rwp mention

rwp@Info_1Corinthians @ Some good commentaries on I Corinthians are the following: On the Greek Bachmann in the _Zahn Kommentar_, Edwards, Ellicott, Findlay (Expositor's Greek Testament), Godet, Goudge, Lietzmann (_Handbuch zum N.T._), Lightfoot (chs. 1-7), Parry, Robertson and Plummer (_Int. Crit._), Stanley, J. Weiss (_Meyer Kommentar_); on the English Dods (_Exp. Bible_), McFadyen, Parry, Ramsay, Rendall, F. W. Robertson, Walker (_Reader's Comm._). strkjv@1Corinthians:1:1 @{Called to be an apostle} (\kltos apostolos\). Verbal adjective \kltos\ from \kale\, without \einai\, to be. Literally, {a called apostle} (Romans:1:1|), not so-called, but one whose apostleship is due not to himself or to men (Galatians:1:1|), but to God, {through the will of God} (\dia thelmatos tou theou\). The intermediate (\dia, duo\, two) agent between Paul's not being Christ's apostle and becoming one was God's will (\thelma\, something willed of God), God's command (1Timothy:1:1|). Paul knows that he is not one of the twelve apostles, but he is on a par with them because, like them, he is chosen by God. He is an apostle of Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus (MSS. vary here, later epistles usually Christ Jesus). The refusal of the Judaizers to recognize Paul as equal to the twelve made him the more careful to claim his position. Bengel sees here Paul's denial of mere human authority in his position and also of personal merit: _...Dei excluditur auctoramentum humanum, mentione Voluntatis..._. {Our brother} (\ho adelphos\). Literally, the brother, but regular Greek idiom for our brother. This Sosthenes, now with Paul in Ephesus, is probably the same Sosthenes who received the beating meant for Paul in Corinth (Acts:18:17|). If so, the beating did him good for he is now a follower of Christ. He is in no sense a co-author of the Epistle, but merely associated with Paul because they knew him in Corinth. He may have been compelled by the Jews to leave Corinth when he, a ruler of the synagogue, became a Christian. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:1| for the mention of Silas and Timothy in the salutation. Sosthenes could have been Paul's amanuensis for this letter, but there is no proof of it.

rwp@1Corinthians:10:16 @{The cup of blessing} (\to potrion ts eulogias\). The cup over which we pronounce a blessing as by Christ at the institution of the ordinance. {A communion of the blood of Christ} (\koinnia tou haimatos tou Christou\). Literally, a participation in (objective genitive) the blood of Christ. The word \koinnia\ is an old one from \koinnos\, partner, and so here and strkjv@Phillipians:2:1; strkjv@3:10|. It can mean also fellowship (Galatians:2:9|) or contribution (2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@Phillipians:1:5|). It is, of course, a spiritual participation in the blood of Christ which is symbolized by the cup. Same meaning for \koinnia\ in reference to "the body of Christ." {The bread which we break} (\ton arton hon klmen\). The loaf. Inverse attraction of the antecedent (\arton\) to the case (accusative) of the relative (\hon\) according to classic idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 488). \Artos\ probably from \ar\, to join or fit (flour mixed with water and baked). The mention of the cup here before the bread does not mean that this order was observed for see the regular order of bread and then cup in strkjv@11:24-27|.

rwp@1Corinthians:12:23 @{We bestow} (\peritithemen\). Literally, We place around as if a garland (Mark:15:17|) or a garment (Matthew:27:28|). {More abundant comeliness} (\euschmosunn perissoteran\). One need only mention the mother's womb and the mother's breast to see the force of Paul's argument here. The word, common in old Greek, from \euschmn\ (\eu\, well, \schma\, figure), here only in N.T. One may think of the coal-miner who digs under the earth for the coal to keep us warm in winter. Songs:\aschmn\ (deformed, uncomely), old word, here only in N.T., but see strkjv@7:36| for \aschmone\.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:32 @{After the manner of men} (\kata anthrpon\). Like men, for applause, money, etc. (4:9ff.; strkjv@Phillipians:3:7|). {If I fought with wild beasts at Ephesus} (\ei ethriomachsa en Ephesi\). Late verb from \thriomachos\, a fighter with wild beasts. Found in inscriptions and in Ignatius. Those who argue for an Ephesian imprisonment for Paul and Ephesus as the place where he wrote the imprisonment epistles (see Duncan's book just mentioned) take the verb literally. There is in the ruins of Ephesus now a place called St. Paul's Prison. But Paul was a Roman citizen and it was unlawful to make such a one be a \thriomachos\...but he does not mention so...2Corinthians:11:23f|. The incident, whatever it was, whether literal or figurative language, took place before Paul wrote I Corinthians. {What doth it profit me?} (\ti moi to ophelos?\). What the profit to me? {Let us eat and drink} (\phagmen kai pimen\). Volitive second aorist subjunctives of \esthi\ and \pin\. Cited from strkjv@Isaiah:22:13|. It is the outcry of the people of Jerusalem during the siege of Jerusalem by the Assyrians. At Anchiale near Tarsus is a statue of Sardanapalus with the inscription: "Eat, drink, enjoy thyself. The rest is nothing." This was the motto of the Epicureans. Paul is not giving his own view, but that of people who deny the resurrection.

rwp@1John:3:24 @{And he in him} (\kai autos en auti\). That is "God abides in him" as in strkjv@4:15|. We abide in God and God abides in us through the Holy Spirit (John:14:10,17,23; strkjv@17:21|). "Therefore let God be a home to thee, and be thou the home of God: abide in God, and let God abide in thee" (Bede). {By the Spirit} (\ek tou pneumatos\). It is thus (...the Holy Spirit, first mention in...) that we know that God abides in us. {Which} (\hou\). Ablative case by attraction from accusative \ho\ (object of \edken\) to agree with \pneumatos\ as often, though not always. It is a pity that the grammatical gender (which) is retained here in the English instead of "whom," as it should be.

rwp@1Peter:1:2 @{According to} (\kata\). Probably to be connected with \eklektois\ rather than with \apostolos\ in spite of a rather loose arrangement of words and the absence of articles in verses 1,2|. {The foreknowledge} (\prognsin\). Late substantive (Plutarch, Lucian, papyri) from \proginsk\ (1:20|), to know beforehand, only twice in N.T. (here and strkjv@Acts:2:23| in Peter's sermon). In this Epistle Peter often uses substantives rather than verbs (cf. strkjv@Romans:8:29|). {Of God the Father} (\theou patros\). Anarthous again and genitive case. See \patr\ applied to God also in strkjv@1:3,17| as often by Paul (Romans:1:7|, etc.). Peter here presents the Trinity (God the Father, the Spirit, Jesus Christ). {In sanctification of the Spirit} (\en hagiasmi pneumatos\). Clearly the Holy Spirit, though anarthrous like \theou patros\. Late word from \hagiaz\, to render holy (\hagios\), to consecrate, as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:7|. The subjective genitive here, sanctification wrought by the Spirit as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:13| (where the Trinity mentioned as here). {Unto obedience} (\eis hupakon\). Obedience (from \hupakou\, to hear under, to hearken) to the Lord Jesus as in strkjv@1:22| "to the truth," result of "the sanctification." {And sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ} (\rantismon haimatos Isou Christou\). Late substantive from \rantiz\, to sprinkle (Hebrews:9:13|), a word used in the LXX of the sacrifices (Numbers:19:9,13,20|, etc.), but not in any non-biblical source so far as known, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:12:24| (of the sprinkling of blood). Reference to the death of Christ on the Cross and to the ratification of the New Covenant by the blood of Christ as given in strkjv@Hebrews:9:19f.; strkjv@12:24| with allusion to strkjv@Exodus:24:3-8|. Paul does not mention this ritual use of the blood of Christ, but Jesus does (Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Mark:14:24|). Hence it is not surprising to find the use of it by Peter and the author of Hebrews. Hort suggests that Peter may also have an ulterior reference to the blood of the martyrs as in strkjv@Revelation:7:14f.; strkjv@12:11|, but only as illustration of what Jesus did for us, not as having any value. The whole Epistle is a commentary upon \prognsis theou, hagiasmos pneumatos, haima Christou\ (Bigg). Peter is not ashamed of the blood of Christ. {Be multiplied} (\plthunthei\). First aorist passive optative (volitive) of \plthun\, old verb (from \plthus\, fulness), in a wish. Songs:in strkjv@2Peter:1:2; strkjv@Jude:1:2|, but nowhere else in N.T. salutations. Grace and peace (\charis kai eirn\) occur together in strkjv@2Peter:1:2|, in strkjv@2John:1:2| (with \eleos\), and in all Paul's Epistles (with \eleos\ added in I and II Timothy).

rwp@1Thessalonians:1:2 @{We give thanks} (\eucharistoumen\). Late denominative verb \euchariste\ from \eucharistos\ (grateful) and that from \eu\, well and \charizomai\, to show oneself kind. See \charis\ in verse 1|. "The plural implies that all three missionaries prayed together" (Moffatt). {Always} (\pantote\). Late word, rare in LXX. Songs:with \euchariste\ in strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:3; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:4; strkjv@Ephesians:5:20; strkjv@Phillipians:1:3|. Moffatt takes it to mean "whenever Paul was at his prayers." Of course, he did not make audible prayer always, but he was always in the spirit of prayer, "a constant attitude" (Milligan), "in tune with the Infinite." {For you all} (\peri pantn humn\). Paul "encircled (\peri\, around) them all," including every one of them and the church as a whole. Distance lends enchantment to the memory of slight drawbacks. Paul is fond of this phrase "you all," particularly in Phil. (Phillipians:1:3,7|). {Making mention} (\mneian poioumenoi\). Paul uses this very idiom in Rom strkjv@1:9; strkjv@Ephesians:1:16; strkjv@Philemon:1:4|. Milligan cites a papyrus example of \mneian poioumenoi\ in prayer (B. Y. U. 652, 5). Did Paul have a prayer list of the Thessalonian disciples which he read over with Silas and Timothy? {In} here is \epi=\...in prayers the writers mention the...(Frame).

rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ Some good commentaries on I Corinthians are the following: On the Greek Bachmann in the _Zahn Kommentar_, Edwards, Ellicott, Findlay (Expositor's Greek Testament), Godet, Goudge, Lietzmann (_Handbuch zum N.T._), Lightfoot (chs. 1-7), Parry, Robertson and Plummer (_Int. Crit._), Stanley, J. Weiss (_Meyer Kommentar_); on the English Dods (_Exp. Bible_), McFadyen, Parry, Ramsay, Rendall, F. W. Robertson, Walker (_Reader's Comm._). strkjv@2Corinthians:1:1 @{And Timothy} (\kai Timotheos\). Timothy is with Paul, having been sent on to Macedonia from Ephesus (Acts:19:22|). He is in no sense co-author any more than Sosthenes was in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:1|. {In all Achaia} (\en holi ti Achaii\). The Romans divided Greece into two provinces (Achaia and Macedonia). Macedonia included also Illyricum, Epirus, and Thessaly. Achaia was all of Greece south of this (both Attica and the Peloponnesus). The restored Corinth was made the capital of Achaia where the pro-consul resided (Acts:18:12|). He does not mention other churches in Achaia outside of the one in Corinth, but only "saints" (\hagiois\). Athens was in Achaia, but it is not clear that there was as yet a church there, though some converts had been won (Acts:17:34|), and there was a church in Cenchreae, the eastern port of Corinth (Romans:16:1|). Paul in strkjv@2Corinthians:9:2| speaks of Achaia and Macedonia together. His language here would seem to cover the whole (\holi\, all) of Achaia in his scope and not merely the environment around Corinth.

rwp@2Corinthians:2:12 @{To Troas} (\eis tn Triada\). Luke does not mention this stop at Troas on the way from Ephesus to Macedonia (Acts:20:1f.|), though he does mention two other visits there (Acts:16:8; strkjv@20:6|). {When a door was opened unto me} (\thuras moi aneigmens\). Genitive absolute with second perfect passive participle of \anoignumi\. Paul used this very metaphor in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:9|. He will use it again in strkjv@Colossians:4:3|. Here was an open door that he could not enter.

