rwp hypothetical
rwp@1Peter:1:8 @{Whom} (\hon\). Relative referring to Christ just before and accusative case, object of both \idontes\ and \agapate\ (ye love). {Not having seen} (\ouk idontes\). Second aorist active participle of \hora\, to see, with \ouk\ rather than \m\ because it negatives an actual experience in contrast with \m horntes\ (though not seeing, hypothetical case). On whom (\eis hon\) with \pisteuontes\ common construction for "believing on" (\pisteu eis\). It is possible that Peter here has in mind the words of Jesus to Thomas as recorded in strkjv@John:20:29| ("Happy are those not seeing and yet believing"). Peter was present and heard the words of Jesus to Thomas, and so he could use them before John wrote his Gospel. {Ye rejoice greatly} (\agallite\). Same form as in verse 6|, only active here instead of middle. {With joy} (\chari\). Instrumental case (manner). {Unspeakable} (\aneklalti\). Late and rare double compound verbal (alpha privative and \eklale\), here only in N.T., in Dioscorides and Heliodorus, "unutterable," like Paul's "indescribable" (\anekdigtos\) gift (2Corinthians:9:15|, here alone in N.T.). {Full of glory} (\dedoxasmeni\). Perfect passive participle of \doxaz\, to glorify, "glorified joy," like the glorified face of Moses (Exodus:34:29ff.; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:10|.
rwp@Colossians:1:20 @{Through him} (\di' autou\). As the sufficient and chosen agent in the work of reconciliation (\apokatallaxai\, first aorist active infinitive of \apokatallass\, further addition to \eudoksen\, was pleased). This double compound (\apo, kata\ with \allass\) occurs only here, verse 22; strkjv@Ephesians:2:16|, and nowhere else so far as known. Paul's usual word for "reconcile" is \katallass\ (2Corinthians:5:18-20; strkjv@Romans:5:10|), though \diallass\ (Matthew:5:24|) is more common in Attic. The addition of \apo\ here is clearly for the idea of complete reconciliation. See on ¯2Corinthians:5:18-20| for discussion of \katallass\, Paul's great word. The use of \ta panta\ (the all things, the universe) as if the universe were somehow out of harmony reminds us of the mystical passage in strkjv@Romans:8:19-23| which see for discussion. Sin somehow has put the universe out of joint. Christ will set it right. {Unto himself} (\eis auton\). Unto God, though \auton\ is not reflexive unless written \hauton\. {Having made peace} (\eirnopoisas\). Late and rare compound (Proverbs:10:10| and here only in N.T.) from \eirnopoios\, peacemaker (Matthew:5:9|; here only in N.T.). In strkjv@Ephesians:2:15| we have \poin eirnn\ (separate words) {making peace}. Not the masculine gender, though agreeing with the idea of Christ involved even if \plrma\ be taken as the subject of \eudoksen\, a participial anacoluthon (construction according to sense as in strkjv@2:19|). If \theos\ be taken as the subject of \eudoksen\ the participle \eirnopoisas\ refers to Christ, not to \theos\ (God). {Through the blood of his cross} (\dia tou haimatos tou staurou autou\). This for the benefit of the Docetic Gnostics who denied the real humanity of Jesus and as clearly stating the _causa medians_ (Ellicott) of the work of reconciliation to be the Cross of Christ, a doctrine needed today. {Or things in the heavens} (\eite ta en tois ouranois\)...It is rather a hypothetical statement...16| not put in categorical form (Abbott), _universitas rerum_ (Ellicott).
rwp@John:21:2 @{There were together} (\san homou\). These seven (Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, the sons of Zebedee, and two others). We know that the sons of Zebedee were James and John (Matthew:4:21|), mentioned by name nowhere in John's Gospel, apparently because John is the author. We do not know who the "two others of his disciples" were, possibly Andrew and Philip. It seems to me to be crass criticism in spite of Harnack and Bernard to identify the incident here with that in strkjv@Luke:5:1-11|...identification even with a hypothetical common...
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}