OT-POET.filter - rwp seeing:

rwp@2Peter:1:3 @{Seeing that his divine power hath granted unto us} (\hs hmin ts theias dunames autou dedrmens\). Genitive absolute with the causal particle \hs\ and the perfect middle participle of \dre\, old verb, to bestow (\drea\, gift), usually middle as here, in N.T. elsewhere only strkjv@Mark:15:45|. \Autou\ refers to Christ, who has "divine power" (\ts theias dunames\), 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 \ts theias dunames\. 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 zn 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 (\eusebs, eusebs, 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 doxs kai arets\). Songs:B K L, but Aleph A C P read \idii doxi kai areti\ (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 \aret\ see on ¯1Peter:2:9| and strkjv@Phillipians:4:8; strkjv@2Peter:1:5|.

rwp@2Peter:1:9 @{He that lacketh these things} (\hi m parestin tauta\). "To whom (dative case of possession) these things are not (\m\ because a general or indefinite relative clause)." {Seeing only what is near} (\mupazn\). Present active participle of \mupaz\, a rare verb from \mups\ (in Aristotle for a near-sighted man) and that from \mue tous pas\ (to close the eyes in order to see, not to keep from seeing). The only other instance of \mupaz\ is given by Suicer from Ps. Dion. Eccl. Hier. ii. 3 (\mupasousi kai apostrephomeni\) used of a soul on which the light shines (blinking and turning away). Thus understood the word here limits \tuphlos\ as a short-sighted man screwing up his eyes because of the light. {Having forgotten} (\lthn labn\). "Having received forgetfulness." Second aorist active participle of \lamban\ and accusative \lthn\, old word, from \lthomai\, to forget, here only in N.T. See strkjv@2Timothy:1:5| for a like phrase \hupomnsin labn\ (having received remembrance). {The cleansing} (\tou katharismou\). See strkjv@Hebrews:1:3| for this word for the expiatory sacrifice of Christ for our sins as in strkjv@1Peter:1:18; strkjv@2:24; strkjv@3:18|. In strkjv@1Peter:3:21| Peter denied actual cleansing of sin by baptism (only symbolic). If there is a reference to baptism here, which is doubtful, it can only be in a symbolic sense. {Old} (\palai\). Of the language as in strkjv@Hebrews:1:1|.

rwp@2Peter:2:8 @{For} (\gar\). Parenthetical explanation in verse 8| of the remark about Lot. {Dwelling} (\enkatoikn\). Present active participle of \enkatoike\, old but rare double compound, here only in N.T. {In seeing and hearing} (\blemmati kai akoi\). "By sight (instrumental case of \blemma\, old word, from \blep\ to see, here only in N.T.) and hearing" (instrumental case of \ako\ from \akou\, to hear, common as strkjv@Matthew:13:14|). {From day to day} (\hmeran ex hmers\). "Day in day out." Accusative of time and ablative with \ex\. Same idiom in strkjv@Psalms:96:2| for the more common \ex hmeras eis hmeran\. {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: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} (\m blepn\). 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} (\periagn eztei cheiraggous\). A rather free rendering. Literally, "going about (\periagn\, present active participle of \periag\) he was seeking (\eztei\, imperfect active of \zte\) guides (\cheiraggous\, from \cheir\, hand, and \aggos\, guide, from \ag\, one who leads by the hand)." The very verb \cheiragge\, to lead by the hand, Luke uses of Paul in strkjv@9:8|, as he entered Damascus.

rwp@Acts:22:11 @{I could not see} (\ouk eneblepon\). Imperfect active of \emblep\, I was not seeing, same fact stated in strkjv@9:8|. Here the reason as "for the glory of that light" (\apo ts doxs tou phtos ekeinou\). {Being led by the hand} (\cheiraggoumenos\). Present passive participle of \cheiragge\, the same verb used in strkjv@9:8| (\cheiraggountes\) which see. Late verb, in the N.T. only in these two places. In LXX.

rwp@Acts:24:2 @{When he (Paul) was called} (\klthentos autou\). Genitive absolute (as so often in Acts) with first aorist passive participle of \kale\. Seeing that by thee we enjoy much peace (\polls eirns 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 ts 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} (\diorthmatn ginomenn ti ethnei touti\). Genitive absolute again, \ginomenn\, present middle participle describing the process of reform going on for this nation (dative case of personal interest). \Diorthma\ (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:24:11 @{Seeing that thou canst take knowledge} (\dunamenou sou epignnai\). Genitive absolute again. The same word and form (\epignnai\) 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 hmerai ddeka\). Here \\ (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' hs\). Supply \hmeras\, "from which day." {To worship} (\proskunsn\). One of the few examples of the future participle of purpose so common in the old Attic.

