[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 estin




rwp@1Corinthians:3:11 @{Other foundation} (\themelion allon\). The gender of the adjective is here masculine as is shown by \allon\. If neuter, it would be \allo\. It is masculine because Paul has Christ in mind. It is not here \heteron\ a different kind of gospel (\heteron euaggelion\, strkjv@Galatians:1:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:4|) which is not another (\allo\, strkjv@Galatians:1:7|) in reality. But another Jesus (2Corinthians:11:4|, \allon Iˆsoun\) is a reflection on the one Lord Jesus. Hence there is no room on the platform with Jesus for another Saviour, whether Buddha, Mahomet, Dowie, Eddy, or what not. Jesus Christ is the one foundation and it is gratuitous impudence for another to assume the role of Foundation. {Than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus} (\para ton keimenon, hos estin Iˆsous Christos\). Literally, "alongside (\para\) the one laid (\keimenon\)," already laid (present middle participle of \keimai\, used here as often as the perfect passive of \tithˆmi\ in place of \tetheimenon\). Paul scouts the suggestion that one even in the interest of so-called "new thought" will dare to lay beside Jesus another foundation for religion. And yet I have seen an article by a professor in a theological seminary in which he advocates regarding Jesus as a landmark, not as a goal, not as a foundation. Clearly Paul means that on this one true foundation, Jesus Christ, one must build only what is in full harmony with the Foundation which is Jesus Christ. If one accuses Paul of narrowness, it can be replied that the architect has to be narrow in the sense of building here and not there. A broad foundation will be too thin and unstable for a solid and abiding structure. It can be said also that Paul is here merely repeating the claim of Jesus himself on this very subject when he quoted strkjv@Psalms:118:22f.| to the members of the Sanhedrin who challenged his authority (Mark:11:10f.; strkjv@Matthew:21:42-45; strkjv@Luke:20:17f.|). Apostles and prophets go into this temple of God, but Christ Jesus is the chief corner stone (\akrog“naios\, strkjv@Ephesians:2:20|). All believers are living stones in this temple (1Peter:2:5|). But there is only one foundation possible.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:22 @{The Lord's freedman} (\apeleutheros Kuriou\). \Apeleutheros\ is an old word for a manumitted slave, \eleutheros\ from \erchomai\, to go and so go free, \ap-\ from bondage. Christ is now the owner of the Christian and Paul rejoices to call himself Christ's slave (\doulos\). But Christ set us free from sin by paying the ransom (\lutron\) of his life on the Cross (Matthew:20:28; strkjv@Romans:8:2; strkjv@Galatians:5:1|). Christ is thus the _patronus_ of the _libertus_ who owes everything to his _patronus_. He is no longer the slave of sin (Romans:6:6,18|), but a slave to God (Romans:6:22|). {Likewise the freeman when called is Christ's slave} (\homoi“s ho eleutheros klˆtheis doulos estin Christou\). Those who were not slaves, but freemen, when converted, are as much slaves of Christ as those who were and still were slaves of men. All were slaves of sin and have been set free from sin by Christ who now owns them all.

rwp@1Corinthians:12:14 @{Is not one member} (\ouk estin hen melos\). The point sounds like a truism, but it is the key to the whole problem of church life both local and general. Vincent refers to the fable of the body and the members by Menenius Agrippa (Livy, II, 32), but it was an old parable. Socrates pointed out how absurd it would be if feet and hands should work against one another when God made them to cooperate (Xen., _Mem_. II. iii. 18). Seneca alludes to it as does Marcus Aurelius and Marcus Antoninus.

rwp@1Corinthians:12:15 @{If the foot shall say} (\ean eipˆi ho pous\). Condition of third class (\ean\ and second aorist subjunctive \eipˆi\). In case the foot say. {I am not of the body} (\ouk eimi ek tou s“matos\). I am independent of the body, not dependent on the body. {It is not therefore not of the body} (\ou para touto ouk estin ek tou s“matos\). Thinking or saying so does not change the fact. \Para touto\ here means "alongside of this" (cf. IV Macc. strkjv@10:19) and so "because of," a rare use (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 616). The two negatives (\ou--ouk\) do not here destroy one another. Each retains its full force.

rwp@1John:2:22 @{The liar} (\ho pseustˆs\). The liar (with the article) _par excellence_. Rhetorical question to sharpen the point made already about lying in strkjv@1:6,10; strkjv@2:4,21|. See strkjv@5:5| for a like rhetorical question. {But} (\ei mˆ\). Except, if not. {That denieth that Jesus is the Christ} (\ho arnoumenos hoti Iˆsous ouk estin ho Christos\). Common Greek idiom for \ouk\ to appear after \arneomai\ like redundant \mˆ\ in strkjv@Luke:20:27; strkjv@Hebrews:12:19|. The old Latin retains _non_ here as old English did (Shakespeare, _Comedy of Errors_ IV. ii. 7, "He denied you had in him no right"). The Cerinthian Gnostics denied the identity of the man Jesus and Christ (an \aeon\, they held) like the modern Jesus or Christ controversy. {This is the antichrist} (\houtos estin ho antichristos\). The one just mentioned, Cerinthus himself in particular. {Even he that denieth the Father and the Son} (\ho arnoumenos ton patera kai ton huion\). This is the inevitable logic of such a rejection of the Son of God. Jesus had himself said this very same thing (John:5:23f.|).

rwp@1John:2:25 @{And this is the promise} (\kai hautˆ estin hˆ epaggelia\). See strkjv@1:5| for the same idiom with \aggelia\ (message). This is the only instance of \epaggelia\ in the Johannine writings. Here "the promise" is explained to be "the life eternal" (1:2|). In strkjv@Acts:1:4| the word is used for the coming of the Holy Spirit. {He promised} (\autos epˆggeilato\). First aorist middle indicative of \epaggell“\. \Autos\ (he) is Christ as is seen in strkjv@3:3| by \ekeinos\.

rwp@1John:2:27 @{And as for you} (\kai humeis\). Prolepsis again as in verse 24|. {Which ye received of him} (\ho elabete ap' autou\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban“\, a definite experience, this anointing (\chrisma\), from Christ himself as in verse 20|. This Paraclete was promised by Christ (John:14:26; strkjv@16:13ff.|) and came on the great Pentecost, as they knew, and in the experience of all who yielded themselves to the Holy Spirit. {That any one teach you} (\hina tis didaskˆi humas\). Sub-final use of \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \didask“\, "that any one keep on teaching you." {Teacheth you} (\didaskei humas\). Present active indicative. The Holy Spirit was to bring all things to their remembrance (John:14:26|) and to bear witness concerning Christ (John:15:26; strkjv@16:12-15|). Yet they need to be reminded of what they already know to be "true" (\alˆthes\) and "no lie" (\ouk estin pseudos\), according to John's habit of positive and negative (1:5|). Songs:he exhorts them to "abide in him" (\menete en aut“i\, imperative active, though same form as the indicative). Precisely so Jesus had urged that the disciples abide in him (John:15:4f.|).

rwp@1John:3:4 @{Sin is lawlessness} (\hˆ hamartia estin hˆ anomia\). The article with both subject and predicate makes them coextensive and so interchangeable. Doing sin is the converse of doing righteousness (2:29|). The present active participle (\poi“n\) means the habit of doing sin.

rwp@1John:3:10 @{In this} (\en tout“i\). As already shown. A life of sin is proof that one is a child of the devil and not of God. This is the line of cleavage that is obvious to all. See strkjv@John:8:33-39| for the claim of the Pharisees to be the children of Abraham, whereas their conduct showed them to be children of the devil. This is not a popular note with an age that wishes to remove all distinctions between Christians and the world. {Doeth not righteousness} (\ho mˆ poi“n dikaiosunˆn\). Habit (linear present participle) again of not doing righteousness, as in verse 7| of doing it. Cf. \poiei\ and \mˆ poi“n\ (doing and not doing) in strkjv@Matthew:7:24,26|. {Neither} (\kai\). Literally, "and," but with the ellipsis of \ouk estin ek tou theou\ (is not of God). The addition here of this one item about not loving (\mˆ agap“n\) one's brother is like Paul's summary in strkjv@Romans:13:9|, a striking illustration of the general principle just laid down and in accord with strkjv@2:9-11|.

rwp@1John:3:20 @{Whereinsoever our heart condemn us} (\hoti ean katagin“skˆi hˆm“n hˆ kardia\). A construction like \hoti an\, whatever, in strkjv@John:2:5; strkjv@14:13|. \Katagin“sk“\ occurs only three times in the N.T., here, verse 21; strkjv@Galatians:2:11|. It means to know something against one, to condemn. {Because God is greater than our heart} (\hoti meiz“n estin tˆs kardias hˆm“n\). Ablative \kardias\ after the comparative \meiz“n\. {And knoweth all things} (\kai gin“skei panta\). Just so Peter replied to Jesus in spite of his denials (John:21:17|). God's omniscience is linked with his love and sympathy. God knows every secret in our hearts. This difficult passage strikes the very centre of Christian truth (Brooke).

rwp@1John:5:1 @{That Jesus is the Christ} (\hoti Iˆsous estin ho Christos\). The Cerinthian antichrist denies the identity of Jesus and Christ (2:22|). Hence John insists on this form of faith (\pisteu“n\ here in the full sense, stronger than in strkjv@3:23; strkjv@4:16|, seen also in \pistis\ in verse 4|, where English and Latin fall down in having to use another word for the verb) as he does in verse 5| and in accord with the purpose of John's Gospel (20:31|). Nothing less will satisfy John, not merely intellectual conviction, but full surrender to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. "The Divine Begetting is the antecedent, not the consequent of the believing" (Law). For "is begotten of God" (\ek tou theou gegennˆtai\) see strkjv@2:29; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@4:7; strkjv@5:4,18|. John appeals here to family relationship and family love. {Him that begat} (\ton gennˆsanta\). First aorist active articular participle of \genna“\, to beget, the Father (our heavenly Father). {Him also that is begotten of him} (\ton gegennˆmenon ex autou\). Perfect passive articular participle of \genna“\, the brother or sister by the same father. Songs:then we prove our love for the common Father by our conduct towards our brothers and sisters in Christ.

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} (\pƒn to gegennˆmenon 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 strkjv@John:3:6,8; strkjv@6:37,39|. {Overcometh the world} (\nikƒi 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} (\hautˆ estin hˆ nikˆ\). For this form of expression see strkjv@1:5; strkjv@John:1:19|. \Nikˆ\ (victory, cf. \nika“\), old word, here alone in N.T., but the later form \nikos\ in strkjv@Matthew:12:20; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:54f.,57|. {That overcometh} (\hˆ nikˆsasa\). 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} (\hˆ pistis hˆm“n\). 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:5:5 @{And who is he that overcometh?} (\tis estin de ho nik“n?\). Not a mere rhetorical question (2:22|), but an appeal to experience and fact. Note the present active articular participle (\nik“n\) like \nikƒi\ (present active indicative in verse 4|), "the one who keeps on conquering the world." See strkjv@1Corinthians:15:57| for the same note of victory (\nikos\) through Christ. See verse 1| for \ho pisteu“n\ (the one who believes) as here. {Jesus is the Son of God} (\Iˆsous estin ho huios tou theou\). As in verse 1| save that here \ho huios tou theou\ in place of \Christos\ and see both in strkjv@2:22f|. Here there is sharp antithesis between "Jesus" (humanity) and "the Son of God" (deity) united in the one personality.

rwp@1John:5:6 @{This} (\houtos\). Jesus the Son of God (verse 5|). {He that came} (\ho elth“n\). Second aorist active articular participle of \erchomai\, referring to the Incarnation as a definite historic event, the preexistent Son of God "sent from heaven to do God's will" (Brooke). {By water and blood} (\di' hudatos kai haimatos\). Accompanied by (\dia\ used with the genitive both as instrument and accompaniment, as in strkjv@Galatians:5:13|) water (as at the baptism) and blood (as on the Cross). These two incidents in the Incarnation are singled out because at the baptism Jesus was formally set apart to his Messianic work by the coming of the Holy Spirit upon him and by the Father's audible witness, and because at the Cross his work reached its culmination ("It is finished," Jesus said). There are other theories that do not accord with the language and the facts. It is true that at the Cross both water and blood came out of the side of Jesus when pierced by the soldier, as John bore witness (John:19:34|), a complete refutation of the Docetic denial of an actual human body for Jesus and of the Cerinthian distinction between Jesus and Christ. There is thus a threefold witness to the fact of the Incarnation, but he repeats the twofold witness before giving the third. The repetition of both preposition (\en\ this time rather than \dia\) and the article (\t“i\ locative case) argues for two separate events with particular emphasis on the blood ("not only" \ouk monon\, "but" \all'\) which the Gnostics made light of or even denied. {It is the Spirit that beareth witness} (\to pneuma estin to marturoun\). Present active articular participle of \marture“\ with article with both subject and predicate, and so interchangeable as in strkjv@3:4|. The Holy Spirit is the third and the chief witness at the baptism of Jesus and all through his ministry. {Because} (\hoti\). Or declarative "that." Either makes sense. In strkjv@John:15:26| Jesus spoke of "the Spirit of truth" (whose characteristic is truth). Here John identifies the Spirit with truth as Jesus said of himself (John:14:6|) without denying personality for the Holy Spirit.

rwp@2Corinthians:1:18 @{Is not yea and nay} (\ouk estin nai kai ou\). He is not a Yes and No man, saying Yes and meaning or acting No. Paul calls God to witness on this point.

rwp@2Corinthians:4:3 @{It is veiled in them that are perishing} (\en tois apollumenois estin kekalummenon\). Periphrastic perfect passive of \kalupt“\, to veil in both condition (first class) and conclusion. See on ¯2:15f.| for "the perishing."