rwp@2Corinthians:11:3 @{The serpent beguiled Eve} (\ho ophis expatsen Heuan\). Paul's only mention of the serpent in Eden. The compound \exapata\ means to deceive completely. {Lest by any means} (\m ps\). Common conjunction after verbs of fearing. {Corrupted} (\phthari\). Second aorist passive subjunctive with \m ps\ of \phtheir\, to corrupt.

rwp@Info_2Peter @ THE RESEMBLANCE TO THE EPISTLE OF JUDE This is undoubted, particularly between Jude:and the second chapter of II Peter. Kuhl argues that strkjv@2Peter:2:1-3:2| is an interpolation, though the same style runs through out the Epistle. "The theory of interpolation is always a last and desperate expedient" (Bigg). In II Peter 2 we have the fallen angels, the flood, the cities of the plain with Lot, Balaam. In Jude:we have Israel in the wilderness, the fallen angels, the cities of the plain (with no mention of Lot, Cain, Balaam, Korah). Jude:mentions the dispute between Michael and Satan, quotes Enoch by name. There is rather more freshness in Jude:than in II Peter, though II Peter is more intelligible. Evidently one had the other before him, besides other material. Which is the earlier? There is no way to decide this point clearly. Every point is looked at differently and argued differently by different writers. My own feeling is that Jude:was before (just before) II Peter, though it is only a feeling and not a conviction.

rwp@2Timothy:4:10 @{Forsook me} (\me egkateleipen\). Imperfect (MSS. also have aorist, \egkatelipen\) active of the old double compound verb \egkataleip\, for which see strkjv@Romans:9:29|. Clearly in contrast to verse 9| and in the sense of strkjv@1Timothy:6:17|, wilful desertion. Only mentioned elsewhere in strkjv@Colossians:4:14|. {Crescens} (\Krsks\). No other mention of him. {Titus to Dalmatia} (\Titos eis Dalmatian\). Titus had been asked to rejoin Paul in Nicopolis where he was to winter, probably the winter previous to this one (Titus:3:12|). He came and has been with Paul.

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE DATE There are three views about the date of the Acts. Baur and his Tubingen School held the second century to be the date of this late pamphlet as they termed it after the fashion of the Clementine Homilies. But that view is now practically abandoned save by the few who still strangely oppose the Lukan authorship. Probably the majority of those who accept the Lukan authorship place it in the latter part of the first century for two reasons. One is that the Gospel according to Luke is dated by them after the destruction of Jerusalem because of the prophecy by Jesus of the encompassing of the city by armies. Predictive prophecy that would be and so it is considered a prophecy _post eventum_. The other reason is the alleged use of the _Antiquities_...Josephus because of his mention of...(Acts:5:36f|. and Josephus, _Ant_. XX. v, 1, 2) that Von Dobschutz (_Dictionary of the Apostolic Church_, art. Josephus) argues that the two accounts are entirely independent of each other. Songs:Luke (Luke:13:1f.|)...a Galilean revolt not mentioned by...12:20-23| and _Ant_. XIX. viii, 2 redounds to the credit of Luke. The Josephus phase of the argument may be brushed to one side. The third view, held by Harnack and adopted here, is that Luke wrote the Acts while with Paul in Rome and finished the book before Paul's release, that is by A.D. 63. This is the obvious and natural way to take the language of Luke at the close of Acts. Events had gone no farther and so he ends the narrative right there. It is argued against this that Luke contemplated a third volume and for this reason closed with the arrival of Paul in Rome. But the use of \prton\ (first) in strkjv@Acts:1:1| is a common _Koin_ idiom and does not imply three volumes any more than first and second stories with us means that the house has three. Of course this date for the Acts puts the date of the Gospel further back either in Caesarea (57 to 59) or in Rome (60 to 62). And that means that Mark's Gospel is still earlier since Luke used it for his Gospel and the Logia (Q) earlier still. But all these dates are probable in the light of all the known facts.

rwp@Acts:4:17 @{That it spread no further} (\hina m epi pleion dianemthi\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \dianem\, to distribute with \hina m\, negative purpose. {Let us threaten them} (\apeilsmetha autois\). Hortatory aorist middle subjunctive of \apeile\, old verb (note middle voice). In the N.T. only here and strkjv@1Peter:2:23|. {That they speak henceforth to no man in this name} (\mketi lalein epi ti onomati touti mdeni anthrpn\). Indirect command with the infinitive and double negative (\mketi, mdeni\). They will not say "Jesus," but make a slur at "this name," contemptuous use of \houtos\...though they apparently do mention the...18|.

rwp@Acts:7:44 @{The tabernacle of the testimony} (\h skn tou marturiou\)...Probably suggested by the mention of...(verse 43|). See on ¯Matthew:17:4| for discussion of \skn\ (from \skia\, shadow, root \ska\, to cover). This first sanctuary was not the temple, but the tent in the wilderness. "Stephen passes on from the conduct of the Israelites to his other argument that God is not necessarily worshipped in a particular spot" (Page). {According to the figure} (\kata ton tupon\). According to the type or pattern. \Tupos\ is from \tupt\, to strike, to smite, and is the print of the blow (John:20:25|), then the figure formed by a blow or impression like our type, a model or example. Quoted from strkjv@Exodus:25:40|. Common word in the old Greek. {That he had seen} (\hon herakei\). Past perfect active of \hora\, to see (double reduplication).

rwp@Acts:9:22 @{Increased the more} (\mllon enedunamouto\). Imperfect passive indicative of \endunamo\, to receive power (late verb), progressive increase in strength as opposition grew. Saul's recantation stirred controversy and Saul grew in power. See also Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:4:13; strkjv@1Timothy:1:12; strkjv@2Timothy:2:1; strkjv@4:17; strkjv@Romans:4:20|. Christ, the dynamo of spiritual energy, was now pouring power (Acts:1:8|) into Paul who is already filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts:9:17|). {Confounded} (\sunechunnen\). Imperfect active indicative of \sunchunn\ (late form of \sunche\, to pour together, commingle, make confusion. The more Saul preached, the more the Jews were confused. {Proving} (\sunbibazn\). Present active participle of \sunbibaz\, old verb to make go together, to coalesce, to knit together. It is the very word that Luke will use in strkjv@16:10| of the conclusion reached at Troas concerning the vision of Paul. Here Saul took the various items in the life of Jesus of Nazareth and found in them the proof that he was in reality "the Messiah" (\ho Christos\). This method of argument Paul continued to use with the Jews (Acts:17:3|). It was irresistible argument and spread consternation among the Jews. It was the most powerful piece of artillery in the Jewish camp that was suddenly turned round upon them. It is probable that at this juncture Saul went into Arabia for several years (Galatians:1:12-24|). Luke makes no mention of this important event, but he leaves ample room for it at this point.

rwp@Acts:11:12 @{Making no distinction} (\mden diakrinanta\). Songs:Westcott and Hort (first aorist active participle) instead of \mden diakrinomenon\ "nothing doubting" (present middle participle) like strkjv@10:20|. The difference in voice shows the distinction in meaning. {We entered into the man's house} (\eislthomen eis ton oikon tou andros\)...in also. He avoids mention of...

rwp@Acts:12:21 @{Upon a set day} (\takti hmeri\). Locative case and the verbal adjective of \tass\, to arrange, appoint, old word, here only in the N.T. Josephus (_Ant_. XVII. 6, 8; XIX. 8, 2) gives a full account of the occasion and the death of Herod Agrippa. It was the second day of the festival in honour of the Emperor Claudius, possibly his birthday rather than the _Quinquennalia_...contradiction. Josephus does not mention the...{Arrayed himself in royal apparel} (\endusamenos esthta basilikn\). First aorist middle (indirect) participle of \endun\ or \endu\, common verb to put on. Literally, having put royal apparel on himself (a robe of silver tissue, Josephus says). The rays of the sun shone on this brilliant apparel and the vast crowd in the open amphitheatre became excited as Herod began to speak. {Made an oration} (\edmgorei\). Imperfect active of \dmgore\, old verb from \dmgoros\ (haranguer of the people), and that from \dmos\ (people) and \agoreu\, to harangue or address the people. Only here in the N.T. He kept it up.

rwp@Acts:13:12 @{Believed} (\episteusen\). Ingressive aorist active indicative. Renan considers it impossible that a Roman proconsul could be converted by a miracle. But it was the teaching about the Lord (\tou kuriou\, objective genitive) by which he was astonished (\ekplssomenos\, present passive participle of \ekplss\, see on ¯Matthew:7:28|) or struck out as well as by the miracle. The blindness came "immediately" (\paraehrma\)...would have called for mention by...(8:13|) for revenue only.

rwp@Acts:14:17 @{And yet} (\kaitoi\). Old Greek compound particle (\kai toi\). In the N.T. twice only, once with finite verb as here, once with the participle (Hebrews:4:3|). {Without witness} (\amarturon\). Old adjective (\a\ privative and \martus\, witness), only here in the N.T. {Left} (\aphken\). First aorist active (\k\ aorist indicative of \aphimi\). {In that he did good} (\agathourgn\). Present active causal participle of \agathourge\, late and rare verb (also \agathoerge\ strkjv@1Timothy:6:18|), reading of the oldest MSS. here for \agathopoie\, to do good. Note two other causal participles here parallel with \agathourgn\, viz., \didous\ ("giving you") present active of \didmi, empipln\ ("filling") present active of \empimpla\ (late form of \empimplmi\). This witness to God (his doing good, giving rains and fruitful seasons, filling your hearts with food and gladness) they could receive without the help of the Old Testament revelation (Romans:1:20|). Zeus was regarded as the god of rain (Jupiter Pluvius) and Paul claims the rain and the fruitful (\karpophorous, karpos\, and \pher\, fruit bearing, old word, here alone in N.T.) seasons as coming from God. Lycaonia was often dry and it would be an appropriate item. "Mercury, as the God of merchandise, was also the dispenser of food" (Vincent). Paul does not talk about laws of nature as if they governed themselves, but he sees the living God "behind the drama of the physical world" (Furneaux). These simple country people could grasp his ideas as he claims everything for the one true God. {Gladness} (\euphrosuns\). Old word from \euphrn\ (\eu\ and \phrn\), good cheer. In the N.T. only strkjv@Acts:2:28|...Paul does not here mention Christ...

rwp@Acts:16:14 @{Lydia} (\Ludia\). Her birthplace was Thyatira in Lydia. She may have been named after the land, though Lydia is a common female name (see Horace). Lydia was itself a Macedonian colony (Strabo, XIII. 4). Thyatira (note plural form like Philippi and one of the seven churches of Asia here strkjv@Revelation:2:18|) was famous for its purple dyes as old as Homer (Iliad, IV. 141) and had a guild of dyers (\hoi bapheis\) as inscriptions show. {A seller of purple} (\porphuroplis\). A female seller of purple fabrics (\porphura, plis\). Late word, masculine form in an inscription. There was a great demand for this fabric as it was used on the official toga at Rome and in Roman colonies. We still use the term "royal purple." See on ¯Luke:16:19|. Evidently Lydia was a woman of some means to carry on such an important enterprise from her native city. She may have been a freed-woman, since racial names were often borne by slaves. {One that worshipped God} (\sebomen ton theon\). A God-...Philippians he does not mention Lydia...{Heard us} (\kouen\). Imperfect active of \akou\, was listening, really listening and she kept it up, listening to each of these new and strange preachers. {Opened} (\dinoixen\). First aorist active indicative of \dianoig\, old word, double compound (\dia, ana, oig\) to open up wide or completely like a folding door (both sides, \dia\, two). Only the Lord could do that. Jesus had opened (the same verb) the mind of the disciples to understand the Scriptures (Luke:24:45|). {To give heed} (\prosechein\). To hold the mind (\ton noun\ understood), present active infinitive. She kept her mind centred on the things spoken by Paul whose words gripped her attention. She rightly perceived that Paul was the foremost one of the group. He had personal magnetism and power of intellect that the Spirit of God used to win the heart of this remarkable woman to Christ. It was worth coming to Philippi to win this fine personality to the Kingdom of God. She will be the chief spirit in this church that will give Paul more joy and co-operation than any of his churches. It is not stated that she was converted on the first Sabbath, though this may have been the case. "One solitary convert, a woman, and she already a seeker after God, and a native of that very Asia where they had been forbidden to preach" (Furneaux). But a new era had dawned for Europe and for women in the conversion of Lydia.

