of all believers as Adam is the head of the race. In this sense Adam "is a figure of him that was to come." {Sin entered into the world} (\hˆ hamartia eis ton kosmon eisˆlthen\). Personification of sin and represented as coming from the outside into the world of humanity. Paul does not discuss the origin of evil beyond this fact. There are some today who deny the fact of sin at all and who call it merely "an error of mortal mind" (a notion) while others regard it as merely an animal inheritance devoid of ethical quality. {And so death passed unto all men} (\kai hout“s eis pantas anthr“pous diˆlthen\). Note use of \dierchomai\ rather than \eiserchomai\, just before, second aorist active indicative in both instances. By "death" in strkjv@Genesis:2:17; strkjv@3:19| physical death is meant, but in verses 17,21| eternal death is Paul's idea and that lurks constantly behind physical death with Paul. {For that all sinned} (\eph' h“i pantes hˆmarton\). Constative (summary) aorist active indicative of \hamartan“\, gathering up in this one tense the history of the race (committed sin). The transmission from Adam became facts of experience. In the old Greek \eph' h“i\ usually meant "on condition that," but "because" in N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 963).

rwp@Romans:5:13 @{Until the law} (\achri nomou\). Until the Mosaic law. Sin was there before the Mosaic law, for the Jews were like Gentiles who had the law of reason and conscience (2:12-16|), but the coming of the law increased their responsibility and their guilt (2:9|). {Sin is not imputed} (\hamartia de ouk ellogeitai\). Present passive indicative of late verb \elloga“\ (\-e“\) from \en\ and \logos\, to put down in the ledger to one's account, examples in inscription and papyri. {When there is no law} (\mˆ ontos nomou\). Genitive absolute, no law of any kind, he means. There was law _before_ the Mosaic law. But what about infants and idiots in case of death? Do they have responsibility? Surely not. The sinful nature which they inherit is met by Christ's atoning death and grace. No longer do men speak of "elect infants."

rwp@Romans:6:1 @{What shall we say then?} (\ti oun eroumen?\). "A debater's phrase" (Morison). Yes, and an echo of the rabbinical method of question and answer, but also an expression of exultant victory of grace versus sin. But Paul sees the possible perversion of this glorious grace. {Shall we continue in sin?} (\epimen“men tˆi hamartiƒi?\). Present active deliberative subjunctive of \epimen“\, old verb to tarry as in Ephesus (1Corinthians:16:8|) with locative case. The practice of sin as a habit (present tense) is here raised. {That grace may abound} (\hina hˆ charis pteonasˆi\). Final clause with ingressive aorist subjunctive, to set free the superfluity of grace alluded to like putting money in circulation. Horrible thought (\mˆ genoito\) and yet Paul faced it. There are occasionally so-called pietists who actually think that God's pardon gives them liberty to sin without penalty (cf. the sale of indulgences that stirred Martin Luther).

rwp@Romans:6:15 @{What then?} (\ti oun?\). Another turn in the argument about the excess of grace. {Shall we sin?} (\hamartes“men?\). First aorist active deliberative subjunctive of \hamartan“\. "Shall we commit sin" (occasional acts of sin as opposed to the life of sin as raised by \epimen“men tˆi hamartiƒi\ in verse 1|)? {Because} (\hoti\). The same reason as in verse 1| and taken up from the very words in verse 14|. Surely, the objector says, we may take a night off now and then and sin a little bit "since we are under grace."

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

rwp@Romans: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.

rwp@Romans:7:5 @{In the flesh} (\en tˆi sarki\). Same sense as in strkjv@6:19| and strkjv@7:18,25|. The "flesh" is not inherently sinful, but is subject to sin. It is what Paul means by being "under the law." He uses \sarx\ in a good many senses. {Sinful passions} (\ta pathˆmata t“n hamarti“n\). "Passions of sins" or marked by sins. {Wrought} (\energeito\). Imperfect middle of \energe“\, "were active." {To bring forth fruit unto death} (\eis to karpophorˆsai t“i thanat“i\). Purpose clause again. Vivid picture of the seeds of sin working for death.

