Bible:
Filter: String:

NONE.filter - rwp assuming:

rwp@1Corinthians:4:18 @{Some are puffed up} (\ephusithsan\). First aorist (effective) passive indicative of \phusio\ which see on verse ¯6|. {As though I were not coming to you} (\hs m erchomenou mou pros humas\). Genitive absolute with particle (assuming it as so) with \m\ as negative.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:14 @{Is sanctified in the wife} (\hgiastai en ti gunaiki\). Perfect passive indicative of \hagiaz\, to set apart, to hallow, to sanctify. Paul does not, of course, mean that the unbelieving husband is saved by the faith of the believing wife, though Hodge actually so interprets him. Clearly he only means that the marriage relation is sanctified so that there is no need of a divorce. If either husband or wife is a believer and the other agrees to remain, the marriage is holy and need not be set aside. This is so simple that one wonders at the ability of men to get confused over Paul's language. {Else were your children unclean} (\epei ara ta tekna akatharta\). The common ellipse of the condition with \epei\: "since, accordingly, if it is otherwise, your children are illegitimate (\akatharta\)." If the relations of the parents be holy, the child's birth must be holy also (not illegitimate). "He is not assuming that the child of a Christian parent would be baptized; that would spoil rather than help his argument, for it would imply that the child was not \hagios\ till it was baptized. The verse throws no light on the question of infant baptism" (Robertson and Plummer).

rwp@Info_1John @ GNOSTICISM The Epistle is not a polemic primarily, but a letter for the edification of the readers in the truth and the life in Christ. And yet the errors of the Gnostics are constantly before John's mind. The leaders had gone out from among the true Christians, but there was an atmosphere of sympathy that constituted a subtle danger. There are only two passages (1John:2:18f.; strkjv@4:1-6|) in which the false teachers are specifically denounced, but "this unethical intellectualism" (Robert Law) with its dash of Greek culture and Oriental mysticism and licentiousness gave a curious attraction for many who did not know how to think clearly. John, like Paul in Colossians, Ephesians, and the Pastoral Epistles, foresaw this dire peril to Christianity. In the second century it gave pure Christianity a gigantic struggle. "The great Gnostics were the first Christian philosophers" (Robert Law, _The Tests of Life_, p. 27) and threatened to undermine the Gospel message by "deifying the devil" (ib., p. 31) along with dethroning Christ. There were two kinds of Gnostics, both agreeing in the essential evil of matter. Both had trouble with the Person of Christ. The Docetic Gnostics denied the actual humanity of Christ, the Cerinthian Gnostics distinguished between the man Jesus and the \aeon\ Christ that came on him at his baptism and left him on the Cross. Some practised asceticism, some licentiousness. John opposes both classes in his Epistles. They claimed superior knowledge (\gnsis\) and so were called Gnostics (\Gnstikoi\). Nine times John gives tests for knowing the truth and uses the verb \ginsk\ (know) each time (1John:2:3,5; strkjv@3:16,19,24; strkjv@4:2,6,13; strkjv@5:2|). Some of the leaders he calls antichrists. There are stories about John's dread of Cerinthus and his unwillingness to be seen in the same public bath with him. The Apostle of love, as he is, is a real son of thunder when Gnosticism shows its head. Westcott thinks that the Fourth Gospel was written to prove the deity of Christ, assuming his humanity, while I John was written to prove the humanity of Christ, assuming his deity. Certainly both ideas appear in both books.

rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE DATE This question is tied up with that of the genuineness of the Epistle, the time of Peter's death, the use of Paul's Epistles, the persecution referred to in the Epistle. Assuming the genuineness of the Epistle and the death of Peter about A.D. 67 or 68 and the persecution to be not that under Domitian or Trajan, but under Nero, the date can be assumed to be about A.D. 65.

