Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-LAW.filter - rwp arise:


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

rwp@1Corinthians:7:12 @{But to the rest say I, not the Lord} (\tois de loipois leg“ eg“, ouch ho Kurios\). Paul has no word about marriage from Jesus beyond the problem of divorce. This is no disclaimer of inspiration. He simply means that here he is not quoting a command of Jesus. {An unbelieving wife} (\gunaika apiston\). This is a new problem, the result of work among the Gentiles, that did not arise in the time of Jesus. The form \apiston\ is the same as the masculine because a compound adjective. Paul has to deal with mixed marriages as missionaries do today in heathen lands. The rest (\hoi loipoi\) for Gentiles (Ephesians:2:3|) we have already had in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13; strkjv@5:6| which see. The Christian husband married his wife when he himself was an unbeliever. The word \apistos\ sometimes means unfaithful (Luke:12:46|), but not here (cf. strkjv@John:20:27|). {She is content} (\suneudokei\). Late compound verb to be pleased together with, agree together. In the papyri. {Let him not leave her} (\mˆ aphiet“ autˆn\). Perhaps here and in verses 11,13| \aphiˆmi\ should be translated "put away" like \apolu“\ in strkjv@Mark:10:1|. Some understand \aphiˆmi\ as separation from bed and board, not divorce.

rwp@1Corinthians:12:1 @{Now concerning spiritual gifts} (\peri de t“n pneumatik“n\). Clearly one of the items asked about in the letter to Paul (7:1|) and introduced precisely as the problem of meats offered to idols (8:1|). This question runs to the end of chapter 14. Plainly much trouble had arisen in Corinth in the exercise of these gifts.

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

rwp@1John:3:8 @{He that doeth sin} (\ho poi“n tˆn hamartian\). "He that keeps on doing sin" (the habit of sin). {Of the devil} (\ek tou diabolou\). In spiritual parentage as Jesus said of the Pharisees in strkjv@John:8:44|. When one acts like the devil he shows that he is not a true child of God. {Sinneth from the beginning} (\ap' archˆs hamartanei\). Linear progressive present active indicative, "he has been sinning from the beginning" of his career as the devil. This is his normal life and those who imitate him become his spiritual children. {That he might destroy} (\hina lusˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \lu“\. This purpose (\eis touto\) Jesus had and has. There is eternal conflict, with final victory over Satan certain.

rwp@1John:3:10 @{In this} (\en tout“i\). As already shown. A life of sin is proof that one is a child of the devil and not of God. This is the line of cleavage that is obvious to all. See strkjv@John:8:33-39| for the claim of the Pharisees to be the children of Abraham, whereas their conduct showed them to be children of the devil. This is not a popular note with an age that wishes to remove all distinctions between Christians and the world. {Doeth not righteousness} (\ho mˆ poi“n dikaiosunˆn\). Habit (linear present participle) again of not doing righteousness, as in verse 7| of doing it. Cf. \poiei\ and \mˆ poi“n\ (doing and not doing) in strkjv@Matthew:7:24,26|. {Neither} (\kai\). Literally, "and," but with the ellipsis of \ouk estin ek tou theou\ (is not of God). The addition here of this one item about not loving (\mˆ agap“n\) one's brother is like Paul's summary in strkjv@Romans:13:9|, a striking illustration of the general principle just laid down and in accord with strkjv@2:9-11|.

rwp@1Peter:1:3 @{Blessed be} (\eulogˆtos\). No copula in the Greek (\est“\, let be, or \estin\, is, or \eiˆ\, may be). The verbal adjective (from \euloge“\) occurs in the N.T. only of God, as in the LXX (Luke:1:68|). See also strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3; strkjv@Ephesians:1:3|. {The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\ho theos kai patˆr tou kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou Christou\). This precise language in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3; Ephesians:I:3|; and part of it in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:31; strkjv@Romans:15:6|. See strkjv@John:20:17| for similar language by Jesus. {Great} (\polu\). Much. {Begat us again} (\anagennˆsas hˆmƒs\). First aorist active articular (\ho\, who) participle of \anagenna“\, late, and rare word to beget again, in Aleph for _Sirach_ (_Prol_. 20), in Philo, in Hermetic writings, in N.T. only here and verse 23|. "It was probably borrowed by the New Paganism from Christianity" (Bigg). The Stoics used \anagennˆsis\ for \palingenesia\ (Titus:3:5|). If \an“then\ in strkjv@John:3:3| be taken to mean "again," the same idea of regeneration is there, and if "from above" it is the new birth, anyhow. {Unto a living hope} (\eis elpida z“san\). Peter is fond of the word "living" (present active participle of \za“\) as in strkjv@1:23; strkjv@2:4,5,24; strkjv@4:5,6|. The Pharisees cherished the hope of the resurrection (Acts:23:6|), but the resurrection of Jesus gave it proof and permanence (1Corinthians:15:14,17|). It is no longer a dead hope like dead faith (James:2:17,26|). This revival of hope was wrought "by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (\dia anastase“s\). Hope rose up with Christ from the dead, though the disciples (Peter included) were slow at first to believe it.

rwp@1Timothy:5:3 @{That are widows indeed} (\tas ont“s chˆras\). For \ont“s\ (actually, really), see strkjv@Luke:23:47; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:25|; and verse 5|. For widows (\chˆra\) see strkjv@Mark:12:40,42; strkjv@Acts:6:1; strkjv@1Corinthians:7:8|. Parry notes that in verses 3-8| Paul discusses widows who are in distress and 9-16| those who are in the employment of the local church for certain work. Evidently, as in Acts strkjv@6:1-6|, so here in Ephesus there had arisen some trouble over the widows in the church. Both for individual cases of need and as a class Timothy is to show proper respect (\timƒ\, keep on honouring) the widows.

rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ It is clear therefore that Paul wrote what we call I Corinthians in a disturbed state of mind. He had founded the church there, had spent two years there (Acts:18|), and took pardonable pride in his work there as a wise architect (1Corinthians:3:10|) for he had built the church on Christ as the foundation. He was anxious that his work should abide. It is plain that the disturbances in the church in Corinth were fomented from without by the Judaizers whom Paul had defeated at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:1-35; strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10|). They were overwhelmed there, but renewed their attacks in Antioch (Galatians:2:11-21|). Henceforth throughout the second mission tour they are a disturbing element in Galatia, in Corinth, in Jerusalem. While Paul is winning the Gentiles in the Roman Empire to Christ, these Judaizers are trying to win Paul's converts to Judaism. Nowhere do we see the conflict at so white a heat as in Corinth. Paul finally will expose them with withering sarcasm (2Corinthians:10-13|) as Jesus did the Pharisees in strkjv@Matthew:23| on that last day in the temple. Factional strife, immorality, perverted ideas about marriage, spiritual gifts, and the resurrection, these complicated problems are a vivid picture of church life in our cities today. The discussion of them shows Paul's manysidedness and also the powerful grasp that he has upon the realities of the gospel. Questions of casuistry are faced fairly and serious ethical issues are met squarely. But along with the treatment of these vexed matters Paul sings the noblest song of the ages on love (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13|) and writes the classic discussion on the resurrection (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:15|). If one knows clearly and fully the Corinthian Epistles and Paul's dealings with Corinth, he has an understanding of a large section of his life and ministry. No church caused him more anxiety than did Corinth (2Corinthians:11:28|).

rwp@2Corinthians:6:8 @{By glory and dishonour} (\dia doxˆs kai atimias\). Here \dia\ is no longer instrument, but state or condition. \Doxa\ here is glory. See strkjv@Romans:9:21; strkjv@2Timothy:2:20| for contrast between honour and dishonour (\timˆ, atimia\). {By evil report and good report} (\dia dusphˆmias kai euphˆmias\). Play on the words with prefixes \dus-\ and \eu-\ and \phˆmˆ\. \Dusphˆmia\ is a late word, only here in N.T. \Euphˆmia\, old and common word, only here in N.T. {As deceivers and yet true} (\h“s planoi kai alˆtheis\). Paul takes up \h“s\ now in place of \dia\ which succeeded \en\. Note use of \kai\ in sense of "and yet" (adversative). \Planos\ is late word (Diodorus, Josephus) for wandering, vagabond, impostor (cf. \plana“\, to lead astray, used of Christ, strkjv@John:7:12|). In N.T. only here; strkjv@Matthew:27:63| (of Christ by Pharisees); strkjv@2John:1:7|. "In the Clementines St. Paul is expressly described by his adversaries as \planos\ and as disseminating deceit (\planˆn\)" (Bernard). Such slander from one's enemies is praise.

rwp@2Peter:1:15 @Peter may also have had an intimation by vision of his approaching death (cf. the legend _Domine quo vadis_) as Paul often did (Acts:16:9; strkjv@18:9; strkjv@21:11; strkjv@23:11; strkjv@27:23|). {At every time} (\hekastote\). As need arises, old adverb, here alone in N.T. {After my decease} (\meta tˆn emˆn exodon\). For \exodos\ meaning death see strkjv@Luke:9:31|, and for departure from Egypt (way out, \ex, hodos\) see strkjv@Hebrews:11:22|, the only other N.T. examples. Here again Peter was present on the Transfiguration mount when the talk was about the "exodus" of Jesus from earth. {That ye may be able} (\echein humas\). Literally, "that ye may have it," the same idiom with \ech“\ and the infinitive in strkjv@Mark:14:8; strkjv@Matthew:18:25|. It is the object-infinitive after \spoudas“\ (I will give diligence, for which see verse 10|). {To call these things to remembrance} (\tˆn tout“n mnˆmˆn poieisthai\). Present middle infinitive of \poie“\ (as in verse 10|). \Mnˆmˆ\ is an old word (from \mnaomai\), here alone in N.T. This idiom, like the Latin _mentionem facere_, is common in the old writers (papyri also both for "mention" and "remembrance"), here only in N.T., but in strkjv@Romans:1:20| we have \mneian poioumai\ (I make mention). Either sense suits here. It is possible, as Irenaeus (iii. I. I) thought, that Peter had in mind Mark's Gospel, which would help them after Peter was gone. Mark's Gospel was probably already written at Peter's suggestion, but Peter may have that fact in mind here.

rwp@2Peter:1:19 @{The word of prophecy} (\ton prophˆtikon logon\). "The prophetic word." Cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:10|, a reference to all the Messianic prophecies. {Made more sure} (\bebaioteron\). Predicate accusative of the comparative adjective \bebaios\ (2Peter:1:10|). The Transfiguration scene confirmed the Messianic prophecies and made clear the deity of Jesus Christ as God's Beloved Son. Some with less likelihood take Peter to mean that the word of prophecy is a surer confirmation of Christ's deity than the Transfiguration. {Whereunto} (\h“i\). Dative of the relative referring to "the prophetic word made more sure." {That ye take heed} (\prosechontes\). Present active participle with \noun\ (mind) understood, "holding your mind upon" with the dative (\h“i\). {As unto a lamp} (\h“s luchn“i\). Dative also after \prosechontes\ of \luchnos\, old word (Matthew:5:15|). {Shining} (\phainonti\). Dative also present active participle of \phain“\, to shine (John:1:5|). Songs:of the Baptist (John:5:35|). {In a dark place} (\en auchmˆr“i top“i\). Old adjective, parched, squalid, dirty, dark, murky, here only in N.T., though in Aristotle and on tombstone for a boy. {Until the day dawn} (\he“s hou hˆmera diaugasˆi\). First aorist active subjunctive of \diaugaz“\ with temporal conjunction \he“s hou\, usual construction for future time. Late compound verb \diaugaz“\ (Polybius, Plutarch, papyri) from \dia\ and \augˆ\, to shine through, here only in N.T. {The day-star} (\ph“sphoros\). Old compound adjective (\ph“s\, light, \pher“\, to bring), light-bringing, light-bearer (Lucifer) applied to Venus as the morning star. Our word \phosphorus\ is this word. In the LXX \he“sphoros\ occurs. Cf. strkjv@Malachi:4:2; strkjv@Luke:1:76-79; strkjv@Revelation:22:16| for "dawn" applied to the Messiah. {Arise} (\anateilˆi\). First aorist active subjunctive of \anatell“\ (James:1:11; strkjv@Matthew:5:45|).

rwp@2Peter:2:1 @{But there arose} (\egenonto de\). Second aorist middle indicative of \ginomai\ (cf. \ginetai\ in strkjv@1:20|). {False prophets also} (\kai pseudoprophˆtai\). In contrast with the true prophets just pictured in strkjv@1:20f|. Late compound in LXX and Philo, common in N.T. (Matthew:7:15|). Allusion to the O.T. times like Balaam and others (Jeremiah:6:13; strkjv@28:9; strkjv@Ezekiel:13:9|). {False teachers} (\pseudodidaskaloi\). Late and rare compound (\pseudˆs, didaskalos\) here alone in N.T. Peter pictures them as in the future here (\esontai\, shall be) and again as already present (\eisin\, are, verse 17|), or in the past (\eplanˆthˆsan\, they went astray, verse 15|). {Shall privily bring in} (\pareisaxousin\). Future active of \pareisag“\, late double compound \pareisag“\, to bring in (\eisag“\), by the side (\para\), as if secretly, here alone in N.T., but see \pareisaktous\ in strkjv@Galatians:2:4| (verbal adjective of this same verb). {Destructive heresies} (\haireseis ap“leias\). Descriptive genitive, "heresies of destruction" (marked by destruction) as in strkjv@Luke:16:8|. \Hairesis\ (from \haire“\) is simply a choosing, a school, a sect like that of the Sadducees (Acts:5:17|), of the Pharisees (Acts:15:5|), and of Christians as Paul admitted (Acts:24:5|). These "tenets" (Galatians:5:20|) led to destruction. {Denying} (\arnoumenoi\). Present middle participle of \arneomai\. This the Gnostics did, the very thing that Peter did, alas (Matthew:26:70|) even after Christ's words (Matthew:10:33|). {Even the Master} (\kai ton despotˆn\). Old word for absolute master, here of Christ as in strkjv@Jude:1:4|, and also of God (Acts:4:24|). Without the evil sense in our "despot." {That bought them} (\ton agorasanta autous\). First aorist active articular participle of \agoraz“\, same idea with \lutro“\ in strkjv@1Peter:1:18f|. These were professing Christians, at any rate, these heretics. {Swift destruction} (\tachinˆn ap“leian\). See strkjv@1:14| for \tachinˆn\ and note repetition of \ap“leian\. This is always the tragedy of such false prophets, the fate that they bring on (\epagontes\) themselves.

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE TEXT OF THE ACTS A special problem arises concerning the text of Acts inasmuch as the Codex Bezae (D) with some other Western support presents a great many additions to the Neutral-Alexandrian text of Aleph A B C. Blass has even proposed the idea that Luke himself issued two editions of the book, an attractive hypothesis that is not generally accepted. J. M. Wilson has published _The Acts of the Apostles from Codex Bezae_. The whole subject is elaborately treated by J. H. Ropes in Vol. III, _The Text of Acts_ in Part I of _The Beginnings of Christianity_. Besides thorough discussion of all the problems of text involved Ropes gives the text of the Vatican Codex (B) on the left page and that of Codex Bezae (D) on the right, making comparison easy. Blass's ideas appear in his _Acta Apostolorum_.

rwp@Acts:4:1 @{The captain of the temple} (\ho stratˆgos tou hierou\). Twenty-four bands of Levites guarded the temple, one guard at a time. They watched the gates. The commander of each band was called captain (\stratˆgos\). Josephus names this captain of the temple police next to the high priest (_War_. VI. 5, 3). {The Sadducees} (\hoi Saddoukaioi\). Most of the priests were Sadducees now and all the chief priests since John Hyrcanus I deserted the Pharisees (Josephus, _Ant_. XVII. 10, 6; XVIII. 1, 4; XX. 9, 1). The Sadducees were slow to line up with the Pharisees against Jesus, but they now take the lead against Peter and John. {Came upon them} (\epestˆsan autois\). Second aorist active indicative (intransitive). Burst upon them suddenly or stood by them in a hostile attitude here (Luke:20:1; strkjv@24:4; strkjv@Acts:6:12; strkjv@17:5; strkjv@22:20; strkjv@23:11|).

rwp@Acts:4:5 @{Rulers and elders and scribes} (\tous archontas kai tous presbuterous kai tous grammateis\). The three classes composing the Sanhedrin (rulers=chief priests who were Sadducees, the scribes usually Pharisees, the elders not in either class: 24 priests, 24 elders, 22 scribes). {Were gathered together} (\sunachthˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \sunag“\ with accusative of general reference and the subject of \egeneto\.

rwp@Acts:5:17 @{Which is the sect of the Sadducees} (\hˆ ousa hairesis t“n Saddoukai“n\). Literally, "the existing sect of the Sadducees" or "the sect which is of the Sadducees," \hˆ\ being the article, not the relative. \Hairesis\ means a choosing, from \haireomai\, to take for oneself, to choose, then an opinion chosen or tenet (possibly strkjv@2Peter:2:1|), then parties or factions (Gal strkjv@5:20; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:19|; possibly strkjv@2Peter:2:1|). It is applied here to the Sadducees; to the Pharisees in strkjv@Acts:15:5; strkjv@26:5|; to the Christians in strkjv@24:5-14; strkjv@28:22|. Already Luke has stated that the Sadducees started the persecution of Peter and John (Acts:4:1f.|). Now it is extended to "the apostles" as a whole since Christianity has spread more rapidly in Jerusalem than before it began.

rwp@Acts:5:34 @{Gamaliel} (\Gamaliˆl\). The grandson of Hillel, teacher of Paul (Acts:22:3|), later president of the Sanhedrin, and the first of the seven rabbis termed "Rabban." It is held by some that he was one of the doctors who heard the Boy Jesus in the temple (Luke:2:47|) and that he was a secret disciple like Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, but there is no evidence of either position. Besides, he appears here as a loyal Pharisee and "a doctor of the law" (\nomodidaskalos\). This word appears already in strkjv@Luke:5:17| of the Pharisaic doctors bent on criticizing Jesus, which see. Paul uses it of Judaizing Christians (1Timothy:1:7|). Like other great rabbis he had a great saying: "Procure thyself a teacher, avoid being in doubt; and do not accustom thyself to give tithes by guess." He was a man of judicial temper and not prone to go off at a tangent, though his brilliant young pupil Saul went to the limit about Stephen without any restraint on the part of Gamaliel so far as the record goes. Gamaliel champions the cause of the apostles as a Pharisee to score a point against the Sadducees. He acts as a theological opportunist, not as a disciple of Christ. He felt that a temporizing policy was best. There are difficulties in this speech of Gamaliel and it is not clear how Luke obtained the data for the address. It is, of course, possible that Saul was present and made notes of it for Luke afterwards. {Had in honour of all the people} (\timios panti t“i la“i\). Ethical dative. \Timios\ from \timˆ\, old word meaning precious, dear. {The men} (\tous anthr“pous\). Correct text as in verse 35|, not "the apostles" as Textus Receptus.

rwp@Acts:5:40 @{To him they agreed} (\epeisthˆsan aut“i\). First aorist passive indicative of \peith“\, to persuade, the passive to be persuaded by, to listen to, to obey. Gamaliel's shrewd advice scored as against the Sadducaic contention (verse 17|). {Not to speak} (\mˆ lalein\). The Sanhedrin repeated the prohibition of strkjv@4:18| which the apostles had steadily refused to obey. The Sanhedrin stood by their guns, but refused to shoot. It was a "draw" with Gamaliel as tactical victor over the Sadducees. Clearly now the disciples were set free because only the Sadducees had become enraged while the Pharisees held aloof.

rwp@Acts:6:11 @{Then they suborned men} (\tote hupebalon andras\). Second aorist active indicative of \hupoball“\, old verb, but here only in the N.T., to put under like a carpet, to bring men under one's control by suggestion or by money. One recalls the plight of Caiaphas in the trial of Jesus when he sought false witnesses. _Subornaverunt_. They put these men forward in an underhand way for fraud. {Blasphemous words against Moses and God} (\blasphˆma eis M“usˆn kai ton theon\). The punishment for blasphemy was stoning to death. See strkjv@Matthew:12:31| for discussion of the word \blasphˆmia, blasphˆme“, blasphˆmos\, all in the N.T. from \blapt“\, to harm, and \phˆmˆ\, speech, harmful speech, or \blax\, stupid, and \phˆmˆ\. But the charge against Stephen was untrue. Please note that Moses is here placed before God and practically on a par with God in the matter of blasphemy. The purpose of this charge is to stir the prejudices of the people in the matter of Jewish rights and privileges. It is the Pharisees who are conducting this attack on Stephen while the Sadducees had led them against Peter and John. The position of Stephen is critical in the extreme for the Sadducees will not help him as Gamaliel did the apostles.

rwp@Acts:6:12 @{They stirred up the people} (\sunekinˆsan ton laon\). They shook the people together like an earthquake. First aorist active indicative of \sunkine“\, to throw into commotion. Old verb, but here only in the N.T. The elders and the scribes (Pharisees) are reached, but no word about the Sadducees. This is the first record of the hostility of the masses against the disciples (Vincent). {Came upon him} (\epistantes\). Second aorist (ingressive) active participle of \ephistˆmi\. Rushed at him. {Seized} (\sunˆrpasan\). Effective aorist active of \sunarpaz“\ as if they caught him after pursuit.

rwp@Acts:6:15 @{As if the face of an angel} (\h“sei pros“pon aggelou\). Even his enemies saw that, wicked as they were. See strkjv@Exodus:34:30| for the face of Moses when he came down from Sinai (2Corinthians:3:7|). Page quotes Tennyson: "God's glory smote him on the face." Where were Peter and John at this crisis? Apparently Stephen stands alone before the Sanhedrin as Jesus did. But he was not alone for he saw Jesus standing at the right hand of God (Acts:7:56|). There was little that Peter and John could have done if they had been present. Gamaliel did not interpose this time for the Pharisees were behind the charges against Stephen, false though they were as Gamaliel could have found out.

rwp@Acts:9:2 @{Asked} (\ˆitˆsato\). First aorist middle indicative, the indirect middle, asked for himself (as a favour to himself). Felten notes that "Saul as a Pharisee makes request of a Sadducee" (the high priest) either Caiaphas if before A.D. 35, but if in 36 Jonathan, son of Caiaphas or if in 37 Theophilus, another son of Caiaphas. {Letters} (\epistolas\). Julius Ceasar and Augustus had granted the high priest and Sanhedrin jurisdiction over Jews in foreign cities, but this central ecclesiastical authority was not always recognized in every local community outside of Judea. Paul says that he received his authority to go to Damascus from the priests (Acts strkjv@26:10|) and "the estate of the elders" (22:5|), that is the Sanhedrin. {To Damascus} (\eis Damaskon\). As if no disciples of importance (outside the apostles in Jerusalem) were left in Judea. Damascus at this time may have been under the rule of Aretas of Arabia (tributary to Rome) as it certainly was a couple of years later when Saul escaped in a basket (2Corinthians:11:32|). This old city is the most enduring in the history of the world (Knowling). It is some 150 miles Northeast from Jerusalem and watered by the river Abana from Anti-Lebanon. Here the Jews were strong in numbers (10,000 butchered by Nero later) and here some disciples had found refuge from Saul's persecution in Judea and still worshipped in the synagogues. Paul's language in strkjv@Acts:26:11| seems to mean that Damascus is merely one of other "foreign cities" to which he carried the persecution. {If he found} (\ean heurˆi\). Third class condition with aorist subjunctive retained after secondary tense (asked). {The Way} (\tˆs hodou\). A common method in the Acts for describing Christianity as the Way of life, absolutely as also in strkjv@19:9,23; strkjv@22:4; strkjv@24:14,22| or the way of salvation (16:17|) or the way of the Lord (18:25|). It is a Jewish definition of life as in strkjv@Isaiah:40:3| "the way of the Lord," strkjv@Psalms:1:6| "the way of the righteous," "the way of the wicked." Jesus called himself "the way" (John:14:6|), the only way to the Father. The so-called Epistle of Barnabas presents the Two Ways. The North American Indians call Christianity the Jesus Road. {That he might bring them bound} (\hop“s dedemenous agagˆi\). Final clause with \hop“s\ (less common than \hina\) and aorist (effective) subjunctive (\agagˆi\, reduplicated aorist of \ag“\, common verb) and perfect passive participle (\dedemenous\) of \de“\, in a state of sheer helplessness like his other victims both men and women. Three times (8:3; strkjv@9:2; strkjv@22:4|) this fact of persecuting women is mentioned as a special blot in Paul's cruelty (the third time by Paul himself) and one of the items in his being chief of sinners (1Timothy:1:15|).

rwp@Acts:13:10 @{Of all guile} (\pantos dolou\). From \del“\, to catch with bait, old word, already seen in strkjv@Matthew:26:4; strkjv@Mark:7:22; strkjv@14:1|. Paul denounces Elymas as a trickster. {All villainy} (\pƒsˆs rhƒidiourgias\). Late compound from \rhƒidiourgos\ (\rhƒidios\, easy, facile, \ergon\, deed, one who does a thing adroitly and with ease). Songs:levity in Xenophon and unscrupulousness in Polybius, Plutarch, and the papyri. Only here in the N.T., though the kindred word \rhƒidiourgˆma\ occurs in strkjv@Acts:18:14|. With deadly accuracy Paul pictured this slick rascal. {Thou son of the devil} (\huie diabolou\). Damning phrase like that used by Jesus of the Pharisees in strkjv@John:8:44|, a slanderer like the \diabolos\. This use of son (\huios\) for characteristic occurs in strkjv@Acts:3:25; strkjv@4:36|, a common Hebrew idiom, and may be used purposely by Paul in contrast with the name Barjesus (son of Jesus) that Elymas bore (13:6|). {Enemy of all righteousness} (\echthre pƒsˆs dikaiosunˆs\). Personal enemy to all justice, sums up all the rest. Note triple use of "all" (\pantos, pƒsˆs, pƒsˆs\), total depravity in every sense. {Wilt thou not cease?} (\ou pausˆi\). An impatient rhetorical question, almost volitive in force (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 874). Note \ou\, not \mˆ\, {To pervert} (\diastreph“n\). Present active participle describing the actual work of Elymas as a perverter or distorter (see verse 8|). More exactly, Wilt thou not cease perverting? {The right ways of the Lord} (\tas hodous tou kuriou tas eutheias\). The ways of the Lord the straight ones as opposed to the crooked ways of men (Isaiah:40:4; strkjv@42:16; strkjv@Luke:3:5|). The task of John the Baptist as of all prophets and preachers is to make crooked paths straight and to get men to walk in them. This false prophet was making even the Lord's straight ways crooked. Elymas has many successors.

