Bible:
Filter: String:

NONE.filter - rwp eipen:

rwp@2Corinthians:6:16 @{Agreement} (\sunkatathesis\). Fifth of these words. Late word, but common, though here only in N.T. Approved by putting together the votes. In the papyri \ek sunkatatheses\ means "by agreement." On the temple of God and idols see strkjv@1Corinthians:10:14-22|. See strkjv@Luke:23:51| for the verb \sunkatatithmi\. {For we are the temple of the living God} (\hmeis gar naos theou esmen zntos\). We, not temples (Acts:7:48; strkjv@17:24; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:16; strkjv@6:19|). {As God said} (\kaths eipen ho theos\). A paraphrase and catena of quotations, what J. Rendel Harris calls _Testimonia_ (from strkjv@Leviticus:26:11f.; strkjv@Isaiah:52:11; strkjv@Ezekiel:20:34; strkjv@37:27; strkjv@2Samuel:7:8,14|). Plummer notes that at the beginning "I will dwell in them" (\enoiks en autois\) is not in any of them. "As God said" points to strkjv@Leviticus:26:12; strkjv@Ezekiel:37:27|.

rwp@2Timothy:4:10 @{Forsook me} (\me egkateleipen\). Imperfect (MSS. also have aorist, \egkatelipen\) active of the old double compound verb \egkataleip\, for which see strkjv@Romans:9:29|. Clearly in contrast to verse 9| and in the sense of strkjv@1Timothy:6:17|, wilful desertion. Only mentioned elsewhere in strkjv@Colossians:4:14|. {Crescens} (\Krsks\). No other mention of him. {Titus to Dalmatia} (\Titos eis Dalmatian\). Titus had been asked to rejoin Paul in Nicopolis where he was to winter, probably the winter previous to this one (Titus:3:12|). He came and has been with Paul.

rwp@Acts:20:35 @{I gave you an example} (\hupedeixa\). First aorist active indicative of \hupodeiknumi\, old verb to show under one's eyes, to give object lesson, by deed as well as by word (Luke:6:47|). \Hupodeigma\ means example (John:13:15; strkjv@James:5:10|). Songs:Paul appeals to his example in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:1; strkjv@Phillipians:3:17|. \Panta\ is accusative plural of general reference (in all things). {Songs:labouring ye ought to help} (\houts kopintas dei antilambanesthai\). So, as I did. Necessity (\dei\). Toiling (\kopintas\) not just for ourselves, but to help (\antilambanesthai\), to take hold yourselves (middle voice) at the other end (\anti\). This verb common in the old Greek, but in the N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:1:54; strkjv@Acts:20:35; strkjv@1Timothy:6:2|. This noble plea to help the weak is the very spirit of Christ (1Thessalonians:5:14; strkjv@1Corinthians:12:28; strkjv@Romans:5:6; strkjv@14:1|). In strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:14| \antechesthe tn asthenountn\ we have Paul's very idea again. Every Community Chest appeal today re-echoes Paul's plea. {He himself said} (\autos eipen\). Not in the Gospels, one of the sayings of Jesus in current use that Paul had received and treasured. Various other _Agrapha_ of Jesus have been preserved in ancient writers and some in recently discovered papyri which may be genuine or not. We are grateful that Paul treasured this one. This Beatitude (on \makarion\ see on strkjv@Matthew:5:3-11|) is illustrated by the whole life of Jesus with the Cross as the culmination. Aristotle (Eth. IV. I) has a saying somewhat like this, but assigns the feeling of superiority as the reason (Page), an utterly different idea from that here. This quotation raises the question of how much Paul personally knew of the life and sayings of Jesus.

