Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-POET.filter - rwp Three:


rwp@1Corinthians:4:6 @{I have in a figure transferred} (\meteschˆmatisa\). First aorist active (not perfect) indicative of \meta-schˆmatiz“\, used by Plato and Aristotle for changing the form of a thing (from \meta\, after, and \schˆma\, form or habit, like Latin _habitus_ from \ech“\ and so different from \morphˆ\ as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:7; strkjv@Romans:12:2|). For the idea of refashioning see Field, _Notes_, p. 169f. and Preisigke, _Fachworter_). Both Greek and Latin writers (Quintilian, Martial) used \schˆma\ for a rhetorical artifice. Paul's use of the word (in Paul only in N.T.) appears also further in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:13-15| where the word occurs three times, twice of the false apostles posing and passing as apostles of Christ and ministers of righteousness, and once of Satan as an angel of light, twice with \eis\ and once with \h“s\. In strkjv@Phillipians:3:21| the word is used for the change in the body of our humiliation to the body of glory. But here it is clearly the rhetorical figure for a veiled allusion to Paul and Apollos "for your sakes" (\dia humas\). {That in us ye may learn} (\hina en hˆmin mathˆte\). Final clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \manthan“\, to learn. As an object lesson in our cases (\en hˆmin\). It is no more true of Paul and Apollos than of other ministers, but the wrangles in Corinth started about them. Songs:Paul boldly puts himself and Apollos to the fore in the discussion of the principles involved. {Not to go beyond the things which are written} (\to Mˆ huper ha gegraptai\). It is difficult to reproduce the Greek idiom in English. The article \to\ is in the accusative case as the object of the verb \mathˆte\ (learn) and points at the words "\Mˆ huper ha gegraptai\," apparently a proverb or rule, and elliptical in form with no principal verb expressed with \mˆ\, whether "think" (Auth.) or "go" (Revised). There was a constant tendency to smooth out Paul's ellipses as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26,31|. Lightfoot thinks that Paul may have in mind O.T. passages quoted in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:19,31; strkjv@3:19,20|. {That ye be not puffed up} (\hina mˆ phusiousthe\). Sub-final use of \hina\ (second use in this sentence) with notion of result. It is not certain whether \phusiousthe\ (late verb form like \phusia“, phusa“\, to blow up, to inflate, to puff up), used only by Paul in the N.T., is present indicative with \hina\ like \zˆloute\ in strkjv@Galatians:4:17| (cf. \hina gin“skomen\ in strkjv@1John:5:20|) or the present subjunctive by irregular contraction (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 203, 342f.), probably the present indicative. \Phusio“\ is from \phusis\ (nature) and so meant to make natural, but it is used by Paul just like \phusa“\ or \phusia“\ (from \phusa\, a pair of bellows), a vivid picture of self-conceit. {One for the one against the other} (\heis huper tou henos kata tou heterou\). This is the precise idea of this idiom of partitive apposition. This is the rule with partisans. They are "for" (\huper\) the one and "against" (\kata\, down on, the genitive case) the other (\tou heterou\, not merely another or a second, but the different sort, \heterodox\).

rwp@1Corinthians:4:10 @{We--you} (\hˆmeis--humeis\). Triple contrast in keenest ironical emphasis. "The three antitheses refer respectively to teaching, demeanour, and worldly position" (Robertson and Plummer). The apostles were fools for Christ's sake (2Corinthians:4:11; strkjv@Phillipians:3:7|). They made "union with Christ the basis of worldly wisdom" (Vincent). There is change of order (chiasm) in the third ironical contrast. They are over strong in pretension. \Endoxos\, illustrious, is one of the 103 words found only in Luke and Paul in the N.T. Notion of display and splendour.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:10 @{How holily and righteously and unblameably} (\h“s hosi“s kai dikai“s kai amempt“s\). Paul calls the Thessalonians and God as witnesses (\martures\) to his life toward you the believers (\humin tois pisteuousin\) dative of personal interest. He employs three common adverbs that show how holily toward God and how righteously toward men so that they did not blame him and his associates in either respect. Songs:there is a reason for each adverb. All this argues that Paul spent a considerable time in Thessalonica, more than the three sabbaths mentioned by Luke. The pastor ought to live so that his life will bear close inspection.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:11 @{As a father with his own children} (\h“s patˆr tekna heautou\). Change from the figure of the mother-nurse in verse 7|. There is ellipse of a principal verb with the participles \parakalountes, paramuthoumenoi, marturoumenoi\. Lightfoot suggests \enouthetoumen\ (we admonished) or \egenˆthˆmen\ (we became). The three participles give three phases of the minister's preaching (exhorting, encouraging or consoling, witnessing or testifying). They are all old verbs, but only the first (\parakale“\) is common in the N.T.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:11 @{That ye study to be quiet} (\philotimeisthai hˆsuchazein\). First infinitive dependent on \parakaloumen\ (verse 10|, we exhort you), the second on \philotimeisthai\ (old verb from \philotimos\, fond of honour, \philos, timˆ\). The notion of ambition appears in each of the three N.T. examples (1Thessalonians:4:11; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:9; strkjv@Romans:5:20|), but it is ambition to do good, not evil. The word ambition is Latin (_ambitio_ from _ambo, ire_), to go on both sides to accomplish one's aims and often evil). A preacher devoid of ambition lacks power. There was a restless spirit in Thessalonica because of the misapprehension of the second coming. Songs:Paul urges an ambition to be quiet or calm, to lead a quiet life, including silence (Acts:11:18|). {To do your own business} (\prassein ta idia\). Present infinitive like the others, to have the habit of attending to their own affairs (\ta idia\). This restless meddlesomeness here condemned Paul alludes to again in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:11| in plainer terms. It is amazing how much wisdom people have about other people's affairs and so little interest in their own. {To work with your own hands} (\ergazesthai tais chersin hum“n\). Instrumental case (\chersin\). Paul gave a new dignity to manual labour by precept and example. There were "pious" idlers in the church in Thessalonica who were promoting trouble. He had commanded them when with them.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:25 @{Thrice was I beaten with rods} (\tris errabdisthˆn\). Roman (Gentile) punishment. It was forbidden to Roman citizens by the _Lex Porcia_, but Paul endured it in Philippi (Acts:16:23,37|), the only one of the three named in Acts. First aorist passive of \rabdiz“\, from \rabdos\, rod, _Koin‚_ word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:16:22| which see. {Once was I stoned} (\hapax elithasthˆn\). Once for all \hapax\ means. At Lystra (Acts:14:5-19|). On \lithaz“\ _Koin‚_ verb from \lithos\, see on ¯Acts:5:26|. {Thrice I suffered shipwreck} (\tris enauagˆsa\). First aorist active of \nauage“\, from \nauagos\, shipwrecked (\naus\, ship, \agnumi\, to break). Old and common verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Timothy:1:19|. We know nothing of these. The one told in strkjv@Acts:27| was much later. What a pity that we have no data for all these varied experiences of Paul. {Night and day} (\nuchthˆmeron\) Rare word. Papyri give \nuktˆmar\ with the same idea (night-day). {Have I been in the deep} (\en t“i buth“i pepoiˆka\). Vivid dramatic perfect active indicative of \poie“\, "I have done a night and day in the deep." The memory of it survives like a nightmare. \Buthos\ is old word (only here in N.T.) for bottom, depth of the sea, then the sea itself. Paul does not mean that he was a night and day under the water, not a Jonah experience, only that he was far out at sea and shipwrecked. This was one of the three shipwrecks-already named.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:4 @{Into Paradise} (\eis paradeison\). See on ¯Luke:23:43| for this interesting word. Paul apparently uses paradise as the equivalent of the third heaven in verse 2|. Some Jews (_Book of the Secrets of Enoch_, chapter viii) make Paradise in the third heaven. The rabbis had various ideas (two heavens, three, seven). We need not commit Paul to any "celestial gradation" (Vincent). {Unspeakable words} (\arrˆta rˆmata\). Old verbal adjective (\a\ privative, \rˆtos\ from \re“\), only here in N.T. {Not lawful} (\ouk exon\). Copula \estin\ omitted. Hence Paul does {not} give these words.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:12 @{Of an apostle} (\tou apostolou\). "Of the apostle" (definite article). Note the three words here for miracles wrought by Paul (\sˆmeia\, signs, \terata\, wonders, \dunameis\, powers or miracles) as in strkjv@Hebrews:2:4|.

rwp@Info_2John @ SECOND JOHN ABOUT A.D. 85 TO 90 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION There is little to add to what was said about the First Epistle except that here the author terms himself "the elder" (\ho presbuteros\) and writes to "the elect lady" (\eklektˆi kuriƒi\). There is dispute about both of these titles. Some hold that it is the mythical "presbyter John" of whom Papias may speak, if so understood, but whose very existence is disproved by Dom Chapman in _John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel_ (1911). Peter the apostle (1Peter:1:1|) calls himself "fellow-elder" (\sunpresbuteros\) with the other elders (1Peter:5:1|). The word referred originally to age (Luke:15:25|), then to rank or office as in the Sanhedrin (Matthew:16:21; strkjv@Acts:6:12|) and in the Christian churches (Acts:11:30; strkjv@20:17; strkjv@1Timothy:5:17,19|) as here also. A few even deny that the author is the same as in the First Epistle of John, but just an imitator. But the bulk of modern scholarly opinion agrees that the same man wrote all three Epistles and the Fourth Gospel (the Beloved Disciple, and many still say the Apostle John) whatever is true of the Apocalypse. There is no way of deciding whether "the elect lady" is a woman or a church. The obvious way of taking it is to a woman of distinction in one of the churches, as is true of "the co-elect lady in Babylon" (1Peter:5:13|), Peter's wife, who travelled with him (1Corinthians:9:5|). Some even take \kuria\ to be the name of the lady (Cyria). Some also take it to be "Eklecta the lady." Dr. Findlay (_Fellowship in the Life Eternal_, p. 31) holds that Pergamum is the church to which the letter was sent. The same commentaries treat I, II, and III John as a rule, though Poggel has a book on II, III John (1896) and Bresky (1906) has _Das Verhaltnis des Zweiten Johannesbriefes zum dritten_. Dr. J. Rendel Harris has an interesting article in _The Expositor_ of London for March, 1901, on "The Problem of the Address to the Second Epistle of John," in which he argues from papyri examples that \kuria\ here means "my dear" or "my lady." But Findlay (_Fellowship in the Life Eternal_, p. 26) argues that "the qualifying adjunct 'elect' lifts us into the region of Christian calling and dignity." It is not certain that II John was written after I John, though probable. Origen rejected it and the Peshitta Syriac does not have II and III John. strkjv@2John:1:1 @{And her children} (\kai tois teknois autˆs\). As with \eklektˆ kuria\, so here \tekna\ may be understood either literally as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:4|, or spiritually, as in strkjv@Galatians:4:19,25; strkjv@1Timothy:1:2|. For the spiritual sense in \teknia\ see strkjv@1John:2:1,12|. {Whom} (\hous\). Masculine accusative plural, though \teknois\ is neuter plural (dative), construction according to sense, not according to grammatical gender, "embracing the mother and the children of both sexes" (Vincent). See thus \hous\ in strkjv@Galatians:4:19|. {I} (\Eg“\). Though \ho presbuteros\ is third person, he passes at once after the Greek idiom to the first and there is also special emphasis here in the use of \agap“\ with the addition of \en alˆtheiƒi\ (in truth, in the highest sphere, as in strkjv@John:17:19; strkjv@3John:1:1|) and \ouk eg“ monos\ (not I only, "not I alone"). Brooke argues that this language is unsuitable if to a single family and not to a church. But Paul employs this very phrase in sending greetings to Prisca and Aquila (Romans:16:4|). {That know} (\hoi egn“kotes\). Perfect active articular participle of \gin“sk“\, "those that have come to know and still know."

