OT-PROPHET.filter - rwp wearing:

rwp@1Corinthians:11:15 @{Have long hair} (\komi\). Present active subjunctive of \koma\ (from \kom\, hair), old verb, same contraction (\-ai=i\) as the indicative (\aei = i\), but subjunctive here with \ean\ in third class condition. Long hair is a glory to a woman and a disgrace to a man (as we still feel). The long-haired man! There is a papyrus example of a priest accused of letting his hair grow long and of wearing woollen garments. {For a covering} (\anti peribolaiou\). Old word from \periball\ to fling around, as a mantle (Hebrews:1:12|) or a covering or veil as here. It is not in the place of a veil, but answering to (\anti\, in the sense of \anti\ in strkjv@John:1:16|), as a permanent endowment (\dedotai\, perfect passive indicative).

rwp@1Peter:3:3 @{Whose adorning} (\hn kosmos\). Genitive plural of the relative referring to \gunaikn\ (wives). \Kosmos\ has here its old meaning of ornament (cf. our cosmetics), not the common one of world (John:17:5|) considered as an orderly whole. _Mundus_ in Latin is used in this double sense (ornament, world). {Let it be} (\est\). Imperative third singular of \eimi\. Not the outward adorning of plaiting the hair (\ouch ho exthen emploks trichn\). The use of \ouch\ here rather than \m\ (usual negative with the imperative) because of the sharp contrast in verse 4| (\all'\). The old adverb \exthen\ (from without) is in the attributive position like an adjective. \Emplok\ is a late word (from \emplek\, to inweave, strkjv@2Timothy:2:4; strkjv@2Peter:2:20|) in Strabo, but often in the papyri for struggle as well as plaiting, here only in N.T. {Of wearing} (\peritheses\). Late and rare word (Galen, Arrian) from \peritithmi\ (Matthew:27:28|), to put around, a placing around. Ornaments of gold were worn round the hair as nets and round the finger, arm, or ankle. {Or of putting on} (\enduses\). Old word from \endu\ (to put on), here only in N.T. Peter is not forbidding the wearing of clothes and ornaments by women, but the display of finery by contrast. Cf. strkjv@1Timothy:2:9-13; strkjv@Isaiah:3:16ff|.

rwp@2Corinthians:10:3 @{In the flesh} (\en sarki\). But that is a very different thing from walking \kata sarka\ according to the standards of the flesh as his enemies charged. It is easy enough to make insinuations. {We war} (\strateuometha\). Literary plural again after \logizomai\ in verse 2|. Old word to lead an army (\stratos\). In N.T. only in the middle as here. Paul admits that he fights, but only the devil and his agents even if wearing the livery of heaven. Paul knew the Roman army well. He knows how to use the military metaphor.

rwp@2Timothy:4:1 @{I charge thee} (\diamarturomai\). Rather, "I testify." See strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:6|. See strkjv@1Timothy:5:21| for this verb and appeal to God and Christ. {Who shall judge} (\tou mellontos krinein\). "The one going or about to judge" (regular idiom with \mell\). The quick and the dead (\zntas kai nekrous\). "Living and dead." See strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:16f|. {And by his appearing} (\kai tn epiphaneian\). Accusative of conjuration (verbs of swearing), after \diamarturomai\ as is \basileian\ (by his kingdom). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:27|. For \epiphaneian\, see strkjv@1:10; strkjv@Titus:2:13; strkjv@1Timothy:6:14; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:8|.

