Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-LAW.filter - rwp serve:


rwp@1Corinthians:1:16 @{Also the household of Stephanas} (\kai ton Stephanƒ oikon\). Mentioned as an afterthought. Robertson and Plummer suggest that Paul's amanuensis reminded him of this case. Paul calls him a first-fruit of Achaia (1Corinthians:16:15|) and so earlier than Crispus and he was one of the three who came to Paul from Corinth (16:17|), clearly a family that justified Paul's personal attention about baptism. {Besides} (\loipon\). Accusative of general reference, "as for anything else." Added to make clear that he is not meaning to omit any one who deserves mention. See also strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:1; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:2; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11; strkjv@2Timothy:4:8|. Ellicott insists on a sharp distinction from \to loipon\ "as for the rest" (2Thessalonians:3:1; strkjv@Phillipians:3:1; strkjv@4:8; strkjv@Ephesians:6:10|). Paul casts no reflection on baptism, for he could not with his conception of it as the picture of the new life in Christ (Romans:6:2-6|), but he clearly denies here that he considers baptism essential to the remission of sin or the means of obtaining forgiveness.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:8 @{Are one} (\hen eisin\). The neuter singular again (\hen\, not \heis\) as with the interrogative \ti\ and the indefinite \ti\. By this bold metaphor which Paul expands he shows how the planter and the waterer work together. If no one planted, the watering would be useless. If no one watered, the planting would come to naught as the dreadful drouth of 1930 testifies while these words are written. {According to his own labour} (\kata ton idion kopon\). God will bestow to each the reward that his labour deserves. That is the pay that the preacher is sure to receive. He may get too little or too much here from men. But the due reward from God is certain and it will be adequate however ungrateful men may be.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:17 @{Destroyeth} (\phtheirei\). The outward temple is merely the symbol of God's presence, the Shechinah (the Glory). God makes his home in the hearts of his people or the church in any given place like Corinth. It is a terrible thing to tear down ruthlessly a church or temple of God like an earthquake that shatters a building in ruins. This old verb \phtheir“\ means to corrupt, to deprave, to destroy. It is a gross sin to be a church-wrecker. There are actually a few preachers who leave behind them ruin like a tornado in their path. {Him shall God destroy} (\phtherei touton ho theos\). There is a solemn repetition of the same verb in the future active indicative. The condition is the first class and is assumed to be true. Then the punishment is certain and equally effective. The church-wrecker God will wreck. What does Paul mean by "will destroy"? Does he mean punishment here or hereafter? May it not be both? Certainly he does not mean annihilation of the man's soul, though it may well include eternal punishment. There is warning enough here to make every pastor pause before he tears a church to pieces in order to vindicate himself. {Holy} (\hagios\). Hence deserves reverential treatment. It is not the building or house of which Paul speaks as "the sanctuary of God" (\ton naon tou theou\), but the spiritual organization or organism of God's people in whom God dwells, "which temple ye are" (\hoitines este humeis\). The qualitative relative pronoun \hoitines\ is plural to agree with \humeis\ (ye) and refers to the holy temple just mentioned. The Corinthians themselves in their angry disputes had forgotten their holy heritage and calling, though this failing was no excuse for the ringleaders who had led them on. In strkjv@6:19| Paul reminds the Corinthians again that the body is the temple (\naos\, sanctuary) of the Holy Spirit, which fact they had forgotten in their immoralities.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:7 @{Maketh thee to differ} (\se diakrinei\). Distinguishes thee, separates thee. \Diakrin“\ means to sift or separate between (\dia\) as in strkjv@Acts:15:9| (which see) where \metaxu\ is added to make it plainer. All self-conceit rests on the notion of superiority of gifts and graces as if they were self-bestowed or self-acquired. {Which thou didst not receive} (\ho ouk elabes\). "Another home-thrust" (Robertson and Plummer). Pride of intellect, of blood, of race, of country, of religion, is thus shut out. {Dost thou glory} (\kauchasai\). The original second person singular middle ending \-sai\ is here preserved with variable vowel contraction, \kauchaesai=kauchasai\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 341). Paul is fond of this old and bold verb for boasting. {As if thou hadst not received it} (\h“s mˆ lab“n\). This neat participial clause (second aorist active of \lamban“\) with \h“s\ (assumption) and negative \mˆ\ punctures effectually the inflated bag of false pride. What pungent questions Paul has asked. Robertson and Plummer say of Augustine, "Ten years before the challenge of Pelagius, the study of St. Paul's writings, and especially of this verse and of strkjv@Romans:9:16|, had crystallized in his mind the distinctively Augustinian doctrines of man's total depravity, of irresistible grace, and of absolute predestination." Human responsibility does exist beyond a doubt, but there is no foundation for pride and conceit.

rwp@1Corinthians:5:9 @{I wrote unto you in my epistle} (\egrapsa humin en tˆi epistolˆi\). Not the epistolary aorist, but a reference to an epistle to the Corinthians earlier than this one (our First Corinthians), one not preserved to us. What a "find" it would be if a bundle of papyri in Egypt should give it back to us? {To have no company with fornicators} (\mˆ sunanamignusthai pornois\). Present middle infinitive with \mˆ\ in an indirect command of a late double compound verb used in the papyri to mix up with (\sun-ana-mignusthai\, a \mi\ verb). It is in the N.T. only here and verse 11; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:14| which see. It is used here with the associative instrumental case (\pornois\, from \pera“, pernˆmi\, to sell, men and women who sell their bodies for lust). It is a pertinent question today how far modern views try to put a veneer over the vice in men and women.

rwp@1Corinthians:9:7 @{What soldier ever serveth?} (\tis strateuetai pote;\). "Who ever serves as a soldier?" serves in an army (\stratos\). Present middle of old verb \strateu“\. {At his own charges} (\idiois ops“niois\). This late word \ops“nion\ (from \opson\, cooked meat or relish with bread, and \“neomai\, to buy) found in Menander, Polybius, and very common in papyri and inscriptions in the sense of rations or food, then for the soldiers' wages (often provisions) or the pay of any workman. Songs:of the wages of sin (Romans:6:23|). Paul uses \lab“n ops“nion\ (receiving wages, the regular idiom) in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:8|. See Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_; Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 148,266; _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 168. To give proof of his right to receive pay for preaching Paul uses the illustrations of the soldier (verse 7|), the husbandman (verse 7|), the shepherd (verse 7|), the ox treading out the grain (8|), the ploughman (verse 10|), the priests in the temple (13|), proof enough in all conscience, and yet not enough for some churches who even today starve their pastors in the name of piety. {Who planteth a vineyard?} (\tis phuteuei ampel“na;\). \Ampel“n\ no earlier than Diodorus, but in LXX and in papyri. Place of vines (\ampelos\), meaning of ending \-“n\. {Who feedeth a flock?} (\tis poimainei poimnˆn;\). Cognate accusative, both old words. Paul likens the pastor to a soldier, vinedresser, shepherd. He contends with the world, he plants churches, he exercises a shepherd's care over them (Vincent).

rwp@1Corinthians:9:16 @{For if I preach} (\ean gar euaggeliz“mai\). Third class condition, supposable case. Same construction in verse 16| (\ean mˆ\). {For necessity is laid upon me} (\anagkˆ gar moi epikeitai\). Old verb, lies upon me (dative case \moi\). Jesus had called him (Acts:9:6,15; strkjv@Galatians:1:15f.; strkjv@Romans:1:14|). He could do no other and deserves no credit for doing it. {Woe is me} (\ouai gar moi\). Explaining the \anagkˆ\ (necessity). Paul had to heed the call of Christ that he had heard. He had a real call to the ministry. Would that this were the case with every modern preacher.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:16 @{The cup of blessing} (\to potˆrion tˆs eulogias\). The cup over which we pronounce a blessing as by Christ at the institution of the ordinance. {A communion of the blood of Christ} (\koin“nia tou haimatos tou Christou\). Literally, a participation in (objective genitive) the blood of Christ. The word \koin“nia\ is an old one from \koin“nos\, partner, and so here and strkjv@Phillipians:2:1; strkjv@3:10|. It can mean also fellowship (Galatians:2:9|) or contribution (2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@Phillipians:1:5|). It is, of course, a spiritual participation in the blood of Christ which is symbolized by the cup. Same meaning for \koin“nia\ in reference to "the body of Christ." {The bread which we break} (\ton arton hon kl“men\). The loaf. Inverse attraction of the antecedent (\arton\) to the case (accusative) of the relative (\hon\) according to classic idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 488). \Artos\ probably from \ar“\, to join or fit (flour mixed with water and baked). The mention of the cup here before the bread does not mean that this order was observed for see the regular order of bread and then cup in strkjv@11:24-27|.

rwp@1Corinthians:16:22 @\Anathema\. The word seems a bit harsh to us, but the refusal to love Christ (\ou philei\) on the part of a nominal Christian deserves \anathema\ (see on ¯12:3| for this word). \Maran atha\. This Aramaic phrase means "Our Lord (\maran\) cometh (\atha\)" or, used as a proleptic perfect, "has come." It seems to be a sort of watchword (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:14ff.; strkjv@James:5:7f.; strkjv@Phillipians:4:5; strkjv@Revelation:1:7; strkjv@3:11; strkjv@22:20|), expressing the lively hope that the Lord will come. It was a curious blunder in the King James Version that connected \Maran atha\ with \Anathema\.

rwp@1John:1:10 @{If we say} (\ean eip“men\). As in verses 6,8|. {We have not sinned} (\ouch hamartˆkamen\). Perfect active indicative of \hamartan“\. This is a denial of any specific acts of sin, while in verse 8| we have the denial of the principle of sin. David Smith observes that the claim to personal perfectionism has two causes, one the stifling of conscience in making God a liar (\pseustˆn\, the word used of the devil by Jesus in strkjv@John:8:44|), and the other ignorance of God's word, which is not in us, else we should not make such a claim.

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

rwp@1Peter:1:4 @{Unto an inheritance} (\eis klˆronomian\). Old word (from \klˆronomos\, heir) for the property received by the heir (Matthew:21:38|), here a picture of the blessedness in store for us pilgrims (Galatians:3:18|). {Incorruptible} (\aphtharton\). Old compound adjective (alpha privative and \phtheir“\, to corrupt), imperishable. Songs:many inheritances vanish away before they are obtained. {Undefiled} (\amianton\). Old verbal adjective (note alliteration) from alpha privative and \miain“\, to defile, without defect or flaw in the title, in N.T. only here, strkjv@James:1:27; strkjv@Hebrews:13:4|. {That fadeth not away} (\amaranton\). Alliterative and verbal adjective again from alpha privative and \marain“\ (to dry up, to wither, as in strkjv@James:1:11|), late and rare word in several inscriptions on tombs, here only in N.T. These inscriptions will fade away, but not this inheritance in Christ. It will not be like a faded rose. {Reserved} (\tetˆrˆmenˆn\). Perfect passive participle of \tˆre“\, old verb, to take care of, to guard. No burglars or bandits can break through where this inheritance is kept (Matthew:6:19f.; strkjv@John:17:11f.|). Cf. strkjv@Colossians:1:5|, where laid away" (\apokeimenˆn\) occurs. {For you} (\eis humas\). More graphic than the mere dative.

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:2:5 @{Ye also as living stones} (\kai autoi h“s lithoi z“ntes\). Peter applies the metaphor about Christ as the living stone to the readers, "ye yourselves also." {Are built up a spiritual house} (\oikodomeisthe oikos pneumatikos\). Present passive indicative second person plural of \oikodome“\, the very verb used by Jesus to Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| (\oikodomˆs“\) of building his church on the rock. If the metaphor of a house of living stones seems "violent" (Vincent), it should be remembered that Jesus employed the figure of a house of believers. Peter just carried it a bit farther and Paul uses a temple for believers in one place (1Corinthians:3:16|) and for the kingdom of God in general (Ephesians:2:22|), as does the author of Hebrews (Hebrews:3:6|). This "spiritual house" includes believers in the five Roman provinces of strkjv@1:1| and shows clearly how Peter understood the metaphor of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| to be not a local church, but the church general (the kingdom of Christ). {To be a holy priesthood} (\eis hierateuma hagion\). Late word (from \hierateu“\, to serve as priest, strkjv@Luke:1:8| alone in N.T.), in LXX (Exodus:19:6|), in N.T. only here and verse 9|, either the office of priest (Hort) or an order or body of priests. At any rate, Peter has the same idea of Rev strkjv@1:6| (\hiereis\, priests) that all believers are priests (Hebrews:4:16|) and can approach God directly. {To offer up} (\anenegkai\). First aorist active infinitive (of purpose here) of \anapher“\, the usual word for offering sacrifices (Hebrews:7:27|). Only these are "spiritual" (\pneumatikas\) as pictured also in strkjv@Hebrews:13:15f|. {Acceptable} (\euprosdektous\). Late (Plutarch) double compound verbal adjective (\eu, pros, dechomai\) as in strkjv@2Corinthians:6:2|.

rwp@1Peter:2:20 @{For what glory} (\poion gar kleos\). Qualitative interrogative (what kind of glory). "What price glory?" \Kleos\ is old word from \kle“\ (\kale“\, to call), report, praise, glory, here only in N.T. {If ye shall take it patiently} (\ei hupomeneite\). First-class condition with \ei\ and future active indicative of \hupomen“\, for which see strkjv@James:1:12|. Same condition also in next sentence (\all' ei\, etc.). {When ye sin} (\hamartanontes\). Present active participle of \hamartan“\ (continued repetition). {And are buffeted for it} (\kai kolaphizomenoi\). Present passive participle of \kolaphiz“\, late word (from \kolaphos\ fist), only in N.T. (cf. strkjv@Matthew:26:67|) and ecclesiastical writers. Repeated action again. No posing as a martyr allowed here. Christians do sometimes deserve persecution, as Jesus implied (Matthew:5:10-12|). {When ye do well} (\agathopoiountes\). Present active participle of \agathopoie“\ as in verse 15|. {And suffer for it} (\kai paschontes\). Present active participle of \pasch“\ (verse 19|). No "for it" in the Greek here or in the previous sentence. {This is acceptable with God} (\touto charis para the“i\). "This thing (neuter) is thanks (verse 19|) by the side of (\para\) God (as God looks at it)."

rwp@1Peter:2:25 @{For ye were going astray like sheep} (\ˆte gar h“s probata plan“menoi\). Brought from strkjv@Isaiah:53:6|, but changed to periphrastic imperfect indicative with \ˆte\ and present middle participle of \plana“\, to wander away. Recall the words of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:15:4-7|. {But are now returned} (\alla epestraphˆte\). Second aorist passive indicative of \epistreph“\, old verb, to turn, to return (Matthew:10:13|). {Unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls} (\epi ton poimena kai episkopon t“n psuch“n hum“n\). Jesus called himself the Good Shepherd (John:10:11|, and see also strkjv@Hebrews:13:20|). Here alone is Christ called our "Bishop" (overseer). See both ideas combined in strkjv@Ezekiel:34:11|. Philo calls God \Episcopos\. Jesus is also \Apostolos\ strkjv@Hebrews:3:1|) and he deserves all other titles of dignity that we can give him.

rwp@1Peter:3:19 @{In which also} (\en h“i kai\). That is, in spirit (relative referring to \pneumati\). But, a number of modern scholars have followed Griesbach's conjecture that the original text was either \N“e kai\ (Noah also), or \En“ch kai\ (Enoch also), or \en h“i kai En“ch\ (in which Enoch also) which an early scribe misunderstood or omitted \En“ch kai\ in copying (\homoioteleuton\). It is allowed in Stier and Theile's _Polyglott_. It is advocated by J. Cramer in 1891, by J. Rendel Harris in _The Expositor_ (1901), and _Sidelights on N.T. Research_ (p. 208), by Nestle in 1902, by Moffatt's New Translation of the New Testament. Windisch rejects it as inconsistent with the context. There is no manuscript for the conjecture, though it would relieve the difficulty greatly. Luther admits that he does not know what Peter means. Bigg has no doubt that the event recorded took place between Christ's death and his resurrection and holds that Peter is alluding to Christ's _Descensus ad Inferos_ in strkjv@Acts:2:27| (with which he compares strkjv@Matthew:27:52f.; strkjv@Luke:23:34; strkjv@Ephesians:4:9|). With this Windisch agrees. But Wohlenberg holds that Peter means that Christ in his preexistent state preached to those who rejected the preaching of Noah who are now in prison. Augustine held that Christ was in Noah when he preached. Bigg argues strongly that Christ during the time between his death and resurrection preached to those who once heard Noah (but are now in prison) and offered them another chance and not mere condemnation. If so, why did Jesus confine his preaching to this one group? Songs:the theories run on about this passage. One can only say that it is a slim hope for those who neglect or reject Christ in this life to gamble with a possible second chance after death which rests on very precarious exegesis of a most difficult passage in Peter's Epistle. Accepting the text as we have, what can we make of it? {He went and preached} (\poreutheis ekˆruxen\). First aorist passive (deponent) participle of \poreuomai\ and first aorist active indicative of \kˆruss“\, the verb commonly used of the preaching of Jesus. Naturally the words mean personal action by Christ "in spirit" as illustration of his "quickening" (verse 18|) whether done before his death or afterwards. It is interesting to observe that, just as the relative \en h“i\ here tells something suggested by the word \pneumati\ (in spirit) just before, so in verse 21| the relative \ho\ (which) tells another illustration of the words \di' hudatos\ (by water) just before. Peter jumps from the flood in Noah's time to baptism in Peter's time, just as he jumped backwards from Christ's time to Noah's time. He easily goes off at a word. What does he mean here by the story that illustrates Christ's quickening in spirit? {Unto the spirits in prison} (\tois en phulakˆi pneumasin\). The language is plain enough except that it does not make it clear whether Jesus did the preaching to spirits in prison at the time or to people whose spirits are now in prison, the point of doubt already discussed. The metaphorical use of \en phulakˆi\ can be illustrated by strkjv@2Peter:2:4; strkjv@Jude:1:6; strkjv@Revelation:20:7| (the final abode of the lost). See strkjv@Hebrews:12:23| for the use of \pneumata\ for disembodied spirits.

rwp@Info_1Thessalonians @ FIRST THESSALONIANS FROM CORINTH A.D. 50 TO 51 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION We cannot say that this is Paul's first letter to a church, for in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2| he speaks of some as palming off letters as his and in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:17| he says that he appends his own signature to every letter after dictating it to an amanuensis (Romans:16:22|). We know of one lost letter (1Corinthians:5:11|) and perhaps another (2Corinthians:2:3|). But this is the earliest one that has come down to us and it may even be the earliest New Testament book, unless the Epistle of James antedates it or even Mark's Gospel. We know, as already shown, that Paul was in Corinth and that Timothy and Silas had just arrived from Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:3:6; strkjv@Acts:18:5|). They had brought supplies from the Macedonian churches to supply Paul's need (2Corinthians:11:9|), as the church in Philippi did once and again while Paul was in Thessalonica (Phillipians:4:15f.|). Before Timothy and Silas came to Corinth Paul had to work steadily at his trade as tent-maker with Aquila and Priscilla (Acts:18:3|) and could only preach in the synagogue on sabbaths, but the rich stores from Macedonia released his hands and "Paul devoted himself to the word" (\suneicheto t“i log“i Paulos\). He gave himself wholly to preaching now. But Timothy and Silas brought news of serious trouble in the church in Thessalonica. Some of the disciples there had misunderstood Paul's preaching about the second coming of Christ and had quit work and were making a decided disturbance on the subject. Undoubtedly Paul had touched upon eschatological matters while in Thessalonica. The Jewish leaders at Thessalonica charged it against Paul and Silas to the politarchs that they had preached another king, Jesus, in place of Caesar. Paul had preached Jesus as King of the spiritual kingdom which the Jews misrepresented to the politarchs as treason against Caesar as the Sanhedrin had done to Pilate about Jesus. Clearly Paul had said also that Jesus was going to come again according to his own promise before his ascension. Some asserted that Paul said Jesus was going to come right away and drew their own inferences for idleness and fanaticism as some do today. Strange as it may seem, there are scholars today who say that Paul did believe and say that Jesus was going to come back right away. They say this in spite of strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1f.| where Paul denies having ever said it. Undoubtedly Paul hoped for the early return of Jesus as most of the early Christians did, but that is a very different thing from setting a time for his coming. It is open to us all to hope for the speedy return of Christ, but times and seasons are with God and not with us. It is not open to us to excuse our negligence and idleness as Christians because of such a hope. That hope should serve as a spur to increased activity for Christ in order to hasten his coming. Songs:Paul writes this group of Epistles to correct gross misapprehension and misrepresentation of his preaching about last things (eschatology). It is a rare preacher who has never been misunderstood or misrepresented.

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:1:9 @{They themselves} (\autoi\). The men of Macedonia, voluntarily. {Report} (\apaggellousin\). Linear present active indicative, keep on reporting. {What manner of entering in} (\hopoian eisodon\). What sort of entrance, qualitative relative in an indirect question. {We had} (\eschomen\). Second aorist active (ingressive) indicative of the common verb \ech“\. {And how} (\kai p“s\). Here the interrogative adverb \p“s\ in this part of the indirect question. This part about "them" (you) as the first part about Paul. The verb \epistreph“\ is an old verb for turning and is common in the Acts for Gentiles turning to God, as here from idols, though not by Paul again in this sense. In strkjv@Galatians:4:9| Paul uses it for turning to the weak and beggarly elements of Judaism. {From idols} (\apo t“n eidol“n\). Old word from \eidos\ (figure) for image or likeness and then for the image of a heathen god (our _idol_). Common in the LXX in this sense. In strkjv@Acts:14:15| Paul at Lystra urged the people {to turn from these vain things to the living God} (\apo tout“n t“n matai“n epistrephein epi theon z“nta\), using the same verb \epistrephein\. Here also Paul has a like idea, {to serve a living and true God} (\douleuein the“i z“nti kai alˆthin“i\). No article, it is true, but should be translated "the living and true God" (cf. strkjv@Acts:14:15|). Not "dead" like the idols from which they turned, but alive and genuine (\alˆthinos\, not \alˆthˆs\).

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:15 @{By the word of the Lord} (\en log“i Kuriou\). We do not know to what word of the Lord Jesus Paul refers, probably Paul meaning only the point in the teaching of Christ rather than a quotation. He may be claiming a direct revelation on this important matter as about the Lord's Supper in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:23|. Jesus may have spoken on this subject though it has not been preserved to us (cf. strkjv@Mark:9:1|). {Ye that are alive} (\hˆmeis hoi z“ntes\). Paul here includes himself, but this by no means shows that Paul knew that he would be alive at the Parousia of Christ. He was alive, not dead, when he wrote. {Shall in no wise precede} (\ou mˆ phthas“men\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \phthan“\, to come before, to anticipate. This strong negative with \ou mˆ\ (double negative) and the subjunctive is the regular idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 929). Hence there was no ground for uneasiness about the dead in Christ.

rwp@1Thessalonians:5:23 @{The God of peace} (\ho theos tˆs eirˆnˆs\). The God characterized by peace in his nature, who gladly bestows it also. Common phrase (Milligan) at close of Paul's Epistles (2Corinthians:13:11; strkjv@Romans:15:33; strkjv@16:20; strkjv@Phillipians:4:9|) and {the Lord of peace} in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:6|. {Sanctify you} (\hagiasai humƒs\). First aorist active optative in a wish for the future. New verb in LXX and N.T. for the old \hagiz“\, to render or to declare holy (\hagios\), to consecrate, to separate from things profane. {Wholly} (\holoteleis\). Predicate adjective in plural (\holos\, whole, \telos\, end), not adverb \holotel“s\. Late word in Plutarch, Hexapla, and in inscription A.D. 67 (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Here alone in N.T. Here it means the whole of each of you, every part of each of you, "through and through" (Luther), qualitatively rather than quantitatively. {Your spirit and soul and body} (\hum“n to pneuma kai hˆ psuchˆ kai to s“ma\). Not necessarily trichotomy as opposed to dichotomy as elsewhere in Paul's Epistles. Both believers and unbelievers have an inner man (soul \psuchˆ\, mind \nous\, heart \kardia\, the inward man \ho es“ anthr“pos\) and the outer man (\s“ma, ho ex“ anthr“pos\). But the believer has the Holy Spirit of God, the renewed spirit of man (1Corinthians:2:11; strkjv@Romans:8:9-11|). {Be preserved entire} (\holoklˆron tˆrˆtheiˆ\). First aorist passive optative in wish for the future. Note singular verb and singular adjective (neuter) showing that Paul conceives of the man as "an undivided whole" (Frame), prayer for the consecration of both body and soul (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:6|). The adjective \holoklˆron\ is in predicate and is an old form and means complete in all its parts (\holos\, whole, \klˆros\, lot or part). There is to be no deficiency in any part. \Teleios\ (from \telos\, end) means final perfection. {Without blame} (\amempt“s\). Old adverb (\a\ privative, \memptos\, verbal of \memphomai\, to blame) only in I Thess. in N.T. (2:10; strkjv@3:13; strkjv@5:23|). Milligan notes it in certain sepulchral inscriptions discovered in Thessalonica. {At the coming} (\en tˆi parousiƒi\). The Second Coming which was a sustaining hope to Paul as it should be to us and mentioned often in this Epistle (see on ¯2:19|).

rwp@1Timothy:3:10 @{First be proved} (\dokimazesth“san pr“ton\). Present passive imperative third plural of \dokimaz“\, old and common verb, to test as metals, etc. (1Thessalonians:2:4|, and often in Paul). How the proposed deacons are to be "first" tested before approved Paul does not say. See strkjv@Phillipians:1:10| for the two senses (test, approve) of the word. {Let them serve as deacons} (\diakoneit“san\). Present active imperative of \diakone“\ (same root as \diakonos\), common verb, to minister, here "to serve as deacons." Cf. \diakonein\ in strkjv@Acts:6:2|. See also verse 13|. {If they be blameless} (\anegklˆtoi ontes\). "Being blameless" (conditional participle, \ontes\). See strkjv@1Corinthians:1:8; strkjv@Colossians:1:22| for \anegklˆtos\.

rwp@1Timothy:5:21 @{The elect angels} (\t“n eklekt“n aggel“n\). For this triad of God, Christ, angels, see strkjv@Luke:9:26|. "Elect" in the sense of the "holy" angels who kept their own principality (Jude:1:6|) and who did not sin (2Peter:2:4|). Paul shows his interest in angels in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:9; strkjv@11:10|. {Observe} (\phulaxˆis\). First aorist active subjunctive of \phulass“\, to guard, to keep (Romans:2:26|). Subfinal use of \hina\. {Without prejudice} (\ch“ris prokrimatos\). Late and rare word (from \prokin“\, to judge beforehand), three times in the papyri, here only in N.T. "Without prejudgment." {By partiality} (\kata prosklisin\). Late word from \prosklin“\, to incline towards one (Acts:5:36|), only here in N.T.

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

rwp@2Corinthians:3:11 @{Passeth away} (\katargoumenon\). In process of disappearing before the gospel of Christ. {Remaineth} (\menon\). The new ministry is permanent. This claim may be recommended to those who clamour for a new religion. Christianity is still alive and is not dying. Note also \en doxˆi\, in glory, in contrast with \dia doxˆs\, with glory. {Boldness} (\parrˆsiƒi\). Instrumental case after \chr“metha\. Old word, \panrˆsis=parrˆsis\, telling it all, absolute unreservedness. Surely Paul has kept nothing back here, no mental reservations, in this triumphant claim of superiority.

rwp@2Corinthians:7:9 @{Now I rejoice} (\nun chair“\). Now that Titus has come and told him the good news from Corinth (2:12f.|). This was the occasion of the noble outburst in strkjv@2:12-6:10|. {Unto repentance} (\eis metanoian\). Note the sharp difference here between "sorrow" (\lupˆ\) which is merely another form of \metamelomai\ (regret, remorse) and "repentance" (\metanoia\) or change of mind and life. It is a linguistic and theological tragedy that we have to go on using "repentance" for \metanoia\. But observe that the "sorrow" has led to "repentance" and was not Itself the repentance. {After a godly sort} (\kata theon\). In God's way. "God's way as opposed to man's way and the devil's way" (Plummer). It was not mere sorrow, but a change in their attitude that counted. {That ye might suffer loss by us in nothing} (\hina en mˆdeni zˆmi“thˆte ex hum“n\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \zˆmio“\, old verb to suffer damage. See on ¯Matthew:16:26|. This was God's intention and so he overruled their sorrow to good.

rwp@2Corinthians:8:23 @{About Titus} (\huper Titou\). There is no verb expressed. Supply "inquire." He endorses Titus up to the hilt. He is "my partner" (\koin“nos emos\) and "fellow-worker" (\sunergos\). {Messengers of the churches} (\apostoloi ekklˆsi“n\). Apostles in the general sense of "sent ones" (from \apostell“\, to send) by the churches and responsible to the churches for the handling of the funds. {The glory of Christ} (\doxa Christou\). Financial agents, please observe.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:15 @{As ministers of righteousness} (\h“s diakonoi dikaiosunˆs\). Jesus (John:10:1-21|) terms these false shepherds thieves and robbers. It is a tragedy to see men in the livery of heaven serve the devil.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:12 @{With a holy kiss} (\en hagi“i philˆmati\). In the Jewish synagogues where the sexes were separated, men kissed men, the women, women. This apparently was the Christian custom also. It is still observed in the Coptic and the Russian churches. It was dropped because of charges made against the Christians by the pagans. In England in 1250 Archbishop Walter of York introduced a "pax-board" which was first kissed by the clergy and then passed around. Think of the germ theory of disease and that kissing tablet!

rwp@2John:1:3 @{Shall be with us} (\estai meth' hˆm“n\). He picks up the words before in reverse order. Future indicative here, not a wish with the optative (\eie\) as we have in strkjv@1Peter:1:2; strkjv@2Peter:1:2|. The salutation is like that in the Pastoral Epistles: "\Charis\, the wellspring in the heart of God; \eleos\, its outpourings; \eirˆnˆ\, its blessed effect" (David Smith). {And from Jesus Christ} (\kai para Iˆsou Christou\). The repetition of \para\ (with the ablative) is unique. "It serves to bring out distinctly the twofold personal relation of man to the Father and to the Son" (Westcott). "The Fatherhood of God, as revealed by one who being His Son _can_ reveal the Father, and who as man (\Iˆsou\) can make him known to men" (Brooke).

rwp@2Peter:2:4 @{For if God spared not} (\ei gar ho theos ouk epheisato\). First instance (\gar\) of certain doom, that of the fallen angels. Condition of the first class precisely like that in strkjv@Romans:11:21| save that here the normal apodosis (\hum“n ou pheisetai\) is not expressed as there, but is simply implied in verse 9| by \oiden kurios ruesthai\ (the Lord knows how to deliver) after the parenthesis in verse 8|. {Angels when they sinned} (\aggel“n hamartˆsant“n\). Genitive case after \epheisato\ (first aorist middle indicative of \pheidomai\) and anarthrous (so more emphatic, even angels), first aorist active participle of \hamartan“\, "having sinned." {Cast them down to hell} (\tartar“sas\). First aorist active participle of \tartaro“\, late word (from \tartaros\, old word in Homer, Pindar, LXX strkjv@Job:40:15; strkjv@41:23|, Philo, inscriptions, the dark and doleful abode of the wicked dead like the Gehenna of the Jews), found here alone save in a scholion on Homer. \Tartaros\ occurs in Enoch strkjv@20:2 as the place of punishment of the fallen angels, while Gehenna is for apostate Jews. {Committed} (\pared“ken\). First aorist active indicative of \paradid“mi\, the very form solemnly used by Paul in strkjv@Romans:1:21,26,28|. {To pits of darkness} (\seirois zophou\). \Zophos\ (kin to \gnophos, nephos\) is an old word, blackness, gloom of the nether world in Homer, in N.T. only here, verse 17; strkjv@Jude:1:13; strkjv@Hebrews:12:18|. The MSS. vary between \seirais\ (\seira\, chain or rope) and \seirois\ (\seiros\, old word for pit, underground granary). \Seirois\ is right (Aleph A B C), dative case of destination. {To be reserved unto judgment} (\eis krisin tˆroumenous\). Present (linear action) passive participle of \tˆre“\. "Kept for judgment." Cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:4|. Aleph A have \kolazomenous tˆrein\ as in verse 9|. Note \krisis\ (act of judgment).

rwp@2Peter:2:5 @{The ancient world} (\archaiou kosmou\). Genitive case after \epheisato\ (with \ei\ understood) repeated (the second example, the deluge). This example not in Jude. Absence of the article is common in the prophetic style like II Peter. For \archaios\ see strkjv@Luke:9:8|. {Preserved} (\ephulaxen\). Still part of the long protasis with \ei\, first aorist active indicative of \phulass“\. {With seven others} (\ogdoon\). "Eighth," predicate accusative adjective (ordinal), classic idiom usually with \auton\. See strkjv@1Peter:3:20| for this same item. Some take \ogdoon\ with \kˆruka\ (eighth preacher), hardly correct. {A preacher of righteousness} (\dikaiosunˆs kˆruka\). "Herald" as in strkjv@1Timothy:2:7; strkjv@2Timothy:1:11| alone in N.T., but \kˆruss“\ is common. It is implied in strkjv@1Peter:3:20| that Noah preached to the men of his time during the long years. {When he brought} (\epaxas\). First aorist active participle (instead of the common second aorist active \epagag“n\) of \eisag“\, old compound verb to bring upon, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:5:28| (by Peter here also). {A flood} (\kataklusmon\). Old word (from \katakluz“\, to inundate), only of Noah's flood in N.T. (Matthew:24:38ff.; strkjv@Luke:17:27; strkjv@2Peter:2:5|). {Upon the world of the ungodly} (\kosmoi aseb“n\). Anarthrous and dative case \kosm“i\. The whole world were "ungodly" (\asebeis\ as in strkjv@1Peter:4:18|) save Noah's family of eight.

rwp@2Peter:2:17 @{Without water} (\anudroi\). As in strkjv@Matthew:12:43; strkjv@Luke:11:24|. Old word for common and disappointing experience of travellers in the orient. {Mists} (\homichlai\). Old word for fog, here alone in N.T. {Driven by a storm} (\hupo lailapos elaunomenai\). \Lailaps\ is a squall (Mark:4:37; strkjv@Luke:8:23|, only other N.T. examples). See strkjv@James:3:4| for another example of \elaun“\ for driving power of wind and waves. {For whom} (\hois\). Dative case of personal interest. {The blackness} (\ho zophos\). See verse 4| for this word. {Hath been reserved} (\tetˆrˆtai\). Perfect passive participle of \tˆre“\, for which see verses 4,9|.

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

rwp@2Timothy:1:3 @{I thank} (\charin ech“\). "I have gratitude." As in strkjv@1Timothy:1:12|. Robinson cites examples of this phrase from the papyri. It occurs also in strkjv@Luke:17:9; strkjv@Acts:2:47|. \Charis\ in doxologies Paul uses (1Corinthians:15:57; strkjv@2:14; strkjv@8:16; strkjv@9:15; strkjv@Romans:6:17; strkjv@7:25|). His usual idiom is \eucharist“\ (1Corinthians:1:4; strkjv@Romans:1:8; strkjv@Philemon:1:4; strkjv@Phillipians:1:3|) or \eucharistoumen\ (1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@Colossians:1:3|) or \ou pauomai eucharist“n\ (Ephesians:1:16|) or \eucharistein opheilomen\ (2Thessalonians:1:3|). {Whom I serve from my forefathers} (\h“i latreu“ apo progon“n\). The relative \h“i\ is the dative case with \latreu“\ (see strkjv@Romans:1:9| for this verb), progressive present (I have been serving). For \progon“n\ (forefathers) see strkjv@1Timothy:5:4|. Paul claims a pious ancestry as in strkjv@Acts:24:14; strkjv@Acts:26:5; strkjv@Galatians:2:14; strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-7|. {In a pure conscience} (\en katharƒi suneidˆsei\). See strkjv@1Timothy:1:5; strkjv@Acts:23:1|. {Unceasing} (\adialeipton\). Late and rare compound, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:9:2| which see. The adverb \adialeipt“s\ is more frequent (in the papyri, literary _Koin‚_, strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@Romans:1:9|). The adjective here is the predicate accusative, "how I hold the memory concerning thee unceasing." The use of \adialeipt“s\ (adverb) is a sort of epistolary formula (papyri, strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@5:17; strkjv@Romans:1:9|). {Remembrance} (\mneian\). Old word, in N.T. only Pauline (seven times, strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@Romans:1:9; strkjv@Phillipians:1:3|).

rwp@2Timothy:1:8 @{Be not ashamed of} (\mˆ epaischunthˆis\). First aorist (ingressive) passive subjunctive (in prohibition) of \epaischunomai\, old word, to be ashamed. Again in verse 16| without augment (\epaischunthˆn\), transitive use of the passive voice as often in the _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 818). See strkjv@Romans:1:16; strkjv@6:21|. "Do not become ashamed" (as he had not). {The testimony of our Lord} (\to marturion tou kuriou\). For the old word \marturion\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:1:6; strkjv@2:1|. Paul probably has in mind the saying of Jesus preserved in strkjv@Mark:8:38| (Luke:9:26|). See also strkjv@2:12|. {His prisoner} (\ton desmion autou\). As in strkjv@Phillipians:1:12; strkjv@Philemon:1:1,9; strkjv@Ephesians:3:1; strkjv@4:1| (the first Roman captivity). Paul is in his last captivity and refers to it again in verse 16; strkjv@2:9|. {Suffer hardship with} (\sunkakopathˆson\). First aorist active imperative of the double compound \sunkakopathe“\, first known use and in N.T. only here and strkjv@2:3| (in eccles. writers). But \kakopathe“\, to suffer evil, is old verb (2:9; strkjv@4:5|). Paul is fond of compounds of \sun\. Paul challenges Timothy by this verb which he apparently coins for the purpose to a joint (\sun\) suffering with the Lord Jesus and Paul "for the gospel" (\t“i euaggeli“i\, dative case rather than associative instrumental "with"). {According to the power of God} (\kata dunamin theou\). Given by God (2Corinthians:6:7|).

rwp@Info_Acts @ SOURCES OF THE ACTS Beyond a doubt Luke employed a variety of sources for this great history as he did for the Gospel (Luke:1:1-4|). In fact, Cadbury argues that this Prologue was meant to apply to the Acts also as Volume II whether he intended to write a third volume or not. Certainly we are entitled to say that Luke used the same historical method for Acts. Some of these sources are easy to see. Luke had his own personal experience for the "we" sections. Then he had the benefit of Paul's own notes or suggestions for all that portion where Paul figures from chapters 8 to 28, since Luke was apparently with Paul in Rome when he finished the Book. This would include Paul's sermons and addresses which Luke gives unless one wishes to say, as some do, that Luke followed the style of Thucydides and composed the kind of addresses that he thought Paul would make. I see no evidence of that for each address differs from the others and suits precisely the occasion when it was delivered. The ancients frequently employed shorthand and Paul may have preserved notes of his addresses. Prof. C. C. Torrey, of Yale University, argues in his _Composition and Date of Acts_ (1916) that Luke used an Aramaic document for the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. There is an Aramaic element in certain portions of these chapters, but nothing like so pronounced as in Luke 1 and 2 after strkjv@Luke:1:1-4|. It cannot be said that Torrey has made out his case for such a single document. Luke may have had several such documents besides access to others familiar with the early days of the work in Jerusalem. There was Simon Peter whom Paul visited for two weeks in Jerusalem (Galatians:1:18|) besides other points of contact with him in Jerusalem and Antioch (Acts:15| and strkjv@Galatians:2|). There was also Barnabas who was early Paul's friend (Acts:9:27|) and who knew the beginnings as few did (Acts:4:36f.|). Besides many others it is to be observed that Paul with Luke made a special visit to Caesarea where he spent a week with the gifted Philip and his daughters with the gift of prophecy (Acts:21:8f.|). But with all the inevitable variety of sources for the information needed to cover the wide field of the Book of Acts the same mind has manifestly worked through it and it is the same style all through that appears in the "we" sections where the writer is confessedly a companion of Paul. No other companion of Paul carries this claim for the authorship and no other was a physician and no author has the external evidence from early writers.

rwp@Acts:1:6 @{They therefore} (\hoi men oun\). Demonstrative use of \hoi\ with \men oun\ without any corresponding \de\ just as in strkjv@1:1| \men\ occurs alone. The combination \men oun\ is common in Acts (27 times). Cf. strkjv@Luke:3:18|. The \oun\ is resumptive and refers to the introductory verses (1:1-5|), which served to connect the Acts with the preceding Gospel. The narrative now begins. {Asked} (\ˆr“t“n\). Imperfect active, repeatedly asked before Jesus answered. {Lord} (\kurie\). Here not in the sense of "sir" (Matthew:21:30|), but to Jesus as Lord and Master as often in Acts (19:5,10|, etc.) and in prayer to Jesus (7:59|). {Dost thou restore} (\ei apokathistaneis\). The use of \ei\ in an indirect question is common. We have already seen its use in direct questions (Matthew:12:10; strkjv@Luke:13:23| which see for discussion), possibly in imitation of the Hebrew (frequent in the LXX) or as a partial condition without conclusion. See also strkjv@Acts:7:1; strkjv@19:2; strkjv@21:37; strkjv@22:25|. The form of the verb \apokathistan“\ is late (also \apokathista“\) omega form for the old and common \apokathistˆmi\, double compound, to restore to its former state. As a matter of fact the Messianic kingdom for which they are asking is a political kingdom that would throw off the hated Roman yoke. It is a futuristic present and they are uneasy that Jesus may yet fail to fulfil their hopes. Surely here is proof that the eleven apostles needed the promise of the Father before they began to spread the message of the Risen Christ. They still yearn for a political kingdom for Israel even after faith and hope have come back. They need the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit (John:14-16|) and the power of the Holy Spirit (Acts:1:4f.|).

rwp@Acts:3:26 @{Unto you first} (\Humin pr“ton\). The Jews were first in privilege and it was through the Jews that the Messiah was to come for "all the families of the earth." {His servant} (\ton paida autou\). As in verse 13|, the Messiah as God's Servant. {To bless you} (\eulogounta humas\). Present active participle to express purpose, blessing you (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 991). In turning away (\en t“i apostrephein\). Articular infinitive in the locative case, almost preserved in the English.

rwp@Acts:5:15 @{Insomuch that} (\h“ste\). With the present infinitive \ekpherein\ and \tithenai\, regular Greek idiom for result. {Into the streets} (\eis tas plateias\). Supply \hodous\ (ways), into the broad ways. {On beds and couches} (\epi klinari“n kai krabatt“n\). Little beds (\klinaria\ diminutive of \klinˆ\) and camp beds or pallets (see on ¯Mark:2:4,9,11|). {As Peter came by} (\erchomenou Petrou\). Genitive absolute with present middle participle. {At the least his shadow might overshadow} (\kan hˆ skia episkiasei\). Future active indicative with \hina\ (common with \hop“s\ in ancient Greek) and \kan\ (crasis for \kai ean\=even if), even if only the shadow. The word for shadow (\skia\, like our "sky") is repeated in the verb and preserved in our "overshadow." There was, of course, no virtue or power in Peter's shadow. That was faith with superstition, of course, just as similar cases in the Gospels occur (Matthew:9:20; strkjv@Mark:6:56; strkjv@John:9:5|) and the use of Paul's handkerchief (Acts:19:12|). God honours even superstitious faith if it is real faith in him. Few people are wholly devoid of superstition.

rwp@Acts:5:33 @{Were cut to the heart} (\dieprionto\). Imperfect passive of \diapri“\ old verb (\dia, pri“\), to saw in two (\dia\), to cut in two (to the heart). Here it is rage that cuts into their hearts, not conviction of sin as in strkjv@Acts:2:37|. Only here and strkjv@Acts:7:54| (after Stephen's speech) in the N.T. (cf. Simeon's prophecy in strkjv@Luke:2:35|). {Were minded} (\eboulonto\). Imperfect middle of \boulomai\. They were plotting and planning to kill (\anelein\, as in strkjv@Acts:2:23; strkjv@Luke:23:33| which see) then and there. The point in strkjv@4:7| was whether the apostles deserved stoning for curing the cripple by demoniacal power, but here it was disobedience to the command of the Sanhedrin which was not a capital offence. "They were on the point of committing a grave judicial blunder" (Furneaux).

rwp@Acts:6:2 @{The multitude} (\to plˆthos\). The whole church, not just the 120. {Fit} (\areston\). Pleasing, verbal adjective from \aresk“\, to please, old word, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:12:3; strkjv@John:8:29; strkjv@1John:3:22|. _Non placet_. {Should forsake} (\kataleipsantas\). Late first aorist active participle for usual second aorist \katalipontas\ from \kataleip“\, to leave behind. {Serve tables} (\diakonein trapezais\). Present active infinitive of \diakone“\ from \diakonos\ (\dia\ and \konis\, dust), to raise a dust in a hurry, to serve, to minister either at table (John:12:20|), or other service (John:12:25f.|), to serve as deacon (1Timothy:3:10,13|). "Tables" here hardly means money-tables as in strkjv@John:2:15|, but rather the tables used in the common daily distribution of the food (possibly including the love-feasts, strkjv@Acts:2:43-47|). This word is the same root as \diakonia\ (ministration) in verse 1| and \diakonos\ (deacon) in strkjv@Phillipians:1:1; strkjv@1Timothy:3:8-13|. It is more frequently used in the N.T. of ministers (preachers) than of deacons, but it is quite possible, even probable, that the office of deacon as separate from bishop or elder grew out of this incident in strkjv@Acts:6:1-7|. Furneaux is clear that these "seven" are not to be identified with the later "deacons" but why he does not make clear.

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:9:3 @{As he journeyed} (\en t“i poreuesthai\). Luke's common idiom for a temporal clause (in the journeying), \en\ with the locative articular middle infinitive. {Drew nigh} (\eggizein\). Present active infinitive, was drawing nigh. {Shone round about him} (\auton periˆstrapsen\). First aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \periastrapt“\, late compound verb common in LXX and Byzantine writers, here and strkjv@22:6| alone in the N.T. "A light from heaven suddenly flashed around him." It was like a flash of lightning. Paul uses the same verb in strkjv@22:5|, but in strkjv@26:13| he employs \perilampsan\ (shining around). There are numerous variations in the historical narrative of Saul's conversion in strkjv@9:3-18| and Luke's report of Paul's two addresses, one on the steps of the Tower of Antonia facing the murderous mob (22:6-16|), the other before Festus and Agrippa (26:12-20|). A great deal of capital has been made of these variations to the discredit of Luke as a writer as if he should have made Paul's two speeches conform at every point with his own narrative. This objection has no weight except for those who hold that Luke composed Paul's speeches freely as some Greek writers used to do. But, if Luke had notes of Paul's speeches or help from Paul himself, he naturally preserved the form of the two addresses without trying to make them agree with each other in all details or with his own narrative in chapter 9. Luke evidently attached great importance to the story of Saul's conversion as the turning point not simply in the career of the man, but an epoch in the history of apostolic Christianity. In broad outline and in all essentials the three accounts agree and testify to the truthfulness of the account of the conversion of Saul. It is impossible to overestimate the worth to the student of Christianity of this event from every angle because we have in Paul's Epistles his own emphasis on the actual appearance of Jesus to him as the fact that changed his whole life (1Corinthians:15:8; strkjv@Galatians:1:16f.|). The variations that appear in the three accounts do not mar the story, when rightly understood, as we shall see. Here, for instance, Luke simply mentions "a light from heaven," while in strkjv@22:6| Paul calls it "a great (\hikanon\) light" "about noon" and in strkjv@26:13| "above the brightness of the sun," as it would have to be "at midday" with the sun shining.

rwp@Acts:13:2 @{As they ministered to the Lord} (\leitourgount“n aut“n toi kuri“i\). Genitive absolute of \leitourge“\, old verb, used of the Attic orators who served the state at their own cost \le“s\ or \laos\, people, and \ergon\, work or service). Common in the LXX of the priests who served in the tabernacle (Exodus:28:31,39|) like \leitourgia\ (Luke:1:23|) which see. Songs:in strkjv@Hebrews:10:11|. In strkjv@Romans:15:27| of aiding others in poverty. Here of worship (prayer, exhortation, fasting). The word liturgy grows out of this use. {And fasted} (\kai nˆsteuont“n\). Genitive absolute also. Christian Jews were keeping up the Jewish fast (Luke:18:12|). Note fasting also in the choice of elders for the Mission Churches (Acts:14:23|). Fasting was not obligatory on the Christians, but they were facing a great emergency in giving the gospel to the Gentile world. {Separate me} (\aphorisate dˆ moi\). First aorist active imperative of \aphoriz“\, old verb to mark off boundaries or horizon, used by Paul of his call (Romans:1:1; strkjv@Galatians:1:15|). The Greek has \dˆ\, a shortened form of \ˆdˆ\ and like Latin _jam_ and German _doch_, now therefore. It ought to be preserved in the translation. Cf. strkjv@Luke:2:15; strkjv@Acts:15:36; strkjv@1Corinthians:6:20|. \Moi\ is the ethical dative. As in verse 1| Barnabas is named before Saul. Both had been called to ministry long ago, but now this call is to the special campaign among the Gentiles. Both had been active and useful in such work. {Whereunto} (\ho\). Here \eis\ has to be repeated from \eis to ergon\ just before, "for which" as Jesus sent the twelve and the seventy in pairs, so here. Paul nearly always had one or more companions.

rwp@Acts:13:16 @{Paul stood up} (\anastas Paulos\). The Jewish custom was to sit while speaking (Luke:4:20|), but the Greek and Roman was to stand (Acts:17:22|). It is possible as Lewin (_Life of St. Paul_, Vol. 1, p. 141) suggests that here Paul stepped upon the platform and then took his seat as he began to speak or he may have followed the Greek and Roman custom. Paul is the leader now and the more gifted speaker (Acts:14:12|), so that he responds to the courteous invitation of the rulers. {Beckoning} (\kataseisas\). First aorist active participle of \katasei“\, old verb to shake down, a dramatic gesture for quiet and order like Peter in strkjv@12:17| and Paul on the steps of the tower of Antonia (21:40|). {And ye that fear God} (\kai hoi phoboumenoi ton theon\). Evidently large numbers of these Gentiles like Cornelius in Caesarea were present. They offered Paul a great opportunity for reaching the purely pagan Gentiles. This (verses 16-41|) is the first full report of a sermon of Paul's that Luke has preserved for us. He is now a practised preacher of the gospel that he began proclaiming at Damascus, that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah of promise and the Saviour of the whole world both Jew and Gentile if they will only believe on him and be saved. It is possible that Paul here based his sermon on the passages of the law and the prophets that had just been read. He uses two words from the LXX, one in verse 19| from strkjv@Deuteronomy:1:31| \etrophophorˆsen\ (as a nursing-father bare he them), the reading of many old MSS. and the one preferred by the American Committee, the other in verse 17| from strkjv@Isaiah:1:2| \hups“sen\ (exalted). At any rate it is clear that Paul spoke in Greek so that all could understand his sermon. He may have written out notes of this sermon afterwards for Luke. The keynotes of Paul's theology as found in his Epistles appear in this sermon. It is interesting to observe the steady growth of Paul's Christology as he faced the great problems of his day. Here we see Paul's gospel for the Jews and the God-fearers (Gentiles friendly to the Jews).

rwp@Acts:13:36 @{His own generation} (\idiƒi geneƒi\). Either locative case, "in his own generation" or dative object of \hupˆretˆsas\ (served). {The counsel of God} (\tˆi tou theou boulˆi\). Songs:here, either the dative, the object of \hupˆretˆsas\ if \geneƒi\ is locative, or the instrumental case "by the counsel of God" which again may be construed either with \hupˆretˆsas\ (having served) or after \ekoimˆthˆ\ (fell on sleep). Either of the three ways is grammatical and makes good sense. \Koimaomai\ for death we have already had (Acts:7:60|). Songs:Jesus (John:11:11|) and Paul (1Corinthians:15:6,51|). {Was laid} (\prosetethˆ\). Was added unto (first aorist passive indicative of \prostithˆmi\). See the verb in strkjv@2:47; strkjv@5:14|. This figure for death probably arose from the custom of burying families together (Genesis:15:15; strkjv@Judges:2:10|). {Saw corruption} (\eiden diaphthoran\). As Jesus did not (Acts:2:31|) as he shows in verse 37|.

rwp@Acts:14:2 @{That were disobedient} (\hoi apeithˆsantes\). First aorist active articular participle, not the present \apeithountes\ as the Textus Receptus has it. But the meaning is probably the Jews that disbelieved, rather than that disobeyed. Strictly \apeithe“\ does mean to disobey and \apiste“\ to disbelieve, but that distinction is not observed in strkjv@John:3:36| nor in strkjv@Acts:19:9; strkjv@28:24|. The word \apeithe“\ means to be \apeithˆs\, to be unwilling to be persuaded or to withhold belief and then also to withhold obedience. The two meanings run into one another. To disbelieve the word of God is to disobey God. {Made them evil affected} (\ekak“san\). First aorist active indicative of \kako“\, old verb from \kakos\, to do evil to, to ill-treat, then in later Greek as here to embitter, to exasperate as in strkjv@Psalms:105:32| and in Josephus. In this sense only here in the N.T. Evidently Paul preached the same message as in Antioch for it won both Jews and Gentiles, and displeased the rabbis. Codex Bezae adds here that "the chiefs of the synagogue and the rulers" brought persecution upon Paul and Barnabas just as was argued about Antioch. Outside the synagogue the Jews would poison the minds of the Gentiles against Paul and Barnabas. "The story of Thecla suggests a means, and perhaps the apostles were brought before the magistrates on some charge of interference with family life. The magistrates however must have seen at once that there was no legal case against them; and by a sentence of acquittal or in some other way the Lord gave peace" (Rackham). As we have it, the story of Paul and Thecla undoubtedly has apocryphal features, though Thecla may very well be an historical character here at Iconium where the story is located. Certainly the picture of Paul herein drawn cannot be considered authentic though a true tradition may underlie it: "bald, bowlegged, strongly built, small in stature, with large eyes and meeting eyebrows and longish nose; full of grace; sometimes looking like a man, sometimes having the face of an angel."

rwp@Acts:16:21 @{Customs which it is not lawful for us to receive, or to observe, being Romans} (\ethˆ ha ouk estin hˆmin paradechesthai oude poiein R“maiois ousin\). Note the sharp contrast between "being Jews" in verse 20| and "being Romans" here. This pose of patriotism is all sound and fury. It is love of money that moves these "masters" far more than zeal for Rome. As Roman citizens in a colony they make full use of all their rights of protest. Judaism was a _religio licita_ in the Roman empire, only they were not allowed to make proselytes of the Romans themselves. No Roman magistrate would pass on abstract theological questions (18:15|), but only if a breach of the peace was made (\ektarassousin hˆm“n tˆn polin\) or the formation of secret sects and organizations. Evidently both of these last points are involved by the charges of "unlawful customs" by the masters who are silent about their real ground of grievance against Paul and Silas. \Ethos\ (kin to \ˆthos\, strkjv@1Corinthians:15:33|) is from \eth“\, to be accustomed or used to a thing. The Romans granted toleration to conquered nations to follow their religious customs provided they did not try to win the Romans. But the Jews had made great headway to favour (the God-fearers) with increasing hatred also. Emperor worship had in store grave peril for both Jews and Christians. The Romans will care more for this than for the old gods and goddesses. It will combine patriotism and piety.

rwp@Acts:16:28 @{Do thyself no harm} (\mˆden praxˆis seaut“i kakon\). The usual construction (\mˆ\ and the aorist subjunctive) for a prohibition not to {begin} to do a thing. The older Greek would probably have used \poiˆsˆis\ here. The later Greek does not always preserve the old distinction between \poie“\, to do a thing, and \prass“\, to practice, though \prassete\ keeps it in strkjv@Phillipians:4:9| and \poie“\ is rightly used in strkjv@Luke:3:10-14|. As a matter of fact \prass“\ does not occur in Matthew or in Mark, only twice in John, six times in Luke's Gospel, thirteen in Acts, and elsewhere by Paul. {Sprang in} (\eisepˆdˆsen\). First aorist active of \eispˆda“\, old verb, but here only in the N.T. Cf. \ekpˆda“\ in strkjv@14:14|. The jailor was at the outer door and he wanted lights to see what was inside in the inner prison.

rwp@Acts:17:6 @{When they found them not} (\mˆ heurontes\). Usual negative \mˆ\ with the participle in the _Koin‚_, second aorist (effective) active participle, complete failure with all the noise and "bums." {They dragged} (\esuron\). Imperfect active, vivid picture, they were dragging (literally). See already strkjv@8:3; strkjv@16:19|. If they could not find Paul, they could drag Jason his host and some other Christians whom we do not know. {Before the rulers of the city} (\epi tous politarchas\). This word does not occur in Greek literature and used to be cited as an example of Luke's blunders. But now it is found in an inscription on an arch in the modern city preserved in the British Museum. It is also found in seventeen inscriptions (five from Thessalonica) where the word or the verb \politarche“\ occurs. It is a fine illustration of the historical accuracy of Luke in matters of detail. This title for city officers in Thessalonica, a free city, is correct. They were burgomasters or "rulers of the city." {Crying} (\bo“ntes\). Yelling as if the house was on fire like the mob in Jerusalem (21:28|). {These that have turned the world upside down} (\hoi tˆn oikoumenˆn anastat“santes\). The use of \oikoumenˆn\ (supply \gen\ or \ch“ran\, the inhabited earth, present passive participle of \oike“\) means the Roman Empire, since it is a political charge, a natural hyperbole in their excitement, but the phrase occurs for the Roman Empire in strkjv@Luke:2:1|. It is possible that news had come to Thessalonica of the expulsion of the Jews from Rome by Claudius. There is truth in the accusation, for Christianity is revolutionary, but on this particular occasion the uproar (verse 5|) was created by the rabbis and the hired loafers. The verb \anastato“\ (here first aorist active participle) does not occur in the ancient writers, but is in LXX and in strkjv@Acts:17:6; strkjv@21:38; strkjv@Galatians:5:12|. It occurs also in Harpocration (A.D. 4th cent.) and about 100 B.C. \exanastato“\ is found in a fragment of papyrus (Tebtunis no. 2) and in a Paris Magical Papyrus l. 2243f. But in an Egyptian letter of Aug. 4, 41 A.D. (Oxyrhynchus Pap. no. 119, 10) "the bad boy" uses it = "he upsets me" or " he drives me out of my senses" (\anastatoi me\). See Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 84f. It is not a "Biblical word" at all, but belongs to the current _Koin‚_. It is a vigorous and graphic term.

rwp@Acts:17:14 @{And then immediately} (\euthe“s de tote\). They acted swiftly as in Thessalonica. {Sent forth} (\exapesteilan\). Double compound (\ex, apo\, both out and away) common in late Greek. First aorist active indicative (\exapostell“\, liquid verb). Same form in strkjv@9:30|. {As far as to the sea} (\he“s epi tˆn thalassan\). It is not clear whether Paul went all the way to Athens by land or took ship at Dium or Pydna, some sixteen miles away, and sailed to Athens. Some even think that Paul gave the Jews the slip and went all the way by land when they expected him to go by sea. At any rate we know that Paul was grieved to cut short his work in Macedonia, probably not over six months in all, which had been so fruitful in Philippi, Thessalonica, and Beroea. Silas and Timothy (note his presence) remained behind in Beroea and they would keep the work going. Paul no doubt hoped to return soon. Silas and Timothy in Beroea would also serve to screen his flight for the Jews wanted his blood, not theirs. The work in Macedonia spread widely (1Thessalonians:1:7f.|).

rwp@Acts:20:35 @{I gave you an example} (\hupedeixa\). First aorist active indicative of \hupodeiknumi\, old verb to show under one's eyes, to give object lesson, by deed as well as by word (Luke:6:47|). \Hupodeigma\ means example (John:13:15; strkjv@James:5:10|). Songs:Paul appeals to his example in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:1; strkjv@Phillipians:3:17|. \Panta\ is accusative plural of general reference (in all things). {Songs:labouring ye ought to help} (\hout“s kopi“ntas dei antilambanesthai\). So, as I did. Necessity (\dei\). Toiling (\kopi“ntas\) not just for ourselves, but to help (\antilambanesthai\), to take hold yourselves (middle voice) at the other end (\anti\). This verb common in the old Greek, but in the N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:1:54; strkjv@Acts:20:35; strkjv@1Timothy:6:2|. This noble plea to help the weak is the very spirit of Christ (1Thessalonians:5:14; strkjv@1Corinthians:12:28; strkjv@Romans:5:6; strkjv@14:1|). In strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:14| \antechesthe t“n asthenount“n\ we have Paul's very idea again. Every Community Chest appeal today re-echoes Paul's plea. {He himself said} (\autos eipen\). Not in the Gospels, one of the sayings of Jesus in current use that Paul had received and treasured. Various other _Agrapha_ of Jesus have been preserved in ancient writers and some in recently discovered papyri which may be genuine or not. We are grateful that Paul treasured this one. This Beatitude (on \makarion\ see on strkjv@Matthew:5:3-11|) is illustrated by the whole life of Jesus with the Cross as the culmination. Aristotle (Eth. IV. I) has a saying somewhat like this, but assigns the feeling of superiority as the reason (Page), an utterly different idea from that here. This quotation raises the question of how much Paul personally knew of the life and sayings of Jesus.

rwp@Acts:21:19 @{He rehearsed} (\exˆgeito\). Imperfect middle of \exˆgeomai\, old verb to lead out, to draw out in narrative, to recount. Songs:Paul is pictured as taking his time for he had a great story to tell of what had happened since they saw him last. {One by one} (\kath' hena hekaston\). According to each one (item) and the adverbial phrase used as an accusative after the verb \exˆgeito\ as Demosthenes does (1265), though it could be like \kath' hena hekastos\ in strkjv@Ephesians:5:33|. {Which} (\h“n\). Genitive attracted from \ha\ (accusative) into the case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\. {God had wrought} (\epoiˆsen ho theos\). Summary constative aorist active indicative that gathers up all that God did and he takes pains to give God the glory. It is possible that at this formal meeting Paul observed an absence of warmth and enthusiasm in contrast with the welcome accorded by his friends the day before (verse 17|). Furneaux thinks that Paul was coldly received on this day in spite of the generous offering brought from the Gentile Christians. "It looks as though his misgiving as to its reception (Romans:15:31|) was confirmed. Nor do we hear that the Christians of Jerusalem later put in so much as a word on his behalf with either the Jewish or the Roman authorities, or expressed any sympathy with him during his long imprisonment at Caesarea" (Furneaux). The most that can be said is that the Judaizers referred to by James do not appear actively against him. The collection and the plan proposed by James accomplished that much at any rate. It stopped the mouths of those lions.

rwp@Acts:21:24 @{These take} (\toutous paralab“n\). Second aorist active participle of \paralamban“\. Taking these alone. {Purify thyself with them} (\hagnisthˆti sun autois\). First aorist passive imperative of \hagniz“\, old verb to purify, to make pure (\hagnos\). See the active voice in strkjv@James:4:8; strkjv@1Peter:1:22; strkjv@1John:3:3|. It is possible to see the full passive force here, "Be purified." But a number of aorist passives in the _Koin‚_ supplant the aorist middle forms and preserve the force of the middle (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 819). That is possible here. Hence, "Purify thyself" is allowable. The word occurs in strkjv@Numbers:6:1| for taking the Nazarite vow. The point is that Paul takes the vow with them. Note \hagnismou\ in verse 26|. {Be at charges for them} (\dapanˆson ep' autois\). First aorist active imperative of old verb \dapana“\, to incur expense, expend. Spend (money) upon (\ep'\) them. Ramsay (_St. Paul the Traveller_, etc., p. 310) argues that Paul had use of considerable money at this period, perhaps from his father's estate. The charges for five men would be considerable. "A poor man would not have been treated with the respect paid him at Caesarea, on the voyage, and at Rome" (Furneaux). {That they may shave their heads} (\hina xurˆsontai tˆn kephalˆn\). Note \tˆn kephalˆn\, the head (singular). Future middle indicative of \xura“\, late form for the old \xure“\, to shave, middle to shave oneself or (causative) to get oneself shaved. This use of \hina\ with the future indicative is like the classic \hop“s\ with the future indicative and is common in the N.T. as in the _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 984). {And all shall know} (\kai gn“sontai\). This future middle indicative of \gin“sk“\ (cf. \akousontai\ in verse 22|) may be independent of \hina\ or dependent on it like \xurˆsontai\, though some MSS. (H L P) have \gn“sin\ (second aorist subjunctive, clearly dependent on \hina\). {Of which} (\h“n\). Genitive plural of the relative \ha\ (accusative) object of the perfect passive verb \katˆchˆntai\ (cf. verse 21| \katˆchˆthˆsan\) attracted into the case of the omitted antecedent \tout“n\. The instruction still in effect. {But that thou thyself walkest orderly} (\alla stoicheis kai autos\). \Stoicheis\ is an old verb to go in a row (from \stoichos\, row, rank, series), to walk in a line or by rule. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Galatians:5:25; strkjv@Romans:4:12; strkjv@Phillipians:3:16|. The rule is the law and Paul was not a sidestepper. The idea of the verb is made plain by the participle \phulass“n ton nomon\ (keeping or observing the law).

rwp@Acts:22:9 @{But they heard not the voice} (\tˆn de ph“nˆn ouk ˆkousan\). The accusative here may be used rather than the genitive as in verse 7| to indicate that those with Paul did not understand what they heard (9:7|) just as they beheld the light (22:9|), but did not see Jesus (9:7|). The difference in cases allows this distinction, though it is not always observed as just noticed about strkjv@22:14; strkjv@26:14|. The verb \akou“\ is used in the sense of understand (Mark:4:33; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:2|). It is one of the evidences of the genuineness of this report of Paul's speech that Luke did not try to smooth out apparent discrepancies in details between the words of Paul and his own record already in ch. 9. The Textus Receptus adds in this verse: "And they became afraid" (\kai emphoboi egenonto\). Clearly not genuine.

rwp@Acts:22:15 @{A witness for him} (\martus aut“i\). As in strkjv@1:8|. {Of what} (\h“n\). Attraction of the accusative relative \ha\ to the genitive case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\. {Thou hast seen and heard} (\he“rakas\, present perfect active indicative \kai ˆkousas\, first aorist active indicative). This subtle change of tense is not preserved in the English. Blass properly cites the perfect \he“raka\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:1| as proof of Paul's enduring qualification for the apostleship.

rwp@Acts:23:2 @{Ananias} (\Hananias\). Not the one in strkjv@Luke:3:2; strkjv@John:18:13; strkjv@Acts:4:7|, but the son of Nebedaeus, nominated high priest by Herod, King of Chalcis, A.D. 48 and till A.D. 59. He was called to Rome A.D. 52 to answer "a charge of rapine and cruelty made against him by the Samaritans, but honourably acquitted" (Page). Though high priest, he was a man of bad character. {Them that stood by him} (\tois parest“sin aut“i\). Dative case of second perfect participle of \paristˆmi\, to place, and intransitive. See the same form in verse 4| (\parest“tes\). {To smite him on the mouth} (\tuptein autou to stoma\). See on ¯12:45; strkjv@18:17|. Cf. the treatment of Jesus (John:18:22|). Ananias was provoked by Paul's self-assertion while on trial before his judges. "The act was illegal and peculiarly offensive to a Jew at the hands of a Jew" (Knowling). More self-control might have served Paul better. Smiting the mouth or cheek is a peculiarly irritating offence and one not uncommon among the Jews and this fact gives point to the command of Jesus to turn the other check (Luke:6:29| where \tupt“\ is also used).

rwp@Acts:23:5 @{I wist not} (\ouk ˆidein\). Second past perfect of \oida\ used as an imperfect. The Greek naturally means that Paul did not know that it was the high priest who gave the order to smite his mouth. If this view is taken, several things may be said by way of explanation. The high priest may not have had on his official dress as the meeting was called hurriedly by Lysias. Paul had been away so long that he may not have known Ananias on sight. And then Paul may have had poor eyesight or the high priest may not have been sitting in the official seat. Another way of explaining it is to say that Paul was so indignant, even angry, at the command that he spoke without considering who it was that gave the order. The Greek allows this idea also. At any rate Paul at once recognizes the justice of the point made against him. He had been guilty of irreverence against the office of high priest as the passage from strkjv@Exodus:22:18| (LXX) shows and confesses his fault, but the rebuke was deserved. Jesus did not threaten (1Peter:2:23|) when smitten on the cheek (John:18:22|), but he did protest against the act and did not turn the other cheek.

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

rwp@Acts:25:16 @{It is not the custom of the Romans} (\hoti ouk estin ethos R“maiois\). If a direct quotation, \hoti\ is recitative as in Authorized Version. Canterbury Revision takes it as indirect discourse after \apekrithˆn\ (I answered), itself in a relative clause (\pros hous\) with the present tense (\estin\, is) preserved as is usual. There is a touch of disdain (Furneaux) in the tone of Festus. He may refer to a demand of the Jews before they asked that Paul be brought to Jerusalem (25:3|). At any rate there is a tone of scorn towards the Jews. {Before that the accused have} (\prin ˆ ho katˆgoroumenos echoi\). This use of the optative in this temporal clause with \prin ˆ\ instead of the subjunctive \an echˆi\ is in conformity with literary Greek and occurs only in Luke's writings in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 970). This sequence of modes is a mark of the literary style occasionally seen in Luke. It is interesting here to note the succession of dependent clauses in verses 14-16|. {The accusers face to face} (\kata pros“pon tous katˆgorous\). Same word \katˆgoros\ as in strkjv@23:30,35; strkjv@25:18|. This all sounds fair enough. {And have had opportunity to make his defence concerning the matter laid against him} (\topon te apologias laboi peri tou egklˆmatos\). Literally, "And should receive (\laboi\ optative for same reason as \echoi\ above, second aorist active of \lamban“\) opportunity for defence (objective genitive) concerning the charge" (\egklˆmatos\ in N.T. only here and strkjv@23:19| which see).

rwp@Acts:26:14 @{When we were all fallen} (\pant“n katapesont“n hˆm“n\). Genitive absolute with second aorist active participle of \katapipt“\. In the Hebrew language (\tˆi Ebraidi dialekt“i\). Natural addition here, for Paul is speaking in Greek, not Aramaic as in strkjv@22:2|. {It is hard for thee to kick against the goad} (\sklˆron soi pros kentra laktizein\). Genuine here, but not in chapters 9,22|. A common proverb as Aeschylus _Ag_. 1624: \Pros kentra mˆ laktize\. "It is taken from an ox that being pricked with a goad kicks and receives a severer wound" (Page). Cf. the parables of Jesus (Matthew:13:35|). Blass observes that Paul's mention of this Greek and Latin proverb is an indication of his culture. Besides he mentions (not invents) it here rather than in chapter 22| because of the culture of this audience. \Kentron\ means either sting as of bees (II Macc. strkjv@14:19) and so of death (1Corinthians:15:55|) or an iron goad in the ploughman's hand as here (the only two N.T. examples). Note plural here (goads) and \laktizein\ is present active infinitive so that the idea is "to keep on kicking against goads." This old verb means to kick with the heel (adverb \lax\, with the heel), but only here in the N.T. There is a papyrus example of kicking (\laktiz“\) with the feet against the door.

rwp@Acts:27:23 @{For there stood by me} (\parestˆ gar moi\). Second aorist active (intransitive) indicative of \paristˆmi\ with the locative case (beside me). The very form used by Paul of his trial (2Timothy:4:17|) when "the Lord stood by me" (\ho de kurios moi parestˆ\) when others deserted him. This angel of the God whom Paul serves (in distinction from the heathen gods) is the reason for Paul's present confidence.

rwp@Acts:28:8 @{Lay} (\katakeisthai\). Common verb for the sick (Mark:1:30; strkjv@John:5:6|). {Sick} (\sunechomenon\). "Held together." Common verb again for the sick as in strkjv@Luke:4:38|. {Of fever} (\puretois\). Instrumental case, and plural "fevers," medical term for intermittent attacks of fever (Demosthenes, Lucian, medical writers). {Dysentery} (\dusenteri“i\). Instrumental case also. Late form of the older \dusenteria\ and only here in N.T. Our very word _dysentery_. Another medical term of which Luke uses so many. Hippocrates often mentions these two diseases together. {Laying his hands on him healed him} (\epitheis tas cheiras aut“i iasato auton\). Either like the laying on of hands in strkjv@James:5:14|, the gift of healing (1Corinthians:12:9f.|), or the tender interest of Jesus when he took hold of the hand of Peter's mother-in-law (Mark:1:31|). Ramsay argues that \iaomai\ is employed here of the miraculous healing by Paul while \therapeu“\ is used of the cures by Luke the physician (verse 9|). This is a general distinction and it is probably observed here, but in strkjv@Luke:6:18| (which see) both verbs are employed of the healings by Jesus. {Came and were healed} (\prosˆrchonto kai etherapeuonto\). Imperfect middle and imperfect passive. A regular stream of patients came during these months. Luke had his share in the honours, "us" (\hˆmƒs\), and no doubt his share in the cures. {With many honours} (\pollais timais\). Instrumental case. The word was often applied to payment for professional services as we today speak of an honorarium. {They put on board} (\epethento\). Second aorist middle indicative of \epitithˆmi\, to put on. The idea of "on board" is merely suggested by \anagomenois\ (when we sailed) "the things for our needs" (\ta pros tas chreias\).

rwp@Acts:28:14 @{Where we found brethren} (\hou heurontes adelphous\). Possibly from Alexandria, but, as Blass observes, it is no more strange to find "brethren" in Christ in Puteoli when Paul arrives than in Rome. There was a large Jewish quarter. {Seven days} (\hˆmeras hepta\). Accusative of extent of time. Paul and his party remained so long at the urgent request of the brethren. He was still a prisoner, but clearly Julius was only too glad to show another courtesy to Paul to whom they all owed their lives. It was 130 miles by land from Puteoli to Rome over one of the great Roman roads. {And so we came to Rome} (\kai hout“s eis tˆn Romˆn ˆlthamen\). Songs:at last. Luke is exultant as Page observes: _Paulus Romae captivus: triumphus unicus_. It is the climax of the book of Acts (19:21; strkjv@23:11|), but not the close of Paul's career. Page rightly remarks that a new paragraph should begin with verse 15|, for brethren came from Rome and this part of the journey is touched with the flavour of that incident. The great event is that Paul reached Rome, but not as he had once hoped (Romans:15:22-29|).

rwp@Colossians:1:16 @{All things} (\ta panta\). The universe as in strkjv@Romans:11:35|, a well-known philosophical phrase. It is repeated at the end of the verse. {In him were created} (\en aut“i ektisthˆ\). Paul now gives the reason (\hoti\, for) for the primacy of Christ in the work of creation (16f.|). It is the constative aorist passive indicative \ektisthˆ\ (from \ktiz“\, old verb, to found, to create (Romans:1:25|). This central activity of Christ in the work of creation is presented also in strkjv@John:1:3; strkjv@Hebrews:1:2| and is a complete denial of the Gnostic philosophy. The whole of creative activity is summed up in Christ including the angels in heaven and everything on earth. God wrought through "the Son of his love." All earthly dignities are included. {Have been created} (\ektistai\). Perfect passive indicative of \ktiz“\, "stand created," "remain created." The permanence of the universe rests, then, on Christ far more than on gravity. It is a Christo-centric universe. {Through him} (\di' autou\). As the intermediate and sustaining agent. He had already used \en aut“i\ (in him) as the sphere of activity. {And unto him} (\kai eis auton\). This is the only remaining step to take and Paul takes it (1Corinthians:15:28|) See strkjv@Ephesians:1:10| for similar use of \en aut“i\ of Christ and in strkjv@Colossians:1:19; 20| again we have \en aut“i, di' autou, eis auton\ used of Christ. See strkjv@Hebrews:2:10| for \di' hon\ (because of whom) and \di' hou\ (by means of whom) applied to God concerning the universe (\ta panta\). In strkjv@Romans:11:35| we find \ex autou kai di' autou kai eis auton ta panta\ referring to God. But Paul does not use \ex\ in this connection of Christ, but only \en\, \dia\, and \eis\. See the same distinction preserved in strkjv@1Corinthians:8:6| (\ex\ of God, \dia\, of Christ).

rwp@Colossians:1:23 @{If so be that ye continue in the faith} (\ei ge epimenete tˆi pistei\). Condition of the first class (determined as fulfilled), with a touch of eagerness in the use of \ge\ (at least). \Epi\ adds to the force of the linear action of the present tense (continue and then some). {Pistei} is in the locative case (in faith). {Grounded} (\tethemeli“menoi\). Perfect passive participle of \themelio“\, old verb from \themelios\ (adjective, from \thema\ from \tithˆmi\, laid down as a foundation, substantive, strkjv@1Corinthians:3:11f.|). Picture of the saint as a building like strkjv@Ephesians:2:20|. {Steadfast} (\hedraioi\). Old adjective from \hedra\ (seat). In N.T. only here, strkjv@1Corinthians:7:37; strkjv@15:58|. Metaphor of seated in a chair. {Not moved away} (\mˆ metakinoumenoi\). Present passive participle (with negative \mˆ\) of \metakine“\, old verb, to move away, to change location, only here in N.T. Negative statement covering the same ground. {From the hope of the gospel} (\apo tˆs elpidos tou euaggeliou\). Ablative case with \apo\. The hope given by or in the gospel and there alone. {Which ye heard} (\hou ˆkousate\). Genitive case of relative either by attraction or after \ˆkousate\. The Colossians had in reality heard the gospel from Epaphras. {Preached} (\kˆruchthentos\). First aorist passive participle of \kˆruss“\, to herald, to proclaim. {In all creation} (\en pasˆi ktisei\). \Ktisis\ is the act of founding (Romans:1:20|) from \ktiz“\ (verse 16|), then a created thing (Romans:1:25|), then the sum of created things as here and strkjv@Revelation:3:14|. It is hyperbole, to be sure, but Paul does not say that all men are converted, but only that the message has been heralded abroad over the Roman Empire in a wider fashion than most people imagine. {A minister} (\diakonos\). General term for service (\dia, konis\, raising a dust by speed) and used often as here of preachers like our "minister" today, one who serves. Jesus used the verb \diakonˆsai\ of himself (Mark:10:45|). Our "deacon" is this word transliterated and given a technical meaning as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:1|.

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:3:24 @{Ye shall receive} (\apolˆmpsesthe\). Future middle indicative of \apolamban“\, old verb, to get back (\apo\), to recover. {The recompense} (\antapodosin\). "The full recompense," old word, in LXX, but only here in N.T., but \antapodoma\ twice (Luke:14:12; strkjv@Romans:11:9|). Given back (\apo\) in return (\anti\). {Ye serve the Lord Christ} (\to Kuri“i Christ“i douleuete\). As his slaves and gladly so. Perhaps better as imperatives, keep on serving.

rwp@Colossians:4:10 @{Aristarchus} (\Aristarchos\). He was from Thessalonica and accompanied Paul to Jerusalem with the collection (Acts:19:29; strkjv@20:4|) and started with Paul to Rome (Acts:27:2; strkjv@Philemon:1:24|). Whether he has been with Paul all the time in Rome we do not know, but he is here now. {My fellow-prisoner} (\ho sunaichmal“tos mou\). One of Paul's compounds, found elsewhere only in Lucian. Paul uses it of Epaphras in strkjv@Philemon:1:23|, but whether of actual voluntary imprisonment or of spiritual imprisonment like \sunstrati“tes\ (fellow-soldier) in strkjv@Phillipians:2:25; strkjv@Philemon:1:2| we do not know. Abbott argues for a literal imprisonment and it is possible that some of Paul's co-workers (\sun-ergoi\) voluntarily shared imprisonment with him by turns. {Mark} (\Markos\). Once rejected by Paul for his defection in the work (Acts:15:36-39|), but now cordially commended because he had made good again. {The cousin of Barnabas} (\ho anepsios Barnabƒ\). It was used for "nephew" very late, clearly "cousin" here and common so in the papyri. This kinship explains the interest of Barnabas in Mark (Acts:12:25; strkjv@13:5; strkjv@15:36-39|). {If he come unto you, receive him} (\ean elthˆi pros humas dexasthe auton\). This third class conditional sentence (\ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\) gives the substance of the commands (\entolas\) about Mark already sent, how we do not know. But Paul's commendation of Mark is hearty and unreserved as he does later in strkjv@2Timothy:4:11|. The verb \dechomai\ is the usual one for hospitable reception (Matthew:10:14; strkjv@John:4:45|) like \prosdechomai\ (Phillipians:2:29|) and \hupodechomai\ (Luke:10:38|).

rwp@Info_Ephesians @ SPECIAL BOOKS ON EPHESIANS One may note Abbott (_Int. Crit. Comm_. 1897), Gross Alexander (1910), Beet (1891), Belser (1908), Candlish (1895), Dale (_Lectures on Ephesians_), Dibelius (_Handbuch_, 1912), Eadie (1883), Ellicott (1884), Ewald (_Zahn Komm._, 2 Auf. 1910), Findlay (1892), Gore (_Practical Exposition_, 1898), Haupt (_Meyer Komm._, 8 Auf. 1902), Hitchcock (1913), Hort (_Intr_. 1895), Knabenbauer (1913), Krukenberg (1903), Lidgett (1915), Lock (1929), Lueken (1906), Martin (_New Century Bible_), McPhail (1893), McPherson (1892), Meinertz (1917), Moule (1900), Mullins (1913), Murray (1915), Oltramare (1891), Robinson (1903), Salmond (1903), E. F. Scott (_Moffatt Comm._, 1930), Stroeter (_The Glory of the Body of Christ_, 1909), Von Soden (2 Aufl. 1893), F. B. Westcott (1906), Wohlenberg (1895). strkjv@Ephesians:1:1 @{Of Christ Jesus} (\Christou Iˆsou\). Songs:B D, though Aleph A L have \Iˆsou Christou\. Paul is named as the author and so he is. Otherwise the Epistle is pseudepigraphic. {By the will of God} (\dia thelˆmatos theou\). As in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:1; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:1; strkjv@Romans:1:1|. {At Ephesus} (\en Ephes“i\). In Aleph and B these words are inserted by later hands, though both MSS. give the title \Pros Ephesious\. Origen explains the words \tois hagiois tois ousin\ as meaning "the saints that are" (genuine saints), showing that his MSS. did not have the words \en Ephes“i\. The explanation of the insertion of these words has already been given in the remarks on "The Destination" as one copy of the general letter that was preserved in Ephesus. It is perfectly proper to call it the Epistle to the Ephesians if we understand the facts.

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@Info_Epistles-Pastorial @ Objections on internal grounds are made on the lines laid down by Baur and followed by Renan. They are chiefly four. The "most decisive" as argued by McGiffert (_History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age_, p. 402) is that "the Christianity of the Pastoral Epistles is not the Christianity of Paul." He means as we know Paul in the other Epistles. But this charge is untrue. It is true that Paul here lists faith with the virtues, but he does that in strkjv@Galatians:5:22|. Nowhere does Paul give a loftier word about faith than in strkjv@1Timothy:1:12-17|. Another objection urged is that the ecclesiastical organization seen in the Pastoral Epistles belongs to the second century, not to the time of Paul's life. Now we have the Epistles of Ignatius in the early part of the second century in which "bishop" is placed over "elders" of which there is no trace in the New Testament (Lightfoot). A forger in the second century would certainly have reproduced the ecclesiastical organization of that century instead of the first as we have it in the Pastoral Epistles. There is only here the normal development of bishop (=elder) and deacon. A third objection is made on the ground that there is no room in Paul's life as we know it in the Acts and the other Pauline Epistles for the events alluded to in the Pastoral Epistles and it is also argued on late and inconclusive testimony that Paul was put to death A.D. 64 and had only one Roman imprisonment. If Paul was executed A.D. 64, this objection has force in it, though Bartlet (_The Apostolic Age_) tries to make room for them in the period covered by the Acts. Duncan makes the same attempt for the Pauline scraps admitted by him as belonging to the hypothecated imprisonment in Ephesus. But, if we admit the release of Paul from the first Roman imprisonment, there is ample room before his execution in A.D. 68 for the events referred to in the Pastoral Epistles and the writing of the letters (his going east to Ephesus, Macedonia, to Crete, to Troas, to Corinth, to Miletus, to Nicopolis, to Rome), including the visit to Spain before Crete once planned for (Romans:15:24,28|) and mentioned by Clement of Rome as a fact ("the limit of the west"). The fourth objection is that of the language in the Pastoral Epistles. Probably more men are influenced by this argument than by any other. The ablest presentation of this difficulty is made by P. N. Harrison in _The Problem of the Pastoral Epistles_ (1921). Besides the arguments Dr. Harrison has printed the Greek text in a fashion to help the eye see the facts. Words not in the other Pauline Epistles are in red, Pauline phrases (from the other ten) are underlined, _hapax legomena_ are marked by an asterisk. At a superficial glance one can see that the words here not in the other Pauline Epistles and the common Pauline phrases are about equal. The data as to mere words are broadly as follows according to Harrison: Words in the Pastorals, not elsewhere in the N.T. (Pastoral _hapax legomena_) 175 (168 according to Rutherford); words in the other ten Pauline Epistles not elsewhere in the N.T. 470 (627 according to Rutherford). Variations in MSS. will account for some of the difficulty of counting. Clearly there is a larger proportion of new words in the Pastorals (about twice as many) than in the other Pauline Epistles. But Harrison's tables show remarkable differences in the other Epistles also. The average of such words per page in Romans is 4, but 5.6 in II Corinthians, 6.2 in Philippians, and only 4 in Philemon. Parry (_Comm._, p. CXVIII) notes that of the 845 words in the Pastorals as compared with each other 278 occur only in I Tim., 96 only in Titus, 185 only in II Tim. "If vocabulary alone is taken, this would point to separate authorship of each epistle." And yet the same style clearly runs through all three. After all vocabulary is not wholly a personal problem. It varies with age in the same person and with the subject matter also. Precisely such differences exist in the writings of Shakespeare and Milton as critics have long ago observed. The only problem that remains is whether the differences are so great in the Pastoral Epistles as to prohibit the Pauline authorship when "Paul the aged" writes on the problem of pastoral leadership to two of the young ministers trained by him who have to meet the same incipient Gnostic heresy already faced in Colossians and Ephesians. My judgment is that, all things considered, the contents and style of the Pastoral Epistles are genuinely Pauline, mellowed by age and wisdom and perhaps written in his own hand or at least by the same amanuensis in all three instances. Lock suggests Luke as the amanuensis for the Pastorals.

rwp@Galatians:2:1 @{Then after the space of fourteen years I went up again} (\epeita dia dekatessar“n et“n palin anebˆn\) This use of \dia\ for interval between is common enough. Paul is not giving a recital of his visits to Jerusalem, but of his points of contact with the apostles in Jerusalem. As already observed, he here refers to the Jerusalem Conference given by Luke in strkjv@Acts:15| when Paul and Barnabas were endorsed by the apostles and elders and the church over the protest of the Judaizers who had attacked them in Antioch (Acts:15:1f.|). But Paul passes by another visit to Jerusalem, that in strkjv@Acts:11:30| when Barnabas and Saul brought alms from Antioch to Jerusalem and delivered them to "the elders" with no mention of the apostles who were probably out of the city since the events in strkjv@Acts:12| apparently preceded that visit and Peter had left for another place (Acts:12:17|). Paul here gives the inside view of this private conference in Jerusalem that came in between the two public meetings (Acts:15:4,6-29|). {With Barnabas} (\meta Barnabƒ\). As in strkjv@Acts:15:2|. {Taking Titus also with me} (\sunparalab“n kai Titon\). Second aorist active participle of \sunparalamban“\ the very verb used in strkjv@Acts:15:37f.| of the disagreement between Paul and Barnabas about Mark. Titus is not mentioned in Acts 15 nor anywhere else in Acts for some reason, possibly because he was Luke's own brother. But his very presence was a challenge to the Judaizers, since he was a Greek Christian.

rwp@Galatians:2:20 @{I have been crucified with Christ} (\Christ“i sunestaur“mai\). One of Paul's greatest mystical sayings. Perfect passive indicative of \sustauro“\ with the associative instrumental case (\Christ“i\). Paul uses the same word in strkjv@Romans:6:6| for the same idea. In the Gospels it occurs of literal crucifixion about the robbers and Christ (Matthew:27:44; strkjv@Mark:15:32; strkjv@John:19:32|). Paul died to the law and was crucified with Christ. He uses often the idea of dying with Christ (Galatians:5:24; strkjv@6:14; strkjv@Romans:6:8; strkjv@Colossians:2:20|) and burial with Christ also (Romans:6:4; strkjv@Colossians:2:12|). {No longer I} (\ouketi eg“\). Songs:complete has become Paul's identification with Christ that his separate personality is merged into that of Christ. This language helps one to understand the victorious cry in strkjv@Romans:7:25|. It is the union of the vine and the branch (John:15:1-6|). {Which is in the Son of God} (\tˆi tou huiou tou theou\). The objective genitive, not the faith of the Son of God. {For me} (\huper emou\). Paul has the closest personal feeling toward Christ. "He appropriates to himself, as Chrysostom observes, the love which belongs equally to the whole world. For Christ is indeed the personal friend of each man individually" (Lightfoot).

rwp@Galatians:4:6 @{Because ye are sons} (\hoti este huioi\). This is the reason for sending forth the Son (4:4| and here). We were "sons" in God's elective purpose and love. \Hoti\ is causal (1Corinthians:12:15; strkjv@Romans:9:7|). {The Spirit of his Son} (\to pneuma tou huioi autou\). The Holy Spirit, called the Spirit of Christ (Romans:8:9f.|), the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Phillipians:1:19|). The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son (John:15:26|). {Crying, Abba, Father} (\krazon Abba ho patˆr\). The participle agrees with \pneuma\ neuter (grammatical gender), not neuter in fact. An old, though rare in present as here, onomatopoetic word to croak as a raven (Theophrastus, like Poe's _The Raven_), any inarticulate cry like "the unuttered groanings" of strkjv@Romans:8:26| which God understands. This cry comes from the Spirit of Christ in our hearts. \Abba\ is the Aramaic word for father with the article and \ho patˆr\ translates it. The articular form occurs in the vocative as in strkjv@John:20:28|. It is possible that the repetition here and in strkjv@Romans:8:15| may be "a sort of affectionate fondness for the very term that Jesus himself used" (Burton) in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mark:14:36|). The rabbis preserve similar parallels. Most of the Jews knew both Greek and Aramaic. But there remains the question why Jesus used both in his prayer. Was it not natural for both words to come to him in his hour of agony as in his childhood? The same thing may be true here in Paul's case.

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

rwp@Galatians:4:24 @{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@Info_Hebrews @ THE PICTURE OF CHRIST At once we are challenged by the bold stand taken by the author concerning the Person of Christ as superior to the prophets of the Old Testament because he is the Son of God through whom God has spoken in the new dispensation (Hebrews:1:1-3|), this Son who is God's Agent in the work of creation and of grace as we see it stated in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11; strkjv@Colossians:1:13-20; strkjv@John:1:1-18|. This high doctrine of Jesus as God's Son with the glory and stamp of God's nature is never lowered, for as God's Son he is superior to angels (Hebrews:1:4-2:4|), though the humanity of Jesus is recognized as one proof of the glory of Jesus (Hebrews:2:5-18|). Jesus is shown to be superior to Moses as God's Son over God's house (Hebrews:3:1-4:13|), But the chief portion of the Epistle is devoted to the superiority of Jesus Christ as priest to the work of Aaron and the whole Levitical line (Hebrews:4:14-12:3|). Here the author with consummate skill, though with rabbinical refinements at times, shows that Jesus is like Melchizedek and so superior to Aaron (Hebrews:4:14-7:28|), works under a better covenant of grace (Hebrews:8:1-13|), works in a better sanctuary which is in heaven (Hebrews:9:1-12|), offers a better sacrifice which is his own blood (Hebrews:9:13-10:18|), and gives us better promises for the fulfilment of his task (Hebrews:10:19-12:3|). Hence this Epistle deserves to be called the Epistle of the Priesthood of Christ. Songs:W. P. Du Bose calls his exposition of the book, _High Priesthood and Sacrifice_ (1908). This conception of Christ as our Priest who offered himself on the Cross and as our Advocate with the Father runs all through the New Testament (Mark:10:46; strkjv@Matthew:20:28; strkjv@John:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Romans:8:32; strkjv@1Peter:1:18f.; strkjv@1John:2:1f.; strkjv@Revelation:5:9|, etc.). But it is in Hebrews that we have the full-length portrait of Jesus Christ as our Priest and Redeemer. The Glory of Jesus runs through the whole book.

rwp@Hebrews:1:5 @{Unto which} (\Tini\). "To which individual angel." As a class angels are called sons of God (Elohim) (Psalms:29:1|), but no single angel is called God's Son like the Messiah in strkjv@Psalms:2:7|. Dods takes "have I begotten thee" (\gegennˆka se\, perfect active indicative of \genna“\) to refer to the resurrection and ascension while others refer it to the incarnation. {And again} (\kai palin\). This quotation is from strkjv@2Samuel:7:14|. Note the use of \eis\ in the predicate with the sense of "as" like the Hebrew (LXX idiom), not preserved in the English. See strkjv@Matthew:19:5; strkjv@Luke:2:34|. Like Old English "to" or "for." See strkjv@2Corinthians:6:18; strkjv@Revelation:21:7| for the same passage applied to relation between God and Christians while here it is treated as Messianic.

rwp@Hebrews:1:11 @{They} (\autoi\). The heavens (\ouranoi\). {Shall perish} (\apolountai\). Future middle of \apollumi\. Modern scientists no longer postulate the eternal existence of the heavenly bodies. {But thou continuest} (\su de diameneis\). This is what matters most, the eternal existence of God's Son as Creator and Preserver of the universe (John:1:1-3; strkjv@Colossians:1:14ff.|). {Shall wax old} (\palai“thˆsontai\). First future passive indicative of \palaio“\, from \palaios\, for which see strkjv@Luke:12:33; strkjv@Hebrews:8:13|.

rwp@Hebrews:3:5 @{And Moses} (\kai M“usˆs men\). "Now Moses indeed on his part" (\men\ contrasted with \de\). {In} (\en\). Moses was in "God's house" "as a servant" (\h“s therap“n\). Old word, in LXX, only here in N.T. and quoted from strkjv@Numbers:12:7f|. Kin to the verb \therapeu“\, to serve, to heal, and \therapeia\, service (Luke:9:11|) and a group of servants (Luke:12:42|). {For a testimony of those things which were afterward to be spoken} (\eis marturion t“n lalˆthˆsomen“n\). Objective genitive of the articular future passive participle of \lale“\. It is not certain what it means whether the "testimony" (\marturion\) is to Moses or to God and whether it points on to Christ. In strkjv@9:9| see \parabolˆ\ applied to the old dispensation as a symbol pointing to Christ and Christianity. {But Christ} (\Christos de\). In contrast with Moses (\men\ in verse 5|). {As a son} (\h“s huios\). Instead of a \therap“n\ (servant). {Over his house} (\epi ton oikon autou\). The difference between \epi\ and \en\ added to that between \huios\ and \therap“n\. It is very neat and quite conclusive, especially when we recall the high place occupied by Moses in Jewish thought. In strkjv@Acts:7:11| the Jews accused Stephen of speaking "blasphemous words against Moses and God" (putting Moses on a par with God).

rwp@Hebrews:7:3 @{Without father, without mother, without genealogy} (\apat“r, amˆt“r, agenealogˆtos\). Alliteration like strkjv@Romans:1:30|, the first two old words, the third coined by the author (found nowhere else) and meaning simply "devoid of any genealogy." The argument is that from silence, made much of by Philo, but not to be pressed. The record in Genesis tells nothing of any genealogy. Melchizedek stands alone. He is not to be understood as a miraculous being without birth or death. Melchizedek has been made more mysterious than he is by reading into this interpretation what is not there. {Made like} (\aph“moi“menos\). Perfect passive participle of \aphomoio“\, old verb, to produce a facsimile or copy, only here in N.T. The likeness is in the picture drawn in Genesis, not in the man himself. Such artificial interpretation does not amount to proof, but only serves as a parallel or illustration. {Unto the Son of God} (\t“i hui“i tou theou\). Associative instrumental case of \huios\. {Abideth a priest} (\menei hiereus\). According to the record in Genesis, the only one in his line just as Jesus stands alone, but with the difference that Jesus continues priest in fact in heaven. {Continually} (\eis to diˆnekes\). Old phrase (for the continuity) like \eis ton ai“na\, in N.T. only in Hebrews (7:3; strkjv@10:1,14,21|).

rwp@Hebrews:8:2 @{Minister} (\leitourgos\). See on ¯Romans:13:6; strkjv@Phillipians:2:25|. {Of the sanctuary} (\t“n hagi“n\). "Of the holy places" (\ta hagia\), without any distinction (like strkjv@9:8f.; strkjv@10:19; strkjv@13:11|) between the holy place and the most holy place as in strkjv@9:2f|. {Of the true tabernacle} (\tˆs skˆnˆs tˆs alˆthinˆs\). By way of explanation of \t“n hagi“n\. For \skˆnˆ\ see strkjv@Matthew:17:4| and \skˆnos\ (2Corinthians:5:1|), old word used here for the antitype or archetype of the tabernacle in the wilderness in which Aaron served, the ideal tabernacle in heaven of which the earthly tabernacle was a symbol and reproduced in the temple which merely copied the tabernacle. Hence it is the "genuine" tabernacle and see strkjv@John:1:9| for \alˆthinos\. {Pitched} (\epˆxen\). First aorist active indicative of \pˆgnumi\, old verb to fasten as the pegs of a tent, here only in the N.T. Cf. strkjv@Numbers:24:6|.

rwp@Hebrews:8:4 @{On earth} (\epi gˆs\). As opposed to \en tois ouranois\ (verse 1|). Condition of second class, determined as unfulfilled. {He would not be a priest at all} (\oud' an ˆn hiereus\). "Not even would he be a priest." Conclusion of second class condition with \an\ and imperfect indicative (\ˆn\). {Seeing there are those} (\ont“n t“n\). Genitive absolute with \ont“n\ (from \eimi\) and the articular present active participle of \prospher“\ (verse 3|). Jesus was not of the tribe of Levi and so could not serve here.

rwp@Hebrews:8:5 @{Serve} (\latreuousin\). Present active indicative of \latreu“\ for which verb see on ¯Matthew:4:10|. {A copy} (\hupodeigmati\). Dative case after \latreuousin\. See already on ¯John:13:15; strkjv@Hebrews:4:11| for this interesting word. {Shadow} (\skiƒi\). Dative case. Old word for which see already strkjv@Matthew:4:16; strkjv@Mark:4:32; strkjv@Colossians:2:17|. See same idea in strkjv@Hebrews:9:23|. For difference between \skia\ and \eik“n\ see strkjv@10:1|. Here "copy and shadow" form a practical hendiadys for "a shadowy out- line" (Moffatt). {Is warned of God} (\kechrˆmatistai\). Perfect passive indicative of \chrˆmatiz“\, old verb (from \chrˆma\, business) for which see on ¯Matthew:2:12,22; strkjv@Luke:2:26|. The word "God" is not used, but it is implied as in strkjv@Acts:10:22; strkjv@Hebrews:12:25|. Songs:in LXX, Josephus, and the papyri. {For saith he} (\gar phˆsi\). Argument from God's command (Exodus:25:40|). {See that thou make} (\Horƒ poiˆseis\). Common Greek idiom with present active imperative of \hora“\ and the volitive future of \poie“\ without \hina\ (asyndeton, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 949). {The pattern} (\ton tupon\). The very word used in strkjv@Exodus:25:40| and quoted also by Stephen in strkjv@Acts:7:44|. For \tupos\ see already strkjv@John:20:25; strkjv@Romans:6:17|, etc. The tabernacle was to be patterned after the heavenly model.

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

rwp@Hebrews:10:39 @{But we} (\hˆmeis de\). In contrast to renegades who do flicker and turn back from Christ. {Of them that shrink back unto perdition} (\hupostolˆs eis ap“leian\). Predicate genitive of \hupostolˆ\, as in strkjv@12:11|, from \hupostell“\ with same sense here, stealthy retreat in Plutarch, dissimulation in Josephus. Here alone in the N.T. {Unto the saving of the soul} (\eis peripoiˆsin psuchˆs\). Old word from \peripoie“\, to reserve, to preserve (Luke:17:33|) to purchase (Acts:20:28|). Songs:here preserving or saving one's life as in Plato, but possession in strkjv@Ephesians:1:14|, obtaining in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:9|. Papyri have it in sense of preservation.

rwp@Hebrews:11:8 @{Not knowing whither he went} (\mˆ epistamenos pou erchetai\). Usual negative \mˆ\ with a participle (present middle from \epistamai\, old and common verb to put the mind on). Present middle indicative (\erchetai\) preserved in the indirect question after the secondary tense \exˆlthen\ (went out) from which \epistamenos\ gets its time. Abraham is a sublime and graphic example of faith. He did not even know where the land was that he was going to receive "as an inheritance" (\eis klˆronomian\).

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 AUTHOR THE APOSTLE JOHN Loisy (_Leviticus:Quatr. Evangile_, p. 132) says that if one takes literally what is given in the body of the Gospel of the Beloved Disciple he is bound to be one of the twelve. Loisy does not take it "literally." But why not? Are we to assume that the author of this greatest of books is playing a part or using a deliberate artifice to deceive? It may be asked why John does not use his own name instead of a _nom de plume_. Reference can be made to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, no one of which gives the author's name. One can see a reason for the turn here given since the book consists so largely of personal experiences of the author with Christ. He thus avoids the too frequent use of the personal pronoun and preserves the element of witness which marks the whole book. One by one the other twelve apostles disappear if we test their claims for the authorship. In the list of seven in chapter strkjv@John:21| it is easy to drop the names of Simon Peter, Thomas, and Nathanael. There are left two unnamed disciples and the sons of Zebedee (here alone mentioned, not even named, in the book). John in this Gospel always means the Baptist. Why does the author so uniformly slight the sons of Zebedee if not one of them himself? In the Acts Luke does not mention his own name nor that of Titus his brother, though so many other friends of Paul are named. If the Beloved Disciple is John the Apostle, the silence about James and himself is easily understood. James is ruled out because of his early death (Acts:12:1|). The evidence in the Gospel points directly to the Apostle John as the author.

rwp@Info_John @ A DIFFERENT STYLE OF TEACHING Songs:different is it in fact that some men bluntly assert that Jesus could not have spoken in the same fashion as presented in the Synoptics and in the Fourth Gospel. Such critics need to recall the Socrates of Xenophon's _Memorabilia_ and of Plato's _Dialogues_. There is a difference beyond a doubt, but there is also some difference in the reports in the Synoptics. Jesus for the most part spoke in Aramaic, sometimes in Greek, as to the great crowds from around Palestine (the Sermon on the Mount, for instance). There is the Logia of Jesus (Q of criticism) preserved in the non-Markan portions of Matthew and Luke besides Mark, and the rest of Matthew and Luke. Certain natural individualities are preserved. The difference is greater in the Fourth Gospel, because John writes in the ripeness of age and in the richness of his long experience. He gives his reminiscences mellowed by long reflection and yet with rare dramatic power. The simplicity of the language leads many to think that they understand this Gospel when they fail to see the graphic pictures as in chapters strkjv@John:7-11|. The book fairly throbs with life. There is, no doubt, a Johannine style here, but curiously enough there exists in the Logia (Q) a genuine Johannine passage written long before the Fourth Gospel (Matthew:11:25-30; strkjv@Luke:10:21-24|). The use of "the Father" and "the Son" is thoroughly Johannine. It is clear that Jesus used the Johannine type of teaching also. Perhaps critics do not make enough allowance for the versatility and variety in Jesus.

rwp@Info_John @ THE SAME STYLE IN THE DISCOURSES It is further objected that there is no difference in style between the discourses of Jesus in John's Gospel and his own narrative style. There is an element of truth in this criticism. There are passages where it is not easy to tell where discourse ends and narrative begins. See, for instance, strkjv@John:3:16-21|. Does the discourse of Jesus end with verse 15,16, or 21? Songs:in strkjv@John:12:44-50|. Does John give here a resume of Christ's teaching or a separate discourse? It is true also that John preserves in a vivid way the conversational style of Christ as in chapters 4,6,7,8,9. In the Synoptic Gospels this element is not so striking, but we do not have to say that John has done as Shakespeare did with his characters. Each Gospel to a certain extent has the colouring of the author in reporting the words of Jesus. An element of this is inevitable unless men are mere automata, phonographs, or radios. But each Gospel preserves an accurate and vivid picture of Christ. We need all four pictures including that of John's Gospel for the whole view of Christ.

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

rwp@John:1:3 @{All things} (\panta\). The philosophical phrase was \ta panta\ (the all things) as we have it in strkjv@1Corinthians:8:6; strkjv@Romans:11:36; strkjv@Colossians:1:16|. In verse 10| John uses \ho kosmos\ (the orderly universe) for the whole. {Were made} (egeneto). Second aorist middle indicative of \ginomai\, the constative aorist covering the creative activity looked at as one event in contrast with the continuous existence of \ˆn\ in verses 1,2|. All things "came into being." Creation is thus presented as a becoming (\ginomai\) in contrast with being (\eimi\). {By him} (\di' autou\). By means of him as the intermediate agent in the work of creation. The Logos is John's explanation of the creation of the universe. The author of Hebrews (Hebrews:1:2|) names God's Son as the one "through whom he made the ages." Paul pointedly asserts that "the all things were created in him" (Christ) and "the all things stand created through him and unto him" (Colossians:1:16|). Hence it is not a peculiar doctrine that John here enunciates. In strkjv@1Corinthians:8:6|, Paul distinguishes between the Father as the primary source (\ex hou\) of the all things and the Son as the intermediate agent as here (\di' hou\). {Without him} (\ch“ris autou\). Old adverbial preposition with the ablative as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:14|, "apart from." John adds the negative statement for completion, another note of his style as in strkjv@John:1:20; strkjv@1John:1:5|. Thus John excludes two heresies (Bernard) that matter is eternal and that angels or aeons had a share in creation. {Not anything} (\oude hen\). "Not even one thing." Bernard thinks the entire Prologue is a hymn and divides it into strophes. That is by no means certain. It is doubtful also whether the relative clause "that hath been made" (\ho gegonen\) is a part of this sentence or begins a new one as Westcott and Hort print it. The verb is second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. Westcott observes that the ancient scholars before Chrysostom all began a new sentence with \ho gegonen\. The early uncials had no punctuation.

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:1:38 @{Turned} (\strapheis\). Second aorist passive participle of \streph“\, vividly picturing the sudden act of Jesus on hearing their steps behind him. {Beheld} (\theasamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \theaomai\ (verse 32|). Both participles here express antecedent action to \legei\ (saith). {Following} (\akolothountas\). Present active participle of \akolouthe“\ (verse 37|). It was Christ's first experience of this kind and the two came from the Baptist to Jesus. {What seek ye?} (\Ti zˆteite;\). Not "whom" (\tina\ strkjv@18:4; strkjv@20:15|), but "what purpose have you." The first words of Jesus preserved in this Gospel. See strkjv@Luke:2:49; strkjv@Matthew:3:15| for words spoken before this and strkjv@Mark:1:15| for Mark's first report in the Galilean ministry. {Rabbi} (\Rabbei\). Aramaic title for "Teacher" which John here translates by \Didaskale\ as he is writing late and for general readers. Luke, a Greek Christian, does not use it, but John recalls his first use of this term to Jesus and explains it. Matthew has it only in the greeting of Judas to the Master (Matthew:26:25,49|) and Mark once by Judas (Mark:14:45|) and twice by Peter (Mark:9:5; strkjv@11:21|). John's Gospel has the disciples at first addressing Jesus by Rabbi while others address him by \Kurie\ (Lord or Sir) as in strkjv@4:11,49; strkjv@5:7|. Peter uses \Kurie\ in strkjv@6:68|. In the end the disciples usually say \Kurie\ (13:6,25|, etc.), but Mary Magdalene says \Rabbounei\ (20:16|). {Being interpreted} (\methermˆmeuomenon\). Present passive participle of \methermˆneu“\, late compound of \meta\ and \hermˆneu“\, to explain (John:1:42|), old word from \Hermes\, the god of speech (hermeneutics). John often explains Aramaic words (1:38,41,42; strkjv@4:25; strkjv@9:7|, etc.). {Where abidest thou?} (\Pou meneis;\). They wished a place for quiet converse with Jesus.

rwp@John:1:41 @{He findeth first} (\heuriskei houtos pr“ton\). "This one finds (vivid dramatic present) first" (\prot“n\). \Prot“n\ (adverb supported by Aleph A B fam. 13) means that Andrew sought "his own brother Simon" (\ton adelphon ton idion Sim“na\) before he did anything else. But Aleph L W read \pr“tos\ (nominative adjective) which means that Andrew was the first who went after his brother implying that John also went after his brother James. Some old Latin manuscripts (b, e, r apparently), have \mane\ for Greek \pr“i\ (early in the morning). Bernard thinks that this is the true reading as it allows more time for Andrew to bring Simon to Jesus. Probably \pr“ton\ is correct, but even so John likely brought also his brother James after Andrew's example. {We have found the Messiah} (\Heurˆkamen ton Messian\). First aorist active indicative of \heurisk“\. Andrew and John had made the greatest discovery of the ages, far beyond gold or diamond mines. The Baptist had told about him. "We have seen him." {Which is} (\ho estin\). Same explanatory neuter relative as in verse 38|, "which word is." This Aramaic title Messiah is preserved in the N.T. only here and strkjv@4:25|, elsewhere translated into \Christos\, Anointed One, from \chri“\, to anoint. See on ¯Matthew:1:1| for discussion.

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

rwp@John:4:16 @{Go, call thy husband} (\Hupage ph“nˆson sou ton andra\). Two imperatives (present active, first aorist active). Had she started to leave after her perplexed reply? Her frequent trips to the well were partly for her husband. We may not have all the conversation preserved, but clearly Jesus by this sudden sharp turn gives the woman a conviction of sin and guilt without which she cannot understand his use of water as a metaphor for eternal life.

rwp@John:6:12 @{And when they were filled} (\h“s de eneplˆsthˆsan\). First aorist (effective) passive indicative of \empimplˆmi\, old verb to fill in, to fill up, to fill completely. They were all satisfied. The Synoptics have \echortasthˆsan\ like strkjv@John:6:26| (\echortasthˆte\). {Gather up} (\sunagagete\). Second aorist active imperative of \sunag“\, to gather together. {Broken pieces} (\klasmata\). From \kla“\, to break. Not crumbs or scraps on the ground, but pieces broken by Jesus (Mark:6:41|) and not consumed. {Be lost} (\apolˆtai\). Second aorist middle subjunctive of \apollumi\ with \hina\ in purpose clause. Only in John. There was to be no wastefulness in Christ's munificence. The Jews had a custom of leaving something for those that served.

rwp@John:6:13 @{Twelve baskets} (\d“deka kophinous\). One for each of the apostles. What about the lad? Stout wicker baskets (coffins, Wycliff) in distinction from the soft and frail \sphurides\ used at the feeding of the four thousand (Mark:8:8; strkjv@Matthew:15:37|). Here all the Gospels (Mark:6:43; strkjv@Matthew:14:20; strkjv@Luke:9:17; strkjv@John:6:13|) use \kophinoi\. The same distinction between \kophinoi\ and \sphurides\ is preserved in the allusion to the incidents by Jesus in strkjv@Mark:8:19,20; strkjv@Matthew:16:9,10|. {Unto them that had eaten} (\tois bebr“kosin\). Articular perfect active participle (dative case) of \bibr“sk“\, old verb to eat, only here in N.T., though often in LXX.

rwp@John:6:26 @{Not because ye saw signs} (\ouch hoti eidete sˆmeia\). Second aorist active indicative of the defective verb \hora“\. They had seen the "signs" wrought by Jesus (verse 2|), but this one had led to wild fanaticism (verse 14|) and complete failure to grasp the spiritual lessons. {But because ye ate of the loaves} (\all' hoti ephagete ek t“n art“n\). Second aorist active indicative of \esthi“\, defective verb. {Ye were filled} (\echortasthˆte\). First aorist passive indicative of \chortaz“\, from \chortos\ (grass) as in verse 10|, to eat grass, then to eat anything, to satisfy hunger. They were more concerned with hungry stomachs than with hungry souls. It was a sharp and deserved rebuke.

rwp@John:6:33 @{The bread of God} (\ho artos tou theou\). All bread is of God (Matthew:6:11|). The manna came down from heaven (Numbers:11:9|) as does this bread (\ho katabain“n\). Refers to the bread (\ho artos\, masculine). Bernard notes that this phrase (coming down) is used seven times in this discourse (33,38,41,42,50,51,58|). {Giveth life} (\z“ˆn didous\). Chrysostom observes that the manna gave nourishment (\trophˆ\), but not life (\z“ˆ\). This is a most astounding statement to the crowd.

rwp@John:9:8 @{Neighbours} (\geitones\). From \gˆ\ (land), of the same land, old word. See strkjv@Luke:14:2|. {Saw him} (\the“rountes\). Present active participle of \the“re“\, who used to observe him. {Aforetime} (\to proteron\). Adverbial accusative, "the former time," formerly. {That he was a beggar} (\hoti prosaitˆs ˆn\). See strkjv@4:19; strkjv@12:19| for declarative \hoti\ after \the“re“\. But it is entirely possible that \hoti\ here is "because" (Westcott). \Prosaitˆs\ is a late word for beggar, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:10:46|. It is from \prosaite“\, to ask in addition (see \prosait“n\ below), a thing that beggars know how to do. {Is not this he that sat and begged?} (\Ouch houtos estin ho kathˆmenos kai prosait“n;\). He had his regular place and was a familiar figure. But now his eyes are wide open.

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

rwp@John:20:22 @{He breathed on them} (\enephusˆsen\). First aorist active indicative of \emphusa“\, late verb, here only in N.T. though eleven times in the LXX and in the papyri. It was a symbolic art with the same word used in the LXX when God breathed the breath of life upon Adam (Genesis:2:7|). It occurs also in strkjv@Ezekiel:37:9|. See Christ's promise in strkjv@John:16:23|. Jesus gives the disciples a foretaste of the great pentecost. {Receive ye the Holy Ghost} (\labete pneuma hagion\). Second aorist (ingressive) active imperative of \lamban“\. Note absence of article here (\pneuma hagion\) though \to pneuma to hagion\ in strkjv@14:26|. No real distinction is to be observed, for Holy Spirit is treated as a proper name with or without the article.

rwp@John:21:17 @{Lovest thou me?} (\phileis me;\). This time Jesus picks up the word \phile“\ used by Peter and challenges that. These two words are often interchanged in the N.T., but here the distinction is preserved. Peter was cut to the heart (\elupˆthˆ\, first aorist passive of \lupe“\, to grieve) because Jesus challenges this very verb, and no doubt the third question vividly reminds him of the three denials in the early morning by the fire. He repeats his love for Jesus with the plea: "Thou knowest all things." {Feed my sheep} (\boske ta probatia\). Many MSS. both here and in verse 16| read \probata\ (sheep) instead of \probatia\ (little sheep or lambs).

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE SOURCES OF THE GOSPEL In his Preface or Prologue (Luke:1:1-4|) the author tells us that he had two kinds of sources, oral and written, and that they were many, how many we have no way of telling. It is now generally accepted that we know two of his written sources, Mark's Gospel and Q or the Logia of Jesus (written by Matthew, Papias says). Mark is still preserved and it is not difficult for any one by the use of a harmony of the Gospels to note how Luke made use of Mark, incorporating what he chose, adapting it in various ways, not using what did not suit his purposes. The other source we only know in the non-Markan portions of Matthew and Luke, that is the material common to both, but not in Mark. This also can be noted by any one in a harmony. Only it is probable that this source was more extensive than just the portions used by both Matthew and Luke. It is probable that both Matthew and Luke each used portions of the Logia not used by the other. But there is a large portion of Luke's Gospel which is different from Mark and Matthew. Some scholars call this source L. There is little doubt that Luke had another document for the material peculiar to him, but it is also probable that he had several others. He spoke of "many." This applies especially to chapters 9 to 21. But Luke expressly says that he had received help from "eye-witnesses and ministers of the word," in oral form this means. It is, then, probable that Luke made numerous notes of such data and used them along with the written sources at his command. This remark applies particularly to chapters 1 and 2 which have a very distinct Semitic (Aramaic) colouring due to the sources used. It is possible, of course, that Mary the mother of Jesus may have written a statement concerning these important matters or that Luke may have had converse with her or with one of her circle. Ramsay, in his volume, _Was Christ Born at Bethlehem?_ shows the likelihood of Luke's contact with Mary or her circle during these two years at Caesarea. Luke handles the data acquired with care and skill as he claims in his Prologue and as the result shows. The outcome is what Renan called the most beautiful book in the world.

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:1:3 @{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:1:5 @{There was} (\egeneto\). Not the usual \en\ for "was," but there arose or came into notice. With this verse the literary _Koin‚_ of verses 1 to 4 disappears. To the end of chapter 2 we have the most Hebraistic (Aramaic) passage in Luke's writings, due evidently to the use of documents or notes of oral tradition. Plummer notes a series of such documents ending with strkjv@1:80, strkjv@2:40, strkjv@2:52|. If the mother of Jesus was still alive, Luke could have seen her. She may have written in Aramaic an account of these great events. Natural reserve would keep her from telling too much and from too early publicity. Luke, as a physician, would take special interest in her birth report. The supernatural aspects disturb only those who do not admit the real Incarnation of Jesus Christ and who are unable to believe that God is superior to nature and that the coming of the Son of God to earth justifies such miraculous manifestations of divine power. Luke tells his story from the standpoint of Mary as Matthew gives his from the standpoint of Joseph. The two supplement each other. We have here the earliest documentary evidence of the origins of Christianity that has come down to us (Plummer). {Herod, King of Judea} (\Hˆr“idou basile“s tˆs Ioudaias\). This note of time locates the events before the death of Herod the Great (as he was called later), appointed King of Judea by the Roman Senate B.C. 40 at the suggestion of Octavius and Antony. He died B.C. 4. {Of the course of Abijah} (\ex ephˆmerias Abia\). Not in old Greek, but in LXX and modern Greek. Papyri have a verb derived from it, \ephˆmere“\. Daily service (Nehemiah:13:30; strkjv@1Chronicles:25:8|) and then a course of priests who were on duty for a week (1Chronicles:23:6; strkjv@28:13|). There were 24 such courses and that of Abijah was the eighth (1Chronicles:24:10; strkjv@2Chronicles:8:14|). Only four of these courses (Jedaiah, Immer, Pashur, Harim) returned from Babylon, but these four were divided into twenty-four with the old names. Each of these courses did duty for eight days, sabbath to sabbath, twice a year. On sabbaths the whole course did duty. At the feast of tabernacles all twenty-four courses were present. {Of the daughters of Aaron} (\ek t“n thugater“n Aar“n\). "To be a priest and married to a priest's daughter was a double distinction" (Plummer). Like a preacher married to a preacher's daughter.

rwp@Luke:1:13 @{Is heard} (\eisˆkousthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative. A sort of timeless aorist, "was heard" when made, and so "is heard" now. Probably the prayer was for a son in spite of the great age of Elisabeth, though the Messianic redemption is possible also. {John} (\I“anˆn\). The word means that God is gracious. The mention of the name should have helped Zacharias to believe. The message of the angel (verses 13-17|) takes on a metrical form when turned into Hebrew (Ragg) and it is a prose poem in Greek and English like strkjv@1:30-33,35-37,42-45,46-55,68-70; strkjv@2:10-12,14,29-32,34-35|. Certainly Luke has preserved the earliest Christian hymns in their oldest sources. He is the first critic of the sources of the Gospels and a scholarly one.

rwp@Luke:1:24 @{Conceived} (\sunelaben\). Luke uses this word eleven times and it occurs only five other times in the N.T. It is a very old and common Greek word. He alone in the N.T. has it for conceiving offspring (1:24,31,36; strkjv@2:21|) though strkjv@James:1:15| uses it of lust producing sin. Hobart (_Medical Language of Luke_, p. 91) observes that Luke has almost as many words for pregnancy and barrenness as Hippocrates (\en gastri echein\, strkjv@21:23|; \egkuos\, strkjv@2:5|; \steira\, strkjv@1:7|; \ateknos\, strkjv@20:28|). {Hid} (\periekruben\). Only here in the N.T., but in late _Koin‚_ writers. Usually considered second aorist active indicative from \perikrupt“\, though it may be the imperfect indicative of a late form \perikrub“\. If it is aorist it is the constative aorist. The preposition \peri\ makes it mean completely (on all sides) hid.

rwp@Luke:1:74 @{Delivered} (\rhusthentas\). First aorist passive participle of an old verb, \rhuomai\. The accusative case appears, where the dative could have been used to agree with \hˆmin\, because of the infinitive \latreuein\ (verse 74|) {to serve} (from {latros}, for hire). But Plato uses the word of service for God so that the bad sense does not always exist.

rwp@Luke:2:42 @{Twelve years old} (\et“n d“deka\). Predicate genitive. Luke does not say that Jesus had not been to Jerusalem before, but at twelve a Jewish boy became a "son of the law" and began to observe the ordinances, putting on the phylacteries as a reminder. {They went up} (\anabainont“n aut“n\). Genitive absolute with present active participle, a loose construction here, for the incident narrated took place _after_ they had gone up, not _while_ they were gong up. "On their usual going up" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:2:49 @{Son} (\teknon\). Child, literally. It was natural for Mary to be the first to speak. {Why} (\Ti\). The mother's reproach of the boy is followed by a confession of negligence on her part and of Joseph ({sorrowing}, \odun“menoi\). {Thy father} (\ho pater sou\). No contradiction in this. Alford says: "Up to this time Joseph had been so called by the holy child himself, but from this time never." {Sought} (\ezˆtoumen\). Imperfect tense describing the long drawn out search for three days. {How is it that} (\Ti hoti\). The first words of Jesus preserved to us. This crisp Greek idiom without copula expresses the boy's amazement that his parents should not know that there was only one possible place in Jerusalem for him. {I must be} (\dei einai me\). Messianic consciousness of the necessity laid on him. Jesus often uses \dei\ (must) about his work. Of all the golden dreams of any boy of twelve here is the greatest. {In my Father's house} (\en tois tou patros mou\). Not "about my Father's business," but "in my Father's house" (cf. strkjv@Genesis:41:51|). Common Greek idiom. And note "my," not "our." When the boy first became conscious of his peculiar relation to the Father in heaven we do not know. But he has it now at twelve and it will grow within him through the years ahead in Nazareth.

rwp@Luke:2:50 @{They understood not} (\ou sunˆkan\). First aorist active indicative (one of the k aorists). Even Mary with all her previous preparation and brooding was not equal to the dawning of the Messianic consciousness in her boy. "My Father is God," Jesus had virtually said, "and I must be in His house." Bruce observes that a new era has come when Jesus calls God "Father," not \Despotes\. "Even we do not yet fully understand" (Bruce) what Jesus the boy here said.

rwp@Luke:3:18 @{Many other exhortations} (\polla men oun kai hetera\). Literally, many and different things did John \evangelize\, \euaggelizeto\, to the people. Luke has given a bare sample of the wonderful messages of the Baptist. Few as his words preserved are they give a definite and powerful conception of his preaching.

rwp@Luke:4:8 @{Thou shalt worship} (\proskunˆseis\). Satan used this verb to Jesus who turns it against him by the quotation from strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:13|. Jesus clearly perceived that one could not worship both Satan and God. He had to choose whom he would serve. Luke does not give the words, "Get thee hence, Satan" (Matthew:4:10|), for he has another temptation to narrate.

rwp@Luke:4:24 @{And he said} (\eipen de\). Also in strkjv@1:13|. The interjection of these words here by Luke may indicate a break in his address, though there is no other indication of an interval here. Perhaps they only serve to introduce solemnly the new proverb like the words {Verily I say unto you} (\amˆn leg“ humin\). This proverb about the prophet having no honour in his own country Jesus had already applied to himself according to strkjv@John:4:44|. Both strkjv@Mark:6:4| and strkjv@Matthew:13:57| give it in a slightly altered form on the last visit of Jesus to Nazareth. The devil had tempted Jesus to make a display of his power to the people by letting them see him floating down from the pinnacle of the temple (Luke:4:9-11|).

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

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

rwp@Luke:6:20 @{And he lifted up his eyes} (\kai autos eparas tous opthalmous autou\). First aorist active participle from \epair“\. Note also Luke's favourite use of \kai autos\ in beginning a paragraph. Vivid detail alone in Luke. Jesus looked the vast audience full in the face. strkjv@Matthew:5:2| mentions that "he opened his mouth and taught them" (began to teach them, inchoative imperfect, \edidasken\). He spoke out so that the great crowd could hear. Some preachers do not open their mouths and do not look up at the people, but down at the manuscript and drawl along while the people lose interest and even go to sleep or slip out. {Ye poor} (\hoi pt“choi\). {The poor}, but "yours" (\humetera\) justifies the translation "ye." Luke's report is direct address in all the four beatitudes and four woes given by him. It is useless to speculate why Luke gives only four of the eight beatitudes in Matthew or why Matthew does not give the four woes in Luke. One can only say that neither professes to give a complete report of the sermon. There is no evidence to show that either saw the report of the other. They may have used a common source like Q (the Logia of Jesus) or they may have had separate sources. Luke's first beatitude corresponds with Matthew's first, but he does not have "in spirit" after "poor." Does Luke represent Jesus as saying that poverty itself is a blessing? It can be made so. Or does Luke represent Jesus as meaning what is in Matthew, poverty of spirit? {The kingdom of God} (\hˆ basileia tou theou\). strkjv@Matthew:5:3| has "the kingdom of heaven" which occurs alone in Matthew though he also has the one here in Luke with no practical difference. The rabbis usually said "the kingdom of heaven." They used it of the political Messianic kingdom when Judaism of the Pharisaic sort would triumph over the world. The idea of Jesus is in the sharpest contrast to that conception here and always. See on ¯Matthew:3:2| for discussion of the meaning of the word "kingdom." It is the favourite word of Jesus for the rule of God in the heart here and now. It is both present and future and will reach a glorious consummation. Some of the sayings of Christ have apocalyptic and eschatological figures, but the heart of the matter is here in the spiritual reality of the reign of God in the hearts of those who serve him. The kingdom parables expand and enlarge upon various phases of this inward life and growth.

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

rwp@Luke: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:9:49 @{And John answered} (\apokritheis de I“anˆs\). As if John wanted to change the subject after the embarrassment of the rebuke for their dispute concerning greatness (Luke:9:46-48|). {Master} (\epistata\). Only in Luke in the N.T. as already four times (5:5; strkjv@8:24,45; strkjv@9:33|). {We forbade him} (\ek“luomen auton\). Conative imperfect as in strkjv@Mark:9:38|, We tried to hinder him. {Because he followeth not with us} (\hoti ouk akolouthei meth hˆm“n\). Present tense preserved for vividness where Mark has imperfect {ˆkolouthei}. Note also here "with us" (\meth' hˆm“n\) where Mark has associative instrumental \hˆmin\. It is a pitiful specimen of partisan narrowness and pride even in the Beloved Disciple, one of the Sons of Thunder. The man was doing the Master's work in the Master's name and with the Master's power, but did not run with the group of the Twelve.

rwp@Luke:9:62 @{Having put his hand to the plough} (\epibal“n tˆn cheira ep' arotron\). Second aorist active participle of \epiball“\, an old and common verb, to place upon. Note repetition of preposition \epi\ before \arotron\ (plough). This agricultural proverb is as old as Hesiod. Pliny observes that the ploughman who does not bend attentively to his work goes crooked. It has always been the ambition of the ploughman to run a straight furrow. The Palestine _fellah_ had good success at it. {And looking back} (\kai blep“n eis ta opis“\). Looking to the things behind. To do that is fatal as any ploughman knows. The call to turn back is often urgent. {Fit} (\euthetos\). From \eu\ and \tithˆmi\=well-placed, suited for, adapted to. "The first case is that of inconsiderate impulse, the second that of conflicting duties, the third that of a divided mind" (Bruce).

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

rwp@Luke:12:42 @{Who then} (\tis ara\). Jesus introduces this parable of the wise steward (42-48|) by a rhetorical question that answers itself. Peter is this wise steward, each of the Twelve is, anyone is who acts thus. {The faithful and wise steward} (\ho pistos oikonomos ho phronimos\). The faithful steward, the wise one. A steward is house manager (\oikos, nem“\, to manage). Each man is a steward in his own responsibilities. {Household} (\therapeias\). Literally, service from \therapeu“\. medical service as in strkjv@Luke:9:11|, by metonymy household (a body of those domestics who serve). {Their portion of food} (\to sitometrion\). Late word from \sitometre“\ (Genesis:47:12|) for the Attic \ton siton metre“\, to measure the food, the rations. Here only in the N.T. or anywhere else till Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 158) found it in an Egyptian papyrus and then an inscription in Lycia (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 104).

rwp@Luke:12:46 @{Shall cut him asunder} (\dichotomˆsei\). An old and somewhat rare word from \dichotomos\ and that from \dicha\ and \temn“\, to cut, to cut in two. Used literally here. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:24:51|. {With the unfaithful} (\meta t“n apist“n\). Not here "the unbelieving" though that is a common meaning of \apistos\ (\a\ privative and \pistos\, from \peith“\), but the unreliable, the untrustworthy. Here strkjv@Matthew:24:51| has "with the hypocrites," the same point. The parallel with strkjv@Matthew:24:43-51| ends here. strkjv@Matthew:24:51| adds the saying about the wailing and the gnashing of teeth. Clearly there Luke places the parable of the wise steward in this context while Matthew has it in the great eschatological discourse. Once again we must either think that Jesus repeated the parable or that one of the writers has misplaced it. Luke alone preserves what he gives in verses 47,48|.

rwp@Luke:15:29 @{Do I serve thee} (\douleu“ soi\). Progressive present tense of this old verb from \doulos\ (slave) which the elder son uses to picture his virtual slavery in staying at home and perhaps with longings to follow the younger son (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 879). {Transgressed} (\parˆlthon\). Second aorist active indicative of \parerchomai\, to pass by. Not even once (aorist) in contrast with so many years of service (linear present). {A kid} (\eriphon\). Some MSS. have \eriphion\, diminutive, a little kid. Songs:margin of Westcott and Hort. B has it also in strkjv@Matthew:25:32|, the only other N.T. passage where the word occurs. {That I might make merry} (\hina euphranth“\). Final clause, first aorist passive subjunctive of the same verb used in verses 23,25|.

rwp@Luke:16:27 @{That you send him} (\hina pempsˆis auton\). As if he had not had a fair warning and opportunity. The Roman Catholics probably justify prayer to saints from this petition from the Rich Man to Abraham, but both are in Hades (the other world). It is to be observed besides, that Abraham makes no effort to communicate with the five brothers. But heavenly recognition is clearly assumed. Dante has a famous description of his visit to the damned (_Purg_. iii, 114).

rwp@Luke:17:6 @{If ye have} (\ei echete\). Condition of the first class, assumed to be true. {Ye would say} (\elegete an\). Imperfect active with \an\ and so a conclusion (apodosis) of the second class, determined as unfulfilled, a mixed condition therefore. {Sycamine tree} (\sukamin“i\). At the present time both the black mulberry (sycamine) and the white mulberry (sycamore) exist in Palestine. Luke alone in the N.T. uses either word, the sycamine here, the sycamore in strkjv@19:4|. The distinction is not observed in the LXX, but it is observed in the late Greek medical writers for both trees have medicinal properties. Hence it may be assumed that Luke, as a physician, makes the distinction. Both trees differ from the English sycamore. In strkjv@Matthew:17:20| we have "mountain" in place of "sycamine tree." {Be thou rooted up} (\ekriz“thˆti\). First aorist passive imperative as is \phuteuthˆti\. {Would have obeyed} (\hupˆkousen an\). First aorist active indicative with \an\, apodosis of a second-class condition (note aorist tense here, imperfect \elegete\).

rwp@Luke:17:33 @{Shall preserve it} (\z“ogonˆsei autˆn\). Or save it alive. Here only in the N.T. except strkjv@1Timothy:6:13; strkjv@Acts:7:19|. It is a late word and common in medical writers, to bring forth alive (\z“os, gen“\) and here to keep alive.

rwp@Luke:18:18 @{Ruler} (\arch“n\). Not in strkjv@Mark:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:19:16|. {What shall I do to inherit?} (\Ti poiˆsas klˆronomˆs“;\). "By doing what shall I inherit?" Aorist active participle and future active indicative. Precisely the same question is asked by the lawyer in strkjv@Luke:10:25|. This young man probably thought that by some one act he could obtain eternal life. He was ready to make a large expenditure for it. {Good} (\agathon\). See on ¯Mark:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:19:16| for discussion of this adjective for absolute goodness. Plummer observes that no Jewish rabbi was called "good" in direct address. The question of Jesus will show whether it was merely fulsome flattery on the part of the young man or whether he really put Jesus on a par with God. He must at any rate define his attitude towards Christ.

rwp@Luke:22:19 @{Which is given for you} (\to huper hum“n didomenon\). Some MSS. omit these verses though probably genuine. The correct text in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:24| has "which is for you," not "which is broken for you." It is curious to find the word "broken" here preserved and justified so often, even by Easton in his commentary on Luke, p. 320. {In remembrance of me} (\eis tˆn emˆn anamnˆsin\). Objective use of the possessive pronoun \emˆn\, not the subjective. {This do} (\touto poieite\). Present active indicative, repetition, keep on doing this.

rwp@Info_Mark @ THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION One of the clearest results of modern critical study of the Gospels is the early date of Mark's Gospel. Precisely how early is not definitely known, but there are leading scholars who hold that A.D. 50 is quite probable. My own views are given in detail in my _Studies in Mark's Gospel_. Zahn still argues that the Gospel according to Matthew is earlier than that according to Mark, but the arguments are against him. The framework of Mark's Gospel lies behind both Matthew and Luke and nearly all of it is used by one or the other. One may satisfy himself on this point by careful use of a Harmony of the Gospels in Greek or English. Whether Mark made use of Q (_Logia of Jesus_) or not is not yet shown, though it is possible. But Mark and Q constitute the two oldest known sources of our Matthew and Luke. We have much of Q preserved in the Non-Markan portions of both Matthew and Luke, though the document itself has disappeared. But Mark's work has remained in spite of its exhaustive use by Matthew and Luke, all except the disputed close. For this preservation we are all grateful. Streeter (_The Four Gospels_) has emphasized the local use of texts in preserving portions of the New Testament. If Mark wrote in Rome, as is quite possible, his book was looked upon as the Roman Gospel and had a powerful environment in which to take root. It has distinctive merits of its own that helped to keep it in use. It is mainly narrative and the style is direct and simple with many vivid touches, like the historical present of an eyewitness. The early writers all agree that Mark was the interpreter for Simon Peter with whom he was at one time, according to Peter's own statement, either in Babylon or Rome (1Peter:5:13|).

rwp@Info_Mark @ The closing passage in the Textus Receptus, strkjv@Mark:16:9-20|, is not found in the oldest Greek Manuscripts, Aleph and B, and is probably not genuine. A discussion of the evidence will appear at the proper place. Swete points out that Mark deals with two great themes, the Ministry in Galilee (Chs. 1 to 9) and the Last Week in Jerusalem (11 to 16) with a brief sketch of the period of withdrawal from Galilee (ch. 10). The first fourteen verses are introductory as strkjv@Mark:16:9-20| is an appendix. The Gospel of Mark pictures Christ in action. There is a minimum of discourse and a maximum of deed. And yet the same essential pictures of Christ appear here as in the Logia, in Matthew, in Luke, in John, in Paul, in Peter, in Hebrews as is shown in my _The Christ of the Logia_. The cry of the critics to get back to the Synoptics and away from Paul and John has ceased since it is plain that the Jesus of Mark is the same as the Christ of Paul. There is a different shading in the pictures, but the same picture, Son of God and Son of Man, Lord of life and death, worker of miracles and Saviour from sin. This Gospel is the one for children to read first and is the one that we should use to lay the foundation for our picture of Christ. In my _Harmony of the Gospels_ I have placed Mark first in the framework since Matthew, Luke, and John all follow in broad outline his plan with additions and supplemental material. Mark's Gospel throbs with life and bristles with vivid details. We see with Peter's eyes and catch almost the very look and gesture of Jesus as he moved among men in his work of healing men's bodies and saving men's souls. strkjv@Mark:1:1 @{The beginning} (\archˆ\). There is no article in the Greek. It is possible that the phrase served as a heading or title for the paragraph about the ministry of the Baptist or as the superscription for the whole Gospel (Bruce) placed either by Mark or a scribe. And then the Gospel of Jesus Christ means the Message about Jesus Christ (objective genitive). The word Gospel here (\euaggelion\) comes close to meaning the record itself as told by Mark. Swete notes that each writer has a different starting point (\archˆ\). Mark, as the earliest form of the evangelic tradition, begins with the work of the Baptist, Matthew with the ancestry and birth of the Messiah, Luke with the birth of the Baptist, John with the Preincarnate Logos, Paul with the foundation of each of the churches (Phillipians:4:15|). {The Son of God} (\Huiou theou\). Aleph 28, 255 omit these words, but B, D, L, have them and the great mass of the manuscripts have \huiou tou theou\. If this is a heading added to what Mark wrote, the heading may have existed early in two forms, one with, one without "Son of God." If Mark wrote the words, there is no reason to doubt the genuineness since he uses the phrase elsewhere.

rwp@Mark:1:13 @{With the wild beasts} (\meta t“u thˆri“n\). Mark does not give the narrative of the three temptations in Matthew and Luke (apparently from the Logia and originally, of course, from Jesus himself). But Mark adds this little touch about the wild beasts in the wilderness. It was the haunt at night of the wolf, the boar, the hyena, the jackal, the leopard. It was lonely and depressing in its isolation and even dangerous. Swete notes that in strkjv@Psalms:90:13| the promise of victory over the wild beasts comes immediately after that of angelic guardianship cited by Satan in strkjv@Matthew:4:6|. The angels did come and minister (\diˆkonoun\), imperfect tense, kept it up till he was cheered and strengthened. Dr. Tristram observes that some Abyssinian Christians are in the habit of coming to the Quarantania during Lent and fasting forty days on the summit amid the ruins of its ancient cells and chapels where they suppose Jesus was tempted. But we are all tempted of the devil in the city even worse than in the desert.

rwp@Mark:1:14 @{Jesus came into Galilee} (\ˆlthen ho Iˆsous eis tˆn Galilaian\). Here Mark begins the narrative of the active ministry of Jesus and he is followed by Matthew and Luke. Mark undoubtedly follows the preaching of Peter. But for the Fourth Gospel we should not know of the year of work in various parts of the land (Perea, Galilee, Judea, Samaria) preceding the Galilean ministry. John supplements the Synoptic Gospels at this point as often. The arrest of John had much to do with the departure of Jesus from Judea to Galilee (John:4:1-4|). {Preaching the gospel of God} (\kˆruss“n to euaggelion tou theou\). It is the subjective genitive, the gospel that comes from God. Swete observes that repentance (\metanoia\) is the keynote in the message of the Baptist as gospel (\euaggelion\) is with Jesus. But Jesus took the same line as John and proclaimed both repentance and the arrival of the kingdom of God. Mark adds to Matthew's report the words "the time is fulfilled" (\peplˆr“tai ho kairos\). It is a significant fact that John looks backward to the promise of the coming of the Messiah and signalizes the fulfilment as near at hand (perfect passive indicative). It is like Paul's fulness of time (\plˆr“ma tou chronou\) in strkjv@Galatians:4:4| and fulness of the times (\plˆr“ma ton kair“n\) in strkjv@Ephesians:1:10| when he employs the word \kairos\, opportunity or crisis as here in Mark rather than the more general term \chronos\. Mark adds here also: "and believe in the gospel" (\kai pisteuete en t“i euaggeli“i\). Both repent and believe in the gospel. Usually faith in Jesus (or God) is expected as in John strkjv@14:1|. But this crisis called for faith in the message of Jesus that the Messiah had come. He did not use here the term Messiah, for it had come to have political connotations that made its use at present unwise. But the kingdom of God had arrived with the presence of the King. It does make a difference what one believes. Belief or disbelief in the message of Jesus made a sharp cleavage in those who heard him. "Faith in the message was the first step; a creed of some kind lies at the basis of confidence in the Person of Christ, and the occurrence of the phrase \pistuete en t“i euaggeli“i\ in the oldest record of the teaching of our Lord is a valuable witness to this fact" (Swete).

rwp@Mark:2:3 @{And they come} (\kai erchontai\). Fine illustration of Mark's vivid dramatic historical present preserved by Luke strkjv@Luke:5:18|, but not by strkjv@Matthew:9:2| (imperfect). {Borne by four} (\airomenon hupo tessar“n\). Another picturesque Markan detail not in the others.

rwp@Mark:2:27 @{For man} (\dia ton anthr“pon\). Mark alone has this profound saying which subordinates the sabbath to man's real welfare (mankind, observe, generic article with \anthr“pos\, class from class). Man was not made for the sabbath as the rabbis seemed to think with all their petty rules about eating an egg laid on the sabbath or looking in the glass, _et cetera_. See 2Macc. strkjv@5:19 and _Mechilta_ on strkjv@Exodus:31:13|: "The sabbath is delivered unto you and ye are not delivered unto the sabbath." Christianity has had to fight this same battle about institutionalism. The church itself is for man, not man for the church.

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:5:35 @{While he yet spake} (\Eti autou lalountos\). Genitive absolute. Another vivid touch in Mark and strkjv@Luke:8:49|. The phrase is in strkjv@Genesis:29:9|. Nowhere does Mark preserve better the lifelike traits of an eyewitness like Peter than in these incidents in chapter 5. The arrival of the messengers from Jairus was opportune for the woman just healed of the issue of blood (\en husei haimatos\) for it diverted attention from her. Now the ruler's daughter has died (\apethane\). {Why troublest thou the master any further?} (\Ti eti skulleis ton didaskalon;\). It was all over, so they felt. Jesus had raised from the dead the son of the widow of Nain (Luke:7:11-17|), but people in general did not expect him to raise the dead. The word \skull“\, from \skulon\ (_skin, pelt, spoils_), means to skin, to flay, in Aeschylus. Then it comes to mean to vex, annoy, distress as in strkjv@Matthew:9:36|, which see. The middle is common in the papyri for bother, worry, as in strkjv@Luke:7:6|. There was no further use in troubling the Teacher about the girl.

rwp@Mark:6:3 @{Is not this the carpenter?} (\Ouch houtos estin ho tekt“n;\). strkjv@Matthew:13:55| calls him "the carpenter's son" (\ho tou tektonos huios\). He was both. Evidently since Joseph's death he had carried on the business and was "the carpenter" of Nazareth. The word \tekt“n\ comes from \tekein, tikt“\, to beget, create, like \technˆ\ (craft, art). It is a very old word, from Homer down. It was originally applied to the worker in wood or builder with wood like our carpenter. Then it was used of any artisan or craftsman in metal, or in stone as well as in wood and even of sculpture. It is certain that Jesus worked in wood. Justin Martyr speaks of ploughs, yokes, et cetera, made by Jesus. He may also have worked in stone and may even have helped build some of the stone synagogues in Galilee like that in Capernaum. But in Nazareth the people knew him, his family (no mention of Joseph), and his trade and discounted all that they now saw with their own eyes and heard with their own ears. This word carpenter "throws the only flash which falls on the continuous tenor of the first thirty years from infancy to manhood, of the life of Christ" (Farrar). That is an exaggeration for we have strkjv@Luke:2:41-50| and "as his custom was" (Luke:4:16|), to go no further. But we are grateful for Mark's realistic use of \tekt“n\ here. {And they were offended in him} (\kai eskandalizonto en aut“i\). Songs:exactly strkjv@Matthew:13:56|, {were made to stumble in him}, trapped like game by the \skandalon\ because they could not explain him, having been so recently one of them. "The Nazarenes found their stumbling block in the person or circumstances of Jesus. He became--\petra skandalou\ (1Peter:2:7,8; strkjv@Romans:9:33|) to those who disbelieved" (Swete). Both Mark and strkjv@Matthew:13:57|, which see, preserve the retort of Jesus with the quotation of the current proverb about a prophet's lack of honour in his own country. strkjv@John:4:44| quoted it from Jesus on his return to Galilee long before this. It is to be noted that Jesus here makes a definite claim to being a prophet (\prophˆtˆs\, forspeaker for God), a seer. He was much more than this as he had already claimed to be Messiah (John:4:26; strkjv@Luke:4:21|), the Son of man with power of God (Mark:1:10; strkjv@Matthew:9:6; strkjv@Luke:5:24|), the Son of God (John:5:22|). They stumble at Jesus today as the townspeople of Nazareth did. {In his own house} (\en tˆi oikiƒi autou\). Also in strkjv@Matthew:13:57|. This was the saddest part of it all, that his own brothers in his own home disbelieved his Messianic claims (John:7:5|). This puzzle was the greatest of all.

rwp@Mark:6:7 @{By two and two} (\duo duo\). This repetition of the numeral instead of the use of \ana duo\ or \kata duo\ is usually called a Hebraism. The Hebrew does have this idiom, but it appears in Aeschylus and Sophocles, in the vernacular _Koin‚_ (Oxyrhynchus Papyri No. 121), in Byzantine Greek, and in modern Greek (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 122f.). Mark preserves the vernacular _Koin‚_ better than the other Gospels and this detail suits his vivid style. The six pairs of apostles could thus cover Galilee in six different directions. Mark notes that he "began to send them forth" (\ˆrxato autous apostellein\). Aorist tense and present infinitive. This may refer simply to this particular occasion in Mark's picturesque way. But the imperfect tense \edidou\ means he kept on giving them all through the tour, a continuous power (authority) over unclean spirits singled out by Mark as representing "all manner of diseases and all manner of sickness" (Matthew:10:1|), "to cure diseases" (\iasthai\, strkjv@Luke:9:1|), healing power. They were to preach and to heal (Luke:9:1; strkjv@Matthew:10:7|). Mark does not mention preaching as a definite part of the commission to the twelve on this their first preaching tour, but he does state that they did preach (6:12|). They were to be missioners or missionaries (\apostellein\) in harmony with their office (\apostoloi\).

rwp@Mark:6:8 @{Save a staff only} (\ei mˆ rabdon monon\). Every traveller and pilgrim carried his staff. Bruce thinks that Mark has here preserved the meaning of Jesus more clearly than strkjv@Matthew:10:10| (nor staff) and strkjv@Luke:9:3| (neither staff). This discrepancy has given trouble to commentators. Grotius suggests no second staff for Matthew and Luke. Swete considers that Matthew and Luke report "an early exaggeration of the sternness of the command." "Without even a staff is the _ne plus ultra_ of austere simplicity, and self-denial. Men who carry out the spirit of these precepts will not labour in vain" (Bruce).

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

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

rwp@Mark:7:33 @{Took him aside} (\apolabomenos auton\). The secrecy here observed was partly to avoid excitement and partly to get the attention of the deaf and dumb demoniac. He could not hear what Jesus said. Songs:Jesus put his fingers into his ears, spat, and touched his tongue. There was, of course, no virtue in the spittle and it is not clear why Jesus used it. Saliva was by some regarded as remedial and was used by exorcists in their incantations. Whether this was a concession to the man's denseness one does not know. But it all showed the poor man that Jesus healed him in his own way.

rwp@Mark:7:34 @{Ephphatha} (\dianoichthˆti\, be opened). Another one of Mark's Aramaic words preserved and transliterated and then translated into Greek. "Be thou unbarred" (_Braid Scots_). Jesus sighed (\estenaxen\) as he looked up into heaven and spoke the word \ephphatha\. Somehow he felt a nervous strain in this complex case (deaf, dumb, demoniac) that we may not quite comprehend.

rwp@Mark:8:2 @{Now three days} (\ˆdˆ hˆmerai treis\). This text preserves a curious parenthetic nominative of time (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 460). See on ¯Matthew:15:32|.

rwp@Mark:8:7 @{A few small fishes} (\ichthudia oliga\). Mark mentions them last as if they were served after the food, but not so strkjv@Matthew:15:34f|.

rwp@Mark:8:23 @{Brought him out of the village} (\exˆnegken auton ex“ tˆs k“mˆs\). It had been a village, but Philip had enlarged it and made it a town or city (\polis\), though still called a village (verses 23,26|). As in the case of the deaf and dumb demoniac given also alone by Mark (Mark:7:31-37|), so here Jesus observes the utmost secrecy in performing the miracle for reasons not given by Mark. It was the season of retirement and Jesus is making the fourth withdrawal from Galilee. That fact may explain it. The various touches here are of interest also. Jesus led him out by the hand, put spittle on his eyes (using the poetical and _Koin‚_ papyri word \ommata\ instead of the usual \opthalmous\), and laid his hands upon him, perhaps all this to help the man's faith.

rwp@Mark:8:32 @{Spake the saying openly} (\parrˆsiƒi ton logon elalei\). He held back nothing, told it all (\pƒn\, all, \rˆsia\, from \eipon\, say), without reserve, to all of them. Imperfect tense \elalei\ shows that Jesus did it repeatedly. Mark alone gives this item. Mark does not give the great eulogy of Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:17,19| after his confession (Mark:8:29; strkjv@Matthew:16:16; strkjv@Luke:9:20|), but he does tell the stinging rebuke given Peter by Jesus on this occasion. See discussion on ¯Matthew:16:21,26|.

rwp@Mark:8:33 @{He turning about and seeing his disciples} (\epistrapheis kai id“n tous mathˆtƒs autou\). Peter had called Jesus off to himself (\proskalesamenos\), but Jesus quickly wheeled round on Peter (\epistrapheis\, only \strapheis\ in Matthew). In doing that the other disciples were in plain view also (this touch only in Mark). Hence Jesus rebukes Peter in the full presence of the whole group. Peter no doubt felt that it was his duty as a leader of the Twelve to remonstrate with the Master for this pessimistic utterance (Swete). It is even possible that the others shared Peter's views and were watching the effect of his daring rebuke of Jesus. It was more than mere officiousness on the part of Peter. He had not risen above the level of ordinary men and deserves the name of Satan whose role he was now acting. It was withering, but it was needed. The temptation of the devil on the mountain was here offered by Peter. It was Satan over again. See on ¯Matthew:16:23|.

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

rwp@Mark:9:23 @{If thou canst} (\to ei dunˆi\). The Greek has a neat idiom not preserved in the English translation. The article takes up the very words of the man and puts the clause in the accusative case of general reference. "As to the 'if thou canst,' all things can (\dunata\) to the one who believes." The word for "possible" is \dunata\, the same root as \dunˆi\ (canst). This quick turn challenges the father's faith. On this use of the Greek article see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 766.

rwp@Mark:10:39 @See on ¯Matthew:20:23-28| for discussion on these memorable verses (39-45|) identical in both Matthew and Mark. In particular in verse 45| note the language of Jesus concerning his death as "a ransom for many" (\lutron anti poll“n\), words of the Master that were not understood by the apostles when spoken by Jesus and which have been preserved for us by Peter through Mark. Some today seek to empty these words of all real meaning as if Jesus could not have or hold such a conception concerning his death for sinners.

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

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

rwp@Mark:13:1 @{Master, behold, what manner of stones and what manner of buildings} (\didaskale, ide potapoi lithoi kai potapai oikodomai\). strkjv@Matthew:24:1| and strkjv@Luke:21:5| tell of the fact of the comment, but Mark alone gives the precise words. Perhaps Peter himself (Swete) was the one who sought thus by a pleasant platitude to divert the Teacher's attention from the serious topics of recent hours in the temple. It was not a new observation, but the merest commonplace might serve at this crisis. Josephus (_Ant_. xv. II, 3) speaks of the great size of these stones and the beauty of the buildings. Some of these stones at the southeastern and southwestern angles survive today and measure from twenty to forty feet long and weigh a hundred tons. Jesus had, of course, often observed them.

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

rwp@Mark:14:1 @{After two days} (\meta duo hˆmeras\). This was Tuesday evening as we count time (beginning of the Jewish Wednesday). In strkjv@Matthew:26:2| Jesus is reported as naming this same date which would put it our Thursday evening, beginning of the Jewish Friday. The Gospel of John mentions five items that superficially considered seem to contradict this definite date in Mark and Matthew, but which are really in harmony with them. See discussion on strkjv@Matthew:26:17| and my {Harmony of the Gospels}, pp. 279 to 284. Mark calls it here the feast of "the passover and the unleavened bread," both names covering the eight days. Sometimes "passover" is applied to only the first day, sometimes to the whole period. No sharp distinction in usage was observed. {Sought} (\ezˆtoun\). Imperfect tense. They were still at it, though prevented so far.

rwp@Mark:14:5 @{Above three hundred pence} (\epan“ dˆnari“n triakosi“n\). Matthew has "for much" while strkjv@John:12:5| has "for three hundred pence." The use of "far above" may be a detail from Peter's memory of Judas' objection whose name in this connection is preserved in strkjv@John:12:4|. {And they murmured against her} (\kai enebrim“nto autˆi\). Imperfect tense of this striking word used of the snorting of horses and seen already in strkjv@Mark:1:43; strkjv@11:38|. It occurs in the LXX in the sense of anger as here (Daniel:11:30|). Judas made the complaint against Mary of Bethany, but all the apostles joined in the chorus of criticism of the wasteful extravagance.

rwp@Mark:14:15 @{And he} (\kai autos\). Emphatic, and he himself. {A large upper room} (\anagaion mega\). Anything above ground (\gˆ\), and particularly upstairs as here. Here and in strkjv@Luke:22:12|. Example in Xenophon. Jesus wishes to observe this last feast with his disciples alone, not with others as was often done. Evidently this friend of Jesus was a man who would understand. {Furnished} (\estr“menon\). Perfect passive participle of \str“nnumi\, state of readiness. "Strewed with carpets, and with couches properly spread" (Vincent).

rwp@Mark:14:31 @{Exceeding vehemently} (\ekperiss“s\). This strong compounded adverb only in Mark and probably preserves Peter's own statement of the remark. About the boast of Peter see on ¯Matthew:26:35|.

rwp@Mark:14:51 @{A certain young man} (\neaniskos tis\). This incident alone in Mark. It is usually supposed that Mark himself, son of Mary (Acts:12:12|) in whose house they probably had observed the passover meal, had followed Jesus and the apostles to the Garden. It is a lifelike touch quite in keeping with such a situation. Here after the arrest he was following with Jesus (\sunˆkolouthei aut“i\, imperfect tense). Note the vivid dramatic present \kratousin\ (they seize him).

rwp@Mark:14:58 @{Made with hands} (\cheiropoiˆton\). In Mark alone. An old Greek word. The negative form \acheiropoiˆton\ here occurs elsewhere only in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1; strkjv@Colossians:2:11|. In strkjv@Hebrews:9:11| the negative \ou\ is used with the positive form. It is possible that a real \logion\ of Jesus underlies the perversion of it here. Mark and Matthew do not quote the witnesses precisely alike. Perhaps they quoted Jesus differently and therein is shown part of the disagreement, for Mark adds verse 59| (not in Matthew). "And not even so did their witness agree together," repeating the point of verse 57|. Swete observes that Jesus, as a matter of fact, did do what he is quoted as saying in Mark: "He said what the event has proved to be true; His death destroyed the old order, and His resurrection created the new." But these witnesses did not mean that by what they said. The only saying of Jesus at all like this preserved to us is that in strkjv@John:2:19|, when he referred not to the temple in Jerusalem, but to the temple of his body, though no one understood it at the time.

rwp@Mark:14:71 @{Curse} (\anathematizein\). Our word _anathema_ (\ana, thema\, an offering, then something devoted or a curse). Finally the two meanings were distinguished by \anathˆma\ for offering and \anathema\ for curse. Deissmann has found examples at Megara of \anathema\ in the sense of curse. Hence the distinction observed in the N.T. was already in the _Koin‚_. strkjv@Matthew:26:74| has \katathematizein\, which is a \hapax legomenon\ in the N.T., though common in the LXX. This word has the notion of calling down curses on one's self if the thing is not true.

rwp@Info_Matthew @ The Gospel of Matthew comes first in the New Testament, though it is not so in all the Greek manuscripts. Because of its position it is the book most widely read in the New Testament and has exerted the greatest influence on the world. The book deserves this influence though it is later in date than Mark, not so beautiful as Luke, nor so profound as John. Yet it is a wonderful book and gives a just and adequate portraiture of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. The author probably wrote primarily to persuade Jews that Jesus is the fulfilment of their Messianic hopes as pictured in the Old Testament. It is thus a proper introduction to the New Testament story in comparison with the Old Testament prophecy.

rwp@Info_Matthew @ THE TITLE The Textus Receptus has "The Holy Gospel according to Matthew" (\to kata Matthaion hagion Euaggelion\), though the Elzevirs omit "holy," not agreeing here with Stephanus, Griesbach, and Scholz. Only minuscules (cursive Greek manuscripts) and all late have the adjective. Other minuscules and nine uncials including W (the Washington Codex of the fifth century), C of the fifth century (the palimpsest manuscript) and Delta of the ninth together with most Latin manuscripts have simply "Gospel according to Matthew" (\Euaggelion kata Matthaion\). But Aleph and B the two oldest and best Greek uncials of the fourth century have only "According to Matthew" (\Kata Maththaion\) (note double th) and the Greek uncial D of the fifth or sixth century follows Aleph and B as do some of the earliest Old Latin manuscripts and the Curetonian Syriac. It is clear, therefore, that the earliest form of the title was simply "According to Matthew." It may be doubted if Matthew (or the author, if not Matthew) had any title at all. The use of "according to" makes it plain that the meaning is not "the Gospel of Matthew," but the Gospel as given by Matthew, \secundum Matthaeum\, to distinguish the report by Matthew from that by Mark, by Luke, by John. Least of all is there any authority in the manuscripts for saying "Saint Matthew," a Roman Catholic practice observed by some Protestants.

rwp@Matthew:1:2 @{Begat} (\egennˆsen\). This word comes, like some of the early chapters of Genesis, with regularity through verse 16, until the birth of Jesus is reached when there is a sudden change. The word itself does not always mean immediate parentage, but merely direct descent. In verse 16| we have "Joseph the husband of Mary, from whom was begotten Jesus who is called Christ" (\ton I“sˆph ton andra Marias ex hˆs egennˆthˆ Iˆsous ho legomenos Christos\). The article occurs here each time with the object of "begat," but not with the subject of the verb to distinguish sharply the proper names. In the case of David the King (1:6|) and Joseph the husband of Mary (1:16|) the article is repeated. The mention of the brethren of Judah (1:2|) and of both Phares and Zara (1:3|) may show that Matthew was not copying a family pedigree but making his own table. All the Greek manuscripts give verse 16| as above save the Ferrar Group of minuscules which are supported by the Sinaitic Syriac Version. Because of this fact Von Soden, whose text Moffatt translates, deliberately prints his text "_Jacob begat Jesus_" (\I“sˆph de egennˆsen Iˆsoun\). But the Sinaitic Syriac gives the Virgin Birth of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:1:18-25|. Hence it is clear that "begat" here in strkjv@1:16| must merely mean line of descent or the text has been tampered with in order to get rid of the Virgin Birth idea, but it was left untouched in strkjv@1:18-25|. I have a full discussion of the problem in chapter XIV of _Studies in the Text of the New Testament_. The evidence as it now stands does not justify changing the text of the Greek uncials to suit the Sinaitic Syriac. The Virgin Birth of Jesus remains in strkjv@1:16|. The spelling of these Hebrew names in English is usually according to the Hebrew form, not the Greek. In the Greek itself the Hebrew spelling is often observed in violation of the Greek rules for the ending of words with no consonants save _n,r,s_. But the list is not spelled consistently in the Greek, now like the Hebrew as in Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, now like the Greek as in Judah, Solomon, Hezekiah, though the Hebrew style prevails.

rwp@Matthew:4:10 @{Get thee hence, Satan} (\Hupage, Satanƒ\). The words "behind me" (\opis“ mou\) belong to strkjv@Matthew:16:23|, not here. "Begone" Christ says to Satan. This temptation is the limit of diabolical suggestion and argues for the logical order in Matthew. "Satan" means the adversary and Christ so terms the devil here. The third time Jesus quotes Deuteronomy, this time strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:13|, and repels the infamous suggestion by Scripture quotation. The words "him alone thou shalt serve" need be recalled today. Jesus will warn men against trying to serve God and mammon (Matthew:6:24|). The devil as the lord of the evil world constantly tries to win men to the service of the world and God. This is his chief camouflage for destroying a preacher's power for God. The word here in strkjv@Matthew:4:10| for serve is \latreuseis\ from \latris\ a hired servant, one who works for hire, then render worship.

rwp@Matthew:5:11 @{Falsely, for my sake} (\pseudomenoi heneken emou\). Codex Bezae changes the order of these last Beatitudes, but that is immaterial. What does matter is that the bad things said of Christ's followers shall be untrue and that they are slandered for Christ's sake. Both things must be true before one can wear a martyr's crown and receive the great reward (\misthos\) in heaven. No prize awaits one there who deserves all the evil said of him and done to him here.

rwp@Matthew:6:24 @{No man can serve two masters} (\oudeis dunatai dusi kuriois douleuein\). Many try it, but failure awaits them all. Men even try "to be slaves to God and mammon" (\The“i douleuein kai mam“nƒi\). Mammon is a Chaldee, Syriac, and Punic word like _Plutus_ for the money-god (or devil). The slave of mammon will obey mammon while pretending to obey God. The United States has had a terrible revelation of the power of the money-god in public life in the Sinclair-Fall-Teapot-Air-Dome-Oil case. When the guide is blind and leads the blind, both fall into the ditch. The man who cannot tell road from ditch sees falsely as Ruskin shows in _Modern Painters_. He will hold to one (\henos anthexetai\). The word means to line up face to face (\anti\) with one man and so against the other.

rwp@Matthew:7:29 @{And not as their scribes} (\kai ouch h“s hoi grammateis aut“n\). They had heard many sermons before from the regular rabbis in the synagogues. We have specimens of these discourses preserved in the Mishna and Gemara, the Jewish Talmud when both were completed, the driest, dullest collection of disjounted comments upon every conceivable problem in the history of mankind. The scribes quoted the rabbis before them and were afraid to express an idea without bolstering it up by some predecessor. Jesus spoke with the authority of truth, the reality and freshness of the morning light, and the power of God's Spirit. This sermon which made such a profound impression ended with the tragedy of the fall of the house on the sand like the crash of a giant oak in the forest. There was no smoothing over the outcome.

rwp@Matthew:8:7 @{I will come and heal him} (\eg“ elth“n therapeus“ auton\). Future indicative, not deliberative subjunctive in question (McNeile). The word here for heal (\therapeus“\) means first to serve, give medical attention, then cure, restore to health. The centurion uses the more definite word for healing (\iathˆsetai\ strkjv@8:8|) as Matthew does in strkjv@8:13| (\iathˆ\). Luke (Luke:9:11|), like a physician, says that Jesus healed (\iato\) those in need of treatment (\therapeias\), but the distinction is not always observed. In strkjv@Acts:28:8| Luke uses \iasato\ of the miraculous healings in Malta by Paul while he employs \etherapeuonto\ (Acts:28:9|) apparently of the practice of Luke the physician (so W. M. Ramsay). Matthew represents the centurion himself as speaking to Jesus while Luke has it that two committees from the centurion brought the messages, apparently a more detailed narrative. What one does through others he does himself as Pilate "scourged Jesus" (had him scourged).

rwp@Matthew:11:25 @{At that season Jesus answered and said} (\en ekein“i t“i kair“i apokritheis eipen\). Spoke to his Father in audible voice. The time and place we do not know. But here we catch a glimpse of Jesus in one of his moods of worship. "It is usual to call this golden utterance a prayer, but it is at once prayer, praise, and self-communing in a devout spirit" (Bruce). Critics are disturbed because this passage from the Logia of Jesus or Q of Synoptic criticism (Matthew:11:25-30; strkjv@Luke:10:21-24|) is so manifestly Johannine in spirit and very language, "the Father" (\ho patˆr\), "the son" (\ho huios\), whereas the Fourth Gospel was not written till the close of the first century and the Logia was written before the Synoptic Gospels. The only satisfying explanation lies in the fact that Jesus did have this strain of teaching that is preserved in John's Gospel. Here he is in precisely the same mood of elevated communion with the Father that we have reflected in John 14 to 17. Even Harnack is disposed to accept this Logion as a genuine saying of Jesus. The word "thank" (\homologoumai\) is better rendered "praise" (Moffatt). Jesus praises the Father "not that the \sophoi\ were ignorant, but that the \nˆpioi\ knew" (McNeile).

rwp@Matthew:13:1 @{On that day} (\en tˆi hˆmerai ekeinˆi\). Songs:this group of parables is placed by Matthew on the same day as the blasphemous accusation and the visit of the mother of Jesus. It is called "the Busy Day," not because it was the only one, but simply that so much is told of this day that it serves as a specimen of many others filled to the full with stress and strain. {Sat by the seaside} (\ekathˆto para tˆn thalassan\). The accusative case need give no difficulty. Jesus came out of the stuffy house and took his seat (\ekathˆto\, imperfect) along the shore with the crowds stretched up and down, a picturesque scene.

rwp@Matthew:13:9 @{He that hath ears let him hear} (\ho ech“n “ta akouet“\), Songs:also in strkjv@11:15| and strkjv@13:43|. It is comforting to teachers and preachers to observe that even Jesus had to exhort people to listen and to understand his sayings, especially his parables. They will bear the closest thought and are often enigmatical.

rwp@Matthew:13:19 @{When anyone heareth} (\pantos akouontos\). Genitive absolute and present participle, "while everyone is listening and not comprehending" (\mˆ sunientos\), "not putting together" or "not grasping." Perhaps at that very moment Jesus observed a puzzled look on some faces.

rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{I will build my church} (\oikodomˆs“ mou tˆn ekklˆsian\). It is the figure of a building and he uses the word \ekklˆsian\ which occurs in the New Testament usually of a local organization, but sometimes in a more general sense. What is the sense here in which Jesus uses it? The word originally meant "assembly" (Acts:19:39|), but it came to be applied to an "unassembled assembly" as in strkjv@Acts:8:3| for the Christians persecuted by Saul from house to house. "And the name for the new Israel, \ekklˆsia\, in His mouth is not an anachronism. It is an old familiar name for the congregation of Israel found in Deut. (Deuteronomy:18:26; strkjv@23:2|) and Psalms (Psalms:22:36|), both books well known to Jesus" (Bruce). It is interesting to observe that in strkjv@Psalms:89| most of the important words employed by Jesus on this occasion occur in the LXX text. Songs:\oikodomˆs“\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:5|; \ekklˆsia\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:6|; \katischu“\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:22|; \Christos\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:39,52|; \hƒidˆs\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:49| (\ek cheiros hƒidou\). If one is puzzled over the use of "building" with the word \ekklˆsia\ it will be helpful to turn to strkjv@1Peter:2:5|. Peter, the very one to whom Jesus is here speaking, writing to the Christians in the five Roman provinces in Asia (1Peter:1:1|), says: "You are built a spiritual house" (\oikodomeisthe oikos pneumatikos\). It is difficult to resist the impression that Peter recalls the words of Jesus to him on this memorable occasion. Further on (1Peter:2:9|) he speaks of them as an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, showing beyond controversy that Peter's use of building a spiritual house is general, not local. This is undoubtedly the picture in the mind of Christ here in strkjv@16:18|. It is a great spiritual house, Christ's Israel, not the Jewish nation, which he describes. What is the rock on which Christ will build his vast temple? Not on Peter alone or mainly or primarily. Peter by his confession was furnished with the illustration for the rock on which His church will rest. It is the same kind of faith that Peter has just confessed. The perpetuity of this church general is guaranteed.

rwp@Matthew:16:21 @{From that time began} (\apo tote ˆrxato\). It was a suitable time for the disclosure of the greatest secret of his death. It is now just a little over six months before the cross. They must know it now to be ready then. The great confession of Peter made this seem an appropriate time. He will repeat the warnings (17:22f.| with mention of betrayal; strkjv@20:17-19| with the cross) which he now "began." Songs:the necessity (\dei\, must) of his suffering death at the hands of the Jerusalem ecclesiastics who have dogged his steps in Galilee is now plainly stated. Jesus added his resurrection "on the third day" (\tˆi tritˆi hˆmerƒi\), not "on the fourth day," please observe. Dimly the shocked disciples grasped something of what Jesus said.

rwp@Matthew:17:25 @{Jesus spake first to him} (\proephthasen auton ho Iˆsous leg“n\). Here only in the N.T. One example in a papyrus B.C. 161 (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). The old idiomatic use of \phthan“\ with the participle survives in this example of \prophthan“\ in strkjv@Matthew:17:25|, meaning to anticipate, to get before one in doing a thing. The _Koin‚_ uses the infinitive thus with \phthan“\ which has come to mean simply to arrive. Here the anticipation is made plain by the use of \pro-\. See Robertson's _Grammar_, p. 1120. The "prevent" of the Authorized Version was the original idea of _praevenire_, to go before, to anticipate. Peter felt obliged to take the matter up with Jesus. But the Master had observed what was going on and spoke to Peter first. {Toll or tribute} (\telˆ ˆ kˆnson\). Customs or wares collected by the publicans (like \phoros\, strkjv@Romans:13:7|) and also the capitation tax on persons, indirect and direct taxation. \Kˆnsos\ is the Latin _census_, a registration for the purpose of the appraisement of property like \hˆ apographˆ\ in strkjv@Luke:2:2; strkjv@Acts:5:37|. By this parable Jesus as the Son of God claims exemption from the temple tax as the temple of his Father just as royal families do not pay taxes, but get tribute from the foreigners or aliens, subjects in reality.

rwp@Matthew:18:4 @{This little child} (\to paidion touto\). This saying about humbling oneself Jesus repeated a number of times as for instance in strkjv@Matthew:23:12|. Probably Jesus pointed to the child by his side. The ninth-century story that the child was Ignatius is worthless. It is not that the child humbled himself, but that the child is humble from the nature of the case in relation to older persons. That is true, however "bumptious" the child himself may be. Bruce observes that to humble oneself is "the most difficult thing in the world for saint as for sinner."

rwp@Matthew:18:14 @{The will of your Father} (\thelˆma emprosthen\). Observe that Westcott and Hort read \mou\ here rather than \h–m“n\ after B Sahidic Coptic. Either makes good sense, though "your" carries on the picture of God's care for "each one of these little ones" (\hen t“n mikr“n tout“n\) among God's children. The use of \emprosthen\ with \thelˆma\ is a Hebraism like \emprosthen sou\ in strkjv@11:25| with \eudokia\, "before the face" of God.

rwp@Matthew:20:3 @{Standing in the marketplace idle} (\hest“tas agorƒi argous\). The market place was the place where men and masters met for bargaining. At Hamadan in Persia, Morier in _Second Journey through Persia_, as cited by Trench in his _Parables_, says: "We observed every morning, before the sun rose, that a numerous band of peasants were collected, with spades in their hands, waiting to be hired for the day to work in the surrounding fields."

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

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

rwp@Matthew:26:6 @{In the house of Simon the leper} (\en oikiƒi Sim“nos tou leprou\). Evidently a man who had been healed of his leprosy by Jesus who gave the feast in honour of Jesus. All sorts of fantastic theories have arisen about it. Some even identify this Simon with the one in strkjv@Luke:7:36ff.|, but Simon was a very common name and the details are very different. Some hold that it was Martha's house because she served (John:12:2|) and that Simon was either the father or husband of Martha, but Martha loved to serve and that proves nothing. Some identify Mary of Bethany with the sinful woman in strkjv@Luke:7| and even with Mary Magdalene, both gratuitous and groundless propositions. For the proof that Mary of Bethany, Mary Magdalene, and the sinful woman of strkjv@Luke:7| are all distinct see my _Some Minor Characters in the New Testament_. John (John:12:1|) apparently locates the feast six days before the passover, while Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (26:6|) seem to place it on the Tuesday evening (Jewish Wednesday) just two days before the passover meal. It is possible that John anticipates the date and notes the feast at Bethany at this time because he does not refer to Bethany again. If not, the order of Mark must be followed. According to the order of Mark and Matthew, this feast took place at the very time that the Sanhedrin was plotting about the death of Jesus (Mark:14:1f.|).

rwp@Matthew:26:17 @{To eat the passover} (\phagein to pascha\). There were two feasts rolled into one, the passover feast and the feast of unleavened bread. Either name was employed. Here the passover meal is meant, though in strkjv@John:18:28| it is probable that the passover feast is referred to as the passover meal (the last supper) had already been observed. There is a famous controversy on the apparent disagreement between the Synoptic Gospels and the Fourth Gospel on the date of this last passover meal. My view is that the five passages in John (John:13:1f.,27; strkjv@18:28; strkjv@19:14,31|) rightly interpreted agree with the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew:26:17,20; strkjv@Mark:14:12,17; strkjv@Luke:22:7,14|) that Jesus ate the passover meal at the regular time about 6 P.M. beginning of 15 Nisan. The passover lamb was slain on the afternoon of 14 Nisan and the meal eaten at sunset the beginning of 15 Nisan. According to this view Jesus ate the passover meal at the regular time and died on the cross the afternoon of 15 Nisan. See my _Harmony of the Gospels for Students of the Life of Christ_, pp.279-284. The question of the disciples here assumes that they are to observe the regular passover meal. Note the deliberative subjunctive (\hetoimas“men\) after \theleis\ with \hina\. For the asyndeton see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 935.

rwp@Matthew:26:18 @{To such a man} (\pros ton deina\). The only instance in the N.T. of this old Attic idiom. The papyri show it for "Mr. X" and the modern Greek keeps it. Jesus may have indicated the man's name. Mark (Mark:14:13|) and Luke (Luke:22:10|) describe him as a man bearing a pitcher of water. It may have been the home of Mary the mother of John Mark. {I keep the passover at thy house} (\pros se poi“ to pascha\). Futuristic present indicative. The use of \pros se\ for "at thy house" is neat Greek of the classic period. Evidently there was no surprise in this home at the command of Jesus. It was a gracious privilege to serve him thus.

rwp@Matthew:26:37 @{He took with him} (\paralab“n\). Taking along, by his side (\para-\), as a mark of special favour and privilege, instead of leaving this inner circle of three (Peter, James, and John) with the other eight. The eight would serve as a sort of outer guard to watch by the gate of the garden for the coming of Judas while the three would be able to share the agony of soul already upon Jesus so as at least to give him some human sympathy which he craved as he sought help from the Father in prayer. These three had been with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration and now they are with him in this supreme crisis. The grief of Christ was now severe. The word for {sore troubled} (\adˆmonein\) is of doubtful etymology. There is an adjective \adˆmos\ equal to \apodˆmos\ meaning "not at home," "away from home," like the German _unheimisch, unheimlich_. But whatever the etymology, the notion of intense discomfort is plain. The word \adˆmonein\ occurs in P.Oxy. II, 298,456 of the first century A.D. where it means "excessively concerned." See strkjv@Phillipians:2:26| where Paul uses it of Epaphroditus. Moffatt renders it here "agitated." The word occurs sometimes with \apore“\ to be at a loss as to which way to go. The _Braid Scots_ has it "sair putten-aboot." Here Matthew has also "to be sorrowful" (\lupeisthai\), but Mark (Mark:14:33|) has the startling phrase {greatly amazed and sore troubled} (\ekthambeisthai kai adˆmonein\), a "feeling of terrified surprise."

rwp@Matthew:27:29 @{A crown of thorns} (\stephanon ex akanth“n\). They wove a crown out of thorns which would grow even in the palace grounds. It is immaterial whether they were young and tender thorn bushes, as probable in the spring, or hard bushes with sharp prongs. The soldiers would not care, for they were after ridicule and mockery even if it caused pain. It was more like a victor's garland (\stephanon\) than a royal diadem (\diadˆma\), but it served the purpose. Songs:with the reed (\kalamon\), a stalk of common cane grass which served as sceptre. The soldiers were familiar with the _Ave Caesar_ and copy it in their mockery of Jesus: {Hail, King of the Jews} (\chaire, Basileu t“n Ioudai“n\). The soldiers added the insults used by the Sanhedrin (Matthew:26:67|), spitting on him and smiting him with the reed. Probably Jesus had been unbound already. At any rate the garments of mockery were removed before the _via dolorosa_ to the cross (verse 31|).

rwp@Matthew:27:46 @{My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?} (\Thee mou, thee mou, hina ti me egkatelipes;\). Matthew first transliterates the Aramaic, according to the Vatican manuscript (B), the words used by Jesus: _El“i, el“i, lema sabachthanei_; Some of the MSS. give the transliteration of these words from strkjv@Psalms:22:1| in the Hebrew (_Eli, Eli, lama Zaphthanei_). This is the only one of the seven sayings of Christ on the Cross given by Mark and Matthew. The other six occur in Luke and John. This is the only sentence of any length in Aramaic preserved in Matthew, though he has Aramaic words like amen, corban, mammon, pascha, raca, Satan, Golgotha. The so-called Gospel of Peter preserves this saying in a Docetic (Cerinthian) form: "My power, my power, thou hast forsaken me!" The Cerinthian Gnostics held that the _aeon_ Christ came on the man Jesus at his baptism and left him here on the Cross so that only the man Jesus died. Nothing from Jesus so well illustrates the depth of his suffering of soul as he felt himself regarded as sin though sinless (2Corinthians:5:21|). strkjv@John:3:16| comes to our relief here as we see the Son of God bearing the sin of the world. This cry of desolation comes at the close of the three hours of darkness.

rwp@Philippians:1:22 @{If this is the fruit of my work} (\touto moi karpos ergou\). There is no \ei\ (if) here in the Greek, but \touto\ (this) seems to be resumptive and to repeat the conditional clause just before. If so, \kai\ just after means {then} and introduces the conclusion of the condition. Otherwise \touto\ introduces the conclusion and \kai\ means {and}. {I wot not} (\ou gn“riz“\). "I know not." It seems odd to preserve the old English word "wot" here. But it is not clear that \gn“riz“\ (old causative verb from \gin“sk“\) means just to know. Elsewhere in the N.T., as in strkjv@Luke:2:15; strkjv@Romans:9:22|, it means to make known, to declare. The papyri examples mean to make known. It makes perfectly good sense to take its usual meaning here, "I do not declare what I shall choose."

rwp@Philippians:1:27 @{Let your manner of life} (\politeuesthe\). Old verb from \politˆs\, citizen, and that from \polis\, city, to be a citizen, to manage a state's affairs, to live as a citizen. Only twice in N.T., here and strkjv@Acts:23:1|. Philippi as a colony possessed Roman citizenship and Paul was proud of his own possession of this right. The Authorized Version missed the figure completely by the word "conversation" which did refer to conduct and not mere talk as now, but did not preserve the figure of citizenship. Better render, "Only do ye live as citizens." {Striving} (\sunathlountes\). Rather, "striving together" as in an athletic contest. Late and rare word (Diodorus). "The very energy of the Christian faith to produce energetic individualities" (Rainy). "Striving in concert" (Lightfoot). {For the faith} (\tˆi pistei\). For the teaching of the gospel, objective sense of \pistis\ (faith).

rwp@Philippians:2:22 @{The proof} (\tˆn dokimˆn\). "The test" as of metals (2Corinthians:2:9; strkjv@9:13|). Three times they had seen Timothy (Acts:16:13; strkjv@19:22; strkjv@20:3f.|). {With me} (\sun emoi\). Paul's delicacy of feeling made him use \sun\ rather than \emoi\ alone. Timothy did not serve Paul. {In furtherance of} (\eis\). See strkjv@Phillipians:1:5| for this use of \eis\.

rwp@Revelation:1:4 @{To the seven churches which are in Asia} (\tais hepta ekklˆsiais tais en tˆi Asiƒi\). Dative case as in a letter (Galatians:1:1|). John is writing, but the revelation is from God and Christ through an angel. It is the Roman province of Asia which included the western part of Phrygia. There were churches also at Troas (Acts:20:5ff.|) and at Colossal and Hierapolis (Colossians:1:1; strkjv@2:1; strkjv@4:13|) and possibly at Magnesia and Tralles. But these seven were the best points of communication with seven districts (Ramsay) and, besides, seven is a favorite number of completion (like the full week) in the book (1:4,12,16; strkjv@4:5; strkjv@5:1,6; strkjv@8:2; strkjv@10:3; strkjv@11:13; strkjv@12:3; strkjv@13:1; strkjv@14:6f.|). {From him which is} (\apo ho “n\). This use of the articular nominative participle of \eimi\ after \apo\ instead of the ablative is not due to ignorance or a mere slip (\lapsus pennae\), for in the next line we have the regular idiom with \apo t“n hepta pneumat“n\. It is evidently on purpose to call attention to the eternity and unchangeableness of God. Used of God in strkjv@Exodus:3:14|. {And which was} (\kai ho ˆn\). Here again there is a deliberate change from the articular participle to the relative use of \ho\ (used in place of \hos\ to preserve identity of form in the three instances like Ionic relative and since no aorist participle of \eimi\ existed). The oracle in Pausanias X. 12 has it: \Zeus ˆn, Zeus esti, Zeus essetai\ (Zeus was, Zeus is, Zeus will be). {Which is to come} (\ho erchomenos\). "The Coming One," futuristic use of the present participle instead of \ho esomenos\. See the same idiom in verse 8; strkjv@4:8| and (without \ho erchomenos\) in strkjv@11:17; strkjv@16:5|. {From the seven spirits} (\apo t“n hepta pneumat“n\). A difficult symbolic representation of the Holy Spirit here on a par with God and Christ, a conclusion borne out by the symbolic use of the seven spirits in strkjv@3:1; strkjv@4:5; strkjv@5:6| (from strkjv@Zechariah:4:2-10|). There is the one Holy Spirit with seven manifestations here to the seven churches (Swete, _The Holy Spirit in the N.T._, p. 374), unity in diversity (1Corinthians:12:4|). {Which are} (\t“n\ article Aleph A, \ha\ relative P). {Before his throne} (\en“pion tou thronou autou\). As in strkjv@4:5f|.

rwp@Revelation:4:4 @{Round about the throne} (\kuklothen tou thronou\). Here as a preposition with the genitive, though only adverb in strkjv@4:8| (only N.T. examples save Textus Rec. in strkjv@5:11|). {Four and twenty thrones} (\thronoi eikosi tessares\). Songs:P Q, but Aleph A have accusative \thronous\ (supply \eidon\ from strkjv@4:1|) and \tessares\ (late accusative in \-es\). This further circle of thrones beyond the great throne. {I saw four and twenty elders} (\eikosi tessaras presbuterous\). No \eidon\ in the text, but the accusative case calls for it. Twenty-four as a symbolic number occurs only in this book and only for these elders (4:4,10; strkjv@5:8; strkjv@11:16; strkjv@19:4|). We do not really know why this number is chosen, perhaps two elders for each tribe, perhaps the twelve tribes and the twelve apostles (Judaism and Christianity), perhaps the twenty-four courses of the sons of Aaron (1Chronicles:24:1-19|), perhaps some angelic rank (Colossians:1:16|) of which we know nothing. Cf. strkjv@Ephesians:2:6|. {Sitting} (\kathˆmenous\). Upon their thrones. {Arrayed} (\peribeblˆmenous\). Perfect passive participle of \periball“\ (to throw around). {In white garments} (\himatiois leukois\). Locative case here as in strkjv@3:5| (with \en\), though accusative in strkjv@7:9,13|. {Crowns of gold} (\stephanous chrusous\). Accusative case again like \presbuterous\ after \eidon\ (4:1|), not \idou\. In strkjv@19:14| \ech“n\ (having) is added. John uses \diadˆma\ (diadem) for the kingly crown in strkjv@12:3; strkjv@13:1; strkjv@19:12|, but it is not certain that the old distinction between \diadem\ as the kingly crown and \stephanos\ as the victor's wreath is always observed in late Greek.

rwp@Revelation:5:13 @{Every created thing} (\pƒn ktisma\). Every creature in a still wider antiphonal circle beyond the circle of angels (from \ktiz“\, for which see strkjv@1Timothy:4:4; strkjv@James:1:18|), from all the four great fields of life (in heaven, upon the earth, under the earth as in verse 3|, with on the sea \epi tˆs thalassˆs\ added). No created thing is left out. This universal chorus of praise to Christ from all created life reminds one of the profound mystical passage in strkjv@Romans:8:20-22| concerning the sympathetic agony of creation (\ktisis\) in hope of freedom from the bondage of corruption. If the trail of the serpent is on all creation, it will be ultimately thrown off. {Saying} (\legontas\). Masculine (construction according to sense, personifying the created things) if genuine, though some MSS. have \legonta\ (grammatical gender agreeing with \panta\) present active participle of \leg“\, to say. {And to the Lamb} (\kai t“i arni“i\). Dative case. Praise and worship are rendered to the Lamb precisely as to God on the throne. Note separate articles here in the doxology as in strkjv@4:11| and the addition of \to kratos\ (active power) in place of \ischus\ (reserve of strength) in strkjv@5:12|.

rwp@Revelation:6:17 @{The great day} (\hˆ hˆmera hˆ megalˆ\). The phrase occurs in the O.T. prophets (Joel:2:11,31; strkjv@Zephaniah:1:14|. Cf. strkjv@Jude:1:6|) and is here combined with "of their wrath" (\tˆs orgˆs aut“n\) as in strkjv@Zephaniah:1:15,18; strkjv@2:3; Rom strkjv@2:5|. "Their" (\aut“n\) means the wrath of God and of the Lamb put here on an equality as in strkjv@1:17f., strkjv@22:3,13; strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:11; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:16|. Beckwith holds that this language about the great day having come "is the mistaken cry of men in terror caused by the portents which are bursting upon them." There is something, to be sure, to be said for this view which denies that John commits himself to the position that this is the end of the ages. {And who is able to stand?} (\kai tis dunatai stathˆnai?\). Very much like the words in strkjv@Nahum:1:6; strkjv@Malachi:3:2|. First aorist passive infinitive of \histˆmi\. It is a rhetorical question, apparently by the frightened crowds of verse 15|. Swete observes that the only possible answer to that cry is the command of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:21:36|: "Keep awake on every occasion, praying that ye may get strength to stand (\stathˆnai\, the very form) before the Son of Man."

rwp@Revelation:7:15 @{Therefore} (\dia touto\). Because of the washing described in verse 14|. {They serve him} (\latreuousin aut“i\). Dative case with \latreu“\ (present active indicative, old verb, originally to serve for hire \latron\, then service in general, then religious service to God, strkjv@Matthew:4:10|, then in particular ritual worship of the priests, strkjv@Hebrews:8:5|). All the redeemed are priests (Revelation:16:5,10|) in the heavenly temple (6:9|) as here. But this service is that of spiritual worship, not of external rites (Romans:12:1; strkjv@Phillipians:3:3|). {Day and night} (\hˆmeras kai nuktos\). Genitive of time, "by day and night," as in strkjv@4:8| of the praise of the four living creatures. {Shall spread his tabernacle over them} (\skˆn“sei ep' autous\). Future (change of tense from present in \latreuousin\) active of \skˆno“\, old verb from \skˆnos\ (tent, tabernacle), used in strkjv@John:1:14| of the earthly life of Christ, elsewhere in N.T. only in Rev. (7:14; strkjv@12:12; strkjv@13:6; strkjv@21:3|). In strkjv@12:12; strkjv@13:6| of those who dwell in tents, here of God spreading his tent "over" (\ep' autous\) the redeemed in heaven, in strkjv@21:3| of God tabernacling "with" (\met' aut“n\) the redeemed, in both instances a picture of sacred fellowship, and "the further idea of God's Presence as a protection from all fear of evil" (Swete) like the overshadowing of Israel by the Shekinah and a possible allusion also to the tents (\skˆnai\) of the feast of tabernacles and to the tent of meeting where God met Moses (Exodus:33:7-11|).

rwp@Revelation:13:3 @{And I saw} (\kai\). No verb (\eidon\) in the old MSS., but clearly understood from verse 2|. {As though it had been smitten} (\h“s esphagmenˆn\). Perfect passive participle of \sphaz“\, as in strkjv@5:6|, accusative singular agreeing with \mian\ (one of the heads), object of \eidon\ understood, "as though slain" (so the word means in seven other instances in the book). There is a reference to the death and new life of the Lamb in strkjv@5:6|. {And his death-stroke was healed} (\kai hˆ plˆgˆ autou etherapeuthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \therapeu“\. "The stroke of death" (that led to death). Apparently refers to the death of Nero in June 68 A.D. by his own hand. But after his death pretenders arose claiming to be Nero _redivivus_ even as late as 89 (Tacitus, _Hist_. i. 78, ii. 8, etc.). John seems to regard Domitian as Nero over again in the persecutions carried on by him. The distinction is not always preserved between the beast (Roman Empire) and the seven heads (emperors), but in strkjv@17:10| the beast survives the loss of five heads. Here it is the death-stroke of one head, while in verses 12,14| the beast himself receives a mortal wound. {Wondered after the beast} (\ethaumasthˆ opis“ tou thˆriou\). First aorist passive (deponent) indicative of \thaumaz“\, to wonder at, to admire, as in strkjv@17:8|. For this pregnant use of \opis“\ see strkjv@John:12:9; strkjv@Acts:5:37; strkjv@20:30; strkjv@1Timothy:5:15|. "All the earth wondered at and followed after the beast," that is Antichrist as represented by Domitian as Nero _redivivus_. But Charles champions the view that Caligula, not Nero, is the head that received the death-stroke and recovered and set up statues of himself for worship, even trying to do it in Jerusalem.

rwp@Revelation:16:5 @{The angel of the waters} (\tou aggelou ton hudat“n\). Genitive case object of \ˆkousa\. See strkjv@7:1| for the four angels in control of the winds and strkjv@14:18| for the angel with power over fire. The rabbis spoke also of an angel with power over the earth and another over the sea. {Which art and which wast} (\ho “n kai ho ˆn\). See this peculiar idiom for God's eternity with \ho\ as relative before \ˆn\ in strkjv@1:4,8; strkjv@4:8|, but without \ho erchomenos\ (the coming on, the one who is to be) there for the future as in strkjv@11:17|. {Thou Holy One} (\ho hosios\). Nominative form, but vocative case, as often. Note both \dikaios\ and \hosios\ applied to God as in strkjv@3:1; strkjv@15:3f|. {Because thou didst thus judge} (\hoti tauta ekrinas\). Reason for calling God \dikaios\ and \hosios\. The punishment on the waters is deserved. First aorist active indicative of \krin“\, to judge.

rwp@Revelation:16:9 @{Were scorched} (\ekaumatisthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of same verb. {With great heat} (\kauma mega\). Cognate accusative retained with the passive verb. Old word (from \kai“\ to burn), in N.T. only strkjv@7:16| and here. For blaspheming the name of God see strkjv@13:6; strkjv@James:2:7; strkjv@Romans:2:24; strkjv@1Timothy:6:1|. They blamed God for the plagues. {They repented not} (\ou metenoˆsan\). This solemn negative aorist of \metanoe“\ is a refrain like a funeral dirge (9:20f.; strkjv@16:11|). In strkjv@11:13| some did repent because of the earthquake. Even deserved punishment may harden the heart. {To give him glory} (\dounai aut“i doxan\). Second aorist active infinitive of \did“mi\, almost result. For the phrase see strkjv@11:13; strkjv@14:7; strkjv@19:7|.

rwp@Romans:1:9 @{I serve} (\latreu“\). Old verb from \latron\, hire, and \latris\, hireling, so to serve for hire, then to serve in general gods or men, whether sacred services (Hebrews:9:9; strkjv@10:2|) or spiritual service as here. Cf. strkjv@Romans:12:1; strkjv@Phillipians:3:3|. {Unceasingly} (\adialeipt“s\). Late adverb for which see strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2f.; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@5:17|, only other N.T. examples. {Always} (\pantote\). One might think that Paul prayed for no others, but he uses both adverbs in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2|. He seems to have had prayer lists. He never omitted the Romans.

rwp@Romans:4:2 @{The Scripture} (\hˆ graphˆ\). strkjv@Genesis:15:6|. {Was justified by works} (\ex erg“n edikai“thˆ\). Condition of first class, assumed as true for the sake of argument, though untrue in fact. The rabbis had a doctrine of the merits of Abraham who had a superfluity of credits to pass on to the Jews (Luke:3:8|). {But not towards God} (\all' ou pros theon\). Abraham deserved all the respect from men that came to him, but his relation to God was a different matter. He had _there_ no ground of boasting at all.

rwp@Romans:5:1 @{Being therefore justified by faith} (\dikai“thentes oun ek piste“s\). First aorist passive participle of \dikaio“\, to set right and expressing antecedent action to the verb \ech“men\. The \oun\ refers to the preceding conclusive argument (chapters 1 to 4) that this is done by faith. {Let us have peace with God} (\eirˆnˆn ech“men pros ton theon\). This is the correct text beyond a doubt, the present active subjunctive, not \echomen\ (present active indicative) of the Textus Receptus which even the American Standard Bible accepts. It is curious how perverse many real scholars have been on this word and phrase here. Godet, for instance. Vincent says that "it is difficult if not impossible to explain it." One has only to observe the force of the _tense_ to see Paul's meaning clearly. The mode is the volitive subjunctive and the present tense expresses linear action and so does not mean "make peace" as the ingressive aorist subjunctive \eirˆnˆn sch“men\ would mean. A good example of \sch“men\ occurs in strkjv@Matthew:21:38| (\sch“men tˆn klˆronomian autou\) where it means: "Let us get hold of his inheritance." Here \eirˆnˆn ech“men\ can only mean: "Let us enjoy peace with God" or "Let us retain peace with God." We have in strkjv@Acts:9:31| \eichen eirˆnˆn\ (imperfect and so linear), the church "enjoyed peace," not "made peace." The preceding justification (\dikai“thentes\) "made peace with God." Observe \pros\ (face to face) with \ton theon\ and \dia\ (intermediate agent) with \tou kuriou\.

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

rwp@Romans:8:1 @{Therefore now} (\ara nun\). Two particles. Points back to the triumphant note in strkjv@7:25| after the preceding despair. {No condemnation} (\ouden katakrima\). As sinners we deserved condemnation in our unregenerate state in spite of the struggle. But God offers pardon "to those in Christ Jesus (\tois en Christ“i Iˆsou\). This is Paul's Gospel. The fire has burned on and around the Cross of Christ. There and there alone is safety. Those in Christ Jesus can lead the consecrated, the crucified, the baptized life.

rwp@Romans:9:20 @{Nay, but, O man, who art thou?} (\O anthr“pe, men oun ge su tis ei?\). "O man, but surely thou who art thou?" Unusual and emphatic order of the words, prolepsis of \su\ (thou) before \tis\ (who) and \men oun ge\ (triple particle, \men\, indeed, \oun\, therefore, \ge\, at least) at the beginning of clause as in strkjv@Romans:10:18; strkjv@Phillipians:3:8| contrary to ancient idiom, but so in papyri. {That repliest} (\ho antapokrinomenos\). Present middle articular participle of double compound verb \antapokrinomai\, to answer to one's face (\anti-\) late and vivid combination, also in strkjv@Luke:14:6|, nowhere else in N.T., but in LXX. {The thing formed} (\to plasma\). Old word (Plato, Aristophanes) from \plass“\, to mould, as with clay or wax, from which the aorist active participle used here (\t“i plasanti\) comes. Paul quotes these words from strkjv@Isaiah:29:16| verbatim. It is a familiar idea in the Old Testament, the absolute power of God as Creator like the potter's use of clay (Isaiah:44:8; strkjv@45:8-10; strkjv@Jeremiah:18:6|). \Mˆ\ expects a negative answer. {Why didst thou make me thus?} (\ti me epoiˆsas hout“s?\). The original words in Isaiah dealt with the nation, but Paul applies them to individuals. This question does not raise the problem of the origin of sin for the objector does not blame God for that but why God has used us as he has, made some vessels out of the clay for this purpose, some for that. Observe "thus" (\hout“s\). The potter takes the clay as he finds it, but uses it as he wishes.

rwp@Romans:13:4 @{A minister of God} (\theou diakonos\). General sense of \diakonos\. Of course even Nero was God's minister "to thee (\soi\ ethical dative) for good (\eis to agathon\, for the good)." That is the ideal, the goal. {Beareth} (\phorei\). Present active indicative of \phore“\, old frequentative form of \pher“\, to bear, to wear. {But if thou do} (\ean de poiˆis\). Condition of third class, \ean\ and present active subjunctive of \poie“\, "if thou continue to do." {Sword} (\machairan\). Symbol of authority as to-day policemen carry clubs or pistols. "The Emperor Trajan presented to a provincial governor on starting for his province, a dagger, with the words, '_For me_. If I deserve it, _in_ me'" (Vincent). {An avenger} (\ekdikos\). Old adjective from \ek\ and \dikˆ\ (right), "outside of penalty," unjust, then in later Greek "exacting penalty from one," in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:6|.

rwp@Romans:14:6 @{Regardeth} (\phronei\). "Thinks of," "esteems," "observes," "puts his mind on" (from \phrˆn\, mind). The Textus Receptus has also "he that regardeth not," but it is not genuine. {Unto the Lord} (\kuri“i\). Dative case. Songs:as to \t“i the“i\ (unto God). He eats unto the Lord, he eats not unto the Lord. Paul's principle of freedom in non-essentials is most important. The Jewish Christians still observed the Seventh day (the Sabbath). The Gentile Christians were observing the first day of the week in honour of Christ's Resurrection on that day. Paul pleads for liberty.

rwp@Titus:2:15 @{With all authority} (\meta pasˆs epitagˆs\). See strkjv@1Corinthians:7:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:8|. Assertion of authority is sometimes necessary. {Let no man despise thee} (\mˆdeis sou periphroneit“\). Present active imperative in prohibition of \periphrone“\, old verb, only here in N.T., to think around (on all sides). Literally, "let no man think around thee" (and so despise thee). In strkjv@1Timothy:4:12| it is \kataphroneit“\ (think down on), a stronger word of scorn, but this one implies the possibility of one making mental circles around one and so "out-thinking" him. The best way for the modern minister to command respect for his "authority" is to do thinking that will deserve it.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Wed Jul 3 00:31:08 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020