OT-PROPHET.filter - rwp nearly:

rwp@1Corinthians:2:13 @{Which things also we speak} (\ha kai laloumen\). This onomatopoetic verb \lale\ (from \la-la\), to utter sounds. In the papyri the word calls more attention to the form of utterance while \leg\ refers more to the substance. But \lale\ in the N.T. as here is used of the highest and holiest speech. Undoubtedly Paul employs the word purposely for the utterance of the revelation which he has understood. That is to say, there is revelation (verse 10|), illumination (verse 12|), and inspiration (verse 13|). Paul claims therefore the help of the Holy Spirit for the reception of the revelation, for the understanding of it, for the expression of it. Paul claimed this authority for his preaching (1Thessalonians:4:2|) and for his epistles (2Thessalonians:3:14|). {Not in words which man's wisdom teacheth} (\ouk en didaktois anthrpins sophias logois\). Literally, "not in words taught by human wisdom." The verbal adjective \didaktois\ (from \didask\, to teach) is here passive in idea and is followed by the ablative case of origin or source as in strkjv@John:6:45|, \esontai pantes didaktoi theou\ (from strkjv@Isaiah:54:13|), "They shall all be taught by God." The ablative in Greek, as is well known, has the same form as the genitive, though quite different in idea (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516). Songs:then Paul claims the help of the Holy Spirit in the utterance (\laloumen\) of the words, "which the Spirit teacheth (\en didaktois pneumatos\), "in words taught by the Spirit" (ablative \pneumatos\ as above). Clearly Paul means that the help of the Holy Spirit in the utterance of the revelation extends to the words. No theory of inspiration is here stated, but it is not _mere_ human wisdom. Paul's own Epistles bear eloquent witness to the lofty claim here made. They remain today after nearly nineteen centuries throbbing with the power of the Spirit of God, dynamic with life for the problems of today as when Paul wrote them for the needs of the believers in his time, the greatest epistles of all time, surcharged with the energy of God. {Comparing spiritual things with spiritual} (\pneumatikois pneumatika sunkrinontes\). Each of these words is in dispute. The verb \sunkrin\, originally meant to combine, to join together fitly. In the LXX it means to interpret dreams (Genesis:40:8,22; strkjv@41:12|) possibly by comparison. In the later Greek it may mean to compare as in strkjv@2Corinthians:10:12|. In the papyri Moulton and Milligan (_Vocabulary_) give it only for "decide," probably after comparing. But "comparing," in spite of the translations, does not suit well here. Songs:it is best to follow the original meaning to combine as do Lightfoot and Ellicott. But what gender is \pneumatikois\? Is it masculine or neuter like \pneumatika\? If masculine, the idea would be "interpreting (like LXX) spiritual truths to spiritual persons" or "matching spiritual truths with spiritual persons." This is a possible rendering and makes good sense in harmony with verse 14|. If \pneumatikois\ be taken as neuter plural (associative instrumental case after \sun\ in \sunkrinontes\), the idea most naturally would be, "combining spiritual ideas (\pneumatika\) with spiritual words" (\pneumatikois\). This again makes good sense in harmony with the first part of verse 13|. On the whole this is the most natural way to take it, though various other possibilities exist.

rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE USE OF PAUL'S EPISTLES There are two extremes about the relation of Peter to Paul. One is that of violent antithesis, with Peter and Paul opposing one another by exaggerating and prolonging Paul's denunciation of Peter's cowardice in Antioch (Galatians:2:11-21|) and making Peter also the exponent of a Jewish type of Christianity (practically a Judaizing type). This view of Baur once had quite a following, but it has nearly disappeared. Under its influence Acts and Peter's Epistles were considered not genuine, but documents designed to patch up the disagreement between Peter and Paul. The other extreme is to deny any Pauline influence on Peter or of Peter on Paul. Paul was friendly to Peter (Galatians:1:18|), but was independent of his ecclesiastical authority (Galatians:2:1-10|) and Peter championed Paul's cause in the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:7-13|). Peter was certainly not a Judaizer (Acts:11:1-18|), in spite of his temporary defection in Antioch. Undoubtedly Peter was won back to cordial relations with Paul if any confidence can be placed in strkjv@2Peter:3:15f|. There is no reason for doubting that Peter was familiar with some of Paul's Epistles as there indicated. There is some indication of Peter's use of Romans and Ephesians in this Epistle. It is not always conclusive to find the same words and even ideas which are not formally quoted, because there was a Christian vocabulary and a body of doctrinal ideas in common though with personal variations in expression. Peter may have read James, but not the Pastoral Epistles. There are points of contact with Hebrews which Von Soden considers sufficiently accounted for by the fact that Peter and the author of Hebrews were contemporaries.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:23 @{As one beside himself} (\paraphronn\). Present active participle of \paraphrone\. Old verb from \paraphrn\ (\para, phrn\), beside one's wits. Only here in N.T. Such open boasting is out of accord with Paul's spirit and habit. {I more} (\huper eg\). This adverbial use of \huper\ appears in ancient Greek (Euripides). It has no effect on \eg\, not "more than I," but "I more than they." He claims superiority now to these "superextra apostles." {More abundant} (\perissoters\). See on ¯7:15|. No verbs with these clauses, but they are clear. {In prisons} (\en phulakais\). Plural also in strkjv@6:5|. Clement of Rome (_Cor_. V.) says that Paul was imprisoned seven times. We know of only five (Philippi, Jerusalem, Caesarea, twice in Rome), and only one before II Corinthians (Philippi). But Luke does not tell them all nor does Paul. Had he been in prison in Ephesus? Songs:many think and it is possible as we have seen. {Above measure} (\huperballonts\). Old adverb from the participle \huperballontn\ (\huperball\, to hurl beyond). Here only in N.T. {In deaths oft} (\en thanatois pollakis\). He had nearly lost his life, as we know, many times (1:9f.; strkjv@4:11|).

rwp@2Peter:3:10 @{The day of the Lord} (\hmera kuriou\). Songs:Peter in strkjv@Acts:2:20| (from strkjv@Joel:3:4|) and Paul in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:2,4; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:5:5|; and day of Christ in strkjv@Phillipians:2:16| and day of God in strkjv@2:12| and day of judgment already in strkjv@2:9; strkjv@3:7|. This great day will certainly come (\hxei\). Future active of \hk\, old verb, to arrive, but in God's own time. {As a thief} (\hs klepts\). That is suddenly, without notice. This very metaphor Jesus had used (Luke:12:39; strkjv@Matthew:24:43|) and Paul after him (1Thessalonians:5:2|) and John will quote it also (Revelation:3:3; strkjv@16:15|). {In the which} (\en hi\). The day when the Lord comes. {Shall pass away} (\pareleusontai\). Future middle of \parerchomai\, old verb, to pass by. {With a great noise} (\roizdon\). Late and rare adverb (from \roize, roizos\)-- Lycophron, Nicander, here only in N.T., onomatopoetic, whizzing sound of rapid motion through the air like the flight of a bird, thunder, fierce flame. {The elements} (\ta stoicheia\). Old word (from \stoichos\ a row), in Plato in this sense, in other senses also in N.T. as the alphabet, ceremonial regulations (Hebrews:5:12; strkjv@Galatians:4:3; strkjv@5:1; strkjv@Colossians:2:8|). {Shall be dissolved} (\luthsetai\). Future passive of \lu\, to loosen, singular because \stoicheia\ is neuter plural. {With fervent heat} (\kausoumena\). Present passive participle of \kauso\, late verb (from \kausos\, usually medical term for fever) and nearly always employed for fever temperature. Mayor suggests a conflagration from internal heat. Bigg thinks it merely a vernacular (Doric) future for \kausomena\ (from \kai\, to burn). {Shall be burned up} (\katakasetai\). Repeated in verse 12|. Second future passive of the compound verb \katakai\, to burn down (up), according to A L. But Aleph B K P read \heurethsetai\ (future passive of \heurisk\, to find) "shall be found." There are various other readings here. The text seems corrupt.

