Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-POET.filter - rwp but:


rwp@1Corinthians:3:19 @{Foolishness with God} (\m“ria para t“i the“i\). Whose standard does a church (temple) of God wish, that of this world or of God? The two standards are not the same. It is a pertinent inquiry with us all whose idea rules in our church. Paul quotes strkjv@Job:5:13|. {That taketh} (\ho drassomenos\). Old verb \drassomai\, to grasp with the hand, is used here for the less vivid word in the LXX \katalamban“n\. It occurs nowhere else in the N.T., but appears in the papyri to lay hands on. Job:is quoted in the N.T. only here and in strkjv@Romans:11:35| and both times with variations from the LXX. This word occurs in Ecclesiasticus strkjv@26:7; strkjv@34:2. In strkjv@Psalms:2:12| the LXX has \draxasthe paideias\, lay hold on instruction. {Craftiness} (\panourgiƒi\). The \panourgos\ man is ready for any or all work (if bad enough). Songs:it means versatile cleverness (Robertson and Plummer), _astutia_ (Vulgate).

rwp@1Corinthians:3:22 @{Yours} (\hum“n\). Predicate genitive, belong to you. All the words in this verse and 23| are anarthrous, though not indefinite, but definite. The English reproduces them all properly without the definite article except \kosmos\ (the world), and even here just world will answer. Proper names do not need the article to be definite nor do words for single objects like world, life, death. Things present (\enest“ta\, second perfect participle of \enistˆmi\) and things to come divide two classes. Few of the finer points of Greek syntax need more attention than the absence of the article. We must not think of the article as "omitted" (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 790). The wealth of the Christian includes all things, all leaders, past, present, future, Christ, and God. There is no room for partisan wrangling here.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:4:3 @{But with me} (\emoi de\). The ethical dative of personal relation and interest, "as I look at my own case." Cf. strkjv@Phillipians:1:21|. {It is a very small thing} (\eis elachiston estin\). This predicate use of \eis\ is like the Hebrew, but it occurs also in the papyri. The superlative \elachiston\ is elative, very little, not the true superlative, least. "It counts for very little with me." {That I should be judged of you} (\hina huph' hum“n anakrith“\). Same use of \hina\ as in verse 2|. For the verb (first aorist passive subjunctive of \anakrin“\) see on ¯1Corinthians:2:14f|. Paul does not despise public opinion, but he denies "the competency of the tribunal" in Corinth (Robertson and Plummer) to pass on his credentials with Christ as his Lord. {Or of man's judgement} (\ˆ hupo anthr“pinˆs hˆmeras\). Or "by human day," in contrast to the Lord's Day (_der Tag_) in strkjv@3:13|. "_That_ is the tribunal which the Apostle recognizes; a _human_ tribunal he does not care to satisfy" (Robertson and Plummer). {Yea, I judge not mine own self} (\all' oude emauton anakrin“\). \Alla\ here is confirmatory, not adversative. "I have often wondered how it is that every man sets less value on his own opinion of himself than on the opinion of others" (M. Aurelius, xii. 4. Translated by Robertson and Plummer). Paul does not even set himself up as judge of himself.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:4:5 @{Wherefore} (\h“ste\). As in strkjv@3:21| which see. {Judge nothing} (\mˆ ti krinete\). Stop passing judgment, stop criticizing as they were doing. See the words of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:7:1|. The censorious habit was ruining the Corinthian Church. {Before the time} (\pro kairou\). The day of the Lord in strkjv@3:13|. "Do not therefore anticipate the great judgment (\krisis\) by any preliminary investigation (\anakrisis\) which must be futile and incomplete" (Lightfoot). {Until the Lord come} (\he“s an elthˆi ho kurios\). Common idiom of \he“s\ and the aorist subjunctive with or without \an\ for a future event. Simple futurity, but held forth as a glorious hope, the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus as Judge. {Who will both bring to light} (\hos kai ph“tisei\). Future indicative of this late verb (in papyri also) from \ph“s\ (light), to turn the light on the hidden things of darkness. {And make manifest} (\kai phaner“sei\). (Ionic and late) causative verb \phanero“\ from \phaneros\. By turning on the light the counsels of all hearts stand revealed. {His praise} (\ho epainos\). The praise (note article) due him from God (Romans:2:29|) will come to each then (\tote\) and not till then. Meanwhile Paul will carry on and wait for the praise from God.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:4:8 @{Already are ye filled?} (\ˆdˆ kekoresmenoi este?\). Perfect passive indicative, state of completion, of \korennumi\, old Greek verb to satiate, to satisfy. The only other example in N.T. is strkjv@Acts:27:38| which see. Paul may refer to strkjv@Deuteronomy:31:20; strkjv@32:15|. But it is keen irony, even sarcasm. Westcott and Hort make it a question and the rest of the sentence also. {Already ye are become rich} (\ˆdˆ eploutˆsate\). Note change to ingressive aorist indicative of \ploute“\, old verb to be rich (cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9|). "The aorists, used instead of perfects, imply indecent haste" (Lightfoot). "They have got a private millennium of their own" (Robertson & Plummer) with all the blessings of the Messianic Kingdom (Luke:22:29f.; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:12; strkjv@2Timothy:2:12|). {Ye have reigned without us} (\ch“ris hˆm“n ebasileusate\). Withering sarcasm. Ye became kings without our company. Some think that Paul as in strkjv@3:21| is purposely employing Stoic phraseology though with his own meanings. If so, it is hardly consciously done. Paul was certainly familiar with much of the literature of his time, but it did not shape his ideas. {I would that ye did reign} (\kai ophelon ge ebasileusate\). More exactly, "And would at least that ye had come to reign (or become kings)." It is an unfulfilled wish about the past expressed by \ophelon\ and the aorist indicative instead of \ei gar\ and the aorist indicative (the ancient idiom). See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1003, for the construction with particle \ophelon\ (an unaugmented second aorist form). {That we also might reign with you} (\hina kai hˆmeis humin sunbasileus“men\). Ironical contrast to \ch“ris hˆm“n ebasileusate\, just before. Associative instrumental case of \humin\ after \sun-\.

rwp@1Corinthians:5:5 @{To deliver such an one unto Satan} (\paradounai ton toiouton t“i Satanƒi\). We have the same idiom in strkjv@1Timothy:1:20| used of Hymenius and Alexander. In strkjv@2Corinthians:12:7| Paul speaks of his own physical suffering as a messenger (\aggelos\) of Satan. Paul certainly means expulsion from the church (verse 2|) and regarding him as outside of the commonwealth of Israel (Ephesians:2:11f.|). But we are not to infer that expulsion from the local church means the damnation of the offender. The wilful offenders have to be expelled and not regarded as enemies, but admonished as brothers (2Thessalonians:3:14f.|). {For the destruction of the flesh} (\eis olethron tˆs sarkos\). Both for physical suffering as in the case of Job:(Job:2:6|) and for conquest of the fleshly sins, remedial punishment. {That the spirit may be saved} (\hina to pneuma s“thˆi\). The ultimate purpose of the expulsion as discipline. Note the use of \to pneuma\ in contrast with \sarx\ as the seat of personality (cf. strkjv@3:15|). Paul's motive is not merely vindictive, but the reformation of the offender who is not named here nor in strkjv@2Corinthians:2:5-11| if the same man is meant, which is very doubtful. The final salvation of the man in the day of Christ is the goal and this is to be attained not by condoning his sin.

rwp@1Corinthians:5:8 @{Wherefore let us keep the feast} (\h“ste heortaz“men\). Present active subjunctive (volitive). Let us keep on keeping the feast, a perpetual feast (Lightfoot), and keep the leaven out. It is quite possible that Paul was writing about the time of the Jewish passover, since it was before pentecost (1Corinthians:16:8|). But, if so, that is merely incidental, and his language here is not a plea for the observance of Easter by Christians. {With the leaven of malice and wickedness} (\en zumˆi kakias kai ponˆrias\). Vicious disposition and evil deed. {With the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth} (\en azumois eilikrinias kai alˆtheias\). No word for "bread." The plural of \azumois\ may suggest "elements" or "loaves." \Eilikrinia\ (sincerity) does not occur in the ancient Greek and is rare in the later Greek. In the papyri it means probity in one example. The etymology is uncertain. Boisacq inclines to the notion of \heilˆ\ or \helˆ\, sunlight, and \krin“\, to judge by the light of the sun, holding up to the light. \Alˆtheia\ (truth) is a common word from \alˆthˆs\ (true) and this from \a\ privative and \lˆth“\ (\lathein, lanthan“\, to conceal or hide) and so unconcealed, not hidden. The Greek idea of truth is out in the open. Note strkjv@Romans:1:18| where Paul pictures those who are holding down the truth in unrighteousness.

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

rwp@1Corinthians:5:10 @{Not altogether} (\ou pant“s\). Not absolutely, not in all circumstances. Paul thus puts a limitation on his prohibition and confines it to members of the church. He has no jurisdiction over the outsiders (this world, \tou kosmou toutou\). {The covetous} (\tois pleonektais\). Old word for the over-reachers, those avaricious for more and more (\pleon, ech“\, to have more). In N.T. only here, strkjv@6:10; strkjv@Ephesians:5:5|. It always comes in bad company (the licentious and the idolaters) like the modern gangsters who form a combination of liquor, lewdness, lawlessness for money and power. {Extortioners} (\harpaxin\). An old adjective with only one gender, rapacious (Matthew:7:15; strkjv@Luke:18:11|), and as a substantive robber or extortioner (here and strkjv@6:10|). Bandits, hijackers, grafters they would be called today. {Idolaters} (\eid“lolatrais\). Late word for hirelings (\latris\) of the idols (\eid“lon\), so our very word idolater. See strkjv@6:9; strkjv@10:7; strkjv@Ephesians:5:5; strkjv@Revelation:21:8; strkjv@22:15|. Nageli regards this word as a Christian formation. {For then must ye needs} (\epei “pheilete oun\). This neat Greek idiom of \epei\ with the imperfect indicative (\“pheilete\, from \opheil“\, to be under obligation) is really the conclusion of a second-class condition with the condition unexpressed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 965). Sometimes \an\ is used also as in strkjv@Hebrews:10:2|, but with verbs of obligation or necessity \an\ is usually absent as here (cf. strkjv@Hebrews:9:20|). The unexpressed condition here would be, "if that were true" (including fornicators, the covetous, extortioners, idolaters of the outside world). \Ara\ means in that case.

rwp@1Corinthians:5:11 @{But now I write unto you} (\nun de egrapsa humin\). This is the epistolary aorist referring to this same epistle and not to a previous one as in verse 9|. As it is (when you read it) I did write unto you. {If any man that is named a brother be} (\ean tis adelphos onomazomenos ˆi\). Condition of the third class, a supposable case. {Or a reviler or a drunkard} (\ˆ loidoros ˆ methusos\). \Loidoros\ occurs in Euripides as an adjective and in later writings. In N.T. only here and strkjv@6:10|. For the verb see strkjv@1Corinthians:4:12|. \Methusos\ is an old Greek word for women and even men (cf. \paroinos\, of men, strkjv@1Timothy:3:3|). In N.T. only here and strkjv@6:10|. Cf. strkjv@Romans:13:13|. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 316) gives a list of virtues and vices on counters for Roman games that correspond remarkably with Paul's list of vices here and in strkjv@6:10|. Chrysostom noted that people in his day complained of the bad company given by Paul for revilers and drunkards as being men with more "respectable" vices! {With such a one, no, not to eat} (\t“i toiout“i mˆde sunesthiein\). Associative instrumental case of \toiout“i\ after \sunesthiein\, "not even to eat with such a one." Social contacts with such "a brother" are forbidden

rwp@1Corinthians:6:1 @{Dare any of you?} (\tolmƒi tis hum“n;\). Does any one of you dare? Rhetorical question with present indicative of \tolma“\, old verb from \tolma\, daring. Bengel: _grandi verbo notatur laesa majestas Christianorum_. "The word is an argument in itself" (Robertson and Plummer). Apparently Paul has an actual case in mind as in chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:5| though no name is called. {Having a matter against his neighbour} (\pragma ech“n pros ton heteron\). Forensic sense of \pragma\ (from \prass“\, to do, to exact, to extort as in strkjv@Luke:3:13|), a case, a suit (Demosthenes 1020, 26), with the other or the neighbour as in strkjv@10:24; strkjv@14:17; strkjv@Galatians:6:4; strkjv@Romans:2:1|. {Go to law} (\krinesthai\). Present middle or passive (ch. strkjv@Romans:3:4|) in the same forensic sense as \krithˆnai\ in strkjv@Matthew:5:40|. \Kritˆs\, judge, is from this verb. {Before the unrighteous} (\epi t“n adik“n\). This use of \epi\ with the genitive for "in the presence of" is idiomatic as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:14|, \epi Titou\, in the case of Titus. The Jews held that to bring a lawsuit before a court of idolaters was blasphemy against the law. But the Greeks were fond of disputatious lawsuits with each other. Probably the Greek Christians brought cases before pagan judges.

rwp@1Corinthians:6:2 @{Shall judge the world} (\ton kosmon krinousin\). Future active indicative. At the last day with the Lord Jesus (Matthew:19:28; strkjv@Luke:22:30|). {Are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?} (\anaxioi este kritˆri“n elachist“n;\). \Anaxios\ is an old word (\an\ and \axios\), though only here in the N.T. There is dispute as to the meaning of \kritˆria\ here and in verse 4|, old word, but nowhere else in N.T. save in strkjv@James:2:6|. Naturally, like other words in \-tˆrion\ (\akroatˆrion\, auditorium, strkjv@Acts:25:23|), this word means the place where judgment is rendered, or court. It is common in the papyri in the sense of tribunal. In the _Apost. Const_. ii. 45 we have \mˆ erchesth“ epi kritˆrion ethnikon\ (Let him not come before a heathen tribunal). Hence here it would mean, "Are ye unworthy of the smallest tribunals?" That is, of sitting on the smallest tribunals, of forming courts yourselves to settle such things?

rwp@1Corinthians:6:3 @{How much more, things that pertain to this life?} (\Mˆti ge bi“tika;\). The question expects the answer no and \ge\ adds sharp point to Paul's surprised tone, "Need I so much as say?" It can be understood also as ellipsis, "let me not say" (\mˆtige leg“\), not to say. \Bi“tika\ occurs first in Aristotle, but is common afterwards. In the papyri it is used of business matters. It is from \bios\ (manner of life in contrast to \z“ˆ\, life principle).

rwp@1Corinthians:6:4 @{If then ye have to judge things pertaining to this life} (\bi“tika men oun kritˆria ean echˆte\). Note emphatic position (proleptic) of \bi“tika kritˆria\ (tribunals pertaining to this life, as above). "If ye have tribunals pertaining to this life" (condition of third class, \ean echˆte\). If \kathizete\ (do ye set) is indicative and interrogative, then by "who are of no account in the church" (\tous exouthenˆmenous en tˆi ekklˆsiƒi\) Paul means the heathen as in verse 1|. If \kathizete\ be imperative, then Paul means the least esteemed members of the church for such unwished for work. It is a harsh term for the heathen, but one of indignation toward Christians.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:10 @{What I am} (\ho eimi\). Not, {who} (\hos\), but {what} (\ho\), neuter singular. His actual character and attainments. All "by the grace of God" (\chariti theou\). {I laboured more abundantly than they all} (\perissoteron aut“n pant“n ekopiasa\). This is sober fact as shown by the Acts and Paul's Epistles. He had tremendous energy and used it. Genius is work, Carlyle said. Take Paul as a specimen.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:13 @{Neither hath Christ been raised} (\oude Christos egˆgertai\). He turns the argument round with tremendous force. But it is fair.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:15 @{False witnesses of God} (\pseudomartures tou theou\). Late word, but \pseudomarture“\, to bear false witness, old and common. The genitive (\tou theou\) can be either subjective (in God's service) or objective (concerning God). Either makes good sense. {Because we witnessed of God} (\hoti emarturˆsamen kata tou theou\). Vulgate has _adversus Deum_. This is the more natural way to take \kata\ and genitive, {against God} not as equal to \peri\ (concerning). He would indeed make God play false in that case, {if so be that the dead are not raised} (\eiper ara nekroi ouk egeirontai\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. Note both \per\ intensive particle {indeed} and \ara\ inferential particle {therefore}.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:20 @{But now} (\nuni de\). Emphatic form of \nun\ with \-i\ added (cf. strkjv@12:18|). It is the logical triumph of Paul after the _reductio ad impossibile_ (Findlay) of the preceding argument. {The first-fruits} (\aparchˆ\). Old word from \aparchomai\, to offer firstlings or first-fruits. In LXX for first-fruits. In papyri for legacy-duty, entrance-fee, and also first-fruits as here. See also verse 23; strkjv@16:15; strkjv@Romans:8:23|, etc. Christ is "first-born from the dead" (Colossians:1:18|). Others raised from the dead died again, but not so Jesus. {That sleep} (\t“n kekoimˆmen“n\). Perfect middle participle as in strkjv@Matthew:27:52| which see. Beautiful picture of death from which word (\koimaomai\) comes our \cemetery\.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:22 @{Shall be made alive} (\z“opoiˆthˆsontai\). First future passive indicative of \z“opoie“\, late verb (Aristotle) to give life, to restore to life as here. In verse 36| \z“opoieitai\ is used in the sense of natural life as in strkjv@John:5:21; strkjv@6:63| of spiritual life. It is not easy to catch Paul's thought here. He means resurrection (restoration) by the verb here, but not necessarily eternal life or salvation. Songs:also \pantes\ may not coincide in both clauses. All who die die in Adam, all who will be made alive will be made alive (restored to life) in Christ. The same problem occurs in strkjv@Romans:5:18| about "all," and in verse 19| about "the many."

rwp@1Corinthians:15:27 @{He put} (\hupetaxen\). First aorist active of \hupotass“\, to subject. Supply God (\theos\) as subject (Psalms:8:7|). See strkjv@Hebrews:2:5-9| for similar use. Cf. strkjv@Psalms:8|. {But when he saith} (\hotan de eipˆi\). Here Christ must be supplied as the subject if the reference is to his future and final triumph. The syntax more naturally calls for God as the subject as before. Either way makes sense. But there is no need to take \eipˆi\ (second aorist active subjunctive) as _a futurum exactum_, merely "whenever he shall say." {Are put in subjection} (\hupotetaktai\). Perfect passive indicative, state of completion, final triumph. {It is evident that} (\dˆlon hoti\). Supply \estin\ (is) before \hoti\. {He is excepted who did subject} (\ektos tou hupotaxantos\). "Except the one (God) who did subject (articular aorist active participle) the all things to him (Christ)."

rwp@1Corinthians:15:31 @{I protest by that glorying in you} (\nˆ tˆn humeteran kauchˆsin\). No word for "I protest." Paul takes solemn oath by the use of \nˆ\ (common in Attic) with the accusative. Only here in N.T., but in LXX (Genesis:42:15f.|). For other solemn oaths by Paul see strkjv@2Corinthians:1:18,23; strkjv@11:10f.,31; strkjv@Romans:9:1|. For \kauchˆsis\ see on ¯1Thessalonians:2:19|. The possessive pronoun (\humeteran\) is objective as \emˆn\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:24|. {I die daily} (\kath' hˆmeran apothnˆsk“\). I am in daily peril of death (2Corinthians:4:11; strkjv@11:23; strkjv@Romans:8:36|).

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

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:8 @{Even so, being affectionately desirous of you} (\hout“s omeiromenoi hum“n\). Clearly the correct text rather than \himeiromenoi\ from \himeir“\, old verb to long for. But the verb \homeiromai\ (Westcott and Hort _om_., smooth breathing) occurs nowhere else except MSS. in strkjv@Job:3:21; strkjv@Psalms:62:2| (Symmachus) and the Lycaonian sepulchral inscription (4th cent. A.D.) about the sorrowing parents \homeiromenoi peri paidos\, {greatly desiring their son} (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Moulton suggests that it comes from a root \smer\, remember, and that \o-\ is a derelict preposition \o\ like \o-duromai, o-kell“, “-keanos\. Wohlenberg (Zahn, _Kommentar_) calls the word "a term of endearment," "derived from the language of the nursery" (Milligan). {We were well pleased} (\ˆudokoumen\). Imperfect active of \eudoke“\, common verb in later Greek and in N.T. (see on strkjv@Matthew:3:17|), picturing Paul's idea of their attitude while in Thessalonica. Paul often has it with the infinitive as here. {To impart} (\metadounai\). Second aorist active infinitive of \metadid“mi\, old verb to share with (see on strkjv@Luke:3:11|). Possible zeugma with {souls} (\psuchas\), though Lightfoot renders "lives." Paul and his associates held nothing back. {Because ye were become very dear to us} (\dioti agapˆtoi hˆmin egenˆthˆte\). Note \dioti\ (double cause, \dia, hoti\, for that), use of \ginomai\ again for become, and dative \hˆmin\ with verbal \agapˆtoi\, beloved and so dear. A beautiful picture of the growth of Paul's affection for them as should be true with every pastor.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:9 @{Travail} (\mochthon\). Old word for difficult labour, harder than \kopos\ (toil). In the N.T. only here, strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:27|. Note accusative case here though genitive with \mnˆmoneu“\ in strkjv@1:3|. {Night and day} (\nuktos kai hˆmeras\). Genitive case, both by day and by night, perhaps beginning before dawn and working after dark. Songs:in strkjv@3:10|. {That we might not burden any of you} (\pros to mˆ epibarˆsai tina hum“n\). Use of \pros\ with the articular infinitive to express purpose (only four times by Paul). The verb \epibare“\ is late, but in the papyri and inscriptions for laying a burden (\baros\) on (\epi-\) one. In N.T. only here and strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:5|. Paul boasted of his financial independence where he was misunderstood as in Thessalonica and Corinth (2Corinthians:9-12|), though he vindicated his right to remuneration. {We preached} (\ekˆruxamen\). {We heralded} (from \kˆrux\, herald) to you, common verb for preach.

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:2:12 @{To the end that} (\eis to\). Final use of \eis\ and the articular infinitive, common idiom in the papyri and Paul uses \eis\ to and the infinitive fifty times (see again in strkjv@3:2|), some final, some sub-final, some result (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 989-91). {Walk worthily of God} (\peripatein axi“s tou theou\). Present infinitive (linear action), and genitive case with adverb \axi“s\ as in strkjv@Colossians:1:10| (cf. strkjv@Phillipians:1:27; strkjv@Ephesians:4:1|), like a preposition. {Calleth} (\kalountos\). Present active participle, keeps on calling. Some MSS. have \kalesantos\, called. {Kingdom} (\basileian\) here is the future consummation because of glory (\doxan\) as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:6:9; strkjv@15:50; strkjv@Galatians:5:21; strkjv@2Timothy:4:1,18|), but Paul uses it for the present kingdom of grace also as in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:20; strkjv@Romans:14:17; strkjv@Colossians:1:13|.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:13 @{And for this cause we also} (\kai dia touto kai hˆmeis\). Note \kai\ twice. We as well as you are grateful for the way the gospel was received in Thessalonica. {Without ceasing} (\adialeipt“s\). Late adverb for which see on strkjv@1:2| and for \eucharistoumen\ see on ¯1:2|. {The word of the message} (\logon akoˆs\). Literally, {the word of} hearing, as in Sir. strkjv@42:1 and strkjv@Hebrews:4:2| \ho logos tˆs akoˆs\, the word marked by hearing (genitive case), the word which you heard. Here with \tou theou\ (of God) added as a second descriptive genitive which Paul expands and justifies. {Ye received it so} (\paralabontes\) and {accepted or welcomed it} (\edexasthe\) so, {not as the word of men} (\ou logou anthr“p“n\), {but as the word of God} (\alla logon theou\), {as it is in truth} (\kath“s alˆth“s estin\). This last clause is literally, {as it truly is}. Paul had not a doubt that he was proclaiming God's message. Should any preacher preach his doubts if he has any? God's message can be found and Paul found it. {Worketh in you} (\energeitai en humin\). Perhaps middle voice of \energe“\ (\en, ergon\, work) late verb, not in ancient Greek or LXX, but in papyri and late writers (Polybius, etc.) and in N.T. only by Paul and James. If it is passive, as Milligan thinks, it means "is set in operation," as Polybius has it. The idea then is that the word of God is set in operation in you that believe.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:15 @{Who both killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets} (\t“n kai ton Kurion apokteinant“n Iˆsoun kai tous prophˆtas\). First aorist active participle of \apoktein“\. Vivid justification of his praise of the churches in Judea. The Jews killed the prophets before the Lord Jesus who reminded them of their guilt (Matthew:23:29|). Paul, as Peter (Acts:2:23|), lays the guilt of the death of Christ on the Jews. {And drove us out} (\kai hˆmƒs ekdi“xant“n\). An old verb to drive out or banish, to chase out as if a wild beast. Only here in N.T. It is Paul's vivid description of the scene told in strkjv@Acts:17:5ff.| when the rabbis and the hoodlums from the agora chased him out of Thessalonica by the help of the politarchs. {Please not God} (\The“i mˆ areskont“n\). The rabbis and Jews thought that they were pleasing God by so doing as Paul did when he ravaged the young church in Jerusalem. But Paul knows better now. {And are contrary to all men} (\kai pasin anthr“pois enanti“n\). Dative case with the adjective \enanti“n\ (old and common word, face to face, opposite). It seems like a bitter word about Paul's countrymen whom he really loved (Romans:9:1-5; strkjv@10:1-6|), but Paul knew only too well the middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile as he shows in strkjv@Ephesians:2| and which only the Cross of Christ can break down. Tacitus (_Hist_. V. 5) says that the Jews are _adversus omnes alios hostile odium_.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:16 @{Forbidding us} (\k“luont“n hˆmƒs\). Explanatory participle of the idea in \enanti“n\. They show their hostility to Paul at every turn. Right here in Corinth, where Paul is when he writes, they had already shown venomous hostility toward Paul as Luke makes plain (Acts:18:6ff.|). They not simply oppose his work among the Jews, but also to the Gentiles (\ethnesi\, nations outside of the Abrahamic covenant as they understood it). {That they may be saved} (\hina s“th“sin\). Final use of \hina\ with first aorist passive subjunctive of \s“z“\ old verb to save. It was the only hope of the Gentiles, Christ alone and not the mystery-religions offered any real hope. {To fill up their sins alway} (\eis to anaplˆr“sai aut“n tas hamartias pantote\). Another example of \eis to\ and the infinitive as in verse 12|. It may either be God's conceived plan to allow the Jews to go on and fill up (\anaplˆr“sai\, note \ana\, fill up full, old verb) or it may be the natural result from the continual (\pantote\) sins of the Jews. {Is come} (\ephthasen\). First aorist (timeless aorist) active indicative of \phthan“\ which no longer means to come before as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:15| where alone in the N.T. it retains the old idea of coming before. Some MSS. have the perfect active \ephthaken\, prophetic perfect of realization already. Frame translates it: "But the wrath has come upon them at last." This is the most likely meaning of \eis telos\. Paul vividly foresees and foretells the final outcome of this attitude of hate on the part of the Jews. _Tristis exitus_, Bengel calls it. Paul speaks out of a sad experience.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:17 @{Being bereaved of you} (\aporphanisthentes aph' hum“n\). First aorist passive participle of the rare compound verb (\aporphaniz“\, in Aeschylus, but nowhere else in N.T.). Literally, {being orphaned from you} (\aph' hum“n\, ablative case). Paul changes the figure again (\trophos\ or mother nurse in verse 7|, \nˆpios\ or babe in verse 7|, \patˆr\ or father in verse 11|) to {orphan} (\orphanos\). He refers to the period of separation from them, {for a short season} (\pros kairon h“ras\) for a season of an hour. This idiom only here in N.T., but \pros kairon\ in strkjv@Luke:8:13| and \pros h“ran\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:8|. But it has seemed long to Paul. Precisely how long he had been gone we do not know, some months at any rate. {In presence, not in heart} (\pros“p“i ou kardiƒi\). Locative case. \Pros“pon\, old word (\pros, ops\, in front of the eye, face) for face, look, person. Literally, {in face or person}. His heart was with them, though they no longer saw his face. Heart, originally \kardia\, is the inner man, the seat of the affections and purposes, not always in contrast with intellect (\nous\). "Out of sight, not out of mind" (Rutherford). {Endeavoured the more exceedingly} (\perissoter“s espoudasamen\). Ingressive aorist active indicative of \spoudaz“\, old word to hasten (from \spoudˆ, speud“\). {We became zealous}. Comparative adverb \perissoter“s\ from \perisson\, more abundantly than before being orphaned from you. {Your face} (\to pros“pon hum“n\). Cf. his {face} above. {With great desire} (\en pollˆi epithumiƒi\). {In much longing} (\epithumia\ from \epi\ and \thumos\, \epithume“\, to run after, to yearn after, whether good or bad).

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:18 @{Because} (\dioti\). As in strkjv@2:8|. {We would fain have come to you} (\ˆthelˆsamen elthein pros humas\). First aorist active indicative of \thel“\. Literally, {we desired to come to you. I Paul} (\eg“ men Paulos\). Clear example of literary plural \ˆthelesamen\ with singular pronoun \eg“\. Paul uses his own name elsewhere also as in strkjv@2Corinthians:10:1; strkjv@Galatians:5:2; strkjv@Colossians:1:23; strkjv@Ephesians:3:1; strkjv@Philemon:1:19|. {Once and again} (\kai hapax kai dis\). {Both once and twice} as in strkjv@Phillipians:4:16|. Old idiom in Plato. {And Satan hindered us} (\kai enekopsen hˆmas ho Satanas\). Adversative use of \kai=\ but or and yet. First aorist active indicative of \enkopt“\, late word to cut in, to hinder. Milligan quotes papyrus example of third century, B.C. Verb used to cut in a road, to make a road impassable. Songs:Paul charges Satan with cutting in on his path. Used by Paul in strkjv@Acts:24:4; strkjv@Galatians:5:7| and passive \enekoptomˆn\ in strkjv@Romans:15:22; strkjv@1Peter:3:7|. This hindrance may have been illness, opposition of the Jews in Corinth, what not.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:19 @{Crown of glorying} (\stephanos kauchˆse“s\). When a king or conqueror came on a visit he was given a chaplet of glorying. Paul is answering the insinuation that he did not really wish to come. {At his coming} (\en tˆi autou parousiƒi\). This word \parousia\ is untechnical (just _presence_ from \pareimi\) in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:9; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:17; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:6f.; strkjv@10:10; strkjv@Phillipians:1:26; strkjv@2:12|. But here (also strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:13; strkjv@4:15; strkjv@5:23; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1,8; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:23|) we have the technical sense of the second coming of Christ. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 372ff.) notes that the word in the papyri is almost technical for the arrival of a king or ruler who expects to receive his "crown of coming." The Thessalonians, Paul says, will be his crown, glory, joy when Jesus comes.

rwp@1Thessalonians:3:1 @{When we could no longer forbear} (\mˆketi stegontes\). \Steg“\ is old verb to cover from \stegˆ\, roof (Mark:2:4|), to cover with silence, to conceal, to keep off, to endure as here and strkjv@1Corinthians:9:12; strkjv@13:7|. In the papyri in this sense (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). \Mˆketi\ usual negative with participle in the _Koin‚_ rather than \ouketi\. {We thought it good} (\ˆudokˆsamen\). Either literary plural as in strkjv@2:18| or Paul and Silas as more likely. If so, both Timothy and Silas came to Athens (Acts:17:15f.|), but Timothy was sent ({we sent}, \epempsamen\, verse 2|) right back to Thessalonica and later Paul sent Silas on to Beroea or Thessalonica (verse 5|, {I sent}, \epempsa\). Then both Silas and Timothy came from Macedonia to Corinth (Acts:18:5|). {Alone} (\monoi\). Including Silas. {God's minister} (\diakonon tou theou\). See on ¯Matthew:22:13| for this interesting word, here in general sense not technical sense of deacon. Some MSS. have {fellow-worker} (\sunergon\). Already {apostle} in strkjv@2:7| and now {brother, minister} (and possibly {fellow-worker}).

rwp@1Thessalonians:3:4 @{We told you beforehand} (\proelegomen humin\). Imperfect active, we used to tell you beforehand. Old verb, rare in N.T. (only in Paul). {That we are to suffer persecution} (\hoti mellomen thlibesthai\). \Mell“\ and present passive infinitive. Not mere prediction, but God's appointed will as it turned out in Thessalonica.

rwp@1Thessalonians:3:5 @{That I might know} (\eis to gn“nai\). Paul's common idiom (verse 2|), \eis to\ and the infinitive of purpose (second aorist ingressive active of \gin“sk“\, come to know). {Lest by any means the tempter had tempted you} (\mˆ p“s epeirasen humƒs ho peiraz“n\). Findlay takes this as a question with negative answer, but most likely negative final clause with \mˆ p“s\ about a past action with aorist indicative according to the classic idiom as in strkjv@Galatians:2:2| (\mˆ p“s--edramon\) and strkjv@Galatians:4:11| after verb of fearing (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 988). It is a fear that the thing may turn out to be so about the past. {Should be} (\genˆtai\). Here the usual construction appears (aorist subjunctive with \mˆ p“s\) about the future.

rwp@1Thessalonians:3:9 @{Render again unto God} (\t“i the“i antapodounai\). Second aorist active infinitive of double compound verb \ant-apodid“mi\, to give back (\apo\) in return for (\anti\). Old verb rare in N.T., but again in strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:6|. {For you} (\peri hum“n\). Around (concerning) you, while in verse 2| \huper\ (over is used for "concerning your faith." {For} (\epi\). Basis again as cause or ground for the joy. {Wherewith we joy} (\hˆi chairomen\). Probably cognate accusative \hˆn\ with \chairomen\ attracted to locative \charƒi\ (Matthew:2:10|).

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:1 @{Finally} (\loipon\). Accusative of general reference of \loipos\, as for the rest. It does not mean actual conclusion, but merely a colloquial expression pointing towards the end (Milligan) as in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11; strkjv@2Timothy:4:8|. Songs:\to loipon\ in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:1; strkjv@Phillipians:3:1; strkjv@4:8|. {We beseech} (\er“t“men\). Not "question" as in ancient Greek, but as often in N.T. (1Thessalonians:5:12; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1; strkjv@Phillipians:4:3|) and also in papyri to make urgent request of one. {How ye ought} (\to p“s dei humƒs\). Literally, explanatory articular indirect question (\to p“s\) after \parelabˆte\ according to common classic idiom in Luke (Luke:1:62; strkjv@22:2,4,23,24|) and Paul (Romans:8:26|). {That ye abound} (\hina perisseuˆte\). Loose construction of the \hina\ clause with present subjunctive after two subordinate clauses with \kath“s\ (as, even as) to be connected with "beseech and exhort." {More and more} (\mallon\). Simply {more}, but added to same idea in \perisseuˆte\. See also verse 11|.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:4 @{That each one of you know how} (\eidenai hekaston hum“n\). Further epexegetic infinitive (second perfect active), learn how and so know how (learn the habit of purity). {To possess himself of his own vessel} (\to heautou skeuos ktasthai\). Present middle infinitive of \ktaomai\, to acquire, not \kektˆsthai\, to possess. But what does Paul mean by "his own vessel"? It can only mean his own body or his own wife. Objections are raised against either view, but perhaps he means that the man shall acquire his own wife "in sanctification and honour," words that elevate the wife and make it plain that Paul demands sexual purity on the part of men (married as well as unmarried). There is no double standard here. When the husband comes to the marriage bed, he should come as a chaste man to a chaste wife.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:5 @{Not in the passion of lust} (\mˆ en pathei epithumias\). Plain picture of the wrong way for the husband to come to marriage. {That know not God} (\ta mˆ eidota ton theon\). Second perfect participle of \oida\. The heathen knew gods as licentious as they are themselves, but not God. One of the reasons for the revival of paganism in modern life is professedly this very thing that men wish to get rid of the inhibitions against licentiousness by God.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:7 @{Not for uncleanness, but in sanctification} (\epi akatharsiƒi all' en hagiasm“i\). Sharp contrast made still sharper by the two prepositions \epi\ (on the basis of) and \en\ (in the sphere of). God has "called" us all for a decent sex life consonant with his aims and purposes. It was necessary for Paul to place this lofty ideal before the Thessalonian Christians living in a pagan world. It is equally important now.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:8 @{Therefore} (\toigaroun\). This old triple compound particle (\toi, gar, oun\) is in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:12:1|. Paul applies the logic of the case. {He that rejecteth} (\ho athet“n\). This late verb (Polybius and LXX) is from \a-thetos\ (\a\ privative and verbal of \tithˆmi\, to proscribe a thing, to annul it. {But God} (\alla ton theon\). Paul sees this clearly and modern atheists see it also. In order to justify their licentiousness they do not hesitate to set aside God.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:9 @{Concerning love of the brethren} (\peri tˆs philadelphias\). Late word, love of brothers or sisters. In profane Greek (one papyrus example) and LXX the word means love of those actually kin by blood, but in the N.T. it is the kinship in the love of Christ as here. {Are taught by God} (\theodidaktoi este\). Only here and ecclesiastical writers. Passive verbal adjective in \-tos\ from \didask“\ as if \theo-\ in ablative case like \didaktoi theou\ (John:6:45|). {To love one another} (\eis to agapƒin allˆlous\). Another example of \eis to\ and the infinitive. Only those taught of God keep on loving one another, love neighbours and even enemies as Jesus taught (Matthew:5:44|). Note the use of \agapa“\, not \phile“\.

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@1Thessalonians:4:12 @{That ye may walk honestly} (\hina peripatˆte euschˆmon“s\). Present subjunctive (linear action). Old adverb from \euschˆm“n\ (\eu, schˆma\, Latin _habitus_, graceful figure), becomingly, decently. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:13:13|. This idea includes honest financial transactions, but a good deal more. People outside the churches have a right to watch the conduct of professing Christians in business, domestic life, social life, politics.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:13 @{We would not have} (\ou thelomen\). We do not wish. {You ignorant} (\humas agnoein\). Old word, not to know (\a\ privative, \gno-\, root of \gin“sk“\). No advantage in ignorance of itself. {Concerning them that fall asleep} (\peri t“n koim“men“n\). Present passive (or middle) participle (Aleph B) rather than the perfect passive \kekoimˆmen“n\ of many later MSS. From old \koima“\, to put to sleep. Present tense gives idea of repetition, from time to time fall asleep. Greeks and Romans used this figure of sleep for death as Jesus does (John:11:11|) and N.T. generally (cf. our word _cemetery_). Somehow the Thessalonians had a false notion about the dead in relation to the second coming. {Even as the rest which have no hope} (\kath“s hoi loipoi hoi mˆ echontes elpida\). This picture of the hopelessness of the pagan world about the future life is amply illustrated in ancient writings and particularly by inscriptions on tombs (Milligan). Some few pagans clung to this hope, but most had none.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:14 @{For if we believe} (\ei gar pisteuomen\). Condition of first class, assuming the death and resurrection of Jesus to be true. {In Jesus} (\dia tou Iˆsou\). Literally, through or by means of Jesus. It is amphibolous in position and can be taken either with \tous koimˆthentas\ (that are fallen asleep in or through Jesus) like \hoi koimˆthentes en Christ“i\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:18| and probably correct or with \axei\ (through Jesus with God). {With him} (\sun aut“i\). Together with Jesus. Jesus is the connecting link (\dia\) for those that sleep (\koimˆthentas\ first aorist passive, but with middle sense) and their resurrection.

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

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:16 @{With a shout} (\en keleusmati\). Note this so-called instrumental use of \en\. Old word, here only in N.T., from \keleu“\, to order, command (military command). Christ will come as Conqueror. {With the voice of the archangel} (\en ph“nˆi archaggelou\). Further explanation of \keleusmati\ (command). The only archangel mentioned in N.T. is Michael in strkjv@Jude:1:9|. But note absence of article with both \ph“nˆi\ and \archaggelou\. The reference may be thus indefinite. {With the trump of God} (\en salpiggi theou\). Trumpet. See same figure in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:52|. {The dead in Christ shall rise first} (\hoi nekroi en Christ“i anastˆsontai pr“ton\). {First} here refers plainly to the fact that, so far from the dead in Christ having no share in the Parousia, they will rise before those still alive are changed.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:17 @{Then} (\epeita\). The next step, not the identical time (\tote\), but immediately afterwards. {Together with them} (\hama sun autois\). Note both \hama\ (at the same time) and \sun\ (together with) with the associative instrumental case \autois\ (the risen saints). {Shall be caught up} (\harpagˆsometha\). Second future passive indicative of \harpaz“\, old verb to seize, to carry off like Latin _rapio_. {To meet the Lord in the air} (\eis apantˆsin tou Kuriou eis aera\). This special Greek idiom is common in the LXX like the Hebrew, but Polybius has it also and it occurs in the papyri (Moulton, _Proleg_., p. 14, n. 3). This rapture of the saints (both risen and changed) is a glorious climax to Paul's argument of consolation. {And so} (\kai hout“s\). This is the outcome, to be forever with the Lord, whether with a return to earth or with an immediate departure for heaven Paul does not say. To be with Christ is the chief hope of Paul's life (1Thessalonians:5:10; strkjv@Phillipians:1:23; strkjv@Colossians:3:4; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:8|).

rwp@1Thessalonians:5:1 @{But concerning the times and the seasons} (\peri de t“n chron“n kai t“n kair“n\). See both words used also in strkjv@Titus:1:2f|. \Chronos\ is rather an extended period and \kairos\ a definite space of time.

rwp@1Thessalonians:5:2 @{Know perfectly} (\akrib“s oidate\). Accurately know, not "the times and the seasons," but their own ignorance. {As a thief in the night} (\h“s kleptˆs en nukti\). As a thief at night, suddenly and unexpectedly. Reminiscence of the word of Jesus (Matthew:24:43; strkjv@Luke:12:39|), used also in strkjv@2Peter:3:10; strkjv@Revelation:3:3; strkjv@16:15|. {Cometh} (\erchetai\). Prophetic or futuristic present tense.

rwp@1Thessalonians:5:4 @{As a thief} (\h“s kleptˆs\). As in verse 2|, but A B Bohairic have \kleptas\ (thieves), turning the metaphor round.

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

rwp@2Corinthians:10:12 @{To number or compare ourselves} (\enkrinai ˆ sunkrinai\). Paronomasia here, play on the two words. \Enkrinai\ is first aorist active infinitive of old verb, but here only in N.T., to judge among, to judge one as worthy to be numbered among as here. The second verb \sunkrinai\ (first aorist active infinitive of \sunkrin“\, old verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:2:13|) originally meant to combine as in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:13| (which see), but here it has the sense of "compare" not found in the old Greek. The papyri use it to mean to decide. Plummer suggests "to pair and compare" for the play on the words here. {Measuring themselves by themselves} (\en heautois heautous metrountes\). Or "in themselves." Keenest sarcasm. Setting themselves up as the standards of orthodoxy these Judaizers always measure up to the standard while Paul falls short. {Comparing themselves with themselves} (\sunkrinontes heautous heautois\). Associate instrumental case \heautois\ after \sunkrinontes\ (verb just explained). Paul is not keen to fall into the trap set for him. {Are without understanding} (\ou suniƒsin\). The regular form for present active indicative third plural of \suniˆmi\, to comprehend, to grasp. Some MSS. have the late form \suniousin\ (omega form \suni“\). It is a hard thing to see, but it is true. These men do not see their own picture so obvious to others (Ephesians:5:17; strkjv@1Timothy:1:7|). Cf. strkjv@Mark:8:17|.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:4 @{Another Jesus} (\allon Iˆsoun\). Not necessarily a different Jesus, but any other "Jesus" is a rival and so wrong. That would deny the identity. {A different spirit} (\pneuma heteron\). This is the obvious meaning of \heteron\ in distinction from \allon\ as seen in strkjv@Acts:4:12; strkjv@Galatians:1:6f|. But this distinction in nature or kind is not always to be insisted on. {A different gospel} (\euaggelion heteron\). Similar use of \heteron\. {Ye do well to bear with him} (\kal“s anechesthe\). Ironical turn again. "Well do you hold yourselves back from him" (the coming one, whoever he is). Some MSS. have the imperfect \aneichesthe\ (did bear with).

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

rwp@2Corinthians:11:9 @{I was not a burden to any man} (\ou katenarkˆsa outhenos\). First aorist active indicative of \katanarka“\. Jerome calls this word one of Paul's _cilicisms_ which he brought from Cilicia. But the word occurs in Hippocrates for growing quite stiff and may be a medical term in popular use. \Narka“\ means to become numb, torpid, and so a burden. It is only here and strkjv@12:13f|. Paul "did not benumb the Corinthians by his demand for pecuniary aid" (Vincent). {From being burdensome} (\abarˆ\). Old adjective, free from weight or light (\a\ privative and \baros\, weight). See on ¯1Thessalonians:2:9| for same idea. Paul kept himself independent.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:13 @{False apostles} (\pseudapostoloi\). From \pseudˆs\, false, and \apostolos\. Paul apparently made this word (cf. strkjv@Revelation:2:2|). In verse 26| we have \pseudadelphos\, a word of like formation (Galatians:2:4|). See also \pseudochristoi\ and \pseudoprophˆtai\ in strkjv@Mark:13:22|. {Deceitful} (\dolioi\). Old word from \dolos\ (lure, snare), only here in N.T. (cf. strkjv@Romans:16:18|). {Fashioning themselves} (\metaschˆmatizomenoi\). Present middle (direct) participle of the old verb \metaschˆmatiz“\ for which see on strkjv@1Corinthians:4:6|. Masquerading as apostles of Christ by putting on the outward habiliments, posing as ministers of Christ ("gentlemen of the cloth," nothing but cloth). Paul plays with this verb in verses 13,14,15|.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:16 @{Let no man think me foolish} (\mˆ tis me doxˆi aphrona einai\). Usual construction in a negative prohibition with \mˆ\ and the aorist subjunctive \doxˆi\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 933). {But if ye do} (\ei de mˆ ge\). Literally, "But if not at least (or otherwise)," that is, If you do think me foolish. {Yet as foolish} (\kan h“s aphrona\). "Even if as foolish." Paul feels compelled to boast of his career and work as an apostle of Christ after the terrible picture just drawn of the Judaizers. He feels greatly embarrassed in doing it. Some men can do it with complete composure (_sang froid_).

rwp@2Corinthians:11:17 @{Not after the Lord} (\ou kata Kurion\). Not after the example of the Lord. He had appealed to the example of Christ in strkjv@10:1| (the meekness and gentleness of Christ). Paul's conduct here, he admits, is not in keeping with that. But circumstances force him on.

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

rwp@2Corinthians:11:23 @{As one beside himself} (\paraphron“n\). Present active participle of \paraphrone“\. Old verb from \paraphr“n\ (\para, phrˆn\), beside one's wits. Only here in N.T. Such open boasting is out of accord with Paul's spirit and habit. {I more} (\huper eg“\). This adverbial use of \huper\ appears in ancient Greek (Euripides). It has no effect on \eg“\, not "more than I," but "I more than they." He claims superiority now to these "superextra apostles." {More abundant} (\perissoter“s\). See on ¯7:15|. No verbs with these clauses, but they are clear. {In prisons} (\en phulakais\). Plural also in strkjv@6:5|. Clement of Rome (_Cor_. V.) says that Paul was imprisoned seven times. We know of only five (Philippi, Jerusalem, Caesarea, twice in Rome), and only one before II Corinthians (Philippi). But Luke does not tell them all nor does Paul. Had he been in prison in Ephesus? Songs:many think and it is possible as we have seen. {Above measure} (\huperballont“s\). Old adverb from the participle \huperballont“n\ (\huperball“\, to hurl beyond). Here only in N.T. {In deaths oft} (\en thanatois pollakis\). He had nearly lost his life, as we know, many times (1:9f.; strkjv@4:11|).

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:11:32 @{The governor under Aretas} (\ho ethnarchˆs Hareta\). How it came to pass that Damascus, ruled by the Romans after B.C. 65, came at this time to be under the rule of Aretas, fourth of the name, King of the Nabatheans (II Macc. strkjv@5:8), we do not know. There is an absence of Roman coins in Damascus from A.D. 34 to 62. It is suggested (Plummer) that Caligula, to mark his dislike for Antipas, gave Damascus to Aretas (enemy of Antipas). {Guarded} (\ephrourei\). Imperfect active of \phroure“\, old verb (from \phrouros\, a guard) to guard by posting sentries. In strkjv@Acts:9:24| we read that the Jews kept watch to seize Paul, but there is no conflict as they cooperated with the guard set by Aretas at their request. {To seize} (\piasai\). Doric first aorist active infinitive of \piez“\ (Luke:6:38|) for which see on ¯Acts:3:7|.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:1 @{I must needs glory} (\kauchasthai dei\). This is the reading of B L Latin Syriac, but Aleph D Bohairic have \de\ while K M read \dˆ\. The first is probably correct. He must go on with the glorying already begun, foolish as it is, though it is not expedient (\ou sumpheron\). {Visions} (\optasias\). Late word from \optaz“\. See on ¯Luke:1:22; strkjv@Acts:26:19|. {Revelations of the Lord} (\apokalupseis Kuriou\). Unveilings (from \apokalupt“\ as in strkjv@Revelation:1:1|). See on ¯2Thessalonians:1:7; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:7; strkjv@14:26|. Paul had both repeated visions of Christ (Acts:9:3; strkjv@16:9; strkjv@18:9; strkjv@22:17; strkjv@27:23f.|) and revelations. He claimed to speak by direct revelation (1Corinthians:11:23; strkjv@15:3; strkjv@Galatians:1:12; strkjv@Ephesians:3:3|, etc.).

rwp@2Corinthians:12:5 @{But on mine own behalf} (\huper de emautou\). As if there were two Pauls. In a sense there were. He will only glory in the things mentioned above, the things of his weaknesses (11:30|).

rwp@2Corinthians:12:6 @{I shall not be foolish} (\ouk esomai aphr“n\). Apparent contradiction to strkjv@11:1,16|. But he is here speaking of the Paul "caught up" in case he should tell the things heard (condition of the third class, \ean\ and first aorist subjunctive \thelˆs“\). {Of me} (\eis eme\). To my credit, almost like dative (cf. \en emoi\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:11|).

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

rwp@2Corinthians:12:10 @{Wherefore I take pleasure} (\dio eudok“\). For this noble word see on ¯Matthew:3:17; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:8|. The enemies of Paul will have a hard time now in making Paul unhappy by persecutions even unto death (Phillipians:1:20-26|). He is not courting martyrdom, but he does not fear it or anything that is "for Christ's sake" (\huper Christou\). {For when} (\hotan gar\). "For whenever," indefinite time. {Then I am strong} (\tote dunatos eimi\). At that very time, but not in myself, but in the fresh access of power from Christ for the emergency.

rwp@2Corinthians:12:11 @{I am become foolish} (\gegona aphr“n\). Perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. In spite of what he said in verse 6| that he would not be foolish if he gloried in the other Paul. But he feels that he has dropped back to the mood of strkjv@11:1,16|. He has been swept on by the memory of the ecstasy. {For I ought to have been commended by you} (\eg“ gar “pheilon huph' hum“n sunistasthai\). Explanation of "ye compelled me." Imperfect active \“pheilon\ of \opheil“\, to be under obligation, and the tense here expresses an unfulfilled obligation about the present. But \sunistasthai\ is present passive infinitive, not aorist or perfect passive. He literally means, "I ought now to be commended by you" instead of having to glorify myself. He repeats his boast already made (11:5f.|), that he is no whit behind "the super-extra apostles" (the Judaizers), "though I am nothing" (\ei kai ouden eimi\). Even boasting himself against those false apostles causes a reaction of feeling that he has to express (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:15:9; strkjv@1Timothy:1:15f.|).

rwp@2Corinthians:12:14 @{Third time I am ready to come} (\triton touto hetoim“s ech“\). Had he been already twice or only once? He had changed his plans once when he did not go (1:15f.|). He will not change his plans now. This looks as if he had only been once (that in strkjv@Acts:18|). Note the third use of \katanarka“\ (11:9; strkjv@12:13,14|). They need not be apprehensive. He will be as financially independent of them as before. "I shall not sponge on you." {Not yours, but you} (\ou ta hum“n, alla humas\). The motto of every real preacher. {To lay up} (\thˆsaurizein\). For this use of the verb see strkjv@1Corinthians:16:2| (Matthew:6:19-21; strkjv@James:5:3|).

rwp@2Corinthians:12:19 @{Ye think all this time} (\palai dokeite\). Progressive present indicative, "for a long time ye have been thinking." {We are excusing ourselves} (\apologoumetha\). He is not just apologizing, but is in deadly earnest, as they will find out when he comes.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:2 @{As when I was present the second time} (\h“s par“n to deuteron\). This translation assumes the second visit as already made. It is a natural way to take the Greek \h“s par“n\. But \h“s\ with \par“n\ can also mean "as if present" the second time (Authorized Version). Probably "as when" is the more natural rendering, but the other cannot be ruled entirely out in view of strkjv@1:15-23|. {If I come again} (\ean elth“ eis to palin\). Condition of third class. The use of \palin\ of itself suits the idea that Paul had not yet made the second visit as it means simply "again" or "back," but in strkjv@Matthew:26:44| we find \palin ek tritou\ (again a third time) and so it is not decisive.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:4 @{But we shall live with him through the power of God} (\alla zˆsomen sun aut“i ek duname“s theou\). Songs:real is Paul's sense of his union with Christ.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:8 @{Against the truth} (\kata tˆs alˆtheias\). He means in the long run. We can hinder and hold down the truth by evil deeds (Romans:1:18|), but in the end the truth wins.

rwp@2Corinthians:13:13 @{The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all} (\hˆ charis tou Kuriou Iˆsou Christou kai hˆ agapˆ tou theou kai hˆ koin“nia tou hagiou pneumatos meta pant“n hum“n\). This benediction is the most complete of them all. It presents the persons of the Trinity in full form. From strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:17| it appears that Paul wrote the greeting or benediction with his own hand. We know from strkjv@Romans:15:19| that Paul went round about unto Illyricum before, apparently, he came on to Corinth. When he did arrive (Acts:20:1-3|) the troubles from the Judaizers had disappeared. Probably the leaders left after the coming of Titus and the brethren with this Epistle. The reading of it in the church would make a stir of no small proportions. But it did the work.

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@2John:1:9 @{Whosoever goeth onward} (\pƒs ho proag“n\). "Every one who goes ahead. \Proag“\ literally means to go on before (Mark:11:9|). That in itself is often the thing to do, but here the bad sense comes out by the parallel clause. {And abideth not in the teaching of Christ} (\kai mˆ men“n en tˆi didachˆi tou Christou\). Not the teaching about Christ, but that of Christ which is the standard of Christian teaching as the walk of Christ is the standard for the Christian's walk (1John:2:6|). See strkjv@John:7:16; strkjv@18:19|. These Gnostics claimed to be the progressives, the advanced thinkers, and were anxious to relegate Christ to the past in their onward march. This struggle goes on always among those who approach the study of Christ. Is he a "landmark" merely or is he our goal and pattern? Progress we all desire, but progress toward Christ, not away from him. Reactionary obscurantists wish no progress toward Christ, but desire to stop and camp where they are. "True progress includes the past" (Westcott). Jesus Christ is still ahead of us all calling us to come on to him.

rwp@2John:1:10 @{If any one cometh and bringeth not} (\ei tis erchetai kai ou pherei\). Condition of first class with \ei\ and two present indicatives (\erchetai, pherei\). {This teaching} (\tautˆn tˆn didachˆn\). This teaching of Christ of verse 9|, which is the standard by which to test Gnostic deceivers (verse 7|). John does not refer to entertaining strangers (He strkjv@13:2; strkjv@1Timothy:5:10|), but to the deceiving propagandists who were carrying dissension and danger with them. {Receive him not} (\mˆ lambanete auton\). Present active imperative with \mˆ\. For \lamban“\ in this sense see strkjv@John:1:12; strkjv@6:21; strkjv@13:20|. {Into your house} (\eis oikian\). Definite without the article like our at home, to town. {Give him no greeting} (\chairein aut“i mˆ legete\). "Say not farewell to him." Apparently \chairein\ here (present active infinitive, object of \legete\ present active imperative with negative \mˆ\) is used of farewell as in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11|, though usually in the N.T. (Acts:15:23; strkjv@23:26; strkjv@James:1:1|) of the salutation. But here the point turns on the stranger bringing into the house (or trying to do so) his heretical and harmful teaching which seems to be after the salutation is over. The usual greeting to a house is given in strkjv@Luke:10:5|. On the other hand, if \chairein\ means greeting, not farewell, here, it can very well be understood of the peril of allowing these Gnostic propagandists to spread their pernicious teachings (cf. Mormons or Bolshevists) in home and church (usually meeting in the home). This is assuming that the men were known and not mere strangers.

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

rwp@Info_2Peter @ CLAIMS PETRINE AUTHORSHIP Not only so, but in fuller form than strkjv@1Peter:1:1|, for the writer terms himself "Simon (Symeon in some MSS.) Peter," a fact that has been used against the genuineness. If no claim had been made, that would have been considered decisive against him. Simon (Symeon was the Jewish form as used by James in strkjv@Acts:15:14|) is the real name (John:1:42|) and Peter merely the Greek for Cephas, the nickname given by Christ. There is no reason why both could not properly be employed here. But the claim to Petrine authorship, if not genuine, leaves the Epistle pseudonymous. That was a custom among some Jewish writers and even Christian writers, as the spurious Petrine literature testifies (Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, etc.), works of a heretical or curious nature. Whatever the motive for such a pious fraud, the fact remains that II Peter, if not genuine, has to take its place with this pseudonymous literature and can hardly be deemed worthy of a place in the New Testament. And yet there is no heresy in this Epistle, no startling new ideas that would lead one to use the name of Simon Peter. It is the rather full of edifying and orthodox teaching.

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

rwp@Info_2Peter @ AND YET THE EPISTLE DIFFERS IN STYLE FROM FIRST PETER This is a fact, though one greatly exaggerated by some scholars. There are many points of similarity, for one thing, like the habit of repeating words (\epichorˆge“\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:10,19, \bebaios\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:12,13,15|, \prophˆteia\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:20; strkjv@3:3|, etc.). These repetitions occur all through the Epistle as in I Peter. "This is a matter of very high importance" (Bigg). Again in both Epistles there is a certain dignity of style with a tendency to iambic rhythm. There is more quotation of the Old Testament in I Peter, but frequent allusion to words and phrases in II Peter. There are more allusions to words and facts in the Gospels in I Peter than in II Peter, though some do occur in II Peter. Besides those already given, note strkjv@2Peter:1:8| (Luke:13:7f.|), strkjv@2Peter:2:1| (Matthew:10:33|), strkjv@2Peter:2:20| (Matthew:12:45; strkjv@Luke:11:26|), strkjv@2Peter:3:4| (Matthew:24:1ff.|), and possibly strkjv@2Peter:1:3| to Christ's calling the apostles. Both appear to know and use the O.T. Apocrypha. Both are fond of the plural of abstract substantives. Both make sparing use of Greek particles. Both use the article similarly, idiomatically, and sometimes not using it. There are some 361 words in 1 Peter not in II Peter, 231 in II Peter not in I Peter. There are 686 \hapax legomena\ in N.T., 54 in II Peter instead of the average of 62, a large number when the brevity of the Epistle is considered. There are several ways of explaining these variations. One way is to say that they are written by different men, but difference of subject has to be borne in mind. All writers and artists have an early and a later manner. Another solution is that Peter employed different amanuenses. Silvanus was the one for I Peter (1Peter:5:12|). Mark was Peter's usual interpreter, but we do not know who was the amanuensis for II Peter, if indeed one was used. We know from strkjv@Acts:4:13| that Peter and John were considered unlettered men (\agrammatoi kai idi“tai\). II Peter and the Apocalypse illustrate this statement. II Peter may have more of Peter's real style than I Peter.

rwp@Info_2Peter @ HE ACCEPTS PAUL'S EPISTLES AS SCRIPTURE This fact (2Peter:3:15f.|) has been used as conclusive proof by Baur and his school that Peter could not have written the Epistle after the stern rebuke from Paul at Antioch (Galatians:2:11f.|). But this argument ignores one element in Peter's impulsive nature and that is his coming back as he did with Jesus. Paul after that event in Antioch spoke kindly of Peter (1Corinthians:9:5|). Neither Peter nor Paul cherished a personal grudge where the Master's work was involved. It is also objected that Peter would not have put Paul's Epistles on the level with the O.T. and call them by implication "Scripture." But Paul claimed the help of the Holy Spirit in his writings and Peter knew the marks of the Holy Spirit's power. Besides, in calling Paul's Epistles Scripture he may not have meant to place them exactly on a par with the Old Testament.

rwp@Info_2Peter @ ANACHRONISMS It used to be said that it was impossible for II Peter to have been written in the first century, because it had the atmosphere of the second. But one fact is strongly against that argument. In strkjv@2Peter:3:8| occurs the quotation of strkjv@Psalms:90:4| about the thousand years without any chiliastic turn at all, a thing sure to happen in the second century after chiliasm had come to have such a swing. Peter's use of it suits the first century, not the second. As a matter of fact, the false teachers described in II Peter suit the first century precisely if one recalls Paul's troubles with the Judaizers in Galatia and Corinth and with the Gnostics in Colossae and Ephesus. "Every feature in the description of the false teachers and mockers is to be found in the apostolic age" (Bigg).

rwp@Info_2Peter @ THE READERS The author says that this is his second Epistle to them (2Peter:3:1|), and that means that he is writing to the saints in the five Roman provinces in Asia Minor to whom the first Epistle was sent (1Peter:1:1|). Spitta and Zahn deny this on the ground that the two Epistles do not discuss the same subjects, surely a flimsy objection. Zahn even holds that II Peter precedes I Peter and that the Epistle referred to in strkjv@2Peter:3:1| has been lost. He holds that II Peter was addressed to the church in Corinth. He considers the readers to be Jews while I Peter was addressed to Gentiles. But "there is nothing in II Peter to differentiate its first readers from those of I Peter" (Bigg).

rwp@Info_2Peter @ THE PURPOSE Certainly Peter is here concerned chiefly with the heresies of that general region in Asia Minor that so disturbed Paul (Colossians, Ephesians, Pastoral Epistles) and John (Gospel, Epistles, Apocalypse). Paul early foresaw at Miletus these wolves that would ravish the sheep (Acts:20:29f.|). In I Peter he is concerned chiefly with the fiery persecutions that are upon them, but here with the heretics that threaten to lead them astray.

rwp@Info_2Peter @ BALANCE OF PROBABILITY There are difficulties in any decision about the authorship and character of II Peter. But, when all things are considered, I agree with Bigg that the Epistle is what it professes to be by Simon Peter. Else it is pseudonymous. The Epistle more closely resembles the other New Testament books than it does the large pseudepigraphic literature of the second and third centuries.

rwp@Info_2Peter @ THE DATE If we accept the Petrine authorship, it must come before his death, which was probably A.D. 67 or 68. Hence the Epistle cannot be beyond this date. There are those who argue for A.D. 64 as the date of Peter's death, but on insufficient grounds in my opinion.

rwp@Info_2Peter @ BOOKS ON II PETER BESIDES THOSE ON I PETER ALSO Abbott, E. A., _The Expositor_ (Jan. to March, 1822). Chase, F. H., _Hastings D B_ (Second Peter). Deuteronomy:Zwaan, _2 Peter en Judas_ (1909). Dietlein, W. O., _Der 2 Brief Petri_ (1851). Grosch, H., _Die Echtheit des zweiten Briefes Petri_ (1889). Henkel, K., _Der zweite Brief des Apostelfursten Petrus_ (1904). Hofmann, J. C., _Der zweite Brief Petri und der Brief Juda (1875) Hundhausen, _Das zweite Pontifkalschreiben des Apostels Petrus_ (1873). James, M. R., _The Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of Jude_ (Cambridge Greek Testament, 1912). Lumby, J. R., _2 Peter and Jude_ (in Bible Commentary). Mayor, J. B., _The Epistle of St. Jude:and the Second Epistle of St. Peter_ (1907). Plummer, A., _The Second Epistle of Peter and the Epistle of Jude_ (Vol. 3, N.T. Commentary for English Readers by Ellicott). Robson, E. I., _Studies in the Second Epistle of St. Peter_ (1915). Schott, Th., _Der zweite Brief Petri und der Brief Juda_ (1863). Schott, _Der 2 Br. Petri und der Br. Juda Erkl_. (1863). Schweenhorst, H., _Das Verhaltnis des Judasbriefes zum zweiten Petrusbriefe_ (1904). Snyman, D. R., _The Authenticity of the Second Epistle of Peter_ (thesis in 1923 for Th.D. degree at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary). Spitta, F, _Der zweite Brief des Petrus und der Brief des Judas_ (1885). Strachan, R. D., _Expositor's Greek Testament_ (1910), Ullman, C., _Der 2 Brief Petri Krit. untersuch._ (1821). Warfield, B. B., _A Defence of 2 Peter_ (Southern Presbyterian Review, January, 1882).,_Dr. Edwin A. Abbott on the Genuineness of Second Peter (Southern Presbyterian Review_, 1883). Werdermann, _H., Die Irrlehrer des Judasbriefes und 2 Petrusbriefes_ (1913). Wiesinger, J. T. A., _Der zweite Brief des Apostels Petrus und der Brief des Judas_ (1862). strkjv@2Peter:1:1 @{Simon Peter} (\Sim“n Petros\). Aleph A K L P have \Syme“n\ as in strkjv@Acts:15:14|, while B has \Sim“n\. The two forms occur indifferently in I Macc. strkjv@2:3, 65 for the same man. {Servant and apostle} (\doulos kai apostolos\). Like strkjv@Romans:1:1; strkjv@Titus:1:1|. {To them that have obtained} (\tois lachousin\). Dative plural articular participle second aorist active of \lagchan“\, old verb, to obtain by lot (Luke:1:9|), here with the accusative (\pistin\) as in strkjv@Acts:1:17|. {Like precious} (\isotimon\). Late compound adjective (\isos\, equal, \timˆ\, honor, price), here only in N.T. But this adjective (Field) is used in two ways, according to the two ideas in \timˆ\ (value, honor), either like in value or like in honor. This second idea is the usual one with \isotimos\ (inscriptions and papyri, Josephus, Lucian), while \polutimos\ has the notion of price like \timˆ\ in strkjv@1:7,19; strkjv@2:4,6f|. The faith which they have obtained is like in honor and privilege with that of Peter or any of the apostles. {With us} (\hˆmin\). Associative-instrumental case after \isotimon\. Equal to \tˆi hˆm“n\ (the faith of us). {In the righteousness} (\en dikaiosunˆi\). Definite because of the preposition \en\ and the following genitive even though anarthrous. The O.T. sense of \dikaiosunˆ\ applied to God (Romans:1:17|) and here to Christ. {Of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ} (\tou theou hˆm“n kai s“tˆros Iˆsou Christou\). Songs:the one article (\tou\) with \theou\ and \s“tˆros\ requires precisely as with \tou kuriou hˆm“n kai s“tˆros Iˆsou Christou\ (of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ), one person, not two, in strkjv@1:11| as in strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:2,18|. Songs:in strkjv@1Peter:1:3| we have \ho theos kai patˆr\ (the God and Father), one person, not two. The grammar is uniform and inevitable (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 786), as even Schmiedel (Winer-Schmiedel, _Grammatik_, p. 158) admits: "Grammar demands that one person be meant." Moulton (_Prol._, p. 84) cites papyri examples of like usage of \theos\ for the Roman emperors. See the same idiom in strkjv@Titus:2:13|. The use of \theos\ by Peter as a predicate with Jesus Christ no more disproves the Petrine authorship of this Epistle than a like use in strkjv@John:1:1| disproves the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel and the same use in strkjv@Titus:2:13| disproves the genuineness of Titus. Peter had heard Thomas call Jesus God (John:20:28|) and he himself had called him the Son of God (Matthew:16:16|).

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:1:3 @{Seeing that his divine power hath granted unto us} (\h“s hˆmin tˆs theias duname“s autou ded“rˆmenˆs\). Genitive absolute with the causal particle \h“s\ and the perfect middle participle of \d“re“\, old verb, to bestow (\d“rea\, gift), usually middle as here, in N.T. elsewhere only strkjv@Mark:15:45|. \Autou\ refers to Christ, who has "divine power" (\tˆs theias duname“s\), since he is \theos\ (1:1|). \Theios\ (from \theos\) is an old adjective in N.T. here and verse 4| only, except strkjv@Acts:17:29|, where Paul uses \to theion\ for deity, thus adapting his language to his audience as the papyri and inscriptions show. The use of \theios\ with an imperial connotation is very common in the papyri and the inscriptions. Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, pp. 360-368) has shown the singular linguistic likeness between strkjv@2Peter:1:3-11| and a remarkable inscription of the inhabitants of Stratonicea in Caria to Zeus Panhemerios and Hecate dated A.D. 22 (in full in C I H ii No. 2715 a b). One of the likenesses is the use of \tˆs theias duname“s\. Peter may have read this inscription (cf. Paul in Athens) or he may have used "the familiar forms and formulae of religious emotion" (Deissmann), "the official liturgical language of Asia Minor." Peter is fond of \dunamis\ in this Epistle, and the \dunamis\ of Christ "is the sword which St. Peter holds over the head of the False Teachers" (Bigg). {All things that pertain unto life and godliness} (\panta ta pros z“ˆn kai eusebeian\). "All the things for life and godliness." The new life in Christ who is the mystery of godliness (1Timothy:3:16|). \Eusebeia\ with its cognates (\eusebˆs, euseb“s, eusebe“\) occurs only in this Epistle, Acts, and the Pastoral Epistles (from \eu\, well, and \sebomai\, to worship). {Of him that called us} (\tou kalesantos\). Genitive of the articular first aorist active participle of \kale“\. Christ called Peter and all other Christians. {By his own glory and virtue} (\dia doxˆs kai aretˆs\). Songs:B K L, but Aleph A C P read \idiƒi doxˆi kai aretˆi\ (either instrumental case "by" or dative "to"). Peter is fond of \idios\ (own, strkjv@1Peter:3:1,5; strkjv@2Peter:2:16,22|, etc.). "Glory" here is the manifestation of the Divine Character in Christ. For \aretˆ\ see on ¯1Peter:2:9| and strkjv@Phillipians:4:8; strkjv@2Peter:1:5|.

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:1:11 @{Thus} (\hout“s\). As shown in verse 10|. {Shall be supplied} (\epichorˆgˆthˆsetai\). Future passive of \epichorˆge“\, for which see verse 5|. You supply the virtues above and God will supply the entrance (\hˆ eisodos\, old word already in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:9|, etc.). {Richly} (\plousi“s\). See strkjv@Colossians:3:16| for this adverb. {Into the eternal kingdom} (\eis tˆn ai“nion basileian\). The believer's inheritance of strkjv@1Peter:1:4| is here termed kingdom, but "eternal" (\ai“nion\ feminine same as masculine). Curiously again in the Stratonicea inscription we find \tˆs ai“niou archˆs\ (of the eternal rule) applied to "the lords of Rome." But this is the spiritual reign of God in men's hearts here on earth (1Peter:2:9|) and in heaven. {Of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ} (\tou kuriou hˆm“n kai s“tˆros Iˆsou Christou\). For which idiom see on ¯1:1|.

rwp@2Peter:1:12 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). Since they are possessed of faith that conduces to godliness which they are diligently practising now he insists on the truth and proposes to do his part by them about it. {I shall be ready always} (\mellˆs“ aei\). Future active of \mell“\ (Matthew:24:6|), old verb, to be on the point of doing and used with the infinitive (present, aorist, or future). It is not here a periphrastic future, but rather the purpose of Peter to be ready in the future as in the past and now (Zahn). {To put you in remembrance} (\humas hupomimnˆskein\). Present active infinitive of \hupomimnˆsk“\, old causative compound (\hupo, mimnˆsk“\, like our suggest), either with two accusatives (John:14:26|) or \peri\ with the thing as here), "to keep on reminding you of those things" (\peri tout“n\). {Though ye know them} (\kaiper eidotas\). Second perfect active concessive participle of \oida\, agreeing (acc. plural), with \humas\. Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:5:8|. {Are established} (\estˆrigmenous\). Perfect passive concessive participle of \stˆriz“\ (1Peter:5:10|). The very verb (\stˆrison\) used by Jesus to Peter (Luke:22:32|). {In the truth which is with you} (\en tˆi parousˆi alˆtheiƒi\). "In the present truth" (the truth present to you), \parousˆi\ present active participle of \pareimi\, to be beside one. See strkjv@Colossians:1:6| for this use of \par“n\. Firmly established in the truth, but all the same Peter is eager to make them stronger.

