Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-LAW.filter - rwp Modern:


rwp@1Corinthians:1:2 @{The church of God} (\tˆi ekklˆsiƒi tou theou\). Belonging to God, not to any individual or faction, as this genitive case shows. In strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:1| Paul wrote "the church of the Thessalonians in God" (\en the“i\), but "the churches of God" in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:14|. See same idiom in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:32; strkjv@11:16,22; strkjv@15:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:1; strkjv@Galatians:1:13|, etc. {Which is in Corinth} (\tˆi ousˆi en Korinth“i\). See on strkjv@Acts:13:1| for idiom. It is God's church even in Corinth, "_laetum et ingens paradoxon_" (Bengel). This city, destroyed by Mummius B.C. 146, had been restored by Julius Caesar a hundred years later, B.C. 44, and now after another hundred years has become very rich and very corrupt. The very word "to Corinthianize" meant to practise vile immoralities in the worship of Aphrodite (Venus). It was located on the narrow Isthmus of the Peloponnesus with two harbours (Lechaeum and Cenchreae). It had schools of rhetoric and philosophy and made a flashy imitation of the real culture of Athens. See strkjv@Acts:18| for the story of Paul's work here and now the later developments and divisions in this church will give Paul grave concern as is shown in detail in I and II Corinthians. All the problems of a modern city church come to the front in Corinth. They call for all the wisdom and statesmanship in Paul. {That are sanctified} (\hˆgiasmenois\). Perfect passive participle of \hagiaz“\, late form for \hagiz“\, so far found only in the Greek Bible and in ecclesiastical writers. It means to make or to declare \hagion\ (from \hagos\, awe, reverence, and this from \haz“\, to venerate). It is significant that Paul uses this word concerning the {called saints} or {called to be saints} (\klˆtois hagiois\) in Corinth. Cf. \klˆtos apostolos\ in strkjv@1:1|. It is because they are sanctified {in Christ Jesus} (\en Christ“i Iˆsou\). He is the sphere in which this act of consecration takes place. Note plural, construction according to sense, because \ekklˆsia\ is a collective substantive. {With all that call upon} (\sun pƒsin tois epikaloumenois\). Associative instrumental case with \sun\ rather than \kai\ (and), making a close connection with "saints" just before and so giving the Corinthian Christians a picture of their close unity with the brotherhood everywhere through the common bond of faith. This phrase occurs in the LXX (Genesis:12:8; strkjv@Zechariah:13:9|) and is applied to Christ as to Jehovah (2Thessalonians:1:7,9,12; strkjv@Phillipians:2:9,10|). Paul heard Stephen pray to Christ as Lord (Acts:7:59|). Here "with a plain and direct reference to the Divinity of our Lord" (Ellicott). {Their Lord and ours} (\aut“n kai hˆm“n\). This is the interpretation of the Greek commentators and is the correct one, an afterthought and expansion (\epanorth“sis\) of the previous "our," showing the universality of Christ.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:7 @{Songs:that ye come behind in no gift} (\h“ste humas mˆ hustereisthai en mˆdeni charismati\). Consecutive clause with \h“ste\ and the infinitive and the double negative. Come behind (\hustereisthai\) is to be late (\husteros\), old verb seen already in strkjv@Mark:10:21; strkjv@Matthew:19:20|. It is a wonderful record here recorded. But in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:7-11; strkjv@9:1-7| Paul will have to complain that they have not paid their pledges for the collection, pledges made over a year before, a very modern complaint. {Waiting for the revelation} (\apekdechomenous tˆn apokalupsin\). This double compound is late and rare outside of Paul (1Corinthians:1:7; strkjv@Galatians:5:5; strkjv@Romans:8:19,23,25; strkjv@Phillipians:3:20|), strkjv@1Peter:3:20; strkjv@Hebrews:9:28|. It is an eager expectancy of the second coming of Christ here termed revelation like the eagerness in \prosdechomenoi\ in strkjv@Titus:2:13| for the same event. "As if that attitude of expectation were the highest posture that can be attained here by the Christian" (F.W. Robertson).

rwp@1Corinthians:1:21 @{Seeing that} (\epeidˆ\). Since (\epei\ and \dˆ\) with explanatory \gar\. {Through its wisdom} (\dia tˆs sophias\). Article here as possessive. The two wisdoms contrasted. {Knew not God} (\ouk egn“\). Failed to know, second aorist (effective) active indicative of \gin“sk“\, solemn dirge of doom on both Greek philosophy and Jewish theology that failed to know God. Has modern philosophy done better? There is today even a godless theology (Humanism). "Now that God's wisdom has reduced the self-wise world to ignorance" (Findlay). {Through the foolishness of the preaching} (\dia tˆs m“rias tou kˆrugmatos\). Perhaps "proclamation" is the idea, for it is not \kˆruxis\, the act of heralding, but \kˆrugma\, the message heralded or the proclamation as in verse 23|. The metaphor is that of the herald proclaiming the approach of the king (Matthew:3:1; strkjv@4:17|). See also \kˆrugma\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:4; strkjv@2Timothy:4:17|. The proclamation of the Cross seemed foolishness to the wiseacres then (and now), but it is consummate wisdom, God's wisdom and good-pleasure (\eudokˆsan\). The foolishness of preaching is not the preaching of foolishness. {To save them that believe} (\s“sai tous pisteuontas\). This is the heart of God's plan of redemption, the proclamation of salvation for all those who trust Jesus Christ on the basis of his death for sin on the Cross. The mystery-religions all offered salvation by initiation and ritual as the Pharisees did by ceremonialism. Christianity reaches the heart directly by trust in Christ as the Saviour. It is God's wisdom.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:14 @{Now the natural man} (\psuchikos de anthr“pos\). Note absence of article here, "A natural man" (an unregenerate man). Paul does not employ modern psychological terms and he exercises variety in his use of all the terms here present as \pneuma\ and \pneumatikos, psuchˆ\ and \psuchikos, sarx\ and \sarkinos\ and \sarkikos\. A helpful discussion of the various uses of these words in the New Testament is given by Burton in his _New Testament Word Studies_, pp. 62-68, and in his {Spirit, Soul, and Flesh}. The papyri furnish so many examples of \sarx, pneuma\, and \psuchˆ\ that Moulton and Milligan make no attempt at an exhaustive treatment, but give a few miscellaneous examples to illustrate the varied uses that parallel the New Testament. \Psuchikos\ is a qualitative adjective from \psuchˆ\ (breath of life like \anima\, life, soul). Here the Vulgate renders it by _animalis_ and the German by _sinnlich_, the original sense of animal life as in strkjv@Jude:1:19; strkjv@James:3:15|. In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:44,46| there is the same contrast between \psuchikos\ and \pneumatikos\ as here. The \psuchikos\ man is the unregenerate man while the \pneumatikos\ man is the renewed man, born again of the Spirit of God. {Receiveth not} (\ou dechetai\). Does not accept, rejects, refuses to accept. In strkjv@Romans:8:7| Paul definitely states the inability (\oude gar dunatai\) of the mind of the flesh to receive the things of the Spirit untouched by the Holy Spirit. Certainly the initiative comes from God whose Holy Spirit makes it possible for us to accept the things of the Spirit of God. They are no longer "foolishness" (\m“ria\) to us as was once the case (1:23|). Today one notes certain of the _intelligentsia_ who sneer at Christ and Christianity in their own blinded ignorance. {He cannot know them} (\ou dunatai gn“nai\). He is not able to get a knowledge (ingressive second aorist active infinitive of \gin“sk“\). His helpless condition calls for pity in place of impatience on our part, though such an one usually poses as a paragon of wisdom and commiserates the deluded followers of Christ. {They are spiritually judged} (\pneumatik“s anakrinetai\). Paul and Luke are fond of this verb, though nowhere else in the N.T. Paul uses it only in I Corinthians. The word means a sifting process to get at the truth by investigation as of a judge. In strkjv@Acts:17:11| the Beroeans scrutinized the Scriptures. These \psuchikoi\ men are incapable of rendering a decision for they are unable to recognize the facts. They judge by the \psuchˆ\ (mere animal nature) rather than by the \pneuma\ (the renewed spirit).

rwp@1Corinthians:3:12 @{Gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble} (\chrusion, argurion, lithous timious, xula, chorton, kalamˆn\). The durable materials are three (gold, silver, marble or precious stones), perishable materials (pieces of wood, hay, stubble), "of a palace on the one hand, of a mud hut on the other" (Lightfoot). Gold was freely used by the ancients in their palaces. Their marble and granite pillars are still the wonder and despair of modern men. The wooden huts had hay (\chortos\, grass, as in strkjv@Mark:6:39|) and stubble (\kalamˆ\, old word for stubble after the grain is cut, here alone in the N.T., though in LXX as strkjv@Exodus:5:12|) which were employed to hold the wood pieces together and to thatch the roof. It is not made clear whether Paul's metaphor refers to the persons as in God's building in verse 9| or to the character of the teaching as in verse 13|. Probably both ideas are involved, for look at the penalty on shoddy work (verse 15|) and shoddy men (verse 17|). The teaching may not always be vicious and harmful. It may only be indifferent and worthless. A co-worker with God in this great temple should put in his very best effort.

rwp@1Corinthians:5:7 @{Purge out} (\ekkatharate\). First aorist (effective) active imperative of \ekkathair“\, old verb to cleanse out (\ek\), to clean completely. Aorist tense of urgency, do it now and do it effectively before the whole church is contaminated. This turn to the metaphor is from the command to purge out the old (\palaian\, now old and decayed) leaven before the passover feast (Exodus:12:15f.; strkjv@13:7; strkjv@Zephaniah:1:12|). Cf. modern methods of disinfection after a contagious disease. {A new lump} (\neon phurama\). Make a fresh start as a new community with the contamination removed. \Neos\ is the root for \neaniskos\, a young man, not yet old (\gˆraios\). Songs:new wine (\oinon neon\ strkjv@Matthew:9:17|). \Kainos\ is fresh as compared with the ancient (\palaios\). See the distinction in strkjv@Colossians:3:10; strkjv@Ephesians:4:22ff.; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:17|. {Unleavened} (\azumoi\). Without (\a\ privative) leaven, the normal and ideal state of Christians. Rare word among the ancients (once in Plato). They are a new creation (\kainˆ ktisis\), "exemplifying Kant's maxim that you should treat a man as if he were what you would wish him to be" (Robertson and Plummer). {For our passover also hath been sacrificed, even Christ} (\kai gar to pascha hˆm“n etuthˆ Christos\). First aorist passive indicative of \thu“\, old verb to sacrifice. Euphony of consonants, \th\ to \t\ because of \-thˆ\. Reference to the death of Christ on the Cross as the Paschal Lamb (common use of \pascha\ as strkjv@Mark:14:12; strkjv@Luke:22:7|), the figure used long before by the Baptist of Jesus (John:1:29|). Paul means that the Lamb was already slain on Calvary and yet you have not gotten rid of the leaven.

rwp@1Corinthians:5:9 @{I wrote unto you in my epistle} (\egrapsa humin en tˆi epistolˆi\). Not the epistolary aorist, but a reference to an epistle to the Corinthians earlier than this one (our First Corinthians), one not preserved to us. What a "find" it would be if a bundle of papyri in Egypt should give it back to us? {To have no company with fornicators} (\mˆ sunanamignusthai pornois\). Present middle infinitive with \mˆ\ in an indirect command of a late double compound verb used in the papyri to mix up with (\sun-ana-mignusthai\, a \mi\ verb). It is in the N.T. only here and verse 11; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:14| which see. It is used here with the associative instrumental case (\pornois\, from \pera“, pernˆmi\, to sell, men and women who sell their bodies for lust). It is a pertinent question today how far modern views try to put a veneer over the vice in men and women.

rwp@1Corinthians:5:10 @{Not altogether} (\ou pant“s\). Not absolutely, not in all circumstances. Paul thus puts a limitation on his prohibition and confines it to members of the church. He has no jurisdiction over the outsiders (this world, \tou kosmou toutou\). {The covetous} (\tois pleonektais\). Old word for the over-reachers, those avaricious for more and more (\pleon, ech“\, to have more). In N.T. only here, strkjv@6:10; strkjv@Ephesians:5:5|. It always comes in bad company (the licentious and the idolaters) like the modern gangsters who form a combination of liquor, lewdness, lawlessness for money and power. {Extortioners} (\harpaxin\). An old adjective with only one gender, rapacious (Matthew:7:15; strkjv@Luke:18:11|), and as a substantive robber or extortioner (here and strkjv@6:10|). Bandits, hijackers, grafters they would be called today. {Idolaters} (\eid“lolatrais\). Late word for hirelings (\latris\) of the idols (\eid“lon\), so our very word idolater. See strkjv@6:9; strkjv@10:7; strkjv@Ephesians:5:5; strkjv@Revelation:21:8; strkjv@22:15|. Nageli regards this word as a Christian formation. {For then must ye needs} (\epei “pheilete oun\). This neat Greek idiom of \epei\ with the imperfect indicative (\“pheilete\, from \opheil“\, to be under obligation) is really the conclusion of a second-class condition with the condition unexpressed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 965). Sometimes \an\ is used also as in strkjv@Hebrews:10:2|, but with verbs of obligation or necessity \an\ is usually absent as here (cf. strkjv@Hebrews:9:20|). The unexpressed condition here would be, "if that were true" (including fornicators, the covetous, extortioners, idolaters of the outside world). \Ara\ means in that case.

rwp@1Corinthians:6:15 @{Members of Christ} (\melˆ Christou\). Old word for limbs, members. Even the Stoics held the body to be common with the animals (Epictetus, _Diss_. l. iii. 1) and only the reason like the gods. Without doubt some forms of modern evolution have contributed to the licentious views of animalistic sex indulgence, though the best teachers of biology show that in the higher animals monogamy is the rule. The body is not only adapted for Christ (verse 13|), but it is a part of Christ, in vital union with him. Paul will make much use of this figure further on (12:12-31; strkjv@Ephesians:4:11-16; strkjv@5:30|). {Shall I then take away?} (\aras oun;\). First aorist active participle of \air“\, old verb to snatch, carry off like Latin _rapio_ (our rape). {Make} (\poiˆs“\). Can be either future active indicative or first aorist active subjunctive (deliberative). Either makes good sense. The horror of deliberately taking "members of Christ" and making them "members of a harlot" in an actual union staggers Paul and should stagger us. {God forbid} (\mˆ genoito\). Optative second aorist in a negative wish for the future. {May it not happen!} The word "God" is not here. The idiom is common in Epictetus though rare in the LXX. Paul has it thirteen times and Luke once (Luke:20:16|).

rwp@1Corinthians:9:12 @{Over you} (\hum“n\). Objective genitive after \exousian\. {Do not we yet more?} (\ou mallon hˆmeis;\). Because of Paul's peculiar relation to that church as founder and apostle. {But we bear all things} (\alla panta stegomen\). Old verb to cover (\stegˆ\, roof) and so to cover up, to conceal, to endure (1Corinthians:13:7| of love). Paul deliberately declined to use (usual instrumental case with \chraomai\) his right to pay in Corinth. {That we may cause no hindrance} (\hina mˆ tina enkopˆn d“men\). Late word \enkopˆ\, a cutting in (cf. _radio_ or telephone) or hindrance from \enkopt“\, to cut in, rare word (like \ekkopˆ\) here only in N.T. and once in Vettius Valens. How considerate Paul is to avoid "a hindrance to the gospel of Christ" (\t“i euaggeli“i tou Christou\, dative case and genitive) rather than insist on his personal rights and liberties, an eloquent example for all modern men.

rwp@1Corinthians:9:16 @{For if I preach} (\ean gar euaggeliz“mai\). Third class condition, supposable case. Same construction in verse 16| (\ean mˆ\). {For necessity is laid upon me} (\anagkˆ gar moi epikeitai\). Old verb, lies upon me (dative case \moi\). Jesus had called him (Acts:9:6,15; strkjv@Galatians:1:15f.; strkjv@Romans:1:14|). He could do no other and deserves no credit for doing it. {Woe is me} (\ouai gar moi\). Explaining the \anagkˆ\ (necessity). Paul had to heed the call of Christ that he had heard. He had a real call to the ministry. Would that this were the case with every modern preacher.

rwp@1John:2:18 @{It is the last hour} (\eschatˆ h“ra estin\). This phrase only here in N.T., though John often uses \h“ra\ for a crisis (John:2:4; strkjv@4:21,23; strkjv@5:25,28|, etc.). It is anarthrous here and marks the character of the "hour." John has seven times "the last day" in the Gospel. Certainly in verse 28| John makes it plain that the \parousia\ might come in the life of those then living, but it is not clear that here he definitely asserts it as a fact. It was his hope beyond a doubt. We are left in doubt about this "last hour" whether it covers a period, a series, or the final climax of all just at hand. {As ye heard} (\kath“s ˆkousate\). First aorist active indicative of \akou“\. {Antichrist cometh} (\antichristos erchetai\). "Is coming." Present futuristic or prophetic middle indicative retained in indirect assertion. Songs:Jesus taught (Mark:13:6,22; strkjv@Matthew:24:5,15,24|) and so Paul taught (Acts:20:30; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3|). These false Christs (Matthew:24:24; strkjv@Mark:13:22|) are necessarily antichrists, for there can be only one. \Anti\ can mean substitution or opposition, but both ideas are identical in the word \antichristos\ (in N.T. only here, strkjv@2:22; strkjv@4:3; strkjv@2John:1:7|). Westcott rightly observes that John's use of the word is determined by the Christian conception, not by the Jewish apocalypses. {Have there arisen} (\gegonasin\). Second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. {Many antichrists} (\antichristoi polloi\). Not just one, but the exponents of the Gnostic teaching are really antichrists, just as some modern deceivers deserve this title. {Whereby} (\hothen\). By the fact that these many antichrists have come.

rwp@1John:2:22 @{The liar} (\ho pseustˆs\). The liar (with the article) _par excellence_. Rhetorical question to sharpen the point made already about lying in strkjv@1:6,10; strkjv@2:4,21|. See strkjv@5:5| for a like rhetorical question. {But} (\ei mˆ\). Except, if not. {That denieth that Jesus is the Christ} (\ho arnoumenos hoti Iˆsous ouk estin ho Christos\). Common Greek idiom for \ouk\ to appear after \arneomai\ like redundant \mˆ\ in strkjv@Luke:20:27; strkjv@Hebrews:12:19|. The old Latin retains _non_ here as old English did (Shakespeare, _Comedy of Errors_ IV. ii. 7, "He denied you had in him no right"). The Cerinthian Gnostics denied the identity of the man Jesus and Christ (an \aeon\, they held) like the modern Jesus or Christ controversy. {This is the antichrist} (\houtos estin ho antichristos\). The one just mentioned, Cerinthus himself in particular. {Even he that denieth the Father and the Son} (\ho arnoumenos ton patera kai ton huion\). This is the inevitable logic of such a rejection of the Son of God. Jesus had himself said this very same thing (John:5:23f.|).

rwp@1Peter:1:11 @{Searching} (\eraun“ntes\). Present active participle of \erauna“\, late form for older \ereuna“\ (both in the papyri), uncompounded verb (John:7:52|), the compound occurring in verse 10| above. {What time or what manner of time} (\eis tina ˆ poion kairon\). Proper sense of \poios\ (qualitative interrogative) kept here as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:35, strkjv@Romans:3:27|, though it is losing its distinctive sense from \tis\ (Acts:23:34|). The prophets knew what they prophesied, but not at what time the Messianic prophecies would be fulfilled. {The Spirit of Christ which was in them} (\to en autois pneuma Christou\). Peter definitely asserts here that the Spirit of Jesus Christ (the Messiah) was in the Old Testament prophets, the Holy Spirit called the Spirit of Christ and the Spirit of God (Romans:8:9|), who spoke to the prophets as he would speak to the apostles (John:16:14|). {Did point unto} (\edˆlou\). Imperfect active of \dˆlo“\, to make plain, "did keep on pointing to," though they did not clearly perceive the time. {When it testified beforehand} (\promarturomenon\). Present middle participle of \promarturomai\, a late compound unknown elsewhere save in a writer of the fourteenth century (Theodorus Mech.) and now in a papyrus of the eighth. It is neuter here because \pneuma\ is neuter, but this grammatical gender should not be retained as "it" in English, but should be rendered "he" (and so as to strkjv@Acts:8:15|). Here we have predictive prophecy concerning the Messiah, though some modern critics fail to find predictions of the Messiah in the Old Testament. {The sufferings of Christ} (\ta eis Christon pathˆmata\). "The sufferings for (destined for) Christ" like the use of \eis\ in verse 10| (\eis humas\ for you). {The glories that should follow them} (\tas meta tauta doxas\). "The after these things (sufferings) glories." The plural of \doxa\ is rare, but occurs in strkjv@Exodus:15:11; strkjv@Hosea:9:11|. The glories of Christ followed the sufferings as in strkjv@4:13; strkjv@5:1,6|.

rwp@1Peter:1:13 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). "Because of which thing," the glorious free grace opened for Gentiles and Jews in Christ (verses 3-12|). {Girding up} (\anaz“samenoi\). First aorist middle participle of \anaz“nnumi\, late and rare verb (Judges:18:16; strkjv@Proverbs:29:35; strkjv@31:17|), here only in N.T., vivid metaphor for habit of the Orientals, who quickly gathered up their loose robes with a girdle when in a hurry or starting on a journey. {The loins} (\tas osphuas\). Old word for the part of the body where the girdle (\z“nˆ\) was worn. Metaphor here as in strkjv@Luke:12:35; strkjv@Ephesians:6:14|. {Mind} (\dianoias\). Old word for the faculty of understanding, of seeing through a thing (\dia, noe“\) as in strkjv@Matthew:22:37|. {Be sober} (\nˆphontes\). "Being sober" (present active participle of \nˆph“\, old verb, but in N.T. always as metaphor (1Thessalonians:5:6,8|, etc., and so in strkjv@4:7|). {Perfectly} (\telei“s\). Adverb, old word (here alone in N.T.), from adjective \teleios\ (perfect), connected with \elpisate\ (set your hope, first aorist active imperative of \elpiz“\) in the Revised Version, but Bigg, Hort, and most modern commentators take it according to Peter's usual custom with the preceding verb, \nˆphontes\ ("being perfectly sober," not "hope perfectly"). {That is to be brought} (\tˆn pheromenˆn\). Present passive articular participle of \pher“\, picturing the process, "that is being brought." For "revelation" (\apokalupsei\) see end of verse 7|.