rwp@Acts:25:9 @{Desiring to gain favour with the Jews} (\theln 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@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@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 martursi\). Final clause with \hina\ and aorist active subjunctive of \marture\ to make clearer \eis marturian\. {Of the light} (\peri tou phtos\). "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 pisteussin\). 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:5:46 @{Ye would believe me} (\episteuete an emoi\). Conclusion of condition of second class (determined as unfulfilled) with imperfect indicative in both protasis and apodosis and \an\ in apodosis. This was a home-thrust, proving that they did not really believe Moses. {For he wrote of me} (\peri gar emou ekeinos egrapsen\). strkjv@Deuteronomy:18:18f.| is quoted by Peter (Acts:3:22|) as a prophecy of Christ and also by Stephen in strkjv@Acts:7:37|. See also strkjv@John:3:14| about the brazen serpent and strkjv@8:56| about Abraham foreseeing Christ's day. Jesus does here say that Moses wrote concerning him.

rwp@John:9:7 @{Wash} (\nipsai\). First aorist middle imperative second person singular of \nipt\, later form of \niz\, to wash, especially parts of the body. Certainly bathing the eyes is good for eye trouble, and yet we are not to infer that the cure was due to the use of the clay or to the washing. {In the pool of Siloam} (\eis tn kolumbthran tou Silam\). The word \kolumbthra\ (from \kolumba\, to swim) is a common word for swimming-pool, in N.T. only here and strkjv@5:2,7|. The name _Siloam_ is Hebrew (Isaiah:8:6|) and means "sent" (\apestalmenos\, perfect passive participle of \apostell\). It was situated south of the temple area and was apparently connected by a subterranean tunnel with the Virgin's Well (5:2|) according to Bernard. The water was conducted artificially to the pool of Siloam. {Washed} (\enipsato\). First aorist direct middle (cf. \nipsai\), apparently bathing and not merely washing his eyes. {Came seeing} (\lthen blepn\). Jesus had healed him. He was tested by the demand to bathe his eyes.

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 m 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 \blepsin\ (may keep on seeing). This man now sees physically and spiritually. {And that they which see may become blind} (\kai hoi blepontes tuphloi genntai\). 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:11:40 @{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 pisteusis\). 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 pisteusis\, 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} (\opsi tn 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@Luke:1:2 @{Even as} (\kaths\). 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} (\paredsan hmin\). Second aorist active indicative of \paradidmi\. 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' archs autoptai kai hupretai 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" (\hupretai\), 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:7:21 @{In that hour he cured} (\en ekeini ti hori etherapeusen\). This item is not in Matthew. Jesus gave the two disciples of John an example of the direct method. They had heard. Then they saw for themselves. {Diseases} (\nosn\), {plagues} (\mastign\), {evil spirits} (\pneumatn ponrn\), all kinds of bodily ills, and he singles out the {blind} (\tuphlois\) to whom in particular he bestowed sight (\echarizato blepein\), gave as a free gift (from \charis\, grace) seeing (\blepein\).

rwp@Luke:8:10 @{The mysteries} (\ta mustria\). 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" \sunisin\, present subjunctive from a late omega form \suni\ instead of the \-mi\ verb \sunimi\.

rwp@Luke:23:49 @{Stood afar off} (\histkeisan apo makrothen\). Same verb as in verse 35|. Melancholy picture of the inner circle of the acquaintances of Jesus and the faithful band of women from Galilee. {Seeing these things} (\horsai tauta\). And helpless either to prevent them or to understand them. They could only stand and look with blinded eyes.

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

rwp@Mark:8:25 @{He looked steadfastly} (\dieblepsen\). He saw thoroughly now, effective aorist (\dieblepsen\), he was completely restored (\apekatest\, second aorist, double compound and double augment), and kept on seeing (\eneblepen\, imperfect, continued action) all things clearly or at a distance (\tlaugs\, common Greek word from \tle\, afar, and \aug\, radiance, far-shining). Some manuscripts (margin in Westcott and Hort) read \dlaugs\, from \dlos\, plain, and \aug\, radiance.

rwp@Mark:8:33 @{He turning about and seeing his disciples} (\epistrapheis kai idn tous mathts 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@Matthew:6:22 @{Single} (\haplous\). Used of a marriage contract when the husband is to repay the dowry "pure and simple" (\tn phernn hapln\), 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 (\ponros\) 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|.