OT-LAW.filter - rwp 6:69:

rwp@1John:2:20 @{Anointing} (\chrisma\). Old word for result (\mat\) and for the material, from \chri\, to anoint, perhaps suggested by the use of \antichristoi\ in verse 18|. Christians are "anointed ones," \christoi\ in this sense, with which compare strkjv@Psalms:105:15|: "Touch not my anointed ones" (\m hapssthe tn christn mou\). These antichrists posed as the equals of or even superior to Christ himself. But followers of Christ do have "the oil of anointing" (\to elaion tou chrismatos\, strkjv@Exodus:29:7|), the Holy Spirit. This word in the N.T. only here and verse 27|. Later the term was applied to baptism after baptismal remission came to be taught (Tertullian, etc.). {From the Holy One} (\apo tou hagiou\). They receive this anointing of the Holy Spirit from the Anointed One, Jesus Christ (the Holy One). Cf. strkjv@John:6:69; strkjv@Acts:3:14|. {And ye know all things} (\kai oidate panta\). But the best MSS. read \pantes\ rather than \panta\, "Ye all know it." This anointing is open to all Christians, not just a select few.

rwp@John:1:49 @{Thou art the Son of God} (\su ei ho huios tou theou\). Whether Nathanael had heard the Baptist say this of Jesus (1:34|) we do not know, apparently not, but Nathanael was a student of the Old Testament as Philip implied (1:45|) and was quick to put together his knowledge, the statement of Philip, and the manifest supernatural knowledge of Jesus as just shown. There is no reason for toning down the noble confession of Nathanael in the light of Christ's claim in verse 51|. Cf. the confession of Peter in strkjv@6:69; strkjv@Matthew:16:16| and Martha's in strkjv@John:11:27|. Nathanael goes further. {Thou art King of Israel} (\Basileus ei tou Isral\). To us this seems an anti-climax, but not so to Nathanael for both are Messianic titles in strkjv@Psalms:2| and Jesus is greeted in the Triumphal Entry as the King of Israel (John:12:13|).

rwp@John:6:69 @{We have believed} (\hmeis pepisteukamen\). Perfect active indicative of \pisteu\, "We have come to believe and still believe" (verse 29|). {And know} (\kai egnkamen\). Same tense of \ginsk\, "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@Luke:22:56 @{In the light} (\pros to phs\). Facing (\pros\) the light, for the fire gave light as well as heat. strkjv@Mark:14:65| has "warming himself in the light," John (John:18:18,25|) "warming himself." {Looking steadfastly} (\atenisasa\). Favourite word in Luke (4:20|, etc.) for gazing steadily at one. {This man also} (\kai houtos\). As if pointing to Peter and talking about him. The other Gospels (Mark:14:67; strkjv@Matthew:26:69; strkjv@John:18:25|) make a direct address to Peter. Both could be true, as she turned to Peter.

rwp@Mark:1:24 @{What have we to do with thee?} (\ti hmin kai soi?\) The same idiom in strkjv@Matthew:8:29|. Ethical dative. Nothing in common between the demon and Jesus. Note "we." The man speaks for the demon and himself, double personality. The recognition of Jesus by the demons may surprise us since the rabbis (the ecclesiastics) failed to do so. They call Jesus "The Holy One of God" (\ho hagios tou theou\). Hence the demon feared that Jesus was come to destroy him and the man in his power. In strkjv@Matthew:8:29| the demon calls Jesus "Son of God." Later the disciples will call Jesus "The Holy One of God" (John:6:69|). The demon cried out aloud (\anekraxen\, late first aorist form, \anekragen\, common second aorist) so that all heard the strange testimony to Jesus. The man says "I know" (\oida\), correct text, some manuscripts "we know" (\oidamen\), including the demon.

rwp@Mark:8:29 @{Thou art the Christ} (\Su ei ho Christos\). Mark does not give "the Son of the living God" (Matthew:16:16|) or "of God" (Luke:9:20|). The full confession is the form in Matthew. Luke's language means practically the same, while Mark's is the briefest. But the form in Mark really means the full idea. Mark omits all praise of Peter, probably because Peter had done so in his story of the incident. For criticism of the view that Matthew's narrative is due to ecclesiastical development and effort to justify ecclesiastical prerogatives, see discussion on ¯Matthew:16:16,18|. The disciples had confessed him as Messiah before. Thus strkjv@John:1:41; strkjv@4:29; strkjv@6:69; strkjv@Matthew:14:33|. But Jesus had ceased to use the word Messiah to avoid political complications and a revolutionary movement (John:6:14f.|). But did the disciples still believe in Jesus as Messiah after all the defections and oppositions seen by them? It was a serious test to which Jesus now put them.

rwp@Mark:14:67 @{Warming himself} (\thermainomenon\). Mark mentions this fact about Peter twice (14:54,67|) as does John (John:18:18,25|). He was twice beside the fire. It is quite difficult to relate clearly the three denials as told in the Four Gospels. Each time several may have joined in, both maids and men. {The Nazarene} (\tou Nazarnou\). In strkjv@Matthew:26:69| it is "the Galilean." A number were probably speaking, one saying one thing, another another.

rwp@Mark:14:69 @{To them that stood by} (\tois parestsin\). This talk about Peter was overheard by him. "This fellow (\houtos\) is one of them." Songs:in verse 70| the talk is directly to Peter as in strkjv@Matthew:26:73|, but in strkjv@Luke:22:59| it is about him. Soon the bystanders (\hoi paresttes\) will join in the accusation to Peter (verse 70; strkjv@Matthew:26:73|), with the specially pungent question in strkjv@John:18:26| which was the climax. See on ¯Matthew:26:69-75| for discussion of similar details.