rwp@1Peter:1:15 @{But like as he which called you is holy} (\alla kata ton kalesanta humas hagion\). This use of \kata\ is a regular Greek idiom (here in contrast with \sunschˆmatizomenoi\). "But according to the holy one calling you or who called you" (first aorist articular participle of \kale“\, to call). God is our standard or pattern (\kata\), not our lusts. {Be ye yourselves also holy} (\kai autoi hagioi genˆthˆte\). First aorist (ingressive) passive imperative of \ginomai\, to become with allusion (\kai\ also) to \kata\ (God as our example), "Do ye also become holy." For \anastrophˆ\ (manner of life) see verse 18; strkjv@2:12; strkjv@3:1-16; strkjv@James:3:13; strkjv@2Peter:2:7|. Peter uses \anastrophˆ\ eight times. The original meaning (turning up and down, back and forth) suited the Latin word _conversatio_ (_converto_), but not our modern "conversation" (talk, not walk).

rwp@1Peter:3:19 @{In which also} (\en h“i kai\). That is, in spirit (relative referring to \pneumati\). But, a number of modern scholars have followed Griesbach's conjecture that the original text was either \N“e kai\ (Noah also), or \En“ch kai\ (Enoch also), or \en h“i kai En“ch\ (in which Enoch also) which an early scribe misunderstood or omitted \En“ch kai\ in copying (\homoioteleuton\). It is allowed in Stier and Theile's _Polyglott_. It is advocated by J. Cramer in 1891, by J. Rendel Harris in _The Expositor_ (1901), and _Sidelights on N.T. Research_ (p. 208), by Nestle in 1902, by Moffatt's New Translation of the New Testament. Windisch rejects it as inconsistent with the context. There is no manuscript for the conjecture, though it would relieve the difficulty greatly. Luther admits that he does not know what Peter means. Bigg has no doubt that the event recorded took place between Christ's death and his resurrection and holds that Peter is alluding to Christ's _Descensus ad Inferos_ in strkjv@Acts:2:27| (with which he compares strkjv@Matthew:27:52f.; strkjv@Luke:23:34; strkjv@Ephesians:4:9|). With this Windisch agrees. But Wohlenberg holds that Peter means that Christ in his preexistent state preached to those who rejected the preaching of Noah who are now in prison. Augustine held that Christ was in Noah when he preached. Bigg argues strongly that Christ during the time between his death and resurrection preached to those who once heard Noah (but are now in prison) and offered them another chance and not mere condemnation. If so, why did Jesus confine his preaching to this one group? Songs:the theories run on about this passage. One can only say that it is a slim hope for those who neglect or reject Christ in this life to gamble with a possible second chance after death which rests on very precarious exegesis of a most difficult passage in Peter's Epistle. Accepting the text as we have, what can we make of it? {He went and preached} (\poreutheis ekˆruxen\). First aorist passive (deponent) participle of \poreuomai\ and first aorist active indicative of \kˆruss“\, the verb commonly used of the preaching of Jesus. Naturally the words mean personal action by Christ "in spirit" as illustration of his "quickening" (verse 18|) whether done before his death or afterwards. It is interesting to observe that, just as the relative \en h“i\ here tells something suggested by the word \pneumati\ (in spirit) just before, so in verse 21| the relative \ho\ (which) tells another illustration of the words \di' hudatos\ (by water) just before. Peter jumps from the flood in Noah's time to baptism in Peter's time, just as he jumped backwards from Christ's time to Noah's time. He easily goes off at a word. What does he mean here by the story that illustrates Christ's quickening in spirit? {Unto the spirits in prison} (\tois en phulakˆi pneumasin\). The language is plain enough except that it does not make it clear whether Jesus did the preaching to spirits in prison at the time or to people whose spirits are now in prison, the point of doubt already discussed. The metaphorical use of \en phulakˆi\ can be illustrated by strkjv@2Peter:2:4; strkjv@Jude:1:6; strkjv@Revelation:20:7| (the final abode of the lost). See strkjv@Hebrews:12:23| for the use of \pneumata\ for disembodied spirits.

rwp@1Peter:4:3 @{Past} (\parelˆluth“s\). Perfect active participle of the compound verb \parerchomai\, old verb, to go by (beside) as in strkjv@Matthew:14:15| with \h“ra\ (hour). {May suffice} (\arketos\). No copula in the Greek, probably \estin\ (is) rather than \dunatai\ (can). Late and rare verbal adjective from \arke“\, to suffice, in the papyri several times, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:6:34; strkjv@10:25|, apparently referring to Christ's words in strkjv@Matthew:6:34| (possibly an axiom or proverb). {To have wrought} (\kateirgasthai\). Perfect middle infinitive of \katergazomai\, common compound (\kata, ergon\ work) as in strkjv@1Corinthians:5:3|. {The desire} (\to boulˆma\). Correct text, not \thelˆma\. Either means the thing desired, willed. Jews sometimes fell in with the ways of Gentiles (Romans:2:21-24; strkjv@3:9-18; strkjv@Ephesians:2:1-3|) as today some Christians copy the ways of the world. {And to have walked} (\peporeumenous\). Perfect middle participle of \poreuomai\ in the accusative plural of general reference with the infinitive \kateirgasthai\. Literally, "having walked or gone." {In lasciviousness} (\en aselgeiais\). All these sins are in the locative case with \en\. "In unbridled lustful excesses" (2Peter:2:7; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:21|). {Lusts} (\epithumiais\). Cf. strkjv@2:11; strkjv@4:2|. {Winebibbings} (\oinophlugiais\). Old compound (\oinos\, wine, \phlu“\, to bubble up), for drunkenness, here only in N.T. (also in strkjv@Deuteronomy:21:20|). {Revellings} (\komois\). Old word (from \keimai\, to lie down), rioting drinking parties, in N.T. here and strkjv@Galatians:5:21; strkjv@Romans:13:13|. {Carousings} (\potois\). Old word for drinking carousal (from \pin“\, to drink), here only in the N.T. In the light of these words it seems strange to find modern Christians justifying their "personal liberty" to drink and carouse, to say nothing of the prohibition law. The Greeks actually carried lust and drunkenness into their religious observances (Aphrodite, for instance). {Abominable idolatries} (\athemitois eid“lolatriais\). To the Christian all "idolatry," (\eid“lon, latreia\), worship of idols, is "abominable," not allowed (alpha privative and \themitos\, \themistos\ the old form, verbal of \themiz“\, to make lawful), but particularly those associated with drinking and licentiousness. The only other N.T. example of \athemitos\ is by Peter also (Acts:10:28|) and about the Mosaic law. That may be the idea here, for Jews often fell into idolatrous practices (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 274).

rwp@1Thessalonians:1:8 @{From you hath sounded forth} (\aph' hum“n exˆchˆtai\). Perfect passive indicative of \exˆche“\, late compound verb (\ex, ˆchos, ˆch“, ˆchˆ\, our echo) to sound out of a trumpet or of thunder, to reverberate like our echo. Nowhere else in the N.T. Songs:"from you" as a sounding board or radio transmitting station (to use a modern figure). It marks forcibly "both the clear and the persuasive nature of the \logos tou Kuriou\" (Ellicott). This phrase, the word of the Lord, may be subjective with the Lord as its author or objective with the Lord as the object. It is both. It is a graphic picture with a pardonable touch of hyperbole (Moffatt) for Thessalonica was a great commercial and political centre for disseminating the news of salvation (on the Egnation Way). {But in every place} (\all' en panti top“i\). In contrast to Macedonia and Achaia. The sentence would naturally stop here, but Paul is dictating rapidly and earnestly and goes on. {Your faith to God-ward} (\hˆ pistis hum“n hˆ pros ton theon\). Literally, {the faith of you that toward the God}. The repeated article makes clear that their faith is now directed toward the true God and not toward the idols from which they had turned (verse 10|). {Is gone forth} (\exelˆluthen\). Second perfect active indicative of old verb \exerchomai\, to go out, state of completion like \exˆchˆtai\ above. {Songs:that we need not to speak anything} (\h“ste mˆ chreian echein hˆmƒs lalein ti\). \H“ste\ with the infinitive for actual result as in verse 7|. No vital distinction between \lalein\ (originally to chatter as of birds) and \legein\, both being used in the _Koin‚_ for speaking and preaching (in the N.T.).

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:5 @{Not in the passion of lust} (\mˆ en pathei epithumias\). Plain picture of the wrong way for the husband to come to marriage. {That know not God} (\ta mˆ eidota ton theon\). Second perfect participle of \oida\. The heathen knew gods as licentious as they are themselves, but not God. One of the reasons for the revival of paganism in modern life is professedly this very thing that men wish to get rid of the inhibitions against licentiousness by God.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:6 @{That no man transgress} (\to mˆ huperbainein\). Old verb to go beyond. Final use of \to\ (accusative of general reference) and the infinitive (negative \mˆ\), parallel to \apechesthai\ and \eidenai ktasthai\ above. {And wrong his brother} (\kai pleonektein ton adelphon autou\). To take more, to overreach, to take advantage of, to defraud. {In the matter} (\en t“i pragmati\). The delicacy of Paul makes him refrain from plainer terms and the context makes it clear enough as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:11| (\t“i pragmati\). {An avenger} (\ekdikos\). Regular term in the papyri for legal avenger. Modern men and women need to remember that God is the avenger for sexual wrongs both in this life and the next.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:8 @{Therefore} (\toigaroun\). This old triple compound particle (\toi, gar, oun\) is in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:12:1|. Paul applies the logic of the case. {He that rejecteth} (\ho athet“n\). This late verb (Polybius and LXX) is from \a-thetos\ (\a\ privative and verbal of \tithˆmi\, to proscribe a thing, to annul it. {But God} (\alla ton theon\). Paul sees this clearly and modern atheists see it also. In order to justify their licentiousness they do not hesitate to set aside God.

rwp@1Timothy:2:8 @{I desire} (\boulomai\). Songs:Phillipians:1:12|. {The men} (\tous andras\). Accusative of general reference with the infinitive \proseuchesthai\. The men in contrast to "women" (\gunaikas\) in 9|. It is public worship, of course, and "in every place" (\en panti top“i\) for public worship. Many modern Christians feel that there were special conditions in Ephesus as in Corinth which called for strict regulations on the women that do not always apply now. {Lifting up holy hands} (\epairontas hosious cheiras\). Standing to pray. Note also \hosious\ used as feminine (so in Plato) with \cheiras\ instead of \hosias\. The point here is that only men should lead in public prayer who can lift up "clean hands" (morally and spiritually clean). See strkjv@Luke:24:50|. Adverb \hosi“s\ in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:10| and \hosiotˆs\ in strkjv@Ephesians:4:24|. {Without wrath and disputing} (\ch“ris orgˆs kai dialogismou\). See strkjv@Phillipians:2:14|.

rwp@1Timothy:2:12 @{I permit not} (\ouk epitrep“\). Old word \epitrep“\, to permit, to allow (1Corinthians:16:7|). Paul speaks authoritatively. {To teach} (\didaskein\). In the public meeting clearly. And yet all modern Christians allow women to teach Sunday school classes. One feels somehow that something is not expressed here to make it all clear. {Nor to have dominion over a man} (\oude authentein andros\). The word \authente“\ is now cleared up by Kretschmer (_Glotta_, 1912, pp. 289ff.) and by Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_. See also Nageli, _Der Wortschatz des Apostels Paulus_ and Deissmann, _Light, etc._, pp. 88f. \Autodike“\ was the literary word for playing the master while \authente“\ was the vernacular term. It comes from \aut-hentes\, a self-doer, a master, autocrat. It occurs in the papyri (substantive \authentˆs\, master, verb \authente“\, to domineer, adjective \authentikos\, authoritative, "authentic"). Modern Greek has \aphentes\ = Effendi = "Mr."

rwp@2Corinthians:3:14 @{But their minds were hardened} (\alla ep“r“thˆ ta noˆmata aut“n\). Their thoughts (\noˆmata\) literally. \P“ro“\ (first aorist passive indicative here) is late verb from \p“ros\, hard skin, to cover with thick skin (callus), to petrify. See on ¯Mark:6:52; strkjv@8:17|. {Of the old covenant} (\tˆs palaias diathˆkˆs\). The Old Testament. \Palaios\ (ancient) in contrast to \kainos\ (fresh, verse 6|). See strkjv@Matthew:13:52|. {The same veil} (\to auto kalumma\). Not that identical veil, but one that has the same effect, that blinds their eyes to the light in Christ. This is the tragedy of modern Judaism. {Unlifted} (\mˆ anakaluptomenon\). Present passive participle of \anakalupt“\, old verb, to draw back the veil, to unveil. {Is done away} (\katargeitai\). Same verb as in verses 7,11|.

rwp@Info_2John @ SECOND JOHN ABOUT A.D. 85 TO 90 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION There is little to add to what was said about the First Epistle except that here the author terms himself "the elder" (\ho presbuteros\) and writes to "the elect lady" (\eklektˆi kuriƒi\). There is dispute about both of these titles. Some hold that it is the mythical "presbyter John" of whom Papias may speak, if so understood, but whose very existence is disproved by Dom Chapman in _John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel_ (1911). Peter the apostle (1Peter:1:1|) calls himself "fellow-elder" (\sunpresbuteros\) with the other elders (1Peter:5:1|). The word referred originally to age (Luke:15:25|), then to rank or office as in the Sanhedrin (Matthew:16:21; strkjv@Acts:6:12|) and in the Christian churches (Acts:11:30; strkjv@20:17; strkjv@1Timothy:5:17,19|) as here also. A few even deny that the author is the same as in the First Epistle of John, but just an imitator. But the bulk of modern scholarly opinion agrees that the same man wrote all three Epistles and the Fourth Gospel (the Beloved Disciple, and many still say the Apostle John) whatever is true of the Apocalypse. There is no way of deciding whether "the elect lady" is a woman or a church. The obvious way of taking it is to a woman of distinction in one of the churches, as is true of "the co-elect lady in Babylon" (1Peter:5:13|), Peter's wife, who travelled with him (1Corinthians:9:5|). Some even take \kuria\ to be the name of the lady (Cyria). Some also take it to be "Eklecta the lady." Dr. Findlay (_Fellowship in the Life Eternal_, p. 31) holds that Pergamum is the church to which the letter was sent. The same commentaries treat I, II, and III John as a rule, though Poggel has a book on II, III John (1896) and Bresky (1906) has _Das Verhaltnis des Zweiten Johannesbriefes zum dritten_. Dr. J. Rendel Harris has an interesting article in _The Expositor_ of London for March, 1901, on "The Problem of the Address to the Second Epistle of John," in which he argues from papyri examples that \kuria\ here means "my dear" or "my lady." But Findlay (_Fellowship in the Life Eternal_, p. 26) argues that "the qualifying adjunct 'elect' lifts us into the region of Christian calling and dignity." It is not certain that II John was written after I John, though probable. Origen rejected it and the Peshitta Syriac does not have II and III John. strkjv@2John:1:1 @{And her children} (\kai tois teknois autˆs\). As with \eklektˆ kuria\, so here \tekna\ may be understood either literally as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:4|, or spiritually, as in strkjv@Galatians:4:19,25; strkjv@1Timothy:1:2|. For the spiritual sense in \teknia\ see strkjv@1John:2:1,12|. {Whom} (\hous\). Masculine accusative plural, though \teknois\ is neuter plural (dative), construction according to sense, not according to grammatical gender, "embracing the mother and the children of both sexes" (Vincent). See thus \hous\ in strkjv@Galatians:4:19|. {I} (\Eg“\). Though \ho presbuteros\ is third person, he passes at once after the Greek idiom to the first and there is also special emphasis here in the use of \agap“\ with the addition of \en alˆtheiƒi\ (in truth, in the highest sphere, as in strkjv@John:17:19; strkjv@3John:1:1|) and \ouk eg“ monos\ (not I only, "not I alone"). Brooke argues that this language is unsuitable if to a single family and not to a church. But Paul employs this very phrase in sending greetings to Prisca and Aquila (Romans:16:4|). {That know} (\hoi egn“kotes\). Perfect active articular participle of \gin“sk“\, "those that have come to know and still know."

rwp@Info_2Peter @ THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER ABOUT A.D. 66 OR 67 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION MOST DOUBTFUL NEW TESTAMENT BOOK Every book in the New Testament is challenged by some one, as indeed the historicity of Jesus Christ himself is and the very existence of God. But it is true that more modern scholars deny the genuineness of II Peter than that of any single book in the canon. This is done by men like F. H. Chase, J. B. Mayor, and R. D. Strachan, who are followers of Christ as Lord and Saviour. One has to admit that the case concerning II Peter has problems of peculiar difficulty that call for careful consideration and balanced judgment. One other word needs to be said, which is that an adverse decision against the authenticity of II Peter stands by itself and does not affect the genuineness of the other books. It is easy to take an extreme position for or against it without full knowledge of all the evidence.

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:3:13 @{Impostors} (\goˆtes\). Old word from wailers (\goa“\, to bewail), professional mourners, deceivers, jugglers. Here only in the N.T. Modern impostors know all the tricks of the trade. {Shall wax worse and worse} (\prokopsousin epi to cheiron\). "Shall cut forward to the worse stage." See strkjv@2:16| for \prokopt“\. \Cheiron\ is comparative of \kakos\, "to the worse than now." {Deceiving and being deceived} (\plan“ntes kai plan“menoi\). Present active and present passive participles of \plana“\. The tragedy of it all is that these seducers are able to deceive others as well as themselves.

rwp@Acts:15:21 @{For Moses} (\M“usˆs gar\). A reason why these four necessary things (verse 28|) are named. In every city are synagogues where rabbis proclaim (\kˆrussontas\) these matters. Hence the Gentile Christians would be giving constant offence to neglect them. The only point where modern Christian sentiment would object would be about "things strangled" and "blood" in the sense of any blood left in the animals, though most Christians probably agree with the feeling of James in objecting to blood in the food. If "blood" is taken to be "murder," that difficulty vanishes. Moses will suffer no loss for these Gentile Christians are not adherents of Judaism.

