rwp oida
rwp@Acts:12:11 @{Was come to himself} (\en heauti genomenos\). Second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\ with \en\ and the locative case, "becoming at himself." In strkjv@Luke:15:17| we have \eis heauton elthn\ (coming to himself, as if he had been on a trip away from himself). {Now I know of a truth} (\nun oida alths\). There was no further confusion of mind that it was an ecstasy as in strkjv@10:10|. But he was in peril for the soldiers would soon learn of his escape, when the change of guards came at 6 A.M. {Delivered me} (\exeilato me\). Second aorist middle indicative of \exaire\. The Lord rescued me of himself by his angel. {Expectation} (\prosdokias\). Old word from \prosdoka\, to look for. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:21:26|. James had been put to death and the Jewish people were eagerly waiting for the execution of Peter like hungry wolves.
rwp@John:7:29 @{I know him} (\eg oida auton\). In contrast to the ignorance of these people. See the same words in strkjv@8:55| and the same claim in strkjv@17:25; strkjv@Matthew:11:27; strkjv@Luke:10:22| (the Johannine aerolite). "These three words contain the unique claim of Jesus, which is pressed all through the chapters of controversy with the Jews" (Bernard). Jesus is the Interpreter of God to men (John:1:18|). {And he sent me} (\kakeinos me apesteilen\). First aorist active indicative of \apostell\, the very verb used of Jesus when he sent forth the twelve (Matthew:10:5|) and used by Jesus again of himself in strkjv@John:17:3|. He is the Father's Apostle to men.
rwp@John:8:14 @{Even if} (\kan\). That is \kai ean\, a condition of the third class with the present active subjunctive \martur\. Jesus means that his own witness concerning himself is true (\althes\) even if it contravenes their technical rules of evidence. He can and does tell the truth all by himself concerning himself. {For I know whence I came and whither I go} (\hoti oida pothen lthon kai pou hupag\). In this terse sentence with two indirect questions Jesus alludes to his pre-existence with the Father before his Incarnation as in strkjv@17:5| and to the return to the Father after the death and resurrection as in strkjv@13:3; strkjv@14:2f|. He again puts both ideas together in one crisp clause in strkjv@16:28| for the apostles who profess to understand him then. But here these Pharisees are blind to the words of Jesus. "But ye know not whence I come nor whither I go" (\humeis de ouk oidate pothen erchomai pou hupag\). He had spoken of his heavenly destiny (7:33|). Jesus alone knew his personal consciousness of his coming from, fellowship with, and return to the Father. Stier (_Words of the Lord Jesus_) argues that one might as well say to the sun, if claiming to be the sun, that it was night, because it bore witness of itself. The answer is the shining of the sun.
rwp@John:8:55 @{And ye have not known him} (\kai ouk egnkate auton\). Adversative use again of \kai\="and yet." Perfect active indicative of \ginsk\, the verb for experiential knowledge. This was true of the \kosmos\ (1:10; strkjv@17:25|) and of the hostile Jews (16:3|). Jesus prays that the world may know (17:23|) and the handful of disciples had come to know (17:25|). {But I know him} (\eg de oida auton\). Equipped by eternal fellowship to reveal the Father (1:1-18|). This peculiar intimate knowledge Jesus had already claimed (7:29|). Jesus used \oida\ (8:19; strkjv@15:21|) or \ginsk\ (17:23,25|) for the knowledge of the Father. No undue distinction can be drawn here. {And if I should say} (\kan eip\). Third-class condition (concession), "even if I say," with \kai ean\ (\kan\) and second aorist active subjunctive. "Suppose I say." {I shall be like you a liar} (\esomai homoios humin pseusts\). Apodosis of the condition. \Homoios\ (like) is followed by the associative-instrumental case \humin\. The word \pseusts\ (liar), in spite of the statement that they are the children of the devil, the father of lying (8:44|), comes with a sudden jolt because it is a direct charge. This word liar is not considered polite today in public speech when hurled at definite individuals. There is a rather free use of the word in strkjv@1John:2:4,22; strkjv@4:20; strkjv@5:10|. It is not hard to imagine the quick anger of these Pharisees.
rwp@Luke:13:27 @{I know not whence ye are} (\ouk oida pothen este\). This blunt statement cuts the matter short and sweeps away the flimsy cobwebs. Acquaintance with Christ in the flesh does not open the door. Jesus quotes strkjv@Psalms:8:9| as in strkjv@Matthew:7:23|, there as in the LXX, here with \pantes ergatai adikias\, there with \hoi ergazomenoi tn anomian\. But \apostte\ (second aorist active imperative) here, and there \apochreite\ (present active imperative).
rwp@Luke:22:57 @{I know him not} (\ouk oida auton\). Just as Jesus had predicted that he would do (Luke:22:34|).
rwp@Luke:22:60 @{I know not what thou sayest} (\ouk oida ho legeis\). Each denial tangles Peter more and more. {While he yet spake} (\eti lalountos autou\). Genitive absolute. Peter could hear the crowing all right.
rwp@Mark:14:68 @{I neither know nor understand} (\oute oida oute epistamai\). This denial is fuller in Mark, briefest in John. {What thou sayest} (\su ti legeis\). Can be understood as a direct question. Note position of {thou} (\su\), proleptical. {Into the porch} (\eis to proaulion\). Only here in the New Testament. Plato uses it of a prelude on a flute. It occurs also in the plural for preparations the day before the wedding. Here it means the vestibule to the court. strkjv@Matthew:26:71| has \pulna\, a common word for gate or front porch. {And the cock crew} (\kai alektr ephnsen\). Omitted by Aleph B L Sinaitic Syriac. It is genuine in verse 72| where "the second time" (\ek deuterou\) occurs also. It is possible that because of verse 72| it crept into verse 68|. Mark alone alludes to the cock crowing twice, originally (Mark:14:30|), and twice in verse 72|, besides verse 68| which is hardly genuine.
rwp@Matthew:25:12 @{I know you not} (\ouk oida hums\). Hence there was no reason for special or unusual favours to be granted them. They must abide the consequences of their own negligence.
rwp@Matthew:26:70 @{I know not what thou sayest} (\ouk oida ti legeis\). It was an affectation of extreme ignorance (Bruce) that deceived no one. It was an easy and ancient dodge and easy subterfuge. Dalman (_Words of Jesus_, 80f.) suggests that Peter used the Galilean Aramaean word for know instead of the Judean Aramaean word which betrayed at once his Galilean residence.
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}