Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-PROPHET.filter - rwp math:


rwp@1Corinthians:4:6 @{I have in a figure transferred} (\meteschˆmatisa\). First aorist active (not perfect) indicative of \meta-schˆmatiz“\, used by Plato and Aristotle for changing the form of a thing (from \meta\, after, and \schˆma\, form or habit, like Latin _habitus_ from \ech“\ and so different from \morphˆ\ as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:7; strkjv@Romans:12:2|). For the idea of refashioning see Field, _Notes_, p. 169f. and Preisigke, _Fachworter_). Both Greek and Latin writers (Quintilian, Martial) used \schˆma\ for a rhetorical artifice. Paul's use of the word (in Paul only in N.T.) appears also further in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:13-15| where the word occurs three times, twice of the false apostles posing and passing as apostles of Christ and ministers of righteousness, and once of Satan as an angel of light, twice with \eis\ and once with \h“s\. In strkjv@Phillipians:3:21| the word is used for the change in the body of our humiliation to the body of glory. But here it is clearly the rhetorical figure for a veiled allusion to Paul and Apollos "for your sakes" (\dia humas\). {That in us ye may learn} (\hina en hˆmin mathˆte\). Final clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \manthan“\, to learn. As an object lesson in our cases (\en hˆmin\). It is no more true of Paul and Apollos than of other ministers, but the wrangles in Corinth started about them. Songs:Paul boldly puts himself and Apollos to the fore in the discussion of the principles involved. {Not to go beyond the things which are written} (\to Mˆ huper ha gegraptai\). It is difficult to reproduce the Greek idiom in English. The article \to\ is in the accusative case as the object of the verb \mathˆte\ (learn) and points at the words "\Mˆ huper ha gegraptai\," apparently a proverb or rule, and elliptical in form with no principal verb expressed with \mˆ\, whether "think" (Auth.) or "go" (Revised). There was a constant tendency to smooth out Paul's ellipses as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26,31|. Lightfoot thinks that Paul may have in mind O.T. passages quoted in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:19,31; strkjv@3:19,20|. {That ye be not puffed up} (\hina mˆ phusiousthe\). Sub-final use of \hina\ (second use in this sentence) with notion of result. It is not certain whether \phusiousthe\ (late verb form like \phusia“, phusa“\, to blow up, to inflate, to puff up), used only by Paul in the N.T., is present indicative with \hina\ like \zˆloute\ in strkjv@Galatians:4:17| (cf. \hina gin“skomen\ in strkjv@1John:5:20|) or the present subjunctive by irregular contraction (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 203, 342f.), probably the present indicative. \Phusio“\ is from \phusis\ (nature) and so meant to make natural, but it is used by Paul just like \phusa“\ or \phusia“\ (from \phusa\, a pair of bellows), a vivid picture of self-conceit. {One for the one against the other} (\heis huper tou henos kata tou heterou\). This is the precise idea of this idiom of partitive apposition. This is the rule with partisans. They are "for" (\huper\) the one and "against" (\kata\, down on, the genitive case) the other (\tou heterou\, not merely another or a second, but the different sort, \heterodox\).

rwp@1Peter:4:16 @{But if as a Christian} (\ei de h“s Christianos\). Supply the verb \paschei\ (condition of first class, "if one suffer as a Christian"). This word occurs only three times in the N.T. (Acts:11:26; strkjv@26:28; strkjv@1Peter:4:16|). It is word of Latin formation coined to distinguish followers of Christ from Jews and Gentiles (Acts:11:26|). Each instance bears that idea. It is not the usual term at first like \mathˆtai\ (disciples), saints (\hagioi\), believers (\pisteuontes\), etc. The Jews used \Naz“raioi\ (Nazarenes) as a nickname for Christians (Acts:24:5|). By A.D. 64 the name Christian was in common use in Rome (Tacitus, Ann. XV. 44). Owing to itacism it was sometimes spelled \Chrˆstianoi\ (\i, ei\ and \ˆ\ pronounced alike). {Let him not be ashamed} (\mˆ aischunesth“\). Prohibition with \mˆ\ and present passive imperative of \aischun“\. Peter had once been ashamed to suffer reproach or even a sneer for being a disciple of Christ (Mark:14:68|). See the words of Jesus in strkjv@Mark:8:38| and Paul's in strkjv@2Timothy:1:12|. Peter is not ashamed now. In this name (\en t“i onomati tout“i\). Of Christian as in strkjv@Mark:9:41|, "because ye are Christ's."

rwp@2Corinthians:2:14 @{But thanks be unto God} (\t“i de the“i charis\). Sudden outburst of gratitude in contrast to the previous dejection in Troas. Surely a new paragraph should begin here. In point of fact Paul makes a long digression from here to strkjv@6:10| on the subject of the Glory of the Christian Ministry as Bachmann points out in his _Kommentar_ (p. 124), only he runs it from strkjv@2:12-7:1| (_Aus der Tiefe in die Hohe_, Out of the Depths to the Heights). We can be grateful for this emotional outburst, Paul's rebound of joy on meeting Titus in Macedonia, for it has given the world the finest exposition of all sides of the Christian ministry in existence, one that reveals the wealth of Paul's nature and his mature grasp of the great things in service for Christ. See my _The Glory of the Ministry (An Exposition of II Cor. strkjv@2:12-6:10_). {Always} (\pantote\). The sense of present triumph has blotted out the gloom at Troas. {Leadeth in triumph} (\thriambeuonti\). Late common _Koin‚_ word from \thriambos\ (Latin _triumphus_, a hymn sung in festal processions to Bacchus). Verbs in \-eu“\ (like \mathˆteu“\, to make disciples) may be causative, but no example of \thriambeu“\ has been found with this meaning. It is always to lead in triumph, in papyri sometimes to make a show of. Picture here is of Paul as captive in God's triumphal procession. {The savour} (\tˆn osmˆn\). In a Roman triumph garlands of flowers scattered sweet odour and incense bearers dispensed perfumes. The knowledge of God is here the aroma which Paul had scattered like an incense bearer.

rwp@2Peter:3:16 @{As also in all his epistles} (\h“s kai en pasais epistolais\). We do not know to how many Peter here refers. There is no difficulty in supposing that Peter "received every one of St. Paul's Epistles within a month or two of its publication" (Bigg). And yet Peter does not here assert the formation of a canon of Paul's Epistles. {Speaking in them of these things} (\lal“n en autais peri tout“n\). Present active participle of \lale“\. That is to say, Paul also wrote about the second coming of Christ, as is obviously true. {Hard to be understood} (\dusnoˆta\). Late verbal from \dus\ and \noe“\ (in Aristotle, Lucian, Diog. Laert.), here only in N.T. We know that the Thessalonians persisted in misrepresenting Paul on this very subject of the second coming as Hymenaeus and Philetus did about the resurrection (2Timothy:2:17|) and Spitta holds that Paul's teaching about grace was twisted to mean moral laxity like strkjv@Galatians:3:10; strkjv@Romans:3:20,28; strkjv@5:20| (with which cf. strkjv@6:1| as a case in point), etc. Peter does not say that he himself did not understand Paul on the subject of faith and freedom. {Unlearned} (\amatheis\). Old word (alpha privative and \manthan“\ to learn), ignorant, here only in N.T. {Unsteadfast} (\astˆriktoi\). See on ¯2:14|. {Wrest} (\streblousin\). Present active indicative of \streblo“\, old verb (from \streblos\ twisted, \streph“\, to turn), here only in N.T. {The other scriptures} (\tas loipas graphas\). There is no doubt that the apostles claimed to speak by the help of the Holy Spirit (1Thessalonians:5:27; strkjv@Colossians:4:16|) just as the prophets of old did (2Peter:1:20f.|). Note \loipas\ (rest) here rather than \allas\ (other). Peter thus puts Paul's Epistles on the same plane with the O.T., which was also misused (Matthew:5:21-44; strkjv@15:3-6; strkjv@19:3-10|).

rwp@2Timothy:3:14 @{But abide thou} (\su de mene\). Emphatic contrast (\su de\), "But thou." Present active imperative of \men“\, common verb, to remain. {In the things which} (\en hois\). The antecedent to \hois\ is not expressed ("in which things") and the relative is attracted from \ha\ accusative with \emathes\ (didst learn, second aorist active indicative of \manthan“\) to the case of the unexpressed antecedent (locative with \en\). {Hast been assured of} (\epist“thˆs\). First aorist passive indicative of \pisto“\, old verb (from \pistos\, faithful), to make reliable, only here in N.T. {Knowing from whom} (\eid“s para tin“n\). Second perfect active participle of \oida\. Note \tin“n\ (ablative case after \para\ in an indirect question). The list included the O.T. prophets, Paul, Eunice, Lois. There ought to be moral authority in such personages.

rwp@Acts:2:38 @{Repent ye} (\metanoˆsate\). First aorist (ingressive) active imperative. Change your mind and your life. Turn right about and do it now. You _crucified_ this Jesus. Now _crown_ him in your hearts as Lord and Christ. This first. {And be baptized every one of you} (\kai baptisthˆt“ hekastos h–m“n\). Rather, "And let each one of you be baptized." Change of number from plural to singular and of person from second to third. This change marks a break in the thought here that the English translation does not preserve. The first thing to do is make a radical and complete change of heart and life. Then let each one be baptized after this change has taken place, and the act of baptism be performed "in the name of Jesus Christ" (\en t“i onomati Iˆsou Christou\). In accordance with the command of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| (\eis to onoma\). No distinction is to be insisted on between \eis to onoma\ and \en t“i onomati\ with \baptiz“\ since \eis\ and \en\ are really the same word in origin. In strkjv@Acts:10:48| \en t“i onomati Iˆsou Christou\ occurs, but \eis\ to \onoma\ in strkjv@8:16; strkjv@19:5|. The use of \onoma\ means in the name or with the authority of one as \eis onoma prophˆtou\ (Matthew:10:41|) as a prophet, in the name of a prophet. In the Acts the full name of the Trinity does not occur in baptism as in strkjv@Matthew:28:19|, but this does not show that it was not used. The name of Jesus Christ is the distinctive one in Christian baptism and really involves the Father and the Spirit. See on ¯Matthew:28:19| for discussion of this point. "Luke does not give the form of words used in baptism by the Apostles, but merely states the fact that they baptized those who acknowledged Jesus as Messiah or as Lord" (Page). {Unto the remission of your sins} (\eis aphesin t“n hamarti“n h–m“n\). This phrase is the subject of endless controversy as men look at it from the standpoint of sacramental or of evangelical theology. In themselves the words can express aim or purpose for that use of \eis\ does exist as in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7| \eis doxan hˆm“n\ (for our glory). But then another usage exists which is just as good Greek as the use of \eis\ for aim or purpose. It is seen in strkjv@Matthew:10:41| in three examples \eis onoma prophˆtou, dikaiou, mathˆtou\ where it cannot be purpose or aim, but rather the basis or ground, on the basis of the name of prophet, righteous man, disciple, because one is, etc. It is seen again in strkjv@Matthew:12:41| about the preaching of Jonah (\eis to kˆrugma I“na\). They repented because of (or at) the preaching of Jonah. The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the _Koin‚_ generally (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 592). One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. Songs:I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received. {The gift of the Holy Ghost} (\tˆn d“rean tou hagiou pneumatos\). The gift consists (Acts:8:17|) in the Holy Spirit (genitive of identification).

rwp@Acts:5:34 @{Gamaliel} (\Gamaliˆl\). The grandson of Hillel, teacher of Paul (Acts:22:3|), later president of the Sanhedrin, and the first of the seven rabbis termed "Rabban." It is held by some that he was one of the doctors who heard the Boy Jesus in the temple (Luke:2:47|) and that he was a secret disciple like Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, but there is no evidence of either position. Besides, he appears here as a loyal Pharisee and "a doctor of the law" (\nomodidaskalos\). This word appears already in strkjv@Luke:5:17| of the Pharisaic doctors bent on criticizing Jesus, which see. Paul uses it of Judaizing Christians (1Timothy:1:7|). Like other great rabbis he had a great saying: "Procure thyself a teacher, avoid being in doubt; and do not accustom thyself to give tithes by guess." He was a man of judicial temper and not prone to go off at a tangent, though his brilliant young pupil Saul went to the limit about Stephen without any restraint on the part of Gamaliel so far as the record goes. Gamaliel champions the cause of the apostles as a Pharisee to score a point against the Sadducees. He acts as a theological opportunist, not as a disciple of Christ. He felt that a temporizing policy was best. There are difficulties in this speech of Gamaliel and it is not clear how Luke obtained the data for the address. It is, of course, possible that Saul was present and made notes of it for Luke afterwards. {Had in honour of all the people} (\timios panti t“i la“i\). Ethical dative. \Timios\ from \timˆ\, old word meaning precious, dear. {The men} (\tous anthr“pous\). Correct text as in verse 35|, not "the apostles" as Textus Receptus.