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

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

rwp@2Peter:2:6 @{Turning into ashes} (\tephr“sas\). First aorist participle of \tephro“\, late word from \tephra\, ashes (in Dio Cassius of an eruption of Vesuvius, Philo), here alone in N.T. {The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah} (\poleis Sodom“n kai Gomorrƒs\). Genitive of apposition after \poleis\ (cities), though it makes sense as possessive genitive, for strkjv@Jude:1:7| speaks of the cities around these two. The third example, the cities of the plain. See strkjv@Genesis:19:24f|. {Condemned them} (\katekrinen\). First aorist active indicative of \katakrin“\, still part of the protasis with \ei\. {With an overthrow} (\katastrophˆi\). Instrumental case or even dative like \thanat“i\ with \katakrin“\ in strkjv@Matthew:20:18|. But Westcott and Hort reject the word here because not in B C Coptic. {Having made them} (\tetheik“s\). Perfect active participle of \tithˆmi\. {An example} (\hupodeigma\). For which see strkjv@James:5:10; strkjv@John:13:15|. Cf. strkjv@1Peter:2:21|. {Unto those that should live ungodly} (\mellont“n asebesin\). Rather, "unto ungodly men of things about to be" (see strkjv@Hebrews:11:20| for this use of \mellont“n\). But Aleph A C K L read \asebein\ (present active infinitive) with \mellont“n\=\asebˆsont“n\ (future active participle of \asebe“\), from which we have our translation.

rwp@2Peter:2:8 @{For} (\gar\). Parenthetical explanation in verse 8| of the remark about Lot. {Dwelling} (\enkatoik“n\). Present active participle of \enkatoike“\, old but rare double compound, here only in N.T. {In seeing and hearing} (\blemmati kai akoˆi\). "By sight (instrumental case of \blemma\, old word, from \blep“\ to see, here only in N.T.) and hearing" (instrumental case of \akoˆ\ from \akou“\, to hear, common as strkjv@Matthew:13:14|). {From day to day} (\hˆmeran ex hˆmerƒs\). "Day in day out." Accusative of time and ablative with \ex\. Same idiom in strkjv@Psalms:96:2| for the more common \ex hˆmeras eis hˆmeran\. {Vexed} (\ebasanizen\). Imperfect active (kept on vexing) of \basaniz“\, old word, to test metals, to torment (Matthew:8:29|). {With their lawless deeds} (\anomois ergois\). Instrumental case of cause, "because of their lawless (contrary to law) deeds." For \anomos\ see strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:8|.

rwp@Acts:8:24 @{Pray ye for me} (\Deˆthˆte humeis huper emou\). Emphasis on \humeis\ (you). First aorist passive imperative. Simon is thoroughly frightened by Peter's words, but shows no sign of personal repentance or change of heart. He wants to escape the penalty for his sin and hopes that Peter can avert it. Peter had clearly diagnosed his case. He was an unconverted man in spite of his profession of faith and baptism. There is no evidence that he ever changed his life at all. {Which} (\h“n\). Genitive by attraction of the accusative relative \ha\ to case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\ (of those things), a common Greek idiom.

rwp@Acts:8:27 @{A eunuch of great authority} (\eunouchos dunastˆs\). Eunuchs were often employed by oriental rulers in high posts. _Dynasty_ comes from this old word \dunastˆs\ used of princes in strkjv@Luke:1:52| and of God in strkjv@1Timothy:6:15|. Eunuchs were not allowed to be Jews in the full sense (Deuteronomy:23:1|), but only proselytes of the gate. But Christianity is spreading to Samaritans and to eunuchs. {Candace} (\Kandakˆs\). Not a personal name, but like Pharaoh and Ptolemy, the title of the queens of Ethiopia. This eunuch apparently brought the gospel to Ethiopia. {Treasure} (\gazˆs\). Persian word, common in late Greek and Latin for the royal treasure, here only in the N.T. {For to worship} (\proskunˆs“n\). Future active participle expressing purpose, a common idiom in the ancient Greek, but rare in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1128).

rwp@Acts:8:30 @{Understandest thou what thou readest?} (\Ara ge gin“skeis ha anagin“skeis?\) The interrogative particle \ara\ and the intensive particle \ge\ indicate doubt on Philip's part. The play (\paranomasia\) upon the words in the Greek is very neat: {Do you know what you know again (read)?} The verb for read (\anagin“sko\) means to know the letters again, recognize, read. The famous comment of Julian about the Christian writings is often quoted: \Anegn“n, egn“n, kategn“n\ (I read, I understood, I condemned). The keen retort was: \Anegn“s, all'ouk egn“s, ei gar egn“s, ouk an kategn“s\ (You read, but did not understand; for if you had understood, you would not have condemned).

rwp@Acts:8:31 @{How can I, except some one shall guide me?} (\P“s gar an dunaimˆn ean me tis hodˆgˆsei me?\). This is a mixed condition, the conclusion coming first belongs to the fourth class (undetermined with less likelihood of being determined) with \an\ and the optative, but the condition (\ean\, instead of the usual \ei\, and the future indicative) is of the first class (determined or fulfilled. Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1022), a common enough phenomenon in the _Koin‚_. The eunuch felt the need of some one to guide (\hodˆge“\ from \hodˆgos\, guide, and that from \hodos\, way, and \hegeomai\, to lead).

rwp@Acts:13:11 @{Upon thee} (\epi se\). The use of \epi\ with the accusative is rich and varied, the precise shade of meaning depending on the content. The "hand of the Lord" might be kindly (Acts:11:21|) or hostile (Hebrews:10:31|), but when God's hand touches one's life (Job:19:21|) it may be in judgment as here with Elymas. He has not humbled himself under the mighty hand of God (1Peter:5:6|). {Not seeing} (\mˆ blep“n\). Repeating with negative participle the negative idea in "blind" (\tuphlos\). "It was a judicial infliction; blindness for blindness, darkness without for wilful darkness within" (Furneaux). He was an example of the blind leading the blind that was to cease and Sergius Paulus was to be led into the light. The blindness was to be "for a season" (\achri kairou\, strkjv@Luke:4:13|), if it should please God to restore his sight. Paul apparently recalls his own blindness as he entered Damascus. {A mist} (\achlus\). Especially a dimness of the eyes, old poetic word and late prose, in LXX, only here in N.T. Galen uses it of the opacity of the eye caused by a wound. {He went about seeking some one to lead him by the hand} (\periag“n ezˆtei cheirag“gous\). A rather free rendering. Literally, "going about (\periag“n\, present active participle of \periag“\) he was seeking (\ezˆtei\, imperfect active of \zˆte“\) guides (\cheirag“gous\, from \cheir\, hand, and \ag“gos\, guide, from \ag“\, one who leads by the hand)." The very verb \cheirag“ge“\, to lead by the hand, Luke uses of Paul in strkjv@9:8|, as he entered Damascus.

rwp@Acts:13:12 @{Believed} (\episteusen\). Ingressive aorist active indicative. Renan considers it impossible that a Roman proconsul could be converted by a miracle. But it was the teaching about the Lord (\tou kuriou\, objective genitive) by which he was astonished (\ekplˆssomenos\, present passive participle of \ekplˆss“\, see on ¯Matthew:7:28|) or struck out as well as by the miracle. The blindness came "immediately" (\paraehrˆma\) upon the judgment pronounced by Paul. It is possible that Sergius Paulus was converted to Christ without openly identifying himself with the Christians as his baptism is not mentioned as in the case of Cornelius. But, even if he was baptized, he need not have been deposed from his proconsulship as Furneaux and Rackham argue because his office called for "official patronage of idolatrous worship." But that could have been merely perfunctory as it probably was already. He had been a disciple of the Jewish magician, Elymas Barjesus, without losing his position. Imperial persecution against Christianity had not yet begun. Furneaux even suggests that the conversion of a proconsul to Christianity at this stage would have called for mention by the Roman and Greek historians. There is the name Sergia Paullina in a Christian cemetery in Rome which shows that one of his family was a Christian later. One will believe what he wills about Sergius Paulus, but I do not see that Luke leaves him in the category of Simon Magus who "believed" (8:13|) for revenue only.

rwp@Acts:13:13 @{Paul and his company} (\hoi peri Paulon\). Neat Greek idiom as in Plato, Cratylus 440 C \hoi peri Herakleiton\. On this idiom see Gildersleeve, _Syntax_, p. 264. It means a man and his followers, "those around Paul." Now Paul ranks first always in Acts save in strkjv@14:2; strkjv@15:12,25| for special reasons. Heretofore Saul (Paul) held a secondary position (9:27; strkjv@11:30; strkjv@13:1f.|). "In nothing is the greatness of Barnabas more manifest than in his recognition of the superiority of Paul and acceptance of a secondary position for himself" (Furneaux). {Set sail} (\anachthentes\). First aorist passive participle of \anag“\. Thirteen times in the Acts and strkjv@Luke:8:22| which see. They sailed up to sea and came down (\katag“, katabain“\) to land. Songs:it looks. {Departed from them} (\apoch“rˆsas ap' aut“n\). First aorist active participle of \apoch“re“\, old verb to withdraw, go away from. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:7:23; strkjv@Luke:9:39|. He is called John there as in verse 5| and Mark in strkjv@15:39|, though John Mark in strkjv@12:12,25|. This may be accidental or on purpose (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 317). Luke is silent on John's reasons for leaving Paul and Barnabas. He was the cousin of Barnabas and may not have relished the change in leadership. There may have been change in plans also now that Paul is in command. Barnabas had chosen Cyprus and Paul has led them to Perga in Pamphylia and means to go on into the highlands to Antioch in Pisidia. There were perils of many sorts around them and ahead (2Corinthians:11:26|), perils to which John Mark was unwilling to be exposed. Paul will specifically charge him at Antioch with desertion of his post (Acts:15:39|). It is possible, as Ramsay suggests, that the mosquitoes at Perga gave John malaria. If so, they bit Paul and Barnabas also. He may not have liked Paul's aggressive attitude towards the heathen. At any rate he went home to Jerusalem instead of to Antioch, _zu seiner Mutter_ (Holtzmann). It was a serious breach in the work, but Paul and Barnabas stuck to the work.

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

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

rwp@Acts:16:24 @{Into the inner prison} (\eis tˆn es“teran phulakˆn\). The comparative form from the adverb \es“\ (within), Ionic and old Attic for \eis“\. In the LXX, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:6:19|. The Roman public prisons had a vestibule and outer prison and behind this the inner prison, a veritable dungeon with no light or air save what came through the door when open. One has only to picture modern cells in our jails, the dungeons in feudal castles, London prisons before the time of Howard, to appreciate the horrors of an inner prison cell in a Roman provincial town of the first century A.D. {Made their feet fast} (\tous podas ˆsphalisato aut“n\). First aorist (effective) middle of \asphaliz“\, from \asphalˆs\ (safe), common verb in late Greek, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:24:64ff|. The inner prison was safe enough without this refinement of cruelty. {In the stocks} (\eis to xulon\). \Xulon\, from \xu“\, to scrape or plane, is used for a piece of wood whether a cross or gibbet (Acts:5:30; strkjv@10:39; strkjv@13:29; strkjv@Galatians:3:13; strkjv@1Peter:2:24|) or a log or timber with five holes (four for the wrists and ankles and one for the neck) or two for the feet as here, \xulopedˆ\, Latin _vervus_, to shackle the feet stretched apart (Job:33:11|). This torment was practiced in Sparta, Athens, Rome, and Adonirom Judson suffered it in Burmah. \Xulon\ is also used in the N.T. for stick or staff (Matthew:26:47|) and even a tree (Luke:23:31|). Tertullian said of Christians in the stocks: _Nihil crus sentit in vervo, quum animus in caelo est_ (Nothing the limb feels in the stocks when the mind is in heaven).

rwp@Acts:17:26 @{And he made of one} (\epoiˆsen te ex henos\). The word \haimatos\ (blood) is absent from Aleph A B and is a later explanatory addition. What Paul affirms is the unity of the human race with a common origin and with God as the Creator. This view runs counter to Greek exclusiveness which treated other races as barbarians and to Jewish pride which treated other nations as heathen or pagan (the Jews were \laos\, the Gentiles \ethnˆ\). The cosmopolitanism of Paul here rises above Jew and Greek and claims the one God as the Creator of the one race of men. The Athenians themselves claimed to be \antochthonous\ (indigenous) and a special creation. Zeno and Seneca did teach a kind of cosmopolitanism (really pantheism) far different from the personal God of Paul. It was Rome, not Greece, that carried out the moral ideas of Zeno. Man is part of the universe (verse 24|) and God created (\epoiˆsen\) man as he created (\poiˆsas\) the all. {For to dwell} (\katoikein\). Infinitive (present active) of purpose, so as to dwell. {Having determined} (\horisas\). First aorist active participle of \horiz“\, old verb to make a horizon as already in strkjv@19:42| which see. Paul here touches God's Providence. God has revealed himself in history as in creation. His hand appears in the history of all men as well as in that of the Chosen People of Israel. {Appointed seasons} (\prostetagmenous kairous\). Not the weather as in strkjv@14:17|, but "the times of the Gentiles" (\kairoi ethn“n\) of which Jesus spoke (Luke:21:24|). The perfect passive participle of \prostass“\, old verb to enjoin, emphasizes God's control of human history without any denial of human free agency as was involved in the Stoic Fate (\Heirmarmenˆ\). {Bounds} (\horothesias\). Limits? Same idea in strkjv@Job:12:23|. Nations rise and fall, but it is not blind chance or hard fate. Thus there is an interplay between God's will and man's activities, difficult as it is for us to see with our shortened vision.

rwp@Acts:17:27 @{That they should seek God} (\Zˆtein ton theon\). Infinitive (present active) of purpose again. Seek him, not turn away from him as the nations had done (Romans:1:18-32|). {If haply they might feel after him} (\ei ara ge psˆlaphˆseian auton\). First aorist active (Aeolic form) optative of \psˆlapha“\, old verb from \psa“\, to touch. Songs:used by the Risen Jesus in his challenge to the disciples (Luke:24:39|), by the Apostle John of his personal contact with Jesus (1John:1:1|), of the contact with Mount Sinai (Hebrews:12:18|). Here it pictures the blind groping of the darkened heathen mind after God to "find him" (\heuroien\, second aorist active optative) whom they had lost. One knows what it is in a darkened room to feel along the walls for the door (Deuteronomy:28:29; strkjv@Job:5:14; strkjv@12:25; strkjv@Isaiah:59:10|). Helen Keller, when told of God, said that she knew of him already, groping in the dark after him. The optative here with \ei\ is due to the condition of the fourth class (undetermined, but with vague hope of being determined) with aim also present (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). Note also \ara ge\ the inferential particle \ara\ with the delicate intensive particle \ge\. {Though he is not far from each one of us} (\kai ge ou makran apo henos hekastou hˆm“n huparchonta\). More exactly with B L (\kai ge\ instead of \kaitoi\ or \kaitoi ge\), "and yet being not far from each one of us," a direct statement rather than a concessive one. The participle \huparchonta\ agrees with \auton\ and the negative \ou\ rather than the usual \me\ with the participle makes an emphatic negative. Note also the intensive particle \ge\.

rwp@Acts:20:28 @{Take heed unto yourselves} (\prosechete heautois\). The full phrase had \ton noun\, hold your mind on yourselves (or other object in the dative), as often in old writers and in strkjv@Job:7:17|. But the ancients often used the idiom with \noun\ understood, but not expressed as here and strkjv@Acts:5:35; strkjv@Luke:12:1; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@21:34; strkjv@1Timothy:1:4; strkjv@3:8; strkjv@4:13|. \Epeche\ is so used in strkjv@1Timothy:4:16|. {To all the flock} (\panti t“i poimni“i\). Contracted form of \poimenion = poimnˆ\ (John:10:16|) already in strkjv@Luke:12:32| and also in strkjv@Acts:20:29; strkjv@1Peter:5:2,3|. Common in old Greek. {Hath made} (\etheto\). Did make, second aorist middle indicative of \tithˆmi\, did appoint. Paul evidently believed that the Holy Spirit calls and appoints ministers. {Bishops} (\episkopous\). The same men termed elders in verse 17| which see. {To shepherd} (\poimainein\). Present active infinitive of purpose of \poimain“\, old verb to feed or tend the flock (\poimnˆ, poimnion\), to act as shepherd (\poimˆn\). These ministers are thus in Paul's speech called elders (verse 17|), bishops (verse 28|), and shepherds (verse 28|). Jesus had used this very word to Peter (John:21:16|, twice \boske\, feed, strkjv@21:15,17|) and Peter will use it in addressing fellow-elders (1Peter:5:2|) with memories, no doubt of the words of Jesus to him. The "elders" were to watch over as "bishops" and "tend and feed as shepherds" the flock. Jesus is termed "the shepherd and bishop of your souls" in strkjv@1Peter:2:25| and "the great Shepherd of the sheep" in strkjv@Hebrews:13:20|. Jesus called himself "the good Shepherd" in strkjv@John:10:11|. {The church of God} (\tˆn ekklˆsian tou theou\). The correct text, not "the church of the Lord" or "the church of the Lord and God" (Robertson, _Introduction to Textual Criticism of the N.T._, p. 189). {He purchased} (\periepoiˆsato\). First aorist middle of \peripoie“\, old verb to reserve, to preserve (for or by oneself, in the middle). In the N.T. only in Luke strkjv@17:33; strkjv@Acts:20:28; strkjv@1Timothy:3:13|. The substantive \peripoiˆsin\ (preservation, possession) occurs in strkjv@1Peter:2:9| ("a peculiar people" = a people for a possession) and in strkjv@Ephesians:1:14|. {With his own blood} (\dia tou haimatos tou idiou\). Through the agency of (\dia\) his own blood. Whose blood? If \tou theou\ (Aleph B Vulg.) is correct, as it is, then Jesus is here called "God" who shed his own blood for the flock. It will not do to say that Paul did not call Jesus God, for we have strkjv@Romans:9:5; strkjv@Colossians:2:9; strkjv@Titus:2:13| where he does that very thing, besides strkjv@Colossians:1:15-20; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|.

rwp@Acts:20:29 @{After my departing} (\meta tˆn aphixin mou\). Not his death, but his departure from them. From \aphikneomai\ and usually meant arrival, but departure in Herodotus IX. 17, 76 as here. {Grievous wolves} (\lukoi bareis\). \Bareis\ is heavy, rapacious, harsh. Jesus had already so described false teachers who would raven the fold (John:10:12|). Whether Paul had in mind the Judaizers who had given him so much trouble in Antioch, Jerusalem, Galatia, Corinth or the Gnostics the shadow of whose coming he already foresaw is not perfectly clear. But it will not be many years before Epaphras will come to Rome from Colossae with news of the new peril there (Epistle to the Colossians). In writing to Timothy (1Timothy:1:20|) Paul will warn him against some who have already made shipwreck of their faith. In strkjv@Revelation:2:2| John will represent Jesus as describing false apostles in Ephesus. {Not sparing the flock} (\mˆ pheidomenoi tou poimniou\). Litotes again as so often in Acts. Sparing the flock was not the fashion of wolves. Jesus sent the seventy as lambs in the midst of wolves (Luke:10:3|). In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus had pictured the false prophets who would come as ravening wolves in sheep's clothing (Matthew:7:15|).

rwp@Acts:20:32 @{And now} (\kai ta nun\). Same phrase as in verses 22,25| save that \idou\ (behold) is wanting and the article \ta\ occurs before \nun\, accusative of general reference. And as to the present things (or situation) as in strkjv@4:29|. {I commend} (\paratithemai\). Present middle indicative of \paratithˆmi\, old verb to place beside, middle, to deposit with one, to interest as in strkjv@1Timothy:1:18; strkjv@2Timothy:2:2|. Paul can now only do this, but he does it hopefully. Cf. strkjv@1Peter:4:19|. {The word of his grace} (\t“i log“i tˆs charitos autou\). The instrumentality through preaching and the Holy Spirit employed by God. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:4:6; strkjv@Ephesians:4:29|. {Which is able to build up} (\t“i dunamen“i oikodomˆsai\). God works through the word of his grace and so it is able to build up (edify); a favourite Pauline word (1Corinthians:3:10-14; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1; strkjv@Ephesians:2:20-22; strkjv@2Timothy:3:15|; etc.), and strkjv@James:1:21|. The very words "build" and "inheritance among the sanctified" will occur in strkjv@Ephesians:1:11; strkjv@2:30; strkjv@3:18| and which some may recall on reading. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:1:12|. Stephen in strkjv@Acts:7:5| used the word "inheritance" (\klˆronomian\), nowhere else in Acts, but in strkjv@Ephesians:1:14,18; strkjv@5:5|. In strkjv@Ephesians:1:18| the very expression occurs "his inheritance among the saints " (\tˆn klˆronomian autou en tois hagiois\).

rwp@Acts:20:34 @{Ye yourselves} (\autoi\). Intensive pronoun. Certainly they knew that the church in Ephesus had not supported Paul while there. {These hands} (\hai cheires hautai\). Paul was not above manual labour. He pointed to his hands with pride as proof that he toiled at his trade of tent-making as at Thessalonica and Corinth for his own needs (\chreiais\) and for those with him (probably Aquila and Priscilla) with whom he lived and probably Timothy because of his often infirmities (1Timothy:5:23|). {Ministered} (\hupˆretˆsan\). First aorist active of \hupˆrete“\, to act as under rower, old verb, but in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:13:36; strkjv@20:34; strkjv@24:23|. While in Ephesus Paul wrote to Corinth: "We toil, working with our own hands" (1Corinthians:4:12|). "As he held them up, they saw a tongue of truth in every seam that marked them" (Furneaux).

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

rwp@Acts:21:2 @{Having found a ship} (\heurontes ploion\). Paul had used a small coasting vessel (probably hired) that anchored each night at Cos, Rhodes, Patara. He was still some four hundred miles from Jerusalem. But at Patara Paul caught a large vessel (a merchantman) that could sail across the open sea. {Crossing over unto Phoenicia} (\diaper“n eis Phoinikˆn\). Neuter singular accusative (agreeing with \ploion\) present active participle of \diapera“\, old verb to go between (\dia\) and so across to Tyre. {We went aboard} (\epibantes\). Second aorist active participle of \epibain“\.

rwp@Acts:21:3 @{When we had come in sight of Cyprus} (\anaphanantes tˆn Kupron\). First aorist active participle of \anaphain“\ (Doric form \-phanƒntes\ rather than the Attic \-phˆnantes\), old verb to make appear, bring to light, to manifest. Having made Cyprus visible or rise up out of the sea. Nautical terms. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:19:11| which see. {On the left hand} (\eu“numon\). Compound feminine adjective like masculine. They sailed south of Cyprus. {We sailed} (\epleomen\). Imperfect active of common verb \ple“\, kept on sailing till we came to Syria. {Landed at Tyre} (\katˆlthomen eis Turon\). Came down to Tyre. Then a free city of Syria in honour of its former greatness (cf. the long siege by Alexander the Great). {There} (\ekeise\). Thither, literally. Only one other instance in N.T., strkjv@22:5| which may be pertinent = \ekei\ (there). {Was to unlade} (\ˆn apophortizomenon\). Periphrastic imperfect middle of \apophortiz“\, late verb from \apo\ and \phortos\, load, but here only in the N.T. Literally, "For thither the boat was unloading her cargo," a sort of "customary" or "progressive" imperfect (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 884). {Burden} (\gomon\). Cargo, old word, from \gem“\, to be full. Only here and strkjv@Revelation:18:11f.| in N.T. Probably a grain or fruit ship. It took seven days here to unload and reload.

rwp@Acts:21:4 @{Having found} (\aneurontes\). Second aorist active participle of \aneurisk“\, to seek for, to find by searching (\ana\). There was a church here, but it was a large city and the number of members may not have been large. Probably some of those that fled from Jerusalem who came to Phoenicia (Acts:11:19|) started the work here. Paul went also through Phoenicia on the way to the Jerusalem Conference (15:3|). As at Troas and Miletus, so here Paul's indefatigible energy shows itself with characteristic zeal. {Through the Spirit} (\dia tou pneumatos\). The Holy Spirit undoubtedly who had already told Paul that bonds and afflictions awaited him in Jerusalem (20:23|). {That he should not set foot in Jerusalem} (\mˆ epibainein eis Ierosoluma\). Indirect command with \mˆ\ and the present active infinitive, not to keep on going to Jerusalem (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1046). In spite of this warning Paul felt it his duty as before (20:22|) to go on. Evidently Paul interpreted the action of the Holy Spirit as information and warning although the disciples at Tyre gave it the form of a prohibition. Duty called louder than warning to Paul even if both were the calls of God.

rwp@Acts:21:5 @{That we had accomplished the days} (\exartisai hˆmƒs tas hˆmeras\). First aorist active infinitive of \exartiz“\, to furnish perfectly, rare in ancient writers, but fairly frequent in the papyri. Only twice in the N.T., here and strkjv@2Timothy:3:17|. Finish the exact number of days (seven) of verse 4|. The accusative of general reference \hˆmƒs\ is the usual construction and the infinitive clause is the subject of \egeneto\. We departed and went on our journey (\exelthontes eporeuometha\). Sharp distinction between the first aorist active participle \exelthontes\ (from \exerchomai\, to go out) and the imperfect middle \eporeuometha\ from \poreu“\ (we were going on). {And they all, with wives and children, brought us on our way} (\propempont“n hˆmƒs pant“n sun gunaixi kai teknois\). No "and" in the Greek, simply genitive absolute, "They all with wives and children accompanying us," just as at Miletus (20:28|), same verb \propemp“\ which see. The first mention of children in connection with the apostolic churches (Vincent). Vivid picture here as at Miletus, evident touch of an eyewitness. {Till we were out of the city} (\he“s ex“ tˆs pole“s\). Note both adverbial prepositions (\he“s ex“\) clear outside of the city.

rwp@Acts:21:6 @{Beach} (\aigialon\). As in strkjv@Matthew:13:2| which see. This scene is in public as at Miletus, but they did not care. {Bade each other farewell} (\apespasametha allˆlous\). First aorist middle of \apaspazomai\. Rare compound, here alone in the N.T. Tender scene, but "no bonds of long comradeship, none of the clinging love" (Furneaux) seen at Miletus (Acts:20:37f.|). {Home again} (\eis ta idia\). To their own places as of the Beloved Disciple in strkjv@John:19:27| and of Jesus in strkjv@John:1:11|. This idiom in the papyri also.

rwp@Acts:21:7 @{Had finished} (\dianusantes\). First aorist active participle of \dianu“\, old verb to accomplish (\anu“\) thoroughly (\dia\), only here in the N.T. {From Tyre} (\apo Turou\). Page takes (Hackett also) with \katˆntˆsamen\ (we arrived) rather than with "\ton ploun\" (the voyage) and with good reason: "And we, having (thereby) finished the voyage, arrived from Tyre at Ptolemais." Ptolemais is the modern Acre, called Accho in strkjv@Judges:1:31|. The harbour is the best on the coast of Palestine and is surrounded by mountains. It is about thirty miles south of Tyre. It was never taken by Israel and was considered a Philistine town and the Greeks counted it a Phoenician city. It was the key to the road down the coast between Syria and Egypt and had successively the rule of the Ptolemies, Syrians, Romans. {Saluted} (\aspasamenoi\). Here greeting as in strkjv@21:19| rather than farewell as in strkjv@20:1|. The stay was short, one day (\hˆmeran mian\, accusative), but "the brethren" Paul and his party found easily. Possibly the scattered brethren (Acts:11:19|) founded the church here or Philip may have done it.

rwp@Acts:21:9 @{Virgins which did prophesy} (\parthenoi prophˆteusai\). Not necessarily an "order" of virgins, but Philip had the honour of having in his home four virgin daughters with the gift of prophecy which was not necessarily predicting events, though that was done as by Agabus here. It was more than ordinary preaching (cf. strkjv@19:6|) and was put by Paul above the other gifts like tongues (1Corinthians:14:1-33|). The prophecy of Joel (2:28f.|) about their sons and daughters prophesying is quoted by Peter and applied to the events on the day of Pentecost (Acts:2:17|). Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:5| gives directions about praying and prophesying by the women (apparently in public worship) with the head uncovered and sharply requires the head covering, though not forbidding the praying and prophesying. With this must be compared his demand for silence by the women in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:34-40; strkjv@1Timothy:2:8-15| which it is not easy to reconcile. One wonders if there was not something known to Paul about special conditions in Corinth and Ephesus that he has not told. There was also Anna the prophetess in the temple (Luke:2:36|) besides the inspired hymns of Elizabeth (Luke:1:42-45|) and of Mary (Luke:1:46-55|). At any rate there was no order of women prophets or official ministers. There were Old Testament prophetesses like Miriam, Deborah, Huldah. Today in our Sunday schools the women do most of the actual teaching. The whole problem is difficult and calls for restraint and reverence. One thing is certain and that is that Luke appreciated the services of women for Christ as is shown often in his writings (Luke:8:1-3|, for instance) before this incident.

rwp@Acts:21:10 @{As we tarried} (\epimenont“n hˆm“n\). Genitive absolute. Note \epi\ (additional) with \men“\ as in strkjv@12:16|. {Many days} (\hˆmeras pleious\). More days (than we expected), accusative of time. {A certain prophet named Agabus} (\prophˆtˆs onomati Agabos\). A prophet like the daughters of Philip, mentioned already in connection with the famine predicted by him (Acts:11:28|), but apparently not a man of prominence like Barnabas, and so no allusion to that former prophecy.

rwp@Acts:21:12 @{Both we and they of that place} (\hˆmeis te kai hoi entopioi\). Usual use of \te kai\ (both--and). \Entopioi\, old word, only here in N.T. {Not to go up} (\tou mˆ anabainein\). Probably ablative of the articular present active infinitive with redundant negative \me\ after \parekaloumen\ (imperfect active, conative). We tried to persuade him from going up. It can be explained as genitive, but not so likely: We tried to persuade him in respect to not going up. Vincent cites the case of Regulus who insisted on returning from Rome to Carthage to certain death and that of Luther on the way to the Diet of Worms. Spalatin begged Luther not to go on. Luther said: "Though devils be as many in Worms as tiles upon the roofs, yet thither will I go." This dramatic warning of Agabus came on top of that in Tyre (21:4|) and Paul's own confession in Miletus (20:23|). It is small wonder that Luke and the other messengers together with Philip and his daughters (prophetesses versus prophet?) joined in a chorus of dissuasion to Paul.

rwp@Acts:21:13 @{What are you doing weeping?} (\Ti poieite klaiontes?\) Strong protest as in strkjv@Mark:11:5|. {Breaking my heart} (\sunthruptontes mou tˆn kardian\). The verb \sunthrupt“\, to crush together, is late _Koin‚_ for \apothrupt“\, to break off, both vivid and expressive words. Songs:to enervate and unman one, weakening Paul's determination to go on with his duty. {I am ready} (\Eg“ hetoim“s ech“\). I hold (myself) in readiness (adverb, \hetoim“s\). Same idiom in strkjv@2Corinthians:12:14|. {Not only to be bound} (\ou monon dethˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \de“\ and note \ou monon\ rather than \mˆ monon\, the usual negative of the infinitive because of the sharp contrast (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1095). Paul's readiness to die, if need be, at Jerusalem is like that of Jesus on the way to Jerusalem the last time. Even before that Luke (9:51|) said that "he set his face to go on to Jerusalem." Later the disciples will say to Jesus, "Master, the Jews were but now seeking to stone thee; and goest thou thither?" (John:11:8|). The stature of Paul rises here to heroic proportions "for the name of the Lord Jesus" (\huper tou onomatos tou kuriou Iˆsou\).

rwp@Acts:21:16 @{Certain of the disciples} (\t“n mathˆt“n\). The genitive here occurs with \tines\ understood as often in the Greek idiom, the partitive genitive used as nominative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 502). {Bringing} (\agontes\). Nominative plural participle agreeing with \tines\ understood, not with case of \mathˆt“n\. {One Mnason of Cyprus, an early disciple, with whom we should lodge} (\par h“i xenisth“men Mnas“ni tini Kupri“i archai“i mathˆtˆi\). A thoroughly idiomatic Greek idiom, incorporation and attraction of the antecedent into the relative clause (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 718). \Mnas“ni\ is really the object of \agontes\ or the accusative with \para\ or \pros\ understood and should be accusative, but it is placed in the clause after the relative and in the same locative case with the relative \h“i\ (due to \par'\, beside, with). Then the rest agrees in case with \Mnas“ni\. He was originally from Cyprus, but now in Caesarea. The Codex Bezae adds \eis tina k“mˆn\ (to a certain village) and makes it mean that they were to lodge with Mnason at his home there about halfway to Jerusalem. This may be true. The use of the subjunctive \xenisth“men\ (first aorist passive of \xeniz“\, to entertain strangers as in strkjv@Acts:10:6,23,32| already) may be volitive of purpose with the relative (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 955, 989). The use of \archai“i\ for "early" may refer to the fact that he was one of the original disciples at Pentecost as Peter in strkjv@15:7| uses \hˆmer“n archai“n\ (early days) to refer to his experience at Ceasarea in strkjv@Acts:10|. "As the number of the first disciples lessened, the next generation accorded a sort of honour to the survivors" (Furneaux).

rwp@Acts:21:18 @{The day following} (\tˆi epiousˆi\). As in strkjv@20:15| which see. {Went in} (\eisˆiei\). Imperfect active of \eiseimi\, old classic verb used only four times in the N.T. (Acts:3:3; strkjv@21:18,26; strkjv@Hebrews:9:6|), a mark of the literary style rather than the colloquial _Koin‚_ use of \eiserchomai\. Together with us to James (\sun hˆmin pros Iak“bon\). Songs:then Luke is present. The next use of "we" is in strkjv@27:1| when they leave Caesarea for Rome, but it is not likely that Luke was away from Paul in Jerusalem and Caesarea. The reports of what was done and said in both places is so full and minute that it seems reasonable that Luke got first hand information here whatever his motive was for so full an account of these legal proceedings to be discussed later. There are many details that read like an eye witness's story (21:30,35,40; strkjv@22:2,3; strkjv@23:12|, etc.). It was probably the house of James (\pros\ and \para\ so used often). {And all the elders were present} (\pantes te paregenonto hoi presbuteroi\). Clearly James is the leading elder and the others are his guests in a formal reception to Paul. It is noticeable that the apostles are not mentioned, though both elders and apostles are named at the Conference in chapter 15. It would seem that the apostles are away on preaching tours. The whole church was not called together probably because of the known prejudice against Paul created by the Judaizers.

rwp@Acts:21:20 @{Glorified} (\edoxazon\). Inchoative imperfect, began to glorify God, though without special praise of Paul. {How many thousands} (\posai muriades\). Old word for ten thousand (Acts:19:19|) and then an indefinite number like our "myriads" (this very word) as strkjv@Luke:12:1; strkjv@Acts:21:20; strkjv@Jude:1:14; strkjv@Revelation:5:11; strkjv@9:16|. But it is a surprising statement even with allowable hyperbole, but one may recall strkjv@Acts:4:4| (number of the men--not women--about five thousand); strkjv@5:14| (multitudes both of men and women); strkjv@6:7|. There were undoubtedly a great many thousands of believers in Jerusalem and all Jewish Christians, some, alas, Judaizers (Acts:11:2; strkjv@15:1,5|). This list may include the Christians from neighbouring towns in Palestine and even some from foreign countries here at the Feast of Pentecost, for it is probable that Paul arrived in time for it as he had hoped. But we do not have to count the hostile Jews from Asia (verse 27|) who were clearly not Christians at all. {All zealous for the law} (\pantes zˆl“tai tou nomou\). Zealots (substantive) rather than zealous (adjective) with objective genitive (\tou nomou\). The word zealot is from \zˆlo“\, to burn with zeal, to boil. The Greek used \zˆl“tˆs\ for an imitator or admirer. There was a party of Zealots (developed from the Pharisees), a group of what would be called "hot-heads," who brought on the war with Rome. One of this party, Simon Zelotes (Acts:1:13|), was in the number of the twelve apostles. It is important to understand the issues in Jerusalem. It was settled at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15; strkjv@Galatians:2|) that the Mosaic ceremonial law was not to be imposed upon Gentile Christians. Paul won freedom for them, but it was not said that it was wrong for Jewish Christians to go on observing it if they wished. We have seen Paul observing the passover in Philippi (Acts:20:6|) and planning to reach Jerusalem for Pentecost (20:16|). The Judaizers rankled under Paul's victory and power in spreading the gospel among the Gentiles and gave him great trouble in Galatia and Corinth. They were busy against him in Jerusalem also and it was to undo the harm done by them in Jerusalem that Paul gathered the great collection from the Gentile Christians and brought it with him and the delegates from the churches. Clearly then Paul had real ground for his apprehension of trouble in Jerusalem while still in Corinth (Romans:15:25|) when he asked for the prayers of the Roman Christians (verses 30-32|). The repeated warnings along the way were amply justified.

rwp@Acts:21:21 @{They have been informed concerning thee} (\katˆchˆthˆsan peri sou\). First aorist passive indicative of \katˆche“\. A word in the ancient Greek, but a few examples survive in the papyri. It means to sound (echo, from \ˆch“\, our word) down (\kata\), to resound, re-echo, to teach orally. Oriental students today (Arabs learning the Koran) often study aloud. In the N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:1:4| which see; strkjv@Acts:18:25; strkjv@21:21; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:19; strkjv@Galatians:6:6; strkjv@Romans:2:18|. This oral teaching about Paul was done diligently by the Judaizers who had raised trouble against Peter (Acts:11:2|) and Paul (15:1,5|). They had failed in their attacks on Paul's world campaigns. Now they try to undermine him at home. In Paul's long absence from Jerusalem, since strkjv@18:22|, they have had a free hand, save what opposition James would give, and have had great success in prejudicing the Jerusalem Christians against Paul. Songs:James, in the presence of the other elders and probably at their suggestion, feels called upon to tell Paul the actual situation. {That thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses} (\hoti apostasian didaskeis apo M“use“s tous kata ta ethnˆ pantas Ioudaious\). Two accusatives with \didaskeis\ (verb of teaching) according to rule. Literally, "That thou art teaching all the Jews among (\kata\) the Gentiles (the Jews of the dispersion as in strkjv@2:9|) apostasy from Moses." That is the point, the dreadful word \apostasian\ (our apostasy), a late form (I Macc. strkjv@2:15) for the earlier \apostasis\ (cf. strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3| for \apostasia\). "In the eyes of the church at Jerusalem this was a far more serious matter than the previous question at the Conference about the status of Gentile converts" (Furneaux). Paul had brought that issue to the Jerusalem Conference because of the contention of the Judaizers. But here it is not the Judaizers, but the elders of the church with James as their spokesman on behalf of the church as a whole. They do not believe this false charge, but they wish Paul to set it straight. Paul had made his position clear in his Epistles (I Corinthians, Galatians, Romans) for all who cared to know. {Telling them not to circumcise their children} (\leg“n mˆ peritemnein autous ta tekna\). The participle \leg“n\ agrees with "thou" (Paul), the subject of \didaskeis\. This is not indirect assertion, but indirect command, hence the negative \mˆ\ instead of \ou\ with the infinitive (Robertson, _Grammar_, p.1046). The point is not that Paul stated what the Jewish Christians in the dispersion do, but that he says that they (\autous\ accusative of general reference) are not to go on circumcising (\peritemnein\, present active infinitive) their children. Paul taught the very opposite (1Corinthians:7:18|) and had Timothy circumcised (Acts:16:3|) because he was half Jew and half Greek. His own practice is stated in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:19| ("to the Jews as a Jew"). {Neither to walk after the customs} (\mˆde tois ethesin peripatein\). Locative case with infinitive \peripatein\. The charge was here enlarged to cover it all and to make Paul out an enemy of Jewish life and teachings. That same charge had been made against Stephen when young Saul (Paul) was the leader (6:14|): "Will change the customs (\ethˆ\ the very word used here) which Moses delivered unto us." It actually seemed that some of the Jews cared more for Moses than for God (Acts:6:11|). Songs:much for the charge of the Judaizers.

rwp@Acts:21:22 @{What is it therefore?} (\Ti oun estin?\). See this form of question by Paul (1Corinthians:14:15,26|). What is to be done about it? Clearly James and the elders do not believe these misrepresentations of Paul's teaching, but many do. {They will certainly hear} (\pant“s akousontai\). \Pant“s\ is old adverb, by all means, altogether, wholly, certainly as here and strkjv@28:4; strkjv@Luke:4:23; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:10|. This future middle of \akou“\ is the usual form instead of \akous“\. There was no way to conceal Paul's arrival nor was it wise to do so. B C and several cursives omit \dei plˆthos sunelthein\ (The multitude must needs come together).

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

rwp@Acts:21:25 @{We wrote} (\epesteilamen\). First aorist active of \epistell“\, to send to and so to write like our epistle (\epistolˆ\). Old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:15:20; strkjv@Hebrews:13:22|. It is the very word used by James in this "judgment" at the Conference (Acts:15:20|, \episteilai\). B D here read \apesteilamen\ from \apostell“\, to send away, to give orders. Wendt and Schuerer object to this as a gloss. Rather is it an explanation by James that he does not refer to the Gentile Christians whose freedom from the Mosaic ceremonial law was guaranteed at the Jerusalem Conference. James himself presided at that Conference and offered the resolution that was unanimously adopted. James stands by that agreement and repeats the main items (four: anything sacrificed to idols, blood, anything strangled, fornication, for discussion see strkjv@Acts:15|) from which they are to keep themselves (direct middle \phulassesthai\ of \phulass“\, indirect command after \krinantes\ with accusative, \autous\, of general reference). James has thus again cleared the air about the Gentiles who have believed (\pepisteukot“n\, perfect active participle genitive plural of \pisteu“\). He asks that Paul will stand by the right of Jewish Christians to keep on observing the Mosaic law. He has put the case squarely and fairly.

rwp@Acts:21:26 @{Took the men} (\paralab“n tous andras\). The very phrase used in verse 24| to Paul. {The next day} (\tˆi echomenˆi\). One of the phrases in strkjv@20:15| for the coming day. Locative case of time. {Purifying himself with them} (\sun autois hagnistheis\, first aorist passive participle of \hagniz“\). The precise language again of the recommendation in verse 24|. Paul was conforming to the letter. {Went into the temple} (\eisˆiei eis to hieron\). Imperfect active of \eiseimi\ as in verse 18| which see. Went on into the temple, descriptive imperfect. Paul joined the four men in their vow of separation. {Declaring} (\diaggell“n\). To the priests what day he would report the fulfilment of the vow. The priests would desire notice of the sacrifice. This verb only used by Luke in N.T. except strkjv@Romans:11:17| (quotation from the LXX). It is not necessary to assume that the vows of each of the five expired on the same day (Rackham). {Until the offering was offered for every one of them} (\he“s hou prosˆnechthˆ huper henos hekastou aut“n hˆ prosphora\). This use of \he“s hou\ (like \he“s\, alone) with the first aorist passive indicative \prosˆnechthˆ\ of \prospher“\, to offer, contemplates the final result (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 974f.) and is probably the statement of Luke added to Paul's announcement. He probably went into the temple one day for each of the brethren and one for himself. The question arises whether Paul acted wisely or unwisely in agreeing to the suggestion of James. What he did was in perfect harmony with his principle of accommodation in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:20| when no principle was involved. It is charged that here on this occasion Paul was unduly influenced by considerations of expediency and was willing for the Jewish Christians to believe him more of a Jew than was true in order to placate the situation in Jerusalem. Furneaux calls it a compromise and a failure. I do not so see it. To say that is to obscure the whole complex situation. What Paul did was not for the purpose of conciliating his opponents, the Judaizers, who had diligently spread falsehoods about him in Jerusalem as in Corinth. It was solely to break the power of these "false apostles" over the thousands in Jerusalem who have been deluded by Paul's accusers. Songs:far as the evidence goes that thing was accomplished. In the trouble that comes in Jerusalem and Caesarea the Judaizers cut no figure at all. The Jewish Christians do not appear in Paul's behalf, but there was no opportunity for them to do so. The explosion that came on the last day of Paul's appearance in the temple was wholly disconnected from his offerings for the four brethren and himself. It must be remembered that Paul had many kinds of enemies. The attack on him by these Jews from Asia had no connexion whatever with the slanders of the Judaizers about Paul's alleged teachings that Jewish Christians in the dispersion should depart from the Mosaic law. That slander was put to rest forever by his following the advice of James and justifies the wisdom of that advice and Paul's conduct about it.

rwp@Acts:21:27 @{The seven days} (\hai hepta hˆmerai\). For which Paul had taken the vow, though there may be an allusion to the pentecostal week for which Paul had desired to be present (20:16|). There is no necessary connexion with the vow in strkjv@18:15|. In strkjv@24:17| Paul makes a general reference to his purpose in coming to Jerusalem to bring alms and offerings (\prosphoras\, sacrifices). Paul spent seven days in Troas (20:6|), Tyre (21:4|), and had planned for seven here if not more. It was on the last of the seven days when Paul was completing his offerings about the vows on all five that the incident occurred that was to make him a prisoner for five years. {When they saw him in the temple} (\theasamenoi auton en t“i hier“i\). First aorist middle participle of \theaomai\ (from \thea\, a view, cf. theatre) to behold. In the very act of honouring the temple these Jews from Asia raise a hue and cry that he is dishonouring it. Paul was not known by face now to many of the Jerusalem Jews, though once the leader of the persecution after the death of Stephen and the outstanding young Jew of the day. But the Jews in Ephesus knew him only too well, some of whom are here at the pentecostal feast. They had plotted against him in Ephesus to no purpose (Acts:19:23-41; strkjv@20:19|), but now a new opportunity had come. It is possible that the cry was led by Alexander put forward by the Jews in Ephesus (19:33|) who may be the same as Alexander the coppersmith who did Paul so much harm (2Timothy:4:14|). Paul was not in the inner sanctuary (\ho naos\), but only in the outer courts (\to hieron\). {Stirred up all the multitude} (\sunecheon panta ton ochlon\). Imperfect (kept on) active of \sunche“\ or \sunchun“\ (\-unn“\), to pour together, to confuse as in strkjv@Acts:2:6; strkjv@9:22; strkjv@19:31,32; strkjv@21:31| and here to stir up by the same sort of confusion created by Demetrius in Ephesus where the same word is used twice (19:31,32|). The Jews from Ephesus had learned it from Demetrius the silversmith. {Laid hands on him} (\epebalan ep' auton tas cheiras\). Second aorist (ingressive, with endings of the first aorist, \-an\) active indicative of \epiball“\, old verb to lay upon, to attack (note repetition of \epi\). They attacked and seized Paul before the charge was made.

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:21:29 @{For} (\gar\). Luke adds the reason for the wild charges made against Paul. {They had before seen} (\ˆsan proe“rakotes\). Periphrastic past perfect of \proora“\, old verb to see before, whether time or place. Only twice in the N.T., here and strkjv@Acts:2:25| quoted from strkjv@Psalms:15:8|. Note the double reduplication in \-e“-\ as in Attic (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 364). {With him in the city Trophimus the Ephesian} (\Trophimon ton Ephesion en tˆi polei sun aut“i\). The Jews from Asia (Ephesus) knew Trophimus by sight as well as Paul. One day they saw both of them together (\sun\) in the city. That was a fact. They had just seized Paul in the temple (\hieron\). That was another fact. {They supposed} (\enomizon\). Imperfect active of \nomiz“\, common to think or suppose. Perfectly harmless word, but they did, as so many people do, put their supposed inference on the same basis with the facts. They did not see Trophimus with Paul now in the temple, nor had they ever seen him there. They simply argued that, if Paul was willing to be seen down street with a Greek Christian, he would not hesitate to bring him (therefore, did bring him, \eisˆgagen\ as in verse 28|) into the temple, that is into the court of Israel and therefore both Paul and Trophimus were entitled to death, especially Paul who had brought him in (if he had) and, besides, they now had Paul. This is the way of the mob-mind in all ages. Many an innocent man has been rushed to his death by the fury of a lynching party.

rwp@Acts:21:30 @{All the city was shaken} (\ekinˆthˆ hˆ polis holˆ\). First aorist passive of \kine“\, common verb for violent motion and emotion. See also strkjv@24:5| where the word is used by Tertullus of Paul as the stirrer up of riots! {The people ran together} (\egeneto sundromˆ tou laou\). Rather, There came a running together (\sun-dromˆ\ from \sun-trech“\) of the people. The cry spread like wildfire over the city and there was a pell-mell scramble or rush to get to the place of the disturbance. {They laid hold on Paul} (\epilabomenoi tou Paulou\). Second aorist middle participle of \epilambanomai\ with the genitive (cf. \epebalan\ in verse 27|). {Dragged} (\heilkon\). Imperfect active of \helk“\ (and also \helku“\), old verb to drag or draw. Imperfect tense vividly pictures the act as going on. They were saving the temple by dragging Paul outside. Curiously enough both \epilabomenoi\ and \heilkusan\ occur in strkjv@16:19| about the arrest of Paul and Silas in Philippi. {Straightway the doors were shut} (\euthe“s ekleisthˆsan hai thurai\). With a bang and at once. First aorist (effective) passive of \klei“\. The doors between the inner court and the court of the Gentiles. But this was only the beginning, the preparation for the real work of the mob. They did not wish to defile the holy place with blood. The doors were shut by the Levites.

rwp@Acts:21:33 @{Came near} (\eggisas\). First aorist active participle of \eggiz“\, to draw near, _Koin‚_ verb from \eggus\, near, and common in the N.T. {Laid hold on him} (\epelabeto antou\). See same verb in verse 30|. {To be bound} (\dethˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \de“\ (see verse 11|). {With two chains} (\halusesi dusi\). Instrumental case of \halusis\, old word from \a\ privative and \lu“\ (not loosing, i.e. chaining). With two chains as a violent and seditious person, probably leader of a band of assassins (verse 38|). See on ¯Mark:5:4|. {Inquired} (\epunthaneto\). Imperfect middle of \punthanomai\, old and common verb used mainly by Luke in the N.T. Lysias repeated his inquiries. {Who he was} (\tis eiˆ\). Present active optative of \eimi\ changed from \estin\ (present indicative) in the indirect question, a change not obligatory after a past tense, but often done in the older Greek, rare in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1043f.). {And what he had done} (\kai ti estin pepoiˆk“s\). Periphrastic perfect active indicative of \poie“\ here retained, not changed to the optative as is true of \eiˆ\ from \estin\ in the same indirect question, illustrating well the freedom about it.

rwp@Acts:21:34 @{Some shouting one thing, some another} (\alloi allo ti epeph“noun\). Same idiom of \alloi allo\ as in strkjv@19:32| which see. The imperfect of \epiph“ne“\, to call out to, suits well the idiom. This old verb occurs in the N.T. only in Luke and Acts (already in strkjv@12:22|). {When he could not know} (\mˆ dunamenou autou gn“nai\). Genitive absolute of present middle participle of \dunamai\ with negative \mˆ\ and second aorist active infinitive of \gin“sk“\. {The certainty} (\to asphales\). Neuter articular adjective from \a\ privative and \sphall“\, to make totter or fall. Old word, in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:21:34; strkjv@22:30; strkjv@25:26; strkjv@Phillipians:3:1; strkjv@Hebrews:6:19|. {Into the castle} (\eis tˆn parembolˆn\). _Koin‚_ word from \paremball“\, to cast in by the side of, to assign soldiers a place, to encamp (see on ¯Luke:19:43|). Songs:\parembolˆ\ comes to mean an interpolation, then an army drawn up (Hebrews:11:34|), but mainly an encampment (Hebrews:13:11,13|), frequent in Polybius and LXX. Songs:here barracks of the Roman soldiers in the tower of Antonia as in verse 37; strkjv@22:24; strkjv@23:10,16,32|.

rwp@Acts:21:36 @{Followed after} (\ˆkolouthei\). Imperfect active of \akoluthe“\, was following. Cheated of their purpose to lynch Paul, they were determined to have his blood. {Crying out} (\krazontes\). Construction according to sense, plural masculine participle agreeing with neuter singular substantive \plˆthos\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 401). {Away with him} (\Aire auton\). The very words used by the mob to Pilate when they chose Barabbas in preference to Jesus (Luke:23:18|, \Aire touton\). He will hear it again from this same crowd (Acts:22:22|). It is the present imperative (\aire\) as in strkjv@Luke:23:18|, but some may have used the urgent aorist active imperative as also in the case of Jesus strkjv@John:19:15|, \ƒron, ƒron\ with \staur“son\ added). Luke does not say that this mob demanded crucifixion for Paul. He was learning what it was to share the sufferings of Christ as the sullen roar of the mob's yells rolled on and on in his ears.

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

rwp@Acts:21:39 @{I am} (\Eg“ men eimi\). In contrast with the wild guess of Lysias Paul uses \men\ and \de\. He tells briefly who he is: {a Jew} (\Ioudaios\) by race, {of Tarsus in Cilicia} (\Tarseus tˆs Kilikias\) by country, belonging to Tarsus (this adjective \Tarseus\ only here and strkjv@Acts:9:11|), and proud of it, one of the great cities of the empire with a great university. {A citizen of no mean city} (\ouk asˆmou pole“s politˆs\). Litotes again, "no mean" (\asˆmos\, old adjective, unmarked, \a\ privative and \sˆma\, mark, insignificant, here only in the N.T.). This same litotes used by Euripides of Athens (_Ion_ 8). But Paul calls himself a citizen (\politˆs\) of Tarsus. Note the "effective assonance" (Page) in \pole“s politˆs\. Paul now (\de\) makes his request (\deomai\) of Lysias. {Give me leave} (\epitrepson moi\). First aorist active imperative of \epitrep“\, old and common verb to turn to, to permit, to allow. It was a strange request and a daring one, to wish to speak to this mob howling for Paul's blood.

rwp@Acts:21:40 @{When he had given him leave} (\epitrepsantos autou\). Genitive absolute of aorist active participle of the same verb \epitrep“\. {Standing on the stairs} (\hest“s epi t“n anabathm“n\). Second perfect active participle of \histˆmi\, to place, but intransitive to stand. Dramatic scene. Paul had faced many audiences and crowds, but never one quite like this. Most men would have feared to speak, but not so Paul. He will speak about himself only as it gives him a chance to put Christ before this angry Jewish mob who look on Paul as a renegade Jew, a turncoat, a deserter, who went back on Gamaliel and all the traditions of his people, who not only turned from Judaism to Christianity, but who went after Gentiles and treated Gentiles as if they were on a par with Jews. Paul knows only too well what this mob thinks of him. {Beckoned with the hand} (\kateseise tˆi cheiri\). He shook down to the multitude with the hand (instrumental case \cheiri\), while Alexander, Luke says (19:33|), "shook down the hand" (accusative with the same verb, which see). In strkjv@26:1| Paul reached out the hand (\ekteinas tˆn cheira\). {When there was made a great silence} (\pollˆs sigˆs genomenˆs\). Genitive absolute again with second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\, "much silence having come." Paul waited till silence had come. {In the Hebrew language} (\tˆi Ebraidi dialekt“i\). The Aramaean which the people in Jerusalem knew better than the Greek. Paul could use either tongue at will. His enemies had said in Corinth that "his bodily presence was weak and his speech contemptible" (2Corinthians:10:10|). But surely even they would have to admit that Paul's stature and words reach heroic proportions on this occasion. Self-possessed with majestic poise Paul faces the outraged mob beneath the stairs.

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:22:2 @{He spake} (\proseph“nei\). Imperfect active, was speaking. See aorist active \proseph“nˆsen\ in strkjv@21:40|. {They were the more quiet} (\mƒllon pareschon hˆsuchian\). Literally, The more (\mƒllon\) they furnished or supplied (second aorist active indicative of \parech“\) quietness (\hˆsuchian\, old word, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:12; strkjv@1Timothy:2:11ff.|). Precisely this idiom occurs in Plutarch (_Cor_. 18) and the LXX (Job:34:29|). Knowling notes the fondness of Luke for words of silence (\sigˆ, siga“, hˆsuchaz“\) as in strkjv@Luke:14:4; strkjv@15:26; strkjv@Acts:11:18; strkjv@12:17; strkjv@15:12; strkjv@21:14,40|. It is a vivid picture of the sudden hush that swept over the vast mob under the spell of the Aramaic. They would have understood Paul's _Koin‚_ Greek, but they much preferred the Aramaic. It was a masterstroke.

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

rwp@Acts:22:4 @{And I} (\hos\). {I who}, literally. {This Way} (\tautˆn tˆn hodon\). The very term used for Christianity by Luke concerning Paul's persecution (9:2|), which see. Here it "avoids any irritating name for the Christian body" (Furneaux) by using this Jewish terminology. {Unto the death} (\achri thanatou\). Unto death, actual death of many as strkjv@26:10| shows. {Both men and women} (\andras te kai gunaikas\). Paul felt ashamed of this fact and it was undoubtedly in his mind when he pictured his former state as "a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious (1Timothy:1:13|), the first of sinners" (1Timothy:1:15|). But it showed the lengths to which Paul went in his zeal for Judaism.

rwp@Acts:22:5 @{Doth bear me witness} (\marturei moi\). Present active indicative as if still living. Caiaphas was no longer high priest now, for Ananias is at this time (23:2|), though he may be still alive. {All the estate of the elders} (\pan to presbuterion\). All the eldership or the Sanhedrin (4:5|) of which Paul was probably then a member (26:10|). Possibly some of those present were members of the Sanhedrin then (some 20 odd years ago). {From whom} (\par' h“n\). The high priest and the Sanhedrin. {Letters unto the brethren} (\epistalas pros tous adelphous\). Paul still can tactfully call the Jews his "brothers" as he did in strkjv@Romans:9:3|. There is no bitterness in his heart. {Journeyed} (\eporeuomˆn\). Imperfect middle indicative of \poreuomai\, and a vivid reality to Paul still as he was going on towards Damascus. {To bring also} (\ax“n kai\). Future active participle of \ag“\, to express purpose, one of the few N.T. examples of this classic idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1118). {Them which were there} (\tous ekeise ontas\). _Constructio praegnans_. The usual word would be \ekei\ (there), not \ekeise\ (thither). Possibly the Christians who had fled to Damascus, and so were there (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 548). {In bonds} (\dedemenous\). Perfect passive participle of \de“\, predicate position, "bound." {For to be punished} (\hina tim“rˆth“sin\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \tim“re“\, old verb to avenge, to take vengeance on. In the N.T. only here, and strkjv@26:11|. Pure final clause with \hina\. He carried his persecution outside of Palestine just as later he carried the gospel over the Roman empire.

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

rwp@Acts:22:16 @{By baptized} (\baptisai\). First aorist middle (causative), not passive, Get thyself baptized (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 808). Cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:10:2|. Submit yourself to baptism. Songs:as to \apolousai\, Get washed off as in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:11|. It is possible, as in strkjv@2:38|, to take these words as teaching baptismal remission or salvation by means of baptism, but to do so is in my opinion a complete subversion of Paul's vivid and picturesque language. As in strkjv@Romans:6:4-6| where baptism is the picture of death, burial and resurrection, so here baptism pictures the change that had already taken place when Paul surrendered to Jesus on the way (verse 10|). Baptism here pictures the washing away of sins by the blood of Christ.

rwp@Acts:22:20 @{Was shed} (\exechunneto\). Imperfect passive of \ekchunn“\ (see on ¯Matthew:23:35|), was being shed. {Witness} (\marturos\). And "martyr" also as in strkjv@Revelation:2:13; strkjv@17:6|. Transition state for the word here. {I also was standing by} (\kai autos ˆmˆn ephest“s\). Periphrastic second past perfect in form, but imperfect (linear) in sense since \hest“s=histamenos\ (intransitive). {Consenting} (\suneudok“n\). The very word used by Luke in strkjv@Acts:8:1| about Paul. _Koin‚_ word for being pleased at the same time with (cf. strkjv@Luke:11:48|). Paul adds here the item of "guarding the clothes of those who were slaying (\anairount“n\ as in strkjv@Luke:23:32; strkjv@Acts:12:2|) him" (Stephen). Paul recalls the very words of protest used by him to Jesus. He did not like the idea of running away to save his own life right where he had helped slay Stephen. He is getting on dangerous ground.

rwp@Acts:22:21 @{I will send thee forth far hence unto the Gentiles} (\Eg“ eis ethnˆ makran exapostel“ se\). Future active of the double (\ex\, out, \apo\, off or away) compound of \exapostell“\, common word in the _Koin‚_ (cf. strkjv@Luke:24:49|). This is a repetition by Jesus of the call given in Damascus through Ananias (9:15|). Paul had up till now avoided the word Gentiles, but at last it had to come, "the fatal word" (Farrar).

rwp@Acts:22:22 @{They gave him audience} (\ˆkouon\). Imperfect active, they kept on listening, at least with respectful attention. {Unto this word} (\achri toutou tou logou\). But "this word" was like a spark in a powder magazine or a torch to an oil tank. The explosion of pent-up indignation broke out instantly worse than at first (21:30|). {Away with such a fellow from the earth} (\Aire apo tˆs gˆs ton toiouton\). They renew the cry with the very words in strkjv@21:36|, but with "from the earth" for vehemence. {For it is not fit} (\ou gar kathˆken\). Imperfect active of \kathˆk“\, old verb to come down to, to become, to fit. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:1:28|. The imperfect is a neat Greek idiom for impatience about an obligation: It was not fitting, he ought to have been put to death long ago. The obligation is conceived as not lived up to like our "ought" (past of owe). See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 886.

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

rwp@Acts:22:25 @{When they had tied him up} (\hos proeteinan auton\). First aorist active indicative of \protein“\, old verb to stretch forward, only here in the N.T. Literally, "When they stretched him forward." {With the thongs} (\tois himasin\). If the instrumental case of \himas\, old word for strap or thong (for sandals as strkjv@Mark:1:7|, or for binding criminals as here), then Paul was bent forward and tied by the thongs to a post in front to expose his back the better to the scourges. But \tois himasin\ may be dative case and then it would mean "for the lashes." In either case it is a dreadful scene of terrorizing by the chiliarch. {Unto the centurion that stood by} (\pros ton hest“ta hekatontarchon\). He was simply carrying out the orders of the chiliarch (cf. strkjv@Matthew:27:54|). Why had not Paul made protest before this? {Is it lawful?} (\ei exestin?\). This use of \ei\ in indirect questions we have had before (1:6|). {A Roman and uncondemned} (\Romaion kai akatakriton\). Just as in strkjv@16:37| which see. Blass says of Paul's question: _Interrogatio subironica est confidentiae plena_.

rwp@Acts:22:28 @{With a great sum} (\pollou kephalaiou\). The use of \kephalaiou\ (from \kephalˆ\, head) for sums of money (principal as distinct from interest) is old and frequent in the papyri. Our word capital is from \caput\ (head). The genitive is used here according to rule for price. "The sale of the Roman citizenship was resorted to by the emperors as a means of filling the exchequer, much as James I. made baronets" (Page). Dio Cassius (LX., 17) tells about Messalina the wife of Claudius selling Roman citizenship. Lysias was probably a Greek and so had to buy his citizenship. {But I am a Roman born} (\Eg“ de kai gegennˆmai\). Perfect passive indicative of \genna“\. The word "Roman" not in the Greek. Literally, "But I have been even born one," (i.e. born a Roman citizen). There is calm and simple dignity in this reply and pardonable pride. Being a citizen of Tarsus (21:39|) did not make Paul a Roman citizen. Tarsus was an _urbs libera_, not a _colonia_ like Philippi. Some one of his ancestors (father, grandfather) obtained it perhaps as a reward for distinguished service. Paul's family was of good social position. "He was educated by the greatest of the Rabbis; he was at an early age entrusted by the Jewish authorities with an important commission; his nephew could gain ready access to the Roman tribune; he was treated as a person of consequence by Felix, Festus, Agrippa, and Julius" (Furneaux).

rwp@Acts:22:30 @{To know the certainty} (\gn“nai to asphales\). Same idiom in strkjv@21:34| which see. {Wherefore he was accused} (\to ti kategoreitai\). Epexegetical after to \asphales\. Note article (accusative case) with the indirect question here as in strkjv@Luke:22:1,23,24| (which see), a neat idiom in the Greek. {Commanded} (\ekeleusen\). Songs:the Sanhedrin had to meet, but in the Tower of Antonia, for he brought Paul down (\katagag“n\, second aorist active participle of \katag“\). {Set him} (\estˆsen\). First aorist active (transitive) indicative of \histˆmi\, not the intransitive second aorist \estˆ\. Lysias is determined to find out the truth about Paul, more puzzled than ever by the important discovery that he has a Roman citizen on his hands in this strange prisoner.

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

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

rwp@Acts:23:3 @{Thou whited wall} (\toiche kekoniamene\). Perfect passive participle of \konia“\ (from \konia\, dust or lime). The same word used in strkjv@Matthew:23:27| for "whited sepulchres" (\taphoi kekoniamenoi\) which see. It is a picturesque way of calling Ananias a hypocrite, undoubtedly true, but not a particularly tactful thing for a prisoner to say to his judge, not to say Jewish high priest. Besides, Paul had hurled back at him the word \tuptein\ (smite) in his command, putting it first in the sentence (\tuptein se mellei ho theos\) in strong emphasis. Clearly Paul felt that he, not Ananias, was living as a good citizen in God's commonwealth. {And sittest thou to judge me?} (\Kai su kathˆi krin“n me?\) Literally, "And thou (being what thou art) art sitting (\kathˆi\, second person singular middle of \kathˆmai\, late form for \kathˆsai\, the uncontracted form) judging me." Cf. strkjv@Luke:22:30|. \Kai su\ at the beginning of a question expresses indignation. {Contrary to the law} (\paranom“n\). Present active participle of \paranome“\, old verb to act contrary to the law, here alone in the N.T., "acting contrary to the law."

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

rwp@Acts:23:6 @{But when Paul perceived} (\gnous de ho Paulos\). Perceiving (second aorist ingressive of \gin“sk“\). Paul quickly saw that his cause was ruined before the Sanhedrin by his unwitting attack on the high priest. It was impossible to get a fair hearing. Hence, Vincent says, "Paul, with great tact, seeks to bring the two parties of the council into collision with each other." Songs:Alford argues with the motto "divide and conquer." Farrar condemns Paul and takes strkjv@24:21| as a confession of error here, but that is reading into Paul's word about the resurrection more than he says. Page considers Luke's report meagre and unsatisfactory. Rackham thinks that the trial was already started and that Paul repeated part of his speech of the day before when "the Sadducees received his words with ostentatious scepticism and ridicule: this provoked counter-expressions of sympathy and credulity among the Pharisees." But all this is inference. We do not have to adopt the Jesuitical principle that the end justifies the means in order to see shrewdness and hard sense in what Paul said and did. Paul knew, of course, that the Sanhedrin was nearly evenly divided between Pharisees and Sadducees, for he himself had been a Pharisee. {I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees} (\Eg“ Pharisaios eimi huios Pharisai“n\). This was strictly true as we know from his Epistles (Phillipians:3:5|). {Touching the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question} (\peri elpidos kai anastase“s nekr“n krinomai\). This was true also and this is the point that Paul mentions in strkjv@24:21|. His failure to mention again the fact that he was a Pharisee throws no discredit on Luke's report here. The chief point of difference between Pharisees and Sadducees was precisely this matter of the resurrection. And this was Paul's cardinal doctrine as a Christian minister. It was this fact that convinced him that Jesus was the Messiah and was "the very centre of his faith" (Page) and of his preaching. It was not a mere trick for Paul to proclaim this fact here and so divide the Sanhedrin. As a matter of fact, the Pharisees held aloof when the Sadducees persecuted Peter and the other apostles for preaching resurrection in the case of Jesus and even Gamaliel threw cold water on the effort to punish them for it (Acts:5:34-39|). Songs:then Paul was really recurring to the original cleavage on this point and was able to score a point against the Sadducees as Gamaliel, his great teacher, had done before him. Besides, "Paul and Pharisaism seem to us such opposite ideas that we often forget that to Paul Christianity was the natural development of Judaism" (Page). Paul shows this in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11|.

rwp@Acts:23:11 @{The night following} (\tˆi epiousˆi nukti\). Locative case, on the next (following) night. {The Lord} (\ho kurios\). Jesus. Paul never needed Jesus more than now. On a previous occasion the whole church prayed for Peter's release (12:5|), but Paul clearly had no such grip on the church as that, though he had been kindly welcomed (21:18|). In every crisis Jesus appears to him (cf. strkjv@Acts:18:9|). It looked dark for Paul till Jesus spoke. Once before in Jerusalem Jesus spoke words of cheer (22:18|). Then he was told to leave Jerusalem. Now he is to have "cheer" or "courage" (\tharsei\). Jesus used this very word to others (Matthew:9:2,22; strkjv@Mark:10:49|). It is a brave word. {Thou hast testified} (\diemartur“\). First aorist middle indicative second person singular of \diamarturomai\, strong word (see on ¯22:18|). {Must thou} (\se dei\). That is the needed word and on this Paul leans. His hopes (19:21|) of going to Rome will not be in vain. He can bide Christ's time now. And Jesus has approved his witness in Jerusalem.

rwp@Acts:23:12 @{Banded together} (\poiˆsantes sustrophˆn\). See on strkjv@19:40| (riot), but here conspiracy, secret combination, binding together like twisted cords. {Bound themselves under a curse} (\anethematisan heautous\). First aorist active indicative of \anathematiz“\, a late word, said by Cremer and Thayer to be wholly Biblical or ecclesiastical. But Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 95) quotes several examples of the verb in an Attic cursing tablet from Megara of the first or second century A.D. This proof shows that the word, as well as \anathema\ (substantive) from which the verb is derived, was employed by pagans as well as by Jews. Deissmann suggests that Greek Jews like the seven sons of Sceva may have been the first to coin it. It occurs in the LXX as well as strkjv@Mark:14:71| (which see and Luke strkjv@21:5|); strkjv@Acts:23:12,14,21|. They placed themselves under an anathema or curse, devoted themselves to God (cf. strkjv@Leviticus:27:28f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:22|). {Drink} (\pein=piein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \pin“\. For this shortened form see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 343. {Till they had killed} (\he“s hou apoktein“sin\). First aorist active subjunctive of \apoktein“\, common verb. No reason to translate "had killed," simply "till they should kill," the aorist merely punctiliar action, the subjunctive retained instead of the optative for vividness as usual in the _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 974-6). Same construction in verse 14|. King Saul took an "anathema" that imperilled Jonathan (1Samuel:14:24|). Perhaps the forty felt that the rabbis could find some way to absolve the curse if they failed. See this verse repeated in verse 21|.

rwp@Acts:23:14 @{Came to the chief priests and the elders} (\proselthontes tois archiereusin kai tois presbuterois\). The Sanhedrin, just as Judas did (Luke:22:4|). {With a great curse} (\anathemati\). This use of the same word as the verb repeated in the instrumental case is in imitation of the Hebrew absolute infinitive and common in the LXX, the very idiom and words of strkjv@Deuteronomy:13:15; strkjv@20:17|, an example of translation Greek, though found in other languages (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 531). See on ¯Luke:21:5| for the distinction between \anathema\ and \anathˆma\. Jesus had foretold: "Whoso killeth you will think that he doeth God service" (John:16:2|).

rwp@Acts:23:15 @{Ye} (\humeis\). Emphatic. {Signify} (\emphanisate\). First aorist active imperative of \emphaniz“\. Make plain from \emphanˆs\, chiefly in Acts. Repeated in verse 22|. The authority is with the chiliarch not with the Sanhedrin, but he had appealed to the Sanhedrin for advice. {As though ye would judge of his case more exactly} (\h“s mellontas diagin“skein akribesteron ta peri autou\). \H“s\ with the participle gives the alleged reason as here. Songs:also in verse 20|. \Diagnosk“\, old verb to distinguish accurately, only here in N.T. and strkjv@24:22|. {Or ever come near} (\pro tou eggisai auton\). "Before the coming near as to him." \Pro\ and the genitive of the articular infinitive of \eggiz“\ with accusative of general reference. {We are ready to slay him} (\hetoimoi esmen tou anelein auton\). Genitive of purpose of the articular infinitive after the adjective \hetoimoi\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1061). \Anelein\, second aorist active of \anaire“\.

rwp@Acts:23:18 @{Paul the prisoner} (\ho desmios Paulos\). Bound (\desmios\) to a soldier, but not with two chains (21:33|), and with some freedom to see his friends as later (28:16|), in military custody (_custodia militaris_). This was better than _custodia publica_ (public custody), the common prison, but more confining. {Who hath something to say to thee} (\echonta ti lalˆsai soi\). Same idiom as in verse 17,19|, but \lalˆsai\ here instead of \apaggeilai\.

rwp@Acts:23:19 @{Took him by the hand} (\epilabomenos tˆs cheiros autou\). Kindly touch in Lysias, _ut fiduciam adolescentis confirmaret_ (Bengel). Note genitive with the second aorist middle (indirect, to himself) of \epilamban“\ as in strkjv@Luke:8:54| with \kratˆsas\ which see. How old the young man (\neanias\) was we do not know, but it is the very word used of Paul in strkjv@7:58| when he helped in the killing of Stephen, a young man in the twenties probably. See also strkjv@20:9| of Eutychus. He is termed \neaniskos\ in verse 22|. {Asked him privately} (\kat' idian epunthaneto\). Imperfect middle, began to ask (inchoative).

rwp@Acts:23:20 @{The Jews} (\hoi Ioudaioi\). As if the whole nation was in the conspiracy and so in verse 12|. The conspirators may have belonged to the Zealots, but clearly they represented the state of Jewish feeling toward Paul in Jerusalem. {Have agreed} (\sunethento\). Second aorist middle indicative of \suntithˆmi\, old verb to join together, to agree. Already this form in strkjv@Luke:22:5| which see. See also strkjv@John:9:22; strkjv@Acts:24:9|. {To bring down} (\hop“s katagagˆis\). Very words of the conspirators in verse 15| as if the young man overheard. Second aorist active subjunctive of \katag“\ with \hop“s\ in final clause, still used, but nothing like so common as \hina\ though again in verse 23| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 985). {As though thou wouldest inquire} (\h“s mell“n punthanesthai\). Just as in verse 15| except that here \mell“n\ refers to Lysias instead of to the conspirators as in verse 15|. The singular is used by the youth out of deference to the authority of Lysias and so modifies a bit the scheming of the conspirators, not "absurd" as Page holds.

rwp@Acts:23:22 @{Tell no man} (\mˆdeni eklalˆsai\). Indirect command (_oratio obliqua_) after \paraggeilas\ (charging) with first aorist active infinitive of \eklale“\ (in ancient Greek, but here only in N.T.), but construction changed to direct in rest of the sentence (_oratio recta_) as in strkjv@1:4|, "that thou hast signified these things to me" (\hoti tauta enephanisas pros eme\). Same verb here as in verse 15|. This change is common in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1047).

rwp@Acts:23:24 @{Provide beasts} (\ktenˆ parastˆsai\). Change from direct to indirect discourse just the opposite of that in verse 22|. {Beasts} (\ktˆnˆ\). For riding as here or for baggage. See on ¯Luke:10:34|. Asses or horses, but not war-horses. Since Paul was chained to a soldier, another animal would be required for baggage. It was also seventy miles and a change of horses might be needed. The extreme precaution of Lysias is explained in some Latin MSS. as due to fear of a night attack with the result that he might be accused to Felix of bribery. Luke also probably accompanied Paul. {To bring safe} (\hina dias“s“sin\). Final clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \dias“z“\, old verb, to save through (\dia\) to a finish. Eight times in the N.T. (Matthew:14:36; strkjv@Luke:7:3; strkjv@Acts:23:24; strkjv@27:43,44; strkjv@28:1,4; strkjv@1Peter:3:20|). {Unto Felix the governor} (\pros Phˆlika ton hˆgemona\). Felix was a brother of Pallas, the notorious favourite of Claudius. Both had been slaves and were now freedmen. Felix was made procurator of Judea by Claudius A.D. 52. He held the position till Festus succeeded him after complaints by the Jews to Nero. He married Drusilla the daughter of Herod Agrippa I with the hope of winning the favour of the Jews. He was one of the most depraved men of his time. Tacitus says of him that "with all cruelty and lust he exercised the power of a king with the spirit of a slave." The term "governor" (\hˆgem“n\) means "leader" from \hˆgeomai\, to lead, and was applied to leaders of all sorts (emperors, kings, procurators). In the N.T. it is used of Pilate (Matthew:27:2|), of Felix, (Acts:23:24,26,33; strkjv@24:1|), of Festus (26:30|).

rwp@Acts:23:25 @{And he wrote} (\grapsas\). First aorist active participle of \graph“\, agreeing with the subject (Lysias) of \eipen\ (said) back in verse 23| (beginning). {After this form} (\echousan ton tupon touton\). Textus Receptus has \periechousan\. The use of \tupon\ (type or form) like _exemplum_ in Latin (Page who quotes Cicero _Ad Att_. IX. 6. 3) may give merely the purport or substantial contents of the letter. But there is no reason for thinking that it is not a genuine copy since the letter may have been read in open court before Felix, and Luke was probably with Paul. The Roman law required that a subordinate officer like Lysias in reporting a case to his superior should send a written statement of the case and it was termed _elogium_. A copy of the letter may have been given Paul after his appeal to Caesar. It was probably written in Latin. The letter is a "dexterous mixture of truth and falsehood" (Furneaux) with the stamp of genuineness. It puts things in a favourable light for Lysias and makes no mention of his order to scourge Paul.

rwp@Acts:23:27 @{Was seized} (\sullˆmphthenta\). First aorist passive participle of \sullamban“\. {Rescued him having learned that he was a Roman} (\exeilamen math“n hoti Romaios estin\). Wendt, Zoeckler, and Furneaux try to defend this record of two facts by Lysias in the wrong order from being an actual lie as Bengel rightly says. Lysias did rescue Paul and he did learn that he was a Roman, but in this order. He did not first learn that he was a Roman and then rescue him as his letter states. The use of the aorist participle (\math“n\ from \manthan“\) after the principal verb \exeilamen\ (second aorist middle of \exaire“\, to take out to oneself, to rescue) can be either simultaneous action or antecedent. There is in Greek no such idiom as the aorist participle of subsequent action (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1112-14). Lysias simply reversed the order of the facts and omitted the order for scourging Paul to put himself in proper light with Felix his superior officer and actually poses as the protector of a fellow Roman citizen.

rwp@Acts:23:29 @{Concerning questions of their law} (\peri zˆtˆmata tou nomou aut“n\). The very distinction drawn by Gallio in Corinth (Acts:18:14f.|). On the word see on strkjv@15:2|. {But to have nothing laid to his charge worthy of death or of bonds} (\mˆden de axion thanatou ˆ desm“n echonta enklˆma\). Literally, "having no accusation (or crime) worthy of death or of bonds." This phrase here only in the N.T. \Egklˆma\ is old word for accusation or crime from \egkale“\ used in verse 28| and in the N.T. only here and strkjv@25:16|. Lysias thus expresses the opinion that Paul ought to be set free and the lenient treatment that Paul received in Caesarea and Rome (first imprisonment) is probably due to this report of Lysias. Every Roman magistrate before whom Paul appears declares him innocent (Gallio, Lysias, Felix, Festus).

rwp@Acts:24:1 @{And with an Orator, one Tertullus} (\kai rhˆtoros Tertullou tinos\). A deputation of elders along with the high priest Ananias, not the whole Sanhedrin, but no hint of the forty conspirators or of the Asian Jews. The Sanhedrin had become divided so that now it is probably Ananias (mortally offended) and the Sadducees who take the lead in the prosecution of Paul. It is not clear whether after five days is from Paul's departure from Jerusalem or his arrival in Caesarea. If he spent nine days in Jerusalem, then the five days would be counted from then (verse 11|). The employment of a Roman lawyer (Latin _orator_) was necessary since the Jews were not familiar with Roman legal procedure and it was the custom in the provinces (Cicero _pro Cael_. 30). The speech was probably in Latin which Paul may have understood also. \Rhˆt“r\ is a common old Greek word meaning a forensic orator or advocate but here only in the N.T. The Latin _rhetor_ was a teacher of rhetoric, a very different thing. Tertullus is a diminutive of Tertius (Romans:16:22|). {Informed} (\enephanisan\). Same verb as in strkjv@23:15,22|, somewhat like our modern "indictment," certainly accusations "against Paul" (\kata tou Paulou\). They were down on Paul and the hired barrister was prosecuting attorney. For the legal form see _Oxyrhynchus Papyri_, Vol. II., p. 162, line 19.

rwp@Acts:24:2 @{When he (Paul) was called} (\klˆthentos autou\). Genitive absolute (as so often in Acts) with first aorist passive participle of \kale“\. Seeing that by thee we enjoy much peace (\pollˆs eirˆnˆs tugchanontes dia sou\). Literally, obtaining much peace by thee. A regular piece of flattery, _captatio benevolentiae_, to ingratiate himself into the good graces of the governor. Felix had suppressed a riot, but Tacitus (_Ann_. XII. 54) declares that Felix secretly encouraged banditti and shared the plunder for which the Jews finally made complaint to Nero who recalled him. But it sounded well to praise Felix for keeping peace in his province, especially as Tertullus was going to accuse Paul of being a disturber of the peace. {And that by thy providence} (\kai dia tˆs pronoias\). Forethought, old Greek word from \pronoos\ (\pronoe“\ in strkjv@1Timothy:5:8; strkjv@Romans:12:17; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:21|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:13:14|. "Providence" is Latin _Providentia_ (foreseeing, _provideo_). Roman coins often have _Providentia Caesaris_. Post-Augustan Latin uses it of God (Deus). {Evils are corrected for this nation} (\diorth“mat“n ginomen“n t“i ethnei tout“i\). Genitive absolute again, \ginomen“n\, present middle participle describing the process of reform going on for this nation (dative case of personal interest). \Diorth“ma\ (from \diortho“\, to set right) occurs from Aristotle on of setting right broken limbs (Hippocrates) or reforms in law and life (Polybius, Plutarch). "Reform continually taking place for this nation." Felix the Reform Governor of Judea! It is like a campaign speech, but it doubtless pleased Felix.

rwp@Acts:24:3 @{In all ways and in all places} (\pantˆi te kai pantachou\). \Pantˆi\, old adverb of manner only here in N.T. \Pantachou\ also old adverb of place, several times in N.T. But these adverbs most likely go with the preceding clause about "reforms" rather than as here translated with "we accept" (\apodechometha\). But "with all gratitude" (\meta pasˆs eucharistias\) does naturally go with \apodechometha\.

rwp@Acts:24:5 @{For we have found} (\heurontes gar\). Second aorist active participle of \heurisk“\, but without a principal verb in the sentence. Probably we have here only a "summary of the charges against Paul" (Page). {A pestilent fellow} (\loimon\). An old word for pest, plague, pestilence, Paul the pest. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:21:11| (\loimoi kai limoi\, pestilences and famines) which see. Latin _pestis_. Think of the greatest preacher of the ages being branded a pest by a contemporary hired lawyer. {A mover of insurrections} (\kinounta staseis\). This was an offence against Roman law if it could be proven. "Plotted against at Damascus, plotted against at Jerusalem, expelled from Pisidian Antioch, stoned at Lystra, scourged and imprisoned at Philippi, accused of treason at Thessalonica, haled before the proconsul at Corinth, cause of a serious riot at Ephesus, and now finally of a riot at Jerusalem" (Furneaux). Specious proof could have been produced, but was not. Tertullus went on to other charges with which a Roman court had no concern (instance Gallio in Corinth). {Throughout the world} (\kata tˆn oikoumenˆn\). The Roman inhabited earth (\gˆn\) as in strkjv@17:6|. {A ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes} (\pr“tostatˆn tˆs t“n Naz“rai“n hairese“s\). \Pr“tostatˆs\ is an old word in common use from \pr“tos\ and \histˆmi\, a front-rank man, a chief, a champion. Here only in the N.T. This charge is certainly true. About "sect" (\hairesis\) see on ¯5:17|. \Naz“raioi\ here only in the plural in the N.T., elsewhere of Jesus (Matthew:2:23; strkjv@26:71; strkjv@Luke:18:37; strkjv@John:18:5,7; strkjv@19:19; strkjv@Acts:2:22; strkjv@3:6; strkjv@4:10; strkjv@6:14; strkjv@22:8; strkjv@26:9|). The disciple is not above his Master. There was a sneer in the term as applied to Jesus and here to his followers.

rwp@Acts:24:6 @{Assayed to profane} (\epeirasen bebˆl“sai\). A flat untruth, but the charge of the Asian Jews (21:28-30|). _Verbum optum ad calumnian_ (Bengel). {We seized} (\ekratˆsamen\). As if the Sanhedrin had arrested Paul, Tertullus identifying himself with his clients. But it was the mob (21:28-31|) that attacked Paul and Lysias who rescued him (21:32ff.|).

rwp@Acts:24:7 @This whole verse with some words at the end of verse 6| and the beginning of verse 8| in the Textus Receptus ("And would have judged according to our law. But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands, commanding his accusers to come unto thee") is absent from Aleph A B H L P 61 (many other cursives) Sahidic Bohairic. It is beyond doubt a later addition to the incomplete report of the speech of Tertullus. As the Revised Version stands, verse 8| connects with verse 6|. The motive of the added words is clearly to prejudice Felix against Lysias and they contradict the record in strkjv@Acts:21|. Furneaux holds them to be genuine and omitted because contradictory to strkjv@Acts:21|. More likely they are a clumsy attempt to complete the speech of Tertullus.

rwp@Acts:24:8 @{From whom} (\par' hou\). Referring to Paul, but in the Textus Receptus referring to Lysias. {By examining him thyself} (\autos anakrinas\). Not by torture, since Paul was a Roman citizen, but by hearing what Paul has to say in defence of himself. \Anakrin“\ is to examine thoroughly up and down as in strkjv@Luke:23:14|.