rwp@1Thessalonians:1:3 @{Remembering} (\mnmoneuontes\). Present active participle of old verb from adjective \mnmn\ (mindful) and so to call to mind, to be mindful of, used either with the accusative as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:9| or the genitive as here. {Without ceasing} (\adialeipts\). Double compound adverb of the _Koin_ (Polybius, Diodorus, Strabo, papyri) from the verbal adjective \a-dia-leiptos\ (\a\ privative and \dia-leip\, to leave off). In the N.T. alone by Paul and always connected with prayer. Milligan prefers to connect this adverb (amphibolous in position) with the preceding participle \poioumenoi\ rather than with \mnmoneuontes\ as Revised Version and Westcott and Hort rightly do. {Your work of faith} (\humn tou ergou ts pistes\). Note article with both \ergou\ and \pistes\ (correlation of the article, both abstract substantives). \Ergou\ is genitive case the object of \mnmoneuontes\ as is common with verbs of emotion (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 508f.), though the accusative \kopon\ occurs in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:9| according to common Greek idiom allowing either case. \Ergou\ is the general term for work or business, employment, task. Note two genitives with \ergou\. \Humn\ is the usual possessive genitive, {your work}, while \ts pistes\ is the descriptive genitive, marked by, characterized by, faith, "the activity that faith inspires" (Frame). It is interesting to note this sharp conjunction of these two words by Paul. We are justified by faith, but faith produces works (Romans:6-8|) as the Baptist taught and as Jesus taught and as James does in strkjv@James:2|. {Labour of love} (\tou kopou ts agaps\). Note article with both substantives. Here again \tou kopou\ is the genitive the object of \mnmoneuontes\ while \ts agaps\ is the descriptive genitive characterizing the "labour" or "toil" more exactly. \Kopos\ is from \kopt\, to cut, to lash, to beat the bread, to toil. In strkjv@Revelation:14:13| the distinction is drawn between \kopou\ (toil) from which the saints rest and \erga\ (works, activities) which follow with them into heaven. Songs:here it is the labour that love prompts, assuming gladly the toil. \Agap\ is one of the great words of the N.T. (Milligan) and no certain example has yet been found in the early papyri or the inscriptions. It occurs in the Septuagint in the higher sense as with the sensuous associations. The Epistle of Aristeas calls love (\agap\) God's gift and Philo uses \agap\ in describing love for God. "When Christianity first began to think and speak in Greek, it took up \agap\ and its group of terms more freely, investing them with the new glow with which the N.T. writings make us familiar, a content which is invariably religious" (Moffatt, _Love in the New Testament_, p. 40). The New Testament never uses the word \ers\ (lust). {Patience of hope} (\ts hupomons ts elpidos\). Note the two articles again and the descriptive genitive \ts elpidos\. It is patience marked by hope, "the endurance inspired by hope" (Frame), yes, and sustained by hope in spite of delays and set-backs. \Hupomon\ is an old word (\hupo, men\, to remain under), but it "has come like \agap\ to be closely associated with a distinctively Christian virtue" (Milligan). The same order as here (\ergou, kopos, hupomon\) appears in strkjv@Revelation:2:2| and Lightfoot considers it" an ascending scale as practical proofs of self-sacrifice." The church in Thessalonica was not old, but already they were called upon to exercise the sanctifying grace of hope (Denney). {In our Lord Jesus Christ} (\tou Kuriou hmn Isou Christou\). The objective genitive with \elpidos\ (hope) and so translated by "in" here (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 499f.). Jesus is the object of this hope, the hope of his second coming which is still open to us. Note "Lord Jesus Christ" as in verse 1|. {Before our God and Father} (\emprosthen tou theou kai patros hmn\). The one article with both substantives precisely as in strkjv@Galatians:1:4|, not "before God and our Father," both article and possessive genitive going with both substantives as in strkjv@2Peter:1:1,11; strkjv@Titus:2:13| (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 785f.). The phrase is probably connected with \elpidos\. \Emprosthen\ in the N.T. occurs only of place, but it is common in the papyri of time. The picture here is the day of judgment when all shall appear before God.

rwp@1Thessalonians:4:14 @{For if we believe} (\ei gar pisteuomen\). Condition of first class, assuming the death and resurrection of Jesus to be true. {In Jesus} (\dia tou Isou\). Literally, through or by means of Jesus. It is amphibolous in position and can be taken either with \tous koimthentas\ (that are fallen asleep in or through Jesus) like \hoi koimthentes en Christi\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:18| and probably correct or with \axei\ (through Jesus with God). {With him} (\sun auti\). Together with Jesus. Jesus is the connecting link (\dia\) for those that sleep (\koimthentas\ first aorist passive, but with middle sense) and their resurrection.