rwp@Acts:10:9 @{On the morrow} (\ti epaurion\). Locative case of article with the compound adverb (\hmeri\ day being understood), the second day after leaving Caesarea, 28 miles from Joppa. The third day (the next morrow, verse 23|) they start back home and the fourth day (on the morrow again, verse 24|) they reach Caesarea. {As they} (\ekeinn\). The party of three from Caesarea. Genitive absolute with present participle \hodoiporountn\ (journeying) and \eggizontn\ (drew nigh). {The housetop} (\to dma\). Old word and in Gospels (Luke:3:19|, etc.), but only here in Acts. From \dem\, to build, and so any part of the building (hall, dining room, and then roof). The roof was nearly flat with walls around and so was a good place for meditation and prayer and naps.

rwp@Acts:18:8 @{Crispus} (\Krispos\). Though a Jew and ruler of the synagogue (cf. strkjv@13:15|), he had a Latin name. Paul baptized him (1Corinthians:1:14|) himself, perhaps because of his prominence, apparently letting Silas and Timothy baptize most of the converts (1Corinthians:1:14-17|). Probably he followed Paul to the house of Titus Justus. It looked like ruin for the synagogue. {With all his house} (\sun holi ti oiki autou\). Another household conversion, for Crispus "believed (\episteusen\) in the Lord with all his house." {Hearing believed and were baptized} (\akouontes episteuon kai ebaptizonto\). Present active participle and imperfect indicatives active and passive, expressing repetition for the "many" others who kept coming to the Lord in Corinth. It was a continual revival after Silas and Timothy came and a great church was gathered here during the nearly two years that Paul laboured in Corinth (possibly A.D. 51 and 52).

rwp@Acts:19:35 @{The town-clerk} (\ho grammateus\). Ephesus was a free city and elected its own officers and the recorder or secretary was the chief magistrate of the city, though the proconsul of the province of Asia resided there. This officer is not a mere secretary of another officer or like the copyists and students of the law among the Jews, but the most influential person in Ephesus who drafted decrees with the aid of the \stratgoi\, had charge of the city's money, was the power in control of the assembly, and communicated directly with the proconsul. Inscriptions at Ephesus give frequently this very title for their chief officer and the papyri have it also. The precise function varied in different cities. His name appeared on the coin at Ephesus issued in his year of office. {Had quieted the multitude} (\katasteilas ton ochlon\). First aorist active participle of \katastell\, to send down, arrange dress (Euripides), lower (Plutarch), restrain (papyrus example), only twice in the N.T. (here and verse 36|, be quiet), but in LXX and Josephus. He evidently took the rostrum and his very presence as the city's chief officer had a quieting effect on the billowy turmoil and a semblance of order came. He waited, however, till the hubbub had nearly exhausted itself (two hours) and did not speak till there was a chance to be heard. {Saith} (\phsin\). Historical present for vividness. {How that}. Merely participle \ousan\ and accusative \polin\ in indirect discourse, no conjunction at all (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1040ff.), common idiom after \ginsk\, to know. {Temple-keeper} (\nekoron\). Old word from \nes\ (\naos)\, temple, and \kore\, to sweep. Warden, verger, cleaner of the temple, a sacristan. Songs:in Xenophon and Plato. Inscriptions so describe Ephesus as \nekoron ts Artemidos\ as Luke has it here and also applied to the imperial _cultus_ which finally had several such temples in Ephesus. Other cities claimed the same honour of being \nekoros\, but it was the peculiar boast of Ephesus because of the great temple of Artemis. A coin of A.D. 65 describes Ephesus as \nekoros\. There are papyri examples of the term applied to individuals, one to Priene as \nekoros\ of the temple in Ephesus (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). {And of the image which fell down from Jupiter} (\kai tou diopetous\). Supply \agalma\ (image), "the from heaven-fallen image." From Zeus (\Dios\) and \pet\ (\pipt, pipet\), to fall. Zeus (Jupiter) was considered lord of the sky or heaven and that is the idea in \diopetous\ here. The legend about a statue fallen from heaven occurs concerning the statue of Artemis at Tauris, Minerva at Athens, etc. Thus the recorder soothed the vanity (Rackham) of the crowd by appeal to the world-wide fame of Ephesus as sacristan of Artemis and of her heaven-fallen image.