rwp@Acts:23:25 @{And he wrote} (\grapsas\). First aorist active participle of \graph\, agreeing with the subject (Lysias) of \eipen\ (said) back in verse 23| (beginning). {After this form} (\echousan ton tupon touton\). Textus Receptus has \periechousan\. The use of \tupon\ (type or form) like _exemplum_ in Latin (Page who quotes Cicero _Ad Att_. IX. 6. 3) may give merely the purport or substantial contents of the letter. But there is no reason for thinking that it is not a genuine copy since the letter may have been read in open court before Felix, and Luke was probably with Paul. The Roman law required that a subordinate officer like Lysias in reporting a case to his superior should send a written statement of the case and it was termed _elogium_. A copy of the letter may have been given Paul after his appeal to Caesar. It was probably written in Latin. The letter is a "dexterous mixture of truth and falsehood" (Furneaux) with the stamp of genuineness. It puts things in a favourable light for Lysias and makes no mention of his order to scourge Paul.

rwp@Galatians:3:8 @{Foreseeing} (\proidousa\). Second aorist active participle of \proora\. The Scripture is here personified. Alone in this sense of "sight," but common with \legei\ or \eipen\ (says, said) and really in verse 22| "hath shut up" (\sunekleisen\). {Would justify} (\dikaioi\). Present active indicative, "does justify." {Preached the gospel beforehand} (\proeuggelisato\). First aorist middle indicative of \proeuaggelizomai\ with augment on \a\ though both \pro\ and \eu\ before it in composition. Only instance in N.T. It occurs in Philo. and Schol. Soph. This Scripture announced beforehand the gospel on this point of justification by faith. He quotes the promise to Abraham in strkjv@Genesis:12:3; strkjv@18:18|, putting \panta ta ethn\ (all the nations) in strkjv@18:18| for \psai hai phulai\ (all the tribes) of the earth. It is a crucial passage for Paul's point, showing that the promise to Abraham included all the nations of the earth. The verb \eneuloge\ (future passive here) occurs in the LXX and here only in N.T. (not strkjv@Acts:3:25| in correct text). {In thee} (\en soi\). "As their spiritual progenitor" (Lightfoot).

rwp@James:2:11 @{He that said} (\ho eipn\) {--said also} (\eipen kai\). The unity of the law lies in the Lawgiver who spoke both prohibitions (\m\ and the aorist active subjunctive in each one, \moicheusis, phoneusis\). The order here is that of B in strkjv@Exodus:20| (Luke:18:20; strkjv@Romans:13:9|), but not in strkjv@Matthew:5:21,27| (with \ou\ and future indicative). {Now if thou dost not commit adultery, but killest} (\ei de ou moicheueis, phoneueis de\). Condition of first class with \ou\ (not \m\) because of the contrast with \de\, whereas \ei m\ would mean "unless," a different idea. Songs:\ou\ in strkjv@1:23|. {A transgressor of the law} (\parabats nomou\) as in verse 9|. Murder springs out of anger (Matthew:5:21-26|). People free from fleshly sins have often "made their condemnation of fleshly sins an excuse for indulgence towards spiritual sins" (Hort).

rwp@John:1:33 @{He said} (\ekeinos eipen\). Explicit and emphatic pronoun as in verse 8|, referring to God as the one who sent John (verse 6|). {With the Holy Spirit} (\en pneumati hagii\). "In the Holy Spirit." Here again one needs the background of the Synoptics for the contrast between John's baptism in water (John:1:26|) and that of the Messiah in the Holy Spirit (Mark:1:8; strkjv@Matthew:3:11; strkjv@Luke:3:16|).

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:2:22 @{When therefore he was raised from the dead} (\Hote oun gerth ek nekrn\). First aorist passive indicative of \egeir\, to raise up. And not at first then, but only slowly after the disciples themselves were convinced. Then "they believed the Scripture" (\episteusan ti graphi\). They "believed" again. Dative case \graphi\. Probably strkjv@Psalms:16:10| is meant (Acts:2:31; strkjv@13:35|). {And the word which Jesus had said} (\kai ti logi hon eipen\). Dative case \logi\ also, but \hon\ (relative) is not attracted to the dative. Clearly then John interprets Jesus to have a parabolic reference to his death and resurrection by his language in strkjv@2:19|. There are those who bluntly say that John was mistaken. I prefer to say that these scholars are mistaken. Even Bernard considers it "hardly possible" that John interprets Jesus rightly in strkjv@1:21|. "Had he meant that, He would have spoken with less ambiguity." But how do we know that Jesus wished to be understood clearly at this time? Certainly no one understood Christ when he spoke the words. The language of Jesus is recalled and perverted at his trial as "I will destroy" (Mark:14:58|), "I can destroy" (Matthew:26:61|), neither of which he said.

rwp@John:4:10 @{Answered and said} (\apekrith kai eipen\). As often (redundant) in John. The first aorist passive (\apekrith\) is deponent, no longer passive in sense. {If thou knewest} (\ei ideis\). Condition of second class, determined as unfulfilled, \ei\ and past perfect \ideis\ (used as imperfect) in condition and \an\ and aorist active indicative in conclusion (\an itsas kai an edken\, note repetition of \an\, not always done). {The gift of God} (\tn drean tou theou\). Naturally the gift mentioned in strkjv@3:16| (Westcott), the inexpressible gift (2Corinthians:9:15|). Some take it to refer to the living water below, but that is another allusion (metaphor) to strkjv@3:16|. See strkjv@Ephesians:4:7| for Paul's use of both \charis\ and \drea\ (from \didmi\, to give). {Who it is} (\tis estin\). She only knew that he was a Jew. This Messianic self-consciousness of Jesus is plain in John, but it is early in the Synoptics also. {Living water} (\hudr zn\). Running water like a spring or well supplied by springs. This Jacob's Well was filled by water from rains percolating through, a sort of cistern, good water, but not equal to a real spring which was always preferred (Genesis:26:19; strkjv@Leviticus:14:5; strkjv@Numbers:19:17|). Jesus, of course, is symbolically referring to himself as the Living Water though he does not say it in plain words as he does about the Living Bread (6:51|). The phrase "the fountain of life" occurs in strkjv@Proverbs:13:14|. Jesus supplies the water of life (John:7:39|). Cf. strkjv@Revelation:7:17; strkjv@22:1|.

rwp@John:4:27 @{Upon this} (\epi touti\). This idiom only here in N.T. At this juncture. Apparently the woman left at once when the disciples came. {They marvelled} (\ethaumazon\). Imperfect active describing the astonishment of the disciples as they watched Jesus talking with a woman. {Was speaking} (\elalei\). As in strkjv@2:25|, so here the tense is changed in indirect discourse from \lalei\ to \elalei\, an unusual idiom in Greek. However, \hoti\ here may be "because" and then the imperfect is regular. It is not "with the woman" (\meta ts gunaikos\), but simply "with a woman" (\meta gunaikos\). There was a rabbinical precept: "Let no one talk with a woman in the street, no, not with his own wife" (Lightfoot, _Hor, Hebr_. iii. 287). The disciples held Jesus to be a rabbi and felt that he was acting in a way beneath his dignity. {Yet no man said} (\oudeis mentoi eipen\). John remembers through the years their amazement and also their reverence for Jesus and unwillingness to reflect upon him.

rwp@John:5:15 @{Went away and told} (\aplthen kai eipen\). Both aorist active indicatives. Instead of giving heed to the warning of Jesus about his own sins he went off and told the Jews that now he knew who the man was who had commanded him to take up his bed on the Sabbath Day, to clear himself with the ecclesiastics and escape a possible stoning. {That it was Jesus} (\hoti Isous estin\). Present indicative preserved in indirect discourse. The man was either ungrateful and wilfully betrayed Jesus or he was incompetent and did not know that he was bringing trouble on his benefactor. In either case one has small respect for him.

rwp@John:10:35 @{If he called them gods} (\ei ekeinous eipen theous\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. The conclusion (verse 36|) is \humeis legete\; ({Do ye say?}). As Jews (and rabbis) they are shut out from charging Jesus with blasphemy because of this usage in the O.T. It is a complete _ad hominem_ argument. To be sure, it is in strkjv@Psalms:82:6| a lower use of the term \theos\, but Jesus did not call himself "Son of Jahweh," but "\huios theou\" which can mean only "Son of _Elohim_." It must not be argued, as some modern men do, that Jesus thus disclaims his own deity. He does nothing of the kind. He is simply stopping the mouths of the rabbis from the charge of blasphemy and he does it effectually. The sentence is quite involved, but can be cleared up. {To whom the word of God came} (\pros hous ho logos tou theou egeneto\). The relative points to \ekeinous\, before. These judges had no other claim to the term \theoi\ (_elohim_). {And the scripture cannot be broken} (\kai ou dunatai luthnai h graph\). A parenthesis that drives home the pertinency of the appeal, one that the Pharisees had to accept. \Luthnai\ is first aorist passive infinitive of \lu\, to loosen, to break.

rwp@John:12:44 @{Cried and said} (\ekraxen kai eipen\). First aorist active indicative of \kraz\, to cry aloud, and second aorist active of defective verb \er\, to say. This is probably a summary of what Jesus had already said as in verse 36| John closes the public ministry of Jesus without the Synoptic account of the last day in the temple on our Tuesday (Mark:11:27-12:44; strkjv@Matthew:21:23-23:39; strkjv@Luke:20:1-21:4|). {Not on me, but on him} (\ou eis eme, alla eis ton\). "Not on me only, but also on," another example of exaggerated contrast like that in verse 30|. The idea of Jesus here is a frequent one (believing on Jesus whom the Father has sent) as in strkjv@3:17f.; strkjv@5:23f.,30,43; strkjv@7:16; strkjv@8:42; strkjv@13:20; strkjv@14:1; strkjv@Matthew:10:40; strkjv@Luke:9:48|.

rwp@John:13:12 @{Sat down again} (\anepesen palin\). Second aorist active indicative of \anapipt\, old compound verb to fall back, to lie down, to recline. \Palin\ (again) can be taken either with \anepesen\, as here, or with \eipen\ (he said again). {Know ye what I have done to you?} (\ginskete ti pepoika humin;\). "Do ye understand the meaning of my act?" Perfect active indicative of \poie\ with dative case (\humin\). It was a searching question, particularly to Simon Peter and Judas.

rwp@John:19:21 @{But that he said} (\all' hoti ekeinos eipen\). The chief priests were uneasy for fear that the joke in the mock title was on them instead of on Jesus. They were right in their fear.

rwp@Luke:4:24 @{And he said} (\eipen de\). Also in strkjv@1:13|. The interjection of these words here by Luke may indicate a break in his address, though there is no other indication of an interval here. Perhaps they only serve to introduce solemnly the new proverb like the words {Verily I say unto you} (\amn leg humin\). This proverb about the prophet having no honour in his own country Jesus had already applied to himself according to strkjv@John:4:44|. Both strkjv@Mark:6:4| and strkjv@Matthew:13:57| give it in a slightly altered form on the last visit of Jesus to Nazareth. The devil had tempted Jesus to make a display of his power to the people by letting them see him floating down from the pinnacle of the temple (Luke:4:9-11|).

rwp@Luke:5:24 @{He saith unto him that was palsied} (\eipen ti paralelumeni\). This same parenthesis right in the midst of the words of Jesus is in strkjv@Mark:2:11; strkjv@Matthew:9:6|, conclusive proof of interrelation between these documents. The words of Jesus are quoted practically alike in all three Gospels, the same purpose also \hina eidte\ (second perfect active subjunctive).

rwp@Luke:6:39 @{Also a parable} (\kai paraboln\). Plummer thinks that the second half of the sermon begins here as indicated by Luke's insertion of "And he spake (\eipen de\) at this point. Luke has the word parable some fifteen times both for crisp proverbs and for the longer narrative comparisons. This is the only use of the term parable concerning the metaphors in the Sermon on the Mount. But in both Matthew and Luke's report of the discourse there are some sixteen possible applications of the word. Two come right together: The blind leading the blind, the mote and the beam. Matthew gives the parabolic proverb of the blind leading the blind later (Matthew:15:14|). Jesus repeated these sayings on various occasions as every teacher does his characteristic ideas. Songs:Luke strkjv@6:40; strkjv@Matthew:10:24|, strkjv@Luke:6:45; strkjv@Matthew:12:34f.| {Can} (\Mti dunatai\). The use of \mti\ in the question shows that a negative answer is expected. {Guide} (\hodgein\). Common verb from \hodgos\ (guide) and this from \hodos\ (way) and \hgeomai\, to lead or guide. {Shall they not both fall?} (\ouchi amphoteroi empesountai;\). \Ouchi\, a sharpened negative from \ouk\, in a question expecting the answer Yes. Future middle indicative of the common verb \empipt\. {Into a pit} (\eis bothunon\). Late word for older \bothros\.

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:9:59 @{And he said unto another} (\eipen de pros heteron\). strkjv@Matthew:8:21| omits Christ's "Follow me" (\akolouthei moi\) and makes this man a volunteer instead of responding to the appeal of Jesus. There is no real opposition, of course. In Matthew's account the man is apologetic as in Luke. Plummer calls him "one of the casual disciples" of whom there are always too many. The scribes knew how to give plausible reasons for not being active disciples. {First} (\prton\). One of the problems of life is the relation of duties to each other, which comes first. The burial of one's father was a sacred duty (Genesis:25:9|), but, as in the case of Tobit strkjv@4:3, this scribe's father probably was still alive. What the scribe apparently meant was that he could not leave his father while still alive to follow Jesus around over the country.

rwp@Luke:9:61 @{And another also said} (\eipen de kai heteros\). A volunteer like the first. This third case is given by Luke alone, though the incident may also come from the same Logia as the other two. \Heteros\ does not here mean one of a "different" sort as is sometimes true of this pronoun, but merely another like \allos\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 749). {But first} (\prton de\). He also had something that was to come "first." {To bid farewell to them that are at my house} (\apotaxasthai tois eis ton oikon mou\). In itself that was a good thing to do. This first aorist middle infinitive is from \apotass\, an old verb, to detach, to separate, to assign as a detachment of soldiers. In the N.T. it only appears in the middle voice with the meaning common in late writers to bid adieu, to separate oneself from others. It is used in strkjv@Acts:18:18| of Paul taking leave of the believers in Corinth. See also strkjv@Mark:6:46; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:13|. It is thus a formal function and this man meant to go home and set things in order there and then in due time to come and follow Jesus.

rwp@Luke:10:40 @{Was cumbered} (\periespto\). Imperfect passive of \perispa\, an old verb with vivid metaphor, to draw around. One has sometimes seen women whose faces are literally drawn round with anxiety, with a permanent twist, distracted in mind and in looks. {She came up to him} (\epistsa\). Second aorist active participle of \ephistmi\, an old verb to place upon, but in the N.T. only in the middle voice or the intransitive tenses of the active (perfect and second aorist as here). It is the ingressive aorist here and really means. stepping up to or bursting in or upon Jesus. It is an explosive act as is the speech of Martha. {Dost thou not care} (\ou melei soi\). This was a reproach to Jesus for monopolizing Mary to Martha's hurt. {Did leave me} (\me kateleipen\). Imperfect active, she kept on leaving me. {Bid her} (\eipon auti\). Late form instead of \eipe\, second aorist active imperative, common in the papyri. Martha feels that Jesus is the key to Mary's help. {That she help me} (\hina moi sunantilabtai\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist middle subjunctive of \sunantilambanomai\, a double compound verb (\sun\, with, \anti\, at her end of the line, and \lambanomai\, middle voice of \lamban\, to take hold), a late compound appearing in the LXX, Diodorus and Josephus. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 87) finds it in many widely scattered inscriptions "throughout the whole extent of the Hellenistic world of the Mediterranean." It appears only twice in the N.T. (here and strkjv@Romans:8:26|). It is a beautiful word, to take hold oneself (middle voice) at his end of the task (\anti\) together with (\sun\) one.

rwp@Luke:11:1 @{As he was praying in a certain place} (\en ti einai auton en topi tini proseuchomenon\). Characteristically Lukan idiom: \en\ with articular periphrastic infinitive (\einai proseuchomenon\) with accusative of general reference (\auton\). {That}. Not in the Greek, asyndeton (\kai egeneto eipen\). {When he ceased} (\hs epausato\). Supply \proseuchomenos\ (praying), complementary or supplementary participle. {Teach us} (\didaxon hmas\). Jesus had taught them by precept (Matthew:6:7-15|) and example (Luke:9:29|). Somehow the example of Jesus on this occasion stirred them to fresh interest in the subject and to revival of interest in John's teachings (Luke:5:33|). Songs:Jesus gave them the substance of the Model Prayer in Matthew, but in shorter form. Some of the MSS. have one or all of the phrases in Matthew, but the oldest documents have it in the simplest form. See on ¯Matthew:6:7-15| for discussion of these details (Father, hallowed, kingdom, daily bread, forgiveness, bringing us into temptation). In strkjv@Matthew:6:11| "give" is \dos\ (second aorist active imperative second singular, a single act) while here strkjv@Luke:11:3| "give" is \didou\ (present active imperative, both from \didmi\) and means, "keep on giving." Songs:in strkjv@Luke:11:4| we have "For we ourselves also forgive" (\kai gar autoi aphiomen\), present active indicative of the late \\ verb \aphi\ while strkjv@Matthew:6:12| has "as we also forgave" (\hs kai hmeis aphkamen\), first aorist (\k\ aorist) active of \aphimi\. Songs:also where strkjv@Matthew:6:12| has "debts" (\ta opheilmata\) strkjv@Luke:11:4| has "sins" (\tas hamartias\). But the spirit of each prayer is the same. There is no evidence that Jesus meant either form to be a ritual. In both strkjv@Matthew:6:13; strkjv@Luke:11:4| \m eisenegkis\ occurs (second aorist subjunctive with \m\ in prohibition, ingressive aorist). "Bring us not" is a better translation than "lead us not." There is no such thing as God enticing one to sin (James:1:13|). Jesus urges us to pray not to be tempted as in strkjv@Luke:22:40| in Gethsemane.

rwp@Luke:11:28 @{But he said} (\autos de eipen\). Jesus in contrast turns attention to others and gives them a beatitude (\makarioi\). "The originality of Christ's reply guarantees its historical character. Such a comment is beyond the reach of an inventor" (Plummer).

rwp@Luke:12:41 @{Peter said} (\Eipen de ho Petros\). This whole paragraph from verse 22-40| had been addressed directly to the disciples. Hence it is not surprising to find Peter putting in a question. This incident confirms also the impression that Luke is giving actual historical data in the environment of these discourses. He is certain that the Twelve are meant, but he desires to know if others are included, for he had spoken to the multitude in verses 13-21|. Recall strkjv@Mark:13:37|. This interruption is somewhat like that on the Mount of Transfiguration (Luke:9:33|) and is characteristic of Peter. Was it the magnificent promise in verse 37| that stirred Peter's impulsiveness? It is certainly more than a literary device of Luke. Peter's question draws out a parabolic reply by Jesus (42-48|).

rwp@Luke: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:19:32 @{As he had said unto them} (\kaths eipen autois\). Luke alone notes this item.

rwp@Luke:22:13 @{He had said} (\eirkei\). Past perfect active indicative of \eipon\ where strkjv@Mark:14:16| has \eipen\ (second aorist).

rwp@Mark:12:19 @{Moses wrote} (\Muss egrapsen\). Songs:Luke:20:28| (Genesis:38:8; De. strkjv@25:5f.|). Matthew has "said" (\eipen\).

rwp@Mark:12:32 @{And the scribe said} (\eipen auti ho grammateus\). Mark alone gives the reply of the scribe to Jesus which is a mere repetition of what Jesus had said about the first and the second commandments with the additional allusion to strkjv@1Samuel:15:22| about love as superior to whole burnt offerings. {Well} (\kals\). Not to be taken with "saidst" (\eipes\) as the Revised Version has it following Wycliff. Probably \kals\ (well) is exclamatory. "Fine, Teacher. Of a truth (\ep' altheias\) didst thou say."

rwp@Matthew:2:8 @{Sent them to Bethlehem and said} (\pempsas autous eis Bthleem eipen\). Simultaneous aorist participle, "sending said." They were to "search out accurately" (\exetasate akribs\) concerning the child. Then "bring me word, that I also may come and worship him." The deceit of Herod seemed plausible enough and might have succeeded but for God's intervention to protect His Son from the jealous rage of Herod.

rwp@Matthew:9:6 @{That ye may know} (\hina eidte\). Jesus accepts the challenge in the thoughts of the scribes and performs the miracle of healing the paralytic, who so far only had his sins forgiven, to prove his Messianic power on earth to forgive sins even as God does. The word \exousia\ may mean either power or authority. He had both as a matter of fact. Note same word in strkjv@9:8|. {Then saith he to the sick of the palsy} (\tote legei ti paralutiki\). These words of course, were not spoken by Jesus. Curiously enough Matthew interjects them right in the midst of the sayings of Jesus in reply to the scorn of the scribes. Still more remarkable is the fact that Mark (Mark:2:10|) has precisely the same words in the same place save that Matthew has added \tote\, of which he is fond, to what Mark already had. Mark, as we know, largely reports Peter's words and sees with Peter's eyes. Luke has the same idea in the same place without the vivid historical present \legei (eipen ti paralelumeni)\ with the participle in place of the adjective. This is one of the many proofs that both Matthew and Luke made use of Mark's Gospel each in his own way. {Take up thy bed} (\ron sou tn klinn\). Pack up at once (aorist active imperative) the rolled-up pallet.

rwp@Matthew:11:25 @{At that season Jesus answered and said} (\en ekeini ti kairi apokritheis eipen\). Spoke to his Father in audible voice. The time and place we do not know. But here we catch a glimpse of Jesus in one of his moods of worship. "It is usual to call this golden utterance a prayer, but it is at once prayer, praise, and self-communing in a devout spirit" (Bruce). Critics are disturbed because this passage from the Logia of Jesus or Q of Synoptic criticism (Matthew:11:25-30; strkjv@Luke:10:21-24|) is so manifestly Johannine in spirit and very language, "the Father" (\ho patr\), "the son" (\ho huios\), whereas the Fourth Gospel was not written till the close of the first century and the Logia was written before the Synoptic Gospels. The only satisfying explanation lies in the fact that Jesus did have this strain of teaching that is preserved in John's Gospel. Here he is in precisely the same mood of elevated communion with the Father that we have reflected in John 14 to 17. Even Harnack is disposed to accept this Logion as a genuine saying of Jesus. The word "thank" (\homologoumai\) is better rendered "praise" (Moffatt). Jesus praises the Father "not that the \sophoi\ were ignorant, but that the \npioi\ knew" (McNeile).

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@Revelation:22:6 @{He said unto me} (\eipen moi\). Apparently the same angel as in strkjv@22:1| (21:9,15|). {These words} (\houtoi hoi logoi\). The same words used in strkjv@21:5| by the angel there. Whatever the application there, here the angel seems to endorse as "faithful and true" (\pistoi kai althinoi\) not merely the preceding vision (21:9-22:5|), but the revelations of the entire book. The language added proves this: "Sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly come to pass" (\apesteilen ton aggelon autou deixai tois doulois autou ha dei genesthai en tachei\), a direct reference to strkjv@1:1| concerning the purpose of Christ's revelation to John in this book. For "the God of the spirits of the prophets" (\ho theos tn pneumatn tn prophtn\) see strkjv@19:10; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:32|. Probably the prophets' own spirits enlightened by the Holy Spirit (10:7; strkjv@11:8; strkjv@22:9|).