OT-PROPHET.filter - rwp material:

rwp@1Corinthians:3:1 @{But as unto carnal} (\all' hs sarkinois\). Latin _carneus_. "As men o' flesh," Braid Scots; "as worldlings," Moffatt. This form in \-inos\ like \lithinos\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3| means the material of flesh, "not on tablets of stone, but on fleshen tablets on hearts." Songs:in strkjv@Hebrews:7:16|. But in strkjv@Romans:7:14| Paul says, "I am fleshen (\sarkinos\) sold under sin," as if \sarkinos\ represented the extreme power of the \sarx\. Which does Paul mean here? He wanted to speak the wisdom of God among the adults (1Corinthians:2:6|), the spiritual (\hoi pneumatikoi\, strkjv@2:15|), but he was unable to treat them as \pneumatikoi\ in reality because of their seditions and immoralities. It is not wrong to be \sarkinos\, for we all live in the flesh (\en sarki\, strkjv@Galatians:2:20|), but we are not to live according to the flesh (\kata sarka\, strkjv@Romans:8:12|). It is not culpable to a babe in Christ (\npios\, strkjv@1Corinthians:13:11|), unless unduly prolonged (1Corinthians:14:20; strkjv@Hebrews:5:13f.|). It is one of the tragedies of the minister's life that he has to keep on speaking to the church members "as unto babes in Christ" (\hs npiois en Christi\), who actually glory in their long babyhood whereas they ought to be teachers of the gospel instead of belonging to the cradle roll. Paul's goal was for all the babes to become adults (Colossians:1:28|).

rwp@1Corinthians:3:12 @{Gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble} (\chrusion, argurion, lithous timious, xula, chorton, kalamn\). The durable materials are three (gold, silver, marble or precious stones), perishable materials (pieces of wood, hay, stubble), "of a palace on the one hand, of a mud hut on the other" (Lightfoot). Gold was freely used by the ancients in their palaces. Their marble and granite pillars are still the wonder and despair of modern men. The wooden huts had hay (\chortos\, grass, as in strkjv@Mark:6:39|) and stubble (\kalam\, old word for stubble after the grain is cut, here alone in the N.T., though in LXX as strkjv@Exodus:5:12|) which were employed to hold the wood pieces together and to thatch the roof. It is not made clear whether Paul's metaphor refers to the persons as in God's building in verse 9| or to the character of the teaching as in verse 13|. Probably both ideas are involved, for look at the penalty on shoddy work (verse 15|) and shoddy men (verse 17|). The teaching may not always be vicious and harmful. It may only be indifferent and worthless. A co-worker with God in this great temple should put in his very best effort.

rwp@1Corinthians:3:13 @{The day} (\h hmera\). The day of judgment as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:4| (which see), strkjv@Romans:13:12; strkjv@Hebrews:10:25|. The work (\ergon\) of each will be made manifest. There is no escape from this final testing. {It is revealed in fire} (\en puri apokaluptetai\). Apparently "the day" is the subject of the verb, not the work, not the Lord. See strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:8; strkjv@2:8|. This metaphor of fire was employed in the O.T. (Daniel:7:9f.; strkjv@Malachi:4:1|) and by John the Baptist (Matthew:3:12; strkjv@Luke:3:16f.|). It is a metaphor that must not be understood as purgatorial, but simple testing (Ellicott) as every fire tests ({the fire itself will test}, \to pur auto dokimasei\) the quality of the material used in the building, {of what sort it is} (\hopoion estin\), qualitative relative pronoun. Men today find, alas, that some of the fireproof buildings are not fireproof when the fire actually comes.

rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER ABOUT A.D. 65 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION THE AUTHOR The Epistle is not anonymous, but claims to be written by "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ" (1Peter:1:1|), that is Cephas (Simon Peter). If this is not true, then the book is pseudonymous by a late writer who assumed Peter's name, as in the so-called Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, etc. "There is no book in the New Testament which has earlier, better, or stronger attestation, though Irenaeus is the first to quote it by name" (Bigg). Eusebius (_H.E_. iii. 25.2) places it among the acknowledged books, those accepted with no doubt at all. We here assume that Simon Peter wrote this Epistle or at any rate dictated it by an amanuensis, as Paul did in Romans (Romans:16:22|). Bigg suggests Silvanus (Silas) as the amanuensis or interpreter (1Peter:5:12|), the obvious meaning of the language (\dia\, through). He may also have been the bearer of the Epistle. It happens that we know more of Peter's life than of any of the twelve apostles because of his prominence in the Gospels and in the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. In the _Student's Chronological New Testament_ I have given a full list of the passages in the Gospels where Peter appears with any clearness and the material is rich and abundant. The account in Acts is briefer, though Peter is the outstanding man in the first five chapters during his career in Jerusalem. After the conversion of Saul he begins to work outside of Jerusalem and after escaping death at the hands of Herod Agrippa I (Acts:12:3ff.|) he left for a while, but is back in Jerusalem at the Conference called by Paul and Barnabas (Acts:15:6-14; Gal strkjv@2:1-10|). After that we have no more about him in Acts, though he reappears in Antioch and is rebuked by Paul for cowardice because of the Judaizers (Galatians:2:11-21). He travelled for the Gospel among the Jews of the Dispersion (Galatians:2:9|) with his wife (1Corinthians:9:5|), and went to Asia Minor (1Peter:1:1|) and as far as Babylon or Rome (1Peter:5:13|). Besides Silvanus he had John Mark with him also (1Peter:5:13|), who was said by the early Christian writers to have been Peter's "interpreter" in his preaching, since Peter was not expert in the Greek (Acts:4:13|), and who also wrote his Gospel under the inspiration of Peter's preaching. We are not able to follow clearly the close of his life or to tell precisely the time of his death. He was apparently put to death in A.D. 67 or 68, but some think that he was executed in Rome in A.D. 64.

