[pBiblx2]
Home
rwp
Chap
OT
NT
INDX
?
Help

Gen
Exo
Lev
Num
Deu
Jos
Jud
Rut
1Sam
2Sam
1Ki
2Ki
1Ch
2Ch
Ezr
Neh
Est
Job
Psa
Pro
Ecc
Son
Isa
Jer
Lam
Eze
Dan
Hos
Amo
Oba
Jon
Mic
Nah
Hab
Zep
Hag
Zac
Mal
TOP

Mat
Mar
Luk
Joh
Act
Rom
1Co
2Ch
Gal
Eph
Phi
Col
1Th
2Th
1Ti
2Ti
Tit
Ph
Heb
Jam
1Pe
2Pe
1Jo
2Jo
3Jo
Jud
Rev
TOP

KJV
NKJV
RSV
ALL
TOP

AAA
BBB
CCC
DDD
EEE
FFF
GGG
HHH
III
JJJ
KKK
LLL
MMM
NNN
OOO
PPP
QQQ
RRR
SSS
TTT
UUU
VVV
WWW
XXX
YYY
ZZZ

TOP

rwp David




rwp@1John:1:10 @{If we say} (\ean eip“men\). As in verses 6,8|. {We have not sinned} (\ouch hamartˆkamen\). Perfect active indicative of \hamartan“\. This is a denial of any specific acts of sin, while in verse 8|...the principle of sin. David Smith...(\pseustˆn\, the word used of the devil by Jesus in strkjv@John:8:44|), and the other ignorance of God's word, which is not in us, else we should not make such a claim.

rwp@1John:2:16 @{All that} (\pƒn to\). Collective use of the neuter singular as in strkjv@5:4|, like \pƒn ho\ in strkjv@John:6:37,39|. Three examples, not necessarily covering all sins, are given in the nominative in apposition with \pƒn to\. "The lust of the flesh" (\hˆ epithumia tˆs sarkos\, subjective genitive, lust felt by the flesh) may be illustrated by strkjv@Mark:4:19; strkjv@Galatians:5:17|. Songs:the genitive with \hˆ epithumia t“n ophthalm“n\ (the lust of the eyes) is subjective, lust with the eyes as organs as shown by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:5:28|. The use of the "movies" today for gain by lustful exhibitions is a case in point. For \alazoneia\ see on ¯James:4:16|, the only other N.T. example. \Alaz“n\ (a boaster) occurs in strkjv@Romans:1:30; strkjv@2Timothy:3:2|. \Bios\ (life) as in strkjv@3:17| is the external aspect (Luke:8:14|), not the inward principle (\z“ˆ\). David Smith thinks that, as in the case of Eve (Genesis:3:1-6|) and the temptations of Jesus (Matthew:4:1-11|), these three sins include all possible sins. But they are all "of the world" (\ek tou kosmou\) in origin, in no sense "of the Father" (\ek tou patros\). The problem for the believer is always how to be in the world and yet not of it (John:17:11,14ff.|).

rwp@Acts:2:25 @{Concerning him} (\eis auton\). Peter interprets strkjv@Psalms:16:8-11| as written by David and with reference to the Messiah. There is but one speaker in this Psalm and both Peter here and Paul in strkjv@Acts:13:36|...make it the Messiah. David is...(Knowling). {I beheld} (\proor“mˆn\). Imperfect middle without augment of \proora“\, common verb, but only twice in the N.T., to see beforehand (Acts:21:29|) or to see right before one as here. This idea of \pro-\ is made plainer by "before my face" (\en“pion mou\). {On my right hand} (\ek dexi“n mou\)...or advocate stands at David's right...(Psalms:109:31|). {That} (\hina\) here is almost result. {Moved} (\saleuth“\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \saleu“\, to shake like an earthquake.

