Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-LAW.filter - rwp knowledge:


rwp@1Corinthians:1:5 @{That} (\hoti\). Explicit specification of this grace of God given to the Corinthians. Paul points out in detail the unusual spiritual gifts which were their glory and became their peril (chapters strkjv@1Corinthians:12-14|). {Ye were enriched in him} (\eploutisthˆte en aut“i\). First aorist passive indicative of \ploutiz“\, old causative verb from \ploutos\, wealth, common in Attic writers, dropped out for centuries, reappeared in LXX. In N.T. only three times and alone in Paul (1Corinthians:1:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:10,11|). The Christian finds his real riches in Christ, one of Paul's pregnant phrases full of the truest mysticism. {In all utterance and all knowledge} (\en panti log“i kai pasˆi gn“sei\). One detail in explanation of the riches in Christ. The outward expression (\log“i\) here is put before the inward knowledge (\gn“sei\) which should precede all speech. But we get at one's knowledge by means of his speech. Chapters strkjv@1Corinthians:12-14| throw much light on this element in the spiritual gifts of the Corinthians (the gift of tongues, interpreting tongues, discernment) as summed up in strkjv@1Corinthians:13:1,2|, the greater gifts of strkjv@12:31|. It was a marvellously endowed church in spite of their perversions.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:30 @{Of him} (\ex autou\). Out of God. He chose you. {In Christ Jesus} (\en Christ“i Iˆsou\). In the sphere of Christ Jesus the choice was made. This is God's wisdom. {Who was made unto us wisdom from God} (\hos egenˆthˆ sophia hˆmin apo theou\). Note \egenˆthˆ\, became (first aorist passive and indicative), not \ˆn\, was, the Incarnation, Cross, and Resurrection. Christ is the wisdom of God (Co strkjv@2:2f.|) "both righteousness and sanctification and redemption" (\dikaiosunˆ te kai hagiasmos kai apolutr“sis\), as is made plain by the use of \te--kai--kai\. The three words (\dikaiosunˆ, hagiasmos, apolutr“sis\) are thus shown to be an epexegesis of \sophia\ (Lightfoot). All the treasures of wisdom and knowledge in Christ Jesus. We are made righteous, holy, and redeemed in Christ Jesus. Redemption comes here last for emphasis though the foundation of the other two. In strkjv@Romans:1:17| we see clearly Paul's idea of the God kind of righteousness (\dikaiosunˆ\) in Christ. In strkjv@Romans:3:24| we have Paul's conception of redemption (\apolutr“sis\, setting free as a ransomed slave) in Christ. In strkjv@Romans:6:19| we have Paul's notion of holiness or sanctification (\hagiasmos\) in Christ. These great theological terms will call for full discussion in Romans, but they must not be overlooked here. See also strkjv@Acts:10:35; strkjv@24:25; strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:3-7; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:2|.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:10 @{But unto us God revealed them} (\hˆmin gar apekalupsen ho theos\). Songs:with \gar\ B 37 Sah Cop read instead of \de\ of Aleph A C D. "\De\ is superficially easier; \gar\ intrinsically better" (Findlay). Paul explains why this is no longer hidden, "for God revealed unto us" the wonders of grace pictured in verse 9|. We do not have to wait for heaven to see them. Hence we can utter those things hidden from the eye, the ear, the heart of man. This revelation (\apekalupsen\, first aorist active indicative) took place, at "the entry of the Gospel into the world," not "when we were admitted into the Church, when we were baptized" as Lightfoot interprets it. {Through the Spirit} (\dia tou pneumatos\). The Holy Spirit is the agent of this definite revelation of grace, a revelation with a definite beginning or advent (constative aorist), an unveiling by the Spirit where "human ability and research would not have sufficed" (Robertson and Plummer), "according to the revelation of the mystery" (Romans:16:25|), "the revelation given to Christians as an event that began a new epoch in the world's history" (Edwards). {Searcheth all things} (\panta eraunƒi\). This is the usual form from A.D. 1 on rather than the old \ereuna“\. The word occurs (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_) for a professional searcher's report and \eraunˆtai\, searchers for customs officials. "The Spirit is the organ of understanding between man and God" (Findlay). Songs:in strkjv@Romans:8:27| we have this very verb \erauna“\ again of God's searching our hearts. The Holy Spirit not merely investigates us, but he searches "even the deep things of God" (\kai ta bathˆ tou theou\). _Profunda Dei_ (Vulgate). Cf. "the deep things of Satan" (Revelation:2:24|) and Paul's language in strkjv@Romans:11:33| "Oh the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God." Paul's point is simply that the Holy Spirit fully comprehends the depth of God's nature and his plans of grace and so is fully competent to make the revelation here claimed.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:11 @{Knoweth} (\oiden, egn“ken\). Second perfect of root \id-\, to see and so know, first perfect of \gin“sk“\, to know by personal experience, has come to know and still knows. See First John for a clear distinction in the use of \oida\ and \gin“sk“\. {The spirit of man that is in him} (\to pneuma tou anthr“pou to en aut“i\). The self-consciousness of man that resides in the man or woman (generic term for mankind, \anthr“pos\). {The Spirit of God} (\to pneuma tou theou\). Note the absence of \to en aut“i\. It is not the mere self-consciousness of God, but the personal Holy Spirit in his relation to God the Father. Paul's analogy between the spirit of man and the Spirit of God does not hold clear through and he guards it at this vital point as he does elsewhere as in strkjv@Romans:8:26| and in the full Trinitarian benediction in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:13|. \Pneuma\ in itself merely means breath or wind as in strkjv@John:3:8|. To know accurately Paul's use of the word in every instance calls for an adequate knowledge of his theology, and psychology. But the point here is plain. God's Holy Spirit is amply qualified to make the revelation claimed here in verses 6-10|.

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:2:15 @{Judgeth all things} (\anakrinei panta\). The spiritual man (\ho pneumatikos\) is qualified to sift, to examine, to decide rightly, because he has the eyes of his heart enlightened (Ephesians:1:18|) and is no longer blinded by the god of this world (2Corinthians:4:4|). There is a great lesson for Christians who know by personal experience the things of the Spirit of God. Men of intellectual gifts who are ignorant of the things of Christ talk learnedly and patronizingly about things of which they are grossly ignorant. The spiritual man is superior to all this false knowledge. {He himself is judged of no man} (\autos de hup' oudenos anakrinetai\). Men will pass judgment on him, but the spiritual man refuses to accept the decision of his ignorant judges. He stands superior to them all as Polycarp did when he preferred to be burnt to saying, "Lord Caesar" in place of "Lord Jesus." He was unwilling to save his earthly life by the worship of Caesar in place of the Lord Jesus. Polycarp was a \pneumatikos\ man.

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:4:1 @{Ministers of Christ} (\hupˆretas Christou\). Paul and all ministers (\diakonous\) of the New Covenant (1Corinthians:3:5|) are under-rowers, subordinate rowers of Christ, only here in Paul's Epistles, though in the Gospels (Luke:4:20| the attendant in the synagogue) and the Acts (Acts:13:5|) of John Mark. The {so} (\hout“s\) gathers up the preceding argument (3:5-23|) and applies it directly by the {as} (\h“s\) that follows. {Stewards of the mysteries of God} (\oikonomous mustˆri“n theou\). The steward or house manager (\oikos\, house, \nem“\, to manage, old word) was a slave (\doulos\) under his lord (\kurios\, strkjv@Luke:12:42|), but a master (Luke:16:1|) over the other slaves in the house (menservants \paidas\, maidservants \paidiskas\ strkjv@Luke:12:45|), an overseer (\epitropos\) over the rest (Matthew:20:8|). Hence the under-rower (\hupˆretˆs\) of Christ has a position of great dignity as steward (\oikonomos\) of the mysteries of God. Jesus had expressly explained that the mysteries of the kingdom were open to the disciples (Matthew:13:11|). They were entrusted with the knowledge of some of God's secrets though the disciples were not such apt pupils as they claimed to be (Matthew:13:51; strkjv@16:8-12|). As stewards Paul and other ministers are entrusted with the mysteries (see on ¯1Corinthians:2:7| for this word) of God and are expected to teach them. "The church is the \oikos\ (1Timothy:3:15|), God the \oikodespotˆs\ (Matthew:13:52|), the members the \oikeioi\ (Galatians:6:10; strkjv@Ephesians:2:19|)" (Lightfoot). Paul had a vivid sense of the dignity of this stewardship (\oikonomia\) of God given to him (Colossians:1:25; strkjv@Ephesians:1:10|). The ministry is more than a mere profession or trade. It is a calling from God for stewardship.

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

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

rwp@1Corinthians: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:8:2 @{Puffeth up} (\phusioi\). From \phusio“\ (present indicative active). See on ¯4:6|. Pride may be the result, not edification (\oikodomei\) which comes from love. Note article (\hˆ\) with both \gn“sis\ and \agapˆ\, making the contrast sharper. See on ¯1Thessalonians:5:11| for the verb \oikodome“\, to build up. Love is the solution, not knowledge, in all social problems. {That he knoweth anything} (\egn“kenai ti\). Perfect active infinitive in indirect discourse after \dokei\ (condition of first class with \ei\). Songs:"has acquired knowledge" (cf. strkjv@3:18|), has gone to the bottom of the subject. {He knoweth not yet} (\oup“ egn“\). Second aorist active indicative, timeless aorist, summary (punctiliar) statement of his ignorance. {As he ought to know} (\kath“s dei gn“nai\). Second aorist active infinitive, ingressive aorist (come to know). Newton's remark that he was only gathering pebbles on the shore of the ocean of truth is pertinent. The really learned man knows his ignorance of what lies beyond. Shallow knowledge is like the depth of the mud hole, not of the crystal spring.

rwp@1Corinthians:8:7 @{Howbeit in all men there is not that knowledge} (\all' ouk en pasin hˆ gn“sis\). The knowledge (\hˆ gn“sis\) of which Paul is speaking. Knowledge has to overcome inheritance and environment, prejudice, fear, and many other hindrances. {Being used until now to the idol} (\tˆi sunˆtheiƒi he“s arti tou eid“lou\). Old word \sunˆtheia\ from \sunˆthˆs\ (\sun, ˆthos\), accustomed to, like Latin _consuetudo_, intimacy. In N.T. only here and strkjv@John:18:39; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:16|. It is the force of habit that still grips them when they eat such meat. They eat it "as an idol sacrifice" (\h“s eid“lothuton\), though they no longer believe in idols. The idol-taint clings in their minds to this meat. {Being weak} (\asthenˆs ousa\). "It is defiled, not by the partaking of polluted food, for food cannot pollute (Mark:7:18f.; strkjv@Luke:11:41|), but by the doing of something which the unenlightened conscience does not allow" (Robertson and Plummer). For this great word \suneidˆsis\ (conscientia, knowing together, conscience) see on ¯Acts:23:1|. It is important in Paul's Epistles, Peter's First Epistle, and Hebrews. Even if unenlightened, one must act according to his conscience, a sensitive gauge to one's spiritual condition. Knowledge breaks down as a guide with the weak or unenlightened conscience. For \asthenˆs\, weak (lack of strength) see on ¯Matthew:26:41|. {Defiled} (\molunetai\). Old word \molun“\, to stain, pollute, rare in N.T. (1Timothy:3:9; strkjv@Revelation:3:4|).

rwp@1Corinthians:8:8 @{Will not commend} (\ou parastˆsei\). Future active indicative of \paristˆmi\, old word to present as in strkjv@Acts:1:3; strkjv@Luke:2:22; strkjv@Colossians:1:28|. Food (\br“ma\) will not give us an entree to God for commendation or condemnation, whether meat-eaters or vegetarians. {Are we the worse} (\husteroumetha\). Are we left behind, do we fall short. Both conditions are of the third class (\ean mˆ, ean\) undetermined. {Are we the better} (\perisseuometha\). Do we overflow, do we have excess of credit. Paul here disposes of the pride of knowledge (the enlightened ones) and the pride of prejudice (the unenlightened). Each was disposed to look down upon the other, the one in scorn of the other's ignorance, the other in horror of the other's heresy and daring.

rwp@1Corinthians:8:10 @{If a man see thee which hast knowledge sitting at meat in an idol's temple} (\ean gar tis idˆi [se] ton echonta gn“sin en eid“lei“i katakeimenon\). Condition of third class, a possible case. Paul draws the picture of the enlightened brother exercising his "liberty" by eating in the idol's temple. Later he will discuss the peril to the man's own soul in this phase of the matter (10:14-22|), but here he considers only the effect of such conduct on the unenlightened or weak brother. This bravado at a sacrificial banquet is in itself idolatrous as Paul will show. But our weak brother will be emboldened (\oikodomˆthˆsetai\, future passive indicative, will be built up) to go on and do what he still believes to be wrong, to eat things sacrificed to idols (\eis to ta eid“lothuta esthiein\). Alas, how often that has happened. Defiance is flung in the face of the unenlightened brother instead of loving consideration.

rwp@1Corinthians:8:11 @{Through thy knowledge} (\en tˆi sˆi gn“sei\). Literally, in thy knowledge. Surely a poor use to put one's superior knowledge. {Perisheth} (\apollutai\). Present middle indicative of the common verb \apollumi\, to destroy. Ruin follows in the wake of such daredevil knowledge. {For whose sake Christ died} (\di' hon Christos apethanen\). Just as much as for the enlightened brother with his selfish pride. The accusative (\hon\) with \di'\ gives the reason, not the agent as with the genitive in strkjv@8:6| (\di' hou\). The appeal to the death (\apethanen\, second aorist active indicative of \apothnˆsk“\) of Christ is the central fact that clinches Paul's argument.

rwp@1Corinthians:11:30 @{And not a few sleep} (\kai koim“ntai hikanoi\). Sufficient number (\hikanoi\) are already asleep in death because of their desecration of the Lord's table. Paul evidently had knowledge of specific instances. A few would be too many.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:34 @{Awake up righteously} (\eknˆpsate dikai“s\). Wake up as if from drunkenness. \Eknˆph“\, only here in N.T. sin not (\mˆ hamartanete\). Stop sinning. {No knowledge of God} (\agn“sian theou\). Old word for ignorance, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Peter:2:15|. Ignorance of God, agnosticism. Some today (agnostics) even take pride in it instead of shame (\entropˆn\, turning in on oneself). See on ¯6:5| for \entropˆ\.

rwp@Info_1John @ GNOSTICISM The Epistle is not a polemic primarily, but a letter for the edification of the readers in the truth and the life in Christ. And yet the errors of the Gnostics are constantly before John's mind. The leaders had gone out from among the true Christians, but there was an atmosphere of sympathy that constituted a subtle danger. There are only two passages (1John:2:18f.; strkjv@4:1-6|) in which the false teachers are specifically denounced, but "this unethical intellectualism" (Robert Law) with its dash of Greek culture and Oriental mysticism and licentiousness gave a curious attraction for many who did not know how to think clearly. John, like Paul in Colossians, Ephesians, and the Pastoral Epistles, foresaw this dire peril to Christianity. In the second century it gave pure Christianity a gigantic struggle. "The great Gnostics were the first Christian philosophers" (Robert Law, _The Tests of Life_, p. 27) and threatened to undermine the Gospel message by "deifying the devil" (ib., p. 31) along with dethroning Christ. There were two kinds of Gnostics, both agreeing in the essential evil of matter. Both had trouble with the Person of Christ. The Docetic Gnostics denied the actual humanity of Christ, the Cerinthian Gnostics distinguished between the man Jesus and the \aeon\ Christ that came on him at his baptism and left him on the Cross. Some practised asceticism, some licentiousness. John opposes both classes in his Epistles. They claimed superior knowledge (\gn“sis\) and so were called Gnostics (\Gn“stikoi\). Nine times John gives tests for knowing the truth and uses the verb \gin“sk“\ (know) each time (1John:2:3,5; strkjv@3:16,19,24; strkjv@4:2,6,13; strkjv@5:2|). Some of the leaders he calls antichrists. There are stories about John's dread of Cerinthus and his unwillingness to be seen in the same public bath with him. The Apostle of love, as he is, is a real son of thunder when Gnosticism shows its head. Westcott thinks that the Fourth Gospel was written to prove the deity of Christ, assuming his humanity, while I John was written to prove the humanity of Christ, assuming his deity. Certainly both ideas appear in both books.

rwp@Info_1John @ THE DATE The time seems to be considerably removed from the atmosphere of the Pauline and Petrine Epistles. Jerusalem has been destroyed. If John wrote the Fourth Gospel by A.D. 95, then the First Epistle would come anywhere from A.D. 85 to 95. The tone of the author is that of an old man. His urgent message that the disciples, his "little children," love one another is like another story about the aged John, who, when too feeble to stand, would sit in his chair and preach "Little children, love one another." The Muratorian Fragment accepts the First Epistle and Origen makes full use of it, as does Clement of Alexandria. Irenaeus quotes it by name. Polycarp shows knowledge of it also.

rwp@Info_1John @ BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexander, _Epistles of John_ (Speaker's Comm., 1889). Barrett, _Devotional Comm. on John_ (1910). Baumgartner, _Die Schriften des N.T_. (IV. 3, 1918). Belser, _Komm_. (1906). Bennett, _New-Century Bible_. Brooke, _Int. Crit. Comm_. (Johannine Epistles, 1912). Cox, _Private Letters of St. Paul and St. John_ (1887). Ebrard, _Die Briefe Johannis_ (1859). Ewald, _Die Johanneischen Schriften_ (1861). Findlay, _Fellowship in the Life Eternal_ (1909) Gibbon, _Eternal Life_ (1890). Gore, _Epistles of John_ (1921). Green, _Ephesian Canonical Writings_ (1910). Haring, _Die Johannesbriefe_ (1927). Haupt, _I John_ (1869). Hilgenfeld, _Das Evangelium und die Briefe Johannis nach ihrem Lehrbegriff dargestellt_ (1849). Holtzmann-Bauer, _Hand-Comm. sum N.T_. (1908). Holtzmann, _Das Problem des I Johannesbr. in seinem Ver- haltniss zum Evang_. (Jahrbuch fur Prot. Theologie, 1881, 1882). Huther, _Crit. and Exeget. to the General Eps. of James and John_ (1882). Karl, _Johanneische Studien_ (der I Johannes Brief, 1898). Law, _The Tests of Life_ (1909). Lias, _Epistles of John_ (1887). Loisy, _Les epitres dites de Jean_ (1921) in le quatrieme evan- gile. Lucke, _Comm. on Epistles of John_ (1837). Luthardt, _Strack-Zoeckler Komm_. (1895). Maurice, _The Epistles of St. John_ (1857). Plummer, _Cambridge Greek Test_ (1886). Ramsay, A., _Westminster N.T_. (1910). Ritter, _Die Gemeinschaft der Heiligen_ (1929). Robertson, J. A., _The Johannine Epistles_ (1920). Rothe, _Der erste Brief Johannis_ (1879). Sawtelle, _American Comm_. (1890). Smith, David, _The Expositor's Greek Testament_ (1910). Watson, _Epistles of John_ (1910). Weiss, B., _Die drei Briefe des Apostels Johannis_ (Meyer Komm. 1900). Wendt, _Die Johannesbriefe und das Johanneische Christen- tum_ (1925). Westcott, _The Epistles of St. John_. 3rd ed. (1892). Windisch, _Die Katholischer Briefe_ (Handbuch zum N.T., 2 Aufl., 1930). Wrede, _In Die Heiligen Schriften des N.T_. (2 Aufl., 1924). Wurm, _Die Irrlehrer im I Johannes Brief_ (1903). strkjv@1John:1:1 @{That which} (\ho\). Strictly speaking, the neuter relative here is not personal, but the message "concerning the Word of life" (\peri tou logou tˆs z“ˆs\), a phrase that reminds one at once of the Word (\Logos\) in strkjv@John:1:1,14; strkjv@Revelation:19:14| (an incidental argument for identity of authorship for all these books). For discussion of the \Logos\ see on ¯John:1:1-18|. Here the \Logos\ is described by \tˆs z“ˆs\ (of life), while in strkjv@John:1:4| he is called \hˆ z“ˆ\ (the Life) as here in verse 2| and as Jesus calls himself (John:11:25; strkjv@14:6|), an advance on the phrase here, and in strkjv@Revelation:19:14| he is termed \ho logos tou theou\ (the Word of God), though in strkjv@John:1:1| the \Logos\ is flatly named \ho theos\ (God). John does use \ho\ in a collective personal sense in strkjv@John:6:37,39|. See also \pan ho\ in strkjv@1John:5:4|. {From the beginning} (\ap' archˆs\). Anarthrous as in strkjv@John:1:1; strkjv@6:64; strkjv@16:4|. See same phrase in strkjv@2:7|. The reference goes beyond the Christian dispensation, beyond the Incarnation, to the eternal purpose of God in Christ (John:3:16|), "coeval in some sense with creation" (Westcott). {That which we have heard} (\ho akˆkoamen\). Note fourfold repetition of \ho\ (that which) without connectives (asyndeton). The perfect tense (active indicative of \akou“\) stresses John's equipment to speak on this subject so slowly revealed. It is the literary plural unless John associates the elders of Ephesus with himself (Lightfoot) the men who certified the authenticity of the Gospel (John:21:24|). {That which we have seen} (\ho he“rakamen\). Perfect active, again, of \hora“\, with the same emphasis on the possession of knowledge by John. {With our eyes} (\tois ophthalmois hˆm“n\). Instrumental case and showing it was not imagination on John's part, not an optical illusion as the Docetists claimed, for Jesus had an actual human body. He could be heard and seen. {That which we beheld} (\ho etheasametha\). Repetition with the aorist middle indicative of \theaomai\ (the very form in strkjv@John:1:14|), "a spectacle which broke on our astonished vision" (D. Smith). {Handled} (\epsˆlaphˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \psˆlapha“\, old and graphic verb (from \psa“\, to touch), the very verb used by Jesus to prove that he was not a mere spirit (Luke:24:39|). Three senses are here appealed to (hearing, sight, touch) as combining to show the reality of Christ's humanity against the Docetic Gnostics and the qualification of John by experience to speak. But he is also "the Word of life" and so God Incarnate.