rwp@2Corinthians:5:12 @{As giving you occasion of glorying} (\aphormn didontes humin kauchmatos\). An old Greek word (\apo, horm\, onset, rush), a base of operations, material with which to glory, as we say "a tip" only much more. {That ye may have wherewith to answer} (\hina echte pros\). Literally, "That ye may have something against (for facing those, etc.)." Paul wishes his champions in Corinth to know the facts. {In appearance, and not in heart} (\en prospi kai m en kardii\). He means the Judaizers who were braggarts about their orthodox Judaism.

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@Info_Acts @ THE UNITY OF THE ACTS There are some scholars who are willing to admit the Lukan authorship of the "we" sections when the author uses "we" and "us" as in chapter strkjv@16:10-40; strkjv@20:6-28:31|. It has been argued that Luke wrote a travel-document or diary for these sections, but that this material was used by the editor or redactor of the whole book. But, unfortunately for that view, the very same style appears in the Acts as a whole and in the Gospel also as Harnack has proven. The man who said "we" and "us" in the "we" sections wrote "I" in strkjv@1:1| and refers to the Gospel as his work. The effort to disprove the unity of the Acts has failed. It stands as the work of the same author as a whole and the same author who wrote the Gospel.

rwp@Acts:6:14 @{We have heard him say} (\akkoamen autou legontos\). The only direct testimony and evidently wrong. Curiously like the charge brought against Jesus before Caiaphas that he would destroy the temple and build it again in three days. Undoubtedly Stephen had said something about Christianity before as meant for others besides Jews. He had caught the spirit of Jesus about worship as shown to the woman at Sychar in strkjv@John:4| that God is spirit and to be worshipped by men anywhere and everywhere without having to come to the temple in Jerusalem. It was inflammable material surely and it was easy to misrepresent and hard to clear up. {This Jesus of Nazareth} (\Isous ho Nazraios houtos\). With contempt.

rwp@Acts:7:51 @{Stiffnecked} (\sklrotrachloi\). From \sklros\ (hard) and \trachlos\, neck, both old words, but this compound only in the LXX and here alone in the N.T. Critics assume that Stephen was interrupted at this point because of the sharp tone of the speech. That may be true, but the natural climax is sufficient explanation. {Uncircumcised in heart} (\aperitmtoi kardiais\). Late adjective common in LXX and here only in the N.T. Verbal of \peritemn\, to cut around and \a\ privative. Both of these epithets are applied to the Jews in the O.T. (Exodus:32:9; strkjv@33:3,5; strkjv@34:9; strkjv@Leviticus:26:41; strkjv@Deuteronomy:9:6; strkjv@Jeremiah:6:10|). \Kardiais\ is locative plural like \sin\ (ears), but some MSS. have genitive singular \kardias\ (objective genitive). No epithet could have been more galling to these Pharisees than to be turned "uncircumcised in heart" (Romans:2:29|). They had only the physical circumcision which was useless. {Ye always} (\humeis aei\). Emphatic position of humeis and "always" looks backward over the history of their forefathers which Stephen had reviewed. {Resist} (\antipiptete\). Old word to fall against, to rush against. Only here in the N.T., but used in the O.T. which is here quoted (Numbers:27:14|). Their fathers had made "external worship a substitute for spiritual obedience" (Furneaux). Stephen has shown how God had revealed himself gradually, the revelation sloping upward to Christ Jesus. "And as he saw his countrymen repeating the old mistake--clinging to the present and the material, while God was calling them to higher spiritual levels--and still, as ever, resisting the Holy Spirit, treating the Messiah as the patriarchs had treated Joseph, and the Hebrews Moses--the pity of it overwhelmed him, and his mingled grief and indignation broke out in words of fire, such as burned of old on the lips of the prophets" (Furneaux). Stephen, the accused, is now the accuser, and the situation becomes intolerable to the Sanhedrin.