rwp@Acts:2:29 @{I may say} (\exon eipein\). Supply \estin\ before \exon\, periphrastic present indicative of \exeimi\, to allow, permit. The Authorized Version has "Let me speak," supplying \esto\ present imperative. {Freely} (\meta parrˆsias\). Telling it all (\pan, rhˆsia\ from \eipon\, to speak), with fulness, with boldness. Luke is fond of the phrase (as in strkjv@4:13|). It is a new start for Simon Peter, full of boldness and courage. {The patriarch} (\tou patriarchou\). Transliteration of the word, from \patria\, family, and \arch“\, to rule, the founder of a family. Late word in LXX. Used of Abraham (Hebrews:7:4|), of the twelve sons of Jacob as founders of the several tribes (Acts:7:8|), and here of David as head of the family from whom the Messiah comes. {Was buried} (\etaphˆ\). Second aorist passive indicative of \thapt“\. His tomb was on Mt. Zion where most of the kings were buried. The tomb was said to have fallen into ruins in the time of the Emperor Hadrian. Josephus (_Ant_. XVI. 7, 1)...rifle the tomb of David....

rwp@Acts:2:31 @{Foreseeing} (\proid“n\). Second aorist active participle. Did it as a prophet. {Of the Christ} (\tou Christou\). Of the Messiah. See under verse 32|...statement by Peter that David knew...16| he was describing the resurrection of the Messiah.

rwp@Acts:2:34 @{Ascended not} (\ou--anebˆ\)...than that: For not David ascended...110:1|...in the case of David"... (Knowling). {Sit thou} (\kathou\). Late _Koin‚_ form for earlier \kathˆso\, present middle imperative second singular of \kathˆmai\.

rwp@Acts:2:35 @{Till I make} (\he“s an th“\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \tithˆmi\ with \an\ after \he“s\ for the future, a common Greek idiom. This dominion of Christ as Mediator will last till the plan of the kingdom is carried out (1Corinthians:15:23-28|). Complete subjugation will come, perhaps referring to the custom of victorious kings placing their feet upon the necks of their enemies (Joshua:10:24|). {Therefore assuredly} (\Asphal“s oun\). Assuredly therefore, without any slip or trip (\asphalˆs\ from \a\ privative and \sphall“\, to trip, to slip. Peter draws a powerfully pungent conclusion by the use of the adverb \asphal“s\ and the inferential conjunction \oun\. Peter's closing sentence drives home the point of his sermon: "This very Jesus whom ye crucified (note \humeis\, strongly emphatic {ye}), him God made both Lord and Messiah" (\kai kurion kai Christon\), as David foretold in strkjv@Psalms:110| and as the events of this day have confirmed. The critics are disturbed over how Luke could have gotten the substance of this masterful address spoken on the spur of the moment with passion and power. They even say that Luke composed it for Peter and put the words in his mouth. If so, he made a good job of it. But Peter could have written out the notes of the address afterwards. Luke had plenty of chances to get hold of it from Peter or from others.

rwp@Acts:3:13 @{His servant Jesus} (\ton paida Iˆsoun\). This phrase occurs in strkjv@Isaiah:42:1; strkjv@52:13| about the Messiah except the name "Jesus" which Peter adds, the first part of the quotation is from strkjv@Exodus:3:6; strkjv@5:30|. The LXX translated the Hebrew _ebhedh_ by \pais\, the servant of Jehovah being a Messianic designation. But the phrase "servant of God" (\pais theou\) is applied also to Israel (Luke:1:54|) and to David (Luke:1:69; strkjv@Acts:4:25|). Paul terms himself \doulos theou\ (Titus:1:1|). \Pais\ is just child (boy or girl), and it was also used of a slave (Matthew:8:6,8,13|). But it is not here \huios\ (son) that Peter uses, but \pais\. Luke quotes Peter as using it again in this Messianic sense in strkjv@Acts:3:26; strkjv@4:27,30|. {Whom ye delivered up} (\hon humeis men pared“kate\). Note emphatic use of \humeis\ (ye). No \de\ to correspond to \men\. First aorist active (\k\ aorist) plural indicative of \paradid“mi\ (usual form \paredote\, second aorist). {When he} (\ekeinou\). Emphatic pronoun, that one, in contrast with "ye" (\humeis\), genitive absolute with \krinantos\, here the nearest word (Pilate), the latter.