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:14:4 @{But the multitude of the city was divided} (\eschisthˆ de to plˆthos tˆs pole“s\). First aorist passive indicative of \schiz“\, old verb to split, to make a schism or factions as Sadducees and Pharisees (23:7|). This division was within the Gentile populace. Part held (\hoi men ˆsan\), literally "some were with the Jews" (\sun tois Ioudaiois\), part with the apostles (\hoi de sun tois apostolois\). Common demonstrative of contrast (\hoi men, hoi de\, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 694). The Jewish leaders made some impression on the Gentiles as at Antioch in Pisidia and later at Thessalonica (17:4f.|). This is the first time in the Acts that Paul and Barnabas are termed "apostles" (see also verse 14|). Elsewhere in the Acts the word is restricted to the twelve. Certainly Luke does not here employ it in that technical sense. To have followed Jesus in his ministry and to have seen the Risen Christ was essential to the technical use (1:22f.|). Whether Barnabas had seen the Risen Christ we do not know, but certainly Paul had (1Corinthians:9:1f.; strkjv@15:8|). Paul claimed to be an apostle on a par with the twelve (Galatians:1:1,16-18|). The word originally means simply one sent (John:13:16|) like messengers of the churches with the collection (2Corinthians:8:23|). The Jews used it of those sent from Jerusalem to collect the temple tribute. Paul applies the word to James the Lord's brother (Galatians:1:19|), to Epaphroditus (Phillipians:2:25|) as the messenger of the church in Philippi, to Silvanus and Timothy (1Thessalonians:2:6; strkjv@Acts:18:5|), apparently to Apollos (1Corinthians:4:9|), and to Andronicus and Junias (Romans:16:6f.|). He even calls the Judaizers "false apostles" (2Corinthians:11:13|).

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

rwp@Acts:15:10 @{Why tempt ye God?} (\ti peirazete ton theon;\). By implying that God had made a mistake this time, though right about Cornelius. It is a home-thrust. They were refusing to follow the guidance of God like the Israelites at Massah and Meribah (Exodus:17:7; strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:16; strkjv@1Corinthians:10:9|). {That ye should put} (\epitheinai\). Second aorist active infinitive of \epitithˆmi\, epexegetic, explaining the tempting. {A yoke upon the neck} (\zugon epi ton trachˆlon\). Familiar image of oxen with yokes upon the necks. Paul's very image for the yoke of bondage of the Mosaic law in strkjv@Galatians:5:1|. It had probably been used in the private interview. Cf. the words of Jesus about the Pharisees (Matthew:23:4|) and how easy and light his own yoke is (Matthew:11:30|). {Were able to bear} (\ischusamen bastasai\). Neither our fathers nor we had strength (\ischu“\) to carry this yoke which the Judaizers wish to put on the necks of the Gentiles. Peter speaks as the spiritual emancipator. He had been slow to see the meaning of God's dealings with him at Joppa and Caesarea, but he has seen clearly by now. He takes his stand boldly with Paul and Barnabas for Gentile freedom.

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

rwp@Acts:17:7 @{Whom Jason hath received} (\hous hupodedektai Ias“n\). Present perfect middle indicative of \hupodechomai\, to entertain, old verb, but in N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:10:38; strkjv@19:6; strkjv@Acts:17:7; strkjv@James:2:25|. This is Jason's crime and he is the prisoner before the politarchs. {These all} (\houtoi pantes\). Jason, the "brethren" of verse 6|, Paul and Silas, and all Christians everywhere. {Contrary} (\apenanti\). Late compound preposition (\apo, en, anti\) found in Polybius, LXX, here only in the N.T. {The decrees of Caesar} (\t“n dogmat“n Kaisaros\). This was a charge of treason and was a sure way to get a conviction. Probably the Julian _Leges Majestatis_ are in mind rather than the definite decree of Claudius about the Jews (Acts:18:2|). {Saying that there is another king, one Jesus} (\Basilea heteron legontes einai Iˆsoun\). Note the very order of the words in the Greek indirect discourse with the accusative and infinitive after \legontes\. \Basilea heteron\ comes first, a different king, another emperor than Caesar. This was the very charge that the smart student of the Pharisees and Herodians had tried to catch Jesus on (Mark:12:14|). The Sanhedrin made it anyhow against Jesus to Pilate (Luke:23:2|) and Pilate had to notice it. "Although the emperors never ventured to assume the title _rex_ at Rome, in the Eastern provinces they were regularly termed _basileus_" (Page). The Jews here, as before Pilate (John:19:15|), renounce their dearest hope of a Messianic king. It is plain that Paul had preached about Jesus as the Messiah, King of the Kingdom of God over against the Roman Empire, a spiritual kingdom, to be sure, but the Jews here turn his language to his hurt as they did with Jesus. As a matter of fact Paul's preaching about the kingdom and the second coming of Christ was gravely misunderstood by the Christians at Thessalonica after his departure (1Thessalonians:4:13-5:4; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2|). The Jews were quick to seize upon his language about Jesus Christ to his own injury. Clearly here in Thessalonica Paul had faced the power of the Roman Empire in a new way and pictured over against it the grandeur of the reign of Christ.

rwp@Acts:21:20 @{Glorified} (\edoxazon\). Inchoative imperfect, began to glorify God, though without special praise of Paul. {How many thousands} (\posai muriades\). Old word for ten thousand (Acts:19:19|) and then an indefinite number like our "myriads" (this very word) as strkjv@Luke:12:1; strkjv@Acts:21:20; strkjv@Jude:1:14; strkjv@Revelation:5:11; strkjv@9:16|. But it is a surprising statement even with allowable hyperbole, but one may recall strkjv@Acts:4:4| (number of the men--not women--about five thousand); strkjv@5:14| (multitudes both of men and women); strkjv@6:7|. There were undoubtedly a great many thousands of believers in Jerusalem and all Jewish Christians, some, alas, Judaizers (Acts:11:2; strkjv@15:1,5|). This list may include the Christians from neighbouring towns in Palestine and even some from foreign countries here at the Feast of Pentecost, for it is probable that Paul arrived in time for it as he had hoped. But we do not have to count the hostile Jews from Asia (verse 27|) who were clearly not Christians at all. {All zealous for the law} (\pantes zˆl“tai tou nomou\). Zealots (substantive) rather than zealous (adjective) with objective genitive (\tou nomou\). The word zealot is from \zˆlo“\, to burn with zeal, to boil. The Greek used \zˆl“tˆs\ for an imitator or admirer. There was a party of Zealots (developed from the Pharisees), a group of what would be called "hot-heads," who brought on the war with Rome. One of this party, Simon Zelotes (Acts:1:13|), was in the number of the twelve apostles. It is important to understand the issues in Jerusalem. It was settled at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15; strkjv@Galatians:2|) that the Mosaic ceremonial law was not to be imposed upon Gentile Christians. Paul won freedom for them, but it was not said that it was wrong for Jewish Christians to go on observing it if they wished. We have seen Paul observing the passover in Philippi (Acts:20:6|) and planning to reach Jerusalem for Pentecost (20:16|). The Judaizers rankled under Paul's victory and power in spreading the gospel among the Gentiles and gave him great trouble in Galatia and Corinth. They were busy against him in Jerusalem also and it was to undo the harm done by them in Jerusalem that Paul gathered the great collection from the Gentile Christians and brought it with him and the delegates from the churches. Clearly then Paul had real ground for his apprehension of trouble in Jerusalem while still in Corinth (Romans:15:25|) when he asked for the prayers of the Roman Christians (verses 30-32|). The repeated warnings along the way were amply justified.

rwp@Acts:21:26 @{Took the men} (\paralab“n tous andras\). The very phrase used in verse 24| to Paul. {The next day} (\tˆi echomenˆi\). One of the phrases in strkjv@20:15| for the coming day. Locative case of time. {Purifying himself with them} (\sun autois hagnistheis\, first aorist passive participle of \hagniz“\). The precise language again of the recommendation in verse 24|. Paul was conforming to the letter. {Went into the temple} (\eisˆiei eis to hieron\). Imperfect active of \eiseimi\ as in verse 18| which see. Went on into the temple, descriptive imperfect. Paul joined the four men in their vow of separation. {Declaring} (\diaggell“n\). To the priests what day he would report the fulfilment of the vow. The priests would desire notice of the sacrifice. This verb only used by Luke in N.T. except strkjv@Romans:11:17| (quotation from the LXX). It is not necessary to assume that the vows of each of the five expired on the same day (Rackham). {Until the offering was offered for every one of them} (\he“s hou prosˆnechthˆ huper henos hekastou aut“n hˆ prosphora\). This use of \he“s hou\ (like \he“s\, alone) with the first aorist passive indicative \prosˆnechthˆ\ of \prospher“\, to offer, contemplates the final result (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 974f.) and is probably the statement of Luke added to Paul's announcement. He probably went into the temple one day for each of the brethren and one for himself. The question arises whether Paul acted wisely or unwisely in agreeing to the suggestion of James. What he did was in perfect harmony with his principle of accommodation in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:20| when no principle was involved. It is charged that here on this occasion Paul was unduly influenced by considerations of expediency and was willing for the Jewish Christians to believe him more of a Jew than was true in order to placate the situation in Jerusalem. Furneaux calls it a compromise and a failure. I do not so see it. To say that is to obscure the whole complex situation. What Paul did was not for the purpose of conciliating his opponents, the Judaizers, who had diligently spread falsehoods about him in Jerusalem as in Corinth. It was solely to break the power of these "false apostles" over the thousands in Jerusalem who have been deluded by Paul's accusers. Songs:far as the evidence goes that thing was accomplished. In the trouble that comes in Jerusalem and Caesarea the Judaizers cut no figure at all. The Jewish Christians do not appear in Paul's behalf, but there was no opportunity for them to do so. The explosion that came on the last day of Paul's appearance in the temple was wholly disconnected from his offerings for the four brethren and himself. It must be remembered that Paul had many kinds of enemies. The attack on him by these Jews from Asia had no connexion whatever with the slanders of the Judaizers about Paul's alleged teachings that Jewish Christians in the dispersion should depart from the Mosaic law. That slander was put to rest forever by his following the advice of James and justifies the wisdom of that advice and Paul's conduct about it.

rwp@Acts:23:1 @{Looking steadfastly} (\atenisas\). See on this word strkjv@1:10; strkjv@3:12; strkjv@6:15; strkjv@7:55; strkjv@13:9|. Paul may have had weak eyes, but probably the earnest gaze was to see if he recognized any faces that were in the body that tried Stephen and to which he apparently once belonged. {I have lived before God} (\pepoliteumai t“i the“i\). Perfect middle indicative of \politeu“\, old verb to manage affairs of city (\polis\) or state, to be a citizen, behave as a citizen. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Phillipians:1:27|. The idea of citizenship was Greek and Roman, not Jewish. "He had lived as God's citizen, as a member of God's commonwealth" (Rackham). God (\the“i\) is the dative of personal interest. As God looked at it and in his relation to God. {In all good conscience unto this day} (\pasˆi suneidˆsei agathˆi achri tautˆs tˆs hˆmeras\). This claim seems to lack tact, but for brevity's sake Paul sums up a whole speech in it. He may have said much more than Luke here reports along the line of his speech the day before, but Paul did not make this claim without consideration. It appears to contradict his confession as the chief of sinners (1Timothy:1:13-16|). But that depends on one's interpretation of "good conscience." The word \suneidˆsis\ is literally "joint-knowledge" in Greek, Latin (_conscientia_) and English "conscience" from the Latin. It is a late word from \sunoida\, to know together, common in O.T., Apocrypha, Philo, Plutarch, New Testament, Stoics, ecclesiastical writers. In itself the word simply means consciousness of one's own thoughts (Hebrews:10:2|), or of one's own self, then consciousness of the distinction between right and wrong (Romans:2:15|) with approval or disapproval. But the conscience is not an infallible guide and acts according to the light that it has (1Corinthians:8:7,10; strkjv@1Peter:2:19|). The conscience can be contaminated (Hebrews:10:22|, evil \ponˆrƒs\). All this and more must be borne in mind in trying to understand Paul's description of his motives as a persecutor. Alleviation of his guilt comes thereby, but not removal of guilt as he himself felt (1Timothy:1:13-16|). He means to say to the Sanhedrin that he persecuted Christians as a conscientious (though mistaken) Jew (Pharisee) just as he followed his conscience in turning from Judaism to Christianity. It is a pointed disclaimer against the charge that he is a renegade Jew, an opposer of the law, the people, the temple. Paul addresses the Sanhedrin as an equal and has no "apologies" (in our sense) to make for his career as a whole. The golden thread of consistency runs through, as a good citizen in God's commonwealth. He had the consolation of a good conscience (1Peter:3:16|). The word does not occur in the Gospels and chiefly in Paul's Epistles, but we see it at work in strkjv@John:8:9| (the interpolation strkjv@7:53-8:11|).

rwp@Acts:23:6 @{But when Paul perceived} (\gnous de ho Paulos\). Perceiving (second aorist ingressive of \gin“sk“\). Paul quickly saw that his cause was ruined before the Sanhedrin by his unwitting attack on the high priest. It was impossible to get a fair hearing. Hence, Vincent says, "Paul, with great tact, seeks to bring the two parties of the council into collision with each other." Songs:Alford argues with the motto "divide and conquer." Farrar condemns Paul and takes strkjv@24:21| as a confession of error here, but that is reading into Paul's word about the resurrection more than he says. Page considers Luke's report meagre and unsatisfactory. Rackham thinks that the trial was already started and that Paul repeated part of his speech of the day before when "the Sadducees received his words with ostentatious scepticism and ridicule: this provoked counter-expressions of sympathy and credulity among the Pharisees." But all this is inference. We do not have to adopt the Jesuitical principle that the end justifies the means in order to see shrewdness and hard sense in what Paul said and did. Paul knew, of course, that the Sanhedrin was nearly evenly divided between Pharisees and Sadducees, for he himself had been a Pharisee. {I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees} (\Eg“ Pharisaios eimi huios Pharisai“n\). This was strictly true as we know from his Epistles (Phillipians:3:5|). {Touching the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question} (\peri elpidos kai anastase“s nekr“n krinomai\). This was true also and this is the point that Paul mentions in strkjv@24:21|. His failure to mention again the fact that he was a Pharisee throws no discredit on Luke's report here. The chief point of difference between Pharisees and Sadducees was precisely this matter of the resurrection. And this was Paul's cardinal doctrine as a Christian minister. It was this fact that convinced him that Jesus was the Messiah and was "the very centre of his faith" (Page) and of his preaching. It was not a mere trick for Paul to proclaim this fact here and so divide the Sanhedrin. As a matter of fact, the Pharisees held aloof when the Sadducees persecuted Peter and the other apostles for preaching resurrection in the case of Jesus and even Gamaliel threw cold water on the effort to punish them for it (Acts:5:34-39|). Songs:then Paul was really recurring to the original cleavage on this point and was able to score a point against the Sadducees as Gamaliel, his great teacher, had done before him. Besides, "Paul and Pharisaism seem to us such opposite ideas that we often forget that to Paul Christianity was the natural development of Judaism" (Page). Paul shows this in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11|.

rwp@Acts:23:8 @{There is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit} (\mˆ einai anastasin mˆte aggelon mˆte pneuma\). Infinitive with negative \mˆ\ in indirect assertion. These points constitute the chief doctrinal differences between the Pharisees and the Sadducees. {Both} (\amphotera\). Here used though three items of belief are mentioned as in strkjv@19:16| where the seven sons of Sceva are thus described. This idiom is common enough in papyri and Byzantine Greek (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 745).

rwp@Acts:23:9 @{Strove} (\diemachonto\). Imperfect middle of \diamachomai\, old Attic verb, to fight it out (between, back and forth, fiercely). Here only in the N.T. It was a lively scrap and Luke pictures it as going on. The Pharisees definitely take Paul's side. {And what if a spirit hath spoken to him or an angel?} (\ei de pneuma elalˆsen aut“i ˆ aggelos?\). This is aposiopesis, not uncommon in the N.T., as in strkjv@Luke:13:9; strkjv@John:6:62| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1203). See one also in strkjv@Exodus:32:32|.

rwp@Acts:23:16 @{Their lying in wait} (\tˆn enedran\). Old word from \en\ (in) and \hedra\ (seat), ambush. In N.T. only here and strkjv@25:3|. Accusative object of \akousas\. {He came} (\paragenomenos\). Second aorist middle participle of \paraginomai\. It may mean, "having come upon them" and so discount their plot, a graphic touch. Vincent thinks that some Pharisee, since Paul was a Pharisee and so a member of the "guild," told his nephew of the plot. Perhaps, and perhaps not. {Told Paul} (\apˆggeilen t“i Paul“i\). This nephew is not known otherwise. He may be a student here from Tarsus as Paul once was. Anyhow he knows what to do when he catches on to the conspirators. He had enough address to get into the barracks where Paul was. He ran the risk of death if discovered.

rwp@Acts:24:14 @{I confess} (\homolog“\). The only charge left was that of being a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes. This Paul frankly confesses is true. He uses the word in its full sense. He is "guilty" of that. {After the Way} (\kata tˆn hodon\). This word Paul had already applied to Christianity (22:4|). He prefers it to "sect" (\hairesin\ which means a choosing, then a division). Paul claims Christianity to be the real (whole, catholic) Judaism, not a "sect" of it. But he will show that Christianity is not a deviation from Judaism, but the fulfilment of it (Page) as he has already shown in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9|. {Songs:serve I the God of our fathers} (\hout“s latreu“ t“i patr“i“i the“i\). Paul has not stretched the truth at all. He has confirmed the claim made before the Sanhedrin that he is a spiritual Pharisee in the truest sense (23:6|). He reasserts his faith in all the law and the prophets, holding to the Messianic hope. A curious "heretic" surely! {Which these themselves also look for} (\hˆn kai autoi houtoi prosdechontai\). Probably with a gesture towards his accusers. He does not treat them all as Sadducees. See strkjv@Titus:2:13| for similar use of the verb (\prosdechomenoi tˆn makarian elpida\, looking for the happy hope).

rwp@Acts:24:15 @{That there shall be a resurrection} (\anastasin mellein esesthai\). Indirect assertion with infinitive and accusative of general reference (\anastasin\) after the word \elpida\ (hope). The future infinitive \esesthai\ after \mellein\ is also according to rule, \mell“\ being followed by either present, aorist, or future infinitive (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 870, 877, 878). {Both of the just and the unjust} (\dikai“n te kai adik“n\). Apparently at the same time as in strkjv@John:5:29| (cf. strkjv@Acts:17:31f.|). Gardner thinks that Luke here misrepresents Paul who held to no resurrection save for those "in Christ," a mistaken interpretation of Paul in my opinion. The Talmud teaches the resurrection of Israelites only, but Paul was more than a Pharisee.

rwp@Acts:26:5 @{Having knowledge of me from the first} (\progin“skontes me an“then\). Literally, "knowing me beforehand" (both \pro\ and \an“then\), from the beginning of Paul's public education in Jerusalem (Knowling). Cf. strkjv@2Peter:3:17|. {If they be willing to testify} (\ean thel“sin marturein\). Condition of third class (\ean\ and subjunctive). A neat turning of the tables on the distinguished audience about Paul's Jerusalem reputation before his conversion. {After the straitest sect} (\tˆn akribestatˆn hairesin\). This is a true superlative (not elative) and one of the three (also \hagi“tatos\, strkjv@Jude:1:20|, \timi“tatos\ strkjv@Revelation:18:12; strkjv@21:11|) superlatives in \-tatos\ in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 279f., 670), though common enough in the LXX and the papyri. \Hairesin\ (choosing) is properly used here with Pharisees (Josephus, _Life_, 38). {Religion} (\thrˆskeias\). From \thrˆskeu“\ and this from \thrˆskos\ (James:1:26|), old word for religious worship or discipline, common in the papyri and inscriptions (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_) for reverent worship, not mere external ritual. In N.T. only here, strkjv@James:1:26f.; strkjv@Colossians:2:18|. {I lived a Pharisee} (\ezˆsa Pharisaios\). Emphatic position. Paul knew the rules of the Pharisees and played the game to the full (Galatians:1:14; strkjv@Phillipians:3:5f.|). The Talmud makes it plain what the life of a Pharisee was. Paul had become one of the leaders and stars of hope for his sect.

rwp@Acts:26:10 @{I both shut up many} (\pollous te katekleisa\). Effective aorist active of \kataklei“\, old word to shut down like a trap door, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:3:20|. Double use of \te\ (both--and). {Having received authority from the chief priests} (\tˆn para t“n archiere“n exousian lab“n\). "The authority," he says. Paul was the official persecutor of the saints under the direction of the Sanhedrin. He mentions "chief priests" (Sadducees), though a Pharisee himself. Both parties were co-operating against the saints. {And when they were put to death} (\anairoumen“n te aut“n\). Genitive absolute with present passive participle of \anaire“\. {I gave my vote against them} (\katˆnegka psˆphon\). "I cast down my pebble" (a black one). The ancient Greeks used white pebbles for acquittal (Revelation:2:17|), black ones for condemnation as here (the only two uses of the word in the N.T.). Paul's phrase (not found elsewhere) is more vivid than the usual \katapsˆphiz“\ for voting. They literally cast the pebbles into the urn. Cf. \sumpsˆphiz“\ in strkjv@Acts:19:19|, \sugkatapsephizo\ in strkjv@Acts:1:26|. If Paul's language is taken literally here, he was a member of the Sanhedrin and so married when he led the persecution. That is quite possible, though he was not married when he wrote strkjv@1Corinthians:7:7f.|, but a widower. It is possible to take the language figuratively for approval, but not so natural.

rwp@Acts:26:16 @{Arise and stand} (\anastˆthi kai stˆthi\). "Emphatic assonance" (Page). Second aorist active imperative of compound verb (\anistˆmi\) and simplex (\histˆmi\). "Stand up and take a stand." {Have I appeared unto thee} (\“phthˆn soi\). First aorist passive indicative of \hora“\. See on ¯Luke:22:43|. {To appoint thee} (\procheirisasthai se\). See strkjv@3:30; strkjv@22:14| for this verb. {Both of the things wherein thou hast seen me} (\h“n te eides me\). The reading \me\ (not in all MSS.) makes it the object of \eides\ (didst see) and \h“n\ is genitive of \ha\ (accusative of general reference) attracted to the case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\. Paul is thus a personal eyewitness of the Risen Christ (Luke:1:1; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:1; strkjv@9:1|). {And of the things wherein I will appear unto thee} (\h“n te ophthˆsomai soi\). Here again \h“n\ is genitive of the accusative (general reference) relative \ha\ attracted to the case of the antecedent \tout“n\ or \ekein“n\ as before. But \ophthˆsomai\ is first future passive of \hora“\ and cannot be treated as active or middle. Page takes it to mean "the visions in which I shall be seen by you," the passive form bringing out the agency of God. See those in strkjv@Acts:18:9; strkjv@23:11; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:2|. The passive voice, however, like \apekrithˆn\ and \ephobˆthˆn\, did become sometimes transitive in the _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 819).

rwp@Acts:28:3 @{When Paul had gathered} (\sustrepsantos tou Paulou\). Genitive absolute with first aorist active participle of \sustreph“\, old verb to twist or turn together or roll into a bundle. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:17:22|. {A bundle of sticks} (\phrugan“n ti plˆthos\). "Some multitude (or pile) of dry twigs" (\phrugan“n\ from \phrug“\ or \phruss“\, to dry. Only here in N.T.). {Laid} (\epithentos\). Songs:genitive absolute again with second aorist active participle of \epitithˆmi\, to place upon. Few things show Paul to better advantage than this incident. {By reason of the heat} (\apo tˆs thermˆs\). Old word, only here in N.T. Ablative case with \apo\ (from the heat). The viper was in a state of torpor in the bundle of sticks. The heat wakened him. {A viper} (\echidna\). The old word used by the Baptist of the Pharisees (Matthew:3:7; strkjv@Luke:3:7|) and by Jesus also (Matthew:12:34; strkjv@23:33|). It is objected that there is little wood in the island today and no vipers, though Lewin as late as 1853 believes that he saw a viper near St. Paul's Bay. But the island now has 1,200 people to the square mile and snakes of any kind have a poor chance. The viper has also disappeared from Arran as the island became more frequented (Knowling). Ramsay thinks that the small constrictor (_Coronella Austriaca_) which still exists in the island may be the "viper," though it has no poison fangs, but clings and bites. The natives thought that it was a poisonous viper. {Fastened on his hand} (\kathˆpse tˆs cheiros autou\). First aorist active indicative of \kathapt“\, to fasten down on with the genitive case. Old verb, here only in N.T. Cf. strkjv@Mark:16:18|.