rwp@1John:1:5 @{And} (\kai\). Mutual fellowship depends on mutual knowledge (Westcott). {Message} (\aggelia\). Old word (from \aggelos\, messenger), in N.T. only here and strkjv@3:11|, and note \ap' autou\ (from God like \apaggell“\ in verse 3|) and \anaggellomen\, to announce, to disclose, here as in strkjv@John:4:25|. {God is light} (\ho theos ph“s estin\). Precisely so the \Logos\ is light (John:1:4-9|) and what Jesus claimed to be (John:8:12|). John repeats it in negative form as he often does (John:1:3|).

rwp@1John:2:3 @{Hereby} (\en tout“i\). See this phrase also in strkjv@2:5; strkjv@3:16,19,24; strkjv@4:2,13; strkjv@5:2|. That is explained by the \ean\ clause, "if we keep his commandments " (\ean tˆr“men\, condition of the third class, \ean\ with present active subjunctive, "if we keep on keeping"), the clause itself in apposition with \tout“i\ (locative case). {Know we that we know him} (\ginoskomen hoti egn“kamen auton\). "Know we that we have come to know and still know him," \egn“kamen\ the perfect active indicative of \gin“sk“\. The Gnostics boasted of their superior knowledge of Christ, and John here challenges their boast by an appeal to experimental knowledge of Christ which is shown by keeping his (\autou\, Christ's) commandments, thoroughly Johannine phrase (12 times in the Gospel, 6 in this Epistle, 6 in the Apocalypse).

rwp@1John:2:29 @{If ye know} (\ean eidˆte\). Third-class condition again with \ean\ and second perfect active subjunctive of \oida\. If ye know by intuitive or absolute knowledge that Christ (because of verse 28|) is righteous, then "ye know" or "know ye" (\gin“skete\ either indicative or imperative) by experimental knowledge (so \gin“sk“\ means in contrast with \oida\). {Is begotten} (\gegennˆtai\). Perfect passive indicative of \genna“\, stands begotten, the second birth (regeneration) of strkjv@John:3:3-8|. {Of him} (\ex autou\). Plainly "of God" in verse 9| and so apparently here in spite of \dikaios\ referring to Christ. Doing righteousness is proof of the new birth.

rwp@1John:3:6 @{Sinneth not} (\ouch hamartanei\). Linear present (linear \men“n\, keeps on abiding) active indicative of \hamartan“\, "does not keep on sinning." For \men“\ (abide) see strkjv@2:6; strkjv@John:15:4-10|. {Whosoever sinneth} (\ho hamartan“n\). Present (linear) active articular participle like \men“n\ above, "the one who keeps on sinning" (lives a life of sin, not mere occasional acts of sin as \hamartˆsas\, aorist active participle, would mean). {Hath not seen him} (\ouch he“raken auton\). Perfect active indicative of \hora“\. The habit of sin is proof that one has not the vision or the knowledge (\egn“ken\, perfect active also) of Christ. He means, of course, spiritual vision and spiritual knowledge, not the literal sense of \hora“\ in strkjv@John:1:18; strkjv@20:29|.

rwp@1John:4:6 @{We} (\hˆmeis\). In sharp contrast with the false prophets and the world. We are in tune with the Infinite God. Hence "he that knoweth God" (\ho gin“sk“n ton theon\, present active articular participle, the one who keeps on getting acquainted with God, growing in his knowledge of God) "hears us" (\akouei hˆm“n\). This is one reason why sermons are dull (some actually are, others so to dull hearers) or inspiring. There is a touch of mysticism here, to be sure, but the heart of Christianity is mysticism (spiritual contact with God in Christ by the Holy Spirit). John states the same idea negatively by a relative clause parallel with the preceding articular participle, the negative with both clauses. John had felt the cold, indifferent, and hostile stare of the worldling as he preached Jesus. {By this} (\ek toutou\). "From this," deduction drawn from the preceding; only example in the Epistle for the common \en tout“i\ as in strkjv@4:2|. The power of recognition (\gin“skomen\, we know by personal experience) belongs to all believers (Westcott). There is no reason for Christians being duped by "the spirit of error" (\to pneuma tˆs planˆs\), here alone in the N.T., though we have \pneumasin planois\ (misleading spirits) in strkjv@1Timothy:4:1|. Rejection of the truth may be due also to our not speaking the truth in love (Ephesians:4:15|).

rwp@1John:4:16 @{We know} (\egn“kamen\). Perfect active indicative, "we have come to know and still know" as in strkjv@John:6:9|, only there order is changed (\pepisteukamen\ coming before \egn“kamen\). Confession (\homologe“\) follows experimental knowledge (\gin“sk“\) and confident trust (\pisteu“\). Believers are the sphere (\en hˆmin\, in our case) in which the love of God operates (Westcott). See strkjv@John:13:35| for "having love." {God is love} (\ho theos agapˆ estin\). Repeated from verse 8|. Songs:he gathers up the whole argument that one who is abiding in love is abiding in God and shows that God is abiding in him. Thoroughly Johannine style.

rwp@1John:5:13 @{I have written} (\egrapsa\). Not epistolary aorist, but refers to verses 1-12| of this Epistle as in strkjv@2:26| to the preceding verses. {That ye may know} (\hina eidˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second perfect active subjunctive of \oida\, to know with settled intuitive knowledge. He wishes them to have eternal life in Christ (John:20:31|) and to know that they have it, but not with flippant superficiality (2:3ff.|). {Unto you that believe on} (\tois pisteuousin eis\). Dative of the articular present active participle of \pisteu“\ and \eis\ as in verse 10|. For this use of \onoma\ (name) with \pisteu“\ see strkjv@3:23; strkjv@John:2:23|.

rwp@1John:5:16 @{If any man see} (\ean tis idˆi\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \eidon\ (\hora“\). {Sinning a sin} (\hamartanonta hamartian\). Present active predicate (supplementary) participle agreeing with \adelphon\ and with cognate accusative \hamartian\. {Not unto death} (\mˆ pros thanaton\). Repeated again with \hamartanousin\ and in contrast with \hamartia pros thanaton\ (sin unto death). Most sins are not mortal sins, but clearly John conceives of a sin that is deadly enough to be called "unto death." This distinction is common in the rabbinic writings and in strkjv@Numbers:18:22| the LXX has \labein hamartian thanatˆphoron\ "to incur a death-bearing sin" as many crimes then and now bear the death penalty. There is a distinction in strkjv@Hebrews:10:26| between sinning wilfully after full knowledge and sins of ignorance (Hebrews:5:2|). Jesus spoke of the unpardonable sin (Mark:3:29; strkjv@Matthew:12:32; strkjv@Luke:12:10|), which was attributing to the devil the manifest work of the Holy Spirit. It is possible that John has this idea in mind when he applies it to those who reject Jesus Christ as God's Son and set themselves up as antichrists. {Concerning this} (\peri ekeinˆs\). This sin unto death. {That he should make request} (\hina er“tˆsˆi\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with the first aorist active subjunctive of \er“ta“\, used here as in strkjv@John:17:15,20| (and often) for request rather than for question. John does not forbid praying for such cases; he simply does not command prayer for them. He leaves them to God.

rwp@1John:5:20 @{Is come} (\hˆkei\). Present active indicative, but the root has a perfect sense, "has come." See \exˆlthon kai hˆk“\ in strkjv@John:8:42|. {An understanding} (\dianoian\). Here alone in John's writings, but in Paul (Ephesians:4:18|) and Peter (1Peter:1:13|). John does not use \gn“sis\ (knowledge) and \nous\ (mind) only in strkjv@Revelation:13:18; strkjv@17:9|. {That we know} (\hina gin“skomen\). Result clause with \hina\ and the present active indicative, as is common with \hina\ and the future indicative (John:7:3|). It is possible that here \o\ was pronounced \“\ as a subjunctive, but many old MSS. have \hina gin“skousin\ (plainly indicative) in strkjv@John:17:3|, and in many other places in the N.T. the present indicative with \hina\ occurs as a variant reading as in strkjv@John:5:20|. {Him that is true} (\ton alˆthinon\). That is, God. Cf. strkjv@1:8|. {In him that is true} (\en t“i alˆthin“i\). In God in contrast with the world "in the evil one" (verse 19|). See strkjv@John:17:3|. {Even in his Son Jesus Christ} (\en t“i hui“i autou Iˆsou Christ“i\). The \autou\ refers clearly to \en t“i alˆthin“i\ (God). Hence this clause is not in apposition with the preceding, but an explanation as to how we are "in the True One" by being "in his Son Jesus Christ." {This} (\houtos\). Grammatically \houtos\ may refer to Jesus Christ or to "the True One." It is a bit tautological to refer it to God, but that is probably correct, God in Christ, at any rate. God is eternal life (John:5:26|) and he gives it to us through Christ.

rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER ABOUT A.D. 65 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION THE AUTHOR The Epistle is not anonymous, but claims to be written by "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ" (1Peter:1:1|), that is Cephas (Simon Peter). If this is not true, then the book is pseudonymous by a late writer who assumed Peter's name, as in the so-called Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, etc. "There is no book in the New Testament which has earlier, better, or stronger attestation, though Irenaeus is the first to quote it by name" (Bigg). Eusebius (_H.E_. iii. 25.2) places it among the acknowledged books, those accepted with no doubt at all. We here assume that Simon Peter wrote this Epistle or at any rate dictated it by an amanuensis, as Paul did in Romans (Romans:16:22|). Bigg suggests Silvanus (Silas) as the amanuensis or interpreter (1Peter:5:12|), the obvious meaning of the language (\dia\, through). He may also have been the bearer of the Epistle. It happens that we know more of Peter's life than of any of the twelve apostles because of his prominence in the Gospels and in the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. In the _Student's Chronological New Testament_ I have given a full list of the passages in the Gospels where Peter appears with any clearness and the material is rich and abundant. The account in Acts is briefer, though Peter is the outstanding man in the first five chapters during his career in Jerusalem. After the conversion of Saul he begins to work outside of Jerusalem and after escaping death at the hands of Herod Agrippa I (Acts:12:3ff.|) he left for a while, but is back in Jerusalem at the Conference called by Paul and Barnabas (Acts:15:6-14; Gal strkjv@2:1-10|). After that we have no more about him in Acts, though he reappears in Antioch and is rebuked by Paul for cowardice because of the Judaizers (Galatians:2:11-21). He travelled for the Gospel among the Jews of the Dispersion (Galatians:2:9|) with his wife (1Corinthians:9:5|), and went to Asia Minor (1Peter:1:1|) and as far as Babylon or Rome (1Peter:5:13|). Besides Silvanus he had John Mark with him also (1Peter:5:13|), who was said by the early Christian writers to have been Peter's "interpreter" in his preaching, since Peter was not expert in the Greek (Acts:4:13|), and who also wrote his Gospel under the inspiration of Peter's preaching. We are not able to follow clearly the close of his life or to tell precisely the time of his death. He was apparently put to death in A.D. 67 or 68, but some think that he was executed in Rome in A.D. 64.

rwp@1Peter:1:2 @{According to} (\kata\). Probably to be connected with \eklektois\ rather than with \apostolos\ in spite of a rather loose arrangement of words and the absence of articles in verses 1,2|. {The foreknowledge} (\progn“sin\). Late substantive (Plutarch, Lucian, papyri) from \progin“sk“\ (1:20|), to know beforehand, only twice in N.T. (here and strkjv@Acts:2:23| in Peter's sermon). In this Epistle Peter often uses substantives rather than verbs (cf. strkjv@Romans:8:29|). {Of God the Father} (\theou patros\). Anarthous again and genitive case. See \patˆr\ applied to God also in strkjv@1:3,17| as often by Paul (Romans:1:7|, etc.). Peter here presents the Trinity (God the Father, the Spirit, Jesus Christ). {In sanctification of the Spirit} (\en hagiasm“i pneumatos\). Clearly the Holy Spirit, though anarthrous like \theou patros\. Late word from \hagiaz“\, to render holy (\hagios\), to consecrate, as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:7|. The subjective genitive here, sanctification wrought by the Spirit as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:13| (where the Trinity mentioned as here). {Unto obedience} (\eis hupakoˆn\). Obedience (from \hupakou“\, to hear under, to hearken) to the Lord Jesus as in strkjv@1:22| "to the truth," result of "the sanctification." {And sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ} (\rantismon haimatos Iˆsou Christou\). Late substantive from \rantiz“\, to sprinkle (Hebrews:9:13|), a word used in the LXX of the sacrifices (Numbers:19:9,13,20|, etc.), but not in any non-biblical source so far as known, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:12:24| (of the sprinkling of blood). Reference to the death of Christ on the Cross and to the ratification of the New Covenant by the blood of Christ as given in strkjv@Hebrews:9:19f.; strkjv@12:24| with allusion to strkjv@Exodus:24:3-8|. Paul does not mention this ritual use of the blood of Christ, but Jesus does (Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Mark:14:24|). Hence it is not surprising to find the use of it by Peter and the author of Hebrews. Hort suggests that Peter may also have an ulterior reference to the blood of the martyrs as in strkjv@Revelation:7:14f.; strkjv@12:11|, but only as illustration of what Jesus did for us, not as having any value. The whole Epistle is a commentary upon \progn“sis theou, hagiasmos pneumatos, haima Christou\ (Bigg). Peter is not ashamed of the blood of Christ. {Be multiplied} (\plˆthuntheiˆ\). First aorist passive optative (volitive) of \plˆthun“\, old verb (from \plˆthus\, fulness), in a wish. Songs:in strkjv@2Peter:1:2; strkjv@Jude:1:2|, but nowhere else in N.T. salutations. Grace and peace (\charis kai eirˆnˆ\) occur together in strkjv@2Peter:1:2|, in strkjv@2John:1:2| (with \eleos\), and in all Paul's Epistles (with \eleos\ added in I and II Timothy).

rwp@1Peter:1:12 @{To whom} (\hois\). Dative plural of the relative pronoun. To the prophets who were seeking to understand. Bigg observes that "the connexion between study and inspiration is a great mystery." Surely, but that is no argument for ignorance or obscurantism. We do the best that we can and only skirt the shore of knowledge, as Newton said. {It was revealed} (\apekaluphthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \apokalupt“\, old verb, to reveal, to unveil. Here is revelation about the revelation already received, revelation after research. {Did they minister} (\diˆkonoun\). Imperfect active of \diakone“\, old verb, to minister, "were they ministering." {Have been announced} (\anˆggelˆ\). Second aorist passive indicative of {anaggell“}, to report, to bring back tidings (John:4:25|). {Through them} (\dia t“n\). Intermediate agent (\dia\), "the gospelizers" (\t“n euaggelisamen“n\, articular first aorist middle participle of \euaggeliz“\, to preach the gospel). {By the Holy Ghost} (\pneumati hagi“i\). Instrumental case of the personal agent, "by the Holy Spirit" (without article). {Sent forth from heaven} (\apostalenti\). Second aorist passive participle of \apostell“\ in instrumental case agreeing with \pneumati hagi“i\ (the Spirit of Christ of verse 11|. {Desire} (\epithumousin\). Eagerly desire (present active indicative of \epithume“\, to long for). {To look into} (\parakupsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \parakupt“\, old compound to peer into as in strkjv@Luke:24:12; strkjv@John:20:5,11; strkjv@James:1:25|, which see. For the interest of angels in the Incarnation see strkjv@Luke:2:13f|.

rwp@1Peter:2:15 @{By well-doing} (\agathopoiountas\). Present active participle of \agathopoie“\, only in LXX and N.T. (Mark:3:4|). In accusative case agreeing with \humas\ understood, accusative of general reference with \phimoin\, present active infinitive (epexegetic infinitive after \to thelˆma tou theou\, the will of God), late and rare verb (from \phimos\ muzzle), as in strkjv@Matthew:22:12|. {The ignorance of foolish men} (\tˆn t“n aphron“n anthr“p“n agn“sian\). \Agn“sia\ is late and rare word (in the papyri) from alpha privative and \gn“sis\ (knowledge), in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:15:24| (disgraceful ignorance in both instances). Note alliteration.

rwp@1Peter:3:7 @{Ye husbands likewise} (\hoi andres homoi“s\). Probably "likewise" here refers to honouring all men (2:17|), not "likewise" of strkjv@3:1|. {Dwell with} (\sunoikountes\). Present active participle of \sunoike“\, old verb for domestic association, here only in N.T. Used as imperative here like the participle in strkjv@2:18; strkjv@3:1|. {According to knowledge} (\kata gn“sin\). "With an intelligent recognition of the nature of the marriage relation" (Vincent). {Giving honour unto the woman as unto the weaker vessel} (\h“s asthenester“i skeuei t“i gunaikei“i aponemontes timˆn\). Present active participle of \aponem“\, old verb, to assign, to portion out (or off), here only in N.T. \Skeuos\ is an old and common word for vessel, furniture, utensil (Matthew:12:29; strkjv@2Timothy:2:20|). Here both husband and wife are termed vessels or "parts of the furniture of God's house" (Bigg). See Paul's use of \skeuos\ for ministers (2Corinthians:4:7|). \Gunaikei“i\ here is an adjective (female, feminine) from \gunˆ\ (woman, wife). She is termed "the weaker" (\t“i asthenester“i\), not for intellectual or moral weakness, but purely for physical reasons, which the husband must recognize with due consideration for marital happiness. {Joint-heirs of the grace of life} (\sunklˆronomoi charitos z“ˆs\). Late double compound found in an Ephesian inscription and the papyri, in N.T. only here, strkjv@Romans:8:17; strkjv@Ephesians:3:6; strkjv@Hebrews:11:9|. God's gift of life eternal belongs to woman as well as to man. In the eyes of God the wife may be superior to the husband, not merely equal. {To the end that your prayers be not hindered} (\eis to mˆ egkoptesthai tas proseuchas hum“n\). Purpose clause with \eis to\ and the present passive infinitive (with negative \mˆ\) of \egkopt“\, to cut in, to interrupt, late verb (Polybius), as in strkjv@Romans:15:22|, etc. Very vivid to us now with our telephones and radios when people cut in on us. \Proseuchas\ (prayers) is the accusative of general reference. Husbands surely have here cause to consider why their prayers are not answered.

rwp@Info_1Thessalonians @ There are excellent commentaries on the Thessalonian Epistles. On the Greek text one may note those by Dibelius, _Handbuch zum N.T. Zweite Auflage_ (1925); Dobschutz, _Meyer-Kommentar_ (1909); Ellicott, _Crit. and Grammat. Comm._ (1884); Findlay, _Cambridge Gk. Test._ (1904); Frame, _Intern. Critical Comm._ (1912); Lightfoot, _Notes on Epistles of Paul_ (1895); Mayer, _Die Thessalonischerbriefe_ (1908); Milligan, _St. Paul's Epistles to the Thess._ (1908); Moffatt, _Expos. Gk. Test._ (1910); Plummer, _First Thess._ (1908), _Second Thess._ (1908); Wohlenberg, _Zahn-Komm. 2 aufl._ (1908). On the English text note those by Adeney, _New Century Bible_ (1907); Denney, _Expos. Bible_ (1892); Findlay, _Cambridge Bible_ (1891); Hutchinson, _Lectures on I & II Thess._ (1883). strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:1 @{Paul, and Silvanus, and Timothy} (\Paulos kai Silouanos kai Timotheos\). Nominative absolute as customary in letters. Paul associates with himself Silvanus (Silas of Acts, spelled \Silbanos\ in D and the papyri), a Jew and Roman citizen, and Timothy, son of Jewish mother and Greek father, one of Paul's converts at Lystra on the first tour. They had both been with Paul at Thessalonica, though Timothy is not mentioned by Luke in Acts in Macedonia till Beroea (Acts:17:14f.|). Timothy had joined Paul in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1f.|), had been sent back to Thessalonica, and with Silas had rejoined Paul in Corinth (1Thessalonians:3:5; strkjv@Acts:18:5, strkjv@2Corinthians:1:19|). Silas is the elder and is mentioned first, but neither is in any sense the author of the Epistle any more than Sosthenes is co-author of I Corinthians or Timothy of II Corinthians, though Paul may sometimes have them in mind when he uses "we" in the Epistle. Paul does not here call himself "apostle" as in the later Epistles, perhaps because his position has not been so vigorously attacked as it was later. Ellicott sees in the absence of the word here a mark of the affectionate relations existing between Paul and the Thessalonians. {Unto the church of the Thessalonians} (\tˆi ekklˆsiƒi Thessalonike“n\). The dative case in address. Note absence of the article with \Thessalonike“n\ because a proper name and so definite without it. This is the common use of \ekklˆsia\ for a local body (church). The word originally meant "assembly" as in strkjv@Acts:19:39|, but it came to mean an organization for worship whether assembled or unassembled (cf. strkjv@Acts:8:3|). The only superscription in the oldest Greek manuscripts (Aleph B A) is \Pros Thessalonikeis A\ ({To the Thessalonians First}). But probably Paul wrote no superscription and certainly he would not write A to it before he had written II Thessalonians (B). His signature at the close was the proof of genuineness (2Thessalonians:3:17|) against all spurious claimants (2Thessalonians:2:2|). Unfortunately the brittle papyrus on which he wrote easily perished outside of the sand heaps and tombs of Egypt or the lava covered ruins of Herculaneum. What a treasure that autograph would be! {In God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ} (\en the“i patri kai kuri“i Jˆsou Christ“i\). This church is grounded in (\en\, with the locative case) and exists in the sphere and power of {God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ}. No article in the Greek, for both \the“i patri\ and \kuri“i Jˆsou Christ“i\ are treated as proper names. In the very beginning of this first Epistle of Paul we meet his Christology. He at once uses the full title, "Lord Jesus Christ," with all the theological content of each word. The name "Jesus" (Saviour, strkjv@Matthew:1:21|) he knew, as the "Jesus of history," the personal name of the Man of Galilee, whom he had once persecuted (Acts:9:5|), but whom he at once, after his conversion, proclaimed to be "the Messiah," (\ho Christos\, strkjv@Acts:9:22|). This position Paul never changed. In the great sermon at Antioch in Pisidia which Luke has preserved (Acts:13:23|) Paul proved that God fulfilled his promise to Israel by raising up "Jesus as Saviour" (\s“tˆra Iˆsoun\). Now Paul follows the Christian custom by adding \Christos\ (verbal from \chri“\, to anoint) as a proper name to Jesus (Jesus Christ) as later he will often say "Christ Jesus" (Colossians:1:1|). And he dares also to apply \kurios\ (Lord) to "Jesus Christ," the word appropriated by Claudius (_Dominus_, \Kurios\) and other emperors in the emperor-worship, and also common in the Septuagint for God as in strkjv@Psalms:32:1f.| (quoted by Paul in strkjv@Romans:4:8|). Paul uses \Kurios\ of God (1Corinthians:3:5|) or of Jesus Christ as here. In fact, he more frequently applies it to Christ when not quoting the Old Testament as in strkjv@Romans:4:8|. And here he places "the Lord Jesus Christ" in the same category and on the same plane with "God the father." There will be growth in Paul's Christology and he will never attain all the knowledge of Christ for which he longs (Phillipians:3:10-12|), but it is patent that here in his first Epistle there is no "reduced Christ" for Paul. He took Jesus as "Lord" when he surrendered to Jesus on the Damascus Road: "And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said to me" (Acts:22:10|). It is impossible to understand Paul without seeing clearly this first and final stand for the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul did not get this view of Jesus from current views of Mithra or of Isis or any other alien faith. The Risen Christ became at once for Paul the Lord of his life. {Grace to you and peace} (\charis humin kai eirˆnˆ\). These words, common in Paul's Epistles, bear "the stamp of Paul's experience" (Milligan). They are not commonplace salutations, but the old words "deepened and spiritualised" (Frame). The infinitive (\chairein\) so common in the papyri letters and seen in the New Testament also (Acts:15:23; strkjv@23:26; strkjv@James:1:1|) here gives place to \charis\, one of the great words of the New Testament (cf. strkjv@John:1:16f.|) and particularly of the Pauline Epistles. Perhaps no one word carries more meaning for Paul's messages than this word \charis\ (from \chair“\, rejoice) from which \charizomai\ comes. {Peace} (\eirˆnˆ\) is more than the Hebrew _shal“m_ so common in salutations. One recalls the "peace" that Christ leaves to us (John:14:27|) and the peace of God that passes all understanding (Phillipians:4:7|). This introduction is brief, but rich and gracious and pitches the letter at once on a high plane.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:5 @{Using words of flattery} (\en log“i kolakeias\). Literally, {in speech of flattery or fawning}. Old word, only here in N.T., from \kolaks\, a flatterer. An Epicurean, Philodemus, wrote a work \Peri Kolakeias\ (Concerning Flattery). Milligan (_Vocabulary_, etc.) speaks of "the selfish conduct of too many of the rhetoricians of the day," conduct extremely repugnant to Paul. The third time (verses 1,2,5|) he appeals to their knowledge of his work in Thessalonica. Frame suggests "cajolery." {Nor a cloke of covetousness} (\oute prophasei pleonexias\). Pretext (\prophasis\ from \prophain“\, to show forth, or perhaps from \pro-phˆmi\, to speak forth). This is the charge of self-interest rather than the mere desire to please people. Pretext of greediness is Frame's translation. \Pleonexia\ is merely "having more" from \pleonektˆs\, one eager for more, and \pleonekte“\, to have more, then to over-reach, all old words, all with bad meaning as the result of the desire for more. In a preacher this sin is especially fatal. Paul feels so strongly his innocence of this charge that he calls God as witness as in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:23; strkjv@Romans:9:1; strkjv@Phillipians:1:8|, a solemn oath for his own veracity.