rwp@Acts:23:6 @{But when Paul perceived} (\gnous de ho Paulos\). Perceiving (second aorist ingressive of \ginsk\). Paul quickly saw that his cause was ruined before the Sanhedrin by his unwitting attack on the high priest. It was impossible to get a fair hearing. Hence, Vincent says, "Paul, with great tact, seeks to bring the two parties of the council into collision with each other." Songs:Alford argues with the motto "divide and conquer." Farrar condemns Paul and takes strkjv@24:21| as a confession of error here, but that is reading into Paul's word about the resurrection more than he says. Page considers Luke's report meagre and unsatisfactory. Rackham thinks that the trial was already started and that Paul repeated part of his speech of the day before when "the Sadducees received his words with ostentatious scepticism and ridicule: this provoked counter-expressions of sympathy and credulity among the Pharisees." But all this is inference. We do not have to adopt the Jesuitical principle that the end justifies the means in order to see shrewdness and hard sense in what Paul said and did. Paul knew, of course, that the Sanhedrin was nearly evenly divided between Pharisees and Sadducees, for he himself had been a Pharisee. {I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees} (\Eg Pharisaios eimi huios Pharisain\). This was strictly true as we know from his Epistles (Phillipians:3:5|). {Touching the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question} (\peri elpidos kai anastases nekrn krinomai\). This was true also and this is the point that Paul mentions in strkjv@24:21|. His failure to mention again the fact that he was a Pharisee throws no discredit on Luke's report here. The chief point of difference between Pharisees and Sadducees was precisely this matter of the resurrection. And this was Paul's cardinal doctrine as a Christian minister. It was this fact that convinced him that Jesus was the Messiah and was "the very centre of his faith" (Page) and of his preaching. It was not a mere trick for Paul to proclaim this fact here and so divide the Sanhedrin. As a matter of fact, the Pharisees held aloof when the Sadducees persecuted Peter and the other apostles for preaching resurrection in the case of Jesus and even Gamaliel threw cold water on the effort to punish them for it (Acts:5:34-39|). Songs:then Paul was really recurring to the original cleavage on this point and was able to score a point against the Sadducees as Gamaliel, his great teacher, had done before him. Besides, "Paul and Pharisaism seem to us such opposite ideas that we often forget that to Paul Christianity was the natural development of Judaism" (Page). Paul shows this in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11|.

rwp@Galatians:6:8 @{Corruption} (\phthoran\). For this old word from \phtheir\, see on ¯1Corinthians:15:42|. The precise meaning turns on the context, here plainly the physical and moral decay or rottenness that follows sins of the flesh as all men know. Nature writes in one's body the penalty of sin as every doctor knows. {Eternal life} (\zn ainion\). See on ¯Matthew:25:46| for this interesting phrase so common in the Johannine writings. Plato used \ainios\ for perpetual. See also strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:9|. It comes as nearly meaning "eternal" as the Greek can express that idea.

rwp@Hebrews:11:2 @{Therein} (\en tauti\). That is, "in faith," feminine demonstrative referring to \pistis\. {The elders} (\hoi presbuteroi\). More nearly like "the fathers," not the technical sense of elders (officers) usual in the N.T., but more like "the tradition of the elders" (Mark:7:3,5; strkjv@Matthew:15:2|). {Had witness borne to them} (\emarturthsan\). First aorist passive of \marture\ (cf. strkjv@7:8|), "were testified to."