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

rwp@Acts:24:13 @{Prove} (\parastˆsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \paristˆmi\, to place beside. They have made "charges," mere assertions. They have not backed up these charges with proof, "nor can they," says Paul. {Now} (\nuni\). As if they had changed their charges from the cries of the mob in Jerusalem which is true. Paul has no hired lawyer to plead for him, but he has made a masterly plea for his freedom.

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

rwp@Acts:24:15 @{That there shall be a resurrection} (\anastasin mellein esesthai\). Indirect assertion with infinitive and accusative of general reference (\anastasin\) after the word \elpida\ (hope). The future infinitive \esesthai\ after \mellein\ is also according to rule, \mell“\ being followed by either present, aorist, or future infinitive (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 870, 877, 878). {Both of the just and the unjust} (\dikai“n te kai adik“n\). Apparently at the same time as in strkjv@John:5:29| (cf. strkjv@Acts:17:31f.|). Gardner thinks that Luke here misrepresents Paul who held to no resurrection save for those "in Christ," a mistaken interpretation of Paul in my opinion. The Talmud teaches the resurrection of Israelites only, but Paul was more than a Pharisee.

rwp@Acts:24:19 @{But certain Jews from Asia} (\tines de apo tˆs Alias Ioudaioi\). No verb appears in the Greek for these words. Perhaps he meant to say that "certain Jews from Asia charged me with doing these things." Instead of saying that, Paul stops to explain that they are not here, a thoroughly Pauline anacoluthon (2Corinthians:7:5|) as in strkjv@26:9|. "The passage as it stands is instinct with life, and seems to exhibit the abruptness so characteristic of the Pauline Epistles" (Page). {Who ought to have been here before thee} (\hous edei epi sou pareinai\). This use of \epi\ with genitive of the person is common. The imperfect indicative with verbs of necessity and obligation to express failure to live up to it is common in Greek (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 919-21). "The accusers who were present had not witnessed the alleged offence: those who could have given evidence at first-hand were not present" (Furneaux). There was no case in a Roman court. These Asiatic Jews are never heard of after the riot, though they almost succeeded in killing Paul then. {If they had aught against me} (\ei ti echoien pros eme\). A condition of the fourth class or undetermined with less likelihood of being determined (\ei\ with the optative, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). This is a "mixed condition" (_op.cit._, p. 1022) with a conclusion of the second class.

rwp@Acts:24:21 @{Except it be} (\e\). Literally, "than," but after interrogative \ti = ti allo\ "what else than." {For this one voice} (\peri mias tautˆs ph“nˆs\). The normal Greek idiom with the attributive use of \houtos\ calls for the article before \mias\, though some inscriptions show it as here (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 702). {That} (\hˆs\). Genitive of the relative attracted to the case of the antecedent {ph“nˆs}. {I cried} (\ekekraxa\). Reduplicated aorist as is usual with this verb in the LXX (Judges:3:15|). Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 348. {Touching} (\peri\). Concerning (around, about). {I am called in question} (\krinomai\). As in strkjv@23:6|. {Before you} (\eph' hum“n\). Same idiom as in verses 19,20|.

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

rwp@Acts:24:25 @{Was terrified} (\emphobos genomenos\). Ingressive aorist middle of \ginomai\, "becoming terrified." \Emphobos\ (\en\ and \phobos\) old word, in the N.T. only strkjv@Luke:24:5; strkjv@Acts:10:5; strkjv@24:25; strkjv@Revelation:11:13|. Paul turned the tables completely around and expounded "the faith in Christ Jesus" as it applied to Felix and Drusilla and discoursed (\dialegomenou autou\, genitive absolute) concerning "righteousness" (\dikaiosunˆs\) which they did not possess, "self-control" or temperance (\egkrateias\) which they did not exhibit, and "the judgment to come" (\tou krimatos tou mellontos\) which was certain to overtake them. Felix was brought under conviction, but apparently not Drusilla. Like another Herodias her resentment was to be feared (Knowling). {Go thy way for this time} (\to nun echon poreuou\). The ancient Greek has this use of \to nun echon\ (Tobit strkjv@7:11) in the accusative of time, "as for the present or holding the now." {When I have a convenient season} (\kairon metalab“n\). Second aorist active participle of the old verb \metalamban“\, to find a share in, to obtain. It was his "excuse" for dodging the personal turn that Paul had given.

rwp@Acts:24:26 @{He hoped withal} (\hama kai elpiz“n\). "At the same time also hoping." Paul had mentioned the "alms" (24:17|) and that excited the avarice of Felix for "money" (\chrˆmata\). Roman law demanded exile and confiscation for a magistrate who accepted bribes, but it was lax in the provinces. Felix had doubtless received them before. Josephus (_Ant_. XX. 8, 9) represents Felix as greedy for money. {The oftener} (\puknoteron\). Comparative adverb of \puknos\, old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:5:33| which see and strkjv@1Timothy:5:23|. Kin to \pugmˆ\ (Mark:7:3|) which see from \puk“\, thick, dense, compact. Paul kept on not offering a bribe, but Felix continued to have hopes (present tense \elpiz“n\), kept on sending for him (present tense \metapempomenos\), and kept on communing (imperfect active \h“milei\ from \homile“\, old word as in strkjv@Acts:20:11; strkjv@Luke:24:14|, which see, only N.T. examples of this word). But he was doomed to disappointment. He was never terrified again.

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

rwp@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:25:2 @{The principal men} (\hoi pr“toi\). The first men, the leading men of the city, besides the chief priests. In verse 15| we have "the chief priests and the elders." These chief men among the Jews would desire to pay their respects to the new Procurator on his first visit to Jerusalem. There was another high priest now, Ishmael in place of Ananias. {Informed him against Paul} (\enephanisan aut“i kata tou Paulou\). "This renewal of the charge after two years, on the very first opportunity, is a measure, not only of their unsleeping hatred, but of the importance which they attached to Paul's influence" (Furneaux). {Besought} (\parekaloun\). Imperfect active, kept on beseeching as a special favour to the Jews.

rwp@Acts:25:3 @{Asking favour against him} (\aitoumenoi charin kat' autou\). A favour to themselves (middle voice), not to Paul, but "against" (\kat'\, down, against) him. {That he would send for} (\hop“s metapempsˆtai\). First aorist middle subjunctive of \metapemp“\ (see strkjv@24:24,26|) with final particle \hop“s\ like \hina\. Aorist tense for single case. {Laying wait} (\enedran poiountes\). See on ¯23:16| for the word \enedra\. Old idiom (Thucydides) for laying a plot or ambush as here. Only these two uses of \enedra\ in N.T. Two years before the Sanhedrin had agreed to the plot of the forty conspirators. Now they propose one on their own initiative. {On the way} (\kata tˆn hodon\). Down along, up and down along the way. Plenty of opportunity would occur between Caesarea and Jerusalem for ambush and surprise attacks.

rwp@Acts:25:4 @{Howbeit} (\men oun\). No antithesis expressed, though Page considers \de\ in verse 6| to be one. They probably argued that it was easier for one man (Paul) to come to Jerusalem than for many to go down there. But Festus was clearly suspicious (verse 6|) and was wholly within his rights to insist that they make their charges in Caesarea where he held court. {Was kept in charge} (\tˆreisthai\). Present passive infinitive of \tˆre“\ in indirect assertion. \Hoti\ with finite verb is more common after \apokrinomai\, but the infinitive with the accusative of general reference is proper as here (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1036). {Shortly} (\en tachei\). In quickness, in speed. Old and common usage, seen already in strkjv@Luke:18:8; strkjv@Acts:12:7; strkjv@22:18|. Festus is clearly within his rights again since his stay in Caesarea had been so brief. He did go down in "eight or ten days" (verse 6|). Luke did not consider the matter important enough to be precise.

rwp@Acts:25:5 @{Them therefore which are of power among you} (\hoi oun en humin dunatoi\). "The mighty ones among you," "the men of power" (\dunatoi\) and authority, "the first men," the Sanhedrin, in other words. Note change here by Luke from indirect discourse in verse 4|, to direct in verse 5| (\phˆsin\, says he). {Go down with me} (\sunkatabantes\). Double compound (\sun, kata\) second aorist active participle of \sunkatabain“\. It was a fair proposal. {If there is anything amiss in the man} (\ei ti estin en t“i andri atopon\). Condition of the first class, assuming that there is (to be courteous to them), but not committing himself on the merits of the case. \Atopon\ is an old word, specially common in Plato, meaning "out of place." In N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:23:41| which see; strkjv@Acts:28:6; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:2|. Note present tense active voice of \katˆgoreit“san\ (imperative) of \katˆgore“\, repeat their accusations.

rwp@Acts:25:7 @{When he was come} (\paragenomenou autou\). Genitive absolute of common verb \paraginomai\ (cf. strkjv@24:24|). {Which had come down} (\hoi katabebˆkotes\). Perfect active participle of \katabain“\. They had come down on purpose at the invitation of Festus (verse 5|), and were now ready. {Stood round about him} (\periestˆsan auton\). Second aorist (ingressive) active (intransitive) of \periistˆmi\, old verb, "Took their stand around him," "_periculum intentantes_" (Bengel). Cf. strkjv@Luke:23:10| about Christ. They have no lawyer this time, but they mass their forces so as to impress Festus. {Bringing against him} (\katapherontes\). Bearing down on. See on ¯20:9; strkjv@26:10|, only N.T. examples of this ancient verb. {Many and grievous charges} (\polla kai barea aiti“mata\). This word \aiti“ma\ for old form \aitiama\ is found in one papyrus (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_) in sense of "blame." But the charges were no "heavier" than those made by Tertullus (24:5-8|). Paul's reply proves this and they were also probably on court record (Furneaux). See this adjective \barus\ (heavy) used with \lukoi\ (wolves) in strkjv@20:29|. {Which they could not prove} (\ha ouk ischuon apodeixai\). Imperfect active of \ischu“\, to have strength or power as in strkjv@19:16,20|. Repetition and reiteration and vehemence took the place of proof (\apodeixai\, first aorist active infinitive of \apodeiknumi\, to show forth, old verb, in N.T. only here, strkjv@Acts:2:22| which see and strkjv@1Corinthians:4:9|).

rwp@Acts:25:9 @{Desiring to gain favour with the Jews} (\thel“n tois Ioudaiois charin katathesthai\). Precisely the expression used of Felix by Luke in strkjv@24:27| which see. Festus, like Felix, falls a victim to fear of the Jews. {Before me} (\ep' emou\). Same use of \epi\ with the genitive as in strkjv@23:30; strkjv@24:19,21|. Festus, seeing that it was unjust to condemn Paul and yet disadvantageous to absolve him (Blass), now makes the very proposal to Paul that the rulers had made to him in Jerusalem (verse 3|). He added the words "\ep' emou\" (before me) as if to insure Paul of justice. If Festus was unwilling to give Paul justice in Caesarea where his regular court held forth, what assurance was there that Festus would give it to him at Jerusalem in the atmosphere of intense hostility to Paul? Only two years ago the mob, the Sanhedrin, the forty conspirators had tried to take his life in Jerusalem. Festus had no more courage to do right than Felix, however plausible his language might sound. Festus also, while wanting Paul to think that he would in Jerusalem "be judged of these things before me," in reality probably intended to turn Paul over to the Sanhedrin in order to please the Jews, probably with Festus present also to see that Paul received justice (\me presente\). Festus possibly was surprised to find that the charges were chiefly against Jewish law, though one was against Caesar. It was not a mere change of venue that Paul sensed, but the utter unwillingness of Festus to do his duty by him and his willingness to connive at Jewish vengeance on Paul. Paul had faced the mob and the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem, two years of trickery at the hands of Felix in Caesarea, and now he is confronted by the bland chicanery of Festus. It is too much, the last straw.

rwp@Acts:25:11 @{If I am a wrong-doer} (\ei men oun adik“\). Condition of the first class with \ei\ and the present active indicative of \adike“\ (\a\ privative and \dikˆ\): "If I am in the habit of doing injustice," assuming it to be true for the sake of argument. {And have committed anything worthy of death} (\kai axion thanatou pepracha\). Same condition with the difference in tense (\pepracha\, perfect active indicative) of a single case instead of a general habit. Assuming either or both Paul draws his conclusion. {I refuse not to die} (\ou paraitoumai to apothanein\). Old verb to ask alongside, to beg from, to deprecate, to refuse, to decline. See on ¯Luke:14:18f|. Josephus (_Life_, 29) has \thanein ou paraitoumai\. Here the articular second aorist active infinitive is in the accusative case the object of \paraitoumai\: "I do not beg off dying from myself." {But if none of these things is} (\ei de ouden estin\). \De\ here is contrasted with \men\ just before. No word for "true" in the Greek. \Estin\ ("is") in the Greek here means "exists." Same condition (first class, assumed as true). {Whereof these accuse me} (\h“n houtoi katˆgorousin mou\). Genitive of relative \hon\ by attraction from \ha\ (accusative with \katˆgorousin\) to case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\ ("of these things"). \Mou\ is genitive of person after \katˆgorousin\. {No man can give me up to them} (\oudeis me dunatai autois charisasthai\). "Can" legally. Paul is a Roman citizen and not even Festus can make a free gift (\charisasthai\) of Paul to the Sanhedrin. {I appeal unto Caesar} (\Kaisara epikaloumai\). Technical phrase like Latin _Caesarem appello_. Originally the Roman law allowed an appeal from the magistrate to the people (_provocatio ad populum_), but the emperor represented the people and so the appeal to Caesar was the right of every Roman citizen. Paul had crossed the Rubicon on this point and so took his case out of the hands of dilatory provincial justice (really injustice). Roman citizens could make this appeal in capital offences. There would be expense connected with it, but better that with some hope than delay and certain death in Jerusalem. Festus was no better than Felix in his vacillation and desire to curry favour with the Jews at Paul's expense. No doubt Paul's long desire to see Rome (19:21; strkjv@Romans:15:22-28|) and the promise of Jesus that he would see Rome (Acts:23:11|) played some part in Paul's decision. But he made it reluctantly for he says in Rome (Acts:28:19|): "I was constrained to appeal." But acquittal at the hands of Festus with the hope of going to Rome as a free man had vanished.

rwp@Acts:25:12 @{When he had conferred with the council} (\sunlalˆsas meta tou sumbouliou\). The word \sumboulion\ in the N.T. usually means "counsel" as in strkjv@Matthew:12:14|, but here alone as an assembly of counsellors or council. But the papyri (Milligan and Moulton's _Vocabulary_) furnish a number of instances of this sense of the word as "council." Here it apparently means the chief officers and personal retinue of the procurator, his assessors (\assessores consiliarii\). These local advisers were a necessity. Some discretion was allowed the governor about granting the appeal. If the prisoner were a well-known robber or pirate, it could be refused. {Thou hast appealed unto Caesar} (\Kaisara epikeklˆsai\). The same technical word, but the perfect tense of the indicative. {Unto Caesar thou shalt go} (\epi Kaisara poreusˆi\). Perhaps the volitive future (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 874). Bengel thinks that Festus sought to frighten Paul with these words. Knowling suggests that "they may have been uttered, if not with a sneer, yet with the implication 'thou little knowest what an appeal to Caesar means.'" But embarrassment will come to Festus. He has refused to acquit this prisoner. Hence he must formulate charges against him to go before Caesar.

rwp@Acts:25:13 @{When certain days were passed} (\Hˆmer“n diagenomenon\). Genitive absolute of \diaginomai\, to come between, "days intervening." {Agrippa the King} (\Agrippas ho basileus\). Agrippa II son of Agrippa I of strkjv@Acts:12:20-23|. On the death of Herod King of Chalcis A.D. 48, Claudius A.D. 50 gave this Herod Agrippa II the throne of Chalcis so that Luke is correct in calling him king, though he is not king of Judea. But he was also given by Claudius the government of the temple and the right of appointing the high priest. Later he was given also the tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias. He was the last Jewish king in Palestine, though not king of Judea. He angered the Jews by building his palace so as to overlook the temple and by frequent changes in the high priesthood. He made his capital at Caesarea Philippi which he called Neronias in honour of Nero. Titus visited it after the fall of Jerusalem. {Bernice} (\Bernikˆ\). He was her brother and yet she lived with him in shameful intimacy in spite of her marriage to her uncle Herod King of Chalcis and to Polemon King of Cilicia whom she left. Schuerer calls her both a Jewish bigot and a wanton. She afterwards became the mistress of Titus. {Arrived at Caesarea} (\katˆntˆsan eis Kaisarian\). Came down (first aorist active of \katanta“\) to Caesarea from Jerusalem. {And saluted Festus} (\aspasamenoi ton Phˆston\). The Textus Receptus has \aspasomenoi\ the future participle, but the correct text is the aorist middle participle \aspasamenoi\ which cannot possibly mean subsequent action as given in the Canterbury Revision "and saluted." It can only mean contemporaneous (simultaneous) action "saluting" or antecedent action like the margin "having saluted." But antecedent action is not possible here, so that simultaneous action is the only alternative. It is to be noted that the salutation synchronized with the arrival in Caesarea (note \kata\, down, the effective aorist tense), not with the departure from Jerusalem, nor with the whole journey. Rightly understood the aorist participle here gives no trouble at all (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 861-3).

rwp@Acts:25:17 @{When they were come together here} (\sunelthont“n enthade\). Genitive absolute of second aorist active participle of \sunerchomai\, but without \aut“n\ (they), merely understood. {Delay} (\anabolˆn\). Old word from \anaball“\, only here in N.T.

rwp@Acts:25:19 @{But had} (\de eichon\). Descriptive imperfect active of \ech“\ and \de\ of contrast (but). {Concerning their own religion} (\peri tˆs idias deisidaimonias\). See on ¯17:22| for discussion of this word. Festus would hardly mean "superstition," whatever he really thought, because Agrippa was a Jew. {And of one Jesus} (\kai peri tinos Iˆsou\). This is the climax of supercilious scorn toward both Paul and "one Jesus." {Who was dead} (\tethnˆkotos\). Perfect active participle of \thnˆsk“\ agreeing with \Iˆsou\ (genitive). As being dead. {Whom Paul affirmed to be alive} (\hon ephasken ho Paulos zˆin\). Imperfect active of \phask“\, old form of \phˆmi\ to say, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:24:9; strkjv@Romans:1:22|. Infinitive \zˆin\ in indirect discourse with \hon\ (whom) the accusative of general reference. With all his top-loftical airs Festus has here correctly stated the central point of Paul's preaching about Jesus as no longer dead, but living.

rwp@Acts:25:20 @{Being perplexed} (\aporoumenos\). Present middle participle of the common verb \apore“\ (\a\ privative and \poros\ way), to be in doubt which way to turn, already in strkjv@Mark:6:20| which see and strkjv@Luke:24:4|. The Textus Receptus has \eis\ after here, but critical text has only the accusative which this verb allows (Mark:6:20|) as in Thucydides and Plato. {How to inquire concerning these things} (\tˆn peri tout“n zˆtˆsin\). Literally, "as to the inquiry concerning these things." This is not the reason given by Luke in verse 9| (wanting to curry favour with the Jews), but doubtless this motive also actuated Festus as both could be true. {Whether he would go to Jerusalem} (\ei bouloito poreuesthai eis Ierosoluma\). Optative in indirect question after \elegon\ (asked or said) imperfect active, though the present indicative could have been retained with change of person: "Dost thou wish, etc.," (\ei boulˆi\, etc.). See Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1031, 1044. This is the question put to Paul in verse 9| though \theleis\ is there used.

rwp@Acts:25:23 @{When Agrippa was come and Bernice} (\elthontos tou Agrippa kai tˆs Bernikˆs\). Genitive absolute, the participle agreeing in number and gender (masculine singular, \elthontos\) with \Agrippa\, \Bernikˆs\ being added as an afterthought. {With great pomp} (\meta pollˆs phantasias\). \Phantasia\ is a _Koin‚_ word (Polybius, Diodorus, etc.) from the old verb \phantaz“\ (Hebrews:12:21|) and it from \phain“\, common verb to show, to make an appearance. This is the only N.T. example of \phantasia\, though the kindred common word \phantasma\ (appearance) occurs twice in the sense of apparition or spectre (Matthew:14:26; strkjv@Mark:6:49|). Herodotus (VII. 10) used the verb \phantaz“\ for a showy parade. Festus decided to gratify the wish of Agrippa by making the "hearing" of Paul the prisoner (verse 22|) an occasion for paying a compliment to Agrippa (Rackham) by a public gathering of the notables in Caesarea. Festus just assumed that Paul would fall in with this plan for a grand entertainment though he did not have to do it. {Into the place of hearing} (\eis to akroatˆrion\). From \akroaomai\ (to be a hearer) and, like the Latin _auditorium_, in Roman law means the place set aside for hearing, and deciding cases. Here only in the N.T. Late word, several times in Plutarch and other _Koin‚_ writers. The hearing was "semi-official" (Page) as is seen in verse 26|. {With the chief captains} (\sun te chiliarchois\). \Chiliarchs\, each a leader of a thousand. There were five cohorts of soldiers stationed in Caesarea. {And the principal men of the city} (\kai andrasin tois kat' exochˆn\). The use of \kat' exochˆn\, like our French phrase _par excellence_, occurs here only in the N.T., and not in the ancient Greek, but it is found in inscriptions of the first century A.D. (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). \Exochˆ\ in medical writers is any protuberance or swelling. Cf. our phrase "outstanding men." {At the command of Festus} (\keleusantos tou Phˆstou\). Genitive absolute again, "Festus having commanded."

rwp@Acts:25:25 @{But I found} (\eg“ de katelabomˆn\). Second aorist middle of \katalamban“\, to lay hold of, to grasp, to comprehend as in strkjv@4:13; strkjv@10:34|. {That he had committed nothing worthy of death} (\mˆden axion auton thanatou peprachenai\). Perfect active infinitive of \prass“\ in indirect assertion with negative \mˆ\ and accusative \auton\ of general reference, the usual idiom. Verse 25| repeats the statement in verse 21|, perhaps for the benefit of the assembled dignitaries.

rwp@Acts:25:26 @{No certain thing} (\asphales ti--ou\). Nothing definite or reliable (\a\ privative, \sphall“\, to trip). All the charges of the Sanhedrin slipped away or were tripped up by Paul. Festus confesses that he had nothing left and thereby convicts himself of gross insincerity in his proposal to Paul in verse 9| about going up to Jerusalem. By his own statement he should have set Paul free. The various details here bear the marks of the eyewitness. Luke was surely present and witnessed this grand spectacle with Paul as chief performer. {Unto my lord} (\t“i kuri“i\). Augustus (Octavius) and Tiberius refused the title of \kurios\ (lord) as too much like _rex_ (king) and like master and slave, but the servility of the subjects gave it to the other emperors who accepted it (Nero among them). Antoninus Pius put it on his coins. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 105) gives an ostracon dated Aug. 4, A.D. 63 with the words "in the year nine of Nero the lord" (\enatou Ner“nos tou kuriou\). Deissmann (_op. cit._, pp. 349ff.) runs a most interesting parallel "between the cult of Christ and the cult of Caesar in the application of the term \kurios\, lord" in ostraca, papyri, inscriptions. Beyond a doubt Paul has all this fully in mind when he says in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3| that "no one is able to say \Kurios Iˆsous\ except in the Holy Spirit" (cf. also strkjv@Phillipians:2:11|). The Christians claimed this word for Christ and it became the test in the Roman persecutions as when Polycarp steadily refused to say " Lord Caesar" and insisted on saying "Lord Jesus" when it meant his certain death. {Before you} (\eph' hum“n\). The whole company. In no sense a new trial, but an examination in the presence of these prominent men to secure data and to furnish entertainment and pleasure to Agrippa (verse 22|). {Especially before thee} (\malista epi sou\). Out of courtesy. It was the main reason as verse 22| shows. Agrippa was a Jew and Festus was glad of the chance to see what he thought of Paul's case. {After examination had} (\tˆs anakrise“s genomenˆs\). Genitive absolute, "the examination having taken place." \Anakrisis\ from \anakrin“\ (cf. strkjv@12:19; strkjv@24:8; strkjv@28:18|) is a legal term for preliminary examination. Only here in the N.T. Inscriptions and papyri give it as examination of slaves or other property. {That I may have somewhat to write} (\hop“s sch“ ti graps“\). Ingressive aorist subjunctive \sch“\ (may get) with \hop“s\ (final particle like \hina\). \Ti graps“\ in indirect question after \sch“\ is either future indicative or aorist subjunctive (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1045). Festus makes it plain that this is not a "trial," but an examination for his convenience to help him out of a predicament.

rwp@Acts:26:1 @{Thou art permitted} (\epitrepetai soi\). Literally, It is permitted thee. As if Agrippa were master of ceremonies instead of Festus. Agrippa as a king and guest presides at the grand display while Festus has simply introduced Paul. {For thyself} (\huper seautou\). Some MSS. have \peri\ (concerning). Paul is allowed to speak in his own behalf. No charges are made against him. In fact, Festus has admitted that he has no real proof of any charges. {Stretched forth his hand} (\ekteinas tˆn cheira\). Dramatic oratorical gesture (not for silence as in strkjv@12:17; strkjv@13:16|) with the chain still upon it (verse 29|) linking him to the guard. First aorist active participle of \ektein“\, to stretch out. {Made his defence} (\apelogeito\). Inchoative imperfect of \apologeomai\ (middle), "began to make his defence." This is the fullest of all Paul's defences. He has no word of censure of his enemies or of resentment, but seizes the opportunity to preach Christ to such a distinguished company which he does with "singular dignity" (Furneaux). He is now bearing the name of Christ "before kings" (Acts:9:15|). In general Paul follows the line of argument of the speech on the stairs (chapter strkjv@Acts:22|).

rwp@Acts:26:2 @{I think myself happy} (\hˆgˆmai emauton makarion\). See on ¯Matthew:5:3| for \makarios\. Blass notes that Paul, like Tertullus, begins with _captatio benevolentiae_, but _absque adulatione_. He says only what he can truthfully speak. For \hˆgˆmai\ see strkjv@Phillipians:3:7; strkjv@1Timothy:6:1| (perfect middle indicative of \hˆgeomai\), I have considered. {That I am to make my defence} (\mell“n apologeisthai\). Literally, "being about to make my defence." {Whereof I am accused} (\h“n egkaloumai\). Genitive with \egkaloumai\ as in strkjv@19:40| or by attraction from accusative of relative (\ha\) to case of antecedent (\pant“n\).

rwp@Acts:26:3 @{Especially because thou art expert} (\malista gn“stˆn onta se\). Or like the margin, "because thou art especially expert," according as \malista\ is construed. \Gn“stˆn\ is from \gin“sk“\ and means a knower, expert, connoisseur. Plutarch uses it and Deissmann (_Light_, etc., p. 367) restores it in a papyrus. Agrippa had the care of the temple, the appointment of the high priest, and the care of the sacred vestments. But the accusative \onta se\ gives trouble here coming so soon after \sou\ (genitive with \epi\). Some MSS. insert \epistamenos\ or \eid“s\ (knowing) but neither is genuine. Page takes it as "governed by the sense of thinking or considering." Knowling considers it an anacoluthon. Buttmann held it to be an accusative absolute after the old Greek idiom. \Tuchon\ is such an instance though used as an adverb (1Corinthians:16:6|). It is possible that one exists in strkjv@Ephesians:1:18|. See other examples discussed in Robertson's _Grammar_, pp. 490f. {Customs and questions} (\eth“n te kai zˆtˆmat“n\). Both _consuetudinum in practicis_ and _quaestionum in theoreticis_ (Bengel). Agrippa was qualified to give Paul an understanding and a sympathetic hearing. Paul understands perfectly the grand-stand play of the whole performance, but he refused to be silent and chose to use this opportunity, slim as it seemed, to get a fresh hearing for his own case and to present the claims of Christ to this influential man. His address is a masterpiece of noble apologetic. {Patiently} (\makrothum“s\). Adverb from \makrothumos\. Only here in the N.T., though \makrothumia\ occurs several times. Vulgate has _longanimiter_. Long spirit, endurance, opposite of impatience. Songs:Paul takes his time.

rwp@Acts:26:6 @{And now} (\kai nun\). Sharp comparison between his youth and the present. {To be judged for the hope} (\ep' elpidi--krinomenos\). The hope of the resurrection and of the promised Messiah (13:32|). Page calls verses 6-8| a parenthesis in the course of Paul's argument by which he shows that his life in Christ is a real development of the best in Pharisaism. He does resume his narrative in verse 9|, but verses 6-8| are the core of his defence already presented in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11| where he proves that the children of faith are the real seed of Abraham.

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

rwp@Acts:26:10 @{I both shut up many} (\pollous te katekleisa\). Effective aorist active of \kataklei“\, old word to shut down like a trap door, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:3:20|. Double use of \te\ (both--and). {Having received authority from the chief priests} (\tˆn para t“n archiere“n exousian lab“n\). "The authority," he says. Paul was the official persecutor of the saints under the direction of the Sanhedrin. He mentions "chief priests" (Sadducees), though a Pharisee himself. Both parties were co-operating against the saints. {And when they were put to death} (\anairoumen“n te aut“n\). Genitive absolute with present passive participle of \anaire“\. {I gave my vote against them} (\katˆnegka psˆphon\). "I cast down my pebble" (a black one). The ancient Greeks used white pebbles for acquittal (Revelation:2:17|), black ones for condemnation as here (the only two uses of the word in the N.T.). Paul's phrase (not found elsewhere) is more vivid than the usual \katapsˆphiz“\ for voting. They literally cast the pebbles into the urn. Cf. \sumpsˆphiz“\ in strkjv@Acts:19:19|, \sugkatapsephizo\ in strkjv@Acts:1:26|. If Paul's language is taken literally here, he was a member of the Sanhedrin and so married when he led the persecution. That is quite possible, though he was not married when he wrote strkjv@1Corinthians:7:7f.|, but a widower. It is possible to take the language figuratively for approval, but not so natural.

rwp@Acts:26:12 @{Whereupon} (\en hois\). "In which things" (affairs of persecution), "on which errand." Cf. strkjv@24:18|. Paul made them leave Palestine (11:19|) and followed them beyond it (9:2|). {With the authority and commission} (\met' exousias kai epitropˆs\). Not merely "authority" (\exousia\), but express appointment (\epitropˆ\, old word, but here only in N.T., derived from \epitropos\, steward, and that from \epitrep“\, to turn over to, to commit).

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

rwp@Acts:26:16 @{Arise and stand} (\anastˆthi kai stˆthi\). "Emphatic assonance" (Page). Second aorist active imperative of compound verb (\anistˆmi\) and simplex (\histˆmi\). "Stand up and take a stand." {Have I appeared unto thee} (\“phthˆn soi\). First aorist passive indicative of \hora“\. See on ¯Luke:22:43|. {To appoint thee} (\procheirisasthai se\). See strkjv@3:30; strkjv@22:14| for this verb. {Both of the things wherein thou hast seen me} (\h“n te eides me\). The reading \me\ (not in all MSS.) makes it the object of \eides\ (didst see) and \h“n\ is genitive of \ha\ (accusative of general reference) attracted to the case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\. Paul is thus a personal eyewitness of the Risen Christ (Luke:1:1; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:1; strkjv@9:1|). {And of the things wherein I will appear unto thee} (\h“n te ophthˆsomai soi\). Here again \h“n\ is genitive of the accusative (general reference) relative \ha\ attracted to the case of the antecedent \tout“n\ or \ekein“n\ as before. But \ophthˆsomai\ is first future passive of \hora“\ and cannot be treated as active or middle. Page takes it to mean "the visions in which I shall be seen by you," the passive form bringing out the agency of God. See those in strkjv@Acts:18:9; strkjv@23:11; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:2|. The passive voice, however, like \apekrithˆn\ and \ephobˆthˆn\, did become sometimes transitive in the _Koin‚_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 819).

rwp@Acts:26:17 @{Delivering thee} (\exairoumenos se\). Present middle participle of \exaire“\, old verb and usually so rendered, but the old Greek also uses it for "choose" as also in LXX (Isaiah:48:10|). The papyri give examples of both meanings and either makes good sense here. God was continually rescuing Paul "out of the hands of Jews and Gentiles and Paul was a chosen vessel" (9:15|). Modern scholars are also divided.

rwp@Ephesians:3:14 @{I bow my knees} (\kampt“ ta gonata mou\). He now prays whether he had at first intended to do so at strkjv@3:1| or not. Calvin supposes that Paul knelt as he dictated this prayer, but this is not necessary. This was a common attitude in prayer (Luke:22:41; strkjv@Acts:7:40; strkjv@20:36; strkjv@21:5|), though standing is also frequent (Mark:11:25; strkjv@Luke:18:11,13|).

rwp@Ephesians:3:15 @{Every family} (\pƒsa patria\). Old word (\patra\ is the usual form) from \patˆr\, descent from a common ancestor as a tribe or race. Some take it here as = \patrotˆs\, fatherhood, but that is most unlikely. Paul seems to mean that all the various classes of men on earth and of angels in heaven get the name of family from God the Father of all.

rwp@Ephesians:3:17 @{That Christ may dwell} (\katoikˆsai ton Christon\). Another infinitive (first aorist active) after \hina d“i\. \Katoike“\ is an old verb to make one's home, to be at home. Christ (\Christon\ accusative of general reference) is asked to make his home in our hearts. This is the ideal, but a deal of fixing would have to be done in our hearts for Christ. {Being rooted and grounded in love} (\en agapˆi erriz“menoi kai tethemeli“menoi\). But it is not certain whether \en agapˆi\ should go with these participles or with the preceding infinitive \katoikˆsai\ (dwell). Besides, these two perfect passive participles (from \rizo“\, old verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Colossians:2:7|, and from \themelio“\, see also strkjv@Colossians:1:23|) are in the nominative case and are to be taken with \hina exischusˆte\ and are proleptically placed before \hina\. Verse 18| should really begin with these participles. Paul piles up metaphors (dwelling, rooted, grounded).

rwp@Ephesians:3:20 @{That is able to do} (\t“i dunamen“i poiˆsai\). Dative case of the articular participle (present middle of \dunamai\). Paul is fully aware of the greatness of the blessings asked for, but the Doxology ascribes to God the power to do them for us. {Above all} (\huper panta\). Not simply \panta\, but \huper\ beyond and above all. {Exceedingly abundantly} (\huperekperissou\). Late and rare double compound (\huper, ek, perissou\) adverb (LXX, strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:10; strkjv@5:13; strkjv@Ephesians:3:20|). It suits well Paul's effort to pile Pelion on Ossa. {That we ask} (\h“n aitoumetha\). Ablative of the relative pronoun attracted from the accusative \ha\ to the case of the unexpressed antecedent \tout“n\. Middle voice (\aitoumetha\) "we ask for ourselves." {Or think} (\ˆ nooumen\). The highest aspiration is not beyond God's "power" (\dunamin\) to bestow.

rwp@Ephesians:4:3 @{The unity} (\tˆn henotˆta\). Late and rare word (from \heis\, one), in Aristotle and Plutarch, though in N.T. only here and verse 13|. {In the bond of peace} (\en t“i sundesm“i tˆs eirˆnˆs\). In strkjv@Colossians:3:14| \agapˆ\ (love) is the \sundesmos\ (bond). But there is no peace without love (verse 2|).

rwp@Ephesians:4:4 @{One body} (\hen s“ma\). One mystical body of Christ (the spiritual church or kingdom, cf. strkjv@1:23; strkjv@2:16|). {One Spirit} (\hen pneuma\). One Holy Spirit, grammatical neuter gender (not to be referred to by "it," but by "he"). {In one hope} (\en miƒi elpidi\). The same hope as a result of their calling for both Jew and Greek as shown in chapter 2|.

rwp@Ephesians:4:5 @{One Lord} (\heis Kurios\). The Lord Jesus Christ and he alone (no series of aeons). {One faith} (\mia pistis\). One act of trust in Christ, the same for all (Jew or Gentile), one way of being saved. {One baptism} (\hen baptisma\). The result of baptizing (\baptisma\), while \baptismos\ is the act. Only in the N.T. (\baptismos\ in Josephus) and ecclesiastical writers naturally. See strkjv@Mark:10:38|. There is only one act of baptism for all (Jews and Gentiles) who confess Christ by means of this symbol, not that they are made disciples by this one act, but merely so profess him, put Christ on publicly by this ordinance.

rwp@Ephesians:4:8 @{Wherefore he saith} (\dio legei\). As a confirmation of what Paul has said. No subject is expressed in the Greek and commentators argue whether it should be \ho theos\ (God) or \hˆ graphˆ\ (Scripture). But it comes to God after all. See strkjv@Acts:2:17|. The quotation is from strkjv@Psalms:68:18|, a Messianic Psalm of victory which Paul adapts and interprets for Christ's triumph over death. {He led captivity captive} (\ˆichmal“teusen aichmal“sian\). Cognate accusative of \aichmal“sian\, late word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:13:10|. The verb also (\aichmal“teu“\) is from the old word \aichmal“tos\, captive in war (in N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:4:18|), in LXX and only here in N.T.

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

rwp@Ephesians:4:20 @{But ye did not so learn Christ} (\Humeis de ouch hout“s emathete ton Christon\). In sharp contrast to pagan life (\hout“s\). Second aorist active indicative of \manthan“\.

rwp@Ephesians:4:22 @{That ye put away} (\apothesthai\). Second aorist middle infinitive of \apotithˆmi\ with the metaphor of putting off clothing or habits as \apothesthe\ in strkjv@Colossians:3:8| (which see) with the same addition of "the old man" (\ton palaion anthr“pon\) as in strkjv@Colossians:3:9|. For \anastrophˆn\ (manner of life) see strkjv@Galatians:1:13|. {Which waxeth corrupt} (\ton phtheiromenon\). Either present middle or passive participle of \phtheir“\, but it is a process of corruption (worse and worse).

rwp@Ephesians:4:23 @{That ye be renewed} (\ananeousthai\). Present passive infinitive (epexegetical, like \apothesthai\, of \alˆtheia en t“i Iˆsou\) and to be compared with \anakainoumenon\ in strkjv@Colossians:3:10|. It is an old verb, \ananeo“\, to make new (young) again; though only here in N.T. {The spirit} (\t“i pneumati\). Not the Holy Spirit, but the human spirit.

rwp@Ephesians:5:4 @{Filthiness} (\aischrotˆs\). Old word from \aischros\ (base), here alone in N.T. {Foolish talking} (\m“rologia\). Late word from \m“rologos\ (\m“ros, logos\), only here in N.T. {Jesting} (\eutrapelia\). Old word from \eutrapelos\ (\eu, trep“\, to turn) nimbleness of wit, quickness in making repartee (so in Plato and Plutarch), but in low sense as here ribaldry, scurrility, only here in N.T. All of these disapproved vices are \hapax legomena\ in the N.T. {Which are not befitting} (\ha ouk anˆken\). Same idiom (imperfect with word of propriety about the present) in strkjv@Colossians:3:18|. Late MSS. read \ta ouk anˆkonta\ like \ta mˆ kathˆkonta\ in strkjv@Romans:1:28|.

rwp@Ephesians:5:5 @{Ye know of a surety} (\iste gin“skontes\). The correct text has \iste\, not \este\. It is the same form for present indicative (second person plural) and imperative, probably indicative here, "ye know." But why \gin“skontes\ added? Probably, "ye know recognizing by your own experience." {No} (\pƒs--ou\). Common idiom in the N.T. like the Hebrew= _oudeis_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 732). {Covetous man} (\pleonektˆs, pleon ech“\). Old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:5:10f.; strkjv@6:10|. {Which is} (\ho estin\). Songs:Aleph B. A D K L have \hos\ (who), but \ho\ is right. See strkjv@Colossians:3:14| for this use of \ho\ (which thing is). On \eid“lolatrˆs\ (idolater) see strkjv@1Corinthians:5:10f|. {In the Kingdom of Christ and God} (\en tˆi basileiƒi tou Christou kai theou\). Certainly the same kingdom and Paul may here mean to affirm the deity of Christ by the use of the one article with \Christou kai theou\. But Sharp's rule cannot be insisted on here because \theos\ is often definite without the article like a proper name. Paul did teach the deity of Christ and may do it here.

rwp@Ephesians:5:8 @{But now light} (\nun de ph“s\). Jesus called his disciples the light of the world (Matthew:5:14|).

rwp@Galatians:6:7 @{Be not deceived} (\mˆ planƒsthe\). Present passive imperative with \mˆ\, "stop being led astray" (\plana“\, common verb to wander, to lead astray as in strkjv@Matthew:24:4f.|). {God is not mocked} (\ou muktˆrizetai\). This rare verb (common in LXX) occurs in Lysias. It comes from \muktˆr\ (nose) and means to turn the nose up at one. That is done towards God, but never without punishment, Paul means to say. In particular, he means "an evasion of his laws which men think to accomplish, but, in fact, cannot" (Burton). {Whatsoever a man soweth} (\ho ean speirˆi anthr“pos\). Indefinite relative clause with \ean\ and the active subjunctive (either aorist or present, form same here). One of the most frequent of ancient proverbs (Job:4:8|; Arist., _Rhet_. iii. 3). Already in strkjv@2Corinthians:9:6|. Same point in strkjv@Matthew:7:16; strkjv@Mark:4:26f|. {That} (\touto\). That very thing, not something different. {Reap} (\therisei\). See on ¯Matthew:6:26| for this old verb.

rwp@Galatians:6:11 @{With how large letters} (\pˆlikois grammasin\). Paul now takes the pen from the amanuensis (cf. strkjv@Romans:16:22|) and writes the rest of the Epistle (verses 11-18|) himself instead of the mere farewell greeting (2Thessalonians:3:17; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:21; strkjv@Colossians:4:18|). But what does he mean by "with how large letters"? Certainly not "how large a letter." It has been suggested that he employed large letters because of defective eyesight or because he could only write ill-formed letters because of his poor handwriting (like the print letters of children) or because he wished to call particular attention to this closing paragraph by placarding it in big letters (Ramsay). This latter is the most likely reason. Deissmann, (_St. Paul_, p. 51) argues that artisans write clumsy letters, yes, and scholars also. Milligan (_Documents_, p. 24; _Vocabulary_, etc.) suggests the contrast seen in papyri often between the neat hand of the scribe and the big sprawling hand of the signature. {I have written} (\egrapsa\). Epistolary aorist. {With mine own hand} (\tˆi emˆi cheiri\). Instrumental case as in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:21|.

rwp@Galatians:6:12 @{To make a fair show} (\eupros“pˆsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \eupros“pe“\, late verb from \eupros“pos\, fair of face (\eu, pros“pon\). Here only in N.T., but one example in papyri (Tebt. I. 19 12 B.C. 114) which shows what may happen to any of our N.T. words not yet found elsewhere. It is in Chrysostom and later writers. {They compel} (\anagkazousin\). Conative present active indicative, "they try to compel." {For the cross of Christ} (\t“i staur“i tou Christou\). Instrumental case (causal use, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 532). Cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:2:13|. "For professing the cross of Christ" (Lightfoot).

rwp@Galatians:6:14 @{Far be it from me} (\emoi mˆ genoito\). Second aorist middle optative of \ginomai\ in a negative (\mˆ\) wish about the future with dative case: "May it not happen to me." See strkjv@2:17|. The infinitive \kauchƒsthai\ (to glory) is the subject of \genoito\ as is common in the LXX, though not elsewhere in the N.T. {Hath been crucified unto me} (\emoi estaur“tai\). Perfect passive indicative of \stauro“\, stands crucified, with the ethical dative again (\emoi\). This is one of the great sayings of Paul concerning his relation to Christ and the world in contrast with the Judaizers. Cf. strkjv@2:19f.; strkjv@3:13; strkjv@4:4f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:23f.; strkjv@Romans:1:16; strkjv@3:21ff.; strkjv@4:25; strkjv@5:18|. {World} (\kosmos\) has no article, but is definite as in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:19|. Paul's old world of Jewish descent and environment is dead to him (Phillipians:3:3f.|).

rwp@Galatians:6:18 @The farewell salutation is much briefer than that in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:13|, but identical with that in strkjv@Philemon:1:25|. He calls them "brethren" (\adelphoi\) in spite of the sharp things spoken to them.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION UNSETTLED PROBLEMS Probably no book in the New Testament presents more unsettled problems than does the Epistle to the Hebrews. On that score it ranks with the Fourth Gospel, the Apocalypse of John, and Second Peter. But, in spite of these unsolved matters, the book takes high rank for its intellectual grasp, spiritual power, and its masterful portrayal of Christ as High Priest. It is much briefer than the Fourth Gospel, but in a sense it carries on further the exalted picture of the Risen Christ as the King-Priest who reigns and pleads for us now.

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

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE STYLE It is called an epistle and so it is, but of a peculiar kind. In fact, as has been said, it begins like a treatise, proceeds like a sermon, and concludes like a letter. It is, in fact, more like a literary composition than any other New Testament book as Deissmann shows: "It points to the fact that the Epistle to the Hebrews, with its more definitely artistic, more literary language (corresponding to its more theological subject matter), constituted an epoch in the history of the new religion. Christianity is beginning to lay hands on the instruments of culture; the literary and theological period has begun" (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 70f.). But Blass (_Die Rhythmen der asianischen und romischen Kunstprosa_, 1905) argues that the author of Hebrews certainly and Paul probably were students of Greek oratory and rhetoric. He is clearly wrong about Paul and probably so about the author of Hebrews. There is in Hebrews more of "a studied rhetorical periodicity" (Thayer), but with many "parenthetical involutions" (Westcott) and with less of "the impetuous eloquence of Paul." The eleventh chapter reveals a studied style and as a whole the Epistle belongs to the literary _Koin‚_ rather than to the vernacular. Moulton (_Cambridge Biblical Essays_, p. 483) thinks that the author did not know Hebrew but follows the Septuagint throughout in his abundant use of the Old Testament.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE AUTHOR Origen bluntly wrote: "Who wrote the Epistle God only knows certainly" as quoted by Eusebius. Origen held that the thoughts were Paul's while Clement of Rome or Luke may have written the book. Clement of Alexandria (Eusebius says) thought that Paul wrote it in Hebrew and that Luke translated it into Greek. No early writer apparently attributed the Greek text to Paul. Eusebius thought it was originally written in Hebrew whether by Paul or not and translated by Clement of Rome. But there is no certainty anywhere in the early centuries. It was accepted first in the east and later in the west which first rejected it. But Jerome and Augustine accepted it. When the Renaissance came Erasmus had doubts, Luther attributed it to Apollos, Calvin denied the Pauline authorship. In North Africa it was attributed to Barnabas. In modern times Harnack has suggested Priscilla, but the masculine participle in strkjv@Hebrews:11:32| (\me diˆgoumenon\) disposes of that theory. The oldest Greek MSS. (Aleph A B) have simply \Pros Hebraious\ as the title, but they place it before the Pastoral Epistles, while the Textus Receptus puts it after the Pastoral Epistles and Philemon. In the light of all the facts one can only make a guess without a sense of certainty. For myself I should with Luther guess Apollos as the most likely author of this book which is full of the Spirit of God.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE RECIPIENTS If the title is allowed to be genuine or a fair interpretation of the Epistle, then it is addressed to Jewish (Hebrew) Christians in a local church somewhere. Dr. James Moffatt in his _Commentary_ (pp. xv to xvii) challenges the title and insists that the book is written for Gentile Christians as truly as First Peter. He argues this largely from the author's use of the LXX. For myself Dr. Moffatt's reasons are not convincing. The traditional view that the author is addressing Jewish Christians in a definite locality, whether a large church or a small household church, is true, I believe. The author seems clearly to refer to a definite church in the experiences alluded to in strkjv@Hebrews:10:32-34|. The church in Jerusalem had undergone sufferings like these, but we really do not know where the church was. Apparently the author is in Italy when he writes (Hebrews:13:24|), though "they of Italy" (\hoi apo tˆs Italias\) can mean those who have come from Italy. These Jewish Christians may even have lived in Rome itself.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE PURPOSE The author states it repeatedly. He urges the Jewish Christians to hold fast the confession which they have made in Jesus as Messiah and Saviour. Their Jewish neighbours have urged them to give up Christ and Christianity and to come back to Judaism. The Judaizers tried to make Jews out of Gentile Christians and to fasten Judaism upon Christianity with a purely sacramental type of religion as the result. Paul won freedom for evangelical and spiritual Christianity against the Judaizers as shown in the Corinthian Epistles, Galatians, and Romans. The Gnostics in subtle fashion tried to dilute Christianity with their philosophy and esoteric mysteries and here again Paul won his fight for the supremacy of Christ over all these imaginary \aeons\ (Colossians and Ephesians). But in Hebrews the author is battling to stop a stampede from Christ back to Judaism, a revolt (apostasy) in truth from the living God. These Jews argued that the prophets were superior to Jesus, the law came by the ministry of angels, Moses was greater than Jesus, and Aaron than Jesus. The author turns the argument on the Jews and boldly champions the Glory of Jesus as superior at every point to all that Judaism had, as God's Son and man's Saviour, the crown and glory of the Old Testament prophecy, the hope of mankind. It is the first great apologetic for Christianity and has never been surpassed. Moffatt terms it "a profound homily."

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@Hebrews:1:2 @{At the end of these days} (\ep' eschatou t“n hˆmer“n tout“n\). In contrast with \palai\ above. {Hath spoken} (\elalˆsen\). First aorist indicative of \lale“\, the same verb as above, "did speak" in a final and full revelation. {In his Son} (\en hui“i\). In sharp contrast to \en tois prophˆtais\. "The Old Testament slopes upward to Christ" (J. R. Sampey). No article or pronoun here with the preposition \en\, giving the absolute sense of "Son." Here the idea is not merely what Jesus said, but what he is (Dods), God's Son who reveals the Father (John:1:18|). "The revelation was a _son-revelation_" (Vincent). {Hath appointed} (\ethˆken\). First aorist (kappa aorist) active of \tithˆmi\, a timeless aorist. {Heir of all things} (\klˆronomon pant“n\). See strkjv@Mark:12:6| for \ho klˆronomos\ in Christ's parable, perhaps an allusion here to this parable (Moffatt). The idea of sonship easily passes into that of heirship (Galatians:4:7; strkjv@Romans:8:17|). See the claim of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:11:27; strkjv@28:18| even before the Ascension. {Through whom} (\di' hou\). The Son as Heir is also the Intermediate Agent (\dia\) in the work of creation as we have it in strkjv@Colossians:1:16f.; strkjv@John:1:3|. {The worlds} (\tous ai“nas\). "The ages" (_secula_, Vulgate). See strkjv@11:3| also where \tous ai“nas=ton kosmon\ (the world) or the universe like \ta panta\ (the all things) in strkjv@1:3; strkjv@Romans:11:36; strkjv@Colossians:1:16|. The original sense of \ai“n\ (from \aei\, always) occurs in strkjv@Hebrews:5:20|, but here "by metonomy of the container for the contained" (Thayer) for "the worlds" (the universe) as in LXX, Philo, Josephus.

rwp@Hebrews:1:3 @{Being} (\“n\). Absolute and timeless existence (present active participle of \eimi\) in contrast with \genomenos\ in verse 4| like \ˆn\ in strkjv@John:1:1| (in contrast with \egeneto\ in strkjv@1:14|) and like \huparch“n\ and \genomenos\ in strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f|. {The effulgence of his glory} (\apaugasma tˆs doxˆs\). The word \apaugasma\, late substantive from \apaugaz“\, to emit brightness (\augˆ, augaz“\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4|), here only in the N.T., but in Wisdom strkjv@7:26 and in Philo. It can mean either reflected brightness, refulgence (Calvin, Thayer) or effulgence (ray from an original light body) as the Greek fathers hold. Both senses are true of Christ in his relation to God as Jesus shows in plain language in strkjv@John:12:45; strkjv@14:9|. "The writer is using metaphors which had already been applied to Wisdom and the Logos" (Moffatt). The meaning "effulgence" suits the context better, though it gives the idea of eternal generation of the Son (John:1:1|), the term Father applied to God necessarily involving Son. See this same metaphor in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:6|. {The very image of his substance} (\charaktˆr tˆs hupostase“s\). \Charaktˆr\ is an old word from \charass“\, to cut, to scratch, to mark. It first was the agent (note ending \=tˆr\) or tool that did the marking, then the mark or impress made, the exact reproduction, a meaning clearly expressed by \charagma\ (Acts:17:29; strkjv@Revelation:13:16f.|). Menander had already used (Moffatt) \charaktˆr\ in the sense of our "character." The word occurs in the inscriptions for "person" as well as for "exact reproduction" of a person. The word \hupostasis\ for the being or essence of God "is a philosophical rather than a religious term" (Moffatt). Etymologically it is the sediment or foundation under a building (for instance). In strkjv@11:1| \hypostasis\ is like the "title-deed" idea found in the papyri. Athanasius rightly used strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4| in his controversy with Arius. Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11| pictures the real and eternal deity of Christ free from the philosophical language here employed. But even Paul's simpler phrase \morphˆ theou\ (the form of God) has difficulties of its own. The use of \Logos\ in strkjv@John:1:1-18| is parallel to strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4|. {And upholding} (\pher“n te\). Present active participle of \pher“\ closely connected with \“n\ (being) by \te\ and like strkjv@Colossians:1:17| in idea. The newer science as expounded by Eddington and Jeans is in harmony with the spiritual and personal conception of creation here presented. {By the word of his power} (\t“i rˆmati tˆs duname“s autou\). Instrumental case of \rˆma\ (word). See strkjv@11:3| for \rˆmati theou\ (by the word of God) as the explanation of creation like Genesis, but here \autou\ refers to God's Son as in strkjv@1:2|. {Purification of sins} (\katharismon t“n hamarti“n\). \Katharismos\ is from \kathariz“\, to cleanse (Matthew:8:3; strkjv@Hebrews:9:14|), here only in Hebrews, but in same sense of cleansing from sins, strkjv@2Peter:1:9; strkjv@Job:7:21|. Note middle participle \poiˆsamenos\ like \heuramenos\ in strkjv@9:12|. This is the first mention of the priestly work of Christ, the keynote of this Epistle. {Sat down} (\ekathisen\). First aorist active of \kathiz“\, "took his seat," a formal and dignified act. {Of the Majesty on high} (\tˆs megalosunˆs en hupsˆlois\). Late word from \megas\, only in LXX (Deuteronomy:32:3; strkjv@2Samuel:7:23|, etc.), Aristeas, strkjv@Hebrews:1:3; strkjv@8:1; strkjv@Jude:1:25|. Christ resumed his original dignity and glory (John:17:5|). The phrase \en hupsˆlois\ occurs in the Psalms (Psalms:93:4|), here only in N.T., elsewhere \en hupsistois\ in the highest (Matthew:21:9; strkjv@Luke:2:14|) or \en tois epouraniois\ in the heavenlies (Ephesians:1:3,20|). Jesus is here pictured as King (Prophet and Priest also) Messiah seated at the right hand of God.

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

rwp@Hebrews:1:6 @{And when he again bringeth in} (\hotan de palin eisagagˆi\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \eisag“\. If \palin\ is taken with \eisagagˆi\, the reference is to the Second Coming as in strkjv@9:28|. If \palin\ merely introduces another quotation (Psalms:97:7|) parallel to \kai palin\ in verse 5|, the reference is to the incarnation when the angels did worship the Child Jesus (Luke:2:13f.|). There is no way to decide certainly about it. {The first-born} (\ton pr“totokon\). See strkjv@Psalms:89:28|. For this compound adjective applied to Christ in relation to the universe see strkjv@Colossians:1:15|, to other men, strkjv@Romans:8:29; strkjv@Colossians:1:18|, to the other children of Mary, strkjv@Luke:2:7|; here it is used absolutely. {The world} (\tˆn oikoumenˆn\). "The inhabited earth." See strkjv@Acts:17:6|. {Let worship} (\proskunˆsat“san\). Imperative first aorist active third plural of \proskune“\, here in the full sense of worship, not mere reverence or courtesy. This quotation is from the LXX of strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:43|, but is not in the Hebrew, though most of the LXX MSS. (except F) have \huioi theou\, but the substance does occur also in strkjv@Psalms:97:7| with \hoi aggeloi autou\.

rwp@Hebrews:1:7 @{Of the angels} (\pros tous aggelous\). "With reference to" (\pros\) as in strkjv@Luke:20:9|. Songs:"of the Son" in verse 8|. Note \men\ here and \de\ in verse 8| in carefully balanced contrast. The quotation is from strkjv@Psalms:104:4|. {Winds} (\pneumata\). "Spirits" the word also means. The meaning (note article with \aggelous\, not with \pneumata\) apparently is one that can reduce angels to the elemental forces of wind and fire (Moffatt). {A flame of fire} (\puros phloga\). Predicate accusative of \phlox\, old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:16:24|. Lunemann holds that the Hebrew here is wrongly rendered and means that God makes the wind his messengers (not angels) and flaming fire his servants. That is all true, but that is not the point of this passage. Preachers also are sometimes like a wind-storm or a fire.