rwp@Acts:7:1 @{Are these things so?} (\ei tauta hout“s echei\). On this use of \ei\ in a direct question see on ¯1:6|. Literally "Do these things hold thus?" A formal question by the high priest like our "Do you plead guilty, or not guilty?" (Furneaux). The abrupt question of the high priest would serve to break the evident spell of the angelic look on Stephen's face. Two charges had been made against Stephen speaking against the holy temple, changing the customs which Moses had delivered. Stephen could not give a yes or no answer to these two charges. There was an element of truth in each of them and a large amount of error all mixed together. Songs:he undertakes to explain his real position by the historical method, that is to say, by a rapid survey of God's dealing with the people of Israel and the Gentiles. It is the same method adopted by Paul in Pisidian Antioch (Acts:13:16ff.|) after he had become the successor of Stephen in his interpretation of the universal mission of Christianity. If one is disposed to say that Luke made up this speech to suit Stephen's predicament, he has to explain how the style is less Lukan than the narrative portions of Acts with knowledge of Jewish traditions that a Greek would not be likely to know. Precisely how Luke obtained the data for the speech we do not know, but Saul heard it and Philip, one of the seven, almost certainly. Both could have given Luke help about it. It is even possible that some one took notes of this important address. We are to remember also that the speech was interrupted at the end and may not include all that Stephen meant to say. But enough is given to give us a good idea of how Stephen met the first charge "by showing that the worship of God is not confined to Jerusalem or the Jewish temple" (Page). Then he answers the second charge by proving that God had many dealings with their fathers before Moses came and that Moses foretold the coming of the Messiah who is now known to be Jesus. It is at this point (verse 51|) that Stephen becomes passionate and so powerful that the wolves in the Sanhedrin lose all self-control. It is a great and masterful exposition of the worldwide mission of the gospel of Christ in full harmony with the Great Commission of Christ. The apostles had been so busy answering the Sadducees concerning the Resurrection of Christ and maintaining their freedom to teach and preach that they had not pushed the world-...rightly interpret Joel and David in...(Furneaux).

rwp@Acts:7:46 @{Asked} (\ˆitˆsato\). Aorist middle (indirect) indicative, asked for himself (as a favour to himself). Cf. strkjv@2Samuel:7:2f|. {A habitation} (\skˆn“ma\). Like strkjv@Psalms:132:5|...was a house that David proposed...(2Samuel:7:2|), not a tent (\skˆnˆ\) which already existed. \Skˆn“ma\ here means a more permanent abode (\oikon\, house, in verse 47|), though from the same root as \skˆnˆ\.

rwp@Acts:7:48 @{Howbeit} (\all'\)...what Solomon did and David planned....(\all' ouch\), "But not does the Most High dwell." The presence of the Most High is not confined in any building, even one so splendid as Solomon's Temple as Solomon himself foresaw and acknowledged in his prayer (1Kings:8:27; strkjv@2Chronicles:6:18|). {In houses made with hands} (\en cheiropoiˆtois\). No word here for "houses" or "temples" in correct text (\naois\ temples in Textus Receptus). Literally, "In things made with hands" (\cheir\, hand, \poiˆtos\, verbal adjective of \poie“\). It occurs in strkjv@Mark:14:58| of the temple and of the sanctuary of Moab (Isaiah:16:12|). It occurs also in strkjv@Acts:7:24; strkjv@Hebrews:9:11,24; strkjv@Ephesians:2:11|. Common in the old Greek. {The prophet} (\ho prophˆtˆs\). strkjv@Isaiah:66:1|. Isaiah taught plainly that heaven is God's throne.