rwp@Acts:6:1 @{When the number of the disciples was multiplying} (\plˆthunont“n t“n mathˆt“n\). Genitive absolute of \plˆthun“\, old verb from \plˆthos\, fulness, to increase. The new freedom from the intercession of Gamaliel was bearing rich fruit. {A murmuring of the Grecian Jews} (\goggusmos t“n Hellˆnist“n\). Late onomatopoetic word (LXX) from the late verb \gogguz“\, to mutter, to murmur. The substantive occurs also in strkjv@John:7:12; strkjv@Phillipians:2:14; strkjv@1Peter:4:9|. It is the secret grumblings that buzz away till they are heard. These "Grecian Jews" or Hellenists are members of the church in Jerusalem who are Jews from outside of Palestine like Barnabas from Cyprus. These Hellenists had points of contact with the Gentile world without having gone over to the habits of the Gentiles, the Jews of the Western Dispersion. They spoke Greek. {Against the Hebrews} (\pros tous Ebraious\). The Jewish Christians from Jerusalem and Palestine. The Aramaean Jews of the Eastern Dispersion are usually classed with the Hebrew (speaking Aramaic) as distinct from the Grecian Jews or Hellenists. {Were neglected} (\parethe“rounto\). Imperfect passive of \parathe“re“\, old verb, to examine things placed beside (\para\) each other, to look beyond (\para\ also), to overlook, to neglect. Here only in the N.T. These widows may receive daily (\kathˆmerinˆi\, late adjective from \kath' hˆmeran\, only here in the N.T.) help from the common fund provided for all who need it (Acts:4:32-37|). The temple funds for widows were probably not available for those who have now become Christians. Though they were all Christians here concerned, yet the same line of cleavage existed as among the other Jews (Hebrew or Aramaean Jews and Hellenists). It is not here said that the murmuring arose among the widows, but because of them. Women and money occasion the first serious disturbance in the church life. There was evident sensitiveness that called for wisdom.

rwp@Acts:9:36 @{At Joppa} (\En Ioppˆi\). The modern Jaffa, the port of Jerusalem (2Chronicles:2:16|). {Disciple} (\mathˆtria\). Feminine form of \mathˆtˆs\, a learner from \manthan“\, to learn, a late word and only here in the N.T. {Tabitha} (\Tabeitha\). Aramaic form of the Hebrew _Tsebi_ and, like the Greek word {Dorcas} (\Dorkas\), means Gazelle, "the creature with the beautiful look" (or eyes), from \derkomai\. The gazelle was a favourite type for beauty in the orient (Song of Solomon strkjv@2:9,17; strkjv@4:5; strkjv@7:3|). She may have had both the Aramaic and the Greek name, Tabitha Dorcas like John Mark. There is nothing said about a husband and so she was probably unmarried. She is the second woman mentioned by name after Pentecost (Sapphira the other). She did her beautiful deeds by herself. She did not have a Dorcas society. {Did} (\epoiei\). Imperfect active, her habit.

rwp@Acts:11:26 @{Even for a whole year} (\kai eniauton holon\). Accusative of extent of time, probably the year A.D. 44, the year preceding the visit to Jerusalem (11:30|), the year of the famine. The preceding years with Tarsus as headquarters covered A.D. 37 (39) to 44. {They were gathered together with the church} (\sunachthˆnai en tˆi ekklˆsiƒi\). First aorist passive infinitive of \sunag“\, old verb, probably here to meet together as in strkjv@Matthew:28:12|. In strkjv@Acts:14:27| the verb is used of gathering together the church, but here \en tˆi ekklˆsiƒi\ excludes that idea. Barnabas met together "in the church" (note first use of the word for the disciples at Antioch). This peculiar phrase accents the leadership and co-operation of Barnabas and Saul in teaching (\didaxai\, first aorist active infinitive) much people. Both infinitives are in the nominative case, the subject of \egeneto\ (it came to pass). {And that the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch} (\chrˆmatisai te pr“t“s en Antiocheiƒi tous mathˆtas Christianous\). This first active infinitive \chrˆmatisai\ is also a subject of \egeneto\ and is added as a separate item by the use of \te\ rather than \kai\. For the word itself in the sense of divine command see on ¯Matthew:2:12,22; strkjv@Luke:2:26; strkjv@Acts:10:22|. Here and in strkjv@Romans:7:3| it means to be called or named (assuming a name from one's business, \chrˆma\, from \chraomai\, to use or to do business). Polybius uses it in this sense as here. \Tous mathˆtas\ (the disciples) is in the accusative of general reference with the infinitive. \Christianous\ (Christians) is simply predicate accusative. This word is made after the pattern of \Herodianus\ (Matthew:22:16|, \Her“idianoi\, followers of Herod), \Caesarianus\, a follower of Caesar (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 377, gives papyri examples of the genitive \Kaisaros\ meaning also "belonging to Caesar" like the common adjective \Caesarianus\). It is made thus like a Latin adjective, though it is a Greek word, and it refers to the Hebrew belief in a Messiah (Page). The name was evidently given to the followers of Christ by the Gentiles to distinguish them from the Jews since they were Greeks, not Grecian Jews. The Jews would not call them Christians because of their own use of \Christos\ the Messiah. The Jews termed them Galileans or Nazarenes. The followers of Christ called themselves disciples (learners), believers, brethren, saints, those of the Way. The three uses of Christian in the N.T. are from the heathen standpoint (here), strkjv@Acts:26:28| (a term of contempt in the mouth of Agrippa), and strkjv@1Peter:4:16| (persecution from the Roman government). It is a clear distinction from both Jews and Gentiles and it is not strange that it came into use first here in Antioch when the large Greek church gave occasion for it. Later Ignatius was bishop in Antioch and was given to the lions in Rome, and John Chrysostom preached here his wonderful sermons.

rwp@Acts:13:29 @{From the tree} (\apo tou xulou\). Not here strictly a tree, but wood as already in strkjv@5:30; strkjv@10:29| and later in strkjv@Galatians:3:13|. Strictly speaking, it was Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus who took the body of Jesus down from the cross, though the Jews had asked Pilate to have the bones of Jesus broken that his body should not remain on the cross during the Sabbath (John:19:31|). Paul does not distinguish the details here. {Laid} (\ethˆkan\). First (kappa) aorist active indicative third plural of \tithˆmi\ in place of \ethesan\ the usual second aorist active plural form. {Tomb} (\mnˆmeion\). Memorial, common in the Gospels.

rwp@Acts:13:50 @{Urged on} (\par“trunan\). First aorist (effective) active of \par-otrun“\, old verb, but here alone in the N.T., to incite, to stir up. The Jews were apparently not numerous in this city as they had only one synagogue, but they had influence with people of prominence, like "the devout women of honourable estate" (\tas sebomenas gunaikas tas euschˆmonas\), the female proselytes of high station, a late use of an old word used about Joseph of Arimathea (Mark:15:43|). The rabbis went after these Gentile women who had embraced Judaism (cf. strkjv@Acts:17:4| in Thessalonica) as Paul had made an appeal to them. The prominence of women in public life here at Antioch is quite in accord with what we know of conditions in the cities of Asia Minor. "Thus women were appointed under the empire as magistrates, as presidents of the games, and even the Jews elected a woman as Archisynagogos, at least in one instance at Smyrna" (Knowling). In Damascus Josephus (_War_ II. 20, 21) says that a majority of the married women were proselytes. Strabo (VIII. 2) and Juvenal (VI. 542) speak of the addiction of women to the Jewish religion. {The chief men of the city} (\tous pr“tous tˆs pole“s\). Probably city officials (the Duumviri, the Praetors, the First Ten in the Greek Cities of the east) or other "foremost" men, not officials. The rabbis were shrewd enough to reach these men (not proselytes) through the women who were proselytes of distinction. {Stirred up a persecution} (\epˆgeiran di“gmon\). First aorist active indicative of \epegeir“\, old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@14:2|. Paul seems to allude to this persecution in strkjv@2Timothy:3:11| "persecutions, sufferings, what things befell me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra, what persecutions I endured." Here Paul had perils from his own countrymen and perils from the Gentiles after the perils of rivers and perils of robbers on the way from Perga (2Corinthians:11:26|). He was thrice beaten with rods (\tris erhabdisthˆn\, strkjv@2Corinthians:11:25|) by Roman lictors in some Roman colony. If that was here, then Paul and Barnabas were publicly scourged by the lictors before they left. Probably the Jews succeeded in making the Roman officials look on Paul and Barnabas as disturbers of the public peace. Songs:"they cast them out of their borders" (\exebalon autous apo t“n hori“n aut“n\). Second aorist active indicative of \ekball“\, forcible expulsion plainly as public nuisances. Just a few days before they were the heroes of the city and now!

rwp@Acts:13:52 @{And the disciples} (\hoi te\ or \hoi de mathˆtai\). The Gentile Christians in Antioch in Pisidia. Persecution had precisely the opposite effect to the intention of the Jews for they "were filled with joy and the Holy Spirit" (\eplˆrounto charas kai pneumatos hagiou\). Imperfect passive, they kept on being filled. It had been so before (Acts:4:31; strkjv@8:4; strkjv@9:31; strkjv@12:24|). The blood of the martyrs is still the seed of the church.

rwp@Acts:14:21 @{When they had preached the gospel to that city} (\euaggelisamenoi tˆn polin ekeinˆn\). Having evangelized (first aorist middle participle) that city, a smaller city and apparently with no trouble from the Jews. {Had made many disciples} (\mathˆteusantes hikanous\). First aorist active participle of \mathˆteu“\ from \mathˆtˆs\, a learner or disciple. Late verb in Plutarch, to be a disciple (Matthew:27:57| like strkjv@John:19:38|) and then to disciple (old English, Spenser), to make a disciple as in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| and here. Paul and Barnabas were literally here obeying the command of Jesus in discipling people in this heathen city. {They returned to Lystra and to Iconium, and to Antioch} (\hupestrepsan eis tˆn Lustran kai eis Ikonion kai eis Antiocheian\). Derbe was the frontier city of the Roman empire. The quickest way to return to Antioch in Syria would have been by the Cilician Gates or by the pass over Mt. Taurus by which Paul and Silas will come to Derbe in the second tour (Acts:15:41-16:1|), but difficult to travel in winter. But it was necessary to revisit the churches in Lystra, Iconium, Antioch in Pisidia and to see that they were able to withstand persecution. Paul was a Roman citizen though he had not made use of this privilege as yet for his own protection. Against mob violence it would count for little, but he did not hesitate. Paul had been stoned in Lystra, threatened in Iconium, expelled in Antioch. He shows his wisdom in conserving his work.

rwp@Acts:17:10 @{Immediately by night} (\euthe“s dia nuktos\). Paul's work had not been in vain in Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:1:7f.; strkjv@2:13,20|). Paul loved the church here. Two of them, Aristarchus and Secundus, will accompany him to Jerusalem (Acts:20:4|) and Aristarchus will go on with him to Rome (27:2|). Plainly Paul and Silas had been in hiding in Thessalonica and in real danger. After his departure severe persecution came to the Christians in Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:2:14; strkjv@3:1-5; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:6|). It is possible that there was an escort of Gentile converts with Paul and Silas on this night journey to Beroea which was about fifty miles southwest from Thessalonica near Pella in another district of Macedonia (Emathia). There is a modern town there of some 6,000 people. {Went} (\apˆiesan\). Imperfect third plural active of \apeimi\, old verb to go away, here alone in the N.T. A literary, almost Atticistic, form instead of \apˆlthon\. {Into the synagogue of the Jews} (\eis tˆn sunag“gˆn t“n Ioudai“n\). Paul's usual custom and he lost no time about it. Enough Jews here to have a synagogue.

rwp@Acts:19:1 @{While Apollos was at Corinth} (\en t“i ton Apoll“ einai en Korinth“i\). Favourite idiom with Luke, \en\ with the locative of the articular infinitive and the accusative of general reference (Luke:1:8; strkjv@2:27|, etc.). {Having passed through the upper country} (\dielthonta ta an“terika merˆ\). Second aorist active participle of \dierchomai\, accusative case agreeing with \Paulon\, accusative of general reference with the infinitive \elthein\, idiomatic construction with \egeneto\. The word for "upper" (\an“terika\) is a late form for \an“tera\ (Luke:14:10|) and occurs in Hippocrates and Galen. It refers to the highlands (cf. Xenophon's _Anabasis_) and means that Paul did not travel the usual Roman road west by Colossae and Laodicea in the Lycus Valley, cities that he did not visit (Colossians:2:1|). Instead he took the more direct road through the Cayster Valley to Ephesus. Codex Bezae says here that Paul wanted to go back to Jerusalem, but that the Holy Spirit bade him to go into Asia where he had been forbidden to go in the second tour (16:6|). Whether the upper "parts" (\merˆ\) here points to North Galatia is still a point of dispute among scholars. Songs:he came again to Ephesus as he had promised to do (18:21|). The province of Asia included the western part of Asia Minor. The Romans took this country B.C. 130. Finally the name was extended to the whole continent. It was a jewel in the Roman empire along with Africa and was a senatorial province. It was full of great cities like Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicea (the seven churches of strkjv@Revelation:2;3|), Colossae, Hierapolis, Apamea, to go no further. Hellenism had full sway here. Ephesus was the capital and chief city and was a richer and larger city than Corinth. It was located at the entrance to the valley of the Maeander to the east. Here was the power of Rome and the splendour of Greek culture and the full tide of oriental superstition and magic. The Temple of Artemis was one of the seven wonders of the world. While in Ephesus some hold that Paul at this time wrote the Epistle to the Galatians after his recent visit there, some that he did it before his recent visit to Jerusalem. But it is still possible that he wrote it from Corinth just before writing to Rome, a point to discuss later. {Certain disciples} (\tinas mathˆtas\). Who were they? Apollos had already gone to Corinth. They show no connection with Priscilla and Aquila. Luke calls them "disciples" or "learners" (\mathˆtas\) because they were evidently sincere though crude and ignorant. There is no reason at all for connecting these uninformed disciples of the Baptist with Apollos. They were floating followers of the Baptist who drifted into Ephesus and whom Paul found. Some of John's disciples clung to him till his death (John:3:22-25; strkjv@Luke:7:19; strkjv@Matthew:14:12|). Some of them left Palestine without the further knowledge of Jesus that came after his death and some did not even know that, as turned out to be the case with the group in Ephesus.