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

rwp@Colossians:2:21 @{Handle not, nor taste, nor touch} (\mˆ hapsˆi mˆde geusˆi mˆde thigˆis\). Specimens of Gnostic rules. The Essenes took the Mosaic regulations and carried them much further and the Pharisees demanded ceremonially clean hands for all food. Later ascetics (the Latin commentators Ambrose, Hilary, Pelagius) regard these prohibitions as Paul's own instead of those of the Gnostics condemned by him. Even today men are finding that the noble prohibition law needs enlightened instruction to make it effective. That is true of all law. The Pharisees, Essenes, Gnostics made piety hinge on outward observances and rules instead of inward conviction and principle. These three verbs are all in the aorist subjunctive second person singular with \mˆ\, a prohibition against handling or touching these forbidden things. Two of them do not differ greatly in meaning. \Hapsˆi\ is aorist middle subjunctive of \hapt“\, to fasten to, middle, to cling to, to handle. \Thigˆis\ is second aorist active subjunctive of \thiggan“\, old verb, to touch, to handle. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:11:28; strkjv@12:20|. \Geusˆi\ is second aorist middle subjunctive of \geu“\, to give taste of, only middle in N.T. to taste as here.

rwp@Galatians:1:14 @{I advanced} (\proekopton\). Imperfect active again of \prokopt“\, old verb, to cut forward (as in a forest), to blaze a way, to go ahead. In N.T. only here, strkjv@Romans:13:12; strkjv@2Timothy:2:16; strkjv@3:9,13|. Paul was a brilliant pupil under Gamaliel. See strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-6|. He was in the lead of the persecution also. {Beyond many of mine own age} (\huper pollous sunˆliki“tas\). Later compound form for the Attic \hˆliki“tˆs\ which occurs in Dion Hal. and inscriptions (from \sun\, with, and \hˆlikia\, age). Paul modestly claims that he went "beyond" (\huper\) his fellow-students in his progress in Judaism. {More exceedingly zealous} (\perissoter“s zˆlotˆs\). Literally, "more exceedingly a zealot." See on ¯Acts:1:13; strkjv@21:20; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:12|. Like Simon Zelotes. {For the traditions of my fathers} (\t“n patrik“n mou paradose“n\). Objective genitive after \zˆlotˆs\. \Patrik“n\ only here in N.T., though old word from \patˆr\ (father), paternal, descending from one's father. For \patr“ios\ see strkjv@Acts:22:3,14|. Tradition (\paradosis\) played a large part in the teaching and life of the Pharisees (Mark:7:1-23|). Paul now taught the Christian tradition (2Thessalonians:2:15|).

rwp@Galatians:1:15 @{It was the good pleasure of God} (\eudokˆsen ho theos\). Paul had no doubt about God's purpose in him (1Thessalonians:2:8|). {Who separated me} (\ho aphorisas me\). \Aphoriz“\ is old word (from \apo\ and \horos\) to mark off from a boundary or line. The Pharisees were the separatists who held themselves off from others. Paul conceives himself as a spiritual Pharisee "separated unto the gospel of God" (Romans:1:1|, the same word \aph“rismenos\). Before his birth God had his plans for him and called him.

rwp@Galatians:2:12 @{For before that certain came from James} (\pro tou gar elthein tinas apo Iak“bou\). The reason (\gar\) for Paul's condemnation of Peter. Articular infinitive in the genitive after \pro\ with the accusative of general reference (\tinas\), "for before the coming as to some from James." Does Paul mean to say that these "certain" ones had been sent by James to Antioch to inspect the conduct of Peter and the other Jewish brethren? Some scholars think so. No doubt these brethren let the idea get out that they were emissaries "from James." But that idea is inconsistent with the position of James as president of the conference and the author of the resolution securing liberty to the Gentile Christians. No doubt these brethren threatened Peter to tell James and the church about his conduct and they reminded Peter of his previous arraignment before the Jerusalem Church on this very charge (Acts:11:1-18|). As a matter of fact the Jerusalem Conference did not discuss the matter of social relations between Jews and Gentiles though that was the charge made against Peter (Acts:11:1ff.|). {He did eat with the Gentiles} (\meta t“n ethn“n sunˆsthien\). It was his habit (imperfect tense). {He drew back} (\hupestellen\). Imperfect tense, inchoative action, "he began to draw himself (\heauton\) back." Old word \hupostell“\. See middle voice to dissemble (Acts:20:20,27|), to shrink (Hebrews:10:38|). {Separated himself} (\aph“rizen heauton\). Inchoative imperfect again, "began to separate himself" just like a Pharisee (see on ¯1:15|) and as if afraid of the Judaizers in the Jerusalem Church, perhaps half afraid that James might not endorse what he had been doing. {Fearing them that were of the circumcision} (\phoboumenos tous ek peritomˆs\). This was the real reason for Peter's cowardice. See strkjv@Acts:11:2| for "\hoi ek peritomˆs\" (they of the circumcision), the very phrase here. It was not that Peter had changed his views from the Jerusalem resolutions. It was pure fear of trouble to himself as in the denials at the trial of Christ.

rwp@Galatians:2:16 @{Is not justified} (\ou dikaioutai\). Present passive indicative of \dikaio“\, an old causative verb from \dikaios\, righteous (from \dike\, right), to make righteous, to declare righteous. It is made like \axio“\, to deem worthy, and \koino“\, to consider common. It is one of the great Pauline words along with \dikaiosunˆ\, righteousness. The two ways of getting right with God are here set forth: by faith in Christ Jesus (objective genitive), by the works of the law (by keeping all the law in the most minute fashion, the way of the Pharisees). Paul knew them both (see strkjv@Romans:7|). In his first recorded sermon the same contrast is made that we have here (Acts:13:39|) with the same word \dikaio“\, employed. It is the heart of his message in all his Epistles. The terms faith (\pistis\), righteousness (\dikaiosunˆ\), law (\nomos\), works (\erga\) occur more frequently in Galatians and Romans because Paul is dealing directly with the problem in opposition to the Judaizers who contended that Gentiles had to become Jews to be saved. The whole issue is here in an acute form. {Save} (\ean mˆ\). Except. {Even we} (\kai hˆmeis\). We Jews believed, had to believe, were not saved or justified till we did believe. This very point Peter had made at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:10f.|). He quotes strkjv@Psalms:143:2|. Paul uses \dikaiosunˆ\ in two senses (1) Justification, on the basis of what Christ has done and obtained by faith. Thus we are set right with God. strkjv@Romans:1-5|. (2) Sanctification. Actual goodness as the result of living with and for Christ. strkjv@Romans:6-8|. The same plan exists for Jew and Gentile.

rwp@Galatians:3:7 @{The same are sons of Abraham} (\houtoi huioi eisin Abraham\). "These are." This is Paul's astounding doctrine to Jews that the real sons of Abraham are those who believe as he did, "they which be of faith" (\hoi ek piste“s\), a common idiom with Paul for this idea (verse 9; strkjv@Romans:3:26; strkjv@4:16; strkjv@14:23|), those whose spiritual sonship springs out of (\ek\) faith, not out of blood. John the Baptist denounced the Pharisees and Sadducees as vipers though descendants of Abraham (Matthew:3:7; strkjv@Luke:3:7|) and Jesus termed the Pharisees children of the devil and not spiritual children of Abraham (not children of God) in strkjv@John:8:37-44|.

rwp@Galatians:4:10 @{Ye observe} (\paratˆreisthe\). Present middle indicative of old verb to stand beside and watch carefully, sometimes with evil intent as in strkjv@Luke:6:7|, but often with scrupulous care as here (so in Dio Cassius and Josephus). The meticulous observance of the Pharisees Paul knew to a nicety. It hurt him to the quick after his own merciful deliverance to see these Gentile Christians drawn into this spider-web of Judaizing Christians, once set free, now enslaved again. Paul does not itemize the "days" (Sabbaths, fast-days, feast-days, new moons) nor the "months" (Isaiah:66:23|) which were particularly observed in the exile nor the "seasons" (passover, pentecost, tabernacles, etc.) nor the "years" (sabbatical years every seventh year and the Year of Jubilee). Paul does not object to these observances for he kept them himself as a Jew. He objected to Gentiles taking to them as a means of salvation.

rwp@Galatians:4:16 @{Your enemy} (\echthros hum“n\). Active sense of \echthros\, hater with objective genitive. They looked on Paul now as an enemy to them. Songs:the Pharisees and Judaizers generally now regarded him. {Because I tell you the truth} (\alˆtheu“n humin\). Present active participle of \alˆtheu“\, old verb from \alˆthˆs\, true. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Ephesians:4:15|. "Speaking the truth." It is always a risky business to speak the truth, the whole truth. It may hit and hurt.

rwp@Galatians:6:5 @{Each shall bear his own burden} (\to idion phortion bastasei\). \Phortion\ is old word for ship's cargo (Acts:27:10|). Christ calls his \phortion\ light, though he terms those of the Pharisees heavy (Matthew:23:4|), meant for other people. The terms are thus not always kept distinct, though Paul does make a distinction here from the \barˆ\ in verse 2|.

rwp@Hebrews:7:15 @{Yet more abundantly evident} (\perissoteron eti katadˆlon\). Only N.T. instance of the old compound adjective \katadˆlos\ thoroughly clear with \eti\ (still) added and the comparative \perissoteron\ (more abundantly) piling Ossa on Pelion like strkjv@Phillipians:1:23|. {Likeness} (\homoiotˆta\). See strkjv@4:15|, only N.T. examples. Cf. the verb in verse 3|. {Ariseth another priest} (\anistatai hiereus heteros\). As said in verse 11|, now assumed in condition of first class.

rwp@Info_John @ HISTORICAL VALUE OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL It is just here that the chief attack is made on the Fourth Gospel even by some who admit the Johannine authorship. It is now assumed by some that the Fourth Gospel is not on a par with the Synoptics in historical reliability and some harmonies omit it entirely or place it separately at the close, though certainly Tatian used it with the Synoptics in his _Diatessaron_, the first harmony of the Gospels. Some even follow Schmiedel in seeing only a symbolic or parabolic character in the miracles in the Fourth Gospel, particularly in the narrative of the raising of Lazarus in chapter strkjv@John:11| which occurs here alone. But John makes this miracle play quite an important part in the culmination of events at the end. Clearly the author professes to be giving actual data largely out of his own experience and knowledge. It is objected by some that the Fourth Gospel gives an unnatural picture of Christ with Messianic claims at the very start. But the Synoptics give that same claim at the baptism and temptation, not to mention Luke's account of the Boy Jesus in the temple. The picture of the Jews as hostile to Jesus is said to be overdrawn in the Fourth Gospel. The answer to that appears in the Sermon on the Mount, the Sabbath miracles, the efforts of the Pharisees and lawyers to catch Jesus in his talk, the final denunciation in strkjv@Matthew:23|, all in the Synoptics. The opposition to Jesus grew steadily as he revealed himself more clearly. Some of the difficulties raised are gratuitous as in the early cleansing of the temple as if it could not have happened twice, confounding the draught of fishes in chapter strkjv@John:21| with that in strkjv@Luke:5|, making Mary of Bethany at the feast of a Simon in chapter strkjv@John:12| the same as the sinful woman at the feast of another Simon in strkjv@Luke:7|, making John's Gospel locate the last passover meal a day ahead instead of at the regular time as the Synoptics have it. Rightly interpreted these difficulties disappear. In simple truth, if one takes the Fourth Gospel at its face value, the personal recollections of the aged John phrased in his own way to supplement the narratives in the Synoptics, there is little left to give serious trouble. The Jerusalem ministry with the feasts is a case in point. The narrative of the call of the first disciples in chapter strkjv@John:1| is another. The author followed Simon in bringing also his own brother James to Jesus. John was present in the appearance of Christ before Annas, and Pilate. He was at the Cross when no other apostles were there. He took the mother of Jesus to his home and then returned to the Cross. He saw the piercing of the side of Jesus. He knew and saw the deed of Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus. E. H. Askwith has a most helpful discussion of this whole problem in _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1910).

rwp@Info_John @ JOHN'S PORTRAIT OF CHRIST No one questions that the Fourth Gospel asserts the deity of Christ. It is in the Prologue at the very start: "And the Word was God" (John:1:1|) and in the correct text of strkjv@John:1:18|, "God only begotten" (\theos monogenˆs\). It occurs repeatedly in the book as in the witness of the Baptist: "This is the Son of God" (John:1:34|). It is in the charge of the Pharisees (John:5:18|) and the claim of Christ himself (John:5:20-23; strkjv@6:48; strkjv@8:12,58; strkjv@11:25; strkjv@14:9; strkjv@17:5|) with the full and frank conviction of the author in strkjv@John:20:31|. He has made good his purpose. He has proven that Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God. With some critics this purpose has vitiated the entire book. The effort has been made to show that Paul, Peter, the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Synoptics give a lower view of Christ without the term \theos\ applied to him. In particular it was once argued that Q, the Logia of Jesus, used by Matthew and Luke (the non-Markan portions in both Matthew and Luke), gives a reduced picture of Jesus as on a lower plane than God, the Arian or Ritschlian view at any rate as answering for God to us though not God in actual nature. But in the Logia of Jesus we find the same essential picture of Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Son of Man as I have shown in my _The Christ of the Logia_ (1924). The only way to get rid of the deity of Christ in the New Testament is to throw overboard all the books in it as legendary or reflections of late theological development away from the original picture. The very earliest picture drawn of Christ that has been preserved to us, that in the Logia of Jesus (drawn W. M. Ramsay believes before Christ's crucifixion), is in essential agreement with the fully drawn portrait in the Fourth Gospel. Each picture in the Four Gospels adds touches of its own, but the features are the same, those of the God-Man Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world. The brilliant blind preacher of Edinburgh, George Matheson, sees this clearly (_Studies in the Portrait of the Messiah_, 1900; _St. John's Portrait of Christ_, 1910).

rwp@John:1:19 @{And this is the witness of John} (\kai hautˆ estin hˆ marturia tou I“anou\). He had twice already alluded to it (verses 7f., 15|) and now he proceeds to give it as the most important item to add after the Prologue. Just as the author assumes the birth narratives of Matthew and Luke, so he assumes the Synoptic accounts of the baptism of Jesus by John, but adds various details of great interest and value between the baptism and the Galilean ministry, filling out thus our knowledge of this first year of the Lord's ministry in various parts of Palestine. The story in John proceeds along the same lines as in the Synoptics. There is increasing unfolding of Christ to the disciples with increasing hostility on the part of the Jews till the final consummation in Jerusalem. {When the Jews sent unto him} (\hote apesteilan pros auton hoi Ioudaioi\). John, writing in Ephesus near the close of the first century long after the destruction of Jerusalem, constantly uses the phrase "the Jews" as descriptive of the people as distinct from the Gentile world and from the followers of Christ (at first Jews also). Often he uses it of the Jewish leaders and rulers in particular who soon took a hostile attitude toward both John and Jesus. Here it is the Jews from Jerusalem who sent (\apesteilan\, first aorist active indicative of \apostell“\). {Priests and Levites} (\hiereis kai Leueitas\). Sadducees these were. Down below in verse 24| the author explains that it was the Pharisees who sent the Sadducees. The Synoptics throw a flood of light on this circumstance, for in strkjv@Matthew:3:7| we are told that the Baptist called the Pharisees and Sadducees "offspring of vipers" (Luke:3:7|). Popular interest in John grew till people were wondering "in their hearts concerning John whether haply he were the Christ" (Luke:3:15|). Songs:the Sanhedrin finally sent a committee to John to get his own view of himself, but the Pharisees saw to it that Sadducees were sent. {To ask him} (\hina er“tˆs“sin auton\). Final \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \er“ta“\, old verb to ask a question as here and often in the _Koin‚_ to ask for something (John:14:16|) like \aite“\. {Who art thou?} (\su tis ei;\). Direct question preserved and note proleptic position of \su\, "Thou, who art thou?" The committee from the Sanhedrin put the question sharply up to John to define his claims concerning the Messiah.

rwp@John:1:24 @{They had been sent} (\apestalmenoi ˆsan\). Periphrastic past perfect passive of \apostell“\. {From the Pharisees} (\ek t“n Pharisai“n\). As the source (\ek\) of the committee of Sadducees (verse 19|).

rwp@John:1:46 @{Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?} (\Ek Nazaret dunatai ti agathon einai;\). Literally, "Out of Nazareth can anything good be." There is a tinge of scorn in the question as if Nazareth (note position at beginning of sentence) had a bad name. Town rivalry may account to some extent for it since Cana (home of Nathanael) was near Nazareth. Clearly he had never heard of Jesus. The best thing in all the world came out of Nazareth, but Philip does not argue the point. A saying had arisen that no prophet comes out of Galilee (John:7:52|), untrue like many such sayings. {Come and see} (\erchou kai ide\). Present middle imperative (come on) and second active imperative (and see at once). Philip followed the method of Jesus with Andrew and John (verse 39|), probably without knowing it. Wise is the one who knows how to deal with the sceptic.

rwp@John:2:18 @{What sign shewest thou unto us?} (\Ti sˆmeion deiknueis hˆmin;\). They may have heard of the "sign" at Cana or not, but they have rallied a bit on the outside of the temple area and demand proof for his Messianic assumption of authority over the temple worship. These traders had paid the Sadducees and Pharisees in the Sanhedrin for the concession as traffickers which they enjoyed. They were within their technical rights in this question.

rwp@John:3:1 @{Now} (\de\). Songs:often in John \de\ is explanatory and transitional, not adversative. Nicodemus is an instance of Christ's knowledge of men (2:25|) and of one to whom he did trust himself unlike those in strkjv@2:24|. As a Pharisee "he belonged to that party which with all its bigotry contained a salt of true patriotism and could rear such cultured and high-toned men as Gamaliel and Paul" (Marcus Dods). {Named Nicodemus} (\Nikodˆmos onoma\). Same construction as in strkjv@1:6|, "Nicodemus name to him." Songs:Revelation:6:8|. It is a Greek name and occurs in Josephus (_Ant_. XIV. iii. 2) as the name of an ambassador from Aristobulus to Pompey. Only in John in N.T. (here, strkjv@7:50; strkjv@19:39|). He was a Pharisee, a member of the Sanhedrin, and wealthy. There is no evidence that he was the young ruler of strkjv@Luke:18:18| because of \arch“n\ (ruler) here.

rwp@John:3:2 @{The same} (\houtos\). "This one." {By night} (\nuktos\). Genitive of time. That he came at all is remarkable, not because there was any danger as was true at a later period, but because of his own prominence. He wished to avoid comment by other members of the Sanhedrin and others. Jesus had already provoked the opposition of the ecclesiastics by his assumption of Messianic authority over the temple. There is no ground for assigning this incident to a later period, for it suits perfectly here. Jesus was already in the public eye (2:23|) and the interest of Nicodemus was real and yet he wished to be cautious. {Rabbi} (\Rabbei\). See on ¯1:38|. Technically Jesus was not an acknowledged Rabbi of the schools, but Nicodemus does recognize him as such and calls him "My Master" just as Andrew and John did (1:38|). It was a long step for Nicodemus as a Pharisee to take, for the Pharisees had closely scrutinized the credentials of the Baptist in strkjv@1:19-24| (Milligan and Moulton's _Comm_.). {We know} (\oidamen\). Second perfect indicative first person plural. He seems to speak for others of his class as the blind man does in strkjv@9:31|. Westcott thinks that Nicodemus has been influenced partly by the report of the commission sent to the Baptist (1:19-27|). {Thou art a teacher come from God} (\apo theou elˆluthas didaskalos\). "Thou hast come from God as a teacher." Second perfect active indicative of \erchomai\ and predicative nominative \didaskalos\. This is the explanation of Nicodemus for coming to Jesus, obscure Galilean peasant as he seemed, evidence that satisfied one of the leaders in Pharisaism. {Can do} (\dunatai poiein\). "Can go on doing" (present active infinitive of \poie“\ and so linear). {These signs that thou doest} (\tauta ta sˆmeia ha su poieis\). Those mentioned in strkjv@2:23| that convinced so many in the crowd and that now appeal to the scholar. Note \su\ (thou) as quite out of the ordinary. The scorn of Jesus by the rulers held many back to the end (John:12:42|), but Nicodemus dares to feel his way. {Except God be with him} (\ean mˆ ˆi ho theos met' autou\). Condition of the third class, presented as a probability, not as a definite fact. He wanted to know more of the teaching accredited thus by God. Jesus went about doing good because God was with him, Peter says (Acts:10:38|).

rwp@John:3:4 @Being old (\ger“n “n\). Nicodemus was probably familiar with the notion of re-birth for proselytes to Judaism for the Gentiles, but not with the idea that a Jew had to be reborn. But "this stupid misunderstanding" (Bernard) of the meaning of Jesus is precisely what John represents Nicodemus as making. How "old" Nicodemus was we do not know, but surely too old to be the young ruler of strkjv@Luke:18:18| as Bacon holds. The blunder of Nicodemus is emphasized by the second question with the \mˆ\ expecting the negative answer. The use of \deuteron\ adds to the grotesqueness of his blunder. The learned Pharisee is as jejune in spiritual insight as the veriest tyro. This is not an unheard of phenomenon.

rwp@John:3:5 @{Of water and the Spirit} (\ex hudatos kai pneumatos\). Nicodemus had failed utterly to grasp the idea of the spiritual birth as essential to entrance into the Kingdom of God. He knew only Jews as members of that kingdom, the political kingdom of Pharisaic hope which was to make all the world Jewish (Pharisaic) under the King Messiah. Why does Jesus add \ex hudatos\ here? In verse 3| we have "\an“then\" (from above) which is repeated in verse 7|, while in verse 8| we have only \ek tou pneumatos\ (of the Spirit) in the best manuscripts. Many theories exist. One view makes baptism, referred to by \ex hudatos\ (coming up out of water), essential to the birth of the Spirit, as the means of obtaining the new birth of the Spirit. If so, why is water mentioned only once in the three demands of Jesus (3,5,7|)? Calvin makes water and Spirit refer to the one act (the cleansing work of the Spirit). Some insist on the language in verse 6| as meaning the birth of the flesh coming in a sac of water in contrast to the birth of the Spirit. One wonders after all what was the precise purpose of Jesus with Nicodemus, the Pharisaic ceremonialist, who had failed to grasp the idea of spiritual birth which is a commonplace to us. By using water (the symbol before the thing signified) first and adding Spirit, he may have hoped to turn the mind of Nicodemus away from mere physical birth and, by pointing to the baptism of John on confession of sin which the Pharisees had rejected, to turn his attention to the birth from above by the Spirit. That is to say the mention of "water" here may have been for the purpose of helping Nicodemus without laying down a fundamental principle of salvation as being by means of baptism. Bernard holds that the words \hudatos kai\ (water and) do not belong to the words of Jesus, but "are a gloss, added to bring the saying of Jesus into harmony with the belief and practice of a later generation." Here Jesus uses \eiselthein\ (enter) instead of \idein\ (see) of verse 3|, but with the same essential idea (participation in the kingdom).

rwp@John:4:1 @{When therefore} (\H“s oun\). Reference to strkjv@3:22f|. the work of the Baptist and the jealousy of his disciples. \Oun\ is very common in John's Gospel in such transitions. {The Lord} (\ho Kurios\). Songs:the best manuscripts (Neutral Alexandrian), though the Western class has \ho Iˆsous\. Mark usually has \ho Iˆsous\ and Luke often \ho Kurios\. In the narrative portion of John we have usually \ho Iˆsous\, but \ho Kurios\ in five passages (4:1; strkjv@6:23; strkjv@11:2; strkjv@20:20; strkjv@21:12|). There is no reason why John should not apply \ho Kurios\ to Jesus in the narrative sections as well as Luke. Bernard argues that these are "explanatory glosses," not in the first draft of the Gospel. But why? When John wrote his Gospel he certainly held Jesus to be \Kurios\ (Lord) as Luke did earlier when he wrote both Gospel and Acts This is hypercriticism. {Knew} (\egn“\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. The Pharisees knew this obvious fact. It was easy for Jesus to know the attitude of the Pharisees about it (2:24|). Already the Pharisees are suspicious of Jesus. {How that} (\hoti\). Declarative \hoti\ (indirect assertion). {Was making and baptizing more disciples than John} (\pleionas mathˆtas poiei kai baptizei ˆ I“anˆs\). Present active indicative in both verbs retained in indirect discourse. Recall the tremendous success of John's early ministry (Mark:1:5; strkjv@Matthew:3:5; strkjv@Luke:3:7,15|) in order to see the significance of this statement that Jesus had forged ahead of him in popular favour. Already the Pharisees had turned violently against John who had called them broods of vipers. It is most likely that they drew John out about the marriage of Herod Antipas and got him involved directly with the tetrarch so as to have him cast into prison (Luke:3:19f.|). Josephus (_Ant_. XVIII. v. 2) gives a public reason for this act of Herod Antipas, the fear that John would "raise a rebellion," probably the public reason for his private vengeance as given by Luke. Apparently John was cast into prison, though recently still free (John:3:24|), before Jesus left for Galilee. The Pharisees, with John out of the way, turn to Jesus with envy and hate.

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

rwp@John:8:30 @{Many believed on him} (\polloi episteusan eis auton\). Ingressive aorist active indicative, came to believe, nominally at any rate, as in strkjv@2:23|. But the tension was keen and Jesus proceeded to test the faith of these new believers from among the Pharisees.

rwp@John:8:41 @{Ye do the works of your father} (\humeis poieite ta erga tou patros hum“n\). Who is not Abraham and not God as Jesus plainly indicates. {We were not born of fornication} (\hˆmeis ek porneias egennˆthˆmen\). First aorist passive indicative of \genna“\. This they said as a proud boast. Jesus had admitted that they were physical (Deuteronomy:23:2|) descendants of Abraham (37|), but now denies that they are spiritual children of Abraham (like Paul in strkjv@Romans:9:7|). \Porneia\ is from \pornos\ (harlot) and that from \pernˆmi\, to sell, a woman who sells her body for sexual uses. It is vaguely possible that in this stern denial the Pharisees may have an indirect fling at Jesus as the bastard son of Mary (so Talmud). {We have one Father, even God} (\hena patera echomen ton theon\). No "even" in the Greek, "One Father we have, God." This in direct reply to the implication of Jesus (verse 38|) that God was not their spiritual Father.

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

rwp@John:8:48 @{Thou art a Samaritan and hast a demon} (\Samareitˆs ei su kai daimonion echeis\). On the spur of the moment in their rage and fury they can think of no meaner things to say. They know, of course, that Jesus was not a Samaritan, but he had acted like a Samaritan in challenging their peculiar spiritual privileges (4:9,39|). The charge of having a demon was an old one by the Pharisees (Matthew:12:24|) and it is repeated later (John:10:20|).

rwp@John:8:52 @{Now we know} (\nun egn“kamen\). Perfect active indicative of \gin“sk“\, state of completion, "Now since such talk we have come to certain knowledge that thou hast a demon" (verse 48|). {Is dead} (\apethanen\). Second aorist active indicative of \apothnˆsk“\. "Abraham died." {And thou sayest} (\kai su legeis\). Adversative use of \kai\, "and yet." Emphatic position of \su\ (thou). Same condition quoted as in verse 51|. {He shall never taste of death} (\ou me geusˆtai thanatou eis ton aiona\). Same emphatic negative with subjunctive as in verse 51|, but \geusˆtai\ (first aorist middle subjunctive of \geu“\ with genitive case \thanatou\ (death). Another Hebraism for dying like \the“rˆsˆi\ (see) in verse 51|. Used in strkjv@Hebrews:2:9| of the death of Jesus and in Synoptics (Matthew:16:28; strkjv@Mark:9:1; strkjv@Luke:9:27|). It occurs in the Talmud, but not in the O.T. The Pharisees thus did not misquote Jesus, though they misunderstood him.

rwp@John:8:55 @{And ye have not known him} (\kai ouk egn“kate auton\). Adversative use again of \kai\="and yet." Perfect active indicative of \gin“sk“\, the verb for experiential knowledge. This was true of the \kosmos\ (1:10; strkjv@17:25|) and of the hostile Jews (16:3|). Jesus prays that the world may know (17:23|) and the handful of disciples had come to know (17:25|). {But I know him} (\eg“ de oida auton\). Equipped by eternal fellowship to reveal the Father (1:1-18|). This peculiar intimate knowledge Jesus had already claimed (7:29|). Jesus used \oida\ (8:19; strkjv@15:21|) or \gin“sk“\ (17:23,25|) for the knowledge of the Father. No undue distinction can be drawn here. {And if I should say} (\kan eip“\). Third-class condition (concession), "even if I say," with \kai ean\ (\kan\) and second aorist active subjunctive. "Suppose I say." {I shall be like you a liar} (\esomai homoios humin pseustˆs\). Apodosis of the condition. \Homoios\ (like) is followed by the associative-instrumental case \humin\. The word \pseustˆs\ (liar), in spite of the statement that they are the children of the devil, the father of lying (8:44|), comes with a sudden jolt because it is a direct charge. This word liar is not considered polite today in public speech when hurled at definite individuals. There is a rather free use of the word in strkjv@1John:2:4,22; strkjv@4:20; strkjv@5:10|. It is not hard to imagine the quick anger of these Pharisees.

rwp@John:8:59 @{They took up stones therefore} (\ˆran oun lithous\). First aorist active indicative of \air“\, inferential use of \oun\. The time for argument had past. {To cast at him} (\hina bal“sin ep' auton\). Final clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \ball“\. Vivid picture of a mob ready to kill Jesus, already beginning to do so. {Hid himself} (\ekrubˆ\). Second aorist passive indicative of \krupt“\. He was hidden. No Docetic vanishing, but quietly and boldly Jesus went out of the temple. His hour had not yet come. Once again three months later the Pharisees will try to kill him, but he will pass out of their hands (10:39|).

rwp@John:9:13 @{They bring him} (\agousin auton\). Vivid dramatic present active of \ag“\. These neighbours bring him. {To the Pharisees} (\pros tous Pharisaious\). The accepted professional teachers who posed as knowing everything. The scribes were usually Pharisees. {Him that aforetime was blind} (\ton pote tuphlon\). Simply, "the once blind man."

rwp@John:9:14 @{Now it was the sabbath} (\ˆn de sabbaton\). Literally, "Now it was a sabbath" (no article). To the Pharisees this fact was a far more important matter than whether or how the thing was done. See Volumes I and II for discussions of the minute Sabbath regulations of the rabbis.

rwp@John:9:15 @{Again} (\palin\). Besides the questioning of the neighbours (verses 8,9|). {Therefore} (\oun\). Since he has been brought to the Pharisees who must make a show of wisdom. {Also asked him} (\ˆr“t“n auton kai\). Inchoative imperfect active of \er“ta“\, "began also to question him." {How he received his sight} (\p“s aneblepsen\). No denial as yet of the fact, only interest in the "how." {He put} (\epethˆken\). Genuine here, but see verse 6|. {And lo see} (\kai blep“\). That is the overwhelming fact.

rwp@John:9:16 @{Because he keepeth not the sabbath} (\hoti to sabbaton ou tˆrei\). This is reason (causal \hoti\) enough. He violates our rules about the Sabbath and therefore is a Sabbath-breaker as charged when here before (5:10,16,18|). Hence he is not "from God" (\para theou\). Songs:some. {How can a man that is a sinner do such signs?} (\P“s dunatai anthr“pos hamart“los toiauta sˆmeia poiein;\). This was the argument of Nicodemus, himself a Pharisee and one of the Sanhedrin, long ago (3:2|). It was a conundrum for the Pharisees. No wonder there was "a division" (\schisma\, schism, split, from \schiz“\) as in strkjv@7:43; strkjv@10:19|.

rwp@John:9:18 @{The Jews} (\hoi Ioudaioi\). Probably the incredulous and hostile section of the Pharisees in verse 16| (cf. strkjv@5:10|). {Did not believe} (\ouk episteusan\). The facts told by the man, "that he had been blind and had received his sight" (\hoti ˆn tuphlos kai aneblepsen\), conflicted with their theological views of God and the Sabbath. Songs:they refused belief "until they called the parents" (\he“s hotou eph“nˆsan tous goneis\). Usual construction of \he“s hotou\ ( = until which time, like \he“s\ alone) with aorist active indicative of \ph“ne“\, old verb from \ph“nˆ\ (voice, sound). They called out loud for his parents to throw light on this grave problem to cover up their own stupidity.

rwp@John:9:19 @{Is this your son who ye say was born blind? how doth he now see?} (\Houtos estin ho huios hum“n, hon humeis lˆgete hoti tuphlos egennˆthˆ; p“s oun blepei arti;\). It was shrewdly put with three questions in one in order to confuse the parents if possible and give the hostile Pharisees a handle.

rwp@John:9:20 @{We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind} (\Oidamen hoti houtos estin ho huios hˆm“n kai hoti tuphlos egennˆthˆ\). These two questions the parents answer clearly and thus cut the ground from under the disbelief of these Pharisees as to the fact of the cure (verse 18|). Songs:these Pharisees made a failure here.

rwp@John:9:21 @{But how he now seeth we know not} (\p“s de nun blepei ouk oidamen\). Concerning the third question they profess ignorance both as to the "how" (\p“s\) and the "who" (\tis\). {Opened} (\ˆnoixen\). First aorist active indicative with single augment of \anoig“\, same form as \ˆne“ixen\ (triple augment) in verse 17|. They were not witnesses of the cure and had the story only from the son as the Pharisees had. {He is of age} (\hˆlikian echei\). "He has maturity of age." He is an adult. A regular classical phrase in Plato, etc. The parents were wholly right and within their rights.

rwp@John:9:22 @{Because they feared the Jews} (\hoti ephobounto tous Ioudaious\). Imperfect middle, a continuing fear and not without reason. See already the whispers about Jesus because of fear of the Jews (7:13|). {Had agreed already} (\ˆdˆ sunetetheinto\). Past perfect middle of \suntithˆmi\, to put together, to form a compact (7:32,47-49|). {If any man should confess him to be Christ} (\ean tis auton homologˆsˆi Christon\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \homologe“\ and predicate accusative \Christon\. Jesus had made confession of himself before men the test of discipleship and denial the disproof (Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:8|). We know that many of the rulers nominally believed on Jesus (12:42|) and yet "did not confess him because of the Pharisees" (\alla dia tous Pharisaious ouch h“mologoun\), for the very reason given here, "that they might not be put out of the synagogue" (\hina mˆ aposunag“goi gen“ntai\). Small wonder then that here the parents cowered a bit. {That he should be put out of the synagogue} (\hina aposunag“gos genˆtai\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\. \Aposunag“gos\ (\apo\ and \sunag“gˆ\) is found in N.T. only here and strkjv@12:42; strkjv@16:2|. A purely Jewish word naturally. There were three kinds of excommunication (for thirty days, for thirty more, indefinitely).

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:11:46 @{Went away to the Pharisees} (\apˆlthon pros tous Pharisaious\). Second aorist active indicative of \aperchomai\. This "some" (\tines\) did who were deeply impressed and yet who did not have the courage to break away from the rabbis without consulting them. It was a crisis for the Sanhedrin.

rwp@John:11:47 @{Gathered a council} (\sunˆgagon sunedrion\). Second aorist active indicative of \sunag“\ and \sunedrion\, the regular word for the Sanhedrin (Matthew:5:22|, etc.), only here in John. Here a sitting or session of the Sanhedrin. Both chief priests (Sadducees) and Pharisees (mentioned no more in John after strkjv@7:57| save strkjv@12:19,42|) combine in the call (cf. strkjv@7:32|). From now on the chief priests (Sadducees) take the lead in the attacks on Jesus, though loyally supported by their opponents (the Pharisees). {And said} (\kai elegon\). Imperfect active of \leg“\, perhaps inchoative, "began to say." {What do we?} (\Ti poioumen;\). Present active (linear) indicative of \poie“\. Literally, "What are we doing?" {Doeth} (\poiei\). Better, "is doing" (present, linear action). He is active and we are idle. There is no mention of the raising of Lazarus as a fact, but it is evidently inoluded in the "many signs."

rwp@John:11:57 @{The chief priests and the Pharisees} (\hoi archiereis kai hoi Pharisaioi\). The Sanhedrin. {Had given commandment} (\ded“keisan entolas\). Past perfect active of \did“mi\. {That he should shew it} (\hina mˆnusˆi\). Sub-final \hina\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \mˆnu“\, old verb to disclose, to report formally (Acts:23:30|). {If any man knew} (\ean tis gn“i\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \gin“sk“\. {Where he was} (\pou estin\). Indirect question with interrogative adverb and present indicative \estin\ retained like \gn“i\ and \mˆnusˆi\ after the secondary tense \ded“keisan\. {That they might take him} (\hop“s pias“sin auton\). Purpose clause with \hop“s\ instead of \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \piaz“\ so often used before (7:44|, etc.).

rwp@John:12:2 @{Songs:they made him a supper there} (\epoiˆsan oun aut“i deipnon ekei\). Here again \oun\ is not inferential, but merely transitional. This supper is given by Mark (Mark:14:3-9|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6-13|) just two days (Mark:14:1|) before the passover, that is on our Tuesday evening (beginning of Jewish Wednesday), while John mentions (12:2-9|) it immediately after the arrival of Jesus in Bethany (12:1|). One must decide which date to follow. Mark and Matthew and Luke follow it with the visit of Judas to the Sanhedrin with an offer to betray Jesus as if exasperated by the rebuke by Jesus at the feast. Bernard considers that John "is here more probably accurate." It all turns on John's purpose in putting it here. This is the last mention of Jesus in Bethany and he may have mentioned it proleptically for that reason as seems to me quite reasonable. Westcott notes that in chapter 12 John closes his record of the public ministry of the Lord relative to the disciples at this feast (1-11|), to the multitude in the triumphal entry (12-19|), to the world outside in the visit of the Greeks (20-36a|), and with two summary judgements (36b-50|). There is no further reason to refer to the feast in the house of another Simon when a sinful woman anointed Jesus (Luke:7:36-50|). It is no credit to Luke or to John with Mark and Matthew to have them all making a jumble like that. There were two anointings by two absolutely different women for wholly different purposes. See the discussion on Luke for further details. {And Martha served} (\kai hˆ Martha diˆkonei\). Imperfect active of \diakone“\, picturing Martha true to the account of her in strkjv@Luke:10:40| (\pollˆn diakonian\, \diakonein\ as here). But this fact does not show that Martha was the wife of this Simon at all. They were friends and neighbours and Martha was following her bent. It is Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6|) who mention the name of the host. It is not Simon the Pharisee (Luke:7:36|), but Simon the leper (Mark:14:3; strkjv@Matthew:26:6|) in whose house they meet. The name is common enough. The Simon in Luke was sharply critical of Jesus; this one is full of gratitude for what Jesus has done for him. {That sat at meat} (\t“n anakeimen“n\). "That lay back," reclined as they did, articular participle (ablative case after \ek\) of the common verb \anakeimai\. Perhaps Simon gave the feast partly in honour of Lazarus as well as of Jesus since all were now talking of both (John:12:9|). It was a gracious occasion. The guests were Jesus, the twelve apostles, and Martha, Mary, and Lazarus.

rwp@John:20:9 @{For} (\gar\). Explanatory use of \gar\. {The Scripture} (\tˆn graphˆn\). Probably strkjv@Psalms:16:10|. Jesus had repeatedly foretold his resurrection, but that was all forgotten in the great sorrow on their hearts. Only the chief priests and Pharisees recalled the words of Jesus (Matthew:27:62ff.|). {Must} (\dei\). For this use of \dei\ concerning Christ's death and resurrection see strkjv@Mark:8:31; strkjv@Matthew:26:54; strkjv@Luke:9:22; strkjv@17:25; strkjv@22:37; strkjv@24:7,26,44; strkjv@John:3:14; strkjv@12:34; strkjv@Acts:1:16|. Jesus had put emphasis on both the fact and the necessity of his resurrection which the disciples slowly perceived.

rwp@Luke:3:7 @{To the multitude that went out} (\tois exporeuomenois ochlois\). Plural, {Multitudes}. The present participle also notes the repetition of the crowds as does \elegen\ (imperfect), he used to say. strkjv@Matthew:3:7-10| singles out the message of John to the Pharisees and Sadducees, which see for discussion of details. Luke gives a summary of his preaching to the crowds with special replies to these inquiries: the multitudes, 10,11|, the publicans 12,13|, the soldiers 14|. {To be baptized of him} (\baptisthˆnai hup' autou\). This is the purpose of their coming. strkjv@Matthew:3:7| has simply "to his baptism." John's metaphors are from the wilderness (vipers, fruits, axe, slave boy loosing sandals, fire, fan, thrashing-floor, garner, chaff, stones). {Who warned you?} (\tis hepedeixen humin;\). The verb is like our "suggest" by proof to eye, ear, or brain (Luke:6:47; strkjv@12:5; strkjv@Acts:9:16; strkjv@20:35; strkjv@Matthew:3:7|). Nowhere else in the N.T. though common ancient word (\hupodeiknumi\, show under, point out, give a tip or private hint).

rwp@Luke:4:13 @{Every temptation} (\panta peirasmon\). These three kinds exhaust the avenues of approach (the appetites, the nerves, the ambitions). Satan tried them all. They formed a cycle (Vincent). Hence "he was in all points tempted like as we are" (Hebrews:4:15|). "The enemy tried all his weapons, and was at all points defeated" (Plummer). Probably all during the forty days the devil tempted him, but three are representatives of all. {For a season} (\achri kairou\). Until a good opportunity should return, the language means. We are thus to infer that the devil returned to his attack from time to time. In the Garden of Gethsemane he tempted Jesus more severely than here. He was here trying to thwart the purpose of Jesus to go on with his Messianic plans, to trip him at the start. In Gethsemane the devil tried to make Jesus draw back from the culmination of the Cross with all its agony and horror. The devil attacked Jesus by the aid of Peter (Mark:8:33|), through the Pharisees (John:8:40ff.|), besides Gethsemane (Luke:22:42,53|).

rwp@Luke:4:15 @{And he taught} (\kai autos edidasken\). Luke is fond of this mode of transition so that it is not certain that he means to emphasize "he himself" as distinct from the rumour about him. It is the imperfect tense, descriptive of the habit of Jesus. The synagogues were an open door to Jesus before the hostility of the Pharisees was aroused. {Being glorified} (\doxazomenos\). Present passive participle, durative action like the imperfect \edidasken\. General admiration of Jesus everywhere. He was the wonder teacher of his time. Even the rabbis had not yet learned how to ridicule and oppose Jesus.

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

rwp@Luke:5:30 @{The Pharisees and their scribes} (\hoi Pharisaioi kai hoi grammateis aut“n\). Note article with each substantive and the order, not "scribes and Pharisees," but "the Pharisees and the scribes of them" (the Pharisees). Some manuscripts omit "their," but strkjv@Mark:2:16| (the scribes of the Pharisees) shows that it is correct here. Some of the scribes were Sadducees. It is only the Pharisees who find fault here. {Murmured} (\egogguzon\). Imperfect active. Picturesque onomatopoetic word that sounds like its meaning. A late word used of the cooing of doves. It is like the buzzing of bees, like \tonthorruz“\ of literary Greek. They were not invited to this feast and would not have come if they had been. But, not being invited, they hang on the outside and criticize the disciples of Jesus for being there. The crowd was so large that the feast may have been served out in the open court at Levi's house, a sort of reclining garden party. {The publicans and sinners} (\t“n tel“n“n kai hamart“l“n\). Here Luke is quoting the criticism of the critics. Note one article making one group of all of them.

rwp@Luke:5:33 @{Often} (\pukna\). Only in Luke. Common word for thick, compact, often. {And make supplications} (\kai deˆseis poiountai\). Only in Luke. {But thine} (\hoi de soi\). Sharp contrast between the conduct of the disciples of Jesus and those of John and the Pharisees who here appear together as critics of Christ and his disciples (Mark:2:18; strkjv@Matthew:9:14|), though Luke does not bring that out sharply. It is probable that Levi had his reception for Jesus on one of the Jewish fast days and, if so, this would give special edge to their criticism.

rwp@Luke:5:39 @{The old is good} (\Hosea:palaios chrˆstos estin\). Songs:the best MSS. rather that \chrˆstoteros\, comparative (better). Westcott and Hort wrongly bracket the whole verse, though occurring in Aleph, B C L and most of the old documents. It is absent in D and some of the old Latin MSS. It is the philosophy of the obscurantist, that is here pictured by Christ. "The prejudiced person will not even try the new, or admit that it has any merits. He knows that the old is pleasant, and suits him; and that is enough; he is not going to change" (Plummer). This is Christ's picture of the reactionary Pharisees.

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

rwp@Luke:6:7 @{The scribes and the Pharisees} (\hoi grammateis kai hoi Pharisaioi\). Only Luke here though Pharisees named in strkjv@Matthew:12:14| and Pharisees and Herodians in strkjv@Mark:3:6|. {Watched him} (\paretˆrounto auton\). Imperfect middle, were watching for themselves on the side (\para\). strkjv@Mark:3:2| has the imperfect active \paretˆroun\. Common verb, but the proposition \para\ gave an extra touch, watching either assiduously like the physician at the bedside or insidiously with evil intent as here. {Would heal} (\therapeusei\). But the present active indicative (\therapeuei\) may be the correct text here. Songs:Westcott and Hort. {That they might find out how to accuse him} (\hina heur“sin katˆgorein autou\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \heurisk“\ and the infinitive with it means to find out how to do a thing. They were determined to make a case against Jesus. They felt sure that their presence would prevent any spurious work on the part of Jesus.

rwp@Luke:6:8 @{But he knew their thoughts} (\autos de ˆidei tous dialogismous aut“n\). In Luke alone. Imperfect in sense, second past perfect in form \ˆidei\ from \oida\. Jesus, in contrast to these spies (Plummer), read their intellectual processes like an open book. {His hand withered} (\xˆran tˆn cheira\). Predicate position of the adjective. Songs:in strkjv@Mark:3:3|. {Stand forth} (\stˆthi\). Luke alone has this verb, second aorist active imperative. strkjv@Mark:3:3| has {Arise into the midst} (\egeire eis to meson\). Luke has {Arise and step forth into the midst} (\egeire kai stˆthi eis to meson\). Christ worked right out in the open where all could see. It was a moment of excitement when the man stepped forth (\estˆ\) there before them all.

rwp@Luke:6:9 @{I ask you} (\eper“t“ humƒs\). They had questions in their hearts about Jesus. He now asks in addition (\ep'\) an open question that brings the whole issue into the open. {A life} (\psuchˆn\). Songs:the Revised Version. The rabbis had a rule: _Periculum vitae pellit sabbatum_. But it had to be a Jew whose life was in peril on the sabbath. The words of Jesus cut to the quick. {Or to destroy it} (\ˆ apolesai\). On this very day these Pharisees were plotting to destroy Jesus (verse 7|).

rwp@Luke:6:24 @{But woe unto you that are rich} (\Plˆn ouai humin tois plousiois\). Sharp contrast (\plˆn\). As a matter of fact the rich Pharisees and Sadducees were the chief opposers of Christ as of the early disciples later (James:5:1-6|). {Ye have received} (\apechete\). Receipt in full \apech“\ means as the papyri show. {Consolation} (\paraklˆsin\). From \parakale“\, to call to one's side, to encourage, to help, to cheer.

rwp@Luke:7:28 @{There is none} (\oudeis estin\). No one exists, this means. strkjv@Matthew:11:11| has \ouk egˆgertai\ (hath not arisen). See Matthew for discussion of "but little" and "greater."

rwp@Luke:7:33 @{John the Baptist is come} (\elˆluthen\). Second perfect active indicative where strkjv@Matthew:11:18| has \ˆlthen\ second aorist active indicative. Songs:as to verse 34|. Luke alone has "bread" and "wine." Otherwise these verses like strkjv@Matthew:11:18,19|, which see for discussion of details. There are actually critics today who say that Jesus was called the friend of sinners and even of harlots because he loved them and their ways and so deserved the slur cast upon him by his enemies. If men can say that today we need not wonder that the Pharisees and lawyers said it then to justify their own rejection of Jesus.

rwp@Luke:7:36 @{That he would eat with him} (\hina phagˆi met' autou\). Second aorist active subjunctive. The use of \hina\ after \er“ta“\ (see also strkjv@Luke:16:27|) is on the border between the pure object clause and the indirect question (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1046) and the pure final clause. Luke has two other instances of Pharisees who invited Jesus to meals (11:37; strkjv@14:1|) and he alone gives them. This is the Gospel of Hospitality (Ragg). Jesus would dine with a Pharisee or with a publican (Luke:5:29; strkjv@Mark:2:15; strkjv@Matthew:9:10|) and even invited himself to be the guest of Zaccheus (Luke:9:5|). This Pharisee was not as hostile as the leaders in Jerusalem. It is not necessary to think this Pharisee had any sinister motive in his invitation though he was not overly friendly (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:7:37 @{A woman which was in the city, a sinner} (\gunˆ hˆtis en tˆi polei hamart“los\). Probably in Capernaum. The use of \hˆtis\ means "Who was of such a character as to be" (cf. strkjv@8:3|) and so more than merely the relative \hˆ\, who, that is, "who was a sinner in the city," a woman of the town, in other words, and known to be such. \Hamart“los\, from \hamartan“\, to sin, means devoted to sin and uses the same form for feminine and masculine. It is false and unjust to Mary Magdalene, introduced as a new character in strkjv@Luke:8:2|, to identify this woman with her. Luke would have no motive in concealing her name here and the life of a courtesan would be incompatible with the sevenfold possession of demons. Still worse is it to identify this courtesan not only with Mary Magdalene, but also with Mary of Bethany simply because it is a Simon who gives there a feast to Jesus when Mary of Bethany does a beautiful deed somewhat like this one here (Mark:14:3-9; strkjv@Matthew:26:6-13; strkjv@John:12:2-8|). Certainly Luke knew full well the real character of Mary of Bethany (10:38-42|) so beautifully pictured by him. But a falsehood, once started, seems to have more lives than the cat's proverbial nine. The very name Magdalene has come to mean a repentant courtesan. But we can at least refuse to countenance such a slander on Mary Magdalene and on Mary of Bethany. This sinful woman had undoubtedly repented and changed her life and wished to show her gratitude to Jesus who had rescued her. Her bad reputation as a harlot clung to her and made her an unwelcome visitor in the Pharisee's house. {When she knew} (\epignousa\). Second aorist active participle from \epigin“sk“\, to know fully, to recognize. She came in by a curious custom of the time that allowed strangers to enter a house uninvited at a feast, especially beggars seeking a gift. This woman was an intruder whereas Mary of Bethany was an invited guest. "Many came in and took their places on the side seats, uninvited and yet unchallenged. They spoke to those at table on business or the news of the day, and our host spoke freely to them" (Trench in his _Parables_, describing a dinner at a Consul's house at Damietta). {He was sitting at meat} (\katakeitai\). Literally, he is reclining (present tense retained in indirect discourse in Greek). {An alabaster cruse of ointment} (\alabastron murou\). See on ¯Matthew:26:7| for discussion of \alabastron\ and \murou\.

rwp@Luke:7:39 @{This man} (\houtos\). Contemptuous, this fellow. {If he were a (the) prophet} (\ei ˆn [ho] prophˆtˆs\). Condition of the second class, determined as unfulfilled. The Pharisee assumes that Jesus is not a prophet (or the prophet, reading of B, that he claims to be). A Greek condition puts the thing from the standpoint of the speaker or writer. It does not deal with the actual facts, but only with the statement about the facts. {Would have perceived} (\egin“sken an\). Wrong translation, would now perceive or know (which he assumes that Jesus does not do). The protasis is false and the conclusion also. He is wrong in both. The conclusion (apodosis), like the condition, deals here with the present situation and so both use the imperfect indicative (\an\ in the conclusion, a mere device for making it plain that it is not a condition of the first class). {Who and what manner of woman} (\tis kai potapˆ hˆ gunˆ\). She was notorious in person and character.

rwp@Luke:7:44 @{Turning} (\strapheis\). Second aorist passive participle. {Seest thou} (\blepeis\). For the first time Jesus looks at the woman and he asks the Pharisee to look at her. She was behind Jesus. Jesus was an invited guest. The Pharisee had neglected some points of customary hospitality. The contrasts here made have the rhythm of Hebrew poetry. In each contrast the first word is the point of defect in Simon: {water} (44), {kiss} (45), {oil} (46).

rwp@Luke:7:48 @{Are forgiven} (\aphe“ntai\). As in verse 47|. Remain forgiven, Jesus means, in spite of the slur of the Pharisee.

rwp@Luke:7:49 @{Who even forgiveth sins} (\hos kai hamartias aphiˆsin\). Present indicative active of same verb, \aphiˆmi\. Once before the Pharisees considered Jesus guilty of blasphemy in claiming the power to forgive sins (Luke:5:21|). Jesus read their inmost thoughts as he always does.

rwp@Luke:8:23 @{He fell asleep} (\aphupn“sen\). First aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \aphupno“\, to put to sleep, to fall off to sleep, a late verb for which the older Greek used \kathupno“\. Originally \aphupno“\ meant to waken from sleep, then to fall off to sleep (possibly a medical use). This is the only passage which speaks of the sleep of Jesus. Here only in the N.T. {Came down} (\katebˆ\). Second aorist active indicative of \katabain“\, common verb. It was literally true. These wind storms (\lailaps\. Songs:also strkjv@Mark:4:37|) rushed from Hermon down through the Jordan gorge upon the Sea of Galilee and shook it like a tempest (Matthew:8:24|). Mark's (Mark:4:37|) vivid use of the dramatic present \ginetai\ (ariseth) is not so precise as Luke's "came down." See on ¯Matthew:8:24|. These sudden squalls were dangerous on this small lake. {They were filling} (\suneplˆrounto\). Imperfect passive. It was the boat that was being filled (Mark:4:37|) and it is here applied to the navigators as sailors sometimes spoke. An old verb, but in the N.T. used only by Luke (8:23; strkjv@9:51; strkjv@Acts:2:1|). {Were in jeopardy} (\ekinduneuon\). Imperfect active, vivid description. Old verb, but in the N.T. only here, strkjv@Acts:19:27; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:30|.

rwp@Luke:10:16 @{Rejecteth him that sent me} (\athetei ton aposteilanta me\). These solemn words form a fit close for this discourse to the Seventy. The fate of Chorazin, Bethsaida, Capernaum will befall those who set aside (\a\ privative and \thete“\, from \tithˆmi\) the mission and message of these messengers of Christ. See this verb used in strkjv@7:30| of the attitude of the scribes and Pharisees toward John and Jesus. It is this thought that makes it so grave a responsibility to be co-workers with Christ, high privilege as it is (John:9:4|).

