Bible:
Filter: String:

NT-EPISTLES.filter - rwp John:12:4:

rwp@1Timothy:1:15 @{Faithful is the saying} (\pistos ho logos\). Five times in the Pastorals (1Timothy:1:15; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@4:9; strkjv@Titus:3:8; strkjv@2Timothy:2:11|). It will pay to note carefully \pistis, pisteu, pistos\. Same use of \pistos\ (trustworthy) applied to \logos\ in strkjv@Titus:1:9; strkjv@Revelation:21:5; strkjv@22:6|. Here and probably in strkjv@2Timothy:2:11| a definite saying seems to be referred to, possibly a quotation (\hoti\) of a current saying quite like the Johannine type of teaching. This very phrase (Christ coming into the world) occurs in strkjv@John:9:37; strkjv@11:27; strkjv@16:28; strkjv@18:37|. Paul, of course, had no access to the Johannine writings, but such "sayings" were current among the disciples. There is no formal quotation, but "the whole phrase implies a knowledge of Synoptic and Johannine language" (Lock) as in strkjv@Luke:5:32; strkjv@John:12:47|. {Acceptation} (\apodochs\). Genitive case with \axios\ (worthy of). Late word (Polybius, Diod., Jos.) in N.T. only here and strkjv@4:9|. {Chief} (\prtos\). Not \n\ (I was), but \eimi\ (I am). "It is not easy to think of any one but St. Paul as penning these words" (White). In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:9| he had called himself "the least of the apostles" (\elachistos tn apostoln\). In strkjv@Ephesians:3:8| he refers to himself as "the less than the least of all saints" (\ti elachistoteri pantn hagin\). On occasion Paul would defend himself as on a par with the twelve apostles (Galatians:2:6-10|) and superior to the Judaizers (2Corinthians:11:5f.; strkjv@12:11|). It is not mock humility here, but sincere appreciation of the sins of his life (cf. strkjv@Romans:7:24|) as a persecutor of the church of God (Galatians:1:13|), of men and even women (Acts:22:4f.; strkjv@26:11|). He had sad memories of those days.

rwp@Acts:28:26 @{Say} (\eipon\). Second aorist active imperative instead of the old form \eipe\. The quotation is from strkjv@Isaiah:6:9,10|. This very passage is quoted by Jesus (Matthew:13:14,15; strkjv@Mark:4:12; strkjv@Luke:8:10|) in explanation of his use of parables and in strkjv@John:12:40| the very point made by Paul here, "the disbelief of the Jews in Jesus" (Page). See on Matthew for discussion of the language used. Here the first time ("go to this people and say") does not occur in Matthew. It is a solemn dirge of the doom of the Jews for their rejection of the Messiah foreseen so long ago by Isaiah.

