OT-POET.filter - rwp convict:

rwp@Info_2Peter @ THE RESEMBLANCE TO THE EPISTLE OF JUDE This is undoubted, particularly between Jude:and the second chapter of II Peter. Kuhl argues that strkjv@2Peter:2:1-3:2| is an interpolation, though the same style runs through out the Epistle. "The theory of interpolation is always a last and desperate expedient" (Bigg). In II Peter 2 we have the fallen angels, the flood, the cities of the plain with Lot, Balaam. In Jude:we have Israel in the wilderness, the fallen angels, the cities of the plain (with no mention of Lot, Cain, Balaam, Korah). Jude:mentions the dispute between Michael and Satan, quotes Enoch by name. There is rather more freshness in Jude:than in II Peter, though II Peter is more intelligible. Evidently one had the other before him, besides other material. Which is the earlier? There is no way to decide this point clearly. Every point is looked at differently and argued differently by different writers. My own feeling is that Jude:was before (just before) II Peter, though it is only a feeling and not a conviction.

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

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" (\dikaiosuns\) 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 metalabn\). 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: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} (\ti kurii\). 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 Nernos 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 Isous\ 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' humn\). 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} (\ts anakrises genomens\). 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} (\hops sch ti graps\). Ingressive aorist subjunctive \sch\ (may get) with \hops\ (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@Ephesians:5:11 @{Have no fellowship with} (\m sunkoinneite\). No partnership with, present imperative with \m\. Followed by associative instrumental case \ergois\ (works). {Unfruitful} (\akarpois\). Same metaphor of verse 9| applied to darkness (\skotos\). {Reprove} (\elegchete\). Convict by turning the light on the darkness.

rwp@James:2:9 @{But if ye have respect of persons} (\ei de prospolmpteite\). Condition of first class by contrast with that in verse 8|. For this verb (present active indicative), formed from \prospon 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 tn 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} (\hs 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@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 monogens\). It occurs repeatedly in the book as in the witness of the Baptist: "This is the Son of God" (John:1:34|). It is in the charge of the Pharisees (John:5:18|) and the claim of Christ himself (John:5:20-23; strkjv@6:48; strkjv@8:12,58; strkjv@11:25; strkjv@14:9; strkjv@17:5|) with the full and frank conviction of the author in strkjv@John:20:31|. He has made good his purpose. He has proven that Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God. With some critics this purpose has vitiated the entire book. The effort has been made to show that Paul, Peter, the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Synoptics give a lower view of Christ without the term \theos\ applied to him. In particular it was once argued that Q, the Logia of Jesus, used by Matthew and Luke (the non-Markan portions in both Matthew and Luke), gives a reduced picture of Jesus as on a lower plane than God, the Arian or Ritschlian view at any rate as answering for God to us though not God in actual nature. But in the Logia of Jesus we find the same essential picture of Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Son of Man as I have shown in my _The Christ of the Logia_ (1924). The only way to get rid of the deity of Christ in the New Testament is to throw overboard all the books in it as legendary or reflections of late theological development away from the original picture. The very earliest picture drawn of Christ that has been preserved to us, that in the Logia of Jesus (drawn W. M. Ramsay believes before Christ's crucifixion), is in essential agreement with the fully drawn portrait in the Fourth Gospel. Each picture in the Four Gospels adds touches of its own, but the features are the same, those of the God-Man Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world. The brilliant blind preacher of Edinburgh, George Matheson, sees this clearly (_Studies in the Portrait of the Messiah_, 1900; _St. John's Portrait of Christ_, 1910).

rwp@John:3:20 @{That doeth ill} (\ho phaula prassn\). The word \phaulos\ means first worthless and then wicked (usually so in N.T.) and both senses occur in the papyri. In strkjv@5:29| see contrast between \agatha poie\ (doing good things) and \phaula prass\ (practising evil things). {Hateth the light} (\misei to phs\). Hence talks against it, ridicules Christ, Christianity, churches, preachers, etc. Does it in talk, magazines, books, in a supercilious tone of sheer ignorance. {Cometh not to the light} (\ouk erchetai pros to phs\). The light hurts his eyes, reveals his own wickedness, makes him thoroughly uncomfortable. Hence he does not read the Bible, he does not come to church, he does not pray. He goes on in deeper darkness. {Lest his works should be reproved} (\hina m elegchthi ta erga autou\). Negative final clause (\hina m\) with first aorist passive subjunctive of \elegch\, old word to correct a fault, to reprove, to convict. See also strkjv@8:46; strkjv@16:8|. To escape this unpleasant process the evil man cuts out Christ.

rwp@Mark:7:37 @{He hath done all things well} (\Kals panta pepoiken\). The present perfect active shows the settled convictions of these people about Jesus. Their great amazement (\huperperisss exeplssonto\), imperfect passive and compound adverb, thus found expression in a vociferous championship of Jesus in this pagan land.