Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-LAW.filter - rwp Nothing:


rwp@1Corinthians:1:27 @{God chose} (\exelexato ho theos\). First aorist middle of \ekleg“\, old verb to pick out, to choose, the middle for oneself. It expands the idea in \klˆsin\ (verse 26|). Three times this solemn verb occurs here with the purpose stated each time. Twice the same purpose is expressed, {that he might put to shame} (\hina kataischunˆi\, first aorist active subjunctive with \hina\ of old verb \kataischun“\, perfective use of \kata\). The purpose in the third example is {that he might bring to naught} (\hina katargˆsˆi\, make idle, \argos\, rare in old Greek, but frequent in Paul). The contrast is complete in each paradox: {the foolish things} (\ta m“ra\), {the wild men} (\tous sophous\); {the weak things} (\ta asthenˆ\), {the strong things} (\ta ischura\); {the things that are not} (\ta mˆ onta\), {and that are despised} (\ta exouthenˆmena\, considered nothing, perfect passive participle of \exouthene“\), {the things that are} (\ta onta\). It is a studied piece of rhetoric and powerfully put.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:2 @{I fed you with milk, not with meat} (\gala humas epotisa, ou br“ma\). Note two accusatives with the verb, \epotisa\, first aorist active indicative of \potiz“\, as with other causative verbs, that of the person and of the thing. In the LXX and the papyri the verb often means to irrigate. \Br“ma\ does not mean meat (flesh) as opposed to bread, but all solid food as in "meats and drinks" (Hebrews:9:7|). It is a zeugma to use \epotisa\ with \br“ma\. Paul did not glory in making his sermons thin and watery. Simplicity does not require lack of ideas or dulness. It is pathetic to think how the preacher has to clip the wings of thought and imagination because the hearers cannot go with him. But nothing hinders great preaching like the dulness caused by sin on the part of auditors who are impatient with the high demands of the gospel.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:4 @{For I know nothing against myself} (\ouden gar emaut“i sunoida\). Not a statement of fact, but an hypothesis to show the unreliability of mere complacent self-satisfaction. Note the use of \sunoida\ (second perfect active indicative with dative (disadvantage) of the reflexive pronoun) for guilty knowledge against oneself (cf. strkjv@Acts:5:2; strkjv@12:12; strkjv@14:6|). {Yet} (\all'\). Adversative use of \alla\. {Amos:I not hereby justified} (\ouk en tout“i dedikai“mai\). Perfect passive indicative of state of completion. Failure to be conscious of one's own sins does not mean that one is innocent. Most prisoners plead "not guilty." Who is the judge of the steward of the mysteries of God? It is the Lord "that judgeth me" (\ho anakrin“n me\). Probably, who examines me and then passes on my fidelity (\pistos\ in verse 2|).

rwp@1Corinthians:4:5 @{Wherefore} (\h“ste\). As in strkjv@3:21| which see. {Judge nothing} (\mˆ ti krinete\). Stop passing judgment, stop criticizing as they were doing. See the words of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:7:1|. The censorious habit was ruining the Corinthian Church. {Before the time} (\pro kairou\). The day of the Lord in strkjv@3:13|. "Do not therefore anticipate the great judgment (\krisis\) by any preliminary investigation (\anakrisis\) which must be futile and incomplete" (Lightfoot). {Until the Lord come} (\he“s an elthˆi ho kurios\). Common idiom of \he“s\ and the aorist subjunctive with or without \an\ for a future event. Simple futurity, but held forth as a glorious hope, the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus as Judge. {Who will both bring to light} (\hos kai ph“tisei\). Future indicative of this late verb (in papyri also) from \ph“s\ (light), to turn the light on the hidden things of darkness. {And make manifest} (\kai phaner“sei\). (Ionic and late) causative verb \phanero“\ from \phaneros\. By turning on the light the counsels of all hearts stand revealed. {His praise} (\ho epainos\). The praise (note article) due him from God (Romans:2:29|) will come to each then (\tote\) and not till then. Meanwhile Paul will carry on and wait for the praise from God.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:25 @{I have no commandment of the Lord} (\epitagˆn Kuriou ouk ech“\). A late word from \epitass“\, old Greek verb to enjoin, to give orders to. Paul did have (verse 10|) a command from the Lord as we have in Matthew and Mark. It was quite possible for Paul to know this command of Jesus as he did other sayings of Jesus (Acts:20:35|) even if he had as yet no access to a written gospel or had received no direct revelation on the subject from Jesus (1Corinthians:11:23|). Sayings of Jesus were passed on among the believers. But Paul had no specific word from Jesus on the subject of virgins. They call for special treatment, young unmarried women only Paul means (7:25,28,34,36-38|) and not as in strkjv@Revelation:14:4| (metaphor). It is probable that in the letter (7:1|) the Corinthians had asked about this problem. {But I give my judgment} (\gn“mˆn de did“mi\). About mixed marriages (12-16|) Paul had the command of Jesus concerning divorce to guide him. Here he has nothing from Jesus at all. Songs:he gives no "command," but only "a judgment," a deliberately formed decision from knowledge (2Corinthians:8:10|), not a mere passing fancy. {As one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful} (\h“s ˆleˆmenos hupo kuriou pistos einai\). Perfect passive participle of \elee“\, old verb to receive mercy (\eleos\). \Pistos\ is predicate nominative with infinitive \einai\. This language, so far from being a disclaimer of inspiration, is an express claim to help from the Lord in the forming of this duly considered judgment, which is in no sense a command, but an inspired opinion.

rwp@1Corinthians:11:21 @{Taketh before} (\prolambanei\). Before others. Old verb to take before others. It was conduct like this that led to the complete separation between the Love-feast and the Lord's Supper. It was not even a common meal together (\koinon deipnon\), not to say a Lord's \deipnon\. It was a mere {grab-game}. {This one is hungry} (\hos de peinƒi\). Demonstrative \hos\. Nothing is left for him at the love-feast. {Another is drunken} (\hos de methuei\). Such disgusting conduct was considered shameful in heathen club suppers. "Hungry poor meeting intoxicated rich, at what was supposed to be a supper of the Lord" (Robertson and Plummer). On \methu“\, to be drunk, see on ¯Matthew:24:49; strkjv@Acts:2:15|.

rwp@1Corinthians:11:22 @{What? Have ye not houses?} (\Mˆ gar oikias ouk echete;\) The double negative (\mˆ--ouk\) in the single question is like the idiom in strkjv@9:4f.| which see. \Mˆ\ expects a negative answer while \ouk\ negatives the verb \echete\. "For do you fail to have houses?" Paul is not approving gluttony and drunkenness but only expressing horror at their sacrilege (despising, \kataphroneite\) of the church of God. {That have not} (\tous mˆ echontas\). Not those without houses, but those who have nothing, "the have-nots" (Findlay) like strkjv@2Corinthians:8:12|, in contrast with \hoi echontes\ "the haves" (the men of property). {What shall I say to you?} (\ti eip“ humin;\) Deliberative subjunctive that well expresses Paul's bewilderment.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:32 @{After the manner of men} (\kata anthr“pon\). Like men, for applause, money, etc. (4:9ff.; strkjv@Phillipians:3:7|). {If I fought with wild beasts at Ephesus} (\ei ethˆriomachˆsa en Ephes“i\). Late verb from \thˆriomachos\, a fighter with wild beasts. Found in inscriptions and in Ignatius. Those who argue for an Ephesian imprisonment for Paul and Ephesus as the place where he wrote the imprisonment epistles (see Duncan's book just mentioned) take the verb literally. There is in the ruins of Ephesus now a place called St. Paul's Prison. But Paul was a Roman citizen and it was unlawful to make such a one be a \thˆriomachos\. If he were cast to the lions unlawfully, he could have prevented it by claiming his citizenship. Besides, shortly after this Paul wrote II Corinthians, but he does not mention so unusual a peril in the list in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:23f|. The incident, whatever it was, whether literal or figurative language, took place before Paul wrote I Corinthians. {What doth it profit me?} (\ti moi to ophelos?\). What the profit to me? {Let us eat and drink} (\phag“men kai pi“men\). Volitive second aorist subjunctives of \esthi“\ and \pin“\. Cited from strkjv@Isaiah:22:13|. It is the outcry of the people of Jerusalem during the siege of Jerusalem by the Assyrians. At Anchiale near Tarsus is a statue of Sardanapalus with the inscription: "Eat, drink, enjoy thyself. The rest is nothing." This was the motto of the Epicureans. Paul is not giving his own view, but that of people who deny the resurrection.

rwp@Info_1John @ DESTINATION It is not clear to whom the Epistle is addressed. Like the Gospel, the Epistle of John came out of the Asiatic circle with Ephesus as the centre. Augustine has the strange statement that the Epistle was addressed to the Parthians. There are other ingenious conjectures which come to nothing. The Epistle was clearly sent to those familiar with John's message, possibly to the churches of the Province of Asia (cf. the Seven Churches in Revelation).

rwp@1John:1:7 @{If we walk} (\ean peripat“men\). Condition of third class also with \ean\ and present active subjunctive (keep on walking in the light with God). {As he} (\h“s autos\). As God is light (verse 5|) and dwells in light unapproachable (1Timothy:6:16|). {One with another} (\met' allˆl“n\). As he has already said in verse 3|. But we cannot have fellowship with one another unless we have it with God in Christ, and to do that we must walk in the light with God. {And the blood of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from all sin} (\kai to haima Iˆsou tou huiou autou katharizei hˆmƒs apo pƒsˆs hamartias\). This clause with \kai\ in true Johannine style is coordinate with the preceding one. Walking in the light with God makes possible fellowship with one another and is made possible also by the blood of Jesus (real blood and no mere phantom, atoning blood of the sinless Son of God for our sins). John is not ashamed to use this word. It is not the mere "example" of Jesus that "cleanses" us from sin. It does cleanse the conscience and life and nothing else does (Hebrews:9:13f.; strkjv@Titus:2:14|). See in verse 9| both forgiveness and cleansing. Cf. strkjv@1John:3:3|.

rwp@1John:5:1 @{That Jesus is the Christ} (\hoti Iˆsous estin ho Christos\). The Cerinthian antichrist denies the identity of Jesus and Christ (2:22|). Hence John insists on this form of faith (\pisteu“n\ here in the full sense, stronger than in strkjv@3:23; strkjv@4:16|, seen also in \pistis\ in verse 4|, where English and Latin fall down in having to use another word for the verb) as he does in verse 5| and in accord with the purpose of John's Gospel (20:31|). Nothing less will satisfy John, not merely intellectual conviction, but full surrender to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. "The Divine Begetting is the antecedent, not the consequent of the believing" (Law). For "is begotten of God" (\ek tou theou gegennˆtai\) see strkjv@2:29; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@4:7; strkjv@5:4,18|. John appeals here to family relationship and family love. {Him that begat} (\ton gennˆsanta\). First aorist active articular participle of \genna“\, to beget, the Father (our heavenly Father). {Him also that is begotten of him} (\ton gegennˆmenon ex autou\). Perfect passive articular participle of \genna“\, the brother or sister by the same father. Songs:then we prove our love for the common Father by our conduct towards our brothers and sisters in Christ.

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:2:4 @{But even as we have been approved by God} (\alla kath“s dedokimasmetha hupo tou theou\). Perfect passive indicative of \dokimaz“\, old verb to put to the test, but here the tense for completed state means tested and proved and so approved by God. Paul here claims the call of God for his ministry and the seal of God's blessing on his work and also for that of Silas and Timothy. {To be entrusted with the gospel} (\pisteuthˆnai to euaggelion\). First aorist passive infinitive of \pisteu“\, common verb for believing, from \pistis\ (faith), but here to entrust rather than to trust. The accusative of the thing is retained in the passive according to regular Greek idiom as in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:17; strkjv@Galatians:2:7; strkjv@Romans:3:2; strkjv@1Timothy:1:11; strkjv@Titus:1:3|, though the active had the dative of the person. {Songs:we speak} (\hout“s laloumen\). Simple, yet confident claim of loyalty to God's call and message. Surely this should be the ambition of every preacher of the gospel of God. {Not as pleasing men} (\ouch h“s anthr“pois areskontes\). Dative case with \aresk“\ as in strkjv@Galatians:1:10|. Few temptations assail the preacher more strongly than this one to please men, even if God is not pleased, though with the dim hope that God will after all condone or overlook. Nothing but experience will convince some preachers how fickle is popular favour and how often it is at the cost of failure to please God. And yet the preacher wishes to win men to Christ. It is all as subtle as it is deceptive. God tests our hearts (the very verb \dokimaz“\ used in the beginning of this verse) and he is the only one whose approval matters in the end of the day (1Corinthians:4:5|).