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

rwp@Hebrews:5:8 @{Though he was a Son} (\kaiper “n huios\). Concessive participle with \kaiper\, regular Greek idiom as in strkjv@7:5; strkjv@12:17|. {Yet learned obedience} (\emathen hupakoˆn\). Second aorist active indicative of \manthan“\. Succinct and crisp statement of the humanity of Jesus in full harmony with strkjv@Luke:2:40,52| and with strkjv@Hebrews:2:10|. {By the things which he suffered} (\aph' h“n epathen\). There is a play on the two verbs (\emathen--epathen\), paronomasia. Second aorist active indicative of \pasch“\. He always did his Father's will (John:8:29|), but he grew in experience as in wisdom and stature and in the power of sympathy with us.

rwp@James:1:11 @{Ariseth} (\aneteilen\). Gnomic or timeless aorist active indicative of the old compound \anatell“\, used here of plants (cf. \anathall“\ in strkjv@Phillipians:4:10|), often of the sun (Matthew:13:6|). {With the scorching wind} (\sun t“i kaus“ni\). Associative instrumental case with \sun\. In the LXX this late word (from \kausos\) is usually the sirocco, the dry east wind from the desert (Job:1:19|). In strkjv@Matthew:20:12; strkjv@Luke:12:55| it is the burning heat of the sun. Either makes sense here. {Withereth} (\exˆranen\). Another gnomic aorist active indicative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 837) of \xˆrain“\, old verb (from \xˆros\, dry or withered, strkjv@Matthew:12:10|), to dry up. Grass and flowers are often used to picture the transitoriness of human life. {Falleth} (\exepesen\). Another gnomic aorist (second aorist active indicative) of \ekpipt“\ to fall out (off). {The grace} (\hˆ euprepeia\). Old word (from \euprepˆs\ well-looking, not in the N.T.), only here in N.T. Goodly appearance, beauty. {Of the fashion of it} (\tou pros“pou autou\). "Of the face of it." The flower is pictured as having a "face," like a rose or lily. {Perisheth} (\ap“leto\). Another gnomic aorist (second aorist middle indicative of \apollumi\, to destroy, but intransitive here, to perish). The beautiful rose is pitiful when withered. {Shall fade away} (\maranthˆsetai\). Future passive indicative of \marain“\, old verb, to extinguish a flame, a light. Used of roses in Wisdom strkjv@2:8. {Goings} (\poreiais\). Old word from \poreu“\ to journey, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:13:22| (of Christ's journey toward Jerusalem). The rich man's travels will come to "journey's end."

rwp@James:1:12 @{Endureth} (\hupomenei\). Present active indicative of \hupomen“\. Cf. verse 3|. {Temptation} (\peirasmon\). Real temptation here. See verse 2| for "trials." {When he hath been approved} (\dokimos genomenos\). "Having become approved," with direct reference to \to dokimion\ in verse 3|. See also strkjv@Romans:5:4| for \dokimˆ\ (approval after test as of gold or silver). This beatitude (\makarios\) is for the one who has come out unscathed. See strkjv@1Timothy:6:9|. {The crown of life} (\ton stephanon tˆs z“ˆs\). The same phrase occurs in strkjv@Revelation:2:10|. It is the genitive of apposition, life itself being the crown as in strkjv@1Peter:5:4|. This crown is "an honourable ornament" (Ropes), with possibly no reference to the victor's crown (garland of leaves) as with Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:25; strkjv@2Timothy:4:8|, nor to the linen fillet (\diadˆma\) of royalty (Psalms:20:3|, where \stephanos\ is used like \diadˆma\, the kingly crown). \Stephanos\ has a variety of uses. Cf. the thorn chaplet on Jesus (Matthew:27:29|). {The Lord}. Not in the oldest Greek MSS., but clearly implied as the subject of \epˆggeilato\ ({he promised}, first aorist middle indicative).

rwp@James:1:13 @{Let no one say} (\mˆdeis leget“\). Present active imperative, prohibiting such a habit. {When he is tempted} (\peirazomenos\). Present passive participle of \peiraz“\, here in evil sense of tempt, not test, as in strkjv@Matthew:4:1|. Verses 12-18| give a vivid picture of temptation. {I am tempted of God} (\apo theou peirazomai\). The use of \apo\ shows origin (\apo\ with ablative case), not agency (\hupo\), as in strkjv@Mark:1:13|, of Satan. It is contemptible, but I have heard wicked and weak men blame God for their sins. Cf. strkjv@Proverbs:19:3|; Sirach strkjv@15:11f. Temptation does not spring "from God." {Cannot be tempted with evil} (\apeirastos kak“n\). Verbal compound adjective (alpha privative and \peiraz“\), probably with the ablative case, as is common with alpha privative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516), though Moulton (_Prolegomena_, p. 74) treats it as the genitive of definition. The ancient Greek has \apeiratos\ (from \peira“\), but this is the earliest example of \apeirastos\ (from \peiraz“\) made on the same model. Only here in the N.T. Hort notes \apeiratos kak“n\ as a proverb (Diodorus, Plutarch, Josephus) "free from evils." That is possible here, but the context calls for "untemptable" rather than "untempted." {And he himself tempteth no man} (\peirazei de autos oudena\). Because "untemptable."

rwp@James:1:15 @{Then} (\eita\). The next step. {The lust} (\hˆ epithumia\). Note article, the lust (verse 14|) which one has. {When it hath conceived} (\sullabousa\). Second aorist active participle of \sullamban“\, old word to grasp together, in hostile sense (Acts:26:21|), in friendly sense of help (Phillipians:4:3|), in technical sense of a woman taking a man's seed in conception (Luke:1:24|), here also of lust (as a woman), "having conceived." The will yields to lust and conception takes place. {Beareth sin} (\tiktei hamartian\). Present active indicative of \tikt“\ to bring forth as a mother or fruit from seed, old verb, often in N.T., here only in James. Sin is the union of the will with lust. See strkjv@Psalms:7:14| for this same metaphor. {The sin} (\hˆ hamartia\). The article refers to \hamartia\ just mentioned. {When it is full-grown} (\apotelestheisa\). First aorist passive participle of \apotele“\, old compound verb with perfective use of \apo\, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:13:32|. It does not mean "full-grown" like \teleio“\, but rather completeness of parts or functions as opposed to rudimentary state (Hort) like the winged insect in contrast with the chrysalis or grub (Plato). The sin at birth is fully equipped for its career (Romans:6:6; strkjv@Colossians:3:5|). {Bringeth forth death} (\apokuei thanaton\). Late compound (\kue“\ to be pregnant, perfective use of \apo\) to give birth to, of animals and women, for normal birth (papyrus example) and abnormal birth (Hort). A medical word (Ropes) rather than a literary one like \tikt“\. The child of lust is sin, of sin is death, powerful figure of abortion. The child is dead at birth. For death as the fruit of sin see strkjv@Romans:6:21-23; strkjv@8:6|. "The birth of death follows of necessity when one sin is fully formed" (Hort).

rwp@James:1:17 @{Gift} (\dosis\) {--boon} (\d“rˆma\). Both old substantives from the same original verb (\did“mi\), to give. \Dosis\ is the act of giving (ending \-sis\), but sometimes by metonymy for the thing given like \ktisis\ for \ktisma\ (Colossians:1:15|). But \d“rˆma\ (from \d“re“\, from \d“ron\ a gift) only means a gift, a benefaction (Romans:5:16|). The contrast here argues for "giving" as the idea in \dosis\. Curiously enough there is a perfect hexameter line here: \pƒsa do / sis aga / thˆ kai / pƒn d“ / rˆma te / leion\. Such accidental rhythm occurs occasionally in many writers. Ropes (like Ewald and Mayor) argues for a quotation from an unknown source because of the poetical word \d“rˆma\, but that is not conclusive. {From above} (\an“then\). That is, from heaven. Cf. strkjv@John:3:31; strkjv@19:11|. {Coming down} (\katabainon\). Present active neuter singular participle of \katabain“\ agreeing with \d“rˆma\, expanding and explaining \an“then\ (from above). {From the Father of lights} (\apo tou patros t“n ph“t“n\). "Of the lights" (the heavenly bodies). For this use of \patˆr\ see strkjv@Job:38:28| (Father of rain); strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3; strkjv@Ephesians:1:17|. God is the Author of light and lights. {With whom} (\par' h“i\). For \para\ (beside) with locative sense for standpoint of God see \para t“i the“i\ (Mark:10:27; strkjv@Romans:2:11; strkjv@9:14; strkjv@Ephesians:6:9|. {Can be no} (\ouk eni\). This old idiom (also in strkjv@Galatians:3:28; strkjv@Colossians:3:11|) may be merely the original form of \en\ with recessive accent (Winer, Mayor) or a shortened form of \enesti\. The use of \eni en\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:5| argues for this view, as does the use of \eine\ (\einai\) in Modern Greek (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 313). {Variation} (\parallagˆ\). Old word from \parallass“\, to make things alternate, here only in N.T. In Aristeas in sense of alternate stones in pavements. Dio Cassius has \parallaxis\ without reference to the modern astronomical parallax, though James here is comparing God (Father of the lights) to the sun (Malachi:4:2|), which does have periodic variations. {Shadow that is cast by turning} (\tropˆs aposkiasma\). \Tropˆ\ is an old word for "turning" (from \trep“\ to turn), here only in N.T. \Aposkiasma\ is a late and rare word (\aposkiasmos\ in Plutarch) from \aposkiaz“\ (\apo, skia\) a shade cast by one object on another. It is not clear what the precise metaphor is, whether the shadow thrown on the dial (\aposkiaz“\ in Plato) or the borrowed light of the moon lost to us as it goes behind the earth. In fact, the text is by no means certain, for Aleph B papyrus of fourth century actually read \hˆ tropˆs aposkiasmatos\ (the variation of the turning of the shadow). Ropes argues strongly for this reading, and rather convincingly. At any rate there is no such periodic variation in God like that we see in the heavenly bodies.

rwp@James:1:18 @{Of his own will} (\boulˆtheis\). First aorist passive participle of \boulomai\. Repeating the metaphor of birth in verse 15|, but in good sense. God as Father acted deliberately of set purpose. {He brought us forth} (\apekuˆsen\). First aorist active indicative of \apokue“\ (verse 15|), only here of the father (4 Macc. strkjv@15:17), not of the mother. Regeneration, not birth of all men, though God is the Father in the sense of creation of all men (Acts:17:28f.|). {By the word of truth} (\log“i alˆtheias\). Instrumental case \log“i\. The reference is thus to the gospel message of salvation even without the article (2Corinthians:6:7|) as here, and certainly with the article (Colossians:1:5; strkjv@Ephesians:1:13; strkjv@2Timothy:2:15|). The message marked by truth (genitive case \alˆtheias\). {That we should be} (\eis to einai hˆmƒs\). Purpose clause \eis to\ and the infinitive \einai\ with the accusative of general reference \hˆmƒs\ (as to us). {A kind of first-fruits} (\aparchˆn tina\). "Some first-fruits" (old word from \aparchomai\), of Christians of that age. See strkjv@Romans:16:5|.

rwp@James:1:19 @{Ye know this} (\iste\). Or "know this." Probably the perfect active indicative (literary form as in strkjv@Ephesians:5:5; strkjv@Hebrews:12:17|, unless both are imperative, while in strkjv@James:4:4| we have \oidate\, the usual vernacular _Koin‚_ perfect indicative). The imperative uses only \iste\ and only the context can decide which it is. \Esto\ (let be) is imperative. {Swift to hear} (\tachus eis to akousai\). For this use of \eis to\ with the infinitive after an adjective see strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:9|. For \eis to\ after adjectives see strkjv@Romans:16:19|. The picture points to listening to the word of truth (verse 18|) and is aimed against violent and disputatious speech (chapter strkjv@3:1-12|). The Greek moralists often urge a quick and attentive ear. {Slow to speak} (\bradus eis to lalˆsai\). Same construction and same ingressive aorist active infinitive, slow to begin speaking, not slow while speaking. {Slow to anger} (\bradus eis orgˆn\). He drops the infinitive here, but he probably means that slowness to speak up when angry will tend to curb the anger.

rwp@James:1:20 @{The wrath of man} (\orgˆ andros\). Here \anˆr\ (as opposed to \gunˆ\ woman), not \anthr“pos\ of verse 19| (inclusive of both man and woman). If taken in this sense, it means that a man's anger (settled indignation in contrast with \thumos\, boiling rage or fury) does not necessarily work God's righteousness. There is such a thing as righteous indignation, but one is not necessarily promoting the cause of God by his own personal anger. See strkjv@Acts:10:35| for "working righteousness," and strkjv@James:2:9| for "working sin" (\ergazomai\ both times).

rwp@James:1:21 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). Because of this principle. See strkjv@Ephesians:4:25|. {Putting away} (\apothemenoi\). Second aorist middle participle of \apotithˆmi\, to put off, metaphor of removing clothing as in strkjv@Romans:13:12; strkjv@Colossians:3:8; strkjv@Ephesians:4:22,25; strkjv@1Peter:2:1|. {Filthiness} (\ruparian\). Late word (Plutarch) from \ruparos\, dirty (James:2:2|), here only in N.T. Surely a dirty garment. {Overflowing of wickedness} (\perisseian kakias\). \Perisseia\ is a late word (from \perissos\, abundant, exceeding), only four times in N.T., in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:2| with \charas\ (of joy), in strkjv@Romans:5:17| with \charitos\ (of grace). \Kakia\ (from \kakos\, evil) can be either general like \ruparia\ (filthiness, naughtiness), or special like "malice." But any of either sense is a "superfluity." {With meekness} (\en pra–tˆti\). In docility. "The contrast is with \orgˆ\ rather than \kakias\" (Ropes). {The implanted word} (\ton emphuton logon\). This old verbal adjective (from \emphu“\ to implant, to grow in), only here in N.T., meaning properly ingrown, inborn, not \emphuteuton\ (engrafted). It is "the rooted word" (verse 18|), sown in the heart as the soil or garden of God (Matthew:13:3-23; strkjv@15:13; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:6|). {Able to save} (\dunamenon s“sai\). Cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:9; strkjv@James:2:14; strkjv@4:12; strkjv@5:20; strkjv@Romans:1:16|. Ultimate salvation (effective aorist active infinitive \s“sai\ from \s“z“\).

rwp@James:1:22 @{But be ye} (\ginesthe de\). Rather, "But keep on becoming" (present middle imperative of \ginomai\). {Doers of the word} (\poiˆtai logou\). Old word for agent (\-tˆs\) from \poie“\ to do as in strkjv@4:11; strkjv@Romans:2:13|, but in strkjv@Acts:17:28| our "poet" (long regarded as a "doer" or "maker"). {Hearers} (\akroatai\). Old word for agent again from \akroamai\ (to be a hearer), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:2:13|. {Deluding yourselves} (\paralogizomenoi heautous\). Present middle (direct) participle of \paralogizomai\, to reckon aside (\para\) and so wrong, to cheat, to deceive. Redundant reflexive \heautous\ with the middle. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Colossians:2:4|. Such a man does not delude anyone but himself.

rwp@James:1:23 @{And not a doer} (\kai ou poiˆtˆs\). Condition of first class, assumed as true, and \ou\ (rather than \mˆ\) contrasts \poiˆtˆs\ with \akroatˆs\. {Unto a man beholding} (\andri katanoounti\). Associative instrumental case after \eoiken\ as in strkjv@1:6|. Note \andri\ as in strkjv@1:8| in contrast with \gunaiki\ (woman), not \anthr“p“i\ (general term for man). Present active participle of \katanoe“\ to put the mind down on (\kata, nous\), to consider attentively, to take note of, as in verse 24| (\katenoˆsen\). {His natural face} (\to pros“pon tˆs genese“s autou\). "The face of his birth" (origin, lineage, nativity). For this use of \genesis\ see strkjv@3:6; strkjv@Matthew:1:1,18; strkjv@Luke:1:13|. {In a mirror} (\en esoptr“i\). Old word (from \eis, opt“\) in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:13:12|. The mirrors of the ancients were not of glass, but of polished metal (of silver or usually of copper and tin). See \katoptrizomai\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:18|.

rwp@James:1:24 @{He beholdeth himself} (\katenoˆsen heauton\). Usually explained as gnomic aorist like those in strkjv@1:11|, but the ordinary force of the tenses is best here. "He glanced at himself (\katenoˆsen\ aorist) and off he has gone (\apelˆluthen\ perfect active) and straightway forgot (\epelatheto\, second aorist middle indicative of \epilanthanomai\) what sort of a man he was" (\hopoios ˆn\, back in the picture, imperfect tense). The tenses thus present a vivid and lifelike picture of the careless listener to preaching (Christ's wayside hearer).

rwp@James:1:25 @{He that looketh into} (\ho parakupsas\). First aorist active articular participle of \parakupt“\, old verb, to stoop and look into (John:20:5,11|), to gaze carefully by the side of, to peer into or to peep into (1Peter:1:12|). Here the notion of beside (\para\) or of stooping (\kupt“\) is not strong. Sometimes, as Hort shows, the word means only a cursory glance, but the contrast with verse 24| seems to preclude that here. {The perfect law} (\nomon teleion\). For \teleion\ see strkjv@1:17|. See strkjv@Romans:7:12| for Paul's idea of the law of God. James here refers to the word of truth (1:18|), the gospel of grace (Galatians:6:2; strkjv@Romans:12:2|). {The law of liberty} (\ton tˆs eleutherias\). "That of liberty," explaining why it is "perfect" (2:12| also), rests on the work of Christ, whose truth sets us free (John:8:32; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:16; strkjv@Romans:8:2|). {And so continueth} (\kai parameinas\). First aorist active articular participle again of \paramen“\, parallel with \parakupsas\. \Paramen“\ is to stay beside, and see strkjv@Phillipians:1:25| for contrast with the simplex \men“\. {Being} (\genomenos\). Rather, "having become" (second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\ to become). {Not a hearer that forgetteth} (\ouk akroatˆs epilˆsmonˆs\). "Not a hearer of forgetfulness" (descriptive genitive, marked by forgetfulness). \Epilˆsmonˆ\ is a late and rare word (from \epilˆsm“n\, forgetful, from \epilanthomai\, to forget, as in verse 24|), here only in N.T. {But a doer that worketh} (\alla poiˆtˆs ergou\). "But a doer of work," a doer marked by work (descriptive genitive \ergou\), not by mere listening or mere talk. {In his doing} (\en tˆi poiˆsei autou\). Another beatitude with \makarios\ as in strkjv@1:12|, like the Beatitudes in strkjv@Matthew:5:3-12|. \Poiˆsis\ is an old word (from \poie“\ for the act of doing), only here in N.T.

rwp@James:1:26 @{Thinketh himself to be religious} (\dokei thrˆskos einai\). Condition of first class (\ei-dokei\). \Thrˆskos\ (of uncertain etymology, perhaps from \threomai\, to mutter forms of prayer) is predicate nominative after \einai\, agreeing with the subject of \dokei\ (either "he seems" or "he thinks"). This source of self-deception is in saying and doing. The word \thrˆskos\ is found nowhere else except in lexicons. Hatch (_Essays in Biblical Greek_, pp. 55-57) shows that it refers to the external observances of public worship, such as church attendance, almsgiving, prayer, fasting (Matthew:6:1-18|). It is the Pharisaic element in Christian worship. {While he bridleth not his tongue} (\mˆ chalinag“g“n gl“ssan heautou\). "Not bridling his own tongue." A reference to verse 19| and the metaphor is repeated in strkjv@3:12|. This is the earliest known example of the compound \chalinag“ge“\ (\chalinos\, bridle \ago\, to lead). It occurs also in Lucian. The picture is that of a man putting the bridle in his own mouth, not in that of another. See the similar metaphor of muzzling (\phimo“\) one's mouth (Matthew:22:12| \ephim“thˆ\). {Deceiveth} (\apat“n\). Present active participle from \apatˆ\ (deceit). He plays a trick on himself. {Religion} (\thrˆskeia\). Later form of \thrˆskiˆ\ (Herodotus) from \thrˆskos\ above. It means religious worship in its external observances, religious exercise or discipline, but not to the exclusion of reverence. In the N.T. we have it also in strkjv@Acts:26:5| of Judaism and in strkjv@Colossians:2:18| of worshipping angels. It is vain (\mataios\, feminine form same as masculine) or empty. Comes to nothing.

rwp@James:1:27 @{Pure religion and undefiled} (\thrˆskeia kathara kai amiantos\). Numerous examples in papyri and inscriptions of \thrˆskeia\ for ritual and reverential worship in the Roman Empire (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_; Deissmann, _St. Paul_, p. 251). As Hort shows, this is not a definition of religion or religious worship, but only a pertinent illustration of the right spirit of religion which leads to such acts. {Before our God and Father} (\para t“i the“i kai patri\). By the side of (\para\) and so from God's standpoint (Mark:10:27|). \Amiantos\ (compound verbal adjective, alpha privative, \miain“\ to defile), puts in negative form (cf. strkjv@1:4,6|) the idea in \kathara\ (pure, clean). This (\hautˆ\). Feminine demonstrative pronoun in the predicate agreeing with \thrˆskeia\. {To visit} (\episkeptesthai\). Epexegetic (explaining \hautˆ\) present middle infinitive of \episkeptomai\, common verb to go to see, to inspect, present tense for habit of going to see. See strkjv@Matthew:25:36,43| for visiting the sick. {The fatherless and widows} (\orphanous kai chˆras\). "The natural objects of charity in the community" (Ropes). \Orphanos\ is old word for bereft of father or mother or both. In N.T. only here and strkjv@John:14:18|. Note order (orphans before widows). {Unspotted} (\aspilon\). Old adjective (alpha privative and \spilos\, spot), spotless. This the more important of the two illustrations and the hardest to execute. {To keep} (\tˆrein\). Present active infinitive, "to keep on keeping oneself un-specked from the world" (a world, \kosmos\, full of dirt and slime that bespatters the best of men).

rwp@James:2:1 @{My brethren} (\adelphoi mou\). Transition to a new topic as in strkjv@1:19; strkjv@2:5,14; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@5:7|. {Hold not} (\mˆ echete\). Present active imperative of \ech“\ with negative \mˆ\, exhortation to stop holding or not to have the habit of holding in the fashion condemned. {The faith of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\tˆn pistin tou kuriou hˆm“n Iˆsou Christou\). Clearly objective genitive, not subjective (faith of), but "faith in our Lord Jesus Christ," like \echete pistin theou\ (Mark:11:22|), "have faith in God." See the same objective genitive with \pistis\ in strkjv@Acts:3:6; strkjv@Galatians:2:16; strkjv@Romans:3:22; strkjv@Revelation:14:12|. Note also the same combination as in strkjv@1:1| "our Lord Jesus Christ" (there on a par with God). {The Lord of Glory} (\tˆs doxˆs\). Simply "the Glory." No word for "Lord" (\kuriou\) in the Greek text. \Tˆs doxˆs\ clearly in apposition with \tou kuriou Iˆsou Christou\. James thus terms "our Lord Jesus Christ" the Shekinah Glory of God. See strkjv@Hebrews:9:5| for "the cherubim of Glory." Other New Testament passages where Jesus is pictured as the Glory are strkjv@Romans:9:4; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:6; strkjv@Ephesians:1:17; strkjv@Hebrews:1:3|. Cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|. {With respect of persons} (\en pros“polˆmpsiais\). A Christian word, like \pros“polˆmptˆs\ (Acts:10:34|) and \pros“polˆmpteite\ (James:2:9|), not in LXX or any previous Greek, but made from \pros“pon lambanein\ (Luke:20:21; strkjv@Galatians:2:6|), which is \a\ Hebrew idiom for _panim nasa_, "to lift up the face on a person," to be favorable and so partial to him. See \pros“polˆmpsia\ in this sense of partiality (respect of persons) in strkjv@Romans:2:11; strkjv@Colossians:3:25; strkjv@Ephesians:6:9| (nowhere else in N.T.). Do not show partiality.

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:2:4 @{Are ye not divided in your own mind?} (\ou diekrithˆte en heautois;\). First aorist (gnomic) passive indicative of \diakrin“\, to separate, conclusion of the third-class condition (future) in a rhetorical question in the gnomic aorist (as if past) with ou expecting an affirmative answer. For this idiom (gnomic aorist) in a conclusion of the third-class condition see strkjv@1Corinthians:7:28|. "Were ye not divided in (among) yourselves?" Cf. strkjv@1:6; strkjv@Matthew:21:21|. {Judges with evil thoughts} (\kritai dialogism“n ponˆr“n\). Descriptive genitive as in strkjv@1:25|. \Dialogismos\ is an old word for reasoning (Romans:1:21|). Reasoning is not necessarily evil, but see strkjv@Matthew:15:19| (\ponˆroi\) and strkjv@Mark:7:21| (\kakoi\) for evil reasonings, and strkjv@1Timothy:2:8| without an adjective. See strkjv@James:1:8; strkjv@4:8| for \dipsuchos\. They are guilty of partiality (a divided mind) as between the two strangers.

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:2:6 @{But ye have dishonoured the poor man} (\humeis de ˆtimasate ton pt“chon\). First aorist active indicative of \atimaz“\, old verb from \atimos\, dishonoured (Matthew:13:57|). In the act of partiality pictured in strkjv@2:3|. {Oppress you} (\katadunasteuousin hum“n\). Not very common compound (\katadunasteu“\, present active indicative, from \kata\ and \dunastˆs\, potentate, strkjv@Luke:1:52|), used of the devil in strkjv@Acts:10:38| (only other N.T. example). Examples in papyri of harsh treatment by men in authority. Already poor Christians are feeling pressure from rich Jews as overlords. {Drag you} (\helkousin humas\). Old and vigorous word for violent treatment, as of Paul in strkjv@Acts:16:19; strkjv@21:30|. Cf. such violence in strkjv@Luke:12:58; strkjv@Acts:8:3|. {Before the judgment-seats} (\eis kritˆria\). "To courts of justice" as in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:2,4| (only other N.T. examples). Common in the papyri in this sense. From \krin“\ to judge, \kritˆs\ (judge), place where judgment is given.

rwp@James:2:8 @{Howbeit} (\mentoi\). Probably not adversative here, but simply confirmatory, "if now," "if indeed," "if really." Common in Xenophon in this sense. See the contrast (\de\) in verse 9|. {If ye fulfil} (\ei teleite\). Condition of first class, assumed as true with \ei\ and present active indicative of \tele“\, old verb, to bring to completion, occurring in strkjv@Romans:2:27| also with \nomos\ (law). Jesus used \plˆro“\ in strkjv@Matthew:4:17|. James has \tˆre“\ in strkjv@2:10|. {The royal law} (\nomon basilikon\). Old adjective for royal, regal (from \basileus\ king), as of an officer (John:4:46|). But why applied to \nomos\? The Romans had a phrase, _lex regia_, which came from the king when they had kings. The absence of the article is common with \nomos\ (4:11|). It can mean a law fit to guide a king, or such as a king would choose, or even the king of laws. Jesus had said that on the law of love hang all the law and the prophets (Matthew:22:40|), and he had given the Golden Rule as the substance of the Law and the prophets (Matthew:7:12|). This is probably the royal law which is violated by partiality (James:2:3|). It is in accord with the Scripture quoted here (Leviticus:19:18|) and ratified by Jesus (Luke:10:28|).

rwp@James:2:9 @{But if ye have respect of persons} (\ei de pros“polˆmpteite\). Condition of first class by contrast with that in verse 8|. For this verb (present active indicative), formed from \pros“pon lamban“\, here alone in the N.T., see in strkjv@2:1|. A direct reference to the partiality there pictured. {Ye commit sin} (\hamartian ergazesthe\). "Ye work a sin." A serious charge, apparently, for what was regarded as a trifling fault. See strkjv@Matthew:7:23|, \hoi ergazomenoi tˆn anomian\ (ye that work iniquity), an apparent reminiscence of the words of Jesus there (from strkjv@Psalms:6:8|). {Being convicted} (\elegchomenoi\). Present passive participle of \elegch“\, to convict by proof of guilt (John:3:20; strkjv@8:9,46; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:24|). {As transgressors} (\h“s parabatai\). For this word from \parabain“\, to step across, to transgress, see strkjv@Galatians:2:18; strkjv@Romans:2:25,27|. See this very sin of partiality condemned in strkjv@Leviticus:19:15; strkjv@Deuteronomy:1:17; strkjv@16:19|. To the law and to the testimony.

rwp@James:2:10 @{Whosoever shall keep} (\hostis tˆrˆsˆi\). Indefinite relative clause with \hostis\ and aorist active subjunctive of \tˆre“\, old verb, to guard (from \tˆros\ guarding), as in strkjv@Matthew:27:36|, without \an\ (though often used, but only one example of modal \ean=an\ in James, viz., strkjv@4:4|). This modal \an\ (\ean\) merely interprets the sentence as either more indefinite or more definite (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 957f.). {And yet stumble in one point} (\ptaisˆi de en heni\). First aorist active subjunctive also of \ptai“\, old verb, to trip, as in strkjv@3:2; strkjv@Romans:11:11|. "It is incipient falling" (Hort). {He is become} (\gegonen\). Second perfect indicative of \ginomai\, "he has become" by that one stumble. {Guilty of all} (\pant“n enochos\). Genitive of the crime with \enochos\, old adjective from \enech“\ (to hold on or in), held in, as in strkjv@Mark:3:29|. This is law. To be a lawbreaker one does not have to violate all the laws, but he must keep all the law (\holon ton nomon\) to be a law-abiding citizen, even laws that one does not like. See strkjv@Matthew:5:18f.| for this same principle. There is Talmudic parallel: "If a man do all, but omit one, he is guilty for all and each." This is a pertinent principle also for those who try to save themselves. But James is urging obedience to all God's laws.

rwp@James:2:11 @{He that said} (\ho eip“n\) {--said also} (\eipen kai\). The unity of the law lies in the Lawgiver who spoke both prohibitions (\mˆ\ and the aorist active subjunctive in each one, \moicheusˆis, phoneusˆis\). The order here is that of B in strkjv@Exodus:20| (Luke:18:20; strkjv@Romans:13:9|), but not in strkjv@Matthew:5:21,27| (with \ou\ and future indicative). {Now if thou dost not commit adultery, but killest} (\ei de ou moicheueis, phoneueis de\). Condition of first class with \ou\ (not \mˆ\) because of the contrast with \de\, whereas \ei mˆ\ would mean "unless," a different idea. Songs:\ou\ in strkjv@1:23|. {A transgressor of the law} (\parabatˆs nomou\) as in verse 9|. Murder springs out of anger (Matthew:5:21-26|). People free from fleshly sins have often "made their condemnation of fleshly sins an excuse for indulgence towards spiritual sins" (Hort).

rwp@James:2:12 @{Songs:speak ye, and so do} (\hout“s laleite kai hout“s poieite\). Present active imperatives as a habit. For the combination see strkjv@1:19-21| contrasted with strkjv@1:22-25|, and strkjv@1:26| with strkjv@1:27|. {By a law of liberty} (\dia nomou eleutherias\). The law pictured in strkjv@1:25|, but law, after all, not individual caprice of "personal liberty." See strkjv@Romans:2:12| for this same use of \dia\ with \krin“\ in the sense of accompaniment as in strkjv@Romans:2:27; strkjv@4:11; strkjv@14:20|. "Under the law of liberty."

rwp@James:2:14 @{What doth it profit?} (\ti ophelos;\). Rhetorical question, almost of impatience. Old word from \ophell“\, to increase, in N.T. only here, verse 16; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:32|. "\Ti ophelos\ was a common expression in the vivacious style of a moral diatribe" (Ropes). {If a man say} (\ean legˆi tis\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and the present active subjunctive of \leg“\, "if one keep on saying." {He hath faith} (\pistin echein\). Infinitive in indirect assertion after \legˆi\. {But have not works} (\erga de mˆ echˆi\). Third-class condition continued, "but keeps on not having (\mˆ\ and present active subjunctive \echˆi\) works." It is the spurious claim to faith that James here condemns. {Can that faith save him?} (\mˆ dunatai hˆ pistis s“sai auton;\). Negative answer expected (\mˆ\). Effective aorist active infinitive \s“sai\ (from \s“z“\). The article \hˆ\ here is almost demonstrative in force as it is in origin, referring to the claim of faith without works just made.

rwp@James:2:15 @{If a brother or sister be naked} (\ean adelphos ˆ adelphˆ gumnoi huparch“sin\). Condition again of third class (supposable case) with \ean\ and present active subjunctive of \huparch“\, to exist, in the plural though \ˆ\ (or) is used and not \kai\ (and). Hence \gumnoi\ is masculine plural in the predicate nominative. It does not here mean absolutely naked, but without sufficient clothing as in strkjv@Matthew:25:36ff.; strkjv@John:21:7; strkjv@Acts:19:16|. {In lack of daily food} (\leipomenoi tˆs ephˆmerou trophˆs\). Present passive participle of \leip“\ and ablative case \trophˆs\ like \leipetai sophias\ (1:5|). The old adjective \ephˆmeros\ (\ho epi hˆmeran “n\, that which is for a day) occurs here only in the N.T., though \ephˆmeria\ (daily routine) is found in strkjv@Luke:1:5,8|. This phrase occurs in Diodorus, but not in LXX.

rwp@James:2:16 @{And one of you say unto them} (\eipˆi de tis autois ex hum“n\). Third-class condition again continued from verse 15| with second aorist active subjunctive \eipˆi\. {Go in peace} (\hupagete en eirˆnˆi\). Present active imperative of \hupag“\. Common Jewish farewell (Judges:18:6; strkjv@1Samuel:1:17; strkjv@20:42; strkjv@2Samuel:15:9|). Used by Jesus (Mark:5:34; strkjv@Luke:7:50|). {Be ye warmed and filled} (\thermainesthe kai chortazesthe\). Present imperative either middle (direct) or passive. We have \thermainomai\ as a direct middle in strkjv@John:18:18| (were warming themselves) and that makes good sense here: "Warm yourselves." \Chortaz“\ was originally used for pasturing cattle, but came to be used of men also as here. "Feed yourselves" (if middle, as is likely). Instead of warm clothes and satisfying food they get only empty words to look out for themselves. {And yet ye give not} (\mˆ d“te de\). Third-class condition with \de\ (and yet) and \mˆ\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \did“mi\, to give, cold deeds with warm words. {The things needful to the body} (\ta epitˆdeia tou s“matos\). "The necessities of the body" (the necessaries of life). Old adjective from adverb \epitˆdes\ (enough), only here in N.T. {What doth it profit?} (\ti ophelos;\). As in verse 14| and here the conclusion (apodosis) of the long condition begun in verse 15|.

rwp@James:2:18 @{Yea, a man will say} (\all' erei tis\). Future active of \eipon\. But \all'\ here is almost certainly adversative (But some one will say), not confirmatory. James introduces an imaginary objector who speaks one sentence: "Thou hast faith and I have works" (\Su pistin echeis kag“ erga ech“\). Then James answers this objector. The objector can be regarded as asking a short question: "Hast thou faith?" In that case James replies: "I have works also." {Show me thy faith apart from thy works} (\deixon moi tˆn pistin sou ch“ris t“n erg“n\). This is the reply of James to the objector. First aorist active imperative of \deiknumi\, tense of urgency. The point lies in \ch“ris\, which means not "without," but "apart from," as in strkjv@Hebrews:11:6| (with the ablative case), "the works that properly belong to it and should characterise it" (Hort). James challenges the objector to do this. {And I by my works will shew thee my faith} (\kag“ soi deix“ ek t“n erg“n mou tˆn pistin\). It is not faith _or_ works, but proof of real faith (live faith _vs_. dead faith). The mere profession of faith with no works or profession of faith shown to be alive by works. This is the alternative clearly stated. Note \pistin\ (faith) in both cases. James is not here discussing "works" (ceremonial works) as a means of salvation as Paul in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:4|, but works as proof of faith.

rwp@James:2:19 @{Thou believest that God is one} (\su pisteueis hoti heis theos estin\). James goes on with his reply and takes up mere creed apart from works, belief that God exists (there is one God), a fundamental doctrine, but that is not belief or trust in God. It may be mere creed. {Thou doest well} (\kal“s poieis\). That is good as far as it goes, which is not far. {The demons also believe} (\kai ta daimonia pisteuousin\). They go that far (the same verb \pisteu“\). They never doubt the fact of God's existence. {And shudder} (\kai phrissousin\). Present active indicative of \phriss“\, old onomatopoetic verb to bristle up, to shudder, only here in N.T. Like Latin _horreo_ (horror, standing of the hair on end with terror). The demons do more than believe a fact. They shudder at it.

rwp@James:2:20 @{But wilt thou know?} (\theleis de gn“nai?\). "But dost thou wish to know?" Ingressive aorist active infinitive of \ginosk“\ (come to know). James here introduces a new argument like strkjv@Romans:13:3|. {O vain man} (\“ anthr“pe kene\). Goes on with the singular objector and demolishes him. For "empty" (deficient) Paul uses \aphr“n\ (fool) in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:36| and just \anthr“pe\ in strkjv@Romans:2:1; strkjv@9:20|. {Barren} (\arge\). See strkjv@2Peter:1:8| (not idle nor unfruitful) and strkjv@Matthew:12:36|, but Hort urges "inactive" as the idea here, like money with no interest and land with no crops.

rwp@James:2:21 @{Justified by works} (\ex erg“n edikai“thˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \dikaio“\ (see Galatians and Romans for this verb, to declare righteous, to set right) in a question with \ouk\ expecting an affirmative answer. This is the phrase that is often held to be flatly opposed to Paul's statement in strkjv@Romans:4:1-5|, where Paul pointedly says that it was the faith of Abraham (Romans:4:9|) that was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness, not his works. But Paul is talking about the faith of Abraham before his circumcision (4:10|) as the basis of his being set right with God, which faith is symbolized in the circumcision. James makes plain his meaning also. {In that he offered up Isaac his son upon the altar} (\anenegkas Isaak ton huion autou epi to thusiastˆrion\). They use the same words, but they are talking of different acts. James points to the offering (\anenegkas\ second aorist--with first aorist ending--active participle of \anapher“\) of Isaac on the altar (Genesis:22:16f.|) as _proof_ of the faith that Abraham already had. Paul discusses Abraham's faith as the basis of his justification, that and not his circumcision. There is no contradiction at all between James and Paul. Neither is answering the other. Paul may or may not have seen the Epistle of James, who stood by him loyally in the Conference in Jerusalem (Acts:15; strkjv@Galatians:2|).

rwp@James:5:2 @{Riches} (\ho ploutos\). Masculine singular, but occasionally neuter \to ploutos\ in nominative and accusative (2Corinthians:8:2|). Apparently \pleotos\ fulness (from \pleos\ full, \pimplˆmi\ to fill). "Wealth." {Are corrupted} (\sesˆpen\). Second perfect active indicative of \sˆp“\ (root \sap\ as in \sapros\, rotten), to corrupt, to destroy, here intransitive "has rotted." Only here in N.T. On the worthlessness of mere wealth see strkjv@Matthew:6:19,24|. {Were moth-eaten} (\sˆtobr“ta gegonen\). "Have become (second perfect indicative of \ginomai\, singular number, though \himatia\, neuter plural, treated collectively) moth-eaten" (\sˆtobr“ta\, late and rare compound from \sˆs\, moth, strkjv@Matthew:6:19f.| and \br“tos\, verbal adjective of \bibr“sk“\ to eat strkjv@John:6:13|. This compound found only here, strkjv@Job:13:28|, Sibyll. Orac. _Proem_. 64). Rich robes as heirlooms, but moth-eaten. Vivid picture. Witness the 250 "lost millionaires" in the United States in 1931 as compared with 1929. Riches have wings.

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

rwp@James:5:11 @{We call blessed} (\makarizomen\). Old word (present active indicative of \makariz“\), from \makarios\ (happy), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:1:48|. "We felicitate." As in strkjv@1:3,12; strkjv@Daniel:12:12|. {Ye have heard} (\ˆkousate\). First aorist (constative) active indicative of \akou“\. As in strkjv@Matthew:5:21,27,33,38,43|. Ropes suggests in the synagogues. {Of Job} (\I“b\). Job:did complain, but he refused to renounce God (Job:1:21; strkjv@2:10; strkjv@13:15; strkjv@16:19; strkjv@19:25f.|). He had become a stock illustration of loyal endurance. {Ye have seen} (\eidete\). Second aorist (constative) active indicative of \hora“\. In Job's case. {The end of the Lord} (\to telos kuriou\). The conclusion wrought by the Lord in Job's case (Job:42:12|). {Full of pity} (\polusplagchnos\). Late and rare compound (\polus, splagchnon\), only here in N.T. It occurs also in Hermas (_Sim_. v. 7. 4; _Mand_. iv, 3). "Very kind." {Merciful} (\oiktirm“n\). Late and rare adjective (from \oikteir“\ to pity), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:6:36|.

rwp@James:5:12 @{Above all things} (\pro pant“n\). No connection with what immediately precedes. Probably an allusion to the words of Jesus (Matthew:5:34-37|). It is not out of place here. See the same phrase in strkjv@1Peter:4:8|. Robinson (_Ephesians_, p. 279) cites like examples from the papyri at the close of letters. Here it means "But especially" (Ropes). {Swear not} (\mˆ omnuete\). Prohibition of the habit (or to quit doing it if guilty) with \mˆ\ and the present active imperative of \omnu“\. The various oaths (profanity) forbidden (\mˆte\, thrice) are in the accusative case after \omnuete\, according to rule (\ouranon, gˆn, horkon\). The Jews were wont to split hairs in their use of profanity, and by avoiding God's name imagine that they were not really guilty of this sin, just as professing Christians today use "pious oaths" which violate the prohibition of Jesus. {Let be} (\ˆt“\). Imperative active third singular of \eimi\, late form (1Corinthians:16:22|) for \est“\. "Your yea be yea" (and no more). A different form from that in strkjv@Matthew:5:37|. {That ye fall not under judgment} (\hina mˆ hupo krisin pesˆte\). Negative purpose with \hina mˆ\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \pipt“\, to fall. See \hina mˆ krithˆte\ in verse 9|. \Krisis\ (from \krin“\) is the act of judging rather than the judgment rendered (\krima\ strkjv@James:3:1|).

rwp@James:5:15 @{The prayer of faith} (\hˆ euchˆ tˆs piste“s\). Cf. strkjv@1:6| for prayer marked by faith. {Shall save} (\s“sei\). Future active of \s“z“\, to make well. As in strkjv@Matthew:9:21f.; strkjv@Mark:6:56|. No reference here to salvation of the soul. The medicine does not heal the sick, but it helps nature (God) do it. The doctor cooperates with God in nature. {The sick} (\ton kamnonta\). Present active articular participle of \kamn“\, old verb, to grow weary (Hebrews:12:3|), to be sick (here), only N.T. examples. {The Lord shall raise him up} (\egerei auton ho kurios\). Future active of \egeir“\. Precious promise, but not for a professional "faith-healer" who scoffs at medicine and makes merchandise out of prayer. {And if he have committed sins} (\kan hamartias ˆi pepoiˆk“s\). Periphrastic perfect active subjunctive (unusual idiom) with \kai ean\ (crasis \kan\) in condition of third class. Supposing that he has committed sins as many sick people have (Mark:2:5ff.; strkjv@John:5:14; strkjv@9:2f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:30|). {It shall be forgiven him} (\aphethˆsetai aut“i\). Future passive of \aphiˆmi\ (impersonal passive as in strkjv@Matthew:7:2,7; strkjv@Romans:10:10|). Not in any magical way, not because his sickness has been healed, not without change of heart and turning to God through Christ. Much is assumed here that is not expressed.

rwp@James:5:16 @{Confess therefore your sins one to another} (\exomologeisthe oun allˆlois tas hamartias\). Present middle (indirect) of \exomologe“\. Confession of sin to God is already assumed. But public confession of certain sins to one another in the meetings is greatly helpful in many ways. This is not confessing to one man like a priest in place of the public confession. One may confess to the pastor without confessing to God or to the church, with little benefit to anybody. {Pray for one another} (\proseuchesthe huper allˆl“n\). Present middle imperative. Keep this up. {That ye may be healed} (\hop“s iathˆte\). Purpose clause with \hop“s\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \iaomai\. Probably of bodily healing (verse 14|), though \iaomai\ is used also of healing of the soul (Matthew:13:15; strkjv@1Peter:2:24; strkjv@Hebrews:12:13|) as Mayor takes it here. {Availeth much} (\polu ischuei\). "Has much force." Present active indicative of \ischu“\ (from \ischus\, strength). {In its working} (\energoumenˆ\). Probably the present middle participle of \energe“\ as Paul apparently uses it in strkjv@Galatians:5:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:12; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:7|, meaning "when it works." The passive is possible, as is the usual idiom elsewhere. Mayor argues strongly for the passive here, "when it is exercised" (Ropes).

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@James:5:18 @{Gave rain} (\hueton ed“ken\). This idiom is in the LXX of God as here of heaven (1Samuel:12:17; strkjv@1Kings:18:1|) and also in strkjv@Acts:14:17| instead of \ebrexen\ of verse 17|. \Hueton\ is old word for rain (from \hu“\, to rain), genuine here, but not in verse 7|. {Brought forth} (\eblastˆsen\). First aorist active of \blastan“\, old verb, to sprout (intransitive as strkjv@Mark:4:27|), here as occasionally in later Greek transitive with accusative \karpon\.

rwp@James:5:19 @{If any one among you do err} (\ean tis en humin planˆthˆi\). Third-class condition (supposed case) with \ean\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \plana“\, old verb, to go astray, to wander (Matthew:18:12|), figuratively (Hebrews:5:2|). {From the truth} (\apo tˆs alˆtheias\). For truth see strkjv@1:18; strkjv@3:14; strkjv@John:8:32; strkjv@1John:1:6; strkjv@3:18f|. It was easy then, and is now, to be led astray from Christ, who is the Truth. {And one convert him} (\kai epistrepsˆi tis auton\). Continuation of the third-class condition with the first aorist active subjunctive of \epistreph“\, old verb, to turn (transitive here as in strkjv@Luke:1:16f.|, but intransitive often as strkjv@Acts:9:35|).

rwp@James:5:20 @{Let him know} (\gin“sket“\). Present active imperative third person singular of \gin“sk“\, but Westcott and Hort read \gin“skete\ (know ye) after B. In either case it is the conclusion of the condition in verse 19|. {He which converteth} (\ho epistrepsas\). First aorist active articular participle of \epistreph“\ of verse 19|. {From the error} (\ek planˆs\). "Out of the wandering" of verse 19| (\planˆ\, from which \plana“\ is made). See strkjv@1John:4:6| for contrast between "truth" and "error." {A soul from death} (\psuchˆn ek thanatou\). The soul of the sinner (\hamart“lon\) won back to Christ, not the soul of the man winning him. A few MSS. have \autou\ added (his soul), which leaves it ambiguous, but \autou\ is not genuine. It is ultimate and final salvation here meant by the future (\s“sei\). {Shall cover a multitude of sins} (\kalupsei plˆthos hamarti“n\). Future active of \kalupt“\, old verb, to hide, to veil. But whose sins (those of the converter or the converted)? The Roman Catholics (also Mayor and Ropes) take it of the sins of the converter, who thus saves himself by saving others. The language here will allow that, but not New Testament teaching in general. It is apparently a proverbial saying which Resch considers one of the unwritten sayings of Christ (Clem. Al. _Paed_. iii. 12). It occurs also in strkjv@1Peter:4:8|, where it clearly means the sins of others covered by love as a veil thrown over them. The saying appears also in strkjv@Proverbs:10:12|: "Hatred stirs up strife, but love hides all transgressions"--that is "love refuses to see faults" (Mayor admits). That is undoubtedly the meaning in strkjv@1Peter:4:8; strkjv@James:5:20|.

rwp@Info_John @ THE FOURTH GOSPEL BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION GREATEST OF BOOKS The test of time has given the palm to the Fourth Gospel over all the books of the world. If Luke's Gospel is the most beautiful, John's Gospel is supreme in its height and depth and reach of thought. The picture of Christ here given is the one that has captured the mind and heart of mankind. It is not possible for a believer in Jesus Christ as the Son of God to be indifferent to modern critical views concerning the authorship and historical value of this Holy of Holies of the New Testament. Here we find _The Heart of Christ_ (E. H. Sears), especially in chapters strkjv@John:14-17|. If Jesus did not do or say these things, it is small consolation to be told that the book at least has symbolic and artistic value for the believer. The language of the Fourth Gospel has the clarity of a spring, but we are not able to sound the bottom of the depths. Lucidity and profundity challenge and charm us as we linger over it.

rwp@Info_John @ THE BELOVED DISCIPLE The book claims to be written by "the disciple whom Jesus loved" (John:21:20|) who is pointedly identified by a group of believers (apparently in Ephesus) as the writer: "This is the disciple which beareth witness of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his witness is true" (John:21:24|). This is the first criticism of the Fourth Gospel of which we have any record, made at the time when the book was first sent forth, made in a postscript to the epilogue or appendix. Possibly the book closed first with strkjv@John:20:31|, but chapter 21 is in precisely the same style and was probably added before publication by the author. The natural and obvious meaning of the language in strkjv@John:21:24| is that the Beloved Disciple wrote the whole book. He is apparently still alive when this testimony to his authorship is given. There are scholars who interpret it to mean that the Beloved Disciple is responsible for the facts in the book and not the actual writer, but that is a manifest straining of the language. There is in this verse no provision made for a redactor as distinct from the witness as is plausibly set forth by Dr. A. E. Garvie in _The Beloved Disciple_ (1922).

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

rwp@Info_John @ WITH A HOME IN JERUSALEM It is not only that the writer was a Jew who knew accurately places and events in Palestine, once denied though now universally admitted. The Beloved Disciple took the mother of Jesus "to his own home" (\eis ta idia\, strkjv@John:19:27|) from the Cross when Jesus commended his mother to his care. But this Beloved Disciple had access to the palace of the high priest (John:18:15f.|). Delff (_Das vierte Evangelium wiederhergestellt_, 1890) argues that this fact shows that the Beloved Disciple was not one of the twelve apostles, one of a priestly family of wealth in Jerusalem. He does seem to have had special information concerning what took place in the Sanhedrin (John:7:45-52; strkjv@11:47-53; strkjv@12:10ff.|). But at once we are confronted with the difficulty of supposing one outside of the circle of the twelve on even more intimate terms with Jesus than the twelve themselves and who was even present at the last passover meal and reclined on the bosom of Jesus (John:13:23|). Nor is this all, for he was one of the seven disciples by the Sea of Galilee (John:21:1ff.|) when Peter speaks to Jesus about the "Beloved Disciple" (John:21:20|).

rwp@Info_John @ ONLY ONE JOHN OF EPHESUS It is true that an ambiguous statement of Papias (circa A.D. 120) is contained in Eusebius where the phrase "the Elder John " (\ho presbuteros I“annˆs\) occurs. The most natural way to understand Papias is that he is referring to the Apostle John by this phrase as he describes the teachings of the apostles by "the words of the elders" just before. This interpretation of the allusion of Papias has been rendered almost certain by the work of Dom John Chapman, _John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel_ (1911). Not before Eusebius is the error found of two Johns in Ephesus, one the apostle, the other the so-called Presbyter. "Papias is no witness for the admission of two Johns of Asia Minor. Irenaeus, too, in any case, knows of but one John of Asia Minor. And this John was an eye-witness of our Lord's Life" (Bousset, _Die Offenbarumg des Joh._, p. 38, translation of Nolloth, _The Fourth Evangelist_, p. 63, note). Let this be admitted and much becomes clear.

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

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

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

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

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

rwp@Info_John @ LIKE THE JOHANNINE EPISTLES Critics of all classes agree that, whoever was the author of the Fourth Gospel, the same man wrote the First Epistle of John. There is the same inimitable style, the same vocabulary, the same theological outlook. Undoubtedly the same author wrote also Second and Third John, for, brief as they are, they exhibit the same characteristics. In Second and Third John the author describes himself as "the Elder" (\ho presbuteros\), which fact has led some to argue for the mythical "Presbyter John" as the author in place of the Apostle John and so of First John and the Fourth Gospel. It is argued that the Apostle John would have termed himself "the Apostle John" after the fashion of Paul. But the example of the Apostle Peter disposes of that argument, for in addressing the elders (1Peter:5:1|) he calls himself "your fellow-elder" (\ho sunpresbuteros\). In the Epistles John opposes Gnosticism both of the Docetic type which denied the actual humanity of Jesus as in strkjv@1John:1:1-4| and the Cerinthian type which denied the identity of the man Jesus and the _aeon_ Christ which came on Jesus at his baptism and left him at his death on the Cross as in strkjv@1John:2:22|. One of the many stories told about John is his abhorrence of Cerinthus when found in the same public bath with him. As Westcott shows, the Epistles of John prove his actual humanity while assuming his deity, whereas the Fourth Gospel proves his deity while assuming his humanity.

rwp@Info_John @ BUT DIFFERENT FROM THE APOCALYPSE It should be said at once that the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel does not depend on that of the Apocalypse. In fact, some men hold to the Johannine authorship of the Apocalypse who deny that of the Gospel while some hold directly the opposite view. Some deny the Johannine authorship of both Gospel and Apocalypse, while the majority hold to the Johannine authorship of Gospel, Epistles, and Apocalypse as was the general rule till after the time of Origen. The author of the Apocalypse claims to be John (Revelation:1:4,9; strkjv@22:8|), though what John he does not say. Denial of the existence of a "Presbyter John" naturally leads one to think of the Apostle John. Origen says that John, the brother of James, was banished to the Isle of Patmos where he saw the Apocalypse. There is undoubted radical difference in language between the Apocalypse and the other Johannine books which will receive discussion when the Apocalypse is reached. Westcott explained these differences as due to the early date of the Apocalypse in the reign of Vespasian before John had become master of the Greek language. Even J. H. Moulton (_Prolegomena_, p. 9, note 4) says bluntly: "If its date was 95 A.D., the author cannot have written the fourth Gospel only a short time after." Or before, he would say. But the date of the Apocalypse seems definitely to belong to the reign of Domitian. Songs:one ventures to call attention to the statement in strkjv@Acts:4:13| where Peter and John are described as \agrammatoi kai idi“tai\ (unlettered and private or unschooled men). It is curious also that it is precisely in 2Peter and the Apocalypse that we have so many grammatical solecisms and peculiarities. We know that the Fourth Gospel was reviewed by a group of John's friends in Ephesus, while he was apparently alone in the Isle of Patmos. The excitement of the visions would naturally increase the uncouth vernacular of the Apocalypse so much like that in the Greek papyri as seen in Milligan's _Greek Papyri_, for instance. This being true, one is able, in spite of Moulton's dictum, to hold to the Johannine authorship of both Gospel and Apocalypse and not far apart in date.

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 @ ORIGINAL LANGUAGE OF THE BOOK The late Dr. C. F. Burney of Oxford wrote a volume called, _The Aramaic Origin of the Fourth Gospel_ (1922) in which he tried to prove that the Fourth Gospel is really the first in time and was originally written in Aramaic. The theory excited some interest, but did not convince either Aramaic or Greek scholars to an appreciable extent. Some of the examples cited are plausible and some quite fanciful. This theory cannot be appealed to in any serious interpretation of the Fourth Gospel. The author was beyond doubt a Jew, but he wrote in the _Koin‚_ Greek of his time that is comparatively free from crude Semiticisms, perhaps due in part to the help of the friends in Ephesus.

rwp@Info_John @ THE PURPOSE OF THE BOOK He tells us himself in strkjv@John:20:30f|. He has made a selection of the many signs wrought by Jesus for an obvious purpose: "But these are written, that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye may have life in his name." This is the high and noble purpose plainly stated by the author. The book is thus confessedly apologetic and this fact ruins it with the critics who demand a dull and dry chronicle of events without plan or purpose in a book of history. Such a book would not be read and would be of little value if written. Each of the Synoptics is written with a purpose and every history or biography worth reading is written with a purpose. It is one thing to have a purpose in writing, but quite another to suppress or distort facts in order to create the impression that one wishes. This John did not do. He has given us his deliberate, mature, tested view of Jesus Christ as shown to him while alive and as proven since his resurrection. He writes to win others to like faith in Christ.

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

rwp@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:1:4 @{In him was life} (\en aut“i z“ˆ ˆn\). That which has come into being (verse 3|) in the Logos was life. The power that creates and sustains life in the universe is the Logos. This is what Paul means by the perfect passive verb \ektistai\ (stands created) in strkjv@Colossians:1:16|. This is also the claim of Jesus to Martha (John:11:25|). This is the idea in strkjv@Hebrews:1:3| "bearing (upholding) the all things by the word of his power." Once this language might have been termed unscientific, but not so now after the spiritual interpretation of the physical world by Eddington and Jeans. Usually in John \z“ˆ\ means spiritual life, but here the term is unlimited and includes all life; only it is not \bios\ (manner of life), but the very principle or essence of life. That is spiritual behind the physical and to this great scientists today agree. It is also personal intelligence and power. Some of the western documents have \estin\ here instead of \ˆn\ to bring out clearly the timelessness of this phrase of the work of the \Logos\. {And the life was the light of men} (\kai hˆ z“ˆ ˆn to ph“s t“n anthr“p“n\). Here the article with both \z“ˆ\ and \ph“s\ makes them interchangeable. "The light was the life of men" is also true. That statement is curiously like the view of some physicists who find in electricity (both light and power) the nearest equivalent to life in its ultimate physical form. Later Jesus will call himself the light of the world (John:8:12|). John is fond of these words life and light in Gospel, Epistles, Revelation. He here combines them to picture his conception of the Pre-incarnate Logos in his relation to the race. He was and is the Life of men (\t“n anthr“pon\, generic use of the article) and the Light of men. John asserts this relation of the Logos to the race of men in particular before the Incarnation.

rwp@John:1:5 @{Shineth} (\phainei\). Linear present active indicative of \phain“\, old verb from \pha“\, to shine (\phaos, ph“s\). "The light keeps on giving light." {In the darkness} (\en tˆi skotiƒi\). Late word for the common \skotos\ (kin to \skia\, shadow). An evident allusion to the darkness brought on by sin. In strkjv@2Peter:2:17| we have \ho zophos tou skotou\ (the blackness of darkness). The Logos, the only real moral light, keeps on shining both in the Pre-incarnate state and after the Incarnation. John is fond of \skotia\ (\skotos\) for moral darkness from sin and \ph“s\ (\ph“tiz“, phain“\) for the light that is in Christ alone. In strkjv@1John:2:8| he proclaims that "the darkness is passing by and the true light is already shining." The Gnostics often employed these words and John takes them and puts them in the proper place. {Apprehended it not} (\auto ou katelaben\). Second aorist active indicative of \katalamban“\, old verb to lay hold of, to seize. This very phrase occurs in strkjv@John:12:35| (\hina mˆ skotia humas katalabˆi\) "that darkness overtake you not," the metaphor of night following day and in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:4| the same idiom (\hina katalabˆi\) is used of day overtaking one as a thief. This is the view of Origen and appears also in 2Macc. strkjv@8:18. The same word appears in Aleph D in strkjv@John:6:17| \katelabe de autous hˆ skotia\ ("but darkness overtook them," came down on them). Hence, in spite of the Vulgate _comprehenderunt_, "overtook" or "overcame" seems to be the idea here. The light kept on shining in spite of the darkness that was worse than a London fog as the Old Testament and archaeological discoveries in Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Persia, Crete, Asia Minor show.

rwp@John:1:7 @{For witness} (\eis marturian\). Old word from \marture“\ (from \martus\), both more common in John's writings than the rest of the N.T. This the purpose of the Baptist's ministry. {That he might bear witness} (\hina marturˆsˆi\). Final clause with \hina\ and aorist active subjunctive of \marture“\ to make clearer \eis marturian\. {Of the light} (\peri tou ph“tos\). "Concerning the light." The light was shining and men with blinded eyes were not seeing the light (John:1:26|), blinded by the god of this world still (2Corinthians:4:4|). John had his own eyes opened so that he saw and told what he saw. That is the mission of every preacher of Christ. But he must first have his own eyes opened. {That all might believe} (\hina pisteus“sin\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \pisteu“\, ingressive aorist "come to believe." This is one of John's great words (about 100 times), "with nine times the frequency with which it is used by the Synoptists" (Bernard). And yet \pistis\, so common in Paul, John uses only in strkjv@1John:5:4| and four times in the Apocalypse where \pisteu“\ does not occur at all. Here it is used absolutely as in strkjv@John:1:50|, etc. {Through him} (\di' autou\). As the intermediate agent in winning men to believe in Christ (the Logos) as the Light and the Life of men. This is likewise the purpose of the author of this book (21:31|). The preacher is merely the herald to point men to Christ.

rwp@John:1:8 @{He} (\ekeinos\). "That one," i.e. John. He was a light (John:5:35|) as all believers are (Matthew:5:14|), but not "the light" (\to ph“s\). {But came} (\all'\). No verb in the Greek, to be supplied by repeating \ˆlthen\ of verse 7|. See similar ellipses in strkjv@9:3; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@15:25|. In Johannine fashion we have the final \hina\ clause of verse 7| repeated.

rwp@John:1:9 @{There was} (\ˆn\). Imperfect indicative. Emphatic position at the beginning of the sentence and so probably not periphrastic conjugation with \erchomenon\ (coming) near the end, though that is possible. {The true light} (\to ph“s to alˆthinon\). "The light the genuine," not a false light of wreckers of ships, but the dependable light that guides to the harbor of safety. This true light had been on hand all the time in the darkness (\ˆn\ imperfect, linear action) before John came. {Even the light} (not in the Greek). Added in the English to make plain this interpretation. {Lighteth every man} (\ph“tizei panta anthr“pon\). Old verb (from \ph“s\) to give light as in strkjv@Revelation:22:5; strkjv@Luke:11:35f|. The Quakers appeal to this phrase for their belief that to every man there is given an inner light that is a sufficient guide, the Quaker's text it is called. But it may only mean that all the real light that men receive comes from Christ, not necessarily that each one receives a special revelation. {Coming} (\erchomenon\). This present middle participle of \erchomai\ can be taken with \anthr“pon\ just before (accusative masculine singular), "every man as he comes into the world." It can also be construed with \ph“s\ (nominative neuter singular). This idea occurs in strkjv@John:3:19; strkjv@11:27; strkjv@12:46|. In the two last passages the phrase is used of the Messiah which makes it probable here. But even so the light presented in strkjv@11:27; strkjv@12:46| is that of the Incarnate Messiah, not the Pre-incarnate Logos. Here \kosmos\ rather than \panta\ occurs in the sense of the orderly universe as often in this Gospel. See strkjv@Ephesians:1:4|.

rwp@John:1:10 @{He was in the world} (\en t“i kosm“i ˆn\). Imperfect tense of continuous existence in the universe before the Incarnation as in verses 1,2|. {Was made by him} (\di' autou egeneto\). "Through him." Same statement here of "the world" (\ho kosmos\) as that made in verse 3| of \panta\. {Knew him not} (\auton ouk egn“\). Second aorist active indicative of common verb \ginosk“\, what Gildersleeve called a negative aorist, refused or failed to recognize him, his world that he had created and that was held together by him (Colossians:1:16|). Not only did the world fail to know the Pre-incarnate Logos, but it failed to recognize him when he became Incarnate (John:1:26|). Two examples in this sentence of John's fondness for \kai\ as in verses 1,4,5,14|, the paratactic rather than the hypotactic construction, like the common Hebrew use of _wav_.

rwp@John:1:11 @{Unto his own} (\eis ta idia\). Neuter plural, "unto his own things," the very idiom used in strkjv@19:27| when the Beloved Disciple took the mother of Jesus "to his own home." The world was "the own home" of the Logos who had made it. See also strkjv@16:32; strkjv@Acts:21:6|. {They that were his own} (\hoi idioi\). In the narrower sense, "his intimates," "his own family," "his own friends" as in strkjv@13:1|. Jesus later said that a prophet is not without honour save in his own country (Mark:6:4; strkjv@John:4:44|), and the town of Nazareth where he lived rejected him (Luke:4:28f.; strkjv@Matthew:13:58|). Probably here \hoi idioi\ means the Jewish people, the chosen people to whom Christ was sent first (Matthew:15:24|), but in a wider sense the whole world is included in \hoi idioi\. Conder's _The Hebrew Tragedy_ emphasizes the pathos of the situation that the house of Israel refused to welcome the Messiah when he did come, like a larger and sadder Enoch Arden experience. {Received him not} (\auton ou parelabon\). Second aorist active indicative of \paralamban“\, old verb to take to one's side, common verb to welcome, the very verb used by Jesus in strkjv@14:3| of the welcome to his Father's house. Cf. \katelaben\ in verse 5|. Israel slew the Heir (Hebrews:1:2|) when he came, like the wicked husbandmen (Luke:20:14|).

rwp@John:1:12 @{As many as received him} (\hosoi elabon auton\). Effective aorist active indicative of \lamban“\ "as many as did receive him," in contrast with \hoi idioi\ just before, exceptional action on the part of the disciples and other believers. {To them} (\autois\). Dative case explanatory of the relative clause preceding, an anacoluthon common in John 27 times as against 21 in the Synoptists. This is a common Aramaic idiom and is urged by Burney (_Aramaic Origin_, etc., p. 64) for his theory of an Aramaic original of the Fourth Gospel. {The right} (\exousian\). In strkjv@5:27| \ed“ken\ (first aorist active indicative of \did“mi\) \exousian\ means authority but includes power (\dunamis\). Here it is more the notion of privilege or right. {To become} (\genesthai\). Second aorist middle of \ginomai\, to become what they were not before. {Children of God} (\tekna theou\). In the full spiritual sense, not as mere offspring of God true of all men (Acts:17:28|). Paul's phrase \huioi theou\ (Gal strkjv@3:26|) for believers, used also by Jesus of the pure in heart (Matthew:5:9|), does not occur in John's Gospel (but in strkjv@Revelation:21:7|). It is possible that John prefers \ta tekna tou theou\ for the spiritual children of God whether Jew or Gentile (John:11:52|) because of the community of nature (\teknon\ from root \tek-\, to beget). But one cannot follow Westcott in insisting on "adoption" as Paul's reason for the use of \huioi\ since Jesus uses \huioi theou\ in strkjv@Matthew:5:9|. Clearly the idea of regeneration is involved here as in strkjv@John:3:3|. {Even to them that believe} (\tois pisteuousin\). No "even" in the Greek, merely explanatory apposition with \autois\, dative case of the articular present active participle of \pisteu“\. {On his name} (\eis to onoma\). Bernard notes \pisteu“ eis\ 35 times in John, to put trust in or on. See also strkjv@2:23; strkjv@3:38| for \pisteu“ eis to onoma autou\. This common use of \onoma\ for the person is an Aramaism, but it occurs also in the vernacular papyri and \eis to onoma\ is particularly common in the payment of debts (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). See strkjv@Acts:1:15| for \onomata\ for persons.

rwp@John:1:13 @{Which were born} (\hoi egennˆthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \genna“\, to beget, "who were begotten." By spiritual generation (of God, \ek theou\), not by physical (\ex haimat“n\, plural as common in classics and O.T., though why it is not clear unless blood of both father and mother; \ek thelˆmatos sarkos\, from sexual desire; \ek thelˆmatos andros\, from the will of the male). But _b_ of the old Latin reads _qui natus est_ and makes it refer to Christ and so expressly teach the Virgin Birth of Jesus. Likewise Irenaeus reads _qui natus est_ as does Tertullian who argues that _qui nati sunt_ (\hoi egennˆthˆsan\) is an invention of the Valentinian Gnostics. Blass (_Philology of the Gospels_, p. 234) opposes this reading, but all the old Greek uncials read \hoi egennˆthˆsan\ and it must be accepted. The Virgin Birth is doubtless implied in verse 14|, but it is not stated in verse 13|.

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

rwp@John:1:15 @{Beareth witness} (\marturei\). Historical (dramatic) present indicative of this characteristic word in John (cf. strkjv@1:17f.|). See strkjv@1:32,34| for historical examples of John's witness to Christ. This sentence is a parenthesis in Westcott and Hort's text, though the Revised Version makes a parenthesis of most of verse 14|. The witness of John is adduced in proof of the glory full of grace and truth already claimed for the Incarnate Logos. {Crieth} (\kekragen\). Second perfect active indicative of \kraz“\, old verb for loud crying, repeated in dramatic form again for emphasis recalling the wonderful Voice in the wilderness which the Beloved Disciple can still hear echoing through the years. {This was} (\houtos ˆn\). Imperfect indicative where John throws the tense back in past time when he looked forward to the coming of the Messiah as in strkjv@Acts:3:10| where we should prefer "is" (\estin\). Gildersleeve (_Syntax_, p. 96) calls this the "imperfect of sudden appreciation of the real state of things." {Of whom I said} (\hon eipon\). But B C and a corrector of Aleph (Westcott and Hort) have \ho eip“n\ "the one who said," a parenthetical explanation about the Baptist, not the words of the Baptist about Christ. {After me} (\opis“ mou\). See also strkjv@1:27|. Later in time John means. He described "the Coming One" (\ho erchomenos\) before he saw Jesus. The language of John here is precisely that in strkjv@Matthew:3:11| \ho opis“ mou erchomenos\ (cf. strkjv@Mark:1:7|). The Beloved Disciple had heard the Baptist say these very words, but he also had the Synoptic Gospels. {Is become} (\gegonen\). Second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. It is already an actual fact when the Baptist is speaking. {Before me} (\emprosthen mou\). In rank and dignity, the Baptist means, \ho ischuroteros mou\ "the one mightier than I" (Mark:1:7|) and \ischuroteros mou\ "mightier than I" (Matthew:3:11|). In strkjv@John:3:28| \emprosthen ekeinou\ (before him, the Christ) does mean priority in time, but not here. This superior dignity of the Messiah John proudly recognizes always (John:3:25-30|). {For he was before me} (\hoti pr“tos mou ˆn\). Paradox, but clear. He had always been (\ˆn imperfect\) before John in his Pre-incarnate state, but "after" John in time of the Incarnation, but always ahead of John in rank immediately on his Incarnation. \Pr“tos mou\ (superlative with ablative) occurs here when only two are compared as is common in the vernacular _Koin‚_. Songs:the Beloved Disciple came first (\pr“tos\) to the tomb, ahead of Peter (20:4|). Songs:also \pr“ton hum“n\ in strkjv@15:18| means "before you" as if it were \proteron hum“n\. Verse 30| repeats these words almost exactly.

rwp@John:1:16 @{For} (\hoti\). Correct text (Aleph B C D L) and not \kai\ (and) of the Textus Receptus. Explanatory reason for verse 14|. {Of his fulness} (\ek tou plˆr“matos\). The only instance of \plˆr“ma\ in John's writings, though five times of Christ in Paul's Epistles (Colossians:1:19; strkjv@2:9; strkjv@Ephesians:1:23; strkjv@3:19; strkjv@4:13|). See strkjv@Colossians:1:19| for discussion of these terms of the Gnostics that Paul employs for all the attributes of God summed up in Christ (Colossians:2:9|) and so used here by John of the Incarnate Logos. {We all} (\hˆmeis pantes\). John is facing the same Gnostic depreciation of Christ of which Paul writes in Colossians. Songs:here John appeals to all his own contemporaries as participants with him in the fulness of the Logos. {Received} (\elabomen\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\, a wider experience than beholding (\etheasametha\, verse 14|) and one that all believers may have. {Grace for grace} (\charin anti charitos\). The point is in \anti\, a preposition disappearing in the _Koin‚_ and here only in John. It is in the locative case of \anta\ (end), "at the end," and was used of exchange in sale. See strkjv@Luke:11:11|, \anti ichthuos ophin\, "a serpent for a fish," strkjv@Hebrews:12:2| where "joy" and "cross" are balanced against each other. Here the picture is "grace" taking the place of "grace" like the manna fresh each morning, new grace for the new day and the new service.

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

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

rwp@John:1:21 @{And they asked him} (\kai ˆr“tˆsan auton\). Here the paratactic \kai\ is like the transitional \oun\ (then). {What then?} (\Ti oun;\). Argumentative \oun\ like Paul's \ti oun\ in strkjv@Romans:6:15|. _Quid ergo?_ {Art thou Elijah?} (\Su Elias ei;\). The next inevitable question since Elijah had been understood to be the forerunner of the Messiah from strkjv@Malachi:4:5|. In strkjv@Mark:9:11f.| Jesus will identify John with the Elijah of Malachi's prophecy. Why then does John here flatly deny it? Because the expectation was that Elijah would return in person. This John denies. Jesus only asserts that John was Elijah in spirit. Elijah in person they had just seen on the Mount of Transfiguration. {He saith} (\legei\). Vivid dramatic present. {I am not} (\ouk eimi\). Short and blunt denial. {Art thou the prophet?} (\ho prophˆtˆs ei su;\). "The prophet art thou?" This question followed naturally the previous denials. Moses (Deuteronomy:18:15|) had spoken of a prophet like unto himself. Christians interpreted this prophet to be the Messiah (Acts:3:22; strkjv@7:37|), but the Jews thought him another forerunner of the Messiah (John:7:40|). It is not clear in strkjv@John:6:15| whether the people identified the expected prophet with the Messiah, though apparently so. Even the Baptist later became puzzled in prison whether Jesus himself was the true Messiah or just one of the forerunners (Luke:7:19|). People wondered about Jesus himself whether he was the Messiah or just one of the looked for prophets (Mark:8:28; strkjv@Matthew:16:14|). {And he answered} (\kai apekrithˆ\). First aorist passive (deponent passive, sense of voice gone) indicative of \apokrinomai\, to give a decision from myself, to reply. {No} (\Ou\). Shortest possible denial.

rwp@John:1:22 @{They said therefore} (\eipan oun\). Second aorist active indicative of defective verb \eipon\ with \a\ instead of usual \o\. Note \oun\, inferential here as in verse 21| though often merely transitional in John. {Who art thou?} (\Tis ei;\). Same question as at first (verse 19|), but briefer. {That we give answer} (\hina apokrisin d“men\). Final use of \hina\ with second aorist active subjunctive of \did“mi\ with \apokrisin\ from \apokrinomai\, above, old substantive as in strkjv@Luke:2:47|. {To those that sent} (\tois pempsasin\). Dative case plural of the articular participle first aorist active of \pemp“\. {What sayest thou of thyself?} (\Ti legeis peri seautou;\). This time they opened wide the door without giving any hint at all.

rwp@John:1:23 @{He said} (\ephˆ\). Common imperfect active (or second aorist active) of \phˆmi\, to say, old defective verb. {I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness} (\Eg“ ph“nˆ bo“ntos en tˆi erˆm“i\). For his answer John quotes strkjv@Isaiah:40:3|. The Synoptics (Mark:1:3; strkjv@Matthew:3:3; strkjv@Luke:3:4|) quote this language from Isaiah as descriptive of John, but do not say that he also applied it to himself. There is no reason to think that he did not do so. John also refers to Isaiah as the author of the words and also of the message, "{Make straight the way of the Lord}" (\Euthunate tˆn hodon tou kuriou\). By this language (\euthun“\ in N.T. only here and strkjv@James:3:4|, first aorist active imperative here) John identifies himself to the committee as the forerunner of the Messiah. The early writers note the differences between the use of \Logos\ (Word) for the Messiah and \ph“nˆ\ (Voice) for John.

rwp@John:3:19 @{And this is the judgment} (\hautˆ de estin hˆ krisis\). A thoroughly Johannine phrase for sequence of thought (15:12; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@1John:1:5; strkjv@5:11,14; strkjv@3John:1:6|). It is more precisely the process of judging (\kri-sis\) rather than the result (\kri-ma\) of the judgment. "It is no arbitrary sentence, but the working out of a moral law" (Bernard). {The light is come} (\to ph“s elˆluthen\). Second perfect active indicative of \erchomai\, a permanent result as already explained in the Prologue concerning the Incarnation (1:4,5,9,11|). Jesus is the Light of the world. {Loved darkness} (\ˆgapˆsan to skotos\). Job:(Job:24:13|) spoke of men rebelling against the light. Here \to skotos\, common word for moral and spiritual darkness (1Thessalonians:5:5|), though \hˆ skotia\ in strkjv@John:1:5|. "Darkness" is common in John as a metaphor for the state of sinners (8:12; strkjv@12:35, 46; strkjv@1John:1:6; strkjv@2:8,9,11|). Jesus himself is the only moral and spiritual light of the world (8:12|) as he dared claim to his enemies. The pathos of it all is that men fall in love with the darkness of sin and rebel against the light like denizens of the underworld, "for their works were evil (\ponˆra\)." When the light appears, they scatter to their holes and dens. \Ponˆros\ (from \ponos\, toil, \pone“\, to toil) is used of the deeds of the world by Jesus (7:7|). In the end the god of this world blinds men's eyes so that they do not see the light (2Corinthians:4:4|). The fish in the Mammoth Cave have no longer eyes, but only sockets where eyes used to be. The evil one has a powerful grip on the world (1John:5:19|).

rwp@John:3:22 @{After these things} (\meta tauta\). Transition after the interview with Nicodemus. For the phrase see strkjv@5:1; strkjv@6:1; strkjv@7:1|. {Into the land of Judea} (\eis tˆn Ioudaian gˆn\). Into the country districts outside of Jerusalem. The only example of this phrase in the N.T., but "the region of Judea" (\hˆ Ioudaia ch“ra\) in strkjv@Mark:1:5|. {He tarried} (\dietriben\). Descriptive imperfect active of \diatrib“\, old verb to rub between or hard, to spend time (Acts:14:3|). {Baptized} (\ebaptizen\). Imperfect active of \baptiz“\. "He was baptizing." The six disciples were with him and in strkjv@4:2| John explains that Jesus did the baptizing through the disciples.

rwp@John:3:23 @{John was also baptizing} (\ˆn de kai ho I“anˆs baptiz“n\). Periphrastic imperfect picturing the continued activity of the Baptist simultaneous with the growing work of Jesus. There was no real rivalry except in people's minds. {In Aenon near to Salim} (\en Ain“n eggus tou Saleim\). It is not clearly known where this place was. Eusebius locates it in the Jordan valley south of Beisan west of the river where are many springs (fountains, eyes). There is a place called Salim east of Shechem in Samaria with a village called 'Aimen, but with no water there. There may have been water there then, of course. {Because there was much water there} (\hoti hudata polla ˆn ekei\). "Because many waters were there." Not for drinking, but for baptizing. "Therefore even in summer baptism by immersion could be continued" (Marcus Dods). {And they came, and were baptized} (\kai pareginonto kai ebaptizonto\). Imperfects both, one middle and the other passive, graphically picturing the long procession of pilgrims who came to John confessing their sins and receiving baptism at his hands.

rwp@John:3:26 @{Rabbi} (\Rabbei\). Greeting John just like Jesus (1:38; strkjv@3:2|). {Beyond Jordan} (\peran tou Iordanou\). Evident reference to John's witness to Jesus told in strkjv@1:29-34|. {To whom thou hast borne witness} (\h“i su memarturˆkas\). Note avoidance of calling the name of Jesus. Perfect active indicative of \marture“\ so common in John (1:7|, etc.). These disciples of John are clearly jealous of Jesus as a rival of John and they distinctly blame John for his endorsement of one who is already eclipsing him in popularity. {The same baptizeth} (\houtos baptizei\). "This one is baptizing." Not personally (4:2|), as John did, but through his six disciples. {And all men come to him} (\kai pantes erchontai pros auton\). Linear present middle indicative, "are coming." The sight of the growing crowds with Jesus and the dwindling crowds with John stirred John's followers to keenest jealousy. What a life-like picture of ministerial jealousy in all ages.

rwp@John:3:31 @{Is above all} (\epan“ pant“n\). Ablative case with the compound preposition \epan“\. See the same idea in strkjv@Romans:9:5|. Here we have the comments of Evangelist (John) concerning the last words of John in verse 30| which place Jesus above himself. He is above all men, not alone above the Baptist. Bernard follows those who treat verses 31-36| as dislocated and put them after verse 21| (the interview with Nicodemus), but they suit better here. {Of the earth} (\ek tˆs gˆs\). John is fond of this use of \ek\ for origin and source of character as in strkjv@1:46; strkjv@1John:4:5|. Jesus is the one that comes out of heaven (\ho ek tou ouranou erchomenos\) as he has shown in strkjv@1:1-18|. Hence he is "above all."

rwp@John:3:32 @{What he hath seen and heard} (\ho he“raken kai ˆkousen\). Perfect active indicative followed by aorist active indicative, because, as Westcott shows, the first belongs to the very existence of the Son and the latter to his mission. There is no confusion of tenses here. {No man} (\oudeis\). There were crowds coming to Jesus, but they do not really accept him as Saviour and Lord (1:11; strkjv@2:24|). It is superficial as time will show. But "no one" is not to be pressed too far, for it is the rhetorical use.

rwp@John:4:1 @{When therefore} (\H“s oun\). Reference to strkjv@3:22f|. the work of the Baptist and the jealousy of his disciples. \Oun\ is very common in John's Gospel in such transitions. {The Lord} (\ho Kurios\). Songs:the best manuscripts (Neutral Alexandrian), though the Western class has \ho Iˆsous\. Mark usually has \ho Iˆsous\ and Luke often \ho Kurios\. In the narrative portion of John we have usually \ho Iˆsous\, but \ho Kurios\ in five passages (4:1; strkjv@6:23; strkjv@11:2; strkjv@20:20; strkjv@21:12|). There is no reason why John should not apply \ho Kurios\ to Jesus in the narrative sections as well as Luke. Bernard argues that these are "explanatory glosses," not in the first draft of the Gospel. But why? When John wrote his Gospel he certainly held Jesus to be \Kurios\ (Lord) as Luke did earlier when he wrote both Gospel and Acts This is hypercriticism. {Knew} (\egn“\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. The Pharisees knew this obvious fact. It was easy for Jesus to know the attitude of the Pharisees about it (2:24|). Already the Pharisees are suspicious of Jesus. {How that} (\hoti\). Declarative \hoti\ (indirect assertion). {Was making and baptizing more disciples than John} (\pleionas mathˆtas poiei kai baptizei ˆ I“anˆs\). Present active indicative in both verbs retained in indirect discourse. Recall the tremendous success of John's early ministry (Mark:1:5; strkjv@Matthew:3:5; strkjv@Luke:3:7,15|) in order to see the significance of this statement that Jesus had forged ahead of him in popular favour. Already the Pharisees had turned violently against John who had called them broods of vipers. It is most likely that they drew John out about the marriage of Herod Antipas and got him involved directly with the tetrarch so as to have him cast into prison (Luke:3:19f.|). Josephus (_Ant_. XVIII. v. 2) gives a public reason for this act of Herod Antipas, the fear that John would "raise a rebellion," probably the public reason for his private vengeance as given by Luke. Apparently John was cast into prison, though recently still free (John:3:24|), before Jesus left for Galilee. The Pharisees, with John out of the way, turn to Jesus with envy and hate.

rwp@John:4:2 @{Although Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples} (\kaitoige Iˆsous autos ouk ebaptizen all' hoi mathˆtai autou\). Parenthetical explanation that applies also to strkjv@3:22|. Imperfect tense means that it was not the habit of Jesus. This is the only N.T. instance of \kaitoige\ (and yet indeed), compound conjunction (\kaitoi\ in strkjv@Acts:14:17; strkjv@Hebrews:4:3|) with intensive particle \ge\ added. This is the last mention of baptism under the direction of Jesus till the Great Commission (Matthew:28:19|). It is possible that Jesus stopped the baptizing because of the excitement and the issue raised about his Messianic claims till after his resurrection when he enjoined it upon his disciples as a rite of public enlistment in his service.

rwp@John:4:37 @{For herein} (\en gar tout“i\). In this relation between the sower and the reaper. {The saying} (\ho logos\). Like strkjv@1Timothy:1:15; strkjv@3:1|, etc. Probably a proverb that is particularly true (\alˆthinos\ for which see strkjv@1:9|) in the spiritual realm. {One soweth, and another reapeth} (\allos estin ho speir“n kai allos ho theriz“n\). "One is the sower and another the reaper." It is sad when the sower misses the joy of reaping (Job:31:8|) and has only the sowing in tears (Psalms:126:5f.|). This may be the punishment for sin (Deuteronomy:28:30; strkjv@Micah:6:15|). Sometimes one reaps where he has not sown (Deuteronomy:6:11; strkjv@Joshua:24:13|). It is the prerogative of the Master to reap (Matthew:25:26f.|), but Jesus here lets the disciples share his joy.

rwp@John:4:41 @{Many more} (\poll“i pleious\). "More by much" (instrumental case \poll“i\) in comparison with just "many" (\polloi\) of verse 39|. Jesus was reaping more rapidly than the woman did. But all were rejoicing that so many "believed" (\episteusan\, really believed).