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:17:6 @{When they found them not} (\mˆ heurontes\). Usual negative \mˆ\ with the participle in the _Koin‚_, second aorist (effective) active participle, complete failure with all the noise and "bums." {They dragged} (\esuron\). Imperfect active, vivid picture, they were dragging (literally). See already strkjv@8:3; strkjv@16:19|. If they could not find Paul, they could drag Jason his host and some other Christians whom we do not know. {Before the rulers of the city} (\epi tous politarchas\). This word does not occur in Greek literature and used to be cited as an example of Luke's blunders. But now it is found in an inscription on an arch in the modern city preserved in the British Museum. It is also found in seventeen inscriptions (five from Thessalonica) where the word or the verb \politarche“\ occurs. It is a fine illustration of the historical accuracy of Luke in matters of detail. This title for city officers in Thessalonica, a free city, is correct. They were burgomasters or "rulers of the city." {Crying} (\bo“ntes\). Yelling as if the house was on fire like the mob in Jerusalem (21:28|). {These that have turned the world upside down} (\hoi tˆn oikoumenˆn anastat“santes\). The use of \oikoumenˆn\ (supply \gen\ or \ch“ran\, the inhabited earth, present passive participle of \oike“\) means the Roman Empire, since it is a political charge, a natural hyperbole in their excitement, but the phrase occurs for the Roman Empire in strkjv@Luke:2:1|. It is possible that news had come to Thessalonica of the expulsion of the Jews from Rome by Claudius. There is truth in the accusation, for Christianity is revolutionary, but on this particular occasion the uproar (verse 5|) was created by the rabbis and the hired loafers. The verb \anastato“\ (here first aorist active participle) does not occur in the ancient writers, but is in LXX and in strkjv@Acts:17:6; strkjv@21:38; strkjv@Galatians:5:12|. It occurs also in Harpocration (A.D. 4th cent.) and about 100 B.C. \exanastato“\ is found in a fragment of papyrus (Tebtunis no. 2) and in a Paris Magical Papyrus l. 2243f. But in an Egyptian letter of Aug. 4, 41 A.D. (Oxyrhynchus Pap. no. 119, 10) "the bad boy" uses it = "he upsets me" or " he drives me out of my senses" (\anastatoi me\). See Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 84f. It is not a "Biblical word" at all, but belongs to the current _Koin‚_. It is a vigorous and graphic term.

rwp@Acts:17:10 @{Immediately by night} (\euthe“s dia nuktos\). Paul's work had not been in vain in Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:1:7f.; strkjv@2:13,20|). Paul loved the church here. Two of them, Aristarchus and Secundus, will accompany him to Jerusalem (Acts:20:4|) and Aristarchus will go on with him to Rome (27:2|). Plainly Paul and Silas had been in hiding in Thessalonica and in real danger. After his departure severe persecution came to the Christians in Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:2:14; strkjv@3:1-5; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:6|). It is possible that there was an escort of Gentile converts with Paul and Silas on this night journey to Beroea which was about fifty miles southwest from Thessalonica near Pella in another district of Macedonia (Emathia). There is a modern town there of some 6,000 people. {Went} (\apˆiesan\). Imperfect third plural active of \apeimi\, old verb to go away, here alone in the N.T. A literary, almost Atticistic, form instead of \apˆlthon\. {Into the synagogue of the Jews} (\eis tˆn sunag“gˆn t“n Ioudai“n\). Paul's usual custom and he lost no time about it. Enough Jews here to have a synagogue.

rwp@Acts:21:7 @{Had finished} (\dianusantes\). First aorist active participle of \dianu“\, old verb to accomplish (\anu“\) thoroughly (\dia\), only here in the N.T. {From Tyre} (\apo Turou\). Page takes (Hackett also) with \katˆntˆsamen\ (we arrived) rather than with "\ton ploun\" (the voyage) and with good reason: "And we, having (thereby) finished the voyage, arrived from Tyre at Ptolemais." Ptolemais is the modern Acre, called Accho in strkjv@Judges:1:31|. The harbour is the best on the coast of Palestine and is surrounded by mountains. It is about thirty miles south of Tyre. It was never taken by Israel and was considered a Philistine town and the Greeks counted it a Phoenician city. It was the key to the road down the coast between Syria and Egypt and had successively the rule of the Ptolemies, Syrians, Romans. {Saluted} (\aspasamenoi\). Here greeting as in strkjv@21:19| rather than farewell as in strkjv@20:1|. The stay was short, one day (\hˆmeran mian\, accusative), but "the brethren" Paul and his party found easily. Possibly the scattered brethren (Acts:11:19|) founded the church here or Philip may have done it.

rwp@Acts:24:1 @{And with an Orator, one Tertullus} (\kai rhˆtoros Tertullou tinos\). A deputation of elders along with the high priest Ananias, not the whole Sanhedrin, but no hint of the forty conspirators or of the Asian Jews. The Sanhedrin had become divided so that now it is probably Ananias (mortally offended) and the Sadducees who take the lead in the prosecution of Paul. It is not clear whether after five days is from Paul's departure from Jerusalem or his arrival in Caesarea. If he spent nine days in Jerusalem, then the five days would be counted from then (verse 11|). The employment of a Roman lawyer (Latin _orator_) was necessary since the Jews were not familiar with Roman legal procedure and it was the custom in the provinces (Cicero _pro Cael_. 30). The speech was probably in Latin which Paul may have understood also. \Rhˆt“r\ is a common old Greek word meaning a forensic orator or advocate but here only in the N.T. The Latin _rhetor_ was a teacher of rhetoric, a very different thing. Tertullus is a diminutive of Tertius (Romans:16:22|). {Informed} (\enephanisan\). Same verb as in strkjv@23:15,22|, somewhat like our modern "indictment," certainly accusations "against Paul" (\kata tou Paulou\). They were down on Paul and the hired barrister was prosecuting attorney. For the legal form see _Oxyrhynchus Papyri_, Vol. II., p. 162, line 19.

rwp@Acts:24:4 @{That I be not further tedious unto thee} (\hina mˆ epi pleion se enkopt“\). _Koin‚_ verb (Hippocrates, Polybius) to cut in on (or into), to cut off, to impede, to hinder. Our modern telephone and radio illustrate it well. In the N.T. (Acts:24:4; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:18; strkjv@Galatians:5:7; strkjv@Romans:15:22; strkjv@1Peter:3:7|). "That I may not cut in on or interrupt thee further (\epi pleion\) in thy reforms." Flattery still. {Of thy clemency} (\tˆi sˆi epieikeiƒi\). Instrumental case of old word from \epieikˆs\ and this from \epi\ and \eikos\ (reasonable, likely, fair). "Sweet Reasonableness" (Matthew Arnold), gentleness, fairness. An \epieikˆs\ man is "one who makes reasonable concessions" (Aristotle, _Eth_. V. 10), while \dikaios\ is "one who insists on his full rights" (Plato, _Leg_. 757 D) as translated by Page. {A few words} (\suntom“s\). Old adverb from \suntemn“\, to cut together (short), abbreviate. Like \dia brache“n\ in strkjv@Hebrews:13:22|. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:16| (shorter conclusion).

rwp@Acts:25:8 @{While Paul said in his defence} (\tou Paulou apologoumenou\). Genitive absolute again, present middle participle of \apologeomai\, old verb to make defence as in strkjv@19:33; strkjv@24:10; strkjv@26:1,2|. The recitative \hoti\ of the Greek before a direct quotation is not reproduced in English. {Have I sinned at all} (\ti hˆmarton\). Constative aorist active indicative of \hamartan“\, to miss, to sin. The \ti\ is cognate accusative (or adverbial accusative). Either makes sense. Paul sums up the charges under the three items of law of the Jews, the temple, the Roman state (Caesar). This last was the one that would interest Festus and, if proved, would render Paul guilty of treason (\majestas\). Nero was Emperor A.D. 54-68, the last of the emperors with any hereditary claim to the name "Caesar." Soon it became merely a title like Kaiser and Czar (modern derivatives). In Acts only "Caesar" and "Augustus" are employed for the Emperor, not "King" (\Basileus\) as from the time of Domitian. Paul's denial is complete and no proof had been presented. Luke was apparently present at the trial.

rwp@Acts:26:17 @{Delivering thee} (\exairoumenos se\). Present middle participle of \exaire“\, old verb and usually so rendered, but the old Greek also uses it for "choose" as also in LXX (Isaiah:48:10|). The papyri give examples of both meanings and either makes good sense here. God was continually rescuing Paul "out of the hands of Jews and Gentiles and Paul was a chosen vessel" (9:15|). Modern scholars are also divided.

rwp@Acts:27:12 @{Because the haven was not commodious to winter in} (\aneuthetou tou limenos huparchontos pros paracheimasian\). Genitive absolute again present tense of \huparch“\: "The harbour being unfit (\aneuthetou\, this compound not yet found elsewhere, simplex in strkjv@Luke:9:62; strkjv@14:35; strkjv@Hebrews:6:7|) for wintering" (\paracheimasia\, only here in N.T., but in Polybius and Diodorus, in an inscription A.D. 48, from \paracheimaz“\). {The more part advised} (\hoi pleiones ethento boulˆn\). Second aorist middle indicative of \tithˆmi\, ancient idiom with \boulˆn\, to take counsel, give counsel. Lysias held a council of the officers of the ship on the issue raised by Paul. {If by any means they could reach Phoenix and winter there} (\ei p“s dunainto katantˆsantes eis Phoinika paracheimasai\). The optative \dunainto\ (present middle of \dunamai\) here with \ei\ is a condition of the fourth class with the notion of purpose implied and indirect discourse (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). "We vote for going on the chance that we may be able" (Page). Phoenix is the town of palms (John:12:13|), the modern Lutro, the only town in Crete on the southern coast with a harbour fit for wintering, though Wordsworth and Page argue for Phineka which suits Luke's description better. The verb \paracheimaz“\, to winter, is from \para\ and \cheim“n\ (see also strkjv@28:11|). Used in several _Koin‚_ writers. {Looking northeast and southeast} (\bleponta kata liba kai kata ch“ron\). There are two ways of interpreting this language. \Lips\ means the southwest wind and \ch“ros\ the northwest wind. But what is the effect of \kata\ with these words? Does it mean "facing" the wind? If so, we must read "looking southwest and northwest." But \kata\ can mean down the line of the wind (the way the wind is blowing). If so, then it is proper to translate "looking northeast and southeast." This translation suits Lutro, the other suits Phoenike. Ramsay takes it to be Lutro, and suggests that sailors describe the harbour by the way it looks as they go into it (the subjectivity of the sailors) and that Luke so speaks and means Lutro which faces northeast and southeast. On the whole Lutro has the best of the argument.

rwp@Acts:27:15 @{When the ship was caught} (\sunarpasthentos tou ploiou\). Genitive absolute again with first aorist passive of \sunarpaz“\, old word, in N.T. only strkjv@Luke:8:29; strkjv@Acts:6:12; strkjv@19:29|, and here. Graphic picture as if the ship was seized by a great monster. {Face the wind} (\antophthalmein t“i anem“i\). Dative case with the vivid infinitive of \antophthalme“\ from \antophthalmos\, looking in the eye, or eye to eye (\anti\, facing and \opthalmos\, eye). Eyes were painted on the prows of vessels. The ship could not face the wind enough to get to Phoenix. Modern sailors talk of sailing into the eye of the wind. We were not able to look the wind in the eye. _Koin‚_ verb used by Polybius. Some MSS. have it in strkjv@Acts:6:11|, but only here in N.T. In Wisdom of Sol. strkjv@12:14 it is used of a prince who cannot look God in the face. Clement of Rome 34 uses it of an idle workman not able to look his employer in the face (Milligan and Moulton's _Vocabulary_). {We gave way} (\epidontes\). Second aorist active participle of \epidid“mi\, giving way to the wind. {Were driven} (\epherometha\). Imperfect passive of \pher“\, "we were being borne along." We "scudded before the gale" (Page). "The suddenness of the hurricane gave no time to furl the great mainsail" (Furneaux).

rwp@Colossians:1:2 @{At Colossae} (\en Kolossais\). The spelling is uncertain, the MSS. differing in the title (\Kolassaeis\) and here (\Kolossais\). Colossae was a city of Phrygia on the Lycus, the tributaries of which brought a calcareous deposit of a peculiar kind that choked up the streams and made arches and fantastic grottoes. In spite of this there was much fertility in the valley with two other prosperous cities some ten or twelve miles away (Hierapolis and Laodicea). "The church at Colossae was the least important of any to which Paul's epistles were addressed" (Vincent). But he had no greater message for any church than he here gives concerning the Person of Christ. There is no more important message today for modern men.

rwp@Colossians:1:11 @{Strengthened} (\dunamoumenoi\). Present passive participle of late verb \dunamo“\ (from \dunamis\), to empower, "empowered with all power." In LXX and papyri and modern Greek. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:11:34| and MSS. in strkjv@Ephesians:6:10| (W H in margin). {According to the might of his glory} (\kata to kratos tˆs doxˆs autou\). \Kratos\ is old word for perfect strength (cf. \krate“, kratilos\). In N.T. it is applied only to God. Here his might is accompanied by glory (_Shekinah_). {Unto all patience and longsuffering} (\eis pƒsan hupomonˆn kai makrothumian\). See both together also in strkjv@James:5:10f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:4,6; strkjv@2Timothy:3:10|. \Hupomonˆ\ is remaining under (\hupomen“\) difficulties without succumbing, while \makrothumia\ is the long endurance that does not retaliate (Trench).

rwp@Colossians:1:13 @{Delivered} (\erusato\). First aorist middle indicative of \ruomai\, old verb, to rescue. This appositional relative clause further describes God the Father's redemptive work and marks the transition to the wonderful picture of the person and work of Christ in nature and grace in verses 14-20|, a full and final answer to the Gnostic depreciation of Jesus Christ by speculative philosophy and to all modern efforts after a "reduced" picture of Christ. God rescued us out from (\ek\) the power (\exousias\) of the kingdom of darkness (\skotous\) in which we were held as slaves. {Translated} (\metestˆsen\). First aorist active indicative of \methistˆmi\ and transitive (not intransitive like second aorist \metestˆ\). Old word. See strkjv@1Corinthians:13:2|. Changed us from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light. {Of the Son of his love} (\tou huiou tˆs agapˆs autou\). Probably objective genitive (\agapˆs\), the Son who is the object of the Father's love like \agapˆtos\ (beloved) in strkjv@Matthew:3:17|. Others would take it as describing love as the origin of the Son which is true, but hardly pertinent here. But Paul here rules out the whole system of aeons and angels that the Gnostics placed above Christ. It is Christ's Kingdom in which he is King. He has moral and spiritual sovereignty.

rwp@Colossians:2:4 @{This I say} (\touto leg“\). Paul explains why he has made this great claim for Christ at this point in his discussion. {May delude} (\paralogizˆtai\). Present middle subjunctive of \paralogizomai\, old verb, only here in N.T., from \para\ and \logizomai\, to count aside and so wrong, to cheat by false reckoning, to deceive by false reasoning (Epictetus). {With persuasiveness of speech} (\en pithanologiƒi\). Rare word (Plato) from \pithanos\ and \logos\, speech, adapted to persuade, then speciously leading astray. Only here in N.T. One papyrus example. The art of persuasion is the height of oratory, but it easily degenerates into trickery and momentary and flashy deceit such as Paul disclaimed in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:4| (\ouk en pithois sophias logois\) where he uses the very adjective \pithos\ (persuasive) of which \pithanos\ (both from \peith“\) is another form. It is curious how winning champions of error, like the Gnostics and modern faddists, can be with plausibility that catches the gullible.

rwp@Colossians:2:15 @{Having put off from himself} (\apekdusamenos\). Only here and strkjv@3:9| and one MS. of Josephus (\apekdus\). Both \apodu“\ and \ekdu“\ occur in ancient writers. Paul simply combines the two for expression of complete removal. But two serious problems arise here. Is God or Christ referred to by \apekdusamenos\? What is meant by "the principalities and the powers" (\tas archas kai tas exousias\)? Modern scholars differ radically and no full discussion can be attempted here as one finds in Lightfoot, Haupt, Abbott, Peake. On the whole I am inclined to look on God as still the subject and the powers to be angels such as the Gnostics worshipped and the verb to mean "despoil" (American Standard Version) rather than "having put off from himself." In the Cross of Christ God showed his power openly without aid or help of angels. {He made a show of them} (\edeigmatisen\). First aorist active indicative of \deigmatiz“\, late and rare verb from \deigma\ (Jude:1:7|), an example, and so to make an example of. Frequent in the papyri though later than \paradeigmatiz“\ and in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:1:19| of Joseph's conduct toward Mary. No idea of disgrace is necessarily involved in the word. The publicity is made plain by "openly" (\en parrˆsiƒi\). {Triumphing over them on it} (\thriambeusas autous en aut“i\). On the Cross the triumph was won. This late, though common verb in _Koin‚_ writers (\ekthriambeu“\ in the papyri) occurs only twice in the N.T., once "to lead in triumph" (2Corinthians:2:14|), here to celebrate a triumph (the usual sense). It is derived from \thriambos\, a hymn sung in festal procession and is kin to the Latin _triumphus_ (our triumph), a triumphal procession of victorious Roman generals. God won a complete triumph over all the angelic agencies (\autous\, masculine regarded as personal agencies). Lightfoot adds, applying \thriambeusas\ to Christ: "The convict's gibbet is the victor's car." It is possible, of course, to take \aut“i\ as referring to \cheirographon\ (bond) or even to Christ.

rwp@Colossians:3:11 @{Where} (\hopou\). In this "new man" in Christ. Cf. strkjv@Galatians:3:28|. {There cannot be} (\ouk eni\). \Eni\ is the long (original) form of \en\ and \estin\ is to be understood. "There does not exist." This is the ideal which is still a long way ahead of modern Christians as the Great War proved. Race distinctions (Greek \Hellˆn\ and Jew \Ioudaios\) disappear in Christ and in the new man in Christ. The Jews looked on all others as Greeks (Gentiles). Circumcision (\peritomˆ\) and uncircumcision (\akrobustia\) put the Jewish picture with the cleavage made plainer (cf. strkjv@Ephesians:2|). The Greeks and Romans regarded all others as barbarians (\barbaroi\, strkjv@Romans:1:14|), users of outlandish jargon or gibberish, onomatopoetic repetition (\bar-bar\). {A Scythian} (\Skuthˆs\) was simply the climax of barbarity, _bar-baris barbariores_ (Bengel), used for any rough person like our "Goths and Vandals." {Bondman} (\doulos\, from \de“\, to bind), {freeman} (\eleutheros\, from \erchomai\, to go). Class distinctions vanish in Christ. In the Christian churches were found slaves, freedmen, freemen, masters. Perhaps Paul has Philemon and Onesimus in mind. But labour and capital still furnish a problem for modern Christianity. {But Christ is all} (\alla panta Christos\). Demosthenes and Lucian use the neuter plural to describe persons as Paul does here of Christ. The plural \panta\ is more inclusive than the singular \pƒn\ would be. {And in all} (\kai en pƒsin\). Locative plural and neuter also. "Christ occupies the whole sphere of human life and permeates all its developments" (Lightfoot). Christ has obliterated the words barbarian, master, slave, all of them and has substituted the word \adelphos\ (brother).

rwp@Colossians:3:20 @{Obey your parents} (\hupakouete tois goneusin\). Old verb to listen under (as looking up), to hearken, to heed, to obey. {In all things} (\kata panta\). This is the hard part for the child, not occasional obedience, but continual. Surely a Christian father or mother will not make unreasonable or unjust demands of the child. Nowhere does modern civilization show more weakness than just here. Waves of lawlessness sweep over the world because the child was not taught to obey. Again Paul argues that this is "in the Lord" (\en Kuri“i\).

rwp@Ephesians:2:2 @{According to the course of this world} (\kata ton ai“na tou kosmou toutou\). Curious combinations of \ai“n\ (a period of time), \kosmos\ (the world in that period). See strkjv@1Corinthians:1:20| for "this age" and strkjv@1Corinthians:3:9| for "this world." {The prince of the power of the air} (\ton archonta tˆs exousias tou aeros\). \Aˆr\ was used by the ancients for the lower and denser atmosphere and \aithˆr\ for the higher and rarer. Satan is here pictured as ruler of the demons and other agencies of evil. Jesus called him "the prince of this world" (\ho arch“n tou kosmou toutou\, strkjv@John:16:11|). {That now worketh} (\tou nun energountos\). Those who deny the existence of a personal devil cannot successfully deny the vicious tendencies, the crime waves, in modern men. The power of the devil in the lives of men does explain the evil at work "in the sons of disobedience" (\en tois huiois tˆs apethias\). In strkjv@5:6| also. A Hebrew idiom found in the papyri like "sons of light" (1Thessalonians:5:5|).

rwp@Ephesians:4:16 @{From which} (\ex hou\). Out of which as the source of energy and direction. {Fitly framed} (\sunarmologoumenon\). See strkjv@2:21| for this verb. {Through that which every joint supplieth} (\dia pasˆs haphˆs tˆs epichorˆgias\). Literally, "through every joint of the supply." See strkjv@Colossians:2:19| for \haphˆ\ and strkjv@Phillipians:1:19| for the late word \epichorˆgia\ (only two examples in N.T.) from \epichorˆge“\, to supply (Colossians:2:19|). {In due measure} (\en metr“i\). Just "in measure" in the Greek, but the assumption is that each part of the body functions properly in its own sphere. {Unto the building up of itself} (\eis oikodomˆn heautou\). Modern knowledge of cell life in the human body greatly strengthens the force of Paul's metaphor. This is the way the body grows by cooperation under the control of the head and all "in love" (\en agapˆi\).

rwp@Info_Epistles-Pastorial @ THE FOURTH GROUP THE PASTORAL EPISTLES FIRST TIMOTHY TITUS SECOND TIMOTHY A.D. 65 TO 68 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION It is necessary to discuss introductory matters concerning the three because they are common to them all. It is true that some modern scholars admit as Pauline the personal passages in strkjv@2Timothy:1:15-18; strkjv@4:9-22| while they deny the genuineness of the rest. But that criticism falls by its own weight since precisely the same stylistic characteristics appear in these admitted passages as in the rest and no earthly reason can be advanced for Paul's writing mere scraps or for the omission of the other portions and the preservation of these by a second century forger.

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ THE EPISTLES OF PAUL BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION IMPORTANCE OF PAUL'S WORK It is impossible to put too much emphasis on the life and work of Paul as the great interpreter of Christ. He has been misunderstood in modern times as he was during his career. Some accuse him of perverting the pure gospel of Christ about the Kingdom of God into a theological and ecclesiastical system. He has been accused of rabbinizing the gospel by carrying over his Pharisaism, while others denounce him for Hellenizing the gospel with Greek philosophy and the Greek mystery-religions. But out of all the welter of attacks Paul's Epistles stand as the marvellous expression of his own conception of Christ and the application of the gospel to the life of the Christians in the Graeco-Roman world in which they lived by eternal principles that apply to us today. In order to understand Paul's Epistles one must know the Acts of the Apostles in which Luke has drawn with graphic power the sudden change of the foremost opponent of Christ into the chief expounder and proclaimer of the gospel of the Risen Christ. The Acts and the Epistles supplement each other in a marvellous way, though chiefly in an incidental fashion. It is by no means certain that Luke had access to any of Paul's Epistles before he wrote the Acts, though that was quite possible for the early Epistles. It does not greatly matter for Luke had access to Paul himself both in Caesarea and in Rome. The best life of Paul one can get comes by combining the Acts with the Epistles if he knows how to do it. Paul is Luke's hero, but he has not overdrawn the picture in the Acts as is made clear by the Epistles themselves which reveal his own grasp and growth. The literature on Paul is vast and constantly growing. He possesses a fascination for students of the New Testament and of Christianity. It is impossible here to allude even to the most important in so vast a field. Conybeare and Howson's _Life and Epistles of St. Paul_ still has value. Sir W. M. Ramsay has a small library on Paul and his Epistles. Stalker's masterful little book on Paul still grips men as does the work of Sabatier. Deissmann's _St. Paul _ continues to throw light on the great Apostle to the Gentiles. Those who wish my own view at greater length will find them in my various books on Paul (_Epochs in the Life of Paul_, _Paul the Interpreter of Christ_, etc.).

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ DATES OF HIS EPISTLES Unfortunately there is not complete agreement among scholars as to the dates of some of Paul's Epistles. Baur denied the Pauline authorship of all the Epistles save I and II Corinthians, Galatians, Romans. Today some deny that Paul wrote the Pastoral Epistles, though admitting the others. Some admit Pauline fragments even in the Pastoral Epistles, but more about this when these Epistles are reached. There is more doubt about the date of Galatians than any of the others. Lightfoot put it just before Romans, while Ramsay now makes it the earliest of all. The Epistle itself has no notes of place or time. The Epistles to the Thessalonians were written from Corinth after Timothy had been sent from Athens by Paul to Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:3:1f.|) and had just returned to Paul (1Thessalonians:3:6|) which we know was in Corinth (Acts:18:5|) shortly before Gallio came as Proconsul of Achaia (Acts:18:12|). We can now feel certain from the new "acclamation" of Claudius in the inscription at Delphi recently explained by Deissmann in his _St. Paul_ that the Thessalonian Epistles were written 50 to 51 A.D. We know also that he wrote I Corinthians while in Ephesus (1Corinthians:16:8|) and before pentecost, though the precise year is not given. But he spent three years at Ephesus in round numbers (Acts:19:8,10; strkjv@20:31|) and he wrote just before he left, probably spring of A.D. 54 or 55. He wrote II Corinthians from Macedonia shortly after leaving Ephesus (2Corinthians:2:12|) ] apparently the same year. Romans was written from Corinth and sent by Phoebe of Cenchreae (Romans:16:1f.|) unless strkjv@Romans:16| be considered a separate Epistle to Ephesus as some hold, a view that does not commend itself to me. Deissmann (_New Testament in the Light of Modern Research_, p. 33) accepts a modern theory that Ephesus was the place of the writing of the first prison Epistles (Philippians, Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians) as well as I Corinthians and Galatians and dates them all between A.D. 52 and 55. But we shall find that these prison Epistles most naturally fall to Rome between A.D. 61 and 63. If the Pastoral Epistles are genuine, as I hold, they come between A.D. 65 and 68. Bartlet argues for a date before A.D. 64, accepting the view that Paul was put to death then. But it is still far more probable that Paul met his death in Rome in A.D. 68 shortly before Nero's death which was June 8, A.D. 68. It will thus be seen that the dates of several of the Epistles are fairly clear, while some remain quite uncertain. In a broad outlook they must all come between A.D. 50 and 68.

rwp@Galatians:1:6 @{Ye are so quickly removing} (\hout“s tache“s metatithesthe\). The present middle indicative of \metatithˆmi\, to change places, to transfer. "You are transferring yourselves" and doing it "so quickly" either from the time of their conversion or most likely from the time when the Judaizers came and tempted them. Songs:easily some of them are falling victims to these perverters of the gospel. That is a continuous amazement (\thaumaz“\) to Paul and to men today that so many are so silly and so gullible to modern as to ancient charlatans. {Unto a different gospel} (\eis heteron euaggelion\). See on ¯2Corinthians:11:4| for distinction between \allo\ and \heteron\ as here. It is not here or there a mere difference in emphasis or spirit as in ¯Phillipians:1:18| so long as Christ is preached. These men as in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:4| preach "another Jesus" and a "different gospel" and so have fallen away from grace and have done away with Christ (Galatians:5:4|). Hence the vehemence of Paul's words.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE AUTHOR Origen bluntly wrote: "Who wrote the Epistle God only knows certainly" as quoted by Eusebius. Origen held that the thoughts were Paul's while Clement of Rome or Luke may have written the book. Clement of Alexandria (Eusebius says) thought that Paul wrote it in Hebrew and that Luke translated it into Greek. No early writer apparently attributed the Greek text to Paul. Eusebius thought it was originally written in Hebrew whether by Paul or not and translated by Clement of Rome. But there is no certainty anywhere in the early centuries. It was accepted first in the east and later in the west which first rejected it. But Jerome and Augustine accepted it. When the Renaissance came Erasmus had doubts, Luther attributed it to Apollos, Calvin denied the Pauline authorship. In North Africa it was attributed to Barnabas. In modern times Harnack has suggested Priscilla, but the masculine participle in strkjv@Hebrews:11:32| (\me diˆgoumenon\) disposes of that theory. The oldest Greek MSS. (Aleph A B) have simply \Pros Hebraious\ as the title, but they place it before the Pastoral Epistles, while the Textus Receptus puts it after the Pastoral Epistles and Philemon. In the light of all the facts one can only make a guess without a sense of certainty. For myself I should with Luther guess Apollos as the most likely author of this book which is full of the Spirit of God.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE DATE Here again modern scholars differ widely. Westcott places it between A.D. 64 and 67. Harnack and Holtzmann prefer a date between 81 and 96. Marcus Dods argues strongly that the Epistle was written while the temple was still standing. If it was already destroyed, it is hard to understand how the author could have written strkjv@Hebrews:10:1f.|: "Else would they not have ceased to be offered?" And in strkjv@Hebrews:8:13| "nigh to vanishing away" (\eggus aphanismou\) is only intelligible with the temple service still going on. The author makes use of the tabernacle instead of the temple because the temple was patterned after the tabernacle. On the other hand, the mention of Timothy in strkjv@Hebrews:13:23| as being "set free" (\apolelumenon\) raises an inquiry concerning Paul's last plea to Timothy to come to him in Rome (2Timothy:4:11-13|). Apparently Timothy came and was put in prison. If so, since Paul was put to death before Nero's own death (June 8, A.D. 68), there is left only the years 67 to 69 A.D. as probable or even possible. It is thus the last of the New Testament books before the Johannine Writings all of which come towards the close of the century and after the destruction of Jerusalem.

rwp@Hebrews:1:11 @{They} (\autoi\). The heavens (\ouranoi\). {Shall perish} (\apolountai\). Future middle of \apollumi\. Modern scientists no longer postulate the eternal existence of the heavenly bodies. {But thou continuest} (\su de diameneis\). This is what matters most, the eternal existence of God's Son as Creator and Preserver of the universe (John:1:1-3; strkjv@Colossians:1:14ff.|). {Shall wax old} (\palai“thˆsontai\). First future passive indicative of \palaio“\, from \palaios\, for which see strkjv@Luke:12:33; strkjv@Hebrews:8:13|.

rwp@Hebrews:5:4 @{Taketh the honour unto himself} (\heaut“i lambanei tˆn timˆn\). Dative case of personal interest (\heaut“i\). The priest was called of God. This is the ideal and was true of Aaron. The modern minister is not a priest, but he also should be a God-called man and not one who pushes himself into the ministry or into ecclesiastical office.

rwp@Hebrews:5:12 @{Teachers} (\didaskaloi\). Predicate nominative after \einai\. {By reason of the time} (\dia ton chronon\). Alas, what a commentary on modern Christians. {That some one teach you the rudiments} (\tou didaskein humas tina ta stoicheia\). Neat Greek idiom, genitive case of the articular infinitive (need of the teaching) with two accusatives of the person (\humas\, you) and the thing (\ta stoicheia\, the rudiments) and the accusative of general reference (\tina\, as to some one). For \stoicheia\ see strkjv@Galatians:4:3,9; strkjv@Colossians:2:8|. {Of the first principles of the oracles of God} (\tˆs archˆs t“n logi“n tou theou\). Three genitives linked to each other. \Archˆs\ (beginning) illustrates \ta stoicheia\, just before, the A B C of Christian teaching like strkjv@Hebrews:6:1f|. \Logion\ is a diminutive of logos, divine oracles being usually brief, common in the O.T. and Philo for God's words, in N.T. used for the O.T. (Acts:7:38; Rom strkjv@3:2|), of God's word through Christians (1Peter:4:11|), of the substance of Christian teaching (Hebrews:5:12|). {Of milk} (\galaktos\). Because still babes (1Corinthians:3:2|) and not able to chew "solid food" (\stereƒs trophˆs\), without intellectual and spiritual teeth.

rwp@Hebrews:9:24 @{Made with hands} (\cheiropoiˆta\). See verse 11| for this word. {Like in pattern to the true} (\antitupa t“n alˆthin“n\). Late compound word, only twice in N.T. (here, strkjv@1Peter:3:21|). Polybius uses \antitupos\ for infantry "opposite" to the cavalry. In modern Greek it means a copy of a book. Here it is the "counterpart of reality" (Moffatt). Moses was shown a \tupos\ (model) of the heavenly realities and he made an \antitupon\ on that model, "answering to the type" (Dods) or model. In strkjv@1Peter:3:21| \antitupos\ has the converse sense, "the reality of baptism which corresponds to or is the antitype of the deluge" (Dods). {Now to appear} (\nun emphanisthˆnai\). Purpose clause by the first aorist passive infinitive of \emphaniz“\ (Matthew:27:53; strkjv@John:14:21f.|). For the phrase see strkjv@Psalms:42:3|. For this work of Christ as our High Priest and Paraclete in heaven see strkjv@Hebrews:7:25; strkjv@Romans:8:34; strkjv@1John:2:1f|.

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:13:5 @{Be ye free from the love of money} (\aphilarguros ho tropos\). No copula, but supply \esto\: "Let your manner of life (\tropos\, way, strkjv@Matthew:23:37|), be without love of money" (\aphilarguros\, double compound), once found only in the N.T., here and strkjv@1Timothy:3:3|, but now several times--or the adverb \aphilargur“s\ --in papyri and inscriptions (Deissmann, _Light_, etc., pp. 85f.). Alpha privative and \philos\ and \arguros\. The N.T. is full of the peril of money on the character as modern life is also. {Content with such things as ye have} (\arkoumenoi tois parousin\). Present passive participle of \arke“\, to suffice, to be content as in strkjv@Luke:3:14|. Cf. \autarkˆs\ in strkjv@Phillipians:4:11|. Here in the nominative plural with no substantive or pronoun (anacoluthon, as in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:7|) or the participle used as a principal verb as in strkjv@Romans:12:16|. "Contented with the present things" (\tois parousin\, associative instrumental case of \ta paronta\, present active neuter plural participle of \pareimi\, to be present or on hand). {For himself hath said} (\autos gar eirˆken\). God himself as in strkjv@Acts:20:33| of Christ. Perfect active indicative as in strkjv@1:13; strkjv@4:3f.; strkjv@10:9|. The quotation is a free paraphrase of strkjv@Genesis:28:15; strkjv@Deuteronomy:31:8; strkjv@Joshua:1:5; strkjv@1Chronicles:28:20|. Philo (de Confus. Ling. 32) has it in this form, "a popular paraphrase" (Moffatt). Note the five negatives strengthening each other (\ou mˆ\ with the second aorist active subjunctive \an“\ from \aniˆmi\, to relate, as in strkjv@Acts:16:26|; \oud' ou mˆ\ with second aorist active subjunctive \egkatalip“\ from \egkataleip“\, to leave behind, as in strkjv@Matthew:27:46; strkjv@2Timothy:4:10|). A noble promise in times of depression.

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:4:15 @{For that ye ought to say} (\anti tou legein humƒs\). "Instead of the saying as to you" (genitive of the articular infinitive with the preposition \anti\ and the accusative of general reference with \legein\), "instead of your saying." {If the Lord will} (\ean ho kurios thelˆi\). Condition of the third class with \ean\ and the present active subjunctive (or first aorist active \thelesˆi\ in some MSS). The proper attitude of mind (Acts:18:21; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:19; strkjv@16:7; strkjv@Romans:1:19; strkjv@Phillipians:2:19,24; strkjv@Hebrews:6:3|), not to be uttered always in words like a charm. This Hellenistic formula was common among the ancient heathen, as today among modern Arabs like the Latin _deo volente_. {This or that} (\touto ˆ ekeino\). Applicable to every act.

rwp@James:5:3 @{Are rusted} (\kati“tai\). Perfect passive indicative (singular for \chrusos\ and \arguros\ are grouped as one) of \katio“\, late verb (from \ios\, rust) with perfective sense of \kata\, to rust through (down to the bottom), found only here, Sir. strkjv@12:11, Epictetus (_Diss_. 4, 6, 14). {Rust} (\ios\). Poison in strkjv@James:3:8; strkjv@Romans:3:13| (only N.T. examples of old word). Silver does corrode and gold will tarnish. Dioscorides (V.91) tells about gold being rusted by chemicals. Modern chemists can even transmute metals as the alchemists claimed. {For a testimony} (\eis marturion\). Common idiom as in strkjv@Matthew:8:4| (use of \eis\ with accusative in predicate). {Against you} (\humin\). Dative of disadvantage as in strkjv@Mark:6:11| (\eis marturion autois\) where in the parallel passage (Luke:9:5|) we have \eis marturion ep' autous\. "To you" will make sense, as in strkjv@Matthew:8:4; strkjv@10:18|, but "against" is the idea here as in strkjv@Luke:21:13|. {Shall eat} (\phagetai\). Future middle (late form from \ephagon\) of defective verb \esthi“\, to eat. {Your flesh} (\tas sarkas\). The plural is used for the fleshy parts of the body like pieces of flesh (Revelation:17:16; strkjv@19:18,21|). Rust eats like a canker, like cancer in the body. {As fire} (\h“s pur\). Editors differ here whether to connect this phrase with \phagetai\, just before (as Mayor), for fire eats up more rapidly than rust, or with the following, as Westcott and Hort and Ropes, that is the eternal fire of Gehenna which awaits them (Matthew:25:41; strkjv@Mark:9:44|). This interpretation makes a more vivid picture for \ethˆsaurisate\ (ye have laid up, first aorist active indicative of \thˆsauriz“\, strkjv@Matthew:6:19| and see strkjv@Proverbs:16:27|), but it is more natural to take it with \phagetai\.

rwp@Info_John @ THE FOURTH GOSPEL BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION GREATEST OF BOOKS The test of time has given the palm to the Fourth Gospel over all the books of the world. If Luke's Gospel is the most beautiful, John's Gospel is supreme in its height and depth and reach of thought. The picture of Christ here given is the one that has captured the mind and heart of mankind. It is not possible for a believer in Jesus Christ as the Son of God to be indifferent to modern critical views concerning the authorship and historical value of this Holy of Holies of the New Testament. Here we find _The Heart of Christ_ (E. H. Sears), especially in chapters strkjv@John:14-17|. If Jesus did not do or say these things, it is small consolation to be told that the book at least has symbolic and artistic value for the believer. The language of the Fourth Gospel has the clarity of a spring, but we are not able to sound the bottom of the depths. Lucidity and profundity challenge and charm us as we linger over it.

rwp@Info_John @ A BRIEF BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RECENT LITERATURE (SINCE 1880) ABBOT, EZRA, _On the Authorship of the Fourth Gospel_ (1880). ABBOT, PEABODY, and LIGHTFOOT, _The Fourth Gospel_ (1891). ABBOTT, E.A., _Johannine Vocabulary_ (1935).,_Johannine Grammar_ (1906). APPEL, _Die Echtheit des Johannesevangeliums_ (1915). ASKWITH, E.H., _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1910). BACON, B.W., _The Fourth Gospel in Research and Debate_ (1910). BALDENSPERGER, W., _Der Prolog des vierten Evangeliums_ (1898). BARTH, K., _The Gospel of John and the Synoptic Gospels_ (1907). BAUER, W., _Das Johannes-Evangelium_. 2 Aufl. (1925). BELZER, _Das Evangelium des heiligen Johannes_ (1905). BERNARD, J. H., _Gospel according to St. John_ (2 vols., 1929), in Int. Crit. Comm. BERT, _Das Evangelium des Johannes_ (1922). BLASS, F., _Evangelium secundum Johannem_ (1902). BROOKE, A. E., _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (Cambridge Biblical Essays, pp. 289 to 328. 1909). BURCH, VACHER, _The Structure and Message of St. John's Gospel_ (1928). BURNEY, C. F., _The Aramaic Origin of the Fourth Gospel_ (1922). CALMES, _L'Evangile selon S. Jean_ (1904). CANDLER, W. A., _Practical Studies in the Gospel of John_ (3 vols,, 1912-15). CARPENTER, J. ESTLIN, _The Johannine Writings_ (1927). CHAPMAN, DOM JOHN, _John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel_ (1911). CHARNWOOD, LORD, _According to St. John_ (1925). CLEMEN, C., _Die Entstehung des Johannesevangeliums_ (1912). D'ALMA, _Lamentations:Controverse du quatrieme evangile_ (1908).,Philo et le quotrieme evangile_ (1911). DAUSCH' _Das Johannesevangelium_ (1909). DELFF, H., _Das vierte Evangelium wiederhergestellt_ (1890).,Neue Beitrage zur Kritik und Erklarung des vierten Evangeliums (1890). DODS, M., _Expositor's Bible_ (2 vols., 1891).,Expositor's Greek Testament_ (1897). DRUMMOND, JAMES, _An Inquiry into the Character and Author- ship of the Fourth Gospel_ (1904). EVANS, H. H., _St. John the Author of the Fourth Gospel_ (1888). EWALD, P., _Das Hauptproblem der Evangelienfrage und der Weg zu seiner Losung_ (1890). FOUARD, S., _Jean et la hn de l'age apostolique_ (1904). GARDNER, P., _The Ephesian Gospel_ (1915). GARVIE, A. E., _The Beloved Disciple_ (1922). GOBEL, _Die Reden des Herrn nach Johannes_ (2 vols., 1906, 1910). GODET, F., _Comm. on the Gospel of St. John_ (Tr., 2 vols., 1886--90). GOGUEL, M., _Les sources du recit Johannique de la Passion_ (1910).,Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_ (1924). GORDON, S. D., _Quiet Talks on St. John's Gospel_. GORE, C., _Exposition of the Gospel of John_ (1920). GREEN, A. V., _The Ephesian Canonical Writings_ (1910). GREGORY, C. R., _Wellhausen und Johannes_ (1910). GRILL, J., _Untersuchungen uber die Entstehung des vierten Evangeliums_ (1902). GUMBEL, _Das Johannesevangelium Eine Erganzung des Lukas ev_. (1911). HARRIS, J. RENDEL, _The Origin of the Prologue to St. John's Gospel_ (1917). HAYES, D. A., _John and His Writings_ (1917). HOERNLE, E. S., _The Record of the Loved Disciple_ etc. (1913). HOLLAND, H. S., _The Philosophy of Faith and the Fourth Gospel_ (1919).,_The Fourth Gospel_ (1923). HOLTZMANN, H. J., _Evangelium, Briefe, und Offenbarung des Johannes_. 3 Aufl. (1908). HOLTZMANN, _Hand-Comm_. 3 Aufl. von Bauer (1908). HOVEY, A. H., _In American Comm_. (1885). HOWARD, W. F., _The Fourth Gospel in Recent Criticism and Interpretation_ (1931). IVERACH, JAMES, _Gospel of John_ (Int. Stand. Bible Encycl.). JACKSON, H. L., _The Fourth Gospel and Some Recent German Criticism_ (1906).,_The Problem of the Fourth Gospel_ (1918). JOHNSTON, J. S., _The Philosophy of the Fourth Gospel_ (1909). KEISKER, _The Inner Witness of the Fourth Gospel_ (1922). KREYENBUHL, _Neue Losung der Johanneischen Frage_ (1905). LARFIELD, _Die beide Johannes von Ephesus_ (1914). LEATHES, STANLEY, _The Witness of St. John to Christ_. LEPIN, _L'origine du quatrieme evangile_ (1907; 1927).,_Lamentations:valeur historique du quatrieme euangile_ (1910). LEWIS, F. G., _The Irenaeus Testimony to the Fourth Gospel_ (1908). LEWIS, F. G., _Disarrangements in the Fourth Gospel_ (1910). LIGHTFOOT, J. B., _Biblical Essays_ (pages 1-198; I-III, 1893). LLOYD, J. P. D., _The Son of Thunder_ (1932). LOISY, A., _Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_ (1903). LOWRIE, _The Doctrine of John_ (1899). LYMAN, MARY ELY, _The Fourth Gospel and the Life of Today_ (1931). MANSON, W., _The Incarnate Glory_ (1923). MAURICE, F. D., _The Gospel of St. John_ (1906). McGREGoR, G. H., _The Moffatt Commentary_ (1930). MONTGOMERY, J. A., _The Origin of the Gospel According to St. John_ (1923). MOUSE, _Johannes und Paulus_ (1915). MUIRHEAD, L. A., _The Message of the Fourth Gospel_ (1925). NOLLOTH, C. F., _The Fourth Evangelist_ (1925). NUNN, H. P. V., _The Son of Zebedee and the Fourth Gospel (1927). ORR, JAMES, _The Authenticity of St. John's Gospel Deduced from Internal Evidence_. OVERBECK, _Das Johannesevangelium_ (1911). PLUMMER, A., _Cambridge Greek Testament_ (1913). REVILLE, J., _Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_ (1901). REYNOLDS, H. R., _Gospel of John_ (Hastings, D. B., 1899). RICHMOND, W., _The Gospel of the Rejection_ (1906). ROBERTSON, A. T., _The Divinity of Christ in the Gospel of John_ (1916). ROBINSON, A., _The Historical Character of St. John's Gospel_ (1929). ROBINSON, B. W., _The Gospel of John_ (1925). SANDAY, W., _Criticism of the Fourth Gospel_ (1905). SCHLATTER, _Die Sprache und Heimath des vierten Evangelisten_ (1903). SCHMIEDEL, P. W., _The Johannine Writings_ (1908). SCOTT, E. F., _The Fourth Gospel: Its Purpose and Theology_ (1906). SCOTT, E. F., _The Historical and Religious Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1903). SCOTT-MONCRIEFF, C. E., _St. John, Apostle, Evangelist and Prophet_ (1909). SELBIE, W. B., _Belief and Life: Studies in the Thought of the Fourth Gospel_ (1916). SMITH, J. R., _The Teaching of the Fourth Gospel_ (1903). SMITH, P. V., _The Fourth Gospel: Its Historical Importance_ (1926). SPEER, R. E., _The Greatest Book in the World_ (1915). SPITTA, F., _Das Johannesevangelium als Quelle der Geschichte Jesu_ (1910). STANGE, _Die Eigenart des Johanneischen Produktion_ (1914). STANTON, V. H., _The Fourth Gospel_ (Part III of Gospels as Hist. Documents, 1921). STEVENS, G. B., _The Johannine Theology_ (1898). STRACHAN, R. H., _Gospel of John_ (Hastings, D C G 1906).,The Fourth Gospel: Its Significance and Environ- ment_ (1917).,The Fourth Evangelist: Dramatist or Historian_ (1925). TILLMANN, FRITZ, _Das Johannesevangelium Uebersetzt und Erklart_ (1931). VEDDER, H. C., _The Johannine Writings and the Johannine Problems_ (1917). WARSCHAUER, J., _The Problem of the Fourth Gospel_. WATKINS, W. H., _Modern Criticism Considered in its Rela- tion to the Fourth Gospel_ (1890). WATSON, H. A., _The Mysticism of St. John's Gospel_ (1916). WEARING, _The World View of the Fourth Gospel_ (1918). WEISS, B., _Meyer Komm_. 9 Aufl. (1902).,_Das Johannesevangelium als einheitliches Werk_ (1911). WELLHAUSEN, J., _Das Evangelium Johannis_ (1908). WENDT, H. H., _The Gospel according to St. John: An Inquiry into its Genesis and Historical Value_ (1911).,_Die Schichten im vierten Evangelium_ (1911). WESTCOTT, B. F., _The Gospel according to St. John_ (2 vols., 1908). WHITELAW, _The Gospel of John_ (1888). WINDISCH, H., _Johannes und die Synoptiker_ (1927). WORSLEY, _The Fourth Gospel and the Synoptists_ (1911). WREDE, W., _Charakter und Tendenz del Johannesevangelium_ (1903). ZAHN, TH., _Dal Evangelium Johannis (1908). 6 Aufl. (1921). strkjv@John:1:1 @{In the beginning} (\en archˆi\). \Archˆ\ is definite, though anarthrous like our at home, in town, and the similar Hebrew _be reshith_ in strkjv@Genesis:1:1|. But Westcott notes that here John carries our thoughts beyond the beginning of creation in time to eternity. There is no argument here to prove the existence of God any more than in Genesis. It is simply assumed. Either God exists and is the Creator of the universe as scientists like Eddington and Jeans assume or matter is eternal or it has come out of nothing. {Was} (\ˆn\). Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of \eimi\ to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence. Quite a different verb (\egeneto\, became) appears in verse 14| for the beginning of the Incarnation of the Logos. See the distinction sharply drawn in strkjv@8:58| "before Abraham came (\genesthai\) I am" (\eimi\, timeless existence). {The Word} (\ho logos\). \Logos\ is from \leg“\, old word in Homer to lay by, to collect, to put words side by side, to speak, to express an opinion. \Logos\ is common for reason as well as speech. Heraclitus used it for the principle which controls the universe. The Stoics employed it for the soul of the world (\anima mundi\) and Marcus Aurelius used \spermatikos logos\ for the generative principle in nature. The Hebrew _memra_ was used in the Targums for the manifestation of God like the Angel of Jehovah and the Wisdom of God in strkjv@Proverbs:8:23|. Dr. J. Rendel Harris thinks that there was a lost wisdom book that combined phrases in Proverbs and in the Wisdom of Solomon which John used for his Prologue (_The Origin of the _Prologue to St. John_, p. 43) which he has undertaken to reproduce. At any rate John's standpoint is that of the Old Testament and not that of the Stoics nor even of Philo who uses the term \Logos\, but not John's conception of personal pre-existence. The term \Logos\ is applied to Christ only in strkjv@John:1:1,14; strkjv@Revelation:19:13; strkjv@1John:1:1| "concerning the Word of life" (an incidental argument for identity of authorship). There is a possible personification of "the Word of God" in strkjv@Hebrews:4:12|. But the personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f.; strkjv@Colossians:1:17|) and in strkjv@Hebrews:1:2f.| and in strkjv@John:17:5|. This term suits John's purpose better than \sophia\ (wisdom) and is his answer to the Gnostics who either denied the actual humanity of Christ (Docetic Gnostics) or who separated the \aeon\ Christ from the man Jesus (Cerinthian Gnostics). The pre-existent Logos "became flesh" (\sarx egeneto\, verse 14|) and by this phrase John answered both heresies at once. {With God} (\pros ton theon\). Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. \Pros\ with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In strkjv@1John:2:1| we have a like use of \pros\: "We have a Paraclete with the Father" (\paraklˆton echomen pros ton patera\). See \pros“pon pros pros“pon\ (face to face, strkjv@1Corinthians:13:12|), a triple use of \pros\. There is a papyrus example of \pros\ in this sense \to gn“ston tˆs pros allˆlous sunˆtheias\, "the knowledge of our intimacy with one another" (M.&M., _Vocabulary_) which answers the claim of Rendel Harris, _Origin of Prologue_, p. 8) that the use of \pros\ here and in strkjv@Mark:6:3| is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is _Koin‚_, not old Attic. In strkjv@John:17:5| John has \para soi\ the more common idiom. {And the Word was God} (\kai theos ˆn ho logos\). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying \ho theos ˆn ho logos\. That would mean that all of God was expressed in \ho logos\ and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (\ho logos\) and the predicate without it (\theos\) just as in strkjv@John:4:24| \pneuma ho theos\ can only mean "God is spirit," not "spirit is God." Songs:in strkjv@1John:4:16| \ho theos agapˆ estin\ can only mean "God is love," not "love is God" as a so-called Christian scientist would confusedly say. For the article with the predicate see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 767f. Songs:in strkjv@John:1:14| \ho Logos sarx egeneto\, "the Word became flesh," not "the flesh became Word." Luther argues that here John disposes of Arianism also because the Logos was eternally God, fellowship of Father and Son, what Origen called the Eternal Generation of the Son (each necessary to the other). Thus in the Trinity we see personal fellowship on an equality.

