OT-LAW.filter - rwp ceremonial:

rwp@1Corinthians:1:21 @{Seeing that} (\epeid\). Since (\epei\ and \d\) with explanatory \gar\. {Through its wisdom} (\dia ts sophias\). Article here as possessive. The two wisdoms contrasted. {Knew not God} (\ouk egn\). Failed to know, second aorist (effective) active indicative of \ginsk\, 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 ts mrias tou krugmatos\). Perhaps "proclamation" is the idea, for it is not \kruxis\, the act of heralding, but \krugma\, 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 \krugma\ 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 (\eudoksan\). The foolishness of preaching is not the preaching of foolishness. {To save them that believe} (\ssai 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:9:1 @{Amos:I not free?} (\Ouk eimi eleutheros;\). Free as a Christian from Mosaic ceremonialism (cf. strkjv@9:19|) as much as any Christian and yet he adapts his moral independence to the principle of considerate love in strkjv@8:13|. {Amos:I not an apostle?} (\ouk eimi apostolos;\). He has the exceptional privileges as an apostle to support from the churches and yet he foregoes these. {Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?} (\ouchi Isoun ton Kurion hmn heoraka;\). Proof (15:8; strkjv@Acts:9:17,27; strkjv@18:9; strkjv@22:14,17f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:1ff.|) that he has the qualification of an apostle (Acts:1:22|) though not one of the twelve. Note strong form of the negative \ouchi\ here. All these questions expect an affirmative answer. The perfect active \heoraka\ from \hora\, to see, does not here have double reduplication as in strkjv@John:1:18|.

rwp@1John:3:3 @{Set on him} (\ep' auti\). Resting upon (\epi\) with locative rather than \eis\, looking to, strkjv@Acts:24:15|. That is upon Christ (Brooke), upon God (D. Smith), upon God in Christ (Westcott). {Purifieth himself} (\hagnizei heauton\). Present active indicative of \hagniz\, old verb, from \hagnos\ (pure from contamination), used of ceremonial purifications (John:11:55; strkjv@Acts:21:24,26| as in strkjv@Exodus:19:10|) and then of personal internal cleansing of heart (James:4:8|), soul (1Peter:1:22|), self (here). Cf. strkjv@Phillipians:2:12f.| the work of both God and man. {As he is pure} (\kaths ekeinos hagnos estin\). As in strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:9| \ekeinos\ (emphatic demonstrative) refers to Christ. Christ can be termed \hagnos\ "in virtue of the perfection of his humanity" (Westcott). Our destiny is to be conformed to the image of God in Christ (Romans:8:29|).

rwp@1Peter:1:22 @{Seeing ye have purified} (\hgnikotes\). Perfect active participle of \hagniz\, old verb from \hagnos\ (pure), here with \psuchas\ (souls), with \kardias\ (hearts) in strkjv@James:4:8| as in strkjv@1John:3:3| of moral cleansing also. See the ceremonial sense of the word as in LXX in strkjv@John:11:55; strkjv@Acts:21:24,26; strkjv@24:18|. {In your obedience} (\en ti hupakoi\). With repetition of the idea in strkjv@1:2,14| (children of obedience). {To the truth} (\ts aletheias\). Objective genitive with which compare strkjv@John:17:17,19| about sanctification in the truth and strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:12| about believing the truth. There is cleansing power in the truth of God in Christ. {Unfeigned} (\anupokriton\). Late and rare double compound, here alone in Peter, but see strkjv@James:3:17; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:6|, etc. No other kind of \philadelphia\ (brotherly love) is worth having (1Thessalonians:4:9; strkjv@Hebrews:13:1; strkjv@2Peter:1:7|). {From the heart fervently} (\ek kardias ektens\). Late adverb (in inscriptions, Polybius, LXX). The adjective \ektens\ is more common (1Peter:4:8|).

rwp@2Corinthians:7:1 @{These promises} (\tautas tas epaggelias\). Songs:many and so precious (2Peter:2:4| \epaggelmata\; strkjv@Hebrews:11:39f.|). {Let us cleanse ourselves} (\katharismen heautous\). Old Greek used \kathair\ (in N.T. only in strkjv@John:15:2|, to prune). In _Koin_ \kathariz\ occurs in inscriptions for ceremonial cleansing (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 216f.). Paul includes himself in this volitive aorist subjunctive. {From all defilement} (\apo pantos molusmou\). Ablative alone would have done, but with \apo\ it is plainer as in strkjv@Hebrews:9:14|. \Molusmos\ is a late word from \molun\, to stain (see on ¯1Corinthians:8:7|), to pollute. In the LXX, Plutarch, Josephus. It includes all sorts of filthiness, physical, moral, mental, ceremonial, "of flesh and spirit." Missionaries in China and India can appreciate the atmosphere of pollution in Corinth, for instance. {Perfecting holiness} (\epitelountes hagiosunn\). Not merely negative goodness (cleansing), but aggressive and progressive (present tense of \epitele\) holiness, not a sudden attainment of complete holiness, but a continuous process (1Thessalonians:3:13; strkjv@Romans:1:4; strkjv@1:6|).