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

rwp@John:4:44 @{For Jesus himself testified} (\autos gar Iˆsous emarturˆsen\). John's explanation of the conduct of Jesus by quoting a proverb often used by Jesus (Mark:6:4; strkjv@Matthew:13:57; strkjv@Luke:4:24| in reference to Nazareth), but not necessarily used by Jesus on this occasion. A similar proverb has been found in Plutarch, Pliny, Seneca. {A prophet hath no honour in his own country} (\prophˆtˆs en tˆi idiƒi patridi timˆn ouk echei\). What is meant by \patridi\? In the Synoptics (Luke:4:24; strkjv@Mark:6:4; strkjv@Matthew:13:57|) the reference is to Nazareth where he was twice rejected. But what has John in mind in quoting it here? He probably knew the quotations in the Synoptics. Does John refer to Judea by "his own country"? If so, the application hardly fits for he had already explained that Jesus was leaving Judea because he was too popular there (4:1-3|). If he means Galilee, he immediately mentions the cordial welcome accorded Jesus there (verse 45|). But even so this is probably John's meaning for he is speaking of the motive of Jesus in going into Galilee where he had not yet laboured and where he apparently had no such fame as in Judea and now in Samaria.

rwp@John:4:45 @{Songs:when} (\hote oun\). Transitional use of \oun\, sequence, not consequence. {Received him} (\edexanto auton\). First aorist middle of \dechomai\, "welcomed him." Jesus had evidently anticipated a quiet arrival. {Having seen} (\he“rakotes\). Perfect active participle of \hora“\. Note \the“rountes\ in strkjv@2:23| about this very thing at the feast in Jerusalem. The miracles of Jesus at that first passover made a stir. {For they also went} (\kai autoi gar ˆlthon\). The Samaritans did not go and so Jesus was a new figure to them, but the Galileans, as orthodox Jews, did go and so were predisposed in his favour.

rwp@John:4:49 @{Sir} (\Kurie\). See strkjv@1:38|. {Come down} (\katabˆthi\). Second aorist active imperative, tense and tone of urgency. \Ere my child die\ (\prin apothanein to paidion mou\). Regular idiom with \prin\ in positive clause, second aorist active infinitive of \apothnˆsk“\ and accusative of general reference, "before dying as to my child." Bengel notes that he only thought Jesus had power before death as even Martha and Mary felt at first (11:21,32|). But the father's heart goes out to Jesus.

rwp@John:4:50 @{Thy son liveth} (\ho huios sou zˆi\). "Thy son is living," and will not now die, Jesus means. Words too good and gracious to be true. His son is healed without Jesus even going to Capernaum, "absent treatment" so to speak, but without the cure being absent. {Believed the word} (\episteusen t“i log“i\). Instantaneous faith (aorist active indicative), trusted the word (dative case \log“i\). {Went his way} (\eporeueto\). Inchoative imperfect middle, "started on his way," acted on his faith.

rwp@John:4:53 @{Songs:the father knew} (\egn“ oun ho patˆr\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. Inferential use of \oun\. {Himself believed} (\episteusen autos\). Not just the word of Jesus (verse 50|), but complete faith in Jesus himself as the Messiah, absolute use of \pisteu“\ as in strkjv@1:7|. {And his whole house} (\kai hˆ oikia autou\). All his family, the first example of a whole family believing in Jesus like the later case of Crispus (Acts:18:8|).

rwp@John:4:54 @{The second sign that} (\deuteron sˆmeion\). No article, simply predicate accusative, "This again a second sign did Jesus having come out of Judea into Galilee." The first one was also in Cana (2:1ff.|), but many were wrought in Jerusalem also (2:23|).

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:5:2 @{There is} (\estin\). Bengel argues that this proves a date before the destruction of Jerusalem, but it is probably only John's vivid memory. {By the sheep gate} (\epi tˆi probatikˆi\). Supply \pulˆi\ (gate) which occurs with the adjective \probatikˆ\ (pertaining to sheep, \probata\) in strkjv@Nehemiah:3:1,22|. {A pool} (\kolumbˆthra\). A diving or swimming pool (from \kolumba“\, to swim, strkjv@Acts:27:43|), old word, only here in N.T. {Which is called} (\hˆ epilegomenˆ\). "The surnamed" (present passive participle, only N.T. example except strkjv@Acts:15:40| first aorist middle participle \epilexamenos\). {In Hebrew} (\Ebraisti\). "In Aramaic" strictly as in strkjv@19:13,17,20; strkjv@20:16; strkjv@Revelation:9:11; strkjv@16:16|. {Bethesda} (\Bethesda\, or House of Mercy. Songs:A C Syr cu). Aleph D L 33 have \Bethzatha\ or House of the Olive, while B W Vulg. Memph. have \Bethsaida\. {Having five porches} (\pente stoas echousa\). \Stoa\ was a covered colonnade where people can gather from which Stoic comes (Acts:17:18|). See strkjv@John:10:23; strkjv@Acts:3:11|. Schick in 1888 found twin pools north of the temple near the fortress of Antonia one of which has five porches. It is not, however, certain that this pool existed before A.D. 70 when the temple was destroyed (Sanday, _Sacred Sites of the Gospels_, p. 55). Some have identified it with the Pool of Siloam (9:7|), though John distinguishes them. There is also the Virgin's Well, called the Gusher, because it periodically bubbles over from a natural spring, a kind of natural siphon. This is south of the temple in the Valley of Kedron and quite possibly the real site.

rwp@John:5:4 @All of this verse is wanting in the oldest and best manuscripts like Aleph B C D W 33 Old Syriac, Coptic versions, Latin Vulgate. It is undoubtedly added, like the clause in verse 3|, to make clearer the statement in verse 7|. Tertullian is the earliest writer to mention it. The Jews explained the healing virtues of the intermittent spring by the ministry of angels. But the periodicity of such angelic visits makes it difficult to believe. It is a relief to many to know that the verse is spurious.

rwp@John:5:7 @{When the water is troubled} (\hotan tarachthˆi to hud“r\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \tarass“\, old verb to agitate (Matthew:2:3|). The popular belief was that, at each outflow of this intermittent spring, there was healing power in the water for the first one getting in. {To put me into the pool} (\hina balˆi me eis tˆn kolumbˆthran\). Final use of \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \ball“\, "that he throw me in" quickly before any one else. For this use of \ball“\ see strkjv@Mark:7:30; strkjv@Luke:16:20|. {But while I am coming} (\en h“i de erchomai\). Temporal use of the relative, "in which time" (\chron“i\ or \kair“i\ understood). \Eg“\ (I) is emphatic.

rwp@John:5:11 @{But he answered} (\hos de apekrithˆ\). Demonstrative \hos\ (But this one) and deponent use of \apekrithˆ\ (first aorist passive indicative of \apokrinomai\ with no passive force). {The same} (\ekeinos\). "That one," emphatic demonstrative as often in John (1:18,33; strkjv@9:37; strkjv@10:1|, etc.). The man did not know who Jesus was nor even his name. He quotes the very words of Jesus. {Whole} (\hugiˆ\). Predicate accusative agreeing with \me\ (me).

rwp@John:5:14 @{Findeth him} (\heuriskei auton\). Dramatic present as in strkjv@1:45|, possibly after search as in strkjv@9:35|. {Sin no more} (\mˆketi hamartane\). "No longer go on sinning." Present active imperative with \mˆketi\, a clear implication that disease was due to personal sin as is so often the case. Jesus used the same words to the woman taken in adultery in the spurious passage (John:8:11|). He had suffered for 38 years. All sickness is not due to personal sin (9:3|), but much is and nature is a hard paymaster. Jesus is here living up to his name (Matthew:1:21|). {Lest a worse thing befall thee} (\hina mˆ cheiron soi ti genˆtai\). Negative final clause with second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\. \Cheiron\ is comparative of \kakos\, bad. Worse than the illness of 38 years, bad as that is. He will now be sinning against knowledge.

rwp@John:5:16 @{Persecute} (\edi“kon\). Inchoative imperfect, "began to persecute" and kept it up. They took this occasion as one excuse (\dia touto\, because of this). They disliked Jesus when here first (2:18|) and were suspicious of his popularity (4:1|). Now they have cause for an open breach. {Because he did} (\hoti epoiei\). Imperfect active, not just this one act, but he was becoming a regular Sabbath-breaker. The Pharisees will watch his conduct on the Sabbath henceforth (Mark:2:23; strkjv@3:2|).

rwp@John:5:17 @{Answered} (\apekrinato\). Regular aorist middle indicative of \apokrinomai\, in John here only and verse 19|, elsewhere \apekrithˆ\ as in verse 11|. {My Father} (\ho pater mou\). Not "our Father," claim to peculiar relation to the Father. {Worketh even until now} (\he“s arti ergazetai\). Linear present middle indicative, "keeps on working until now" without a break on the Sabbath. Philo points out this fact of the continuous activity of God. Justin Martyr, Origen and others note this fact about God. He made the Sabbath for man's blessing, but cannot observe it himself. {And I work} (\kag“ ergazomai\). Jesus puts himself on a par with God's activity and thus justifies his healing on the Sabbath.

rwp@John:5:18 @{Sought the more} (\mallon ezˆtoun\). Imperfect active of \zˆte“\, graphic picture of increased and untiring effort "to kill him" (\auton apokteinai\, first aorist active, to kill him off and be done with him). John repeats this clause "they sought to kill him" in strkjv@7:1,19,25; strkjv@8:37,40|. Their own blood was up on this Sabbath issue and they bend every energy to put Jesus to death. If this is a passover, this bitter anger, murderous wrath, will go on and grow for two years. {Not only brake the Sabbath} (\ou monon elue to sabbaton\). Imperfect active of \lu“\. He was now a common and regular Sabbath-breaker. \Lu“\ means to loosen, to set at naught. The papyri give examples of \lu“\ in this sense like \luein ta penthˆ\ (to break the period of mourning). This was the first grudge against Jesus, but his defence had made the offence worse and had given them a far graver charge. {But also called God his own Father} (\alla kai patera idion elege ton theon\). "His own" (\idion\) in a sense not true of others. That is precisely what Jesus meant by "My Father." See strkjv@Romans:8:32| for \ho idios huios\, "his own Son." {Making himself equal with God} (\ison heauton poi“n t“i the“i\). \Isos\ is an old common adjective (in papyri also) and means {equal}. In strkjv@Phillipians:2:6| Paul calls the Pre-incarnate Christ \isa the“i\, "equal to God" (plural \isa\, attributes of God). Bernard thinks that Jesus would not claim to be \isos the“i\ because in strkjv@John:14:28| he says: "The Father is greater than I." And yet he says in strkjv@14:7| that the one who sees him sees in him the Father. Certainly the Jews understood Jesus to claim equality with the Father in nature and privilege and power as also in strkjv@10:33; strkjv@19:7|. Besides, if the Jews misunderstood Jesus on this point, it was open and easy for him to deny it and to clear up the misapprehension. This is precisely what he does not do. On the contrary Jesus gives a powerful apologetic in defence of his claim to equality with the Father (verses 19-47|).

rwp@John:5:19 @{The Son} (\ho huios\). The absolute use of the Son in relation to the Father admitting the charge in verse 18| and defending his equality with the Father. {Can do nothing by himself} (\ou dunatai poiein aph'heautou ouden\). True in a sense of every man, but in a much deeper sense of Christ because of the intimate relation between him and the Father. See this same point in strkjv@5:30; strkjv@7:28; strkjv@8:28; strkjv@14:10|. Jesus had already made it in strkjv@5:17|. Now he repeats and defends it. {But what he seeth the Father doing} (\an mˆ ti blepˆi ton patera poiounta\). Rather, "unless he sees the Father doing something." Negative condition (\an mˆ\=\ean mˆ\, if not, unless) of third class with present (habit) subjunctive (\blepˆi\) and present active participle (\poiounta\). It is a supreme example of a son copying the spirit and work of a father. In his work on earth the Son sees continually what the Father is doing. In healing this poor man he was doing what the Father wishes him to do. {For what things soever he doeth, these the Son also doeth in like manner} (\ha gar an ekeinos poiˆi tauta kai ho huios homoi“s poiei\). Indefinite relative clause with \an\ and the present active subjunctive (\poiˆi\). Note \ekeinos\, emphatic demonstrative, that one, referring to the Father. This sublime claim on the part of Jesus will exasperate his enemies still more.

rwp@John:5:20 @{Loveth} (\philei\). In strkjv@3:35| we have \agapƒi\ from \agapa“\, evidently one verb expressing as noble a love as the other. Sometimes a distinction (21:17|) is made, but not here, unless \phile“\ presents the notion of intimate friendship (\philos\, friend), fellowship, the affectionate side, while \agapa“\ (Latin _diligo_) is more the intelligent choice. But John uses both verbs for the mystery of love of the Father for the Son. {Greater works than these} (\meizona tout“n erga\). \Tout“n\ is ablative case after the comparative \meizona\ (from \megas\, great). John often uses \erga\ for the miracles of Christ (5:36; strkjv@7:3,21; strkjv@10:25,32,38|, etc.). It is the Father who does these works (14:10|). There is more to follow. Even the disciples will surpass what Christ is doing in the extent of the work (14:12|). \Deixei\ is future active indicative of \deiknumi\, to show. See also strkjv@10:32|. {That ye may marvel} (\hina humeis thaumazˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \thaumaz“\. Wonder belongs to childhood and to men of knowledge. Modern science has increased the occasion for wonder. Clement of Alexandria has a saying of Jesus: "He that wonders shall reign, and he that reigns shall rest."

rwp@John:5:21 @{Quickeneth whom he will} (\hous thelei z“opoiei\). Present active indicative of \z“opoie“\ (from \z“opoios\, making alive), common in Paul (1Corinthians:15:45|, etc.). As yet, so far as we know, Jesus had not raised the dead, but he claims the power to do it on a par with the power of the Father. The raising of the son of the widow of Nain (Luke:7:11-17|) is not far ahead, followed by the message to the Baptist which speaks of this same power (Luke:7:22; strkjv@Matthew:11:5|), and the raising of Jairus' daughter (Matthew:9:18,22-26|). Jesus exercises this power on those "whom he wills." Christ has power to quicken both body and soul.

rwp@John:5:23 @{That all may honour the Son} (\hina pantes tim“sin ton huion\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \tima“\ (may keep on honouring the Son). {He that honoureth not the Son} (\ho mˆ tim“n ton huion\). Articular present active participle of \tima“\ with negative \mˆ\. Jesus claims here the same right to worship from men that the Father has. Dishonouring Jesus is dishonouring the Father who sent him (8:49; strkjv@12:26; strkjv@15:23; strkjv@1John:2:23|). See also strkjv@Luke:10:16|. There is small comfort here for those who praise Jesus as teacher and yet deny his claims to worship. The Gospel of John carries this high place for Christ throughout, but so do the other Gospels (even Q, the Logia of Jesus) and the rest of the New Testament.

rwp@John:5:24 @{Hath eternal life} (\echei z“ˆn ai“nion\). Has now this spiritual life which is endless. See strkjv@3:36|. In verses 24,25| Jesus speaks of spiritual life and spiritual death. In this passage (21-29|) Jesus speaks now of physical life and death, now of spiritual, and one must notice carefully the quick transition. In strkjv@Revelation:20:14| we have the phrase "the second death" with which language compare strkjv@Revelation:20:4-6|. {But hath passed out of death into life} (\alla metabebˆken ek tou thanatou eis tˆn z“ˆn\). Perfect active indicative of \metabain“\, to pass from one place or state to another. Out of spiritual death into spiritual life and so no judgement (\krisis\).

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:5:27 @{Because he is the Son of man} (\hoti huios anthr“pou estin\). Rather, "because he is a son of man" (note absence of articles and so not as the Messiah), because the judge of men must partake of human nature himself (Westcott). Bernard insists that John is here giving his own reflections rather than the words of Jesus and uses \huios anthr“pou\ in the same sense as \ho huios tou anthr“pou\ (always in the Gospels used by Jesus of himself). But that in my opinion is a wrong view since we have here ostensibly certainly the words of Jesus himself. Songs:in strkjv@Revelation:1:13; strkjv@4:14| \huion anthr“pou\ means "a son of man."

rwp@John:5:28 @{In the tombs} (\en tois mnˆmeiois\). \Taphos\ (grave) presents the notion of burial (\thapt“\, to bury) as in strkjv@Matthew:23:27|, \mnˆmeion\ (from \mnaomai\, \mimnˆsk“\, to remind) is a memorial (sepulchre as a monument). Jesus claims not only the power of life (spiritual) and of judgement, but of power to quicken the actual dead at the Last Day. They will hear his voice and come out (\ekporeusontai\, future middle indicative of \ekporeuomai\). A general judgement and a general bodily resurrection we have here for both good and bad as in strkjv@Matthew:25:46; strkjv@Acts:24:15; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:10| and as often implied in the words of Jesus (Matthew:5:29f.; strkjv@10:28; strkjv@Luke:11:32|). In strkjv@John:6:39| Jesus asserts that he will raise up the righteous.

rwp@John:5:29 @{Unto the resurrection of life} (\eis anastasin z“ˆs\). \Anastasis\ is an old word (Aeschylus) from \anistˆmi\, to raise up, to arise. This combination occurs nowhere else in the N.T. nor does "the resurrection of judgement" (\eis anastasin krise“s\), but in strkjv@Luke:14:14| there is the similar phrase "in the resurrection of the just" (\en tˆi anastasei t“n dikai“n\). Only there note both articles. Here without the articles it can mean "to a resurrection of life" and "to a resurrection of judgement," though the result is practically the same. There are two resurrections as to result, one to life, one to judgement. See both in strkjv@Daniel:12:2|.

rwp@John:5:30 @{I} (\Eg“\). The discourse returns to the first person after using "the Son" since verse 19|. Here Jesus repeats in the first person (as in strkjv@8:28|) the statement made in verse 19| about the Son. In John \emautou\ is used by Jesus 16 times and not at all by Jesus in the Synoptics. It occurs in the Synoptics only in strkjv@Matthew:8:8; strkjv@Luke:7:7f|. {Righteous} (\dikaia\). As all judgements should be. The reason is plain (\hoti\, because), the guiding principle with the Son being the will of the Father who sent him and made him Judge. Judges often have difficulty in knowing what is law and what is right, but the Son's task as Judge is simple enough, the will of the Father which he knows (verse 20|).

rwp@John:5:31 @{If I bear witness of myself} (\Ean eg“ martur“ peri emautou\). Condition of third class, undetermined with prospect of determination (\ean\ and present active subjunctive of \marture“\). The emphasis is on \eg“\ (I alone with no other witness). {Is not true} (\ouk estin alˆthˆs\). In law the testimony of a witness is not received in his own case (Jewish, Greek, Roman law). See strkjv@Deuteronomy:19:15| and the allusion to it by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:18:16|. See also strkjv@2Corinthians:13:1; strkjv@1Timothy:5:19|. And yet in strkjv@8:12-19| Jesus claims that his witness concerning himself is true because the Father gives confirmation of his message. The Father and the Son are the two witnesses (8:17|). It is a paradox and yet true. But here Jesus yields to the rabbinical demand for proof outside of himself. He has the witness of another (the Father, strkjv@5:32,37|), the witness of the Baptist (5:33|), the witness of the works of Jesus (5:36|), the witness of the Scriptures (5:39|), the witness of Moses in particular (5:45|).

rwp@John:5:34 @{But the witness which I receive} (\Eg“ de ou tˆn marturian lamban“\). "But I do not receive the witness" simply from a man (like John). The \eg“\ (I) in sharp contrast with \humeis\ (ye) of verse 33|. Jesus complained of Nicodemus for not accepting his witness (3:11|). Cf. also strkjv@3:32|. In strkjv@1John:5:9| the witness of God is greater than that of men and this Jesus has. {That ye may be saved} (\hina humeis s“thˆte\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \s“z“\. This was the purpose of Christ's coming, that the world might be saved (3:17|).

rwp@John:5:35 @{He} (\ekeinos\). "That one" (John of 33|). Common demonstrative (that one) in John to point out the subject. Used in strkjv@1:8| of the Baptist as here. John was now in prison and so Christ uses \ˆn\ (was). His active ministry is over. {The lamp} (\ho luchnos\). The lamp in the room (Mark:4:21|). Old word for lamp or candle as in strkjv@Matthew:5:15|. Used of Christ (the Lamb) as the Lamp of the New Jerusalem (Revelation:21:23|). \Lampas\ (Matthew:25:1,3|, etc.) is a torch whose wick is fed with oil. The Baptist was not the Light (\to ph“s\, strkjv@1:8|), but a lamp shining in the darkness. "When the Light comes, the lamp is no longer needed" (Bernard). "_Non Lux iste, sed lucerna_." Jesus by his own claim is the Light of the World (8:12; strkjv@9:5; strkjv@12:46|). And yet all believers are in a sense "the light of the world" (Matthew:5:14|) since the world gets the Light of Christ through us. {That burneth} (\ho kaiomenos\). See strkjv@Matthew:5:15| for this verb used with \luchnos\ (lighting a candle or lamp). The lamp that is lit and is burning (present passive participle of \kai“\, and so is consumed). {And shineth} (\kai phain“n\). See strkjv@1:4| for this verb used of the Logos shining in the darkness. Cf. strkjv@1John:2:8|. John was giving light as he burned for those in darkness like these Jews. {And ye were willing} (\humeis de ˆthelˆsate\). "But ye became willing." Ingressive aorist active indicative of \thel“\. Reference again to strkjv@1:19|. Cf. also for the temporary popularity of the Baptist strkjv@Mark:1:5; strkjv@Matthew:3:5; strkjv@11:7; strkjv@21:26|. The Jews were attracted to John "like moths to a candle" (Bernard). {To rejoice} (\agalliathˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \agalliaomai\, late word for \agallomai\ for which see strkjv@Matthew:5:12|. "They were attracted by his brightness, not by his warmth" (Bengel). Even so the brightness of John's shining did not really enlighten their minds. "The interest in the Baptist was a frivolous, superficial, and short-lived excitement" (Vincent). It was only "for an hour" (\pros h“ran\) when they turned against him.

rwp@John:5:36 @{But the witness which I have is greater than that of John} (\Eg“ de ech“ tˆn marturian meiz“ tou I“anou\). Literally, "But I have the witness greater than John's." \Meiz“\ (\meizona\) is predicate accusative and \I“anou\ is ablative of comparison after \meiz“\. Good as the witness of John is, Christ has superior testimony. {To accomplish} (\hina telei“s“\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \teleio“\, the same idiom in strkjv@4:34|. Jesus felt keenly the task laid on him by the Father (cf. strkjv@3:35|) and claimed at the end that he had performed it (17:4; strkjv@19:30|). Jesus held that the highest form of faith did not require these "works" (\erga\) as in strkjv@2:23; strkjv@10:38; strkjv@14:11|. But these "works" bear the seal of the Father's approval (5:20,36; strkjv@10:25|) and to reject their witness is wrong (10:25; strkjv@10:37f.; strkjv@15:24|). {The very works} (\auta ta erga\). "The works themselves," repeating \ta erga\ just before for vernacular emphasis. {Hath sent me} (\me apestalken\). Perfect active indicative of \apostell“\, the permanence of the mission. Cf. strkjv@3:17|. The continuance of the witness is emphasized in strkjv@5:32; strkjv@8:18|.

rwp@John:5:37 @{He hath borne witness} (\ekeinos memarturˆken\). \Ekeinos\ (that one; cf. strkjv@5:35,38|), not \autos\. Perfect active indicative of \marture“\, the direct witness of the Father, besides the indirect witness of the works. Jesus is not speaking of the voice of the Father at his baptism (Mark:1:11|), the transfiguration (Mark:9:7|), nor even at the time of the visit of the Greeks (John:12:28|). This last voice was heard by many who thought it was thunder or an angel. The language of Jesus refers to the witness of the Father in the heart of the believers as is made plain in strkjv@1John:5:9,10|. God's witness does not come by audible "voice" (\ph“nˆn\) nor visible "form" (\eidos\). Cf. strkjv@1:18; strkjv@6:46; strkjv@1John:4:12|. \Akˆkoate\ is perfect active indicative of \akou“\, to hear, and \he“rakate\ is perfect active indicative of \hora“\, to see. It is a permanent state of failure to hear and see God. The experience of Jacob in Peniel (Genesis:32:30|) was unusual, but Jesus will say that those who have seen him have seen the Father (John:14:9|), but here he means the Father's "voice" and "form" as distinct from the Son.

rwp@John:5:38 @{And} (\kai\). "And yet" as in strkjv@1:10| and strkjv@5:40| below. {His word abiding in you} (\ton logon autou en humin menonta\). But God's word had come to them through the centuries by the prophets. For the phrase see strkjv@10:35; strkjv@15:3; strkjv@17:6; strkjv@1John:1:10; strkjv@2:14|. {Him ye believe not} (\tout“i humeis ou pisteuete\). "This one" (\tout“i\, dative case with \pisteuete\) in emphatic relation to preceding "he" (\ekeinos\, God). Jesus has given them God's word, but they reject both Jesus and God's word (John:14:9|).

rwp@John:5:39 @{Ye search} (\eraunƒte\). Proper spelling as the papyri show rather than \ereunƒte\, the old form (from \ereuna\, search) as in strkjv@7:52|. The form here can be either present active indicative second person plural or the present active imperative second person plural. Only the context can decide. Either makes sense here, but the reason given "because ye think" (\hoti humeis dokeite\, clearly indicative), supports the indicative rather than the imperative. Besides, Jesus is arguing on the basis of their use of "the Scriptures" (\tas graphas\). The plural with the article refers to the well-known collection in the Old Testament (Matthew:21:42; strkjv@Luke:24:27|). Elsewhere in John the singular refers to a particular passage (2:22; strkjv@7:38; strkjv@10:35|). {In them ye have eternal life} (\en autais z“ˆn ai“nion echein\). Indirect assertion after \dokeite\ without "ye" expressed either as nominative (\humeis\) or accusative (\humas\). Bernard holds that in John \doke“\ always indicates a mistaken opinion (5:45; strkjv@11:13,31; strkjv@13:29; strkjv@16:20; strkjv@20:15|). Certainly the rabbis did make a mechanical use of the letter of Scripture as a means of salvation. {These are they} (\ekeinai eisin hai\). The true value of the Scriptures is in their witness to Christ (of me, \peri emou\). Luke (24:27,45|) gives this same claim of Jesus, and yet some critics fail to find the Messiah in the Old Testament. But Jesus did.

rwp@John:5:41 @{Glory from men} (\doxan para anthr“p“n\). Mere honour and praise Jesus does not expect from men (verse 34|). This is not wounded pride, for ambition is not Christ's motive. He is unlike the Jews (5:44; strkjv@12:43; strkjv@Matthew:6:1f.|) and seeks not his own glory, but the glory and fellowship of the Father (1:14; strkjv@2:11; strkjv@7:18|). Paul did not seek glory from men (1Thessalonians:2:6|).

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

rwp@John:5:44 @{How can ye believe?} (\p“s dunasthe humeis pisteusai;\). Emphasis on "ye" (\humeis\), ye being what ye are. They were not true Jews (Romans:2:29; strkjv@Esther:9:28|) who cared for the glory of God, but they prefer the praise of men (Matthew:6:1f.; strkjv@23:5|) like the Pharisees who feared to confess Christ (John:12:43|). {From the only God} (\para tou monou theou\). B and W omit \theou\ which is certainly meant even if not genuine here. See strkjv@17:3; strkjv@Romans:16:27; strkjv@1Timothy:6:15f|.

rwp@John:5:47 @{His writings} (\tois ekeinou grammasin\). Dative case with \pistuete\. See strkjv@Luke:16:31| for a like argument. The authority of Moses was the greatest of all for Jews. There is a contrast also between {writings} (\grammasin\, from \graph“\, to write) and {words} (\rˆmasin\, from \eipon\). \Gramma\ may mean the mere letter as opposed to spirit (2Corinthians:3:6; strkjv@Romans:2:27,29; strkjv@7:6|), a debtor's bond (Luke:16:6f.|), letters or learning (John:7:15; strkjv@Acts:26:24|) like \agrammatoi\ for unlearned (Acts:4:13|), merely written characters (Luke:23:38; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:7; strkjv@Galatians:6:11|), official communications (Acts:28:21|), once \hiera grammata\ for the sacred writings (2Timothy:3:15|) instead of the more usual \hai hagiai graphai\. \Graphˆ\ is used also for a single passage (Mark:12:10|), but \biblion\ for a book or roll (Luke:4:17|) or \biblos\ (Luke:20:42|). Jesus clearly states the fact that Moses wrote portions of the Old Testament, what portions he does not say. See also strkjv@Luke:24:27,44| for the same idea. There was no answer from the rabbis to this conclusion of Christ. The scribes (\hoi grammateis\) made copies according to the letter (\kata to gramma\).

rwp@John:6:1 @{After these things} (\meta tauta\). A common, but indefinite, note of time in John (3:22; strkjv@5:1; strkjv@6:1; strkjv@7:1|). The phrase does not mean immediate sequence of events. As a matter of fact, a whole year may intervene between the events of chapter 5 in Jerusalem and those in chapter 6 in Galilee. There is no sufficient reason for believing that chapter 6 originally preceded chapter 5. The feeding of the five thousand is the only event before the last visit to Jerusalem recorded in all Four Gospels (Mark:6:30-44; strkjv@Matthew:14:13-21; strkjv@Luke:9:10-17; strkjv@John:6:1-13|). The disciples have returned from the tour of Galilee and report to Jesus. It was the passover time (John:6:4|) just a year before the end. {To the other side of the Sea of Galilee} (\peran tˆs thalassˆs tˆs Galilaias\). The name given in Mark and Matthew. It is called Gennesaret in strkjv@Luke:5:1| and "Sea of Tiberias" in strkjv@John:21:1|. Here "of Tiberias" (\tˆs Tiberiados\) is added as further description. Herod Antipas A.D. 22 built Tiberias to the west of the Sea of Galilee and made it his capital. See verse 23| for this city. Luke (Luke:9:10|) explains that it was the eastern Bethsaida (Julias) to which Jesus took the disciples, not the western Bethsaida of strkjv@Mark:6:45| in Galilee.

rwp@John:6:2 @{Followed} (\ˆkolouthei\). Descriptive imperfect active, picturing the crowd, but without the details of the boat for Christ and the rapid race of the crowd on foot (Mark:6:32f.; strkjv@Matthew:14:13f.|). {They beheld} (\ethe“roun\). Imperfect active of \the“re“\. They had been beholding the signs which Jesus had been doing (\epoiei\, imperfect again) for a long time (2:23|), most of which John has not given (Mark:1:29f.; strkjv@2:1; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@6:5|). The people were eager to hear Jesus again (Luke:9:11|) and to get the benefit of his healing power "on them that were sick" (\epi t“n asthenount“n\, the weak or feeble, without strength, \a\ privative and \sthenos\, strength).

rwp@John:6:7 @{Two hundred pennyworth of bread} (\diakosi“n dˆnari“n artoi\). "Loaves of two hundred denarii." The Roman coin originally for ten asses (afterwards sixteen), about 16 2/3 cents. The denarius was the usual pay for a day's labour (Matthew:20:2,9,13|). This item in strkjv@Mark:6:37|, but not in Matthew or Luke. {That every one may take a little} (\hina hekastos brachu labˆi\). Final clause with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \lamban“\. This detail in John alone.

rwp@John:6:8 @{One of} (\heis ek\). Songs:in strkjv@12:4|; strkjv@13:23; strkjv@Mark:13:1| without \ek\. {Simon Peter's brother} (\ho adelphos Sim“nos Petrou\). Songs:described in strkjv@1:40|. The great distinction of Andrew was precisely this that he brought Simon to Christ. Philip and Andrew appear together again in strkjv@12:20-22|, but in the Synoptics he is distinguished only in strkjv@Mark:13:3|. In the Muratorian Fragment Andrew received the revelation for John to write the Fourth Gospel.

rwp@John:6:11 @{The loaves} (\tous artous\). Those of verse 9|. {Having given thanks} (\eucharistˆsas\). The usual grace before meals (Deuteronomy:8:10|). The Synoptics use "blessed" \eulogˆsen\ (Mark:6:41; strkjv@Matthew:14:19; strkjv@Luke:9:16|). {He distributed} (\died“ken\). First aorist active indicative of \diadid“mi\, old verb to give to several (\dia\, between). {To them that were set down} (\tois anakeimenois\). Present middle participle (dative case) of \anakeimai\, old verb to recline like \anapesein\ in verse 10|. {As much as they would} (\hoson ˆthelon\). Imperfect active of \thel“\, "as much as they wished."

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

rwp@John:6:14 @{Saw the sign which he did} (\idontes ha epoiˆsen sˆmeia\). "Signs" oldest MSS. have. This sign added to those already wrought (verse 2|). Cf. strkjv@2:23; strkjv@3:2|. {They said} (\elegon\). Inchoative imperfect, began to say. {Of a truth} (\alˆth“s\). Common adverb (from \alˆthˆs\) in John (7:40|). {The prophet that cometh} (\ho prophˆtˆs ho erchomenos\). There was a popular expectation about the prophet of strkjv@Deuteronomy:18:15| as being the Messiah (John:1:21; strkjv@11:27|). The phrase is peculiar to John, but the idea is in Acts (3:22; strkjv@7:37|). The people are on the tiptoe of expectation and believe that Jesus is the political Messiah of Pharisaic hope.

rwp@John:6:15 @{Perceiving} (\gnous\). Second aorist active participle of \gin“sk“\. It was not hard for Christ to read the mind of this excited mob. {They were about} (\mellousin\). Present active indicative of \mell“\. Probably the leaders were already starting. {Take him by force} (\harpazein\). Present active infinitive of \harpaz“\, old verb for violent seizing (Matthew:11:12; strkjv@13:19|). There was a movement to start a revolution against Roman rule in Palestine by proclaiming Jesus King and driving away Pilate. {To make him king} (\hina poiˆs“sin basilea\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \poie“\ with \basilea\ as predicate accusative. It was a crisis that called for quick action. {Himself alone} (\autos monos\). At first he had the disciples with him (verse 3|). But he sent them hurriedly by boat to the western side (Mark:6:45f.; strkjv@Matthew:14:22f.|) because clearly the apostles were sympathetic with the revolutionary impulse of the crowd. Then Jesus sent the multitudes away also and went up into the mountain alone. He was alone in every sense, for no one but the Father understood him at this stage, not even his own disciples. He went up to pray (Mark:6:46; strkjv@Matthew:14:23|).

rwp@John:6:17 @{Were going} (\ˆrchonto\). Picturesque imperfect. {It was now dark} (\skotia ˆdˆ egegonei\). Past perfect active of \ginomai\. While they were going, "darkness had already come." {And Jesus had not yet come to them} (\kai ouk elˆluthei pros autous ho Iˆsous\). Another past perfect active of \erchomai\ with negative \oup“\. Darkness had come, but Jesus had not come, while they were going over the sea. The tenses in these verses are very graphic.

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:6:24 @{When the multitude therefore saw} (\hote oun eiden ho ochlos\). Resumption and clarification of the complicated statements of verse 22|. {That Jesus was not there} (\hoti Iˆsous ouk estin ekei\). Present indicative retained in indirect discourse. They still did not understand how Jesus had crossed over, but they acted on the basis of the plain fact. {They themselves got into} (\enebˆsan autoi eis\). Second aorist active indicative of \embain“\ followed by \eis\ (both \en\ and \eis\ together as often in N.T.). {Seeking Jesus} (\zˆtountes ton Iˆsoun\). Present active participle of \zˆte“\. They had a double motive apart from the curiosity explained in verse 22|. They had clearly not given up the impulse of the evening before to make Jesus king (6:15|) and they had hopes of still another bountiful repast at the hands of Jesus as he said (6:26|).

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

rwp@John:6:30 @{For a sign} (\sˆmeion\). Predicate accusative, as a sign, with \ti\ (what). As if the sign of the day before was without value. Jesus had said that they did not understand his signs (verse 26|). {That we may see, and believe thee} (\hina id“men kai pisteus“men\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of \hora“\ and the first aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of \pisteu“\, "that we may come to see and come to have faith in thee." It is hard to have patience with this superficial and almost sneering mob. {What workest thou?} (\Ti ergazˆi;\). They not simply depreciate the miracle of the day before, but set up a standard for Jesus.

rwp@John:6:32 @{It was not Moses that gave you} (\ou M“usˆs ed“ken humin\). "Not Moses gave you." Blunt and pointed denial (aorist active indicative of \did“mi\) that Moses was the giver of the bread from heaven (the manna). Moses was not superior to Christ on this score. {But my Father} (\all ho patˆr mou\). Not "our Father," but same claim as in strkjv@5:17f|. Which caused so much anger in Jerusalem. {Gives} (\did“sin\). Present active indicative, not aorist (\ed“ken\). Continual process. {The true bread out of heaven} (\ton arton ek tou ouranou ton alˆthinon\). "The bread out of heaven" as the manna and more "the genuine bread" of which that was merely a type. On \alˆthinos\ see strkjv@1:9; strkjv@4:23|.

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

rwp@John:6:35 @{I am the bread of life} (\Eg“ eimi ho artos tˆs z“ˆs\). This sublime sentence was startling in the extreme to the crowd. Philo does compare the manna to the \theios logos\ in an allegorical sense, but this language is far removed from Philo's vagueness. In the Synoptics (Mark:14:22; strkjv@Matthew:26:26; strkjv@Luke:22:19|) Jesus uses bread (\artos\) as the symbol of his body in the Lord's Supper, but here Jesus offers himself in place of the loaves and fishes which they had come to seek (24,26|). He is the bread of life in two senses: it has life in itself, the living bread (51|), and it gives life to others like the water of life, the tree of life. John often has Jesus saying "I am" (\eg“ eimi\). As also in strkjv@6:41,48,51; strkjv@8:12; strkjv@10:7,9,11,14; strkjv@11:25; strkjv@14:6; strkjv@15:1,5|. {He that cometh to me} (\ho erchomenos pros eme\). The first act of the soul in approaching Jesus. See also verse 37|. {Shall not hunger} (\ou mˆ peinasˆi\). Strong double negative \ou me\ with first aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive, "shall not become hungry." {He that believeth on me} (\ho pisteu“n eis eme\). The continuous relation of trust after coming like \pisteuˆte\ (present tense) in verse 29|. See both verbs used together also in strkjv@7:37f|. {Shall never thirst} (\ou mˆ dipsˆsei p“pote\). Songs:the old MSS. the future active indicative instead of the aorist subjunctive as above, an even stronger form of negation with \p“pote\ (1:18|) added.

rwp@John:6:38 @{I am come down} (\katabebˆka\). Perfect active indicative of \katabain“\. See on ¯33| for frequent use of this phrase by Jesus. Here \apo\ is correct rather than \ek\ with \tou ouranou\. {Not to do} (\ouch hina poi“\). "Not that I keep on doing" (final clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \poie“\). {But the will} (\alla to thelˆma\). Supply \hina poi“\ after \alla\, "but that I keep on doing." This is the fulness of joy for Jesus, to do his Father's will (4:34; strkjv@5:30|).

rwp@John:6:39 @{That of all that which} (\hina pƒn ho\). Literally, "That all which" (see verse 37| for \pan ho\), but there is a sharp anacoluthon with \pƒn\ left as _nominativus pendens_. {I should lose nothing} (\mˆ apoles“ ex autou\). Construed with \hina\, "that I shall not lose anything of it." \Apoles“\, from \apollumi\, can be either future active indicative or first aorist active subjunctive as is true also of \anastˆs“\ (from \anistˆmi\), "I shall raise up." {At the last day} (\tˆi eschatˆi hemerƒi\). Locative case without \en\. Only in John, but four times here (39,40,44,54|) "with the majesty of a solemn refrain." In strkjv@7:37| it is the last day of the feast of tabernacles, but in strkjv@11:24; strkjv@12:48| of the day of judgment as here. Christ is the Agent of the general resurrection in strkjv@5:28| as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:22| while here only the resurrection of the righteous is mentioned.

rwp@John:9:2 @{Who did sin?} (\tis hˆmarten;\). Second aorist active indicative of \hamartan“\. See strkjv@Acts:3:2; strkjv@14:8| for two examples of lameness from birth. Blindness is common in the Orient and Jesus healed many cases (cf. strkjv@Mark:8:23; strkjv@10:46|) and mentions this fact as one of the marks of the Messiah in the message to the Baptist (Matthew:11:5|). This is the only example of congenital blindness healed. It is not clear that the disciples expected Jesus to heal this case. They are puzzled by the Jewish notion that sickness was a penalty for sin. The Book of Job:had shown that this was not always the case and Jesus shows it also (Luke:13:1-5|). If this man was guilty, it was due to prenatal sin on his part, a curious notion surely. The other alternative charged it upon his parents. That is sometimes true (Exodus:20:5|, etc.), but by no means always. The rabbinical casuists loved to split hairs on this problem. Ezekiel (Ezekiel:18:20|) says: "The soul that sinneth it shall die" (individual responsibility for sin committed). There is something in heredity, but not everything. {That he should be born blind} (\hina tuphlos gennˆthˆi\). Probably consecutive (or sub-final) use of \hina\ with first aorist passive subjunctive of \genna“\.

rwp@John:9:3 @{But that the works of God should be made manifest in him} (\all' hina phaner“thˆi ta erga tou theou en aut“i\). Jesus denies both alternatives, and puts God's purpose (\all' hina\ with first aorist subjunctive of \phanero“\) as the true solution. It is sometimes true that disease is the result of personal sin as in the man in strkjv@5:14| and parents can hand on the effects of sin to the third and fourth generations, but there are cases free from blame like this. There is comfort for many sufferers in the words of Jesus here.

rwp@John:9:4 @{We must work the works of him that sent me} (\hˆmas dei ergazesthai ta erga tou pempsantos me\). This is undoubtedly the correct text (supported by the Neutral and Western classes) and not \eme\ (I) and \me\ (me) of the Syrian class nor \hˆmas\ (we) and \hˆmas\ (us) of the Alexandrian class. Jesus associates us with him in the task committed to him by the Father. Bernard argues vigorously, but vainly, for \eme\ me. We are not able to fathom the depth of the necessity (\dei\) here involved in each life as in this poor blind man and in each of us. {While it is day} (\he“s hˆmera estin\). This clause gives the note of urgency upon us all. {The night cometh} (\erchetai nux\). "Night is coming on," and rapidly. Night was coming for Jesus (7:33|) and for each of us. Cf. strkjv@11:9; strkjv@12:35|. Even electric lights do not turn night into day. \He“s\ with the present indicative (21:22f.|) means "while," not until as in strkjv@13:38|.

rwp@John:9:5 @{When I am in the world} (\hotan en t“i kosm“i “\). Indefinite relative clause with \hotan\ and present active subjunctive \“\, "whenever I am in the world." The Latin Vulgate renders here \hotan\ by _quamdiu_ so long as or while as if it were \he“s\. But clearly Jesus here refers to the historic Incarnation (17:11|) and to any previous visitations in the time of the patriarchs, prophets, etc. Jesus as God's Son is always the Light of the World (1:4,10; strkjv@8:12|), but here the reference is limited to his manifestation "in the world." {I am the light of the world} (\ph“s eimi tou kosmou\). The absence of the definite article (\to ph“s\ in strkjv@8:12|) is to be noted (Westcott). Literally, "I am light to the world, whenever I am in the world." "The display of the character varies with the occasion" (Westcott).

rwp@John:9:6 @{He spat on the ground} (\eptusen chamai\). First aorist active indicative of the old verb \ptu“\ for which see strkjv@Mark:7:33|. \Chamai\ is an old adverb either in the dative or locative (sense suits locative), in N.T. only here and strkjv@John:18:6|. Jesus was not asked to cure this man. The curative effects of saliva are held in many places. The Jews held saliva efficacious for eye-trouble, but it was forbidden on the Sabbath. "That Jesus supposed some virtue lay in the application of the clay is contradicted by the fact that in other cases of blindness He did not use it" (Dods). Cf. strkjv@Mark:8:23|. Why he here accommodated himself to current belief we do not know unless it was to encourage the man to believe. {He made clay} (\epoiˆsen pˆlon\). Only use of \pˆlos\, old word for clay, in N.T. in this chapter and strkjv@Romans:9:21|. The kneading of the clay and spittle added another offence against the Sabbath rules of the rabbis. {Anointed his eyes with the clay} (\epechrisen autou ton pˆlon epi tous ophthalmous\). First aorist active indicative of \epichri“\, old verb, to spread on, anoint, here only and verse 11| in N.T. "He spread the clay upon his eyes." B C read \epethˆken\ (first aorist active indicative of \epitithˆmi\, to put on).

rwp@John:9:34 @{Thou wast altogether born in sin} (\en hamartiais su egennˆthˆs holos\). First aorist passive indicative of \genna“\. "In sins thou wast begotten (or born) all of thee." \Holos\ is predicate nominative and teaches total depravity in this case beyond controversy, the Pharisees being judges. {And dost thou teach us?} (\kai su didaskeis hˆmas;\). The audacity of it all. Note emphasis on \su\ (thou). It was insufferable. He had not only taught the rabbis, but had utterly routed them in argument. {And they cast him out} (\kai exebalon auton ex“\). Effective second aorist active indicative of \ekball“\ intensified by the addition of \ex“\. Probably not yet expulsion from the synagogue (9:22|) which required a formal meeting of the Sanhedrin, but certainly forcible driving of the gifted upstart from their presence. See strkjv@6:37| for another use of \ekball“ ex“\ besides strkjv@9:35|.

rwp@John:9:35 @{Finding him} (\heur“n auton\). Second aorist active participle of \heurisk“\, after search because of what he had heard (\ˆkousen\). {Dost thou believe on the Son of God?} (\Su pisteueis eis ton huion tou theou;\). Songs:A L Theta and most versions, but Aleph B D W Syr-sin read \tou anthr“pou\ (the Son of Man), almost certainly correct. In either case it is a distinct Messianic claim quite beyond the range of this man's limited knowledge, keen as he is.

rwp@John:9:36 @{And who is he, Lord, that I may believe on him?} (\Kai tis estin, kurie;\). The initial \kai\ (and) is common (Mark:10:26; strkjv@Luke:10:29; strkjv@18:26|). Probably by \kurie\ he means only "Sir." It usually comes at the beginning of the sentence, not at the end as here and verse 38|. {That I may believe on him} (\hina pisteus“ eis auton\). Ellipsis to be supplied before this final clause. He catches up the words of Jesus in the preceding verse, though he does not yet know who the Son of Man (or Son of God) is, but he trusts Jesus.

rwp@John:9:38 @{Lord, I believe} (\Pisteu“, kurie\). \Kurie\ here = Lord (reverence, no longer respect as in 36|). A short creed, but to the point. {And he worshipped him} (\kai prosekunˆsen aut“i\). Ingressive first aorist active indicative of \proskune“\, old verb to fall down in reverence, to worship. Sometimes of men (Matthew:18:26|). In John (see strkjv@4:20|) this verb "is always used to express divine worship" (Bernard). It is tragic to hear men today deny that Jesus should be worshipped. He accepted worship from this new convert as he later did from Thomas who called him "God" (John:20:28|). Peter (Acts:10:25f.|) refused worship from Cornelius as Paul and Barnabas did at Lystra (Acts:14:18|), but Jesus made no protest here.

rwp@John:9:39 @{For judgement} (\eis krima\). The Father had sent the Son for this purpose (3:17|). This world (\kosmos\) is not the home of Jesus. The \krima\ (judgement), a word nowhere else in John, is the result of the \krisis\ (sifting) from \krin“\, to separate. The Father has turned over this process of sifting (\krisis\) to the Son (5:22|). He is engaged in that very work by this miracle. {They which see not} (\hoi mˆ blepontes\). The spiritually blind as well as the physically blind (Luke:4:18; strkjv@Isaiah:42:18|). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive \blep“sin\ (may keep on seeing). This man now sees physically and spiritually. {And that they which see may become blind} (\kai hoi blepontes tuphloi gen“ntai\). Another part of God's purpose, seen in strkjv@Matthew:11:25; strkjv@Luke:10:21|, is the curse on those who blaspheme and reject the Son. Note ingressive aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\ and predicate nominative. \Hoi blepontes\ are those who profess to see like these Pharisees, but are really blind. Blind guides they were (Matthew:23:16|). Complacent satisfaction with their dim light.

rwp@John:11:13 @{Had spoken} (\eirˆkei\). Past perfect of \eipon\ (\er“\). The disciples had misunderstood Christ's metaphor for death. {That he spake} (\hoti legei\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse after the secondary tense (\edoxan\). {Of taking rest in sleep} (\peri tˆs koimˆse“s tou hupou\). Only use of \koimˆsis\ (from \koima“\) in the N.T., but it also was used of death (Sirach strkjv@46:19). \Hupnou\ (in sleep) is objective genitive of \hupnos\ (sleep, strkjv@Matthew:1:24|).

rwp@John:11:15 @{For your sakes} (\di' humas\). That they may witness his raising from the grave. {That I was not there} (\hoti ouk ˆmˆn ekei\). Imperfect middle \ˆmˆn\ of the later Greek instead of the common active \ˆn\ in indirect discourse in place of the usual present retained as in verse 13|. {To the intent ye may believe} (\hina pisteusˆte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the ingressive aorist active subjunctive, "that ye may come to believe" (more than you do). See the same use of the ingressive aorist in \episteusan\ (2:11|) where the disciples gained in belief. {Nevertheless let us go to him} (\alla ag“men pros auton\). Volitive subjunctive, repeating the proposal of verse 7|. He is dead, but no matter, yea all the more let us go on to him.

rwp@John:11:18 @{About fifteen furlongs off} (\h“s apo stadi“n dekapente\). The idiom of \apo\ with the ablative for distance is like the Latin _a millibus passum duobus_ (Caesar, _Bell. Gall_. ii. 7), but it (\pro\ also, strkjv@John:12:1|) occurs already in the Doric and in the _Koin‚_ often (Moulton, _Proleg_., p. 101; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 110). See it again in strkjv@21:8; strkjv@Revelation:14:20|.

rwp@John:11:20 @{That Jesus was coming} (\hoti Iˆsous erchetai\). Present middle indicative retained in indirect discourse after the secondary tense \ˆkousen\ (first aorist active). {Went and met him} (\hupˆntˆsen aut“i\). First aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \hupanta“\, old compound verb, to go to meet (Matthew:8:28|) with the associative instrumental case \aut“i\. {But Mary still sat in the house} (\Mariam de en t“i oik“i ekathezeto\). Imperfect middle of \kathezomai\, old verb to sit down, graphic picture of Mary, "while Mary was sitting in the house." Both Martha and Mary act true to form here as in strkjv@Luke:10:38-42|.

rwp@John:11:21 @{Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died} (\Kurie, ei ˆs h“de ouk an apethanen ho adelphos mou\). Condition of the second class with \ei\ and the imperfect \ˆs\ (no aorist of \eimi\, to be) in the condition and \an\ with the second aorist active indicative of \apothnˆsk“\. Mary (verse 32|) uses these identical words to Jesus. Clearly they had said so to each other with wistful longing if not with a bit of reproach for his delay. But they used \ˆs\, not \ˆlthes\ or \egenou\. But busy, practical Martha comes to the point.

rwp@John:11:22 @{And even now I know} (\kai nun oida\). Rather just, "Even now I know." \Alla\ (but) of the Textus Receptus is not genuine. {Whatsoever thou shalt ask of God} (\hosa an aitˆsˆi ton theon\). Indefinite relative (\hosa\, as many things as) with \an\ and the first aorist middle (indirect middle, thou thyself asking) subjunctive of \aite“\. Martha uses \aite“\ (usual word of prayer of men to God) rather than \er“ta“\ (usual word of Jesus praying to the Father), but in strkjv@16:23| we have \er“ta“\ used of prayer to Jesus and \aite“\ of prayer to God. But the distinction is not to be pressed. "As many things as thou dost ask of God." {God will give} (\d“sei soi ho theos\). Repetition of \ho theos\ for emphasis. Martha still has courageous faith in the power of God through Jesus and Jesus in verse 41| says practically what she has said here.

rwp@John:11:24 @{In the resurrection at the last day} (\en tˆi anastasei en tˆi eschatˆi hˆmerƒi\). Did Jesus mean only that? She believed it, of course, and such comfort is often offered in case of death, but that idea did not console Martha and is not what she hinted at in verse 22|.

rwp@John:11:25 @{I am the resurrection and the life} (\Eg“ eimi hˆ anastasis kai hˆ z“ˆ\). This reply is startling enough. They are not mere doctrines about future events, but present realities in Jesus himself. "The Resurrection is one manifestation of the Life: it is involved in the Life" (Westcott). Note the article with both \anastasis\ and \z“ˆ\. Jesus had taught the future resurrection often (6:39|), but here he means more, even that Lazarus is now alive. {Though he die} (\kan apothanˆi\). "Even if he die," condition (concession) of third class with \kai ean\ (\kan\) and the second aorist active subjunctive of \apothnˆsk“\ (physical death, he means). {Yet shall he live} (\zˆsetai\). Future middle of \za“\ (spiritual life, of course).

rwp@John:11:26 @{Shall never die} (\ou mˆ apothanˆi eis ton ai“na\). Strong double negative \ou mˆ\ with second aorist active subjunctive of \apothnˆsk“\ again (but spiritual death, this time), "shall not die for ever" (eternal death). {Believest thou this?} (\pisteueis touto;\) Sudden test of Martha's insight and faith with all the subtle turns of thought involved.

rwp@John:11:27 @{Yea, Lord} (\Nai, kurie\). Martha probably did not understand all that Jesus said and meant, but she did believe in the future resurrection, in eternal life for believers in Christ, in the power of Christ to raise even the dead here and now. She had heroic faith and makes now her own confession of faith in words that outrank those of Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:16| because she makes hers with her brother dead now four days and with the hope that Jesus will raise him up now. {I have believed} (\pepisteuka\). Perfect active indicative of \pisteu“\. It is my settled and firm faith. Peter uses this same tense in strkjv@6:69|. {That thou art the Son of God} (\hoti su ei ho Christos ho huios tou theou\). The Messiah or the Christ (1:41|) was to be also "the Son of God" as the Baptist said he had found Jesus to be (1:34|), as Peter confessed on Hermon for the apostles (Matthew:16:16|), as Jesus claimed to be (John:11:41|) and confessed on oath before Caiaphas that he was (Matthew:26:63f.|), and as John stated that it was his purpose to prove in his Gospel (20:31|). But no one said it under more trying circumstances than Martha. {Even he that cometh into the world} (\ho eis ton kosmon erchomenos\). No "even" in the Greek. This was a popular way of putting the people's expectation (6:14; strkjv@Matthew:11:3|). Jesus himself spoke of his coming into the world (9:39; strkjv@16:28; strkjv@8:37|).

rwp@John:11:31 @{Followed her} (\ˆkolouthˆsan autˆi\). First aorist active indicative of \akolouthe“\ with associative instrumental case (\autˆi\). This crowd of consolers (\paramuthoumenoi\) meant kindly enough, but did the one wrong thing for Mary wished to see Jesus alone. People with kind notions often so act. The secrecy of Martha (verse 28|) was of no avail. {Supposing that she was going unto the tomb} (\doxantes hoti hupagei eis to mnˆmeion\). First aorist active participle of \doke“\, justifying their conduct by a wrong inference. Note retention of present tense \hupagei\ in indirect discourse after the secondary tense \ˆkolouthˆsan\. {To weep there} (\hina klausˆi ekei\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \klai“\, old verb to weep. Sometimes to wail or howl in oriental style of grief, but surely not that here. At any rate this supposed purpose of Mary was a real reason for this crowd {not} to go with her.

rwp@John:11:32 @{Fell down at his feet} (\epesen autou pros tous podas\). Second aorist active of \pipt“\, to fall. Note unusual position of \autou\. This impulsive act like Mary. She said precisely what Martha had said to Jesus (verse 21|). But she said no more, only wept (verse 33|).

rwp@John:11:34 @{Where have ye laid him?} (\Pou tetheikate auton;\). Perfect active indicative of \tithˆmi\. A simple question for information. The only other like it in John is in strkjv@6:6| where it is expressly stated that Jesus knew what he was going to do. Songs:it was here, only he politely asked for direction to the tomb of Lazarus. The people invite him to come and see, the very language used by Philip to Nathanael (1:46|). It was a natural and polite reply as they would show Jesus the way, but they had no idea of his purpose.

rwp@John:11:35 @{Jesus wept} (\edakrusen ho Iˆsous\). Ingressive first aorist active indicative of \dakru“\, old verb from \dakru\ or \dakruon\, a tear (Acts:20:19|), only here in N.T. It never means to wail, as \klai“\ sometimes does. "Jesus burst into tears." \Klai“\ is used of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:19:41|. See strkjv@Hebrews:5:7| "with strong crying and tears" (\meta kraugˆs kai dakru“n\). Apparently this was as Jesus started towards (see verse 38|) the tomb. In a sense it was a reaction from the severe strain in verse 33|, but chiefly it was the sheer human sympathy of his heart with Martha and Mary touched with the feeling of our common weakness (Hebrews:4:15|). Often all that we can do is to shed tears in grief too deep for words. Jesus understood and understands. This is the shortest verse in the Bible, but no verse carries more meaning in it.

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:11:40 @{Said I not unto thee?} (\Ouk eipon soi;\). Jesus pointedly reminds Martha of his promise to raise Lazarus (verses 25f.|). {That if thou believedst} (\hoti ean pisteusˆis\). Indirect discourse with \ean\ and the first aorist active subjunctive (condition of third class) retained after the secondary tense \eipon\. He had not said this very phrase, \ean pisteusˆis\, to Martha, but he did say to her: \Pisteueis touto\; (Believest thou this?). He meant to test Martha as to her faith already hinted at (verse 22|) on this very point. Jesus had also spoken of increase of faith on the part of the disciples (verse 15|). {Thou shouldest see the glory of God} (\opsˆi tˆn doxan tou theou\). Future middle indicative of the old defective verb \hora“\ retained in the conclusion of this condition in indirect discourse. Jesus means the glory of God as shown in the resurrection of Lazarus as he had already said to the disciples (verse 4|) and as he meant Martha to understand (verse 25|) and may in fact have said to her (the report of the conversation is clearly abridged). Hence Bernard's difficulty in seeing how Martha could understand the words of Jesus about the resurrection of Lazarus here and now seems fanciful and far-fetched.

rwp@John:11:41 @{Songs:they took away the stone} (\ˆran oun ton lithon\). First aorist active indicative of \air“\, but without the explanatory gloss of the Textus Receptus "from the place where the dead was laid" (not genuine). {I thank thee that thou heardest me} (\eucharist“ soi hoti ˆkousas mou\). See strkjv@6:11| for \euchariste“\. Clearly Jesus had prayed to the Father concerning the raising of Lazarus. He has the answer before he acts. "No pomp of incantation, no wrestling in prayer even; but simple words of thanksgiving, as if already Lazarus was restored" (Dods). Jesus well knew the issues involved on this occasion. If he failed, his own claims to be the Son of God (the Messiah), would be hopelessly discredited with all. If he succeeded, the rulers would be so embittered as to compass his own death.

rwp@John:11:43 @{He cried with a loud voice} (\ph“nˆi megalˆi ekraugasen\). First aorist active indicative of \kraugaz“\, old and rare word from \kraugˆ\ (Matthew:25:6|). See strkjv@Matthew:12:19|. Occurs again in strkjv@John:18:40; strkjv@19:6,12|. Only once in the LXX (Ezra:3:13|) and with \ph“nˆi megalˆi\ (either locative or instrumental case makes sense) as here. For this "elevated (great) voice" see also strkjv@Matthew:24:31; strkjv@Mark:15:34,37; strkjv@Revelation:1:10; strkjv@21:3|. The loud voice was not for the benefit of Lazarus, but for the sake of the crowd standing around that they might see that Lazarus came forth simultaneously with the command of Jesus. {Lazarus, come forth} (\Lazare, deuro ex“\). "Hither out." No verb, only the two adverbs, \deuro\ here alone in John. Lazarus heard and obeyed the summons.

rwp@John:11:44 @{He that was dead came forth} (\exˆlthen ho tethnˆk“s\). Literally, "Came out the dead man," (effective aorist active indicative and perfect active articular participle of \thnˆsk“\). Just as he was and at once. {Bound hand and foot} (\dedemenos tous podas kai tas cheiras\). Perfect passive participle of \de“\ with the accusative loosely retained according to the common Greek idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 486), but literally "as to the feet and hands" (opposite order from the English). Probably the legs were bound separately. {With grave-clothes} (\keiriais\). Or "with bands." Instrumental case of this late and rare word (in Plutarch, medical papyrus in the form \kˆria\, and strkjv@Proverbs:7:16|). Only here in N.T. {His face} (\hˆ opsis autou\). Old word, but \pros“pon\ is usual in N.T. See strkjv@Revelation:1:16| for another instance. {Was bound about} (\periededeto\). Past perfect passive of \peride“\, old verb to bind around, only here in N.T. {With a napkin} (\soudari“i\). Instrumental case of \soudarion\ (Latin word _sudarium_ from _sudor_, sweat). In N.T. here, strkjv@20:7; strkjv@Luke:19:20; strkjv@Acts:19:12|. Our handkerchief. {Loose him} (\lusate auton\). First aorist active imperative of \lu“\. From the various bands. {Let him go} (\aphete auton hupagein\). Second aorist active imperative of \aphiˆmi\ and present active infinitive.

rwp@John:11:47 @{Gathered a council} (\sunˆgagon sunedrion\). Second aorist active indicative of \sunag“\ and \sunedrion\, the regular word for the Sanhedrin (Matthew:5:22|, etc.), only here in John. Here a sitting or session of the Sanhedrin. Both chief priests (Sadducees) and Pharisees (mentioned no more in John after strkjv@7:57| save strkjv@12:19,42|) combine in the call (cf. strkjv@7:32|). From now on the chief priests (Sadducees) take the lead in the attacks on Jesus, though loyally supported by their opponents (the Pharisees). {And said} (\kai elegon\). Imperfect active of \leg“\, perhaps inchoative, "began to say." {What do we?} (\Ti poioumen;\). Present active (linear) indicative of \poie“\. Literally, "What are we doing?" {Doeth} (\poiei\). Better, "is doing" (present, linear action). He is active and we are idle. There is no mention of the raising of Lazarus as a fact, but it is evidently inoluded in the "many signs."

rwp@John:11:48 @{If we let him thus alone} (\ean aph“men auton hout“s\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \apiˆmi\. "Suppose we leave him thus alone." Suppose also that he keeps on raising the dead right here next door to Jerusalem! {All will believe on him} (\pantes pisteusousin eis auton\). Future active of \pisteu“\. The inevitable conclusion, "all" (\pantes\), not just "some" (\tines\). as now. {And the Romans will come} (\kai eleusontai hoi R“maioi\). Another inevitable result with the future middle of \erchomai\. Only if the people take Jesus as their political Messiah (6:15|) as they had once started to do. This is a curious muddle for the rulers knew that Jesus did not claim to be a political Messiah and would not be a rival to Caesar. And yet they use this fear (their own belief about the Messiah) to stir themselves to frenzy as they will use it with Pilate later. {And take away both our place and our nation} (\kai arousin hˆm“n kai ton topon kai to ethnos\). Future active of \air“\, another certain result of their inaction. Note the order here when "place" (job) is put before nation (patriotism), for all the world like modern politicians who make the fate of the country turn on their getting the jobs which they are seeking. In the course of time the Romans will come, not because of the leniency of the Sanhedrin toward Jesus, but because of the uprising against Rome led by the Zealots and they will destroy both temple and city and the Sanhedrin will lose their jobs and the nation will be scattered. Future historians will say that this fate came as punishment on the Jews for their conduct toward Jesus.

rwp@John:11:50 @{That it is expedient for you} (\hoti sumpherei humin\). Indirect discourse with present active indicative of \sumpher“\ used with the \hina\ clause as subject. It means to bear together, to be profitable, with the dative case as here (\humin\, for you). It is to your interest and that is what they cared most for. {That one man die} (\hina heis anthr“pos apothanˆi\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist active subjunctive of \apothnˆsk“\ as subject clause with \sumpherei\. See strkjv@16:7; strkjv@18:7| for the same construction. {For the people} (\huper tou laou\). \Huper\ simply means _over_, but can be in behalf of as often, and in proper context the resultant idea is "instead of" as the succeeding clause shows and as is clearly so in strkjv@Galatians:3:13| of the death of Christ and naturally so in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14f.; strkjv@Romans:5:6|. In the papyri \huper\ is the usual preposition used of one who writes a letter for one unable to write. {And that the whole nation perish not} (\kai mˆ holon to ethnos apolˆtai\). Continuation of the \hina\ construction with \mˆ\ and the second aorist subjunctive of \apollumi\. What Caiaphas has in mind is the giving of Jesus to death to keep the nation from perishing at the hands of the Romans. Politicians are often willing to make a sacrifice of the other fellow.

rwp@John:11:51 @{Not of himself} (\aph' heautou ouk\). Not wholly of himself, John means. There was more in what Caiaphas said than he understood. His language is repeated in strkjv@18:14|. {Prophesied} (\eprophˆteusen\). Aorist active indicative of \prophˆteu“\. But certainly unconscious prophecy on his part and purely accidental. Caiaphas meant only what was mean and selfish. {That Jesus should die} (\hoti emellen Iˆsous apothnˆskein\). Imperfect active of \mell“\ in indirect discourse instead of the usual present retained after a secondary tense (\eprophˆteusen\) as sometimes occurs (see strkjv@2:25|).

rwp@John:11:52 @{But that he might also gather together into one} (\all' hina sunagagˆi eis hen\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \sunag“\. Caiaphas was thinking only of the Jewish people (\laou, ethnos\, verse 50|). The explanation and interpretation of John here follow the lead of the words of Jesus about the other sheep and the one flock in strkjv@10:16|. {That are scattered abroad} (\ta dieskorpismena\). Perfect passive articular participle of \diaskorpiz“\, late verb (Polybius, LXX) to scatter apart, to winnow grain from chaff, only here in John. The meaning here is not the Diaspora (Jews scattered over the world), but the potential children of God in all lands and all ages that the death of Christ will gather "into one" (\eis hen\). A glorious idea, but far beyond Caiaphas.

rwp@John:11:54 @{Therefore walked no more openly} (\oun ouketi parrˆsiƒi periepatei\). Imperfect active of \peripate“\, to walk around. Jesus saw clearly that to do so would bring on the end now instead of his "hour" which was to be at the passover a month ahead. {Into the country near to the wilderness} (\eis tˆn ch“ran eggus tˆs erˆmou\). It was now in Jerusalem as it had become once in Galilee (7:1|) because of the plots of the hostile Jews. The hill country northeast of Jerusalem was thinly populated. {Into a city called Ephraim} (\eis Ephraim legomenˆn polin\). \Polis\ here means no more than town or village (\k“mˆ\). The place is not certainly known, not mentioned elsewhere in the N.T. Josephus mentions (_War_, IV. ix. 9) a small fort near Bethel in the hill country and in strkjv@2Chronicles:13:19| Ephron is named in connexion with Bethel. Up here Jesus would at least be free for the moment from the machinations of the Sanhedrin while he faced the coming catastrophe at the passover. He is not far from the mount of temptation where the devil showed and offered him the kingdoms of the world for the bending of the knee before him. Is it mere fancy to imagine that the devil came to see Jesus again here at this juncture with a reminder of his previous offer and of the present plight of the Son of God with the religious leaders conspiring his death? At any rate Jesus has the fellowship of his disciples this time (\meta t“n mathˆt“n\). But what were they thinking?

rwp@John:11:56 @{They sought therefore for Jesus} (\ezˆtoun oun ton Iˆsoun\). Imperfect active of \zˆte“\ and common \oun\ of which John is so fond. They were seeking Jesus six months before at the feast of tabernacles (7:11|), but now they really mean to kill him. {As they stood in the temple} (\en t“i hier“i hestˆkotes\). Perfect active participle (intransitive) of \histˆmi\, a graphic picture of the various groups of leaders in Jerusalem and from other lands, "the knots of people in the Temple precincts" (Bernard). They had done this at the tabernacles (7:11-13|), but now there is new excitement due to the recent raising of Lazarus and to the public order for the arrest of Jesus. {That he will not come to the feast?} (\hoti ou mˆ elthˆi eis tˆn heortˆn;\). The form of the question (indirect discourse after \dokeite\) assumes strongly that Jesus will not (\ou mˆ\, double negative with second aorist active \elthˆi\ from \erchomai\) dare to come this time for the reason given in verse 57|.

rwp@John:12:1 @{Jesus therefore} (\Iˆsous oun\). Here \oun\ is not causal, but simply copulative and transitional, "and so" (Bernard), as often in John (1:22|, etc.). {Six days before the passover} (\pro hex hˆmer“n tou pascha\). This idiom, transposition of \pro\, is like the Latin use of _ante_, but it occurs in the old Doric, in the inscriptions and the papyri. See strkjv@Amos:1:1| for it also (cf. Moulton, _Proleg_., pp. 100ff.; Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 621f.). If the crucifixion was on Friday, as seems certain from both John and the Synoptics, then six days before would be the Jewish Sabbath preceding or more probably the Friday afternoon before, since Jesus would most likely arrive before the Sabbath. Probably we are to put together in one scene for the atmosphere strkjv@John:11:55-57; strkjv@John:12:1, 9-11|. {Came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, whom Jesus raised from the dead} (\ˆtlhen eis Bˆthanian, hopou ˆn Lazaros, hon ˆgeiren ek nekr“n Iˆsous\). Each phrase explains the preceding. There is no reason for thinking this a gloss as Bernard does. It was a place of danger now after that great miracle and the consequent rage of the Sanhedrin (12:9-11|). The crowd of eager spectators to see both Lazarus and Jesus would only intensify this rage.

