rwp H
rwp@2Peter:1:3 @{Seeing that his divine power hath granted unto us} (\hs hmin ts theias dunames autou dedrmens\). Genitive absolute with the causal particle \hs\ and the perfect middle participle of \dre\, old verb, to bestow (\drea\, gift), usually middle as here, in N.T. elsewhere only strkjv@Mark:15:45|. \Autou\ refers to Christ, who has "divine power" (\ts theias dunames\), since he is \theos\ (1:1|). \Theios\ (from \theos\) is an old adjective in N.T. here and verse 4| only, except strkjv@Acts:17:29|, where Paul uses \to theion\ for deity, thus adapting his language to his audience as the papyri and inscriptions show. The use of \theios\ with an imperial connotation is very common in the papyri and the inscriptions. Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, pp. 360-368) has shown the singular linguistic likeness between strkjv@2Peter:1:3-11|...to Zeus Panhemerios and Hecate dated...22 (...full in C I H ii...2715 a b). One of the likenesses is the use of \ts theias dunames\. Peter may have read this inscription (cf. Paul in Athens) or he may have used "the familiar forms and formulae of religious emotion" (Deissmann), "the official liturgical language of Asia Minor." Peter is fond of \dunamis\ in this Epistle, and the \dunamis\ of Christ "is the sword which St. Peter holds over the head of the False Teachers" (Bigg). {All things that pertain unto life and godliness} (\panta ta pros zn kai eusebeian\). "All the things for life and godliness." The new life in Christ who is the mystery of godliness (1Timothy:3:16|). \Eusebeia\ with its cognates (\eusebs, eusebs, eusebe\) occurs only in this Epistle, Acts, and the Pastoral Epistles (from \eu\, well, and \sebomai\, to worship). {Of him that called us} (\tou kalesantos\). Genitive of the articular first aorist active participle of \kale\. Christ called Peter and all other Christians. {By his own glory and virtue} (\dia doxs kai arets\). Songs:B K L, but Aleph A C P read \idii doxi kai areti\ (either instrumental case "by" or dative "to"). Peter is fond of \idios\ (own, strkjv@1Peter:3:1,5; strkjv@2Peter:2:16,22|, etc.). "Glory" here is the manifestation of the Divine Character in Christ. For \aret\ see on ¯1Peter:2:9| and strkjv@Phillipians:4:8; strkjv@2Peter:1:5|.
rwp@Acts:1:1 @_The Title_ is simply _Acts_ (\Praxeis\)...Aleph, Origen, Tertullian, Didymus, Hilary, Eusebius,..._The Acts of the Apostles_ (\Praxeis apostoln\) is the reading of B D (Aleph in subscription)...Cyril of Jerusalem, Theodoret, Hilary.... _The Acts of the Holy Apostles_ (\Praxeis tn hagin apostoln\) is read by A2 E G H A K Chrysostom. It is possible that the book was given no title at all by Luke, for it is plain that usage varied greatly even in the same writers. The long title as found in the Textus Receptus (Authorized Version) is undoubtedly wrong with the adjective "Holy." The reading of B D, "_The Acts of the Apostles_," may be accepted as probably correct.
rwp@Acts:10:37 @{Ye know} (\humeis oidate\). Peter reminds his Gentile audience that the main facts concerning Jesus and the gospel were known to them. Note emphatic expression of \humeis\ (you). {Beginning} (\arxamenos\). The Textus Receptus has \arxamenon\ (accusative)...B C D E H and...\rhma\ used in the sense of message or story as told by the disciples. The nominative does not agree with anything in the sentence. The same phrase occurs in strkjv@Luke:23:5|. Here is this aorist middle participle almost used like an adverb. See a similar loose use of \arxamenos\ in the same sense by Peter in strkjv@Acts:1:22|. The baptism of John is given as the _terminus a quo_. The story began with a skip to Galilee after the baptism just like the Gospel of Mark. This first message of Peter to the Gentiles (10:37-44|) corresponds in broad outline with Mark's Gospel. Mark heard Peter preach many times and evidently planned his Gospel (the Roman Gospel) on this same model. There is in it nothing about the birth and childhood of Jesus nor about the intervening ministry supplied by John's Gospel for the period (a year) between the baptism and the Galilean Ministry. Peter here presents an objective statement of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus with proof from the Scriptures that he is the Messiah. It is a skilful presentation.
rwp@Acts:11:20 @{Spake} (\elaloun\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to speak. For them it was an experiment. {Unto the Greeks also} (\kai pros tous Hellnas\)...reading in spite of Hellenists... (\Hellnistas\)...Jews in B E H L...\Hellnas\ is read by A and D and a corrector of Aleph. The presence of "also" or "even" (\kai\)...unless "Greeks" is correct. Hellenists or...2; 6|...had preached to the Hellenists in...(9:29|). Hellenists were merely one kind of Jews in contrast with those who spoke Aramaic (Acts:6|). It is true that the case of Cornelius was first in importance, but it is not clear that it was before the work in Antioch. Probably the report of the work among the Greeks in Antioch reached Jerusalem after Peter's defence in strkjv@11:1-18|. That explains the calm tone about it and also why Barnabas and not Peter was sent to investigate. Peter and John (Acts:8|)...the Romans in Caesarea. His position...-known and his services discounted for this new crisis. These Greeks in Antioch were apparently in part pure heathen and not "God-...These preachers were themselves Hellenists... (verse 19|) and open to the lessons from their environment without a vision such as Peter had at Joppa. "It was a departure of startling boldness" (Furneaux) by laymen outside of the circle of official leaders.
rwp@Acts:24:7 @This whole verse with some words at the end of verse 6| and the beginning of verse 8| in the Textus Receptus ("And would have judged according to our law. But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands, commanding his accusers to come unto thee")...from Aleph A B H L...61 (many other cursives) Sahidic Bohairic. It is beyond doubt a later addition to the incomplete report of the speech of Tertullus. As the Revised Version stands, verse 8| connects with verse 6|. The motive of the added words is clearly to prejudice Felix against Lysias and they contradict the record in strkjv@Acts:21|. Furneaux holds them to be genuine and omitted because contradictory to strkjv@Acts:21|. More likely they are a clumsy attempt to complete the speech of Tertullus.
rwp@Colossians:1:11 @{Strengthened} (\dunamoumenoi\). Present passive participle of late verb \dunamo\ (from \dunamis\)...N.T. only here and Hebrews:...11:34| and MSS. in strkjv@Ephesians:6:10| (W H in margin). {According to the might of his glory} (\kata to kratos ts doxs autou\). \Kratos\ is old word for perfect strength (cf. \krate, kratilos\)...applied only to God. Here his...(_Shekinah_). {Unto all patience and longsuffering} (\eis psan hupomonn kai makrothumian\). See both together also in strkjv@James:5:10f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:4,6; strkjv@2Timothy:3:10|. \Hupomon\ is remaining under (\hupomen\) difficulties without succumbing, while \makrothumia\ is the long endurance that does not retaliate (Trench).
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}