rwp@Acts:17:23 @{For} (\gar\). Paul gives an illustration of their religiousness from his own experiences in their city. {The objects of your worship} (\ta sebasmata humn\). Late word from \sebazomai\, to worship. In N T. only here and strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:4|. The use of this word for temples, altars, statues, shows the conciliatory tone in the use of \deisidaimonesterous\ in verse 22|. {An altar} (\bmon\)...N.T. and the only mention of...{With this inscription} (\en hi epegegrapto\). On which had been written (stood written), past perfect passive indicative of \epigraph\, old and common verb for writing on inscriptions (\epigraph\, strkjv@Luke:23:38|). {To an Unknown God} (\AGNOSTO THEO\). Dative case, dedicated to. Pausanias (I. 1, 4) says that in Athens there are "altars to gods unknown" (\bmoi then agnstn\). Epimenides in a pestilence advised the sacrifice of a sheep to the befitting god whoever he might be. If an altar was dedicated to the wrong deity, the Athenians feared the anger of the other gods. The only use in the N.T. of \agnstos\, old and common adjective (from \a\ privative and \gnstos\ verbal of \ginsk\, to know). Our word agnostic comes from it. Here it has an ambiguous meaning, but Paul uses it though to a stern Christian philosopher it may be the "confession at once of a bastard philosophy and of a bastard religion" (Hort, _Hulsean Lectures_, p. 64). Paul was quick to use this confession on the part of the Athenians of a higher power than yet known to them. Songs:he gets his theme from this evidence of a deeper religious sense in them and makes a most clever use of it with consummate skill. {In ignorance} (\agnoountes\). Present active participle of \agnoe\, old verb from same root as \agnstos\ to which Paul refers by using it. {This set I forth unto you} (\touto ego kataggell humin\). He is a \kataggeleus\ (verse 18|) as they suspected of a God, both old and new, old in that they already worship him, new in that Paul knows who he is. By this master stroke he has brushed to one side any notion of violation of Roman law or suspicion of heresy and claims their endorsement of his new gospel, a shrewd and consummate turn. He has their attention now and proceeds to describe this God left out of their list as the one true and Supreme God. The later MSS. here read \hon--touton\ (whom--this one) rather than \ho--touto\ (what--this), but the late text is plainly an effort to introduce too soon the personal nature of God which comes out clearly in verse 24|.

rwp@Acts:18:18 @{Having tarried after this yet many days} (\eti prosmeinas hmeras hikanas\). First aorist (constative) active participle of \prosmen\, old verb, to remain besides (\pros\ as in strkjv@1Timothy:1:3|) and that idea is expressed also in \eti\ (yet). The accusative is extent of time. On Luke's frequent use of \hikanos\ see strkjv@8:11|. It is not certain that this period of "considerable days" which followed the trial before Gallio is included in the year and six months of verse 11| or is in addition to it which is most likely. Vindicated as Paul was, there was no reason for haste in leaving, though he usually left after such a crisis was passed. {Took his leave} (\apotaxamenos\). First aorist middle (direct), old verb, to separate oneself, to bid farewell (Vulgate _valefacio_), as in verse 21; strkjv@Mark:6:46|. {Sailed thence} (\exeplei\). Imperfect active of \ekple\...Priscilla and Aquila are mentioned as...{Having shorn his head} (\keiramenos tn kephaln\). First aorist middle (causative) of \keir\, old verb to shear (sheep) and the hair as also in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:6|...the participle, but since mention of...(\prosmeinas, apotaxamenos\) refer to Paul it seems clear that this one does also. {For he had a vow} (\eichen gar euchn\). Imperfect active showing the continuance of the vow up till this time in Cenchreae, the port of Corinth when it expired. It was not a Nazarite vow which could be absolved only in Jerusalem. It is possible that the hair was only polled or trimmed, cut shorter, not "shaved" (\xura\ as in strkjv@21:24|) for there is a distinction as both verbs are contrasted in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:6| (\keirsthai xursthai\). It is not clear what sort of a vow Paul had taken nor why he took it. It may have been a thank offering for the outcome at Corinth (Hackett). Paul as a Jew kept up his observance of the ceremonial law, but refused to impose it on the Gentiles.

rwp@Acts:19:3 @{Into what} (\eis ti\). More properly, {Unto what} or {on what basis} (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 592). Clearly, Paul felt they had received a poor baptism with no knowledge of the Holy Spirit. {John's baptism} (\to Ianou baptisma\). Last mention of John the Baptist in the N.T. They had been dipped in other words, but they had not grasped the significance of the ordinance.

rwp@Acts:20:22 @{Bound in the spirit} (\dedemenos ti pneumati\). Perfect passive participle of \de\, to bind, with the locative case. "Bound in my spirit" he means, as in strkjv@19:21|...sense of duty. The mention of...23| seems to be in contrast to his own spirit here. His own spirit was under the control of the Holy Spirit (Romans:8:16|) and the sense does not differ greatly. {Not knowing} (\m eids\). Second perfect active participle of \oida\ with \m\. {That shall befall me} (\ta sunantsonta emoi\). Articular future active participle of \sunanta\, to meet with (Acts:10:25|), to befall (with associative instrumental case) and compare with \sumbantn\ (befell) in verse 19|. One of the rare instances of the future participle in the N.T.

rwp@Acts:21:5 @{That we had accomplished the days} (\exartisai hms tas hmeras\). First aorist active infinitive of \exartiz\, to furnish perfectly, rare in ancient writers, but fairly frequent in the papyri. Only twice in the N.T., here and strkjv@2Timothy:3:17|. Finish the exact number of days (seven) of verse 4|. The accusative of general reference \hms\ is the usual construction and the infinitive clause is the subject of \egeneto\. We departed and went on our journey (\exelthontes eporeuometha\). Sharp distinction between the first aorist active participle \exelthontes\ (from \exerchomai\, to go out) and the imperfect middle \eporeuometha\ from \poreu\ (we were going on). {And they all, with wives and children, brought us on our way} (\propempontn hms pantn sun gunaixi kai teknois\). No "and" in the Greek, simply genitive absolute, "They all with wives and children accompanying us," just as at Miletus (20:28|), same verb \propemp\...which see. The first mention of...(Vincent). Vivid picture here as at Miletus, evident touch of an eyewitness. {Till we were out of the city} (\hes ex ts poles\). Note both adverbial prepositions (\hes ex\) clear outside of the city.

rwp@Acts:23:6 @{But when Paul perceived} (\gnous de ho Paulos\). Perceiving (second aorist ingressive of \ginsk\). Paul quickly saw that his cause was ruined before the Sanhedrin by his unwitting attack on the high priest. It was impossible to get a fair hearing. Hence, Vincent says, "Paul, with great tact, seeks to bring the two parties of the council into collision with each other." Songs:Alford argues with the motto "divide and conquer." Farrar condemns Paul and takes strkjv@24:21| as a confession of error here, but that is reading into Paul's word about the resurrection more than he says. Page considers Luke's report meagre and unsatisfactory. Rackham thinks that the trial was already started and that Paul repeated part of his speech of the day before when "the Sadducees received his words with ostentatious scepticism and ridicule: this provoked counter-expressions of sympathy and credulity among the Pharisees." But all this is inference. We do not have to adopt the Jesuitical principle that the end justifies the means in order to see shrewdness and hard sense in what Paul said and did. Paul knew, of course, that the Sanhedrin was nearly evenly divided between Pharisees and Sadducees, for he himself had been a Pharisee. {I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees} (\Eg Pharisaios eimi huios Pharisain\). This was strictly true as we know from his Epistles (Phillipians:3:5|). {Touching the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question} (\peri elpidos kai anastases nekrn krinomai\)...the point that Paul mentions in...24:21|. His failure to mention again the fact that he was a Pharisee throws no discredit on Luke's report here. The chief point of difference between Pharisees and Sadducees was precisely this matter of the resurrection. And this was Paul's cardinal doctrine as a Christian minister. It was this fact that convinced him that Jesus was the Messiah and was "the very centre of his faith" (Page) and of his preaching. It was not a mere trick for Paul to proclaim this fact here and so divide the Sanhedrin. As a matter of fact, the Pharisees held aloof when the Sadducees persecuted Peter and the other apostles for preaching resurrection in the case of Jesus and even Gamaliel threw cold water on the effort to punish them for it (Acts:5:34-39|). Songs:then Paul was really recurring to the original cleavage on this point and was able to score a point against the Sadducees as Gamaliel, his great teacher, had done before him. Besides, "Paul and Pharisaism seem to us such opposite ideas that we often forget that to Paul Christianity was the natural development of Judaism" (Page). Paul shows this in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11|.

rwp@Acts:23:25 @{And he wrote} (\grapsas\). First aorist active participle of \graph\, agreeing with the subject (Lysias) of \eipen\ (said) back in verse 23| (beginning). {After this form} (\echousan ton tupon touton\). Textus Receptus has \periechousan\. The use of \tupon\ (type or form) like _exemplum_ in Latin (Page who quotes Cicero _Ad Att_. IX. 6. 3) may give merely the purport or substantial contents of the letter. But there is no reason for thinking that it is not a genuine copy since the letter may have been read in open court before Felix, and Luke was probably with Paul. The Roman law required that a subordinate officer like Lysias in reporting a case to his superior should send a written statement of the case and it was termed _elogium_. A copy of the letter may have been given Paul after his appeal to Caesar. It was probably written in Latin. The letter is a "dexterous mixture of truth and falsehood" (Furneaux)...Lysias and makes no mention of...

rwp@Acts:24:24 @{With Drusilla his wife} (\sun Drousilli ti idii gunaiki\). Felix had induced her to leave her former husband Aziz, King of Emesa. She was one of three daughters of Herod Agrippa I (Drusilla, Mariamne, Bernice). Her father murdered James, her great-uncle Herod Antipas slew John the Baptist, her great-grandfather (Herod the Great)...of Bethlehem. Perhaps the mention of...{Sent for} (\metepempsato\). First aorist middle of \metapemp\ as usual (Acts:10:5|).

rwp@Acts:26:14 @{When we were all fallen} (\pantn katapesontn hmn\). Genitive absolute with second aorist active participle of \katapipt\. In the Hebrew language (\ti Ebraidi dialekti\). Natural addition here, for Paul is speaking in Greek, not Aramaic as in strkjv@22:2|. {It is hard for thee to kick against the goad} (\sklron soi pros kentra laktizein\). Genuine here, but not in chapters 9,22|. A common proverb as Aeschylus _Ag_. 1624: \Pros kentra m laktize\. "It is taken from an ox that being pricked with a goad kicks and receives a severer wound" (Page). Cf. the parables of Jesus (Matthew:13:35|)...Blass observes that Paul's mention of...(not invents) it here rather than in chapter 22| because of the culture of this audience. \Kentron\ means either sting as of bees (II Macc. strkjv@14:19) and so of death (1Corinthians:15:55|) or an iron goad in the ploughman's hand as here (the only two N.T. examples). Note plural here (goads) and \laktizein\ is present active infinitive so that the idea is "to keep on kicking against goads." This old verb means to kick with the heel (adverb \lax\, with the heel), but only here in the N.T. There is a papyrus example of kicking (\laktiz\) with the feet against the door.

rwp@Acts:28:1 @{Then we knew} (\tote epegnmen\). Second aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \epiginsk\. Then we recognized. See strkjv@27:39|. {Was called} (\kaleitai\). Present passive indicative retained in indirect discourse. {Melita} (\Melit\). Not \Mileten\ as only B reads, a clerical error, but retained in the text of Westcott and Hort because of B. Page notes that the island was Malta as is shown from the name, the location, the presence of a ship from Alexandria bound for Rome wintering there (verse 11|), and the mention of Syracuse as the next stop after leaving (verse 12|).

rwp@Colossians:4:12 @{Epaphras who is one of you} (\Epaphrs ho ex humn\). See strkjv@1:7| for previous mention of this brother who had brought Paul news from Colossae. {Always striving for you} (\pantote agnizomenos huper hmn\). See strkjv@1:29| of Paul. {That ye may stand} (\hina stathte\). Final clause, first aorist passive subjunctive (according to Aleph B) rather than the usual second aorist active subjunctives (\stte\) of \histmi\ (according to A C D). {Fully assured} (\peplrophormenoi\). Perfect passive participle of \plrophore\, late compound, for which see strkjv@Luke:1:1; strkjv@Romans:14:5|.

