Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-LAW.filter - rwp flesh:


rwp@1Corinthians:1:11 @{For it hath been signified unto me} (\edˆl“thˆ gar moi\). First aorist passive indicative of \dˆlo“\ and difficult to render into English. Literally, It was signified to me. {By them of Chloe} (\hupo t“n Chloˆs\). Ablative case of the masculine plural article \t“n\, by the (folks) of Chloe (genitive case). The words "which are of the household" are not in the Greek, though they correctly interpret the Greek, "those of Chloe." Whether the children, the kinspeople, or the servants of Chloe we do not know. It is uncertain also whether Chloe lived in Corinth or Ephesus, probably Ephesus because to name her if in Corinth might get her into trouble (Heinrici). Already Christianity was working a social revolution in the position of women and slaves. The name {Chloe} means tender verdure and was one of the epithets of Demeter the goddess of agriculture and for that reason Lightfoot thinks that she was a member of the freedman class like Phoebe (Romans:16:1|), Hermes (Romans:16:14|), Nereus (Romans:16:15|). It is even possible that Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus (1Corinthians:16:17|) may have been those who brought Chloe the news of the schisms in Corinth. {Contentions} (\erides\). Unseemly wranglings (as opposed to discussing, \dialegomai\) that were leading to the {schisms}. Listed in works of the flesh (Galatians:5:19f.|) and the catalogues of vices (2Corinthians:12:20; strkjv@Romans:1:19f.; strkjv@1Timothy:6:4|).

rwp@1Corinthians:1:26 @{Behold} (\blepete\). Same form for imperative present active plural and indicative. Either makes sense as in strkjv@John:5:39| \eraunate\ and strkjv@14:1| \pisteuete\. {Calling} (\klˆsin\). The act of calling by God, based not on the external condition of those called (\klˆtoi\, verse 2|), but on God's sovereign love. It is a clinching illustration of Paul's argument, an _argumentum ad hominen_. {How that} (\hoti\). Explanatory apposition to \klˆsin\. {After the flesh} (\kata sarka\). According to the standards of the flesh and to be used not only with \sophoi\ (wise, philosophers), but also \dunatoi\ (men of dignity and power), \eugeneis\ (noble, high birth), the three claims to aristocracy (culture, power, birth). {Are called}. Not in the Greek, but probably to be supplied from the idea in \klˆsin\.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:29 @{That no flesh should glory before God} (\hop“s mˆ kauchˆsˆtai pƒsa sarx en“pion tou theou\). This is the further purpose expressed by \hop“s\ for variety and appeals to God's ultimate choice in all three instances. The first aorist middle of the old verb \kauchaomai\, to boast, brings out sharply that not a single boast is to be made. The papyri give numerous examples of \en“pion\ as a preposition in the vernacular, from adjective \en-“pios\, in the eye of God. One should turn to strkjv@2Corinthians:4:7| for Paul's further statement about our having this treasure in earthen vessels that the excellency of the power may be of God and not of us.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:3:1 @{But as unto carnal} (\all' h“s sarkinois\). Latin _carneus_. "As men o' flesh," Braid Scots; "as worldlings," Moffatt. This form in \-inos\ like \lithinos\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3| means the material of flesh, "not on tablets of stone, but on fleshen tablets on hearts." Songs:in strkjv@Hebrews:7:16|. But in strkjv@Romans:7:14| Paul says, "I am fleshen (\sarkinos\) sold under sin," as if \sarkinos\ represented the extreme power of the \sarx\. Which does Paul mean here? He wanted to speak the wisdom of God among the adults (1Corinthians:2:6|), the spiritual (\hoi pneumatikoi\, strkjv@2:15|), but he was unable to treat them as \pneumatikoi\ in reality because of their seditions and immoralities. It is not wrong to be \sarkinos\, for we all live in the flesh (\en sarki\, strkjv@Galatians:2:20|), but we are not to live according to the flesh (\kata sarka\, strkjv@Romans:8:12|). It is not culpable to a babe in Christ (\nˆpios\, strkjv@1Corinthians:13:11|), unless unduly prolonged (1Corinthians:14:20; strkjv@Hebrews:5:13f.|). It is one of the tragedies of the minister's life that he has to keep on speaking to the church members "as unto babes in Christ" (\h“s nˆpiois en Christ“i\), who actually glory in their long babyhood whereas they ought to be teachers of the gospel instead of belonging to the cradle roll. Paul's goal was for all the babes to become adults (Colossians:1:28|).

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

rwp@1Corinthians:3:3 @{For ye are yet carnal} (\eti gar sarkikoi este\). \Sarkikos\, unlike \sarkinos\, like \ikos\ formations, means adapted to, fitted for the flesh (\sarx\), one who lives according to the flesh (\kata sarka\). Paul by \psuchikos\ describes the unregenerate man, by \pneumatikos\ the regenerate man. Both classes are \sarkinoi\ made in flesh, and both may be \sarkikoi\ though the \pneumatikoi\ should not be. The \pneumatikoi\ who continue to be \sarkinoi\ are still babes (\nˆpioi\), not adults (\teleioi\), while those who are still \sarkikoi\ (carnal) have given way to the flesh as if they were still \psuchikoi\ (unregenerate). It is a bold and cutting figure, not without sarcasm, but necessary to reveal the Corinthians to themselves. {Jealousy and strife} (\zˆlos kai eris\). Zeal (\zˆlos\ from \ze“\, to boil) is not necessarily evil, but good if under control. It may be not according to knowledge (Romans:10:2|) and easily becomes jealousy (same root through the French _jaloux_) as zeal. Ardour may be like the jealousy of God (2Corinthians:11:2|) or the envy of men (Acts:5:17|). \Eris\ is an old word, but used only by Paul in N.T. (see on ¯1Corinthians:1:11|). Wrangling follows jealousy. These two voices of the spirit are to Paul proof that the Corinthians are still \sarkikoi\ and walking according to men, not according to the Spirit of Christ.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:4 @{For when one saith} (\hotan gar legˆi tis\). Indefinite temporal clause with the present subjunctive of repetition (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 972). Each instance is a case in point and proof abundant of the strife. {Of Paul} (\Paulou\). Predicate genitive, belong to Paul, on Paul's side. {Of Apollos} (\Apoll“\). Same genitive, but the form is the so-called Attic second declension. See the nominative \Apoll“s\ in verse 5|. {Men} (\anthr“poi\). Just mere human creatures (\anthr“poi\, generic term for mankind), in the flesh (\sarkinoi\), acting like the flesh (\sarkikoi\), not \pneumatikoi\, as if still \psuchikoi\. It was a home-thrust. Paul would not even defend his own partisans.

rwp@1Corinthians:5:5 @{To deliver such an one unto Satan} (\paradounai ton toiouton t“i Satanƒi\). 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 tˆs 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 s“thˆi\). 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:6:13 @{But God shall bring to nought both it and them} (\ho de theos kai tautˆn kai tauta katargˆsei\). Another proverb about the adaptation of the belly (\koilia\) and food (\br“mata\, not just flesh), which had apparently been used by some in Corinth to justify sexual license (fornication and adultery). These Gentiles mixed up matters not alike at all (questions of food and sensuality). " We have traces of this gross moral confusion in the circumstances which dictated the Apostolic Letter (Acts:15:23-29|), where things wholly diverse are combined, as directions about meats to be avoided and a prohibition of fornication" (Lightfoot). Both the belly (\tautˆn\) and the foods (\tauta\) God will bring to an end by death and change. {But the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body} (\to de s“ma ou tˆi porneiƒi alla t“i kuri“i, kai ho kurios t“i s“mati\). Paul here boldly shows the fallacy in the parallel about appetite of the belly for food. The human body has a higher mission than the mere gratification of sensual appetite. Sex is of God for the propagation of the race, not for prostitution. Paul had already stated that God dwells in us as the sanctuary of the Holy Spirit (3:16f.|). This higher function of the body he here puts forward against the debased Greek philosophy of the time which ignored completely Paul's idea, "the body for the Lord and the Lord for the body" (dative of personal interest in both cases). "The Lord Jesus and \porneia\ contested for the bodies of Christian men; loyal to him they must renounce _that_, yielding to _that_ they renounce him" (Findlay).

rwp@1Corinthians:7:28 @{But and if thou marry} (\ean de kai gamˆsˆis\). Condition of the third class, undetermined with prospect of being determined, with the ingressive first aorist (late form) active subjunctive with \ean\: "But if thou also commit matrimony or get married," in spite of Paul's advice to the contrary. {Thou hast not sinned} (\ouch hˆmartes\). Second aorist active indicative of \hamartan“\, to sin, to miss a mark. Here either Paul uses the timeless (gnomic) aorist indicative or by a swift transition he changes the standpoint (proleptic) in the conclusion from the future (in the condition) to the past. Such mixed conditions are common (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1020, 1023). Precisely the same construction occurs with the case of the virgin (\parthenos\) except that the old form of the first aorist subjunctive (\gˆmˆi\) occurs in place of the late \gamˆsˆi\ above. The MSS. interchange both examples. There is no special point in the difference in the forms. {Shall have tribulation in the flesh} (\thlipsin tˆi sarki hexousin\). Emphatic position of \thlipsin\ (pressure). See strkjv@2Corinthians:12:7| \skolops tˆi sarki\ (thorn in the flesh). {And I would spare you} (\eg“ de hum“n pheidomai\). Possibly conative present middle indicative, I am trying to spare you like \agei\ in strkjv@Romans:2:4| and \dikaiousthe\ in strkjv@Galatians:5:4|.

rwp@1Corinthians:8:1 @{Now concerning things sacrificed to idols} (\peri de t“n eid“lothut“n\). Plainly the Corinthians had asked also about this problem in their letter to Paul (7:1|). This compound adjective (\eid“lon\, idol, \thutos\, verbal adjective from \thu“\, to sacrifice) is still found only in the N.T. and ecclesiastical writers, not so far in the papyri. We have seen this problem mentioned in the decision of the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:29; strkjv@21:25|). The connection between idolatry and impurity was very close, especially in Corinth. See both topics connected in strkjv@Revelation:2:14,20|. By \eid“lothuta\ was meant the portion of the flesh left over after the heathen sacrifices. The heathen called it \hierothuton\ (1Corinthians:10:28|). This leftover part "was either eaten sacrificially, or taken home for private meals, or sold in the markets" (Robertson and Plummer). What were Christians to do about eating such portions either buying in the market or eating in the home of another or at the feast to the idol? Three questions are thus involved and Paul discusses them all. There was evidently difference of opinion on the subject among the Corinthian Christians. Aspects of the matter come forward not touched on in the Jerusalem Conference to which Paul does not here allude, though he does treat it in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10|. There was the more enlightened group who acted on the basis of their superior knowledge about the non-existence of the gods represented by the idols. {Ye know that we all have knowledge} (\oidamen hoti pantes gn“sin echomen\). This may be a quotation from the letter (Moffatt, _Lit. of N.T._, p. 112). Since their conversion to Christ, they know the emptiness of idol-worship. Paul admits that all Christians have this knowledge (personal experience, \gn“sis\), but this problem cannot be solved by knowledge.