rwp@Matthew:16:16 @Peter is the spokesman now: "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God" (\Su ei ho Christos ho huios tou theou tou zntos\). It was a noble confession, but not a new claim by Jesus. Peter had made it before (John:6:69|) when the multitude deserted Jesus in Capernaum. Since the early ministry (John 4) Jesus had avoided the word Messiah because of its political meaning to the people. But now Peter plainly calls Jesus the Anointed One, the Messiah, the Son of the God the living one (note the four Greek articles). This great confession of Peter means that he and the other disciples believe in Jesus as the Messiah and are still true to him in spite of the defection of the Galilean populace (John 6).

rwp@Matthew:21:19 @{A fig tree} (\sukn mian\). "A single fig tree" (Margin of Rev. Version). But \heis\ was often used = \tis\ or like our indefinite article. See strkjv@Matthew:8:10; strkjv@26:69|. The Greek has strictly no indefinite article as the Latin has no definite article. {Let there be no fruit from thee henceforward for ever} (\ou mketi sou karpos gentai eis ton aina\). Strictly speaking this is a prediction, not a prohibition or wish as in strkjv@Mark:11:14| (optative \phagoi\). "On you no fruit shall ever grow again" (Weymouth). The double negative \ou m\ with the aorist subjunctive (or future indicative) is the strongest kind of negative prediction. It sometimes amounts to a prohibition like \ou\ and the future indicative (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 926f.). The early figs start in spring before the leaves and develop after the leaves. The main fig crop was early autumn (Mark:11:14|). There should have been figs on the tree with the crop of leaves. It was a vivid object lesson. Matthew does not distinguish between the two mornings as Mark does (Mark:11:13,20|), but says "immediately" (\parachrma\) twice (21:19,20|). This word is really \para to chrma\ like our "on the spot" (Thayer). It occurs in the papyri in monetary transactions for immediate cash payment.

rwp@Matthew:26:69 @{Thou also} (\kai su\). Peter had gone within (\es\) the palace (26:58|), but was sitting {without} (\ex\) the hall where the trial was going on in the open central court with the servants or officers (\hupretn\, under rowers, literally, strkjv@26:58|) of the Sanhedrin. But he could possibly see through the open door above what was going on inside. It is not plain at what stage of the Jewish trial the denials of Peter took place nor the precise order in which they came as the Gospels give them variously. This maid (\paidisk\, slave girl) stepped up to Peter as he was sitting in the court and pointedly said: "Thou also wast with Jesus the Galilean." Peter was warming himself by the fire and the light shone in his face. She probably had noticed Peter come in with John the Beloved Disciple who went on up into the hall of trial. Or she may have seen Peter with Jesus on the streets of Jerusalem.

rwp@Revelation:3:7 @{In Philadelphia} (\en Philadelphii\). Some twenty-eight miles south-east of Sardis, in Lydia, subject to earthquakes, rebuilt by Tiberius after the great earthquake of A.D. 17, for a time called in coins Neo-Caesarea, in wine-growing district with Bacchus (Dionysos) as the chief deity, on fine Roman roads and of commercial importance, though not a large city, called by Ramsay (_op. cit._, p. 392) "the Missionary City" to promote the spread of the Graeco-Roman civilization and then of Christianity, later offering stubborn resistance to the Turks (1379-90 A.D.) and now called Ala-Sheher (reddish city, Charles, from the red hills behind it). The chief opposition to the faithful little church is from the Jews (cf. strkjv@Romans:9-11|). There are some 1,000 Christians there today. {The holy, he that is true} (\ho hagios, ho althinos\). Separate articles (four in all) for each item in this description. "The holy, the genuine." Asyndeton in the Greek. Latin Vulgate, _Sanctus et Verus_. \Hosea:hagios\ is ascribed to God in strkjv@4:8; strkjv@6:10| (both \hagios\ and \althinos\ as here), but to Christ in strkjv@Mark:1:24; strkjv@Luke:4:34; strkjv@John:6:69; strkjv@Acts:4:27,30; strkjv@1John:2:20|, a recognized title of the Messiah as the consecrated one set apart. Swete notes that \althinos\ is _verus_ as distinguished from _verax_ (\alths\). Songs:it is applied to God in strkjv@6:10| and to Christ in strkjv@3:14; strkjv@19:11| as in strkjv@John:1:9; strkjv@6:32; strkjv@15:1|. {He that hath the key of David} (\ho echn tn klein Daueid\). This epithet comes from strkjv@Isaiah:22:22|, where Eliakim as the chief steward of the royal household holds the keys of power. Christ as the Messiah (Revelation:5:5; strkjv@22:16|) has exclusive power in heaven, on earth, and in Hades (Matthew:16:19; strkjv@28:18; strkjv@Romans:14:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:9f.; strkjv@Revelation:1:18|). Christ has power to admit and exclude of his own will (Matthew:25:10f.; strkjv@Ephesians:1:22; strkjv@Revelation:3:21; strkjv@19:11-16; strkjv@20:4; strkjv@22:16|). {And none shall shut} (\kai oudeis kleisei\). Charles calls the structure Hebrew (future active indicative of \klei\), and not Greek because it does not correspond to the present articular participle just before \ho anoign\ (the one opening), but it occurs often in this book as in the very next clause, "and none openeth" (\kai oudeis anoigei\) over against \klein\ (present active participle, opening) though here some MSS. read \kleiei\ (present active indicative, open).