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:8 @{Even so, being affectionately desirous of you} (\hout“s omeiromenoi hum“n\). Clearly the correct text rather than \himeiromenoi\ from \himeir“\, old verb to long for. But the verb \homeiromai\ (Westcott and Hort _om_., smooth breathing) occurs nowhere else except MSS. in strkjv@Job:3:21; strkjv@Psalms:62:2| (Symmachus) and the Lycaonian sepulchral inscription (4th cent. A.D.) about the sorrowing parents \homeiromenoi peri paidos\, {greatly desiring their son} (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Moulton suggests that it comes from a root \smer\, remember, and that \o-\ is a derelict preposition \o\ like \o-duromai, o-kell“, “-keanos\. Wohlenberg (Zahn, _Kommentar_) calls the word "a term of endearment," "derived from the language of the nursery" (Milligan). {We were well pleased} (\ˆudokoumen\). Imperfect active of \eudoke“\, common verb in later Greek and in N.T. (see on strkjv@Matthew:3:17|), picturing Paul's idea of their attitude while in Thessalonica. Paul often has it with the infinitive as here. {To impart} (\metadounai\). Second aorist active infinitive of \metadid“mi\, old verb to share with (see on strkjv@Luke:3:11|). Possible zeugma with {souls} (\psuchas\), though Lightfoot renders "lives." Paul and his associates held nothing back. {Because ye were become very dear to us} (\dioti agapˆtoi hˆmin egenˆthˆte\). Note \dioti\ (double cause, \dia, hoti\, for that), use of \ginomai\ again for become, and dative \hˆmin\ with verbal \agapˆtoi\, beloved and so dear. A beautiful picture of the growth of Paul's affection for them as should be true with every pastor.

rwp@1Thessalonians:5:20 @{Despise not prophesyings} (\prophˆteias mˆ exoutheneite\). Same construction, stop counting as nothing (\exouthene“\, \outhen=ouden\), late form in LXX. Plutarch has \exoudeniz“\. Plural form \prophˆteias\ (accusative). Word means {forth-telling} (\pro-phˆmi\) rather than {fore-telling} and is the chief of the spiritual gifts (1Corinthians:14|) and evidently depreciated in Thessalonica as in Corinth later.

rwp@1Timothy:6:4 @{He is puffed up} (\tetuph“tai\). Perfect passive indicative of \tupho“\, for which see strkjv@3:6|. {Knowing nothing} (\mˆden epistamenos\). Present middle participle of \epistamai\. Ignorance is a frequent companion of conceit. {Doting} (\nos“n\). Present active participle of \nose“\, to be sick, to be morbid over, old word, only here in N.T. {Disputes of words} (\logomachias\). Our "logomachy." From \logomache“\ (2Timothy:2:14|), and that from \logos\ and \machomai\, to fight over words, late and rare word, here only in N.T. See Plato (_Tim_. 1085 F) for "wars in words" (\machas en logois\). {Whereof} (\ex h“n\). "From which things." {Surmisings} (\huponoiai\). Old word from \huponoe“\, to surmise, to suspect (Acts:25:18|), only here in N.T. All these words are akin (envy, \phthonos\, strife, \eris\, railings or slanders, \blasphˆmiai\), all products of an ignorant and conceited mind.

rwp@2Corinthians:3:11 @{Passeth away} (\katargoumenon\). In process of disappearing before the gospel of Christ. {Remaineth} (\menon\). The new ministry is permanent. This claim may be recommended to those who clamour for a new religion. Christianity is still alive and is not dying. Note also \en doxˆi\, in glory, in contrast with \dia doxˆs\, with glory. {Boldness} (\parrˆsiƒi\). Instrumental case after \chr“metha\. Old word, \panrˆsis=parrˆsis\, telling it all, absolute unreservedness. Surely Paul has kept nothing back here, no mental reservations, in this triumphant claim of superiority.

rwp@2Corinthians:5:16 @{Henceforth} (\apo tou nun\). From the time that we gained this view of Christ's death for us. {After the flesh} (\kata sarka\). According to the flesh, the fleshy way of looking at men. He, of course, knows men "in the flesh (\en tˆi sarki\), but Paul is not speaking of that. Worldly standards and distinctions of race, class, cut no figure now with Paul (Galatians:3:28|) as he looks at men from the standpoint of the Cross of Christ. {Even though we have known Christ after the flesh} (\ei kai egn“kamen kata sarka Christon\). Concessive clause (\ei kai\, if even or also) with perfect active indicative. Paul admits that he had once looked at Christ \kata sarka\, but now no longer does it. Obviously he uses \kata sarka\ in precisely the same sense that he did in verse 15| about men. He had before his conversion known Christ \kata sarka\, according to the standards of the men of his time, the Sanhedrin and other Jewish leaders. He had led the persecution against Jesus till Jesus challenged and stopped him (Acts:9:4|). That event turned Paul clean round and he no longer knows Christ in the old way \kata sarka\. Paul may or may not have seen Jesus in the flesh before his death, but he says absolutely nothing on that point here.

rwp@2Corinthians:6:10 @{Always rejoicing} (\aei chairontes\). Even in sorrow (11:9; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:16; strkjv@Romans:5:3-5; strkjv@9:2; strkjv@Phillipians:2:18,27; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@4:4,15|). {Yet making many rich} (\pollous de ploutizontes\). Old word from \ploutos\ (wealth), to enrich. Spiritual riches Paul has in mind as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:5| (cf. strkjv@Matthew:5:37|). {As having nothing and yet possessing all things} (\h“s mˆden echontes kai panta katechontes\). Contrast between \mˆden\ (nothing) and \panta\ (all things, cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:3:22|) and \ech“\ (to have) and \katech“\ (to hold down, to hold fast). Play on words (simple and compound) as in strkjv@3:2; strkjv@4:8|. Climax of Paul's panegyric on the Christian ministry. He now resumes the thread of the story broken off in strkjv@2:14|.

rwp@2Corinthians:6:11 @{Our mouth is open unto you} (\to stoma hˆm“n ane“igen pros humas\). Second perfect active indicative of \anoig“\ and intransitive, stand open. He has kept back nothing in his portrayal of the glory of the ministry as the picture of the open mouth shows. {Our heart is enlarged} (\hˆ kardia hˆm“n peplatuntai\). Perfect passive indicative of old verb \platun“\, to broaden, from \platus\, broad. In N T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:23:5| (cf. phylacteries). Hence his freedom of speech for "out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks" (Matthew:12:34|).

rwp@2Corinthians:7:9 @{Now I rejoice} (\nun chair“\). Now that Titus has come and told him the good news from Corinth (2:12f.|). This was the occasion of the noble outburst in strkjv@2:12-6:10|. {Unto repentance} (\eis metanoian\). Note the sharp difference here between "sorrow" (\lupˆ\) which is merely another form of \metamelomai\ (regret, remorse) and "repentance" (\metanoia\) or change of mind and life. It is a linguistic and theological tragedy that we have to go on using "repentance" for \metanoia\. But observe that the "sorrow" has led to "repentance" and was not Itself the repentance. {After a godly sort} (\kata theon\). In God's way. "God's way as opposed to man's way and the devil's way" (Plummer). It was not mere sorrow, but a change in their attitude that counted. {That ye might suffer loss by us in nothing} (\hina en mˆdeni zˆmi“thˆte ex hum“n\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \zˆmio“\, old verb to suffer damage. See on ¯Matthew:16:26|. This was God's intention and so he overruled their sorrow to good.

rwp@2Corinthians:10:10 @{They say} (\phasin\). Reading of B old Latin Vulgate, but Westcott and Hort prefer \phˆsin\ (says one, the leader). This charge Paul quotes directly. {Weighty and strong} (\bareiai kai ischurai\). These adjectives can be uncomplimentary and mean "severe and violent" instead of "impressive and vigorous." The adjectives bear either sense. {His bodily presence} (\hˆ parousia tou s“matos\). This certainly is uncomplimentary. "The presence of his body." It seems clear that Paul did not have a commanding appearance like that of Barnabas (Acts:14:12|). He had some physical defect of the eyes (Galatians:4:14|) and a thorn in the flesh (2Corinthians:12:7|). In the second century _Acts of Paul and Thecla_ he is pictured as small, short, bow-legged, with eye-brows knit together, and an aquiline nose. A forgery of the fourth century in the name of Lucian describes Paul as "the bald-headed, hook-nosed Galilean." However that may be, his accusers sneered at his personal appearance as "weak" (\asthenˆs\). {His speech of no account} (\ho logos exouthenˆmenos\). Perfect passive participle of \exouthene“\, to treat as nothing (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:1:28|). The Corinthians (some of them) cared more for the brilliant eloquence of Apollos and did not find Paul a trained rhetorician (1Corinthians:1:17; strkjv@2:1,4; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:6|). He made different impressions on different people. "Seldom has any one been at once so ardently hated and so passionately loved as St. Paul" (Deissmann, _St. Paul_, p. 70). "At one time he seemed like a man, and at another he seemed like an angel" (_Acts of Paul and Thecla_). He spoke like a god at Lystra (Acts:14:8-12|), but Eutychus went to sleep on him (Acts:20:9|). Evidently Paul winced under this biting criticism of his looks and speech.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:13 @{False apostles} (\pseudapostoloi\). From \pseudˆs\, false, and \apostolos\. Paul apparently made this word (cf. strkjv@Revelation:2:2|). In verse 26| we have \pseudadelphos\, a word of like formation (Galatians:2:4|). See also \pseudochristoi\ and \pseudoprophˆtai\ in strkjv@Mark:13:22|. {Deceitful} (\dolioi\). Old word from \dolos\ (lure, snare), only here in N.T. (cf. strkjv@Romans:16:18|). {Fashioning themselves} (\metaschˆmatizomenoi\). Present middle (direct) participle of the old verb \metaschˆmatiz“\ for which see on strkjv@1Corinthians:4:6|. Masquerading as apostles of Christ by putting on the outward habiliments, posing as ministers of Christ ("gentlemen of the cloth," nothing but cloth). Paul plays with this verb in verses 13,14,15|.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:25 @{Thrice was I beaten with rods} (\tris errabdisthˆn\). Roman (Gentile) punishment. It was forbidden to Roman citizens by the _Lex Porcia_, but Paul endured it in Philippi (Acts:16:23,37|), the only one of the three named in Acts. First aorist passive of \rabdiz“\, from \rabdos\, rod, _Koin‚_ word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:16:22| which see. {Once was I stoned} (\hapax elithasthˆn\). Once for all \hapax\ means. At Lystra (Acts:14:5-19|). On \lithaz“\ _Koin‚_ verb from \lithos\, see on ¯Acts:5:26|. {Thrice I suffered shipwreck} (\tris enauagˆsa\). First aorist active of \nauage“\, from \nauagos\, shipwrecked (\naus\, ship, \agnumi\, to break). Old and common verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Timothy:1:19|. We know nothing of these. The one told in strkjv@Acts:27| was much later. What a pity that we have no data for all these varied experiences of Paul. {Night and day} (\nuchthˆmeron\) Rare word. Papyri give \nuktˆmar\ with the same idea (night-day). {Have I been in the deep} (\en t“i buth“i pepoiˆka\). Vivid dramatic perfect active indicative of \poie“\, "I have done a night and day in the deep." The memory of it survives like a nightmare. \Buthos\ is old word (only here in N.T.) for bottom, depth of the sea, then the sea itself. Paul does not mean that he was a night and day under the water, not a Jonah experience, only that he was far out at sea and shipwrecked. This was one of the three shipwrecks-already named.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:11 @{I am become foolish} (\gegona aphr“n\). Perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. In spite of what he said in verse 6| that he would not be foolish if he gloried in the other Paul. But he feels that he has dropped back to the mood of strkjv@11:1,16|. He has been swept on by the memory of the ecstasy. {For I ought to have been commended by you} (\eg“ gar “pheilon huph' hum“n sunistasthai\). Explanation of "ye compelled me." Imperfect active \“pheilon\ of \opheil“\, to be under obligation, and the tense here expresses an unfulfilled obligation about the present. But \sunistasthai\ is present passive infinitive, not aorist or perfect passive. He literally means, "I ought now to be commended by you" instead of having to glorify myself. He repeats his boast already made (11:5f.|), that he is no whit behind "the super-extra apostles" (the Judaizers), "though I am nothing" (\ei kai ouden eimi\). Even boasting himself against those false apostles causes a reaction of feeling that he has to express (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:15:9; strkjv@1Timothy:1:15f.|).

rwp@Info_2Peter @ THE READERS The author says that this is his second Epistle to them (2Peter:3:1|), and that means that he is writing to the saints in the five Roman provinces in Asia Minor to whom the first Epistle was sent (1Peter:1:1|). Spitta and Zahn deny this on the ground that the two Epistles do not discuss the same subjects, surely a flimsy objection. Zahn even holds that II Peter precedes I Peter and that the Epistle referred to in strkjv@2Peter:3:1| has been lost. He holds that II Peter was addressed to the church in Corinth. He considers the readers to be Jews while I Peter was addressed to Gentiles. But "there is nothing in II Peter to differentiate its first readers from those of I Peter" (Bigg).

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

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

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

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

rwp@3John:1:12 @{Demetrius hath the witness of all men} (\Dˆmˆtri“i memarturˆtai hupo pant“n\). Perfect passive indicative of \marture“\, "it has been witnessed to Demetrius (dative case) by all." We know nothing else about him, unless, as is unlikely, he be identified with Demas as a shortened form (Philemon:1:24; strkjv@Colossians:4:4; strkjv@2Timothy:4:10|), who has come back after his desertion or with the Ephesian silversmith (Acts:19:21ff.|), who may have been converted under John's ministry, which one would like to believe, though there is no evidence for it. He may indeed be the bearer of this letter from Ephesus to Gaius and may also have come under suspicion for some reason and hence John's warm commendation. {And of the truth itself} (\kai hupo autˆs tˆs alˆtheias\). A second commendation of Demetrius. It is possible, in view of strkjv@1John:5:6| (the Spirit is the truth), that John means the Holy Spirit and not a mere personification of the truth. {Yea we also} (\kai hˆmeis de\). A third witness to Demetrius, that is John himself (literary plural). {Thou knowest} (\oidas\). "The words in strkjv@John:21:24| sound like an echo of this sentence" (Westcott). John knew Demetrius well in Ephesus.

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

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

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

rwp@Acts:4:14 @{They could say nothing against it} (\ouden eichon anteipein\). Imperfect again, they kept on having nothing to say against it. The lame man was standing there before their eyes in proof of what Peter had said.

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

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

rwp@Acts:9:8 @{He saw nothing} (\ouden eblepen\). Imperfect active indicative, was seeing nothing. "The glory of that light" (22:11|) when he saw Jesus had blinded his eyes now wide open (\ane“igmen“n\, perfect passive participle of \anoig“\ with double reduplication). The blindness was proof that something had happened to him and that it was no hallucination that he had seen the Risen Christ. Saul arose after the others were on their feet. {They led him by the hand} (\cheirag“gountes\). From \cheirag“gos\ (\cheir\, hand and \ag“\, to lead). Only here in the N.T., but in LXX and late writers though not in the old Greek. It was a pathetic picture to see the masterful Saul, victorious persecutor and conqueror of the disciples, now helpless as a child.

rwp@Acts:13:13 @{Paul and his company} (\hoi peri Paulon\). Neat Greek idiom as in Plato, Cratylus 440 C \hoi peri Herakleiton\. On this idiom see Gildersleeve, _Syntax_, p. 264. It means a man and his followers, "those around Paul." Now Paul ranks first always in Acts save in strkjv@14:2; strkjv@15:12,25| for special reasons. Heretofore Saul (Paul) held a secondary position (9:27; strkjv@11:30; strkjv@13:1f.|). "In nothing is the greatness of Barnabas more manifest than in his recognition of the superiority of Paul and acceptance of a secondary position for himself" (Furneaux). {Set sail} (\anachthentes\). First aorist passive participle of \anag“\. Thirteen times in the Acts and strkjv@Luke:8:22| which see. They sailed up to sea and came down (\katag“, katabain“\) to land. Songs:it looks. {Departed from them} (\apoch“rˆsas ap' aut“n\). First aorist active participle of \apoch“re“\, old verb to withdraw, go away from. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:7:23; strkjv@Luke:9:39|. He is called John there as in verse 5| and Mark in strkjv@15:39|, though John Mark in strkjv@12:12,25|. This may be accidental or on purpose (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 317). Luke is silent on John's reasons for leaving Paul and Barnabas. He was the cousin of Barnabas and may not have relished the change in leadership. There may have been change in plans also now that Paul is in command. Barnabas had chosen Cyprus and Paul has led them to Perga in Pamphylia and means to go on into the highlands to Antioch in Pisidia. There were perils of many sorts around them and ahead (2Corinthians:11:26|), perils to which John Mark was unwilling to be exposed. Paul will specifically charge him at Antioch with desertion of his post (Acts:15:39|). It is possible, as Ramsay suggests, that the mosquitoes at Perga gave John malaria. If so, they bit Paul and Barnabas also. He may not have liked Paul's aggressive attitude towards the heathen. At any rate he went home to Jerusalem instead of to Antioch, _zu seiner Mutter_ (Holtzmann). It was a serious breach in the work, but Paul and Barnabas stuck to the work.

rwp@Acts:13:45 @{The Jews} (\hoi Ioudaioi\). Certainly not the proselytes of verse 43|. Probably many of the Jews that were then favourably disposed to Paul's message had reacted against him under the influence of the rabbis during the week and evidently on this Sabbath very many Gentiles ("almost the whole city," "the multitudes" \tous ochlous\) had gathered, to the disgust of the stricter Jews. Nothing is specifically stated here about the rabbis, but they were beyond doubt the instigators of, and the ringleaders in, the opposition as in Thessalonica (17:5|). No such crowds (\ochlous\) came to the synagogue when they were the speakers. {With jealousy} (\zˆlou\). Genitive case of \zˆlos\ (from \ze“\, to boil) after \eplˆsthˆsan\ (effective first aorist passive indicative of \pimplˆmi\). Envy and jealousy arise between people of the same calling (doctors towards doctors, lawyers towards lawyers, preachers towards preachers). Songs:these rabbis boiled with jealousy when they saw the crowds gathered to hear Paul and Barnabas. {Contradicted} (\antelegon\). Imperfect active of \antileg“\, old verb to speak against, to say a word in opposition to (\anti\, face to face). It was interruption of the service and open opposition in the public meeting. Paul and Barnabas were guests by courtesy and, of course, could not proceed further, when denied that privilege. {Blasphemed} (\blasphˆmountes\). Blaspheming. Songs:the correct text without the addition \antilegontes\ (repeated from \antelegon\ above). Common verb in the Gospels for saying injurious and harmful things. Doubtless these rabbis indulged in unkind personalities and made it plain that Paul and Barnabas were going beyond the limitations of pure Judaism in their contacts with Gentiles.

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

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

rwp@Acts:16:7 @{Over against Mysia} (\kata tˆn Musian\). This was an ill-defined region rather north and west of Phrygia. The Romans finally absorbed most of it in the Province of Asia. {They assayed to go into Bithynia} (\epeirazon eis tˆn Bithunian poreuthˆnai\). Conative imperfect of \peiraz“\ and ingressive aorist passive infinitive of \poreuomai\. Now Bithynia is northeast of Mysia and north of Galatia (province). Clearly Luke means to say that Paul had, when hindered by the Holy Spirit from going west into Asia, gone north so as to come in front of Bithynia. This journey would take him directly through Phrygia and the North Galatian country (the real Gauls or Celts). This is, to my mind, the strongest argument for the North Galatian view in these verses 6,7|. The grammar and the topography bring Paul right up to Bithynia (north of the old Galatia). It is verses 6,7| that make me pause before accepting the plausible arguments of Ramsay for the South Galatian theory. In itself the problem is nothing like so important or so determinative as he makes it. But shall we smash Luke's grammar to pieces to bolster up a theory of criticism? {And the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not} (\kai ouk eiasen autous to pneuma Iˆsou\). The same Spirit who in verse 6| had forbidden going into Asia now closed the door into Bithynia. This expression occurs nowhere else, but we have the spirit of Christ (Romans:8:9|) and the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Phillipians:1:19|). \Eiasen\ is first aorist active indicative of \ea“\, old verb to allow.

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

rwp@Acts:16:24 @{Into the inner prison} (\eis 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:17:5 @{Moved with jealousy} (\zˆl“santes\). Both our English words, {zeal} and {jealousy}, are from the Greek \zˆlos\. In strkjv@13:45| the Jews (rabbis) "were filled with jealousy" (\eplˆsthˆsan zˆlou\). That is another way of saying the same thing as here. The success of Paul was entirely too great in both places to please the rabbis. Songs:here is jealousy of Jewish preachers towards Christian preachers. It is always between men or women of the same profession or group. In strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:3-10| Paul hints at some of the slanders spread against him by these rabbis (deceivers, using words of flattery as men-pleasers, after vain-glory, greed of gain, etc.). {Took unto them} (\proslabomenoi\). Second aorist middle (indirect, to themselves) participle of \proslamban“\, old and common verb. {Certain vile fellows of the rabble} (\t“n agorai“n andras tinas ponˆrous\). The \agora\ or market-place was the natural resort for those with nothing to do (Matthew:20:4|) like the court-house square today or various parks in our cities where bench-warmers flock. Plato (_Protagoras_ 347 C) calls these \agoraioi\ (common word, but in N.T. only here and strkjv@19:38|) idlers or good-for-nothing fellows. They are in every city and such "bums" are ready for any job. The church in Thessalonica caught some of these peripatetic idlers (2Thessalonians:3:10f.|) "doing nothing but doing about." Songs:the Jewish preachers gather to themselves a choice collection of these market-loungers or loafers or wharf-rats. The Romans called them _subrostrani_ (hangers round the rostrum or _subbasilicari_). {Gathering a crowd} (\ochlopoiˆsantes\). Literally, making or getting (\poie“\) a crowd (\ochlos\), a word not found elsewhere. Probably right in the \agora\ itself where the rabbis could tell men their duties and pay them in advance. Instance Hyde Park in London with all the curious gatherings every day, Sunday afternoons in particular. {Set the city on an uproar} (\ethoruboun\). Imperfect active of \thorube“\, from \thorubos\ (tumult), old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@20:10; strkjv@Matthew:9:23; strkjv@Mark:4:39|. They kept up the din, this combination of rabbis and rabble. {Assaulting the house of Jason} (\epistantes tˆi oikiƒi Iasonos\). Second aorist (ingressive) active of \ephistˆmi\, taking a stand against, rushing at, because he was Paul's host. He may have been a Gentile (Jason the name of an ancient king of Thessaly), but the Jews often used it for Joshua or Jesus (II Macc. strkjv@1:7). {They sought} (\ezˆtoun\). Imperfect active. They burst into the house and searched up and down. {Them} (\autous\). Paul and Silas. They were getting ready to have a lynching party.

rwp@Acts:23:20 @{The Jews} (\hoi Ioudaioi\). As if the whole nation was in the conspiracy and so in verse 12|. The conspirators may have belonged to the Zealots, but clearly they represented the state of Jewish feeling toward Paul in Jerusalem. {Have agreed} (\sunethento\). Second aorist middle indicative of \suntithˆmi\, old verb to join together, to agree. Already this form in strkjv@Luke:22:5| which see. See also strkjv@John:9:22; strkjv@Acts:24:9|. {To bring down} (\hop“s katagagˆis\). Very words of the conspirators in verse 15| as if the young man overheard. Second aorist active subjunctive of \katag“\ with \hop“s\ in final clause, still used, but nothing like so common as \hina\ though again in verse 23| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 985). {As though thou wouldest inquire} (\h“s mell“n punthanesthai\). Just as in verse 15| except that here \mell“n\ refers to Lysias instead of to the conspirators as in verse 15|. The singular is used by the youth out of deference to the authority of Lysias and so modifies a bit the scheming of the conspirators, not "absurd" as Page holds.

rwp@Acts:23:29 @{Concerning questions of their law} (\peri zˆtˆmata tou nomou aut“n\). The very distinction drawn by Gallio in Corinth (Acts:18:14f.|). On the word see on strkjv@15:2|. {But to have nothing laid to his charge worthy of death or of bonds} (\mˆden de axion thanatou ˆ desm“n echonta enklˆma\). Literally, "having no accusation (or crime) worthy of death or of bonds." This phrase here only in the N.T. \Egklˆma\ is old word for accusation or crime from \egkale“\ used in verse 28| and in the N.T. only here and strkjv@25:16|. Lysias thus expresses the opinion that Paul ought to be set free and the lenient treatment that Paul received in Caesarea and Rome (first imprisonment) is probably due to this report of Lysias. Every Roman magistrate before whom Paul appears declares him innocent (Gallio, Lysias, Felix, Festus).

rwp@Acts:25:25 @{But I found} (\eg“ de katelabomˆn\). Second aorist middle of \katalamban“\, to lay hold of, to grasp, to comprehend as in strkjv@4:13; strkjv@10:34|. {That he had committed nothing worthy of death} (\mˆden axion auton thanatou peprachenai\). Perfect active infinitive of \prass“\ in indirect assertion with negative \mˆ\ and accusative \auton\ of general reference, the usual idiom. Verse 25| repeats the statement in verse 21|, perhaps for the benefit of the assembled dignitaries.

rwp@Acts:25:26 @{No certain thing} (\asphales ti--ou\). Nothing definite or reliable (\a\ privative, \sphall“\, to trip). All the charges of the Sanhedrin slipped away or were tripped up by Paul. Festus confesses that he had nothing left and thereby convicts himself of gross insincerity in his proposal to Paul in verse 9| about going up to Jerusalem. By his own statement he should have set Paul free. The various details here bear the marks of the eyewitness. Luke was surely present and witnessed this grand spectacle with Paul as chief performer. {Unto my lord} (\t“i kuri“i\). Augustus (Octavius) and Tiberius refused the title of \kurios\ (lord) as too much like _rex_ (king) and like master and slave, but the servility of the subjects gave it to the other emperors who accepted it (Nero among them). Antoninus Pius put it on his coins. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 105) gives an ostracon dated Aug. 4, A.D. 63 with the words "in the year nine of Nero the lord" (\enatou Ner“nos tou kuriou\). Deissmann (_op. cit._, pp. 349ff.) runs a most interesting parallel "between the cult of Christ and the cult of Caesar in the application of the term \kurios\, lord" in ostraca, papyri, inscriptions. Beyond a doubt Paul has all this fully in mind when he says in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3| that "no one is able to say \Kurios Iˆsous\ except in the Holy Spirit" (cf. also strkjv@Phillipians:2:11|). The Christians claimed this word for Christ and it became the test in the Roman persecutions as when Polycarp steadily refused to say " Lord Caesar" and insisted on saying "Lord Jesus" when it meant his certain death. {Before you} (\eph' hum“n\). The whole company. In no sense a new trial, but an examination in the presence of these prominent men to secure data and to furnish entertainment and pleasure to Agrippa (verse 22|). {Especially before thee} (\malista epi sou\). Out of courtesy. It was the main reason as verse 22| shows. Agrippa was a Jew and Festus was glad of the chance to see what he thought of Paul's case. {After examination had} (\tˆs anakrise“s genomenˆs\). Genitive absolute, "the examination having taken place." \Anakrisis\ from \anakrin“\ (cf. strkjv@12:19; strkjv@24:8; strkjv@28:18|) is a legal term for preliminary examination. Only here in the N.T. Inscriptions and papyri give it as examination of slaves or other property. {That I may have somewhat to write} (\hop“s sch“ ti graps“\). Ingressive aorist subjunctive \sch“\ (may get) with \hop“s\ (final particle like \hina\). \Ti graps“\ in indirect question after \sch“\ is either future indicative or aorist subjunctive (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1045). Festus makes it plain that this is not a "trial," but an examination for his convenience to help him out of a predicament.

rwp@Acts:26:22 @{Having therefore obtained} (\oun tuch“n\). Second aorist active participle of old verb \tugchan“\. {The help that is from God} (\epikourias tˆs apo tou theou\). Old word from \epikoure“\, to aid, and that from \epikouros\, ally, assister. Only here in N.T. God is Paul's ally. All of the plots of the Jews against Paul had failed so far. {I stand} (\hestˆka\). Second perfect of \histˆmi\, to place, intransitive to stand. Picturesque word (Page) of Paul's stability and fidelity (cf. strkjv@Phillipians:4:1; strkjv@Ephesians:6:13|). {Both to small and great} (\mikr“i te kai megal“i\). Dative singular (rather than instrumental, taking \marturoumenos\ middle, not passive) and use of \te kai\ links the two adjectives together in an inclusive way. These two adjectives in the singular (representative singular rather than plural) can apply to age (young and old) or to rank (Revelation:11:18|) as is specially suitable here with Festus and Agrippa present. In strkjv@Acts:8:10| (Hebrews:8:11|) the phrase explains \pantes\ (all). {Saying nothing but what} (\ouden ektos leg“n h“n\). "Saying nothing outside of those things which." The ablative relative \h“n\ is attracted into the case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\ and so ablative after \ektos\ (adverbial preposition common in LXX, the papyri. In N.T. here and strkjv@1Corinthians:6:18; strkjv@15:27; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:2f.|). Cf. strkjv@Luke:16:29| about Moses and the prophets.

rwp@Acts:26:31 @{They spake one to another} (\elaloun pros allˆlous\). Imperfect active, describing the eager conversation of the dignitaries about Paul's wonderful speech. {Nothing worthy of death or bonds} (\ouden thanatou ˆ desm“n axion\). This is the unanimous conclusion of all these dignitaries (Romans, Jews, Greeks) as it was of Festus before (25:25|). But Paul had not won any of them to Christ. The conclusion leaves Festus in a predicament. Why had he not set Paul free before this?