rwp@Acts:24:16 @{Herein} (\en touti\). His whole confession of belief in verses 14,15|. {Do I also exercise myself} (\kai autos ask\). "Do I also myself take exercise," take pains, labour, strive. Old word in Homer to work as raw materials, to adorn by art, then to drill. Our word ascetic comes from this root, one who seeks to gain piety by rules and severe hardship. Paul claims to be equal to his accusers in efforts to please God. {Void of offence} (\aproskopon\). This word belongs to the papyri and N.T. (only in Paul), not in the ancient writers. The papyri examples (Moulton Milligan, _Vocabulary_) use the word to mean "free from hurt or harm." It is a privative and \proskopt\ (to cut or stumble against). Page likes "void of offence" since that can be either active "not stumbling" as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:10| or passive "not stumbled against" as in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:32| (the first toward God and the second toward men), the only other N.T. examples. Hence the word here appears in both senses (the first towards God, the second towards men). Paul adds "alway" (\dia pantos\), a bold claim for a consistent aim in life. "Certainly his conscience acquitted him of having caused any offence to his countrymen" (Rackham). Furneaux thinks that it must have been wormwood and gall to Ananias to hear Paul repeat here the same words because of which he had ordered Paul to be smitten on the mouth (23:1f.|).

rwp@Acts:24:27 @{But when two years were fulfilled} (\dietias de plrtheiss\). Genitive absolute first aorist passive of \plro\, common verb to fill full. \Dietia\, late word in LXX and Philo, common in the papyri, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:28:30|. Compound of \dia\, two (\duo, dis\) and \etos\, year. Songs:Paul lingered on in prison in Caesarea, waiting for the second hearing under Felix which never came. Caesarea now became the compulsory headquarters of Paul for two years. With all his travels Paul spent several years each at Tarsus, Antioch, Corinth, Ephesus, though not as a prisoner unless that was true part of the time at Ephesus for which there is some evidence though not of a convincing kind. We do not know that Luke remained in Caesarea all this time. In all probability he came and went with frequent visits with Philip the Evangelist. It was probably during this period that Luke secured the material for his Gospel and wrote part or all of it before going to Rome. He had ample opportunity to examine the eyewitnesses who heard Jesus and the first attempts at writing including the Gospel of Mark (Luke:1:1-4|). {Was succeeded by} (\elaben diadochon\). Literally, "received as successor." \Diadochos\ is an old word from \diadechomai\, to receive in succession (\dia, duo\, two) and occurs here alone in the N.T. Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 115) gives papyri examples where \hoi diadochoi\ means "higher officials at the court of the Ptolemies," probably "deputies," a usage growing out of the "successors" of Alexander the Great (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_), though here the original notion of "successor" occurs (cf. Josephus, _Ant_. XX. 8, 9). Luke does not tell why Felix "received" a successor. The explanation is that during these two years the Jews and the Gentiles had an open fight in the market-place in Caesarea. Felix put the soldiers on the mob and many Jews were killed. The Jews made formal complaint to the Emperor with the result that Felix was recalled and Porcius Festus sent in his stead. {Porcius Festus} (\Porkion Phston\). We know very little about this man. He is usually considered a worthier man than Felix, but Paul fared no better at his hands and he exhibits the same insincerity and eagerness to please the Jews. Josephus (_Ant_. XX. 8, 9) says that "Porcius Festus was sent as a successor to Felix." The precise year when this change occurred is not clear. Albinus succeeded Festus by A.D. 62, so that it is probable that Festus came A.D. 58 (or 59). Death cut short his career in a couple of years though he did more than Felix to rid the country of robbers and _sicarii_. Some scholars argue for an earlier date for the recall of Felix. Nero became Emperor Oct. 13, A.D. 54. Poppaea, his Jewish mistress and finally wife, may have had something to do with the recall of Felix at the request of the Jews. {Desiring to gain favour with the Jews} (\theln te charita katathesthai tois Ioudaiois\). Reason for his conduct. Note second aorist (ingressive) middle infinitive \katathesthai\ from \katatithmi\, old verb to place down, to make a deposit, to deposit a favour with, to do something to win favour. Only here and strkjv@25:9| in N.T., though in some MSS. in strkjv@Mark:15:46|. It is a banking figure. {Left Paul in bonds} (\katelipe ton Paulon dedemenon\). Effective aorist active indicative of \kataleip\, to leave behind. Paul "in bonds" (\dedemenon\, perfect passive participle of \de\, to bind) was the "deposit" (\katathesthai\) for their favour. Codex Bezae adds that Felix left Paul in custody "because of Drusilla" (\dia Drousillan\). She disliked Paul as much as Herodias did John the Baptist. Songs:Pilate surrendered to the Jews about the death of Jesus when they threatened to report him to Caesar. Some critics would date the third group of Paul's Epistles (Philippians, Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians) to the imprisonment here in Caesarea, some even to one in Ephesus. But the arguments for either of these two views are more specious than convincing. Furneaux would even put strkjv@2Timothy:4:9-22| here in spite of the flat contradiction with strkjv@Acts:21:29| about Trophimus being in Jerusalem instead of Miletus (2Timothy:4:20|), a "mistake" which he attributes to Luke! That sort of criticism can prove anything.