rwp@Hebrews:1:3 @{Being} (\n\). Absolute and timeless existence (present active participle of \eimi\) in contrast with \genomenos\ in verse 4| like \n\ in strkjv@John:1:1| (in contrast with \egeneto\ in strkjv@1:14|) and like \huparchn\ and \genomenos\ in strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f|. {The effulgence of his glory} (\apaugasma ts doxs\). The word \apaugasma\, late substantive from \apaugaz\, to emit brightness (\aug, augaz\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4|), here only in the N.T., but in Wisdom strkjv@7:26 and in Philo. It can mean either reflected brightness, refulgence (Calvin, Thayer) or effulgence (ray from an original light body) as the Greek fathers hold. Both senses are true of Christ in his relation to God as Jesus shows in plain language in strkjv@John:12:45; strkjv@14:9|. "The writer is using metaphors which had already been applied to Wisdom and the Logos" (Moffatt). The meaning "effulgence" suits the context better, though it gives the idea of eternal generation of the Son (John:1:1|), the term Father applied to God necessarily involving Son. See this same metaphor in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:6|. {The very image of his substance} (\charaktr ts hupostases\). \Charaktr\ is an old word from \charass\, to cut, to scratch, to mark. It first was the agent (note ending \=tr\) or tool that did the marking, then the mark or impress made, the exact reproduction, a meaning clearly expressed by \charagma\ (Acts:17:29; strkjv@Revelation:13:16f.|). Menander had already used (Moffatt) \charaktr\ in the sense of our "character." The word occurs in the inscriptions for "person" as well as for "exact reproduction" of a person. The word \hupostasis\ for the being or essence of God "is a philosophical rather than a religious term" (Moffatt). Etymologically it is the sediment or foundation under a building (for instance). In strkjv@11:1| \hypostasis\ is like the "title-deed" idea found in the papyri. Athanasius rightly used strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4| in his controversy with Arius. Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11| pictures the real and eternal deity of Christ free from the philosophical language here employed. But even Paul's simpler phrase \morph theou\ (the form of God) has difficulties of its own. The use of \Logos\ in strkjv@John:1:1-18| is parallel to strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4|. {And upholding} (\phern te\). Present active participle of \pher\ closely connected with \n\ (being) by \te\ and like strkjv@Colossians:1:17| in idea. The newer science as expounded by Eddington and Jeans is in harmony with the spiritual and personal conception of creation here presented. {By the word of his power} (\ti rmati ts dunames autou\). Instrumental case of \rma\ (word). See strkjv@11:3| for \rmati theou\ (by the word of God) as the explanation of creation like Genesis, but here \autou\ refers to God's Son as in strkjv@1:2|. {Purification of sins} (\katharismon tn hamartin\). \Katharismos\ is from \kathariz\, to cleanse (Matthew:8:3; strkjv@Hebrews:9:14|), here only in Hebrews, but in same sense of cleansing from sins, strkjv@2Peter:1:9; strkjv@Job:7:21|. Note middle participle \poisamenos\ like \heuramenos\ in strkjv@9:12|. This is the first mention of the priestly work of Christ, the keynote of this Epistle. {Sat down} (\ekathisen\). First aorist active of \kathiz\, "took his seat," a formal and dignified act. {Of the Majesty on high} (\ts megalosuns en hupslois\). Late word from \megas\, only in LXX (Deuteronomy:32:3; strkjv@2Samuel:7:23|, etc.), Aristeas, strkjv@Hebrews:1:3; strkjv@8:1; strkjv@Jude:1:25|. Christ resumed his original dignity and glory (John:17:5|). The phrase \en hupslois\ occurs in the Psalms (Psalms:93:4|), here only in N.T., elsewhere \en hupsistois\ in the highest (Matthew:21:9; strkjv@Luke:2:14|) or \en tois epouraniois\ in the heavenlies (Ephesians:1:3,20|). Jesus is here pictured as King (Prophet and Priest also) Messiah seated at the right hand of God.

rwp@Info_John @ THE SAME STYLE IN THE DISCOURSES It is further objected that there is no difference in style between the discourses of Jesus in John's Gospel and his own narrative style. There is an element of truth in this criticism. There are passages where it is not easy to tell where discourse ends and narrative begins. See, for instance, strkjv@John:3:16-21|. Does the discourse of Jesus end with verse 15,16, or 21? Songs:in strkjv@John:12:44-50|. Does John give here a resume of Christ's teaching or a separate discourse? It is true also that John preserves in a vivid way the conversational style of Christ as in chapters 4,6,7,8,9. In the Synoptic Gospels this element is not so striking, but we do not have to say that John has done as Shakespeare did with his characters. Each Gospel to a certain extent has the colouring of the author in reporting the words of Jesus. An element of this is inevitable unless men are mere automata, phonographs, or radios. But each Gospel preserves an accurate and vivid picture of Christ. We need all four pictures including that of John's Gospel for the whole view of Christ.

rwp@John:5:44 @{How can ye believe?} (\ps dunasthe humeis pisteusai;\). Emphasis on "ye" (\humeis\), ye being what ye are. They were not true Jews (Romans:2:29; strkjv@Esther:9:28|) who cared for the glory of God, but they prefer the praise of men (Matthew:6:1f.; strkjv@23:5|) like the Pharisees who feared to confess Christ (John:12:43|). {From the only God} (\para tou monou theou\). B and W omit \theou\ which is certainly meant even if not genuine here. See strkjv@17:3; strkjv@Romans:16:27; strkjv@1Timothy:6:15f|.