rwp@Acts:27:9 @{Where much time was spent} (\Hikanou chronou diagenomenou\). Genitive absolute again with second aorist middle participle of \diaginomai\, to come in between (\dia\). "Considerable time intervening," since they became weatherbound in this harbour, though some take it since they left Caesarea. {And the voyage was now dangerous} (\kai ontos ˆdˆ episphalous\). Genitive absolute, "and the voyage being already (\ˆdˆ\=Latin _jam_) dangerous" (old word from \epi\ and \sphall“\, to trip, to fall, and so prone to fall, here only in N.T.). {Because the Fast was now already gone by} (\dia to kai tˆn nˆsteian ˆdˆ parelˆluthenai\). Accusative (after \dia\) of the articular infinitive perfect active of \parerchomai\, to pass by, with the accusative of general reference (\nˆsteian\, the great day of atonement of the Jews, strkjv@Leviticus:16:29ff.|) occurring about the end of September. The ancients considered navigation on the Mediterranean unsafe from early October till the middle of March. In A.D. 59 the Fast occurred on Oct. 5. There is nothing strange in Luke using this Jewish note of time as in strkjv@20:6| though a Gentile Christian. Paul did it also (1Corinthians:16:8|). It is no proof that Luke was a Jewish proselyte. We do not know precisely when the party left Caesarea (possibly in August), but in ample time to arrive in Rome before October if conditions had been more favourable. But the contrary winds had made the voyage very slow and difficult all the way (verse 7|) besides the long delay here in this harbour of Fair Havens. {Paul admonished them} (\parˆinˆi ho Paulos\). Imperfect active of \paraine“\, old word to exhort from \para\ and \aine“\, to praise (3:8|), only here and verse 22| in N.T. It is remarkable that a prisoner like Paul should venture to give advice at all and to keep on doing it (imperfect tense inchoative, began to admonish and kept on at it). Paul had clearly won the respect of the centurion and officers and also felt it to be his duty to give this unasked for warning. {I perceive} (\the“r“\). Old word from \the“ros\, a spectator. See strkjv@Luke:10:18|. Paul does not here claim prophecy, but he had plenty of experience with three shipwrecks already (2Corinthians:11:25|) to justify his apprehension. {Will be} (\mellein esesthai\). Infinitive in indirect assertion followed by future infinitive after \mellein\ in spite of \hoti\ which would naturally call for present indicative \mellei\, an anacoluthon due to the long sentence (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 478). {With injury} (\meta hubre“s\). An old word from \huper\ (above, upper, like our "uppishness") and so pride, insult, personal injury, the legal word for personal assault (Page). Josephus (_Ant_. III. 6, 4) uses it of the injury of the elements. {Loss} (\zˆmian\). Old word, opposite of \kerdos\, gain or profit (Phillipians:3:7f.|). Nowhere else in N.T. {Lading} (\phortiou\). Diminutive of \phortos\ (from \pher“\, to bear) only in form. Common word, but in N.T. only here in literal sense, as metaphor in strkjv@Matthew:11:30; strkjv@23:4; strkjv@Luke:11:46; strkjv@Galatians:6:5|. {But also of our lives} (\alla kai t“n psuch“n\). Common use of \psuchˆ\ for life, originally "breath of life" (Acts:20:10|), and also "soul" (14:2|). Fortunately no lives were lost, though all else was. But this outcome was due to the special mercy of God for the sake of Paul (verse 24|), not to the wisdom of the officers in rejecting Paul's advice. Paul begins now to occupy the leading role in this marvellous voyage.

rwp@Acts:27:33 @{While the day was coming on} (\achri hou hˆmera ˆmellen ginesthai\). More likely here \achri hou\ (for \achri toutou h“i\) with the imperfect \ˆmellen\, has its usual meaning, "until which time day was about to come on (\ginesthai\, present middle infinitive, linear action)." That is Paul kept on exhorting or beseeching (\parekalei\, imperfect active) them until dawn began to come on (cf. verse 39| when day came). In strkjv@Hebrews:3:13| \achri hou\ with the present indicative has to mean "so long as" or while, but that is not true here (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 975). See on ¯Acts:2:46| for the same phrase for partaking food (\metalamban“ trophˆs\, genitive case) as also in strkjv@27:34|. Paul wanted them to be ready for action when day really came. "Fourteenth day" repeated (verse 27|), only here in the accusative of duration of time (\hˆmeran\). It is not clear whether the "waiting" (\prosdok“ntes\, present active participle predicate nominative complementary participle after \diateleite\, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1121) means fourteen days of continuous fasting or only fourteen successive nights of eager watching without food. Galen and Dionysius of Halicarnassus employ the very idiom used here by Luke (\asitos diatele“\). {Having taken nothing} (\mˆthen proslabomenoi\). Second aorist middle participle of \proslamban“\ with the accusative \mˆthen\ rather than the more usual \mˆden\. Probably Paul means that they had taken no regular meals, only bits of food now and then.

rwp@Acts:28:4 @{The beast} (\to thˆrion\). Diminutive of \thˆr\ and so little beast. See on ¯Mark:1:13|. Aristotle and the medical writers apply the word to venomous serpents, the viper in particular (Knowling), as Luke does here. Vincent calls attention to the curious history of our word "_treacle_" for molasses (Latin _theriaca_) from \thˆriakˆ\, an antidote made from the flesh of vipers. Coverdale translates strkjv@Jeremiah:8:22|: "There is no more treacle in Gilead." Jeremy Taylor: "We kill the viper and make treacle of him." {Hanging from his hand} (\kremamenon ek tˆs cheiros autou\). Vivid picture of the snake dangling from Paul's hand. Present middle participle of \kremamai\, late form for \kremannumi\, to hang up, to suspend (cf. strkjv@Galatians:3:13|). {No doubt} (\pant“s\). Literally, By all means, old adverb. Cf. strkjv@21:22; strkjv@Luke:4:23; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:22|. Only by Luke and Paul in the N.T. "They _knew_ that he was a prisoner being taken to Rome on some grave charge, and _inferred_ that the charge was murder" (Page). {Though he hath escaped} (\dias“thenta\). First aorist passive participle of \dias“z“\ (same verb used in strkjv@24:43,44; strkjv@28:1|), so-called concessive use of the participle (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1129). {Yet Justice} (\dikˆ\). An abstraction personified like the Latin _Justitia_ (Page). The natives speak of \Dikˆ\ as a goddess, but we know nothing of such actual worship in Malta, though the Greeks worshipped abstractions as in Athens. {Hath not suffered} (\ouk eiasen\). Did not suffer. They look on Paul as a doomed man as good as dead. These people thought that calamity was proof of guilt, poor philosophy and worse theology.

rwp@Acts:28:6 @{But they expected} (\hoi de prosedok“n\). Imperfect active, were expecting, continued to expect. {That he would have swollen} (\auton mellein pimprasthai\). More exactly, "Expecting him to be about (or that he was about) to swell up." \Pimprasthai\ is present middle infinitive from \pimprˆmi\, to blow, to burn, to inflame, to cause to swell. \Prˆth“\, to swell, seems connected and both use the aorist \eprˆsa\. Our word "inflammation" likewise means a burning and a swelling. This verb is a common medical term used as Luke has it. It occurs here only in N.T. {Or fallen down dead suddenly} (\ˆ katapiptein aphn“ nekron\). Rather, "or was about to fall down dead suddenly." The two common results of a bite by a viper or other poisonous snake, both medical terms used by Luke. {But when they were long in expectation} (\epi polu de aut“n prosdok“nt“n\). Genitive absolute. "But while they were expecting for much time." {Nothing amiss come to him} (\mˆden atopon eis auton ginomenon\). "Nothing out of place coming to him" (present middle participle). \Mˆden\ the usual negative of the participle and the accusative case the object of \the“rount“n\ (genitive absolute). {Changed their minds} (\metabalomenoi\). Aorist middle (direct) participle of \metaball“\, old verb to turn about or around, turning themselves about, changing their minds. Plato uses this very verb in middle voice for changing the mind. {That he was a god} (\auton einai theon\). Accusative and infinitive in indirect discourse. At Lystra Paul was first received as a god (Mercury) and then they stoned him to kill him (Acts:14:11,19|). Songs:fickle is popular favour.

rwp@Acts:28:17 @{Those that were the chief of the Jews} (\tous ontas t“n Ioudai“n pr“tous\). This use of \pr“tos\ for the leading men of a city or among the Jews we have already had in strkjv@13:50; strkjv@25:2; strkjv@Luke:19:47|. Literally, "Those that were first among the Jews." The position of the participle \ontas\ between the article and the adjective \pr“tous\ is regular (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 777). {When they were come together} (\sunelthont“n aut“n\). Genitive absolute again. Paul could not go to the synagogue, as his custom was, being a bound prisoner. Songs:he invited the Jewish leaders to come to his lodging and hear his explanation of his presence in Rome as a prisoner with an appeal to Caesar. He is anxious that they may understand that this appeal was forced upon him by Festus following Felix and lot because he has come to make an attack on the Jewish people. He was sure that false reports had come to Rome. These non-Christian Jews accepted Paul's invitation. {Nothing against} (\ouden enantion\). Adjective here as in strkjv@26:9|, not preposition as in strkjv@7:10; strkjv@8:32|. From \en\ and \antios\ (\anti\), face to face. Concessive participle \poiˆsas\ as in verse 4| (\dias“thenta\) which see. {Yet was I delivered prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans} (\desmios ex Ierosolum“n paredothˆn eis tas cheiras t“n Romai“n\). This condensed statement does not explain how he "was delivered," for in fact the Jews were trying to kill him when Lysias rescued him from the mob (22:27-36|). The Jews were responsible for his being in the hands of the Romans, though they had hoped to kill him first.

rwp@Colossians:2:7 refers to 'rooted' in 'Ephesians:3:17 (18)'. Verse 18 has nothing to

rwp@Info_Ephesians @ THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS FROM ROME A.D. 63 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION There are some problems of a special nature that confront us about the so-called Epistle to the Ephesians. THE AUTHORSHIP It is not admitted by all that Paul wrote it, though no other adequate explanation of its origin has ever been given. Songs:far as subject matter and vocabulary and style are concerned, if Colossians is Pauline, there is little or nothing to be said against the Pauline authorship of this Epistle.

rwp@Info_Ephesians @ THE CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLE The same Gnostic heresy is met as in Colossians, but with this difference. In Colossians the emphasis is on the Dignity of Christ as the Head of the Church, while in Ephesians chief stress is placed upon the Dignity of the Church as the Body of Christ the Head. Paul has written nothing more profound than chapters strkjv@Ephesians:1-3| of Ephesians. Stalker termed them the profoundest thing ever written. He sounds the depths of truth and reaches the heights. Since Ephesians covers the same ground so largely as Colossians, only the words in Ephesians that differ or are additional will call for discussion.

rwp@Ephesians:3:19 @{And to know} (\gn“nai te\). Second aorist active infinitive with \exischusˆte\. {Which passeth knowledge} (\tˆn huperballousan tˆs gn“se“s\). Ablative case \gn“se“s\ after \huperballousan\ (from \huperball“\). All the same Paul dares to scale this peak. {That ye may be filled with all the fulness of God} (\hina plˆr“thˆte eis pƒn to plˆr“ma tou theou\). Final clause again (third use of \hina\ in the sentence) with first aorist passive subjunctive of \plˆro“\ and the use of \eis\ after it. One hesitates to comment on this sublime climax in Paul's prayer, the ultimate goal for followers of Christ in harmony with the injunction in strkjv@Matthew:5:48| to be perfect (\teleioi\) as our heavenly Father is perfect. There is nothing that any one can add to these words. One can turn to strkjv@Romans:8:29| again for our final likeness to God in Christ.

rwp@Galatians:2:6 @{Somewhat} (\ti\). Something, not somebody. Paul refers to the Big Three (Cephas, James, and John). He seems a bit embarrassed in the reference. He means no disrespect, but he asserts his independence sharply in a tangled sentence with two parentheses (dashes in Westcott and Hort). {Whatsoever they were} (\hopoioi pote ˆsan\). Literally, "What sort they once were." {Hopoioi} is a qualitative word (1Thessalonians:1:9; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:13; strkjv@James:1:24|). Lightfoot thinks that these three leaders were the ones who suggested the compromise about Titus. That is a possible, but not the natural, interpretation of this involved sentence. The use of \de\ (but) in verse 6| seems to make a contrast between the three leaders and the pleaders for compromise in verses 4f|. {They, I say, imparted nothing to me} (\emoi gar ouden prosanethento\). He starts over again after the two parentheses and drops the construction \apo t“n dokount“n\ and changes the construction (anacoluthon) to \hoi dokountes\ (nominative case), the men of reputation and influences whom he names in verses 8f|. See the same verb in strkjv@1:16|. They added nothing in the conference to me. The compromisers tried to win them, but they finally came over to my view. Paul won his point, when he persuaded Peter, James, and John to agree with him and Barnabas in their contention for freedom for the Gentile Christians from the bondage of the Mosaic ceremonial law.

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

rwp@Hebrews:2:8 @{In that he subjected} (\en t“i hupotaxai\). First aorist active articular infinitive of \hupatass“\ in the locative case, "in the subjecting." {He left} (\aphˆken\). First aorist active indicative (kappa aorist) of \aphiˆmi\. {Nothing that is not subject to him} (\ouden aut“i anupotakton\). Later verbal of \hupotass“\ with \a\ privative. Here in passive sense, active sense in strkjv@1Timothy:1:9|. Man's sovereignty was meant to be all-inclusive including the administration of "the world to come." "He is crowned king of nature, invested with a divine authority over creation" (Moffatt). But how far short of this destiny has man come! {But now we see not yet} (\nun de oup“ hor“men\). Not even today in the wonderful twentieth century with man's triumphs over nature has he reached that goal, wonderful as are the researches by the help of telescope and microscope, the mechanism of the airplane, the submarine, steam, electricity, radio.