rwp@Colossians:1:18 @{The head of the body} (\h kephal tou smatos\). Jesus is first also in the spiritual realm as he is in nature (verses 18-20|). Paul is fond of the metaphor of the body (\sma\) for believers of which body Christ is the head (\kephal\) as seen already in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:3; strkjv@12:12,27; strkjv@Romans:12:5|. See further strkjv@Colossians:1:24: strkjv@2:19; strkjv@Ephesians:1:22f.; strkjv@4:2,15; strkjv@5:30|. {The church} (\ts ekklsias\) Genitive case in explanatory apposition with \tou smatos\. This is the general sense of \ekklsia\, not of a local body, assembly, or organization. Here the contrast is between the realm of nature (\ta panta\) in verses 15-17| and the realm of spirit or grace in verses 18-20|. A like general sense of \ekklsia\ occurs in strkjv@Ephesians:1:22f.; strkjv@5:24-32; strkjv@Hebrews:12:23|. In strkjv@Ephesians:2:11-22| Paul uses various figures for the kingdom of Christ (commonwealth \politeia\, verse 12|, one new man \eis hena kainon anthrpon\, verse 15|, one body \en heni smati\, verse 16|, family of God \oikeioi tou theou\, verse 19|, building or temple \oikodom\ and \naos\, verses 20-22|). {Who} (\hos\). Causal use of the relative, "in that he is." {The beginning} (\h arch\). It is uncertain if the article (\h\) is genuine. It is absolute without it. Christ has priority in time and in power. See strkjv@Revelation:3:14| for his relation as \arch\ to creation and strkjv@1Corinthians:15:20,23| for \aparch\ used of Christ and the resurrection and strkjv@Acts:3:14| for \archgos\ used of him as the author of life and strkjv@Hebrews:2:10| of Jesus and salvation and strkjv@Hebrews:12-2| of Jesus as the pioneer of faith. {That in all things he might have the preeminence} (\hina gentai en psin autos prteun\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\, "that he himself in all things (material and spiritual) may come to (\gentai\, not \i\, be) hold the first place" (\prteun\, present active participle of \prteu\, old verb, to hold the first place, here only in the N.T.). Christ is first with Paul in time and in rank. See strkjv@Revelation:1:5| for this same use of \prtotokos\ with \tn nekrn\ (the dead).

rwp@Colossians:2:8 @{Take heed} (\blepete\). Present active imperative second person plural of \blep\, common verb for warning like our "look out," "beware," "see to it." {Lest there shall be any one} (\m tis estai\). Negative purpose with the future indicative, though the aorist subjunctive also occurs as in strkjv@2Corinthians:12:6|. {That maketh spoil of you} (\ho sulaggn\). Articular present active participle of \sulagge\, late and rare (found here first) verb (from \sul\, booty, and \ag\, to lead, to carry), to carry off as booty a captive, slave, maiden. Only here in N.T. Note the singular here. There was some one outstanding leader who was doing most of the damage in leading the people astray. {Through his philosophy} (\dia ts philosophias\). The only use of the word in the N.T. and employed by Paul because the Gnostics were fond of it. Old word from \philosophos\ (\philos, sophos\, one devoted to the pursuit of wisdom) and in N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:17:18|. Paul does not condemn knowledge and wisdom (see verse 2|), but only this false philosophy, "knowledge falsely named" (\pseudnumos gnsis\, strkjv@1Timothy:6:20|), and explained here by the next words. {And vain deceit} (\kai kens apats\). Old word for trick, guile, like riches (Matthew:13:22|). Descriptive of the philosophy of the Gnostics. {Tradition} (\paradosin\). Old word from \paradidmi\, a giving over, a passing on. The word is colourless in itself. The tradition may be good (2Thessalonians:2:15; strkjv@3:6|) or bad (Mark:7:3|). Here it is worthless and harmful, merely the foolish theories of the Gnostics. {Rudiments} (\stoicheia\). Old word for anything in a \stoichos\ (row, series) like the letters of the alphabet, the materials of the universe (2Peter:3:10,12|), elementary teaching (Hebrews:5:12|), elements of Jewish ceremonial training (Acts:15:10; Gal strkjv@4:3,9|), the specious arguments of the Gnostic philosophers as here with all their aeons and rules of life. {And not after Christ} (\kai ou kata Christon\). Christ is the yardstick by which to measure philosophy and all phases of human knowledge. The Gnostics were measuring Christ by their philosophy as many men are doing today. They have it backwards. Christ is the measure for all human knowledge since he is the Creator and the Sustainer of the universe.

rwp@Colossians:2:22 @{Are to perish with the using} (\estin eis phthoran ti apochrsei\). Literally, "are for perishing in the using." \Phthora\ (from \phtheir\) is old word for decay, decomposition. \Apochrsis\ (from \apochraomai\, to use to the full, to use up), late and rare word (in Plutarch), here only in N.T. Either locative case here or instrumental. These material things all perish in the use of them.

rwp@Ephesians:2:22 @{Ye also are builded together} (\kai humeis sunoikodomeisthe\). Ye Gentiles also. Present passive indicative (continuous process) of common old verb \sunoikodome\, to build together with others or out of varied materials as here. Only here in N.T. In strkjv@1Peter:2:5| Peter uses \oikodomeisthe\ for the same process. {For a habitation} (\eis katoiktrion\). Late word (LXX), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:18:2|. From \katoike\, to dwell, as strkjv@Ephesians:3:17|. Possibly each of us is meant here to be the "habitation of God in the Spirit" and all together growing (\auxei\) "into a holy temple in the Lord," a noble conception of the brotherhood in Christ.

rwp@Galatians:3:17 @{Now this I say} (\touto de leg\). Now I mean this. He comes back to his main point and is not carried afield by the special application of \sperma\ to Christ. {Confirmed beforehand by God} (\prokekurmenn hupo tou theou\). Perfect passive participle of \prokuro\, in Byzantine writers and earliest use here. Nowhere else in N.T. The point is in \pro\ and \hupo tou theou\ (by God) and in \meta\ (after) as Burton shows. {Four hundred and thirty years after} (\meta tetrakosia kai triakonta et\). Literally, "after four hundred and thirty years." This is the date in strkjv@Exodus:12:40| for the sojourn in Egypt (cf. strkjv@Genesis:15:13|). But the LXX adds words to include the time of the patriarchs in Canaan in this number of years which would cut the time in Egypt in two. Cf. strkjv@Acts:7:6|. It is immaterial to Paul's argument which chronology is adopted except that "the longer the covenant had been in force the more impressive is his statement" (Burton). {Doth not disannul} (\ouk akuroi\). Late verb \akuro\, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:15:6; strkjv@Mark:7:13| (from \a\ privative and \kuros\, authority). On \katargsai\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:1:28; strkjv@2:6; strkjv@15:24,26|.

rwp@Galatians:4:3 @{When we were children} (\hote men npioi\). Before the epoch of faith came and we (Jews and Gentiles) were under the law as paedagogue, guardian, steward, to use all of Paul's metaphors. {We were held in bondage} (\hmeis metha dedoulmenoi\). Periphrastic past perfect of \doulo\, to enslave, in a permanent state of bondage. {Under the rudiments of the world} (\hupo ta stoicheia tou kosmou\). \Stoichos\ is row or rank, a series. Songs:\stoicheion\ is any first thing in a \stoichos\ like the letters of the alphabet, the material elements in the universe (2Peter:3:10|), the heavenly bodies (some argue for that here), the rudiments of any act (Hebrews:5:12; strkjv@Acts:15:10; strkjv@Galatians:5:1; strkjv@4:3,9; strkjv@Colossians:2:8,20|). The papyri illustrate all the varieties in meaning of this word. Burton has a valuable excursus on the word in his commentary. Probably here (Lightfoot) Paul has in mind the rudimentary character of the law as it applies to both Jews and Gentiles, to all the knowledge of the world (\kosmos\ as the orderly material universe as in strkjv@Colossians:2:8,20|). See on ¯Matthew:13:38; strkjv@Acts:17:24; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:22|. All were in the elementary stage before Christ came.

rwp@Info_John @ THE UNITY OF THE GOSPEL This has been attacked in various ways in spite of the identity of style throughout. There are clearly three parts in the Gospel: the Prologue, strkjv@John:1:1-18|, the Body of the Book, strkjv@John:1:19-20:31|, the Epilogue, strkjv@John:21|. But there is no evidence that the Prologue was added by another hand, even though the use of Logos (Word) for Christ does not occur thereafter. This high conception of Christ dominates the whole book. Some argue that the Epilogue was added by some one else than John, but here again there is no proof and no real reason for the supposition. It is possible, as already stated, that John stopped at strkjv@John:20:31| and then added strkjv@John:21| before sending the book forth after his friends added strkjv@John:21:24| as their endorsement of the volume. Some scholars claim that they detect various displacements in the arrangement of the material, but such subjective criticism is never convincing. There are undoubtedly long gaps in the narrative as between chapters 5 and 6, but John is not giving a continuous narrative, but only a supplementary account assuming knowledge of the Synoptics. It is held that editorial comments by redactors can be detected here and there. Perhaps, and perhaps not. The unity of this great book stands even if that be true.

rwp@John:2:7 @{Fill} (\gemisate\). Effective first aorist active imperative of \gemiz\, to fill full. {With water} (\hudatos\). Genitive case of material. {Up to the brim} (\hes an\). "Up to the top." See \hes kat\ (Matthew:27:51|) for "down to the bottom." No room left in the waterpots now full of water.

rwp@John:4:42 @{Not because of thy speaking} (\ouketi dia tn sn lalian\). "No longer because of thy talk," good and effective as that was. \Lalia\ (cf. \lale\) is talk, talkativeness, mode of speech, one's vernacular, used by Jesus of his own speech (John:8:43|). {We have heard} (\akkoamen\). Perfect active indicative of \akou\, their abiding experience. {For ourselves} (\autoi\). Just "ourselves." {The Saviour of the world} (\ho str tou kosmou\). See strkjv@Matthew:1:21| for ssei used of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term \str\ to Jesus again in strkjv@1John:4:14|. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (verse 22|). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (verse 26|) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: "At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah." But why "merely"? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their "Saviour," Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on strkjv@John:4:42|: "That in the first century Messiah was given the title str is not proven." The use of "saviour and god" for Ptolemy in the third century B.C. is well known. "The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East" (Deissmann, _Light_, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke:2:11; strkjv@John:4:42; strkjv@Acts:5:31; strkjv@3:23; strkjv@Phillipians:3:20; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23; strkjv@Titus:1:4; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@3:6; strkjv@2Timothy:1:10; strkjv@2Peter:1:1,11; strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:2,18|). All these are writings of the first century A.D. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world.

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE SOURCES OF THE GOSPEL In his Preface or Prologue (Luke:1:1-4|) the author tells us that he had two kinds of sources, oral and written, and that they were many, how many we have no way of telling. It is now generally accepted that we know two of his written sources, Mark's Gospel and Q or the Logia of Jesus (written by Matthew, Papias says). Mark is still preserved and it is not difficult for any one by the use of a harmony of the Gospels to note how Luke made use of Mark, incorporating what he chose, adapting it in various ways, not using what did not suit his purposes. The other source we only know in the non-Markan portions of Matthew and Luke, that is the material common to both, but not in Mark. This also can be noted by any one in a harmony. Only it is probable that this source was more extensive than just the portions used by both Matthew and Luke. It is probable that both Matthew and Luke each used portions of the Logia not used by the other. But there is a large portion of Luke's Gospel which is different from Mark and Matthew. Some scholars call this source L. There is little doubt that Luke had another document for the material peculiar to him, but it is also probable that he had several others. He spoke of "many." This applies especially to chapters 9 to 21. But Luke expressly says that he had received help from "eye-witnesses and ministers of the word," in oral form this means. It is, then, probable that Luke made numerous notes of such data and used them along with the written sources at his command. This remark applies particularly to chapters 1 and 2 which have a very distinct Semitic (Aramaic) colouring due to the sources used. It is possible, of course, that Mary the mother of Jesus may have written a statement concerning these important matters or that Luke may have had converse with her or with one of her circle. Ramsay, in his volume, _Was Christ Born at Bethlehem?_ shows the likelihood of Luke's contact with Mary or her circle during these two years at Caesarea. Luke handles the data acquired with care and skill as he claims in his Prologue and as the result shows. The outcome is what Renan called the most beautiful book in the world.

rwp@Luke:12:22 @{Unto his disciples} (\pros tous mathtas autou\). Songs:Jesus turns from the crowd to the disciples (verses 22-40|, when Peter interrupts the discourse). From here to the end of the chapter Luke gives material that appears in Matthew, but not in one connection as here. In Matthew part of it is in the charge to the Twelve on their tour in Galilee, part in the eschatological discourse on the Mount of Olives. None of it is in Mark. Hence Q or the Logia seems to be the source of it. The question recurs again whether Jesus repeated on other occasions what is given here or whether Luke has here put together separate discourses as Matthew is held by many to have done in the Sermon on the Mount. We have no way of deciding these points. We can only say again that Jesus would naturally repeat his favourite sayings like other popular preachers and teachers. Songs:Luke:12:22-31| corresponds to strkjv@Matthew:6:25-33|, which see for detailed discussion. The parable of the rich fool was spoken to the crowd, but this exhortation to freedom from care (22-31|) is to the disciples. Songs:the language in strkjv@Luke:12:22| is precisely that in strkjv@Matthew:6:25|. See there for \m merimnte\ (stop being anxious) and the deliberative subjunctive retained in the indirect question (\phagte, endussthe\). Songs:verse 23| here is the same in strkjv@Matthew:6:25| except that there it is a question with \ouch\ expecting the affirmative answer, whereas here it is given as a reason (\gar\, for) for the preceding command.

rwp@Mark:13:4 @{Tell us, when shall these things be?} (\Eipon hmin pote tauta estai;\). The Revised Version punctuates it as a direct question, but Westcott and Hort as an indirect inquiry. They asked about the {when} (\pote\) and the {what sign} (\ti smeion\). strkjv@Matthew:24:3| includes "the sign of thy coming and the end of the world," showing that these tragic events are brought before Jesus by the disciples. See discussion of the interpretation of this discourse on ¯Matthew:24:3|. This chapter in Mark is often called "The Little Apocalypse" with the notion that a Jewish apocalypse has been here adapted by Mark and attributed to Jesus. Many of the theories attribute grave error to Jesus or to the Gospels on this subject. The view adopted in the discussion in Matthew is the one suggested here, that Jesus blended in one picture his death, the destruction of Jerusalem within that generation, the second coming and end of the world typified by the destruction of the city. The lines between these topics are not sharply drawn in the report and it is not possible for us to separate the topics clearly. This great discourse is the longest preserved in Mark and may be due to Peter. Mark may have given it in order "to forewarn and forearm" (Bruce) the readers against the coming catastrophe of the destruction of Jerusalem. Both Matthew (Matthew:24|) and Luke (Luke:21:5-36|) follow the general line of Mark 13 though strkjv@Matthew:24:43-25:46| presents new material (parables).

rwp@Matthew:5:11 @{Falsely, for my sake} (\pseudomenoi heneken emou\). Codex Bezae changes the order of these last Beatitudes, but that is immaterial. What does matter is that the bad things said of Christ's followers shall be untrue and that they are slandered for Christ's sake. Both things must be true before one can wear a martyr's crown and receive the great reward (\misthos\) in heaven. No prize awaits one there who deserves all the evil said of him and done to him here.

rwp@Matthew:27:29 @{A crown of thorns} (\stephanon ex akanthn\). They wove a crown out of thorns which would grow even in the palace grounds. It is immaterial whether they were young and tender thorn bushes, as probable in the spring, or hard bushes with sharp prongs. The soldiers would not care, for they were after ridicule and mockery even if it caused pain. It was more like a victor's garland (\stephanon\) than a royal diadem (\diadma\), but it served the purpose. Songs:with the reed (\kalamon\), a stalk of common cane grass which served as sceptre. The soldiers were familiar with the _Ave Caesar_ and copy it in their mockery of Jesus: {Hail, King of the Jews} (\chaire, Basileu tn Ioudain\). The soldiers added the insults used by the Sanhedrin (Matthew:26:67|), spitting on him and smiting him with the reed. Probably Jesus had been unbound already. At any rate the garments of mockery were removed before the _via dolorosa_ to the cross (verse 31|).

rwp@Revelation:3:9 @{I give} (\did\). Late omega form for \didmi\, but the \-mi\ form in strkjv@17:13| (\didoasin\). These Jewish converts are a gift from Christ. For this use of \didmi\ see strkjv@Acts:2:27; strkjv@10:40; strkjv@14:3|. There is ellipse of \tinas\ before \ek\ as in strkjv@2:10| (\ex humn\) and see strkjv@2:9| for "the synagogue of Satan." {Of them which say} (\tn legontn\). Ablative plural in apposition with \sunaggs\. On the construction of \heautous Ioudaious einai\ see on ¯2:9| (\Ioudaious einai heautous\, the order of words being immaterial). {But do lie} (\alla pseudontai\). Present middle indicative of \pseudomai\, explanatory positive, addition here to \kai ouk eisin\ of strkjv@2:9|, in contrast also with \ho althinos\ of verse 7| and in Johannine style (John:8:44; strkjv@1John:1:10; strkjv@2:4|). {I will make them} (\pois autous\). Future active indicative of \poie\, resuming the prophecy after the parenthesis (\tn--pseudontai\, which say--but do lie). {To come and worship} (\hina hxousin kai proskunsousin\). "That they come and worship" (final clause, like _facio ut_ in Latin, with \hina\ and the future active of \hk\ and \proskune\). The language is based on strkjv@Isaiah:45:14; strkjv@60:14|. The Jews expected homage (not worship in the strict sense) from the Gentiles, but it will come to the Christians at last (1Corinthians:14:24|). Later Ignatius (_Philad_. 6) warns this church against Judaizing Christians, perhaps one result of an influx of Jews. {And to know} (\kai gnsin\). Continuation of the purpose clause with \hina\, but with the second aorist active subjunctive rather than the less usual future indicative. See both constructions also with \hina\ in strkjv@22:14|. Probably a reminiscence of strkjv@Isaiah:43:4| in \eg gapsa se\ (I loved thee), first aorist active indicative.

rwp@Revelation:4:6 @{As it were a glassy sea} (\hs thalassa hualin\). Old adjective (from \hualos\, glass, strkjv@21:18,21|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@15:2|. Possibly from \huei\ (it rains), like a raindrop. At any rate here it is the appearance, not the material. Glass was made in Egypt 4,000 years ago. In strkjv@Exodus:24:10| the elders see under the feet of God in the theophany a paved work of sapphire stone (cf. strkjv@Ezekiel:1:26|). The likeness of the appearance of sky to sea suggests the metaphor here (Beckwith). {Like crystal} (\homoia krustalli\). Associative-instrumental case after \homoia\. Old word, from \kruos\ (ice and sometimes used for ice), in N.T. only here and strkjv@22:1|, not semi-opaque, but clear like rock-crystal. {In the midst of the throne} (\en mesi tou thronou\). As one looks from the front, really before. {Round about the throne} (\kukli tou thronou\). Merely an adverb in the locative case (Romans:15:19|), as a preposition in N.T. only here, strkjv@5:11; strkjv@7:11|. This seems to mean that on each of the four sides of the throne was one of the four living creatures either stationary or moving rapidly round (Ezekiel:1:12f.|). {Four living creatures} (\tessera za\). Not \thria\ (beasts), but living creatures. Certainly kin to the \za\ of strkjv@Ezekiel:1; 2| which are cherubim (Ezekiel:10:2,20|), though here the details vary as to faces and wings with a significance of John's own, probably representing creation in contrast with the redeemed (the elders). {Full of eyes} (\gemonta ophthalmn\). Present active participle of \gem\, to be full of, with the genitive, signifying here unlimited intelligence (Beckwith), the ceaseless vigilance of nature (Swete).