rwp@Acts:19:13 @{Of the strolling Jews, exorcists} (\tn perierchomenn Ioudain exorkistn\). These exorcists travelled around (\peri\) from place to place like modern Gypsy fortune-tellers. The Jews were especially addicted to such practices with spells of sorcery connected with the name of Solomon (Josephus, _Ant_. VIII. 2.5). See also Tobit strkjv@8:1-3. Jesus alludes to those in Palestine (Matthew:12:27; strkjv@Luke:11:19|). The exorcists were originally those who administered an oath (from \exorkiz\, to exact an oath), then to use an oath as a spell or charm. Only instance here in the N.T. These men regarded Paul as one of their own number just as Simon Magus treated Simon Peter. Only here these exorcists paid Paul the compliment of imitation instead of offering money as Magus did. {To name over} (\onomazein epi\). They heard what Paul said and treated his words as a magic charm or spell to drive the evil spirits out. {I adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth} (\Horkiz humas ton Isoun hon Paulos krussei\). Note two accusatives with the verb of swearing (cf. strkjv@Mark:5:7|) as a causative verb (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 483). The papyri furnish numerous instances of \horkiz\ in such constructions (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 281). Note also the article with Jesus, "the Jesus," as if to identify the magic word to the demons with the addition "whom Paul preaches." They thought that success turned on the correct use of the magical formula. The Ephesian mysteries included Christianity, so they supposed.

rwp@James:2:2 @{For} (\gar\). An illustration of the prohibition. {If there come in} (\ean eiselthi\). Condition of third class (supposable case) with \ean\ and second (ingressive) aorist active subjunctive of \eiserchomai\. {Into your synagogue} (\eis sunaggn humn\). The common word for the gathering of Jews for worship (Luke:12:11|) and particularly for the building where they met (Luke:4:15,20,28|, etc.). Here the first is the probable meaning as it clearly is in strkjv@Hebrews:10:25| (\tn episunaggn heautn\), where the longer compound occurs. It may seem a bit odd for a Christian church (\ekklsia\) to be termed \sunagg\, but James is writing to Jewish Christians and this is another incidental argument for the early date. Epiphanius (_Haer_. XXX. 18) states that the Ebionites call their church \sunagg\, not \ekklsia\. In the fourth century an inscription has \sunagg\ for the meeting-house of certain Christians. {A man with a gold ring} (\anr chrusodaktulios\). "A gold-fingered man," "wearing a gold ring." The word occurs nowhere else, but Lucian has \chrusocheir\ (gold-handed) and Epictetus has \chrusous daktulious\ (golden seal-rings). "Hannibal, after the battle of Cannae, sent as a great trophy to Carthage, three bushels of gold-rings from the fingers of Roman knights slain in battle" (Vincent). {In fine clothing} (\en esthti lampri\). "In bright (brilliant) clothing" as in strkjv@Luke:23:11; strkjv@Acts:10:30; strkjv@Revelation:18:41|. In contrast with "vile clothing" (\en rupari esthti\), "new glossy clothes and old shabby clothes" (Hort). \Ruparos\ (late word from \rupos\, filth, strkjv@1Peter:3:21|) means filthy, dirty. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:22:11| (filthy). {Poor man} (\ptchos\). Beggarly mendicant (Matthew:19:21|), the opposite of \plousios\ (rich).

rwp@James:2:3 @{And ye have regard to} (\epiblepste de epi\). First aorist active subjunctive (still with \ean\ of verse 2|) of \epiblep\, followed by repeated preposition \epi\, to gaze upon, old compound, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:1:48; strkjv@9:38|. {Weareth} (\phorounta\). "Wearing," present active participle of the old frequentative verb \phore\ (from \pher\), to bear constantly, to wear (Matthew:11:8|). Note repeated article \tn\ (the) with \esthta\ pointing to verse 2|. {And say} (\kai eipte\). Continuing the third-class condition with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \eipon\. {Sit thou here in a good place} (\su kathou hde kals\). Emphatic position of \su\, "Do thou sit here in a good place." Present middle imperative of \kathmai\ to sit for the literary \kathso\. See strkjv@Matthew:23:6| for the first seats in the synagogue (places of honour). {And ye say to the poor man} (\kai ti ptchi eipte\). Third class condition with \ean\ continued as before (\eipte\). Note article \ti\ pointing to verse 2|. {Stand thou there} (\su stthi ekei\). Second aorist (intransitive) active imperative of \histmi\, to place. Ingressive aorist, Take a stand. \Su\ emphatic again. The MSS. vary in the position of \ekei\ (there). {Or sit under my footstool} (\ kathou hupo to hupopodion mou\). For this use of \hupo\ "down against" or "down beside" see strkjv@Exodus:19:17| \hupo to oros\ ("at the foot of the mountain") and \hupo se\ ("at thy feet") (Deuteronomy:33:3|). Conquerors often placed their feet on the necks of the victims (Luke:20:43|).

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 archi\). \Arch\ 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} (\n\). 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" (\paraklton echomen pros ton patera\). See \prospon pros prospon\ (face to face, strkjv@1Corinthians:13:12|), a triple use of \pros\. There is a papyrus example of \pros\ in this sense \to gnston ts pros alllous suntheias\, "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 n ho logos\). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying \ho theos n 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 agap 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:19:5 @{Wearing} (\phorn\). Present active participle of \phore\, an early frequentative of \pher\, denoting a continual wearing, though not true here (only temporary). Jesus bore the mockery with kingly dignity as part of the shame of the Cross (Hebrews:12:2|). {Behold, the man} (\Idou ho anthrpos\). _Ecce Homo!_ by Pilate. This exclamatory introduction of Jesus in mock coronation robes to the mob was clearly intended to excite pity and to show how absurd the charge of the Sanhedrin was that such a pitiable figure should be guilty of treason. Pilate failed utterly in this effort and did not dream that he was calling attention to the greatest figure of history, the Man of the ages.

rwp@Matthew:14:9 @{Grieved} (\luptheis\). Not to hurt, for in verse 5| we read that he wanted (\theln\) to put him to death (\apokteinai\). Herod, however, shrank from so dastardly a deed as this public display of brutality and bloodthirstiness. Men who do wrong always have some flimsy excuses for their sins. A man here orders a judicial murder of the most revolting type "for the sake of his oath" (\dia tous horkous\). "More like profane swearing than deliberate utterance once for all of a solemn oath" (Bruce). He was probably maudlin with wine and befuddled by the presence of the guests.

rwp@Matthew:23:5 @{To be seen of men} (\pros to theathnai tois anthrpois\). See strkjv@6:1| where this same idiom occurs. Ostentation regulates the conduct of the rabbis. {Phylacteries} (\phulaktria\). An adjective from \phulaktr, phulass\ (to guard). Songs:a fortified place, station for garrison, then a safeguard, protecting charm or amulet. The rabbis wore \tephillin\ or prayer-fillets, small leather cases with four strips of parchment on which were written the words of strkjv@Exodus:13:1-10,11-16; strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:4-9; strkjv@11:13-21|. They took literally the words about "a sign unto thy hand," "a memorial between thine eyes," and "frontlets." "That for the head was to consist of a box with four compartments, each containing a slip of parchment inscribed with one of the four passages. Each of these strips was to be tied up with a well-washed hair from a calf's tail; lest, if tied with wool or thread, any fungoid growth should ever pollute them. The phylactery of the arm was to contain a single slip, with the same four passages written in four columns of seven lines each. The black leather straps by which they were fastened were wound seven times round the arm and three times round the hand. They were reverenced by the rabbis as highly as the scriptures, and, like them, might be rescued from the flames on a sabbath. They profanely imagined that God wore the _tephillin_" (Vincent). It is small wonder that Jesus ridiculed such minute concern for pretentious externalism and literalism. These _tephillin_ "are still worn at the present day on the forehead and left arm by Jews at the daily Morning Prayer" (McNeile). "The size of the phylacteries indexed the measure of zeal, and the wearing of large ones was apt to take the place of obedience" (Bruce). Hence they made them "broad." The superstitious would wear them as mere charms to ward off evil. {Enlarge the borders} (\megalunousin ta kraspeda\). In strkjv@9:20| we see that Jesus, like the Jews generally, wore a tassel or tuft, hem or border, a fringe on the outer garment according to strkjv@Numbers:15:38|. Here again the Jewish rabbi had minute rules about the number of the fringes and the knots (see on ¯9:20|). They made a virtue of the size of the fringes also. "Such things were useful as reminders; they were fatal when they were regarded as charms" (Plummer).