OT-PROPHET-MINOR.filter - rwp Stood:

rwp@Mark:14:58 @{Made with hands} (\cheiropoiton\). In Mark alone. An old Greek word. The negative form \acheiropoiton\ here occurs elsewhere only in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1; strkjv@Colossians:2:11|. In strkjv@Hebrews:9:11| the negative \ou\ is used with the positive form. It is possible that a real \logion\ of Jesus underlies the perversion of it here. Mark and Matthew do not quote the witnesses precisely alike. Perhaps they quoted Jesus differently and therein is shown part of the disagreement, for Mark adds verse 59| (not in Matthew). "And not even so did their witness agree together," repeating the point of verse 57|. Swete observes that Jesus, as a matter of fact, did do what he is quoted as saying in Mark: "He said what the event has proved to be true; His death destroyed the old order, and His resurrection created the new." But these witnesses did not mean that by what they said. The only saying of Jesus at all like this preserved to us is that in strkjv@John:2:19|, when he referred not to the temple in Jerusalem, but to the temple of his body, though no one understood it at the time.

rwp@Mark:14:60 @{Stood up in the midst} (\anastas eis meson\). Second aorist active participle. For greater solemnity he arose to make up by bluster the lack of evidence. The high priest stepped out into the midst as if to attack Jesus by vehement questions. See on ¯Matthew:26:59-68| for details here.

rwp@Matthew:10:17 @{Beware of men} (\prosechete apo tn anthrpn\). Ablative case with \apo\. Hold your mind (\noun\ understood) away from. The article with \anthrpn\ points back to \lukn\ (wolves) in strkjv@10:16|.

rwp@Matthew:16:19 @{The Keys of the kingdom} (\tas kleidas ts 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" (\dsis\) in rabbinical language is to forbid, to "loose" (\lusis\) 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@Revelation:3:8 @{I have set} (\dedka\). Perfect active indicative of \didmi\, "I have given" (a gift of Christ, this open door). See strkjv@Luke:12:51| for a like use of \didmi\. {A door opened} (\thuran neigmenn\). Perfect (triple reduplication) passive predicate participle of \anoig\ (verse 7|) accusative feminine singular. The metaphor of the open door was a common one (John:10:7-9; strkjv@Acts:14:27; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12; strkjv@Colossians:4:3; strkjv@Revelation:3:20; strkjv@4:1|). Probably it means here a good opportunity for missionary effort in spite of the Jewish hostility. {Which} (\hn--autn\). Pleonastic vernacular and Hebrew repetition of the personal pronoun \autn\ (it) after the relative \hn\ (which). Direct reference to the statement in verse 7|. {That} (\hoti\). This conjunction resumes the construction of \oida sou ta erga\ (I know thy works) after the parenthesis (\idou--autn\, Behold--shut). {A little power} (\mikran dunamin\). Probably "little power," little influence or weight in Philadelphia, the members probably from the lower classes (1Corinthians:1:26f.|). {And didst keep} (\kai etrsas\). "And yet (adversative use of \kai\) didst keep" (first aorist active indicative of \tre\) my word in some crisis of trial. See strkjv@John:17:6| for the phrase "keeping the word." {Didst not deny} (\ouk rns\). First aorist middle indicative second person singular of \arneomai\. The issue was probably forced by the Jews (cf. strkjv@2:9|), but they stood true.