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

rwp@John:12:3 @{A pound} (\litran\). Latin _libra_, late _Koin‚_ (Polybius, Plutarch) word with weight of 12 ounces, in N.T. only here and strkjv@19:39|. Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:7|) have alabaster cruse. {Of ointment of spikenard} (\murou nardou pistikˆs\). "Of oil of nard." See already strkjv@11:2| for \murou\ (also strkjv@Matthew:26:7|). Nard is the head or spike of an East Indian plant, very fragrant. Occurs also in strkjv@Mark:14:3|. \Pistikˆs\ here and in strkjv@Mark:14:3| probably means genuine (\pistikos\, from \pistos\, reliable). Only two instances in the N.T. {Very precious} (\polutimou\). Old compound adjective (\polus\, much, \timˆ\), in N.T. only here, strkjv@Matthew:13:46; strkjv@1Peter:1:7|. Mark has \polutelous\ (very costly). Matthew (Matthew:26:7|) has here \barutimou\ of weighty value (only N.T. instance). {Anointed} (\ˆleipsen\). First aorist active indicative of \aleiph“\, old word (Mark:16:1|). {The feet} (\tous podas\). Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:7|) have "his head." Why not both, though neither Gospel mentions both? The Latin MS. _fuldensis_ and the Syriac Sinatic do give both head and feet here. {Wiped} (\exemaxen\). First aorist active indicative of \ekmass“\, old verb to wipe off already in strkjv@11:2; strkjv@Luke:7:38,44|. {With her hair} (\tais thrixin autˆs\). Instrumental plural. It is this item that is relied on largely by those who identify Mary of Bethany with the sinful woman in Luke 7 and with Mary Magdalene. It is no doubt true that it was usually considered immodest for a woman to wear her hair loose. But it is not impossible that Mary of Bethany in her carefully planned love-offering for Jesus on this occasion was only glad to throw such a punctilio to the winds. Such an act on this occasion does not brand her a woman of loose character. {Was filled with the odour of the ointment} (\eplˆr“thˆ ek tˆs osmˆs tou murou\). Effective first aorist passive of \plˆro“\ and a natural result.

rwp@John:12:4 @{Judas Iscariot} (\Ioudas ho Iskari“tˆs\). See \ho Iskari“tˆs\ in strkjv@14:22|. See strkjv@6:71; strkjv@13:1| for like description of Judas save that in strkjv@6:71| the father's name is given in the genitive, \Sim“nos\ and \Iskari“tou\ (agreeing with the father), but in strkjv@13:1| \Iskari“tˆs\ agrees with \Ioudas\, not with \Sim“nos\. Clearly then both father and son were called "Iscariot" or man of Kerioth in the tribe of Judah (Joshua:15:25|). Judas is the only one of the twelve not a Galilean. {One of his disciples} (\heis t“n mathˆt“n autou\). Likewise in strkjv@6:71|, only there \ek\ is used after \heis\ as some MSS. have here. This is the shameful fact that clung to the name of Judas. {Which should betray him} (\ho mell“n auton paradidonai\). John does not say in strkjv@6:71| (\emellen paradidonai auton\) or here that Judas "was predestined to betray Jesus" as Bernard suggests. He had his own responsibility for his guilt as Jesus said (Matthew:26:24|). \Mell“\ here simply points to the act as future, not as necessary. Note the contrast between Mary and Judas. "Mary in her devotion unconsciously provides for the honour of the dead. Judas in his selfishness unconsciously brings about the death itself" (Westcott).

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:12:6 @{Not because he cared for the poor} (\ouch hoti peri t“n pt“ch“n emelen aut“i\). Literally, "not because it was a care to him concerning the poor" (impersonal imperfect of \melei\, it was a care). John often makes explanatory comments of this kind as in strkjv@2:21f.; strkjv@7:22,39|. {But because he was a thief} (\alle hoti kleptˆs ˆn\). Clearly the disciples did not know then that Judas was a petty thief. That knowledge came later after he took the bribe of thirty pieces of silver for betraying Jesus (Matthew:26:15|), for the disciples did not suspect Judas of treachery (13:28f.|), let alone small peculations. There is no reason for thinking that John is unfair to Judas. "Temptation commonly comes through that for which we are naturally fitted" (Westcott). In this case Judas himself was "the poor beggar" who wanted this money. {And having the bag took away what was put therein} (\kai to gl“ssokomon ech“n ta ballomena ebastazen\). This is the correct text. This compound for the earlier \gl“ssokomeion\ (from \gl“ssa\, tongue, and \kome“\, to tend) was originally a receptacle for the tongues or mouth-pieces of wind instruments. The shorter form is already in the Doric inscriptions and is common in the papyri for "money-box" as here. It occurs also in Josephus, Plutarch, etc. In N.T. only here and strkjv@13:29| in same sense about Judas. \Ballomena\ is present passive participle (repeatedly put in) of \ball“\, to cast or fling. The imperfect active (custom) of \bastaz“\, old verb to pick up (John:10:31|), to carry (19:17|), but here and strkjv@20:15| with the sense to bear away as in Polybius, Josephus, Diogenes Laertes, and often so in the papyri.

rwp@John:12:7 @{Suffer her to keep it against the day of my burying} (\Aphes autˆn, hina eis tˆn hˆmeran tou entaphiasmou mou tˆrˆsˆi auto\). This reading (\hina tˆrˆsˆi\, purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \tˆre“\) rather than that of the Textus Receptus (just \tetˆreken\, perfect active indicative) is correct. It is supported by Aleph B D L W Theta. The \hina\ can be rendered as above after \aphes\ according to _Koin‚_ idiom or more probably: "Let her alone: it was that," etc. (supplying "it was"). Either makes good sense. The word \entaphiasmos\ is a later and rare substantive from the late verb \entaphiaz“\, to prepare for burial (Matthew:26:12; strkjv@John:19:40|), and means preparation for burial. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:14:8|. "Preparation for my burial" is the idea here and in Mark. The idea of Jesus is that Mary had saved this money to use in preparing his body for burial. She is giving him the flowers before the funeral. We can hardly take it that Mary did not use all of the ointment for Mark (Mark:14:3|) says that she broke it and yet he adds (Mark:14:8|) what John has here. It is a paradox, but Jesus is fond of paradoxes. Mary has kept this precious gift by giving it now beforehand as a preparation for my burial. We really keep what we give to Christ. This is Mary's glory that she had some glimmering comprehension of Christ's death which none of the disciples possessed.

rwp@John:12:8 @{Ye have always} (\pantote echete\). Jesus does not discredit gifts to the poor at all. But there is relativity in one's duties. {But me ye have not always} (\eme de ou pantote echete\). This is what Mary perceived with her delicate woman's intuition and what the apostles failed to understand though repeatedly and plainly told by Jesus. John does not mention the precious promise of praise for Mary preserved in strkjv@Mark:14:9; strkjv@Matthew:26:13|, but he does show her keen sympathetic insight and Christ's genuine appreciation of her noble deed. It is curiously \mal-a-propos\ surely to put alongside this incident the other incident told long before by Luke (Luke:7:35ff.|) of the sinful woman. Let Mary alone in her glorious act of love.

rwp@John:12:9 @{The common people} (\ho ochlos polus\). This is the right reading with the article \ho\, literally, "the people much or in large numbers." One is reminded of the French idiom. Gildersleeve (_Syntax_, p. 284) gives a few rare examples of the idiom \ho anˆr agathos\. Westcott suggests that \ochlos polus\ came to be regarded as a compound noun. This is the usual order in the N.T. rather than \polus ochlos\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 774). Mark (Mark:12:37|) has \ho polus ochlos\. Moulton (_Proleg_., p. 84) terms \ho ochlos polus\ here and in verse 12| "a curious misplacement of the article." John's use of \ochlos\ is usually the common crowd as "riff-raff." {That he was} (\hoti estin\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse after the secondary tense (\egn“\, second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\). These "Jews" are not all hostile to Jesus as in strkjv@5:10; strkjv@6:41|, etc., but included some who were friendly (verse 11|). {But that they might see Lazarus also} (\all' hina kai ton Lazaron id“sin\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \hora“\. Motive enough to gather a great crowd, to see one raised from the dead (cf. verse 1| for the same phrase, "whom he had raised from the dead"). Some of the very witnesses of the raising of Lazarus will bear witness later (verse 17|). It was a tense situation.

rwp@John:12:10 @{The chief priests took counsel} (\ebouleusanto hoi archiereis\). First aorist middle indicative of \bouleu“\, old verb, seen already in strkjv@11:53| which see. The whole Sanhedrin (7:32|) had decided to put Jesus to death and had asked for information concerning him (11:57|) that might lead to his arrest, but the Sadducees were specially active now to accomplish the death of Lazarus also (\hina\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \apoktein“\ as in strkjv@11:53|). Perhaps they argued that, if they should kill both Jesus and Lazarus, then Lazarus would remain dead. The raising of Lazarus has brought matters to a crisis. Incidentally, it may be observed that here we may see the reason why the Synoptics do not tell the story of the raising of Lazarus, if he was still living (cf. the case of Malchus's name in strkjv@John:18:10|).

rwp@John:12:13 @{Took} (\elabon\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\. {The branches of the palm-trees} (\ta baia t“n phoinik“n\). \Phoinix\ is an old word for palm-tree (Revelation:7:9| for the branches) and in strkjv@Acts:27:12| the name of a city. \Baion\ is apparently a word of Egyptian origin, palm branches, here only in N.T., but in the papyri and I Macc. strkjv@13:51. Here we have "the palm branches of the palm-trees." The use in 1 Macc. strkjv@13:51 (cf. II Macc. strkjv@10:7) is in the account of Simon's triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Bernard notes that to carry palms was a mark of triumphant homage to a victor or a king (Revelation:7:9|). Palm-trees grew on the Mount of Olives (Mark:11:8|) on the road from Bethany to Jerusalem. The crowds (one in front and one behind, strkjv@Mark:11:9; strkjv@Matthew:21:9; strkjv@John:2:18|) cut the branches as they came (Matthew:21:8|). {To meet him} (\eis hupantˆsin aut“i\). Literally, {for a meeting} (\hupantˆsis\, late word from the verb \hupanta“\, strkjv@Matthew:8:28; strkjv@John:11:20,30; strkjv@12:18|, in the papyri, but only here in the N.T.) with him" (\aut“i\, associative instrumental case after \hupantˆsin\ as after the verb in verse 18|). It was a scene of growing excitement. {And cried out} (\kai ekraugazon\). Imperfect active of \kraugaz“\, old and rare verb (from \kraugˆ\) as in strkjv@Matthew:12:19; strkjv@John:19:15|. {Hosannah} (\H“sannah\). Transliteration of the Hebrew word meaning "Save now." The LXX renders it by \S“son dˆ\ (Save now). {Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord} (\eulogˆmenos ho erchomenos en onomati kuriou\). Perfect passive participle of \euloge“\. Quotation from strkjv@Psalms:118:25f.|, written, some think, for the dedication of the second temple, or, as others think, for the feast of tabernacles after the return (Ezra:3:1f.|). It was sung in the processional recitation then as a welcome to the worshippers. Here the words are addressed to the Messiah as is made plain by the addition of the words, "even the king of Israel" (\kai ho basileus tou Israˆl\) as Nathanael called him (1:49|). Jesus is here hailed by the multitudes as the long-looked for Messiah of Jewish hope and he allows them so to greet him (Luke:19:38-40|), a thing that he prevented a year before in Galilee (John:6:14f.|). It is probable that "in the name of the Lord" should be taken with "blessed" as in strkjv@Deuteronomy:21:5; strkjv@2Samuel:6:18; strkjv@1Kings:22:16; strkjv@2Kings:2:24|. The Messiah was recognized by Martha as the Coming One (John:11:27|) and is so described by the Baptist (Matthew:11:3|). Mark (Mark:11:10|) adds "the kingdom that cometh" while Luke (19:38|) has "the king that cometh." "It was this public acclamation of Jesus as King of Israel or King of the Jews which was the foundation of the charge made against him before Pilate (18:33|)" (Bernard).

rwp@John:12:15 @{Daughter of Zion} (\thugatˆr Si“n\). Nominative form (instead of \thugater\) but vocative case. The quotation is from strkjv@Zechariah:9:9| shortened. {Thy King cometh} (\ho basileus erchetai\). Prophetic futuristic present. The ass was the animal ridden in peace as the horse was in war (Judges:10:4; strkjv@12:14; strkjv@2Samuel:17:23; strkjv@19:26|). Zechariah pictures one coming in peace. Songs:the people here regarded Jesus as the Prince of Peace in the triumphal entry. {Sitting on an ass's colt} (\kathˆmenos epi p“lon onou\). Matthew (Matthew:21:6f.|) does speak of both the ass and the colt having garments put on them, but he does not say that Jesus "sat upon" both animals at once, for \epan“ aut“n\ (upon them) probably refers to the garments, not to the colts. When John wrote (end of the century), Jerusalem had fallen. Jesus will lament over Jerusalem (Luke:19:41ff.|). Songs:"Fear not" (\mˆ phobou\).

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:12:19 @{The Pharisees therefore laid among themselves} (\hoi oun Pharisaioi eipan pros heautous\). Graphic picture of the predicament of the Pharisees standing off and watching the enthusiastic crowds sweep by. As people usually do, they blame each other for the defeat of their plots against Jesus and for his final victory, as it seemed. {Behold how ye prevail nothing} (\the“reite hoti ouk “pheleite ouden\). It was a pathetic confession of failure because the rest of the plotters had bungled the whole thing. "Ye help nothing at all" by your plots and plans. {Lo, the world is gone after him} (\ide ho kosmos opis“ autou apˆlthen\). Exclamatory use of \ide\ and timeless aorist active indicative of \aperchomai\. The "world" is a bunch of fools, they feel, but see for yourselves. And the Sanhedrin had advertised to "find" Jesus! They can find him now!

rwp@John:12:20 @{Certain Greeks} (\Hellˆnes tines\). Real Greeks, not Greek-speaking Jews (Hellenists, strkjv@Acts:6:1|), but Greeks like those in Antioch (Acts:11:20|, correct text \pros tous Hellˆnas\) to whom Barnabas was sent. These were probably proselytes of the gate or God-fearers like those worshipping Greeks in Thessalonica whom Paul won to Christ (Acts:17:4|). {To worship at the feast} (\hina proskunˆs“sin en tˆi heortˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \proskune“\, old and common verb to kiss the hand in reverence, to bow the knee in reverence and worship. We do not know whence they came, whether from Decapolis, Galilee, or further away. They found the pilgrims and the city ringing with talk about Jesus. They may even have witnessed the triumphal entry.

rwp@John:12:21 @{To Philip which was of Bethsaida of Galilee} (\Philipp“i t“i apo Bˆthsaida tˆs Galilaias\). He had a Greek name and the Greeks may have seen Philip in Galilee where there were many Greeks, probably (Mark:6:45|) the Western Bethsaida in Galilee, not Bethsaida Julias on the Eastern side (Luke:9:10|). {Asked} (\ˆr“t“n\). Imperfect active, probably inchoative, "began to ask," in contrast with the aorist tense just before (\prosˆlthan\, came to). {Sir} (\Kurie\). Most respectfully and courteously. {We would see Jesus} (\thelomen ton Iˆsoun idein\). "We desire to see Jesus." This is not abrupt like our "we wish" or "we want," but perfectly polite. However, they could easily "see" Jesus, had already done so, no doubt. They wish an interview with Jesus.

rwp@John:12:22 @{Andrew} (\t“i Andreƒi\). Another apostle with a Greek name and associated with Philip again (John:6:7f.|), the man who first brought his brother Simon to Jesus (1:41|). Andrew was clearly a man of wisdom for a crisis. Note the vivid dramatic presents here, {cometh} (\erchetai\), {telleth} (\legei\). What was the crisis? These Greeks wish an interview with Jesus. True Jesus had said something about "other sheep" than Jews (10:16|), but he had not explained. Philip and Andrew wrestle with the problem that will puzzle Peter on the housetop in Joppa (Acts:10:9-18|), that middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile that was only broken down by the Cross of Christ (Ephesians:2:11-22|) and that many Christians and Jews still set up between each other. Andrew has no solution for Philip and they bring the problem, but not the Greeks, to Jesus.

rwp@John:12:23 @{The hour is come} (\elˆluthen hˆ h“ra\). The predestined hour, seen from the start (2:4|), mentioned by John (7:30; strkjv@8:20|) as not yet come and later as known by Jesus as come (13:1|), twice again used by Jesus as already come (in the prayer of Jesus, strkjv@17:1; strkjv@Mark:14:41|, just before the betrayal in the Garden). The request from the Greeks for this interview stirs the heart of Jesus to its depths. {That the Son of man should be glorified} (\hina doxasthˆi ho huios tou anthr“pou\). Purpose clause with \hina\ (not in the sense of \hote\, when) and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \doxaz“\, same sense as in strkjv@12:16, strkjv@13:31|. The Cross must come before Greeks can really come to Jesus with understanding. But this request shows that interest in Jesus now extends beyond the Jewish circles.

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@John:12:26 @{If any man serve me} (\ean emoi tis diakonˆi\). Condition of third class again (\ean\ with present active subjunctive of \diakone“\, keep on serving with dative \emoi\). {Let him follow me} (\emoi akoloutheit“\). "Me (associative instrumental case) let him keep on following" (present active imperative of \akolouthe“\). {Where... there} (\hopou... ekei\). In presence and spiritual companionship here and hereafter. Cf. strkjv@14:3; strkjv@17:24; strkjv@Matthew:28:20|. {Shall honour} (\timˆsei\). Future active of \tima“\, but it may be the kind of honour that Jesus will get (verse 23|).

rwp@John:12:27 @{My soul} (\hˆ psuchˆ mou\). The soul (\psuchˆ\) here is synonymous with spirit (\pneuma\) in strkjv@13:21|. {Is troubled} (\tetaraktai\). Perfect passive indicative of \tarass“\, used also in strkjv@11:33; strkjv@13:21| of Jesus. While John proves the deity of Jesus in his Gospel, he assumes throughout his real humanity as here (cf. strkjv@4:6|). The language is an echo of that in strkjv@Psalms:6:4; strkjv@42:7|. John does not give the agony in Gethsemane which the Synoptics have (Mark:14:35f.; strkjv@Matthew:26:39; strkjv@Luke:22:42|), but it is quite beside the mark to suggest, as Bernard does, that the account here is John's version of the Gethsemane experience. Why do some critics feel called upon to level down to a dead plane every variety of experience in Christ's life? {And what shall I say?} (\kai ti eip“;\). Deliberative subjunctive which expresses vividly "a genuine, if momentary indecision" (Bernard). The request of the Greeks called up graphically to Jesus the nearness of the Cross. {Father, save me from this hour} (\pater, s“son me ek tˆs h“ras tautˆs\). Jesus began his prayers with "Father" (11:41|). Dods thinks that this should be a question also. Westcott draws a distinction between \ek\ (out of) and \apo\ (from) to show that Jesus does not pray to draw back from the hour, but only to come safely out of it all and so interprets \ek\ in strkjv@Hebrews:5:7|, but that distinction will not stand, for in strkjv@John:1:44| \ek\ and \apo\ are used in the same sense and in the Synoptics (Mark:14:35f.; strkjv@Matthew:26:39; strkjv@Luke:52:42|) we have \apo\. If it holds here, we lose the point there. Here as in Gethsemane the soul of Jesus instinctively and naturally shrinks from the Cross, but he instantly surrenders to the will of God in both experiences. {But for this cause came I unto this hour} (\alla dia touto ˆlthon eis tˆn h“ran tautˆn\). It was only a moment of human weakness as in Gethsemane that quickly passed. Thus understood the language has its natural meaning.

rwp@John:12:29 @{That it had thundered} (\brontˆn gegonenai\). Perfect active infinitive of \ginomai\ in indirect discourse after \elegen\ and the accusative of general reference (\brontˆn\, thunder, as in strkjv@Mark:3:17|), "that thunder came to pass." Songs:the crowd "standing by" (\hest“s\, second perfect active participle of \histˆmi\), but Jesus understood his Father's voice. {An angel hath spoken to him} (\Aggelos aut“i lelalˆken\). Perfect active indicative of \lale“\. So, when Jesus spoke to Saul on the way to Damascus, those with Saul heard the voice, but did not understand (Acts:9:7; strkjv@22:9|).

rwp@John:12:30 @{Not for my sake, but for your sakes} (\ou di' eme, alla di' humas\). These words seem to contradict verses 28,29|. Bernard suggests an interpolation into the words of Jesus. But why not take it to be the figure of exaggerated contrast, "not merely for my sake, but also for yours"?

rwp@John:12:31 @{The judgement} (\krisis\). No article, "A judgement." The next few days will test this world. {The prince of this world} (\ho arch“n tou kosmou toutou\). This phrase here, descriptive of Satan as in possession of the evil world, occurs again in strkjv@14:30; strkjv@16:11|. In the temptations Satan claims power over the world and offers to share it with Jesus (Matthew:4:8-10; strkjv@Luke:4:5-8|). Jesus did not deny Satan's power then, but here proclaims final victory over him. {Shall be cast out} (\ekblˆthˆsetai ex“\). Future passive of \ekball“\. Note \ex“\, clean out. The Book of Revelation also proclaims final victory over Satan.

rwp@John:12:32 @{And I, if I be lifted from the earth} (\kag“ an hups“th“ ek tˆs gˆs\). Note proleptic position of \eg“\ (I). Condition of third class (undetermined with prospect) with \an\ (=\ean\ here) with first aorist passive subjunctive of \hupso“\, the verb used in strkjv@3:14| of the brazen serpent and of the Cross of Christ as here and also in strkjv@8:28|. Westcott again presses \ek\ instead of \apo\ to make it refer to the ascension rather than to the Cross, a wrong interpretation surely. {Will draw all men unto myself} (\pantas helkus“ pros emauton\). Future active of \helku“\, late form of \helk“\, to draw, to attract. Jesus had already used this verb of the Father's drawing power (6:44|). The magnetism of the Cross is now known of all men, however little they understand the mystery of the Cross. By "all men" (\pantas\) Jesus does not mean every individual man, for some, as Simeon said (Luke:2:34|) are repelled by Christ, but this is the way that Greeks (verse 22|) can and will come to Christ, by the way of the Cross, the only way to the Father (14:6|).

rwp@Jude:1:16 @{Murmurers} (\goggustai\). Late onomatopoetic word for agent, from \gogguz“\ (Matthew:20:11; strkjv@1Corinthians:10:10|) in the LXX (Exodus:16:8; strkjv@Numbers:11:1,14-29|). {Complainers} (\mempsimoiroi\). Rare word (Isocrates, Aristotle, Plutarch) from \memphomai\ to complain and \moira\ lot or fate. Here alone in N.T. {Lusts} (\epithumias\). As in strkjv@2Peter:3:3|. {Swelling} (\huperogka\). Songs:in strkjv@2Peter:2:18| (big words). {Showing respect of persons} (\thaumazontes pros“pa\). Present active participle of \thaumaz“\ to admire, to wonder at. Nowhere else in N.T. with \pros“pa\, but a Hebraism (in strkjv@Leviticus:19:15; strkjv@Job:13:10|) like \lambanein pros“pon\ (Luke:20:21|) and \blepein pros“pon\ (Matthew:22:16|) and \prosop“lempte“\ (James:2:9|). Cf. strkjv@James:2:1|. {For the sake of advantage} (\“pheleias charin\). To themselves. See also verse 11|. The covetousness of these Gnostic leaders is plainly shown in strkjv@2Peter:2:3,14|. For \charin\ as preposition with genitive see strkjv@Ephesians:3:1,14|.

rwp@Jude:1:17 @{Remember ye} (\humeis mnˆsthˆte\). First aorist passive (deponent) imperative of \mimnˆsk“\ with genitive \rˆmat“n\ (words). In strkjv@2Peter:3:2| we have the indirect form (infinitive \mnˆsthˆnai\). The rest as in II Peter, but in simpler and more exact structure and with the absence of \t“n hagi“n prophˆt“n\ (the holy prophets).

rwp@Jude:1:21 @{Keep yourselves} (\heautous tˆrˆsate\). First aorist active imperative (of urgency) of \tˆre“\. In verse 1| they are said to be kept, but note the warning in verse 5| from the angels who did not keep their dominion. See also strkjv@James:1:27|. In strkjv@Phillipians:2:12| both sides (human responsibility and divine sovereignty are presented side by side). {Looking for} (\prosdechomenoi\). Present middle participle of \prosdechomai\, the very form in strkjv@Titus:2:13|. The same idea in \prosdok“ntes\ in strkjv@2Peter:3:14|.

rwp@Jude:1:22 @{And on some} (\kai hous men\). Demonstrative plural of \hos men--hos de\ (\hous de\, below), not the relative \hous\, but by contrast (\men, de\). Songs:Matthew:13:8|. {Have mercy} (\eleƒte\). Present active imperative of \elea“\ (rare form in strkjv@Romans:9:16| also for the usual \elee“\ strkjv@Matthew:9:27|). But A C read \elegchete\, refute, in place of \eleate\. The text of this verse is in much confusion. {Who are in doubt} (\diakrinomenous\). Present middle participle of \diakrin“\, in the accusative case agreeing with \hous men\, though K L P have the nominative. If the accusative and \eleate\ is read, see strkjv@James:1:6| for the idea (doubters). If \elegchete\ is read, see strkjv@Jude:1:9| for the idea (disputers).

rwp@Jude:1:24 @{From stumbling} (\aptaistous\). Verbal from \ptai“\, to stumble (James:3:2; strkjv@2Peter:1:10|), sure-footed as of a horse that does not stumble (Xenophon), and so of a good man (Epictetus, Marcus Antoninus). {Before the presence of his glory} (\katen“pion tˆs doxˆs autou\). Late compound preposition (\kata, en, “ps\), right down before the eye of his glory as in strkjv@Ephesians:1:4|. Cf. strkjv@Matthew:25:31-33; strkjv@Colossians:1:22|, where Paul has \parastˆsai\ like \stˆsai\ here (first aorist active infinitive) and also \am“mous\ as here, but \am“mˆtos\ in strkjv@2Peter:3:14|. {In exceeding joy} (\en agalliasei\). See strkjv@Luke:1:14|.

rwp@Jude:1:25 @{To the only God our Saviour} (\mon“i the“i s“tˆri hˆm“n\). Dative in the noble doxology. See strkjv@Romans:16:27|, \mon“i soph“i the“i\ (to the alone wise God), where also we have \dia Iˆsou Christou\, but without \tou kuriou hˆm“n\ (our Lord) as here. \S“tˆr\ is used of God eight times in the N.T., six of them in the Pastoral Epistles. \Doxa\ (glory) to God or Christ in all the doxologies except strkjv@1Timothy:6:16|. \Megalosunˆ\ (Majesty) is a late LXX word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:1:3; strkjv@8:1|. {Before all time} (\pro pantos tou ai“nos\). Eternity behind us. See same idea in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7| \pro t“n ai“n“n\. {Now} (\nun\). The present. {For ever more} (\eis pantas tous ai“nas\). "Unto all the ages." All the future. As complete a statement of eternity as can be made in human language.

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE AUTHOR OF ACTS A COMPANION OF PAUL The proof of this position belongs to the treatment of Acts, but a word is needed here. The use of "we" and "us" in strkjv@Acts:16:10 and from strkjv@Acts:20:6| to the end of chapter strkjv@Acts:28| shows it beyond controversy if the same man wrote the "we" sections and the rest of the Acts. This proof Harnack has produced with painstaking detail in his _Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_ and in his volume _The Acts of the Apostles_ and in his _Luke the Physician_.

rwp@Info_Luke @ A SKETCH OF LUKE His name is not a common one, and is probably a shortened form of \Lukios\ and \Lukanos\. Some of the manuscripts of the Gospel actually have as the title \Kata Lukanon\. Dean Plumptre suggests that the Latin poet Lucanus was named after Luke who probably was the family physician when he was born. That is conjecture as well as the notion of Hayes that, since the brothers Gallio and Seneca were uncles of Lucanus they were influenced by Luke to be friendly toward Paul both in Corinth and in Rome. It is probable that Luke was a Greek, certainly a Gentile, possibly a freedman. Songs:this man who wrote more than one-fourth of the New Testament was not a Jew. It is not certain whether his home was in Antioch or in Philippi. It is also uncertain whether he was already converted when Paul met him at Troas. The Codex Bezae has a "we" passage after strkjv@Acts:11:27| which, if genuine, would bring Luke in contact with Paul before Troas. Hayes thinks that he was a slave boy in the family of Theophilus at Antioch, several conjectures in one. We do not know that Theophilus lived at Antioch. It may have been Rome. But, whether one of Paul's converts or not, he was a loyal friend to Paul. If he lived at Antioch, he could have studied medicine there and the great medical temple of Aesculapius was at Aegae, not far away. As a Greek physician, Luke was a university man and in touch with the science of his day. Greek medicine is the beginning of the science of medicine as it is known today. Tradition calls him a painter, but of that we know nothing. Certainly he was a humanist and a man of culture and broad sympathies and personal charm. He was the first genuine scientist who faced the problem of Christ and of Christianity. It must be said of him that he wrote his books with open mind and not as a credulous enthusiast.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

rwp@Luke:1:8 @{While he executed the priest's office} (\en t“i hierateuein auton\). A favourite idiom in Luke, \en\ with the articular infinitive and the accusative of general reference where the genitive absolute could have been used or a temporal conjunction and finite verb. It is proper Greek, but occurs often in the LXX, which Luke read, particularly in imitation of the Hebrew infinitive construct. The word \hierateu“\ does not appear in the ancient Greek, but in the LXX and this one example in Luke. It is on the Rosetta Stone and the early inscriptions so that the word was simply applied by the LXX translators from current usage.

rwp@Luke:1:17 @{Before his face} (\en“pion autou\). Not in the ancient Greek, but common in the papyri as in LXX and N.T. It is a vernacular _Koin‚_ word, adverb used as preposition from adjective \en“pios\, and that from \ho en “pi “n\ (the one who is in sight). {Autou} here seems to be "the Lord their God" in verse 16| since the Messiah has not yet been mentioned, though he was to be actually the Forerunner of the Messiah. {In the spirit and power of Elijah} (\en pneumati kai dunamei Eleiƒ\). See strkjv@Isaiah:40:1-11; strkjv@Malachi:3:1-5|. John will deny that he is actually Elijah in person, as they expected (John:1:21|), but Jesus will call him Elijah in spirit (Mark:9:12; strkjv@Matthew:17:12|). {Hearts of fathers} (\kardias pater“n\). Paternal love had died out. This is one of the first results of conversion, the revival of love in the home. {Wisdom} (\phronˆsei\). Not \sophia\, but a word for practical intelligence. {Prepared} (\kateskeuasmenon\). Perfect passive participle, state of readiness for Christ. This John did. This is a marvellous forecast of the character and career of John the Baptist, one that should have caught the faith of Zacharias.

rwp@Luke:6:49 @{He that heareth and doeth not} (\ho de akousas kai mˆ poiˆsas\). Aorist active participle with article. Particular case singled out (punctiliar, aorist). {Like a man} (\homoios estin anthr“p“i\). Associative instrumental case after \homoios\ as in verse 47|. {Upon the earth} (\epi tˆn gˆn\). strkjv@Matthew:7:26| has "upon the sand" (\epi tˆn ammon\), more precise and worse than mere earth. But not on the rock. {Without a foundation} (\ch“ris themeliou\). The foundation on the rock after deep digging as in verse 48|. {It fell in} (\sunepesen\). Second aorist active of \sunpipt“\, to fall together, to collapse. An old verb from Homer on, but only here in the N.T. {The ruin} (\to rˆgma\). The crash like a giant oak in the forest resounded far and wide. An old word for a rent or fracture as in medicine for laceration of a wound. Only here in the N.T.

rwp@Luke:7:1 @{After} (\epeidˆ, epei and dˆ\). This conjunction was written \epei dˆ\ in Homer and is simple \epei\ with the intensive \dˆ\ added and even \epei dˆ per\ once in N.T. (Luke:1:1|). This is the only instance of the temporal use of \epeidˆ\ in the N.T. The causal sense occurs only in Luke and Paul, for \epei\ is the correct text in strkjv@Matthew:21:46|. {Had ended} (\eplˆr“sen\). First aorist active indicative. There is here a reference to the conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount, but with nothing concerning the impression produced by the discourse such as is seen in strkjv@Matthew:7:28|. This verse really belongs as the conclusion of Chapter 6, not as the beginning of Chapter 7. {In the ears of the people} (\eis tas akoas tou laou\). \Akoˆ\ from \akou“\, to hear, is used of the sense of hearing (1Corinthians:12:17|), the ear with which one hears (Mark:7:35; strkjv@Hebrews:5:11|), the thing heard or the report (Rom strkjv@10:16|) or oral instruction (Galatians:3:2,5|). Both strkjv@Matthew:8:5-13; strkjv@Luke:7:1-10| locate the healing of the centurion's servant in Capernaum where Jesus was after the Sermon on the Mount.

rwp@Luke:7:3 @{Sent unto him elders of the Jews} (\apesteilen pros auton presbouterous t“n Ioudai“n\). strkjv@Matthew:8:5| says "the centurion came unto him." For discussion of this famous case of apparent discrepancy see discussion on Matthew. One possible solution is that Luke tells the story as it happened with the details, whereas Matthew simply presents a summary statement without the details. What one does through another he does himself. {Asking him} (\er“t“n auton\). Present active participle, masculine singular nominative, of the verb \er“ta“\ common for asking a question as in the old Greek (Luke:22:68|). But more frequently in the N.T. the verb has the idea of making a request as here. This is not a Hebraism or an Aramaism, but is a common meaning of the verb in the papyri (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 168). It is to be noted here that Luke represents the centurion himself as "asking" through the elders of the Jews (leading citizens). In strkjv@Matthew:8:6| the verb is \parakal“n\ (beseeching). {That he would come and save} (\hop“s elth“n dias“sˆi\). \Hina\ is the more common final or sub-final (as here) conjunction, but \hop“s\ still occurs. \Dias“sˆi\ is effective aorist active subjunctive, to bring safe through as in a storm (Acts:28:1,4|). Common word.

rwp@Luke:7:5 @{For} (\gar\). This clause gives the reason why the elders of the Jews consider him "worthy" (\axios\, drawing down the scale, \axis\, \ago\). He was hardly a proselyte, but was a Roman who had shown his love for the Jews. {Himself} (\autos\). All by himself and at his own expense. {Us} (\hˆmin\). Dative case, for us. It is held by some archaeologists that the black basalt ruins in Tell Hum are the remains of the very synagogue (\tˆn sunag“gˆn\). Literally, {the synagogue}, the one which we have, the one for us.

rwp@Luke:7:12 @{Behold} (\kai idou\). The \kai\ introduces the apodosis of the temporal sentence and has to be left out in translations. It is a common idiom in Luke, \kai idou\. {There was carried out} (\exekomizeto\). Imperfect passive indicative. Common verb in late Greek for carrying out a body for burial, though here only in the N.T. (\ekkomiz“\). Rock tombs outside of the village exist there today. {One that was dead} (\tethnˆk“s\). Perfect active participle of \thnˆsk“\, to die. {The only son of his mother} (\monogenˆs huios tˆi mˆtri auto–\). Only begotten son to his mother (dative case). The compound adjective \monogenˆs\ (\monos\ and \genos\) is common in the old Greek and occurs in the N.T. about Jesus (John:3:16,18|). The "death of a widow's only son was the greatest misfortune conceivable" (Easton). {And she was a widow} (\kai autˆ ˆn chˆra\). This word \chˆra\ gives the finishing touch to the pathos of the situation. The word is from \chˆros\, bereft. The mourning of a widow for an only son is the extremity of grief (Plummer). {Much people} (\ochlos hikanos\). Considerable crowd as often with this adjective \hikanos\. Some were hired mourners, but the size of the crowd showed the real sympathy of the town for her.

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:7:22 @{What things ye have seen and heard} (\ha eidete kai ˆkousate\). In strkjv@Matthew:11:4|, present tense "which ye do hear and see." Rest of verse 22,23| as in strkjv@Matthew:11:4-6|, which see for details. Luke mentions no raisings from the dead in verse 21|, but the language is mainly general, while here it is specific. \Skandalizomai\ used here has the double notion of to trip up and to entrap and in the N.T. always means causing to sin.

rwp@Luke:7:28 @{There is none} (\oudeis estin\). No one exists, this means. strkjv@Matthew:11:11| has \ouk egˆgertai\ (hath not arisen). See Matthew for discussion of "but little" and "greater."

rwp@Luke:7:37 @{A woman which was in the city, a sinner} (\gunˆ hˆtis en tˆi polei hamart“los\). Probably in Capernaum. The use of \hˆtis\ means "Who was of such a character as to be" (cf. strkjv@8:3|) and so more than merely the relative \hˆ\, who, that is, "who was a sinner in the city," a woman of the town, in other words, and known to be such. \Hamart“los\, from \hamartan“\, to sin, means devoted to sin and uses the same form for feminine and masculine. It is false and unjust to Mary Magdalene, introduced as a new character in strkjv@Luke:8:2|, to identify this woman with her. Luke would have no motive in concealing her name here and the life of a courtesan would be incompatible with the sevenfold possession of demons. Still worse is it to identify this courtesan not only with Mary Magdalene, but also with Mary of Bethany simply because it is a Simon who gives there a feast to Jesus when Mary of Bethany does a beautiful deed somewhat like this one here (Mark:14:3-9; strkjv@Matthew:26:6-13; strkjv@John:12:2-8|). Certainly Luke knew full well the real character of Mary of Bethany (10:38-42|) so beautifully pictured by him. But a falsehood, once started, seems to have more lives than the cat's proverbial nine. The very name Magdalene has come to mean a repentant courtesan. But we can at least refuse to countenance such a slander on Mary Magdalene and on Mary of Bethany. This sinful woman had undoubtedly repented and changed her life and wished to show her gratitude to Jesus who had rescued her. Her bad reputation as a harlot clung to her and made her an unwelcome visitor in the Pharisee's house. {When she knew} (\epignousa\). Second aorist active participle from \epigin“sk“\, to know fully, to recognize. She came in by a curious custom of the time that allowed strangers to enter a house uninvited at a feast, especially beggars seeking a gift. This woman was an intruder whereas Mary of Bethany was an invited guest. "Many came in and took their places on the side seats, uninvited and yet unchallenged. They spoke to those at table on business or the news of the day, and our host spoke freely to them" (Trench in his _Parables_, describing a dinner at a Consul's house at Damietta). {He was sitting at meat} (\katakeitai\). Literally, he is reclining (present tense retained in indirect discourse in Greek). {An alabaster cruse of ointment} (\alabastron murou\). See on ¯Matthew:26:7| for discussion of \alabastron\ and \murou\.

rwp@Luke:7:38 @{Standing behind at his feet} (\stƒsa opis“ para tous podas autou\). Second aorist active participle from \histˆmi\ and intransitive, first aorist \estˆsa\ being transitive. The guest removed his sandals before the meal and he reclined on the left side with the feet outward. She was standing beside (\para\) his feet {weeping} (\klaiousa\). She was drawn irresistibly by gratitude to Jesus and is overcome with emotion before she can use the ointment; her tears (\tois dakrusin\, instrumental case of \dakru\) take the place of the ointment. {Wiped them with the hair of her head} (\tais thrixin tˆs kephalˆs autˆs exemassen\). Inchoative imperfect of an old verb \ekmass“\, to rub out or off, began to wipe off, an act of impulse evidently and of embarrassment. "Among the Jews it was a shameful thing for a woman to let down her hair in public; but she makes this sacrifice" (Plummer). Songs:Mary of Bethany wiped the feet of Jesus with her hair (John:12:3|) with a similar sacrifice out of her great love for Jesus. This fact is relied on by some to prove that Mary of Bethany had been a woman of bad character, surely an utter failure to recognize Mary's motive and act. {Kissed} (\katephilei\). Imperfect active of \kataphile“\, to kiss repeatedly (force of \kata\), and accented by the tense of continued action here. The word in the N.T. occurs here, of the prodigal's father (15:20|), of the kiss of Judas (Mark:14:45; strkjv@Matthew:26:49|), of the Ephesian elders (Acts:20:37|). " Kissing the feet was a common mark of deep reverence, especially to leading rabbis" (Plummer). {Anointed them with the ointment} (\ˆleiphen t“i mur“i\). Imperfect active again of \aleiph“\, a very common verb. \Chri“\ has a more religious sense. The anointing came after the burst of emotional excitement.

rwp@Luke:7:39 @{This man} (\houtos\). Contemptuous, this fellow. {If he were a (the) prophet} (\ei ˆn [ho] prophˆtˆs\). Condition of the second class, determined as unfulfilled. The Pharisee assumes that Jesus is not a prophet (or the prophet, reading of B, that he claims to be). A Greek condition puts the thing from the standpoint of the speaker or writer. It does not deal with the actual facts, but only with the statement about the facts. {Would have perceived} (\egin“sken an\). Wrong translation, would now perceive or know (which he assumes that Jesus does not do). The protasis is false and the conclusion also. He is wrong in both. The conclusion (apodosis), like the condition, deals here with the present situation and so both use the imperfect indicative (\an\ in the conclusion, a mere device for making it plain that it is not a condition of the first class). {Who and what manner of woman} (\tis kai potapˆ hˆ gunˆ\). She was notorious in person and character.

rwp@Luke:7:42 @{Will love him most} (\pleion agapˆsei auton\). Strictly, comparative {more}, \pleion\, not superlative \pleista\, but most suits the English idiom best, even between two. Superlative forms are vanishing before the comparative in the _Koin‚_. This is the point of the parable, the attitude of the two debtors toward the lender who forgave both of them (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:7:47 @{Are forgiven} (\aphe“ntai\). Doric perfect passive form. See strkjv@Luke:5:21,23|. {For she loved much} (\hoti ˆgapˆsen polu\). Illustration or proof, not reason for the forgiveness. Her sins had been already forgiven and remained forgiven. {But to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little} (\H“i de oligon aphietai oligon agapƒi\). This explanation proves that the meaning of \hoti\ preceding is proof, not cause.

rwp@Luke:8:1 @{Soon afterwards} (\en t“i kathexˆs\). In strkjv@7:11| we have \en t“i hexˆs\. This word means one after the other, successively, but that gives no definite data as to the time, only that this incident in strkjv@8:1-3| follows that in strkjv@7:36-50|. Both in Luke alone. {That} (\kai\). One of Luke's idioms with \kai egeneto\ like Hebrew _wav_. Went about (\di“deuen\). Imperfect active of \diodeu“\, to make one's way through (\dia, hodos\), common in late Greek writers. In the N.T. here only and strkjv@Acts:17:1|. {Through cities and villages} (\kata polin kai k“mˆn\). Distributive use of \kata\ (up and down). The clause is amphibolous and goes equally well with \di“deuen\ or with \kˆruss“n\ (heralding) \kai euaggelizomenos\ (evangelizing, gospelizing). This is the second tour of Galilee, this time the Twelve with him.

rwp@Luke:8:3 @{Joanna} (\I“ana\). Her husband \Chuzƒ\, steward (\epitropou\) of Herod, is held by some to be the nobleman (\basilikos\) of strkjv@John:4:46-53| who believed and all his house. At any rate Christ had a follower from the household of Herod Antipas who had such curiosity to see and hear him. One may recall also Manaen (Acts:13:1|), Herod's foster brother. Joanna is mentioned again with Mary Magdalene in strkjv@Luke:24:10|. {Who ministered unto them} (\haitines diˆkonoun autois\). Imperfect active of \diakone“\, common verb, but note augment as if from \dia\ and \akone“\, but from \diakonos\ and that from \dia\ and \konis\ (dust). The very fact that Jesus now had twelve men going with him called for help from others and the women of means responded to the demand. {Of their substance} (\ek t“n huparchont“n autais\). From the things belonging to them. This is the first woman's missionary society for the support of missionaries of the Gospel. They had difficulties in their way, but they overcame these, so great was their gratitude and zeal.

rwp@Luke:8:4 @{By a parable} (\dia parabolˆs\). strkjv@Mark:4:2| says "in parables" as does strkjv@Matthew:13:3|. This is the beginning of the first great group of parables as given in strkjv@Mark:4:1-34| and strkjv@Matthew:13:1-53|. There are ten of these parables in Mark and Matthew and only two in strkjv@Luke:8:4-18| (The Sower and the Lamp, strkjv@8:16|) though Luke also has the expression "in parables" (8:10|). See strkjv@Matthew:13| and strkjv@Mark:4| for discussion of the word parable and the details of the Parable of the Sower. Luke does not locate the place, but he mentions the great crowds on hand, while both Mark and Matthew name the seaside as the place where Jesus was at the start of the series of parables.

rwp@Luke:8:10 @{The mysteries} (\ta mustˆria\). See for this word on ¯Matthew:13:11; strkjv@Mark:4:11|. Part of the mystery here explained is how so many people who have the opportunity to enter the kingdom fail to do so because of manifest unfitness. {That} (\hina\). Here strkjv@Mark:4:11| also has \hina\ while strkjv@Matthew:13:13| has \hoti\ (because). On the so-called causal use of \hina\ as here equal to \hoti\ see discussion on ¯Matthew:13:13; strkjv@Mark:4:11|. Plummer sensibly argues that there is truth both in the causal \hoti\ of Matthew and the final \hina\ of Mark and Matthew. "But the principle that he who hath shall receive more, while he who hath not shall be deprived of what he seemeth to have, explains both the \hina\ and the \hoti\. Jesus speaks in parables because the multitudes see without seeing and hear without hearing. But He also speaks in parable {in order that} they may see without seeing and hear without hearing." Only for "hearing" Luke has "understand" \suni“sin\, present subjunctive from a late omega form \suni“\ instead of the \-mi\ verb \suniˆmi\.

rwp@Luke:8:11 @{Is this} (\estin de hautˆ\). Means this. Jesus now proceeds to interpret his own parable. {The seed is the word of God} (\ho sporos estin ho logos tou theou\). The article with both subject and predicate as here means that they are interchangeable and can be turned round: The word of God is the seed. The phrase "the word of God" does not appear in Matthew and only once in Mark (Mark:7:13|) and John (John:10:35|), but four times in Luke (5:1; strkjv@8:11,21; strkjv@11:28|) and twelve times in Acts. In strkjv@Mark:4:14| we have only "the word." In strkjv@Mark:3:31| we have "the will of God," and in strkjv@Matthew:12:46| "the will of my Father" where strkjv@Luke:8:21| has "the word of God." This seems to show that Luke has the subjective genitive here and means the word that comes from God.

rwp@Luke:8:15 @{In an honest and good heart} (\en kardiƒi kalˆi kai agathˆi\). Peculiar to Luke. In verse 8| the land (\gˆn\) is called \agathˆn\ (really good, generous) and in verse 15| we have \en tˆi kalˆi gˆi\ ({in the beautiful or noble land}). Songs:Luke uses both adjectives of the heart. The Greeks used \kalos k' agathos\ of the high-minded gentleman. It is probable that Luke knew this idiom. It occurs here alone in the N.T. It is not easy to translate. We have such phrases as "good and true," "sound and good," "right and good," no one of which quite suits the Greek. Certainly Luke adds new moral qualities not in the Hellenic phrase. The English word "honest" here is like the Latin _honestus_ (fair, noble). The words are to be connected with "hold fast" (\katechousin\), "hold it down" so that the devil does not snatch it away, having depth of soil so that it does not shrivel up under the sun, and is not choked by weeds and thorns. It bears fruit (\karpophorousin\, an old expressive verb, \karpos\ and \phore“\). That is the proof of spiritual life. {In patience} (\en hupomonˆi\). There is no other way for real fruit to come. Mushrooms spring up overnight, but they are usually poisonous. The best fruits require time, cultivation, patience.

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:8:19 @{His mother and brethren} (\hˆ mˆtˆr kai hoi adelphoi autou\). strkjv@Mark:3:31-35; strkjv@Matthew:12:46-50| place the visit of the mother and brothers of Jesus before the parable of the sower. Usually Luke follows Mark's order, but he does not do so here. At first the brothers of Jesus (younger sons of Joseph and Mary, I take the words to mean, there being sisters also) were not unfriendly to the work of Jesus as seen in strkjv@John:2:12| when they with the mother of Jesus are with him and the small group (half dozen) disciples in Capernaum after the wedding in Cana. But as Jesus went on with his work and was rejected at Nazareth (Luke:4:16-31|), there developed an evident disbelief in his claims on the part of the brothers who ridiculed him six months before the end (John:7:5|). At this stage they have apparently come with Mary to take Jesus home out of the excitement of the crowds, perhaps thinking that he is beside himself (Mark:3:21|). They hardly believed the charge of the rabbis that Jesus was in league with Beelzebub. Certainly the mother of Jesus could give no credence to that slander. But she herself was deeply concerned and wanted to help him if possible. See discussion of the problem in my little book _The Mother of Jesus_ and also on ¯Mark:3:31| and ¯Matthew:12:46|. {Come to him} (\suntuchein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \suntugchan“\, an old verb, though here alone in the N.T., meaning to meet with, to fall in with as if accidentally, here with associative instrumental case \aut“i\.

rwp@Luke:8:23 @{He fell asleep} (\aphupn“sen\). First aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \aphupno“\, to put to sleep, to fall off to sleep, a late verb for which the older Greek used \kathupno“\. Originally \aphupno“\ meant to waken from sleep, then to fall off to sleep (possibly a medical use). This is the only passage which speaks of the sleep of Jesus. Here only in the N.T. {Came down} (\katebˆ\). Second aorist active indicative of \katabain“\, common verb. It was literally true. These wind storms (\lailaps\. Songs:also strkjv@Mark:4:37|) rushed from Hermon down through the Jordan gorge upon the Sea of Galilee and shook it like a tempest (Matthew:8:24|). Mark's (Mark:4:37|) vivid use of the dramatic present \ginetai\ (ariseth) is not so precise as Luke's "came down." See on ¯Matthew:8:24|. These sudden squalls were dangerous on this small lake. {They were filling} (\suneplˆrounto\). Imperfect passive. It was the boat that was being filled (Mark:4:37|) and it is here applied to the navigators as sailors sometimes spoke. An old verb, but in the N.T. used only by Luke (8:23; strkjv@9:51; strkjv@Acts:2:1|). {Were in jeopardy} (\ekinduneuon\). Imperfect active, vivid description. Old verb, but in the N.T. only here, strkjv@Acts:19:27; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:30|.

rwp@Luke:8:26 @{They arrived} (\katepleusan\). First aorist active indicative of \kataple“\, common verb, but here only in the N.T. Literally, {they sailed down} from the sea to the land, the opposite of {launched forth} (\anˆchthˆsan\) of verse 22|. Songs:we today use like nautical terms, to bear up, to bear down. {The Gerasenes} (\ton Gerasˆn“n\). This is the correct text here as in strkjv@Mark:5:1| while Gadarenes is correct in strkjv@Matthew:8:28|. See there for explanation of this famous discrepancy, now cleared up by Thomson's discovery of Khersa (\Gersa\) on the steep eastern bank and in the vicinity of Gadara. {Over against Galilee} (\antipera tˆs Galilaias\). Only here in the N.T. The later Greek form is \antiperan\ (Polybius, etc.). Some MSS. here have \peran\ like strkjv@Mark:5:1; strkjv@Matthew:8:28|.

rwp@Luke:8:28 @{Fell down} (\prosepesen\). Second aorist active of \prospipt“\, to fall forward, towards, prostrate before one as here. Common verb. strkjv@Mark:5:6| has \prosekunˆsen\ (worshipped). {The Most High God} (\tou theou tou hupsistou\). Uncertain whether \tou theou\ genuine or not. But "the Most High" clearly means God as already seen (Luke:1:32,35,36; strkjv@6:35|). The phrase is common among heathen (Numbers:24:16; strkjv@Micah:6:6; strkjv@Isaiah:14:14|). The demoniac may have been a Gentile, but it is the demon here speaking. See on ¯Mark:2:7; strkjv@Matthew:8:29| for the Greek idiom (\ti emoi kai soi\). "What have I to do with thee?" See there also for "Torment me not."

rwp@Luke:18:7 @{And he is longsuffering} (\makrothumei\). This present active indicative comes in awkwardly after the aorist subjunctive \poiˆsˆi\ after \ou mˆ\, but this part of the question is positive. Probably \kai\ here means "and yet" as so often (John:9:30; strkjv@16:32|, etc.). God delays taking vengeance on behalf of his people, not through indifference, but through patient forbearance.

rwp@Luke:18:8 @{Howbeit} (\plˆn\). It is not clear whether this sentence is also a question or a positive statement. There is no way to decide. Either will make sense though not quite the same sense. The use of \ƒra\ before \heurˆsei\ seems to indicate a question expecting a negative answer as in strkjv@Acts:8:30; strkjv@Romans:14:19|. But here \ƒra\ comes in the middle of the sentence instead of near the beginning, an unusual position for either inferential \ƒra\ or interrogative \ƒra\. On the whole the interrogative \ƒra\ is probably correct, meaning to question if the Son will find a persistence of faith like that of the widow.

rwp@Luke:18:10 @{Stood} (\statheis\). First aorist passive participle of \histˆmi\. Struck an attitude ostentatiously where he could be seen. Standing was the common Jewish posture in prayer (Matthew:6:5; strkjv@Mark:11:25|). {Prayed thus} (\tauta prosˆucheto\). Imperfect middle, was praying these things (given following). {With himself} (\pros heauton\). A soliloquy with his own soul, a complacent recital of his own virtues for his own self-satisfaction, not fellowship with God, though he addresses God. {I thank thee} (\eucharist“ soi\). But his gratitude to God is for his own virtues, not for God's mercies to him. One of the rabbis offers a prayer like this of gratitude that he was in a class by himself because he was a Jew and not a Gentile, because he was a Pharisee and not of the _am-haaretz_ or common people, because he was a man and not a woman. {Extortioners} (\harpages\). An old word, \harpax\ from same root as \harpaz“\, to plunder. An adjective of only one gender, used of robbers and plunderers, grafters, like the publicans (Luke:3:13|), whether wolves (Matthew:7:15|) or men (1Corinthians:5:19f.|). The Pharisee cites the crimes of which he is not guilty. {Or even} (\ˆ kai\). As the climax of iniquity (Bruce), he points to "this publican." Zaccheus will admit robbery (Luke:19:8|). {God} (\ho theos\). Nominative form with the article as common with the vocative use of \theos\ (so verse 13; strkjv@John:20:28|).

rwp@Luke:18:13 @{Standing afar off} (\makrothen hest“s\). Second perfect active participle of \histˆmi\, intransitive like \statheis\ above. But no ostentation as with the Pharisee in verse 11|. At a distance from the Pharisee, not from the sanctuary. {Would not lift} (\ouk ˆthelen oude epƒrai\). Negatives (double) imperfect of {thel“}, was not willing even to lift up, refused to lift (\epƒrai\, first aorist active infinitive of the liquid compound verb, \ep-air“\). Smote (\etupte\). Imperfect active of \tupt“\, old verb, kept on smiting or beating. Worshippers usually lifted up their closed eyes to God. {Be merciful} (\hilasthˆti\). First aorist passive imperative of \hilaskomai\, an old verb, found also in LXX and inscriptions (\exhilaskomai\, Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 224). {A sinner} (\t“i hamart“l“i\). The sinner, not a sinner. It is curious how modern scholars ignore this Greek article. The main point in the contrast lies in this article. The Pharisee thought of others as sinners. The publican thinks of himself alone as the sinner, not of others at all.

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:18:27 @{The impossible with men possible with God} (\ta adunata para anthr“pois dunata para t“i the“i\). Paradoxical, but true. Take your stand "beside" (\para\) God and the impossible becomes possible. Clearly then Jesus meant the humanly impossible by the parabolic proverb about the camel going through the needle's eye. God can break the grip of gold on a man's life, but even Jesus failed with this young ruler.

rwp@Luke:18:28 @{Our own} (\ta idia\). Our own things (home, business, etc.). Right here is where so many fail. Peter speaks here not in a spirit of boastfulness, but rather with his reactions from their consternation at what has happened and at the words of Jesus (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:19:2 @{Chief publican} (\architel“nˆs\). The word occurs nowhere else apparently but the meaning is clear from the other words with \archi-\ like \archiereus\ (chief priest) \archipoimˆn\ (chief shepherd). Jericho was an important trading point for balsam and other things and so Zacchaeus was the head of the tax collections in this region, a sort of commissioner of taxes who probably had other publicans serving under him.

rwp@Luke:19:7 @{Murmured} (\diegogguzonto\). Imperfect middle of this compound onomatopoetic word \dia-gogguz“\. In strkjv@Luke:5:30| we have the simple \gogguz“\, a late word like the cooing doves or the hum of bees. This compound with \dia-\ is still rarer, but more expressive. {To lodge} (\katalusai\). Jesus was the hero of this crowd from Galilee on their way to the passover. But here he had shocked their sensibilities and those of the people of Jericho by inviting himself to be the guest of this chief publican and notorious sinner who had robbed nearly everybody in the city by exorbitant taxes.

rwp@Luke:19:20 @{I kept} (\eichon\). Imperfect active of \ech“\. I kept on keeping. {Laid up} (\apokeimenˆn\). Present passive participle agreeing with \hˆn\ (which), used often as perfect passive of \tithˆmi\ as here, laid away or off (\apo\). It is not the periphrastic construction, but two separate verbs, each with its own force. {In a napkin} (\en soudari“i\). A Latin word _sudarium_ from _sudor_ (sweat) transliterated into Greek, a sweatcloth handkerchief or napkin. Found in papyrus marriage contracts as part of the dowry (second and third centuries A.D., Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 223). Used also for swathing the head of the dead (John:11:44; strkjv@20:7|).

rwp@Luke:19:23 @{Then wherefore} (\kai dia ti\). Note this inferential use of \kai-\ in that case. {Into the bank} (\epi trapezan\). Literally, {upon a table}. This old word \trapeza\, from \tetrapeza\ (\tetra\, four, \pous\, foot). It means then any table (Mark:7:28|), food on the table (Acts:16:34|), feast or banquet (Romans:11:9|), table of the money-changers (John:2:15; strkjv@Mark:11:15; strkjv@Matthew:21:12|), or bank as here. Our word bank is from Old English _bench_. {With interest} (\sun tok“i\). Not usury, but proper and legal interest. Old word from \tikt“\, to bring forth. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:25:27|. {Should have required it} (\an auto epraxa\). Conclusion of second-class condition the condition or apodosis being implied in the participle "coming" (\elth“n\), and the previous question. On this technical use of \prass“\ (\epraxa\) see strkjv@Luke:3:13|.

rwp@Luke:19:27 @{Reign} (\basileusai\). First aorist active infinitive, ingressive aorist, come to rule. {Slay} (\katasphaxate\). First aorist active imperative of \katasphaz“\, to slaughter, an old verb, but only here in the N.T.

rwp@Luke:19:29 @{Unto Bethphage and Bethany} (\eis Bˆthphagˆ kai Bˆthania\). Both indeclinable forms of the Hebrew or Aramaic names. In strkjv@Mark:11:1| "Bethany" is inflected regularly, which see. {Of Olives} (\Elai“n\). As in strkjv@Mark:11:1; strkjv@Matthew:21:1|, though some editors take it to be, not the genitive plural of \elaia\ (olive tree), but the name of the place Olivet. In the Greek it is just a matter of accent (circumflex or acute) Olivet is correct in strkjv@Acts:1:12|. See on ¯Matthew:21:1ff.; strkjv@Mark:11:1ff.| for details.

rwp@Luke:19:39 @{Some of the Pharisees} (\tines t“n Pharisai“n\). Luke seems to imply by "from the multitude" (\apo tou ochlou\) that these Pharisees were in the procession, perhaps half-hearted followers of the mob. But strkjv@John:12:19| speaks of Pharisees who stood off from the procession and blamed each other for their failure and the triumph of Jesus. These may represent the bolder spirits of their same group who dared to demand of Jesus that he rebuke his disciples.

rwp@Luke:19:40 @{If these shall hold their peace} (\ean houtoi si“pˆsousin\). A condition of the first class, determined as fulfilled. The use of \ean\ rather than \ei\ cuts no figure in the case (see strkjv@Acts:8:31; strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:8; strkjv@1John:5:15|). The kind of condition is determined by the mode which is here indicative. The future tense by its very nature does approximate the aorist subjunctive, but after all it is the indicative. {The stones will cry out} (\hoi lithoi kraxousin\). A proverb for the impossible happening.

rwp@Luke:19:42 @{If thou hadst known} (\ei egn“s\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. Second-class condition, determined as unfulfilled. {Even thou} (\kai su\). Emphatic position of the subject. {But now} (\nun de\). Aposiopesis. The conclusion is not expressed and the sudden breaking off and change of structure is most impressive. {They are hid} (\ekrubˆ\). Second aorist passive indicative of \krupt“\, common verb, to hide.

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

rwp@Luke:19:47 @{He was teaching} (\ˆn didask“n\). Periphrastic imperfect. {Daily} (\to kath' hˆmeran\). Note the accusative neuter article, "as to the according to the day," very awkward English surely, but perfectly good Greek. The same idiom occurs in strkjv@11:3|. {Sought} (\ezˆtoun\). Imperfect active, conative imperfect, were seeking, trying to seek. {The principal men of the people} (\hoi pr“toi tou laou\). The first men of the people. The position after the verb and apart from the chief priests and the scribes calls special attention to them. Some of these "first men" were chief priests or scribes, but not all of them. The lights and leaders of Jerusalem were bent on the destruction (\apolesai\) of Jesus. The raising of Lazarus from the dead brought them together for this action (John:11:47-53; strkjv@12:9-11|).

rwp@Luke:20:2 @{Tell us} (\eipon hˆmin\). Luke adds these words to what Mark and Matthew have. Second aorist active imperative for the old form \eipe\ and with ending \-on\ of the first aorist active. Westcott and Hort punctuate the rest of the sentence as an indirect question after \eipon\, but the Revised Version puts a semicolon after "us" and retains the direct question. The Greek manuscripts have no punctuation.

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:20:12 @{They wounded} (\traumatisantes\). First aorist active participle of \traumatiz“\. An old verb, from \trauma\, a wound, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:19:16|.

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:20:19 @{To lay hands on him} (\epibalein ep' auton tas cheiras\). Second aorist active infinitive of \epiball“\, an old verb and either transitively as here or intransitively as in strkjv@Mark:4:37|. Vivid picture here where strkjv@Mark:12:12; strkjv@Matthew:21:46| has "to seize" (\kratˆsai\). {In that very hour} (\en autˆi tˆi h“rƒi\). Luke's favourite idiom, in the hour itself. Not in Mark or Matthew and shows that the Sanhedrin were angry enough to force the climax then. {And they feared} (\kai ephobˆthˆsan\). Adversative use of \kai\ = but they feared. Hence they refrained. {For they perceived} (\egn“san gar\). The reason for their rage. Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. {Against them} (\pros autous\). As in strkjv@Mark:12:12|. The cap fitted them and they saw it.

rwp@Luke:20:22 @{Tribute} (\phoron\). Old word for the annual tax on land, houses, etc. Mark and Matthew have \kˆnson\, which see for this Latin word in Greek letters. The picture on the coin may have been that of Tiberius.

rwp@Luke:20:41 @{How say they?} (\P“s legousin;\). The Pharisees had rallied in glee and one of their number, a lawyer, had made a feeble contribution to the controversy which resulted in his agreement with Jesus and in praise from Jesus (Mark:12:28-34; strkjv@Matthew:27:34-40|). Luke does not give this incident which makes it plain that by "they say" (\legousin\) Jesus refers to the Pharisees (rabbis, lawyers), carrying on the discussion and turning the tables on them while the Pharisees are still gathered together (Matthew:22:41|). The construction with \legousin\ is the usual infinitive and the accusative in indirect discourse. By "the Christ" (\ton Christon\) "the Messiah" is meant.

rwp@Luke:21:1 @{And he looked up} (\Anablepsas de\). He had taken his seat, after the debate was over and the Sanhedrin had slunk away in sheer defeat, "over against the treasury" (Mark:12:41|). The word for "treasury" (\gazophulakion\) is a compound of \gaza\ (Persian word for royal treasury) and \phulakˆ\ guard or protection. It is common in the LXX, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:12:41,43; strkjv@John:8:20|. Jesus was watching (Mark:12:41|) the rich put in their gifts as a slight diversion from the intense strain of the hours before.

rwp@Luke:21:5 @{As some spake} (\tin“n legont“n\). Genitive absolute. The disciples we know from strkjv@Mark:13:1; strkjv@Matthew:24:1|. {How} (\hoti\). Literally, "that." {It was adorned} (\kekosmˆtai\). Perfect passive indicative, state of completion, stands adorned, tense retained in indirect discourse, though English has to change it. \Kosme“\, old and common verb for orderly arrangement and adorning. {With goodly stones and offerings} (\lithois kalois kai anathˆmasin\). Instrumental case. Some of these stones in the substructure were enormous. "The columns of the cloister or portico were monoliths of marble over forty feet high" (Plummer). Cf. Josephus, _War_, V.5. The word \anathˆma\ (here only in the N.T.) is not to be confused with \anathema\ from the same verb \anatithˆmi\, but which came to mean a curse (Galatians:1:8; strkjv@Acts:23:14|). Songs:\anathema\ came to mean devoted in a bad sense, \anathˆma\ in a good sense. "Thus _knave_, lad, becomes a _rascal; villain_, a _farmer_, becomes a _scoundrel; cunning_, _skilful_, becomes _crafty_" (Vincent). These offerings in the temple were very numerous and costly (2Macc. strkjv@3:2-7) like the golden vine of Herod with branches as tall as a man (Josephus, _Ant_. XV. ii.3).

rwp@Luke:21:12 @{But before all these things} (\pro de tout“n pant“n\). In strkjv@Mark:13:8; strkjv@Matthew:24:8| these things are termed "the beginning of travail." That may be the idea here. Plummer insists that priority of time is the point, not magnitude. {Bringing you} (\apagomenous\). Present passive participle from \apag“\, an old verb to lead off or away. But here the participle is in the accusative plural, not the nominative like \paradidontes\ (present active participle, delivering you up), agreeing with \humas\ not expressed the object of \paradidontes\, "you being brought before or led off." "A technical term in Athenian legal language" (Bruce).

rwp@Luke:21:15 @{Your adversaries} (\hoi antikeimenoi humin\). Those who stand against, line up face to face with (note \anti-\). {To withstand or to gainsay} (\antistˆnai ˆ anteipein\). Two second aorist active infinitives with \anti-\ in composition again. But these "antis" will go down before the power of Christ.

rwp@Luke:21:20 @{Compassed with armies} (\kukloumenˆn hupo stratoped“n\). Present passive participle of \kuklo“\, to circle, encircle, from \kuklos\, circle. Old verb, but only four times in N.T. The point of this warning is the present tense, being encircled. It will be too late after the city is surrounded. It is objected by some that Jesus, not to say Luke, could not have spoken (or written) these words before the Roman armies came. One may ask why not, if such a thing as predictive prophecy can exist and especially in the case of the Lord Jesus. The word \stratoped“n\ (\stratos\, army, \pedon\, plain) is a military camp and then an army in camp. Old word, but only here in the N.T. {Then know} (\tote gn“te\). Second aorist active imperative of \gin“sk“\. Christians did flee from Jerusalem to Pella before it was too late as directed in strkjv@Luke:21:21; strkjv@Mark:13:14f.; strkjv@Matthew:24:16f|.

rwp@Luke:21:28 @{Look up} (\anakupsate\). First aorist active imperative of \anakupt“\, to raise up. Here of the soul as in strkjv@John:8:7,10|, but in strkjv@Luke:13:11| of the body. These the only N.T. examples of this common verb. {Redemption} (\apolutr“sis\). Act of redeeming from \apolutro“\. The final act at the second coming of Christ, a glorious hope.

rwp@Luke:21:29 @{The fig tree, and all the trees} (\tˆn sukˆn kai panta ta dendra\). This parable of the fig-tree (Mark:13:28-32; strkjv@Matthew:24:32-35|) Luke applies to "all the trees." It is true about all of them, but the fig tree was very common in Palestine.

rwp@Luke:21:30 @{Shoot forth} (\probal“sin\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \proball“\, common verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:19:33|. {Summer} (\theros\). Not harvest, but summer. Old word, but in the N.T. only here (Mark:13:28; strkjv@Matthew:24:32|).

rwp@Luke:21:34 @{Lest haply your hearts be overcharged} (\mˆ pote barˆth“sin hai kardiai hum“n\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \bare“\, an old verb to weigh down, depress, with \mˆ pote\. {With surfeiting} (\en krepalˆi\). A rather late word, common in medical writers for the nausea that follows a debauch. Latin _crapula_, the giddiness caused by too much wine. Here only in the N.T. {Drunkenness} (\methˆi\). From \methu\ (wine). Old word but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:13:13; strkjv@Galatians:5:21|. {Cares of this life} (\merimnais bi“tikais\). Anxieties of life. The adjective \bi“tikos\ is late and in the N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:6:3f|. {Come on you} (\epistˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \ephistˆmi\, ingressive aorist. Construed also with \mˆ pote\. {Suddenly} (\ephnidios\). Adjective in predicate agreeing with \hˆmera\ (day). {As a snare} (\h“s pagis\). Old word from \pˆgnumi\, to make fast a net or trap. Paul uses it several times of the devil's snares for preachers (1Timothy:3:7; strkjv@2Timothy:2:26|).

rwp@Luke:21:36 @{But watch ye} (\agrupneite de\). \Agrupne“\ is a late verb to be sleepless (\a\ privative and \hupnos\, sleep). Keep awake and be ready is the pith of Christ's warning. {That ye may prevail to escape} (\hina katischusˆte ekphugein\). First aorist active subjunctive with \hina\ of purpose. The verb \katischu“\ means to have strength against (cf. strkjv@Matthew:16:18|). Common in later writers. \Ekphugein\ is second aorist active infinitive, to escape out. {To stand before the Son of man} (\stathˆnai emprosthen tou huiou tou anthr“pou\). That is the goal. There will be no dread of the Son then if one is ready. \Stathˆnai\ is first aorist passive infinitive of \histˆmi\.

rwp@Luke:22:5 @{Were glad} (\echarˆsan\). Second aorist passive indicative of \chair“\ as in strkjv@Mark:14:11|. Ingressive aorist, a natural exultation that one of the Twelve had offered to do this thing. {Covenanted} (\sunethento\). Second aorist indicative middle of \suntithˆmi\. An old verb to put together and in the middle with one another. In the N.T. outside of strkjv@John:9:22| only in Luke (here and strkjv@Acts:23:20; strkjv@24:9|). Luke only mentions "money" (\argurion\), but not "thirty pieces" (Matthew:26:15|).

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

rwp@Luke:22:18 @{The fruit of the vine} (\tou genˆmatos tˆs ampelou\). Songs:Mark:14:25; strkjv@Matthew:26:29| and not \oinos\ though it was wine undoubtedly. But the language allows anything that is "the fruit of the vine." {Come} (\elthˆi\). Second aorist active subjunctive with \he“s\ as in verse 16|. Here it is the consummation of the kingdom that Jesus has in mind, for the kingdom had already come.

rwp@Luke:22:20 @{After the supper} (\meta to deipnˆsai\). Preposition \meta\ and the accusative articular infinitive. The textual situation here is confusing, chiefly because of the two cups (verses 17,20|). Some of the documents omit the latter part of verse 19| and all of verse 20|. It is possible, of course, that this part crept into the text of Luke from strkjv@1Corinthians:11:24f|. But, if this part is omitted, Luke would then have the order reversed, the cup before the bread. Songs:there are difficulties whichever turn one takes here with Luke's text whether one cup or two cups. {The New Covenant} (\he kainˆ diathˆkˆ\). See on ¯Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Mark:14:24| for "covenant." Westcott and Hort reject "new" there, but accept it here and in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:25|. See on ¯Luke:5:38| for difference between \kainˆ\ and \nea\. "The ratification of a covenant was commonly associated with the shedding of blood; and what was written in blood was believed to be indelible" (Plummer). {Poured out} (\ekchunnomenon\). Same word in strkjv@Mark:14:24; strkjv@Matthew:26:28| translated "shed." Late form present passive participle of \ekchunn“\ of \ekche“\, to pour out.

rwp@Luke:22:22 @{As it hath been determined} (\kata to h“rismenon\). Perfect passive participle of \horiz“\, to limit or define, mark off the border, our "horizon." But this fact does not absolve Judas of his guilt as the "woe" here makes plain.

rwp@Luke:22:27 @{But I} (\Eg“ de\). Jesus dares to cite his own conduct, though their leader, to prove his point and to put a stop to their jealous contention for the chief place at this very feast, a wrangling that kept up till Jesus had to arise and give them the object lesson of humility by washing their feet (John:13:1-20|).

rwp@Luke:22:30 @{And ye shall sit} (\kathˆsesthe\). But Westcott and Hort read in the text \kathˆsthe\ (present middle subjunctive with \hina\). The picture seems to be that given in strkjv@Matthew:19:28| when Jesus replied to Peter's inquiry. It is not clear how literally this imagery is to be taken. But there is the promise of honour for the loyal among these in the end.

rwp@Luke:22:31 @{Asked to have you} (\exˆitˆsato\). First aorist indirect middle indicative of \exaite“\, an old verb to beg something of one and (middle) for oneself. Only here in the N.T. The verb is used either in the good or the bad sense, but it does not mean here "obtained by asking" as margin in Revised Version has it. {That he might sift you} (\tou siniasai\). Genitive articular infinitive of purpose. First aorist active infinitive of \siniaz“\, to shake a sieve, to sift, from \sinion\, a winnowing fan. Later word. Here only in the N.T.

rwp@Luke:22:32 @{That thy faith fail not} (\hina mˆ eklipˆi he pistis mou\). Second aorist active subjunctive of purpose with \hina\ after \edeˆthˆn\ ({I prayed}) of \ekleip“\, old verb. Our word _eclipse_ is this word. Evidently Jesus could not keep Satan from attacking Peter. He had already captured Judas. Did he not repeatedly attack Jesus? But he could and did pray for Peter's faith and his praying won in the end, though Peter stumbled and fell. {And do thou} (\kai su\). The words single out Peter sharply. {Once thou hast turned again} (\pote epistrepsas\). First aorist active participle of \epistreph“\, common verb to turn to, to return. But the use of this word implied that Peter would fall though he would come back and "strengthen thy brethren."

rwp@Luke:22:35 @{Without purse} (\ater ballantiou\). Money bag or purse. Old word, but in the N.T. only in Luke (10:4; strkjv@12:33; strkjv@22:35ff.|). {Wallet} (\pˆras\). See on ¯Matthew:10:10|. {Lacked ye anything} (\mˆ tinos husterˆsate;\). Answer No expected (\outhenos\ below). Ablative case after \hustere“\.

rwp@Luke:22:36 @{Buy a sword} (\agorasat“ machairan\). This is for defence clearly. The reference is to the special mission in Galilee (Luke:9:1-6; strkjv@Mark:6:6-13; strkjv@Matthew:9:35-11:1|). They are to expect persecution and bitter hostility (John:15:18-21|). Jesus does not mean that his disciples are to repel force by force, but that they are to be ready to defend his cause against attack. Changed conditions bring changed needs. This language can be misunderstood as it was then.

rwp@Luke:22:38 @{Lord, behold, here are two swords} (\kurie idou machairai h“de duo\). They took his words literally. And before this very night is over Peter will use one of these very swords to try to cut off the head of Malchus only to be sternly rebuked by Jesus (Mark:14:47; strkjv@Matthew:26:51f.; strkjv@Luke:22:50f.; strkjv@John:18:10f.|). Then Jesus will say: "For all that take the sword shall perish with the sword" (Matthew:26:52|). Clearly Jesus did not mean his language even about the sword to be pressed too literally. Songs:he said: "It is enough" (\Hikanon estin\). It is with sad irony and sorrow that Jesus thus dismisses the subject. They were in no humour now to understand the various sides of this complicated problem. Every preacher and teacher understands this mood, not of impatience, but of closing the subject for the present.

rwp@Luke:22:44 @{In an agony} (\en ag“niƒi\). It was conflict, contest from \ag“n\. An old word, but only here in the N.T. Satan pressed Jesus harder than ever before. {As it were great drops of blood} (\h“sei thromboi haimatos\). Thick, clotted blood. An old word (\thromboi\) common in medical works, but here only in the N.T. This passage (verses 43,44|) is absent from some ancient documents. Aristotle speaks of a bloody sweat as does Theophrastus.

rwp@Luke:22:46 @{Why sleep ye?} (\Ti katheudete;\). This reproach Luke gives, but not the almost bitter details in strkjv@Mark:14:37-42; strkjv@Matthew:26:40-46|).

rwp@Luke:22:48 @{With a kiss} (\philˆmati\). Instrumental case. Jesus challenges the act of Judas openly and calls it betrayal, but it did not stop him.

rwp@Luke:22:50 @{His right ear} (\to ous autou to dexion\). Mark strkjv@14:47; strkjv@Matthew:26:51| do not mention "right," but Luke the Physician does. strkjv@John:18:10| follows Luke in this item and also adds the names of Peter and of Malchus since probably both were dead by that time and Peter would not be involved in trouble.

rwp@Luke:22:51 @{Suffer us thus far} (\eƒte he“s toutou\). Present active imperative of \ea“\, to allow. But the meaning is not clear. If addressed to Peter and the other disciples it means that they are to suffer this much of violence against Jesus. This is probably the idea. If it is addressed to the crowd, it means that they are to excuse Peter for his rash act. {He touched his ear and healed him} (\hapsamenos tou otiou iasato auton\). Whether Jesus picked up the piece of the ear and put it back is not said. He could have healed the wound without that. This miracle of surgery is given alone by Luke.

rwp@Luke:22:53 @{But this is your hour} (\all' hautˆ estin hum“n hˆ h“ra\). Songs:Jesus surrenders. The moral value of his atoning sacrifice on the Cross consists in the voluntariness of his death. He makes it clear that they have taken undue advantage of him in this hour of secret prayer and had failed to seize him in public in the temple. But "the power of darkness" (\hˆ exousia tou skotous\), had its turn. A better day will come. The might, authority of darkness.

rwp@Luke:22:55 @{When they had kindled a fire} (\periapsant“n pur\). Genitive absolute, first aorist active participle of \periapt“\, an old verb, but here only in the N.T. Kindle around, make a good fire that blazes all over. It was April and cool at night. The servants made the fire. {And had sat down together} (\kai sunkathisant“n\). Genitive absolute again. Note \sun-\ (together), all had taken seats around the fire. {Peter sat in the midst of them} (\ekathˆto ho Petros mesos aut“n\). Imperfect tense, he was sitting, and note \mesos\, nominative predicate adjective with the genitive, like strkjv@John:1:26|, good Greek idiom.

rwp@Luke:22:62 @{And he went out and wept bitterly} (\kai exelth“n ex“ eklausen pikr“s\). A few old Latin documents omit this verse which is genuine in strkjv@Matthew:26:75|. It may be an insertion here from there, but the evidence for the rejection is too slight. It is the ingressive aorist (\eklausen\), he burst into tears. "Bitter" is a common expression for tears in all languages and in all hearts.

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:22:67 @{If thou art the Christ} (\Ei su ei ho Christos\). The Messiah, they mean. The condition is the first class, assuming it to be true. {If I tell you} (\Ean humin eip“\). Condition of the third class, undetermined, but with likelihood of being determined. This is the second appearance of Jesus before the Sanhedrin merely mentioned by strkjv@Mark:15:1; strkjv@Matthew:27:1| who give in detail the first appearance and trial. Luke merely gives this so-called ratification meeting after daybreak to give the appearance of legality to their vote of condemnation already taken (Mark:14:64; strkjv@Matthew:26:66|). {Ye will not believe} (\ou mˆ pisteusˆte\). Double negative with the aorist subjunctive, strongest possible negative. Songs:as to verse 68|.

rwp@Luke:23:1 @{The whole company} (\hapan to plˆthos\). All but Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea who were probably not invited to this meeting.

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:23:5 @{But they were the more urgent} (\hoi de epischuon\). Imperfect active of \epischu“\, to give added (\epi\) strength (\ischu“\). And they kept insisting. Evidently Pilate had taken the thing too lightly. {He stirred up the people} (\anaseiei ton laon\). This compound is rare, though old (Thucydides), to shake up (back and forth). This is a more vigorous repetition of the first charge (verse 2|, "perverting our nation"). {Beginning from Galilee} (\arxamenos apo tˆs Galilaias\). These very words occur in the address of Peter to the group in the house of Cornelius (Acts:10:37|). The idiomatic use of \arxamenos\ appears also in strkjv@Acts:1:22|. Galilee (Grote) was the mother of seditious men (see Josephus).

rwp@Luke:23:10 @{Stood} (\histˆkeisan\). Second perfect active intransitive of \histˆmi\ with sense of imperfect. They stood by while Herod quizzed Jesus and when he refused to answer, they broke loose with their accusations like a pack of hounds with full voice (\euton“s\, adverb from adjective \eutonos\, from \eu\, well, and \tein“\, to stretch, well tuned). Old word, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:18:28|.

rwp@Luke:23:15 @{No nor yet} (\all' oude\). But not even. {Hath been done by him} (\estin pepragmenon aut“i\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \prass“\, common verb, to do. The case of \aut“i\ can be regarded as either the dative or the instrumental (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 534,542).

rwp@Luke:23:16 @{Chastise} (\paideusas\). First aorist active participle of \paideu“\, to train a child (\pais\), and then, as a part of the training, punishment. Our English word chasten is from the Latin _castus_, pure, chaste, and means to purify (cf. strkjv@Hebrews:12:6f.|). Perhaps Pilate may have split a hair over the word as Wycliff puts it: "I shall deliver him amended." But, if Jesus was innocent, Pilate had no doubt to "chastise" him to satisfy a mob. Verse 17| is omitted by Westcott and Hort as from strkjv@Mark:15:6; strkjv@Matthew:27:15|.

rwp@Luke:23:18 @{All together} (\panplˆthei\). An adverb from the adjective \panplˆthˆs\, all together. Used by Dio Cassius. Only here in the N.T. {Away} (\aire\). Present active imperative, Take him on away and keep him away as in strkjv@Acts:21:36; strkjv@22:22|, of Paul. But {release} (\apoluson\) is first aorist active imperative, do it now and at once.

rwp@Luke:23:21 @{But they shouted} (\hoi de epeph“noun\). Imperfect active of \epiph“ne“\, to call to. Old verb and a verb pertinent here. They kept on yelling. {Crucify, crucify} (\staurou, staurou\). Present active imperative. Go on with the crucifixion. strkjv@Mark:15:13| has \staur“son\ (first aorist active imperative), do it now and be done with it. No doubt some shouted one form, some another.

rwp@Luke:23:23 @{But they were instant} (\hoi de epekeinto\). Imperfect middle of \epikeimai\, an old verb for the rush and swirl of a tempest. {With loud voices} (\ph“nais megalais\). Instrumental case. Poor Pilate was overwhelmed by this tornado. {Prevailed} (\katischuon\). Imperfect active of \katischu“\ (see strkjv@Matthew:16:18; strkjv@Luke:21:36|). The tempest Pilate had invited (23:13|).

rwp@Luke:23:32 @{Were led} (ˆgonto). Imperfect passive of \ag“\, were being led. {Malefactors} (\kakourgoi\). Evil (\kakon\), doers (work, \ergon\). Old word, but in the N.T. only in this passage (32,33,39|) and strkjv@2Timothy:2:9|. Luke does not call them "robbers" like strkjv@Mark:15:27; strkjv@Matthew:27:38,44|. {To be put to death} (\anairethˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \anaire“\, old verb, to take up, to take away, to kill.

rwp@Luke:23:34 @{Father forgive them} (\Pater, aphes autois\). Second aorist active imperative of \aphiˆmi\, with dative case. Some of the oldest and best documents do not contain this verse, and yet, while it is not certain that it is a part of Luke's Gospel, it is certain that Jesus spoke these words, for they are utterly unlike any one else. Jesus evidently is praying for the Roman soldiers, who were only obeying, but not for the Sanhedrin. {Cast lots} (\ebalon klˆron\). Second aorist active indicative of \ball“\. See strkjv@Mark:15:24; strkjv@Matthew:27:35|. strkjv@John:19:23f|. shows how the lot was cast for the seamless garment, the four soldiers dividing the other garments.

rwp@Luke:23:37 @{If} (\ei\). Condition of the first class as is text in verse 35| used by the rulers. The soldiers pick out "the king of the Jews" as the point of their sneer, the point on which Jesus was condemned. But both soldiers and rulers fail to understand that Jesus could not save himself if he was to save others.

rwp@Luke:23:38 @{A superscription} (\epigraphˆ\). strkjv@Mark:15:26| has "the superscription of his accusation" strkjv@Matthew:27:37|, "his accusation," strkjv@John:19:19| "a title." But they all refer to the charge written at the top on the cross giving, as was the custom, the accusation on which the criminal was condemned, with his name and residence. Put all the reports together and we have: This is Jesus of Nazareth the King of the Jews. This full title appeared in Latin for law, in Aramaic for the Jews, in Greek for everybody (John:19:20|).

rwp@Luke:23:39 @{Railed} (\eblasphˆmei\). Imperfect active, implying that he kept it up. His question formally calls for an affirmative answer (\ouchi\), but the ridicule is in his own answer: "Save thyself and us." It was on a level with an effort to break prison. Luke alone gives this incident (39-43|), though strkjv@Mark:15:32; strkjv@Matthew:27:44| allude to it.

rwp@Luke:23:40 @{Rebuking} (\epitim“n\). From what Mark and Matthew say both robbers sneered at Jesus at first, but this one came to himself and turned on his fellow robber in a rage. {Dost thou not even fear God?} (\Oude phobˆi ton theon;\). \Oude\ here goes with the verb. \Phobˆi\ (second person singular present indicative middle of \phobeomai\. Both of you will soon appear before God. Jesus has nothing to answer for and you have added this to your other sins.

rwp@Luke:23:43 @{Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise} (\Sˆmeron met' emou esˆi en t“i paradeis“i\). However crude may have been the robber's Messianic ideas Jesus clears the path for him. He promises him immediate and conscious fellowship after death with Christ in Paradise which is a Persian word and is used here not for any supposed intermediate state; but the very bliss of heaven itself. This Persian word was used for an enclosed park or pleasure ground (so Xenophon). The word occurs in two other passages in the N.T. (2Corinthians:12:4; strkjv@Revelation:2:7|), in both of which the reference is plainly to heaven. Some Jews did use the word for the abode of the pious dead till the resurrection, interpreting "Abraham's bosom" (Luke:16:22f.|) in this sense also. But the evidence for such an intermediate state is too weak to warrant belief in it.

rwp@Luke:23:45 @{The sun's light failing} (\tou hˆliou ekleipontos\). Genitive absolute of the present active participle of \ekleip“\, an old verb, to leave out, omit, pass by, to fail, to die. The word was used also of the eclipse of the sun or moon. But this was impossible at this time because the moon was full at the passover. Hence many documents change this correct text to "the sun was darkened" (\eskotisthˆ ho hˆlios\) to obviate the difficulty about the technical eclipse. But the sun can be darkened in other ways. In a London fog at noon the street lights are often turned on. The Revised Version translates it correctly, "the sun's light failing." Leave the darkness unexplained. {In the midst} (\meson\). In the middle. strkjv@Mark:15:38; strkjv@Matthew:27:51| have "in two" (\eis duo\).

rwp@Luke:23:46 @{Father} (\Pater\). Jesus dies with the words of strkjv@Psalms:31:5| on his lips. {Gave up the ghost} (\exepneusen\). First aorist active indicative of \ekpne“\, to breathe out, to expire, old word, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:15:37,39|. There is no special reason for retaining "ghost" in the English as both strkjv@Matthew:27:50| (yielded up his spirit, \aphˆken to pneuma\) and strkjv@John:19:30| (gave up his spirit, \pared“ken to pneuma\) use \pneuma\ which is the root of \ekpne“\, the verb in Mark and Luke.

rwp@Luke:23:54 @{The day of the Preparation} (\hˆmera paraskeuˆs\). The technical Jewish phrase for the day before the sabbath for which see discussion on ¯Matthew:27:62|. {Drew on} (\epeph“sken\). Imperfect active, began to dawn or give light. However, it was sundown, not sunrise when the Jewish sabbath (twenty-four-hour day) began. The confusion is to us, not to the Jews or the readers of the Greek New Testament. Luke is not speaking of the twelve-hour day which began with sunrise, but the twenty-four-hour day which began with sunset.

rwp@Luke:23:55 @{Had come with him} (\ˆsan sunelˆluthuiai\). Periphrastic past perfect active of \sunerchomai\. {Followed after} (\katakolouthˆsasai\). Aorist active participle of \katakolouthe“\, an old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:16:17|. It is possible that they followed after Joseph and Nicodemus so that they "beheld the tomb," (\etheasanto to mnˆmeion\), and also "how his body was laid" (\h“s etethˆ to s“ma autou\). First aorist passive indicative of \tithˆmi\. They may in fact, have witnessed the silent burial from a distance. The Syriac Sinaitic and the Syriac Curetonian give it thus: "and the women, who came with Him from Galilee went to the sepulchre in their footsteps, and saw the body when they had brought it in there." At any rate the women saw "that" and "how" the body of Jesus was laid in this new tomb of Joseph in the rocks.

rwp@Luke:24:3 @{Of the Lord Jesus} (\tou kuriou Iˆsou\). The Western family of documents does not have these words and Westcott and Hort bracket them as Western non-interpolations. There are numerous instances of this shorter Western text in this chapter. For a discussion of the subject see my _Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament_, pp. 225-237. This precise combination (the Lord Jesus) is common in the Acts, but nowhere else in the Gospels.

rwp@Luke:24:6 @{He is not here, but is risen} (\ouk estin h“de, alla ˆgerthˆ\). Another Western non-interpolation according to Westcott and Hort. The words are genuine at any rate in strkjv@Mark:16:6; strkjv@Matthew:28:7|. {The third day rise again} (\tˆi tritˆi hˆmerƒi anastˆnai\). See strkjv@9:22; strkjv@18:32,33| where Jesus plainly foretold this fact. And yet they had forgotten it, for it ran counter to all their ideas and hopes.

rwp@Luke:24:21 @{But we hoped} (\hˆmeis de ˆlpizomen\). Imperfect active, we were hoping. Note emphasis in \hˆmeis\ (we). {Redeem} (\lutrousthai\). From the bondage of Rome, no doubt. {Yea and beside all this} (\alla ge kai sun pƒsin toutois\). Particles pile up to express their emotions. {Yea} (\alla\ here affirmative, as in verse 22|, not adversative) at least (\ge\) also (\kai\) together with all these things (\sun pƒsin toutois\). Like Pelion on Ossa with them in their perplexity. {Now the third day} (\tritˆn tautˆn hˆmeran agei\). A difficult idiom for the English. "One is keeping this a third day." And he is still dead and we are still without hope.

rwp@Luke:24:23 @{Had seen} (\he“rakenai\). Perfect active infinitive in indirect assertion after \legousai\. Same construction for \zˆin\ after \legousin\. But all this was too indirect and uncertain (women and angels) for Cleopas and his companion.

rwp@Luke:24:27 @{Interpreted} (\diˆrmˆneusen\). First aorist active (constative aorist) indicative of \diermˆneu“\ (Margin has the imperfect \diˆrmˆneuen\), intensive compound (\dia\) of \hermˆneu“\, the old verb to interpret from \hermˆneus\, interpreter, and that from \Hermˆs\, the messenger of the gods as the people of Lystra took Paul to be (Acts:14:12|). But what wonderful exegesis the two disciples were now hearing! {Concerning himself} (\peri heauton\). Jesus found himself in the Old Testament, a thing that some modern scholars do not seem able to do.

rwp@Luke:24:35 @{Rehearsed} (\exˆgounto\). Imperfect middle indicative of \exˆgeomai\, verb to lead out, to rehearse. Our word exegesis comes from this verb. Their story was now confirmatory, not revolutionary. The women were right then after all. {Of them} (\autois\). To them, dative case. They did not recognize Jesus in his exegesis, but did in the breaking of bread. One is reminded of that saying in the _Logia of Jesus_: "Raise the stone and there thou shalt find me, cleave the wood and there am I."

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

rwp@Luke:24:41 @{Disbelieved for joy} (\apistount“n aut“n apo tˆs charas\). Genitive absolute and a quite understandable attitude. They were slowly reconvinced, but it was after all too good to be true. {Anything to eat} (\br“simon\). Only here in the N.T., though an old word from \bibr“sk“\, to eat.

rwp@Luke:24:42 @{A piece of broiled fish} (\ichthuos optou meros\). \Optos\ is a verbal from \opta“\, to cook, to roast, to broil. Common word, but only here in the N.T. The best old documents omit "and a honeycomb" (\kai apo melissiou kˆriou\).

rwp@Luke:24:45 @{Opened he their mind} (\diˆnoixen aut“n ton noun\). The same verb as that in verses 31,32| about the eyes and the Scriptures. Jesus had all these years been trying to open their minds that they might understand the Scriptures about the Messiah and now at last he makes one more effort in the light of the Cross and the Resurrection. They can now see better the will and way of God, but they will still need the power of the Holy Spirit before they will fully know the mind of Christ.

rwp@Luke:24:47 @{Beginning} (\arxamenoi\). Aorist middle participle of \arch“\, but the nominative plural with no syntactical connection (an anacoluthon).

rwp@Luke:24:51 @{He parted from them} (\diestˆ ap' aut“n\). Second aorist active (intransitive) indicative of \diistˆmi\. He stood apart (\dia\) and he was gone. Some manuscripts do not have the words "and was carried into heaven." But we know that Jesus was taken up into heaven on a cloud (Acts:1:9|).

rwp@Luke:24:52 @{Worshipped him} (\proskunˆsantes auton\). Here again we have one of Westcott and Hort's Western non-interpolations that may be genuine or not. {With great joy} (\meta charas megalˆs\). Now that the Ascension has come they are no longer in despair. Joy becomes the note of victory as it is today. No other note can win victories for Christ. The bells rang in heaven to greet the return of Jesus there, but he set the carillon of joy to ringing on earth in human hearts in all lands and for all time.

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

rwp@Info_Mark @ This Gospel is the briefest of the four, but is fullest of striking details that apparently came from Peter's discourses which Mark heard, such as green grass, flower beds (Mark:6:38|), two thousand hogs (Mark:5:13|), looking round about (Mark:3:5,34|). Peter usually spoke in Aramaic and Mark has more Aramaic phrases than the others, like _Boanerges_ (Mark:3:17|), _Talitha cumi_ (Mark:5:41|), _Korban_ (Mark:7:11|), _Ephphatha_ (Mark:7:34|), _Abba_ (Mark:14:36|). The Greek is distinctly vernacular _Koin‚_ like one-eyed (\monophthalmon\, strkjv@Mark:9:47|) as one would expect from both Peter and Mark. There are also more Latin phrases and idioms like _centurio_ (Mark:15:39|), _quadrans_ (Mark:12:42|), _flagellare_ (Mark:15:15|), _speculator_ (Mark:6:27|), _census_ (Mark:12:14|), _sextarius_ (Mark:7:4|), _praetorium_ (Mark:15:6|), than in the other Gospels, so much so that C. H. Turner raises the question whether Mark wrote first in Latin, or at any rate in Rome. There are some who hold that Mark wrote first in Aramaic, but the facts are sufficiently accounted for by the fact of Peter's preaching and the activity in Rome. Some even think that he wrote the Gospel in Rome while with Peter who suggested and read the manuscript. B.W. Bacon holds that this Gospel has a distinct Pauline flavour and may have had several recensions. The Ur-Marcus theory does not have strong support now. Mark was once a co-worker with Barnabas and Paul, but deserted them at Perga. Paul held this against Mark and refused to take him on the second mission tour. Barnabas took Mark, his cousin, with him and then he appeared with Simon Peter with whom he did his greatest work. When Mark had made good with Barnabas and Peter, Paul rejoiced and commends him heartily to the Colossians (Colossians:4:10|) In the end Paul will ask Timothy to pick up Mark and bring him along with him to Paul in Rome, for he has found him useful for ministry, this very young man who made such a mistake that Paul would have no more of him. This tribute to Mark by Paul throws credit upon both of them as is shown in my _Making Good in the Ministry_. The character of the Gospel of Mark is determined largely by the scope of Peter's preaching as we see it in strkjv@Acts:10:36-42|, covering the period in outline from John the Baptist to the Resurrection of Jesus. There is nothing about the birth of the Baptist or of Jesus. This peculiarity of Mark's Gospel cannot be used against the narratives of the Virgin Birth of Jesus in Matthew and Luke, since Mark tells nothing whatever about his birth at all.

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

rwp@Mark:1:2 @{In Isaiah, the prophet} (\en t“i Esaiƒi t“i prophˆtˆi\). The quotation comes from strkjv@Malachi:3:1| and strkjv@Isaiah:40:3|. The Western and Neutral classes read Isaiah, the Alexandrian and Syrian, "the prophets," an evident correction because part of it is from Malachi. But Isaiah is mentioned as the chief of the prophets. It was common to combine quotations from the prophets in _testimonia_ and _catenae_ (chains of quotations). This is Mark's only prophetic quotation on his own account (Bruce).

rwp@Mark:4:37 @{There ariseth a great storm of wind} (\ginetai lailaps megalˆ anemou\). Mark's vivid historical present again. strkjv@Matthew:8:24| has \egeneto\ (arose) and strkjv@Luke:8:23| \katebˆ\ (came down). Luke has also \lailaps\, but Matthew \seismos\ (tempest), a violent upheaval like an earthquake. \Lailaps\ is an old word for these cyclonic gusts or storms. Luke's "came down" shows that the storm fell suddenly from Mount Hermon down into the Jordan Valley and smote the Sea of Galilee violently at its depth of 682 feet below the Mediterranean Sea. The hot air at this depth draws the storm down with sudden power. These sudden storms continue to this day on the Sea of Galilee. The word occurs in the LXX of the whirlwind out of which God answered Job:(Job:38:1|) and in strkjv@Jonah:1:4|. {The waves beat into the boat} (\ta kumata epeballen eis to ploion\). Imperfect tense (were beating) vividly picturing the rolling over the sides of the boat "so that the boat was covered with the waves" (Matthew:8:24|). Mark has it: "insomuch that the boat was now filling" (\h“ste ˆdˆ gemizesthai to ploion\). Graphic description of the plight of the disciples.

rwp@Mark:4:40 @{Why are ye fearful?} (\Ti deiloi este;\). They had the Lord of the wind and the waves with them in the boat. He was still Master even if asleep in the storm. {Have ye not yet faith?} (\Oup“ echete pistin;\). Not yet had they come to feel that Jesus was really Lord of nature. They had accepted his Messiaship, but all the conclusions from it they had not yet drawn. How like us in our troubles they were!

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

rwp@Mark:5:3 @{No man could any more bind him, no, not with a chain} (\oude halusei oudeis edunato auton dˆsai\). Instrumental case \halusei\, a handcuff (\a\ privative and \lu“\, to loosen). But this demoniac snapped a handcuff as if a string.

rwp@Mark:5:4 @{Often bound} (\pollakis dedesthai\). Perfect passive infinitive, state of completion. With fetters (\pedais\, from \peza\, foot, instep) and chains, bound hand and foot, but all to no purpose. The English plural of foot is feet (Anglo-Saxon _fot_, _fet_) and fetter is _feeter_. {Rent asunder} (\diespƒsthai\). Drawn (\spa“\) in two (\dia-\ same root as \duo\, two). Perfect passive infinitive. {Broken in pieces} (\suntetriphthai\.) Perfect passive infinitive again, from \suntrib“\, to rub together. Rubbed together, crushed together. Perhaps the neighbours who told the story could point to broken fragments of chains and fetters. The fetters may have been cords, or even wooden stocks and not chains. {No man had strength to tame him} (\oudeis ischuen auton damasai\). Imperfect tense. He roamed at will like a lion in the jungle.

rwp@Mark:5:8 @{For he said} (\elegen gar\). For he had been saying (progressive imperfect). Jesus had already repeatedly ordered the demon to come out of the man whereat the demon made his outcry to Jesus and protested. strkjv@Matthew:8:29| had "before the time" (\pro kairou\) and strkjv@8:31| shows that the demons did not want to go back to the abyss (\tˆn abusson\) right now. That was their real home, but they did not wish to return to the place of torment just now.

rwp@Mark:5:9 @{My name is Legion} (\Legi“n onoma moi\). Songs:Luke:8:30|, but not Matthew. Latin word (_legio_). A full Roman legion had 6,826 men. See on ¯Matthew:26:53|. This may not have been a full legion, for strkjv@Mark:5:13| notes that the number of hogs was "about two thousand." Of course, a stickler for words might say that each hog had several demons.

rwp@Mark:5:13 @{And he gave them leave} (\kai epetrepsen autois\). These words present the crucial difficulty for interpreters as to why Jesus allowed the demons to enter the hogs and destroy them instead of sending them back to the abyss. Certainly it was better for hogs to perish than men, but this loss of property raises a difficulty of its own akin to the problem of tornadoes and earthquakes. The question of one man containing so many demons is difficult also, but not much more so than how one demon can dwell in a man and make his home there. One is reminded of the man out of whom a demon was cast, but the demon came back with seven other demons and took possession. Gould thinks that this man with a legion of demons merely makes a historical exaggeration. "I feel as if I were possessed by a thousand devils." That is too easy an explanation. See on ¯Matthew:8:32| for "rushed down the steep." {They were choked} (\epnigonto\). Imperfect tense picturing graphically the disappearance of pig after pig in the sea. strkjv@Luke:8:33| has \apegnigˆ\, {choked off}, constative second aorist passive indicative, treated as a whole, strkjv@Matthew:8:32| merely has "perished" (\apethanon\; died).

rwp@Mark:5:15 @{They come to Jesus} (\erchontai pros ton Iˆsoun\). Vivid present. To Jesus as the cause of it all, "to meet Jesus" (\eis hupantˆsin Iˆsou\, strkjv@Matthew:8:34|). {And behold} (\the“rousin\). Present tense again. {And they were afraid} (\kai ephobˆthˆsan\). They became afraid. Mark drops back to the ingressive aorist tense (passive voice). They had all been afraid of the man, but there he was "sitting clothed and in his right mind," (\kathˆmenon himatismenon kai s“phronounta\. Note the participles). "At the feet of Jesus," Luke adds (Luke:8:35|). For a long time he had worn no clothes (Luke:8:17|). Here was the healing of the wild man and the destruction of the hogs all by this same Jesus.

rwp@Mark:5:19 @{Go to thy house unto thy friends} (\Hupage eis ton oikon sou pros tous sous\). "To thy own folks" rather than "thy friends." Certainly no people needed the message about Christ more than these people who were begging Jesus to leave. Jesus had greatly blessed this man and so gave him the hardest task of all, to go home and witness there for Christ. In Galilee Jesus had several times forbidden the healed to tell what he had done for them because of the undue excitement and misunderstanding. But here it was different. There was no danger of too much enthusiasm for Christ in this environment.

rwp@Mark:5:24 @{He went with him} (\apˆlthen\). Aorist tense. Went off with him promptly, but a great multitude followed him (\ˆkolouthei\), was following, kept following (imperfect tense). {They thronged him} (\sunethlibon auton\). Imperfect tense again. Only example of (here and in verse 31|) this compound verb in the N.T., common in old Greek. Were pressing Jesus so that he could hardly move because of the jam, or even to breathe (\sunepnigon\, strkjv@Luke:8:42|).

rwp@Mark:5:26 @{Had suffered many things of many physicians} (\polla pathousa hupo poll“n iatr“n\). A pathetic picture of a woman with a chronic case who had tried doctor after doctor. {Had spent all that she had} (\dapanˆsasa ta par' autˆs panta\). Having spent the all from herself, all her resources. For the idiom with \para\ see strkjv@Luke:10:7; strkjv@Phillipians:4:18|. The tragedy of it was that she "was nothing bettered, but rather grew worse" (\mˆden “phelˆtheisa alla mƒllon eis to cheiron elthousa\). Her money was gone, her disease was gaining on her, her one chance came now with Jesus. Matthew says nothing about her experience with the doctors and strkjv@Luke:8:43| merely says that she "had spent all her living upon physicians and could not be healed of any," a plain chronic case. Luke the physician neatly takes care of the physicians. But they were not to blame. She had a disease that they did not know how to cure. Vincent quotes a prescription for an issue of blood as given in the Talmud which gives one a most grateful feeling that he is not under the care of doctors of that nature. The only parallel today is Chinese medicine of the old sort before modern medical schools came.

rwp@Mark:5:28 @{If I touch but his garments} (\Ean haps“mai k'an t“n himati“n autou\). She was timid and shy from her disease and did not wish to attract attention. Songs:she crept up in the crowd and touched the hem or border of his garment (\kraspedon\) according to strkjv@Matthew:9:20| and strkjv@Luke:8:44|.

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

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

rwp@Mark:5:36 @{Not heeding} (\parakousas\). This is the sense in strkjv@Matthew:18:17| and uniformly so in the LXX. But here the other sense of hearing aside, overhearing what was not spoken directly to him, probably exists also. "Jesus might overhear what was said and disregard its import" (Bruce). Certainly he ignored the conclusion of the messengers. The present participle \laloumenon\ suits best the idea of overhearing. Both Mark and strkjv@Luke:8:50| have "Fear not, only believe" (\mˆ phobou, monon pisteue\). This to the ruler of the synagogue (\t“i archisunag“g“i\) who had remained and to whom the messenger had spoken.

rwp@Mark:5:39 @{Make a tumult} (\thorubeisthe\). Middle voice. Jesus had dismissed one crowd (verse 37|), but finds the house occupied by the hired mourners making bedlam (\thorubos\) as if that showed grief with their ostentatious noise. strkjv@Matthew:9:23| spoke of flute-players (\aulˆtas\) and the hubbub of the excited throng (\thoruboumenon\. Cf. strkjv@Mark:14:2; strkjv@Acts:20:1,21,34|). Mark, Matthew, and Luke all quote Jesus as saying that "the child is not dead, but sleepeth." Jesus undoubtedly meant that she was not dead to stay dead, though some hold that the child was not really dead. It is a beautiful word (she is {sleeping}, \katheudei\) that Jesus uses of death.

rwp@Mark:5:40 @{And they laughed him to scorn} (\kai kategel“n\). "They jeered at him" (Weymouth). Note imperfect tense. They kept it up. And note also \kat-\ (perfective use). Exactly the same words in strkjv@Matthew:9:24| and strkjv@Luke:8:53|. The loud laughter was ill suited to the solemn occasion. But Jesus on his part (\autos de\) took charge of the situation. {Taketh the father of the child and her mother and them that were with him} (\paralambanei ton patera tou paidiou kai tˆn mˆtera kai tous met' autou\). Having put out (\ekbal“n\) the rest by a stern assertion of authority as if he were master of the house, Jesus takes along with him these five and enters the chamber of death "where the child was" (\hopou ˆn to paidion\). He had to use pressure to make the hired mourners leave. The presence of some people will ruin the atmosphere for spiritual work.

rwp@Mark:5:43 @{That no one should know this} (\hina mˆdeis gnoi touto\). Second aorist active subjunctive, \gnoi\. But would they keep still about it? There was the girl besides. Both Mark and Luke note that Jesus ordered that food be given to the child {given her to eat}, (\dothˆnai autˆi phagein\), a natural care of the Great Physician. Two infinitives here (first aorist passive and second aorist active). "She could walk and eat; not only alive, but well" (Bruce).

rwp@Mark:6:1 @{Into his own country} (\eis tˆn patrida autou\). Songs:Matthew:13:54|. There is no real reason for identifying this visit to Nazareth with that recorded in strkjv@Luke:4:26-31| at the beginning of the Galilean Ministry. He was rejected both times, but it is not incongruous that Jesus should give Nazareth a second chance. It was only natural for Jesus to visit his mother, brothers, and sisters again. Neither Mark nor Matthew mention Nazareth here by name, but it is plain that by \patrida\ the region of Nazareth is meant. He had not lived in Bethlehem since his birth.

rwp@Mark:6:2 @{Began to teach} (\ˆrxato didaskein\). As was now his custom in the synagogue on the sabbath. The ruler of the synagogue (\archisunag“gos\, see strkjv@Matthew:5:22|) would ask some one to speak whensoever he wished. The reputation of Jesus all over Galilee opened the door for him. Jesus may have gone to Nazareth for rest, but could not resist this opportunity for service. {Whence hath this man these things?} (\Pothen tout“i tauta;\). Laconic and curt, {Whence these things to this fellow?} With a sting and a fling in their words as the sequel shows. They continued to be amazed (\exeplˆssonto\, imperfect tense passive). They challenge both the apparent {wisdom} (\sophia\) with which he spoke and {the mighty works} or powers (\hai dunameis\) {such as those} (\toiautai\) {coming to pass} (\ginomenai\, present middle participle, repeatedly wrought) {by his hands} (\dia t“n cheir“n\). They felt that there was some hocus-pocus about it somehow and somewhere. They do not deny the wisdom of his words, nor the wonder of his works, but the townsmen knew Jesus and they had never suspected that he possessed such gifts and graces.

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

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

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

rwp@Mark:6:9 @{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:6:10 @{There abide} (\ekei menete\). Songs:also strkjv@Matthew:10:11; strkjv@Luke:9:4|. Only Matthew has city or village (10:11|), but he mentions house in verse 12|. They were to avoid a restless and dissatisfied manner and to take pains in choosing a home. It is not a prohibition against accepting invitations.

rwp@Mark:6:14 @{Heard} (\ˆkousen\). This tour of Galilee by the disciples in pairs wakened all Galilee, for the name of Jesus thus became known (\phaneron\) or known till even Herod heard of it in the palace. "A palace is late in hearing spiritual news" (Bengel). {Therefore do these powers work in him} (\dia touto energousin hai dunameis en aut“i\). "A snatch of Herod's theology and philosophy" (Morison). John wrought no miracles (John:10:41|), but if he had risen from the dead perhaps he could. Songs:Herod may have argued. "Herod's superstition and his guilty conscience raised this ghost to plague him" (Gould). Our word _energy_ is this same Greek word here used (\energousin\). It means at work. Miraculous powers were at work in Jesus whatever the explanation. This all agreed, but they differed widely as to his personality, whether Elijah or another of the prophets or John the Baptist. Herod was at first much perplexed (\diˆporei\, strkjv@Luke:9:7| and strkjv@Mark:6:20|).

rwp@Mark:6:17 @{For Herod himself} (\Autos gar ho Hˆr“idˆs\). Mark now proceeds to give the narrative of the death of John the Baptist some while before these nervous fears of Herod. But this _post eventum_ narrative is very little out of the chronological order. The news of John's death at Machaerus may even have come at the close of the Galilean tour. "The tidings of the murder of the Baptist seem to have brought the recent circuit to an end" (Swete). The disciples of John "went and told Jesus. Now when Jesus heard it, he withdrew from thence in a boat" (Matthew:14:12f.|). See on ¯Matthew:14:3-12| for the discussion about Herod Antipas and John and Herodias.

rwp@Mark:6:19 @{And Herodias set herself against him} (\Hˆ de Hˆr“idias eneichen aut“i\). Dative of disadvantage. Literally, {had it in for him}. This is modern slang, but is in exact accord with this piece of vernacular _Koin‚_. No object of \eichen\ is expressed, though \orgˆn\ or \cholon\ may be implied. The tense is imperfect and aptly described the feelings of Herodias towards this upstart prophet of the wilderness who had dared to denounce her private relations with Herod Antipas. Gould suggests that she "kept her eye on him" or kept up her hostility towards him. She never let up, but bided her time which, she felt sure, would come. See the same idiom in strkjv@Genesis:49:23|. She {desired to kill him} (\ˆthelen auton apokteinai\). Imperfect again. {And she could not} (\kai ouk ˆdunato\). \Kai\ here has an adversative sense, but she could not. That is, not yet. "The power was wanting, not the will" (Swete).

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

rwp@Mark:6:24 @{What shall I ask?} (\Ti aitˆs“mai;\). The fact that she went and spoke to her mother proves that she had not been told beforehand what to ask. strkjv@Matthew:14:8| does not necessarily mean that, but he simply condenses the account. The girl's question implies by the middle voice that she is thinking of something for herself. She was no doubt unprepared for her mother's ghastly reply.

rwp@Mark:6:27 @{A soldier of his guard} (\spekoulatora\). Latin word _speculator_. A spy, scout, lookout, and often executioner. It was used of the bodyguard of the Roman emperor and so for one of Herod's spies. He was used to do errands of this sort and it was soon done. It was a gruesome job, but he soon brought John's head to the damsel, apparently in the presence of all, and she took it to her mother. This miserable Tetrarch, the slave of Herodias, was now the slave of his fears. He is haunted by the ghost of John and shudders at the reports of the work of Jesus.

rwp@Mark:6:34 @{They were as sheep not having a shepherd} (\ˆsan h“s probata mˆ echonta poimena\). Matthew has these words in another context (Matthew:9:26|), but Mark alone has them here. \Mˆ\ is the usual negative for the participle in the _Koin‚_. These excited and exciting people (Bruce) greatly needed teaching. strkjv@Matthew:14:14| mentions healing as does strkjv@Luke:9:11| (both preaching and healing). But a vigorous crowd of runners would not have many sick. The people had plenty of official leaders but these rabbis were for spiritual matters blind leaders of the blind. Jesus had come over for rest, but his heart was touched by the pathos of this situation. Songs:"he began to teach them many things" (\ˆrxato didaskein autous polla\). Two accusatives with the verb of teaching and the present tense of the infinitive. He kept it up.

rwp@Mark:6:39 @{By companies} (\sumposia sumposia\). Distribution expressed by repetition as in strkjv@Mark:6:7| (\duo duo\) instead of using \ana\ or \kata\. Literally our word _symposium_ and originally a drinking party, Latin _convivium_, then the party of guests of any kind without the notion of drinking. Songs:in Plutarch and the LXX (especially I Macca.). {Upon the green grass} (\epi t“i chl“r“i chort“i\). Another Markan touch. It was passover time (John:6:4|) and the afternoon sun shone upon the orderly groups upon the green spring grass. See on ¯Matthew:14:15|. They may have been seated like companies at tables, open at one end.

rwp@Mark:6:40 @{They sat down in ranks} (\anepesan prasiai prasiai\). They half-way reclined (\anaklithˆnai\, verse 39|). Fell up here (we have to say fell down), the word \anepesan\ means. But they were arranged in groups by hundreds and by fifties and they looked like garden beds with their many-coloured clothes which even men wore in the Orient. Then again Mark repeats the word, \prasiai prasiai\, in the nominative absolute as in verse 39| instead of using \ana\ or \kata\ with the accusative for the idea of distribution. Garden beds, garden beds. Peter saw and he never forgot the picture and so Mark caught it. There was colour as well as order in the grouping. There were orderly walks between the rows on rows of men reclining on the green grass. The grass is not green in Palestine much of the year, mainly at the passover time. Songs:here the Synoptic Gospels have an indication of more than a one-year ministry of Jesus (Gould). It is still one year before the last passover when Jesus was crucified.

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

rwp@Mark:7:4 @{From the marketplace} (\ap' agoras\). Ceremonial defilement was inevitable in the mixing with men in public. This \agora\ from \ageir“\ to collect or gather, was a public forum in every town where the people gathered like the courthouse square in American towns. The disciples were already ceremonially defiled. {Wash themselves} (\baptis“ntai\). First aorist middle subjunctive of \baptiz“\, dip or immerse. Westcott and Hort put \rantis“ntai\ in the text translated "sprinkle themselves" in the margin of the Revised Version, because Aleph, B, and some of the best cursives have it. Gould terms \rantis“ntai\ "a manifest emendation," to get rid of the difficulty of dipping or bathing the whole body. Meyer says: "The statement proceeds by way of climax: before eating they wash the hands always. When they come from market they take a bath before eating." This is not the place to enter into any controversy about the meaning of \baptiz“\, to dip, \rantiz“\, to sprinkle, and \ecche“\, to pour, all used in the New Testament. The words have their distinctive meanings here as elsewhere. Some scribes felt a difficulty about the use of \baptis“ntai\ here. The Western and Syrian classes of manuscripts add "and couches" (\kai klin“n\) at the end of the sentence. Swete considers the immersions of beds (\baptismous klin“n\) "an incongruous combination." But Gould says: "Edersheim shows that the Jewish ordinance required immersions, \baptismous\, of these vessels." We must let the Jewish scrupulosity stand for itself, though "and couches" is not supported by Aleph, B L D Bohairic, probably not genuine.

rwp@Mark:7:6 @{Well} (\kal“s\). Appositely here, but ironical sarcasm in verse 9|. Note here "you hypocrites" (\hum“n t“n hupokrit“n\).

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

rwp@Mark:7:17 @{When he was entered into the house from the multitude} (\hote eisˆlthen eis oikon apo tou ochlou\). This detail in Mark alone, probably in Peter's house in Capernaum. To the crowd Jesus spoke the parable of corban, but the disciples want it interpreted (cf. strkjv@4:10ff.,33ff.|). strkjv@Matthew:15:15| represents Peter as the spokesman as was usually the case.

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:7:24 @{Into the borders of Tyre and Sidon} (\eis ta horia Turou kai Sid“nos\). The departure from Capernaum was a withdrawal from Galilee, the second of the four withdrawals from Galilee. The first had been to the region of Bethsaida Julias in the territory of Herod Philip. This is into distinctly heathen land. It was not merely the edge of Phoenicia, but into the parts of Tyre and Sidon (Matthew:15:21|). There was too much excitement among the people, too much bitterness among the Pharisees, too much suspicion on the part of Herod Antipas, too much dulness on the part of the disciples for Jesus to remain in Galilee. {And he could not be hid} (\kai ouk ˆdunasthˆ lathein\). Jesus wanted to be alone in the house after all the strain in Galilee. He craved a little privacy and rest. This was his purpose in going into Phoenicia. Note the adversative sense of \kai\ here= "but."

rwp@Mark:7:27 @{Let the children first be filled} (\aphes pr“ton chortasthˆnai ta paidia\). The Jews had the first claim. See the command of Jesus in the third tour of Galilee to avoid the Gentiles and the Samaritans (Matthew:10:5|). Paul was the Apostle to the Gentiles, but he gave the Jew the first opportunity (Romans:2:9f.|). See on ¯Matthew:15:24f|.

rwp@Mark:7:29 @{For this saying} (\dia touton ton logon\). She had faith, great faith as strkjv@Matthew:15:28| shows, but it was her quick and bright repartee that pleased Jesus. He had missed his rest, but it was worth it to answer a call like this.

rwp@Mark:7:31 @{Through the midst of the borders of Decapolis} (\ana meson t“n hori“n Dekapole“s\). Jesus left Phoenicia, but did not go back into Galilee. He rather went east and came down east of the Sea of Galilee into the region of the Greek cities of Decapolis. He thus kept out of the territory of Herod Antipas. He had been in this region when he healed the Gadarene demoniac and was asked to leave.

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

rwp@Mark:7:36 @{Songs:much the more a great deal they published it} (\autoi mƒllon perissoteron ekˆrusson\). Imperfect tense, continued action. Double comparative as occurs elsewhere for emphasis as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:23| "much more better" (\poll“i mƒllon kreisson\). See Robertson's _Grammar_, pp. 663f. Human nature is a peculiar thing. The command not to tell provoked these people to tell just as the leper had done (Mark:1:44f.|). The more Jesus commanded (\hoson autois diestelleto\) them not to tell the more they told. It was a continuous performance. Prohibitions always affect some people that way, especially superficial and light-headed folks. But we have to have prohibitions or anarchy.

rwp@Mark:8:1 @{Had nothing to eat} (\mˆ echont“n ti phag“sin\). Genitive absolute and plural because \ochlou\ a collective substantive. Not having what to eat (deliberative subjunctive retained in indirect question). The repetition of a nature miracle of feeding four thousand in Decapolis disturbs some modern critics who cannot imagine how Jesus could or would perform another miracle elsewhere so similar to the feeding of the five thousand up near Bethsaida Julias. But both Mark and Matthew give both miracles, distinguish the words for baskets (\kophinos, sphuris\), and both make Jesus later refer to both incidents and use these two words with the same distinction (Mark:8:19f.; strkjv@Matthew:16:9f.|). Surely it is easier to conceive that Jesus wrought two such miracles than to hold that Mark and Matthew have made such a jumble of the whole business.

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

rwp@Mark:8:10 @{Into the parts of Dalmanutha} (\eis ta merˆ Dalmanoutha\). strkjv@Matthew:15:39| calls it "the borders of Magadan." Both names are unknown elsewhere, but apparently the same region of Galilee on the western side of the lake not far from Tiberias. Mark here uses "parts" (\merˆ\) in the same sense as "borders" (\horia\) in strkjv@7:24| just as Matthew reverses it with "parts" in strkjv@Matthew:15:21| and "borders" here in strkjv@Matthew:15:39|. Mark has here "with his disciples" (\meta t“n mathˆt“n autou\) only implied in strkjv@Matthew:15:39|.

rwp@Mark:8:12 @{He sighed deeply in his spirit} (\anastenaxas t“i pneumati\). The only instance of this compound in the N.T. though in the LXX. The uncompounded form occurs in strkjv@Mark:7:34| and it is common enough. The preposition \ana-\ intensifies the meaning of the verb (perfective use). "The sigh seemed to come, as we say, from the bottom of his heart, the Lord's human spirit was stirred to its depths" (Swete). Jesus resented the settled prejudice of the Pharisees (and now Sadducees also) against him and his work. {There shall no sign be given unto this generation} (\ei dothˆsetai tˆi geneƒi tautˆi sˆmeion\). strkjv@Matthew:16:4| has simply \ou dothˆsetai\, plain negative with the future passive indicative. Mark has \ei\ instead of \ou\, which is technically a conditional clause with the conclusion unexpressed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1024), really aposiopesis in imitation of the Hebrew use of \im\. This is the only instance in the N.T. except in quotations from the LXX (Hebrews:3:11; strkjv@4:3,5|). It is very common in the LXX. The rabbis were splitting hairs over the miracles of Jesus as having a possible natural explanation (as some critics do today) even if by the power of Beelzebub, and those not of the sky (from heaven) which would be manifested from God. Songs:they put up this fantastic test to Jesus which he deeply resents. strkjv@Matthew:16:4| adds "but the sign of Jonah" mentioned already by Jesus on a previous occasion (Matthew:12:39-41|) at more length and to be mentioned again (Luke:11:32|). But the mention of the sign of Jonah was "an absolute refusal of signs in their sense" (Bruce). And when he did rise from the dead on the third day, the Sanhedrin refused to be convinced (see Acts 3 to 5).

rwp@Mark:8:21 @{Do ye not yet understand?} (\oup“ suniete;\). After all this rebuke and explanation. The greatest of all teachers had the greatest of all classes, but he struck a snag here. strkjv@Matthew:16:12| gives the result: "Then they understood how that he bade them not beware of the loaves of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees." They had once said that they understood the parables of Jesus (Matthew:13:51|). But that was a long time ago. The teacher must have patience if his pupils are to understand.

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

rwp@Mark:8:29 @{Thou art the Christ} (\Su ei ho Christos\). Mark does not give "the Son of the living God" (Matthew:16:16|) or "of God" (Luke:9:20|). The full confession is the form in Matthew. Luke's language means practically the same, while Mark's is the briefest. But the form in Mark really means the full idea. Mark omits all praise of Peter, probably because Peter had done so in his story of the incident. For criticism of the view that Matthew's narrative is due to ecclesiastical development and effort to justify ecclesiastical prerogatives, see discussion on ¯Matthew:16:16,18|. The disciples had confessed him as Messiah before. Thus strkjv@John:1:41; strkjv@4:29; strkjv@6:69; strkjv@Matthew:14:33|. But Jesus had ceased to use the word Messiah to avoid political complications and a revolutionary movement (John:6:14f.|). But did the disciples still believe in Jesus as Messiah after all the defections and oppositions seen by them? It was a serious test to which Jesus now put them.

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

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

rwp@Mark:8:38 @{For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and my words} (\hos gar ean epaischunthˆi me kai tous emous logous\). More exactly, {whosoever is ashamed} (first aorist passive subjunctive with indefinite relative and \ean = an\. See Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 957-9. It is not a statement about the future conduct of one, but about his present attitude toward Jesus. The conduct of men toward Christ now determines Christ's conduct then (\epaischunthˆsetai\, first future passive indicative). This passive verb is transitive and uses the accusative (\me, auton\). {In this adulterous and sinful generation} (\en tˆi geneƒi tautˆi tˆi moichalidi kai hamart“l“i\). Only in Mark. {When he cometh} (\hotan elthˆi\). Aorist active subjunctive with reference to the future second coming of Christ with the glory of the Father with his holy angels (cf. strkjv@Matthew:16:27|). This is a clear prediction of the final eschatological coming of Christ. This verse could not be separated from strkjv@Mark:9:1| as the chapter division does. These two verses in strkjv@Mark:8:38; strkjv@9:1| form one paragraph and should go together.

rwp@Mark:9:6 @{For he wist not what to answer} (\ou gar ˆidei ti apokrithˆi\). Deliberative subjunctive retained in indirect question. But why did Peter say anything? Luke says that he spoke, "not knowing what he said," as an excuse for the inappropriateness of his remarks. Perhaps Peter felt embarrassed at having been asleep (Luke:9:32|) and the feast of tabernacles or booths (\skˆnai\) was near. See on ¯Matthew:17:4|. Peter and the others apparently had not heard the talk of Moses and Elijah with Jesus about his decease (\exodon\, exodus, departure) and little knew the special comfort that Jesus had found in this understanding of the great approaching tragedy concerning which Peter had shown absolute stupidity (Mark:8:32f.|) so recently. See on ¯Matthew:17:5| about the overshadowing and the voice.

rwp@Mark:9:10 @{They kept the saying} (\ton logon ekratˆsan\) to themselves as Jesus had directed, but {questioning among themselves} (\pros heautous sunzˆtountes\). Now they notice his allusion to rising from the dead which had escaped them before (Mark:8:31|).

rwp@Mark:9:12 @{Restoreth all things} (\apokatistanei panta\). This late double compound verb, usual form \apokathistˆmi\ in the papyri, is Christ's description of the Baptist as the promised Elijah and Forerunner of the Messiah. See on ¯Matthew:17:10-13|. The disciples had not till now understood that the Baptist fulfilled the prophecy in strkjv@Malachi:3:5f|. They had just seen Elijah on the mountain, but Jesus as Messiah preceded this coming of Elijah. But Jesus patiently enlightens his dull pupils as they argue about the exegesis of the scribes.

rwp@Mark:9:19 @{Bring him unto me} (\pherete auton pros me\). The disciples had failed and their unbelief had led to this fiasco. Even the disciples were like and part of the {faithless} (\apistos\, unbelieving) generation in which they lived. The word {faithless} does not here mean treacherous as it does with us. But Jesus is not afraid to undertake this case. We can always come to Jesus when others fail us.

rwp@Mark:9:22 @{But if thou canst} (\all 'ei ti dunˆi\). Jesus had asked (verse 21|) the history of the case like a modern physician. The father gave it and added further pathetic details about the fire and the water. The failure of the disciples had not wholly destroyed his faith in the power of Jesus, though the conditional form (first class, assuming it to be true) does suggest doubt whether the boy can be cured at all. It was a chronic and desperate case of epilepsy with the demon possession added. {Help us} (\boethˆson hemin\). Ingressive aorist imperative. Do it now. With touching tenderness he makes the boy's case his own as the Syrophoenician woman had said, "Have mercy on me" (Matthew:15:21|). The leper had said: "If thou wilt" (Mark:1:40|). This father says: "If thou canst."

rwp@Mark:9:24 @{Cried out} (\kraxas\). Loud outcry and at once (\euthus\). The later manuscripts have "with tears" (\meta dakru“n\), not in the older documents. {I believe; help my unbelief} (\Pisteu“: boˆthei tˆi apistiƒi\). An exact description of his mental and spiritual state. He still had faith, but craved more. Note present imperative here (continuous help) \boˆthei\, while aorist imperative (instant help) \boˆthˆson\, verse 22|. The word comes from \boˆ\, a cry and \the“\, to run, to run at a cry for help, a vivid picture of this father's plight.

rwp@Mark:9:25 @{A multitude came running together} (\episuntrechei ochlos\). A double compound here alone in the N.T. and not in the old Greek writers. \Epitrech“\ occurs in the papyri, but not \episuntrech“\. The double compound vividly describes the rapid gathering of the crowd to Jesus and the epileptic boy to see the outcome. {Come out of him} (\exelthe ex autou\). Jesus addresses the demon as a separate being from the boy as he often does. This makes it difficult to believe that Jesus was merely indulging popular belief in a superstition. He evidently regards the demon as the cause in this case of the boy's misfortune.

rwp@Mark:9:29 @{Save by prayer} (\ei mˆ en proseuchˆi\). The addition of "and of fasting" does not appear in the two best Greek manuscripts (Aleph and B). It is clearly a late addition to help explain the failure. But it is needless and also untrue. Prayer is what the nine had failed to use. They were powerless because they were prayerless. Their self-complacency spelled defeat. strkjv@Matthew:17:20| has "because of your little faith" (\oligopistian\). That is true also. They had too much faith in themselves, too little in Christ. "They had trusted to the semi-magical power with which they thought themselves invested" (Swete). "Spirits of such malignity were quick to discern the lack of moral power and would yield to no other" (_ibid_.).

rwp@Mark:9:30 @{He would not that any man should know it} (\ouk ˆthelen hina tis gnoi\). Imperfect tense followed by ingressive aorist subjunctive (\gnoi = gn“i\, the usual form). He was not willing that any one should learn it. Back in Galilee Jesus was, but he was avoiding public work there now (cf. strkjv@7:24|). He was no longer the hero of Galilee. He had left Caesarea Philippi for Galilee.

rwp@Mark:9:32 @{But they understood not the saying} (\hoi de ˆgnooun to rhˆma\). An old word. Chiefly in Paul's Epistles in the N.T. Imperfect tense. They continued not to understand. They were agnostics on the subject of the death and resurrection even after the Transfiguration experience. As they came down from the mountain they were puzzled again over the Master's allusion to his resurrection (Mark:9:10|). strkjv@Matthew:17:23| notes that "they were exceeding sorry" to hear Jesus talk this way again, but Mark adds that they "were afraid to ask him" (\ephobounto auton eper“tˆsai\). Continued to be afraid (imperfect tense), perhaps with a bitter memory of the term "Satan" hurled at Peter when he protested the other time when Jesus spoke of his death (Mark:8:33; strkjv@Matthew:16:23|). strkjv@Luke:9:45| explains that "it was concealed from them," probably partly by their own preconceived ideas and prejudices.

rwp@Mark:9:33 @{In the house} (\en tˆi oikiƒi\). Probably Peter's house in Capernaum which was the home of Jesus when in the city. {What were ye reasoning in the way?} (\Ti en tˆi hod“i dielogiszethe;\). Imperfect tense. They had been disputing (verse 34|), not about the coming death of the Master, but about the relative rank of each of them in the political kingdom which they were expecting him to establish. Jesus had suspected the truth about them and they had apparently kept it up in the house. See on ¯Matthew:18:1| where the disciples are represented as bringing the dispute to Jesus while here Jesus asks them about it. Probably they asked Jesus first and then he pushed the matter further and deeper to see if this had not been the occasion of the somewhat heated discussion on the way in.

rwp@Mark:9:34 @{But they held their peace} (\Hoi de esi“p“n\). Imperfect tense. Put thus to them, they felt ashamed that the Master had discovered their jealous rivalry. It was not a mere abstract query, as they put it to Jesus, but it was a canker in their hearts.

rwp@Mark:9:43 @{Into hell, into the unquenchable fire} (\eis tˆn geennan, eis to p–r to asbeston\). Not Hades, but Gehenna. \Asbeston\ is alpha privative and \sbestos\ from \sbennumi\ to quench. It occurs often in Homer. Our word asbestos is this very word. strkjv@Matthew:18:8| has "into the eternal fire." The Valley of Hinnom had been desecrated by the sacrifice of children to Moloch so that as an accursed place it was used for the city garbage where worms gnawed and fires burned. It is thus a vivid picture of eternal punishment.

rwp@Matthew:6:2 @{Sound not a trumpet} (\mˆ salpisˆis\). Is this literal or metaphorical? No actual instance of such conduct has been found in the Jewish writings. McNeile suggests that it may refer to the blowing of trumpets in the streets on the occasion of public fasts. Vincent suggests the thirteen trumpet-shaped chests of the temple treasury to receive contributions (Luke:21:2|). But at Winona Lake one summer a missionary from India named Levering stated to me that he had seen Hindu priests do precisely this very thing to get a crowd to see their beneficences. Songs:it looks as if the rabbis could do it also. Certainly it was in keeping with their love of praise. And Jesus expressly says that "the hypocrites" (\hoi hupokritai\) do this very thing. This is an old word for actor, interpreter, one who personates another, from \hupokrinomai\ to answer in reply like the Attic \apokrinomai\. Then to pretend, to feign, to dissemble, to act the hypocrite, to wear a mask. This is the hardest word that Jesus has for any class of people and he employs it for these pious pretenders who pose as perfect. {They have received their reward} (\apechousin ton misthon aut“n\). This verb is common in the papyri for receiving a receipt, "they have their receipt in full," all the reward that they will get, this public notoriety. "They can sign the receipt of their reward" (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 229). Songs:_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 110f. \Apochˆ\ means "receipt." Songs:also in strkjv@6:5|.

rwp@Matthew:6:4 @{In secret} (\t“i krupt“i\). The Textus Receptus added the words \en t“i phaner“i\ (openly) here and in strkjv@6:6|, but they are not genuine. Jesus does not promise a _public_ reward for private piety.

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:6:9 @{After this manner therefore pray ye} (\hout“s oun proseuchesthe humeis\). "You" expressed in contrast with "the Gentiles." It should be called "The Model Prayer" rather than "The Lord's Prayer." "Thus" pray as he gives them a model. He himself did not use it as a liturgy (cf. strkjv@John:17|). There is no evidence that Jesus meant it for liturgical use by others. In strkjv@Luke:11:2-4| practically the same prayer though briefer is given at a later time by Jesus to the apostles in response to a request that he teach them how to pray. McNeile argues that the form in Luke is the original to which Matthew has made additions: "The tendency of liturgical formulas is towards enrichment rather than abbreviation." But there is no evidence whatever that Jesus designed it as a set formula. There is no real harm in a liturgical formula if one likes it, but no one sticks to just one formula in prayer. There is good and not harm in children learning and saying this noble prayer. Some people are disturbed over the words "Our Father" and say that no one has a right to call God Father who has not been "born again." But that is to say that an unconverted sinner cannot pray until he is converted, an absurd contradiction. God is the Father of all men in one sense; the recognition of Him as the Father in the full sense is the first step in coming back to him in regeneration and conversion.

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:6:13 @{And bring us not into temptation} (\kai mˆ eisenegkˆis eis peirasmon\). "Bring" or "lead" bothers many people. It seems to present God as an active agent in subjecting us to temptation, a thing specifically denied in strkjv@James:1:13|. The word here translated "temptation" (\peirasmon\) means originally "trial" or "test" as in strkjv@James:1:2| and Vincent so takes it here. _Braid Scots_ has it: "And lat us no be siftit." But God does test or sift us, though he does not tempt us to evil. No one understood temptation so well as Jesus for the devil tempted him by every avenue of approach to all kinds of sin, but without success. In the Garden of Gethsemane Jesus will say to Peter, James, and John: "Pray that ye enter not into temptation" (Luke:22:40|). That is the idea here. Here we have a "Permissive imperative" as grammarians term it. The idea is then: "Do not allow us to be led into temptation." There is a way out (1Corinthians:10:13|), but it is a terrible risk.

rwp@Matthew:6:14 @{Trespasses} (\parapt“mata\). This is no part of the Model Prayer. The word "trespass" is literally "falling to one side," a lapse or deviation from truth or uprightness. The ancients sometimes used it of intentional falling or attack upon one's enemy, but "slip" or "fault" (Galatians:6:1|) is the common New Testament idea. \Parabasis\ (Romans:5:14|) is a positive violation, a transgression, conscious stepping aside or across.

rwp@Matthew:6:18 @{In secret} (\en t“i kruphai“i\). Here as in strkjv@6:4,6| the Textus Receptus adds \en t“i phaner“i\ (openly), but it is not genuine. The word \kruphaios\ is here alone in the New Testament, but occurs four times in the Septuagint.

rwp@Matthew:6:19 @{Lay not up for yourselves treasures} (\mˆ thˆsaurizete humin thˆsaurous\). Do not have this habit (\mˆ\ and the present imperative). See on ¯Matthew:2:11| for the word "treasure." Here there is a play on the word, "treasure not for yourselves treasures." Same play in verse 20| with the cognate accusative. In both verses \humin\ is dative of personal interest and is not reflexive, but the ordinary personal pronoun. Wycliff has it: "Do not treasure to you treasures."

rwp@Matthew:6:22 @{Single} (\haplous\). Used of a marriage contract when the husband is to repay the dowry "pure and simple" (\tˆn phernˆn haplˆn\), if she is set free; but in case he does not do so promptly, he is to add interest also (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_, etc.). There are various other instances of such usage. Here and in strkjv@Luke:11:34| the eye is called "single" in a moral sense. The word means "without folds" like a piece of cloth unfolded, _simplex_ in Latin. Bruce considers this parable of the eye difficult. "The figure and the ethical meaning seem to be mixed up, moral attributes ascribed to the physical eye which with them still gives light to the body. This confusion may be due to the fact that the eye, besides being the organ of vision, is the seat of expression, revealing inward dispositions." The "evil" eye (\ponˆros\) may be diseased and is used of stinginess in the LXX and so \haplous\ may refer to liberality as Hatch argues (_Essays in Biblical Greek_, p. 80). The passage may be elliptical with something to be supplied. If our eyes are healthy we see clearly and with a single focus (without astigmatism). If the eyes are diseased (bad, evil), they may even be cross-eyed or cock-eyed. We see double and confuse our vision. We keep one eye on the hoarded treasures of earth and roll the other proudly up to heaven. Seeing double is double-mindedness as is shown in verse 24|.

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

rwp@Matthew:6:25 @Vincent quotes Bacon (Henry VII): "Harris, an alderman of London, was put in trouble and died with thought and anguish." But words change with time and now this passage is actually quoted (Lightfoot) "as an objection to the moral teaching of the Sermon on the Mount, on the ground that it encouraged, nay, commanded, a reckless neglect of the future." We have narrowed the word to mere planning without any notion of anxiety which is in the Greek word. The verb \merimna“\ is from \meris, meriz“\, because care or anxiety distracts and divides. It occurs in Christ's rebuke to Martha for her excessive solicitude about something to eat (Luke:10:41|). The notion of proper care and forethought appears in strkjv@1Corinthians:7:32; strkjv@12:25; strkjv@Phillipians:2:20|. It is here the present imperative with the negative, a command not to have the habit of petulant worry about food and clothing, a source of anxiety to many housewives, a word for women especially as the command not to worship mammon may be called a word for men. The command can mean that they must stop such worry if already indulging in it. In verse 31| Jesus repeats the prohibition with the ingressive aorist subjunctive: "Do not become anxious," "Do not grow anxious." Here the direct question with the deliberative subjunctive occurs with each verb (\phag“men, pi“men, peribal“metha\). This deliberative subjunctive of the direct question is retained in the indirect question employed in verse 25|. A different verb for clothing occurs, both in the indirect middle (\peribal“metha\, fling round ourselves in 31|, \endusˆsthe\, put on yourselves in 25|).

rwp@Matthew:6:27 @{Unto his stature} (\epi tˆn hˆlikian autou\). The word \hˆlikian\ is used either of height (stature) or length of life (age). Either makes good sense here, though probably "stature" suits the context best. Certainly anxiety will not help either kind of growth, but rather hinder by auto-intoxication if nothing more. This is no plea for idleness, for even the birds are diligent and the flowers grow.

rwp@Matthew:7:1 @{Judge not} (\mˆ krinete\). The habit of censoriousness, sharp, unjust criticism. Our word critic is from this very word. It means to separate, distinguish, discriminate. That is necessary, but pre-judice (prejudgment) is unfair, captious criticism.

rwp@Matthew:7:3 @{The mote} (\to karphos\). Not dust, but a piece of dried wood or chaff, splinter (Weymouth, Moffatt), speck (Goodspeed), a very small particle that may irritate. {The beam} (\tˆn dokon\). A log on which planks in the house rest (so papyri), joist, rafter, plank (Moffatt), pole sticking out grotesquely. Probably a current proverb quoted by Jesus like our people in glass houses throwing stones. Tholuck quotes an Arabic proverb: "How seest thou the splinter in thy brother's eye, and seest not the cross-beam in thine eye?"

rwp@Matthew:7:6 @{That which is holy unto the dogs} (\to hagion tois kusin\). It is not clear to what "the holy" refers, to ear-rings or to amulets, but that would not appeal to dogs. Trench (_Sermon on the Mount_, p. 136) says that the reference is to meat offered in sacrifice that must not be flung to dogs: "It is not that the dogs would not eat it, for it would be welcome to them; but that it would be a profanation to give it to them, thus to make it a _skubalon_, strkjv@Exodus:22:31|." The yelping dogs would jump at it. Dogs are kin to wolves and infest the streets of oriental cities. {Your pearls before the swine} (\tous margaritas h–m“n emprosthen t“n choir“n\). The word pearl we have in the name Margarita (Margaret). Pearls look a bit like peas or acorns and would deceive the hogs until they discovered the deception. The wild boars haunt the Jordan Valley still and are not far removed from bears as they trample with their feet and rend with their tusks those who have angered them.

rwp@Matthew:7:13 @{By the narrow gate} (\dia tˆs stenˆs pulˆs\). The Authorized Version "at the strait gate" misled those who did not distinguish between "strait" and "straight." The figure of the Two Ways had a wide circulation in Jewish and Christian writings (cf. strkjv@Deuteronomy:30:19; strkjv@Jeremiah:21:8; strkjv@Psalms:1|). See the _Didache_ i-vi; Barnabas xviii-xx. "The narrow gate" is repeated in verse 14| and {straitened the way} (\tethlimmenˆ hˆ hodos\) added. The way is "compressed," narrowed as in a defile between high rocks, a tight place like \stenoch“ria\ in strkjv@Romans:8:35|. "The way that leads to life involves straits and afflictions" (McNeile). Vincent quotes the _Pinax_ or _Tablet_ of Cebes, a contemporary of Socrates: "Seest thou not, then, a little door, and a way before the door, which is not much crowded, but very few travel it? This is the way that leadeth unto true culture." "The broad way" (\euruch“ros\) is in every city, town, village, with the glaring white lights that lure to destruction.

rwp@Matthew:7:15 @{False prophets} (\t“n pseudoprophˆt“n\). There were false prophets in the time of the Old Testament prophets. Jesus will predict "false Messiahs and false prophets" (Matthew:24:24|) who will lead many astray. They came in due time posing as angels of light like Satan, Judaizers (2Corinthians:11:13ff|.) and Gnostics (1John:4:1; strkjv@1Timothy:4:1|). Already false prophets were on hand when Jesus spoke on this occasion (cf. strkjv@Acts:13:6; strkjv@2Peter:2:1|). In outward appearance they look like sheep in the sheep's clothing which they wear, but within they are "ravening wolves" (\lukoi harpages\), greedy for power, gain, self. It is a tragedy that such men and women reappear through the ages and always find victims. Wolves are more dangerous than dogs and hogs.

rwp@Matthew:7:21 @{Not--but} (\ou--all'\). Sharp contrast between the mere talker and the doer of God's will.

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

rwp@Matthew:8:2 @{If thou wilt} (\ean thelˆis\). The leper knew that Jesus had the power to heal him. His doubt was about his willingness. "Men more easily believe in miraculous power than in miraculous love" (Bruce). This is a condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of being determined), a hopeful doubt at any rate. Jesus accepted his challenge by "I will." The command to "tell no one" was to suppress excitement and prevent hostility.

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

rwp@Matthew:8:12 @{The sons of the kingdom} (\hoi huioi tˆs basileias\). A favourite Hebrew idiom like "son of hell" (Matthew:23:15|), "sons of this age" (Luke:16:8|). The Jews felt that they had a natural right to the privileges of the kingdom because of descent from Abraham (Matthew:3:9|). But mere natural birth did not bring spiritual sonship as the Baptist had taught before Jesus did.

rwp@Matthew:8:17 @{Himself took our infirmities and bare our diseases} (\autos tas astheneias elaben kai tas nosous ebastasen\). A quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:53:4|. It is not clear in what sense Matthew applies the words in Isaiah whether in the precise sense of the Hebrew or in an independent manner. Moffatt translates it: "He took away our sicknesses, and bore the burden of our diseases." Goodspeed puts it: "He took our sickness and carried away our diseases." Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, pp. 102f.) thinks that Matthew has made a free interpretation of the Hebrew, has discarded the translation of the Septuagint, and has transposed the two Hebrew verbs so that Matthew means: "He took upon himself our pains, and bore our diseases." Plummer holds that "It is impossible, and also unnecessary, to understand what the Evangelist understood by 'took ' (\elaben\) and 'bare' (\ebastasen\). It at least must mean that Christ removed their sufferings from the sufferers. He can hardly have meant that the diseases were transferred to Christ." \Bastaz“\ occurs freely in the papyri with the sense of lift, carry, endure, carry away (the commonest meaning, Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_), pilfer. In strkjv@Matthew:3:11| we have the common vernacular use to take off sandals. The Attic Greek did not use it in the sense of carrying off. "This passage is the cornerstone of the faith-cure theory, which claims that the atonement of Christ includes provision for _bodily_ no less than for spiritual healing, and therefore insists on translating 'took away'" (Vincent). We have seen that the word \bastaz“\ will possibly allow that meaning, but I agree with McNeile: "The passage, _as Mt. employs it_, has no bearing on the doctrine of the atonement." But Jesus does show his sympathy with us. "Christ's sympathy with the sufferers was so intense that he really felt their weaknesses and pains." In our burdens Jesus steps under the load with us and helps us to carry on.

rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{The gates of Hades} (\pulai hƒidou\) {shall not prevail against it} (\ou katischusousin autˆs\). Each word here creates difficulty. Hades is technically the unseen world, the Hebrew Sheol, the land of the departed, that is death. Paul uses \thanate\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:55| in quoting strkjv@Hosea:13:14| for \hƒidˆ\. It is not common in the papyri, but it is common on tombstones in Asia Minor, "doubtless a survival of its use in the old Greek religion" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). The ancient pagans divided Hades (\a\ privative and \idein\, to see, abode of the unseen) into Elysium and Tartarus as the Jews put both Abraham's bosom and Gehenna in Sheol or Hades (cf. strkjv@Luke:16:25|). Christ was in Hades (Acts:2:27,31|), not in Gehenna. We have here the figure of two buildings, the Church of Christ on the Rock, the House of Death (Hades). "In the Old Testament the 'gates of Hades' (Sheol) never bears any other meaning (Isaiah:38:10|; Wisd. strkjv@16:3; 3Macc. strkjv@5:51) than death," McNeile claims. See also strkjv@Psalms:9:13; strkjv@107:18; strkjv@Job:38:17| (\pulai thanatou pul“roi hƒidou\). It is not the picture of Hades _attacking_ Christ's church, but of death's possible victory over the church. "The \ekklˆsia\ is built upon the Messiahship of her master, and death, the gates of Hades, will not prevail against her by keeping Him imprisoned. It was a mysterious truth, which He will soon tell them in plain words (verse 21|); it is echoed in strkjv@Acts:2:24,31|" (McNeile). Christ's church will prevail and survive because He will burst the gates of Hades and come forth conqueror. He will ever live and be the guarantor of the perpetuity of His people or church. The verb \katischu“\ (literally have strength against, \ischu“\ from \ischus\ and \kat-\) occurs also in strkjv@Luke:21:36; strkjv@23:23|. It appears in the ancient Greek, the LXX, and in the papyri with the accusative and is used in the modern Greek with the sense of gaining the mastery over. The wealth of imagery in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| makes it difficult to decide each detail, but the main point is clear. The \ekklˆsia\ which consists of those confessing Christ as Peter has just done will not cease. The gates of Hades or bars of Sheol will not close down on it. Christ will rise and will keep his church alive. _Sublime Porte_ used to be the title of Turkish power in Constantinople.

rwp@Matthew:16:19 @{The Keys of the kingdom} (\tas kleidas tˆs basileias\). Here again we have the figure of a building with keys to open from the outside. The question is raised at once if Jesus does not here mean the same thing by "kingdom" that he did by "church" in verse 18|. In strkjv@Revelation:1:18; strkjv@3:7| Christ the Risen Lord has "the keys of death and of Hades." He has also "the keys of the kingdom of heaven" which he here hands over to Peter as "gatekeeper" or "steward" (\oikonomos\) provided we do not understand it as a special and peculiar prerogative belonging to Peter. The same power here given to Peter belongs to every disciple of Jesus in all the ages. Advocates of papal supremacy insist on the primacy of Peter here and the power of Peter to pass on this supposed sovereignty to others. But this is all quite beside the mark. We shall soon see the disciples actually disputing again (Matthew:18:1|) as to which of them is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven as they will again (20:21|) and even on the night before Christ's death. Clearly neither Peter nor the rest understood Jesus to say here that Peter was to have supreme authority. What is added shows that Peter held the keys precisely as every preacher and teacher does. To "bind" (\dˆsˆis\) in rabbinical language is to forbid, to "loose" (\lusˆis\) is to permit. Peter would be like a rabbi who passes on many points. Rabbis of the school of Hillel "loosed" many things that the school of Schammai "bound." The teaching of Jesus is the standard for Peter and for all preachers of Christ. Note the future perfect indicative (\estai dedemenon, estai lelumenon\), a state of completion. All this assumes, of course, that Peter's use of the keys will be in accord with the teaching and mind of Christ. The binding and loosing is repeated by Jesus to all the disciples (18:18|). Later after the Resurrection Christ will use this same language to all the disciples (John:20:23|), showing that it was not a special prerogative of Peter. He is simply first among equals, _primus inter pares_, because on this occasion he was spokesman for the faith of all. It is a violent leap in logic to claim power to forgive sins, to pronounce absolution, by reason of the technical rabbinical language that Jesus employed about binding and loosing. Every preacher uses the keys of the kingdom when he proclaims the terms of salvation in Christ. The proclamation of these terms when accepted by faith in Christ has the sanction and approval of God the Father. The more personal we make these great words the nearer we come to the mind of Christ. The more ecclesiastical we make them the further we drift away from him.

rwp@Matthew:16:20 @{That they should tell no man} (\hina mˆdeni eip“sin\). Why? For the very reason that he had himself avoided this claim in public. He was the Messiah (\ho Christos\), but the people would inevitably take it in a political sense. Jesus was plainly profoundly moved by Peter's great confession on behalf of the disciples. He was grateful and confident of the final outcome. But he foresaw peril to all. Peter had confessed him as the Messiah and on this rock of faith thus confessed he would build his church or kingdom. They will all have and use the keys to this greatest of all buildings, but for the present they must be silent.

rwp@Matthew:16:22 @{Peter took him} (\proslabomenos auton ho Petros\). Middle voice, "taking to himself," aside and apart, "as if by a right of his own. He acted with greater familiarity after the token of acknowledgment had been given. Jesus, however, reduces him to his level" (Bengel). "Peter here appears in a new character; a minute ago speaking under inspiration from heaven, now under inspiration from the opposite quarter" (Bruce). Syriac Sinaitic for strkjv@Mark:8:32| has it "as though pitying him." But this exclamation and remonstrance of Peter was soon interrupted by Jesus. {God have mercy on thee} (\hile“s\. Supply \eiˆ\ or \est“ ho theos\). {This shall never be} (\ou mˆ estai soi touto\). Strongest kind of negation, as if Peter would not let it happen. Peter had perfect assurance.

rwp@Matthew:16:23 @{But he turned} (\ho de strapheis\). Second aorist passive participle, quick ingressive action, away from Peter in revulsion, and toward the other disciples (Mark:8:33| has \epistrapheis\ and \id“n tous mathˆtas autou\). {Get thee behind me, Satan} (\Hupage opis“ mou, Satanƒ\). Just before Peter played the part of a rock in the noble confession and was given a place of leadership. Now he is playing the part of Satan and is ordered to the rear. Peter was tempting Jesus not to go on to the cross as Satan had done in the wilderness. "None are more formidable instruments of temptation than well-meaning friends, who care more for our comfort than for our character" (Bruce). "In Peter the banished Satan had once more returned" (Plummer). {A stumbling-block unto me} (\skandalon ei emou\). Objective genitive. Peter was acting as Satan's catspaw, in ignorance, surely, but none the less really. He had set a trap for Christ that would undo all his mission to earth. "Thou art not, as before, a noble block, lying in its right position as a massive foundation stone. On the contrary, thou art like a stone quite out of its proper place, and lying right across the road in which I must go--lying as a stone of stumbling" (Morison). {Thou mindest not} (\ou phroneis\). "Your outlook is not God's, but man's" (Moffatt). You do not think God's thoughts. Clearly the consciousness of the coming cross is not a new idea with Jesus. We do not know when he first foresaw this outcome any more than we know when first the Messianic consciousness appeared in Jesus. He had the glimmerings of it as a boy of twelve, when he spoke of "My Father's house." He knows now that he must die on the cross.

rwp@Matthew:16:24 @{Take up his cross} (\arat“ ton stauron autou\). Pick up at once, aorist tense. This same saying in strkjv@10:38|, which see. But pertinent here also in explanation of Christ's rebuke to Peter. Christ's own cross faces him. Peter had dared to pull Christ away from his destiny. He would do better to face squarely his own cross and to bear it after Jesus. The disciples would be familiar with cross-bearing as a figure of speech by reason of the crucifixion of criminals in Jerusalem. {Follow} (\akaloutheit“\). Present tense. Keep on following.

rwp@Matthew:16:26 @{Gain} (\kerdˆsˆi\) and {profit} (\zˆmi“thˆi\). Both aorist subjunctives (one active, the other passive) and so punctiliar action, condition of third class, undetermined, but with prospect of determination. Just a supposed case. The verb for "forfeit" occurs in the sense of being fined or mulcted of money. Songs:the papyri and inscriptions. {Exchange} (\antallagma\). As an exchange, accusative in apposition with \ti\. The soul has no market price, though the devil thinks so. "A man must give, surrender, his life, and nothing less to God; no \antallagma\ is possible" (McNeile). This word \antallagma\ occurs twice in the _Wisdom of Sirach_: "There is no exchange for a faithful friend" (6:15); "There is no exchange for a well-instructed soul" (26:14).

