Bible:
Filter: String:

NONE.filter - rwp justified:

rwp@1Corinthians:1:16 @{Also the household of Stephanas} (\kai ton Stephan oikon\). Mentioned as an afterthought. Robertson and Plummer suggest that Paul's amanuensis reminded him of this case. Paul calls him a first-fruit of Achaia (1Corinthians:16:15|) and so earlier than Crispus and he was one of the three who came to Paul from Corinth (16:17|), clearly a family that justified Paul's personal attention about baptism. {Besides} (\loipon\). Accusative of general reference, "as for anything else." Added to make clear that he is not meaning to omit any one who deserves mention. See also strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:1; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:2; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11; strkjv@2Timothy:4:8|. Ellicott insists on a sharp distinction from \to loipon\ "as for the rest" (2Thessalonians:3:1; strkjv@Phillipians:3:1; strkjv@4:8; strkjv@Ephesians:6:10|). Paul casts no reflection on baptism, for he could not with his conception of it as the picture of the new life in Christ (Romans:6:2-6|), but he clearly denies here that he considers baptism essential to the remission of sin or the means of obtaining forgiveness.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:4 @{For I know nothing against myself} (\ouden gar emauti sunoida\). Not a statement of fact, but an hypothesis to show the unreliability of mere complacent self-satisfaction. Note the use of \sunoida\ (second perfect active indicative with dative (disadvantage) of the reflexive pronoun) for guilty knowledge against oneself (cf. strkjv@Acts:5:2; strkjv@12:12; strkjv@14:6|). {Yet} (\all'\). Adversative use of \alla\. {Amos:I not hereby justified} (\ouk en touti dedikaimai\). Perfect passive indicative of state of completion. Failure to be conscious of one's own sins does not mean that one is innocent. Most prisoners plead "not guilty." Who is the judge of the steward of the mysteries of God? It is the Lord "that judgeth me" (\ho anakrinn me\). Probably, who examines me and then passes on my fidelity (\pistos\ in verse 2|).

rwp@1Corinthians:5:2 @{And ye are puffed up} (\kai humeis pephusimenoi este\). Emphatic position of \humeis\ (you). It may be understood as a question. Perfect passive periphrastic indicative of the same verb \phusio\ used already of the partisans in Corinth (4:6,19,20|). Those of the same faction with this scoundrel justified his rascality. {Did not rather mourn} (\kai ouchi mallon epenthsate\). Possibly question also and note strong negative form \ouchi\, which favours it. The very least that they could have done (\mallon\ rather than be puffed up) was to mourn for shame (\penthe\, old verb for lamentation) as if for one dead. {That he might be taken away} (\hina arthi\). The sub-final use of \hina\ of desired result (1:15|) so common in the _Koin_. First aorist passive subjunctive of \air\, to lift up, to carry off. Decent self-respect should have compelled the instant expulsion of the man instead of pride in his rascality.

rwp@1Corinthians:6:11 @{And such were some of you} (\kai tauta tines te\). A sharp homethrust. Literally, "And these things (\tauta\, neuter plural) were ye (some of you)." The horror is shown by \tauta\, but by \tines\ Paul narrows the picture to some, not all. But that was in the past (\te\, imperfect indicative) like strkjv@Romans:6:17|. Thank God the blood of Jesus does cleanse from such sins as these. But do not go back to them. {But ye were washed} (\apelousasthe\). First aorist middle indicative, not passive, of \apolou\. Either direct middle, ye washed yourselves, or indirect middle, as in strkjv@Acts:22:16|, ye washed your sins away (force of \apo\). This was their own voluntary act in baptism which was the outward expression of the previous act of God in cleansing (\hgiasthte\, ye were sanctified or cleansed before the baptism) and justified (\edikaithte\, ye were put right with God before the act of baptism). "These twin conceptions of the Christian state in its beginning appear commonly in the reverse order" (Findlay). The outward expression is usually mentioned before the inward change which precedes it. In this passage the Trinity appear as in the baptismal command in strkjv@Matthew:28:19|.

rwp@1Corinthians:7:9 @{But if they have not continency} (\ei de ouk egkrateuontai\). Condition of the first class, assumed as true. Direct middle voice \egkrateuontai\, hold themselves in, control themselves. {Let them marry} (\gamsatsan\). First aorist (ingressive) active imperative. Usual _Koin_ form in \-tsan\ for third plural. {Better} (\kreitton\). Marriage is better than continued sexual passion. Paul has not said that celibacy is {better} than marriage though he has justified it and expressed his own personal preference for it. The metaphorical use of \purousthai\ (present middle infinitive) for sexual passion is common enough as also for grief (2Corinthians:11:29|).