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

rwp@2Peter:1:4 @{Whereby} (\di' h“n\). Probably the "glory and virtue" just mentioned, though it is possible to take it with \panta ta pros\, etc., or with \hˆmin\ (unto us, meaning "through whom"). {He hath granted} (\ded“rˆtai\). Perfect middle indicative of \d“re“\, for which see verse 3|. {His precious and exceeding great promises} (\ta timia kai megista epaggelmata\). \Epaggelma\ is an old word (from \epaggell“\) in place of the common \epaggelia\, in N.T. only here and strkjv@3:13|. \Timios\ (precious, from \timˆ\, value), three times by Peter (1Peter:1:7| of faith; strkjv@1:19| of the blood of Christ; strkjv@2Peter:1:4| of Christ's promises). \Megista\ is the elative superlative used along with a positive adjective (\timia\). {That ye may become} (\hina genˆsthe\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\. {Through these} (\dia tout“n\). The promises. {Partakers} (\koin“noi\). Partners, sharers in, for which word see strkjv@1Peter:5:1|. {Of the divine nature} (\theias phuse“s\). This phrase, like \to theion\ in strkjv@Acts:17:29|, "belongs rather to Hellenism than to the Bible" (Bigg). It is a Stoic phrase, but not with the Stoic meaning. Peter is referring to the new birth as strkjv@1Peter:1:23| (\anagegennˆmenoi\). The same phrase occurs in an inscription possibly under the influence of Mithraism (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). {Having escaped} (\apophugontes\). Second aorist active participle of \apopheug“\, old compound verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@2:18-20|, with the ablative here (\phthorƒs\, old word from \phtheir“\, moral decay as in strkjv@2:12|) and the accusative there. {By lust} (\en epithumiƒi\). Caused by, consisting in, lust. "Man becomes either regenerate or degenerate" (Strachan).

rwp@2Peter:2:7 @{And delivered} (\kai erusato\). First aorist middle of \ruomai\ as in strkjv@Matthew:6:13|, still part of the protasis with \ei\. {Righteous Lot} (\dikaion Lot\). This adjective \dikaios\ occurs three times in verses 7,8|. See Wisdom strkjv@10:6. {Sore distressed} (\kataponoumenon\). Present passive participle of \katapone“\, late and common verb, to work down, to exhaust with labor, to distress, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:7:24|. {By the lascivious life of the wicked} (\hupo tˆs t“n athesm“n en aselgeiƒi anastrophˆs\). "By the life in lasciviousness of the lawless." \Athesmos\ (alpha privative and \thesmos\), late and common adjective (cf. \athemitos\ strkjv@1Peter:4:3|) for rebels against law (of nature and conscience here). \Anastrophˆ\ is frequent in I Peter.

rwp@Acts:20:31 @{Wherefore watch ye} (\dio grˆgoreite\). Paul has concluded his defence of himself and his warning. Now he exhorts on the basis of it (\dio\) because of which thing. The very command of Jesus concerning the perils before his return as in strkjv@Mark:13:35| (\grˆgoreite\), the very form (late present imperative from the second perfect \egrˆgora\ of \egeir“\, to arouse). Stay awake. {I ceased not to admonish} (\ouk epausamˆn nouthet“n\). Participle describes Paul, I did not cease admonishing, night and day (\nukta kai hˆmeran\, accusative of extent of time, for three years \trietian\, accusative of extent of time also). \Nouthet“n\ is from \nouthete“\, to put sense into one. Songs:Paul kept it up with tears (verse 19|) if so be he could save the Ephesians from the impending perils. Forewarned is to be forearmed. Paul did his duty by them.

rwp@Acts:21:1 @{Were parted from them} (\apospasthentas ap' aut“n\). First aorist passive participle of \apospa“\ same verb as in strkjv@20:30; strkjv@Luke:22:41|. {Had set sail} (\anachthˆnai\). First aorist passive of \anag“\, the usual verb to put out (up) to sea as in verse 2| (\anˆchthˆmen\). {We came with a straight course} (\euthudromˆsantes ˆlthomen\). The same verb (aorist active participle of \euthudrome“\) used by Luke in strkjv@16:11| of the voyage from Troas to Samothrace and Neapolis, which see. {Unto Cos} (\eis tˆn Ko\). Standing today, about forty nautical miles south from Miletus, island famous as the birthplace of Hippocrates and Apelles with a great medical school. Great trading place with many Jews. {The next day} (\tˆi hexˆs\). Locative case with \hˆmerƒi\ (day) understood. The adverb \hexˆs\ is from \ech“\ (future \hex“\) and means successively or in order. This is another one of Luke's ways of saying "on the next day" (cf. three others in strkjv@20:15|). {Unto Rhodes} (\eis tˆn Rhodon\). Called the island of roses. The sun shone most days and made roses luxuriant. The great colossus which represented the sun, one of the seven wonders of the world, was prostrate at this time. The island was at the entrance to the Aegean Sea and had a great university, especially for rhetoric and oratory. There was great commerce also. {Unto Patara} (\eis Patara\). A seaport on the Lycian coast on the left bank of the Xanthus. It once had an oracle of Apollo which rivalled that at Delphi. This was the course taken by hundreds of ships every season.

rwp@Acts:21:8 @{On the morrow} (\tˆi epaurion\). Another and the more common way of expressing this idea of "next day" besides the three in strkjv@20:15| and the one in strkjv@21:1|. {Unto Caesarea} (\eis Kaisarian\). Apparently by land as the voyage (\ploun\) ended at Ptolemais (verse 7|). Caesarea is the political capital of Judea under the Romans where the procurators lived and a city of importance, built by Herod the Great and named in honour of Augustus. It had a magnificent harbour built Most of the inhabitants were Greeks. This is the third time that we have seen Paul in Caesarea, on his journey from Jerusalem to Tarsus (Acts:9:30|), on his return from Antioch at the close of the second mission tour (18:22|) and now. The best MSS. omit \hoi peri Paulou\ (we that were of Paul's company) a phrase like that in strkjv@13:13|. {Into the house of Philip the evangelist} (\eis ton oikon Philippou tou euaggelistou\). Second in the list of the seven (6:5|) after Stephen and that fact mentioned here. By this title he is distinguished from "Philip the apostle," one of the twelve. His evangelistic work followed the death of Stephen (Acts:8|) in Samaria, Philistia, with his home in Caesarea. The word "evangelizing" (\euˆggelizeto\) was used of him in strkjv@8:40|. The earliest of the three N.T. examples of the word "evangelist" (Acts:21:8; strkjv@Ephesians:4:11; strkjv@2Timothy:4:5|). Apparently a word used to describe one who told the gospel story as Philip did and may have been used of him first of all as John was termed "the baptizer" (\ho baptiz“n\, strkjv@Mark:1:4|), then "the Baptist" (\ho baptistˆs\, strkjv@Matthew:3:1|). It is found on an inscription in one of the Greek islands of uncertain date and was used in ecclesiastical writers of later times on the Four Gospels as we do. As used here the meaning is a travelling missionary who "gospelized" communities. This is probably Paul's idea in strkjv@2Timothy:4:5|. In strkjv@Ephesians:4:11| the word seems to describe a special class of ministers just as we have them today. Men have different gifts and Philip had this of evangelizing as Paul was doing who is the chief evangelist. The ideal minister today combines the gifts of evangelist, herald, teacher, shepherd. "{We abode with him}" (\emeinamen par' aut“i\). Constative aorist active indicative. \Par aut“i\ (by his side) is a neat idiom for "at his house." What a joyful time Paul had in conversation with Philip. He could learn from him much of value about the early days of the gospel in Jerusalem. And Luke could, and probably did, take notes from Philip and his daughters about the beginnings of Christian history. It is generally supposed that the "we" sections of Acts represent a travel document by Luke (notes made by him as he journeyed from Troas to Rome). Those who deny the Lukan authorship of the whole book usually admit this. Songs:we may suppose that Luke is already gathering data for future use. If so, these were precious days for him.

rwp@Acts:21:11 @{Coming} (\elth“n\, second aorist active participle of \erchomai\), taking (\aras\, first aorist active participle of \air“\, to take up), {binding} (\dˆsas\, first aorist active participle of \de“\, to bind). Vivid use of three successive participles describing the dramatic action of Agabus. {Paul's girdle} (\tˆn z“nˆn tou Paulou\). Old word from \z“nnumi\, to gird. See on ¯12:8|. {His own feet and hands} (\heautou tous podas kai tas cheiras\). Basis for the interpretation. Old Testament prophets often employed symbolic deeds (1Kings:22:11; strkjv@James:2:2; strkjv@Jeremiah:13:1-7; strkjv@Ezekiel:4:1-6|). Jesus interpreted the symbolism of Peter's girding himself (John:21:18|). {So} (\hout“s\). As Agabus had bound himself. Agabus was just from Jerusalem and probably knew the feeling there against Paul. At any rate the Holy Spirit revealed it to him as he claims. {Shall deliver} (\parad“sousin\). Like the words of Jesus about himself (Matthew:20:19|). He was "delivered" into the hands of the Gentiles and it took five years to get out of those hands.

rwp@Acts:21:28 @{Help} (\boˆtheite\). Present active imperative of \boˆthe“\, to run (\the“\) at a cry (\boˆ\), as if an outrage had been committed like murder or assault. {All men everywhere} (\panta pantachˆi\). Alliterative. \Pantachˆi\ is a variation in MSS., often \pantachou\, and here only in the N.T. The charges against Paul remind one of those against Stephen (Acts:6:13|) in which Paul had participated according to his confession (22:20|). Like the charges against Stephen and Jesus before him truth and falsehood are mixed. Paul had said that being a Jew would not save a man. He had taught the law of Moses was not binding on Gentiles. He did hold, like Jesus and Stephen, that the temple was not the only place to worship God. But Paul gloried himself in being a Jew, considered the Mosaic law righteous for Jews, and was honouring the temple at this very moment. {And moreover also he brought Greeks also into the temple} (\eti te kai Hellˆnas eisˆgagen eis to hieron\). Note the three particles (\eti te kai\), {and} (\te\) {still more} (\eti\) {also} or {even} (\kai\). Worse than his teaching (\didask“n\) is his dreadful deed: he actually brought (\eisˆgagen\, second aorist active indicative of \eisag“\). This he had a right to do if they only went into the court of the Gentiles. But these Jews mean to imply that Paul had brought Greeks beyond this court into the court of Israel. An inscription was found by Clermont-Ganneau in Greek built into the walls of a mosque on the Via Dolorosa that was on the wall dividing the court of Israel from the court of the Gentiles. Death was the penalty to any Gentile who crossed over into the Court of Israel (_The Athenaeum_, July, 1871). {Hath defiled this holy place} (\kekoin“ken ton hagion topon touton\). Present perfect active of \koino“\, to make common (see on ¯10:14|). Note vivid change of tense, the defilement lasts (state of completion). All this is the substance of the call of these shrewd conspirators from Ephesus, Jews (not Jewish Christians, not even Judaizers) who hated him for his work there and who probably "spoke evil of the Way before the multitude" there so that Paul had to separate the disciples from the synagogue and go to the School of Tyrannus (19:9f.|). These enemies of Paul had now raised the cry of "fire" and vanish from the scene completely (24:19|). This charge was absolutely false as we shall see, made out of inferences of hate and suspicion.

rwp@Acts:22:1 @{Brethren and fathers} (\Andres adelphoi kai pateres\) Men, brethren, and fathers. The very language used by Stephen (7:2|) when arraigned before the Sanhedrin with Paul then present. Now Paul faces a Jewish mob on the same charges brought against Stephen. These words are those of courtesy and dignity (_amoris et honoris nomina_, Page). These men were Paul's brother Jews and were (many of them) official representatives of the people (Sanhedrists, priests, rabbis). Paul's purpose is conciliatory, he employs "his ready tact" (Rackham). {The defence which I now make unto you} (\mou tˆs pros humas nuni apologias\). Literally, My defence to you at this time. \Nuni\ is a sharpened form (by \-i\) of \nun\ (now), just now. The term \apologia\ (apology) is not our use of the word for apologizing for an offence, but the original sense of defence for his conduct, his life. It is an old word from \apologeomai\, to talk oneself off a charge, to make defence. It occurs also in strkjv@Acts:25:16| and then also in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:11; strkjv@Phillipians:1:7,16; strkjv@2Timothy:4:16; strkjv@1Peter:3:15|. Paul uses it again in strkjv@Acts:25:16| as here about his defence against the charges made by the Jews from Asia. He is suspected of being a renegade from the Mosaic law and charged with specific acts connected with the alleged profanation of the temple. Songs:Paul speaks in Aramaic and recites the actual facts connected with his change from Judaism to Christianity. The facts make the strongest argument. He first recounts the well-known story of his zeal for Judaism in the persecution of the Christians and shows why the change came. Then he gives a summary of his work among the Gentiles and why he came to Jerusalem this time. He answers the charge of enmity to the people and the law and of desecration of the temple. It is a speech of great skill and force, delivered under remarkable conditions. The one in chapter strkjv@Acts:26| covers some of the same ground, but for a slightly different purpose as we shall see. For a discussion of the three reports in Acts of Paul's conversion see chapter strkjv@Acts:9|. Luke has not been careful to make every detail correspond, though there is essential agreement in all three.

rwp@Acts:22:6 @{And it came to pass} (\egeneto de\). Rather than the common \kai egeneto\ and with the infinitive (\periastrapsai\), one of the three constructions with \kai (de) egeneto\ by Luke (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1042f.), followed by \kai\, by finite verb, by subject infinitive as here. {As I made my journey} (\moi poreuomen“i\). To me (dative after \egeneto\, happened to me) journeying (participle agreeing with \moi\). See this same idiom in verse 17|. Luke uses \egeneto de\ seventeen times in the gospel and twenty-one in the Acts. {Unto Damascus} (\tˆi Damask“i\). Dative after \eggizonti\ (drawing nigh to). {About noon} (\peri mesˆmbrian\). Mid (\mesos\) day (\hˆmera\), old word, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@8:26| which see where it may mean "toward the south." An item not in ch. 9. {Shone round about me} (\periastrapsai peri eme\). First aorist active infinitive of \periastrapt“\, to flash around, in LXX and late Greek, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@9:3| which see. Note repetition of \peri\. {A great light} (\ph“s hikanon\). Luke's favourite word \hikanon\ (considerable). Accusative of general reference with the infinitive.

rwp@Acts:22:14 @{Hath appointed thee} (\proecheirisato\). First aorist middle indicative of \procheiriz“\, old verb to put forth into one's hands, to take into one's hands beforehand, to plan, propose, determine. In the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:3:20; strkjv@22:14; strkjv@26:16|. Three infinitives after this verb of God's purpose about Paul: {to know} (\gn“nai\, second aorist active of \gin“sk“\) his will, {to see} (\idein\, second aorist active of \hora“\) the Righteous One (cf. strkjv@3:14|), {to hear} (\akousai\, first aorist active of \akou“\) a voice from his mouth.

rwp@Acts:23:8 @{There is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit} (\mˆ einai anastasin mˆte aggelon mˆte pneuma\). Infinitive with negative \mˆ\ in indirect assertion. These points constitute the chief doctrinal differences between the Pharisees and the Sadducees. {Both} (\amphotera\). Here used though three items of belief are mentioned as in strkjv@19:16| where the seven sons of Sceva are thus described. This idiom is common enough in papyri and Byzantine Greek (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 745).

rwp@Acts:23:23 @{Two} (\tinas duo\). "Some two" as in strkjv@Luke:7:19|, indicating (Page) that they were not specially chosen. {Soldiers} (\strati“tas\), {horsemen} (\hippeis\), {spearmen} (\dexiolabous\). The three varieties of troops in a Roman army like the cohort of Lysias (Page). The \strati“tai\ were the heavy-armed legionaries, the \hippeis\ belonged to every legion, the \dexiolaboi\ were light-armed supplementary troops who carried a lance in the right hand (\dexios\, right, \lamban“\, to take). Vulgate, _lancearios_. At the third hour of the night (\apo tritˆs h“ras tˆs nuktos\). About nine in the evening.

rwp@Acts:24:24 @{With Drusilla his wife} (\sun Drousillˆi tˆi idiƒi gunaiki\). Felix had induced her to leave her former husband Aziz, King of Emesa. She was one of three daughters of Herod Agrippa I (Drusilla, Mariamne, Bernice). Her father murdered James, her great-uncle Herod Antipas slew John the Baptist, her great-grandfather (Herod the Great) killed the babes of Bethlehem. Perhaps the mention of Drusilla as "his own wife" is to show that it was not a formal trial on this occasion. Page thinks that she was responsible for the interview because of her curiosity to hear Paul. {Sent for} (\metepempsato\). First aorist middle of \metapemp“\ as usual (Acts:10:5|).

rwp@Acts:25:1 @{Having come into the province} (\epibas tˆi eparcheiƒi\). Second aorist active participle of \epibain“\, to set foot upon. Literally, "Having set foot upon his province." \Eparcheia\ is a late word for province, in N.T. only here and strkjv@23:34|. Judea was not strictly a province, but a department (Page) of the province of Syria which was under a _propraetor_ (\legatus Caesaris\) while Judea was under a _procurator_ (\epitropos\). {After three days} (\meta treis hˆmeras\). Songs:in strkjv@Acts:28:17| in Rome. That is on the third day, with a day of rest in between. Precisely the language used of the resurrection of Jesus "after three days" = "on the third day." Songs:by common usage then and now.

rwp@Acts:25:8 @{While Paul said in his defence} (\tou Paulou apologoumenou\). Genitive absolute again, present middle participle of \apologeomai\, old verb to make defence as in strkjv@19:33; strkjv@24:10; strkjv@26:1,2|. The recitative \hoti\ of the Greek before a direct quotation is not reproduced in English. {Have I sinned at all} (\ti hˆmarton\). Constative aorist active indicative of \hamartan“\, to miss, to sin. The \ti\ is cognate accusative (or adverbial accusative). Either makes sense. Paul sums up the charges under the three items of law of the Jews, the temple, the Roman state (Caesar). This last was the one that would interest Festus and, if proved, would render Paul guilty of treason (\majestas\). Nero was Emperor A.D. 54-68, the last of the emperors with any hereditary claim to the name "Caesar." Soon it became merely a title like Kaiser and Czar (modern derivatives). In Acts only "Caesar" and "Augustus" are employed for the Emperor, not "King" (\Basileus\) as from the time of Domitian. Paul's denial is complete and no proof had been presented. Luke was apparently present at the trial.

rwp@Acts:25:18 @{Brought} (\epheron\). Imperfect active of \pher“\, referring to their repeated charges. {Of such evil things as I supposed} (\h“n eg“ hupenooun ponˆr“n\). Incorporation of the antecedent \ponˆr“n\ into the relative clause and change of the case of the relative from the accusative \ha\ object of \hupenooun\ to the genitive like \ponˆr“n\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 719). Note the imperfect active \hupenooun\ of \huponoe“\ to emphasize Festus's state of mind about Paul before the trial. This old verb only three times in the N.T. (here, strkjv@Acts:13:25| which see; strkjv@27:27|).

rwp@Acts:25:21 @{When Paul had appealed} (\tou Paulou epikalesamenou\). Genitive absolute with first aorist middle participle of \epikaleomai\, the technical word for appeal (verses 11,12|). The first aorist passive infinitive \tˆrˆthˆnai\ (to be kept) is the object of the participle. {For the decision of the emperor} (\eis tˆn tou Sebastou diagn“sin\). \Diagn“sin\ (cf. \diagn“somai\ strkjv@24:22|, I will determine) is the regular word for a legal examination (\cognitio\), thorough sifting (\dia\), here only in N.T. Instead of "the Emperor" it should be "the Augustus," as \Sebastos\ is simply the Greek translation of _Augustus_, the adjective (Revered, Reverent) assumed by Octavius B.C. 27 as the \agnomen\ that summed up all his various offices instead of _Rex_ so offensive to the Romans having led to the death of Julius Caesar. The successors of Octavius assumed _Augustus_ as a title. The Greek term \Sebastos\ has the notion of worship (cf. \sebasma\ in Acts strkjv@17:25|). In the N.T. only here, verse 25; strkjv@27:1| (of the legion). It was more imposing than "Caesar" which was originally a family name (always official in the N.T.) and it fell in with the tendency toward emperor-worship which later played such a large part in Roman life and which Christians opposed so bitterly. China is having a revival of this idea in the insistence on bowing three times to the picture of Sun-Yat-Sen. {Till I should send him to Caesar} (\he“s an anapemps“ auton pros Kaisara\). Here \anapemps“\ can be either future indicative or first aorist subjunctive (identical in first person singular), aorist subjunctive the usual construction with \he“s\ for future time (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 876). Literally, "send up" (\ana\) to a superior (the emperor). Common in this sense in the papyri and _Koin‚_ writers. Here "Caesar" is used as the title of Nero instead of "Augustus" as \Kurios\ (Lord) occurs in verse 26|.

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

rwp@Ephesians:4:6 @{One God and Father of all} (\heis theos kai patˆr pant“n\). Not a separate God for each nation or religion. One God for all men. See here the Trinity again (Father, Jesus, Holy Spirit). {Who is over all} (\ho epi pant“n\), {and through all} (\kai dia pant“n\), {and in all} (\kai en pƒsin\). Thus by three prepositions (\epi, dia, en\) Paul has endeavoured to express the universal sweep and power of God in men's lives. The pronouns (\pant“n, pant“n, pƒsin\) can be all masculine, all neuter, or part one or the other. The last "in all" is certainly masculine and probably all are.

rwp@Ephesians:4:11 @{And he gave} (\kai autos ed“ken\). First aorist active indicative of \did“mi\. In strkjv@1Corinthians:12:28| Paul uses \etheto\ (more common verb, appointed), but here repeats \ed“ken\ from the quotation in verse 8|. There are four groups (\tous men\, \tous de\ three times, as the direct object of \ed“ken\). The titles are in the predicate accusative (\apostolous, prophˆtas, poimenas kai didaskalous\). Each of these words occurs in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:28| (which see for discussion) except \poimenas\ (shepherds). This word \poimˆn\ is from a root meaning to protect. Jesus said the good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep (John:10:11|) and called himself the Good Shepherd. In strkjv@Hebrews:13:20| Christ is the Great Shepherd (cf. strkjv@1Peter:2:25|). Only here are preachers termed shepherds (Latin _pastores_) in the N.T. But the verb \poimain“\, to shepherd, is employed by Jesus to Peter (John:21:16|), by Peter to other ministers (1Peter:5:2|), by Paul to the elders (bishops) of Ephesus (Acts:20:28|). Here Paul groups "shepherds and teachers" together. All these gifts can be found in one man, though not always. Some have only one.

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

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ SOME BOOKS ON HEBREWS ANDEL, _Deuteronomy:Brief aan de Hebraer_ (1906). ANDERSON, R., _The Hebrews Epistle in the Light of the Types_ (1911). AYLES, _Destination, Date and Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1899). BAILEY, _Leading Ideas of the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1907). BLASS, F., _Brief an die Hebraer, Text, Angabe der Rhythmen_ (1903). BLEEK, F., _Der Hebraerbrief Erklart_ (1840). BRUCE, A. B., _The Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1899). DALE, R. W., _The Jewish Temple in the Christian Church_ (1865). DAVIDSON, A. B., _The Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1882). DELITZSCH, F., _Commentary on the Hebrews_ (1857). DIBELIUS, M., _Der Verfasser des Hebraerbriefes_ (1910). DODS, M., _Expositor's Greek Testament_ (1910). DU BOSE, W. P., _High Priesthood and sacrifice_ (1908). EDWARDS, T. C., _Expositor's Bible_ (1888). FARRAR, F. W., _Cambridge Greek Testament_ (1893). GOODSPEED, E. J., _Bible for Home and School_ (1908). GRIFFTH-THOMAS, W. H., _Let Us Go On_ (1923). HEIGL, _Verfalser und Addresse des Briefes an die Hebraer_ (1905). HOLLMANN, _Schriften d. N. T_. 2 Aufl. (1907). KENDRICK, A. C., _American Commentary_ (1890). LIDGETT, J. S., _Sonship and Salvation_ (1921). LOWRIE, _An Explanation of Hebrews_ (1921). LUNEMANN, G., _Meyer Komm_. (1882). MACFADYEN, J. F., _Through the Eternal Spirit_ (1925). MACNEILL, _The Christology of the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1914). MENEGOZ, E., _Lamentations:Theologie de l'epitre aux Hebreaux_ (1894). MILLIGAN, G., _The Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1899). MOFFATT JAMES, _Int. and Cosit. Comm_. (1924) MOULE, H. C., _Messages from the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1909). MURRAY, ANDREW, _Devotional Commentary_. NAIRNE, A., _The Epistle of Priesthood_ (1913). NAIRNE, A., _The Alexandrian Gospel_ (1917). PEAKE, A. S., _New Century Bible_ (1904). PORTER, S. J., _The Twelve-Gemmed Crown_ (1913). RENDALL, F., _The Theology of the Hebrew Christians_ (1886). RIGGENBACH, M., _Zoeckler Komm_. 2 Aufl. (1913). ROTHERHAM, _The Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1906). SAPHIR, A., _Exposition of Hebrews_. SCOTT, E. F., _The Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1922). SEEBERG, A., _Der Brief an die Hebraer_ (1912). SLOT, _Deuteronomy:Letterkundige Vorm van den Brief aan de Hebraer (1912). SODEN, VON, _Hand-Comm_. (1899). THOLUCK, A., _Komm. zum Briefe an die Hebraer_. VAUGHAN, C. J., _Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1899). WADE, _The Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1923). WEISS, B., _Meyer-Komm_. 6 Aufl. (1902). WEISS, B., _Der Hebraerbrief in Zeitgeschichtlicher Bekuch- tung_ (1910). WELCH, _Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1899). WESTCOTT, B. F., _Epistle to the Hebrews_ (3rd ed. 1906). WICKHAM, E. C., _Westminster Comm_. (1910). WINDISCH, H., _Handbuch zum N.T_. (1913). WREDE, W., _Das literarisches Ratsel des Hebraerbriefs_ (1906). strkjv@Hebrews:1:1 @{God} (\ho theos\). This Epistle begins like Genesis and the Fourth Gospel with God, who is the Author of the old revelation in the prophets and of the new in his Son. Verses 1-3| are a _proemium_ (Delitzsch) or introduction to the whole Epistle. The periodic structure of the sentence (1-4|) reminds one of strkjv@Luke:1:1-4, strkjv@Romans:1:1-7, strkjv@1John:1:1-4|. The sentence could have concluded with \en hui“i\ in verse 2|, but by means of three relatives (\hon, di' hou, hos\) the author presents the Son as "the exact counterpart of God" (Moffatt). {Of old time} (\palai\). "Long ago" as in strkjv@Matthew:11:21|. {Having spoken} (\lalˆsas\). First aorist active participle of \lale“\, originally chattering of birds, then used of the highest form of speech as here. {Unto the fathers} (\tois patrasin\). Dative case. The Old Testament worthies in general without "our" or "your" as in strkjv@John:6:58; strkjv@7:22; strkjv@Romans:9:5|. {In the prophets} (\en tois prophˆtais\). As the quickening power of their life (Westcott). strkjv@Songs:4:7|. {By divers portions} (\polumer“s\). "In many portions." Adverb from late adjective \polumerˆs\ (in papyri), both in _Vettius Valens_, here only in N.T., but in Wisdom strkjv@7:22 and Josephus (_Ant_. VIII, 3, 9). The Old Testament revelation came at different times and in various stages, a progressive revelation of God to men. {In divers manners} (\polutrop“s\). "In many ways." Adverb from old adjective \polutropos\, in Philo, only here in N.T. The two adverbs together are "a sonorous hendiadys for 'variously'" (Moffatt) as Chrysostom (\diaphor“s\). God spoke by dream, by direct voice, by signs, in different ways to different men (Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, Isaiah, etc.).

rwp@James:2:2 @{For} (\gar\). An illustration of the prohibition. {If there come in} (\ean eiselthˆi\). Condition of third class (supposable case) with \ean\ and second (ingressive) aorist active subjunctive of \eiserchomai\. {Into your synagogue} (\eis sunag“gˆn hum“n\). The common word for the gathering of Jews for worship (Luke:12:11|) and particularly for the building where they met (Luke:4:15,20,28|, etc.). Here the first is the probable meaning as it clearly is in strkjv@Hebrews:10:25| (\tˆn episunag“gˆn heaut“n\), where the longer compound occurs. It may seem a bit odd for a Christian church (\ekklˆsia\) to be termed \sunag“gˆ\, but James is writing to Jewish Christians and this is another incidental argument for the early date. Epiphanius (_Haer_. XXX. 18) states that the Ebionites call their church \sunag“gˆ\, not \ekklˆsia\. In the fourth century an inscription has \sunag“gˆ\ for the meeting-house of certain Christians. {A man with a gold ring} (\anˆr chrusodaktulios\). "A gold-fingered man," "wearing a gold ring." The word occurs nowhere else, but Lucian has \chrusocheir\ (gold-handed) and Epictetus has \chrusous daktulious\ (golden seal-rings). "Hannibal, after the battle of Cannae, sent as a great trophy to Carthage, three bushels of gold-rings from the fingers of Roman knights slain in battle" (Vincent). {In fine clothing} (\en esthˆti lamprƒi\). "In bright (brilliant) clothing" as in strkjv@Luke:23:11; strkjv@Acts:10:30; strkjv@Revelation:18:41|. In contrast with "vile clothing" (\en ruparƒi esthˆti\), "new glossy clothes and old shabby clothes" (Hort). \Ruparos\ (late word from \rupos\, filth, strkjv@1Peter:3:21|) means filthy, dirty. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:22:11| (filthy). {Poor man} (\pt“chos\). Beggarly mendicant (Matthew:19:21|), the opposite of \plousios\ (rich).

rwp@James:2:5 @{Did not God choose?} (\ouch ho theos exelexato;\). Affirmative answer expected. First aorist middle (indirect, God chose for himself) indicative of \ekleg“\, the very form used by Paul three times of God's choice in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:27f|. {As to the world} (\t“i kosm“i\). The ethical dative of interest, as the world looks at it as in strkjv@Acts:7:20; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:18; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:4; strkjv@James:4:4|. By the use of the article (the poor) James does not affirm that God chose all the poor, but only that he did choose poor people (Matthew:10:23-26; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26-28|). {Rich in faith} (\plousious en pistei\). Rich because of their faith. As he has shown in strkjv@1:9f|. {Which he promised} (\hˆs epeggeilato\). Genitive of the accusative relative \hˆn\ attracted to the case of the antecedent \basileias\ (the Messianic kingdom), the same verb and idea already in strkjv@1:12| (\epˆggeilato\). Cf. the beatitude of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:5:3| for the poor in spirit.

rwp@James:5:17 @{Of like passions with us} (\homoiopathˆs hˆmin\). Associative-instrumental case \hˆmin\ as with \homoios\. This old compound adjective (\homoios, pasch“\), suffering the like with another, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:14:15|. {He prayed fervently} (\proseuchˆi prosˆuxato\). First aorist middle indicative of \proseuchomai\ and the instrumental case \proseuchˆi\ (cognate substantive), after idiom for intensity in classical Greek, like \pheugein phugˆi\, to flee with all speed (_figura etymologica_), but particularly frequent in the LXX (Genesis:2:17; strkjv@31:30|) in imitation of the Hebrew infinitive absolute. Songs:Luke:22:15; strkjv@John:3:29; strkjv@Acts:4:17|. {That it might not rain} (\tou mˆ brexai\). Genitive of the articular infinitive (\brexai\, first aorist active of \brech“\, old verb, to moisten, strkjv@Luke:7:38|, to rain, strkjv@Matthew:5:45|) with negative \mˆ\ used either for direct purpose, for an object clause as here and strkjv@Acts:3:12; strkjv@15:20|, or even for result. {For three years and six months} (\eniautous treis kai mˆnas hex\). Accusative of extent of time.

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

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

rwp@John:1:17 @{Was given} (\edothˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \did“mi\. {By Moses} (\dia M“use“s\). "Through Moses" as the intermediate agent of God. {Came} (\egeneto\). The historical event, the beginning of Christianity. {By Jesus Christ} (\dia Iˆsou Christou\). "Through Jesus Christ," the intermediate agent of God the Father. Here in plain terms John identifies the Pre-incarnate Logos with Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah. The full historical name "Jesus Christ" is here for the first time in John. See also strkjv@17:3| and four times in 1John and five times in Revelation. Without Christ there would have been no Christianity. John's theology is here pictured by the words "grace and truth" (\hˆ charis kai hˆ alˆtheia\), each with the article and each supplementary to the other. It is grace in contrast with law as Paul sets forth in Galatians and Romans. Paul had made grace "a Christian commonplace" (Bernard) before John wrote. It is truth as opposed to Gnostic and all other heresy as Paul shows in Colossians and Ephesians. The two words aptly describe two aspects of the Logos and John drops the use of \Logos\ and \charis\, but clings to \alˆtheia\ (see strkjv@8:32| for the freedom brought by truth), though the ideas in these three words run all through his Gospel.

rwp@John:5:1 @{After these things} (\meta tauta\). John is fond of this vague phrase (3:22; strkjv@6:1|). He does not mean that this incident follows immediately. He is supplementing the Synoptic Gospels and does not attempt a full story of the work of Jesus. Some scholars needlessly put chapter 5 after chapter 6 because in chapter 6 Jesus is in Galilee as at the end of chapter 4. But surely it is not incongruous to think of Jesus making a visit to Jerusalem before the events in chapter 6 which undoubtedly come within a year of the end (6:4|). {A feast of the Jews} (\heortˆ t“n Ioudai“n\). Some manuscripts have the article (\hˆ\) "the feast" which would naturally mean the passover. As a matter of fact there is no way of telling what feast it was which Jesus here attended. Even if it was not the passover, there may well be another passover not mentioned besides the three named by John (2:13,23; strkjv@6:4: strkjv@12:1|). {Went up} (\anebˆ\). Second aorist active indicative of \anabain“\. It was up towards Jerusalem from every direction save from Hebron.

rwp@John:5:25 @{And now is} (\kai nun estin\). See strkjv@4:23| for this phrase. Not the future resurrection in verse 28|, but the spiritual resurrection here and now. {The dead} (\hoi nekroi\). The spiritually dead, dead in trespasses and sins (Ephesians:2:1,5; strkjv@5:14|). {Shall hear the voice of the Son of God} (\akousousin tˆs ph“nˆs tou huiou tou theou\). Note three genitives (\ph“nˆs\ after \akousousin\, \huiou\ with \ph“nˆs\, \theou\ with \huiou\). Note three articles (correlation of the article) and that Jesus here calls himself "the Son of God" as in strkjv@10:36; strkjv@11:4|. {Shall live} (\zˆsousin\). Future active indicative, shall come to life spiritually.

rwp@John:6:22 @{Which stood} (\ho hestˆk“s\). Perfect active (intransitive) participle of \histˆmi\, to put, to stand. Jesus had sent the multitudes away the evening before (Mark:6:45; strkjv@Matthew:14:22|), but evidently some did not go very far, still lingering in excitement on the eastern side of the lake next morning. {Boat} (\ploiarion\). Diminutive of \ploion\, little boat (Mark:3:9|). {Entered not with} (\ou suneisˆlthen\). Second aorist active of the double compound verb \suneiserchomai\, followed by associative instrumental case \mathˆtais\. {Went away alone} (\monoi apˆlthon\). Second aorist active indicative of \aperchomai\, to go away or off. \Monoi\ is predicate nominative. These people noted these three items.

rwp@John:11:37 @{Could not this man} (\ouk edunato houtos\). Imperfect middle of \dunamai\. They do not say \dunatai\ (can, present middle indicative). But clearly the opening of the blind man's eyes (chapter 9) had made a lasting impression on some of these Jews, for it was done three months ago. {Have caused that this man also should not die} (\poiˆsai hina kai houtos mˆ apothanˆi\). First aorist active infinitive of \poie“\ with \hina\, like the Latin _facere ut_ (sub-final use, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 985), with the second aorist active subjunctive \apothanˆi\ and negative \mˆ\. These Jews share the view expressed by Martha (verse 21|) and Mary (verse 32|) that Jesus could have {prevented} the death of Lazarus.

rwp@John:11:39 @{Take ye away the stone} (\arate ton lithon\). First aorist active imperative of \air“\. They could do this much without the exercise of Christ's divine power. It was a startling command to them. {By this time he stinketh} (\ˆdˆ ozei\). Present active indicative of old verb, here only in N.T. (cf. strkjv@Exodus:8:14|). It means to give out an odour, either good or bad. {For he hath been dead four days} (\tetartaios gar estin\). The Greek simply says, "For he is a fourth-day man." It is an old ordinal numeral from \tetartos\ (fourth). Herodotus (ii. 89) has \tetartaios genesthai\ of one four days dead as here. The word is only here in the N.T. The same idiom occurs in strkjv@Acts:28:13| with \deuteraioi\ (second-day men). Lightfoot (_Hor. Hebr._) quotes a Jewish tradition (_Beresh. Rabba_) to the effect that the soul hovers around the tomb for three days hoping to return to the body, but on the fourth day leaves it. But there is no suggestion here that Martha held that notion. Her protest is a natural one in spite of her strong faith in verses 22-27|.

rwp@John:12:5 @{Sold} (\eprathˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \piprask“\, old verb to sell (Matthew:13:46|). {For three hundred pence} (\triakosi“n dˆnari“n\). Genitive of price. Same item in strkjv@Mark:14:5|, while in strkjv@Matthew:26:9| it is simply "for much" (\pollou\). But all three have "given to the poor" (\edothˆ pt“chois\). First aorist passive indicative of \did“mi\ with dative case \pt“chois\ (note absence of the article, poor people), real beggars, mendicants (Matthew:19:21; strkjv@Luke:14:13|). But only John singles out Judas as the one who made the protest against this waste of money while Mark says that "some" had indignation and Matthew has it that "the disciples" had indignation. Clearly Judas was the spokesman for the group who chimed in and agreed with his protest. The amount here spent by Mary (ten guineas) would equal a day labourer's wages for a year (Dods).

rwp@John:12:16 @{Understood not} (\ouk egn“san\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. Another comment by John concerning the failure of the disciples to know what was happening (cf. strkjv@2:22; strkjv@7:39|). {At the first} (\to pr“ton\). Adverbial accusative, as in strkjv@10:40; strkjv@19:39|. {Was glorified} (\edoxasthˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \doxaz“\, to glorify, used of his death already in strkjv@7:39| and by Jesus himself of his death, resurrection, and ascension in strkjv@12:23; strkjv@13:31|. {Then remembered they} (\tote emnˆsthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \mimnˆsk“\. It was easier to understand then and they had the Holy Spirit to help them (16:13-15|). {Were written of him} (\ˆn ep' aut“i gegrammena\). Periphrastic past perfect passive of \graph“\ with neuter plural participle agreeing with \tauta\ (these things) and singular verb, though the plural \ˆsan\ could have been used. Note the threefold repetition of \tauta\ in this verse, "clumsy" Bernard calls it, but making for clarity. The use of \ep' aut“i\ for "of him" rather than \peri autou\ is unusual, but occurs in strkjv@Revelation:10:11; strkjv@22:16|. {They had done} (\epoiˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \poie“\, simply, "they did."

rwp@John:12:24 @{Except} (\ean mˆ\). Negative condition of third class (undetermined, supposable case) with second aorist active participle \pes“n\ (from \pipt“\, to fall) and the second aorist active subjunctive of \apothnˆsk“\, to die. {A grain of wheat} (\ho kokkos tou sitou\). Rather, "the grain of wheat." {By itself alone} (\autos monos\). Both predicate nominatives after \menei\. It is not necessary to think (nor likely) that Jesus has in mind the Eleusinian mysteries which became a symbol of the mystery of spring. Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:36| uses the same illustration of the resurrection that Jesus does here. Jesus shows here the paradox that life comes through death. Whether the Greeks heard him or not we do not know. If so, they heard something not in Greek philosophy, the Christian ideal of sacrifice, "and this was foreign to the philosophy of Greece" (Bernard). Jesus had already spoken of himself as the bread of life (6:35-65|). {But if it die} (\ean de apothanˆi\). Parallel condition of the third class. Grains of wheat have been found in Egyptian tombs three or four thousand years old, but they are now dead. They bore no fruit.

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

rwp@Luke:7:15 @{Sat up} (\anekathisen\). First aorist active indicative. The verb in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:9:40|. Medical writers often used it of the sick sitting up in bed (Hobart, _Med. Lang. of St. Luke_, p. 11). It is objected that the symmetry of these cases (daughter of Jairus raised from the death-bed, this widow's son raised from the bier, Lazarus raised from the tomb) is suspicious, but no one Gospel gives all three (Plummer). {Gave him to his mother} (\ed“ken auton tˆi mˆtri autou\). Tender way of putting it. "For he had already ceased to belong to his mother" (Bengel). Songs:in strkjv@Luke:9:42|.

rwp@Luke:8:16 @{When he hath lighted a lamp} (\luchnon hapsas\). It is a portable lamp (\luchnon\) that one lights (\hapsas\ aorist active participle of \hapt“\, to kindle, fasten to, light). {With a vessel} (\skeuei\, instrumental case of \skeuos\). Here strkjv@Mark:4:21| has the more definite figure "under the bushel" as has strkjv@Matthew:5:15|. {Under the bed} (\hupokat“ klinˆs\). Here strkjv@Mark:4:21| has the regular \hupo tˆn klinˆn\ instead of the late compound \hupokat“\. Ragg notes that Matthew distributes the sayings of Jesus given here by strkjv@Luke:8:16-18; strkjv@Mark:4:21-25| concerning the parable of the lamp and gives them in three separate places (Matthew:5:15; strkjv@10:26; strkjv@13:12|). That is true, but it does not follow that Mark and Luke have bunched together separate sayings or that Matthew has scattered sayings delivered only on one occasion. One of the slowest lessons for some critics to learn is that Jesus repeated favourite sayings on different occasions and in different groupings just as every popular preacher and teacher does today. See on ¯Mark:4:21| for further discussion of the lamp and stand. {May see the light} (\Blep“sin to ph“s\). In strkjv@Matthew:5:16| Jesus has it "may see your good works." The purpose of light is to let one see something else, not the light. Note present subjunctive (\blep“sin\), linear action "Jesus had kindled a light within them. They must not hide it, but must see that it spreads to others" (Plummer). The parable of the lamp throws light on the parable of the sower.

rwp@Luke:8:27 @{And for a long time} (\kai chron“i hikan“i\). The use of the associative instrumental case in expressions of time is a very old Greek idiom that still appears in the papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 527). {He had worn no clothes} (\ouk enedusato himation\). First aorist middle indicative, constative aorist, viewing the "long time" as a point. Not pluperfect as English has it and not for the pluperfect, simply "and for a long time he did not put on himself (indirect middle) any clothing." The physician would naturally note this item. Common verb \endu“\ or \endun“\. This item in Luke alone, though implied by strkjv@Mark:5:15| "clothed" (\himatismenon\). {And abode not in any house} (\kai en oikiƒi ouk emenen\). Imperfect active. Peculiar to Luke, though implied by the mention of tombs in all three (Mark:5:3; strkjv@Matthew:8:28; strkjv@Luke:8:27|).

rwp@Luke:18:22 @{One thing thou lackest yet} (\eti hen soi leipei\). Literally, one thing still fails thee or is wanting to thee. An old verb with the dative of personal interest. strkjv@Mark:10:21| has here \husterei se\, which see. It was an amazing compliment for one who was aiming at perfection (Matthew:19:21|). The youth evidently had great charm and was sincere in his claims. {Distribute} (\diados\). Second aorist active imperative of \diadid“mi\ (give to various ones, \dia-\). Here Mark and Matthew simply have \dos\ (give). The rest the same in all three Gospels.

rwp@Luke:18:33 @{The third day} (\tˆi hˆmerƒi tˆi tritˆi\). The day the third. In strkjv@Matthew:20:19| it is "the third day" while in strkjv@Mark:10:34| "after three days" occurs in the same sense, which see.

rwp@Luke:18:34 @{And they perceived not} (\kai ouk egin“skon\). Imperfect active. They kept on not perceiving. Twice already Luke has said this in the same sentence. {They understood none of these things} (\ouden tout“n sunˆkan\). First aorist active indicative, a summary statement. {This saying was hid from them} (\ˆn to rhˆma touto kekrummenon ap' aut“n\). Past perfect passive indicative (periphrastic), state of completion. It was a puzzling experience. No wonder that Luke tries three times to explain the continued failure of the apostles to understand Jesus. The words of Christ about his death ran counter to all their hopes and beliefs.

rwp@Luke:18:41 @{What wilt thou that I should do unto thee?} (\Ti soi theleis poiˆs“;\). Same idiom in strkjv@Mark:10:51; strkjv@Matthew:20:32| which see, the use of \thel“\ without \hina\ with aorist subjunctive (or future indicative). See same references also for \hina anableps“\ "that I may see again" without verb before \hina\. Three uses of \anablep“\ here (verses 41,42,43|).

rwp@Luke:19:45 @{Began to cast out} (\ˆrxato ekballein\). Songs:Mark:11:15| whereas strkjv@Matthew:21:12| has simply "he cast out." See Mark and Matthew for discussion of this second cleansing of the temple at the close of the public ministry in relation to the one at the beginning in strkjv@John:2:14-22|. There is nothing gained by accusing John or the Synoptics of a gross chronological blunder. There was abundant time in these three years for all the abuses to be revived.

rwp@Luke:20:9 @{Vineyard} (\ampel“na\). Late word from \ampelos\ (vine), place of vines. Songs:in strkjv@Mark:12:1; strkjv@Matthew:21:33|. {Let it out} (\exedeto\). Second aorist middle of \ekdid“mi\, but with variable vowel \e\ in place of \o\ of the stem \do\ (\exedoto\). Same form in Mark and Matthew. {For a long time} (\chronous hikanous\). Accusative of extent of time, considerable times or periods of time. Not in Mark and Matthew, though all three have \apedˆmˆsen\ (went off from home). See on ¯Luke:7:6| for \hikanos\.

rwp@Luke:20:13 @{What shall I do?} (\Ti poiˆs“;\). Deliberative future indicative or aorist subjunctive (same form). This detail only in Luke. Note the variations in all three Gospels. All three have "will reverence" (\entrapˆsontai\) for which see Matthew and Mark. {It may be} (\is“s\). Perhaps, from \isos\, equal. Old adverb, but only here in the N.T.

rwp@Luke:20:42 @{For David himself} (\autos gar Daueid\). This language of Jesus clearly means that he treats David as the author of strkjv@Psalms:110|. The inspiration of this Psalm is expressly stated in strkjv@Mark:12:36; strkjv@Matthew:22:43| (which see) and the Messianic character of the Psalm in all three Synoptics who all quote the LXX practically alike. Modern criticism that denies the Davidic authorship of this Psalm has to say either that Jesus was ignorant of the fact about it or that he declined to disturb the current acceptation of the Davidic authorship. Certainly modern scholars are not agreed on the authorship of strkjv@Psalms:110|. Meanwhile one can certainly be excused for accepting the natural implication of the words of Jesus here, "David himself." {In the book of the Psalms} (\en bibl“i Psalm“n\). Compare strkjv@3:4| "in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet."

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:22:45 @{Sleeping for sorrow} (\koim“menous apo tˆs lupˆs\). Luke does not tell of the three turnings of Jesus to the trusted three for human sympathy.

rwp@Luke:22:58 @{After a little while another} (\meta brachu heteros\). strkjv@Matthew:26:71| makes it after Peter had gone out into the porch and mentions a maid as speaking as does strkjv@Mark:14:69|, while here the "other" (\heteros\) is a man (masculine gender). It is almost impossible to co-ordinate the three denials in the four accounts unless we conceive of several joining in when one led off. This time Peter's denial is very blunt, "I am not."

rwp@Luke:22:66 @{As soon as it was day} (\h“s egeneto hˆmera\). strkjv@Mark:15:1| (Matthew:27:1|) has "morning." {The assembly of the people} (\to presbuterion tou laou\). The technical word for "the eldership" (from \presbuteros\, an old man or elder) or group of the elders composing the Sanhedrin. The word occurs in the LXX for the Sanhedrin. In the N.T. occurs only here and strkjv@Acts:22:5| of the Sanhedrin. In strkjv@1Timothy:4:14| Paul uses it of the elders in a church (or churches). The Sanhedrin was composed of the elders and scribes and chief priests (Mark:15:1|) and all three groups are at this meeting. Luke's language (both chief priests and scribes, \te... kai\) seems to apply the word \presbuterion\ to the whole Sanhedrin. Sadducees (chief priests) and Pharisees (scribes) were nearly equally represented. {Into their council} (\eis to sunedrion aut“n\). The place of the gathering is not given, but Jesus was led into the council chamber.

rwp@Luke:22:70 @{Art thou the Son of God?} (\Su oun ei ho huios tou theou;\). Note how these three epithets are used as practical equivalents. They ask about "the Messiah." Jesus affirms that he is the Son of Man and will sit at the right hand of the power of God. They take this to be a claim to be the Son of God (both humanity and deity). Jesus accepts the challenge and admits that he claims to be all three (Messiah, the Son of man, the Son of God). {Ye say} (\Humeis legete\). Just a Greek idiom for "Yes" (compare "I am" in strkjv@Mark:14:62| with "Thou has said" in strkjv@Matthew:26:64|).

rwp@Luke:23:2 @{Began to accuse} (\ˆrxanto katˆgorein\). They went at it and kept it up. Luke mentions three, but neither of them includes their real reason nor do they mention their own condemnation of Jesus. They had indulged their hatred in doing it, but they no longer have the power of life and death. Hence they say nothing to Pilate of that. {We found} (\heuramen\). Second aorist active indicative with first aorist vowel \a\. Probably they mean that they had caught Jesus in the act of doing these things (_in flagrante delicto_) rather than discovery by formal trial. {Perverting our nation} (\diastrephonta to ethnos hˆm“n\). Present active participle of \diastreph“\, old verb to turn this way and that, distort, disturb. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:13:10|. The Sanhedrin imply that the great popularity of Jesus was seditious. {Forbidding to give tribute to Caesar}, (\k“luonta phorous kaisari didonai\). Note object infinitive \didonai\ after the participle \k“luonta\. Literally, hindering giving tribute to Caesar. This was a flat untruth. Their bright young students had tried desperately to get Jesus to say this very thing, but they had failed utterly (Luke:20:25|). {Saying that he himself is Christ a king} (\legonta hauton Christon basilea einai\). Note the indirect discourse here after the participle \legonta\ with the accusative (\hauton\ where \auton\ could have been used), and the infinitive. This charge is true, but not in the sense meant by them. Jesus did claim to be the Christ and the king of the kingdom of God. But the Sanhedrin wanted Pilate to think that he set himself up as a rival to Caesar. Pilate would understand little from the word "Christ," but "King" was a different matter. He was compelled to take notice of this charge else he himself would be accused to Caesar of winking at such a claim by Jesus.

rwp@Luke:23:14 @{As one that perverteth the people} (\h“s apostrephonta ton laon\). Pilate here condenses the three charges in verse 2| into one (Plummer). He uses a more common compound of \streph“\ here, \apostreph“\, to turn away from, to seduce, to mislead, whereas \diastreph“\ in verse 2| has more the notion of disturbing (turning this way and that). Note the use of \h“s\ with the particle, the alleged reason. Pilate understands the charge against Jesus to be that he is a revolutionary agitator and a dangerous rival to Caesar, treason in plain words. {Having examined him before you} (\en“pion hum“n anakrinas\). Right before your eyes I have given him a careful examination (\ana\) up and down, \krin“\, to judge, sift. Old and common verb in the general sense and in the forensic sense as here and which Luke alone has in the N.T. (Luke:23:14; strkjv@4:9; strkjv@12:19; strkjv@28:18; strkjv@Acts:24:8|) except strkjv@1Corinthians:9:3|. {Whereof} (\h“n\). Attraction of the relative \ha\ to the case (genitive) of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\.

rwp@Luke:23:41 @{Nothing amiss} (\ouden atopon\). Nothing out of place (\a\ privative, \topos\, place). Old word, three times in the N.T. (Luke:23:44; strkjv@Acts:28:6; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:2|). This can only mean that this robber accepts the claims of Jesus to be true. He is dying for claiming to be Messiah, as he is.

rwp@Mark:4:39 @{Rebuked the wind} (\epetimˆsen t“i anem“i\) as in strkjv@Matthew:8:26| and strkjv@Luke:8:24|. He spoke to the sea also. All three Gospels speak of the sudden calm (\galˆnˆ\) and the rebuke to the disciples for this lack of faith.

rwp@Mark:5:7 @{I adjure thee by God} (\horkiz“ se ton theon\). The demoniac puts Jesus on oath (two accusatives) after the startled outcry just like the one in strkjv@1:24|, which see. He calls Jesus here "son of the Most High God" (\huie tou theou tou hupsistou\) as in strkjv@Luke:8:28| (cf. strkjv@Genesis:14:18f.|). {Torment me not} (\mˆ me basanisˆis\). Prohibition with \mˆ\ and the ingressive aorist subjunctive. The word means to test metals and then to test one by torture (cf. our "third degree"). Same word in all three Gospels.

rwp@Mark:5:17 @{To depart from their borders} (\apelthein apo t“n hori“n\). Once before the people of Nazareth had driven Jesus out of the city (Luke:4:16-31|). Soon they will do it again on his return there (Mark:6:1-6; strkjv@Matthew:13:54-58|). Here in Decapolis pagan influence was strong and the owners of the hogs cared more for the loss of their property than for the healing of the wild demoniac. In the clash between business and spiritual welfare business came first with them as often today. All three Gospels tell of the request for Jesus to leave. They feared the power of Jesus and wanted no further interference with their business affairs.

rwp@Mark:5:37 @{Save Peter, and James, and John} (\ei mˆ Petron kai lak“bon kai I“anˆn\). Probably the house was too small for the other disciples to come in with the family. The first instance of this inner circle of three seen again on the Mount of Transfiguration and in the Garden of Gethsemane. The one article in the Greek treats the group as a unit.

rwp@Mark:5:41 @{Talitha cumi}. These precious Aramaic words, spoken by Jesus to the child, Peter heard and remembered so that Mark gives them to us. Mark interprets the simple words into Greek for those who did not know Aramaic (\to korasion, egeire\), that is, {Damsel, arise}. Mark uses the diminutive \korasi“n\, a little girl, from \korˆ\, girl. _Braid Scots_ has it: "Lassie, wauken." strkjv@Luke:8:5-9| has it \Hˆ pais, egeire\, {Maiden, arise}. All three Gospels mention the fact that Jesus took her by the hand, a touch of life (\kratˆsas tˆs cheiros\), giving confidence and help.

rwp@Mark:6:9 @{Shod with sandals} (\hupodedemenous sandalia\). Perfect passive participle in the accusative case as if with the infinitive \poreuesthai\ or \poreuthˆnai\, (to go). Note the aorist infinitive middle, \endusasthai\ (text of Westcott and Hort), but \endusˆsthe\ (aorist middle subjunctive) in the margin. Change from indirect to direct discourse common enough, not necessarily due to "disjointed notes on which the Evangelist depended" (Swete). strkjv@Matthew:10:10| has "nor shoes" (\mˆde hupodˆmata\), possibly preserving the distinction between "shoes" and "sandals" (worn by women in Greece and by men in the east, especially in travelling). But here again extra shoes may be the prohibition. See on ¯Matthew:10:10| for this. {Two coats} (\duo chit“nas\). Two was a sign of comparative wealth (Swete). The mention of "two" here in all three Gospels probably helps us to understand that the same thing applies to shoes and staff. "In general, these directions are against luxury in equipment, and also against their providing themselves with what they could procure from the hospitality of others" (Gould).

rwp@Mark:6:21 @{When a convenient day was come} (\genomenˆs hˆmeras eukairou\). Genitive absolute. A day well appointed \eu\, well, \kairos\, time) for the purpose, the day for which she had long waited. She had her plans all laid to spring a trap for her husband Herod Antipas and to make him do her will with the Baptist. Herod was not to know that he was the mere catspaw of Herodias till it was all over. See on ¯Matthew:14:6| for discussion of Herod's birthday (\genesiois\, locative case or associative instrumental of time). {Made a supper} (\deipnon epoiˆsen\). Banquet. {To his lords} (\tois megistƒsin autou\). From \megistan\ (that from \megas\, great), common in the LXX and later Greek. Cf. strkjv@Revelation:6:15; strkjv@18:23|. In the papyri. The grandees, magnates, nobles, the chief men of civil life. {The high captains} (\tois chiliarchois\). Military tribunes, commanders of a thousand men. {The chief men of Galilee} (\tois pr“tois tˆs Galilaias\). The first men of social importance and prominence. A notable gathering that included these three groups at the banquet on Herod's birthday.

rwp@Mark:6:44 @{Men} (\andres\). Men as different from women as in strkjv@Matthew:14:21|. This remarkable miracle is recorded by all Four Gospels, a nature miracle that only God can work. No talk about accelerating natural processes will explain this miracle. And three eyewitnesses report it: the Logia of Matthew, the eyes of Peter in Mark, the witness of John the Beloved Disciple (Gould). The evidence is overwhelming.

rwp@Mark:6:48 @{Seeing them distressed in rowing} (\id“n autous basanizomenous en t“i elaunein\). See also strkjv@Matthew:8:29| for the word \basaniz“\, to torture, torment (Matthew:4:24|) with a touch-stone, then to distress as here. Papyri have \dia basan“n\ used on slaves like our third degree for criminals. \Elaunein\ is literally to drive as of ships or chariots. They drove the boat with oars. Common in Xenophon for marching. {About the fourth watch of the night} (\peri tetartˆn phulakˆn tˆs nuktos\). That is, between three and six A.M. The wind was {contrary to them} (\enantios autois\), that is in their faces and rowing was difficult, "a great wind" (John:6:18|), and as a result the disciples had made little progress. They should have been over long before this. {And he would have passed by them} (\kai ˆthelen parelthein autous\). Only in Mark. He wished to pass by them, _praeterire eos_ (Vulgate). Imperfect tense \ˆthelen\. {They thought} (\edoxan\). A natural conclusion. {And cried out} (\anekraxan\). {Cried up}, literally, a shriek of terror, or scream.

rwp@Mark:7:19 @{Making all meats clean} (\kathariz“n panta ta br“mata\). This anacoluthon can be understood by repeating {he says} (\legei\) from verse 18|. The masculine participle agrees with Jesus, the speaker. The words do not come from Jesus, but are added by Mark. Peter reports this item to Mark, probably with a vivid recollection of his own experience on the housetop in Joppa when in the vision Peter declined three times the Lord's invitation to kill and eat unclean animals (Acts:10:14-16|). It was a riddle to Peter as late as that day. "Christ asserts that _Levitical_ uncleanness, such as eating with unwashed hands, is of small importance compared with _moral_ uncleanness" (Vincent). The two chief words in both incidents, here and in Acts, are {defile} (\koino“\) and {cleanse} (\kathariz“\). "What God cleansed do not thou treat as defiled" (Acts:10:15|). It was a revolutionary declaration by Jesus and Peter was slow to understand it even after the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. Jesus was amply justified in his astonished question: {Perceive ye not?} (\ou noeite;\). They were making little use of their intelligence in trying to comprehend the efforts of Jesus to give them a new and true spiritual insight.

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:8:31 @{He began to teach them} (\ˆrxato didaskein autous\). Mark is fond of this idiom, but it is not a mere rhetorical device. strkjv@Matthew:16:21| expressly says "from that time." They had to be told soon about the approaching death of Jesus. The confession of faith in Jesus indicated that it was a good time to begin. Death at the hands of the Sanhedrin (elders, chief priests, and scribes) in which Pharisees and Sadducees had about equal strength. The resurrection on the third day is mentioned, but it made no impression on their minds. This rainbow on the cloud was not seen. {After three days} (\meta treis hˆmeras\). strkjv@Matthew:16:21| has "the third day" (\tˆi tritˆi hˆmerƒi\) in the locative case of point of time (so also strkjv@Luke:9:22|). There are some people who stickle for a strict interpretation of "after three days" which would be "on the fourth day," not "on the third day." Evidently Mark's phrase here has the same sense as that in Matthew and Luke else they are hopelessly contradictory. In popular language "after three days" can and often does mean "on the third day," but the fourth day is impossible.

rwp@Mark:9:9 @{Save when} (\ei mˆ hotan\). Matthew has "until" (\he“s hou\). {Should have risen} (\anastˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive. More exactly, "should rise" (punctiliar aorist and futuristic, not with any idea of perfect tense). strkjv@Luke:9:36| merely says that they told no man any of these things. It was a high and holy secret experience that the chosen three had had for their future good and for the good of all.

rwp@Mark:9:14 @{And scribes questioning with them} (\kai grammateis sunzˆtountes pros autous\). Mark alone gives this item. He is much fuller on this incident (9:14-29|) than either Matthew (Matthew:17:14-20|) or Luke (Luke:9:37-43|). It was just like the professional scribes to take keen interest in the failure of the nine disciples to cure this poor boy. They gleefully nagged and quizzed them. Jesus and the three find them at it when they arrive in the plain.

rwp@Mark:9:31 @{For he taught} (\edidasken gar\). Imperfect tense, and the reason given for secrecy. He was renewing again definitely the prediction of his death in Jerusalem some six months ahead as he had done before (Mark:8:31; strkjv@Matthew:16:21; strkjv@Luke:9:22|). Now as then Jesus foretells his resurrection "after three days" ("the third day," strkjv@Matthew:17:23|).

rwp@Matthew:5:48 @{Perfect} (\teleioi\). The word comes from \telos\, end, goal, limit. Here it is the goal set before us, the absolute standard of our Heavenly Father. The word is used also for relative perfection as of adults compared with children. strkjv@Matthew:6:1 @{Take heed} (\prosechete\). The Greek idiom includes "mind" (\noun\) which is often expressed in ancient Greek and once in the Septuagint (Job:7:17|). In the New Testament the substantive \nous\ is understood. It means to "hold the mind on a matter," take pains, take heed. "Righteousness" (\dikaiosunˆn\) is the correct text in this verse. Three specimens of the Pharisaic "righteousness" are given (alms, prayer, fasting). {To be seen} (\theathˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of purpose. Our word _theatrical_ is this very word, spectacular performance. {With your Father} (\para t“i patri hum“n\). Literally "beside your Father," standing by his side, as he looks at it.

rwp@Matthew:6:7 @{Use not vain repetitions} (\mˆ battalogˆsˆte\). Used of stammerers who repeat the words, then mere babbling or chattering, empty repetition. The etymology is uncertain, but it is probably onomatopoetic like "babble." The worshippers of Baal on Mount Carmel (1Kings:8:26|) and of Diana in the amphitheatre at Ephesus who yelled for two hours (Acts:19:34|) are examples. The Mohammedans may also be cited who seem to think that they "will be heard for their much speaking" (\en tˆi polulogiƒi\). Vincent adds "and the Romanists with their _paternosters_ and _avast_." The Syriac Sinaitic has it: "Do not be saying idle things." Certainly Jesus does not mean to condemn all repetition in prayer since he himself prayed three times in Gethsemane "saying the same words again" (Matthew:26:44|). "As the Gentiles do," says Jesus. "The Pagans thought that by endless repetitions and many words they would inform their gods as to their needs and weary them ('_fatigare deos_') into granting their requests" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:6:11 @{Our daily bread} (\ton arton hˆm“n ton epiousion\). This adjective "daily" (\epiousion\) coming after "Give us this day" (\dos hˆmŒn sˆmeron\) has given expositors a great deal of trouble. The effort has been made to derive it from \epi\ and \“n\ (\ousa\). It clearly comes from \epi\ and \i“n\ (\epi\ and \eimi\) like \tˆi epiousˆi\ ("on the coming day," "the next day," strkjv@Acts:16:12|). But the adjective \epiousios\ is rare and Origen said it was made by the Evangelists Matthew and Luke to reproduce the idea of an Aramaic original. Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_ say: "The papyri have as yet shed no clear light upon this difficult word (Matthew:6:11; strkjv@Luke:11:3|), which was in all probability a new coinage by the author of the Greek Q to render his Aramaic Original" (this in 1919). Deissmann claims that only about fifty purely New Testament or "Christian" words can be admitted out of the more than 5,000 used. "But when a word is not recognizable at sight as a Jewish or Christian new formation, we must consider it as an ordinary Greek word until the contrary is proved. \Epiousios\ has all the appearance of a word that originated in trade and traffic of the everyday life of the people (cf. my hints in _Neutestamentliche Studien Georg Heinrici dargebracht_, Leipzig, 1914, pp. 118f.). The opinion here expressed has been confirmed by A. Debrunner's discovery (_Theol. Lit. Ztg_. 1925, Col. 119) of \epiousios\ in an ancient housekeeping book" (_Light from the Ancient East_, New ed. 1927, p. 78 and note 1). Songs:then it is not a word coined by the Evangelist or by Q to express an Aramaic original. The word occurs also in three late MSS. after 2Macc. strkjv@1:8, \tous epiousious\ after \tous artous\. The meaning, in view of the kindred participle (\epiousˆi\) in strkjv@Acts:16:12|, seems to be "for the coming day," a daily prayer for the needs of the next day as every housekeeper understands like the housekeeping book discovered by Debrunner.

rwp@Matthew:6:12 @{Our debts} (\ta opheilˆmata hˆm“n\). Luke (Luke:11:4|) has "sins" (\hamartias\). In the ancient Greek \opheilˆma\ is common for actual legal debts as in strkjv@Romans:4:4|, but here it is used of moral and spiritual debts to God. "Trespasses" is a mistranslation made common by the Church of England Prayer Book. It is correct in verse 14| in Christ's argument about prayer, but it is not in the Model Prayer itself. See strkjv@Matthew:18:28,30| for sin pictured again by Christ "as debt and the sinner as a debtor" (Vincent). We are thus described as having wronged God. The word \opheilˆ\ for moral obligation was once supposed to be peculiar to the New Testament. But it is common in that sense in the papyri (Deismann, _Bible Studies_, p. 221; _Light from the Ancient East,_ New ed., p. 331). We ask forgiveness "in proportion as" (\h“s\) we _also_ have forgiven those in debt to us, a most solemn reflection. \Aphˆkamen\ is one of the three k aorists (\ethˆka, ed“ka, hˆka\). It means to send away, to dismiss, to wipe off.

rwp@Matthew:6:25 @{For your life} (\tˆi psuchˆi\). "Here \psuchˆi\ stands for the life principle common to man and beast, which is embodied in the \s“ma\: the former needs food, the latter clothing" (McNeile). \Psuchˆ\ in the Synoptic Gospels occurs in three senses (McNeile): either the life principle in the body as here and which man may kill (Mark:3:4|) or the seat of the thoughts and emotions on a par with \kardia\ and \dianoia\ (Matthew:22:37|) and \pneuma\ (Luke:1:46|; cf. strkjv@John:12:27; strkjv@13:21|) or something higher that makes up the real self (Matthew:10:28; strkjv@16:26|). In strkjv@Matthew:16:25| (Luke:9:25|) \psuchˆ\ appears in two senses paradoxical use, saving life and losing it.

rwp@Matthew:17:1 @{After six days} (\meth' hˆmerƒs hex\). This could be on the sixth day, but as Luke (Luke:9:28|) puts it "about eight days" one naturally thinks of a week as the probable time, though it is not important. {Taketh with him} (\paralambanei\). Literally, {takes along}. Note historical present. These three disciples form an inner group who have shown more understanding of Jesus. Songs:at Gethsemane. {Apart} (\kat' idian\) means "by themselves" ({alone}, \monous\, Mark has it) up (\anapherei\) into a high mountain, probably Mount Hermon again, though we do not really know. "The Mount of Transfiguration does not concern geography" (Holtzmann).

rwp@Matthew:17:3 @{There appeared} (\“phthˆ\). Singular aorist passive verb with Moses (to be understood also with Elijah), but the participle \sunlalountes\ is plural agreeing with both. "Sufficient objectivity is guaranteed by the vision being enjoyed by all three" (Bruce). The Jewish apocalypses reveal popular expectations that Moses and Elijah would reappear. Both had mystery connected with their deaths. One represented law, the other prophecy, while Jesus represented the gospel (grace). They spoke of his decease (Luke:9:31|), the cross, the theme uppermost in the mind of Christ and which the disciples did not comprehend. Jesus needed comfort and he gets it from fellowship with Moses and Elijah.

rwp@Matthew:17:13 @{Then understood} (\tote sunˆkan\). One of the three k aorists. It was plain enough even for them. John was Elijah in spirit and had prepared the way for the Messiah.

rwp@Matthew:18:1 @{Who then is greatest} (\tis ara meiz“n estin\). The \ara\ seems to point back to the tax-collection incident when Jesus had claimed exemption for them all as "sons" of the Father. But it was not a new dispute, for jealousy had been growing in their hearts. The wonderful words of Jesus to Peter on Mount Hermon (Matthew:16:17-19|) had evidently made Peter feel a fresh sense of leadership on the basis of which he had dared even to rebuke Jesus for speaking of his death (16:22|). And then Peter was one of the three (James and John also) taken with the Master up on the Mount of Transfiguration. Peter on that occasion had spoken up promptly. And just now the tax-collectors had singled out Peter as the one who seemed to represent the group. Mark (Mark:9:33|) represents Jesus as asking them about their dispute on the way into the house, perhaps just after their question in strkjv@Matthew:18:1|. Jesus had noticed the wrangling. It will break out again and again (Matthew:20:20-28; strkjv@Luke:22:24|). Plainly the primacy of Peter was not yet admitted by the others. The use of the comparative \meiz“n\ (so \ho meiz“n\ in verse 4|) rather than the superlative \megistos\ is quite in accord with the _Koin‚_ idiom where the comparative is displacing the superlative (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 667ff.). But it is a sad discovery to find the disciples chiefly concerned about their own places (offices) in the political kingdom which they were expecting.

rwp@Matthew:21:1 @{Unto Bethphage} (\eis Bethphagˆ\). An indeclinable Aramaic name here only in O.T. or N.T. (Mark:11:1; strkjv@Luke:19:29|). It means "house of unripe young figs." It apparently lay on the eastern slope of Olivet or at the foot of the mountain, a little further from Jerusalem than Bethany. Both Mark and Luke speak of Christ's coming "unto Bethphage and Bethany" as if Bethphage was reached first. It is apparently larger than Bethany. {Unto the Mount of Olives} (\eis to oros t“n Elai“n\). Matthew has thus three instances of \eis\ with Jerusalem, Mount of Olives. Mark and Luke use \pros\ with Mount of Olives, the Mount of Olive trees (\elai“n\ from \elaia\, olive tree), the mountain covered with olive trees.

rwp@Matthew:21:33 @{A hedge} (\phragmon\). Or fence as a protection against wild beasts. {Digged a winepress} (\“ruxen lˆnon\). Out of the solid rock to hold the grapes and wine as they were crushed. Such wine-vats are to be seen today in Palestine. {Built a tower} (\“ikodomˆsen purgon\). This for the vinedressers and watchmen (2Chronicles:26:10|). Utmost care was thus taken. Note "a booth in a vineyard" (Isaiah:1:8|). See also strkjv@Isaiah:24:20; strkjv@Job:27:18|. Let it out (\exedeto, exedoto\ the usual form). For hire, the terms not being given. The lease allowed three forms, money-rent, a proportion of the crop, or a definite amount of the produce whether it was a good or bad year. Probably the last form is that contemplated here.

rwp@Matthew:23:5 @{To be seen of men} (\pros to theathˆnai tois anthr“pois\). See strkjv@6:1| where this same idiom occurs. Ostentation regulates the conduct of the rabbis. {Phylacteries} (\phulaktˆria\). An adjective from \phulaktˆr, phulass“\ (to guard). Songs:a fortified place, station for garrison, then a safeguard, protecting charm or amulet. The rabbis wore \tephillin\ or prayer-fillets, small leather cases with four strips of parchment on which were written the words of strkjv@Exodus:13:1-10,11-16; strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:4-9; strkjv@11:13-21|. They took literally the words about "a sign unto thy hand," "a memorial between thine eyes," and "frontlets." "That for the head was to consist of a box with four compartments, each containing a slip of parchment inscribed with one of the four passages. Each of these strips was to be tied up with a well-washed hair from a calf's tail; lest, if tied with wool or thread, any fungoid growth should ever pollute them. The phylactery of the arm was to contain a single slip, with the same four passages written in four columns of seven lines each. The black leather straps by which they were fastened were wound seven times round the arm and three times round the hand. They were reverenced by the rabbis as highly as the scriptures, and, like them, might be rescued from the flames on a sabbath. They profanely imagined that God wore the _tephillin_" (Vincent). It is small wonder that Jesus ridiculed such minute concern for pretentious externalism and literalism. These _tephillin_ "are still worn at the present day on the forehead and left arm by Jews at the daily Morning Prayer" (McNeile). "The size of the phylacteries indexed the measure of zeal, and the wearing of large ones was apt to take the place of obedience" (Bruce). Hence they made them "broad." The superstitious would wear them as mere charms to ward off evil. {Enlarge the borders} (\megalunousin ta kraspeda\). In strkjv@9:20| we see that Jesus, like the Jews generally, wore a tassel or tuft, hem or border, a fringe on the outer garment according to strkjv@Numbers:15:38|. Here again the Jewish rabbi had minute rules about the number of the fringes and the knots (see on ¯9:20|). They made a virtue of the size of the fringes also. "Such things were useful as reminders; they were fatal when they were regarded as charms" (Plummer).

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

rwp@Matthew:24:24 @{Great signs and wonders} (\sˆmeia megala kai terata\). Two of the three words so often used in the N.T. about the works (\erga\) of Jesus, the other being \dunameis\ (powers). They often occur together of the same work (John:4:48; strkjv@Acts:2:22; strkjv@4:30; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:12; strkjv@Hebrews:2:4|). \Teras\ is a wonder or prodigy, \dunamis\, a mighty work or power, \sˆmeion\, a sign of God's purpose. Miracle (\miraculum\) presents only the notion of wonder or portent. The same deed can be looked at from these different angles. But the point to note here is that mere "signs and wonders" do not of themselves prove the power of God. These charlatans will be so skilful that they will, {if possible} (\ei dunaton\), lead astray the very elect. The implication is that it is not possible. People become excited and are misled and are unable to judge of results. Often it is _post hoc, sed non propter hoc_. Patent-medicine men make full use of the credulity of people along this line as do spiritualistic mediums. Sleight-of-hand men can deceive the unwary.

rwp@Revelation:6:6 @{As it were a voice} (\h“s ph“nˆn\). "This use of \h“s\, giving a certain vagueness or mysteriousness to a phrase, is one of the characteristics of the writer's style, e.g., strkjv@8:1; strkjv@14:3; strkjv@19:1,6|" (Beckwith). This voice comes from the midst of the four living creatures, "the protest of nature against the horrors of famine" (Swete). {A measure} (\choinix\). Old word for less than a quart with us, here only in N.T. {Of wheat} (\sitou\). Old word for wheat, a number of times in N.T., in Rev. only here and strkjv@18:13|. This was enough wheat to keep a man of moderate appetite alive for a day. {For a penny} (\dˆnariou\). Genitive of price, the wages of a day laborer (Matthew:20:2|), about eighteen cents in our money today. {Of barley} (\krith“n\). Old word \krithˆ\, usually in plural as here. Barley was the food of the poor and it was cheaper even in the famine and it took more of it to support life. Here the proportion is three to one (cf. strkjv@2Kings:7:18|). The proclamation forbids famine prices for food (solid and liquid). {Hurt thou not} (\mˆ adikˆsˆis\). Prohibition with \mˆ\ and the ingressive first aorist active subjunctive of \adike“\. See strkjv@7:3; strkjv@9:4| for \adike“\ for injury to vegetable life. "The prohibition is addressed to the nameless rider who represents Dearth" (Swete). Wheat and barley, oil and the vine, were the staple foods in Palestine and Asia Minor.

rwp@Revelation:9:17 @{And thus I saw in the vision} (\kai hout“s eidon en tˆi horasei\). Nowhere else does John allude to his own vision, though often in Dan. (Daniel:7:2; strkjv@8:2,15; strkjv@9:21|). {Having} (\echontas\). Accusative masculine plural of \ech“\, probably referring to the riders (\tous kathˆmenous ep' aut“n\) rather than to the horses (\tous hippous\). {Breastplates as of fire and of hyacinth and of brimstone} (\th“rakas purinous kai huakinthinous kai thei“deis\). There is no \h“s\ (as) in the Greek, but that is the idea of these three adjectives which are only metaphors. \Purinos\ is an old adjective (from \pur\, fire), here only in N.T. \Huakinthos\ is also an old word (from \huakinthos\, hyacinth, then of a sapphire stone strkjv@Revelation:21:20|), of a red color bordering on black, here only in the N.T. \Thei“dˆs\ is a late word (from \theion\, brimstone), sulphurous, here only in N.T. {As the heads of lions} (\h“s kephalai leont“n\). This of the horses, war-horses as always in the Bible except in strkjv@Isaiah:28:28|. These horses likewise have "fire and smoke and brimstone" (\theion\, brimstone, is old word, in N.T. only in Rev. and strkjv@Luke:17:29|) proceeding (\ekporeuetai\, singular because it comes first and the subjects afterwards) out of their mouths. Both rider and horse are terrible.

rwp@Revelation:12:3 @{Another sign} (\allo sˆmeion\). "A second tableau following close upon the first and inseparable from it" (Swete). {And behold} (\kai idou\). As often (4:1; strkjv@6:2,5,8|, etc.). {A great red dragon} (\drak“n megas purros\). Homer uses this old word (probably from \derkomai\, to see clearly) for a great monster with three heads coiled like a serpent that ate poisonous herbs. The word occurs also in Hesiod, Pindar, Eschylus. The Babylonians feared a seven-headed hydra and Typhon was the Egyptian dragon who persecuted Osiris. One wonders if these and the Chinese dragons are not race memories of conflicts with the diplodocus and like monsters before their disappearance. Charles notes in the O.T. this monster as the chief enemy of God under such title as Rahab (Isaiah:51:9f.; strkjv@Job:26:12f.|), Behemoth (Job:40:15-24|), Leviathan (Isaiah:27:1|), the Serpent (Amos:9:2ff.|). In strkjv@Psalms:74:13| we read of "the heads of the dragons." On \purros\ (red) see strkjv@6:4|. Here (12:9|) and in strkjv@20:2| the great dragon is identified with Satan. See strkjv@Daniel:7| for many of the items here, like the ten horns (Daniel:7:7|) and hurling the stars (Daniel:8:10|). The word occurs in the Apocalypse alone in the N.T. {Seven diadems} (\hepta diadˆmata\). Old word from \diade“\ (to bind around), the blue band marked with white with which Persian kings used to bind on the tiara, so a royal crown in contrast with \stephanos\ (chaplet or wreath like the Latin _corona_ as in strkjv@2:10|), in N.T. only here, strkjv@13:1; strkjv@19:12|. If Christ as Conqueror has "many diadems," it is not strange that Satan should wear seven (ten in strkjv@13:1|).

rwp@Revelation:16:13 @{Coming out of} (\ek\ alone, no participle \erchomena\). {Of the dragon} (\tou drakontos\). That is Satan (12:3,9|). {Of the beast} (\tou thˆriou\). The first beast (13:1,12|) and then just the beast (13:14ff.; strkjv@14:9,11; strkjv@15:2; strkjv@16:2,10|), the brute force of the World-power represented by the Roman Empire" (Swete). {Of the false prophet} (\tou pseudoprophˆtou\). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:7:15; strkjv@Acts:13:6; strkjv@1John:2:22; strkjv@4:3; strkjv@2John:1:7|. Identified with the second beast (13:11-14|) in strkjv@19:20; strkjv@20:10|. Songs:the sixth bowl introduces the dragon and his two subalterns of chapters strkjv@Revelation:12; 13| (the two beasts). {Three unclean spirits} (\pneumata tria akatharta\). Out of the mouths of each of the three evil powers (the dragon and the two beasts) comes an evil spirit. See the use of mouth in strkjv@1:16| (9:17f.; strkjv@11:5; strkjv@12:15; strkjv@19:15,21|) as a chief seat of influence. In strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:8| we have "the breath of his mouth" (the other sense of \pneuma\). For \akatharton\ (unclean) with \pneuma\ see strkjv@Mark:1:23f.; strkjv@3:11; strkjv@5:2ff.; strkjv@Acts:5:16; strkjv@8:7|. Christ expelled unclean spirits, but His enemies send them forth" (Swete). See strkjv@Zechariah:13:2| "the false prophets and the unclean spirits." {As it were frogs} (\h“s batrachoi\). Cf. strkjv@Exodus:8:5; strkjv@Leviticus:11:10ff|. Old word, here alone in N.T. Like loathsome frogs in form.

rwp@Revelation:16:14 @{Spirits of devils} (\pneumata daimoni“n\). "Spirits of demons." Explanation of the simile \h“s batrachoi\. See strkjv@1Timothy:4:1| about "deceiving spirits and teachings of demons." {Working signs} (\poiounta sˆmeia\). "Doing signs" (present active participle of \poie“\). The Egyptian magicians wrought "signs" (tricks), as did Simon Magus and later Apollonius of Tyana. Houdini claimed that he could reproduce every trick of the spiritualistic mediums. {Which go forth} (\ha ekporeuetai\). Singular verb with neuter plural (collective) subject. {Unto the kings} (\epi tous basileis\). The three evil spirits (dragon and the two beasts) spur on the kings of the whole world to a real world war. "There have been times when nations have been seized by a passion for war which the historian can but imperfectly explain" (Swete). {To gather them together} (\sunagagein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \sunag“\, to express purpose (that of the unclean spirits). {Unto the war of the great day of God, the Almighty} (\eis ton polemon tˆs hˆmeras tˆs megalˆs tou theou tou pantokratoros\). Some take this to be war between nations, like strkjv@Mark:13:8|, but it is more likely war against God (Psalms:2:2|) and probably the battle pictured in strkjv@17:14; strkjv@19:19|. Cf. strkjv@2Peter:3:12|, "the day of God," his reckoning with the nations. See strkjv@Joel:2:11; strkjv@3:4|. Paul uses "that day" for the day of the Lord Jesus (the Parousia) as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:2; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:10; strkjv@2:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:14; strkjv@Phillipians:1:6; strkjv@2:16; strkjv@2Timothy:1:12,18; strkjv@4:8|.

rwp@Revelation:16:16 @{They gathered} (\sunˆgagen\). Second aorist active indicative of \sunag“\, singular (the three unclean spirits), like \ekporeuetai\ in verse 14|. {Har-Magedon} (\Har-Maged“n\). John proceeds now after the interruption in verse 15|. Perhaps "the mountains of Megiddo" though not certain. Megiddo is in the valley of Esdraelon, and by the waters of Megiddo (the Kishon) Israel gained a decisive victory over Sisera (Judges:5:19|), celebrated in Deborah's song. See also strkjv@Revelation:20:8ff. and strkjv@Ezekiel:39:2,4|.

rwp@Revelation:16:19 @{Was divided into three parts} (\egeneto eis tria merˆ\). "Came into three parts" (\ginomai\ again). In strkjv@11:3| a tenth part of the city fell. Babylon (Rome) is meant (17:18|). {Fell} (\epesan\). Second aorist active indicative of \pipt“\ (\-an\ form in place of \-on\). {Was remembered} (\emnˆsthˆ\). First aorist (prophetic) passive indicative of \mimnˆsk“\. Babylon (Rome) had not been overlooked. God was simply biding his time with Rome. {To give unto her} (\dounai autˆi\). Second aorist active infinitive of \did“mi\, epexegetic use as in strkjv@11:18; strkjv@16:9|. {The cup of the wine of the fierceness of his wrath} (\to potˆrion tou oinou tou thumou tˆs orgˆs autou\). "The cup of the wine of the wrath of his anger," using both \thumos\ (boiling rage) and \orgˆ\ (settled anger). See both in strkjv@Jeremiah:30:24|.

rwp@Romans:11:30 @{Ye in time past} (\humeis pote\). Ye Gentiles (1:18-32|). {Were disobedient} (\epeithˆsate\). First aorist active indicative of \apeithe“\, to disbelieve and then to disobey. "Ye once upon a time disobeyed God." {By their disobedience} (\tˆi tout“n apeithiƒi\). Instrumental case, "by the disobedience of these" (Jews). Note "now" (\nun\) three times in this sentence.

rwp@Romans:11:36 @{Of him} (\ex autou\), {through him} (\di' autou\), {unto him} (\eis auton\). By these three prepositions Paul ascribes the universe (\ta panta\) with all the phenomena concerning creation, redemption, providence to God as the {Source} (\ex\), the {Agent} (\di\), the {Goal} (\eis\). {For ever} (\eis tous ai“nas\). "For the ages." Alford terms this doxology in verses 33-36| "the sublimest apostrophe existing even in the pages of inspiration itself."

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Mon Jul 1 13:13:06 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020