OT-PROPHET.filter - rwp Intellectual:

rwp@1Corinthians:2:4 @{Not in persuasive words of wisdom} (\ouk en pithois sophias logois\). This looks like a false disclaimer or mock modesty, for surely the preacher desires to be persuasive. This adjective \pithos\ (MSS. \peithos\) has not yet been found elsewhere. It seems to be formed directly from \peith\, to persuade, as \pheidos\ (\phidos\) is from \pheidomai\, to spare. The old Greek form \pithanos\ is common enough and is used by Josephus (_Ant_. VIII. 9. 1) of "the plausible words of the lying prophet" in strkjv@1Kings:13|. The kindred word \pithanologia\ occurs in strkjv@Colossians:2:4| for the specious and plausible Gnostic philosophers. And gullible people are easy marks for these plausible pulpiteers. Corinth put a premium on the veneer of false rhetoric and thin thinking. {But in demonstration} (\all' en apodeixei\). In contrast with the {plausibility} just mentioned. This word, though an old one from \apodeiknumi\, to show forth, occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. {Spirit} (\pneuma\) here can be the Holy Spirit or inward spirit as opposed to superficial expression and {power} (\dunamis\) is moral power rather than intellectual acuteness (cf. strkjv@1:18|).

rwp@1Corinthians:2:15 @{Judgeth all things} (\anakrinei panta\). The spiritual man (\ho pneumatikos\) is qualified to sift, to examine, to decide rightly, because he has the eyes of his heart enlightened (Ephesians:1:18|) and is no longer blinded by the god of this world (2Corinthians:4:4|). There is a great lesson for Christians who know by personal experience the things of the Spirit of God. Men of intellectual gifts who are ignorant of the things of Christ talk learnedly and patronizingly about things of which they are grossly ignorant. The spiritual man is superior to all this false knowledge. {He himself is judged of no man} (\autos de hup' oudenos anakrinetai\). Men will pass judgment on him, but the spiritual man refuses to accept the decision of his ignorant judges. He stands superior to them all as Polycarp did when he preferred to be burnt to saying, "Lord Caesar" in place of "Lord Jesus." He was unwilling to save his earthly life by the worship of Caesar in place of the Lord Jesus. Polycarp was a \pneumatikos\ man.

rwp@1Corinthians:14:20 @{Be not children in mind} (\m paidia ginesthe tais phresin\). "Cease becoming children in your intellects," as some of them evidently were. Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:5:11-14| for a like complaint of intellectual dulness for being old babies. {In malice be ye babes} (\ti kakii npiazete\). {Be men} (\teleioi ginesthe\). Keep on becoming adults in your minds. A noble and a needed command, pertinent today.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:36 @{Thou foolish one} (\aphrn\). Old word (\a\ privative, \phrn\), lack of sense. It is a severe term and justified by the implication "that the objector plumes himself on his acuteness" (Robertson and Plummer). Proleptic position of \su\ (thou) sharpens the point. Sceptics (agnostics) pose as unusually intellectual (the intelligentsia), but the pose does not make one intelligent. {Except it die} (\ean m apothani\). Condition of third class, possibility assumed. This is the answer to the "how" question. In plant life death precedes life, death of the seed and then the new plant.

rwp@1John:5:1 @{That Jesus is the Christ} (\hoti Isous estin ho Christos\). The Cerinthian antichrist denies the identity of Jesus and Christ (2:22|). Hence John insists on this form of faith (\pisteun\ here in the full sense, stronger than in strkjv@3:23; strkjv@4:16|, seen also in \pistis\ in verse 4|, where English and Latin fall down in having to use another word for the verb) as he does in verse 5| and in accord with the purpose of John's Gospel (20:31|). Nothing less will satisfy John, not merely intellectual conviction, but full surrender to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. "The Divine Begetting is the antecedent, not the consequent of the believing" (Law). For "is begotten of God" (\ek tou theou gegenntai\) see strkjv@2:29; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@4:7; strkjv@5:4,18|. John appeals here to family relationship and family love. {Him that begat} (\ton gennsanta\). First aorist active articular participle of \genna\, to beget, the Father (our heavenly Father). {Him also that is begotten of him} (\ton gegennmenon ex autou\). Perfect passive articular participle of \genna\, the brother or sister by the same father. Songs:then we prove our love for the common Father by our conduct towards our brothers and sisters in Christ.

rwp@1Peter:2:9 @{But ye} (\humeis de\). In contrast with the disobedient ones. {An elect race} (\genos eklekton\). From strkjv@Isaiah:43:20|. The blood relation of the spiritual Israel (not the Jewish race) through the new birth (1:23|). {A royal priesthood} (\basileion hierateuma\). From strkjv@Exodus:19:6| (cf. strkjv@Revelation:1:6; strkjv@5:10|). The official in Christian churches is \presbuteros=episcopos\, not \hiereus\. We are all \hiereis\ (priests). Cf. strkjv@2:5|. {A holy nation} (\ethnos hagion\). Also from strkjv@Exodus:19:6|, but here applied, not to the national Israel, but to the spiritual Israel of believers (both Jews and Gentiles). {A people for God's own possession} (\laos eis peripoisin\). The idea here occurs in strkjv@Exodus:19:5; strkjv@Deuteronomy:7:6; strkjv@14:2; strkjv@26:18|, where we have \laos periousios\ as in strkjv@Titus:2:14| (alone in the N.T.), and in strkjv@Malachi:3:17| we find \eis peripoisin\ (for a possession). \Periousios laos\ is a people over and above the others and \peripoisis\ is a possession in a special sense (Ephesians:1:14|). See Paul's use of \periepoisato\ in strkjv@Acts:20:28|. The old rendering, "a peculiar people," had this idea of possession, for "peculiar" is from _pecus_ (Latin for flock). {That ye may shew forth} (\hops exaggeilte\). Purpose clause with \hops\, rather than \hina\, with the first aorist active subjunctive of \exaggell\, old verb, to tell out, here alone in N.T. {The excellencies} (\tas aretas\). From strkjv@Isaiah:43:21|. Old word for any preeminence (moral, intellectual, military), often for "virtue," but not in that sense in the O.T. or the N.T. The word has the sense of moral worth in strkjv@2Peter:1:3,5; strkjv@Phillipians:4:8|; and the Apocrypha. In Isaiah (here quoted) it means praise and glory to God. Songs:also strkjv@Isaiah:42:12|. See strkjv@Acts:2:11| \ta megaleia tou theou\ (the mighty works of God). {Darkness} (\skotous\). Heathenism. {His marvellous light} (\to thaumaston autou phs\). Christianity. For \thaumaston\ (from \thaumaz\) see strkjv@Matthew:21:42|. For the change from heathenism to Christianity see strkjv@Colossians:1:12; strkjv@Ephesians:5:8-14|.