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:17:2 @{He was transfigured before them} (\metemorph“thˆ emprosthen aut“n\). The word is the same as the metamorphoses (cf. Ovid) of pagan mythology. Luke does not use it. The idea is change (\meta-\) of form (\morphˆ\). It really presents the essence of a thing as separate from the \schˆma\ (fashion), the outward accident. Songs:in strkjv@Romans:12:2| Paul uses both verbs, \sunschematizesthe\ (be not fashioned) and \metamorphousthe\ (be ye transformed in your inner life). Songs:in strkjv@1Corinthians:7:31| \schˆma\ is used for the fashion of the world while in strkjv@Mark:16:12| \morphˆ\ is used of the form of Jesus after his resurrection. The false apostles are described by \metaschˆmatisomai\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:13-15|. In strkjv@Phillipians:2:6| we have \en morphˆi\ used of the Preincarnate state of Christ and \morphˆn doulou\ of the Incarnate state (Phillipians:2:7|), while \schˆmati h“s anthr“pos\ emphasizes his being found "in fashion as a man." But it will not do in strkjv@Matthew:17:2| to use the English transliteration \metamorph“sis\ because of its pagan associations. Songs:the Latin _transfigured_ (Vulgate _transfiguratus est_) is better. "The deeper force of \metamorphousthai\ is seen in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:18| (with reference to the shining on Moses' face), strkjv@Romans:12:2|" (McNeile). The word occurs in a second-century papyrus of the pagan gods who are invisible. Matthew guards against the pagan idea by adding and explaining about the face of Christ "as the sun" and his garments "as the light."

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:17:4 @{And Peter answered} (\apokritheis de ho Petros\). "Peter to the front again, but not greatly to his credit" (Bruce). It is not clear what Peter means by his saying: "It is good for us to be here" (\kalon estin hˆmƒs h“de einai\). Luke (Luke:9:33|) adds "not knowing what he said," as they "were heavy with sleep." Songs:it is not well to take Peter too seriously on this occasion. At any rate he makes a definite proposal. {I will make} (\paiˆs“\). Future indicative though aorist subjunctive has same form. {Tabernacles} (\skˆnas\), booths. The Feast of Tabernacles was not far away. Peter may have meant that they should just stay up here on the mountain and not go to Jerusalem for the feast.

rwp@Matthew:17:10 @{Elijah must first come} (\Eleian dei elthein pr“ton\). Songs:this piece of theology concerned them more than anything else. They had just seen Elijah, but Jesus the Messiah had come before Elijah. The scribes used strkjv@Malachi:4:5|. Jesus had also spoken again of his death (resurrection). Songs:they are puzzled.

rwp@Matthew:17:20 @{Little faith} (\oligopistian\). A good translation. It was less than "a grain of mustard seed" (\kokkon sinape“s\). See strkjv@13:31| for this phrase. They had no miracle faith. Bruce holds "this mountain" to be the Mount of Transfiguration to which Jesus pointed. Probably so. But it is a parable. Our trouble is always with "this mountain" which confronts our path. Note the form \metaba\ (\meta\ and \bˆthi\).

rwp@Matthew:17:24 @{They that received the half-shekel} (\hoi ta didrachma lambanontes\). This temple tax amounted to an Attic drachma or the Jewish half-shekel, about one-third of a dollar. Every Jewish man twenty years of age and over was expected to pay it for the maintenance of the temple. But it was not a compulsory tax like that collected by the publicans for the government. "The tax was like a voluntary church-rate; no one could be compelled to pay" (Plummer). The same Greek word occurs in two Egyptian papyri of the first century A.D. for the receipt for the tax for the temple of Suchus (Milligan and Moulton's _Vocabulary_). This tax for the Jerusalem temple was due in the month Adar (our March) and it was now nearly six months overdue. But Jesus and the Twelve had been out of Galilee most of this time. Hence the question of the tax-collectors. The payment had to be made in the Jewish coin, half-shekel. Hence the money-changers did a thriving business in charging a small premium for the Jewish coin, amounting to some forty-five thousand dollars a year, it is estimated. It is significant that they approached Peter rather than Jesus, perhaps not wishing to embarrass "Your Teacher," "a roundabout hint that the tax was overdue" (Bruce). Evidently Jesus had been in the habit of paying it (Peter's).

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

rwp@Matthew:17:26 @{The sons} (\hoi huioi\). Christ, of course, and the disciples also in contrast with the Jews. Thus a reply to Peter's prompt "Yes." Logically (\arage\) free from the temple tax, but practically not as he proceeds to show.

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:18:3 @{Except ye turn and become} (\ean mˆ straphˆte kai genˆsthe\). Third-class condition, undetermined but with prospect of determination. \Straphˆte\ is second aorist passive subjunctive and \genˆsthe\ second aorist middle subjunctive. They were headed in the wrong direction with their selfish ambition. "His tone at this time is markedly severe, as much as when He denounces the Pharisaism in the bud He had to deal with" (Bruce). The strong double negative \ou mˆ eiselthˆte\ means that they will otherwise not get into the kingdom of heaven at all, let alone have big places in it.

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

rwp@Matthew:18:7 @{Through whom} (\di' ou\). Jesus recognizes the inevitableness of stumbling-blocks, traps, hindrances, the world being as it is, but he does not absolve the man who sets the trap (cf. strkjv@Luke:17:1|).

rwp@Matthew:18:8 @In verses 8| and 9| we have one of the dualities or doublets in Matthew (5:29-30|). Jesus repeated his pungent sayings many times. Instead of \eis geennan\ (5:29|) we have \eis to pur to ai“nion\ and at the end of verse 9| \tou puros\ is added to \tˆn geennan\. This is the first use in Matthew of \ai“nios\. We have it again in strkjv@19:16,29| with \zoˆ\, in strkjv@25:41| with \pur\, in strkjv@25:46| with \kolasin\ and \zoˆn\. The word means ageless, without beginning or end as of God (Romans:16:26|), without beginning as in strkjv@Romans:16:25|, without end as here and often. The effort to make it mean "\aeonian\" fire will make it mean "\aeonian\" life also. If the punishment is limited, _ipso facto_ the life is shortened. In verse 9| also \monophthalmon\ occurs. It is an Ionic compound in Herodotus that is condemned by the Atticists, but it is revived in the vernacular _Koin‚_. Literally one-eyed. Here only and strkjv@Mark:9:47| in the New Testament.

rwp@Matthew:18:12 @{Leave the ninety and nine} (\aphˆsei ta enenˆkonta ennea epi ta orˆ kai poreutheis zˆtei to plan“menon?\). This is the text of Westcott and Hort after BL, etc. This text means: "Will he not leave the ninety and nine upon the mountains and going does he not seek (change to present tense) the wandering one?" On the high pastures where the sheep graze at will one has wandered afield. See this parable later in strkjv@Luke:15:4-7|. Our word "planet" is from \planaomai\, wandering (moving) stars they were called as opposed to fixed stars. But now we know that no stars are fixed. They are all moving and rapidly.

rwp@Matthew:18:15 @{If thy brother sin against thee} (\ean hamartˆsˆi adelphos sou\). Literally, commit a sin (ingressive aorist subjunctive of \hamartan“\). Aleph B Sahidic do not have "against thee" (\eis se\). {Shew him his fault} (\elegxon\). Such private reproof is hard to do, but it is the way of Christ. {Thou hast gained} (\ekerdˆsas\). Aorist active indicative of \kerdain“\ in conclusion of a third-class condition, a sort of timeless aorist, a blessed achievement already made.

rwp@Matthew:20:14 @{Take up} (\aron\). First aorist active imperative of \air“\. Pick up, as if he had saucily refused to take it from the table or had contemptuously thrown the denarius on the ground. If the first had been paid first and sent away, there would probably have been no murmuring, but "the murmuring is needed to bring out the lesson" (Plummer). The \dˆnarius\ was the common wage of a day labourer at that time. {What I will} (\ho thel“\). This is the point of the parable, the _will_ of the householder. {With mine own} (\en tois emois\). In the sphere of my own affairs. There is in the _Koin‚_ an extension of the instrumental use of \en\.

rwp@Matthew:20:26 @{Would become great} (\hos an thelˆi megas genesthai\). Jesus does not condemn the desire to become great. It is a laudable ambition. There are "great ones" (\megaloi\) among Christians as among pagans, but they do not "lord it over" one another (\katakurieuousin\), a LXX word and very expressive, or "play the tyrant" (\katexousiazousin\), another suggestive word. {Your minister} (\h–m“n diakonos\). This word may come from \dia\ and \konis\ (dust), to raise a dust by one's hurry, and so to minister. It is a general word for servant and is used in a variety of ways including the technical sense of our "deacon" in Php. strkjv@1:1|. But it more frequently is applied to ministers of the Gospel (1Corinthians:3:5|). The way to be "first" (\pr“tos\), says Jesus, is to be your "servant" (\doulos\), "bond-servant" (verse 27|). This is a complete reversal of popular opinion then and now.

rwp@Matthew:20:28 @{A ransom for many} (\lutron anti poll“n\). The Son of man is the outstanding illustration of this principle of self-abnegation in direct contrast to the self-seeking of James and John. The word translated "ransom" is the one commonly employed in the papyri as the price paid for a slave who is then set free by the one who bought him, the purchase money for manumitting slaves. See examples in Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_ and Deissmann's _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 328f. There is the notion of exchange also in the use of \anti\. Jesus gave his own life as the price of freedom for the slaves of sin. There are those who refuse to admit that Jesus held this notion of a substitutionary death because the word in the N.T. occurs only here and the corresponding passage in strkjv@Mark:10:45|. But that is an easy way to get rid of passages that contradict one's theological opinions. Jesus here rises to the full consciousness of the significance of his death for men.

rwp@Matthew:20:29 @{From Jericho} (\apo Iereich“\). Songs:Mark:10:46|. But Luke (Luke:18:35|) places the incident as they were drawing near to Jericho (\eis Iereich“\). It is probable that Mark and Matthew refer to the old Jericho, the ruins of which have been discovered, while Luke alludes to the new Roman Jericho. The two blind men were apparently between the two towns. Mark (Mark:10:46|) and Luke (Luke:18:35|) mention only one blind man, Bartimaeus (Mark). In Kentucky there are two towns about a half mile apart both called Pleasureville (one Old Pleasureville, the other New Pleasureville).

rwp@Matthew:21:3 @{The Lord} (\ho kurios\). It is not clear how the word would be understood here by those who heard the message though it is plain that Jesus applies it to himself. The word is from \kuros\, power or authority. In the LXX it is common in a variety of uses which appear in the N.T. as master of the slave (Matthew:10:24|), of the harvest (9:38|), of the vineyard (20:8|), of the emperor (Acts:13:27|), of God (Matthew:11:20; strkjv@11:25|), and often of Jesus as the Messiah (Acts:10:36|). Note strkjv@Matthew:8:25|. This is the only time in Matthew where the words \ho kurios\ are applied to Jesus except the doubtful passage in strkjv@28:6|. A similar usage is shown by Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_ and Deissmann's _Light from the Ancient East_. Particularly in Egypt it was applied to "the Lord Serapis" and Ptolemy and Cleopatra are called "the lords, the most great gods" (\hoi kurioi theoi megistoi\). Even Herod the Great and Herod Agrippa I are addressed as "Lord King." In the west the Roman emperors are not so termed till the time of Domitian. But the Christians boldly claimed the word for Christ as Jesus is here represented as using it with reference to himself. It seems as if already the disciples were calling Jesus "Lord" and that he accepted the appellative and used it as here.

rwp@Matthew:21:4 @{By the prophet} (\dia tou prophˆtou\). The first line is from strkjv@Isaiah:62:11|, the rest from strkjv@Zechariah:9:9|. John (John:12:14f.|) makes it clear that Jesus did not quote the passage himself. In Matthew it is not so plain, but probably it is his own comment about the incident. It is not Christ's intention to fulfil the prophecy, simply that his conduct did fulfil it.

rwp@Matthew:21:35 @{They will reverence my son} (\entrapˆsontai ton huion mou\). Second future passive from \entrep“\, to turn at, but used transitively here as though active or middle. It is the picture of turning with respect when one worthy of it appears.

rwp@Matthew:21:42 @{The stone which} (\lithon hon\). Inverse attraction of the antecedent into the case of the relative. {The builders rejected} (\apedokimasan hoi oikodomountes\). From strkjv@Psalms:118:22|. A most telling quotation. These experts in building God's temple had rejected the corner-stone chosen by God for his own house. But God has the last word and sets aside the building experts and puts his Son as the Head of the corner. It was a withering indictment.

rwp@Matthew:21:44 @{Shall be broken to pieces} (\sunthlasthˆsetai\). Some ancient manuscripts do not have this verse. But it graphically pictures the fate of the man who rejects Christ. The verb means to shatter. We are familiar with an automobile that dashes against a stone wall, a tree, or a train and the ruin that follows. {Will scatter him as dust} (\likmˆsei\). The verb was used of winnowing out the chaff and then of grinding to powder. This is the fate of him on whom this Rejected Stone falls.

rwp@Matthew:22:1 @{Again in parables} (\palin en parabolais\). Matthew has already given two on this occasion (The Two Sons, The Wicked Husbandmen). He alone gives this Parable of the Marriage Feast of the King's Son. It is somewhat similar to that of The Supper in strkjv@Luke:14:16-23| given on another occasion. Hence some scholars consider this merely Matthew's version of the Lucan parable in the wrong place because of Matthew's habit of grouping the sayings of Jesus. But that is a gratuitous indictment of Matthew's report which definitely locates the parable here by \palin\. Some regard it as not spoken by Jesus at all, but an effort on the part of the writer to cover the sin and fate of the Jews, the calling of the Gentiles, and God's demand for righteousness. But here again it is like Jesus and suits the present occasion.

rwp@Matthew:22:2 @{A marriage feast} (\gamous\). The plural, as here (2,3,4,9|), is very common in the papyri for the wedding festivities (the several acts of feasting) which lasted for days, seven in strkjv@Judges:14:17|. The very phrase here, \gamous poiein\, occurs in the Doric of Thera about B.C. 200. The singular \gamos\ is common in the papyri for the wedding contract, but Field (_Notes_, p. 16) sees no difference between the singular here in strkjv@22:8| and the plural (see also strkjv@Genesis:29:22; strkjv@Esther:9:22|; Macc. strkjv@10:58).

rwp@Matthew:22:5 @{Made light of it} (\amelˆsantes\). Literally, neglecting, not caring for. They may even have ridiculed the invitation, but the verb does not say so. However, to neglect an invitation to a wedding feast is a gross discourtesy. {One to his own farm} (\hos men eis ton idion agron\) or field, {another to his merchandise} (\hos de epi tˆn emporian autou\) only example in the N.T., from \emporos\, merchant, one who travels for traffic (\emporeuomai\), a drummer.

rwp@Matthew:22:10 @{The wedding} (\ho gamos\). But Westcott and Hort rightly read here \ho numph“n\, marriage dining hall. The same word in strkjv@9:15| means the bridechamber.

rwp@Matthew:22:12 @{Not having a wedding-garment} (\mˆ ech“n enduma gamou\). \Mˆ\ is in the _Koin‚_ the usual negative with participles unless special emphasis on the negative is desired as in \ouk endedumenon\. There is a subtle distinction between \mˆ\ and \ou\ like our subjective and objective notions. Some hold that the wedding-garment here is a portion of a lost parable separate from that of the Wedding Feast, but there is no evidence for that idea. Wunsche does report a parable by a rabbi of a king who set no time for his feast and the guests arrived, some properly dressed waiting at the door; others in their working clothes did not wait, but went off to work and, when the summons suddenly came, they had no time to dress properly and were made to stand and watch while the others partook of the feast.

rwp@Matthew:22:14 @{For many are called, but few chosen} (\polloi gar eisin klˆtoi oligoi de eklektoi\). This crisp saying of Christ occurs in various connections. He evidently repeated many of his sayings many times as every teacher does. There is a distinction between the called (\klˆtoi\) and the chosen (\eklektoi\) called out from the called.

rwp@Matthew:22:16 @{Their disciples} (\tous mathˆtas aut“n\). Students, pupils, of the Pharisees as in strkjv@Mark:2:18|. There were two Pharisaic theological seminaries in Jerusalem (Hillel, Shammai). {The Herodians} (\t“n Her“idian“n\). Not members of Herod's family or Herod's soldiers, but partisans or followers of Herod. The form in \-ianos\ is a Latin termination like that in \Christianos\ (Acts:11:26|). Mentioned also in strkjv@Mark:3:6| combining with the Pharisees against Jesus. {The person of men} (\pros“pon anthr“p“n\). Literally, face of men. Paying regard to appearance is the sin of partiality condemned by James (James:2:1,9|) when \pros“polˆmpsia, pros“polˆmptein\ are used, in imitation of the Hebrew idiom. This suave flattery to Jesus implied "that Jesus was a reckless simpleton" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:22:19 @{Tribute money} (\to nomisma tou kˆnsou\). \Kˆnsos\, Latin _census_, was a capitation tax or head-money, _tributum capitis_, for which silver denaria were struck, with the figure of Caesar and a superscription, e.g. "Tiberiou Kaisaros" (McNeile). \Nomisma\ is the Latin _numisma_ and occurs here only in the N.T., is common in the old Greek, from \nomiz“\ sanctioned by law or custom.

rwp@Matthew:22:20 @{This image and superscription} (\hˆ eik“n hautˆ kai hˆ epigraphˆ\). Probably a Roman coin because of the image (picture) on it. The earlier Herods avoided this practice because of Jewish prejudice, but the Tetrarch Philip introduced it on Jewish coins and he was followed by Herod Agrippa I. This coin was pretty certainly stamped in Rome with the image and name of Tiberius Caesar on it.

rwp@Matthew:22:24 @{Shall marry} (\epigambreusei\). The Sadducees were "aiming at amusement rather than deadly mischief" (Bruce). It was probably an old conundrum that they had used to the discomfiture of the Pharisees. This passage is quoted from strkjv@Deuteronomy:25:5,6|. The word appears here only in the N.T. and elsewhere only in the LXX. It is used of any connected by marriage as in strkjv@Genesis:34:9; strkjv@1Samuel:18:22|. But in strkjv@Genesis:38:8| and strkjv@Deuteronomy:25:5| it is used specifically of one marrying his brother's widow.

rwp@Matthew:22:36 @{The great commandment in the law} (\entolˆ megalˆ en t“i nom“i\). The positive adjective is sometimes as high in rank as the superlative. See \megas\ in strkjv@Matthew:5:19| in contrast with \elachistos\. The superlative \megistos\ occurs in the N.T. only in strkjv@2Peter:1:4|. Possibly this scribe wishes to know which commandment stood first (Mark:12:28|) with Jesus. "The scribes declared that there were 248 affirmative precepts, as many as the members of the human body; and 365 negative precepts, as many as the days in the year, the total being 613, the number of letters in the Decalogue" (Vincent). But Jesus cuts through such pettifogging hair-splitting to the heart of the problem.

rwp@Matthew:23:3 @{For they say and do not} (\legousin kai ou poiousin\). "As teachers they have their place, but beware of following their example" (Bruce). Songs:Jesus said: "Do not ye after their works " (\mˆ poieite\). Do not practice their practices. They are only preachers. Jesus does not here disapprove any of their teachings as he does elsewhere. The point made here is that they are only teachers (or preachers) and do not practice what they teach as God sees it.

rwp@Matthew:23:6 @{The chief place at feasts} (\tˆn pr“toklisian en tois deipnois\). Literally, the first reclining place on the divan at the meal. The Persians, Greeks, Romans, Jews differed in their customs, but all cared for the post of honour at formal functions as is true of us today. Hostesses often solve the point by putting the name of each guest at the table. At the last passover meal the apostles had an ugly snarl over this very point of precedence (Luke:22:24; strkjv@John:13:2-11|), just two days after this exposure of the Pharisees in the presence of the apostles. {The chief seats in the synagogues} (\tas pr“tokathedrias en tais sunag“gais\). "An insatiable hunger for prominence" (Bruce). These chief seats (Zuchermandel) were on the platform looking to the audience and with the back to the chest in which were kept the rolls of scripture. The Essenes had a different arrangement. People today pay high prices for front seats at the theatre, but at church prefer the rear seats out of a curious mock-humility. In the time of Jesus the hypocrites boldly sat up in front. Now, if they come to church at all, they take the rear seats.

rwp@Matthew:23:8 @{But be not ye called Rabbi} (\humeis de mˆ klˆthˆte Rabbei\). An apparent aside to the disciples. Note the emphatic position of \humeis\. Some even regard verses 8-10| as a later addition and not part of this address to the Pharisees, but the apostles were present. Euthymius Zigabenus says: "Do not seek to be called (ingressive aorist subjunctive), if others call you this it will not be your fault." This is not far from the Master's meaning. Rabbi means "my great one," "my Master," apparently a comparatively new title in Christ's time.

rwp@Matthew:23:9 @{Call no man your father} (\patera mˆ kalesˆte h–m“n\). Jesus meant the full sense of this noble word for our heavenly Father. "Abba was not commonly a mode of address to a living person, but a title of honour for Rabbis and great men of the past" (McNeile). In Gethsemane Jesus said: "Abba, Father" (Mark:14:36|). Certainly the ascription of "Father" to pope and priest seems out of harmony with what Jesus here says. He should not be understood to be condemning the title to one's real earthly father. Jesus often leaves the exceptions to be supplied.

rwp@Matthew:23:10 @{Masters} (\kathˆgˆtai\). This word occurs here only in the N.T. It is found in the papyri for teacher (Latin, _doctor_). It is the modern Greek word for professor. "While \didaskalos\ represents \Rab\, \kathˆgˆtes\ stands for the more honourable \Rabban, -b“n\" (McNeile). Dalman (_Words of Jesus_, p. 340) suggests that the same Aramaic word may be translated by either \didaskalos\ or \kathˆgˆtes\. {The Christ} (\ho Christos\). The use of these words here by Jesus like "Jesus Christ" in his Prayer (John:17:3|) is held by some to show that they were added by the evangelist to what Jesus actually said, since the Master would not have so described himself. But he commended Peter for calling him "the Christ the Son of the living God" (Matthew:16:16f.|). We must not empty the consciousness of Jesus too much.

rwp@Matthew:23:15 @{Twofold more a son of hell than yourselves} (\huion geennˆs diploteron h–m“n\). It is a convert to Pharisaism rather than Judaism that is meant by "one proselyte" (\hena prosˆluton\), from \proserchomai\, newcomers, aliens. There were two kinds of proselytes: of the gate (not actual Jews, but God-fearers and well-wishers of Judaism, like Cornelius), of righteousness who received circumcision and became actual Jews. But a very small per cent of the latter became Pharisees. There was a Hellenistic Jewish literature (Philo, Sibylline Oracles, etc.) designed to attract Gentiles to Judaism. But the Pharisaic missionary zeal (compass, \periagˆte\, go around) was a comparative failure. And success was even worse, Jesus says with pitiless plainness. The "son of Gehenna" means one fitted for and so destined for Gehenna. "The more converted the more perverted" (H.J. Holtzmann). The Pharisees claimed to be in a special sense sons of the kingdom (Matthew:8:12|). They were more partisan than pious. \Diplous\ (twofold, double) is common in the papyri. The comparative here used, as if from \diplos\, appears also in Appian. Note the ablative of comparison h–m“n. It was a withering thrust.

rwp@Matthew:23:17 @{Ye fools} (\m“roi\). In strkjv@5:22| Jesus had warned against calling a man \m“ros\ in a rage, but here he so terms the blind Pharisees for their stupidity, description of the class. "It shows that not the word but the spirit in which it is uttered is what matters" (McNeile).

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

rwp@Matthew:24:1 @{Went out from the temple} (\exelth“n apo tou hierou\). All the discourses since strkjv@Matthew:21:23| have been in the temple courts (\hieron\, the sacred enclosure). But now Jesus leaves it for good after the powerful denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees in chapter 23. His public teaching is over. It was a tragic moment. As he was going out (\eporeueto\, descriptive imperfect) the disciples, as if to relieve the thought of the Master came to him (\prosˆlthon\) to show (\epideixai\, ingressive aorist infinitive) the buildings of the temple (\tas oikodomas tou hierou\). They were familiar to Jesus and the disciples, but beautiful like a snow mountain (Josephus, _Wars_ V,5,6), the monument that Herod the Great had begun and that was not yet complete (John:2:20|). Great stones were there of polished marble.

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

rwp@Matthew:24:8 @{The beginning of travail} (\archˆ odin“n\). The word means birth-pangs and the Jews used the very phrase for the sufferings of the Messiah which were to come before the coming of the Messiah (Book of Jubilees, strkjv@23:18; Apoc. of Baruch 27-29). But the word occurs with no idea of birth as the pains of death (Psalms:18:5; strkjv@Acts:2:24|). These woes, says Jesus, are not a proof of the end, but of the beginning.

rwp@Matthew:24:9 @{Ye shall be hated} (\esesthe misoumenoi\). Periphrastic future passive to emphasize the continuous process of the linear action. For tribulation (\thlipsin\ see strkjv@13:21|), a word common in the Acts, Epistles, and Apocalypse for the oppression (pressure) that the Christians received. {For my name's sake} (\dia to onoma mou\). The most glorious name in the world today, but soon to be a byword of shame (Acts:5:41|). The disciples would count it an honour to be dishonoured for the Name's sake.

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@Matthew:24:31 @{With a great sound of a trumpet} (\meta salpiggos ph“nˆs megalˆs\). Some MSS. omit (\ph“nˆs\) "sound." The trumpet was the signal employed to call the hosts of Israel to march as to war and is common in prophetic imagery (Isaiah:27:13|). Cf. the seventh angel (Revelation:11:15|). Clearly "the coming of the son of man is not to be identified with the judgment of Jerusalem but rather forms its preternatural background" (Bruce).

rwp@Revelation:4:5 @{Out of the throne} (\ek tou thronou\). Back to the throne itself. The imagery is kin to that in strkjv@Exodus:19:16; strkjv@24:9f.; strkjv@Ezekiel:1:22,27|. {Proceed} (\ekporeuontai\). Graphic historical present. {Lightnings and voices and thunders} (\astrapai kai ph“nai kai brontai\). Songs:exactly in strkjv@11:19; strkjv@16:18|, but in strkjv@8:5| with \brontai\ first, \astrapai\ last, all old and common words. "The thunderstorm is in Hebrew poetry a familiar symbol of the Divine power: cf., e.g., strkjv@1Samuel:2:10; strkjv@Psalms:18:9f.; strkjv@Job:37:4f|." (Swete). {Seven lamps of fire} (\hepta lampades puros\). Return to the nominative (\idou\, not \eidon\) with \ˆsan\ (were) understood. Metaphor drawn from strkjv@Ezekiel:1:13; strkjv@Zechariah:4:12ff|. Our word "lamp," but here a torch as in strkjv@8:10|, identified with the Holy Spirit (the Seven Spirits of God) as in strkjv@1:4; strkjv@3:1|, not \luchniai\ (lampstands) as in strkjv@1:12,20|, nor \luchnos\ a hand-lamp with oil (Matthew:5:15|). "These torches blaze perpetually before the throne of God" (Swete).

rwp@Revelation:4:6 @{As it were a glassy sea} (\h“s thalassa hualinˆ\). Old adjective (from \hualos\, glass, strkjv@21:18,21|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@15:2|. Possibly from \huei\ (it rains), like a raindrop. At any rate here it is the appearance, not the material. Glass was made in Egypt 4,000 years ago. In strkjv@Exodus:24:10| the elders see under the feet of God in the theophany a paved work of sapphire stone (cf. strkjv@Ezekiel:1:26|). The likeness of the appearance of sky to sea suggests the metaphor here (Beckwith). {Like crystal} (\homoia krustall“i\). Associative-instrumental case after \homoia\. Old word, from \kruos\ (ice and sometimes used for ice), in N.T. only here and strkjv@22:1|, not semi-opaque, but clear like rock-crystal. {In the midst of the throne} (\en mes“i tou thronou\). As one looks from the front, really before. {Round about the throne} (\kukl“i tou thronou\). Merely an adverb in the locative case (Romans:15:19|), as a preposition in N.T. only here, strkjv@5:11; strkjv@7:11|. This seems to mean that on each of the four sides of the throne was one of the four living creatures either stationary or moving rapidly round (Ezekiel:1:12f.|). {Four living creatures} (\tessera z“a\). Not \thˆria\ (beasts), but living creatures. Certainly kin to the \z“a\ of strkjv@Ezekiel:1; 2| which are cherubim (Ezekiel:10:2,20|), though here the details vary as to faces and wings with a significance of John's own, probably representing creation in contrast with the redeemed (the elders). {Full of eyes} (\gemonta ophthalm“n\). Present active participle of \gem“\, to be full of, with the genitive, signifying here unlimited intelligence (Beckwith), the ceaseless vigilance of nature (Swete).

rwp@Revelation:4:7 @{Like a lion} (\homoion leonti\). Associative-instrumental case again. In Ezekiel:(1:6,10|) each \z“on\ has four faces, but here each has a different face. "The four forms represent whatever is noblest, strongest, wisest, and swiftest in nature" (Swete). But it is not necessary to try to find a symbolism in each face here like the early baseless identification with the Four Evangelists (the lion for Mark, the man for Matthew, the calf for Luke, the eagle for John). \Moschos\ is first a sprout, then the young of animals, then a calf (bullock or heifer) as in strkjv@Luke:15:23, 27,30|, or a full-grown ox (Ezekiel:1:10|). {Had} (\ech“n\). Masculine singular (some MSS. \echon\ neuter singular agreeing with \z“on\) present active participle of \ech“\, changing the construction with the \triton z“on\ almost like a finite verb as in verse 8|. {A face as of a man} (\pros“pon h“s anthr“pou\). Shows that the likeness in each instance extended only to the face. {Like an eagle flying} (\homoion aet“i petomen“i\). Present middle participle of \petomai\, to fly, old verb, in N.T. only in strkjv@Revelation:4:7; strkjv@8:13; strkjv@12:14; strkjv@14:6; strkjv@19:17|. The \aetos\ in strkjv@Matthew:24:28; strkjv@Luke:17:37| may be a form of vulture going after carrion, but not in strkjv@Revelation:8:13; strkjv@12:14|.

rwp@Revelation:4:8 @{Each one of them} (\hen kath' hen aut“n\). "One by one of them," a vernacular idiom like \heis kata heis\ in strkjv@Mark:14:19|. {Having} (\ech“n\). Masculine participle again as in verse 7|, though \z“on\ neuter. {Six wings} (\ana pterugas hex\). Distributive use of \ana\, "six wings apiece" as in strkjv@Luke:10:1| (\ana duo\, by twos). Like strkjv@Isaiah:6:2|, not like strkjv@Ezekiel:1:6|, where only four wings are given apiece. {Are full of} (\gemousin\). Plural verb, though \z“a\ neuter, to individualize each one. {Round about and within} (\kuklothen kai es“then\). Perhaps before and behind (4:6|) and under the wings, "pointing to the secret energies of nature" (Swete). {Rest} (\anapausin\). See also strkjv@14:11|. Old word (from \anapau“\, to relax), as in strkjv@Matthew:11:29|. God and Christ cease not their activity (John:5:17|). "This ceaseless activity of nature under the hand of God is a ceaseless tribute of praise" (Swete). {Day and night} (\hˆmeras kai nuktos\). Genitive of time, by day and by night. {Holy, holy, holy} (\hagios, hagios, hagios\). "The task of the Cherubim together with the Seraphim and Ophannim is to sing the praises of God" (Charles) in the \trisagion\ (triple repetition of \hagios\). {Is the Lord God} (\Kurios ho theos\). See strkjv@Isaiah:6:3|. The copula \estin\ (is) is not expressed, but is implied. {The Almighty} (\ho pantokrat“r\). See on ¯1:8|. {Which was and which is and which is to come} (\ho ˆn kai ho “n kai ho erchomenos\). Just as in strkjv@1:4,8|, but with the order changed.

rwp@Revelation:6:1 @{And I saw} (\kai eidon\). As in strkjv@4:1; strkjv@5:1|. The vision unfolds without anything being said about opening the book and reading from it. In a more vivid and dramatic fashion the Lamb breaks the seals one by one and reveals the contents and the symbolism. The first four seals have a common note from one of the four \z“a\ and the appearance of a horse. No effort will be made here to interpret these seals as referring to persons or historical events in the past, present, or future, but simply to relate the symbolism to the other symbols in the book. It is possible that there is some allusion here to the symbolism in the so-called "Little Apocalypse" of strkjv@Mark:13; strkjv@Matthew:24f.; strkjv@Luke:21|. The imagery of the four horses is similar to that in strkjv@Zechariah:1:7-11; strkjv@6:1-8| (cf. strkjv@Jeremiah:14:12; strkjv@24:10; strkjv@42:17|). In the Old Testament the horse is often the emblem of war (Job:39:25; strkjv@Psalms:76:6; strkjv@Proverbs:21:31; strkjv@Ezekiel:26:10|). "Homer pictures the horses of Rhesus as whiter than snow, and swift as the wind" (Vincent). {When the Lamb opened} (\hote ˆnoixen to arnion\). First aorist active indicative of \anoig“\. This same phrase recurs in rhythmical order at the opening of each seal (6:1,3,5,7,9,12|) till the last (8:1|), where we have \hotan ˆnoixen\ (\hotan\ rather than \hote\ calling particular attention to it). {One} (\mian\). Probably used here as an ordinal (the first) as in strkjv@Matthew:28:1|. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 671f. {Of} (\ek\). This use of \ek\ with the ablative in the partitive sense is common in the Apocalypse, as twice in this verse (\ek t“n\, etc.). Songs:\henos ek t“n\ (one of the four living creatures) is "the first of," etc. {In a voice of thunder} (\en ph“nˆi brontˆs\). Old word used of John and James (Mark:3:17|) and elsewhere in N.T. only strkjv@John:12:29| and a dozen times in the Apocalypse. {Come} (\Erchou\). Present middle imperative of \erchomai\, but with exclamatory force (not strictly linear). The command is not addressed to the Lamb nor to John (the correct text omits \kai ide\ "and see") as in strkjv@17:1; strkjv@21:9|, but to one of the four horsemen each time. Swete takes it as a call to Christ because \erchou\ is so used in strkjv@22:17,20|, but that is not conclusive.

rwp@Revelation:6:2 @{And I saw and behold} (\kai eidon kai idou\). This combination is frequent in the Apocalypse (4:1; strkjv@6:2,5,8; strkjv@14:1,14; strkjv@19:11|). {A white horse} (\hippos leukos\). In strkjv@Zechariah:6:1-8| we have red, black, white, and grizzled bay horses like the four winds of heaven, ministers to do God's will. White seems to be the colour of victory (cf. the white horse of the Persian Kings) like the white horse ridden by the Roman conqueror in a triumphant procession. {Had} (\ech“n\). Agreeing in gender and case with \ho kathˆmenos\. {A bow} (\toxon\). Old word (Zechariah:9:13f.| of a great bow), here only in N.T. {Was given} (\edothˆ\). First aorist passive indicative of \did“mi\. {A crown} (\stephanos\). See on ¯4:4| for this word. {He came forth} (\exˆlthen\). Second aorist active indicative of \exerchomai\, either to come out or to go out (went forth). {Conquering} (\nik“n\). Present active participle of \nika“\. {And to conquer} (\kai hina nikˆsˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \nika“\. Here \h“s nikˆs“n\ (future active participle with \h“s\) could have been used. The aorist tense here points to ultimate victory. Commentators have been busy identifying the rider of the white horse according to their various theories. "It is tempting to identify him with the Rider on the white horse in strkjv@19:11f.|, whose name is 'the Word of God'" (Swete). Tempting, "but the two riders have nothing in common beyond the white horse."

rwp@Revelation:6:5 @{A black horse} (\hippos melas\). Lust of conquest brings bloodshed, but also famine and hunger. "The colour of mourning and famine. See strkjv@Jeremiah:4:28; strkjv@8:21; strkjv@Malachi:3:14|, where _mournfully_ is, literally, in black" (Vincent). {Had} (\ech“n\) as in verse 2|. {A balance} (\zugon\). Literally, a yoke (old word from \zeugnumi\, to join), of slavery (Acts:15:10; strkjv@Galatians:5:1|), of teaching (Matthew:11:29|), of weight or measure like a pair of scales evenly balancing as here (Ezekiel:5:1; strkjv@45:10|). The rider of this black horse, like the spectral figure of hunger, carries in his hand a pair of scales. This is also one of the fruits of war.

rwp@Revelation:6:10 @{How long} (\he“s pote\). "Until when." Cf. strkjv@Matthew:7:17; strkjv@John:10:24|. {O Master} (\ho despotˆs\). Nominative articular form, but used as vocative (\despota\) as in strkjv@4:11| (John:20:28|). On \despotˆs\ (correlative of \doulos\) see strkjv@Luke:2:29|. Here (alone in the Apocalypse) it is applied to God as in strkjv@Luke:2:29; strkjv@Acts:4:24|, but to Christ in strkjv@Jude:1:4; strkjv@2Peter:2:1|. {The holy and true} (\ho hagios kai alˆthinos\). See strkjv@3:7| for these attributes of God. {Avenge our blood on them that dwell upon the earth} (\ekdikeis to haima hˆm“n ek t“n katoikount“n epi tˆs gˆs\). This same idiom in strkjv@19:2| and see it also in strkjv@Luke:18:7f.|, "a passage which goes far to answer many questions in theodicy" (Swete). We find \ekdike“\, late compound, used with \ek\ as here in strkjv@Deuteronomy:18:19; strkjv@1Samuel:24:13|, but with \apo\ in strkjv@Luke:18:3|. For \epi tˆs gˆs\ (upon the earth) see strkjv@3:10|.

rwp@Revelation:9:6 @{Men} (\hoi anthr“poi\). Generic use of the article (men as a class). {Shall not find it} (\ou mˆ heurˆsousin auton\). Strong double negative \ou mˆ\ with the future active indicative according to Aleph Q, but \heur“sin\ (second aorist active subjunctive) according to A P (either construction regular). The idea here is found in strkjv@Job:3:21; strkjv@Jeremiah:8:3|. "Such a death as they desire, a death which will end their sufferings, is impossible; physical death is no remedy for the \basanismos\ of an evil conscience" (Swete). {They shall desire to die} (\epithumˆsousin apothanein\). Future active of \epithume“\, a climax to \zˆtˆsousin\ (they shall seek), to desire vehemently. Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:1:23| shows a preference for death if his work is done, in order to be with Christ, a very different feeling from what we have here. {Fleeth} (\pheugei\). Vivid futuristic present active indicative of \pheug“\. Even death does not come to their relief.

rwp@Revelation:9:7 @{The shapes} (\ta homoi“mata\). Old word from \homoio“\, to make like (from \homoios\, like), likeness, in N.T. only here, strkjv@Romans:5:14; strkjv@Phillipians:2:7|, "the likenesses were like" (\homoia\). \Homoi“ma\ is "midway between \morphˆ\ and \schˆma\" (Lightfoot). {Unto horses} (\hippois\). Associative-instrumental case, as is the rule with \homoios\ (1:15; strkjv@2:18; strkjv@4:6ff.; strkjv@9:10,19; strkjv@11:1; strkjv@13:2,11|), but with the accusative in strkjv@1:13; strkjv@14:14|. Songs:also \homoioi chrus“i\ (like gold) in this same verse. {Prepared for war} (\hˆtoimasmenois eis polemon\). Perfect passive participle of \hetoimaz“\. This imagery of war-horses is like that in strkjv@Joel:2:4f|. "The likeness of a locust to a horse, especially to a horse equipped with armour, is so striking that the insect is named in German _Heupferd_ (hay horse), and in Italian _cavalett_ a little horse" (Vincent). {As it were crowns} (\hos stephanoi\). Not actual crowns, but what looked like crowns of gold, as conquerors, as indeed they were (4:4; strkjv@6:2; strkjv@12:1; strkjv@14:14|). These locusts of the abyss have another peculiar feature. {As men's faces} (\h“s pros“pa anthr“p“n\). Human-looking faces in these demonic locusts to give added terror, "suggesting the intelligence and capacity of man" (Swete). Vincent actually sees "a distinct resemblance to the human countenance in the face of the locust."

rwp@Revelation:9:9 @{As it were breastplates of iron} (\h“s th“rakas siderous\). The \th“rax\ was originally the breast (from the neck to the navel), then the breastplate, only N.T. usage (Revelation:9:9,17; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:8; strkjv@Ephesians:6:14|). The armour for the breastplate was usually of iron (\siderous\, strkjv@Revelation:2:27|), but with the locusts it only seemed to be so (\h“s\). However, the scaly backs and flanks of the locusts do resemble coats of mail. "The locusts of the Abyss may be the memories of the past brought home at times of Divine visitation" (Swete). {The sound of their wings} (\hˆ ph“nˆ t“n pterug“n\). Graphic picture of the onrush of the swarms of demonic locusts and the hopelessness of resisting them. {As the sound of chariots, of many horses rushing to war} (\h“s ph“nˆ harmat“n hipp“n poll“n trechont“n eis polemon\). Both metaphors here, the clatter and clangour of the chariot wheels and the prancing of the horses are found in strkjv@Joel:2:4f|. \Trechont“n\ is present active predicate participle of \trech“\, to run. Cf. strkjv@2Kings:7:6; strkjv@Jeremiah:47:3|.

rwp@Revelation:9:11 @{As king} (\basilea\). Predicate accusative and anarthrous. In strkjv@Proverbs:30:27| it is stated that the locust has no king, but this is not true of these demonic locusts. Their king is "the angel of the abyss (verse 1|) whose orders they obey." {His name is} (\onoma aut“i\). "Name to him" (nominative absolute and dative, as in strkjv@6:8|). {In Hebrew} (\Ebraisti\). Adverb as in strkjv@16:16; strkjv@John:5:2; strkjv@19:13,17,20; strkjv@20:16|. \Abadd“n\. A word almost confined to the Wisdom books (Job:26:6; strkjv@Psalms:88:11; strkjv@Proverbs:15:11|). It is rendered in the LXX by \Ap“leia\, destruction. {In the Greek tongue} (\en tˆi Hellˆnikˆi\). With \gl“ssˆi\ or \dialekt“i\ understood. As usual, John gives both the Hebrew and the Greek. {Apollyon} (\Apollu“n\). Present active masculine singular participle of \apollu“\, meaning "destroying," used here as a name and so "Destroyer," with the nominative case retained though in apposition with the accusative \onoma\. The personification of Abaddon occurs in the Talmud also. It is not clear whether by Apollyon John means Death or Satan. Bousset even finds in the name Apollyon an indirect allusion to Apollo, one of whose symbols was the locust, a doubtful point assuredly.

rwp@Revelation:9:12 @{The first woe} (\hˆ ouai hˆ mia\). Note feminine gender ascribed to the interjection \ouai\ as in strkjv@11:14|, perhaps because \thlipsis\ is feminine, though we really do not know. Note also the ordinal use of \mia\ (one) like \pr“tˆ\ (first) as in strkjv@6:1; strkjv@Mark:16:2|. {There come yet two Woes} (\erchetai eti duo Ouai\). Singular number \erchetai\ instead of \erchontai\, though \duo ouai\. It is true that \ouai\ is an interjection and indeclinable, but it is here used with \duo\ and is feminine just before, and not neuter.

rwp@Revelation:9:13 @{A voice} (\ph“nˆn mian\). For \mian\ as indefinite article see strkjv@8:13|. Accusative case here after \ˆkousa\, though genitive in strkjv@8:13|, a distinction between sound and sense sometimes exists (Acts:9:7; strkjv@22:9|), but not here as the words are clearly heard in both instances. {From} (\ek\). "Out of the horns." Note triple use of the genitive article here as of the accusative article with this identical phrase in strkjv@8:3| ("the altar the golden the one before the throne").

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:12:4 @{His tail} (\hˆ oura autou\). See strkjv@9:10,19|. {Draweth} (\surei\). Present active indicative of \sur“\, old verb, to drag, here alone in the Apocalypse, but see strkjv@John:21:8|. {The third part of the stars} (\to triton t“n aster“n\). Like a great comet is this monster. See strkjv@Daniel:8:10|. Perhaps only the third is meant to soften the picture as in strkjv@Revelation:8:7f|. {Did cast them} (\ebalen autous\). Second aorist active indicative. Charles takes this to refer to a war in heaven between the good angels and Satan, with the fall of some angels (Jude:1:6|). But John may have in mind the martyrs before Christ (Hebrews:11:32f.|) and after Christ's ascension (Matthew:23:35|). {Stood} (\estˆken\). Imperfect active of a late verb, \stˆk“\, from the perfect \hestˆka\ of \histˆmi\, graphic picture of the dragon's challenge of the woman who is about to give birth. {When she was delivered} (\hotan tekˆi\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \tikt“\, "whenever she gives birth." {That he might devour} (\hina kataphagˆi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \katesthi“\, to eat up (down). Cf. strkjv@Jeremiah:28:34|. This is what Pharaoh did to Israel (Exodus:1:15-22; strkjv@Psalms:85:13; strkjv@Isaiah:27:1; strkjv@51:9; strkjv@Ezekiel:29:3|). Precisely so the devil tried to destroy the child Jesus on his birth.

rwp@Revelation:12:7 @{There was war in heaven} (\egeneto polemos en t“i ouran“i\). "There came to be war in heaven" (\egeneto\, not \ˆn\). "Another \tableau\, not a \sˆmeion\ (vv. 1,3|), but consequent upon the two \sˆmeia\ which precede it. The birth and rapture of the Woman's Son issue in a war which invades the \epourania\" (Swete). The reference is not to the original rebellion of Satan, as Andreas held. As the coming of Christ brought on fresh manifestations of diabolic power (Mark:1:13; strkjv@Luke:22:3,31; strkjv@John:12:31; strkjv@14:30; strkjv@16:11|), just so Christ's return to heaven is pictured as being the occasion of renewed attacks there. We are not to visualize it too literally, but certainly modern airplanes help us to grasp the notion of battles in the sky even more than the phalanxes of storm-clouds (Swete). John even describes this last conflict as in heaven itself. Cf. strkjv@Luke:10:18; strkjv@1Kings:22:1ff.; strkjv@Job:1; 2; strkjv@Zechariah:3:1ff|. {Michael and his angels} (\ho Michaˆl kai hoi aggeloi autou\). The nominative here may be in apposition with \polemos\, but it is an abnormal construction with no verb, though \egeneto\ (arose) can be understood as repeated. Michael is the champion of the Jewish people (Daniel:10:13,21; strkjv@12:1|) and is called the archangel in strkjv@Jude:9|. {Going forth to war} (\tou polemˆsai\). This genitive articular infinitive is another grammatical problem in this sentence. If \egeneto\ (arose) is repeated as above, then we have the infinitive for purpose, a common enough idiom. Otherwise it is anomalous, not even like strkjv@Acts:10:25|. {With the dragon} (\meta tou drakontos\). On the use of \meta\ with \poleme“\ see strkjv@2:16; strkjv@13:4; strkjv@17:14| (nowhere else in N.T.). The devil has angels under his command (Matthew:25:41|) and preachers also (2Corinthians:11:14f.|). {Warred} (\epolemˆsen\). Constative aorist active indicative of \poleme“\, picturing the whole battle in one glimpse.

rwp@Revelation:12:8 @{And they prevailed not} (\kai ouk ischusan\). Here \kai\ equals "and yet" or "but." A few MSS. read the singular \ischusen\ like \epolemˆsen\, but wrongly so. {Neither was their place found any more} (\oude topos heurethˆ aut“n eti\). First aorist passive indicative of \heurisk“\, to find. Probably \aut“n\ is the objective genitive (place for them), just as in strkjv@20:11| \autois\ (dative, for them) is used with \topos ouch heurethˆ\. The phrase occurs in strkjv@Daniel:2:35| Theod. and strkjv@Zechariah:10:10|. The dragon is finally expelled from heaven (cf. strkjv@Job:1:6|), though to us it seems a difficult conception to think of Satan having had access to heaven.

rwp@Revelation:12:9 @{Was cast down} (\eblˆthˆ\). Effective first aorist passive indicative of \ball“\, cast down for good and all, a glorious consummation. This vision of final victory over Satan is given by Jesus in strkjv@Luke:10:18; strkjv@John:12:31|. It has not come yet, but it is coming, and the hope of it should be a spur to missionary activity and zeal. The word megas (great) occurs here with \drak“n\ as in strkjv@12:3|, and the whole picture is repeated in strkjv@20:2|. The dragon in both places is identified with the old serpent (Genesis:3:1ff.|) and called \archaios\ (from \archˆ\, beginning), as Jesus said that the devil was a murderer "from the beginning" (John:8:44|). Both \diabolos\ (slanderer) and Satan (\Satanƒs\) are common in N.T. for this great dragon and old serpent, the chief enemy of mankind. See on ¯Matthew:4:1; strkjv@Revelation:2:10| for \diabolos\ and strkjv@Luke:10:18| for \Satanƒs\. {The deceiver of the whole world} (\ho plan“n tˆn oikoumenˆn holˆn\). This is his aim and his occupation, pictured here by the nominative articular present active participle of \plana“\, to lead astray. For "the inhabited world" see strkjv@Luke:2:1; strkjv@Revelation:3:10; strkjv@16:14|. Satan can almost "lead astray" the very elect of God (Matthew:24:24|), so artful is he in his beguilings as he teaches us how to deceive ourselves (1John:1:8|). {He was cast down to the earth} (\eblˆthˆ eis tˆn gˆn\). Effective aorist repeated from the beginning of the verse. "The earth was no new sphere of Satan's working" (Swete). {Were cast down} (\eblˆthˆsan\). Triple use of the same verb applied to Satan's minions. The expulsion is complete.

rwp@Revelation:12:10 @{A great voice saying} (\ph“nˆn megalˆn legousan\). Accusative after \ˆkousa\ in this phrase as in strkjv@5:11; strkjv@10:4; strkjv@14:2; strkjv@18:4|, but the genitive \ph“nˆs legousˆs\ in strkjv@11:12; strkjv@14:13|. We are not told whence this voice or song comes, possibly from one of the twenty-four elders (Swete) or some other heavenly beings (11:15|) who can sympathize with human beings (19:10|), the martyrs in heaven (Charles). {Now is come} (\arti egeneto\). \Arti\ (John:13:33|) shows how recent the downfall of Satan here proleptically pictured as behind us in time (aorist tense \egeneto\). {The salvation} (\hˆ s“tˆria\). Here "the victory" as in strkjv@7:10; strkjv@19:1|. {The power} (\hˆ dunamis\). Gods power over the dragon (cf. strkjv@7:12; strkjv@11:17; strkjv@19:1|). {The kingdom} (\hˆ basileia\). "The empire of God" as in strkjv@11:15|. {The authority of his Christ} (\hˆ exousia tou Christou autou\). Which Christ received from the Father (Matthew:28:18; strkjv@John:17:2|). See strkjv@11:15| (Psalms:2:2|) for "his Anointed." {The accuser} (\ho katˆg“r\). The regular form, \katˆgoros\, occurs in strkjv@John:8:10; strkjv@Acts:23:30,35; strkjv@25:16,18| and in many MSS. here in strkjv@Revelation:12:10|, but A reads \katˆg“r\, which Westcott and Hort accept. It was once considered a Greek transliteration of a Hebrew word, but Deissmann (_Light_, etc., p. 93f.) quotes it from a vernacular magical papyrus of the fourth century A.D. with no sign of Jewish or Christian influence, just as \diak“n\ appears as a vernacular form of \diakonos\. Only here is the word applied to Satan in the N.T. In late Judaism Satan is the accuser, and Michael the defender, of the faithful. {Of our brethren} (\t“n adelph“n hˆm“n\). The saints still on earth battling with Satan and his devices. {Which accuseth them} (\ho katˆgor“n autous\). Articular present active participle of \katˆgore“\, old verb, to accuse, usually with the genitive of the person (John:5:45|), but here with the accusative. This is the devil's constant occupation (Job:1:6f.|). {Day and night} (\hˆmeras kai nuktos\). Genitive of time. "By day and by night."

rwp@Revelation:12:11 @{They overcame him} (\autoi enikˆsan\). First aorist active indicative of \nika“\, the verb used by Jesus of his own victory (John:16:33|) and about him (Revelation:3:21; strkjv@5:5|). "The victory of the martyrs marks the failure of Satan's endeavours" (Swete). {Because of the blood of the Lamb} (\dia to haima tou arniou\). As in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@5:6,9; strkjv@7:14|. The blood of Christ is here presented by \dia\ as the ground for the victory and not the means, as by \en\ in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@5:9|. Both ideas are true, but \dia\ with the accusative gives only the reason. The blood of Christ does cleanse us from sin (John:1:29; strkjv@1John:1:7|). Christ conquered Satan, and so makes our victory possible (Luke:11:21f.; strkjv@Hebrews:2:18|). "Thus the Lamb is the true \sunˆgoros\ (like Michael) of the New Israel, its \paraklˆtos pros ton patera\ (1John:2:1|)" (Swete). {Because of the Word of their testimony} (\dia ton logon tˆs marturias aut“n\). The same use of \dia\, "because of their testimony to Jesus" as in John's own case in strkjv@1:9|. These martyrs have been true to their part. {They loved not their life even unto death} (\ouk ˆgapˆsan ten psuchˆn aut“n achri thanatou\). First aorist active indicative of \agapa“\. They did resist "unto blood" (\mechris haimatos\ strkjv@Hebrews:12:4|) and did not put their own lives before loyalty to Christ. There is a direct reference to the words of Jesus in strkjv@John:12:25| as illustrated also in strkjv@Mark:8:35; strkjv@Matthew:10:39; strkjv@16:25; strkjv@Luke:9:24; strkjv@17:33|. Paul's own example is pertinent (Acts:21:13; strkjv@Phillipians:1:20ff.|). Jesus himself had been "obedient unto death" (Phillipians:2:8|). These martyrs seem to be still alive on earth, but their heroism is proleptically pictured.

rwp@Revelation:12:12 @{Therefore} (\dia touto\). "For this reason" as in strkjv@7:15; strkjv@18:8| (15 times in John's Gospel, Charles notes). It points back to verse 10|. {Rejoice} (\euphrainesthe\). Present middle imperative of \euphrain“\ as in strkjv@11:10; strkjv@18:20|. {O heavens} (\hoi ouranoi\). Plural here alone in the Apocalypse, though common elsewhere in the N.T. Satan is no longer in the heavens. {They that dwell therein} (\hoi en autois skˆnountes\). Present active articular participle of \skˆno“\ (see strkjv@7:15; strkjv@13:6|) to dwell (tabernacle) as of Christ in strkjv@John:1:14| and of God in strkjv@Revelation:21:3|. The inhabitants of heaven (angels and saints) have cause to rejoice, and earth reason to mourn. {Woe for the earth and for the sea} (\ouai tˆn gˆn kai tˆn thalassan\). The accusative after \ouai\ as in strkjv@8:13|, but nominative in strkjv@18:10,16,19| in place of the usual dative (Matthew:11:21; strkjv@18:7|, etc.). {Is gone down} (\katebˆ\). Second aorist (effective) active indicative of \katabain“\, "did go down." {But a short time} (\oligon kairon\). Accusative of extent of time, "a little time." The devil's departure from his warfare in the heavens reveals (\eid“s\, knowing, perfect active participle) to him that his time for doing harm to men is limited, and hence his great wrath (\thumon\, boiling rage).

rwp@Revelation:12:14 @{There were given} (\edothˆsan\). As in strkjv@8:2; strkjv@9:1,3|. {The two wings of the great eagle} (\hai duo pteruges tou aetou tou megalou\). Not the eagle of strkjv@8:13|, but the generic use of the article. Every eagle had two wings. Probably here, as in strkjv@Matthew:24:28|, the griffon or vulture rather than the true eagle is pictured. For the eagle in the O.T. see strkjv@Exodus:19:4; strkjv@Isaiah:40:31; strkjv@Job:9:26; strkjv@Proverbs:24:54|. {That she might fly} (\hina petˆtai\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present middle subjunctive of \petomai\, old verb, to fly, in N.T. only in the Apocalypse (4:7; strkjv@8:13; strkjv@12:14; strkjv@14:6; strkjv@19:17|). Resumption of the details in verse 6| (which see) about the "wilderness," her "place," the redundant \ekei\ with \hopou\, the "time and times, and half a time" (\kairon kai kairous kai hˆmisu\), 1260 days, but with \trephetai\ (present passive indicative) instead of \treph“sin\ (general plural of the present active subjunctive), and with the addition of "from the face of the serpent" (\apo pros“pou tou ophe“s\), because the serpent rules the earth for that period. "To the end of the present order the Church dwells in the wilderness" (Swete), and yet we must carry on for Christ.

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

rwp@Revelation:16:6 @{For} (\hoti\). Second causal conjunction (\hoti\) explanatory of the first \hoti\, like the two cases of \hoti\ in strkjv@15:4|. {They poured out} (\exechean\). Second aorist active indicative of \ekche“\ with \-an\ instead of \-on\. {Blood hast thou given them to drink} (\haima autois ded“kas pein\). \Haima\ (blood) is the emphatic word, measure for measure for shedding the blood of saints and prophets (11:18; strkjv@18:24|). Perfect active indicative of \did“mi\, and so a permanent and just punishment. \Pein\ is the abbreviated second aorist active infinitive of \pin“\ for \piein\ (\epion\). It is the epexegetical infinitive after \ded“kas\. There was no more drinking-water, but only this coagulated blood. {They are worthy} (\axioi eisin\). "Terrible antithesis" (Swete) to strkjv@3:4|. The asyndeton adds to it (Alford).

rwp@Revelation:16:8 @{Upon the sun} (\epi ton hˆlion\). Not \eis\ (into) as in verses 2,3,4|. The fourth trumpet (8:12|) affected a third of the sun, moon, and stars with a plague of darkness, but here it is a plague of extreme heat. {To scorch with fire} (\kaumatisai en puri\). First aorist active infinitive of \kaumatiz“\, late (Plutarch, Epictetus) causative verb (from \kauma\, heat), in N.T. only here and verse 9; strkjv@Matthew:13:6; strkjv@Mark:4:6|. The addition of \en puri\ (in fire, with fire) intensifies the picture.

rwp@Revelation:16:11 @{They blasphemed} (\eblasphˆmˆsan\) {and they repented not} (\kai ou metenoˆsan\). Precisely as in verse 9|, which see. Not just because of the supernatural darkness, but also "because of their pains" (\ek t“n pon“n aut“n\, plural here and same use of \ek\) and their sores (\kai ek t“n helk“n aut“n\, as in verse 2|, only plural, and same use of \ek\). {Of their works} (\ek t“n erg“n aut“n\). "Out of their deeds," and addition to verse 9|. {The God of heaven} (\ton theon tou ouranou\). As in strkjv@Daniel:2:44|. Like the pride of Nebuchadrezzar against Jehovah.

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:16:21 @{Hail} (\chalaza\). As in strkjv@8:17; strkjv@11:19|. {Every stone about the weight of a talent} (\h“s talantiaia\). Old adjective (from \talanton\), here only in N.T., but in Polybius and Josephus. See strkjv@Exodus:9:24| for the great hail in Egypt and also strkjv@Joshua:10:11; strkjv@Isaiah:28:2; strkjv@Ezekiel:38:22| for hail as the symbol of God's wrath. In the LXX a \talanton\ ranged in weight from 108 to 130 pounds. {Because of the plague of hail} (\ek tˆs plˆgˆs tˆs chalazˆs\). "As a result of the plague of hail." This punishment had the same effect as in verses 9,11|. {Exceeding great} (\Megalˆ--sphrodra\). Emphatic positions at ends of the clause (great--exceedingly).

rwp@Romans:11:26 @{And so} (\kai hout“s\). By the complement of the Gentiles stirring up the complement of the Jews (verses 11f.|). {All Israel} (\pƒs Israˆl\). What does Paul mean? The immediate context (use of \pƒs\ in contrast with \apo merous, plˆr“ma\ here in contrast with \plˆr“ma\ in verse 12|) argues for the Jewish people "as a whole." But the spiritual Israel (both Jews and Gentiles) may be his idea in accord with strkjv@9:6| (Galatians:6:16|) as the climax of the argument. At any rate we should strive for and pray for the conversion of Jews as a whole. Paul here quotes from strkjv@Isaiah:59:20f.; strkjv@27:9|. {The Deliverer} (\ho ruomenos\). Present middle articular participle of \ruomai\, to rescue, to deliver. See on ¯1Thessalonians:1:10; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:10|. The Hebrew _Goel_, the Avenger, the Messiah, the Redeemer (Deuteronomy:25:5-10; strkjv@Job:19:25; strkjv@Ruth:3:12f.|). Paul interprets it of Jesus as Messiah.

rwp@Romans:11:27 @{My covenant} (\hˆ par' emou diathˆkˆ\). "The from me covenant," "my side of the covenant I have made with them" (Sanday and Headlam). Cf. strkjv@Jeremiah:31:31ff|. Not a political deliverance, but a religious and ethical one. {When I shall take away} (\hotan aphel“mai\). Second aorist middle subjunctive of \aphaire“\, old and common verb, to take away.

rwp@Romans:11:32 @{Hath shut up} (\sunekleisen\). First aorist active indicative of \sunklei“\, to shut together like a net (Luke:5:6|). See strkjv@Galatians:3:22| for this word with \hupo hamartian\ (under sin). This is a resultant (effective) aorist because of the disbelief and disobedience of both Gentile (1:17-32|) and Jew (2:1-3:20|). {All} (\tous pantas\). "The all" (both Gentiles and Jews). {That he might have mercy} (\hina--eleˆsˆi\). Purpose with \hina\ and aorist active subjunctive. No merit in anyone, but all of grace. "The all" again, who receive God's mercy, not that "all" men are saved.

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

rwp@Romans:11:35 @{First driven to him} (\proed“ken aut“i\). First aorist active indicative of \prodid“mi\, to give beforehand or first. Old verb, here alone in N.T. From strkjv@Job:41:11|, but not like the LXX, Paul's own translation. {Shall be recompensed} (\antapodothˆsetai\). First future passive of double compound \antapodid“mi\, to pay back (both \anti\ and \apo\), old word in good sense, as here and strkjv@Luke:14:14; strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:9| and in bad sense as strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:6; strkjv@Romans:12:19|.

rwp@Romans:12:1 @{Therefore} (\oun\). This inferential participle gathers up all the great argument of chapters 1-11|. Now Paul turns to exhortation (\parakal“\), "I beseech you." {By the mercies} (\dia t“n oiktirm“n\). "By means of the mercies of God" as shown in his argument and in our lives. See strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3| for "the Father of mercies." {To present} (\parastˆsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \paristˆmi\, for which verb see strkjv@6:13|, a technical term for offering a sacrifice (Josephus, _Ant_. IV. 6, 4), though not in the O.T. Used of presenting the child Jesus in the temple (Luke:2:22|), of the Christian presenting himself (Romans:6:13|), of God presenting the saved (Ephesians:5:27|), of Christ presenting the church (Colossians:1:28|). {Bodies} (\s“mata\). Songs:literally as in strkjv@6:13,19; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:10| and in contrast with \nous\ (mind) in verse 2|. {A living sacrifice} (\thusian z“san\). In contrast with the Levitical sacrifices of slain animals. Cf. strkjv@6:8,11,13|. Not a propitiatory sacrifice, but one of praise. {Acceptable} (\euareston\). "Well-pleasing." See on ¯2Corinthians:5:9|. {Which is your reasonable service} (\tˆn logikˆn hum“n latreian\). "Your rational (spiritual) service (worship)." For \latreia\, see on ¯9:4|. \Logikos\ is from \logos\, reason. The phrase means here "worship rendered by the reason (or soul)." Old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Peter:2:2| \to logikon gala\ (not logical milk, but the milk nourishing the soul).

rwp@Romans:12:5 @{And severally} (\to de kath' heis\). A difficult late idiom where the preposition \kath'\ (\kata\) is treated adverbially with no effect on the nominative case \heis\ like \huper eg“\ (2Corinthians:11:23|). Songs:\heis kath' heis\ (Mark:14:19|) and in Modern Greek \katheis\ as a distributive pronoun. But we have \kath' hena\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:31|. The use of the neuter article here \to\ with \kath' heis\ is probably the accusative of general reference, "as to each one."

rwp@Romans:12:7 @{Let us give ourselves}. There is no verb in the Greek. We must supply \d“men heautous\ or some such phrase. {Or he that teacheth} (\eite ho didask“n\). Here the construction changes and no longer do we have the accusative case like \diakonian\ (general word for Christian service of all kinds including ministers and deacons) as the object of \echontes\, but the nominative articular participle. A new verb must be supplied of which \ho didask“n\ is the subject as with the succeeding participles through verse 8|. Perhaps in each instance the verb is to be repeated from the participle like \didasket“\ here (let him teach) or a general term \poieit“\ (let him do it) can be used for all of them as seems necessary before "with liberality" in verse 8| (\en haplotˆti\, in simplicity, for which word, see strkjv@Matthew:6:22; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@9:11,13|). {He that ruleth} (\ho proistamenos\). "The one standing in front" for which see strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:12|. {With diligence} (\en spoudˆi\). "In haste" as if in earnest (Mark:6:25; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:11f., strkjv@8:8,16|), from \speud“\, to hasten. Again verse 11|. {With cheerfulness} (\en hilarotˆti\). Late word, only here in N.T., from \hilaros\ (2Corinthians:9:7|) cheerful, hilarious.

rwp@Romans:12:13 @{Communicating} (\koin“nountes\). "Contributing." From \koin“ne“\ for which see strkjv@2Corinthians:9:13|. Paul had raised a great collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem. {Given to hospitality} (\tˆn philoxenian di“kontes\). "Pursuing (as if in a chase or hunt) hospitality" (\philoxenia\, old word from \philoxenos\, fond of strangers, \philos\ and \xenos\ as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:2|). In N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:13:2|. See strkjv@2Corinthians:3:1|. They were to pursue (\di“k“\) hospitality as their enemies pursued (\di“kontas\) them.

rwp@Romans:12:14 @{And curse not} (\kai mˆ katarƒsthe\). Present middle imperative with \mˆ\. Like strkjv@Matthew:5:44| in spirit, not a quotation, but a reminiscence of the words of Jesus. The negative addition gives emphasis. See strkjv@Luke:6:28| for the old verb \kataraomai\ from \katara\ (curse).

rwp@Romans:12:19 @{Avenge not} (\mˆ ekdikountes\). Independent participle again of late verb \ekdike“\ from \ekdikos\, exacting justice (13:4|). See already strkjv@Luke:18:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:6|. {But give place unto wrath} (\alla dote topon tˆi orgˆi\). Second aorist active imperative of \did“mi\, to give. "Give room for the (note article as in strkjv@5:9; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:16|) wrath" of God instead of taking vengeance in your own hands. See strkjv@Ephesians:4:27| for \didote topon\. Paul quotes strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:35| (the Hebrew rather than the LXX). Songs:have strkjv@Hebrews:10:30| and the Targum of Onkelos, but the relation between them and Paul we cannot tell. Socrates and Epictetus condemned personal vindictiveness as Paul does here. {I will recompense} (\antapod“s“\). Future active of the double compound verb quoted also in strkjv@11:35|.

rwp@Romans:12:21 @{Be not overcome of evil} (\mˆ nik“ hupo tou kakou\). Present passive imperative of \nika“\, to conquer. "Stop being conquered by the evil (thing or man)," {But overcome evil with good} (\alla nika en t“i agath“i to kakon\). "But keep on conquering the evil in the good." Drown the evil in the good. Seneca: _Vincit malos pertinax bonitas_.

rwp@Romans:13:1 @{Every soul} (\pƒsa psuchˆ\). As in strkjv@2:9; strkjv@Acts:2:43|. A Hebraism for \pƒs anthr“pos\ (every man). {To the higher powers} (\exousiais huperechousais\). Abstract for concrete. See strkjv@Mark:2:10| for \exousia\. \Huperech“\ is an old verb to have or hold over, to be above or supreme, as in strkjv@1Peter:2:13|. {Except by God} (\ei mˆ hupo theou\). Songs:the best MSS. rather than \apo theou\ (from God). God is the author of order, not anarchy. {The powers that be} (\hai ousai\). "The existing authorities" (supply \exousiai\). Art ordained (\tetagmenai eisin\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \tass“\, "stand ordained by God." Paul is not arguing for the divine right of kings or for any special form of government, but for government and order. Nor does he oppose here revolution for a change of government, but he does oppose all lawlessness and disorder.

rwp@Romans:13:2 @{He that resisteth} (\ho antitassomenos\). Present middle articular participle of \antitass“\, old verb to range in battle against as in strkjv@Acts:18:6|, "he that lines himself up against." {Withstandeth} (\anthestˆken\). Perfect active indicative of \anthistˆmi\ and intransitive, "has taken his stand against." {The ordinance of God} (\tˆi tou theou diatagˆi\). Late word, but common in papyri (Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 89), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:7:53|. Note repetition of root of \tass“\. {To themselves} (\heautois\). Dative of disadvantage. See strkjv@Mark:12:40| for "shall receive a judgment" (\krina lˆmpsontai\). Future middle of \lamban“\.

rwp@Romans:13:3 @{A terror} (\phobos\). This meaning in strkjv@Isaiah:8:13|. Paul does not approve all that rulers do, but he is speaking generally of the ideal before rulers. Nero was Emperor at this time. {From the same} (\ex autˆs\). "From it" (\exousia\, personified in verse 4|).

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Mon Jun 3 01:01:19 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020