rwp@Luke:11:38 @{That he had not first washed before dinner} (\hoti ou pr“ton ebaptisthˆ pro tou aristou\). The verb is first aorist passive indicative of \baptiz“\, to dip or to immerse. Here it is applied to the hands. It was the Jewish custom to dip the hands in water before eating and often between courses for ceremonial purification. In Galilee the Pharisees and scribes had sharply criticized the disciples for eating with unwashed hands (Mark:7:1-23; strkjv@Matthew:15:1-20|) when Jesus had defended their liberty and had opposed making a necessity of such a custom (tradition) in opposition to the command of God. Apparently Jesus on this occasion had himself reclined at the breakfast (not dinner) without this ceremonial dipping of the hands in water. The Greek has "first before" (\pr“ton pro\), a tautology not preserved in the translation.

rwp@Luke:11:39 @{The Lord} (\ho kurios\). The Lord Jesus plainly and in the narrative portion of Luke. {Now} (\nun\). Probably refers to him. You Pharisees do now what was formerly done. {The platter} (\tou pinakos\). The dish. Old word, rendered "the charger" in strkjv@Matthew:14:8|. Another word for "platter" (\paropsis\) in strkjv@Matthew:23:25| means "side-dish." {But your inward part} (\to de es“then hum“n\). The part within you (Pharisees). They keep the external regulations, but their hearts are full of plunder (\harpagˆs\, from \harpaz“\, to seize) and wickedness (\ponˆrias\, from \ponˆros\, evil man). See strkjv@Matthew:23:25| for a like indictment of the Pharisees for care for the outside of the cup but neglect of what is on the inside. Both inside and outside should be clean, but the inside first.

rwp@Luke:11:42 @{Tithe} (\apodekatoute\). Late verb for the more common \dekateu“\. Songs:in strkjv@Matthew:23:23|. Take a tenth off (\apo-\). Rue (\pˆganon\). Botanical term in late writers from \pˆgnumi\, to make fast because of its thick leaves. Here strkjv@Matthew:23:23| has "anise." {Every herb} (\pƒn lachanon\). General term as in strkjv@Mark:4:32|. Matthew has "cummin." {Pass by} (\parerchesthe\). Present middle indicative of \parerchomai\, common verb, to go by or beside. strkjv@Matthew:23:23| has "ye have left undone" (\aphˆkate\). Luke here has "love" (\agapˆn\), not in Matthew. {Ought} (\edei\). As in Matthew. Imperfect of a present obligation, not lived up to just like our "ought" (\owed\, not paid). \Pareinai\, as in Matthew, the second aorist active infinitive of \aphiˆmi\. to leave off. Common verb. Luke does not have the remark about straining out the gnat and swallowing the camel (Matthew:23:34|). It is plain that the terrible exposure of the scribes and Pharisees in strkjv@Matthew:23| in the temple was simply the culmination of previous conflicts such as this one.

rwp@Luke:11:43 @{The chief seats in the synagogues} (\tˆn pr“tokathedrian en tais sunag“gais\). Singular here, plural in strkjv@Matthew:23:6|. This semi-circular bench faced the congregation. strkjv@Matthew:23:6| has also the chief place at feasts given by Luke also in that discourse (20:46|) as well as in strkjv@14:7|, a marked characteristic of the Pharisees.

rwp@Luke:11:44 @{The tombs which appear not} (\ta mnˆneia ta adˆla\). These hidden graves would give ceremonial defilement for seven days (Numbers:19:16|). Hence they were usually whitewashed as a warning. Songs:in strkjv@Matthew:23:27| the Pharisees are called "whited sepulchres." Men do not know how rotten they are. The word \adˆlos\ (\a\ privative and \dˆlos\, apparent or plain) occurs in the N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:14:8|, though an old and common word. {Here men walking around} (\peripatountes\) walk over the tombs without knowing it. These three woes cut to the quick and evidently made the Pharisees wince.

rwp@Luke:11:45 @{Thou reproachest us also} (\kai hˆmƒs hubrizeis\). Because the lawyers (scribes) were usually Pharisees. The verb \hubriz“\ is an old one and common for outrageous treatment, a positive insult (so strkjv@Luke:18:32; strkjv@Matthew:22:6; strkjv@Acts:14;5; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:2|). Songs:Jesus proceeds to give the lawyers three woes as he had done to the Pharisees.

rwp@Luke:11:53 @{From thence} (\k'akeithen\). Out of the Pharisee's house. What became of the breakfast we are not told, but the rage of both Pharisees and lawyers knew no bounds. {To press upon him} (\enechein\). An old Greek verb to hold in, to be enraged at, to have it in for one. It is the same verb used of the relentless hatred of Herodias for John the Baptist (Mark:6:19|). {To provoke him to speak} (\apostomatizein\). From \apo\ and \stoma\ (mouth). Plato uses it of repeating to a pupil for him to recite from memory, then to recite by heart (Plutarch). Here (alone in the N.T.) the verb means to ply with questions, to entice to answers, to catechize. {Of many things} (\peri pleion“n\). "Concerning more (comparative) things." They were stung to the quick by these woes which laid bare their hollow hypocrisy.

rwp@Luke:11:54 @{Laying wait for him} (\enedreuontes auton\). An old verb from \en\ and \hedra\, a seat, so to lie in ambush for one. Here only and strkjv@Acts:23:21| in the N.T. Vivid picture of the anger of these rabbis who were treating Jesus as if he were a beast of prey. {To catch something out of his mouth} (\thˆreusai to ek tou stomatos autou\). An old Greek verb, though here only in the N.T., from \thˆra\ (cf. strkjv@Romans:11:9|), to ensnare, to catch in hunting, to hunt. These graphic words from the chase show the rage of the rabbis toward Jesus. Luke gives more details here than in strkjv@20:45-47; strkjv@Matthew:23:1-7|, but there is no reason at all why Jesus should not have had this conflict at the Pharisee's breakfast before that in the temple in the great Tuesday debate.

rwp@Luke:12:1 @{In the meantime} (\en hois\). It is a classic idiom to start a sentence or even a paragraph as here with a relative, "in which things or circumstances," without any expressed antecedent other than the incidents in strkjv@11:53f|. In strkjv@12:3| Luke actually begins the sentence with two relatives \anth' h“n hosa\ (wherefore whatsoever). {Many thousands} (\muriad“n\). Genitive absolute with \episunachtheis“n\ (first aorist passive participle feminine plural because of \muriad“n\), a double compound late verb, \episunag“\, to gather together unto. The word "myriads" is probably hyperbolical as in strkjv@Acts:21:20|, but in the sense of ten thousand, as in strkjv@Acts:19:19|, it means a very large crowd apparently drawn together by the violent attacks of the rabbis against Jesus. {Insomuch that they trode one upon another} (\h“ste katapatein allˆlous\). The imagination must complete the picture of this jam. {Unto his disciples first of all} (\pros tous mathˆtas autou pr“ton\). This long discourse in strkjv@Luke:12| is really a series of separate talks to various groups in the vast crowds around Jesus. This particular talk goes through verse 12|. {Beware of} (\prosechete heautois apo\). Put your mind (\noun\ understood) for yourselves (dative) and avoid (\apo\ with the ablative). {The leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocrisy} (\tˆs zumˆs hˆtis estin hupocrisis t“n Pharisai“n\). In strkjv@Mark:8:15| Jesus had coupled the lesson of the Pharisees with that of Herod, in strkjv@Matthew:16:6| with that of the Sadducees also. He had long ago called the Pharisees hypocrites (Matthew:6:2,5,16|). The occasion was ripe here for this crisp saying. In strkjv@Matthew:13:33| leaven does not have an evil sense as here, which see. See strkjv@Matthew:23:13| for hypocrites. Hypocrisy was the leading Pharisaic vice (Bruce) and was a mark of sanctity to hide an evil heart.

rwp@Luke:12:4 @{Unto you my friends} (\humin tois philois\). As opposed to the Pharisees and lawyers in strkjv@11:43,46,53|. {Be not afraid of} (\mˆ phobˆthˆte apo\). First aorist passive subjunctive with \mˆ\, ingressive aorist, do not become afraid of, with \apo\ and the ablative like the Hebrew _min_ and the English "be afraid of," a translation Hebraism as in strkjv@Matthew:10:28| (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 102). {Have no more that they can do} (\mˆ echont“n perissoteron ti poiˆsai\). Luke often uses the infinitive thus with \ech“\, a classic idiom (7:40,42; strkjv@12:4,50; strkjv@14:14; strkjv@Acts:4:14|, etc.).

rwp@Luke:12:54 @{To the multitudes also} (\kai tois ochlois\). After the strong and stirring words just before with flash and force Jesus turns finally in this series of discourses to the multitudes again as in verse 15|. There are similar sayings to these verses 54-59| in strkjv@Matthew:16:1f; strkjv@5:25f|. There is a good deal of difference in phraseology whether that is due to difference of source or different use of the same source (Q or Logia) we do not know. Not all the old MSS. give strkjv@Matthew:16:2,3|. In Matthew the Pharisees and Sadducees were asking for a sign from heaven as they often did. These signs of the weather, "a shower" (\ombros\, strkjv@Luke:12:54|) due to clouds in the west, "a hot wave" (\kaus“n\, verse 55) due to a south wind (\noton\) blowing, "fair weather" (\eudia\, strkjv@Matthew:16:2|) when the sky is red, are appealed to today. They have a more or less general application due to atmospheric and climatic conditions.

rwp@Luke:13:31 @{In that very hour} (\en autˆi tˆi h“rƒi\). Luke's favourite notation of time. {Pharisees} (\Pharisaioi\). Here we see the Pharisees in a new role, warning Jesus against the machinations of Herod, when they are plotting themselves.

rwp@Luke:13:32 @{That fox} (\tˆi al“peki tautˆi\). This epithet for the cunning and cowardice of Herod shows clearly that Jesus understood the real attitude and character of the man who had put John the Baptist to death and evidently wanted to get Jesus into his power in spite of his superstitious fears that he might be John the Baptist _redivivus_. The message of Jesus means that he is independent of the plots and schemes of both Herod and the Pharisees. The preacher is often put in a tight place by politicians who are quite willing to see him shorn of all real power. {Cures} (\iaseis\). Old word, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:4:22,30|. {I am perfected} (\teleioumai\). Present passive indicative of \teleio“\, old verb from \teleios\, to bring to perfection, frequent in the N.T. Used in strkjv@Hebrews:2:10| of the Father's purpose in the humanity of Christ. Perfect humanity is a process and Jesus was passing through that, without sin, but not without temptation and suffering. It is the prophetic present with the sense of the future.

rwp@Luke:14:3 @{Answering} (\apokritheis\). First aorist passive participle without the passive meaning. Jesus answered the thoughts of those mentioned in verse 1|. Here "lawyers and Pharisees" are treated as one class with one article (\tous\) whereas in strkjv@7:30| they are treated as two classes with separate articles. {Or not} (\ˆ ou\). The dilemma forestalled any question by them. {They held their peace} (\hˆsuchasan\). Ingressive aorist active of old verb \hˆsuchaz“\. They became silent, more so than before.

rwp@Luke:14:5 @{An ass or an ox} (\onos ˆ bous\). But Westcott and Hort \huios ˆ bous\ ({a son or an ox}). The manuscripts are much divided between \huios\ (son) and \onos\ (ass) which in the abbreviated uncials looked much alike (TC, OC) and were much alike. The sentence in the Greek reads literally thus: Whose ox or ass of you shall fall (\peseitai\, future middle of \pipto\) into a well and he (the man) will not straightway draw him up (\anaspasei\, future active of \anaspa“\) on the sabbath day? The very form of the question is a powerful argument and puts the lawyers and the Pharisees hopelessly on the defensive.

rwp@Luke:14:7 @{A parable for those which were bidden} (\pros tous keklˆmenous parabolˆn\). Perfect passive participle of \kale“\, to call, to invite. This parable is for the guests who were there and who had been watching Jesus. {When he marked} (\epech“n\). Present active participle of \epech“\ with \ton noun\ understood, holding the mind upon them, old verb and common. {They chose out} (\exelegonto\). Imperfect middle, were picking out for themselves. {The chief seats} (\tas pr“toklisias\). The first reclining places at the table. Jesus condemned the Pharisees later for this very thing (Matthew:23:6; strkjv@Mark:12:39; strkjv@Luke:20:46|). On a couch holding three the middle place was the chief one. At banquets today the name of the guests are usually placed at the plates. The place next to the host on the right was then, as now, the post of honour.

rwp@Luke:14:15 @{Blessed} (\makarios\). Happy, same word in the Beatitudes of Jesus (Matthew:5:3ff.|). This pious platitude whether due to ignorance or hypocrisy was called forth by Christ's words about the resurrection. It was a common figure among the rabbis, the use of a banquet for the bliss of heaven. This man may mean that this is a prerogative of the Pharisees. He assumed complacently that he will be among the number of the blest. Jesus himself uses this same figure of the spiritual banquet for heavenly bliss (Luke:22:29|). {Shall eat} (\phagetai\). Future middle from \esthi“\, defective verb, from stem of the aorist (\ephagon\) like \edomai\ of the old Greek.

rwp@Luke:15:1 @{All the publicans and sinners} (\pantes hoi tel“nai kai hoi hamart“loi\). The two articles separate the two classes (all the publicans and the sinners). They are sometimes grouped together (5:30; strkjv@Matthew:9:11|), but not here. The publicans are put on the same level with the outcasts or sinners. Songs:in verse 2| the repeated article separates Pharisees and scribes as not quite one. The use of "all" here may be hyperbole for very many or the reference may be to these two classes in the particular place where Jesus was from time to time. {Were drawing near unto him} (\ˆsan aut“i eggizontes\). Periphrastic imperfect of \eggiz“\, from \eggus\ (near), late verb. {For to hear} (\akouein\). Just the present active infinitive of purpose.

rwp@Luke:15:2 @{Both... and} (\te... kai\). United in the complaint. {Murmured} (\diegogguzon\). Imperfect active of \diagogguz“\, late Greek compound in the LXX and Byzantine writers. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:19:7|. The force of \dia\ here is probably between or among themselves. It spread (imperfect tense) whenever these two classes came in contact with Jesus. As the publicans and the sinners were drawing near to Jesus just in that proportion the Pharisees and the scribes increased their murmurings. The social breach is here an open yawning chasm. {This man} (\houtos\). A contemptuous sneer in the use of the pronoun. They spoke out openly and probably pointed at Jesus. {Receiveth} (\prosdechetai\). Present middle indicative of the common verb \prosdechomai\. In strkjv@12:36| we had it for expecting, here it is to give access to oneself, to welcome like \hupedexato\ of Martha's welcome to Jesus (Luke:10:38|). The charge here is that this is the habit of Jesus. He shows no sense of social superiority to these outcasts (like the Hindu "untouchables" in India). {And eateth with them} (\kai sunesthiei autois\). Associative instrumental case (\autois\) after \sun-\ in composition. This is an old charge (Luke:5:30|) and a much more serious breach from the standpoint of the Pharisees. The implication is that Jesus prefers these outcasts to the respectable classes (the Pharisees and the scribes) because he is like them in character and tastes, even with the harlots. There was a sting in the charge that he was the "friend" (\philos\) of publicans and sinners (Luke:7:34|).

rwp@Luke:15:7 @{Over one sinner that repenteth} (\epi heni hamart“l“i metanoounti\). The word sinner points to verse 1|. Repenting is what these sinners were doing, these lost sheep brought to the fold. The joy in heaven is in contrast with the grumbling Pharisees and scribes. {More than over} (\ˆ epi\). There is no comparative in the Greek. It is only implied by a common idiom like our "rather than." {Which need no repentance} (\hoitines ou chreian echousin metanoias\). Jesus does not mean to say that the Pharisees and the scribes do not need repentance or are perfect. He for the sake of argument accepts their claims about themselves and by their own words condemns them for their criticism of his efforts to save the lost sheep. It is the same point that he made against them when they criticized Jesus and the disciples for being at Levi's feast (Luke:5:31f.|). They posed as "righteous." Very well, then. That shuts their mouths on the point of Christ's saving the publicans and sinners.

rwp@Luke:15:10 @{There is joy} (\ginetai chara\). More exactly, joy arises. Futuristic present of \ginomai\ (cf. \estai\ in verse 7|). {In the presence of the angels of God} (\en“pion t“n aggel“n tou theou\). That is to say, the joy of God himself. The angels are in a sense the neighbours of God.

rwp@Luke:15:18 @{I will arise and go} (\anastas proreusomai\). This determination is the act of the will after he comes to himself and sees his real condition. {I did sin} (\hˆmarton\). That is the hard word to say and he will say it first. The word means to miss the mark. I shot my bolt and I missed my aim (compare the high-handed demand in verse 12|).

rwp@Luke:15:32 @{It was meet} (\edei\). Imperfect tense. It expressed a necessity in the father's heart and in the joy of the return that justifies the feasting. \Euphranthˆnai\ is used again (first aorist passive infinitive) and \charˆnai\ (second aorist passive infinitive) is more than mere hilarity, deep-seated joy. The father repeats to the elder son the language of his heart used in verse 24| to his servants. A real father could do no less. One can well imagine how completely the Pharisees and scribes (verse 2|) were put to silence by these three marvellous parables. The third does it with a graphic picture of their own attitude in the case of the surly elder brother. Luke was called a painter by the ancients. Certainly he has produced a graphic pen picture here of God's love for the lost that justifies forever the coming of Christ to the world to seek and to save the lost. It glorifies also soul-saving on the part of his followers who are willing to go with Jesus after the lost in city and country, in every land and of every race.

rwp@Luke:16:1 @{Unto the disciples} (\kai pros tous mathˆtas\). The three preceding parables in chapter 15 exposed the special faults of the Pharisees, "their hard exclusiveness, self-righteousness, and contempt for others" (Plummer). This parable is given by Luke alone. The \kai\ (also) is not translated in the Revised Version. It seems to mean that at this same time, after speaking to the Pharisees (chapter 15), Jesus proceeds to speak a parable to the disciples (16:1-13|), the parable of the Unjust Steward. It is a hard parable to explain, but Jesus opens the door by the key in verse 9|. {Which had a steward} (\hos ˆichen oikonomon\). Imperfect active, continued to have. Steward is house-manager or overseer of an estate as already seen in strkjv@Luke:12:42|. {Was accused} (\dieblˆthˆ\). First aorist indicative passive, of \diaball“\, an old verb, but here only in the N.T. It means to throw across or back and forth, rocks or words and so to slander by gossip. The word implies malice even if the thing said is true. The word \diabolos\ (slanderer) is this same root and it is used even of women, she-devils (1Timothy:3:11|). {That he was wasting} (\h“s diaskorpiz“n\). For the verb see on ¯15:13|. The use of \h“s\ with the participle is a fine Greek idiom for giving the alleged ground of a charge against one. {His goods} (\ta huparchonta autou\). "His belongings," a Lukan idiom.

rwp@Luke:16:14 @{Who were lovers of money} (\philarguroi huparchontes\). Literally, being lovers of money. \Philarguroi\ is an old word, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@2Timothy:3:2|. It is from \philos\ and \arguros\. {Heard} (\ˆkouon\). Imperfect active, were listening (all the while Jesus was talking to the disciples (verses 1-13|). {And they scoffed at him} (\kai exemuktˆrizon\). Imperfect active again of \ekmuktˆriz“\. LXX where late writers use simple verb. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:23:35|. It means to turn out or up the nose at one, to sneer, to scoff. The Romans had a phrase, _naso adunco suspendere_, to hang on the hooked nose (the subject of ridicule). These money-loving Pharisees were quick to see that the words of Jesus about the wise use of money applied to them. They had stood without comment the three parables aimed directly at them (the lost sheep, the lost coin, the lost son). But now they do not remain quiet while they hear the fourth parable spoken to the disciples. No words were apparently spoken, but their eyes, noses, faces were eloquent with a fine disdain.

rwp@Luke:16:19 @{He was clothed} (\enedidusketo\). Imperfect middle of \endidusk“\, a late intensive form of \endu“\. He clothed himself in or with. It was his habit. {Purple} (\porphuran\). This purple dye was obtained from the purple fish, a species of mussel or \murex\ (1Macc. strkjv@4:23). It was very costly and was used for the upper garment by the wealthy and princes (royal purple). They had three shades of purple (deep violet, deep scarlet or crimson, deep blue). See also strkjv@Mark:15:17,20; strkjv@Revelation:18:12|. {Fine linen} (\busson\). {Byssus} or Egyptian flax (India and Achaia also). It is a yellowed flax from which fine linen was made for undergarments. It was used for wrapping mummies. "Some of the Egyptian linen was so fine that it was called _woven air_" (Vincent). Here only in the N.T. for the adjective \bussinos\ occurs in strkjv@Revelation:18:12; strkjv@19:8,14|. {Faring sumptuously} (\euphrainomenos lampr“s\). {Making merry brilliantly}. The verb \euphrainomai\ we have already had in strkjv@12:19; strkjv@15:23,25,32|. \Lampr“s\ is an old adverb from \lampros\, brilliant, shining, splendid, magnificent. It occurs here only in the N.T. This parable apparently was meant for the Pharisees (verse 14|) who were lovers of money. It shows the wrong use of money and opportunity.

rwp@Luke:16:31 @{Neither will they be persuaded} (\oud' peisthˆsontai\). First future passive of \peith“\. Gressmann calls attention to the fact that Jesus is saying this in the conclusion of the parable. It is a sharp discouragement against efforts today to communicate with the dead. "Saul was not led to repentance when he saw Samuel at Endor nor were the Pharisees when they saw Lazarus come forth from the tomb. The Pharisees tried to put Lazarus to death and to explain away the resurrection of Jesus" (Plummer). Alford comments on the curious fact that Lazarus was the name of the one who did rise from the dead but whose return from the dead "was the immediate exciting cause of their (Pharisees) crowning act of unbelief."

rwp@Luke:17:21 @{Within you} (\entos hum“n\). This is the obvious, and, as I think, the necessary meaning of \entos\. The examples cited of the use of \entos\ in Xenophon and Plato where \entos\ means "among" do not bear that out when investigated. Field (_Ot. Norv_.) "contends that there is no clear instance of \entos\ in the sense of among" (Bruce), and rightly so. What Jesus says to the Pharisees is that they, as others, are to look for the kingdom of God within themselves, not in outward displays and supernatural manifestations. It is not a localized display "Here" or "There." It is in this sense that in strkjv@Luke:11:20| Jesus spoke of the kingdom of God as "come upon you" (\ephthasen eph' humƒs\), speaking to Pharisees. The only other instance of \entos\ in the N.T. (Matthew:23:26|) necessarily means "within" ("the inside of the cup"). There is, beside, the use of \entos\ meaning "within" in the Oxyrhynchus Papyrus saying of Jesus of the Third Century (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 426) which is interesting: "The kingdom of heaven is within you" (\entos hum“n\ as here in strkjv@Luke:17:21|).

rwp@Luke:17:23 @{Go not away nor follow after them} (\mˆ apelthˆte mˆde di“xˆte\). Westcott and Hort bracket \apelthˆte mˆde\. Note aorist subjunctive with \mˆ\ in prohibition, ingressive aorist. Do not rush after those who set times and places for the second advent. The Messiah was already present in the first advent (verse 21|) though the Pharisees did not know it.

rwp@Luke:18:10 @{Stood} (\statheis\). First aorist passive participle of \histˆmi\. Struck an attitude ostentatiously where he could be seen. Standing was the common Jewish posture in prayer (Matthew:6:5; strkjv@Mark:11:25|). {Prayed thus} (\tauta prosˆucheto\). Imperfect middle, was praying these things (given following). {With himself} (\pros heauton\). A soliloquy with his own soul, a complacent recital of his own virtues for his own self-satisfaction, not fellowship with God, though he addresses God. {I thank thee} (\eucharist“ soi\). But his gratitude to God is for his own virtues, not for God's mercies to him. One of the rabbis offers a prayer like this of gratitude that he was in a class by himself because he was a Jew and not a Gentile, because he was a Pharisee and not of the _am-haaretz_ or common people, because he was a man and not a woman. {Extortioners} (\harpages\). An old word, \harpax\ from same root as \harpaz“\, to plunder. An adjective of only one gender, used of robbers and plunderers, grafters, like the publicans (Luke:3:13|), whether wolves (Matthew:7:15|) or men (1Corinthians:5:19f.|). The Pharisee cites the crimes of which he is not guilty. {Or even} (\ˆ kai\). As the climax of iniquity (Bruce), he points to "this publican." Zaccheus will admit robbery (Luke:19:8|). {God} (\ho theos\). Nominative form with the article as common with the vocative use of \theos\ (so verse 13; strkjv@John:20:28|).

rwp@Luke:18:12 @{Twice in the week} (\dis tou sabbatou\). One fast a year was required by the law (Leviticus:16:29; strkjv@Numbers:29:7|). The Pharisees added others, twice a week between passover and pentecost, and between tabernacles and dedication of the temple. {I get} (\kt“mai\). Present middle indicative, not perfect middle \kektˆmai\ (I possess). He gave a tithe of his income, not of his property.