rwp@Hebrews:12:1 @{Therefore} (\toigaroun\). Triple compound inferential participle (\toi, gar, oun\) like the German _doch denn nun_, a conclusion of emphasis, old particle, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:8|. There should be no chapter division here, since strkjv@12:1-3| really is the climax in the whole argument about the better promises (10:19-12:3|) with a passionate appeal for loyalty to Christ. {Us also} (\kai hmeis\). We as well as "these all" of strkjv@11:39| and all the more because of the "something better" given us in the actual coming of Christ. {Compassed about} (\echontes perikeimenon\). Literally, "having (\echontes\, present active participle of \ech\) lying around us" (\perikeimenon\, present middle participle of \perikeimai\, old verb as in strkjv@Luke:17:2|). {Cloud of witnesses} (\nephos marturn\). Old word (Latin _nubes_), here only in the N.T., for vast mass of clouds. \Nephel\ is a single cloud. The metaphor refers to the great amphitheatre with the arena for the runners and the tiers upon tiers of seats rising up like a cloud. The \martures\ here are not mere spectators (\theatai\), but testifiers (witnesses) who testify from their own experience (11:2,4,5,33,39|) to God's fulfilling his promises as shown in chapter strkjv@Hebrews:11|. {Laying aside} (\apothemenoi\). Second aorist-middle (indirect, from ourselves) participle of \apotithmi\, old verb as in strkjv@Colossians:3:8| (laying off old clothes). The runners ran in the stadium nearly naked. {Every weight} (\ogkon panta\). Old word (kin to \enegkein, pher\) like \phortos, baros\. Here every encumbrance that handicaps like doubt, pride, sloth, anything. No trailing garment to hinder or trip one. {The sin which doth so easily beset us} (\tn euperistaton hamartian\). "The easily besetting sin." There are a dozen possible renderings of this double compound verbal from \eu\, well, and \periistmi\, to place around or to stand around (intransitive). The Vulgate has _circumstans nos peccatum_ (the sin standing around us). Probably this is the true idea here, "the easily encompassing (or surrounding) sin." In this case apostasy from Christ was that sin. In our cases it may be some other sin. The verbal adjective reminds one of the ring of wild beasts in the jungle that encircle the camp-fire at night each ready to pounce upon a careless victim. {Let us run} (\trechmen\). Present active volitive subjunctive of \trech\, "let us keep on running." {With patience} (\di' hupomons\). Not with impatience, doubt, or despair. {The race that is set before us} (\ton prokeimenon hmin agna\). Note the article and the present middle participle of \prokeimai\, old compound (already in strkjv@6:18|, and also in strkjv@12:2|). Dative case (\hmin\) of personal interest.

rwp@Info_John @ A PERSONAL WITNESS It is manifest all through the book that the writer is the witness who is making the contribution of his personal knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ during his earthly ministry. In strkjv@John:1:14| he plainly says that "the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory" (\etheasametha tn doxan autou\). He here associates others with him in this witness to the glory of the Word, but in strkjv@John:21:25| he employs the singular "I suppose" (\oimai\) in sharp dis- tinction from the plural "we know" (\oidamen\) just before. The writer is present in nearly all the scenes described. The word witness (\marture, marturia\) so common in this Gospel (John:1:7,8,19; strkjv@3:11,26,33; strkjv@5:31; strkjv@12:17; strkjv@21:24|, etc.) illustrates well this point of view. In the Gospel of Luke we have the work of one who was not a personal witness of Christ (Luke:1:1-4|). In the Gospel of Matthew we possess either the whole work of a personal follower and apostle or at least the Logia of Matthew according to Papias preserved in it. In Mark's Gospel we have as the basis the preaching of Simon Peter as preserved by his interpreter John Mark. John's Gospel claims to be the personal witness of "the disciple whom Jesus loved" and as such deserves and has received exceptional esteem. One may note all through the book evidences of an eye-witness in the vivid details.