rwp@1Timothy:1:15 @{Faithful is the saying} (\pistos ho logos\). Five times in the Pastorals (1Timothy:1:15; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@4:9; strkjv@Titus:3:8; strkjv@2Timothy:2:11|). It will pay to note carefully \pistis, pisteu“, pistos\. Same use of \pistos\ (trustworthy) applied to \logos\ in strkjv@Titus:1:9; strkjv@Revelation:21:5; strkjv@22:6|. Here and probably in strkjv@2Timothy:2:11| a definite saying seems to be referred to, possibly a quotation (\hoti\) of a current saying quite like the Johannine type of teaching. This very phrase (Christ coming into the world) occurs in strkjv@John:9:37; strkjv@11:27; strkjv@16:28; strkjv@18:37|. Paul, of course, had no access to the Johannine writings, but such "sayings" were current among the disciples. There is no formal quotation, but "the whole phrase implies a knowledge of Synoptic and Johannine language" (Lock) as in strkjv@Luke:5:32; strkjv@John:12:47|. {Acceptation} (\apodochˆs\). Genitive case with \axios\ (worthy of). Late word (Polybius, Diod., Jos.) in N.T. only here and strkjv@4:9|. {Chief} (\pr“tos\). Not \ˆn\ (I was), but \eimi\ (I am). "It is not easy to think of any one but St. Paul as penning these words" (White). In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:9| he had called himself "the least of the apostles" (\elachistos t“n apostol“n\). In strkjv@Ephesians:3:8| he refers to himself as "the less than the least of all saints" (\t“i elachistoter“i pant“n hagi“n\). On occasion Paul would defend himself as on a par with the twelve apostles (Galatians:2:6-10|) and superior to the Judaizers (2Corinthians:11:5f.; strkjv@12:11|). It is not mock humility here, but sincere appreciation of the sins of his life (cf. strkjv@Romans:7:24|) as a persecutor of the church of God (Galatians:1:13|), of men and even women (Acts:22:4f.; strkjv@26:11|). He had sad memories of those days.

rwp@1Timothy:2:4 @{Willeth} (\thelei\). God's wish and will in so far as he can influence men. {That all men should be saved} (\pantas anthr“pous s“thˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \s“z“\ with accusative of general reference. See strkjv@1Corinthians:10:33; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:18f|. {To the knowledge} (\eis epign“sin\). "The full knowledge" as in strkjv@Colossians:1:6; strkjv@Ephesians:4:13| (ten times in Paul). See strkjv@2Timothy:3:7| for the whole phrase "full knowledge of the truth" (\alˆtheia\ 14 times in the Pastorals). Paul is anxious as in Colossians and Ephesians that the Gnostics may not lead the people astray. They need the full intellectual apprehension of Christianity.

rwp@1Timothy:6:20 @{Guard that which is committed unto thee} (\tˆn parathˆkˆn phulaxon\). "Keep (aorist of urgency) the deposit." \Parathˆkˆn\ (from \paratithˆmi\, to place beside as a deposit, strkjv@2Timothy:2:2|), a banking figure, common in the papyri in this sense for the Attic \parakatathˆkˆ\ (Textus Receptus here, strkjv@2Timothy:1:12,14|). See substantive also in strkjv@2Timothy:1:12,14|. {Turning away from} (\ektrepomenos\). Present middle participle of \ektrep“\, for which see strkjv@1:6; strkjv@5:15|. {Babblings} (\kenoph“nias\). From \kenoph“nos\, uttering emptiness. Late and rare compound, in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Timothy:2:16|. {Oppositions} (\antitheseis\). Old word (\anti, thesis\), antithesis, only here in N.T. {Of the knowledge which is falsely so called} (\tˆs pseud“numou gn“se“s\). "Of the falsely named knowledge." Old word (\pseudˆs, onoma\). Our "pseudonymous." Only here in N.T.

rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ FIRST CORINTHIANS FROM EPHESUS A.D. 54 OR 55 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION It would be a hard-boiled critic today who would dare deny the genuineness of I Corinthians. The Dutch wild man, Van Manen, did indeed argue that Paul wrote no epistles if indeed he ever lived. Such intellectual banality is well answered by Whateley's _Historic Doubts about Napolean Bonaparte_ which was so cleverly done that some readers were actually convinced that no such man ever existed, but is the product of myth and legend. Even Baur was compelled to acknowledge the genuineness of I and II Corinthians, Galatians and Romans (the Big Four of Pauline criticism). It is a waste of time now to prove what all admit to be true. Paul of Tarsus, the Apostle to the Gentiles, wrote I Corinthians.

rwp@2Corinthians:1:13 @{Than what ye read} (\all' ˆ ha anagin“skete\). Note comparative conjunction \ˆ\ (than) after \all'\ and that after \alla\ (other things, same word in reality), "other than." Read in Greek (\anagin“sk“\) is knowing again, recognizing. See on ¯Acts:8:30|. {Or even acknowledge} (\ˆ kai epigin“skete\). Paul is fond of such a play on words (\anagin“skete, epigin“skete\) or paronomasia. Does he mean "read between the lines," as we say, by the use of \epi\ (additional knowledge)? {Unto the end} (\he“s telous\). The report of Titus showed that the majority now at last understood Paul. He hopes that it will last (1Corinthians:1:8|).

rwp@2Corinthians:1:14 @{As also ye did acknowledge us in part} (\kath“s kai epegn“te hˆmas apo merous\). Gracious acknowledgment (second aorist active indicative of \epign“sk“\) to the original Pauline party (1Corinthians:1:12; strkjv@3:4|) that he had seemed to care so little for them. And now in his hour of victory he shows that, if he is their ground of glorying, they are his also (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:19f.; strkjv@Phillipians:2:16|).

rwp@2Corinthians:2:14 @{But thanks be unto God} (\t“i de the“i charis\). Sudden outburst of gratitude in contrast to the previous dejection in Troas. Surely a new paragraph should begin here. In point of fact Paul makes a long digression from here to strkjv@6:10| on the subject of the Glory of the Christian Ministry as Bachmann points out in his _Kommentar_ (p. 124), only he runs it from strkjv@2:12-7:1| (_Aus der Tiefe in die Hohe_, Out of the Depths to the Heights). We can be grateful for this emotional outburst, Paul's rebound of joy on meeting Titus in Macedonia, for it has given the world the finest exposition of all sides of the Christian ministry in existence, one that reveals the wealth of Paul's nature and his mature grasp of the great things in service for Christ. See my _The Glory of the Ministry (An Exposition of II Cor. strkjv@2:12-6:10_). {Always} (\pantote\). The sense of present triumph has blotted out the gloom at Troas. {Leadeth in triumph} (\thriambeuonti\). Late common _Koin‚_ word from \thriambos\ (Latin _triumphus_, a hymn sung in festal processions to Bacchus). Verbs in \-eu“\ (like \mathˆteu“\, to make disciples) may be causative, but no example of \thriambeu“\ has been found with this meaning. It is always to lead in triumph, in papyri sometimes to make a show of. Picture here is of Paul as captive in God's triumphal procession. {The savour} (\tˆn osmˆn\). In a Roman triumph garlands of flowers scattered sweet odour and incense bearers dispensed perfumes. The knowledge of God is here the aroma which Paul had scattered like an incense bearer.

rwp@2Corinthians:4:6 @{God who said} (\ho theos ho eip“n\). Paraphrase of strkjv@Genesis:1:3|. {Who shined} (\hos elampsen\). Like a lamp in the heart (cf. strkjv@Matthew:5:15|). Miners carry a lamp on the forehead, Christians carry one in their hearts lit by the Spirit of God. {To give the light} (\pros ph“tismon\). For the illumination. {In the face of Jesus Christ} (\en pros“p“i Iˆsou Christou\). The Christian who looks on the face of Jesus Christ as Moses looked upon the glory of God will be able to give the illumination of the knowledge of the glory of God. See strkjv@2:10| for \pros“pon\.

rwp@2Corinthians:4:7 @{This treasure} (\ton thˆsauron touton\). On \thˆsauron\ see strkjv@Matthew:6:19-21|. It is the power of giving the illumination of the knowledge of the glory of God (verse 6|). "The power is limitless, but it is stored in very unlikely receptacles" (Plummer). This warning Paul gives in contrast (\de\) with the exultation of verse 6| (Bernard). {In earthen vessels} (\en ostrakinois skeuesin\). This adjective is common in the LXX with \skeuos, aggos\ and \aggeion\. It occurs again in strkjv@2Timothy:2:20| with \skeuˆ\. It is found also in the papyri with \skeuos\ as here. It is from \ostrakon\, baked clay (same root as \osteon\, bone), so many fragments of which are found in Egypt with writing on them. We are but earthen jars used of God for his purposes (Romans:9:20ff.|) and so fragile. {The exceeding greatness} (\hˆ huperbolˆ\). See on ¯1Corinthians:12:31| for this word, "the preeminence of the power." This is God's purpose (\hina--ˆi\). God, not man, is the {dynamo} (\dunamis\). It comes from God (\tou theou\, ablative) and does not originate with us (\mˆ ex hˆm“n\).

rwp@2Corinthians:10:5 @{Casting down imaginations} (\logismous kathairountes\). The same military figure (\kathairesis\) and the present active participle agreeing with \strateuometha\ in verse 3| (verse 4| a parenthesis). The reasonings or imaginations (\logismous\, old word from \logizomai\, to reckon, only here in N.T. and strkjv@Romans:2:15|) are treated as forts or citadels to be conquered. {Every high thing that is exalted} (\pan hups“ma epairomenon\). Same metaphor. \Hups“ma\ from \hupso“\ is late _Koin‚_ word (in LXX, Plutarch, Philo, papyri) for height and that figure carried on by \epairomenon\. Paul aims to pull down the top-most perch of audacity in their reasonings against the knowledge of God. We need Paul's skill and courage today. {Bringing every thought into captivity} (\aichmal“tizontes pƒn noˆma\). Present active participle of \aichmal“tiz“\, common _Koin‚_ verb from \aichmal“tos\, captive in war (\aichmˆ\, spear, \hal“tos\ verbal of \haliskomai\, to be taken). See on ¯Luke:21:24|. Paul is the most daring of thinkers, but he lays all his thoughts at the feet of Jesus. For \noˆma\ (device) see on ¯2:11|. {To the obedience of Christ} (\eis tˆn hupakoˆn tou Christou\). Objective genitive, "to the obedience unto Christ." That is Paul's conception of intellectual liberty, freedom in Christ. Deissmann (_St. Paul_, p. 141) calls this "the mystic genitive."

rwp@2Corinthians:11:6 @{Rude in speech} (\idi“tˆs t“i log“i\). Locative case with \idi“tˆs\ for which word see on ¯Acts:4:13; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:16,23,24|. The Greeks regarded a man as \idi“tˆs\ who just attended to his own affairs (\ta idia\) and took no part in public life. Paul admits that he is not a professional orator (cf. strkjv@10:10|), but denies that he is unskilled in knowledge (\all' ou tˆi gn“sei\). {Among all men} (\en pƒsin\). He has made his mastery of the things of Christ plain among all men. He knew his subject.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:6 @{That ye shall know} (\hoti epign“sesthe\). Such a testing of themselves will give them full knowledge that Paul is not {reprobate} (\adokimos\). The best way for vacillating Christians to stop it is to draw close to Christ.

rwp@Info_2Peter @ THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER ABOUT A.D. 66 OR 67 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION MOST DOUBTFUL NEW TESTAMENT BOOK Every book in the New Testament is challenged by some one, as indeed the historicity of Jesus Christ himself is and the very existence of God. But it is true that more modern scholars deny the genuineness of II Peter than that of any single book in the canon. This is done by men like F. H. Chase, J. B. Mayor, and R. D. Strachan, who are followers of Christ as Lord and Saviour. One has to admit that the case concerning II Peter has problems of peculiar difficulty that call for careful consideration and balanced judgment. One other word needs to be said, which is that an adverse decision against the authenticity of II Peter stands by itself and does not affect the genuineness of the other books. It is easy to take an extreme position for or against it without full knowledge of all the evidence.

rwp@Info_2Peter @ AND PERSONAL EXPERIENCES OF PETER The writer makes use of his own contact with Jesus, especially at the Transfiguration of Christ (Mark:9:2-8; strkjv@Matthew:17:1-8; strkjv@Luke:9:28-36|). This fact has been used against the genuineness of the Epistle on the plea that the writer is too anxious, anyhow, to show that he is Symeon Peter (2Peter:1:1|). But Bigg rightly replies that, if he had only given his name with no personal contacts with Jesus, the name would be called "a forged addition." It is possible also that the experience on the Mount of Transfiguration may have been suggested by Peter's use of \exodos\ for his own death (2Peter:1:15|), the very word used by Luke (Luke:9:31|) as the topic of discussion between Jesus and Moses and Elijah. There is also in strkjv@2Peter:1:13| the use of "tent" (\skˆnoma\) for the life in the body, like Peter's use of "tents" (\skˆnas\) to Jesus at that very time (Mark:9:5; strkjv@Matthew:17:4; strkjv@Luke:9:33|). In strkjv@2Peter:1:14| Peter also refers to the plain words of Jesus about his coming death (John:21:18f.|). In strkjv@2Peter:1:15| Peter speaks of his own plan for preserving the knowledge of Jesus when he is gone (possibly by Mark's Gospel). All this is in perfect keeping with Peter's own nature.

rwp@2Peter:1:2 @{Be multiplied} (\plˆthuntheiˆ\). First aorist passive optative of \plˆthun“\ in a wish for the future (volitive use) as in strkjv@1Peter:1:2; strkjv@Jude:1:2|. {In the knowledge} (\en epign“sei\). Full (additional, \epi\) knowledge as in strkjv@1:8| (only \gn“sis\ in strkjv@1:5,6; strkjv@3:18|), but \epign“sin\ again in strkjv@1:3,8; strkjv@2:20|. As in Colossians, so here full knowledge is urged against the claims of the Gnostic heretics to special \gn“sis\. {Of God and of Jesus our Lord} (\tou theou kai Iˆsou tou kuriou hˆm“n\). At first sight the idiom here seems to require one person as in strkjv@1:1|, though there is a second article (\tou\) before \kuriou\, and \Iˆsou\ is a proper name. But the text here is very uncertain. Bengel, Spitta, Zahn, Nestle accept the short reading of P and some Vulgate MSS. and some minuscles with only \tou kuriou hˆm“n\ (our Lord) from which the three other readings may have come. Elsewhere in II Peter \gn“sis\ and \epign“sis\ are used of Christ alone. The text of II Peter is not in a good state of preservation.

rwp@2Peter:1:5 @{Yea, and for this very cause} (\kai auto touto de\). Adverbial accusative (\auto touto\) here, a classic idiom, with both \kai\ and \de\. Cf. \kai touto\ (Phillipians:1:29|), \touto men--touto de\ (Hebrews:10:33|). "The soul of religion is the practical part" (Bunyan). Because of the new birth and the promises we have a part to play. {Adding on your part} (\pareisenegkantes\). First aorist active participle of \pareispher“\, old double compound, to bring in (\eispher“\), besides (\para\), here only in N.T. {All diligence} (\spoudˆn pƒsan\). Old word from \speud“\ to hasten (Luke:19:5f.|). This phrase (\pƒsan spoudˆn\) occurs in strkjv@Jude:1:3| with \poioumenos\ and on the inscription in Stratonicea (verse 3|) with \ispheresthai\ (certainly a curious coincidence, to say the least, though common in the _Koin‚_). {In your faith} (\en tˆi pistei hum“n\). Faith or \pistis\ (strong conviction as in strkjv@Hebrews:11:1,3|, the root of the Christian life strkjv@Ephesians:2:8|) is the foundation which goes through various steps up to love (\agapˆ\). See similar lists in strkjv@James:1:30; strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:3; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:3f.; strkjv@Galatians:5:22f.; strkjv@Romans:5:3f.; strkjv@8:29f|. Hermas (Vis. iii. 8. 1-7) has a list called "daughters" of one another. Note the use of \en\ (in, on) with each step. {Supply} (\epichorˆgˆsate\). First aorist active imperative of \epichorˆge“\, late and rare double compound verb (\epi\ and \chorˆge“\ strkjv@1Peter:4:11| from \chorˆgos\, chorus-leader, \choros\ and \hˆgeomai\, to lead), to fit out the chorus with additional (complete) supplies. Both compound and simplex (more common) occur in the papyri. In strkjv@1:11| and already in strkjv@2Corinthians:9:10; strkjv@Galatians:3:5; strkjv@Colossians:2:19|. {Virtue} (\aretˆn\). Moral power, moral energy, vigor of soul (Bengel). See 3|. {Knowledge} (\gn“sin\). Insight, understanding (1Corinthians:16:18; strkjv@John:15:15|).

rwp@2Peter:1:8 @{For if these things are yours and abound} (\tauta gar humin huparchonta kai pleonazonta\). Present active circumstantial (conditional) participles neuter plural of \huparch“\ and \pleonaz“\ (see strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:12|) with dative case \humin\, "these things existing for you (or in you) and abounding." {They make you to be} (\kathistˆsin\). "Render" (present active indicative of \kathistˆmi\, old verb, strkjv@James:3:6|), singular because \tauta\ neuter plural. {Not idle nor unfruitful} (\ouk argous oude akarpous\). Accusative predicative plural with \humas\ understood, both adjectives with alpha privative, for \argos\ see strkjv@James:2:20| and for \akarpos\ strkjv@Matthew:13:22|. {Knowledge} (\epign“sin\). "Full (additional) knowledge" as in strkjv@1:2|.

rwp@2Peter:3:18 @{But grow} (\auxanete de\). Present active imperative of \auxan“\, in contrast with such a fate pictured in verse 17|, "but keep on growing." {In the grace and knowledge} (\en chariti kai gn“sei\). Locative case with \en\. Grow in both. Keep it up. See on ¯1:1| for the idiomatic use of the single article (\tou\) here, "of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." {To him} (\aut“i\). To Christ. {For ever} (\eis hˆmeran ai“nos\). "Unto the day of eternity." Songs:Sirach strkjv@18:9f. One of the various ways of expressing eternity by the use of \ai“n\. Songs:\eis ton ai“na\ in strkjv@John:6:5; strkjv@12:34|.

rwp@2Timothy:2:2 @{From me} (\par' emou\). As in strkjv@1:13|. Paul was Timothy's chief teacher of Christ. {Among many witnesses} (\dia poll“n martur“n\). Plutarch has \dia\ in this sense and Field (_Ot. Norv._) suggests that it is a legal phrase "supported by many witnesses." Not mere spectators, but testifiers. See Paul's use of \dia\ strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:2; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:4; strkjv@Romans:2:27; strkjv@14:20|. Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:1-8| gives many witnesses of the resurrection of Christ. {Commit thou} (\parathou\). Second aorist middle imperative of \paratithˆmi\ (1Timothy:1:18|) to deposit, same metaphor as \parathˆkˆ\ in strkjv@1:12,14|. "Deposit thou." {Faithful} (\pistois\). "Trustworthy," "reliable," as in strkjv@1Timothy:1:12| of Paul himself. {Able} (\hikanoi\). Capable, qualified, as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:16; strkjv@3:5|. {Others also} (\kai heterous\). Not necessarily "different," but "others in addition." This is the way to pass on the torch of the light of the knowledge of God in Christ. Paul taught Timothy who will teach others who will teach still others, an endless chain of teacher-training and gospel propaganda.

rwp@2Timothy:2:25 @{Correcting} (\paideuonta\). See strkjv@Titus:2:12|. "Schooling" (Parry). {Oppose themselves} (\antidiatithemenous\). Present middle (direct) participle of \antidiatithˆmi\, late double compound (Diodorus, Philo) to place oneself in opposition, here only in N.T. {If peradventure God may give} (\mˆ pote d“iˆ ho theos\). Here Westcott and Hort read the late form of the second aorist active optative of \did“mi\ for the usual \doiˆ\ as they do in strkjv@1:18|. But there it is a wish for the future and so regular, while here the optative with \mˆ pote\ in a sort of indirect question is used with a primary tense \dei\ (present) and parallel with an undoubted subjunctive \ananˆps“sin\, while in strkjv@Luke:3:15| \mˆ pote eie\ is with a secondary tense. Examples of such an optative do occur in the papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 989) so that we cannot go as far as Moulton does and say that we "must" read the subjunctive \d“ˆi\ here (_Prolegomena_, pp. 55, 193). {Repentance} (\metanoian\). "Change of mind" (2Corinthians:7:10; strkjv@Romans:2:4|). {Unto the knowledge of the truth} (\eis epign“sin alˆtheias\). Paul's word "full knowledge" (Co strkjv@1:9|).

rwp@2Timothy:3:7 @{Never able to come to the knowledge of the truth} (\mˆdepote eis epign“sin alˆtheias elthein dunamena\). Pathetic picture of these hypnotized women without intellectual power to cut through the fog of words and, though always learning scraps of things, they never come into the full knowledge (\epign“sin\) of the truth in Christ. And yet they even pride themselves on belonging to the intelligentsia!

