CONCORDANCE:String = reason
rwp@Info @ I have called these volumes _Word Pictures_ for the obvious reason that language was originally purely pictographic. Children love to read by pictures either where it is all picture or where pictures are interspersed with simple words. The Rosetta Stone is a famous illustration. The Egyptian hieroglyphics come at the top of the stone, followed by the Demotic Egyptian language with the Greek translation at the bottom. By means of this stone the secret of the hieroglyphs or pictographs was unravelled. Chinese characters are also pictographic. The pictures were first for ideas, then for words, then for syllables, then for letters. Today in Alaska there are Indians who still use pictures alone for communicating their ideas. "Most words have been originally metaphors, and metaphors are continually falling into the rank of words" (Professor Campbell). Rather is it not true that words are metaphors, sometimes with the pictured flower still blooming, sometimes with the blossom blurred? Words have never gotten wholly away from the picture stage. These old Greek words in the New Testament are rich with meaning. They speak to us out of the past and with lively images to those who have eyes to see. It is impossible to translate all of one language into another. Much can be carried over, but not all. Delicate shades of meaning defy the translator. But some of the very words of Jesus we have still as he said: "The words that I have spoken unto you are spirit and are life" (John:6:63|). We must never forget that in dealing with the words of Jesus we are dealing with things that have life and breath. That is true of all the New Testament, the most wonderful of all books of all time. One can feel the very throb of the heart of Almighty God in the New Testament if the eyes of his own heart have been enlightened by the Holy Spirit. May the Spirit of God take of the things of Christ and make them ours as we muse over the words of life that speak to us out of the New Covenant that we call the New Testament. A.T. ROBERTSON. LOUISVILLE, KY. kjv@Info:1Corinthians @ FIRST CORINTHIANS FROM EPHESUS A.D. 54 OR 55 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION It would be a hard-boiled critic today who would dare deny the genuineness of I Corinthians. The Dutch wild man, Van Manen, did indeed argue that Paul wrote no epistles if indeed he ever lived. Such intellectual banality is well answered by Whateley's _Historic Doubts about Napolean Bonaparte_ which was so cleverly done that some readers were actually convinced that no such man ever existed, but is the product of myth and legend. Even Baur was compelled to acknowledge the genuineness of I and II Corinthians, Galatians and Romans (the Big Four of Pauline criticism). It is a waste of time now to prove what all admit to be true. Paul of Tarsus, the Apostle to the Gentiles, wrote I Corinthians.
rwp@Info_1Corinthians @ The occasion of the Epistle is made plain by numerous allusions personal and otherwise. Paul had arrived in Ephesus from Antioch shortly after the departure of Apollos for Corinth with letters of commendation from Priscilla and Aquila (Acts:18:28-19:1|). It is not clear how long Apollos remained in Corinth, but he is back in Ephesus when Paul writes the letter and he has declined Paul's request to go back to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:12|)...and Paul, clearly the reason why ...(1Corinthians:1:10-12|). Even Cephas nominally was drawn into it, though there is no evidence that Peter himself had come to Corinth. Paul had sent Timothy over to Corinth to put an end to the factions (1Corinthians:4:17|), though he was uneasy over the outcome (1Corinthians:16:10f.|). This disturbance was enough of itself to call forth a letter from Paul. But it was by no means the whole story. Paul had already written a letter, now lost to us, concerning a peculiarly disgusting case of incest in the membership (1Corinthians:5:9|). They were having lawsuits with one another before heathen judges. Members of the church had written Paul a letter about marriage whether any or all should marry (1Corinthians:7:1|). They were troubled also whether it was right to eat meat that had been offered to idols in the heathen temples (1Corinthians:8:1|). Spiritual gifts of an unusual nature were manifested in Corinth and these were the occasion of a deal of trouble (1Corinthians:12:1|). The doctrine of the resurrection gave much trouble in Corinth (1Corinthians:15:12|). Paul was interested in the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem (1Corinthians:16:1|) and in their share in it. The church in Corinth had sent a committee (Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus) to Paul in Ephesus. He hopes to come himself after passing through Macedonia (1Corinthians:16:5f.|). It is possible that he had made a short visit before this letter (2Corinthians:13:1|), though not certain as he may have intended to go one time without going as he certainly once changed his plans on the subject (2Corinthians:1:15-22|). Whether Titus took the letter on his visit or it was sent on after the return of Timothy is not perfectly clear. Probably Timothy returned to Ephesus from Corinth shortly after the epistle was sent on, possibly by the committee who returned to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:17|), for Timothy and Erastus were sent on from Ephesus to Macedonia before the outbreak at the hands of Demetrius (Acts:19:22|). Apparently Timothy had not fully succeeded in reconciling the factions in Corinth for Paul dispatched Titus who was to meet him at Troas as he went on to Macedonia. Paul's hurried departure from Ephesus (Acts:20:1|) took him to Troas before Titus arrived and Paul's impatience there brought him to Macedonia where he did meet Titus on his return from Corinth (2Corinthians:2:12f.|).
rwp@1Corinthians:1:11 @{For it hath been signified unto me} (\edlth gar moi\). First aorist passive indicative of \dlo\ and difficult to render into English. Literally, It was signified to me. {By them of Chloe} (\hupo tn Chlos\). Ablative case of the masculine plural article \tn\, by the (folks) of Chloe (genitive case). The words "which are of the household" are not in the Greek, though they correctly interpret the Greek, "those of Chloe." Whether the children, the kinspeople, or the servants of Chloe we do not know. It is uncertain also whether Chloe lived in Corinth or Ephesus, probably Ephesus because to name her if in Corinth might get her into trouble (Heinrici). Already Christianity was working a social revolution in the position of women and slaves. The name {Chloe}...agriculture and for that reason Lightfoot ...(Romans:16:1|), Hermes (Romans:16:14|), Nereus (Romans:16:15|). It is even possible that Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus (1Corinthians:16:17|) may have been those who brought Chloe the news of the schisms in Corinth. {Contentions} (\erides\). Unseemly wranglings (as opposed to discussing, \dialegomai\) that were leading to the {schisms}. Listed in works of the flesh (Galatians:5:19f.|) and the catalogues of vices (2Corinthians:12:20; kjv@Romans:1:19f.; kjv@1Timothy:6:4|).
rwp@1Corinthians:1:18 @{For the word of the cross} (\ho logos gar ho tou staurou\). Literally, "for the preaching (with which I am concerned as the opposite of {wisdom of word} in verse 17|) that (repeated article \ho\, almost demonstrative) of the cross." "Through this incidental allusion to preaching St. Paul passes to a new subject. The discussions in the Corinthian Church are for a time forgotten, and he takes the opportunity of correcting his converts for their undue exaltation of human eloquence and wisdom" (Lightfoot). {To them that are perishing} (\tois men apollumenois\). Dative of disadvantage (personal interest). Present middle participle is here timeless, those in the path to destruction (not annihilation. See kjv@2Thessalonians:2:10|). Cf. kjv@2Corinthians:4:3|. {Foolishness} (\mria\). Folly. Old word from \mros\, foolish. In N.T. only in kjv@1Corinthians:1:18,21,23; 2:14; 3:19|. {But unto us which are being saved} (\tois szomenois hmin\)...the articular participle. No reason for ...(Romans:8:24|), as a present state, "ye have been saved" (Ep 2:5|), as a process, "ye are being saved" (1Corinthians:15:2|), as a future result, "thou shalt be saved" (Romans:10:9|). {The power of God} (\dunamis theou\). Songs:in kjv@Romans:1:16|. No other message has this dynamite of God (1Corinthians:4:20|). God's power is shown in the preaching of the Cross of Christ through all the ages, now as always. No other preaching wins men and women from sin to holiness or can save them. The judgment of Paul here is the verdict of every soul winner through all time.
rwp@1Corinthians:6:15 @{Members of Christ} (\mel Christou\). Old word for limbs, members. Even the Stoics held the body to be common with the animals (Epictetus, _Diss_. l. iii. 1) and only the reason like the gods. Without doubt some forms of modern evolution have contributed to the licentious views of animalistic sex indulgence, though the best teachers of biology show that in the higher animals monogamy is the rule. The body is not only adapted for Christ (verse 13|), but it is a part of Christ, in vital union with him. Paul will make much use of this figure further on (12:12-31; kjv@Ephesians:4:11-16; 5:30|). {Shall I then take away?} (\aras oun;\). First aorist active participle of \air\, old verb to snatch, carry off like Latin _rapio_ (our rape). {Make} (\pois\). Can be either future active indicative or first aorist active subjunctive (deliberative). Either makes good sense. The horror of deliberately taking "members of Christ" and making them "members of a harlot" in an actual union staggers Paul and should stagger us. {God forbid} (\m genoito\). Optative second aorist in a negative wish for the future. {May it not happen!} The word "God" is not here. The idiom is common in Epictetus though rare in the LXX. Paul has it thirteen times and Luke once (Luke:20:16|).
rwp@1Corinthians:7:2 @{Because of fornications} (\dia tas porneias\)...is not the only reason for ...
rwp@1Corinthians:7:26 @{I think therefore} (\nomiz oun\). Paul proceeds to express therefore the previously mentioned judgment (\gnmn\) and calls it his opinion, not because he is uncertain, but simply because it is not a command, but advice. {By reason of the present distress} (\dia tn enestsan anagkn\). The participle \enestsan\ is second perfect active of \enistmi\ and means "standing on" or "present" (cf. kjv@Galatians:1:4; kjv@Hebrews:9:9|). It occurs in kjv@2Thessalonians:2:2| of the advent of Christ as not "present." Whether Paul has in mind the hoped for second coming of Jesus in this verse we do not certainly know, though probably so. Jesus had spoken of those calamities which would precede his coming (Matthew:24:8ff.|) though Paul had denied saying that the advent was right at hand (2Thessalonians:2:2|). \Anagk\ is a strong word (old and common), either for external circumstances or inward sense of duty. It occurs elsewhere for the woes preceding the second coming (Luke:21:23|) and also for Paul's persecutions (1Thessalonians:3:7; kjv@2Corinthians:6:4; 12:10|). Perhaps there is a mingling of both ideas here. {Namely}. This word is not in the Greek. The infinitive of indirect discourse (\huparchein\) after \nomiz\ is repeated with recitative \hoti\, "That the being so is good for a man" (\hoti kalon anthrpi to houts einai\). The use of the article \to\ with \einai\ compels this translation. Probably Paul means for one (\anthrpi\, generic term for man or woman) to remain as he is whether married or unmarried. The copula \estin\ is not expressed. He uses \kalon\ (good) as in 7:1|.
rwp@1Corinthians:9:15 @{For it were good for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void} (\kalon gar moi mallon apothanein to kauchma mou oudeis kensei\). The tangled syntax of this sentence reflects the intensity of Paul's feeling on the subject. He repeats his refusal to use his privileges and rights to a salary by use of the present perfect middle indicative (\kechrmai\). By the epistolary aorist (\egrapsa\) he explains that he is not now hinting for a change on their part towards him in the matter, "in my case" (\en emoi\)...Then he gives his reason in ...(\n\, were): "For good for me to die rather than," but here he changes the construction by a violent anacoluthon. Instead of another infinitive (\kensai\) after \\ (than) he changes to the future indicative without \hoti\ or \hina\, "No one shall make my glorying void," viz., his independence of help from them. \Keno\ is an old verb, from \kenos\, empty, only in Paul in N.T. See on ¯1Corinthians:1:17|.
rwp@1Corinthians:10:3 @{The same spiritual meat} (\to auto pneumatikon brma\). Westcott and Hort needlessly bracket to \auto\. \Brma\ is food, not just flesh. The reference is to the manna (Exodus:16:13ff.|)...is termed "spiritual" by reason of ...(John:6:35|) which the manna typified.
rwp@1Corinthians:10:26 @This verse gives the reason for Paul's advice. It is a quotation from kjv@Psalms:24:1| and was a common form of grace before meals. {Fulness} (\plrma\). Old word from \plro\, to fill, here that with which a thing is filled, whatever fills the earth.
rwp@1Corinthians:10:29 @{For why is my liberty judged by another conscience?} (\hina ti gar h eleutheria mou krinetai hupo alls suneidses;\). Supply \gentai\ (deliberative subjunctive) after \ti\...individualities clash. The only reason is ...(8:2| and all of chapter kjv@1Corinthians:13|). There is this eternal collision between the forces of progress and reaction. If they work together, they must consider the welfare of each other.
rwp@1Corinthians:11:9 @{For the woman} (\dia tn gunaika\). Because of (\dia\ with accusative case) the woman. The record in Genesis gives the man (\anr\) as the origin (\ek\)...the woman and the reason for ...(\dia\) the creation (\ektisth\, first aorist passive of \ktiz\, old verb to found, to create, to form) of woman.
rwp@1Corinthians:11:18 @{First of all} (\prton men\). There is no antithesis (\deuteron de\, secondly, or \epeita de\, in the next place)...This is the primary reason for ...{When ye come together in the church} (\sunerchomenn hmn en ekklsii\). Genitive absolute. Here \ekklsia\ has the literal meaning of assembly. {Divisions} (\schismata\). Accusative of general reference with the infinitive \huparchein\ in indirect discourse. Old word for cleft, rent, from \schiz\. Example in papyri for splinter of wood. See on 1:10|. Not yet formal cleavages into two or more organizations, but partisan divisions that showed in the love-feasts and at the Lord's Supper. {Partly} (\meros ti\). Accusative of extent (to some part) like \panta\ in 10:33|. He could have said \ek merous\ as in 13:9|. The rumours of strife were so constant (I keep on hearing, \akou\).
rwp@1Corinthians:13:11 @{A child} (\npios\). See on ¯3:1| for \npios\ in contrast with \teleios\ (adult). {I spake} (\elaloun\). Imperfect active, I used to talk. {I felt} (\ephronoun\). Imperfect active, I used to think. Better, I used to understand. {I thought} (\elogizomn\)...middle, I used to reason or ...{Now that I am become} (\hote gegona\). Perfect active indicative \gegona\, I have become a man (\anr\) and remain so (Ephesians:4:14|). {I have put away} (\katrgka\). Perfect active indicative. I have made inoperative (verse 8|) for good.
rwp@1Corinthians:14:34 @{Keep silence in the churches} (\en tais ekklsiais sigatsan\). The same verb used about the disorders caused by speakers in tongues (verse 28|) and prophets (30|). For some reason some of the women were creating disturbance in the public worship by their dress (11:2-16|) and now by their speech. There is no doubt at all as to Paul's meaning here. In church the women are not allowed to speak (\lalein\) nor even to ask questions. They are to do that {at home} (\en oiki\). He calls it a shame (\aischron\) as in 11:6| (cf. kjv@Ephesians:5:12; kjv@Titus:1:11|). Certainly women are still in subjection (\hupotassesthsan\) to their husbands (or ought to be). But somehow modern Christians have concluded that Paul's commands on this subject, even kjv@1Timothy:2:12|, were meant for specific conditions that do not apply wholly now. Women do most of the teaching in our Sunday schools today. It is not easy to draw the line. The daughters of Philip were prophetesses. It seems clear that we need to be patient with each other as we try to understand Paul's real meaning here.
rwp@1Corinthians:15:4 @{And that he was buried} (\kai hoti etaph\). Note \hoti\ repeated before each of the four verbs as a separate item. Second aorist passive indicative of \thapt\, old verb, to bury. This item is an important detail as the Gospels show. {And that he hath been raised} (\kai hoti eggertai\). Perfect passive indicative, not \gerth\ like {rose}...James' Version. There is reason for ...{On the third day} (\ti hmeri ti triti\). Locative case of time. Whether Paul had seen either of the Gospels we do not know, but this item is closely identified with the fact of Christ's resurrection. We have it in Peter's speech (Acts:10:40|) and Jesus points it out as part of prophecy (Luke:24:46|). The other expression occasionally found "after three days" (Mark:10:34|) is merely free vernacular for the same idea and not even kjv@Matthew:12:40| disturbs it. See on ¯Luke:24:1| for record of the empty tomb on the first day of the week (the third day).
rwp@1Corinthians:16:9 @{For a great and effectual door is opened unto me} (\thura gar moi aneigen megal kai energs\). Second perfect active indicative of \anoig\, to open. Intransitive, stands wide open at last after his years there (Acts:20:31|). A wide open door. What does he mean by \energs\? It is a late word in the _Koin_. In the papyri a medical receipt has it for "tolerably strong." The form \energos\ in the papyri is used of a mill "in working order," of "tilled land," and of "wrought iron." In the N.T. it occurs in kjv@Philemon:1:6; kjv@Hebrews:4:12| of "the word of God" as "\energs\" (powerful). Paul means that he has at least a great opportunity for work in Ephesus. {And there are many adversaries} (\kai antikeimenoi polloi\)...Paul mentions as a reason for ...19| and see the opposition from Jews and Gentiles with the explosion under the lead of Demetrius. And yet Paul suddenly leaves. He hints of much of which we should like to know more (1Corinthians:15:32; kjv@2Corinthians:1:8f.|).
rwp@1Corinthians:16:10 @{That he be without fear} (\hina aphobs gentai\). Evidently he had reason to fear the treatment that Timothy might receive in Corinth as shown in 4:17-21|.
rwp@1John:3:22 @{Whatsoever we ask} (\ho ean aitmen\). Indefinite relative clause with modal \an\ and the present active subjunctive, like \hoti ean kataginski\ in verse 20|. In form no limitations are placed here save that of complete fellowship with God, which means complete surrender of our will to that of God our Father. See the clear teaching of Jesus on this subject in kjv@Mark:11:24; kjv@Luke:11:9; kjv@John:14:12f.; 16:23| and his example (Mark:14:36; kjv@Matthew:26:39; kjv@Luke:22:42|). The answer may not always be in the form that we expect, but it will be better. {We receive of him} (\lambanomen ap' autou\). See 1:5| for \ap' autou\ (from him). {Because} (\hoti\). Twofold reason why we receive regularly (\lambanomen\) the answer to our prayers (1) "we keep" (\troumen\, for which see 2:3|) his commandments and (2) "we do" (\poioumen\, we practise regularly) "the things that are pleasing" (\ta aresta\, old verbal adjective from \aresk\, to please, with dative in kjv@John:8:29| with same phrase; kjv@Acts:12:3| and infinitive in kjv@Acts:6:2|, only other N.T. examples) "in his sight" (\enpion autou\, common late vernacular preposition in papyri, LXX, and in N.T., except Matthew and Mark, chiefly by Luke and in the Apocalypse), in God's eye, as in kjv@Hebrews:13:21|.
rwp@1John:4:4 @{Have overcome them} (\nenikkate autous\). Perfect active indicative of \nika\, calm confidence of final victory as in 2:13; kjv@John:16:33|. The reference in \autous\ (them) is to the false prophets in 4:1|. {Because} (\hoti\). The reason for the victory lies in God, who abides in them (3:20,24; kjv@John:14:20; 15:4f.|). God is greater than Satan, "he that is in the world" (\ho en ti kosmi\), the prince of this world (John:12:31; 14:30|), the god of this age (2Corinthians:4:4|), powerful as he seems.
rwp@1John:4:6 @{We} (\hmeis\). In sharp contrast with the false prophets and the world. We are in tune with the Infinite God. Hence "he that knoweth God" (\ho ginskn ton theon\, present active articular participle, the one who keeps on getting acquainted with God, growing in his knowledge of God) "hears us" (\akouei hmn\). This is one reason why sermons are dull (some actually are, others so to dull hearers) or inspiring. There is a touch of mysticism here, to be sure, but the heart of Christianity is mysticism (spiritual contact with God in Christ by the Holy Spirit). John states the same idea negatively by a relative clause parallel with the preceding articular participle, the negative with both clauses. John had felt the cold, indifferent, and hostile stare of the worldling as he preached Jesus. {By this} (\ek toutou\). "From this," deduction drawn from the preceding; only example in the Epistle for the common \en touti\ as in 4:2|. The power of recognition (\ginskomen\, we know by personal experience) belongs to all believers (Westcott). There is no reason for Christians being duped by "the spirit of error" (\to pneuma ts plans\), here alone in the N.T., though we have \pneumasin planois\ (misleading spirits) in kjv@1Timothy:4:1|. Rejection of the truth may be due also to our not speaking the truth in love (Ephesians:4:15|).
rwp@1John:5:4 @{For} (\hoti\). The reason why God's commandments are not heavy is the power that comes with the new birth from God. {Whatsoever is begotten of God} (\pn to gegennmenon ek tou theou\). Neuter singular perfect passive participle of \genna\ rather than the masculine singular (verse 1|) to express sharply the universality of the principle (Rothe) as in kjv@John:3:6,8; 6:37,39|. {Overcometh the world} (\niki ton kosmon\). Present active indicative of \nika\, a continuous victory because a continuous struggle, "keeps on conquering the world" ("the sum of all the forces antagonistic to the spiritual life," D. Smith). {This is the victory} (\haut estin h nik\). For this form of expression see 1:5; kjv@John:1:19|. \Nik\ (victory, cf. \nika\), old word, here alone in N.T., but the later form \nikos\ in kjv@Matthew:12:20; kjv@1Corinthians:15:54f.,57|. {That overcometh} (\h niksasa\). First aorist active articular participle of \nika\. The English cannot reproduce the play on the word here. The aorist tense singles out an individual experience when one believed or when one met temptation with victory. Jesus won the victory over the world (John:16:33|) and God in us (1John:4:4|) gives us the victory. {Even our faith} (\h pistis hmn\). The only instance of \pistis\ in the Johannine Epistles (not in John's Gospel, though in the Apocalypse). It is our faith in Jesus Christ as shown by our confession (verse 1|) and by our life (verse 2|).
rwp@1John:5:10 @{Believeth on} (\pisteun eis\). John draws a distinction between "not believing God" (\m pisteun ti thei\) in next clause, the testimony of God about his Son, and surrender to and reliance on the Son as here (\eis\ and the accusative). See the same distinction less clearly drawn in kjv@John:6:30f|. See also \eis tn marturian\ after \pepisteuken\ in this same verse and kjv@John:2:23|. {In him} (\en hauti\). "In himself," though the evidence is not decisive between \hauti\ and \auti\. {Hath made} (\pepoiken\). Perfect active indicative of \poie\ like \memarturken\ and \pepisteuken\, permanent state. {A liar} (\pseustn\). As in 1:10|, which see. {Because he hath not believed} (\hoti ou pepisteuken\). Actual negative reason with negative \ou\, not the subjective reason as in kjv@John:3:18|, where we have \hoti m pepisteuken\). The subjective negative is regular with \ho m pisteun\. Relative clause here repeats close of verse 9|.
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 kjv@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@Info_1Peter @ THE READERS Peter writes "to the elect who are sojourners of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia" (1Peter:1:1|)...rate, there is no reason to ...(Galatians:21:7ff.|), though the distinction was not absolute, for Paul usually began his work in the Jewish synagogue. Probably the readers are mainly Jewish Christians. but not to the exclusion of Gentiles. Peter has clearly Paul's idea that Christianity is the true Judaism of God's promise (1Peter:2:4-10|)
rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE PURPOSE Evidently Peter's object is to cheer and strengthen the Christians in these five provinces who are undergoing fiery trials (1Peter:1:7f.|). There is every reason why Peter, as the leading apostle to the circumcision, should write to these believers in the provinces, especially since Paul's long imprisonment in Caesarea and Rome had removed him from his accustomed activities and travel.
rwp@1Peter:2:13 @{Be subject to} (\hupotagte\). Second aorist passive imperative second person plural of \hupotass\, to subject to, as in 3:22|. {Every ordinance of man} (\pasi anthrpini ktisei\). Dative case of old and common word \ktisis\ (from \ktiz\, to create, to found), act of creation (Romans:1:20|), a creature or creation (Romans:1:25|), all creation (Colossians:1:15|), an institution as here (in Pindar so). For \anthrpinos\ (human) see kjv@James:3:7|. Peter here approves no special kind of government, but he supports law and order as Paul does (Romans:13:1-8|) unless it steps in between God and man (Acts:4:20|). {For the Lord's sake} (\dia ton kurion\)...Jesus' sake. That is reason enough ...(Matthew:22:21|). The heathen were keen to charge the Christians with any crime after Nero set the fashion. "It should not be forgotten that, in spite of the fine language of the philosophers, the really popular religions in Greece and Rome were forms of devil-worship, intimately blended with magic in all its grades" (Bigg). {As supreme} (\hs huperechonti\). Dative singular of present active participle of \huperech\, old verb (intransitive), to stand out above (to have it over), as in kjv@Romans:13:1|. It is not the divine right of kings, but the fact of the king as the outstanding ruler.
rwp@1Peter:3:10 @{For} (\gar\). Reason for the entire exhortation in verses 8,9| and introducing in verses 10-12| a quotation from kjv@Psalms:34:13-17| with some slight changes. {Would love life} (\theln zn agapin\). "Wishing to love life." This present life. The LXX expressions are obscure Hebraisms. The LXX has \agapn\ (participle present active of \agapa\, not the infinitive \agapin\. {Let him refrain} (\pausat\). Third person singular first aorist active imperative of \pau\ to make stop, whereas the LXX has \pauson\ (second person singular). {His tongue} (\tn glssan\). See kjv@James:3:1-12|. {That they speak no guile} (\tou m lalsai dolon\). Purpose clause with genitive article \tou\ (negative \m\) and the first aorist active infinitive of \lale\. But it can also be explained as the ablative case with the redundant negative \m\ after a verb of hindering (\pausat\) like kjv@Luke:4:42|. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1061. "Let him refrain his lips from speaking guile."
rwp@1Peter:3:15 @{Sanctify} (\hagiasate\). First aorist active imperative of \hagiaz\. This instead of being afraid. {Christ as Lord} (\kurion ton Christon\). \Ton Christon\, direct object with article and \kurion\ predicate accusative (without article). This is the correct text, not \ton theon\ of the Textus Receptus. An adaptation to Christ of kjv@Isaiah:8:13|. {Being ready always} (\hetoimoi aei\). No participle in the Greek, old adjective (Titus:3:1|). {To give answer} (\pros apologian\). "For an apology," the old sense of \apologia\, an answer back, a defence (not excuse), as in kjv@Acts:22:1|, from \apologeomai\ to defend (not to apologize). {A reason concerning the hope that is in you} (\logon peri ts en humin elpidos\). Original sense of \logon\ (accusative of the thing with \aitounti\ with \hums\, accusative of the person) "concerning the in you hope." Ready with a spoken defence of the inward hope. This attitude calls for an intelligent grasp of the hope and skill in presenting it. In Athens every citizen was expected to be able to join in the discussion of state affairs. {Yet with meekness and fear} (\alla meta prauttos kai phobou\). Of God (2:18; 3:2,4|), not of man.
rwp@1Peter:4:1 @{For as much then as Christ suffered in the flesh} (\Christou oun pathontos sarki\). Genitive absolute with second aorist active participle of \pasch\, to suffer, and the locative case of \sarx\ (flesh). The \oun\ (then, therefore) draws and applies the main lesson of 3:18-22|, the fact that Christ suffered for us. {Arm ye yourselves also} (\kai humeis hoplisasthe\). Direct middle first aorist imperative of \hopliz\, old verb from \hoplon\ (weapon, kjv@John:18:3|), in metaphorical sense, here only in N.T. {With the same mind} (\tn autn ennoian\). Accusative of the thing (content), \ennoian\, old word (from \en, nous\), putting in mind, thinking, will, in N.T. only here and kjv@Hebrews:4:12|. "Here again _Christus Patiens_ is our \hupogrammos\" (Bigg). {For} (\hoti\). Reason for the exhortation. {Hath ceased from sin} (\pepautai hamartias\). Perfect middle indicative of \pau\ to make cease and the ablative singular \hamartias\, but B reads the dative plural \hamartiais\ (cf. kjv@Romans:6:1f.|). Temptation has lost its appeal and power with such a man.
rwp@1Peter:5:13 @{She that is in Babylon, elect together with you} (\h en Babulni suneklekt\). Either actual Babylon or, as most likely, mystical Babylon (Rome) as in the Apocalypse. If Peter is in Rome about A.D. 65, there is every reason why he should not make that fact plain to the world at large and least of all to Nero. It is also uncertain whether \h suneklekt\ (found here alone), "the co-elect woman," means Peter's wife (1Corinthians:9:5|) or the church in "Babylon." The natural way to take it is for Peter's wife. Cf. \eklekti kurii\ in kjv@2John:1:1| (also verse kjv@2John:1:13|). {Mark my son} (\Markos ho huios mou\). Songs:this fact agrees with the numerous statements by the early Christian writers that Mark, after leaving Barnabas, became Peter's "interpreter" and under his influence wrote his Gospel. We know that Mark was with Paul in Rome some years before this time (Colossians:4:10|).