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

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

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

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

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

rwp@James:5:14 @{Is any among you sick?} (\asthenei tis en humin;\). Present active indicative of \asthene“\, old verb, to be weak (without strength), often in N.T. (Matthew:10:8|). {Let him call for} (\proskalesasth“\). First aorist (ingressive) middle imperative of \proskale“\. Note change of tense (aorist) and middle (indirect) voice. Care for the sick is urged in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:14| ("help the sick"). Note the plural here, "elders of the church, as in strkjv@Acts:20:17; strkjv@15:6,22; strkjv@21:18; strkjv@Phillipians:1:1| (bishops). {Let them pray over him} (\proseuxasth“san ep' auton\). First aorist middle imperative of \proseuchomai\. Prayer for the sick is clearly enjoined. {Anointing him with oil} (\aleipsantes elai“i\). First aorist active participle of \aleiph“\, old verb, to anoint, and the instrumental case of \elaion\ (oil). The aorist participle can be either simultaneous or antecedent with \proseuxasth“san\ (pray). See the same use of \aleiph“ elai“i\ in strkjv@Mark:6:13|. The use of olive oil was one of the best remedial agencies known to the ancients. They used it internally and externally. Some physicians prescribe it today. It is clear both in strkjv@Mark:6:13| and here that medicinal value is attached to the use of the oil and emphasis is placed on the worth of prayer. There is nothing here of the pagan magic or of the later practice of "extreme unction" (after the eighth century). It is by no means certain that \aleiph“\ here and in strkjv@Mark:6:13| means "anoint" in a ceremonial fashion rather than "rub" as it commonly does in medical treatises. Trench (N.T. Synonyms) says: "\Aleiphein\ is the mundane and profane, \chriein\ the sacred and religious, word." At bottom in James we have God and medicine, God and the doctor, and that is precisely where we are today. The best physicians believe in God and want the help of prayer.

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: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:4:3 @{Left Judea} (\aphˆken tˆn Ioudaian\). Unusual use of \aphiˆmi\. First (\Kappa\) aorist active indicative. Originally the word means to send away, to dismiss, to forsake, to forgive, to allow. Jesus uses it in this sense in strkjv@16:28|. Evidently because Jesus did not wish to bring the coming conflict with the Pharisees to an issue yet. Songs:he mainly avoids Jerusalem and Judea now till the end. Each time hereafter that Jesus appears in Jerusalem and Judea before the last visit there is an open breach with the Pharisees who attack him (John:5:1-47; strkjv@7:14-10:21; strkjv@10:22-42; strkjv@11:17-53|). {Again into Galilee} (\palin eis tˆn Galilaian\). Reference to strkjv@2:1-12|. The Synoptics tell nothing of this early work in Perea (John:1:19-51|), Galilee, or Judea (2:13-4:2|). John supplements their records purposely.

rwp@John:4:11 @{Sir} (\Kurie\). Songs:it has to mean here in the mouth of the Samaritan woman, not Lord. {Thou hast nothing to draw with and the well is deep} (\oute antlˆma echeis kai to phrear estin bathu\). This broken construction of \oute-kai\ (neither--and) occurs in N.T. elsewhere only in strkjv@3John:1:10|. \Antlˆma\ (from \antle“\, to draw) is a late word for that which is drawn, then (Plutarch) for the act of drawing, and then for the rope as here to draw with. This well (\phrear\) is 100 feet deep and Jesus had no rope. The bucket of skin ("with three cross sticks at the mouth to keep it open," Vincent) was kept at the well to be let down by a goat's hair rope. {That living water} (\to hud“r to z“n\). "The water the living," with the article referring to the language of Jesus in verse 10|. She is still thinking only of literal water.

rwp@John:4:35 @{Say not ye?} (\Ouch humeis legete;\). It is not possible to tell whether Jesus is alluding to a rural proverb of which nothing is known about there being four months from seedtime to harvest (a longer time than four months in fact) or whether he means that it was then actually four months to harvest. In the latter sense, since harvest began about the middle of April, it would be December when Jesus spoke. {There are yet four months} (\eti tetramˆnos estin\). The use of \eti\ (yet) and the fact that the space between seedtime and harvest is longer than four months (\tetra\, Aeolic for \tessara\, and \mˆn\, month) argue against the proverb idea. {And then cometh the harvest} (\kai ho therismos erchetai\). "And the harvest (\therismos\, from \theriz“\, rare in Greek writers) comes." The possible Iambic verse here is purely accidental as in strkjv@5:14|. {Lift up your eyes} (\eparate tous ophthalmous hum“n\). First aorist active imperative of \epair“\. Deliberate looking as in strkjv@John:6:5| where \theaomai\ also is used as here. {Fields} (\ch“ras\). Cultivated or ploughed ground as in strkjv@Luke:21:21|. {White} (\leukai\). Ripened grain like grey hair (Matthew:5:36|). {Already unto harvest} (\pros therismon ˆdˆ\). Probably \ˆdˆ\ (already) goes with verse 36|. The Samaritans could already be seen approaching and they were the field "white for harvest." This is the meaning of Christ's parable. If it is the spring of the year and Christ can point to the ripened grain, the parable is all the plainer, but it is not dependent on this detail. Recall the parable of the sower in strkjv@Matthew:13|.

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

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

rwp@John:11:49 @{Caiaphas} (\Kaiaphas\). Son-in-law of Annas and successor and high priest for 18 years (A.D. 18 to 36). {That year} (\tou eniautou ekeinou\). Genitive of time; his high-priesthood included that year (A.D. 29 or 30). Songs:he took the lead at this meeting. {Ye know nothing at all} (\humeis ouk oidate ouden\). In this he is correct, for no solution of their problem had been offered.

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

rwp@Info_Luke @ A SKETCH OF LUKE His name is not a common one, and is probably a shortened form of \Lukios\ and \Lukanos\. Some of the manuscripts of the Gospel actually have as the title \Kata Lukanon\. Dean Plumptre suggests that the Latin poet Lucanus was named after Luke who probably was the family physician when he was born. That is conjecture as well as the notion of Hayes that, since the brothers Gallio and Seneca were uncles of Lucanus they were influenced by Luke to be friendly toward Paul both in Corinth and in Rome. It is probable that Luke was a Greek, certainly a Gentile, possibly a freedman. Songs:this man who wrote more than one-fourth of the New Testament was not a Jew. It is not certain whether his home was in Antioch or in Philippi. It is also uncertain whether he was already converted when Paul met him at Troas. The Codex Bezae has a "we" passage after strkjv@Acts:11:27| which, if genuine, would bring Luke in contact with Paul before Troas. Hayes thinks that he was a slave boy in the family of Theophilus at Antioch, several conjectures in one. We do not know that Theophilus lived at Antioch. It may have been Rome. But, whether one of Paul's converts or not, he was a loyal friend to Paul. If he lived at Antioch, he could have studied medicine there and the great medical temple of Aesculapius was at Aegae, not far away. As a Greek physician, Luke was a university man and in touch with the science of his day. Greek medicine is the beginning of the science of medicine as it is known today. Tradition calls him a painter, but of that we know nothing. Certainly he was a humanist and a man of culture and broad sympathies and personal charm. He was the first genuine scientist who faced the problem of Christ and of Christianity. It must be said of him that he wrote his books with open mind and not as a credulous enthusiast.

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

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

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

rwp@Luke:4:2 @{Being tempted} (\peirazomenos\). Present passive participle and naturally parallel with the imperfect passive \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:6:35 @{But} (\plˆn\). Plain adversative like \plˆn\ in verse 24|. Never despairing (\mˆden apelpizontes\). \Mˆden\ is read by A B L Bohairic and is the reading of Westcott and Hort. The reading \mˆdena\ is translated "despairing of no man." The Authorized Version has it "hoping for nothing again," a meaning for \apelpiz“\ with no parallel elsewhere. Field (_Otium Nor._ iii. 40) insists that all the same the context demands this meaning because of \apelpizein\ in verse 34|, but the correct reading there is \elpizein\, not \apelpizein\. Here Field's argument falls to the ground. The word occurs in Polybius, Diodorus, LXX with the sense of despairing and that is the meaning here. D and Old Latin documents have _nihil desperantes_, but the Vulgate has _nihil inde sperantes_ (hoping for nothing thence) and this false rendering has wrought great havoc in Europe. "On the strength of it Popes and councils have repeatedly condemned the taking of any interest whatever for loans. As loans could not be had without interest, and Christians were forbidden to take it, money lending passed into the hands of the Jews, and added greatly to the unnatural detestation in which Jews were held" (Plummer). By "never despairing" or "giving up nothing in despair" Jesus means that we are not to despair about getting the money back. We are to help the apparently hopeless cases. Medical writers use the word for desperate or hopeless cases. {Sons of the Most High} (\huoi Hupsistou\). In strkjv@1:32| Jesus is called "Son of the Highest" and here all real children or sons of God (Luke:20:36|) are so termed. See also strkjv@1:35,76| for the use of "the Highest" of God. He means the same thing that we see in strkjv@Matthew:5:45,48| by "your Father." {Toward the unthankful and evil} (\epi tous acharistous kai ponˆrous\). God the Father is kind towards the unkind and wicked. Note the one article with both adjectives.

rwp@Luke:7:1 @{After} (\epeidˆ, epei and dˆ\). This conjunction was written \epei dˆ\ in Homer and is simple \epei\ with the intensive \dˆ\ added and even \epei dˆ per\ once in N.T. (Luke:1:1|). This is the only instance of the temporal use of \epeidˆ\ in the N.T. The causal sense occurs only in Luke and Paul, for \epei\ is the correct text in strkjv@Matthew:21:46|. {Had ended} (\eplˆr“sen\). First aorist active indicative. There is here a reference to the conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount, but with nothing concerning the impression produced by the discourse such as is seen in strkjv@Matthew:7:28|. This verse really belongs as the conclusion of Chapter 6, not as the beginning of Chapter 7. {In the ears of the people} (\eis tas akoas tou laou\). \Akoˆ\ from \akou“\, to hear, is used of the sense of hearing (1Corinthians:12:17|), the ear with which one hears (Mark:7:35; strkjv@Hebrews:5:11|), the thing heard or the report (Rom strkjv@10:16|) or oral instruction (Galatians:3:2,5|). Both strkjv@Matthew:8:5-13; strkjv@Luke:7:1-10| locate the healing of the centurion's servant in Capernaum where Jesus was after the Sermon on the Mount.

rwp@Luke:8:43 @{Had spent all her living upon physicians} (\eis iatrous prosanal“sasa holon ton bion\). First aorist active participle of an old verb \prosanalisk“\, only here in the N.T. But Westcott and Hort reject this clause because it is not in B D Syriac Sinaitic. Whether genuine or not, the other clause in strkjv@Mark:5:26| certainly is not in Luke: "had suffered many things of many physicians." Probably both are not genuine in Luke who takes care of the physicians by the simple statement that it was a chronic case: {could not be healed of any} (\ouk ischusen ap' oudenos therapeuthˆnai\). He omitted also what Mark has: "and was nothing bettered but rather grew worse."

rwp@Luke:9:42 @{As he was yet a coming} (\eti proserchomenou autou\). Genitive absolute. While he was yet coming (the boy, that is, not Jesus). Note quaint English "a coming" retained in the Revised Version. {Dashed him} (\errˆxen auton\). First aorist active indicative of \rˆgnumi\ or \rˆss“\, to rend or convulse, a common verb, used sometimes of boxers giving knockout blows. {Tare grievously} (\sunesparaxen\). Rare word as only here and strkjv@Mark:9:20| in the N.T., which see. {Gave him back to his father} (\aped“ken auton t“i patri autou\). Tender touch alone in Luke as in strkjv@7:15|. {They were all astonished} (\exeplˆssonto de pantes\). Imperfect passive of the common verb \ekplˆss“\ or \ekplˆgnumi\, to strike out, a picturesque description of the amazement of all at the easy victory of Jesus where the nine disciples had failed. {At the majesty of God} (\epi tˆi megaleiotˆti tou theou\). A late word from the adjective \megaleios\ and that from \megas\ (great). In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:19:27| of Artemis and in strkjv@2Peter:1:16| of the Transfiguration. It came to be used by the emperors like our word "Majesty." {Which he did} (\hois epoiei\). This is one of the numerous poor verse divisions. This sentence has nothing to do with the first part of the verse. The imperfect active \epoiei\ covers a good deal not told by Luke (see strkjv@Mark:9:30; strkjv@Matthew:17:22|). Note the attraction of the relative {hois} into the case of {pƒsin}, its antecedent.

rwp@Luke:10:19 @{And over all the power of the enemy} (\kai epi pƒsan tˆn dunamin tou echthrou\). This is the heart of "the authority" (\tˆn exousian\) here given by Jesus which is far beyond their expectations. The victory over demons was one phase of it. The power to tread upon serpents is repeated in strkjv@Mark:16:18| (the Appendix) and exemplified in Paul's case in Malta (Acts:28:3-5|). But protection from physical harm is not the main point in this struggle with Satan "the enemy" (Matthew:13:25; strkjv@Romans:16:20; strkjv@1Peter:5:8|). {Nothing shall in any wise hurt you} (\ouden humƒs ou mˆ adikˆsei\). Text has future active indicative, while some MSS. read \adikˆsˆi\, aorist active subjunctive of \adike“\, common verb from \adikos\ (\a\ privative and \dikos\), to suffer wrong, to do wrong. The triple negative here is very strong. Certainly Jesus does not mean this promise to create presumption or foolhardiness for he repelled the enemy's suggestion on the pinnacle of the temple.

rwp@Luke:12:8 @{Everyone who shall confess me} (\pas hos an homologˆsei en emoi\). Just like strkjv@Matthew:10:32| except the use of \an\ here which adds nothing. The Hebraistic use of \en\ after \homologe“\ both here and in Matthew is admitted by even Moulton (_Prolegomena_, p. 104). {The Son of man} (\ho huios tou anthr“pou\). Here strkjv@Matthew:10:32| has \k'ag“\ (I also) as the equivalent.

rwp@Luke:13:7 @{The vinedresser} (\ton ampelourgon\). Old word, but here only in the N.T., from \ampelos\, vine, and \ergon\, work. {These three years I come} (\tria etˆ aph' hou erchomai\). Literally, "three years since (from which time) I come." These three years, of course, have nothing to do with the three years of Christ's public ministry. The three years are counted from the time when the fig tree would normally be expected to bear, not from the time of planting. The Jewish nation is meant by this parable of the barren fig tree. In the withering of the barren fig tree later at Jerusalem we see parable changed to object lesson or fact (Mark:11:12-14; strkjv@Matthew:21:18f.|). {Cut it down} (\ekkopson\). "Cut it out," the Greek has it, out of the vineyard, perfective use of \ek\ with the effective aorist active imperative of \kopt“\, where we prefer "down." {Why?} (\hina ti\). Ellipsis here of \genˆtai\ of which \ti\ is subject (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 739,916). {Also} (\kai\). Besides bearing no fruit. {Doth cumber the ground} (\tˆn gˆn katargei\). Makes the ground completely idle, of no use (\kata, arge“\, from \argos\, \a\ privative and \ergon\, work). Late verb, here only in the N.T. except in Paul's Epistles.

rwp@Luke:15:4 @{In the wilderness} (\en tˆi erˆm“i\). Their usual pasturage, not a place of danger or peril. It is the owner of the hundred sheep who cares so much for the one that is lost. He knows each one of the sheep and loves each one. {Go after that which is lost} (\poreuetai epi to apol“los\). The one lost sheep (\apol“los\, second perfect active participle of \apollumi\, to destroy, but intransitive, to be lost). There is nothing more helpless than a lost sheep except a lost sinner. The sheep went off by its own ignorance and folly. The use of \epi\ for the goal occurs also in strkjv@Matthew:22:9; strkjv@Acts:8:26; strkjv@9:11|. {Until he find it} (\he“s heurˆi auto\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \heurisk“\, common verb, with \he“s\, common Greek idiom. He keeps on going (\poreuetai\, linear present middle indicative) until success comes (effective aorist, \heurˆi\).

rwp@Luke:16:21 @{With the crumbs that fell} (\apo t“n piptont“n\). From the things that fell from time to time. The language reminds one of strkjv@Luke:15:16| (the prodigal son) and the Syro-Phoenician woman (Mark:7:28|). Only it does not follow that this beggar did not get the scraps from the rich man's table. Probably he did, though nothing more. Even the wild street dogs would get them also. {Yea, even the dogs} (\alla kai hoi kunes\). For \alla kai\ see also strkjv@12:7; strkjv@24:22|. \Alla\ can mean "yea," though it often means "but." Here it depends on how one construes Luke's meaning. If he means that he was dependent on casual scraps and it was so bad that even the wild dogs moreover were his companions in misery, the climax came that he was able to drive away the dogs. The other view is that his hunger was unsatisfied, but even the dogs increased his misery. {Licked his sores} (\epeleichon ta helkˆ autou\). Imperfect active of \epileich“\, a late vernacular _Koin‚_ verb, to lick over the surface. It is not clear whether the licking of the sores by the dogs added to the misery of Lazarus or gave a measure of comfort, as he lay in his helpless condition. "Furrer speaks of witnessing dogs and lepers waiting together for the refuse" (Bruce). It was a scramble between the dogs and Lazarus.

rwp@Luke:18:9 @{Set all others at naught} (\exouthenountas tous loipous\). A late verb \exouthene“\, like \oudene“\, from \outhen\ (\ouden\), to consider or treat as nothing. In LXX and chiefly in Luke and Paul in the N.T.

rwp@Luke:19:8 @{Stood} (\statheis\). Apparently Jesus and Zacchaeus had come to the house of Zacchaeus and were about to enter when the murmur became such a roar that Zacchaeus turned round and faced the crowd. {If I have wrongfully exacted aught of any man} (\ei tinos ti esukophantˆsa\). A most significant admission and confession. It is a condition of the first class (\ei\ and the aorist active indicative) that assumes it to be true. His own conscience was at work. He may have heard audible murmurs from the crowd. For the verb \sukophantein\, see discussion on ¯3:14|, the only two instances in the N.T. He had extorted money wrongfully as they all knew. {I return fourfold} (\apodid“mi tetraploun\). I offer to do it here and now on this spot. This was the Mosaic law (Exodus:22:1; strkjv@Numbers:5:6f.|). Restitution is good proof of a change of heart. D. L. Moody used to preach it with great power. Without this the offer of Zacchaeus to give half his goods to the poor would be less effective. "It is an odd coincidence, nothing more, that the fig-mulberry (sycamore) should occur in connexion with the _fig_-shewer (sycophant)."

rwp@Luke:19:45 @{Began to cast out} (\ˆrxato ekballein\). Songs:Mark:11:15| whereas strkjv@Matthew:21:12| has simply "he cast out." See Mark and Matthew for discussion of this second cleansing of the temple at the close of the public ministry in relation to the one at the beginning in strkjv@John:2:14-22|. There is nothing gained by accusing John or the Synoptics of a gross chronological blunder. There was abundant time in these three years for all the abuses to be revived.

rwp@Luke:23:2 @{Began to accuse} (\ˆrxanto katˆgorein\). They went at it and kept it up. Luke mentions three, but neither of them includes their real reason nor do they mention their own condemnation of Jesus. They had indulged their hatred in doing it, but they no longer have the power of life and death. Hence they say nothing to Pilate of that. {We found} (\heuramen\). Second aorist active indicative with first aorist vowel \a\. Probably they mean that they had caught Jesus in the act of doing these things (_in flagrante delicto_) rather than discovery by formal trial. {Perverting our nation} (\diastrephonta to ethnos hˆm“n\). Present active participle of \diastreph“\, old verb to turn this way and that, distort, disturb. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:13:10|. The Sanhedrin imply that the great popularity of Jesus was seditious. {Forbidding to give tribute to Caesar}, (\k“luonta phorous kaisari didonai\). Note object infinitive \didonai\ after the participle \k“luonta\. Literally, hindering giving tribute to Caesar. This was a flat untruth. Their bright young students had tried desperately to get Jesus to say this very thing, but they had failed utterly (Luke:20:25|). {Saying that he himself is Christ a king} (\legonta hauton Christon basilea einai\). Note the indirect discourse here after the participle \legonta\ with the accusative (\hauton\ where \auton\ could have been used), and the infinitive. This charge is true, but not in the sense meant by them. Jesus did claim to be the Christ and the king of the kingdom of God. But the Sanhedrin wanted Pilate to think that he set himself up as a rival to Caesar. Pilate would understand little from the word "Christ," but "King" was a different matter. He was compelled to take notice of this charge else he himself would be accused to Caesar of winking at such a claim by Jesus.

rwp@Luke:23:11 @{Set him at nought} (\exouthenˆsas\). First aorist active participle from \exouthene“\, to count as nothing, to treat with utter contempt, as zero. {Arraying him in gorgeous apparel} (\peribal“n esthˆta lampran\). Second aorist active participle of \periball“\, to fling around one. \Lampran\ is brilliant, shining as in strkjv@James:2:2|, so different from the modest dress of the Master. This was part of the shame.

rwp@Luke:23:40 @{Rebuking} (\epitim“n\). From what Mark and Matthew say both robbers sneered at Jesus at first, but this one came to himself and turned on his fellow robber in a rage. {Dost thou not even fear God?} (\Oude phobˆi ton theon;\). \Oude\ here goes with the verb. \Phobˆi\ (second person singular present indicative middle of \phobeomai\. Both of you will soon appear before God. Jesus has nothing to answer for and you have added this to your other sins.

rwp@Luke:23:41 @{Nothing amiss} (\ouden atopon\). Nothing out of place (\a\ privative, \topos\, place). Old word, three times in the N.T. (Luke:23:44; strkjv@Acts:28:6; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:2|). This can only mean that this robber accepts the claims of Jesus to be true. He is dying for claiming to be Messiah, as he is.

rwp@Info_Mark @ This Gospel is the briefest of the four, but is fullest of striking details that apparently came from Peter's discourses which Mark heard, such as green grass, flower beds (Mark:6:38|), two thousand hogs (Mark:5:13|), looking round about (Mark:3:5,34|). Peter usually spoke in Aramaic and Mark has more Aramaic phrases than the others, like _Boanerges_ (Mark:3:17|), _Talitha cumi_ (Mark:5:41|), _Korban_ (Mark:7:11|), _Ephphatha_ (Mark:7:34|), _Abba_ (Mark:14:36|). The Greek is distinctly vernacular _Koin‚_ like one-eyed (\monophthalmon\, strkjv@Mark:9:47|) as one would expect from both Peter and Mark. There are also more Latin phrases and idioms like _centurio_ (Mark:15:39|), _quadrans_ (Mark:12:42|), _flagellare_ (Mark:15:15|), _speculator_ (Mark:6:27|), _census_ (Mark:12:14|), _sextarius_ (Mark:7:4|), _praetorium_ (Mark:15:6|), than in the other Gospels, so much so that C. H. Turner raises the question whether Mark wrote first in Latin, or at any rate in Rome. There are some who hold that Mark wrote first in Aramaic, but the facts are sufficiently accounted for by the fact of Peter's preaching and the activity in Rome. Some even think that he wrote the Gospel in Rome while with Peter who suggested and read the manuscript. B.W. Bacon holds that this Gospel has a distinct Pauline flavour and may have had several recensions. The Ur-Marcus theory does not have strong support now. Mark was once a co-worker with Barnabas and Paul, but deserted them at Perga. Paul held this against Mark and refused to take him on the second mission tour. Barnabas took Mark, his cousin, with him and then he appeared with Simon Peter with whom he did his greatest work. When Mark had made good with Barnabas and Peter, Paul rejoiced and commends him heartily to the Colossians (Colossians:4:10|) In the end Paul will ask Timothy to pick up Mark and bring him along with him to Paul in Rome, for he has found him useful for ministry, this very young man who made such a mistake that Paul would have no more of him. This tribute to Mark by Paul throws credit upon both of them as is shown in my _Making Good in the Ministry_. The character of the Gospel of Mark is determined largely by the scope of Peter's preaching as we see it in strkjv@Acts:10:36-42|, covering the period in outline from John the Baptist to the Resurrection of Jesus. There is nothing about the birth of the Baptist or of Jesus. This peculiarity of Mark's Gospel cannot be used against the narratives of the Virgin Birth of Jesus in Matthew and Luke, since Mark tells nothing whatever about his birth at all.

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

rwp@Mark: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:6:6 @{And he marvelled because of their unbelief} (\kai ethaumasen dia tˆn apistian aut“n\). Aorist tense, but Westcott and Hort put the imperfect in the margin. Jesus had divine knowledge and accurate insight into the human heart, but he had human limitations in certain things that are not clear to us. He marvelled at the faith of the Roman centurion where one would not expect faith (Matthew:8:10; strkjv@Luke:7:9|). Here he marvels at the lack of faith where he had a right to expect it, not merely among the Jews, but in his own home town, among his kinspeople, even in his own home. One may excuse Mary, the mother of Jesus, from this unbelief, puzzled, as she probably was, by his recent conduct (Mark:3:21,31|). There is no proof that she ever lost faith in her wonderful Son. {He went round about the villages teaching} (\periˆgen tƒs k“mas kukl“i didask“n\). A good illustration of the frequent poor verse division. An entirely new paragraph begins with these words, the third tour of Galilee. They should certainly be placed with verse 7|. The Revised Version would be justified if it had done nothing else than give us paragraphs according to the sense and connection. "Jesus resumes the role of a wandering preacher in Galilee" (Bruce). Imperfect tense, \periˆgen\.

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:8:17 @Mark here (vv. 17-20|) gives six keen questions of Jesus while strkjv@Matthew:16:8-11| gives as four that really include the six of Mark running some together. The questions reveal the disappointment of Jesus at the intellectual dulness of his pupils. The questions concern the intellect (\noeite\, from \nous, suniete\, comprehend), the heart in a {hardened state} (\pep“r“menˆn\, perfect passive predicate participle as in strkjv@Mark:6:52|, which see), the eyes, the ears, the memory of both the feeding of the five thousand and the four thousand here sharply distinguished even to the two kinds of baskets (\kophinous, sphurid“n\). The disciples did recall the number of baskets left over in each instance, twelve and seven. Jesus "administers a sharp rebuke for their preoccupation with mere temporalities, as if there were nothing higher to be thought of _than bread_" (Bruce). "For the time the Twelve are way-side hearers, with hearts like a beaten path, into which the higher truths cannot sink so as to germinate" (Bruce).

rwp@Mark:8:32 @{Spake the saying openly} (\parrˆsiƒi ton logon elalei\). He held back nothing, told it all (\pƒn\, all, \rˆsia\, from \eipon\, say), without reserve, to all of them. Imperfect tense \elalei\ shows that Jesus did it repeatedly. Mark alone gives this item. Mark does not give the great eulogy of Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:17,19| after his confession (Mark:8:29; strkjv@Matthew:16:16; strkjv@Luke:9:20|), but he does tell the stinging rebuke given Peter by Jesus on this occasion. See discussion on ¯Matthew:16:21,26|.

rwp@Mark:9:50 @{Have salt in yourselves} (\echete en heautois hala\). Jesus had once called them the salt of the earth (Matthew:5:13|) and had warned them against losing the saltness of the salt. If it is \analon\, nothing can {season} (\artu“\) it and it is of no use to season anything else. It is like an exploded shell, a burnt-out crater, a spent force. This is a warning for all Christians.

rwp@Mark:14:61 @{And answered nothing} (\kai ouk apekrinato ouden\). Mark adds the negative statement to the positive "kept silent" (\esi“pƒ\), imperfect, also in Matthew. Mark does not give the solemn oath in Matthew under which Jesus had to answer. See on Matthew.

rwp@Mark:15:21 @{They compel} (\aggareuousin\). Dramatic present indicative again where strkjv@Matthew:27:32| has the aorist. For this Persian word see on ¯Matthew:5:41; strkjv@27:32|. {Coming out of the country} (\erchomenon ap' agrou\). Hence Simon met the procession. Mark adds that he was "the father of Alexander and Rufus." Paul mentions a Rufus in strkjv@Romans:16:13|, but it was a common name and proves nothing. See on ¯Matthew:27:32| for discussion of cross-bearing by criminals. Luke adds "after Jesus" (\opisthen tou Iˆsou\). But Jesus bore his own cross till he was relieved of it, and he walked in front of his own cross for the rest of the way.

rwp@Mark:16:8 @{Had come upon them} (\eichen autas\). Imperfect tense, more exactly, {held them, was holding them fast}. {Trembling and astonishment} (\tromos kai ekstasis\, trembling and ecstasy), Mark has it, while strkjv@Matthew:28:8| has "with fear and great joy" which see for discussion. Clearly and naturally their emotions were mixed. {They said nothing to any one} (\oudeni ouden eipan\). This excitement was too great for ordinary conversation. strkjv@Matthew:28:8| notes that they "ran to bring his disciples word." Hushed to silence their feet had wings as they flew on. {For they were afraid} (\ephobounto gar\). Imperfect tense. The continued fear explains their continued silence. At this point Aleph and B, the two oldest and best Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, stop with this verse. Three Armenian MSS. also end here. Some documents (cursive 274 and Old Latin k) have a shorter ending than the usual long one. The great mass of the documents have the long ending seen in the English versions. Some have both the long and the short endings, like L, Psi, 0112, 099, 579, two Bohairic MSS; the Harklean Syriac (long one in the text, short one in the Greek margin). One Armenian MS. (at Edschmiadzin) gives the long ending and attributes it to Ariston (possibly the Aristion of Papias). W (the Washington Codex) has an additional verse in the long ending. Songs:the facts are very complicated, but argue strongly against the genuineness of verses 9-20| of Mark 16. There is little in these verses not in strkjv@Matthew:28|. It is difficult to believe that Mark ended his Gospel with verse 8| unless he was interrupted. A leaf or column may have been torn off at the end of the papyrus roll. The loss of the ending was treated in various ways. Some documents left it alone. Some added one ending, some another, some added both. A full discussion of the facts is found in the last chapter of my _Studies in Mark's Gospel_ and also in my _Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament_, pp. 214-16.

rwp@Info_Matthew @ If the book is genuine, as I believe, the date becomes a matter of interest. Here again there is nothing absolutely decisive save that it is later than the Gospel according to Mark which it apparently uses. If Mark is given an early date, between A.D. 50 to 60, then Matthew's book may be between 60 and 70, though many would place it between 70 and 80. It is not certain whether Luke wrote after Matthew or not, though that is quite possible. There is no definite use of Matthew by Luke that has been shown. One guess is as good as another and each decides by his own predilections. My own guess is that A.D. 60 is as good as any.

rwp@Info_Matthew @ In the Gospel itself we find Matthew the publican (Matthew:9:9; strkjv@10:3|) though Mark (Mark:2:14|) and Luke (Luke:5:27|) call him Levi the publican. Evidently therefore he had two names like John Mark. It is significant that Jesus called this man from so disreputable a business to follow him. He was apparently not a disciple of John the Baptist. He was specially chosen by Jesus to be one of the Twelve Apostles, a business man called into the ministry as was true of the fishermen James and John, Andrew and Simon. In the lists of the Apostles he comes either seventh or eighth. There is nothing definite told about him in the Gospels apart from the circle of the Twelve after the feast which he gave to his fellow publicans in honor of Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:1:18 @{Of the Holy Ghost} (\ek pneumatos hagiou\). The discovery that Mary was pregnant was inevitable and it is plain that she had not told Joseph. She "was found with child" (\heurethˆ en gastri echousa\). This way of putting it, the usual Greek idiom, plainly shows that it was the discovery that shocked Joseph. He did not as yet know what Matthew plainly asserts that the Holy Ghost, not Joseph and not any man, was responsible for the pregnancy of Mary. The problem of the Virgin Birth of Jesus has been a disturbing fact to some through all the ages and is today to those who do not believe in the pre-existence of Christ, the Son of God, before his Incarnation on earth. This is the primal fact about the Birth of Christ. The Incarnation of Christ is clearly stated by Paul (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|; and involved in strkjv@Colossians:1:15-19|) and by John (John:1:14; strkjv@17:5|). If one frankly admits the actual pre-existence of Christ and the real Incarnation, he has taken the longest and most difficult step in the matter of the supernatural Birth of Christ. That being true, no merely human birth without the supernatural element can possibly explain the facts. Incarnation is far more than the Indwelling of God by the Holy Spirit in the human heart. To admit real incarnation and also full human birth, both father and mother, creates a greater difficulty than to admit the Virgin Birth of Jesus begotten by the Holy Spirit, as Matthew here says, and born of the Virgin Mary. It is true that only Matthew and Luke tell the story of the supernatural birth of Jesus, though strkjv@John:1:14| seems to refer to it. Mark has nothing whatever concerning the birth and childhood of Jesus and so cannot be used as a witness on the subject. Both Matthew and Luke present the birth of Jesus as not according to ordinary human birth. Jesus had no human father. There is such a thing in nature as parthenogenesis in the lower orders of life. But that scientific fact has no bearing here. We see here God sending his Son into the world to be the world's Saviour and he gave him a human mother, but not a human father so that Jesus Christ is both Son of God and Son of Man, the God Man. Matthew tells the story of the birth of Jesus from the standpoint of Joseph as Luke gives it from the standpoint of Mary. The two narratives harmonize with each other. One credits these most wonderful of all birth narratives according as he believes in the love and power of Almighty God to do what he wills. There is no miracle with God who has all power and all knowledge. The laws of nature are simply the expression of God's will, but he has not revealed all his will in the laws that we discover. God is Spirit. He is Person. He holds in his own power all life. strkjv@John:3:16| is called the Little Gospel because it puts briefly the love of God for men in sending his own Son to live and die for us.

rwp@Matthew:2:22 @{Warned in a dream} (\chrˆmatistheis kat' onar\). He was already afraid to go to Judea because Archelaus was reigning (ruling, not technically king, \basileuei\). In a fret at last before his death Herod had changed his will again and put Archelaus, the worst of his living sons, in the place of Antipas. Songs:Joseph went to Galilee. Matthew has had nothing about the previous dwelling of Joseph and Mary in Nazareth. We learn that from Luke who tells nothing of the flight into Egypt. The two narratives supplement one another and are in no sense contradictory.

rwp@Matthew:4:12 @{Now when he heard} (\akousas de\). The reason for Christ's return to Galilee is given here to be that John had been delivered up into prison. The Synoptic Gospels skip from the temptation of Jesus to the Galilean ministry, a whole year. But for strkjv@John:1:19-3:36| we should know nothing of the "year of obscurity" (Stalker). John supplies items to help fill in the picture. Christ's work in Galilee began after the close of the active ministry of the Baptist who lingered on in prison for a year or more.

rwp@Matthew:5:43 @{And hate thine enemy} (\kai misˆseis\). This phrase is not in strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|, but is a rabbinical inference which Jesus repudiates bluntly. The Talmud says nothing of love to enemies. Paul in strkjv@Romans:12:20| quotes strkjv@Proverbs:25:22| to prove that we ought to treat our enemies kindly. Jesus taught us to pray for our enemies and did it himself even when he hung upon the cross. Our word "neighbour" is "nigh-bor," one who is nigh or near like the Greek word \plˆsion\ here. But proximity often means strife and not love. Those who have adjoining farms or homes may be positively hostile in spirit. The Jews came to look on members of the same tribe as neighbours as even Jews everywhere. But they hated the Samaritans who were half Jews and lived between Judea and Galilee. Jesus taught men how to act as neighbours by the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke:10:29ff.|).

rwp@Matthew:6:27 @{Unto his stature} (\epi tˆn hˆlikian autou\). The word \hˆlikian\ is used either of height (stature) or length of life (age). Either makes good sense here, though probably "stature" suits the context best. Certainly anxiety will not help either kind of growth, but rather hinder by auto-intoxication if nothing more. This is no plea for idleness, for even the birds are diligent and the flowers grow.

rwp@Matthew:8:29 @{Thou Son of God} (\huie tou theou\). The recognition of Jesus by the demons is surprising. The whole subject of demonology is difficult. Some hold that it is merely the ancient way of describing disease. But that does not explain the situation here. Jesus is represented as treating the demons as real existences separate from the human personality. Missionaries in China today claim that they have seen demons cast out. The devil knew Jesus clearly and it is not strange that Jesus was recognized by the devil's agents. They know that there is nothing in common between them and the Son of God (\hˆmin kai soi\, ethical dative) and they fear torment "before the time" (\pro kairou\). Usually \ta daimonia\ is the word in the New Testament for demons, but in strkjv@8:31| we have \hoi daimones\ (the only example in the N.T.). \Daimonion\ is a diminutive of \daim“n\. In Homer \daim“n\ is used synonymously with \theos\ and \thea\. Hesiod employed \daim“n\ of men of the golden age as tutelary deities. Homer has the adjective \daimonios\ usually in an evil sense. Empedocles considered the demons both bad and good. They were thus used to relieve the gods and goddesses of much rascality. Grote (_History of Greece_) notes that the Christians were thus by pagan usage justified in calling idolatry the worship of demons. See strkjv@1Corinthians:10:20f.; strkjv@1Timothy:4:1; strkjv@Revelation:9:20; strkjv@16:13f|. In the Gospels demons are the same as unclean spirits (Mark:5:12,15; strkjv@3:22,30; strkjv@Luke:4:33|). The demons are disturbers (Vincent) of the whole life of man (Mark:5:2f.; strkjv@7:25; strkjv@Matthew:12:45; strkjv@Luke:13:11,16|).

rwp@Matthew:9:14 @{The disciples of John} (\hoi mathˆtai I“anou\). One is surprised to find disciples of the Baptist in the role of critics of Christ along with the Pharisees. But John was languishing in prison and they perhaps were blaming Jesus for doing nothing about it. At any rate John would not have gone to Levi's feast on one of the Jewish fast-days. "The strict asceticism of the Baptist (11:18|) and of the Pharisaic rabbis (Luke:18:12|) was imitated by their disciples" (McNeile).

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

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

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

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

rwp@Matthew:16:26 @{Gain} (\kerdˆsˆi\) and {profit} (\zˆmi“thˆi\). Both aorist subjunctives (one active, the other passive) and so punctiliar action, condition of third class, undetermined, but with prospect of determination. Just a supposed case. The verb for "forfeit" occurs in the sense of being fined or mulcted of money. Songs:the papyri and inscriptions. {Exchange} (\antallagma\). As an exchange, accusative in apposition with \ti\. The soul has no market price, though the devil thinks so. "A man must give, surrender, his life, and nothing less to God; no \antallagma\ is possible" (McNeile). This word \antallagma\ occurs twice in the _Wisdom of Sirach_: "There is no exchange for a faithful friend" (6:15); "There is no exchange for a well-instructed soul" (26:14).

rwp@Matthew:25:30 @{The unprofitable} (\ton achreion\). Useless (\a\ privative and \chreios\, useful) and so unprofitable, injurious. Doing nothing is doing harm.

rwp@Matthew:26:6 @{In the house of Simon the leper} (\en oikiƒi Sim“nos tou leprou\). Evidently a man who had been healed of his leprosy by Jesus who gave the feast in honour of Jesus. All sorts of fantastic theories have arisen about it. Some even identify this Simon with the one in strkjv@Luke:7:36ff.|, but Simon was a very common name and the details are very different. Some hold that it was Martha's house because she served (John:12:2|) and that Simon was either the father or husband of Martha, but Martha loved to serve and that proves nothing. Some identify Mary of Bethany with the sinful woman in strkjv@Luke:7| and even with Mary Magdalene, both gratuitous and groundless propositions. For the proof that Mary of Bethany, Mary Magdalene, and the sinful woman of strkjv@Luke:7| are all distinct see my _Some Minor Characters in the New Testament_. John (John:12:1|) apparently locates the feast six days before the passover, while Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (26:6|) seem to place it on the Tuesday evening (Jewish Wednesday) just two days before the passover meal. It is possible that John anticipates the date and notes the feast at Bethany at this time because he does not refer to Bethany again. If not, the order of Mark must be followed. According to the order of Mark and Matthew, this feast took place at the very time that the Sanhedrin was plotting about the death of Jesus (Mark:14:1f.|).

rwp@Matthew:26:8 @{This waste} (\hˆ ap“leia hautˆ\). Dead loss (\ap“leia\) they considered it, nothing but sentimental aroma. It was a cruel shock to Mary of Bethany to hear this comment. Matthew does not tell as John does (John:12:4|) that it was Judas who made the point which the rest endorsed. Mark explains that they mentioned "three hundred pence," while Matthew (26:9|) only says "for much" (\pollou\).

rwp@Matthew:27:3 @{Repented himself} (\metamelˆtheis\). Probably Judas saw Jesus led away to Pilate and thus knew that the condemnation had taken place. This verb (first aorist passive participle of \metamelomai\) really means to be sorry afterwards like the English word _repent_ from the Latin _repoenitet_, to have pain again or afterwards. See the same verb \metamelˆtheis\ in strkjv@Matthew:21:30| of the boy who became sorry and changed to obedience. The word does not have an evil sense in itself. Paul uses it of his sorrow for his sharp letter to the Corinthians, a sorrow that ceased when good came of the letter (2Corinthians:7:8|). But mere sorrow avails nothing unless it leads to change of mind and life (\metanoia\), the sorrow according to God (2Corinthians:7:9|). This sorrow Peter had when he wept bitterly. It led Peter back to Christ. But Judas had only remorse that led to suicide.

rwp@Matthew:27:46 @{My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?} (\Thee mou, thee mou, hina ti me egkatelipes;\). Matthew first transliterates the Aramaic, according to the Vatican manuscript (B), the words used by Jesus: _El“i, el“i, lema sabachthanei_; Some of the MSS. give the transliteration of these words from strkjv@Psalms:22:1| in the Hebrew (_Eli, Eli, lama Zaphthanei_). This is the only one of the seven sayings of Christ on the Cross given by Mark and Matthew. The other six occur in Luke and John. This is the only sentence of any length in Aramaic preserved in Matthew, though he has Aramaic words like amen, corban, mammon, pascha, raca, Satan, Golgotha. The so-called Gospel of Peter preserves this saying in a Docetic (Cerinthian) form: "My power, my power, thou hast forsaken me!" The Cerinthian Gnostics held that the _aeon_ Christ came on the man Jesus at his baptism and left him here on the Cross so that only the man Jesus died. Nothing from Jesus so well illustrates the depth of his suffering of soul as he felt himself regarded as sin though sinless (2Corinthians:5:21|). strkjv@John:3:16| comes to our relief here as we see the Son of God bearing the sin of the world. This cry of desolation comes at the close of the three hours of darkness.

rwp@Matthew:27:63 @{Sir, we remember} (\kurie, emnesthˆmen\). This was the next day, on our Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath, the day after the Preparation (Matthew:27:62|). Ingressive aorist indicative, we have just recalled. It is objected that the Jewish rulers would know nothing of such a prediction, but in strkjv@Matthew:12:40| he expressly made it to them. Meyer scouts as unhistorical legend the whole story that Christ definitely foretold his resurrection on the third day. But that is to make legendary much of the Gospels and to limit Jesus to a mere man. The problem remains why the disciples forgot and the Jewish leaders remembered. But that is probably due on the one hand to the overwhelming grief of the disciples coupled with the blighting of all their hopes of a political Messiah in Jesus, and on the other hand to the keen nervous fear of the leaders who dreaded the power of Jesus though dead. They wanted to make sure of their victory and prevent any possible revival of this pernicious heresy. {That deceiver} (\ekeinos ho planos\) they call him, a vagabond wanderer (\planos\) with a slur in the use of {that} (\ekeinos\), a picturesque sidelight on their intense hatred of and fear of Jesus.