rwp@1Corinthians:8:13 @{Meat} (\br“ma\). Food it should be, not flesh (\krea\). {Maketh my brother to stumble} (\skandalizei ton adelphon mou\). Late verb (LXX and N.T.) to set a trap-stick (Matthew:5:29|) or stumbling-block like \proskomma\ in verse 9| (cf. strkjv@Romans:14:13,21|). Small boys sometimes set snares for other boys, not merely for animals to see them caught. {I will eat no flesh for evermore} (\ou mˆ phag“ krea eis ton ai“na\). The strong double negative \ou mˆ\ with the second aorist subjunctive. Here Paul has {flesh} (\krea\) with direct reference to the flesh offered to idols. Old word, but in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:14:21|. This is Paul's principle of love (verse 2|) applied to the matter of eating meats offered to idols. Paul had rather be a vegetarian than to lead his weak brother to do what he considered sin. There are many questions of casuistry today that can only be handled wisely by Paul's ideal of love.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:3 @{The same spiritual meat} (\to auto pneumatikon br“ma\). Westcott and Hort needlessly bracket to \auto\. \Br“ma\ is food, not just flesh. The reference is to the manna (Exodus:16:13ff.|) which is termed "spiritual" by reason of its supernatural character. Jesus called himself the true bread from heaven (John:6:35|) which the manna typified.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:18 @{After the flesh} (\kata sarka\). The literal Israel, the Jewish people, not the spiritual Israel (\Israˆl kata pneuma\) composed of both Jews and Gentiles, the true children of faith (Romans:2:28; strkjv@9:8; Gal strkjv@3:7|). {Communion with the altar} (\koin“noi tou thusiastˆriou\). Same idea in \koin“noi\ participators in, partners in, sharers in (with objective genitive). The word \thusiastˆrion\ is from late verb \thusiaz“\, to offer sacrifice, and that from \thusia\, sacrifice, and that from \thu“\, common verb to slay, to sacrifice (verse 20|). The Israelites who offer sacrifices have a spiritual participation in the altar.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:35 @{But some one will say} (\alla erei tis\). Paul knows what the sceptics were saying. He is a master at putting the standpoint of the imaginary adversary. {How} (\p“s\). This is still the great objection to the resurrection of our bodies. Granted that Jesus rose from the dead, for the sake of argument, these sceptics refuse to believe in the possibility of our resurrection. It is the attitude of Matthew Arnold who said, "Miracles do not happen." Scientifically we know the "how" of few things. Paul has an astounding answer to this objection. Death itself is the way of resurrection as in the death of the seed for the new plant (verses 36f.|). {With what manner of body} (\poi“i s“mati\). This is the second question which makes plainer the difficulty of the first. The first body perishes. Will that body be raised? Paul treats this problem more at length (verses 38-54|) and by analogy of nature (Cf. Butler's famous _Analogy_). It is a spiritual, not a natural, body that is raised. \S“ma\ here is an organism. {Flesh} (\sarx\) is the \s“ma\ for the natural man, but there is spiritual (\pneumatikon\) \s“ma\ for the resurrection.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:39 @{The same flesh} (\hˆ autˆ sarx\). Paul takes up animal life to show the great variety there is as in the plant kingdom. Even if evolution should prove to be true, Paul's argument remains valid. Variety exists along with kinship. Progress is shown in the different kingdoms, progress that even argues for a spiritual body after the body of flesh is lost. {Of beasts} (\ktˆn“n\). Old word, from \ktaomai\, to possess, and so property. See strkjv@Luke:10:34|. {Of birds} (\ptˆn“n\). Old word from \petomai\, to fly, winged, flying. Only here in N.T.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:42 @{Songs:is the resurrection of the dead} (\hout“s kai hˆ anastasis t“n nekr“n\). Paul now applies his illustrations to his argument to prove the kind of body we shall have after the resurrection. He does it by a series of marvellous contrasts that gather all his points. The earthly and the risen beings differ in duration, value, power (Wendt). {It is sown} (\speiretai\). In death, like the seed (37|). {In incorruption} (\en aphtharsiƒi\). Late word from \a\ privative and \phtheir“\, to corrupt. In LXX, Plutarch, Philo, late papyrus of a Gnostic gospel, and quotation from Epicurus. Vulgate _incorruptio_. The resurrection body has undergone a complete change as compared with the body of flesh like the plant from the seed. It is related to it, but it is a different body of glory.

rwp@1John:1:3 @{That which we have seen} (\ho he“rakamen\). Third use of this form (verses 1,2,3|), this time resumption after the parenthesis in verse 2|. {And heard} (\kai akˆkoamen\). Second (verse 1| for first) use of this form, a third in verse 5|. Emphasis by repetition is a thoroughly Johannine trait. {Declare we} (\apaggellomen\). Second use of this word (verse 2| for first), but \aggelia\ (message) and \anaggellomen\ (announce) in verse 5|. {That ye also may have} (\hina kai humeis echˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \ech“\ (may keep on having). "Ye also" who have not seen Jesus in the flesh as well as those like John who have seen him. Like \kai humin\ (to you also) just before. {Fellowship with us} (\koin“nian meth' hˆm“n\). Common word in this Epistle, from \koin“nos\, partner (Luke:5:10|), and \koin“ne“\, to share, in (1Peter:4:13|), with \meta\ emphasising mutual relationship (Acts:2:42|). This Epistle often uses \ech“\ with a substantive rather than a verb. {Yea, and our fellowship} (\kai hˆ koin“nia de hˆ hˆmetera\). Careful explanation of his meaning in the word "fellowship" (partnership), involving fellowship with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ and only possible in Christ.

rwp@1John:1:8 @{If we say} (\ean eip“men\). See verse 6|. {We have no sin} (\hamartian ouk echomen\). For this phrase see strkjv@John:9:41; strkjv@15:22,24|. That is, we have no personal guilt, no principle of sin. This some of the Gnostics held, since matter was evil and the soul was not contaminated by the sinful flesh, a thin delusion with which so-called Christian scientists delude themselves today. {We deceive ourselves} (\heautous plan“men\). Present active indicative of \plana“\, to lead astray. We do not deceive others who know us. Negative statement again of the same idea, "the truth is not in us."

rwp@1John:2:16 @{All that} (\pƒn to\). Collective use of the neuter singular as in strkjv@5:4|, like \pƒn ho\ in strkjv@John:6:37,39|. Three examples, not necessarily covering all sins, are given in the nominative in apposition with \pƒn to\. "The lust of the flesh" (\hˆ epithumia tˆs sarkos\, subjective genitive, lust felt by the flesh) may be illustrated by strkjv@Mark:4:19; strkjv@Galatians:5:17|. Songs:the genitive with \hˆ epithumia t“n ophthalm“n\ (the lust of the eyes) is subjective, lust with the eyes as organs as shown by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:5:28|. The use of the "movies" today for gain by lustful exhibitions is a case in point. For \alazoneia\ see on ¯James:4:16|, the only other N.T. example. \Alaz“n\ (a boaster) occurs in strkjv@Romans:1:30; strkjv@2Timothy:3:2|. \Bios\ (life) as in strkjv@3:17| is the external aspect (Luke:8:14|), not the inward principle (\z“ˆ\). David Smith thinks that, as in the case of Eve (Genesis:3:1-6|) and the temptations of Jesus (Matthew:4:1-11|), these three sins include all possible sins. But they are all "of the world" (\ek tou kosmou\) in origin, in no sense "of the Father" (\ek tou patros\). The problem for the believer is always how to be in the world and yet not of it (John:17:11,14ff.|).

rwp@1John:4:2 @{Hereby know ye} (\en tout“i gin“skete\). Either present active indicative or imperative. The test of "the Spirit of God" (\to pneuma tou theou\) here alone in this Epistle, save verse 13|. With the clamour of voices then and now this is important. The test (\en tout“i\, as in strkjv@3:19|) follows. {That Jesus Christ is come in the flesh} (\Iˆsoun Christon en sarki elˆluthota\). The correct text (perfect active participle predicate accusative), not the infinitive (\elˆluthenai\, B Vg). The predicate participle (see strkjv@John:9:22| for predicate accusative with \homologe“\) describes Jesus as already come in the flesh (his actual humanity, not a phantom body as the Docetic Gnostics held). See this same idiom in strkjv@2John:1:7| with \erchomenon\ (coming). A like test is proposed by Paul for confessing the deity of Jesus Christ in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3| and for the Incarnation and Resurrection of Jesus in strkjv@Romans:10:6-10|.

rwp@1Peter:2:11 @{As sojourners and pilgrims} (\h“s paroikous kai parepidˆmous\). This combination from the LXX (Genesis:33:4; strkjv@Psalms:39:13|). See strkjv@1:1| for \parepidˆmos\ and strkjv@1:17| for \paroikia\ and strkjv@Ephesians:2:19| for \paroikos\ (only there and here in N.T., Christians whose fatherland is heaven). {To abstain from} (\apechesthai\). Present middle (direct) infinitive of \apech“\, old verb, to hold back from (1Thessalonians:4:3|). In indirect command (to keep on abstaining from) after \parakal“\ (I beseech). With the ablative case \t“n sarkik“n epithumi“n\, the grosser sins of the flesh (for \sarkikos\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:3:3|) like the list in strkjv@4:3|. {Which} (\haitines\). "Which very ones." Like Latin _quippe qui_. {War against the soul} (\strateuontai kata tˆs psuchˆs\). Present middle indicative of \strateu“\, to carry on a campaign (James:4:1|). See this struggle between the flesh and the spirit vividly pictured by Paul in strkjv@Galatians:5:16-24|.

rwp@1Peter:3:18 @{Because Christ also died} (\hoti kai Christos apethanen\). Songs:the best MSS.; later ones \epathen\ (suffered). The example of Christ should stir us to patient endurance. {For sins} (\peri hamarti“n\). "Concerning sins" (not his, but ours, strkjv@1:18|). \Peri\ (around, concerning) with \hamartias\ in the regular phrase for the sin offering (Leviticus:5:7; strkjv@6:30|), though \huper hamartias\ does occur (Ezekiel:43:25|). Songs:in the N.T. we find both \peri hamarti“n\ (Hebrews:5:3|) and \huper hamarti“n\ (Hebrews:5:1|). {Once} (\hapax\). Once for all (Hebrews:9:28|), not once upon a time (\pote\). {The righteous for the unrighteous} (\dikaios huper adik“n\). Literally, "just for unjust" (no articles). See strkjv@1Peter:2:19| for the sinlessness of Christ as the one perfect offering for sin. This is what gives Christ's blood value. He has no sin himself. Some men today fail to perceive this point. {That he might bring us to God} (\hina hˆmƒs prosagagˆi t“i the“i\). Purpose clause with \hina\, with second aorist active subjunctive of \prosag“\ and the dative case \t“i the“i\. The MSS. vary between \hˆmƒs\ (us) and \humƒs\ (you). The verb \prosag“\ means to lead or bring to (Matthew:18:24|), to approach God (cf. \prosag“gˆn\ in strkjv@Ephesians:2:18|), to present us to God on the basis of his atoning death for us, which has opened the way (Romans:3:25; strkjv@Hebrews:10:19f|.) {Being put to death in the flesh} (\thanat“theis men sarki\). First aorist passive participle of \thanato“\, old verb (from \thanatos\ death), to put to death. \Sarki\ is locative case of \sarx\. {But quickened in the spirit} (\z“opoiˆtheis de pneumati\). First aorist passive participle of \z“opoie“\ rare (Aristotle) verb (from \z“opoios\ making alive), to make alive. The participles are not antecedent to \apethanen\, but simultaneous with it. There is no such construction as the participle of subsequent action. The spirit of Christ did not die when his flesh did, but "was endued with new and greater powers of life" (Thayer). See strkjv@1Corinthians:15:22| for the use of the verb for the resurrection of the body. But the use of the word \pneumati\ (locative case) in contrast with \sarki\ starts Peter's mind off in a long comparison by way of illustration that runs from verses 19-22|. The following verses have caused more controversy than anything in the Epistle.

rwp@1Peter:3:21 @{Which also} (\ho kai\). Water just mentioned. {After a true likeness} (\antitupon\). Water in baptism now as an anti-type of Noah's deliverance by water. For \baptisma\ see on ¯Matthew:3:7|. For \antitupon\ see on ¯Hebrews:9:24| (only other N.T. example) where the word is used of the earthly tabernacle corresponding (\antitupa\) to the heavenly, which is the pattern (\tupon\ strkjv@Hebrews:8:5|) for the earthly. Songs:here baptism is presented as corresponding to (prefigured by) the deliverance of Noah's family by water. It is only a vague parallel, but not over-fanciful. {Doth now save you} (\humas nun s“zei\). Simplex verb (\s“z“\, not the compound \dias“z“\). The saving by baptism which Peter here mentions is only symbolic (a metaphor or picture as in strkjv@Romans:6:2-6|), not actual as Peter hastens to explain. {Not the putting away of the filth of the flesh} (\ou sarkos apothesis rupou\). \Apothesis\ is old word from \apotithˆmi\ (2:1|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Peter:1:14|. \Rupou\ (genitive of \rupos\) is old word (cf. \ruparos\, filthy, in strkjv@James:2:2; strkjv@Revelation:22:11|), here only in N.T. (cf. strkjv@Isaiah:3:3; strkjv@4:4|). Baptism, Peter explains, does not wash away the filth of the flesh either in a literal sense, as a bath for the body, or in a metaphorical sense of the filth of the soul. No ceremonies really affect the conscience (Hebrews:9:13f.|). Peter here expressly denies baptismal remission of sin. {But the interrogation of a good conscience toward God} (\alla suneidˆse“s agathˆs eper“tˆma eis theon\). Old word from \eper“ta“\ (to question as in strkjv@Mark:9:32; strkjv@Matthew:16:1|), here only in N.T. In ancient Greek it never means answer, but only inquiry. The inscriptions of the age of the Antonines use it of the Senate's approval after inquiry. That may be the sense here, that is, avowal of consecration to God after inquiry, having repented and turned to God and now making this public proclamation of that fact by means of baptism (the symbol of the previous inward change of heart). Thus taken, it matters little whether \eis theon\ (toward God) be taken with \eper“tˆma\ or \suneidˆse“s\. {Through the resurrection of Jesus Christ} (\di' anastase“s Iˆsou Christou\). For baptism is a symbolic picture of the resurrection of Christ as well as of our own spiritual renewal (Romans:6:2-6|). See strkjv@1:3| for regeneration made possible by the resurrection of Jesus.