rwp@Galatians:2:1 @{Then after the space of fourteen years I went up again} (\epeita dia dekatessarn etn palin anebn\) This use of \dia\ for interval between is common enough. Paul is not giving a recital of his visits to Jerusalem, but of his points of contact with the apostles in Jerusalem. As already observed, he here refers to the Jerusalem Conference given by Luke in strkjv@Acts:15| when Paul and Barnabas were endorsed by the apostles and elders and the church over the protest of the Judaizers who had attacked them in Antioch (Acts:15:1f.|). But Paul passes by another visit to Jerusalem, that in strkjv@Acts:11:30|..."the elders" with no mention of...12| apparently preceded that visit and Peter had left for another place (Acts:12:17|). Paul here gives the inside view of this private conference in Jerusalem that came in between the two public meetings (Acts:15:4,6-29|). {With Barnabas} (\meta Barnab\). As in strkjv@Acts:15:2|. {Taking Titus also with me} (\sunparalabn kai Titon\). Second aorist active participle of \sunparalamban\ the very verb used in strkjv@Acts:15:37f.|...Mark. Titus is not mentioned in...15 nor anywhere else in Acts for some reason, possibly because he was Luke's own brother. But his very presence was a challenge to the Judaizers, since he was a Greek Christian.

rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE DATE Here again modern scholars differ widely. Westcott places it between A.D. 64 and 67. Harnack and Holtzmann prefer a date between 81 and 96. Marcus Dods argues strongly that the Epistle was written while the temple was still standing. If it was already destroyed, it is hard to understand how the author could have written strkjv@Hebrews:10:1f.|: "Else would they not have ceased to be offered?" And in strkjv@Hebrews:8:13| "nigh to vanishing away" (\eggus aphanismou\)...the other hand, the mention of...13:23| as being "set free" (\apolelumenon\) raises an inquiry concerning Paul's last plea to Timothy to come to him in Rome (2Timothy:4:11-13|). Apparently Timothy came and was put in prison. If so, since Paul was put to death before Nero's own death (June 8, A.D. 68), there is left only the years 67 to 69 A.D. as probable or even possible. It is thus the last of the New Testament books before the Johannine Writings all of which come towards the close of the century and after the destruction of Jerusalem.

rwp@Hebrews:1:3 @{Being} (\n\). Absolute and timeless existence (present active participle of \eimi\) in contrast with \genomenos\ in verse 4| like \n\ in strkjv@John:1:1| (in contrast with \egeneto\ in strkjv@1:14|) and like \huparchn\ and \genomenos\ in strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f|. {The effulgence of his glory} (\apaugasma ts doxs\). The word \apaugasma\, late substantive from \apaugaz\, to emit brightness (\aug, augaz\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4|), here only in the N.T., but in Wisdom strkjv@7:26 and in Philo. It can mean either reflected brightness, refulgence (Calvin, Thayer) or effulgence (ray from an original light body) as the Greek fathers hold. Both senses are true of Christ in his relation to God as Jesus shows in plain language in strkjv@John:12:45; strkjv@14:9|. "The writer is using metaphors which had already been applied to Wisdom and the Logos" (Moffatt). The meaning "effulgence" suits the context better, though it gives the idea of eternal generation of the Son (John:1:1|), the term Father applied to God necessarily involving Son. See this same metaphor in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:6|. {The very image of his substance} (\charaktr ts hupostases\). \Charaktr\ is an old word from \charass\, to cut, to scratch, to mark. It first was the agent (note ending \=tr\) or tool that did the marking, then the mark or impress made, the exact reproduction, a meaning clearly expressed by \charagma\ (Acts:17:29; strkjv@Revelation:13:16f.|). Menander had already used (Moffatt) \charaktr\ in the sense of our "character." The word occurs in the inscriptions for "person" as well as for "exact reproduction" of a person. The word \hupostasis\ for the being or essence of God "is a philosophical rather than a religious term" (Moffatt). Etymologically it is the sediment or foundation under a building (for instance). In strkjv@11:1| \hypostasis\ is like the "title-deed" idea found in the papyri. Athanasius rightly used strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4| in his controversy with Arius. Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11| pictures the real and eternal deity of Christ free from the philosophical language here employed. But even Paul's simpler phrase \morph theou\ (the form of God) has difficulties of its own. The use of \Logos\ in strkjv@John:1:1-18| is parallel to strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4|. {And upholding} (\phern te\). Present active participle of \pher\ closely connected with \n\ (being) by \te\ and like strkjv@Colossians:1:17| in idea. The newer science as expounded by Eddington and Jeans is in harmony with the spiritual and personal conception of creation here presented. {By the word of his power} (\ti rmati ts dunames autou\). Instrumental case of \rma\ (word). See strkjv@11:3| for \rmati theou\ (by the word of God) as the explanation of creation like Genesis, but here \autou\ refers to God's Son as in strkjv@1:2|. {Purification of sins} (\katharismon tn hamartin\). \Katharismos\ is from \kathariz\, to cleanse (Matthew:8:3; strkjv@Hebrews:9:14|), here only in Hebrews, but in same sense of cleansing from sins, strkjv@2Peter:1:9; strkjv@Job:7:21|. Note middle participle \poisamenos\ like \heuramenos\ in strkjv@9:12|...This is the first mention of...{Sat down} (\ekathisen\). First aorist active of \kathiz\, "took his seat," a formal and dignified act. {Of the Majesty on high} (\ts megalosuns en hupslois\). Late word from \megas\, only in LXX (Deuteronomy:32:3; strkjv@2Samuel:7:23|, etc.), Aristeas, strkjv@Hebrews:1:3; strkjv@8:1; strkjv@Jude:1:25|. Christ resumed his original dignity and glory (John:17:5|). The phrase \en hupslois\ occurs in the Psalms (Psalms:93:4|), here only in N.T., elsewhere \en hupsistois\ in the highest (Matthew:21:9; strkjv@Luke:2:14|) or \en tois epouraniois\ in the heavenlies (Ephesians:1:3,20|). Jesus is here pictured as King (Prophet and Priest also) Messiah seated at the right hand of God.

rwp@Hebrews:13:20 @{The God of peace} (\ho theos ts eirns\). God is the author and giver of peace, a Pauline phrase (6 times) as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:23|. {Who brought again from the dead} (\ho anagagn ek nekrn\). Second aorist active articular participle of \anag\ (cf. strkjv@Romans:10:7|), the only direct mention of the resurrection of Jesus in the Epistle, though implied often (1:3|, etc.). {That great shepherd of the sheep} (\ton poimena tn probatn ton megan\). This phrase occurs in strkjv@Isaiah:63:11| except \ton megan\ which the author adds as in strkjv@4:14; strkjv@10:21|. Songs:here, "the shepherd of the sheep the great one." {With the blood of the eternal covenant} (\en haimati diathks ainiou\). This language is from strkjv@Zechariah:9:11|. The language reminds us of Christ's own words in strkjv@Mark:14:24| (Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Luke:22:20; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:25|) about "my blood of the covenant."

rwp@Info_John @ THE AUTHOR THE APOSTLE JOHN Loisy (_Leviticus:Quatr. Evangile_, p. 132) says that if one takes literally what is given in the body of the Gospel of the Beloved Disciple he is bound to be one of the twelve. Loisy does not take it "literally." But why not? Are we to assume that the author of this greatest of books is playing a part or using a deliberate artifice to deceive? It may be asked why John does not use his own name instead of a _nom de plume_. Reference can be made to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, no one of which gives the author's name. One can see a reason for the turn here given since the book consists so largely of personal experiences of the author with Christ. He thus avoids the too frequent use of the personal pronoun and preserves the element of witness which marks the whole book. One by one the other twelve apostles disappear if we test their claims for the authorship. In the list of seven in chapter strkjv@John:21| it is easy to drop the names of Simon Peter, Thomas, and Nathanael. There are left two unnamed disciples and the sons of Zebedee (here alone mentioned, not even named, in the book)...Acts Luke does not mention his...(Acts:12:1|). The evidence in the Gospel points directly to the Apostle John as the author.

rwp@Info_John @ HISTORICAL VALUE OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL It is just here that the chief attack is made on the Fourth Gospel even by some who admit the Johannine authorship. It is now assumed by some that the Fourth Gospel is not on a par with the Synoptics in historical reliability and some harmonies omit it entirely or place it separately at the close, though certainly Tatian used it with the Synoptics in his _Diatessaron_, the first harmony of the Gospels. Some even follow Schmiedel in seeing only a symbolic or parabolic character in the miracles in the Fourth Gospel, particularly in the narrative of the raising of Lazarus in chapter strkjv@John:11|...and temptation, not to mention Luke's...23|, all in the Synoptics. The opposition to Jesus grew steadily as he revealed himself more clearly. Some of the difficulties raised are gratuitous as in the early cleansing of the temple as if it could not have happened twice, confounding the draught of fishes in chapter strkjv@John:21| with that in strkjv@Luke:5|, making Mary of Bethany at the feast of a Simon in chapter strkjv@John:12| the same as the sinful woman at the feast of another Simon in strkjv@Luke:7|, making John's Gospel locate the last passover meal a day ahead instead of at the regular time as the Synoptics have it. Rightly interpreted these difficulties disappear. In simple truth, if one takes the Fourth Gospel at its face value, the personal recollections of the aged John phrased in his own way to supplement the narratives in the Synoptics, there is little left to give serious trouble. The Jerusalem ministry with the feasts is a case in point. The narrative of the call of the first disciples in chapter strkjv@John:1| is another. The author followed Simon in bringing also his own brother James to Jesus. John was present in the appearance of Christ before Annas, and Pilate. He was at the Cross when no other apostles were there. He took the mother of Jesus to his home and then returned to the Cross. He saw the piercing of the side of Jesus. He knew and saw the deed of Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus. E. H. Askwith has a most helpful discussion of this whole problem in _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_.

rwp@John:2:1 @{The third day} (\ti hmeri ti triti\). "On the day the third" (locative case), from the start to Galilee when Philip was found (1:43|), seven days since strkjv@1:19|. {There was a marriage} (\gamos egeneto\). "A wedding (or marriage festival) took place." See on ¯Matthew:22:8|. {In Cana of Galilee} (\en Kana ts Galilaias\). This town, the home of Nathanael (21:2|), is only mentioned again in strkjv@4:46| as the home of the nobleman. There was a Cana in Coele-Syria. It is usually located at _Kefr Kenna_ (3 1/2 miles from Nazareth), though _Ain Kana_ and _Khirbet Kana_ are also possible. Bernard thinks that it was probably on Wednesday afternoon the fourth day of the week (usual day for marriage of virgins), when the party of Jesus arrived. {And the mother of Jesus was there} (\kai n h mtr tou Isou ekei\)...arrived. John does not mention her...

rwp@John:3:5 @{Of water and the Spirit} (\ex hudatos kai pneumatos\). Nicodemus had failed utterly to grasp the idea of the spiritual birth as essential to entrance into the Kingdom of God. He knew only Jews as members of that kingdom, the political kingdom of Pharisaic hope which was to make all the world Jewish (Pharisaic) under the King Messiah. Why does Jesus add \ex hudatos\ here? In verse 3| we have "\anthen\" (from above) which is repeated in verse 7|, while in verse 8| we have only \ek tou pneumatos\ (of the Spirit) in the best manuscripts. Many theories exist. One view makes baptism, referred to by \ex hudatos\ (coming up out of water)...so, why is water mentioned only...(3,5,7|)? Calvin makes water and Spirit refer to the one act (the cleansing work of the Spirit). Some insist on the language in verse 6| as meaning the birth of the flesh coming in a sac of water in contrast to the birth of the Spirit. One wonders after all what was the precise purpose of Jesus with Nicodemus, the Pharisaic ceremonialist, who had failed to grasp the idea of spiritual birth which is a commonplace to us. By using water (the symbol before the thing signified)...is to say the mention of...\hudatos kai\ (water and) do not belong to the words of Jesus, but "are a gloss, added to bring the saying of Jesus into harmony with the belief and practice of a later generation." Here Jesus uses \eiselthein\ (enter) instead of \idein\ (see) of verse 3|, but with the same essential idea (participation in the kingdom).

rwp@John:4:2 @{Although Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples} (\kaitoige Isous autos ouk ebaptizen all' hoi mathtai autou\). Parenthetical explanation that applies also to strkjv@3:22|. Imperfect tense means that it was not the habit of Jesus. This is the only N.T. instance of \kaitoige\ (and yet indeed), compound conjunction (\kaitoi\ in strkjv@Acts:14:17; strkjv@Hebrews:4:3|) with intensive particle \ge\...This is the last mention of...(Matthew:28:19|). It is possible that Jesus stopped the baptizing because of the excitement and the issue raised about his Messianic claims till after his resurrection when he enjoined it upon his disciples as a rite of public enlistment in his service.

rwp@John:5:4 @All of this verse is wanting in the oldest and best manuscripts like Aleph B C D W 33 Old Syriac, Coptic versions, Latin Vulgate. It is undoubtedly added, like the clause in verse 3|, to make clearer the statement in verse 7|...the earliest writer to mention it....

rwp@John:6:3 @{Into the mountain} (\eis to oros\). From the level of the Jordan valley up into the high hill on the eastern side. Mark (Mark:6:46|) and Matthew (Matthew:14:23|) mention that after the miracle Jesus went further up into the mountain to pray. {Sat} (\ekathto\). Imperfect middle of \kathmai\, was sitting, a picture of repose.

rwp@John:8:3 @{The scribes and the Pharisees} (\hoi grammateis kai hoi Pharisaioi\). John does not mention "scribes," though this combination (note two articles) is common enough in the Synoptics (Luke:5:30; strkjv@6:7|, etc.). {Bring} (\agousin\). Vivid dramatic present active indicative of \ag\. Dods calls this "in itself an unlawful thing to do" since they had a court for the trial of such a case. Their purpose is to entrap Jesus. {Taken in adultery} (\epi moicheii kateilemmenn\). Perfect passive participle of \katalamban\, old compound to seize (Mark:9:18|), to catch, to overtake (John:12:35|), to overcome (or overtake) in strkjv@1:5|. {Having let her in the midst} (\stsantes autn en mesi\). First aorist active (transitive) participle of \histmi\. Here all could see her and what Jesus did with such a case. They knew his proneness to forgive sinners.

rwp@John:8:6 @{Tempting him} (\peirazontes auton\). Evil sense of this present active participle of \peiraz\, as so often (Mark:8:11; strkjv@10:2|, etc.). {That they might have whereof to accuse him} (\hina echsin katgorein autou\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \ech\. This laying of traps for Jesus was a common practice of his enemies (Luke:11:16|, etc.). Note present active infinitive of \katgore\ (see strkjv@Matthew:12:10| for the verb) to go on accusing (with genitive \autou\). It was now a habit with these rabbis. {Stooped down} (\kat kupsas\). First aorist active participle of \kupt\, old verb to bow the head, to bend forward, in N.T. only here and verse 8; strkjv@Mark:1:7|. The use of \kat\ (down) gives a vivid touch to the picture. {With his finger} (\ti daktuli\). Instrumental case of \daktulos\ for which see strkjv@Matthew:23:4|. {Wrote on the ground} (\kategraphen eis tn gn\). Imperfect active of \katagraph\...done sometimes. The only mention of...\katagraph\ leaves it uncertain whether he was writing words or drawing pictures or making signs. If we only knew what he wrote! Certainly Jesus knew how to write. And yet more books have been written about this one who wrote nothing that is preserved than any other person or subject in human history. There is a tradition that Jesus wrote down the names and sins of these accusers. That is not likely. They were written on their hearts. Jesus alone on this occasion showed embarrassment over this woman's sin.

rwp@John:11:47 @{Gathered a council} (\sungagon sunedrion\). Second aorist active indicative of \sunag\ and \sunedrion\, the regular word for the Sanhedrin (Matthew:5:22|, etc.), only here in John. Here a sitting or session of the Sanhedrin. Both chief priests (Sadducees) and Pharisees (mentioned no more in John after strkjv@7:57| save strkjv@12:19,42|) combine in the call (cf. strkjv@7:32|). From now on the chief priests (Sadducees) take the lead in the attacks on Jesus, though loyally supported by their opponents (the Pharisees). {And said} (\kai elegon\). Imperfect active of \leg\, perhaps inchoative, "began to say." {What do we?} (\Ti poioumen;\). Present active (linear) indicative of \poie\. Literally, "What are we doing?" {Doeth} (\poiei\). Better, "is doing" (present, linear action)...idle. There is no mention of...

rwp@John:12:2 @{Songs:they made him a supper there} (\epoisan oun auti deipnon ekei\). Here again \oun\ is not inferential, but merely transitional. This supper is given by Mark (Mark:14:3-9|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6-13|) just two days (Mark:14:1|) before the passover, that is on our Tuesday evening (beginning of Jewish Wednesday), while John mentions (12:2-9|) it immediately after the arrival of Jesus in Bethany (12:1|)...and he may have mentioned it...12 John closes his record of the public ministry of the Lord relative to the disciples at this feast (1-11|), to the multitude in the triumphal entry (12-19|), to the world outside in the visit of the Greeks (20-36a|), and with two summary judgements (36b-50|). There is no further reason to refer to the feast in the house of another Simon when a sinful woman anointed Jesus (Luke:7:36-50|). It is no credit to Luke or to John with Mark and Matthew to have them all making a jumble like that. There were two anointings by two absolutely different women for wholly different purposes. See the discussion on Luke for further details. {And Martha served} (\kai h Martha dikonei\). Imperfect active of \diakone\, picturing Martha true to the account of her in strkjv@Luke:10:40| (\polln diakonian\, \diakonein\ as here). But this fact does not show that Martha was the wife of this Simon at all. They were friends and neighbours and Martha was following her bent. It is Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6|) who mention the name of the host. It is not Simon the Pharisee (Luke:7:36|), but Simon the leper (Mark:14:3; strkjv@Matthew:26:6|) in whose house they meet. The name is common enough. The Simon in Luke was sharply critical of Jesus; this one is full of gratitude for what Jesus has done for him. {That sat at meat} (\tn anakeimenn\). "That lay back," reclined as they did, articular participle (ablative case after \ek\) of the common verb \anakeimai\. Perhaps Simon gave the feast partly in honour of Lazarus as well as of Jesus since all were now talking of both (John:12:9|). It was a gracious occasion. The guests were Jesus, the twelve apostles, and Martha, Mary, and Lazarus.

rwp@John:12:8 @{Ye have always} (\pantote echete\). Jesus does not discredit gifts to the poor at all. But there is relativity in one's duties. {But me ye have not always} (\eme de ou pantote echete\)...Jesus. John does not mention the...14:9; strkjv@Matthew:26:13|, but he does show her keen sympathetic insight and Christ's genuine appreciation of her noble deed. It is curiously \mal-a-propos\ surely to put alongside this incident the other incident told long before by Luke (Luke:7:35ff.|) of the sinful woman. Let Mary alone in her glorious act of love.

rwp@John:14:13 @{Whatsoever ye shall ask} (\hoti an aitste\). Indefinite relative clause with \hoti\ (neuter accusative singular of \hostis\), \an\ and the aorist active subjunctive of \aite\. This is an advance thought over verse 12|. {In my name} (\en ti onomati mou\). First mention of his "name" as the open sesame to the Father's will. See also strkjv@14:26; strkjv@15:16; strkjv@16:23,24,26|. {That will I do} (\touto pois\). The Father answers prayers (15:16; strkjv@16:23|), but so does the Son (here and verse 14|). The purpose (\hina\ clause with first aorist passive subjunctive of \doxaz\) is "that the Father may be glorified in the Son." Plead Christ's name in prayer to the Father.

rwp@John:18:3 @{The band of soldiers} (\tn speiran\). No word for "of soldiers" in the Greek, but the Latin _spira_ (roll or ball) was used for a military cohort (Polybius 11, 23, 1) as in strkjv@Matthew:27:27; strkjv@Acts:10:1|...The Synoptics do not mention the...(\hupretas\ for which see strkjv@Matthew:26:58; strkjv@Mark:14:54,65|) or temple police from the Sanhedrin. {Cometh} (\erchetai\). Dramatic historical present middle indicative. {With lanterns and torches} (\meta phann kai lampadn\). Both old words, \phanos\ only here in N.T., \lampas\, an oil lamp (Matthew:25:1|). It was full moon, but Judas took no chances for it may have been cloudy and there were dark places by the walls and under the olive trees. \Meta\ is accompanied with {and weapons} (\kai hopln\). Mark (Mark:14:43|) mentions "swords and staves." Probably the temple guard had weapons as well as the soldiers.

rwp@John:18:5 @{Was standing} (\histkei\). Second past perfect active of \histmi\...Jesus. John does not mention the...4|. Then Jesus stepped forth and affirmed that he was the one whom they were seeking.

rwp@John:19:7 @{Because he made himself the Son of God} (\hoti huion theou heauton epoisen\). Here at last the Sanhedrin give the real ground for their hostility to Jesus, one of long standing for probably three years (John:5:18|) and the one on which the Sanhedrin voted the condemnation of Jesus (Mark:14:61-64; strkjv@Matthew:27:23-66|)...now they do not mention their...

rwp@John:20:18 @{And telleth} (\aggellousa\). Present active participle, "announcing." {I have seen the Lord} (\Heraka ton kurion\). Perfect active indicative of \hora\. She will always carry in her heart that vision (picture) of the Risen Christ. She tells this fact before she delivers Christ's message to the brethren of Christ. {How that}. No word in the Greek, but a conjunction like \hs\ is implied. \Hoti\ here is recitative. The disciples (brethren) did not believe Mary's story nor that of the other women (Luke:24:11; strkjv@Mark:16:11|). Paul does not mention the vision to Mary or the women in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:5-7|. But Mary Magdalene was the first one to see the Risen Lord.

rwp@Jude:1:7 @{Even as} (\hs\). Just "as." The third instance (Jude:passes by the deluge) in Jude, the cities of the plain. {The cities about them} (\hai peri autas poleis\). These were also included, Admah and Zeboiim (Deuteronomy:29:23; strkjv@Hosea:11:8|). Zoar, the other city, was spared. {In like manner} (\ton homoion tropon\). Adverbial accusative (cf. \hs\). Like the fallen angels. {Having given themselves over to fornication} (\ekporneusasai\). First aorist active participle feminine plural of \ekporneu\, late and rare compound (perfective use of \ek\, outside the moral law), only here in N.T., but in LXX (Genesis:38:24; strkjv@Exodus:34:15f.|, etc.). Cf. \aselgeian\ in verse 4|. {Strange flesh} (\sarkos heteras\). Horrible licentiousness, not simply with women not their wives or in other nations, but even unnatural uses (Romans:1:27|) for which the very word "sodomy" is used (Genesis:19:4-11|). The pronoun \heteras\ (other, strange) is not in strkjv@2Peter:2:10|. {Are set forth} (\prokeintai\). Present middle indicative of \prokeimai\, old verb, to lie before, as in strkjv@Hebrews:12:1f|. {As an example} (\deigma\). Predicate nominative of \deigma\, old word (from \deiknumi\ to show), here only in N.T., sample, specimen. strkjv@2Peter:2:6| has \hupodeigma\ (pattern). {Suffering} (\hupechousai\). Present active participle of \hupech\, old compound, to hold under, often with \dikn\ (right, justice, sentence strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:9|) to suffer sentence (punishment), here only in N.T. {Of eternal fire} (\puros ainiou\). Like \desmois aidiois\ in verse 7|. Cf. the hell of fire (Matthew:5:22|) and also strkjv@Matthew:25:46|. Jude:has no mention of Lot.

rwp@Luke:1:13 @{Is heard} (\eiskousth\). First aorist passive indicative. A sort of timeless aorist, "was heard" when made, and so "is heard" now. Probably the prayer was for a son in spite of the great age of Elisabeth, though the Messianic redemption is possible also. {John} (\Iann\)...God is gracious. The mention of...(verses 13-17|) takes on a metrical form when turned into Hebrew (Ragg) and it is a prose poem in Greek and English like strkjv@1:30-33,35-37,42-45,46-55,68-70; strkjv@2:10-12,14,29-32,34-35|. Certainly Luke has preserved the earliest Christian hymns in their oldest sources. He is the first critic of the sources of the Gospels and a scholarly one.

rwp@Luke:3:1 @{Now in the fifteenth year} (\en etei de pentekaidekati\). Tiberius Caesar was ruler in the provinces two years before Augustus Caesar died. Luke makes a six-fold attempt here to indicate the time when John the Baptist began his ministry. John revived the function of the prophet (\Ecce Homo\, p. 2|)...the Roman Emperor, then mentions Pontius...(and Perea), Philip, Tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis, Lysanias, Tetrarch of Abilene (all with the genitive absolute construction) and concludes with the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas (son-in-law and successor of Annas)...been made to the mention of...(_Ant_. XXVII. I)...site of Abilene with mention of...(see my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_, pp. 167f.). Songs:Luke is vindicated again by the rocks.

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

rwp@Luke:4:2 @{Being tempted} (\peirazomenos\). Present passive participle and naturally parallel with the imperfect passive \geto\ (was led) in verse 1|. This is another instance of poor verse division which should have come at the end of the sentence. See on ¯Matthew:4:1; strkjv@Mark:1:13| for the words "tempt" and "devil." The devil challenged the Son of man though also the Son of God. It was a contest between Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, and the slanderer of men. The devil had won with Adam and Eve. He has hopes of triumph over Jesus. The story of this conflict is given only in strkjv@Matthew:4:1-11; strkjv@Luke:4:1-13|...There is a mere mention of...1:12f|. Songs:then here is a specimen of the Logia of Jesus (Q), a non-Markan portion of Matthew and Luke, the earliest document about Christ. The narrative could come ultimately only from Christ himself. It is noteworthy that it bears all the marks of the high conception of Jesus as the Son of God found in the Gospel of John and in Paul and Hebrews, the rest of the New Testament in fact, for Mark, Matthew, Luke, Acts, Peter, and Jude:follow in this same strain. The point is that modern criticism has revealed the Messianic consciousness of Jesus as God's Son at his Baptism and in his Temptations at the very beginning of his ministry and in the oldest known documents about Christ (The Logia, Mark's Gospel). {He did eat nothing} (\ouk ephagen ouden\). Second aorist (constative) active indicative of the defective verb \esthi\. Mark does not give the fast. strkjv@Matthew:4:2| has the aorist active participle \nsteusas\ which usually means a religious fast for purposes of devotion. That idea is not excluded by Luke's words. The entrance of Jesus upon his Messianic ministry was a fit time for this solemn and intense consecration. This mental and spiritual strain would naturally take away the appetite and there was probably nothing at hand to eat. The weakness from the absence of food gave the devil his special opportunity to tempt Jesus which he promptly seized. {When they were completed} (\suntelestheisn autn\). Genitive absolute with the first aorist passive participle feminine plural because \hemern\ (days) is feminine. According to Luke the hunger (\epeinasen\, became hungry, ingressive aorist active indicative) came at the close of the forty days as in strkjv@Matthew:4:2|.

rwp@Luke:4:39 @{He stood over her} (\epistas epan auts\). Second aorist active participle. Only in Luke. Surely we are not to take Luke to mean that Jesus here took the exorcist's position and was rebuking a malignant personality. The attitude of Jesus is precisely that of any kindly sympathetic physician. strkjv@Mark:1:31; strkjv@Matthew:8:15| mention the touch of her hand rather than the tender look over her head. {Rebuked} (\epetimsen\). Only in Luke. Jesus bade the fever leave her as he spoke to the wind and the waves and Luke uses this same verb (8:24|). {Rose up and ministered} (\anastsa dikonei\). Second aorist active participle as in verse 38|, but inchoative imperfect tense \dikonei\, from \diakone\ (note augment of compound verb). She rose up immediately, though a long high fever usually leaves one very weak. The cure was instantaneous and complete. She began to minister at once and kept it up.

rwp@Luke:5:12 @{Behold} (\kai idou\). Quite a Hebraistic idiom, this use of \kai\ after \egeneto\ (almost like \hoti\) with \idou\ (interjection) and no verb. {Full of leprosy} (\plrs lepras\). strkjv@Mark:1:40| and strkjv@Matthew:8:2| have simply "a leper" which see. Evidently a bad case full of sores and far advanced as Luke the physician notes. The law (Leviticus:13:12f.|) curiously treated advanced cases as less unclean than the earlier stages. {Fell on his face} (\pesn epi prospon\). Second aorist active participle of \pipt\, common verb. strkjv@Mark:1:40| has "kneeling" (\gonupetn\) and strkjv@Matthew:8:40| "worshipped" (\prosekunei\). All three attitudes were possible one after the other. All three Synoptics quote the identical language of the leper and the identical answer of Jesus. His condition of the third class turned on the "will" (\thelis\) of Jesus who at once asserts his will (\thl\)...him. All three likewise mention the...(\hpsato\, verse 13|) of Christ's hand on the unclean leper and the instantaneous cure.

rwp@Luke:6:17 @{He came down with them} (\katabas met' autn\). Second aorist active participle of \katabain\, common verb. This was the night of prayer up in the mountain (Mark:31:3; strkjv@Luke:6:12|) and the choice of the Twelve next morning. The going up into the mountain of strkjv@Matthew:5:1|...summary statement with no mention of...(Matthew:5:1|), above the plain or "level place" (\epi topou pedinou\) on the mountain side where Jesus "stood" or "stopped" (\est\). It may be a level place towards the foot of the mountain. He stopped his descent at this level place and then found a slight elevation on the mountain side and began to speak. There is not the slightest reason for making Matthew locate this sermon on the mountain and Luke in the valley as if the places, audiences, and topics were different. For the unity of the sermon see discussion on ¯Matthew:5:1f|. The reports in Matthew and Luke begin alike, cover the same general ground and end alike. The report in Matthew is longer chiefly because in Chapter 5, he gives the argument showing the contrast between Christ's conception of righteousness and that of the Jewish rabbis. Undoubtedly, Jesus repeated many of the crisp sayings here at other times as in Luke 12, but it is quite gratuitous to argue that Matthew and Luke have made up this sermon out of isolated sayings of Christ at various times. Both Matthew and Luke give too much that is local of place and audience for that idea. strkjv@Matthew:5:1| speaks of "the multitudes" and "his disciples." strkjv@Luke:6:17| notes "a great multitude of his disciples, and a great number of the people from all Judea and Jerusalem, and the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon." They agree in the presence of disciples and crowds besides the disciples from whom the twelve apostles were chosen. It is important to note how already people were coming from "the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon" "to hear him and to be healed (\iathnai\, first aorist passive of \iaomai\) of their diseases."

rwp@Luke:8:2 @{Which had been healed} (\hai san tetherapeumenai\). Periphrastic past perfect passive, suggesting that the healing had taken place some time before this tour. These women all had personal grounds of gratitude to Jesus. {From whom seven devils (demons) had gone out} (\aph' hs daimonia hepta exelluthei\). Past perfect active third singular for the \daimonia\...neuter plural. This first mention of...16:9| in the disputed close of the Gospel. The presence of seven demons in one person indicates special malignity (Mark:5:9|). See strkjv@Matthew:17:45| for the parable of the demon who came back with seven other demons worse than the first. It is not known where Magdala was, whence Mary came.

rwp@Luke:8:27 @{And for a long time} (\kai chroni hikani\). The use of the associative instrumental case in expressions of time is a very old Greek idiom that still appears in the papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 527). {He had worn no clothes} (\ouk enedusato himation\). First aorist middle indicative, constative aorist, viewing the "long time" as a point. Not pluperfect as English has it and not for the pluperfect, simply "and for a long time he did not put on himself (indirect middle) any clothing." The physician would naturally note this item. Common verb \endu\ or \endun\. This item in Luke alone, though implied by strkjv@Mark:5:15| "clothed" (\himatismenon\). {And abode not in any house} (\kai en oikii ouk emenen\)...though implied by the mention of...(Mark:5:3; strkjv@Matthew:8:28; strkjv@Luke:8:27|).

rwp@Luke:9:44 @{Sink into your ears} (\Thesthe humeis eis ta ta humn\). Second aorist imperative middle of \tithmi\, common verb. "Do you (note emphatic position) yourselves (whatever others do) put into your ears." No word like "sink" here. The same prediction here as in strkjv@Mark:9:31; strkjv@Matthew:17:22|...of man only without mention of...

rwp@Luke:13:34 @{O Jerusalem, Jerusalem} (\Ierousalm, Ierousalm\). In strkjv@Matthew:23:37f.|...here because of the mention of...(Luke:13:34f.; strkjv@Matthew:23:37-39|). For details see on Matthew. In Luke we have \episunaxai\ (late first aorist active infinitive) and in Matthew \episunagagein\ (second aorist active infinitive), both from \episunag\, a double compound of late Greek (Polybius). Both have "How often would I" (\posakis thelsa\). How often did I wish. Clearly showing that Jesus made repeated visits to Jerusalem as we know otherwise only from John's Gospel. {Even as} (\hon tropon\). Accusative of general reference and in strkjv@Matthew:23:37| also. Incorporation of antecedent into the relative clause. {Brood} (\nossian\) is in Luke while Matthew has {chickens} (\nossia\), both late forms for the older \neossia\. The adjective {desolate} (\ermos\) is wanting in strkjv@Luke:13:35| and is doubtful in strkjv@Matthew:23:39|.

rwp@Luke:22:1 @{The Passover} (\pascha\) Both names (unleavened bread and passover) are used here as in strkjv@Mark:14:1|. Strictly speaking the passover was Nisan 14 and the unleavened bread 15-21. This is the only place in the N.T. where the expression "the feast of unleavened bread" (common in LXX, Ex. strkjv@23:15|, etc.) occurs, for strkjv@Mark:14:1| has just "the unleavened bread." strkjv@Matthew:26:17| uses unleavened bread and passover interchangeably. {Drew nigh} (\ggizen\). Imperfect active. strkjv@Mark:14:1; strkjv@Matthew:26:2| mention "after two days" definitely.

rwp@Luke:22:50 @{His right ear} (\to ous autou to dexion\). Mark strkjv@14:47; strkjv@Matthew:26:51| do not mention "right," but Luke the Physician does. strkjv@John:18:10| follows Luke in this item and also adds the names of Peter and of Malchus since probably both were dead by that time and Peter would not be involved in trouble.

rwp@Luke:23:2 @{Began to accuse} (\rxanto katgorein\)...reason nor do they mention their...{We found} (\heuramen\). Second aorist active indicative with first aorist vowel \a\. Probably they mean that they had caught Jesus in the act of doing these things (_in flagrante delicto_) rather than discovery by formal trial. {Perverting our nation} (\diastrephonta to ethnos hmn\). Present active participle of \diastreph\, old verb to turn this way and that, distort, disturb. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:13:10|. The Sanhedrin imply that the great popularity of Jesus was seditious. {Forbidding to give tribute to Caesar}, (\kluonta phorous kaisari didonai\). Note object infinitive \didonai\ after the participle \kluonta\. Literally, hindering giving tribute to Caesar. This was a flat untruth. Their bright young students had tried desperately to get Jesus to say this very thing, but they had failed utterly (Luke:20:25|). {Saying that he himself is Christ a king} (\legonta hauton Christon basilea einai\). Note the indirect discourse here after the participle \legonta\ with the accusative (\hauton\ where \auton\ could have been used), and the infinitive. This charge is true, but not in the sense meant by them. Jesus did claim to be the Christ and the king of the kingdom of God. But the Sanhedrin wanted Pilate to think that he set himself up as a rival to Caesar. Pilate would understand little from the word "Christ," but "King" was a different matter. He was compelled to take notice of this charge else he himself would be accused to Caesar of winking at such a claim by Jesus.

rwp@Luke:23:4 @{The multitude} (\tous ochlous\). The first mention of them. It is now after daybreak. The procession of the Sanhedrin would draw a crowd (Plummer) and some may have come to ask for the release of a prisoner (Mark:15:8|). There was need of haste if the condemnation went through before friends of Jesus came. {I find no fault} (\ouden heurisk aition\). In the N.T. Luke alone uses this old adjective \aitios\ (Luke:23:4,14,22; strkjv@Acts:19:40|) except Heb. strkjv@5:9|. It means one who is the author, the cause of or responsible for anything. Luke does not give the explanation of this sudden decision of Pilate that Jesus is innocent. Evidently he held a careful examination before he delivered his judgment on the case. That conversation is given in strkjv@John:18:33-38|. Pilate took Jesus inside the palace from the upper gallery (John:18:33|) and then came out and rendered his decision to the Sanhedrin (John:18:38|) who would not go into the palace of Pilate (John:18:28|).

