OT-LAW.filter - rwp destruction:

rwp@1Corinthians:1:18 @{For the word of the cross} (\ho logos gar ho tou staurou\). Literally, "for the preaching (with which I am concerned as the opposite of {wisdom of word} in verse 17|) that (repeated article \ho\, almost demonstrative) of the cross." "Through this incidental allusion to preaching St. Paul passes to a new subject. The discussions in the Corinthian Church are for a time forgotten, and he takes the opportunity of correcting his converts for their undue exaltation of human eloquence and wisdom" (Lightfoot). {To them that are perishing} (\tois men apollumenois\). Dative of disadvantage (personal interest). Present middle participle is here timeless, those in the path to destruction (not annihilation. See strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:10|). Cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:4:3|. {Foolishness} (\mria\). Folly. Old word from \mros\, foolish. In N.T. only in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:18,21,23; strkjv@2:14; strkjv@3:19|. {But unto us which are being saved} (\tois szomenois hmin\). Sharp contrast to those that are perishing and same construction with the articular participle. No reason for the change of pronouns in English. This present passive participle is again timeless. Salvation is described by Paul as a thing done in the past, "we were saved" (Romans:8:24|), as a present state, "ye have been saved" (Ep strkjv@2:5|), as a process, "ye are being saved" (1Corinthians:15:2|), as a future result, "thou shalt be saved" (Romans:10:9|). {The power of God} (\dunamis theou\). Songs:in strkjv@Romans:1:16|. No other message has this dynamite of God (1Corinthians:4:20|). God's power is shown in the preaching of the Cross of Christ through all the ages, now as always. No other preaching wins men and women from sin to holiness or can save them. The judgment of Paul here is the verdict of every soul winner through all time.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:15 @{Shall be burned} (\katakasetai\). First-class condition again, assumed as true. Second future (late form) passive indicative of \katakai\, to burn down, old verb. Note perfective use of preposition \kata\, shall be burned down. We usually say "burned up," and that is true also, burned up in smoke. {He shall suffer loss} (\zmithsetai\). First future passive indicative of \zmi\, old verb from \zmia\ (damage, loss), to suffer loss. In strkjv@Matthew:16:26; strkjv@Mark:8:36; strkjv@Luke:9:25| the loss is stated to be the man's soul (\psuchn\) or eternal life. But here there is no such total loss as that. The man's work (\ergon\) is burned up (sermons, lectures, books, teaching, all dry as dust). {But he himself shall be saved} (\autos de sthsetai\). Eternal salvation, but not by purgatory. His work is burned up completely and hopelessly, but he himself escapes destruction because he is really a saved man a real believer in Christ. {Yet so as through fire} (\houts de hs dia puros\). Clearly Paul means with his work burned down (verse 15|). It is the tragedy of a fruitless life, of a minister who built so poorly on the true foundation that his work went up in smoke. His sermons were empty froth or windy words without edifying or building power. They left no mark in the lives of the hearers. It is the picture of a wasted life. The one who enters heaven by grace, as we all do who are saved, yet who brings no sheaves with him. There is no garnered grain the result of his labours in the harvest field. There are no souls in heaven as the result of his toil for Christ, no enrichment of character, no growth in grace.

rwp@1Corinthians:5:5 @{To deliver such an one unto Satan} (\paradounai ton toiouton ti Satani\). We have the same idiom in strkjv@1Timothy:1:20| used of Hymenius and Alexander. In strkjv@2Corinthians:12:7| Paul speaks of his own physical suffering as a messenger (\aggelos\) of Satan. Paul certainly means expulsion from the church (verse 2|) and regarding him as outside of the commonwealth of Israel (Ephesians:2:11f.|). But we are not to infer that expulsion from the local church means the damnation of the offender. The wilful offenders have to be expelled and not regarded as enemies, but admonished as brothers (2Thessalonians:3:14f.|). {For the destruction of the flesh} (\eis olethron ts sarkos\). Both for physical suffering as in the case of Job:(Job:2:6|) and for conquest of the fleshly sins, remedial punishment. {That the spirit may be saved} (\hina to pneuma sthi\). The ultimate purpose of the expulsion as discipline. Note the use of \to pneuma\ in contrast with \sarx\ as the seat of personality (cf. strkjv@3:15|). Paul's motive is not merely vindictive, but the reformation of the offender who is not named here nor in strkjv@2Corinthians:2:5-11| if the same man is meant, which is very doubtful. The final salvation of the man in the day of Christ is the goal and this is to be attained not by condoning his sin.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:10 @{Neither murmur ye} (\mde gogguzete\). Implying that some of them were murmuring. For this late picturesque onomatopoetic verb see on ¯Matthew:20:11|. The reference seems to be to strkjv@Numbers:16:41f.| after the punishment of Korah. {By the destroyer} (\hupo tou olothreutou\). This word, from \olothreu\ (late verb from \olethros\, destruction) occurs only here, so far as known. The reference is to the destroying angel of strkjv@Exodus:12:23| (\ho olothreun\).

rwp@1Corinthians:12:3 @{Wherefore I give you to understand} (\dio gnriz humin\). Causative idea (only in Aeschylus in old Greek) in papyri (also in sense of recognize) and N.T., from root \gn\ in \ginsk\, to know. {Speaking in the Spirit of God} (\en pneumati theou laln\). Either sphere or instrumentality. No great distinction here between \lale\ (utter sounds) and \leg\ (to say). {Jesus is anathema} (\anathema Isous\). On distinction between \anathema\ (curse) and \anathma\ (offering strkjv@Luke:21:5|) see discussion there. In LXX \anathma\ means a thing devoted to God without being redeemed, doomed to destruction (Leviticus:27:28f.; strkjv@Joshua:6:17; strkjv@7:12|). See strkjv@1Corinthians:16:22; strkjv@Galatians:1:8f.; strkjv@Romans:9:3|. This blasphemous language against Jesus was mainly by the Jews (Acts:13:45; strkjv@18:6|). It is even possible that Paul had once tried to make Christians say \Anathema Isous\ (Acts:26:11|). {Jesus is Lord} (\Kurios Isous\). The term \Kurios\, as we have seen, is common in the LXX for God. The Romans used it freely for the emperor in the emperor worship. "Most important of all is the early establishment of a polemical parallelism between the cult of Christ and the cult of Caesar in the application of the term \Kurios\, 'lord.' The new texts have here furnished quite astonishing revelations" (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 349). Inscriptions, ostraca, papyri apply the term to Roman emperors, particularly to Nero when Paul wrote this very letter (_ib._, p. 353f.): "One with 'Nero Kurios' quite in the manner of a formula (without article, like the 'Kurios Jesus' in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3|." "The battle-cries of the spirits of error and of truth contending at Corinth" (Findlay). One is reminded of the demand made by Polycarp that he say \Kurios Caesar\ and how each time he replied \Kurios Isous\. He paid the penalty for his loyalty with his life. Lighthearted men today can say "Lord Jesus" in a flippant or even in an irreverent way, but no Jew or Gentile then said it who did not mean it.

rwp@1Thessalonians:5:3 @{When they are saying} (\hotan legsin\). Present active subjunctive picturing these false prophets of {peace and safety} like strkjv@Ezekiel:13:10| (Peace, and there is no peace). \Asphaleia\ only in N.T. in strkjv@Luke:1:4| (which see); strkjv@Acts:5:23| and here. {Sudden destruction} (\aiphnidios olethros\). \Olethros\ old word from \ollumi\, to destroy. See also strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:9|. \Aiphnidios\, old adjective akin to \aphn\ and in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:21:34| where Westcott and Hort spell it \ephnidios\. {Cometh upon them} (\autois epistatai\). Unaspirated form instead of the usual \ephistatai\ (present middle indicative) from \ephistmi\ perhaps due to confusion with \epistamai\. {As travail upon a woman with child} (\hsper h din ti en gastri echousi\). Earlier form \dis\ for birth-pang used also by Jesus (Mark:13:8; strkjv@Matthew:24:8|). Technical phrase for pregnancy, {to the one who has it in belly} (cf. strkjv@Matthew:1:18| of Mary). {They shall in no wise escape} (\ou m ekphugsin\). Strong negative like that in strkjv@4:15| \ou m\ (double negative) and the second aorist active subjunctive.

rwp@1Timothy:6:9 @{Desire to be rich} (\boulomenoi ploutein\). The will (\boulomai\) to be rich at any cost and in haste (Proverbs:28:20|). Some MSS. have "trust in riches" in strkjv@Mark:10:24|. Possibly Paul still has teachers and preachers in mind. {Fall into} (\empiptousin eis\). See on ¯3:6| for \en -- eis\ and ¯3:7| for \pagida\ (snare). {Foolish} (\anotous\). See strkjv@Galatians:3:1,3|. {Hurtful} (\blaberas\). Old adjective from \blapt\, to injure, here alone in N.T. {Drown} (\buthizousin\). Late word (literary _Koin_) from \buthos\ (bottom), to drag to the bottom. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:5:7| (of the boat). Drown in the lusts with the issue "in destruction and perdition" (\eis olethron kai apleian\). Not annihilation, but eternal punishment. The combination only here, but for \olethros\, see strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:3; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:9; strkjv@1Corinthians:5:5| and for \apleia\, see strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3; strkjv@Phillipians:3:19|.

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 pseudoprophtai\). 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 (\pseuds, 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 (\eplanthsan\, 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 apleias\). 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 despotn\). 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} (\tachinn apleian\). See strkjv@1:14| for \tachinn\ and note repetition of \apleian\. This is always the tragedy of such false prophets, the fate that they bring on (\epagontes\) themselves.

rwp@2Peter:2:3 @{In covetousness} (\en pleonexii\). As did Balaam (verse 15|). These licentious Gnostics made money out of their dupes. A merely intellectual Gnosticism had its fruit in immorality and fraud. {With feigned words} (\plastois logois\). Instrumental case. \Plastos\ is verbal adjective (from \plass\, to mould as from clay, for which see strkjv@Romans:9:20|), here only in N.T. "With forged words." See sample in strkjv@3:4|. {Shall make merchandise of you} (\humas emporeusontai\). Future middle of \emporeuomai\ (from \emporos\, a travelling merchant), old word, to go in for trade, in N.T. only here and strkjv@James:4:13|, which see. Cf. our emporium (John:2:16|, market house). {Whose sentence} (\hois to krima\). "For whom (dative case) the sentence" (verdict, not process \krisis\). {Now from of old} (\ekpalai\). Late and common compound adverb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@3:5|. {Lingereth not} (\ouk argei\). "Is not idle," old verb, \arge\ (from \argos\ not working, alpha privative and \ergon\), here only in N.T. {Slumbereth not} (\ou nustazei\). Old and common verb (from \nu\ to nod), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:25:5|. Note \apleia\ (destruction) three times in verses 1-3|.

rwp@2Peter:2:12 @{But these} (\houtoi de\). The false teachers of verse 1|. {As creatures} (\za\). Living creatures, old word, from \zos\ (alive), strkjv@Jude:1:10; strkjv@Revelation:4:6-9|. {Without reason} (\aloga\). Old adjective, in N.T. only here, strkjv@Jude:1:10; strkjv@Acts:25:27|. Brute beasts like \thria\ (wild animals). {Born} (\gegennmena\). Perfect passive participle of \genna\. {Mere animals} (\phusika\). Old adjective in \-ikos\ (from \phusis\, nature), natural animals, here only in N.T. {To be taken} (\eis halsin\). "For capture" (old substantive, from \halo\, here only in N.T.). {And destroyed} (\kai phthoran\). "And for destruction" just like a beast of prey caught. See strkjv@1:4|. {In matters whereof they are ignorant} (\en hois agnoousin\). "In which things they are ignorant." Here \en hois\ = \en toutois ha\ (in those things which), a common Greek idiom. For \agnoe\ (present active indicative) see strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13; strkjv@1Timothy:1:7| for a like picture of loud ignoramuses posing as professional experts. {Shall in their destroying surely be destroyed} (\en ti phthori autn phtharsontai\). Second future passive of \phtheir\. Rhetorical Hebraism in the use of \en phthori\ (same root as \phtheir\), word four times in II Peter. See strkjv@Jude:1:10|.

rwp@2Peter:3:7 @{That now are} (\nun\). "The now heavens" over against "the then world" (\ho tote kosmos\ verse 6|). {By the same word} (\ti auti logi\). Instrumental case again referring to \logi\ in verse 6|. {Have been stored up} (\tethsaurismenoi eisin\). Perfect passive indicative of \thsauriz\, for which verb see strkjv@Matthew:6:19; strkjv@Luke:12:21|. {For fire} (\puri\). Dative case of \pur\, not with fire (instrumental case). The destruction of the world by fire is here pictured as in strkjv@Joel:2:30f.; strkjv@Psalms:50:3|. {Being reserved} (\troumenoi\). Present passive participle of \tre\, for which see strkjv@2:4|. {Against} (\eis\). Unto. As in strkjv@2:4,9| and see strkjv@1Peter:1:4| for the inheritance reserved for the saints of God.

rwp@2Thessalonians:1:9 @{Who} (\hoitines\). Qualitative use, such as. Vanishing in papyri though surviving in Paul (1Corinthians:3:17; strkjv@Romans:1:25; strkjv@Galatians:4:26; strkjv@Phillipians:4:3|). {Shall suffer punishment} (\dikn tisousin\). Future active of old verb \tin\, to pay penalty (\dikn\, right, justice), here only in N.T., but \apotin\ once also to repay strkjv@Philemon:1:19|. In the papyri \dik\ is used for a case or process in law. This is the regular phrase in classic writers for paying the penalty. {Eternal destruction} (\olethron ainion\). Accusative case in apposition with \dikn\ (penalty). This phrase does not appear elsewhere in the N.T., but is in IV Macc. strkjv@10:15 \ton ainion tou turannou olethron\ the eternal destruction of the tyrant (Antiochus Epiphanes). Destruction (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:3|) does not mean here annihilation, but, as Paul proceeds to show, separation {from the face of the Lord} (\apo prospou tou kuriou\) and from the {glory of his might} (\kai apo ts doxs ts ischuos autou\), an eternity of woe such as befell Antiochus Epiphanes. \Ainios\ in itself only means age-long and papyri and inscriptions give it in the weakened sense of a Caesar's life (Milligan), but Paul means by age-long {the coming age} in contrast with {this age}, as {eternal} as the New Testament knows how to make it. See on ¯Matthew:25:46| for use of \ainios\ both with \zn\, life, and \kolasin\, punishment.

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE DATE There are three views about the date of the Acts. Baur and his Tubingen School held the second century to be the date of this late pamphlet as they termed it after the fashion of the Clementine Homilies. But that view is now practically abandoned save by the few who still strangely oppose the Lukan authorship. Probably the majority of those who accept the Lukan authorship place it in the latter part of the first century for two reasons. One is that the Gospel according to Luke is dated by them after the destruction of Jerusalem because of the prophecy by Jesus of the encompassing of the city by armies. Predictive prophecy that would be and so it is considered a prophecy _post eventum_. The other reason is the alleged use of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus by Luke. Josephus finished this work A.D. 93 so that, if Luke did use it, he must have written the Acts after that date. Usually this argument is made to show that Luke could not have written it at all, but some hold that he may have lived to an age that would allow it. But it cannot be assumed that Luke used Josephus because of his mention of Theudas and Judas the Galilean. They differ so widely (Acts:5:36f|. and Josephus, _Ant_. XX. v, 1, 2) that Von Dobschutz (_Dictionary of the Apostolic Church_, art. Josephus) argues that the two accounts are entirely independent of each other. Songs:Luke (Luke:13:1f.|) alludes to a Galilean revolt not mentioned by Josephus and Josephus records three revolts under Pilate not referred to by Luke. A comparison of the accounts of the death of Agrippa I in strkjv@Acts:12:20-23| and _Ant_. XIX. viii, 2 redounds to the credit of Luke. The Josephus phase of the argument may be brushed to one side. The third view, held by Harnack and adopted here, is that Luke wrote the Acts while with Paul in Rome and finished the book before Paul's release, that is by A.D. 63. This is the obvious and natural way to take the language of Luke at the close of Acts. Events had gone no farther and so he ends the narrative right there. It is argued against this that Luke contemplated a third volume and for this reason closed with the arrival of Paul in Rome. But the use of \prton\ (first) in strkjv@Acts:1:1| is a common _Koin_ idiom and does not imply three volumes any more than first and second stories with us means that the house has three. Of course this date for the Acts puts the date of the Gospel further back either in Caesarea (57 to 59) or in Rome (60 to 62). And that means that Mark's Gospel is still earlier since Luke used it for his Gospel and the Logia (Q) earlier still. But all these dates are probable in the light of all the known facts.

rwp@Info_Epistles-General @ ORDER AND DATES The oldest Greek manuscripts give these General Epistles immediately after the Acts, and Westcott and Hort so print them in their Greek New Testament. But the English Versions follow the Textus Receptus and put them just before the Apocalypse. The order of the seven letters varies greatly in the different manuscripts, though usually James comes first and Jude:last (as the last accepted and the least known of the four authors). It is possible that the order of James, Peter, and John (omitting Jude) represented a sort of chronological precedence in some minds. It is possible also that no importance is to be attached to this order. Certainly John wrote last and after the destruction of Jerusalem, while the others come before that great event if they are genuine, as I believe, though there are difficulties of a serious nature concerning II Peter. James may be very early. If so, these seven Epistles are scattered all the way from A.D. 45 to 90. They have no connection with one another save in the case of the Epistles of Peter and Jude.

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

rwp@John:1:19 @{And this is the witness of John} (\kai haut estin h marturia tou Ianou\). 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 ertssin auton\). Final \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \erta\, 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:2:13 @{The passover of the Jews} (\to pascha tn Ioudain\). The Synoptics do not give "of the Jews," but John is writing after the destruction of the temple and for Gentile readers. John mentions the passovers in Christ's ministry outside of the one when Christ was crucified, this one and one in strkjv@6:4|. There may be another (5:1|), but we do not know. But for John we should not know that Christ's ministry was much over a year in length.

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE DATE OF THE GOSPEL There are two outstanding facts to mark off the date of this Gospel by Luke. It was later than the Gospel of Mark since Luke makes abundant use of it. It was before the Acts of the Apostles since he definitely refers to it in strkjv@Acts:1:1|. Unfortunately the precise date of both _termini_ is uncertain. There are still some scholars who hold that the author of the Acts shows knowledge of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus and so is after A.D. 85, a mistaken position, in my opinion, but a point to be discussed when Acts is reached. Still others more plausibly hold that the Acts was written after the destruction of Jerusalem and that the Gospel of Luke has a definite allusion to that event (Luke:21:20f.|), which is interpreted as a prophecy _post eventum_ instead of a prediction by Christ a generation beforehand. Many who accept this view hold to authorship of both Acts and Gospel by Luke. I have long held the view, now so ably defended by Harnack, that the Acts of the Apostles closes as it does for the simple and obvious reason that Paul was still a prisoner in Rome. Whether Luke meant the Acts to be used in the trial in Rome, which may or may not have come to pass, is not the point. Some argue that Luke contemplated a third book which would cover the events of the trial and Paul's later career. There is no proof of that view. The outstanding fact is that the book closes with Paul already a prisoner for two years in Rome. If the Acts was written about A.D. 63, as I believe to be the case, then obviously the Gospel comes earlier. How much before we do not know. It so happens that Paul was a prisoner a little over two years in Caesarea. That period gave Luke abundant opportunity for the kind of research of which he speaks in strkjv@Luke:1:1-4|. In Palestine he could have access to persons familiar with the earthly life and teachings of Jesus and to whatever documents were already produced concerning such matters. Luke may have produced the Gospel towards the close of the stay of Paul in Caesarea or during the early part of the first Roman imprisonment, somewhere between A.D. 59 and 62. The other testimony concerns the date of Mark's Gospel which has already been discussed in volume I. There is no real difficulty in the way of the early date of Mark's Gospel. All the facts that are known admit, even argue for a date by A.D. 60. If Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome, as is possible, it would certainly be before A.D. 64, the date of the burning of Rome by Nero. There are scholars, however, who argue for a much earlier date for his gospel, even as early as A.D. 50. The various aspects of the Synoptic problem are ably discussed by Hawkins in his _Horae Synopticae_, by Sanday and others in _Oxford Studies in the Synoptic Problem_, by Streeter in his _The Four Gospels_, by Hayes in his _The Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts_, by Harnack in his _Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_, by Stanton in his _The Gospels as Historical Documents_, and by many others. My own views are given at length in my _Studies in Mark's Gospel_ and in _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_.

rwp@Luke:17:31 @{Let him not go down} (\m katabat\). Second aorist active imperative of \katabain\ with \m\ in a prohibition in the third person singular. The usual idiom here would be \m\ and the aorist subjunctive. See strkjv@Mark:13:15f.; strkjv@Matthew:24:17f.| when these words occur in the great eschatological discussion concerning flight before the destruction of Jerusalem. Here the application is "absolute indifference to all worldly interests as the attitude of readiness for the Son of Man" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:19:44 @{Shall dash to the ground} (\edaphiousin\). Attic future of \edaphiz\, to beat level, to raze to the ground, a rare verb from \edaphos\, bottom, base, ground (Acts:22:7|), here alone in the N.T. {Because} (\anth' hn\). "In return for which things." {Thou knewest not} (\ouk egns\). Applying the very words of the lament in the condition in verse 42|. This vivid prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem is used by those who deny predictive prophecy even for Jesus as proof that Luke wrote the Gospel after the destruction of Jerusalem. But it is no proof at all to those who concede to Jesus adequate knowledge of his mission and claims.

rwp@Luke:19:47 @{He was teaching} (\n didaskn\). Periphrastic imperfect. {Daily} (\to kath' hmeran\). Note the accusative neuter article, "as to the according to the day," very awkward English surely, but perfectly good Greek. The same idiom occurs in strkjv@11:3|. {Sought} (\eztoun\). Imperfect active, conative imperfect, were seeking, trying to seek. {The principal men of the people} (\hoi prtoi tou laou\). The first men of the people. The position after the verb and apart from the chief priests and the scribes calls special attention to them. Some of these "first men" were chief priests or scribes, but not all of them. The lights and leaders of Jerusalem were bent on the destruction (\apolesai\) of Jesus. The raising of Lazarus from the dead brought them together for this action (John:11:47-53; strkjv@12:9-11|).

rwp@Luke:21:24 @{Edge of the sword} (\stomati machairs\). Instrumental case of \stomati\ which means "mouth" literally (Genesis:34:26|). This verse like the close of verse 22| is only in Luke. Josephus (_War_, VI. 9.3) states that 1,100,000 Jews perished in the destruction of Jerusalem and 97,000 were taken captive. Surely this is an exaggeration and yet the number must have been large. {Shall be led captive} (\aichmaltisthsontai\). Future passive of \aichmaltiz\ from \aichm\, spear and \haltos\ (\haliskomai\). Here alone in the literal sense in the N.T. {Shall be trodden under foot} (\estai patoumen\). Future passive periphrastic of \pate\, to tread, old verb. {Until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled} (\achri hou plrthsin kairoi ethnn\). First aorist passive subjunctive with \achri hou\ like \hes hou\. What this means is not clear except that Paul in strkjv@Romans:11:25| shows that the punishment of the Jews has a limit. The same idiom appears there also with \achri hou\ and the aorist subjunctive.

rwp@Luke:21:32 @{This generation} (\h genea haut\). Naturally people then living. {Shall not pass away} (\ou m parelthi\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \parerchomai\. Strongest possible negative with \ou m\. {Till all things be accomplished} (\hes an panta gentai\). Second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\ with \hes\, common idiom. The words give a great deal of trouble to critics. Some apply them to the whole discourse including the destruction of the temple and Jerusalem, the second coming and the end of the world. Some of these argue that Jesus was simply mistaken in his eschatology, some that he has not been properly reported in the Gospels. Others apply them only to the destruction of Jerusalem which did take place in A.D. 70 before that generation passed away. It must be said for this view that it is not easy in this great eschatological discourse to tell clearly when Jesus is discussing the destruction of Jerusalem and when the second coming. Plummer offers this solution: "The reference, therefore, is to the destruction of Jerusalem regarded as the type of the end of the world."

rwp@Mark:5:14 @{And in the country} (\kai eis tous agrous\). Mark adds this to "the city." In the fields and in the city as the excited men ran they told the tale of the destruction of the hogs. They came to see (\lthon idein\). All the city came out (Matthew), they went out to see (Luke).

rwp@Mark:5:15 @{They come to Jesus} (\erchontai pros ton Isoun\). Vivid present. To Jesus as the cause of it all, "to meet Jesus" (\eis hupantsin Isou\, strkjv@Matthew:8:34|). {And behold} (\therousin\). Present tense again. {And they were afraid} (\kai ephobthsan\). They became afraid. Mark drops back to the ingressive aorist tense (passive voice). They had all been afraid of the man, but there he was "sitting clothed and in his right mind," (\kathmenon himatismenon kai sphronounta\. Note the participles). "At the feet of Jesus," Luke adds (Luke:8:35|). For a long time he had worn no clothes (Luke:8:17|). Here was the healing of the wild man and the destruction of the hogs all by this same Jesus.

rwp@Mark:9:1 @{Till they see the kingdom of God come with power} (\hes an idsin tn basileian tou theou elluthuian en dunamei\). In strkjv@8:38| Jesus clearly is speaking of the second coming. To what is he referring in strkjv@9:1|? One is reminded of strkjv@Mark:13:32; strkjv@Matthew:24:36| where Jesus expressly denies that anyone save the Father himself (not even the Son) knows the day or the hour. Does he contradict that here? It may be observed that Luke has only "see the kingdom of God," while Matthew has "see the Son of man coming" (\erchomenon\, present participle, a process). Mark has "see the kingdom of God come" (\elluthuian\, perfect active participle, already come) and adds "with power." Certainly the second coming did not take place while some of those standing there still lived. Did Jesus mean that? The very next incident in the Synoptic Gospels is the Transfiguration on Mount Hermon. Does not Jesus have that in mind here? The language will apply also to the coming of the Holy Spirit on the great Day of Pentecost. Some see in it a reference to the destruction of the temple. It is at least open to question whether the Master is speaking of the same event in strkjv@Mark:8:38; strkjv@9:1|.

rwp@Mark:13:4 @{Tell us, when shall these things be?} (\Eipon hmin pote tauta estai;\). The Revised Version punctuates it as a direct question, but Westcott and Hort as an indirect inquiry. They asked about the {when} (\pote\) and the {what sign} (\ti smeion\). strkjv@Matthew:24:3| includes "the sign of thy coming and the end of the world," showing that these tragic events are brought before Jesus by the disciples. See discussion of the interpretation of this discourse on ¯Matthew:24:3|. This chapter in Mark is often called "The Little Apocalypse" with the notion that a Jewish apocalypse has been here adapted by Mark and attributed to Jesus. Many of the theories attribute grave error to Jesus or to the Gospels on this subject. The view adopted in the discussion in Matthew is the one suggested here, that Jesus blended in one picture his death, the destruction of Jerusalem within that generation, the second coming and end of the world typified by the destruction of the city. The lines between these topics are not sharply drawn in the report and it is not possible for us to separate the topics clearly. This great discourse is the longest preserved in Mark and may be due to Peter. Mark may have given it in order "to forewarn and forearm" (Bruce) the readers against the coming catastrophe of the destruction of Jerusalem. Both Matthew (Matthew:24|) and Luke (Luke:21:5-36|) follow the general line of Mark 13 though strkjv@Matthew:24:43-25:46| presents new material (parables).

rwp@Mark:13:7 @{Must needs come to pass} (\dei genesthai\). Already there were outbreaks against the Jews in Alexandria, at Seleucia with the slaughter of more than fifty thousand, at Jamnia, and elsewhere. Caligula, Claudius, Nero will threaten war before it finally comes with the destruction of the city and temple by Titus in A.D. 70. Vincent notes that between this prophecy by Jesus in A.D. 30 (or 29) and the destruction of Jerusalem there was an earthquake in Crete (A.D. 46 or 47), at Rome (A.D. 51), at Apamaia in Phrygia (A.D. 60), at Campania (A.D. 63). He notes also four famines during the reign of Claudius A.D. 41-54. One of them was in Judea in A.D. 44 and is alluded to in strkjv@Acts:11:28|. Tacitus (_Annals_ xvi. 10-13) describes the hurricanes and storms in Campania in A.D. 65.

rwp@Mark:13:10 @{Must first be preached} (\prton dei kruchthnai\). This only in Mark. It is interesting to note that Paul in strkjv@Colossians:1:6,23| claims that the gospel has spread all over the world. All this was before the destruction of Jerusalem.

rwp@Mark:13:32 @{Not even the Son} (\oude ho huios\). There is no doubt as to the genuineness of these words here such as exists in strkjv@Matthew:24:36|. This disclaimer of knowledge naturally interpreted applies to the second coming, not to the destruction of Jerusalem which had been definitely limited to that generation as it happened in A.D. 70.

rwp@Matthew:7:13 @{By the narrow gate} (\dia ts stens puls\). The Authorized Version "at the strait gate" misled those who did not distinguish between "strait" and "straight." The figure of the Two Ways had a wide circulation in Jewish and Christian writings (cf. strkjv@Deuteronomy:30:19; strkjv@Jeremiah:21:8; strkjv@Psalms:1|). See the _Didache_ i-vi; Barnabas xviii-xx. "The narrow gate" is repeated in verse 14| and {straitened the way} (\tethlimmen h hodos\) added. The way is "compressed," narrowed as in a defile between high rocks, a tight place like \stenochria\ in strkjv@Romans:8:35|. "The way that leads to life involves straits and afflictions" (McNeile). Vincent quotes the _Pinax_ or _Tablet_ of Cebes, a contemporary of Socrates: "Seest thou not, then, a little door, and a way before the door, which is not much crowded, but very few travel it? This is the way that leadeth unto true culture." "The broad way" (\euruchros\) is in every city, town, village, with the glaring white lights that lure to destruction.

rwp@Matthew:8:32 @{Rushed down the steep} (\hrmsen kata tou krmnou\). Down from the cliff (ablative case) into the sea. Constative aorist tense. The influence of mind on matter is now understood better than formerly, but we have the mastery of the mind of the Master on the minds of the maniacs, the power of Christ over the demons, over the herd of hogs. Difficulties in plenty exist for those who see only folk-lore and legend, but plain enough if we take Jesus to be really Lord and Saviour. The incidental destruction of the hogs need not trouble us when we are so familiar with nature's tragedies which we cannot comprehend.

rwp@Matthew:8:34 @{That he would depart} (\hops metabi\). The whole city was excited over the destruction of the hogs and begged Jesus to leave, forgetful of the healing of the demoniacs in their concern over the loss of property. They cared more for hogs than for human souls, as often happens today.

rwp@Matthew:16:28 @{Some of them that stand here} (\tines tn hode hesttn\). A _crux interpretum_ in reality. Does Jesus refer to the Transfiguration, the Resurrection of Jesus, the great Day of Pentecost, the Destruction of Jerusalem, the Second Coming and Judgment? We do not know, only that Jesus was certain of his final victory which would be typified and symbolized in various ways. The apocalyptic eschatological symbolism employed by Jesus here does not dominate his teaching. He used it at times to picture the triumph of the kingdom, not to set forth the full teaching about it. The kingdom of God was already in the hearts of men. There would be climaxes and consummations.

rwp@Matthew:24:3 @{As he sat} (\kathmenou\). Genitive absolute. Picture of Jesus sitting on the Mount of Olives looking down on Jerusalem and the temple which he had just left. After the climb up the mountain four of the disciples (Peter, James, John, Andrew) come to Jesus with the problem raised by his solemn words. They ask these questions about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, his own second coming (\parousia\, presence, common in the papyri for the visit of the emperor), and the end of the world. Did they think that they were all to take place simultaneously? There is no way to answer. At any rate Jesus treats all three in this great eschatological discourse, the most difficult problem in the Synoptic Gospels. Many theories are advanced that impugn the knowledge of Jesus or of the writers or of both. It is sufficient for our purpose to think of Jesus as using the destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem which did happen in that generation in A.D. 70, as also a symbol of his own second coming and of the end of the world (\sunteleias tou ainos\) or consummation of the age. In a painting the artist by skilful perspective may give on the same surface the inside of a room, the fields outside the window, and the sky far beyond. Certainly in this discourse Jesus blends in apocalyptic language the background of his death on the cross, the coming destruction of Jerusalem, his own second coming and the end of the world. He now touches one, now the other. It is not easy for us to separate clearly the various items. It is enough if we get the picture as a whole as it is here drawn with its lessons of warning to be ready for his coming and the end. The destruction of Jerusalem came as he foretold. There are some who would date the Synoptic Gospels after A.D. 70 in order to avoid the predictive element involved in the earlier date. But that is to limit the fore-knowledge of Jesus to a merely human basis. The word \parousia\ occurs in this chapter alone (3,27,37,39|) in the Gospels, but often in the Epistles, either of presence as opposed to absence (Phillipians:2:12|) or the second coming of Christ (2Thessalonians:2:1|).

rwp@Matthew:24:5 @{In my name} (\epi ti onomati mou\). They will arrogate to themselves false claims of Messiahship in (on the basis of) the name of Christ himself. Josephus (_Wars_ VI, 54) gives there false Christs as one of the reasons for the explosion against Rome that led to the city's destruction. Each new hero was welcomed by the masses including Barcochba. "I am the Messiah," each would say. Forty odd years ago two men in Illinois claimed to be Messiah, each with followers (Schlatter, Schweinfurth). In more recent years Mrs. Annie Besant has introduced a theosophical Messiah and Mrs. Eddy made claims about herself on a par with those of Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:24:34 @{This generation} (\h genea haut\). The problem is whether Jesus is here referring to the destruction of Jerusalem or to the second coming and end of the world. If to the destruction of Jerusalem, there was a literal fulfilment. In the Old Testament a generation was reckoned as forty years. This is the natural way to take verse 34| as of 33| (Bruce), "all things" meaning the same in both verses.

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

rwp@Matthew:27:51 @{Was rent} (\eschisth\). Both Mark (Mark:15:38|) and Luke (Luke:23:45|) mention also this fact. Matthew connects it with the earthquake, "the earth did quake" (\h g eseisth\). Josephus (_War_ VI. 299) tells of a quaking in the temple before the destruction and the Talmud tells of a quaking forty years before the destruction of the temple. Allen suggests that "a cleavage in the masonry of the porch, which rent the outer veil and left the Holy Place open to view, would account for the language of the Gospels, of Josephus, and of the Talmud." This veil was a most elaborately woven fabric of seventy-two twisted plaits of twenty-four threads each and the veil was sixty feet long and thirty wide. The rending of the veil signified the removal of the separation between God and the people (Gould).

rwp@Philemon:1:22 @{But withal} (\hama de\). Along with your kindly reception of Onesimus. On \hama\, see strkjv@Acts:24:26; strkjv@27:40|. {A lodging} (\xenian\). Old word from \xenos\, stranger. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:28:23|. {I shall be granted unto you} (\charisthsomai humin\). First future passive of \charizomai\. Used either as a favour as here and strkjv@Acts:3:14| or for destruction (Acts:25:11|).

rwp@Revelation:2:17 @{Of the hidden manna} (\tou manna tou kekrummenou\). "Of the manna the hidden" (perfect passive articular participle of \krupt\). The partitive genitive, the only N.T. example with \didmi\, though Q reads \to\ (accusative) here. For examples of the ablative with \apo\ and \ek\ see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 519. See strkjv@John:6:31,49| for the indeclinable word \manna\. The golden pot of manna was "laid up before God in the ark" (Exodus:16:23|). It was believed that Jeremiah hid the ark, before the destruction of Jerusalem, where it would not be discovered till Israel was restored (II Macc. strkjv@2:5ff.). Christ is the true bread from heaven (John:6:31-33, 48-51|) and that may be the idea here. Those faithful to Christ will have transcendent fellowship with him. Swete takes it to be "the life-sustaining power of the Sacred Humanity now hid with Christ in God." {A white stone} (\psphon leukn\). This old word for pebble (from \psa\, to rub) was used in courts of justice, black pebbles for condemning, white pebbles for acquitting. The only other use of the word in the N.T. is in strkjv@Acts:26:10|, where Paul speaks of "depositing his pebble" (\katnegka psphon\) or casting his vote. The white stone with one's name on it was used to admit one to entertainments and also as an amulet or charm. {A new name written} (\onoma kainon gegrammenon\). Perfect passive predicate participle of \graph\. Not the man's own name, but that of Christ (Heitmuller, _Im Namen Jsu_, p. 128-265). See strkjv@3:12| for the name of God so written on one. The man himself may be the \psphos\ on which the new name is written. "The true Christian has a charmed life" (Moffatt). {But he that receiveth it} (\ei m ho lambann\). "Except the one receiving it." See strkjv@Matthew:11:27| for like intimate and secret knowledge between the Father and the Son and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal the Father. See also strkjv@Revelation:19:12|.

rwp@Revelation:8:9 @{Of the creatures} (\tn ktismatn\). See strkjv@5:13| for this word \ktisma\. Even they that had life (\ta echonta psuchas\). Here the nominative articular participle is in apposition with the genitive \ktismatn\, as often in this book. See strkjv@Exodus:7:20| for the destruction of fish, and strkjv@Zephaniah:1:3|. {Was destroyed} (\diephtharsan\). Second aorist passive indicative of \diaphtheir\, old compound, to corrupt, to consume, to destroy (perfective use of \dia\), also strkjv@11:18|. The plural \ploion\ just before the verb makes the idea plural.

rwp@Revelation:9:11 @{As king} (\basilea\). Predicate accusative and anarthrous. In strkjv@Proverbs:30:27| it is stated that the locust has no king, but this is not true of these demonic locusts. Their king is "the angel of the abyss (verse 1|) whose orders they obey." {His name is} (\onoma auti\). "Name to him" (nominative absolute and dative, as in strkjv@6:8|). {In Hebrew} (\Ebraisti\). Adverb as in strkjv@16:16; strkjv@John:5:2; strkjv@19:13,17,20; strkjv@20:16|. \Abaddn\. A word almost confined to the Wisdom books (Job:26:6; strkjv@Psalms:88:11; strkjv@Proverbs:15:11|). It is rendered in the LXX by \Apleia\, destruction. {In the Greek tongue} (\en ti Hellniki\). With \glssi\ or \dialekti\ understood. As usual, John gives both the Hebrew and the Greek. {Apollyon} (\Apollun\). Present active masculine singular participle of \apollu\, meaning "destroying," used here as a name and so "Destroyer," with the nominative case retained though in apposition with the accusative \onoma\. The personification of Abaddon occurs in the Talmud also. It is not clear whether by Apollyon John means Death or Satan. Bousset even finds in the name Apollyon an indirect allusion to Apollo, one of whose symbols was the locust, a doubtful point assuredly.

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

rwp@Revelation:12:6 @{Fled into the wilderness} (\ephugen eis tn ermon\). Second aorist active indicative of \pheug\. Here, of course, not Mary, but "the ideal woman" (God's people) of the preceding verses, who fled under persecution of the dragon. God's people do not at once share the rapture of Christ, but the dragon is unable to destroy them completely. The phrases used here seem to be reminiscent of strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:2ff.| (wanderings of Israel in the wilderness), strkjv@1Kings:17:2f.| and strkjv@19:3f.| (Elijah's flight), I Macc. strkjv@2:29 (flight of the Jews from Antiochus Epiphanes), strkjv@Matthew:2:13| (flight of Joseph and Mary to Egypt), strkjv@Mark:13:14| (the flight of Christians at the destruction of Jerusalem). {Where} (\hopou--ekei\). Hebrew redundancy (where--there) as in strkjv@3:8; strkjv@8:9,9; strkjv@13:8,12; strkjv@17:9; strkjv@20:8|. {Prepared} (\htoimasmenon\). Perfect passive predicate participle of \hetoimaz\, for which verb see strkjv@Matthew:20:23; strkjv@Revelation:8:6; strkjv@9:7,15; strkjv@16:12; strkjv@19:7; strkjv@21:2|, and for its use with \topos\ strkjv@John:14:2f.| and for the kind of fellowship meant by it (Psalms:31:21; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:13; strkjv@Colossians:3:3; strkjv@1John:1:3|). {Of God} (\apo tou theou\). "From (by) God," marking the source as God (9:18; strkjv@James:1:13|). This anticipatory symbolism is repeated in strkjv@12:13f|. {That there they may nourish her} (\hina ekei trephsin autn\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the present for continued action: active subjunctive according to A P though C reads \trephousin\, present active indicative, as is possible also in strkjv@13:17| and certainly so in strkjv@1John:5:20| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 984), a solecism in late vernacular Greek. The plural is indefinite "they" as in strkjv@10:11; strkjv@11:9|. One MSS. has \trephetai\ (is nourished). The stereotyped phrase occurs here, as in strkjv@11:2f.|, for the length of the dragon's power, repeated in strkjv@12:14| in more general terms and again in strkjv@13:5|.

rwp@Revelation:16:3 @{Into the sea} (\eis tn thalassan\). Like the first Egyptian plague (Exodus:7:12-41|) though only the Nile affected then. {Blood as of a dead man} (\haima hs nekrou\). At the trumpet (8:11|) the water becomes wormwood. Here \hs nekrou\ is added to strkjv@Exodus:7:19|, "the picture of a murdered man weltering in his blood" (Swete). "Coagulated blood, fatal to animal life" (Moffatt). {Every living soul} (\psa psuch zs\). "Every soul of life" (Hebraism, strkjv@Genesis:1:21|, marked by life). {Even the things that were in the sea} (\ta en ti thalassi\). "The things in the sea," in apposition with \psuch\. Complete destruction, not partial as in strkjv@8:9|.

rwp@Revelation:18:11 @{The merchants} (\hoi emporoi\). As in strkjv@18:3,15,23|. The dirge of the merchants follows the wail of the kings. {Weep and mourn} (\klaiousin kai penthousin\). Present active indicatives of \klai\ and \penthe\ as in verses 9| (for \klai\), 15,19|. {For no man buyeth their merchandise any more} (\hoti ton gomon autn oudeis agorazei ouketi\). Reason enough for their sorrow over Rome's fall. \Gomos\ is old word (from \gem\ to be full) for a ship's cargo (Acts:21:3|) and then any merchandise (Revelation:18:11f.|). Galen, Pliny, Aristides tell of the vastness of the commerce and luxury of Rome, the world's chief market. Many of the items here are like those in the picture of the destruction of Tyre in strkjv@Ezekiel:26; 27|. There are twenty-nine items singled out in verses 12,13| of this merchandise or cargo (\gomon\), imports into the port of Rome. Only a few need any comment.

rwp@Romans:1:24 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). Paul's inexorable logic. See it also in verse 26| with the same verb and in verse 28| \kai\ like "and so." {God gave them up} (\paredken autous ho theos\). First aorist active indicative of \paradidmi\, old and common verb to hand over (beside, \para\) to one's power as in strkjv@Matthew:4:12|. These people had already wilfully deserted God who merely left them to their own self-determination and self-destruction, part of the price of man's moral freedom. Paul refers to this stage and state of man in strkjv@Acts:17:30| by "overlooked" (\huperidn\). The withdrawal of God's restraint sent men deeper down. Three times Paul uses \paredken\ here (verses 24,26,28|), not three stages in the giving over, but a repetition of the same withdrawal. The words sound to us like clods on the coffin as God leaves men to work their own wicked will. {That their bodies should be dishonoured} (\tou atimazesthai ta smata autn\). Contemplated result expressed by \tou\ (genitive article) and the passive infinitive \atimazesthai\ (from \atimos\, \a\ privative and \timos\, dishonoured) with the accusative of general reference. Christians had a new sense of dignity for the body (1Thessalonians:4:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:6:13|). Heathenism left its stamp on the bodies of men and women.

rwp@Romans:3:16 @{Destruction} (\suntrimma\). Rare word from \suntrib\, to rub together, to crush. In strkjv@Leviticus:21:19| for fracture and so in papyri. Only here in N.T. {Misery} (\talaipria\). Common word from \talaipros\ (Romans:7:24|), only here in the N.T.

rwp@Romans:3:17 @{The way of peace} (\hodon eirns\). Wherever they go they leave a trail of woe and destruction (Denney).

rwp@Romans:9:22 @{Willing} (\theln\). Concessive use of the participle, "although willing," not causal, "because willing" as is shown by "with much long-suffering" (\en polli makrothumii\, in much long-suffering). {His power} (\to dunaton autou\). Neuter singular of the verbal adjective rather than the substantive \dunamin\. {Endured} (\negken\). Constative second aorist active indicative of the old defective verb \pher\, to bear. {Vessels of wrath} (\skeu orgs\). The words occur in strkjv@Jeremiah:50:25| (LXX strkjv@Jeremiah:27:25|), but not in the sense here (objective genitive like \tekna orgs\, strkjv@Ephesians:2:3|, the objects of God's wrath). {Fitted} (\katrtismena\). Perfect passive participle of \katartiz\, old verb to equip (see strkjv@Matthew:4:21; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11|), state of readiness. Paul does not say here that God did it or that they did it. That they are responsible may be seen from strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:15f|. {Unto destruction} (\eis apleian\). Endless perdition (Matthew:7:13; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3; strkjv@Phillipians:3:19|), not annihilation.