rwp startling
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-...note of the many startling discoveries..._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@1Corinthians:11:10 @{Ought} (\opheilei\). Moral obligation therefore (\dia touto\, rests on woman in the matter of dress that does not (\ouk opheilei\ in verse 7|) rest on the man. {To have a sign of authority} (\exousian echein\). He means \smeion exousias\ (symbol of authority) by \exousian\, but it is the sign of authority of the man over the woman. The veil on the woman's head is the symbol of the authority that the man with the uncovered head has over her. It is, as we see it, more a sign of subjection (\hypotags\, strkjv@1Timothy:2:10|) than of authority (\exousias\). {Because of the angels} (\dia tous aggelous\). This startling phrase has caused all kinds of conjecture which may be dismissed. It is not preachers that Paul has in mind, nor evil angels who could be tempted (Genesis:6:1f.|), but angels present in worship (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:4:9; strkjv@Psalms:138:1|) who would be shocked at the conduct of the women since the angels themselves veil their faces before Jehovah (Isaiah:6:2|).
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:3 @{Exhortation} (\paraklsis\). Persuasive discourse, calling to one's side, for admonition, encouragement, or comfort. {Not of error} (\ouk ek plans\). This word is same as \plana\, to lead astray (2Timothy:3:13|) like Latin _errare_. Passive idea of {error} here rather than deceit. That is seen in {nor in guile} (\oude en doli\) from \del\, to catch with bait. Paul is keenly sensitive against charges against the correctness of his message and the purity of his life. {Nor of uncleanness} (\oude ex akatharsias\). "This disclaimer, startling as it may seem, was not unneeded amidst the impurities consecrated by the religions of the day" (Lightfoot). There was no necessary connection in the popular mind between religion and morals. The ecstatic initiations in some of the popular religions were grossly sensual.
rwp@Info_2Peter @ CLAIMS PETRINE AUTHORSHIP Not only so, but in fuller form than strkjv@1Peter:1:1|, for the writer terms himself "Simon (Symeon in some MSS.) Peter," a fact that has been used against the genuineness. If no claim had been made, that would have been considered decisive against him. Simon (Symeon was the Jewish form as used by James in strkjv@Acts:15:14|) is the real name (John:1:42|) and Peter merely the Greek for Cephas, the nickname given by Christ. There is no reason why both could not properly be employed here. But the claim to Petrine authorship, if not genuine, leaves the Epistle pseudonymous. That was a custom among some Jewish writers and even Christian writers, as the spurious Petrine literature testifies (Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, etc.)...in this Epistle, no startling new...
rwp@Acts:11:20 @{Spake} (\elaloun\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to speak. For them it was an experiment. {Unto the Greeks also} (\kai pros tous Hellnas\). This is undoubtedly the correct reading in spite of Hellenists (\Hellnistas\) or Grecian Jews in B E H L P. \Hellnas\ is read by A and D and a corrector of Aleph. The presence of "also" or "even" (\kai\) in Aleph A B makes no sense unless "Greeks" is correct. Hellenists or Grecian Jews as Christians were common enough as is seen in strkjv@Acts:2; 6|. Saul also had preached to the Hellenists in Jerusalem (9:29|). Hellenists were merely one kind of Jews in contrast with those who spoke Aramaic (Acts:6|). It is true that the case of Cornelius was first in importance, but it is not clear that it was before the work in Antioch. Probably the report of the work among the Greeks in Antioch reached Jerusalem after Peter's defence in strkjv@11:1-18|. That explains the calm tone about it and also why Barnabas and not Peter was sent to investigate. Peter and John (Acts:8|) had condoned Philip's work in Samaria and Peter was the agent in the work among the Romans in Caesarea. His position was now well-known and his services discounted for this new crisis. These Greeks in Antioch were apparently in part pure heathen and not "God-fearers" like Cornelius. A man of wisdom was called for. These preachers were themselves Hellenists (verse 19|)...was a departure of startling boldness"...(Furneaux) by laymen outside of the circle of official leaders.
rwp@Acts:26:23 @{How that the Christ must suffer} (\ei pathtos ho Christos\). Literally, "if the Messiah is subject to suffering." \Ei\ can here mean "whether" as in strkjv@Hebrews:7:15|. This use of a verbal in \-tos\ for capability or possibility occurs in the N.T. alone in \pathtos\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 157). This word occurs in Plutarch in this sense. It is like the Latin _patibilis_ and is from _pasch_. Here alone in N.T. Paul is speaking from the Jewish point of view. Most rabbis had not rightly understood strkjv@Isaiah:53|. When the Baptist called Jesus "the Lamb of God" (John:1:29|) it was a startling idea. It is not then "must suffer" here, but "can suffer." The Cross of Christ was a stumbling-block to the rabbis. {How that he first by the resurrection of the dead} (\ei prtos ex anastases nekrn\). Same construction with \ei\ (whether). This point Paul had often discussed with the Jews: "whether he (the Messiah) by a resurrection of dead people." Others had been raised from the dead, but Christ is the first (\prtos\) who arose from the dead and no longer dies (Romans:6:19|) and proclaims light (\phs mellei kataggellein\). Paul is still speaking from the Jewish standpoint: "is about to (going to) proclaim light." See verse 18| for "light" and strkjv@Luke:2:32|. {Both to the people and to the Gentiles} (\ti te lai kai tois ethnesin\). See verse 17|. It was at the word Gentiles (\ethn\) that the mob lost control of themselves in the speech from the stairs (22:21f.|). Songs:it is here, only not because of that word, but because of the word "resurrection" (\anastasis\).
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)...of the narrative. That startling style...{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@Hebrews:7:9 @{Songs:to say} (\hs epos eipein\)...used to limit a startling statement,...\hs\. {Hath paid tithes} (\dedekattai\). Perfect passive indicative of \dekato\, "has been tithed." This could only be true of Levi "so to speak."
rwp@James:2:26 @{Apart from the spirit} (\chris pneumatos\). "Apart from breath" (the breath of life). It is not easy to tell when one is dead, but the absence of a sign of breath on a glass before the mouth and nose is proof of death. Startling picture of dead faith in our churches and church members with only a name to live (Revelation:3:2|).
rwp@James:3:13 @{Who} (\Tis\). Rhetorical interrogative like strkjv@Luke:11:11|. Common in Paul and characteristic of the diatribe. James here returns to the standpoint of verse 1| about many teachers. Speech and wisdom are both liable to abuse (1Corinthians:1:5,17; strkjv@2:1-3:20|). {Wise and understanding} (\sophos kai epistmn\). \Sophos\ is used for the practical teacher (verse 1|), \epistmn\ (old word from \epistamai\, here only in N.T.) for an expert, a skilled and scientific person with a tone of superiority. In strkjv@Deuteronomy:1:13,15; strkjv@4:6|, the two terms are practically synonyms. {Let him shew} (\deixat\). First aorist active imperative of \deiknumi\, old verb to show. As about faith in strkjv@2:18|. Emphatic position of this verb. {By his good life} (\ek ts kals anastrophs\). For this literary _Koin_ word from \anastrephomai\ (walk, conduct) see strkjv@Galatians:1:13|. Actions speak louder than words even in the case of the professional wise man. Cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:15|. {In meekness of wisdom} (\en prautti sophias\). As in strkjv@1:21| of the listener, so here of the teacher. Cf. strkjv@Matthew:5:5; strkjv@11:29| and Zac strkjv@9:9| of King Messiah quoted in strkjv@Matthew:21:5|. Startling combination.
rwp@John:1:26 @{In the midst of you standeth} (\mesos humn stkei\). Adjective as in strkjv@19:18|, not \en mesi humn\. Present active indicative of late verb \stk\ from perfect stem \hestka\. John had already baptized Jesus and recognized him as the Messiah. {Whom ye know not} (\hon humeis ouk oidate\). This was the tragedy of the situation (1:11|). Apparently this startling declaration excited no further inquiry from the committee.
rwp@John:6:35 @{I am the bread of life} (\Eg eimi ho artos ts zs\)...This sublime sentence was startling in...\theios logos\ in an allegorical sense, but this language is far removed from Philo's vagueness. In the Synoptics (Mark:14:22; strkjv@Matthew:26:26; strkjv@Luke:22:19|) Jesus uses bread (\artos\) as the symbol of his body in the Lord's Supper, but here Jesus offers himself in place of the loaves and fishes which they had come to seek (24,26|). He is the bread of life in two senses: it has life in itself, the living bread (51|), and it gives life to others like the water of life, the tree of life. John often has Jesus saying "I am" (\eg eimi\). As also in strkjv@6:41,48,51; strkjv@8:12; strkjv@10:7,9,11,14; strkjv@11:25; strkjv@14:6; strkjv@15:1,5|. {He that cometh to me} (\ho erchomenos pros eme\). The first act of the soul in approaching Jesus. See also verse 37|. {Shall not hunger} (\ou m peinasi\). Strong double negative \ou me\ with first aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive, "shall not become hungry." {He that believeth on me} (\ho pisteun eis eme\). The continuous relation of trust after coming like \pisteute\ (present tense) in verse 29|. See both verbs used together also in strkjv@7:37f|. {Shall never thirst} (\ou m dipssei ppote\). Songs:the old MSS. the future active indicative instead of the aorist subjunctive as above, an even stronger form of negation with \ppote\ (1:18|) added.
rwp@John:7:19 @{And yet} (\kai\). Clear use of \kai\ in the adversative sense of "and yet" or "but." They marvelled at Christ's "ignorance" and boasted of their own knowledge of the law of Moses. And yet they violated that law by not practising it. {Why seek ye to kill me?} (\Ti me zteite apokteinai;\). A sudden and startling question as an illustration of their failure to do the law of Moses. Jesus had previously known (5:39,45-47|) that the Jews really rejected the teaching of Moses while professing to believe it. On that very occasion they had sought to kill him (5:18|), the very language used here. Apparently he had not been to Jerusalem since then. He undoubtedly alludes to their conduct then and charges them with the same purpose now.
rwp@John:11:25 @{I am the resurrection and the life} (\Eg eimi h anastasis kai h z\). This reply is startling enough. They are not mere doctrines about future events, but present realities in Jesus himself. "The Resurrection is one manifestation of the Life: it is involved in the Life" (Westcott). Note the article with both \anastasis\ and \z\. Jesus had taught the future resurrection often (6:39|), but here he means more, even that Lazarus is now alive. {Though he die} (\kan apothani\). "Even if he die," condition (concession) of third class with \kai ean\ (\kan\) and the second aorist active subjunctive of \apothnsk\ (physical death, he means). {Yet shall he live} (\zsetai\). Future middle of \za\ (spiritual life, of course).
rwp@John:11:39 @{Take ye away the stone} (\arate ton lithon\). First aorist active imperative of \air\...power. It was a startling command...{By this time he stinketh} (\d ozei\). Present active indicative of old verb, here only in N.T. (cf. strkjv@Exodus:8:14|). It means to give out an odour, either good or bad. {For he hath been dead four days} (\tetartaios gar estin\). The Greek simply says, "For he is a fourth-day man." It is an old ordinal numeral from \tetartos\ (fourth). Herodotus (ii. 89) has \tetartaios genesthai\ of one four days dead as here. The word is only here in the N.T. The same idiom occurs in strkjv@Acts:28:13| with \deuteraioi\ (second-day men). Lightfoot (_Hor. Hebr._) quotes a Jewish tradition (_Beresh. Rabba_) to the effect that the soul hovers around the tomb for three days hoping to return to the body, but on the fourth day leaves it. But there is no suggestion here that Martha held that notion. Her protest is a natural one in spite of her strong faith in verses 22-27|.
rwp@John:16:7 @{It is expedient for you} (\sumpherei humin\). Present active indicative of \sumpher\, old verb to bear together. See strkjv@11:50| where the phrase is used by Caiaphas "for us," here "for you" (\humin\ ethical dative). {That I go away} (\hina eg apelth\). Subject clause the subject of \sumpherei\, \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \aperchomai\. The reason (\gar\) for this startling statement follows. {If I go not away} (\ean m apelth\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and the negative \m\ with \apelth\ as before. {Will not come} (\ou m elthi\). Strong double negative with second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\. The Holy Spirit was, of course, already at work in the hearts of men, but not in the sense of witnessing as Paraclete which could only take place after Jesus had gone back to the Father. {But if I go} (\ean de poreuth\). Third-class condition again (\ean\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \poreuomai\). {I will send} (\pemps\). First person future as in 15|.
rwp@Luke:5:4 @{Had left speaking} (\epausato laln\). He ceased speaking (aorist middle indicative and present active participle, regular Greek idiom). {Put out into the deep} (\epanagage eis to bathos\). The same double compound verb as in verse 3|, only here second aorist active imperative second person singular. {Let down} (\chalasate\). Peter was master of the craft and so he was addressed first. First aorist active imperative second person plural. Here the whole crew are addressed. The verb is the regular nautical term for lowering cargo or boats (Acts:27:17,30|). But it was used for lowering anything from a higher place (Mark:2:4; strkjv@Acts:9:25; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:33|). For a catch (\eis agran\)...This purpose was the startling thing...
rwp@Matthew:3:1 @{Preaching in the wilderness of Judea} (\Krussn en ti ermi ts Ioudaias\)...were, but soon his startling message...
rwp@Matthew:3:2 @{For the kingdom of heaven is at hand} (\ggiken gar h Basileia tn ourann\)...tense. It was a startling word...-echoed throughout the land. The Old Testament prophets had said that it would come some day in God's own time. John proclaims as the herald of the new day that it has come, has drawn near. How near he does not say, but he evidently means very near, so near that one could see the signs and the proof. The words "the kingdom of heaven" he does not explain. The other Gospels use "the kingdom of God" as Matthew does a few times, but he has "the kingdom of heaven" over thirty times. He means "the reign of God," not the political or ecclesiastical organization which the Pharisees expected. His words would be understood differently by different groups as is always true of popular preachers. The current Jewish apocalypses had numerous eschatological ideas connected with the kingdom of heaven. It is not clear what sympathy John had with these eschatological features. He employs vivid language at times, but we do not have to confine John's intellectual and theological horizon to that of the rabbis of his day. He has been an original student of the Old Testament in his wilderness environment without any necessary contact with the Essenes who dwelt there. His voice is a new one that strikes terror to the perfunctory theologians of the temple and of the synagogue. It is the fashion of some critics to deny to John any conception of the spiritual content of his words, a wholly gratuitous criticism.
rwp@Matthew:24:2 @{One stone upon another} (\lithos epi lithon\)...Stone upon stone. A startling prediction...
rwp@Matthew:26:37 @{He took with him} (\paralabn\). Taking along, by his side (\para-\), as a mark of special favour and privilege, instead of leaving this inner circle of three (Peter, James, and John) with the other eight. The eight would serve as a sort of outer guard to watch by the gate of the garden for the coming of Judas while the three would be able to share the agony of soul already upon Jesus so as at least to give him some human sympathy which he craved as he sought help from the Father in prayer. These three had been with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration and now they are with him in this supreme crisis. The grief of Christ was now severe. The word for {sore troubled} (\admonein\) is of doubtful etymology. There is an adjective \admos\ equal to \apodmos\ meaning "not at home," "away from home," like the German _unheimisch, unheimlich_. But whatever the etymology, the notion of intense discomfort is plain. The word \admonein\ occurs in P.Oxy. II, 298,456 of the first century A.D. where it means "excessively concerned." See strkjv@Phillipians:2:26| where Paul uses it of Epaphroditus. Moffatt renders it here "agitated." The word occurs sometimes with \apore\ to be at a loss as to which way to go. The _Braid Scots_ has it "sair putten-aboot." Here Matthew has also "to be sorrowful" (\lupeisthai\), but Mark (Mark:14:33|) has the startling phrase {greatly amazed and sore troubled} (\ekthambeisthai kai admonein\), a "feeling of terrified surprise."
rwp@Romans:9:6 @{But it is not as though} (\ouch hoion de hoti\). Supply \estin\ after \ouch\: "But it is not such as that," an old idiom, here alone in N.T. {Hath come to nought} (\ekpeptken\). Perfect active indicative of \ekpipt\, old verb, to fall out. {For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel} (\ou gar pantes hoi ex Isral houtoi Isral\). "For not all those out of Israel (the literal Jewish nation), these are Israel (the spiritual Israel)." This startling paradox is not a new idea with Paul. He had already shown (Galatians:3:7-9|) that those of faith are the true sons of Abraham. He has amplified that idea also in strkjv@Romans:4|. Songs:he is not making a clever dodge here to escape a difficulty. He now shows how this was the original purpose of God to include only those who believed. {Seed of Abraham} (\sperma Abraam\). Physical descent here, but spiritual seed by promise in verse 8|. He quotes strkjv@Genesis:21:12f|.
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}