rwp@John:1:20 @{And he confessed} (\kai h“mologˆsen\). The continued paratactic use of \kai\ (and) and the first aorist active indicative of \homologe“\, old verb from \homologos\ (\homon, leg“\, to say the same thing), to confess, in the Synoptics (Matthew:10:32|) as here. {And denied not} (\kai ouk ˆrnˆsato\). Negative statement of same thing in Johannine fashion, first aorist middle indicative of \arneomai\, another Synoptic and Pauline word (Matthew:10:33; strkjv@2Timothy:2:12|). He did not contradict or refuse to say who he was. {And he confessed} (\kai h“mologˆsen\). Thoroughly Johannine again in the paratactic repetition. {I am not the Christ} (\Eg“ ouk eimi ho Christos\). Direct quotation again with recitative \hoti\ before it like our modern quotation marks. "I am not the Messiah," he means by \ho Christos\ (the Anointed One). Evidently it was not a new question as Luke had already shown (Luke:3:15|).

rwp@John:2:9 @{Tasted} (\egeusato\). First aorist middle indicative of \geuomai\. As it was his function to do. {The water now become wine} (\to hud“r oinon gegenˆmenon\). Accusative case, though the genitive also occurs with \geuomai\. Perfect passive participle of \ginomai\ and \oinon\, predicative accusative. The tablemaster knew nothing of the miracle, "whence it was" (\pothen estin\, indirect question retaining present indicative). The servants knew the source of the water, but not the power that made the wine. {Calleth the bridegroom} (\ph“nei ton numphion\). As apparently responsible for the supply of the wine ({thou hast kept} \tetˆrˆkas\). See strkjv@Matthew:9:15| for \numphios\. When men have drunk freely (\hotan methusth“sin\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \methusk“\. The verb does not mean that these guests are now drunk, but that this is a common custom to put "the worse" (\ton elass“\, the less, the inferior) wine last. It is real wine that is meant by \oinos\ here. Unlike the Baptist Jesus mingled in the social life of the time, was even abused for it (Matthew:11:19; strkjv@Luke:7:34|). But this fact does not mean that today Jesus would approve the modern liquor trade with its damnable influences. The law of love expounded by Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:8-10| and in strkjv@Romans:14,15| teaches modern Christians to be willing gladly to give up what they see causes so many to stumble into sin.

rwp@John:11:48 @{If we let him thus alone} (\ean aph“men auton hout“s\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \apiˆmi\. "Suppose we leave him thus alone." Suppose also that he keeps on raising the dead right here next door to Jerusalem! {All will believe on him} (\pantes pisteusousin eis auton\). Future active of \pisteu“\. The inevitable conclusion, "all" (\pantes\), not just "some" (\tines\). as now. {And the Romans will come} (\kai eleusontai hoi R“maioi\). Another inevitable result with the future middle of \erchomai\. Only if the people take Jesus as their political Messiah (6:15|) as they had once started to do. This is a curious muddle for the rulers knew that Jesus did not claim to be a political Messiah and would not be a rival to Caesar. And yet they use this fear (their own belief about the Messiah) to stir themselves to frenzy as they will use it with Pilate later. {And take away both our place and our nation} (\kai arousin hˆm“n kai ton topon kai to ethnos\). Future active of \air“\, another certain result of their inaction. Note the order here when "place" (job) is put before nation (patriotism), for all the world like modern politicians who make the fate of the country turn on their getting the jobs which they are seeking. In the course of time the Romans will come, not because of the leniency of the Sanhedrin toward Jesus, but because of the uprising against Rome led by the Zealots and they will destroy both temple and city and the Sanhedrin will lose their jobs and the nation will be scattered. Future historians will say that this fate came as punishment on the Jews for their conduct toward Jesus.

rwp@John:20:20 @{Showed} (\edeixen\). First aorist active indicative of \deiknumi\. This body, not yet glorified, retained the marks of the nails and of the soldier's spear, ample proof of the bodily resurrection against the modern view that only Christ's "spirit" arose and against the Docetic notion that Jesus had no actual human body. Luke (Luke:24:39f.|) adds feet to hands and side. {Were glad} (\echarˆsan\). Second aorist passive indicative of \chair“\. Jesus had said (16:22|) that it would be so. Luke adds (Luke:24:41|) that they "disbelieved for joy." It was too good to be true, though terror had first seized them when Jesus appeared (Luke:24:37|) because of the suddenness of Christ's appearance and their highly wrought state.

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE CHARACTER OF THE BOOK Literary charm is here beyond dispute. It is a book that only a man with genuine culture and literary genius could write. It has all the simple grace of Mark and Matthew plus an indefinable quality not in these wonderful books. There is a delicate finish of detail and proportion of parts that give the balance and poise that come only from full knowledge of the subject, the chief element in a good style according to Dr. James Stalker. This scientific physician, this man of the schools, this converted Gentile, this devoted friend of Paul, comes to the study of the life of Christ with a trained intellect, with an historian's method of research, with a physician's care in diagnosis and discrimination, with a charm of style all his own, with reverence for and loyalty to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. One could not afford to give up either of the Four Gospels. They each supplement the other in a wonderful way. John's Gospel is the greatest book in all the world, reaching the highest heights of all. But if we had only Luke's Gospel, we should have an adequate portrait of Jesus Christ as Son of God and Son of Man. If Mark's is the Gospel for the Romans and Matthew's for the Jews, the Gospel of Luke is for the Gentile world. He shows the sympathy of Jesus for the poor and the outcast. Luke understands women and children and so is the universal Gospel of mankind in all phases and conditions. It is often called the Gospel of womanhood, of infancy, of prayer, of praise. We have in Luke the first Christian hymns. With Luke we catch some glimpses of the child Jesus for which we are grateful. Luke was a friend and follower of Paul, and verbal parallels with Paul's Epistles do occur, but there is no Pauline propaganda in the Gospel as Moffatt clearly shows (_Intr. to Lit. of the N.T._, p. 281). The Prologue is in literary _Koin‚_ and deserves comparison with those in any Greek and Latin writers. His style is versatile and is often coloured by his source. He was a great reader of the Septuagint as is shown by occasional Hebraisms evidently due to reading that translation Greek. He has graciousness and a sense of humour as McLachlan and Ragg show. Every really great man has a saving sense of humour as Jesus himself had. Ramsay dares to call Luke, as shown by the Gospel and Acts, the greatest of all historians not even excepting Thucydides. Ramsay has done much to restore Luke to his rightful place in the estimation of modern scholars. Some German critics used to cite strkjv@Luke:2:1-7| as a passage containing more historical blunders than any similar passage in any historian. The story of how papyri and inscriptions have fully justified Luke in every statement here made is carefully worked out by Ramsay in his various books, especially in _The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament_. The main feature of this proof appears also in my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_. Songs:many items, where Luke once stood alone, have been confirmed by recent discoveries that the burden of proof now rests on those who challenge Luke in those cases where he still stands alone.

rwp@Luke:1:1 @{Forasmuch as} (\epeidˆper\). Here alone in the N.T., though common in literary Attic. Appears in the papyri. A triple compound (\epei\ = since, \dˆ\ = admittedly true, \per\ = intensive particle to emphasize importance). {Many} (\polloi\). How many no one knows, but certainly more than two or three. We know that Luke used the Logia of Jesus written by Matthew in Aramaic (Papias) and Mark's Gospel. Undoubtedly he had other written sources. {Have taken in hand} (\epecheirˆsan\). A literal translation of \epicheire“\ (from \cheir\, hand and \epi\, upon). Both Hippocrates and Galen use this word in their introduction to their medical works. Here only in the N.T., though a common literary word. Common in the papyri for undertaking with no idea of failure or blame. Luke does not mean to cast reflection on those who preceded him. The apocryphal gospels were all much later and are not in his mind. Luke had secured fuller information and planned a book on a larger scale and did surpass them with the result that they all perished save Mark's Gospel and what Matthew and Luke possess of the Logia of Jesus. There was still room for Luke's book. That motive influences every author and thus progress is made. {To draw up, a narrative} (\anataxasthai diˆgˆsin\). Ingressive aorist middle infinitive. This verb \anataxasthai\ has been found only in Plutarch's _Moral_. 968 CD about an elephant "rehearsing" by moonlight certain tricks it had been taught (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). That was from memory going regularly through the thing again. But the idea in the word is plain enough. The word is composed of \tass“\, a common verb for arranging things in proper order and \ana\, again. Luke means to say that those before him had made attempts to rehearse in orderly fashion various matters about Christ. "The expression points to a connected series of narratives in some order (\taxis\), topical or chronological rather than to isolated narratives" (Bruce). "They had produced something more than mere notes or anecdotes" (Plummer). \Diˆgˆsis\ means leading or carrying a thing through, not a mere incident. Galen applies this word some seventy-five times to the writing of Hippocrates. {Which have been fulfilled} (\t“n peplˆr“phorˆmen“n\). Perfect passive participle from \plˆrophore“\ and that from \plˆrˆs\ (full) and \pher“\ (to bring). Hence to bring or make full. The verb is rare outside of the LXX and the N.T. Papyri examples occur for finishing off a legal matter or a financial matter in full. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 86f.) gives examples from the papyri and inscriptions for completing a task or being convinced or satisfied in mind. The same ambiguity occurs here. When used of persons in the N.T. the meaning is to be convinced, or fully persuaded (Romans:4:21; strkjv@14:5; strkjv@Hebrews:6:11; strkjv@10:22|). When used of things it has the notion of completing or finishing (2Timothy:4:5,17|). Luke is here speaking of "matters" (\pragmat“n\). Luke may refer to the matters connected with Christ's life which have been brought to a close among us or accomplished. Bruce argues plausibly that he means fulness of knowledge "concerning the things which have become widely known among us Christians." In strkjv@Colossians:2:2| we have "fulness of understanding" (\tˆs plˆrophorias tˆs sunese“s\). In modern Greek the verb means to inform. The careful language of Luke here really pays a tribute to those who had preceded him in their narratives concerning Christ.

rwp@Luke:1:5 @{There was} (\egeneto\). Not the usual \en\ for "was," but there arose or came into notice. With this verse the literary _Koin‚_ of verses 1 to 4 disappears. To the end of chapter 2 we have the most Hebraistic (Aramaic) passage in Luke's writings, due evidently to the use of documents or notes of oral tradition. Plummer notes a series of such documents ending with strkjv@1:80, strkjv@2:40, strkjv@2:52|. If the mother of Jesus was still alive, Luke could have seen her. She may have written in Aramaic an account of these great events. Natural reserve would keep her from telling too much and from too early publicity. Luke, as a physician, would take special interest in her birth report. The supernatural aspects disturb only those who do not admit the real Incarnation of Jesus Christ and who are unable to believe that God is superior to nature and that the coming of the Son of God to earth justifies such miraculous manifestations of divine power. Luke tells his story from the standpoint of Mary as Matthew gives his from the standpoint of Joseph. The two supplement each other. We have here the earliest documentary evidence of the origins of Christianity that has come down to us (Plummer). {Herod, King of Judea} (\Hˆr“idou basile“s tˆs Ioudaias\). This note of time locates the events before the death of Herod the Great (as he was called later), appointed King of Judea by the Roman Senate B.C. 40 at the suggestion of Octavius and Antony. He died B.C. 4. {Of the course of Abijah} (\ex ephˆmerias Abia\). Not in old Greek, but in LXX and modern Greek. Papyri have a verb derived from it, \ephˆmere“\. Daily service (Nehemiah:13:30; strkjv@1Chronicles:25:8|) and then a course of priests who were on duty for a week (1Chronicles:23:6; strkjv@28:13|). There were 24 such courses and that of Abijah was the eighth (1Chronicles:24:10; strkjv@2Chronicles:8:14|). Only four of these courses (Jedaiah, Immer, Pashur, Harim) returned from Babylon, but these four were divided into twenty-four with the old names. Each of these courses did duty for eight days, sabbath to sabbath, twice a year. On sabbaths the whole course did duty. At the feast of tabernacles all twenty-four courses were present. {Of the daughters of Aaron} (\ek t“n thugater“n Aar“n\). "To be a priest and married to a priest's daughter was a double distinction" (Plummer). Like a preacher married to a preacher's daughter.

rwp@Luke:3:1 @{Now in the fifteenth year} (\en etei de pentekaidekat“i\). Tiberius Caesar was ruler in the provinces two years before Augustus Caesar died. Luke makes a six-fold attempt here to indicate the time when John the Baptist began his ministry. John revived the function of the prophet (\Ecce Homo\, p. 2|) and it was a momentous event after centuries of prophetic silence. Luke begins with the Roman Emperor, then mentions Pontius Pilate Procurator of Judea, Herod Antipas Tetrarch of Galilee (and Perea), Philip, Tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis, Lysanias, Tetrarch of Abilene (all with the genitive absolute construction) and concludes with the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas (son-in-law and successor of Annas). The ancients did not have our modern system of chronology, the names of rulers as here being the common way. Objection has been made to the mention of Lysanias here because Josephus (_Ant_. XXVII. I) tells of a Lysanias who was King of Abila up to B.C. 36 as the one referred to by Luke with the wrong date. But an inscription has been found on the site of Abilene with mention of "Lysanias the tetrarch" and at the time to which Luke refers (see my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_, pp. 167f.). Songs:Luke is vindicated again by the rocks.

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

rwp@Luke:4:26 @{Unto Zarephath} (\eis Sarepta\). The modern village Surafend on the coast road between Tyre and Sidon. {Unto a woman that was a widow} (\pros gunaika chˆran\). Literally, unto a woman a widow (like our vernacular widow woman). This is an illustration of the proverb from the life of Elijah (1Kings:17:8,9|). This woman was in the land of Sidon or Phoenicia, a heathen, where Jesus himself will go later.

rwp@Luke:6:29 @{On the cheek} (\epi tˆn siagona\). strkjv@Matthew:5:39| has "right." Old word meaning jaw or jawbone, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:5:39|, which see for discussion. It seems an act of violence rather than contempt. Sticklers for extreme literalism find trouble with the conduct of Jesus in strkjv@John:18:22f.| where Jesus, on receiving a slap in the face, protested against it. {Thy cloke} (\to himation\), {thy coat} (\ton chit“na\). Here the upper and more valuable garment (\himation\) is first taken, the under and less valuable \chit“n\ last. In strkjv@Matthew:5:40| the process (apparently a legal one) is reversed. {Withhold not} (\mˆ k“lusˆis\). Aorist subjunctive in prohibition against committing an act. Do not hinder him in his robbing. It is usually useless anyhow with modern armed bandits.

rwp@Luke:8:41 @{Was} (\hupˆrchen\). Imperfect of \huparch“\ in sense of \ˆn\ as in modern Greek. Common in Luke, and Acts, but not in other Gospels.

rwp@Luke:9:48 @{This little child} (\touto to paidion\). As Jesus spoke he probably had his hand upon the head of the child. strkjv@Matthew:18:5| has "one such little child." The honoured disciple, Jesus holds, is the one who welcomes little children "in my name" (\epi t“i onomati mou\), upon the basis of my name and my authority. It was a home-thrust against the selfish ambition of the Twelve. Ministry to children is a mark of greatness. Have preachers ever yet learned how to win children to Christ? They are allowed to slip away from home, from Sunday school, from church, from Christ. {For he that is least among you all} (\ho gar mikroteros en pasin humin huparch“n\). Note the use of \huparch“\ as in strkjv@8:41; strkjv@23:50|. The comparative \mikroteros\ is in accord with the _Koin‚_ idiom where the superlative is vanishing (nearly gone in modern Greek). But {great} (\megas\) is positive and very strong. This saying peculiar to Luke here.

rwp@Luke:14:18 @{With one consent} (\apo mias\). Some feminine substantive like \gn“mˆs\ or \psuchˆs\ has to be supplied. This precise idiom occurs nowhere else. It looked like a conspiracy for each one in his turn did the same thing. {To make excuse} (\paraiteisthai\). This common Greek verb is used in various ways, to ask something from one (Mark:15:6|), to deprecate or ask to avert (Hebrews:12:19|), to refuse or decline (Acts:25:11|), to shun or to avoid (2Timothy:2:23|), to beg pardon or to make excuses for not doing or to beg (Luke:14:18ff.|). All these ideas are variations of \aite“\, to ask in the middle voice with \para\ in composition. {The first} (\ho pr“tos\). In order of time. There are three of the "many" ("all"), whose excuses are given, each more flimsy than the other. {I must needs} (\ech“ anagkˆn\). I have necessity. The land would still be there, a strange "necessity." {Have me excused} (\eche me parˆitˆmenon\). An unusual idiom somewhat like the English perfect with the auxiliary "have" and the modern Greek idiom with \ech“\, but certainly not here a Greek periphrasis for \parˆitˆso\. This perfect passive participle is predicate and agrees with \me\. See a like idiom in strkjv@Mark:3:1; strkjv@Luke:12:19| (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 902f.). The Latin had a similar idiom, _habe me excusatum_. Same language in verse 19|.

rwp@Luke:18:13 @{Standing afar off} (\makrothen hest“s\). Second perfect active participle of \histˆmi\, intransitive like \statheis\ above. But no ostentation as with the Pharisee in verse 11|. At a distance from the Pharisee, not from the sanctuary. {Would not lift} (\ouk ˆthelen oude epƒrai\). Negatives (double) imperfect of {thel“}, was not willing even to lift up, refused to lift (\epƒrai\, first aorist active infinitive of the liquid compound verb, \ep-air“\). Smote (\etupte\). Imperfect active of \tupt“\, old verb, kept on smiting or beating. Worshippers usually lifted up their closed eyes to God. {Be merciful} (\hilasthˆti\). First aorist passive imperative of \hilaskomai\, an old verb, found also in LXX and inscriptions (\exhilaskomai\, Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 224). {A sinner} (\t“i hamart“l“i\). The sinner, not a sinner. It is curious how modern scholars ignore this Greek article. The main point in the contrast lies in this article. The Pharisee thought of others as sinners. The publican thinks of himself alone as the sinner, not of others at all.

rwp@Luke:20:42 @{For David himself} (\autos gar Daueid\). This language of Jesus clearly means that he treats David as the author of strkjv@Psalms:110|. The inspiration of this Psalm is expressly stated in strkjv@Mark:12:36; strkjv@Matthew:22:43| (which see) and the Messianic character of the Psalm in all three Synoptics who all quote the LXX practically alike. Modern criticism that denies the Davidic authorship of this Psalm has to say either that Jesus was ignorant of the fact about it or that he declined to disturb the current acceptation of the Davidic authorship. Certainly modern scholars are not agreed on the authorship of strkjv@Psalms:110|. Meanwhile one can certainly be excused for accepting the natural implication of the words of Jesus here, "David himself." {In the book of the Psalms} (\en bibl“i Psalm“n\). Compare strkjv@3:4| "in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet."

rwp@Luke:24:27 @{Interpreted} (\diˆrmˆneusen\). First aorist active (constative aorist) indicative of \diermˆneu“\ (Margin has the imperfect \diˆrmˆneuen\), intensive compound (\dia\) of \hermˆneu“\, the old verb to interpret from \hermˆneus\, interpreter, and that from \Hermˆs\, the messenger of the gods as the people of Lystra took Paul to be (Acts:14:12|). But what wonderful exegesis the two disciples were now hearing! {Concerning himself} (\peri heauton\). Jesus found himself in the Old Testament, a thing that some modern scholars do not seem able to do.

rwp@Info_Mark @ THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION One of the clearest results of modern critical study of the Gospels is the early date of Mark's Gospel. Precisely how early is not definitely known, but there are leading scholars who hold that A.D. 50 is quite probable. My own views are given in detail in my _Studies in Mark's Gospel_. Zahn still argues that the Gospel according to Matthew is earlier than that according to Mark, but the arguments are against him. The framework of Mark's Gospel lies behind both Matthew and Luke and nearly all of it is used by one or the other. One may satisfy himself on this point by careful use of a Harmony of the Gospels in Greek or English. Whether Mark made use of Q (_Logia of Jesus_) or not is not yet shown, though it is possible. But Mark and Q constitute the two oldest known sources of our Matthew and Luke. We have much of Q preserved in the Non-Markan portions of both Matthew and Luke, though the document itself has disappeared. But Mark's work has remained in spite of its exhaustive use by Matthew and Luke, all except the disputed close. For this preservation we are all grateful. Streeter (_The Four Gospels_) has emphasized the local use of texts in preserving portions of the New Testament. If Mark wrote in Rome, as is quite possible, his book was looked upon as the Roman Gospel and had a powerful environment in which to take root. It has distinctive merits of its own that helped to keep it in use. It is mainly narrative and the style is direct and simple with many vivid touches, like the historical present of an eyewitness. The early writers all agree that Mark was the interpreter for Simon Peter with whom he was at one time, according to Peter's own statement, either in Babylon or Rome (1Peter:5:13|).

rwp@Mark:1:9 @{In the Jordan} (\eis ton Iordanˆn\). Songs:in verse 10|, \ek tou hudatos\, out of the water, after the baptism into the Jordan. Mark is as fond of "straightway" (\euthus\) as Matthew is of "then" (\tote\). {Rent asunder} (\schizomenous\). Split like a garment, present passive participle. Jesus saw the heavens parting as he came up out of the water, a more vivid picture than the "opened" in strkjv@Matthew:3:16| and strkjv@Luke:3:21|. Evidently the Baptist saw all this and the Holy Spirit coming down upon Jesus as a dove because he later mentions it (John:1:32|). The Cerinthian Gnostics took the dove to mean the heavenly _aeon Christ_ that here descended upon the man Jesus and remained with him till the Cross when it left him, a sort of forecast of the modern distinction between the Jesus of history and the theological Christ.

rwp@Mark:4:27 @{Should sleep and rise} (\katheudˆi kai egeirˆtai\). Present subjunctive for continued action. Songs:also {spring up and grow} (\blastƒi kai mˆkunˆtai\) two late verbs. The process of growth goes on all night and all day (\nukta kai hˆmeran\, accusative of time). {He knoweth not how} (\h“s ouk oiden autos\). Note position of \h“s\ (beginning) and \autos\ (end) of clause: {How knows not he}. The mystery of growth still puzzles farmers and scientists of today with all our modern knowledge. But nature's secret processes do not fail to operate because we are ignorant. This secret and mysterious growth of the kingdom in the heart and life is the point of this beautiful parable given only by Mark. "When man has done his part, the actual process of growth is beyond his reach or comprehension" (Swete).

rwp@Mark:5:26 @{Had suffered many things of many physicians} (\polla pathousa hupo poll“n iatr“n\). A pathetic picture of a woman with a chronic case who had tried doctor after doctor. {Had spent all that she had} (\dapanˆsasa ta par' autˆs panta\). Having spent the all from herself, all her resources. For the idiom with \para\ see strkjv@Luke:10:7; strkjv@Phillipians:4:18|. The tragedy of it was that she "was nothing bettered, but rather grew worse" (\mˆden “phelˆtheisa alla mƒllon eis to cheiron elthousa\). Her money was gone, her disease was gaining on her, her one chance came now with Jesus. Matthew says nothing about her experience with the doctors and strkjv@Luke:8:43| merely says that she "had spent all her living upon physicians and could not be healed of any," a plain chronic case. Luke the physician neatly takes care of the physicians. But they were not to blame. She had a disease that they did not know how to cure. Vincent quotes a prescription for an issue of blood as given in the Talmud which gives one a most grateful feeling that he is not under the care of doctors of that nature. The only parallel today is Chinese medicine of the old sort before modern medical schools came.

rwp@Mark:6:7 @{By two and two} (\duo duo\). This repetition of the numeral instead of the use of \ana duo\ or \kata duo\ is usually called a Hebraism. The Hebrew does have this idiom, but it appears in Aeschylus and Sophocles, in the vernacular _Koin‚_ (Oxyrhynchus Papyri No. 121), in Byzantine Greek, and in modern Greek (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 122f.). Mark preserves the vernacular _Koin‚_ better than the other Gospels and this detail suits his vivid style. The six pairs of apostles could thus cover Galilee in six different directions. Mark notes that he "began to send them forth" (\ˆrxato autous apostellein\). Aorist tense and present infinitive. This may refer simply to this particular occasion in Mark's picturesque way. But the imperfect tense \edidou\ means he kept on giving them all through the tour, a continuous power (authority) over unclean spirits singled out by Mark as representing "all manner of diseases and all manner of sickness" (Matthew:10:1|), "to cure diseases" (\iasthai\, strkjv@Luke:9:1|), healing power. They were to preach and to heal (Luke:9:1; strkjv@Matthew:10:7|). Mark does not mention preaching as a definite part of the commission to the twelve on this their first preaching tour, but he does state that they did preach (6:12|). They were to be missioners or missionaries (\apostellein\) in harmony with their office (\apostoloi\).

rwp@Mark:6:19 @{And Herodias set herself against him} (\Hˆ de Hˆr“idias eneichen aut“i\). Dative of disadvantage. Literally, {had it in for him}. This is modern slang, but is in exact accord with this piece of vernacular _Koin‚_. No object of \eichen\ is expressed, though \orgˆn\ or \cholon\ may be implied. The tense is imperfect and aptly described the feelings of Herodias towards this upstart prophet of the wilderness who had dared to denounce her private relations with Herod Antipas. Gould suggests that she "kept her eye on him" or kept up her hostility towards him. She never let up, but bided her time which, she felt sure, would come. See the same idiom in strkjv@Genesis:49:23|. She {desired to kill him} (\ˆthelen auton apokteinai\). Imperfect again. {And she could not} (\kai ouk ˆdunato\). \Kai\ here has an adversative sense, but she could not. That is, not yet. "The power was wanting, not the will" (Swete).

rwp@Mark:7:21 @{Evil thoughts} (\hoi dialogismoi hoi kakoi\). These come out of the heart (\ek tˆs kardias\), the inner man, and lead to the dreadful list here given like the crimes of a modern police court: {fornications} (\porneiai\, usually of the unmarried), {adulteries} (\moichaiai\, of the married), {thefts} (\klopai\, stealings), {covetings} (\pleonexiai\, craze for more and more), {murders} (\phonoi\, growing out of the others often), {wickednesses} (\ponˆriai\, from \ponos\, toil, then drudge, bad like our _knave_, serving boy like German _Knabe_, and then criminal), {deceit} (\dolos\, lure or snare with bait), {lasciviousness} (\aselgeia\, unrestrained sex instinct), {evil eye} (\ophthalmos ponˆros\) or eye that works evil and that haunts one with its gloating stare, {railing} (\blasphˆmia\, blasphemy, hurtful speech), {pride} (\huperˆphania\, holding oneself above others, stuck up), {foolishness} (\aphrosunˆ\, lack of sense), a fitting close to it all.

rwp@Mark:8:1 @{Had nothing to eat} (\mˆ echont“n ti phag“sin\). Genitive absolute and plural because \ochlou\ a collective substantive. Not having what to eat (deliberative subjunctive retained in indirect question). The repetition of a nature miracle of feeding four thousand in Decapolis disturbs some modern critics who cannot imagine how Jesus could or would perform another miracle elsewhere so similar to the feeding of the five thousand up near Bethsaida Julias. But both Mark and Matthew give both miracles, distinguish the words for baskets (\kophinos, sphuris\), and both make Jesus later refer to both incidents and use these two words with the same distinction (Mark:8:19f.; strkjv@Matthew:16:9f.|). Surely it is easier to conceive that Jesus wrought two such miracles than to hold that Mark and Matthew have made such a jumble of the whole business.

rwp@Mark:9:22 @{But if thou canst} (\all 'ei ti dunˆi\). Jesus had asked (verse 21|) the history of the case like a modern physician. The father gave it and added further pathetic details about the fire and the water. The failure of the disciples had not wholly destroyed his faith in the power of Jesus, though the conditional form (first class, assuming it to be true) does suggest doubt whether the boy can be cured at all. It was a chronic and desperate case of epilepsy with the demon possession added. {Help us} (\boethˆson hemin\). Ingressive aorist imperative. Do it now. With touching tenderness he makes the boy's case his own as the Syrophoenician woman had said, "Have mercy on me" (Matthew:15:21|). The leper had said: "If thou wilt" (Mark:1:40|). This father says: "If thou canst."

rwp@Mark:14:14 @{The goodman of the house} (\t“i oikodespotˆi\). A non-classical word, but in late papyri. It means master (\despot\) of the house, householder. The usual Greek has two separate words, \oikou despotˆs\ (master of the house). {My guest-chamber} (\to kataluma mou\). In LXX, papyri, and modern Greek for lodging-place (inn, as in strkjv@Luke:2:7| or guest-chamber as here). It was used for \khan\ or \caravanserai\. {I shall eat} (\phag“\). Futuristic aorist subjunctive with \hopou\.

rwp@Mark:15:46 @{Wound} (\eneilˆsen\). This word is only here in the N.T. As \entuliss“\ is only in strkjv@Matthew:27:59; strkjv@Luke:23:53; strkjv@John:20:7|. Both verbs occur in the papyri, Plutarch, etc. They both mean to wrap, wind, roll in. The body of Jesus was wound in the linen cloth bought by Joseph and the hundred pounds of spices brought by Nicodemus (John:19:39|) for burying were placed in the folds of the linen and the linen was bound around the body by strips of cloth (John:19:40|). The time was short before the sabbath began and these two reverently laid the body of the Master in Joseph's new tomb, hewn out of a rock. The perfect passive participle (\lelatomˆmenon\) is from \latomos\, a stonecutter (\l“s\, stone, \temn“\, to cut). For further details see on ¯Matthew:27:57-60|. strkjv@Luke:23:53| and strkjv@John:19:41| also tell of the new tomb of Joseph. Some modern scholars think that this very tomb has been identified in Gordon's Calvary north of the city. {Against the door} (\epi tˆn thuran\). Matthew has the dative \tˆi thurƒi\ without \epi\ and adds the adjective "great" (\megan\).

rwp@Info_Matthew @ THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION The passing years do not make it any plainer who actually wrote our Greek Matthew. Papias records, as quoted by Eusebius, that Matthew wrote the _Logia_ of Jesus in Hebrew (Aramaic). Is our present Matthew a translation of the Aramaic _Logia_ along with Mark and other sources as most modern scholars think? If so, was the writer the Apostle Matthew or some other disciple? There is at present no way to reach a clear decision in the light of the known facts. There is no real reason why the Apostle Matthew could not have written both the Aramaic _Logia_ and our Greek Matthew, unless one is unwilling to believe that he would make use of Mark's work on a par with his own. But Mark's book rests primarily on the preaching of Simon Peter. Scholfield has recently (1927) published _An Old Hebrew Text of St. Matthew's Gospel_. We know quite too little of the origin of the Synoptic Gospels to say dogmatically that the Apostle Matthew was not in any real sense the author.

rwp@Matthew:1:22 @{That it may be fulfilled} (\hina plˆr“thˆi\). Alford says that "it is impossible to interpret \hina\ in any other sense than in order that." That was the old notion, but modern grammarians recognize the non-final use of this particle in the _Koin‚_ and even the consecutive like the Latin _ut_. Some even argue for a causal use. If the context called for result, one need not hesitate to say so as in strkjv@Mark:11:28; strkjv@John:9:36; strkjv@1John:1:9; strkjv@Revelation:9:20; strkjv@13:13|. See discussion in my _Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research_, pp. 997-9. All the same it is purpose here, God's purpose, Matthew reports the angel as saying, spoken "by (\hupo\, immediate agent) the Lord through (\dia\, intermediate agent) the prophet." {"All this has happened"} (\touto de holon gegonen\, present perfect indicative), stands on record as historical fact. But the Virgin Birth of Jesus is not due to this interpretation of strkjv@Isaiah:7:14|. It is not necessary to maintain (Broadus) that Isaiah himself saw anything more in his prophecy than that a woman then a virgin, would bear a son and that in the course of a few years Ahaz would be delivered from the king of Syria and Israel by the coming of the Assyrians. This historical illustration finds its richest fulfilment in the birth of Jesus from Mary. "Words of themselves are empty. They are useful only as vessels to convey things from mind to mind" (Morison). The Hebrew word for young woman is translated by virgin (\parthenos\), but it is not necessary to conclude that Isaiah himself contemplated the supernatural birth of Jesus. We do not have to say that the idea of the Virgin Birth of Jesus came from Jewish sources. Certainly it did not come from the pagan myths so foreign to this environment, atmosphere and spirit. It is far simpler to admit the supernatural fact than try to explain the invention of the idea as a myth to justify the deification of Jesus. The birth, life, and death of Jesus throw a flood of light on the Old Testament narrative and prophecies for the early Christians. In Matthew and John in particular we often see "that the events of Christ's life were divinely ordered for the express purpose of fulfilling the Old Testament" (McNeile). See strkjv@Matthew:2:15,23; strkjv@4:14-17; strkjv@8:17; strkjv@12:17-21; strkjv@13:25; strkjv@21:4f.; strkjv@John:12:38f.; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@19:24,28,36f|.

rwp@Matthew:4:13 @{Dwelt in Capernaum} (\Kat“ikˆsen eis Kapharnaoum\). He went first to Nazareth, his old home, but was rejected there (Luke:4:16-31|). In Capernaum (probably the modern \Tell H–m\) Jesus was in a large town, one of the centres of Galilean political and commercial life, a fishing mart, where many Gentiles came. Here the message of the kingdom would have a better chance than in Jerusalem with its ecclesiastical prejudices or in Nazareth with its local jealousies. Songs:Jesus "made his home" (\kat“ikˆsen\) here.

rwp@Matthew:5:29 @{Causeth thee to stumble} (\skandalizei se\). This is far better than the Authorized Version "_Offend thee_." _Braid Scots_ has it rightly "ensnare ye." It is not the notion of giving offence or provoking, but of setting a trap or snare for one. The substantive (\skandalon\, from \skandalˆthron\) means the stick in the trap that springs and closes the trap when the animal touches it. Pluck out the eye when it is a snare, cut off the hand, even the right hand. These vivid pictures are not to be taken literally, but powerfully plead for self-mastery. Bengel says: _Non oculum, sed scandalizentem oculum_. It is not mutilating of the body that Christ enjoins, but control of the body against sin. The man who plays with fire will get burnt. Modern surgery finely illustrates the teaching of Jesus. The tonsils, the teeth, the appendix, to go no further, if left diseased, will destroy the whole body. Cut them out in time and the life will be saved. Vincent notes that "the words scandal and slander are both derived from \skandalon\. And Wyc. renders, 'if thy right eye _slander_ thee.'" Certainly slander is a scandal and a stumbling-block, a trap, and a snare.

rwp@Matthew:5:32 @{Saving for the cause of fornication} (\parektos logou porneias\). An unusual phrase that perhaps means "except for a matter of unchastity." "Except on the ground of unchastity" (Weymouth), "except unfaithfulness" (Goodspeed), and is equivalent to \mˆ epi porneiƒi\ in strkjv@Matthew:19:9|. McNeile denies that Jesus made this exception because Mark and Luke do not give it. He claims that the early Christians made the exception to meet a pressing need, but one fails to see the force of this charge against Matthew's report of the words of Jesus. It looks like criticism to meet modern needs.

rwp@Matthew:5:34 @{Swear not at all} (\mˆ omosai hol“s\). More exactly "not to swear at all" (indirect command, and aorist infinitive). Certainly Jesus does not prohibit oaths in a court of justice for he himself answered Caiaphas on oath. Paul made solemn appeals to God (1Thessalonians:5:27; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:31|). Jesus prohibits all forms of profanity. The Jews were past-masters in the art of splitting hairs about allowable and forbidden oaths or forms of profanity just as modern Christians employ a great variety of vernacular "cuss-words" and excuse themselves because they do not use the more flagrant forms.

rwp@Matthew:5:42 @{Turn not thou away} (\mˆ apostraphˆis\). Second aorist passive subjunctive in prohibition. "This is one of the clearest instances of the necessity of accepting the spirit and not the letter of the Lord's commands (see vv.32,34,38|). Not only does indiscriminate almsgiving do little but injury to society, but the words must embrace far more than almsgiving" (McNeile). Recall again that Jesus is a popular teacher and expects men to understand his paradoxes. In the organized charities of modern life we are in danger of letting the milk of human kindness dry up.

rwp@Matthew:6:5 @{In the synagogues and in the corners of the streets} (\en tais sunag“gais kai en tais g“niais t“n platei“n\). These were the usual places of prayer (synagogues) and the street corners where crowds stopped for business or talk. If the hour of prayer overtook a Pharisee here, he would strike his attitude of prayer like a modern Moslem that men might see that he was pious.

rwp@Matthew:6:24 @{No man can serve two masters} (\oudeis dunatai dusi kuriois douleuein\). Many try it, but failure awaits them all. Men even try "to be slaves to God and mammon" (\The“i douleuein kai mam“nƒi\). Mammon is a Chaldee, Syriac, and Punic word like _Plutus_ for the money-god (or devil). The slave of mammon will obey mammon while pretending to obey God. The United States has had a terrible revelation of the power of the money-god in public life in the Sinclair-Fall-Teapot-Air-Dome-Oil case. When the guide is blind and leads the blind, both fall into the ditch. The man who cannot tell road from ditch sees falsely as Ruskin shows in _Modern Painters_. He will hold to one (\henos anthexetai\). The word means to line up face to face (\anti\) with one man and so against the other.

rwp@Matthew:8:11 @{Sit down} (\anaklithˆsontai\). Recline at table on couches as Jews and Romans did. Hence Leonardo da Vinci's famous picture of the Last Supper is an anachronism with all seated at table in modern style.

rwp@Matthew:8:21 @{The Son of man} (\tho huios tou anthr“pou\). This remarkable expression, applied to himself by Jesus so often, appears here for the first time. There is a considerable modern literature devoted to it. "It means much for the Speaker, who has chosen it deliberately, in connection with private reflections, at whose nature we can only guess, by study of the many occasions on which the name is used" (Bruce). Often it means the Representative Man. It may sometimes stand for the Aramaic _barnasha_, the man, but in most instances that idea will not suit. Jesus uses it as a concealed Messianic title. It is possible that this scribe would not understand the phrase at all. Bruce thinks that here Jesus means "the unprivileged Man," worse off than the foxes and the birds. Jesus spoke Greek as well as Aramaic. It is inconceivable that the Gospels should never call Jesus "the Son of man" and always credit it to him as his own words if he did not so term himself, about eighty times in all, thirty-three in Matthew. Jesus in his early ministry, except at the very start in strkjv@John:4|, abstains from calling himself Messiah. This term suited his purpose exactly to get the people used to his special claim as Messiah when he is ready to make it openly.

rwp@Matthew:11:11 @{He that is but little} (\ho mikroteros\). The Authorized Version here has it better, "he that is least." The article with the comparative is a growing idiom in the vernacular _Koin‚_ for the superlative as in the modern Greek it is the only idiom for the superlative (Robertson, _Grammar of the Greek N.T._, p. 668). The papyri and inscriptions show the same construction. The paradox of Jesus has puzzled many. He surely means that John is greater (\meiz“n\) than all others in character, but that the least in the kingdom of heaven surpasses him in privilege. John is the end of one age, "until John" (11:14|), and the beginning of the new era. All those that come after John stand upon his shoulders. John is the mountain peak between the old and the new.

rwp@Matthew:11:17 @{Children sitting in the market places} (\paidiois kathˆmenois en tais agorais\). This parable of the children playing in the market place is given also in strkjv@Luke:7:31f|. Had Jesus as a child in Nazareth not played games with the children? He had certainly watched them often since. The interest of Christ in children was keen. He has really created the modern child's world out of the indifference of the past. They would not play wedding or funeral in a peevish fret. These metaphors in the Gospels are vivid to those with eyes to see. The \agora\ was originally the assembly, then the forum or public square where the people gathered for trade or for talk as in Athens (Acts:17:17|) and in many modern towns. Songs:the Roman Forum. The oriental bazaars today are held in streets rather than public squares. Even today with all the automobiles children play in the streets. In English the word "cheap" (Cheapside) meant only barter and price, not cheap in our sense. The word for mourn (\ekopsasthe\) means to beat the heart, direct middle, after the fashion of eastern funeral lamentations.

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:13:23 @{Verily beareth fruit} (\dˆ karpophorei\). Who in reality (\dˆ\) does bear fruit (cf. strkjv@Matthew:7:16-20|). The fruit reveals the character of the tree and the value of the straw for wheat. Some grain must come else it is only chaff, straw, worthless. The first three classes have no fruit and so show that they are unfruitful soil, unsaved souls and lives. There is variety in those who do bear fruit, but they have some fruit. The lesson of the parable as explained by Jesus is precisely this, the variety in the results of the seed sown according to the soil on which it falls. Every teacher and preacher knows how true this is. It is the teacher's task as the sower to sow the right seed, the word of the kingdom. The soil determines the outcome. There are critics today who scout this interpretation of the parable by Jesus as too allegorical with too much detail and probably not that really given by Jesus since modern scholars are not agreed on the main point of the parable. But the average Christian sees the point all right. This parable was not meant to explain all the problems of human life.

rwp@Matthew:13:25 @{While men slept} (\en t“i katheudein tous anthr“pous\). Same use of the articular present infinitive with \en\ and the accusative as in strkjv@13:4|. {Sowed tares also} (\epespeiren ta zizania\). Literally "sowed upon," "resowed" (Moffatt). The enemy deliberately sowed "the darnel" (\zizania\ is not "tares," but "darnel," a bastard wheat) over (\epi\) the wheat, "in the midst of the wheat." This bearded darnel, _lolium temulentum_, is common in Palestine and resembles wheat except that the grains are black. In its earlier stages it is indistinguishable from the wheat stalks so that it has to remain till near the harvest. Modern farmers are gaining more skill in weeding it out.

rwp@Matthew:14:3 @{For the sake of Herodias} (\dia Hˆr“idiada\). The death of John had taken place some time before. The Greek aorists here (\edˆsen, apetheto\) are not used for past perfects. The Greek aorist simply narrates the event without drawing distinctions in past time. This Herodias was the unlawful wife of Herod Antipas. She was herself a descendant of Herod the Great and had married Herod Philip of Rome, not Philip the Tetrarch. She had divorced him in order to marry Herod Antipas after he had divorced his wife, the daughter of Aretas King of Arabia. It was a nasty mess equal to any of our modern divorces. Her first husband was still alive and marriage with a sister-in-law was forbidden to Jews (Leviticus:18:16|). Because of her Herod Antipas had put John in the prison at Machaerus. The bare fact has been mentioned in strkjv@Matthew:4:12| without the name of the place. See strkjv@11:2| also for the discouragement of John \en t“i desm“tˆri“i\ (place of bondage), here \en tˆi phulakˆi\ (the guard-house). Josephus (_Ant_. xviii. 5.2) tells us that Machaerus is the name of the prison. On a high hill an impregnable fortress had been built. Tristram (_Land of Moab_) says that there are now remains of "two dungeons, one of them deep and its sides scarcely broken in" with "small holes still visible in the masonry where staples of wood and iron had once been fixed. One of these must surely have been the prison-house of John the Baptist." "On this high ridge Herod the Great built an extensive and beautiful palace" (Broadus). "The windows commanded a wide and grand prospect, including the Dead Sea, the course of the Jordan, and Jerusalem" (Edersheim, _Life and Times of Jesus_).

rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{The gates of Hades} (\pulai hƒidou\) {shall not prevail against it} (\ou katischusousin autˆs\). Each word here creates difficulty. Hades is technically the unseen world, the Hebrew Sheol, the land of the departed, that is death. Paul uses \thanate\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:55| in quoting strkjv@Hosea:13:14| for \hƒidˆ\. It is not common in the papyri, but it is common on tombstones in Asia Minor, "doubtless a survival of its use in the old Greek religion" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). The ancient pagans divided Hades (\a\ privative and \idein\, to see, abode of the unseen) into Elysium and Tartarus as the Jews put both Abraham's bosom and Gehenna in Sheol or Hades (cf. strkjv@Luke:16:25|). Christ was in Hades (Acts:2:27,31|), not in Gehenna. We have here the figure of two buildings, the Church of Christ on the Rock, the House of Death (Hades). "In the Old Testament the 'gates of Hades' (Sheol) never bears any other meaning (Isaiah:38:10|; Wisd. strkjv@16:3; 3Macc. strkjv@5:51) than death," McNeile claims. See also strkjv@Psalms:9:13; strkjv@107:18; strkjv@Job:38:17| (\pulai thanatou pul“roi hƒidou\). It is not the picture of Hades _attacking_ Christ's church, but of death's possible victory over the church. "The \ekklˆsia\ is built upon the Messiahship of her master, and death, the gates of Hades, will not prevail against her by keeping Him imprisoned. It was a mysterious truth, which He will soon tell them in plain words (verse 21|); it is echoed in strkjv@Acts:2:24,31|" (McNeile). Christ's church will prevail and survive because He will burst the gates of Hades and come forth conqueror. He will ever live and be the guarantor of the perpetuity of His people or church. The verb \katischu“\ (literally have strength against, \ischu“\ from \ischus\ and \kat-\) occurs also in strkjv@Luke:21:36; strkjv@23:23|. It appears in the ancient Greek, the LXX, and in the papyri with the accusative and is used in the modern Greek with the sense of gaining the mastery over. The wealth of imagery in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| makes it difficult to decide each detail, but the main point is clear. The \ekklˆsia\ which consists of those confessing Christ as Peter has just done will not cease. The gates of Hades or bars of Sheol will not close down on it. Christ will rise and will keep his church alive. _Sublime Porte_ used to be the title of Turkish power in Constantinople.

rwp@Matthew:18:28 @{A hundred pence} (\hekaton dˆnaria\). A denarius was worth about eight and a half pence. The hundred denarii here were equal to some "fifty shillings" (Bruce), "about 4 pounds" (McNeile), "twenty pounds" (Moffatt), "twenty dollars" (Goodspeed), "100 shillings" (Weymouth). These are various efforts to represent in modern language the small amount of this debt compared with the big one. {Took him by the throat} (\epnigen\). "Held him by the throat" (Allen). It is imperfect, probably inchoative, "began to choke or throttle him." The Roman law allowed this indignity. Vincent quotes Livy (iv. 53) who tells how the necks were twisted (_collum torsisset_) and how Cicero (_Pro Cluentio_, xxi.) says: "Lead him to the judgment seat with twisted neck (_collo obtorto_)." {What thou owest} (\ei ti opheileis\). Literally, "if thou owest anything," however little. He did not even know how much it was, only that he owed him something. "The 'if' is simply the expression of a pitiless logic" (Meyer).

rwp@Matthew:19:3 @{Pharisees tempting him} (\Pharisaioi peirazontes auton\). They "could not ask a question of Jesus without sinister motives" (Bruce). See strkjv@4:1| for the word (\peiraz“\). {For every cause} (\kata pasan aitian\). This clause is an allusion to the dispute between the two theological schools over the meaning of strkjv@Deuteronomy:24:1|. The school of Shammai took the strict and unpopular view of divorce for unchastity alone while the school of Hillel took the liberal and popular view of easy divorce for any passing whim if the husband saw a prettier woman (modern enough surely) or burnt his biscuits for breakfast. It was a pretty dilemma and meant to do Jesus harm with the people. There is no real trouble about the use of \kata\ here in the sense of \propter\ or because of (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 509).

rwp@Matthew:20:13 @{To one of them} (\heni aut“n\). Evidently the spokesman of the group. "Friend" (\hetaire\). Comrade. Songs:a kindly reply to this man in place of an address to the whole gang. strkjv@Genesis:31:40; strkjv@Job:27:21; strkjv@Hosea:13:15|. The word survives in modern Greek.

rwp@Matthew:20:34 @{Touched their eyes} (\hˆpsato t“n ommat“n\). A synonym for \ophthalm“n\ in strkjv@Mark:8:23| and here alone in the N.T. In the LXX and a common poetic word (Euripides) and occurs in the papyri. In modern Greek \matia mou\ (abbreviation) means "light of my eye," "my darling." The verb \haptomai\ is very common in the Synoptic Gospels. The touch of Christ's hand would sooth the eyes as they were healed.

rwp@Matthew:23:10 @{Masters} (\kathˆgˆtai\). This word occurs here only in the N.T. It is found in the papyri for teacher (Latin, _doctor_). It is the modern Greek word for professor. "While \didaskalos\ represents \Rab\, \kathˆgˆtes\ stands for the more honourable \Rabban, -b“n\" (McNeile). Dalman (_Words of Jesus_, p. 340) suggests that the same Aramaic word may be translated by either \didaskalos\ or \kathˆgˆtes\. {The Christ} (\ho Christos\). The use of these words here by Jesus like "Jesus Christ" in his Prayer (John:17:3|) is held by some to show that they were added by the evangelist to what Jesus actually said, since the Master would not have so described himself. But he commended Peter for calling him "the Christ the Son of the living God" (Matthew:16:16f.|). We must not empty the consciousness of Jesus too much.

rwp@Matthew:23:25 @{From extortion and excess} (\ex harpagˆs kai akrasias\). A much more serious accusation. These punctilious observers of the external ceremonies did not hesitate at robbery (\harpages\) and graft (\akrasias\), lack of control. A modern picture of wickedness in high places both civil and ecclesiastical where the moral elements in life are ruthlessly trodden under foot. Of course, the idea is for both the outside \ektos\ and the inside (\entos\) of the cup and the platter (fine side dish). But the inside is the more important. Note the change to singular in verse 26| as if Jesus in a friendlier tone pleads with a Pharisee to mend his ways.

rwp@Matthew:24:36 @{Not even the Son} (\oude ho huios\). Probably genuine, though absent in some ancient MSS. The idea is really involved in the words "but the Father only" (\ei mˆ ho patˆr monos\). It is equally clear that in this verse Jesus has in mind the time of his second coming. He had plainly stated in verse 34| that those events (destruction of Jerusalem) would take place in that generation. He now as pointedly states that no one but the Father knows the day or the hour when these things (the second coming and the end of the world) will come to pass. One may, of course, accuse Jesus of hopeless confusion or extend his confession of ignorance of the date of the second coming to the whole chain of events. Songs:McNeile: "It is impossible to escape the conclusion that Jesus as Man, expected the End, within the lifetime of his contemporaries." And that after his explicit denial that he knew anything of the kind! It is just as easy to attribute ignorance to modern scholars with their various theories as to Jesus who admits his ignorance of the date, but not of the character of the coming.

rwp@Matthew:26:18 @{To such a man} (\pros ton deina\). The only instance in the N.T. of this old Attic idiom. The papyri show it for "Mr. X" and the modern Greek keeps it. Jesus may have indicated the man's name. Mark (Mark:14:13|) and Luke (Luke:22:10|) describe him as a man bearing a pitcher of water. It may have been the home of Mary the mother of John Mark. {I keep the passover at thy house} (\pros se poi“ to pascha\). Futuristic present indicative. The use of \pros se\ for "at thy house" is neat Greek of the classic period. Evidently there was no surprise in this home at the command of Jesus. It was a gracious privilege to serve him thus.

rwp@Matthew:26:28 @{The Covenant} (\tˆs diathˆkˆs\). The adjective \kainˆs\ in Textus Receptus is not genuine. The covenant is an agreement or contract between two (\dia, duo, thˆke\, from \tithˆmi\). It is used also for will (Latin, _testamentum_) which becomes operative at death (Hebrews:9:15-17|). Hence our _New Testament_. Either covenant or will makes sense here. Covenant is the idea in strkjv@Hebrews:7:22; strkjv@8:8| and often. In the Hebrew to make a covenant was to cut up the sacrifice and so ratify the agreement (Genesis:15:9-18|). Lightfoot argues that the word \diathˆke\ means covenant in the N.T. except in strkjv@Hebrews:9:15-17|. Jesus here uses the solemn words of strkjv@Exodus:24:8| "the blood of the covenant" at Sinai. "My blood of the covenant" is in contrast with that. This is the New Covenant of strkjv@Jeremiah:31; strkjv@Hebrews:8|. {Which is shed for many} (\to peri poll“n ekchunnomenon\). A prophetic present passive participle. The act is symbolized by the ordinance. Cf. the purpose of Christ expressed in strkjv@20:28|. There \anti\ and here \peri\. {Unto remission of sins} (\eis aphesin hamarti“n\). This clause is in Matthew alone but it is not to be restricted for that reason. It is the truth. This passage answers all the modern sentimentalism that finds in the teaching of Jesus only pious ethical remarks or eschatological dreamings. He had the definite conception of his death on the cross as the basis of forgiveness of sin. The purpose of the shedding of his blood of the New Covenant was precisely to remove (forgive) sins.

rwp@Matthew:27:32 @{Compelled} (\ˆggareusan\). This word of Persian origin was used in strkjv@Matthew:5:41|, which see. There are numerous papyri examples of Ptolemaic date and it survives in modern Greek vernacular. Songs:the soldiers treat Simon of Cyrene (a town of Libya) as a Persian courier (\aggaros\) and impress him into service, probably because Jesus was showing signs of physical weakness in bearing his own Cross as the victims had to do, and not as a mere jest on Simon. "Gethsemane, betrayal, the ordeal of the past sleepless night, scourging, have made the flesh weak" (Bruce). Yes, and the burden of sin of the world that was breaking his heart. {His cross} (\ton stauron autou\). Jesus had used the term cross about himself (16:24|). It was a familiar enough picture under Roman rule. Jesus had long foreseen and foretold this horrible form of death for himself (Matthew:20:19; strkjv@23:24; strkjv@26:2|). He had heard the cry of the mob to Pilate that he be crucified (27:22|) and Pilate's surrender (27:26|) and he was on the way to the Cross (27:31|). There were various kinds of crosses and we do not know precisely the shape of the Cross on which Jesus was crucified, though probably the one usually presented is correct. Usually the victim was nailed (hands and feet) to the cross before it was raised and it was not very high. The crucifixion was done by the soldiers (27:35|) in charge and two robbers were crucified on each side of Jesus, three crosses standing in a row (27:38|).

rwp@Matthew:27:57 @{And when even was come} (\opsias de genomenˆs\). It was the Preparation (\paraskeuˆ\), the day before the sabbath (Mark:15:42; strkjv@Luke:23:54; strkjv@John:31:42|). \Paraskeuˆ\ is the name in modern Greek today for Friday. The Jews were anxious that these bodies should be taken down before the sabbath began at 6 P.M. The request of Joseph of Arimathea for the body of Jesus was a relief to Pilate and to the Jews also. We know little about this member of the Sanhedrin save his name Joseph, his town Arimathea, that he was rich, a secret disciple, and had not agreed to the death of Jesus. Probably he now wished that he had made an open profession. But he has courage now when others are cowardly and asked for the personal privilege (\ˆitˆsato\, middle voice, asked for himself) of placing the body of Jesus in his new tomb. Some today identify this tomb with one of the rock tombs now visible under Gordon's Calvary. It was a mournful privilege and dignity that came to Joseph and Nicodemus (John:19:39-41|) as they wrapped the body of Jesus in clean linen cloth and with proper spices placed it in this fresh (\kain“i\) tomb in which no body had yet been placed. It was cut in the rock (\elatomˆsen\) for his own body, but now it was for Jesus. But now (verse 60|) he rolled a great stone to the door of the tomb and departed. That was for safety. But two women had watched the sad and lonely ceremony, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (mother of James and Joseph). They were sitting opposite and looking in silence.

rwp@Philippians:2:13 @{Which worketh in you} (\ho energ“n en humin\). Articular present active participle of \energe“\ from \energos\ (\en, ergon\) one at work, common verb from Aristotle on, to be at work, to energize. God is the Energy and the Energizer of the universe. Modern scientists, like Eddington, Jeans, and Whitney, are not afraid to agree with Paul and to put God back of all activity in nature. {Both to will and to work} (\kai to thelein kai to energein\). "Both the willing and the working (the energizing)." God does it all, then. Yes, but he puts us to work also and our part is essential, as he has shown in verse 12|, though secondary to that of God. {For his good-pleasure} (\huper tˆs eudokias\). Songs:Whitney puts "the will of God" behind gravitation and all the laws of nature.

rwp@Revelation:2:13 @{Where} (\pou--hopou\). \Pou\ is interrogative adverb used here in an indirect question as in strkjv@John:1:39|. \Hopou\ is relative adverb referring to \pou\. Satan's throne (\ho thronos tou Satanƒ\). Satan not simply resided in Pergamum, but his "throne" or seat of power of king or judge (Matthew:19:28; strkjv@Luke:1:32,52|). The symbol of Asklepios was the serpent as it is of Satan (12:9; strkjv@20:2|). There was, besides, a great throne altar to Zeus cut on the Acropolis rock, symbol of "rampant paganism" (Swete) and the new Caesar-worship with the recent martyrdom of Antipas made Pergamum indeed a very throne of Satan. {Holdest fast my name} (\krateis to onoma sou\). Present active indicative of \krate“\, "dost keep on holding," as in strkjv@2:25, strkjv@3:11|. This church refused to say \Kurios Kaisar\ (_Martyrd. Polyc_. 8f.) and continued to say \Kurios Iˆsous\ (1Corinthians:12:3|). They stood true against the emperor-worship. {Didst not deny} (\ouk ˆrnˆs“\). First aorist middle second person singular of \arneomai\. Reference to a specific incident not known to us. {My faith} (\tˆn pistin mou\). Objective genitive, "thy faith in me." {Of Antipas} (\Antipas\). Indeclinable in this form. It is possible that \Antipa\ (genitive) was really written, though unimportant as the nominative follows in apposition. Nothing is really known of this early martyr in Pergamum before the writing of the Apocalypse. One legend is that he was burnt to death in a brazen bull. Other martyrs followed him at Pergamum (Agathonice, Attalus, Carpus, Polybus). {My witness} (\ho martus mou\). Nominative in apposition with a genitive as in strkjv@1:5| (with ablative), common solecism in the Apocalypse. "Witness" as Jesus had said they should be (Acts:1:8|) and Stephen was (Acts:22:20|) and others were (Revelation:17:6|). The word later (by third century) took on the modern meaning of martyr. {My faithful one} (\ho pistos mou\). Nominative also, with \mou\ also. Jesus gives Antipas his own title (Swete) as in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@3:14|. Faithful unto death. {Was killed} (\apektanthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \apoktein“\, this passive form common in the Apocalypse (?2:13; strkjv@6:11; strkjv@5:9,13; strkjv@13:10,15; 18, 20; strkjv@19:21?). {Among you} (\par humin\). By your side. Proof of the throne of Satan, "where Satan dwells" (\hopou ho Satanƒs katoikei\), repeated for emphasis.

rwp@Revelation:4:3 @{To look upon} (\horasei\). Locative case of \horasis\, old word (from \hora“\, to see) for appearance (in appearance) as in strkjv@Ezekiel:1:5,26|. {Like a jasper stone} (\homoios iaspidi\). Associative-instrumental case of \iaspis\, old word (Persian), used for stones of different colors, one opaque like opal, one translucent (21:11,18f.|, possibly here, only N.T. examples), one a red or yellow stone (Isaiah:54:12|). Some even take it for the diamond. Certainly not our cheap modern jasper. {A sardius} (\sardi“i\). Old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@21:20|. The carnelian or other red stone, derived from Sardis (Pliny). {Rainbow} (\iris\). Old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@10:1|. From strkjv@Ezekiel:1:28|. {An emerald} (\smaragdin“i\). Adjective (from \smaragdos\, strkjv@Revelation:21:19|), of emerald (supply \lith“i\), in associative instrumental case after \homoios\. John sees no form for God (Exodus:24:10|), but only the brilliant flashing gems. "In the vision the flashing lustre of the \iaspis\ and the fiery red of the \sard\ are relieved by the halo (\iris\) of emerald which encircled the Throne" (Swete). A complete circle.