rwp@Romans:7:7 @{Is the law sin?} (\ho nomos hamartia?\). A pertinent query in view of what he had said. Some people today oppose all inhibitions and prohibitions because they stimulate violations. That is half-baked thinking. {I had not known sin} (\tˆn hamartian ouk egn“n\). Second aorist indicative of \gin“sk“\, to know. It is a conclusion of a second class condition, determined as unfulfilled. Usually \an\ is used in the conclusion to make it plain that it is second class condition instead of first class, but occasionally it is not employed when it is plain enough without as here (John:16:22,24|). See on ¯Galatians:4:15|. Songs:as to {I had not known coveting} (lust), \epithumian ouk ˆidein\. But all the same the law is not itself sin nor the cause of sin. Men with their sinful natures turn law into an occasion for sinful acts.

rwp@Romans:7:8 @{Finding occasion} (\aphormˆn labousa\). See strkjv@2Corinthians:5:12; strkjv@11:12; strkjv@Galatians:5:13| for \aphormˆn\, a starting place from which to rush into acts of sin, excuses for doing what they want to do. Just so drinking men use the prohibition laws as "occasions" for violating them. {Wrought in me} (\kateirgasato en emoi\). First aorist active middle indicative of the intensive verb \katergazomai\, to work out (to the finish), effective aorist. The command not to lust made me lust more. {Dead} (\nekra\). Inactive, not non-existent. Sin in reality was there in a dormant state.

rwp@Romans:7:15 @{I know not} (\ou gin“sk“\). "I do not recognize" in its true nature. My spiritual perceptions are dulled, blinded by sin (2Corinthians:4:4|). The dual life pictured here by Paul finds an echo in us all, the struggle after the highest in us ("what I really wish," \ho thel“\, to practise it steadily, \prass“\) and the slipping into doing (\poi“\) "what I really hate" (\ho mis“\) and yet sometimes do. There is a deal of controversy as to whether Paul is describing his struggle with sin before conversion or after it. The words "sold under sin" in verse 14| seem to turn the scale for the pre-conversion period. "It is the unregenerate man's experience, surviving at least in memory into regenerate days, and read with regenerate eyes" (Denney).

rwp@Romans:7:16 @{I consent unto the law} (\sunphˆmi t“i nom“i\). Old verb, here only in N.T., with associative instrumental case. "I speak with." My wanting (\thel“\) to do the opposite of what I do proves my acceptance of God's law as good (\kalos\).

rwp@Romans:7:19 @{But the evil which I would not} (\alla ho ou thel“ kakon\). Incorporation of the antecedent into the relative clause, "what evil I do not wish." An extreme case of this practise of evil is seen in the drunkard or the dope-fiend.

rwp@Romans:8:35 @{Shall separate} (\ch“risei\). Future active of old verb \choriz“\ from adverb \ch“ris\ and that from \ch“ra\, space. Can any one put a distance between Christ's love and us (objective genitive)? Can any one lead Christ to cease loving us? Such things do happen between husband and wife, alas. Paul changes the figure from "who" (\tis\) to "what" (\ti\). The items mentioned will not make Christ love us less. Paul here glories in tribulations as in strkjv@5:3ff|.

rwp@Romans:9:13 @Paul quotes strkjv@Malachi:1:2f|. {But Esau I hated} (\ton de Esau emisˆsa\). This language sounds a bit harsh to us. It is possible that the word \mise“\ did not always carry the full force of what we mean by "hate." See strkjv@Matthew:6:24| where these very verbs (\mise“\ and \agapa“\) are contrasted. Songs:also in strkjv@Luke:14:26| about "hating" (\mise“\) one's father and mother if coming between one and Christ. Songs:in strkjv@John:12:25| about "hating" one's life. There is no doubt about God's preference for Jacob and rejection of Esau, but in spite of Sanday and Headlam one hesitates to read into these words here the intense hatred that has always existed between the descendants of Jacob and of Esau.

rwp@Romans:10:6 @{Saith thus} (\hout“s legei\). Paul personifies "the from faith righteousness" (\hˆ ek piste“s dikaiosunˆ\). A free reproduction from strkjv@Deuteronomy:30:11-14|. Paul takes various phrases from the LXX and uses them for "his inspired conviction and experiences of the gospel" (Denney). He does not quote Moses as saying this or meaning this. {Say not in thy heart} (\mˆ eipˆis en tˆi kardiƒi sou\). Second aorist active subjunctive with \mˆ\ like strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:17|. To say in the heart is to think (Matthew:3:9|). {That is, to bring Christ down} (\tout' estin Christon katagagein\). Second aorist active infinitive of the common verb \katag“\, to bring or lead down. It is dependent on the preceding verb \anabˆsetai\ (shall ascend). \Tout' estin\ (that is) is what is called _Midrash_ or interpretation as in strkjv@9:8|. It occurs three times here (verses 6-8|). Paul applies the words of Moses to Christ. There is no need for one to go to heaven to bring Christ down to earth. The Incarnation is already a glorious fact. Today some men scout the idea of the Deity and Incarnation of Christ.