rwp@2Peter:3:4 @{Where is the promise of his coming?} (\pou estin hˆ epaggelia tˆs parousias autou;\). This is the only sample of the questions raised by these mockers. Peter had mentioned this subject of the \parousia\ in strkjv@1:16|. Now he faces it squarely. Peter, like Paul (1Thessalonians:5:1f.; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1f.|), preached about the second coming (1:16; strkjv@Acts:3:20f.|), as Jesus himself did repeatedly (Matthew:24:34|) and as the angels promised at the Ascension (Acts:1:11|). Both Jesus and Paul (2Thessalonians:2:1f.|) were misunderstood on the subject of the time and the parables of Jesus urged readiness and forbade setting dates for his coming, though his language in strkjv@Matthew:24:34| probably led some to believe that he would certainly come while they were alive. {From the day that} (\aph' hˆs\). "From which day." See strkjv@Luke:7:45|. {Fell asleep} (\ekoimˆthˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \koima“\, old verb, to put sleep, classic euphemism for death (John:11:11|) like our cemetery (sleeping-place). {Continue} (\diamenei\). Present active indicative of \diamen“\, to remain through (Luke:1:22|). _In statu quo_. {As they were} (\hout“s\). "Thus." {From the beginning of creation} (\ap' archˆs ktise“s\). Precisely so in strkjv@Mark:10:6|, which see.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:4 @{He that opposeth and exalteth himself} (\ho antikeimenos kai huperairomenos\). Like John's Antichrist this one opposes (\anti-\) Christ and exalts himself (direct middle of \huperair“\, old verb to lift oneself up {above} others, only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:12:7| in N.T.), but not Satan, but an agent of Satan. This participial clause is in apposition with the two preceding phrases, the man of sin, the son of perdition. Note strkjv@1Corinthians:8:5| about one called God and strkjv@Acts:17:23| for \sebasma\ (from \sebazomai\), object of worship, late word, in N.T. only in these two passages. {Songs:that he sitteth in the temple of God} (\h“ste auton eis ton naon tou theou kathisai\). Another example of the infinitive with \h“ste\ for result. Caius Caligula had made a desperate attempt to have his statue set up for worship in the Temple in Jerusalem. This incident may lie behind Paul's language here. {Setting himself forth as God} (\apodeiknunta heauton hoti estin theos\). Present active participle (\mi\ form) of \apodeiknumi\, agreeing in case with \auton\, {showing himself that he is God}. Caligula claimed to be God. Moffatt doubts if Paul is identifying this deception with the imperial cultus at this stage. Lightfoot thinks that the deification of the Roman emperor supplied Paul's language here. Wetstein notes a coin of Julius with \theos\ on one side and \Thessalonike“n\ on the other. In strkjv@1John:2:18| we are told of "many antichrists" some of whom had already come. Hence it is not clear that Paul has in mind only one individual or even individuals at all rather than evil principles, for in verse 6| he speaks of \to katechon\ (that which restraineth) while in verse 7| it is \ho katech“n\ (the one that restraineth). Frame argues for a combination of Belial and Antichrist as the explanation of Paul's language. But the whole subject is left by Paul in such a vague form that we can hardly hope to clear it up. It is possible that his own preaching while with them gave his readers a clue that we do not possess.

rwp@2Thessalonians:2:9 @{Whose coming is} (\hou estin hˆ parousia\). Refers to \hon\ in verse 8|. The Antichrist has his \parousia\ also. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 374, 378) notes an inscription at Epidaurus in which "Asclepius manifested his \Parousia\." Antiochus Epiphanes is called _the manifest god_ (III Macc. strkjv@5:35). Songs:the two Epiphanies coincide. {Lying wonders} (\terasin pseudous\). "In wonders of a lie." Note here the three words for the miracles of Christ (Hebrews:2:4|), power (\dunamis\), signs (\sˆmeia\), wonders (\terata\), but all according to the working of Satan (\kata energeian tou Satana\, the energy of Satan) just as Jesus had foretold (Matthew:24:24|), wonders that would almost lead astray the very elect.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:3 @{But the Lord is faithful} (\pistos de estin ho kurios\). {But faithful is the Lord} (correct rendition), with a play (paronomasia) on \pistis\ by \pistos\ as in strkjv@Romans:3:3| we have a word-play on \apiste“\ and \apistia\. The Lord can be counted on, however perverse men may be. {From the evil one} (\apo tou ponˆrou\). Apparently a reminiscence of the Lord's Prayer in strkjv@Matthew:6:13| \rusai hˆmas apo tou ponˆrou\. But here as there it is not certain whether \tou ponˆrou\ is neuter (evil) like to \ponˆron\ in strkjv@Romans:12:9| or masculine (the evil one). But we have \ho ponˆros\ (the evil one) in strkjv@1John:5:18| and \tou ponˆrou\ is clearly masculine in strkjv@Ephesians:6:16|. If masculine here, as is probable, is it "the Evil One" (Ellicott) or merely the evil man like those mentioned in verse 2|? Perhaps Paul has in mind the representative of Satan, the man of sin, pictured in strkjv@2:1-12|, by the phrase here without trying to be too definite.

rwp@2Timothy:4:11 @{Only Luke is with me} (\Loukas estin monos met' emou\). Luke is with Paul now in Rome as during the first Roman imprisonment (Philemon:1:24; strkjv@Colossians:4:14|). {Take Mark} (\Markon analab“n\). Second aorist active participle of \analamban“\, old verb, to pick up, as in strkjv@Ephesians:6:13,16|. "Pick up Mark." {He is useful to me} (\estin moi euchrˆstos\). See strkjv@2:21| for \euchrˆstos\. Paul had long ago changed his opinion of Mark (Colossians:4:10|) because Mark had changed his conduct and had made good in his ministry. Now Paul longs to have the man that he once scornfully rejected (Acts:15:37ff.|).

rwp@Acts:1:12 @{Olivet} (\Elai“nos\). Genitive singular. Vulgate _Olivetum_. Made like \ampel“n\. Here only in the N.T., usually \to oros t“n Elai“n\ (the Mount of Olives), though some MSS. have Olivet in strkjv@Luke:19:29; strkjv@21:37|. Josephus (_Ant_. VII. 9, 2) has it also and the papyri (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 170). {A sabbath day's journey off} (\Sabbatou ech“n hodon\). Luke only says here that Olivet is a Sabbath day's journey from Jerusalem, not that Jesus was precisely that distance when he ascended. In the Gospel Luke (24:50|) states that Jesus led them "over against" (\he“s pros\) Bethany (about two miles or fifteen furlongs). The top of Olivet is six furlongs or three-fourths of a mile. The Greek idiom here is "having a journey of a Sabbath" after "which is nigh unto Jerusalem" (\ho estin eggus Ierousalˆm\), note the periphrastic construction. Why Luke mentions this item for Gentile readers in this form is not known, unless it was in his Jewish source. See strkjv@Exodus:16:29; strkjv@Numbers:35:5; strkjv@Joshua:3:4|. But it does not contradict what he says in strkjv@Luke:24:50|, where he does not say that Jesus led them all the way to Bethany.

rwp@Acts:2:16 @{This is that which hath been spoken by the prophet Joel} (\touto estin to eirˆmenon dia tou prophˆtou I“ˆl\). Positive interpretation of the supernatural phenomena in the light of the Messianic prophecy of strkjv@Joel:2:28-32|. Peter's mind is now opened by the Holy Spirit to understand the Messianic prophecy and the fulfilment right before their eyes. Peter now has spiritual insight and moral courage. The {power} (\dunamis\) of the Holy Spirit has come upon him as he proceeds to give the first interpretation of the life and work of Jesus Christ since his Ascension. It is also the first formal apology for Christianity to a public audience. Peter rises to the height of his powers in this remarkable sermon. Jesus had foretold that he would be a Rock and now he is no longer shale, but a solid force for aggressive Christianity. He follows here in verses 17-21| closely the LXX text of Joel and then applies the passage to the present emergency (22-24|).

rwp@Acts:8:26 @{Toward the South} (\kata mesˆmbrian\). Old word from \mesos\ and \hˆmera\, midday or noon as in strkjv@Acts:22:16|, the only other example in the N.T. That may be the idea here also, though "towards the South" gets support from the use of \kata liba\ in strkjv@Acts:27:12|. {The same is desert} (\hautˆ estin erˆmos\). Probably a parenthetical remark by Luke to give an idea of the way. One of the ways actually goes through a desert. Gaza itself was a strong city that resisted Alexander the Great five months. It was destroyed by the Romans after war broke out with the Jews.

rwp@Acts:9:20 @{He proclaimed Jesus} (\ekˆrussen ton Iˆsoun\). Imperfect indicative, inchoative, began to preach. Jesus, not Christ, is the correct text here. He did this first preaching in the Jewish synagogues, a habit of his life when possible, and following the example of Jesus. {That he is the Son of God} (\hoti houtos estin ho huios tou theou\). This is Paul's platform as a Christian preacher, one that he always occupied to the very end. It was a complete reversal of his previous position. Jesus had turned him completely around. It is the conclusion that Saul now drew from the vision of the Risen Christ and the message through Ananias. By "the Son of God" Saul means the Messiah of promise and hope, the Messianic sense of the Baptist (John:1:34|) and of Nathanael (John:1:49|) for Saul is now proclaiming his faith in Jesus in the very synagogues where he had meant to arrest those who professed their faith in him. Peter laid emphasis on the Resurrection of Jesus as a glorious fact and proclaimed Jesus as Lord and Christ. Paul boldly calls Jesus the Son of God with full acknowledgment of his deity from the very start. Thomas had come to this place slowly (John:20:28|). Saul begins with this truth and never leaves it. With this faith he can shake the world. There is no power in any other preaching.

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 eirˆnˆn dia Iˆsou 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 strkjv@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 pant“n kurios\). A triumphant parenthesis that Peter throws in as the reason for his new truth. Jesus Christ is Lord of all, both Jews and Gentiles.

rwp@Acts:12:3 @{That it pleased the Jews} (\hoti areston estin tois Ioudaiois\). Indirect assertion with the present tense \estin\ retained. \Areston\ is the verbal adjective from \aresk“\ followed by the dative as in strkjv@John:8:29|. {Proceeded to seize} (\prosetheto sullabein\). A patent Hebraism in strkjv@Luke:20:11f.| already, and nowhere else in the N.T. It occurs in the LXX (Genesis:4:2; strkjv@8:12; strkjv@18:29|, etc.). Second aorist middle indicative of \prostithˆmi\ and the second aorist active infinitive of \sullamban“\. Literally, he added to seize, he seized Peter in addition to James. {The days of unleavened bread} (\hˆmerai t“n azum“n\). By this parenthesis Luke locates the time of the year when Peter was arrested, the passover. It was a fine occasion for Agrippa to increase his favour among the crowds of Jews there by extra zeal against the Christians. It is possible that Luke obtained his information about this incident from John Mark for at his Mother's house the disciples gathered (12:12|).

rwp@Acts:12:15 @{Thou art mad} (\mainˆi\). Present middle indicative second person singular. Old verb, only in the middle voice. Festus used the same word to Paul (26:24|). The maid was undoubtedly excited, but it was a curious rebuff from those who had been praying all night for Peter's release. In their defence it may be said that Stephen and James had been put to death and many others by Saul's persecution. {She confidently affirmed} (\diischurizeto\). Imperfect middle of \diischurizomai\, an old word of vigorous and confident assertion, originally to lean upon. Only here in the N.T. The girl stuck to her statement. {It is his angel} (\Hosea:aggelos estin autou\). This was the second alternative of the disciples. It was a popular Jewish belief that each man had a guardian angel. Luke takes no position about it. No scripture teaches it.

rwp@Acts:13:15 @{After the reading of the law and the prophets} (\meta tˆn anagn“sin tou nomou kai t“n prophˆt“n\). The law was first read in the synagogues till B.C. 163 when Antiochus Epiphones prohibited it. Then the reading of the prophets was substituted for it. The Maccabees restored both. There was a reading from the law and one from the prophets in Hebrew which was interpreted into the Aramaic or the Greek _Koin‚_ for the people. The reading was followed by the sermon as when Jesus was invited to read and to preach in Nazareth (Luke:4:16f.|). For the service in the synagogue see Schuerer, _History of the Jewish People_, Div. II, Vol. II, pp. 79ff. It was the duty of the rulers of the synagogue (\archisunag“goi\) to select the readers and the speakers for the service (Mark:5:22,35-38; strkjv@Luke:8:49; strkjv@13:14; strkjv@Acts:13:15; strkjv@18:8,17|). Any rabbi or distinguished stranger could be called on to speak. {If ye have any word of exhortation for the people} (\ei tis estin en humin logos paraklˆse“s pros ton laon\). Literally, if there is among you any word of exhortation for the people. It is a condition of the first class and assumed to be true, a polite invitation. On "exhortation" (\paraklˆsis\) see strkjv@9:31|. It may be a technical phrase used in the synagogue (Hebrews:13:22; strkjv@1Timothy:4:13|).

rwp@Acts:16:21 @{Customs which it is not lawful for us to receive, or to observe, being Romans} (\ethˆ ha ouk estin hˆmin paradechesthai oude poiein R“maiois ousin\). Note the sharp contrast between "being Jews" in verse 20| and "being Romans" here. This pose of patriotism is all sound and fury. It is love of money that moves these "masters" far more than zeal for Rome. As Roman citizens in a colony they make full use of all their rights of protest. Judaism was a _religio licita_ in the Roman empire, only they were not allowed to make proselytes of the Romans themselves. No Roman magistrate would pass on abstract theological questions (18:15|), but only if a breach of the peace was made (\ektarassousin hˆm“n tˆn polin\) or the formation of secret sects and organizations. Evidently both of these last points are involved by the charges of "unlawful customs" by the masters who are silent about their real ground of grievance against Paul and Silas. \Ethos\ (kin to \ˆthos\, strkjv@1Corinthians:15:33|) is from \eth“\, to be accustomed or used to a thing. The Romans granted toleration to conquered nations to follow their religious customs provided they did not try to win the Romans. But the Jews had made great headway to favour (the God-fearers) with increasing hatred also. Emperor worship had in store grave peril for both Jews and Christians. The Romans will care more for this than for the old gods and goddesses. It will combine patriotism and piety.

rwp@Acts:17:3 @{Opening and alleging} (\dianoig“n kai paratithemenos\). Opening the Scriptures, Luke means, as made plain by the mission and message of Jesus, the same word (\dianoig“\) used by him of the interpretation of the Scriptures by Jesus (Luke:24:32|) and of the opening of the mind of the disciples also by Jesus (Luke:24:45|) and of the opening of Lydia's heart by the Lord (16:14|). One cannot refrain from saying that such exposition of the Scriptures as Jesus and Paul gave would lead to more opening of mind and heart. Paul was not only "expounding" the Scriptures, he was also "propounding" (the old meaning of "allege") his doctrine or setting forth alongside the Scriptures (\para-tithemenos\), quoting the Scripture to prove his contention which was made in much conflict (1Thessalonians:2:2|), probably in the midst of heated discussion by the opposing rabbis who were anything but convinced by Paul's powerful arguments, for the Cross was a stumbling-block to the Jews (1Corinthians:1:23|). {That it behoved the Christ to suffer} (\hoti ton Christon edei pathein\). The second aorist active infinitive is the subject of \edei\ with \ton Christon\, the accusative of general reference. This is Paul's major premise in his argument from the Scriptures about the Messiah, the necessity of his sufferings according to the Scriptures, the very argument made by the Risen Jesus to the two on the way to Emmaus (Luke:24:25-27|). The fifty-third chapter of Isaiah was a passage in point that the rabbis had overlooked. Peter made the same point in strkjv@Acts:3:18| and Paul again in strkjv@Acts:26:23|. The minor premise is the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. {To rise again from the dead} (\anastˆnai ek nekr“n\). This second aorist active infinitive \anastˆnai\ is also the subject of \edei\. The actual resurrection of Jesus was also a necessity as Paul says he preached to them (1Thessalonians:4:14|) and argued always from Scripture (1Corinthians:15:3-4|) and from his own experience (Acts:9:22; strkjv@22:7; strkjv@26:8,14; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:8|). {This Jesus is the Christ} (\houtos estin ho Christos, ho Iˆsous\). More precisely, "This is the Messiah, viz., Jesus whom I am proclaiming unto you." This is the conclusion of Paul's line of argument and it is logical and overwhelming. It is his method everywhere as in Damascus, in Antioch in Pisidia, here, in Corinth. He spoke as an eye-witness.

rwp@Acts:18:10 @{Because I am with thee} (\dioti eg“ eimi meta sou\). Jesus had given this promise to all believers (Matthew:28:20|) and here he renews it to Paul. This promise changes Paul's whole outlook. Jesus had spoken to Paul before, on the way to Damascus (9:4|), in Jerusalem (22:17f.|), in Troas (16:9|), in great crises of his life. He will hear him again (23:11; strkjv@27:23|). Paul knows the voice of Jesus. {No man shall set on thee to harm thee} (\oudeis epithˆsetai soi tou kak“sai se\). Future direct middle indicative of \epitithˆmi\, old and common verb, here in direct middle to lay or throw oneself upon, to attack. Jesus kept that promise in Corinth for Paul. \Tou kak“sai\ is genitive articular infinitive of purpose of \kako“\, to do harm to. Paul would now face all the rabbis without fear. {I have much people} (\laos estin moi polus\). Dative of personal interest. "There is to me much people," not yet saved, but who will be if Paul holds on. There is the problem for every preacher and pastor, how to win the elect to Christ.

rwp@Acts:19:2 @{Did ye receive the Holy Spirit when ye believed?} (\ei pneuma hagion elabete pisteusantes?\). This use of \Pi\ in a direct question occurs in strkjv@1:6|, is not according to the old Greek idiom, but is common in the LXX and the N.T. as in strkjv@Luke:13:23| which see (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 916). Apparently Paul was suspicious of the looks or conduct of these professed disciples. The first aorist active participle \pisteusantes\ is simultaneous with the second aorist active indicative \elabete\ and refers to the same event. {Nay, we did not so much as hear whether the Holy Spirit was} (\...oude ei pneuma hagion estin... ˆkousamen\). The reply of these ignorant disciples is amazing. They probably refer to the time of their baptism and mean that, when baptized, they did not hear whether (\ei\ in indirect question) the Holy Spirit was (\estin\ retained as in strkjv@John:7:39|). Plain proof that they knew John's message poorly.

rwp@Acts:19:4 @{With the baptism of repentance} (\baptisma metanoias\). Cognate accusative with \ebaptisen\ and the genitive \metanoias\ describing the baptism as marked by (case of species or genus), not as conveying, repentance just as in strkjv@Mark:1:4| and that was the work of the Holy Spirit. But John preached also the baptism of the Holy Spirit which the Messiah was to bring (Mark:1:7f.; strkjv@Matthew:3:11f.; strkjv@Luke:3:16|). If they did not know of the Holy Spirit, they had missed the point of John's baptism. {That they should believe on him that should come after him, that is on Jesus} (\eis ton erchomenon met' auton hina pisteus“sin, tout' estin eis ton Iˆsoun\). Note the emphatic prolepsis of \eis ton erchomenon met' auton\ before \hina pisteus“sin\ with which it is construed. This is John's identical phrase, "the one coming after me" as seen in strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Matthew:3:11; strkjv@Luke:3:16; strkjv@John:1:15|. It is not clear that these "disciples" believed in a Messiah, least of all in Jesus. They were wholly unprepared for the baptism of John. Paul does not mean to say that John's baptism was inadequate, but he simply explains what John really taught and so what his baptism signified.

rwp@Acts:21:33 @{Came near} (\eggisas\). First aorist active participle of \eggiz“\, to draw near, _Koin‚_ verb from \eggus\, near, and common in the N.T. {Laid hold on him} (\epelabeto antou\). See same verb in verse 30|. {To be bound} (\dethˆnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \de“\ (see verse 11|). {With two chains} (\halusesi dusi\). Instrumental case of \halusis\, old word from \a\ privative and \lu“\ (not loosing, i.e. chaining). With two chains as a violent and seditious person, probably leader of a band of assassins (verse 38|). See on ¯Mark:5:4|. {Inquired} (\epunthaneto\). Imperfect middle of \punthanomai\, old and common verb used mainly by Luke in the N.T. Lysias repeated his inquiries. {Who he was} (\tis eiˆ\). Present active optative of \eimi\ changed from \estin\ (present indicative) in the indirect question, a change not obligatory after a past tense, but often done in the older Greek, rare in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1043f.). {And what he had done} (\kai ti estin pepoiˆk“s\). Periphrastic perfect active indicative of \poie“\ here retained, not changed to the optative as is true of \eiˆ\ from \estin\ in the same indirect question, illustrating well the freedom about it.

rwp@Acts:25:5 @{Them therefore which are of power among you} (\hoi oun en humin dunatoi\). "The mighty ones among you," "the men of power" (\dunatoi\) and authority, "the first men," the Sanhedrin, in other words. Note change here by Luke from indirect discourse in verse 4|, to direct in verse 5| (\phˆsin\, says he). {Go down with me} (\sunkatabantes\). Double compound (\sun, kata\) second aorist active participle of \sunkatabain“\. It was a fair proposal. {If there is anything amiss in the man} (\ei ti estin en t“i andri atopon\). Condition of the first class, assuming that there is (to be courteous to them), but not committing himself on the merits of the case. \Atopon\ is an old word, specially common in Plato, meaning "out of place." In N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:23:41| which see; strkjv@Acts:28:6; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:2|. Note present tense active voice of \katˆgoreit“san\ (imperative) of \katˆgore“\, repeat their accusations.

rwp@Acts:25:16 @{It is not the custom of the Romans} (\hoti ouk estin ethos R“maiois\). If a direct quotation, \hoti\ is recitative as in Authorized Version. Canterbury Revision takes it as indirect discourse after \apekrithˆn\ (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 ˆ ho katˆgoroumenos echoi\). This use of the optative in this temporal clause with \prin ˆ\ instead of the subjunctive \an echˆi\ 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 pros“pon tous katˆgorous\). Same word \katˆgoros\ as in strkjv@23:30,35; strkjv@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 egklˆmatos\). 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" (\egklˆmatos\ in N.T. only here and strkjv@23:19| which see).

rwp@Colossians:3:5 @{Mortify} (\nekr“sate\). First aorist active imperative of \nekro“\, late verb, to put to death, to treat as dead. Latin Vulgate _mortifico_, but "mortify" is coming with us to mean putrify. Paul boldly applies the metaphor of death (2:20; strkjv@3:3|) pictured in baptism (2:12|) to the actual life of the Christian. He is not to go to the other Gnostic extreme of license on the plea that the soul is not affected by the deeds of the body. Paul's idea is that the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit (1Corinthians:6:19|). He mentions some of these "members upon the earth" like fornication (\porneian\), uncleanness (\akatharsian\), passion (\pathos\), evil desire (\epithumian kakˆn\), covetousness (\pleonexian\) "the which is idolatry" (\hˆtis estin eid“lolatria\). See the longer list of the works of the flesh in Gal strkjv@5:19-21|, though covetousness is not there named, but it is in strkjv@Ephesians:4:19; strkjv@5:5|.

rwp@Colossians:3:25 @{Shall receive again for the wrong that he hath done} (\komisetai ho ˆdikˆsen\). It is not clear whether \ho adik“n\ (he that doeth wrong) is the master or the slave. It is true of either and Lightfoot interprets it of both, "shall receive back the wrong which he did." This is a general law of life and of God and it is fair and square. {There is no respect of persons} (\ouk estin pros“polˆmpsia\). There is with men, but not with God. For this word patterned after the Hebrew see strkjv@Romans:2:11; strkjv@Ephesians:6:9; strkjv@James:2:1| The next verse should be in this chapter also.

rwp@Colossians:4:9 @{Together with Onesimus} (\sun Onˆsim“i\). Co-bearer of the letter with Tychicus and praised on a par with him, runaway slave though he is. {Who is one of you} (\hos estin ex hum“n\). Said not as a reproach to Colossae for having such a man, but as a privilege to the church in Colossae to give a proper welcome to this returning converted slave and to treat him as a brother as Paul argues to Philemon.

rwp@Ephesians:2:14 @{For he is our peace} (\autos gar estin hˆ eirˆnˆ hˆm“n\). He himself, not just what he did (necessary as that was and is). He is our peace with God and so with each other (Jews and Gentiles). {Both one} (\ta amphotera hen\). "The both" (Jew and Gentile). Jesus had said "other sheep I have which are not of this fold" (John:10:16|). {One} (\hen\) is neuter singular (oneness, unity, identity) as in strkjv@Galatians:3:28|. Race and national distinctions vanish in Christ. If all men were really in Christ, war would disappear. {Brake down the middle wall of partition} (\to mesotoichon tou phragmou lusas\). "Having loosened (first aorist active participle of \lu“\, see strkjv@John:2:19|) the middle-wall (late word, only here in N.T., and very rare anywhere, one in papyri, and one inscription) of partition (\phragmou\, old word, fence, from \phrass“\, to fence or hedge, as in strkjv@Matthew:21:33|)." In the temple courts a partition wall divided the court of the Gentiles from the court of Israel with an inscription forbidding a Gentile from going further (Josephus, _Ant_. VIII. 3, 2). See the uproar when Paul was accused of taking Trophimus beyond this wall (Acts:21:28|).

rwp@Ephesians:4:21 @{If so be that} (\ei ge\). "If indeed." Condition of first class with aorist indicatives here, assumed to be true (\ˆkousate kai edidachthˆte\). {Even as truth is in Jesus} (\kath“s estin alˆtheia en t“i Iˆsou\). It is not clear what Paul's precise idea is here. The Cerinthian Gnostics did distinguish between the man Jesus and the aeon Christ. Paul here identifies Christ (verse 20|) and Jesus (verse 21|). At any rate he flatly affirms that there is "truth in Jesus" which is in direct opposition to the heathen manner of life and which is further explained by the epexegetical infinitives that follow (\apothesthai, ananeousthai de, kai endusasthai\).

rwp@Ephesians:5:23 @{For the husband is the head of the wife} (\hoti anˆr estin kephalˆ tˆs gunaikos\). "For a husband is head of the (his) wife." No article with \anˆr\ or \kephalˆ\. {As Christ also is the head of the church} (\h“s kai ho Christos kephalˆ tˆs ekklˆsias\). No article with \kephalˆ\, "as also Christ is head of the church." This is the comparison, but with a tremendous difference which Paul hastens to add either in an appositional clause or as a separate sentence. {Himself the saviour of the body} (\autos s“tˆr tou s“matos\). He means the church as the body of which Christ is head and Saviour.

rwp@Ephesians:6:12 @{Our wrestling is not} (\ouk estin hˆmin hˆ palˆ\). "To us the wrestling is not." \Palˆ\ is an old word from \pall“\, to throw, to swing (from Homer to the papyri, though here only in N.T.), a contest between two till one hurls the other down and holds him down (\katech“\). Note \pros\ again (five times) in sense of "against," face to face conflict to the finish. {The world-rulers of this darkness} (\tous kosmokratoras tou skotous toutou\). This phrase occurs here alone. In strkjv@John:14:30| Satan is called "the ruler of this world" (\ho arch“n tou kosmou toutou\). In strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4| he is termed "the god of this age" (\ho theos tou ai“nos toutou\). The word \kosmokrat“r\ is found in the Orphic Hymns of Satan, in Gnostic writings of the devil, in rabbinical writings (transliterated) of the angel of death, in inscriptions of the Emperor Caracalla. These "world-rulers" are limited to "this darkness" here on earth. {The spiritual hosts of wickedness} (\ta pneumatika tˆs ponˆrias\). No word for "hosts" in the Greek. Probably simply, "the spiritual things (or elements) of wickedness." \Ponˆria\ (from \ponˆros\) is depravity (Matthew:22:18; strkjv@1Corinthians:5:8|). {In the heavenly places} (\en tois epouraniois\). Clearly so here. Our "wrestling" is with foes of evil natural and supernatural. We sorely need "the panoply of God" (furnished by God).

rwp@Ephesians:6:17 @{The helmet of salvation} (\tˆn perikephalaian tou s“tˆriou\). Late word (\peri, kephalˆ\, head, around the head), in Polybius, LXX, strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:8; strkjv@Ephesians:6:17| alone in N.T. {Which is the word of God} (\ho estin to rˆma tou theou\). Explanatory relative (\ho\) referring to the sword (\machairan\). The sword given by the Spirit to be wielded as offensive weapon (the others defensive) by the Christian is the word of God. See strkjv@Hebrews:4:12| where the word of God is called "sharper than any two-edged sword."

rwp@Galatians:1:7 @{Which is not another} (\ho ouk estin allo\). It is no "gospel" (good news) at all, but a yoke of bondage to the law and the abolition of grace. There is but one gospel and that is of grace, not works. The relative \ho\ (which) refers to \heteron euaggelion\ (a different gospel) "taken as a single term and designating the erroneous teachings of the Judaizers" (Burton). {Only} (\ei mˆ\). Literally, "except," that is, "Except in this sense," "in that it is an attempt to pervert the one true gospel" (Lightfoot). {Who disturb you} (\hoi tarassontes\). The disturbers. This very verb \tarass“\ is used in strkjv@Acts:17:8| of the Jews in Thessalonica who "disturbed" the politarchs and the people about Paul. {Would pervert} (\thelontes metastrepsai\). "Wish to turn about," change completely as in strkjv@Acts:2:20; strkjv@James:4:9|. The very existence of the gospel of Christ was at stake.

rwp@Galatians:1:11 @{Which was preached} (\to euaggelisthen\). Play on the word \euaggelion\ by first aorist passive participle of \euaggeliz“\, "the gospel which was gospelized by me." {It is not after man} (\ouk estin kata anthr“pon\). Not after a human standard and so he does not try to conform to the human ideal. Paul alone (1Corinthians:3:3; strkjv@9:8; strkjv@15:32; strkjv@Romans:3:15|) in the N.T. uses this old and common idiom.

rwp@Galatians:3:12 @{The law is not of faith} (\ho nomos ouk estin ek piste“s\). Law demands complete obedience and rests not on mercy, faith, grace.

rwp@Galatians:3:16 @{But as of one} (\all' h“s eph' henos\). But as in the case of one. {Which is Christ} (\hos estin Christos\). Masculine relative agreeing with \Christos\ though \sperma\ is neuter. But the promise to Abraham uses \sperma\ as a collective substantive and applies to all believers (both Jews and Gentiles) as Paul has shown in verses 7-14|, and as of course he knew full well Here Paul uses a rabbinical refinement which is yet intelligible. The people of Israel were a type of the Messiah and he gathers up the promise in its special application to Christ. He does not say that Christ is specifically referred to in strkjv@Genesis:13:15| or strkjv@17:7f|.

rwp@Galatians:4:24 @{Which things contain an allegory} (\hatina estin allˆgoroumena\). Literally, "Which things are allegorized" (periphrastic present passive indicative of \allˆgore“\). Late word (Strabo, Plutarch, Philo, Josephus, ecclesiastical writers), only here in N.T. The ancient writers used \ainittomai\ to speak in riddles. It is compounded of \allo\, another, and \agoreu“\, to speak, and so means speaking something else than what the language means, what Philo, the past-master in the use of allegory, calls the deeper spiritual sense. Paul does not deny the actual historical narrative, but he simply uses it in an allegorical sense to illustrate his point for the benefit of his readers who are tempted to go under the burden of the law. He puts a secondary meaning on the narrative just as he uses \tupik“s\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:11| of the narrative. We need not press unduly the difference between allegory and type, for each is used in a variety of ways. The allegory in one sense is a speaking parable like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_, the Prodigal Son in strkjv@Luke:15|, the Good Shepherd in strkjv@John:10|. But allegory was also used by Philo and by Paul here for a secret meaning not obvious at first, one not in the mind of the writer, like our illustration which throws light on the point. Paul was familiar with this rabbinical method of exegesis (Rabbi Akiba, for instance, who found a mystical sense in every hook and crook of the Hebrew letters) and makes skilful use of that knowledge here. Christian preachers in Alexandria early fell victims to Philo's allegorical method and carried it to excess without regard to the plain sense of the narrative. That startling style of preaching survives yet to the discredit of sound preaching. Please observe that Paul says here that he is using allegory, not ordinary interpretation. It is not necessary to say that Paul intended his readers to believe that this allegory was designed by the narrative. He illustrates his point by it. {For these are} (\hautai gar eisin\). Allegorically interpreted, he means. {From Mount Sinai} (\apo orous Sinƒ\). Spoken from Mount Sinai. {Bearing} (\genn“sa\). Present active participle of \genna“\, to beget of the male (Matthew:1:1-16|), more rarely as here to bear of the female (Luke:1:13,57|). {Which is Hagar} (\hˆtis estin Hagar\). Allegorically interpreted.

rwp@Galatians:4:27 @{Which is our mother} (\hˆtis estin mˆtˆr hˆm“n\). The mother of us Christians, apply the allegory of Hagar and Sarah to us. The Jerusalem above is the picture of the Kingdom of God. Paul illustrates the allegory by quoting strkjv@Isaiah:54:1|, a song of triumph looking for deliverance from a foreign yoke. {Rejoice} (\euphranthˆti\). First aorist passive imperative of \euphrain“\. {Break forth} (\rˆxon\). First aorist active imperative of \rˆgnumi\, to rend, to burst asunder. Supply \euphrosunˆn\ (joy) as in strkjv@Isaiah:49:13|. {The desolate} (\tˆs erˆmou\). The prophet refers to Sarah's prolonged barrenness and Paul uses this fact as a figure for the progress and glory of Christianity (the new Jerusalem of freedom) in contrast with the old Jerusalem of bondage (the current Judaism). His thought has moved rapidly, but he does not lose his line.

rwp@John:1:19 @{And this is the witness of John} (\kai hautˆ estin hˆ marturia tou I“anou\). He had twice already alluded to it (verses 7f., 15|) and now he proceeds to give it as the most important item to add after the Prologue. Just as the author assumes the birth narratives of Matthew and Luke, so he assumes the Synoptic accounts of the baptism of Jesus by John, but adds various details of great interest and value between the baptism and the Galilean ministry, filling out thus our knowledge of this first year of the Lord's ministry in various parts of Palestine. The story in John proceeds along the same lines as in the Synoptics. There is increasing unfolding of Christ to the disciples with increasing hostility on the part of the Jews till the final consummation in Jerusalem. {When the Jews sent unto him} (\hote apesteilan pros auton hoi Ioudaioi\). John, writing in Ephesus near the close of the first century long after the destruction of Jerusalem, constantly uses the phrase "the Jews" as descriptive of the people as distinct from the Gentile world and from the followers of Christ (at first Jews also). Often he uses it of the Jewish leaders and rulers in particular who soon took a hostile attitude toward both John and Jesus. Here it is the Jews from Jerusalem who sent (\apesteilan\, first aorist active indicative of \apostell“\). {Priests and Levites} (\hiereis kai Leueitas\). Sadducees these were. Down below in verse 24| the author explains that it was the Pharisees who sent the Sadducees. The Synoptics throw a flood of light on this circumstance, for in strkjv@Matthew:3:7| we are told that the Baptist called the Pharisees and Sadducees "offspring of vipers" (Luke:3:7|). Popular interest in John grew till people were wondering "in their hearts concerning John whether haply he were the Christ" (Luke:3:15|). Songs:the Sanhedrin finally sent a committee to John to get his own view of himself, but the Pharisees saw to it that Sadducees were sent. {To ask him} (\hina er“tˆs“sin auton\). Final \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \er“ta“\, old verb to ask a question as here and often in the _Koin‚_ to ask for something (John:14:16|) like \aite“\. {Who art thou?} (\su tis ei;\). Direct question preserved and note proleptic position of \su\, "Thou, who art thou?" The committee from the Sanhedrin put the question sharply up to John to define his claims concerning the Messiah.

rwp@John:3:19 @{And this is the judgment} (\hautˆ de estin hˆ krisis\). A thoroughly Johannine phrase for sequence of thought (15:12; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@1John:1:5; strkjv@5:11,14; strkjv@3John:1:6|). It is more precisely the process of judging (\kri-sis\) rather than the result (\kri-ma\) of the judgment. "It is no arbitrary sentence, but the working out of a moral law" (Bernard). {The light is come} (\to ph“s elˆluthen\). Second perfect active indicative of \erchomai\, a permanent result as already explained in the Prologue concerning the Incarnation (1:4,5,9,11|). Jesus is the Light of the world. {Loved darkness} (\ˆgapˆsan to skotos\). Job:(Job:24:13|) spoke of men rebelling against the light. Here \to skotos\, common word for moral and spiritual darkness (1Thessalonians:5:5|), though \hˆ skotia\ in strkjv@John:1:5|. "Darkness" is common in John as a metaphor for the state of sinners (8:12; strkjv@12:35, 46; strkjv@1John:1:6; strkjv@2:8,9,11|). Jesus himself is the only moral and spiritual light of the world (8:12|) as he dared claim to his enemies. The pathos of it all is that men fall in love with the darkness of sin and rebel against the light like denizens of the underworld, "for their works were evil (\ponˆra\)." When the light appears, they scatter to their holes and dens. \Ponˆros\ (from \ponos\, toil, \pone“\, to toil) is used of the deeds of the world by Jesus (7:7|). In the end the god of this world blinds men's eyes so that they do not see the light (2Corinthians:4:4|). The fish in the Mammoth Cave have no longer eyes, but only sockets where eyes used to be. The evil one has a powerful grip on the world (1John:5:19|).

rwp@John:3:21 @{That doeth the truth} (\ho poi“n tˆn alˆtheian\). See strkjv@1John:1:6| for this striking phrase. {Comes to the light} (\erchetai pros to ph“s\). Is drawn by the light, spiritual heliotropes, not driven from it. {That may be made manifest} (\hina phaner“thˆi\). Final \hina\ with first aorist passive subjunctive of \phanero“\. {They have been wrought in God} (\en the“i estin eirgasmena\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \ergazomai\. He does not claim that they are perfect, only that they have been wrought in the sphere of and in the power of God. Hence he wants the light turned on.

rwp@John:4:11 @{Sir} (\Kurie\). Songs:it has to mean here in the mouth of the Samaritan woman, not Lord. {Thou hast nothing to draw with and the well is deep} (\oute antlˆ...echeis kai to phrear estin... bathu\). This broken construction of \oute-kai\ (neither--and) occurs in N.T. elsewhere only in strkjv@3John:1:10|. \Antlˆma\ (from \antle“\, to draw) is a late word for that which is drawn, then (Plutarch) for the act of drawing, and then for the rope as here to draw with. This well (\phrear\) is 100 feet deep and Jesus had no rope. The bucket of skin ("with three cross sticks at the mouth to keep it open," Vincent) was kept at the well to be let down by a goat's hair rope. {That living water} (\to hud“r to z“n\). "The water the living," with the article referring to the language of Jesus in verse 10|. She is still thinking only of literal water.

rwp@John:4:17 @{I have no husband} (\ouk ech“ andra\). The Greek \anˆr\ means either "man" or "husband." She had her "man," but he was not a legal "husband." Her language veils her deceit. {Thou saidst well} (\kal“s eipes\). Jesus saw through the double sense of her language and read her heart as he only can do, a supernatural gift of which John often speaks (1:48; strkjv@2:24f.; strkjv@5:20|). {For thou hast had five husbands} (\pente gar andras esches\). "For thou didst have five men." Second aorist (constative) active indicative of \ech“\. {Is not thy husband} (\ouk estin sou anˆr\). In the full and legal sense of \anˆr\, not a mere "man." {This hast thou said truly} (\touto alˆthes eirˆkas\). "This a true thing thou hast said." Note absence of article with \alˆthes\ (predicate accusative). Perfect active indicative \eirˆkas\ here, not aorist \eipes\ (verse 17|).

rwp@John:4:29 @{All things that ever I did} (\panta ha epoiˆsa\). {Ha}, not \hosa\ (as many as), no "ever" in the Greek. But a guilty conscience (verse 18f.|) led her to exaggerate a bit. {Can this be the Christ?} (\mˆti houtos estin ho Christos;\). She is already convinced herself (verses 26f.|), but she puts the question in a hesitant form to avoid arousing opposition. With a woman's intuition she avoided \ouk\ and uses \mˆti\. She does not take sides, but piques their curiosity.

rwp@John:4:37 @{For herein} (\en gar tout“i\). In this relation between the sower and the reaper. {The saying} (\ho logos\). Like strkjv@1Timothy:1:15; strkjv@3:1|, etc. Probably a proverb that is particularly true (\alˆthinos\ for which see strkjv@1:9|) in the spiritual realm. {One soweth, and another reapeth} (\allos estin ho speir“n kai allos ho theriz“n\). "One is the sower and another the reaper." It is sad when the sower misses the joy of reaping (Job:31:8|) and has only the sowing in tears (Psalms:126:5f.|). This may be the punishment for sin (Deuteronomy:28:30; strkjv@Micah:6:15|). Sometimes one reaps where he has not sown (Deuteronomy:6:11; strkjv@Joshua:24:13|). It is the prerogative of the Master to reap (Matthew:25:26f.|), but Jesus here lets the disciples share his joy.

rwp@John:5:12 @{Who is the man?} (\Tis estin ho anthr“pos;\). Contemptuous expression, "Who is the fellow?" They ask about the command to violate the Sabbath, not about the healing.

rwp@John:5:31 @{If I bear witness of myself} (\Ean eg“ martur“ peri emautou\). Condition of third class, undetermined with prospect of determination (\ean\ and present active subjunctive of \marture“\). The emphasis is on \eg“\ (I alone with no other witness). {Is not true} (\ouk estin alˆthˆs\). In law the testimony of a witness is not received in his own case (Jewish, Greek, Roman law). See strkjv@Deuteronomy:19:15| and the allusion to it by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:18:16|. See also strkjv@2Corinthians:13:1; strkjv@1Timothy:5:19|. And yet in strkjv@8:12-19| Jesus claims that his witness concerning himself is true because the Father gives confirmation of his message. The Father and the Son are the two witnesses (8:17|). It is a paradox and yet true. But here Jesus yields to the rabbinical demand for proof outside of himself. He has the witness of another (the Father, strkjv@5:32,37|), the witness of the Baptist (5:33|), the witness of the works of Jesus (5:36|), the witness of the Scriptures (5:39|), the witness of Moses in particular (5:45|).

rwp@John:6:24 @{When the multitude therefore saw} (\hote oun eiden ho ochlos\). Resumption and clarification of the complicated statements of verse 22|. {That Jesus was not there} (\hoti Iˆsous ouk estin ekei\). Present indicative retained in indirect discourse. They still did not understand how Jesus had crossed over, but they acted on the basis of the plain fact. {They themselves got into} (\enebˆsan autoi eis\). Second aorist active indicative of \embain“\ followed by \eis\ (both \en\ and \eis\ together as often in N.T.). {Seeking Jesus} (\zˆtountes ton Iˆsoun\). Present active participle of \zˆte“\. They had a double motive apart from the curiosity explained in verse 22|. They had clearly not given up the impulse of the evening before to make Jesus king (6:15|) and they had hopes of still another bountiful repast at the hands of Jesus as he said (6:26|).

rwp@John:6:58 @{This is the bread} (\houtos estin ho artos\). Summary and final explanation of the true manna (from verse 32| on) as being Jesus Christ himself.

rwp@John:6:63 @{That quickeneth} (\to z“opoioun\). Articular present active participle of \z“opoie“\ for which see strkjv@5:21|. For the contrast between \pneuma\ (spirit) and \sarx\ (flesh) see already strkjv@3:6|. {The words} (\ta rˆmata\). Those in this discourse (I have just spoken, \lelalˆka\), for they are the words of God (3:34; strkjv@8:47; strkjv@17:8|). No wonder they "are spirit and are life" (\pneuma estin kai z“ˆ estin\). The breath of God and the life of God is in these words of Jesus. Never man spoke like Jesus (7:46|). There is life in his words today.

rwp@John:6:64 @{That believe not} (\hoi ou pisteuousin\). Failure to believe kills the life in the words of Jesus. {Knew from the beginning} (\ˆidei ex archˆs\). In the N.T. we have \ex archˆs\ only here and strkjv@16:4|, but \ap' archˆs\ in apparently the same sense as here in strkjv@15:27; strkjv@1John:2:7,24; strkjv@3:11| and see strkjv@Luke:1:2; strkjv@1John:1:1|. From the first Jesus distinguished between real trust in him and mere lip service (2:24; strkjv@8:31|), two senses of \pisteu“\. {Were} (\eisin\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse. {And who it was that should betray him} (\kai tis estin ho parad“s“n\). Same use of \estin\ and note article and future active participle of \paradid“mi\, to hand over, to betray. John does not say here that Jesus knew that Judas would betray him when he chose him as one of the twelve, least of all that he chose him for that purpose. What he does say is that Jesus was not taken by surprise and soon saw signs of treason in Judas. The same verb is used of John's arrest in strkjv@Matthew:4:12|. Once Judas is termed traitor (\prodotˆs\) in strkjv@Luke:6:16|. Judas had gifts and was given his opportunity. He did not have to betray Jesus.

rwp@John:7:11 @{The Jews} (\hoi Ioudaioi\). The hostile leaders in Jerusalem, not the Galilean crowds (7:12|) nor the populace in Jerusalem (7:25|). {Sought} (\ezˆtoun\). Imperfect active of \zˆte“\, "were seeking," picture of the attitude of the Jewish leaders toward Jesus who had not yet appeared in public at the feast. In fact he had avoided Jerusalem since the collision in chapter 5. The leaders clearly wished to attack him. {Where is he?} (\pou estin ekeinos;\). "Where is that one? (emphatic use of \ekeinos\ as in strkjv@1:8; strkjv@9:12|). Jesus had been at two feasts during his ministry (passover in strkjv@2:12ff.|; possibly another passover in strkjv@5:1|), but he had avoided the preceding passover (6:4; strkjv@7:1|). The leaders in Jerusalem had kept in touch with Christ's work in Galilee. They anticipate a crisis in Jerusalem.

rwp@John:7:22 @{For this cause} (\dia touto\). Some would take this phrase with the preceding verb \thaumazete\ (ye marvel for this cause). {Hath given} (\ded“ken\). Present active indicative of \did“mi\ (permanent state). {Not that it is of Moses, but of the fathers} (\ouch hoti ek tou M“use“s estin all' ek t“n pater“n\). A parenthesis to explain that circumcision is older in origin than Moses. {And on the sabbath ye circumcise} (\kai en sabbat“i peritemnete\). Adversative use of \kai\=and yet as in 19|. That is to say, the Jews keep one law (circumcision) by violating another (on the Sabbath, the charge against him in chapter 5, healing on the Sabbath).

rwp@John:7:26 @{They say nothing unto him} (\ouden autoi legousin\). But only make sneering comments about him (7:16|) in spite of his speaking "openly" (\parrˆsiƒi\, for which word see strkjv@7:13; strkjv@18:20|) before all. lt was sarcasm about the leaders, though an element of surprise on the part of "these shrewd townsmen" (Bernard) may have existed also. {Can it be that the rulers indeed know} (\mˆ pote alˆth“s egn“sin hoi archontes\). Negative answer expected by \mˆ pote\ and yet there is ridicule of the rulers in the form of the question. See a like use of \mˆ pote\ in strkjv@Luke:3:15|, though nowhere else in John. \Egn“san\ (second aorist ingressive active indicative of \gin“sk“\) may refer to the examination of Jesus by these rulers in strkjv@5:19ff.| and means, "Did they come to know or find out" (and so hold now)? {That this is the Christ} (\hoti houtos estin ho Christos\). The Messiah of Jewish hope.

rwp@John:7:36 @{What is this word?} (\Tis estin ho logos houtos;\). Puzzled and uneasy over this unintelligible saying. Even Peter is distressed over it later (\13:37\).

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\). These denied that Jesus was the Messiah and gave as their reason (\gar\, for) the fact that he came from Galilee. The use of \mˆ\ expects a negative answer.

rwp@John:8:19 @{Where is thy Father?} (\pou estin ho patˆr sou;\). "The testimony of an unseen and unheard witness would not satisfy them" (Vincent). Bernard understands the Pharisees to see that Jesus claims God the Father as his second witness and so ask "where," not "who" he is. Augustine has it: _Patrem Christi carnaliter acceperunt_, Christ's human father, as if the Pharisees were "misled perhaps by the Lord's use of \anthr“pon\ (verse 17|)" (Dods). Cyril even took it to be a coarse allusion to the birth of Jesus as a bastard according to the Talmud. Perhaps the Pharisees used the question with _double entendre_, even with all three ideas dancing in their hostile minds. {Ye would know my Father also} (\kai ton patera mou an ˆideite\). Conclusion of second-class condition determined as unfulfilled with \an\ and second perfect active of \oida\ used as imperfect in both condition and conclusion. See this same point made to Philip in strkjv@14:9|. In strkjv@14:7| Jesus will use \gin“sk“\ in the condition and \oida\ in the conclusion. The ignorance of the Pharisees about Jesus proves it and is due to their ignorance of the Father. See this point more fully stated in strkjv@5:36-38| when Jesus had his previous controversy in Jerusalem. In strkjv@7:28| Jesus said that they knew his home in Nazareth, but he denied then that they knew the Father who sent him. Jesus will again on this occasion (8:55|) deny their knowledge of the Father. Later he will deny their knowledge of the Father and of the Son (16:3|). The Pharisees are silenced for the moment.

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

rwp@John:8:44 @{Ye are of your father the devil} (\humeis ek tou patros tou diabolou\). Certainly they can "understand" (\gin“skete\ in 43|) this "talk" (\lalian\) though they will be greatly angered. But they had to hear it (\akouein\ in 43|). It was like a bombshell in spite of the preliminary preparation. {Your will to do} (\thelete poiein\). Present active indicative of \thel“\ and present active infinitive, "Ye wish to go on doing." This same idea Jesus presents in strkjv@Matthew:13:38| (the sons of the evil one, the devil) and strkjv@23:15| (twofold more a son of Gehenna than you). See also strkjv@1John:3:8| for "of the devil" (\ek tou diabolou\) for the one who persists in sinning. In strkjv@Revelation:12:9| the devil is one who leads all the world astray. The Gnostic view that Jesus means "the father of the devil" is grotesque. Jesus does not, of course, here deny that the Jews, like all men, are children of God the Creator, like Paul's offspring of God for all men in strkjv@Acts:17:28|. What he denies to these Pharisees is that they are spiritual children of God who do his will. They do the lusts and will of the devil. The Baptist had denied this same spiritual fatherhood to the merely physical descendants of Abraham (Matthew:3:9|). He even called them "broods of vipers" as Jesus did later (Matthew:12:34|). {A murderer} (\anthr“poktonos\). Old and rare word (Euripides) from \anthr“pos\, man, and \ktein“\, to kill. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1John:3:15|. The Jews were seeking to kill Jesus and so like their father the devil. {Stood not in the truth} (\en tˆi alˆtheiƒi ouk estˆken\). Since \ouk\, not \ouch\, is genuine, the form of the verb is \esteken\ the imperfect of the late present stem \stˆk“\ (Mark:11:25|) from the perfect active \hestˆka\ (intransitive) of \histˆmi\, to place. {No truth in him} (\ouk estin alˆtheia en aut“i\). Inside him or outside (environment). The devil and truth have no contact. {When he speaketh a lie} (\hotan lalˆi to pseudos\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the present active subjunctive of \lale“\. But note the article \to\: "Whenever he speaks the lie," as he is sure to do because it is his nature. Hence "he speaks out of his own" (\ek t“n idi“n lalei\) like a fountain bubbling up (cf. strkjv@Matthew:12:34|). {For he is a liar} (\hoti pseustˆs estin\). Old word for the agent in a conscious falsehood (\pseudos\). See strkjv@1John:1:10; strkjv@Romans:3:4|. Common word in John because of the emphasis on \alˆtheia\ (truth). {And the father thereof} (\kai ho patˆr autou\). Either the father of the lie or of the liar, both of which are true as already shown by Jesus. {Autou} in the genitive can be either neuter or masculine. Westcott takes it thus, "because he is a liar and his father (the devil) is a liar," making "one," not the devil, the subject of "whenever he speaks," a very doubtful expression.

rwp@John:9:8 @{Neighbours} (\geitones\). From \gˆ\ (land), of the same land, old word. See strkjv@Luke:14:2|. {Saw him} (\the“rountes\). Present active participle of \the“re“\, who used to observe him. {Aforetime} (\to proteron\). Adverbial accusative, "the former time," formerly. {That he was a beggar} (\hoti prosaitˆs ˆn\). See strkjv@4:19; strkjv@12:19| for declarative \hoti\ after \the“re“\. But it is entirely possible that \hoti\ here is "because" (Westcott). \Prosaitˆs\ is a late word for beggar, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:10:46|. It is from \prosaite“\, to ask in addition (see \prosait“n\ below), a thing that beggars know how to do. {Is not this he that sat and begged?} (\Ouch houtos estin ho kathˆmenos kai prosait“n;\). He had his regular place and was a familiar figure. But now his eyes are wide open.

rwp@John:9:12 @{Where is he?} (\Pou estin ekeinos;\). The very question of strkjv@7:11|.

rwp@John:9:19 @{Is this your son who ye say was born blind? how doth he now see?} (\Houtos estin ho huios hum“n, hon humeis lˆgete hoti tuphlos egennˆthˆ; p“s oun blepei arti;\). It was shrewdly put with three questions in one in order to confuse the parents if possible and give the hostile Pharisees a handle.

rwp@John:9:20 @{We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind} (\Oidamen hoti houtos estin ho huios hˆm“n kai hoti tuphlos egennˆthˆ\). These two questions the parents answer clearly and thus cut the ground from under the disbelief of these Pharisees as to the fact of the cure (verse 18|). Songs:these Pharisees made a failure here.

rwp@John:10:1 @{Verily, Verily} (\Amˆn, amˆn\). Solemn prelude by repetition as in strkjv@1:51|. The words do not ever introduce a fresh topic (cf. strkjv@8:34,51,58|). Songs:in strkjv@10:7|. The Pharisees had previously assumed (Vincent) they alone were the authoritative guides of the people (9:24,29|). Songs:Jesus has a direct word for them. Songs:Jesus begins this allegory in a characteristic way. John does not use the word \parabolˆ\, but \paroimia\ (verse 6|), and it really is an allegory of the Good Shepherd and self-explanatory like that of the Prodigal Son in strkjv@Luke:15|. He first tells it in verses 1-5| and then explains and expands it in verses 7-18|. {Into the fold of the sheep} (\eis tˆn aulˆn t“n probat“n\). Originally \aulˆ\ (from \a“\, to blow) in Homer's time was just an uncovered space around the house enclosed by a wall, then a roofless enclosure in the country where flocks were herded as here and verse 16|. It later came to mean the house itself or palace (Matthew:26:3,58|, etc.). In the papyri it means the court attached to the house. {Climbeth up} (\anabain“n\). Present active participle of \anabain“\, to go up. One who goes up, not by the door, has to climb up over the wall. {Some other way} (\allachothen\). Rare word for old \allothen\, but in 4Macc. strkjv@1:7 and in a papyrus. Only here in N.T. {The same} (\ekeinos\). "That one" just described. {Is a thief and a robber} (\kleptˆs estin kai lˆistˆs\). Both old and common words (from \klept“\, to steal, \lˆizomai\, to plunder). The distinction is preserved in the N.T. as here. Judas was a \kleptˆs\ (John:12:6|), Barabbas a robber (18:40|) like the two robbers (Matthew:27:38,44|) crucified with Jesus erroneously termed thieves like "the thief on the cross" by most people. See strkjv@Mark:11:17|. Here the man jumping over the wall comes to steal and to do it by violence like a bandit. He is both thief and robber.

rwp@John:10:2 @{The shepherd of the sheep} (\poimˆn estin t“n probat“n\). No article with \poimˆn\, "a shepherd to the sheep." He comes in by the door with the sheep whom he leads. Old word is \poimˆn\, root meaning to protect. Jesus applies it to himself in verse 16| and implies it here. It is used of Christ in strkjv@1Peter:2:25; strkjv@Hebrews:13:20|. Paul applies it to ministers in strkjv@Ephesians:4:11|. Jesus uses the verb \poimain“\, to shepherd, to Peter (John:21:16|) and Peter uses it to other preachers (1Peter:5:2|) and Paul uses it for bishops (elders) in strkjv@Acts:20:28|. Our word pastor is simply Latin for shepherd. Christ is drawing a sharp contrast after the conduct of the Pharisees towards the blind man between himself and them.

rwp@John:10:34 @{Is it not written?} (\ouk estin gegrammenon;\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \graph“\ (as in strkjv@2:17|) in place of the usual \gegraptai\. "Does it not stand written?" {In your law} (\en t“i nom“i hum“n\). From strkjv@Psalms:82:6|. The term \nomos\ (law) applying here to the entire O.T. as in strkjv@12:34; strkjv@15:25; strkjv@Romans:3:19; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:21|. Aleph D Syr-sin. omit \hum“n\, but needlessly. We have it already so from Jesus in strkjv@8:17|. They posed as the special custodians of the O.T. {I said} (\hoti eg“ eipa\). Recitative \hoti\ before a direct quotation like our quotation marks. \Eipa\ is a late second aorist form of indicative with \-a\ instead of \-on\. {Ye are gods} (\theoi este\). Another direct quotation after \eipa\ but without \hoti\. The judges of Israel abused their office and God is represented in strkjv@Psalms:82:6| as calling them "gods" (\theoi\, _elohim_) because they were God's representatives. See the same use of _elohim_ in strkjv@Exodus:21:6; strkjv@22:9,28|. Jesus meets the rabbis on their own ground in a thoroughly Jewish way.

rwp@John:11:4 @{Heard it} (\akousas\). The messenger delivered the message of the sisters. The reply of Jesus is for him and for the apostles. {Is not unto death} (\ouk estin pros thanaton\). Death in the final issue, to remain dead. Lazarus did die, but he did not remain dead. See \hamartia pros thanaton\ in strkjv@1John:5:16|, "sin unto death" (final death). {But for the glory of God} (\all' huper tˆs doxˆs tou theou\). In behalf of God's glory, as the sequel shows. Cf. strkjv@9:3| about the man born blind. The death of Lazarus will illustrate God's glory. In some humble sense those who suffer the loss of loved ones are entitled to some comfort from this point made by Jesus about Lazarus. In a supreme way it is true of the death of Christ which he himself calls glorification of himself and God (13:31|). In strkjv@7:39| John had already used \doxaz“\ of the death of Christ. {That the Son of God may be glorified thereby} (\hina doxasthˆi ho huios tou theou di' autˆs\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \doxaz“\. Here Jesus calls himself "the Son of God." In strkjv@8:54| Jesus had said: "It is my Father that glorifieth me." The raising of Lazarus from the tomb will bring glory to the Son of God. See strkjv@17:1| for this idea in Christ's prayer. The raising of Lazarus will also bring to an issue his own death and all this involves the glorification of the Father (7:39; strkjv@12:16; strkjv@13:31; strkjv@14:13|). The death of Lazarus brings Jesus face to face with his own death.

rwp@John:13:16 @{Is not greater} (\ouk estin meiz“n\). Comparative adjective of \megas\ (greater) followed by the ablative case \kuriou\ (contrast between slave, lord) and \tou pempsantos\ (articular participle of \pemp“\, to send, with contrast with apostle, "one sent" (\apostolos\) from \apostell“\). Jesus here enforces the dignity of service. In strkjv@Luke:22:27| Jesus argues this point a bit. In strkjv@Luke:6:40| the contrast is between the pupil and the teacher, though some pupils consider themselves superior to the teacher. In strkjv@Matthew:10:24| Jesus uses both forms of the saying (pupil and slave). He clearly repeated this \logion\ often.

rwp@John:13:24 @{Beckoneth} (\neuei\). Old verb to nod, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:24:10|. They were all looking in surprise at each other. {Tell us who it is of whom he speaketh} (\eipe tis estin peri hou legei\). Second aorist active imperative with indirect question (\tis\) and relative clause (\peri hou\). Peter was cautious, but could not contain his curiosity. John in front of Jesus was in a favourable position to have a whispered word with him. {Breast} (\stˆthos\). As in strkjv@21:20; strkjv@Luke:18:13| in place of \kolpon\ (verse 23|). This is the moment represented in Leonardo da Vinci's "Last Supper," only he shows the figures like the monks for whom he painted it.

rwp@John:14:21 @{He it is that loveth me} (\ekeinos estin ho agap“n me\). Emphatic demonstrative pronoun \ekeinos\: "that is the one who loves me." {And will manifest myself unto him} (\kai emphanis“ aut“i emauton\). Future active of \emphaniz“\, old verb from \emphanˆs\ (Acts:10:40; strkjv@Romans:10:20|). The Unseen and Risen Christ will be a real and spiritual Presence to the obedient and loving believer.

rwp@John:14:24 @{He that loveth me not} (\ho mˆ agap“n me\). Present active articular participle of \agapa“\ with negative \mˆ\, "the one who keeps on not loving me." {Is not mine, but the Father's} (\ouk estin emos, alla tou patros\). Predicative possessive pronoun \emos\ and the predicate genitive of possession \patros\.

rwp@John:18:38 @{What is truth?} (\ti estin alˆtheia;\). This famous sneer of Pilate reveals his own ignorance of truth, as he stood before Incarnate Truth (John:14:6|). _Quid est veritas?_ The answer in Latin is _Vir est qui adest_ as has been succinctly said by the use of the same letters. Pilate turned with indifference from his own great question and rendered his verdict: "I find no crime in him" (\eg“ oudemian heurisk“ en aut“i aitian\). For this use of \aitia\ see strkjv@Matthew:27:37; strkjv@Mark:15:26|. Pilate therefore should have set Jesus free at once.

rwp@John:20:30 @{Many other signs} (\polla alla sˆmeia\). Not only those described in the Synoptic Gospels or referred to in general statements, but many alluded to in John's Gospel (2:23; strkjv@4:45; strkjv@12:37|). {Are not written} (\ouk estin gegrammena\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \graph“\, do not stand written, are not described "in this book." John has made a selection of the vast number wrought by Jesus "in the presence of the disciples" (\en“pion t“n mathˆt“n\), common idiom in Luke, not in Mark and Matthew, and by John elsewhere only in strkjv@1John:3:22|. John's book is written with a purpose which he states.

rwp@John:20:31 @{Are written} (\gegraptai\). Perfect passive indicative of \graph“\, "have been written" by John. {That ye may believe} (\hina pisteuˆte\). Purpose with \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \pisteu“\, "that you may keep on believing." The book has had precisely this effect of continuous and successive confirmation of faith in Jesus Christ through the ages. {Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God} (\Iˆsous estin ho Christos ho huios tou theou\). The man named Jesus is identical with the Messiah (the Anointed One) as opposed to the Cerinthian separation of the Jesus of history and the Christ (\aeon\) of theology. And the Docetic notion of a phantom body for Jesus with no actual human body is also false. Jesus is the Son of God with all that this high term implies, the Logos of strkjv@John:1:1-18| (the Prologue). "Very God of very God," Incarnate Revealer of God. But there is a further purpose. {And that believing ye may have life in his name} (\kai hina pisteuontes z“ˆn echˆte en t“i onomati autou\). Note present participle \pisteuontes\ (continuing to believe) and the present active subjunctive \echˆte\ (keep on having). "Life" (\z“ˆn\) is eternal life so often mentioned in this Gospel, life to be found only in the name (and power) of Jesus Christ the Son of God. This verse constitutes a fitting close for this wonderful book and John may at first have intended to stop here. But before he published the work he added the Epilogue (Chapter XXI) which is written in the same style and gives a beautiful picture of the Risen Christ with a side-light on John and Peter (restored to fellowship).

rwp@Luke:4:22 @{Bare him witness} (\emarturoun\). Imperfect active, perhaps inchoative. They all began to bear witness that the rumours were not exaggerations (4:14|) as they had supposed, but had foundation in fact if this discourse or its start was a fair sample of his teaching. The verb \marture“\ is a very old and common one. It is frequent in Acts, Paul's Epistles, and the Johannine books. The substantive \martur\ is seen in our English \martyr\, one who witnesses even by his death to his faith in Christ. {And wondered} (\kai ethaumazon\). Imperfect active also, perhaps inchoative also. They began to marvel as he proceeded with his address. This verb is an old one and common in the Gospels for the attitude of the people towards Jesus. {At the words of grace} (\epi tois logois tˆs charitos\). See on ¯Luke:1:30; strkjv@2:52| for this wonderful word \charis\ so full of meaning and so often in the N.T. The genitive case (case of genus or kind) here means that the words that came out of the mouth of Jesus in a steady stream (present tense, \ekporeuomenois\) were marked by fascination and charm. They were "winning words" as the context makes plain, though they were also "gracious" in the Pauline sense of "grace." There is no necessary antithesis in the ideas of graceful and gracious in these words of Jesus. {Is not this Joseph's son?} (\Ouchi huios estin I“sˆph houtos;\). Witness and wonder gave way to bewilderment as they began to explain to themselves the situation. The use of \ouchi\ intensive form of \ouk\ in a question expects the answer "yes." Jesus passed in Nazareth as the son of Joseph as Luke presents him in strkjv@3:23|. He does not stop here to correct this misconception because the truth has been already amply presented in strkjv@1:28-38; strkjv@2:49|. This popular conception of Jesus as the son of Joseph appears also in strkjv@John:1:45|. The puzzle of the people was due to their previous knowledge of Jesus as the carpenter (Mark:6:3|; the carpenter's son, strkjv@Matthew:13:55|). For him now to appear as the Messiah in Nazareth where he had lived and laboured as the carpenter was a phenomenon impossible to credit on sober reflection. Songs:the mood of wonder and praise quickly turned with whispers and nods and even scowls to doubt and hostility, a rapid and radical transformation of emotion in the audience.

rwp@Luke:6:40 @{The disciple is not above his master} (\ouk estin mathˆtˆs huper ton didaskalon\). Literally, a learner (or pupil) is not above the teacher. Precisely so in strkjv@Matthew:10:24| where "slave" is added with "lord." But here Luke adds: "But everyone when he is perfected shall be as his master" (\katˆrtismenos de pƒs estai h“s ho didaskalos autou\). The state of completion, perfect passive participle, is noted in \katˆrtismenos\. The word is common for mending broken things or nets (Matthew:4:21|) or men (Galatians:6:1|). Songs:it is a long process to get the pupil patched up to the plane of his teacher.

rwp@Luke:6:49 @{He that heareth and doeth not} (\ho de akousas kai mˆ poiˆsas\). Aorist active participle with article. Particular case singled out (punctiliar, aorist). {Like a man} (\homoios estin anthr“p“i\). Associative instrumental case after \homoios\ as in verse 47|. {Upon the earth} (\epi tˆn gˆn\). strkjv@Matthew:7:26| has "upon the sand" (\epi tˆn ammon\), more precise and worse than mere earth. But not on the rock. {Without a foundation} (\ch“ris themeliou\). The foundation on the rock after deep digging as in verse 48|. {It fell in} (\sunepesen\). Second aorist active of \sunpipt“\, to fall together, to collapse. An old verb from Homer on, but only here in the N.T. {The ruin} (\to rˆgma\). The crash like a giant oak in the forest resounded far and wide. An old word for a rent or fracture as in medicine for laceration of a wound. Only here in the N.T.

rwp@Luke:8:11 @{Is this} (\estin de hautˆ\). Means this. Jesus now proceeds to interpret his own parable. {The seed is the word of God} (\ho sporos estin ho logos tou theou\). The article with both subject and predicate as here means that they are interchangeable and can be turned round: The word of God is the seed. The phrase "the word of God" does not appear in Matthew and only once in Mark (Mark:7:13|) and John (John:10:35|), but four times in Luke (5:1; strkjv@8:11,21; strkjv@11:28|) and twelve times in Acts. In strkjv@Mark:4:14| we have only "the word." In strkjv@Mark:3:31| we have "the will of God," and in strkjv@Matthew:12:46| "the will of my Father" where strkjv@Luke:8:21| has "the word of God." This seems to show that Luke has the subjective genitive here and means the word that comes from God.

rwp@Luke:10:22 @{Knoweth who the Son is} (\gin“skei tis estin ho huios\). Knows by experience, \gin“skei\. Here strkjv@Matthew:11:27| has \epigin“skei\ (fully knows) and simply \ton huion\ (the Son) instead of the "who" (\tis\) clause. Songs:also in "who the Father is" (\tis estin ho pater\). But the same use and contrast of "the Father," "the Son." in both Matthew and Luke, "an aerolite from the Johannean heaven" (Hase). No sane criticism can get rid of this Johannine bit in these Gospels written long before the Fourth Gospel was composed. We are dealing here with the oldest known document about Christ (the Logia) and the picture is that drawn in the Fourth Gospel (see my _The Christ of the Logia_). It is idle to try to whittle away by fantastic exegesis the high claims made by Jesus in this passage. It is an ecstatic prayer in the presence of the Seventy under the rapture of the Holy Spirit on terms of perfect equality and understanding between the Father and the Son in the tone of the priestly prayer in strkjv@John:17|. We are justified in saying that this prayer of supreme Fellowship with the Father in contemplation of final victory over Satan gives us a glimpse of the prayers with the Father when the Son spent whole nights on the mountain alone with the Father. Here is the Messianic consciousness in complete control and with perfect confidence in the outcome. Here as in strkjv@Matthew:11:27| by the use of {willeth to reveal him} (\boulˆtai apokalupsai\). The Son claims the power to reveal the Father "to whomsoever he wills" (\h“i an boulˆtai\, indefinite relative and present subjunctive of \boulomai\, to will, not the future indicative). This is divine sovereignty most assuredly. Human free agency is also true, but it is full divine sovereignty in salvation that is here claimed along with possession (\paredothˆ\, timeless aorist passive indicative) of all power from the Father. Let that supreme claim stand.

rwp@Luke:10:29 @{Desiring to justify himself} (\thel“n dikai“sai heauton\). The lawyer saw at once that he had convicted himself of asking a question that he already knew. In his embarrassment he asks another question to show that he did have some point at first: {And who is my neighbour?} (\kai tis estin mou plˆsion;\). The Jews split hairs over this question and excluded from "neighbour" Gentiles and especially Samaritans. Songs:here was his loop-hole. A neighbour is a nigh dweller to one, but the Jews made racial exceptions as many, alas, do today. The word \plˆsion\ here is an adverb (neuter of the adjective \plˆsios\) meaning \ho plˆsion “n\ (the one who is near), but \“n\ was usually not expressed and the adverb is here used as if a substantive.

rwp@Luke:10:41 @{Art anxious} (\merimnƒis\). An old verb for worry and anxiety from \meriz“\ (\meris\, part) to be divided, distracted. Jesus had warned against this in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew:6:25,28,31,34|. See also strkjv@Luke:12:11,22,26|). {And troubled} (\kai thorubazˆi\). From \thorubazomai\, a verb found nowhere else so far. Many MSS. here have the usual form \turbazˆi\, from \turbaz“\. Apparently from \thorubos\, a common enough word for tumult. Martha had both inward anxiety and outward agitation. {But one thing is needful} (\henos de estin chreia\). This is the reading of A C and may be correct. A few manuscripts have: "There is need of few things." Aleph B L (and Westcott and Hort) have: "There is need of few things or one," which seems like a conflate reading though the readings are all old. See Robertson, _Introduction to Textual Criticism of the N.T._, p. 190. Jesus seems to say to Martha that only one dish was really necessary for the meal instead of the "many" about which she was so anxious.

rwp@Luke:12:1 @{In the meantime} (\en hois\). It is a classic idiom to start a sentence or even a paragraph as here with a relative, "in which things or circumstances," without any expressed antecedent other than the incidents in strkjv@11:53f|. In strkjv@12:3| Luke actually begins the sentence with two relatives \anth' h“n hosa\ (wherefore whatsoever). {Many thousands} (\muriad“n\). Genitive absolute with \episunachtheis“n\ (first aorist passive participle feminine plural because of \muriad“n\), a double compound late verb, \episunag“\, to gather together unto. The word "myriads" is probably hyperbolical as in strkjv@Acts:21:20|, but in the sense of ten thousand, as in strkjv@Acts:19:19|, it means a very large crowd apparently drawn together by the violent attacks of the rabbis against Jesus. {Insomuch that they trode one upon another} (\h“ste katapatein allˆlous\). The imagination must complete the picture of this jam. {Unto his disciples first of all} (\pros tous mathˆtas autou pr“ton\). This long discourse in strkjv@Luke:12| is really a series of separate talks to various groups in the vast crowds around Jesus. This particular talk goes through verse 12|. {Beware of} (\prosechete heautois apo\). Put your mind (\noun\ understood) for yourselves (dative) and avoid (\apo\ with the ablative). {The leaven of the Pharisees which is hypocrisy} (\tˆs zumˆs hˆtis estin hupocrisis t“n Pharisai“n\). In strkjv@Mark:8:15| Jesus had coupled the lesson of the Pharisees with that of Herod, in strkjv@Matthew:16:6| with that of the Sadducees also. He had long ago called the Pharisees hypocrites (Matthew:6:2,5,16|). The occasion was ripe here for this crisp saying. In strkjv@Matthew:13:33| leaven does not have an evil sense as here, which see. See strkjv@Matthew:23:13| for hypocrites. Hypocrisy was the leading Pharisaic vice (Bruce) and was a mark of sanctity to hide an evil heart.

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 strkjv@Acts:14:15| where that is the idiom employed. {Render} (\apodos\). Second aorist active imperative of \apodid“mi\, Give back (and at once). {The account} (\ton logon\). The reckoning or report. Common use of \logos\. {Stewardship} (\oikonomias\). Same root as \oikonomos\ (steward). This demand does not necessarily mean dismissal if investigation proved him innocent of the charges. But the reason given implies that he is to be dismissed: {Thou canst no longer} (\ou gar dunˆi\).

rwp@Luke:22:53 @{But this is your hour} (\all' hautˆ estin hum“n hˆ h“ra\). Songs:Jesus surrenders. The moral value of his atoning sacrifice on the Cross consists in the voluntariness of his death. He makes it clear that they have taken undue advantage of him in this hour of secret prayer and had failed to seize him in public in the temple. But "the power of darkness" (\hˆ exousia tou skotous\), had its turn. A better day will come. The might, authority of darkness.

rwp@Luke:24:6 @{He is not here, but is risen} (\ouk estin h“de, alla ˆgerthˆ\). Another Western non-interpolation according to Westcott and Hort. The words are genuine at any rate in strkjv@Mark:16:6; strkjv@Matthew:28:7|. {The third day rise again} (\tˆi tritˆi hˆmerƒi anastˆnai\). See strkjv@9:22; strkjv@18:32,33| where Jesus plainly foretold this fact. And yet they had forgotten it, for it ran counter to all their ideas and hopes.

rwp@Mark:3:17 @{Boanerges, which is Sons of thunder} (\Boanˆrges ho estin huioi brontˆs\). This Hebrew nickname is given only by Mark and the reason for it is not clear. It may refer to the fiery temperament revealed in strkjv@Luke: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 \anˆr\, 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, strkjv@John:11:16|). There are two uses of the name of James (\Iac“bos\, Jacob). Thaddeus is another name for Lebbaeus.

rwp@Mark:3:29 @{Guilty of an eternal sin} (\enochos estin ai“niou hamartˆmatos\). The genitive of the penalty occurs here with \enochos\. In saying that Jesus had an unclean spirit (verse 30|) they had attributed to the devil the work of the Holy Spirit. This is the unpardonable sin and it can be committed today by men who call the work of Christ the work of the devil, Nietzsche may be cited as an instance in point. Those who hope for a second probation hereafter may ponder carefully how a soul that eternally sins in such an environment can ever repent. That is eternal punishment. The text here is \hamartˆmatos\ (sin), not \krise“s\ (judgment), as the Textus Receptus has it.

rwp@Mark:6:3 @{Is not this the carpenter?} (\Ouch houtos estin ho tekt“n;\). strkjv@Matthew:13:55| calls him "the carpenter's son" (\ho tou tektonos huios\). He was both. Evidently since Joseph's death he had carried on the business and was "the carpenter" of Nazareth. The word \tekt“n\ comes from \tekein, tikt“\, to beget, create, like \technˆ\ (craft, art). It is a very old word, from Homer down. It was originally applied to the worker in wood or builder with wood like our carpenter. Then it was used of any artisan or craftsman in metal, or in stone as well as in wood and even of sculpture. It is certain that Jesus worked in wood. Justin Martyr speaks of ploughs, yokes, et cetera, made by Jesus. He may also have worked in stone and may even have helped build some of the stone synagogues in Galilee like that in Capernaum. But in Nazareth the people knew him, his family (no mention of Joseph), and his trade and discounted all that they now saw with their own eyes and heard with their own ears. This word carpenter "throws the only flash which falls on the continuous tenor of the first thirty years from infancy to manhood, of the life of Christ" (Farrar). That is an exaggeration for we have strkjv@Luke:2:41-50| and "as his custom was" (Luke:4:16|), to go no further. But we are grateful for Mark's realistic use of \tekt“n\ here. {And they were offended in him} (\kai eskandalizonto en aut“i\). Songs:exactly strkjv@Matthew:13:56|, {were made to stumble in him}, trapped like game by the \skandalon\ because they could not explain him, having been so recently one of them. "The Nazarenes found their stumbling block in the person or circumstances of Jesus. He became--\petra skandalou\ (1Peter:2:7,8; strkjv@Romans:9:33|) to those who disbelieved" (Swete). Both Mark and strkjv@Matthew:13:57|, which see, preserve the retort of Jesus with the quotation of the current proverb about a prophet's lack of honour in his own country. strkjv@John:4:44| quoted it from Jesus on his return to Galilee long before this. It is to be noted that Jesus here makes a definite claim to being a prophet (\prophˆtˆs\, forspeaker for God), a seer. He was much more than this as he had already claimed to be Messiah (John:4:26; strkjv@Luke:4:21|), the Son of man with power of God (Mark:1:10; strkjv@Matthew:9:6; strkjv@Luke:5:24|), the Son of God (John:5:22|). They stumble at Jesus today as the townspeople of Nazareth did. {In his own house} (\en tˆi oikiƒi autou\). Also in strkjv@Matthew:13:57|. This was the saddest part of it all, that his own brothers in his own home disbelieved his Messianic claims (John:7:5|). This puzzle was the greatest of all.

rwp@Mark:7:2 @{With defiled, that is unwashen hands} (\koinais chersin, tout' estin aniptois\). Associative instrumental case. Originally \koinos\ meant what was common to everybody like the _Koin‚_ Greek. But in later Greek it came also to mean as here what is vulgar or profane. Songs:Peter in strkjv@Acts:10:14| "common and unclean." The next step was the ceremonially unclean. The emissaries of the Pharisees and the scribes from Jerusalem had seen "some of the disciples" eat without washing their hands, how many we are not told. Swete suggests that in going through the plain the disciples were seen eating some of the bread preserved in the twelve baskets the afternoon before across the lake. There was no particular opportunity to wash the hands, a very proper thing to do before eating for sanitary reasons. But the objection raised is on ceremonial, not sanitary, grounds.

rwp@Mark:7:11 @{Corban} (\korban ho estin d“ron\). See on ¯Matthew:15:5|. Mark preserves the Hebrew word for a gift or offering to God (Exodus:21:17; strkjv@Leviticus:20:9|), indeclinable here, meaning {gift} (\d“ron\), but declinable \korbanas\ in strkjv@Matthew:27:6|, meaning sacred treasury. The rabbis ({but ye say}, \humeis de legete\) actually allowed the mere saying of this word by an unfaithful son to prevent the use of needed money for the support of father or mother. It was a home thrust to these pettifogging sticklers for ceremonial punctilios. They not only justified such a son's trickery, but held that he was prohibited from using it for father or mother, but he might use it for himself.

rwp@Mark:9:40 @{He that is not against us is with us} (\hos ouk estin kath' hˆm“n huper hˆm“n estin\). This profound saying throws a flood of light in every direction. The complement of this logion is that in strkjv@Matthew:12:30|: "He that is not with me is against me." Both are needed. Some people imagine that they are really for Christ who refuse to take a stand in the open with him and for him.

rwp@Matthew:3:2 @{For this is he that was spoken of by Isaiah the prophet} (\houtos gar estin ho rhˆtheis dia Esaiou tou prophˆtou\). This is Matthew's way of interpreting the mission and message of the Baptist. He quotes strkjv@Isaiah:40:3| where "the prophet refers to the return of Israel from the exile, accompanied by their God" (McNeile). He applies it to the work of John as "a voice crying in the wilderness" for the people to make ready the way of the Lord who is now near. He was only a voice, but what a voice he was. He can be heard yet across the centuries.

rwp@Matthew:11:14 @{This is Elijah} (\autos estin Eleias\). Jesus here endorses John as the promise of Malachi. The people understood strkjv@Malachi:4:1| to mean the return of Elijah in person. This John denied as to himself (John:1:21|). But Jesus affirms that John is the Elijah of promise who has come already (Matthew:17:12|). He emphasizes the point: "He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."

rwp@Matthew:12:23 @{Is this the Son of David?} (\mˆti houtos estin ho huios Daueid?\). The form of the question expects the answer "no," but they put it so because of the Pharisaic hostility towards Jesus. The multitudes "were amazed" or "stood out of themselves" (\existanto\), imperfect tense, vividly portraying the situation. They were almost beside themselves with excitement.

rwp@Matthew:13:33 @{Is like unto leaven} (\homoia estin zumˆi\). In its pervasive power. Curiously enough some people deny that Jesus here likens the expanding power of the Kingdom of heaven to leaven, because, they say, leaven is the symbol of corruption. But the language of Jesus is not to be explained away by such exegetical jugglery. The devil is called like a lion by Peter (1Peter:5:8|) and Jesus in Revelation is called the Lion of the Tribe of Judah (Revelation:5:5|). The leaven permeates all the "wheaten meal" (\aleurou\) till the whole is leavened. There is nothing in the "three measures," merely a common amount to bake. Dr. T.R. Glover in his _Jesus of History_ suggests that Jesus used to notice his mother using that amount of wheat flour in baking bread. To find the Trinity here is, of course, quite beside the mark. The word for leaven, \zumˆ\, is from \ze“\, to boil, to seethe, and so pervasive fermentation.

rwp@Matthew:13:38 @{The field is the world} (\ho de agros estin ho kosmos\). The article with both "field" and "world" in Greek means that subject and predicate are coextensive and so interchangeable. It is extremely important to understand that both the good seed and the darnel (tares) are sown in the world, not in the Kingdom, not in the church. The separation comes at the consummation of the age (\sunteleia ai“nos\, 39|), the harvest time. They all grow together in the field (the world).

rwp@Matthew:13:54 @{Is not this the carpenter's son?} (\ouch houtos estin ho tou tekt“nos huios?\). The well-known, the leading, or even for a time the only carpenter in Nazareth till Jesus took the place of Joseph as the carpenter. What the people of Nazareth could not comprehend was how one with the origin and environment of Jesus here in Nazareth could possess the wisdom which he appeared to have in his teaching (\edidasken\). That has often puzzled people how a boy whom they knew could become the man he apparently is after leaving them. They knew Joseph, Mary, the brothers (four of them named) and sisters (names not given). Jesus passed here as the son of Joseph and these were younger brothers and sisters (half brothers and sisters technically).

rwp@Matthew:13:57 @{And they were offended in him} (\kai eskandalizonto en aut“i\). Graphic imperfect passive. Literally, "They stumbled at him," "They were repelled by him" (Moffatt), "They turned against him" (Weymouth). It was unpardonable for Jesus not to be commonplace like themselves. {Not without honour} (\ouk estin atimos\). This is a proverb found in Jewish, Greek, and Roman writers. Seen also in the _Logia of Jesus_ (_Oxyr. Papyri_ i. 3).

rwp@Matthew:14:15 @{When even was come} (\opsias genomenˆs\). Genitive absolute. Not sunset about 6 P.M. as in strkjv@8:16| and as in strkjv@14:23|, but the first of the two "evenings" beginning at 3 P.M. {The place is desert} (\erˆmos estin ho topos\). Not a desolate region, simply lonely, comparatively uninhabited with no large towns near. There were "villages" (\k“mas\) where the people could buy food, but they would need time to go to them. Probably this is the idea of the disciples when they add: {The time is already past} (\hˆ h“ra ˆdˆ parˆlthen\). They must hurry.

rwp@Matthew:17:4 @{And Peter answered} (\apokritheis de ho Petros\). "Peter to the front again, but not greatly to his credit" (Bruce). It is not clear what Peter means by his saying: "It is good for us to be here" (\kalon estin hˆmƒs h“de einai\). Luke (Luke:9:33|) adds "not knowing what he said," as they "were heavy with sleep." Songs:it is not well to take Peter too seriously on this occasion. At any rate he makes a definite proposal. {I will make} (\paiˆs“\). Future indicative though aorist subjunctive has same form. {Tabernacles} (\skˆnas\), booths. The Feast of Tabernacles was not far away. Peter may have meant that they should just stay up here on the mountain and not go to Jerusalem for the feast.

rwp@Matthew:19:24 @{It is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye} (\eukop“teron estin kamˆlon dia trˆmatos rhaphidos eiselthein\). Jesus, of course, means by this comparison, whether an eastern proverb or not, to express the impossible. The efforts to explain it away are jejune like a ship's cable, \kamilon\ or \rhaphis\ as a narrow gorge or gate of entrance for camels which recognized stooping, etc. All these are hopeless, for Jesus pointedly calls the thing "impossible" (verse 26|). The Jews in the Babylonian Talmud did have a proverb that a man even in his dreams did not see an elephant pass through the eye of a needle (Vincent). The Koran speaks of the wicked finding the gates of heaven shut "till a camel shall pass through the eye of a needle." But the Koran may have got this figure from the New Testament. The word for an ordinary needle is \rhaphis\, but, Luke (Luke:18:25|) employs \belonˆ\, the medical term for the surgical needle not elsewhere in the N.T.

rwp@Matthew:24:6 @{See that ye be not troubled} (\horate mˆ throeisthe\). Asyndeton here with these two imperatives as strkjv@Mark:8:15| \orate blepete\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 949). Look out for the wars and rumours of wars, but do not be scared out of your wits by them. \Throe“\ means to cry aloud, to scream, and in the passive to be terrified by an outcry. Paul uses this very verb (\mˆde throeisthai\) in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2| as a warning against excitement over false reports that he had predicted the immediate second coming of Christ. {But the end is not yet} (\all' oup“ estin to telos\). It is curious how people overlook these words of Jesus and proceed to set dates for the immediate end. That happened during the Great War and it has happened since.

rwp@Matthew:26:26 @{And blessed and brake it} (\eulogˆsas eklasen\). Special "Grace" in the middle of the passover meal, "as they were eating," for the institution of the Supper. Jesus broke one of the passover wafers or cakes that each might have a piece, not as a symbol of the breaking of his body as the Textus Receptus has it in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:24|. The correct text there has only to \huper hum“n\ without \kl“menon\. As a matter of fact the body of Jesus was not "broken" (John:19:33|) as John expressly states. {This is my body} (\touto estin to s“ma mou\). The bread as a symbol _represents_ the body of Jesus offered for us, "a beautifully simple, pathetic, and poetic symbol of his death" (Bruce). But some have made it "run into fetish worship" (Bruce). Jesus, of course, does not mean that the bread actually becomes his body and is to be worshipped. The purpose of the memorial is to remind us of his death for our sins.

rwp@Revelation:17:8 @{Was and is not} (\ˆn kai ouk estin\). Imperfect and present of \eimi\, an apparent antithesis to \ho ˆn kai ho “n\ of strkjv@1:4|. This is a picture of the beast of strkjv@13:1ff.| which the woman is riding, but no longer just the empire, but one of the emperors who died (\ouk estin\, is not). {And is about to come up out of the abyss} (\kai mellei anabainein ek tˆs abussou\). That is, he is going to come to life again. {And to go into perdition} (\kai eis ap“leian hupagei\). Songs:(and he goes into perdition) the best MSS. read rather than the infinitive \hupagein\. Most interpreters see here an allusion to the "Nero _redivivus_" expectancy realized in Domitian, who was ruling when John wrote and who was called Nero _redivivus_. {Shall wonder} (\thaumasthˆsontai\). First future passive (deponent) of \thaumaz“\, with which compare \ethaumasthˆ\ in strkjv@13:3|. John had wondered (\ethaumasa\) in verse 6| "with the amazement of a horrible surprise; the world will wonder and admire" (Swete). {Whose name} (\h“n onoma\). Singular \onoma\, like \pt“ma\ in strkjv@11:8|. See strkjv@13:8| for the same description of those who worship the beast and for discussion of details. {When they behold} (\blepont“n\). Genitive plural of the present active participle of \blep“\, agreeing with \h“n\ (genitive relative) rather than with \hoi katoikountes\ (nominative just before \h“n\). {How that} (\hoti\). "Namely that." {He was, and is not, and shall come} (\ˆn kai ouk estin kai parestai\). Repetition of what is in verse 7| with \parestai\ (future of \pareimi\, from which \parousia\ comes) in place of \mellei\, "parody of the divine name" (Charles) in strkjv@1:4,8; strkjv@4:8|, "as the hellish antitype of Christ." The Neronic Antichrist has also a \parousia\.

rwp@Revelation:17:14 @{These} (\houtoi\). These ten kings. {Shall war against the Lamb} (\meta tou thˆriou polemˆsousin\). Future active of \polemeo\, to war. As allies of the beast (the servant of the dragon, strkjv@12:7|) they will wage war with the Lamb (the enemy of the dragon). These kings gather for battle as in strkjv@16:13f|. {And the Lamb shall overcome them} (\kai to arnion nikˆsei autous\). Future active of \nika“\. This is the glorious outcome, victory by the Lamb over the coalition of kings as against the beast before. {For he is Lord of lords and King of kings} (\hoti Kurios kuri“n estin kai Basileus basile“n\). The same words are again descriptive of Christ in strkjv@19:16|, as of God in strkjv@Deuteronomy:10:17| (God of gods and Lord of lords) and strkjv@Daniel:10:17| (God of gods and Lord of kings). Cf. also strkjv@1Timothy:6:15; strkjv@Revelation:1:5|. Crowned heads are Christ's subjects. {And they also shall overcome that are with him} (\kai hoi met' autou\). "And those with him shall also overcome" (supply \nikˆsousin\, not \eisin\). They will share in the triumph of the Lamb, as they shared in the conflict. Cf. \meta tou thˆriou\ in verse 12|. {Called and chosen and faithful} (\klˆtoi kai eklektoi kai pistoi\). These are the three notes of those who share in the victory. For \klˆtos\ and \eklektos\ see strkjv@Matthew:22:14| (contrasted); strkjv@Romans:8:28ff.; strkjv@2Peter:1:10; strkjv@Revelation:2:10,13|. The elect are called and prove faithful.

rwp@Revelation:20:12 @{The dead, the great and the small} (\tous nekrous tous megalous kai tous mikrous\). The general resurrection of verse 13| is pictured by anticipation as already over. No living are mentioned after the battle of verses 7-10|, though some will be living when Jesus comes to judge the quick and the dead (2Timothy:4:1; strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13ff.|). All classes and conditions (11:18; strkjv@13:16; strkjv@19:5,18|) John saw "standing before the throne" (\hest“tas en“pion tou thronou\). {Books were opened} (\biblia ˆnoichthˆsan\). First aorist passive of \anoig“\. Like strkjv@Daniel:7:10|. The record of each human being has been kept in God's books. {Were judged} (\ekrithˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \krin“\. The sentence upon each rests upon written evidence. {Another book which is the book of life} (\allo biblion ho estin tˆs z“ˆs\). This book has already been mentioned (3:5; strkjv@13:8; strkjv@17:8|). "It is the roll of living citizens of Jerusalem" (Swete), "the church of the first born enrolled in heaven" (Hebrews:12:23|). The books are "the vouchers for the book of life" (Alford). We are saved by grace, but character at last (according to their works) is the test as the fruit of the tree (Matthew:7:16,20; strkjv@10:32f.; strkjv@25:31-46; strkjv@John:15:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:10; strkjv@Romans:2:10; strkjv@Revelation:2:23; strkjv@20:12; strkjv@22:12|).

rwp@Revelation:21:1 @{A new heaven and a new earth} (\ouranon kainon kai gˆn kainˆn\). This new vision (\eidon\) is the picture of the bliss of the saints. {The first heaven and the first earth} (\ho pr“tos ouranos kai hˆ pr“tˆ gˆ\) {are passed away} (\apˆlthan\, went away, second aorist active indicative of \aperchomai\). "Fled away" (\ephugen\) in strkjv@20:11|. {And the sea is no more} (\kai hˆ thalassa ouk estin eti\). The sea had given up its dead (20:13|). There were great risks on the sea (18:17ff.|). The old physical world is gone in this vision. It is not a picture of renovation of this earth, but of the disappearance of this earth and sky (not heaven where God dwells). It is a glorious picture here in strkjv@21:1-8| in sharp contrast to the lake of fire in strkjv@20:11-15|. The symbolism in neither case is to be pressed too literally, but a stern and a glorious reality exists behind it all.

rwp@Revelation:21:17 @{A hundred and forty and four cubits} (\hekaton tesserakonta tessar“n pˆch“n\). Another multiple of 12 (12x12=144) as in strkjv@7:4; strkjv@14:1|. It is not clear whether it is the height or the breadth of the wall that is meant, though \hupsos\ (height) comes just before. That would be 216 feet high (cf. verse 12|), not enormous in comparison with the 7,000,000 feet (1500 miles) height of the city. {According to the measure of a man, that is, of an angel} (\metron anthr“pou, ho estin aggelou\). No preposition for "according to," just the accusative case of general reference in apposition with the verb \emetrˆsen\. Though measured by an angel, a human standard was employed, man's measure which is angel's (Bengel).

rwp@Revelation:21:22 @{I saw no temple therein} (\naon ouk eidon en autˆi\). "Temple I did not see in it." The whole city is a temple in one sense (verse 16|), but it is something more than a temple even with its sanctuary and Shekinah Glory in the Holy of Holies. {For the Lord God the Almighty, and the Lamb are the temple thereof} (\ho gar Kurios ho theos ho pantokrat“r, naos autˆs estin kai to arnion\). "For the Lord God, the Almighty, is the sanctuary of it and the Lamb." The Eternal Presence is the Shekinah Glory of God (verse 3|). In strkjv@2Corinthians:6:16| we are the sanctuary of God here, but now God is our Sanctuary, and so is the Lamb as in chapters strkjv@Revelation:4; 5|. See strkjv@1:8| and often for the description of God here.

rwp@Romans:1:25 @{Exchanged} (\metˆllaxan\). First aorist active indicative of \metallass“\, old word for exchanging trade, only here and verse 26| in N.T. What a bargain they made, "the truth of God for (\en\) the (\t“i\) lie." "The price of mythology" (Bengel). {Worshipped} (\esebasthˆsan\). First aorist passive (used transitively) of \sebazomai\, old verb, used in late Greek like \sebomai\, to worship. {Rather than the Creator} (\para ton ktisanta\). Placed side by side (\para\, the Creator and the creature, \ktisis\) they preferred the creature. {Who is blessed forever. Amen} (\hos estin eulogˆtos. Amˆn\). One of Paul's doxologies which may come at any moment when he is greatly stirred, as in strkjv@9:5|. \Eulogˆtos\ is verbal of \euloge“\.

rwp@Romans:3:10 @{As it is written} (\kath“s gegraptai hoti\). Usual formula of quotation as in verse 4| with recitative \hoti\ added as in verse 8|. Paul here uses a catena or chain of quotations to prove his point in verse 9| that Jews are in no better fix than the Greeks for all are under sin. Dr. J. Rendel Harris has shown that the Jews and early Christians had _Testimonia_ (quotations from the Old Testament) strung together for certain purposes as proof-texts. Paul may have used one of them or he may have put these passages together himself. Verses 10-12| come from strkjv@Psalms:14:1-3|; first half of 13| as far as \edoliousan\ from strkjv@Psalms:4:9|, the second half from strkjv@Psalms:140:3|; verse 14| from strkjv@Psalms:10:7|; 15-17| from an abridgment of strkjv@Isaiah:59:7f.|; verse 18| from strkjv@Psalms:35:1|. Paul has given compounded quotations elsewhere (2Corinthians:6:16; strkjv@Romans:9:25f.,27f; strkjv@11:26f.,34f.; strkjv@12:19f.|). Curiously enough this compounded quotation was imported bodily into the text (LXX) of strkjv@Psalms:14| after verse 4 in Aleph B, etc. {There is none righteous, no, not one} (\ouk estin dikaios oude heis\). "There is not a righteous man, not even one." This sentence is like a motto for all the rest, a summary for what follows.

rwp@Romans:3:12 @{They are together become unprofitable} (\hama ˆchre“thˆsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \achreo“\. Late word in Polybius and Cilician inscription of first century A.D. Some MSS. read \ˆchrei“thˆsan\ from \achreios\, useless (\a\ privative and \chreios\, useful) as in strkjv@Luke:17:10; strkjv@Matthew:25:30|, but Westcott and Hort print as above from the rarer spelling \achreos\. Only here in N.T. The Hebrew word means to go bad, become sour like milk (Lightfoot). {No, not so much as one} (\ouk estin he“s henos\). "There is not up to one."

rwp@Romans:8:34 @{Shall condemn} (\katakrin“n\). Can be either present active participle (condemns) or the future (shall condemn). It is a bold accuser who can face God with false charges or with true ones for that matter for we have an "Advocate" at God's Court (1John:2:1|), "who is at the right hand of God" (\hos estin en dexiƒi tou theou\) "who also maketh intercession for us" (\hos kai entugchanei huper hˆm“n\). Our Advocate paid the debt for our sins with his blood. The score is settled. We are free (8:1|).

rwp@Romans:10:6 @{Saith thus} (\hout“s legei\). Paul personifies "the from faith righteousness" (\hˆ ek piste“s dikaiosunˆ\). A free reproduction from strkjv@Deuteronomy:30:11-14|. Paul takes various phrases from the LXX and uses them for "his inspired conviction and experiences of the gospel" (Denney). He does not quote Moses as saying this or meaning this. {Say not in thy heart} (\mˆ eipˆis en tˆi kardiƒi sou\). Second aorist active subjunctive with \mˆ\ like strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:17|. To say in the heart is to think (Matthew:3:9|). {That is, to bring Christ down} (\tout' estin Christon katagagein\). Second aorist active infinitive of the common verb \katag“\, to bring or lead down. It is dependent on the preceding verb \anabˆsetai\ (shall ascend). \Tout' estin\ (that is) is what is called _Midrash_ or interpretation as in strkjv@9:8|. It occurs three times here (verses 6-8|). Paul applies the words of Moses to Christ. There is no need for one to go to heaven to bring Christ down to earth. The Incarnation is already a glorious fact. Today some men scout the idea of the Deity and Incarnation of Christ.

rwp@Romans:11:23 @{If they continue not in their unbelief} (\ean mˆ epimen“si tˆi apistiƒi\). Third class condition with the same verb used in verse 22| of the Gentile. Locative case of \apistiƒi\ here (same form as the instrumental in verse 20|). {For God is able} (\dunatos gar estin ho theos\). See this use of \dunatos estin\ in strkjv@4:21| rather than \dunatai\. This is the \crux\ of the whole matter. God is able.


Seeker Overlay: Off On
Bible:
Bible:
Book: