rwp spoken
rwp@Info
@ It has now been forty years since Dr. Marvin R. Vincent wrote his most useful series of volumes entitled _Word Studies in the New Testament_. They are still helpful for those for whom they were designed, but a great deal of water has run under the mill in these years. More scientific methods of philology are now in use. No longer are Greek tenses and prepositions explained in terms of conjectural English translations or interchanged according to the whim of the interpreter. Comparative grammar has thrown a flood of light on the real meaning of New Testament forms and idioms. New Testament writers are no longer explained as using one construction "for" another. New light has come also from the papyri discoveries in Egypt. Unusual Greek words from the standpoint of the literary critic or classical scholar are here found in everyday use in letters and business and public documents. The New Testament Greek is now known to be not a new or peculiar dialect of the Greek language, but the very lingo of the time. The vernacular _Koin_, the spoken language of the day, appears in the New Testament as in these scraps of Oxyrhynchus and Fayum papyri. There are specimens of the literary _Koin_ in the papyri as also in the writings of Luke, the Epistles of Paul, the Epistle to the Hebrews. A new Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament will come in due time which will take note of the many startling discoveries from the Greek papyri and inscriptions first brought to notice in their bearing on the New Testament by Dr. Adolf Deissmann, then of Heidelberg, now of Berlin. His _Bible Studies_ (Translation by Alexander Grieve, 1901) and his _Light from the Ancient East_ (Revised Edition translated by L.R.M. Strachan, 1927) are accessible to students unfamiliar with the German originals.
rwp@Info @ I have called these volumes _Word Pictures_ for the obvious reason that language was originally purely pictographic. Children love to read by pictures either where it is all picture or where pictures are interspersed with simple words. The Rosetta Stone is a famous illustration. The Egyptian hieroglyphics come at the top of the stone, followed by the Demotic Egyptian language with the Greek translation at the bottom. By means of this stone the secret of the hieroglyphs or pictographs was unravelled. Chinese characters are also pictographic. The pictures were first for ideas, then for words, then for syllables, then for letters. Today in Alaska there are Indians who still use pictures alone for communicating their ideas. "Most words have been originally metaphors, and metaphors are continually falling into the rank of words" (Professor Campbell)...words that I have spoken unto...(John:6:63|). We must never forget that in dealing with the words of Jesus we are dealing with things that have life and breath. That is true of all the New Testament, the most wonderful of all books of all time. One can feel the very throb of the heart of Almighty God in the New Testament if the eyes of his own heart have been enlightened by the Holy Spirit. May the Spirit of God take of the things of Christ and make them ours as we muse over the words of life that speak to us out of the New Covenant that we call the New Testament. A.T. ROBERTSON. LOUISVILLE, KY. strkjv@Info:1Corinthians @ FIRST CORINTHIANS FROM EPHESUS A.D. 54 OR 55 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION It would be a hard-boiled critic today who would dare deny the genuineness of I Corinthians. The Dutch wild man, Van Manen, did indeed argue that Paul wrote no epistles if indeed he ever lived. Such intellectual banality is well answered by Whateley's _Historic Doubts about Napolean Bonaparte_ which was so cleverly done that some readers were actually convinced that no such man ever existed, but is the product of myth and legend. Even Baur was compelled to acknowledge the genuineness of I and II Corinthians, Galatians and Romans (the Big Four of Pauline criticism). It is a waste of time now to prove what all admit to be true. Paul of Tarsus, the Apostle to the Gentiles, wrote I Corinthians.
rwp@1Corinthians:4:19 @{If the Lord will} (\ean ho kurios thelsi\). Third-class condition. See James strkjv@4:15; strkjv@Acts:18:21; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:7|...not always to be spoken aloud....{But the power} (\alla tn dunamin\). The puffed up Judaizers did a deal of talking in Paul's absence. He will come and will know their real strength. II Corinthians gives many evidences of Paul's sensitiveness to their talk about his inconsistencies and cowardice (in particular chs. 2 Co 1; 2; 10; 11; 12; 13|). He changed his plans to spare them, not from timidity. It will become plain later that Timothy failed on this mission and that Titus succeeded.
rwp@1Corinthians:7:10 @{To the married} (\tois gegamkosin\). Perfect active participle of \game\, old verb, to marry, and still married as the tense shows. {I give charge} (\paraggell\). Not mere wish as in verses 7,8|. {Not I, but the Lord} (\ouk eg alla ho kurios\). Paul had no commands from Jesus to the unmarried (men or women), but Jesus had spoken to the married (husbands and wives) as in strkjv@Matthew:5:31f.; strkjv@19:3-12; strkjv@Mark:10:9-12; strkjv@Luke:16:18|. The Master had spoken plain words about divorce. Paul reenforces his own inspired command by the command of Jesus. In strkjv@Mark:10:9| we have from Christ: "What therefore God joined together let not man put asunder" (\m chorizet\). {That the wife depart not from her husband} (\gunaika apo andros m choristhnai\). First aorist passive infinitive (indirect command after \paraggell\) of \choriz\, old verb from adverbial preposition \chris\, separately, apart from, from. Here used of divorce by the wife which, though unusual then, yet did happen as in the case of Salome (sister of Herod the Great) and of Herodias before she married Herod Antipas. Jesus also spoke of it (Mark:10:12|). Now most of the divorces are obtained by women. This passive infinitive is almost reflexive in force according to a constant tendency in the _Koin_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 817).
rwp@1Corinthians:7:26 @{I think therefore} (\nomiz oun\). Paul proceeds to express therefore the previously mentioned judgment (\gnmn\) and calls it his opinion, not because he is uncertain, but simply because it is not a command, but advice. {By reason of the present distress} (\dia tn enestsan anagkn\). The participle \enestsan\ is second perfect active of \enistmi\ and means "standing on" or "present" (cf. strkjv@Galatians:1:4; strkjv@Hebrews:9:9|). It occurs in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2|...probably so. Jesus had spoken of...(Matthew:24:8ff.|) though Paul had denied saying that the advent was right at hand (2Thessalonians:2:2|). \Anagk\ is a strong word (old and common), either for external circumstances or inward sense of duty. It occurs elsewhere for the woes preceding the second coming (Luke:21:23|) and also for Paul's persecutions (1Thessalonians:3:7; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:4; strkjv@12:10|). Perhaps there is a mingling of both ideas here. {Namely}. This word is not in the Greek. The infinitive of indirect discourse (\huparchein\) after \nomiz\ is repeated with recitative \hoti\, "That the being so is good for a man" (\hoti kalon anthrpi to houts einai\). The use of the article \to\ with \einai\ compels this translation. Probably Paul means for one (\anthrpi\, generic term for man or woman) to remain as he is whether married or unmarried. The copula \estin\ is not expressed. He uses \kalon\ (good) as in strkjv@7:1|.
rwp@1Corinthians:10:30 @...risk of being evil spoken of...(\blasphmoumai\) for the sake of maintaining one's liberty? Is it worth it? See strkjv@Romans:14:6| where Paul justifies the conscience of one who eats the meat and of one who does not. Saying grace over food that one should not eat seems inconsistent. We have this very word _blaspheme_ in English.
rwp@1Peter:3:15 @{Sanctify} (\hagiasate\). First aorist active imperative of \hagiaz\. This instead of being afraid. {Christ as Lord} (\kurion ton Christon\). \Ton Christon\, direct object with article and \kurion\ predicate accusative (without article). This is the correct text, not \ton theon\ of the Textus Receptus. An adaptation to Christ of strkjv@Isaiah:8:13|. {Being ready always} (\hetoimoi aei\). No participle in the Greek, old adjective (Titus:3:1|). {To give answer} (\pros apologian\). "For an apology," the old sense of \apologia\, an answer back, a defence (not excuse), as in strkjv@Acts:22:1|, from \apologeomai\ to defend (not to apologize). {A reason concerning the hope that is in you} (\logon peri ts en humin elpidos\). Original sense of \logon\ (accusative of the thing with \aitounti\ with \hums\, accusative of the person)...hope." Ready with a spoken defence...{Yet with meekness and fear} (\alla meta prauttos kai phobou\). Of God (2:18; strkjv@3:2,4|), not of man.
rwp@1Peter:3:16 @{Having a good conscience} (\suneidsin echontes agathn\). Present active participle of \ech\. See strkjv@2:18| for \suneidsin\ and strkjv@3:21| for \suneidsis agath\ again ("a quasi-personification," Hart). {That they may be put to shame} (\hina kataischunthsin\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \kataischun\, old verb, to put to shame (Luke:13:17; strkjv@1Peter:2:6|). {Wherein ye are spoken against} (\en hi katalaleisthe\). Present passive indicative of \katalale\, for which see strkjv@2:12| with \en hi\ also. Peter may be recalling (Hart) his own experience at Pentecost when the Jews first scoffed and others were cut to the heart (Acts:2:13,37|). {Who revile} (\hoi epreazontes\). Articular present active participle of \epreaz\, old verb (from \epreia\, spiteful abuse), to insult, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:6:28|. {In Christ} (\en Christi\). Paul's common mystical phrase that Peter has three times (here, strkjv@5:10,14|), not in John, though the idea is constantly in John. Peter here gives a new turn (cf. strkjv@2:12|) to \anastroph\ (manner of life). "Constantly the apostle repeats his phrases with new significance and in a new light" (Bigg).
rwp@1Thessalonians:4:15 @{By the word of the Lord} (\en logi Kuriou\). We do not know to what word of the Lord Jesus Paul refers, probably Paul meaning only the point in the teaching of Christ rather than a quotation. He may be claiming a direct revelation on this important matter as about the Lord's Supper in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:23|. Jesus may have spoken on this subject though it has not been preserved to us (cf. strkjv@Mark:9:1|). {Ye that are alive} (\hmeis hoi zntes\). Paul here includes himself, but this by no means shows that Paul knew that he would be alive at the Parousia of Christ. He was alive, not dead, when he wrote. {Shall in no wise precede} (\ou m phthasmen\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \phthan\, to come before, to anticipate. This strong negative with \ou m\ (double negative) and the subjunctive is the regular idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 929). Hence there was no ground for uneasiness about the dead in Christ.
rwp@2Corinthians:10:1 @{Now I Paul myself} (\Autos de eg Paulos\). Cf. strkjv@Galatians:5:2|. Paul now turns to the third part of the epistle in chapters 10-13| in which he vigorously defends himself against the accusations of the stubborn minority of Judaizers in Corinth. Great ministers of Christ through the ages have had to pass through fiery trials like these. Paul has shown the way for us all. He speaks of himself now plainly, but under compulsion, as is clear. It may be that at this point he took the pen from the amanuensis and wrote himself as in strkjv@Galatians:6:11|. {By the meekness and gentleness of Christ} (\dia tes prauttos kai epieikias tou Christou\). This appeal shows (Plummer) that Paul had spoken to the Corinthians about the character of Christ. Jesus claimed meekness for himself (Matthew:11:29|) and felicitated the meek (Matthew:5:5|) and he exemplified it abundantly (Luke:23:34|). See on ¯Matthew:5:15; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:21| for this great word that has worn thin with us. Plutarch combines \prauts\ with \epieikia\ as Paul does here. Matthew Arnold suggested "sweet reasonableness" for \epieikeia\ in Plato, Aristotle, Plutarch. It is in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:24:4| (\to epieikes\ in strkjv@Phillipians:4:5|). In Greek Ethics the equitable man was called \epieiks\, a man who does not press for the last farthing of his rights (Bernard). {Lowly among you} (\tapeinos en humin\). The bad use of \tapeinos\, the old use, but here alone in N.T. in that meaning. Socrates and Aristotle used it for littleness of soul. Probably Paul here is quoting one of the sneers of his traducers in Corinth about his humble conduct while with them (1Corinthians:2:23; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:6|) and his boldness (\apn tharr\) when away (1Corinthians:7:16|). "It was easy to satirize and misrepresent a depression of spirits, a humility of demeanour, which were either the direct results of some bodily affliction, or which the consciousness of this affliction had rendered habitual" (Farrar). The words stung Paul to the quick.
rwp@2Thessalonians:2:3 @{Let no man beguile you in any wise} (\m tis humas exapatsi kata mdena tropon\). First aorist active subjunctive of \exapata\ (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb \apata\) with double negative (\m tis, mdena\) in accord with regular Greek idiom as in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:11| rather than the aorist imperative which does occur sometimes in the third person as in strkjv@Mark:13:15| (\m katabat\). Paul broadens the warning to go beyond conversation and letter. He includes "tricks" of any kind. It is amazing how gullible some of the saints are when a new deceiver pulls off some stunts in religion. {For it will not be} (\hoti\). There is an ellipse here of \ouk estai\ (or \gensetai\) to be supplied after \hoti\. Westcott and Hort make an anacoluthon at the end of verse 4|. The meaning is clear. \Hoti\ is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not "imminent," but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of verse 2|. {Except the falling away come first} (\ean m elthi h apostasia prton\). Negative condition of the third class, undetermined with prospect of determination and the aorist subjunctive. \Apostasia\ is the late form of \apostasis\ and is our word apostasy. Plutarch uses it of political revolt and it occurs in I Macc. strkjv@2:15 about Antiochus Epiphanes who was enforcing the apostasy from Judaism to Hellenism. In strkjv@Joshua:22:22| it occurs for rebellion against the Lord. It seems clear that the word here means a religious revolt and the use of the definite article (\h\)...mean that Paul had spoken to...21:21| where it means apostasy from Moses. It is not clear whether Paul means revolt of the Jews from God, of Gentiles from God, of Christians from God, or of the apostasy that includes all classes within and without the body of Christians. But it is to be {first} (\prton\) before Christ comes again. Note this adverb when only two events are compared (cf. strkjv@Acts:1:1|). {And the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition} (\kai apokaluphthi ho anthrpos ts anomias, ho huios ts apleias\). First aorist passive subjunctive after \ean m\ and same condition as with \elthi\. The use of this verb \apokalupt\, like \apokalupsin\ of the second coming in strkjv@1:7|, seems to note the superhuman character (Milligan) of the event and the same verb is repeated in verses 6,8|. The implication is that {the man of sin} is hidden somewhere who will be suddenly manifested just as false apostles pose as angels of light (2Corinthians:11:13ff.|), whether the crowning event of the apostasy or another name for the same event. Lightfoot notes the parallel between the man of sin, of whom sin is the special characteristic (genitive case, a Hebraism for the lawless one in verse 8|) and Christ. Both Christ and the adversary of Christ are revealed, there is mystery about each, both make divine claims (verse 4|). He seems to be the Antichrist of strkjv@1John:2:18|. The terrible phrase, the son of perdition, is applied to Judas in strkjv@John:17:12| (like Judas doomed to perdition), but here to the lawless one (\ho anomos\, verse 8|), who is not Satan, but some one definite person who is doing the work of Satan. Note the definite article each time.
rwp@Acts:2:16 @{...that which hath been spoken by...} (\touto estin to eirmenon dia tou prophtou Il\). Positive interpretation of the supernatural phenomena in the light of the Messianic prophecy of strkjv@Joel:2:28-32|. Peter's mind is now opened by the Holy Spirit to understand the Messianic prophecy and the fulfilment right before their eyes. Peter now has spiritual insight and moral courage. The {power} (\dunamis\) of the Holy Spirit has come upon him as he proceeds to give the first interpretation of the life and work of Jesus Christ since his Ascension. It is also the first formal apology for Christianity to a public audience. Peter rises to the height of his powers in this remarkable sermon. Jesus had foretold that he would be a Rock and now he is no longer shale, but a solid force for aggressive Christianity. He follows here in verses 17-21| closely the LXX text of Joel and then applies the passage to the present emergency (22-24|).
rwp@Acts:2:20 @{Shall be turned} (\metastraphsetai\). Second future passive of \metastreph\, common verb, but only three times in the N.T. (Acts:2:20| from Joel; strkjv@James:4:9; strkjv@Galatians:1:7|). These are the "wonders" or portents of verse 19|. It is worth noting that Peter interprets these "portents" as fulfilled on the Day of Pentecost, though no such change of the sun into darkness or of the moon into blood is recorded. Clearly Peter does not interpret the symbolism of Joel in literal terms. This method of Peter may be of some service in the Book of Revelation where so many apocalyptic symbols occur as well as in the great Eschatological Discourse of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:24,25|. In strkjv@Matthew:24:6,29| Jesus had spoken of wars on earth and wonders in heaven. {Before the day of the Lord come, that great and notable day} (\prin elthein hmeran kuriou tn megaln kai epiphan\). The use of \prin\ with the infinitive and the accusative of general reference is a regular Greek idiom. The use of the adjectives with the article is also good Greek, though the article is not here repeated as in strkjv@1:25|. The Day of the Lord is a definite conception without the article. {Notable} (\epiphan\) is the same root as epiphany (\epiphaneia\) used of the Second Coming of Christ (2Thessalonians:2:8; strkjv@1Timothy:6:14; strkjv@2Timothy:4:1; strkjv@Titus:2:13|). It translates here the Hebrew word for "terrible." In the Epistles the Day of the Lord is applied (Knowling) to the Coming of Christ for judgment (1Thessalonians:5:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:14; strkjv@Phillipians:1:10|).
rwp@Acts:2:33 @{By the right hand of God} (\ti dexii tou theou\). This translation makes it the instrumental case. The margin has it "at" instead of "by," that is the locative case. And it will make sense in the true dative case, "to the right hand of God." These three cases came to have the same form in Greek. strkjv@Romans:8:24| furnishes another illustration of like ambiguity (\ti elpidi\), saved by hope, in hope, or for hope. Usually it is quite easy to tell the case when the form is identical. {Exalted} (\hupstheis\). First aorist passive participle of \hupso\, to lift up. Here both the literal and tropical sense occurs. Cf. strkjv@John:12:32|. {The promise of the Holy Spirit} (\tn epaggelian tou pneumatos tou hagiou\). The promise mentioned in strkjv@1:4| and now come true, consisting in the Holy Spirit "from the Father" (\para tou patros\), sent by the Father and by the Son (John:15:26; strkjv@16:7|). See also strkjv@Galatians:3:14|. {He hath poured forth} (\execheen\). Aorist active indicative of \ekche\ the verb used by Joel and quoted by Peter already in verses 17,18|. Jesus has fulfilled his promise. {This which ye see and hear} (\touto ho humeis kai blepete kai akouete\)...them, the different languages spoken by...120. "The proof was before their eyes in this new energy from heaven" (Furneaux), a culminating demonstration that Jesus was the Messiah.
rwp@Acts:2:35 @{Till I make} (\hes an th\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \tithmi\ with \an\ after \hes\ for the future, a common Greek idiom. This dominion of Christ as Mediator will last till the plan of the kingdom is carried out (1Corinthians:15:23-28|). Complete subjugation will come, perhaps referring to the custom of victorious kings placing their feet upon the necks of their enemies (Joshua:10:24|). {Therefore assuredly} (\Asphals oun\). Assuredly therefore, without any slip or trip (\asphals\ from \a\ privative and \sphall\, to trip, to slip. Peter draws a powerfully pungent conclusion by the use of the adverb \asphals\ and the inferential conjunction \oun\. Peter's closing sentence drives home the point of his sermon: "This very Jesus whom ye crucified (note \humeis\, strongly emphatic {ye}), him God made both Lord and Messiah" (\kai kurion kai Christon\), as David foretold in strkjv@Psalms:110|...of this masterful address spoken on...
rwp@Acts:9:4 @{He fell upon the earth} (\pesn epi tn gn\). Second aorist active participle. Songs:in strkjv@22:7| Paul says: "I fell unto the ground" (\epesa eis to edaphos\) using an old word rather than the common \gn\. In strkjv@26:14| Paul states that "we were all fallen to the earth" (\pantn katapesontn hmn eis tn gn\, genitive absolute construction). But here in verse 7| "the men that journeyed with him stood speechless" (\histkeisan eneoi\). But surely the points of time are different. In strkjv@26:14| Paul refers to the first appearance of the vision when all fell to the earth. Here in verse 7| Luke refers to what occurred after the vision when both Saul and the men had risen from the ground. {Saul, Saul} (\Saoul, Saoul\). The Hebrew form occurs also in strkjv@22:7; strkjv@26:14| where it is expressly stated that the voice was in the Hebrew (Aramaic) tongue as also in strkjv@9:17| (Ananias). Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 316) terms this use of \Saoul\ "the historian's sense of liturgical rhythm." For the repetition of names by Jesus note strkjv@Luke:10:41| (Martha, Martha), strkjv@Luke:22:31| (Simon, Simon). {Me} (\me\). In persecuting the disciples, Saul was persecuting Jesus, as the words of Jesus in verse 5|...plain. Christ had already spoken of...(Matthew:10:40; strkjv@25:40,45; strkjv@John:15:1-5|). The proverb (Pindar) that Jesus quotes to Saul about kicking against the goad is genuine in strkjv@26:14|, but not here.
rwp@Acts:14:9 @{The same} (\houtos\). Just "this one." {Heard} (\kouen\). Imperfect active, was listening to Paul speaking (\lalountos\). Either at the gate or in the market place (17:17|) Paul was preaching to such as would listen or could understand his Greek (_Koin_). Ramsay (_St. Paul the Traveller_, pp. 114, 116) thinks that the cripple was a proselyte. At any rate he may have heard of the miracles wrought at Iconium (verse 3|)...and Paul may have spoken of...{Fastening his eyes upon him} (\atenisas auti\). Just as in strkjv@13:9| of Paul and strkjv@1:10| which see. Paul saw a new hope in the man's eyes and face. {He had faith} (\echei pistin\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse. {To be made whole} (\tou sthnai\). Genitive of articular first aorist passive infinitive (purpose and result combined) of \sz\, to make sound and also to save. Here clearly to make whole or well as in strkjv@Luke:7:50| (cf. strkjv@Acts:3:16; strkjv@4:10|).
rwp@Acts:14:24 @{When they had spoken the word in Perga} (\lalsantes en Pergi ton logon\). Now they stopped and preached in Perga which they had apparently not done before (see strkjv@13:13f.|). After leaving Antioch they passed on through Pisidia, as if Antioch was not strictly in Pisidia (see on strkjv@13:14|) and into Pamphylia. They crossed from Perga to Attaleia, the port of Perga, sixteen miles down the Cestus, and capital of Pamphylia, to find a ship for Antioch in Syria. It is now called Adala and for long was the chief harbour of the south coast of Asia Minor. We do not know why they did not revisit Cyprus, perhaps because no permanent Gentile churches were founded there.
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-fearer or proselyte of the gate. There was a Jewish settlement in Thyatira which was especially interested in the dyeing industry. She probably became a proselyte there. Whether this was true of the other women we do not know. They may have been Jewesses or proselytes like Lydia, probably all of them employees of hers in her business. When Paul writes to the Philippians he does not mention Lydia who may have died meanwhile and who certainly was not Paul's wife. She was wealthy and probably a widow. {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)...centred on the things spoken by...-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:17:2 @{As his custom was} (\kata to eithos ti Pauli\). The same construction in strkjv@Luke:4:16| about Jesus in Nazareth (\kata to eithos auti\) with the second perfect active participle neuter singular from \eth\. Paul's habit was to go to the Jewish synagogue to use the Jews and the God-fearers as a springboard for his work among the Gentiles. {For three Sabbaths} (\epi sabbata tria\)...weeks. He may have spoken there...1Thessalonians:1:8|. The church consisted mainly of Gentile converts (2Thessalonians:3:4,7,8|) and seems to have been well organized (1Thessalonians:5:12|). He received help while there several times from Philippi (Phillipians:4:16|) and even so worked night and day to support himself (1Thessalonians:2:9|). His preaching was misunderstood there in spite of careful instruction concerning the second coming of Christ (1Thessalonians:4:13-5:5; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1-12|). {Reasoned} (\dielexato\). First aorist middle indicative of \dialegomai\, old verb in the active to select, distinguish, then to revolve in the mind, to converse (interchange of ideas), then to teach in the Socratic ("dialectic") method of question and answer (cf. \dielegeto\ in verse 17|), then simply to discourse, but always with the idea of intellectual stimulus. With these Jews and God-fearers Paul appealed to the Scriptures as text and basis (\apo\) of his ideas.
rwp@Acts:18:10 @{Because I am with thee} (\dioti eg eimi meta sou\). Jesus had given this promise to all believers (Matthew:28:20|)...whole outlook. Jesus had spoken to...(9:4|), in Jerusalem (22:17f.|), in Troas (16:9|), in great crises of his life. He will hear him again (23:11; strkjv@27:23|). Paul knows the voice of Jesus. {No man shall set on thee to harm thee} (\oudeis epithsetai soi tou kaksai se\). Future direct middle indicative of \epitithmi\, old and common verb, here in direct middle to lay or throw oneself upon, to attack. Jesus kept that promise in Corinth for Paul. \Tou kaksai\ is genitive articular infinitive of purpose of \kako\, to do harm to. Paul would now face all the rabbis without fear. {I have much people} (\laos estin moi polus\). Dative of personal interest. "There is to me much people," not yet saved, but who will be if Paul holds on. There is the problem for every preacher and pastor, how to win the elect to Christ.
rwp@Acts:22:10 @{Into Damascus} (\eis Damaskon\). In strkjv@9:6| simply "into the city" (\eis tn polin\). {Of all things which} (\peri pantn hn\). \Hn\, relative plural attracted to genitive of antecedent from accusative \ha\, object of \poisai\ (do). {Are appointed for thee} (\tetaktai soi\). Perfect passive indicative of \tass\, to appoint, to order, with dative \soi\. Compare with \hoti se dei\ of strkjv@9:6|. The words were spoken to Paul, of course, in the Aramaic, Saoul, Saoul.
rwp@Acts:23:9 @{Strove} (\diemachonto\). Imperfect middle of \diamachomai\, old Attic verb, to fight it out (between, back and forth, fiercely). Here only in the N.T. It was a lively scrap and Luke pictures it as going on. The Pharisees definitely take Paul's side. {...if a spirit hath spoken to...} (\ei de pneuma elalsen auti aggelos?\). This is aposiopesis, not uncommon in the N.T., as in strkjv@Luke:13:9; strkjv@John:6:62| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1203). See one also in strkjv@Exodus:32:32|.
rwp@Acts:26:24 @{As he thus made his defence} (\tauta autou apologoumenou\). Genitive absolute again with present middle participle. Paul was still speaking when Festus interrupted him in great excitement. {With a loud voice} (\megali ti phni\). Associative instrumental case showing manner (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 530) and the predicate use of the adjective, "with the voice loud" (elevated). {Thou art mad} (\maini\). Old verb for raving. See also strkjv@John:10:20; strkjv@Acts:12:15; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:23|...and then he had spoken of...(verse 8|). "Thou art going mad" (linear present), Festus means. {Thy much learning doth turn thee to madness} (\ta polla se grammata eis manian peritrepei\). "Is turning thee round." Old verb \peritrep\, but only here in N.T. Festus thought that Paul's "much learning" (="many letters," cf. strkjv@John:7:15| of Jesus) of the Hebrew Scriptures to which he had referred was turning his head to madness (wheels in his head) and he was going mad right before them all. The old word \mania\ (our mania, frenzy, cf. maniac) occurs here only in N.T. Note unusual position of \se\ between \polla\ and \grammata\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 418, 420)
rwp@Acts:28:22 @{But we desire} (\axioumen de\). Old verb \axio\, to deem worthy, to think right or proper as in strkjv@15:38| which see. They think it only fair to hear Paul's side of his case. {Concerning this sect} (\peri ts haireses tauts\). Paul had identified Christianity with Judaism (verse 20|) in its Messianic hope. The language seems to imply that the number of Christians in Rome was comparatively small and mainly Gentile. If the edict of Claudius for the expulsion of the Jews from Rome (Acts:18:2|) was due to disturbance over Christ (\Chrstus\), then even in Rome the Jews had special reason for hostility towards Christians. {Everywhere spoken against} (\pantachou antilegetai\). Cf. verse 19|. The line of cleavage between Jew and Christian was now sharply drawn everywhere.
rwp@Acts:28:25 @{When they agreed not} (\asumphnoi ontes\). Old adjective, only here in N.T., double compound (\a\ privative, \sum, phn\), without symphony, out of harmony, dissonant, discordant. It was a triumph to gain adherents at all in such an audience. {They departed} (\apeluonto\). Imperfect middle (direct) indicative, "They loosed themselves from Paul." Graphic close. {After that Paul had spoken one word} (\eipontos tou Paulou rhma hen\). Genitive absolute. One last word (like a preacher) after the all day exposition. {Well} (\kals\). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:14:7; strkjv@Mark:7:6,9| (irony). Here strong indignation in the very position of the word (Page). {To your fathers} (\pros tous pateras humn\). Songs:Aleph A B instead of \hmn\ (our) like Stephen in strkjv@7:52| whose words Paul had heard. By mentioning the Holy Spirit Paul shows (Knowling) that they are resisting God (7:52|).
rwp@Ephesians:2:20 @{Being built upon} (\epoikodomthentes\). First aorist passive participle of \epoikodome\, for which double compound verb see strkjv@1Corinthians:3:10; Co; strkjv@2:17|. {The foundation} (\epi ti themelii\). Repetition of \epi\ with the locative case. See strkjv@1Corinthians:3:11| for this word. {Of the apostles and prophets} (\ton apostoln kai prophtn\). Genitive of apposition with \themelii\, consisting in. If one is surprised that Paul should refer so to the apostles, he being one himself, Peter does the same thing (2Peter:3:2|). Paul repeats this language in strkjv@3:5|. {Christ Jesus himself being the chief corner stone} (\onts akrognianiou autou Christou Isou\). Genitive absolute. The compound \akrogniaios\ occurs only in the LXX (first in strkjv@Isaiah:28:16|) and in the N.T. (here, strkjv@1Peter:2:6|). \Lithos\ (stone)...is understood. Jesus had spoken of...(experts), but chosen of God as the head of the corner (Matthew:21:42|), \eis kephaln gnias\. "The \akrogniaios\ here is the primary foundation-stone at the angle of the structure by which the architect fixes a standard for the bearings of the walls and cross-walls throughout" (W. W. Lloyd).
rwp@Ephesians:4:15 @{In love} (\en agapi\)...If truth were always spoken only...{May grow into him} (\auxsmen eis auton\). Supply \hina\ and then note the final use of the first aorist active subjunctive. It is the metaphor of verse 13| (the full-grown man). We are the body and Christ is the Head. We are to grow up to his stature.
rwp@Galatians:2:15 @{Not sinners of the Gentiles} (\ouk ex ethnn hamartloi\). The Jews regarded all Gentiles as "sinners" in contrast with themselves (cf. strkjv@Matthew:26:45| "sinners" and strkjv@Luke:18:32| "Gentiles"). It is not clear whether verses 15-21| were spoken by Paul to Peter or whether Paul is now simply addressing the Galatians in the light of the controversy with Peter. Burton thinks that he is "mentally addressing Peter, if not quoting from what he said to him."
rwp@Galatians:3:24 @{Our tutor unto Christ} (\paidaggos humn eis Christon\). See strkjv@1Corinthians:4:15| for the only other N.T. example of this old and common word for the slave employed in Greek and Roman families of the better class in charge of the boy from about six to sixteen. The paedagogue watched his behaviour at home and attended him when he went away from home as to school. Christ is our Schoolmaster and the law as paedagogue kept watch over us till we came to Christ. {That we might be justified by faith} (\hina ek pistes dikaithmen\). This is the ultimate purpose of the law as paedagogue. {Now that faith is come} (\elthouss ts pistes\). Genitive absolute, "the faith (...time of the faith spoken of...23|) having come." {Under a tutor} (\hupo paidaggon\). The pedagogue is dismissed. We are in the school of the Master.
rwp@Galatians:4:24 @{Which things contain an allegory} (\hatina estin allgoroumena\). Literally, "Which things are allegorized" (periphrastic present passive indicative of \allgore\). Late word (Strabo, Plutarch, Philo, Josephus, ecclesiastical writers), only here in N.T. The ancient writers used \ainittomai\ to speak in riddles. It is compounded of \allo\, another, and \agoreu\, to speak, and so means speaking something else than what the language means, what Philo, the past-master in the use of allegory, calls the deeper spiritual sense. Paul does not deny the actual historical narrative, but he simply uses it in an allegorical sense to illustrate his point for the benefit of his readers who are tempted to go under the burden of the law. He puts a secondary meaning on the narrative just as he uses \tupiks\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:11| of the narrative. We need not press unduly the difference between allegory and type, for each is used in a variety of ways. The allegory in one sense is a speaking parable like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_, the Prodigal Son in strkjv@Luke:15|, the Good Shepherd in strkjv@John:10|. But allegory was also used by Philo and by Paul here for a secret meaning not obvious at first, one not in the mind of the writer, like our illustration which throws light on the point. Paul was familiar with this rabbinical method of exegesis (Rabbi Akiba, for instance, who found a mystical sense in every hook and crook of the Hebrew letters) and makes skilful use of that knowledge here. Christian preachers in Alexandria early fell victims to Philo's allegorical method and carried it to excess without regard to the plain sense of the narrative. That startling style of preaching survives yet to the discredit of sound preaching. Please observe that Paul says here that he is using allegory, not ordinary interpretation. It is not necessary to say that Paul intended his readers to believe that this allegory was designed by the narrative. He illustrates his point by it. {For these are} (\hautai gar eisin\). Allegorically interpreted, he means. {From Mount Sinai} (\apo orous Sin\). Spoken from Mount Sinai. {Bearing} (\gennsa\). Present active participle of \genna\, to beget of the male (Matthew:1:1-16|), more rarely as here to bear of the female (Luke:1:13,57|). {Which is Hagar} (\htis estin Hagar\). Allegorically interpreted.
rwp@Galatians:6:18 @The farewell salutation is much briefer than that in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:13|, but identical with that in strkjv@Philemon:1:25|. He calls them "brethren" (\adelphoi\)...of the sharp things spoken to...
rwp@Info_Hebrews @...through whom God has spoken in...(Hebrews:1:1-3|), this Son who is God's Agent in the work of creation and of grace as we see it stated in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11; strkjv@Colossians:1:13-20; strkjv@John:1:1-18|. This high doctrine of Jesus as God's Son with the glory and stamp of God's nature is never lowered, for as God's Son he is superior to angels (Hebrews:1:4-2:4|), though the humanity of Jesus is recognized as one proof of the glory of Jesus (Hebrews:2:5-18|). Jesus is shown to be superior to Moses as God's Son over God's house (Hebrews:3:1-4:13|), But the chief portion of the Epistle is devoted to the superiority of Jesus Christ as priest to the work of Aaron and the whole Levitical line (Hebrews:4:14-12:3|). Here the author with consummate skill, though with rabbinical refinements at times, shows that Jesus is like Melchizedek and so superior to Aaron (Hebrews:4:14-7:28|), works under a better covenant of grace (Hebrews:8:1-13|), works in a better sanctuary which is in heaven (Hebrews:9:1-12|), offers a better sacrifice which is his own blood (Hebrews:9:13-10:18|), and gives us better promises for the fulfilment of his task (Hebrews:10:19-12:3|). Hence this Epistle deserves to be called the Epistle of the Priesthood of Christ. Songs:W. P. Du Bose calls his exposition of the book, _High Priesthood and Sacrifice_. This conception of Christ as our Priest who offered himself on the Cross and as our Advocate with the Father runs all through the New Testament (Mark:10:46; strkjv@Matthew:20:28; strkjv@John:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Romans:8:32; strkjv@1Peter:1:18f.; strkjv@1John:2:1f.; strkjv@Revelation:5:9|, etc.). But it is in Hebrews that we have the full-length portrait of Jesus Christ as our Priest and Redeemer. The Glory of Jesus runs through the whole book.
rwp@Hebrews:4:12 @{The word of God} (\ho logos tou theou\). That just quoted about the promise of rest and God's rest, but true of any real word of God. {Living} (\zn\). Cf. the Living God (3:12|). In Philo and the Book of Wisdom the Logos of God is personified, but still more in strkjv@John:1:1-18| where Jesus is pictured as the Logos on a par with God. "Our author is using Philonic language rather than Philonic ideas" (Moffatt). See strkjv@John:6:63|...words which I have spoken are...{Active} (\energs\). Energetic, powerful (John:1:12; strkjv@Phillipians:3:21; strkjv@Colossians:1:29|). {Sharper} (\tomteros\). Comparative of \tomos\, cutting (from \temn\, to cut), late adjective, here only in the N.T. {Than} (\huper\). Often so after a comparative (Luke:16:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:13|). {Two-edged} (\distomon\). "Two-mouthed" (\di-, stoma\), double-mouthed like a river (Polybius), branching ways (Sophocles), applied to sword (\xiphos\) by Homer and Euripides. {Piercing} (\diiknoumenos\). Present middle participle of \diikneomai\, old verb to go through, here only in N.T. {Even to the dividing} (\achri merismou\). Old word from \meriz\ (\meros\, part), to partition. {Of soul and spirit} (\psuchs kai pneumatos\). As in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:23; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:45|, but not an argument for trichotomy. Psychology is constantly changing its terminology. {Of both joints and marrow} (\harmn te kai mueln\). From \ar\, to join, comes \harmos\, old word, here only in the N.T. \Muelos\ (from \mu\, to shut), old word, here only in N.T. This surgeon goes into and through the joints and marrow, not cleaving between them. {Quick to discern} (\kritikos\). Verbal adjective in \-ikos\, from \krin\, skilled in judging, as the surgeon has to be and able to decide on the instant what to do. Songs:God's word like his eye sees the secret lurking doubt and unbelief "of the thoughts and intents of the heart" (\enthumsen kai ennoin kardias\). The surgeon carries a bright and powerful light for every dark crevice and a sharp knife for the removal of all the pus revealed by the light. It is a powerful picture here drawn.
rwp@Hebrews:5:13 @{Without experience} (\apeiros\). Old adjective (alpha privative and \peira\, trial). Inexperienced. The babe (\npios\, old word, negative \n\ and \epos\, word like Latin _infans_, infant, not able to talk), not able to chew if one uses only milk and is without teeth. Perhaps moral truth is meant by "word of righteousness" (cf. strkjv@1:2; strkjv@2:3| for the word spoken by Christ).
rwp@Hebrews:11:24 @{When he was grown up} (\megas genomenos\). "Having become great" (from strkjv@Exodus:2:11|). {Refused} (\rnesato\). First aorist middle indicative of \arneomai\, to deny, to refuse. He was of age and made his choice not from ignorance. {Son} (\huios\). Predicate nominative with \legesthai\ (to be spoken of, present passive infinitive, of \leg\).
rwp@Hebrews:12:19 @{Unto blackness} (\gnophi\). Dative case of \gnophos\ (late form for earlier \dnophos\ and kin to \nephos\, cloud), here only in N.T. Quoted here from strkjv@Exodus:10:22|. {Darkness} (\zophi\). Old word, in Homer for the gloom of the world below. In the Symmachus Version of strkjv@Exodus:10:22|, also in strkjv@Jude:1:6; strkjv@2Peter:2:4,15|. {Tempest} (\thuelli\). Old word from \thu\ (to boil, to rage), a hurricane, here only in N.T. From strkjv@Exodus:10:22|. {The sound of a trumpet} (\salpiggos chi\). From strkjv@Exodus:19:16|. \Echos\ is an old word (our \echo\) as in strkjv@Luke:21:25; strkjv@Acts:2:2|. {The voice of words} (\phni rmatn\). From strkjv@Exodus:19:19; strkjv@Deuteronomy:4:12|. {Which voice} (\hs\). Relative referring to \phn\ (voice) just before, genitive case with \akousantes\ (heard, aorist active participle). {Intreated} (\paritsanto\). First aorist middle (indirect) indicative of \paraiteomai\, old verb, to ask from alongside (Mark:15:6|), then to beg away from oneself, to depreciate as here, to decline (Acts:25:11|), to excuse (Luke:14:18|), to avoid (1Timothy:4:7|). {...no word should be spoken unto...} (\prostethnai autois logon\). First aorist passive infinitive of \prostithmi\, old word to add, here with accusative of general reference (\logon\), "that no word be added unto them." Some MSS. have here a redundant negative \m\ with the infinitive because of the negative idea in \paritsanto\ as in strkjv@Galatians:5:7|.
rwp@Info_James @ RECENT BOOKS ON JAMES Baljon, J. M. S., _Comm. op de katholieke brieven_. Bardenhewer, O., _Der Brief des hl. Jakobus_. Bartmann, _St. Paulus und St. Jakobus_. Belser, J. E., _Epistel des hl. Jakobus_. Beyschlag, W., _Der Brief des Jakobus_. Meyer Komm. 6 Aufl.. Brown, Charles, _The General Epistle of James_. 2nd ed.. Camerlinck, _Commentarius in epistolas catholicas_. Carpenter, W. Boyd, _The Wisdom of James the Just_. Carr, Arthur, _The General Epistle of James_. Cambridge Greek Testament. New ed.. Chaine, J., _L Epitre de S. Jacques_. Dale, R. W., _Discourses on the Epistle of James. Deems, C. F., _The Gospel of Common Sense_. Dibelius, _M., Meyer's Comm. 7 Aufl.. Feine, _Der Jakobusbrief_, etc.. Fitch, _James the Lord's Brother_. Gaugusch, L., _Der Lehrgehalt der Jakobus-epistel_. Grafe, _Stellung und Bedeutung des Jakobusbriefes_. Grosheide, F. W., _Deuteronomy:brief aan de Hebreen en de brief des Jakobus_. Hauck, F., _Der Br. d. Jak. in Zahn's Komm_.. Hollmann, G., _Die Schriften d. N.T_. 3 Aufl.. Holtzmann, O., _Das N.T. II_. Hort, F. J. A., _The Epistle of James as far as strkjv@4:7_. Huther, J. E., _Meyer's Komm_. 3 Aufl.. Johnstone, R., _Lectures Exegetical and Practical_. 2nd ed.. Knowling, R. J., _Comm. on the Epistle of St. James_. Westminster Series. Mayor, J. B., _The Epistle of St. James_. 3rd ed.. Meinertz, _Der Jakobusbrief und sein Verfasser_. Meyer, A., _Das Ratsel des Jak_.. Moffatt, James, _The General Epistles (James, Peter, and Judas_). Osterley, W. E., _The Epistle of St. James_. Expos. Gk. Test.. Parry, J., _The General Epistle of James_. Patrick, W., _James, the Lord's Brother_. Plummer, A., _The General Epistle of St. James_. Expos. Bible. Rendall, G. H., _The Epistle of St. James and Judaic Chris- tianity_. Robertson, A. T., _Studies in the Epistle of James_. 3rd ed.. First in 1915 as _Pract. and Social Aspects of Christianity_. Ropes, J. H., _A Crit. and Exeget. Comm. on the Epistle of St. James_. Int. and Crit. Comm.. Smith, H. M., _The Epistle of James_. Soden, H. Von, _Der Brief des Jakobus_. Hand-Comm.. Spitta, F., _Der Brief des Jakobus untersucht_. Taylor, J. F., _The Apostle of Patience_. Weiss, B., _Die Katholische Briefe_. _Der Jakobusbrief und die neuere Kritik_. Windisch, H., _Die Katholische Briefe. Handbuch Zum N.T._, 2 Aufl.. strkjv@James:1:1 @{James} (\Iakbos\). Grecised form (nominative absolute) of the Hebrew \Iakb\ (so LXX). Common name among the Jews, and this man in Josephus (_Ant_. XX.9.1) and three others of this name in Josephus also. {Servant} (\doulos\). Bond-servant or slave as Paul (Romans:1:1; strkjv@Phillipians:1:1; strkjv@Titus:1:1|). {Of the Lord Jesus Christ} (\kuriou Isou Christou\). Here on a par with God (\theou\) and calls himself not \adelphos\ (brother) of Jesus, but \doulos\. The three terms here as in strkjv@2:1| have their full significance: Jesus is the Messiah and Lord. James is not an Ebionite. He accepts the deity of Jesus his brother, difficult as it was for him to do so. The word \kurios\ is frequent in the LXX for _Elohim_ and _Jahweh_ as the Romans applied it to the emperor in their emperor worship. See strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3| for \Kurios Isous\ and strkjv@Phillipians:2:11| for \Kurios Isous Christos\. {To the twelve tribes} (\tais ddeka phulais\). Dative case. The expression means "Israel in its fulness and completeness" (Hort), regarded as a unity (Acts:26:7|) with no conception of any "lost" tribes. {Which are of the Dispersion} (\tais en ti diaspori\). "Those in the Dispersion" (repeated article). The term appears in strkjv@Deuteronomy:28:25| (LXX) and comes from \diaspeir\, to scatter (sow) abroad. In its literal sense we have it in strkjv@John:7:34|, but here and in strkjv@1Peter:1:1| Christian Jews are chiefly, if not wholly, in view. The Jews at this period were roughly divided into Palestinian Jews (chiefly agriculturists) and Jews of the Dispersion (dwellers in cities and mainly traders)...In Palestine Aramaic was spoken as...(_Koin_, LXX), though the Eastern Diaspora spoke Aramaic and Syriac. The Jews of the Diaspora were compelled to compare their religion with the various cults around them (comparative religion) and had a wider outlook on life. James writes thus in cultural _Koin_ but in the Hebraic tone. {Greeting} (\chairein\). Absolute infinitive (present active of \chair\) as in strkjv@Acts:15:23| (the Epistle to Antioch and the churches of Syria and Galatia). It is the usual idiom in the thousands of papyri letters known to us, but in no other New Testament letter. But note \chairein legete\ in strkjv@2John:1:10,11|.
rwp@James:4:9 @{Be afflicted} (\talaiprsate\). First aorist active imperative \talaipre\, old verb from \talaipros\ (Romans:7:24|), to endure toils, here only in N.T. Cf. \talaipriais\ in strkjv@5:1|. {Mourn} (\penthsate\). First aorist active imperative of \penthe\, old verb from \penthos\ (mourning, strkjv@4:9|), as in strkjv@Matthew:5:4f|. Often in N.T. joined as here with \klai\, to weep (Mark:16:10; strkjv@Luke:6:25|)...to the godly sorrow spoken of...2Corinthians:7:10| (Mayor), like an O.T. prophet. {Weep} (\klausate\). First aorist active imperative of \klai\. {Laughter} (\gels\). Old word from Homer down, only here in N.T. as \gela\, to {laugh} (opposite of \klai\), in N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:6:21,25|, but \katagela\ in strkjv@Luke:8:53| (Mark:5:40; strkjv@Matthew:9:24|). {Be turned} (\metatrapt\). Second aorist passive imperative of \metatrep\, old word, to turn about, to transmute, in Homer (not in Attic), here only in N.T. {Heaviness} (\katpheian\). Old word from \katphs\ (of a downcast look, from \kata\, \pha\ eyes), hanging down of the eyes like the publican in strkjv@Luke:18:13|, here only in N.T.
rwp@Info_John @...Jesus could not have spoken in..._Memorabilia_ and of Plato's _Dialogues_. There is a difference beyond a doubt, but there is also some difference in the reports in the Synoptics. Jesus for the most part spoke in Aramaic, sometimes in Greek, as to the great crowds from around Palestine (the Sermon on the Mount, for instance). There is the Logia of Jesus (Q of criticism) preserved in the non-Markan portions of Matthew and Luke besides Mark, and the rest of Matthew and Luke. Certain natural individualities are preserved. The difference is greater in the Fourth Gospel, because John writes in the ripeness of age and in the richness of his long experience. He gives his reminiscences mellowed by long reflection and yet with rare dramatic power. The simplicity of the language leads many to think that they understand this Gospel when they fail to see the graphic pictures as in chapters strkjv@John:7-11|. The book fairly throbs with life. There is, no doubt, a Johannine style here, but curiously enough there exists in the Logia (Q) a genuine Johannine passage written long before the Fourth Gospel (Matthew:11:25-30; strkjv@Luke:10:21-24|). The use of "the Father" and "the Son" is thoroughly Johannine. It is clear that Jesus used the Johannine type of teaching also. Perhaps critics do not make enough allowance for the versatility and variety in Jesus.
rwp@John:1:21 @{And they asked him} (\kai rtsan auton\). Here the paratactic \kai\ is like the transitional \oun\ (then). {What then?} (\Ti oun;\). Argumentative \oun\ like Paul's \ti oun\ in strkjv@Romans:6:15|. _Quid ergo?_ {Art thou Elijah?} (\Su Elias ei;\). The next inevitable question since Elijah had been understood to be the forerunner of the Messiah from strkjv@Malachi:4:5|. In strkjv@Mark:9:11f.| Jesus will identify John with the Elijah of Malachi's prophecy. Why then does John here flatly deny it? Because the expectation was that Elijah would return in person. This John denies. Jesus only asserts that John was Elijah in spirit. Elijah in person they had just seen on the Mount of Transfiguration. {He saith} (\legei\). Vivid dramatic present. {I am not} (\ouk eimi\). Short and blunt denial. {Art thou the prophet?} (\ho prophts ei su;\). "The prophet art thou?" This question followed naturally the previous denials. Moses (Deuteronomy:18:15|) had spoken of a prophet like unto himself. Christians interpreted this prophet to be the Messiah (Acts:3:22; strkjv@7:37|), but the Jews thought him another forerunner of the Messiah (John:7:40|). It is not clear in strkjv@John:6:15| whether the people identified the expected prophet with the Messiah, though apparently so. Even the Baptist later became puzzled in prison whether Jesus himself was the true Messiah or just one of the forerunners (Luke:7:19|). People wondered about Jesus himself whether he was the Messiah or just one of the looked for prophets (Mark:8:28; strkjv@Matthew:16:14|). {And he answered} (\kai apekrith\). First aorist passive (deponent passive, sense of voice gone) indicative of \apokrinomai\, to give a decision from myself, to reply. {No} (\Ou\). Shortest possible denial.
rwp@John:1:38 @{Turned} (\strapheis\). Second aorist passive participle of \streph\, vividly picturing the sudden act of Jesus on hearing their steps behind him. {Beheld} (\theasamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \theaomai\ (verse 32|). Both participles here express antecedent action to \legei\ (saith). {Following} (\akolothountas\). Present active participle of \akolouthe\ (verse 37|). It was Christ's first experience of this kind and the two came from the Baptist to Jesus. {What seek ye?} (\Ti zteite;\). Not "whom" (\tina\ strkjv@18:4; strkjv@20:15|), but "what purpose have you." The first words of Jesus preserved in this Gospel. See strkjv@Luke:2:49; strkjv@Matthew:3:15| for words spoken before this and strkjv@Mark:1:15| for Mark's first report in the Galilean ministry. {Rabbi} (\Rabbei\). Aramaic title for "Teacher" which John here translates by \Didaskale\ as he is writing late and for general readers. Luke, a Greek Christian, does not use it, but John recalls his first use of this term to Jesus and explains it. Matthew has it only in the greeting of Judas to the Master (Matthew:26:25,49|) and Mark once by Judas (Mark:14:45|) and twice by Peter (Mark:9:5; strkjv@11:21|). John's Gospel has the disciples at first addressing Jesus by Rabbi while others address him by \Kurie\ (Lord or Sir) as in strkjv@4:11,49; strkjv@5:7|. Peter uses \Kurie\ in strkjv@6:68|. In the end the disciples usually say \Kurie\ (13:6,25|, etc.), but Mary Magdalene says \Rabbounei\ (20:16|). {Being interpreted} (\methermmeuomenon\). Present passive participle of \methermneu\, late compound of \meta\ and \hermneu\, to explain (John:1:42|), old word from \Hermes\, the god of speech (hermeneutics). John often explains Aramaic words (1:38,41,42; strkjv@4:25; strkjv@9:7|, etc.). {Where abidest thou?} (\Pou meneis;\). They wished a place for quiet converse with Jesus.
rwp@John:2:19 @{Destroy this temple} (\lusate ton naon touton\). First aorist active imperative of \lu\, to loosen or destroy. It is the permissive imperative, not a command to do it. Note also \naos\, not \hieron\, the sanctuary, symbol of God's \naos\, in our hearts (1Corinthians:3:16f.|). There is much confusion about this language since Jesus added: "And in three days I will raise it up" (\kai en trisin hmerais eger auton\). Those who heard Jesus, including the disciples till after the resurrection (verse 22|)...enigmas. He may have spoken of...
rwp@John:2:22 @{When therefore he was raised from the dead} (\Hote oun gerth ek nekrn\). First aorist passive indicative of \egeir\, to raise up. And not at first then, but only slowly after the disciples themselves were convinced. Then "they believed the Scripture" (\episteusan ti graphi\). They "believed" again. Dative case \graphi\. Probably strkjv@Psalms:16:10| is meant (Acts:2:31; strkjv@13:35|). {And the word which Jesus had said} (\kai ti logi hon eipen\). Dative case \logi\ also, but \hon\ (relative) is not attracted to the dative. Clearly then John interprets Jesus to have a parabolic reference to his death and resurrection by his language in strkjv@2:19|. There are those who bluntly say that John was mistaken. I prefer to say that these scholars are mistaken. Even Bernard considers it "hardly possible" that John interprets Jesus rightly in strkjv@1:21|...that, He would have spoken with...(Mark:14:58|), "I can destroy" (Matthew:26:61|), neither of which he said.
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:8:25 @{Who art thou?} (\Su tis ei;\). Proleptic use of \su\ before \tis\, "Thou, who art thou?" Cf. strkjv@1:19|. He had virtually claimed to be the Messiah and on a par with God as in strkjv@5:15|. They wish to pin him down and to charge him with blasphemy. {...which I have also spoken unto...} (\tn archn hoti kai lal humin\). A difficult sentence. It is not clear whether it is an affirmation or a question. The Latin and Syriac versions treat it as affirmative. Westcott and Hort follow Meyer and take it as interrogative. The Greek fathers take it as an exclamation. It seems clear that the adverbial accusative \tn archn\ cannot mean "from the beginning" like \ap' archs\ (15:27|) or \ex archs\ (16:4|). The LXX has \tn archn\ for "at the beginning" or "at the first" (Genesis:43:20|). There are examples in Greek, chiefly negative, where \tn archn\ means "at all," "essentially," "primarily." Vincent and Bernard so take it here, "Primarily what I am telling you." Jesus avoids the term Messiah with its political connotations. He stands by his high claims already made.
rwp@John:9:29 @{...know that God hath spoken unto...} (\hmeis oidamen hoti Musei lelalken ho theos\). Perfect active indicative of \lale\, so still on record. See strkjv@Exodus:33:11|. For \lale\ used of God speaking see strkjv@Hebrews:1:1|. They are proud to be disciples of Moses. {But as for this man, we do not know whence he is} (\touton de ouk oidamen pothen estin\). "This fellow" they mean by "\touton\" in emphatic position, we do not even know whence he is. Some of the people did (7:27|), but in the higher sense none of the Jews knew (8:14|). These Pharisees neither knew nor cared.
rwp@John:11:40 @{Said I not unto thee?} (\Ouk eipon soi;\). Jesus pointedly reminds Martha of his promise to raise Lazarus (verses 25f.|). {That if thou believedst} (\hoti ean pisteusis\). Indirect discourse with \ean\ and the first aorist active subjunctive (condition of third class) retained after the secondary tense \eipon\. He had not said this very phrase, \ean pisteusis\, to Martha, but he did say to her: \Pisteueis touto\; (Believest thou this?). He meant to test Martha as to her faith already hinted at (verse 22|)...point. Jesus had also spoken of...(verse 15|). {Thou shouldest see the glory of God} (\opsi tn doxan tou theou\). Future middle indicative of the old defective verb \hora\ retained in the conclusion of this condition in indirect discourse. Jesus means the glory of God as shown in the resurrection of Lazarus as he had already said to the disciples (verse 4|) and as he meant Martha to understand (verse 25|) and may in fact have said to her (the report of the conversation is clearly abridged). Hence Bernard's difficulty in seeing how Martha could understand the words of Jesus about the resurrection of Lazarus here and now seems fanciful and far-fetched.
rwp@John:12:24 @{Except} (\ean m\). Negative condition of third class (undetermined, supposable case) with second aorist active participle \pesn\ (from \pipt\, to fall) and the second aorist active subjunctive of \apothnsk\, to die. {A grain of wheat} (\ho kokkos tou sitou\). Rather, "the grain of wheat." {By itself alone} (\autos monos\). Both predicate nominatives after \menei\. It is not necessary to think (nor likely) that Jesus has in mind the Eleusinian mysteries which became a symbol of the mystery of spring. Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:36| uses the same illustration of the resurrection that Jesus does here. Jesus shows here the paradox that life comes through death. Whether the Greeks heard him or not we do not know. If so, they heard something not in Greek philosophy, the Christian ideal of sacrifice, "and this was foreign to the philosophy of Greece" (Bernard). Jesus had already spoken of himself as the bread of life (6:35-65|). {But if it die} (\ean de apothani\). Parallel condition of the third class. Grains of wheat have been found in Egyptian tombs three or four thousand years old, but they are now dead. They bore no fruit.
rwp@John:12:25 @{Loseth it} (\apolluei autn\). The second paradox. Present active indicative of \apollu\...This great saying was spoken at...8:35| (Matthew:16:25; strkjv@Luke:9:24|) and strkjv@Mark:10:39| (Luke:17:33|). See those passages for discussion of \psuch\ (life or soul). For "he that hateth his life" (\ho misn tn psuchn autou\) see the sharp contrasts in Luke strkjv@14:26-35| where \mise\ is used of father, mother, wife, children, brothers, sisters, as well as one's own life. Clearly \mise\ means "hate" when the issue is between Christ and the dearest things of life as happens when the choice is between martyrdom and apostasy. In that case one keeps his soul for eternal life by losing his life (\psuch\, each time) here. That is the way to "guard" (\phulaxei\) life by being true to Christ. This is the second paradox to show Christ's philosophy of life.
rwp@John:12:29 @{That it had thundered} (\brontn gegonenai\). Perfect active infinitive of \ginomai\ in indirect discourse after \elegen\ and the accusative of general reference (\brontn\, thunder, as in strkjv@Mark:3:17|), "that thunder came to pass." Songs:the crowd "standing by" (\hests\, second perfect active participle of \histmi\), but Jesus understood his Father's voice. {An angel hath spoken to him} (\Aggelos auti lelalken\). Perfect active indicative of \lale\. So, when Jesus spoke to Saul on the way to Damascus, those with Saul heard the voice, but did not understand (Acts:9:7; strkjv@22:9|).
rwp@John:16:8 @{And he} (\kai ekeinos\). Emphatic demonstrative masculine pronoun. {When he is come} (\elthn\). Second aorist active participle of \erchomai\, "having come" or "coming." {Will convict the world} (\elegxei ton kosmon\). Future active of \elegch\, old word for confuting, convicting by proof already in strkjv@3:29; strkjv@8:46|. Jesus had been doing this (7:7|), but this is pre-eminently the work of the Holy Spirit and the most needed task today for our complacent age. {In respect of sin} (\peri hamartias\). Concerning the reality of sin as missing the mark and as wronging God and man, and not a mere slip or animal instinct or devoid of moral responsibility or evil. Some scientists and psychologists (Freudians and behaviourists) seem bent on destroying man's sense of sin. Hence crime waves even in youth. {And of righteousness} (\kai peri dikaiosuns\). The opposite of "sin" and to be yearned for after conviction. Cf. strkjv@Romans:1:19-3:21| about the necessity of the God-kind of righteousness and the Sermon on the Mount for Christ's idea of righteousness. {And of judgment} (\kai peri krises\)...The Paraclete is here spoken of...(1John:2:1|), but as Christ's advocate with the world" (Bernard).
rwp@John:18:23 @{If I have spoken evil} (\ei kaks elalsa\). Condition of first class (assumed to be true), with \ei\...indicative. Jesus had not spoken evilly...{Bear witness of the evil} (\marturson peri tou kakou\). First aorist active imperative of \marture\, to testify. This is the conclusion (apodosis). Jesus is clearly entitled to proof of such a charge if there is any. {But if well} (\ei de kals\). Supply the same verb \elalsa\. The same condition, but with a challenging question as the apodosis. {Smitest} (\dereis\). Old verb \der\, to flay, to skin, to beat, as in strkjv@Matthew:21:35; strkjv@Luke:22:63; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:20| (of an insulting blow in the face as here).
rwp@John:20:21 @{Even so send I you} (\kag pemp humas\). Jesus has often spoken of the Father's sending him using both \apostell\ and \pemp\. Here he employs both words in practically the same sense. Jesus still bears the Commission of the Father (perfect active indicative). For this balanced contention (as... so) see strkjv@6:57; strkjv@10:15|. This is the first of the three commissions given by the Risen Christ (another on the mountain in Galilee (Matthew:28:16-20; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:6|), another on the Mount of Olives (Luke:24:44-51; strkjv@Acts:1:3-11|).
rwp@Luke:1:45 @{For} (\hoti\). It is not certain whether \hoti\ here is "that" or "because." It makes good sense either way. See also strkjv@7:16|...one in the Gospels spoken to...(John:20:29|). Elisabeth wishes Mary to have full faith in the prophecy of the angel. This song of Elisabeth is as real poetry as is that of Mary (1:47-55|) and Zacharias (1:68-70|). All three spoke under the power of the Holy Spirit. These are the first New Testament hymns and they are very beautiful. Plummer notes four strophes in Mary's Magnificat (46-48|,49,50|,51-53|,54,55|). Every idea here occurs in the Old Testament, showing that Mary's mind was full of the spiritual message of God's word.
rwp@Luke:4:21 @{And he began to say} (\rxato de legein\). Aorist ingressive active indicative and present infinitive. He began speaking. The moment of hushed expectancy was passed. These may or may not be the first words uttered here by Jesus. Often the first sentence is the crucial one in winning an audience. Certainly this is an arresting opening sentence. {Hath been fulfilled} (\peplrtai\). Perfect passive indicative, {stands fulfilled}. "Today this scripture (Isaiah:61:1,2|, just read) stands fulfilled in your ears." It was a most amazing statement and the people of Nazareth were quick to see the Messianic claim involved. Jesus could only mean that the real year of Jubilee had come, that the Messianic prophecy of Isaiah had come true today, and that in him they saw the Messiah of prophecy. There are critics today who deny that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah. To be able to do that, they must reject the Gospel of John and all such passages as this one. And it is no apocalyptic eschatological Messiah whom Jesus here sets forth, but the one who forgives sin and binds up the broken-...true and to be spoken here...
rwp@Luke:10:5 @{First say} (\prton legete\). Say first. The adverb \prton\ can be construed with "enter" (\eiselthte\), but probably with \legete\...is right. The word spoken is...
rwp@Luke:12:2 @{Covered up} (\sugkekalummenon estin\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \sugkalupt\, an old verb, but here only in the N.T., to cover up on all sides and so completely. Verses 2-9| here are parallel with strkjv@Matthew:10:26-33| spoken to the Twelve on their tour of Galilee, illustrating again how often Jesus repeated his sayings unless we prefer to say that he never did so and that the Gospels have hopelessly jumbled them as to time and place. See the passage in Matthew for discussion of details.
rwp@Luke:12:22 @{Unto his disciples} (\pros tous mathtas autou\). Songs:Jesus turns from the crowd to the disciples (verses 22-40|, when Peter interrupts the discourse). From here to the end of the chapter Luke gives material that appears in Matthew, but not in one connection as here. In Matthew part of it is in the charge to the Twelve on their tour in Galilee, part in the eschatological discourse on the Mount of Olives. None of it is in Mark. Hence Q or the Logia seems to be the source of it. The question recurs again whether Jesus repeated on other occasions what is given here or whether Luke has here put together separate discourses as Matthew is held by many to have done in the Sermon on the Mount. We have no way of deciding these points. We can only say again that Jesus would naturally repeat his favourite sayings like other popular preachers and teachers. Songs:Luke:12:22-31| corresponds to strkjv@Matthew:6:25-33|...the rich fool was spoken to...(22-31|) is to the disciples. Songs:the language in strkjv@Luke:12:22| is precisely that in strkjv@Matthew:6:25|. See there for \m merimnte\ (stop being anxious) and the deliberative subjunctive retained in the indirect question (\phagte, endussthe\). Songs:verse 23| here is the same in strkjv@Matthew:6:25| except that there it is a question with \ouch\ expecting the affirmative answer, whereas here it is given as a reason (\gar\, for) for the preceding command.
rwp@Luke:12:41 @{Peter said} (\Eipen de ho Petros\). This whole paragraph from verse 22-40|...included, for he had spoken to...13-21|. Recall strkjv@Mark:13:37|. This interruption is somewhat like that on the Mount of Transfiguration (Luke:9:33|) and is characteristic of Peter. Was it the magnificent promise in verse 37| that stirred Peter's impulsiveness? It is certainly more than a literary device of Luke. Peter's question draws out a parabolic reply by Jesus (42-48|).
rwp@Luke:13:14 @{Answered} (\apokritheis\). First aorist passive participle of \apokrinomai\. No one had spoken to him, but he felt his importance as the ruler of the synagogue and was indignant (\aganaktn\, from \agan\ and \achomai\, to feel much pain). His words have a ludicrous sound as if all the people had to do to get their crooked backs straightened out was to come round to his synagogue during the week. He forgot that this poor old woman had been coming for eighteen years with no result. He was angry with Jesus, but he spoke to the multitude (\ti ochli\). {Ought} (\dei\). Really, must, necessary, a direct hit at Jesus who had "worked" on the sabbath in healing this old woman. {And not} (\kai m\). Instead of \kai ou\, because in the imperative clause.
rwp@Luke:13:15 @{The Lord answered him} (\apekrith de auti ho Kurios\)...the synagogue who had spoken to...{Hypocrites} (\hupokritai\). This pretentious faultfinder and all who agree with him. {Each of you} (\hekastos humn\). An _argumentum ad hominen_. These very critics of Jesus cared too much for an ox or an ass to leave it all the sabbath without water. {Stall} (\phatns\). Old word, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:2:7,12,16| the manger where the infant Jesus was placed. {To watering} (\potizei\). Old verb, causative, to give to drink.
rwp@Luke:16:14 @{Who were lovers of money} (\philarguroi huparchontes\). Literally, being lovers of money. \Philarguroi\ is an old word, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@2Timothy:3:2|. It is from \philos\ and \arguros\. {Heard} (\kouon\). Imperfect active, were listening (all the while Jesus was talking to the disciples (verses 1-13|). {And they scoffed at him} (\kai exemuktrizon\). Imperfect active again of \ekmuktriz\. LXX where late writers use simple verb. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:23:35|. It means to turn out or up the nose at one, to sneer, to scoff. The Romans had a phrase, _naso adunco suspendere_, to hang on the hooked nose (the subject of ridicule). These money-loving Pharisees were quick to see that the words of Jesus about the wise use of money applied to them. They had stood without comment the three parables aimed directly at them (the lost sheep, the lost coin, the lost son)...No words were apparently spoken, but...
rwp@Luke:21:20 @{Compassed with armies} (\kukloumenn hupo stratopedn\). Present passive participle of \kuklo\, to circle, encircle, from \kuklos\...Luke, could not have spoken... (or written) these words before the Roman armies came. One may ask why not, if such a thing as predictive prophecy can exist and especially in the case of the Lord Jesus. The word \stratopedn\ (\stratos\, army, \pedon\, plain) is a military camp and then an army in camp. Old word, but only here in the N.T. {Then know} (\tote gnte\). Second aorist active imperative of \ginsk\. Christians did flee from Jerusalem to Pella before it was too late as directed in strkjv@Luke:21:21; strkjv@Mark:13:14f.; strkjv@Matthew:24:16f|.
rwp@Mark:1:4 @{John came} (\egeneto Ians\). His coming was an epoch (\egeneto\), not a mere event (\n\). His coming was in accordance with the prophetic picture (\kaths\, strkjv@1:2|). Note the same verb about John in strkjv@John:1:6|...real beginning of the spoken message...{the baptizing one} (\ho haptizn\) in the wilderness (\en ti ermi\). The baptizing took place in the River Jordan (Mark:1:5,9|) which was included in the general term the wilderness or the deserted region of Judea. {Preached the baptism of repentance} (\krussn baptisma metanoias\). Heralded a repentance kind of baptism (genitive case, genus case), a baptism marked by repentance. See on ¯Matthew:3:2| for discussion of repent, an exceedingly poor rendering of John's great word \metanoias\. He called upon the Jews to change their minds and to turn from their sins, "confessing their sins" (\exomologoumenoi tas hamartias autn\). See strkjv@Matthew:3:16|. The public confessions produced a profound impression as they would now. {Unto remission of sins} (\eis aphesin hamartin\). This is a difficult phrase to translate accurately. Certainly John did not mean that the baptism was the means of obtaining the forgiveness of their sins or necessary to the remission of sins. The trouble lies in the use of \eis\ which sometimes is used when purpose is expressed, but sometimes when there is no such idea as in strkjv@Matthew:10:41| and strkjv@Matthew:12:41|. Probably "with reference to" is as good a translation here as is possible. The baptism was on the basis of the repentance and confession of sin and, as Paul later explained (Romans:6:4|), was a picture of the death to sin and resurrection to new life in Christ. This symbol was already in use by the Jews for proselytes who became Jews. John is treating the Jewish nation as pagans who need to repent, to confess their sins, and to come back to the kingdom of God. The baptism in the Jordan was the objective challenge to the people.
rwp@Mark:5:36 @{Not heeding} (\parakousas\). This is the sense in strkjv@Matthew:18:17|...overhearing what was not spoken directly...(Bruce). Certainly he ignored the conclusion of the messengers. The present participle \laloumenon\ suits best the idea of overhearing. Both Mark and strkjv@Luke:8:50| have "Fear not, only believe" (\m phobou, monon pisteue\). This to the ruler of the synagogue (\ti archisunaggi\)...whom the messenger had spoken....
rwp@Mark:5:41 @{Talitha cumi}...These precious Aramaic words, spoken by...(\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:10:2 @{Tempting him} (\peirazontes\). As soon as Jesus appears in Galilee the Pharisees attack him again (cf. strkjv@7:5; strkjv@8:11|). Gould thinks that this is a test, not a temptation. The word means either (see on ¯Matthew:4:1|)...that he had already spoken in...(Matthew:5:31f.|).
rwp@Mark:10:39 @See on ¯Matthew:20:23-28| for discussion on these memorable verses (39-45|) identical in both Matthew and Mark. In particular in verse 45| note the language of Jesus concerning his death as "a ransom for many" (\lutron anti polln\)...by the apostles when spoken by...
rwp@Mark:16:15 @{To the whole creation} (\psi ti ktisei\). This commission in Mark is probably another report of the missionary _Magna Charta_ in strkjv@Matthew:28:16-20| spoken on the mountain in Galilee. One commission has already been given by Christ (John:20:21-23|). The third appears in strkjv@Luke:24:44-49; strkjv@Acts:1:3-8|.
rwp@Matthew:1:22 @{That it may be fulfilled} (\hina plrthi\). Alford says that "it is impossible to interpret \hina\ in any other sense than in order that." That was the old notion, but modern grammarians recognize the non-final use of this particle in the _Koin_ and even the consecutive like the Latin _ut_. Some even argue for a causal use. If the context called for result, one need not hesitate to say so as in strkjv@Mark:11:28; strkjv@John:9:36; strkjv@1John:1:9; strkjv@Revelation:9:20; strkjv@13:13|. See discussion in my _Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research_, pp. 997-...the angel as saying, spoken "by...(\hupo\, immediate agent) the Lord through (\dia\, intermediate agent) the prophet." {"All this has happened"} (\touto de holon gegonen\, present perfect indicative), stands on record as historical fact. But the Virgin Birth of Jesus is not due to this interpretation of strkjv@Isaiah:7:14|. It is not necessary to maintain (Broadus) that Isaiah himself saw anything more in his prophecy than that a woman then a virgin, would bear a son and that in the course of a few years Ahaz would be delivered from the king of Syria and Israel by the coming of the Assyrians. This historical illustration finds its richest fulfilment in the birth of Jesus from Mary. "Words of themselves are empty. They are useful only as vessels to convey things from mind to mind" (Morison). The Hebrew word for young woman is translated by virgin (\parthenos\), but it is not necessary to conclude that Isaiah himself contemplated the supernatural birth of Jesus. We do not have to say that the idea of the Virgin Birth of Jesus came from Jewish sources. Certainly it did not come from the pagan myths so foreign to this environment, atmosphere and spirit. It is far simpler to admit the supernatural fact than try to explain the invention of the idea as a myth to justify the deification of Jesus. The birth, life, and death of Jesus throw a flood of light on the Old Testament narrative and prophecies for the early Christians. In Matthew and John in particular we often see "that the events of Christ's life were divinely ordered for the express purpose of fulfilling the Old Testament" (McNeile). See strkjv@Matthew:2:15,23; strkjv@4:14-17; strkjv@8:17; strkjv@12:17-21; strkjv@13:25; strkjv@21:4f.; strkjv@John:12:38f.; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@19:24,28,36f|.
rwp@Matthew:2:23 @{Should be called a Nazarene} (\Nazraios klthsetai\)...be fulfilled which was spoken by...(\dia tn prophtn\). It is the plural and no single prophecy exists which says that the Messiah was to be called a Nazarene. It may be that this term of contempt (John:1:46; strkjv@7:52|) is what is meant, and that several prophecies are to be combined like Ps. strkjv@22:6,8; strkjv@69:11,19; strkjv@Isaiah:53:2,3,4|. The name Nazareth means a shoot or branch, but it is by no means certain that Matthew has this in mind. It is best to confess that we do not know. See Broadus on Matthew for the various theories. But, despised as Nazareth was at that time, Jesus has exalted its fame. The lowly Nazarene he was at first, but it is our glory to be the followers of the Nazarene. Bruce says that "in this case, therefore, we certainly know that the historic fact suggested the prophetic reference, instead of the prophecy creating the history." The parallels drawn by Matthew between the history of Israel and the birth and infancy of Jesus are not mere fancy. History repeats itself and writers of history find frequent parallels. Surely Matthew is not beyond the bounds of reason or of fact in illustrating in his own way the birth and infancy of Jesus by the Providence of God in the history of Israel.
rwp@Matthew:3:2 @{...is he that was spoken of...} (\houtos gar estin ho rhtheis dia Esaiou tou prophtou\). This is Matthew's way of interpreting the mission and message of the Baptist. He quotes strkjv@Isaiah:40:3| where "the prophet refers to the return of Israel from the exile, accompanied by their God" (McNeile). He applies it to the work of John as "a voice crying in the wilderness" for the people to make ready the way of the Lord who is now near. He was only a voice, but what a voice he was. He can be heard yet across the centuries.
rwp@Matthew:9:6 @{That ye may know} (\hina eidte\). Jesus accepts the challenge in the thoughts of the scribes and performs the miracle of healing the paralytic, who so far only had his sins forgiven, to prove his Messianic power on earth to forgive sins even as God does. The word \exousia\ may mean either power or authority. He had both as a matter of fact. Note same word in strkjv@9:8|. {Then saith he to the sick of the palsy} (\tote legei ti paralutiki\)...of course, were not spoken by...(Mark:2:10|) has precisely the same words in the same place save that Matthew has added \tote\, of which he is fond, to what Mark already had. Mark, as we know, largely reports Peter's words and sees with Peter's eyes. Luke has the same idea in the same place without the vivid historical present \legei (eipen ti paralelumeni)\ with the participle in place of the adjective. This is one of the many proofs that both Matthew and Luke made use of Mark's Gospel each in his own way. {Take up thy bed} (\ron sou tn klinn\). Pack up at once (aorist active imperative) the rolled-up pallet.
rwp@Matthew:9:9 @{At the place of toll} (\epi to telnion\). The tax-office or custom-house of Capernaum placed here to collect taxes from the boats going across the lake outside of Herod's territory or from people going from Damascus to the coast, a regular caravan route. "{Called Matthew}" (\Maththaion legomenon\) and in strkjv@10:3| Matthew the publican is named as one of the Twelve Apostles. Mark (Mark:2:14|) and Luke (Luke:5:27|) call this man Levi. He had two names as was common, Matthew Levi. The publicans (\telnai\) get their name in English from the Latin _publicanus_ (a man who did public duty), not a very accurate designation. They were detested because they practised graft. Even Gabinius the proconsul of Syria was accused by Cicero of relieving Syrians and Jews of legitimate taxes for graft. He ordered some of the tax-...removed. Already Jesus had spoken of...(5:46|) in a way that shows the public disfavour in which they were held.
rwp@Matthew:11:7 @{As these went their way} (\toutn poreuomenn\)...eulogy of Jesus was spoken as...(Plummer). {A reed shaken by the wind} (\kalamon hupo anemou saleuomenon\). Latin _calamus_. Used of the reeds that grew in plenty in the Jordan Valley where John preached, of a staff made of a reed (Matthew:27:29|), as a measuring rod (Revelation:11:1|), of a writer's pen (3John:1:13|). The reeds by the Jordan bent with the wind, but not so John.
rwp@Matthew:13:3 @{Many things in parables} (\polla en parabolais\)...time that he had spoken so...12 to 18 and Matt. 24 and 25. The parables already mentioned in Matthew include the salt and the light (5:13-16|), the birds and the lilies (6:26-30|), the splinter and the beam in the eye (7:3-5|), the two gates (7:13f.|), the wolves in sheep's clothing (7:15|), the good and bad trees (7:17-19|), the wise and foolish builders (7:24-27|), the garment and the wineskins (9:16f.|), the children in the market places (11:16f.|). It is not certain how many he spoke on this occasion. Matthew mentions eight in this chapter (the Sower, the Tares, the Mustard Seed, the Leaven, the Hid Treasure, the Pearl of Great Price, the Net, the Householder). Mark adds the Parable of the Lamp (Mark:4:21; strkjv@Luke:8:16|), the Parable of the Seed Growing of Itself (Mark:4:26-29|), making ten of which we know. But both Mark (Mark:4:33|) and Matthew (13:34|) imply that there were many others. "Without a parable spake he nothing unto them" (Matthew:13:34|), on this occasion, we may suppose. The word parable (\parabol\ from \paraball\, to place alongside for measurement or comparison like a yardstick) is an objective illustration for spiritual or moral truth. The word is employed in a variety of ways (a) as for sententious sayings or proverbs (Matthew:15:15; strkjv@Mark:3:23; strkjv@Luke:4:23; strkjv@5:36-39; strkjv@6:39|), for a figure or type (Heb. strkjv@9:9; strkjv@11:19|); (b) a comparison in the form of a narrative, the common use in the Synoptic Gospels like the Sower; (c) "A narrative illustration not involving a comparison" (Broadus), like the Rich Fool, the Good Samaritan, etc. "The oriental genius for picturesque speech found expression in a multitude of such utterances" (McNeile)...But no one has spoken such...(\allgoria\) is a speaking parable that is self-explanatory all along like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_. All allegories are parables, but not all parables are allegories. The Prodigal Son is an allegory, as is the story of the Vine and Branches (John:15|). John does not use the word parable, but only \paroimia\, a saying by the way (John:10:6; strkjv@16:25,29|). As a rule the parables of Jesus illustrate one main point and the details are more or less incidental, though sometimes Jesus himself explains these. When he does not do so, we should be slow to interpret the minor details. Much heresy has come from fantastic interpretations of the parables. In the case of the Parable of the Sower (13:3-8|) we have also the careful exposition of the story by Jesus (18-23|) as well as the reason for the use of parables on this occasion by Jesus (9-17|).
rwp@Matthew:15:18 @{Out of the mouth} (\ek tou stomatos\). Spoken words come out of the heart and so are a true index of character. By "heart" (\kardias\) Jesus means not just the emotional nature, but the entire man, the inward life of "evil thoughts" (\dialogismoi ponroi\) that issue in words and deeds. "These defile the man," not "eating with unwashed hands." The captious quibblings of the Pharisees, for instance, had come out of evil hearts.
rwp@Matthew:17:10 @{Elijah must first come} (\Eleian dei elthein prton\). Songs:this piece of theology concerned them more than anything else. They had just seen Elijah, but Jesus the Messiah had come before Elijah. The scribes used strkjv@Malachi:4:5|. Jesus had also spoken again of his death (resurrection). Songs:they are puzzled.
rwp@Matthew:18:1 @{Who then is greatest} (\tis ara meizn estin\). The \ara\ seems to point back to the tax-collection incident when Jesus had claimed exemption for them all as "sons" of the Father. But it was not a new dispute, for jealousy had been growing in their hearts. The wonderful words of Jesus to Peter on Mount Hermon (Matthew:16:17-19|) had evidently made Peter feel a fresh sense of leadership on the basis of which he had dared even to rebuke Jesus for speaking of his death (16:22|). And then Peter was one of the three (James and John also)...on that occasion had spoken up...-collectors had singled out Peter as the one who seemed to represent the group. Mark (Mark:9:33|) represents Jesus as asking them about their dispute on the way into the house, perhaps just after their question in strkjv@Matthew:18:1|. Jesus had noticed the wrangling. It will break out again and again (Matthew:20:20-28; strkjv@Luke:22:24|). Plainly the primacy of Peter was not yet admitted by the others. The use of the comparative \meizn\ (so \ho meizn\ in verse 4|) rather than the superlative \megistos\ is quite in accord with the _Koin_ idiom where the comparative is displacing the superlative (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 667ff.). But it is a sad discovery to find the disciples chiefly concerned about their own places (offices) in the political kingdom which they were expecting.
rwp@Matthew:22:1 @{Again in parables} (\palin en parabolais\). Matthew has already given two on this occasion (The Two Sons, The Wicked Husbandmen). He alone gives this Parable of the Marriage Feast of the King's Son. It is somewhat similar to that of The Supper in strkjv@Luke:14:16-23| given on another occasion. Hence some scholars consider this merely Matthew's version of the Lucan parable in the wrong place because of Matthew's habit of grouping the sayings of Jesus. But that is a gratuitous indictment of Matthew's report which definitely locates the parable here by \palin\...regard it as not spoken by...
rwp@Matthew:26:65 @{He hath spoken blasphemy} (\eblasphmsen\). There was no need of witnesses now, for Jesus had incriminated himself by claiming under oath to be the Messiah, the Son of God. Now it would not be blasphemy for the real Messiah to make such a claim, but it was intolerable to admit that Jesus could be the Messiah of Jewish hope. At the beginning of Christ's ministry he occasionally used the word Messiah of himself, but he soon ceased, for it was plain that it would create trouble. The people would take it in the sense of a political revolutionist who would throw off the Roman yoke. If he declined that role, the Pharisees would have none of him for that was the kind of a Messiah that they desired. But the hour has now come. At the Triumphal Entry Jesus let the Galilean crowds hail him as Messiah, knowing what the effect would be. Now the hour has struck. He has made his claim and has defied the High Priest.
rwp@Revelation:20:3 @{Into the abyss} (\eis tn abusson\). The one in strkjv@9:1f.| and the one spoken of by the legion of demons in strkjv@Luke:8:31| under the charge of the angel of the abyss (Apollyon, strkjv@Revelation:9:11|) who is either Satan himself or a kindred power. "Already he has been cast out of Heaven (12:9|), now he is cast out of the earth, and returns to his own place" (Swete). {Shut it and sealed it} (\ekleisen kai esphragisen\). Effective first aorists active indicative of \klei\ and \sphragiz\. {That he should deceive no more} (\hina m plansi\). Negative purpose clause with \hina m\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \plana\. Glorious relief after the strain of the previous visions of conflict. Small wonder that Christians today cherish this blessed hope whatever the actual meaning may be. {Until should be finished} (\achri telesthi\). Temporal clause of future purpose with \achri\ (as a conjunction like \hes\) and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \tele\. Repeated in verse 5| and see \achri\ and the subjunctive in strkjv@7:3; strkjv@15:8|. {He must be loosed} (\dei luthnai\). Sad necessity, alas, with \dei\ and the first aorist passive infinitive of \lu\. {For a little time} (\mikron chronon\). Accusative of time. Whatever the thousand years means, it is here said plainly that after it is over the devil will again have power on earth "for a little time."
rwp@Revelation:21:14 @{Had} (\echn\). Masculine present active participle of \ech\ instead of \echon\ (neuter like to \teichos\), and the participle occurs independently as if a principal verb (\eichen\) as often in this book. {Twelve foundations} (\themelious ddeka\). Foundation stones, old adjective (from \thema\, from \tithmi\), here as in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:11ff.; strkjv@2Timothy:2:19|, with \lithous\ (stones understood), though often neuter substantive to \themelion\ (Luke:6:48f.; strkjv@Acts:16:26|). See strkjv@Isaiah:28:16; strkjv@Hebrews:11:10|. Twelve because of the twelve apostles as foundation stones (Ephesians:2:20|). {On them} (\ep' autn\). On the twelve foundation stones. {Names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb} (\onomata tn ddeka apostoln tou arniou\). Jesus had spoken of twelve thrones for the apostles (Matthew:19:28|); names of all twelve are here written, not just that of Peter, as some would argue from strkjv@Matthew:16:18|. As a matter of fact, Christ is the corner stone or \akrogniaion\ (1Peter:2:6; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:10; strkjv@Ephesians:2:20|), though rejected by the Sanhedrin (Matthew:21:42ff.|). One may wonder if the name of Judas is on that stone or that of Matthias.
rwp@Revelation:22:20 @{He which testifieth} (\ho marturn\). That is Jesus (1:2|) who has just spoken (22:18|). {Yea: I come quickly} (\Nai, erchomai tachu\). Affirmation again of the promise in strkjv@22:7,12|. On \Nai\ (Yes) see strkjv@1:7| for the Lord's assent to the call. Then John expresses his absolute belief in the Lord's promise: "Amen: come, Lord Jesus" (\Amn, erchou, Kurie Isou\). On \Amn\ see strkjv@1:7|. On \erchou\ see strkjv@22:17|. Note \Kurie\ with \Isou\. As in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3; strkjv@Phillipians:2:11|. For Paul's confidence in the deity of Christ and the certainty of his second coming see strkjv@Titus:2:13; strkjv@2Timothy:4:8|. \Marana tha\ (1Corinthians:16:22|).
rwp@Romans:14:16 @{Your good} (\humn to agathon\). "The good thing of you" = the liberty or Christian freedom which you claim. {Be evil spoken of} (\blasphmeisth\). Present passive imperative of \blasphme\ for which see strkjv@Matthew:9:3; strkjv@Romans:3:8|.
rwp@Romans:15:15 @{I write} (\egrapsa\). Epistolary aorist. {The more boldly} (\tolmroters\). Old comparative adverb from \tolmrs\. Most MSS. read \tolmroteron\. Only here in N.T. {In some measure} (\apo merous\)...Epistle where he has spoken plainly...(6:12,19; strkjv@8:9; strkjv@11:17; strkjv@14:3,4,10|, etc.). {As putting you again in remembrance} (\hos epanamimnskn humas\). Delicately put with \hs\ and \epi\ in the verb, "as if calling back to mind again" (\epi\). This rare verb is here alone in the N.T.
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}