rwp@Revelation:7:16 @{They shall hunger no more} (\ou peinasousin eti\). Future tense of \peina\, old verb with late form instead of \peinsousin\ like strkjv@Luke:6:25|. It is a free translation of strkjv@Isaiah:49:10| (not quotation from the LXX). {Neither thirst any more} (\oude dipssousin eti\). Future tense of \dipsa\, the two strong human appetites will be gone, a clear refutation of a gross materialistic or sensual conception of the future life. Cf. strkjv@John:6:35|. {Neither shall strike} (\oude m pesi\). Strong double negative \oude m\ with second aorist active subjunctive of \pipt\, to fall. They will no longer be under the rays of the sun as upon earth. {Nor any heat} (\oude pn kauma\). Old word from \kai\, to burn, painful and burning heat, in N.T. only here and strkjv@16:9| (picture of the opposite condition). The use of the negative with \pn\ (all) for "not any" is common in N.T. Cf. strkjv@Psalms:121:6|.

rwp@Revelation:17:16 @{These shall hate the harlot} (\houtoi missousin tn pornn\). Future active of \mise\. \Houtoi\ is resumptive demonstrative pronoun (masculine) referring to the ten horns and the beast (neuter); construction according to sense. The downfall of Rome will come from the sudden change in subject peoples. {Shall make her desolate and naked} (\rmmenn poisousin autn kai gumnn\). Future active of \poie\ and perfect passive predicate accusative participle of \ermo\, old verb (from \ermos\ desolate), again in strkjv@18:16,19|. \Gumnn\ (naked) is predicate adjective. {Shall eat her flesh} (\tas sarkas auts phagontai\). Future middle of the defective verb \esthi\, to eat. Note plural \sarkas\, portions of flesh (James:5:3|) as in strkjv@Psalms:27:2; strkjv@Micah:3:3|. {Shall burn her utterly with fire} (\autn katakausousin en puri\). Future active of \katakai\, to burn down (perfective use of \kai\). John wrote before the days of Alaric, Genseric, Ricimer, Totila, with their hordes which devastated Rome and the west in the fifth and sixth centuries. "No reader of the _Decline and Fall_ can be at a loss for materials which will at once illustrate and justify the general trend of St. John's prophecy" (Swete).

rwp@Revelation:21:16 @{Lieth foursquare} (\tetragnos keitai\). Present middle indicative of \keimai\. The predicate adjective is from \tetra\ (Aeolic for \tessares\ four) and \gnos\ (\gnia\ corner, strkjv@Matthew:6:5|) here only in N.T. As in strkjv@Ezekiel:48:16,20|. It is a tetragon or quadrilateral quadrangle (21:12f.|). {The length thereof is as great as the breadth} (\to mkos auts hoson to platos\). It is rectangular, both walls and city within. Babylon, according to Herodotus, was a square, each side being 120 stadia. Diodorus Siculus says that Nineveh was also foursquare. {With the reed} (\ti kalami\). Instrumental case (cf. verse 15| for \kalamos\) and for \metre\ (aorist active indicative here) {Twelve thousand furlongs} (\epi stadin ddeka chiliadn\). This use of the genitive \stadin\ with \epi\ is probably correct (reading of Aleph P), though A Q have \stadious\ (more usual, but confusing here with \chiliadn\). Thucydides and Xenophon use \epi\ with the genitive in a like idiom (in the matter of). It is not clear whether the 1500 miles (12,000 furlongs) is the measurement of each of the four sides or the sum total. Some of the rabbis argued that the walls of the New Jerusalem of Ezekiel would reach to Damascus and the height would be 1500 miles high. {Equal} (\isa\). That is, it is a perfect cube like the Holy of Holies in Solomon's temple (1Kings:6:19f.|). This same measurement (\platos, mkos, hupsos\) is applied to Christ's love in strkjv@Ephesians:3:18|, with \bathos\ (depth) added. It is useless to try to reduce the measurements or to put literal interpretations upon this highly wrought symbolic language. Surely the meaning is that heaven will be large enough for all, as Jesus said (John:14:1ff.|) without insisting on the materialistic measurement of a gorgeous apartment house full of inside rooms.