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:10 @{How holily and righteously and unblameably} (\hs hosis kai dikais kai amempts\). Paul calls the Thessalonians and God as witnesses (\martures\) to his life toward you the believers (\humin tois pisteuousin\)...respect. Songs:there is a reason for ...
rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ The occasion of the Epistle is made plain by numerous allusions personal and otherwise. Paul had arrived in Ephesus from Antioch shortly after the departure of Apollos for Corinth with letters of commendation from Priscilla and Aquila (Acts:18:28-19:1|). It is not clear how long Apollos remained in Corinth, but he is back in Ephesus when Paul writes the letter and he has declined Paul's request to go back to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:12|)...and Paul, clearly the reason why ...(1Corinthians:1:10-12|). Even Cephas nominally was drawn into it, though there is no evidence that Peter himself had come to Corinth. Paul had sent Timothy over to Corinth to put an end to the factions (1Corinthians:4:17|), though he was uneasy over the outcome (1Corinthians:16:10f.|). This disturbance was enough of itself to call forth a letter from Paul. But it was by no means the whole story. Paul had already written a letter, now lost to us, concerning a peculiarly disgusting case of incest in the membership (1Corinthians:5:9|). They were having lawsuits with one another before heathen judges. Members of the church had written Paul a letter about marriage whether any or all should marry (1Corinthians:7:1|). They were troubled also whether it was right to eat meat that had been offered to idols in the heathen temples (1Corinthians:8:1|). Spiritual gifts of an unusual nature were manifested in Corinth and these were the occasion of a deal of trouble (1Corinthians:12:1|). The doctrine of the resurrection gave much trouble in Corinth (1Corinthians:15:12|). Paul was interested in the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem (1Corinthians:16:1|) and in their share in it. The church in Corinth had sent a committee (Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus) to Paul in Ephesus. He hopes to come himself after passing through Macedonia (1Corinthians:16:5f.|). It is possible that he had made a short visit before this letter (2Corinthians:13:1|), though not certain as he may have intended to go one time without going as he certainly once changed his plans on the subject (2Corinthians:1:15-22|). Whether Titus took the letter on his visit or it was sent on after the return of Timothy is not perfectly clear. Probably Timothy returned to Ephesus from Corinth shortly after the epistle was sent on, possibly by the committee who returned to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:17|), for Timothy and Erastus were sent on from Ephesus to Macedonia before the outbreak at the hands of Demetrius (Acts:19:22|). Apparently Timothy had not fully succeeded in reconciling the factions in Corinth for Paul dispatched Titus who was to meet him at Troas as he went on to Macedonia. Paul's hurried departure from Ephesus (Acts:20:1|) took him to Troas before Titus arrived and Paul's impatience there brought him to Macedonia where he did meet Titus on his return from Corinth (2Corinthians:2:12f.|).
rwp@2Corinthians:3:10 @{In this respect} (\en touti ti merei\). The glory on the face of Moses was temporary, though real, and passed away (verse 7|), a type of the dimming of the glory of the old dispensation by the brightness of the new. The moon makes a dim light after the sun rises, "is not glorified" (\ou dedoxastai\, perfect passive indicative of \doxaz\). {By reason of the glory that surpasseth} (\heineken ts huperballouss doxs\). The surpassing (\huper-ball\, throwing beyond) glory. Christ as the Sun of Righteousness has thrown Moses in the shade. Cf. the claims of superiority by Christ in kjv@Matthew:5-7|.
rwp@2Corinthians:4:5 @{For we preach not ourselves} (\ou gar heautous krussomen\). Surely as poor and disgusting a topic as a preacher can find. {But Christ Jesus as Lord} (\alla Christon Isoun Kurion\). \Kurion\ is predicate accusative in apposition. {As your servants for Jesus' sake} (\doulous humn dia Isoun\). Your bond-...This is the sufficient reason for ...
rwp@2Corinthians:5:20 @{We are ambassadors therefore on behalf of Christ} (\huper Christou oun presbeuomen\). Old word from \presbus\, an old man, first to be an old man, then to be an ambassador (here and kjv@Ephesians:6:20| with \en halusi\ in a chain added), common in both senses in the Greek. "The proper term in the Greek East for the Emperor's Legate" (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 374), in inscriptions and papyri. Songs:Paul has a natural pride in using this dignified term for himself and all ministers. The ambassador has to be _persona grata_ with both countries (the one that he represents and the one to which he goes). Paul was Christ's _Legate_ to act in his behalf and in his stead. {As though God were intreating by us} (\hs tou theou parakalountos di' hmn\). Genitive absolute with \hs\...often to give the reason... (apparent or real). Here God speaks through Christ's Legate. {Be ye reconciled to God} (\katallagte ti thei\). Second aorist passive imperative of \katallass\ and used with the dative case. "Get reconciled to God," and do it now. This is the ambassador's message as he bears it to men from God.
rwp@2Corinthians:6:14 @{Be not unequally yoked with unbelievers} (\m ginesthe heterozugountes apistois\). No other example of this verb has yet been found, though the adjective from which it is apparently formed, \heterozugos\ (yoked with a different yoke) occurs in kjv@Leviticus:19:19| of the union of beasts of different kinds. In kjv@Deuteronomy:22:10| we read: "Thou shalt not plough with an ox and an ass together." Literally, "Stop becoming (\m ginesthe\ present imperative, not \m gensthe\ aorist subj.) unequally yoked with unconverted heathen (unbelievers)." Some were already guilty. Marriage is certainly included, but other unions may be in mind. Cf. kjv@Ephesians:5:7|...Paul gives as the reason... (\gar\) for this prohibition five words in questions to distinguish the contrasts. {Fellowship} (\metoch\). Sharing with and followed by associative instrumental case of \dikaiosuni\ (righteousness) and iniquity (\anomii\). A pertinent challenge today when church members wink at violations of laws of the land and laws of God. {Communion} (\koinnia\). Partnership to light (\phti\ dative case) with (\pros\), facing darkness.
rwp@2Corinthians:12:7 @{By reason of the exceeding greatness} (\ti huperboli\). Instrumental case, "by the excess." {That I should not be exalted overmuch} (\hina m huperairmai\). Present passive subjunctive in final clause of \huperair\, old verb to lift up beyond, only here in N.T. This clause is repeated at the end of the sentence. {A thorn in the flesh} (\skolops ti sarki\). This old word is used for splinter, stake, thorn. In the papyri and inscriptions examples occur both for splinter and thorn as the meaning. In the LXX it is usually thorn. The case of \ti sarki\ can be either locative (in) or dative (for). What was it? Certainly it was some physical malady that persisted. All sorts of theories are held (malaria, eye-trouble, epilepsy, insomnia, migraine or sick-headache, etc.). It is a blessing to the rest of us that we do not know the particular affliction that so beset Paul. Each of us has some such splinter or thorn in the flesh, perhaps several at once. {Messenger of Satan} (\aggelos Satana\). Angel of Satan, the affliction personified. {Buffet} (\kolaphizi\). See on ¯Matthew:26:67; kjv@1Corinthians:4:11| for this late and rare word from \kolaphos\, fist. The messenger of Satan kept slapping Paul in the face and Paul now sees that it was God's will for it to be so.
rwp@Info_2Peter @ CLAIMS PETRINE AUTHORSHIP Not only so, but in fuller form than kjv@1Peter:1:1|, for the writer terms himself "Simon (Symeon in some MSS.) Peter," a fact that has been used against the genuineness. If no claim had been made, that would have been considered decisive against him. Simon (Symeon was the Jewish form as used by James in kjv@Acts:15:14|) is the real name (John:1:42|)...Christ. There is no reason why ...(Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, etc.), works of a heretical or curious nature. Whatever the motive for such a pious fraud, the fact remains that II Peter, if not genuine, has to take its place with this pseudonymous literature and can hardly be deemed worthy of a place in the New Testament. And yet there is no heresy in this Epistle, no startling new ideas that would lead one to use the name of Simon Peter. It is the rather full of edifying and orthodox teaching.
rwp@2Peter:1:21 @{For} (\gar\). The reason for the previous statement that no prophet starts a prophecy himself. He is not a self-starter. {Came} (\nechth\). First aorist passive indicative of \pher\ (verses 17f.|). {By the will of man} (\thelmati anthrpou\). Instrumental case of \thelma\. Prophecy is of divine origin, not of one's private origination (\idias epiluses\). {Moved by the Holy Ghost} (\hupo pneumatos hagiou pheromenoi\). Present passive participle of \pher\, moved from time to time. There they "spoke from God." Peter is not here warning against personal interpretation of prophecy as the Roman Catholics say, but against the folly of upstart prophets with no impulse from God.
rwp@2Peter:2:2 @{Lascivious doings} (\aselgeiais\). Associative instrumental ease after \exakolouthsousin\ (future active, for which verb see 1:16|). See kjv@1Peter:4:3| for this word. {By reason of whom} (\di' hous\). "Because of whom" (accusative case of relative, referring to \polloi\, many). \Autn\ (their) refers to \pseudodidaskaloi\ (false teachers) while \polloi\ to their deluded followers. See kjv@Romans:2:23f.| for a picture of such conduct by Jews (quotation from kjv@Isaiah:52:5|, with \blasphme\ used as here with \di' humas\, because of you). {The way of truth} (\h hodos ts altheias\). \Hodos\ (way) occurs often in N.T. for Christianity (Acts:9:2; 16:17; 18:25; 22:4; 24:14|). This phrase is in kjv@Genesis:24:48| as "the right road," and that is what Peter means here. Songs:Psalms:119:30|. See again 2:15,21|.
rwp@2Thessalonians:2:11 @{And for this reason God sendeth them} (\kai dia touto pempei autois ho theos\). Futuristic (prophetic) present of the time when the lawless one is revealed. Here is the definite judicial act of God (Milligan) who gives the wicked over to the evil which they have deliberately chosen (Romans:1:24,26,28|). {A working of error} (\energeian plans\). Terrible result of wilful rejection of the truth of God. {That they should believe a lie} (\eis to pisteusai autous ti pseudei\). Note \eis to\ again and \ti pseudei\ (the lie, the falsehood already described), a contemplated result. Note kjv@Romans:1:25| "who changed the truth of God into the lie."
rwp@3John:1:12 @{Demetrius hath the witness of all men} (\Dmtrii memarturtai hupo pantn\). Perfect passive indicative of \marture\, "it has been witnessed to Demetrius (dative case) by all." We know nothing else about him, unless, as is unlikely, he be identified with Demas as a shortened form (Philemon:1:24; kjv@Colossians:4:4; kjv@2Timothy:4:10|), who has come back after his desertion or with the Ephesian silversmith (Acts:19:21ff.|)...under suspicion for some reason and ...{And of the truth itself} (\kai hupo auts ts altheias\). A second commendation of Demetrius. It is possible, in view of kjv@1John:5:6| (the Spirit is the truth), that John means the Holy Spirit and not a mere personification of the truth. {Yea we also} (\kai hmeis de\). A third witness to Demetrius, that is John himself (literary plural). {Thou knowest} (\oidas\). "The words in kjv@John:21:24| sound like an echo of this sentence" (Westcott). John knew Demetrius well in Ephesus.
rwp@Info_Acts @...first century for two reasons. One ..._post eventum_. The other reason is the alleged use of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus by Luke. Josephus finished this work A.D. 93 so that, if Luke did use it, he must have written the Acts after that date. Usually this argument is made to show that Luke could not have written it at all, but some hold that he may have lived to an age that would allow it. But it cannot be assumed that Luke used Josephus because of his mention of Theudas and Judas the Galilean. They differ so widely (Acts:5:36f|. and Josephus, _Ant_. XX. v, 1, 2) that Von Dobschutz (_Dictionary of the Apostolic Church_, art. Josephus) argues that the two accounts are entirely independent of each other. Songs:Luke (Luke:13:1f.|) alludes to a Galilean revolt not mentioned by Josephus and Josephus records three revolts under Pilate not referred to by Luke. A comparison of the accounts of the death of Agrippa I in kjv@Acts:12:20-23| and _Ant_...volume and for this reason closed ...\prton\ (first) in kjv@Acts:1:1| is a common _Koin_ idiom and does not imply three volumes any more than first and second stories with us means that the house has three. Of course this date for the Acts puts the date of the Gospel further back either in Caesarea (57 to 59) or in Rome (60 to 62). And that means that Mark's Gospel is still earlier since Luke used it for his Gospel and the Logia (Q) earlier still. But all these dates are probable in the light of all the known facts.
rwp@Acts:4:34 @{That lacked} (\endes\). Literally, in need, old adjective, here only in the N.T. {Were} (\huprchon\). Imperfect active of \huparch\, to exist. {Sold them and brought} (\plountes epheron\)...there was occasion by reason of ...{Laid them} (\etithoun\). Imperfect active again, _repetition_, of \tithmi\, late omega form for the usual \etithesan\.
rwp@Acts:5:38 @{Refrain from} (\apostte apo\). Second aorist (ingressive) active imperative of \aphistmi\ of verse 37|. Do ye stand off from these men. "Hands off" was the policy of Gamaliel. {For if--be} (\hoti ean--i\). \Hoti\ gives the reason for the advice. Gamaliel presents two alternatives in terms of two conditional clauses. The first one is stated as a condition of the third class, \ean\ with the present subjunctive \i\, undetermined with prospect of determination. Assuming that it is from men, "it will be overthrown" (\kataluthsetai\, first future passive of \katalu\, to loosen down like a falling house) as was true of the following of Theudas and Judas the Galilean.
rwp@Acts:10:14 @{Not so, Lord} (\Mdams, kurie\). The negative \mdams\ calls for the optative \ei\ (may it not be) or the imperative \est\ (let it be). It is not \oudams\, a blunt refusal (I shall not do it)...polite refusal with a reason given. ...(\thuson\) the unclean animals as from the Lord (\kurie\) but declines it three times. {For I have never eaten anything} (\hoti oudepote ephagon pan\). Second aorist active indicative, I never did anything like this and I shall not do it now. The use of \pan\ (everything) with \oudepote\ (never) is like the Hebrew (_lo--kl_) though a like idiom appears in the vernacular _Koin_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 752). {Common and unclean} (\koinon kai akatharton\). \Koinos\ from epic \xunos\ (\xun, sun\, together with) originally meant common to several (Latin _communis_) as in kjv@Acts:2:44; 4:32; kjv@Titus:1:4; kjv@Jude:1:3|. The use seen here (also kjv@Mark:7:2,5; kjv@Romans:14:14; kjv@Hebrews:10:29; kjv@Revelation:21:27; kjv@Acts:10:28; 11:8|), like Latin _vulgaris_ is unknown in ancient Greek. Here the idea is made plain by the addition of \akatharton\ (unclean), ceremonially unclean, of course. We have the same double use in our word "common." See on ¯Mark:7:18f.| where Mark adds the remarkable participle \katharizn\ (making all meats clean), evidently from Peter who recalls this vision. Peter had been reared from childhood to make the distinction between clean and unclean food and this new proposal even from the Lord runs against all his previous training. He did not see that some of God's plans for the Jews could be temporary. This symbol of the sheet was to show Peter ultimately that Gentiles could be saved without becoming Jews. At this moment he is in spiritual and intellectual turmoil.
rwp@Acts:10:36 @{The word which he sent} (\ton logon hon apesteilen\). Many ancient MSS. (so Westcott and Hort) read merely \ton logon apesteilen\ (he sent the word). This reading avoids the anacoluthon and inverse attraction of \logon\ to the case of the relative \hon\ (which). {Preaching good tidings of peace through Jesus Christ} (\euaggelizomenos eirnn dia Isou Christou\). Gospelizing peace through Jesus Christ. There is no other way to have real peace between individuals and God, between races and nations, than by Jesus Christ. Almost this very language occurs in kjv@Ephesians:2:17| where Paul states that Jesus on the cross "preached (gospelized) peace to you who are afar off and peace to you who are near." Peter here sees what Paul will see later with great clearness. {He is Lord of all} (\houtos estin pantn kurios\)...throws in as the reason for ...
rwp@Acts:10:38 @{Jesus of Nazareth} (\Isoun ton apo Nazareth\). Jesus the one from Nazareth, the article before the city identifying him clearly. The accusative case is here by \prolepsis\, Jesus being expressed for emphasis before the verb "anointed" and the pronoun repeated pleonastically after it. "Jesus transfers the mind from the gospel-history to the personal subject of it" (Hackett). {God anointed him} (\echrisen, auton, ho theos\). First aorist active of the verb \chri\, to anoint, from which the verbal \Christos\ is formed (Acts:2:36|). The precise event referred to by Peter could be the Incarnation (Luke:1:35f.|), the Baptism (Luke:3:22|), the Ministry at Nazareth (Luke:4:14|). Why not to the life and work of Jesus as a whole? {Went about doing good} (\dilthen euergetn\). Beautiful description of Jesus. Summary (constative) aorist active of \dierehomai\, to go through (\dia\) or from place to place. The present active participle \euergetn\ is from the old verb \euergete\ (\eu\, well, \ergon\, work) and occurs only here in the N.T. The substantive \euergets\ (benefactor) was often applied to kings like Ptolemy Euergetes and that is the sense in kjv@Luke:22:25| the only N.T. example. But the term applies to Jesus far more than to Ptolemy or any earthly king (Cornelius a Lapide). {And healing} (\kai imenos\). And in particular healing. Luke does not exclude other diseases (cf. kjv@Luke:13:11,16|), but he lays special emphasis on demoniacal possession (cf. kjv@Mark:1:23|). {That were oppressed} (\tous katadunasteuomenous\). Present passive articular participle of \katadunasteu\. A late verb in LXX and papyri. In the N.T. only here and kjv@James:2:6| (best MSS.). One of the compounds of \kata\ made transitive. The reality of the devil (the slanderer, \diabolos\) is recognized by Peter. {For God was with him} (\hoti ho theos n met' autou\). Surely this reason does not reveal "a low Christology" as some charge. Peter had used the same language in kjv@Acts:7:9| and earlier in kjv@Luke:1:28,66| as Nicodemus does in kjv@John:3:2|.
rwp@Acts:12:12 @{When he had considered} (\sunidn\). Second aorist active participle of \suneidon\ (for the defective verb \sunora\), to see together, to grasp as a whole, old verb, but in the N.T. only here and 14:6|, save the perfect indicative \sunoida\ (1Corinthians:4:4|) and participle (Acts:5:2|). It is the word from which \suneidsis\ (conscience) comes (Romans:2:15|). Peter's mind worked rapidly and he decided what to do. He took in his situation clearly. {To the house of Mary} (\epi tn oikian ts Marias\). Another Mary (the others were Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary of Bethany, Mary Magdalene, Mary wife of Cleopas, Mary the mother of James and Joses). She may have been a widow and was possessed of some means since her house was large enough to hold the large group of disciples there. Barnabas, cousin of John Mark her son (Colossians:4:10|), was also a man of property or had been (Acts:4:36f.|). It is probable that the disciples had been in the habit of meeting in her house, a fact known to Peter and he was evidently fond of John Mark whom he afterwards calls "my son" (1Peter:5:13|) and whom he had met here. The upper room of kjv@Acts:1:13| may have been in Mary's house and Mark may have been the man bearing a pitcher of water (Luke:22:10|) and the young man who fled in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mark:14:51f.|). There was a gate and portress here as in the house of the highpriest (John:18:16|)...have become famous by reason of ...{Were gathered together and were praying} (\san sunthroismenoi kai proseuchomenoi\). Note difference in the tenses, one periphrastic past perfect passive (\sunathroiz\ old verb, in the N.T. here only and 19:25| and the uncompounded \throiz\ in kjv@Luke:24:33|) and the periphrastic imperfect. The praying apparently had been going on all night and a large number (many, \hikanoi\) of the disciples were there. One recalls the time when they had gathered to pray (4:31|) after Peter had told the disciples of the threats of the Sanhedrin (4:23|). God had rescued Peter then. Would he let him be put to death now as James had been?
rwp@Acts:12:20 @{Was highly displeased} (\n thumomachn\). Periphrastic imperfect active of \thumomache\, late compound of \thumos\ (passionate heat) and \machomai\, to fight. Only here in the N.T., to fight desperately, to have a hot quarrel. Whether it was open war with the Phoenicians or just violent hostility we do not know, save that Phoenicia belonged to Syria and Herod Agrippa had no authority there. The quarrel may have been over commercial matters. {They came with one accord} (\homothumadon parsan\). The representatives of Tyre and Sidon. See on ¯1:14| for \homothumadon\...of the world by reason of ...{The king's chamberlain} (\ton epi tou koitnos tou basileos\). The one over the bedchamber (\koitnos\, late word from \koit\, bed, here only in the N.T.). {Made their friend} (\peisantes\). First aorist active participle of \peith\, to persuade. Having persuaded (probably with bribes as in kjv@Matthew:28:14|). {They asked for peace} (\itounto eirnn\). Imperfect middle of \aite\, kept on asking for peace. {Because their country was fed} (\dia to trephesthai autn tn choran\). Causal sentence with \dia\ and the articular infinitive (present passive of \treph\, to nourish or feed) and the accusative of general reference, "because of the being fed as to their country." Tyre and Sidon as large commercial cities on the coast received large supplies of grain and fruits from Palestine. Herod had cut off the supplies and that brought the two cities to action.
rwp@Acts:13:35 @{Because} (\dioti\). Compound conjunction (\dia, hoti\)...our "because that." The reason for ...{Thou wilt not give thy holy one to see corruption} (\ou dseis ton hosion sou idein diaphthoran\). Quotation from kjv@Psalms:16:10| to show that Jesus did not see corruption in his body, a flat contradiction for those who deny the bodily resurrection of Jesus.
rwp@Acts:15:21 @{For Moses} (\Muss gar\). A reason why these four necessary things (verse 28|) are named. In every city are synagogues where rabbis proclaim (\krussontas\) these matters. Hence the Gentile Christians would be giving constant offence to neglect them. The only point where modern Christian sentiment would object would be about "things strangled" and "blood" in the sense of any blood left in the animals, though most Christians probably agree with the feeling of James in objecting to blood in the food. If "blood" is taken to be "murder," that difficulty vanishes. Moses will suffer no loss for these Gentile Christians are not adherents of Judaism.
rwp@Acts:15:38 @{But Paul thought not good to take with them} (\Paulos de xiou--m sunparalambanein touton\). The Greek is far more effective than this English rendering. It is the imperfect active of \axio\, old verb to think meet or right and the present active infinitive of the same verb (\sunparalamban\) with negative used with this infinitive. Literally, "But Paul kept on deeming it wise not to be taking along with them this one." Barnabas looked on it as a simple punctiliar proposal (aorist infinitive), but Paul felt a lively realization of the problem of having a quitter on his hands (present infinitive). Each was insistent in his position (two imperfects)...Paul had a definite reason for ...(\ton apostanta ap' autn apo Pamphulias\). Second aorist active articular participle of \aphistmi\, intransitive use, "the one who stood off from, apostatized from" (our very word "apostasy"). And also as the one who "went not with them to the work" (\kai m sunelthonta autois eis to ergon\). At Perga Mark had faced the same task that Paul and Barnabas did, but he flinched and flickered and quit. Paul declined to repeat the experiment with Mark.
rwp@Acts:16:10 @{We sought} (\eztsamen\). This sudden use of the plural, dropped in 17:1| when Paul leaves Philippi, and resumed in 20:5| when Paul rejoins Luke in Philippi, argues conclusively that Luke, the author, is in the party ("we" portions of Acts) and shows in a writer of such literary skill as Luke that he is not copying a document in a blundering sort of way. Paul told his vision to the party and they were all ready to respond to the call. {Concluding} (\sunbibazontes\). A very striking word, present active participle of \sunbibaz\, old verb to make go together, to coalesce or knit together, to make this and that agree and so to conclude. Already in 9:22|...proper use of the reason in ...