rwp@Acts:19:9 @{But when some were hardened} (\h“s de tines esklˆrunonto\). Imperfect passive of \sklˆrun“\, causative like _hiphil_ in Hebrew, to make hard (\sklˆros\) or rough or harsh (Matthew:25:24|). In LXX and Hippocrates and Galen (in medical writings). In N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:9:18| and 4 times in strkjv@Hebrews:3:8,13,15; strkjv@4:7,8| quoting and referring to strkjv@Psalms:95:8| about hardening the heart like a gristle. The inevitable reaction against Paul went on even in Ephesus though slowly. {Disobedient} (\epeithoun\). Imperfect again, showing the growing disbelief and disobedience (\apeithˆs\), both ideas as in strkjv@14:2; strkjv@17:5|, first refusal to believe and then refusal to obey. Both \sklˆrun“\ and \apeithe“\ occur together, as here, in Ecclus. strkjv@30:12. {Speaking evil of the Way} (\kakologountes tˆn hodon\). Late verb from \kakologos\ (speaker of evil) for the old \kak“s leg“\. Already in strkjv@Mark:7:10; strkjv@9:39; strkjv@Matthew:15:4|. Now these Jews are aggressive opponents of Paul and seek to injure his influence with the crowd. Note "the Way" as in strkjv@9:2| for Christianity. {He departed from them} (\apostas ap' aut“n\). Second aorist active participle of \aphistˆmi\, made an "apostasy" (standing off, cleavage) as he did at Corinth (18:7|, \metabas\, making a change). {Separated the disciples} (\aph“risen tous mathˆtas\). First aorist active indicative of \aphoriz“\, old verb to mark limits (horizon) as already in strkjv@13:2|. Paul himself was a spiritual Pharisee "separated" to Christ (Romans:1:1|). The Jews regarded this withdrawal as apostasy, like separating the sheep from the goats (Matthew:25:32|). Paul now made a separate church as he had done at Thessalonica and Corinth. {In the school of Tyrannus} (\en tˆi scholˆi Turannou\). \Scholˆ\ (our school) is an old word from \schein\ (\ech“\) to hold on, leisure and then in later Greek (Plutarch, etc.) a place where there is leisure as here. Only this example in the N.T. This is the Greek notion of "school," the Jewish being that of "yoke" as in strkjv@Matthew:11:29|. The name Tyrannus (our tyrant) is a common one. It is an inscription in the Columbarium of the Empress Livia as that of a physician in the court. Furneaux suggests the possibility that a relative of this physician was lecturing on medicine in Ephesus and so as a friend of Luke, the physician, would be glad to help Paul about a place to preach. It was probably a public building or lecture hall with this name whether hired by Paul or loaned to him. The pagan sophists often spoke in such halls. The Codex Bezae adds "from the fifth hour to the tenth" as the time allotted Paul for his work in this hall, which is quite possible, from just before midday till the close of the afternoon (from before the noon meal till two hours before sunset) each day. Here Paul had great freedom and a great hearing. As the church grows there will be other places of meeting as the church in the house of Aquila and Priscilla (1Corinthians:16:19|).

rwp@Acts:21:16 @{Certain of the disciples} (\t“n mathˆt“n\). The genitive here occurs with \tines\ understood as often in the Greek idiom, the partitive genitive used as nominative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 502). {Bringing} (\agontes\). Nominative plural participle agreeing with \tines\ understood, not with case of \mathˆt“n\. {One Mnason of Cyprus, an early disciple, with whom we should lodge} (\par h“i xenisth“men Mnas“ni tini Kupri“i archai“i mathˆtˆi\). A thoroughly idiomatic Greek idiom, incorporation and attraction of the antecedent into the relative clause (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 718). \Mnas“ni\ is really the object of \agontes\ or the accusative with \para\ or \pros\ understood and should be accusative, but it is placed in the clause after the relative and in the same locative case with the relative \h“i\ (due to \par'\, beside, with). Then the rest agrees in case with \Mnas“ni\. He was originally from Cyprus, but now in Caesarea. The Codex Bezae adds \eis tina k“mˆn\ (to a certain village) and makes it mean that they were to lodge with Mnason at his home there about halfway to Jerusalem. This may be true. The use of the subjunctive \xenisth“men\ (first aorist passive of \xeniz“\, to entertain strangers as in strkjv@Acts:10:6,23,32| already) may be volitive of purpose with the relative (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 955, 989). The use of \archai“i\ for "early" may refer to the fact that he was one of the original disciples at Pentecost as Peter in strkjv@15:7| uses \hˆmer“n archai“n\ (early days) to refer to his experience at Ceasarea in strkjv@Acts:10|. "As the number of the first disciples lessened, the next generation accorded a sort of honour to the survivors" (Furneaux).

rwp@Acts:22:3 @{I am a Jew} (\Eg“ eimi anˆr Ioudaios\). Note use of \Eg“\ for emphasis. Paul recounts his Jewish advantages or privileges with manifest pride as in strkjv@Acts:26:4f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:22; strkjv@Galatians:1:14; strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-7|. {Born} (\gegennˆmenos\). Perfect passive participle of \genna“\. See above in strkjv@21:39| for the claim of Tarsus as his birth-place. He was a Hellenistic Jew, not an Aramaean Jew (cf. strkjv@Acts:6:1|). {Brought up} (\anatethrammenos\). Perfect passive participle again of \anatreph“\, to nurse up, to nourish up, common old verb, but in the N.T. only here, strkjv@7:20ff.|, and MSS. in strkjv@Luke:4:16|. The implication is that Paul was sent to Jerusalem while still young, "from my youth" (26:4|), how young we do not know, possibly thirteen or fourteen years old. He apparently had not seen Jesus in the flesh (2Corinthians:5:16|). {At the feet of Gamaliel} (\pros tous podas Gamaliˆl\). The rabbis usually sat on a raised seat with the pupils in a circle around either on lower seats or on the ground. Paul was thus nourished in Pharisaic Judaism as interpreted by Gamaliel, one of the lights of Judaism. For remarks on Gamaliel see chapter strkjv@5:34ff|. He was one of the seven Rabbis to whom the Jews gave the highest title \Rabban\ (our Rabbi). \Rabbi\ (my teacher) was next, the lowest being \Rab\ (teacher). "As Aquinas among the schoolmen was called _Doctor Angelicus_, and Bonaventura _Doctor Seraphicus_, so Gamaliel was called _the Beauty of the Law_" (Conybeare and Howson). {Instructed} (\pepaideumenos\). Perfect passive participle again (each participle beginning a clause), this time of \paideu“\, old verb to train a child (\pais\) as in strkjv@7:22| which see. In this sense also in strkjv@1Timothy:1:20; strkjv@Titus:2:12|. Then to chastise as in strkjv@Luke:23:16,22| (which see); strkjv@2Timothy:2:25; strkjv@Hebrews:12:6f|. {According to the strict manner} (\kata akribeian\). Old word, only here in N.T. Mathematical accuracy, minute exactness as seen in the adjective in strkjv@26:5|. See also strkjv@Romans:10:2; Gal strkjv@1:4; strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-7|. {Of our fathers} (\patr“iou\). Old adjective from \pater\, only here and strkjv@24:14| in N.T. Means descending from father to son, especially property and other inherited privileges. \Patrikos\ (patrician) refers more to personal attributes and affiliations. {Being zealous for God} (\zˆl“tˆs huparch“n tou theou\). Not adjective, but substantive {zealot} (same word used by James of the thousands of Jewish Christians in Jerusalem, strkjv@21:20| which see) with objective genitive \tou theou\ (for God). See also verse 14; strkjv@28:17; strkjv@2Timothy:1:3| where he makes a similar claim. Songs:did Peter (Acts:3:13; strkjv@5:30|) and Stephen (7:32|). Paul definitely claims, whatever freedom he demanded for Gentile Christians, to be personally "a zealot for God" "even as ye all are this day" (\kath“s pantes humeis este sˆmeron\). In his conciliation he went to the limit and puts himself by the side of the mob in their zeal for the law, mistaken as they were about him. He was generous surely to interpret their fanatical frenzy as zeal for God. But Paul is sincere as he proceeds to show by appeal to his own conduct.

rwp@Acts:23:27 @{Was seized} (\sullˆmphthenta\). First aorist passive participle of \sullamban“\. {Rescued him having learned that he was a Roman} (\exeilamen math“n hoti Romaios estin\). Wendt, Zoeckler, and Furneaux try to defend this record of two facts by Lysias in the wrong order from being an actual lie as Bengel rightly says. Lysias did rescue Paul and he did learn that he was a Roman, but in this order. He did not first learn that he was a Roman and then rescue him as his letter states. The use of the aorist participle (\math“n\ from \manthan“\) after the principal verb \exeilamen\ (second aorist middle of \exaire“\, to take out to oneself, to rescue) can be either simultaneous action or antecedent. There is in Greek no such idiom as the aorist participle of subsequent action (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1112-14). Lysias simply reversed the order of the facts and omitted the order for scourging Paul to put himself in proper light with Felix his superior officer and actually poses as the protector of a fellow Roman citizen.

rwp@Acts:23:30 @{When it was shown to me that there would be a plot} (\mˆnutheisˆs moi epiboulˆs esesthai\). Two constructions combined; genitive absolute (\mˆnutheisˆs epiboulˆs\, first aorist passive participle of \mˆnu“\) and future infinitive (\esesthai\ as if \epiboulˆn\ accusative of general reference used) in indirect assertion after \mˆnu“\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 877). {Charging his accusers also} (\paraggeilas kai tois katˆgorois\). First aorist active participle of \paraggell“\ with which compare \math“n\ above (verse 27|), not subsequent action. Dative case in \katˆgorois\. {Before thee} (\epi sou\). Common idiom for "in the presence of" when before a judge (like Latin _apud_) as in strkjv@24:20,21; strkjv@25:26; strkjv@26:2|. What happened to the forty conspirators we have no way of knowing. Neither they nor the Jews from Asia are heard of more during the long five years of Paul's imprisonment in Caesarea and Rome.

rwp@Colossians:2:7 @{Rooted} (\erriz“menoi\). Perfect passive participle of old verb \rizo“\ from \riza\, root. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Ephesians:3:17|. Paul changes the figure from walk to growing tree. {Builded up in him} (\epoikodomoumenoi en aut“i\). Present passive participle (rooted to stay so) of \epoikodome“\, old verb, to build upon as in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:10,12|. The metaphor is changed again to a building as continually going up (present tense). {Stablished} (\bebaioumenoi\). Present passive participle of \bebaio“\, old verb from \bebaios\ (from \bain“, bai“\), to make firm or stable. {In your faith} (\tˆi pistei\). Locative case, though the instrumental case, {by your faith}, makes good sense also. {Even as ye were taught} (\kath“s edidachthˆte\). First aorist passive indicative of \didask“\, an allusion to \parelabete\ in verse 6| and to \emathete\ in strkjv@1:7|. {In thanksgiving} (\en eucharistiƒi\). Hence they had no occasion to yield to the blandishments of the Gnostic teachers.

rwp@Ephesians:4:20 @{But ye did not so learn Christ} (\Humeis de ouch hout“s emathete ton Christon\). In sharp contrast to pagan life (\hout“s\). Second aorist active indicative of \manthan“\.

rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ The study of Paul's Epistles in the order of their writing is the best possible way of seeing his own growth as a theologian and interpreter of Christ. Sabatier long ago laid emphasis on this point in his book _The Apostle Paul_ as did Matheson in _The Spiritual Development of Paul_. It is a tragedy to have to read Paul's Epistles as printed in the usual Greek text of Westcott and Hort and the English translations, beginning with Romans and ending with Philemon. In the manuscripts that give Paul's Epistles Romans comes first as the largest and most important, but Titus and Philemon come after II Timothy (the last just before his death). We know something of Paul's early preaching how he laid emphasis on the Messiahship of Jesus proven by his resurrection, Paul himself having seen the Risen Christ (Acts:9:22|). This conviction and experience lay at the foundation of all his work and he never faltered concerning it (Acts:17:3). In the earliest sermon of which we have a full report Paul proclaims justification by faith in Christ with forgiveness of sins (Acts:13:38f.|), blessings not obtained by the law of Moses. In the unfolding life of Paul he grappled with great problems of Jewish rabbinism and Greek philosophy and mystery-religions and Paul himself grew in stature as he courageously and victoriously faced Judaizer and Gnostic. There are scholars who claim that Paul surrendered to the appeal of Gnostic sacramentarianism and so went back on his great doctrine of justification by faith, not by works. It will be shown at the proper time that this view misinterprets Paul's attitude. The events given by Luke in the Acts fit in with the self-revelation of Paul in his own Epistles as we read them. Each one of the four groups of Epistles has a slightly different style and vocabulary as is natural when one comes to think of it. The same thing is true of the plays of Shakespeare and the poems of Milton. Style is the man, Buffon says. Yes, but style is also a function of the subject. Particularly is this true of vocabulary which has to vary with the different topics treated. But style in the same man varies with different ages. Ripened old age mellows the exuberance of youth and the passionate vehemence of manhood. We shall see Paul himself in his Epistles, letting himself go in various ways and in different moods. But in all the changing phases of his life and work there is the same masterful man who glories in being the slave of Jesus Christ and the Apostle to the Gentiles. The passion of Paul is Christ and one can feel the throb of the heart of the chief of sinners who became the chief of saints in all his Epistles. There is the Pauline glow and glory in them all.