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

rwp@Acts:7:1 @{Are these things so?} (\ei tauta hout“s echei\). On this use of \ei\ in a direct question see on ¯1:6|. Literally "Do these things hold thus?" A formal question by the high priest like our "Do you plead guilty, or not guilty?" (Furneaux). The abrupt question of the high priest would serve to break the evident spell of the angelic look on Stephen's face. Two charges had been made against Stephen (1) speaking against the holy temple, (2) changing the customs which Moses had delivered. Stephen could not give a yes or no answer to these two charges. There was an element of truth in each of them and a large amount of error all mixed together. Songs:he undertakes to explain his real position by the historical method, that is to say, by a rapid survey of God's dealing with the people of Israel and the Gentiles. It is the same method adopted by Paul in Pisidian Antioch (Acts:13:16ff.|) after he had become the successor of Stephen in his interpretation of the universal mission of Christianity. If one is disposed to say that Luke made up this speech to suit Stephen's predicament, he has to explain how the style is less Lukan than the narrative portions of Acts with knowledge of Jewish traditions that a Greek would not be likely to know. Precisely how Luke obtained the data for the speech we do not know, but Saul heard it and Philip, one of the seven, almost certainly. Both could have given Luke help about it. It is even possible that some one took notes of this important address. We are to remember also that the speech was interrupted at the end and may not include all that Stephen meant to say. But enough is given to give us a good idea of how Stephen met the first charge "by showing that the worship of God is not confined to Jerusalem or the Jewish temple" (Page). Then he answers the second charge by proving that God had many dealings with their fathers before Moses came and that Moses foretold the coming of the Messiah who is now known to be Jesus. It is at this point (verse 51|) that Stephen becomes passionate and so powerful that the wolves in the Sanhedrin lose all self-control. It is a great and masterful exposition of the worldwide mission of the gospel of Christ in full harmony with the Great Commission of Christ. The apostles had been so busy answering the Sadducees concerning the Resurrection of Christ and maintaining their freedom to teach and preach that they had not pushed the world-wide propaganda of the gospel as Jesus had commanded after they had received the Promise of the Father. But Stephen had proclaimed the same message of Christ and was now facing the same fate. Peter's mind had been enlightened by the Holy Spirit so that he could rightly interpret Joel and David in the light of Pentecost. "Songs:Stephen read the history of the Old Testament with new eyes in the light of the life and death of Jesus" (Furneaux).

rwp@Acts:15:12 @{Kept silence} (\esigˆsen\). Ingressive first aorist active of \siga“\, old verb, to hold one's peace. All the multitude became silent after Peter's speech and because of it. {Hearkened} (\ˆkouon\). Imperfect active of \akou“\, descriptive of the rapt attention, were listening. {Unto Barnabas and Paul} (\Barnaba kai Paulou\). Note placing Barnabas before Paul as in verse 25|, possibly because in Jerusalem Barnabas was still better known than Paul. {Rehearsing} (\exˆgoumen“n\). Present middle participle of \exˆgeomai\, old verb, to go through or lead out a narrative of events as in strkjv@Luke:24:35; strkjv@Acts:10:8| which see. Three times (14:27; strkjv@15:4,12|) Paul is described as telling the facts about their mission work, facts more eloquent than argument (Page). One of the crying needs in the churches is fuller knowledge of the facts of mission work and progress with enough detail to give life and interest. The signs and wonders which God had wrought among the Gentiles set the seal of approval on the work done through (\dia\) Barnabas and Paul. This had been Peter's argument about Cornelius (11:17|). This same verb (\exˆgˆsato\) is used by James in verse 14| referring to Peter's speech.

rwp@Acts:21:37 @{May I say something unto thee?} (\Ei exestin moi eipein ti pros se?\). On this use of \ei\ in a direct question see on ¯1:6|. The calm self-control of Paul in the presence of this mob is amazing. His courteous request to Lysias was in Greek to the chiliarch's amazement. {Dost thou know Greek?} (\Hellˆnisti gin“skeis?\). Old Greek adverb in \-i\ from \Hellˆniz“\, meaning "in Greek." "Do you know it in Greek?" In the N.T. only here and strkjv@John:19:20|. {Art thou not then the Egyptian?} (\Ouk ara su ei ho Aiguptios?\). Expects the answer _Yes_ and \ara\ argues the matter (therefore). The well-known (\ho\) Egyptian who had given the Romans so much trouble. {Stirred up to sedition} (\anastat“sas\). First aorist active participle of \anastato“\, a late verb from \anastatos\, outcast, and so to unsettle, to stir up, to excite, once known only in LXX and strkjv@Acts:17:6| (which see); strkjv@21:38; strkjv@Galatians:5:12|, but now found in several papyri examples with precisely this sense to upset. {Of the Assassins} (\t“n sikari“n\). Latin word _sicarius_, one who carried a short sword \sica\ under his cloak, a cutthroat. Josephus uses this very word for bands of robbers under this Egyptian (_War_ II. 17,6 and 13,5; _Ant_. XX. 8,10). Josephus says that there were 30,000 who gathered on the Mount of Olives to see the walls of Jerusalem fall down and not merely 4,000 as Lysias does here. But Lysias may refer to the group that were armed thus (banditti) the core of the mob of 30,000. Lysias at once saw by Paul's knowledge of Greek that he was not the famous Egyptian who led the Assassins and escaped himself when Felix attacked and slew the most of them.

rwp@Acts:22:24 @{That he be examined by scourging} (\mastixin anetazesthai auton\). The present passive infinitive of \anetaz“\ in indirect command after \eipas\ (bidding). This verb does not occur in the old Greek (which used \exetaz“\ as in strkjv@Matthew:2:8|), first in the LXX, in the N.T. only here and verse 29|, but Milligan and Moulton's _Vocabulary_ quotes an Oxyrhynchus papyrus of A.D. 127 which has a prefect using the word directing government clerks to "examine" (\anetazein\) documents and glue them together into volumes (\tomoi\). The word was evidently in use for such purposes. It was a kind of "third degree" applied to Paul by the use of scourges (\mastixin\), instrumental plural of \mastix\, old word for whip, as in strkjv@Hebrews:11:36|. But this way of beginning an inquiry by torture (inquisition) was contrary to Roman law (Page): _Non esse a tormentis incipiendum, Divus Augustus statuit_. {That he might know} (\hina epign“i\). Final clause with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \epign“sk“\ (full knowledge). Lysias was as much in the dark as ever, for Paul's speech had been in Aramaic and this second explosion was a mystery to him like the first. {They so shouted} (\houtos epeph“noun\). Imperfect active progressive imperfect had been so shouting.

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

rwp@Acts:24:11 @{Seeing that thou canst take knowledge} (\dunamenou sou epign“nai\). Genitive absolute again. The same word and form (\epign“nai\) used by Tertullus, if in Greek, in verse 8| to Felix. Paul takes it up and repeats it. {Not more than twelve days} (\ou pleious hˆmerai d“deka\). Here \ˆ\ (than) is absent without change of case to the ablative as usually happens. But this idiom is found in the _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 666). {Since} (\aph' hˆs\). Supply \hˆmeras\, "from which day." {To worship} (\proskunˆs“n\). One of the few examples of the future participle of purpose so common in the old Attic.

rwp@Acts:24:22 @{Having more exact knowledge} (\akribesteron eid“s\). "Knowing" (second perfect active participle of \oida\) "more accurately" (comparative of adverb \akrib“s\). More accurately than what? Than the Sanhedrin supposed he had "concerning the Way" (\ta peri tˆs hodou\, the things concerning the Way, common in Acts for Christianity). How Felix had gained this knowledge of Christianity is not stated. Philip the Evangelist lived here in Caesarea and there was a church also. Drusilla was a Jewess and may have told him something. Besides, it is wholly possible that Felix knew of the decision of Gallio in Corinth that Christianity was a _religio licita_ as a form of Judaism. As a Roman official he knew perfectly well that the Sanhedrin with the help of Tertullus had failed utterly to make out a case against Paul. He could have released Paul and probably would have done so but for fear of offending the Jews whose ruler he was and the hope that Paul (note "alms" in verse 17|) might offer him bribes for his liberty. {Deferred them} (\anebaleto autous\). Second aorist middle indicative of \anaball“\, old verb (only here in N.T.) to throw or toss up, to put back or off, in middle to put off from one, to delay, to adjourn. Felix adjourned the case without a decision under a plausible pretext, that he required the presence of Lysias in person, which was not the case. Lysias had already said that Paul was innocent and was never summoned to Caesarea, so far as we know. Since Paul was a Roman citizen, Lysias could have thrown some light on the riot, if he had any. {Shall come down} (\katabˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \katabain“\. {I will determine your matter} (\diagn“somai ta kath' humƒs\). Future middle of \diagin“sk“\, old and common verb to know accurately or thoroughly (\dia\). In the N.T. only here (legal sense) and strkjv@23:15|. "The things according to you" (plural, the matters between Paul and the Sanhedrin).

rwp@Acts:25:10 @{I am standing before Caesar's judgment-seat} (\Hest“s epi tou bˆmatos Kaisaros eimi\). Periphrastic present perfect indicative (\hest“s eimi\), second perfect participle \hest“s\ of \histˆmi\ (intransitive). Paul means to say that he is a Roman citizen before a Roman tribunal. Festus was the representative of Caesar and had no right to hand him over to a Jewish tribunal. Festus recognized this by saying to Paul "wilt thou" (\theleis\). {Where I ought to be judged} (\hou me dei krinesthai\). Rather, "Where I must be judged," for \dei\ expresses necessity (it is necessary). Paul exposes the conduct of Festus with merciless precision. {As thou also very well knowest} (\h“s kai su kallion epigin“skeis\). "As thou also dost understand (hast additional knowledge, \epigin“skeis\) better" (than thou art willing to admit). That this is Paul's meaning by the use of the comparative \kallion\ (positive \kal“s\) is made plain by the confession of Festus to Agrippa in verse 18|. Paul says that Festus knows that he has done no wrong to the Jews at all (\ouden ˆdikˆka\) and yet he is trying to turn him over to the wrath of the Jews in Jerusalem.

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

rwp@Acts:26:7 @{Our twelve tribes} (\to d“dekaphulon hˆm“n\). A word found only here in N.T. and in Christian and Jewish writings, though \d“dekamˆnon\ (twelve month) is common in the papyri and \dekaphulos\ (ten tribes) in Herodotus. Paul's use of this word for the Jewish people, like strkjv@James:1:1| (\tais d“deka phulais\, the twelve tribes), shows that Paul had no knowledge of any "lost ten tribes." There is a certain national pride and sense of unity in spite of the dispersion (Page). {Earnestly} (\en ekteneiƒi\). A late word from \ektein“\, to stretch out, only here in N.T., but in papyri and inscriptions. Page refers to Simeon and Anna (Luke:2:25-28|) as instances of Jews looking for the coming of the Messiah. Note the accusative of \nukta kai hˆmeran\ as in strkjv@20:31|. {Hope to attain} (\elpizei katantˆsai\). This Messianic hope had been the red thread running through Jewish history. Today, alas, it is a sadly worn thread for Jews who refuse to see the Messiah in Jesus. {I am accused by Jews} (\egkaloumai hupo Ioudai“n\). The very word used in strkjv@23:28| (\enekaloun\) which see, and by Jews of all people in the world whose mainspring was this very "hope." It is a tremendously effective turn.

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:1:7 @{Of Epaphras} (\apo Epaphrƒ\). "From Epaphras" who is the source of their knowledge of Christ. {On our behalf} (\huper hˆm“n\). Clearly correct (Aleph A B D) and not \huper hum“n\ (on your behalf). In a true sense Epaphras was Paul's messenger to Colossae.

rwp@Colossians:1:9 @{That ye may be filled with} (\hina plˆr“thˆte\). First aorist (effective) passive subjunctive of \plˆro“\, to fill full. {The knowledge of his will} (\tˆn epign“sin tou thelˆmatos autou\). The accusative case is retained with this passive verb. \Epign“sis\ is a _Koin‚_ word (Polybius, Plutarch, etc.) for additional (\epi\) or full knowledge. The word is the keynote of Paul's reply to the conceit of Gnosticism. The cure for these intellectual upstarts is not ignorance, not obscurantism, but more knowledge of the will of God. {In all spiritual wisdom and understanding} (\en pasˆi sophiƒi kai sunesei pneumatikˆi\). Both \pasei\ (all) and \pneumatikˆi\ (spiritual) are to be taken with both \sophiƒi\ and \sunesei\. In strkjv@Ephesians:1:8| Paul uses \phronˆsei\ (from \phrˆn\, intellect) rather than \sunesei\ (grasp, from \suniˆmi\, to send together). \Sunesis\ is the faculty of deciding in particular cases while \sophia\ gives the general principles (Abbott). Paul faces Gnosticism with full front and wishes the freest use of all one's intellectual powers in interpreting Christianity. The preacher ought to be the greatest man in the world for he has to deal with the greatest problems of life and death.

rwp@Colossians:1:10 @{To walk worthily of the Lord} (\peripatˆsai axi“s tou Kuriou\). This aorist active infinitive may express purpose or result. Certainly this result is the aim of the right knowledge of God. "The end of all knowledge is conduct" (Lightfoot). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:12; strkjv@Phillipians:1:27; strkjv@Ephesians:4:1| for a like use of \axi“s\ (adverb) with the genitive. {In the knowledge of God} (\tˆi epign“sei tou theou\). Instrumental case, "by means of the full knowledge of God." This is the way for fruit-bearing and growth to come. Note both participles (\karpophorountes kai auxanomenoi\) together as in verse 6|. {Unto all pleasing} (\eis pƒsan areskian\). In order to please God in all things (1Thessalonians:4:1|). \Areskia\ is late word from \areskeu“\, to be complaisant (Polybius, Plutarch) and usually in bad sense (obsequiousness). Only here in N.T., but in good sense. It occurs in the good sense in the papyri and inscriptions.

rwp@Colossians:2:2 @{May be comforted} (\paraklˆth“sin\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \parakale“\ (for which see strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3-7|) in final clause with \hina\. {Being knit together} (\sunbibasthentes\). First aorist passive participle of \sunbibaz“\, old verb, causal of \bain“\, to make go together, to coalesce in argument (Acts:16:10|), in spiritual growth (Colossians:2:19|), in love as here. Love is the \sundesmos\ (3:14|) that binds all together. {Unto all riches} (\eis pan ploutos\). Probably some distinction intended between \en\ (in love as the sphere) and \eis\ (unto as the goal). {Of the full assurance of understanding} (\tˆs plˆrophorias tˆs sunese“s\). On \plˆrophoria\, see strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:5|. From \plˆrophore“\ (see strkjv@Luke:1:1|) and only in N.T. (1Thessalonians:1:5; strkjv@Colossians:2:2; strkjv@Hebrews:6:11; strkjv@10:22|), Clement of Rome (_Cor_. 42) and one papyrus example. Paul desires the full use of the intellect in grasping the great mystery of Christ and it calls for the full and balanced exercise of all one's mental powers. {That they may know} (\eis epign“sin\). "Unto full knowledge." This use of \epign“sis\ (full, additional knowledge) is Paul's reply to the Gnostics with the limited and perverted \gn“sis\ (knowledge). {The mystery of God, even Christ} (\tou mustˆriou tou theou, Christou\). The MSS. differ widely here, but this is Westcott and Hort's reading. Genitive (objective) with \epign“sin\ and \Christou\ in apposition. Christ is "the mystery of God," but no longer hidden, but manifested (1:26|) and meant for us to know to the fulness of our capacity.

rwp@Colossians:2:3 @{In whom} (\en h“i\). This locative form can refer to \mustˆriou\ or to \Christou\. It really makes no difference in sense since Christ is the mystery of God. {All the treasures of wisdom and knowledge} (\pantes hoi thˆsauroi tˆs sophias kai gn“se“s\). See on ¯Matthew:2:11; strkjv@6:19-21| for this old word, our thesaurus, for coffer, storehouse, treasure. Paul confronts these pretentious intellectuals (Gnostics) with the bold claim that Christ sums up all wisdom and knowledge. These treasures are hidden (\apokruphoi\, old adjective from \apokrupt“\, to hide away, strkjv@Mark:4:22|) whether the Gnostics have discovered them or not. They are there (in Christ) as every believer knows by fresh and repeated discovery.

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

rwp@Colossians:2:9 @{For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily} (\hoti en aut“i katoikei pƒn to plˆr“ma tˆs theotˆtos s“matik“s\). In this sentence, given as the reason (\hoti\, because) for the preceding claim for Christ as the measure of human knowledge Paul states the heart of his message about the Person of Christ. There dwells (at home) in Christ not one or more aspects of the Godhead (the very \essence\ of God, from \theos, deitas\) and not to be confused with \theiotes\ in strkjv@Romans:1:20| (from \theios\, the {quality} of God, _divinitas_), here only in N.T. as \theiotˆs\ only in strkjv@Romans:1:20|. The distinction is observed in Lucian and Plutarch. \Theiotˆs\ occurs in the papyri and inscriptions. Paul here asserts that "all the \plˆr“ma\ of the Godhead," not just certain aspects, dwells in Christ and in bodily form (\s“matik“s\, late and rare adverb, in Plutarch, inscription, here only in N.T.), dwells now in Christ in his glorified humanity (Phillipians:2:9-11|), "the body of his glory" (\t“i s“mati tˆs doxˆs\). The fulness of the God-head was in Christ before the Incarnation (John:1:1,18; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6|), during the Incarnation (John:1:14,18; strkjv@1John:1:1-3|). It was the Son of God who came in the likeness of men (Phillipians:2:7|). Paul here disposes of the Docetic theory that Jesus had no human body as well as the Cerinthian separation between the man Jesus and the aeon Christ. He asserts plainly the deity and the humanity of Jesus Christ in corporeal form.

rwp@Colossians:3:10 @{And have put on} (\kai endusamenoi\). First aorist middle participle (in causal sense as before) of \endun“\, old and common verb (Latin _induo_, English endue) for putting on a garment. Used of putting on Christ (Galatians:3:27; strkjv@Romans:13:14|). {The new man} (\ton neon\). "The new (young as opposed to old \palaion\) man" (though \anthr“pon\ is not here expressed, but understood from the preceding phrase). In strkjv@Ephesians:4:24| Paul has \endusasthai ton kainon\ (fresh as opposed to worn out) \anthr“pon\. {Which is being renewed} (\ton anakainoumenon\). Present passive articular participle of \anakaino“\. Paul apparently coined this word on the analogy of \ananeomai\. \Anakainiz“\ already existed (Hebrews:6:6|). Paul also uses \anakain“sis\ (Romans:12:2; strkjv@Titus:3:5|) found nowhere before him. By this word Paul adds the meaning of \kainos\ to that of \neos\ just before. It is a continual refreshment (\kainos\) of the new (\neos\, young) man in Christ Jesus. {Unto knowledge} (\eis epign“sin\). "Unto full (additional) knowledge," one of the keywords in this Epistle. {After the image} (\kat' eikona\). An allusion to strkjv@Genesis:1:26,28|. The restoration of the image of God in us is gradual and progressive (2Corinthians:3:18|), but will be complete in the final result (Romans:8:29; strkjv@1John:3:2|).

rwp@Ephesians:1:17 @{The Father of glory} (\ho patˆr tˆs doxˆs\). The God characterized by glory (the Shekinah, strkjv@Hebrews:9:5|) as in strkjv@Acts:7:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3; strkjv@James:2:1|. {That--may give} (\hina--d“iˆ\). In strkjv@Colossians:1:9| \hina\ is preceded by \aitoumenoi\, but here the sub-final use depends on the general idea asking in the sentence. The form \d“iˆ\ is a late _Koin‚_ optative (second aorist active) for the usual \doiˆ\. It occurs also in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:16; strkjv@Romans:15:5; strkjv@2Timothy:1:16,18| in the text of Westcott and Hort. Here B 63 read \d“i\ (like strkjv@John:15:16|) second aorist active subjunctive, the form naturally looked for after a primary tense (\pauomai\). This use of the volitive optative with \hina\ after a primary tense is rare, but not unknown in ancient Greek. {A spirit of wisdom and revelation} (\pneuma sophias kai apokalupse“s\). The Revised Version does not refer this use of \pneuma\ to the Holy Spirit (cf. strkjv@Galatians:6:1; strkjv@Romans:8:15|), but it is open to question if it is possible to obtain this wisdom and revelation apart from the Holy Spirit. {In the knowledge of him} (\en epign“sei autou\). In the full knowledge of Christ as in Colossians.

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

rwp@Ephesians:4:13 @{Till we all attain} (\mechri katantˆs“men hoi pantes\). Temporal clause with purpose idea with \mechri\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \katanta“\, late verb, to come down to the goal (Phillipians:3:11|). "The whole" including every individual. Hence the need of so many gifts. {Unto the unity of the faith} (\eis tˆn henotˆta tˆs piste“s\). "Unto oneness of faith" (of trust) in Christ (verse 3|) which the Gnostics were disturbing. {And of the knowledge of the Son of God} (\kai tˆs epign“se“s tou huiou tou theou\). Three genitives in a chain dependent also on \tˆn henotˆta\, "the oneness of full (\epi-\) knowledge of the Son of God," in opposition to the Gnostic vagaries. {Unto a full-grown man} (\eis andra teleion\). Same figure as in strkjv@2:15| and \teleios\ in sense of adult as opposed to \nˆpioi\ (infants) in 14|. {Unto the measure of the stature} (\eis metron hˆlikias\). Songs:apparently \hˆlikia\ here as in strkjv@Luke:2:52|, not age (John:9:21|). Boys rejoice in gaining the height of a man. But Paul adds to this idea "the fulness of Christ" (\tou plˆr“matos tou Christou\), like "the fulness of God" in strkjv@3:19|. And yet some actually profess to be "perfect" with a standard like this to measure by! No pastor has finished his work when the sheep fall so far short of the goal.

rwp@Ephesians:4:14 @{That we may be no longer children} (\hina mˆketi “men nˆpioi\). Negative final clause with present subjunctive. Some Christians are quite content to remain "babes" in Christ and never cut their eye-teeth (Hebrews:5:11-14|), the victims of every charlatan who comes along. {Tossed to and fro} (\klud“nizomenoi\). Present passive participle of \klud“nizomai\, late verb from \klud“n\ (wave, strkjv@James:1:6|), to be agitated by the waves, in LXX, only here in N.T. One example in Vettius Valens. {Carried about} (\peripheromenoi\). Present passive participle of \peripher“\, old verb, to carry round, whirled round "by every wind (\anem“i\, instrumental case) of teaching." In some it is all wind, even like a hurricane or a tornado. If not anchored by full knowledge of Christ, folks are at the mercy of these squalls. {By the sleight} (\en tˆi kubiƒi\). "In the deceit," "in the throw of the dice" (\kubia\, from \kubos\, cube), sometimes cheating. {In craftiness} (\en panourgiƒi\). Old word from \panourgos\ (\pan, ergon\, any deed, every deed), cleverness, trickiness. {After the wiles of error} (\pros tˆn methodian tˆs planˆs\). \Methodia\ is from \methodeu“\ (\meta, hodos\) to follow after or up, to practise deceit, and occurs nowhere else (Ephesians:4:13; strkjv@6:11|) save in late papyri in the sense of method. The word \planˆs\ (wandering like our "planet") adds to the evil idea in the word. Paul has covered the whole ground in this picture of Gnostic error.

rwp@Ephesians:4:16 @{From which} (\ex hou\). Out of which as the source of energy and direction. {Fitly framed} (\sunarmologoumenon\). See strkjv@2:21| for this verb. {Through that which every joint supplieth} (\dia pasˆs haphˆs tˆs epichorˆgias\). Literally, "through every joint of the supply." See strkjv@Colossians:2:19| for \haphˆ\ and strkjv@Phillipians:1:19| for the late word \epichorˆgia\ (only two examples in N.T.) from \epichorˆge“\, to supply (Colossians:2:19|). {In due measure} (\en metr“i\). Just "in measure" in the Greek, but the assumption is that each part of the body functions properly in its own sphere. {Unto the building up of itself} (\eis oikodomˆn heautou\). Modern knowledge of cell life in the human body greatly strengthens the force of Paul's metaphor. This is the way the body grows by cooperation under the control of the head and all "in love" (\en agapˆi\).

rwp@Ephesians:6:11 @{Put on} (\endusasthe\). Like strkjv@3:12|. See also strkjv@4:24|. {The whole armour} (\tˆn panoplian\). Old word from \panoplos\ (wholly armed, from \pan, hoplon\). In N.T. only strkjv@Luke:11:22; strkjv@Ephesians:6:11,13|. Complete armour in this period included "shield, sword, lance, helmet, greaves, and breastplate" (Thayer). Our "panoply." Polybius gives this list of Thayer. Paul omits the lance (spear). Our museums preserve specimens of this armour as well as the medieval coat-of-mail. Paul adds girdle and shoes to the list of Polybius, not armour but necessary for the soldier. Certainly Paul could claim knowledge of the Roman soldier's armour, being chained to one for some three years. {That ye may be able to stand} (\pros to dunasthai humƒs stˆnai\). Purpose clause with \pros to\ and the infinitive (\dunasthai\) with the accusative of general reference (\humƒs\) and the second aorist active infinitive \stˆnai\ (from \histˆmi\) dependent on \dunasthai\. Against (\pros\). Facing. Another instance of \pros\ meaning "against" (Colossians:2:23|). {The wiles of the devil} (\tas methodias tou diabolou\). See already strkjv@4:14| for this word. He is a crafty foe and knows the weak spots in the Christian's armour.

rwp@Galatians:1:18 @{Then after three years} (\epeita meta tria etˆ\). A round number to cover the period from his departure from Jerusalem for Damascus to his return to Jerusalem. This stay in Damascus was an important episode in Paul's theological readjustment to his new experience. {To visit Cephas} (\historˆsai Kˆphƒn\). First aorist infinitive of \histore“\, old verb (from \hist“r\, one who knows by inquiry), to gain knowledge by visiting. Only here in N.T. If we turn to strkjv@Acts:9:26-30|, we shall see that the visit of two weeks to Peter came after Barnabas endorsed Paul to the suspicious disciples in Jerusalem and probably while he was preaching in the city. It was a delightful experience, but Peter did not start Paul upon his apostleship. He visited him as an equal. Peter no doubt had much to say to Paul.

rwp@Galatians:2:8 @{He that wrought for Peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision} (\ho gar energˆsas Petr“i eis apostolˆn tˆs peritomˆs\). Paul here definitely recognizes Peter's leadership (apostleship, \apostolˆn\, late word, already in strkjv@Acts:1:25; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:2|) to the Jews and asserts that Peter acknowledges his apostleship to the Gentiles. This is a complete answer to the Judaizers who denied the genuineness of Paul's apostleship because he was not one of the twelve.

rwp@Galatians:4:3 @{When we were children} (\hote ˆmen nˆpioi\). Before the epoch of faith came and we (Jews and Gentiles) were under the law as paedagogue, guardian, steward, to use all of Paul's metaphors. {We were held in bondage} (\hˆmeis ˆmetha dedoul“menoi\). Periphrastic past perfect of \doulo“\, to enslave, in a permanent state of bondage. {Under the rudiments of the world} (\hupo ta stoicheia tou kosmou\). \Stoichos\ is row or rank, a series. Songs:\stoicheion\ is any first thing in a \stoichos\ like the letters of the alphabet, the material elements in the universe (2Peter:3:10|), the heavenly bodies (some argue for that here), the rudiments of any act (Hebrews:5:12; strkjv@Acts:15:10; strkjv@Galatians:5:1; strkjv@4:3,9; strkjv@Colossians:2:8,20|). The papyri illustrate all the varieties in meaning of this word. Burton has a valuable excursus on the word in his commentary. Probably here (Lightfoot) Paul has in mind the rudimentary character of the law as it applies to both Jews and Gentiles, to all the knowledge of the world (\kosmos\ as the orderly material universe as in strkjv@Colossians:2:8,20|). See on ¯Matthew:13:38; strkjv@Acts:17:24; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:22|. All were in the elementary stage before Christ came.

rwp@Galatians:4:4 @{The fulness of the time} (\to plˆr“ma tou chronou\). Old word from \plˆro“\, to fill. Here the complement of the preceding time as in strkjv@Ephesians:1:10|. Some examples in the papyri in the sense of complement, to accompany. God sent forth his preexisting Son (Phillipians:2:6|) when the time for his purpose had come like the \prothesmia\ of verse 2|. {Born of a woman} (\genomenon ek gunaikos\). As all men are and so true humanity, "coming from a woman." There is, of course, no direct reference here to the Virgin Birth of Jesus, but his deity had just been affirmed by the words "his Son" (\ton huion autou\), so that both his deity and humanity are here stated as in strkjv@Romans:1:3|. Whatever view one holds about Paul's knowledge of the Virgin Birth of Christ one must admit that Paul believed in his actual personal preexistence with God (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|), not a mere existence in idea. The fact of the Virgin Birth agrees perfectly with the language here. {Born under the law} (\genomenon hupo nomon\). He not only became a man, but a Jew. The purpose (\hina\) of God thus was plainly to redeem (\exagorasˆi\, as in strkjv@3:13|) those under the law, and so under the curse. The further purpose (\hina\) was that we (Jew and Gentile) might receive (\apolab“men\, second aorist active subjunctive of \apolamban“\), not get back (Luke:15:27|), but get from (\apo\) God the adoption (\tˆn huiothesian\). Late word common in the inscriptions (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 239) and occurs in the papyri also and in Diogenes Laertes, though not in LXX. Paul adopts this current term to express his idea (he alone in the N.T.) as to how God takes into his spiritual family both Jews and Gentiles who believe. See also strkjv@Romans:8:15,23; strkjv@9:4; strkjv@Ephesians:1:5|. The Vulgate uses _adoptio filiorum_. It is a metaphor like the others above, but a very expressive one.

rwp@Galatians:4:24 @{Which things contain an allegory} (\hatina estin allˆgoroumena\). Literally, "Which things are allegorized" (periphrastic present passive indicative of \allˆgore“\). Late word (Strabo, Plutarch, Philo, Josephus, ecclesiastical writers), only here in N.T. The ancient writers used \ainittomai\ to speak in riddles. It is compounded of \allo\, another, and \agoreu“\, to speak, and so means speaking something else than what the language means, what Philo, the past-master in the use of allegory, calls the deeper spiritual sense. Paul does not deny the actual historical narrative, but he simply uses it in an allegorical sense to illustrate his point for the benefit of his readers who are tempted to go under the burden of the law. He puts a secondary meaning on the narrative just as he uses \tupik“s\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:11| of the narrative. We need not press unduly the difference between allegory and type, for each is used in a variety of ways. The allegory in one sense is a speaking parable like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_, the Prodigal Son in strkjv@Luke:15|, the Good Shepherd in strkjv@John:10|. But allegory was also used by Philo and by Paul here for a secret meaning not obvious at first, one not in the mind of the writer, like our illustration which throws light on the point. Paul was familiar with this rabbinical method of exegesis (Rabbi Akiba, for instance, who found a mystical sense in every hook and crook of the Hebrew letters) and makes skilful use of that knowledge here. Christian preachers in Alexandria early fell victims to Philo's allegorical method and carried it to excess without regard to the plain sense of the narrative. That startling style of preaching survives yet to the discredit of sound preaching. Please observe that Paul says here that he is using allegory, not ordinary interpretation. It is not necessary to say that Paul intended his readers to believe that this allegory was designed by the narrative. He illustrates his point by it. {For these are} (\hautai gar eisin\). Allegorically interpreted, he means. {From Mount Sinai} (\apo orous Sinƒ\). Spoken from Mount Sinai. {Bearing} (\genn“sa\). Present active participle of \genna“\, to beget of the male (Matthew:1:1-16|), more rarely as here to bear of the female (Luke:1:13,57|). {Which is Hagar} (\hˆtis estin Hagar\). Allegorically interpreted.

rwp@Hebrews:10:26 @{If we sin wilfully} (\hekousi“s hamartanont“n hˆm“n\). Genitive absolute with the present active participle of \hamartan“\, circumstantial participle here in a conditional sense. {After that we have received} (\meta to labein\). "After the receiving" (accusative case of the articular infinitive second aorist active of \lamban“\ after \meta\). {Knowledge} (\epign“sin\). "Full knowledge," as in strkjv@6:4f|. {There remaineth no more} (\ouketi apoleipetai\). "No longer is there left behind" (present passive indicative as in strkjv@4:9|), for one has renounced the one and only sacrifice for sin that does or can remove sin (10:1-18|).

rwp@Hebrews:10:32 @{Call to remembrance} (\anamimnˆskesthe\). Present middle imperative of \anamimnˆsk“\, as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:15| "remind yourselves." The former days were some distance in the past (5:12|), some years at any rate. It is a definite experience of people in a certain place. Jerusalem Christians had had experiences of this nature, but so had others. {After ye were enlightened} (\ph“tisthentes\). First aorist passive participle of \ph“tiz“\ in the same sense as in strkjv@6:4| (regeneration) and like "the full knowledge of the truth" in strkjv@10:26|. {Conflict} (\athlˆsin\). Late word from \athle“\, to engage in a public contest in the games (2Timothy:2:5|), only here in the N.T. It occurs in the inscriptions. Cf. strkjv@2:10| for the benefit of "sufferings" in training.

rwp@Hebrews:11:3 @{By faith} (\pistei\). Instrumental case of \pistis\ which he now illustrates in a marvellous way. Each example as far as verse 31| is formally and with rhetorical skill introduced by \pistei\. After that only a summary is given. {We understand} (\nooumen\). Present active indicative of \noe“\, old verb (from \nous\, intellect) as in strkjv@Matthew:15:17; strkjv@Romans:1:20|. The author appeals to our knowledge of the world in which these heroes lived as an illustration of faith. Recent books by great scientists like Eddington and Jeans confirm the position here taken that a Supreme Mind is behind and before the universe. Science can only stand still in God's presence and believe like a little child. {The worlds} (\tous ai“nas\). "The ages" as in strkjv@1:2| (cf. Einstein's fourth dimension, time). Accusative case of general reference. {Have been framed} (\katˆrtisthai\). Perfect passive infinitive of \katartiz“\, to mend, to equip, to perfect (Luke:6:40|), in indirect discourse after \nooumen\. {Songs:that} (\eis to\). As a rule \eis to\ with the infinitive is final, but sometimes as here it expresses result as in strkjv@Romans:12:3| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1003). {Hath been made} (\gegonenai\). Perfect active infinitive of \ginomai\. {What is seen} (\to blepomenon\). Present passive articular participle (accusative case of general reference) of \blep“\. {Of things which do appear} (\ek phainomen“n\). Ablative case with \ek\ (out of) of the present passive participle. The author denies the eternity of matter, a common theory then and now, and places God before the visible universe as many modern scientists now gladly do.

rwp@James:3:14 @{Bitter jealousy} (\zˆlon pikron\). \Zˆlos\ occurs in N.T. in good sense (John:2:17|) and bad sense (Acts:5:17|). Pride of knowledge is evil (1Corinthians:8:1|) and leaves a bitter taste. See "root of bitterness" in strkjv@Hebrews:12:14| (cf. strkjv@Ephesians:4:31|). This is a condition of the first class. {Faction} (\erithian\). Late word, from \erithos\ (hireling, from \eritheu“\ to spin wool), a pushing forward for personal ends, partisanship, as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:16|. {In your heart} (\en tˆi kardiƒi hum“n\). The real fountain (\pˆgˆ\, verse 11|). {Glory not} (\mˆ katakauchƒsthe\). Present middle imperative of \katakauchaomai\, for which see strkjv@2:13|. Wisdom is essential for the teacher. Boasting arrogance disproves the possession of wisdom. {Lie not against the truth} (\pseudesthe kata tˆs alˆtheias\). Present middle imperative of \pseudomai\, old verb, to play false, with \mˆ\ carried over. Lying against the truth is futile. By your conduct do not belie the truth which you teach; a solemn and needed lesson. Cf. strkjv@Romans:1:18f., strkjv@2:18,20|.

rwp@James:4:17 @{To him that knoweth} (\eidoti\). Dative case of second perfect participle \eid“s\ (from \oida\), and with the infinitive to know how, "to one knowing how." {To do good} (\kalon poiein\). "To do a good deed." {And doeth it not} (\kai mˆ poiounti\). Dative again of the present active participle of \poie“\, "and to one not doing it." Cf. "not a doer" (1:23|) and strkjv@Matthew:7:26|. {Sin} (\hamartia\). Unused knowledge of one's duty is sin, the sin of omission. Cf. strkjv@Matthew:23:23|.

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 @ THE USE OF THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS As the latest of the Gospels and by the oldest living apostle, it is only natural that there should be an infrequent use of the Synoptic Gospels. Outside of the events of Passion Week and the Resurrection period the Fourth Gospel touches the Synoptic narrative in only one incident, that of the Feeding of the Five Thousand and the walking on the water. The author supplements the Synoptic record in various ways. He mentions two passovers not given by the other Gospels (John:2:23; strkjv@6:4|) and another (John:5:1|) may be implied. Otherwise we could not know certainly that the ministry of Jesus was more than a year in length. He adds greatly to our knowledge of the first year of our Lord's public ministry ("the year of obscurity," Stalker) without which we should know little of this beginning (John:1:19-4:45|). The Synoptics give mainly the Galilean and Perean and Judean ministry, but John adds a considerable Jerusalem ministry which is really demanded by allusions in the Synoptics. The Prologue (John:1:1-18|) relates the Incarnation to God's eternal purpose as in strkjv@Colossians:1:14-20| and strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-3| and employs the language of the intellectuals of the time (\Logos\ -- Word) to interpret Christ as the Incarnate Son of God.

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

rwp@Info_John @ THE UNITY OF THE GOSPEL This has been attacked in various ways in spite of the identity of style throughout. There are clearly three parts in the Gospel: the Prologue, strkjv@John:1:1-18|, the Body of the Book, strkjv@John:1:19-20:31|, the Epilogue, strkjv@John:21|. But there is no evidence that the Prologue was added by another hand, even though the use of Logos (Word) for Christ does not occur thereafter. This high conception of Christ dominates the whole book. Some argue that the Epilogue was added by some one else than John, but here again there is no proof and no real reason for the supposition. It is possible, as already stated, that John stopped at strkjv@John:20:31| and then added strkjv@John:21| before sending the book forth after his friends added strkjv@John:21:24| as their endorsement of the volume. Some scholars claim that they detect various displacements in the arrangement of the material, but such subjective criticism is never convincing. There are undoubtedly long gaps in the narrative as between chapters 5 and 6, but John is not giving a continuous narrative, but only a supplementary account assuming knowledge of the Synoptics. It is held that editorial comments by redactors can be detected here and there. Perhaps, and perhaps not. The unity of this great book stands even if that be true.

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

rwp@John:1:48 @{Whence knowest thou me?} (\Pothen me gin“skeis;\). Nathanael is astonished at this tribute, at any knowledge about himself by Jesus. He had overheard Christ's comment and longed to know its source. {Before Philip called thee} (\Pro tou se Philippon ph“nˆsai\). Idiomatic Greek, \pro\ and the ablative case of the articular aorist active infinitive (\tou ph“nˆsai\, from \ph“ne“\, to call) with \se\ as the object and \Philippon\, the accusative of general reference, "before the calling thee as to Philip." {When thou wast under the fig tree} (\onta hupo tˆn sukˆn\). "Being under the fig tree," accusative present participle agreeing with \se\. The fig tree was a familiar object in Palestine, probably in leaf at this time, the accusative with \hupo\ may suggest that Nathanael had withdrawn there for prayer. Note genitive with \hupokat“\ in verse 50|. Jesus saw Nathanael's heart as well as his mere presence there. He saw him in his worship and so knew him.

rwp@John:1:49 @{Thou art the Son of God} (\su ei ho huios tou theou\). Whether Nathanael had heard the Baptist say this of Jesus (1:34|) we do not know, apparently not, but Nathanael was a student of the Old Testament as Philip implied (1:45|) and was quick to put together his knowledge, the statement of Philip, and the manifest supernatural knowledge of Jesus as just shown. There is no reason for toning down the noble confession of Nathanael in the light of Christ's claim in verse 51|. Cf. the confession of Peter in strkjv@6:69; strkjv@Matthew:16:16| and Martha's in strkjv@John:11:27|. Nathanael goes further. {Thou art King of Israel} (\Basileus ei tou Israˆl\). To us this seems an anti-climax, but not so to Nathanael for both are Messianic titles in strkjv@Psalms:2| and Jesus is greeted in the Triumphal Entry as the King of Israel (John:12:13|).

rwp@John:2:11 @{This beginning of his signs did Jesus} (\tautˆn epoiˆsen archˆn t“n sˆmei“n ho Iˆsous\). Rather, "this Jesus did as a beginning of his signs," for there is no article between \tautˆn\ and \archˆn\. "We have now passed from the 'witness' of the Baptist to the 'witness' of the works of Jesus" (Bernard). This is John's favourite word "signs" rather than wonders (\terata\) or powers (\dunameis\) for the works (\erga\) of Jesus. \Sˆmeion\ is an old word from \sˆmain“\, to give a sign (12:33|). He selects eight in his Gospel by which to prove the deity of Christ (20:30|) of which this is the first. {Manifested his glory} (\ephaner“sen tˆn doxan autou\). First aorist (effective) active indicative of \phanero“\, that glory of which John spoke in strkjv@1:14|. {Believed on him} (\episteusan eis auton\). First aorist active indicative of \pisteu“\, to believe, to put trust in, so common in John. These six disciples (learners) had already believed in Jesus as the Messiah (1:35-51|). Now their faith was greatly strengthened. Songs:it will be all through this Gospel. Jesus will increasingly reveal himself while the disciples will grow in knowledge and trust and the Jews will become increasingly hostile till the culmination.

rwp@John:2:25 @{And because he needed not} (\kai hoti chreian eichen\). Imperfect active, "and because he did not have need." {That any one should bear witness concerning man} (\hina tis marturˆsˆi peri tou anthr“pou\). Non-final use of \hina\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \marture“\ and the generic article (\peri tou anthr“pou\) concerning mankind as in the next clause also. {For he himself knew} (\autos gar egin“sken\). Imperfect active, "for he himself kept on knowing" as he did from the start. {What was in man} (\ti ˆn en t“i anthr“p“i\). Indirect question with \estin\ of the direct changed to the imperfect \ˆn\, a rare idiom in the _Koin‚_. This supernatural knowledge of man is a mark of deity. Some men of genius can read men better than others, but not in the sense meant here.