rwp@1Peter:4:1 @{For as much then as Christ suffered in the flesh} (\Christou oun pathontos sarki\). Genitive absolute with second aorist active participle of \pasch“\, to suffer, and the locative case of \sarx\ (flesh). The \oun\ (then, therefore) draws and applies the main lesson of strkjv@3:18-22|, the fact that Christ suffered for us. {Arm ye yourselves also} (\kai humeis hoplisasthe\). Direct middle first aorist imperative of \hopliz“\, old verb from \hoplon\ (weapon, strkjv@John:18:3|), in metaphorical sense, here only in N.T. {With the same mind} (\tˆn autˆn ennoian\). Accusative of the thing (content), \ennoian\, old word (from \en, nous\), putting in mind, thinking, will, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:4:12|. "Here again _Christus Patiens_ is our \hupogrammos\" (Bigg). {For} (\hoti\). Reason for the exhortation. {Hath ceased from sin} (\pepautai hamartias\). Perfect middle indicative of \pau“\ to make cease and the ablative singular \hamartias\, but B reads the dative plural \hamartiais\ (cf. strkjv@Romans:6:1f.|). Temptation has lost its appeal and power with such a man.

rwp@1Peter:4:2 @{That ye no longer should live} (\eis to mˆketi bi“sai\). Purpose clause with \eis to\ (negative \mˆ\) and the first aorist (for the Attic second aorist \bi“nai\) active infinitive of \bio“\, old verb, to spend a life (from \bios\, course of life, strkjv@Luke:8:14|), here only in N.T. {The rest of your time in the flesh} (\ton epiloipon en sarki chronon\). Accusative of time (\chronon\, period of time). \Epiloipon\ is old adjective (\epi, loipos\, remaining in addition), here only in N.T. But \eis to\ here can be result (so that) as in strkjv@Romans:1:20; strkjv@4:18|.

rwp@1Timothy:1:10 @{For abusers of themselves with men} (\arsenokoitais\). Late compound for sodomites. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:6:9|. {Men-stealers} (\andrapodistais\). Old word from \andrapodiz“\ (from \anˆr\, man, \pous\, foot, to catch by the foot), to enslave. Songs:enslavers, whether kidnappers (men-stealers) of free men or stealers of the slaves of other men. Songs:slave-dealers. By the use of this word Paul deals a blow at the slave-trade (cf. Philemon). {Liars} (\pseustais\). Old word, see strkjv@Romans:3:4|. {False swearers} (\epiorkois\). Old word (\epi, orkos\, oath). Perjurers. Only here in N.T. For similar lists, see strkjv@1Corinthians:5:11; strkjv@6:9f.; strkjv@Galatians:5:19f.; strkjv@Romans:1:28f.; strkjv@13:13; strkjv@Colossians:3:5; strkjv@Ephesians:5:5; strkjv@2Timothy:3:2f|. {The sound doctrine} (\tˆi hugiainousˆi didaskaliƒi\). Dative case after \antikeitai\, for which verb see strkjv@Galatians:5:17| for the conflict between the Spirit and the flesh. "The healthful (\hugiain“\, old word for being well, as strkjv@Luke:5:31; strkjv@3John:1:2|, in figurative sense in N.T. only in the Pastorals) teaching." See strkjv@Titus:1:9; strkjv@2Timothy:4:3|.

rwp@2Corinthians:1:12 @{Glorying} (\kauchˆsis\). Act of glorying, while in verse 14| \kauchˆma\ is the thing boasted of. {The testimony of our conscience} (\to marturion tˆs suneidˆse“s hˆm“n\). In apposition with \kauchˆsis\. {Sincerity of God} (\eilikrineiƒi tou theou\). Like \dikaiosunˆ theou\ (Romans:1:17; strkjv@3:21|), the God-kind of righteousness. Songs:the God-kind (genitive case) of sincerity. Late word from \eilikrinˆs\. See on ¯1Corinthians:5:8|. {Not in fleshly wisdom} (\ouk en sophiƒi sarkikˆi\). See on ¯1Corinthians:1:17; strkjv@2:4,13f|. Paul uses \sarkikos\ five times and it occurs only twice elsewhere in N.T. See on ¯1Corinthians:3:3|. {We behaved ourselves} (\anestraphˆmen\). Second aorist passive indicative of \anastreph“\, old verb, to turn back, to turn back and forth, to walk. Here the passive is used as in late Greek as if middle. {More abundantly to you-ward} (\perissoter“s pros humas\). They had more abundant opportunity to observe how scrupulous Paul was (Acts:18:11|).

rwp@2Corinthians:3:3 @{An epistle of Christ} (\epistolˆ Christou\). He turns the metaphor round and round. They are Christ's letter to men as well as Paul's. {Not with ink} (\ou melani\). Instrumental case of \melas\, black. Plato uses \to melan\ for ink as here. See also strkjv@2John:1:12; strkjv@3John:1:13|. {Of stone} (\lithinais\). Composed of stone (\lithos\ and ending \-inos\). {Of flesh} (\sarkinais\). "Fleshen" as in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:1; strkjv@Romans:7:14|.

rwp@2Corinthians:4:16 @{Wherefore we faint not} (\dio ouk egkakoumen\). Repeats from verse 1|. {Our outward man} (\ho ex“ hˆm“n anthr“pos\), {our inward man} (\ho es“ hˆm“n\). In strkjv@Romans:7:22; strkjv@Colossians:3:9; strkjv@Ephesians:4:22f.|, we have the inward man and the outward for the higher and the lower natures (the spirit and the flesh). "Here the decay (\diaphtheiretai\) of the bodily organism is set over against the growth in grace (\anakainoutai\, is refreshed) of the man himself" (Bernard). Plato (_Republ_. ix, p. 589) has \ho entos anthr“pos\. Cf. "the hidden man of the heart" (1Peter:3:4|). {Day by day} (\hˆmerƒi kai hˆmerƒi\). This precise idiom is not in LXX nor rest of N.T. It may be colloquial use of locative in repetition.

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

rwp@2Corinthians:7:1 @{These promises} (\tautas tas epaggelias\). Songs:many and so precious (2Peter:2:4| \epaggelmata\; strkjv@Hebrews:11:39f.|). {Let us cleanse ourselves} (\katharis“men 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 hagiosunˆn\). 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@2Corinthians:10:2 @{I beseech} (\deomai\). Songs:here, but \parakal“\ in verse 1|. Perhaps, "I beg" suits the new turn here. {That I may not when present show courage} (\to mˆ par“n tharrˆsai\). Articular infinitive (aorist active of \tharre“\) in the accusative case with negative \mˆ\ the direct object of \deomai\. Literally, "I beg the not when present (\par“n\ nominative present participle agreeing with subject of \tharr“\ in spite of being in the accusative infinitive clause, \to mˆ tharrˆsai\) showing courage." The example of humility in Christ makes Paul drop "from magisterial exhortation to earnest entreaty" (Plummer). {As if we walked according to the flesh} (\h“s kata sarka peripatountas\). Another sneering charge as made plain by the use of \h“s\ with the participle for the alleged reason.

rwp@2Corinthians:10:3 @{In the flesh} (\en sarki\). But that is a very different thing from walking \kata sarka\ according to the standards of the flesh as his enemies charged. It is easy enough to make insinuations. {We war} (\strateuometha\). Literary plural again after \logizomai\ in verse 2|. Old word to lead an army (\stratos\). In N.T. only in the middle as here. Paul admits that he fights, but only the devil and his agents even if wearing the livery of heaven. Paul knew the Roman army well. He knows how to use the military metaphor.

rwp@2Corinthians:10:4 @{The weapons of our warfare} (\ta hopla tˆs strateias\). \Strateia\ (old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Timothy:1:18|) is {campaign} and not army as some MSS. have (\stratia\). But both \strateia\ and \stratia\ occur in the papyri for the same word (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 181f.). For \hopla\ (Latin _arma_) see on ¯6:7; Rom strkjv@6:13; strkjv@13:12|. {Of the flesh} (\sarkika\). See on ¯1Corinthians:3:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:12|. They had accused him of artifices and craft. {Mighty before God} (\dunata t“i the“i\). This dative of personal interest (ethical dative) can be like \asteios t“i the“i\ (Acts:7:20|), in God's eyes, as it looks to God. {To the casting down of strongholds} (\pros kathairesin ochur“mat“n\). \Kathairesis\ is old word from \kathaire“\, to take down, to tear down walls and buildings. Carries on the military metaphor. \Ochur“ma\ is old word, common in the Apocrypha, from \ochuro“\, to fortify, and that from \ochuros\ (from \ech“\, to hold fast). Nowhere else in N.T. In Cilicia the Romans had to tear down many rocky forts in their attacks on the pirates.

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

rwp@2Corinthians:11:18 @{After the flesh} (\kata sarka\). It is \kata sarka\ not \kata Kurion\. {I also} (\kag“\). But he knows that it is a bit of foolishness and not like Christ.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:7 @{By reason of the exceeding greatness} (\tˆi huperbolˆi\). Instrumental case, "by the excess." {That I should not be exalted overmuch} (\hina mˆ huperair“mai\). Present passive subjunctive in final clause of \huperair“\, old verb to lift up beyond, only here in N.T. This clause is repeated at the end of the sentence. {A thorn in the flesh} (\skolops tˆi sarki\). This old word is used for splinter, stake, thorn. In the papyri and inscriptions examples occur both for splinter and thorn as the meaning. In the LXX it is usually thorn. The case of \tˆi sarki\ can be either locative (in) or dative (for). What was it? Certainly it was some physical malady that persisted. All sorts of theories are held (malaria, eye-trouble, epilepsy, insomnia, migraine or sick-headache, etc.). It is a blessing to the rest of us that we do not know the particular affliction that so beset Paul. Each of us has some such splinter or thorn in the flesh, perhaps several at once. {Messenger of Satan} (\aggelos Satana\). Angel of Satan, the affliction personified. {Buffet} (\kolaphizˆi\). See on ¯Matthew:26:67; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:11| for this late and rare word from \kolaphos\, fist. The messenger of Satan kept slapping Paul in the face and Paul now sees that it was God's will for it to be so.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:9 @{He hath said} (\eirˆken\). Perfect active indicative, as if a final word. Paul probably still has the thorn in his flesh and needs this word of Christ. {Is sufficient} (\arkei\). Old word of rich meaning, perhaps kin to Latin _arceo_, to ward off against danger. Christ's grace suffices and abides. {Is perfected} (\teleitai\). Present passive indicative of \tele“\, to finish. It is linear in idea. Power is continually increased as the weakness grows. See strkjv@Phillipians:4:13| for this same noble conception. The human weakness opens the way for more of Christ's power and grace. {Most gladly rather} (\hˆdista mallon\). Two adverbs, one superlative (\hˆdista\), one comparative (\mallon\). "Rather" than ask any more (thrice already) for the removal of the thorn or splinter "most gladly will I glory in my weaknesses." Slowly Paul had learned this supreme lesson, but it will never leave him (Romans:5:2; strkjv@2Timothy:4:6-8|). {May rest upon me} (\episkˆn“sˆi ep' eme\). Late and rare verb in first aorist active subjunctive with \hina\ (final clause), to fix a tent upon, here upon Paul himself by a bold metaphor, as if the Shechinah of the Lord was overshadowing him (cf. strkjv@Luke:9:34|), the power (\dunamis\) of the Lord Jesus.

rwp@2John:1:7 @{Deceivers} (\planoi\). Late adjective (Diodorus, Josephus) meaning wandering, roving (1Timothy:4:1|). As a substantive in N.T. of Jesus (Matthew:27:63|), of Paul (2Corinthians:6:8|), and here. See the verb (\t“n planont“n humƒs\) in strkjv@1John:2:26| of the Gnostic deceivers as here and also of Jesus (John:7:12|). Cf. strkjv@1John:1:8|. {Are gone forth} (\exˆlthan\, alpha ending). Second aorist active indicative of \exerchomai\, perhaps an allusion to the crisis when they left the churches (1John:2:19|, same form). {Even they that confess not} (\hoi mˆ homologountes\). "The ones not confessing" (\mˆ\ regular negative with the participle). The articular participle describes the deceivers (\planoi\). {That Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh} (\Iˆsoun Christon erchomenon en sarki\). "Jesus Christ coming in the flesh." Present middle participle of \erchomai\ treating the Incarnation as a continuing fact which the Docetic Gnostics flatly denied. In strkjv@1John:4:2| we have \elˆluthota\ (perfect active participle) in this same construction with \homologe“\, because there the reference is to the definite historical fact of the Incarnation. There is no allusion here to the second coming of Christ. {This} (\houtos\). See strkjv@1John:2:18,22; strkjv@5:6,20|. {The deceiver and the antichrist} (\ho planos kai ho antichristos\). Article with each word, as in strkjv@Revelation:1:17|, to bring out sharply each separate phrase, though one individual is referred to. The one _par excellence_ in popular expectation (1John:2:22|), though many in reality (1John:2:18; strkjv@3John:1:7|).