rwp@Acts:13:22 @{When he had removed him} (\metastˆsas auton\). First aorist active participle of \methistˆmi\, old verb to transfer, to transpose (note force of \meta\). This verb occurs in strkjv@Luke:16:4| by the unjust steward about his removal from office. Cf. strkjv@1Samuel:15:16|. {To be} (\eis\). As or for, Greek idiom like the Hebrew _le_, common in the LXX. {A man after my heart} (\andra kata tˆn kardian mou\). The words quoted by Paul as a direct saying of God are a combination of strkjv@Psalms:89:20, 21; strkjv@1Samuel:13:14| (...Lord to Samuel about David...)...that the commendation of David is...(Psalms:51|). Note "wills" (\thelˆmata\), plural, of God.

rwp@Acts:13:23 @{Of this man's seed} (\toutou apo tou spermatos\). Emphatic position of \toutou\. Of this one from the (his) seed. {According to promise} (\kat' epaggelian\). This phrase in strkjv@Galatians:3:29; strkjv@2Timothy:1:1|. See the promise in strkjv@2Samuel:7:2; strkjv@Psalms:132:11; strkjv@Isaiah:11:1,10; strkjv@Jeremiah:23:5f.; strkjv@Zechariah:3:8|. In strkjv@Zechariah:3:8| the verb \ag“\ is used of the sending of the Messiah as here. {A Saviour Jesus} (\S“tˆra Iˆsoun\). Jesus is in apposition with Saviour (accusative case) and comes at the end of the sentence in contrast with "this man" (David)...in the flesh from David. By...(Romans:9:6f.|).

rwp@Acts:13:34 @{Now no more to return to corruption} (\mˆketi mellonta hupostrephein eis diaphthoran\). No longer about to return as Lazarus did. Jesus did not die again and so is the first fruits of the resurrection (1Corinthians:15:23; strkjv@Romans:6:9|). {He hath spoken} (\eirˆken\). Present perfect active indicative, common way of referring to the permanent utterances of God which are on record in the Scriptures. {...and sure blessings of David...} (\ta hosia Daueid ta pista\). See strkjv@2Samuel:7:13|..."the holy things of David the...

rwp@Acts:15:15 @{To this agree} (\tout“i sumph“nousin\). Associative instrumental case (\tout“i\) after \sumph“nousin\ (voice together with, symphony with, harmonize with), from \sumph“ne“\, old verb seen already in strkjv@Matthew:18:19; strkjv@Luke:5:36; strkjv@Acts:5:9| which see. James cites only strkjv@Amos:9:11,12| from the LXX as an example of "the words of the prophets" (\hoi logoi t“n prophˆt“n\) to which he refers on this point. The somewhat free quotation runs here through verses 16-18| of strkjv@Acts:15|...the restoration of the Davidic empire,...(the throne of David his father," strkjv@Luke:1:32|).

rwp@Acts:15:16 @{I will build again} (\anoikodomˆs“\). Here LXX has \anastˆs“\. Compound (\ana\, up or again) of \oikodome“\, the verb used by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| of the general church or kingdom as here which see. {The tabernacle of David} (\tˆn skˆnˆn Daueid\)...of the throne of David... (2Samuel:7:12|) now "the fallen tent" (\tˆn pept“kuian\), perfect active participle of \pipt“\, state of completion. {The ruins thereof} (\ta katestrammena autˆs\). Literally, "the ruined portions of it." Perfect passive participle of \katastreph“\...torn down tent of David.... {I will let it up} (\anorth“s“\). Old verb from \anortho“\ (\ana, orthos\), to set upright. See on strkjv@Luke:3:13| of the old woman whose crooked back was set straight.

rwp@Hebrews:4:7 @{He again defineth a certain day} (\palin tina horizei hˆmeran\). Present active indicative of \horiz“\, old verb to set a limit (\horos\, horizon) as in strkjv@Acts:17:26; strkjv@Romans:1:4|. {In David} (\en Daueid\)...Attributing the Psalm to David or...{Hath been before said} (\proeirˆtai\). Perfect passive indicative referring to the quotation in strkjv@3:7,15|. {After so long a time} (\meta tosouton chronon\)...time between Joshua and David....

rwp@John:13:1 @{Now before the feast of the passover} (\pro de tˆs heortˆs tou pascha\). Just before, John means, not twenty-four hours before, that is our Thursday evening (beginning of 15th of Nisan, sunset to sunset Jewish day), since Jesus was crucified on Friday 15th of Nisan. Hence Jesus ate the regular passover meal at the usual time. The whole feast, including the feast of unleavened bread, lasted eight days. For a discussion of the objections to this interpretation of John in connexion with the Synoptic Gospels one may consult my _Harmony of the Gospels_, pp. 279-84, and David Smith's _In the Days of His Flesh_, Appendix VIII. The passover feast began on the 15th Nisan at sunset, the passover lamb being slain the afternoon of 14th Nisan. There seems no real doubt that this meal in strkjv@John:13:1-30| is the real passover meal described by the Synoptics also (Mark:14:18-21; strkjv@Matthew:26:21-25; strkjv@Luke:22:21-23|), followed by the institution of the Lord's Supper. Thus understood verse 1| here serves as an introduction to the great esoteric teaching of Christ to the apostles (John:13:2-17:26|), called by Barnas Sears _The Heart of Christ_. This phrase goes with the principal verb \ˆgapˆsen\ (loved). {Knowing} (\eid“s\). Second perfect active participle, emphasizing the full consciousness of Christ. He was not stumbling into the dark as he faced "his hour" (\autou hˆ h“ra\). See strkjv@18:4; strkjv@19:28| for other examples of the insight and foresight (Bernard) of Jesus concerning his death. See on strkjv@12:23| for use before by Jesus. {That he should depart} (\hina metabˆi\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist active subjunctive of \metabain“\, old word, to go from one place to another, here (5:24; strkjv@1John:3:14|) to go from this world (8:23|) back to the Father from whom he had come (14:12,28; strkjv@16:10,28; strkjv@17:5|). {His own which were in the world} (\tous idious tous en t“i kosm“i\). His own disciples (17:6,9,11|), those left in the world when he goes to the Father, not the Jews as in strkjv@1:11|. See strkjv@Acts:4:23; strkjv@1Timothy:5:8| for the idiom. John pictures here the outgoing of Christ's very heart's love (chs. strkjv@John:13-17|) towards these men whom he had chosen and whom he loved "unto the end" (\eis telos\) as in strkjv@Matthew:10:22; strkjv@Luke:18:15|, but here as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:16| rather "to the uttermost." The culmination of the crisis ("his hour") naturally drew out the fulness of Christ's love for them as is shown in these great chapters (John:13-17|).

rwp@Luke:1:33 @{Shall be no end} (\ouk estai telos\)...the perpetuity of this Davidic kingdom...(Luke:1:27|) and Mary also apparently (Luke:2:5|).

rwp@Luke:2:5 @{To enrol himself with Mary} (\apograpsasthai sun Mariam\)...to the house of David. It...(\anebˆ\) in verse 4|...was a descendant of David and...3:23-38|)...house and city of David.... {Betrothed} (\emnˆsteumenˆn\). Same verb as in strkjv@1:27|, but here it really means "married" or "espoused" as strkjv@Matthew:1:24f.| shows. Otherwise she could not have travelled with Joseph. {Great with child} (\enku“i\). Only here in N.T. Common Greek word.

rwp@Luke:2:8 @{Abiding in the field} (\agraulountes\). From \agros\, field and \aulˆ\, court. The shepherds were making the field their court. Plutarch and Strabo use the word. {Keeping watch} (\phulassontes phulakas\)...In these very pastures David had...(1Samuel:17:34f.|). The plural here probably means that they watched by turns. The flock may have been meant for the temple sacrifices. There is no way to tell.

rwp@Luke:3:23 @{Jesus Himself} (\autos Iˆsous\). Emphatic intensive pronoun calling attention to the personality of Jesus at this juncture. When he entered upon his Messianic work. {When he began to teach} (\archomenos\). The words "to teach" are not in the Greek text. The Authorized Version "began to be about thirty years of age," is an impossible translation. The Revised Version rightly supplies "to teach" (\didaskein\) after the present participle \archomenos\. Either the infinitive or the participle can follow \archomai\, usually the infinitive in the _Koin‚_. It is not necessary to supply anything (Acts:1:22|). {Was about thirty years of age} (\ˆn h“sei et“n triakonta\). Tyndale has it right "Jesus was about thirty yere of age when he beganne." Luke does not commit himself definitely to precisely thirty years as the age of Christ. The Levites entered upon full service at that age, but that proves nothing about Jesus. God's prophets enter upon their task when the word of God comes to them. Jesus may have been a few months under or over thirty or a year or two less or more. {Being Son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli} (\“n huios h“s enomizeto I“sˆph tou Helei\). For the discussion of the genealogy of Jesus see on ¯Matthew:1:1-17|. The two genealogies differ very widely and many theories have been proposed about them. At once one notices that Luke begins with Jesus and goes back to Adam, the Son of God, while Matthew begins with Abraham and comes to "Joseph the husband of Mary of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ" (Matthew:1:16|). Matthew employs the word "begot" each time, while Luke has the article \tou\ repeating \huiou\ (Son)...differ from Joseph to David except...(\h“s enomizeto\). His own narrative in strkjv@Luke:1:26-38| has shown that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. Plummer objects that, if Luke is giving the genealogy of Jesus through Mary, \huios\ must be used in two senses here (son as was supposed of Joseph, and grandson through Mary of Heli). But that is not an unheard of thing. In neither list does Matthew or Luke give a complete genealogy. Just as Matthew uses "begat" for descent, so does Luke employ "son" in the same way for descendant. It was natural for Matthew, writing for Jews, to give the legal genealogy through Joseph, though he took pains to show in strkjv@Matthew:1:16,18-25| that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. It was equally natural for Luke, a Greek himself and writing for the whole world, to give the actual genealogy of Jesus through Mary. It is in harmony with Pauline universality (Plummer) that Luke carries the genealogy back to Adam and does not stop with Abraham. It is not clear why Luke adds "the Son of God" after Adam (3:38|). Certainly he does not mean that Jesus is the Son of God only in the sense that Adam is. Possibly he wishes to dispose of the heathen myths about the origin of man and to show that God is the Creator of the whole human race, Father of all men in that sense. No mere animal origin of man is in harmony with this conception.

rwp@Luke:20:42 @{For David himself} (\autos gar Daueid\)...means that he treats David as...110|. The inspiration of this Psalm is expressly stated in strkjv@Mark:12:36; strkjv@Matthew:22:43| (which see)...current acceptation of the Davidic authorship....110|. Meanwhile one can certainly be excused for accepting the natural implication of the words of Jesus here, "David himself." {In the book of the Psalms} (\en bibl“i Psalm“n\). Compare strkjv@3:4| "in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet."

rwp@Mark:2:26 @{The house of God} (\ton oikon tou theou\). The tent or tabernacle at Nob, not the temple in Jerusalem built by Solomon. {When Abiathar was high priest} (\epi Abiathar archiere“s\). Neat Greek idiom, in the time of Abiathar as high priest. There was confusion in the Massoretic text and in the LXX about the difference between Ahimelech (Abimelech) and Abiathar (2Samuel:8:17|), Ahimelech's son and successor (1Samuel:21:2; strkjv@22:20|). Apparently Ahimelech, not Abiathar was high priest at this time. It is possible that both father and son bore both names (1Samuel:22:20; strkjv@2Samuel:8:17; strkjv@1Chronicles:18:16|), Abiathar mentioned though both involved. \Epi\ may so mean in the passage about Abiathar. Or we may leave it unexplained. They had the most elaborate rules for the preparation of the shewbread (\tous artous tˆs prothese“s\)...went. This is what David ate....

rwp@Mark:12:35 @{How say the scribes} (\P“s legousin hoi grammateis\). The opponents of Jesus are silenced, but he answers them and goes on teaching (\didask“n\) in the temple as before the attacks began that morning (11:27|). They no longer dare to question Jesus, but he has one to put to them "while the Pharisees were gathered together" (Matthew:22:41|). The question is not a conundrum or scriptural puzzle (Gould), but "He contents himself with pointing out a difficulty, in the solution of which lay the key to the whole problem of His person and work" (Swete)...be the son of David... (John:7:41|)...as the son of David... (Matthew:21:9|)...overlooked the fact that David in...110:1| called the Messiah his Lord also. The deity and the humanity of the Messiah are both involved in the problem. strkjv@Matthew:22:45| observes that "no one was able to answer him a word."

rwp@Mark:15:13 @{Crucify him} (\Staur“son auton\). strkjv@Luke:23:21| repeats the verb. strkjv@Matthew:27:22|...to the Son of David in...¯Matthew:27:23| for discussion of strkjv@Mark:15:14|.

rwp@Matthew:1:1 @{The Son of David, the son of Abraham} (\huiou Daueid huiou Abraam\)...side the son of David, as...(\bˆn\) for the quality or character, but here the idea is descent. Christians are called sons of God because Christ has bestowed this dignity upon us (Romans:8:14; strkjv@9:26; strkjv@Galatians:3:26; strkjv@4:5-7|). Verse 1 is the description of the list in verses 2-17|...three groups, Abraham to David... (2-6|), David to Babylon Removal (6-11|), Jechoniah to Jesus (12-16|). The removal to Babylon (\metoikesias Babul“nos\) occurs at the end of verse 11|, the beginning of verse 12|, and twice in the resume in verse 17|. This great event is used to mark off the two last divisions from each other. It is a good illustration of the genitive as the case of genus or kind. The Babylon removal could mean either to Babylon or from Babylon or, indeed, the removal of Babylon. But the readers would know the facts from the Old Testament, the removal of the Jews to Babylon. Then verse 17|...in each by counting David twice...(Thamar, Rahab, Ruth, Bathsheba the wife of Uriah) are likewise not counted. But it is a most interesting list.

rwp@Matthew:1:2 @{Begat} (\egennˆsen\). This word comes, like some of the early chapters of Genesis, with regularity through verse 16, until the birth of Jesus is reached when there is a sudden change. The word itself does not always mean immediate parentage, but merely direct descent. In verse 16| we have "Joseph the husband of Mary, from whom was begotten Jesus who is called Christ" (\ton I“sˆph ton andra Marias ex hˆs egennˆthˆ Iˆsous ho legomenos Christos\)...In the case of David the...(1:6|) and Joseph the husband of Mary (1:16|) the article is repeated. The mention of the brethren of Judah (1:2|) and of both Phares and Zara (1:3|) may show that Matthew was not copying a family pedigree but making his own table. All the Greek manuscripts give verse 16| as above save the Ferrar Group of minuscules which are supported by the Sinaitic Syriac Version. Because of this fact Von Soden, whose text Moffatt translates, deliberately prints his text "_Jacob begat Jesus_" (\I“sˆph de egennˆsen Iˆsoun\). But the Sinaitic Syriac gives the Virgin Birth of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:1:18-25|. Hence it is clear that "begat" here in strkjv@1:16| must merely mean line of descent or the text has been tampered with in order to get rid of the Virgin Birth idea, but it was left untouched in strkjv@1:18-25|. I have a full discussion of the problem in chapter XIV of _Studies in the Text of the New Testament_. The evidence as it now stands does not justify changing the text of the Greek uncials to suit the Sinaitic Syriac. The Virgin Birth of Jesus remains in strkjv@1:16|. The spelling of these Hebrew names in English is usually according to the Hebrew form, not the Greek. In the Greek itself the Hebrew spelling is often observed in violation of the Greek rules for the ending of words with no consonants save _n,r,s_. But the list is not spelled consistently in the Greek, now like the Hebrew as in Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, now like the Greek as in Judah, Solomon, Hezekiah, though the Hebrew style prevails.