rwp@Hebrews:5:8 @{Though he was a Son} (\kaiper “n huios\). Concessive participle with \kaiper\, regular Greek idiom as in strkjv@7:5; strkjv@12:17|. {Yet learned obedience} (\emathen hupakoˆn\). Second aorist active indicative of \manthan“\. Succinct and crisp statement of the humanity of Jesus in full harmony with strkjv@Luke:2:40,52| and with strkjv@Hebrews:2:10|. {By the things which he suffered} (\aph' h“n epathen\). There is a play on the two verbs (\emathen--epathen\), paronomasia. Second aorist active indicative of \pasch“\. He always did his Father's will (John:8:29|), but he grew in experience as in wisdom and stature and in the power of sympathy with us.

rwp@Info_John @ HISTORICAL VALUE OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL It is just here that the chief attack is made on the Fourth Gospel even by some who admit the Johannine authorship. It is now assumed by some that the Fourth Gospel is not on a par with the Synoptics in historical reliability and some harmonies omit it entirely or place it separately at the close, though certainly Tatian used it with the Synoptics in his _Diatessaron_, the first harmony of the Gospels. Some even follow Schmiedel in seeing only a symbolic or parabolic character in the miracles in the Fourth Gospel, particularly in the narrative of the raising of Lazarus in chapter strkjv@John:11| which occurs here alone. But John makes this miracle play quite an important part in the culmination of events at the end. Clearly the author professes to be giving actual data largely out of his own experience and knowledge. It is objected by some that the Fourth Gospel gives an unnatural picture of Christ with Messianic claims at the very start. But the Synoptics give that same claim at the baptism and temptation, not to mention Luke's account of the Boy Jesus in the temple. The picture of the Jews as hostile to Jesus is said to be overdrawn in the Fourth Gospel. The answer to that appears in the Sermon on the Mount, the Sabbath miracles, the efforts of the Pharisees and lawyers to catch Jesus in his talk, the final denunciation in strkjv@Matthew:23|, all in the Synoptics. The opposition to Jesus grew steadily as he revealed himself more clearly. Some of the difficulties raised are gratuitous as in the early cleansing of the temple as if it could not have happened twice, confounding the draught of fishes in chapter strkjv@John:21| with that in strkjv@Luke:5|, making Mary of Bethany at the feast of a Simon in chapter strkjv@John:12| the same as the sinful woman at the feast of another Simon in strkjv@Luke:7|, making John's Gospel locate the last passover meal a day ahead instead of at the regular time as the Synoptics have it. Rightly interpreted these difficulties disappear. In simple truth, if one takes the Fourth Gospel at its face value, the personal recollections of the aged John phrased in his own way to supplement the narratives in the Synoptics, there is little left to give serious trouble. The Jerusalem ministry with the feasts is a case in point. The narrative of the call of the first disciples in chapter strkjv@John:1| is another. The author followed Simon in bringing also his own brother James to Jesus. John was present in the appearance of Christ before Annas, and Pilate. He was at the Cross when no other apostles were there. He took the mother of Jesus to his home and then returned to the Cross. He saw the piercing of the side of Jesus. He knew and saw the deed of Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus. E. H. Askwith has a most helpful discussion of this whole problem in _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1910).

rwp@Info_John @ JOHN'S PORTRAIT OF CHRIST No one questions that the Fourth Gospel asserts the deity of Christ. It is in the Prologue at the very start: "And the Word was God" (John:1:1|) and in the correct text of strkjv@John:1:18|, "God only begotten" (\theos monogenˆs\). It occurs repeatedly in the book as in the witness of the Baptist: "This is the Son of God" (John:1:34|). It is in the charge of the Pharisees (John:5:18|) and the claim of Christ himself (John:5:20-23; strkjv@6:48; strkjv@8:12,58; strkjv@11:25; strkjv@14:9; strkjv@17:5|) with the full and frank conviction of the author in strkjv@John:20:31|. He has made good his purpose. He has proven that Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God. With some critics this purpose has vitiated the entire book. The effort has been made to show that Paul, Peter, the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Synoptics give a lower view of Christ without the term \theos\ applied to him. In particular it was once argued that Q, the Logia of Jesus, used by Matthew and Luke (the non-Markan portions in both Matthew and Luke), gives a reduced picture of Jesus as on a lower plane than God, the Arian or Ritschlian view at any rate as answering for God to us though not God in actual nature. But in the Logia of Jesus we find the same essential picture of Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Son of Man as I have shown in my _The Christ of the Logia_ (1924). The only way to get rid of the deity of Christ in the New Testament is to throw overboard all the books in it as legendary or reflections of late theological development away from the original picture. The very earliest picture drawn of Christ that has been preserved to us, that in the Logia of Jesus (drawn W. M. Ramsay believes before Christ's crucifixion), is in essential agreement with the fully drawn portrait in the Fourth Gospel. Each picture in the Four Gospels adds touches of its own, but the features are the same, those of the God-Man Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world. The brilliant blind preacher of Edinburgh, George Matheson, sees this clearly (_Studies in the Portrait of the Messiah_, 1900; _St. John's Portrait of Christ_, 1910).

rwp@Info_John @ A BRIEF BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RECENT LITERATURE (SINCE 1880) ABBOT, EZRA, _On the Authorship of the Fourth Gospel_ (1880). ABBOT, PEABODY, and LIGHTFOOT, _The Fourth Gospel_ (1891). ABBOTT, E.A., _Johannine Vocabulary_ (1935).,_Johannine Grammar_ (1906). APPEL, _Die Echtheit des Johannesevangeliums_ (1915). ASKWITH, E.H., _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1910). BACON, B.W., _The Fourth Gospel in Research and Debate_ (1910). BALDENSPERGER, W., _Der Prolog des vierten Evangeliums_ (1898). BARTH, K., _The Gospel of John and the Synoptic Gospels_ (1907). BAUER, W., _Das Johannes-Evangelium_. 2 Aufl. (1925). BELZER, _Das Evangelium des heiligen Johannes_ (1905). BERNARD, J. H., _Gospel according to St. John_ (2 vols., 1929), in Int. Crit. Comm. BERT, _Das Evangelium des Johannes_ (1922). BLASS, F., _Evangelium secundum Johannem_ (1902). BROOKE, A. E., _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (Cambridge Biblical Essays, pp. 289 to 328. 1909). BURCH, VACHER, _The Structure and Message of St. John's Gospel_ (1928). BURNEY, C. F., _The Aramaic Origin of the Fourth Gospel_ (1922). CALMES, _L'Evangile selon S. Jean_ (1904). CANDLER, W. A., _Practical Studies in the Gospel of John_ (3 vols,, 1912-15). CARPENTER, J. ESTLIN, _The Johannine Writings_ (1927). CHAPMAN, DOM JOHN, _John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel_ (1911). CHARNWOOD, LORD, _According to St. John_ (1925). CLEMEN, C., _Die Entstehung des Johannesevangeliums_ (1912). D'ALMA, _Lamentations:Controverse du quatrieme evangile_ (1908).,Philo et le quotrieme evangile_ (1911). DAUSCH' _Das Johannesevangelium_ (1909). DELFF, H., _Das vierte Evangelium wiederhergestellt_ (1890).,Neue Beitrage zur Kritik und Erklarung des vierten Evangeliums (1890). DODS, M., _Expositor's Bible_ (2 vols., 1891).,Expositor's Greek Testament_ (1897). DRUMMOND, JAMES, _An Inquiry into the Character and Author- ship of the Fourth Gospel_ (1904). EVANS, H. H., _St. John the Author of the Fourth Gospel_ (1888). EWALD, P., _Das Hauptproblem der Evangelienfrage und der Weg zu seiner Losung_ (1890). FOUARD, S., _Jean et la hn de l'age apostolique_ (1904). GARDNER, P., _The Ephesian Gospel_ (1915). GARVIE, A. E., _The Beloved Disciple_ (1922). GOBEL, _Die Reden des Herrn nach Johannes_ (2 vols., 1906, 1910). GODET, F., _Comm. on the Gospel of St. John_ (Tr., 2 vols., 1886--90). GOGUEL, M., _Les sources du recit Johannique de la Passion_ (1910).,Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_ (1924). GORDON, S. D., _Quiet Talks on St. John's Gospel_. GORE, C., _Exposition of the Gospel of John_ (1920). GREEN, A. V., _The Ephesian Canonical Writings_ (1910). GREGORY, C. R., _Wellhausen und Johannes_ (1910). GRILL, J., _Untersuchungen uber die Entstehung des vierten Evangeliums_ (1902). GUMBEL, _Das Johannesevangelium Eine Erganzung des Lukas ev_. (1911). HARRIS, J. RENDEL, _The Origin of the Prologue to St. John's Gospel_ (1917). HAYES, D. A., _John and His Writings_ (1917). HOERNLE, E. S., _The Record of the Loved Disciple_ etc. (1913). HOLLAND, H. S., _The Philosophy of Faith and the Fourth Gospel_ (1919).,_The Fourth Gospel_ (1923). HOLTZMANN, H. J., _Evangelium, Briefe, und Offenbarung des Johannes_. 3 Aufl. (1908). HOLTZMANN, _Hand-Comm_. 3 Aufl. von Bauer (1908). HOVEY, A. H., _In American Comm_. (1885). HOWARD, W. F., _The Fourth Gospel in Recent Criticism and Interpretation_ (1931). IVERACH, JAMES, _Gospel of John_ (Int. Stand. Bible Encycl.). JACKSON, H. L., _The Fourth Gospel and Some Recent German Criticism_ (1906).,_The Problem of the Fourth Gospel_ (1918). JOHNSTON, J. S., _The Philosophy of the Fourth Gospel_ (1909). KEISKER, _The Inner Witness of the Fourth Gospel_ (1922). KREYENBUHL, _Neue Losung der Johanneischen Frage_ (1905). LARFIELD, _Die beide Johannes von Ephesus_ (1914). LEATHES, STANLEY, _The Witness of St. John to Christ_. LEPIN, _L'origine du quatrieme evangile_ (1907; 1927).,_Lamentations:valeur historique du quatrieme euangile_ (1910). LEWIS, F. G., _The Irenaeus Testimony to the Fourth Gospel_ (1908). LEWIS, F. G., _Disarrangements in the Fourth Gospel_ (1910). LIGHTFOOT, J. B., _Biblical Essays_ (pages 1-198; I-III, 1893). LLOYD, J. P. D., _The Son of Thunder_ (1932). LOISY, A., _Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_ (1903). LOWRIE, _The Doctrine of John_ (1899). LYMAN, MARY ELY, _The Fourth Gospel and the Life of Today_ (1931). MANSON, W., _The Incarnate Glory_ (1923). MAURICE, F. D., _The Gospel of St. John_ (1906). McGREGoR, G. H., _The Moffatt Commentary_ (1930). MONTGOMERY, J. A., _The Origin of the Gospel According to St. John_ (1923). MOUSE, _Johannes und Paulus_ (1915). MUIRHEAD, L. A., _The Message of the Fourth Gospel_ (1925). NOLLOTH, C. F., _The Fourth Evangelist_ (1925). NUNN, H. P. V., _The Son of Zebedee and the Fourth Gospel (1927). ORR, JAMES, _The Authenticity of St. John's Gospel Deduced from Internal Evidence_. OVERBECK, _Das Johannesevangelium_ (1911). PLUMMER, A., _Cambridge Greek Testament_ (1913). REVILLE, J., _Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_ (1901). REYNOLDS, H. R., _Gospel of John_ (Hastings, D. B., 1899). RICHMOND, W., _The Gospel of the Rejection_ (1906). ROBERTSON, A. T., _The Divinity of Christ in the Gospel of John_ (1916). ROBINSON, A., _The Historical Character of St. John's Gospel_ (1929). ROBINSON, B. W., _The Gospel of John_ (1925). SANDAY, W., _Criticism of the Fourth Gospel_ (1905). SCHLATTER, _Die Sprache und Heimath des vierten Evangelisten_ (1903). SCHMIEDEL, P. W., _The Johannine Writings_ (1908). SCOTT, E. F., _The Fourth Gospel: Its Purpose and Theology_ (1906). SCOTT, E. F., _The Historical and Religious Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1903). SCOTT-MONCRIEFF, C. E., _St. John, Apostle, Evangelist and Prophet_ (1909). SELBIE, W. B., _Belief and Life: Studies in the Thought of the Fourth Gospel_ (1916). SMITH, J. R., _The Teaching of the Fourth Gospel_ (1903). SMITH, P. V., _The Fourth Gospel: Its Historical Importance_ (1926). SPEER, R. E., _The Greatest Book in the World_ (1915). SPITTA, F., _Das Johannesevangelium als Quelle der Geschichte Jesu_ (1910). STANGE, _Die Eigenart des Johanneischen Produktion_ (1914). STANTON, V. H., _The Fourth Gospel_ (Part III of Gospels as Hist. Documents, 1921). STEVENS, G. B., _The Johannine Theology_ (1898). STRACHAN, R. H., _Gospel of John_ (Hastings, D C G 1906).,The Fourth Gospel: Its Significance and Environ- ment_ (1917).,The Fourth Evangelist: Dramatist or Historian_ (1925). TILLMANN, FRITZ, _Das Johannesevangelium Uebersetzt und Erklart_ (1931). VEDDER, H. C., _The Johannine Writings and the Johannine Problems_ (1917). WARSCHAUER, J., _The Problem of the Fourth Gospel_. WATKINS, W. H., _Modern Criticism Considered in its Rela- tion to the Fourth Gospel_ (1890). WATSON, H. A., _The Mysticism of St. John's Gospel_ (1916). WEARING, _The World View of the Fourth Gospel_ (1918). WEISS, B., _Meyer Komm_. 9 Aufl. (1902).,_Das Johannesevangelium als einheitliches Werk_ (1911). WELLHAUSEN, J., _Das Evangelium Johannis_ (1908). WENDT, H. H., _The Gospel according to St. John: An Inquiry into its Genesis and Historical Value_ (1911).,_Die Schichten im vierten Evangelium_ (1911). WESTCOTT, B. F., _The Gospel according to St. John_ (2 vols., 1908). WHITELAW, _The Gospel of John_ (1888). WINDISCH, H., _Johannes und die Synoptiker_ (1927). WORSLEY, _The Fourth Gospel and the Synoptists_ (1911). WREDE, W., _Charakter und Tendenz del Johannesevangelium_ (1903). ZAHN, TH., _Dal Evangelium Johannis (1908). 6 Aufl. (1921). strkjv@John:1:1 @{In the beginning} (\en archˆi\). \Archˆ\ is definite, though anarthrous like our at home, in town, and the similar Hebrew _be reshith_ in strkjv@Genesis:1:1|. But Westcott notes that here John carries our thoughts beyond the beginning of creation in time to eternity. There is no argument here to prove the existence of God any more than in Genesis. It is simply assumed. Either God exists and is the Creator of the universe as scientists like Eddington and Jeans assume or matter is eternal or it has come out of nothing. {Was} (\ˆn\). Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of \eimi\ to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence. Quite a different verb (\egeneto\, became) appears in verse 14| for the beginning of the Incarnation of the Logos. See the distinction sharply drawn in strkjv@8:58| "before Abraham came (\genesthai\) I am" (\eimi\, timeless existence). {The Word} (\ho logos\). \Logos\ is from \leg“\, old word in Homer to lay by, to collect, to put words side by side, to speak, to express an opinion. \Logos\ is common for reason as well as speech. Heraclitus used it for the principle which controls the universe. The Stoics employed it for the soul of the world (\anima mundi\) and Marcus Aurelius used \spermatikos logos\ for the generative principle in nature. The Hebrew _memra_ was used in the Targums for the manifestation of God like the Angel of Jehovah and the Wisdom of God in strkjv@Proverbs:8:23|. Dr. J. Rendel Harris thinks that there was a lost wisdom book that combined phrases in Proverbs and in the Wisdom of Solomon which John used for his Prologue (_The Origin of the _Prologue to St. John_, p. 43) which he has undertaken to reproduce. At any rate John's standpoint is that of the Old Testament and not that of the Stoics nor even of Philo who uses the term \Logos\, but not John's conception of personal pre-existence. The term \Logos\ is applied to Christ only in strkjv@John:1:1,14; strkjv@Revelation:19:13; strkjv@1John:1:1| "concerning the Word of life" (an incidental argument for identity of authorship). There is a possible personification of "the Word of God" in strkjv@Hebrews:4:12|. But the personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f.; strkjv@Colossians:1:17|) and in strkjv@Hebrews:1:2f.| and in strkjv@John:17:5|. This term suits John's purpose better than \sophia\ (wisdom) and is his answer to the Gnostics who either denied the actual humanity of Christ (Docetic Gnostics) or who separated the \aeon\ Christ from the man Jesus (Cerinthian Gnostics). The pre-existent Logos "became flesh" (\sarx egeneto\, verse 14|) and by this phrase John answered both heresies at once. {With God} (\pros ton theon\). Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. \Pros\ with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In strkjv@1John:2:1| we have a like use of \pros\: "We have a Paraclete with the Father" (\paraklˆton echomen pros ton patera\). See \pros“pon pros pros“pon\ (face to face, strkjv@1Corinthians:13:12|), a triple use of \pros\. There is a papyrus example of \pros\ in this sense \to gn“ston tˆs pros allˆlous sunˆtheias\, "the knowledge of our intimacy with one another" (M.&M., _Vocabulary_) which answers the claim of Rendel Harris, _Origin of Prologue_, p. 8) that the use of \pros\ here and in strkjv@Mark:6:3| is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is _Koin‚_, not old Attic. In strkjv@John:17:5| John has \para soi\ the more common idiom. {And the Word was God} (\kai theos ˆn ho logos\). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying \ho theos ˆn ho logos\. That would mean that all of God was expressed in \ho logos\ and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (\ho logos\) and the predicate without it (\theos\) just as in strkjv@John:4:24| \pneuma ho theos\ can only mean "God is spirit," not "spirit is God." Songs:in strkjv@1John:4:16| \ho theos agapˆ estin\ can only mean "God is love," not "love is God" as a so-called Christian scientist would confusedly say. For the article with the predicate see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 767f. Songs:in strkjv@John:1:14| \ho Logos sarx egeneto\, "the Word became flesh," not "the flesh became Word." Luther argues that here John disposes of Arianism also because the Logos was eternally God, fellowship of Father and Son, what Origen called the Eternal Generation of the Son (each necessary to the other). Thus in the Trinity we see personal fellowship on an equality.

rwp@John:1:37 @{Heard him speak} (\ˆkousan autou lalountos\). First active indicative of \akou“\ and present active participle of \lale“\ in genitive case agreeing with \autou\, object of \akou“\. "Heard him speaking" (kind of indirect discourse). John had disciples (\mathˆtai\, learners, from \manthan“\, to learn). {They followed Jesus} (\ˆkolouthˆsan t“i Iˆsou\). Associative instrumental case after verb (first aorist active indicative, ingressive aorist, of \akolouthe“\). These two disciples of the Baptist (Andrew and John) took him at his word and acted on it. John the Baptist had predicted and portrayed the Messiah, had baptized him, had interpreted him, and now for the second time had identified him.

rwp@John:2:2 @{Jesus also was bidden} (\eklˆthˆ kai ho Iˆsous\). First aorist passive indicative of \kale“\, "was also invited" as well as his mother and because of her presence, possibly at her suggestion. {And his disciples} (\kai hoi mathˆtai\). Included in the invitation and probably all of them acquaintances of the family. See on ¯1:35| for this word applied to John's followers. This group of six already won form the nucleus of the great host of "learners" through the ages who will follow Jesus as Teacher and Lord and Saviour. The term is sometimes restricted to the twelve apostles, but more often has a wider circle in view as in strkjv@John:6:61,66; strkjv@20:30|.

rwp@John:4:1 @{When therefore} (\H“s oun\). Reference to strkjv@3:22f|. the work of the Baptist and the jealousy of his disciples. \Oun\ is very common in John's Gospel in such transitions. {The Lord} (\ho Kurios\). Songs:the best manuscripts (Neutral Alexandrian), though the Western class has \ho Iˆsous\. Mark usually has \ho Iˆsous\ and Luke often \ho Kurios\. In the narrative portion of John we have usually \ho Iˆsous\, but \ho Kurios\ in five passages (4:1; strkjv@6:23; strkjv@11:2; strkjv@20:20; strkjv@21:12|). There is no reason why John should not apply \ho Kurios\ to Jesus in the narrative sections as well as Luke. Bernard argues that these are "explanatory glosses," not in the first draft of the Gospel. But why? When John wrote his Gospel he certainly held Jesus to be \Kurios\ (Lord) as Luke did earlier when he wrote both Gospel and Acts This is hypercriticism. {Knew} (\egn“\). Second aorist active indicative of \gin“sk“\. The Pharisees knew this obvious fact. It was easy for Jesus to know the attitude of the Pharisees about it (2:24|). Already the Pharisees are suspicious of Jesus. {How that} (\hoti\). Declarative \hoti\ (indirect assertion). {Was making and baptizing more disciples than John} (\pleionas mathˆtas poiei kai baptizei ˆ I“anˆs\). Present active indicative in both verbs retained in indirect discourse. Recall the tremendous success of John's early ministry (Mark:1:5; strkjv@Matthew:3:5; strkjv@Luke:3:7,15|) in order to see the significance of this statement that Jesus had forged ahead of him in popular favour. Already the Pharisees had turned violently against John who had called them broods of vipers. It is most likely that they drew John out about the marriage of Herod Antipas and got him involved directly with the tetrarch so as to have him cast into prison (Luke:3:19f.|). Josephus (_Ant_. XVIII. v. 2) gives a public reason for this act of Herod Antipas, the fear that John would "raise a rebellion," probably the public reason for his private vengeance as given by Luke. Apparently John was cast into prison, though recently still free (John:3:24|), before Jesus left for Galilee. The Pharisees, with John out of the way, turn to Jesus with envy and hate.

rwp@John:4:2 @{Although Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples} (\kaitoige Iˆsous autos ouk ebaptizen all' hoi mathˆtai autou\). Parenthetical explanation that applies also to strkjv@3:22|. Imperfect tense means that it was not the habit of Jesus. This is the only N.T. instance of \kaitoige\ (and yet indeed), compound conjunction (\kaitoi\ in strkjv@Acts:14:17; strkjv@Hebrews:4:3|) with intensive particle \ge\ added. This is the last mention of baptism under the direction of Jesus till the Great Commission (Matthew:28:19|). It is possible that Jesus stopped the baptizing because of the excitement and the issue raised about his Messianic claims till after his resurrection when he enjoined it upon his disciples as a rite of public enlistment in his service.

rwp@John:6:22 @{Which stood} (\ho hestˆk“s\). Perfect active (intransitive) participle of \histˆmi\, to put, to stand. Jesus had sent the multitudes away the evening before (Mark:6:45; strkjv@Matthew:14:22|), but evidently some did not go very far, still lingering in excitement on the eastern side of the lake next morning. {Boat} (\ploiarion\). Diminutive of \ploion\, little boat (Mark:3:9|). {Entered not with} (\ou suneisˆlthen\). Second aorist active of the double compound verb \suneiserchomai\, followed by associative instrumental case \mathˆtais\. {Went away alone} (\monoi apˆlthon\). Second aorist active indicative of \aperchomai\, to go away or off. \Monoi\ is predicate nominative. These people noted these three items.

rwp@John:6:45 @{Taught of God} (\didaktoi theou\). A free quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:54:13| with this phrase in the LXX. There is here the ablative case \theou\ with the passive verbal adjective \didaktoi\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516). In strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:9| we have the compound verbal \theodidaktoi\. The same use of \didaktos\ with the ablative occurs in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:13|. {And hath learned} (\kai math“n\). Second aorist active participle of \manthan“\. It is not enough to hear God's voice. He must heed it and learn it and do it. This is a voluntary response. This one inevitably comes to Christ.

rwp@John:7:3 @{His brethren} (\hoi adelphoi autou\). "His brothers" (half-brothers actually), who "were not believing on him" (\oude episteuon eis auton\) as stated in verse 5|. They were hostile to the Messianic assumptions of Jesus, a natural attitude as one can well see, though at first they were friendly (2:12|). {Depart hence} (\metabˆthi enteuthen\). Second aorist active imperative of \metabain“\, to pass to another place (5:24; strkjv@13:1|). It was impertinence on their part. {That thy disciples also may behold} (\hina kai hoi mathˆtai sou the“rˆsousin\). Final clause with \hina\ and the future active indicative of \the“re“\. Jesus had many disciples in Judea at the start (2:23; strkjv@4:1|) and had left it because of the jealousy of the Pharisees over his success (4:3|). The brothers may have heard of the great defection in the synagogue in Capernaum (6:66|), but the advice is clearly ironical. {Which thou doest} (\ha poieis\). To what works they refer by this language we do not know. But Jesus had been away from Galilee for some months and from Judea for a year and a half. Perhaps the brothers of Jesus may actually have been eager to rush Jesus into the hostile atmosphere of Jerusalem again.

rwp@John:7:15 @{Marvelled} (\ethaumazon\). Picturesque imperfect active of \thaumaz“\, "were wondering." After all the bluster of the rulers (verse 13|) here was Jesus teaching without interruption. {Knoweth letters} (\grammata oiden\). Second perfect active indicative used as present. \Grammata\, old word from \graph“\, to write, is originally the letters formed (Galatians:6:11|), then a letter or epistle (Acts:28:21|), then the sacred Scriptures (John:5:47; strkjv@2Timothy:3:15|), then learning like Latin _litterae_ and English letters (Acts:26:24; strkjv@John:7:15|). "The marvel was that Jesus showed Himself familiar with the literary methods of the time, which were supposed to be confined to the scholars of the popular teachers" (Westcott). {Having never learned} (\mˆ memathˆk“s\). Perfect active participle of \manthan“\ with \mˆ\, the usual negative (subjective) with the participle. It is not the wisdom of Jesus that disconcerted the Jewish leaders, but his learning (Marcus Dods). And yet Jesus had not attended either of the rabbinical theological schools in Jerusalem (Hillel, Shammai). He was not a rabbi in the technical sense, only a carpenter, and yet he surpassed the professional rabbis in the use of their own methods of debate. It is sometimes true today that unschooled men in various walks of life forge ahead of men of lesser gifts with school training. See the like puzzle of the Sanhedrin concerning Peter and John (Acts:4:13|). This is not an argument against education, but it takes more than education to make a real man. Probably this sneer at Jesus came from some of the teachers in the Jerusalem seminaries. "Christ was in the eyes of the Jews a merely self-taught enthusiast" (Westcott).

rwp@John:7:50 @{Nicodemus} (\Nikodˆmos\). Not heard from since chapter 3 when he timidly came to Jesus by night. Now he boldly protests against the injustice of condemning Jesus unheard. He appears once more (and only in John) in strkjv@19:39| with Joseph of Arimathea as a secret disciple of Jesus. He is a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin and his present act is courageous. {Saith} (\legei\). Dramatic present active indicative as in strkjv@2:3|. {Before} (\proteron\). This is genuine, a reference to the visit in chapter 3, but \nuktos\ (by night) is not genuine here. {Being one of them} (\heis “n ex aut“n\). As a member of the Sanhedrin he takes up the challenge in verse 48|. He is both ruler and Pharisee.

rwp@John:8:31 @{Which had believed him} (\tous pepisteukotas aut“i\). Articular perfect active participle of \pisteu“\ with dative \aut“i\ (trusted him) rather than \eis auton\ (on him) in verse 30|. They believed him (cf. strkjv@6:30|) as to his claims to being the Messiah with their own interpretation (6:15|), but they did not commit themselves to him and may represent only one element of those in verse 30|, but see strkjv@2:23| for \pisteu“ eis\ there. {If ye abide in my word} (\ean humeis meinˆte en t“i log“i t“i em“i\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and first aorist (constative) active subjunctive. {Are ye truly my disciples} (\alˆth“s mathˆtai mou este\). Your future loyalty to my teaching will prove the reality of your present profession. Songs:the conclusion of this future condition is put in the present tense. As then, so now. We accept church members on _profession_ of trust in Christ. Continuance in the word (teaching) proves the sincerity or insincerity of the profession. It is the acid test of life.

rwp@John:9:27 @{I told you even now} (\eipon humin ˆdˆ\). In verses 15,17,25|. {Would ye also become his disciples?} (\Mˆ kai humeis thelete autou mathˆtai genesthai;\). Negative answer formally expected, but the keenest irony in this gibe. Clearly the healed man knew from the use of "also" (\kai\) that Jesus had some "disciples" (\mathˆtai\, predicate nominative with the infinitive \genesthai\) and that the Pharisees knew that fact. "Do ye also (like the Galilean mob) wish, etc." See strkjv@7:45-52|. It cut to the bone.

rwp@John:9:28 @{They reviled him} (\eloidorˆsan auton\). First aorist active indicative of \loidore“\, old verb from \loidoros\ (reviler, strkjv@1Corinthians:5:11|), in N.T. only here, strkjv@Acts:23:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:12; strkjv@1Peter:2:23|. {Thou art his disciple} (\su mathˆtˆs ei ekeinou\). Probably a fling in \ekeinou\ (of that fellow). He had called him a prophet (9:17|) and became a joyful follower later (9:36-38|). {But we are disciples of Moses} (\hˆmeis de tou M“use“s esmen mathˆtai\). This they said with proud scorn of the healed beggar. All orthodox rabbis so claimed.

rwp@John:11:16 @{Didymus} (\Didumos\). The word means twin. Clearly Thomas had a twin brother or sister. Applied two other times to him (20:24; strkjv@21:2|). The Aramaic word for Thomas means Twin and Didymus is just the Greek equivalent of Thomas. He may even in Greek circles have been called Didymus. {His fellow disciples} (\tois sunmathˆtais\). Dative case and article use like "his." Only use of \sunmathˆtes\ in the N.T., rare word (in Plato). {Us also} (\kai hˆmeis\). As well as Jesus, since he is bent on going. {That we may die with him} (\hina apothan“men met' autou\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \apothnˆsk“\. Die with Jesus, Thomas means. Lazarus is already dead and they will kill Jesus (verse 8|). Pessimistic courage surely.

rwp@John:11:54 @{Therefore walked no more openly} (\oun ouketi parrˆsiƒi periepatei\). Imperfect active of \peripate“\, to walk around. Jesus saw clearly that to do so would bring on the end now instead of his "hour" which was to be at the passover a month ahead. {Into the country near to the wilderness} (\eis tˆn ch“ran eggus tˆs erˆmou\). It was now in Jerusalem as it had become once in Galilee (7:1|) because of the plots of the hostile Jews. The hill country northeast of Jerusalem was thinly populated. {Into a city called Ephraim} (\eis Ephraim legomenˆn polin\). \Polis\ here means no more than town or village (\k“mˆ\). The place is not certainly known, not mentioned elsewhere in the N.T. Josephus mentions (_War_, IV. ix. 9) a small fort near Bethel in the hill country and in strkjv@2Chronicles:13:19| Ephron is named in connexion with Bethel. Up here Jesus would at least be free for the moment from the machinations of the Sanhedrin while he faced the coming catastrophe at the passover. He is not far from the mount of temptation where the devil showed and offered him the kingdoms of the world for the bending of the knee before him. Is it mere fancy to imagine that the devil came to see Jesus again here at this juncture with a reminder of his previous offer and of the present plight of the Son of God with the religious leaders conspiring his death? At any rate Jesus has the fellowship of his disciples this time (\meta t“n mathˆt“n\). But what were they thinking?

rwp@John:12:4 @{Judas Iscariot} (\Ioudas ho Iskari“tˆs\). See \ho Iskari“tˆs\ in strkjv@14:22|. See strkjv@6:71; strkjv@13:1| for like description of Judas save that in strkjv@6:71| the father's name is given in the genitive, \Sim“nos\ and \Iskari“tou\ (agreeing with the father), but in strkjv@13:1| \Iskari“tˆs\ agrees with \Ioudas\, not with \Sim“nos\. Clearly then both father and son were called "Iscariot" or man of Kerioth in the tribe of Judah (Joshua:15:25|). Judas is the only one of the twelve not a Galilean. {One of his disciples} (\heis t“n mathˆt“n autou\). Likewise in strkjv@6:71|, only there \ek\ is used after \heis\ as some MSS. have here. This is the shameful fact that clung to the name of Judas. {Which should betray him} (\ho mell“n auton paradidonai\). John does not say in strkjv@6:71| (\emellen paradidonai auton\) or here that Judas "was predestined to betray Jesus" as Bernard suggests. He had his own responsibility for his guilt as Jesus said (Matthew:26:24|). \Mell“\ here simply points to the act as future, not as necessary. Note the contrast between Mary and Judas. "Mary in her devotion unconsciously provides for the honour of the dead. Judas in his selfishness unconsciously brings about the death itself" (Westcott).

rwp@John:12:42 @{Nevertheless even} (\hom“s mentoi kai\). For the old \hom“s\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:14:7; strkjv@Galatians:3:15| (only other examples in N.T.), here only with \mentoi\, "but yet," and \kai\, "even." In spite of what has just been said "many (\polloi\) even of the rulers" (recall the lonely shyness of Nicodemus in strkjv@3:1ff.|). These actually "believed on him" (\episteusan eis auton\) in their convictions, a remarkable statement as to the effect that Christ had in Jerusalem as the Sanhedrin plotted his death. Cf. Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea. {But because of the Pharisees} (\alla dia tous Pharisaious\). Like the whispered talk in strkjv@7:13| "because of the fear of the Jews." Once the Pharisees sneeringly asked the officers (7:48|): "Hath any one of the rulers believed on him?" And now "many of the rulers have believed on him." {They did not confess} (\ouch h“mologoun\). Negative imperfect in contrast to the punctiliar aorist \episteusan\. "They kept on not confessing." How like the cowardly excuses made today by those under conviction who refuse to step out for Christ. {Lest they should be put out of the synagogue} (\hina mˆ aposunag“goi gen“ntai\). Cf. strkjv@9:22| where this very word occurs in a purpose clause like this. Only once more in the N.T. (16:2|), a Jewish word not in profane authors. This ostracism from the synagogue was dreaded by the Jews and made cowards of these "believing elders." {More than} (\mallon ˆper\). They preferred the glory and praise of men more than the glory and praise of God. How \apropos\ these words are to some suave cowards today.

rwp@John:19:39 @{Nicodemus also} (\kai Nikodˆmos\). The Synoptics tell about Joseph of Arimathea, but only John adds the help that Nicodemus gave him in the burial of Jesus, these two timid disciples, Nicodemus now at last taking an open stand. {At the first} (\to pr“ton\). Adverbial accusative and reference to strkjv@3:1ff|. {Mixture} (\migma\). Late word from \mignumi\, to mix, only here in the N.T. Many old MSS. have here \heligma\ (roll), from \heliss“\ (Hebrews:1:12|), another late word here only in N.T. It was common to use sweet-smelling spices in the burial (2Chronicles:16:14|). {Pound} (\litras\). Late word for twelve ounces, in N.T. only here and strkjv@12:3|. Nicodemus was a rich man and probably covered the entire body with the spices.

rwp@Luke:6:40 @{The disciple is not above his master} (\ouk estin mathˆtˆs huper ton didaskalon\). Literally, a learner (or pupil) is not above the teacher. Precisely so in strkjv@Matthew:10:24| where "slave" is added with "lord." But here Luke adds: "But everyone when he is perfected shall be as his master" (\katˆrtismenos de pƒs estai h“s ho didaskalos autou\). The state of completion, perfect passive participle, is noted in \katˆrtismenos\. The word is common for mending broken things or nets (Matthew:4:21|) or men (Galatians:6:1|). Songs:it is a long process to get the pupil patched up to the plane of his teacher.

rwp@Luke:7:18 @{And the disciples of John told him} (\kai apˆggeilan I“anˆi hoi mathˆtai autou\). Literally, and his disciples announced to John. Such news (verse 17|) was bound to come to the ears of the Baptist languishing in the dungeon of Machaerus (Luke:3:20|). strkjv@Luke:7:18-35| runs parallel with strkjv@Matthew:11:2-19|, a specimen of Q, the non-Marcan portion of Matthew and Luke.

rwp@Luke:10:23 @{Turning to the disciples} (\strapheis pros tous mathˆtas\). Second aorist passive of \streph“\ as in strkjv@9:55|. The prayer was a soliloquy though uttered in the presence of the Seventy on their return. Now Jesus turned and spoke "privately" or to the disciples (the Twelve, apparently), whether on this same occasion or a bit later. {Blessed} (\makarioi\). A beatitude, the same adjective as in strkjv@Matthew:5:3-11|. A beatitude of privilege very much like that in strkjv@Matthew:5:13-16|. Jesus often repeated his sayings.

rwp@Luke:12:1 @{In the meantime} (\en hois\). It is a classic idiom to start a sentence or even a paragraph as here with a relative, "in which things or circumstances," without any expressed antecedent other than the incidents in strkjv@11:53f|. In strkjv@12:3| Luke actually begins the sentence with two relatives \anth' h“n hosa\ (wherefore whatsoever). {Many thousands} (\muriad“n\). Genitive absolute with \episunachtheis“n\ (first aorist passive participle feminine plural because of \muriad“n\), a double compound late verb, \episunag“\, to gather together unto. The word "myriads" is probably hyperbolical as in strkjv@Acts:21:20|, but in the sense of ten thousand, as in strkjv@Acts:19:19|, it means a very large crowd apparently drawn together by the violent attacks of the rabbis against Jesus. {Insomuch that they trode one upon another} (\h“ste katapatein allˆlous\). The imagination must complete the picture of this jam. {Unto his disciples first of all} (\pros tous mathˆtas autou pr“ton\). This long discourse in strkjv@Luke:12| is really a series of separate talks to various groups in the vast crowds around Jesus. This particular talk goes through verse 12|. {Beware of} (\prosechete heautois apo\). Put your mind (\noun\ understood) for yourselves (dative) and avoid (\apo\ with the ablative). {The leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocrisy} (\tˆs zumˆs hˆtis estin hupocrisis t“n Pharisai“n\). In strkjv@Mark:8:15| Jesus had coupled the lesson of the Pharisees with that of Herod, in strkjv@Matthew:16:6| with that of the Sadducees also. He had long ago called the Pharisees hypocrites (Matthew:6:2,5,16|). The occasion was ripe here for this crisp saying. In strkjv@Matthew:13:33| leaven does not have an evil sense as here, which see. See strkjv@Matthew:23:13| for hypocrites. Hypocrisy was the leading Pharisaic vice (Bruce) and was a mark of sanctity to hide an evil heart.

rwp@Luke:12:22 @{Unto his disciples} (\pros tous mathˆtas 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 \mˆ merimnƒte\ (stop being anxious) and the deliberative subjunctive retained in the indirect question (\phagˆte, endusˆsthe\). 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@Luke:16:1 @{Unto the disciples} (\kai pros tous mathˆtas\). The three preceding parables in chapter 15 exposed the special faults of the Pharisees, "their hard exclusiveness, self-righteousness, and contempt for others" (Plummer). This parable is given by Luke alone. The \kai\ (also) is not translated in the Revised Version. It seems to mean that at this same time, after speaking to the Pharisees (chapter 15), Jesus proceeds to speak a parable to the disciples (16:1-13|), the parable of the Unjust Steward. It is a hard parable to explain, but Jesus opens the door by the key in verse 9|. {Which had a steward} (\hos ˆichen oikonomon\). Imperfect active, continued to have. Steward is house-manager or overseer of an estate as already seen in strkjv@Luke:12:42|. {Was accused} (\dieblˆthˆ\). First aorist indicative passive, of \diaball“\, an old verb, but here only in the N.T. It means to throw across or back and forth, rocks or words and so to slander by gossip. The word implies malice even if the thing said is true. The word \diabolos\ (slanderer) is this same root and it is used even of women, she-devils (1Timothy:3:11|). {That he was wasting} (\h“s diaskorpiz“n\). For the verb see on ¯15:13|. The use of \h“s\ with the participle is a fine Greek idiom for giving the alleged ground of a charge against one. {His goods} (\ta huparchonta autou\). "His belongings," a Lukan idiom.

rwp@Mark:2:18 @{John's disciples and the Pharisees were fasting} (\ˆsan hoi mathˆtai I“anou kai hoi Pharisaioi nˆsteuontes\). The periphrastic imperfect, so common in Mark's vivid description. Probably Levi's feast happened on one of the weekly fast-days (second and fifth days of the week for the stricter Jews). Songs:there was a clash of standpoints. The disciples of John sided with the Pharisees in the Jewish ceremonial ritualistic observances. John was still a prisoner in Machaerus. John was more of an ascetic than Jesus (Matthew:18f.; strkjv@Luke:7:33-35|), but neither one pleased all the popular critics. These learners (\mathˆtai\) or disciples of John had missed the spirit of their leader when they here lined up with the Pharisees against Jesus. But there was no real congeniality between the formalism of the Pharisees and the asceticism of John the Baptist. The Pharisees hated John who had denounced them as broods of vipers. Here the disciples of John and the disciples of the Pharisees (\hoi mathˆtai I“anou kai hoi mathˆtai t“n Pharisai“n\) join in criticizing Jesus and his disciples. Later we shall see Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians, who bitterly detested each other, making com- mon cause against Jesus Christ. Songs:today we find various hostile groups combining against our Lord and Saviour. See on ¯Matthew:9:14-17| for comments. Matthew has here followed Mark closely.

rwp@Mark:4:34 @{But privately to his disciples he expounded all things} (\kat' idian de tois idiois mathˆtais epeluen panta\). To his own (\idiois\) disciples in private, in distinction from the mass of the people Jesus was in the habit (imperfect tense, \epeluen\) of {disclosing}, revealing, all things (\panta\) in plain language without the parabolic form used before the crowds. This verb \epilu“\ occurs in the N.T. only here and in strkjv@Acts:19:39| where the town-clerk of Ephesus says of the troubles by the mob: "It shall be settled in the regular assembly" (\en tˆi ennom“i ekklˆsiƒi epiluthˆsetai\). First future passive indicative from \epilu“\. The word means to give additional (\epi\) loosening (\lu“\), so to explain, to make plainer, clearer, even to the point of revelation. This last is the idea of the substantive in strkjv@2Peter:1:20| where even the Revised Version has it: "No prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation" (\pƒsa prophˆteia graphˆs idias epiluse“s ou ginetai\). Here the use of \ginetai\ (comes) with the ablative case (\epiluse“s\) and the explanation given in verse strkjv@2Peter:1:21| shows plainly that disclosure or revelation to the prophet is what is meant, not interpretation of what the prophet said. The prophetic impulse and message came from God through the Holy Spirit. In private the further disclosures of Jesus amounted to fresh revelations concerning the mysteries of the kingdom of God.

rwp@Mark:8:10 @{Into the parts of Dalmanutha} (\eis ta merˆ Dalmanoutha\). strkjv@Matthew:15:39| calls it "the borders of Magadan." Both names are unknown elsewhere, but apparently the same region of Galilee on the western side of the lake not far from Tiberias. Mark here uses "parts" (\merˆ\) in the same sense as "borders" (\horia\) in strkjv@7:24| just as Matthew reverses it with "parts" in strkjv@Matthew:15:21| and "borders" here in strkjv@Matthew:15:39|. Mark has here "with his disciples" (\meta t“n mathˆt“n autou\) only implied in strkjv@Matthew:15:39|.

rwp@Mark:8:33 @{He turning about and seeing his disciples} (\epistrapheis kai id“n tous mathˆtƒs autou\). Peter had called Jesus off to himself (\proskalesamenos\), but Jesus quickly wheeled round on Peter (\epistrapheis\, only \strapheis\ in Matthew). In doing that the other disciples were in plain view also (this touch only in Mark). Hence Jesus rebukes Peter in the full presence of the whole group. Peter no doubt felt that it was his duty as a leader of the Twelve to remonstrate with the Master for this pessimistic utterance (Swete). It is even possible that the others shared Peter's views and were watching the effect of his daring rebuke of Jesus. It was more than mere officiousness on the part of Peter. He had not risen above the level of ordinary men and deserves the name of Satan whose role he was now acting. It was withering, but it was needed. The temptation of the devil on the mountain was here offered by Peter. It was Satan over again. See on ¯Matthew:16:23|.

rwp@Mark:8:34 @{And he called unto him the multitude with his disciples} (\kai proskalesamenos ton ochlon sun tois mathˆtais autou\). Mark alone notes the unexpected presence of a crowd up here near Caesarea Philippi in heathen territory. In the presence of this crowd Jesus explains his philosophy of life and death which is in direct contrast with that offered by Peter and evidently shared by the disciples and the people. Songs:Jesus gives this profound view of life and death to them all. {Deny himself} (\aparnˆsasth“ heauton\). Say no to himself, a difficult thing to do. Note reflexive along with the middle voice. Ingressive first aorist imperative. See on ¯Matthew:16:24| about taking up the Cross. The shadow of Christ's Cross was already on him (Mark:8:31|) and one faces everyone.

rwp@Mark:11:14 @{No man eat fruit from thee henceforward forever} (\Mˆketi eis ton ai“na ek sou mˆdeis karpon phagoi\). The verb \phagoi\ is in the second aorist active optative. It is a wish for the future that in its negative form constitutes a curse upon the tree. strkjv@Matthew:21:19| has the aorist subjunctive with double negative \ou mˆketi genˆtai\, a very strong negative prediction that amounts to a prohibition. See on Matthew. Jesus probably spoke in the Aramaic on this occasion. {And his disciples heard it} (\kai ˆkouon hoi mathˆtai autou\). Imperfect tense, "were listening to it," and evidently in amazement, for, after all, it was not the fault of the poor fig tree that it had put out leaves. One often sees peach blossoms nipped by the frost when they are too precocious in the changeable weather. But Jesus offered no explanation at this time.

rwp@Mark:14:13 @{Two of his disciples} (\duo t“n mathˆt“n autou\). strkjv@Luke:22:8| names them, Peter and John. {Bearing a pitcher of water} (\keramion hudatos bastaz“n\). This item also in Luke, but not in Matthew.

rwp@Matthew:8:19 @{A scribe} (\heis grammateus\). One (\heis\)="a," indefinite article. Already a disciple as shown by "another of the disciples" (\heteros t“n mathˆt“n\) in strkjv@8:21|. He calls Jesus "Teacher" (\didaskale\), but he seems to be a "bumptious" brother full of self-confidence and self-complacency. "Even one of that most unimpressionable class, in spirit and tendency utterly opposed to the ways of Jesus" (Bruce). Yet Jesus deals gently with him.

rwp@Matthew:9:9 @{At the place of toll} (\epi to tel“nion\). The tax-office or custom-house of Capernaum placed here to collect taxes from the boats going across the lake outside of Herod's territory or from people going from Damascus to the coast, a regular caravan route. "{Called Matthew}" (\Maththaion legomenon\) and in strkjv@10:3| Matthew the publican is named as one of the Twelve Apostles. Mark (Mark:2:14|) and Luke (Luke:5:27|) call this man Levi. He had two names as was common, Matthew Levi. The publicans (\tel“nai\) get their name in English from the Latin _publicanus_ (a man who did public duty), not a very accurate designation. They were detested because they practised graft. Even Gabinius the proconsul of Syria was accused by Cicero of relieving Syrians and Jews of legitimate taxes for graft. He ordered some of the tax-officers removed. Already Jesus had spoken of the publican (5:46|) in a way that shows the public disfavour in which they were held.

rwp@Matthew:9:13 @{But go ye and learn} (\poreuthentes de mathete\). With biting sarcasm Jesus bids these preachers to learn the meaning of strkjv@Hosea:6:6|. It is repeated in strkjv@Matthew:12:7|. Ingressive aorist imperative (\mathete\).

rwp@Matthew:11:29 @{Take my yoke upon you and learn of me} (\arate ton zugon mou eph'humas kai mathete ap'emou\). The rabbis used yoke for school as many pupils find it now a yoke. The English word "school" is Greek for leisure (\scholˆ\). But Jesus offers refreshment (\anapausin\) in his school and promises to make the burden light, for he is a meek and humble teacher. Humility was not a virtue among the ancients. It was ranked with servility. Jesus has made a virtue of this vice. He has glorified this attitude so that Paul urges it (Phillipians:2:3|), "in lowliness of mind each counting other better than himself." In portions of Europe today people place yokes on the shoulders to make the burden easier to carry. Jesus promises that we shall find the yoke kindly and the burden lightened by his help. "Easy" is a poor translation of \chrˆstos\. Moffatt puts it "kindly." That is the meaning in the Septuagint for persons. We have no adjective that quite carries the notion of kind and good. The yoke of Christ is useful, good, and kindly. Cf. strkjv@Songs:1:10|.

rwp@Matthew:12:2 @{Thy disciples do} (\hoi mathˆtai sou poiousin\). These critics are now watching a chance and they jump at this violation of their Pharisaic rules for Sabbath observance. The disciples were plucking the heads of wheat which to the Pharisees was reaping and were rubbing them in their hands (Luke:6:1|) which was threshing.

rwp@Matthew:13:52 @{Made a disciple to the kingdom of heaven} (\matheteutheis tˆi basileiƒi t“n ouran“n\). First aorist passive participle. The verb is transitive in strkjv@28:19|. Here a scribe is made a learner to the kingdom. "The mere scribe, Rabbinical in spirit, produces only the old and stale. The disciple of the kingdom like the Master, is always fresh-minded, yet knows how to value all old spiritual treasures of Holy Writ, or Christian tradition" (Bruce). Songs:he uses things fresh (\kaina\) and ancient (\palaia\). "He hurls forth" (\ekballei\) both sorts.

rwp@Matthew:15:33 @{And the disciples say to him} (\kai legousin aut“i hoi mathˆtai\). It seems strange that they should so soon have forgotten the feeding of the five thousand (Matthew:14:13-21|), but they did. Soon Jesus will remind them of both these demonstrations of his power (16:9,10|). They forgot both of them, not just one. Some scholars scout the idea of two miracles so similar as the feeding of the five thousand and the four thousand, though both are narrated in detail by both Mark and Matthew and both are later mentioned by Jesus. Jesus repeated his sayings and wrought multitudes of healings. There is no reason in itself why Jesus should not on occasion repeat a nature miracle like this elsewhere. He is in the region of Decapolis, not in the country of Philip (\Trachonitis\).

rwp@Matthew:19:10 @{The disciples say unto him} (\legousin aut“i hoi mathˆtai\). "Christ's doctrine on marriage not only separated Him \toto caelo\ from Pharisaic opinions of all shades, but was too high even for the Twelve" (Bruce). {The case} (\hˆ aitia\). The word may refer to the use in verse 3| "for every cause." It may have a vague idea here = \res\, condition. But the point clearly is that "it is not expedient to marry" (\ou sumpherei gamˆsai\) if such a strict view is held. If the bond is so tight a man had best not commit matrimony. It is a bit unusual to have \anthr“pos\ and \gunˆ\ contrasted rather than \anˆr\ and \gunˆ\.

rwp@Matthew:22:16 @{Their disciples} (\tous mathˆtas aut“n\). Students, pupils, of the Pharisees as in strkjv@Mark:2:18|. There were two Pharisaic theological seminaries in Jerusalem (Hillel, Shammai). {The Herodians} (\t“n Her“idian“n\). Not members of Herod's family or Herod's soldiers, but partisans or followers of Herod. The form in \-ianos\ is a Latin termination like that in \Christianos\ (Acts:11:26|). Mentioned also in strkjv@Mark:3:6| combining with the Pharisees against Jesus. {The person of men} (\pros“pon anthr“p“n\). Literally, face of men. Paying regard to appearance is the sin of partiality condemned by James (James:2:1,9|) when \pros“polˆmpsia, pros“polˆmptein\ are used, in imitation of the Hebrew idiom. This suave flattery to Jesus implied "that Jesus was a reckless simpleton" (Bruce).

rwp@Matthew:26:12 @{To prepare me for burial} (\pros to entaphiasai me\). Mary alone had understood what Jesus had repeatedly said about his approaching death. The disciples were so wrapped up in their own notions of a political kingdom that they failed utterly to sympathize with Jesus as he faced the cross. But Mary with the woman's fine intuitions did begin to understand and this was her way of expressing her high emotions and loyalty. The word here is the same used in strkjv@John:19:40| about what Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus did for the body of Jesus before burial with the addition of \pros to\ showing the purpose of Mary (the infinitive of purpose). Mary was vindicated by Jesus and her noble deed has become a "memorial of her" (\eis mnˆmosumon autˆs\) as well as of Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:26:66 @{He is worthy of death} (\enochos thanatou estin\). Held in the bonds of death (\en, ech“\) as actually guilty with the genitive (\thanatou\). The dative expresses liability as in strkjv@Matthew:5:21| (\tˆi krisei\) and as \eis\ and the accusative (Matthew:5:22|). They took the vote though it was at night and they no longer had the power of death since the Romans took it away from them. Death was the penalty of blasphemy (Leviticus:24:15|). But they enjoyed taking it as their answer to his unanswerable speeches in the temple that dreadful Tuesday a few days before. It was unanimous save that Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus did not agree. They were probably absent and not even invited as being under suspicion for being secret disciples of Christ.

rwp@Matthew:27:57 @{And when even was come} (\opsias de genomenˆs\). It was the Preparation (\paraskeuˆ\), the day before the sabbath (Mark:15:42; strkjv@Luke:23:54; strkjv@John:31:42|). \Paraskeuˆ\ is the name in modern Greek today for Friday. The Jews were anxious that these bodies should be taken down before the sabbath began at 6 P.M. The request of Joseph of Arimathea for the body of Jesus was a relief to Pilate and to the Jews also. We know little about this member of the Sanhedrin save his name Joseph, his town Arimathea, that he was rich, a secret disciple, and had not agreed to the death of Jesus. Probably he now wished that he had made an open profession. But he has courage now when others are cowardly and asked for the personal privilege (\ˆitˆsato\, middle voice, asked for himself) of placing the body of Jesus in his new tomb. Some today identify this tomb with one of the rock tombs now visible under Gordon's Calvary. It was a mournful privilege and dignity that came to Joseph and Nicodemus (John:19:39-41|) as they wrapped the body of Jesus in clean linen cloth and with proper spices placed it in this fresh (\kain“i\) tomb in which no body had yet been placed. It was cut in the rock (\elatomˆsen\) for his own body, but now it was for Jesus. But now (verse 60|) he rolled a great stone to the door of the tomb and departed. That was for safety. But two women had watched the sad and lonely ceremony, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (mother of James and Joseph). They were sitting opposite and looking in silence.

rwp@Matthew:28:8 @{With fear and great joy} (\meta phobou kai charas megalˆs\). A touch of life was this as the excited women ran quickly (\tachu edramon\) as they had been told "to bring his disciples word" (\apaggeilai tois mathˆtais autou\). They had the greatest piece of news that it was possible to have. Mark calls it fear and ecstasy. Anything seemed possible now. Mark even says that at first they told no one anything for they were afraid (Mark:16:9|), the tragic close of the text of Mark in Aleph and B, our two oldest manuscripts. But these mingled emotions of ecstasy and dread need cause no surprise when all things are considered.

rwp@Matthew:28:19 @{All the nations} (\panta ta ethnˆ\). Not just the Jews scattered among the Gentiles, but the Gentiles themselves in every land. And not by making Jews of them, though this point is not made plain here. It will take time for the disciples to grow into this _Magna Charta_ of the missionary propaganda. But here is the world program of the Risen Christ and it should not be forgotten by those who seek to foreshorten it all by saying that Jesus expected his second coming to be very soon, even within the lifetime of those who heard. He did promise to come, but he has never named the date. Meanwhile we are to be ready for his coming at any time and to look for it joyfully. But we are to leave that to the Father and push on the campaign for world conquest. This program includes making disciples or learners (\mathˆteusate\) such as they were themselves. That means evangelism in the fullest sense and not merely revival meetings. Baptism in (\eis\, not _into_) the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, in the name of the Trinity. Objection is raised to this language in the mouth of Jesus as too theological and as not a genuine part of the Gospel of Matthew for the same reason. See strkjv@Matthew:11:27|, where Jesus speaks of the Father and the Son as here. But it is all to no purpose. There is a chapter devoted to this subject in my _The Christ of the Logia_ in which the genuineness of these words is proven. The name of Jesus is the essential part of it as is shown in the Acts. Trine immersion is not taught as the Greek Church holds and practices, baptism in the name of the Father, then of the Son, then of the Holy Spirit. The use of name (\onoma\) here is a common one in the Septuagint and the papyri for power or authority. For the use of \eis\ with \onoma\ in the sense here employed, not meaning _into_, see strkjv@Matthew:10:41f.| (cf. also strkjv@12:41|).

rwp@Philippians:4:11 @{In respect of want} (\kath' husterˆsin\). Late and rare word from \hustere“\, to be behind or too late, only here and strkjv@Mark:12:44| in N.T. {I have learned} (\emathon\). Simply, "I did learn" (constative second aorist active indicative of \manthan“\, to learn, looking at his long experience as a unit. {In whatsoever state I am} (\en hois eimi\). "In what things (circumstances) I am." {To be content} (\autarkˆs einai\). Predicate nominative with the infinitive of the old adjective \autarkˆs\ (from \autos\ and \arke“\, to be self-sufficient), self-sufficing. Favourite word with the Stoics, only here in N.T., though \autarkeia\ occurs in strkjv@2Corinthians:9:8; strkjv@1Timothy:6:6|. Paul is contented with his lot and he learned that lesson long ago. Socrates said as to who is wealthiest: "He that is content with least, for \autarkeia\ is nature's wealth."

rwp@Revelation:14:3 @{They sing as it were a new song} (\aidousin h“s “idˆn kainˆn\). See strkjv@5:9| for this phrase (cognate accusative) save that here \h“s\ (as if) is added. There the new song was sung by the four living creatures and the elders, but here "before" (\en“pion\) them and so apparently by the throng who were themselves redeemed by the Lamb. {No man could learn the song save} (\oudeis edunato mathein tˆn “idˆn ei mˆ\). Imperfect (\edunato\) of \dunamai\ and second aorist (ingressive) active infinitive of \manthan“\. In strkjv@5:9-12| the angels join in the song. In strkjv@15:3| it is the Song of Moses and the Lamb. {Even they that had been purchased out of the earth} (\hoi ˆgorasmenoi apo tˆs gˆs\). Perfect passive articular participle of \agoraz“\, purchased by the blood of the Lamb (5:9|), masculine plural in apposition with \chiliades\ (thousands) feminine plural (7:5,8; strkjv@14:1|). \Apo\ (from) here, though \ek\ (out of) in strkjv@5:9|. The 144,000 are not yet separated from the earth (John:17:15|). Whether the 144,000 here are identical with that number in strkjv@7:4-8| or not, they must embrace both men and women.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ A BRIEF BIBLIOGRAPHY (ONLY BOOKS SINCE 1875) Abbott, E. A., _Johannine Grammar_ (1906).,_Notes on New Testament Criticism_ (Part VII of Diatessarica, 1907). Allo, E. B., _L'apocalypse et l'epoque de la parousia_ (1915).,_Saint Jean. L'apocalypse_ (1921). Baldensperger, _Messian. Apok. Hoffnung_. 3rd ed. (1903). Baljon, J. M. S., _Openbaring van Johannes_ (1908). Beckwith, J. T., _The Apocalypse of John_ (1919). Benson, E. W., _The Apocalypse_ (1900). Berg, _The Drama of the Apocalypse_ (1894). Bleek, F., _Lectures on the Apocalypse_ (1875). Boll, _Aus der Offenbarung Johannis_ (1914). Bousset, W., _Die Offenbarung Johannis_. 2 Aufl. (1906).,_Zur Textkritik der Apokalypse_ (1894). Brown, Charles, _Heavenly Visions_ (1911). Brown, D., _The Structure of the Apocalypse_ (1891). Bullinger, _Die Apokalypse_ (1904). Bungeroth, _Schlussel zur Offenbarung Johannis_ (1907). Burger, C. H. A., _Offenbarung Johannis_ (1877). Cadwell, _The Revelation of Jesus Christ_ (1920). Calmes, _L'Apokalypse devant la Critique_ (1907). Campbell, _The Patmos Letters Applied to Modern Criticism_ (1908). Carrington, P., _The Meaning of the Revelation_ (1931). Case, S. J., _The Millennial Hope_ (1918).,_The Revelation of John_ (1920). Charles, R. H., _Studies in the Apocalypse_ (1913).,_The Revelation of St. John_. 2 vols. (1921). Chevalin, _L'apocalypse et les temps presents_ (1904). Crampon, _L'apocalypse de S. Jean_ (1904). Dean, J. T., _The Book of Revelation_ (1915) Deissmann, A., _Light from the Ancient East_. Tr. by Strachan (1927). Delaport, _Fragments sahidiques du N.T. Apocalypse_ (1906). Douglas, C. E., _New Light on the Revelation of St. John the Divine_ (1923). Dusterdieck, _Offenbarung Johannis_. 4 Aufl. (1887). Eckman, _When Christ Comes Again_ (1917). Erbes, _Offenbar. Johan. Kritischuntersucht_ (1891). Forbes, H. P., _International Handbook on the Apocalypse_ (1907). Gebhardt, _Doctrine of the Apocalypse_ (1878). Geil, W. E., _The Isle That Is Called Patmos_ (1905). Gibson, E. C. S., _The Revelation of St. John_ (1910). Gigot, _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1915). Glazebrook, _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1924). Gunkel, H., _Schopfung und Chaos_ (1895). Gwynn, _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1897). Harnack, A., _Die Chronologie der altchristlichen Litteratur_. Bd I (1897). Henderson, B. W., _The Life and Principate of the Emperor Nero_ (1903). Hill, _Apocalyptic Problems_ (1916). Hill, Erskine, _Mystic Studies in the Apocalypse_ (1931). Hirscht, _Die Apokalypse und ihre neueste Kritik_ (1895). Holtzmann, H. J., _Die Offenbarung Johannis_ (1891). Holtzmann-Bauer, _Hand-Comm., Offenbarung des Johannis_. 3 Aufl. (1908). Horne, _The Meaning of the Apocalypse_ (1916). Hort, F. J. A., _The Apocalypse of St. John, Chs. 1-3_ (1908). James, M. R., _The Apocalypse in Art_ (1931). Jowett, G. T., _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1910). Kubel, _Offenbarung Johannis_ (1893). Laughlin, _The Solecisms of the Apocalypse_ (1902). Lee, S., _Revelation in Speaker's Comm_. (1881). Linder, _Die Offenbarung des Johannis aufgeschlossen_ (1905). Llwyd, J. P. D., _The Son of Thunder_ (1932). Lohmeyer, E., _Die Offenbarung des Johannes_. Handbuch zum N.T. (1926). Loisy, A., _L'Apocalypse de Jean_ (1923). Matheson, _Sidelights upon Patmos_. Milligan, W., _The Revelation of St. John_. Schaff's Popular Comm. (1885).,_The Book of Revelation_. Expositor's Bible (1889).,_Lectures on the Apocalypse_ (1892).,_Discussions on the Apocalypse_ (1893). Moffatt, James, _Intr. to Literature of the N.T_. (1911).,_Revelation in Expos. Greek Testament_ (1910). Moule, H.C., _Some Thoughts on the Seven Epistles_ (1915). Mozley, _The Christian's Hope in the Apocalypse_ (1915). Oman, John, _The Book of Revelation_ (1923).,_The Text of Revelation_ (1928). Osborn, _The Lion and the Lamb_ (1922). Palmer, _The Drama of the Apocalypse_ (1902). Paul, _Latter Day Light on the Apocalypse_ (1898). Peake, A. S., _The Revelation of John_ (1921). Porter, F. C., _The Messages of the Apocalyptic Writers_ (1905). Pounder, _Historical Notes on the Book of Revelation_ (1912). Prager, L., _Die Offenbarung Johannis_ (1901). Ramsay, A., _Revelation in Westminster N.T_. (1910). Ramsay, W. M., _The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia_ (1904). Rauch, _Offenbarung des Johannis_ (1894). Reymond, _L'apocalypse_ (1908). Ross, J. J., _Pearls from Patmos_ (1923). Russell, J. S., _The Parousia_ (1878). Sabatier, _Les Origines Litteraires et la Comp. de l'Apoc_. (1888). Schlatter, _Der Evangelist Johannes_ (1931). Schoen, _L'Origine de l'Apocalypse_ (1887). Scott, C. Anderson, _Revelation in New Century Bible_ (1902). Scott, C. A., _Revelation in Devot. Comm_. (1906). Scott, J. J., _Lectures on the Apocalypse_ (1909). Selwyn, E. C., _The Christian Prophets and the Prophetic Apocalypse_ (1901). Shepherd, W. J. L., _The Revelation of St. John the Divine_. 2 vols. (1923). Simcox, W. H., _Revelation in Cambridge Greek Testament_ (1893). Smith, J. A., _Revelation in American Comm_. (1888).,_The World Lighted_ (1890).,_The Divine Parable of History_ (1901). Spitta, F., _Die Offenbarung des Johannis_ (1889). Strange, _Instructions on the Revelation of St. John the Divine_ (1900). Swete, H. B., _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1906). 2nd ed. 1907. Turner, C. H., _Studies in Early Church History_ (1912). Vischer, _Die Offenb. Johan. eine judische Apok_ (1886). Volter, _Offenb. Johannis_. 2 Aufl. (1911).,_Das Problem der Apok_. (1893). Weiss, B., _Die Johannes-Apokalypse_. Textkrit. (1891, 2 Aufl. 1902). Weiss, J., _Offenb. Johannis_ (1904). Wellhausen, J., _Analyse der Offenb_. (1907). Weyland, _Omwerkings-en Compilatie-Hupothesen Toegepast op de Apok_. (1888). Whiting, _The Revelation of John_ (1918). Zahn, _Introduction to the N.T_. 3 vols. (1909).,_Komm_. (1926).

rwp@Romans:16:17 @{Mark} (\skopeite\). Keep an eye on so as to avoid. \Skopos\ is the goal, \skope“\ means keeping your eye on the goal. {Divisions} (\dichostasias\). Old word for "standings apart," cleavages. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Galatians:5:20|. {Those which are causing} (\tous--poiountas\). This articular participle clause has within it not only the objects of the participle but the relative clause \hˆn humeis emathete\ (which you learned), a thoroughly Greek idiom.

Bible:
Filter: String:

[pBiblx2]
Sat Jun 29 23:26:12 2024
pBiblx2 Field Wise Bible System Version 2.1.9 - GPL3 2009-2020