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

rwp@Luke:19:39 @{Some of the Pharisees} (\tines t“n Pharisai“n\). Luke seems to imply by "from the multitude" (\apo tou ochlou\) that these Pharisees were in the procession, perhaps half-hearted followers of the mob. But strkjv@John:12:19| speaks of Pharisees who stood off from the procession and blamed each other for their failure and the triumph of Jesus. These may represent the bolder spirits of their same group who dared to demand of Jesus that he rebuke his disciples.

rwp@Luke:20:1 @{On one of the days} (\en miƒi t“n hˆmer“n\). Luke's favourite way of indicating time. It was the last day of the temple teaching (Tuesday). strkjv@Luke:20:1-19| is to be compared with strkjv@Mark:11:27-12:12; strkjv@Matthew:21:23-46|. {There came upon him} (\epestˆsan\). Second aorist active indicative, ingressive aorist of \ephistˆmi\, old and common verb, stood up against him, with the notion of sudden appearance. These leaders (cf. strkjv@19:47|) had determined to attack Jesus on this morning, both Sadducees (chief priests) and Pharisees (scribes), a formal delegation from the Sanhedrin.

rwp@Luke:20:20 @{They watched him} (\paratˆrˆsantes\). First aorist active participle of \paratˆre“\, a common Greek verb to watch on the side or insidiously or with evil intent as in strkjv@Luke:6:7| (\paretˆrounto\) of the scribes and Pharisees. See on ¯Mark:3:2|. There is no "him" in the Greek. They were watching their chance. {Spies} (\enkathetous\). An old verbal adjective from \enkathiˆmi\, to send down in or secretly. It means liers in wait who are suborned to spy out, one who is hired to trap one by crafty words. Only here in the N.T. {Feigned themselves} (\hupokrinomenous heautous\). Hypocritically professing to be "righteous" (\dikaious\). "They posed as scrupulous persons with a difficulty of conscience" (Plummer). {That they might take hold of his speech} (\hina epilab“ntai autou logou\). Second aorist middle of \epilamban“\, an old verb for seizing hold with the hands and uses as here the genitive case. These spies are for the purpose of (\hina\) catching hold of the talk of Jesus if they can get a grip anywhere. This is their direct purpose and the ultimate purpose or result is also stated, "so as to deliver him up" (\h“ste paradounai auton\). Second aorist active infinitive of \paradid“mi\, to hand over, to give from one's side to another. The trap is all set now and ready to be sprung by these "spies." {Of the governor} (\tou hˆgemonos\). The Sanhedrin knew that Pilate would have to condemn Jesus if he were put to death. Songs:then all their plans focus on this point as the goal. Luke alone mentions this item here.

rwp@Luke:20:21 @{Rightly} (\orth“s\). Matthew (Matthew:22:16|) notes that these "spies" were "disciples" (students) of the Pharisees and Mark (Mark:12:13|) adds that the Herodians are also involved in the plot. These bright theologues are full of palaver and flattery and openly endorse the teaching of Jesus as part of their scheme. {Acceptest not the person of any} (\ou lambaneis pros“pon\). Dost not take the face (or personal appearance) as the test. It is a Hebraism from which the word \pros“polempsia\ (James:2:1|) comes. Originally it meant to lift the face, to lift the countenance, to regard the face, to accept the face value. See strkjv@Mark:12:13-17; strkjv@Matthew:22:15-22| for discussion of details here. They both have \blepeis\ here.

rwp@Luke:20:27 @{There is no resurrection} (\anastasin mˆ einai\). Accusative and infinitive with negative \mˆ\ in indirect assertion. The Sadducees rally after the complete discomfiture of the Pharisees and Herodians. They had a stock conundrum with which they had often gotten a laugh on the Pharisees. Songs:they volunteer to try it on Jesus. For discussion of details here see on ¯Matthew:22:23-33; strkjv@Mark:12:18-27|. Only a few striking items remain for Luke.

rwp@Luke:20:39 @{Certain of the scribes} (\tines t“n grammate“n\). Pharisees who greatly enjoyed this use by Jesus of a portion of the Pentateuch against the position of the Sadducees. Songs:they praise the reply of Jesus, hostile though they are to him.

rwp@Luke:20:40 @{They durst not any more} (\ouketi etolm“n ouden\). Double negative and imperfect active of \tolma“\. The courage of Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians vanished.

rwp@Luke:20:41 @{How say they?} (\P“s legousin;\). The Pharisees had rallied in glee and one of their number, a lawyer, had made a feeble contribution to the controversy which resulted in his agreement with Jesus and in praise from Jesus (Mark:12:28-34; strkjv@Matthew:27:34-40|). Luke does not give this incident which makes it plain that by "they say" (\legousin\) Jesus refers to the Pharisees (rabbis, lawyers), carrying on the discussion and turning the tables on them while the Pharisees are still gathered together (Matthew:22:41|). The construction with \legousin\ is the usual infinitive and the accusative in indirect discourse. By "the Christ" (\ton Christon\) "the Messiah" is meant.

rwp@Luke:20:45 @{In the hearing of all the people} (\akouontos pantos tou laou\). Genitive absolute, "while all the people were listening" (present active participle). That is the time to speak. The details in this verse and verse 47| are precisely those given in strkjv@Mark:12:38f.|, which see for discussion of details. strkjv@Matthew:23:1-39| has a very full and rich description of this last phase of the debate in the temple where Jesus drew a full-length portrait of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees and scribes in their presence. It was a solemn climax to this last public appearance of Christ in the temple when Jesus poured out the vials of his indignation as he had done before (Matthew:16:2; strkjv@Luke:11:37-54; 12-1|).

rwp@Luke:22:27 @{But I} (\Eg“ de\). Jesus dares to cite his own conduct, though their leader, to prove his point and to put a stop to their jealous contention for the chief place at this very feast, a wrangling that kept up till Jesus had to arise and give them the object lesson of humility by washing their feet (John:13:1-20|).

rwp@Luke:22:66 @{As soon as it was day} (\h“s egeneto hˆmera\). strkjv@Mark:15:1| (Matthew:27:1|) has "morning." {The assembly of the people} (\to presbuterion tou laou\). The technical word for "the eldership" (from \presbuteros\, an old man or elder) or group of the elders composing the Sanhedrin. The word occurs in the LXX for the Sanhedrin. In the N.T. occurs only here and strkjv@Acts:22:5| of the Sanhedrin. In strkjv@1Timothy:4:14| Paul uses it of the elders in a church (or churches). The Sanhedrin was composed of the elders and scribes and chief priests (Mark:15:1|) and all three groups are at this meeting. Luke's language (both chief priests and scribes, \te... kai\) seems to apply the word \presbuterion\ to the whole Sanhedrin. Sadducees (chief priests) and Pharisees (scribes) were nearly equally represented. {Into their council} (\eis to sunedrion aut“n\). The place of the gathering is not given, but Jesus was led into the council chamber.

rwp@Mark:1:22 @{They were astonished} (\exeplˆssonto\). Pictorial imperfect as in strkjv@Luke:4:32| describing the amazement of the audience, "meaning strictly to strike a person out of his senses by some strong feeling, such as fear, wonder, or even joy" (Gould). {And not as their scribes} (\kai ouch h“s hoi grammateis\). strkjv@Luke:4:32| has only "with authority" (\en exousiƒi\). Mark has it "as having authority" (\h“s ech“n exousian\). He struck a note not found by the rabbi. They quoted other rabbis and felt their function to be expounders of the traditions which they made a millstone around the necks of the people. By so doing they set aside the word and will of God by their traditions and petty legalism (Mark:7:9,13|). They were casuists and made false interpretations to prove their punctilious points of external etiquette to the utter neglect of the spiritual reality. The people noticed at once that here was a personality who got his power (authority) direct from God, not from the current scribes. "Mark omits much, and is in many ways a meagre Gospel, but it makes a distinctive contribution to the evangelic history _in showing by a few realistic touches_ (this one of them) _the remarkable personality of Jesus_" (Bruce). See on strkjv@Matthew:7:29| for the like impression made by the Sermon on the Mount where the same language occurs. The chief controversy in Christ's life was with these scribes, the professional teachers of the oral law and mainly Pharisees. At once the people see that Jesus stands apart from the old group. He made a sensation in the best sense of that word. There was a buzz of excitement at the new teacher that was increased by the miracle that followed the sermon.

rwp@Mark:2:6 @{Sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts} (\ekei kathˆmenoi kai dialogizomenoi en tais kardiais aut“n\). Another of Mark's pictures through Peter's eyes. These scribes (and Pharisees, strkjv@Luke:5:21|) were there to cause trouble, to pick flaws in the teaching and conduct of Jesus. His popularity and power had aroused their jealousy. There is no evidence that they spoke aloud the murmur in their hearts, "within themselves" (Matthew:9:3|). It was not necessary, for their looks gave them away and Jesus knew their thoughts (Matthew:9:4|) and perceived their reasoning (Luke:5:22|). {Instantly Jesus recognized it in his own spirit} (\euthus epignous ho Iˆsous t“i pneumati autou\, strkjv@Mark:2:8|). The Master at once recognizes the hostile atmosphere in the house. The debate (\dialogizomenoi\) in their hearts was written on their faces. No sound had come, but feeling did.

rwp@Mark:2:16 @{The scribes of the Pharisees} (\hoi grammateis t“n Pharisai“n\). This is the correct text. Cf. "their scribes" in strkjv@Luke:5:30|. Matthew gave a great reception (\dochˆn\, strkjv@Luke:5:29|) in his house (Mark:2:15|). These publicans and sinners not simply accepted Levi's invitation, but they imitated his example "and were following Jesus" (\kai ˆkolouthoun aut“i\). It was a motly crew from the standpoint of these young theologues, scribes of the Pharisees, who were on hand, being invited to pick flaws if they could. It was probably in the long hall of the house where the scribes stood and ridiculed Jesus and the disciples, unless they stood outside, feeling too pious to go into the house of a publican. It was an offence for a Jew to eat with Gentiles as even many of the early Jewish Christians felt (Acts:11:3|) and publicans and sinners were regarded like Gentiles (1Corinthians:5:11|).

rwp@Mark:2:17 @{The righteous} (\dikaious\). Jesus for the sake of argument accepts the claim of the Pharisees to be righteous, though, as a matter of fact, they fell very far short of it. Elsewhere (Matthew:23|) Jesus shows that the Pharisees were extortionate and devoured widows' houses and wore a cloak of pride and hypocritical respectability. The words "unto repentance" (\eis metanoian\) are not genuine in Mark, but are in strkjv@Luke:5:32|. Jesus called men to new spiritual life and away from sin and so to repentance. But this claim stopped their mouths against what Jesus was doing. The well or the strong (\ischuontes\) are not those who need the physician in an epidemic.

rwp@Mark:2:18 @{John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting} (\ˆsan hoi mathˆtai I“anou kai hoi Pharisaioi nˆsteuontes\). The periphrastic imperfect, so common in Mark's vivid description. Probably Levi's feast happened on one of the weekly fast-days (second and fifth days of the week for the stricter Jews). Songs:there was a clash of standpoints. The disciples of John sided with the Pharisees in the Jewish ceremonial ritualistic observances. John was still a prisoner in Machaerus. John was more of an ascetic than Jesus (Matthew:18f.; strkjv@Luke:7:33-35|), but neither one pleased all the popular critics. These learners (\mathˆtai\) or disciples of John had missed the spirit of their leader when they here lined up with the Pharisees against Jesus. But there was no real congeniality between the formalism of the Pharisees and the asceticism of John the Baptist. The Pharisees hated John who had denounced them as broods of vipers. Here the disciples of John and the disciples of the Pharisees (\hoi mathˆtai I“anou kai hoi mathˆtai t“n Pharisai“n\) join in criticizing Jesus and his disciples. Later we shall see Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians, who bitterly detested each other, making com- mon cause against Jesus Christ. Songs:today we find various hostile groups combining against our Lord and Saviour. See on ¯Matthew:9:14-17| for comments. Matthew has here followed Mark closely.

rwp@Mark:3:2 @{They watched} (\paretˆroun\). Imperfect tense, were watching on the side (or sly). Luke uses the middle voice, \paretˆrounto\, to accent their personal interest in the proceedings. It was the sabbath day and in the synagogue and they were there ready to catch him in the act if he should dare to violate their rules as he had done in the wheat fields on the previous sabbath. Probably the same Pharisees are present now as then. {That they might accuse him} (\hina katˆgorˆs“sin autou\). Songs:Matthew:12:10|. Luke has it "that they might find how to accuse him" (\hina heur“sin katˆgorein autou\). They were determined to accuse him. The sabbath controversy offered the best opening. Songs:here they are ready for business.

rwp@Mark:3:6 @{And straightway with the Herodians took council} (\euthus meta t“n Hˆr“idian“n\). The Pharisees could stand no more. Songs:out they stalked at once in a rage of madness (Luke:6:11|) and outside of the synagogue took counsel (\sumboulion epoiˆsan\) or gave counsel (\sumboulion edidoun\, as some MSS. have it, imperfect tense, offered counsel as their solution of the problem) with their bitter enemies, the Herodians, on the sabbath day still "how they might destroy him" (\hop“s auton apoles“sin\), a striking illustration of the alternatives of Jesus a few moments before, "to save life or to kill." This is the first mention of the Herodians or adherents of Herod Antipas and the Herod family rather than the Romans. The Pharisees would welcome the help of their rivals to destroy Jesus. In the presence of Jesus they unite their forces as in strkjv@Mark:8:15; strkjv@12:13; strkjv@Matthew:22:16|.

rwp@Mark:3:23 @{In parables} (\en parabolais\). In crisp pungent thrusts that exposed the inconsistencies of the scribes and Pharisees. See on ¯Matthew:13| for discussion of the word {parable} (\parabolˆ\, placing beside for comparison). These short parabolic quips concern Satan's casting out (\ekballei\, the very word used of casting out demons) Satan (rhetorical question), a kingdom divided (\meristhˆi\, for a mere portion) against itself, a house divided (\meristhˆi\) against itself, two conditions of the third class undetermined, but with prospect of determination.

rwp@Mark:4:11 @{Unto you is given the mystery of the kingdom of God} (\Humin to mustˆrion dedotai tˆs basileias tou theou\). See on ¯Matthew:13:11| for word \mustˆrion\. Here (Mark:4:11; strkjv@Matthew:13:11; strkjv@Luke:8:10|) alone in the Gospels, but in Paul 21 times and in the Revelation 4 times. It is frequent in Daniel and O.T. Apocrypha. Matthew and Luke use it here in the plural. Matthew and Luke add the word {to know} (\gn“nai\), but Mark's presentation covers a wider range than growing knowledge, the permanent possession of the mystery even before they understand it. The secret is no longer hidden from the initiated. Discipleship means initiation into the secret of God's kingdom and it will come gradually to these men. {But unto them that are without} (\ekeinois de tois ex“\). Peculiar to Mark, those outside our circle, the uninitiated, the hostile group like the scribes and Pharisees, who were charging Jesus with being in league with Beelzebub. strkjv@Luke:8:10| has "to the rest" (\tois loipois\), strkjv@Matthew:13:11| simply "to them" (\ekeinois\). Without the key the parables are hard to understand, for parables veil the truth of the kingdom being stated in terms of another realm. Without a spiritual truth and insight they are unintelligible and are often today perverted. The parables are thus a condemnation on the wilfully blind and hostile, while a guide and blessing to the enlightened. {That} (\hina\). Mark has the construction of the Hebrew "lest" of strkjv@Isaiah:6:9f|. with the subjunctive and so strkjv@Luke:8:10|, while strkjv@Matthew:13:13| uses causal \hoti\ with the indicative following the LXX. See on ¯Matthew:13:13| for the so-called causal use of \hina\. Gould on strkjv@Mark:4:12| has an intelligent discussion of the differences between Matthew and Mark and Luke. He argues that Mark here probably "preserves the original form of Jesus' saying." God ironically commands Isaiah to harden the hearts of the people. If the notion of purpose is preserved in the use of \hina\ in Mark and Luke, there is probably some irony also in the sad words of Jesus. If \hina\ is given the causative use of \hoti\ in Matthew, the difficulty disappears. What is certain is that the use of parables on this occasion was a penalty for judicial blindness on those who will not see.

rwp@Mark:4:12 @{Lest haply they should turn again, and it should be forgiven them} (\mˆpote epistreps“sin kai aphethˆi autois\). Luke does not have these difficult words that seem in Isaiah to have an ironical turn, though strkjv@Matthew:13:15| does retain them even after using \hoti\ for the first part of the quotation. There is no way to make \mˆpote\ in strkjv@Mark:4:12| and strkjv@Matthew:13:15| have a causal sense. It is the purpose of condemnation for wilful blindness and rejection such as suits the Pharisees after their blasphemous accusation against Jesus. Bengel says: _iam ante non videbant, nunc accedit iudicium divinum_. Jesus is pronouncing their doom in the language of Isaiah. It sounds like the dirge of the damned.

rwp@Mark:4:37 @{There ariseth a great storm of wind} (\ginetai lailaps megalˆ anemou\). Mark's vivid historical present again. strkjv@Matthew:8:24| has \egeneto\ (arose) and strkjv@Luke:8:23| \katebˆ\ (came down). Luke has also \lailaps\, but Matthew \seismos\ (tempest), a violent upheaval like an earthquake. \Lailaps\ is an old word for these cyclonic gusts or storms. Luke's "came down" shows that the storm fell suddenly from Mount Hermon down into the Jordan Valley and smote the Sea of Galilee violently at its depth of 682 feet below the Mediterranean Sea. The hot air at this depth draws the storm down with sudden power. These sudden storms continue to this day on the Sea of Galilee. The word occurs in the LXX of the whirlwind out of which God answered Job:(Job:38:1|) and in strkjv@Jonah:1:4|. {The waves beat into the boat} (\ta kumata epeballen eis to ploion\). Imperfect tense (were beating) vividly picturing the rolling over the sides of the boat "so that the boat was covered with the waves" (Matthew:8:24|). Mark has it: "insomuch that the boat was now filling" (\h“ste ˆdˆ gemizesthai to ploion\). Graphic description of the plight of the disciples.

rwp@Mark:5:41 @{Talitha cumi}. These precious Aramaic words, spoken by Jesus to the child, Peter heard and remembered so that Mark gives them to us. Mark interprets the simple words into Greek for those who did not know Aramaic (\to korasion, egeire\), that is, {Damsel, arise}. Mark uses the diminutive \korasi“n\, a little girl, from \korˆ\, girl. _Braid Scots_ has it: "Lassie, wauken." strkjv@Luke:8:5-9| has it \Hˆ pais, egeire\, {Maiden, arise}. All three Gospels mention the fact that Jesus took her by the hand, a touch of life (\kratˆsas tˆs cheiros\), giving confidence and help.

rwp@Mark:6:45 @{To Bethsaida} (\pros Bˆthsaidan\). This is Bethsaida on the Western side, not Bethsaida Julias on the Eastern side where they had just been (Luke:9:10|). {While he himself sendeth the multitude away} (\he“s autos apoluei ton ochlon\). strkjv@Matthew:14:22| has it "till he should send away" (\he“s hou apolusˆi\) with the aorist subjunctive of purpose. Mark with the present indicative \apoluei\ pictures Jesus as personally engaged in persuading the crowds to go away now. strkjv@John:6:41f.| explains this activity of Jesus. The crowds had become so excited that they were in the mood to start a revolution against the Roman government and proclaim Jesus king. He had already forced in reality the disciples to leave in a boat {to go before him} (\proagein\) in order to get them out of this atmosphere of overwrought excitement with a political twist to the whole conception of the Messianic Kingdom. They were in grave danger of being swept off their feet and falling heedlessly into the Pharisaic conception and so defeating the whole teaching and training of Jesus with them. See on ¯Matthew:14:22,23|. To this pass things had come one year before the Crucifixion. He had done his best to help and bless the crowds and lost his chance to rest. No one really understood Jesus, not the crowds, not the disciples. Jesus needed the Father to stay and steady him. The devil had come again to tempt him with world dominion in league with the Pharisees, the populace, and the devil in the background.

rwp@Mark:7:2 @{With defiled, that is unwashen hands} (\koinais chersin, tout' estin aniptois\). Associative instrumental case. Originally \koinos\ meant what was common to everybody like the _Koin‚_ Greek. But in later Greek it came also to mean as here what is vulgar or profane. Songs:Peter in strkjv@Acts:10:14| "common and unclean." The next step was the ceremonially unclean. The emissaries of the Pharisees and the scribes from Jerusalem had seen "some of the disciples" eat without washing their hands, how many we are not told. Swete suggests that in going through the plain the disciples were seen eating some of the bread preserved in the twelve baskets the afternoon before across the lake. There was no particular opportunity to wash the hands, a very proper thing to do before eating for sanitary reasons. But the objection raised is on ceremonial, not sanitary, grounds.

rwp@Mark:7:9 @{Full well do ye reject the commandment of God that ye may keep your traditions} (\kal“s atheteite tˆn entolˆn tou theou hina tˆn paradosin hum“n tˆrˆsˆte\). One can almost see the scribes withering under this terrible arraignment. It was biting sarcasm that cut to the bone. The evident irony should prevent literal interpretation as commendation of the Pharisaic pervasion of God's word. See my _The Pharisees and Jesus_ for illustrations of the way that they placed this oral tradition above the written law. See on ¯Matthew:15:7|.

rwp@Mark:7:18 @{Are ye so without understanding also?} (\Hout“s kai humeis asunetoi este;\). See on ¯Matthew:15:16|. You also as well as the multitude. It was a discouraging moment for the great Teacher if his own chosen pupils (disciples) were still under the spell of the Pharisaic theological outlook. It was a riddle to them. "They had been trained in Judaism, in which the distinction between clean and unclean is ingrained, and could not understand a statement abrogating this" (Gould). They had noticed that the Pharisees stumbled at the parable of Jesus (Matthew:15:12|). They were stumbling themselves and did not know how to answer the Pharisees. Jesus charges the disciples with intellectual dulness and spiritual stupidity.

rwp@Mark:7:24 @{Into the borders of Tyre and Sidon} (\eis ta horia Turou kai Sid“nos\). The departure from Capernaum was a withdrawal from Galilee, the second of the four withdrawals from Galilee. The first had been to the region of Bethsaida Julias in the territory of Herod Philip. This is into distinctly heathen land. It was not merely the edge of Phoenicia, but into the parts of Tyre and Sidon (Matthew:15:21|). There was too much excitement among the people, too much bitterness among the Pharisees, too much suspicion on the part of Herod Antipas, too much dulness on the part of the disciples for Jesus to remain in Galilee. {And he could not be hid} (\kai ouk ˆdunasthˆ lathein\). Jesus wanted to be alone in the house after all the strain in Galilee. He craved a little privacy and rest. This was his purpose in going into Phoenicia. Note the adversative sense of \kai\ here= "but."

rwp@Mark:8:11 @{And the Pharisees came forth} (\kai exˆlthon hoi Pharisaioi\). At once they met Jesus and opened a controversy. strkjv@Matthew:16:1| adds "and Sadducees," the first time these two parties appear together against Jesus. See discussion on ¯Matthew:16:1|. The Pharisees and Herodians had already joined hands against Jesus in the sabbath controversy (Mark:3:6|). They {began to question with him} (\ˆrxanto sunzˆtein aut“i\). Dispute, not mere inquiry, associative instrumental case of \autoi\. They began at once and kept it up (present infinitive).

rwp@Mark:8:12 @{He sighed deeply in his spirit} (\anastenaxas t“i pneumati\). The only instance of this compound in the N.T. though in the LXX. The uncompounded form occurs in strkjv@Mark:7:34| and it is common enough. The preposition \ana-\ intensifies the meaning of the verb (perfective use). "The sigh seemed to come, as we say, from the bottom of his heart, the Lord's human spirit was stirred to its depths" (Swete). Jesus resented the settled prejudice of the Pharisees (and now Sadducees also) against him and his work. {There shall no sign be given unto this generation} (\ei dothˆsetai tˆi geneƒi tautˆi sˆmeion\). strkjv@Matthew:16:4| has simply \ou dothˆsetai\, plain negative with the future passive indicative. Mark has \ei\ instead of \ou\, which is technically a conditional clause with the conclusion unexpressed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1024), really aposiopesis in imitation of the Hebrew use of \im\. This is the only instance in the N.T. except in quotations from the LXX (Hebrews:3:11; strkjv@4:3,5|). It is very common in the LXX. The rabbis were splitting hairs over the miracles of Jesus as having a possible natural explanation (as some critics do today) even if by the power of Beelzebub, and those not of the sky (from heaven) which would be manifested from God. Songs:they put up this fantastic test to Jesus which he deeply resents. strkjv@Matthew:16:4| adds "but the sign of Jonah" mentioned already by Jesus on a previous occasion (Matthew:12:39-41|) at more length and to be mentioned again (Luke:11:32|). But the mention of the sign of Jonah was "an absolute refusal of signs in their sense" (Bruce). And when he did rise from the dead on the third day, the Sanhedrin refused to be convinced (see Acts 3 to 5).

rwp@Mark:8:15 @{Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and the leaven of Herod} (\Horƒte, blepete apo tˆs zumˆs t“n Pharisai“n kai tˆs zumˆs Hˆr“idou\). Present imperatives. Note \apo\ and the ablative case. \Zumˆ\ is from \zumo“\ and occurs already in strkjv@Matthew:13:33| in a good sense. For the bad sense see strkjv@1Corinthians:5:6|. He repeatedly charged (\diestelleto\, imperfect indicative), showing that the warning was needed. The disciples came out of a Pharisaic atmosphere and they had just met it again at Dalmanutha. It was insidious. Note the combination of Herod here with the Pharisees. This is after the agitation of Herod because of the death of the Baptist and the ministry of Jesus (Mark:6:14-29; strkjv@Matthew:14:1-12; strkjv@Luke:9:7-9|). Jesus definitely warns the disciples against "the leaven of Herod" (bad politics) and the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees (bad theology and also bad politics).

rwp@Mark:8:21 @{Do ye not yet understand?} (\oup“ suniete;\). After all this rebuke and explanation. The greatest of all teachers had the greatest of all classes, but he struck a snag here. strkjv@Matthew:16:12| gives the result: "Then they understood how that he bade them not beware of the loaves of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees." They had once said that they understood the parables of Jesus (Matthew:13:51|). But that was a long time ago. The teacher must have patience if his pupils are to understand.

rwp@Mark:8:27 @{Into the villages of Caesarea Philippi} (\eis tƒs k“mas Kaisariƒs tˆs Philippou\). Parts (\merˆ\) strkjv@Matthew:16:13| has, the Caesarea of Philippi in contrast to the one down on the Mediterranean Sea. Mark means the villages belonging to the district around Caesarea Philippi. This region is on a spur of Mount Hermon in Iturea ruled by Herod Philip so that Jesus is safe from annoyance by Herod Antipas or the Pharisees and Sadducees. Up here on this mountain slope Jesus will have his best opportunity to give the disciples special teaching concerning the crucifixion just a little over six months ahead. Songs:Jesus asked (\epˆr“tƒ\, descriptive imperfect) {Who do men say that I am?} (\Tina me legousin hoi anthr“poi einai;\). strkjv@Matthew:16:13| has "the Son of Man" in place of "I" here in Mark and in strkjv@Luke:9:18|. He often described himself as "the Son of Man." Certainly here the phrase could not mean merely "a man." They knew the various popular opinions about Jesus of which Herod Antipas had heard (Mark:3:21,31|). It was time that the disciples reveal how much they had been influenced by their environment as well as by the direct instruction of Jesus.

rwp@Mark:8:31 @{He began to teach them} (\ˆrxato didaskein autous\). Mark is fond of this idiom, but it is not a mere rhetorical device. strkjv@Matthew:16:21| expressly says "from that time." They had to be told soon about the approaching death of Jesus. The confession of faith in Jesus indicated that it was a good time to begin. Death at the hands of the Sanhedrin (elders, chief priests, and scribes) in which Pharisees and Sadducees had about equal strength. The resurrection on the third day is mentioned, but it made no impression on their minds. This rainbow on the cloud was not seen. {After three days} (\meta treis hˆmeras\). strkjv@Matthew:16:21| has "the third day" (\tˆi tritˆi hˆmerƒi\) in the locative case of point of time (so also strkjv@Luke:9:22|). There are some people who stickle for a strict interpretation of "after three days" which would be "on the fourth day," not "on the third day." Evidently Mark's phrase here has the same sense as that in Matthew and Luke else they are hopelessly contradictory. In popular language "after three days" can and often does mean "on the third day," but the fourth day is impossible.