rwp@1Corinthians:10:20 @{But I say that} (\all' hoti\). The verb \phmi\ (I say) must be repeated from verse 19| before \hoti\. {To demons, and not to God} (\daimoniois kai ou thei\). Referring to LXX text of strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:17|. It is probable that by \ou thei\ Paul means "to a no-god" as also in strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:21| \ep' ouk ethnei\ (by a no-people). This is Paul's reply to the heathen who claimed that they worshipped the gods represented by the images and not the mere wood or stone or metal idols. The word \daimonia\ is an adjective \daimonios\ from \daimn\, an inferior deity, and with same idea originally, once in this sense in N.T. (Acts:17:18|). Elsewhere in N.T. it has the notion of evil spirits as here, those spiritual forces of wickedness (Ephesians:6:12|) that are under the control of Satan. The word \daimonia\, so common in the Gospels, occurs in Paul's writings only here and strkjv@1Timothy:4:1|. Demonology is a deep and dark subject here pictured by Paul as the explanation of heathenism which is a departure from God (Romans:1:19-23|) and a substitute for the worship of God. It is a terrible indictment which is justified by the licentious worship associated with paganism then and now.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:36 @{Thou foolish one} (\aphrn\). Old word (\a\ privative, \phrn\), lack of sense. It is a severe term and justified by the implication "that the objector plumes himself on his acuteness" (Robertson and Plummer). Proleptic position of \su\ (thou) sharpens the point. Sceptics (agnostics) pose as unusually intellectual (the intelligentsia), but the pose does not make one intelligent. {Except it die} (\ean m apothani\). Condition of third class, possibility assumed. This is the answer to the "how" question. In plant life death precedes life, death of the seed and then the new plant.

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

rwp@1Timothy:3:16 @{Without controversy} (\homologoumens\). Old adverb from the participle \homologoumenos\ from \homologe\. Here only in N.T. "Confessedly." {Great} (\mega\). See strkjv@Ephesians:5:32|. "A great mystery." {The mystery of godliness} (\to ts eusebeias mustrion\). See verse 9| "the mystery of the faith," and strkjv@2:2| for \eusebeia\. Here the phrase explains "a pillar and stay of the truth" (verse 15|). See in particular Co strkjv@1:27|. "The revealed secret of true religion, the mystery of Christianity, the Person of Christ" (Lock). {He who} (\hos\). The correct text, not \theos\ (God) the reading of the Textus Receptus (Syrian text) nor \ho\ (neuter relative, agreeing with \mustrion\) the reading of the Western documents. Westcott and Hort print this relative clause as a fragment of a Christian hymn (like strkjv@Ephesians:5:14|) in six strophes. That is probably correct. At any rate \hos\ (who) is correct and there is asyndeton (no connective) in the verbs. Christ, to whom \hos\ refers, is the mystery (Colossians:1:27; strkjv@2:2|). {Was manifested} (\ephanerth\). First aorist passive indicative of \phanero\, to manifest. Here used to describe the incarnation (\en sarki\) of Christ (an answer also to the Docetic Gnostics). The verb is used by Paul elsewhere of the incarnation (Romans:16:26; strkjv@Colossians:1:26|) as well as of the second coming (Colossians:3:4|). {Justified in the spirit} (\edikaith en pneumati\). First aorist passive indicative of \dikaio\, to declare righteous, to vindicate. Christ was vindicated in his own spirit (Hebrews:9:14|) before men by overcoming death and rising from the dead (Romans:1:3f.|). {Seen of angels} (\phth aggelois\). First aorist passive indicative of \hora\, to see, with either the instrumental or the dative case of angels (\aggelois\). The words were probably suggested by the appearance of Jesus (\phth\, the usual form for the resurrection appearances of Christ) of the angels at the tomb and at the ascension of Christ. See strkjv@Phillipians:2:10; strkjv@1Peter:3:22| for the appearance of Jesus to the angels in heaven at the ascension. Some would take "angels" here to be "messengers" (the women). {Preached among the nations} (\ekruchth en ethnesin\). First aorist passive indicative of \kruss\, to proclaim. The word \ethnos\ may mean "all creation" (Colossians:1:23|) and not just Gentiles as distinct from Jews. Paul had done more of this heralding of Christ among the Gentiles than any one else. It was his glory (Ephesians:3:1,8|). Cf. strkjv@2:7|. {Believed on in the world} (\episteuth en kosmi\). First aorist indicative passive again of \pisteu\, to believe (2Thessalonians:1:10|). Cf. strkjv@1:15; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:19|. {Received up in glory} (\anelmphth en doxi\). First aorist passive again (six verbs in the same voice and tense in succession, a rhythmic arrangement like a hymn). Cf. strkjv@Romans:8:29f|. This time the verb is \analamban\, the verb used of the ascension (Acts:1:11,22|, which see). In a wonderful way this stanza of a hymn presents the outline of the life of Christ.

rwp@Acts:4:20 @{For we cannot but speak} (\ou dunametha gar hmeis--m lalein\). Both negatives hold here, "For we (note emphatic \hmeis\) are not able not to speak" (what we saw and heard). This is defiance of the civil and ecclesiastical authorities that was justified, for the temple authorities stepped in between the conscience and God. Peter and John were willing to pay the price of this defiance with their lives. This is the courage of martyrs through all the ages.