rwp@Philemon:1:14 @{Without thy mind} (\ch“ris tˆs sˆs gn“mˆs\). Judgment, purpose (1Corinthians:1:10; strkjv@7:25|). Ablative case with \ch“ris\ (apart from). {I would do nothing} (\ouden ˆthelˆsa poiˆsai\). First aorist active indicative of \thel“\, I decided, I wished, decision reached (cf. \eboulomˆn\ in verse 13|. {Thy goodness} (\to agathon sou\). Neuter articular adjective (thy good deed). {As of necessity} (\h“s kata anagkˆn\). "As if according to compulsion." See strkjv@2Corinthians:9:7|. {But of free will} (\alla kata hekousion\). According to what is voluntary (Numbers:15:3|). Perhaps \tropon\ (way, manner) is to be understood with the adjective \hekousios\ (old word, here alone in N.T.), from \hek“n\ (1Corinthians:9:17; strkjv@Romans:8:20|).

rwp@Philippians:2:12 @{Not as in my presence only} (\mˆ h“s en tˆi parousiƒi monon\). B and a few other MSS. omit \h“s\. The negative \mˆ\ goes with the imperative \katergazesthe\ (work out), not with \hupˆkousate\ (obeyed) which would call for \ouch\. {Much more} (\poll“i mallon\). They are not to render eye-service only when Paul is there, but much more when he is away. {Work out} (\katergazesthe\). Perfective use of \kata\ (down) in composition, work on to the finish. This exhortation assumes human free agency in the carrying on the work of one's salvation. {With fear and trembling} (\meta phobou kai tromou\). "Not slavish terror, but wholesome, serious caution" (Vincent). "A nervous and trembling anxiety to do right" (Lightfoot). Paul has no sympathy with a cold and dead orthodoxy or formalism that knows nothing of struggle and growth. He exhorts as if he were an Arminian in addressing men. He prays as if he were a Calvinist in addressing God and feels no inconsistency in the two attitudes. Paul makes no attempt to reconcile divine sovereignty and human free agency, but boldly proclaims both.

rwp@Philippians:3:12 @{Not that} (\ouch hoti\). To guard against a misunderstanding as in strkjv@John:6:26; strkjv@12:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:24; strkjv@Phillipians:4:11,17|. {I have already obtained} (\ˆdˆ elabon\). Rather, "I did already obtain," constative second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\, summing up all his previous experiences as a single event. {Or am already made perfect} (\ˆ ˆdˆ tetelei“mai\). Perfect passive indicative (state of completion) of \teleio“\, old verb from \teleios\ and that from \telos\ (end). Paul pointedly denies that he has reached a spiritual impasse of non- development. Certainly he knew nothing of so-called sudden absolute perfection by any single experience. Paul has made great progress in Christlikeness, but the goal is still before him, not behind him. {But I press on} (\di“k“ de\). He is not discouraged, but encouraged. He keeps up the chase (real idea in \di“k“\, as in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:1; strkjv@Romans:9:30; strkjv@1Timothy:6:11|). {If so be that} (\ei kai\). "I follow after." The condition (third class, \ei--katalab“\, second aorist active subjunctive of \katalamban“\) is really a sort of purpose clause or aim. There are plenty of examples in the _Koin‚_ of the use of \ei\ and the subjunctive as here (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1017), "if I also may lay hold of that for which (\eph' h“i\, purpose expressed by \epi\) I was laid hold of (\katelˆmphthˆn\, first aorist passive of the same verb \katalamban“\) by Christ Jesus." His conversion was the beginning, not the end of the chase.

rwp@Philippians:4:6 @{In nothing be anxious} (\mˆden merimnƒte\). Present imperative in prohibition, "stop being anxious." See \mˆ merimnƒte\ in strkjv@Matthew:6:31|. {With thanksgiving} (\meta eucharistias\). In all the forms of prayer here named thanksgiving should appear.

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:4:4 @{Round about the throne} (\kuklothen tou thronou\). Here as a preposition with the genitive, though only adverb in strkjv@4:8| (only N.T. examples save Textus Rec. in strkjv@5:11|). {Four and twenty thrones} (\thronoi eikosi tessares\). Songs:P Q, but Aleph A have accusative \thronous\ (supply \eidon\ from strkjv@4:1|) and \tessares\ (late accusative in \-es\). This further circle of thrones beyond the great throne. {I saw four and twenty elders} (\eikosi tessaras presbuterous\). No \eidon\ in the text, but the accusative case calls for it. Twenty-four as a symbolic number occurs only in this book and only for these elders (4:4,10; strkjv@5:8; strkjv@11:16; strkjv@19:4|). We do not really know why this number is chosen, perhaps two elders for each tribe, perhaps the twelve tribes and the twelve apostles (Judaism and Christianity), perhaps the twenty-four courses of the sons of Aaron (1Chronicles:24:1-19|), perhaps some angelic rank (Colossians:1:16|) of which we know nothing. Cf. strkjv@Ephesians:2:6|. {Sitting} (\kathˆmenous\). Upon their thrones. {Arrayed} (\peribeblˆmenous\). Perfect passive participle of \periball“\ (to throw around). {In white garments} (\himatiois leukois\). Locative case here as in strkjv@3:5| (with \en\), though accusative in strkjv@7:9,13|. {Crowns of gold} (\stephanous chrusous\). Accusative case again like \presbuterous\ after \eidon\ (4:1|), not \idou\. In strkjv@19:14| \ech“n\ (having) is added. John uses \diadˆma\ (diadem) for the kingly crown in strkjv@12:3; strkjv@13:1; strkjv@19:12|, but it is not certain that the old distinction between \diadem\ as the kingly crown and \stephanos\ as the victor's wreath is always observed in late Greek.

rwp@Revelation:6:2 @{And I saw and behold} (\kai eidon kai idou\). This combination is frequent in the Apocalypse (4:1; strkjv@6:2,5,8; strkjv@14:1,14; strkjv@19:11|). {A white horse} (\hippos leukos\). In strkjv@Zechariah:6:1-8| we have red, black, white, and grizzled bay horses like the four winds of heaven, ministers to do God's will. White seems to be the colour of victory (cf. the white horse of the Persian Kings) like the white horse ridden by the Roman conqueror in a triumphant procession. {Had} (\ech“n\). Agreeing in gender and case with \ho kathˆmenos\. {A bow} (\toxon\). Old word (Zechariah:9:13f.| of a great bow), here only in N.T. {Was given} (\edothˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \did“mi\. {A crown} (\stephanos\). See on ¯4:4| for this word. {He came forth} (\exˆlthen\). Second aorist active indicative of \exerchomai\, either to come out or to go out (went forth). {Conquering} (\nik“n\). Present active participle of \nika“\. {And to conquer} (\kai hina nikˆsˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \nika“\. Here \h“s nikˆs“n\ (future active participle with \h“s\) could have been used. The aorist tense here points to ultimate victory. Commentators have been busy identifying the rider of the white horse according to their various theories. "It is tempting to identify him with the Rider on the white horse in strkjv@19:11f.|, whose name is 'the Word of God'" (Swete). Tempting, "but the two riders have nothing in common beyond the white horse."

rwp@Revelation:11:7 @{When they shall have finished} (\hotan teles“sin\). Merely the first aorist active subjunctive of \tele“\ with \hotan\ in an indefinite temporal clause with no _futurum exactum_ (future perfect), "whenever they finish." {The beast} (\to thˆrion\). "The wild beast comes out of the abyss" of strkjv@9:1f|. He reappears in strkjv@13:1; strkjv@17:8|. In strkjv@Daniel:7:3| \thˆria\ occurs. Nothing less than antichrist will satisfy the picture here. Some see the abomination of strkjv@Daniel:7:7; strkjv@Matthew:24:15|. Some see Nero _redivivus_. {He shall make war with them} (\poiˆsei met' aut“n polemon\). This same phrase occurs in strkjv@12:17| about the dragon's attack on the woman. It is more the picture of single combat (2:16|). {He shall overcome them} (\nikˆsei autous\). Future active of \nika“\. The victory of the beast over the two witnesses is certain, as in strkjv@Daniel:7:21|. {And kill them} (\kai apoktenei\). Future active of \apoktein“\. Without attempting to apply this prophecy to specific individuals or times, one can agree with these words of Swete: "But his words cover in effect all the martyrdoms and massacres of history in which brute force has seemed to triumph over truth and righteousness."

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

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

rwp@Romans:13:8 @{Save to love one another} (\ei mˆ to allˆlous agapƒin\). "Except the loving one another." This articular infinitive is in the accusative case the object of \opheilete\ and partitive apposition with \mˆden\ (nothing). This debt can never be paid off, but we should keep the interest paid up. {His neighbour} (\ton heteron\). "The other man," "the second man." "Just as in the relations of man and God \pistis\ has been substituted for \nomos\, so between man and man \agapˆ\ takes the place of definite legal relations" (Sanday and Headlam). See strkjv@Matthew:22:37-40| for the words of Jesus on this subject. Love is the only solution of our social relations and national problems.

rwp@Romans:14:3 @{Set at nought} (\exoutheneit“\). Present active imperative of \exouthene“\, to treat as nothing and so with contempt (Luke:23:11; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:20|). {Judge} (\krinet“\). Present active imperative of \krin“\, criticize. One side (the meat-eaters) despises the vegetarians, while the vegetarians criticize the meat-eaters. {Received him} (\auton proselabeto\). Aorist middle (indirect) of \proslamban“\, same verb used in verse 1|. God took both sides into his fellowship without requiring that they be vegetarians or meat-eaters.

rwp@Romans:15:33 @{The God of peace} (\ho theos tˆs eirˆnˆs\). One of the characteristics of God that Paul often mentions in benedictions (1Thessalonians:5:23; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:16; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11; strkjv@Phillipians:4:9; strkjv@Romans:16:20|). Because of the "amen" here some scholars would make this the close of the Epistle and make chapter 16 a separate Epistle to the Ephesians. But the MSS. are against it. There is nothing strange at all in Paul's having so many friends in Rome though he had not yet been there himself. Rome was the centre of the world's life as Paul realized (1:15|). All men sooner or later hoped to see Rome.

rwp@Romans:16:1 @{I commend} (\sunistˆmi\). The regular word for letters of commendation as in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:1| (\sustatik“n epistol“n\). See also strkjv@Romans:3:5|. Songs:here verses 1,2| constitute Paul's recommendation of Phoebe, the bearer of the Epistle. Nothing else is known of her, though her name (\Phoibˆ\) means bright or radiant. {Sister} (\adelphˆn\). In Christ, not in the flesh. {Who is a servant of the church} (\ousan diakonon tˆs ekklˆsias\). The etymology of \diakonos\ we have had repeatedly. The only question here is whether it is used in a general sense or in a technical sense as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:1; strkjv@1Timothy:3:8-13|. In favour of the technical sense of "deacon" or "deaconess" is the addition of "\tˆs ekklˆsias\" (of the church). In some sense Phoebe was a servant or minister of the church in Cenchreae. Besides, right in the midst of the discussion in strkjv@1Timothy:3:8-13| Paul has a discussion of \gunaikas\ (verse 11|) either as women as deaconesses or as the wives of deacons (less likely though possible). The _Apostolic Constitutions_ has numerous allusions to deaconesses. The strict separation of the sexes made something like deaconesses necessary for baptism, visiting the women, etc. Cenchreae, as the eastern port of Corinth, called for much service of this kind. Whether the deaconesses were a separate organization on a par with the deacons we do not know nor whether they were the widows alluded to in strkjv@1Timothy:5:9f|.

rwp@Romans:16:5 @{The church that is in their house} (\tˆn kat' oikon aut“n ekklˆsian\). The early Christians had no church buildings. See also strkjv@Acts:12:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:19; strkjv@Philemon:1:2; strkjv@Colossians:4:15|. The Roman Christians had probably several such homes where they would meet. {Epainetus} (\Epaineton\). Nothing is known of him except this item, "the first-fruits of Asia" (\aparchˆ tˆs Asias\). An early convert from the province of Asia. Cf. strkjv@Acts:2:9; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:15| (about Stephanus and Achaia).

rwp@Titus:3:12 @{When I shall send} (\hotan pemps“\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the first aorist active subjunctive (or future indicative) of \pemp“\ (same form). {Artemas} (\Artemƒn\). Perhaps abbreviation of Artemidorus. Nothing more is known of him. {Or Tychicus} (\ˆ Tuchikon\). Paul's well-known disciple (Colossians:4:7; strkjv@Ephesians:6:21; strkjv@2Timothy:4:12|). {To Nicopolis} (\eis Nikopolin\). Probably in Epirus, a good place for work in Dalmatia (2Timothy:4:10|). {I have determined} (\kekrika\). Perfect active indicative. I have decided. {To winter there} (\ekei paracheimasai\). First aorist active infinitive of \paracheimaz“\, a literary _Koin‚_ word for which see strkjv@Acts:27:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:6|.

rwp@Titus:3:13 @{Zenas the lawyer} (\Zˆnƒn ton nomikon\). Possibly abbreviation of Zenodorus and may be one of the bearers of the Epistle with Apollos. Probably an expert in the Mosaic law as the word means in the Gospels. A converted Jewish lawyer. The Latin term is _jurisconsultum_ for \nomikon\. {Apollos} (\Apoll“n\). Paul's friend (Acts:18:24-19:1; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:12ff.|). {Set forward} (\propempson\). First aorist active imperative of \propemp“\, old verb, to send on ahead (1Corinthians:16:6,11; strkjv@Romans:15:24|). {That nothing be wanting unto them} (\hina mˆden autois leipˆi\). Purpose with \hina\ and present (or second aorist \lipˆi\, some MSS.) subjunctive of \leip“\, old verb to leave, to remain, to lack. With dative case here (\autois\).

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Sun Jun 30 20:45:27 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020