rwp@Mark:10:2 @{Tempting him} (\peirazontes\). As soon as Jesus appears in Galilee the Pharisees attack him again (cf. strkjv@7:5; strkjv@8:11|). Gould thinks that this is a test, not a temptation. The word means either (see on ¯Matthew:4:1|), but their motive was evil. They had once involved the Baptist with Herod Antipas and Herodias on this subject. They may have some such hopes about Jesus, or their purpose may have been to see if Jesus will be stricter than Moses taught. They knew that he had already spoken in Galilee on the subject (Matthew:5:31f.|).

rwp@Mark:10:4 @{To write a bill of divorcement and to put her away} (\biblion apostasiou grapsai kai apolusai\). The word for "bill" (\biblion\) is a diminutive and means "little book," like the Latin _libellus_, from which comes our word _libel_ (Vincent). Wycliff has it here "a libel of forsaking." This same point the Pharisees raise in strkjv@Matthew:19:7|, showing probably that they held to the liberal view of Hillel, easy divorce for almost any cause. That was the popular view as now. See on ¯Matthew:19:7| for this and for discussion of "for your hardness of heart" (\sklˆrokardia\). Jesus expounds the purpose of marriage (Genesis:2:24|) and takes the stricter view of divorce, that of the school of Shammai. See on ¯Matthew:19:1-12| for discussion. strkjv@Mark:10:10| notes that the disciples asked Jesus about this problem "in the house" after they had gone away from the crowd.

rwp@Mark:11:18 @{Sought how they might destroy him} (\ezˆtoun p“s auton apoles“sin\). Imperfect indicative, a continuous attitude and endeavour. Note deliberative subjunctive with \p“s\ retained in indirect question. Here both Sadducees (chief priests) and Pharisees (scribes) combine in their resentment against the claims of Jesus and in the determination to kill him. Long ago the Pharisees and the Herodians had plotted for his death (Mark:3:6|). Now in Jerusalem the climax has come right in the temple. {For they feared him} (\ephobounto gar\). Imperfect middle indicative. Hence in wrath they planned his death and yet they had to be cautious. The Triumphal Entry had shown his power with the people. And now right in the temple itself "all the multitude was astonished at his teaching" (\pƒs ho ochlos exeplˆsseto epi tˆi didachˆi autou\). Imperfect passive. The people looked on Jesus as a hero, as the Messiah. This verse aptly describes the crisis that has now come between Christ and the Sanhedrin.

rwp@Mark:11:27 @{The chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders} (\hoi archiereis kai hoi grammateis kai hoi presbuteroi\). Note the article with each separate group as in strkjv@Luke:20:1| and strkjv@Matthew:21:23|. These three classes were in the Sanhedrin. Clearly a large committee of the Sanhedrin including both Sadducees and Pharisees here confront Jesus in a formal attack upon his authority for cleansing the temple and teaching in it.

rwp@Mark:12:13 @{That they might catch him in talk} (\hina auton agreus“sin log“i\). Ingressive aorist subjunctive. The verb is late from \agra\ (a hunt or catching). It appears in the LXX and papyri. Here alone in the N.T. strkjv@Luke:20:20| has the same idea, "that they may take hold of his speech" (\epilab“ntai autou logon\) while strkjv@Matthew:22:15| uses \pagideus“sin\ (to snare or trap). See discussion in Matthew. We have seen the scribes and Pharisees trying to do this very thing before (Luke:11:33f.|). Mark and Matthew note here the combination of Pharisees and Herodians as Mark did in strkjv@3:6|. Matthew speaks of "disciples" or pupils of the Pharisees while Luke calls them "spies" (\enkathetous\).

rwp@Mark:12:18 @{There come unto him Sadducees} (\erchontai Saddoukaioi pros auton\). Dramatic present. The Pharisees and Herodians had had their turn after the formal committee of the Sanhedrin had been so completely routed. It was inevitable that they should feel called upon to show their intellectual superiority to these raw Pharisaic and Herodian theologians. See on ¯Matthew:22:23-33| for discussion of details. It was a good time to air their disbelief in the resurrection at the expense of the Pharisees and to score against Jesus where the Sanhedrin and then the Pharisees and Herodians had failed so ignominiously.

rwp@Mark:12:24 @{Is it not for this cause that ye err?} (\Ou dia touto planƒsthe;\). Mark puts it as a question with \ou\ expecting the affirmative answer. Matthew puts it as a positive assertion: "Ye are." \Planaomai\ is to wander astray (cf. our word _planet_, wandering stars, \asteres planˆtai\, strkjv@Jude:1:13|) like the Latin _errare_ (our _error_, err). {That ye know not the scriptures} (\mˆ eidotes tas graphas\). The Sadducees posed as men of superior intelligence and knowledge in opposition to the traditionalists among the Pharisees with their oral law. And yet on this very point they were ignorant of the Scriptures. How much error today is due to this same ignorance among the educated! {Nor the power of God} (\mˆde tˆn dunamin tou theou\). The two kinds of ignorance generally go together (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:15:34|).

rwp@Mark:12:25 @{When they shall rise from the dead} (\hotan ek nekr“n anast“sin\). Second aorist active subjunctive with \hotan\ (\hote\ plus \an\). strkjv@Matthew:22:30| has it "in the resurrection," strkjv@Luke:20:35| "to attain to the resurrection." The Pharisees regarded the future resurrection body as performing marriage functions, as Mohammedans do today. The Pharisees were in error on this point. The Sadducees made this one of their objections to belief in the resurrection body, revealing thus their own ignorance of the true resurrection body and the future life where marriage functions do not exist. {As angels in heaven} (\h“s aggeloi en t“i ouran“i\). Songs:Matthew:22:30|. strkjv@Luke:20:36| has "equal unto the angels" (\isaggeloi\). "Their equality with angels consists in their deliverance from mortality and its consequences" (Swete). The angels are directly created, not procreated.

rwp@Mark:12:28 @{Heard them questioning together} (\akousas aut“n sunzˆtount“n\). The victory of Christ over the Sadducees pleased the Pharisees who now had come back with mixed emotions over the new turn of things (Matthew:22:34|). strkjv@Luke:20:39| represents one of the scribes as commending Jesus for his skilful reply to the Sadducees. Mark here puts this scribe in a favourable light, "knowing that he had answered them well" (\eid“s hoti kal“s apekrithˆ autois\). "Them" here means the Sadducees. But strkjv@Matthew:22:35| says that this lawyer (\nomikos\) was "tempting" (\peiraz“n\) by his question. "A few, among whom was the scribe, were constrained to admire, even if they were willing to criticize, the Rabbi who though not himself a Pharisee, surpassed the Pharisees as a champion of the truth." That is a just picture of this lawyer. {The first of all} (\pr“tˆ pant“n\). First in rank and importance. strkjv@Matthew:22:36| has "great" (\megalˆ\). See discussion there. Probably Jesus spoke in Aramaic. "First" and "great" in Greek do not differ essentially here. Mark quotes strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:4f.| as it stands in the LXX and also strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|. strkjv@Matthew:22:40| adds the summary: "On these two commandments hangeth (\krematai\) the whole law and the prophets."

rwp@Mark:12:35 @{How say the scribes} (\P“s legousin hoi grammateis\). The opponents of Jesus are silenced, but he answers them and goes on teaching (\didask“n\) in the temple as before the attacks began that morning (11:27|). They no longer dare to question Jesus, but he has one to put to them "while the Pharisees were gathered together" (Matthew:22:41|). The question is not a conundrum or scriptural puzzle (Gould), but "He contents himself with pointing out a difficulty, in the solution of which lay the key to the whole problem of His person and work" (Swete). The scribes all taught that the Messiah was to be the son of David (John:7:41|). The people in the Triumphal Entry had acclaimed Jesus as the son of David (Matthew:21:9|). But the rabbis had overlooked the fact that David in strkjv@Psalms:110:1| called the Messiah his Lord also. The deity and the humanity of the Messiah are both involved in the problem. strkjv@Matthew:22:45| observes that "no one was able to answer him a word."

rwp@Mark:12:38 @{Beware of the scribes} (\blepete apo t“n grammate“n\). Jesus now turns to the multitudes and to his disciples (Matthew:23:1|) and warns them against the scribes and the Pharisees while they are still there to hear his denunciation. The scribes were the professional teachers of the current Judaism and were nearly all Pharisees. Mark (Mark:14:38-40|) gives a mere summary sketch of this bold and terrific indictment as preserved in strkjv@Matthew:23| in words that fairly blister today. strkjv@Luke:20:45-47| follows Mark closely. See strkjv@Matthew:8:15| for this same use of \blepete apo\ with the ablative. It is usually called a translation-Hebraism, a usage not found with \blep“\ in the older Greek. But the papyri give it, a vivid vernacular idiom. "Beware of the Jews" (\blepe saton apo t“n Ioudai“n\, Berl. G. U. 1079. A.D. 41). See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 577. The pride of the pompous scribes is itemized by Mark: {To walk in long robes} (\stolais\), {stoles}, the dress of dignitaries like kings and priests. {Salutations in the marketplaces} (\aspasmous en tais agorais\), where the people could see their dignity recognized.

rwp@Mark:12:41 @{Sat down over against the treasury} (\kathisas katenanti tou gazophulakiou\). The storm is over. The Pharisees, Sadducees, Herodians, scribes, have all slunk away in terror ere the closing words. Mark draws this immortal picture of the weary Christ sitting by the treasury (compound word in the LXX from \gaza\, Persian word for treasure, and \phulakˆ\, guard, so safe for gifts to be deposited). {Beheld} (\ethe“rei\). Imperfect tense. He was watching {how the multitude cast money} (\p“s ho ochlos ballei\) into the treasury. The rich were casting in (\eballon\, imperfect tense) as he watched.

rwp@Mark:12:43 @{Called unto him} (\proskalesamenos\). Indirect middle voice. The disciples themselves had slipped away from him while the terrific denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees had gone on, puzzled at this turn of affairs. {More than all} (\pleion pant“n\). Ablative of comparison (\pant“n\). It may mean, more than all the rich put together. {All that she had} (\panta hosa eichen\). Imperfect tense. {Cast in} (\ebalen\). Aorist tense, in sharp contrast. {All her living} (\holon ton bion autˆs\). Her {livelihood} (\bios\), not her life (\z“ˆ\). It is a tragedy to see a stingy saint pose as giving the widow's mite when he could give thousands instead of pennies.

rwp@Mark:14:43 @{And the scribes} (\kai t“n grammate“n\). Mark adds this item while strkjv@John:18:3| mentions "Pharisees." It was evidently a committee of the Sanhedrin for Judas had made his bargain with the Sanhedrin (Mark:14:1; strkjv@Matthew:26:3; strkjv@Luke:22:2|). See discussion of the betrayal and arrest on ¯Matthew:26:47-56| for details.

rwp@Info_Matthew @ Matthew was in the habit of keeping accounts and it is quite possible that he took notes of the sayings of Jesus as he heard them. At any rate he gives much attention to the teachings of Jesus as, for instance, the Sermon on the Mount in chapters strkjv@Matthew:5-7|, the parables in strkjv@Matthew:13|, the denunciation of the Pharisees in strkjv@Matthew:23|, the great eschatological discourse in strkjv@Matthew:24; 25|. As a publican in Galilee he was not a narrow Jew and so we do not expect a book prejudiced in favor of the Jews and against the Gentiles. He does seem to show that Jesus is the Messiah of Jewish expectation and hope and so makes frequent quotations from the Old Testament by way of confirmation and illustration. There is no narrow nationalism in Matthew. Jesus is both the Messiah of the Jews and the Saviour of the world.

rwp@Matthew:2:4 @{He inquired of them where the Christ should be born} (\epunthaneto par' aut“n pou ho Christos gennƒtai\). The prophetic present (\gennƒtai\) is given, the very words of Herod retained by Matthew's report. The imperfect tense (epunthaneto) suggests that Herod inquired repeatedly, probably of one and another of the leaders gathered together, both Sadducees (chief priests) and Pharisees (scribes). McNeile doubts, like Holtzmann, if Herod actually called together all the Sanhedrin and probably "he could easily ask the question of a single scribe," because he had begun his reign with a massacre of the Sanhedrin (Josephus, _Ant_. XIV. ix. 4). But that was thirty years ago and Herod was desperately in earnest to learn what the Jews really expected about the coming of "the Messiah." Still Herod probably got together not the Sanhedrin since "elders" are not mentioned, but leaders among the chief priests and scribes, not a formal meeting but a free assembly for conference. He had evidently heard of this expected king and he would swallow plenty of pride to be able to compass the defeat of these hopes.

rwp@Matthew:3:2 @{For the kingdom of heaven is at hand} (\ˆggiken gar hˆ Basileia t“n ouran“n\). Note the position of the verb and the present perfect tense. It was a startling word that John thundered over the hills and it re-echoed throughout the land. The Old Testament prophets had said that it would come some day in God's own time. John proclaims as the herald of the new day that it has come, has drawn near. How near he does not say, but he evidently means very near, so near that one could see the signs and the proof. The words "the kingdom of heaven" he does not explain. The other Gospels use "the kingdom of God" as Matthew does a few times, but he has "the kingdom of heaven" over thirty times. He means "the reign of God," not the political or ecclesiastical organization which the Pharisees expected. His words would be understood differently by different groups as is always true of popular preachers. The current Jewish apocalypses had numerous eschatological ideas connected with the kingdom of heaven. It is not clear what sympathy John had with these eschatological features. He employs vivid language at times, but we do not have to confine John's intellectual and theological horizon to that of the rabbis of his day. He has been an original student of the Old Testament in his wilderness environment without any necessary contact with the Essenes who dwelt there. His voice is a new one that strikes terror to the perfunctory theologians of the temple and of the synagogue. It is the fashion of some critics to deny to John any conception of the spiritual content of his words, a wholly gratuitous criticism.

rwp@Matthew:3:7 @{The Pharisees and Sadducees} (\t“n Pharisai“n kai Saddoukai“n\). These two rival parties do not often unite in common action, but do again in strkjv@Matthew:16:1|. "Here a strong attraction, there a strong repulsion, made them for the moment forget their differences" (McNeile). John saw these rival ecclesiastics "coming for baptism" (\erchomenous epi to baptisma\). Alford speaks of "the Pharisees representing hypocritical superstition; the Sadducees carnal unbelief." One cannot properly understand the theological atmosphere of Palestine at this time without an adequate knowledge of both Pharisees and Sadducees. The books are numerous besides articles in the Bible dictionaries. I have pictured the Pharisees in my first (1916) Stone Lectures, _The Pharisees and Jesus_. John clearly grasped the significance of this movement on the part of the Pharisees and Sadducees who had followed the crowds to the Jordan. He had welcomed the multitudes, but right in the presence of the crowds he exposes the hypocrisy of the ecclesiastics. {Ye offspring of vipers} (\gennˆmata echidn“n\). Jesus (Matthew:12:34; strkjv@23:33|) will use the same language to the Pharisees. Broods of snakes were often seen by John in the rocks and when a fire broke out they would scurry (\phugein\) to their holes for safety. "The coming wrath" was not just for Gentiles as the Jews supposed, but for all who were not prepared for the kingdom of heaven (1Thessalonians:1:10|). No doubt the Pharisees and Sadducees winced under the sting of this powerful indictment.

rwp@Matthew:5:19 @{Shall do and teach} (\poiˆsˆi kai didaxˆi\). Jesus puts practice before preaching. The teacher must apply the doctrine to himself before he is qualified to teach others. The scribes and Pharisees were men who "say and do not" (Matthew:23:3|), who preach but do not perform. This is Christ's test of greatness.

rwp@Matthew:5:20 @{Shall exceed} (\perisseusˆi pleion\). Overflow like a river out of its banks and then Jesus adds "more" followed by an unexpressed ablative (\tˆs dikaiosunˆs\), brachylogy. A daring statement on Christ's part that they had to be better than the rabbis. They must excel the scribes, the small number of regular teachers (5:21-48|), and the Pharisees in the Pharisaic life (6:1-18|) who were the separated ones, the orthodox pietists.

rwp@Matthew:5:39 @{Resist not him that is evil} (\me antistˆnai t“i ponˆr“i\). Here again it is the infinitive (second aorist active) in indirect command. But is it "the evil man" or the "evil deed"? The dative case is the same form for masculine and neuter. Weymouth puts it "not to resist a (the) wicked man," Moffatt "not to resist an injury," Goodspeed "not to resist injury." The examples will go with either view. Jesus protested when smitten on the cheek (John:18:22|). And Jesus denounced the Pharisees (Matthew:23|) and fought the devil always. The language of Jesus is bold and picturesque and is not to be pressed too literally. Paradoxes startle and make us think. We are expected to fill in the other side of the picture. One thing certainly is meant by Jesus and that is that personal revenge is taken out of our hands, and that applies to "lynch-law." Aggressive or offensive war by nations is also condemned, but not necessarily defensive war or defence against robbery and murder. Professional pacifism may be mere cowardice.

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

rwp@Matthew:9:10 @{Publicans and sinners} (\tel“nai kai hamart“loi\). Often coupled together in common scorn and in contrast with the righteous (\dikaioi\ in strkjv@9:13|). It was a strange medley at Levi's feast (Jesus and the four fisher disciples, Nathanael and Philip; Matthew Levi and his former companions, publicans and sinners; Pharisees with their scribes or students as on-lookers; disciples of John the Baptist who were fasting at the very time that Jesus was feasting and with such a group). The Pharisees criticize sharply "your teacher" for such a social breach of "reclining" together with publicans at Levi's feast.

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:9:34 @{By the prince of the devils} (\en t“i archonti t“n daimoni“n\). Demons, not devils. The codex Bezae omits this verse, but it is probably genuine. The Pharisees are becoming desperate and, unable to deny the reality of the miracles, they seek to discredit them by trying to connect Jesus with the devil himself, the prince of the demons. They will renew this charge later (Matthew:12:24|) when Jesus will refute it with biting sarcasm.

rwp@Matthew:9:36 @{Were distressed and scattered} (\ˆsan eskulmenoi kai erimmenoi\). Periphrastic past perfect indicative passive. A sad and pitiful state the crowds were in. Rent or mangled as if by wild beasts. \Skull“\ occurs in the papyri in sense of plunder, concern, vexation. "Used here of the common people, it describes their religious condition. They were harassed, importuned, bewildered by those who should have taught them; hindered from entering into the kingdom of heaven (23:13|), laden with the burdens which the Pharisees laid upon them (23:3|). \Erimmenoi\ denotes men cast down and prostrate on the ground, whether from drunkenness, Polyb. v. 48.2, or from mortal wounds" (Allen): This perfect passive participle from \rhipt“\, to throw down. The masses were in a state of mental dejection. No wonder that Jesus was moved with compassion (\esplagchnisthˆ\).

rwp@Matthew:10:38 @{Doth not take his cross} (\ou lambanei ton stauron autou\). The first mention of cross in Matthew. Criminals were crucified in Jerusalem. It was the custom for the condemned person to carry his own cross as Jesus did till Simon of Cyrene was impressed for that purpose. The Jews had become familiar with crucifixion since the days of Antiochus Epiphanes and one of the Maccabean rulers (Alexander Jannaeus) had crucified 800 Pharisees. It is not certain whether Jesus was thinking of his own coming crucifixion when he used this figure, though possible, perhaps probable. The disciples would hardly think of that outcome unless some of them had remarkable insight.

rwp@Matthew:12:2 @{Thy disciples do} (\hoi mathˆtai sou poiousin\). These critics are now watching a chance and they jump at this violation of their Pharisaic rules for Sabbath observance. The disciples were plucking the heads of wheat which to the Pharisees was reaping and were rubbing them in their hands (Luke:6:1|) which was threshing.

rwp@Matthew:12:12 @{How much then is a man} (\pos“i oun diapherei anthr“pos\). Another of Christ's pregnant questions that goes to the roots of things, an _a fortiori_ argument. "By how much does a human being differ from a sheep? That is the question which Christian civilization has not even yet adequately answered" (Bruce). The poor pettifogging Pharisees are left in the pit.

rwp@Matthew:12:13 @{Stretch forth thy hand} (\ekteinon sou tˆn cheira\). Probably the arm was not withered, though that is not certain. But he did the impossible. "He stretched it forth," straight, I hope, towards the Pharisees who were watching Jesus (Mark:3:2|).

rwp@Matthew:12:14 @{Took counsel against him} (\sumboulion elabon kat' autou\). An imitation of the Latin _concilium capere_ and found in papyri of the second century A.D. (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 238.) This incident marks a crisis in the hatred of the Pharisees toward Jesus. They bolted out of the synagogue and actually conspired with their hated rivals, the Herodians, how to put Jesus to death (Mark:3:6; strkjv@Matthew:12:14; strkjv@Luke:6:11|). By "destroy" (\apoles“sin\) they meant "kill."

rwp@Matthew:12:24 @{The Pharisees} (\hoi de Pharisaioi\). Already (Matthew:9:32-34|) we have had in Matthew the charge that Jesus is in league with the prince of demons, though the incident may be later than this one. See on ¯10:25| about "Beelzebub." The Pharisees feel that the excited condition of the crowds and the manifest disposition to believe that Jesus is the Messiah (the Son of David) demand strenuous action on their part. They cannot deny the fact of the miracles for the blind and dumb men both saw and spoke (12:22|). Songs:in desperation they suggest that Jesus works by the power of Beelzebub the prince of the demons.

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

rwp@Matthew:12:34 @{Ye offspring of vipers} (\gennˆmata echidn“n\). These same terrible words the Baptist had used to the Pharisees and Sadducees who came to his baptism (Matthew:3:7|). But these Pharisees had deliberately made their choice and had taken Satan's side. The charge against Jesus of being in league with Satan reveals the evil heart within. The heart "spurts out" (\ekballei\) good or evil according to the supply (treasure, \thˆsaurou\) within. Verse 33| is like strkjv@Matthew:7:17-19|. Jesus often repeated his crisp pungent sayings as every teacher does.

rwp@Matthew:12:38 @{A sign from thee} (\apo sou sˆmeion\). One wonders at the audacity of scribes and Pharisees who accused Jesus of being in league with Satan and thus casting out demons who can turn round and blandly ask for a "sign from thee." As if the other miracles were not signs! "The demand was impudent, hypocritical, insulting" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:12:46 @{His mother and his brothers} (\hˆ mˆtˆr kai hoi adelphoi autou\). Brothers of Jesus, younger sons of Joseph and Mary. The charge of the Pharisees that Jesus was in league with Satan was not believed by the disciples of Jesus, but some of his friends did think that he was beside himself (Mark:3:21|) because of the excitement and strain. It was natural for Mary to want to take him home for rest and refreshment. Songs:the mother and brothers are pictured standing outside the house (or the crowd). They send a messenger to Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:13:11 @{To know the mysteries} (\gn“nai ta mustˆria\). Second aorist active infinitive of \gin“sk“\. The word \mustˆrion\ is from \mustˆs\, one initiated, and that from \mue“\ (\mu“\), to close or shut (Latin, _mutus_). The mystery-religions of the east had all sorts of secrets and signs as secret societies do today. But those initiated knew them. Songs:the disciples have been initiated into the secrets of the kingdom of heaven. Paul will use it freely of the mystery once hidden, but now revealed, now made known in Christ (Romans:16:25; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7|, etc.). In strkjv@Phillipians:4:12| Paul says: "I have learned the secret or been initiated" (\memuˆmai\). Songs:Jesus here explains that his parables are open to the disciples, but shut to the Pharisees with their hostile minds. In the Gospels \mustˆrion\ is used only here and in the parallel passages (Mark:4:11; strkjv@Luke:8:10|).

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

rwp@Matthew:13:16 @{Blessed are your eyes} (\hum“n de makarioi hoi ophthalmoi\). A beatitude for the disciples in contrast with the Pharisees. Note position of "Happy" here also as in the Beatitudes in strkjv@Matthew:5|.

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

rwp@Matthew:14:4 @{For John said unto him} (\elegen gar I“anˆs aut“i\). Possibly the Pharisees may have put Herod up to inveigling John to Machaerus on one of his visits there to express an opinion concerning his marriage to Herodias (Broadus) and the imperfect tense (\elegen\) probably means that John said it repeatedly. It was a blunt and brave thing that John said. It cost him his head, but it is better to have a head like John's and lose it than to have an ordinary head and keep it. Herod Antipas was a politician and curbed his resentment toward John by his fear of the people who still held (\eichon\, imperfect tense) him as a prophet.

rwp@Matthew:15:1 @{From Jerusalem} (\apo Ierosolum“n\). Jerusalem is the headquarters of the conspiracy against Jesus with the Pharisees as the leaders in it. Already we have seen the Herodians combining with the Pharisees in the purpose to put Jesus to death (Mark:3:6; strkjv@Matthew:12:14; strkjv@Luke:6:11|). Soon Jesus will warn the disciples against the Sadducees also (Matthew:16:6|). Unusual order here, "Pharisees and scribes." "The guardians of tradition in the capital have their evil eye on Jesus and co-operate with the provincial rigorists" (Bruce), if the Pharisees were not all from Jerusalem.

rwp@Matthew:15:2 @{The tradition of the elders} (\tˆn paradosin t“n presbuter“n\). This was the oral law, handed down by the elders of the past in _ex cathedra_ fashion and later codified in the Mishna. Handwashing before meals is not a requirement of the Old Testament. It is, we know, a good thing for sanitary reasons, but the rabbis made it a mark of righteousness for others at any rate. This item was magnified at great length in the oral teaching. The washing (\niptontai\, middle voice, note) of the hands called for minute regulations. It was commanded to wash the hands before meals, it was one's duty to do it after eating. The more rigorous did it between the courses. The hands must be immersed. Then the water itself must be "clean" and the cups or pots used must be ceremonially "clean." Vessels were kept full of clean water ready for use (John:2:6-8|). Songs:it went on _ad infinitum_. Thus a real issue is raised between Jesus and the rabbis. It was far more than a point of etiquette or of hygienics. The rabbis held it to be a mortal sin. The incident may have happened in a Pharisee's house.

rwp@Matthew:15:12 @{Were offended} (\eskandalisthˆsan\). First aorist passive. "Were caused to stumble," "have taken offence" (Moffatt), "have turned against you" (Weymouth), "were shocked" (Goodspeed), "War ill-pleased" (Braid Scots). They took umbrage at the public rebuke and at such a scorpion sting in it all. It cut to the quick because it was true. It showed in the glowering countenances of the Pharisees so plainly that the disciples were uneasy. See on ¯5:29|.

rwp@Matthew:15:14 @{They are blind guides} (\tuphloi eisin hodˆgoi\). Graphic picture. Once in Cincinnati a blind man introduced me to his blind friend. He said that he was showing him the city. Jesus is not afraid of the Pharisees. Let them alone to do their worst. Blind leaders and blind victims will land in the ditch. A proverbial expression in the O.T.

rwp@Matthew:15:16 @{Are ye also even yet without understanding?} (\Akmˆn kai h–meis asunetoi este\). \Akmˆn\ is an adverbial accusative (classic \aichmˆ\, point (of a weapon)=\akmˆn chronou\ at this point of time, just now=\eti\. It occurs in papyri and inscriptions, though condemned by the old grammarians. "In spite of all my teaching, are ye also like the Pharisees without spiritual insight and grasp?" One must never forget that the disciples lived in a Pharisaic environment. Their religious world-outlook was Pharisaic. They were lacking in spiritual intelligence or sense, "totally ignorant" (Moffatt).

rwp@Matthew:15:18 @{Out of the mouth} (\ek tou stomatos\). Spoken words come out of the heart and so are a true index of character. By "heart" (\kardias\) Jesus means not just the emotional nature, but the entire man, the inward life of "evil thoughts" (\dialogismoi ponˆroi\) that issue in words and deeds. "These defile the man," not "eating with unwashed hands." The captious quibblings of the Pharisees, for instance, had come out of evil hearts.

rwp@Matthew:15:24 @{I was not sent} (\ouk apestalˆn\). Second aorist passive indicative of \apostell“\. Jesus takes a new turn with this woman in Phoenicia. He makes a test case of her request. In a way she represented the problem of the Gentile world. He calls the Jews "the lost sheep of the house of Israel" in spite of the conduct of the Pharisees.

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

rwp@Matthew:16:3 @{Lowring} (\stugnaz“n\). A sky covered with clouds. Used also of a gloomy countenance as of the rich young ruler in strkjv@Mark:10:22|. Nowhere else in the New Testament. This very sign of a rainy day we use today. The word for "foul weather" (\cheim“n\) is the common one for winter and a storm. {The signs of the times} (\ta sˆmeia t“n kair“n\). How little the Pharisees and Sadducees understood the situation. Soon Jerusalem would be destroyed and the Jewish state overturned. It is not always easy to discern (\diakrinein\, discriminate) the signs of our own time. Men are numerous with patent keys to it all. But we ought not to be blind when others are gullible.

rwp@Matthew:16:7 @{They reasoned} (\dielogizonto\). It was pathetic, the almost jejune inability of the disciples to understand the parabolic warning against "the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees" (verse 6|) after the collision of Christ just before with both parties in Magadan. They kept it up, imperfect tense. It is "loaves" (\artous\) rather than "bread."

rwp@Matthew:16:14 @{And they said} (\hoi de eipan\). They were ready to respond for they knew that popular opinion was divided on that point (14:1f.|). They give four different opinions. It is always a risky thing for a pastor to ask for people's opinions of him. But Jesus was not much concerned by their answers to this question. He knew by now that the Pharisees and Sadducees were bitterly hostile to him. The masses were only superficially following him and they looked for a political Messiah and had vague ideas about him. How much did the disciples understand and how far have they come in their development of faith? Are they still loyal?

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

rwp@Matthew:22:16 @{Their disciples} (\tous mathˆtas aut“n\). Students, pupils, of the Pharisees as in strkjv@Mark:2:18|. There were two Pharisaic theological seminaries in Jerusalem (Hillel, Shammai). {The Herodians} (\t“n Her“idian“n\). Not members of Herod's family or Herod's soldiers, but partisans or followers of Herod. The form in \-ianos\ is a Latin termination like that in \Christianos\ (Acts:11:26|). Mentioned also in strkjv@Mark:3:6| combining with the Pharisees against Jesus. {The person of men} (\pros“pon anthr“p“n\). Literally, face of men. Paying regard to appearance is the sin of partiality condemned by James (James:2:1,9|) when \pros“polˆmpsia, pros“polˆmptein\ are used, in imitation of the Hebrew idiom. This suave flattery to Jesus implied "that Jesus was a reckless simpleton" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:22:24 @{Shall marry} (\epigambreusei\). The Sadducees were "aiming at amusement rather than deadly mischief" (Bruce). It was probably an old conundrum that they had used to the discomfiture of the Pharisees. This passage is quoted from strkjv@Deuteronomy:25:5,6|. The word appears here only in the N.T. and elsewhere only in the LXX. It is used of any connected by marriage as in strkjv@Genesis:34:9; strkjv@1Samuel:18:22|. But in strkjv@Genesis:38:8| and strkjv@Deuteronomy:25:5| it is used specifically of one marrying his brother's widow.

rwp@Matthew:22:34 @{He had put the Sadducees to silence} (\ephim“sen tous Saddoukaious\). Muzzled the Sadducees. The Pharisees could not restrain their glee though they were joining with the Sadducees in trying to entrap Jesus. {Gathered themselves together} (\sunˆchthˆsan epi to auto\). First aorist passive, were gathered together. \Epi to auto\ explains more fully \sun-\. See also strkjv@Acts:2:47|. "Mustered their forces" (Moffatt).

rwp@Matthew:22:42 @{The Christ} (\tou Christou\). The Messiah, of course, not Christ as a proper name of Jesus. Jesus here assumes that strkjv@Psalms:110| refers to the Messiah. By his pungent question about the Messiah as David's son and Lord he really touches the problem of his Person (his Deity and his Humanity). Probably the Pharisees had never faced that problem before. They were unable to answer.

rwp@Matthew:23:6 @{The chief place at feasts} (\tˆn pr“toklisian en tois deipnois\). Literally, the first reclining place on the divan at the meal. The Persians, Greeks, Romans, Jews differed in their customs, but all cared for the post of honour at formal functions as is true of us today. Hostesses often solve the point by putting the name of each guest at the table. At the last passover meal the apostles had an ugly snarl over this very point of precedence (Luke:22:24; strkjv@John:13:2-11|), just two days after this exposure of the Pharisees in the presence of the apostles. {The chief seats in the synagogues} (\tas pr“tokathedrias en tais sunag“gais\). "An insatiable hunger for prominence" (Bruce). These chief seats (Zuchermandel) were on the platform looking to the audience and with the back to the chest in which were kept the rolls of scripture. The Essenes had a different arrangement. People today pay high prices for front seats at the theatre, but at church prefer the rear seats out of a curious mock-humility. In the time of Jesus the hypocrites boldly sat up in front. Now, if they come to church at all, they take the rear seats.

rwp@Matthew:23:8 @{But be not ye called Rabbi} (\humeis de mˆ klˆthˆte Rabbei\). An apparent aside to the disciples. Note the emphatic position of \humeis\. Some even regard verses 8-10| as a later addition and not part of this address to the Pharisees, but the apostles were present. Euthymius Zigabenus says: "Do not seek to be called (ingressive aorist subjunctive), if others call you this it will not be your fault." This is not far from the Master's meaning. Rabbi means "my great one," "my Master," apparently a comparatively new title in Christ's time.

rwp@Matthew:23:13 @{Hypocrites} (\hupokritai\). This terrible word of Jesus appears first from him in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew:6:2,5,16; strkjv@7:5|), then in strkjv@15:7| and strkjv@22:18|. Here it appears "with terrific iteration" (Bruce) save in the third of the seven woes (23:13,15,23,25,27,29|). The verb in the active (\hupokrin“\) meant to separate slowly or slightly subject to gradual inquiry. Then the middle was to make answer, to take up a part on the stage, to act a part. It was an easy step to mean to feign, to pretend, to wear a masque, to act the hypocrite, to play a part. This hardest word from the lips of Jesus falls on those who were the religious leaders of the Jews (Scribes and Pharisees), who had justified this thunderbolt of wrath by their conduct toward Jesus and their treatment of things high and holy. The _Textus Receptus has eight woes, adding verse 14| which the Revised Version places in the margin (called verse 13| by Westcott and Hort and rejected on the authority of Aleph B D as a manifest gloss from strkjv@Mark:12:40| and strkjv@Luke:20:47|). The MSS. that insert it put it either before 13 or after 13. Plummer cites these seven woes as another example of Matthew's fondness for the number seven, more fancy than fact for Matthew's Gospel is not the Apocalypse of John. These are all illustrations of Pharisaic saying and not doing (Allen). {Ye shut the kingdom of heaven} (\kleiete tˆn basileian t“n ouran“n\). In strkjv@Luke:11:52| the lawyers are accused of keeping the door to the house of knowledge locked and with flinging away the keys so as to keep themselves and the people in ignorance. These custodians of the kingdom by their teaching obscured the way to life. It is a tragedy to think how preachers and teachers of the kingdom of God may block the door for those who try to enter in (\tous eiserchomenous\, conative present middle participle). {Against} (\emprosthen\). Literally, before. These door-keepers of the kingdom slam it shut in men's faces and they themselves are on the outside where they will remain. They hide the key to keep others from going in.

rwp@Matthew:23:15 @{Twofold more a son of hell than yourselves} (\huion geennˆs diploteron h–m“n\). It is a convert to Pharisaism rather than Judaism that is meant by "one proselyte" (\hena prosˆluton\), from \proserchomai\, newcomers, aliens. There were two kinds of proselytes: of the gate (not actual Jews, but God-fearers and well-wishers of Judaism, like Cornelius), of righteousness who received circumcision and became actual Jews. But a very small per cent of the latter became Pharisees. There was a Hellenistic Jewish literature (Philo, Sibylline Oracles, etc.) designed to attract Gentiles to Judaism. But the Pharisaic missionary zeal (compass, \periagˆte\, go around) was a comparative failure. And success was even worse, Jesus says with pitiless plainness. The "son of Gehenna" means one fitted for and so destined for Gehenna. "The more converted the more perverted" (H.J. Holtzmann). The Pharisees claimed to be in a special sense sons of the kingdom (Matthew:8:12|). They were more partisan than pious. \Diplous\ (twofold, double) is common in the papyri. The comparative here used, as if from \diplos\, appears also in Appian. Note the ablative of comparison h–m“n. It was a withering thrust.

rwp@Matthew:23:16 @{Ye blind guides} (\hodˆgoi tuphloi\). Note omission of "Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites" with this third woe. In strkjv@15:14| Jesus had already called the Pharisees "blind guides" (leaders). They split hairs about oaths, as Jesus had explained in strkjv@5:33-37|, between the temple and the gold of the temple. {He is a debtor} (\opheilei\). He owes his oath, is bound by his oath. A.V., {is guilty}, is old English, obsolete sense of guilt as fine or payment.

rwp@Matthew:23:17 @{Ye fools} (\m“roi\). In strkjv@5:22| Jesus had warned against calling a man \m“ros\ in a rage, but here he so terms the blind Pharisees for their stupidity, description of the class. "It shows that not the word but the spirit in which it is uttered is what matters" (McNeile).

rwp@Matthew:23:23 @{Ye tithe} (\apodekatoute\). The tithe had to be paid upon "all the increase of thy seed" (Deuteronomy:14:22; strkjv@Leviticus:27:30|). The English word tithe is tenth. These small aromatic herbs, mint (\to hˆduosmon\, sweet-smelling), anise or dill (\anˆthon\), cummin (\kuminon\, with aromatic seeds), show the Pharisaic scrupulous conscientiousness, all marketable commodities. "The Talmud tells of the ass of a certain Rabbi which had been so well trained as to refuse corn of which the tithes had not been taken" (Vincent). {These ye ought} (\tauta edei\). Jesus does not condemn tithing. What he does condemn is doing it to the neglect of the {weightier matters} (\ta barutera\). The Pharisees were externalists; cf. strkjv@Luke:11:39-44|.

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

rwp@Matthew:23:29 @{The tombs of the prophets} (\tous taphous t“n prophˆt“n\). Cf. strkjv@Luke:11:48-52|. They were bearing witness against themselves (\heautois\, verse 31|) to "the murder-taint in your blood" (Allen). "These men who professed to be so distressed at the murdering of the Prophets, were themselves compassing the death of Him who was far greater than any Prophet" (Plummer). There are four monuments called Tombs of the Prophets (Zechariah, Absalom, Jehoshaphat, St. James) at the base of the Mount of Olives. Some of these may have been going up at the very time that Jesus spoke. In this seventh and last woe Jesus addresses the Jewish nation and not merely the Pharisees.

rwp@Matthew:23:33 @{Ye serpents, ye offspring of vipers} (\opheis gennˆmata echidn“n\). These blistering words come as a climax and remind one of the Baptist (3:17|) and of the time when the Pharisees accused Jesus of being in league with Beelzebub (12:34|). They cut to the bone like whip-cords. {How shall ye escape} (\p“s phugˆte\). Deliberate subjunctive. There is a curse in the Talmud somewhat like this: "Woe to the house of Annas! Woe to their serpent-like hissings."

rwp@Matthew:24:1 @{Went out from the temple} (\exelth“n apo tou hierou\). All the discourses since strkjv@Matthew:21:23| have been in the temple courts (\hieron\, the sacred enclosure). But now Jesus leaves it for good after the powerful denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees in chapter 23. His public teaching is over. It was a tragic moment. As he was going out (\eporeueto\, descriptive imperfect) the disciples, as if to relieve the thought of the Master came to him (\prosˆlthon\) to show (\epideixai\, ingressive aorist infinitive) the buildings of the temple (\tas oikodomas tou hierou\). They were familiar to Jesus and the disciples, but beautiful like a snow mountain (Josephus, _Wars_ V,5,6), the monument that Herod the Great had begun and that was not yet complete (John:2:20|). Great stones were there of polished marble.

rwp@Matthew:24:23 @{Lo, here is the Christ, or here} (\idou h“de ho Christos ˆ h“de\). The false prophets (24:11|) create the trouble and now false Christs (\pseudo-Christoi\, verse 24|) offer a way out of these troubles. The deluded victims raise the cries of "Lo, here," when these false Messiahs arise with their panaceas for public ills (political, religious, moral, and spiritual).

rwp@Matthew:24:37 @{The days of Noah} (\hai hˆmerai tou N“e\). Jesus had used this same imagery before to the Pharisees (Luke:17:26-30|). In Noah's day there was plenty of warning, but utter unpreparedness. Most people are either indifferent about the second coming or have fanciful schemes or programs about it. Few are really eager and expectant and leave to God the time and the plans.

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:26:47 @{While he yet spake} (\eti autou lalountos\). It was an electric moment as Jesus faced Judas with his horde of helpers as if he turned to meet an army. {Let us go} (\ag“men\), Jesus had said. And here he is. The eight at the gate seemed to have given no notice. Judas is described here as "one of the twelve" (\heis t“n d“deka\) in all three Synoptic Gospels (Mark:14:43; strkjv@Matthew:26:47; strkjv@Luke:22:47|). The very horror of the thing is thus emphasized, that one of the chosen twelve apostles should do this dastardly deed. {A great multitude} (\ochlos polus\). The chief priests and Pharisees had furnished Judas a band of soldiers from the garrison in Antonia (John:18:3|) and the temple police (Luke:22:52|) with swords (knives) and staves (clubs) with a hired rabble who had lanterns also (John:18:3|) in spite of the full moon. Judas was taking no chances of failure for he well knew the strange power of Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:26:65 @{He hath spoken blasphemy} (\eblasphˆmˆsen\). There was no need of witnesses now, for Jesus had incriminated himself by claiming under oath to be the Messiah, the Son of God. Now it would not be blasphemy for the real Messiah to make such a claim, but it was intolerable to admit that Jesus could be the Messiah of Jewish hope. At the beginning of Christ's ministry he occasionally used the word Messiah of himself, but he soon ceased, for it was plain that it would create trouble. The people would take it in the sense of a political revolutionist who would throw off the Roman yoke. If he declined that role, the Pharisees would have none of him for that was the kind of a Messiah that they desired. But the hour has now come. At the Triumphal Entry Jesus let the Galilean crowds hail him as Messiah, knowing what the effect would be. Now the hour has struck. He has made his claim and has defied the High Priest.

rwp@Matthew:27:20 @{Persuaded} (\epeisan\). The chief priests (Sadducees) and elders (Pharisees) saw the peril of the situation and took no chances. While Pilate wavered in pressing the question, they used all their arts to get the people to "ask for themselves" (\aitˆs“ntai\, indirect middle ingressive aorist subjunctive) and to choose Barabbas and not Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:27:25 @{His blood be upon us and upon our children} (\to haima autou kai epi ta tekna hˆm“n\). These solemn words do show a consciousness that the Jewish people recognized their guilt and were even proud of it. But Pilate could not wash away his own guilt that easily. The water did not wash away the blood of Jesus from his hands any more than Lady Macbeth could wash away the blood-stains from her lily-white hands. One legend tells that in storms on Mt. Pilatus in Switzerland his ghost comes out and still washes his hands in the storm-clouds. There was guilt enough for Judas, for Caiaphas and for all the Sanhedrin both Sadducees and Pharisees, for the Jewish people as a whole (\pas ho laos\), and for Pilate. At bottom the sins of all of us nailed Jesus to the Cross. This language is no excuse for race hatred today, but it helps explain the sensitiveness between Jew and Christians on this subject. And Jews today approach the subject of the Cross with a certain amount of prejudice.

rwp@Philippians:2:6 @{Being} (\huparch“n\). Rather, "existing," present active participle of \huparch“\. In the form of God (\en morphˆi theou\). \Morphˆ\ means the essential attributes as shown in the form. In his preincarnate state Christ possessed the attributes of God and so appeared to those in heaven who saw him. Here is a clear statement by Paul of the deity of Christ. {A prize} (\harpagmon\). Predicate accusative with \hˆgˆsato\. Originally words in \-mos\ signified the act, not the result (\-ma\). The few examples of \harpagmos\ (Plutarch, etc.) allow it to be understood as equivalent to \harpagma\, like \baptismos\ and \baptisma\. That is to say Paul means a prize to be held on to rather than something to be won ("robbery"). {To be on an equality with God} (\to einai isa theoi\). Accusative articular infinitive object of \hˆgˆsato\, "the being equal with God" (associative instrumental case \the“i\ after \isa\). \Isa\ is adverbial use of neuter plural with \einai\ as in strkjv@Revelation:21:16|. {Emptied himself} (\heauton eken“se\). First aorist active indicative of \keno“\, old verb from \kenos\, empty. Of what did Christ empty himself? Not of his divine nature. That was impossible. He continued to be the Son of God. There has arisen a great controversy on this word, a \Kenosis\ doctrine. Undoubtedly Christ gave up his environment of glory. He took upon himself limitations of place (space) and of knowledge and of power, though still on earth retaining more of these than any mere man. It is here that men should show restraint and modesty, though it is hard to believe that Jesus limited himself by error of knowledge and certainly not by error of conduct. He was without sin, though tempted as we are. "He stripped himself of the insignia of majesty" (Lightfoot).

rwp@Philippians:3:5 @{Thinketh to have confidence} (\dokei pepoithenai\). Second perfect active infinitive. Old idiom, "seems to himself to have confidence." Later idiom like strkjv@Matthew:3:9| "think not to say" and strkjv@1Corinthians:11:16|, "thinks that he has ground of confidence in himself." {I yet more} (\eg“ mallon\). "I have more ground for boasting than he" and Paul proceeds to prove it in the rest of verses 5,6|. {Circumcised the eighth day} (\peritomˆi oktaˆmeros\). "In circumcision (locative case) an eighth day man." Use of the ordinal with persons like \tetartaios\ (John:11:39|). Ishmaelites were circumcised in the thirteenth year, proselytes from Gentiles in mature age, Jews on the eighth day (Luke:2:21|). {Of the stock of Israel} (\ek genous Israˆl\). Of the original stock, not a proselyte. {Benjamin} (\Beniamin\). Son of the right hand (that is, left-handed), son of Rachel. The first King, Saul (Paul's own Hebrew name) was from this little tribe. The battle cry of Israel was "After thee, O Benjamin" (Judges:5:14|). {A Hebrew of the Hebrews} (\Ebraios ex Ebrai“n\). Of Hebrew parents who retained the characteristic qualities in language and custom as distinct from the Hellenistic Jews (Acts:6:1|). Paul was from Tarsus and knew Greek as well as Aramaic (Acts:21:40; strkjv@22:2|) and Hebrew, but he had not become Hellenized. {A Pharisee} (\Pharisaios\). In distinction from the Sadducees (Galatians:1:14|) and he continued a Pharisee in many essential matters like the doctrine of the resurrection (Acts:23:6|). Cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:11:22|.

rwp@Revelation:3:2 @{Be thou watchful} (\ginou grˆgor“n\). Periphrastic imperative with present middle of \ginomai\ (keep on becoming) and present active participle of \grˆgore“\ (late present from perfect \egrˆgora\ and that from \egeir“\, as in strkjv@Matthew:24:42|) and see strkjv@16:15| for \grˆgore“\ also. He does not say "Arise from the dead" (Ephesians:5:14|), for there are vestiges of life. Those still alive are addressed through the angel of the church. {Stablish the things that remain} (\stˆrison ta loipa\). First aorist active imperative of \stˆriz“\, to make stable. Those not actually dead, but in grave peril. See a like command to Titus in Crete (Titus:1:5|). Every new pastor faces such a problem. {Which were ready to die} (\ha emellon apothanein\). Imperfect active plural because the individuals, though neuter plural, are regarded as living realities. The imperfect looking on the situation "with a delicate optimism" (Swete) as having passed the crisis, a sort of epistolary imperfect. {For I have found no works of thine} (\ou gar heurˆka sou erga\). "For I have not found any works of thine." Perfect active indicative of \heurisk“\. The church as a whole represented by \sou\ (thy). {Fulfilled} (\peplˆr“mena\). Perfect passive predicate participle of \plˆro“\. Their works have not measured up to God's standard (\en“pion tou theou mou\).

rwp@Info_Romans @{Paul} @(\Paulos\). Roman name (\Paulus\). See on ¯Acts:13:9| for the origin of this name by the side of Saul. {Servant} (\doulos\). Bond-slave of Jesus Christ (or Christ Jesus as some MSS. give it and as is the rule in the later Epistles) for the first time in the Epistles in the opening sentence, though the phrase already in strkjv@Galatians:1:10|. Recurs in strkjv@Phillipians:1:1| and \desmios\ (bondsman) in strkjv@Philemon:1:1|. {Called to be an apostle} (\klˆtos apostolos\). An apostle by vocation (Denney) as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:1|. In strkjv@Galatians:1:1| \klˆtos\ is not used, but the rest of the verse has the same idea. {Separated} (\aph“rismenos\). Perfect passive participle of \aphoriz“\ for which verb see on ¯Galatians:1:15|. Paul is a spiritual Pharisee (etymologically), separated not to the oral tradition, but to God's gospel, a chosen vessel (Acts:9:15|). By man also (Acts:13:2|). Many of Paul's characteristic words like \euaggelion\ have been already discussed in the previous Epistles that will call for little comment from now on.

rwp@Romans:1:17 @{For therein} (\gar en aut“i\). In the gospel (verse 16|) of which Paul is not ashamed. {A righteousness of God} (\dikaiosunˆ theou\). Subjective genitive, "a God kind of righteousness," one that each must have and can obtain in no other way save "from faith unto faith" (\ek piste“s eis pistin\), faith the starting point and faith the goal (Lightfoot). {Is revealed} (\apokaluptetai\). It is a revelation from God, this God kind of righteousness, that man unaided could never have conceived or still less attained. In these words we have Paul's statement in his own way of the theme of the Epistle, the content of the gospel as Paul understands it. Every word is important: \s“tˆrian\ (salvation), \euaggelion\ (gospel), \apokaluptetai\ (is revealed), \dikaiosunˆ theou\ (righteousness of God), \pistis\ (faith) and \pisteuonti\ (believing). He grounds his position on strkjv@Habbakkuk:2:4| (quoted also in strkjv@Galatians:3:11|). By "righteousness" we shall see that Paul means both "justification" and "sanctification." It is important to get a clear idea of Paul's use of \dikaiosunˆ\ here for it controls the thought throughout the Epistle. Jesus set up a higher standard of righteousness (\dikaiosunˆ\) in the Sermon on the Mount than the Scribes and Pharisees taught and practised (Matthew:5:20|) and proves it in various items. Here Paul claims that in the gospel, taught by Jesus and by himself there is revealed a God kind of righteousness with two ideas in it (the righteousness that God has and that he bestows). It is an old word for quality from \dikaios\, a righteous man, and that from \dikˆ\, right or justice (called a goddess in strkjv@Acts:28:4|), and that allied with \deiknumi\, to show, to point out. Other allied words are \dikaio“\, to declare or make \dikaios\ (Romans:3:24,26|), \dikai“ma\, that which is deemed \dikaios\ (sentence or ordinance as in strkjv@1:32; strkjv@2:26; strkjv@8:4|), \dikai“sis\, the act of declaring \dikaios\ (only twice in N.T., strkjv@4:25; strkjv@5:18|). \Dikaiosunˆ\ and \dikaio“\ are easy to render into English, though we use justice in distinction from righteousness and sanctification for the result that comes after justification (the setting one right with God). Paul is consistent and usually clear in his use of these great words.

rwp@Romans:2:3 @{And doest the same} (\kai poi“n auta\). "And doest them occasionally." {That thou shalt escape} (\su ekpheuxˆi\). Emphasis on \su\, "thou conceited Jew expecting to escape God's \krima\ because thou art a Jew." Cf. strkjv@Matthew:3:8f|. Paul justifies the bitter words of the Baptist to the Pharisees and Sadducees. The future middle of the old verb \ekpheug“\ (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:3|). The Jew posed as immune to the ordinary laws of ethics because a Jew. Alas, some Christians affect the same immunity.

rwp@Romans:12:17 @{Render to no man} (\mˆdeni apodidontes\). "Giving back to no man." Independent participle again. {Evil for evil} (\kakon anti kakou\). Directly opposite to the law of retaliation of the Pharisees as in strkjv@Matthew:5:39; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:15; strkjv@1Corinthians:13:5f|. {Take thought of} (\pronooumenoi\). "Taking thought beforehand." Old word. See strkjv@2Corinthians:8:21|.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Sun Jun 30 08:05:48 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020