rwp@1Peter:3:7 @{Ye husbands likewise} (\hoi andres homois\). Probably "likewise" here refers to honouring all men (2:17|), not "likewise" of strkjv@3:1|. {Dwell with} (\sunoikountes\). Present active participle of \sunoike\, old verb for domestic association, here only in N.T. Used as imperative here like the participle in strkjv@2:18; strkjv@3:1|. {According to knowledge} (\kata gnsin\). "With an intelligent recognition of the nature of the marriage relation" (Vincent). {Giving honour unto the woman as unto the weaker vessel} (\hs asthenesteri skeuei ti gunaikeii aponemontes timn\). Present active participle of \aponem\, old verb, to assign, to portion out (or off), here only in N.T. \Skeuos\ is an old and common word for vessel, furniture, utensil (Matthew:12:29; strkjv@2Timothy:2:20|). Here both husband and wife are termed vessels or "parts of the furniture of God's house" (Bigg). See Paul's use of \skeuos\ for ministers (2Corinthians:4:7|). \Gunaikeii\ here is an adjective (female, feminine) from \gun\ (woman, wife). She is termed "the weaker" (\ti asthenesteri\), not for intellectual or moral weakness, but purely for physical reasons, which the husband must recognize with due consideration for marital happiness. {Joint-heirs of the grace of life} (\sunklronomoi charitos zs\). Late double compound found in an Ephesian inscription and the papyri, in N.T. only here, strkjv@Romans:8:17; strkjv@Ephesians:3:6; strkjv@Hebrews:11:9|. God's gift of life eternal belongs to woman as well as to man. In the eyes of God the wife may be superior to the husband, not merely equal. {To the end that your prayers be not hindered} (\eis to m egkoptesthai tas proseuchas humn\). Purpose clause with \eis to\ and the present passive infinitive (with negative \m\) of \egkopt\, to cut in, to interrupt, late verb (Polybius), as in strkjv@Romans:15:22|, etc. Very vivid to us now with our telephones and radios when people cut in on us. \Proseuchas\ (prayers) is the accusative of general reference. Husbands surely have here cause to consider why their prayers are not answered.

rwp@1Timothy:2:4 @{Willeth} (\thelei\). God's wish and will in so far as he can influence men. {That all men should be saved} (\pantas anthrpous sthnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \sz\ with accusative of general reference. See strkjv@1Corinthians:10:33; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:18f|. {To the knowledge} (\eis epignsin\). "The full knowledge" as in strkjv@Colossians:1:6; strkjv@Ephesians:4:13| (ten times in Paul). See strkjv@2Timothy:3:7| for the whole phrase "full knowledge of the truth" (\altheia\ 14 times in the Pastorals). Paul is anxious as in Colossians and Ephesians that the Gnostics may not lead the people astray. They need the full intellectual apprehension of Christianity.

rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ FIRST CORINTHIANS FROM EPHESUS A.D. 54 OR 55 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION It would be a hard-boiled critic today who would dare deny the genuineness of I Corinthians. The Dutch wild man, Van Manen, did indeed argue that Paul wrote no epistles if indeed he ever lived. Such intellectual banality is well answered by Whateley's _Historic Doubts about Napolean Bonaparte_ which was so cleverly done that some readers were actually convinced that no such man ever existed, but is the product of myth and legend. Even Baur was compelled to acknowledge the genuineness of I and II Corinthians, Galatians and Romans (the Big Four of Pauline criticism). It is a waste of time now to prove what all admit to be true. Paul of Tarsus, the Apostle to the Gentiles, wrote I Corinthians.

rwp@2Corinthians:10:5 @{Casting down imaginations} (\logismous kathairountes\). The same military figure (\kathairesis\) and the present active participle agreeing with \strateuometha\ in verse 3| (verse 4| a parenthesis). The reasonings or imaginations (\logismous\, old word from \logizomai\, to reckon, only here in N.T. and strkjv@Romans:2:15|) are treated as forts or citadels to be conquered. {Every high thing that is exalted} (\pan hupsma epairomenon\). Same metaphor. \Hupsma\ from \hupso\ is late _Koin_ word (in LXX, Plutarch, Philo, papyri) for height and that figure carried on by \epairomenon\. Paul aims to pull down the top-most perch of audacity in their reasonings against the knowledge of God. We need Paul's skill and courage today. {Bringing every thought into captivity} (\aichmaltizontes pn noma\). Present active participle of \aichmaltiz\, common _Koin_ verb from \aichmaltos\, captive in war (\aichm\, spear, \haltos\ verbal of \haliskomai\, to be taken). See on ¯Luke:21:24|. Paul is the most daring of thinkers, but he lays all his thoughts at the feet of Jesus. For \noma\ (device) see on ¯2:11|. {To the obedience of Christ} (\eis tn hupakon tou Christou\). Objective genitive, "to the obedience unto Christ." That is Paul's conception of intellectual liberty, freedom in Christ. Deissmann (_St. Paul_, p. 141) calls this "the mystic genitive."

