OT-POET.filter - rwp During:

rwp@1Corinthians:15:32 @{After the manner of men} (\kata anthrpon\). Like men, for applause, money, etc. (4:9ff.; strkjv@Phillipians:3:7|). {If I fought with wild beasts at Ephesus} (\ei ethriomachsa en Ephesi\). Late verb from \thriomachos\, a fighter with wild beasts. Found in inscriptions and in Ignatius. Those who argue for an Ephesian imprisonment for Paul and Ephesus as the place where he wrote the imprisonment epistles (see Duncan's book just mentioned) take the verb literally. There is in the ruins of Ephesus now a place called St. Paul's Prison. But Paul was a Roman citizen and it was unlawful to make such a one be a \thriomachos\. If he were cast to the lions unlawfully, he could have prevented it by claiming his citizenship. Besides, shortly after this Paul wrote II Corinthians, but he does not mention so unusual a peril in the list in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:23f|. The incident, whatever it was, whether literal or figurative language, took place before Paul wrote I Corinthians. {What doth it profit me?} (\ti moi to ophelos?\). What the profit to me? {Let us eat and drink} (\phagmen kai pimen\). Volitive second aorist subjunctives of \esthi\ and \pin\. Cited from strkjv@Isaiah:22:13|. It is the outcry of the people of Jerusalem during the siege of Jerusalem by the Assyrians. At Anchiale near Tarsus is a statue of Sardanapalus with the inscription: "Eat, drink, enjoy thyself. The rest is nothing." This was the motto of the Epicureans. Paul is not giving his own view, but that of people who deny the resurrection.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:20 @{Lest by any means, when I come, I should find you not such as I would} (\m ps elthn ouch hoious thel heur humas\). An idiomatic construction after the verb of fearing (\phoboumai\) with \m ps\ as the conjunction and with \ouch\ as the negative of the verb \heur\ (second aorist active subjunctive of \heurisk\), \m\ the conjunction, \ouch\ the negative. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 995. {And I be found} (\kag heureth\). Same construction with first aorist passive subjunctive. {Such as ye would not} (\hoion ou thelete\). Neat change in voice just before and position of the negative here. {Lest by any means} (\m ps\). Still further negative purpose by repeating the conjunction. With graphic pen pictures Paul describes what had been going on against him during his long absence. {Backbitings} (\katalaliai\). Late and rare word. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1Peter:2:1|. If it only existed nowhere else! {Whisperings} (\psithurismoi\). Late word from \psithuriz\, to whisper into one's ear. An onomatopoetic word for the sibilant murmur of a snake charmer (Ecclesiastes:10:11|). Only here in N.T. {Swellings} (\phusiseis\). From \phusio\, to swell up, late word only here and in ecclesiastical writers. Did Paul make up the word for the occasion? See on ¯1Corinthians:4:6| for verb. {Tumults} (\akatastasiai\). See on strkjv@2Corinthians:6:5|.

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 \kruka\ (eighth preacher), hardly correct. {A preacher of righteousness} (\dikaiosuns kruka\). "Herald" as in strkjv@1Timothy:2:7; strkjv@2Timothy:1:11| alone in N.T., but \kruss\ 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 \epagagn\) 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 asebn\). Anarthrous and dative case \kosmi\. The whole world were "ungodly" (\asebeis\ as in strkjv@1Peter:4:18|) save Noah's family of eight.

rwp@Acts:21:19 @{He rehearsed} (\exgeito\). Imperfect middle of \exgeomai\, 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 \exgeito\ as Demosthenes does (1265), though it could be like \kath' hena hekastos\ in strkjv@Ephesians:5:33|. {Which} (\hn\). Genitive attracted from \ha\ (accusative) into the case of the unexpressed antecedent \toutn\. {God had wrought} (\epoisen 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:21:31 @{As they were seeking to kill him} (\ztountn autn\). Genitive absolute of \zte\, to seek, without \autn\ (they). This was their real purpose. {Tidings} (\phasis\). From \phain\, to show. Old word for the work of informers and then the exposure of secret crime. In LXX. Here only in the N.T. {Came up} (\aneb\). Naturally in the wild uproar. The Roman guard during festivals was kept stationed in the Tower of Antonia at the northwest corner of the temple overlooking the temple and connected by stairs (verse 35|). {To the chief captain} (\ti chiliarchi\). Commander of a thousand men or cohort (Mark:15:16|). His name was Claudius Lysias. {Of the band} (\ts speirs\). Each legion had six tribunes and so each tribune (chiliarch) had a thousand if the cohort had its full quota. See on ¯10:1; strkjv@27:1|. The word is the Latin _spira_ (anything rolled up). Note the genitive \speirs\ instead of \speiras\ (Attic). {Was in confusion} (\sunchunnetai\). Present passive indicative of \sunchunn\ (see verse 27|, \sunecheon\). This is what the conspirators had desired.

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

rwp@Acts:23:30 @{When it was shown to me that there would be a plot} (\mnutheiss moi epibouls esesthai\). Two constructions combined; genitive absolute (\mnutheiss epibouls\, first aorist passive participle of \mnu\) and future infinitive (\esesthai\ as if \epibouln\ accusative of general reference used) in indirect assertion after \mnu\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 877). {Charging his accusers also} (\paraggeilas kai tois katgorois\). First aorist active participle of \paraggell\ with which compare \mathn\ above (verse 27|), not subsequent action. Dative case in \katgorois\. {Before thee} (\epi sou\). Common idiom for "in the presence of" when before a judge (like Latin _apud_) as in strkjv@24:20,21; strkjv@25:26; strkjv@26:2|. What happened to the forty conspirators we have no way of knowing. Neither they nor the Jews from Asia are heard of more during the long five years of Paul's imprisonment in Caesarea and Rome.

rwp@Acts:24:27 @{But when two years were fulfilled} (\dietias de plrtheiss\). Genitive absolute first aorist passive of \plro\, common verb to fill full. \Dietia\, late word in LXX and Philo, common in the papyri, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:28:30|. Compound of \dia\, two (\duo, dis\) and \etos\, year. Songs:Paul lingered on in prison in Caesarea, waiting for the second hearing under Felix which never came. Caesarea now became the compulsory headquarters of Paul for two years. With all his travels Paul spent several years each at Tarsus, Antioch, Corinth, Ephesus, though not as a prisoner unless that was true part of the time at Ephesus for which there is some evidence though not of a convincing kind. We do not know that Luke remained in Caesarea all this time. In all probability he came and went with frequent visits with Philip the Evangelist. It was probably during this period that Luke secured the material for his Gospel and wrote part or all of it before going to Rome. He had ample opportunity to examine the eyewitnesses who heard Jesus and the first attempts at writing including the Gospel of Mark (Luke:1:1-4|). {Was succeeded by} (\elaben diadochon\). Literally, "received as successor." \Diadochos\ is an old word from \diadechomai\, to receive in succession (\dia, duo\, two) and occurs here alone in the N.T. Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 115) gives papyri examples where \hoi diadochoi\ means "higher officials at the court of the Ptolemies," probably "deputies," a usage growing out of the "successors" of Alexander the Great (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_), though here the original notion of "successor" occurs (cf. Josephus, _Ant_. XX. 8, 9). Luke does not tell why Felix "received" a successor. The explanation is that during these two years the Jews and the Gentiles had an open fight in the market-place in Caesarea. Felix put the soldiers on the mob and many Jews were killed. The Jews made formal complaint to the Emperor with the result that Felix was recalled and Porcius Festus sent in his stead. {Porcius Festus} (\Porkion Phston\). We know very little about this man. He is usually considered a worthier man than Felix, but Paul fared no better at his hands and he exhibits the same insincerity and eagerness to please the Jews. Josephus (_Ant_. XX. 8, 9) says that "Porcius Festus was sent as a successor to Felix." The precise year when this change occurred is not clear. Albinus succeeded Festus by A.D. 62, so that it is probable that Festus came A.D. 58 (or 59). Death cut short his career in a couple of years though he did more than Felix to rid the country of robbers and _sicarii_. Some scholars argue for an earlier date for the recall of Felix. Nero became Emperor Oct. 13, A.D. 54. Poppaea, his Jewish mistress and finally wife, may have had something to do with the recall of Felix at the request of the Jews. {Desiring to gain favour with the Jews} (\theln te charita katathesthai tois Ioudaiois\). Reason for his conduct. Note second aorist (ingressive) middle infinitive \katathesthai\ from \katatithmi\, old verb to place down, to make a deposit, to deposit a favour with, to do something to win favour. Only here and strkjv@25:9| in N.T., though in some MSS. in strkjv@Mark:15:46|. It is a banking figure. {Left Paul in bonds} (\katelipe ton Paulon dedemenon\). Effective aorist active indicative of \kataleip\, to leave behind. Paul "in bonds" (\dedemenon\, perfect passive participle of \de\, to bind) was the "deposit" (\katathesthai\) for their favour. Codex Bezae adds that Felix left Paul in custody "because of Drusilla" (\dia Drousillan\). She disliked Paul as much as Herodias did John the Baptist. Songs:Pilate surrendered to the Jews about the death of Jesus when they threatened to report him to Caesar. Some critics would date the third group of Paul's Epistles (Philippians, Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians) to the imprisonment here in Caesarea, some even to one in Ephesus. But the arguments for either of these two views are more specious than convincing. Furneaux would even put strkjv@2Timothy:4:9-22| here in spite of the flat contradiction with strkjv@Acts:21:29| about Trophimus being in Jerusalem instead of Miletus (2Timothy:4:20|), a "mistake" which he attributes to Luke! That sort of criticism can prove anything.

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 tn 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@John:4:42 @{Not because of thy speaking} (\ouketi dia tn sn lalian\). "No longer because of thy talk," good and effective as that was. \Lalia\ (cf. \lale\) is talk, talkativeness, mode of speech, one's vernacular, used by Jesus of his own speech (John:8:43|). {We have heard} (\akkoamen\). Perfect active indicative of \akou\, their abiding experience. {For ourselves} (\autoi\). Just "ourselves." {The Saviour of the world} (\ho str tou kosmou\). See strkjv@Matthew:1:21| for ssei used of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term \str\ to Jesus again in strkjv@1John:4:14|. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (verse 22|). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (verse 26|) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: "At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah." But why "merely"? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their "Saviour," Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on strkjv@John:4:42|: "That in the first century Messiah was given the title str is not proven." The use of "saviour and god" for Ptolemy in the third century B.C. is well known. "The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East" (Deissmann, _Light_, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke:2:11; strkjv@John:4:42; strkjv@Acts:5:31; strkjv@3:23; strkjv@Phillipians:3:20; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23; strkjv@Titus:1:4; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@3:6; strkjv@2Timothy:1:10; strkjv@2Peter:1:1,11; strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:2,18|). All these are writings of the first century A.D. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world.

rwp@John:4:52 @{Inquired} (\eputheto\). Second aorist middle indicative of \punthanomai\. {Began to mend} (\kompsoteron eschen\). Second aorist ingressive active indicative of \ech\ (took a turn, got better) and comparative of adverb \kompss\. Arrian (_Epictetus iii. 10.13) has \kompss echeis\ from a physician, "Thou hast it fine," "Thou art doing finely." The papyri give several similar examples. \Kompss\ (neat) is from \kome\, to take care of. {At the seventh hour} (\hran hebdomn\). The accusative case without a preposition as in strkjv@Revelation:3:3|, though we have \peri hran enatn\ (about the ninth hour) in strkjv@Acts:10:3|. See the accusative also in strkjv@Exodus:9:18| \tautn tn hran aurion\ (tomorrow about this hour). The accusative has the notion of extension and can be thus loosely used. It can even mean here "during the seventh hour." In verse 53| the locative is more exact, "at that hour" (\en ekeini ti hri\). The seventh hour would be (Roman time) seven P.M.

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

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE 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@Luke:8:12 @{Those by the wayside} (\hoi para tn hodon\). As in strkjv@Mark:4:15; strkjv@Matthew:13:19| so here the people who hear the word = the seed are discussed by metonymy. {The devil} (\ho diabolos\). The slanderer. Here strkjv@Mark:4:15| has Satan. {From their heart} (\apo ts kardias autn\). Here Mark has "in them." It is the devil's business to snatch up the seed from the heart before it sprouts and takes root. Every preacher knows how successful the devil is with his auditors. strkjv@Matthew:13:19| has it "sown in the heart." {That they may not believe and be saved} (\hina m pisteusantes sthsin\). Peculiar to Luke. Negative purpose with aorist active participle and first aorist (ingressive) passive subjunctive. Many reasons are offered today for the failure of preachers to win souls. Here is the main one, the activity of the devil during and after the preaching of the sermon. No wonder then that the sower must have good seed and sow wisely, for even then he can only win partial success.

rwp@Luke:21:37 @{Every day} (\tas hmeras\). During the days, accusative of extent of time. {Every night} (\tas nuktas\). "During the nights," accusative of extent of time. {Lodged} (\ulizeto\). Imperfect middle, was lodging, \aulizomai\ from \aul\ (court).

rwp@Luke:22:6 @{Consented} (\exmologsen\). Old verb, but the ancients usually used the simple form for promise or consent rather than the compound. This is the only instance of this sense in the N.T. It is from \homologos\ (\homos\, same, and \leg\, to say), to say the same thing with another and so agree. {Opportunity} (\eukarian\). From \eukairos\ (\eu, kairos\), a good chance. Old word, but in the N.T. only here and parallel passage strkjv@Matthew:26:16|. {In the absence of the multitude} (\ater ochlou\). \Ater\ is an old preposition, common in the poets, but rare in prose. Also in verse 35|. It means "without," "apart from," like \chris\. The point of Judas was just this. He would get Jesus into the hands of the Sanhedrin during the feast in spite of the crowd. It was necessary to avoid tumult (Matthew:26:5|) because of the popularity of Jesus.

rwp@Luke:22:17 @{He received a cup} (\dexamenos potrion\). This cup is a diminutive of \potr\. It seems that this is still one of the four cups passed during the passover meal, though which one is uncertain. It is apparently just before the formal introduction of the Lord's Supper, though he gave thanks here also (\eucharistsas\). It is from this verb \euchariste\ (see also verse 19|) that our word Eucharist comes. It is a common verb for giving thanks and was used also for "saying grace" as we call it.

rwp@Luke:22:43 @{An angel} (\aggelos\). The angels visited Jesus at the close of the three temptations at the beginning of his ministry (Matthew:4:11|). Here the angel comes during the conflict.

rwp@Luke:23:56 @{On the sabbath they rested} (\to sabbaton hsuchasan\). They returned and prepared spices before the sabbath began. Then they rested all during the sabbath (accusative of extent of time, \to sabbaton\).

rwp@Mark:5:5 @{He was crying out, and cutting himself with stones} (\n krazn kai katakoptn heauton lithois\). Further vivid details by Mark. Night and day his loud scream or screech could be heard like other demoniacs (cf. strkjv@1:26; strkjv@3:11; strkjv@9:26|). The verb for cutting himself occurs here only in the N.T., though an old verb. It means to _cut down_ (perfective use of \kata-\). We say _cut up_, gash, hack to pieces. Perhaps he was scarred all over with such gashes during his moments of wild frenzy night and day in the tombs and on the mountains. Periphrastic imperfect active with \n\ and the participles.

rwp@Mark:6:20 @{Feared John} (\ephobeito ton Iann\). Imperfect tense, continual state of fear. He feared John and also Herodias. Between the two Herod vacillated. He knew him to be righteous and holy (\dikaion kai hagion\) and so innocent of any wrong. Songs:he {kept him safe} (\sunetrei\). Imperfect tense again. Late Greek verb. From the plots and schemes of Herodias. She was another Jezebel towards John and with Herod. {Much perplexed} (\polla porei\). This the correct text not \polla epoiei\, did many things. Imperfect tense again. {He heard him gladly} (\hdes kouen\). Imperfect tense again. This is the way that Herod really felt when he could slip away from the meshes of Herodias. These interviews with the Baptist down in the prison at Machaerus during his occasional visits there braced "his jaded mind as with a whiff of fresh air" (Swete). But then he saw Herodias again and he was at his wits' end (\porei\, lose one's way, \a\ privative and \poros\, way), for he knew that he had to live with Herodias with whom he was hopelessly entangled.

rwp@Matthew:24:6 @{See that ye be not troubled} (\horate m throeisthe\). Asyndeton here with these two imperatives as strkjv@Mark:8:15| \orate blepete\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 949). Look out for the wars and rumours of wars, but do not be scared out of your wits by them. \Throe\ means to cry aloud, to scream, and in the passive to be terrified by an outcry. Paul uses this very verb (\mde throeisthai\) in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2| as a warning against excitement over false reports that he had predicted the immediate second coming of Christ. {But the end is not yet} (\all' oup estin to telos\). It is curious how people overlook these words of Jesus and proceed to set dates for the immediate end. That happened during the Great War and it has happened since.

rwp@Revelation:6:9 @{Under the altar} (\hupokat tou thusiastriou\). "Under" (\hupokat\), for the blood of the sacrifices was poured at the bottom of the altar (Leviticus:4:7|). The altar of sacrifice (Exodus:39:39; strkjv@40:29|), not of incense. The imagery, as in Hebrews, is from the tabernacle. For the word see strkjv@Matthew:5:23f.|, often in Rev. (Revelation:8:3,5; strkjv@9:13; strkjv@11:1; strkjv@14:18; strkjv@16:7|). This altar in heaven is symbolic, of course, the antitype for the tabernacle altar (Hebrews:8:5|). The Lamb was slain (5:6,9,12|) and these martyrs have followed the example of their Lord. {The souls} (\tas psuchas\). The lives, for the life is in the blood (Leviticus:17:11|), were given for Christ (Phillipians:2:17; strkjv@2Timothy:4:6|). {Of the slain} (\tn esphagmenn\). See strkjv@5:6|. Christians were slain during the Neronian persecution and now again under Domitian. A long line of martyrs has followed. {For the word of God} (\dia ton logon tou theou\). As in strkjv@1:9|, the confession of loyalty to Christ as opposed to emperor-worship. {And for the testimony which they held} (\kai dia tn marturian hn eichon\). See also strkjv@1:9|. Probably \kai\ equals "even" here, explaining the preceding. The imperfect tense \eichon\ suits the repetition of the witness to Christ and the consequent death.