OT-PROPHET-MINOR.filter - rwp further:

rwp@1Corinthians:16:1 @{Now concerning the collection for the saints} (\peri de ts logias ts eis tous hagious\). Paul has discussed all the problems raised by the Corinthians. Now he has on his own heart the collection for the saints in Jerusalem (see chapters strkjv@2Corinthians:8; 9|). This word \logia\ (or \-eia\) is now known to be derived from a late verb \logeu\, to collect, recently found in papyri and inscriptions (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 143). The word \logia\ is chiefly found in papyri, ostraca, and inscriptions that tell of religious collections for a god or a temple (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 105). The introduction of this topic may seem sudden, but the Corinthians were behind with their part of it. They may even have asked further about it. Paul feels no conflict between discussion of the resurrection and the collection. {Songs:also do ye} (\houts kai humas poisate\). Paul had given orders (\dietaxa\) to the churches of Galatia and now gives them like commands. As a matter of fact, they had promised a long time before this (2Corinthians:8:10; strkjv@9:1-5|). Now do what you pledged.

rwp@Hebrews:12:9 @{Furthermore} (\eita\). The next step in the argument (Mark:4:17|). {We had} (\eichomen\). Imperfect indicative of customary action, "we used to have." {To chasten us} (\paideutas\). Predicate accusative after \eichomen\, "as chasteners." Old word from \paideu\, as agent (\-ts\). Only once in LXX (Hosea:5:2|) and twice in N.T. (here and strkjv@Romans:2:20|). {We gave them reverence} (\enetrepometha\). Imperfect middle of old word \entrep\, to turn in or at. Here "we turned ourselves to" as in strkjv@Matthew:21:37|, habitual attitude of reverence. {Shall we be in subjection} (\hupotagsometha\). Second future passive of \hupotass\. There is no \de\ here to correspond to \men\ in the first part of the verse. {Unto the father of spirits} (\ti patri tn pneumatn\). Rather, "Unto the Father of our spirits" (note article \ton\). As God is.

rwp@John:20:31 @{Are written} (\gegraptai\). Perfect passive indicative of \graph\, "have been written" by John. {That ye may believe} (\hina pisteute\). Purpose with \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \pisteu\, "that you may keep on believing." The book has had precisely this effect of continuous and successive confirmation of faith in Jesus Christ through the ages. {Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God} (\Isous estin ho Christos ho huios tou theou\). The man named Jesus is identical with the Messiah (the Anointed One) as opposed to the Cerinthian separation of the Jesus of history and the Christ (\aeon\) of theology. And the Docetic notion of a phantom body for Jesus with no actual human body is also false. Jesus is the Son of God with all that this high term implies, the Logos of strkjv@John:1:1-18| (the Prologue). "Very God of very God," Incarnate Revealer of God. But there is a further purpose. {And that believing ye may have life in his name} (\kai hina pisteuontes zn echte en ti onomati autou\). Note present participle \pisteuontes\ (continuing to believe) and the present active subjunctive \echte\ (keep on having). "Life" (\zn\) is eternal life so often mentioned in this Gospel, life to be found only in the name (and power) of Jesus Christ the Son of God. This verse constitutes a fitting close for this wonderful book and John may at first have intended to stop here. But before he published the work he added the Epilogue (Chapter XXI) which is written in the same style and gives a beautiful picture of the Risen Christ with a side-light on John and Peter (restored to fellowship).

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.