rwp@Revelation:11:1 @{A reed} (\kalamos\). Old word for a growing reed (Matthew:11:7|) which grew in immense brakes in the Jordan valley, a writer's reed (3John:1:7|), a measuring-rod (here, strkjv@21:15f.; strkjv@Ezekiel:40:3-6; strkjv@42:16-19|). {Like a rod} (\homoios rabd“i\). See strkjv@2:27; strkjv@Mark:6:8| for \rabdos\. {And one said} (\leg“n\). "Saying" (present active masculine participle of \leg“\) is all that the Greek has. The participle implies \ed“ken\ (he gave), not \edothˆ\, a harsh construction seen in strkjv@Genesis:22:20; strkjv@38:24|, etc. {Rise and measure} (\egeire kai metrˆson\). Present active imperative of \egeir“\ (intransitive, exclamatory use as in strkjv@Mark:2:11|) and first aorist active imperative of \metre“\. In strkjv@Ezekiel:42:2ff.| the prophet measures the temple and that passage is probably in mind here. But modern scholars do not know how to interpret this interlude (11:1-13|) before the seventh trumpet (11:15|). Some (Wellhausen) take it to be a scrap from the Zealot party before the destruction of Jerusalem, which event Christ also foretold (Mark:13:2; strkjv@Matthew:24:2; strkjv@Luke:21:6|) and which was also attributed to Stephen (Acts:6:14|). Charles denies any possible literal interpretation and takes the language in a wholly eschatological sense. There are three points in the interlude, however understood: the chastisement of Jerusalem or Israel (verses 1,2|), the mission of the two witnesses (3-12|), the rescue of the remnant (13|). There is a heavenly sanctuary (7:15; strkjv@11:19; strkjv@14:15|, etc.), but here \naos\ is on earth and yet not the actual temple in Jerusalem (unless so interpreted). Perhaps here it is the spiritual (3:12; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:16f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:16; strkjv@Ephesians:2:19ff.|). For altar (\thusiastˆrion\) see strkjv@8:3|. Perhaps measuring as applied to "them that worship therein" (\tous proskunountas en aut“i\) implies a word like numbering, with an allusion to the 144,000 in chapter 7 (a zeugma).

rwp@Revelation:12:7 @{There was war in heaven} (\egeneto polemos en t“i ouran“i\). "There came to be war in heaven" (\egeneto\, not \ˆn\). "Another \tableau\, not a \sˆmeion\ (vv. 1,3|), but consequent upon the two \sˆmeia\ which precede it. The birth and rapture of the Woman's Son issue in a war which invades the \epourania\" (Swete). The reference is not to the original rebellion of Satan, as Andreas held. As the coming of Christ brought on fresh manifestations of diabolic power (Mark:1:13; strkjv@Luke:22:3,31; strkjv@John:12:31; strkjv@14:30; strkjv@16:11|), just so Christ's return to heaven is pictured as being the occasion of renewed attacks there. We are not to visualize it too literally, but certainly modern airplanes help us to grasp the notion of battles in the sky even more than the phalanxes of storm-clouds (Swete). John even describes this last conflict as in heaven itself. Cf. strkjv@Luke:10:18; strkjv@1Kings:22:1ff.; strkjv@Job:1; 2; strkjv@Zechariah:3:1ff|. {Michael and his angels} (\ho Michaˆl kai hoi aggeloi autou\). The nominative here may be in apposition with \polemos\, but it is an abnormal construction with no verb, though \egeneto\ (arose) can be understood as repeated. Michael is the champion of the Jewish people (Daniel:10:13,21; strkjv@12:1|) and is called the archangel in strkjv@Jude:9|. {Going forth to war} (\tou polemˆsai\). This genitive articular infinitive is another grammatical problem in this sentence. If \egeneto\ (arose) is repeated as above, then we have the infinitive for purpose, a common enough idiom. Otherwise it is anomalous, not even like strkjv@Acts:10:25|. {With the dragon} (\meta tou drakontos\). On the use of \meta\ with \poleme“\ see strkjv@2:16; strkjv@13:4; strkjv@17:14| (nowhere else in N.T.). The devil has angels under his command (Matthew:25:41|) and preachers also (2Corinthians:11:14f.|). {Warred} (\epolemˆsen\). Constative aorist active indicative of \poleme“\, picturing the whole battle in one glimpse.

rwp@Revelation:21:24 @{Amidst the light thereof} (\dia tou ph“tos autˆs\). Rather "by the light thereof." From strkjv@Isaiah:60:3,11,20|. All the moral and spiritual progress of moderns is due to Christ, and the nations of earth will be represented, including "the kings" (\hoi basileis\), mentioned also in strkjv@Isaiah:60:3|, "do bring their glory into it" (\pherousin tˆn doxan aut“n eis autˆn\). Present active indicative of \pher“\. Swete is uncertain whether this is a picture of heaven itself or "some gracious purpose of God towards humanity which has not yet been revealed" and he cites strkjv@22:2| in illustration. The picture is beautiful and glorious even if not realized here, but only in heaven.

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_Revelation @ A BRIEF BIBLIOGRAPHY (ONLY BOOKS SINCE 1875) Abbott, E. A., _Johannine Grammar_ (1906).,_Notes on New Testament Criticism_ (Part VII of Diatessarica, 1907). Allo, E. B., _L'apocalypse et l'epoque de la parousia_ (1915).,_Saint Jean. L'apocalypse_ (1921). Baldensperger, _Messian. Apok. Hoffnung_. 3rd ed. (1903). Baljon, J. M. S., _Openbaring van Johannes_ (1908). Beckwith, J. T., _The Apocalypse of John_ (1919). Benson, E. W., _The Apocalypse_ (1900). Berg, _The Drama of the Apocalypse_ (1894). Bleek, F., _Lectures on the Apocalypse_ (1875). Boll, _Aus der Offenbarung Johannis_ (1914). Bousset, W., _Die Offenbarung Johannis_. 2 Aufl. (1906).,_Zur Textkritik der Apokalypse_ (1894). Brown, Charles, _Heavenly Visions_ (1911). Brown, D., _The Structure of the Apocalypse_ (1891). Bullinger, _Die Apokalypse_ (1904). Bungeroth, _Schlussel zur Offenbarung Johannis_ (1907). Burger, C. H. A., _Offenbarung Johannis_ (1877). Cadwell, _The Revelation of Jesus Christ_ (1920). Calmes, _L'Apokalypse devant la Critique_ (1907). Campbell, _The Patmos Letters Applied to Modern Criticism_ (1908). Carrington, P., _The Meaning of the Revelation_ (1931). Case, S. J., _The Millennial Hope_ (1918).,_The Revelation of John_ (1920). Charles, R. H., _Studies in the Apocalypse_ (1913).,_The Revelation of St. John_. 2 vols. (1921). Chevalin, _L'apocalypse et les temps presents_ (1904). Crampon, _L'apocalypse de S. Jean_ (1904). Dean, J. T., _The Book of Revelation_ (1915) Deissmann, A., _Light from the Ancient East_. Tr. by Strachan (1927). Delaport, _Fragments sahidiques du N.T. Apocalypse_ (1906). Douglas, C. E., _New Light on the Revelation of St. John the Divine_ (1923). Dusterdieck, _Offenbarung Johannis_. 4 Aufl. (1887). Eckman, _When Christ Comes Again_ (1917). Erbes, _Offenbar. Johan. Kritischuntersucht_ (1891). Forbes, H. P., _International Handbook on the Apocalypse_ (1907). Gebhardt, _Doctrine of the Apocalypse_ (1878). Geil, W. E., _The Isle That Is Called Patmos_ (1905). Gibson, E. C. S., _The Revelation of St. John_ (1910). Gigot, _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1915). Glazebrook, _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1924). Gunkel, H., _Schopfung und Chaos_ (1895). Gwynn, _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1897). Harnack, A., _Die Chronologie der altchristlichen Litteratur_. Bd I (1897). Henderson, B. W., _The Life and Principate of the Emperor Nero_ (1903). Hill, _Apocalyptic Problems_ (1916). Hill, Erskine, _Mystic Studies in the Apocalypse_ (1931). Hirscht, _Die Apokalypse und ihre neueste Kritik_ (1895). Holtzmann, H. J., _Die Offenbarung Johannis_ (1891). Holtzmann-Bauer, _Hand-Comm., Offenbarung des Johannis_. 3 Aufl. (1908). Horne, _The Meaning of the Apocalypse_ (1916). Hort, F. J. A., _The Apocalypse of St. John, Chs. 1-3_ (1908). James, M. R., _The Apocalypse in Art_ (1931). Jowett, G. T., _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1910). Kubel, _Offenbarung Johannis_ (1893). Laughlin, _The Solecisms of the Apocalypse_ (1902). Lee, S., _Revelation in Speaker's Comm_. (1881). Linder, _Die Offenbarung des Johannis aufgeschlossen_ (1905). Llwyd, J. P. D., _The Son of Thunder_ (1932). Lohmeyer, E., _Die Offenbarung des Johannes_. Handbuch zum N.T. (1926). Loisy, A., _L'Apocalypse de Jean_ (1923). Matheson, _Sidelights upon Patmos_. Milligan, W., _The Revelation of St. John_. Schaff's Popular Comm. (1885).,_The Book of Revelation_. Expositor's Bible (1889).,_Lectures on the Apocalypse_ (1892).,_Discussions on the Apocalypse_ (1893). Moffatt, James, _Intr. to Literature of the N.T_. (1911).,_Revelation in Expos. Greek Testament_ (1910). Moule, H.C., _Some Thoughts on the Seven Epistles_ (1915). Mozley, _The Christian's Hope in the Apocalypse_ (1915). Oman, John, _The Book of Revelation_ (1923).,_The Text of Revelation_ (1928). Osborn, _The Lion and the Lamb_ (1922). Palmer, _The Drama of the Apocalypse_ (1902). Paul, _Latter Day Light on the Apocalypse_ (1898). Peake, A. S., _The Revelation of John_ (1921). Porter, F. C., _The Messages of the Apocalyptic Writers_ (1905). Pounder, _Historical Notes on the Book of Revelation_ (1912). Prager, L., _Die Offenbarung Johannis_ (1901). Ramsay, A., _Revelation in Westminster N.T_. (1910). Ramsay, W. M., _The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia_ (1904). Rauch, _Offenbarung des Johannis_ (1894). Reymond, _L'apocalypse_ (1908). Ross, J. J., _Pearls from Patmos_ (1923). Russell, J. S., _The Parousia_ (1878). Sabatier, _Les Origines Litteraires et la Comp. de l'Apoc_. (1888). Schlatter, _Der Evangelist Johannes_ (1931). Schoen, _L'Origine de l'Apocalypse_ (1887). Scott, C. Anderson, _Revelation in New Century Bible_ (1902). Scott, C. A., _Revelation in Devot. Comm_. (1906). Scott, J. J., _Lectures on the Apocalypse_ (1909). Selwyn, E. C., _The Christian Prophets and the Prophetic Apocalypse_ (1901). Shepherd, W. J. L., _The Revelation of St. John the Divine_. 2 vols. (1923). Simcox, W. H., _Revelation in Cambridge Greek Testament_ (1893). Smith, J. A., _Revelation in American Comm_. (1888).,_The World Lighted_ (1890).,_The Divine Parable of History_ (1901). Spitta, F., _Die Offenbarung des Johannis_ (1889). Strange, _Instructions on the Revelation of St. John the Divine_ (1900). Swete, H. B., _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1906). 2nd ed. 1907. Turner, C. H., _Studies in Early Church History_ (1912). Vischer, _Die Offenb. Johan. eine judische Apok_ (1886). Volter, _Offenb. Johannis_. 2 Aufl. (1911).,_Das Problem der Apok_. (1893). Weiss, B., _Die Johannes-Apokalypse_. Textkrit. (1891, 2 Aufl. 1902). Weiss, J., _Offenb. Johannis_ (1904). Wellhausen, J., _Analyse der Offenb_. (1907). Weyland, _Omwerkings-en Compilatie-Hupothesen Toegepast op de Apok_. (1888). Whiting, _The Revelation of John_ (1918). Zahn, _Introduction to the N.T_. 3 vols. (1909).,_Komm_. (1926).

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

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

rwp@Romans:1:28 @{And even as they refused} (\kai kath“s ouk edokimasan\). "And even as they rejected" after trial just as \dokimaz“\ is used of testing coins. They tested God at first and turned aside from him. {Knowledge} (\epign“sei\). Full knowledge (\epi\ additional, \gn“sis\). They had a dim memory that was a caricature. {Unto a reprobate mind} (\eis adokimon noun\). Play on \ouk edokimasan\. They rejected God and God rejected their mental attitude and gave them over (verses 24,26,28|). See this adjective already in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:27; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:5-7|. Like an old abandoned building, the home of bats and snakes, left "to do those things which are not fitting" (\poiein ta mˆ kathˆkonta\), like the night clubs of modern cities, the dives and dens of the underworld, without God and in the darkness of unrestrained animal impulses. This was a technical term with Stoics (II Macc. strkjv@6:4).

rwp@Romans:1:30 @Paul changes the construction again to twelve substantives and adjectives that give vivid touches to this composite photograph of the God abandoned soul. {Whisperers} (\psithuristas\). Old word from \psithuriz“\, to speak into the ear, to speak secretly, an onomatopoetic word like \psithurismos\ (2Corinthians:12:20|) and only here in N.T. {Backbiters} (\katalalous\). Found nowhere else except in Hermas, compound like \katalale“\, to talk back (James:4:11|), and \katalalia\, talking back (2Corinthians:12:20|), talkers back whether secretly or openly. {Hateful to God} (\theostugeis\). Old word from \theos\ and \stuge“\. All the ancient examples take it in the passive sense and so probably here. Songs:\stugˆtos\ (Titus:3:13|). Vulgate has _deo odibiles_. {Insolent} (\hubristas\). Old word for agent from \hubriz“\, to give insult to, here alone in N.T. save strkjv@1Timothy:1:13|. {Haughty} (\huperˆphanous\). From \huper\ and \phainomai\, to appear above others, arrogant in thought and conduct, "stuck up." {Boastful} (\alazonas\). From \alˆ\, wandering. Empty pretenders, swaggerers, braggarts. {Inventors of evil things} (\epheuretas kak“n\). Inventors of new forms of vice as Nero was. Tacitus (_Ann_. IV. ii) describes Sejanus as _facinorum omnium repertor_ and Virgil (_Aen_. ii. 163) _scelerum inventor_. {Disobedient to parents} (\goneusin apeitheis\). Cf. strkjv@1Timothy:1:9; strkjv@2Timothy:3:2|. An ancient and a modern trait.

rwp@Romans:1:31 @{Without understanding} (\asunetous\). Same word in verse 21|. {Covenant-breakers} (\asunthetous\). Another paronomasia or pun. \A\ privative and verbal \sunthetos\ from \suntithˆmi\, to put together. Old word, common in LXX (Jeremiah:3:7|), men "false to their engagements" (Sanday and Headlam), who treat covenants as "a scrap of paper." {Without natural affection} (\astorgous\). Late word, \a\ privative and \storgˆ\, love of kindred. In N.T. only here and strkjv@2Timothy:3:3|. {Unmerciful} (\aneleˆmonas\). From \a\ privative and \eleˆm“n\, merciful. Late word, only here in N.T. Some MSS. add \aspondous\, implacable, from strkjv@2Timothy:3:3|. It is a terrible picture of the effects of sin on the lives of men and women. The late Dr. R. H. Graves of Canton, China, said that a Chinaman who got hold of this chapter declared that Paul could not have written it, but only a modern missionary who had been to China. It is drawn to the life because Paul knew Pagan Graeco-Roman civilization.

rwp@Romans:6:19 @{I speak after the manner of men} (\anthr“pinon leg“\). "I speak a human word." He begs pardon for using "slaving" in connection with righteousness. But it is a good word, especially for our times when self-assertiveness and personal liberty bulk so large in modern speech. See strkjv@3:5; strkjv@Galatians:3:15| where he uses \kata anthr“pon\. {Because of the infirmity of your flesh} (\dia tˆn astheneian tˆs sarkos hum“n\). Because of defective spiritual insight largely due to moral defects also. {Servants to uncleanness} (\doula tˆi akatharsiƒi\). Neuter plural form of \doulos\ to agree with \melˆ\ (members). Patently true in sexual sins, in drunkenness, and all fleshly sins, absolutely slaves like narcotic fiends. {Songs:now} (\hout“s nun\). Now that you are born again in Christ. Paul uses twice again the same verb \paristˆmi\, to present (\parestˆsate, parastˆsate\). {Servants to righteousness} (\doula tˆi dikaiosunˆi\). Repeats the idea of verse 18|. {Unto sanctification} (\eis hagiasmon\). This the goal, the blessed consummation that demands and deserves the new slavery without occasional lapses or sprees (verse 15|). This late word appears only in LXX, N.T., and ecclesiastical writers so far. See on strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:3; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:30|. Paul includes sanctification in his conception of the God-kind (1:17|) of righteousness (both justification, strkjv@1:18-5:21| and sanctification, chapters 6-8|). It is a life process of consecration, not an instantaneous act. Paul shows that we ought to be sanctified (6:1-7:6|) and illustrates the obligation by death (6:1-14|), by slavery (6:15-23|), and by marriage (7:1-6|).

rwp@Romans:7:12 @{Holy, and righteous, and good} (\hagia kai dikaia kai agathˆ\). This is the conclusion (wherefore, \h“ste\) to the query in verse 7|. The commandment is God's and so holy like Him, just in its requirements and designed for our good. The modern revolt against law needs these words.

rwp@Romans:11:3 @{They have digged down} (\kateskapsan\). First aorist active indicative of \kataskapt“\, to dig under or down. Old verb, here only in N.T. (critical text). LXX has \katheilan\ "pulled down." Paul has reversed the order of the LXX of strkjv@1Kings:19:10,14,18|. {Altars} (\thusiastˆria\). Late word (LXX, Philo, Josephus, N.T. eccl. writers) from \thusiaz“\, to sacrifice. See strkjv@Acts:17:23|. {And I am left alone} (\kag“ hupeleiphthˆn monos\). First aorist passive indicative of \hupoleip“\, old word, to leave under or behind, here only in N.T. Elijah's mood was that of utter dejection in his flight from Jezebel. {Life} (\psuchˆn\). It is not possible to draw a clear distinction between \psuchˆ\ (soul) and \pneuma\ (spirit). \Psuchˆ\ is from \psuch“\, to breathe or blow, \pneuma\ from \pne“\, to blow. Both are used for the personality and for the immortal part of man. Paul is usually dichotomous in his language, but sometimes trichotomous in a popular sense. We cannot hold Paul's terms to our modern psychological distinctions.

rwp@Romans:12:5 @{And severally} (\to de kath' heis\). A difficult late idiom where the preposition \kath'\ (\kata\) is treated adverbially with no effect on the nominative case \heis\ like \huper eg“\ (2Corinthians:11:23|). Songs:\heis kath' heis\ (Mark:14:19|) and in Modern Greek \katheis\ as a distributive pronoun. But we have \kath' hena\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:31|. The use of the neuter article here \to\ with \kath' heis\ is probably the accusative of general reference, "as to each one."

rwp@Romans:14:13 @{Let us not therefore judge one another any more} (\mˆketi oun allˆlous krin“men\). Present active subjunctive (volitive). "Let us no longer have the habit of criticizing one another." A wonderfully fine text for modern Christians and in harmony with what the Master said (Matthew:7:1|). {That no man put a stumbling block in his brother's way or an occasion of falling} (\to mˆ tithenai proskomma t“i adelph“i ˆ skandalon\). Articular present active infinitive of \tithˆmi\ in apposition with \touto\, accusative case after \krinate\: "Judge this rather, the not putting a stumbling block (see strkjv@9:32| for \proskomma\) or a trap (\skandalon\, strkjv@9:33|) for his brother" (\adelph“i\, dative of disadvantage).

rwp@Romans:15:22 @{I was hindered} (\enekoptomˆn\). Imperfect passive (repetition) of \enkopt“\, late verb, to cut in, to cut off, to interrupt. Seen already in strkjv@Acts:24:4; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:18; strkjv@Galatians:5:7|. Cf. modern telephone and radio and automobile. {These many times} (\ta polla\). "As to the many things." In strkjv@1:13| Paul used \pollakis\ (many times) and B D read it here. But Paul's work (\ta polla\) had kept him away. {From coming to you} (\tou elthein pros humas\). Ablative case (after the verb of hindering) of the articular infinitive, "from the coming."

rwp@Titus:2:15 @{With all authority} (\meta pasˆs epitagˆs\). See strkjv@1Corinthians:7:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:8|. Assertion of authority is sometimes necessary. {Let no man despise thee} (\mˆdeis sou periphroneit“\). Present active imperative in prohibition of \periphrone“\, old verb, only here in N.T., to think around (on all sides). Literally, "let no man think around thee" (and so despise thee). In strkjv@1Timothy:4:12| it is \kataphroneit“\ (think down on), a stronger word of scorn, but this one implies the possibility of one making mental circles around one and so "out-thinking" him. The best way for the modern minister to command respect for his "authority" is to do thinking that will deserve it.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Thu Jul 4 00:26:40 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020