rwp@2Peter:2:3 @{In covetousness} (\en pleonexii\). As did Balaam (verse 15|). These licentious Gnostics made money out of their dupes. A merely intellectual Gnosticism had its fruit in immorality and fraud. {With feigned words} (\plastois logois\). Instrumental case. \Plastos\ is verbal adjective (from \plass\, to mould as from clay, for which see strkjv@Romans:9:20|), here only in N.T. "With forged words." See sample in strkjv@3:4|. {Shall make merchandise of you} (\humas emporeusontai\). Future middle of \emporeuomai\ (from \emporos\, a travelling merchant), old word, to go in for trade, in N.T. only here and strkjv@James:4:13|, which see. Cf. our emporium (John:2:16|, market house). {Whose sentence} (\hois to krima\). "For whom (dative case) the sentence" (verdict, not process \krisis\). {Now from of old} (\ekpalai\). Late and common compound adverb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@3:5|. {Lingereth not} (\ouk argei\). "Is not idle," old verb, \arge\ (from \argos\ not working, alpha privative and \ergon\), here only in N.T. {Slumbereth not} (\ou nustazei\). Old and common verb (from \nu\ to nod), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:25:5|. Note \apleia\ (destruction) three times in verses 1-3|.

rwp@2Timothy:3:7 @{Never able to come to the knowledge of the truth} (\mdepote eis epignsin altheias elthein dunamena\). Pathetic picture of these hypnotized women without intellectual power to cut through the fog of words and, though always learning scraps of things, they never come into the full knowledge (\epignsin\) of the truth in Christ. And yet they even pride themselves on belonging to the intelligentsia!

rwp@3John:1:3 @{I rejoiced greatly} (\echarn lian\). As in strkjv@2John:1:4; strkjv@Phillipians:4:10|, not epistolary aorist, but reference to his emotions at the good tidings about Gaius. {When brethren came} (\erchomenn adelphn\). Genitive absolute with present middle participle of \erchomai\, and so with \marturountn\ (bare witness, present active participle of \marture\). Present participle here denotes repetition, from time to time. {To the truth} (\ti altheii\). Dative case. "As always in the Johannine writings, 'truth' covers every sphere of life, moral, intellectual, spiritual" (Brooke). {Even as thou walkest in truth} (\kaths su en altheii peripateis\). "Thou" in contrast to Diotrephes (verse 9|) and others like him. On \peripate\ see strkjv@1John:1:6| and on \en altheii\ see strkjv@2John:1:4|.

rwp@Acts:10:14 @{Not so, Lord} (\Mdams, kurie\). The negative \mdams\ calls for the optative \ei\ (may it not be) or the imperative \est\ (let it be). It is not \oudams\, a blunt refusal (I shall not do it). And yet it is more than a mild protest as Page and Furneaux argue. It is a polite refusal with a reason given. Peter recognizes the invitation to slay (\thuson\) the unclean animals as from the Lord (\kurie\) but declines it three times. {For I have never eaten anything} (\hoti oudepote ephagon pan\). Second aorist active indicative, I never did anything like this and I shall not do it now. The use of \pan\ (everything) with \oudepote\ (never) is like the Hebrew (_lo--kl_) though a like idiom appears in the vernacular _Koin_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 752). {Common and unclean} (\koinon kai akatharton\). \Koinos\ from epic \xunos\ (\xun, sun\, together with) originally meant common to several (Latin _communis_) as in strkjv@Acts:2:44; strkjv@4:32; strkjv@Titus:1:4; strkjv@Jude:1:3|. The use seen here (also strkjv@Mark:7:2,5; strkjv@Romans:14:14; strkjv@Hebrews:10:29; strkjv@Revelation:21:27; strkjv@Acts:10:28; strkjv@11:8|), like Latin _vulgaris_ is unknown in ancient Greek. Here the idea is made plain by the addition of \akatharton\ (unclean), ceremonially unclean, of course. We have the same double use in our word "common." See on ¯Mark:7:18f.| where Mark adds the remarkable participle \katharizn\ (making all meats clean), evidently from Peter who recalls this vision. Peter had been reared from childhood to make the distinction between clean and unclean food and this new proposal even from the Lord runs against all his previous training. He did not see that some of God's plans for the Jews could be temporary. This symbol of the sheet was to show Peter ultimately that Gentiles could be saved without becoming Jews. At this moment he is in spiritual and intellectual turmoil.

rwp@Acts:17:2 @{As his custom was} (\kata to eithos ti Pauli\). The same construction in strkjv@Luke:4:16| about Jesus in Nazareth (\kata to eithos auti\) with the second perfect active participle neuter singular from \eth\. Paul's habit was to go to the Jewish synagogue to use the Jews and the God-fearers as a springboard for his work among the Gentiles. {For three Sabbaths} (\epi sabbata tria\). Probably the reference is to the first three Sabbaths when Paul had a free hand in the synagogue as at first in Antioch in Pisidia. Luke does not say that Paul was in Thessalonica only three weeks. He may have spoken there also during the week, though the Sabbath was the great day. Paul makes it plain, as Furneaux shows, that he was in Thessalonica a much longer period than three weeks. The rest of the time he spoke, of course, outside of the synagogue. Paul implies an extended stay by his language in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:8|. The church consisted mainly of Gentile converts (2Thessalonians:3:4,7,8|) and seems to have been well organized (1Thessalonians:5:12|). He received help while there several times from Philippi (Phillipians:4:16|) and even so worked night and day to support himself (1Thessalonians:2:9|). His preaching was misunderstood there in spite of careful instruction concerning the second coming of Christ (1Thessalonians:4:13-5:5; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1-12|). {Reasoned} (\dielexato\). First aorist middle indicative of \dialegomai\, old verb in the active to select, distinguish, then to revolve in the mind, to converse (interchange of ideas), then to teach in the Socratic ("dialectic") method of question and answer (cf. \dielegeto\ in verse 17|), then simply to discourse, but always with the idea of intellectual stimulus. With these Jews and God-fearers Paul appealed to the Scriptures as text and basis (\apo\) of his ideas.

