Bible:
Filter: String:

NT-EPISTLES.filter - rwp experiment:

rwp@1John:2:3 @{Hereby} (\en touti\). See this phrase also in strkjv@2:5; strkjv@3:16,19,24; strkjv@4:2,13; strkjv@5:2|. That is explained by the \ean\ clause, "if we keep his commandments " (\ean trmen\, condition of the third class, \ean\ with present active subjunctive, "if we keep on keeping"), the clause itself in apposition with \touti\ (locative case). {Know we that we know him} (\ginoskomen hoti egnkamen auton\). "Know we that we have come to know and still know him," \egnkamen\ the perfect active indicative of \ginsk\. The Gnostics boasted of their superior knowledge of Christ, and John here challenges their boast by an appeal to experimental knowledge of Christ which is shown by keeping his (\autou\, Christ's) commandments, thoroughly Johannine phrase (12 times in the Gospel, 6 in this Epistle, 6 in the Apocalypse).

rwp@1John:2:29 @{If ye know} (\ean eidte\). Third-class condition again with \ean\ and second perfect active subjunctive of \oida\. If ye know by intuitive or absolute knowledge that Christ (because of verse 28|) is righteous, then "ye know" or "know ye" (\ginskete\ either indicative or imperative) by experimental knowledge (so \ginsk\ means in contrast with \oida\). {Is begotten} (\gegenntai\). Perfect passive indicative of \genna\, stands begotten, the second birth (regeneration) of strkjv@John:3:3-8|. {Of him} (\ex autou\). Plainly "of God" in verse 9| and so apparently here in spite of \dikaios\ referring to Christ. Doing righteousness is proof of the new birth.

rwp@1John:4:16 @{We know} (\egnkamen\). Perfect active indicative, "we have come to know and still know" as in strkjv@John:6:9|, only there order is changed (\pepisteukamen\ coming before \egnkamen\). Confession (\homologe\) follows experimental knowledge (\ginsk\) and confident trust (\pisteu\). Believers are the sphere (\en hmin\, in our case) in which the love of God operates (Westcott). See strkjv@John:13:35| for "having love." {God is love} (\ho theos agap estin\). Repeated from verse 8|. Songs:he gathers up the whole argument that one who is abiding in love is abiding in God and shows that God is abiding in him. Thoroughly Johannine style.

rwp@Acts:11:20 @{Spake} (\elaloun\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to speak. For them it was an experiment. {Unto the Greeks also} (\kai pros tous Hellnas\). This is undoubtedly the correct reading in spite of Hellenists (\Hellnistas\) or Grecian Jews in B E H L P. \Hellnas\ is read by A and D and a corrector of Aleph. The presence of "also" or "even" (\kai\) in Aleph A B makes no sense unless "Greeks" is correct. Hellenists or Grecian Jews as Christians were common enough as is seen in strkjv@Acts:2; 6|. Saul also had preached to the Hellenists in Jerusalem (9:29|). Hellenists were merely one kind of Jews in contrast with those who spoke Aramaic (Acts:6|). It is true that the case of Cornelius was first in importance, but it is not clear that it was before the work in Antioch. Probably the report of the work among the Greeks in Antioch reached Jerusalem after Peter's defence in strkjv@11:1-18|. That explains the calm tone about it and also why Barnabas and not Peter was sent to investigate. Peter and John (Acts:8|) had condoned Philip's work in Samaria and Peter was the agent in the work among the Romans in Caesarea. His position was now well-known and his services discounted for this new crisis. These Greeks in Antioch were apparently in part pure heathen and not "God-fearers" like Cornelius. A man of wisdom was called for. These preachers were themselves Hellenists (verse 19|) and open to the lessons from their environment without a vision such as Peter had at Joppa. "It was a departure of startling boldness" (Furneaux) by laymen outside of the circle of official leaders.

rwp@Acts:14:28 @{And they tarried no little time} (\dietribon de chronon ouk oligon\). Imperfect active of \diatrib\, old verb to rub hard, to consume, with accusative of extent of time. It was a happy time of fellowship. The experiment entered upon by the church of Antioch was now a pronounced success. It was at the direct command of the Holy Spirit, but they had prayed for the absent missionaries and rejoiced at their signal success. There is no sign of jealousy on the part of Barnabas when Paul returns as the chief hero of the expedition. A new corner has been turned in the history of Christianity. There is a new centre of Christian activity. What will Jerusalem think of the new developments at Antioch? Paul and Barnabas made no report to Jerusalem.

rwp@James:1:2 @{Count it} (\hgsasthe\). First aorist middle imperative of \hgeomai\, old verb to consider. Do it now and once for all. {All joy} (\psan charan\). "Whole joy," " unmixed joy," as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:29|. Not just "some joy" along with much grief. {When} (\hotan\). "Whenever," indefinite temporal conjunction. {Ye fall into} (\peripeste\). Second aorist active subjunctive (with the indefinite \hotan\) from \peripipt\, literally to fall around (into the midst of), to fall among as in strkjv@Luke:10:30| \listais periepesen\ (he fell among robbers). Only other N.T. example of this old compound is in strkjv@Acts:27:41|. Thucydides uses it of falling into affliction. It is the picture of being surrounded (\peri\) by trials. {Manifold temptations} (\peirasmois poikilois\). Associative instrumental case. The English word temptation is Latin and originally meant trials whether good or bad, but the evil sense has monopolized the word in our modern English, though we still say "attempt." The word \peirasmos\ (from \peiraz\, late form for the old \peira\ as in strkjv@Acts:26:21|, both in good sense as in strkjv@John:6:6|, and in bad sense as in strkjv@Matthew:16:1|) does not occur outside of the LXX and the N.T. except in Dioscorides (A.D. 100?) of experiments on diseases. "Trials" is clearly the meaning here, but the evil sense appears in verse 12| (clearly in \peiraz\ in verse 13|) and so in strkjv@Hebrews:3:8|. Trials rightly faced are harmless, but wrongly met become temptations to evil. The adjective \poikilos\ (manifold) is as old as Homer and means variegated, many coloured as in strkjv@Matthew:4:24; strkjv@2Timothy:3:6; strkjv@Hebrews:2:4|. In strkjv@1Peter:1:6| we have this same phrase. It is a bold demand that James here makes.

rwp@James:1:3 @{Knowing} (\ginskontes\). Present active participle of \ginsk\ (experimental knowledge, the only way of getting this view of "trials" as "all joy"). {The proof} (\to dokimion\). Now known (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 259ff.) from the papyri examples of \dokimios\ as an adjective in the same sense (good gold, standard gold) as \dokimos\ proved or tested (James:1:12|). The use of \to dokimion\ (neuter article with neuter single adjective) here and in strkjv@1Peter:1:7|, clearly means "the genuine element in your faith," not "crucible" nor "proving." Your faith like gold stands the test of fire and is approved as standard. James here, as in verse 6; strkjv@2:1; strkjv@5:15|, regards faith (\pistis\) like Paul "as the very foundation of religion" (Mayor). {Worketh} (\katergazetai\). Present (durative) middle indicative of the compound verb with the perfective sense of \kata\ as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:12|, which see. {Patience} (\hupomonn\). Old and common word for remaining under (\hupomen\), "staying power" (Ropes), as in strkjv@Colossians:1:11|.

rwp@John:7:17 @{If any man willeth to do} (\ean tis theli poiein\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and present active subjunctive \theli\ not used as a mere auxiliary verb for the future "will do," but with full force of \thel\, to will, to wish. See the same use of \thel\ in strkjv@5:40| "and yet ye are not willing to come" (\kai ou thelete elthein\). {He shall know} (\gnsetai\). Future middle indicative of \ginsk\. Experimental knowledge from willingness to do God's will. See this same point by Jesus in strkjv@5:46; strkjv@18:37|. There must be moral harmony between man's purpose and God's will. "If there be no sympathy there can be no understanding" (Westcott). Atheists of all types have no point of contact for approach to the knowledge of Christ. This fact does not prove the non-existence of God, but simply their own isolation. They are out of tune with the Infinite. For those who love God it is also true that obedience to God's will brings richer knowledge of God. Agnostic and atheistic critics are disqualified by Jesus as witnesses to his claims. {Of God} (\ek tou theou\). Out of God as source. {From myself} (\ap' emautou\). Instead of from God.

rwp@John:10:14 @{I am the good-shepherd} (\eg eimi ho poimn ho kalos\). Effective repetition. {And mine own know me} (\kai ginskousin me ta ema\). Jesus as the Good Shepherd knows his sheep by name as he had already said (verse 3|) and now repeats. Yes, and they know his voice (verse 4|), they have experimental knowledge (\ginsk\) of Jesus as their own Shepherd. Here (in this mutually reciprocal knowledge) lies the secret of their love and loyalty.

rwp@Matthew:7:22 @{Did we not prophesy in thy name?} (\ou ti si onomati eprophteusamen;\). The use of \ou\ in the question expects the affirmative answer. They claim to have prophesied (preached) in Christ's name and to have done many miracles. But Jesus will tear off the sheepskin and lay bare the ravening wolf. "I never knew you" (\oudepote egnn hms\). "I was never acquainted with you" (experimental knowledge). Success, as the world counts it, is not a criterion of one's knowledge of Christ and relation to him. "I will profess unto them" (\homologs autois\), the very word used of profession of Christ before men (Matthew:10:32|). This word Jesus will use for public and open announcement of their doom.