rwp@John:8:34 @{Every one that committeth sin is the bondservant of sin} (\pas ho poin tn hamartian doulos estin [ts hamartias]\). The Western class omits \ts hamartias\ (sin), but that is the idea anyhow. Note the use of \poin\ (present active participle, continuous habit or practice), not \poisas\ (aorist active participle for single act), precisely as in strkjv@1John:3:4-8|. Note also strkjv@3:21| for \ho poin tn altheian\ (the one who practises the truth). Sin, like the worst narcotic, is habit forming. Hence the problem today for criminologists for paroled or pardoned criminals nearly always go back to crime, sink again into sin, the slaves of sin. Xenophon has this notion of the slavery of sin (_Memor_. IV. 5. 3). Songs:Paul clearly in strkjv@Romans:6:17,20| "slaves of sin" (\douloi ts hamartias\).

rwp@John:10:22 @{And it was the feast of the dedication at Jerusalem} (\egeneto de ta enkainia en tois Ierosolumois\). But Westcott and Hort read \tote\ (then) instead of \de\ (and) on the authority of B L W 33 and some versions. This is probably correct: "At that time came the feast of dedication in Jerusalem." \Tote\ does not mean that the preceding events followed immediately after the incidents in strkjv@10:1-21|. Bernard brings chapter 9 up to this date (possibly also chapter 8) and rearranges chapter 10 in a purely arbitrary way. There is no real reason for this arrangement. Clearly there is a considerable lapse between the events in strkjv@10:22-39| and strkjv@10:1-21|, possibly nearly three months (from just after tabernacles strkjv@7:37| to dedication strkjv@10:22|). The Pharisees greet his return with the same desire to catch him. This feast of dedication, celebrated for eight days about the middle of our December, was instituted by Judas Maccabeus B.C. 164 in commemoration of the cleansing of the temple from the defilements of pagan worship by Antiochus Epiphanes (1Macc. strkjv@4:59). The word \enkainia\ (\en\, \kainos\, new) occurs here only in the N.T. It was not one of the great feasts and could be observed elsewhere without coming to Jerusalem. Jesus had apparently spent the time between tabernacles and dedication in Judea (Luke:10:1-13:21|). {Winter} (\cheimn\). Old word from \cheima\ (\che\, to pour, rain, or from \chin\, snow). See strkjv@Matthew:24:20|.

rwp@John:12:33 @{Signifying} (\smainn\). Present active participle of \semain\, old verb to give a sign (\smeion\) as in strkjv@Acts:25:27|, and the whole phrase repeated in strkjv@18:32| and nearly so in strkjv@21:19|. The indirect question here and in strkjv@18:32| has the imperfect \emellen\ with present infinitive rather than the usual present \mellei\ retained while in strkjv@21:19| the future indicative \doxasei\ occurs according to rule. The point in \poii\ (qualitative relative in the instrumental case with \thanati\) is the Cross (lifted up) as the kind of death before Christ.

rwp@Luke:2:24 @{A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons} (\Zeugos trugonn duo nossous peristern\). The offspring of the poor, costing about sixteen cents, while a lamb would cost nearly two dollars. The "young of pigeons" is the literal meaning.

rwp@Luke:15:8 @{Ten pieces of silver} (\drachmas deka\). The only instance in the N.T. of this old word for a coin of 65.5 grains about the value of the common \dnarius\ (about eighteen cents), a quarter of a Jewish shekel. The double drachma (\didrachmon\) occurs in the N.T. only in strkjv@Matthew:17:24|. The root is from \drassomai\, to grasp with the hand (1Corinthians:3:19|), and so a handful of coin. Ten drachmas would be equal to nearly two dollars, but in purchasing power much more. {Sweep} (\saroi\). A late colloquial verb \saro\ for the earlier \sair\, to clear by sweeping. Three times in the N.T. (Luke:11:25; strkjv@15:8; strkjv@Matthew:12:44|). The house was probably with out windows (only the door for light and hence the lamp lit) and probably also a dirt floor. Hence Bengel says: _non sine pulvere_. This parable is peculiar to Luke.

rwp@Mark:6:54 @{Knew him} (\epignontes auton\). Recognizing Jesus, knowing fully (\epi\) as nearly all did by now. Second aorist active participle.

rwp@Mark:12:38 @{Beware of the scribes} (\blepete apo tn grammaten\). Jesus now turns to the multitudes and to his disciples (Matthew:23:1|) and warns them against the scribes and the Pharisees while they are still there to hear his denunciation. The scribes were the professional teachers of the current Judaism and were nearly all Pharisees. Mark (Mark:14:38-40|) gives a mere summary sketch of this bold and terrific indictment as preserved in strkjv@Matthew:23| in words that fairly blister today. strkjv@Luke:20:45-47| follows Mark closely. See strkjv@Matthew:8:15| for this same use of \blepete apo\ with the ablative. It is usually called a translation-Hebraism, a usage not found with \blep\ in the older Greek. But the papyri give it, a vivid vernacular idiom. "Beware of the Jews" (\blepe saton apo tn Ioudain\, Berl. G. U. 1079. A.D. 41). See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 577. The pride of the pompous scribes is itemized by Mark: {To walk in long robes} (\stolais\), {stoles}, the dress of dignitaries like kings and priests. {Salutations in the marketplaces} (\aspasmous en tais agorais\), where the people could see their dignity recognized.

rwp@Revelation:4:2 @{Straightway I was in the Spirit} (\euthes egenomn en pneumati\). But John had already "come to be in the Spirit" (1:10|, the very same phrase). Perhaps here effective aorist middle indicative while ingressive aorist in strkjv@1:10| (sequel or result, not entrance), "At once I found myself in the Spirit" (Swete), not "I came to be in the Spirit" as in strkjv@1:10|. {Was set} (\ekeito\). Imperfect middle of \keimai\, old verb, used as passive of \tithmi\. As the vision opens John sees the throne already in place as the first thing in heaven. This bold imagery comes chiefly from strkjv@1Kings:22:19; strkjv@Isaiah:6:1ff.; strkjv@Ezekiel:1:26-28; strkjv@Daniel:7:9f|. One should not forget that this language is glorious imagery, not actual objects in heaven. God is spirit. The picture of God on the throne is common in the O.T. and the N.T. (Matthew:5:34f.; strkjv@23:22; strkjv@Hebrews:1:3| and in nearly every chapter in the Revelation, strkjv@1:4|, etc.). The use of \kathmenos\ (sitting) for the name of God is like the Hebrew avoidance of the name _Jahweh_ and is distinguished from the Son in strkjv@6:16; strkjv@7:10|. {Upon the throne} (\epi ton thronon\). \Epi\ with the accusative, as in strkjv@4:4; strkjv@6:2,4f.; strkjv@11:16; strkjv@20:4|, but in verses 9,10, strkjv@4:1,7,13; strkjv@6:16; strkjv@7:15| we have \epi tou thronou\ (genitive), while in strkjv@7:10; strkjv@19:14; strkjv@21:5| we have \epi ti throni\ (locative) with no great distinction in the resultant idea.

rwp@Romans:10:9 @{If thou shalt confess} (\ean homologsis\). Third class condition (\ean\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \homologe\). {With thy mouth Jesus as Lord} (\en ti stomati sou Kurion Isoun\). This is the reading of nearly all the MSS. But B 71 Clem of Alex. read \to rma en ti stomati sou hoti Kurios Isous\ (the word in thy mouth that Jesus is Lord). The idea is the same, the confession of Jesus as Lord as in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3; strkjv@Phillipians:2:11|. No Jew would do this who had not really trusted Christ, for \Kurios\ in the LXX is used of God. No Gentile would do it who had not ceased worshipping the emperor as \Kurios\. The word \Kurios\ was and is the touchstone of faith. {And shalt believe} (\kai pisteusis\). Same construction. Faith precedes confession, of course.