rwp@Acts:17:18 @{And certain also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him} (\tines de kai tn Epikourin kai Stikn philosophn suneballon auti\). Imperfect active of \sunball\, old verb, in the N.T. only by Luke, to bring or put together in one's mind (Luke:2:19|), to meet together (Acts:20:14|), to bring together aid (18:27|), to confer or converse or dispute as here and already strkjv@4:15| which see. These professional philosophers were always ready for an argument and so they frequented the agora for that purpose. Luke uses one article and so groups the two sects together in their attitude toward Paul, but they were very different in fact. Both sects were eager for argument and both had disdain for Paul, but they were the two rival practical philosophies of the day, succeeding the more abstruse theories of Plato and Aristotle. Socrates had turned men's thought inward (\Gnthi Seauton\, Know Thyself) away from the mere study of physics. Plato followed with a profound development of the inner self (metaphysics). Aristotle with his cyclopaedic grasp sought to unify and relate both physics and metaphysics. Both Zeno and Epicurus (340-272 B.C.) took a more practical turn in all this intellectual turmoil and raised the issues of everyday life. Zeno (360-260 B.C.) taught in the \Stoa\ (Porch) and so his teaching was called Stoicism. He advanced many noble ideas that found their chief illustration in the Roman philosophers (Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius). He taught self-mastery and hardness with an austerity that ministered to pride or suicide in case of failure, a distinctly selfish and unloving view of life and with a pantheistic philosophy. Epicurus considered practical atheism the true view of the universe and denied a future life and claimed pleasure as the chief thing to be gotten out of life. He did not deny the existence of gods, but regarded them as unconcerned with the life of men. The Stoics called Epicurus an atheist. Lucretius and Horace give the Epicurean view of life in their great poems. This low view of life led to sensualism and does today, for both Stoicism and Epicureanism are widely influential with people now. "Eat and drink for tomorrow we die," they preached. Paul had doubtless become acquainted with both of these philosophies for they were widely prevalent over the world. Here he confronts them in their very home. He is challenged by past-masters in the art of appealing to the senses, men as skilled in their dialectic as the Pharisaic rabbis with whom Paul had been trained and whose subtleties he had learned how to expose. But, so far as we know, this is a new experience for Paul to have a public dispute with these philosophical experts who had a natural contempt for all Jews and for rabbis in particular, though they found Paul a new type at any rate and so with some interest in him. "In Epicureanism, it was man's sensual nature which arrayed itself against the claims of the gospel; in Stoicism it was his self-righteousness and pride of intellect" (Hackett). Knowling calls the Stoic the Pharisee of philosophy and the Epicurean the Sadducee of philosophy. Socrates in this very agora used to try to interest the passers-by in some desire for better things. That was 450 years before Paul is challenged by these superficial sophistical Epicureans and Stoics. It is doubtful if Paul had ever met a more difficult situation. {What would this babbler say?} (\Ti an theloi ho spermologos houtos legein?\). The word for "babbler" means "seed-picker" or picker up of seeds (\sperma\, seed, \leg\, to collect) like a bird in the agora hopping about after chance seeds. Plutarch applies the word to crows that pick up grain in the fields. Demosthenes called Aeschines a \spermologos\. Eustathius uses it of a man hanging around in the markets picking up scraps of food that fell from the carts and so also of mere rhetoricians and plagiarists who picked up scraps of wisdom from others. Ramsay considers it here a piece of Athenian slang used to describe the picture of Paul seen by these philosophers who use it, for not all of them had it ("some," \tines\). Note the use of \an\ and the present active optative \theloi\, conclusion of a fourth-class condition in a rhetorical question (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). It means, What would this picker up of seeds wish to say, if he should get off an idea? It is a contemptuous tone of supreme ridicule and doubtless Paul heard this comment. Probably the Epicureans made this sneer that Paul was a charlatan or quack. {Other some} (\hoi de\). But others, in contrast with the "some" just before. Perhaps the Stoics take this more serious view of Paul. {He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods} (\zenn daimonin dokei kataggeleus einai\). This view is put cautiously by \dokei\ (seems). \Kataggeleus\ does not occur in the old Greek, though in ecclesiastical writers, but Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 99) gives an example of the word "on a marble stele recording a decree of the Mitylenaens in honour of the Emperor Augustus," where it is the herald of the games. Here alone in the N.T. \Daimonion\ is used in the old Greek sense of deity or divinity whether good or bad, not in the N.T. sense of demons. Both this word and \kataggeleus\ are used from the Athenian standpoint. \Xenos\ is an old word for a guest-friend (Latin _hospes_) and then host (Romans:16:23|), then for foreigner or stranger (Matthew:25:31; strkjv@Acts:17:21|), new and so strange as here and strkjv@Hebrews:13:9; strkjv@1Peter:4:12|, and then aliens (Ephesians:2:12|). This view of Paul is the first count against Socrates: Socrates does wrong, introducing new deities (\adikei Skrats, kaina daimonia eisphern\, Xen. _Mem_. I). On this charge the Athenians voted the hemlock for their greatest citizen. What will they do to Paul? This Athens was more sceptical and more tolerant than the old Athens. But Roman law did not allow the introduction of a new religion (_religio illicita_). Paul was walking on thin ice though he was the real master philosopher and these Epicureans and Stoics were quacks. Paul had the only true philosophy of the universe and life with Jesus Christ as the centre (Colossians:1:12-20|), the greatest of all philosophers as Ramsay justly terms him. But these men are mocking him. {Because he preached Jesus and the resurrection} (\hoti ton Isoun kai tn anastasin euggelizato\). Reason for the view just stated. Imperfect middle indicative of \euaggeliz\, to "gospelize." Apparently these critics considered \anastasis\ (Resurrection) another deity on a par with Jesus. The Athenians worshipped all sorts of abstract truths and virtues and they misunderstood Paul on this subject. They will leave him as soon as he mentions the resurrection (verse 32|). It is objected that Luke would not use the word in this sense here for his readers would not under stand him. But Luke is describing the misapprehension of this group of philosophers and this interpretation fits in precisely.

rwp@Acts:17:34 @{Clave unto him and believed} (\kollthentes auti episteusan\). First aorist passive of this strong word \kolla\, to glue to, common in Acts (5:13; strkjv@8:29; strkjv@9:26; strkjv@10:28|) No sermon is a failure which leads a group of men (\andres\) to believe (ingressive aorist of \pisteu\) in Jesus Christ. Many so-called great or grand sermons reap no such harvest. {Dionysius the Areopagite} (\Dionusios ho Areopagits\). One of the judges of the Court of the Areopagus. That of itself was no small victory. He was one of this college of twelve judges who had helped to make Athens famous. Eusebius says that he became afterwards bishop of the Church at Athens and died a martyr. {A woman named Damaris} (\gun onomati Damaris\). A woman by name Damaris. Not the wife of Dionysius as some have thought, but an aristocratic woman, not necessarily an educated courtezan as Furneaux holds. And there were "others" (\heteroi\) with them, a group strong enough to keep the fire burning in Athens. It is common to say that Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:1-5| alludes to his failure with philosophy in Athens when he failed to preach Christ crucified and he determined never to make that mistake again. On the other hand Paul determined to stick to the Cross of Christ in spite of the fact that the intellectual pride and superficial culture of Athens had prevented the largest success. As he faced Corinth with its veneer of culture and imitation of philosophy and sudden wealth he would go on with the same gospel of the Cross, the only gospel that Paul knew or preached. And it was a great thing to give the world a sermon like that preached in Athens.

rwp@Acts:20:19 @[After what manner I was with you} (\ps meth' hmn egenomn\). Literally, "How I came (from Asia and so was) with you." Cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:5; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1-10| where Paul likewise dares to refer boldly to his life while with them "all the time" (\ton panta chronon\). Accusative of duration of time. Songs:far as we know, Paul stuck to Ephesus the whole period. He had devoted himself consecratedly to the task in Ephesus. Each pastor is bishop of his field and has a golden opportunity to work it for Christ. One of the saddest things about the present situation is the restlessness of preachers to go elsewhere instead of devoting themselves wholly to the task where they are. 19|. {Serving the Lord} (\douleun ti kurii\). It was Paul's glory to be the \doulos\ (bond-slave) as in strkjv@Romans:1:1; strkjv@Phillipians:1:1|. Paul alone, save Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:6:24; strkjv@Luke:16:13|, uses \douleu\ six times for serving God (Page). {With all lowliness of mind} (\meta pass tapeinophrosuns\). Lightfoot notes that heathen writers use this word for a grovelling, abject state of mind, but Paul follows Christ in using it for humility, humble-mindedness that should mark every Christian and in particular the preacher. {With tears} (\dakrun\). Construed with \meta\. Paul was a man of the deepest emotion along with his high intellectuality. He mentions his tears again in verse 31|, tears of sorrow and of anxiety. He refers to his tears in writing the sharp letter to the church in Corinth (2Corinthians:2:4|) and in denouncing the sensual apostates in strkjv@Phillipians:3:18|. Adolphe Monod has a wonderful sermon on the tears of Paul. Consider also the tears of Jesus. {Trials which befell me} (\peirasmn tn sumbantn moi\). Construed also with \meta\. Second aorist active participle of \sunbain\, to walk with, to go with, to come together, to happen, to befall. Very common in this sense in the old Greek (cf. strkjv@Acts:3:10|). {By the plots of the Jews} (\en tais epiboulais tn Ioudain\). Like the plot (\epiboul\) against him in Corinth (20:3|) as well as the earlier trial before Gallio and the attacks in Thessalonica. In strkjv@Acts:19:9| Luke shows the hostile attitude of the Jews in Ephesus that drove Paul out of the synagogue to the school of Tyrannus. He does not describe in detail these "plots" which may easily be imagined from Paul's own letters and may be even referred to in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:10; strkjv@15:30ff.; strkjv@16:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:4-10; strkjv@7:5; strkjv@11:23|. In fact, one has only to dwell on the allusions in strkjv@2Corinthians:11| to picture what Paul's life was in Ephesus during these three years. Luke gives in strkjv@Acts:19| the outbreak of Demetrius, but Paul had already fought with "wild-beasts" there.

rwp@Colossians:1:9 @{That ye may be filled with} (\hina plrthte\). First aorist (effective) passive subjunctive of \plro\, to fill full. {The knowledge of his will} (\tn epignsin tou thelmatos autou\). The accusative case is retained with this passive verb. \Epignsis\ is a _Koin_ word (Polybius, Plutarch, etc.) for additional (\epi\) or full knowledge. The word is the keynote of Paul's reply to the conceit of Gnosticism. The cure for these intellectual upstarts is not ignorance, not obscurantism, but more knowledge of the will of God. {In all spiritual wisdom and understanding} (\en pasi sophii kai sunesei pneumatiki\). Both \pasei\ (all) and \pneumatiki\ (spiritual) are to be taken with both \sophii\ and \sunesei\. In strkjv@Ephesians:1:8| Paul uses \phronsei\ (from \phrn\, intellect) rather than \sunesei\ (grasp, from \sunimi\, to send together). \Sunesis\ is the faculty of deciding in particular cases while \sophia\ gives the general principles (Abbott). Paul faces Gnosticism with full front and wishes the freest use of all one's intellectual powers in interpreting Christianity. The preacher ought to be the greatest man in the world for he has to deal with the greatest problems of life and death.

rwp@Colossians:1:28 @{Whom} (\hon\). That is, "Christ in you, the hope of glory." {We proclaim} (\kataggellomen\). Paul, Timothy and all like-minded preachers against the Gnostic depreciation of Christ. This verb originally (Xenophon) meant to denounce, but in N.T. it means to announce (\aggell\) throughout (\kata\), to proclaim far and wide (Acts:13:5|). {Admonishing} (\nouthetountes\). Old verb from \nouthets\, admonisher (from \nous, tithmi\). See already strkjv@Acts:20:31; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:12,14; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:15|, etc. Warning about practice and teaching (\didaskontes\) about doctrine. Such teaching calls for "all wisdom" {Every man} (\panta anthrpon\). Repeated three times. "In opposition to the doctrine of an intellectual exclusiveness taught by the false teachers" (Abbott). {That we may present} (\hina parastsmen\). Final use of \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \paristmi\, for which see strkjv@1:22|, the final presentation to Christ. {Perfect} (\teleion\). Spiritual adults in Christ, no longer babes in Christ (Hebrews:5:14|), mature and ripened Christians (4:22|), the full-grown man in Christ (Ephesians:4:13|). The relatively perfect (Phillipians:3:15|) will on that day of the presentation be fully developed as here (Colossians:4:12; strkjv@Ephesians:4:13|). The Gnostics used \teleios\ of the one fully initiated into their mysteries and it is quite possible that Paul here has also a sidewise reference to their use of the term.

rwp@Colossians:2:3 @{In whom} (\en hi\). This locative form can refer to \mustriou\ or to \Christou\. It really makes no difference in sense since Christ is the mystery of God. {All the treasures of wisdom and knowledge} (\pantes hoi thsauroi ts sophias kai gnses\). See on ¯Matthew:2:11; strkjv@6:19-21| for this old word, our thesaurus, for coffer, storehouse, treasure. Paul confronts these pretentious intellectuals (Gnostics) with the bold claim that Christ sums up all wisdom and knowledge. These treasures are hidden (\apokruphoi\, old adjective from \apokrupt\, to hide away, strkjv@Mark:4:22|) whether the Gnostics have discovered them or not. They are there (in Christ) as every believer knows by fresh and repeated discovery.

rwp@Galatians:4:1 @{Songs:long as} (\eph' hoson chronon\). "For how long a time," incorporation of the antecedent (\chronon\) into the relative clause. {The heir} (\ho klronomos\). Old word (\klros\, lot, \nemomai\, to possess). Illustration from the law of inheritance carrying on the last thought in strkjv@3:29|. {A child} (\npios\). One that does not talk (\n, epos\, word). That is a minor, an infant, immature intellectually and morally in contrast with \teleioi\, full grown (1Corinthians:3:1; strkjv@14:20; strkjv@Phillipians:3:15; strkjv@Ephesians:4:13|). {From a bondservant} (\doulou\). Slave. Ablative case of comparison after \diapherei\ for which verb see on ¯Matthew:6:26|. {Though he is lord of all} (\Kurios pantn n\). Concessive participle \n\, "being legally owner of all" (one who has the power, \ho echn kuros\).

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@Hebrews:5:12 @{Teachers} (\didaskaloi\). Predicate nominative after \einai\. {By reason of the time} (\dia ton chronon\). Alas, what a commentary on modern Christians. {That some one teach you the rudiments} (\tou didaskein humas tina ta stoicheia\). Neat Greek idiom, genitive case of the articular infinitive (need of the teaching) with two accusatives of the person (\humas\, you) and the thing (\ta stoicheia\, the rudiments) and the accusative of general reference (\tina\, as to some one). For \stoicheia\ see strkjv@Galatians:4:3,9; strkjv@Colossians:2:8|. {Of the first principles of the oracles of God} (\ts archs tn login tou theou\). Three genitives linked to each other. \Archs\ (beginning) illustrates \ta stoicheia\, just before, the A B C of Christian teaching like strkjv@Hebrews:6:1f|. \Logion\ is a diminutive of logos, divine oracles being usually brief, common in the O.T. and Philo for God's words, in N.T. used for the O.T. (Acts:7:38; Rom strkjv@3:2|), of God's word through Christians (1Peter:4:11|), of the substance of Christian teaching (Hebrews:5:12|). {Of milk} (\galaktos\). Because still babes (1Corinthians:3:2|) and not able to chew "solid food" (\steres trophs\), without intellectual and spiritual teeth.

rwp@James:1:8 @{Man} (\anr\). Instead of \anthrpos\ (general term) in verse 7|, perhaps for variety (Ropes), but often in James (1:12,23; strkjv@2:2; strkjv@3:2|), though in other Epistles usually in distinction from \gun\ (woman). {Double-minded} (\dipsuchos\). First appearance of this compound known and in N.T. only here and strkjv@4:8|. Apparently coined by James, but copied often in early Christian writings and so an argument for the early date of James' Epistle (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). From \dis\ twice and \psuch\ soul, double-souled, double-minded, Bunyan's "Mr. Facing-both-ways." Cf. the rebuke to Peter (\edistasas\) in strkjv@Matthew:14:31|. {Unstable} (\akatastatos\). Late double compound (alpha privative and \katastatos\ verbal from \kathistmi\), in LXX once (Is strkjv@54:11|) and in Polybius, in N.T. only here and strkjv@3:8|. It means unsteady, fickle, staggering, reeling like a drunken man. Surely to James such "doubt" is no mark of intellectuality.

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@John:8:32 @{And ye shall know the truth} (\kai gnsesthe tn altheian\). Truth is one of the marks of Christ (1:14|) and Jesus will claim to Thomas to be the personification of truth (14:6|). But it will be for them knowledge to be learned by doing God's will (7:17|). The word is from \alths\ (\a\ privative and \lth\, to conceal, unsealed, open). See also verses 40,44,45|. {And the truth shall make you free} (\kai h altheia eleuthersei humas\). Future active indicative of \eleuthero\, old verb from \eleutheros\ (from \erchomai\, to go where one wishes and so free). One of Paul's great words for freedom from the bondage of the law (Romans:6:18; strkjv@Galatians:5:1|). The freedom of which Jesus here speaks is freedom from the slavery of sin as Paul in strkjv@Romans:8:2|. See strkjv@John:8:36|. This freedom is won alone by Christ (8:36|) and we are sanctified in truth (17:19|). In strkjv@1:17| truth is mentioned with grace as one of the marks of the gospel through Christ. Freedom (intellectual, moral, spiritual) is only attainable when we are set free from darkness, sin, ignorance, superstition and let the Light of the World shine on us and in us.

rwp@Luke:2:40 @{The child grew} (\uxane\). Imperfect indicative of a very ancient verb (\auxan\). This child grew and waxed strong (\ekrataiouto\, imperfect middle), a hearty vigorous little boy (\paidion\). Both verbs Luke used in strkjv@1:80| of the growth of John the Baptist as a child. Then he used also \pneumati\, in spirit. Here in addition to the bodily development Luke has "filled with wisdom" (\plroumenon sophii\). Present passive participle, showing that the process of filling with wisdom kept pace with the bodily growth. If it were only always true with others! We need not be troubled over this growth in wisdom on the part of Jesus any more than over his bodily growth. "The intellectual, moral, and spiritual growth of the Child, like the physical, was real. His was a perfect humanity developing perfectly, unimpeded by hereditary or acquired defects. It was the first instance of such a growth in history. For the first time a human infant was realizing the ideal of humanity" (Plummer). {The grace of God} (\charis theou\). In full measure.

rwp@Luke:2:46 @{After three days} (\meta hmeras treis\). One day out, one day back, and on the third day finding him. {In the temple} (\en ti hieri\). Probably on the terrace where members of the Sanhedrin gave public instruction on sabbaths and feast-days, so probably while the feast was still going on. The rabbis probably sat on benches in a circle. The listeners on the ground, among whom was Jesus the boy in a rapture of interest. {Both hearing them and asking them questions} (\kai akouonta autn kai epertnta autous\). Paul sat at the feet of Gamaliel (Acts:22:3|). Picture this eager boy alive with interest. It was his one opportunity in a theological school outside of the synagogue to hear the great rabbis expound the problems of life. This was the most unusual of all children, to be sure, in intellectual grasp and power. But it is a mistake to think that children of twelve do not think profoundly concerning the issues of life. What father or mother has ever been able to answer a child's questions?

rwp@Luke:2:47 @{Were amazed} (\existanto\). Imperfect indicative middle, descriptive of their continued and repeated astonishment. Common verb \existmi\ meaning that they stood out of themselves as if their eyes were bulging out. The boy had a holy thirst for knowledge (Plummer), and he used a boy's way of learning. {At his understanding} (\epi ti sunesei\). Based on (\epi\), the grasp and comprehension from \sunimi\, comparing and combining things. Cf. strkjv@Mark:12:33|. {His answers} (\tais apokrisesin autou\). It is not difficult to ask hard questions, but this boy had astounding answers to their questions, revealing his amazing intellectual and spiritual growth.

rwp@Luke:2:52 @{Advanced in wisdom and stature} (\proekopten ti sophii kai hlikii\). Imperfect active, he kept cutting his way forward as through a forest or jungle as pioneers did. He kept growing in stature (\hlikia\ may mean age, as in strkjv@12:25|, but stature here) and in wisdom (more than mere knowledge). His physical, intellectual, moral, spiritual development was perfect. "At each stage he was perfect for that stage" (Plummer). {In favour} (\chariti\). Or grace. This is ideal manhood to have the favour of God and men.

rwp@Luke:10:21 @{In that same hour} (\en auti ti hri\). Literally, "at the hour itself," almost a demonstrative use of \autos\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 686) and in Luke alone in the N.T. (2:38; strkjv@10:21; strkjv@12:12; strkjv@20:19|). strkjv@Matthew:11:25| uses the demonstrative here, "at that time" (\en ekeini ti kairi\). {Rejoiced in the Holy Spirit} (\galliasato ti pneumati ti hagii\). First aorist middle of the late verb \agallia\ for \agall\, to exult. Always in the middle in the N.T. save strkjv@Luke:1:47| in Mary's _Magnificat_. This holy joy of Jesus was directly due to the Holy Spirit. It is joy in the work of his followers, their victories over Satan, and is akin to the joy felt by Jesus in strkjv@John:4:32-38| when the vision of the harvest of the world stirred his heart. The rest of this verse is precisely like strkjv@Matthew:11:25f.|, a peculiarly Johannine passage in Matthew and Luke, but not in Mark, and so from Q (the Logia of Jesus). It has disturbed critics who are unwilling to admit the Johannine style and type of teaching as genuine, but here it is. See on Matthew for discussion. "That God had proved his independence of the human intellect is a matter for thankfulness. Intellectual gifts, so far from being necessary, are often a hindrance" (Plummer).

rwp@Mark:6:52 @{For they understood not} (\ou gar sunkan\). Explanation of their excessive amazement, viz., their failure to grasp the full significance of the miracle of the loaves and fishes, a nature miracle. Here was another, Jesus walking on the water. Their reasoning process (\kardia\ in the general sense for all the inner man) {was hardened} (\n peprmen\). See on ¯3:5| about \prsis\. Today some men have such intellectual hardness or denseness that they cannot believe that God can or would work miracles, least of all nature miracles.

rwp@Mark:7:18 @{Are ye so without understanding also?} (\Houts kai humeis asunetoi este;\). See on ¯Matthew:15:16|. You also as well as the multitude. It was a discouraging moment for the great Teacher if his own chosen pupils (disciples) were still under the spell of the Pharisaic theological outlook. It was a riddle to them. "They had been trained in Judaism, in which the distinction between clean and unclean is ingrained, and could not understand a statement abrogating this" (Gould). They had noticed that the Pharisees stumbled at the parable of Jesus (Matthew:15:12|). They were stumbling themselves and did not know how to answer the Pharisees. Jesus charges the disciples with intellectual dulness and spiritual stupidity.

rwp@Mark:8:17 @Mark here (vv. 17-20|) gives six keen questions of Jesus while strkjv@Matthew:16:8-11| gives as four that really include the six of Mark running some together. The questions reveal the disappointment of Jesus at the intellectual dulness of his pupils. The questions concern the intellect (\noeite\, from \nous, suniete\, comprehend), the heart in a {hardened state} (\peprmenn\, perfect passive predicate participle as in strkjv@Mark:6:52|, which see), the eyes, the ears, the memory of both the feeding of the five thousand and the four thousand here sharply distinguished even to the two kinds of baskets (\kophinous, sphuridn\). The disciples did recall the number of baskets left over in each instance, twelve and seven. Jesus "administers a sharp rebuke for their preoccupation with mere temporalities, as if there were nothing higher to be thought of _than bread_" (Bruce). "For the time the Twelve are way-side hearers, with hearts like a beaten path, into which the higher truths cannot sink so as to germinate" (Bruce).