rwp@John:12:4 @{Judas Iscariot} (\Ioudas ho Iskarits\). See \ho Iskarits\ in strkjv@14:22|. See strkjv@6:71; strkjv@13:1| for like description of Judas save that in strkjv@6:71| the father's name is given in the genitive, \Simnos\ and \Iskaritou\ (agreeing with the father), but in strkjv@13:1| \Iskarits\ agrees with \Ioudas\, not with \Simnos\. Clearly then both father and son were called "Iscariot" or man of Kerioth in the tribe of Judah (Joshua:15:25|). Judas is the only one of the twelve not a Galilean. {One of his disciples} (\heis tn mathtn autou\). Likewise in strkjv@6:71|, only there \ek\ is used after \heis\ as some MSS. have here. This is the shameful fact that clung to the name of Judas. {Which should betray him} (\ho melln auton paradidonai\). John does not say in strkjv@6:71| (\emellen paradidonai auton\) or here that Judas "was predestined to betray Jesus" as Bernard suggests. He had his own responsibility for his guilt as Jesus said (Matthew:26:24|). \Mell\ here simply points to the act as future, not as necessary. Note the contrast between Mary and Judas. "Mary in her devotion unconsciously provides for the honour of the dead. Judas in his selfishness unconsciously brings about the death itself" (Westcott).

rwp@John:12:40 @{He hath blinded} (\tetuphlken\). Perfect active indicative of \tuphlo\, old causative verb to make blind (from \tuphlos\, blind), in N.T. only here, strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4; strkjv@1John:2:11|. {He hardened} (\eprsen\). First aorist active indicative of \pro\, a late causative verb (from \pros\, hard skin), seen already in strkjv@Mark:6:52|, etc. This quotation is from strkjv@Isaiah:6:10| and differs from the LXX. {Lest they should see} (\hina m idsin\). Negative purpose clause with \hina m\ instead of \mpote\ (never used by John) of the LXX. Matthew (Matthew:13:15|) has \mpote\ and quotes Jesus as using the passage as do Mark (Mark:4:12|) and Luke (Luke:8:10|). Paul quotes it again (Acts:28:26|) to the Jews in Rome. In each instance the words of Isaiah are interpreted as forecasting the doom of the Jews for rejecting the Messiah. Matthew (Matthew:13:15|) has \sunsin\ where John has \nossin\ (perceive), and both change from the subjunctive to the future (\kai iasomai\), "And I should heal them." John has here \straphsin\ (second aorist passive subjunctive of \streph\) while Matthew reads \epistrepssin\ (first aorist active of \epistreph\).

rwp@John:12:41 @{Because he saw his glory} (\hoti eiden tn doxan autou\). Correct reading here \hoti\ (because), not \hote\ (when). Isaiah with spiritual vision saw the glory of the Messiah and spoke (\elalsen\) of him, John says, whatever modern critics may think or say. Songs:Jesus said that Abraham saw his day (8:56|). Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:11:13|.

rwp@John:12:42 @{Nevertheless even} (\homs mentoi kai\). For the old \homs\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:14:7; strkjv@Galatians:3:15| (only other examples in N.T.), here only with \mentoi\, "but yet," and \kai\, "even." In spite of what has just been said "many (\polloi\) even of the rulers" (recall the lonely shyness of Nicodemus in strkjv@3:1ff.|). These actually "believed on him" (\episteusan eis auton\) in their convictions, a remarkable statement as to the effect that Christ had in Jerusalem as the Sanhedrin plotted his death. Cf. Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea. {But because of the Pharisees} (\alla dia tous Pharisaious\). Like the whispered talk in strkjv@7:13| "because of the fear of the Jews." Once the Pharisees sneeringly asked the officers (7:48|): "Hath any one of the rulers believed on him?" And now "many of the rulers have believed on him." {They did not confess} (\ouch hmologoun\). Negative imperfect in contrast to the punctiliar aorist \episteusan\. "They kept on not confessing." How like the cowardly excuses made today by those under conviction who refuse to step out for Christ. {Lest they should be put out of the synagogue} (\hina m aposunaggoi genntai\). Cf. strkjv@9:22| where this very word occurs in a purpose clause like this. Only once more in the N.T. (16:2|), a Jewish word not in profane authors. This ostracism from the synagogue was dreaded by the Jews and made cowards of these "believing elders." {More than} (\mallon per\). They preferred the glory and praise of men more than the glory and praise of God. How \apropos\ these words are to some suave cowards today.

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:12:46 @{I am come a light} (\Eg phs ellutha\). As in strkjv@3:19; strkjv@9:5; strkjv@8:12; strkjv@12:35|. Final clause (negative) also here (\hina m meini\, first aorist active subjunctive) as in strkjv@12:35|. Light dispels darkness.

rwp@John:12:47 @{If any one} (\ean tis\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and first aorist active subjunctive (\akousi\) of \akou\ and same form (\phulaxi\) of \phulass\ with negative \m\. {But to save the world} (\all' hina ss ton kosmon\). Purpose clause again (cf. \hina krin\, just before) with \hina\ and first aorist active of sz. Exaggerated contrast again, "not so much to judge, but also to save." See strkjv@3:17| for same contrast. And yet Jesus does judge the world inevitably (8:15f.; strkjv@9:39|), but his primary purpose is to save the world (3:16|). See close of the Sermon on the Mount for the same insistence on hearing and keeping (obeying) the words of Jesus (Matthew:7:24,26|) and also strkjv@Luke:11:28|.

rwp@John:12:48 @{Rejecteth} (\athetn\). Present active participle of \athete\, late _Koin_ verb (from \athetos\, \a\ privative, and \tithmi\), to render null and void, only here in John, but see strkjv@Mark:6:26; strkjv@7:9|. {One that judgeth him} (\ton krinonta auton\). Articular present active participle of \krin\. See same idea in strkjv@5:45; strkjv@9:50|. {The same} (\ekeinos\). "That" very word of Christ which one rejects will confront him and accuse him to the Father "at the last day" (\en ti eschati hmerai\, this phrase peculiar to John). There is no escaping it. And yet Jesus himself will bear witness for or against the one whose conduct has already revealed his attitude towards the message of God (Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:8f.|).

rwp@John:12:49 @{He hath given} (\dedken\). Perfect active indicative. Christ has permanent commission. {What I should say and what I should speak} (\ti eip kai ti lals\). Indirect question retaining the deliberative subjunctive (second aorist active \eip\, first aorist active \lals\). Meyer and Westcott take \eip\ to refer to the content and \lals\ more to the varying manner of delivery. Possibly so.

rwp@Luke:22:4 @{Went away} (\apelthn\). Second aorist active participle of \aperchomai\. He went off under the impulse of Satan and after the indignation over the rebuke of Jesus at the feast in Simon's house (John:12:4-6|). {Captains} (\stratgois\). Leaders of the temple guards (Acts:4:1|), the full title, "captains of the temple," occurs in verse 52|. {How he might deliver him unto them} (\to ps autois paradi auton\). The same construction as in verse 2|, the article \to\ with the indirect question and deliberative subjunctive second aorist active (\paradi\).

rwp@Mark:14:5 @{Above three hundred pence} (\epan dnarin triakosin\). Matthew has "for much" while strkjv@John:12:5| has "for three hundred pence." The use of "far above" may be a detail from Peter's memory of Judas' objection whose name in this connection is preserved in strkjv@John:12:4|. {And they murmured against her} (\kai enebrimnto auti\). Imperfect tense of this striking word used of the snorting of horses and seen already in strkjv@Mark:1:43; strkjv@11:38|. It occurs in the LXX in the sense of anger as here (Daniel:11:30|). Judas made the complaint against Mary of Bethany, but all the apostles joined in the chorus of criticism of the wasteful extravagance.