rwp@2Peter:2:10 @{Chiefly} (\malista\). Especially. He turns now to the libertine heretics (verses 2,7|). {After the flesh} (\opis“ sarkos\). Hebraistic use of \opis“\ as with \hamarti“n\ (sins) in strkjv@Isaiah:65:2|. Cf. strkjv@Matthew:4:19; strkjv@1Timothy:5:15|. {Of defilement} (\miasmou\). Old word (from \miain“\ strkjv@Titus:1:15|), here only in N.T. {Despise dominion} (\kuriotˆtos kataphronountas\). \Kuriotˆs\ is late word for lordship (perhaps God or Christ) (from \Kurios\), in strkjv@Colossians:1:16; strkjv@Ephesians:1:21; strkjv@Jude:1:8|. Genitive case after \kataphrountas\ (thinking down on, strkjv@Matthew:6:24|). {Daring} (\tolmˆtai\). Old substantive (from \tolma“\, to dare), daring men, here only in N.T. {Self-willed} (\authadeis\). Old adjective (from \autos\ and \hˆdomai\), self-pleasing, arrogant, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Titus:1:7|. {They tremble not to rail at dignities} (\doxas ou tremousin blasphˆmountes\). "They tremble not blaspheming dignities." \Trem“\ is old verb (Mark:5:33|), used only in present as here and imperfect. Here with the complementary participle \blasphˆmountes\ rather than the infinitive \blasphˆmein\. See strkjv@Jude:1:8|. Perhaps these dignities (\doxas\) are angels (\evil\).

rwp@Acts:12:23 @{Smote him} (\epataxen auton\). Effective aorist active indicative of \patass“\, old verb, used already in verse 7| of gentle smiting of the angel of the Lord, here of a severe stroke of affliction. Like Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel:4:30|) pride went before a fall. He was struck down in the very zenith of his glory. {Because} (\anth' h“n\). \Anti\ with the genitive of the relative pronoun, "in return for which things." He accepted the impious flattery (Hackett) instead of giving God the glory. He was a nominal Jew. {He was eaten of worms} (\genomenos sk“lˆkobr“tos\). Ingressive aorist middle participle, "becoming worm-eaten." The compound verbal adjective (\sk“lˆx\, worm, \br“tos\, eaten, from \bibr“sk“\) is a late word (II Macc. strkjv@9:9) of the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, used also of a tree (Theophrastus), here only in the N.T. The word \sk“lˆx\ was used of intestinal worms and Herodotus (IV. 205) describes Pheretima, Queen of Cyrene, as having swarms of worms which ate her flesh while still alive. Josephus (_Ant_. XIX. 8, 2) says that Herod Agrippa lingered for five days and says that the rotting of his flesh produced worms, an item in harmony with the narrative in Luke. Josephus gives further details, one a superstitious sight of an owl sitting on one of the ropes of the awning of the theatre while the people flattered him, an omen of his death to him. Luke puts it simply that God smote him. {Gave up the ghost} (\exepsuxen\). Effective aorist active of \ekpsuch“\, to breathe out, late verb, medical term in Hippocrates, in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:5:5,10; strkjv@12:23|. Herod was carried out of the theatre a dying man and lingered only five days.

rwp@Acts:13:14 @{Passing through} (\dielthontes\). It is not clear why Paul and Barnabas left Perga so soon nor why they went to Antioch in Pisidia. Ramsay suggests malaria that spurred them on to the hills after the desertion of John Mark. They preached at Perga on the return (14:25|) and apparently hurried away now. Farrar thinks that the hot weather had driven the population to the hills. At any rate it is not difficult to imagine the perils of this climb over the rough mountain way from Perga to Pisidian Antioch to which Paul apparently refers in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:26|. {Sat down} (\ekathisan\). Ingressive aorist active indicative, took their seats as visiting Jews, possibly in the seats of the rabbis (J. Lightfoot). Whether they expected to be called on or not, they were given the opportunity as prominent visitors. The Pisidian Antioch was really in Phrygia, but towards Pisidia to distinguish it from Antioch on the Maeander (Ramsay, _Church in the Roman Empire_, p. 25). It was a colony like Philippi and so a free city. If Paul is referring to South Galatia and not North Galatia in strkjv@Galatians:4:13| when he says that his preaching in Galatia at first was due to illness, then it was probably here at Pisidian Antioch. What it was we have no means of knowing, though it was a temptation in his flesh to them so severe that they were willing to pluck out their eyes for him (Galatians:4:14f.|). Opthalmia, malaria, epilepsy have all been suggested as this stake in the flesh (2Corinthians:12:7|). But Paul was able to preach with power whatever his actual physical condition was.

rwp@Acts:22:3 @{I am a Jew} (\Eg“ eimi anˆr Ioudaios\). Note use of \Eg“\ for emphasis. Paul recounts his Jewish advantages or privileges with manifest pride as in strkjv@Acts:26:4f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:22; strkjv@Galatians:1:14; strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-7|. {Born} (\gegennˆmenos\). Perfect passive participle of \genna“\. See above in strkjv@21:39| for the claim of Tarsus as his birth-place. He was a Hellenistic Jew, not an Aramaean Jew (cf. strkjv@Acts:6:1|). {Brought up} (\anatethrammenos\). Perfect passive participle again of \anatreph“\, to nurse up, to nourish up, common old verb, but in the N.T. only here, strkjv@7:20ff.|, and MSS. in strkjv@Luke:4:16|. The implication is that Paul was sent to Jerusalem while still young, "from my youth" (26:4|), how young we do not know, possibly thirteen or fourteen years old. He apparently had not seen Jesus in the flesh (2Corinthians:5:16|). {At the feet of Gamaliel} (\pros tous podas Gamaliˆl\). The rabbis usually sat on a raised seat with the pupils in a circle around either on lower seats or on the ground. Paul was thus nourished in Pharisaic Judaism as interpreted by Gamaliel, one of the lights of Judaism. For remarks on Gamaliel see chapter strkjv@5:34ff|. He was one of the seven Rabbis to whom the Jews gave the highest title \Rabban\ (our Rabbi). \Rabbi\ (my teacher) was next, the lowest being \Rab\ (teacher). "As Aquinas among the schoolmen was called _Doctor Angelicus_, and Bonaventura _Doctor Seraphicus_, so Gamaliel was called _the Beauty of the Law_" (Conybeare and Howson). {Instructed} (\pepaideumenos\). Perfect passive participle again (each participle beginning a clause), this time of \paideu“\, old verb to train a child (\pais\) as in strkjv@7:22| which see. In this sense also in strkjv@1Timothy:1:20; strkjv@Titus:2:12|. Then to chastise as in strkjv@Luke:23:16,22| (which see); strkjv@2Timothy:2:25; strkjv@Hebrews:12:6f|. {According to the strict manner} (\kata akribeian\). Old word, only here in N.T. Mathematical accuracy, minute exactness as seen in the adjective in strkjv@26:5|. See also strkjv@Romans:10:2; Gal strkjv@1:4; strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-7|. {Of our fathers} (\patr“iou\). Old adjective from \pater\, only here and strkjv@24:14| in N.T. Means descending from father to son, especially property and other inherited privileges. \Patrikos\ (patrician) refers more to personal attributes and affiliations. {Being zealous for God} (\zˆl“tˆs huparch“n tou theou\). Not adjective, but substantive {zealot} (same word used by James of the thousands of Jewish Christians in Jerusalem, strkjv@21:20| which see) with objective genitive \tou theou\ (for God). See also verse 14; strkjv@28:17; strkjv@2Timothy:1:3| where he makes a similar claim. Songs:did Peter (Acts:3:13; strkjv@5:30|) and Stephen (7:32|). Paul definitely claims, whatever freedom he demanded for Gentile Christians, to be personally "a zealot for God" "even as ye all are this day" (\kath“s pantes humeis este sˆmeron\). In his conciliation he went to the limit and puts himself by the side of the mob in their zeal for the law, mistaken as they were about him. He was generous surely to interpret their fanatical frenzy as zeal for God. But Paul is sincere as he proceeds to show by appeal to his own conduct.

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

rwp@Info_Colossians @ PURPOSE OF THE EPISTLE Epaphras did not come in vain, for Paul was tremendously stirred by the peril to Christianity from the Gnostics (\hoi gn“stikoi\, the knowing ones). He had won his fight for freedom in Christ against the Judaizers who tried to fasten Jewish sacramentarianism upon spiritual Christianity. Now there is an equal danger of the dissipation of vital Christianity in philosophic speculation. In particular, the peril was keen concerning the Person of Christ when the Gnostics embraced Christianity and applied their theory of the universe to him. They split into factions on the subject of Christ. The Docetic (from \doke“\, to seem) Gnostics held that Jesus did not have a real human body, but only a phantom body. He was, in fact, an aeon and had no real humanity. The Cerinthian (followers of Cerinthus) Gnostics admitted the humanity of the man Jesus, but claimed that the Christ was an aeon that came on Jesus at his baptism in the form of a dove and left him on the Cross so that only the man Jesus died. At once this heresy sharpened the issue concerning the Person of Christ already set forth in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|. Paul met the issue squarely and powerfully portrayed his full-length portrait of Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Son of Man (both deity and humanity) in opposition to both types of Gnostics. Songs:then Colossians seems written expressly for our own day when so many are trying to rob Jesus Christ of his deity. The Gnostics took varying views of moral issues also as men do now. There were the ascetics with rigorous rules and the licentious element that let down all the bars for the flesh while the spirit communed with God. One cannot understand Colossians without some knowledge of Gnosticism such as may be obtained in such books as Angus's _The Mystery-Religions and Christianity_, Glover's _The Conflict of Religion in the Early Roman Empire_, Kennedy's St. _Paul and the Mystery-Religions_, Lightfoot's _Commentary on Colossians_.

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} (\apokatˆllaxen\). First aorist (effective, timeless) active indicative (a sort of parenthetical anacoluthon). Here B reads \apokatallagˆte\, be ye reconciled like \katallagˆte\ 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 t“i s“mati tˆs sarkos autou\). See the same combination in strkjv@2:11| though in strkjv@Ephesians:2:14| only \sarki\ (flesh). Apparently Paul combines both \s“ma\ 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} (\parastˆsai\). First aorist active (transitive) infinitive (of purpose) of \paristˆmi\, 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} (\am“mous\). Without spot (Phillipians:2:15|). Old word \a\ privative and \m“mos\ (blemish). Common in the LXX for ceremonial purifications. {Unreproveable} (\anegklˆtous\). 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" (\katen“pion autou\), right down in the eye of Christ the Judge of all.

rwp@Colossians:2:1 @{How greatly I strive} (\hˆlikon ag“na ech“\). Literally, "how great a contest I am having." The old adjectival relative \hˆlikos\ (like Latin _quantus_) is used for age or size in N.T. only here and strkjv@James:3:5| (twice, how great, how small). It is an inward contest of anxiety like the \merimna\ for all the churches (2Corinthians:11:28|). \Ag“na\ carries on the metaphor of \ag“nizomenos\ in strkjv@1:29|. {For them at Laodicea} (\t“n en Laodikiƒi\). {Supply} \huper\ as with \huper hum“n\. Paul's concern extended beyond Colossae to Laodicea (4:16|) and to Hierapolis (4:13|), the three great cities in the Lycus Valley where Gnosticism was beginning to do harm. Laodicea is the church described as lukewarm in strkjv@Revelation:3:14|. {For as many as have not seen my face} (\hosoi ouch heorakan to pros“pon mou\). The phrase undoubtedly includes Hierapolis (4:13|), and a few late MSS. actually insert it here. Lightfoot suggests that Hierapolis had not yet been harmed by the Gnostics as much as Colossae and Laodicea. Perhaps so, but the language includes all in that whole region who have not seen Paul's face in the flesh (that is, in person, and not in picture). How precious a real picture of Paul would be to us today. The antecedent to \hosoi\ is not expressed and it would be \tout“n\ after \huper\. The form \heorakan\ (perfect active indicative of \hora“\ instead of the usual \he“rakasin\ has two peculiarities \o\ in Paul's Epistles (1Corinthians:9:1|) instead of \“\ (see strkjv@John:1:18| for \he“raken\) and \-an\ by analogy in place of \-asin\, which short form is common in the papyri. See strkjv@Luke:9:36| \he“rakan\.

rwp@Colossians:2:11 @{Ye were also circumcised} (\kai perietmˆthˆte\). First aorist passive indicative of \peritemn“\, to circumcise. But used here as a metaphor in a spiritual sense as in strkjv@Romans:2:29| "the circumcision of the heart." {Not made with hands} (\acheiropoiˆt“i\). This late and rare negative compound verbal occurs only in the N.T. (Mark:14:58; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1; strkjv@Colossians:2:11|) by merely adding \a\ privative to the old verbal \cheiropoiˆtos\ (Acts:7:48; strkjv@Ephesians:2:11|), possibly first in strkjv@Mark:14:58| where both words occur concerning the temple. In strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1| the reference is to the resurrection body. The feminine form of this compound adjective is the same as the masculine. {In the putting off} (\en tˆi apekdusei\). As if an old garment (the fleshly body). From \apekduomai\ (Colossians:2:15|, possibly also coined by Paul) and occurring nowhere else so far as known. The word is made in a perfectly normal way by the perfective use of the two Greek prepositions (\apo, ek\), "a resource available for and generally used by any real thinker writing Greek" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Paul had as much right to mint a Greek compound as any one and surely no one ever had more ideas to express and more power in doing it. {Of Christ} (\tou Christou\). Specifying genitive, the kind of circumcision that belongs to Christ, that of the heart.

rwp@Colossians:2:13 @{And you} (\kai humas\). Emphatic position, object of the verb \sunez“opoiˆsen\ (did he quicken) and repeated (second \humƒs\). You Gentiles as he explains. {Being dead through your trespasses} (\nekrous ontas tois parapt“masin\). Moral death, of course, as in strkjv@Romans:6:11; strkjv@Ephesians:2:1,5|. Correct text does not have \en\, but even so \parapt“masin\ (from \parapipt“\, to fall beside or to lapse, strkjv@Hebrews:6:6|), a lapse or misstep as in strkjv@Matthew:6:14; strkjv@Romans:5:15-18; strkjv@Galatians:6:1|, can be still in the locative, though the instrumental makes good sense also. {And the uncircumcision of your flesh} (\kai tˆi akroboustiƒi tˆs sarkos hum“n\). "Dead in your trespasses and your alienation from God, of which the uncircumcision of your flesh was a symbol" (Abbott). Clearly so, "the uncircumcision" used merely in a metaphorical sense. {Did he quicken together with him} (\sunez“opoiˆsen sun aut“i\). First aorist active indicative of the double compound verb \sunz“opoie“\, to make alive (\z“os, poie“\) with (\sun\, repeated also with \aut“i\, associative instrumental), found only here and in strkjv@Ephesians:2:5|, apparently coined by Paul for this passage. Probably \theos\ (God) is the subject because expressly so stated in strkjv@Ephesians:2:4f.| and because demanded by \sun aut“i\ here referring to Christ. This can be true even if Christ be the subject of \ˆrken\ in verse 14|. {Having forgiven us} (\charisamenos hˆmin\). First aorist middle participle of \charizomai\, common verb from \charis\ (favour, grace). Dative of the person common as in strkjv@3:13|. The act of forgiving is simultaneous with the quickening, though logically antecedent.

rwp@Colossians:2:23 @{Which things} (\hatina\). "Which very things," these ascetic regulations. {Have indeed a show of wisdom} (\estin logon men echonta sophias\). Periphrastic present indicative with \estin\ in the singular, but present indicative \echonta\ in the plural (\hatina\). \Logon sophias\ is probably "the repute of wisdom" (Abbott) like Plato and Herodotus. \Men\ (in deed) has no corresponding \de\. {In will-worship} (\en ethelothrˆskiƒi\). This word occurs nowhere else and was probably coined by Paul after the pattern of \ethelodouleia\, to describe the voluntary worship of angels (see strkjv@2:18|). {And humility} (\kai tapeinophrosunˆi\). Clearly here the bad sense, "in mock humility." {And severity to the body} (\kai apheidiƒi s“matos\). Old word (Plato) from \apheidˆs\, unsparing (\a\ privative, \pheidomai\, to spare). Here alone in N.T. Ascetics often practice flagellations and other hardnesses to the body. {Not of any value} (\ouk en timˆi tini\). \Timˆ\ usually means honour or price. {Against the indulgence of the flesh} (\pros plˆsmonˆn tˆs sarkos\). These words are sharply debated along with \timˆ\ just before. It is not unusual for \pros\ to be found in the sense of "against" rather than "with" or "for." See \pros\ in sense of {against} in strkjv@3:13; strkjv@Ephesians:6:11f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:6:1|. \Plˆsmonˆ\ is an old word from \pimplˆmi\, to fill and means satiety. It occurs here only in the N.T. Peake is inclined to agree with Hort and Haupt that there is a primitive corruption here. But the translation in the Revised Version is possible and it is true that mere rules do not carry us very far in human conduct as every father or mother knows, though we must have some regulations in family and state and church. But they are not enough of themselves.

rwp@Colossians:3:5 @{Mortify} (\nekr“sate\). First aorist active imperative of \nekro“\, late verb, to put to death, to treat as dead. Latin Vulgate _mortifico_, but "mortify" is coming with us to mean putrify. Paul boldly applies the metaphor of death (2:20; strkjv@3:3|) pictured in baptism (2:12|) to the actual life of the Christian. He is not to go to the other Gnostic extreme of license on the plea that the soul is not affected by the deeds of the body. Paul's idea is that the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit (1Corinthians:6:19|). He mentions some of these "members upon the earth" like fornication (\porneian\), uncleanness (\akatharsian\), passion (\pathos\), evil desire (\epithumian kakˆn\), covetousness (\pleonexian\) "the which is idolatry" (\hˆtis estin eid“lolatria\). See the longer list of the works of the flesh in Gal strkjv@5:19-21|, though covetousness is not there named, but it is in strkjv@Ephesians:4:19; strkjv@5:5|.

rwp@Colossians:3:6 @{Cometh the wrath of God} (\erchetai hˆ orgˆ tou theou\). Paul does not regard these sins of the flesh as matters of indifference, far otherwise. Many old MSS. do not have "upon the sons of disobedience," genuine words in strkjv@Ephesians:5:6|.

rwp@Colossians:3:22 @{Your masters according to the flesh} (\tois kata sarka kuriois\). "Lords" really, but these Christian slaves (\douloi\) had Christ as lord, but even so they were to obey their lords in the flesh. {Not with eye-service} (\mˆ en ophthalmodouliais\). Another Pauline word (here only and strkjv@Ephesians:6:6|), elsewhere only in Christian writers after Paul, an easy and expressive compound, service while the master's eye was on the slave and no longer. {Men-pleasers} (\anthr“pareskoi\). Late compound only in LXX and Paul (here and strkjv@Ephesians:6:6|). {In singleness of heart} (\en haplotˆti kardias\). Songs:in strkjv@Ephesians:6:5|. Old and expressive word from \haplous\ (simple, without folds). See strkjv@2Corinthians:11:3|. {Fearing the Lord} (\phoboumenoi ton Kurion\). Rather than the lords according to the flesh.

rwp@Ephesians:2:3 @{We also all} (\kai hˆmeis pantes\). We Jews. {Once lived} (\anestraphˆmen pote\). Second aorist passive indicative of \anastreph“\, old verb, to turn back and forth, to live (2Corinthians:1:12|). Cf. \pote periepatˆsate\, of the Gentiles in verse 2|. {The desires} (\ta thelˆmata\). Late and rare word except in LXX and N.T., from \thel“\, to will, to wish. Plural here "the wishes," "the wills" of the flesh like \tais epithumiais tˆs sarkos\ just before. Gentiles had no monopoly of such sinful impulses. {Of the mind} (\t“n dianoi“n\). Plural again, "of the thoughts or purposes." {Were by nature children of wrath} (\ˆmetha tekna phusei orgˆs\). This is the proper order of these words which have been the occasion of much controversy. There is no article with \tekna\. Paul is insisting that Jews as well as Gentiles ("even as the rest") are the objects of God's wrath (\orgˆs\) because of their lives of sin. See strkjv@Romans:2:1-3:20| for the full discussion of this to Jews unpalatable truth. The use of \phusei\ (associative instrumental case of manner) is but the application of Paul's use of "all" (\pantes\) as shown also in strkjv@Romans:3:20; strkjv@5:12|. See \phusei\ of Gentiles in strkjv@Romans:2:14|. The implication of original sin is here, but not in the form that God's wrath rests upon little children before they have committed acts of sin. The salvation of children dying before the age of responsibility is clearly involved in strkjv@Romans:5:13f|.

rwp@Ephesians:2:15 @{Having abolished} (\katargˆsas\). First aorist active participle of \katarge“\, to make null and void. {The enmity} (\tˆn echthran\). But it is very doubtful if \tˆn echthran\ (old word from \echthros\, hostile, strkjv@Luke:23:12|) is the object of \katargˆsas\. It looks as if it is in apposition with to \mesotoichon\ and so the further object of \lusas\. The enmity between Jew and Gentile was the middle wall of partition. And then it must be decided whether "in his flesh" (\en tˆi sarki autou\) should be taken with \lusas\ and refer especially to the Cross (Colossians:1:22|) or be taken with \katargˆsas\. Either makes sense, but better sense with \lusas\. Certainly "the law of commandments in ordinances (\ton nomon t“n entol“n en dogmasin\) is governed by \katargˆsas\. {That he might create} (\hina ktisˆi\). Final clause with first aorist active subjunctive of \ktiz“\. {The twain} (\tous duo\). The two men (masculine here, neuter in verse 14|), Jew and Gentile. {One new man} (\eis hena kainon anthr“pon\). Into one fresh man (Colossians:3:9-11|) "in himself" (\en haut“i\). Thus alone is it possible. {Making peace} (\poi“n eirˆnˆn\). Thus alone can it be done. Christ is the peace-maker between men, nations, races, classes.

rwp@Ephesians:5:30 @{Of his flesh and of his bones} (\ek tˆs sarkos autou kai ek t“n oste“n autou\). These words are in the Textus Receptus (Authorized Version) supported by D G L P cursives Syriac, etc., though wanting in Aleph A B 17 Bohairic. Certainly not genuine.

rwp@Galatians:1:16 @{To reveal his Son in me} (\apokalupsai ton huion autou en emoi\). By "in me" (\en emoi\) Paul can mean to lay emphasis on his inward experience of grace or he may refer objectively to the vision of Christ on the way to Damascus, "in my case." Paul uses \en emoi\ in this sense (in my case) several times (verse 24; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:3; strkjv@Phillipians:1:30; strkjv@1Timothy:1:16|). Once (1Corinthians:14:11|) \en emoi\ is almost equivalent to the dative (to me). On the whole Lightfoot seems correct here in taking it to mean "in my case," though the following words suit either idea. Certainly Paul could not preach Christ among the Gentiles without the rich inward experience and in the objective vision he was called to that task. {I conferred not with flesh and blood} (\ou prosanethemˆn sarki kai haimati\). Second aorist middle indicative of \prosanatithˆmi\, old verb, double compound (\pros, ana\), to lay upon oneself in addition, to betake oneself to another, to confer with, dative case as here. In N.T. only here and strkjv@2:6|.

rwp@Galatians:3:3 @{Are ye now perfected in the flesh?} (\nun sarki epiteleisthe?\). Rather middle voice as in strkjv@1Peter:5:9|, finishing of yourselves. There is a double contrast, between \enarxamenoi\ (having begun) and \epiteleisthe\ (finishing) as in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:6; strkjv@Phillipians:1:6|, and also between "Spirit" (\pneumati\) and flesh (\sarki\). There is keen irony in this thrust.

rwp@Galatians:4:13 @{Because of an infirmity of the flesh} (\di' astheneian tˆs sarkos\). All that we can get from this statement is the fact that Paul's preaching to the Galatians "the first time" or "the former time" (\to proteron\, adverbial accusative) was due to sickness of some kind whether it was eye trouble (4:15|) which was a trial to them or to the thorn in the flesh (2Corinthians:12:7|) we do not know. It can be interpreted as applying to North Galatia or to South Galatia if he had an attack of malaria on coming up from Perga. But the narrative in strkjv@Acts:13; 14| does not read as if Paul had planned to pass by Pisidia and by Lycaonia but for the attack of illness. The Galatians understood the allusion for Paul says "Ye know" (\oidate\).

rwp@Galatians:4:14 @{A temptation to you in my flesh} (\ton peirasmon hum“n en tˆi sarki mou\). "Your temptation (or trial) in my flesh." Peirasmon can be either as we see in strkjv@James:1:2,12ff|. If trial here, it was a severe one. {Nor rejected} (\oude exeptusate\). First aorist active indicative of \ekptu“\, old word to spit out (Homer), to spurn, to loathe. Here only in N.T. Clemen (_Primitive Christianity_, p. 342) thinks it should be taken literally here since people spat out as a prophylactic custom at the sight of invalids especially epileptics. But Plutarch uses it of mere rejection. {As an angel of God} (\h“s aggelon theou\), {as Christ Jesus} (\h“s Christon Iˆsoun\). In spite of his illness and repulsive appearance, whatever it was. Not a mere "messenger" of God, but a very angel, even as Christ Jesus. We know that at Lystra Paul was at first welcomed as Hermes the god of oratory (Acts:14:12f.|). But that narrative hardly applies to these words, for they turned against Paul and Barnabas then and there at the instigation of Jews from Antioch in Pisidia and Iconium.

rwp@Galatians:4:23 @{Is born} (\gegennˆtai\). Perfect passive indicative of \genna“\, stand on record so. {Through promise} (\di' epaggelias\). In addition to being "after the flesh" (\kata sarka\).

rwp@Galatians:5:13 @{Ye were called for freedom} (\ep' eleutheriƒi eklˆthˆte\). The same point as in strkjv@5:1| made plainer by the use of \ep'\ (on the basis of, for the purpose of). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:7| for this use of \epi\. {Only use not} (\monon mˆ\). No word for "use" in the Greek. Probably supply \trepete\ or \strephete\, "turn not your liberty into an occasion for the flesh" (\eis aphormˆn tˆi sarki\), as a spring board for license. On \aphormˆ\, see on ¯2Corinthians:5:12|. Liberty so easily turns to license.

rwp@Galatians:5:16 @{Ye shall not fulfil} (\ou mˆ telesˆte\). Rather, "Ye will not fulfil." Strong double negative with aorist active subjunctive. {The lust of the flesh} (\epithumian sarkos\). Bad sense here as usual in Paul, but not so in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:17; strkjv@Phillipians:1:23|. The word is just craving or longing (from \epi, thumos\, yearning after).

rwp@Galatians:5:18 @{Under the law} (\hupo nomon\). Instead of "under the flesh" as one might expect. See strkjv@Galatians:3:2-6| for contrast between law and spirit. The flesh made the law weak (Rom strkjv@8:3; strkjv@Hebrews:9:10,13|). They are one and the same in result. See same idea in strkjv@Romans:8:14|. Note present tense of \agesthe\ (if you are continually led by the Spirit). See verse 23|.

rwp@Galatians:5:24 @{Crucified the flesh} (\tˆn sarka estaur“san\). Definite event, first aorist active indicative of \stauro“\ as in strkjv@2:19| (mystical union with Christ). Paul uses \sarx\ here in the same sense as in verses 16,17,19|, "the force in men that makes for evil" (Burton). {With} (\sun\). "Together with," emphasizing "the completeness of the extermination of this evil force" and the guarantee of victory over one's passions and dispositions toward evil.

rwp@Galatians:6:8 @{Corruption} (\phthoran\). For this old word from \phtheir“\, see on ¯1Corinthians:15:42|. The precise meaning turns on the context, here plainly the physical and moral decay or rottenness that follows sins of the flesh as all men know. Nature writes in one's body the penalty of sin as every doctor knows. {Eternal life} (\z“ˆn ai“nion\). See on ¯Matthew:25:46| for this interesting phrase so common in the Johannine writings. Plato used \ai“nios\ for perpetual. See also strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:9|. It comes as nearly meaning "eternal" as the Greek can express that idea.

rwp@Hebrews:2:14 @{Are sharers in flesh and blood} (\kekoin“nˆken haimatos kai sarkos\). The best MSS. read "blood and flesh." The verb is perfect active indicative of \koin“ne“\, old verb with the regular genitive, elsewhere in the N.T. with the locative (Romans:12:13|) or with \en\ or \eis\. "The children have become partners (\koin“noi\) in blood and flesh." {Partook} (\metesche\). Second aorist active indicative of \metech“\, to have with, a practical synonym for \koin“ne“\ and with the genitive also (\t“n aut“n\). That he might bring to nought (\hina katargˆsˆi\). Purpose of the incarnation clearly stated with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \katarge“\, old word to render idle or ineffective (from \kata, argos\), causative verb (25 times in Paul), once in Luke (Luke:13:7|), once in Hebrews (here). "By means of death" (his own death) Christ broke the power (\kratos\) of the devil over death (paradoxical as it seems), certainly in men's fear of death and in some unexplained way Satan had sway over the realm of death (Zechariah:3:5f.|). Note the explanatory \tout' estin\ (that is) with the accusative after it as before it. In strkjv@Revelation:12:7| Satan is identified with the serpent in Eden, though it is not done in the Old Testament. See strkjv@Romans:5:12; strkjv@John:8:44; strkjv@14:30; strkjv@16:11; strkjv@1John:3:12|. Death is the devil's realm, for he is the author of sin. "Death as death is no part of the divine order" (Westcott).

rwp@Hebrews:5:7 @{In the days of his flesh} (\en tais hˆmerais tˆs sarkos autou\). Here (verses 7-9|) the author turns to the other requirement of a high priest (human sympathy). Since Jesus was "without sin" (4:15|) he did not have to offer sacrifices "for himself," yet in all other points he felt the sympathy of the human high priest, even more so by reason of his victory over sin. {Having offered up} (\prosenegkas\). Second aorist active (\-a\ form) participle of \prospher“\ (cf. verse 3|). An allusion to the Agony of Christ in Gethsemane. {Supplications} (\hiketˆrias\). Socrates, Polybius, Job:(Job:40:22|) combine this word with \deˆseis\ (prayers) as here. The older form was \hikesia\. The word \hiketˆrios\ is an adjective from \hiketˆs\ (a suppliant from \hik“\, to come to one) and suggests one coming with an olive-branch (\elaia\). Here only in the N.T. {With strong crying and tears} (\meta kraugˆs ischuras kai dakru“n\). See strkjv@Luke:22:44f|. for a picture of the scene in Gethsemane (anguish and pathos). No doubt the writer has in mind other times when Jesus shed tears (John:11:35; strkjv@Luke:19:41|), but Gethsemane chiefly. {To save him from death} (\s“zein ek thanatou\). A reference to the cry of Jesus in Gethsemane (Matthew:26:39|). {Having been heard for his godly fear} (\eisakoustheis apo tˆs eulabeias\). Old word from \eulabˆs\ (taking hold well, strkjv@Luke:2:25| from \eu, lamban“\, the verb \eulabeomai\ in N.T. only in strkjv@Hebrews:11:7|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@12:28|. Fine picture of Christ's attitude toward the Father in the prayer in Gethsemane and in all his prayers. Jesus in Gethsemane at once surrendered his will to that of the Father who heard his plea and enabled him to acquiesce in the Father's will.

rwp@Hebrews:7:16 @{Carnal} (\sarkinˆs\). "Fleshen" as in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:1|, not \sarkikˆs\ (fleshlike, strkjv@1Corinthians:3:3|). The Levitical priests became so merely by birth. {Of an endless life} (\z“ˆs akatalutou\). Late compound (alpha privative and verbal adjective from \katalu“\, to dissolve, as in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:1|), indissoluble. Jesus as priest lives on forever. He is Life.

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} (\damale“s\). 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 (\katharotˆta\, old word here only in N.T.) of the flesh," but not for the conscience (verse 9|). The cow was \am“mon\, the individual \katharos\.

rwp@Hebrews:10:20 @{By the way which he dedicated for us} (\hˆn enekainisen hˆmin hodon\). This "new" (\prosphaton\, freshly killed, newly made, from \pros\ and the root of \phatos\, in the papyri, only here in N.T.) and "living" (\z“san\) Jesus opened ("dedicated") for us by his Incarnation and Death for us. Thus he fulfilled God's promise of the "New Covenant" (8:7-13|) in Jeremiah. The language is highly symbolic here and "through the veil" here is explained as meaning the flesh of Christ, his humanity, not the veil opening into heaven (6:20|). Some do take "veil" here as obscuring the deity of Christ rather than the revelation of God in the human body of Christ (John:1:18; strkjv@14:9|). At any rate because of the coming of Christ in the flesh we have the new way opened for access to God (Hebrews:2:17f.; strkjv@4:16|).

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

rwp@Info_John @ A PERSONAL WITNESS It is manifest all through the book that the writer is the witness who is making the contribution of his personal knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ during his earthly ministry. In strkjv@John:1:14| he plainly says that "the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory" (\etheasametha tˆn doxan autou\). He here associates others with him in this witness to the glory of the Word, but in strkjv@John:21:25| he employs the singular "I suppose" (\oimai\) in sharp dis- tinction from the plural "we know" (\oidamen\) just before. The writer is present in nearly all the scenes described. The word witness (\marture“, marturia\) so common in this Gospel (John:1:7,8,19; strkjv@3:11,26,33; strkjv@5:31; strkjv@12:17; strkjv@21:24|, etc.) illustrates well this point of view. In the Gospel of Luke we have the work of one who was not a personal witness of Christ (Luke:1:1-4|). In the Gospel of Matthew we possess either the whole work of a personal follower and apostle or at least the Logia of Matthew according to Papias preserved in it. In Mark's Gospel we have as the basis the preaching of Simon Peter as preserved by his interpreter John Mark. John's Gospel claims to be the personal witness of "the disciple whom Jesus loved" and as such deserves and has received exceptional esteem. One may note all through the book evidences of an eye-witness in the vivid details.

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

rwp@John:1:14 @{And the Word became flesh} (\kai ho logos sarx egeneto\). See verse 3| for this verb and note its use for the historic event of the Incarnation rather than \ˆn\ of verse 1|. Note also the absence of the article with the predicate substantive \sarx\, so that it cannot mean "the flesh became the Word." The Pre-existence of the Logos has already been plainly stated and argued. John does not here say that the Logos entered into a man or dwelt in a man or filled a man. One is at liberty to see an allusion to the birth narratives in strkjv@Matthew:1:16-25; strkjv@Luke:1:28-38|, if he wishes, since John clearly had the Synoptics before him and chiefly supplemented them in his narrative. In fact, one is also at liberty to ask what intelligent meaning can one give to John's language here apart from the Virgin Birth? What ordinary mother or father ever speaks of a child "becoming flesh"? For the Incarnation see also strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Galatians:4:4; strkjv@Romans:1:3; strkjv@8:3; strkjv@Phillipians:2:7f.; strkjv@1Timothy:3:16; strkjv@Hebrews:2:14|. "To explain the exact significance of \egeneto\ in this sentence is beyond the powers of any interpreter" (Bernard). Unless, indeed, as seems plain, John is referring to the Virgin Birth as recorded in Matthew and Luke. "The Logos of philosophy is, John declares, the Jesus of history" (Bernard). Thus John asserts the deity and the real humanity of Christ. He answers the Docetic Gnostics who denied his humanity. {Dwelt among us} (\eskˆn“sen en hˆmin\). First aorist ingressive aorist active indicative of \skˆno“\, old verb, to pitch one's tent or tabernacle (\skˆnos\ or \skˆnˆ\), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:7-15; strkjv@12:12; strkjv@13:6; strkjv@21:3|. In Revelation it is used of God tabernacling with men and here of the Logos tabernacling, God's Shekinah glory here among us in the person of his Son. {We beheld his glory} (\etheasametha tˆn doxan autou\). First aorist middle indicative of \theaomai\ (from \thea\, spectacle). The personal experience of John and of others who did recognize Jesus as the Shekinah glory (\doxa\) of God as James, the brother of Jesus, so describes him (James:2:1|). John employs \theaomai\ again in strkjv@1:32| (the Baptist beholding the Spirit coming down as a dove) and strkjv@1:38| of the Baptist gazing in rapture at Jesus. Songs:also strkjv@4:35; strkjv@11:45; strkjv@1John:1:1f.; strkjv@4:12,14|. By this word John insists that in the human Jesus he beheld the Shekinah glory of God who was and is the Logos who existed before with God. By this plural John speaks for himself and all those who saw in Jesus what he did. {As of the only begotten from the Father} (\h“s monogenous para patros\). Strictly, "as of an only born from a father," since there is no article with \monogenous\ or with \patros\. In strkjv@John:3:16; strkjv@1John:4:9| we have \ton monogenˆ\ referring to Christ. This is the first use in the Gospel of \patˆr\ of God in relation to the Logos. \Monogenˆs\ (only born rather than only begotten) here refers to the eternal relationship of the Logos (as in strkjv@1:18|) rather than to the Incarnation. It distinguishes thus between the Logos and the believers as children (\tekna\) of God. The word is used of human relationships as in strkjv@Luke:7:12; strkjv@8:42; strkjv@9:38|. It occurs also in the LXX and strkjv@Hebrews:11:17|, but elsewhere in N.T. only in John's writings. It is an old word in Greek literature. It is not clear whether the words \para patros\ (from the Father) are to be connected with \monogenous\ (cf. strkjv@6:46; strkjv@7:29|, etc.) or with \doxan\ (cf. strkjv@5:41,44|). John clearly means to say that "the manifested glory of the Word was as it were the glory of the Eternal Father shared with His only Son" (Bernard). Cf. strkjv@8:54; strkjv@14:9; strkjv@17:5|. {Full} (\plˆrˆs\). Probably indeclinable accusative adjective agreeing with \doxan\ (or genitive with \monogenous\) of which we have papyri examples (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 275). As nominative \plˆrˆs\ can agree with the subject of \eskˆn“sen\. {Of grace and truth} (\charitos kai alˆtheias\). Curiously this great word \charis\ (grace), so common with Paul, does not occur in John's Gospel save in strkjv@1:14,16,17|, though \alˆtheia\ (truth) is one of the keywords in the Fourth Gospel and in 1John, occurring 25 times in the Gospel and 20 in the Johannine Epistles, 7 times in the Synoptics and not at all in Revelation (Bernard). In strkjv@1:17| these two words picture the Gospel in Christ in contrast with the law of Moses. See Epistles of Paul for origin and use of both words.

rwp@John:1:18 @{No man hath seen God at any time} (\theon oudeis he“raken p“pote\). "God no one has ever seen." Perfect active indicative of \hora“\. Seen with the human physical eye, John means. God is invisible (Exodus:33:20; strkjv@Deuteronomy:4:12|). Paul calls God \aoratos\ (Colossians:1:15; strkjv@1Timothy:1:17|). John repeats the idea in strkjv@John:5:37; strkjv@6:46|. And yet in strkjv@14:7| Jesus claims that the one who sees him has seen the Father as here. {The only begotten Son} (\ho monogenˆs huios\). This is the reading of the Textus Receptus and is intelligible after \h“s monogenous para patros\ in verse 14|. But the best old Greek manuscripts (Aleph B C L) read \monogenˆs theos\ (God only begotten) which is undoubtedly the true text. Probably some scribe changed it to \ho monogenˆs huios\ to obviate the blunt statement of the deity of Christ and to make it like strkjv@3:16|. But there is an inner harmony in the reading of the old uncials. The Logos is plainly called \theos\ in verse 1|. The Incarnation is stated in verse 14|, where he is also termed \monogenˆs\. He was that before the Incarnation. Songs:he is "God only begotten," "the Eternal Generation of the Son" of Origen's phrase. {Which is in the bosom of the Father} (\ho “n eis ton kolpon tou patros\). The eternal relation of the Son with the Father like \pros ton theon\ in verse 1|. In strkjv@3:13| there is some evidence for \ho “n en t“i ouran“i\ used by Christ of himself while still on earth. The mystic sense here is that the Son is qualified to reveal the Father as Logos (both the Father in Idea and Expression) by reason of the continual fellowship with the Father. {He} (\ekinos\). Emphatic pronoun referring to the Son. {Hath declared him} (\exˆgˆsato\). First aorist (effective) middle indicative of \exˆgeomai\, old verb to lead out, to draw out in narrative, to recount. Here only in John, though once in Luke's Gospel (24:35|) and four times in Acts:(10:8; strkjv@15:12,14; strkjv@21:19|). This word fitly closes the Prologue in which the Logos is pictured in marvellous fashion as the Word of God in human flesh, the Son of God with the Glory of God in him, showing men who God is and what he is.

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

rwp@John:3:6 @{That which is born} (\to gegennˆmenon\). Perfect passive articular participle. The sharp contrast between flesh (\sarx\) and Spirit (\pneuma\), drawn already in strkjv@1:13|, serves to remind Nicodemus of the crudity of his question in strkjv@3:4| about a second physical birth.

rwp@John:6:51 @{The living bread} (\ho artos ho z“n\). "The bread the living." Repetition of the claim in 35,41,48|, but with a slight change from \z“ˆs\ to \z“n\ (present active participle of \za“\). It is alive and can give life. See strkjv@4:10| for living water. In strkjv@Revelation:1:17| Jesus calls himself the Living One (\ho z“n\). {For ever} (\eis ton ai“na\). Eternally like \ai“nion\ with \z“ˆn\ in 47|. {I shall give} (\eg“ d“s“\). Emphasis on \eg“\ (I). Superior so to Moses. {Is my flesh} (\hˆ sarx mou estin\). See on ¯1:14| for \sarx\ the Incarnation. This new idea creates far more difficulty to the hearers who cannot grasp Christ's idea of self-sacrifice. {For the life of the world} (\huper tˆs tou kosmou z“ˆs\). Over, in behalf of, \huper\ means, and in some connexions instead of as in strkjv@11:50|. See strkjv@1:30| for the Baptist's picture of Christ as the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. See also strkjv@3:17; strkjv@4:42; strkjv@1John:3:16; strkjv@Matthew:20:28; strkjv@Galatians:3:13; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14f.; strkjv@Romans:5:8|. Jesus has here presented to this Galilean multitude the central fact of his atoning death for the spiritual life of the world.

rwp@John:6:52 @{Strove} (\emachonto\). Imperfect (inchoative) middle of \machomai\, to fight in armed combat (Acts:7:26|), then to wage a war of words as here and strkjv@2Timothy:2:24|. They were already murmuring (41|), now they began bitter strife with one another over the last words of Jesus (43-51|), some probably seeing a spiritual meaning in them. There was division of opinion about Jesus in Jerusalem also later (7:12,40; strkjv@9:16; strkjv@10:19|). {How can?} (\P“s dunatai;\). The very idiom used by Nicodemus in strkjv@3:4,9|. Here scornful disbelief. {This man} (\houtos\). Contemptuous use pictured in verse 42|. {His flesh to eat} (\tˆn sarka autou phagein\). As if we were cannibals! Some MSS. do not have \autou\, but the meaning is clear. The mystical appropriation of Christ by the believer (Galatians:2:20; strkjv@Ephesians:3:17|) they could not comprehend, though some apparently were against this literal interpretation of "flesh" (\sarx\).

rwp@John:6:63 @{That quickeneth} (\to z“opoioun\). Articular present active participle of \z“opoie“\ for which see strkjv@5:21|. For the contrast between \pneuma\ (spirit) and \sarx\ (flesh) see already strkjv@3:6|. {The words} (\ta rˆmata\). Those in this discourse (I have just spoken, \lelalˆka\), for they are the words of God (3:34; strkjv@8:47; strkjv@17:8|). No wonder they "are spirit and are life" (\pneuma estin kai z“ˆ estin\). The breath of God and the life of God is in these words of Jesus. Never man spoke like Jesus (7:46|). There is life in his words today.

rwp@Jude:1:7 @{Even as} (\h“s\). Just "as." The third instance (Jude:passes by the deluge) in Jude, the cities of the plain. {The cities about them} (\hai peri autas poleis\). These were also included, Admah and Zeboiim (Deuteronomy:29:23; strkjv@Hosea:11:8|). Zoar, the other city, was spared. {In like manner} (\ton homoion tropon\). Adverbial accusative (cf. \h“s\). Like the fallen angels. {Having given themselves over to fornication} (\ekporneusasai\). First aorist active participle feminine plural of \ekporneu“\, late and rare compound (perfective use of \ek\, outside the moral law), only here in N.T., but in LXX (Genesis:38:24; strkjv@Exodus:34:15f.|, etc.). Cf. \aselgeian\ in verse 4|. {Strange flesh} (\sarkos heteras\). Horrible licentiousness, not simply with women not their wives or in other nations, but even unnatural uses (Romans:1:27|) for which the very word "sodomy" is used (Genesis:19:4-11|). The pronoun \heteras\ (other, strange) is not in strkjv@2Peter:2:10|. {Are set forth} (\prokeintai\). Present middle indicative of \prokeimai\, old verb, to lie before, as in strkjv@Hebrews:12:1f|. {As an example} (\deigma\). Predicate nominative of \deigma\, old word (from \deiknumi\ to show), here only in N.T., sample, specimen. strkjv@2Peter:2:6| has \hupodeigma\ (pattern). {Suffering} (\hupechousai\). Present active participle of \hupech“\, old compound, to hold under, often with \dikˆn\ (right, justice, sentence strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:9|) to suffer sentence (punishment), here only in N.T. {Of eternal fire} (\puros ai“niou\). Like \desmois aidiois\ in verse 7|. Cf. the hell of fire (Matthew:5:22|) and also strkjv@Matthew:25:46|. Jude:has no mention of Lot.

rwp@Luke:3:6 @{All flesh} (\pƒsa sarx\). Used in the N.T. of the human race alone, though in the LXX brutes are included. {The salvation of God} (\to sotˆrion tou theou\). The saving act of God. This phrase aptly describes Luke's Gospel which has in mind the message of Christ for all men. It is the universal Gospel.

rwp@Luke:13:27 @{I know not whence ye are} (\ouk oida pothen este\). This blunt statement cuts the matter short and sweeps away the flimsy cobwebs. Acquaintance with Christ in the flesh does not open the door. Jesus quotes strkjv@Psalms:8:9| as in strkjv@Matthew:7:23|, there as in the LXX, here with \pantes ergatai adikias\, there with \hoi ergazomenoi tˆn anomian\. But \apostˆte\ (second aorist active imperative) here, and there \apoch“reite\ (present active imperative).

rwp@Luke:24:39 @{Myself} (\autos\). Jesus is patient with his proof. They were convinced before he came into the room, but that psychological shock had unnerved them all. {Handle} (\psˆlaphˆsate\). This very word is used in strkjv@1John:1:1| as proof of the actual human body of Jesus. It is an old verb for touching with the hand. {Flesh and bones} (\sarka kai ostea\). At least this proves that he is not just a ghost and that Jesus had a real human body against the Docetic Gnostics who denied it. But clearly we are not to understand that our resurrection bodies will have "flesh and bones." Jesus was in a transition state and had not yet been glorified. The mystery remains unsolved, but it was proof to the disciples of the identity of the Risen Christ with Jesus of Nazareth.

rwp@Mark:14:37 @{Simon, sleepest thou?} (\Sim“n, katheudeis;\). The old name, not the new name, Peter. Already his boasted loyalty was failing in the hour of crisis. Jesus fully knows the weakness of human flesh (see on ¯Matthew:26:41|).

rwp@Mark:14:40 @{Very heavy} (\katabarunomenoi\). Perfective use of \kata-\ with the participle. Matthew has the simple verb. Mark's word is only here in the N.T. and is rare in Greek writers. Mark has the vivid present passive participle, while Matthew has the perfect passive \bebarˆmenoi\. {And they wist not what to answer him} (\kai ouk ˆideisan ti apokrith“sin aut“i\). Deliberative subjunctive retained in the indirect question. Alone in Mark and reminds one of the like embarrassment of these same three disciples on the Mount of Transfiguration (Mark:9:6|). On both occasions weakness of the flesh prevented their real sympathy with Jesus in his highest and deepest experiences. "Both their shame and their drowsiness would make them dumb" (Gould).

rwp@Matthew:19:5 @{Shall cleave} (\kollˆthˆsetai\). First future passive, "shall be glued to," the verb means. {The twain shall become one flesh} (\esontai hoi duo eis sarka mian\). This use of \eis\ after \eimi\ is an imitation of the Hebrew, though a few examples occur in the older Greek and in the papyri. The frequency of it is due to the Hebrew and here the LXX is a direct translation of the Hebrew idiom.

rwp@Matthew:24:48 @{My lord tarrieth} (\chronizei mou ho kurios\). That is the temptation and to give way to indulge in fleshly appetites or to pride of superior intellect. Within a generation scoffers will be asking where is the promise of the coming of Christ (2Peter:3:4|). They will forget that God's clock is not like our clock and that a day with the Lord may be a thousand years or a thousand years as one day (2Peter:3:8|).

rwp@Matthew:26:41 @{Watch and pray} (\grˆgoreite kai proseuchesthe\). Jesus repeats the command of verse 38| with the addition of prayer and with the warning against the peril of temptation. He himself was feeling the worst of all temptations of his earthly life just then. He did not wish then to enter such temptation (\peirasmon\, here in this sense, not mere trial). Thus we are to understand the prayer in strkjv@Matthew:6:13| about leading (being led) into temptation. Their failure was due to weakness of the flesh as is often the case. {Spirit} (\pneuma\) here is the moral life (\intellect, will, emotions\) as opposed to the flesh (cf. strkjv@Isaiah:31:3; strkjv@Romans:7:25|). {Except I drink it} (\ean mˆ auto pi“\). Condition of the third class undetermined, but with likelihood of determination, whereas {if this cannot pass away} (\ei ou dunatai touto parelthein\) is first-class condition, determined as fulfilled, assumed to be true. This delicate distinction accurately presents the real attitude of Jesus towards this subtle temptation.

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

rwp@Philemon:1:16 @{No longer as a servant} (\ouketi h“s doulon\). "No longer as a slave." Songs:it has to be here. Songs:it should be always. Paul sends Onesimus, the converted runaway slave, back to his legal master, but shows that he expects Philemon the Christian to treat Onesimus as a brother in Christ, not as a slave. {But more than a servant} (\all' huper doulon\). "But beyond a slave." {A brother beloved} (\adelphon agapˆton\). A brother in Christ. {How much rather to thee} (\pos“i de mƒllon soi\). "By how much more to thee," because of Philemon's legal ownership of this now Christian slave. "In the flesh Philemon had the brother for a slave; in the Lord he had the slave for a brother" (Meyer).

rwp@Philippians:1:24 @{In the flesh} (\en tˆi sarki\). Songs:B D G, but Aleph A C do not have \en\. Unnecessary with \epimen“\, to abide by (common verb).

rwp@Philippians:3:3 @{For we} (\hˆmeis gar\). We believers in Christ, the children of Abraham by faith, whether Jew or Gentile, the spiritual circumcision in contrast to the merely physical (Romans:2:25-29; strkjv@Colossians:2:11; strkjv@Ephesians:2:11|). See strkjv@Galatians:5:12| for \apotemnein\ (to cut off) in sense of mutilation also. {By the Spirit of God} (\pneumati theou\). Instrumental case, though the dative case as the object of \latreu“\ makes good sense also (worshipping the Spirit of God) or even the locative (worshipping in the Spirit of God). {No} (\ouk\). Actual condition rather than \mˆ\ with the participle. {In the flesh} (\en sarki\). Technical term in Paul's controversy with the Judaizers (2Corinthians:11:18; Gal strkjv@6:13f.|). External privileges beyond mere flesh.

rwp@Revelation:12:1 @{A great sign} (\sˆmeion mega\). The first of the visions to be so described (13:3; strkjv@15:1|), and it is introduced by \“phthˆ\ as in strkjv@11:19; strkjv@12:3|, not by \meta tauto\ or by \eidon\ or by \eidon kai idou\ as heretofore. This "sign" is really a \teras\ (wonder), as it is so by association in strkjv@Matthew:24:24; strkjv@John:4:48; strkjv@Acts:2:22; strkjv@5:12|. The element of wonder is not in the word \sˆmeion\ as in \teras\, but often in the thing itself as in strkjv@Luke:21:11; strkjv@John:9:16; strkjv@Revelation:13:13ff.; strkjv@15:1; strkjv@16:14; strkjv@19:20|. {A woman} (\gunˆ\). Nominative case in apposition with \sˆmeion\. "The first 'sign in heaven' is a Woman--the earliest appearance of a female figure in the Apocalyptic vision" (Swete). {Arrayed with the sun} (\peribeblˆmenˆ ton hˆlion\). Perfect passive participle of \periball“\, with the accusative retained as so often (9 times) in the Apocalypse. Both Charles and Moffatt see mythological ideas and sources behind the bold imagery here that leave us all at sea. Swete understands the Woman to be "the church of the Old Testament" as "the Mother of whom Christ came after the flesh. But here, as everywhere in the Book, no sharp dividing line is drawn between the Church of the Old Testament and the Christian Society." Certainly she is not the Virgin Mary, as verse 17| makes clear. Beckwith takes her to be "the heavenly representative of the people of God, the _ideal_ Zion, which, so far as it is embodied in concrete realities, is represented alike by the people of the Old and the New Covenants." John may have in mind strkjv@Isaiah:7:14| (Matthew:1:23; strkjv@Luke:1:31|) as well as strkjv@Micah:4:10; strkjv@Isaiah:26:17f.; strkjv@66:7| without a definite picture of Mary. The metaphor of childbirth is common enough (John:16:21; strkjv@Galatians:4:19|). The figure is a bold one with the moon "under her feet" (\hupokat“ t“n pod“n autˆs\) and "a crown of twelve stars" (\stephanos aster“n d“deka\), a possible allusion to the twelve tribes (James:1:1; strkjv@Revelation:21:12|) or to the twelve apostles (Revelation:21:14|).

rwp@Revelation:19:18 @{That ye may eat} (\hina phagˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \esthi“\. {The flesh of kings} (\sarkas basile“n\). "Pieces of flesh" (plural of \sarx\, flesh) and of all classes and conditions of men who fell in the battle (6:18; strkjv@11:13; strkjv@13:16; strkjv@19:5; strkjv@20:12|). War is no respecter of persons.

rwp@Romans:1:3 @{Concerning his Son} (\peri tou huiou autou\). Just as Jesus found himself in the O.T. (Luke:24:27,46|). The deity of Christ here stated. {According to the flesh} (\kata sarka\). His real humanity alongside of his real deity. For the descent from David see strkjv@Matthew:1:1,6,20; strkjv@Luke:1:27; strkjv@John:7:42; strkjv@Acts:13:23|, etc.

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

rwp@Romans:7:5 @{In the flesh} (\en tˆi sarki\). Same sense as in strkjv@6:19| and strkjv@7:18,25|. The "flesh" is not inherently sinful, but is subject to sin. It is what Paul means by being "under the law." He uses \sarx\ in a good many senses. {Sinful passions} (\ta pathˆmata t“n hamarti“n\). "Passions of sins" or marked by sins. {Wrought} (\energeito\). Imperfect middle of \energe“\, "were active." {To bring forth fruit unto death} (\eis to karpophorˆsai t“i thanat“i\). Purpose clause again. Vivid picture of the seeds of sin working for death.

rwp@Romans:7:14 @{Spiritual} (\pneumatikos\). Spirit-caused and spirit-given and like the Holy Spirit. See strkjv@1Corinthians:10:3f|. {But I am carnal} (\eg“ de sarkinos eimi\). "Fleshen" as in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:1| which see, more emphatic even than \sarkikos\," a creature of flesh." {Sold under sin} (\pepramenos hupo tˆn hamartian\). Perfect passive participle of \piprask“\, old verb, to sell. See on ¯Matthew:13:46; strkjv@Acts:2:45|, state of completion. Sin has closed the mortgage and owns its slave.

rwp@Romans:7:18 @{In me} (\en emoi\). Paul explains this by "in my flesh" (\en tˆi sarki mou\), the unregenerate man "sold under sin" of verse 14|. {No good thing} (\ouk--agathon\). "Not absolutely good." This is not a complete view of man even in his unregenerate state as Paul at once shows. {For to will is present with me} (\to gar thelein parakeitai moi\). Present middle indicative of \parakeimai\, old verb, to lie beside, at hand, with dative \moi\. Only here in N.T. {The wishing} is the better self, {the doing not} the lower self.

rwp@Romans:8:3 @{That the law could not do} (\to adunaton tou nomou\). Literally, "the impossibility of the law" as shown in strkjv@7:7-24|, either nominative absolute or accusative of general reference. No syntactical connection with the rest of the sentence. {In that} (\en h“i\). "Wherein." {It was weak} (\ˆsthenei\). Imperfect active, continued weak as already shown. {In the likeness of sinful flesh} (\en homoi“mati sarkos hamartias\). For "likeness" see strkjv@Phillipians:2:7|, a real man, but more than man for God's "own Son." Two genitives "of flesh of sin" (marked by sin), that is the flesh of man is, but not the flesh of Jesus. {And for sin} (\kai peri hamartias\). Condensed phrase, God sent his Son also concerning sin (our sin). {Condemned sin in the flesh} (\katekrine tˆn hamartian en tˆi sarki\). First aorist active indicative of \katakrin“\. He condemned the sin of men and the condemnation took place in the flesh of Jesus. If the article \tˆn\ had been repeated before \en tˆi sarki\ Paul would have affirmed sin in the flesh of Jesus, but he carefully avoided that (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 784).

rwp@Romans:8:4 @{The ordinance of the law} (\to dikai“ma tou nomou\). "The requirement of the law." {Might be fulfilled} (\hina pler“thˆi\). Purpose of the death of Christ by \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \plˆro“\. Christ met it all in our stead (3:21-26|). {Not after the flesh, but after the Spirit} (\mˆ kata sarka alla kata pneuma\). The two laws of life (\kata sarka\ in strkjv@7:7-24|, \kata pneuma\ strkjv@8:1-11|). Most likely the Holy Spirit or else the renewed spirit of man.

rwp@Romans:8:6 @{The mind} (\to phronˆma\). The bent or will of the flesh is death as shown in strkjv@7:7-24|. {Life} (\z“ˆ\). In contrast with "death." {Peace} (\eirˆnˆ\). As seen in strkjv@5:1-5|.

rwp@Romans:8:9 @{Not in the flesh} (\ouk en sarki\). Not sold under sin (7:14|) any more. {But in the spirit} (\alla en pneumati\). Probably, "in the Holy Spirit." It is not Pantheism or Buddhism that Paul here teaches, but the mystical union of the believer with Christ in the Holy Spirit. {If so be that} (\eiper\). "If as is the fact" (cf. strkjv@3:30|). {The Spirit of Christ} (\pneuma Christou\). The same as "the Spirit of God" just before. See also strkjv@Phillipians:1:19; strkjv@1Peter:1:11|. Incidental argument for the Deity of Christ and probably the meaning of strkjv@2Corinthians:3:18| "the Spirit of the Lord." Condition of first class, assumed as true.

rwp@Romans:8:12 @{We are debtors} (\opheiletai esmen\). See on ¯Galatians:5:3; strkjv@Romans:1:14|. {Not to the flesh} (\ou tˆi sarki\). Negative \ou\ goes with preceding verb and \tˆi sarki\, not with the infinitive \tou zˆin\.

rwp@Romans:9:3 @{I could wish} (\ˆuchomˆn\). Idiomatic imperfect, "I was on the point of wishing." We can see that \euchomai\ (I do wish) would be wrong to say. \An ˆuchomˆn\ would mean that he does not wish (conclusion of second class condition). \An ˆuchomˆn\ would be conclusion of fourth class condition and too remote. He is shut up to the imperfect indicative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 886). {Anathema} (\anathema\). See for this word as distinct from \anathˆma\ (offering) strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3; strkjv@Galatians:1:8f.| {I myself} (\autos eg“\). Nominative with the infinitive \einai\ and agreeing with subject of \ˆuchomˆn\. {According to the flesh} (\kata sarka\). As distinguished from Paul's Christian brethren.

rwp@Romans:9:5 @{Of whom} (\ex h“n\). Fourth relative clause and here with \ex\ and the ablative. {Christ} (\ho Christos\). The Messiah. {As concerning the flesh} (\to kata sarka\). Accusative of general reference, "as to the according to the flesh." Paul limits the descent of Jesus from the Jews to his human side as he did in strkjv@1:3f|. {Who is over all, God blessed for ever} (\ho on epi pant“n theos eulogˆtos\). A clear statement of the deity of Christ following the remark about his humanity. This is the natural and the obvious way of punctuating the sentence. To make a full stop after \sarka\ (or colon) and start a new sentence for the doxology is very abrupt and awkward. See strkjv@Acts:20:28; strkjv@Titus:2:13| for Paul's use of \theos\ applied to Jesus Christ.

rwp@Romans:13:14 @{But ye on} (\endusasthe\). The same metaphor as in verse 12|. The Lord Jesus Christ is the garment that we all need. See strkjv@Galatians:3:27| with baptism as the symbol. {Provision} (\pronoian\). Old word for forethought (from \pronoos\). In N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:24:2|. {For the flesh} (\tˆs sarkos\). Objective genitive. {To fulfil the lusts thereof} (\eis epithumias\). "For lusts." No verb.

rwp@Romans:14:21 @{Not to eat} (\to mˆ phagein\). "The not eating." Articular infinitive (second aorist active of \esthi“\) and subject of \kalon estin\ (copula, understood). {Flesh} (\kreas\). Old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:8:13|. {To drink} (\pein\). Shortened form for \piein\ (second aorist active infinitive of \pin“\). {Whereby} (\en h“i\). "On which thy brother stumbleth" (\proskoptei\).

rwp@Romans:15:27 @{Their debtors} (\opheiletai aut“n\). Objective genitive: the Gentiles are debtors to the Jews. See the word \opheiletˆs\ in strkjv@1:14; strkjv@8:12|. {For if} (\ei gar\). Condition of the first class, assumed as true, first aorist active indicative (\ekoin“nˆsan\, from \koin“ne“\, to share) with associative instrumental case (\pneumatikois\, spiritual things). {To minister unto} (\leitourgˆsai\, first aorist active infinitive of \leitourge“\ with dative case \autois\, to them), but here certainly with no "sacerdotal" functions (cf. verse 16|). {In carnal things} (\en tois sarkikois\). Things which belong to the natural life of the flesh (\sarx\), not the sinful aspects of the flesh at all.

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

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Sun Jun 30 08:09:13 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020