rwp@2Peter:3:10 @{The day of the Lord} (\hmera kuriou\). Songs:Peter in strkjv@Acts:2:20| (from strkjv@Joel:3:4|) and Paul in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:2,4; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:5:5|; and day of Christ in strkjv@Phillipians:2:16| and day of God in strkjv@2:12| and day of judgment already in strkjv@2:9; strkjv@3:7|. This great day will certainly come (\hxei\). Future active of \hk\, old verb, to arrive, but in God's own time. {As a thief} (\hs klepts\). That is suddenly, without notice. This very metaphor Jesus had used (Luke:12:39; strkjv@Matthew:24:43|) and Paul after him (1Thessalonians:5:2|) and John will quote it also (Revelation:3:3; strkjv@16:15|). {In the which} (\en hi\). The day when the Lord comes. {Shall pass away} (\pareleusontai\). Future middle of \parerchomai\, old verb, to pass by. {With a great noise} (\roizdon\). Late and rare adverb (from \roize, roizos\)-- Lycophron, Nicander, here only in N.T., onomatopoetic, whizzing sound of rapid motion through the air like the flight of a bird, thunder, fierce flame. {The elements} (\ta stoicheia\). Old word (from \stoichos\ a row), in Plato in this sense, in other senses also in N.T. as the alphabet, ceremonial regulations (Hebrews:5:12; strkjv@Galatians:4:3; strkjv@5:1; strkjv@Colossians:2:8|). {Shall be dissolved} (\luthsetai\). Future passive of \lu\, to loosen, singular because \stoicheia\ is neuter plural. {With fervent heat} (\kausoumena\). Present passive participle of \kauso\, late verb (from \kausos\, usually medical term for fever) and nearly always employed for fever temperature. Mayor suggests a conflagration from internal heat. Bigg thinks it merely a vernacular (Doric) future for \kausomena\ (from \kai\, to burn). {Shall be burned up} (\katakasetai\). Repeated in verse 12|. Second future passive of the compound verb \katakai\, to burn down (up), according to A L. But Aleph B K P read \heurethsetai\ (future passive of \heurisk\, to find) "shall be found." There are various other readings here. The text seems corrupt.

rwp@Acts:5:6 @{The young men} (\hoi neteroi\). Literally the younger men (contrast with \hoi presbuteroi\, the elder men). Same as \neaniskoi\ in verse 10| and so no order in the young church. Perhaps these young men were acting as ushers or actual pallbearers. {Wrapped him round} (\sunesteilan\). First aorist active indicative of \sustell\, old verb, to draw together, or contract (1Corinthians:7:29|), to roll together, to wrap with bandages, to enshroud as here. Nowhere else in the N.T. Frequent in medical writers. They may have used their own mantles. The time for burial was short in Jerusalem for sanitary reasons and to avoid ceremonial defilement.

rwp@Acts:13:39 @{And by him every one that believeth is justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses} (\kai apo pantn hn ouk dunthte en nomi Muses dikaiothnai en touti ps ho pisteun dikaioutai\). This is a characteristic Greek sentence with the principal clause at the end and Pauline to the core. A literal rendering as to the order would be: "And from all the things from (\apo\ not repeated in the Greek, but understood, the ablative case being repeated) which ye were not able to be justified in this one every one who believes is justified." The climax is at the close and gives us the heart of Paul's teaching about Christ. "We have here the germ of all that is most characteristic in Paul's later teaching. It is the argument of the Epistle to Galatians and Romans in a sentence" (Furneaux). The failure of the Mosaic law to bring the kind of righteousness that God demands is stated. This is made possible in and by (\en\) Christ alone. Paul's favourite words occur here, \pisteu\, believe, with which \pistis\, faith, is allied, \dikaio\, to set right with God on the basis of faith. In strkjv@Romans:6:7| Paul uses \apo\ also after \dikaio\. These are key words (\pisteu\ and \dikaio\) in Paul's theology and call for prolonged and careful study if one is to grasp the Pauline teaching. \Dikaio\ primarily means to make righteous, to declare righteous like \axio\, to deem worthy (\axios\). But in the end Paul holds that real righteousness will come (Romans:6-8|) to those whom God treats as righteous (Romans:3-5|) though both Gentile and Jew fall short without Christ (Romans:1-3|). This is the doctrine of grace that will prove a stumbling block to the Jews with their ceremonial works and foolishness to the Greeks with their abstract philosophical ethics (1Corinthians:1:23-25|). It is a new and strange doctrine to the people of Antioch.