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

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

rwp@John:3:11 @{We speak that we do know} (\ho oidamen laloumen\). Jesus simply claims knowledge of what he has tried to make plain to the famous Rabbi without success. John uses \lale“\ some 60 times, half of them by Jesus, very little distinction existing between the use of \lale“\ and \leg“\ in John. Originally \lale“\ referred to the chatter of birds. Note John's frequent use of \amˆn amˆn\ and \leg“\ (double emphasis). {And bear witness of that we have seen} (\kai ho he“rakamen marturoumen\). The same use of neuter singular relative \ho\ as before. Perfect active indicative of \hora“\. He is not a dreamer, guesser, or speculator. He is bearing witness from personal knowledge, strange as this may seem to Nicodemus. {And ye receive not our witness} (\kai tˆn marturian hˆm“n ou lambanete\). This is the tragedy of the matter as John has shown (1:11,26|) and as will continue to be true even today. Jesus probably associates here with himself ("we") those who have personal experience of grace and so are qualified as witnesses. Note the plural in strkjv@1John:1:1f|. Bernard thinks that John has here read into the words of Jesus the convictions of a later age, a serious charge to make.

rwp@John:4:19 @{Sir} (\Kurie\). Songs:still. {I perceive} (\the“r“\). "I am beginning to perceive" from what you say, your knowledge of my private life (verse 29|). See strkjv@2:23| for \the“re“\ which John's Gospel has 23 times, of bodily sight (20:6,14|), of mental contemplation (12:45; strkjv@14:17|). See both \the“re“\ and \optomai\ in strkjv@1:51; strkjv@16:16|. {That thou art a prophet} (\hoti prophˆtˆs ei su\). "That a prophet art thou" (emphasis on "thou"). She felt that this was the explanation of his knowledge of her life and she wanted to change the subject at once to the outstanding theological dispute.

rwp@John:4:22 @{That which ye know not} (\ho ouk oidate\). Cf. strkjv@Acts:17:23|. "You know whom to worship, but you do not know him" (Westcott). The Samaritans rejected the prophets and the Psalms and so cut themselves off from the fuller knowledge of God. {We} (\hˆmeis\). We Jews. Jesus is a Jew as he fully recognizes (Matthew:15:24|). {That which we know} (\ho oidamen\). Neuter singular relative as before. The Jews, as the chosen people, had fuller revelations of God (Psalms:147:19f.; strkjv@Romans:9:3-5|). But even so the Jews as a whole failed to recognize God in Christ (1:11,26; strkjv@7:28|). {For salvation is from the Jews} (\hoti hˆ s“tˆria ek t“n Ioudai“n estin\). "The salvation," the Messianic salvation which had long been the hope and guiding star of the chosen people (Luke:1:69,71,77; strkjv@Acts:13:26,47|). It was for the whole world (John:3:17|), but it comes "out of" (\ek\) the Jews. This tremendous fact should never be forgotten, however unworthy the Jews may have proved of their privilege. The Messiah, God's Son, was a Jew.

rwp@John:4:25 @{Messiah cometh} (\Messias erchetai\). Hebrew word in N.T. only here and strkjv@1:41| and explained by \Christos\ in both places. The Samaritans looked for a Messiah, a prophet like Moses (Deuteronomy:18:18|). Simon Magus gave himself out in Samaria as some great one and had a large following (Acts:8:9|). Pilate quelled an uprising in Samaria over a fanatical Messianic claimant (Josephus, _Ant_. XVIII. iv. 1). {When he is come} (\hotan elthˆi ekeinos\). "Whenever that one comes." Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ (\hote\, \an\) and the second aorist active subjunctive. Wistfully she turns to this dim hope as a bare possibility about this strange "prophet." {He will declare unto us all things} (\anaggelei hˆmin hapanta\). Future active indicative of \anaggell“\, old and common verb to announce fully (\ana\, up and down). See also strkjv@16:13|. Perhaps here is light on the knowledge of her life by Jesus as well as about the way to worship God.

rwp@John:5:42 @{But I know you} (\alla egn“ka humas\). Perfect active indicative of \gin“sk“\, "I have come to know and still know," the knowledge of personal experience (2:24f.|). {The love o' God} (\tˆn agapˆn tou theou\). Objective genitive, "the love toward God." See strkjv@Luke:11:42| for this phrase in the same sense (only other instance in the Gospels, but common in 1John (1John:2:5; strkjv@3:17; strkjv@4:7,9; strkjv@5:3|) and in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:14; strkjv@Romans:5:5|. The sense of God's love for man occurs in strkjv@1John:3:1; strkjv@4:9,10,16; strkjv@John:15:9f.| of Christ's love for man. These rabbis did not love God and hence did not love Christ.

rwp@John:8:28 @{When ye have lifted up the Son of man} (\hotan hups“sˆte ton huion tou anthr“pou\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ (\hote + an\) and the first aorist active subjunctive of \hupso“\, to lift up (_Koin‚_ verb from \hupsos\, height), used several times in John of the Cross of Christ (3:14; strkjv@8:28; strkjv@12:32,34|). It is unnecessary to render the aorist subjunctive as if a future perfect, simply "whenever ye lift up" (actually lift up, ingressive aorist). In strkjv@Acts:2:33| the verb is used of the Ascension. {Shall ye know} (\gn“sesthe\). Future (ingressive aoristic) middle of \gin“sk“\. _Cognoscetis ex re quod nunc ex verbo non creditis_ (Bengel). But the knowledge from the facts like the fall of Jerusalem will come too late and will not bring a change of heart. The Holy Spirit will convict them concerning judgment (16:8|). For {I am} (\eg“ eimi\) see on verse ¯24|. {As the Father taught me} (\Kath“s edidasken me ho patˆr\). This claim Jesus repeats (see verse 26|) and clearly makes on his arrival at the feast (7:16f.|). This fact marks Jesus off from the rabbis.

rwp@John:8:32 @{And ye shall know the truth} (\kai gn“sesthe tˆn alˆtheian\). Truth is one of the marks of Christ (1:14|) and Jesus will claim to Thomas to be the personification of truth (14:6|). But it will be for them knowledge to be learned by doing God's will (7:17|). The word is from \alˆthˆs\ (\a\ privative and \lˆth“\, to conceal, unsealed, open). See also verses 40,44,45|. {And the truth shall make you free} (\kai hˆ alˆtheia eleuther“sei humas\). Future active indicative of \eleuthero“\, old verb from \eleutheros\ (from \erchomai\, to go where one wishes and so free). One of Paul's great words for freedom from the bondage of the law (Romans:6:18; strkjv@Galatians:5:1|). The freedom of which Jesus here speaks is freedom from the slavery of sin as Paul in strkjv@Romans:8:2|. See strkjv@John:8:36|. This freedom is won alone by Christ (8:36|) and we are sanctified in truth (17:19|). In strkjv@1:17| truth is mentioned with grace as one of the marks of the gospel through Christ. Freedom (intellectual, moral, spiritual) is only attainable when we are set free from darkness, sin, ignorance, superstition and let the Light of the World shine on us and in us.

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

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

rwp@John:11:42 @{And I knew} (\eg“ de ˆidein\). Past perfect of \oida\ used as imperfect. This confident knowledge is no new experience with Jesus. It has "always" (\pantote\) been so. {Which standeth around} (\ton periest“ta\). Second perfect active (intransitive) articular participle of \periistˆmi\. It was a picturesque and perilous scene. {That they may believe} (\hina pisteus“sin\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and first ingressive aorist active subjunctive of \pisteu“\, "that they may come to believe." {That thou didst send me} (\hoti su me apesteilas\). First aorist active indicative of \apostell“\ and note position of \su me\ side by side. This claim Jesus had long ago made (5:36|) and had repeatedly urged (10:25,38|). Here was a supreme opportunity and Jesus opens his heart about it.

rwp@John:20:27 @{Then saith he to Thomas} (\eita legei t“i Thomƒi\). Jesus turns directly to Thomas as if he had come expressly for his sake. He reveals his knowledge of the doubt in the mind of Thomas and mentions the very tests that he had named (25|). {Be not faithless} (\mˆ ginou apistos\). Present middle imperative of \ginomai\ in prohibition, "stop becoming disbelieving." The doubt of Thomas in the face of the witness of the others was not a proof of his superior intelligence. Sceptics usually pose as persons of unusual mentality. The medium who won Sir Arthur Conan Doyle to spiritualism has confessed that it was all humbug, but he deceived the gullible novelist. But Thomas had carried his incredulity too far. Note play on \apistos\ (disbelieving) and \pistos\ (believing).

rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE RELATION TO II PETER Beyond a doubt one of these Epistles was used by the other, as one can see by comparing particularly strkjv@Jude:1:3-18| and strkjv@2Peter:2:1-18|. As already said concerning II Peter, scholars are greatly divided on this point, and in our present state of knowledge it does not seem possible to reach a solid conclusion. The probability is that not much time elapsed between them. Mayor devotes a whole chapter to the discussion of the relation between II Peter and Jude:and reaches the conclusion "that in Jude:we have the first thought, in Peter the second thought." That is my own feeling, but it is all so subjective that I have no desire to urge the point unduly. Bigg is equally positive that II Peter comes before Jude.

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

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE CHARACTER OF THE BOOK Literary charm is here beyond dispute. It is a book that only a man with genuine culture and literary genius could write. It has all the simple grace of Mark and Matthew plus an indefinable quality not in these wonderful books. There is a delicate finish of detail and proportion of parts that give the balance and poise that come only from full knowledge of the subject, the chief element in a good style according to Dr. James Stalker. This scientific physician, this man of the schools, this converted Gentile, this devoted friend of Paul, comes to the study of the life of Christ with a trained intellect, with an historian's method of research, with a physician's care in diagnosis and discrimination, with a charm of style all his own, with reverence for and loyalty to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. One could not afford to give up either of the Four Gospels. They each supplement the other in a wonderful way. John's Gospel is the greatest book in all the world, reaching the highest heights of all. But if we had only Luke's Gospel, we should have an adequate portrait of Jesus Christ as Son of God and Son of Man. If Mark's is the Gospel for the Romans and Matthew's for the Jews, the Gospel of Luke is for the Gentile world. He shows the sympathy of Jesus for the poor and the outcast. Luke understands women and children and so is the universal Gospel of mankind in all phases and conditions. It is often called the Gospel of womanhood, of infancy, of prayer, of praise. We have in Luke the first Christian hymns. With Luke we catch some glimpses of the child Jesus for which we are grateful. Luke was a friend and follower of Paul, and verbal parallels with Paul's Epistles do occur, but there is no Pauline propaganda in the Gospel as Moffatt clearly shows (_Intr. to Lit. of the N.T._, p. 281). The Prologue is in literary _Koin‚_ and deserves comparison with those in any Greek and Latin writers. His style is versatile and is often coloured by his source. He was a great reader of the Septuagint as is shown by occasional Hebraisms evidently due to reading that translation Greek. He has graciousness and a sense of humour as McLachlan and Ragg show. Every really great man has a saving sense of humour as Jesus himself had. Ramsay dares to call Luke, as shown by the Gospel and Acts, the greatest of all historians not even excepting Thucydides. Ramsay has done much to restore Luke to his rightful place in the estimation of modern scholars. Some German critics used to cite strkjv@Luke:2:1-7| as a passage containing more historical blunders than any similar passage in any historian. The story of how papyri and inscriptions have fully justified Luke in every statement here made is carefully worked out by Ramsay in his various books, especially in _The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament_. The main feature of this proof appears also in my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_. Songs:many items, where Luke once stood alone, have been confirmed by recent discoveries that the burden of proof now rests on those who challenge Luke in those cases where he still stands alone.

rwp@Luke:1:1 @{Forasmuch as} (\epeidˆper\). Here alone in the N.T., though common in literary Attic. Appears in the papyri. A triple compound (\epei\ = since, \dˆ\ = admittedly true, \per\ = intensive particle to emphasize importance). {Many} (\polloi\). How many no one knows, but certainly more than two or three. We know that Luke used the Logia of Jesus written by Matthew in Aramaic (Papias) and Mark's Gospel. Undoubtedly he had other written sources. {Have taken in hand} (\epecheirˆsan\). A literal translation of \epicheire“\ (from \cheir\, hand and \epi\, upon). Both Hippocrates and Galen use this word in their introduction to their medical works. Here only in the N.T., though a common literary word. Common in the papyri for undertaking with no idea of failure or blame. Luke does not mean to cast reflection on those who preceded him. The apocryphal gospels were all much later and are not in his mind. Luke had secured fuller information and planned a book on a larger scale and did surpass them with the result that they all perished save Mark's Gospel and what Matthew and Luke possess of the Logia of Jesus. There was still room for Luke's book. That motive influences every author and thus progress is made. {To draw up, a narrative} (\anataxasthai diˆgˆsin\). Ingressive aorist middle infinitive. This verb \anataxasthai\ has been found only in Plutarch's _Moral_. 968 CD about an elephant "rehearsing" by moonlight certain tricks it had been taught (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). That was from memory going regularly through the thing again. But the idea in the word is plain enough. The word is composed of \tass“\, a common verb for arranging things in proper order and \ana\, again. Luke means to say that those before him had made attempts to rehearse in orderly fashion various matters about Christ. "The expression points to a connected series of narratives in some order (\taxis\), topical or chronological rather than to isolated narratives" (Bruce). "They had produced something more than mere notes or anecdotes" (Plummer). \Diˆgˆsis\ means leading or carrying a thing through, not a mere incident. Galen applies this word some seventy-five times to the writing of Hippocrates. {Which have been fulfilled} (\t“n peplˆr“phorˆmen“n\). Perfect passive participle from \plˆrophore“\ and that from \plˆrˆs\ (full) and \pher“\ (to bring). Hence to bring or make full. The verb is rare outside of the LXX and the N.T. Papyri examples occur for finishing off a legal matter or a financial matter in full. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 86f.) gives examples from the papyri and inscriptions for completing a task or being convinced or satisfied in mind. The same ambiguity occurs here. When used of persons in the N.T. the meaning is to be convinced, or fully persuaded (Romans:4:21; strkjv@14:5; strkjv@Hebrews:6:11; strkjv@10:22|). When used of things it has the notion of completing or finishing (2Timothy:4:5,17|). Luke is here speaking of "matters" (\pragmat“n\). Luke may refer to the matters connected with Christ's life which have been brought to a close among us or accomplished. Bruce argues plausibly that he means fulness of knowledge "concerning the things which have become widely known among us Christians." In strkjv@Colossians:2:2| we have "fulness of understanding" (\tˆs plˆrophorias tˆs sunese“s\). In modern Greek the verb means to inform. The careful language of Luke here really pays a tribute to those who had preceded him in their narratives concerning Christ.

rwp@Luke:1:2 @{Even as} (\kath“s\). This particle was condemned by the Atticists though occurring occasionally from Aristotle on. It is in the papyri. Luke asserts that the previous narratives had their sound basis. {Delivered unto us} (\pared“san hˆmin\). Second aorist active indicative of \paradid“mi\. Luke received this tradition along with those who are mentioned above (the many). That is he was not one of the "eyewitnesses." He was a secondary, not a primary, witness of the events. Tradition has come to have a meaning of unreliability with us, but that is not the idea here. Luke means to say that the handing down was dependable, not mere wives' fables. Those who drew up the narratives had as sources of knowledge those who handed down the data. Here we have both written and oral sources. Luke had access to both kinds. {Which from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word} (\hoi ap' archˆs autoptai kai hupˆretai genomenoi tou logou\). "Who" is better than "which" for the article here. The word for {eyewitnesses} (\autoptai\) is an old Greek word and appears in the papyri also. It means seeing with one's own eyes. It occurs here only in the N.T. We have the very word in the medical term _autopsy_. Greek medical writers often had the word. It is a different word from \epoptai\ (eyewitness) in strkjv@2Peter:1:16|, a word used of those who beheld heavenly mysteries. The word for "ministers" (\hupˆretai\), under rowers or servants we have had already in strkjv@Matthew:5:25; strkjv@26:58; strkjv@Mark:14:54,65|, which see. We shall see it again in strkjv@Luke:4:20| of the attendant in the synagogue. In the sense of a preacher of the gospel as here, it occurs also in strkjv@Acts:26:16|. Here "the word" means the gospel message, as in strkjv@Acts:6:4; strkjv@8:4|, etc. {From the beginning} apparently refers to the beginning of the ministry of Jesus as was true of the apostles (Acts:1:22|) and of the early apostolic preaching (Acts:10:37-43|). The Gospel of Mark follows this plan. The Gospel of Luke goes behind this in chapters 1 and 2 as does Matthew in chapters 1 and 2. But Luke is not here referring to himself. The matters about the childhood of Jesus Christ would not form part of the traditional preaching for obvious reasons.

rwp@Luke:1:3 @{It seemed good to me also} (\edoxe kamoi\). A natural conclusion and justification of Luke's decision to write his narrative. They had ample reason to draw up their narratives. Luke has more reason to do so because of his fuller knowledge and wider scope. {Having traced the course of all things} (\parˆkolouthˆkoti pƒsin\). The perfect active participle of a common verb of the ancient Greek. Literally it means to follow along a thing in mind, to trace carefully. Both meanings occur abundantly in the ancient Greek. Cadbury (Appendix C to _Beginnings of Christianity_, Vol. II, pp. 489ff.) objects to the translation "having traced" here as implying research which the word does not here mean. Milligan (_Vocabulary_) is somewhat impressed by this argument. See my discussion of the point in Chapter XVI of _Studies in the Text of the N.T._ (The Implications in Luke's Preface) where the point is made that Luke here claims fulness of knowledge before he began to write his book. He had the traditions of the eyewitnesses and ministers of the word and the narratives previously drawn up. Whether he was a personal contemporary with any or all of these events we do not know and it is not particularly pertinent. He had _mentally_ followed along by the side of these events. Galen used this verb for the investigation of symptoms. Luke got himself ready to write before he began by full and accurate knowledge of the subject. \Akrib“s\ (accurately) means going into minute details, from \akron\, the topmost point. And he did it {from the first} (\an“then\). He seems to refer to the matters in Chapters strkjv@1:5-2:52|, the Gospel of the Infancy. {In order} (\kathexˆs\). Chronological order in the main following Mark's general outline. But in strkjv@9:51-18:10| the order is often topical. He has made careful investigation and his work deserves serious consideration. {Most excellent Theophilus} (\kratiste Theophile\). The name means god-lover or god-beloved. He may have been a believer already. He was probably a Gentile. Ramsay holds that "most excellent" was a title like "Your Excellency" and shows that he held office, perhaps a Knight. Songs:of Felix (Acts:23:26|) and Festus (Acts:26:25|). The adjective does not occur in the dedication in strkjv@Acts:1:1|.

rwp@Luke:1:4 @{Mightest know} (\epign“is\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \epigin“sk“\. Full knowledge (\epi\-), in addition to what he already has. {The certainty} (\tˆn asphaleian\). Make no slip (\sphall“\, to totter or fall, and \a\ privative). Luke promises a reliable narrative. "Theophilus shall know that the faith which he has embraced has an impregnable historical foundation" (Plummer). {The things} (\log“n\). Literally "words," the details of the words in the instruction. {Wast instructed} (\katˆchˆthˆs\). First aorist passive indicative. Not in O.T. and rare in ancient Greek. Occurs in the papyri. The word \ˆche“\ is our word echo (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:8| for \exˆchˆtai\, has sounded forth). \Katˆche“\ is to sound down, to din, to instruct, to give oral instruction. Cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:14:9; strkjv@Acts:21:21,24; strkjv@18:25; Gal strkjv@6:6|. Those men doing the teaching were called _catechists_ and those receiving it were called _catechumens_. Whether Theophilus was still a catechumen is not known. This Preface by Luke is in splendid literary _Koin‚_ and is not surpassed by those in any Greek writer (Herodotus, Thucydides, Polybius). It is entirely possible that Luke was familiar with this habit of Greek historians to write prefaces since he was a man of culture.

rwp@Luke:1:77 @{Knowledge of salvation} (\gn“sin s“tˆrias\). "This is the aim and end of the work of the Forerunner" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:2:47 @{Were amazed} (\existanto\). Imperfect indicative middle, descriptive of their continued and repeated astonishment. Common verb \existˆmi\ meaning that they stood out of themselves as if their eyes were bulging out. The boy had a holy thirst for knowledge (Plummer), and he used a boy's way of learning. {At his understanding} (\epi tˆi sunesei\). Based on (\epi\), the grasp and comprehension from \suniˆmi\, comparing and combining things. Cf. strkjv@Mark:12:33|. {His answers} (\tais apokrisesin autou\). It is not difficult to ask hard questions, but this boy had astounding answers to their questions, revealing his amazing intellectual and spiritual growth.

rwp@Luke:2:52 @{Advanced in wisdom and stature} (\proekopten tˆi sophiƒi kai hˆlikiƒi\). Imperfect active, he kept cutting his way forward as through a forest or jungle as pioneers did. He kept growing in stature (\hˆlikia\ may mean age, as in strkjv@12:25|, but stature here) and in wisdom (more than mere knowledge). His physical, intellectual, moral, spiritual development was perfect. "At each stage he was perfect for that stage" (Plummer). {In favour} (\chariti\). Or grace. This is ideal manhood to have the favour of God and men.