rwp@Acts:17:18 @{And certain also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him} (\tines de kai tn Epikourin kai Stikn philosophn suneballon auti\). Imperfect active of \sunball\, old verb, in the N.T. only by Luke, to bring or put together in one's mind (Luke:2:19|), to meet together (Acts:20:14|), to bring together aid (18:27|), to confer or converse or dispute as here and already 4:15| which see. These professional philosophers were always ready for an argument and so they frequented the agora for that purpose. Luke uses one article and so groups the two sects together in their attitude toward Paul, but they were very different in fact. Both sects were eager for argument and both had disdain for Paul, but they were the two rival practical philosophies of the day, succeeding the more abstruse theories of Plato and Aristotle. Socrates had turned men's thought inward (\Gnthi Seauton\, Know Thyself) away from the mere study of physics. Plato followed with a profound development of the inner self (metaphysics). Aristotle with his cyclopaedic grasp sought to unify and relate both physics and metaphysics. Both Zeno and Epicurus (340-272 B.C.) took a more practical turn in all this intellectual turmoil and raised the issues of everyday life. Zeno (360-260 B.C.) taught in the \Stoa\ (Porch) and so his teaching was called Stoicism. He advanced many noble ideas that found their chief illustration in the Roman philosophers (Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius). He taught self-mastery and hardness with an austerity that ministered to pride or suicide in case of failure, a distinctly selfish and unloving view of life and with a pantheistic philosophy. Epicurus considered practical atheism the true view of the universe and denied a future life and claimed pleasure as the chief thing to be gotten out of life. He did not deny the existence of gods, but regarded them as unconcerned with the life of men. The Stoics called Epicurus an atheist. Lucretius and Horace give the Epicurean view of life in their great poems. This low view of life led to sensualism and does today, for both Stoicism and Epicureanism are widely influential with people now. "Eat and drink for tomorrow we die," they preached. Paul had doubtless become acquainted with both of these philosophies for they were widely prevalent over the world. Here he confronts them in their very home. He is challenged by past-masters in the art of appealing to the senses, men as skilled in their dialectic as the Pharisaic rabbis with whom Paul had been trained and whose subtleties he had learned how to expose. But, so far as we know, this is a new experience for Paul to have a public dispute with these philosophical experts who had a natural contempt for all Jews and for rabbis in particular, though they found Paul a new type at any rate and so with some interest in him. "In Epicureanism, it was man's sensual nature which arrayed itself against the claims of the gospel; in Stoicism it was his self-righteousness and pride of intellect" (Hackett). Knowling calls the Stoic the Pharisee of philosophy and the Epicurean the Sadducee of philosophy. Socrates in this very agora used to try to interest the passers-by in some desire for better things. That was 450 years before Paul is challenged by these superficial sophistical Epicureans and Stoics. It is doubtful if Paul had ever met a more difficult situation. {What would this babbler say?} (\Ti an theloi ho spermologos houtos legein?\). The word for "babbler" means "seed-picker" or picker up of seeds (\sperma\, seed, \leg\, to collect) like a bird in the agora hopping about after chance seeds. Plutarch applies the word to crows that pick up grain in the fields. Demosthenes called Aeschines a \spermologos\. Eustathius uses it of a man hanging around in the markets picking up scraps of food that fell from the carts and so also of mere rhetoricians and plagiarists who picked up scraps of wisdom from others. Ramsay considers it here a piece of Athenian slang used to describe the picture of Paul seen by these philosophers who use it, for not all of them had it ("some," \tines\). Note the use of \an\ and the present active optative \theloi\, conclusion of a fourth-class condition in a rhetorical question (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). It means, What would this picker up of seeds wish to say, if he should get off an idea? It is a contemptuous tone of supreme ridicule and doubtless Paul heard this comment. Probably the Epicureans made this sneer that Paul was a charlatan or quack. {Other some} (\hoi de\). But others, in contrast with the "some" just before. Perhaps the Stoics take this more serious view of Paul. {He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods} (\zenn daimonin dokei kataggeleus einai\). This view is put cautiously by \dokei\ (seems). \Kataggeleus\ does not occur in the old Greek, though in ecclesiastical writers, but Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 99) gives an example of the word "on a marble stele recording a decree of the Mitylenaens in honour of the Emperor Augustus," where it is the herald of the games. Here alone in the N.T. \Daimonion\ is used in the old Greek sense of deity or divinity whether good or bad, not in the N.T. sense of demons. Both this word and \kataggeleus\ are used from the Athenian standpoint. \Xenos\ is an old word for a guest-friend (Latin _hospes_) and then host (Romans:16:23|), then for foreigner or stranger (Matthew:25:31; kjv@Acts:17:21|), new and so strange as here and kjv@Hebrews:13:9; kjv@1Peter:4:12|, and then aliens (Ephesians:2:12|). This view of Paul is the first count against Socrates: Socrates does wrong, introducing new deities (\adikei Skrats, kaina daimonia eisphern\, Xen. _Mem_. I). On this charge the Athenians voted the hemlock for their greatest citizen. What will they do to Paul? This Athens was more sceptical and more tolerant than the old Athens. But Roman law did not allow the introduction of a new religion (_religio illicita_). Paul was walking on thin ice though he was the real master philosopher and these Epicureans and Stoics were quacks. Paul had the only true philosophy of the universe and life with Jesus Christ as the centre (Colossians:1:12-20|), the greatest of all philosophers as Ramsay justly terms him. But these men are mocking him. {Because he preached Jesus and the resurrection} (\hoti ton Isoun kai tn anastasin euggelizato\). Reason for the view just stated. Imperfect middle indicative of \euaggeliz\, to "gospelize." Apparently these critics considered \anastasis\ (Resurrection) another deity on a par with Jesus. The Athenians worshipped all sorts of abstract truths and virtues and they misunderstood Paul on this subject. They will leave him as soon as he mentions the resurrection (verse 32|). It is objected that Luke would not use the word in this sense here for his readers would not under stand him. But Luke is describing the misapprehension of this group of philosophers and this interpretation fits in precisely.
rwp@Acts:17:28 @{For in him} (\en auti gar\). Proof of God's nearness, not stoic pantheism, but real immanence in God as God dwells in us. The three verbs (\zmen, kinoumetha, esmen\) form an ascending scale and reach a climax in God (life, movement, existence). \Kinoumetha\ is either direct middle present indicative (we move ourselves) or passive (we are moved). {As certain even of your own poets} (\hs kai tines tn kath' hums poitn\). "As also some of the poets among you." Aratus of Soli in Cilicia (ab. B.C. 270) has these very words in his _Ta Phainomena_ and Cleanthes, Stoic philosopher (300-220 B.C.) in his _Hymn to Zeus_ has \Ek sou gar genos esmen\. In kjv@1Corinthians:15:32| Paul quotes from Menander and in kjv@Titus:1:12|...writers. There is no reason in ...(Jupiter), not of Jehovah, but he applies the idea in them to his point just made that all men are the offspring of God.
rwp@Acts:18:14 @{When Paul was about to open his mouth} (\mellontos tou Paulou anoigein to stoma\). Genitive absolute again. Before Paul could speak, Gallio cut in and ended the whole matter. According to their own statement Paul needed no defence. {Wrong} (\adikma\). _Injuria_. Old word, a wrong done one. In N.T. only here, kjv@Acts:24:20; kjv@Revelation:18:5|. Here it may mean a legal wrong to the state. {Wicked villainy} (\rhidiourgma\). A crime, act of a criminal, from \rhidiourgos\ (\rhidios\, easy, \ergon\, work), one who does a thing with ease, adroitly, a "slick citizen." {Reason would that I should bear with you} (\kata logon an aneschomn humn\). Literally, "according to reason I should have put up with you (or held myself back from you)." This condition is the second class (determined as unfulfilled) and means that the Jews had no case against Paul in a Roman court. The verb in the conclusion (\aneschomn\) is second aorist middle indicative and means with the ablative \humn\ "I should have held myself back (direct middle) from you (ablative). The use of \an\ makes the form of the condition plain.
rwp@Acts:18:18 @{Having tarried after this yet many days} (\eti prosmeinas hmeras hikanas\). First aorist (constative) active participle of \prosmen\, old verb, to remain besides (\pros\ as in kjv@1Timothy:1:3|) and that idea is expressed also in \eti\ (yet). The accusative is extent of time. On Luke's frequent use of \hikanos\ see 8:11|. It is not certain that this period of "considerable days" which followed the trial before Gallio is included in the year and six months of verse 11|...was, there was no reason for ...{Took his leave} (\apotaxamenos\). First aorist middle (direct), old verb, to separate oneself, to bid farewell (Vulgate _valefacio_), as in verse 21; kjv@Mark:6:46|. {Sailed thence} (\exeplei\). Imperfect active of \ekple\, old and common verb, inchoative imperfect, started to sail. Only Priscilla and Aquila are mentioned as his companions though others may have been in the party. {Having shorn his head} (\keiramenos tn kephaln\). First aorist middle (causative) of \keir\, old verb to shear (sheep) and the hair as also in kjv@1Corinthians:11:6|. The participle is masculine and so cannot refer to Priscilla. Aquila comes next to the participle, but since mention of Priscilla and Aquila is parenthetical and the two other participles (\prosmeinas, apotaxamenos\) refer to Paul it seems clear that this one does also. {For he had a vow} (\eichen gar euchn\). Imperfect active showing the continuance of the vow up till this time in Cenchreae, the port of Corinth when it expired. It was not a Nazarite vow which could be absolved only in Jerusalem. It is possible that the hair was only polled or trimmed, cut shorter, not "shaved" (\xura\ as in 21:24|) for there is a distinction as both verbs are contrasted in kjv@1Corinthians:11:6| (\keirsthai xursthai\). It is not clear what sort of a vow Paul had taken nor why he took it. It may have been a thank offering for the outcome at Corinth (Hackett). Paul as a Jew kept up his observance of the ceremonial law, but refused to impose it on the Gentiles.
rwp@Acts:18:21 @{I shall return} (\anakamps\). Future active indicative of \anakampt\, old verb to bend back, turn back (Matthew:2:2|). {If God will} (\tou theou thelontos\). Genitive absolute of present active participle. This expression (\ean\ with subjunctive) occurs also in kjv@1Corinthians:4:19; 16:7; kjv@James:4:15|...desire to give a reason for ...22| about "going up" to Jerusalem. Whether Paul said it or not, it was in the spring when he made this journey with a company of pilgrims probably going to the feast of Pentecost in Jerusalem. We know that later Paul did try to reach Jerusalem for Pentecost (20:16|) and succeeded. As the ship was leaving, Paul had to go, but with the hope of returning soon to Ephesus as he did.
rwp@Acts:18:22 @{He went up and saluted the church} (\anabas kai aspasamenos tn ekklsian\). The language could refer to the church in Caesarea where Paul had just landed, except for several things. The going up (\anabas\, second aorist active participle of \anabain\) is the common way of speaking of going to Jerusalem which was up from every direction save from Hebron. It was the capital of Palestine as people in England today speaking of going up to London. Besides "he went down to Antioch" (\kateb eis Antiocheian\, second aorist active indicative of \katabain\)...there was no special reason for ...(9:26; 11:30; 15:4; 18:22; 21:17|). The apostles may or may not have been in the city, but Paul had friends in Jerusalem now. Apparently he did not tarry long, but returned to Antioch to make a report of his second mission tour as he had done at the close of the first when he and Barnabas came back (14:26-28|). He had started on this tour with Silas and had picked up Timothy and Luke, but came back alone. He had a great story to tell.
rwp@Acts:18:24 @{Apollos} (\Apolls\). Genitive \-\ Attic second declension. Probably a contraction of \Apollonios\ as D has it here. {An Alexandrian} (\Alexandreus\). Alexander the Great founded this city B.C. 332 and placed a colony of Jews there which flourished greatly, one-third of the population at this time. There was a great university and library there. The Jewish-Alexandrian philosophy developed here of which Philo was the chief exponent who was still living. Apollos was undoubtedly a man of the schools and a man of parts. {A learned man} (\anr logios\). Or eloquent, as the word can mean either a man of words (like one "wordy," verbose) or a man of ideas, since \logos\...was used either for reason or ...(mighty in the Scriptures) and eloquent, though eloquence varies greatly in people's ideas. {Mighty in the Scriptures} (\dunatos n en tais graphais\). Being powerful (\dunatos\ verbal of \dunamai\ and same root as \dunamis\, dynamite, dynamo) in the Scriptures (in the knowledge and the use of the Scriptures), as should be true of every preacher. There is no excuse for ignorance of the Scriptures on the part of preachers, the professed interpreters of the word of God. The last lecture made to the New Testament English class in Southern Baptist Theological Seminary by John A. Broadus was on this passage with a plea for his students to be mighty in the Scriptures. In Alexandria Clement of Alexandria and Origen taught in the Christian theological school.
rwp@Acts:19:1 @{While Apollos was at Corinth} (\en ti ton Apoll einai en Korinthi\). Favourite idiom with Luke, \en\ with the locative of the articular infinitive and the accusative of general reference (Luke:1:8; 2:27|, etc.). {Having passed through the upper country} (\dielthonta ta anterika mer\). 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" (\anterika\) is a late form for \antera\ (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" (\mer\) 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 kjv@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 mathtas\). Who were they? Apollos had already gone to Corinth. They show no connection with Priscilla and Aquila. Luke calls them "disciples" or "learners" (\mathtas\)...ignorant. There is no reason at ...(John:3:22-25; kjv@Luke:7:19; kjv@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:19:22 @{Timothy and Erastus} (\Timotheon kai Eraston\). Paul had sent Timothy to Corinth (1Corinthians:4:17|) and had requested kindly treatment of this young minister in his difficult task of placating the divided church (1Corinthians:16:10-11|) that he might return to Paul as he evidently had before Paul leaves Ephesus. He then despatched Titus to Corinth to finish what Timothy had not quite succeeded in doing with instructions to meet him in Troas. Now Timothy and Erastus (cf. kjv@Romans:16:23; kjv@2Timothy:4:20|) go on to Macedonia to prepare the way for Paul who will come on later. {He himself stayed in Asia for a while} (\autos epeschen chronon eis tn Asian\). Literally, He himself had additional time in Asia. Second aorist active indicative of \epech\...Luke and Paul. The reason for ...1Corinthians:16:8f.|, the great door wide open in Ephesus. Here again Luke and Paul supplement each other. Pentecost came towards the end of May and May was the month of the festival of Artemis (Diana) when great multitudes would come to Ephesus. But he did not remain till Pentecost as both Luke and Paul make plain.
rwp@Acts:19:32 @{Some therefore cried one thing and some another} (\alloi men oun allo ti ekrazon\). This classical use of \allos allo\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 747) appears also in 2:12; 21:34|. Literally, "others cried another thing." The imperfect shows the repetition (kept on crying) and confusion which is also distinctly stated. {For the assembly was in confusion} (\n gar h ekklsia sunkechumen\). The reason for the previous statement. Periphrastic past perfect passive of \sugche, sugchun (-unn)\, to pour together, to commingle as in verse 29| (\sugchuses\). It was not an "assembly" (\ekklsia, ek, kale\, to call out), but a wholly irregular, disorganized mob in a state (perfect tense) of confusion. There was "a lawful assembly" (verse 39|), but this mob was not one. Luke shows his contempt for this mob (Furneaux). {Had come together} (\sunellutheisan\). Past perfect active of \sunerchomai\...one sense. For some reason Demetrius ...-leader of the gathering (verse 38|). It was just a mob that shouted because others did.
rwp@Acts:20:13 @{To the ship} (\epi to ploion\). Note article. It is possible that Paul's party had chartered a coasting vessel from Philippi or Troas to take them to Patara in Lycia. Hence the boat stopped when and where Paul wished. That is possible, but not certain, for Paul could simply have accommodated himself to the plans of the ship's managers. {To take in Paul} (\analambanein ton Paulon\). Songs:in verse 14|. Same use in kjv@2Timothy:4:11|: "Picking up Mark" (\Markon analabn\). Assos was a seaport south of Troas in Mysia in the province of Asia. {He had appointed} (\diatetagmenos n\). Past perfect periphrastic middle of \diatass\, old verb to give orders (military in particular). {To go by land} (\pezeuein\). Present active infinitive of \pezeu\, old verb to go on foot, not on horse back or in a carriage or by ship. Here only in the N.T. It was about twenty miles over a paved Roman road, much shorter (less than half) than the sea voyage around Cape Lectum. It was a beautiful walk in the spring-...enjoyed it whatever his reason was ...(Matthew:14:23|).
rwp@Acts:20:25 @{And now, behold} (\kai nun, idou\). Second time and solemn reminder as in verse 22|. {I know} (\eg oida\). Emphasis on \eg\ which is expressed. {Ye all} (\humeis pantes\). In very emphatic position after the verb \opsesthe\ (shall see) and the object (my face). Twice Paul will write from Rome (Phillipians:2:24; kjv@Philemon:1:22|) the hope of coming east again; but that is in the future, and here Paul is expressing his personal conviction and his fears. The Pastoral Epistles show Paul did come to Ephesus again (1Timothy:1:3; 3:14; 4:13|) and Troas (2Timothy:4:13|) and Miletus (2Timothy:4:20|)...out otherwise. He had reason enough ...{Among whom I went about} (\en hois dilthon\). Apparently Paul here has in mind others beside the ministers. They represented the church in Ephesus and the whole region where Paul laboured.
rwp@Acts:20:35 @{I gave you an example} (\hupedeixa\). First aorist active indicative of \hupodeiknumi\, old verb to show under one's eyes, to give object lesson, by deed as well as by word (Luke:6:47|). \Hupodeigma\ means example (John:13:15; kjv@James:5:10|). Songs:Paul appeals to his example in kjv@1Corinthians:11:1; kjv@Phillipians:3:17|. \Panta\ is accusative plural of general reference (in all things). {Songs:labouring ye ought to help} (\houts kopintas dei antilambanesthai\). So, as I did. Necessity (\dei\). Toiling (\kopintas\) not just for ourselves, but to help (\antilambanesthai\), to take hold yourselves (middle voice) at the other end (\anti\). This verb common in the old Greek, but in the N.T. only in kjv@Luke:1:54; kjv@Acts:20:35; kjv@1Timothy:6:2|. This noble plea to help the weak is the very spirit of Christ (1Thessalonians:5:14; kjv@1Corinthians:12:28; kjv@Romans:5:6; 14:1|). In kjv@1Thessalonians:5:14| \antechesthe tn asthenountn\ we have Paul's very idea again. Every Community Chest appeal today re-echoes Paul's plea. {He himself said} (\autos eipen\). Not in the Gospels, one of the sayings of Jesus in current use that Paul had received and treasured. Various other _Agrapha_ of Jesus have been preserved in ancient writers and some in recently discovered papyri which may be genuine or not. We are grateful that Paul treasured this one. This Beatitude (on \makarion\ see on kjv@Matthew:5:3-11|) is illustrated by the whole life of Jesus with the Cross as the culmination. Aristotle (Eth. IV. I)...of superiority as the reason... (Page), an utterly different idea from that here. This quotation raises the question of how much Paul personally knew of the life and sayings of Jesus.
rwp@Acts:21:29 @{For} (\gar\). Luke adds the reason for the wild charges made against Paul. {They had before seen} (\san proerakotes\). Periphrastic past perfect of \proora\, old verb to see before, whether time or place. Only twice in the N.T., here and kjv@Acts:2:25| quoted from kjv@Psalms:15:8|. Note the double reduplication in \-e-\ as in Attic (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 364). {With him in the city Trophimus the Ephesian} (\Trophimon ton Ephesion en ti polei sun auti\). The Jews from Asia (Ephesus) knew Trophimus by sight as well as Paul. One day they saw both of them together (\sun\) in the city. That was a fact. They had just seized Paul in the temple (\hieron\). That was another fact. {They supposed} (\enomizon\). Imperfect active of \nomiz\, common to think or suppose. Perfectly harmless word, but they did, as so many people do, put their supposed inference on the same basis with the facts. They did not see Trophimus with Paul now in the temple, nor had they ever seen him there. They simply argued that, if Paul was willing to be seen down street with a Greek Christian, he would not hesitate to bring him (therefore, did bring him, \eisgagen\ as in verse 28|) into the temple, that is into the court of Israel and therefore both Paul and Trophimus were entitled to death, especially Paul who had brought him in (if he had) and, besides, they now had Paul. This is the way of the mob-mind in all ages. Many an innocent man has been rushed to his death by the fury of a lynching party.
rwp@Acts:22:11 @{I could not see} (\ouk eneblepon\). Imperfect active of \emblep\, I was not seeing, same fact stated in 9:8|. Here the reason as "for the glory of that light" (\apo ts doxs tou phtos ekeinou\). {Being led by the hand} (\cheiraggoumenos\). Present passive participle of \cheiragge\, the same verb used in 9:8| (\cheiraggountes\) which see. Late verb, in the N.T. only in these two places. In LXX.
rwp@Acts:22:29 @{Departed from him} (\apestsan ap' autou\). Second aorist active indicative (intransitive) of \aphistmi\, stood off from him at once. {Was afraid} (\ephobth\). Ingressive aorist passive indicative of \phobeomai\...became afraid. He had reason to ...{That he was a Roman} (\hoti Romaios estin\). Indirect assertion with tense of \estin\ retained. {Because he had bound him} (\hoti auton n dedeks\). Causal \hoti\ here after declarative \hoti\ just before. Periphrastic past perfect active of \de\, to bind.
rwp@Acts:23:12 @{Banded together} (\poisantes sustrophn\). See on 19:40| (riot), but here conspiracy, secret combination, binding together like twisted cords. {Bound themselves under a curse} (\anethematisan heautous\). First aorist active indicative of \anathematiz\, a late word, said by Cremer and Thayer to be wholly Biblical or ecclesiastical. But Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 95) quotes several examples of the verb in an Attic cursing tablet from Megara of the first or second century A.D. This proof shows that the word, as well as \anathema\ (substantive) from which the verb is derived, was employed by pagans as well as by Jews. Deissmann suggests that Greek Jews like the seven sons of Sceva may have been the first to coin it. It occurs in the LXX as well as kjv@Mark:14:71| (which see and Luke 21:5|); kjv@Acts:23:12,14,21|. They placed themselves under an anathema or curse, devoted themselves to God (cf. kjv@Leviticus:27:28f.; kjv@1Corinthians:16:22|). {Drink} (\pein=piein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \pin\. For this shortened form see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 343. {Till they had killed} (\hes hou apokteinsin\). First aorist active subjunctive of \apoktein\, common verb. No reason to translate "had killed," simply "till they should kill," the aorist merely punctiliar action, the subjunctive retained instead of the optative for vividness as usual in the _Koin_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 974-6). Same construction in verse 14|. King Saul took an "anathema" that imperilled Jonathan (1Samuel:14:24|). Perhaps the forty felt that the rabbis could find some way to absolve the curse if they failed. See this verse repeated in verse 21|.
rwp@Acts:23:15 @{Ye} (\humeis\). Emphatic. {Signify} (\emphanisate\). First aorist active imperative of \emphaniz\. Make plain from \emphans\, chiefly in Acts. Repeated in verse 22|. The authority is with the chiliarch not with the Sanhedrin, but he had appealed to the Sanhedrin for advice. {As though ye would judge of his case more exactly} (\hs mellontas diaginskein akribesteron ta peri autou\). \Hs\...participle gives the alleged reason as ...20|. \Diagnosk\, old verb to distinguish accurately, only here in N.T. and 24:22|. {Or ever come near} (\pro tou eggisai auton\). "Before the coming near as to him." \Pro\ and the genitive of the articular infinitive of \eggiz\ with accusative of general reference. {We are ready to slay him} (\hetoimoi esmen tou anelein auton\). Genitive of purpose of the articular infinitive after the adjective \hetoimoi\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1061). \Anelein\, second aorist active of \anaire\.
rwp@Acts:23:25 @{And he wrote} (\grapsas\). First aorist active participle of \graph\, agreeing with the subject (Lysias) of \eipen\ (said) back in verse 23| (beginning). {After this form} (\echousan ton tupon touton\). Textus Receptus has \periechousan\. The use of \tupon\ (type or form) like _exemplum_ in Latin (Page who quotes Cicero _Ad Att_. IX. 6. 3)...But there is no reason for ..._elogium_. A copy of the letter may have been given Paul after his appeal to Caesar. It was probably written in Latin. The letter is a "dexterous mixture of truth and falsehood" (Furneaux) with the stamp of genuineness. It puts things in a favourable light for Lysias and makes no mention of his order to scourge Paul.
rwp@Acts:24:27 @{But when two years were fulfilled} (\dietias de plrtheiss\). Genitive absolute first aorist passive of \plro\, common verb to fill full. \Dietia\, late word in LXX and Philo, common in the papyri, in N.T. only here and kjv@Acts:28:30|. Compound of \dia\, two (\duo, dis\) and \etos\, year. Songs:Paul lingered on in prison in Caesarea, waiting for the second hearing under Felix which never came. Caesarea now became the compulsory headquarters of Paul for two years. With all his travels Paul spent several years each at Tarsus, Antioch, Corinth, Ephesus, though not as a prisoner unless that was true part of the time at Ephesus for which there is some evidence though not of a convincing kind. We do not know that Luke remained in Caesarea all this time. In all probability he came and went with frequent visits with Philip the Evangelist. It was probably during this period that Luke secured the material for his Gospel and wrote part or all of it before going to Rome. He had ample opportunity to examine the eyewitnesses who heard Jesus and the first attempts at writing including the Gospel of Mark (Luke:1:1-4|). {Was succeeded by} (\elaben diadochon\). Literally, "received as successor." \Diadochos\ is an old word from \diadechomai\, to receive in succession (\dia, duo\, two) and occurs here alone in the N.T. Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 115) gives papyri examples where \hoi diadochoi\ means "higher officials at the court of the Ptolemies," probably "deputies," a usage growing out of the "successors" of Alexander the Great (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_), though here the original notion of "successor" occurs (cf. Josephus, _Ant_. XX. 8, 9). Luke does not tell why Felix "received" a successor. The explanation is that during these two years the Jews and the Gentiles had an open fight in the market-place in Caesarea. Felix put the soldiers on the mob and many Jews were killed. The Jews made formal complaint to the Emperor with the result that Felix was recalled and Porcius Festus sent in his stead. {Porcius Festus} (\Porkion Phston\). We know very little about this man. He is usually considered a worthier man than Felix, but Paul fared no better at his hands and he exhibits the same insincerity and eagerness to please the Jews. Josephus (_Ant_. XX. 8, 9) says that "Porcius Festus was sent as a successor to Felix." The precise year when this change occurred is not clear. Albinus succeeded Festus by A.D. 62, so that it is probable that Festus came A.D. 58 (or 59). Death cut short his career in a couple of years though he did more than Felix to rid the country of robbers and _sicarii_. Some scholars argue for an earlier date for the recall of Felix. Nero became Emperor Oct. 13, A.D. 54. Poppaea, his Jewish mistress and finally wife, may have had something to do with the recall of Felix at the request of the Jews. {Desiring to gain favour with the Jews} (\theln te charita katathesthai tois Ioudaiois\). Reason for his conduct. Note second aorist (ingressive) middle infinitive \katathesthai\ from \katatithmi\, old verb to place down, to make a deposit, to deposit a favour with, to do something to win favour. Only here and 25:9| in N.T., though in some MSS. in kjv@Mark:15:46|. It is a banking figure. {Left Paul in bonds} (\katelipe ton Paulon dedemenon\). Effective aorist active indicative of \kataleip\, to leave behind. Paul "in bonds" (\dedemenon\, perfect passive participle of \de\, to bind) was the "deposit" (\katathesthai\) for their favour. Codex Bezae adds that Felix left Paul in custody "because of Drusilla" (\dia Drousillan\). She disliked Paul as much as Herodias did John the Baptist. Songs:Pilate surrendered to the Jews about the death of Jesus when they threatened to report him to Caesar. Some critics would date the third group of Paul's Epistles (Philippians, Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians) to the imprisonment here in Caesarea, some even to one in Ephesus. But the arguments for either of these two views are more specious than convincing. Furneaux would even put kjv@2Timothy:4:9-22| here in spite of the flat contradiction with kjv@Acts:21:29| about Trophimus being in Jerusalem instead of Miletus (2Timothy:4:20|), a "mistake" which he attributes to Luke! That sort of criticism can prove anything.
rwp@Acts:25:16 @{It is not the custom of the Romans} (\hoti ouk estin ethos Rmaiois\). If a direct quotation, \hoti\ is recitative as in Authorized Version. Canterbury Revision takes it as indirect discourse after \apekrithn\ (I answered), itself in a relative clause (\pros hous\) with the present tense (\estin\, is) preserved as is usual. There is a touch of disdain (Furneaux) in the tone of Festus. He may refer to a demand of the Jews before they asked that Paul be brought to Jerusalem (25:3|). At any rate there is a tone of scorn towards the Jews. {Before that the accused have} (\prin ho katgoroumenos echoi\). This use of the optative in this temporal clause with \prin \ instead of the subjunctive \an echi\ is in conformity with literary Greek and occurs only in Luke's writings in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 970). This sequence of modes is a mark of the literary style occasionally seen in Luke. It is interesting here to note the succession of dependent clauses in verses 14-16|. {The accusers face to face} (\kata prospon tous katgorous\). Same word \katgoros\ as in 23:30,35; 25:18|. This all sounds fair enough. {And have had opportunity to make his defence concerning the matter laid against him} (\topon te apologias laboi peri tou egklmatos\). Literally, "And should receive (\laboi\ optative for same reason as \echoi\ above, second aorist active of \lamban\) opportunity for defence (objective genitive) concerning the charge" (\egklmatos\ in N.T. only here and 23:19| which see).
rwp@Acts:25:20 @{Being perplexed} (\aporoumenos\). Present middle participle of the common verb \apore\ (\a\ privative and \poros\ way), to be in doubt which way to turn, already in kjv@Mark:6:20| which see and kjv@Luke:24:4|. The Textus Receptus has \eis\ after here, but critical text has only the accusative which this verb allows (Mark:6:20|) as in Thucydides and Plato. {How to inquire concerning these things} (\tn peri toutn ztsin\)...This is not the reason given ...9| (wanting to curry favour with the Jews), but doubtless this motive also actuated Festus as both could be true. {Whether he would go to Jerusalem} (\ei bouloito poreuesthai eis Ierosoluma\). Optative in indirect question after \elegon\ (asked or said) imperfect active, though the present indicative could have been retained with change of person: "Dost thou wish, etc.," (\ei bouli\, etc.). See Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1031, 1044. This is the question put to Paul in verse 9| though \theleis\ is there used.
rwp@Acts:25:22 @{I also could wish} (\eboulomn kai autos\). The imperfect for courtesy, rather than the blunt \boulomai\, I wish, I want. Literally, "I myself also was wishing" (while you were talking), a compliment to the interesting story told by Festus. The use of \an\ with the imperfect would really mean that he does not wish (a conclusion of the second class condition, determined as unfulfilled). \An\...if inconvenient for any reason... (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 885-7). Agrippa may have heard much about Christianity.
rwp@Acts:25:26 @{No certain thing} (\asphales ti--ou\). Nothing definite or reliable (\a\ privative, \sphall\, to trip). All the charges of the Sanhedrin slipped away or were tripped up by Paul. Festus confesses that he had nothing left and thereby convicts himself of gross insincerity in his proposal to Paul in verse 9| about going up to Jerusalem. By his own statement he should have set Paul free. The various details here bear the marks of the eyewitness. Luke was surely present and witnessed this grand spectacle with Paul as chief performer. {Unto my lord} (\ti kurii\). Augustus (Octavius) and Tiberius refused the title of \kurios\ (lord) as too much like _rex_ (king) and like master and slave, but the servility of the subjects gave it to the other emperors who accepted it (Nero among them). Antoninus Pius put it on his coins. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 105) gives an ostracon dated Aug. 4, A.D. 63 with the words "in the year nine of Nero the lord" (\enatou Nernos tou kuriou\). Deissmann (_op. cit._, pp. 349ff.) runs a most interesting parallel "between the cult of Christ and the cult of Caesar in the application of the term \kurios\, lord" in ostraca, papyri, inscriptions. Beyond a doubt Paul has all this fully in mind when he says in kjv@1Corinthians:12:3| that "no one is able to say \Kurios Isous\ except in the Holy Spirit" (cf. also kjv@Phillipians:2:11|). The Christians claimed this word for Christ and it became the test in the Roman persecutions as when Polycarp steadily refused to say " Lord Caesar" and insisted on saying "Lord Jesus" when it meant his certain death. {Before you} (\eph' humn\). The whole company. In no sense a new trial, but an examination in the presence of these prominent men to secure data and to furnish entertainment and pleasure to Agrippa (verse 22|). {Especially before thee} (\malista epi sou\)...It was the main reason as ...22| shows. Agrippa was a Jew and Festus was glad of the chance to see what he thought of Paul's case. {After examination had} (\ts anakrises genomens\). Genitive absolute, "the examination having taken place." \Anakrisis\ from \anakrin\ (cf. 12:19; 24:8; 28:18|) is a legal term for preliminary examination. Only here in the N.T. Inscriptions and papyri give it as examination of slaves or other property. {That I may have somewhat to write} (\hops sch ti graps\). Ingressive aorist subjunctive \sch\ (may get) with \hops\ (final particle like \hina\). \Ti graps\ in indirect question after \sch\ is either future indicative or aorist subjunctive (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1045). Festus makes it plain that this is not a "trial," but an examination for his convenience to help him out of a predicament.
rwp@Acts:27:22 @{And now} (\kai ta nun\). Accusative plural neuter article of general reference in contrast with \men\ in verse 21|. Paul shows modesty (Bengel) in the mild contrast. {No loss of life} (\apobol psuchs oudemia\). Old word from \apoball\, to throw away, only twice in N.T. kjv@Romans:11:15| (rejection) and here. He had foretold such loss of life as likely (verse 10|)...he now gives his reason for ...
rwp@Acts:27:23 @{For there stood by me} (\parest gar moi\). Second aorist active (intransitive) indicative of \paristmi\ with the locative case (beside me). The very form used by Paul of his trial (2Timothy:4:17|) when "the Lord stood by me" (\ho de kurios moi parest\) when others deserted him. This angel of the God whom Paul serves (in distinction from the heathen gods) is the reason for Paul's present confidence.
rwp@Acts:27:25 @{Wherefore be of good cheer} (\dio euthumeite\). God had spoken. That was enough. This old verb from \euthumos\ in the N.T. only here, verse 25; kjv@James:5:13|. See the adjective 27:36|. {For I believe God} (\pisteu gar ti thei\). This is Paul's reason for his own good cheer and for his exhortation to confidence in spite of circumstances so untoward. Paul had doubtless prayed for his own life and for the lives of all. He was sure that he was to bear his witness in Rome.
rwp@Acts:28:3 @{When Paul had gathered} (\sustrepsantos tou Paulou\). Genitive absolute with first aorist active participle of \sustreph\, old verb to twist or turn together or roll into a bundle. In N.T. only here and kjv@Matthew:17:22|. {A bundle of sticks} (\phrugann ti plthos\). "Some multitude (or pile) of dry twigs" (\phrugann\ from \phrug\ or \phruss\, to dry. Only here in N.T.). {Laid} (\epithentos\). Songs:genitive absolute again with second aorist active participle of \epitithmi\, to place upon. Few things show Paul to better advantage than this incident. {By reason of the heat} (\apo ts therms\). Old word, only here in N.T. Ablative case with \apo\ (from the heat). The viper was in a state of torpor in the bundle of sticks. The heat wakened him. {A viper} (\echidna\). The old word used by the Baptist of the Pharisees (Matthew:3:7; kjv@Luke:3:7|) and by Jesus also (Matthew:12:34; 23:33|). It is objected that there is little wood in the island today and no vipers, though Lewin as late as 1853 believes that he saw a viper near St. Paul's Bay. But the island now has 1,200 people to the square mile and snakes of any kind have a poor chance. The viper has also disappeared from Arran as the island became more frequented (Knowling). Ramsay thinks that the small constrictor (_Coronella Austriaca_) which still exists in the island may be the "viper," though it has no poison fangs, but clings and bites. The natives thought that it was a poisonous viper. {Fastened on his hand} (\kathpse ts cheiros autou\). First aorist active indicative of \kathapt\, to fasten down on with the genitive case. Old verb, here only in N.T. Cf. kjv@Mark:16:18|.
rwp@Acts:28:22 @{But we desire} (\axioumen de\). Old verb \axio\, to deem worthy, to think right or proper as in 15:38| which see. They think it only fair to hear Paul's side of his case. {Concerning this sect} (\peri ts haireses tauts\). Paul had identified Christianity with Judaism (verse 20|) in its Messianic hope. The language seems to imply that the number of Christians in Rome was comparatively small and mainly Gentile. If the edict of Claudius for the expulsion of the Jews from Rome (Acts:18:2|) was due to disturbance over Christ (\Chrstus\)...the Jews had special reason for ...{Everywhere spoken against} (\pantachou antilegetai\). Cf. verse 19|. The line of cleavage between Jew and Christian was now sharply drawn everywhere.
rwp@Colossians:1:16 @{All things} (\ta panta\). The universe as in kjv@Romans:11:35|, a well-known philosophical phrase. It is repeated at the end of the verse. {In him were created} (\en auti ektisth\)...Paul now gives the reason... (\hoti\, for) for the primacy of Christ in the work of creation (16f.|). It is the constative aorist passive indicative \ektisth\ (from \ktiz\, old verb, to found, to create (Romans:1:25|). This central activity of Christ in the work of creation is presented also in kjv@John:1:3; kjv@Hebrews:1:2| and is a complete denial of the Gnostic philosophy. The whole of creative activity is summed up in Christ including the angels in heaven and everything on earth. God wrought through "the Son of his love." All earthly dignities are included. {Have been created} (\ektistai\). Perfect passive indicative of \ktiz\, "stand created," "remain created." The permanence of the universe rests, then, on Christ far more than on gravity. It is a Christo-centric universe. {Through him} (\di' autou\). As the intermediate and sustaining agent. He had already used \en auti\ (in him) as the sphere of activity. {And unto him} (\kai eis auton\). This is the only remaining step to take and Paul takes it (1Corinthians:15:28|) See kjv@Ephesians:1:10| for similar use of \en auti\ of Christ and in kjv@Colossians:1:19; 20| again we have \en auti, di' autou, eis auton\ used of Christ. See kjv@Hebrews:2:10| for \di' hon\ (because of whom) and \di' hou\ (by means of whom) applied to God concerning the universe (\ta panta\). In kjv@Romans:11:35| we find \ex autou kai di' autou kai eis auton ta panta\ referring to God. But Paul does not use \ex\ in this connection of Christ, but only \en\, \dia\, and \eis\. See the same distinction preserved in kjv@1Corinthians:8:6| (\ex\ of God, \dia\, of Christ).
rwp@Colossians:2:9 @{For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily} (\hoti en auti katoikei pn to plrma ts theottos smatiks\)...sentence, given as the reason... (\hoti\, because) for the preceding claim for Christ as the measure of human knowledge Paul states the heart of his message about the Person of Christ. There dwells (at home) in Christ not one or more aspects of the Godhead (the very \essence\ of God, from \theos, deitas\) and not to be confused with \theiotes\ in kjv@Romans:1:20| (from \theios\, the {quality} of God, _divinitas_), here only in N.T. as \theiots\ only in kjv@Romans:1:20|. The distinction is observed in Lucian and Plutarch. \Theiots\ occurs in the papyri and inscriptions. Paul here asserts that "all the \plrma\ of the Godhead," not just certain aspects, dwells in Christ and in bodily form (\smatiks\, late and rare adverb, in Plutarch, inscription, here only in N.T.), dwells now in Christ in his glorified humanity (Phillipians:2:9-11|), "the body of his glory" (\ti smati ts doxs\). The fulness of the God-head was in Christ before the Incarnation (John:1:1,18; kjv@Phillipians:2:6|), during the Incarnation (John:1:14,18; kjv@1John:1:1-3|). It was the Son of God who came in the likeness of men (Phillipians:2:7|). Paul here disposes of the Docetic theory that Jesus had no human body as well as the Cerinthian separation between the man Jesus and the aeon Christ. He asserts plainly the deity and the humanity of Jesus Christ in corporeal form.
rwp@Colossians:3:13 @{Forbearing one another} (\anechomenoi allln\). Present middle (direct) participle of \anech\ with the ablative case (\allln\), "holding yourselves back from one another." {Forgiving each other} (\charizomenoi heautois\). Present middle participle also of \charizomai\ with the dative case of the reflexive pronoun (\heautois\) instead of the reciprocal just before (\allln\). {If any man have} (\ean tis echi\). Third class condition (\ean\ and present active subjunctive of \ech\). {Complaint} (\momphn\). Old word from \memphomai\, to blame. Only here in N.T. Note \pros\ here with \tina\ in the sense of against for comparison with \pros\ in 2:31|. {Even as the Lord} (\kaths kai ho Kurios\). Some MSS. read \Christos\ for \Kurios\...is here made the reason for ...6:12,14f.| where our forgiveness of others is made by Jesus a prerequisite to our obtaining forgiveness from God.
rwp@Info_Epistles-Pastorial @ THE FOURTH GROUP THE PASTORAL EPISTLES FIRST TIMOTHY TITUS SECOND TIMOTHY A.D. 65 TO 68 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION It is necessary to discuss introductory matters concerning the three because they are common to them all. It is true that some modern scholars admit as Pauline the personal passages in kjv@2Timothy:1:15-18; 4:9-22|...rest and no earthly reason can ...
rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ THE REASON FOR HIS EPISTLES In a real sense Paul's Epistles are tracts for the times, not for the age in general, but to meet real emergencies. He wrote to a particular church or group of churches or persons to meet immediate needs brought to his attention by messengers or letters. Dr. Deissmann contends strongly for the idea of calling Paul's Epistles "letters" rather than "Epistles." He gives a studied literary character to "epistles" as more or less artificial and written for the public eye rather than for definite effect. Four of Paul's Epistles are personal (those to Philemon, Titus, and Timothy) beyond a doubt, but in these which can properly be termed personal letters there are the principles of the gospel applied to personal, social, and ecclesiastical problems in such a pungent fashion that they possess permanent value. In the earliest group of Paul's Epistles, he reminds the Thessalonians of the official character of the Epistle which was meant for the church as a whole (1Thessalonians:5:27|). He says also: "But if any one does not obey our word by the epistle, mark this one, not to associate with him, that he may be put to shame" (2Thessalonians:3:14|). He calls attention to his signature as proof of the genuineness of every epistle (2Thessalonians:3:17|). He gave directions for the public reading of his epistles (Colossians:4:16|). He regarded them as the expression of God's will through the life of the churches and he put his whole heart into them. Two great controversies stirred Paul's life. That with the Judaizers called forth the great doctrinal group (I Corinthians, II Corinthians, Galatians, Romans). That with the Gnostics occasioned the Epistles to the Colossians and the Ephesians (Laodiceans) and this controversy ran on into the Pastoral Epistles. Each Epistle had its particular occasion which will be pointed out in due season. But even in the short ones like Philippians, Colossians and Ephesians Paul deals with the sublimest of all themes, the Person of Christ, with a masterfulness never equalled elsewhere. Even in I Corinthians, which deals so largely with church problems in Corinth, two great chapters rise to the heights of real eloquence (Chapter kjv@1Corinthians:13| on Love and Chapter kjv@1Corinthians:15| on the Resurrection). Romans, the greatest of his Epistles, has the fullest discussion of Paul's gospel of grace and Chapter kjv@1Corinthians:8| has a sweep of imagination and a grasp of faith unsurpassed. Hence, while denying to Paul the artificial rules of the rhetoricians attributed to him by Blass, I cannot agree that Paul's church Epistles are mere incidental letters. It is not a question whether Paul was writing for posterity or for the present emergency. He wrote for the present emergency in the most effective possible way. He brought the whole gospel message to bear upon the varied and pressing problems of the early Christians in the power of the Holy Spirit with the eloquence of a mind all ablaze with the truth and with a heart that yearned for their souls for Christ. They are not literary epistles, but they are more than personal letters. They are thunderbolts of passion and power that struck centre and that strike fire now for all who will take the trouble to come to them for the mind of Christ that is here.
rwp@Galatians:2:12 @{For before that certain came from James} (\pro tou gar elthein tinas apo Iakbou\). The reason (\gar\) for Paul's condemnation of Peter. Articular infinitive in the genitive after \pro\ with the accusative of general reference (\tinas\), "for before the coming as to some from James." Does Paul mean to say that these "certain" ones had been sent by James to Antioch to inspect the conduct of Peter and the other Jewish brethren? Some scholars think so. No doubt these brethren let the idea get out that they were emissaries "from James." But that idea is inconsistent with the position of James as president of the conference and the author of the resolution securing liberty to the Gentile Christians. No doubt these brethren threatened Peter to tell James and the church about his conduct and they reminded Peter of his previous arraignment before the Jerusalem Church on this very charge (Acts:11:1-18|). As a matter of fact the Jerusalem Conference did not discuss the matter of social relations between Jews and Gentiles though that was the charge made against Peter (Acts:11:1ff.|). {He did eat with the Gentiles} (\meta tn ethnn sunsthien\). It was his habit (imperfect tense). {He drew back} (\hupestellen\). Imperfect tense, inchoative action, "he began to draw himself (\heauton\) back." Old word \hupostell\. See middle voice to dissemble (Acts:20:20,27|), to shrink (Hebrews:10:38|). {Separated himself} (\aphrizen heauton\). Inchoative imperfect again, "began to separate himself" just like a Pharisee (see on ¯1:15|) and as if afraid of the Judaizers in the Jerusalem Church, perhaps half afraid that James might not endorse what he had been doing. {Fearing them that were of the circumcision} (\phoboumenos tous ek peritoms\)...This was the real reason for ...11:2| for "\hoi ek peritoms\" (they of the circumcision), the very phrase here. It was not that Peter had changed his views from the Jerusalem resolutions. It was pure fear of trouble to himself as in the denials at the trial of Christ.
rwp@Galatians:3:11 @{In the sight of God} (\para ti thei\). By the side of (\para\)...it, for the simple reason that ..._all_ the law, God's perfect law.
rwp@Galatians:4:6 @{Because ye are sons} (\hoti este huioi\). This is the reason for sending forth the Son (4:4| and here). We were "sons" in God's elective purpose and love. \Hoti\ is causal (1Corinthians:12:15; kjv@Romans:9:7|). {The Spirit of his Son} (\to pneuma tou huioi autou\). The Holy Spirit, called the Spirit of Christ (Romans:8:9f.|), the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Phillipians:1:19|). The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son (John:15:26|). {Crying, Abba, Father} (\krazon Abba ho patr\). The participle agrees with \pneuma\ neuter (grammatical gender), not neuter in fact. An old, though rare in present as here, onomatopoetic word to croak as a raven (Theophrastus, like Poe's _The Raven_), any inarticulate cry like "the unuttered groanings" of kjv@Romans:8:26| which God understands. This cry comes from the Spirit of Christ in our hearts. \Abba\ is the Aramaic word for father with the article and \ho patr\ translates it. The articular form occurs in the vocative as in kjv@John:20:28|. It is possible that the repetition here and in kjv@Romans:8:15| may be "a sort of affectionate fondness for the very term that Jesus himself used" (Burton) in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mark:14:36|). The rabbis preserve similar parallels. Most of the Jews knew both Greek and Aramaic. But there remains the question why Jesus used both in his prayer. Was it not natural for both words to come to him in his hour of agony as in his childhood? The same thing may be true here in Paul's case.
rwp@Galatians:6:10 @{As we have opportunity} (\hs kairon echmen\). Indefinite comparative clause (present subjunctive without \an\). "As we have occasion at any time." {Let us work that which is good} (\ergazmetha to agathon\). Volitive present middle subjunctive of \ergazomai\, "Let us keep on working the good deed." {Of the household of faith} (\tous oikeious ts pistes\). For the obvious reason that they belong to the same family with necessary responsibility.
rwp@Galatians:6:17 @{From henceforth} (\tou loipou\). Usually \to loipon\, the accusative of general reference, "as for the rest" (Phillipians:3:1; 4:8|). The genitive case (as here and kjv@Ephesians:6:10|) means "in respect of the remaining time." {The marks of Jesus} (\ta stigmata tou Isou\). Old word from \stiz\, to prick, to stick, to sting. Slaves had the names or stamp of their owners on their bodies. It was sometimes done for soldiers also. There were devotees also who stamped upon their bodies the names of the gods whom they worshipped. Today in a round-up cattle are given the owner's mark. Paul gloried in being the slave of Jesus Christ. This is probably the image in Paul's mind since he bore in his body brandmarks of suffering for Christ received in many places (2Corinthians:6:4-6; 11:23ff.|), probably actual scars from the scourgings (thirty-nine lashes at a time)...listen to me by reason of ...
rwp@Hebrews:2:10 @{It became him} (\eprepen auti\). Imperfect active of \prep\, old verb to stand out, to be becoming or seemly. Here it is impersonal with \teleisai\ as subject, though personal in kjv@Hebrews:7:26|. \Auti\ (him) is in the dative case and refers to God, not to Christ as is made plain by \ton archgon\ (author). One has only to recall kjv@John:3:16| to get the idea here. The voluntary humiliation or incarnation of Christ the Son a little lower than the angels was a seemly thing to God the Father as the writer now shows in a great passage (2:10-18|) worthy to go beside kjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|. {For whom} (\di' hon\). Referring to \auti\ (God) as the reason (cause) for the universe (\ta panta\). {Through whom} (\di' hou\). With the genitive \dia\ expresses the agent by whom the universe came into existence, a direct repudiation of the Gnostic view of intermediate agencies (aeons) between God and the creation of the universe. Paul puts it succinctly in kjv@Romans:11:36| by his \ex autou kai di' autou kai eis auton ta panta\. The universe comes out of God, by means of God, for God. This writer has already said that God used his Son as the Agent (\di' hou\) in creation (1:2|), a doctrine in harmony with kjv@Colossians:1:15f.| (\en auti, di' autou eis auton\) and kjv@John:1:3|. {In bringing} (\agagonta\). Second aorist active participle of \ag\ in the accusative case in spite of the dative \auti\ just before to which it refers. {The author} (\ton archgon\). Old compound word (\arch\ and \ag\) one leading off, leader or prince as in kjv@Acts:5:31|, one blazing the way, a pioneer (Dods) in faith (Hebrews:12:2|), author (Acts:3:15|). Either sense suits here, though author best (verse 9|). Jesus is the author of salvation, the leader of the sons of God, the Elder Brother of us all (Romans:8:29|). {To make perfect} (\teleisai\). First aorist active infinitive of \teleio\ (from \teleios\). If one recoils at the idea of God making Christ perfect, he should bear in mind that it is the humanity of Jesus that is under discussion. The writer does not say that Jesus was sinful (see the opposite in 4:15|), but simply that "by means of sufferings" God perfected his Son in his human life and death for his task as Redeemer and Saviour. One cannot know human life without living it. There was no moral imperfection in Jesus, but he lived his human life in order to be able to be a sympathizing and effective leader in the work of salvation.
rwp@Hebrews:5:7 @{In the days of his flesh} (\en tais hmerais ts sarkos autou\). Here (verses 7-9|) the author turns to the other requirement of a high priest (human sympathy). Since Jesus was "without sin" (4:15|)...even more so by reason of ...{Having offered up} (\prosenegkas\). Second aorist active (\-a\ form) participle of \prospher\ (cf. verse 3|). An allusion to the Agony of Christ in Gethsemane. {Supplications} (\hiketrias\). Socrates, Polybius, Job:(Job:40:22|) combine this word with \deseis\ (prayers) as here. The older form was \hikesia\. The word \hiketrios\ is an adjective from \hikets\ (a suppliant from \hik\, to come to one) and suggests one coming with an olive-branch (\elaia\). Here only in the N.T. {With strong crying and tears} (\meta kraugs ischuras kai dakrun\). See kjv@Luke:22:44f|. for a picture of the scene in Gethsemane (anguish and pathos). No doubt the writer has in mind other times when Jesus shed tears (John:11:35; kjv@Luke:19:41|), but Gethsemane chiefly. {To save him from death} (\szein ek thanatou\). A reference to the cry of Jesus in Gethsemane (Matthew:26:39|). {Having been heard for his godly fear} (\eisakoustheis apo ts eulabeias\). Old word from \eulabs\ (taking hold well, kjv@Luke:2:25| from \eu, lamban\, the verb \eulabeomai\ in N.T. only in kjv@Hebrews:11:7|), in N.T. only here and 12:28|. Fine picture of Christ's attitude toward the Father in the prayer in Gethsemane and in all his prayers. Jesus in Gethsemane at once surrendered his will to that of the Father who heard his plea and enabled him to acquiesce in the Father's will.
rwp@Hebrews:5:12 @{Teachers} (\didaskaloi\). Predicate nominative after \einai\. {By reason of the time} (\dia ton chronon\). Alas, what a commentary on modern Christians. {That some one teach you the rudiments} (\tou didaskein humas tina ta stoicheia\). Neat Greek idiom, genitive case of the articular infinitive (need of the teaching) with two accusatives of the person (\humas\, you) and the thing (\ta stoicheia\, the rudiments) and the accusative of general reference (\tina\, as to some one). For \stoicheia\ see kjv@Galatians:4:3,9; kjv@Colossians:2:8|. {Of the first principles of the oracles of God} (\ts archs tn login tou theou\). Three genitives linked to each other. \Archs\ (beginning) illustrates \ta stoicheia\, just before, the A B C of Christian teaching like kjv@Hebrews:6:1f|. \Logion\ is a diminutive of logos, divine oracles being usually brief, common in the O.T. and Philo for God's words, in N.T. used for the O.T. (Acts:7:38; Rom 3:2|), of God's word through Christians (1Peter:4:11|), of the substance of Christian teaching (Hebrews:5:12|). {Of milk} (\galaktos\). Because still babes (1Corinthians:3:2|) and not able to chew "solid food" (\steres trophs\), without intellectual and spiritual teeth.
rwp@Hebrews:5:14 @{For full-grown men} (\telein\). Predicate genitive. The word is for adults, relative perfection (\teleioi\) in contrast with babes as in kjv@1Corinthians:2:6; 3:1; 13:11; kjv@Phillipians:3:15; kjv@Ephesians:4:4|, not absolute perfection (Matthew:5:48|). {Their senses} (\ta aisthtria\). The organs of perception (Stoic term for sense organs) from \aisthanomai\ (Luke:9:45|), in Plato, Galen, Hippocrates, here only in N.T. {Exercised} (\gegumnasmena\). Perfect passive participle of \gumnaz\, to exercise (naked, \gumnos\). Galen uses \aisthtria gegumnasmena\ together after \ech\ as we have here. For this predicate use of the participle with \ech\ see kjv@Luke:13:6; 14:19f|. "By reason of use" one gains such skill. {To discern} (\pros diakrisin\). "For deciding between" (from \diakrin\), old word with ablative \kalou te kai kakou\ (between good and evil). See kjv@1Corinthians:12:1; Rom 14:1|.
rwp@Hebrews:6:6 @{It is impossible to renew them again} (\adunaton palin anakainizein\). The \adunaton\ (impossible) comes first in verse 4| without \estin\ (is) and there is no "them" in the Greek. There are three other instances of \adunaton\ in Hebrews (6:18; 10:4; 11:6|). The present active infinitive of \anakainiz\ (late verb, \ana, kainos\, here only in the N.T., but \anakaino\, kjv@2Corinthians:4:16; kjv@Colossians:3:10|) with \adunaton\ bluntly denies the possibility of renewal for apostates from Christ (cf. 3:12-4:2|). It is a terrible picture and cannot be toned down. The one ray of light comes in verses 8-12|, not here. {Seeing they crucify to themselves afresh} (\anastraurountas heautois\). Present active participle (accusative plural agreeing with \tous ... parapesontas\) of \anastauro\, the usual verb for crucify in the old Greek so that \ana-\ here does not mean "again" or "afresh," but "up," _sursum_, not _rursum_ (Vulgate). This is the reason why renewal for such apostates is impossible. They crucify Christ. {And put him to an open shame} (\kai paradeigmatizontas\). Present active participle of \paradeigmatiz\, late verb from \paradeigma\ (example), to make an example of, and in bad sense to expose to disgrace. Simplex verb \deigmatisai\ in this sense in kjv@Matthew:1:19|.
rwp@Info_James @ THE EPISTLE OF JAMES BEFORE A.D. 50 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION THE AUTHOR He claims to be James, and so the book is not anonymous. It is either genuine or pseudonymous. He does not claim to be the brother of the Lord Jesus, as one might expect. James the brother of John was put to death by Herod Agrippa I about A.D. 44 (Acts:12:2|). But James the brother of Jesus (Galatians:1:19|) was still alive and became a leader of the church in Jerusalem (Acts:12:17|), presiding over the Conference in Jerusalem (Acts:15:13-21|) and apparently writing the message from the Conference to the Gentile churches (Acts:15:22-29|), and was still the leading elder in Jerusalem on Paul's last visit (Acts:21:18-25|). James does not claim here to be an apostle and he was not one of the twelve apostles, and the dispute about accepting it of which Eusebius spoke was about its apostolicity since James was only an apostle by implication (Galatians:1:19|) in the general sense of that term like Barnabas (Acts:14:14|), perhaps Silas and Timothy (1Thessalonians:2:7|), certainly not on a par with Paul, who claimed equality with the twelve. James, like the other brothers of Jesus, had once disbelieved his claims to be the Messiah (John:7:6f.|), but he was won by a special vision of the Risen Christ (1Corinthians:15:7|) and was in the upper room before the great pentecost (Acts:1:14|). It is plain that he had much to overcome as a zealous Jew to become a Christian, though he was not a mere cousin of Jesus or a son of Joseph by a former marriage. He was strictly the half-...Jesus. There is no reason to ...(1Corinthians:9:5|). He came to be called James the Just and was considered very devout. The Judaizers had counted on him to agree with them against Paul and Barnabas, but he boldly stood for Gentile freedom from the ceremonial law. The Judaizers still claimed him at Antioch and used his name wrongly to frighten Peter thereby (Galatians:2:12|). But to the end he remained the loyal friend to Paul and his gospel rightly understood (Acts:21:18-25|). Clement of Alexandria (_Hypot_. vii) says that, when he bore strong testimony to Jesus as the Son of man, they flung him down from the gable of the temple, stoned him, and beat him to death with a club. But Josephus (_Ant_. XX. ix. I) says that the Sadducees about A.D. 62 had James and some others brought before the Sanhedrin (Ananus presiding) and had them stoned as transgressors of the law. At any rate he won a martyr's crown like Stephen and James the brother of John.
rwp@James:3:1 @{Be not many teachers} (\m polloi didaskaloi ginesthe\). Prohibition with \m\ and present middle imperative of \ginomai\. "Stop becoming many teachers" (so many of you). There is thus a clear complaint that too many of the Jewish Christians were attempting to teach what they did not clearly comprehend. There was a call for wise teachers (verses 13f.|), not for foolish ones. This soon became an acute question, as one can see in I Cor. 12 to 14. They were not all teachers (1Corinthians:12:28f.; 14:26|). The teacher is here treated as the wise man (3:13-18|) as he ought to be. The rabbi was the teacher (Matthew:23:7f.; kjv@John:1:38; 3:10; 20:16|). Teachers occupied an honourable position among the Christians (Ephesians:4:11; kjv@Acts:13:1|). James counts himself a teacher (we shall receive, 3:1|) and this discussion is linked on with 1:19-27|. Teachers are necessary, but incompetent and unworthy ones do much harm. {Heavier judgment} (\meizon krima\). "Greater sentence." See kjv@Mark:12:40; kjv@Luke:20:47| for \perrisoteron krima\ (the sentence from the judge, kjv@Romans:13:2|). The reason is obvious. The pretence of knowledge adds to the teacher's responsibility and condemnation.
rwp@James:4:2 @{Ye lust} (\epithumeite\). Present active indicative of \epithume\, old word (from \epi, thumos\, yearning passion for), not necessarily evil as clearly not in kjv@Luke:22:15| of Christ, but usually so in the N.T., as here. Coveting what a man or nation does not have is the cause of war according to James. {Ye kill and covet} (\phoneuete kai zloute\). Present active indicatives of \phoneu\ (old verb from \phoneus\, murderer) and \zlo\, to desire hotly to possess (1Corinthians:12:31|). It is possible (perhaps probable) that a full stop should come after \phoneuete\ (ye kill) as the result of lusting and not having. Then we have the second situation: "Ye covet and cannot obtain (\epituchein\, second aorist active infinitive of \epitugchan\), and (as a result) ye fight and war." This punctuation makes better sense than any other and is in harmony with verse 1|. Thus also the anticlimax in \phoneuete\ and \zloute\ is avoided. Mayor makes the words a hendiadys, "ye murderously envy." {Ye have not, because ye ask not} (\ouk echete dia to m aiteisthai humas\). James refers again to \ouk echete\ (ye do not have) in verse 2|. Such sinful lusting will not obtain. "Make the service of God your supreme end, and then your desires will be such as God can fulfil in answer to your prayer" (Ropes). Cf. kjv@Matthew:6:31-33|. The reason here is expressed by \dia\ and the accusative of the articular present middle infinitive of \aite\, used here of prayer to God as in kjv@Matthew:7:7f|. \Hums\ (you) is the accusative of general reference. Note the middle voice here as in \aiteisthe\ in 3|. Mayor argues that the middle here, in contrast with the active, carries more the spirit of prayer, but Moulton (_Prol_., p. 160) regards the distinction between \aite\ and \aiteomai\ often "an extinct subtlety."
rwp@Info_John @ THE AUTHOR THE APOSTLE JOHN Loisy (_Leviticus:Quatr. Evangile_, p. 132) says that if one takes literally what is given in the body of the Gospel of the Beloved Disciple he is bound to be one of the twelve. Loisy does not take it "literally." But why not? Are we to assume that the author of this greatest of books is playing a part or using a deliberate artifice to deceive? It may be asked why John does not use his own name instead of a _nom de plume_...One can see a reason for ...21| it is easy to drop the names of Simon Peter, Thomas, and Nathanael. There are left two unnamed disciples and the sons of Zebedee (here alone mentioned, not even named, in the book). John in this Gospel always means the Baptist. Why does the author so uniformly slight the sons of Zebedee if not one of them himself? In the Acts Luke does not mention his own name nor that of Titus his brother, though so many other friends of Paul are named. If the Beloved Disciple is John the Apostle, the silence about James and himself is easily understood. James is ruled out because of his early death (Acts:12:1|). The evidence in the Gospel points directly to the Apostle John as the author.
rwp@Info_John @ THE UNITY OF THE GOSPEL This has been attacked in various ways in spite of the identity of style throughout. There are clearly three parts in the Gospel: the Prologue, kjv@John:1:1-18|, the Body of the Book, kjv@John:1:19-20:31|, the Epilogue, kjv@John:21|. But there is no evidence that the Prologue was added by another hand, even though the use of Logos (Word)...proof and no real reason for ...20:31| and then added kjv@John:21| before sending the book forth after his friends added kjv@John:21:24| as their endorsement of the volume. Some scholars claim that they detect various displacements in the arrangement of the material, but such subjective criticism is never convincing. There are undoubtedly long gaps in the narrative as between chapters 5 and 6, but John is not giving a continuous narrative, but only a supplementary account assuming knowledge of the Synoptics. It is held that editorial comments by redactors can be detected here and there. Perhaps, and perhaps not. The unity of this great book stands even if that be true.
rwp@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). kjv@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 kjv@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 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 kjv@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 kjv@John:1:1,14; kjv@Revelation:19:13; kjv@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 kjv@Hebrews:4:12|. But the personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul (2Corinthians:8:9; kjv@Phillipians:2:6f.; kjv@Colossians:1:17|) and in kjv@Hebrews:1:2f.| and in kjv@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 kjv@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, kjv@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 kjv@Mark:6:3| is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is _Koin_, not old Attic. In kjv@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 kjv@John:4:24| \pneuma ho theos\ can only mean "God is spirit," not "spirit is God." Songs:in kjv@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 kjv@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:1:12 @{As many as received him} (\hosoi elabon auton\). Effective aorist active indicative of \lamban\ "as many as did receive him," in contrast with \hoi idioi\ just before, exceptional action on the part of the disciples and other believers. {To them} (\autois\). Dative case explanatory of the relative clause preceding, an anacoluthon common in John 27 times as against 21 in the Synoptists. This is a common Aramaic idiom and is urged by Burney (_Aramaic Origin_, etc., p. 64) for his theory of an Aramaic original of the Fourth Gospel. {The right} (\exousian\). In 5:27| \edken\ (first aorist active indicative of \didmi\) \exousian\ means authority but includes power (\dunamis\). Here it is more the notion of privilege or right. {To become} (\genesthai\). Second aorist middle of \ginomai\, to become what they were not before. {Children of God} (\tekna theou\). In the full spiritual sense, not as mere offspring of God true of all men (Acts:17:28|). Paul's phrase \huioi theou\ (Gal 3:26|) for believers, used also by Jesus of the pure in heart (Matthew:5:9|), does not occur in John's Gospel (but in kjv@Revelation:21:7|). It is possible that John prefers \ta tekna tou theou\ for the spiritual children of God whether Jew or Gentile (John:11:52|) because of the community of nature (\teknon\ from root \tek-\, to beget)...on "adoption" as Paul's reason for ...\huioi\ since Jesus uses \huioi theou\ in kjv@Matthew:5:9|. Clearly the idea of regeneration is involved here as in kjv@John:3:3|. {Even to them that believe} (\tois pisteuousin\). No "even" in the Greek, merely explanatory apposition with \autois\, dative case of the articular present active participle of \pisteu\. {On his name} (\eis to onoma\). Bernard notes \pisteu eis\ 35 times in John, to put trust in or on. See also 2:23; 3:38| for \pisteu eis to onoma autou\. This common use of \onoma\ for the person is an Aramaism, but it occurs also in the vernacular papyri and \eis to onoma\ is particularly common in the payment of debts (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). See kjv@Acts:1:15| for \onomata\ for persons.
rwp@John:1:16 @{For} (\hoti\). Correct text (Aleph B C D L) and not \kai\ (and)...the Textus Receptus. Explanatory reason for ...14|. {Of his fulness} (\ek tou plrmatos\). The only instance of \plrma\ in John's writings, though five times of Christ in Paul's Epistles (Colossians:1:19; 2:9; kjv@Ephesians:1:23; 3:19; 4:13|). See kjv@Colossians:1:19| for discussion of these terms of the Gnostics that Paul employs for all the attributes of God summed up in Christ (Colossians:2:9|) and so used here by John of the Incarnate Logos. {We all} (\hmeis pantes\). John is facing the same Gnostic depreciation of Christ of which Paul writes in Colossians. Songs:here John appeals to all his own contemporaries as participants with him in the fulness of the Logos. {Received} (\elabomen\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban\, a wider experience than beholding (\etheasametha\, verse 14|) and one that all believers may have. {Grace for grace} (\charin anti charitos\). The point is in \anti\, a preposition disappearing in the _Koin_ and here only in John. It is in the locative case of \anta\ (end), "at the end," and was used of exchange in sale. See kjv@Luke:11:11|, \anti ichthuos ophin\, "a serpent for a fish," kjv@Hebrews:12:2| where "joy" and "cross" are balanced against each other. Here the picture is "grace" taking the place of "grace" like the manna fresh each morning, new grace for the new day and the new service.
rwp@John:1:18 @{No man hath seen God at any time} (\theon oudeis heraken ppote\). "God no one has ever seen." Perfect active indicative of \hora\. Seen with the human physical eye, John means. God is invisible (Exodus:33:20; kjv@Deuteronomy:4:12|). Paul calls God \aoratos\ (Colossians:1:15; kjv@1Timothy:1:17|). John repeats the idea in kjv@John:5:37; 6:46|. And yet in 14:7| Jesus claims that the one who sees him has seen the Father as here. {The only begotten Son} (\ho monogens huios\). This is the reading of the Textus Receptus and is intelligible after \hs monogenous para patros\ in verse 14|. But the best old Greek manuscripts (Aleph B C L) read \monogens theos\ (God only begotten) which is undoubtedly the true text. Probably some scribe changed it to \ho monogens huios\ to obviate the blunt statement of the deity of Christ and to make it like 3:16|. But there is an inner harmony in the reading of the old uncials. The Logos is plainly called \theos\ in verse 1|. The Incarnation is stated in verse 14|, where he is also termed \monogens\. He was that before the Incarnation. Songs:he is "God only begotten," "the Eternal Generation of the Son" of Origen's phrase. {Which is in the bosom of the Father} (\ho n eis ton kolpon tou patros\). The eternal relation of the Son with the Father like \pros ton theon\ in verse 1|. In 3:13| there is some evidence for \ho n en ti ourani\ used by Christ of himself while still on earth. The mystic sense here is that the Son is qualified to reveal the Father as Logos (both the Father in Idea and Expression) by reason of the continual fellowship with the Father. {He} (\ekinos\). Emphatic pronoun referring to the Son. {Hath declared him} (\exgsato\). First aorist (effective) middle indicative of \exgeomai\, old verb to lead out, to draw out in narrative, to recount. Here only in John, though once in Luke's Gospel (24:35|) and four times in Acts:(10:8; 15:12,14; 21:19|). This word fitly closes the Prologue in which the Logos is pictured in marvellous fashion as the Word of God in human flesh, the Son of God with the Glory of God in him, showing men who God is and what he is.
rwp@John:1:23 @{He said} (\eph\). Common imperfect active (or second aorist active) of \phmi\, to say, old defective verb. {I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness} (\Eg phn bontos en ti ermi\). For his answer John quotes kjv@Isaiah:40:3|. The Synoptics (Mark:1:3; kjv@Matthew:3:3; kjv@Luke:3:4|)...himself. There is no reason to ...{Make straight the way of the Lord}" (\Euthunate tn hodon tou kuriou\). By this language (\euthun\ in N.T. only here and kjv@James:3:4|, first aorist active imperative here) John identifies himself to the committee as the forerunner of the Messiah. The early writers note the differences between the use of \Logos\ (Word) for the Messiah and \phn\ (Voice) for John.
rwp@John:1:49 @{Thou art the Son of God} (\su ei ho huios tou theou\). Whether Nathanael had heard the Baptist say this of Jesus (1:34|) we do not know, apparently not, but Nathanael was a student of the Old Testament as Philip implied (1:45|)...shown. There is no reason for ...51|. Cf. the confession of Peter in 6:69; kjv@Matthew:16:16| and Martha's in kjv@John:11:27|. Nathanael goes further. {Thou art King of Israel} (\Basileus ei tou Isral\). To us this seems an anti-climax, but not so to Nathanael for both are Messianic titles in kjv@Psalms:2| and Jesus is greeted in the Triumphal Entry as the King of Israel (John:12:13|).
rwp@John:3:18 @{Is not judged} (\ou krinetai\). Present passive indicative. Trust in Christ prevents condemnation, for he takes our place and pays the penalty for sin for all who put their case in his hands (Romans:8:32f.|). The believer in Christ as Saviour does not come into judgment (John:5:24|). {Hath been judged already} (\d kekritai\). Perfect passive indicative of \krin\. Judgment has already been passed on the one who refuses to believe in Christ as the Saviour sent by the Father, the man who is not willing to come to Christ for life (5:40|). {Because he hath not believed} (\hoti m pepisteuken\). Perfect active indicative of \pisteu\, has taken a permanent attitude of refusal. Here \hoti m\ states the reason subjectively as the judgment of the Judge in any such case (\ho m pisteun\ already mentioned) while in kjv@1John:5:10| \hoti ou pepisteuken\ gives the reason objectively (\ou\ instead of \m\) conceived as an actual case and no longer hypothetical. See 1:12| for \eis to onoma\ with \pisteu\ (believing on the name) and 1:14| for \monogenous\ (only begotten) and also 3:16|.
rwp@John:3:24 @{For John had not yet been cast into prison} (\oup gar n beblmenos eis tn phulakn Ians\). Periphrastic past perfect indicative of \ball\ explaining (\gar\)...was still baptizing, the reason for ...(Luke:3:19f.|).
rwp@John:4:1 @{When therefore} (\Hs oun\). Reference to 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 Isous\. Mark usually has \ho Isous\ and Luke often \ho Kurios\. In the narrative portion of John we have usually \ho Isous\, but \ho Kurios\ in five passages (4:1; 6:23; 11:2; 20:20; 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 \ginsk\. 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 mathtas poiei kai baptizei Ians\). Present active indicative in both verbs retained in indirect discourse. Recall the tremendous success of John's early ministry (Mark:1:5; kjv@Matthew:3:5; kjv@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)...rebellion," probably the public reason for ...(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:4:8 @{For} (\gar\). Explanation of the reason for asking her. {Were gone away} (\apellutheisan\). Past perfect of \aperchomai\, to go off. They had already gone before she came. To Sychar (5,39|). {To buy food} (\hina trophas agorassin\). \Hina\ in purpose clause with first aorist active subjunctive of \agoraz\, old verb from \agora\ (marketplace). See kjv@Matthew:21:12|. \Troph\ (nourishment) is old word from \treph\, to nourish (Matthew:3:4|). "Victuals" (plural).
rwp@John:4:47 @{When he heard} (\akousas\). First aorist active participle of \akou\. The news spread rapidly about Jesus. {Was come} (\hkei\). Present active indicative of \hk\, one of the perfective presents, retained in indirect discourse. He had heard the people talk about the miracles in Jerusalem and the first one in Cana. {Went and besought} (\aplthen kai rta\). Ingressive aorist indicative (went off at once) and imperfect active (\rta\, began to beg and kept it up). {That he would come down} (\hina katabi\, \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \katabain\, come down at once) {and heal his son} (\kai iastai autou ton huion\, \hina\ construction, sub-final use or object clause, with first aorist middle subjunctive of \iaomai\, completely heal). {For he was at the point of death} (\mellen gar apothnskein\). Reason (\gar\) for the urgency. Imperfect active of \mell\ with present active infinitive old and common verb for what is about to be and it is used with the infinitive present as here, the aorist infinitive (Revelation:13:16|), or the future infinitive (Acts:11:28|). The idiom is used of the impending death of Jesus (John:11:51; 12:33; 18:32|).
rwp@John:5:13 @{He that was healed} (\ho iatheis\). First aorist passive articular participle of \iaomai\ (John's usual word). {Who it was} (\tis estin\). Present tense preserved in indirect question. {Had conveyed himself away} (\exeneusen\). First aorist active indicative of \ekne\, old verb to swim out, to slip out, or from \ekneu\, to turn out, to turn the head to one side (to one side with which compare \eneneuon\, they nodded, kjv@Luke:1:62|). Either of these verbs can explain the form here. The aorist tense simply states an antecedent action without being a pastperfect. {A multitude being in the place} (\ochlou ontos en ti topi\)...Genitive absolute and the reason for ...
rwp@John:5:30 @{I} (\Eg\). The discourse returns to the first person after using "the Son" since verse 19|. Here Jesus repeats in the first person (as in 8:28|) the statement made in verse 19| about the Son. In John \emautou\ is used by Jesus 16 times and not at all by Jesus in the Synoptics. It occurs in the Synoptics only in kjv@Matthew:8:8; kjv@Luke:7:7f|. {Righteous} (\dikaia\)...judgements should be. The reason is ...(\hoti\, because), the guiding principle with the Son being the will of the Father who sent him and made him Judge. Judges often have difficulty in knowing what is law and what is right, but the Son's task as Judge is simple enough, the will of the Father which he knows (verse 20|).
rwp@John:5:39 @{Ye search} (\eraunte\). Proper spelling as the papyri show rather than \ereunte\, the old form (from \ereuna\, search) as in 7:52|...sense here, but the reason given ...(\hoti humeis dokeite\, clearly indicative), supports the indicative rather than the imperative. Besides, Jesus is arguing on the basis of their use of "the Scriptures" (\tas graphas\). The plural with the article refers to the well-known collection in the Old Testament (Matthew:21:42; kjv@Luke:24:27|). Elsewhere in John the singular refers to a particular passage (2:22; 7:38; 10:35|). {In them ye have eternal life} (\en autais zn ainion echein\). Indirect assertion after \dokeite\ without "ye" expressed either as nominative (\humeis\) or accusative (\humas\). Bernard holds that in John \doke\ always indicates a mistaken opinion (5:45; 11:13,31; 13:29; 16:20; 20:15|). Certainly the rabbis did make a mechanical use of the letter of Scripture as a means of salvation. {These are they} (\ekeinai eisin hai\). The true value of the Scriptures is in their witness to Christ (of me, \peri emou\). Luke (24:27,45|) gives this same claim of Jesus, and yet some critics fail to find the Messiah in the Old Testament. But Jesus did.
rwp@John:6:1 @{After these things} (\meta tauta\). A common, but indefinite, note of time in John (3:22; 5:1; 6:1; 7:1|)...There is no sufficient reason for ...6 originally preceded chapter 5. The feeding of the five thousand is the only event before the last visit to Jerusalem recorded in all Four Gospels (Mark:6:30-44; kjv@Matthew:14:13-21; kjv@Luke:9:10-17; kjv@John:6:1-13|). The disciples have returned from the tour of Galilee and report to Jesus. It was the passover time (John:6:4|) just a year before the end. {To the other side of the Sea of Galilee} (\peran ts thalasss ts Galilaias\). The name given in Mark and Matthew. It is called Gennesaret in kjv@Luke:5:1| and "Sea of Tiberias" in kjv@John:21:1|. Here "of Tiberias" (\ts Tiberiados\) is added as further description. Herod Antipas A.D. 22 built Tiberias to the west of the Sea of Galilee and made it his capital. See verse 23| for this city. Luke (Luke:9:10|) explains that it was the eastern Bethsaida (Julias) to which Jesus took the disciples, not the western Bethsaida of kjv@Mark:6:45| in Galilee.
rwp@John:6:18 @{And the sea was rising} (\h te thalassa diegeireto\). Imperfect (without augment) passive of \diegeir\, late compound to wake up thoroughly, to arouse. {By reason of a great wind that blew} (\anemou megalou pneontos\). Genitive absolute with present active participle of \pne\, to blow, "a great wind blowing."
rwp@John:6:57 @{The living Father} (\ho zn patr\). Nowhere else in the N.T., but see 5:26| and "the living God" (Matthew:16:16; kjv@2Corinthians:6:16|). The Father is the source of life and so "I live because of the Father" (\kag z dia ton patera\). {He that eateth me} (\ho trgn me\). Still bolder putting of the mystical appropriation of Christ (51,53,54,56|). {Because of me} (\di' eme\). The same idea appears in 14:19|: "Because I live ye shall live also." See 11:25|. Jesus Christ is our ground of hope and guarantee of immortality. Life is in Christ. There is no real difficulty in this use of \dia\ with the accusative as with \dia ton patera\ just before. It occurs also in 15:3|. As the Father is the fount of life to Christ, so Christ is the fount of life to us. See kjv@1John:4:9| where \dia\ is used with the genitive (\di' autou\)...not the ground or reason as ...
rwp@John:7:39 @{Which} (\hou\). Genitive by attraction of the relative \ho\ (accusative singular object of \lambanein\) to the case of \tou pneumatos\ (the Spirit) the antecedent. But it is purely grammatical gender (neuter \ho\ because of \pneuma\) which we do not have in English. Even here one should say "whom," not which, of the Spirit of God. {Were to receive} (\emellon lambanein\). Imperfect active of \mell\ with the present active infinitive \lambanein\, to receive, one of the three constructions with \mell\ (present, aorist, or future infinitive). Literally, "whom they were about to receive," a clear reference to the great pentecost. {For the Spirit was not yet given} (\oup gar n pneuma\). No verb for "given" in the Greek. The reference is not to the existence of the Spirit, but to the dispensation of the Spirit. This same use of \eimi\ like \pareimi\ (to be present) appears in kjv@Acts:19:2| of the Spirit's activity. John, writing at the close of the century, inserts this comment and interpretation of the language of Jesus as an allusion to the coming of the Holy Spirit at pentecost (the Promise of the Father). {Because Jesus was not yet glorified} (\hoti Isous oup edoxasth\). Reason for the previous statement, the pentecostal outpouring following the death of Jesus here called "glorified" (\edoxasth\, first aorist passive indicative of \doxaz\), used later of the death of Jesus (12:16|), even by Jesus himself (12:23; 13:31|).
rwp@John:7:41 @{This is the Christ} (\houtos estin ho Christos\). These went further and dared to call Jesus the Messiah and not merely the prophet who might not be the Messiah. They said it openly. {What} (\gar\)...and gave as their reason... (\gar\, for) the fact that he came from Galilee. The use of \m\ expects a negative answer.
rwp@John:9:16 @{Because he keepeth not the sabbath} (\hoti to sabbaton ou trei\). This is reason (causal \hoti\) enough. He violates our rules about the Sabbath and therefore is a Sabbath-breaker as charged when here before (5:10,16,18|). Hence he is not "from God" (\para theou\). Songs:some. {How can a man that is a sinner do such signs?} (\Ps dunatai anthrpos hamartlos toiauta smeia poiein;\). This was the argument of Nicodemus, himself a Pharisee and one of the Sanhedrin, long ago (3:2|). It was a conundrum for the Pharisees. No wonder there was "a division" (\schisma\, schism, split, from \schiz\) as in 7:43; 10:19|.
rwp@John:9:22 @{Because they feared the Jews} (\hoti ephobounto tous Ioudaious\)...fear and not without reason. See ...(7:13|). {Had agreed already} (\d sunetetheinto\). Past perfect middle of \suntithmi\, to put together, to form a compact (7:32,47-49|). {If any man should confess him to be Christ} (\ean tis auton homologsi Christon\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \homologe\ and predicate accusative \Christon\. Jesus had made confession of himself before men the test of discipleship and denial the disproof (Matthew:10:32; kjv@Luke:12:8|). We know that many of the rulers nominally believed on Jesus (12:42|) and yet "did not confess him because of the Pharisees" (\alla dia tous Pharisaious ouch hmologoun\), for the very reason given here, "that they might not be put out of the synagogue" (\hina m aposunaggoi genntai\). Small wonder then that here the parents cowered a bit. {That he should be put out of the synagogue} (\hina aposunaggos gentai\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\. \Aposunaggos\ (\apo\ and \sunagg\) is found in N.T. only here and 12:42; 16:2|. A purely Jewish word naturally. There were three kinds of excommunication (for thirty days, for thirty more, indefinitely).
rwp@John:9:23 @{Therefore} (\dia touto\). "For this reason." Reason enough for due caution.
rwp@John:10:13 @{Because he is a hireling} (\hoti misthtos estin\). And only that, without the shepherd heart that loves the sheep. Reason given for the conduct of the hireling after the parenthesis about the wolf. {And careth not for the sheep} (\kai ou melei auti peri tn probatn\). Literally, "and it is no care to him about the sheep." This use of the impersonal \melei\ (present active indicative) is quite common, as in kjv@Matthew:22:16|. But God does care (1Peter:5:7|).
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 10:1-21|. Bernard brings chapter 9 up to this date (possibly also chapter 8)...There is no real reason for ...10:22-39| and 10:1-21|, possibly nearly three months (from just after tabernacles 7:37| to dedication 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. 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 kjv@Matthew:24:20|.
rwp@John:11:31 @{Followed her} (\kolouthsan auti\). First aorist active indicative of \akolouthe\ with associative instrumental case (\auti\). This crowd of consolers (\paramuthoumenoi\) meant kindly enough, but did the one wrong thing for Mary wished to see Jesus alone. People with kind notions often so act. The secrecy of Martha (verse 28|) was of no avail. {Supposing that she was going unto the tomb} (\doxantes hoti hupagei eis to mnmeion\). First aorist active participle of \doke\, justifying their conduct by a wrong inference. Note retention of present tense \hupagei\ in indirect discourse after the secondary tense \kolouthsan\. {To weep there} (\hina klausi ekei\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \klai\...Mary was a real reason for ...{not} to go with her.
rwp@John:11:56 @{They sought therefore for Jesus} (\eztoun oun ton Isoun\). Imperfect active of \zte\ and common \oun\ of which John is so fond. They were seeking Jesus six months before at the feast of tabernacles (7:11|), but now they really mean to kill him. {As they stood in the temple} (\en ti hieri hestkotes\). Perfect active participle (intransitive) of \histmi\, a graphic picture of the various groups of leaders in Jerusalem and from other lands, "the knots of people in the Temple precincts" (Bernard). They had done this at the tabernacles (7:11-13|), but now there is new excitement due to the recent raising of Lazarus and to the public order for the arrest of Jesus. {That he will not come to the feast?} (\hoti ou m elthi eis tn heortn;\). The form of the question (indirect discourse after \dokeite\) assumes strongly that Jesus will not (\ou m\, double negative with second aorist active \elthi\ from \erchomai\)...this time for the reason given ...57|.
rwp@John:12:1 @{Jesus therefore} (\Isous oun\). Here \oun\ is not causal, but simply copulative and transitional, "and so" (Bernard), as often in John (1:22|, etc.). {Six days before the passover} (\pro hex hmern tou pascha\). This idiom, transposition of \pro\, is like the Latin use of _ante_, but it occurs in the old Doric, in the inscriptions and the papyri. See kjv@Amos:1:1| for it also (cf. Moulton, _Proleg_., pp. 100ff.; Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 621f.). If the crucifixion was on Friday, as seems certain from both John and the Synoptics, then six days before would be the Jewish Sabbath preceding or more probably the Friday afternoon before, since Jesus would most likely arrive before the Sabbath. Probably we are to put together in one scene for the atmosphere kjv@John:11:55-57; kjv@John:12:1, 9-11|. {Came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, whom Jesus raised from the dead} (\tlhen eis Bthanian, hopou n Lazaros, hon geiren ek nekrn Isous\)...preceding. There is no reason for ...(12:9-11|). The crowd of eager spectators to see both Lazarus and Jesus would only intensify this rage.
rwp@John:12:2 @{Songs:they made him a supper there} (\epoisan oun auti deipnon ekei\). Here again \oun\ is not inferential, but merely transitional. This supper is given by Mark (Mark:14:3-9|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6-13|) just two days (Mark:14:1|) before the passover, that is on our Tuesday evening (beginning of Jewish Wednesday), while John mentions (12:2-9|) it immediately after the arrival of Jesus in Bethany (12:1|)...seems to me quite reasonable. Westcott ...12 John closes his record of the public ministry of the Lord relative to the disciples at this feast (1-11|), to the multitude in the triumphal entry (12-19|), to the world outside in the visit of the Greeks (20-36a|), and with two summary judgements (36b-50|)...There is no further reason to ...(Luke:7:36-50|). It is no credit to Luke or to John with Mark and Matthew to have them all making a jumble like that. There were two anointings by two absolutely different women for wholly different purposes. See the discussion on Luke for further details. {And Martha served} (\kai h Martha dikonei\). Imperfect active of \diakone\, picturing Martha true to the account of her in kjv@Luke:10:40| (\polln diakonian\, \diakonein\ as here). But this fact does not show that Martha was the wife of this Simon at all. They were friends and neighbours and Martha was following her bent. It is Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6|) who mention the name of the host. It is not Simon the Pharisee (Luke:7:36|), but Simon the leper (Mark:14:3; kjv@Matthew:26:6|) in whose house they meet. The name is common enough. The Simon in Luke was sharply critical of Jesus; this one is full of gratitude for what Jesus has done for him. {That sat at meat} (\tn anakeimenn\). "That lay back," reclined as they did, articular participle (ablative case after \ek\) of the common verb \anakeimai\. Perhaps Simon gave the feast partly in honour of Lazarus as well as of Jesus since all were now talking of both (John:12:9|). It was a gracious occasion. The guests were Jesus, the twelve apostles, and Martha, Mary, and Lazarus.
rwp@John:12:6 @{Not because he cared for the poor} (\ouch hoti peri tn ptchn emelen auti\). Literally, "not because it was a care to him concerning the poor" (impersonal imperfect of \melei\, it was a care). John often makes explanatory comments of this kind as in 2:21f.; 7:22,39|. {But because he was a thief} (\alle hoti klepts n\). Clearly the disciples did not know then that Judas was a petty thief. That knowledge came later after he took the bribe of thirty pieces of silver for betraying Jesus (Matthew:26:15|), for the disciples did not suspect Judas of treachery (13:28f.|)...peculations. There is no reason for ...(Westcott). In this case Judas himself was "the poor beggar" who wanted this money. {And having the bag took away what was put therein} (\kai to glssokomon echn ta ballomena ebastazen\). This is the correct text. This compound for the earlier \glssokomeion\ (from \glssa\, tongue, and \kome\, to tend) was originally a receptacle for the tongues or mouth-pieces of wind instruments. The shorter form is already in the Doric inscriptions and is common in the papyri for "money-box" as here. It occurs also in Josephus, Plutarch, etc. In N.T. only here and 13:29| in same sense about Judas. \Ballomena\ is present passive participle (repeatedly put in) of \ball\, to cast or fling. The imperfect active (custom) of \bastaz\, old verb to pick up (John:10:31|), to carry (19:17|), but here and 20:15| with the sense to bear away as in Polybius, Josephus, Diogenes Laertes, and often so in the papyri.
rwp@John:12:10 @{The chief priests took counsel} (\ebouleusanto hoi archiereis\). First aorist middle indicative of \bouleu\, old verb, seen already in 11:53| which see. The whole Sanhedrin (7:32|) had decided to put Jesus to death and had asked for information concerning him (11:57|) that might lead to his arrest, but the Sadducees were specially active now to accomplish the death of Lazarus also (\hina\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \apoktein\ as in 11:53|)...we may see the reason why ...(cf. the case of Malchus's name in kjv@John:18:10|).
rwp@John:12:11 @{Because that} (\hoti\). Causal use of \hoti\. {By reason of him} (\di' auton\). "Because of him," regular idiom, accusative case with \dia\. {Went away} (\hupgon\). Cf. 6:67| for this verb. Inchoative imperfect active of \hupag\, "began to withdraw" as happened at the time of the raising of Lazarus (11:45f.|) and the secession was still going on. {And believed on Jesus} (\kai episteuon eis ton Isoun\). Imperfect active of \pisteu\ (note aorist in 11:45|). There was danger of a mass movement of the people to Jesus.
rwp@John:14:2 @{Mansions} (\monai\). Old word from \men\, to abide, abiding places, in N.T. only here and verse 23|. There are many resting-places in the Father's house (\oikia\). Christ's picture of heaven here is the most precious one that we possess. It is our heavenly home with the Father and with Jesus. {If it were not so} (\ei de m\). Ellipsis of the verb (Mark:2:21; kjv@Revelation:2:5,16; kjv@John:14:11|). Here a suppressed condition of the second class (determined as unfulfilled) as the conclusion shows. {I would have told you} (\eipon an humin\). Regular construction for this apodosis (\an\ and aorist--second active--indicative). {For I go} (\hoti poreuomai\). Reason for the consolation given, futuristic present middle indicative, and explanation of his words in 13:33| that puzzled Peter so (13:36f.|). {To prepare a place for you} (\hetoimasai topon humin\). First aorist active infinitive of purpose of \hetoimaz\, to make ready, old verb from \hetoimos\. Here only in John, but in kjv@Mark:10:40| (Matthew:20:23|). It was customary to send one forward for such a purpose (Numbers:10:33|). Songs:Jesus had sent Peter and John to make ready (this very verb) for the passover meal (Mark:14:12; kjv@Matthew:26:17|). Jesus is thus our Forerunner (\prodromos\) in heaven (Hebrews:6:20|).
rwp@John:14:12 @{Shall he do also} (\kakeinos poisei\). Emphatic pronoun \ekeinos\, "that one also." {Greater works than these} (\meizona toutn\). Comparative adjective neuter plural from \megas\ with ablative case \toutn\. Not necessarily greater miracles and not greater spiritual works in quality, but greater in quantity. Cf. Peter at Pentecost and Paul's mission tours. "Because I go" (\hoti eg poreuornai\). Reason for this expansion made possible by the Holy Spirit as Paraclete (16:7|).
rwp@John:15:19 @{The world would love its own} (\ho kosmos an to idion ephilei\). Conclusion of second-class condition (determined as unfulfilled), regular idiom with \an\ and imperfect indicative in present time. {But because ye are not of the world} (\hoti de ek tou kosmou ouk este\). Definite and specific reason for the world's hatred of real Christians whose very existence is a reproach to the sinful world. Cf. 7:7; 17:14; kjv@1John:3:13|. Does the world hate us? If not, why not? Has the world become more Christian or Christians more worldly?
rwp@John:16:3 @{Because} (\hoti\). Definite reason for the religious hatred is ignorance of God and Christ as in 15:21|.
rwp@John:16:7 @{It is expedient for you} (\sumpherei humin\). Present active indicative of \sumpher\, old verb to bear together. See 11:50| where the phrase is used by Caiaphas "for us," here "for you" (\humin\ ethical dative). {That I go away} (\hina eg apelth\). Subject clause the subject of \sumpherei\, \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \aperchomai\. The reason (\gar\) for this startling statement follows. {If I go not away} (\ean m apelth\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and the negative \m\ with \apelth\ as before. {Will not come} (\ou m elthi\). Strong double negative with second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\. The Holy Spirit was, of course, already at work in the hearts of men, but not in the sense of witnessing as Paraclete which could only take place after Jesus had gone back to the Father. {But if I go} (\ean de poreuth\). Third-class condition again (\ean\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \poreuomai\). {I will send} (\pemps\). First person future as in 15|.
rwp@John:19:6 @{Crucify him, crucify him} (\staurson, staurson\). First aorist active imperative of \stauro\ for which verb see kjv@Matthew:29:19|, etc. Here the note of urgency (aorist imperative) with no word for "him," as they were led by the chief priests and the temple police till the whole mob takes it up (Matthew:27:22|). {For I find no crime in him} (\eg gar ouch heurisk\). This is the third time Pilate has rendered his opinion of Christ's innocence (18:38; 19:4|)...and gives as his reason... (\gar\, for) for his surrender the innocence of Jesus (the strangest judicial decision ever rendered). Perhaps Pilate was only franker than some judges!
rwp@John:19:31 @{The Preparation} (\paraskeu\). Friday. See verse 14|. {Might not remain} (\m meini\). Negative final clause with \hina m\ and first aorist active (constative) subjunctive of \men\. {A high day} (\megal\). A "great" day, since "the sabbath day following synchronized with the first day of unleavened bread which was a 'great' day" (Bernard). A double reason therefore for wanting the bodies removed before sunset when the Sabbath began. {That their legs might be broken} (\hina kateagsin auton ta skel\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist passive subjunctive of \katagnumi\ with the augment retained in the subjunctive, a "false augment" common in later Greek as in the future in kjv@Matthew:12:20| with this verb (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 365). This _crurifragium_ was done with a heavy mallet and ended the sufferings of the victim. {Legs} (\skel\). Old word, here only in N.T. {Might be taken away} (\arthsin\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \air\ with \hina\ also.
rwp@John:20:12 @{Beholdeth} (\therei\). Vivid historical present again as in verses 6,14|...ignorance as to the reason why ...16:5| (a young man in a white robe), kjv@Matthew:28:5| (the angel), kjv@Luke:24:4| (two men in dazzling apparel). For other angels in John's Gospel see 1:41; 12:29; 20:12|. {Had lain} (\ekeito\). Imperfect in progressive sense, "had been lying," though not there now.
rwp@Info_Luke @ THIS COMPANION AND AUTHOR LUKE All the Greek manuscripts credit the Gospel to Luke in the title. We should know that Luke wrote these two books if there was no evidence from early writers. Irenaeus definitely ascribes the Gospel to Luke as does Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, the Muratorian Fragment. Plummer holds that the authorship of the four great Epistles of Paul (I and II Corinthians, Galatians, Romans)...is no very strong reason for ...
rwp@Info_Luke @ THE DATE OF THE GOSPEL There are two outstanding facts to mark off the date of this Gospel by Luke. It was later than the Gospel of Mark since Luke makes abundant use of it. It was before the Acts of the Apostles since he definitely refers to it in kjv@Acts:1:1|. Unfortunately the precise date of both _termini_ is uncertain. There are still some scholars who hold that the author of the Acts shows knowledge of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus and so is after A.D. 85, a mistaken position, in my opinion, but a point to be discussed when Acts is reached. Still others more plausibly hold that the Acts was written after the destruction of Jerusalem and that the Gospel of Luke has a definite allusion to that event (Luke:21:20f.|), which is interpreted as a prophecy _post eventum_...the simple and obvious reason that ...63, as I believe to be the case, then obviously the Gospel comes earlier. How much before we do not know. It so happens that Paul was a prisoner a little over two years in Caesarea. That period gave Luke abundant opportunity for the kind of research of which he speaks in kjv@Luke:1:1-4|. In Palestine he could have access to persons familiar with the earthly life and teachings of Jesus and to whatever documents were already produced concerning such matters. Luke may have produced the Gospel towards the close of the stay of Paul in Caesarea or during the early part of the first Roman imprisonment, somewhere between A.D. 59 and 62. The other testimony concerns the date of Mark's Gospel which has already been discussed in volume I. There is no real difficulty in the way of the early date of Mark's Gospel. All the facts that are known admit, even argue for a date by A.D. 60. If Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome, as is possible, it would certainly be before A.D. 64, the date of the burning of Rome by Nero. There are scholars, however, who argue for a much earlier date for his gospel, even as early as A.D. 50. The various aspects of the Synoptic problem are ably discussed by Hawkins in his _Horae Synopticae_, by Sanday and others in _Oxford Studies in the Synoptic Problem_, by Streeter in his _The Four Gospels_, by Hayes in his _The Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts_, by Harnack in his _Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_, by Stanton in his _The Gospels as Historical Documents_, and by many others. My own views are given at length in my _Studies in Mark's Gospel_ and in _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_.
rwp@Luke:1:3 @{It seemed good to me also} (\edoxe kamoi\)...narratives. Luke has more reason to ...{Having traced the course of all things} (\parkolouthkoti psin\). The perfect active participle of a common verb of the ancient Greek. Literally it means to follow along a thing in mind, to trace carefully. Both meanings occur abundantly in the ancient Greek. Cadbury (Appendix C to _Beginnings of Christianity_, Vol. II, pp. 489ff.) objects to the translation "having traced" here as implying research which the word does not here mean. Milligan (_Vocabulary_) is somewhat impressed by this argument. See my discussion of the point in Chapter XVI of _Studies in the Text of the N.T._ (The Implications in Luke's Preface) where the point is made that Luke here claims fulness of knowledge before he began to write his book. He had the traditions of the eyewitnesses and ministers of the word and the narratives previously drawn up. Whether he was a personal contemporary with any or all of these events we do not know and it is not particularly pertinent. He had _mentally_ followed along by the side of these events. Galen used this verb for the investigation of symptoms. Luke got himself ready to write before he began by full and accurate knowledge of the subject. \Akribs\ (accurately) means going into minute details, from \akron\, the topmost point. And he did it {from the first} (\anthen\). He seems to refer to the matters in Chapters 1:5-2:52|, the Gospel of the Infancy. {In order} (\kathexs\). Chronological order in the main following Mark's general outline. But in 9:51-18:10| the order is often topical. He has made careful investigation and his work deserves serious consideration. {Most excellent Theophilus} (\kratiste Theophile\). The name means god-lover or god-beloved. He may have been a believer already. He was probably a Gentile. Ramsay holds that "most excellent" was a title like "Your Excellency" and shows that he held office, perhaps a Knight. Songs:of Felix (Acts:23:26|) and Festus (Acts:26:25|). The adjective does not occur in the dedication in kjv@Acts:1:1|.
rwp@Luke:1:18 @{Whereby} (\kata ti\)...proof and gives the reason... (for, \gar\) for his doubt. He had prayed for this blessing and was now sceptical like the disciples in the house of Mary about the return of Peter (Acts:12:14f.|).
rwp@Luke:2:5 @{To enrol himself with Mary} (\apograpsasthai sun Mariam\). Direct middle. "With Mary" is naturally taken with the infinitive as here. If so, that means that Mary's family register was in Bethlehem also and that she also belonged to the house of David. It is possible to connect "with Mary" far back with "went up" (\aneb\) in verse 4|...There is no real reason for ...3:23-38|). The Syriac Sinaitic expressly says that both Joseph and Mary were of the house and city of David. {Betrothed} (\emnsteumenn\). Same verb as in 1:27|, but here it really means "married" or "espoused" as kjv@Matthew:1:24f.| shows. Otherwise she could not have travelled with Joseph. {Great with child} (\enkui\). Only here in N.T. Common Greek word.
rwp@Luke:2:39 @{To their own city Nazareth} (\eis polin heautn Nazaret\). See on kjv@Matthew:2:23|...to Egypt and the reason for ...2:13-23|. But then neither Gospel gives all the details of this period. Luke has also nothing about the visit of the wise men (Matthew:2:1-12|) as Matthew tells nothing of the shepherds and of Simeon and Anna (Luke:2:8-28|). The two Gospels supplement each other.
rwp@Luke:6:17 @{He came down with them} (\katabas met' autn\). Second aorist active participle of \katabain\, common verb. This was the night of prayer up in the mountain (Mark:31:3; kjv@Luke:6:12|) and the choice of the Twelve next morning. The going up into the mountain of kjv@Matthew:5:1| may simply be a summary statement with no mention of what Luke has explained or may be a reference to the elevation, where he "sat down" (Matthew:5:1|), above the plain or "level place" (\epi topou pedinou\) on the mountain side where Jesus "stood" or "stopped" (\est\)...is not the slightest reason for ...¯Matthew:5:1f|. The reports in Matthew and Luke begin alike, cover the same general ground and end alike. The report in Matthew is longer chiefly because in Chapter 5, he gives the argument showing the contrast between Christ's conception of righteousness and that of the Jewish rabbis. Undoubtedly, Jesus repeated many of the crisp sayings here at other times as in Luke 12, but it is quite gratuitous to argue that Matthew and Luke have made up this sermon out of isolated sayings of Christ at various times. Both Matthew and Luke give too much that is local of place and audience for that idea. kjv@Matthew:5:1| speaks of "the multitudes" and "his disciples." kjv@Luke:6:17| notes "a great multitude of his disciples, and a great number of the people from all Judea and Jerusalem, and the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon." They agree in the presence of disciples and crowds besides the disciples from whom the twelve apostles were chosen. It is important to note how already people were coming from "the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon" "to hear him and to be healed (\iathnai\, first aorist passive of \iaomai\) of their diseases."
rwp@Luke:6:19 @{Sought to touch him} (\eztoun haptesthai autou\). Imperfect active. One can see the surging, eager crowd pressing up to Jesus. Probably some of them felt that there was a sort of virtue or magic in touching his garments like the poor woman in kjv@Luke:8:43f|. (Mark:5:23; kjv@Matthew:9:21|). {For power came forth from him} (\hoti dunamis par' autou exrcheto\). Imperfect middle, {power was coming out from him}. This is the reason for the continual approach to Jesus. {And healed them all} (\kai ito pantas\)...a blessing is one reason why ...4:13|: "I have strength for all things in him who keeps on pouring power into me" (\panta ischu en ti endunamounti me\). It was at a time of surpassing dynamic spiritual energy when Jesus delivered this greatest of all sermons so far as they are reported to us. The very air was electric with spiritual power. There are such times as all preachers know.
rwp@Luke:7:5 @{For} (\gar\)...This clause gives the reason why ...(\axios\, drawing down the scale, \axis\, \ago\). He was hardly a proselyte, but was a Roman who had shown his love for the Jews. {Himself} (\autos\). All by himself and at his own expense. {Us} (\hmin\). Dative case, for us. It is held by some archaeologists that the black basalt ruins in Tell Hum are the remains of the very synagogue (\tn sunaggn\). Literally, {the synagogue}, the one which we have, the one for us.
rwp@Luke:7:47 @{Are forgiven} (\aphentai\). Doric perfect passive form. See kjv@Luke:5:21,23|. {For she loved much} (\hoti gapsen polu\)...Illustration or proof, not reason for ...{But to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little} (\Hi de oligon aphietai oligon agapi\). This explanation proves that the meaning of \hoti\ preceding is proof, not cause.
rwp@Luke:9:53 @{And they did not receive him} (\kai ouk edexanto auton\). Adversative use of \kai\ = But. {Because his face was going to Jerusalem} (\hoti to prospon autou n poreuomenon eis Ierousalm\)...imperfect middle. It was reason enough ...
rwp@Luke:11:54 @{Laying wait for him} (\enedreuontes auton\). An old verb from \en\ and \hedra\, a seat, so to lie in ambush for one. Here only and kjv@Acts:23:21| in the N.T. Vivid picture of the anger of these rabbis who were treating Jesus as if he were a beast of prey. {To catch something out of his mouth} (\threusai to ek tou stomatos autou\). An old Greek verb, though here only in the N.T., from \thra\ (cf. kjv@Romans:11:9|), to ensnare, to catch in hunting, to hunt. These graphic words from the chase show the rage of the rabbis toward Jesus. Luke gives more details here than in 20:45-47; kjv@Matthew:23:1-7|...but there is no reason at ...
rwp@Luke:12:10 @{But unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Spirit} (\ti de eis to hagion pneuma blasphmsanti\). This unpardonable sin is given by kjv@Mark:3:28f.; kjv@Matthew:12:31f.| immediately after the charge that Jesus was in league with Beelzebub. Luke here separates it from the same charge made in Judea (11:15-20|)...there is no sound reason for ...\eis\ here in the sense of "against."
rwp@Luke:12:22 @{Unto his disciples} (\pros tous mathtas autou\). Songs:Jesus turns from the crowd to the disciples (verses 22-40|, when Peter interrupts the discourse). From here to the end of the chapter Luke gives material that appears in Matthew, but not in one connection as here. In Matthew part of it is in the charge to the Twelve on their tour in Galilee, part in the eschatological discourse on the Mount of Olives. None of it is in Mark. Hence Q or the Logia seems to be the source of it. The question recurs again whether Jesus repeated on other occasions what is given here or whether Luke has here put together separate discourses as Matthew is held by many to have done in the Sermon on the Mount. We have no way of deciding these points. We can only say again that Jesus would naturally repeat his favourite sayings like other popular preachers and teachers. Songs:Luke:12:22-31| corresponds to kjv@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 kjv@Luke:12:22| is precisely that in kjv@Matthew:6:25|. See there for \m merimnte\ (stop being anxious) and the deliberative subjunctive retained in the indirect question (\phagte, endussthe\). Songs:verse 23| here is the same in kjv@Matthew:6:25| except that there it is a question with \ouch\...is given as a reason... (\gar\, for) for the preceding command.
rwp@Luke:16:2 @{What is this that I hear?} (\ti touto akou;\). There are several ways of understanding this terse Greek idiom. The Revised Version (above) takes \ti\ to be equal to \ti estin touto ho akou\; That is a possible use of the predicate \touto\. Another way is to take \ti\ to be exclamatory, which is less likely. Still another view is that \ti\ is " Why": "Why do I hear this about thee?" See kjv@Acts:14:15| where that is the idiom employed. {Render} (\apodos\). Second aorist active imperative of \apodidmi\, Give back (and at once). {The account} (\ton logon\). The reckoning or report. Common use of \logos\. {Stewardship} (\oikonomias\). Same root as \oikonomos\ (steward)...the charges. But the reason given ...{Thou canst no longer} (\ou gar duni\).
rwp@Luke:16:13 @{Servant} (\oikets\). Household (\oikos\) servant. This is the only addition to kjv@Matthew:6:24| where otherwise the language is precisely the same, which see. Either Matthew or Luke has put the \logion\...There is no real reason for ...
rwp@Luke:18:37 @{Passeth by} (\parerchetai\). Present middle indicative retained in indirect discourse as \paragei\ is in kjv@Matthew:20:30|. No reason for differences of English tenses in the two passages (was passing by, passeth by).
rwp@Luke:19:19 @{Be thou also over} (\kai su epano ginou\)...There is no real reason for ...25|. The versatility of Jesus needs to be remembered by those who seek to flatten out everything.
rwp@Luke:20:6 @{Will stone us} (\katalithasei\). Late verb and here only in the N.T. Literally, will throw stones down on us, stone us down, overwhelm us with stones. {They be persuaded} (\pepeismenos estin\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \peith\, to persuade, a settled state of persuasion, "is persuaded" (no reason for use of "be" here). {That John was a prophet} (\Iann prophtn einai\). Accusative and infinitive in indirect assertion.
rwp@Luke:20:19 @{To lay hands on him} (\epibalein ep' auton tas cheiras\). Second aorist active infinitive of \epiball\, an old verb and either transitively as here or intransitively as in kjv@Mark:4:37|. Vivid picture here where kjv@Mark:12:12; kjv@Matthew:21:46| has "to seize" (\kratsai\). {In that very hour} (\en auti ti hri\). Luke's favourite idiom, in the hour itself. Not in Mark or Matthew and shows that the Sanhedrin were angry enough to force the climax then. {And they feared} (\kai ephobthsan\). Adversative use of \kai\ = but they feared. Hence they refrained. {For they perceived} (\egnsan gar\). The reason for their rage. Second aorist active indicative of \ginsk\. {Against them} (\pros autous\). As in kjv@Mark:12:12|. The cap fitted them and they saw it.
rwp@Luke:23:2 @{Began to accuse} (\rxanto katgorein\)...them includes their real reason nor ...{We found} (\heuramen\). Second aorist active indicative with first aorist vowel \a\. Probably they mean that they had caught Jesus in the act of doing these things (_in flagrante delicto_) rather than discovery by formal trial. {Perverting our nation} (\diastrephonta to ethnos hmn\). Present active participle of \diastreph\, old verb to turn this way and that, distort, disturb. In the N.T. only here and kjv@Acts:13:10|. The Sanhedrin imply that the great popularity of Jesus was seditious. {Forbidding to give tribute to Caesar}, (\kluonta phorous kaisari didonai\). Note object infinitive \didonai\ after the participle \kluonta\. Literally, hindering giving tribute to Caesar. This was a flat untruth. Their bright young students had tried desperately to get Jesus to say this very thing, but they had failed utterly (Luke:20:25|). {Saying that he himself is Christ a king} (\legonta hauton Christon basilea einai\). Note the indirect discourse here after the participle \legonta\ with the accusative (\hauton\ where \auton\ could have been used), and the infinitive. This charge is true, but not in the sense meant by them. Jesus did claim to be the Christ and the king of the kingdom of God. But the Sanhedrin wanted Pilate to think that he set himself up as a rival to Caesar. Pilate would understand little from the word "Christ," but "King" was a different matter. He was compelled to take notice of this charge else he himself would be accused to Caesar of winking at such a claim by Jesus.
rwp@Luke:23:46 @{Father} (\Pater\). Jesus dies with the words of kjv@Psalms:31:5| on his lips. {Gave up the ghost} (\exepneusen\). First aorist active indicative of \ekpne\, to breathe out, to expire, old word, but in the N.T. only here and kjv@Mark:15:37,39|...There is no special reason for ...27:50| (yielded up his spirit, \aphken to pneuma\) and kjv@John:19:30| (gave up his spirit, \paredken to pneuma\) use \pneuma\ which is the root of \ekpne\, the verb in Mark and Luke.
rwp@Info_Mark @ The closing passage in the Textus Receptus, kjv@Mark:16:9-20|, is not found in the oldest Greek Manuscripts, Aleph and B, and is probably not genuine. A discussion of the evidence will appear at the proper place. Swete points out that Mark deals with two great themes, the Ministry in Galilee (Chs. 1 to 9) and the Last Week in Jerusalem (11 to 16) with a brief sketch of the period of withdrawal from Galilee (ch. 10). The first fourteen verses are introductory as kjv@Mark:16:9-20| is an appendix. The Gospel of Mark pictures Christ in action. There is a minimum of discourse and a maximum of deed. And yet the same essential pictures of Christ appear here as in the Logia, in Matthew, in Luke, in John, in Paul, in Peter, in Hebrews as is shown in my _The Christ of the Logia_. The cry of the critics to get back to the Synoptics and away from Paul and John has ceased since it is plain that the Jesus of Mark is the same as the Christ of Paul. There is a different shading in the pictures, but the same picture, Son of God and Son of Man, Lord of life and death, worker of miracles and Saviour from sin. This Gospel is the one for children to read first and is the one that we should use to lay the foundation for our picture of Christ. In my _Harmony of the Gospels_ I have placed Mark first in the framework since Matthew, Luke, and John all follow in broad outline his plan with additions and supplemental material. Mark's Gospel throbs with life and bristles with vivid details. We see with Peter's eyes and catch almost the very look and gesture of Jesus as he moved among men in his work of healing men's bodies and saving men's souls. kjv@Mark:1:1 @{The beginning} (\arch\). There is no article in the Greek. It is possible that the phrase served as a heading or title for the paragraph about the ministry of the Baptist or as the superscription for the whole Gospel (Bruce) placed either by Mark or a scribe. And then the Gospel of Jesus Christ means the Message about Jesus Christ (objective genitive). The word Gospel here (\euaggelion\) comes close to meaning the record itself as told by Mark. Swete notes that each writer has a different starting point (\arch\). Mark, as the earliest form of the evangelic tradition, begins with the work of the Baptist, Matthew with the ancestry and birth of the Messiah, Luke with the birth of the Baptist, John with the Preincarnate Logos, Paul with the foundation of each of the churches (Phillipians:4:15|). {The Son of God} (\Huiou theou\). Aleph 28, 255 omit these words, but B, D, L, have them and the great mass of the manuscripts have \huiou tou theou\...words, there is no reason to ...
rwp@Mark:1:7 @{Mightier than I} (\ho ischuroteros mou\)...and he gives a reason for ...{The Latchet} (\ton himanta\). The thong of the sandal which held it together. When the guest comes into the house, performed by a slave before one enters the bath. Mark alone gives this touch.
rwp@Mark:1:34 @{Devils} (\daimonia\). Demons it should be translated always. {Suffered not} (\ouk phien\)...of continued refusal. The reason given ...(\hoti ideisan auton\). Whether "to be Christ" (\Christon einai\) is genuine or not, that is the meaning and is a direct reference to 1:24| when in the synagogue the demon recognized and addressed Jesus as the Holy One of God. Testimony from such a source was not calculated to help the cause of Christ with the people. He had told the other demon to be silent. See on ¯Matthew:8:29| for discussion of the word demon.
rwp@Mark:2:5 @{Their faith} (\tn pistin autn\)...himself. There is no reason for ...{Are forgiven} (\aphientai\, aoristic present passive, cf. punctiliar action, Robertson's _Grammar_, pp. 864ff.). Songs:Matthew:9:3|, but kjv@Luke:5:20| has the Doric perfect passive \aphentai\. The astonishing thing both to the paralytic and to the four friends is that Jesus forgave his sins instead of healing him. The sins had probably caused the paralysis.
rwp@Mark:3:17 @{Boanerges, which is Sons of thunder} (\Boanrges ho estin huioi bronts\)...by Mark and the reason for ...9:34| when James and John wanted to call down fire on the Samaritan villages that were unfriendly to them. The word literally means {sons of tumult, sons of thunder} in Syriac. No other epithets are given by Mark save descriptions to distinguish as Simon the Cananaean (or Zealot) and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him (verse 19|). Andrew, (from \anr\, a man) and Philip (Philippos, fond of horses) are both Greek names. Bartholomew, son of Tolmai, is the Nathanael of John's Gospel (John:21:2|). He probably had both names. Matthew is a Hebrew name meaning gift of God (\Maththaios\). Thomas is Hebrew and means Twin (Didymus, kjv@John:11:16|). There are two uses of the name of James (\Iacbos\, Jacob). Thaddeus is another name for Lebbaeus.
rwp@Mark:6:1 @{Into his own country} (\eis tn patrida autou\). Songs:Matthew:13:54|...There is no real reason for ...4:26-31| at the beginning of the Galilean Ministry. He was rejected both times, but it is not incongruous that Jesus should give Nazareth a second chance. It was only natural for Jesus to visit his mother, brothers, and sisters again. Neither Mark nor Matthew mention Nazareth here by name, but it is plain that by \patrida\ the region of Nazareth is meant. He had not lived in Bethlehem since his birth.
rwp@Mark:8:24 @{I see men, for I behold them as trees walking} (\Blep tous anthrpous hoti hs dendra hor peripatountas\)...wrought by Jesus. The reason for ...
rwp@Mark:15:10 @{He perceived} (\eginsken\). Imperfect tense descriptive of Pilate's growing apprehension from their conduct which increased his intuitive impression at the start. It was gradually dawning on him. Both Mark and Matthew give "envy" (\phthonon\)...popularity of Jesus by reason of ...{Had delivered} (\paradedkeisan\). Past perfect indicative without augment where kjv@Matthew:27:18| has the first aorist (kappa aorist) indicative \paredkan\, not preserving the distinction made by Mark. The aorist is never used "as" a past perfect.
rwp@Info_Matthew @ THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION The passing years do not make it any plainer who actually wrote our Greek Matthew. Papias records, as quoted by Eusebius, that Matthew wrote the _Logia_ of Jesus in Hebrew (Aramaic). Is our present Matthew a translation of the Aramaic _Logia_...There is no real reason why ..._Logia_ and our Greek Matthew, unless one is unwilling to believe that he would make use of Mark's work on a par with his own. But Mark's book rests primarily on the preaching of Simon Peter. Scholfield has recently (1927) published _An Old Hebrew Text of St. Matthew's Gospel_. We know quite too little of the origin of the Synoptic Gospels to say dogmatically that the Apostle Matthew was not in any real sense the author.
rwp@Matthew:2:1 @{In Bethlehem of Judea} (\en Bthleem ts Ioudaias\). There was a Bethlehem in Galilee seven miles northwest of Nazareth (Josephus, _Antiquities_ XIX. 15). This Bethlehem (house of bread, the name means) of Judah was the scene of Ruth's life with Boaz (Ruth:1:1f.; Mt. 1:5|) and the home of David, descendant of Ruth and ancestor of Jesus (Mt. 1:5|). David was born here and anointed king by Samuel (1Samuel:17:12|). The town came to be called the city of David (Luke:2:11|). Jesus, who was born in this House of Bread called himself the Bread of Life (John:6:35|), the true Manna from heaven. Matthew assumes the knowledge of the details of the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem which are given in kjv@Luke:2:1-7| or did not consider them germane to his purpose. Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem from Nazareth because it was the original family home for both of them. The first enrolment by the Emperor Augustus as the papyri show was by families (\kat' oikian\)...the journey for some reason till ...
rwp@Matthew:2:23 @{Should be called a Nazarene} (\Nazraios klthsetai\). Matthew says "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets" (\dia tn prophtn\). It is the plural and no single prophecy exists which says that the Messiah was to be called a Nazarene. It may be that this term of contempt (John:1:46; 7:52|) is what is meant, and that several prophecies are to be combined like Ps. 22:6,8; 69:11,19; kjv@Isaiah:53:2,3,4|...beyond the bounds of reason or ...
rwp@Matthew:4:12 @{Now when he heard} (\akousas de\). The reason for Christ's return to Galilee is given here to be that John had been delivered up into prison. The Synoptic Gospels skip from the temptation of Jesus to the Galilean ministry, a whole year. But for kjv@John:1:19-3:36| we should know nothing of the "year of obscurity" (Stalker). John supplies items to help fill in the picture. Christ's work in Galilee began after the close of the active ministry of the Baptist who lingered on in prison for a year or more.
rwp@Matthew:5:3 @{Blessed} (\makarioi\). The English word "blessed" is more exactly represented by the Greek verbal \eulogtoi\ as in kjv@Luke:1:68| of God by Zacharias, or the perfect passive participle \eulogmenos\ as in kjv@Luke:1:42| of Mary by Elizabeth and in kjv@Matthew:21:9|. Both forms come from \euloge\, to speak well of (\eu, logos\). The Greek word here (\makarioi\) is an adjective that means "happy" which in English etymology goes back to hap, chance, good-luck as seen in our words haply, hapless, happily, happiness. "Blessedness is, of course, an infinitely higher and better thing than mere happiness" (Weymouth). English has thus ennobled "blessed" to a higher rank than "happy." But "happy" is what Jesus said and the _Braid Scots New Testament_ dares to say "Happy" each time here as does the _Improved Edition of the American Bible Union Version_. The Greek word is as old as Homer and Pindar and was used of the Greek gods and also of men, but largely of outward prosperity. Then it is applied to the dead who died in the Lord as in kjv@Revelation:14:13|. Already in the Old Testament the Septuagint uses it of moral quality. "Shaking itself loose from all thoughts of outward good, it becomes the express symbol of a happiness identified with pure character. Behind it lies the clear cognition of sin as the fountain-head of all misery, and of holiness as the final and effectual cure for every woe. For knowledge as the basis of virtue, and therefore of happiness, it substitutes faith and love" (Vincent). Jesus takes this word "happy" and puts it in this rich environment. "This is one of the words which have been transformed and ennobled by New Testament use; by association, as in the Beatitudes, with unusual conditions, accounted by the world miserable, or with rare and difficult" (Bruce). It is a pity that we have not kept the word "happy" to the high and holy plane where Jesus placed it. "If you know these things, happy (\makarioi\) are you if you do them" (John:13:17|). "Happy (\makarioi\) are those who have not seen and yet have believed" (John:20:29|). And Paul applies this adjective to God, "according to the gospel of the glory of the happy (\makariou\) God" (1Timothy:1:11|. Cf. also kjv@Titus:2:13|). The term "Beatitudes" (Latin _beatus_) comes close to the meaning of Christ here by \makarioi\. It will repay one to make a careful study of all the "beatitudes" in the New Testament where this word is employed. It occurs nine times here (3-11|)...In each case a reason is ...(\hoti\), that shows the spiritual quality involved. Some of the phrases employed by Jesus here occur in the Psalms, some even in the Talmud (itself later than the New Testament, though of separate origin). That is of small moment. "The originality of Jesus lies in putting the due value on these thoughts, collecting them, and making them as prominent as the Ten Commandments. No greater service can be rendered to mankind than to rescue from obscurity neglected moral commonplaces " (Bruce). Jesus repeated his sayings many times as all great teachers and preachers do, but this sermon has unity, progress, and consummation. It does not contain all that Jesus taught by any means, but it stands out as the greatest single sermon of all time, in its penetration, pungency, and power. {The poor in spirit} (\hoi ptchoi ti pneumati\). Luke has only "the poor," but he means the same by it as this form in Matthew, "the pious in Israel, for the most part poor, whom the worldly rich despised and persecuted" (McNeile). The word used here (\ptchoi\) is applied to the beggar Lazarus in kjv@Luke:16:20,22| and suggests spiritual destitution (from \ptss\ to crouch, to cower). The other word \pens\ is from \penomai\, to work for one's daily bread and so means one who works for his living. The word \ptchos\ is more frequent in the New Testament and implies deeper poverty than \pens\. "The kingdom of heaven" here means the reign of God in the heart and life. This is the _summum bonum_ and is what matters most.
rwp@Matthew:13:3 @{Many things in parables} (\polla en parabolais\). It was not the first time that Jesus had used parables, but the first time that he had spoken so many and some of such length. He will use a great many in the future as in Luke 12 to 18 and Matt. 24 and 25. The parables already mentioned in Matthew include the salt and the light (5:13-16|), the birds and the lilies (6:26-30|), the splinter and the beam in the eye (7:3-5|), the two gates (7:13f.|), the wolves in sheep's clothing (7:15|), the good and bad trees (7:17-19|), the wise and foolish builders (7:24-27|), the garment and the wineskins (9:16f.|), the children in the market places (11:16f.|). It is not certain how many he spoke on this occasion. Matthew mentions eight in this chapter (the Sower, the Tares, the Mustard Seed, the Leaven, the Hid Treasure, the Pearl of Great Price, the Net, the Householder). Mark adds the Parable of the Lamp (Mark:4:21; kjv@Luke:8:16|), the Parable of the Seed Growing of Itself (Mark:4:26-29|), making ten of which we know. But both Mark (Mark:4:33|) and Matthew (13:34|) imply that there were many others. "Without a parable spake he nothing unto them" (Matthew:13:34|), on this occasion, we may suppose. The word parable (\parabol\ from \paraball\, to place alongside for measurement or comparison like a yardstick) is an objective illustration for spiritual or moral truth. The word is employed in a variety of ways (a) as for sententious sayings or proverbs (Matthew:15:15; kjv@Mark:3:23; kjv@Luke:4:23; 5:36-39; 6:39|), for a figure or type (Heb. 9:9; 11:19|); (b) a comparison in the form of a narrative, the common use in the Synoptic Gospels like the Sower; (c) "A narrative illustration not involving a comparison" (Broadus), like the Rich Fool, the Good Samaritan, etc. "The oriental genius for picturesque speech found expression in a multitude of such utterances" (McNeile). There are parables in the Old Testament, in the Talmud, in sermons in all ages. But no one has spoken such parables as these of Jesus. They hold the mirror up to nature and, as all illustrations should do, throw light on the truth presented. The fable puts things as they are not in nature, Aesop's Fables, for instance. The parable may not be actual fact, but it could be so. It is harmony with the nature of the case. The allegory (\allgoria\) is a speaking parable that is self-explanatory all along like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_. All allegories are parables, but not all parables are allegories. The Prodigal Son is an allegory, as is the story of the Vine and Branches (John:15|). John does not use the word parable, but only \paroimia\, a saying by the way (John:10:6; 16:25,29|). As a rule the parables of Jesus illustrate one main point and the details are more or less incidental, though sometimes Jesus himself explains these. When he does not do so, we should be slow to interpret the minor details. Much heresy has come from fantastic interpretations of the parables. In the case of the Parable of the Sower (13:3-8|) we have also the careful exposition of the story by Jesus (18-23|)...as well as the reason for ...(9-17|).
rwp@Matthew:13:10 @{Why speakest thou unto them in parables?} (\dia ti en parabolais laleis autois\)...this parable and the reason for ...
rwp@Matthew:13:18 @{Hear then ye the parable} (\humeis oun akousate tn paraboln\). Jesus has given in 13:13| one reason for his use of parables, the condemnation which the Pharisees have brought on themselves by their spiritual dulness: "Therefore I speak to them in parables" (\dia touto en parablais antois lal\). He can go on preaching the mysteries of the kingdom without their comprehending what he is saying, but he is anxious that the disciples really get personal knowledge (\gnnai\, verse 11|) of these same mysteries. Songs:he explains in detail what he means to teach by the Parable of the Sower. He appeals to them (note position of \hmeis\) to listen as he explains.
rwp@Matthew:14:18 @{And he said} (\ho de eipen\). Here is the contrast between the helpless doubt of the disciples and the confident courage of Jesus. He used "_the_...had mentioned as a reason for ...
rwp@Matthew:15:33 @{And the disciples say to him} (\kai legousin auti hoi mathtai\). 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|)...healings. There is no reason in ...(\Trachonitis\).
rwp@Matthew:16:19 @{The Keys of the kingdom} (\tas kleidas ts basileias\). Here again we have the figure of a building with keys to open from the outside. The question is raised at once if Jesus does not here mean the same thing by "kingdom" that he did by "church" in verse 18|. In kjv@Revelation:1:18; 3:7| Christ the Risen Lord has "the keys of death and of Hades." He has also "the keys of the kingdom of heaven" which he here hands over to Peter as "gatekeeper" or "steward" (\oikonomos\) provided we do not understand it as a special and peculiar prerogative belonging to Peter. The same power here given to Peter belongs to every disciple of Jesus in all the ages. Advocates of papal supremacy insist on the primacy of Peter here and the power of Peter to pass on this supposed sovereignty to others. But this is all quite beside the mark. We shall soon see the disciples actually disputing again (Matthew:18:1|) as to which of them is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven as they will again (20:21|) and even on the night before Christ's death. Clearly neither Peter nor the rest understood Jesus to say here that Peter was to have supreme authority. What is added shows that Peter held the keys precisely as every preacher and teacher does. To "bind" (\dsis\) in rabbinical language is to forbid, to "loose" (\lusis\) is to permit. Peter would be like a rabbi who passes on many points. Rabbis of the school of Hillel "loosed" many things that the school of Schammai "bound." The teaching of Jesus is the standard for Peter and for all preachers of Christ. Note the future perfect indicative (\estai dedemenon, estai lelumenon\), a state of completion. All this assumes, of course, that Peter's use of the keys will be in accord with the teaching and mind of Christ. The binding and loosing is repeated by Jesus to all the disciples (18:18|). Later after the Resurrection Christ will use this same language to all the disciples (John:20:23|), showing that it was not a special prerogative of Peter. He is simply first among equals, _primus inter pares_...to pronounce absolution, by reason of ...
rwp@Matthew:16:20 @{That they should tell no man} (\hina mdeni eipsin\)...Why? For the very reason that ...(\ho Christos\), but the people would inevitably take it in a political sense. Jesus was plainly profoundly moved by Peter's great confession on behalf of the disciples. He was grateful and confident of the final outcome. But he foresaw peril to all. Peter had confessed him as the Messiah and on this rock of faith thus confessed he would build his church or kingdom. They will all have and use the keys to this greatest of all buildings, but for the present they must be silent.
rwp@Matthew:16:24 @{Take up his cross} (\arat ton stauron autou\). Pick up at once, aorist tense. This same saying in 10:38|, which see. But pertinent here also in explanation of Christ's rebuke to Peter. Christ's own cross faces him. Peter had dared to pull Christ away from his destiny. He would do better to face squarely his own cross and to bear it after Jesus. The disciples would be familiar with cross-...figure of speech by reason of ...{Follow} (\akaloutheit\). Present tense. Keep on following.
rwp@Matthew:25:12 @{I know you not} (\ouk oida hums\)...Hence there was no reason for ...
rwp@Matthew:25:13 @{Watch therefore} (\grgoreite oun\)...for neglect, but a reason for ...
rwp@Matthew:26:52 @{Put up again thy sword} (\apostrepson tn machairan sou\). Turn back thy sword into its place. It was a stern rebuke for Peter who had misunderstood the teaching of Jesus in kjv@Luke:22:38| as well as in kjv@Matthew:5:39| (cf. kjv@John:18:36|). The reason given by Jesus has had innumerable illustrations in human history. The sword calls for the sword. Offensive war is here given flat condemnation. The Paris Pact of 1928 (the Kellogg Treaty) is certainly in harmony with the mind of Christ. The will to peace is the first step towards peace, the outlawing of war. Our American cities are often ruled by gangsters who kill each other off.
rwp@Matthew:26:75 @{Peter remembered} (\emnsth ho Petros\). A small thing, but _magna circumstantia_ (Bengel). In a flash of lightning rapidity he recalled the words of Jesus a few hours before (Matthew:26:34|) which he had then scouted with the proud boast that "even if I must die with thee, yet will I not deny thee" (26:35|). And now this triple denial was a fact. There is no extenuation for the base denials of Peter. He had incurred the dread penalty involved in the words of Jesus in kjv@Matthew:10:33| of denial by Jesus before the Father in heaven. But Peter's revulsion of feeling was as sudden as his sin. {He went out and wept bitterly} (\exelthn ex eklausen pikrs\). Luke adds that the Lord turned and looked upon Peter (Luke:22:61|). That look brought Peter back to his senses. He could not stay where he now was with the revilers of Jesus. He did not feel worthy or able to go openly into the hall where Jesus was. Songs:outside he went with a broken heart. The constative aorist here does not emphasize as Mark's imperfect does (Mark:14:72|, \eklaien\)...the more so by reason of ...(Luke:22:31f.|). Will Satan show Peter to be all chaff as Judas was?
rwp@Matthew:27:8 @{The field of blood} (\agros haimatos\). This name was attached to it because it was the price of blood and that is not inconsistent with kjv@Acts:1:18f|. Today potter's field carries the idea here started of burial place for strangers who have no where else to lie (\eis taphn tois xenois\), probably at first Jews from elsewhere dying in Jerusalem. In kjv@Acts:1:19| it is called {Aceldama} or {place of blood} (\chrion haimatos\)...by blood money. Both reasons could ...
rwp@Matthew:27:17 @{Barabbas or Jesus which is called Christ?} (\Barabbn Isoun ton legomenon Christon;\). Pilate was catching at straws or seeking any loophole to escape condemning a harmless lunatic or exponent of a superstitious cult such as he deemed Jesus to be, certainly in no political sense a rival of Caesar. The Jews interpreted "Christ" for Pilate to be a claim to be King of the Jews in opposition to Caesar, "a most unprincipled proceeding" (Bruce). Songs:he bethought him of the time-honoured custom at the passover of releasing to the people "a prisoner whom they wished" (\desmion hon thelon\). No parallel case has been found, but Josephus mentions the custom (_Ant_. xx. 9,3)...Barabbas was for some reason a ...(\epismon\), if not notorious, prisoner, leader of an insurrection or revolution (Mark:15:7|) probably against Rome, and so guilty of the very crime that they tried to fasten on Jesus who only claimed to be king in the spiritual sense of the spiritual kingdom. Songs:Pilate unwittingly pitted against each other two prisoners who represented the antagonistic forces of all time. It is an elliptical structure in the question, "whom do you wish that I release?" (\tina thelete apolus;\), either two questions in one (asyndeton) or the ellipse of \hina\ before \apolus\. See the same idiom in verse 21|. But Pilate's question tested the Jews as well as himself. It tests all men today. Some manuscripts add the name Jesus to Barabbas and that makes it all the sharper. Jesus Barabbas or Jesus Christ?
rwp@Philemon:1:9 @{Paul the aged} (\Paulos presbuts\). Paul is called \neanias\ (a young man) at the stoning of Stephen (Acts:7:58|). He was perhaps a bit under sixty now. Hippocrates calls a man \presbuts\ from 49 to 56 and \gern\ after that. The papyri use \presbuts\ for old man as in kjv@Luke:1:18| of Zacharias and in kjv@Titus:2:2|. But in kjv@Ephesians:6:20| Paul says \presbeu en halusei\ (I am an ambassador in a chain). Hence Lightfoot holds that here \presbuts\ = \presbeuts\ because of common confusion by the scribes between \u\ and \eu\. In the LXX four times the two words are used interchangeably. There is some confusion also in the papyri and the inscriptions. Undoubtedly ambassador (\presbeuts\) is possible here as in kjv@Ephesians:6:20| (\presbeu\)...there is no real reason why ...
rwp@Philippians:2:8 @{In fashion} (\schmati\). Locative case of \schma\, from \ech\, to have, to hold. Bengel explains \morph\ by _forma_, \homoima\ by _similitudo_, \schma\ by _habitus_. Here with \schma\ the contrast "is between what He is in Himself, and what He _appeared_ in the eyes of men" (Lightfoot). {He humbled himself} (\etapeinsen heauton\). First aorist active of \tapeino\, old verb from \tapeinos\...Christ and for this reason Paul ..._The Humiliation of Christ_. {Obedient} (\hupkoos\). Old adjective, giving ear to. See kjv@Acts:7:39; kjv@2Corinthians:2:9|. {Unto death} (\mechri thanatou\). "Until death." See "until blood" (\mechris haimatos\, kjv@Hebrews:12:4|). {Yea, the death of the cross} (\thanatou de staurou\). The bottom rung in the ladder from the Throne of God. Jesus came all the way down to the most despised death of all, a condemned criminal on the accursed cross.
rwp@Revelation:1:3 @{Blessed} (\makarios\). As in kjv@Matthew:5:3ff|. This endorses the book as a whole. {He that readeth} (\ho anaginskn\). Present active singular articular participle of \anaginsk\ (as in kjv@Luke:4:16|). Christians in their public worship followed the Jewish custom of public reading of the Scriptures (2Corinthians:3:14f.|). The church reader (\anagnsts\, lector) gradually acquired an official position. John expects this book to be read in each of the seven churches mentioned (1:4|) and elsewhere. Today the public reading of the Bible is an important part of worship that is often poorly done. {They that hear} (\hoi akouontes\). Present active plural articular participle of \akou\ (the audience). {And keep} (\kai trountes\). Present active participle of \tre\, a common Johannine word (1John:2:4|, etc.). Cf. kjv@Matthew:7:24|. "The content of the Apocalypse is not merely prediction; moral counsel and religious instruction are the primary burdens of its pages" (Moffatt). {Written} (\gegrammena\). Perfect passive participle of \graph\. {For the time is at hand} (\ho gar kairos eggus\). Reason for listening and keeping. On \kairos\ see kjv@Matthew:12:1|, time of crisis as in kjv@1Corinthians:7:29|. How near \eggus\ (at hand) is we do not know any more than we do about \en tachei\ (shortly) in 1:1|.
rwp@Revelation:1:9 @{I John} (\Eg Ians\). kjv@Songs:22:8|. In apocalyptic literature the personality of the writer is always prominent to guarantee the visions (Daniel:8:1; 10:2|). {Partaker with you} (\sunkoinnos\). See already kjv@1Corinthians:9:23|. "Co-partner with you" (Romans:11:17|). One article with \adelphos\ and \sunkoinnos\ unifying the picture. The absence of \apostolos\ here does not show that he is not an apostle, but merely his self-effacement, as in the Fourth Gospel, and still more his oneness with his readers. Songs:there is only one article (\ti\) with \thlipsei\ (tribulation), \basileii\ (kingdom), \hupomoni\ (patience), ideas running all through the book. Both the tribulation (see kjv@Matthew:13:21| for \thlipsis\) and the kingdom (see kjv@Matthew:3:2| for \basileia\) were present realities and called for patience (\hupomon\ being "the spiritual alchemy" according to Charles for those in the kingdom, for which see kjv@Luke:8:15; kjv@James:5:7|). All this is possible only "in Jesus" (\en Isou\), a phrase on a par with Paul's common \en Christi\ (in Christ), repeated in 14:13|. Cf. 3:20; kjv@2Thessalonians:3:5|. {Was} (\egenomn\). Rather, "I came to be," second aorist middle indicative of \ginomai\. {In the isle that is called Patmos} (\en ti nsi ti kaloumeni Patmi\). Patmos is a rocky sparsely settled island some ten miles long and half that wide, one of the Sporades group in the Aegean Sea, south of Miletus. The present condition of the island is well described by W. E. Geil in _The Isle That Is Called Patmos_ (1905). Here John saw the visions described in the book, apparently written while still a prisoner there in exile. {For the word of God and the testimony of Jesus} (\dia ton logon tou theou kai tn marturian Isou\). The reason for (\dia\ and the accusative) John's presence in Patmos, naturally as a result of persecution already alluded to, not for the purpose of preaching there or of receiving the visions. See verse 2| for the phrase.
rwp@Revelation:4:11 @{Our Lord and our God} (\ho kurios kai ho theos hmn\). The nominative form here used as vocative as in kjv@John:20:28| and often. {To receive} (\labein\). Epexegetic second aorist active infinitive of \lamban\ with \axios\ (worthy). {The glory} (\tn doxan\). The article referring to \doxan\ in verse 9| and so with \tn timn\ (the honour), though \tn dunamin\ (the power) is not in verse 9|, but is the power due to be ascribed to God. {Thou didst create} (\su ektisas\). Emphasis on \su\ (thou), first aorist active indicative of \ktiz\, the verb used about the act of creation by Paul in kjv@Colossians:1:16| (\ektisth, ektistai\), constative aorist giving a summary picture of the whole (not as a process). {Because of thy will} (\dia to thelma sou\). Reason for creation of the universe as in kjv@Hebrews:2:10| (\di' hon\). {They were} (\san\). Imperfect tense with a cursory glance at the universe as a fact, possibly a potential existence in God's purpose in the eternal past before the actual creation in time. {And were created} (\kai ektisthsan\). First aorist passive indicative of the same verb, \ktiz\, just used and in the plural, while Paul (Colossians:1:16|) uses the singular \ektisth\. See kjv@1Corinthians:8:6|. God's will wrought through the Logos (Christ).
rwp@Revelation:5:5 @{One of the elders} (\heis ek tn presbutern\). "One from among the elders" of 4:4,10| (\ek\ with the ablative 8 times in the Apocalypse, 12 in the Fourth Gospel, 10 in rest of the N.T., in place of the mere partitive genitive). No particular reason for one elder as the agent over another (7:13|). {Saith} (\legei\). Dramatic vivid present. {Weep not} (\m klaie\). "Cease weeping" (prohibition with \m\ and the present active imperative of \klai\. {The Lion} (\ho len\). Satan is called a lion by Peter (1Peter:5:8|), but the metaphor belongs to Jesus also. Judah is called a lion in the blessing of Jacob (Genesis:49:9|) and Jesus as the greatest of the tribe of Judah, "the Root of David" (\h riza Daueid\, kjv@Isaiah:11:1,10|) or the Branch from this root (the Messiah). {Hath overcome} (\eniksen\). First aorist active indicative of \nika\, "did overcome," coming first in the sentence as "the great historical fact of the victory of the Christ" (Swete).
rwp@Revelation:5:9 @{They sing} (\idousin\). Present active indicative of \id\. Old verb, to chant with lyrical emotion (Colossians:3:16|). {A new song} (\idn kainn\). Cognate accusative for \oide\ (\id\, song) is \oide\ from \eid\, that is \id\ (the verb used), old word already used (Colossians:3:16; kjv@Ephesians:5:19|), called \kainn\ because a fresh song for new mercies (Isaiah:42:10; kjv@Psalms:33:3; 40:3|, etc.), here in praise of redemption to Christ (14:3|) like the new name (2:17; 3:12|), the new Jerusalem (3:12; 21:2|), the new heaven and the new earth (21:1|), not the old song of creation (4:8,11|) to God. {For thou wast slain} (\hoti esphags\). Second aorist passive indicative of \sphaz\. \Agoraz\ used by Paul and Peter of our purchase from sin by Christ (1Corinthians:6:20; 7:23; kjv@Galatians:3:13; 4:5; kjv@2Peter:2:1|; cf. kjv@1Peter:1:18f.|). {Unto God} (\ti thei\). Dative case of advantage as also in verse 10|. {With thy blood} (\en ti haimati sou\). Instrumental use of \en\ as in 1:5|...Apocalypse. This is the reason why ...(4:11|) as the Father does. {Men of every} (\ek pass\). No \anthrpous\ (men) or \tinas\ (some) before \ek\ in the Greek. See a like ellipsis in 11:9| with a like grouping of words for all mankind, representatives of all races and nations (7:9; 13:7; 14:6|).
rwp@Revelation:8:13 @{An eagle} (\henos aetou\). "One eagle," perhaps \henos\ (\heis\) used as an indefinite article (9:13; 18:21; 19:17|). See 4:7| also for the flying eagle, the strongest of birds, sometimes a symbol of vengeance (Deuteronomy:28:49; kjv@Hosea:8:1; kjv@Habbakkuk:1:8|). {Flying in mid-heaven} (\petomenou en mesouranmati\). Like the angel in 14:6| and the birds in 19:17|. \Mesouranma\ (from \mesourane\ to be in mid-heaven) is a late word (Plutarch, papyri) for the sun at noon, in N.T. only these three examples. This eagle is flying where all can see, and crying so that all can hear. {Woe, woe, woe} (\ouai, ouai, ouai\). Triple because three trumpets yet to come. In 18:10,16,19| the double \ouai\ is merely for emphasis. {For them that dwell on the earth} (\tous katoikountas\). Accusative of the articular present active participle of \katoike\, is unusual (Aleph Q here and also in 12:12|) as in kjv@Matthew:11:21|. There is even a nominative in 18:10|. {By reason of the other voices} (\ek tn loipn phnn\). "As a result of (\ek\) the rest of the voices." There is more and worse to come, "of the three angels who are yet to sound" (\tn trin aggeln tn mellontn salpizein\).
rwp@Revelation:9:2 @{Opened} (\noixen\). First aorist active indicative of \anoignumi\. With the "key" (\kleis\). {As the smoke of a great furnace} (\hs kapnos kaminou megals\). The plague of demonic locusts is here turned loose. \Kaminos\ is old word for a smelting-furnace, already in 1:15|. {Were darkened} (\eskotth\). First aorist passive indicative of \skoto\, old causative verb from \skotos\, in N.T. only here, 16:10; kjv@Ephesians:4:18|. {By reason of} (\ek\). "Out of," as a result of (8:13|).
rwp@Revelation:11:10 @{They that dwell upon the earth} (\hoi katoikountes epi ts gs\). Present active articular participle of \katoike\, "an Apocalyptic formula" (Swete) for the non-Christian world (3:10; 6:10; 8:13; 13:8,12,14; 17:8|). {Rejoice} (\chairousin\). Present active indicative of \chair\. {Over them} (\ep' autois\). Locative (or dative) case with \epi\ as in 10:11|. {Make merry} (\euphrainontai\). Present middle indicative of \euphrain\, old verb (\eu, phrn\, jolly mind), as in kjv@Luke:15:32; kjv@Revelation:12:12; 18:20|. Jubilant jollification over the cessation of the activity of the two prophets. {They shall send gifts to one another} (\dra pempsousin alllois\). Future active of \pemp\ with dative \alllois\. Just as we see it done in kjv@Esther:9:19,22; kjv@Nehemiah:8:10,12|. {Tormented} (\ebasanisan\). First aorist active indicative of \basaniz\, for which see 9:5|. This is the reason (\hoti\) of the fiendish glee of Jew and Gentile, who no longer will have to endure the prophecies (11:3f.|) and dread miracles (11:5f.|) of these two prophets. "Such a sense of relief is perhaps not seldom felt today by bad men when a preacher of righteousness or a signal example of goodness is removed" (Swete).
rwp@Revelation:12:12 @{Therefore} (\dia touto\). "For this reason" as in 7:15; 18:8| (15 times in John's Gospel, Charles notes). It points back to verse 10|. {Rejoice} (\euphrainesthe\). Present middle imperative of \euphrain\ as in 11:10; 18:20|. {O heavens} (\hoi ouranoi\). Plural here alone in the Apocalypse, though common elsewhere in the N.T. Satan is no longer in the heavens. {They that dwell therein} (\hoi en autois sknountes\). Present active articular participle of \skno\ (see 7:15; 13:6|) to dwell (tabernacle) as of Christ in kjv@John:1:14| and of God in kjv@Revelation:21:3|. The inhabitants of heaven (angels and saints)...to rejoice, and earth reason to ...{Woe for the earth and for the sea} (\ouai tn gn kai tn thalassan\). The accusative after \ouai\ as in 8:13|, but nominative in 18:10,16,19| in place of the usual dative (Matthew:11:21; 18:7|, etc.). {Is gone down} (\kateb\). Second aorist (effective) active indicative of \katabain\, "did go down." {But a short time} (\oligon kairon\). Accusative of extent of time, "a little time." The devil's departure from his warfare in the heavens reveals (\eids\, knowing, perfect active participle) to him that his time for doing harm to men is limited, and hence his great wrath (\thumon\, boiling rage).
rwp@Revelation:16:5 @{The angel of the waters} (\tou aggelou ton hudatn\). Genitive case object of \kousa\. See 7:1| for the four angels in control of the winds and 14:18| for the angel with power over fire. The rabbis spoke also of an angel with power over the earth and another over the sea. {Which art and which wast} (\ho n kai ho n\). See this peculiar idiom for God's eternity with \ho\ as relative before \n\ in 1:4,8; 4:8|, but without \ho erchomenos\ (the coming on, the one who is to be) there for the future as in 11:17|. {Thou Holy One} (\ho hosios\). Nominative form, but vocative case, as often. Note both \dikaios\ and \hosios\ applied to God as in 3:1; 15:3f|. {Because thou didst thus judge} (\hoti tauta ekrinas\). Reason for calling God \dikaios\ and \hosios\. The punishment on the waters is deserved. First aorist active indicative of \krin\, to judge.
rwp@Revelation:18:1 @{Coming down out of heaven} (\katabainonta ek tou ouranou\). Present active predicate participle. Not the angel of 17:1,7,15| (John's guide), but one announcing the doom of Babylon (Rome). As in 10:1; 20:1|. {Was lightened} (\ephtisth\). First aorist passive of \phtiz\, old causative verb (from \phs\, light), common in N.T. as in kjv@Revelation:18:1; 21:23; 22:5|. {With his glory} (\ek ts doxs autou\). "By reason of (\ek\ as in 8:13; 16:10|) his glory." "Songs:recently has he come from the Presence that in passing he flings a broad belt of light across the dark earth" (Swete).
rwp@Revelation:18:11 @{The merchants} (\hoi emporoi\). As in 18:3,15,23|. The dirge of the merchants follows the wail of the kings. {Weep and mourn} (\klaiousin kai penthousin\). Present active indicatives of \klai\ and \penthe\ as in verses 9| (for \klai\), 15,19|. {For no man buyeth their merchandise any more} (\hoti ton gomon autn oudeis agorazei ouketi\). Reason enough for their sorrow over Rome's fall. \Gomos\ is old word (from \gem\ to be full) for a ship's cargo (Acts:21:3|) and then any merchandise (Revelation:18:11f.|). Galen, Pliny, Aristides tell of the vastness of the commerce and luxury of Rome, the world's chief market. Many of the items here are like those in the picture of the destruction of Tyre in kjv@Ezekiel:26; 27|. There are twenty-nine items singled out in verses 12,13| of this merchandise or cargo (\gomon\), imports into the port of Rome. Only a few need any comment.
rwp@Revelation:18:16 @For the Woe see verses 10,19|. For the next clause see 17:4| with the addition here of \bussinon\ (18:12|). {For in one hour so great riches is made desolate} (\hoti mii hri rmth ho tosoutos ploutos\). The reason (\hoti\) for the "woe." First aorist passive indicative of \ermo\, for which verb see 17:16; 18:19|. This is the dirge of the merchants.
rwp@Revelation:18:19 @{They cast dust} (\ebalon choun\). Second aorist active of \ball\. \Chous\ is old word (from \che\ to pour) for heap of earth, dust, in N.T. only here and kjv@Mark:6:11|. Cf. kjv@Ezekiel:27:30; kjv@Luke:10:13|. This is the dirge of the sea-folk (cf. verses 10,16|). {By reason of her costliness} (\ek ts timiottos auts\). Occasionally in later literary Greek, though here only in N.T. and not in LXX. The same use of \tim\ appears in kjv@1Peter:2:7|. Common in the papyri as a title like "Your Honor" (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_).
rwp@Revelation:19:2 @{For} (\hoti\). Because. The reason for God's judgments is given in 15:3; 16:7|. The doom of Babylon seen in 14:7| is now realized. {For} (\hoti\). Second use of \hoti\, explaining the first. {He hath judged} (\ekrinen\). First aorist (prophetic and climacteric, effective) active indicative of \krin\. {Which} (\htis\). The very one which. {Did corrupt} (\ephtheiren\). This is the terrible fact. First aorist active indicative of \phtheir\. Cf. 11:18; 14:8; 17:2; 18:3|. {And he hath avenged} (\kai exediksen\). God has exacted vengeance for the blood of his servants from (\ek\) her. Prophetic aorist again of \ekdike\ with accusative and \ek\ with ablative as in 6:10|.
rwp@Revelation:21:5 @{Behold, I make all things new} (\Idou kaina poi panta\). The first time since 1:8| that God has been represented as speaking directly, though voices have come out of the throne before (21:3|) and out of the sanctuary (16:1,17|), which may be from God himself, though more likely from one of the angels of the Presence. This message is not addressed to John (7:14; 17:7; 21:6; 22:6|), but to the entire world of the blessed. See kjv@Isaiah:43:18f.| for the words (\Idou eg poi kaina\). The idea of a new heaven and a new earth is in kjv@Isaiah:65:17; 66:22; kjv@Psalms:102:25f|. For the locative here with \epi\ (\epi ti throni\) see 7:10; 19:4| (genitive more usual, 4:9f.; 5:1,7,13|, etc.). See 20:11| for the picture. {And he saith} (\kai legei\). Probably this means a change of speakers, made plain by \moi\ (to me) in many MSS. An angel apparently (as in 14:13; 19:9f.|) assures John and urges him to write (\grapson\ as in 1:11; 2:1,8,12,18; 3:1,7,14; 14:3|). The reason given (\hoti\, for) is precisely the saying in 22:6| and he uses the two adjectives (\pistoi kai althinoi\) employed in 19:11| about God himself, and 3:14| about Christ. In 19:9| \althinoi\ occurs also about "the words of God" as here. They are reliable and genuine.
rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE APOCALYPTIC STYLE The book claims to be an apocalypse (Revelation:1:1|) and has to be treated as such. It is an unveiling (\apokalupsis\, from \apokalupt\) or revelation of Jesus Christ, a prophecy, in other words, of a special type, like Ezekiel, Zechariah, and Daniel in the Old Testament. There was a considerable Jewish apocalyptic literature by this time when John wrote, much of it B.C., some of it A.D., like the Book of Enoch, the Apocalypse of Baruch, the Book of Jubilees, the Assumption of Moses, the Psalms of Solomon, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the Sibylline Oracles, some of them evidently "worked over by Christian hands" (Swete). Jesus himself used the apocalyptic style at times (Mark:13; kjv@Matthew:24,25; kjv@Luke:21|). Paul in kjv@1Corinthians:14| spoke of the unpremeditated apocalyptic utterances in the Christian meetings and suggested restraints concerning them. "The Revelation of John is the only written apocalypse, as it is the only written prophecy of the Apostolic age.... The first Christian apocalypse came on the crest of this long wave of apocalyptic effort" (Swete). The reason for this style of writing is usually severe persecution and the desire to deliver a message in symbolic form. The effort of Antiochus Epiphanes, who claimed to be "a god manifest," to hellenize the Jews aroused violent opposition and occasioned many apocalypses to cheer the persecuted Jews.
rwp@Info_Romans @ THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS SPRING OF A.D. 57 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION INTEGRITY OF THE EPISTLE The genuineness of the Epistle is so generally admitted by scholars that it is unnecessary to prove it here, for Loman, Steck, and the Dutch scholars (Van Manen, etc.) who deny it as Pauline are no longer taken seriously. He wrote it from Corinth because he sent it to Rome by Phoebe of Cenchreae (Romans:16:2|) if chapter 16 is acknowledged to be a part of the Epistle. Chapter 16 is held by some to be really a short epistle to Ephesus because of the long list of names in it, because of Paul's long stay in Ephesus, because he had not yet been to Rome, and because, in particular, Aquila and Priscilla are named (Romans:16:3-5|)...and there is no reason for ...(Aleph A B C D) give chapter 16 as an integral part of the Epistle. Marcion rejected it and chapter 15 also for reasons of his own. Renan's theory that Romans was a circular letter like Ephesians sent in different forms to different churches (Rome, Ephesus, Thessalonica, etc.) has appealed to some scholars as explaining the several doxologies in the Epistle, but they cause no real difficulty since Paul interjected them in his other epistles according to his moods (2Corinthians:1:20|, for instance). That theory raises more problems than it solves as, for example, Paul's remarks about going to Rome (Romans:1:9-16|) which apply to Rome. Lightfoot suggests the possibility that Paul added kjv@Romans:16:25-27| some years after the original date so as to turn it into a circular letter. But the MSS. do not support that theory and that leaves kjv@Romans:15:22-33 in the Epistle quite unsuitable to a circular letter. Modern knowledge leaves the Epistle intact with occasional variations in the MSS. on particular points as is true of all the N.T.
rwp@Romans:1:18 @{For the wrath of God is revealed} (\apokaluptetai gar org theou\). Note in Romans Paul's use of \gar\, now argumentative, now explanatory, now both as here. There is a parallel and antecedent revelation (see verse 17|) of God's wrath corresponding to the revelation of God's righteousness, this an unwritten revelation, but plainly made known. \Org\ is from \orga\...but the wrath of reason and ...(Shedd). The revelation of God's righteousness in the gospel was necessary because of the failure of men to attain it without it, for God's wrath justly rested upon all both Gentiles (1:18-32|) and Jews (2:1-3:20|). {Ungodliness} (\asebeian\). Irreligion, want of reverence toward God, old word (cf. kjv@2Timothy:2:16|). {Unrighteousness} (\adikian\). Lack (\a\ privative and \dik\) of right conduct toward men, injustice (Romans:9:14; kjv@Luke:18:6|). This follows naturally from irreverence. The basis of ethical conduct rests on the nature of God and our attitude toward him, otherwise the law of the jungle (cf. Nietzsche, "might makes right"). {Hold down the truth} (\tn altheian katechontn\). Truth (\altheia, alths\, from \a\ privative and \lth\ or \lanthan\, to conceal) is out in the open, but wicked men, so to speak, put it in a box and sit on the lid and "hold it down in unrighteousness." Their evil deeds conceal the open truth of God from men. Cf. kjv@2Thessalonians:2:6f.| for this use of \katech\, to hinder.
rwp@Romans:1:19 @{Because} (\dioti\). Gives the reason (\dia, hoti\ like our "for that") for the revelation of God's wrath. {That which may be known of God} (\to gnston tou theou\). Verbal adjective from \ginsk\, either "the known" as elsewhere in N.T. (Acts:1:19; 15:18|, etc.) or "the knowable" as usual in ancient Greek, that is "the knowledge" (\h gnsis\) of God. See kjv@Phillipians:3:8|. Cf. same use of the verbal \chrston\ in kjv@Romans:2:4|, \ametatheton\ in kjv@Hebrews:6:17|. {Manifest in them} (\phaneron en autois\). In their hearts and consciences. {God manifested} (\ho theos ephanersen\). First aorist active indicative of \phanero\. Not mere tautology. See 2:14-16|.
rwp@Romans:1:21 @{Because that} (\dioti\). As in verse 19|. {Knowing God} (\gnontes ton theon\). Second aorist active participle of \ginsk\, to know by personal experience. Definite statement that originally men had some knowledge of God. No people, however degraded, have yet been found without some yearning after a god, a seeking to find the true God and get back to him as Paul said in Athens (Acts:17:27|). {Glorified not as God} (\ouch hs theon edoxasan\)...did. This is the reason for ...(2:12-16|), the failure to do what they know. {Their senseless heart} (\h asunetos autn kardia\). \Kardia\ is the most comprehensive term for all our faculties whether feeling (Romans:9:2|), will (1Corinthians:4:5|), intellect (Romans:10:6|). It may be the home of the Holy Spirit (Romans:5:5|) or of evil desires (1:24|). See kjv@Mark:7:21f.| for list of vices that come "out of the heart." \Asunetos\ is a verbal adjective from \sunimi\, to put together, and \a\ privative, unintelligent, not able to put together the manifest evidence about God (verse 20|). Songs:darkness settled down on their hearts (\eskotisth\, first aorist ingressive passive of \skotiz\, to darken).
rwp@Romans:2:1 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). See 1:24,26| for this relative conjunction, "because of which thing." {Without excuse} (\anapologtos\). See on ¯1:21|. {Whosoever thou art that judgest} (\pas ho krinn\). Literally, "every one that judgest," vocative case in apposition with \anthrpe\. Paul begins his discussion of the failure of the Jew to attain to the God-kind of righteousness (2:1-3:20|) with a general statement applicable to all as he did (1:18|) in the discussion of the failure of the Gentiles (Lightfoot). The Gentile is readily condemned by the Jew when he sins and equally so is the Jew condemned by the Gentile in like case. \Krin\ does not of itself mean to condemn, but to pick out, separate, approve, determine, pronounce judgment, condemn (if proper). {Another} (\ton heteron\). Literally, "the other man." The notion of two in the word, one criticizing the other. {Thou condemnest thyself} (\seauton katakrineis\). Note \kata\ here with \krin\, to make plain the adverse judgment. {For} (\gar\). Explanatory reason for the preceding statement. The critic {practises} (\prasseis\, not single acts \poie\, but the habit \prass\) the same things that he condemns.
rwp@Romans:5:4 @{Knowing} (\eidotes\). Second perfect participle of \eidon\ (\oida\), giving the reason for the previous exhortation to glory in tribulations. He gives a linked chain, one linking to the other (tribulation \thlipsis\, patience \hupomon\, experience \dokim\, hope \elpis\) running into verse 5|. On \dokim\, see kjv@2Corinthians:2:9|.
rwp@Romans:5:13 @{Until the law} (\achri nomou\)...had the law of reason and ...(2:12-16|), but the coming of the law increased their responsibility and their guilt (2:9|). {Sin is not imputed} (\hamartia de ouk ellogeitai\). Present passive indicative of late verb \elloga\ (\-e\) from \en\ and \logos\, to put down in the ledger to one's account, examples in inscription and papyri. {When there is no law} (\m ontos nomou\). Genitive absolute, no law of any kind, he means. There was law _before_ the Mosaic law. But what about infants and idiots in case of death? Do they have responsibility? Surely not. The sinful nature which they inherit is met by Christ's atoning death and grace. No longer do men speak of "elect infants."
rwp@Romans:6:15 @{What then?} (\ti oun?\). Another turn in the argument about the excess of grace. {Shall we sin?} (\hamartesmen?\). First aorist active deliberative subjunctive of \hamartan\. "Shall we commit sin" (occasional acts of sin as opposed to the life of sin as raised by \epimenmen ti hamartii\ in verse 1|)? {Because} (\hoti\). The same reason as in verse 1| and taken up from the very words in verse 14|. Surely, the objector says, we may take a night off now and then and sin a little bit "since we are under grace."
rwp@Romans:8:20 @{Was subjected} (\hupetag\). Second aorist passive indicative of \hupatass\ (cf. verse 7|). {To vanity} (\ti mataiotti\). Dative case. Rare and late word, common in LXX. From \mataios\, empty, vain. kjv@Ephesians:4:17; kjv@2Peter:2:18|. {Not of its own will} (\ouch hekousa\). Common adjective, in N.T. only here and kjv@1Corinthians:9:27|. It was due to the effect of man's sin. {But by reason of him} (\alla dia ton\). Because of God. {In hope that} (\eph' helpidi hoti\). Note the form \helpidi\ rather than the usual \elpidi\ and so \eph'\. \Hoti\ can be causal "because" instead of declarative "that."
rwp@Romans:11:33 @{O the depth} (\O bathos\). Exclamation with omega and the nominative case of \bathos\ (see on ¯2Corinthians:8:2; kjv@Romans:8:39|)...the plummet of human reason and ...{Unsearchable} (\anexeraunta\). Double compound (\a\ privative and \ex\) verbal adjective of \ereuna\ (old spelling \-eu-\), late and rare word (LXX, Dio Cassius, Heraclitus), only here in N.T. Some of God's wisdom can be known (1:20f.|), but not all. {Past tracing out} (\anexichniastoi\). Another verbal adjective from \a\ privative and \exichniaz\, to trace out by tracks (\ichnos\ kjv@Romans:4:12|). Late word in Job:(Job:5:9; 9:10; 34:24|) from which use Paul obtained it here and kjv@Ephesians:3:8| (only N.T. examples). Also in ecclesiastical writers. Some of God's tracks he has left plain to us, but others are beyond us.
rwp@Romans:12:1 @{Therefore} (\oun\). This inferential participle gathers up all the great argument of chapters 1-11|. Now Paul turns to exhortation (\parakal\), "I beseech you." {By the mercies} (\dia tn oiktirmn\). "By means of the mercies of God" as shown in his argument and in our lives. See kjv@2Corinthians:1:3| for "the Father of mercies." {To present} (\parastsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \paristmi\, for which verb see 6:13|, a technical term for offering a sacrifice (Josephus, _Ant_. IV. 6, 4), though not in the O.T. Used of presenting the child Jesus in the temple (Luke:2:22|), of the Christian presenting himself (Romans:6:13|), of God presenting the saved (Ephesians:5:27|), of Christ presenting the church (Colossians:1:28|). {Bodies} (\smata\). Songs:literally as in 6:13,19; kjv@2Corinthians:5:10| and in contrast with \nous\ (mind) in verse 2|. {A living sacrifice} (\thusian zsan\). In contrast with the Levitical sacrifices of slain animals. Cf. 6:8,11,13|. Not a propitiatory sacrifice, but one of praise. {Acceptable} (\euareston\). "Well-pleasing." See on ¯2Corinthians:5:9|. {Which is your reasonable service} (\tn logikn humn latreian\). "Your rational (spiritual) service (worship)." For \latreia\, see on ¯9:4|. \Logikos\ is from \logos\..."worship rendered by the reason... (or soul)." Old word, in N.T. only here and kjv@1Peter:2:2| \to logikon gala\ (not logical milk, but the milk nourishing the soul).