rwp@Romans:10:8 @{But what saith it?} (\alla ti legei?\). That is "the from faith righteousness." {The word of faith} (\to rˆma tˆs piste“s\). The gospel message concerning faith (objective genitive). Only here. In contrast to the law. {Which we preach} (\ho kˆrussomen\). The living voice brings home to every one the faith kind of righteousness. Paul seizes upon the words of Moses with the orator's instinct and with rhetorical skill (Sanday and Headlam) applies them to the facts about the gospel message about the Incarnation and Resurrection of Christ.

rwp@Romans:11:7 @{What then?} (\ti oun?\). Since God did not push Israel away (verse 1|), what is true? {The election} (\hˆ eklogˆ\). Abstract for concrete (the elect). {Obtained} (\epetuchen\). Second aorist active indicative of \epitugchan“\, old verb, to hit upon, only here in Paul. See strkjv@9:30-33| for the failure of the Jews. {Were hardened} (\ep“r“thˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \p“ro“\, late verb, to cover with thick skin (\p“ros\). See on strkjv@2Corinthians:3:14; strkjv@Mark:3:5|.

rwp@Romans:11:9 @{David says} (\Daueid legei\). From strkjv@Psalms:69:23f|; (68:23f| LXX); strkjv@34:8; strkjv@28:4| (combined quotation). {Table} (\trapeza\). For what is on the table, "a feast." {A snare} (\eis pagida\). From \pˆgnumi\, to make fast, old word for snares for birds and beasts. See on ¯Luke:21:35|. \Eis\ in predicate with \ginomai\ is a translation-Hebraism. {A trap} (\eis thˆran\). Old word for hunting of wild beasts, then a trap. Only here in N.T. {A stumbling-block} (\eis skandalon\). A third word for trap, snare, trap-stick or trigger over which they fall. See on ¯1Corinthians:1:23; strkjv@Romans:9:33|. {A recompense} (\eis antapodoma\). Late word from double compound verb \antapodid“mi\, to repay (both \anti\ and \apo\). Ancient Greeks used \antapodosis\. In LXX and Didache. In N.T. only here (bad sense) and strkjv@Luke:14:12| (good sense).

rwp@Romans:11:24 @{Contrary to nature} (\para phusin\). This is the gist of the argument, the power of God to do what is contrary to natural processes. He put the wild olive (Gentile) into the good olive tree (the spiritual Israel) and made the wild olive (contrary to nature) become the good olive (\kallielaios\, the garden olive, \kallos\ and \elaia\ in Aristotle and a papyrus). {Into their own olive tree} (\tˆi idiƒi elaiƒi\). Dative case. Another argument _a fortiori_, "how much more" (\poll“i mallon\). God can graft the natural Israel back upon the spiritual Israel, if they become willing.

rwp@Romans:11:26 @{And so} (\kai hout“s\). By the complement of the Gentiles stirring up the complement of the Jews (verses 11f.|). {All Israel} (\pƒs Israˆl\). What does Paul mean? The immediate context (use of \pƒs\ in contrast with \apo merous, plˆr“ma\ here in contrast with \plˆr“ma\ in verse 12|) argues for the Jewish people "as a whole." But the spiritual Israel (both Jews and Gentiles) may be his idea in accord with strkjv@9:6| (Galatians:6:16|) as the climax of the argument. At any rate we should strive for and pray for the conversion of Jews as a whole. Paul here quotes from strkjv@Isaiah:59:20f.; strkjv@27:9|. {The Deliverer} (\ho ruomenos\). Present middle articular participle of \ruomai\, to rescue, to deliver. See on ¯1Thessalonians:1:10; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:10|. The Hebrew _Goel_, the Avenger, the Messiah, the Redeemer (Deuteronomy:25:5-10; strkjv@Job:19:25; strkjv@Ruth:3:12f.|). Paul interprets it of Jesus as Messiah.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Sat Jun 29 23:21:22 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020