rwp@Mark:1:29 @{The house of Simon and Andrew} (\tn oikian Simnos kai Andreou\). Peter was married and both he and Andrew lived together in "Peter's house" (Matthew:8:14|) with Peter's wife and mother-in-law. Peter was evidently married before he began to follow Jesus. Later his wife accompanied him on his apostolic journeys (1Corinthians:9:5|). This incident followed immediately after the service in the synagogue on the sabbath. All the Synoptics give it. Mark heard Peter tell it as it occurred in his own house where Jesus made his home while in Capernaum. Each Gospel gives touches of its own to the story. Mark has "lay sick of a fever " (\katekeito puressousa\), lay prostrate burning with fever. Matthew puts it "stretched out (\beblmenn\) with a fever." Luke has it "holden with a great fever" (\n sunechomen pureti megali\)...medical phrase. They all mention the...

rwp@Mark:3:6 @{And straightway with the Herodians took council} (\euthus meta tn Hridiann\). The Pharisees could stand no more. Songs:out they stalked at once in a rage of madness (Luke:6:11|) and outside of the synagogue took counsel (\sumboulion epoisan\) or gave counsel (\sumboulion edidoun\, as some MSS. have it, imperfect tense, offered counsel as their solution of the problem) with their bitter enemies, the Herodians, on the sabbath day still "how they might destroy him" (\hops auton apolessin\)...This is the first mention of...8:15; strkjv@12:13; strkjv@Matthew:22:16|.

rwp@Mark:4:41 @{They feared exceedingly} (\ephobthsan phobon megan\). Cognate accusative with the first aorist passive indicative. They feared a great fear. strkjv@Matthew:8:27| and strkjv@Luke:8:22| mention that "they marvelled." But there was fear in it also. {Who then is this?} (\Tis ara houtos estin;\). No wonder that they feared if this One could command the wind and the waves at will as well as demons and drive out all diseases and speak such mysteries in parables. They were growing in their apprehension and comprehension of Jesus Christ. They had much yet to learn. There is much yet for us today to learn or seek to grow in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. This incident opened the eyes and minds of the disciples to the majesty of Jesus.

rwp@Mark:5:2 @{Out of the boat} (\ek tou ploiou\). Straightway (\euthus\) Mark says, using the genitive absolute (\exelthontos autou\) and then repeating \auti\ associative instrumental after \apntsen\. The demoniac greeted Jesus at once. Mark and strkjv@Luke:9:27| mention only one man while Matthew notes two demoniacs, perhaps one more violent than the other. Each of the Gospels has a different phrase. Mark has "a man with an unclean spirit" (\en pneumati akatharti\), strkjv@Matthew:8:28| "two possessed with demons" (\duo daimonizomenoi\), strkjv@Luke:8:27| "one having demons" (\tis echn daimonia\). Mark has many touches about this miracle not retained in Matthew and Luke. See on ¯Matthew:8:28|.

rwp@Mark:5:41 @{Talitha cumi}. These precious Aramaic words, spoken by Jesus to the child, Peter heard and remembered so that Mark gives them to us. Mark interprets the simple words into Greek for those who did not know Aramaic (\to korasion, egeire\), that is, {Damsel, arise}. Mark uses the diminutive \korasin\, a little girl, from \kor\, girl. _Braid Scots_ has it: "Lassie, wauken." strkjv@Luke:8:5-9| has it \H pais, egeire\, {Maiden, arise}. All three Gospels mention the fact that Jesus took her by the hand, a touch of life (\kratsas ts cheiros\), giving confidence and help.

rwp@Mark:6:1 @{Into his own country} (\eis tn patrida autou\). Songs:Matthew:13:54|. There is no real reason for identifying this visit to Nazareth with that recorded in strkjv@Luke:4:26-31|...Neither Mark nor Matthew mention Nazareth...\patrida\ the region of Nazareth is meant. He had not lived in Bethlehem since his birth.

rwp@Mark:6:3 @{Is not this the carpenter?} (\Ouch houtos estin ho tektn;\). 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 \tektn\ comes from \tekein, tikt\, to beget, create, like \techn\ (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 \tektn\ here. {And they were offended in him} (\kai eskandalizonto en auti\). 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 (\prophts\, 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 ti oikii 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:6:7 @{By two and two} (\duo duo\). This repetition of the numeral instead of the use of \ana duo\ or \kata duo\ is usually called a Hebraism. The Hebrew does have this idiom, but it appears in Aeschylus and Sophocles, in the vernacular _Koin_ (Oxyrhynchus Papyri No. 121), in Byzantine Greek, and in modern Greek (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 122f.). Mark preserves the vernacular _Koin_ better than the other Gospels and this detail suits his vivid style. The six pairs of apostles could thus cover Galilee in six different directions. Mark notes that he "began to send them forth" (\rxato autous apostellein\). Aorist tense and present infinitive. This may refer simply to this particular occasion in Mark's picturesque way. But the imperfect tense \edidou\ means he kept on giving them all through the tour, a continuous power (authority) over unclean spirits singled out by Mark as representing "all manner of diseases and all manner of sickness" (Matthew:10:1|), "to cure diseases" (\iasthai\, strkjv@Luke:9:1|), healing power. They were to preach and to heal (Luke:9:1; strkjv@Matthew:10:7|). Mark does not mention preaching as a definite part of the commission to the twelve on this their first preaching tour, but he does state that they did preach (6:12|). They were to be missioners or missionaries (\apostellein\) in harmony with their office (\apostoloi\).

rwp@Mark:6:9 @{Shod with sandals} (\hupodedemenous sandalia\). Perfect passive participle in the accusative case as if with the infinitive \poreuesthai\ or \poreuthnai\, (to go). Note the aorist infinitive middle, \endusasthai\ (text of Westcott and Hort), but \endussthe\ (aorist middle subjunctive) in the margin. Change from indirect to direct discourse common enough, not necessarily due to "disjointed notes on which the Evangelist depended" (Swete). strkjv@Matthew:10:10| has "nor shoes" (\mde hupodmata\), possibly preserving the distinction between "shoes" and "sandals" (worn by women in Greece and by men in the east, especially in travelling). But here again extra shoes may be the prohibition. See on ¯Matthew:10:10| for this. {Two coats} (\duo chitnas\). Two was a sign of comparative wealth (Swete). The mention of "two" here in all three Gospels probably helps us to understand that the same thing applies to shoes and staff. "In general, these directions are against luxury in equipment, and also against their providing themselves with what they could procure from the hospitality of others" (Gould).

rwp@Mark:8:12 @{He sighed deeply in his spirit} (\anastenaxas ti pneumati\). The only instance of this compound in the N.T. though in the LXX. The uncompounded form occurs in strkjv@Mark:7:34| and it is common enough. The preposition \ana-\ intensifies the meaning of the verb (perfective use). "The sigh seemed to come, as we say, from the bottom of his heart, the Lord's human spirit was stirred to its depths" (Swete). Jesus resented the settled prejudice of the Pharisees (and now Sadducees also) against him and his work. {There shall no sign be given unto this generation} (\ei dothsetai ti genei tauti smeion\). strkjv@Matthew:16:4| has simply \ou dothsetai\, plain negative with the future passive indicative. Mark has \ei\ instead of \ou\, which is technically a conditional clause with the conclusion unexpressed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1024), really aposiopesis in imitation of the Hebrew use of \im\. This is the only instance in the N.T. except in quotations from the LXX (Hebrews:3:11; strkjv@4:3,5|). It is very common in the LXX. The rabbis were splitting hairs over the miracles of Jesus as having a possible natural explanation (as some critics do today) even if by the power of Beelzebub, and those not of the sky (from heaven) which would be manifested from God. Songs:they put up this fantastic test to Jesus which he deeply resents. strkjv@Matthew:16:4|...the sign of Jonah" mentioned already...(Matthew:12:39-41|)...length and to be mentioned again...(Luke:11:32|). But the mention of the sign of Jonah was "an absolute refusal of signs in their sense" (Bruce). And when he did rise from the dead on the third day, the Sanhedrin refused to be convinced (see Acts 3 to 5).

rwp@Mark:16:2 @{When the sun was risen} (\anateilantos tou hliou\). Genitive absolute, aorist participle, though some manuscripts read \anatellontos\, present participle. strkjv@Luke:24:1| has it "at early dawn" (\orthrou batheos\) and strkjv@John:20:1| "while it was yet dark." It was some two miles from Bethany to the tomb. Mark himself gives both notes of time, "very early" (\lian pri\)...the tomb. All three mention that...(our Saturday) which began at sunset. This is made clear as a bell by strkjv@Luke:23:54| "and the sabbath drew on." The women rested on the sabbath (Luke strkjv@23:56|). This visit of the women was in the early morning of our Sunday, the first day of the week. Some people are greatly disturbed over the fact that Jesus did not remain in the grave full seventy-two hours. But he repeatedly said that he would rise on the third day and that is precisely what happened. He was buried on Friday afternoon. He was risen on Sunday morning. If he had really remained in the tomb full three days and then had risen after that, it would have been on the fourth day, not on the third day. The occasional phrase "after three days" is merely a vernacular idiom common in all languages and not meant to be exact and precise like "on the third day." We can readily understand "after three days" in the sense of "on the third day." It is impossible to understand "on the third day" to be "on the fourth day." See my _Harmony of the Gospels_, pp. 289-91.

rwp@Mark:16:5 @{Entering into the tomb} (\eiselthousai eis to mnmeion\). Told also by strkjv@Luke:24:3|, though not by Matthew. {A young man} (\neaniskon\). An angel in strkjv@Matthew:28:5|, two men in strkjv@Luke:24|. These and like variations in details show the independence of the narrative and strengthen the evidence for the general fact of the resurrection. The angel sat upon the stone (Matthew:28:2|), probably at first. Mark here speaks of the young man {sitting on the right side} (\kathmenon en tois dexiois\) inside the tomb. Luke has the two men standing by them on the inside (Luke strkjv@24:4|). Possibly different aspects and stages of the incident. {Arrayed in a white robe} (\peribeblmenon stoln leukn\). Perfect passive participle with the accusative case of the thing retained (verb of clothing). strkjv@Luke:24:4| has "in dazzling apparel." {They were amazed} (\exethambthsan\). They were utterly (\ex\ in composition) amazed. strkjv@Luke:24:5| has it "affrighted." strkjv@Matthew:28:3f.|...and Luke, does not mention the...(John:20:1-10|).

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

rwp@Matthew:2:1 @{Wise men from the east} (\magoi apo anatoln\). The etymology of \Magi\ is quite uncertain. It may come from the same Indo-European root as _(megas) magnus_, though some find it of Babylonian origin. Herodotus speaks of a tribe of Magi among the Medians. Among the Persians there was a priestly caste of Magi like the Chaldeans in Babylon (Daniel:1:4|). Daniel was head of such an order (Daniel:2:48|). It is the same word as our "magician" and it sometimes carried that idea as in the case of Simon Magus (Acts:8:9,11|) and of Elymas Barjesus (Acts:13:6,8|). But here in Matthew the idea seems to be rather that of astrologers. Babylon was the home of astrology, but we only know that the men were from the east whether Arabia, Babylon, Persia, or elsewhere. The notion that they were kings arose from an interpretation of Is strkjv@60:3; strkjv@Revelation:21:24|...is due to the mention of...(gold, frankincense, myrrh), but that is no proof at all. Legend has added to the story that the names were Caspar, Balthasar, and Melchior as in _Ben Hur_ and also that they represent Shem, Ham, and Japhet. A casket in the Cologne Cathedral actually is supposed to contain the skulls of these three Magi. The word for east (\apo anatoln\) means "from the risings" of the sun.

rwp@Matthew:8:28 @{The country of the Gadarenes} (\ten chran tn Gadarnn\). This is the correct text in Matthew while in strkjv@Mark:5:1| and strkjv@Luke:8:26| it is "the country of the Gerasenes." Dr. Thomson discovered by the lake the ruins of Khersa (Gerasa)...while Mark and Luke mention only...{The tombs}" (\tn mnmein\) were chambers cut into the mountain side common enough in Palestine then and now. On the eastern side of the lake the precipitous cliffs are of limestone formation and full of caves. It is one of the proofs that one is a maniac that he haunts the tombs. People shunned the region as dangerous because of the madmen.

rwp@Matthew:10:1 @{His twelve disciples} (\tous ddeka mathtas autou\). First mention of the group of "learners" by Matthew and assumed as already in existence (note the article) as they were (Mark:3:14|)...but Matthew did not mention it...

rwp@Matthew:10:38 @{Doth not take his cross} (\ou lambanei ton stauron autou\). The first mention of cross in Matthew. Criminals were crucified in Jerusalem. It was the custom for the condemned person to carry his own cross as Jesus did till Simon of Cyrene was impressed for that purpose. The Jews had become familiar with crucifixion since the days of Antiochus Epiphanes and one of the Maccabean rulers (Alexander Jannaeus) had crucified 800 Pharisees. It is not certain whether Jesus was thinking of his own coming crucifixion when he used this figure, though possible, perhaps probable. The disciples would hardly think of that outcome unless some of them had remarkable insight.

rwp@Matthew:15:35 @{On the ground} (\epi tn gn\). No mention of "grass" as in strkjv@14:19| for this time, midsummer, the grass would be parched and gone.

rwp@Matthew:16:21 @{From that time began} (\apo tote rxato\). It was a suitable time for the disclosure of the greatest secret of his death. It is now just a little over six months before the cross. They must know it now to be ready then. The great confession of Peter made this seem an appropriate time. He will repeat the warnings (17:22f.| with mention of betrayal; strkjv@20:17-19| with the cross) which he now "began." Songs:the necessity (\dei\, must) of his suffering death at the hands of the Jerusalem ecclesiastics who have dogged his steps in Galilee is now plainly stated. Jesus added his resurrection "on the third day" (\ti triti hmeri\), not "on the fourth day," please observe. Dimly the shocked disciples grasped something of what Jesus said.

rwp@Matthew:20:29 @{From Jericho} (\apo Iereich\). Songs:Mark:10:46|. But Luke (Luke:18:35|) places the incident as they were drawing near to Jericho (\eis Iereich\). It is probable that Mark and Matthew refer to the old Jericho, the ruins of which have been discovered, while Luke alludes to the new Roman Jericho. The two blind men were apparently between the two towns. Mark (Mark:10:46|) and Luke (Luke:18:35|) mention only one blind man, Bartimaeus (Mark). In Kentucky there are two towns about a half mile apart both called Pleasureville (one Old Pleasureville, the other New Pleasureville).

rwp@Matthew:27:51 @{Was rent} (\eschisth\). Both Mark (Mark:15:38|) and Luke (Luke:23:45|) mention also this fact. Matthew connects it with the earthquake, "the earth did quake" (\h g eseisth\). Josephus (_War_ VI. 299) tells of a quaking in the temple before the destruction and the Talmud tells of a quaking forty years before the destruction of the temple. Allen suggests that "a cleavage in the masonry of the porch, which rent the outer veil and left the Holy Place open to view, would account for the language of the Gospels, of Josephus, and of the Talmud." This veil was a most elaborately woven fabric of seventy-two twisted plaits of twenty-four threads each and the veil was sixty feet long and thirty wide. The rending of the veil signified the removal of the separation between God and the people (Gould).

rwp@Matthew:28:10 @{Fear not} (\m phobeisthe\)...There is no special mention of...("and Peter") as in strkjv@Mark:16:7|, but we may be sure that the special message to Peter was delivered.

rwp@Philemon:1:4 @{Always} (\pantote\). Goes with \eucharist\ though so far away in the Greek sentence. {Making mention of thee} (\mneian sou poioumenos\). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2| for this phrase. {In} (\epi\). Upon the occasion of.

rwp@Philippians:1:1 @{Paul} (\Paulos\). He does not mention his apostleship as he usually does. Omitted also in I and II Thess. and Philemon. {Timothy} (\Timotheos\). In no sense the author, but associated with Paul because with him here in Rome as in Corinth when I and II Thessalonians written and in Ephesus when I Corinthians sent and in Macedonia when II Corinthians written. Timothy was with Paul when the Philippian church was founded (Acts:16:1,13; strkjv@17:14|). He had been there twice since (Acts:19:22; strkjv@20:3f.|). {To all the saints} (\psi tois hagiois\). The word saint (\hagios\) here is used for the professing Christians as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:2| which see as well as strkjv@Romans:1:7| for the origin of the word. The word "all" (\psi\) means that all individual believers are included. Paul employs this word frequently in Philippians. {In Christ Jesus} (\en Christi Isou\). The centre for all Christian relations and activities for Paul and for us. {In Philippi} (\en Philippois\). See on ¯Acts:16:12| for discussion of this name. {With the bishops} (\sun episkopois\). "Together with bishops," thus singled out from "all the saints." See strkjv@Acts:20:17,28| for the use of this most interesting word as equivalent to \presbuteros\ (elder). It is an old word from \episkeptomai\, to look upon or after, to inspect, so the overseer or superintendent. In the second century \episcopos\ (Ignatius)...church officers are here mentioned... (bishops or elders and deacons). The plural is here employed because there was usually one church in a city with several pastors (bishops, elders). {And deacons} (\kai diakonois\). Technical sense here of the other church officers as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:8-13|, not the general use as in strkjv@Matthew:22:13|. The origin of the office is probably seen in strkjv@Acts:6:1-6|. The term is often applied to preachers (1Corinthians:3:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:6|). The etymology (\dia, konis\) suggests raising a dust by hastening.

rwp@Revelation:2:24 @{To you the rest} (\humin tois loipois\). Dative case. Those who hold out against Jezebel, not necessarily a minority (9:20; strkjv@19:21; strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13|). {As many as} (\hosoi\). Inclusive of all "the rest." {This teaching} (\tn didachn tautn\). That of Jezebel. {Which} (\hoitines\). "Which very ones," generic of the class, explanatory definition as in strkjv@1:7|. {Know not} (\ouk egnsan\). Second aorist (ingressive) active of \ginsk\, "did not come to know by experience." {The deep things of Satan} (\ta bathea tou Satan\). The Ophites (worshippers of the serpent) and other later Gnostics (Cainites, Carpocratians, Naassenes) boasted of their knowledge of "the deep things," some claiming this very language about Satan (the serpent) as Paul did of God (1Corinthians:2:10|). It is not clear whether the words here quoted are a boast of the Nicolaitans or a reproach on the other Christians for not knowing the depths of sin. Some even claimed that they could indulge in immorality without sinning (1John:1:10; strkjv@3:10|). Perhaps both ideas are involved. {As they say} (\hs legousin\). Probably referring to the heretics who ridicule the piety of the other Christians. {None other burden} (\ou--allo baros\). \Baros\ refers to weight (Matthew:20:12|), \phortion\, from \pher\, to bear, refers to load (Galatians:6:5|), \ogkos\ to bulk (Hebrews:12:1|). Apparently a reference to the decision of the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:28|) where the very word \baros\ is used and mention is made about the two items in verse 20| (fornication and idolatry) without mentioning the others about things strangled, etc. See the Pharisaic narrowness in strkjv@Matthew:23:4|.

rwp@Revelation:20:4 @{And they sat upon them} (\kai ekathisan ep' autous\). First aorist active indicative of \kathiz\. Another period here apparently synchronous (verse 7|) with the confinement of Satan in the abyss. No subject is given for this plural verb. Apparently Christ and the Apostles (Matthew:19:28; strkjv@Luke:22:30|) and some of the saints (1Corinthians:6:3|), martyrs some hold. {Judgment was given unto them} (\krima edoth autois\). First aorist passive of \didmi\. Picture of the heavenly court of assizes. {The souls} (\tas psuchas\). Accusative after \eidon\ at the beginning of the verse. {Of them that had been beheaded} (\tn pepelekismenn\). Genitive of the articular perfect passive participle of \pelekiz\, old word (from \pelekus\ an axe, the traditional instrument for execution in republican Rome, but later supplanted by the sword), to cut off with an axe, here only in N.T. See strkjv@6:9; strkjv@18:24; strkjv@19:2| for previous mention of these martyrs for the witness of Jesus (1:9; strkjv@12:17; strkjv@19:10|). Others also besides martyrs shared in Christ's victory, those who refused to worship the beast or wear his mark as in strkjv@13:15; strkjv@14:9ff.; strkjv@16:2; strkjv@19:20|. {And they lived} (\kai ezsan\). First aorist active indicative of \za\. If the ingressive aorist, it means "came to life" or "lived again" as in strkjv@2:8| and so as to verse 5|. If it is the constative aorist here and in verse 5|, then it could mean increased spiritual life. See strkjv@John:5:21-29| for the double sense of life and death (now literal, now spiritual) precisely as we have the second death in strkjv@Revelation:2:11; strkjv@20:6,14|. {And reigned with Christ} (\kai ebasileusan meta tou Christou\). Same use of the first aorist active indicative of \basileu\, but more clearly constative. Beckwith and Swete take this to apply solely to the martyrs, the martyrs' reign with Christ.

rwp@Revelation:20:6 @{Blessed and holy} (\makarios kai hagios\). A fifth beatitude (1:3; strkjv@14:13; strkjv@16:15; strkjv@19:9|) already and two more to come (22:7,14|, seven in all). Here \hagios\ is added to the usual \makarios\. The second death (\ho deuteros thanatos\). The spiritual death of strkjv@2:11; strkjv@20:14; strkjv@21:8| in contrast to the first or physical death. This language raises a question about the interpretation of the first and the second resurrections, whether both are of the body or one of the spirit. There seems no way to reach a solid conception about it. In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:23| there is no mention of the resurrection of any save "those of Christ" (\hoi tou Christou\), though the end follows (verse 24|). However, Paul elsewhere (Acts:24:15|) speaks of the resurrection of the just and of the unjust as if one event. {Priests of God and of Christ} (\hiereis tou theou kai tou Christou\). As in strkjv@1:6; strkjv@5:10; strkjv@22:3,5|. {Shall reign with him} (\basileusousin met' autou\). As promised in the same passages. The servants of God are to be priests with Christ and to reign with him (Matthew:19:28|). In strkjv@5:10| \epi ts gs\ (upon earth) occurs, but this item does not appear here. "No hint is given as to where this service is to be rendered and this royalty to be exercised" (Swete).

rwp@Romans:7:4 @{Ye also were made to the law} (\kai humeis ethanatthte\). First aorist indicative passive of \thanato\, old verb, to put to death (Matthew:10:21|) or to make to die (extinct) as here and strkjv@Romans:8:13|. The analogy calls for the death of the law, but Paul refuses to say that. He changes the structure and makes them dead to the law as the husband (6:3-6|). The relation of marriage is killed "through the body of Christ" as the "propitiation" (3:25|) for us. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:1:22|. {That we should be joined to another} (\eis to genesthai heteri\). Purpose clause with \eis to\...and the infinitive. First mention of...1Corinthians:6:13; strkjv@Galatians:4:26|. See further strkjv@Ephesians:5:22-33|. {That we might bring forth fruit unto God} (\hina karpophorsmen ti thei\). He changes the metaphor to that of the tree used in strkjv@6:22|.

rwp@Romans:15:26 @{For it hath been the good pleasure of Macedonia and Achaia} (\udoksan gar Makedonia kai Achaia\). "For Macedonia and Achaia took pleasure." The use of \udoksan\ (first aorist active indicative of \eudoke\) shows that it was voluntary (2Corinthians:8:4|)...Paul does not here mention Asia...{A certain contribution} (\koinnian tina\). Put thus because it was unknown to the Romans. For this sense of \koinnian\, see strkjv@2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@9:13|. {For the poor among the saints} (\eis tous ptchous tn hagin\). Partitive genitive. Not all there were poor, but strkjv@Acts:4:32-5:11; strkjv@6:1-6; strkjv@11:29f.; strkjv@Galatians:2:10| prove that many were.

Seeker Overlay: Off On

Bible:
Bible:
Book: