NONE.filter - rwp doubt:
rwp@Info
@ There is no doubt of the need of a new series of volumes today in the light of the new knowledge. Many ministers have urged me to undertake such a task and finally I have agreed to do it at the solicitation of my publishers. The readers of these volumes (six are planned) are expected to be primarily those who know no Greek or comparatively little and yet who are anxious to get fresh help from the study of words and phrases in the New Testament, men who do not have access to the technical books required, like Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary of the New Testament_. The critical student will appreciate the more delicate distinctions in words. But it is a sad fact that many ministers, laymen, and women, who took courses in Greek at college, university, or seminary, have allowed the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches to choke off the Greek that they once knew. Some, strangely enough, have done it even in the supposed interest of the very gospel whose vivid messages they have thus allowed to grow dim and faint. If some of these vast numbers can have their interest in the Greek New Testament revived, these volumes will be worth while. Some may be incited, as many have been by my volume, _The Minister and His Greek New Testament_, to begin the study of the Greek New Testament under the guidance of a book like Davis's _Beginner's Grammar of the Greek New Testament_. Others who are without a turn for Greek or without any opportunity to start the study will be able to follow the drift of the remarks and be able to use it all to profit in sermons, in Sunday school lessons, or for private edification.
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). Rather is it not true that words are metaphors, sometimes with the pictured flower still blooming, sometimes with the blossom blurred? Words have never gotten wholly away from the picture stage. These old Greek words in the New Testament are rich with meaning. They speak to us out of the past and with lively images to those who have eyes to see. It is impossible to translate all of one language into another. Much can be carried over, but not all. Delicate shades of meaning defy the translator. But some of the very words of Jesus we have still as he said: "The words that I have spoken unto you are spirit and are life" (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:1:20 @{Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this world?} (\Pou sophos; pou grammateus; pou sunztts tou ainos toutou;\). Paul makes use of strkjv@Isaiah:33:18| without exact quotation. The sudden retreat of Sennacherib with the annihilation of his officers. "On the tablet of Shalmaneser in the Assyrian Gallery of the British Museum there is a surprisingly exact picture of the scene described by Isaiah" (Robertson and Plummer). Note the absence of the Greek article in each of these rhetorical questions though the idea is clearly definite. Probably \sophos\ refers to the Greek philosopher, \grammateus\ to the Jewish scribe and \sunztts\ suits both the Greek and the Jewish disputant and doubter (Acts:6:9; strkjv@9:29; strkjv@17:18; strkjv@28:29|). There is a note of triumph in these questions. The word \sunztts\ occurs here alone in the N.T. and elsewhere only in Ignatius, Eph. 18 quoting this passage, but the papyri give the verb \sunzte\ for disputing (questioning together). {Hath not God made foolish?} (\ouchi emranen ho theos;\). Strong negative form with aorist active indicative difficult of precise translation, "Did not God make foolish?" The old verb \mrain\ from \mros\, foolish, was to be foolish, to act foolish, then to prove one foolish as here or to make foolish as in strkjv@Romans:1:22|. In strkjv@Matthew:5:13; strkjv@Luke:14:34| it is used of salt that is tasteless. {World} (\kosmou\). Synonymous with \ain\ (age), orderly arrangement, then the non-Christian cosmos.
rwp@1Corinthians:2:9 @{But as it is written} (\alla kaths gegraptai\). Elliptical sentence like Rom strkjv@15:3| where \gegonen\ (it has happened) can be supplied. It is not certain where Paul derives this quotation as Scripture. Origen thought it a quotation from the _Apocalypse of Elias_ and Jerome finds it also in the _Ascension of Isaiah_. But these books appear to be post-Pauline, and Jerome denies that Paul obtained it from these late apocryphal books. Clement of Rome finds it in the LXX text of strkjv@Isaiah:64:4| and cites it as a Christian saying. It is likely that Paul here combines freely strkjv@Isaiah:64:4; strkjv@65:17; strkjv@52:15| in a sort of catena or free chain of quotations as he does in strkjv@Romans:3:10-18|. There is also an anacoluthon for \ha\ (which things) occurs as the direct object (accusative) with \eiden\ (saw) and \kousan\ (heard), but as the subject (nominative) with \aneb\ (entered, second aorist active indicative of \anabain\, to go up). {Whatsoever} (\hosa\). A climax to the preceding relative clause (Findlay). {Prepared} (\htoimasen\). First aorist active indicative of \hetoimaz\. The only instance where Paul uses this verb of God, though it occurs of final glory (Luke:2:31; strkjv@Matthew:20:23; strkjv@25:34; strkjv@Mark:10:40; strkjv@Hebrews:11:16|) and of final misery (Matthew:25:41|). But here undoubtedly the dominant idea is the present blessing to these who love God (1Corinthians:1:5-7|). {Heart} (\kardian\) here as in strkjv@Romans:1:21| is more than emotion. The Gnostics used this passage to support their teaching of esoteric doctrine as Hegesippus shows. Lightfoot thinks that probably the apocryphal _Ascension of Isaiah_ and _Apocalypse of Elias_ were Gnostic and so quoted this passage of Paul to support their position. But the next verse shows that Paul uses it of what is now {revealed} and made plain, not of mysteries still unknown.
rwp@1Corinthians:2:13 @{Which things also we speak} (\ha kai laloumen\). This onomatopoetic verb \lale\ (from \la-la\), to utter sounds. In the papyri the word calls more attention to the form of utterance while \leg\ refers more to the substance. But \lale\ in the N.T. as here is used of the highest and holiest speech. Undoubtedly Paul employs the word purposely for the utterance of the revelation which he has understood. That is to say, there is revelation (verse 10|), illumination (verse 12|), and inspiration (verse 13|). Paul claims therefore the help of the Holy Spirit for the reception of the revelation, for the understanding of it, for the expression of it. Paul claimed this authority for his preaching (1Thessalonians:4:2|) and for his epistles (2Thessalonians:3:14|). {Not in words which man's wisdom teacheth} (\ouk en didaktois anthrpins sophias logois\). Literally, "not in words taught by human wisdom." The verbal adjective \didaktois\ (from \didask\, to teach) is here passive in idea and is followed by the ablative case of origin or source as in strkjv@John:6:45|, \esontai pantes didaktoi theou\ (from strkjv@Isaiah:54:13|), "They shall all be taught by God." The ablative in Greek, as is well known, has the same form as the genitive, though quite different in idea (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516). Songs:then Paul claims the help of the Holy Spirit in the utterance (\laloumen\) of the words, "which the Spirit teacheth (\en didaktois pneumatos\), "in words taught by the Spirit" (ablative \pneumatos\ as above). Clearly Paul means that the help of the Holy Spirit in the utterance of the revelation extends to the words. No theory of inspiration is here stated, but it is not _mere_ human wisdom. Paul's own Epistles bear eloquent witness to the lofty claim here made. They remain today after nearly nineteen centuries throbbing with the power of the Spirit of God, dynamic with life for the problems of today as when Paul wrote them for the needs of the believers in his time, the greatest epistles of all time, surcharged with the energy of God. {Comparing spiritual things with spiritual} (\pneumatikois pneumatika sunkrinontes\). Each of these words is in dispute. The verb \sunkrin\, originally meant to combine, to join together fitly. In the LXX it means to interpret dreams (Genesis:40:8,22; strkjv@41:12|) possibly by comparison. In the later Greek it may mean to compare as in strkjv@2Corinthians:10:12|. In the papyri Moulton and Milligan (_Vocabulary_) give it only for "decide," probably after comparing. But "comparing," in spite of the translations, does not suit well here. Songs:it is best to follow the original meaning to combine as do Lightfoot and Ellicott. But what gender is \pneumatikois\? Is it masculine or neuter like \pneumatika\? If masculine, the idea would be "interpreting (like LXX) spiritual truths to spiritual persons" or "matching spiritual truths with spiritual persons." This is a possible rendering and makes good sense in harmony with verse 14|. If \pneumatikois\ be taken as neuter plural (associative instrumental case after \sun\ in \sunkrinontes\), the idea most naturally would be, "combining spiritual ideas (\pneumatika\) with spiritual words" (\pneumatikois\). This again makes good sense in harmony with the first part of verse 13|. On the whole this is the most natural way to take it, though various other possibilities exist.
rwp@1Corinthians:4:7 @{Maketh thee to differ} (\se diakrinei\). Distinguishes thee, separates thee. \Diakrin\ means to sift or separate between (\dia\) as in strkjv@Acts:15:9| (which see) where \metaxu\ is added to make it plainer. All self-conceit rests on the notion of superiority of gifts and graces as if they were self-bestowed or self-acquired. {Which thou didst not receive} (\ho ouk elabes\). "Another home-thrust" (Robertson and Plummer). Pride of intellect, of blood, of race, of country, of religion, is thus shut out. {Dost thou glory} (\kauchasai\). The original second person singular middle ending \-sai\ is here preserved with variable vowel contraction, \kauchaesai=kauchasai\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 341). Paul is fond of this old and bold verb for boasting. {As if thou hadst not received it} (\hs m labn\). This neat participial clause (second aorist active of \lamban\) with \hs\ (assumption) and negative \m\ punctures effectually the inflated bag of false pride. What pungent questions Paul has asked. Robertson and Plummer say of Augustine, "Ten years before the challenge of Pelagius, the study of St. Paul's writings, and especially of this verse and of strkjv@Romans:9:16|, had crystallized in his mind the distinctively Augustinian doctrines of man's total depravity, of irresistible grace, and of absolute predestination." Human responsibility does exist beyond a doubt, but there is no foundation for pride and conceit.
rwp@1Corinthians:5:5 @{To deliver such an one unto Satan} (\paradounai ton toiouton ti Satani\). We have the same idiom in strkjv@1Timothy:1:20| used of Hymenius and Alexander. In strkjv@2Corinthians:12:7| Paul speaks of his own physical suffering as a messenger (\aggelos\) of Satan. Paul certainly means expulsion from the church (verse 2|) and regarding him as outside of the commonwealth of Israel (Ephesians:2:11f.|). But we are not to infer that expulsion from the local church means the damnation of the offender. The wilful offenders have to be expelled and not regarded as enemies, but admonished as brothers (2Thessalonians:3:14f.|). {For the destruction of the flesh} (\eis olethron ts sarkos\). Both for physical suffering as in the case of Job:(Job:2:6|) and for conquest of the fleshly sins, remedial punishment. {That the spirit may be saved} (\hina to pneuma sthi\). The ultimate purpose of the expulsion as discipline. Note the use of \to pneuma\ in contrast with \sarx\ as the seat of personality (cf. strkjv@3:15|). Paul's motive is not merely vindictive, but the reformation of the offender who is not named here nor in strkjv@2Corinthians:2:5-11| if the same man is meant, which is very doubtful. The final salvation of the man in the day of Christ is the goal and this is to be attained not by condoning his sin.
rwp@1Corinthians:6:15 @{Members of Christ} (\mel Christou\). Old word for limbs, members. Even the Stoics held the body to be common with the animals (Epictetus, _Diss_. l. iii. 1) and only the reason like the gods. Without doubt some forms of modern evolution have contributed to the licentious views of animalistic sex indulgence, though the best teachers of biology show that in the higher animals monogamy is the rule. The body is not only adapted for Christ (verse 13|), but it is a part of Christ, in vital union with him. Paul will make much use of this figure further on (12:12-31; strkjv@Ephesians:4:11-16; strkjv@5:30|). {Shall I then take away?} (\aras oun;\). First aorist active participle of \air\, old verb to snatch, carry off like Latin _rapio_ (our rape). {Make} (\pois\). Can be either future active indicative or first aorist active subjunctive (deliberative). Either makes good sense. The horror of deliberately taking "members of Christ" and making them "members of a harlot" in an actual union staggers Paul and should stagger us. {God forbid} (\m genoito\). Optative second aorist in a negative wish for the future. {May it not happen!} The word "God" is not here. The idiom is common in Epictetus though rare in the LXX. Paul has it thirteen times and Luke once (Luke:20:16|).
rwp@1Corinthians:7:11 @{But and if she depart} (\ean de kai christhi\). Third class condition, undetermined. If, in spite of Christ's clear prohibition, she get separated (ingressive passive subjunctive), {let her remain unmarried} (\menet agamos\). Paul here makes no allowance for remarriage of the innocent party as Jesus does by implication. {Or else be reconciled to her husband} (\ ti andri katallagt\). Second aorist (ingressive) passive imperative of \katallass\, old compound verb to exchange coins as of equal value, to reconcile. One of Paul's great words for reconciliation with God (2Corinthians:5:18-20; strkjv@Romans:5:10|). \Diallass\ (Matthew:5:24| which see) was more common in the older Greek, but \katallass\ in the later. The difference in idea is very slight, \dia-\ accents notion of exchange, \kat-\ the perfective idea (complete reconciliation). Dative of personal interest is the case of \andri\. This sentence is a parenthesis between the two infinitives \christhnai\ and \aphienai\ (both indirect commands after \paraggell\). {And that the husband leave not his wife} (\kai andra m aphienai\). This is also part of the Lord's command (Mark:10:11|). \Apolu\ occurs in Mark of the husband's act and \aphienai\ here, both meaning to send away. Bengel actually stresses the difference between \christhnai\ of the woman as like _separatur_ in Latin and calls the wife "pars ignobilior" and the husband "nobilior." I doubt if Paul would stand for that extreme.
rwp@1Corinthians:Note @\m melei\ expects the negative answer, impersonal verb with dative and genitive cases (\theoi\, God, \bon\, oxen). {Altogether} (\pants\). But here probably with the notion of doubtless or assuredly. The editors differ in the verse divisions here. The Canterbury Version puts both these questions in verse 10|, the American Standard the first in verse 9|, the second in verse 10|.
rwp@1Corinthians:14:18 @{More than you all} (\pantn humn mallon\). Ablative case after \mallon\. Astonishing claim by Paul that doubtless had a fine effect.
rwp@1Corinthians:14:34 @{Keep silence in the churches} (\en tais ekklsiais sigatsan\). The same verb used about the disorders caused by speakers in tongues (verse 28|) and prophets (30|). For some reason some of the women were creating disturbance in the public worship by their dress (11:2-16|) and now by their speech. There is no doubt at all as to Paul's meaning here. In church the women are not allowed to speak (\lalein\) nor even to ask questions. They are to do that {at home} (\en oiki\). He calls it a shame (\aischron\) as in strkjv@11:6| (cf. strkjv@Ephesians:5:12; strkjv@Titus:1:11|). Certainly women are still in subjection (\hupotassesthsan\) to their husbands (or ought to be). But somehow modern Christians have concluded that Paul's commands on this subject, even strkjv@1Timothy:2:12|, were meant for specific conditions that do not apply wholly now. Women do most of the teaching in our Sunday schools today. It is not easy to draw the line. The daughters of Philip were prophetesses. It seems clear that we need to be patient with each other as we try to understand Paul's real meaning here.
rwp@1Corinthians:15:5 @{And that he appeared to Cephas} (\kai hoti phth Kphi\). First aorist passive indicative of the defective verb \hora\, to see. Paul means not a mere "vision," but actual appearance. John uses \ephanerth\ (John:21:14|) from \phanero\, to make manifest, of Christ's appearance to the seven by the Sea of Galilee. Peter was listed first (\prtos\) among the Apostles (Matthew:10:2|). Jesus had sent a special message to him (Mark:16:7|) after his resurrection. This special appearance to Peter is made the determining factor in the joyful faith of the disciples (Luke:24:34|), though mentioned incidentally here. Paul had told all these four facts to the Corinthians in his preaching. He gives further proof of the fact of Christ's resurrection. There are ten appearances given besides the one to Paul. Nine are in the Gospels (Mary Magdalene in John and Mark, the other women in Matthew, the two going to Emmaus in Luke, Simon Peter in Luke and I Corinthians, the ten apostles and others in Luke and John and Mark, the eleven and others in John, the seven by the sea in John, to over five hundred in Galilee in Matthew and Paul and Mark, to the apostles in Jerusalem in Luke and Mark and Acts and I Corinthians) and one in I Corinthians above (to James). It will be seen that Paul mentions only five of the ten, one, that to James, not given elsewhere. What he gives is conclusive evidence of the fact, particularly when re-enforced by his own experience (the sixth appearance mentioned by Paul). The way to prove this great fact is to start with Paul's own witness given in this undoubted Epistle. The natural way to understand Paul's adverbs of time here is chronological: {then} (\eita\), {then} (\epeita\), {then} (\epeita\), {then} (\eita\), {last of all} (\eschaton pantn\). {To the twelve} (\tois ddeka\). The technical name. Only ten were present, for Judas was dead and Thomas was absent (John:20:24|).
rwp@1Corinthians:15:58 @{Be ye steadfast, unmovable} (\hedraioi ginesthe, ametakintoi\). "Keep on becoming steadfast, unshaken." Let the sceptics howl and rage. Paul has given rational grounds for faith and hope in Christ the Risen Lord and Saviour. Note practical turn to this great doctrinal argument. {Work} (\ergon\), {labour} (\kopos\, toil). The best answer to doubt is work.
rwp@1John:2:18 @{It is the last hour} (\eschat hra estin\). This phrase only here in N.T., though John often uses \hra\ for a crisis (John:2:4; strkjv@4:21,23; strkjv@5:25,28|, etc.). It is anarthrous here and marks the character of the "hour." John has seven times "the last day" in the Gospel. Certainly in verse 28| John makes it plain that the \parousia\ might come in the life of those then living, but it is not clear that here he definitely asserts it as a fact. It was his hope beyond a doubt. We are left in doubt about this "last hour" whether it covers a period, a series, or the final climax of all just at hand. {As ye heard} (\kaths kousate\). First aorist active indicative of \akou\. {Antichrist cometh} (\antichristos erchetai\). "Is coming." Present futuristic or prophetic middle indicative retained in indirect assertion. Songs:Jesus taught (Mark:13:6,22; strkjv@Matthew:24:5,15,24|) and so Paul taught (Acts:20:30; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3|). These false Christs (Matthew:24:24; strkjv@Mark:13:22|) are necessarily antichrists, for there can be only one. \Anti\ can mean substitution or opposition, but both ideas are identical in the word \antichristos\ (in N.T. only here, strkjv@2:22; strkjv@4:3; strkjv@2John:1:7|). Westcott rightly observes that John's use of the word is determined by the Christian conception, not by the Jewish apocalypses. {Have there arisen} (\gegonasin\). Second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. {Many antichrists} (\antichristoi polloi\). Not just one, but the exponents of the Gnostic teaching are really antichrists, just as some modern deceivers deserve this title. {Whereby} (\hothen\). By the fact that these many antichrists have come.
rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER ABOUT A.D. 65 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION THE AUTHOR The Epistle is not anonymous, but claims to be written by "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ" (1Peter:1:1|), that is Cephas (Simon Peter). If this is not true, then the book is pseudonymous by a late writer who assumed Peter's name, as in the so-called Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, etc. "There is no book in the New Testament which has earlier, better, or stronger attestation, though Irenaeus is the first to quote it by name" (Bigg). Eusebius (_H.E_. iii. 25.2) places it among the acknowledged books, those accepted with no doubt at all. We here assume that Simon Peter wrote this Epistle or at any rate dictated it by an amanuensis, as Paul did in Romans (Romans:16:22|). Bigg suggests Silvanus (Silas) as the amanuensis or interpreter (1Peter:5:12|), the obvious meaning of the language (\dia\, through). He may also have been the bearer of the Epistle. It happens that we know more of Peter's life than of any of the twelve apostles because of his prominence in the Gospels and in the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. In the _Student's Chronological New Testament_ I have given a full list of the passages in the Gospels where Peter appears with any clearness and the material is rich and abundant. The account in Acts is briefer, though Peter is the outstanding man in the first five chapters during his career in Jerusalem. After the conversion of Saul he begins to work outside of Jerusalem and after escaping death at the hands of Herod Agrippa I (Acts:12:3ff.|) he left for a while, but is back in Jerusalem at the Conference called by Paul and Barnabas (Acts:15:6-14; Gal strkjv@2:1-10|). After that we have no more about him in Acts, though he reappears in Antioch and is rebuked by Paul for cowardice because of the Judaizers (Galatians:2:11-21). He travelled for the Gospel among the Jews of the Dispersion (Galatians:2:9|) with his wife (1Corinthians:9:5|), and went to Asia Minor (1Peter:1:1|) and as far as Babylon or Rome (1Peter:5:13|). Besides Silvanus he had John Mark with him also (1Peter:5:13|), who was said by the early Christian writers to have been Peter's "interpreter" in his preaching, since Peter was not expert in the Greek (Acts:4:13|), and who also wrote his Gospel under the inspiration of Peter's preaching. We are not able to follow clearly the close of his life or to tell precisely the time of his death. He was apparently put to death in A.D. 67 or 68, but some think that he was executed in Rome in A.D. 64.
rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE USE OF PAUL'S EPISTLES There are two extremes about the relation of Peter to Paul. One is that of violent antithesis, with Peter and Paul opposing one another by exaggerating and prolonging Paul's denunciation of Peter's cowardice in Antioch (Galatians:2:11-21|) and making Peter also the exponent of a Jewish type of Christianity (practically a Judaizing type). This view of Baur once had quite a following, but it has nearly disappeared. Under its influence Acts and Peter's Epistles were considered not genuine, but documents designed to patch up the disagreement between Peter and Paul. The other extreme is to deny any Pauline influence on Peter or of Peter on Paul. Paul was friendly to Peter (Galatians:1:18|), but was independent of his ecclesiastical authority (Galatians:2:1-10|) and Peter championed Paul's cause in the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:7-13|). Peter was certainly not a Judaizer (Acts:11:1-18|), in spite of his temporary defection in Antioch. Undoubtedly Peter was won back to cordial relations with Paul if any confidence can be placed in strkjv@2Peter:3:15f|. There is no reason for doubting that Peter was familiar with some of Paul's Epistles as there indicated. There is some indication of Peter's use of Romans and Ephesians in this Epistle. It is not always conclusive to find the same words and even ideas which are not formally quoted, because there was a Christian vocabulary and a body of doctrinal ideas in common though with personal variations in expression. Peter may have read James, but not the Pastoral Epistles. There are points of contact with Hebrews which Von Soden considers sufficiently accounted for by the fact that Peter and the author of Hebrews were contemporaries.
rwp@1Peter:1:19 @{But with precious blood} (\alla timii haimati\). Instrumental case of \haima\ after \elutrthte\ (repeated from verse 18|). Peter here applies the old adjective \timios\ (from \tim\, of Christ in strkjv@1Peter:2:7|) to Christ as in strkjv@1:7| \polutimoteron\ to testing of faith. The blood of anyone is "precious" (costly), far above gold or silver, but that of Jesus immeasurably more so. {As of a lamb} (\hs amnou\). This word occurs in strkjv@Leviticus:12:8; strkjv@Numbers:15:11; strkjv@Deuteronomy:14:4| of the lamb prescribed for the passover sacrifice (Exodus:12:5|). John the Baptist applies it to Jesus (John:1:29,36|). It occurs also in strkjv@Acts:8:32| quoted from strkjv@Isaiah:53:7f|. Undoubtedly both the Baptist and Peter have this passage in mind. Elsewhere in the N.T. \arnion\ is used of Christ (Revelation:5:6,12|). Jesus is the Paschal Lamb. Peter sees clearly that it was by the blood of Christ that we are redeemed from sin. {Without blemish} (\ammou\). Without (alpha privative) spot (\mmos\) as the paschal lamb had to be (Leviticus:22:21|). Songs:Hebrews:9:14|. {Without spot} (\aspilou\). Without (alpha privative) stain (\spilos\ spot) as in strkjv@James:1:27; strkjv@2Peter:3:14; strkjv@1Peter:6:14|. {Even the blood of Christ} (\Christou\). Genitive case with \haimati\, but in unusual position for emphasis and clearness with the participles following.
rwp@1Peter:1:20 @{Who was foreknown indeed} (\proegnsmenou men\). Perfect passive participle (in genitive singular agreeing with \Christou\) of \proginsk\, old verb, to know beforehand (Romans:8:29; strkjv@2Peter:3:17|). See \prognsin theou\ in verse 2|. {Before the foundation of the world} (\pro katabols kosmou\). This precise curious phrase occurs in strkjv@John:17:24| in the Saviour's mouth of his preincarnate state with the Father as here and in strkjv@Ephesians:1:4|. We have \apo katabols kosmou\ in strkjv@Matthew:25:34| (\kosmou\ omitted in strkjv@Matthew:13:35|); strkjv@Luke:11:50; strkjv@Hebrews:4:3; strkjv@9:26; strkjv@Revelation:13:8; strkjv@17:8|. \Katabol\ (from \kataball\) was originally laying the foundation of a house (Hebrews:6:1|). The preincarnate Messiah appears in the counsels of God also in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7; strkjv@Colossians:1:26f.; strkjv@Ephesians:1:9f.; strkjv@3:9-11; strkjv@Romans:16:25; strkjv@1Timothy:1:9|. {But was manifested} (\phanerthentos de\). First aorist (ingressive) passive participle of \phanero\, referring to the Incarnation in contrast with the preexistence of Christ (cf. strkjv@John:1:31; strkjv@1John:3:5,8|). {At the end of the times} (\ep' eschatou tn chronn\). Like \ep' eschatou tn hmern\ (Hebrews:1:2|). The plural \chronoi\, doubtless referring to successive periods in human history until the fullness of the time came (Galatians:4:4|). {For your sake} (\di' hums\). Proof of God's love, not of their desert or worth (Acts:17:30f.; strkjv@Hebrews:11:39f.|).
rwp@1Peter:3:19 @{In which also} (\en hi kai\). That is, in spirit (relative referring to \pneumati\). But, a number of modern scholars have followed Griesbach's conjecture that the original text was either \Ne kai\ (Noah also), or \Ench kai\ (Enoch also), or \en hi kai Ench\ (in which Enoch also) which an early scribe misunderstood or omitted \Ench kai\ in copying (\homoioteleuton\). It is allowed in Stier and Theile's _Polyglott_. It is advocated by J. Cramer in 1891, by J. Rendel Harris in _The Expositor_ (1901), and _Sidelights on N.T. Research_ (p. 208), by Nestle in 1902, by Moffatt's New Translation of the New Testament. Windisch rejects it as inconsistent with the context. There is no manuscript for the conjecture, though it would relieve the difficulty greatly. Luther admits that he does not know what Peter means. Bigg has no doubt that the event recorded took place between Christ's death and his resurrection and holds that Peter is alluding to Christ's _Descensus ad Inferos_ in strkjv@Acts:2:27| (with which he compares strkjv@Matthew:27:52f.; strkjv@Luke:23:34; strkjv@Ephesians:4:9|). With this Windisch agrees. But Wohlenberg holds that Peter means that Christ in his preexistent state preached to those who rejected the preaching of Noah who are now in prison. Augustine held that Christ was in Noah when he preached. Bigg argues strongly that Christ during the time between his death and resurrection preached to those who once heard Noah (but are now in prison) and offered them another chance and not mere condemnation. If so, why did Jesus confine his preaching to this one group? Songs:the theories run on about this passage. One can only say that it is a slim hope for those who neglect or reject Christ in this life to gamble with a possible second chance after death which rests on very precarious exegesis of a most difficult passage in Peter's Epistle. Accepting the text as we have, what can we make of it? {He went and preached} (\poreutheis ekruxen\). First aorist passive (deponent) participle of \poreuomai\ and first aorist active indicative of \kruss\, the verb commonly used of the preaching of Jesus. Naturally the words mean personal action by Christ "in spirit" as illustration of his "quickening" (verse 18|) whether done before his death or afterwards. It is interesting to observe that, just as the relative \en hi\ here tells something suggested by the word \pneumati\ (in spirit) just before, so in verse 21| the relative \ho\ (which) tells another illustration of the words \di' hudatos\ (by water) just before. Peter jumps from the flood in Noah's time to baptism in Peter's time, just as he jumped backwards from Christ's time to Noah's time. He easily goes off at a word. What does he mean here by the story that illustrates Christ's quickening in spirit? {Unto the spirits in prison} (\tois en phulaki pneumasin\). The language is plain enough except that it does not make it clear whether Jesus did the preaching to spirits in prison at the time or to people whose spirits are now in prison, the point of doubt already discussed. The metaphorical use of \en phulaki\ can be illustrated by strkjv@2Peter:2:4; strkjv@Jude:1:6; strkjv@Revelation:20:7| (the final abode of the lost). See strkjv@Hebrews:12:23| for the use of \pneumata\ for disembodied spirits.
rwp@1Peter:5:2 @{Tend} (\poimanate\). First aorist active imperative of \poimain\, old verb, from \poimn\ (shepherd) as in strkjv@Luke:17:7|. Jesus used this very word to Peter in the interview by the Sea of Galilee (John:21:16|) and Peter doubtless has this fact in mind here. Paul used the word to the elders at Miletus (Acts:20:28|). See strkjv@2:25| for the metaphor. {Flock} (\poimnion\). Old word, likewise from \poimn\, contraction of \poimenion\ (Luke:12:32|). {Exercising the oversight} (\episkopountes\). Present active participle of \episkope\, old word (in strkjv@Hebrews:12:15| alone in N.T.), omitted here by Aleph B. {Not by constraint} (\m anagkasts\). Negative \m\ because of the imperative. Old adverb from verbal adjective \anagkastos\, here alone in N.T. {But willingly} (\alla hekousis\). By contrast. Old adverb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:10:26|. {Nor yet for filthy lucre} (\mde aischrokerds\). A compound adverb not found elsewhere, but the old adjective \aischrokerds\ is in strkjv@1Timothy:3:8; strkjv@Titus:1:7|. See also strkjv@Titus:1:11| "for the sake of filthy lucre" (\aischrou kerdous charin\). Clearly the elders received stipends, else there could be no such temptation. {But of a ready mind} (\alla prothums\). Old adverb from \prothumos\ (Matthew:26:41|), here only in N.T.
rwp@Info_1Thessalonians @ FIRST THESSALONIANS FROM CORINTH A.D. 50 TO 51 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION We cannot say that this is Paul's first letter to a church, for in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2| he speaks of some as palming off letters as his and in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:17| he says that he appends his own signature to every letter after dictating it to an amanuensis (Romans:16:22|). We know of one lost letter (1Corinthians:5:11|) and perhaps another (2Corinthians:2:3|). But this is the earliest one that has come down to us and it may even be the earliest New Testament book, unless the Epistle of James antedates it or even Mark's Gospel. We know, as already shown, that Paul was in Corinth and that Timothy and Silas had just arrived from Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:3:6; strkjv@Acts:18:5|). They had brought supplies from the Macedonian churches to supply Paul's need (2Corinthians:11:9|), as the church in Philippi did once and again while Paul was in Thessalonica (Phillipians:4:15f.|). Before Timothy and Silas came to Corinth Paul had to work steadily at his trade as tent-maker with Aquila and Priscilla (Acts:18:3|) and could only preach in the synagogue on sabbaths, but the rich stores from Macedonia released his hands and "Paul devoted himself to the word" (\suneicheto ti logi Paulos\). He gave himself wholly to preaching now. But Timothy and Silas brought news of serious trouble in the church in Thessalonica. Some of the disciples there had misunderstood Paul's preaching about the second coming of Christ and had quit work and were making a decided disturbance on the subject. Undoubtedly Paul had touched upon eschatological matters while in Thessalonica. The Jewish leaders at Thessalonica charged it against Paul and Silas to the politarchs that they had preached another king, Jesus, in place of Caesar. Paul had preached Jesus as King of the spiritual kingdom which the Jews misrepresented to the politarchs as treason against Caesar as the Sanhedrin had done to Pilate about Jesus. Clearly Paul had said also that Jesus was going to come again according to his own promise before his ascension. Some asserted that Paul said Jesus was going to come right away and drew their own inferences for idleness and fanaticism as some do today. Strange as it may seem, there are scholars today who say that Paul did believe and say that Jesus was going to come back right away. They say this in spite of strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1f.| where Paul denies having ever said it. Undoubtedly Paul hoped for the early return of Jesus as most of the early Christians did, but that is a very different thing from setting a time for his coming. It is open to us all to hope for the speedy return of Christ, but times and seasons are with God and not with us. It is not open to us to excuse our negligence and idleness as Christians because of such a hope. That hope should serve as a spur to increased activity for Christ in order to hasten his coming. Songs:Paul writes this group of Epistles to correct gross misapprehension and misrepresentation of his preaching about last things (eschatology). It is a rare preacher who has never been misunderstood or misrepresented.
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:13 @{And for this cause we also} (\kai dia touto kai hmeis\). Note \kai\ twice. We as well as you are grateful for the way the gospel was received in Thessalonica. {Without ceasing} (\adialeipts\). Late adverb for which see on strkjv@1:2| and for \eucharistoumen\ see on ¯1:2|. {The word of the message} (\logon akos\). Literally, {the word of} hearing, as in Sir. strkjv@42:1 and strkjv@Hebrews:4:2| \ho logos ts akos\, the word marked by hearing (genitive case), the word which you heard. Here with \tou theou\ (of God) added as a second descriptive genitive which Paul expands and justifies. {Ye received it so} (\paralabontes\) and {accepted or welcomed it} (\edexasthe\) so, {not as the word of men} (\ou logou anthrpn\), {but as the word of God} (\alla logon theou\), {as it is in truth} (\kaths alths estin\). This last clause is literally, {as it truly is}. Paul had not a doubt that he was proclaiming God's message. Should any preacher preach his doubts if he has any? God's message can be found and Paul found it. {Worketh in you} (\energeitai en humin\). Perhaps middle voice of \energe\ (\en, ergon\, work) late verb, not in ancient Greek or LXX, but in papyri and late writers (Polybius, etc.) and in N.T. only by Paul and James. If it is passive, as Milligan thinks, it means "is set in operation," as Polybius has it. The idea then is that the word of God is set in operation in you that believe.
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:14 @{Imitators of the churches of God which are in Judea} (\mimtai tn ekklsin tou theou tn ousn en ti Ioudaii\). On \mimtai\ see on ¯1:5|. "This passage, implying an affectionate admiration of the Jewish churches on the part of St. Paul, and thus entirely bearing out the impression produced by the narrative in the Acts, is entirely subversive of the theory maintained by some and based on a misconception of strkjv@Galatians:2|, and by the fiction of the Pseudo-Clementines, of the feud existing between St. Paul and the Twelve" (Lightfoot). {In Christ Jesus} (\en Christi Isou\). It takes this to make a _Christian_ church of God. Note order here {Christ Jesus} as compared with {Jesus Christ} in strkjv@1:1,3|. {Ye also--even as they} (\kai humeis--kai autoi\). Note \kai\ twice (correlative use of \kai\). {Countrymen} (\sumphuletn\). Fellow-countrymen or tribesmen. Late word that refers primarily to Gentiles who no doubt joined the Jews in Thessalonica who instigated the attacks on Paul and Silas so that it "was taken up by the native population, without whose co-operation it would have been powerless" (Lightfoot). {Own} (\idin\) here has apparently a weakened force. Note \hupo\ here with the ablative both with \sumphuletn\ and \Ioudain\ after the intransitive \epathete\ (suffered). The persecution of the Christians by the Jews in Judea was known everywhere.
rwp@1Timothy:1:3 @{As I exhorted} (\kaths parekalesa\). There is an ellipse of the principal clause in verse 4| ({so do I now} not being in the Greek). {To tarry} (\prosmeinai\). First aorist active infinitive of \prosmen\, old verb, attributed by Luke to Paul in strkjv@Acts:13:43|. {That thou mightest charge} (\hina paraggeilis\). Subfinal clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \paraggell\, old verb, to transmit a message along (\para\) from one to another. See strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:4,6,10|. Lock considers this idiom here an elliptical imperative like strkjv@Ephesians:4:29; strkjv@5:33|. {Certain men} (\tisin\). Dative case. Expressly vague (no names as in strkjv@1:20|), though Paul doubtless has certain persons in Ephesus in mind. {Not to teach a different doctrine} (\m heterodidaskalein\). Earliest known use of this compound like \kakodidaskalein\ of Clement of Rome. Only other N.T. example in strkjv@6:3|. Eusebius has \heterodidaskalos\. Same idea in strkjv@Galatians:1:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:4; strkjv@Romans:16:17|. Perhaps coined by Paul.
rwp@1Timothy:3:13 @{Gain to themselves} (\heautois peripoiountai\). Present middle indicative of \peripoie\, old verb, to make besides (\peri\, around, over), to lay by. Reflexive (indirect) middle with reflexive pronoun (\heautois\) repeated as often happens in the _Koin_. In N.T. only here, strkjv@Luke:17:33; strkjv@Acts:20:28| (Paul also, quoting strkjv@Isaiah:43:21|). {A good standing} (\bathmon kalon\). Late word from \bain\, in LXX for steps at a door (1Samuel:5:5|). In plural the steps of a stair. In the inscriptions it means a good foothold or standing. The ecclesiastical writers (Theodoret) take it to be a higher grade or rank, but it is doubtful if Paul means that here. {Much boldness} (\polln parrsian\). A Pauline phrase (2Corinthians:3:12; strkjv@7:4; strkjv@Phillipians:1:20|). {In the faith which is in Christ Jesus} (\en pistei ti en Christi Isou\). Pauline phrase again (Acts:26:18; strkjv@Galatians:3:26; strkjv@Colossians:1:4; strkjv@Ephesians:1:15; strkjv@2Timothy:1:13; strkjv@3:15|).
rwp@1Timothy:4:14 @{Neglect not} (\m amelei\). Present active imperative in prohibition of \amele\, old verb, rare in N.T. (Matthew:22:5; strkjv@1Timothy:4:14; strkjv@Hebrews:2:3; strkjv@8:9|). From \amels\ (\a\ privative and \melei\, not to care). Use with genitive. {The gift that is in thee} (\tou en soi charismatos\). Late word of result from \charizomai\, in papyri (Preisigke), a regular Pauline word in N.T. (1Corinthians:1:7; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:11; strkjv@Romans:1:11|; etc.). Here it is God's gift to Timothy as in strkjv@2Timothy:1:6|. {By prophecy} (\dia prophteias\). Accompanied by prophecy (1:18|), not bestowed by prophecy. {With the laying on of the hands of the presbytery} (\meta epitheses tn cheirn tou presbuteriou\). In strkjv@Acts:13:2f.|, when Barnabas and Saul were formally set apart to the mission campaign (not then ordained as ministers, for they were already that), there was the call of the Spirit and the laying on of hands with prayer. Here again \meta\ does not express instrument or means, but merely accompaniment. In strkjv@2Timothy:1:6| Paul speaks only of his own laying on of hands, but the rest of the presbytery no doubt did so at the same time and the reference is to this incident. There is no way to tell when and where it was done, whether at Lystra when Timothy joined Paul's party or at Ephesus just before Paul left Timothy there (1:3|). \Epithesis\ (\from epitithmi\, to lay upon) is an old word, in LXX, etc. In the N.T. we find it only here, strkjv@2Timothy:1:16; strkjv@Acts:8:18; strkjv@Hebrews:6:2|, but the verb \epitithmi\ with \tas cheiras\ more frequently (Acts:6:6| of the deacons; strkjv@8:19; strkjv@13:3; strkjv@1Timothy:5:22|, etc.). \Presbuterion\ is a late word (ecclesiastical use also), first for the Jewish Sanhedrin (Luke:22:66; strkjv@Acts:22:5|), then (here only in N.T.) of Christian elders (common in Ignatius), though \presbuteros\ (elder) for preachers (bishops) is common (Acts:11:30; strkjv@15:2; strkjv@20:17|, etc.).
rwp@1Timothy:5:5 @{Desolate} (\memonmen\). Perfect passive participle of \mono\ (from \monos\), "left alone," old verb, here alone in N.T. Without husband, children, or other close kin. {Hath her hope set on God} (\lpiken epi theon\). Perfect active indicative of \elpiz\, "hath placed her hope (and keeps it) on God." Text doubtful whether God (\theon\) or Lord (\Kurion\). {Continues} (\prosmenei\). See on ¯1:3|. With dative case here. {Night and day} (\nuktos kai hmeras\). "By night and by day" (genitive, not accusative). Paul does not say that she should pray "all night and day."
rwp@1Timothy:5:17 @{The elders that rule well} (\hoi kals proesttes presbuteroi\). See verse 1| for ordinary sense of \presbuteros\ for "older man." But here of position in same sense as \episkopos\ (3:2|) as in strkjv@Titus:1:5| = \episkopos\ in verse 7|. Cf. Luke's use of \presbuteros\ (Acts:20:17|) = Paul's \episkopous\ (Acts:20:28|). \Proesttes\ is second perfect active participle of \proistmi\ (intransitive use) for which see strkjv@3:4|. {Let be counted worthy} (\axiousthsan\). Present passive imperative of \axio\, to deem worthy (2Thessalonians:1:11|). With genitive case here. {Of double honour} (\dipls tims\). Old and common contract adjective (\diploos\, two-fold, in opposition to \haploos\, single fold). But why "of double honour"? See strkjv@6:1| for "of all honour." White suggests "remuneration" rather than "honour" for \tims\ (a common use for price or pay). Liddon proposes "honorarium" (both honour and pay and so "double"). Wetstein gives numerous examples of soldiers receiving double pay for unusual services. Some suggest twice the pay given the enrolled widows. {Especially those who labour in word and teaching} (\malista hoi kopintes en logi kai didaskalii\). Either those who work hard or toil (usual meaning of \kopia\, strkjv@2Timothy:2:6|) in preaching and teaching (most probable meaning. See verse 18|) or those who teach and preach and not merely preside (a doubtful distinction in "elders" at this time). See strkjv@Titus:1:8f|. See both \kopia\ and \proistamai\ used for same men (elders) in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:12| and the use of \kopia\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:10; strkjv@16:16|.
rwp@1Timothy:6:10 @{The love of money} (\h philarguria\). Vulgate, _avaritia_. Common word (from \philarguros\, strkjv@2Timothy:3:12|, and that from \philos, arguros\), only here in N.T. Refers to verse 9| (\boulomenoi ploutein\). {A root of all kinds of evil} (\riza pantn tn kakn\). A root (\riza\). Old word, common in literal (Matthew:3:10|) and metaphorical sense (Romans:11:11-18|). Field (_Ot. Norv_.) argues for "the root" as the idea of this predicate without saying that it is the only root. Undoubtedly a proverb that Paul here quotes, attributed to Bion and to Democritus (\tn philargurian einai mtropolin pantn tn kakn\), where "metropolis" takes the place of "root." Surely men today need no proof of the fact that men and women will commit any sin or crime for money. {Reaching after} (\oregomenoi\). Present middle participle of \oreg\ (see strkjv@3:1|) with genitive \hs\ (which). {Have been led astray} (\apeplanthsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \apoplana\, old compound verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:13:22|. {Have pierced themselves through} (\heautous periepeiran\). First aorist active (with reflexive pronoun) of late compound \peripeir\, only here in N.T. Perfective use of \peri\ (around, completely to pierce). {With many sorrows} (\odunais pollais\). Instrumental case of \odun\ (consuming, eating grief). In N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:9:2|.
rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ 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@Info_2Peter @ THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER ABOUT A.D. 66 OR 67 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION MOST DOUBTFUL NEW TESTAMENT BOOK Every book in the New Testament is challenged by some one, as indeed the historicity of Jesus Christ himself is and the very existence of God. But it is true that more modern scholars deny the genuineness of II Peter than that of any single book in the canon. This is done by men like F. H. Chase, J. B. Mayor, and R. D. Strachan, who are followers of Christ as Lord and Saviour. One has to admit that the case concerning II Peter has problems of peculiar difficulty that call for careful consideration and balanced judgment. One other word needs to be said, which is that an adverse decision against the authenticity of II Peter stands by itself and does not affect the genuineness of the other books. It is easy to take an extreme position for or against it without full knowledge of all the evidence.
rwp@Info_2Peter @ SLOW IN GENERAL ACCEPTANCE It was accepted in the canon by the council at Laodicea (372) and at Carthage (397). Jerome accepted it for the Vulgate, though it was absent from the Peshito Syriac Version. Eusebius placed it among the disputed books, while Origen was inclined to accept it. Clement of Alexandria accepted it and apparently wrote a commentary on it. It is probable that the so-called Apocalypse of Peter (early second century) used it and the Epistle of Jude:either used it or II Peter used Jude. There are undoubted allusions also to phrases in II Peter in Aristides, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Ignatius, Clement of Rome. When one considers the brevity of the Epistle, the use of it is really as strong as one can expect. Athanasius and Augustine accepted it as genuine, as did Luther, while Calvin doubted and Erasmus rejected it. It may be said for it that it won its way under criticism and was not accepted blindly.
rwp@Info_2Peter @ THE RESEMBLANCE TO THE EPISTLE OF JUDE This is undoubted, particularly between Jude:and the second chapter of II Peter. Kuhl argues that strkjv@2Peter:2:1-3:2| is an interpolation, though the same style runs through out the Epistle. "The theory of interpolation is always a last and desperate expedient" (Bigg). In II Peter 2 we have the fallen angels, the flood, the cities of the plain with Lot, Balaam. In Jude:we have Israel in the wilderness, the fallen angels, the cities of the plain (with no mention of Lot, Cain, Balaam, Korah). Jude:mentions the dispute between Michael and Satan, quotes Enoch by name. There is rather more freshness in Jude:than in II Peter, though II Peter is more intelligible. Evidently one had the other before him, besides other material. Which is the earlier? There is no way to decide this point clearly. Every point is looked at differently and argued differently by different writers. My own feeling is that Jude:was before (just before) II Peter, though it is only a feeling and not a conviction.
rwp@2Peter:1:9 @{He that lacketh these things} (\hi m parestin tauta\). "To whom (dative case of possession) these things are not (\m\ because a general or indefinite relative clause)." {Seeing only what is near} (\mupazn\). Present active participle of \mupaz\, a rare verb from \mups\ (in Aristotle for a near-sighted man) and that from \mue tous pas\ (to close the eyes in order to see, not to keep from seeing). The only other instance of \mupaz\ is given by Suicer from Ps. Dion. Eccl. Hier. ii. 3 (\mupasousi kai apostrephomeni\) used of a soul on which the light shines (blinking and turning away). Thus understood the word here limits \tuphlos\ as a short-sighted man screwing up his eyes because of the light. {Having forgotten} (\lthn labn\). "Having received forgetfulness." Second aorist active participle of \lamban\ and accusative \lthn\, old word, from \lthomai\, to forget, here only in N.T. See strkjv@2Timothy:1:5| for a like phrase \hupomnsin labn\ (having received remembrance). {The cleansing} (\tou katharismou\). See strkjv@Hebrews:1:3| for this word for the expiatory sacrifice of Christ for our sins as in strkjv@1Peter:1:18; strkjv@2:24; strkjv@3:18|. In strkjv@1Peter:3:21| Peter denied actual cleansing of sin by baptism (only symbolic). If there is a reference to baptism here, which is doubtful, it can only be in a symbolic sense. {Old} (\palai\). Of the language as in strkjv@Hebrews:1:1|.
rwp@2Peter:3:1 @{Beloved} (\agaptoi\). With this vocative verbal (four times in this chapter), Peter "turns away from the Libertines and their victims" (Mayor). {This is now the second epistle that I write unto you} (\tautn d deuteran humin graph epistoln\). Literally, "This already a second epistle I am writing to you." For \d\ see strkjv@John:21:24|. It is the predicate use of \deuteran epistoln\ in apposition with \tautn\, not "this second epistle." Reference apparently to I Peter. {And in both of them} (\en hais\). "In which epistles." {I stir up} (\diegeir\). Present active indicative, perhaps conative, "I try to stir up." See strkjv@1:13|. {Mind} (\dianoian\). Understanding (Plato) as in strkjv@1Peter:1:13|. {Sincere} (\eilikrin\). Old adjective of doubtful etymology (supposed to be \heil\, sunlight, and \krin\, to judge by it). Plato used it of ethical purity (\psuch eilikrins\) as here and strkjv@Phillipians:1:10|, the only N.T. examples. {By putting you in remembrance} (\en hupomnsei\). As in strkjv@1:13|.
rwp@2Peter:3:16 @{As also in all his epistles} (\hs kai en pasais epistolais\). We do not know to how many Peter here refers. There is no difficulty in supposing that Peter "received every one of St. Paul's Epistles within a month or two of its publication" (Bigg). And yet Peter does not here assert the formation of a canon of Paul's Epistles. {Speaking in them of these things} (\laln en autais peri toutn\). Present active participle of \lale\. That is to say, Paul also wrote about the second coming of Christ, as is obviously true. {Hard to be understood} (\dusnota\). Late verbal from \dus\ and \noe\ (in Aristotle, Lucian, Diog. Laert.), here only in N.T. We know that the Thessalonians persisted in misrepresenting Paul on this very subject of the second coming as Hymenaeus and Philetus did about the resurrection (2Timothy:2:17|) and Spitta holds that Paul's teaching about grace was twisted to mean moral laxity like strkjv@Galatians:3:10; strkjv@Romans:3:20,28; strkjv@5:20| (with which cf. strkjv@6:1| as a case in point), etc. Peter does not say that he himself did not understand Paul on the subject of faith and freedom. {Unlearned} (\amatheis\). Old word (alpha privative and \manthan\ to learn), ignorant, here only in N.T. {Unsteadfast} (\astriktoi\). See on ¯2:14|. {Wrest} (\streblousin\). Present active indicative of \streblo\, old verb (from \streblos\ twisted, \streph\, to turn), here only in N.T. {The other scriptures} (\tas loipas graphas\). There is no doubt that the apostles claimed to speak by the help of the Holy Spirit (1Thessalonians:5:27; strkjv@Colossians:4:16|) just as the prophets of old did (2Peter:1:20f.|). Note \loipas\ (rest) here rather than \allas\ (other). Peter thus puts Paul's Epistles on the same plane with the O.T., which was also misused (Matthew:5:21-44; strkjv@15:3-6; strkjv@19:3-10|).
rwp@2Thessalonians:2:2 @{To the end that} (\eis to\). One of Paul's favourite idioms for purpose, \eis to\ and the infinitive. {Ye be not quickly shaken} (\m taches saleuthnai humas\). First aorist passive infinitive of \saleu\, old verb to agitate, to cause to totter like a reed (Matthew:11:7|), the earth (Hebrews:12:26|). Usual negative \m\ and accusative of general reference \humas\ with the infinitive. {From your mind} (\apo tou noos\). Ablative case of nous, mind, reason, sober sense, "from your witte" (Wyclif), to "keep their heads." {Nor yet be troubled} (\mde throeisthai\). Old verb \throe\, to cry aloud (from \throos\, clamour, tumult), to be in a state of nervous excitement (present passive infinitive, as if it were going on), "a continued state of agitation following the definite shock received (\saleuthnai\)" (Milligan). {Either by spirit} (\mte dia pneumatos\). By ecstatic utterance (1Thessalonians:5:10|). The nervous fear that the coming was to be at once prohibited by \mde\ Paul divides into three sources by \mte, mte, mte\. No individual claim to divine revelation (the gift of prophecy) can justify the statement. {Or by word} (\mte dia logou\). Oral statement of a conversation with Paul (Lightfoot) to this effect {as from us}. An easy way to set aside Paul's first Epistle by report of a private remark from Paul. {Or by epistle as from us} (\mte di' epistols hs di' hmn\). In strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13-5:3| Paul had plainly said that Jesus would come as a thief in the night and had shown that the dead would not be left out in the rapture. But evidently some one claimed to have a private epistle from Paul which supported the view that Jesus was coming at once, {as that the day of the Lord is now present} (\hs hoti enestken h hmera tou kuriou\). Perfect active indicative of \enistmi\, old verb, to place in, but intransitive in this tense to stand in or at or near. Songs:"is imminent" (Lightfoot). The verb is common in the papyri. In strkjv@1Corinthians:3:22; strkjv@Romans:8:38| we have a contrast between \ta enestta\, the things present, and \ta mellonta\, the things future (to come). The use of \hs hoti\ may be disparaging here, though that is not true in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:19|. In the _Koin_ it comes in the vernacular to mean simply "that" (Moulton, _Proleg_., p. 212), but that hardly seems the case in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1033). Here it means "to wit that," though "as that" or "as if" does not miss it much. Certainly it flatly denies that by conversation or by letter he had stated that the second coming was immediately at hand. "It is this misleading assertion that accounts both for the increased discouragement of the faint-hearted to encourage whom Paul writes strkjv@1:3-2:17|, and for the increased meddlesomeness of the idle brethren to warn whom Paul writes strkjv@3:1-18|" (Frame). It is enough to give one pause to note Paul's indignation over this use of his name by one of the over-zealous advocates of the view that Christ was coming at once. It is true that Paul was still alive, but, if such a "pious fraud" was so common and easily condoned as some today argue, it is difficult to explain Paul's evident anger. Moreover, Paul's words should make us hesitate to affirm that Paul definitely proclaimed the early return of Jesus. He hoped for it undoubtedly, but he did not specifically proclaim it as so many today assert and accuse him of misleading the early Christians with a false presentation.
rwp@2Thessalonians:2:4 @{He that opposeth and exalteth himself} (\ho antikeimenos kai huperairomenos\). Like John's Antichrist this one opposes (\anti-\) Christ and exalts himself (direct middle of \huperair\, old verb to lift oneself up {above} others, only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:12:7| in N.T.), but not Satan, but an agent of Satan. This participial clause is in apposition with the two preceding phrases, the man of sin, the son of perdition. Note strkjv@1Corinthians:8:5| about one called God and strkjv@Acts:17:23| for \sebasma\ (from \sebazomai\), object of worship, late word, in N.T. only in these two passages. {Songs:that he sitteth in the temple of God} (\hste auton eis ton naon tou theou kathisai\). Another example of the infinitive with \hste\ for result. Caius Caligula had made a desperate attempt to have his statue set up for worship in the Temple in Jerusalem. This incident may lie behind Paul's language here. {Setting himself forth as God} (\apodeiknunta heauton hoti estin theos\). Present active participle (\mi\ form) of \apodeiknumi\, agreeing in case with \auton\, {showing himself that he is God}. Caligula claimed to be God. Moffatt doubts if Paul is identifying this deception with the imperial cultus at this stage. Lightfoot thinks that the deification of the Roman emperor supplied Paul's language here. Wetstein notes a coin of Julius with \theos\ on one side and \Thessaloniken\ on the other. In strkjv@1John:2:18| we are told of "many antichrists" some of whom had already come. Hence it is not clear that Paul has in mind only one individual or even individuals at all rather than evil principles, for in verse 6| he speaks of \to katechon\ (that which restraineth) while in verse 7| it is \ho katechn\ (the one that restraineth). Frame argues for a combination of Belial and Antichrist as the explanation of Paul's language. But the whole subject is left by Paul in such a vague form that we can hardly hope to clear it up. It is possible that his own preaching while with them gave his readers a clue that we do not possess.
rwp@2Timothy:2:20 @{In a great house} (\en megali oikii\). Metaphor of a palace. He doubtless has the Kingdom of God in mind, but he works out the metaphor of a great house of the rich and mighty. {Vessels} (\skeu\). Old word \skeuos\. See strkjv@Romans:9:21| for the same double use as here. {Of gold} (\chrus\). Old contracted adjective \chruseos\, only here by Paul. {Of silver} (\argur\). Old contracted adjective \argureos\, in N.T. here, strkjv@Acts:19:24; strkjv@Revelation:9:20|. {Of wood} (\xulina\). Old adjective, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:9:20|. {Of earth} (\ostrakina\). Late adjective, from \ostrakon\, baked clay, in LXX, in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:4:7|.
rwp@2Timothy:2:25 @{Correcting} (\paideuonta\). See strkjv@Titus:2:12|. "Schooling" (Parry). {Oppose themselves} (\antidiatithemenous\). Present middle (direct) participle of \antidiatithmi\, late double compound (Diodorus, Philo) to place oneself in opposition, here only in N.T. {If peradventure God may give} (\m pote di ho theos\). Here Westcott and Hort read the late form of the second aorist active optative of \didmi\ for the usual \doi\ as they do in strkjv@1:18|. But there it is a wish for the future and so regular, while here the optative with \m pote\ in a sort of indirect question is used with a primary tense \dei\ (present) and parallel with an undoubted subjunctive \ananpssin\, while in strkjv@Luke:3:15| \m pote eie\ is with a secondary tense. Examples of such an optative do occur in the papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 989) so that we cannot go as far as Moulton does and say that we "must" read the subjunctive \di\ here (_Prolegomena_, pp. 55, 193). {Repentance} (\metanoian\). "Change of mind" (2Corinthians:7:10; strkjv@Romans:2:4|). {Unto the knowledge of the truth} (\eis epignsin altheias\). Paul's word "full knowledge" (Co strkjv@1:9|).
rwp@2Timothy:3:16 @{Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable} (\psa graph theopneustos kai phelimos\). There are two matters of doubt in this clause. One is the absence of the article \h\ before \graph\, whether that makes it mean "every scripture" or "all scripture" as of necessity if present. Unfortunately, there are examples both ways with both \ps\ and \graph\. Twice we find \graph\ in the singular without the article and yet definite (1Peter:2:6; strkjv@2Peter:1:20|). We have \ps Isral\ (Romans:11:26|) for all Israel (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 772). Songs:far as the grammatical usage goes, one can render here either "all scripture" or "every scripture." There is no copula (\estin\) in the Greek and so one has to insert it either before the \kai\ or after it. If before, as is more natural, then the meaning is: "All scripture (or every scripture) is inspired of God and profitable." In this form there is a definite assertion of inspiration. That can be true also of the second way, making "inspired of God" descriptive of "every scripture," and putting \estin\ (is) after \kai\: "All scripture (or every scripture), inspired of God, is also profitable." {Inspired of God} (\theopneustos\). "God-breathed." Late word (Plutarch) here only in N.T. Perhaps in contrast to the commandments of men in strkjv@Titus:1:14|. {Profitable} (\phelimos\). See strkjv@1Timothy:4:8|. See strkjv@Romans:15:4|. Four examples of \pros\ (facing, with a view to, for): \didaskalian\, teaching; \elegmon\, reproof, in LXX and here only in N.T.; \epanorthsin\, correction, old word, from \epanortho\, to set up straight in addition, here only in N.T., with which compare \epidiortho\ in strkjv@Titus:1:5|; \paideian\, instruction, with which compare strkjv@Ephesians:6:4|.
rwp@Info_Acts @ SOURCES OF THE ACTS Beyond a doubt Luke employed a variety of sources for this great history as he did for the Gospel (Luke:1:1-4|). In fact, Cadbury argues that this Prologue was meant to apply to the Acts also as Volume II whether he intended to write a third volume or not. Certainly we are entitled to say that Luke used the same historical method for Acts. Some of these sources are easy to see. Luke had his own personal experience for the "we" sections. Then he had the benefit of Paul's own notes or suggestions for all that portion where Paul figures from chapters 8 to 28, since Luke was apparently with Paul in Rome when he finished the Book. This would include Paul's sermons and addresses which Luke gives unless one wishes to say, as some do, that Luke followed the style of Thucydides and composed the kind of addresses that he thought Paul would make. I see no evidence of that for each address differs from the others and suits precisely the occasion when it was delivered. The ancients frequently employed shorthand and Paul may have preserved notes of his addresses. Prof. C. C. Torrey, of Yale University, argues in his _Composition and Date of Acts_ (1916) that Luke used an Aramaic document for the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. There is an Aramaic element in certain portions of these chapters, but nothing like so pronounced as in Luke 1 and 2 after strkjv@Luke:1:1-4|. It cannot be said that Torrey has made out his case for such a single document. Luke may have had several such documents besides access to others familiar with the early days of the work in Jerusalem. There was Simon Peter whom Paul visited for two weeks in Jerusalem (Galatians:1:18|) besides other points of contact with him in Jerusalem and Antioch (Acts:15| and strkjv@Galatians:2|). There was also Barnabas who was early Paul's friend (Acts:9:27|) and who knew the beginnings as few did (Acts:4:36f.|). Besides many others it is to be observed that Paul with Luke made a special visit to Caesarea where he spent a week with the gifted Philip and his daughters with the gift of prophecy (Acts:21:8f.|). But with all the inevitable variety of sources for the information needed to cover the wide field of the Book of Acts the same mind has manifestly worked through it and it is the same style all through that appears in the "we" sections where the writer is confessedly a companion of Paul. No other companion of Paul carries this claim for the authorship and no other was a physician and no author has the external evidence from early writers.
rwp@Acts:1:1 @_The Title_ is simply _Acts_ (\Praxeis\) in Aleph, Origen, Tertullian, Didymus, Hilary, Eusebius, Epiphanius. _The Acts of the Apostles_ (\Praxeis apostoln\) is the reading of B D (Aleph in subscription) Athanasius, Origen, Tertullian, Cyprian, Eusebius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Theodoret, Hilary. _The Acts of the Holy Apostles_ (\Praxeis tn hagin apostoln\) is read by A2 E G H A K Chrysostom. It is possible that the book was given no title at all by Luke, for it is plain that usage varied greatly even in the same writers. The long title as found in the Textus Receptus (Authorized Version) is undoubtedly wrong with the adjective "Holy." The reading of B D, "_The Acts of the Apostles_," may be accepted as probably correct.
rwp@Acts:1:3 @{To whom also} (\hois kai\). He chose them and then also manifested himself to these very same men that they might have personal witness to give. {Shewed himself alive} (\parestsen heauton znta\). To the disciples the first Sunday evening (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:36-43; strkjv@John:20:19-25|), the second Sunday evening (John:20:26-29|), at the Sea of Tiberias (John:21:1-23|), on the mountain in Galilee (Matthew:28:16-20; strkjv@Mark:16:15-18; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:6|), to the disciples in Jerusalem and Olivet (Luke:24:44-53; strkjv@Mark:16-19f.; strkjv@Acts:1:1-11|). Luke uses this verb \paristmi\ 13 times in the Acts both transitively and intransitively. It is rendered by various English words (present, furnish, provide, assist, commend). The early disciples including Paul never doubted the fact of the Resurrection, once they were convinced by personal experience. At first some doubted like Thomas (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:41; strkjv@John:20:24f.; strkjv@Matthew:28:17|). But after that they never wavered in their testimony to their own experience with the Risen Christ, "whereof we are witnesses" Peter said (Acts:3:15|). They doubted at first, that we may believe, but at last they risked life itself in defence of this firm faith. {After his passion} (\meta to pathein auton\). Neat Greek idiom, \meta\ with the articular infinitive (second aorist active of \pasch\) and the accusative of general reference, "after the suffering as to him." For \pathein\ used absolutely of Christ's suffering see also strkjv@Acts:17:3; strkjv@26:23|. {By many proofs} (\en pollois tekmriois\). Literally, "in many proofs." \Tekmrion\ is only here in the N.T., though an old and common word in ancient Greek and occurring in the _Koin_ (papyri, etc.). The verb \tekmair\, to prove by sure signs, is from \tekmar\, a sign. Luke does not hesitate to apply the definite word "proofs" to the evidence for the Resurrection of Christ after full investigation on the part of this scientific historian. Aristotle makes a distinction between \tekmrion\ (proof) and \smeion\ (sign) as does Galen the medical writer. {Appearing} (\optanomenos\). Present middle participle from late verb \optan\, late _Koin_ verb from root \opt\ seen in \opsomai, phthn\. In LXX, papyri of second century B.C. (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 83). Only here in the N.T. For \optasia\ for vision see strkjv@Acts:26:19; strkjv@Luke:1:22; strkjv@24:23|. {By the space of forty days} (\di' hmern tesserakonta\). At intervals (\dia\, between) during the forty days, ten appearances being known to us. Jesus was not with them continually now in bodily presence. The period of forty days is given here alone. The Ascension was thus ten days before Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came. Moses was in the mount forty days (Exodus:24:18|) and Jesus fasted forty days (Matthew:4:2|). In the Gospel of Luke 24 this separation of forty days between the Resurrection and the Ascension is not drawn. {The things concerning the Kingdom of God} (\ta peri ts basileias tou theou\). This phrase appears 33 times in Luke's Gospel, 15 times in Mark, 4 times in Matthew who elsewhere has "the kingdom of heaven," once in John, and 6 times in Acts. No essential distinction is to be drawn between the two for the Jews often used "heaven" rather than "God" to avoid using the Tetragrammaton. But it is noticeable how the word kingdom drops out of Acts. Other words like gospel (\euaggelion\) take the place of "kingdom." Jesus was fond of the word "kingdom" and Luke is fond of the idiom "the things concerning" (\ta peri\). Certainly with Jesus the term "kingdom" applies to the present and the future and covers so much that it is not strange that the disciples with their notions of a political Messianic kingdom (Acts:1:6|) were slow to comprehend the spiritual nature of the reign of God.
rwp@Acts:1:4 @{Being assembled together with them} (\sunalizomenos\). Present passive participle from \sunaliz\, an old verb in Herodotus, Xenophon, etc., from sun, with, and \haliz\, from \hals\, crowded. The margin of both the Authorized and the Revised Versions has "eating with them" as if from \sun\ and \hals\ (salt). Salt was the mark of hospitality. There is the verb \halisthte en auti\ used by Ignatius _Ad Magnes_. X, "Be ye salted in him." But it is more than doubtful if that is the idea here though the Vulgate does have _convescens illis_ "eating with them," as if that was the common habit of Jesus during the forty days (Wendt, Feine, etc.). Jesus did on occasion eat with the disciples (Luke:24:41-43; strkjv@Mark:16:14|). {To wait for the promise of the Father} (\perimenein tn epaggelian tou patros\). Note present active infinitive, to keep on waiting for (around, \peri\). In the Great Commission on the mountain in Galilee this item was not given (Matthew:28:16-20|). It is the subjective genitive, the promise given by the Father (note this Johannine use of the word), that is the Holy Spirit ("the promise of the Holy Spirit," objective genitive). {Which ye heard from me} (\hn kousate mou\). Change from indirect discourse (command), infinitives \chrizesthai\ and \perimenein\ after \parggeilen\ to direct discourse without any \eph\ (said he) as the English (Italics). Luke often does this (_oratior ariata_). Note also the ablative case of \mou\ (from me). Luke continues in verse 5| with the direct discourse giving the words of Jesus.
rwp@Acts:1:15 @{Brethren} (\adelphn\). Codex Bezae has "disciples." {Multitude of persons} (\ochlos onomatn\). Literally, multitude of names. This Hebraistic use of \onoma\=person occurs in the LXX (Numbers:1:2; strkjv@18:20; strkjv@3:40,43; strkjv@26:53|) and in strkjv@Revelation:3:4; strkjv@11:13|. {Together} (\epi to auto\). The word "gathered" is not in the Greek here, but it does occur in strkjv@Matthew:22:34| and that is undoubtedly the idea in strkjv@Luke:17:35| as in strkjv@Acts:2:1,44,47; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:20; strkjv@14:23|. Songs:also here. They were in the same place (\to auto\). {About a hundred and twenty} (\hs hekaton eikosi\). A crowd for "the upper room." No special significance in the number 120, just the number there.
rwp@Acts:1:25 @{Apostleship} (\apostols\). Jesus had called the twelve apostles. An old word for sending away, then for a release, then the office and dignity of an apostle (Acts:1:25; strkjv@Romans:1:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:2; Gal strkjv@2:8|). {To his own place} (\eis ton topon ton idion\). A bold and picturesque description of the destiny of Judas worthy of Dante's _Inferno_. There is no doubt in Peter's mind of the destiny of Judas nor of his own guilt. He made ready his own berth and went to it.
rwp@Acts:2:39 @{The promise} (\h epaggelia\). The promise made by Jesus (1:4|) and foretold by Joel (verse 18|). {To you} (\humin\). You Jews. To your descendants, sons and daughters of verse 17|. {To all that are afar off} (\psin tois eis makran\. The horizon widens and includes the Gentiles. Those "afar off" from the Jews were the heathen (Isaiah:49:1; strkjv@57:19; strkjv@Ephesians:2:13,17|). The rabbis so used it. {Shall call} (\an proskalestai\). First aorist middle subjunctive with \an\ in an indefinite relative clause, a perfectly regular construction. The Lord God calls men of every nation anywhere whether Jews or Gentiles. It may be doubted how clearly Peter grasped the significance of these words for he will have trouble over this very matter on the housetop in Joppa and in Caesarea, but he will see before long the full sweep of the great truth that he here proclaims under the impulse of the Holy Spirit. It was a great moment that Peter here reaches.
rwp@Acts:2:42 @{They continued steadfastly} (\san proskarturountes\). Periphrastic active imperfect of \proskarture\ as in strkjv@Acts:1:14| (same participle in verse 46|). {Fellowship} (\koinnii\). Old word from \koinnos\ (partner, sharer in common interest) and this from \koinos\ what is common to all. This partnership involves participation in, as the blood of Christ (Phillipians:2:1|) or co-operation in the work of the gospel (Phillipians:1:5|) or contribution for those in need (2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@9:13|). Hence there is wide diversity of opinion concerning the precise meaning of \koinnia\ in this verse. It may refer to the distribution of funds in verse 44| or to the oneness of spirit in the community of believers or to the Lord's Supper (as in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:16|) in the sense of communion or to the fellowship in the common meals or \agapae\ (love-feasts). {The breaking of bread} (\ti klasei tou artou\). The word \klasis\ is an old word, but used only by Luke in the N.T. (Luke:24:35; strkjv@Acts:2:42|), though the verb \kla\ occurs in other parts of the N.T. as in verse 46|. The problem here is whether Luke refers to the ordinary meal as in strkjv@Luke:24:35| or to the Lord's Supper. The same verb \kla\ is used of breaking bread at the ordinary meal (Luke:24:30|) or the Lord's Supper (Luke:22:19|). It is generally supposed that the early disciples attached so much significance to the breaking of bread at the ordinary meals, more than our saying grace, that they followed the meal with the Lord's Supper at first, a combination called \agapai\ or love-feasts. "There can be no doubt that the Eucharist at this period was preceded uniformly by a common repast, as was the case when the ordinance was instituted" (Hackett). This led to some abuses as in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:20|. Hence it is possible that what is referred to here is the Lord's Supper following the ordinary meal. "To simply explain \ti klasei tou artou\ as='The Holy Communion' is to pervert the plain meaning of words, and to mar the picture of family life, which the text places before us as the ideal of the early believers" (Page). But in strkjv@Acts:20:7| they seem to have come together especially for the observance of the Lord's Supper. Perhaps there is no way to settle the point conclusively here. {The prayers} (\tais proseuchais\). Services where they prayed as in strkjv@1:14|, in the temple (Acts:3:1|), in their homes (4:23|).
rwp@Acts:4:36 @{Barnabas} (\Barnabas\). His name was Joseph (correct text, and not Jesus) and he is mentioned as one illustration of those in verse 34| who selling brought the money. The apostles gave him the nickname Barnabas by which later he was known because of this noble deed. This fact argues that all did not actually sell, but were ready to do so if needed. Possibly Joseph had a larger estate than some others also. The meaning of the nickname is given by Luke as "son of consolation or exhortation" (\huios paraklses\). Doubtless his gifts as a preacher lay along this same line. Rackham thinks that the apostles gave him this name when he was recognized as a prophet. In strkjv@Acts:11:23| the very word \parekalei\ (exhorted) is used of Barnabas up at Antioch. He is the type of preacher described by Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:3|. Encouragement is the chief idea in \paraklsis\ though exhortation, comfort, consolation are used to render it (Acts:9:31; strkjv@13:15; strkjv@15:31|). See also strkjv@16:9; strkjv@20:12|. It is not necessary to think that the apostles coined the name Barnabas for Joseph which originally may have come from \Barnebous\ (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 308-10), son of Nebo, or even the Hebrew _Bar Nebi_ (son of a prophet). But, whatever the origin, the popular use is given by Luke. He was even called apostle along with Paul (Acts:14:14|) in the broad sense of that word.
rwp@Acts:5:26 @{Brought} (\gen\). Imperfect active of \ag\, was bringing (leading), slowly no doubt, and solemnly. {But without violence} (\ou meta bias\). Literally, not with violence. {For they feared} (\ephobounto gar\). Imperfect middle, still feared, kept on fearing. {Lest they be stoned} (\m lithasthsin\). Negative purpose with \m\ (like \hina m\), probably with "not with violence," though possible with "they feared." They handled the apostles gently for fear of being stoned themselves by the people. First aorist passive subjunctive of \lithaz\ (from \lithos\, stone), old verb to pelt with stones (Acts:14:19; strkjv@John:10:31-33|).
rwp@Acts:5:34 @{Gamaliel} (\Gamalil\). The grandson of Hillel, teacher of Paul (Acts:22:3|), later president of the Sanhedrin, and the first of the seven rabbis termed "Rabban." It is held by some that he was one of the doctors who heard the Boy Jesus in the temple (Luke:2:47|) and that he was a secret disciple like Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, but there is no evidence of either position. Besides, he appears here as a loyal Pharisee and "a doctor of the law" (\nomodidaskalos\). This word appears already in strkjv@Luke:5:17| of the Pharisaic doctors bent on criticizing Jesus, which see. Paul uses it of Judaizing Christians (1Timothy:1:7|). Like other great rabbis he had a great saying: "Procure thyself a teacher, avoid being in doubt; and do not accustom thyself to give tithes by guess." He was a man of judicial temper and not prone to go off at a tangent, though his brilliant young pupil Saul went to the limit about Stephen without any restraint on the part of Gamaliel so far as the record goes. Gamaliel champions the cause of the apostles as a Pharisee to score a point against the Sadducees. He acts as a theological opportunist, not as a disciple of Christ. He felt that a temporizing policy was best. There are difficulties in this speech of Gamaliel and it is not clear how Luke obtained the data for the address. It is, of course, possible that Saul was present and made notes of it for Luke afterwards. {Had in honour of all the people} (\timios panti ti lai\). Ethical dative. \Timios\ from \tim\, old word meaning precious, dear. {The men} (\tous anthrpous\). Correct text as in verse 35|, not "the apostles" as Textus Receptus.
rwp@Acts:6:5 @{Pleased} (\resen\). Aorist active indicative of \aresk\ like Latin _placuit_ when a vote was taken. The use of \enpion\ before "the whole multitude" is like the LXX. {They chose} (\exelexanto\). First aorist middle indicative of \ekleg\, to pick out for oneself. Each one of the seven has a Greek name and was undoubtedly a Hellenist, not an Aramaean Jew. Consummate wisdom is here displayed for the murmuring had come from the Hellenists, seven of whom were chosen to take proper care of the widows of Hellenists. This trouble was settled to stay settled so far as we know. Nothing is here told of any of the seven except Stephen who is "a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit" and Nicolas "a proselyte of Antioch" (who was not then born a Jew, but had come to the Jews from the Greek world).
rwp@Acts:6:9 @{The synagogue of the Libertines} (\ek ts sunaggs ts legomens Libertinn\). The Libertines (Latin _libertinus_, a freedman or the son of a freedman) were Jews, once slaves of Rome (perhaps descendants of the Jews taken to Rome as captives by Pompey), now set free and settled in Jerusalem and numerous enough to have a synagogue of their own. Schuerer calls a Talmudic myth the statement that there were 480 synagogues in Jerusalem. There were many, no doubt, but how many no one knows. These places of worship and study were in all the cities of the later times where there were Jews enough to maintain one. Apparently Luke here speaks of five such synagogues in Jerusalem (that of the Libertines, of the Cyrenians, of the Alexandrians, of Cilicia, and of Asia). There probably were enough Hellenists in Jerusalem to have five such synagogues. But the language of Luke is not clear on this point. He may make only two groups instead of five since he uses the article \tn\ twice (once before \Libertinn kai Kurnain kai Alexandren\, again before \apo Kilikias kai Asias\). He also changes from the genitive plural to \apo\ before Cilicia and Asia. But, leaving the number of the synagogues unsettled whether five or two, it is certain that in each one where Stephen appeared as a Hellenist preaching Jesus as the Messiah he met opposition. Certain of them "arose" (\anestsan\) "stood up" after they had stood all that they could from Stephen, "disputing with Stephen" (\sunztountes ti Stephani\). Present active participle of \sunzte\, to question together as the two on the way to Emmaus did (Luke:24:15|). Such interruptions were common with Jews. They give a skilled speaker great opportunity for reply if he is quick in repartee. Evidently Stephen was fully equipped for the emergency. One of their synagogues had men from Cilicia in it, making it practically certain that young Saul of Tarsus, the brilliant student of Gamaliel, was present and tried his wits with Stephen. His ignominious defeat may be one explanation of his zest in the stoning of Stephen (Acts:8:1|).
rwp@Acts:6:14 @{We have heard him say} (\akkoamen autou legontos\). The only direct testimony and evidently wrong. Curiously like the charge brought against Jesus before Caiaphas that he would destroy the temple and build it again in three days. Undoubtedly Stephen had said something about Christianity before as meant for others besides Jews. He had caught the spirit of Jesus about worship as shown to the woman at Sychar in strkjv@John:4| that God is spirit and to be worshipped by men anywhere and everywhere without having to come to the temple in Jerusalem. It was inflammable material surely and it was easy to misrepresent and hard to clear up. {This Jesus of Nazareth} (\Isous ho Nazraios houtos\). With contempt.
rwp@Acts:7:37 @{Like unto me} (\hs eme\). This same passage Peter quoted to the crowd in Solomon's Porch (Acts:3:22|). Stephen undoubtedly means to argue that Moses was predicting the Messiah as a prophet like himself who is no other than Jesus so that these Pharisees are in reality opposing Moses. It was a neat turn.
rwp@Acts:8:15 @{That they might receive} (\hops labsin\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \lamban\, final clause with \hops\. Did they wish the Samaritan Pentecost to prove beyond a doubt that the Samaritans were really converted when they believed? They had been baptized on the assumption that the Holy Spirit had given them new hearts. The coming of the Holy Spirit with obvious signs (cf. strkjv@10:44-48|) as in Jerusalem would make it plain.
rwp@Acts:8:30 @{Understandest thou what thou readest?} (\Ara ge ginskeis ha anaginskeis?\) The interrogative particle \ara\ and the intensive particle \ge\ indicate doubt on Philip's part. The play (\paranomasia\) upon the words in the Greek is very neat: {Do you know what you know again (read)?} The verb for read (\anaginsko\) means to know the letters again, recognize, read. The famous comment of Julian about the Christian writings is often quoted: \Anegnn, egnn, kategnn\ (I read, I understood, I condemned). The keen retort was: \Anegns, all'ouk egns, ei gar egns, ouk an kategns\ (You read, but did not understand; for if you had understood, you would not have condemned).
rwp@Acts:8:35 @{Beginning from this scripture} (\arxamenos apo ts graphs tauts\). As a text. Philip needed no better opening than this Messianic passage in Isaiah. {Preached unto him Jesus} (\euggelisato auti ton Isoun\). Philip had no doubt about the Messianic meaning and he knew that Jesus was the Messiah. There are scholars who do not find Jesus in the Old Testament at all, but Jesus himself did (Luke:24:27|) as Philip does here. Scientific study of the Old Testament (historical research) misses its mark if it fails to find Christ the Center of all history. The knowledge of the individual prophet is not always clear, but after events throw a backward light that illumines it all (1Peter:1:11f.; strkjv@2Peter:1:19-21|).
rwp@Acts:9:7 @{That journeyed with him} (\hoi sunodeuontes auti\). Not in the older Greek, but in the _Koin_, with the associative instrumental. {Speechless} (\eneoi\). Mute. Only here in N.T., though old word. {Hearing the voice, but beholding no man} (\akouontes men ts phns, mdena de therountes\). Two present active participles in contrast (\men, de\). In strkjv@22:9| Paul says that the men "beheld the light" (\to men phs etheasanto\), but evidently did not discern the person. Paul also says there, "but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me" (\tn de phnn ouk kousan tou lalountos moi\). Instead of this being a flat contradiction of what Luke says in strkjv@9:7| it is natural to take it as being likewise (as with the "light" and "no one") a distinction between the "sound" (original sense of \phn\ as in strkjv@John:3:8|) and the separate words spoken. It so happens that \akou\ is used either with the accusative (the extent of the hearing) or the genitive (the specifying). It is possible that such a distinction here coincides with the two senses of \phn\. They heard the sound (9:7|), but did not understand the words (22:9|). However, this distinction in case with \akou\, though possible and even probable here, is by no means a necessary one for in strkjv@John:3:8| where \phnn\ undoubtedly means "sound" the accusative occurs as Luke uses \kousen phnn\ about Saul in strkjv@Acts:9:4|. Besides in strkjv@22:7| Paul uses \kousa phns\ about himself, but \kousa phnn\ about himself in strkjv@76:14|, interchangeably.
rwp@Acts:9:17 @{Laying his hands on him} (\epitheis ep' auton tas cheiras\). As in the vision Saul saw (verse 12|). {Brother Saul} (\Saoul adelphe\). All suspicion has vanished and Ananias takes Saul to his heart as a brother in Christ. It was a gracious word to Saul now under suspicion on both sides. {The Lord, even Jesus} (\ho kurios, Isous\). Undoubted use of \kurios\ as Lord and applied to Jesus. {Who appeared} (\ho ophtheis\). First aorist passive participle of \hora\, was seen as in strkjv@26:16| and with the dative also (\soi\). {Thou camest} (\rchou\). Imperfect indicative middle, "thou wert coming." {Be filled with the Holy Spirit} (\plstheis pneumatos hagiou\). This enduement of special power he will need as an apostle (Hackett) and as promised by Jesus (1:8; strkjv@Galatians:2:7|).
rwp@Acts:9:19 @{Was strengthened} (\enischuth\). First aorist passive indicative of \enischu\, to receive strength (\ischus\), comparatively late verb and here only in the N.T. save strkjv@Luke:22:43| where it is doubtful. Poor verse division. This clause belongs in sense to verse 18|. {Some days} (\hmeras tinas\). An indefinite period, probably not long, the early period in Damascus before Saul left for Arabia (Galatians:1:13-24|).
rwp@Acts:9:31 @{Songs:the church} (\H men oun ekklsia\). The singular \ekklsia\ is undoubtedly the true reading here (all the great documents have it so). By this time there were churches scattered over Judea, Galilee, and Samaria (Galatians:1:22|), but Luke either regards the disciples in Palestine as still members of the one great church in Jerusalem (instance already the work of Philip in Samaria and soon of Peter in Joppa and Caesarea) or he employs the term \ekklsia\ in a geographical or collective sense covering all of Palestine. The strictly local sense we have seen already in strkjv@8:1,3| (and strkjv@Matthew:18:17|) and the general spiritual sense in strkjv@Matthew:16:18|. But in strkjv@Acts:8:3| it is plain that the term is applied to the organization of Jerusalem Christians even when scattered in their homes. The use of \men oun\ (so) is Luke's common way of gathering up the connection. The obvious meaning is that the persecution ceased because the persecutor had been converted. The wolf no longer ravined the sheep. It is true also that the effort of Caligula A.D. 39 to set up his image in the temple in Jerusalem for the Jews to worship greatly excited the Jews and gave them troubles of their own (Josephus, _Ant_. XVIII. 8, 2-9). {Had peace} (\eichen eirnn\). Imperfect active. Kept on having peace, enjoying peace, because the persecution had ceased. Many of the disciples came back to Jerusalem and the apostles began to make preaching tours out from the city. This idiom (\ech eirnn\) occurs again in strkjv@Romans:5:1| (\eirnn echmen\, present active subjunctive) where it has been grievously misunderstood. There it is an exhortation to keep on enjoying the peace with God already made, not to make peace with God which would be \eirnn schmen\ (ingressive aorist subjunctive). {Edified} (\oikodomoumen\). Present passive participle, linear action also. One result of the enjoyment of peace after the persecution was the continued edification (Latin word _aedificatio_ for building up a house), a favourite figure with Paul (1Corinthians:14; strkjv@Ephesians:3|) and scattered throughout the N.T., old Greek verb. In strkjv@1Peter:2:5| Peter speaks of "the spiritual house" throughout the five Roman provinces being "built up" (cf. strkjv@Matthew:16:18|). {In the comfort of the Holy Spirit} (\ti paraklsei tou hagiou pneumatos\). Either locative ({in}) or instrumental case ({by}). The Holy Spirit had been promised by Jesus as "another Paraclete" and now this is shown to be true. The only instance in Acts of the use of \paraklsis\ with the Holy Spirit. The word, of course, means calling to one's side (\parakale\) either for advice or for consolation. {Was multiplied} (\eplthuneto\). Imperfect middle passive. The multiplication of the disciples kept pace with the peace, the edification, the walking in the fear of the Lord, the comfort of the Holy Spirit. The blood of the martyrs was already becoming the seed of the church. Stephen had not borne his witness in vain.
rwp@Acts:9:38 @{Delay not} (\m oknsis\). Ingressive aorist active subjunctive in prohibition. Direct discourse and not indirect as late MSS. have (aorist active infinitive, \oknsai\). Possibly the two messengers started before Dorcas was quite dead, though we do not know. Peter had recently healed Aeneas and the disciples may have had faith enough to believe that he could raise the dead by the power of Christ. W. M. Ramsay doubts if Dorcas was really dead, but why see legends in these supernatural events?
rwp@Acts:10:20 @{But} (\alla\). Songs:usually, though it is open to question whether \alla\ is adversative here and not rather, "Now then." {Get thee down} (\katabthi\). Second aorist active imperative, at once. {Go} (\poreuou\). Present middle imperative, go on. {Nothing doubting} (\mden diakrinomenos\). Another compound of \dia\, old and common verb for a divided mind (\dia\ like \duo\, two). Note usual negative of the present middle participle, the subjective \mden\. The notion of wavering (James:1:6|) is common with this verb in the middle voice. In strkjv@Acts:11:12| the aorist active (\mden diakrinanta\) is used perhaps with the idea of conduct towards others rather than his own internal doubt as here (Page). {For I} (\hoti eg\). The Holy Spirit assumes responsibility for the messengers from Cornelius and thus connects their mission with the vision which was still troubling Peter. Peter had heard his name called by the man (verse 19|).
rwp@Acts:11:12 @{Making no distinction} (\mden diakrinanta\). Songs:Westcott and Hort (first aorist active participle) instead of \mden diakrinomenon\ "nothing doubting" (present middle participle) like strkjv@10:20|. The difference in voice shows the distinction in meaning. {We entered into the man's house} (\eislthomen eis ton oikon tou andros\). Peter confesses it, but shows that the other six went in also. He avoids mention of Cornelius's name and office.
rwp@Acts:11:18 @{Held their peace} (\hsuchasan\). Ingressive aorist active indicative of \hsuchaz\, old verb to be quiet, to keep quiet. The wrangling (verse 2|) ceased. The critics even "glorified God" (\edoxasan\, ingressive aorist again). {Then to the Gentiles also} (\Ara kai tois ethnesin\). \Ergo\ as in strkjv@Luke:11:20,48| and like \ara oun\ in strkjv@Romans:5:18|. In ancient Greek inferential \ara\ cannot come at the beginning of a clause as here. It was reluctant acquiescence in the undoubted fact that God had "granted repentance unto life" to these Gentiles in Caesarea, but the circumcision party undoubtedly looked on it as an exceptional case and not to be regarded as a precedent to follow with other Gentiles. Peter will see in this incident (Acts:15:8|) the same principle for which Paul contends at the Jerusalem Conference. Furneaux suggests that this conduct of Peter in Caesarea, though grudgingly acquiesced in after his skilful defence, decreased his influence in Jerusalem where he had been leader and helped open the way for the leadership of James the Lord's brother.
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|) and open to the lessons from their environment without a vision such as Peter had at Joppa. "It was a departure of startling boldness" (Furneaux) by laymen outside of the circle of official leaders.
rwp@Acts:12:12 @{When he had considered} (\sunidn\). Second aorist active participle of \suneidon\ (for the defective verb \sunora\), to see together, to grasp as a whole, old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@14:6|, save the perfect indicative \sunoida\ (1Corinthians:4:4|) and participle (Acts:5:2|). It is the word from which \suneidsis\ (conscience) comes (Romans:2:15|). Peter's mind worked rapidly and he decided what to do. He took in his situation clearly. {To the house of Mary} (\epi tn oikian ts Marias\). Another Mary (the others were Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary of Bethany, Mary Magdalene, Mary wife of Cleopas, Mary the mother of James and Joses). She may have been a widow and was possessed of some means since her house was large enough to hold the large group of disciples there. Barnabas, cousin of John Mark her son (Colossians:4:10|), was also a man of property or had been (Acts:4:36f.|). It is probable that the disciples had been in the habit of meeting in her house, a fact known to Peter and he was evidently fond of John Mark whom he afterwards calls "my son" (1Peter:5:13|) and whom he had met here. The upper room of strkjv@Acts:1:13| may have been in Mary's house and Mark may have been the man bearing a pitcher of water (Luke:22:10|) and the young man who fled in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mark:14:51f.|). There was a gate and portress here as in the house of the highpriest (John:18:16|). Peter knew where to go and even at this early hour hoped to find some of the disciples. Mary is one of the many mothers who have become famous by reason of their sons, though she was undoubtedly a woman of high character herself. {Were gathered together and were praying} (\san sunthroismenoi kai proseuchomenoi\). Note difference in the tenses, one periphrastic past perfect passive (\sunathroiz\ old verb, in the N.T. here only and strkjv@19:25| and the uncompounded \throiz\ in strkjv@Luke:24:33|) and the periphrastic imperfect. The praying apparently had been going on all night and a large number (many, \hikanoi\) of the disciples were there. One recalls the time when they had gathered to pray (4:31|) after Peter had told the disciples of the threats of the Sanhedrin (4:23|). God had rescued Peter then. Would he let him be put to death now as James had been?
rwp@Acts:12:15 @{Thou art mad} (\maini\). Present middle indicative second person singular. Old verb, only in the middle voice. Festus used the same word to Paul (26:24|). The maid was undoubtedly excited, but it was a curious rebuff from those who had been praying all night for Peter's release. In their defence it may be said that Stephen and James had been put to death and many others by Saul's persecution. {She confidently affirmed} (\diischurizeto\). Imperfect middle of \diischurizomai\, an old word of vigorous and confident assertion, originally to lean upon. Only here in the N.T. The girl stuck to her statement. {It is his angel} (\Hosea:aggelos estin autou\). This was the second alternative of the disciples. It was a popular Jewish belief that each man had a guardian angel. Luke takes no position about it. No scripture teaches it.
rwp@Acts:13:7 @{With the proconsul Sergius Paulus} (\sun ti anthupati Sergii Pauli\). Luke used to be sharply criticized for applying this term to Sergius Paulus on the ground that Cyprus was a province under the appointment of the emperor with the title of propraetor and not under the control of the senate with the title of proconsul. That was true B.C. 30, but five years later it was changed to proconsul by Augustus and put under the control of the Senate. Two inscriptions have been found with the date A.D. 51 and 52 with the names of proconsuls of Cyprus and one is in the Cesnola Collection, an inscription found at Soli with the name of Paulus as Proconsul, undoubtedly this very man, though no date occurs. {A man of understanding} (\andri suneti\). All the more amazing that he should be a victim of Barjesus. He had given up idolatry at any rate and was eager to hear Barnabas and Saul.
rwp@Acts:13:9 @{But Saul, who is also called Paul} (\Saulos de, ho kai Paulos\). By this remarkably brief phrase Luke presents this epoch in the life of Saul Paul. The "also" (\kai\) does not mean that the name Paul was given now for the first time, rather than he had always had it. As a Jew and a Roman citizen, he undoubtedly had both names all the time (cf. John Mark, Symeon Niger, Barsabbas Justus). Jerome held that the name of Sergius Paulus was adopted by Saul because of his conversion at this time, but this is a wholly unlikely explanation, "an element of vulgarity impossible to St. Paul " (Farrar). Augustine thought that the meaning of the Latin _paulus_ (little) would incline Saul to adopt, "but as a proper name the word rather suggested the glories of the Aemilian family, and even to us recalls the name of another Paulus, who was 'lavish of his noble life'" (Page). Among the Jews the name Saul was naturally used up to this point, but from now on Luke employs Paul save when there is a reference to his previous life (Acts:22:7; strkjv@26:14|). His real career is work among the Gentiles and Paul is the name used by them. There is a striking similarity in sound between the Hebrew Saul and the Roman Paul. Paul was proud of his tribe of Benjamin and so of King Saul (Phillipians:3:5|). {Filled with the Holy Spirit} (\plstheis pneumatos hagiou\). First aorist (ingressive) passive participle of \pimplmi\ with the genitive case. A special influx of power to meet this emergency. Here was a cultured heathen, typical of the best in Roman life, who called forth all the powers of Paul plus the special help of the Holy Spirit to expose the wickedness of Elymas Barjesus. If one wonders why the Holy Spirit filled Paul for this emergency rather than Barnabas, when Barnabas was named first in strkjv@13:2|, he can recall the sovereignty of the Holy Spirit in his choice of agents (1Corinthians:12:4-11|) and also the special call of Paul by Christ (Acts:9:15; strkjv@26:17f.|). {Fastened his eyes} (\atenisas\). As already in strkjv@Luke:4:20; strkjv@22:56; strkjv@Acts:3:4,12; strkjv@6:15; strkjv@10:4|.
rwp@Acts:13:42 @{And as they went out} (\Exiontn de autn\). Genitive absolute with present active participle of \exeimi\, to go out, old verb, in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:12:42; strkjv@17:15; strkjv@20:7; strkjv@27:43|. As they (Paul and Barnabas) were going out with all the excitement and hubbub created by the sermon. {They besought} (\parekaloun\). Imperfect active, inchoative, began to beseech. The Textus Receptus inserts wrongly \ta ethn\ (the Gentiles) as if the Jews were opposed to Paul from the first as some doubtless were. But both Jews and Gentiles asked for the repetition of the sermon (\lalthnai\, first aorist passive infinitive object of \parekaloun\ with accusative of general reference). {The next Sabbath} (\eis to metaxu sabbaton\). Late use (Josephus, Plutarch, etc.) of \metaxu\ (\meta\ and \xun\=\sun\) in sense of after or next instead of between (sense of \meta\ prevailing). Note use of \eis\ for "on" or "by."
rwp@Acts:13:45 @{The Jews} (\hoi Ioudaioi\). Certainly not the proselytes of verse 43|. Probably many of the Jews that were then favourably disposed to Paul's message had reacted against him under the influence of the rabbis during the week and evidently on this Sabbath very many Gentiles ("almost the whole city," "the multitudes" \tous ochlous\) had gathered, to the disgust of the stricter Jews. Nothing is specifically stated here about the rabbis, but they were beyond doubt the instigators of, and the ringleaders in, the opposition as in Thessalonica (17:5|). No such crowds (\ochlous\) came to the synagogue when they were the speakers. {With jealousy} (\zlou\). Genitive case of \zlos\ (from \ze\, to boil) after \eplsthsan\ (effective first aorist passive indicative of \pimplmi\). Envy and jealousy arise between people of the same calling (doctors towards doctors, lawyers towards lawyers, preachers towards preachers). Songs:these rabbis boiled with jealousy when they saw the crowds gathered to hear Paul and Barnabas. {Contradicted} (\antelegon\). Imperfect active of \antileg\, old verb to speak against, to say a word in opposition to (\anti\, face to face). It was interruption of the service and open opposition in the public meeting. Paul and Barnabas were guests by courtesy and, of course, could not proceed further, when denied that privilege. {Blasphemed} (\blasphmountes\). Blaspheming. Songs:the correct text without the addition \antilegontes\ (repeated from \antelegon\ above). Common verb in the Gospels for saying injurious and harmful things. Doubtless these rabbis indulged in unkind personalities and made it plain that Paul and Barnabas were going beyond the limitations of pure Judaism in their contacts with Gentiles.
rwp@Acts:14:2 @{That were disobedient} (\hoi apeithsantes\). First aorist active articular participle, not the present \apeithountes\ as the Textus Receptus has it. But the meaning is probably the Jews that disbelieved, rather than that disobeyed. Strictly \apeithe\ does mean to disobey and \apiste\ to disbelieve, but that distinction is not observed in strkjv@John:3:36| nor in strkjv@Acts:19:9; strkjv@28:24|. The word \apeithe\ means to be \apeiths\, to be unwilling to be persuaded or to withhold belief and then also to withhold obedience. The two meanings run into one another. To disbelieve the word of God is to disobey God. {Made them evil affected} (\ekaksan\). First aorist active indicative of \kako\, old verb from \kakos\, to do evil to, to ill-treat, then in later Greek as here to embitter, to exasperate as in strkjv@Psalms:105:32| and in Josephus. In this sense only here in the N.T. Evidently Paul preached the same message as in Antioch for it won both Jews and Gentiles, and displeased the rabbis. Codex Bezae adds here that "the chiefs of the synagogue and the rulers" brought persecution upon Paul and Barnabas just as was argued about Antioch. Outside the synagogue the Jews would poison the minds of the Gentiles against Paul and Barnabas. "The story of Thecla suggests a means, and perhaps the apostles were brought before the magistrates on some charge of interference with family life. The magistrates however must have seen at once that there was no legal case against them; and by a sentence of acquittal or in some other way the Lord gave peace" (Rackham). As we have it, the story of Paul and Thecla undoubtedly has apocryphal features, though Thecla may very well be an historical character here at Iconium where the story is located. Certainly the picture of Paul herein drawn cannot be considered authentic though a true tradition may underlie it: "bald, bowlegged, strongly built, small in stature, with large eyes and meeting eyebrows and longish nose; full of grace; sometimes looking like a man, sometimes having the face of an angel."
rwp@Acts:14:27 @{Gathered the church together} (\sunagagontes tn ekklsian\). Second aorist active participle of \sunag\. It "was the first missionary meeting in history" (Furneaux). It was not hard to get the church together when the news spread that Paul and Barnabas had returned. "The suitability of the Gospel to become the religion of the world had not before been put to the test" (Furneaux). Doubtless many "wise-acres" had predicted failure as they did for William Carey and for Adoniram Judson and Luther Rice. {Rehearsed} (\anggellon\). Imperfect active. It was a long story for they had many things to tell of God's dealings "with them" (\met' autn\) for God had been "with them" all the while as Jesus had said he would be (Matthew:28:20|, \meth' hmn\). Paul could recount some of the details given later in strkjv@2Corinthians:11|. {And how} (\kai hoti\). Or "and that" in particular, as the upshot of it all. {He had opened a door of faith unto the Gentiles} (\noixen tois ethnesin thuran pistes\). Three times in Paul's Epistles (1Corinthians:16:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12; strkjv@Colossians:4:3|) he employed the metaphor of "door," perhaps a reminiscence of the very language of Paul here. This work in Galatia gained a large place in Paul's heart (Galatians:4:14f.|). The Gentiles now, it was plain, could enter the kingdom of God (verse 22|) through the door of faith, not by law or by circumcision or by heathen philosophy or mythology.
rwp@Acts:15:1 @{And certain men came down from Judea} (\kai tines katelthontes apo ts Ioudaias\). Evidently the party of the circumcision in the church in Jerusalem (11:2|) had heard of the spread of the gospel among the Gentiles in Cyprus, Pamphylia, and South Galatia (Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycaonia). Possibly John Mark after his desertion at Perga (13:13|) told of this as one of his reasons for coming home. At any rate echoes of the jubilation in Antioch in Syria would be certain to reach Jerusalem. The Judaizers in Jerusalem, who insisted that all the Gentile Christians must become Jews also, had acquiesced in the case of Cornelius and his group (11:1-18|) after plain proof by Peter that it was the Lord's doing. But they had not agreed to a formal campaign to turn the exception into the rule and to make Christianity mainly Gentile with a few Jews instead of mainly Jewish with a few Gentiles. Since Paul and Barnabas did not come up to Jerusalem, the leaders among the Judaizers decided to go down to Antioch and attack Paul and Barnabas there. They had volunteered to go without church action in Jerusalem for their activity is disclaimed by the conference (Acts:15:24|). In strkjv@Galatians:2:4| Paul with some heat describes these Judaizers as "false brethren, secretly introduced who sneaked in to spy out our liberty." It is reasonably certain that this visit to Jerusalem described in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| is the same one as the Jerusalem Conference in Acts strkjv@15:5-29| in spite of the effort of Ramsay to identify it with that in strkjv@11:29f|. Paul in Galatians is not giving a list of his visits to Jerusalem. He is showing his independence of the twelve apostles and his equality with them. He did not see them in strkjv@11:29f.|, but only "the elders." In strkjv@Acts:15| Luke gives the outward narrative of events, in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| Paul shows us the private interview with the apostles when they agreed on their line of conduct toward the Judaizers. In strkjv@Galatians:2:2| by the use of "them" (\autois\) Paul seems to refer to the first public meeting in Acts before the private interview that came in between verses strkjv@15:5-6|. If we recall the difficulty that Peter had on the subject of preaching the gospel to the heathen (10:1-11:18|), we can the better understand the attitude of the Judaizers. They were men of sincere convictions without a doubt, but they were obscurantists and unable and unwilling to receive new light from the Lord on a matter that involved their racial and social prejudices. They recalled that Jesus himself had been circumcised and that he had said to the Syro-Phoenician woman that he had come only save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew:15:24ff.|). They argued that Christ had not repealed circumcision. Songs:one of the great religious controversies of all time was begun, that between spiritual religion and ritualistic or ceremonial religion. It is with us yet with baptism taking the place of circumcision. These self-appointed champions of circumcision for Gentile Christians were deeply in earnest. {Taught the brethren} (\edidaskon tous adelphous\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to teach and kept it up. Their attitude was one of supercilious superiority. They probably resented the conduct of Barnabas, who, when sent by the Church in Jerusalem to investigate the conversion of the Greeks in Antioch (11:20-26|), did not return and report till a strong church had been established there with the help of Saul and only then with a big collection to confuse the issue. Paul and Barnabas were on hand, but the Judaizers persisted in their efforts to force their views on the church in Antioch. It was a crisis. {Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved} (\ean me peritmthte ti ethei Muses, ou dunasthe sthnai\). There was the dictum of the Judaizers to the Gentiles. Paul and Barnabas had been circumcised. This is probably the precise language employed, for they spoke in Greek to these Greeks. It is a condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of being determined, \ean\ plus the first aorist passive subjunctive of \peritemn\). There was thus hope held out for them, but only on condition that they be circumcised. The issue was sharply drawn. The associative instrumental case (\ti ethei\) is customary. "Saved" (\sthnai\) here is the Messianic salvation. This doctrine denied the efficacy of the work of Christ.
rwp@Acts:15:14 @{Hearken unto me} (\akousate mou\). Usual appeal for attention. James was termed James the Just and was considered a representative of the Hebraic as opposed to the Hellenistic wing of the Jewish Christians (Acts:6:1|). The Judaizers had doubtless counted on him as a champion of their view and did later wrongfully make use of his name against Peter at Antioch (Galatians:2:12|). There was instant attention when James began to speak. {Symeon} (\Sumen\). The Aramaic form of Simon as in strkjv@2Peter:2:1|. This little touch would show his affinities with the Jewish Christians (not the Judaizers). This Aramaic form is used also in strkjv@Luke:2:25,34| of the old prophet in the temple. Possibly both forms (Symeon, Aramaic, and Simon, Greek) were current in Jerusalem. {How} (\kaths\). Strictly, "according as," here like \hos\ in indirect discourse somewhat like the epexegetic or explanatory use in strkjv@3John:1:3|. {First} (\prton\). Told by Peter in verse 7|. James notes, as Peter did, that this experience of Barnabas and Paul is not the beginning of work among the Gentiles. {Did visit} (\epeskepsato\). First aorist middle indicative of \episkeptomai\, old verb to look upon, to look after, provide for. This same verb occurs in strkjv@James:1:27| and is one of various points of similarity between this speech of James in Acts and the Epistle of James as shown by Mayor in his _Commentary on James_. Somehow Luke may have obtained notes of these various addresses. {To take from the Gentiles a people for his name} (\labein ex ethnn laon ti onomati autou\). Bengel calls this _egregium paradoxon_, a chosen people (\laon\) out of the Gentiles (\ethnn\). This is what is really involved in what took place at Caesarea at the hands of Peter and the campaign of Barnabas and Paul from Antioch. But such a claim of God's purpose called for proof from Scripture to convince Jews and this is precisely what James undertakes to give. This new Israel from among the Gentiles is one of Paul's great doctrines as set forth in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11|. Note the use of God's "name" here for "the Israel of God" (Galatians:6:16|).
rwp@Acts:15:32 @{Being themselves also prophets} (\kai autoi prophtai ontes\). As well as Paul and Barnabas and like Agabus (11:27-30|), for-speakers for Christ who justify the commendation in the letter (verse 27|) "with many words" (\dia logou pollou\), "with much talk," and no doubt with kindly words concerning the part played at the Conference by Paul and Barnabas. {Confirmed} (\epestrixan\). See on ¯14:22|. It was a glorious time with no Judaizers to disturb their fellowship as in 1-3|.
rwp@Acts:17:14 @{And then immediately} (\euthes de tote\). They acted swiftly as in Thessalonica. {Sent forth} (\exapesteilan\). Double compound (\ex, apo\, both out and away) common in late Greek. First aorist active indicative (\exapostell\, liquid verb). Same form in strkjv@9:30|. {As far as to the sea} (\hes epi tn thalassan\). It is not clear whether Paul went all the way to Athens by land or took ship at Dium or Pydna, some sixteen miles away, and sailed to Athens. Some even think that Paul gave the Jews the slip and went all the way by land when they expected him to go by sea. At any rate we know that Paul was grieved to cut short his work in Macedonia, probably not over six months in all, which had been so fruitful in Philippi, Thessalonica, and Beroea. Silas and Timothy (note his presence) remained behind in Beroea and they would keep the work going. Paul no doubt hoped to return soon. Silas and Timothy in Beroea would also serve to screen his flight for the Jews wanted his blood, not theirs. The work in Macedonia spread widely (1Thessalonians:1:7f.|).
rwp@Acts:17:18 @{And certain also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him} (\tines de kai tn Epikourin kai Stikn philosophn suneballon auti\). Imperfect active of \sunball\, old verb, in the N.T. only by Luke, to bring or put together in one's mind (Luke:2:19|), to meet together (Acts:20:14|), to bring together aid (18:27|), to confer or converse or dispute as here and already strkjv@4:15| which see. These professional philosophers were always ready for an argument and so they frequented the agora for that purpose. Luke uses one article and so groups the two sects together in their attitude toward Paul, but they were very different in fact. Both sects were eager for argument and both had disdain for Paul, but they were the two rival practical philosophies of the day, succeeding the more abstruse theories of Plato and Aristotle. Socrates had turned men's thought inward (\Gnthi Seauton\, Know Thyself) away from the mere study of physics. Plato followed with a profound development of the inner self (metaphysics). Aristotle with his cyclopaedic grasp sought to unify and relate both physics and metaphysics. Both Zeno and Epicurus (340-272 B.C.) took a more practical turn in all this intellectual turmoil and raised the issues of everyday life. Zeno (360-260 B.C.) taught in the \Stoa\ (Porch) and so his teaching was called Stoicism. He advanced many noble ideas that found their chief illustration in the Roman philosophers (Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius). He taught self-mastery and hardness with an austerity that ministered to pride or suicide in case of failure, a distinctly selfish and unloving view of life and with a pantheistic philosophy. Epicurus considered practical atheism the true view of the universe and denied a future life and claimed pleasure as the chief thing to be gotten out of life. He did not deny the existence of gods, but regarded them as unconcerned with the life of men. The Stoics called Epicurus an atheist. Lucretius and Horace give the Epicurean view of life in their great poems. This low view of life led to sensualism and does today, for both Stoicism and Epicureanism are widely influential with people now. "Eat and drink for tomorrow we die," they preached. Paul had doubtless become acquainted with both of these philosophies for they were widely prevalent over the world. Here he confronts them in their very home. He is challenged by past-masters in the art of appealing to the senses, men as skilled in their dialectic as the Pharisaic rabbis with whom Paul had been trained and whose subtleties he had learned how to expose. But, so far as we know, this is a new experience for Paul to have a public dispute with these philosophical experts who had a natural contempt for all Jews and for rabbis in particular, though they found Paul a new type at any rate and so with some interest in him. "In Epicureanism, it was man's sensual nature which arrayed itself against the claims of the gospel; in Stoicism it was his self-righteousness and pride of intellect" (Hackett). Knowling calls the Stoic the Pharisee of philosophy and the Epicurean the Sadducee of philosophy. Socrates in this very agora used to try to interest the passers-by in some desire for better things. That was 450 years before Paul is challenged by these superficial sophistical Epicureans and Stoics. It is doubtful if Paul had ever met a more difficult situation. {What would this babbler say?} (\Ti an theloi ho spermologos houtos legein?\). The word for "babbler" means "seed-picker" or picker up of seeds (\sperma\, seed, \leg\, to collect) like a bird in the agora hopping about after chance seeds. Plutarch applies the word to crows that pick up grain in the fields. Demosthenes called Aeschines a \spermologos\. Eustathius uses it of a man hanging around in the markets picking up scraps of food that fell from the carts and so also of mere rhetoricians and plagiarists who picked up scraps of wisdom from others. Ramsay considers it here a piece of Athenian slang used to describe the picture of Paul seen by these philosophers who use it, for not all of them had it ("some," \tines\). Note the use of \an\ and the present active optative \theloi\, conclusion of a fourth-class condition in a rhetorical question (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). It means, What would this picker up of seeds wish to say, if he should get off an idea? It is a contemptuous tone of supreme ridicule and doubtless Paul heard this comment. Probably the Epicureans made this sneer that Paul was a charlatan or quack. {Other some} (\hoi de\). But others, in contrast with the "some" just before. Perhaps the Stoics take this more serious view of Paul. {He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods} (\zenn daimonin dokei kataggeleus einai\). This view is put cautiously by \dokei\ (seems). \Kataggeleus\ does not occur in the old Greek, though in ecclesiastical writers, but Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 99) gives an example of the word "on a marble stele recording a decree of the Mitylenaens in honour of the Emperor Augustus," where it is the herald of the games. Here alone in the N.T. \Daimonion\ is used in the old Greek sense of deity or divinity whether good or bad, not in the N.T. sense of demons. Both this word and \kataggeleus\ are used from the Athenian standpoint. \Xenos\ is an old word for a guest-friend (Latin _hospes_) and then host (Romans:16:23|), then for foreigner or stranger (Matthew:25:31; strkjv@Acts:17:21|), new and so strange as here and strkjv@Hebrews:13:9; strkjv@1Peter:4:12|, and then aliens (Ephesians:2:12|). This view of Paul is the first count against Socrates: Socrates does wrong, introducing new deities (\adikei Skrats, kaina daimonia eisphern\, Xen. _Mem_. I). On this charge the Athenians voted the hemlock for their greatest citizen. What will they do to Paul? This Athens was more sceptical and more tolerant than the old Athens. But Roman law did not allow the introduction of a new religion (_religio illicita_). Paul was walking on thin ice though he was the real master philosopher and these Epicureans and Stoics were quacks. Paul had the only true philosophy of the universe and life with Jesus Christ as the centre (Colossians:1:12-20|), the greatest of all philosophers as Ramsay justly terms him. But these men are mocking him. {Because he preached Jesus and the resurrection} (\hoti ton Isoun kai tn anastasin euggelizato\). Reason for the view just stated. Imperfect middle indicative of \euaggeliz\, to "gospelize." Apparently these critics considered \anastasis\ (Resurrection) another deity on a par with Jesus. The Athenians worshipped all sorts of abstract truths and virtues and they misunderstood Paul on this subject. They will leave him as soon as he mentions the resurrection (verse 32|). It is objected that Luke would not use the word in this sense here for his readers would not under stand him. But Luke is describing the misapprehension of this group of philosophers and this interpretation fits in precisely.
rwp@Acts:17:24 @{The God that made the world} (\Hosea:theos ho poisas ton kosmon\). Not a god for this and a god for that like the 30,000 gods of the Athenians, but the one God who made the Universe (\kosmos\ on the old Greek sense of orderly arrangement of the whole universe). {And all things therein} (\kai panta ta en auti\). All the details in the universe were created by this one God. Paul is using the words of strkjv@Isaiah:42:5|. The Epicureans held that matter was eternal. Paul sets them aside. This one God was not to be confounded with any of their numerous gods save with this "Unknown God." {Being Lord of heaven and earth} (\ouranou kai gs huparchn kurios\). \Kurios\ here owner, absolute possessor of both heaven and earth (Isaiah:45:7|), not of just parts. {Dwelleth not in temples made with hands} (\ouken cheiropoitois naois katoikei\). The old adjective \cheiropoitos\ (\cheir, poie\) already in Stephen's speech (7:48|). No doubt Paul pointed to the wonderful Parthenon, supposed to be the home of Athene as Stephen denied that God dwelt alone in the temple in Jerusalem.
rwp@Acts:17:31 @{Inasmuch as} (\kathoti\). According as (\kata, hoti\). Old causal conjunction, but in N.T. only used in Luke's writings (Luke:1:7; strkjv@19:9; strkjv@Acts:2:45; strkjv@4:35; strkjv@17:31|). {Hath appointed a day} (\estsen hmeran\) First aorist active indicative of \histmi\, to place, set. God did set the day in his counsel and he will fulfil it in his own time. {Will judge} (\mellei krinein\). Rather, is going to judge, \mell\ and the present active infinitive of \krin\. Paul here quotes strkjv@Psalms:9:8| where \krinei\ occurs. {By the man whom he hath ordained} (\en andri hi hrisen\). Here he adds to the Psalm the place and function of Jesus Christ, a passage in harmony with Christ's own words in strkjv@Matthew:25|. \Hi\ (whom) is attracted from the accusative, object of \hrisen\ (first aorist active indicative of \horiz\) to the case of the antecedent \andri\. It has been said that Paul left the simple gospel in this address to the council of the Areopagus for philosophy. But did he? He skilfully caught their attention by reference to an altar to an Unknown God whom he interprets to be the Creator of all things and all men who overrules the whole world and who now commands repentance of all and has revealed his will about a day of reckoning when Jesus Christ will be Judge. He has preached the unity of God, the one and only God, has proclaimed repentance, a judgment day, Jesus as the Judge as shown by his Resurrection, great fundamental doctrines, and doubtless had much more to say when they interrupted his address. There is no room here for such a charge against Paul. He rose to a great occasion and made a masterful exposition of God's place and power in human history. {Whereof he hath given assurance} (\pistin paraschn\). Second aorist active participle of \parech\, old verb to furnish, used regularly by Demosthenes for bringing forward evidence. Note this old use of \pistis\ as conviction or ground of confidence (Hebrews:11:1|) like a note or title-deed, a conviction resting on solid basis of fact. All the other uses of \pistis\ grow out of this one from \peith\, to persuade. {In that he hath raised him from the dead} (\anastsas auton ek nekrn\). First aorist active participle of \anistmi\, causal participle, but literally, "having raised him from the dead." This Paul knew to be a fact because he himself had seen the Risen Christ. Paul has here come to the heart of his message and could now throw light on their misapprehension about "Jesus and the Resurrection" (verse 18|). Here Paul has given the proof of all his claims in the address that seemed new and strange to them.
rwp@Acts:18:5 @{Was constrained by the word} (\suneicheto ti logi\). This is undoubtedly the correct text and not \ti pneumati\ of the Textus Receptus, but \suneicheto\ is in my opinion the direct middle imperfect indicative, not the imperfect passive as the translations have it (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 808). Paul held himself together or completely to the preaching instead of just on Sabbaths in the synagogue (verse 4|). The coming of Silas and Timothy with the gifts from Macedonia (1Thessalonians:3:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:9; strkjv@Phillipians:4:15|) set Paul free from tent-making for a while so that he began to devote himself (inchoative imperfect) with fresh consecration to preaching. See the active in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14|. He was now also assisted by Silas and Timothy (2Corinthians:1:19|). {Testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ} (\diamarturomenos tois Ioudaiois einai ton Christon Isoun\). Paul's witness everywhere (9:22; strkjv@17:3|). This verb \diamarturomenos\ occurs in strkjv@2:40| (which see) for Peter's earnest witness. Perhaps daily now in the synagogue he spoke to the Jews who came. \Einai\ is the infinitive in indirect discourse (assertion) with the accusative of general reference. By \ton Christon\ Paul means "the Messiah." His witness is to show to the Jews that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah.
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:18:9 @{Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace} (\M phobou, alla lalei kai m sipsis\). Literally, "stop being afraid (\m\ with present middle imperative of \phobe\), but go on speaking (present active imperative of \lale\) and do not become silent (\m\ and first aorist active of \sipa\, ingressive aorist)." Evidently there were signs of a gathering storm before this vision and message from the Lord Jesus came to Paul one night. Paul knew only too well what Jewish hatred could do as he had learned it at Damascus, Jerusalem, Antioch in Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra, Derbe, Thessalonica, Beroea. He had clearly moments of doubt whether he had not better move on or become silent for a while in Corinth. Every pastor knows what it is to have such moods and moments. In strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:2| (written at this time) we catch Paul's dejection of spirits. He was like Elijah (1Kings:19:4|) and Jeremiah (Jeremiah:15:15ff.|).
rwp@Acts:18:24 @{Apollos} (\Apolls\). Genitive \-\ Attic second declension. Probably a contraction of \Apollonios\ as D has it here. {An Alexandrian} (\Alexandreus\). Alexander the Great founded this city B.C. 332 and placed a colony of Jews there which flourished greatly, one-third of the population at this time. There was a great university and library there. The Jewish-Alexandrian philosophy developed here of which Philo was the chief exponent who was still living. Apollos was undoubtedly a man of the schools and a man of parts. {A learned man} (\anr logios\). Or eloquent, as the word can mean either a man of words (like one "wordy," verbose) or a man of ideas, since \logos\ was used either for reason or speech. Apollos was doubtless both learned (mighty in the Scriptures) and eloquent, though eloquence varies greatly in people's ideas. {Mighty in the Scriptures} (\dunatos n en tais graphais\). Being powerful (\dunatos\ verbal of \dunamai\ and same root as \dunamis\, dynamite, dynamo) in the Scriptures (in the knowledge and the use of the Scriptures), as should be true of every preacher. There is no excuse for ignorance of the Scriptures on the part of preachers, the professed interpreters of the word of God. The last lecture made to the New Testament English class in Southern Baptist Theological Seminary by John A. Broadus was on this passage with a plea for his students to be mighty in the Scriptures. In Alexandria Clement of Alexandria and Origen taught in the Christian theological school.
rwp@Acts:19:10 @{For two years} (\epi et duo\). Note \epi\ with accusative for extent of time as in verse 8|, \epi mnas treis\ and often. But in strkjv@20:31| Paul said to the Ephesian elders at Miletus that he laboured with them for the space of "three years." That may be a general expression and there was probably a longer period after the "two years" in the school of Tyrannus besides the six months in the synagogue. Paul may have preached thereafter in the house of Aquila and Priscilla for some months, the "for a while" of verse 22|. {Songs:that all they which dwelt in Asia heard} (\hste pantas tous katoikountas tn Asian akousai\). Actual result with \hste\ and the infinitive with accusative of general reference as is common (also verse 11|) in the _Koin_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 999f.). Paul apparently remained in Ephesus, but the gospel spread all over the province even to the Lycus Valley including the rest of the seven churches of strkjv@Revelation:1:11; 2; 3|. Demetrius in verse 26| will confirm the tremendous influence of Paul's ministry in Ephesus on Asia. Forty years after this Pliny in his famous letter to Trajan from Bithynia will say of Christianity: "For the contagion of this superstition has not only spread through cities, but also through villages and country places." It was during these years in Ephesus that Paul was greatly disturbed over the troubles in the Corinthian Church. He apparently wrote a letter to them now lost to us (1Corinthians:5:9|), received messages from the household of Chloe, a letter from the church, special messengers, sent Timothy, then Titus, may have made a hurried trip himself, wrote our First Corinthians, was planning to go after the return of Titus to Troas where he was to meet him after Pentecost, when all of a sudden the uproar raised by Demetrius hurried Paul away sooner than he had planned. Meanwhile Apollos had returned from Corinth to Ephesus and refused to go back (1Corinthians:16:12|). Paul doubtless had helpers like Epaphras and Philemon who carried the message over the province of Asia, Tychicus, and Trophimus of Asia who were with him on the last visit to Jerusalem (verses 22,29; strkjv@20:4|). Paul's message reached Greeks, not merely Hellenists and God-fearers, but some of the Greeks in the upper circles of life in Ephesus.
rwp@Acts:19:26 @{At Ephesus} (\Ephesou\). Genitive of place as also with \Asias\ (Asia). Cf. Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 494f. {This Paul} (\ho Paulos houtos\). Contemptuous use of \houtos\. {Hath turned away} (\metestsen\). Changed, transposed. First aorist active indicative, did change. Tribute to Paul's powers as a preacher borne out by Luke's record in strkjv@19:10|. There may be an element of exaggeration on the part of Demetrius to incite the workmen to action, for the worship of Artemis was their wealth. Paul had cut the nerve of their business. There had long been a Jewish colony in Ephesus, but their protest against idolatry was as nothing compared with Paul's preaching (Furneaux). {Which are made with hands} (\hoi dia cheirn ginomenoi\). Note the present tense, made from time to time. No doubt Paul had put the point sharply as in Athens (Acts:17:29|). Isaiah (Isaiah:44:9-17|) had pictured graphically the absurdity of worshipping stocks and stones, flatly forbidden by the Old Testament (Exodus:20:4; strkjv@Psalms:135:15-18|). The people identified their gods with the images of them and Demetrius reflects that point of view. He was jealous of the brand of gods turned out by his factory. The artisans would stand by him on this point. It was a reflection on their work.
rwp@Acts:20:13 @{To the ship} (\epi to ploion\). Note article. It is possible that Paul's party had chartered a coasting vessel from Philippi or Troas to take them to Patara in Lycia. Hence the boat stopped when and where Paul wished. That is possible, but not certain, for Paul could simply have accommodated himself to the plans of the ship's managers. {To take in Paul} (\analambanein ton Paulon\). Songs:in verse 14|. Same use in strkjv@2Timothy:4:11|: "Picking up Mark" (\Markon analabn\). Assos was a seaport south of Troas in Mysia in the province of Asia. {He had appointed} (\diatetagmenos n\). Past perfect periphrastic middle of \diatass\, old verb to give orders (military in particular). {To go by land} (\pezeuein\). Present active infinitive of \pezeu\, old verb to go on foot, not on horse back or in a carriage or by ship. Here only in the N.T. It was about twenty miles over a paved Roman road, much shorter (less than half) than the sea voyage around Cape Lectum. It was a beautiful walk in the spring-time and no doubt Paul enjoyed it whatever his reason was for going thus to Assos while the rest went by sea. Certainly he was entitled to a little time alone, this one day, as Jesus sought the Father in the night watches (Matthew:14:23|).
rwp@Acts:20:24 @{But I hold not my life of any account} (\all' oudenos logou poioumai tn psuchn\). Neat Greek idiom, accusative \psuchn\ and genitive \logou\ and then Paul adds "dear unto myself" (\timian emauti\) in apposition with \psuchn\ (really a combination of two constructions). {Songs:that I may accomplish my course} (\hs teleis dromon mou\). Rather, "In order that" (purpose, not result). Aleph and B read \teleis\ here (first aorist active subjunctive) rather than \teleisai\ (first aorist active infinitive). It is the lone instance in the N.T. of \hs\ as a final particle (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 987). Paul in strkjv@Acts:13:25| in his sermon at Antioch in Pisidia described John as fulfilling his course and in strkjv@2Timothy:4:7| he will say: "I have finished my course" (\ton dromon teteleka\). He will run the race to the end. {Which I received from the Lord Jesus} (\hn elabon para tou kuriou Isou\). Of that fact he never had a doubt and it was a proud boast (Gal strkjv@1:1; strkjv@Romans:11:13|). {The gospel of the grace of God} (\to euaggelion ts charitos tou theou\). To Paul the gospel consisted in the grace of God. See this word "grace" (\charis\) in Romans and his other Epistles.
rwp@Acts:20:28 @{Take heed unto yourselves} (\prosechete heautois\). The full phrase had \ton noun\, hold your mind on yourselves (or other object in the dative), as often in old writers and in strkjv@Job:7:17|. But the ancients often used the idiom with \noun\ understood, but not expressed as here and strkjv@Acts:5:35; strkjv@Luke:12:1; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@21:34; strkjv@1Timothy:1:4; strkjv@3:8; strkjv@4:13|. \Epeche\ is so used in strkjv@1Timothy:4:16|. {To all the flock} (\panti ti poimnii\). Contracted form of \poimenion = poimn\ (John:10:16|) already in strkjv@Luke:12:32| and also in strkjv@Acts:20:29; strkjv@1Peter:5:2,3|. Common in old Greek. {Hath made} (\etheto\). Did make, second aorist middle indicative of \tithmi\, did appoint. Paul evidently believed that the Holy Spirit calls and appoints ministers. {Bishops} (\episkopous\). The same men termed elders in verse 17| which see. {To shepherd} (\poimainein\). Present active infinitive of purpose of \poimain\, old verb to feed or tend the flock (\poimn, poimnion\), to act as shepherd (\poimn\). These ministers are thus in Paul's speech called elders (verse 17|), bishops (verse 28|), and shepherds (verse 28|). Jesus had used this very word to Peter (John:21:16|, twice \boske\, feed, strkjv@21:15,17|) and Peter will use it in addressing fellow-elders (1Peter:5:2|) with memories, no doubt of the words of Jesus to him. The "elders" were to watch over as "bishops" and "tend and feed as shepherds" the flock. Jesus is termed "the shepherd and bishop of your souls" in strkjv@1Peter:2:25| and "the great Shepherd of the sheep" in strkjv@Hebrews:13:20|. Jesus called himself "the good Shepherd" in strkjv@John:10:11|. {The church of God} (\tn ekklsian tou theou\). The correct text, not "the church of the Lord" or "the church of the Lord and God" (Robertson, _Introduction to Textual Criticism of the N.T._, p. 189). {He purchased} (\periepoisato\). First aorist middle of \peripoie\, old verb to reserve, to preserve (for or by oneself, in the middle). In the N.T. only in Luke strkjv@17:33; strkjv@Acts:20:28; strkjv@1Timothy:3:13|. The substantive \peripoisin\ (preservation, possession) occurs in strkjv@1Peter:2:9| ("a peculiar people" = a people for a possession) and in strkjv@Ephesians:1:14|. {With his own blood} (\dia tou haimatos tou idiou\). Through the agency of (\dia\) his own blood. Whose blood? If \tou theou\ (Aleph B Vulg.) is correct, as it is, then Jesus is here called "God" who shed his own blood for the flock. It will not do to say that Paul did not call Jesus God, for we have strkjv@Romans:9:5; strkjv@Colossians:2:9; strkjv@Titus:2:13| where he does that very thing, besides strkjv@Colossians:1:15-20; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|.
rwp@Acts:21:4 @{Having found} (\aneurontes\). Second aorist active participle of \aneurisk\, to seek for, to find by searching (\ana\). There was a church here, but it was a large city and the number of members may not have been large. Probably some of those that fled from Jerusalem who came to Phoenicia (Acts:11:19|) started the work here. Paul went also through Phoenicia on the way to the Jerusalem Conference (15:3|). As at Troas and Miletus, so here Paul's indefatigible energy shows itself with characteristic zeal. {Through the Spirit} (\dia tou pneumatos\). The Holy Spirit undoubtedly who had already told Paul that bonds and afflictions awaited him in Jerusalem (20:23|). {That he should not set foot in Jerusalem} (\m epibainein eis Ierosoluma\). Indirect command with \m\ and the present active infinitive, not to keep on going to Jerusalem (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1046). In spite of this warning Paul felt it his duty as before (20:22|) to go on. Evidently Paul interpreted the action of the Holy Spirit as information and warning although the disciples at Tyre gave it the form of a prohibition. Duty called louder than warning to Paul even if both were the calls of God.
rwp@Acts:21:20 @{Glorified} (\edoxazon\). Inchoative imperfect, began to glorify God, though without special praise of Paul. {How many thousands} (\posai muriades\). Old word for ten thousand (Acts:19:19|) and then an indefinite number like our "myriads" (this very word) as strkjv@Luke:12:1; strkjv@Acts:21:20; strkjv@Jude:1:14; strkjv@Revelation:5:11; strkjv@9:16|. But it is a surprising statement even with allowable hyperbole, but one may recall strkjv@Acts:4:4| (number of the men--not women--about five thousand); strkjv@5:14| (multitudes both of men and women); strkjv@6:7|. There were undoubtedly a great many thousands of believers in Jerusalem and all Jewish Christians, some, alas, Judaizers (Acts:11:2; strkjv@15:1,5|). This list may include the Christians from neighbouring towns in Palestine and even some from foreign countries here at the Feast of Pentecost, for it is probable that Paul arrived in time for it as he had hoped. But we do not have to count the hostile Jews from Asia (verse 27|) who were clearly not Christians at all. {All zealous for the law} (\pantes zltai tou nomou\). Zealots (substantive) rather than zealous (adjective) with objective genitive (\tou nomou\). The word zealot is from \zlo\, to burn with zeal, to boil. The Greek used \zlts\ for an imitator or admirer. There was a party of Zealots (developed from the Pharisees), a group of what would be called "hot-heads," who brought on the war with Rome. One of this party, Simon Zelotes (Acts:1:13|), was in the number of the twelve apostles. It is important to understand the issues in Jerusalem. It was settled at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15; strkjv@Galatians:2|) that the Mosaic ceremonial law was not to be imposed upon Gentile Christians. Paul won freedom for them, but it was not said that it was wrong for Jewish Christians to go on observing it if they wished. We have seen Paul observing the passover in Philippi (Acts:20:6|) and planning to reach Jerusalem for Pentecost (20:16|). The Judaizers rankled under Paul's victory and power in spreading the gospel among the Gentiles and gave him great trouble in Galatia and Corinth. They were busy against him in Jerusalem also and it was to undo the harm done by them in Jerusalem that Paul gathered the great collection from the Gentile Christians and brought it with him and the delegates from the churches. Clearly then Paul had real ground for his apprehension of trouble in Jerusalem while still in Corinth (Romans:15:25|) when he asked for the prayers of the Roman Christians (verses 30-32|). The repeated warnings along the way were amply justified.
rwp@Acts:22:4 @{And I} (\hos\). {I who}, literally. {This Way} (\tautn tn hodon\). The very term used for Christianity by Luke concerning Paul's persecution (9:2|), which see. Here it "avoids any irritating name for the Christian body" (Furneaux) by using this Jewish terminology. {Unto the death} (\achri thanatou\). Unto death, actual death of many as strkjv@26:10| shows. {Both men and women} (\andras te kai gunaikas\). Paul felt ashamed of this fact and it was undoubtedly in his mind when he pictured his former state as "a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious (1Timothy:1:13|), the first of sinners" (1Timothy:1:15|). But it showed the lengths to which Paul went in his zeal for Judaism.
rwp@Acts:23:3 @{Thou whited wall} (\toiche kekoniamene\). Perfect passive participle of \konia\ (from \konia\, dust or lime). The same word used in strkjv@Matthew:23:27| for "whited sepulchres" (\taphoi kekoniamenoi\) which see. It is a picturesque way of calling Ananias a hypocrite, undoubtedly true, but not a particularly tactful thing for a prisoner to say to his judge, not to say Jewish high priest. Besides, Paul had hurled back at him the word \tuptein\ (smite) in his command, putting it first in the sentence (\tuptein se mellei ho theos\) in strong emphasis. Clearly Paul felt that he, not Ananias, was living as a good citizen in God's commonwealth. {And sittest thou to judge me?} (\Kai su kathi krinn me?\) Literally, "And thou (being what thou art) art sitting (\kathi\, second person singular middle of \kathmai\, late form for \kathsai\, the uncontracted form) judging me." Cf. strkjv@Luke:22:30|. \Kai su\ at the beginning of a question expresses indignation. {Contrary to the law} (\paranomn\). Present active participle of \paranome\, old verb to act contrary to the law, here alone in the N.T., "acting contrary to the law."
rwp@Acts:24:2 @{When he (Paul) was called} (\klthentos autou\). Genitive absolute (as so often in Acts) with first aorist passive participle of \kale\. Seeing that by thee we enjoy much peace (\polls eirns tugchanontes dia sou\). Literally, obtaining much peace by thee. A regular piece of flattery, _captatio benevolentiae_, to ingratiate himself into the good graces of the governor. Felix had suppressed a riot, but Tacitus (_Ann_. XII. 54) declares that Felix secretly encouraged banditti and shared the plunder for which the Jews finally made complaint to Nero who recalled him. But it sounded well to praise Felix for keeping peace in his province, especially as Tertullus was going to accuse Paul of being a disturber of the peace. {And that by thy providence} (\kai dia ts pronoias\). Forethought, old Greek word from \pronoos\ (\pronoe\ in strkjv@1Timothy:5:8; strkjv@Romans:12:17; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:21|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:13:14|. "Providence" is Latin _Providentia_ (foreseeing, _provideo_). Roman coins often have _Providentia Caesaris_. Post-Augustan Latin uses it of God (Deus). {Evils are corrected for this nation} (\diorthmatn ginomenn ti ethnei touti\). Genitive absolute again, \ginomenn\, present middle participle describing the process of reform going on for this nation (dative case of personal interest). \Diorthma\ (from \diortho\, to set right) occurs from Aristotle on of setting right broken limbs (Hippocrates) or reforms in law and life (Polybius, Plutarch). "Reform continually taking place for this nation." Felix the Reform Governor of Judea! It is like a campaign speech, but it doubtless pleased Felix.
rwp@Acts:24:7 @This whole verse with some words at the end of verse 6| and the beginning of verse 8| in the Textus Receptus ("And would have judged according to our law. But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands, commanding his accusers to come unto thee") is absent from Aleph A B H L P 61 (many other cursives) Sahidic Bohairic. It is beyond doubt a later addition to the incomplete report of the speech of Tertullus. As the Revised Version stands, verse 8| connects with verse 6|. The motive of the added words is clearly to prejudice Felix against Lysias and they contradict the record in strkjv@Acts:21|. Furneaux holds them to be genuine and omitted because contradictory to strkjv@Acts:21|. More likely they are a clumsy attempt to complete the speech of Tertullus.
rwp@Acts:24:26 @{He hoped withal} (\hama kai elpizn\). "At the same time also hoping." Paul had mentioned the "alms" (24:17|) and that excited the avarice of Felix for "money" (\chrmata\). Roman law demanded exile and confiscation for a magistrate who accepted bribes, but it was lax in the provinces. Felix had doubtless received them before. Josephus (_Ant_. XX. 8, 9) represents Felix as greedy for money. {The oftener} (\puknoteron\). Comparative adverb of \puknos\, old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:5:33| which see and strkjv@1Timothy:5:23|. Kin to \pugm\ (Mark:7:3|) which see from \puk\, thick, dense, compact. Paul kept on not offering a bribe, but Felix continued to have hopes (present tense \elpizn\), kept on sending for him (present tense \metapempomenos\), and kept on communing (imperfect active \hmilei\ from \homile\, old word as in strkjv@Acts:20:11; strkjv@Luke:24:14|, which see, only N.T. examples of this word). But he was doomed to disappointment. He was never terrified again.
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:25:14 @{Tarried} (\dietribon\). Imperfect active of \diatrib\, common verb for spending time (Acts:12:19|, etc.). {Many days} (\pleious hmeras\). More days (than a few). Accusative case for extent of time. {Laid Paul's case} (\anetheto ta kata ton Paulon\). Second aorist middle indicative of \anatithmi\, old verb to set before, to place up, as if for consultation in conference. Only twice in N.T. here and strkjv@Galatians:2:2|. The motive of Festus is not given, though it was natural enough in view of the quandary of Festus about Paul (the things about Paul) and Agrippa's interest in and responsibility for Jewish worship in the temple in Jerusalem. It is quite possible that Festus had a bit of \ennui\ over the visit of these Jewish dignitaries as "more days" went by. Hence the tone of Festus about Paul in this proposal for the entertainment of Agrippa and Bernice is certainly one of superficial and supremely supercilious indifference. {Left a prisoner} (\katalelimmenos desmios\). Perfect passive participle of \kataleip\, to leave behind. Paul is one of Felix's left overs (left behind), a sort of "junk" left on his hands. This cowardly Roman procurator thus pictures the greatest of living men and the greatest preacher of all time to this profligate pair (brother and sister) of sinners. Undoubtedly today in certain circles Christ and his preachers are held up to like contempt.
rwp@Acts:25:20 @{Being perplexed} (\aporoumenos\). Present middle participle of the common verb \apore\ (\a\ privative and \poros\ way), to be in doubt which way to turn, already in strkjv@Mark:6:20| which see and strkjv@Luke:24:4|. The Textus Receptus has \eis\ after here, but critical text has only the accusative which this verb allows (Mark:6:20|) as in Thucydides and Plato. {How to inquire concerning these things} (\tn peri toutn ztsin\). Literally, "as to the inquiry concerning these things." This is not the reason given by Luke in verse 9| (wanting to curry favour with the Jews), but doubtless this motive also actuated Festus as both could be true. {Whether he would go to Jerusalem} (\ei bouloito poreuesthai eis Ierosoluma\). Optative in indirect question after \elegon\ (asked or said) imperfect active, though the present indicative could have been retained with change of person: "Dost thou wish, etc.," (\ei bouli\, etc.). See Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1031, 1044. This is the question put to Paul in verse 9| though \theleis\ is there used.
rwp@Acts:25:26 @{No certain thing} (\asphales ti--ou\). Nothing definite or reliable (\a\ privative, \sphall\, to trip). All the charges of the Sanhedrin slipped away or were tripped up by Paul. Festus confesses that he had nothing left and thereby convicts himself of gross insincerity in his proposal to Paul in verse 9| about going up to Jerusalem. By his own statement he should have set Paul free. The various details here bear the marks of the eyewitness. Luke was surely present and witnessed this grand spectacle with Paul as chief performer. {Unto my lord} (\ti kurii\). Augustus (Octavius) and Tiberius refused the title of \kurios\ (lord) as too much like _rex_ (king) and like master and slave, but the servility of the subjects gave it to the other emperors who accepted it (Nero among them). Antoninus Pius put it on his coins. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 105) gives an ostracon dated Aug. 4, A.D. 63 with the words "in the year nine of Nero the lord" (\enatou Nernos tou kuriou\). Deissmann (_op. cit._, pp. 349ff.) runs a most interesting parallel "between the cult of Christ and the cult of Caesar in the application of the term \kurios\, lord" in ostraca, papyri, inscriptions. Beyond a doubt Paul has all this fully in mind when he says in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3| that "no one is able to say \Kurios Isous\ except in the Holy Spirit" (cf. also strkjv@Phillipians:2:11|). The Christians claimed this word for Christ and it became the test in the Roman persecutions as when Polycarp steadily refused to say " Lord Caesar" and insisted on saying "Lord Jesus" when it meant his certain death. {Before you} (\eph' humn\). The whole company. In no sense a new trial, but an examination in the presence of these prominent men to secure data and to furnish entertainment and pleasure to Agrippa (verse 22|). {Especially before thee} (\malista epi sou\). Out of courtesy. It was the main reason as verse 22| shows. Agrippa was a Jew and Festus was glad of the chance to see what he thought of Paul's case. {After examination had} (\ts anakrises genomens\). Genitive absolute, "the examination having taken place." \Anakrisis\ from \anakrin\ (cf. strkjv@12:19; strkjv@24:8; strkjv@28:18|) is a legal term for preliminary examination. Only here in the N.T. Inscriptions and papyri give it as examination of slaves or other property. {That I may have somewhat to write} (\hops sch ti graps\). Ingressive aorist subjunctive \sch\ (may get) with \hops\ (final particle like \hina\). \Ti graps\ in indirect question after \sch\ is either future indicative or aorist subjunctive (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1045). Festus makes it plain that this is not a "trial," but an examination for his convenience to help him out of a predicament.
rwp@Acts:27:16 @{Running under the lee of} (\hupodramontes\). Second aorist active participle of \hupotrech\. Same use of \hupo\ as in \hupepleusamen\ (verses 4,8|) for "under the lee", under the protection of. \Nsion\ is diminutive of \nsos\, a small island. The MSS. vary between Cauda (B) and Clauda (Aleph). {To secure the boat} (\perikrateis genesthai ts skaphs\). "To become masters (\perikrateis\ from \peri\ and \kratos\, power over, found in Susannah and ecclesiastical writers, and here only in N.T.) of the boat ("dug out," like Indian boats, literally, from \skapt\, to dig, old word, here only in N.T. and verses 30,32|). The smooth water behind the little island enabled them to do this. {When they had hoisted it up} (\hn rantes\). "Which (the little boat) having hoisted up (\arantes\, verse 13|)." Even so it was "with difficulty" (\molis\). Perhaps the little boat was waterlogged. {Used helps} (\botheiais echrnto\). Imperfect middle of \chraomai\ with instrumental case. The "helps" were ropes or chains, no doubt. {Under-girding the ship} (\hupoznnuntes to ploion\). Present active participle of \hupoznnumi\. Old verb, here only in N.T. Probably cables (\hupozmata\) or ropes were used under the hull of the ship laterally or even longitudinally, tightly secured on deck. This "frapping" was more necessary for ancient vessels because of the heavy mast. The little island made it possible to do this also. {Lest we be cast upon the Syrtis} (\m eis tn Surtin ekpessin\). Final clause after verb of fearing (\phoboumenoi\) with \m\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \ekpipt\, old verb to fall out or off, to be cast away. Songs:here and verses 26,29|, a classical use of the verb for a ship driven out of its course on to shoals or rocks (Page who cites Xenophon, _Anab_. VII. 5, 12). The Syrtis was the name for two quicksands between Carthage and Cyrenaica, this clearly being the Syrtis Major most dangerous because of the sandbanks (\surtis\, from \sur\). The wind would drive the ship right into this peril if something were not done. {They lowered the gear} (\chalasantes to skeuos\). First aorist active participle of \chala\ (cf. strkjv@Luke:5:4| for lowering the nets). \Skeuos\ means vessel or gear. They slackened or reduced sail, especially the mainsail, but leaving enough to keep the ship's head as close to the wind as was practicable. {Songs:were driven} (\houts epheronto\). Imperfect passive indicative again as in verse 15| with the addition of \houts\ (thus). The ship was now fixed as near to the wind (E N E) as possible (seven points). That would enable the ship to go actually W by N and so avoid the quicksands. J. Smith has shown that, a day being lost around Cauda, the ship going 36 miles in 24 hours in 13 days would make 468 miles. The Island of Malta (Melita) is precisely in that direction (W by N) from Cauda and is 480 miles. Page sees a difficulty about this explanation of the steady drift of the ship in the word \diapheromenon\ in verse 27|, but that was at the end of the drifting and the varied winds could have come then and not before. The whole narrative as explained carefully in Smith's _Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul_ is a masterpiece of precise and accurate scholarship. A resume of his results appears in my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_.
rwp@Acts:27:25 @{Wherefore be of good cheer} (\dio euthumeite\). God had spoken. That was enough. This old verb from \euthumos\ in the N.T. only here, verse 25; strkjv@James:5:13|. See the adjective strkjv@27:36|. {For I believe God} (\pisteu gar ti thei\). This is Paul's reason for his own good cheer and for his exhortation to confidence in spite of circumstances so untoward. Paul had doubtless prayed for his own life and for the lives of all. He was sure that he was to bear his witness in Rome.
rwp@Acts:27:39 @{They knew not} (\ouk epeginskon\). Imperfect active of \epiginsk\, to recognize. Probably conative, tried to recognize and could not (Conybeare and Howson). The island was well-known (28:1|, \epegnmen\), but St. Paul's Bay where the wreck took place was some distance from the main harbour (Valetta) of Melita (Malta). {They perceived} (\katenooun\). Imperfect active of \katanoe\, gradually perceived after some effort as in strkjv@11:16|. This beach seemed their only hope. {They took counsel} (\ebouleuonto\). Imperfect middle showing the process of deliberation and doubt. The bay "having a beach" (\echonta aigialon\) is a phrase found in Xenophon's _Anabasis_ VI. 4, 4. {Whether they could drive} (\ei dunainto ekssai\). This use of the optative with \ei\ in questions of this sort (implied indirect) is a neat Greek idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). B C Bohairic read \ekssai\ (first aorist active infinitive of \eksz\), to save out (so Westcott and Hort), instead of \exsai\ (from \exthe\, to push out, as Textus Receptus).
rwp@Acts:28:4 @{The beast} (\to thrion\). Diminutive of \thr\ and so little beast. See on ¯Mark:1:13|. Aristotle and the medical writers apply the word to venomous serpents, the viper in particular (Knowling), as Luke does here. Vincent calls attention to the curious history of our word "_treacle_" for molasses (Latin _theriaca_) from \thriak\, an antidote made from the flesh of vipers. Coverdale translates strkjv@Jeremiah:8:22|: "There is no more treacle in Gilead." Jeremy Taylor: "We kill the viper and make treacle of him." {Hanging from his hand} (\kremamenon ek ts cheiros autou\). Vivid picture of the snake dangling from Paul's hand. Present middle participle of \kremamai\, late form for \kremannumi\, to hang up, to suspend (cf. strkjv@Galatians:3:13|). {No doubt} (\pants\). Literally, By all means, old adverb. Cf. strkjv@21:22; strkjv@Luke:4:23; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:22|. Only by Luke and Paul in the N.T. "They _knew_ that he was a prisoner being taken to Rome on some grave charge, and _inferred_ that the charge was murder" (Page). {Though he hath escaped} (\diasthenta\). First aorist passive participle of \diasz\ (same verb used in strkjv@24:43,44; strkjv@28:1|), so-called concessive use of the participle (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1129). {Yet Justice} (\dik\). An abstraction personified like the Latin _Justitia_ (Page). The natives speak of \Dik\ as a goddess, but we know nothing of such actual worship in Malta, though the Greeks worshipped abstractions as in Athens. {Hath not suffered} (\ouk eiasen\). Did not suffer. They look on Paul as a doomed man as good as dead. These people thought that calamity was proof of guilt, poor philosophy and worse theology.
rwp@Acts:28:8 @{Lay} (\katakeisthai\). Common verb for the sick (Mark:1:30; strkjv@John:5:6|). {Sick} (\sunechomenon\). "Held together." Common verb again for the sick as in strkjv@Luke:4:38|. {Of fever} (\puretois\). Instrumental case, and plural "fevers," medical term for intermittent attacks of fever (Demosthenes, Lucian, medical writers). {Dysentery} (\dusenterii\). Instrumental case also. Late form of the older \dusenteria\ and only here in N.T. Our very word _dysentery_. Another medical term of which Luke uses so many. Hippocrates often mentions these two diseases together. {Laying his hands on him healed him} (\epitheis tas cheiras auti iasato auton\). Either like the laying on of hands in strkjv@James:5:14|, the gift of healing (1Corinthians:12:9f.|), or the tender interest of Jesus when he took hold of the hand of Peter's mother-in-law (Mark:1:31|). Ramsay argues that \iaomai\ is employed here of the miraculous healing by Paul while \therapeu\ is used of the cures by Luke the physician (verse 9|). This is a general distinction and it is probably observed here, but in strkjv@Luke:6:18| (which see) both verbs are employed of the healings by Jesus. {Came and were healed} (\prosrchonto kai etherapeuonto\). Imperfect middle and imperfect passive. A regular stream of patients came during these months. Luke had his share in the honours, "us" (\hms\), and no doubt his share in the cures. {With many honours} (\pollais timais\). Instrumental case. The word was often applied to payment for professional services as we today speak of an honorarium. {They put on board} (\epethento\). Second aorist middle indicative of \epitithmi\, to put on. The idea of "on board" is merely suggested by \anagomenois\ (when we sailed) "the things for our needs" (\ta pros tas chreias\).
rwp@Acts:28:30 @{Two whole years} (\dietian holn\). Only here in N.T. and strkjv@24:27| which see. During these busy years in Rome Paul wrote Philippians, Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians, Epistles that would immortalize any man, unless, forsooth, one or more of them was written from Ephesus or Caesarea, which has not yet been proven. {In his own hired dwelling} (\en idii misthmati\). Old word, here only in N.T., that which is hired for a price (from \mistho\ and that from \misthos\, hire). {Received} (\apedecheto\). Imperfect middle of \apodechomai\, received from time to time as they came, all that came (\eisporeuomenous\) from time to time. {Preaching} (\kerussn\), {teaching} (\didaskn\), the two things that concerned Paul most, doing both as if his right hand was not in chains, to the amazement of those in Rome and in Philippi (Phillipians:1:12-14|). {None forbidding him} (\akluts\). Old adverb from \a\ privative and the verbal adjective \klutos\ (from \klu\, to hinder), here only in the N.T. Page comments on "the rhythmic cadence of the concluding words." Page rejects the notion that the book is an unfinished work. It closes with the style of a concluded work. I agree with Harnack that Luke wrote the Acts during this period of two years in Rome and carried events no further because they had gone no further. Paul was still a prisoner in Rome when Luke completed the book. But he had carried Paul to "Rome, the capital of the world, _Urbi et Orbi_" (Page). The gospel of Christ has reached Rome. For the fate of Paul we must turn elsewhere. But Luke had the presence of Paul while he carried the Acts to its triumphant conclusion. Ramsay can give a good deal in proof of his claim that Luke is the greatest of all historians. Beyond a doubt his rank is high and the world can never repay its debt to this cultured physician who wrote the Gospel and the Acts.
rwp@Info_Colossians @ THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS FROM ROME A.D. 63 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION GENUINENESS The author claims to be Paul (Colossians:1:1|) and there is no real doubt about it in spite of Baur's denial of the Pauline authorship which did not suit his _Tendenz_ theory of the New Testament books. There is every mark of Paul's style and power in the little Epistle and there is no evidence that any one else took Paul's name to palm off this striking and vigorous polemic.
rwp@Colossians:2:1 @{How greatly I strive} (\hlikon agna ech\). Literally, "how great a contest I am having." The old adjectival relative \hlikos\ (like Latin _quantus_) is used for age or size in N.T. only here and strkjv@James:3:5| (twice, how great, how small). It is an inward contest of anxiety like the \merimna\ for all the churches (2Corinthians:11:28|). \Agna\ carries on the metaphor of \agnizomenos\ in strkjv@1:29|. {For them at Laodicea} (\tn en Laodikii\). {Supply} \huper\ as with \huper humn\. Paul's concern extended beyond Colossae to Laodicea (4:16|) and to Hierapolis (4:13|), the three great cities in the Lycus Valley where Gnosticism was beginning to do harm. Laodicea is the church described as lukewarm in strkjv@Revelation:3:14|. {For as many as have not seen my face} (\hosoi ouch heorakan to prospon mou\). The phrase undoubtedly includes Hierapolis (4:13|), and a few late MSS. actually insert it here. Lightfoot suggests that Hierapolis had not yet been harmed by the Gnostics as much as Colossae and Laodicea. Perhaps so, but the language includes all in that whole region who have not seen Paul's face in the flesh (that is, in person, and not in picture). How precious a real picture of Paul would be to us today. The antecedent to \hosoi\ is not expressed and it would be \toutn\ after \huper\. The form \heorakan\ (perfect active indicative of \hora\ instead of the usual \herakasin\ has two peculiarities \o\ in Paul's Epistles (1Corinthians:9:1|) instead of \\ (see strkjv@John:1:18| for \heraken\) and \-an\ by analogy in place of \-asin\, which short form is common in the papyri. See strkjv@Luke:9:36| \herakan\.
rwp@Colossians:2:14 @{Having blotted out} (\exaleipsas\). And so "cancelled." First aorist active participle of old verb \exaleiph\, to rub out, wipe off, erase. In N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:3:19| (LXX); strkjv@Revelation:3:5; strkjv@Colossians:2:14|. Here the word explains \charisamenos\ and is simultaneous with it. Plato used it of blotting out a writing. Often MSS. were rubbed or scraped and written over again (palimpsests, like Codex C). {The bond written in ordinances that was against us} (\to kath' hmn cheirographon tois dogmasin\). The late compound \cheirographon\ (\cheir\, hand, \graph\) is very common in the papyri for a certificate of debt or bond, many of the original \cheirographa\ (handwriting, "chirography"). See Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 247. The signature made a legal debt or bond as Paul says in strkjv@Philemon:1:18f.|: "I Paul have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it." Many of the papyri examples have been "crossed out" thus X as we do today and so cancelled. One decree is described as "neither washed out nor written over" (Milligan, N. T. _Documents_, p. 16). Undoubtedly "the handwriting in decrees" (\dogmasin\, the Mosaic law, strkjv@Ephesians:2:15|) was against the Jews (Exodus:24:3; strkjv@Deuteronomy:27:14-26|) for they accepted it, but the Gentiles also gave moral assent to God's law written in their hearts (Romans:2:14f.|). Songs:Paul says "against us" (\kath' hmn\) and adds "which was contrary to us" (\ho n hupenantion hmin\) because we (neither Jew nor Gentile) could not keep it. \Hupenantios\ is an old double compound adjective (\hupo, en, antios\) set over against, only here in N.T. except strkjv@Hebrews:10:27| when it is used as a substantive. It is striking that Paul has connected the common word \cheirographon\ for bond or debt with the Cross of Christ (Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 332). {And he hath taken it out of the way} (\kai rken ek tou mesou\). Perfect active indicative of \air\, old and common verb, to lift up, to bear, to take away. The word used by the Baptist of Jesus as "the Lamb of God that bears away (\airn\) the sin of the world" (John:1:29|). The perfect tense emphasizes the permanence of the removal of the bond which has been paid and cancelled and cannot be presented again. Lightfoot argues for Christ as the subject of \rken\, but that is not necessary, though Paul does use sudden anacolutha. God has taken the bond against us "out of the midst" (\ek tou mesou\). Nailing it to the cross (\proslsas auto ti stauri\). First aorist active participle of old and common verb \proslo\, to fasten with nails to a thing (with dative \stauri\). Here alone in N.T., but in III Macc. strkjv@4:9 with the very word \stauri\. The victim was nailed to the cross as was Christ. "When Christ was crucified, God nailed the Law to His cross" (Peake). Hence the "bond" is cancelled for us. Business men today sometimes file cancelled accounts. No evidence exists that Paul alluded to such a custom here.
rwp@Ephesians:1:3 @{Blessed} (\eulogtos\). Verbal of \euloge\, common in the LXX for Hebrew _baruk_ (Vulgate _benedictus_) and applied usually to God, sometimes to men (Genesis:24:31|), but in N.T. always to God (Luke:1:68|), while \eulogmenos\ (perfect passive participle) is applied to men (Luke:1:42|). "While \eulogmenos\ points to an isolated act or acts, \eulogtos\ describes the intrinsic character" (Lightfoot). Instead of the usual \eucharistoumen\ (Colossians:1:3|) Paul here uses \eulogtos\, elsewhere only in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3| in opening, though in a doxology in strkjv@Romans:1:25; strkjv@9:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:31|. The copula here is probably \estin\ (is), though either \est\ (imperative) or \ei\ (optative as wish) will make sense. {The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\ho theos kai patr tou Kuriou hmn Isou Christou\). \Kai\ is genuine here, though not in strkjv@Colossians:1:3|. The one article (\ho\) with \theos kai patr\ links them together as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:3; strkjv@3:11,13; strkjv@Galatians:1:4|. See also the one article in strkjv@2Peter:1:1,11|. In strkjv@Ephesians:1:17| we have \ho theos tou Kuriou hmn Isou Christou\, and the words of Jesus in strkjv@John:20:17|. {Who hath blessed us} (\ho eulogsas hums\). First aorist active participle of \euloge\, the same word, antecedent action to the doxology (\eulogtos\). {With} (\en\). So-called instrumental use of \en\ though {in} is clear. {Every spiritual blessing} (\pasi eulogii pneumatiki\). Third use of the root \eulog\ (verbal, verb, substantive). Paul lovingly plays with the idea. The believer is a citizen of heaven and the spiritual blessings count for most to him. {In the heavenly places in Christ} (\en tois epouraniois en Christi\). In four other places in Eph. (1:20; strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:10; strkjv@6:12|). This precise phrase (with \en\) occurs nowhere else in the N.T. and has a clearly local meaning in strkjv@1:20; strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:10|, doubtful in strkjv@6:12|, but probably so here. In strkjv@2:6| the believer is conceived as already seated with Christ. Heaven is the real abode of the citizen of Christ's kingdom (Phillipians:3:20|) who is a stranger on earth (Phillipians:1:27; strkjv@Ephesians:2:19|). The word \epouranios\ (heavenly) occurs in various passages in the N.T. in contrast with \ta epigeia\ (the earthly) as in strkjv@John:3:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:40,48,49; strkjv@Phillipians:2:10|, with \patris\ (country) in strkjv@Hebrews:11:16|, with \klsis\ (calling) in strkjv@Hebrews:3:1|, with \drea\ (gift) in strkjv@Hebrews:6:4|, with \basileia\ (kingdom) in strkjv@2Timothy:4:18|.
rwp@Ephesians:2:15 @{Having abolished} (\katargsas\). First aorist active participle of \katarge\, to make null and void. {The enmity} (\tn echthran\). But it is very doubtful if \tn echthran\ (old word from \echthros\, hostile, strkjv@Luke:23:12|) is the object of \katargsas\. It looks as if it is in apposition with to \mesotoichon\ and so the further object of \lusas\. The enmity between Jew and Gentile was the middle wall of partition. And then it must be decided whether "in his flesh" (\en ti sarki autou\) should be taken with \lusas\ and refer especially to the Cross (Colossians:1:22|) or be taken with \katargsas\. Either makes sense, but better sense with \lusas\. Certainly "the law of commandments in ordinances (\ton nomon tn entoln en dogmasin\) is governed by \katargsas\. {That he might create} (\hina ktisi\). Final clause with first aorist active subjunctive of \ktiz\. {The twain} (\tous duo\). The two men (masculine here, neuter in verse 14|), Jew and Gentile. {One new man} (\eis hena kainon anthrpon\). Into one fresh man (Colossians:3:9-11|) "in himself" (\en hauti\). Thus alone is it possible. {Making peace} (\poin eirnn\). Thus alone can it be done. Christ is the peace-maker between men, nations, races, classes.
rwp@Ephesians:5:26 @{That he might sanctify it} (\hina autn hagiasi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \hagiaz\. Jesus stated this as his longing and his prayer (John:17:17-19|). This was the purpose of Christ's death (verse 25|). {Having cleansed it} (\katharisas\). First aorist active participle of \kathariz\, to cleanse, either simultaneous action or antecedent. {By the washing of water} (\ti loutri tou hudatos\). If \loutron\ only means bath or bathing-place ( = \loutron\), then \loutri\ is in the locative. If it can mean bathing or washing, it is in the instrumental case. The usual meaning from Homer to the papyri is the bath or bathing-place, though some examples seem to mean bathing or washing. Salmond doubts if there are any clear instances. The only other N.T. example of \loutron\ is in strkjv@Titus:3:5|. The reference here seems to be to the baptismal bath (immersion) of water, "in the bath of water." See strkjv@1Corinthians:6:11| for the bringing together of \apelousasthe\ and \hgiasthte\. Neither there nor here does Paul mean that the cleansing or sanctification took place in the bath save in a symbolic fashion as in strkjv@Romans:6:4-6|. Some think that Paul has also a reference to the bath of the bride before marriage. Still more difficult is the phrase "with the word" (\en rmati\). In strkjv@John:17:17| Jesus connected "truth" with "sanctify." That is possible here, though it may also be connected with \katharisas\ (having cleansed). Some take it to mean the baptismal formula.
rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ THE REASON FOR HIS EPISTLES In a real sense Paul's Epistles are tracts for the times, not for the age in general, but to meet real emergencies. He wrote to a particular church or group of churches or persons to meet immediate needs brought to his attention by messengers or letters. Dr. Deissmann contends strongly for the idea of calling Paul's Epistles "letters" rather than "Epistles." He gives a studied literary character to "epistles" as more or less artificial and written for the public eye rather than for definite effect. Four of Paul's Epistles are personal (those to Philemon, Titus, and Timothy) beyond a doubt, but in these which can properly be termed personal letters there are the principles of the gospel applied to personal, social, and ecclesiastical problems in such a pungent fashion that they possess permanent value. In the earliest group of Paul's Epistles, he reminds the Thessalonians of the official character of the Epistle which was meant for the church as a whole (1Thessalonians:5:27|). He says also: "But if any one does not obey our word by the epistle, mark this one, not to associate with him, that he may be put to shame" (2Thessalonians:3:14|). He calls attention to his signature as proof of the genuineness of every epistle (2Thessalonians:3:17|). He gave directions for the public reading of his epistles (Colossians:4:16|). He regarded them as the expression of God's will through the life of the churches and he put his whole heart into them. Two great controversies stirred Paul's life. That with the Judaizers called forth the great doctrinal group (I Corinthians, II Corinthians, Galatians, Romans). That with the Gnostics occasioned the Epistles to the Colossians and the Ephesians (Laodiceans) and this controversy ran on into the Pastoral Epistles. Each Epistle had its particular occasion which will be pointed out in due season. But even in the short ones like Philippians, Colossians and Ephesians Paul deals with the sublimest of all themes, the Person of Christ, with a masterfulness never equalled elsewhere. Even in I Corinthians, which deals so largely with church problems in Corinth, two great chapters rise to the heights of real eloquence (Chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13| on Love and Chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:15| on the Resurrection). Romans, the greatest of his Epistles, has the fullest discussion of Paul's gospel of grace and Chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:8| has a sweep of imagination and a grasp of faith unsurpassed. Hence, while denying to Paul the artificial rules of the rhetoricians attributed to him by Blass, I cannot agree that Paul's church Epistles are mere incidental letters. It is not a question whether Paul was writing for posterity or for the present emergency. He wrote for the present emergency in the most effective possible way. He brought the whole gospel message to bear upon the varied and pressing problems of the early Christians in the power of the Holy Spirit with the eloquence of a mind all ablaze with the truth and with a heart that yearned for their souls for Christ. They are not literary epistles, but they are more than personal letters. They are thunderbolts of passion and power that struck centre and that strike fire now for all who will take the trouble to come to them for the mind of Christ that is here.
rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ DATES OF HIS EPISTLES Unfortunately there is not complete agreement among scholars as to the dates of some of Paul's Epistles. Baur denied the Pauline authorship of all the Epistles save I and II Corinthians, Galatians, Romans. Today some deny that Paul wrote the Pastoral Epistles, though admitting the others. Some admit Pauline fragments even in the Pastoral Epistles, but more about this when these Epistles are reached. There is more doubt about the date of Galatians than any of the others. Lightfoot put it just before Romans, while Ramsay now makes it the earliest of all. The Epistle itself has no notes of place or time. The Epistles to the Thessalonians were written from Corinth after Timothy had been sent from Athens by Paul to Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:3:1f.|) and had just returned to Paul (1Thessalonians:3:6|) which we know was in Corinth (Acts:18:5|) shortly before Gallio came as Proconsul of Achaia (Acts:18:12|). We can now feel certain from the new "acclamation" of Claudius in the inscription at Delphi recently explained by Deissmann in his _St. Paul_ that the Thessalonian Epistles were written 50 to 51 A.D. We know also that he wrote I Corinthians while in Ephesus (1Corinthians:16:8|) and before pentecost, though the precise year is not given. But he spent three years at Ephesus in round numbers (Acts:19:8,10; strkjv@20:31|) and he wrote just before he left, probably spring of A.D. 54 or 55. He wrote II Corinthians from Macedonia shortly after leaving Ephesus (2Corinthians:2:12|) ] apparently the same year. Romans was written from Corinth and sent by Phoebe of Cenchreae (Romans:16:1f.|) unless strkjv@Romans:16| be considered a separate Epistle to Ephesus as some hold, a view that does not commend itself to me. Deissmann (_New Testament in the Light of Modern Research_, p. 33) accepts a modern theory that Ephesus was the place of the writing of the first prison Epistles (Philippians, Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians) as well as I Corinthians and Galatians and dates them all between A.D. 52 and 55. But we shall find that these prison Epistles most naturally fall to Rome between A.D. 61 and 63. If the Pastoral Epistles are genuine, as I hold, they come between A.D. 65 and 68. Bartlet argues for a date before A.D. 64, accepting the view that Paul was put to death then. But it is still far more probable that Paul met his death in Rome in A.D. 68 shortly before Nero's death which was June 8, A.D. 68. It will thus be seen that the dates of several of the Epistles are fairly clear, while some remain quite uncertain. In a broad outlook they must all come between A.D. 50 and 68.
rwp@Galatians:1:15 @{It was the good pleasure of God} (\eudoksen ho theos\). Paul had no doubt about God's purpose in him (1Thessalonians:2:8|). {Who separated me} (\ho aphorisas me\). \Aphoriz\ is old word (from \apo\ and \horos\) to mark off from a boundary or line. The Pharisees were the separatists who held themselves off from others. Paul conceives himself as a spiritual Pharisee "separated unto the gospel of God" (Romans:1:1|, the same word \aphrismenos\). Before his birth God had his plans for him and called him.
rwp@Galatians:1:18 @{Then after three years} (\epeita meta tria et\). A round number to cover the period from his departure from Jerusalem for Damascus to his return to Jerusalem. This stay in Damascus was an important episode in Paul's theological readjustment to his new experience. {To visit Cephas} (\historsai Kphn\). First aorist infinitive of \histore\, old verb (from \histr\, one who knows by inquiry), to gain knowledge by visiting. Only here in N.T. If we turn to strkjv@Acts:9:26-30|, we shall see that the visit of two weeks to Peter came after Barnabas endorsed Paul to the suspicious disciples in Jerusalem and probably while he was preaching in the city. It was a delightful experience, but Peter did not start Paul upon his apostleship. He visited him as an equal. Peter no doubt had much to say to Paul.
rwp@Galatians:2:12 @{For before that certain came from James} (\pro tou gar elthein tinas apo Iakbou\). The reason (\gar\) for Paul's condemnation of Peter. Articular infinitive in the genitive after \pro\ with the accusative of general reference (\tinas\), "for before the coming as to some from James." Does Paul mean to say that these "certain" ones had been sent by James to Antioch to inspect the conduct of Peter and the other Jewish brethren? Some scholars think so. No doubt these brethren let the idea get out that they were emissaries "from James." But that idea is inconsistent with the position of James as president of the conference and the author of the resolution securing liberty to the Gentile Christians. No doubt these brethren threatened Peter to tell James and the church about his conduct and they reminded Peter of his previous arraignment before the Jerusalem Church on this very charge (Acts:11:1-18|). As a matter of fact the Jerusalem Conference did not discuss the matter of social relations between Jews and Gentiles though that was the charge made against Peter (Acts:11:1ff.|). {He did eat with the Gentiles} (\meta tn ethnn sunsthien\). It was his habit (imperfect tense). {He drew back} (\hupestellen\). Imperfect tense, inchoative action, "he began to draw himself (\heauton\) back." Old word \hupostell\. See middle voice to dissemble (Acts:20:20,27|), to shrink (Hebrews:10:38|). {Separated himself} (\aphrizen heauton\). Inchoative imperfect again, "began to separate himself" just like a Pharisee (see on ¯1:15|) and as if afraid of the Judaizers in the Jerusalem Church, perhaps half afraid that James might not endorse what he had been doing. {Fearing them that were of the circumcision} (\phoboumenos tous ek peritoms\). This was the real reason for Peter's cowardice. See strkjv@Acts:11:2| for "\hoi ek peritoms\" (they of the circumcision), the very phrase here. It was not that Peter had changed his views from the Jerusalem resolutions. It was pure fear of trouble to himself as in the denials at the trial of Christ.
rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE AUTHOR Origen bluntly wrote: "Who wrote the Epistle God only knows certainly" as quoted by Eusebius. Origen held that the thoughts were Paul's while Clement of Rome or Luke may have written the book. Clement of Alexandria (Eusebius says) thought that Paul wrote it in Hebrew and that Luke translated it into Greek. No early writer apparently attributed the Greek text to Paul. Eusebius thought it was originally written in Hebrew whether by Paul or not and translated by Clement of Rome. But there is no certainty anywhere in the early centuries. It was accepted first in the east and later in the west which first rejected it. But Jerome and Augustine accepted it. When the Renaissance came Erasmus had doubts, Luther attributed it to Apollos, Calvin denied the Pauline authorship. In North Africa it was attributed to Barnabas. In modern times Harnack has suggested Priscilla, but the masculine participle in strkjv@Hebrews:11:32| (\me digoumenon\) disposes of that theory. The oldest Greek MSS. (Aleph A B) have simply \Pros Hebraious\ as the title, but they place it before the Pastoral Epistles, while the Textus Receptus puts it after the Pastoral Epistles and Philemon. In the light of all the facts one can only make a guess without a sense of certainty. For myself I should with Luther guess Apollos as the most likely author of this book which is full of the Spirit of God.
rwp@Hebrews:3:6 @{Whose house are we} (\hou oikos esmen hmeis\). We Christians (Jew and Gentile) looked at as a whole, not as a local organization. {If we hold fast} (\ean kataschmen\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist (effective) active subjunctive of \katech\. This note of contingency and doubt runs all through the Epistle. We are God's house if we do not play the traitor and desert. {Boldness} (\parrsian\) {and glorying} (\kai kauchma\) some had lost. The author makes no effort to reconcile this warning with God's elective purpose. He is not exhorting God, but these wavering Christians. All these are Pauline words. B does not have \mechri telous bebaian\ (firm unto the end), but it is clearly genuine in verse 14|. He pleads for intelligent confidence.
rwp@Hebrews:4:9 @{A sabbath rest} (\sabbatismos\). Late word from \sabbatiz\ (Exodus:16:30|) to keep the Sabbath, apparently coined by the author (a doubtful passage in Plutarch). Here it is parallel with \katapausis\ (cf. strkjv@Revelation:14:13|). {For the people of God} (\ti lai tou theou\). Dative case of blessed personal interest to the true Israel (Galatians:6:16|).
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|: "The words which I have spoken are spirit and are life." {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:4:13 @{That is not manifest} (\aphans\). Old adjective (\a\ privative and \phain\, to show), here only in the N.T. God's microscope can lay bare the smallest microbe of doubt and sin. {Naked} (\gumna\). Both soul and body are naked to the eye of God. {Laid open} (\tetrachlismena\). Perfect passive participle of \trachliz\, late verb to bend back the neck (\trachlos\, strkjv@Matthew:18:6|) as the surgeon does for operating, here only in N.T. See strkjv@Romans:16:4| for the peril of risking one's neck (\trachlon hupotithenai\). God's eyes see all the facts in our inmost hearts. There are no mental reservations from God. {With whom we have to do} (\pros hon hmin ho logos\). "With whom the matter or account for us is." There is a slight play here on \logos\ of verse 12|. Surely every servant of Christ today needs to gaze into this revealing mirror and be honest with himself and God.
rwp@Hebrews:5:7 @{In the days of his flesh} (\en tais hmerais ts sarkos autou\). Here (verses 7-9|) the author turns to the other requirement of a high priest (human sympathy). Since Jesus was "without sin" (4:15|) he did not have to offer sacrifices "for himself," yet in all other points he felt the sympathy of the human high priest, even more so by reason of his victory over sin. {Having offered up} (\prosenegkas\). Second aorist active (\-a\ form) participle of \prospher\ (cf. verse 3|). An allusion to the Agony of Christ in Gethsemane. {Supplications} (\hiketrias\). Socrates, Polybius, Job:(Job:40:22|) combine this word with \deseis\ (prayers) as here. The older form was \hikesia\. The word \hiketrios\ is an adjective from \hikets\ (a suppliant from \hik\, to come to one) and suggests one coming with an olive-branch (\elaia\). Here only in the N.T. {With strong crying and tears} (\meta kraugs ischuras kai dakrun\). See strkjv@Luke:22:44f|. for a picture of the scene in Gethsemane (anguish and pathos). No doubt the writer has in mind other times when Jesus shed tears (John:11:35; strkjv@Luke:19:41|), but Gethsemane chiefly. {To save him from death} (\szein ek thanatou\). A reference to the cry of Jesus in Gethsemane (Matthew:26:39|). {Having been heard for his godly fear} (\eisakoustheis apo ts eulabeias\). Old word from \eulabs\ (taking hold well, strkjv@Luke:2:25| from \eu, lamban\, the verb \eulabeomai\ in N.T. only in strkjv@Hebrews:11:7|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@12:28|. Fine picture of Christ's attitude toward the Father in the prayer in Gethsemane and in all his prayers. Jesus in Gethsemane at once surrendered his will to that of the Father who heard his plea and enabled him to acquiesce in the Father's will.
rwp@Hebrews:9:1 @{Even the first covenant} (\kai h prt\). \Kai\ (even) is doubtful. No word for covenant with \prte\ (cf. strkjv@8:7|). {Had} (\eiche\). Imperfect active, used to have. {Ordinances} (\dikaimata\). Regulations (from \dikaio\) as in strkjv@Luke:1:6; strkjv@Romans:5:16|. {Of divine service} (\latreias\). No word for "divine," though worship is meant as in strkjv@Romans:9:4; strkjv@Phillipians:3:3|. Genitive case. {And its sanctuary, a sanctuary of this world} (\to te hagion kosmikon\). By \to hagion\ the author describes the whole sanctuary (Exodus:36:3; strkjv@Numbers:3:38|) like \tn hagin\ in strkjv@8:2|. \Kosmikon\ is a late adjective (Aristotle, Plutarch) from \kosmos\, relating to this world, like \epi gs\ (upon earth) of strkjv@8:4|. It is in the predicate position, not attributive.
rwp@Hebrews:9:10 @{Only with meats and drinks and divers washings} (\monon epi brmasin kai pomasin kai diaphorois baptismois\). The parenthesis of the Revised Version here is unnecessary. The use of \epi\ here with the locative case is regular, "in the matter of" (Luke:12:52; strkjv@John:12:16; strkjv@Acts:21:24|). What ritual value these Levitical sacrifices had was confined to minute regulations about diet and ceremonial cleansing (clean and unclean). For "divers" (\diaphorois\, late adjective, in N.T. only in strkjv@Hebrews:1:4; strkjv@8:6; strkjv@9:10; strkjv@Romans:12:6|) say "different" or "various." \Baptismois\ is, of course, the Jewish ceremonial immersions (cf. strkjv@Mark:7:4; strkjv@Exodus:29:4; strkjv@Leviticus:11:25,28f.; strkjv@Numbers:8:7; strkjv@Revelation:6:2|). {Carnal ordinances} (\dikaimasin sarkos\). But the correct text is undoubtedly simply \dikaimata sarkos\ (nominative case), in apposition with \dra te kai thusiai\ (gifts and sacrifices). See strkjv@9:1| for \dikaimata\. {Imposed} (\epikeimena\). Present middle or passive participle of \epikeimai\, old verb to lie upon (be laid upon). Cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:9:16|. {Until a time of reformation} (\mechri kairou diorthses\). Definite statement of the temporary nature of the Levitical system already stated in strkjv@7:10-17; strkjv@8:13| and argued clearly by Paul in strkjv@Galatians:3:15-22|. \Diorthsis\ is a late word, here alone in N.T. (from \diortho\, to set right or straight), used by Hippocrates for making straight misshapen limbs like \anortho\ in strkjv@Hebrews:12:12|. Here for reformation like \diorthma\ (reform) in strkjv@Acts:24:2f|. Christianity itself is the great Reformation of the current Judaism (Pharisaism) and the spiritual Judaism foreshadowed by the old Abrahamic promise (see strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9|).
rwp@Hebrews:10:22 @{Let us draw near} (\proserchmetha\). Present middle volitive subjunctive as in strkjv@4:16| with which exhortation the discussion began. There are three exhortations in verses strkjv@22:25| (Let us draw near, \proserchmetha\, let us hold fast, \katechmen\, let us consider one another, \katanomen alllous\). Four items are added to this first exhortation. {With a true heart} (\meta althins kardias\). With loyalty and fealty. {In fulness of faith} (\en plrophorii pistes\). See strkjv@6:11| for this very phrase. {Having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience} (\rerantismenoi tas kardias apo suneidses ponras\). Perfect passive participle of \rantiz\ with the accusative retained in the passive, an evident allusion to the sprinkling of blood in the old tabernacle (9:18-22|) and the shedding of Christ's blood for the cleansing of our consciences (10:1-4|). Cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:2| for "the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ." {Our body washed with pure water} (\lelousmenoi to sma hudati kathari\). Perfect passive (or middle) of \lou\, old verb to bathe, to wash. Accusative also retained if passive. \Hudati\ can be either locative (in) or instrumental (with). See strkjv@Ephesians:5:26; strkjv@Titus:3:5| for the use of \loutron\. If the reference here is to baptism (quite doubtful), the meaning is a symbol (Dods) of the previous cleansing by the blood of Christ.
rwp@Hebrews:12:1 @{Therefore} (\toigaroun\). Triple compound inferential participle (\toi, gar, oun\) like the German _doch denn nun_, a conclusion of emphasis, old particle, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:8|. There should be no chapter division here, since strkjv@12:1-3| really is the climax in the whole argument about the better promises (10:19-12:3|) with a passionate appeal for loyalty to Christ. {Us also} (\kai hmeis\). We as well as "these all" of strkjv@11:39| and all the more because of the "something better" given us in the actual coming of Christ. {Compassed about} (\echontes perikeimenon\). Literally, "having (\echontes\, present active participle of \ech\) lying around us" (\perikeimenon\, present middle participle of \perikeimai\, old verb as in strkjv@Luke:17:2|). {Cloud of witnesses} (\nephos marturn\). Old word (Latin _nubes_), here only in the N.T., for vast mass of clouds. \Nephel\ is a single cloud. The metaphor refers to the great amphitheatre with the arena for the runners and the tiers upon tiers of seats rising up like a cloud. The \martures\ here are not mere spectators (\theatai\), but testifiers (witnesses) who testify from their own experience (11:2,4,5,33,39|) to God's fulfilling his promises as shown in chapter strkjv@Hebrews:11|. {Laying aside} (\apothemenoi\). Second aorist-middle (indirect, from ourselves) participle of \apotithmi\, old verb as in strkjv@Colossians:3:8| (laying off old clothes). The runners ran in the stadium nearly naked. {Every weight} (\ogkon panta\). Old word (kin to \enegkein, pher\) like \phortos, baros\. Here every encumbrance that handicaps like doubt, pride, sloth, anything. No trailing garment to hinder or trip one. {The sin which doth so easily beset us} (\tn euperistaton hamartian\). "The easily besetting sin." There are a dozen possible renderings of this double compound verbal from \eu\, well, and \periistmi\, to place around or to stand around (intransitive). The Vulgate has _circumstans nos peccatum_ (the sin standing around us). Probably this is the true idea here, "the easily encompassing (or surrounding) sin." In this case apostasy from Christ was that sin. In our cases it may be some other sin. The verbal adjective reminds one of the ring of wild beasts in the jungle that encircle the camp-fire at night each ready to pounce upon a careless victim. {Let us run} (\trechmen\). Present active volitive subjunctive of \trech\, "let us keep on running." {With patience} (\di' hupomons\). Not with impatience, doubt, or despair. {The race that is set before us} (\ton prokeimenon hmin agna\). Note the article and the present middle participle of \prokeimai\, old compound (already in strkjv@6:18|, and also in strkjv@12:2|). Dative case (\hmin\) of personal interest.
rwp@Hebrews:12:3 @{Consider} (\analogisasthe\). First aorist middle imperative of \analogizomai\, old word to reckon up, to compare, to weigh, only here in the N.T. See \katanosate\ in strkjv@3:1|. Understanding Jesus is the key to the whole problem, the cure for doubt and hesitation. {Endured} (\hupomemenkota\). Perfect active participle of the same verb \hupomen\ used in verse 2|. {Gainsaying} (\antilogian\). Old word from \antilogos\ (from \antileg\), already in strkjv@6:16; strkjv@7:7|. {Of sinners} (\hupo tn hamartln\). "By sinners." {Against themselves} (\eis heautous\). Against their better selves if a genuine reading. But \eis heauton\ (against himself), against Christ, is far more likely correct. {That ye wax not weary} (\hina m kamte\). Negative final clause with \hina m\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \kamn\, old verb to be weary as here or sick as in strkjv@James:5:15|. {Fainting in your souls} (\tais psuchais humn ekluomenoi\). Present passive participle of \eklu\, old verb to loosen out, to set free, and in passive to be enfeebled, to be tired out (here in soul with locative case), as in verse 5|. The rest of the Epistle drives home the argument.
rwp@James:1:6 @{In faith} (\en pistei\). Faith here "is the fundamental religious attitude" (Ropes), belief in God's beneficent activity and personal reliance on him (Oesterley). {Nothing doubting} (\mden diakrinomenos\). Negative way of saying \en pistei\ (in faith), present passive participle of \diakrin\, old verb to separate (\krin\) between (\dia\), to discriminate as shown clearly in strkjv@Acts:11:12, strkjv@15:9|, but no example of the sense of divided against oneself has been found earlier than the N.T., though it appears in later Christian writings. It is like the use of \diamerizomai\ in strkjv@Luke:11:18| and occurs in strkjv@Matthew:21:21; strkjv@Mark:11:23; strkjv@Acts:10:20; strkjv@Romans:2:4; strkjv@4:20; strkjv@14:23|. It is a vivid picture of internal doubt. {Is like} (\eoiken\). Second perfect active indicative with the linear force alone from \eik\ to be like. Old form, but in N.T. only here and verse 23| (a literary touch, not in LXX). {The surge of the sea} (\kludni thalasss\). Old word (from \kluz\ to wash against) for a dashing or surging wave in contrast with \kuma\ (successive waves), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:8:24|. In associative instrumental case after \eoiken\. In strkjv@Ephesians:4:14| we have \kludoniz\ (from \kludn\), to toss by waves. {Driven by the wind} (\anemizomeni\). Present passive participle (agreeing in case with \kludni\) of \anemiz\, earliest known example and probably coined by James (from \anemos\), who is fond of verbs in \-iz\ (Mayor). The old Greek used \anemo\. In strkjv@Ephesians:4:14| Paul uses both \kludoniz\ and \peripher anemi\. It is a vivid picture of the sea whipped into white-caps by the winds. {Tossed} (\ripizomeni\). Present passive participle also in agreement with \kludni\ from \ripiz\, rare verb (Aristophanes, Plutarch, Philo) from \ripis\ (a bellows or fire-fan), here only in N.T. It is a picture of "the restless swaying to and fro of the surface of the water, blown upon by shifting breezes" (Hort), the waverer with slight rufflement.
rwp@James:1:8 @{Man} (\anr\). Instead of \anthrpos\ (general term) in verse 7|, perhaps for variety (Ropes), but often in James (1:12,23; strkjv@2:2; strkjv@3:2|), though in other Epistles usually in distinction from \gun\ (woman). {Double-minded} (\dipsuchos\). First appearance of this compound known and in N.T. only here and strkjv@4:8|. Apparently coined by James, but copied often in early Christian writings and so an argument for the early date of James' Epistle (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). From \dis\ twice and \psuch\ soul, double-souled, double-minded, Bunyan's "Mr. Facing-both-ways." Cf. the rebuke to Peter (\edistasas\) in strkjv@Matthew:14:31|. {Unstable} (\akatastatos\). Late double compound (alpha privative and \katastatos\ verbal from \kathistmi\), in LXX once (Is strkjv@54:11|) and in Polybius, in N.T. only here and strkjv@3:8|. It means unsteady, fickle, staggering, reeling like a drunken man. Surely to James such "doubt" is no mark of intellectuality.
rwp@James:2:13 @{Without mercy} (\aneleos\). Found here only save a doubtful papyrus example (\aneles\) for the vernacular \aniles\ and the Attic \anles\. For this principle of requital see strkjv@Matthew:5:7; strkjv@6:14; strkjv@7:1f.; strkjv@18:33|. {Glorieth against} (\katakauchtai\). Present middle indicative of the old compound verb \katakauchaomai\, to exult over (down), in N.T. only here, strkjv@3:14; strkjv@Romans:11:18|. Only mercy can triumph over justice with God and men. "Mercy is clothed with the divine glory and stands by the throne of God" (Chrysostom). See strkjv@Romans:8:31-39; strkjv@Matthew:9:13; strkjv@12:7|.
rwp@James:2:19 @{Thou believest that God is one} (\su pisteueis hoti heis theos estin\). James goes on with his reply and takes up mere creed apart from works, belief that God exists (there is one God), a fundamental doctrine, but that is not belief or trust in God. It may be mere creed. {Thou doest well} (\kals poieis\). That is good as far as it goes, which is not far. {The demons also believe} (\kai ta daimonia pisteuousin\). They go that far (the same verb \pisteu\). They never doubt the fact of God's existence. {And shudder} (\kai phrissousin\). Present active indicative of \phriss\, old onomatopoetic verb to bristle up, to shudder, only here in N.T. Like Latin _horreo_ (horror, standing of the hair on end with terror). The demons do more than believe a fact. They shudder at it.
rwp@James:3:17 @{First pure} (\prton men hagn\). First in rank and time. \Hagnos\ is from the same root as \hagios\ (holy), old adjective, pure from fault, not half-good and half-bad, like that above. {Then peaceable} (\epeita eirnik\). Old adjective from \eirn\ (peace), loving peace here, bringing peace in strkjv@Hebrews:12:11| (only N.T. examples). But clearly great as peace is, purity (righteousness) comes before peace and peace at any price is not worth the having. Hence Jesus spurned the devil's peace of surrender. {Gentle} (\epieiks\). Old adjective (from \eikos\, reasonable, fair), equitable (Phillipians:4:5; strkjv@1Peter:2:18|). No English word renders it clearly. {Easy to be entreated} (\eupeiths\). Old adjective (\eu, peithomai\), compliant, approachable. Only here in N.T. {Mercy} (\eleous\). Practical help (2:13,16|). {Good fruits} (\karpn agathn\). \Kaloi karpoi\ in strkjv@Matthew:7:17f|. Good deeds the fruit of righteousness (Phillipians:1:11|). {Without variance} (\adiakritos\). Late verbal adjective (from alpha privative and \diakrin\, to distinguish). "Unhesitating," not doubting (\diakrinomenos\) like the man in strkjv@1:6|. Here only in N.T. This wisdom does not put a premium on doubt. {Without hypocrisy} (\anupokritos\). Late and rare verbal adjective (alpha privative and \hupokrin\). Not hypocritical, sincere, unfeigned (Romans:12:9|).
rwp@James:5:20 @{Let him know} (\ginsket\). Present active imperative third person singular of \ginsk\, but Westcott and Hort read \ginskete\ (know ye) after B. In either case it is the conclusion of the condition in verse 19|. {He which converteth} (\ho epistrepsas\). First aorist active articular participle of \epistreph\ of verse 19|. {From the error} (\ek plans\). "Out of the wandering" of verse 19| (\plan\, from which \plana\ is made). See strkjv@1John:4:6| for contrast between "truth" and "error." {A soul from death} (\psuchn ek thanatou\). The soul of the sinner (\hamartlon\) won back to Christ, not the soul of the man winning him. A few MSS. have \autou\ added (his soul), which leaves it ambiguous, but \autou\ is not genuine. It is ultimate and final salvation here meant by the future (\ssei\). {Shall cover a multitude of sins} (\kalupsei plthos hamartin\). Future active of \kalupt\, old verb, to hide, to veil. But whose sins (those of the converter or the converted)? The Roman Catholics (also Mayor and Ropes) take it of the sins of the converter, who thus saves himself by saving others. The language here will allow that, but not New Testament teaching in general. It is apparently a proverbial saying which Resch considers one of the unwritten sayings of Christ (Clem. Al. _Paed_. iii. 12). It occurs also in strkjv@1Peter:4:8|, where it clearly means the sins of others covered by love as a veil thrown over them. The saying appears also in strkjv@Proverbs:10:12|: "Hatred stirs up strife, but love hides all transgressions"--that is "love refuses to see faults" (Mayor admits). That is undoubtedly the meaning in strkjv@1Peter:4:8; strkjv@James:5:20|.
rwp@Info_John @ A DIFFERENT STYLE OF TEACHING Songs:different is it in fact that some men bluntly assert that Jesus could not have spoken in the same fashion as presented in the Synoptics and in the Fourth Gospel. Such critics need to recall the Socrates of Xenophon's _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@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 @ BUT DIFFERENT FROM THE APOCALYPSE It should be said at once that the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel does not depend on that of the Apocalypse. In fact, some men hold to the Johannine authorship of the Apocalypse who deny that of the Gospel while some hold directly the opposite view. Some deny the Johannine authorship of both Gospel and Apocalypse, while the majority hold to the Johannine authorship of Gospel, Epistles, and Apocalypse as was the general rule till after the time of Origen. The author of the Apocalypse claims to be John (Revelation:1:4,9; strkjv@22:8|), though what John he does not say. Denial of the existence of a "Presbyter John" naturally leads one to think of the Apostle John. Origen says that John, the brother of James, was banished to the Isle of Patmos where he saw the Apocalypse. There is undoubted radical difference in language between the Apocalypse and the other Johannine books which will receive discussion when the Apocalypse is reached. Westcott explained these differences as due to the early date of the Apocalypse in the reign of Vespasian before John had become master of the Greek language. Even J. H. Moulton (_Prolegomena_, p. 9, note 4) says bluntly: "If its date was 95 A.D., the author cannot have written the fourth Gospel only a short time after." Or before, he would say. But the date of the Apocalypse seems definitely to belong to the reign of Domitian. Songs:one ventures to call attention to the statement in strkjv@Acts:4:13| where Peter and John are described as \agrammatoi kai iditai\ (unlettered and private or unschooled men). It is curious also that it is precisely in 2Peter and the Apocalypse that we have so many grammatical solecisms and peculiarities. We know that the Fourth Gospel was reviewed by a group of John's friends in Ephesus, while he was apparently alone in the Isle of Patmos. The excitement of the visions would naturally increase the uncouth vernacular of the Apocalypse so much like that in the Greek papyri as seen in Milligan's _Greek Papyri_, for instance. This being true, one is able, in spite of Moulton's dictum, to hold to the Johannine authorship of both Gospel and Apocalypse and not far apart in date.
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@Info_John @ ORIGINAL LANGUAGE OF THE BOOK The late Dr. C. F. Burney of Oxford wrote a volume called, _The Aramaic Origin of the Fourth Gospel_ (1922) in which he tried to prove that the Fourth Gospel is really the first in time and was originally written in Aramaic. The theory excited some interest, but did not convince either Aramaic or Greek scholars to an appreciable extent. Some of the examples cited are plausible and some quite fanciful. This theory cannot be appealed to in any serious interpretation of the Fourth Gospel. The author was beyond doubt a Jew, but he wrote in the _Koin_ Greek of his time that is comparatively free from crude Semiticisms, perhaps due in part to the help of the friends in Ephesus.
rwp@John:1:3 @{All things} (\panta\). The philosophical phrase was \ta panta\ (the all things) as we have it in strkjv@1Corinthians:8:6; strkjv@Romans:11:36; strkjv@Colossians:1:16|. In verse 10| John uses \ho kosmos\ (the orderly universe) for the whole. {Were made} (egeneto). Second aorist middle indicative of \ginomai\, the constative aorist covering the creative activity looked at as one event in contrast with the continuous existence of \n\ in verses 1,2|. All things "came into being." Creation is thus presented as a becoming (\ginomai\) in contrast with being (\eimi\). {By him} (\di' autou\). By means of him as the intermediate agent in the work of creation. The Logos is John's explanation of the creation of the universe. The author of Hebrews (Hebrews:1:2|) names God's Son as the one "through whom he made the ages." Paul pointedly asserts that "the all things were created in him" (Christ) and "the all things stand created through him and unto him" (Colossians:1:16|). Hence it is not a peculiar doctrine that John here enunciates. In strkjv@1Corinthians:8:6|, Paul distinguishes between the Father as the primary source (\ex hou\) of the all things and the Son as the intermediate agent as here (\di' hou\). {Without him} (\chris autou\). Old adverbial preposition with the ablative as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:14|, "apart from." John adds the negative statement for completion, another note of his style as in strkjv@John:1:20; strkjv@1John:1:5|. Thus John excludes two heresies (Bernard) that matter is eternal and that angels or aeons had a share in creation. {Not anything} (\oude hen\). "Not even one thing." Bernard thinks the entire Prologue is a hymn and divides it into strophes. That is by no means certain. It is doubtful also whether the relative clause "that hath been made" (\ho gegonen\) is a part of this sentence or begins a new one as Westcott and Hort print it. The verb is second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. Westcott observes that the ancient scholars before Chrysostom all began a new sentence with \ho gegonen\. The early uncials had no punctuation.
rwp@John:1:13 @{Which were born} (\hoi egennthsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \genna\, to beget, "who were begotten." By spiritual generation (of God, \ek theou\), not by physical (\ex haimatn\, plural as common in classics and O.T., though why it is not clear unless blood of both father and mother; \ek thelmatos sarkos\, from sexual desire; \ek thelmatos andros\, from the will of the male). But _b_ of the old Latin reads _qui natus est_ and makes it refer to Christ and so expressly teach the Virgin Birth of Jesus. Likewise Irenaeus reads _qui natus est_ as does Tertullian who argues that _qui nati sunt_ (\hoi egennthsan\) is an invention of the Valentinian Gnostics. Blass (_Philology of the Gospels_, p. 234) opposes this reading, but all the old Greek uncials read \hoi egennthsan\ and it must be accepted. The Virgin Birth is doubtless implied in verse 14|, but it is not stated in verse 13|.
rwp@John:1:18 @{No man hath seen God at any time} (\theon oudeis heraken ppote\). "God no one has ever seen." Perfect active indicative of \hora\. Seen with the human physical eye, John means. God is invisible (Exodus:33:20; strkjv@Deuteronomy:4:12|). Paul calls God \aoratos\ (Colossians:1:15; strkjv@1Timothy:1:17|). John repeats the idea in strkjv@John:5:37; strkjv@6:46|. And yet in strkjv@14:7| Jesus claims that the one who sees him has seen the Father as here. {The only begotten Son} (\ho monogens huios\). This is the reading of the Textus Receptus and is intelligible after \hs monogenous para patros\ in verse 14|. But the best old Greek manuscripts (Aleph B C L) read \monogens theos\ (God only begotten) which is undoubtedly the true text. Probably some scribe changed it to \ho monogens huios\ to obviate the blunt statement of the deity of Christ and to make it like strkjv@3:16|. But there is an inner harmony in the reading of the old uncials. The Logos is plainly called \theos\ in verse 1|. The Incarnation is stated in verse 14|, where he is also termed \monogens\. He was that before the Incarnation. Songs:he is "God only begotten," "the Eternal Generation of the Son" of Origen's phrase. {Which is in the bosom of the Father} (\ho n eis ton kolpon tou patros\). The eternal relation of the Son with the Father like \pros ton theon\ in verse 1|. In strkjv@3:13| there is some evidence for \ho n en ti ourani\ used by Christ of himself while still on earth. The mystic sense here is that the Son is qualified to reveal the Father as Logos (both the Father in Idea and Expression) by reason of the continual fellowship with the Father. {He} (\ekinos\). Emphatic pronoun referring to the Son. {Hath declared him} (\exgsato\). First aorist (effective) middle indicative of \exgeomai\, old verb to lead out, to draw out in narrative, to recount. Here only in John, though once in Luke's Gospel (24:35|) and four times in Acts:(10:8; strkjv@15:12,14; strkjv@21:19|). This word fitly closes the Prologue in which the Logos is pictured in marvellous fashion as the Word of God in human flesh, the Son of God with the Glory of God in him, showing men who God is and what he is.
rwp@John:1:28 @{In Bethany beyond Jordan} (\en Bthanii peran tou Iordanou\). Undoubtedly the correct text, not "in Bethabara" as Origen suggested instead of "in Bethany" of all the known Greek manuscripts under the mistaken notion that the only Bethany was that near Jerusalem. {Was baptizing} (\n baptizn\). Periphrastic imperfect, common idiom in John.
rwp@John:1:34 @{I have seen} (\heraka\). Present perfect active of \hora\. John repeats the statement of verse 32| (\tetheamai\). {Have borne witness} (\memarturka\). Perfect active indicative of \marture\ for which verb see 32|. {This is the Son of God} (\ho huios tou theou\). The Baptist saw the Spirit come on Jesus at his baptism and undoubtedly heard the Father's voice hail him as "My Beloved Son" (Mark:1:11; strkjv@Matthew:3:17; strkjv@Luke:3:22|). Nathanael uses it as a Messianic title (John:1:49|) as does Martha (11:27|). The Synoptics use it also of Christ (Mark:3:11; strkjv@Matthew:14:33; strkjv@Luke:22:70|). Caiaphas employs it to Christ as a Messianic title (Matthew:26:63|) and Jesus confessed under oath that he was (verse strkjv@Matthew:26:64|), thus applying the term to himself as he does in John's Gospel (5:25; strkjv@10:36; strkjv@11:4|) and by implication (the Father, the Son) in strkjv@Matthew:11:27| (Luke:10:22|). Hence in the Synoptics also Jesus calls himself the Son of God. The phrase means more than just Messiah and expresses the peculiar relation of the Son to the Father (John:3:18; strkjv@5:25; strkjv@17:5; strkjv@19:7; strkjv@20:31|) like that of the Logos with God in strkjv@1:1|.
rwp@John:1:50 @{Answered and said} (\apekrith kai eipen\). This redundant use of both verbs (cf. strkjv@1:26|) occurs in the Synoptics also and in the LXX also. It is Aramaic also and vernacular. It is not proof of an Aramaic original as Burney argues (_Aramaic Origin_, etc., p. 53). {Because} (\hoti\). Causal use of \hoti\ at beginning of the sentence as in strkjv@14:19; strkjv@15:19; strkjv@16:6|. The second \hoti\ before \eidon\ (I saw) is either declarative (that) or merely recitative (either makes sense here). {Thou shalt see greater things than these} (\meiz toutn opsi\). Perhaps volitive future middle indicative of \hora\ (though merely futuristic is possible as with \opsesthe\ in 51|) ablative case of \toutn\ after the comparative adjective \meiz\. The wonder of Nathanael no doubt grew as Jesus went on.
rwp@John:4:34 @{To do the will} (\hina pois to thelma\). Non-final use of \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive as subject or predicate nominative as in strkjv@6:29; strkjv@15:8; strkjv@17:3|. The Messianic consciousness of Jesus is clear and steady (5:30; strkjv@6:38|). He never doubted that the Father sent him. {And to accomplish his work} (\kai teleis autou to ergon\). \Hina\ understood with \teleis\ in like idiom, first aorist active subjunctive of \teleio\ (from \teleios\), to bring to an end. See strkjv@5:36|. In strkjv@17:4| (the Intercessory Prayer) he will say that he has done (\teleisas\) this task which the Father gave him to do. On the Cross Jesus will cry \Tetelestai\ (It is finished). He will carry through the Father's programme (John:3:16|). That is his "food." He had been doing that in winning the woman to God.
rwp@John:5:1 @{After these things} (\meta tauta\). John is fond of this vague phrase (3:22; strkjv@6:1|). He does not mean that this incident follows immediately. He is supplementing the Synoptic Gospels and does not attempt a full story of the work of Jesus. Some scholars needlessly put chapter 5 after chapter 6 because in chapter 6 Jesus is in Galilee as at the end of chapter 4. But surely it is not incongruous to think of Jesus making a visit to Jerusalem before the events in chapter 6 which undoubtedly come within a year of the end (6:4|). {A feast of the Jews} (\heort tn Ioudain\). Some manuscripts have the article (\h\) "the feast" which would naturally mean the passover. As a matter of fact there is no way of telling what feast it was which Jesus here attended. Even if it was not the passover, there may well be another passover not mentioned besides the three named by John (2:13,23; strkjv@6:4: strkjv@12:1|). {Went up} (\aneb\). Second aorist active indicative of \anabain\. It was up towards Jerusalem from every direction save from Hebron.
rwp@John:5:4 @All of this verse is wanting in the oldest and best manuscripts like Aleph B C D W 33 Old Syriac, Coptic versions, Latin Vulgate. It is undoubtedly added, like the clause in verse 3|, to make clearer the statement in verse 7|. Tertullian is the earliest writer to mention it. The Jews explained the healing virtues of the intermittent spring by the ministry of angels. But the periodicity of such angelic visits makes it difficult to believe. It is a relief to many to know that the verse is spurious.
rwp@John:7:4 @{In secret} (\en krupti\). See strkjv@Matthew:6:4,6| for this phrase. {Openly} (\en parrsii\). "In public" (\pn, rsis\, telling it all). See on ¯Matthew:8:32|. Common in John (7:13,26; strkjv@10:24; strkjv@16:25,29; strkjv@18:20|; here again contrasted with \en krupti\). It is wise advice in the abstract that a public teacher must allow inspection of his deeds, but the motive is evil. They might get Jesus into trouble. \If thou doest these things\ (\ei tauta poieis\). This condition of the first class assumes the reality of the deeds of Jesus, but the use of the condition at all throws doubt on it all as in strkjv@Matthew:4:3,6|. {Manifest thyself} (\phanerson seauton\). First aorist active imperative of \phanero\. {To the world} (\ti kosmi\). Not just to "thy disciples," but to the public at large as at the feast of tabernacles. See strkjv@8:26; strkjv@14:22| for this use of \kosmos\.
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:8:44 @{Ye are of your father the devil} (\humeis ek tou patros tou diabolou\). Certainly they can "understand" (\ginskete\ in 43|) this "talk" (\lalian\) though they will be greatly angered. But they had to hear it (\akouein\ in 43|). It was like a bombshell in spite of the preliminary preparation. {Your will to do} (\thelete poiein\). Present active indicative of \thel\ and present active infinitive, "Ye wish to go on doing." This same idea Jesus presents in strkjv@Matthew:13:38| (the sons of the evil one, the devil) and strkjv@23:15| (twofold more a son of Gehenna than you). See also strkjv@1John:3:8| for "of the devil" (\ek tou diabolou\) for the one who persists in sinning. In strkjv@Revelation:12:9| the devil is one who leads all the world astray. The Gnostic view that Jesus means "the father of the devil" is grotesque. Jesus does not, of course, here deny that the Jews, like all men, are children of God the Creator, like Paul's offspring of God for all men in strkjv@Acts:17:28|. What he denies to these Pharisees is that they are spiritual children of God who do his will. They do the lusts and will of the devil. The Baptist had denied this same spiritual fatherhood to the merely physical descendants of Abraham (Matthew:3:9|). He even called them "broods of vipers" as Jesus did later (Matthew:12:34|). {A murderer} (\anthrpoktonos\). Old and rare word (Euripides) from \anthrpos\, man, and \ktein\, to kill. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1John:3:15|. The Jews were seeking to kill Jesus and so like their father the devil. {Stood not in the truth} (\en ti altheii ouk estken\). Since \ouk\, not \ouch\, is genuine, the form of the verb is \esteken\ the imperfect of the late present stem \stk\ (Mark:11:25|) from the perfect active \hestka\ (intransitive) of \histmi\, to place. {No truth in him} (\ouk estin altheia en auti\). Inside him or outside (environment). The devil and truth have no contact. {When he speaketh a lie} (\hotan lali to pseudos\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the present active subjunctive of \lale\. But note the article \to\: "Whenever he speaks the lie," as he is sure to do because it is his nature. Hence "he speaks out of his own" (\ek tn idin lalei\) like a fountain bubbling up (cf. strkjv@Matthew:12:34|). {For he is a liar} (\hoti pseusts estin\). Old word for the agent in a conscious falsehood (\pseudos\). See strkjv@1John:1:10; strkjv@Romans:3:4|. Common word in John because of the emphasis on \altheia\ (truth). {And the father thereof} (\kai ho patr autou\). Either the father of the lie or of the liar, both of which are true as already shown by Jesus. {Autou} in the genitive can be either neuter or masculine. Westcott takes it thus, "because he is a liar and his father (the devil) is a liar," making "one," not the devil, the subject of "whenever he speaks," a very doubtful expression.
rwp@John:8:58 @{Before Abraham was} (\prin Abraam genesthai\). Usual idiom with \prin\ in positive sentence with infinitive (second aorist middle of \ginomai\) and the accusative of general reference, "before coming as to Abraham," "before Abraham came into existence or was born." {I am} (\eg eimi\). Undoubtedly here Jesus claims eternal existence with the absolute phrase used of God. The contrast between \genesthai\ (entrance into existence of Abraham) and \eimi\ (timeless being) is complete. See the same contrast between \en\ in strkjv@1:1| and \egeneto\ in strkjv@1:14|. See the contrast also in strkjv@Psalms:90:2| between God (\ei\, art) and the mountains (\genthnai\). See the same use of \eimi\ in strkjv@John:6:20; strkjv@9:9; strkjv@8:24,28; strkjv@18:6|.
rwp@John:9:4 @{We must work the works of him that sent me} (\hmas dei ergazesthai ta erga tou pempsantos me\). This is undoubtedly the correct text (supported by the Neutral and Western classes) and not \eme\ (I) and \me\ (me) of the Syrian class nor \hmas\ (we) and \hmas\ (us) of the Alexandrian class. Jesus associates us with him in the task committed to him by the Father. Bernard argues vigorously, but vainly, for \eme\ me. We are not able to fathom the depth of the necessity (\dei\) here involved in each life as in this poor blind man and in each of us. {While it is day} (\hes hmera estin\). This clause gives the note of urgency upon us all. {The night cometh} (\erchetai nux\). "Night is coming on," and rapidly. Night was coming for Jesus (7:33|) and for each of us. Cf. strkjv@11:9; strkjv@12:35|. Even electric lights do not turn night into day. \Hes\ with the present indicative (21:22f.|) means "while," not until as in strkjv@13:38|.
rwp@John:10:7 @{Therefore again} (\oun palin\). Jesus repeats the allegory with more detail and with more directness of application. Repeating a story is not usually an exhilarating experience. {I am the door of the sheep} (\eg eimi h thura tn probatn\). The door for the sheep by which they enter. "He is the legitimate door of access to the spiritual \aul\, the Fold of the House of Israel, the door by which a true shepherd must enter" (Bernard). He repeats it in verse 9|. This is a new idea, not in the previous story (1-5|). Moffatt follows the Sahidic in accepting \ho poimn\ here instead of \h thura\, clearly whimsical. Jesus simply changes the metaphor to make it plainer. They were doubtless puzzled by the meaning of the door in verse 1|. Once more, this metaphor should help those who insist on the literal meaning of bread as the actual body of Christ in strkjv@Mark:14:22|. Jesus is not a physical "door," but he is the only way of entrance into the Kingdom of God (14:6|).
rwp@John:10:16 @{Other sheep} (\alla probata\). Sheep, not goats, but "not of this fold" (\ek ts auls tauts\). See verse 1| for \aul\. Clearly "his flock is not confined to those enclosed in the Jewish fold, whether in Palestine or elsewhere" (Westcott). Christ's horizon takes in all men of all races and times (John:11:52; strkjv@12:32|). The world mission of Christ for all nations is no new idea with him (Matthew:8:11; strkjv@Luke:13:28|). God loved the world and gave his Son for the race (\John strkjv@3:16\), {Them also I must bring} (\kakeina dei me agagein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \ag\ with \dei\ expressing the moral urgency of Christ's passion for God's people in all lands and ages. Missions in Christ's mind takes in the whole world. This is according to prophecy (Isaiah:42:6; strkjv@49:6; strkjv@56:8|) for the Messiah is to be a Light also to the Gentiles. It was typified by the brazen serpent (John:3:14|). Christ died for every man. The Pharisees doubtless listened in amazement and even the disciples with slow comprehension. {And they shall hear my voice} (\kai ts phns mou akousontai\). Future middle indicative of \akou\ with the genitive \phns\. These words read like a transcript from the Acts and the Epistles of Paul (Romans:9-11| in particular). See especially Paul's words in strkjv@Acts:28:28|. Present-day Christianity is here foretold. Only do we really listen to the voice of the Shepherd as we should? Jesus means that the Gentiles will hearken if the Jews turn away from him. {And they shall become one flock, one shepherd} (\kai gensontai mia poimn, heis poimn\). Future middle indicative of \ginomai\, plural, not singular \gensetai\ as some MSS. have it. All (Jews and Gentiles) will form one flock under one Shepherd. Note the distinction here by Jesus between \poimn\ (old word, contraction of \poimen\ from \poimn\, shepherd), as in strkjv@Matthew:26:31|, and \aul\ (fold) just before. There may be many folds of the one flock. Jerome in his Vulgate confused this distinction, but he is wrong. His use of _ovile_ for both \aul\ and \pomnion\ has helped Roman Catholic assumptions. Christ's use of "flock" (\poimn\) here is just another metaphor for kingdom (\basileia\) in strkjv@Matthew:8:11| where the children of the kingdom come from all climes and nations. See also the various metaphors in strkjv@Ephesians:2| for this same idea. There is only the one Great Shepherd of the sheep (Hebrews:13:20|), Jesus Christ our Lord.
rwp@John:10:24 @{Came round about him} (\ekuklsan auton\). Aorist active indicative of \kuklo\, old verb from \kuklos\ (cycle, circle). See strkjv@Acts:14:20| for the circle of disciples around Paul when stoned. Evidently the hostile Jews cherished the memory of the stinging rebuke given them by Jesus when here last, particularly the allegory of the Good Shepherd (10:1-19|), in which he drew so sharply their own picture. {How long dost thou hold us in suspense?} (\hes pote tn psuchn hmn aireis;\). Literally, "Until when dost thou lift up our soul?" But what do they mean by this metaphor? \Air\ is common enough to lift up the eyes (John:11:41|), the voice (Luke:17:13|), and in strkjv@Psalms:25:1; strkjv@86:4| (Josephus, _Ant_. III. ii. 3) we have "to lift up the soul." We are left to the context to judge the precise meaning. Clearly the Jews mean to imply doubt and suspense. The next remark makes it clear. {If thou art the Christ} (\ei su ei ho Christos\). Condition of first class assumed to be true for the sake of argument. {Tell us plainly} (\eipon hmin parrsii\). Conclusion with \eipon\ rather than the usual \eipe\ as if first aorist active imperative like \luson\. The point is in "plainly" (\parrsii\), adverb as in strkjv@7:13,26| which see. That is to say "I am the Christ" in so many words. See strkjv@11:14; strkjv@16:29| for the same use of \parrsii\. The demand seemed fair enough on the surface. They had made it before when here at the feast of tabernacles (8:25|). Jesus declined to use the word \Christos\ (Messiah) then as now because of the political bearing of the word in their minds. The populace in Galilee had once tried to make him king in opposition to Pilate (John:6:14f.|). When Jesus does confess on oath before Caiaphas that he is the Christ the Son of God (Mark:14:61f.; strkjv@Matthew:26:63f.|), the Sanhedrin instantly vote him guilty of blasphemy and then bring him to Pilate with the charge of claiming to be king as a rival to Caesar. Jesus knew their minds too well to be caught now.
rwp@John:10:27 @{My sheep} (\ta probata ta ema\). In contrast with you they are not in doubt and suspense. They know my voice and follow me. Repetition of the idea in strkjv@10:4,14|.
rwp@John:10:33 @{For a good work we stone thee not} (\peri kalou ergou ou lithazomen\). "Concerning a good deed we are not stoning thee." Flat denial that the healing of the blind man on the Sabbath had led them to this attempt (8:59|) in spite of the facts. {But for blasphemy} (\alla peri blasphmias\). See strkjv@Acts:26:7| where \peri\ with the genitive is also used with \egkaloumai\ for the charge against Paul. This is the only example in John of the word \blasphmia\ (cf. strkjv@Matthew:12:31|). {And because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God} (\kai hoti su anthrpos n poieis seauton theon\). In strkjv@5:18| they stated the charge more accurately: "He called God his own Father, making himself equal with God." That is, he made himself the Son of God. This he did beyond a doubt. But was it blasphemy? Only if he was not the Son of God. The penalty for blasphemy was death by stoning (Leviticus:24:16; strkjv@1Kings:21:10,13|).
rwp@John:11:1 @{Was sick} (\n asthenn\). Periphrastic imperfect active of \asthene\, old verb (from \asthens\, \a\ privative, and \sthenos\, strength). {Lazarus} (\Lazaros\). See on ¯Luke:16:20| for the name of another man in the parable, a shortened form of Eleazer, only other N.T. use, but in Josephus and rabbinical writings. No connexion between this Lazarus and the one in the parable. {Of Bethany} (\apo Bthanias\). Use of \apo\ as in strkjv@1:44| Philip of Bethsaida and strkjv@1:45| Joseph of Nazareth. This Bethany is about two miles (11:18|) east of Jerusalem on the south-east slope of Olivet and is now called El Azariyeh, from the name Lazarus. Jesus is still apparently at the other Bethany beyond Jordan (10:40|). It is doubtful if a distinction is meant here by \apo\ and \ek\ between Bethany as the residence and some other village (\ek ts kms\) as the birthplace of Lazarus and the sisters. {Of Mary and Martha} (\Marias kai Marthas\). Note \Marthas\, not \Marths\ for the genitive. Elsewhere (John:11:19; strkjv@Luke:10:38|) Martha comes first as the mistress and hostess. The two sisters are named for further identification of Lazarus. Martha was apparently the elder sister (11:5,19; strkjv@Luke:10:38f.|). "The identification of Mary with Mary Magdalene is a mere conjecture supported by no direct evidence, and opposed to the general tenor of the Gospels" (Westcott).
rwp@John:12:3 @{A pound} (\litran\). Latin _libra_, late _Koin_ (Polybius, Plutarch) word with weight of 12 ounces, in N.T. only here and strkjv@19:39|. Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:7|) have alabaster cruse. {Of ointment of spikenard} (\murou nardou pistiks\). "Of oil of nard." See already strkjv@11:2| for \murou\ (also strkjv@Matthew:26:7|). Nard is the head or spike of an East Indian plant, very fragrant. Occurs also in strkjv@Mark:14:3|. \Pistiks\ here and in strkjv@Mark:14:3| probably means genuine (\pistikos\, from \pistos\, reliable). Only two instances in the N.T. {Very precious} (\polutimou\). Old compound adjective (\polus\, much, \tim\), in N.T. only here, strkjv@Matthew:13:46; strkjv@1Peter:1:7|. Mark has \polutelous\ (very costly). Matthew (Matthew:26:7|) has here \barutimou\ of weighty value (only N.T. instance). {Anointed} (\leipsen\). First aorist active indicative of \aleiph\, old word (Mark:16:1|). {The feet} (\tous podas\). Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:7|) have "his head." Why not both, though neither Gospel mentions both? The Latin MS. _fuldensis_ and the Syriac Sinatic do give both head and feet here. {Wiped} (\exemaxen\). First aorist active indicative of \ekmass\, old verb to wipe off already in strkjv@11:2; strkjv@Luke:7:38,44|. {With her hair} (\tais thrixin auts\). Instrumental plural. It is this item that is relied on largely by those who identify Mary of Bethany with the sinful woman in Luke 7 and with Mary Magdalene. It is no doubt true that it was usually considered immodest for a woman to wear her hair loose. But it is not impossible that Mary of Bethany in her carefully planned love-offering for Jesus on this occasion was only glad to throw such a punctilio to the winds. Such an act on this occasion does not brand her a woman of loose character. {Was filled with the odour of the ointment} (\eplrth ek ts osms tou murou\). Effective first aorist passive of \plro\ and a natural result.
rwp@John:12:21 @{To Philip which was of Bethsaida of Galilee} (\Philippi ti apo Bthsaida ts Galilaias\). He had a Greek name and the Greeks may have seen Philip in Galilee where there were many Greeks, probably (Mark:6:45|) the Western Bethsaida in Galilee, not Bethsaida Julias on the Eastern side (Luke:9:10|). {Asked} (\rtn\). Imperfect active, probably inchoative, "began to ask," in contrast with the aorist tense just before (\proslthan\, came to). {Sir} (\Kurie\). Most respectfully and courteously. {We would see Jesus} (\thelomen ton Isoun idein\). "We desire to see Jesus." This is not abrupt like our "we wish" or "we want," but perfectly polite. However, they could easily "see" Jesus, had already done so, no doubt. They wish an interview with Jesus.
rwp@John:13:1 @{Now before the feast of the passover} (\pro de ts heorts tou pascha\). Just before, John means, not twenty-four hours before, that is our Thursday evening (beginning of 15th of Nisan, sunset to sunset Jewish day), since Jesus was crucified on Friday 15th of Nisan. Hence Jesus ate the regular passover meal at the usual time. The whole feast, including the feast of unleavened bread, lasted eight days. For a discussion of the objections to this interpretation of John in connexion with the Synoptic Gospels one may consult my _Harmony of the Gospels_, pp. 279-84, and David Smith's _In the Days of His Flesh_, Appendix VIII. The passover feast began on the 15th Nisan at sunset, the passover lamb being slain the afternoon of 14th Nisan. There seems no real doubt that this meal in strkjv@John:13:1-30| is the real passover meal described by the Synoptics also (Mark:14:18-21; strkjv@Matthew:26:21-25; strkjv@Luke:22:21-23|), followed by the institution of the Lord's Supper. Thus understood verse 1| here serves as an introduction to the great esoteric teaching of Christ to the apostles (John:13:2-17:26|), called by Barnas Sears _The Heart of Christ_. This phrase goes with the principal verb \gapsen\ (loved). {Knowing} (\eids\). Second perfect active participle, emphasizing the full consciousness of Christ. He was not stumbling into the dark as he faced "his hour" (\autou h hra\). See strkjv@18:4; strkjv@19:28| for other examples of the insight and foresight (Bernard) of Jesus concerning his death. See on strkjv@12:23| for use before by Jesus. {That he should depart} (\hina metabi\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist active subjunctive of \metabain\, old word, to go from one place to another, here (5:24; strkjv@1John:3:14|) to go from this world (8:23|) back to the Father from whom he had come (14:12,28; strkjv@16:10,28; strkjv@17:5|). {His own which were in the world} (\tous idious tous en ti kosmi\). His own disciples (17:6,9,11|), those left in the world when he goes to the Father, not the Jews as in strkjv@1:11|. See strkjv@Acts:4:23; strkjv@1Timothy:5:8| for the idiom. John pictures here the outgoing of Christ's very heart's love (chs. strkjv@John:13-17|) towards these men whom he had chosen and whom he loved "unto the end" (\eis telos\) as in strkjv@Matthew:10:22; strkjv@Luke:18:15|, but here as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:16| rather "to the uttermost." The culmination of the crisis ("his hour") naturally drew out the fulness of Christ's love for them as is shown in these great chapters (John:13-17|).
rwp@John:13:22 @{Looked one on another} (\eblepon eis alllous\). Inchoative imperfect of \blep\, "began to glance at one another in bewilderment (doubting, \aporoumenoi\, present passive participle of \apore\, to be at a loss, to lose one's way, \a\ privative and \poros\, way). They recalled their strife about precedence and Judas betrayed nothing. {Concerning whom he spake} (\peri tinos legei\). Indirect question retaining present active indicative \legei\. See same note in ¯Mark:14:19; strkjv@Matthew:26:22; strkjv@Luke:22:23|.
rwp@John:13:23 @{Was at the table reclining in Jesus' bosom} (\n anakeimenos en ti kolpi tou Isou\). No word for "table" in the text. Periphrastic imperfect of \anakeimai\, to lie back, to recline. \Kolpos\ usual word for bosom (1:18|). {Whom Jesus loved} (\hon gapa Isous\). Imperfect active of \agapa\, John's description of himself of which he was proud (19:26; strkjv@20:2; strkjv@21:7,20|), identified in strkjv@21:24| as the author of the book and necessarily one of the twelve because of the "explicit" (Bernard) language of Mark (Mark:14:17; strkjv@Luke:22:14|). John son of Zebedee and brother of James. At the table John was on the right of Jesus lying obliquely so that his head lay on the bosom of Jesus. The centre, the place of honour, Jesus occupied. The next place in rank was to the left of Jesus, held by Peter (Westcott) or by Judas (Bernard) which one doubts.
rwp@John:14:5 @{Whither} (\pou\)--{how} (\ps\). It is Thomas, not Peter (13:36f.|) who renews the doubt about the destination of Jesus including the path or way thither (\tn hodon\). Thomas is the spokesman for the materialistic conception then and now.
rwp@John:17:5 @{With thine own self} (\para seauti\). "By the side of thyself." Jesus prays for full restoration to the pre-incarnate glory and fellowship (cf. strkjv@1:1|) enjoyed before the Incarnation (John:1:14|). This is not just ideal pre-existence, but actual and conscious existence at the Father's side (\para soi\, with thee) "which I had" (\hi eichon\, imperfect active of \ech\, I used to have, with attraction of case of \hn\ to \hi\ because of \doxi\), "before the world was" (\pro tou ton kosmon einai\), "before the being as to the world" (cf. verse 24|). It is small wonder that those who deny or reject the deity of Jesus Christ have trouble with the Johannine authorship of this book and with the genuineness of these words. But even Harnack admits that the words here and in verse 24| are "undoubtedly the reflection of the certainty with which Jesus himself spoke" (_What Is Christianity_, Engl. Tr., p. 132). But Paul, as clearly as John, believes in the actual pre-existence and deity of Jesus Christ (Phillipians:2:5-11|).
rwp@John:17:6 @{I manifested} (\ephanersa\). First aorist active indicative of \phanero\ (from \phaneros\, manifest). Another word for claiming successful accomplishment of his task as in verse 4| with \edoxasa\ and in verse 26| with \egnrisa\. {Whom} (\hous\). Accusative case after \edkas\, not attracted to case of antecedent (\anthrpois\). Jesus regards the apostles as the Father's gift to him. Recall the night of prayer before he chose them. {They have kept} (\tetrkan\). Perfect active indicative, late _Koin_ form for the third plural instead of the usual \tetrkasin\. Jesus claims loyalty and fidelity in these men with the one exception of Judas (verse 12|). He does not claim perfection for them, but they have at least held on to the message of the Father in spite of doubt and wavering (6:67-71; strkjv@Matthew:16:15-20|).
rwp@John:17:21 @{That they also may be in us} (\hina kai autoi en hmin sin\). Another purpose clause with \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \eimi\. The only possible way to have unity among believers is for all of them to find unity first with God in Christ. {That the world may believe} (\hina ho kosmos pisteui\). Another purpose clause with \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \pisteu\, "may keep on believing." Beyond a doubt, strife, wrangling, division are a stumblingblock to the outside world.
rwp@John:19:14 @{The Preparation of the passover} (\paraskeu tou pascha\). That is, Friday of passover week, the preparation day before the Sabbath of passover week (or feast). See also verses 31,42; strkjv@Mark:15:42; strkjv@Matthew:27:62; strkjv@Luke:23:54| for this same use of \paraskeu\ for Friday. It is the name for Friday today in Greece. {About the sixth hour} (\hs hekt\). Roman time, about 6 A.M. (a little after 6 no doubt) when Pilate rendered his final decision. Mark (Mark:15:25|) notes that it was the third hour (Jewish time), which is 9 A.M. Roman time, when the crucifixion began. Why should John give Jewish time writing at the close of the first century when Jerusalem and the Jewish state passed away in A.D. 70? He is writing for Greek and Roman readers. {Behold your king} (\Ide ho basileus humn\). \Ide\ is here an exclamation with no effect on the case of \basileus\ just as in strkjv@1:29|. The sarcasm of Pilate is aimed at the Jews, not at Jesus.
rwp@John:20:25 @{We have seen the Lord} (\herakamen ton kurion\). The very language in the plural that Mary Magdalene had used (20:18|) when no one believed her. {Except I shall see} (\ean m id\). Negative condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive and so as to \bal\ (from \ball\) "and put." {The print} (\ton tupon\). The mark or stamp made by the nails, here the original idea. Various terms as in strkjv@Acts:7:44; strkjv@1Timothy:4:12|. Finally our "type" as in strkjv@Romans:5:14|. Clearly the disciples had told Thomas that they had seen the \tupon\ of the nails in his hands and the spear in his side. {I will not believe} (\ou m pisteus\). Strong refusal with \ou m\ (doubtful negative) and first aorist active subjunctive (or future indicative).
rwp@John:20:27 @{Then saith he to Thomas} (\eita legei ti Thomi\). Jesus turns directly to Thomas as if he had come expressly for his sake. He reveals his knowledge of the doubt in the mind of Thomas and mentions the very tests that he had named (25|). {Be not faithless} (\m ginou apistos\). Present middle imperative of \ginomai\ in prohibition, "stop becoming disbelieving." The doubt of Thomas in the face of the witness of the others was not a proof of his superior intelligence. Sceptics usually pose as persons of unusual mentality. The medium who won Sir Arthur Conan Doyle to spiritualism has confessed that it was all humbug, but he deceived the gullible novelist. But Thomas had carried his incredulity too far. Note play on \apistos\ (disbelieving) and \pistos\ (believing).
rwp@John:21:17 @{Lovest thou me?} (\phileis me;\). This time Jesus picks up the word \phile\ used by Peter and challenges that. These two words are often interchanged in the N.T., but here the distinction is preserved. Peter was cut to the heart (\elupth\, first aorist passive of \lupe\, to grieve) because Jesus challenges this very verb, and no doubt the third question vividly reminds him of the three denials in the early morning by the fire. He repeats his love for Jesus with the plea: "Thou knowest all things." {Feed my sheep} (\boske ta probatia\). Many MSS. both here and in verse 16| read \probata\ (sheep) instead of \probatia\ (little sheep or lambs).
rwp@John:21:19 @{By what manner of death} (\poii thanati\). Undoubtedly John, who is writing long after Peter's death, seems to mean that Peter was to die (and did die) a martyr's death. "Whither thou wouldest not." There is a tradition that Peter met death by crucifixion and asked to be crucified head downwards, but that is not made plain here.
rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE RELATION TO II PETER Beyond a doubt one of these Epistles was used by the other, as one can see by comparing particularly strkjv@Jude:1:3-18| and strkjv@2Peter:2:1-18|. As already said concerning II Peter, scholars are greatly divided on this point, and in our present state of knowledge it does not seem possible to reach a solid conclusion. The probability is that not much time elapsed between them. Mayor devotes a whole chapter to the discussion of the relation between II Peter and Jude:and reaches the conclusion "that in Jude:we have the first thought, in Peter the second thought." That is my own feeling, but it is all so subjective that I have no desire to urge the point unduly. Bigg is equally positive that II Peter comes before Jude.
rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE USE OF APOCRYPHAL BOOKS Jude:(verse strkjv@Jude:1:14|) quotes from "Enoch" by name and says that he "prophesied." What he quotes is a combination of various passages in the Book of Enoch as we have it now. It used to be held that part of Enoch was later than Jude, but Charles seems to have disproved that, though the book as we have it has many interpolations. Tertullian wanted to canonise Enoch because of what Jude:says, whereas Chrysostom says that the authenticity of Jude:was doubted because of the use of Enoch. In verse strkjv@Jude:1:9| there seems to be an allusion to the _Assumption of Moses_, another apocryphal book, but it is the use of "prophesied" in verse strkjv@Jude:1:14| about Enoch that gave most offence. It is possible, of course, that Jude:did not attach the full sense to that term.
rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE PURPOSE The author undoubtedly has the Gnostics in mind and is seeking to warn his readers against them, as is true of II Peter. This same purpose appears in the Johannine Epistles, as was true also of Colossians, Ephesians, the Pastoral Epistles.
rwp@Jude:1:12 @{Hidden rocks} (\spilades\). Old word for rocks in the sea (covered by the water), as in Homer, here only in N.T. strkjv@2Peter:2:13| has \spiloi\. {Love-feasts} (\agapais\). Undoubtedly the correct text here, though A C have \apatais\ as in strkjv@2Peter:2:14|. For disorder at the Lord's Supper (and love-feasts?) see strkjv@1Corinthians:11:17-34|. The Gnostics made it worse, so that the love-feasts were discontinued. {When they feast with you} (\suneuchoumenoi\). See strkjv@2Peter:2:13| for this very word and form. Masculine gender with \houtoi hoi\ rather than with the feminine \spilades\. Cf. strkjv@Revelation:11:4|. Construction according to sense. {Shepherds that feed themselves} (\heautous poimainontes\). "Shepherding themselves." Cf. strkjv@Revelation:7:17| for this use of \poimain\. Clouds without water (\nephelai anudroi\). \Nephel\ common word for cloud (Matthew:24:30|). strkjv@2Peter:2:17| has \pgai anudroi\ (springs without water) and then \homichlai\ (mists) and \elaunomenai\ (driven) rather than \peripheromenai\ here (borne around, whirled around, present passive participle of \peripher\ to bear around), a powerful picture of disappointed hopes. {Autumn trees} (\dendra phthinoprina\). Late adjective (Aristotle, Polybius, Strabo) from \phthin\, to waste away, and \opra\, autumn, here only in N.T. For \akarpa\ (without fruit) see strkjv@2Peter:1:8|. {Twice dead} (\dis apothanonta\). Second aorist active participle of \apothnsk\. Fruitless and having died. Having died and also "uprooted" (\ekrizthenta\). First aorist passive participle of \ekrizo\, late compound, to root out, to pluck up by the roots, as in strkjv@Matthew:13:29|.
rwp@Jude:1:22 @{And on some} (\kai hous men\). Demonstrative plural of \hos men--hos de\ (\hous de\, below), not the relative \hous\, but by contrast (\men, de\). Songs:Matthew:13:8|. {Have mercy} (\elete\). Present active imperative of \elea\ (rare form in strkjv@Romans:9:16| also for the usual \elee\ strkjv@Matthew:9:27|). But A C read \elegchete\, refute, in place of \eleate\. The text of this verse is in much confusion. {Who are in doubt} (\diakrinomenous\). Present middle participle of \diakrin\, in the accusative case agreeing with \hous men\, though K L P have the nominative. If the accusative and \eleate\ is read, see strkjv@James:1:6| for the idea (doubters). If \elegchete\ is read, see strkjv@Jude:1:9| for the idea (disputers).
rwp@Info_Luke @ THE SOURCES OF THE GOSPEL In his Preface or Prologue (Luke:1:1-4|) the author tells us that he had two kinds of sources, oral and written, and that they were many, how many we have no way of telling. It is now generally accepted that we know two of his written sources, Mark's Gospel and Q or the Logia of Jesus (written by Matthew, Papias says). Mark is still preserved and it is not difficult for any one by the use of a harmony of the Gospels to note how Luke made use of Mark, incorporating what he chose, adapting it in various ways, not using what did not suit his purposes. The other source we only know in the non-Markan portions of Matthew and Luke, that is the material common to both, but not in Mark. This also can be noted by any one in a harmony. Only it is probable that this source was more extensive than just the portions used by both Matthew and Luke. It is probable that both Matthew and Luke each used portions of the Logia not used by the other. But there is a large portion of Luke's Gospel which is different from Mark and Matthew. Some scholars call this source L. There is little doubt that Luke had another document for the material peculiar to him, but it is also probable that he had several others. He spoke of "many." This applies especially to chapters 9 to 21. But Luke expressly says that he had received help from "eye-witnesses and ministers of the word," in oral form this means. It is, then, probable that Luke made numerous notes of such data and used them along with the written sources at his command. This remark applies particularly to chapters 1 and 2 which have a very distinct Semitic (Aramaic) colouring due to the sources used. It is possible, of course, that Mary the mother of Jesus may have written a statement concerning these important matters or that Luke may have had converse with her or with one of her circle. Ramsay, in his volume, _Was Christ Born at Bethlehem?_ shows the likelihood of Luke's contact with Mary or her circle during these two years at Caesarea. Luke handles the data acquired with care and skill as he claims in his Prologue and as the result shows. The outcome is what Renan called the most beautiful book in the world.
rwp@Luke:1:1 @{Forasmuch as} (\epeidper\). Here alone in the N.T., though common in literary Attic. Appears in the papyri. A triple compound (\epei\ = since, \d\ = admittedly true, \per\ = intensive particle to emphasize importance). {Many} (\polloi\). How many no one knows, but certainly more than two or three. We know that Luke used the Logia of Jesus written by Matthew in Aramaic (Papias) and Mark's Gospel. Undoubtedly he had other written sources. {Have taken in hand} (\epecheirsan\). A literal translation of \epicheire\ (from \cheir\, hand and \epi\, upon). Both Hippocrates and Galen use this word in their introduction to their medical works. Here only in the N.T., though a common literary word. Common in the papyri for undertaking with no idea of failure or blame. Luke does not mean to cast reflection on those who preceded him. The apocryphal gospels were all much later and are not in his mind. Luke had secured fuller information and planned a book on a larger scale and did surpass them with the result that they all perished save Mark's Gospel and what Matthew and Luke possess of the Logia of Jesus. There was still room for Luke's book. That motive influences every author and thus progress is made. {To draw up, a narrative} (\anataxasthai digsin\). Ingressive aorist middle infinitive. This verb \anataxasthai\ has been found only in Plutarch's _Moral_. 968 CD about an elephant "rehearsing" by moonlight certain tricks it had been taught (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). That was from memory going regularly through the thing again. But the idea in the word is plain enough. The word is composed of \tass\, a common verb for arranging things in proper order and \ana\, again. Luke means to say that those before him had made attempts to rehearse in orderly fashion various matters about Christ. "The expression points to a connected series of narratives in some order (\taxis\), topical or chronological rather than to isolated narratives" (Bruce). "They had produced something more than mere notes or anecdotes" (Plummer). \Digsis\ means leading or carrying a thing through, not a mere incident. Galen applies this word some seventy-five times to the writing of Hippocrates. {Which have been fulfilled} (\tn peplrphormenn\). Perfect passive participle from \plrophore\ and that from \plrs\ (full) and \pher\ (to bring). Hence to bring or make full. The verb is rare outside of the LXX and the N.T. Papyri examples occur for finishing off a legal matter or a financial matter in full. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 86f.) gives examples from the papyri and inscriptions for completing a task or being convinced or satisfied in mind. The same ambiguity occurs here. When used of persons in the N.T. the meaning is to be convinced, or fully persuaded (Romans:4:21; strkjv@14:5; strkjv@Hebrews:6:11; strkjv@10:22|). When used of things it has the notion of completing or finishing (2Timothy:4:5,17|). Luke is here speaking of "matters" (\pragmatn\). Luke may refer to the matters connected with Christ's life which have been brought to a close among us or accomplished. Bruce argues plausibly that he means fulness of knowledge "concerning the things which have become widely known among us Christians." In strkjv@Colossians:2:2| we have "fulness of understanding" (\ts plrophorias ts suneses\). In modern Greek the verb means to inform. The careful language of Luke here really pays a tribute to those who had preceded him in their narratives concerning Christ.
rwp@Luke:1:9 @{His lot was} (\elache\). Literally, {he obtained the lot}. Second aorist active indicative of \lagchan\, to obtain by lot, a very old verb from Homer on. It is used either with the genitive as here, or the accusative as in strkjv@Acts:1:17; strkjv@2Peter:1:1|. Papyri show examples with the accusative. It was only once in a lifetime that a priest obtained the lot of going (\eiselthn\, here nominative aorist active participle agreeing with the subject of \elache\) into the sanctuary (\ton naon\, not \to hieron\, the outer courts) and burning incense on the golden altar. "It was the great moment of Zacharias's life, and his heart was no doubt alert for the supernatural" (Ragg). The fortunate lot was "a white stone" to which strkjv@Revelation:2:17| may refer. {Burn incense} (\tou thumiasai\). Here only in the N.T. Occurs on inscriptions. Hobart finds it used by medical writers for fumigating herbs. "Ascending the steps to the Holy Place, the priests spread the coals on the golden altar, and arranged the incense, and the chief operating priest was then left alone within the Holy Place to await the signal of the president to burn the incense. It was probably at this time that the angel appeared to Zacharias" (Vincent).
rwp@Luke:1:18 @{Whereby} (\kata ti\). According to what. It was too good to be true and Zacharias demanded proof and gives the reason (for, \gar\) for his doubt. He had prayed for this blessing and was now sceptical like the disciples in the house of Mary about the return of Peter (Acts:12:14f.|).
rwp@Luke:1:19 @{Gabriel} (\Gabril\). The Man of God (Daniel:8:6; strkjv@9:21|). The other angel whose name is given in Scripture is Michael (Daniel:10:13,21; strkjv@Jude:1:9; strkjv@Revelation:12:7|). The description of himself is a rebuke to the doubt of Zacharias.
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|. This is the first beatitude in the New Testament and it is similar to the last one in the Gospels spoken to Thomas to discourage his doubt (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:1:47 @{Hath rejoiced} (\galliasen\). This is aorist active indicative. Greek tenses do not correspond to those in English. The verb \agallia\ is a Hellenistic word from the old Greek \agall\. It means to exult. See the substantive \agalliasis\ in strkjv@Luke:1:14,44|. Mary is not excited like Elisabeth, but breathes a spirit of composed rapture. {My spirit} (\to pneuma mou\). One need not press unduly the difference between "soul" (\psuch\) in verse 46| and "spirit" here. Bruce calls them synonyms in parallel clauses. Vincent argues that the soul is the principle of individuality while the spirit is the point of contact between God and man. It is doubtful, however, if the trichotomous theory of man (body, soul, and spirit) is to be insisted on. It is certain that we have an inner spiritual nature for which various words are used in strkjv@Mark:12:30|. Even the distinction between intellect, emotions, and will is challenged by some psychologists. {God my Saviour} (\ti thei ti sotri mou\). Article with each substantive. God is called Saviour in the O.T. (Deuteronomy:32:15, strkjv@Psalms:24:5; strkjv@95:1|).
rwp@Luke:2:5 @{To enrol himself with Mary} (\apograpsasthai sun Mariam\). Direct middle. "With Mary" is naturally taken with the infinitive as here. If so, that means that Mary's family register was in Bethlehem also and that she also belonged to the house of David. It is possible to connect "with Mary" far back with "went up" (\aneb\) in verse 4|, but it is unnatural to do so. There is no real reason for doubting that Mary herself was a descendant of David and that is the obvious way to understand Luke's genealogy of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:3:23-38|). The Syriac Sinaitic expressly says that both Joseph and Mary were of the house and city of David. {Betrothed} (\emnsteumenn\). Same verb as in strkjv@1:27|, but here it really means "married" or "espoused" as strkjv@Matthew:1:24f.| shows. Otherwise she could not have travelled with Joseph. {Great with child} (\enkui\). Only here in N.T. Common Greek word.
rwp@Luke:2:14 @{Among men in whom he is well pleased} (\en anthrpois eudokias\). The Textus Receptus (Authorized Version also has \eudokia\, but the genitive \eudokias\ is undoubtedly correct, supported by the oldest and best uncials. (Aleph, A B D W). C has a lacuna here. Plummer justly notes how in this angelic hymn Glory and Peace correspond, in the highest and on earth, to God and among men of goodwill. It would be possible to connect "on earth" with "the highest" and also to have a triple division. There has been much objection raised to the genitive \eudokias\, the correct text. But it makes perfectly good sense and better sense. As a matter of fact real peace on earth exists only among those who are the subjects of God's goodwill, who are characterized by goodwill toward God and man. This word \eudokia\ we have already had in strkjv@Matthew:11:26|. It does not occur in the ancient Greek. The word is confined to Jewish and Christian writings, though the papyri furnish instances of \eudoksis\. Wycliff has it "to men of goodwill."
rwp@Luke:4:3 @{The Son of God} (\huios tou theou\). No article as in strkjv@Matthew:4:3|. Songs:refers to the relationship as Son of God rather than to the office of Messiah. Manifest reference to the words of the Father in strkjv@Luke:3:22|. Condition of the first class as in Matthew. The devil assumes that Jesus is Son of God. {This stone} (\ti lithi touti\). Perhaps pointing to a particular round stone that looked in shape and size like a loaf of bread. Stanley (_Sinai and Palestine_, p. 154) on Mt. Carmel found crystallizations of stones called "Elijah's melons." The hunger of Jesus opened the way for the diabolic suggestion designed to inspire doubt in Jesus toward his Father. Matthew has "these stones." {Bread} (\artos\). Better "loaf." For discussion of this first temptation see on ¯Matthew:4:3f|. Jesus felt the force of each of the temptations without yielding at all to the sin involved. See discussion on Matthew also for reality of the devil and the objective and subjective elements in the temptations. Jesus quotes strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:3| in reply to the devil.
rwp@Luke:4:22 @{Bare him witness} (\emarturoun\). Imperfect active, perhaps inchoative. They all began to bear witness that the rumours were not exaggerations (4:14|) as they had supposed, but had foundation in fact if this discourse or its start was a fair sample of his teaching. The verb \marture\ is a very old and common one. It is frequent in Acts, Paul's Epistles, and the Johannine books. The substantive \martur\ is seen in our English \martyr\, one who witnesses even by his death to his faith in Christ. {And wondered} (\kai ethaumazon\). Imperfect active also, perhaps inchoative also. They began to marvel as he proceeded with his address. This verb is an old one and common in the Gospels for the attitude of the people towards Jesus. {At the words of grace} (\epi tois logois ts charitos\). See on ¯Luke:1:30; strkjv@2:52| for this wonderful word \charis\ so full of meaning and so often in the N.T. The genitive case (case of genus or kind) here means that the words that came out of the mouth of Jesus in a steady stream (present tense, \ekporeuomenois\) were marked by fascination and charm. They were "winning words" as the context makes plain, though they were also "gracious" in the Pauline sense of "grace." There is no necessary antithesis in the ideas of graceful and gracious in these words of Jesus. {Is not this Joseph's son?} (\Ouchi huios estin Isph houtos;\). Witness and wonder gave way to bewilderment as they began to explain to themselves the situation. The use of \ouchi\ intensive form of \ouk\ in a question expects the answer "yes." Jesus passed in Nazareth as the son of Joseph as Luke presents him in strkjv@3:23|. He does not stop here to correct this misconception because the truth has been already amply presented in strkjv@1:28-38; strkjv@2:49|. This popular conception of Jesus as the son of Joseph appears also in strkjv@John:1:45|. The puzzle of the people was due to their previous knowledge of Jesus as the carpenter (Mark:6:3|; the carpenter's son, strkjv@Matthew:13:55|). For him now to appear as the Messiah in Nazareth where he had lived and laboured as the carpenter was a phenomenon impossible to credit on sober reflection. Songs:the mood of wonder and praise quickly turned with whispers and nods and even scowls to doubt and hostility, a rapid and radical transformation of emotion in the audience.
rwp@Luke:4:23 @{Doubtless} (\pants\). Adverb. Literally, at any rate, certainly, assuredly. Cf. strkjv@Acts:21:22; strkjv@28:4|. {This parable} (\tn paraboln tautn\). See discussion on ¯Matthew:13|. Here the word has a special application to a crisp proverb which involves a comparison. The word physician is the point of comparison. Luke the physician alone gives this saying of Jesus. The proverb means that the physician was expected to take his own medicine and to heal himself. The word \parabol\ in the N.T. is confined to the Synoptic Gospels except strkjv@Hebrews:9:9; strkjv@11:19|. This use for a proverb occurs also in strkjv@Luke:5:36; strkjv@6:39|. This proverb in various forms appears not only among the Jews, but in Euripides and Aeschylus among the Greeks, and in Cicero's _Letters_. Hobart quotes the same idea from Galen, and the Chinese used to demand it of their physicians. The point of the parable seems to be that the people were expecting him to make good his claim to the Messiahship by doing here in Nazareth what they had heard of his doing in Capernaum and elsewhere. "Establish your claims by direct evidence" (Easton). This same appeal (Vincent) was addressed to Christ on the Cross (Matthew:27:40,42|). There is a tone of sarcasm towards Jesus in both cases. {Heard done} (\kousamen genomena\). The use of this second aorist middle participle \genomena\ after \kousamen\ is a neat Greek idiom. It is punctiliar action in indirect discourse after this verb of sensation or emotion (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1040-42, 1122-24). {Do also here} (\poison kai hde\). Ingressive aorist active imperative. Do it here in thy own country and town and do it now. Jesus applies the proverb to himself as an interpretation of their real attitude towards himself.
rwp@Luke:4:25 @{Three years and six months} (\et tria kai mnas hex\). Accusative of duration of time without \epi\ (doubtful). The same period is given in strkjv@James:5:17|, the popular Jewish way of speaking. In strkjv@1Kings:18:1| the rain is said to have come in the third year. But the famine probably lasted still longer.
rwp@Luke:4:42 @{When it was day} (\genomens hmeras\). Genitive absolute with aorist middle participle. strkjv@Mark:1:35| notes it was "a great while before day" (which see for discussion) when Jesus rose up to go after a restless night. No doubt, because of the excitement of the previous sabbath in Capernaum. He went out to pray (Mark:1:35|). {Sought after him} (\epeztoun auton\). Imperfect active indicative. The multitudes kept at it until "they came unto him" (\lthon hes autou\, aorist active indicative). They accomplished their purpose, \hes autou\, right up to him. {Would have stayed him} (\kateichon auton\). Better, {They tried to hinder him}. The conative imperfect active of \katech\, an old and common verb. It means either to hold fast (Luke:8:15|), to take, get possession of (Luke:14:9|) or to hold back, to retain, to restrain (Philemon:1:13; strkjv@Romans:1:18; strkjv@7:6; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:6; strkjv@Luke:4:42|). In this passage it is followed by the ablative case. {That he should not go from them} (\tou m poreuesthai ap' autn\). Literally, "from going away from them." The use of \m\ (not) after \kateichon\ is the neat Greek idiom of the redundant negative after a verb of hindering like the French _ne_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1171).
rwp@Luke:5:19 @{By what way they might bring him in} (\poias eis enegksin auton\). Deliberative subjunctive of the direct question retained in the indirect. {The housetop} (\to dma\). Very old word. The flat roof of Jewish houses was usually reached by outside stairway. Cf. strkjv@Acts:10:9| where Peter went for meditation. {Through the tiles} (\dia tn keramn\). Common and old word for the tile roof. strkjv@Mark:2:4| speaks of digging a hole in this tile roof. {Let him down} (\kathkan auton\). First aorist (k aorist) effective active of \kathimi\, common verb. strkjv@Mark:2:4| has historical present \chalsi\, the verb used by Jesus to Peter and in Peter's reply (Luke:5:4f.|). {With his couch} (\sun ti klinidii\). Also in verse 24|. Diminutive of \klin\ (verse 18|) occurring in Plutarch and _Koin_ writers. strkjv@Mark:2:4| has \krabatton\ (pallet). It doubtless was a pallet on which the paralytic lay. {Into the midst before Jesus} (\eis to meson emprosthen tou Isou\). The four friends had succeeded, probably each holding a rope to a corner of the pallet. It was a moment of triumph over difficulties and surprise to all in the house (Peter's apparently, strkjv@Mark:2:1|).
rwp@Luke:6:1 @{On a sabbath} (\en sabbati\). This is the second sabbath on which Jesus is noted by Luke. The first was strkjv@Luke:4:31-41|. There was another in strkjv@John:5:1-47|. There is Western and Syrian (Byzantine) evidence for a very curious reading here which calls this sabbath "secondfirst" (\deuteroprti\). It is undoubtedly spurious, though Westcott and Hort print it in the margin. A possible explanation is that a scribe wrote "first" (\prti\) on the margin because of the sabbath miracle in strkjv@Luke:6:6-11|. Then another scribe recalled strkjv@Luke:4:31| where a sabbath is mentioned and wrote "second" (\deuteri\) also on the margin. Finally a third scribe combined the two in the word \deuteroprti\ that is not found elsewhere. If it were genuine, we should not know what it means. {Plucked} (\etillon\). Imperfect active. They were plucking as they went on through (\diaporeuesthai\). Whether wheat or barley, we do not know, not our "corn" (maize). {Did eat} (\sthion\). Imperfect again. See on ¯Matthew:12:1f.; strkjv@Mark:2:23f.| for the separate acts in supposed violence of the sabbath laws. {Rubbing them in their hands} (\pschontes tais chersin\). Only in Luke and only here in the N.T. This was one of the chief offences. "According to Rabbinical notions, it was reaping, threshing, winnowing, and preparing food all at once" (Plummer). These Pharisees were straining out gnats and swallowing camels! This verb \psch\ is a late one for \psa\, to rub.
rwp@Luke:6:13 @{When it was day} (\hote egeneto hmera\). When day came, after the long night of prayer. {He chose from them twelve} (\eklexamenos ap' autn ddeka\). The same root (\leg\) was used for picking out, selecting and then for saying. There was a large group of "disciples" or "learners" whom he "called" to him (\prosephnsen\), and from among whom he chose (of himself, and for himself, indirect middle voice (\eklexamenos\). It was a crisis in the work of Christ. Jesus assumed full responsibility even for the choice of Judas who was not forced upon Jesus by the rest of the Twelve. "You did not choose me, but I chose you," (John:15:16|) where Jesus uses \exelexasthe\ and \exelexamn\ as here by Luke. {Whom also he named apostles} (\hous kai apostolous nomasen\). Songs:then Jesus gave the twelve chosen disciples this appellation. Aleph and B have these same words in strkjv@Mark:3:14| besides the support of a few of the best cursives, the Bohairic Coptic Version and the Greek margin of the Harclean Syriac. Westcott and Hort print them in their text in strkjv@Mark:3:14|, but it remains doubtful whether they were not brought into Mark from strkjv@Luke:6:13| where they are undoubtedly genuine. See strkjv@Matthew:10:2| where the connection with sending them out by twos in the third tour of Galilee. The word is derived from \apostell\, to send (Latin, _mitto_) and apostle is missionary, one sent. Jesus applies the term to himself (\apesteilas\, strkjv@John:17:3|) as does strkjv@Hebrews:3:1|. The word is applied to others, like Barnabas, besides these twelve including the Apostle Paul who is on a par with them in rank and authority, and even to mere messengers of the churches (2Corinthians:8:23|). But these twelve apostles stand apart from all others in that they were all chosen at once by Jesus himself "that they might be with him" (Mark:3:14|), to be trained by Jesus himself and to interpret him and his message to the world. In the nature of the case they could have no successors as they had to be personal witnesses to the life and resurrection of Jesus (Acts:1:22|). The selection of Matthias to succeed Judas cannot be called a mistake, but it automatically ceased. For discussion of the names and groups in the list see discussion on ¯Matthew:10:1-4; strkjv@Mark:3:14-19|.
rwp@Luke:6:17 @{He came down with them} (\katabas met' autn\). Second aorist active participle of \katabain\, common verb. This was the night of prayer up in the mountain (Mark:31:3; strkjv@Luke:6:12|) and the choice of the Twelve next morning. The going up into the mountain of strkjv@Matthew:5:1| may simply be a summary statement with no mention of what Luke has explained or may be a reference to the elevation, where he "sat down" (Matthew:5:1|), above the plain or "level place" (\epi topou pedinou\) on the mountain side where Jesus "stood" or "stopped" (\est\). It may be a level place towards the foot of the mountain. He stopped his descent at this level place and then found a slight elevation on the mountain side and began to speak. There is not the slightest reason for making Matthew locate this sermon on the mountain and Luke in the valley as if the places, audiences, and topics were different. For the unity of the sermon see discussion on ¯Matthew:5:1f|. The reports in Matthew and Luke begin alike, cover the same general ground and end alike. The report in Matthew is longer chiefly because in Chapter 5, he gives the argument showing the contrast between Christ's conception of righteousness and that of the Jewish rabbis. Undoubtedly, Jesus repeated many of the crisp sayings here at other times as in Luke 12, but it is quite gratuitous to argue that Matthew and Luke have made up this sermon out of isolated sayings of Christ at various times. Both Matthew and Luke give too much that is local of place and audience for that idea. strkjv@Matthew:5:1| speaks of "the multitudes" and "his disciples." strkjv@Luke:6:17| notes "a great multitude of his disciples, and a great number of the people from all Judea and Jerusalem, and the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon." They agree in the presence of disciples and crowds besides the disciples from whom the twelve apostles were chosen. It is important to note how already people were coming from "the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon" "to hear him and to be healed (\iathnai\, first aorist passive of \iaomai\) of their diseases."
rwp@Luke:6:19 @{Sought to touch him} (\eztoun haptesthai autou\). Imperfect active. One can see the surging, eager crowd pressing up to Jesus. Probably some of them felt that there was a sort of virtue or magic in touching his garments like the poor woman in strkjv@Luke:8:43f|. (Mark:5:23; strkjv@Matthew:9:21|). {For power came forth from him} (\hoti dunamis par' autou exrcheto\). Imperfect middle, {power was coming out from him}. This is the reason for the continual approach to Jesus. {And healed them all} (\kai ito pantas\). Imperfect middle again. Was healing all, kept on healing all. The preacher today who is not a vehicle of power from Christ to men may well question why that is true. Undoubtedly the failure to get a blessing is one reason why many people stop going to church. One may turn to Paul's tremendous words in strkjv@Phillipians:4:13|: "I have strength for all things in him who keeps on pouring power into me" (\panta ischu en ti endunamounti me\). It was at a time of surpassing dynamic spiritual energy when Jesus delivered this greatest of all sermons so far as they are reported to us. The very air was electric with spiritual power. There are such times as all preachers know.
rwp@Luke:7:8 @{"Set"} (\tassomenos\). Genuine here, though doubtful in strkjv@Matthew:8:9| where see discussion of this vivid and characteristic speech of the centurion.
rwp@Luke:7:37 @{A woman which was in the city, a sinner} (\gun htis en ti polei hamartlos\). Probably in Capernaum. The use of \htis\ means "Who was of such a character as to be" (cf. strkjv@8:3|) and so more than merely the relative \h\, who, that is, "who was a sinner in the city," a woman of the town, in other words, and known to be such. \Hamartlos\, from \hamartan\, to sin, means devoted to sin and uses the same form for feminine and masculine. It is false and unjust to Mary Magdalene, introduced as a new character in strkjv@Luke:8:2|, to identify this woman with her. Luke would have no motive in concealing her name here and the life of a courtesan would be incompatible with the sevenfold possession of demons. Still worse is it to identify this courtesan not only with Mary Magdalene, but also with Mary of Bethany simply because it is a Simon who gives there a feast to Jesus when Mary of Bethany does a beautiful deed somewhat like this one here (Mark:14:3-9; strkjv@Matthew:26:6-13; strkjv@John:12:2-8|). Certainly Luke knew full well the real character of Mary of Bethany (10:38-42|) so beautifully pictured by him. But a falsehood, once started, seems to have more lives than the cat's proverbial nine. The very name Magdalene has come to mean a repentant courtesan. But we can at least refuse to countenance such a slander on Mary Magdalene and on Mary of Bethany. This sinful woman had undoubtedly repented and changed her life and wished to show her gratitude to Jesus who had rescued her. Her bad reputation as a harlot clung to her and made her an unwelcome visitor in the Pharisee's house. {When she knew} (\epignousa\). Second aorist active participle from \epiginsk\, to know fully, to recognize. She came in by a curious custom of the time that allowed strangers to enter a house uninvited at a feast, especially beggars seeking a gift. This woman was an intruder whereas Mary of Bethany was an invited guest. "Many came in and took their places on the side seats, uninvited and yet unchallenged. They spoke to those at table on business or the news of the day, and our host spoke freely to them" (Trench in his _Parables_, describing a dinner at a Consul's house at Damietta). {He was sitting at meat} (\katakeitai\). Literally, he is reclining (present tense retained in indirect discourse in Greek). {An alabaster cruse of ointment} (\alabastron murou\). See on ¯Matthew:26:7| for discussion of \alabastron\ and \murou\.
rwp@Luke:7:40 @{Answering} (\apokritheis\). First aorist passive participle, redundant use with \eipen\. Jesus answers the thoughts and doubts of Simon and so shows that he knows all about the woman also. Godet notes a tone of Socratic irony here.
rwp@Luke:9:33 @{As they were departing from him} (\en ti diachrizesthai autous ap' autou\). Peculiar to Luke and another instance of Luke's common idiom of \en\ with the articular infinitive in a temporal clause. This common verb occurs here only in the N.T. The present middle voice means to separate oneself fully (direct middle). This departing of Moses and Elijah apparently accompanied Peter's remark as given in all three Gospels. See for details on Mark and Matthew. {Master} (\Epistata\) here, {Rabbi} (Mark:9:5|), {Lord} (\Kurie\, strkjv@Matthew:17:4|). {Let us make} (\poismen\, first aorist active subjunctive) as in strkjv@Mark:9:5|, but strkjv@Matthew:17:4| has "I will make" (\pois\). It was near the time of the feast of the tabernacles. Songs:Peter proposes that they celebrate it up here instead of going to Jerusalem for it as they did a bit later (John:7|). {Not knowing what he said} (\m eids ho legei\). Literally, {not understanding what he was saying} (\m\, regular negative with participle and \legei\, present indicative retained in relative clause in indirect discourse). Luke puts it more bluntly than Mark (Peter's account), "For he wist not what to answer; for they became sore afraid" (Mark:9:6|). Peter acted according to his impulsive nature and spoke up even though he did not know what to say or even what he was saying when he spoke. He was only half awake as Luke explains and he was sore afraid as Mark (Peter) explains. He had bewilderment enough beyond a doubt, but it was Peter who spoke, not James and John.
rwp@Luke:12:29 @{Seek not ye} (\humeis m zteite\). Note emphatic position of "ye" (\humeis\). Stop seeking (\m\ and present imperative active). strkjv@Matthew:6:31| has: "Do not become anxious" (\m merimnste\), \m\ and ingressive subjunctive occur as direct questions (What are we to eat? What are we to drink? What are we to put on?) whereas here they are in the indirect form as in verse 22| save that the problem of clothing is not here mentioned: {Neither be ye of doubtful mind} (\kai m meterizesthe\). \M\ and present passive imperative (stop being anxious) of \meteriz\. An old verb from \meteros\ in midair, high (our meteor), to lift up on high, then to lift oneself up with hopes (false sometimes), to be buoyed up, to be tossed like a ship at sea, to be anxious, to be in doubt as in late writers (Polybius, Josephus). This last meaning is probably true here. In the LXX and Philo, but here only in the N.T.
rwp@Luke:13:25 @{When once} (\aph' hou an\). Possibly to be connected without break with the preceding verse (so Westcott and Hort), though Bruce argues for two parables here, the former (verse 24|) about being in earnest, while this one (verses 25-30|) about not being too late. The two points are here undoubtedly. It is an awkward construction, \aph' hou = apo toutou hote\ with \an\ and the aorist subjunctive (\egerthi\ and \apokleisi\). See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 978. {Hath shut to} (\apokleisi\), first aorist active subjunctive of \apoklei\, old verb, but only here in the N.T. Note effective aorist tense and perfective use of \apo\, slammed the door fast. {And ye begin} (\kai arxsthe\). First aorist middle subjunctive of \archomai\ with \aph' hou an\ like \egerthi\ and \apokleisi\. {To stand} (\hestanai\). Second perfect active infinitive of \histmi\, intransitive tense {and to knock} (\kai krouein\). Present active infinitive, to keep on knocking. {Open to us} (\anoixon hmin\). First aorist active imperative, at once and urgent. {He shall say} (\erei\). Future active of \eipon\ (defective verb). This is probably the apodosis of the \aph' hou\ clause.
rwp@Luke:13:34 @{O Jerusalem, Jerusalem} (\Ierousalm, Ierousalm\). In strkjv@Matthew:23:37f.| Jesus utters a similar lament over Jerusalem. The connection suits both there and here, but Plummer considers it "rather a violent hypothesis" to suppose that Jesus spoke these words twice. It is possible, of course, though not like Luke's usual method, that he put the words here because of the mention of Jerusalem. In itself it is not easy to see why Jesus could not have made the lament both here and in Jerusalem. The language of the apostrophe is almost identical in both places (Luke:13:34f.; strkjv@Matthew:23:37-39|). For details see on Matthew. In Luke we have \episunaxai\ (late first aorist active infinitive) and in Matthew \episunagagein\ (second aorist active infinitive), both from \episunag\, a double compound of late Greek (Polybius). Both have "How often would I" (\posakis thelsa\). How often did I wish. Clearly showing that Jesus made repeated visits to Jerusalem as we know otherwise only from John's Gospel. {Even as} (\hon tropon\). Accusative of general reference and in strkjv@Matthew:23:37| also. Incorporation of antecedent into the relative clause. {Brood} (\nossian\) is in Luke while Matthew has {chickens} (\nossia\), both late forms for the older \neossia\. The adjective {desolate} (\ermos\) is wanting in strkjv@Luke:13:35| and is doubtful in strkjv@Matthew:23:39|.
rwp@Luke:19:3 @{He sought} (\eztei\). Imperfect active. He was seeking, conative idea. {Jesus who he was} (\Isoun tis estin\). Prolepsis, to see who Jesus was. He had heard so much about him. He wanted to see which one of the crowd was Jesus. {For the crowd} (\apo tou ochlou\). He was short and the crowd was thick and close. {Stature} (\ti hlikii\). No doubt of that meaning here and possibly so in strkjv@2:52|. Elsewhere "age" except strkjv@Luke:12:25; strkjv@Matthew:6:27| where it is probably "stature" also.
rwp@Luke:19:11 @{He added and spake} (\prostheis eipen\). Second aorist active participle of \prostithmi\ with \eipen\. It is a Hebrew idiom seen also in strkjv@Luke:20:1f.| he added to send (\prosetheto pempsai\) and in strkjv@Acts:12:3| "he added to seize" (\prosetheto sullabein\). This undoubted Hebraism occurs in the N.T. in Luke only, probably due to the influence of the LXX on Luke the Greek Christian. {To appear} (\anaphainesthai\). Present passive infinitive of an old verb to be made manifest, to be shown up. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:21:3|.
rwp@Luke:22:18 @{The fruit of the vine} (\tou genmatos ts ampelou\). Songs:Mark:14:25; strkjv@Matthew:26:29| and not \oinos\ though it was wine undoubtedly. But the language allows anything that is "the fruit of the vine." {Come} (\elthi\). Second aorist active subjunctive with \hes\ as in verse 16|. Here it is the consummation of the kingdom that Jesus has in mind, for the kingdom had already come.
rwp@Luke:23:16 @{Chastise} (\paideusas\). First aorist active participle of \paideu\, to train a child (\pais\), and then, as a part of the training, punishment. Our English word chasten is from the Latin _castus_, pure, chaste, and means to purify (cf. strkjv@Hebrews:12:6f.|). Perhaps Pilate may have split a hair over the word as Wycliff puts it: "I shall deliver him amended." But, if Jesus was innocent, Pilate had no doubt to "chastise" him to satisfy a mob. Verse 17| is omitted by Westcott and Hort as from strkjv@Mark:15:6; strkjv@Matthew:27:15|.
rwp@Luke:23:21 @{But they shouted} (\hoi de epephnoun\). Imperfect active of \epiphne\, to call to. Old verb and a verb pertinent here. They kept on yelling. {Crucify, crucify} (\staurou, staurou\). Present active imperative. Go on with the crucifixion. strkjv@Mark:15:13| has \staurson\ (first aorist active imperative), do it now and be done with it. No doubt some shouted one form, some another.
rwp@Luke:24:21 @{But we hoped} (\hmeis de lpizomen\). Imperfect active, we were hoping. Note emphasis in \hmeis\ (we). {Redeem} (\lutrousthai\). From the bondage of Rome, no doubt. {Yea and beside all this} (\alla ge kai sun psin toutois\). Particles pile up to express their emotions. {Yea} (\alla\ here affirmative, as in verse 22|, not adversative) at least (\ge\) also (\kai\) together with all these things (\sun psin toutois\). Like Pelion on Ossa with them in their perplexity. {Now the third day} (\tritn tautn hmeran agei\). A difficult idiom for the English. "One is keeping this a third day." And he is still dead and we are still without hope.
rwp@Info_Mark @ The closing passage in the Textus Receptus, strkjv@Mark:16:9-20|, is not found in the oldest Greek Manuscripts, Aleph and B, and is probably not genuine. A discussion of the evidence will appear at the proper place. Swete points out that Mark deals with two great themes, the Ministry in Galilee (Chs. 1 to 9) and the Last Week in Jerusalem (11 to 16) with a brief sketch of the period of withdrawal from Galilee (ch. 10). The first fourteen verses are introductory as strkjv@Mark:16:9-20| is an appendix. The Gospel of Mark pictures Christ in action. There is a minimum of discourse and a maximum of deed. And yet the same essential pictures of Christ appear here as in the Logia, in Matthew, in Luke, in John, in Paul, in Peter, in Hebrews as is shown in my _The Christ of the Logia_. The cry of the critics to get back to the Synoptics and away from Paul and John has ceased since it is plain that the Jesus of Mark is the same as the Christ of Paul. There is a different shading in the pictures, but the same picture, Son of God and Son of Man, Lord of life and death, worker of miracles and Saviour from sin. This Gospel is the one for children to read first and is the one that we should use to lay the foundation for our picture of Christ. In my _Harmony of the Gospels_ I have placed Mark first in the framework since Matthew, Luke, and John all follow in broad outline his plan with additions and supplemental material. Mark's Gospel throbs with life and bristles with vivid details. We see with Peter's eyes and catch almost the very look and gesture of Jesus as he moved among men in his work of healing men's bodies and saving men's souls. strkjv@Mark:1:1 @{The beginning} (\arch\). There is no article in the Greek. It is possible that the phrase served as a heading or title for the paragraph about the ministry of the Baptist or as the superscription for the whole Gospel (Bruce) placed either by Mark or a scribe. And then the Gospel of Jesus Christ means the Message about Jesus Christ (objective genitive). The word Gospel here (\euaggelion\) comes close to meaning the record itself as told by Mark. Swete notes that each writer has a different starting point (\arch\). Mark, as the earliest form of the evangelic tradition, begins with the work of the Baptist, Matthew with the ancestry and birth of the Messiah, Luke with the birth of the Baptist, John with the Preincarnate Logos, Paul with the foundation of each of the churches (Phillipians:4:15|). {The Son of God} (\Huiou theou\). Aleph 28, 255 omit these words, but B, D, L, have them and the great mass of the manuscripts have \huiou tou theou\. If this is a heading added to what Mark wrote, the heading may have existed early in two forms, one with, one without "Son of God." If Mark wrote the words, there is no reason to doubt the genuineness since he uses the phrase elsewhere.
rwp@Mark:1:14 @{Jesus came into Galilee} (\lthen ho Isous eis tn Galilaian\). Here Mark begins the narrative of the active ministry of Jesus and he is followed by Matthew and Luke. Mark undoubtedly follows the preaching of Peter. But for the Fourth Gospel we should not know of the year of work in various parts of the land (Perea, Galilee, Judea, Samaria) preceding the Galilean ministry. John supplements the Synoptic Gospels at this point as often. The arrest of John had much to do with the departure of Jesus from Judea to Galilee (John:4:1-4|). {Preaching the gospel of God} (\krussn to euaggelion tou theou\). It is the subjective genitive, the gospel that comes from God. Swete observes that repentance (\metanoia\) is the keynote in the message of the Baptist as gospel (\euaggelion\) is with Jesus. But Jesus took the same line as John and proclaimed both repentance and the arrival of the kingdom of God. Mark adds to Matthew's report the words "the time is fulfilled" (\peplrtai ho kairos\). It is a significant fact that John looks backward to the promise of the coming of the Messiah and signalizes the fulfilment as near at hand (perfect passive indicative). It is like Paul's fulness of time (\plrma tou chronou\) in strkjv@Galatians:4:4| and fulness of the times (\plrma ton kairn\) in strkjv@Ephesians:1:10| when he employs the word \kairos\, opportunity or crisis as here in Mark rather than the more general term \chronos\. Mark adds here also: "and believe in the gospel" (\kai pisteuete en ti euaggelii\). Both repent and believe in the gospel. Usually faith in Jesus (or God) is expected as in John strkjv@14:1|. But this crisis called for faith in the message of Jesus that the Messiah had come. He did not use here the term Messiah, for it had come to have political connotations that made its use at present unwise. But the kingdom of God had arrived with the presence of the King. It does make a difference what one believes. Belief or disbelief in the message of Jesus made a sharp cleavage in those who heard him. "Faith in the message was the first step; a creed of some kind lies at the basis of confidence in the Person of Christ, and the occurrence of the phrase \pistuete en ti euaggelii\ in the oldest record of the teaching of our Lord is a valuable witness to this fact" (Swete).
rwp@Mark:1:33 @{At the door} (\pros tn thuran\). At the door of Peter's house. The whole city was gathered together there (n episungmen, past perfect passive periphrastic indicative, double compound \epi\ and \sun\). Mark alone mentions this vivid detail. He is seeing with Peter's eyes again. Peter no doubt watched the beautiful scene with pride and gratitude as Jesus stood in the door and healed the great crowds in the glory of that sunset. He loved to tell it afterwards. {Divers diseases} (\poikilais nosois\). See strkjv@Matthew:4:24| about \poikilos\ meaning many-coloured, variegated. All sorts of sick folk came and were healed.
rwp@Mark:4:13 @{Know ye not this parable?} (\ouk oidate tn paraboln tauten;\). They had asked Jesus his reasons for using parables. This question implies surprise at their dulness though initiated into the secret of God's Kingdom. Incapacity to comprehend this parable of the sower raises doubt about all the others on this day and at all times.
rwp@Mark:5:30 @{Perceiving in himself} (\epignous en heauti\). She thought, perhaps, that the touch of Christ's garment would cure her without his knowing it, a foolish fancy, no doubt, but one due to her excessive timidity. Jesus felt in his own consciousness. The Greek idiom more exactly means: "Jesus perceiving in himself the power from him go out" (\tn ex autou dunamin exelthousan\). The aorist participle here is punctiliar simply and timeless and can be illustrated by strkjv@Luke:10:18|: "I was beholding Satan fall" (\etheroun ton Satann pesonta\), where \pesonta\ does not mean _fallen_ (\peptkota\) as in strkjv@Revelation:9:1| nor falling (\piptonta\) but simply the constative aorist {fall} (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 684). Songs:here Jesus means to say: "I felt in myself the power from me go." Scholars argue whether in this instance Jesus healed the woman by conscious will or by unconscious response to her appeal. Some even argue that the actual healing took place after Jesus became aware of the woman's reaching for help by touching his garment. What we do know is that Jesus was conscious of the going out of power from himself. strkjv@Luke:8:46| uses \egnn\ (personal knowledge), but Mark has \epignous\ (personal and additional, clear knowledge). One may remark that no real good can be done without the outgoing of power. That is true of mother, preacher, teacher, doctor. {Who touched my garments?} (\Tis mou hpsato tn himatin;\). More exactly, {Who touched me on my clothes}; The Greek verb uses two genitives, of the person and the thing. It was a dramatic moment for Jesus and for the timid woman. Later it was a common practice for the crowds to touch the hem of Christ's garments and be healed (Mark:6:56|). But here Jesus chose to single out this case for examination. There was no magic in the garments of Jesus. Perhaps there was superstition in the woman's mind, but Jesus honoured her darkened faith as in the case of Peter's shadow and Paul's handkerchief.
rwp@Mark:5:39 @{Make a tumult} (\thorubeisthe\). Middle voice. Jesus had dismissed one crowd (verse 37|), but finds the house occupied by the hired mourners making bedlam (\thorubos\) as if that showed grief with their ostentatious noise. strkjv@Matthew:9:23| spoke of flute-players (\aultas\) and the hubbub of the excited throng (\thoruboumenon\. Cf. strkjv@Mark:14:2; strkjv@Acts:20:1,21,34|). Mark, Matthew, and Luke all quote Jesus as saying that "the child is not dead, but sleepeth." Jesus undoubtedly meant that she was not dead to stay dead, though some hold that the child was not really dead. It is a beautiful word (she is {sleeping}, \katheudei\) that Jesus uses of death.
rwp@Mark:6:24 @{What shall I ask?} (\Ti aitsmai;\). The fact that she went and spoke to her mother proves that she had not been told beforehand what to ask. strkjv@Matthew:14:8| does not necessarily mean that, but he simply condenses the account. The girl's question implies by the middle voice that she is thinking of something for herself. She was no doubt unprepared for her mother's ghastly reply.
rwp@Mark:8:33 @{He turning about and seeing his disciples} (\epistrapheis kai idn tous mathts autou\). Peter had called Jesus off to himself (\proskalesamenos\), but Jesus quickly wheeled round on Peter (\epistrapheis\, only \strapheis\ in Matthew). In doing that the other disciples were in plain view also (this touch only in Mark). Hence Jesus rebukes Peter in the full presence of the whole group. Peter no doubt felt that it was his duty as a leader of the Twelve to remonstrate with the Master for this pessimistic utterance (Swete). It is even possible that the others shared Peter's views and were watching the effect of his daring rebuke of Jesus. It was more than mere officiousness on the part of Peter. He had not risen above the level of ordinary men and deserves the name of Satan whose role he was now acting. It was withering, but it was needed. The temptation of the devil on the mountain was here offered by Peter. It was Satan over again. See on ¯Matthew:16:23|.
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@Mark:9:38 @{Because he followed not us} (\hoti ouk kolouthei hmin\). Note vivid imperfect tense again. John evidently thought to change the subject from the constraint and embarrassment caused by their dispute. Songs:he told about a case of extra zeal on his part expecting praise from Jesus. Perhaps what Jesus had just said in verse 37| raised a doubt in John's mind as to the propriety of his excessive narrowness. One needs to know the difference between loyalty to Jesus and stickling over one's own narrow prejudices.
rwp@Mark:11:23 @{Shall not doubt in his heart} (\m diakrithi en ti kardii autou\). First aorist passive subjunctive with \hos an\. The verb means a divided judgment (\dia\ from \duo\, two, and \krin\, to judge). Wavering doubt. Not a single act of doubt (\diakrithi\), but continued faith (\pisteui\). {Cometh to pass} (\ginetai\). Futuristic present middle indicative.
rwp@Mark:13:32 @{Not even the Son} (\oude ho huios\). There is no doubt as to the genuineness of these words here such as exists in strkjv@Matthew:24:36|. This disclaimer of knowledge naturally interpreted applies to the second coming, not to the destruction of Jerusalem which had been definitely limited to that generation as it happened in A.D. 70.
rwp@Mark:14:11 @{And they, when they heard it, were glad} (\hoi de akousantes echarsan\). No doubt the rabbis looked on the treachery of Judas as a veritable dispensation of Providence amply justifying their plots against Jesus. {Conveniently} (\eukairs\). This was the whole point of the offer of Judas. He claimed that he knew enough of the habits of Jesus to enable them to catch him "in the absence of the multitude" (Luke:22:6|) without waiting for the passover to be over, when the crowds would leave. For discussion of the motives of Judas, see on ¯Matthew:26:15|. Mark merely notes the promise of "money" while Matthew mentions "thirty pieces of silver" (Zechariah:11:12|), the price of a slave.
rwp@Mark:15:13 @{Crucify him} (\Staurson auton\). strkjv@Luke:23:21| repeats the verb. strkjv@Matthew:27:22| has it, "Let him be crucified." There was a chorus and a hubbub of confused voices all demanding crucifixion for Christ. Some of the voices beyond a doubt had joined in the hallelujahs to the Son of David in the triumphal entry. See on ¯Matthew:27:23| for discussion of strkjv@Mark:15:14|.
rwp@Mark:16:7 @{And Peter} (\kai ti Petri\). Only in Mark, showing that Peter remembered gratefully this special message from the Risen Christ. Later in the day Jesus will appear also to Peter, an event that changed doubt to certainty with the apostles (Luke:24:34; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:5|). See on ¯Matthew:28:7| for discussion of promised meeting in Galilee.
rwp@Mark:16:13 @{Neither believed they them} (\oude ekeinois episteusan\). The men fared no better than the women. But Luke's report of the two on the way to Emmaus is to the effect that they met a hearty welcome by them in Jerusalem (Luke:24:33-35|). This shows the independence of the two narratives on this point. There was probably an element who still discredited all the resurrection stories as was true on the mountain in Galilee later when "some doubted" (Matthew:28:17|).
rwp@Mark:16:14 @{To the eleven themselves} (\autois tois hendeka\). Both terms, eleven and twelve (John:20:24|), occur after the death of Judas. There were others present on this first Sunday evening according to strkjv@Luke:24:33|. {Afterward} (\husteron\) is here alone in Mark, though common in Matthew. {Upbraided} (\neidisen\). They were guilty of unbelief (\apistian\) and hardness of heart (\sklrokardian\). Doubt is not necessarily a mark of intellectual superiority. One must steer between credulity and doubt. That problem is a vital one today in all educated circles. Some of the highest men of science today are devout believers in the Risen Christ. Luke explains how the disciples were upset by the sudden appearance of Christ and were unable to believe the evidence of their own senses (Luke:24:38-43|).
rwp@Mark:16:18 @{They shall take up serpents} (\opheis arousin\). Jesus had said something like this in strkjv@Luke:10:19| and Paul was unharmed by the serpent in Malta (Acts:28:3f.|). {If they drink any deadly thing} (\k'an thanasimon ti pisin\). This is the only N.T. instance of the old Greek word \thanasimos\ (deadly). strkjv@James:3:8| has \thanatphoros\, deathbearing. Bruce considers these verses in Mark "a great lapse from the high level of Matthew's version of the farewell words of Jesus" and holds that "taking up venomous serpents and drinking deadly poison seem to introduce us into the twilight of apocryphal story." The great doubt concerning the genuineness of these verses (fairly conclusive proof against them in my opinion) renders it unwise to take these verses as the foundation for doctrine or practice unless supported by other and genuine portions of the N.T.
rwp@Info_Matthew @ THE TITLE The Textus Receptus has "The Holy Gospel according to Matthew" (\to kata Matthaion hagion Euaggelion\), though the Elzevirs omit "holy," not agreeing here with Stephanus, Griesbach, and Scholz. Only minuscules (cursive Greek manuscripts) and all late have the adjective. Other minuscules and nine uncials including W (the Washington Codex of the fifth century), C of the fifth century (the palimpsest manuscript) and Delta of the ninth together with most Latin manuscripts have simply "Gospel according to Matthew" (\Euaggelion kata Matthaion\). But Aleph and B the two oldest and best Greek uncials of the fourth century have only "According to Matthew" (\Kata Maththaion\) (note double th) and the Greek uncial D of the fifth or sixth century follows Aleph and B as do some of the earliest Old Latin manuscripts and the Curetonian Syriac. It is clear, therefore, that the earliest form of the title was simply "According to Matthew." It may be doubted if Matthew (or the author, if not Matthew) had any title at all. The use of "according to" makes it plain that the meaning is not "the Gospel of Matthew," but the Gospel as given by Matthew, \secundum Matthaeum\, to distinguish the report by Matthew from that by Mark, by Luke, by John. Least of all is there any authority in the manuscripts for saying "Saint Matthew," a Roman Catholic practice observed by some Protestants.
rwp@Matthew:2:4 @{He inquired of them where the Christ should be born} (\epunthaneto par' autn pou ho Christos genntai\). The prophetic present (\genntai\) is given, the very words of Herod retained by Matthew's report. The imperfect tense (epunthaneto) suggests that Herod inquired repeatedly, probably of one and another of the leaders gathered together, both Sadducees (chief priests) and Pharisees (scribes). McNeile doubts, like Holtzmann, if Herod actually called together all the Sanhedrin and probably "he could easily ask the question of a single scribe," because he had begun his reign with a massacre of the Sanhedrin (Josephus, _Ant_. XIV. ix. 4). But that was thirty years ago and Herod was desperately in earnest to learn what the Jews really expected about the coming of "the Messiah." Still Herod probably got together not the Sanhedrin since "elders" are not mentioned, but leaders among the chief priests and scribes, not a formal meeting but a free assembly for conference. He had evidently heard of this expected king and he would swallow plenty of pride to be able to compass the defeat of these hopes.
rwp@Matthew:3:7 @{The Pharisees and Sadducees} (\tn Pharisain kai Saddoukain\). These two rival parties do not often unite in common action, but do again in strkjv@Matthew:16:1|. "Here a strong attraction, there a strong repulsion, made them for the moment forget their differences" (McNeile). John saw these rival ecclesiastics "coming for baptism" (\erchomenous epi to baptisma\). Alford speaks of "the Pharisees representing hypocritical superstition; the Sadducees carnal unbelief." One cannot properly understand the theological atmosphere of Palestine at this time without an adequate knowledge of both Pharisees and Sadducees. The books are numerous besides articles in the Bible dictionaries. I have pictured the Pharisees in my first (1916) Stone Lectures, _The Pharisees and Jesus_. John clearly grasped the significance of this movement on the part of the Pharisees and Sadducees who had followed the crowds to the Jordan. He had welcomed the multitudes, but right in the presence of the crowds he exposes the hypocrisy of the ecclesiastics. {Ye offspring of vipers} (\gennmata echidnn\). Jesus (Matthew:12:34; strkjv@23:33|) will use the same language to the Pharisees. Broods of snakes were often seen by John in the rocks and when a fire broke out they would scurry (\phugein\) to their holes for safety. "The coming wrath" was not just for Gentiles as the Jews supposed, but for all who were not prepared for the kingdom of heaven (1Thessalonians:1:10|). No doubt the Pharisees and Sadducees winced under the sting of this powerful indictment.
rwp@Matthew:6:34 @{For the morrow} (\eis ten aurion\). The last resort of the anxious soul when all other fears are allayed. The ghost of tomorrow stalks out with all its hobgoblins of doubt and distrust.
rwp@Matthew:8:2 @{If thou wilt} (\ean thelis\). The leper knew that Jesus had the power to heal him. His doubt was about his willingness. "Men more easily believe in miraculous power than in miraculous love" (Bruce). This is a condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of being determined), a hopeful doubt at any rate. Jesus accepted his challenge by "I will." The command to "tell no one" was to suppress excitement and prevent hostility.
rwp@Matthew:11:6 @{Whosoever shall find none occasion of stumbling in me} (\hos an m skandalisthi en emoi\). Indefinite relative clause with first aorist passive subjunctive. This beatitude is a rebuke to John for his doubt even though in prison. Doubt is not a proof of superior intellect, scholarship, or piety. John was in the fog and that is the time not to make serious decisions. "In some way even the Baptist had found some occasion of stumbling in Jesus" (Plummer).
rwp@Matthew:11:12 @{Suffereth violence} (\biazetai\). This verb occurs only here and in strkjv@Luke:16:16| in the N.T. It seems to be middle in Luke and Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 258) quotes an inscription "where \biazomai\ is without doubt reflexive and absolute" as in strkjv@Luke:16:16|. But there are numerous papyri examples where it is passive (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_, etc.) so that "there seems little that promises decisive help for the difficult Logion of strkjv@Matthew:11:12; strkjv@Luke:16:16|." Songs:then in strkjv@Matthew:11:12| the form can be either middle or passive and either makes sense, though a different sense. The passive idea is that the kingdom is forced, is stormed, is taken by men of violence like "men of violence take it by force" (\biastai harpazousin autn\) or seize it like a conquered city. The middle voice may mean "experiences violence" or "forces its way" like a rushing mighty wind (so Zahn holds). These difficult words of Jesus mean that the preaching of John "had led to a violent and impetuous thronging to gather round Jesus and his disciples" (Hort, _Judaistic Christianity_, p. 26).
rwp@Matthew:14:18 @{And he said} (\ho de eipen\). Here is the contrast between the helpless doubt of the disciples and the confident courage of Jesus. He used "_the_ five loaves and two fishes" which they had mentioned as a reason for doing nothing. "Bring them hither unto me." They had overlooked the power of Jesus in this emergency.
rwp@Matthew:14:31 @{Didst thou doubt?} (\edistasas?\). Only here and strkjv@28:17| in the N.T. From \distaz\ and that from \dis\ (twice). Pulled two ways. Peter's trust in the power of Christ gave way to his dread of the wind and waves. Jesus had to take hold of Peter (\epelabeto\, middle voice) and pull him up while still walking on the water.
rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{I will build my church} (\oikodoms mou tn ekklsian\). It is the figure of a building and he uses the word \ekklsian\ which occurs in the New Testament usually of a local organization, but sometimes in a more general sense. What is the sense here in which Jesus uses it? The word originally meant "assembly" (Acts:19:39|), but it came to be applied to an "unassembled assembly" as in strkjv@Acts:8:3| for the Christians persecuted by Saul from house to house. "And the name for the new Israel, \ekklsia\, in His mouth is not an anachronism. It is an old familiar name for the congregation of Israel found in Deut. (Deuteronomy:18:26; strkjv@23:2|) and Psalms (Psalms:22:36|), both books well known to Jesus" (Bruce). It is interesting to observe that in strkjv@Psalms:89| most of the important words employed by Jesus on this occasion occur in the LXX text. Songs:\oikodoms\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:5|; \ekklsia\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:6|; \katischu\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:22|; \Christos\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:39,52|; \hids\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:49| (\ek cheiros hidou\). If one is puzzled over the use of "building" with the word \ekklsia\ it will be helpful to turn to strkjv@1Peter:2:5|. Peter, the very one to whom Jesus is here speaking, writing to the Christians in the five Roman provinces in Asia (1Peter:1:1|), says: "You are built a spiritual house" (\oikodomeisthe oikos pneumatikos\). It is difficult to resist the impression that Peter recalls the words of Jesus to him on this memorable occasion. Further on (1Peter:2:9|) he speaks of them as an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, showing beyond controversy that Peter's use of building a spiritual house is general, not local. This is undoubtedly the picture in the mind of Christ here in strkjv@16:18|. It is a great spiritual house, Christ's Israel, not the Jewish nation, which he describes. What is the rock on which Christ will build his vast temple? Not on Peter alone or mainly or primarily. Peter by his confession was furnished with the illustration for the rock on which His church will rest. It is the same kind of faith that Peter has just confessed. The perpetuity of this church general is guaranteed.
rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{The gates of Hades} (\pulai hidou\) {shall not prevail against it} (\ou katischusousin auts\). Each word here creates difficulty. Hades is technically the unseen world, the Hebrew Sheol, the land of the departed, that is death. Paul uses \thanate\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:55| in quoting strkjv@Hosea:13:14| for \hid\. It is not common in the papyri, but it is common on tombstones in Asia Minor, "doubtless a survival of its use in the old Greek religion" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). The ancient pagans divided Hades (\a\ privative and \idein\, to see, abode of the unseen) into Elysium and Tartarus as the Jews put both Abraham's bosom and Gehenna in Sheol or Hades (cf. strkjv@Luke:16:25|). Christ was in Hades (Acts:2:27,31|), not in Gehenna. We have here the figure of two buildings, the Church of Christ on the Rock, the House of Death (Hades). "In the Old Testament the 'gates of Hades' (Sheol) never bears any other meaning (Isaiah:38:10|; Wisd. strkjv@16:3; 3Macc. strkjv@5:51) than death," McNeile claims. See also strkjv@Psalms:9:13; strkjv@107:18; strkjv@Job:38:17| (\pulai thanatou pulroi hidou\). It is not the picture of Hades _attacking_ Christ's church, but of death's possible victory over the church. "The \ekklsia\ is built upon the Messiahship of her master, and death, the gates of Hades, will not prevail against her by keeping Him imprisoned. It was a mysterious truth, which He will soon tell them in plain words (verse 21|); it is echoed in strkjv@Acts:2:24,31|" (McNeile). Christ's church will prevail and survive because He will burst the gates of Hades and come forth conqueror. He will ever live and be the guarantor of the perpetuity of His people or church. The verb \katischu\ (literally have strength against, \ischu\ from \ischus\ and \kat-\) occurs also in strkjv@Luke:21:36; strkjv@23:23|. It appears in the ancient Greek, the LXX, and in the papyri with the accusative and is used in the modern Greek with the sense of gaining the mastery over. The wealth of imagery in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| makes it difficult to decide each detail, but the main point is clear. The \ekklsia\ which consists of those confessing Christ as Peter has just done will not cease. The gates of Hades or bars of Sheol will not close down on it. Christ will rise and will keep his church alive. _Sublime Porte_ used to be the title of Turkish power in Constantinople.
rwp@Matthew:18:30 @{And he would not} (\ho de ouk thelen\). Imperfect tense of persistent refusal. {Till he should pay} (\hes apodi\). This futuristic aorist subjunctive is the rule with \hes\ for a future goal. He was to stay in prison till he should pay. "He acts on the instinct of a base nature, and also doubtless in accordance with long habits of harsh tyrannical behaviour towards men in his power" (Bruce). On imprisonment for debt among the Greeks and Romans see Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 270,330.
rwp@Matthew:19:13 @{Rebuked them} (\epetimsen autois\). No doubt people did often crowd around Jesus for a touch of his hand and his blessing. The disciples probably felt that they were doing Jesus a kindness. How little they understood children and Jesus. It is a tragedy to make children feel that they are in the way at home and at church. These men were the twelve apostles and yet had no vision of Christ's love for little children. The new child world of today is due directly to Jesus.
rwp@Matthew:21:3 @{The Lord} (\ho kurios\). It is not clear how the word would be understood here by those who heard the message though it is plain that Jesus applies it to himself. The word is from \kuros\, power or authority. In the LXX it is common in a variety of uses which appear in the N.T. as master of the slave (Matthew:10:24|), of the harvest (9:38|), of the vineyard (20:8|), of the emperor (Acts:13:27|), of God (Matthew:11:20; strkjv@11:25|), and often of Jesus as the Messiah (Acts:10:36|). Note strkjv@Matthew:8:25|. This is the only time in Matthew where the words \ho kurios\ are applied to Jesus except the doubtful passage in strkjv@28:6|. A similar usage is shown by Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_ and Deissmann's _Light from the Ancient East_. Particularly in Egypt it was applied to "the Lord Serapis" and Ptolemy and Cleopatra are called "the lords, the most great gods" (\hoi kurioi theoi megistoi\). Even Herod the Great and Herod Agrippa I are addressed as "Lord King." In the west the Roman emperors are not so termed till the time of Domitian. But the Christians boldly claimed the word for Christ as Jesus is here represented as using it with reference to himself. It seems as if already the disciples were calling Jesus "Lord" and that he accepted the appellative and used it as here.
rwp@Matthew:21:21 @{Doubt not} (\m diakrithte\). First aorist passive subjunctive, second-class condition. To be divided in mind, to waver, to doubt, the opposite of "faith" (\pistin\), trust, confidence. {What is done to the fig tree} (\to ts suks\). The Greek means "the matter of the fig tree," as if a slight matter in comparison with {this mountain} (\ti orei touti\). Removing a mountain is a bigger task than blighting a fig tree. "The cursing of the fig-tree has always been regarded as of symbolic import, the tree being in Christ's mind an emblem of the Jewish people, with a great show of religion and no fruit of real godliness. This hypothesis is very credible" (Bruce). Plummer follows Zahn in referring it to the Holy City. Certainly "this mountain" is a parable and one already reported in strkjv@Matthew:17:20| (cf. sycamine tree in Lk strkjv@17:6|). Cf. strkjv@Zechariah:17:4|.
rwp@Matthew:25:32 @{All the nations} (panta ta ethn). Not just Gentiles, but Jews also. Christians and non-Christians. This program for the general judgment has been challenged by some scholars who regard it as a composition by the evangelist to exalt Christ. But why should not Christ say this if he is the Son of Man and the Son of God and realized it? A "reduced" Christ has trouble with all the Gospels, not merely with the Fourth Gospel, and no less with Q and Mark than with Matthew and Luke. This is a majestic picture with which to close the series of parables about readiness for the second coming. Here is the program when he does come. "I am aware that doubt is thrown on this passage by some critics. But the doubt is most wanton. Where is the second brain that could have invented anything so original and so sublime as vv. 35-40,42-45|?" (Sanday, _Life of Christ in Recent Research_, p. 128). {As the shepherd separates} (\hsper ho poimn aphorizei\). A common figure in Palestine. The sheep are usually white and the goats black. There are kids (\eriphn, eriphia\) which have grazed together. The goats devastate a field of all herbage. "Indeed they have extirpated many species of trees which once covered the hills" (Tristram, _Natural History of the Bible_, pp. 89f.). The shepherd stands at the gate and taps the sheep to go to the right and the goats to the left.
rwp@Matthew:26:15 @{What are ye willing to give me?} (\ti thelete moi dounai?\) This "brings out the _chaffering_ aspect of the transaction" (Vincent). "Mary and Judas extreme opposites: she freely spending in love, he willing to sell his Master for money" (Bruce). And her act of love provoked Judas to his despicable deed, this rebuke of Jesus added to all the rest. {And I will deliver him unto you} (\kag hmin parads auton\). The use of \kai\ with a co-ordinate clause is a colloquialism (common in the _Koin_ as in the Hebrew use of _wav_. "A colloquialism or a Hebraism, the traitor mean in style as in spirit" (Bruce). The use of \eg\ seems to mean "I though one of his disciples will hand him over to you if you give me enough." {They weighed unto him} (\hoi de estsan auto\). They placed the money in the balances or scales. "Coined money was in use, but the shekels may have been weighed out in antique fashion by men careful to do an iniquitous thing in the most orthodox way" (Bruce). It is not known whether the Sanhedrin had offered a reward for the arrest of Jesus or not. {Thirty pieces of silver} (\triakonta arguria\). A reference to strkjv@Zechariah:11:12|. If a man's ox gored a servant, he had to pay this amount (Exodus:21:32|). Some manuscripts have \statras\ (staters). These thirty silver shekels were equal to 120 \denarii\, less than five English pounds, less than twenty-five dollars, the current price of a slave. There was no doubt contempt for Jesus in the minds of both the Sanhedrin and Judas in this bargain.
rwp@Matthew:26:35 @{Even if I must die with thee} (\k
n dei me sun soi apothanein\). Third-class condition. A noble speech and meant well. His boast of loyalty is made still stronger by \ou m se aparnsomai\. The other disciples were undoubtedly embarrassed by Peter's boast and lightheartedly joined in the same profession of fidelity. ![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}