rwp@Mark:12:18 @{There come unto him Sadducees} (\erchontai Saddoukaioi pros auton\). Dramatic present. The Pharisees and Herodians had had their turn after the formal committee of the Sanhedrin had been so completely routed. It was inevitable that they should feel called upon to show their intellectual superiority to these raw Pharisaic and Herodian theologians. See on ¯Matthew:22:23-33| for discussion of details. It was a good time to air their disbelief in the resurrection at the expense of the Pharisees and to score against Jesus where the Sanhedrin and then the Pharisees and Herodians had failed so ignominiously.

rwp@Matthew:3:2 @{For the kingdom of heaven is at hand} (\ggiken gar h Basileia tn ourann\). Note the position of the verb and the present perfect tense. It was a startling word that John thundered over the hills and it re-echoed throughout the land. The Old Testament prophets had said that it would come some day in God's own time. John proclaims as the herald of the new day that it has come, has drawn near. How near he does not say, but he evidently means very near, so near that one could see the signs and the proof. The words "the kingdom of heaven" he does not explain. The other Gospels use "the kingdom of God" as Matthew does a few times, but he has "the kingdom of heaven" over thirty times. He means "the reign of God," not the political or ecclesiastical organization which the Pharisees expected. His words would be understood differently by different groups as is always true of popular preachers. The current Jewish apocalypses had numerous eschatological ideas connected with the kingdom of heaven. It is not clear what sympathy John had with these eschatological features. He employs vivid language at times, but we do not have to confine John's intellectual and theological horizon to that of the rabbis of his day. He has been an original student of the Old Testament in his wilderness environment without any necessary contact with the Essenes who dwelt there. His voice is a new one that strikes terror to the perfunctory theologians of the temple and of the synagogue. It is the fashion of some critics to deny to John any conception of the spiritual content of his words, a wholly gratuitous criticism.

rwp@Matthew:15:17 @{Perceive ye not?} (\ou noeite\). Christ expects us to make use of our \nous\, intellect, not for pride, but for insight. The mind does not work infallibly, but we should use it for its God-given purpose. Intellectual laziness or flabbiness is no credit to a devout soul.

rwp@Matthew:16:8 @Jesus asks four pungent questions about the intellectual dulness, refers to the feeding of the five thousand and uses the word \kophinous\ (14:20|) for it and \sphuridas\ for the four thousand (15:37|), and repeats his warning (16:11|). Every teacher understands this strain upon the patience of this Teacher of teachers.

rwp@Philippians:2:2 @{Fulfil} (\plrsate\). Better here, "fill full." Paul's cup of joy will be full if the Philippians will only keep on having unity of thought and feeling (\to auto phronte\, present active subjunctive, keep on thinking the same thing). {Being of one accord} (\sunpsuchoi\). Late word here for the first time, from \sun\ and \psuch\, harmonious in soul, souls that beat together, in tune with Christ and with each other. {Of one mind} (\to hen phronountes\). "Thinking the one thing." Like clocks that strike at the same moment. Perfect intellectual telepathy. Identity of ideas and harmony of feelings.

rwp@Romans:11:25 @{This mystery} (\to mustrion touto\). Not in the pagan sense of an esoteric doctrine for the initiated (from \mue\, to blink, to wink), unknown secrets (2Thessalonians:2:7|), or like the mystery religions of the time, but the revealed will of God now made known to all (1Corinthians:2:1,7; strkjv@4:1|) which includes Gentiles also (Romans:16:25; strkjv@Colossians:1:26f.; strkjv@Ephesians:3:3f.|) and so far superior to man's wisdom (Colossians:2:2; strkjv@4:13; strkjv@Ephesians:3:9; strkjv@5:32; strkjv@6:19; strkjv@Matthew:13:11; strkjv@Mark:4:11|). Paul has covered every point of difficulty concerning the failure of the Jews to accept Jesus as the Messiah and has shown how God has overruled it for the blessing of the Gentiles with a ray of hope still held out for the Jews. "In early ecclesiastical Latin \mustrion\ was rendered by _sacramentum_, which in classical Latin means _the military oath_. The explanation of the word _sacrament_, which is so often founded on this etymology, is therefore mistaken, since the meaning of sacrament belongs to \mustrion\ and not to _sacramentum_ in the classical sense" (Vincent). {Wise in your own conceits} (\en heautois phronimoi\). "Wise in yourselves." Some MSS. read \par' heautois\ (by yourselves). Negative purpose here (\hina m te\), to prevent self-conceit on the part of the Gentiles who have believed. They had no merit in themselves {A hardening} (\prsis\). Late word from \pro\ (11:7|). Occurs in Hippocrates as a medical term, only here in N.T. save strkjv@Mark:3:5; strkjv@Ephesians:4:18|. It means obtuseness of intellectual discernment, mental dulness. {In part} (\apo merous\). Goes with the verb \gegonen\ (has happened in part). For \apo merous\, see strkjv@2Corinthians:1:14; strkjv@2:5; strkjv@Romans:15:24|; for \ana meros\, see strkjv@1Corinthians:14:27|; for \ek merous\, see strkjv@1Corinthians:12:27; strkjv@13:9|; for \kata meros\, see strkjv@Hebrews:9:5|; for \meros ti\ (adverbial accusative) partly see strkjv@1Corinthians:11:18|. Paul refuses to believe that no more Jews will be saved. {Until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in} (\achri hou to plrma tn ethnn eiselthi\). Temporal clause with \achri hou\ (until which time) and the second aorist active subjunctive of \eiserchomai\, to come in (Matthew:7:13,21|). {For fulness of the Gentiles} (\to plrma tn ethnn\) see on verse ¯12|, the complement of the Gentiles.