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

rwp@Acts:15:1 @{And certain men came down from Judea} (\kai tines katelthontes apo ts Ioudaias\). Evidently the party of the circumcision in the church in Jerusalem (11:2|) had heard of the spread of the gospel among the Gentiles in Cyprus, Pamphylia, and South Galatia (Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycaonia). Possibly John Mark after his desertion at Perga (13:13|) told of this as one of his reasons for coming home. At any rate echoes of the jubilation in Antioch in Syria would be certain to reach Jerusalem. The Judaizers in Jerusalem, who insisted that all the Gentile Christians must become Jews also, had acquiesced in the case of Cornelius and his group (11:1-18|) after plain proof by Peter that it was the Lord's doing. But they had not agreed to a formal campaign to turn the exception into the rule and to make Christianity mainly Gentile with a few Jews instead of mainly Jewish with a few Gentiles. Since Paul and Barnabas did not come up to Jerusalem, the leaders among the Judaizers decided to go down to Antioch and attack Paul and Barnabas there. They had volunteered to go without church action in Jerusalem for their activity is disclaimed by the conference (Acts:15:24|). In strkjv@Galatians:2:4| Paul with some heat describes these Judaizers as "false brethren, secretly introduced who sneaked in to spy out our liberty." It is reasonably certain that this visit to Jerusalem described in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| is the same one as the Jerusalem Conference in Acts strkjv@15:5-29| in spite of the effort of Ramsay to identify it with that in strkjv@11:29f|. Paul in Galatians is not giving a list of his visits to Jerusalem. He is showing his independence of the twelve apostles and his equality with them. He did not see them in strkjv@11:29f.|, but only "the elders." In strkjv@Acts:15| Luke gives the outward narrative of events, in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| Paul shows us the private interview with the apostles when they agreed on their line of conduct toward the Judaizers. In strkjv@Galatians:2:2| by the use of "them" (\autois\) Paul seems to refer to the first public meeting in Acts before the private interview that came in between verses strkjv@15:5-6|. If we recall the difficulty that Peter had on the subject of preaching the gospel to the heathen (10:1-11:18|), we can the better understand the attitude of the Judaizers. They were men of sincere convictions without a doubt, but they were obscurantists and unable and unwilling to receive new light from the Lord on a matter that involved their racial and social prejudices. They recalled that Jesus himself had been circumcised and that he had said to the Syro-Phoenician woman that he had come only save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew:15:24ff.|). They argued that Christ had not repealed circumcision. Songs:one of the great religious controversies of all time was begun, that between spiritual religion and ritualistic or ceremonial religion. It is with us yet with baptism taking the place of circumcision. These self-appointed champions of circumcision for Gentile Christians were deeply in earnest. {Taught the brethren} (\edidaskon tous adelphous\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to teach and kept it up. Their attitude was one of supercilious superiority. They probably resented the conduct of Barnabas, who, when sent by the Church in Jerusalem to investigate the conversion of the Greeks in Antioch (11:20-26|), did not return and report till a strong church had been established there with the help of Saul and only then with a big collection to confuse the issue. Paul and Barnabas were on hand, but the Judaizers persisted in their efforts to force their views on the church in Antioch. It was a crisis. {Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved} (\ean me peritmthte ti ethei Muses, ou dunasthe sthnai\). There was the dictum of the Judaizers to the Gentiles. Paul and Barnabas had been circumcised. This is probably the precise language employed, for they spoke in Greek to these Greeks. It is a condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of being determined, \ean\ plus the first aorist passive subjunctive of \peritemn\). There was thus hope held out for them, but only on condition that they be circumcised. The issue was sharply drawn. The associative instrumental case (\ti ethei\) is customary. "Saved" (\sthnai\) here is the Messianic salvation. This doctrine denied the efficacy of the work of Christ.

rwp@Acts:15:5 @{But there rose up} (\exanestsan 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" (\ts haireses tn Pharisain\). 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:15:20 @{But that we write unto them} (\alla episteilai autois\). By way of contrast (\alla\). First aorist active infinitive of \epistell\, old verb to send to one (message, letter, etc.). Our word \epistle\ (\epistol\ as in verse 30|) comes from this verb. In the N.T. only here, He strkjv@13:22|, and possibly strkjv@Acts:21:25|. {That they abstain from} (\tou apechesthai\). The genitive of the articular infinitive of purpose, present middle (direct) of \apech\, old verb, to hold oneself back from. The best old MSS. do not have \apo\, but the ablative is clear enough in what follows. James agrees with Peter in his support of Paul and Barnabas in their contention for Gentile freedom from the Mosaic ceremonial law. The restrictions named by James affect the moral code that applies to all (idolatry, fornication, murder). Idolatry, fornication and murder were the outstanding sins of paganism then and now (Revelation:22:15|). Harnack argues ably against the genuineness of the word \pniktou\ (strangled) which is absent from D Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian. It is a nice point, though the best MSS. have it in accord with strkjv@Leviticus:17:10-16|. The problem is whether the words were added because "blood" was understood as not "murder," but a reference to the Mosaic regulation or whether it was omitted to remove the ceremonial aspect and make it all moral and ethical. The Western text omits the word also in verse 29|. But with the word retained here and in verse 29| the solution of James is not a compromise, though there is a wise concession to Jewish feeling. {Pollutions of idols} (\alisgmatn\). From \alisge\ only in the LXX and this substantive nowhere else. The word refers to idolatrous practices (pollutions) and things sacrificed to idols (\eidluthn\) in verse 29|, not to sacrificial meat sold in the market (1Corinthians:10:27|), a matter not referred to here. Cf. strkjv@Leviticus:17:1-9|. All the four items in the position of James (accepting \pniktou\) are mentioned in strkjv@Leviticus:17,18|.

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

rwp@Acts:16:13 @{By a river side} (\para potamon\). The little river Gangites (or Gargites) was one mile west of the town. Philippi as a military outpost had few Jews. There was evidently no synagogue inside the city, but "without the gates" (\ex ts puls\) they had noticed an enclosure "where we supposed" (\hou enomizomen\, correct text, imperfect active), probably as they came into the city, "was a place of prayer" (\proscuchn einai\). Infinitive with accusative of general reference in indirect discourse. \Proseuch\ is common in the LXX and the N.T. for the act of prayer as in strkjv@Acts:2:42| then for a place of prayer either a synagogue (III Macc. strkjv@7:20) or more often an open air enclosure near the sea or a river where there was water for ceremonial ablutions. The word occurs also in heathen writers for a place of prayer (Schurer, _Jewish People_, Div. II, Vol. II, p. 69, Engl. Tr.). Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 222) quotes an Egyptian inscription of the third century B.C. with this sense of the word and one from Panticapaeum on the Black Sea of the first century A.D. (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 102). Juvenal (III. 296) has a sneering reference to the Jewish \proseucha\. Josephus (_Ant_. XIV. 10, 23) quotes a decree of Halicarnassus which allowed the Jews "to make their prayers (\proseuchas\) on the seashore according to the custom of their fathers." There was a synagogue in Thessalonica, but apparently none in Amphipolis and Apollonia (Acts:17:1|). The rule of the rabbis required ten men to constitute a synagogue, but here were gathered only a group of women at the hour of prayer. In pioneer days in this country it was a common thing to preach under bush arbours in the open air. John Wesley and George Whitfield were great open air preachers. Paul did not have an inspiring beginning for his work in Europe, but he took hold where he could. The conjecture was correct. It was a place of prayer, but only a bunch of women had come together (\tais sunelthousais gunaixin\), excuse enough for not preaching to some preachers, but not to Paul and his party. The "man of Macedonia" turned out to be a group of women (Furneaux). Macedonian inscriptions show greater freedom for women in Macedonia than elsewhere at this time and confirm Luke's story of the activities of women in Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea. {We sat down and spake} (\kathisantes elaloumen\). Having taken our seats (aorist active participle of \kathiz\) we began to speak or preach (inchoative imperfect of \lale\, often used for preaching). Sitting was the Jewish attitude for public speaking. It was not mere conversation, but more likely conversational preaching of an historical and expository character. Luke's use of the first person plural implies that each of the four (Paul, Silas, Timothy, Luke) preached in turn, with Paul as chief speaker.

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 zltai tou nomou\). Zealots (substantive) rather than zealous (adjective) with objective genitive (\tou nomou\). The word zealot is from \zlo\, to burn with zeal, to boil. The Greek used \zlts\ 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:21:25 @{We wrote} (\epesteilamen\). First aorist active of \epistell\, to send to and so to write like our epistle (\epistol\). Old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:15:20; strkjv@Hebrews:13:22|. It is the very word used by James in this "judgment" at the Conference (Acts:15:20|, \episteilai\). B D here read \apesteilamen\ from \apostell\, to send away, to give orders. Wendt and Schuerer object to this as a gloss. Rather is it an explanation by James that he does not refer to the Gentile Christians whose freedom from the Mosaic ceremonial law was guaranteed at the Jerusalem Conference. James himself presided at that Conference and offered the resolution that was unanimously adopted. James stands by that agreement and repeats the main items (four: anything sacrificed to idols, blood, anything strangled, fornication, for discussion see strkjv@Acts:15|) from which they are to keep themselves (direct middle \phulassesthai\ of \phulass\, indirect command after \krinantes\ with accusative, \autous\, of general reference). James has thus again cleared the air about the Gentiles who have believed (\pepisteukotn\, perfect active participle genitive plural of \pisteu\). He asks that Paul will stand by the right of Jewish Christians to keep on observing the Mosaic law. He has put the case squarely and fairly.

rwp@Colossians:1:22 @{Yet now} (\nuni de\). Sharpened contrast with emphatic form of \nun\, "now" being not at the present moment, but in the present order of things in the new dispensation of grace in Christ. {Hath he reconciled} (\apokatllaxen\). First aorist (effective, timeless) active indicative (a sort of parenthetical anacoluthon). Here B reads \apokatallagte\, be ye reconciled like \katallagte\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:20| while D has \apokatallagentes\. Lightfoot prefers to follow B here (the hard reading), though Westcott and Hort only put it in the margin. On the word see verse 20|. {In the body of his flesh} (\en ti smati ts sarkos autou\). See the same combination in strkjv@2:11| though in strkjv@Ephesians:2:14| only \sarki\ (flesh). Apparently Paul combines both \sma\ and \sarx\ to make plain the actual humanity of Jesus against incipient Docetic Gnostics who denied it. {Through death} (\dia tou thanatou\). The reconciliation was accomplished by means of Christ's death on the cross (verse 20|) and not just by the Incarnation (the body of his flesh) in which the death took place. {To present} (\parastsai\). First aorist active (transitive) infinitive (of purpose) of \paristmi\, old verb, to place beside in many connections. See it used of presenting Paul and the letter from Lysias to Felix (Acts:23:33|). Repeated in strkjv@Colossians:2:28|. See also strkjv@2Corinthians:11:2; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:14|. Paul has the same idea of his responsibility in rendering an account for those under his influence seen in strkjv@Hebrews:13:17|. See strkjv@Romans:12:1| for use of living sacrifice. {Holy} (\hagious\). Positively consecrated, separated unto God. Common in N.T. for believers. Haupt holds that all these terms have a religious and forensic sense here. {Without blemish} (\ammous\). Without spot (Phillipians:2:15|). Old word \a\ privative and \mmos\ (blemish). Common in the LXX for ceremonial purifications. {Unreproveable} (\anegkltous\). Old verbal adjective from \a\ privative and \egkale\, to call to account, to pick flaws in. These three adjectives give a marvellous picture of complete purity (positive and negative, internal and external). This is Paul's ideal when he presents the Colossians "before him" (\katenpion autou\), right down in the eye of Christ the Judge of all.

rwp@Colossians:2:8 @{Take heed} (\blepete\). Present active imperative second person plural of \blep\, common verb for warning like our "look out," "beware," "see to it." {Lest there shall be any one} (\m tis estai\). Negative purpose with the future indicative, though the aorist subjunctive also occurs as in strkjv@2Corinthians:12:6|. {That maketh spoil of you} (\ho sulaggn\). Articular present active participle of \sulagge\, late and rare (found here first) verb (from \sul\, booty, and \ag\, to lead, to carry), to carry off as booty a captive, slave, maiden. Only here in N.T. Note the singular here. There was some one outstanding leader who was doing most of the damage in leading the people astray. {Through his philosophy} (\dia ts philosophias\). The only use of the word in the N.T. and employed by Paul because the Gnostics were fond of it. Old word from \philosophos\ (\philos, sophos\, one devoted to the pursuit of wisdom) and in N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:17:18|. Paul does not condemn knowledge and wisdom (see verse 2|), but only this false philosophy, "knowledge falsely named" (\pseudnumos gnsis\, strkjv@1Timothy:6:20|), and explained here by the next words. {And vain deceit} (\kai kens apats\). Old word for trick, guile, like riches (Matthew:13:22|). Descriptive of the philosophy of the Gnostics. {Tradition} (\paradosin\). Old word from \paradidmi\, a giving over, a passing on. The word is colourless in itself. The tradition may be good (2Thessalonians:2:15; strkjv@3:6|) or bad (Mark:7:3|). Here it is worthless and harmful, merely the foolish theories of the Gnostics. {Rudiments} (\stoicheia\). Old word for anything in a \stoichos\ (row, series) like the letters of the alphabet, the materials of the universe (2Peter:3:10,12|), elementary teaching (Hebrews:5:12|), elements of Jewish ceremonial training (Acts:15:10; Gal strkjv@4:3,9|), the specious arguments of the Gnostic philosophers as here with all their aeons and rules of life. {And not after Christ} (\kai ou kata Christon\). Christ is the yardstick by which to measure philosophy and all phases of human knowledge. The Gnostics were measuring Christ by their philosophy as many men are doing today. They have it backwards. Christ is the measure for all human knowledge since he is the Creator and the Sustainer of the universe.

rwp@Colossians:2:21 @{Handle not, nor taste, nor touch} (\m hapsi mde geusi mde thigis\). 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 \m\, a prohibition against handling or touching these forbidden things. Two of them do not differ greatly in meaning. \Hapsi\ is aorist middle subjunctive of \hapt\, to fasten to, middle, to cling to, to handle. \Thigis\ 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|. \Geusi\ is second aorist middle subjunctive of \geu\, to give taste of, only middle in N.T. to taste as here.

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

rwp@Galatians:2:18 @{A transgressor} (\parabatn\). Peter, by his shifts had contradicted himself helplessly as Paul shows by this condition. When he lived like a Gentile, he tore down the ceremonial law. When he lived like a Jew, he tore down salvation by grace.

rwp@Hebrews:8:13 @{In that he saith} (\en ti legein\). Locative case of the articular present active infinitive of \leg\, "in the saying as to him." {He hath made the first old} (\pepalaiken tn prtn\). Perfect active indicative of \palaio\, old verb from \palaios\ (in contrast with \kainos\, fresh, new), to treat as old and out of date. The conclusion is to the point. {That which is becoming old and waxeth aged} (\to palaioumenon kai graskon\). \Grask\ is old verb from \gras\ (age) like \gern\ (old man) and refers to the decay of old age so that both ideas appear here in opposition to \kainos\ (\palaios\) and \neos\ (\geraios\). {Is nigh unto vanishing away} (\eggus aphanismou\). Genitive case with \eggus\ and late word for disappearance (from \aphaniz\, strkjv@Matthew:6:19|), here only in the N.T. The author writes as if the Old Testament legal and ceremonial system were about to vanish before the new covenant of grace. If he wrote after A.D. 70, would he not have written "has vanished away"?

rwp@Hebrews:9:9 @{Which} (\htis\). "Which very thing," the first tent (\ts prts skns\, division of the tabernacle), a parenthesis and explanation. {A parable} (\parabol\). Only in the Synoptic Gospels in the N.T. and strkjv@Hebrews:9:9; strkjv@11:19|. See on ¯Matthew:13:3| for the word (from \paraball\, to place alongside). Here like \tupos\ (type or shadow of "the heavenly reality," Moffatt). {For the time now present} (\eis ton kairon ton enestkota\). "For the present crisis " (\kairon\, not \aina\, age, not \chronon\, time). Perfect active articular (repeated article) participle of \enistmi\ (intransitive), the age in which they lived, not the past, not the future. See strkjv@1Corinthians:3:22; strkjv@Romans:8:38| for contrast between \enestta\ and \mellonta\. This age of crisis, foreshadowed by the old tabernacle, pointed on to the richer fulfilment still to come. {According to which} (\kath' hn\). Here the relative refers to \parabol\ just mentioned, not to \skns\. See strkjv@5:1; strkjv@8:3|. {As touching the conscience} (\kata suneidsin\). For \suneidsis\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:8:10; strkjv@10:17; strkjv@Romans:2:15|. This was the real failure of animal sacrifice (10:1-4|). {Make the worshipper perfect} (\teleisai ton latreuonta\). First aorist active infinitive (2:10|). At best it was only ritual or ceremonial purification (7:11|), that called for endless repetition (10:1-4|).

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

rwp@Hebrews:9:13 @{Ashes} (\spodos\). Old word, in N. T. only here, strkjv@Matthew:11:21; strkjv@Luke:10:13|. Common in LXX. {Of a heifer} (\damales\). Old word (\damalis\), a red heifer whose ashes mingled with water (\meta hudatos\, verse 19|) were sprinkled (\rantizousa\, present active participle of \rantiz\, in LXX, though \rain\ more common) on the contaminated or defiled ones (Numbers:19|) as the blood of bulls and goats was offered for sins (Leviticus:16|). {Sanctify} (\hagiazei\). First-class condition, assumed as true. This ceremonial ritual does serve "for the cleansing (\katharotta\, old word here only in N.T.) of the flesh," but not for the conscience (verse 9|). The cow was \ammon\, the individual \katharos\.

rwp@Hebrews:9:14 @{How much more} (\posi mallon\). Instrumental case, "by how much more," by the measure of the superiority of Christ's blood to that of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer. {Through the eternal Spirit} (\dia pneumatos ainiou\). Not the Holy Spirit, but Christ's own spirit which is eternal as he is. There is thus a moral quality in the blood of Christ not in that of other sacrifices. {Offered himself} (\heauton prosnegken\). Second aorist active indicative of \prospher\ (used so often as in strkjv@5:1,3; strkjv@8:3|). The voluntary character of Christ's death is again emphasized. {Without blemish} (\ammon\). Old compound adjective (Colossians:1:22; strkjv@1Peter:1:19|) as the sacrifice had to be (Exodus:29:1; strkjv@Leviticus:1:3,10|). {Shall cleanse from conscience} (\kathariei tn suneidsin humn\). Future active indicative of \kathariz\. Some MSS. have \hmn\ (our). The old Greek used \kathair\, not \kathariz\ (in inscriptions for ceremonial cleansing, Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 216f.), for cleansing. {From dead works} (\apo nekrn ergn\). As in strkjv@6:1|. "A pause might be made before \ergn\, from dead--(not bodies but) works."

rwp@James:4:8 @{Draw nigh to God} (\eggisate ti thei\). First aorist active imperative of \eggiz\, late verb from \eggus\ (near) as in strkjv@Matthew:3:2|. With dative case again of personal relation. The priests in the sanctuary drew nigh to God (Exodus:19:22|), as we should now. {Cleanse your hands} (\katharisate cheiras\). First aorist active imperative of \kathariz\, to cleanse, from dirt in a ritual sense (Exodus:30:19-21; strkjv@Mark:7:3,19|). Here it is figurative, as in strkjv@Hosea:1:16; strkjv@Psalms:24:4|. If we always had clean (from sin) hands and hearts? {Ye sinners} (\hamartloi\). A sharp term to strike the conscience, "a reproach meant to startle and sting" (Ropes). {Purify your hearts} (\hagnisate kardias\). First aorist active imperative of \hagniz\, old verb from \hagnos\ (James:3:17|), ceremonially (Acts:21:24,26|), but here morally as in strkjv@1Peter:1:22; strkjv@1John:3:3|. Anarthrous use of \kardias\ as of \cheiras\ (wash hands, purify hearts). {Ye double-minded} (\dipsuchoi\). As in strkjv@1:8|.

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

rwp@John:2:6 @{Waterpots} (\hudriai\). Old word from \hudr\ (water) and used in papyri for pots or pans for holding money or bread as well as water. These stone (\lithinai\ as in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3|) jars full of water were kept handy ({set there}, \keimenai\, present middle participle of \keimai\) at a feast for ceremonial cleansing of the hands (2Kings:3:11; strkjv@Mark:7:3|), "after the Jews' manner of purifying" (\kata ton katharismon tn Ioudain\). See strkjv@Mark:1:44; strkjv@Luke:2:22| for the word \katharismos\ (from \kathariz\) which fact also raised a controversy with disciples of John because of his baptizing (John:3:25|). {Containing} (\chrousai\). Present active participle feminine plural of \chre\, old verb from \chros\, place, space, having space or room for. {Two or three firkins apiece} (\ana metrtas duo treis\). The word \metrts\, from \metre\, to measure, simply means "measurer," an amphora for measuring liquids (in Demosthenes, Aristotle, Polybius), the Hebrew _bath_ (2Chronicles:4:5|), here only in N.T., about 8 1/2 English gallons. Each \hudria\ thus held about 20 gallons. This common distributive use of \ana\ occurs here only in this Gospel, but is in strkjv@Revelation:4:8|. In strkjv@John:4:28| a much smaller \hudria\ was used for carrying water.

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 "\anthen\" (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:11:55 @{Was near} (\n eggus\). See strkjv@2:13| for the same phrase. This last passover was the time of destiny for Jesus. {Before the passover to purify themselves} (\pro tou pascha hina hagnissin heautous\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \hagniz\, old verb from \hagnos\ (pure), ceremonial purification here, of course. All this took time. These came "from the country" (\ek ts chras\), from all over Palestine, from all parts of the world, in fact. John shifts the scene to Jerusalem just before the passover with no record of the way that Jesus came to Jerusalem from Ephraim. The Synoptic Gospels tell this last journey up through Samaria into Galilee to join the great caravan that crossed over into Perea and came down on the eastern side of the Jordan opposite Jericho and then marched up the mountain road to Bethany and Bethphage just beside Jerusalem. This story is found in strkjv@Luke:17:11-19:28; strkjv@Mark:10:1-52; strkjv@Matthew:19:1-20:34|. John simply assumes the Synoptic narrative and gives the picture of things in and around Jerusalem just before the passover (11:56,57|).

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

rwp@Luke:4:40 @{When the sun was setting} (\dunontos tou hliou\). Genitive absolute and present participle (\dun\, late form of \du\) picturing the sunset scene. Even strkjv@Mark:1:32| has here the aorist indicative \edusen\ (punctiliar active). It was not only cooler, but it was the end of the sabbath when it was not regarded as work (Vincent) to carry a sick person (John:5:10|). And also by now the news of the cure of the demoniac of Peter's mother-in-law had spread all over the town. {Had} (\eichon\). Imperfect tense including all the chronic cases. {With divers diseases} (\nosois poikilais\). Instrumental case. For "divers" say "many coloured" or "variegated." See on ¯Matthew:4:24; strkjv@Mark:1:34|. {Brought} (\gagon\). Constative summary second aorist active indicative like strkjv@Matthew:8:16|, \prosenegkan\, where strkjv@Mark:1:32| has the imperfect \epheron\, brought one after another. {He laid his hands on every one of them and healed them} (\ho de heni hekasti autn tas cheiras epititheis etherapeuen autous\). Note the present active participle \epititheis\ and the imperfect active \etherapeuen\, picturing the healing one by one with the tender touch upon each one. Luke alone gives this graphic detail which was more than a mere ceremonial laying on of hands. Clearly the cures of Jesus reached the physical, mental, and spiritual planes of human nature. He is Lord of life and acted here as Master of each case as it came.

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

rwp@Luke:10:31 @{By chance} (\kata sugkurian\). Here only in the N.T., meaning rather, "by way of coincidence." It is a rare word elsewhere and in late writers like Hippocrates. It is from the verb \sugkure\, though \sugkursis\ is more common. {Was going down} (\katebainen\). Imperfect active as in verse 30|. Passed by on the other side (\antiparlthen\). Second aorist active indicative of \antiparerchomai\, a late double compound here (verses 31,32|) only in the N.T., but in the papyri and late writers. It is the ingressive aorist (\lthen\), came alongside (\para\), and then he stepped over to the opposite side (\anti\) of the road to avoid ceremonial contamination with a stranger. A vivid and powerful picture of the vice of Jewish ceremonial cleanliness at the cost of moral principle and duty. The Levite in verse 32| behaved precisely as the priest had done and for the same reason.

rwp@Luke:11:38 @{That he had not first washed before dinner} (\hoti ou prton ebaptisth 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" (\prton pro\), a tautology not preserved in the translation.

rwp@Luke:11:44 @{The tombs which appear not} (\ta mnneia ta adla\). 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 \adlos\ (\a\ privative and \dlos\, 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@Mark:2:18 @{John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting} (\san hoi mathtai Ianou kai hoi Pharisaioi nsteuontes\). 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 (\mathtai\) 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 mathtai Ianou kai hoi mathtai tn Pharisain\) 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:2:19 @{The sons of the bridechamber} (\hoi huioi tou numphnos\). Not merely the groomsmen, but the guests also, the \paranymphs\ (\paranumphoi\ of the old Greek). Jesus here adopts the Baptist's own metaphor (John:3:29|), changing the friend of the bridegroom (\ho philos tou numphiou\) to sons of the bridechamber. Jesus identifies himself with the bridegroom of the O.T. (Hosea:2:21|), God in his covenant relation with Israel (Swete). Mourning does not suit the wedding feast. Mark, Matthew, and Luke all give the three parables (bridegroom, unfulled cloth, new wineskins) illustrating and defending the conduct of Jesus in feasting with Levi on a Jewish fast-day. strkjv@Luke:5:36| calls these parables. Jesus here seems iconoclastic to the ecclesiastics and revolutionary in emphasis on the spiritual instead of the ritualistic and ceremonial.

rwp@Mark:6:13 @{They cast out many demons and they anointed with oil} (\exeballon kai leiphon elaii\). Imperfect tenses, continued repetition. Alone in Mark. This is the only example in the N.T. of \aleiph elaii\ used in connection with healing save in strkjv@James:5:14|. In both cases it is possible that the use of oil (olive oil) as a medicine is the basis of the practice. See strkjv@Luke:10:34| for pouring oil and wine upon the wounds. It was the best medicine of the ancients and was used internally and externally. It was employed often after bathing. The papyri give a number of examples of it. The only problem is whether \aleiph\ in Mark and James is used wholly in a ritualistic and ceremonial sense or partly as medicine and partly as a symbol of divine healing. The very word \aleiph\ can be translated rub or anoint without any ceremony. "Traces of a ritual use of the unction of the sick appear first among Gnostic practices of the second century" (Swete). We have today, as in the first century, God and medicine. God through nature does the real healing when we use medicine and the doctor.

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:7:4 @{From the marketplace} (\ap' agoras\). Ceremonial defilement was inevitable in the mixing with men in public. This \agora\ from \ageir\ to collect or gather, was a public forum in every town where the people gathered like the courthouse square in American towns. The disciples were already ceremonially defiled. {Wash themselves} (\baptisntai\). First aorist middle subjunctive of \baptiz\, dip or immerse. Westcott and Hort put \rantisntai\ in the text translated "sprinkle themselves" in the margin of the Revised Version, because Aleph, B, and some of the best cursives have it. Gould terms \rantisntai\ "a manifest emendation," to get rid of the difficulty of dipping or bathing the whole body. Meyer says: "The statement proceeds by way of climax: before eating they wash the hands always. When they come from market they take a bath before eating." This is not the place to enter into any controversy about the meaning of \baptiz\, to dip, \rantiz\, to sprinkle, and \ecche\, to pour, all used in the New Testament. The words have their distinctive meanings here as elsewhere. Some scribes felt a difficulty about the use of \baptisntai\ here. The Western and Syrian classes of manuscripts add "and couches" (\kai klinn\) at the end of the sentence. Swete considers the immersions of beds (\baptismous klinn\) "an incongruous combination." But Gould says: "Edersheim shows that the Jewish ordinance required immersions, \baptismous\, of these vessels." We must let the Jewish scrupulosity stand for itself, though "and couches" is not supported by Aleph, B L D Bohairic, probably not genuine.

rwp@Mark:7:11 @{Corban} (\korban ho estin dron\). See on ¯Matthew:15:5|. Mark preserves the Hebrew word for a gift or offering to God (Exodus:21:17; strkjv@Leviticus:20:9|), indeclinable here, meaning {gift} (\dron\), but declinable \korbanas\ in strkjv@Matthew:27:6|, meaning sacred treasury. The rabbis ({but ye say}, \humeis de legete\) actually allowed the mere saying of this word by an unfaithful son to prevent the use of needed money for the support of father or mother. It was a home thrust to these pettifogging sticklers for ceremonial punctilios. They not only justified such a son's trickery, but held that he was prohibited from using it for father or mother, but he might use it for himself.

rwp@Matthew:4:2 @{Had fasted} (\nsteusas\). No perfunctory ceremonial fast, but of communion with the Father in complete abstention from food as in the case of Moses during forty days and forty nights (Exodus:34:28|). "The period of the fast, as in the case of Moses was spent in a spiritual ecstasy, during which the wants of the natural body were suspended" (Alford). "He afterward hungered" and so at the close of the period of forty days.

rwp@Matthew:5:17 @{I came not to destroy, but to fulfil} (\ouk lthon katalusai alla plrsai\). The verb "destroy" means to "loosen down" as of a house or tent (2Corinthians:5:1|). Fulfil is to fill full. This Jesus did to the ceremonial law which pointed to him and the moral law he kept. "He came to fill the law, to reveal the full depth of meaning that it was intended to hold" (McNeile).

rwp@Matthew:12:7 @{The guiltless} (\tous anaitious\). Songs:in verse 5|. Common in ancient Greek. No real ground against, it means \an\ + \aitios\. Jesus quotes strkjv@Hosea:6:6| here as he did in strkjv@Matthew:9:13|. A pertinent prophecy that had escaped the notice of the sticklers for ceremonial literalness and the letter of the law.

rwp@Matthew:15:2 @{The tradition of the elders} (\tn paradosin tn presbutern\). 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:15:3 @{Ye also} (\kai hmeis\). Jesus admits that the disciples had transgressed the rabbinical traditions. Jesus treats it as a matter of no great importance in itself save as they had put the tradition of the elders in the place of the commandment of God. When the two clashed, as was often the case, the rabbis transgress the commandment of God "because of your tradition" (\dia tn paradosin hmn\). The accusative with \dia\ means that, not "by means of." Tradition is not good or bad in itself. It is merely what is handed on from one to another. Custom tended to make these traditions binding like law. The Talmud is a monument of their struggle with tradition. There could be no compromise on this subject and Jesus accepts the issue. He stands for real righteousness and spiritual freedom, not for bondage to mere ceremonialism and tradition. The rabbis placed tradition (the oral law) above the law of God.

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

rwp@Matthew:23:24 @{Strain out the gnat} (\diulizontes ton knpa\). By filtering through (\dia\), not the "straining at" in swallowing so crudely suggested by the misprint in the A.V. {Swallow the camel} (\tn de kamlon katapinontes\). Gulping or drinking down the camel. An oriental hyperbole like that in strkjv@19:24|. See also strkjv@5:29,30; strkjv@17:20; strkjv@21:21|. Both insects and camels were ceremonially unclean (Leviticus:11:4,20,23,42|). "He that kills a flea on the Sabbath is as guilty as if he killed a camel" (Jer. _Shabb._ 107).

rwp@Matthew:25:6 @{There is a cry} (\kraug gegonen\). A cry has come. Dramatic use of the present perfect (second perfect active) indicative, not the perfect for the aorist. It is not \estin\, but \gegonen\ which emphasizes the sudden outcry which has rent the air. The very memory of it is preserved by this tense with all the bustle and confusion, the rushing to the oil-venders. {Come ye forth to meet him} (\exerchesthe eis apantsin\). Or, Go out for meeting him, dependent on whether the cry comes from outside the house or inside the house where they were sleeping because of the delay. It was a ceremonial salutation neatly expressed by the Greek phrase.