rwp@Luke:4:22 @{Bare him witness} (\emarturoun\). Imperfect active, perhaps inchoative. They all began to bear witness that the rumours were not exaggerations (4:14|) as they had supposed, but had foundation in fact if this discourse or its start was a fair sample of his teaching. The verb \marture“\ is a very old and common one. It is frequent in Acts, Paul's Epistles, and the Johannine books. The substantive \martur\ is seen in our English \martyr\, one who witnesses even by his death to his faith in Christ. {And wondered} (\kai ethaumazon\). Imperfect active also, perhaps inchoative also. They began to marvel as he proceeded with his address. This verb is an old one and common in the Gospels for the attitude of the people towards Jesus. {At the words of grace} (\epi tois logois tˆs charitos\). See on ¯Luke:1:30; strkjv@2:52| for this wonderful word \charis\ so full of meaning and so often in the N.T. The genitive case (case of genus or kind) here means that the words that came out of the mouth of Jesus in a steady stream (present tense, \ekporeuomenois\) were marked by fascination and charm. They were "winning words" as the context makes plain, though they were also "gracious" in the Pauline sense of "grace." There is no necessary antithesis in the ideas of graceful and gracious in these words of Jesus. {Is not this Joseph's son?} (\Ouchi huios estin I“sˆph houtos;\). Witness and wonder gave way to bewilderment as they began to explain to themselves the situation. The use of \ouchi\ intensive form of \ouk\ in a question expects the answer "yes." Jesus passed in Nazareth as the son of Joseph as Luke presents him in strkjv@3:23|. He does not stop here to correct this misconception because the truth has been already amply presented in strkjv@1:28-38; strkjv@2:49|. This popular conception of Jesus as the son of Joseph appears also in strkjv@John:1:45|. The puzzle of the people was due to their previous knowledge of Jesus as the carpenter (Mark:6:3|; the carpenter's son, strkjv@Matthew:13:55|). For him now to appear as the Messiah in Nazareth where he had lived and laboured as the carpenter was a phenomenon impossible to credit on sober reflection. Songs:the mood of wonder and praise quickly turned with whispers and nods and even scowls to doubt and hostility, a rapid and radical transformation of emotion in the audience.

rwp@Luke:5:5 @{Master} (\epistata\). Used only by Luke in the N.T. and always in addresses to Christ (8:24,45; strkjv@9:33,49; strkjv@17:13|). Common in the older writers for superintendent or overseer (one standing over another). This word recognizes Christ's authority. {We toiled} (\kopiasantes\). This verb is from \kopos\ (\work, toil\) and occurs from Aristophanes on. It used to be said that the notion of weariness in toil appears only in the LXX and the N.T. But Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 312f.) cites examples from inscriptions on tombstones quite in harmony with the use in the N.T. Peter's protest calls attention also to the whole night of fruitless toil. {But at thy word} (\epi de t“i rhˆmati sou\). On the base of \epi\. Acquiescence to show his obedience to Christ as "Master," but with no confidence whatsoever in the wisdom of this particular command. Besides, fishing in this lake was Peter's business and he really claimed superior knowledge on this occasion to that of Jesus.

rwp@Luke:6:44 @{Is known} (\gin“sketai\). The fruit of each tree reveals its actual character. It is the final test. This sentence is not in strkjv@Matthew:7:17-20|, but the same idea is in the repeated saying (Matthew:7:16,20|): "By their fruits ye shall know them," where the verb {epign“sesthe} means full knowledge. The question in strkjv@Matthew:7:16| is put here in positive declarative form. The verb is in the plural for "men" or "people," \sullegousin\. See on ¯Matthew:7:16|. {Bramble bush} (\batou\). Old word, quoted from the LXX in strkjv@Mark:12:26; strkjv@Luke:20:37| (from strkjv@Exodus:3:6|) about the burning bush that Moses saw, and by Stephen (Acts:7:30,35|) referring to the same incident. Nowhere else in the N.T. "Galen has a chapter on its medicinal uses, and the medical writings abound in prescriptions of which it is an ingredient" (Vincent). {Gather} (\trug“sin\). A verb common in Greek writers for gathering ripe fruit. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:14:18f|. {Grapes} (\staphulˆn\). Cluster of grapes.

rwp@Luke:8:46 @{For I perceived that power had gone forth from me} (\eg“ gar egn“n dunamin exelˆluthuian ap' emou\). \Egn“n\ is second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\, knowledge by personal experience as here. It is followed by the second perfect active participle \exelˆluthuian\ in indirect discourse (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1040-42). Jesus felt the sensation of power already gone. Who does not know what this sense of "goneness" or exhaustion of nervous energy means?

rwp@Luke:9:45 @{It was concealed from them} (\ˆn parakekalummenon ap' aut“n\). Periphrastic past perfect of \parakalupt“\, a common verb, but only here in the N.T., to cover up, to hide from. This item only in Luke. {That they should not perceive it} (\hina mˆ aisth“ntai auto\). Second aorist middle subjunctive of the common verb \aisthanomai\ used with \hina mˆ\, negative purpose. This explanation at least relieves the disciples to some extent of full responsibility for their ignorance about the death of Jesus as strkjv@Mark:9:32| observes, as does Luke here that they were afraid to ask him. Plummer says, "They were not allowed to understand the saying then, in order that they might remember it afterwards, and see that Jesus had met His sufferings with full knowledge and free will." Perhaps also, if they had fully understood, they might have lacked courage to hold on to the end. But it is a hard problem.

rwp@Luke:11:49 @{The wisdom of God} (\hˆ sophia tou theou\). In strkjv@Matthew:23:34| Jesus uses "I send" (\eg“ apostell“\) without this phrase "the wisdom of God." There is no book to which it can refer. Jesus is the wisdom of God as Paul shows (1Corinthians:1:30|), but it is hardly likely that he so describes himself here. Probably he means that God in his wisdom said, but even so "Jesus here speaks with confident knowledge of the Divine counsels" (Plummer). See strkjv@Luke:10:22; strkjv@15:7,10|. Here the future tense occurs, "I will send" (\apostel“\). {Some of them} (\ex aut“n\). No "some" (\tinas\) in the Greek, but understood. They will act as their fathers did. They will kill and persecute.

rwp@Luke:11:52 @{Ye took away the key of knowledge} (\ˆrate tˆn kleida tˆs gn“se“s\). First aorist active indicative of \air“\, common verb. But this is a flat charge of obscurantism on the part of these scribes (lawyers), the teachers (rabbis) of the people. They themselves (\autoi\) refused to go into the house of knowledge (beautiful figure) and learn. They then locked the door and hid the key to the house of knowledge and hindered (\ek“lusate\, effective aorist active) those who were trying to enter (\tous eiserchomenous\, present participle, conative action). It is the most pitiful picture imaginable of blind ecclesiastics trying to keep others as blind as they were, blind leaders of the blind, both falling into the pit.

rwp@Luke:19:12 @{To take to himself a kingdom} (\labein heaut“i basileian\). Second aorist active infinitive of \lamban“\ with the dative reflexive \heaut“i\ where the middle voice could have been used. Apparently this parable has the historical basis of Archelaus who actually went from Jerusalem to Rome on this very errand to get a kingdom in Palestine and to come back to it. This happened while Jesus was a boy in Nazareth and it was a matter of common knowledge.

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

rwp@Luke:23:7 @{When he knew} (\epignous\). Second aorist active participle from \epigin“sk“\, having gained full (\epi\, added knowledge). {Of Herod's jurisdiction} (\ek tˆs exousias Hˆr“idou\). Herod was naturally jealous of any encroachment by Pilate, the Roman Procurator of Judea. Songs:here was a chance to respect the prerogative (\exousia\) of Herod and get rid of this troublesome case also. {Sent him up} (\anepempsen\). First aorist active indicative of \anapemp“\. This common verb is used of sending back as in verse 11| or of sending up to a higher court as of Paul to Caesar (Acts:25:21|). {Who himself also was} (\onta kai auton\). Being also himself in Jerusalem. Present active participle of \eimi\.

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

rwp@Mark:4:27 @{Should sleep and rise} (\katheudˆi kai egeirˆtai\). Present subjunctive for continued action. Songs:also {spring up and grow} (\blastƒi kai mˆkunˆtai\) two late verbs. The process of growth goes on all night and all day (\nukta kai hˆmeran\, accusative of time). {He knoweth not how} (\h“s ouk oiden autos\). Note position of \h“s\ (beginning) and \autos\ (end) of clause: {How knows not he}. The mystery of growth still puzzles farmers and scientists of today with all our modern knowledge. But nature's secret processes do not fail to operate because we are ignorant. This secret and mysterious growth of the kingdom in the heart and life is the point of this beautiful parable given only by Mark. "When man has done his part, the actual process of growth is beyond his reach or comprehension" (Swete).

rwp@Mark:4:41 @{They feared exceedingly} (\ephobˆthˆsan phobon megan\). Cognate accusative with the first aorist passive indicative. They feared a great fear. strkjv@Matthew:8:27| and strkjv@Luke:8:22| mention that "they marvelled." But there was fear in it also. {Who then is this?} (\Tis ara houtos estin;\). No wonder that they feared if this One could command the wind and the waves at will as well as demons and drive out all diseases and speak such mysteries in parables. They were growing in their apprehension and comprehension of Jesus Christ. They had much yet to learn. There is much yet for us today to learn or seek to grow in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. This incident opened the eyes and minds of the disciples to the majesty of Jesus.

rwp@Mark:5:30 @{Perceiving in himself} (\epignous en heaut“i\). She thought, perhaps, that the touch of Christ's garment would cure her without his knowing it, a foolish fancy, no doubt, but one due to her excessive timidity. Jesus felt in his own consciousness. The Greek idiom more exactly means: "Jesus perceiving in himself the power from him go out" (\tˆn ex autou dunamin exelthousan\). The aorist participle here is punctiliar simply and timeless and can be illustrated by strkjv@Luke:10:18|: "I was beholding Satan fall" (\ethe“roun ton Satanƒn pesonta\), where \pesonta\ does not mean _fallen_ (\pept“kota\) as in strkjv@Revelation:9:1| nor falling (\piptonta\) but simply the constative aorist {fall} (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 684). Songs:here Jesus means to say: "I felt in myself the power from me go." Scholars argue whether in this instance Jesus healed the woman by conscious will or by unconscious response to her appeal. Some even argue that the actual healing took place after Jesus became aware of the woman's reaching for help by touching his garment. What we do know is that Jesus was conscious of the going out of power from himself. strkjv@Luke:8:46| uses \egn“n\ (personal knowledge), but Mark has \epignous\ (personal and additional, clear knowledge). One may remark that no real good can be done without the outgoing of power. That is true of mother, preacher, teacher, doctor. {Who touched my garments?} (\Tis mou hˆpsato t“n himati“n;\). More exactly, {Who touched me on my clothes}; The Greek verb uses two genitives, of the person and the thing. It was a dramatic moment for Jesus and for the timid woman. Later it was a common practice for the crowds to touch the hem of Christ's garments and be healed (Mark:6:56|). But here Jesus chose to single out this case for examination. There was no magic in the garments of Jesus. Perhaps there was superstition in the woman's mind, but Jesus honoured her darkened faith as in the case of Peter's shadow and Paul's handkerchief.

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

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

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

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

rwp@Matthew:2:1 @{In Bethlehem of Judea} (\en Bˆthleem tˆs Ioudaias\). There was a Bethlehem in Galilee seven miles northwest of Nazareth (Josephus, _Antiquities_ XIX. 15). This Bethlehem (house of bread, the name means) of Judah was the scene of Ruth's life with Boaz (Ruth:1:1f.; Mt. strkjv@1:5|) and the home of David, descendant of Ruth and ancestor of Jesus (Mt. strkjv@1:5|). David was born here and anointed king by Samuel (1Samuel:17:12|). The town came to be called the city of David (Luke:2:11|). Jesus, who was born in this House of Bread called himself the Bread of Life (John:6:35|), the true Manna from heaven. Matthew assumes the knowledge of the details of the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem which are given in strkjv@Luke:2:1-7| or did not consider them germane to his purpose. Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem from Nazareth because it was the original family home for both of them. The first enrolment by the Emperor Augustus as the papyri show was by families (\kat' oikian\). Possibly Joseph had delayed the journey for some reason till now it approached the time for the birth of the child.

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

rwp@Matthew:5:3 @{Blessed} (\makarioi\). The English word "blessed" is more exactly represented by the Greek verbal \eulogˆtoi\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:68| of God by Zacharias, or the perfect passive participle \eulogˆmenos\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:42| of Mary by Elizabeth and in strkjv@Matthew:21:9|. Both forms come from \euloge“\, to speak well of (\eu, logos\). The Greek word here (\makarioi\) is an adjective that means "happy" which in English etymology goes back to hap, chance, good-luck as seen in our words haply, hapless, happily, happiness. "Blessedness is, of course, an infinitely higher and better thing than mere happiness" (Weymouth). English has thus ennobled "blessed" to a higher rank than "happy." But "happy" is what Jesus said and the _Braid Scots New Testament_ dares to say "Happy" each time here as does the _Improved Edition of the American Bible Union Version_. The Greek word is as old as Homer and Pindar and was used of the Greek gods and also of men, but largely of outward prosperity. Then it is applied to the dead who died in the Lord as in strkjv@Revelation:14:13|. Already in the Old Testament the Septuagint uses it of moral quality. "Shaking itself loose from all thoughts of outward good, it becomes the express symbol of a happiness identified with pure character. Behind it lies the clear cognition of sin as the fountain-head of all misery, and of holiness as the final and effectual cure for every woe. For knowledge as the basis of virtue, and therefore of happiness, it substitutes faith and love" (Vincent). Jesus takes this word "happy" and puts it in this rich environment. "This is one of the words which have been transformed and ennobled by New Testament use; by association, as in the Beatitudes, with unusual conditions, accounted by the world miserable, or with rare and difficult" (Bruce). It is a pity that we have not kept the word "happy" to the high and holy plane where Jesus placed it. "If you know these things, happy (\makarioi\) are you if you do them" (John:13:17|). "Happy (\makarioi\) are those who have not seen and yet have believed" (John:20:29|). And Paul applies this adjective to God, "according to the gospel of the glory of the happy (\makariou\) God" (1Timothy:1:11|. Cf. also strkjv@Titus:2:13|). The term "Beatitudes" (Latin _beatus_) comes close to the meaning of Christ here by \makarioi\. It will repay one to make a careful study of all the "beatitudes" in the New Testament where this word is employed. It occurs nine times here (3-11|), though the beatitudes in verses 10 and 11 are very much alike. The copula is not expressed in either of these nine beatitudes. In each case a reason is given for the beatitude, "for" (\hoti\), that shows the spiritual quality involved. Some of the phrases employed by Jesus here occur in the Psalms, some even in the Talmud (itself later than the New Testament, though of separate origin). That is of small moment. "The originality of Jesus lies in putting the due value on these thoughts, collecting them, and making them as prominent as the Ten Commandments. No greater service can be rendered to mankind than to rescue from obscurity neglected moral commonplaces " (Bruce). Jesus repeated his sayings many times as all great teachers and preachers do, but this sermon has unity, progress, and consummation. It does not contain all that Jesus taught by any means, but it stands out as the greatest single sermon of all time, in its penetration, pungency, and power. {The poor in spirit} (\hoi pt“choi t“i pneumati\). Luke has only "the poor," but he means the same by it as this form in Matthew, "the pious in Israel, for the most part poor, whom the worldly rich despised and persecuted" (McNeile). The word used here (\pt“choi\) is applied to the beggar Lazarus in strkjv@Luke:16:20,22| and suggests spiritual destitution (from \pt“ss“\ to crouch, to cower). The other word \penˆs\ is from \penomai\, to work for one's daily bread and so means one who works for his living. The word \pt“chos\ is more frequent in the New Testament and implies deeper poverty than \penˆs\. "The kingdom of heaven" here means the reign of God in the heart and life. This is the _summum bonum_ and is what matters most.

rwp@Matthew:7:22 @{Did we not prophesy in thy name?} (\ou t“i s“i onomati eprophˆteusamen;\). The use of \ou\ in the question expects the affirmative answer. They claim to have prophesied (preached) in Christ's name and to have done many miracles. But Jesus will tear off the sheepskin and lay bare the ravening wolf. "I never knew you" (\oudepote egn“n h–mƒs\). "I was never acquainted with you" (experimental knowledge). Success, as the world counts it, is not a criterion of one's knowledge of Christ and relation to him. "I will profess unto them" (\homologˆs“ autois\), the very word used of profession of Christ before men (Matthew:10:32|). This word Jesus will use for public and open announcement of their doom.

rwp@Matthew:11:21 @{Chorazin} (\Chorazein\). Mentioned only here and in strkjv@Luke:10:13|. Proof of "the meagreness of our knowledge of Judaism in the time of Christ" (Plummer) and of the many things not told in our Gospels (John:21:25|). We know something of Bethsaida and more about Capernaum as places of privilege. But (\plˆn\, howbeit) neither of these cities repented, changed their conduct. Note condition of the second class, determined as unfulfilled in verses 21| and 23|.

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

rwp@Matthew:17:27 @{Lest we cause them to stumble} (\hina mˆ skandalis“men autous\). He does not wish to create the impression that he and the disciples despise the temple and its worship. Aorist tense (punctiliar single act) here, though some MSS. have present subjunctive (linear). "A hook" (\agkistron\). The only example in the N.T. of fishing with a hook. From an unused verb \agkiz“\, to angle, and that from \agkos\, a curve (so also \agkalˆ\ the inner curve of the arm, strkjv@Luke:2:38|). {First cometh up} (\ton anabanta pr“ton ichthun\). More correctly, "the first fish that cometh up." {A shekel} (\statˆra\). Greek stater = four drachmae, enough for two persons to pay the tax. {For me and thee} (\anti emou kai sou\). Common use of \anti\ in commercial transactions, "in exchange for." Here we have a miracle of foreknowledge. Such instances have happened. Some try to get rid of the miracle by calling it a proverb or by saying that Jesus only meant for Peter to sell the fish and thus get the money, a species of nervous anxiety to relieve Christ and the Gospel of Matthew from the miraculous. "All the attempts have been in vain which were made by the older Rationalism to put a non-miraculous meaning into these words" (B. Weiss). It is not stated that Peter actually caught such a fish though that is the natural implication. Why provision is thus only made for Peter along with Jesus we do not know.

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

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

rwp@Matthew:25:24 @{That had received the one talent} (\ho to talenton eilˆph“s\). Note the perfect active participle to emphasize the fact that he still had it. In verse 20| we have \ho--lab“n\ (aorist active participle). {I knew thee} (\egn“n se\). Second aorist active indicative. Experimental knowledge (\gin“sk“\) and proleptical use of \se\. {A hard man} (\sklˆros\). Harsh, stern, rough man, worse than \austˆros\ in strkjv@Luke:19:21|, grasping and ungenerous. {Where thou didst not scatter} (\hothen ou dieskorpisas\). But this scattering was the chaff from which wheat was winnowed, not the scattering of seed.

rwp@Matthew:28:20 @{I am with you} (\eg“ meta hum“n\). This is the amazing and blessed promise. He is to be with the disciples when he is gone, with all the disciples, with all knowledge, with all power, with them all the days (all sorts of days, weakness, sorrows, joy, power), till the consummation of the age (\he“s tˆs sunteleias tou ai“nos\). That goal is in the future and unknown to the disciples. This blessed hope is not designed as a sedative to an inactive mind and complacent conscience, but an incentive to the fullest endeavor to press on to the farthest limits of the world that all the nations may know Christ and the power of his Risen Life. Songs:Matthew's Gospel closes in a blaze of glory. Christ is conqueror in prospect and in fact. Christian history from that eventful experience on the Mountain in Galilee has been the fulfilment of that promise in as far as we allow God's power to work in us for the winning of the world to Christ, the Risen, all powerful Redeemer, who is with his people all the time. Jesus employs the prophetic present here (\eimi\, I am). He is with us all the days till he comes in glory.

rwp@Philippians:1:9 @{May abound} (\perisseuˆi\). Present active subjunctive of \perisseu“\, may keep on overflowing, a perpetual flood of love, "yet more and more" (\eti mallon kai mallon\), but with necessary limitations (river banks), "in knowledge" (\en epign“sei\, in full knowledge) "and all discernment" (\pƒsˆi aisthˆsei\). The delicate spiritual perception (\aisthˆsis\, old word from \aisthanomai\, only here in N.T. as the verb only in strkjv@Luke:9:45| in N.T.) can be cultivated as in \aisthˆtˆrion\ (Hebrews:5:14|)

rwp@Philippians:1:18 @{What then?} (\ti gar?\). Sharp problem put up to Paul by the conduct of the Judaizers. {Only that} (\plˆn hoti\). Same idiom in strkjv@Acts:20:23|. \Plˆn\ is adverb \pleon\ (more besides). As a preposition \plˆn\ means "except." This essential thing Paul sees in spite of all their envy and selfishness that Christ is preached. {Whether in pretence} (\eite prophasei\). Either from \prophain“\, to shew forth, or \prophˆmi\, to speak forth, the ostensible presentation often untrue. See strkjv@Acts:27:30|. Paul sees clearly through the pious pretence of these Judaizers and rejoices that people get some knowledge of Christ. Some Christ is better than no Christ. {Yea, and will rejoice} (\alla kai charˆsomai\). Note affirmative, not adversative, use of \alla\. Volitive use of the future (second future passive) indicative (\charˆsomai\) of \chair“\. Paul is determined to rejoice in spite of the efforts of the Judaizers to prod him to anger.

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

rwp@Philippians:3:8 @{Yea, verily, and} (\alla men oun ge kai\). Five particles before Paul proceeds (yea, indeed, therefore, at least, even), showing the force and passion of his conviction. He repeats his affirmation with the present middle indicative (\hˆgoumai\), "I still count all things loss for the excellency of the knowledge (\to huperechon\, the surpassingness, neuter articular participle of \huperech“\, strkjv@Phillipians:2:3|) of Christ Jesus my Lord." {Dung} (\skubala\). Late word of uncertain etymology, either connected with \sk“r\ (dung) or from \es kunas ball“\, to fling to the dogs and so refuse of any kind. It occurs in the papyri. Here only in the N.T. {That I may gain Christ} (\hina Christon kerdˆs“\). First aorist active subjunctive of \kerda“\, Ionic form for \kerdain“\ with \hina\ in purpose clause. Paul was never satisfied with his knowledge of Christ and always craved more fellowship with him.

rwp@Philippians:3:10 @{That I may know him} (\tou gn“nai auton\). Genitive of the articular second aorist (ingressive) active infinitive (purpose) of \gin“sk“\, to have personal acquaintance or experience with. This is Paul's major passion, to get more knowledge of Christ by experience. {The power of his resurrection} (\tˆn dunamin tˆs anastase“s autou\). Power (Lightfoot) in the sense of assurance to believers in immortality (1Corinthians:15:14f.; strkjv@Romans:8:11|), in the triumph over sin (Romans:4:24f.|), in the dignity of the body (1Corinthians:6:13ff.; strkjv@Phillipians:3:21|), in stimulating the moral and spiritual life (Galatians:2:20; strkjv@Romans:6:4f.; strkjv@Colossians:2:12; strkjv@Ephesians:2:5|). See Westcott's _The Gospel of the Resurrection_, ii, 31. {The fellowship of his sufferings} (\tˆn koin“nian t“n pathˆmat“n autou\). Partnership in (objective genitive) his sufferings, an honour prized by Paul (Co strkjv@1:24|). {Becoming conformed to his death} (\summorphizomenos t“i thanat“i autou\). Present passive participle of \summorphiz“\, late verb from \summorphos\, found only here and ecclesiastical writers quoting it. The Latin Vulgate uses _configuro_. See strkjv@Romans:6:4| for \sumphutoi\ in like sense and strkjv@2Corinthians:4:10|. "The agony of Gethsemane, not less than the agony of Calvary, will be reproduced however faintly in the faithful servant of Christ" (Lightfoot). "In this passage we have the deepest secrets of the Apostle's Christian experience unveiled" (Kennedy).

rwp@Revelation:2:2 @{I know} (\oida\). Rather than \gin“sk“\ and so "emphasizes better the absolute clearness of mental vision which photographs all the facts of life as they pass" (Swete). Songs:also in strkjv@2:9,13,19; strkjv@3:1,8,15|. For the distinction see strkjv@John:21:17|, "where the universal knowledge passes into the field of special observation." {Works} (\erga\). The whole life and conduct as in strkjv@John:6:29|. {And thy toil and patience} (\kai ton kopon kai tˆn hupomonˆn sou\). "Both thy toil and patience," in explanation of \erga\, and see strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:3|, where all three words (\ergon, kopos, hupomonˆ\) occur together as here. See strkjv@14:13| for sharp distinction between \erga\ (activities) and \kopoi\ (toils, with weariness). Endurance (\hupomonˆ\) in hard toil (\kopos\). {And that} (\kai hoti\). Further explanation of \kopos\ (hard toil). {Not able} (\ou dunˆi\). This _Koin‚_ form for the Attic \dunasai\ (second person singular indicative middle) occurs also in strkjv@Mark:9:22; strkjv@Luke:16:2|. {Bear} (\bastasai\). First aorist active infinitive of \bastaz“\, for which verb see strkjv@John:10:31; strkjv@12:6; strkjv@Galatians:6:2|. These evil men were indeed a heavy burden. {And didst try} (\kai epeirasas\). First aorist active indicative of \peiraz“\, to test, a reference to a recent crisis when these Nicolaitans (verse 6|) were condemned. The present tenses (\dunˆi, echeis\) indicate the continuance of this attitude. Cf. strkjv@1John:4:1|. {Which call themselves apostles} (\tous legontas heautous apostolous\). Perhaps itinerant missionaries of these Nicolaitans who posed as equal to or even superior to the original apostles, like the Judaizers so described by Paul (2Corinthians:11:5,13; strkjv@12:11|). Paul had foretold such false teachers (Gnostics), grievous wolves, in strkjv@Acts:20:29|; in sheep's clothing, Jesus had said (Matthew:7:15|). {And they are not} (\kai ouk eisin\). A parenthesis in Johannine style (John:2:9; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@1John:3:1|) for \kai ouk ontas\ to correspond to \legontas\. {And didst find} (\kai heures\). Second aorist active indicative of \heurisk“\. Dropping back to the regular structure parallel with \epeirasas\. {False} (\pseudeis\). Predicate accusative plural of \pseudˆs\, self-deceived deceivers as in strkjv@21:8|.

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

rwp@Revelation:2:24 @{To you the rest} (\humin tois loipois\). Dative case. Those who hold out against Jezebel, not necessarily a minority (9:20; strkjv@19:21; strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13|). {As many as} (\hosoi\). Inclusive of all "the rest." {This teaching} (\tˆn didachˆn tautˆn\). That of Jezebel. {Which} (\hoitines\). "Which very ones," generic of the class, explanatory definition as in strkjv@1:7|. {Know not} (\ouk egn“san\). Second aorist (ingressive) active of \gin“sk“\, "did not come to know by experience." {The deep things of Satan} (\ta bathea tou Satanƒ\). The Ophites (worshippers of the serpent) and other later Gnostics (Cainites, Carpocratians, Naassenes) boasted of their knowledge of "the deep things," some claiming this very language about Satan (the serpent) as Paul did of God (1Corinthians:2:10|). It is not clear whether the words here quoted are a boast of the Nicolaitans or a reproach on the other Christians for not knowing the depths of sin. Some even claimed that they could indulge in immorality without sinning (1John:1:10; strkjv@3:10|). Perhaps both ideas are involved. {As they say} (\h“s legousin\). Probably referring to the heretics who ridicule the piety of the other Christians. {None other burden} (\ou--allo baros\). \Baros\ refers to weight (Matthew:20:12|), \phortion\, from \pher“\, to bear, refers to load (Galatians:6:5|), \ogkos\ to bulk (Hebrews:12:1|). Apparently a reference to the decision of the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:28|) where the very word \baros\ is used and mention is made about the two items in verse 20| (fornication and idolatry) without mentioning the others about things strangled, etc. See the Pharisaic narrowness in strkjv@Matthew:23:4|.

rwp@Revelation:4:10 @{Shall fall down} (\pesountai\, future middle of \pipt“\), {shall worship} (\proskunˆsousin\, future active of \proskune“\), {shall cast their crowns} (\balousin tous stephanous\, future active of \ball“\). The two actions by the two groups (living creatures, elders) are coordinated (simultaneous in the repetition). They thus acknowledge that all this kingly dignity comes from God, who is King of kings and Lord of lords. Charles takes the elders, however, to be angels, not redeemed men.

rwp@Info_Romans @ THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS SPRING OF A.D. 57 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION INTEGRITY OF THE EPISTLE The genuineness of the Epistle is so generally admitted by scholars that it is unnecessary to prove it here, for Loman, Steck, and the Dutch scholars (Van Manen, etc.) who deny it as Pauline are no longer taken seriously. He wrote it from Corinth because he sent it to Rome by Phoebe of Cenchreae (Romans:16:2|) if chapter 16 is acknowledged to be a part of the Epistle. Chapter 16 is held by some to be really a short epistle to Ephesus because of the long list of names in it, because of Paul's long stay in Ephesus, because he had not yet been to Rome, and because, in particular, Aquila and Priscilla are named (Romans:16:3-5|) who had been with Paul in Ephesus. But they had come from Rome before going to Corinth and there is no reason for thinking that they did not return to Rome. It was quite possible for Paul to have many friends in Rome whom he had met elsewhere. People naturally drifted to Rome from all over the empire. The old MSS. (Aleph A B C D) give chapter 16 as an integral part of the Epistle. Marcion rejected it and chapter 15 also for reasons of his own. Renan's theory that Romans was a circular letter like Ephesians sent in different forms to different churches (Rome, Ephesus, Thessalonica, etc.) has appealed to some scholars as explaining the several doxologies in the Epistle, but they cause no real difficulty since Paul interjected them in his other epistles according to his moods (2Corinthians:1:20|, for instance). That theory raises more problems than it solves as, for example, Paul's remarks about going to Rome (Romans:1:9-16|) which apply to Rome. Lightfoot suggests the possibility that Paul added strkjv@Romans:16:25-27| some years after the original date so as to turn it into a circular letter. But the MSS. do not support that theory and that leaves strkjv@Romans:15:22-33 in the Epistle quite unsuitable to a circular letter. Modern knowledge leaves the Epistle intact with occasional variations in the MSS. on particular points as is true of all the N.T.

rwp@Info_Romans @ THE PURPOSE Paul tells this himself. He had long cherished a desire to come to Rome (Acts:19:21|) and had often made his plans to do so (Romans:1:13|) which were interrupted (Romans:15:22|), but now he definitely plans to go from Jerusalem, after taking the contribution there (Romans:15:26|), to Rome and then on to Spain (Romans:15:24,28|). Meanwhile he sends this Epistle that the Romans may know what Paul's gospel really is (Romans:1:15; strkjv@2:16|). He is full of the issues raised by the Judaizing controversy as set forth in the Epistles to Corinth and to Galatia. Songs:in a calmer mood and more at length he presents his conception of the Righteousness demanded by God (Romans:1:17|) of both Gentile (Romans:1:18-32|) and Jew (Romans:2:1-3:20|) and only to be obtained by faith in Christ who by his atoning death (justification) has made it possible (Romans:3:21-5:21|). This new life of faith in Christ should lead to holiness of life (sanctification, chapters strkjv@Romans:6-8|). This is Paul's gospel and the remaining chapters deal with corollaries growing out of the doctrine of grace as applied to practical matters. It is a cause for gratitude that Paul did write out so full a statement of his message. He had a message for the whole world and was anxious to win the Roman Empire to Christ. It was important that he go to Rome for it was the centre of the world's life. Nowhere does Paul's Christian statesmanship show to better advantage than in this greatest of his Epistles. It is not a book of formal theology though Paul is the greatest of theologians. Here Paul is seen in the plenitude of his powers with all the wealth of his knowledge of Christ and his rich experience in mission work. The church in Rome is plainly composed of both Jews and Greeks, though who started the work there we have no way of knowing. Paul's ambition was to preach where no one else had been (Romans:15:20|), but he has no hesitation in going on to Rome.

rwp@Romans:1:19 @{Because} (\dioti\). Gives the reason (\dia, hoti\ like our "for that") for the revelation of God's wrath. {That which may be known of God} (\to gn“ston tou theou\). Verbal adjective from \gin“sk“\, either "the known" as elsewhere in N.T. (Acts:1:19; strkjv@15:18|, etc.) or "the knowable" as usual in ancient Greek, that is "the knowledge" (\hˆ gn“sis\) of God. See strkjv@Phillipians:3:8|. Cf. same use of the verbal \chrˆston\ in strkjv@Romans:2:4|, \ametatheton\ in strkjv@Hebrews:6:17|. {Manifest in them} (\phaneron en autois\). In their hearts and consciences. {God manifested} (\ho theos ephaner“sen\). First aorist active indicative of \phanero“\. Not mere tautology. See strkjv@2:14-16|.

rwp@Romans:1:21 @{Because that} (\dioti\). As in verse 19|. {Knowing God} (\gnontes ton theon\). Second aorist active participle of \gin“sk“\, to know by personal experience. Definite statement that originally men had some knowledge of God. No people, however degraded, have yet been found without some yearning after a god, a seeking to find the true God and get back to him as Paul said in Athens (Acts:17:27|). {Glorified not as God} (\ouch h“s theon edoxasan\). They knew more than they did. This is the reason for the condemnation of the heathen (2:12-16|), the failure to do what they know. {Their senseless heart} (\hˆ asunetos aut“n kardia\). \Kardia\ is the most comprehensive term for all our faculties whether feeling (Romans:9:2|), will (1Corinthians:4:5|), intellect (Romans:10:6|). It may be the home of the Holy Spirit (Romans:5:5|) or of evil desires (1:24|). See strkjv@Mark:7:21f.| for list of vices that come "out of the heart." \Asunetos\ is a verbal adjective from \suniˆmi\, to put together, and \a\ privative, unintelligent, not able to put together the manifest evidence about God (verse 20|). Songs:darkness settled down on their hearts (\eskotisthˆ\, first aorist ingressive passive of \skotiz“\, to darken).

rwp@Romans:1:28 @{And even as they refused} (\kai kath“s ouk edokimasan\). "And even as they rejected" after trial just as \dokimaz“\ is used of testing coins. They tested God at first and turned aside from him. {Knowledge} (\epign“sei\). Full knowledge (\epi\ additional, \gn“sis\). They had a dim memory that was a caricature. {Unto a reprobate mind} (\eis adokimon noun\). Play on \ouk edokimasan\. They rejected God and God rejected their mental attitude and gave them over (verses 24,26,28|). See this adjective already in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:27; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:5-7|. Like an old abandoned building, the home of bats and snakes, left "to do those things which are not fitting" (\poiein ta mˆ kathˆkonta\), like the night clubs of modern cities, the dives and dens of the underworld, without God and in the darkness of unrestrained animal impulses. This was a technical term with Stoics (II Macc. strkjv@6:4).

rwp@Romans:2:14 @{That have no law} (\ta mˆ nomon echonta\). Better, "that have not the law" (the Mosaic law). {By nature} (\phusei\). Instrumental case of \phusis\, old word from \phu“\, to beget. The Gentiles are without the Mosaic law, but not without some knowledge of God in conscience and when they do right "they are a law to themselves" (\heautois eisin nomos\). This is an obvious reply to the Jewish critic.

rwp@Romans:2:15 @{In that they} (\hoitines\). "The very ones who," qualitative relative. {Written in their hearts} (\grapton en tais kardiais aut“n\). Verbal adjective of \graph“\, to write. When their conduct corresponds on any point with the Mosaic law they practise the unwritten law in their hearts. {Their conscience bearing witness therewith} (\sunmarturousˆs aut“n tˆs suneidˆse“s\). On conscience (\suneidˆsis\) see on ¯1Corinthians:8:7; strkjv@10:25f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:12|. Genitive absolute here with present active participle \sunmarturousˆs\ as in strkjv@9:1|. The word \suneidˆsis\ means co-knowledge by the side of the original consciousness of the act. This second knowledge is personified as confronting the first (Sanday and Headlam). The Stoics used the word a great deal and Paul has it twenty times. It is not in the O.T., but first in this sense in Wisdom strkjv@17:10. All men have this faculty of passing judgment on their actions. It can be over-scrupulous (1Corinthians:10:25|) or "seared" by abuse (1Timothy:4:12|). It acts according to the light it has. {Their thoughts one with another accusing or also excusing them} (\metaxu allˆl“n t“n logism“n katˆgorount“n ˆ kai apologoumen“n\). Genitive absolute again showing the alternative action of the conscience, now accusing, now excusing. Paul does not say that a heathen's conscience always commends everything that he thinks, says, or does. In order for one to be set right with God by his own life he must always act in accord with his conscience and never have its disapproval. That, of course, is impossible else Christ died for naught (Galatians:2:21|). Jesus alone lived a sinless life. For one to be saved without Christ he must also live a sinless life.

rwp@Romans:3:20 @{Because} (\dioti\, again, \dia, hoti\). {By the works of the law} (\ex erg“n nomou\). "Out of works of law." Mosaic law and any law as the source of being set right with God. Paul quotes strkjv@Psalms:43:2| as he did in strkjv@Galatians:2:16| to prove his point. {The knowledge of sin} (\epign“sis hamartias\). The effect of law universally is rebellion to it (1Corinthians:15:56|). Paul has shown this carefully in strkjv@Galatians:3:19-22|. Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:10:3|. He has now proven the guilt of both Gentile and Jew.

rwp@Romans:8:29 @{Foreknew} (\proegn“\). Second aorist active indicative of \progin“sk“\, old verb as in strkjv@Acts:26:5|. See strkjv@Psalms:1:6| (LXX) and strkjv@Matthew:7:23|. This fore-knowledge and choice is placed in eternity in strkjv@Ephesians:1:4|. {He foreordained} (\pro“risen\). First aorist active indicative of \prooriz“\, late verb to appoint beforehand as in strkjv@Acts:4:28; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7|. Another compound with \pro-\ (for eternity). {Conformed to the image} (\summorphous tˆs eikonos\). Late adjective from \sun\ and \morphˆ\ and so an inward and not merely superficial conformity. \Eik“n\ is used of Christ as the very image of the Father (2Corinthians:4:4; strkjv@Colossians:1:15|). See strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f.| for \morphˆ\. Here we have both \morphˆ\ and \eik“n\ to express the gradual change in us till we acquire the likeness of Christ the Son of God so that we ourselves shall ultimately have the family likeness of sons of God. Glorious destiny. {That he might be} (\eis to einai auton\). Common idiom for purpose. {First born among many brethren} (\pr“totokon en pollois adelphois\). Christ is "first born" of all creation (Colossians:1:15|), but here he is "first born from the dead" (Colossians:1:18|), the Eldest Brother in this family of God's sons, though "Son" in a sense not true of us.

rwp@Romans:10:2 @{A zeal for God} (\zˆlon theou\). Objective genitive like strkjv@Phillipians:3:9|, "through faith in Christ" (\dia piste“s Christou\). {But not according to knowledge} (\all' ou kat' epign“sin\). They had knowledge of God and so were superior to the Gentiles in privilege (2:9-11|), but they sought God in an external way by rules and rites and missed him (9:30-33|). They became zealous for the letter and the form instead of for God himself.

rwp@Romans:11:33 @{O the depth} (\O bathos\). Exclamation with omega and the nominative case of \bathos\ (see on ¯2Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@Romans:8:39|). Paul's argument concerning God's elective grace and goodness has carried him to the heights and now he pauses on the edge of the precipice as he contemplates God's wisdom and knowledge, fully conscious of his inability to sound the bottom with the plummet of human reason and words. {Unsearchable} (\anexeraunˆta\). Double compound (\a\ privative and \ex\) verbal adjective of \ereuna“\ (old spelling \-eu-\), late and rare word (LXX, Dio Cassius, Heraclitus), only here in N.T. Some of God's wisdom can be known (1:20f.|), but not all. {Past tracing out} (\anexichniastoi\). Another verbal adjective from \a\ privative and \exichniaz“\, to trace out by tracks (\ichnos\ strkjv@Romans:4:12|). Late word in Job:(Job:5:9; strkjv@9:10; strkjv@34:24|) from which use Paul obtained it here and strkjv@Ephesians:3:8| (only N.T. examples). Also in ecclesiastical writers. Some of God's tracks he has left plain to us, but others are beyond us.

rwp@Romans:14:15 @Because of meat (\dia br“ma\). "Because of food." {In love} (\kata agapˆn\). "According to love" as the regulating principle of life. See strkjv@1Corinthians:8| where Paul pleads for love in place of knowledge on this point. {Destroy not} (\mˆ apollue\). Present active imperative of \apollu“\, the very argument made in strkjv@1Corinthians:8:10f|. {With thy meat} (\t“i br“mati sou\). Instrumental case, "with thy food." It is too great a price to pay for personal liberty as to food.

rwp@Romans:15:14 @{I myself also} (\kai autos eg“\). See strkjv@7:25| for a like emphasis on himself, here in contrast with "ye yourselves" (\kai autoi\). The argument of the Epistle has been completed both in the main line (chapters 1-8|) and the further applications (9:1-15:13|). Here begins the Epilogue, the personal matters of importance. {Full of goodness} (\mestoi agathosunˆs\). See strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:11; strkjv@Galatians:5:22| for this LXX and Pauline word (in ecclesiastical writers also) made from the adjective \agathos\, good, by adding \-sunˆ\ (common ending for words like \dikaiosunˆ\. See strkjv@1:29| for \mestos\ with genitive and \peplˆr“menoi\ (perfect passive participle of \plˆro“\ as here), but there with instrumental case after it instead of the genitive. Paul gives the Roman Christians (chiefly Gentiles) high praise. The "all knowledge" is not to be pressed too literally, "our Christian knowledge in its entirety" (Sanday and Headlam). {To admonish} (\nouthetein\). To put in mind (from \nouthetˆs\ and this from \nous\ and \tithˆmi\). See on ¯1Thessalonians:5:12,14|. "Is it laying too much stress on the language of compliment to suggest that these words give a hint of St. Paul's aim in this Epistle?" (Sanday and Headlam). The strategic position of the church in Rome made it a great centre for radiating and echoing the gospel over the world as Thessalonica did for Macedonia (1Thessalonians:1:8|).

rwp@Titus:1:1 @{According to the faith of God's elect} (\kata pistin eklekt“n theou\). Here \kata\ expresses the aim of Paul's apostleship, not the standard by which he was chosen as in strkjv@Phillipians:3:14|; a classic idiom, repeated here with \epign“sin, eusebeian, epitagˆn\, "with a view to" in each case. For "God's elect" see strkjv@Romans:8:33; strkjv@Colossians:3:12|. {The knowledge} (\epign“sin\). "Full knowledge," one of Paul's favourite words. For the phrase see strkjv@1Timothy:2:4|. {Which is according to godliness} (\tˆs kat' eusebeian\). "The (truth) with a view to godliness." The combination of faith and full knowledge of the truth is to bring godliness on the basis of the hope of life eternal.

rwp@Titus:1:13 @{Testimony} (\marturia\). Of the poet Epimenides. Paul endorses it from his recent knowledge. {Sharply} (\apotom“s\). Old adverb from \apotomos\ (from \apotemn“\, to cut off), in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:13:10|, "curtly," "abruptly." It is necessary to appear rude sometimes for safety, if the house is on fire and life is in danger. {That they may be sound} (\hina hugiain“sin\). Final clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \hugiain“\, for which verb see on ¯1Timothy:1:10|.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Sat Jun 29 23:29:07 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020