rwp@Acts:13:39 @{And by him every one that believeth is justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses} (\kai apo pantn hn ouk dunthte en nomi Muses dikaiothnai en touti ps ho pisteun dikaioutai\). This is a characteristic Greek sentence with the principal clause at the end and Pauline to the core. A literal rendering as to the order would be: "And from all the things from (\apo\ not repeated in the Greek, but understood, the ablative case being repeated) which ye were not able to be justified in this one every one who believes is justified." The climax is at the close and gives us the heart of Paul's teaching about Christ. "We have here the germ of all that is most characteristic in Paul's later teaching. It is the argument of the Epistle to Galatians and Romans in a sentence" (Furneaux). The failure of the Mosaic law to bring the kind of righteousness that God demands is stated. This is made possible in and by (\en\) Christ alone. Paul's favourite words occur here, \pisteu\, believe, with which \pistis\, faith, is allied, \dikaio\, to set right with God on the basis of faith. In strkjv@Romans:6:7| Paul uses \apo\ also after \dikaio\. These are key words (\pisteu\ and \dikaio\) in Paul's theology and call for prolonged and careful study if one is to grasp the Pauline teaching. \Dikaio\ primarily means to make righteous, to declare righteous like \axio\, to deem worthy (\axios\). But in the end Paul holds that real righteousness will come (Romans:6-8|) to those whom God treats as righteous (Romans:3-5|) though both Gentile and Jew fall short without Christ (Romans:1-3|). This is the doctrine of grace that will prove a stumbling block to the Jews with their ceremonial works and foolishness to the Greeks with their abstract philosophical ethics (1Corinthians:1:23-25|). It is a new and strange doctrine to the people of Antioch.

rwp@Acts:20:30 @{From among your own selves} (\ex humn autn\). In sheep's clothing just as Jesus had foretold. The outcome fully justified Paul's apprehensions as we see in Colossians, Ephesians, I and II Timothy, Revelation. False philosophy, immorality, asceticism will lead some astray (Colossians:2:8,18; strkjv@Ephesians:4:14; strkjv@5:6|). John will picture "antichrists" who went out from us because they were not of us (1John:2:18f.|). There is a false optimism that is complacently blind as well as a despondent pessimism that gives up the fight. {Perverse things} (\diestrammena\). Perfect passive participle of \diastreph\, old verb to turn aside, twist, distort as in strkjv@Acts:13:8,10|. {To draw away} (\tou apospin\). Articular genitive present active participle of purpose from \apospa\, old verb used to draw the sword (Matthew:26:51|), to separate (Luke:22:41; strkjv@Acts:21:1|). The pity of it is that such leaders of dissension can always gain a certain following. Paul's long residence in Ephesus enabled him to judge clearly of conditions there.

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@Galatians:2:16 @{Is not justified} (\ou dikaioutai\). Present passive indicative of \dikaio\, an old causative verb from \dikaios\, righteous (from \dike\, right), to make righteous, to declare righteous. It is made like \axio\, to deem worthy, and \koino\, to consider common. It is one of the great Pauline words along with \dikaiosun\, righteousness. The two ways of getting right with God are here set forth: by faith in Christ Jesus (objective genitive), by the works of the law (by keeping all the law in the most minute fashion, the way of the Pharisees). Paul knew them both (see strkjv@Romans:7|). In his first recorded sermon the same contrast is made that we have here (Acts:13:39|) with the same word \dikaio\, employed. It is the heart of his message in all his Epistles. The terms faith (\pistis\), righteousness (\dikaiosun\), law (\nomos\), works (\erga\) occur more frequently in Galatians and Romans because Paul is dealing directly with the problem in opposition to the Judaizers who contended that Gentiles had to become Jews to be saved. The whole issue is here in an acute form. {Save} (\ean m\). Except. {Even we} (\kai hmeis\). We Jews believed, had to believe, were not saved or justified till we did believe. This very point Peter had made at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:10f.|). He quotes strkjv@Psalms:143:2|. Paul uses \dikaiosun\ in two senses (1) Justification, on the basis of what Christ has done and obtained by faith. Thus we are set right with God. strkjv@Romans:1-5|. (2) Sanctification. Actual goodness as the result of living with and for Christ. strkjv@Romans:6-8|. The same plan exists for Jew and Gentile.

rwp@Galatians:3:24 @{Our tutor unto Christ} (\paidaggos humn eis Christon\). See strkjv@1Corinthians:4:15| for the only other N.T. example of this old and common word for the slave employed in Greek and Roman families of the better class in charge of the boy from about six to sixteen. The paedagogue watched his behaviour at home and attended him when he went away from home as to school. Christ is our Schoolmaster and the law as paedagogue kept watch over us till we came to Christ. {That we might be justified by faith} (\hina ek pistes dikaithmen\). This is the ultimate purpose of the law as paedagogue. {Now that faith is come} (\elthouss ts pistes\). Genitive absolute, "the faith (the time of the faith spoken of in verse 23|) having come." {Under a tutor} (\hupo paidaggon\). The pedagogue is dismissed. We are in the school of the Master.

rwp@Galatians:3:27 @{Were baptized into Christ} (\eis Christon ebaptisthte\). First aorist passive indicative of \baptiz\. Better, "were baptized unto Christ" in reference to Christ. {Did put on Christ} (\Christon enedusasthe\). First aorist middle indicative of \endu\ (\-n\). As a badge or uniform of service like that of the soldier. This verb is common in the sense of putting on garments (literally and metaphorically as here). See further in Paul (Romans:13:14; strkjv@Colossians:3:9f.; strkjv@Ephesians:4:22-24; strkjv@6:11,14|). In strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:8| Paul speaks of "putting on the breastplate of righteousness." He does not here mean that one enters into Christ and so is saved by means of baptism after the teaching of the mystery religions, but just the opposite. We are justified by faith in Christ, not by circumcision or by baptism. But baptism was the public profession and pledge, the soldier's _sacramentum_, oath of fealty to Christ, taking one's stand with Christ, the symbolic picture of the change wrought by faith already (Romans:6:4-6|).

rwp@Galatians:5:4 @{Ye are severed from Christ} (\katrgthte apo Christou\). First aorist passive of \katarge\, to make null and void as in strkjv@Romans:7:2,6|. {Who would be justified by the law} (\hoitines en nomi dikaiousthe\). Present passive conative indicative, "ye who are trying to be justified in the law." {Ye are fallen away from grace} (\ts charitos exepesate\). Second aorist active indicative of \ekpipt\ (with \a\ variable vowel of the first aorist) and followed by the ablative case. "Ye did fall out of grace," "ye left the sphere of grace in Christ and took your stand in the sphere of law" as your hope of salvation. Paul does not mince words and carries the logic to the end of the course. He is not, of course, speaking of occasional sins, but he has in mind a far more serious matter, that of substituting law for Christ as the agent in salvation.

rwp@James:2:21 @{Justified by works} (\ex ergn edikaith\). First aorist passive indicative of \dikaio\ (see Galatians and Romans for this verb, to declare righteous, to set right) in a question with \ouk\ expecting an affirmative answer. This is the phrase that is often held to be flatly opposed to Paul's statement in strkjv@Romans:4:1-5|, where Paul pointedly says that it was the faith of Abraham (Romans:4:9|) that was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness, not his works. But Paul is talking about the faith of Abraham before his circumcision (4:10|) as the basis of his being set right with God, which faith is symbolized in the circumcision. James makes plain his meaning also. {In that he offered up Isaac his son upon the altar} (\anenegkas Isaak ton huion autou epi to thusiastrion\). They use the same words, but they are talking of different acts. James points to the offering (\anenegkas\ second aorist--with first aorist ending--active participle of \anapher\) of Isaac on the altar (Genesis:22:16f.|) as _proof_ of the faith that Abraham already had. Paul discusses Abraham's faith as the basis of his justification, that and not his circumcision. There is no contradiction at all between James and Paul. Neither is answering the other. Paul may or may not have seen the Epistle of James, who stood by him loyally in the Conference in Jerusalem (Acts:15; strkjv@Galatians:2|).

rwp@James:2:24 @{Ye see} (\horte\). Present indicative active of \hora\. Now he uses the plural again as in strkjv@2:14|. {Is justified} (\dikaioutai\). Present passive indicative of \dikaio\, here not "is made righteous," but "is shown to be righteous." James is discussing the proof of faith, not the initial act of being set right with God (Paul's idea in strkjv@Romans:4:1-10|). {And not only by faith} (\kai ouk ek pistes monon\). This phrase clears up the meaning of James. Faith (live faith) is what we must all have (2:18|), only it must shew itself also in deeds as Abraham's did.

rwp@John:13:35 @{By this} (\en touti\). Locative case with \en\, "In this way," viz., "if ye have love" (\ean agapn echte\), condition of third class (in apposition with \en touti\) with \ean\ and present active subjunctive of \ech\ ("keep on having love"). See strkjv@17:23| where Jesus prays for mutual love among the disciples "that the world may know" that the Father sent him. Jerome (_ad Galat_. vi. 10) says that in his extreme old age John repeated often this command of Jesus and justified it: "Because it is the Lord's commandment; and if it be fulfilled it is enough." See also strkjv@14:31|. Tertullian (_Apol_. 39) urges it also as proof of being disciples. Hatred of one another _per contra_, is an argument that we are \not\ disciples (learners) of Jesus.

rwp@John:19:26 @{His mother} (\tn mtera\). Common Greek idiom, the article as possessive. {Standing by} (\parestta\). Perfect active (intransitive) participle of \paristmi\, vivid and picturesque scene. The dying Saviour thinks of the comfort of his mother. {Whom he loved} (\hon gapa\). Imperfect active. Surely John is justified in inserting this phrase here. If John were his cousin, that helps explain why Jesus turns the care of his mother over to him. But the brothers of Jesus are not present and disbelieved his claims. John is the only one of the apostles with courage enough to take his stand with the women by the Cross. There is no disrespect in the use of "Woman" (\Gunai\) here as there was not in strkjv@2:4|. This trust is to John, though Salome, John's own mother, was standing there.

rwp@Info_Luke @ THE CHARACTER OF THE BOOK Literary charm is here beyond dispute. It is a book that only a man with genuine culture and literary genius could write. It has all the simple grace of Mark and Matthew plus an indefinable quality not in these wonderful books. There is a delicate finish of detail and proportion of parts that give the balance and poise that come only from full knowledge of the subject, the chief element in a good style according to Dr. James Stalker. This scientific physician, this man of the schools, this converted Gentile, this devoted friend of Paul, comes to the study of the life of Christ with a trained intellect, with an historian's method of research, with a physician's care in diagnosis and discrimination, with a charm of style all his own, with reverence for and loyalty to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. One could not afford to give up either of the Four Gospels. They each supplement the other in a wonderful way. John's Gospel is the greatest book in all the world, reaching the highest heights of all. But if we had only Luke's Gospel, we should have an adequate portrait of Jesus Christ as Son of God and Son of Man. If Mark's is the Gospel for the Romans and Matthew's for the Jews, the Gospel of Luke is for the Gentile world. He shows the sympathy of Jesus for the poor and the outcast. Luke understands women and children and so is the universal Gospel of mankind in all phases and conditions. It is often called the Gospel of womanhood, of infancy, of prayer, of praise. We have in Luke the first Christian hymns. With Luke we catch some glimpses of the child Jesus for which we are grateful. Luke was a friend and follower of Paul, and verbal parallels with Paul's Epistles do occur, but there is no Pauline propaganda in the Gospel as Moffatt clearly shows (_Intr. to Lit. of the N.T._, p. 281). The Prologue is in literary _Koin_ and deserves comparison with those in any Greek and Latin writers. His style is versatile and is often coloured by his source. He was a great reader of the Septuagint as is shown by occasional Hebraisms evidently due to reading that translation Greek. He has graciousness and a sense of humour as McLachlan and Ragg show. Every really great man has a saving sense of humour as Jesus himself had. Ramsay dares to call Luke, as shown by the Gospel and Acts, the greatest of all historians not even excepting Thucydides. Ramsay has done much to restore Luke to his rightful place in the estimation of modern scholars. Some German critics used to cite strkjv@Luke:2:1-7| as a passage containing more historical blunders than any similar passage in any historian. The story of how papyri and inscriptions have fully justified Luke in every statement here made is carefully worked out by Ramsay in his various books, especially in _The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament_. The main feature of this proof appears also in my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_. Songs:many items, where Luke once stood alone, have been confirmed by recent discoveries that the burden of proof now rests on those who challenge Luke in those cases where he still stands alone.

rwp@Luke:7:29 @{Justified God} (\edikaisan ton theon\). They considered God just or righteous in making these demands of them. Even the publicans did. They submitted to the baptism of John (\baptisthentes to baptisma tou Ianou\. First aorist passive participle with the cognate accusative retained in the passive. Some writers consider verses 29,30| a comment of Luke in the midst of the eulogy of John by Jesus. This would be a remarkable thing for so long a comment to be interjected. It is perfectly proper as the saying of Jesus.

rwp@Luke:10:22 @{Knoweth who the Son is} (\ginskei tis estin ho huios\). Knows by experience, \ginskei\. Here strkjv@Matthew:11:27| has \epiginskei\ (fully knows) and simply \ton huion\ (the Son) instead of the "who" (\tis\) clause. Songs:also in "who the Father is" (\tis estin ho pater\). But the same use and contrast of "the Father," "the Son." in both Matthew and Luke, "an aerolite from the Johannean heaven" (Hase). No sane criticism can get rid of this Johannine bit in these Gospels written long before the Fourth Gospel was composed. We are dealing here with the oldest known document about Christ (the Logia) and the picture is that drawn in the Fourth Gospel (see my _The Christ of the Logia_). It is idle to try to whittle away by fantastic exegesis the high claims made by Jesus in this passage. It is an ecstatic prayer in the presence of the Seventy under the rapture of the Holy Spirit on terms of perfect equality and understanding between the Father and the Son in the tone of the priestly prayer in strkjv@John:17|. We are justified in saying that this prayer of supreme Fellowship with the Father in contemplation of final victory over Satan gives us a glimpse of the prayers with the Father when the Son spent whole nights on the mountain alone with the Father. Here is the Messianic consciousness in complete control and with perfect confidence in the outcome. Here as in strkjv@Matthew:11:27| by the use of {willeth to reveal him} (\boultai apokalupsai\). The Son claims the power to reveal the Father "to whomsoever he wills" (\hi an boultai\, indefinite relative and present subjunctive of \boulomai\, to will, not the future indicative). This is divine sovereignty most assuredly. Human free agency is also true, but it is full divine sovereignty in salvation that is here claimed along with possession (\paredoth\, timeless aorist passive indicative) of all power from the Father. Let that supreme claim stand.

rwp@Luke:22:19 @{Which is given for you} (\to huper humn didomenon\). Some MSS. omit these verses though probably genuine. The correct text in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:24| has "which is for you," not "which is broken for you." It is curious to find the word "broken" here preserved and justified so often, even by Easton in his commentary on Luke, p. 320. {In remembrance of me} (\eis tn emn anamnsin\). Objective use of the possessive pronoun \emn\, not the subjective. {This do} (\touto poieite\). Present active indicative, repetition, keep on doing this.

rwp@Mark:2:7 @{He blasphemeth} (\blasphmei\). This is the unspoken charge in their hearts which Jesus read like an open book. The correct text here has this verb. They justify the charge with the conviction that God alone has the power (\dunatai\) to forgive sins. The word \blasphme\ means injurious speech or slander. It was, they held, blasphemy for Jesus to assume this divine prerogative. Their logic was correct. The only flaw in it was the possibility that Jesus held a peculiar relation to God which justified his claim. Songs:the two forces clash here as now on the deity of Christ Jesus. Knowing full well that he had exercised the prerogative of God in forgiving the man's sins he proceeds to justify his claim by healing the man.

rwp@Mark:6:6 @{And he marvelled because of their unbelief} (\kai ethaumasen dia tn apistian autn\). Aorist tense, but Westcott and Hort put the imperfect in the margin. Jesus had divine knowledge and accurate insight into the human heart, but he had human limitations in certain things that are not clear to us. He marvelled at the faith of the Roman centurion where one would not expect faith (Matthew:8:10; strkjv@Luke:7:9|). Here he marvels at the lack of faith where he had a right to expect it, not merely among the Jews, but in his own home town, among his kinspeople, even in his own home. One may excuse Mary, the mother of Jesus, from this unbelief, puzzled, as she probably was, by his recent conduct (Mark:3:21,31|). There is no proof that she ever lost faith in her wonderful Son. {He went round about the villages teaching} (\perigen ts kmas kukli didaskn\). A good illustration of the frequent poor verse division. An entirely new paragraph begins with these words, the third tour of Galilee. They should certainly be placed with verse 7|. The Revised Version would be justified if it had done nothing else than give us paragraphs according to the sense and connection. "Jesus resumes the role of a wandering preacher in Galilee" (Bruce). Imperfect tense, \perigen\.

rwp@Mark:7:11 @{Corban} (\korban ho estin dron\). See on ¯Matthew:15:5|. Mark preserves the Hebrew word for a gift or offering to God (Exodus:21:17; strkjv@Leviticus:20:9|), indeclinable here, meaning {gift} (\dron\), but declinable \korbanas\ in strkjv@Matthew:27:6|, meaning sacred treasury. The rabbis ({but ye say}, \humeis de legete\) actually allowed the mere saying of this word by an unfaithful son to prevent the use of needed money for the support of father or mother. It was a home thrust to these pettifogging sticklers for ceremonial punctilios. They not only justified such a son's trickery, but held that he was prohibited from using it for father or mother, but he might use it for himself.

rwp@Mark:7:19 @{Making all meats clean} (\katharizn panta ta brmata\). This anacoluthon can be understood by repeating {he says} (\legei\) from verse 18|. The masculine participle agrees with Jesus, the speaker. The words do not come from Jesus, but are added by Mark. Peter reports this item to Mark, probably with a vivid recollection of his own experience on the housetop in Joppa when in the vision Peter declined three times the Lord's invitation to kill and eat unclean animals (Acts:10:14-16|). It was a riddle to Peter as late as that day. "Christ asserts that _Levitical_ uncleanness, such as eating with unwashed hands, is of small importance compared with _moral_ uncleanness" (Vincent). The two chief words in both incidents, here and in Acts, are {defile} (\koino\) and {cleanse} (\kathariz\). "What God cleansed do not thou treat as defiled" (Acts:10:15|). It was a revolutionary declaration by Jesus and Peter was slow to understand it even after the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. Jesus was amply justified in his astonished question: {Perceive ye not?} (\ou noeite;\). They were making little use of their intelligence in trying to comprehend the efforts of Jesus to give them a new and true spiritual insight.

rwp@Matthew:2:16 @{Slew all the male children that were in Bethlehem} (\aneilen pantas tous paidas tous en Bthleem\). The flight of Joseph was justified, for Herod was violently enraged (\ethumth lian\) that he had been mocked by the Magi, deluded in fact (\enepaichth\). Vulgate _illusus esset_. Herod did not know, of course, how old the child was, but he took no chances and included all the little boys (\tous paidas\, masculine article) in Bethlehem two years old and under, perhaps fifteen or twenty. It is no surprise that Josephus makes no note of this small item in Herod's chamber of horrors. It was another fulfilment of the prophecy in strkjv@Jeremiah:31:15|. The quotation (2:18|) seems to be from the Septuagint. It was originally written of the Babylonian captivity but it has a striking illustration in this case also. Macrobius (_Sat_. II. iv. II) notes that Augustus said that it was better to be Herod's sow (\hus\) than his son (\huios\), for the sow had a better chance of life.

rwp@Matthew:8:29 @{Thou Son of God} (\huie tou theou\). The recognition of Jesus by the demons is surprising. The whole subject of demonology is difficult. Some hold that it is merely the ancient way of describing disease. But that does not explain the situation here. Jesus is represented as treating the demons as real existences separate from the human personality. Missionaries in China today claim that they have seen demons cast out. The devil knew Jesus clearly and it is not strange that Jesus was recognized by the devil's agents. They know that there is nothing in common between them and the Son of God (\hmin kai soi\, ethical dative) and they fear torment "before the time" (\pro kairou\). Usually \ta daimonia\ is the word in the New Testament for demons, but in strkjv@8:31| we have \hoi daimones\ (the only example in the N.T.). \Daimonion\ is a diminutive of \daimn\. In Homer \daimn\ is used synonymously with \theos\ and \thea\. Hesiod employed \daimn\ of men of the golden age as tutelary deities. Homer has the adjective \daimonios\ usually in an evil sense. Empedocles considered the demons both bad and good. They were thus used to relieve the gods and goddesses of much rascality. Grote (_History of Greece_) notes that the Christians were thus by pagan usage justified in calling idolatry the worship of demons. See strkjv@1Corinthians:10:20f.; strkjv@1Timothy:4:1; strkjv@Revelation:9:20; strkjv@16:13f|. In the Gospels demons are the same as unclean spirits (Mark:5:12,15; strkjv@3:22,30; strkjv@Luke:4:33|). The demons are disturbers (Vincent) of the whole life of man (Mark:5:2f.; strkjv@7:25; strkjv@Matthew:12:45; strkjv@Luke:13:11,16|).

rwp@Matthew:10:10 @{No wallet} (\m pran\). Better than "scrip." It can be either a travelling or bread bag. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 108f.) shows that it can mean the beggar's collecting bag as in an inscription on a monument at Kefr Hanar in Syria: "While Christianity was still young the beggar priest was making his rounds in the land of Syria on behalf of the national goddess." Deissmann also quotes a pun in the _Didaskalia=Const. Apost_. 3, 6 about some itinerant widows who said that they were not so much \chrai\ (spouseless) as \prai\ (pouchless). He cites also Shakespeare, _Troilus and Cressida_ III. iii. 145: "Time hath, my lord, a wallet at his back, wherein he puts alms for oblivion." {For the labourer is worthy of his food} (\axios gar ho ergats ts trophs autou\). The sermon is worth the dinner, in other words. Luke in the charge to the seventy (Luke:10:7|) has the same words with \misthou\ (reward) instead of \trophs\ (food). In strkjv@1Timothy:5:18| Paul quotes Luke's form as scripture (\h graph\) or as a well-known saying if confined to the first quotation. The word for workman here (\ergats\) is that used by Jesus in the prayer for labourers (Matthew:9:38|). The well-known _Didach_ or _Teaching of the Twelve_ (xiii) shows that in the second century there was still a felt need for care on the subject of receiving pay for preaching. The travelling sophists added also to the embarrassment of the situation. The wisdom of these restrictions was justified in Galilee at this time. Mark (Mark:6:6-13|) and Luke (Luke:9:1-6|) vary slightly from Matthew in some of the details of the instructions of Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:11:19 @{Wisdom is justified by her works} (\edikaith apo tn ergn auts\). A timeless aorist passive (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 836f.). The word "justified" means "set right" Luke (Luke:7:35|) has "by all her children" as some MSS. have here to make Matthew like Luke. These words are difficult, but understandable. God's wisdom has planned the different conduct of both John and Jesus. He does not wish all to be just alike in everything. "This generation" (verse 16|) is childish, not childlike, and full of whimsical inconsistencies in their faultfinding. They exaggerate in each case. John did not have a demon and Jesus was not a glutton or a winebibber. "And, worse than either, for \philos\ is used in a sinister sense and implies that Jesus was the comrade of the worst characters, and like them in conduct. A malicious nickname at first, it is now a name of honour: the sinner's lover" (Bruce). Cf. strkjv@Luke:15:2|. The plan of God is justified by results.

rwp@Matthew:23:13 @{Hypocrites} (\hupokritai\). This terrible word of Jesus appears first from him in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew:6:2,5,16; strkjv@7:5|), then in strkjv@15:7| and strkjv@22:18|. Here it appears "with terrific iteration" (Bruce) save in the third of the seven woes (23:13,15,23,25,27,29|). The verb in the active (\hupokrin\) meant to separate slowly or slightly subject to gradual inquiry. Then the middle was to make answer, to take up a part on the stage, to act a part. It was an easy step to mean to feign, to pretend, to wear a masque, to act the hypocrite, to play a part. This hardest word from the lips of Jesus falls on those who were the religious leaders of the Jews (Scribes and Pharisees), who had justified this thunderbolt of wrath by their conduct toward Jesus and their treatment of things high and holy. The _Textus Receptus has eight woes, adding verse 14| which the Revised Version places in the margin (called verse 13| by Westcott and Hort and rejected on the authority of Aleph B D as a manifest gloss from strkjv@Mark:12:40| and strkjv@Luke:20:47|). The MSS. that insert it put it either before 13 or after 13. Plummer cites these seven woes as another example of Matthew's fondness for the number seven, more fancy than fact for Matthew's Gospel is not the Apocalypse of John. These are all illustrations of Pharisaic saying and not doing (Allen). {Ye shut the kingdom of heaven} (\kleiete tn basileian tn ourann\). In strkjv@Luke:11:52| the lawyers are accused of keeping the door to the house of knowledge locked and with flinging away the keys so as to keep themselves and the people in ignorance. These custodians of the kingdom by their teaching obscured the way to life. It is a tragedy to think how preachers and teachers of the kingdom of God may block the door for those who try to enter in (\tous eiserchomenous\, conative present middle participle). {Against} (\emprosthen\). Literally, before. These door-keepers of the kingdom slam it shut in men's faces and they themselves are on the outside where they will remain. They hide the key to keep others from going in.

rwp@Revelation:13:4 @{They worshipped the dragon} (\prosekunsan ti drakonti\). First aorist active indicative of \proskune\, with dative case \drakonti\ (from \drakn\). They really worshipped Satan (the dragon) when "they worshipped the beast" (\prosekunsan ti thrii\) or any one of the heads (like Caligula, Nero, Domitian) of the beast. The beast is merely the tool of the devil for worship. Recall the fact that the devil even proposed that Jesus worship him. Emperor-worship, like all idolatry, was devil-worship. The same thing is true today about self-worship (humanism or any other form of it). {Who is like unto the beast?} (\tis homoios ti thrii;\). Associative-instrumental case after \homoios\. An echo, perhaps parody, of like language about God in strkjv@Exodus:15:11; strkjv@Psalms:35:10; strkjv@113:5|. "The worship of such a monster as Nero was indeed a travesty of the worship of God" (Swete). {And who is able to war with him?} (\kai tis dunatai polemsai met' autou;\). Worship of the devil and the devil's agent is justified purely on the ground of brute force. It is the doctrine of Nietzsche that might makes right.

rwp@Romans:2:13 @{Not the hearers--but the doers} (\ou gar hoi akroatai--all' hoi poitai\). The law was read in the synagogue, but there was no actual virtue in listening. The virtue is in doing. See a like contrast by James between "hearers" and "doers" of the gospel (James:1:22-25|). {Before God} (\para ti thei\). By God's side, as God looks at it. {Shall be justified} (\dikaithsontai\). Future passive indicative of \dikaio\, to declare righteous, to set right. "Shall be declared righteous." Like strkjv@James:1:22-25|.

rwp@Romans:3:4 @{Let God be found true} (\ginesth ho theos alths\). "Let God continue to be true" (present middle imperative). {But every man a liar} (\ps de anthrpos pseusts\). The contrast in \de\ really means, "though every man be found a liar." Cf. strkjv@Psalms:116:12|. {As it is written} (\kaths gegraptai\). strkjv@Psalms:51:6|. {That thou mightest be justified} (\hops an dikaithis\). \Hops\ rather than the common \hina\ for purpose and \an\ with the first aorist passive subjunctive of \dikaio\. Used of God this verb here has to mean "declared righteous," not "made righteous." {Mightest prevail} (\nikseis\). Future active indicative with \hops\ of \nika\, to win a victory, though B L have \niksis\ (first aorist active subjunctive, the usual construction). {When thou comest into judgement} (\en ti krinesthai se\). "In the being judged as to thee" (present passive infinitive or, if taken as middle, "in the entering upon trial as to thee"). Common construction in the LXX from the Hebrew infinitive construct.

rwp@Romans:3:24 @{Being justified} (\dikaioumenoi\). Present passive participle of \dikaio\, to set right, repeated action in each case, each being set right. {Freely} (\drean\). As in strkjv@Galatians:2:21|. {By his grace} (\ti autou chariti\). Instrumental case of this wonderful word \charis\ which so richly expresses Paul's idea of salvation as God's free gift. {Through the redemption} (\dia ts apolutrses\). A releasing by ransom (\apo, lutrsis\ from \lutro\ and that from \lutron\, ransom). God did not set men right out of hand with nothing done about men's sins. We have the words of Jesus that he came to give his life a ransom (\lutron\) for many (Mark:10:45; strkjv@Matthew:20:28|). \Lutron\ is common in the papyri as the purchase-money in freeing slaves (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 327f.). {That is in Christ Jesus} (\ti en Christi Isou\). There can be no mistake about this redemption. It is like strkjv@John:3:16|.

rwp@Romans:4:2 @{The Scripture} (\h graph\). strkjv@Genesis:15:6|. {Was justified by works} (\ex ergn edikaith\). Condition of first class, assumed as true for the sake of argument, though untrue in fact. The rabbis had a doctrine of the merits of Abraham who had a superfluity of credits to pass on to the Jews (Luke:3:8|). {But not towards God} (\all' ou pros theon\). Abraham deserved all the respect from men that came to him, but his relation to God was a different matter. He had _there_ no ground of boasting at all.

rwp@Romans:5:1 @{Being therefore justified by faith} (\dikaithentes oun ek pistes\). First aorist passive participle of \dikaio\, to set right and expressing antecedent action to the verb \echmen\. The \oun\ refers to the preceding conclusive argument (chapters 1 to 4) that this is done by faith. {Let us have peace with God} (\eirnn echmen pros ton theon\). This is the correct text beyond a doubt, the present active subjunctive, not \echomen\ (present active indicative) of the Textus Receptus which even the American Standard Bible accepts. It is curious how perverse many real scholars have been on this word and phrase here. Godet, for instance. Vincent says that "it is difficult if not impossible to explain it." One has only to observe the force of the _tense_ to see Paul's meaning clearly. The mode is the volitive subjunctive and the present tense expresses linear action and so does not mean "make peace" as the ingressive aorist subjunctive \eirnn schmen\ would mean. A good example of \schmen\ occurs in strkjv@Matthew:21:38| (\schmen tn klronomian autou\) where it means: "Let us get hold of his inheritance." Here \eirnn echmen\ can only mean: "Let us enjoy peace with God" or "Let us retain peace with God." We have in strkjv@Acts:9:31| \eichen eirnn\ (imperfect and so linear), the church "enjoyed peace," not "made peace." The preceding justification (\dikaithentes\) "made peace with God." Observe \pros\ (face to face) with \ton theon\ and \dia\ (intermediate agent) with \tou kuriou\.

rwp@Romans:6:7 @{Is justified} (\dedikaitai\). Perfect passive indicative of \dikaio\, stands justified, set free from, adding this great word to death and life of verses 1,2|.

rwp@Romans:8:30 @{Called} (\ekalesen\) {--Justified} (\edikaisen\) {--Glorified} (\edoxasen\). All first aorist active indicatives of common verbs (\kale, dikaio, doxaz\). But the glorification is stated as already consummated (constative aorists, all of them), though still in the future in the fullest sense. "The step implied in \edoxasen\ is both complete and certain in the Divine counsels" (Sanday and Headlam).

rwp@Titus:3:7 @{Being justified by his grace} (\dikaithentes ti ekeinou chariti\). First aorist passive participle of \dikaio\ and instrumental case of \charis\ as in strkjv@Romans:3:24; strkjv@5:1|. {That we might be made heirs} (\hina klronomoi genthmen\). Purpose with \hina\ and first aorist passive of \ginomai\. See strkjv@Romans:4:13; strkjv@8:17|.