rwp@Info_1Timothy @ FIRST TIMOTHY PROBABLY A.D. 65 FROM MACEDONIA BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION Assuming the Pauline authorship the facts shape up after this fashion. Paul had been in Ephesus (1Timothy:1:3|) after his arrival from Rome, which was certainly before the burning of Rome in A.D. 64. He had left Timothy in charge of the work in Ephesus and has gone on into Macedonia (1Timothy:1:3|), possibly to Philippi as he had hoped (Phillipians:2:24|). He wishes to help Timothy meet the problems of doctrine (against the Gnostics), discipline, and church training which are increasingly urgent. There are personal touches of a natural kind about Timothy's own growth and leadership. There are wise words here from the greatest of all preachers to a young minister whom Paul loved. strkjv@1Timothy:1:1 @{According to the commandment} (\kat' epitagn\). A late _Koin_ word (Polybius, Diodorus), but a Pauline word also in N.T. This very idiom ("by way of command") in strkjv@1Corinthians:7:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:8; strkjv@Romans:16:26; strkjv@1Timothy:1:1; strkjv@Titus:1:3|. Paul means to say that he is an apostle under orders. {Of God our Saviour} (\theou stros hmn\). Genitive case with \epitagn\. In the LXX \str\ (old word from \sz\ for agent in saving, applied to deities, princes, kings, etc.) occurs 20 times, all but two to God. The Romans called the emperor "Saviour God." In the N.T. the designation of God as Saviour is peculiar to strkjv@Luke:1:47; strkjv@Jude:1:25; strkjv@1Timothy:1:3; strkjv@2:3; strkjv@4:10; strkjv@Titus:1:3; strkjv@2:10; strkjv@3:4|. In the other Epistles Paul uses it of Christ (Phillipians:3:20; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23|) as in strkjv@2Timothy:1:10|. In strkjv@2Peter:1:1| we have "our God and Saviour Jesus Christ" as in strkjv@Titus:2:13|. {Our hope} (\ts elpidos hmn\). Like strkjv@Colossians:1:27|. More than the author and object of hope, "its very substance and foundation" (Ellicott).

rwp@2John:1:10 @{If any one cometh and bringeth not} (\ei tis erchetai kai ou pherei\). Condition of first class with \ei\ and two present indicatives (\erchetai, pherei\). {This teaching} (\tautn tn didachn\). This teaching of Christ of verse 9|, which is the standard by which to test Gnostic deceivers (verse 7|). John does not refer to entertaining strangers (He strkjv@13:2; strkjv@1Timothy:5:10|), but to the deceiving propagandists who were carrying dissension and danger with them. {Receive him not} (\m lambanete auton\). Present active imperative with \m\. For \lamban\ in this sense see strkjv@John:1:12; strkjv@6:21; strkjv@13:20|. {Into your house} (\eis oikian\). Definite without the article like our at home, to town. {Give him no greeting} (\chairein auti m legete\). "Say not farewell to him." Apparently \chairein\ here (present active infinitive, object of \legete\ present active imperative with negative \m\) is used of farewell as in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11|, though usually in the N.T. (Acts:15:23; strkjv@23:26; strkjv@James:1:1|) of the salutation. But here the point turns on the stranger bringing into the house (or trying to do so) his heretical and harmful teaching which seems to be after the salutation is over. The usual greeting to a house is given in strkjv@Luke:10:5|. On the other hand, if \chairein\ means greeting, not farewell, here, it can very well be understood of the peril of allowing these Gnostic propagandists to spread their pernicious teachings (cf. Mormons or Bolshevists) in home and church (usually meeting in the home). This is assuming that the men were known and not mere strangers.

rwp@2Thessalonians:3:14 @{And if any one obeyeth not our word by this epistle} (\ei de tis ouch hupakouei ti logi hmn dia ts epistols\). Paul sums up the issue bluntly with this ultimatum. Condition of the first class, with negative \ou\, assuming it to be true. {Note that man} (\touton smeiousthe\). Late verb \smeio\, from \smeion\, sign, mark, token. Put a tag on that man. Here only in N.T. "The verb is regularly used for the signature to a receipt or formal notice in the papyri and the ostraca of the Imperial period" (Moulton & Milligan's _Vocabulary_). How this is to be done (by letter or in public meeting) Paul does not say. {That ye have no company with him} (\m sunanamignusthai auti\). The MSS. are divided between the present middle infinitive as above in a command like strkjv@Romans:12:15; strkjv@Phillipians:3:16| or the present middle imperative \sunanamignusthe\ (\-ai\ and \-e\ often being pronounced alike in the _Koin_). The infinitive can also be explained as an indirect command. This double compound verb is late, in LXX and Plutarch, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:5:9,11|. \Auti\ is in associative instrumental case. {To the end that he may be ashamed} (\hina entrapi\). Purpose clause with \hina\. Second aorist passive subjunctive of \entrep\, to turn on, middle to turn on oneself or to put to shame, passive to be made ashamed. The idea is to have one's thoughts turned in on oneself.

rwp@Acts:5:38 @{Refrain from} (\apostte apo\). Second aorist (ingressive) active imperative of \aphistmi\ of verse 37|. Do ye stand off from these men. "Hands off" was the policy of Gamaliel. {For if--be} (\hoti ean--i\). \Hoti\ gives the reason for the advice. Gamaliel presents two alternatives in terms of two conditional clauses. The first one is stated as a condition of the third class, \ean\ with the present subjunctive \i\, undetermined with prospect of determination. Assuming that it is from men, "it will be overthrown" (\kataluthsetai\, first future passive of \katalu\, to loosen down like a falling house) as was true of the following of Theudas and Judas the Galilean.

rwp@Acts:11:26 @{Even for a whole year} (\kai eniauton holon\). Accusative of extent of time, probably the year A.D. 44, the year preceding the visit to Jerusalem (11:30|), the year of the famine. The preceding years with Tarsus as headquarters covered A.D. 37 (39) to 44. {They were gathered together with the church} (\sunachthnai en ti ekklsii\). First aorist passive infinitive of \sunag\, old verb, probably here to meet together as in strkjv@Matthew:28:12|. In strkjv@Acts:14:27| the verb is used of gathering together the church, but here \en ti ekklsii\ excludes that idea. Barnabas met together "in the church" (note first use of the word for the disciples at Antioch). This peculiar phrase accents the leadership and co-operation of Barnabas and Saul in teaching (\didaxai\, first aorist active infinitive) much people. Both infinitives are in the nominative case, the subject of \egeneto\ (it came to pass). {And that the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch} (\chrmatisai te prts en Antiocheii tous mathtas Christianous\). This first active infinitive \chrmatisai\ is also a subject of \egeneto\ and is added as a separate item by the use of \te\ rather than \kai\. For the word itself in the sense of divine command see on ¯Matthew:2:12,22; strkjv@Luke:2:26; strkjv@Acts:10:22|. Here and in strkjv@Romans:7:3| it means to be called or named (assuming a name from one's business, \chrma\, from \chraomai\, to use or to do business). Polybius uses it in this sense as here. \Tous mathtas\ (the disciples) is in the accusative of general reference with the infinitive. \Christianous\ (Christians) is simply predicate accusative. This word is made after the pattern of \Herodianus\ (Matthew:22:16|, \Heridianoi\, followers of Herod), \Caesarianus\, a follower of Caesar (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 377, gives papyri examples of the genitive \Kaisaros\ meaning also "belonging to Caesar" like the common adjective \Caesarianus\). It is made thus like a Latin adjective, though it is a Greek word, and it refers to the Hebrew belief in a Messiah (Page). The name was evidently given to the followers of Christ by the Gentiles to distinguish them from the Jews since they were Greeks, not Grecian Jews. The Jews would not call them Christians because of their own use of \Christos\ the Messiah. The Jews termed them Galileans or Nazarenes. The followers of Christ called themselves disciples (learners), believers, brethren, saints, those of the Way. The three uses of Christian in the N.T. are from the heathen standpoint (here), strkjv@Acts:26:28| (a term of contempt in the mouth of Agrippa), and strkjv@1Peter:4:16| (persecution from the Roman government). It is a clear distinction from both Jews and Gentiles and it is not strange that it came into use first here in Antioch when the large Greek church gave occasion for it. Later Ignatius was bishop in Antioch and was given to the lions in Rome, and John Chrysostom preached here his wonderful sermons.

rwp@Acts:18:6 @{When they opposed themselves} (\antitassomenn autn\). Genitive absolute with present middle (direct middle again) of \antitass\, old verb to range in battle array (\tass\) face to face with or against (\anti\). In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:13:2; strkjv@James:4:6; strkjv@1Peter:5:5|. Paul's fresh activity roused the rabbis as at Antioch in Pisidia and at Thessalonica in concerted opposition and railing (blasphemy). {He shook out his raiment} (\ektinaxamenos ta himatia\). First aorist middle of \ektinass\, old verb, in the N.T. only here as in strkjv@13:51| (middle) and strkjv@Mark:6:11; strkjv@Matthew:10:15| where active voice occurs of shaking out dust also. Vivid and dramatic picture here like that in strkjv@Nehemiah:5:13|, "undoubtedly a very exasperating gesture" (Ramsay), but Paul was deeply stirred. {Your blood be upon your own heads} (\To haima humn epi tn kephaln humn\). As in strkjv@Ezekiel:3:18f., strkjv@33:4,8f.; strkjv@2Samuel:1:16|. Not as a curse, but "a solemn disclaimer of responsibility" by Paul (Page) as in strkjv@Acts:20:26|. The Jews used this very phrase in assuming responsibility for the blood of Jesus (Matthew:27:25|). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:23:35|. {I am clean} (\katharos eg\). Pure from your blood. Repeats the claim made in previous sentence. Paul had done his duty. {From henceforth} (\apo tou nun\). Turning point reached in Corinth. He will devote himself to the Gentiles, though Jews will be converted there also. Elsewhere as in Ephesus (19:1-10|) and in Rome (Acts:28:23-28|) Paul will preach also to Jews.

rwp@Acts:25:5 @{Them therefore which are of power among you} (\hoi oun en humin dunatoi\). "The mighty ones among you," "the men of power" (\dunatoi\) and authority, "the first men," the Sanhedrin, in other words. Note change here by Luke from indirect discourse in verse 4|, to direct in verse 5| (\phsin\, says he). {Go down with me} (\sunkatabantes\). Double compound (\sun, kata\) second aorist active participle of \sunkatabain\. It was a fair proposal. {If there is anything amiss in the man} (\ei ti estin en ti andri atopon\). Condition of the first class, assuming that there is (to be courteous to them), but not committing himself on the merits of the case. \Atopon\ is an old word, specially common in Plato, meaning "out of place." In N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:23:41| which see; strkjv@Acts:28:6; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:2|. Note present tense active voice of \katgoreitsan\ (imperative) of \katgore\, repeat their accusations.

rwp@Acts:25:11 @{If I am a wrong-doer} (\ei men oun adik\). Condition of the first class with \ei\ and the present active indicative of \adike\ (\a\ privative and \dik\): "If I am in the habit of doing injustice," assuming it to be true for the sake of argument. {And have committed anything worthy of death} (\kai axion thanatou pepracha\). Same condition with the difference in tense (\pepracha\, perfect active indicative) of a single case instead of a general habit. Assuming either or both Paul draws his conclusion. {I refuse not to die} (\ou paraitoumai to apothanein\). Old verb to ask alongside, to beg from, to deprecate, to refuse, to decline. See on ¯Luke:14:18f|. Josephus (_Life_, 29) has \thanein ou paraitoumai\. Here the articular second aorist active infinitive is in the accusative case the object of \paraitoumai\: "I do not beg off dying from myself." {But if none of these things is} (\ei de ouden estin\). \De\ here is contrasted with \men\ just before. No word for "true" in the Greek. \Estin\ ("is") in the Greek here means "exists." Same condition (first class, assumed as true). {Whereof these accuse me} (\hn houtoi katgorousin mou\). Genitive of relative \hon\ by attraction from \ha\ (accusative with \katgorousin\) to case of the unexpressed antecedent \toutn\ ("of these things"). \Mou\ is genitive of person after \katgorousin\. {No man can give me up to them} (\oudeis me dunatai autois charisasthai\). "Can" legally. Paul is a Roman citizen and not even Festus can make a free gift (\charisasthai\) of Paul to the Sanhedrin. {I appeal unto Caesar} (\Kaisara epikaloumai\). Technical phrase like Latin _Caesarem appello_. Originally the Roman law allowed an appeal from the magistrate to the people (_provocatio ad populum_), but the emperor represented the people and so the appeal to Caesar was the right of every Roman citizen. Paul had crossed the Rubicon on this point and so took his case out of the hands of dilatory provincial justice (really injustice). Roman citizens could make this appeal in capital offences. There would be expense connected with it, but better that with some hope than delay and certain death in Jerusalem. Festus was no better than Felix in his vacillation and desire to curry favour with the Jews at Paul's expense. No doubt Paul's long desire to see Rome (19:21; strkjv@Romans:15:22-28|) and the promise of Jesus that he would see Rome (Acts:23:11|) played some part in Paul's decision. But he made it reluctantly for he says in Rome (Acts:28:19|): "I was constrained to appeal." But acquittal at the hands of Festus with the hope of going to Rome as a free man had vanished.

rwp@Acts:26:8 @{Incredible with you} (\apiston par' humin\). This old word \apiston\ (\a\ privative and \pistos\) means either unfaithful (Luke:12:46|), unbelieving (John:20:27|), or unbelievable as here). Paul turns suddenly from Agrippa to the audience (\par' humin\, plural), most of whom were probably Gentiles and scouted the doctrine of the resurrection as at Athens (17:32|). {If God doth raise the dead} (\ei ho theos nekrous egeirei\). Condition of the first class assuming that God does raise dead people. Only God can do it. This rhetorical question needs no answer, though the narrative resumed in verse 9| does it in a way.

rwp@Galatians:2:2 @{By revelation} (\kata apokalupsin\). In strkjv@Acts:15:2| the church sent them. But surely there is no inconsistency here. {I laid before them} (\anethemn autois\). Second aorist middle indicative of old word \anatithmi\, to put up, to place before, with the dative case. But who were the "them" (\autois\)? Evidently not the private conference for he distinguishes this address from that, "but privately" (\kat' idian\). Just place strkjv@Acts:15:4f.| beside the first clause and it is clear: "I laid before them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles," precisely as Luke has recorded. Then came the private conference after the uproar caused by the Judaizers (Acts:15:5|). {Before them who were of repute} (\tois dokousin\). He names three of them (Cephas, James, and John). James the Lord's brother, for the other James is now dead (Acts:12:1f.|). But there were others also, a select group of real leaders. The decision reached by this group would shape the decision of the public conference in the adjourned meeting. Songs:far as we know Paul had not met John before, though he had met Peter and James at the other visit. Lightfoot has much to say about the Big Four (St. Paul and the Three) who here discuss the problems of mission work among Jews and Gentiles. It was of the utmost importance that they should see eye to eye. The Judaizers were assuming that the twelve apostles and James the Lord's brother would side with them against Paul and Barnabas. Peter had already been before the Jerusalem Church for his work in Caesarea (Acts:11:1-18|). James was considered a very loyal Jew. {Lest by any means I should be running or had run in vain} (\m ps eis kenon trech edramon\). Negative purpose with the present subjunctive (\trech\) and then by a sudden change the aorist indicative (\edramon\), as a sort of afterthought or retrospect (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 201; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 988). There are plenty of classical parallels. See also strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:5| for both together again.

rwp@Info_John @ LIKE THE JOHANNINE EPISTLES Critics of all classes agree that, whoever was the author of the Fourth Gospel, the same man wrote the First Epistle of John. There is the same inimitable style, the same vocabulary, the same theological outlook. Undoubtedly the same author wrote also Second and Third John, for, brief as they are, they exhibit the same characteristics. In Second and Third John the author describes himself as "the Elder" (\ho presbuteros\), which fact has led some to argue for the mythical "Presbyter John" as the author in place of the Apostle John and so of First John and the Fourth Gospel. It is argued that the Apostle John would have termed himself "the Apostle John" after the fashion of Paul. But the example of the Apostle Peter disposes of that argument, for in addressing the elders (1Peter:5:1|) he calls himself "your fellow-elder" (\ho sunpresbuteros\). In the Epistles John opposes Gnosticism both of the Docetic type which denied the actual humanity of Jesus as in strkjv@1John:1:1-4| and the Cerinthian type which denied the identity of the man Jesus and the _aeon_ Christ which came on Jesus at his baptism and left him at his death on the Cross as in strkjv@1John:2:22|. One of the many stories told about John is his abhorrence of Cerinthus when found in the same public bath with him. As Westcott shows, the Epistles of John prove his actual humanity while assuming his deity, whereas the Fourth Gospel proves his deity while assuming his humanity.

rwp@Info_John @ THE UNITY OF THE GOSPEL This has been attacked in various ways in spite of the identity of style throughout. There are clearly three parts in the Gospel: the Prologue, strkjv@John:1:1-18|, the Body of the Book, strkjv@John:1:19-20:31|, the Epilogue, strkjv@John:21|. But there is no evidence that the Prologue was added by another hand, even though the use of Logos (Word) for Christ does not occur thereafter. This high conception of Christ dominates the whole book. Some argue that the Epilogue was added by some one else than John, but here again there is no proof and no real reason for the supposition. It is possible, as already stated, that John stopped at strkjv@John:20:31| and then added strkjv@John:21| before sending the book forth after his friends added strkjv@John:21:24| as their endorsement of the volume. Some scholars claim that they detect various displacements in the arrangement of the material, but such subjective criticism is never convincing. There are undoubtedly long gaps in the narrative as between chapters 5 and 6, but John is not giving a continuous narrative, but only a supplementary account assuming knowledge of the Synoptics. It is held that editorial comments by redactors can be detected here and there. Perhaps, and perhaps not. The unity of this great book stands even if that be true.

rwp@John:9:33 @{If this man were not from God} (\ei m n houtos para theou\). Negative condition of second class with imperfect indicative. Assuming that Jesus is not "from God" (\para theou\) as some argued in strkjv@9:16|, "he could do nothing" (\ouk dunato poiein ouden\). Conclusion of the second-class condition with imperfect indicative (double augment in \dunato\) without \an\ as is usual in conditions of possibility, propriety, obligation (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 920,1014). The man has scored with terrific power in his use of Scripture and logic.

rwp@John:15:1 @{The true vine} (\h ampelos h althin\). "The vine the genuine." Assuming that the Lord's Supper had just been instituted by Jesus the metaphor of the vine is naturally suggested by "the fruit of the vine" (Mark:14:25; strkjv@Matthew:26:29|). \Ampelos\ in the papyri (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_) is sometimes used in the sense of _ampeln_ (vineyard), but not so here. Jesus uses various metaphors to illustrate himself and his work (the light, strkjv@8:12|; the door, strkjv@10:7|; the shepherd, strkjv@10:11|; the vine, strkjv@15:1|). The vine was common in Palestine. See strkjv@Psalms:80:8f|. "On the Maccabean coinage Israel was represented by a vine" (Dods). Jesus is the genuine Messianic vine. {The husbandman} (\ho gergos\) as in strkjv@Mark:12:1; strkjv@James:5:7; strkjv@2Timothy:2:6|. cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:3:9|, \theou gergion\ (God's field).

rwp@Luke:22:67 @{If thou art the Christ} (\Ei su ei ho Christos\). The Messiah, they mean. The condition is the first class, assuming it to be true. {If I tell you} (\Ean humin eip\). Condition of the third class, undetermined, but with likelihood of being determined. This is the second appearance of Jesus before the Sanhedrin merely mentioned by strkjv@Mark:15:1; strkjv@Matthew:27:1| who give in detail the first appearance and trial. Luke merely gives this so-called ratification meeting after daybreak to give the appearance of legality to their vote of condemnation already taken (Mark:14:64; strkjv@Matthew:26:66|). {Ye will not believe} (\ou m pisteuste\). Double negative with the aorist subjunctive, strongest possible negative. Songs:as to verse 68|.

rwp@Mark:3:13 @{He goeth up into the mountain} (\anabainei eis to oros\). Songs:Matthew (Matthew:5:1|) and Luke (Luke:6:12|), "to pray" Luke adds. Historical present so common in Mark's vivid narrative. Neither Gospel gives the name of the mountain, assuming it as well known, probably not far from the lake. {Whom he himself would} (\hous thelen autos\). Emphatic use of \autos\ (himself) at end of sentence. Whether by personal imitation or through the disciples Jesus invites or calls to himself (\proskaleitai\, historical middle present indicative) a select number out of the vast crowds by the sea, those whom he really wished to be with him. {They went off to him} (\aplthon pros auton\). Luke states that Jesus "continued all night in prayer, to God." It was a crisis in the ministry of Christ. This select group up in the hills probably respected the long agony of Jesus though they did not comprehend his motive. They formed a sort of spiritual body-guard around the Master during his night vigil in the mountain.

rwp@Mark:9:22 @{But if thou canst} (\all 'ei ti duni\). Jesus had asked (verse 21|) the history of the case like a modern physician. The father gave it and added further pathetic details about the fire and the water. The failure of the disciples had not wholly destroyed his faith in the power of Jesus, though the conditional form (first class, assuming it to be true) does suggest doubt whether the boy can be cured at all. It was a chronic and desperate case of epilepsy with the demon possession added. {Help us} (\boethson hemin\). Ingressive aorist imperative. Do it now. With touching tenderness he makes the boy's case his own as the Syrophoenician woman had said, "Have mercy on me" (Matthew:15:21|). The leper had said: "If thou wilt" (Mark:1:40|). This father says: "If thou canst."

rwp@Philippians:2:1 @{If} (\ei\). Paul uses four conditions in this verse, all of the first class, assuming the condition to be true. {Comfort} (\paraklsis\). Rather, "ground of appeal to you in Christ." See strkjv@1Corinthians:1:10; strkjv@Ephesians:4:1|. {Consolation} (\paramuthion\). Old word from \paramutheomai\, persuasive address, incentive. {Of love} (\agaps\). Objective genitive, "in love" (undefined as in strkjv@1Corinthians:13|). {Fellowship} (\koinnia\). Partnership in the Holy Spirit "whose first fruit is love" (Galatians:5:22|). {Any tender mercies} (\tis splagchna\). Common use of this word for the nobler \viscera\ and so for the higher emotions. But \tis\ is masculine singular and \splagchna\ is neuter plural. Lightfoot suggests an error of an early transcriber or even of the amanuensis in writing \ei tis\ instead of \ei tina\.

rwp@Revelation:1:20 @{The mystery of the seven stars} (\to mustrion tn hepta astern\). On the word \mustrion\ see on ¯Matthew:13:11; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:7; strkjv@Colossians:1:26|. Here it means the inner meaning (the secret symbol) of a symbolic vision (Swete) as in strkjv@10:7; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@17:7,9; strkjv@Daniel:2:47|. Probably the accusative absolute (Charles), "as for the mystery" (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 490, 1130), as in strkjv@Romans:8:3|. This item is picked out of the previous vision (1:16|) as needing explanation at once and as affording a clue to what follows (2:1,5|). {Which} (\hous\). Masculine accusative retained without attraction to case of \astern\ (genitive, \hn\). {In my right hand} (\epi ts dexias mou\). Or "upon," but \en ti\, etc., in verse 16|. {And the seven golden candlesticks} (\kai tas hepta luchnias tas chruss\). "The seven lampstands the golden," identifying the stars of verse 16| with the lampstands of verse 12|. The accusative case here is even more peculiar than the accusative absolute \mustrion\, since the genitive \luchnin\ after \mustrion\ is what one would expect. Charles suggests that John did not revise his work. {The angels of the seven churches} (\aggeloi tn hepta ekklsin\). Anarthrous in the predicate (angels of, etc.). "The seven churches" mentioned in strkjv@1:4,11|. Various views of \aggelos\ here exist. The simplest is the etymological meaning of the word as messenger from \aggell\ (Matthew:11:10|) as messengers from the seven churches to Patmos or by John from Patmos to the churches (or both). Another view is that \aggelos\ is the pastor of the church, the reading \tn gunaika sou\ (thy wife) in strkjv@2:20| (if genuine) confirming this view. Some would even take it to be the bishop over the elders as \episcopos\ in Ignatius, but a separate \aggelos\ in each church is against this idea. Some take it to be a symbol for the church itself or the spirit and genius of the church, though distinguished in this very verse from the churches themselves (the lampstands). Others take it to be the guardian angel of each church assuming angelic patrons to be taught in strkjv@Matthew:18:10; strkjv@Acts:12:15|. Each view is encompassed with difficulties, perhaps fewer belonging to the view that the "angel" is the pastor. {Are seven churches} (\hepta ekklsiai eisin\). These seven churches (1:4,11|) are themselves lampstands (1:12|) reflecting the light of Christ to the world (Matthew:5:14-16; strkjv@John:8:12|) in the midst of which Christ walks (1:13|).

rwp@Revelation:10:3 @{The seven thunders} (\hai hepta brontai\). A recognized group, but not explained here, perhaps John assuming them to be known. For \brontai\ see already strkjv@4:5; strkjv@6:1; strkjv@8:5|. In strkjv@Psalms:29| the Lord speaks in the sevenfold voice of the thunderstorm upon the sea. {Their voices} (\tas heautn phnas\). Cognate accusative with \elalsan\ and \heautn\ (reflexive) means "their own." In strkjv@John:12:28| the voice of the Father to Christ was thought by some to be thunder.

rwp@Romans:5:12 @{Therefore} (\dia touto\). "For this reason." What reason? Probably the argument made in verses 1-11|, assuming our justification and urging exultant joy in Christ because of the present reconciliation by Christ's death and the certainty of future final salvation by his life. {As through one man} (\hsper di' henos anthrpou\). Paul begins a comparison between the effects of Adam's sin and the effects of the redemptive work of Christ, but he does not give the second member of the comparison. Instead of that he discusses some problems about sin and death and starts over again in verse 15|. The general point is plain that the effects of Adam's sin are transmitted to his descendants, though he does not say how it was done whether by the natural or the federal headship of Adam. It is important to note that Paul does not say that the whole race receives the full benefit of Christ's atoning death, but only those who do. Christ is the head of all believers as Adam is the head of the race. In this sense Adam "is a figure of him that was to come." {Sin entered into the world} (\h hamartia eis ton kosmon eislthen\). Personification of sin and represented as coming from the outside into the world of humanity. Paul does not discuss the origin of evil beyond this fact. There are some today who deny the fact of sin at all and who call it merely "an error of mortal mind" (a notion) while others regard it as merely an animal inheritance devoid of ethical quality. {And so death passed unto all men} (\kai houts eis pantas anthrpous dilthen\). Note use of \dierchomai\ rather than \eiserchomai\, just before, second aorist active indicative in both instances. By "death" in strkjv@Genesis:2:17; strkjv@3:19| physical death is meant, but in verses 17,21| eternal death is Paul's idea and that lurks constantly behind physical death with Paul. {For that all sinned} (\eph' hi pantes hmarton\). Constative (summary) aorist active indicative of \hamartan\, gathering up in this one tense the history of the race (committed sin). The transmission from Adam became facts of experience. In the old Greek \eph' hi\ usually meant "on condition that," but "because" in N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 963).