rwp@Matthew:2:1 @{In Bethlehem of Judea} (\en Bˆthleem tˆs 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. strkjv@1:5|)...and the home of David, descendant...(Mt. strkjv@1:5|). David was born here and anointed king by Samuel (1Samuel:17:12|)...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 strkjv@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\). Possibly Joseph had delayed the journey for some reason till now it approached the time for the birth of the child.

rwp@Matthew:2:5 @{And they said unto him} (\hoi de eipan aut“i\)...of the seed of David... (John:7:42|). Songs:they quote strkjv@Micah:5:2|, "a free paraphrase" Alford calls it, for it is not precisely like the Hebrew text or like the Septuagint. It may have come from a collection of _testimonia_ with which J. Rendel Harris has made the world familiar. He had consulted the experts and now he has their answer. Bethlehem of Judah is the place. The use of the perfect passive indicative (\gegraptai\) is the common form in quoting scripture. It stands written. {Shall be shepherd} (\poimanei\). The Authorized Version had "shall rule," but "shepherd" is correct. "Homer calls kings 'the shepherds of the people'" (Vincent). In strkjv@Hebrews:13:20| Jesus is called "the great shepherd of the sheep." Jesus calls himself "the good shepherd" (John:10:11|). Peter calls Christ "the chief shepherd" (1Peter:2:25|). "The Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall be their shepherd" (Revelation:7:17|). Jesus told Peter to "shepherd" the lambs (John:21:16|). Our word pastor means shepherd.

rwp@Matthew:12:3 @{What David did} (\ti epoiˆsen Daueid\)...to the conduct of David... (2Samuel:21:6|). David and those with him did "what was not lawful" (\ho ouk exon ˆn\) precisely the charge made against the disciples (\ho ouk exestin\ in verse 2|).

rwp@Revelation:1:18 @{And I was dead} (\kai egenomˆn nekros\). "And I be came dead" (aorist middle participle of \ginomai\ as in strkjv@1:9,10|, definite reference to the Cross). {I am alive} (\z“n eimi\). Periphrastic present active indicative, "I am living," as the words \ho z“n\ just used mean. {Forevermore} (\eis tous ai“nas t“n ai“n“n\). "Unto the ages of the ages," a stronger expression of eternity even than in strkjv@1:6|. {The keys} (\tas kleis\). One of the forms for the accusative plural along with \kleidas\, the usual one (Matthew:16:19|). {Of death and of Hades} (\tou thanatou kai tou hƒidou\). Conceived as in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| as a prison house or walled city. The keys are the symbol of authority, as we speak of honouring one by giving him the keys of the city. Hades here means the unseen world to which death is the portal. Jesus has the keys because of his victory over death. See this same graphic picture in strkjv@6:8; strkjv@20:13f|...For the key of David see...3:7|, for the key of the abyss see strkjv@9:1; strkjv@20:1|.

rwp@Revelation:21:7 @{He that overcometh} (\ho nik“n\). Recalls the promises at the close of each of the Seven Letters in chapters 2 and 3. {Shall inherit} (\klˆronomˆsei\). Future active of \klˆronome“\, word with great history (Mark:10:17; strkjv@1Peter:1:4; strkjv@Galatians:4:7; strkjv@Romans:8:17|), here interpreted for the benefit of these who share in Christ's victory. {I will be his God} (\Esomai aut“i theos\). Repeated Old Testament promise (first to Abraham, strkjv@Genesis:17:7f.|). Cf. strkjv@Revelation:21:3|. {He shall be my son} (\autos estai moi huios\). Made first of Solomon (2Samuel:7:14|) and applied to David later in strkjv@Psalms:89:26f|.

rwp@Romans:1:3 @{Concerning his Son} (\peri tou huiou autou\). Just as Jesus found himself in the O.T. (Luke:24:27,46|). The deity of Christ here stated. {According to the flesh} (\kata sarka\)...For the descent from David see...1:1,6,20; strkjv@Luke:1:27; strkjv@John:7:42; strkjv@Acts:13:23|, etc.


Seeker Overlay: Off On
Bible:
Bible:
Book: