NT-GOSPEL.filter - rwp law:
rwp@
1Corinthians:1:10 @{Now I beseech you} (\parakal de humas\). Old and common verb, over 100 times in N.T., to call to one's side. Corresponds here to \eucharist\, {I thank}, in verse 4|. Direct appeal after the thanksgiving. {Through the name} (\dia tou onomatos\). Genitive, not accusative (cause or reason), as the medium or instrument of the appeal (2Corinthians:10:1; strkjv@Romans:12:1; strkjv@15:30|). {That} (\hina\). Purport (sub-final) rather than direct purpose, common idiom in _Koin_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp.991-4) like strkjv@Matthew:14:36|. Used here with \legte, i, te katrtismenoi\, though expressed only once. {All speak} (\legte pantes\). Present active subjunctive, that ye all keep on speaking. With the divisions in mind. An idiom from Greek political life (Lightfoot). This touch of the classical writers argues for Paul's acquaintance with Greek culture. {There be no divisions among you} (\m i en humin schismata\). Present subjunctive, that divisions may not continue to be (they already had them). Negative statement of preceding idea. \Schisma\ is from \schiz\, old word to split or rend, and so means a rent (Matthew:9:16; strkjv@Mark:2:21|). Papyri use it for a splinter of wood and for ploughing. Here we have the earliest instance of its use in a moral sense of division, dissension, see also strkjv@1Corinthians:11:18| where a less complete change than \haireseis\; strkjv@12:25; strkjv@John:7:43| (discord); strkjv@9:16; strkjv@10:19|. "Here, faction, for which the classical word is \stasis\: division within the Christian community" (Vincent). These divisions were over the preachers (1:12-4:21|), immorality (5:1-13|), going to law before the heathen (6:1-11|), marriage (7:1-40|), meats offered to idols (1Corinthians:8-10|), conduct of women in church (11:1-16|), the Lord's Supper (11:17-34|), spiritual gifts (1Corinthians:12-14|), the resurrection (1Corinthians:15|). {But that ye be perfected together} (\te de katrtismenoi\). Periphrastic perfect passive subjunctive. See this verb in strkjv@Matthew:4:21| (Mark:1:19|) for mending torn nets and in moral sense already in strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:10|. Galen uses it for a surgeon's mending a joint and Herodotus for composing factions. See strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11; strkjv@Galatians:6:1|. {Mind} (\noi\), {judgment} (\gnmi\). "Of these words \nous\ denotes the frame or state of mind, \gnm\ the judgment, opinion or sentiment, which is the outcome of \nous\" (Lightfoot).
rwp@1Corinthians:5:1 @{Actually} (\hols\). Literally, wholly, altogether, like Latin _omnino_ and Greek \pants\ (1Corinthians:9:22|). Songs:papyri have it for "really" and also for "generally" or "everywhere" as is possible here. See also strkjv@6:7|. With a negative it has the sense of "not at all" as in strkjv@15:29; strkjv@Matthew:5:34| the only N.T. examples, though a common word. {It is reported} (\akouetai\). Present passive indicative of \akou\, to hear; so literally, it is heard. "Fornication is heard of among you." Probably the household of Chloe (1:11|) brought this sad news (Ellicott). {And such} (\kai toiaut\). Climactic qualitative pronoun showing the revolting character of this particular case of illicit sexual intercourse. \Porneia\ is sometimes used (Acts:15:20,29|) of such sin in general and not merely of the unmarried whereas \moicheia\ is technically adultery on the part of the married (Mark:7:21|). {As is not even among the Gentiles} (\htis oude en tois ethnesin\). Height of scorn. The Corinthian Christians were actually trying to win pagans to Christ and living more loosely than the Corinthian heathen among whom the very word "Corinthianize" meant to live in sexual wantonness and license. See Cicero _pro Cluentio_, v. 14. {That one of you hath his father's wife} (\hste gunaika tina tou patros echein\). "Songs:as (usual force of \hste\) for one to go on having (\echein\, present infinitive) a wife of the (his) father." It was probably a permanent union (concubine or mistress) of some kind without formal marriage like strkjv@John:4:8|. The woman probably was not the offender's mother (step-mother) and the father may have been dead or divorced. The Jewish law prescribed stoning for this crime (Leviticus:18:8; strkjv@22:11; strkjv@Deuteronomy:22:30|). But the rabbis (Rabbi Akibah) invented a subterfuge in the case of a proselyte to permit such a relation. Perhaps the Corinthians had also learned how to split hairs over moral matters in such an evil atmosphere and so to condone this crime in one of their own members. Expulsion Paul had urged in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:6| for such offenders.
rwp@1Corinthians:5:10 @{Not altogether} (\ou pants\). Not absolutely, not in all circumstances. Paul thus puts a limitation on his prohibition and confines it to members of the church. He has no jurisdiction over the outsiders (this world, \tou kosmou toutou\). {The covetous} (\tois pleonektais\). Old word for the over-reachers, those avaricious for more and more (\pleon, ech\, to have more). In N.T. only here, strkjv@6:10; strkjv@Ephesians:5:5|. It always comes in bad company (the licentious and the idolaters) like the modern gangsters who form a combination of liquor, lewdness, lawlessness for money and power. {Extortioners} (\harpaxin\). An old adjective with only one gender, rapacious (Matthew:7:15; strkjv@Luke:18:11|), and as a substantive robber or extortioner (here and strkjv@6:10|). Bandits, hijackers, grafters they would be called today. {Idolaters} (\eidlolatrais\). Late word for hirelings (\latris\) of the idols (\eidlon\), so our very word idolater. See strkjv@6:9; strkjv@10:7; strkjv@Ephesians:5:5; strkjv@Revelation:21:8; strkjv@22:15|. Nageli regards this word as a Christian formation. {For then must ye needs} (\epei pheilete oun\). This neat Greek idiom of \epei\ with the imperfect indicative (\pheilete\, from \opheil\, to be under obligation) is really the conclusion of a second-class condition with the condition unexpressed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 965). Sometimes \an\ is used also as in strkjv@Hebrews:10:2|, but with verbs of obligation or necessity \an\ is usually absent as here (cf. strkjv@Hebrews:9:20|). The unexpressed condition here would be, "if that were true" (including fornicators, the covetous, extortioners, idolaters of the outside world). \Ara\ means in that case.
rwp@1Corinthians:6:1 @{Dare any of you?} (\tolmi tis humn;\). Does any one of you dare? Rhetorical question with present indicative of \tolma\, old verb from \tolma\, daring. Bengel: _grandi verbo notatur laesa majestas Christianorum_. "The word is an argument in itself" (Robertson and Plummer). Apparently Paul has an actual case in mind as in chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:5| though no name is called. {Having a matter against his neighbour} (\pragma echn pros ton heteron\). Forensic sense of \pragma\ (from \prass\, to do, to exact, to extort as in strkjv@Luke:3:13|), a case, a suit (Demosthenes 1020, 26), with the other or the neighbour as in strkjv@10:24; strkjv@14:17; strkjv@Galatians:6:4; strkjv@Romans:2:1|. {Go to law} (\krinesthai\). Present middle or passive (ch. strkjv@Romans:3:4|) in the same forensic sense as \krithnai\ in strkjv@Matthew:5:40|. \Krits\, judge, is from this verb. {Before the unrighteous} (\epi tn adikn\). This use of \epi\ with the genitive for "in the presence of" is idiomatic as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:14|, \epi Titou\, in the case of Titus. The Jews held that to bring a lawsuit before a court of idolaters was blasphemy against the law. But the Greeks were fond of disputatious lawsuits with each other. Probably the Greek Christians brought cases before pagan judges.
rwp@1Corinthians:6:12 @{Lawful} (\exestin\). Apparently this proverb may have been used by Paul in Corinth (repeated in strkjv@10:23|), but not in the sense now used by Paul's opponents. The "all things" do not include such matters as those condemned in chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:5; strkjv@6:1-11|. Paul limits the proverb to things not immoral, things not wrong _per se_. But even here liberty is not license. {But not all things are expedient} (\all' ou panta sumpherei\). Old word \sumpherei\, bears together for good and so worthwhile. Many things, harmless in themselves in the abstract, do harm to others in the concrete. We live in a world of social relations that circumscribe personal rights and liberties. {But I will not be brought under the power of any} (\all ouk eg exousiasthsomai hupo tinos\). Perhaps a conscious play on the verb \exestin\ for \exousiaz\ is from \exousia\ and that from \exestin\. Verb from Aristotle on, though not common (Dion. of Hal., LXX and inscriptions). In N.T. only here, strkjv@7:4; strkjv@Luke:22:25|. Paul is determined not to be a slave to anything harmless in itself. He will maintain his self-control. He gives a wholesome hint to those who talk so much about personal liberty.
rwp@1Corinthians:9:20 @{As a Jew} (\hs Ioudaios\). He was a Jew and was not ashamed of it (Acts:18:18; strkjv@21:26|). {Not being myself under the law} (\m n autos hupo nomon\). He was emancipated from the law as a means of salvation, yet he knew how to speak to them because of his former beliefs and life with them (Galatians:4:21|). He knew how to put the gospel to them without compromise and without offence.
rwp@1Corinthians:11:2 @{Hold fast the traditions} (\tas paradoseis katechete\). Hold down as in strkjv@15:2|. \Paradosis\ (tradition) from \paradidmi\ (\paredka\, first aorist active indicative) is an old word and merely something handed on from one to another. The thing handed on may be bad as in strkjv@Matthew:15:2f.| (which see) and contrary to the will of God (Mark:7:8f.|) or it may be wholly good as here. There is a constant conflict between the new and the old in science, medicine, law, theology. The obscurantist rejects all the new and holds to the old both true and untrue. New truth must rest upon old truth and is in harmony with it.
rwp@1Corinthians:12:26 @{Suffer with it} (\sunpaschei\). Medical term in this sense in Hippocrates and Galen. In N.T only here and strkjv@Romans:8:17| (of our suffering with Christ). One of Solon's Laws allowed retaliation by any one for another's injuries. Plato (_Republic_, V, 462) says the body politic "feels the hurt" as the whole body feels a hurt finger. {Rejoice with it} (\sunchairei\). This is fortunately true also. One may tingle with joy all over the body thanks to the wonderful nervous system and to the relation between mind and matter. See strkjv@13:6| for joy of love with truth.
rwp@1Corinthians:15:46 @{Howbeit that is not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural} (\all' ou prton to pneumatikon, alla to psuchikon\). Literally, "But not first the spiritual, but the natural." This is the law of growth always.
rwp@1John:2:14 @{I have written} (\egrapsa\). Repeated three times. Epistolary aorist referring to this Epistle, not to a previous Epistle. Law (_Tests of Life_, p. 309) suggests that John was interrupted at the close of verse 13| and resumes here in verse 14| with a reference to what he had previously written in verse 13|. But that is needless ingenuity. It is quite in John's style to repeat himself with slight variations. {The Father} (\ton patera\). The heavenly Father as all of God's children should come to know him. He repeats from verse 13| what he said to "fathers." To the young men he adds \ischuroi\ (strong) and the word of God abiding in them. That is what makes them powerful (\ischuroi\) and able to gain the victory over the evil one.
rwp@1John:5:1 @{That Jesus is the Christ} (\hoti Isous estin ho Christos\). The Cerinthian antichrist denies the identity of Jesus and Christ (2:22|). Hence John insists on this form of faith (\pisteun\ here in the full sense, stronger than in strkjv@3:23; strkjv@4:16|, seen also in \pistis\ in verse 4|, where English and Latin fall down in having to use another word for the verb) as he does in verse 5| and in accord with the purpose of John's Gospel (20:31|). Nothing less will satisfy John, not merely intellectual conviction, but full surrender to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. "The Divine Begetting is the antecedent, not the consequent of the believing" (Law). For "is begotten of God" (\ek tou theou gegenntai\) see strkjv@2:29; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@4:7; strkjv@5:4,18|. John appeals here to family relationship and family love. {Him that begat} (\ton gennsanta\). First aorist active articular participle of \genna\, to beget, the Father (our heavenly Father). {Him also that is begotten of him} (\ton gegennmenon ex autou\). Perfect passive articular participle of \genna\, the brother or sister by the same father. Songs:then we prove our love for the common Father by our conduct towards our brothers and sisters in Christ.
rwp@1John:5:17 @{All unrighteousness is sin} (\psa adikia hamartia estin\). Unrighteousness is one manifestation of sin as lawlessness (3:4|) is another (Brooke). The world today takes sin too lightly, even jokingly as a mere animal inheritance. Sin is a terrible reality, but there is no cause for despair. Sin not unto death can be overcome in Christ.
rwp@1Peter:1:4 @{Unto an inheritance} (\eis klronomian\). Old word (from \klronomos\, heir) for the property received by the heir (Matthew:21:38|), here a picture of the blessedness in store for us pilgrims (Galatians:3:18|). {Incorruptible} (\aphtharton\). Old compound adjective (alpha privative and \phtheir\, to corrupt), imperishable. Songs:many inheritances vanish away before they are obtained. {Undefiled} (\amianton\). Old verbal adjective (note alliteration) from alpha privative and \miain\, to defile, without defect or flaw in the title, in N.T. only here, strkjv@James:1:27; strkjv@Hebrews:13:4|. {That fadeth not away} (\amaranton\). Alliterative and verbal adjective again from alpha privative and \marain\ (to dry up, to wither, as in strkjv@James:1:11|), late and rare word in several inscriptions on tombs, here only in N.T. These inscriptions will fade away, but not this inheritance in Christ. It will not be like a faded rose. {Reserved} (\tetrmenn\). Perfect passive participle of \tre\, old verb, to take care of, to guard. No burglars or bandits can break through where this inheritance is kept (Matthew:6:19f.; strkjv@John:17:11f.|). Cf. strkjv@Colossians:1:5|, where laid away" (\apokeimenn\) occurs. {For you} (\eis humas\). More graphic than the mere dative.
rwp@1Peter:2:13 @{Be subject to} (\hupotagte\). Second aorist passive imperative second person plural of \hupotass\, to subject to, as in strkjv@3:22|. {Every ordinance of man} (\pasi anthrpini ktisei\). Dative case of old and common word \ktisis\ (from \ktiz\, to create, to found), act of creation (Romans:1:20|), a creature or creation (Romans:1:25|), all creation (Colossians:1:15|), an institution as here (in Pindar so). For \anthrpinos\ (human) see strkjv@James:3:7|. Peter here approves no special kind of government, but he supports law and order as Paul does (Romans:13:1-8|) unless it steps in between God and man (Acts:4:20|). {For the Lord's sake} (\dia ton kurion\). For Jesus' sake. That is reason enough for the Christian not to be an anarchist (Matthew:22:21|). The heathen were keen to charge the Christians with any crime after Nero set the fashion. "It should not be forgotten that, in spite of the fine language of the philosophers, the really popular religions in Greece and Rome were forms of devil-worship, intimately blended with magic in all its grades" (Bigg). {As supreme} (\hs huperechonti\). Dative singular of present active participle of \huperech\, old verb (intransitive), to stand out above (to have it over), as in strkjv@Romans:13:1|. It is not the divine right of kings, but the fact of the king as the outstanding ruler.
rwp@1Peter:4:3 @{Past} (\parelluths\). Perfect active participle of the compound verb \parerchomai\, old verb, to go by (beside) as in strkjv@Matthew:14:15| with \hra\ (hour). {May suffice} (\arketos\). No copula in the Greek, probably \estin\ (is) rather than \dunatai\ (can). Late and rare verbal adjective from \arke\, to suffice, in the papyri several times, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:6:34; strkjv@10:25|, apparently referring to Christ's words in strkjv@Matthew:6:34| (possibly an axiom or proverb). {To have wrought} (\kateirgasthai\). Perfect middle infinitive of \katergazomai\, common compound (\kata, ergon\ work) as in strkjv@1Corinthians:5:3|. {The desire} (\to boulma\). Correct text, not \thelma\. Either means the thing desired, willed. Jews sometimes fell in with the ways of Gentiles (Romans:2:21-24; strkjv@3:9-18; strkjv@Ephesians:2:1-3|) as today some Christians copy the ways of the world. {And to have walked} (\peporeumenous\). Perfect middle participle of \poreuomai\ in the accusative plural of general reference with the infinitive \kateirgasthai\. Literally, "having walked or gone." {In lasciviousness} (\en aselgeiais\). All these sins are in the locative case with \en\. "In unbridled lustful excesses" (2Peter:2:7; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:21|). {Lusts} (\epithumiais\). Cf. strkjv@2:11; strkjv@4:2|. {Winebibbings} (\oinophlugiais\). Old compound (\oinos\, wine, \phlu\, to bubble up), for drunkenness, here only in N.T. (also in strkjv@Deuteronomy:21:20|). {Revellings} (\komois\). Old word (from \keimai\, to lie down), rioting drinking parties, in N.T. here and strkjv@Galatians:5:21; strkjv@Romans:13:13|. {Carousings} (\potois\). Old word for drinking carousal (from \pin\, to drink), here only in the N.T. In the light of these words it seems strange to find modern Christians justifying their "personal liberty" to drink and carouse, to say nothing of the prohibition law. The Greeks actually carried lust and drunkenness into their religious observances (Aphrodite, for instance). {Abominable idolatries} (\athemitois eidlolatriais\). To the Christian all "idolatry," (\eidlon, latreia\), worship of idols, is "abominable," not allowed (alpha privative and \themitos\, \themistos\ the old form, verbal of \themiz\, to make lawful), but particularly those associated with drinking and licentiousness. The only other N.T. example of \athemitos\ is by Peter also (Acts:10:28|) and about the Mosaic law. That may be the idea here, for Jews often fell into idolatrous practices (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 274).
rwp@1Peter:4:11 @{If any man speaketh} (\ei tis lalei\). Condition of first class, assumed as a fact. {Speaking as it were oracles of God} (\hs logia theou\). No predicate in this conclusion of the condition. For \logia theou\ see strkjv@Acts:7:38| (Mosaic law); strkjv@Romans:3:2| (the Old Testament); strkjv@Hebrews:5:12| (the substance of Christian teaching), here of the utterances of God through Christian teachers. \Logion\ (old word) is a diminutive of \logos\ (speech, word). It can be construed here as nominative or as accusative. The verb has to be supplied. {If any one ministereth} (\ei tis diakonei\). First-class condition again. See strkjv@Acts:6:2-4| for the twofold division of service involved here. {Which God supplieth} (\hs chorgei ho theos\). Ablative case (\hs\) of the relative attracted from the accusative \hn\, object of \chorgei\ (present active indicative of \chorge\, old verb, to supply from \chorgos\, chorus leader, in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:9:10|). Peter has the compound \epichorge\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:5,11|. God is the supplier of strength. {That God may be glorified} (\hina doxaztai ho theos\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the present passive subjunctive of \doxaz\. See strkjv@John:15:8|. {Whose is} (\hi estin\). "To whom (dative) is," that is to Jesus Christ the immediate antecedent, but in strkjv@Romans:16:27; strkjv@Jude:1:25| the doxology is to God through Christ. For other doxologies see strkjv@1Peter:5:11; strkjv@2Peter:3:18; strkjv@Galatians:1:5; strkjv@Romans:9:5; strkjv@11:36; strkjv@Phillipians:4:20; strkjv@Ephesians:3:21; strkjv@1Timothy:1:17; strkjv@6:16; strkjv@2Timothy:4:18; strkjv@Hebrews:13:21; strkjv@Revelation:1:6; strkjv@5:13; strkjv@7:12|. The others addressed to Christ are strkjv@2Peter:3:18; strkjv@2Timothy:4:18; strkjv@Revelation:1:6|.
rwp@1Peter:5:8 @{Be watchful} (\grgorsate\). First aorist active imperative of \grgore\, late present imperative from perfect \egrgora\ (to be awake) from \egeir\ (to arouse), as in strkjv@Matthew:24:42|. For \npsate\ see strkjv@1:13; strkjv@4:7|. {Your adversary} (\ho antidikos humn\). Old word for opponent in a lawsuit (Matthew:5:25|). {The devil} (\diabolos\). Slanderer. See on ¯Matthew:4:1|. {As a roaring lion} (\hs ruomenos len\). But Jesus is also pictured as the Lion of the tribe of Judah (Revelation:5:5|). But Satan {roars} at the saints. Present middle participle \ruomai\, old verb, here only in N.T., to howl like a wolf, dog, or lion, of men to sing loud (Pindar). See strkjv@Psalms:22:13|. {Whom he may devour} (\katapiein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \katapin\, to drink down. B does not have \tina\, Aleph has \tina\ (somebody), "to devour some one," while A has interrogative \tina\, "whom he may devour" (very rare idiom). But the devil's purpose is the ruin of men. He is a "peripatetic" (\peripatei\) like the peripatetic philosophers who walked as they talked. Satan wants all of us and sifts us all (Luke:22:31|).
rwp@1Timothy:4:6 @{If thou put the brethren in mind of these things} (\tauta hupotithemenos tois adelphois\). Present middle participle of \hupotithmi\, to place under, to suggest, old and common verb, here only in N.T., "suggesting these things to the brethren." {Thou shalt be a good minister of Christ Jesus} (\kalos esi diakonos Christou Isou\). This beautiful phrase covers one's whole service for Christ (3:1-7|). {Nourished in} (\entrephomenos\). Present passive participle of \entreph\, old verb, to nourish in, used by Plato of "nourished in the laws," here only in the N.T. {The words of the faith} (\tois logois ts pistes\). Locative case. The right diet for babes in Christ. The Bolshevists in Russia are feeding the children on atheism to get rid of God. {Which thou hast followed} (\hi parkolouthkas\). Perfect active indicative of \parakolouthe\, old verb, to follow beside, of persons (often in old Greek) or of ideas and things (Luke:1:3; strkjv@1Timothy:4:6; strkjv@2Timothy:3:10|). With associative instrumental case \hi\ (which).
rwp@2Corinthians:6:14 @{Be not unequally yoked with unbelievers} (\m ginesthe heterozugountes apistois\). No other example of this verb has yet been found, though the adjective from which it is apparently formed, \heterozugos\ (yoked with a different yoke) occurs in strkjv@Leviticus:19:19| of the union of beasts of different kinds. In strkjv@Deuteronomy:22:10| we read: "Thou shalt not plough with an ox and an ass together." Literally, "Stop becoming (\m ginesthe\ present imperative, not \m gensthe\ aorist subj.) unequally yoked with unconverted heathen (unbelievers)." Some were already guilty. Marriage is certainly included, but other unions may be in mind. Cf. strkjv@Ephesians:5:7|. Paul gives as the reason (\gar\) for this prohibition five words in questions to distinguish the contrasts. {Fellowship} (\metoch\). Sharing with and followed by associative instrumental case of \dikaiosuni\ (righteousness) and iniquity (\anomii\). A pertinent challenge today when church members wink at violations of laws of the land and laws of God. {Communion} (\koinnia\). Partnership to light (\phti\ dative case) with (\pros\), facing darkness.
rwp@2Corinthians:12:4 @{Into Paradise} (\eis paradeison\). See on ¯Luke:23:43| for this interesting word. Paul apparently uses paradise as the equivalent of the third heaven in verse 2|. Some Jews (_Book of the Secrets of Enoch_, chapter viii) make Paradise in the third heaven. The rabbis had various ideas (two heavens, three, seven). We need not commit Paul to any "celestial gradation" (Vincent). {Unspeakable words} (\arrta rmata\). Old verbal adjective (\a\ privative, \rtos\ from \re\), only here in N.T. {Not lawful} (\ouk exon\). Copula \estin\ omitted. Hence Paul does {not} give these words.
rwp@2Peter:2:7 @{And delivered} (\kai erusato\). First aorist middle of \ruomai\ as in strkjv@Matthew:6:13|, still part of the protasis with \ei\. {Righteous Lot} (\dikaion Lot\). This adjective \dikaios\ occurs three times in verses 7,8|. See Wisdom strkjv@10:6. {Sore distressed} (\kataponoumenon\). Present passive participle of \katapone\, late and common verb, to work down, to exhaust with labor, to distress, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:7:24|. {By the lascivious life of the wicked} (\hupo ts tn athesmn en aselgeii anastrophs\). "By the life in lasciviousness of the lawless." \Athesmos\ (alpha privative and \thesmos\), late and common adjective (cf. \athemitos\ strkjv@1Peter:4:3|) for rebels against law (of nature and conscience here). \Anastroph\ is frequent in I Peter.
rwp@2Peter:2:8 @{For} (\gar\). Parenthetical explanation in verse 8| of the remark about Lot. {Dwelling} (\enkatoikn\). Present active participle of \enkatoike\, old but rare double compound, here only in N.T. {In seeing and hearing} (\blemmati kai akoi\). "By sight (instrumental case of \blemma\, old word, from \blep\ to see, here only in N.T.) and hearing" (instrumental case of \ako\ from \akou\, to hear, common as strkjv@Matthew:13:14|). {From day to day} (\hmeran ex hmers\). "Day in day out." Accusative of time and ablative with \ex\. Same idiom in strkjv@Psalms:96:2| for the more common \ex hmeras eis hmeran\. {Vexed} (\ebasanizen\). Imperfect active (kept on vexing) of \basaniz\, old word, to test metals, to torment (Matthew:8:29|). {With their lawless deeds} (\anomois ergois\). Instrumental case of cause, "because of their lawless (contrary to law) deeds." For \anomos\ see strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:8|.
rwp@2Peter:2:16 @{But he was rebuked} (\elegxin de eschen\). "But he had rebuke." Second aorist active indicative of \ech\ and accusative of \elegxis\ (late word from \elegch\, a periphrasis for \elegch\, here only in N.T. {For his own transgression} (\idias paranomias\). Objective genitive of \paranomia\, old word (from \paranomos\ lawbreaker), here only in N.T. {A dumb ass} (\hupozugion aphnon\). Dumb is without voice, old word for idols and beasts. The adjective \hupozugios\ (\hupo zugon on\) "being under a yoke," is applied to the ass as the common beast of burden (papyri, Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 160), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:21:5|. {Spake} (\phthegxamenon\). First aorist middle participle of \phtheggomai\, old verb, to utter a sound, in N.T. only here, verse 18, strkjv@Acts:4:18|. {Stayed} (\eklusen\). First aorist active indicative of \klu\, to hinder. {Madness} (\paraphronian\). Only known example of this word instead of the usual \paraphrosun\ or \paraphronsis\. It is being beside one's wits.
rwp@2Thessalonians:1:9 @{Who} (\hoitines\). Qualitative use, such as. Vanishing in papyri though surviving in Paul (1Corinthians:3:17; strkjv@Romans:1:25; strkjv@Galatians:4:26; strkjv@Phillipians:4:3|). {Shall suffer punishment} (\dikn tisousin\). Future active of old verb \tin\, to pay penalty (\dikn\, right, justice), here only in N.T., but \apotin\ once also to repay strkjv@Philemon:1:19|. In the papyri \dik\ is used for a case or process in law. This is the regular phrase in classic writers for paying the penalty. {Eternal destruction} (\olethron ainion\). Accusative case in apposition with \dikn\ (penalty). This phrase does not appear elsewhere in the N.T., but is in IV Macc. strkjv@10:15 \ton ainion tou turannou olethron\ the eternal destruction of the tyrant (Antiochus Epiphanes). Destruction (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:3|) does not mean here annihilation, but, as Paul proceeds to show, separation {from the face of the Lord} (\apo prospou tou kuriou\) and from the {glory of his might} (\kai apo ts doxs ts ischuos autou\), an eternity of woe such as befell Antiochus Epiphanes. \Ainios\ in itself only means age-long and papyri and inscriptions give it in the weakened sense of a Caesar's life (Milligan), but Paul means by age-long {the coming age} in contrast with {this age}, as {eternal} as the New Testament knows how to make it. See on ¯Matthew:25:46| for use of \ainios\ both with \zn\, life, and \kolasin\, punishment.
rwp@2Thessalonians:2:3 @{Let no man beguile you in any wise} (\m tis humas exapatsi kata mdena tropon\). First aorist active subjunctive of \exapata\ (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb \apata\) with double negative (\m tis, mdena\) in accord with regular Greek idiom as in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:11| rather than the aorist imperative which does occur sometimes in the third person as in strkjv@Mark:13:15| (\m katabat\). Paul broadens the warning to go beyond conversation and letter. He includes "tricks" of any kind. It is amazing how gullible some of the saints are when a new deceiver pulls off some stunts in religion. {For it will not be} (\hoti\). There is an ellipse here of \ouk estai\ (or \gensetai\) to be supplied after \hoti\. Westcott and Hort make an anacoluthon at the end of verse 4|. The meaning is clear. \Hoti\ is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not "imminent," but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of verse 2|. {Except the falling away come first} (\ean m elthi h apostasia prton\). Negative condition of the third class, undetermined with prospect of determination and the aorist subjunctive. \Apostasia\ is the late form of \apostasis\ and is our word apostasy. Plutarch uses it of political revolt and it occurs in I Macc. strkjv@2:15 about Antiochus Epiphanes who was enforcing the apostasy from Judaism to Hellenism. In strkjv@Joshua:22:22| it occurs for rebellion against the Lord. It seems clear that the word here means a religious revolt and the use of the definite article (\h\) seems to mean that Paul had spoken to the Thessalonians about it. The only other New Testament use of the word is in strkjv@Acts:21:21| where it means apostasy from Moses. It is not clear whether Paul means revolt of the Jews from God, of Gentiles from God, of Christians from God, or of the apostasy that includes all classes within and without the body of Christians. But it is to be {first} (\prton\) before Christ comes again. Note this adverb when only two events are compared (cf. strkjv@Acts:1:1|). {And the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition} (\kai apokaluphthi ho anthrpos ts anomias, ho huios ts apleias\). First aorist passive subjunctive after \ean m\ and same condition as with \elthi\. The use of this verb \apokalupt\, like \apokalupsin\ of the second coming in strkjv@1:7|, seems to note the superhuman character (Milligan) of the event and the same verb is repeated in verses 6,8|. The implication is that {the man of sin} is hidden somewhere who will be suddenly manifested just as false apostles pose as angels of light (2Corinthians:11:13ff.|), whether the crowning event of the apostasy or another name for the same event. Lightfoot notes the parallel between the man of sin, of whom sin is the special characteristic (genitive case, a Hebraism for the lawless one in verse 8|) and Christ. Both Christ and the adversary of Christ are revealed, there is mystery about each, both make divine claims (verse 4|). He seems to be the Antichrist of strkjv@1John:2:18|. The terrible phrase, the son of perdition, is applied to Judas in strkjv@John:17:12| (like Judas doomed to perdition), but here to the lawless one (\ho anomos\, verse 8|), who is not Satan, but some one definite person who is doing the work of Satan. Note the definite article each time.
rwp@2Thessalonians:2:7 @{For the mystery of lawlessness doth already work} (\to gar mustrion d energeitai ts anomias\). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:13| for \energeitai\. The genitive \ts anomias\ (lawlessness) describes \to mustrion\ (note emphatic position of both). This mystery (\mustrion\ secret, from \musts\, an initiate, \mue\, to wink or blink) means here the secret purpose of lawlessness already at work, the only instance of this usage in the N.T. where it is used of the kingdom of God (Matthew:13:11|), of God (1Corinthians:2:1|) and God's will (Ephesians:1:9|), of Christ (Ephesians:3:4|), of the gospel (Ephesians:6:9|), of faith (1Timothy:3:9|), of godliness (1Timothy:3:16|), of the seven stars (Revelation:1:20|), of the woman (Revelation:17:7|). But this secret will be "revealed" and then we shall understand clearly what Paul's meaning is here. {Until he be taken out of the way} (\hes ek mesou gentai\). Usual construction with \hes\ for the future (aorist middle subjunctive, \gentai\). Note absence of \an\ as often in N.T. and the \Koin\. Paul uses \hes\ only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:4:5|. When the obstacle is removed then the mystery of lawlessness will be revealed in plain outline.
rwp@2Thessalonians:2:8 @{And then} (\kai tote\). Emphatic note of time, {then} when the restraining one (\ho katechn\) is taken out of the way, then \the lawless one\ (\ho anomos\), the man of sin, the man of perdition, will be revealed. {Whom the Lord [Jesus] shall slay} (\hon ho kurios [Isous] anelei\). Whether Jesus is genuine or not, he is meant by Lord. \Anelei\ is a late future from \anaire\, in place of \anairsei\. Paul uses strkjv@Isaiah:11:4| (combining {by the word of his mouth} with {in breath through lips}) to picture the triumph of Christ over this adversary. It is a powerful picture how the mere breath of the Lord will destroy this arch-enemy (Milligan). {And bring to naught by the manifestation of his coming} (\kai katargsei ti epiphaneii ts parousias autou\). This verb \katarge\ (\kata, argos\) to render useless, rare in ancient Greek, appears 25 times in Paul and has a variety of renderings. In the papyri it has a weakened sense of hinder. It will be a grand fiasco, this advent of the man of sin. Paul here uses both \epiphaneia\ (\epiphany\, elsewhere in N.T. in the Pastorals, familiar to the Greek mind for a visit of a god) and \parousia\ (more familiar to the Jewish mind, but common in the papyri) of the second coming of Christ. "The apparition of Jesus heralds his doom" (Moffatt). The mere appearance of Christ destroys the adversary (Vincent).
rwp@2Timothy:2:5 @{If also a man contend in the games} (\ean de kai athli tis\). Condition of third class with present (linear) active subjunctive of \athle\, old and common verb (from \athlos\, a contest), only this verse in N.T., but \sunathle\ in strkjv@Phillipians:1:27|. Note sharp distinction between \athli\ (present subjunctive, engage in a contest in general) and \athlsi\ (first aorist active subjunctive, engage in a particular contest). Not "except he have contended," but simply "unless he contend" (in any given case) "lawfully" (\nomims\). Old adverb, agreeably to the law, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Timothy:1:8|. {Is not crowned} (\ou stephanoutai\). Present passive indicative of \stephano\, old verb (from \stephanos\, crown), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:2:7,9|. One apodosis for two protases. The victor in the athletic contests was crowned with a garland.
rwp@Acts:7:53 @{Ye who} (\hoitines\). The very ones who, _quippe qui_, often in Acts when the persons are enlarged upon (8:15; strkjv@9:35; strkjv@10:41,47|). {As it was ordained by angels} (\eis diatagas aggeln\). About angels see on ¯7:38|. \Diatag\ (from \diatass\, to arrange, appoint) occurs in late Greek, LXX, inscriptions, papyri, Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 89ff., and in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:13:2|. At (or as) the appointment of angels (cf. strkjv@Matthew:10:41; strkjv@12:41| for this use of \eis\). {And kept it not} (\kai ouk ephulaxate\). Like a whipcracker these words cut to the quick. They gloried in possessing the law and openly violated it (Romans:2:23|).
rwp@Acts:7:57 @{Stopped their ears} (\suneschon ta ta autn\). Second aorist active of \sunech\, to hold together. They held their ears together with their hands and affected to believe Stephen guilty of blasphemy (cf. strkjv@Matthew:26:65|). {Rushed upon him with one accord} (\hrmsan homothumadon ep' auton\). Ingressive aorist active indicative of \horma\, to rush impetuously as the hogs did down the cliff when the demons entered them (Luke:8:33|). No vote was taken by the Sanhedrin. No scruple was raised about not having the right to put him to death (John:8:31|). It may have taken place after Pilate's recall and before his successor came or Pilate, if there, just connived at such an incident that did not concern Rome. At any rate it was mob violence like modern lynching that took the law into the hands of the Sanhedrin without further formalities. {Out of the city} (\ek ts poles\). To keep from defiling the place with blood. But they sought to kill Paul as soon as they got him out of the temple area (Acts:21:30f.|). {Stoned} (\elithoboloun\). Imperfect active indicative of \lithobole\, began to stone, from \lithobolos\ (\lithos\, stone, \ball\, to throw), late Greek verb, several times in the N.T. as strkjv@Luke:13:34|. Stoning was the Jewish punishment for blasphemy (Leviticus:24:14-16|). {The witnesses} (\hoi martures\). The false testifiers against Stephen suborned by the Pharisees (Acts:6:11,13|). These witnesses had the privilege of casting the first stones (Deuteronomy:13:10; strkjv@17:7|) against the first witness for Christ with death (_martyr_ in our modern sense of the word). {At the feet of a young man named Saul} (\para tous podas neaniou kaloumenou Saulou\). Beside (\para\) the feet. Our first introduction to the man who became the greatest of all followers of Jesus Christ. Evidently he was not one of the "witnesses" against Stephen, for he was throwing no stones at him. But evidently he was already a leader in the group of Pharisees. We know from later hints from Saul (Paul) himself that he had been a pupil of Gamaliel (Acts:22:3|). Gamaliel, as the Pharisaic leader in the Sanhedrin, was probably on hand to hear the accusations against Stephen by the Pharisees. But, if so, he does not raise his voice against this mob violence. Saul does not seem to be aware that he is going contrary to the views of his master, though pupils often go further than their teachers.
rwp@Acts:14:27 @{Gathered the church together} (\sunagagontes tn ekklsian\). Second aorist active participle of \sunag\. It "was the first missionary meeting in history" (Furneaux). It was not hard to get the church together when the news spread that Paul and Barnabas had returned. "The suitability of the Gospel to become the religion of the world had not before been put to the test" (Furneaux). Doubtless many "wise-acres" had predicted failure as they did for William Carey and for Adoniram Judson and Luther Rice. {Rehearsed} (\anggellon\). Imperfect active. It was a long story for they had many things to tell of God's dealings "with them" (\met' autn\) for God had been "with them" all the while as Jesus had said he would be (Matthew:28:20|, \meth' hmn\). Paul could recount some of the details given later in strkjv@2Corinthians:11|. {And how} (\kai hoti\). Or "and that" in particular, as the upshot of it all. {He had opened a door of faith unto the Gentiles} (\noixen tois ethnesin thuran pistes\). Three times in Paul's Epistles (1Corinthians:16:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12; strkjv@Colossians:4:3|) he employed the metaphor of "door," perhaps a reminiscence of the very language of Paul here. This work in Galatia gained a large place in Paul's heart (Galatians:4:14f.|). The Gentiles now, it was plain, could enter the kingdom of God (verse 22|) through the door of faith, not by law or by circumcision or by heathen philosophy or mythology.
rwp@Acts:15:10 @{Why tempt ye God?} (\ti peirazete ton theon;\). By implying that God had made a mistake this time, though right about Cornelius. It is a home-thrust. They were refusing to follow the guidance of God like the Israelites at Massah and Meribah (Exodus:17:7; strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:16; strkjv@1Corinthians:10:9|). {That ye should put} (\epitheinai\). Second aorist active infinitive of \epitithmi\, epexegetic, explaining the tempting. {A yoke upon the neck} (\zugon epi ton trachlon\). Familiar image of oxen with yokes upon the necks. Paul's very image for the yoke of bondage of the Mosaic law in strkjv@Galatians:5:1|. It had probably been used in the private interview. Cf. the words of Jesus about the Pharisees (Matthew:23:4|) and how easy and light his own yoke is (Matthew:11:30|). {Were able to bear} (\ischusamen bastasai\). Neither our fathers nor we had strength (\ischu\) to carry this yoke which the Judaizers wish to put on the necks of the Gentiles. Peter speaks as the spiritual emancipator. He had been slow to see the meaning of God's dealings with him at Joppa and Caesarea, but he has seen clearly by now. He takes his stand boldly with Paul and Barnabas for Gentile freedom.
rwp@Acts:15:28 @{To the Holy Spirit and to us} (\ti pneumati ti hagii kai hmin\). Dative case after \edoxen\ (third example, verses 22,25,28|). Definite claim that the church in this action had the guidance of the Holy Spirit. That fact was plain to the church from what had taken place in Caesarea and in this campaign of Paul and Barnabas (verse 8|). Jesus had promised that the Holy Spirit would guide them into all truth (John:16:13|). Even so the church deliberated carefully before deciding. What a blessing it would be if this were always true! But even so the Judaizers are only silenced for the present, not convinced and only waiting for a better day to start over again. {No greater burden} (\mden pleon baros\). The restrictions named did constitute some burden (cf. strkjv@Matthew:20:12|), for the old word \baros\ means weight or heaviness. Morality itself is a restraint upon one's impulses as is all law a prohibition against license.
rwp@Acts:15:29 @{Than these necessary things} (\pln toutn tn epanagkes\). This old adverb (from \epi\ and \anagk\) means on compulsion, of necessity. Here only in the N.T. For discussion of these items see on verses 20,21|. In comparison with the freedom won this "burden" is light and not to be regarded as a compromise in spite of the arguments of Lightfoot and Ramsay. It was such a concession as any converted Gentile would be glad to make even if "things strangled" be included. This "necessity" was not a matter of salvation but only for fellowship between Jews and Gentiles. The Judaizers made the law of Moses essential to salvation (15:16|). {It shall be well with you} (\eu praxete\). Ye shall fare well. A classical idiom used here effectively. The peace and concord in the fellowship of Jews and Gentiles will justify any slight concession on the part of the Gentiles. This letter is not laid down as a law, but it is the judgment of the Jerusalem Christians for the guidance of the Gentiles (16:4|) and it had a fine effect at once (15:30-35|). Trouble did come later from the Judaizers who were really hostile to the agreement in Jerusalem, but that opposition in no way discredits the worth of the work of this Conference. No sane agreement will silence perpetual and professional disturbers like these Judaizers who will seek to unsettle Paul's work in Antioch, in Corinth, in Galatia, in Jerusalem, in Rome. {Fare ye well} (\Errsthe\). _Valete_. Perfect passive imperative of \rhnnumi\, to make strong. Common at the close of letters. Be made strong, keep well, fare well. Here alone in the N.T. though some MSS. have it in strkjv@23:30|.
rwp@Acts:16:37 @{Unto them} (\pros autous\). The lictors by the jailor. The reply of Paul is a marvel of brevity and energy, almost every word has a separate indictment showing the utter illegality of the whole proceeding. {They have beaten us} (\deirantes hmas\). First aorist active participle of \der\, old verb to flay, to skin, to smite. The _Lex Valeria_ B.C. 509 and the _Lex Poscia_ B.C. 248 made it a crime to inflict blows on a Roman citizen. Cicero says, "To fetter a Roman citizen was a crime, to scourge him a scandal, to slay him--parricide." Claudius had "deprived the city of Rhodes of its freedom for having crucified some citizen of Rome" (Rackham). {Publicly} (\dmosii\). This added insult to injury. Common adverb (\hodi\) supplied with adjective, associative instrumental case, opposed to \idii\ or \kat' oikous\, strkjv@Acts:20:20|) {Uncondemned} (\akatakritous\). This same verbal adjective from \kata-krin\ with \a\ privative is used by Paul in strkjv@22:25| and nowhere else in the N.T. Rare in late Greek like \akatagnstos\, but in late _Koin_ (papyri, inscriptions). The meaning is clearly "without being tried." Paul and Silas were not given a chance to make a defence. They were sentenced unheard (25:16|). Even slaves in Roman law had a right to be heard. {Men that are Romans} (\anthrpous Romaious huparchontas\). The praetors did not know, of course, that Paul and Silas were Roman citizens any more than Lysias knew it in strkjv@Acts:22:27|. Paul's claim is not challenged in either instance. It was a capital offence to make a false claim to Roman citizenship. {Have cast us into prison} (\ebalan eis phulakn\). Second aorist active indicative of \ball\, old verb, with first aorist ending as often in the _Koin_ (\-an\, not \-on\). This was the climax, treating them as criminals. {And now privily} (\kai nun lathri\). Paul balances their recent conduct with the former. {Nay verily, but} (\ou gar, alla\). No indeed! It is the use of \gar\ so common in answers (\ge+ara\) as in strkjv@Matthew:27:23|. \Alla\ gives the sharp alternative. {Themselves} (\autoi\). As a public acknowledgment that they had wronged and mistreated Paul and Silas. Let them come themselves and lead us out (\exagagetsan\, third person plural second aorist active imperative of \exag\). It was a bitter pill to the proud praetors.
rwp@Acts:17:18 @{And certain also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him} (\tines de kai tn Epikourin kai Stikn philosophn suneballon auti\). Imperfect active of \sunball\, old verb, in the N.T. only by Luke, to bring or put together in one's mind (Luke:2:19|), to meet together (Acts:20:14|), to bring together aid (18:27|), to confer or converse or dispute as here and already strkjv@4:15| which see. These professional philosophers were always ready for an argument and so they frequented the agora for that purpose. Luke uses one article and so groups the two sects together in their attitude toward Paul, but they were very different in fact. Both sects were eager for argument and both had disdain for Paul, but they were the two rival practical philosophies of the day, succeeding the more abstruse theories of Plato and Aristotle. Socrates had turned men's thought inward (\Gnthi Seauton\, Know Thyself) away from the mere study of physics. Plato followed with a profound development of the inner self (metaphysics). Aristotle with his cyclopaedic grasp sought to unify and relate both physics and metaphysics. Both Zeno and Epicurus (340-272 B.C.) took a more practical turn in all this intellectual turmoil and raised the issues of everyday life. Zeno (360-260 B.C.) taught in the \Stoa\ (Porch) and so his teaching was called Stoicism. He advanced many noble ideas that found their chief illustration in the Roman philosophers (Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius). He taught self-mastery and hardness with an austerity that ministered to pride or suicide in case of failure, a distinctly selfish and unloving view of life and with a pantheistic philosophy. Epicurus considered practical atheism the true view of the universe and denied a future life and claimed pleasure as the chief thing to be gotten out of life. He did not deny the existence of gods, but regarded them as unconcerned with the life of men. The Stoics called Epicurus an atheist. Lucretius and Horace give the Epicurean view of life in their great poems. This low view of life led to sensualism and does today, for both Stoicism and Epicureanism are widely influential with people now. "Eat and drink for tomorrow we die," they preached. Paul had doubtless become acquainted with both of these philosophies for they were widely prevalent over the world. Here he confronts them in their very home. He is challenged by past-masters in the art of appealing to the senses, men as skilled in their dialectic as the Pharisaic rabbis with whom Paul had been trained and whose subtleties he had learned how to expose. But, so far as we know, this is a new experience for Paul to have a public dispute with these philosophical experts who had a natural contempt for all Jews and for rabbis in particular, though they found Paul a new type at any rate and so with some interest in him. "In Epicureanism, it was man's sensual nature which arrayed itself against the claims of the gospel; in Stoicism it was his self-righteousness and pride of intellect" (Hackett). Knowling calls the Stoic the Pharisee of philosophy and the Epicurean the Sadducee of philosophy. Socrates in this very agora used to try to interest the passers-by in some desire for better things. That was 450 years before Paul is challenged by these superficial sophistical Epicureans and Stoics. It is doubtful if Paul had ever met a more difficult situation. {What would this babbler say?} (\Ti an theloi ho spermologos houtos legein?\). The word for "babbler" means "seed-picker" or picker up of seeds (\sperma\, seed, \leg\, to collect) like a bird in the agora hopping about after chance seeds. Plutarch applies the word to crows that pick up grain in the fields. Demosthenes called Aeschines a \spermologos\. Eustathius uses it of a man hanging around in the markets picking up scraps of food that fell from the carts and so also of mere rhetoricians and plagiarists who picked up scraps of wisdom from others. Ramsay considers it here a piece of Athenian slang used to describe the picture of Paul seen by these philosophers who use it, for not all of them had it ("some," \tines\). Note the use of \an\ and the present active optative \theloi\, conclusion of a fourth-class condition in a rhetorical question (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). It means, What would this picker up of seeds wish to say, if he should get off an idea? It is a contemptuous tone of supreme ridicule and doubtless Paul heard this comment. Probably the Epicureans made this sneer that Paul was a charlatan or quack. {Other some} (\hoi de\). But others, in contrast with the "some" just before. Perhaps the Stoics take this more serious view of Paul. {He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods} (\zenn daimonin dokei kataggeleus einai\). This view is put cautiously by \dokei\ (seems). \Kataggeleus\ does not occur in the old Greek, though in ecclesiastical writers, but Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 99) gives an example of the word "on a marble stele recording a decree of the Mitylenaens in honour of the Emperor Augustus," where it is the herald of the games. Here alone in the N.T. \Daimonion\ is used in the old Greek sense of deity or divinity whether good or bad, not in the N.T. sense of demons. Both this word and \kataggeleus\ are used from the Athenian standpoint. \Xenos\ is an old word for a guest-friend (Latin _hospes_) and then host (Romans:16:23|), then for foreigner or stranger (Matthew:25:31; strkjv@Acts:17:21|), new and so strange as here and strkjv@Hebrews:13:9; strkjv@1Peter:4:12|, and then aliens (Ephesians:2:12|). This view of Paul is the first count against Socrates: Socrates does wrong, introducing new deities (\adikei Skrats, kaina daimonia eisphern\, Xen. _Mem_. I). On this charge the Athenians voted the hemlock for their greatest citizen. What will they do to Paul? This Athens was more sceptical and more tolerant than the old Athens. But Roman law did not allow the introduction of a new religion (_religio illicita_). Paul was walking on thin ice though he was the real master philosopher and these Epicureans and Stoics were quacks. Paul had the only true philosophy of the universe and life with Jesus Christ as the centre (Colossians:1:12-20|), the greatest of all philosophers as Ramsay justly terms him. But these men are mocking him. {Because he preached Jesus and the resurrection} (\hoti ton Isoun kai tn anastasin euggelizato\). Reason for the view just stated. Imperfect middle indicative of \euaggeliz\, to "gospelize." Apparently these critics considered \anastasis\ (Resurrection) another deity on a par with Jesus. The Athenians worshipped all sorts of abstract truths and virtues and they misunderstood Paul on this subject. They will leave him as soon as he mentions the resurrection (verse 32|). It is objected that Luke would not use the word in this sense here for his readers would not under stand him. But Luke is describing the misapprehension of this group of philosophers and this interpretation fits in precisely.
rwp@Acts:18:15 @{Questions} (\ztmata\). Plural, contemptuous, "a parcel of questions" (Knowling). {About words} (\peri logou\). Word, singular, talk, not deed or fact (\ergon, factum\). {And names} (\kai onomatn\). As to whether "Jesus" should also be called "Christ" or "Messiah." The Jews, Gallio knew, split hairs over words and names. {And your own law} (\kai nomou tou kath' hums\) Literally, "And law that according to you." Gallio had not been caught in the trap set for him. What they had said concerned Jewish law, not Roman law at all. {Look to it yourselves} (\opsesthe autoi\). The volitive future middle indicative of \hora\ often used (cf. strkjv@Matthew:27:4|) where an imperative could be employed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 874). The use of \autoi\ (yourselves) turns it all over to them. {I am not minded} (\ou boulomai\). I am not willing, I do not wish. An absolute refusal to allow a religious question to be brought before a Roman civil court. This decision of Gallio does not establish Christianity in preference to Judaism. It simply means that the case was plainly that Christianity was a form of Judaism and as such was not opposed to Roman law. This decision opened the door for Paul's preaching all over the Roman Empire. Later Paul himself argues (Romans:9-11|) that in fact Christianity is the true, the spiritual Judaism.
rwp@Acts:19:38 @{Have a matter against any one} (\echousin pros tina logon\). For this use of \ech logon\ with \pros\ see strkjv@Matthew:5:32; strkjv@Colossians:3:13|. The town-clerk names Demetrius and the craftsmen (\technitai\) as the parties responsible for the riot. {The courts are open} (\agoraioi agontai\). Supply \hmerai\ (days), court days are kept, or \sunodoi\, court-meetings are now going on, Vulgate _conventus forenses aguntur_. Old adjective from \agora\ (forum) marketplace where trials were held. Cf. strkjv@Acts:17:4|. There were regular court days whether they were in session then or not. {And there are proconsuls} (\kai anthupatoi eisin\). Asia was a senatorial province and so had proconsuls (general phrase) though only one at a time, "a rhetorical plural" (Lightfoot). Page quotes from an inscription of the age of Trajan on an aqueduct at Ephesus in which some of Luke's very words occur (\nekoros, anthupatos, grammateus, dmos\). {Let them accuse one another} (\egkaleitsan alllois\). Present active imperative of \egkale\ (\en, kale\), old verb to call in one's case, to bring a charge against, with the dative. Luke uses the verb six times in Acts for judicial proceedings (19:38,40; strkjv@23:28,29; strkjv@26:2,7|). The town-clerk makes a definite appeal to the mob for orderly legal procedure as opposed to mob violence in a matter where money and religious prejudice unite, a striking rebuke to so-called lynch-law proceedings in lands today where Christianity is supposed to prevail.
rwp@Acts:19:39 @{Anything about other matters} (\ti peraiter\). Most MSS. here have \ti peri hetern\, but B b Vulgate read \ti peraiter\ as in Plato's \Phaedo\. Several papyri examples of it also. It is comparative \peraiteros\ of \pera\, beyond. Note also \epi\ in \epizteite\. Charges of illegal conduct (Page) should be settled in the regular legal way. But, if you wish to go further and pass resolutions about the matter exciting you, "it shall be settled in the regular assembly" (\en ti ennomi ekklsii\). "In the lawful assembly," not by a mob like this. Wood (_Ephesus_) quotes an inscription there with this very phrase "at every lawful assembly" (\kata psan ennomon ekklsian\). The Roman officials alone could give the sanction for calling such a lawful or regular assembly. The verb \epilu\ is an old one, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:4:34| (which see) where Jesus privately opened or disclosed the parables to the disciples. The papyri give examples of the verb in financial transactions as well as of the metaphorical sense. The solution will come in the lawful assembly, not in a riot like this. See also strkjv@2Peter:1:20| where the substantive \epilusis\ occurs for disclosure or revelation (prophecy).
rwp@Acts:19:41 @{Dismissed the assembly} (\apelusen tn ekklsian\). The town-clerk thus gave a semblance of law and order to the mob by formally dismissing them, this much to protect them against the charge to which they were liable. This vivid, graphic picture given by Luke has all the earmarks of historical accuracy. Paul does not describe the incidents in his letters, was not in the theatre in fact, but Luke evidently obtained the details from one who was there. Aristarchus, we know, was with Luke in Caesarea and in Rome and could have supplied all the data necessary. Certainly both Gaius and Aristarchus were lively witnesses of these events since their own lives were involved.
rwp@Acts:22:24 @{That he be examined by scourging} (\mastixin anetazesthai auton\). The present passive infinitive of \anetaz\ in indirect command after \eipas\ (bidding). This verb does not occur in the old Greek (which used \exetaz\ as in strkjv@Matthew:2:8|), first in the LXX, in the N.T. only here and verse 29|, but Milligan and Moulton's _Vocabulary_ quotes an Oxyrhynchus papyrus of A.D. 127 which has a prefect using the word directing government clerks to "examine" (\anetazein\) documents and glue them together into volumes (\tomoi\). The word was evidently in use for such purposes. It was a kind of "third degree" applied to Paul by the use of scourges (\mastixin\), instrumental plural of \mastix\, old word for whip, as in strkjv@Hebrews:11:36|. But this way of beginning an inquiry by torture (inquisition) was contrary to Roman law (Page): _Non esse a tormentis incipiendum, Divus Augustus statuit_. {That he might know} (\hina epigni\). Final clause with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \epignsk\ (full knowledge). Lysias was as much in the dark as ever, for Paul's speech had been in Aramaic and this second explosion was a mystery to him like the first. {They so shouted} (\houtos epephnoun\). Imperfect active progressive imperfect had been so shouting.
rwp@Acts:22:25 @{When they had tied him up} (\hos proeteinan auton\). First aorist active indicative of \protein\, old verb to stretch forward, only here in the N.T. Literally, "When they stretched him forward." {With the thongs} (\tois himasin\). If the instrumental case of \himas\, old word for strap or thong (for sandals as strkjv@Mark:1:7|, or for binding criminals as here), then Paul was bent forward and tied by the thongs to a post in front to expose his back the better to the scourges. But \tois himasin\ may be dative case and then it would mean "for the lashes." In either case it is a dreadful scene of terrorizing by the chiliarch. {Unto the centurion that stood by} (\pros ton hestta hekatontarchon\). He was simply carrying out the orders of the chiliarch (cf. strkjv@Matthew:27:54|). Why had not Paul made protest before this? {Is it lawful?} (\ei exestin?\). This use of \ei\ in indirect questions we have had before (1:6|). {A Roman and uncondemned} (\Romaion kai akatakriton\). Just as in strkjv@16:37| which see. Blass says of Paul's question: _Interrogatio subironica est confidentiae plena_.
rwp@Acts:23:3 @{Thou whited wall} (\toiche kekoniamene\). Perfect passive participle of \konia\ (from \konia\, dust or lime). The same word used in strkjv@Matthew:23:27| for "whited sepulchres" (\taphoi kekoniamenoi\) which see. It is a picturesque way of calling Ananias a hypocrite, undoubtedly true, but not a particularly tactful thing for a prisoner to say to his judge, not to say Jewish high priest. Besides, Paul had hurled back at him the word \tuptein\ (smite) in his command, putting it first in the sentence (\tuptein se mellei ho theos\) in strong emphasis. Clearly Paul felt that he, not Ananias, was living as a good citizen in God's commonwealth. {And sittest thou to judge me?} (\Kai su kathi krinn me?\) Literally, "And thou (being what thou art) art sitting (\kathi\, second person singular middle of \kathmai\, late form for \kathsai\, the uncontracted form) judging me." Cf. strkjv@Luke:22:30|. \Kai su\ at the beginning of a question expresses indignation. {Contrary to the law} (\paranomn\). Present active participle of \paranome\, old verb to act contrary to the law, here alone in the N.T., "acting contrary to the law."
rwp@Acts: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@Acts:24:1 @{And with an Orator, one Tertullus} (\kai rhtoros Tertullou tinos\). A deputation of elders along with the high priest Ananias, not the whole Sanhedrin, but no hint of the forty conspirators or of the Asian Jews. The Sanhedrin had become divided so that now it is probably Ananias (mortally offended) and the Sadducees who take the lead in the prosecution of Paul. It is not clear whether after five days is from Paul's departure from Jerusalem or his arrival in Caesarea. If he spent nine days in Jerusalem, then the five days would be counted from then (verse 11|). The employment of a Roman lawyer (Latin _orator_) was necessary since the Jews were not familiar with Roman legal procedure and it was the custom in the provinces (Cicero _pro Cael_. 30). The speech was probably in Latin which Paul may have understood also. \Rhtr\ is a common old Greek word meaning a forensic orator or advocate but here only in the N.T. The Latin _rhetor_ was a teacher of rhetoric, a very different thing. Tertullus is a diminutive of Tertius (Romans:16:22|). {Informed} (\enephanisan\). Same verb as in strkjv@23:15,22|, somewhat like our modern "indictment," certainly accusations "against Paul" (\kata tou Paulou\). They were down on Paul and the hired barrister was prosecuting attorney. For the legal form see _Oxyrhynchus Papyri_, Vol. II., p. 162, line 19.
rwp@Acts:24:5 @{For we have found} (\heurontes gar\). Second aorist active participle of \heurisk\, but without a principal verb in the sentence. Probably we have here only a "summary of the charges against Paul" (Page). {A pestilent fellow} (\loimon\). An old word for pest, plague, pestilence, Paul the pest. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:21:11| (\loimoi kai limoi\, pestilences and famines) which see. Latin _pestis_. Think of the greatest preacher of the ages being branded a pest by a contemporary hired lawyer. {A mover of insurrections} (\kinounta staseis\). This was an offence against Roman law if it could be proven. "Plotted against at Damascus, plotted against at Jerusalem, expelled from Pisidian Antioch, stoned at Lystra, scourged and imprisoned at Philippi, accused of treason at Thessalonica, haled before the proconsul at Corinth, cause of a serious riot at Ephesus, and now finally of a riot at Jerusalem" (Furneaux). Specious proof could have been produced, but was not. Tertullus went on to other charges with which a Roman court had no concern (instance Gallio in Corinth). {Throughout the world} (\kata tn oikoumenn\). The Roman inhabited earth (\gn\) as in strkjv@17:6|. {A ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes} (\prtostatn ts tn Nazrain haireses\). \Prtostats\ is an old word in common use from \prtos\ and \histmi\, a front-rank man, a chief, a champion. Here only in the N.T. This charge is certainly true. About "sect" (\hairesis\) see on ¯5:17|. \Nazraioi\ here only in the plural in the N.T., elsewhere of Jesus (Matthew:2:23; strkjv@26:71; strkjv@Luke:18:37; strkjv@John:18:5,7; strkjv@19:19; strkjv@Acts:2:22; strkjv@3:6; strkjv@4:10; strkjv@6:14; strkjv@22:8; strkjv@26:9|). The disciple is not above his Master. There was a sneer in the term as applied to Jesus and here to his followers.
rwp@Acts:25:23 @{When Agrippa was come and Bernice} (\elthontos tou Agrippa kai ts Berniks\). Genitive absolute, the participle agreeing in number and gender (masculine singular, \elthontos\) with \Agrippa\, \Berniks\ being added as an afterthought. {With great pomp} (\meta polls phantasias\). \Phantasia\ is a _Koin_ word (Polybius, Diodorus, etc.) from the old verb \phantaz\ (Hebrews:12:21|) and it from \phain\, common verb to show, to make an appearance. This is the only N.T. example of \phantasia\, though the kindred common word \phantasma\ (appearance) occurs twice in the sense of apparition or spectre (Matthew:14:26; strkjv@Mark:6:49|). Herodotus (VII. 10) used the verb \phantaz\ for a showy parade. Festus decided to gratify the wish of Agrippa by making the "hearing" of Paul the prisoner (verse 22|) an occasion for paying a compliment to Agrippa (Rackham) by a public gathering of the notables in Caesarea. Festus just assumed that Paul would fall in with this plan for a grand entertainment though he did not have to do it. {Into the place of hearing} (\eis to akroatrion\). From \akroaomai\ (to be a hearer) and, like the Latin _auditorium_, in Roman law means the place set aside for hearing, and deciding cases. Here only in the N.T. Late word, several times in Plutarch and other _Koin_ writers. The hearing was "semi-official" (Page) as is seen in verse 26|. {With the chief captains} (\sun te chiliarchois\). \Chiliarchs\, each a leader of a thousand. There were five cohorts of soldiers stationed in Caesarea. {And the principal men of the city} (\kai andrasin tois kat' exochn\). The use of \kat' exochn\, like our French phrase _par excellence_, occurs here only in the N.T., and not in the ancient Greek, but it is found in inscriptions of the first century A.D. (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). \Exoch\ in medical writers is any protuberance or swelling. Cf. our phrase "outstanding men." {At the command of Festus} (\keleusantos tou Phstou\). Genitive absolute again, "Festus having commanded."
rwp@Colossians:1:22 @{Yet now} (\nuni de\). Sharpened contrast with emphatic form of \nun\, "now" being not at the present moment, but in the present order of things in the new dispensation of grace in Christ. {Hath he reconciled} (\apokatllaxen\). First aorist (effective, timeless) active indicative (a sort of parenthetical anacoluthon). Here B reads \apokatallagte\, be ye reconciled like \katallagte\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:20| while D has \apokatallagentes\. Lightfoot prefers to follow B here (the hard reading), though Westcott and Hort only put it in the margin. On the word see verse 20|. {In the body of his flesh} (\en ti smati ts sarkos autou\). See the same combination in strkjv@2:11| though in strkjv@Ephesians:2:14| only \sarki\ (flesh). Apparently Paul combines both \sma\ and \sarx\ to make plain the actual humanity of Jesus against incipient Docetic Gnostics who denied it. {Through death} (\dia tou thanatou\). The reconciliation was accomplished by means of Christ's death on the cross (verse 20|) and not just by the Incarnation (the body of his flesh) in which the death took place. {To present} (\parastsai\). First aorist active (transitive) infinitive (of purpose) of \paristmi\, old verb, to place beside in many connections. See it used of presenting Paul and the letter from Lysias to Felix (Acts:23:33|). Repeated in strkjv@Colossians:2:28|. See also strkjv@2Corinthians:11:2; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:14|. Paul has the same idea of his responsibility in rendering an account for those under his influence seen in strkjv@Hebrews:13:17|. See strkjv@Romans:12:1| for use of living sacrifice. {Holy} (\hagious\). Positively consecrated, separated unto God. Common in N.T. for believers. Haupt holds that all these terms have a religious and forensic sense here. {Without blemish} (\ammous\). Without spot (Phillipians:2:15|). Old word \a\ privative and \mmos\ (blemish). Common in the LXX for ceremonial purifications. {Unreproveable} (\anegkltous\). Old verbal adjective from \a\ privative and \egkale\, to call to account, to pick flaws in. These three adjectives give a marvellous picture of complete purity (positive and negative, internal and external). This is Paul's ideal when he presents the Colossians "before him" (\katenpion autou\), right down in the eye of Christ the Judge of all.
rwp@Colossians:2:14 @{Having blotted out} (\exaleipsas\). And so "cancelled." First aorist active participle of old verb \exaleiph\, to rub out, wipe off, erase. In N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:3:19| (LXX); strkjv@Revelation:3:5; strkjv@Colossians:2:14|. Here the word explains \charisamenos\ and is simultaneous with it. Plato used it of blotting out a writing. Often MSS. were rubbed or scraped and written over again (palimpsests, like Codex C). {The bond written in ordinances that was against us} (\to kath' hmn cheirographon tois dogmasin\). The late compound \cheirographon\ (\cheir\, hand, \graph\) is very common in the papyri for a certificate of debt or bond, many of the original \cheirographa\ (handwriting, "chirography"). See Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 247. The signature made a legal debt or bond as Paul says in strkjv@Philemon:1:18f.|: "I Paul have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it." Many of the papyri examples have been "crossed out" thus X as we do today and so cancelled. One decree is described as "neither washed out nor written over" (Milligan, N. T. _Documents_, p. 16). Undoubtedly "the handwriting in decrees" (\dogmasin\, the Mosaic law, strkjv@Ephesians:2:15|) was against the Jews (Exodus:24:3; strkjv@Deuteronomy:27:14-26|) for they accepted it, but the Gentiles also gave moral assent to God's law written in their hearts (Romans:2:14f.|). Songs:Paul says "against us" (\kath' hmn\) and adds "which was contrary to us" (\ho n hupenantion hmin\) because we (neither Jew nor Gentile) could not keep it. \Hupenantios\ is an old double compound adjective (\hupo, en, antios\) set over against, only here in N.T. except strkjv@Hebrews:10:27| when it is used as a substantive. It is striking that Paul has connected the common word \cheirographon\ for bond or debt with the Cross of Christ (Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 332). {And he hath taken it out of the way} (\kai rken ek tou mesou\). Perfect active indicative of \air\, old and common verb, to lift up, to bear, to take away. The word used by the Baptist of Jesus as "the Lamb of God that bears away (\airn\) the sin of the world" (John:1:29|). The perfect tense emphasizes the permanence of the removal of the bond which has been paid and cancelled and cannot be presented again. Lightfoot argues for Christ as the subject of \rken\, but that is not necessary, though Paul does use sudden anacolutha. God has taken the bond against us "out of the midst" (\ek tou mesou\). Nailing it to the cross (\proslsas auto ti stauri\). First aorist active participle of old and common verb \proslo\, to fasten with nails to a thing (with dative \stauri\). Here alone in N.T., but in III Macc. strkjv@4:9 with the very word \stauri\. The victim was nailed to the cross as was Christ. "When Christ was crucified, God nailed the Law to His cross" (Peake). Hence the "bond" is cancelled for us. Business men today sometimes file cancelled accounts. No evidence exists that Paul alluded to such a custom here.
rwp@Colossians:2:21 @{Handle not, nor taste, nor touch} (\m hapsi mde geusi mde thigis\). Specimens of Gnostic rules. The Essenes took the Mosaic regulations and carried them much further and the Pharisees demanded ceremonially clean hands for all food. Later ascetics (the Latin commentators Ambrose, Hilary, Pelagius) regard these prohibitions as Paul's own instead of those of the Gnostics condemned by him. Even today men are finding that the noble prohibition law needs enlightened instruction to make it effective. That is true of all law. The Pharisees, Essenes, Gnostics made piety hinge on outward observances and rules instead of inward conviction and principle. These three verbs are all in the aorist subjunctive second person singular with \m\, a prohibition against handling or touching these forbidden things. Two of them do not differ greatly in meaning. \Hapsi\ is aorist middle subjunctive of \hapt\, to fasten to, middle, to cling to, to handle. \Thigis\ is second aorist active subjunctive of \thiggan\, old verb, to touch, to handle. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:11:28; strkjv@12:20|. \Geusi\ is second aorist middle subjunctive of \geu\, to give taste of, only middle in N.T. to taste as here.
rwp@Colossians:3:20 @{Obey your parents} (\hupakouete tois goneusin\). Old verb to listen under (as looking up), to hearken, to heed, to obey. {In all things} (\kata panta\). This is the hard part for the child, not occasional obedience, but continual. Surely a Christian father or mother will not make unreasonable or unjust demands of the child. Nowhere does modern civilization show more weakness than just here. Waves of lawlessness sweep over the world because the child was not taught to obey. Again Paul argues that this is "in the Lord" (\en Kurii\).
rwp@Colossians:3:25 @{Shall receive again for the wrong that he hath done} (\komisetai ho diksen\). It is not clear whether \ho adikn\ (he that doeth wrong) is the master or the slave. It is true of either and Lightfoot interprets it of both, "shall receive back the wrong which he did." This is a general law of life and of God and it is fair and square. {There is no respect of persons} (\ouk estin prospolmpsia\). There is with men, but not with God. For this word patterned after the Hebrew see strkjv@Romans:2:11; strkjv@Ephesians:6:9; strkjv@James:2:1| The next verse should be in this chapter also.
rwp@Ephesians:2:15 @{Having abolished} (\katargsas\). First aorist active participle of \katarge\, to make null and void. {The enmity} (\tn echthran\). But it is very doubtful if \tn echthran\ (old word from \echthros\, hostile, strkjv@Luke:23:12|) is the object of \katargsas\. It looks as if it is in apposition with to \mesotoichon\ and so the further object of \lusas\. The enmity between Jew and Gentile was the middle wall of partition. And then it must be decided whether "in his flesh" (\en ti sarki autou\) should be taken with \lusas\ and refer especially to the Cross (Colossians:1:22|) or be taken with \katargsas\. Either makes sense, but better sense with \lusas\. Certainly "the law of commandments in ordinances (\ton nomon tn entoln en dogmasin\) is governed by \katargsas\. {That he might create} (\hina ktisi\). Final clause with first aorist active subjunctive of \ktiz\. {The twain} (\tous duo\). The two men (masculine here, neuter in verse 14|), Jew and Gentile. {One new man} (\eis hena kainon anthrpon\). Into one fresh man (Colossians:3:9-11|) "in himself" (\en hauti\). Thus alone is it possible. {Making peace} (\poin eirnn\). Thus alone can it be done. Christ is the peace-maker between men, nations, races, classes.
rwp@Galatians:1:7 @{Which is not another} (\ho ouk estin allo\). It is no "gospel" (good news) at all, but a yoke of bondage to the law and the abolition of grace. There is but one gospel and that is of grace, not works. The relative \ho\ (which) refers to \heteron euaggelion\ (a different gospel) "taken as a single term and designating the erroneous teachings of the Judaizers" (Burton). {Only} (\ei m\). Literally, "except," that is, "Except in this sense," "in that it is an attempt to pervert the one true gospel" (Lightfoot). {Who disturb you} (\hoi tarassontes\). The disturbers. This very verb \tarass\ is used in strkjv@Acts:17:8| of the Jews in Thessalonica who "disturbed" the politarchs and the people about Paul. {Would pervert} (\thelontes metastrepsai\). "Wish to turn about," change completely as in strkjv@Acts:2:20; strkjv@James:4:9|. The very existence of the gospel of Christ was at stake.
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:2:20 @{I have been crucified with Christ} (\Christi sunestaurmai\). One of Paul's greatest mystical sayings. Perfect passive indicative of \sustauro\ with the associative instrumental case (\Christi\). Paul uses the same word in strkjv@Romans:6:6| for the same idea. In the Gospels it occurs of literal crucifixion about the robbers and Christ (Matthew:27:44; strkjv@Mark:15:32; strkjv@John:19:32|). Paul died to the law and was crucified with Christ. He uses often the idea of dying with Christ (Galatians:5:24; strkjv@6:14; strkjv@Romans:6:8; strkjv@Colossians:2:20|) and burial with Christ also (Romans:6:4; strkjv@Colossians:2:12|). {No longer I} (\ouketi eg\). Songs:complete has become Paul's identification with Christ that his separate personality is merged into that of Christ. This language helps one to understand the victorious cry in strkjv@Romans:7:25|. It is the union of the vine and the branch (John:15:1-6|). {Which is in the Son of God} (\ti tou huiou tou theou\). The objective genitive, not the faith of the Son of God. {For me} (\huper emou\). Paul has the closest personal feeling toward Christ. "He appropriates to himself, as Chrysostom observes, the love which belongs equally to the whole world. For Christ is indeed the personal friend of each man individually" (Lightfoot).
rwp@Galatians:2:21 @{I do not make void the grace of God} (\ouk athet tn charin tou theou\). Common word in LXX and Polybius and on, to make ineffective (\a\ privative and \tithmi\, to place or put). Some critic would charge him with that after his claim to such a close mystic union with Christ. {Then Christ died for nought} (\ara Christos drean apethanen\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. If one man apart from grace can win his own righteousness, any man can and should. Hence (\ara\, accordingly) Christ died gratuitously (\drean\), unnecessarily. Adverbial accusative of \drea\, a gift. This verse is a complete answer to those who say that the heathen (or any mere moralist) are saved by doing the best that they know and can. No one, apart from Jesus, ever did the best that he knew or could. To be saved by law (\dia nomou\) one has to keep all the law that he knows. That no one ever did.
rwp@Galatians:3:2 @{This only} (\touto monon\). Paul strikes at the heart of the problem. He will show their error by the point that the gifts of the Spirit came by the hearing of faith, not by works of the law.
rwp@Galatians:3:5 @{Supplieth} (\epichorgn\). It is God. See on ¯2Corinthians:9:10| for this present active participle. Cf. strkjv@Phillipians:1:19; strkjv@2Peter:1:5|. {Worketh miracles} (\energn dunameis\). On the word \energe\ see strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:13; strkjv@1Corinthians:12:6|. It is a great word for God's activities (Phillipians:2:13|). "In you" (Lightfoot) is preferable to "among you" for \en humin\ (1Corinthians:13:10; strkjv@Matthew:14:2|). The principal verb for "doeth he it" (\poiei\) is not expressed. Paul repeats the contrast in verse 2| about "works of the law" and "the hearing of faith."
rwp@Galatians:3:13 @{Redeemed us} (\hmas exgorasen\). First aorist active of the compound verb \exagoraz\ (Polybius, Plutarch, Diodorus), to buy from, to buy back, to ransom. The simple verb \agoraz\ (1Corinthians:6:20; strkjv@7:23|) is used in an inscription for the purchase of slaves in a will (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 324). See also strkjv@Galatians:4:5; strkjv@Colossians:4:5; strkjv@Ephesians:5:16|. Christ purchased us {from the curse of the law} (\ek ts kataras tou nomou\). "Out from (\ek\ repeated) under (\hupo\ in verse 10|) the curse of the law." {Having become a curse for us} (\genomenos huper hmn katara\). Here the graphic picture is completed. We were under (\hupo\) a curse, Christ became a curse {over} (\huper\) us and so between us and the overhanging curse which fell on him instead of on us. Thus he bought us out (\ek\) and we are free from the curse which he took on himself. This use of \huper\ for substitution is common in the papyri and in ancient Greek as in the N.T. (John:11:50; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14f.|). {That hangeth on a tree} (\ho kremamenos epi xulou\). Quotation from strkjv@Deuteronomy:21:23| with the omission of \hupo theou\ (by God). Since Christ was not cursed by God. The allusion was to exposure of dead bodies on stakes or crosses (Joshua:10:26|). \Xulon\ means wood, not usually tree, though so in strkjv@Luke:23:31| and in later Greek. It was used of gallows, crosses, etc. See strkjv@Acts:5:30; strkjv@10:39; strkjv@1Peter:2:24|. On the present middle participle from the old verb \kremannumi\, to hang, see on ¯Matthew:18:6; strkjv@Acts:5:30|.
rwp@Galatians:3:15 @{After the manner of men} (\kata anthrpon\). After the custom and practice of men, an illustration from life. {Though it be but a man's covenant, yet when it hath been confirmed} (\homs anthrpou kekurmenn diathkn\). Literally, "Yet a man's covenant ratified." On \Diathk\ as both covenant and will see on ¯Matthew:26:28; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:25; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:6; strkjv@Hebrews:9:16f|. On \kuro\, to ratify, to make valid, see on ¯2Corinthians:2:8|. Perfect passive participle here, state of completion, authoritative confirmation. {Maketh it void} (\athetei\). See on ¯2:21| for this verb. Both parties can by agreement cancel a contract, but not otherwise. {Addeth thereto} (\epidiatassetai\). Present middle indicative of the double compound verb \epidiatassomai\, a word found nowhere else as yet. But inscriptions use \diatassomai, diataxis, diatag, diatagma\ with the specialized meaning to "determine by testamentary disposition" (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 90). It was unlawful to add (\epi\) fresh clauses or specifications (\diataxeis\).
rwp@Galatians:3:18 @{The inheritance} (\h klronomia\). Old word from \klronomos\, heir (\kleros\, lot, \nemomai\, to distribute). See on ¯Matthew:21:38; strkjv@Acts:7:5|. This came to Israel by the promise to Abraham, not by the Mosaic law. Songs:with us, Paul argues. {Hath granted} (\kecharistai\). Perfect middle indicative of \charizomai\. It still holds good after the law came.
rwp@Galatians:3:19 @{What then is the law?} (\ti oun ho nomos?\). Or, why then the law? A pertinent question if the Abrahamic promise antedates it and holds on afterwards. {It was added because of transgressions} (\tn parabasen charin proseteth\). First aorist passive of \prostithmi\, old verb to add to. It is only in apparent contradiction to verses 15ff.|, because in Paul's mind the law is no part of the covenant, but a thing apart "in no way modifying its provisions" (Burton). \Charin\ is the adverbial accusative of \charis\ which was used as a preposition with the genitive as early as Homer, in favour of, for the sake of. Except in strkjv@1John:3:12| it is post-positive in the N.T. as in ancient Greek. It may be causal (Luke:7:47; strkjv@1John:3:12|) or telic (Titus:1:5,11; strkjv@Jude:1:16|). It is probably also telic here, not in order to create transgressions, but rather "to make transgressions palpable" (Ellicott), "thereby pronouncing them to be from that time forward transgressions of the law" (Rendall). \Parabasis\, from \parabain\, is in this sense a late word (Plutarch on), originally a slight deviation, then a wilful disregarding of known regulations or prohibitions as in strkjv@Romans:2:23|. {Till the seed should come} (\achris an elthi to sperma\). Future time with \achris an\ and aorist subjunctive (usual construction). Christ he means by \to sperma\ as in verse 16|. {The promise hath been made} (\epggeltai\). Probably impersonal perfect passive rather than middle of \epaggellomai\ as in II Macc. strkjv@4:27. {Ordained through angels} (\diatageis di' aggeln\). Second aorist passive participle of \diatass\ (see on ¯Matthew:11:1|). About angels and the giving of the law see on strkjv@Deuteronomy:33:2| (LXX); strkjv@Acts:7:38,52; strkjv@Hebrews:2:2|; Josephus (_Ant_. XV. 5. 3). {By the hand of a mediator} (\en cheiri mesitou\). \En cheiri\ is a manifest Aramaism or Hebraism and only here in the N.T. It is common in the LXX. \Mesits\, from \mesos\ is middle or midst, is a late word (Polybius, Diodorus, Philo, Josephus) and common in the papyri in legal transactions for arbiter, surety, etc. Here of Moses, but also of Christ (1Timothy:2:5; strkjv@Hebrews:8:6; strkjv@9:15; strkjv@12:24|).
rwp@Galatians:4:1 @{Songs:long as} (\eph' hoson chronon\). "For how long a time," incorporation of the antecedent (\chronon\) into the relative clause. {The heir} (\ho klronomos\). Old word (\klros\, lot, \nemomai\, to possess). Illustration from the law of inheritance carrying on the last thought in strkjv@3:29|. {A child} (\npios\). One that does not talk (\n, epos\, word). That is a minor, an infant, immature intellectually and morally in contrast with \teleioi\, full grown (1Corinthians:3:1; strkjv@14:20; strkjv@Phillipians:3:15; strkjv@Ephesians:4:13|). {From a bondservant} (\doulou\). Slave. Ablative case of comparison after \diapherei\ for which verb see on ¯Matthew:6:26|. {Though he is lord of all} (\Kurios pantn n\). Concessive participle \n\, "being legally owner of all" (one who has the power, \ho echn kuros\).
rwp@Galatians:4:2 @{Under guardians} (\hupo epitropous\). Old word from \epitrep\, to commit, to intrust. Songs:either an overseer (Matthew:20:8|) or one in charge of children as here. It is common as the guardian of an orphan minor. Frequent in the papyri as guardian of minors. {Stewards} (\oikonomous\). Old word for manager of a household whether freeborn or slave. See strkjv@Luke:12:42; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:2|. Papyri show it as manager of an estate and also as treasurer like strkjv@Romans:16:23|. No example is known where this word is used of one in charge of a minor and no other where both occur together. {Until the time appointed of the father} (\achri ts prothesmias tou patros\). Supply \hmeras\ (day), for \prothesmios\ is an old adjective "appointed beforehand" (\pro, thesmos\, from \tithmi\). Under Roman law the _tutor_ had charge of the child till he was fourteen when the curator took charge of him till he was twenty-five. Ramsay notes that in Graeco-Phrygia cities the same law existed except that the father in Syria appointed both tutor and curator whereas the Roman father appointed only the tutor. Burton argues plausibly that no such legal distinction is meant by Paul, but that the terms here designate two functions of one person. The point does not disturb Paul's illustration at all.
rwp@Galatians:4:3 @{When we were children} (\hote men npioi\). Before the epoch of faith came and we (Jews and Gentiles) were under the law as paedagogue, guardian, steward, to use all of Paul's metaphors. {We were held in bondage} (\hmeis metha dedoulmenoi\). Periphrastic past perfect of \doulo\, to enslave, in a permanent state of bondage. {Under the rudiments of the world} (\hupo ta stoicheia tou kosmou\). \Stoichos\ is row or rank, a series. Songs:\stoicheion\ is any first thing in a \stoichos\ like the letters of the alphabet, the material elements in the universe (2Peter:3:10|), the heavenly bodies (some argue for that here), the rudiments of any act (Hebrews:5:12; strkjv@Acts:15:10; strkjv@Galatians:5:1; strkjv@4:3,9; strkjv@Colossians:2:8,20|). The papyri illustrate all the varieties in meaning of this word. Burton has a valuable excursus on the word in his commentary. Probably here (Lightfoot) Paul has in mind the rudimentary character of the law as it applies to both Jews and Gentiles, to all the knowledge of the world (\kosmos\ as the orderly material universe as in strkjv@Colossians:2:8,20|). See on ¯Matthew:13:38; strkjv@Acts:17:24; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:22|. All were in the elementary stage before Christ came.
rwp@Galatians:4:24 @{Which things contain an allegory} (\hatina estin allgoroumena\). Literally, "Which things are allegorized" (periphrastic present passive indicative of \allgore\). Late word (Strabo, Plutarch, Philo, Josephus, ecclesiastical writers), only here in N.T. The ancient writers used \ainittomai\ to speak in riddles. It is compounded of \allo\, another, and \agoreu\, to speak, and so means speaking something else than what the language means, what Philo, the past-master in the use of allegory, calls the deeper spiritual sense. Paul does not deny the actual historical narrative, but he simply uses it in an allegorical sense to illustrate his point for the benefit of his readers who are tempted to go under the burden of the law. He puts a secondary meaning on the narrative just as he uses \tupiks\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:11| of the narrative. We need not press unduly the difference between allegory and type, for each is used in a variety of ways. The allegory in one sense is a speaking parable like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_, the Prodigal Son in strkjv@Luke:15|, the Good Shepherd in strkjv@John:10|. But allegory was also used by Philo and by Paul here for a secret meaning not obvious at first, one not in the mind of the writer, like our illustration which throws light on the point. Paul was familiar with this rabbinical method of exegesis (Rabbi Akiba, for instance, who found a mystical sense in every hook and crook of the Hebrew letters) and makes skilful use of that knowledge here. Christian preachers in Alexandria early fell victims to Philo's allegorical method and carried it to excess without regard to the plain sense of the narrative. That startling style of preaching survives yet to the discredit of sound preaching. Please observe that Paul says here that he is using allegory, not ordinary interpretation. It is not necessary to say that Paul intended his readers to believe that this allegory was designed by the narrative. He illustrates his point by it. {For these are} (\hautai gar eisin\). Allegorically interpreted, he means. {From Mount Sinai} (\apo orous Sin\). Spoken from Mount Sinai. {Bearing} (\gennsa\). Present active participle of \genna\, to beget of the male (Matthew:1:1-16|), more rarely as here to bear of the female (Luke:1:13,57|). {Which is Hagar} (\htis estin Hagar\). Allegorically interpreted.
rwp@Galatians:4:30 @{Cast out} (\ekbale\). Second aorist active imperative of \ekball\. Quotation from strkjv@Genesis:21:10| (Sarah to Abraham) and confirmed in strkjv@21:12| by God's command to Abraham. Paul gives allegorical warning thus to the persecuting Jews and Judaizers. {Shall not inherit} (\ou m klronomsei\). Strong negative (\ou m\ and future indicative). "The law and the gospel cannot co-exist. The law must disappear before the gospel" (Lightfoot). See strkjv@3:18,29| for the word "inherit."
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@Galatians:5:5 @{For we} (\hmeis gar\). We Christians as opposed to the legalists. {Through the Spirit by faith} (\pneumati ek pistes\). By the Spirit (Holy Spirit) out of faith (not law). Clear-cut repetition to make it plain.
rwp@Galatians:5:6 @{Availeth anything} (\ischuei ti\). Old word to have strength (\ischs\). See on ¯Matthew:5:13|. Neither Jew nor Greek has any recommendation in his state. See strkjv@3:28|. All stand on a level in Christ. {Faith working through love} (\pistis di' agaps energoumen\). Middle voice of \energe\ and "through love," "the moral dynamic" (Burton) of Paul's conception of freedom from law.
rwp@Galatians:5:14 @{Even in this} (\en ti\). Just the article with \en\, "in the," but it points at the quotation from strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|. Jews (Luke:10:29|) confined "neighbour" (\plsion\) to Jews. Paul uses here a striking paradox by urging obedience to the law against which he has been arguing, but this is the moral law as proof of the new love and life. See also strkjv@Romans:13:8|, precisely as Jesus did (Matthew:22:40|).
rwp@Galatians:5:18 @{Under the law} (\hupo nomon\). Instead of "under the flesh" as one might expect. See strkjv@Galatians:3:2-6| for contrast between law and spirit. The flesh made the law weak (Rom strkjv@8:3; strkjv@Hebrews:9:10,13|). They are one and the same in result. See same idea in strkjv@Romans:8:14|. Note present tense of \agesthe\ (if you are continually led by the Spirit). See verse 23|.
rwp@Galatians:6:7 @{Be not deceived} (\m plansthe\). Present passive imperative with \m\, "stop being led astray" (\plana\, common verb to wander, to lead astray as in strkjv@Matthew:24:4f.|). {God is not mocked} (\ou muktrizetai\). This rare verb (common in LXX) occurs in Lysias. It comes from \muktr\ (nose) and means to turn the nose up at one. That is done towards God, but never without punishment, Paul means to say. In particular, he means "an evasion of his laws which men think to accomplish, but, in fact, cannot" (Burton). {Whatsoever a man soweth} (\ho ean speiri anthrpos\). Indefinite relative clause with \ean\ and the active subjunctive (either aorist or present, form same here). One of the most frequent of ancient proverbs (Job:4:8|; Arist., _Rhet_. iii. 3). Already in strkjv@2Corinthians:9:6|. Same point in strkjv@Matthew:7:16; strkjv@Mark:4:26f|. {That} (\touto\). That very thing, not something different. {Reap} (\therisei\). See on ¯Matthew:6:26| for this old verb.
rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE PURPOSE The author states it repeatedly. He urges the Jewish Christians to hold fast the confession which they have made in Jesus as Messiah and Saviour. Their Jewish neighbours have urged them to give up Christ and Christianity and to come back to Judaism. The Judaizers tried to make Jews out of Gentile Christians and to fasten Judaism upon Christianity with a purely sacramental type of religion as the result. Paul won freedom for evangelical and spiritual Christianity against the Judaizers as shown in the Corinthian Epistles, Galatians, and Romans. The Gnostics in subtle fashion tried to dilute Christianity with their philosophy and esoteric mysteries and here again Paul won his fight for the supremacy of Christ over all these imaginary \aeons\ (Colossians and Ephesians). But in Hebrews the author is battling to stop a stampede from Christ back to Judaism, a revolt (apostasy) in truth from the living God. These Jews argued that the prophets were superior to Jesus, the law came by the ministry of angels, Moses was greater than Jesus, and Aaron than Jesus. The author turns the argument on the Jews and boldly champions the Glory of Jesus as superior at every point to all that Judaism had, as God's Son and man's Saviour, the crown and glory of the Old Testament prophecy, the hope of mankind. It is the first great apologetic for Christianity and has never been surpassed. Moffatt terms it "a profound homily."
rwp@Hebrews:7:19 @{Made nothing perfect} (\ouden eteleisen\). Another parenthesis. First aorist active indicative of \teleio\. See verse 11|. And yet law is necessary. {A bringing in thereupon} (\epeisagg\). An old double compound (\epi\, additional, \eisagg\, bringing in from \eisag\). Here only in N.T. Used by Josephus (_Ant_. XI. 6, 2) for the introduction of a new wife in place of the repudiated one. {Of a better hope} (\kreittonos elpidos\). This better hope (6:18-20|) does bring us near to God (\eggizomen ti thei\) as we come close to God's throne through Christ (4:16|).
rwp@Hebrews:8:8 @{Finding fault with them} (\memphomenos autous\). Present middle participle of \memphomai\ (cf. \amemptos\), old verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:9:19|. The covenant was all right, but the Jews failed to keep it. Hence God made a new one of grace in place of law. Why do marriage covenants so often fail to hold? The author quotes in verses 8-12; strkjv@Jeremiah:38:31-34| (in LXX strkjv@31:31-34|) in full which calls for little explanation or application to prove his point (verse 13|). {I will make} (\sunteles\). Future active of \suntele\, old compound verb to accomplish as in strkjv@Mark:13:4; strkjv@Romans:9:28|. {A new covenant} (\diathkn kainn\). In strkjv@12:24| we have \diathks neas\, but \kains\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:25|. \Kainos\ is fresh, on new lines as opposed to the old (\palaios\) as in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:6,14|; \neos\ is young or not yet old.
rwp@Hebrews:10:1 @{Shadow} (\skian\). The contrast here between \skia\ (shadow, shade caused by interruption of light as by trees, strkjv@Mark:4:32|) and \eikn\ (image or picture) is striking. Christ is the \eikn\ of God (2Corinthians:4:4; strkjv@Colossians:1:15|). In strkjv@Colossians:2:17| Paul draws a distinction between \skia\ for the Jewish rites and ceremonies and \sma\ for the reality in Christ. Children are fond of shadow pictures. The law gives only a dim outline of the good things to come (9:11|). {Continually} (\eis to dinekes\). See this phrase also in strkjv@7:3; strkjv@9:12,14|. Nowhere else in N.T. From \dinegka\ (\diapher\), to bear through. {They can} (\dunantai\). This reading leaves \ho nomos\ a _nominativus pendens_ (an anacoluthon). But many MSS. read \dunatai\ (it--the law--can). For the idea and use of \teleisai\ see strkjv@9:9|.
rwp@Hebrews:10:28 @{Hath set at naught} (\athetsas\). First aorist active participle of \athete\, late compound, very common in LXX, from alpha privative and \tithmi\, to render null and void, to set aside, only here in Hebrews (see strkjv@Mark:7:9|), but note \athetsis\ (Hebrews:7:18; strkjv@9:26|). {Without mercy} (\chris oiktirmn\). See strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3|. This was the law (Deuteronomy:17:6|) for apostates. {On the word of two or three} (\epi dusin trisin\). "On the basis of two or three." For this use of \epi\ with the locative see strkjv@9:17|.
rwp@James:1:25 @{He that looketh into} (\ho parakupsas\). First aorist active articular participle of \parakupt\, old verb, to stoop and look into (John:20:5,11|), to gaze carefully by the side of, to peer into or to peep into (1Peter:1:12|). Here the notion of beside (\para\) or of stooping (\kupt\) is not strong. Sometimes, as Hort shows, the word means only a cursory glance, but the contrast with verse 24| seems to preclude that here. {The perfect law} (\nomon teleion\). For \teleion\ see strkjv@1:17|. See strkjv@Romans:7:12| for Paul's idea of the law of God. James here refers to the word of truth (1:18|), the gospel of grace (Galatians:6:2; strkjv@Romans:12:2|). {The law of liberty} (\ton ts eleutherias\). "That of liberty," explaining why it is "perfect" (2:12| also), rests on the work of Christ, whose truth sets us free (John:8:32; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:16; strkjv@Romans:8:2|). {And so continueth} (\kai parameinas\). First aorist active articular participle again of \paramen\, parallel with \parakupsas\. \Paramen\ is to stay beside, and see strkjv@Phillipians:1:25| for contrast with the simplex \men\. {Being} (\genomenos\). Rather, "having become" (second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\ to become). {Not a hearer that forgetteth} (\ouk akroats epilsmons\). "Not a hearer of forgetfulness" (descriptive genitive, marked by forgetfulness). \Epilsmon\ is a late and rare word (from \epilsmn\, forgetful, from \epilanthomai\, to forget, as in verse 24|), here only in N.T. {But a doer that worketh} (\alla poits ergou\). "But a doer of work," a doer marked by work (descriptive genitive \ergou\), not by mere listening or mere talk. {In his doing} (\en ti poisei autou\). Another beatitude with \makarios\ as in strkjv@1:12|, like the Beatitudes in strkjv@Matthew:5:3-12|. \Poisis\ is an old word (from \poie\ for the act of doing), only here in N.T.
rwp@James:2:8 @{Howbeit} (\mentoi\). Probably not adversative here, but simply confirmatory, "if now," "if indeed," "if really." Common in Xenophon in this sense. See the contrast (\de\) in verse 9|. {If ye fulfil} (\ei teleite\). Condition of first class, assumed as true with \ei\ and present active indicative of \tele\, old verb, to bring to completion, occurring in strkjv@Romans:2:27| also with \nomos\ (law). Jesus used \plro\ in strkjv@Matthew:4:17|. James has \tre\ in strkjv@2:10|. {The royal law} (\nomon basilikon\). Old adjective for royal, regal (from \basileus\ king), as of an officer (John:4:46|). But why applied to \nomos\? The Romans had a phrase, _lex regia_, which came from the king when they had kings. The absence of the article is common with \nomos\ (4:11|). It can mean a law fit to guide a king, or such as a king would choose, or even the king of laws. Jesus had said that on the law of love hang all the law and the prophets (Matthew:22:40|), and he had given the Golden Rule as the substance of the Law and the prophets (Matthew:7:12|). This is probably the royal law which is violated by partiality (James:2:3|). It is in accord with the Scripture quoted here (Leviticus:19:18|) and ratified by Jesus (Luke:10:28|).
rwp@James:2:9 @{But if ye have respect of persons} (\ei de prospolmpteite\). Condition of first class by contrast with that in verse 8|. For this verb (present active indicative), formed from \prospon lamban\, here alone in the N.T., see in strkjv@2:1|. A direct reference to the partiality there pictured. {Ye commit sin} (\hamartian ergazesthe\). "Ye work a sin." A serious charge, apparently, for what was regarded as a trifling fault. See strkjv@Matthew:7:23|, \hoi ergazomenoi tn anomian\ (ye that work iniquity), an apparent reminiscence of the words of Jesus there (from strkjv@Psalms:6:8|). {Being convicted} (\elegchomenoi\). Present passive participle of \elegch\, to convict by proof of guilt (John:3:20; strkjv@8:9,46; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:24|). {As transgressors} (\hs parabatai\). For this word from \parabain\, to step across, to transgress, see strkjv@Galatians:2:18; strkjv@Romans:2:25,27|. See this very sin of partiality condemned in strkjv@Leviticus:19:15; strkjv@Deuteronomy:1:17; strkjv@16:19|. To the law and to the testimony.
rwp@James:2:10 @{Whosoever shall keep} (\hostis trsi\). Indefinite relative clause with \hostis\ and aorist active subjunctive of \tre\, old verb, to guard (from \tros\ guarding), as in strkjv@Matthew:27:36|, without \an\ (though often used, but only one example of modal \ean=an\ in James, viz., strkjv@4:4|). This modal \an\ (\ean\) merely interprets the sentence as either more indefinite or more definite (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 957f.). {And yet stumble in one point} (\ptaisi de en heni\). First aorist active subjunctive also of \ptai\, old verb, to trip, as in strkjv@3:2; strkjv@Romans:11:11|. "It is incipient falling" (Hort). {He is become} (\gegonen\). Second perfect indicative of \ginomai\, "he has become" by that one stumble. {Guilty of all} (\pantn enochos\). Genitive of the crime with \enochos\, old adjective from \enech\ (to hold on or in), held in, as in strkjv@Mark:3:29|. This is law. To be a lawbreaker one does not have to violate all the laws, but he must keep all the law (\holon ton nomon\) to be a law-abiding citizen, even laws that one does not like. See strkjv@Matthew:5:18f.| for this same principle. There is Talmudic parallel: "If a man do all, but omit one, he is guilty for all and each." This is a pertinent principle also for those who try to save themselves. But James is urging obedience to all God's laws.
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@James:2:12 @{Songs:speak ye, and so do} (\houts laleite kai houts poieite\). Present active imperatives as a habit. For the combination see strkjv@1:19-21| contrasted with strkjv@1:22-25|, and strkjv@1:26| with strkjv@1:27|. {By a law of liberty} (\dia nomou eleutherias\). The law pictured in strkjv@1:25|, but law, after all, not individual caprice of "personal liberty." See strkjv@Romans:2:12| for this same use of \dia\ with \krin\ in the sense of accompaniment as in strkjv@Romans:2:27; strkjv@4:11; strkjv@14:20|. "Under the law of liberty."
rwp@James:4:11 @{Speak not one against another} (\m katalaleite allln\). Prohibition against such a habit or a command to quit doing it, with \m\ and the present imperative of \katalale\, old compound usually with the accusative in ancient Greek, in N.T. only with the genitive (here, strkjv@1Peter:2:12; strkjv@3:16|). Often harsh words about the absent. James returns to the subject of the tongue as he does again in strkjv@5:12| (twice before, strkjv@1:26; strkjv@3:1-12|). {Judgeth} (\krinn\). In the sense of harsh judgment as in strkjv@Matthew:7:1; strkjv@Luke:6:37| (explained by \katadikaz\). {Not a doer of the law, but a judge} (\ouk poits nomou, alla krits\). This tone of superiority to law is here sharply condemned. James has in mind God's law, of course, but the point is the same for all laws under which we live. We cannot select the laws which we will obey unless some contravene God's law, and so our own conscience (Acts:4:20|). Then we are willing to give our lives for our rebellion if need be.
rwp@James:4:12 @{One only} (\heis\). No "only" in the Greek, but \heis\ here excludes all others but God. {The lawgiver} (\ho nomothets\). Old compound (from \nomos, tithmi\), only here in N.T. In strkjv@Psalms:9:20|. Cf. \nomothete\ in strkjv@Hebrews:7:11; strkjv@8:6|. {To save} (\ssai\, first aorist active infinitive of \sz\) {and to destroy} (\kai apolesai\, first aorist active infinitive of \apollumi\ to destroy). Cf. the picture of God's power in strkjv@Matthew:10:28|, a common idea in the O.T. (Deuteronomy:32:39; strkjv@1Samuel:2:16; strkjv@2Kings:5:7|). {But who art thou?} (\su de tis ei;\). Proleptic and emphatic position of \su\ (thou) in this rhetorical question as in strkjv@Romans:9:20; strkjv@14:4|. {Thy neighbour} (\ton plsion\). "The neighbour" as in strkjv@James:2:8|.
rwp@Info_John @ HISTORICAL VALUE OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL It is just here that the chief attack is made on the Fourth Gospel even by some who admit the Johannine authorship. It is now assumed by some that the Fourth Gospel is not on a par with the Synoptics in historical reliability and some harmonies omit it entirely or place it separately at the close, though certainly Tatian used it with the Synoptics in his _Diatessaron_, the first harmony of the Gospels. Some even follow Schmiedel in seeing only a symbolic or parabolic character in the miracles in the Fourth Gospel, particularly in the narrative of the raising of Lazarus in chapter strkjv@John:11| which occurs here alone. But John makes this miracle play quite an important part in the culmination of events at the end. Clearly the author professes to be giving actual data largely out of his own experience and knowledge. It is objected by some that the Fourth Gospel gives an unnatural picture of Christ with Messianic claims at the very start. But the Synoptics give that same claim at the baptism and temptation, not to mention Luke's account of the Boy Jesus in the temple. The picture of the Jews as hostile to Jesus is said to be overdrawn in the Fourth Gospel. The answer to that appears in the Sermon on the Mount, the Sabbath miracles, the efforts of the Pharisees and lawyers to catch Jesus in his talk, the final denunciation in strkjv@Matthew:23|, all in the Synoptics. The opposition to Jesus grew steadily as he revealed himself more clearly. Some of the difficulties raised are gratuitous as in the early cleansing of the temple as if it could not have happened twice, confounding the draught of fishes in chapter strkjv@John:21| with that in strkjv@Luke:5|, making Mary of Bethany at the feast of a Simon in chapter strkjv@John:12| the same as the sinful woman at the feast of another Simon in strkjv@Luke:7|, making John's Gospel locate the last passover meal a day ahead instead of at the regular time as the Synoptics have it. Rightly interpreted these difficulties disappear. In simple truth, if one takes the Fourth Gospel at its face value, the personal recollections of the aged John phrased in his own way to supplement the narratives in the Synoptics, there is little left to give serious trouble. The Jerusalem ministry with the feasts is a case in point. The narrative of the call of the first disciples in chapter strkjv@John:1| is another. The author followed Simon in bringing also his own brother James to Jesus. John was present in the appearance of Christ before Annas, and Pilate. He was at the Cross when no other apostles were there. He took the mother of Jesus to his home and then returned to the Cross. He saw the piercing of the side of Jesus. He knew and saw the deed of Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus. E. H. Askwith has a most helpful discussion of this whole problem in _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1910).
rwp@John:1:14 @{And the Word became flesh} (\kai ho logos sarx egeneto\). See verse 3| for this verb and note its use for the historic event of the Incarnation rather than \n\ of verse 1|. Note also the absence of the article with the predicate substantive \sarx\, so that it cannot mean "the flesh became the Word." The Pre-existence of the Logos has already been plainly stated and argued. John does not here say that the Logos entered into a man or dwelt in a man or filled a man. One is at liberty to see an allusion to the birth narratives in strkjv@Matthew:1:16-25; strkjv@Luke:1:28-38|, if he wishes, since John clearly had the Synoptics before him and chiefly supplemented them in his narrative. In fact, one is also at liberty to ask what intelligent meaning can one give to John's language here apart from the Virgin Birth? What ordinary mother or father ever speaks of a child "becoming flesh"? For the Incarnation see also strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Galatians:4:4; strkjv@Romans:1:3; strkjv@8:3; strkjv@Phillipians:2:7f.; strkjv@1Timothy:3:16; strkjv@Hebrews:2:14|. "To explain the exact significance of \egeneto\ in this sentence is beyond the powers of any interpreter" (Bernard). Unless, indeed, as seems plain, John is referring to the Virgin Birth as recorded in Matthew and Luke. "The Logos of philosophy is, John declares, the Jesus of history" (Bernard). Thus John asserts the deity and the real humanity of Christ. He answers the Docetic Gnostics who denied his humanity. {Dwelt among us} (\esknsen en hmin\). First aorist ingressive aorist active indicative of \skno\, old verb, to pitch one's tent or tabernacle (\sknos\ or \skn\), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:7-15; strkjv@12:12; strkjv@13:6; strkjv@21:3|. In Revelation it is used of God tabernacling with men and here of the Logos tabernacling, God's Shekinah glory here among us in the person of his Son. {We beheld his glory} (\etheasametha tn doxan autou\). First aorist middle indicative of \theaomai\ (from \thea\, spectacle). The personal experience of John and of others who did recognize Jesus as the Shekinah glory (\doxa\) of God as James, the brother of Jesus, so describes him (James:2:1|). John employs \theaomai\ again in strkjv@1:32| (the Baptist beholding the Spirit coming down as a dove) and strkjv@1:38| of the Baptist gazing in rapture at Jesus. Songs:also strkjv@4:35; strkjv@11:45; strkjv@1John:1:1f.; strkjv@4:12,14|. By this word John insists that in the human Jesus he beheld the Shekinah glory of God who was and is the Logos who existed before with God. By this plural John speaks for himself and all those who saw in Jesus what he did. {As of the only begotten from the Father} (\hs monogenous para patros\). Strictly, "as of an only born from a father," since there is no article with \monogenous\ or with \patros\. In strkjv@John:3:16; strkjv@1John:4:9| we have \ton monogen\ referring to Christ. This is the first use in the Gospel of \patr\ of God in relation to the Logos. \Monogens\ (only born rather than only begotten) here refers to the eternal relationship of the Logos (as in strkjv@1:18|) rather than to the Incarnation. It distinguishes thus between the Logos and the believers as children (\tekna\) of God. The word is used of human relationships as in strkjv@Luke:7:12; strkjv@8:42; strkjv@9:38|. It occurs also in the LXX and strkjv@Hebrews:11:17|, but elsewhere in N.T. only in John's writings. It is an old word in Greek literature. It is not clear whether the words \para patros\ (from the Father) are to be connected with \monogenous\ (cf. strkjv@6:46; strkjv@7:29|, etc.) or with \doxan\ (cf. strkjv@5:41,44|). John clearly means to say that "the manifested glory of the Word was as it were the glory of the Eternal Father shared with His only Son" (Bernard). Cf. strkjv@8:54; strkjv@14:9; strkjv@17:5|. {Full} (\plrs\). Probably indeclinable accusative adjective agreeing with \doxan\ (or genitive with \monogenous\) of which we have papyri examples (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 275). As nominative \plrs\ can agree with the subject of \esknsen\. {Of grace and truth} (\charitos kai altheias\). Curiously this great word \charis\ (grace), so common with Paul, does not occur in John's Gospel save in strkjv@1:14,16,17|, though \altheia\ (truth) is one of the keywords in the Fourth Gospel and in 1John, occurring 25 times in the Gospel and 20 in the Johannine Epistles, 7 times in the Synoptics and not at all in Revelation (Bernard). In strkjv@1:17| these two words picture the Gospel in Christ in contrast with the law of Moses. See Epistles of Paul for origin and use of both words.
rwp@John:1:45 @{Philip findeth} (\heuriskei Philippos\). Dramatic present again. Philip carries on the work. One wins one. If that glorious beginning had only kept on! Now it takes a hundred to win one. {Nathaniel} (\ton Nathanal\). It is a Hebrew name meaning "God has given" like the Greek \Theodore\ (Gift of God). He was from Cana of Galilee (John:21:2|), not far from Bethsaida and so known to Philip. His name does not occur in the Synoptics while Bartholomew (a patronymic, _Bar Tholmai_) does not appear in John. They are almost certainly two names of the same man. Philip uses \heurkamen\ (verse 41|) also to Nathanael and so unites himself with the circle of believers, but instead of \Messian\ describes him "of whom (\hon\ accusative with \egrapsen\) Moses in the law (Deuteronomy:18:15|) and the prophets (so the whole O.T. as in strkjv@Luke:24:27,44|) did write." {Jesus of Nazareth the son of Joseph} (\Isoun huion tou Isph ton apo Nazaret\). More exactly, "Jesus, son of Joseph, the one from Nazareth." Jesus passed as son (no article in the Greek) of Joseph, though John has just described him as "God-only Begotten" in verse 18|, but certainly Philip could not know this. Bernard terms this part "the irony of St. John" for he is sure that his readers will agree with him as to the real deity of Jesus Christ. These details were probably meant to interest Nathanael.
rwp@John:2:9 @{Tasted} (\egeusato\). First aorist middle indicative of \geuomai\. As it was his function to do. {The water now become wine} (\to hudr oinon gegenmenon\). Accusative case, though the genitive also occurs with \geuomai\. Perfect passive participle of \ginomai\ and \oinon\, predicative accusative. The tablemaster knew nothing of the miracle, "whence it was" (\pothen estin\, indirect question retaining present indicative). The servants knew the source of the water, but not the power that made the wine. {Calleth the bridegroom} (\phnei ton numphion\). As apparently responsible for the supply of the wine ({thou hast kept} \tetrkas\). See strkjv@Matthew:9:15| for \numphios\. When men have drunk freely (\hotan methusthsin\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \methusk\. The verb does not mean that these guests are now drunk, but that this is a common custom to put "the worse" (\ton elass\, the less, the inferior) wine last. It is real wine that is meant by \oinos\ here. Unlike the Baptist Jesus mingled in the social life of the time, was even abused for it (Matthew:11:19; strkjv@Luke:7:34|). But this fact does not mean that today Jesus would approve the modern liquor trade with its damnable influences. The law of love expounded by Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:8-10| and in strkjv@Romans:14,15| teaches modern Christians to be willing gladly to give up what they see causes so many to stumble into sin.
rwp@John:3:19 @{And this is the judgment} (\haut de estin h krisis\). A thoroughly Johannine phrase for sequence of thought (15:12; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@1John:1:5; strkjv@5:11,14; strkjv@3John:1:6|). It is more precisely the process of judging (\kri-sis\) rather than the result (\kri-ma\) of the judgment. "It is no arbitrary sentence, but the working out of a moral law" (Bernard). {The light is come} (\to phs elluthen\). Second perfect active indicative of \erchomai\, a permanent result as already explained in the Prologue concerning the Incarnation (1:4,5,9,11|). Jesus is the Light of the world. {Loved darkness} (\gapsan to skotos\). Job:(Job:24:13|) spoke of men rebelling against the light. Here \to skotos\, common word for moral and spiritual darkness (1Thessalonians:5:5|), though \h skotia\ in strkjv@John:1:5|. "Darkness" is common in John as a metaphor for the state of sinners (8:12; strkjv@12:35, 46; strkjv@1John:1:6; strkjv@2:8,9,11|). Jesus himself is the only moral and spiritual light of the world (8:12|) as he dared claim to his enemies. The pathos of it all is that men fall in love with the darkness of sin and rebel against the light like denizens of the underworld, "for their works were evil (\ponra\)." When the light appears, they scatter to their holes and dens. \Ponros\ (from \ponos\, toil, \pone\, to toil) is used of the deeds of the world by Jesus (7:7|). In the end the god of this world blinds men's eyes so that they do not see the light (2Corinthians:4:4|). The fish in the Mammoth Cave have no longer eyes, but only sockets where eyes used to be. The evil one has a powerful grip on the world (1John:5:19|).
rwp@John:5:10 @{Unto him that was cured} (\ti tetherapeumeni\). Perfect passive articular participle of \therapeu\ (only example in John), "to the healed man." See strkjv@Matthew:8:7|. {To take up thy bed} (\rai ton krabatton\). The very words of Jesus (verse 8|), only infinitive (first aorist active). Carrying burdens was considered unlawful on the Sabbath (Exodus:23:12; strkjv@Nehemiah:13:19; strkjv@Jeremiah:17:21|). Stoning was the rabbinical punishment. The healing of the man was a minor detail.
rwp@John:5:30 @{I} (\Eg\). The discourse returns to the first person after using "the Son" since verse 19|. Here Jesus repeats in the first person (as in strkjv@8:28|) the statement made in verse 19| about the Son. In John \emautou\ is used by Jesus 16 times and not at all by Jesus in the Synoptics. It occurs in the Synoptics only in strkjv@Matthew:8:8; strkjv@Luke:7:7f|. {Righteous} (\dikaia\). As all judgements should be. The reason is plain (\hoti\, because), the guiding principle with the Son being the will of the Father who sent him and made him Judge. Judges often have difficulty in knowing what is law and what is right, but the Son's task as Judge is simple enough, the will of the Father which he knows (verse 20|).
rwp@John:5:31 @{If I bear witness of myself} (\Ean eg martur peri emautou\). Condition of third class, undetermined with prospect of determination (\ean\ and present active subjunctive of \marture\). The emphasis is on \eg\ (I alone with no other witness). {Is not true} (\ouk estin alths\). In law the testimony of a witness is not received in his own case (Jewish, Greek, Roman law). See strkjv@Deuteronomy:19:15| and the allusion to it by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:18:16|. See also strkjv@2Corinthians:13:1; strkjv@1Timothy:5:19|. And yet in strkjv@8:12-19| Jesus claims that his witness concerning himself is true because the Father gives confirmation of his message. The Father and the Son are the two witnesses (8:17|). It is a paradox and yet true. But here Jesus yields to the rabbinical demand for proof outside of himself. He has the witness of another (the Father, strkjv@5:32,37|), the witness of the Baptist (5:33|), the witness of the works of Jesus (5:36|), the witness of the Scriptures (5:39|), the witness of Moses in particular (5:45|).
rwp@John:7:7 @{Cannot hate} (\ou dunatai misein\). Because of "the law of moral correspondence" (Westcott), often in John for "inherent impossibility" (Vincent). The brothers of Jesus here belong to the unbelieving world (\kosmos\) which is unable to love Jesus (15:18,23,24|) and which Jesus had already exposed ("testify," \martur\, strkjv@5:42,45|). This unbelieving "world" resented the exposure (3:19|, cf. strkjv@18:37|).
rwp@John:7:22 @{For this cause} (\dia touto\). Some would take this phrase with the preceding verb \thaumazete\ (ye marvel for this cause). {Hath given} (\dedken\). Present active indicative of \didmi\ (permanent state). {Not that it is of Moses, but of the fathers} (\ouch hoti ek tou Muses estin all' ek tn patern\). A parenthesis to explain that circumcision is older in origin than Moses. {And on the sabbath ye circumcise} (\kai en sabbati peritemnete\). Adversative use of \kai\=and yet as in 19|. That is to say, the Jews keep one law (circumcision) by violating another (on the Sabbath, the charge against him in chapter 5, healing on the Sabbath).
rwp@John:7:23 @{That the law of Moses may not be broken} (\hina m luthi ho nomos Muses\). Purpose clause with negative \m\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \lu\. They are punctilious about their Sabbath rules and about circumcision on the eighth day. When they clash, they drop the Sabbath rule and circumcise. {Are ye wroth with me?} (\emoi cholte;\). Old word from \chol\ (bile, gall), possibly from \chlo\ or \chlros\ (yellowish green). Only here in N.T. Songs:to be mad. With dative. Vivid picture of bitter spleen against Jesus for healing a man on the sabbath when they circumcise on the Sabbath. {A man every whit whole} (\holon anthrpon hugi\). Literally, "a whole (\holon\) man (all the man) sound (\hugi\, well)," not just one member of the body mended.
rwp@John:7:49 @{This multitude} (\ho ochlos houtos\). The Pharisees had a scorn for the _amhaaretz_ or "people of the earth" (cf. our "clod-hoppers") as is seen in rabbinic literature. It was some of the \ochlos\ (multitude at the feast especially from Galilee) who had shown sympathy with Jesus (7:12,28f.|). {Which knoweth not the law} (\ho m ginoskn\). Present active articular participle of \ginsk\ with \m\ usual negative of the participle in the _Koin_. "No brutish man is sin-fearing, nor is one of the people of the earth pious" (_Aboth_, II. 6). See the amazement of the Sanhedrin at Peter and John in strkjv@Acts:4:13| as "unlettered and private men" (\agrammatoi kai iditai\). No wonder the common people (\ochlos\) heard Jesus gladly (Mark:12:37|). The rabbis scouted and scorned them. {Are accursed} (\eparatoi eisin\). Construction according to sense (plural verb and adjective with collective singular \ochlos\). \Eparatoi\ is old verbal adjective from \eparaomai\, to call down curses upon, here only in the N.T.
rwp@John:8:17 @{Yea and in your law} (\kai en ti nomi de ti humeteri\). Same use of \kai--de\ as in verse 16|. They claimed possession of the law (7:49|) and so Jesus takes this turn in answer to the charge of single witness in verse 13|. He will use similar language (your law) in strkjv@10:34| in an _argumentum ad hominem_ as here in controversy with the Jews. In strkjv@15:24| to the apostles Jesus even says "in their law" in speaking of the hostile Jews plotting his death. He does not mean in either case to separate himself wholly from the Jews and the law, though in Matthew 5 he does show the superiority of his teaching to that of the law. For the Mosaic regulation about two witnesses see strkjv@Deuteronomy:17:6; strkjv@19:15|. This combined witness of two is not true just because they agree, unless true in fact separately. But if they disagree, the testimony falls to the ground. In this case the Father confirms the witness of the Son as Jesus had already shown (5:37|).
rwp@John:8:32 @{And ye shall know the truth} (\kai gnsesthe tn altheian\). Truth is one of the marks of Christ (1:14|) and Jesus will claim to Thomas to be the personification of truth (14:6|). But it will be for them knowledge to be learned by doing God's will (7:17|). The word is from \alths\ (\a\ privative and \lth\, to conceal, unsealed, open). See also verses 40,44,45|. {And the truth shall make you free} (\kai h altheia eleuthersei humas\). Future active indicative of \eleuthero\, old verb from \eleutheros\ (from \erchomai\, to go where one wishes and so free). One of Paul's great words for freedom from the bondage of the law (Romans:6:18; strkjv@Galatians:5:1|). The freedom of which Jesus here speaks is freedom from the slavery of sin as Paul in strkjv@Romans:8:2|. See strkjv@John:8:36|. This freedom is won alone by Christ (8:36|) and we are sanctified in truth (17:19|). In strkjv@1:17| truth is mentioned with grace as one of the marks of the gospel through Christ. Freedom (intellectual, moral, spiritual) is only attainable when we are set free from darkness, sin, ignorance, superstition and let the Light of the World shine on us and in us.
rwp@John:10:34 @{Is it not written?} (\ouk estin gegrammenon;\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \graph\ (as in strkjv@2:17|) in place of the usual \gegraptai\. "Does it not stand written?" {In your law} (\en ti nomi humn\). From strkjv@Psalms:82:6|. The term \nomos\ (law) applying here to the entire O.T. as in strkjv@12:34; strkjv@15:25; strkjv@Romans:3:19; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:21|. Aleph D Syr-sin. omit \humn\, but needlessly. We have it already so from Jesus in strkjv@8:17|. They posed as the special custodians of the O.T. {I said} (\hoti eg eipa\). Recitative \hoti\ before a direct quotation like our quotation marks. \Eipa\ is a late second aorist form of indicative with \-a\ instead of \-on\. {Ye are gods} (\theoi este\). Another direct quotation after \eipa\ but without \hoti\. The judges of Israel abused their office and God is represented in strkjv@Psalms:82:6| as calling them "gods" (\theoi\, _elohim_) because they were God's representatives. See the same use of _elohim_ in strkjv@Exodus:21:6; strkjv@22:9,28|. Jesus meets the rabbis on their own ground in a thoroughly Jewish way.
rwp@John:11:49 @{Caiaphas} (\Kaiaphas\). Son-in-law of Annas and successor and high priest for 18 years (A.D. 18 to 36). {That year} (\tou eniautou ekeinou\). Genitive of time; his high-priesthood included that year (A.D. 29 or 30). Songs:he took the lead at this meeting. {Ye know nothing at all} (\humeis ouk oidate ouden\). In this he is correct, for no solution of their problem had been offered.
rwp@John:15:25 @{But this cometh to pass} (\all'\). Ellipsis in the Greek (no verb), as in strkjv@9:3; strkjv@13:18|. {In their law} (\en ti nomi autn\). Cf. strkjv@8:17; strkjv@10:34| for this standpoint. "Law" (\nomos\) here is for the whole of Scripture as in strkjv@12:34|. The allusion is to strkjv@Psalms:69:4| (or strkjv@Psalms:35:19|). The hatred of the Jews toward Jesus the promised Messiah (1:11|) is "part of the mysterious purpose of God" (Bernard) as shown by \hina plrthi\ (first aorist passive subjunctive of \plro\, to fulfil). {Without a cause} (\drean\). Adverbial accusative of \drea\ from \didmi\, gratuitously, then unnecessarily or _gratis_ (in two _Koin_ tablets, Nageli) as here and strkjv@Galatians:2:21|.
rwp@John:18:10 @{Having a sword} (\echn machairan\). It was unlawful to carry a weapon on a feast-day, but Peter had become alarmed at Christ's words about his peril. They had two swords or knives in the possession of the eleven according to Luke (22:38|). After the treacherous kiss of Judas (on the hand or the cheek?) the disciples asked: "Lord, shall we smite with the sword?" (Luke:22:49|). Apparently before Jesus could answer Peter with his usual impulsiveness jerked out (\heilkusen\, first aorist active indicative of \helku\ for which see strkjv@6:44|) his sword and cut off the right ear of Malchus (John:18:10|), a servant of the high priest. Peter missed the man's head as he swerved to his left. Luke also (Luke:22:50|) mentions the detail of the right ear, but John alone mentions the man's name and Peter's. There was peril to Peter in his rash act as comes out later (John:18:26|), but he was dead long before John wrote his Gospel as was Lazarus of whom John could also safely write (12:9-11|). For \tarion\, diminutive of \ous\, see strkjv@Mark:14:47| (only other N.T. example), another diminutive \tion\ in strkjv@Matthew:26:51| (Mark:14:47; strkjv@Luke:22:51|).
rwp@John:18:12 @{The chief captain} (\ho chiliarchos\). They actually had the Roman commander of the cohort along (cf. strkjv@Acts:21:31|), not mentioned before. {Seized} (\sunelabon\). Second aorist active of \sullamban\, old verb to grasp together, to arrest (technical word) in the Synoptics in this context (Mark:14:48; strkjv@Matthew:26:55|), here alone in John. {Bound} (\edsan\). First aorist active indicative of \de\, to bind. As a matter of course, with the hands behind his back, but with no warrant in law and with no charge against him. {To Annas first} (\pros Annan prton\). Ex-high priest and father-in-law (\pentheros\, old word, only here in N.T.) of Caiaphas the actual high priest. Then Jesus was subjected to a preliminary and superfluous inquiry by Annas (given only by John) while the Sanhedrin were gathering before Caiaphas. Bernard curiously thinks that the night trial actually took place here before Annas and only the early morning ratification was before Caiaphas. Songs:he calmly says that "Matthew inserts the name _Caiaphas_ at this point (the night trial) in which he seems to have been mistaken." But why "mistaken"? {That year} (\tou eniautou ekeinou\). Genitive of time.
rwp@Jude:1:7 @{Even as} (\hs\). Just "as." The third instance (Jude:passes by the deluge) in Jude, the cities of the plain. {The cities about them} (\hai peri autas poleis\). These were also included, Admah and Zeboiim (Deuteronomy:29:23; strkjv@Hosea:11:8|). Zoar, the other city, was spared. {In like manner} (\ton homoion tropon\). Adverbial accusative (cf. \hs\). Like the fallen angels. {Having given themselves over to fornication} (\ekporneusasai\). First aorist active participle feminine plural of \ekporneu\, late and rare compound (perfective use of \ek\, outside the moral law), only here in N.T., but in LXX (Genesis:38:24; strkjv@Exodus:34:15f.|, etc.). Cf. \aselgeian\ in verse 4|. {Strange flesh} (\sarkos heteras\). Horrible licentiousness, not simply with women not their wives or in other nations, but even unnatural uses (Romans:1:27|) for which the very word "sodomy" is used (Genesis:19:4-11|). The pronoun \heteras\ (other, strange) is not in strkjv@2Peter:2:10|. {Are set forth} (\prokeintai\). Present middle indicative of \prokeimai\, old verb, to lie before, as in strkjv@Hebrews:12:1f|. {As an example} (\deigma\). Predicate nominative of \deigma\, old word (from \deiknumi\ to show), here only in N.T., sample, specimen. strkjv@2Peter:2:6| has \hupodeigma\ (pattern). {Suffering} (\hupechousai\). Present active participle of \hupech\, old compound, to hold under, often with \dikn\ (right, justice, sentence strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:9|) to suffer sentence (punishment), here only in N.T. {Of eternal fire} (\puros ainiou\). Like \desmois aidiois\ in verse 7|. Cf. the hell of fire (Matthew:5:22|) and also strkjv@Matthew:25:46|. Jude:has no mention of Lot.
rwp@Luke:2:23 @{In the law of the Lord} (\en nomi Kuriou\). No articles, but definite by preposition and genitive. Vincent notes that "law" occurs in this chapter five times. Paul (Gal strkjv@4:4|) will urge that Jesus "was made under the law" as Luke here explains. The law did not require that the child be brought to Jerusalem. The purification concerned the mother, the presentation the son.
rwp@Luke:2:27 @{When the parents brought in the child Jesus} (\en ti eisagagein tous goneis to paidion Isoun\). A neat Greek and Hebrew idiom difficult to render into English, very common in the LXX; {In the bringing the Child Jesus as to the parents}. The articular infinitive and two accusatives (one the object, the other accusative of general reference). {After the custom of the law} (\kata to eithismenon tou nomou\). Here the perfect passive participle \eithismenon\, neuter singular from \ethiz\ (common Greek verb, to accustom) is used as a virtual substantive like \to ethos\ in strkjv@1:8|. Luke alone in the N.T. uses either word save \ethos\ in strkjv@John:19:40|, though \eitha\ from \eth\, occurs also in strkjv@Matthew:27:15; strkjv@Mark:10:1|.
rwp@Luke:2:41 @{Every year} (\kat' etos\). This idiom only here in the N.T., a common Greek construction. Every male was originally expected to appear at the passover, pentecost, and tabernacles (Exodus:23:14-17; strkjv@34:23; strkjv@Deuteronomy:16:16|). But the Dispersion rendered that impossible. But pious Palestinian Jews made a point of going at least to the passover. Mary went with Joseph as a pious habit, though not required by law to go.
rwp@Luke:2:42 @{Twelve years old} (\etn ddeka\). Predicate genitive. Luke does not say that Jesus had not been to Jerusalem before, but at twelve a Jewish boy became a "son of the law" and began to observe the ordinances, putting on the phylacteries as a reminder. {They went up} (\anabainontn autn\). Genitive absolute with present active participle, a loose construction here, for the incident narrated took place _after_ they had gone up, not _while_ they were gong up. "On their usual going up" (Plummer).
rwp@Luke:3:1 @{Now in the fifteenth year} (\en etei de pentekaidekati\). Tiberius Caesar was ruler in the provinces two years before Augustus Caesar died. Luke makes a six-fold attempt here to indicate the time when John the Baptist began his ministry. John revived the function of the prophet (\Ecce Homo\, p. 2|) and it was a momentous event after centuries of prophetic silence. Luke begins with the Roman Emperor, then mentions Pontius Pilate Procurator of Judea, Herod Antipas Tetrarch of Galilee (and Perea), Philip, Tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis, Lysanias, Tetrarch of Abilene (all with the genitive absolute construction) and concludes with the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas (son-in-law and successor of Annas). The ancients did not have our modern system of chronology, the names of rulers as here being the common way. Objection has been made to the mention of Lysanias here because Josephus (_Ant_. XXVII. I) tells of a Lysanias who was King of Abila up to B.C. 36 as the one referred to by Luke with the wrong date. But an inscription has been found on the site of Abilene with mention of "Lysanias the tetrarch" and at the time to which Luke refers (see my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_, pp. 167f.). Songs:Luke is vindicated again by the rocks.
rwp@Luke:4:38 @{He rose up} (\anastas\). Second aorist active participle of \anistmi\, a common verb. B. Weiss adds here "from the teacher's seat." Either from his seat or merely leaving the synagogue. This incident of the healing of Peter's mother-in-law is given in strkjv@Mark:1:29-34| and strkjv@Matthew:8:14-17|, which see for details. {Into the house of Simon} (\eis tn oikian Simnos\). "Peter's house" (Matthew:8:14|). "The house of Simon and Andrew" (Mark:1:29|). Paul's reference to Peter's wife (1Corinthians:9:5|) is pertinent. They lived together in Capernaum. This house came also to be the Capernaum home of Jesus. {Simon's wife's mother} (\penthera tou Simnos\). The word \penthera\ for mother-in-law is old and well established in usage. Besides the parallel passages (Mark:1:30; strkjv@Matthew:8:14; strkjv@Luke:4:38|) it occurs in the N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:12:53|. The corresponding word \pentheros\, father-in-law, occurs in strkjv@John:18:13| alone in the N.T. {Was holden with a great fever} (\n sunechomen pureti megali\). Periphrastic imperfect passive, the analytical tense accenting the continuous fever, perhaps chronic and certainly severe. Luke employs this verb nine times and only three others in the N.T. (Matthew:4:24| passive with diseases here; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14| active; strkjv@Phillipians:1:23| passive). In strkjv@Acts:28:8| the passive "with dysentery" is like the construction here and is a common one in Greek medical writers as in Greek literature generally. Luke uses the passive with "fear," strkjv@Luke:8:37|, the active for holding the hands over the ears (Acts:7:57|) and for pressing one or holding together (Luke:8:45; strkjv@19:43; strkjv@22:63|), the direct middle for holding oneself to preaching (Acts:18:5|). It is followed here by the instrumental case. Hobart (_Medical Language of Luke_, p. 3) quotes Galen as dividing fevers into "great" (\megaloi\) and "small" (\smikroi\).
rwp@Luke:4:40 @{When the sun was setting} (\dunontos tou hliou\). Genitive absolute and present participle (\dun\, late form of \du\) picturing the sunset scene. Even strkjv@Mark:1:32| has here the aorist indicative \edusen\ (punctiliar active). It was not only cooler, but it was the end of the sabbath when it was not regarded as work (Vincent) to carry a sick person (John:5:10|). And also by now the news of the cure of the demoniac of Peter's mother-in-law had spread all over the town. {Had} (\eichon\). Imperfect tense including all the chronic cases. {With divers diseases} (\nosois poikilais\). Instrumental case. For "divers" say "many coloured" or "variegated." See on ¯Matthew:4:24; strkjv@Mark:1:34|. {Brought} (\gagon\). Constative summary second aorist active indicative like strkjv@Matthew:8:16|, \prosenegkan\, where strkjv@Mark:1:32| has the imperfect \epheron\, brought one after another. {He laid his hands on every one of them and healed them} (\ho de heni hekasti autn tas cheiras epititheis etherapeuen autous\). Note the present active participle \epititheis\ and the imperfect active \etherapeuen\, picturing the healing one by one with the tender touch upon each one. Luke alone gives this graphic detail which was more than a mere ceremonial laying on of hands. Clearly the cures of Jesus reached the physical, mental, and spiritual planes of human nature. He is Lord of life and acted here as Master of each case as it came.
rwp@Luke:5:12 @{Behold} (\kai idou\). Quite a Hebraistic idiom, this use of \kai\ after \egeneto\ (almost like \hoti\) with \idou\ (interjection) and no verb. {Full of leprosy} (\plrs lepras\). strkjv@Mark:1:40| and strkjv@Matthew:8:2| have simply "a leper" which see. Evidently a bad case full of sores and far advanced as Luke the physician notes. The law (Leviticus:13:12f.|) curiously treated advanced cases as less unclean than the earlier stages. {Fell on his face} (\pesn epi prospon\). Second aorist active participle of \pipt\, common verb. strkjv@Mark:1:40| has "kneeling" (\gonupetn\) and strkjv@Matthew:8:40| "worshipped" (\prosekunei\). All three attitudes were possible one after the other. All three Synoptics quote the identical language of the leper and the identical answer of Jesus. His condition of the third class turned on the "will" (\thelis\) of Jesus who at once asserts his will (\thl\) and cleanses him. All three likewise mention the touch (\hpsato\, verse 13|) of Christ's hand on the unclean leper and the instantaneous cure.
rwp@Luke:5:17 @{That} (\kai\). Use of \kai\ = \hoti\ (that) like the Hebrew _wav_, though found in Greek also. {He} (\autos\). Luke sometimes has \autos\ in the nominative as unemphatic "he" as here, not "he himself." {Was teaching} (\n didaskn\). Periphrastic imperfect again like our English idiom. {Were sitting by} (\san kathmenoi\). Periphrastic imperfect again. There is no "by" in the Greek. {Doctors of the law} (\nomodidaskaloi\). A compound word formed after analogy of \hierodidaskalos\, but not found outside of the N.T. and ecclesiastical writers, one of the very few words apparently N.T. in usage. It appears here and strkjv@Acts:5:34; strkjv@1Timothy:1:7|. It is not likely that Luke and Paul made the word, but they simply used the term already in current use to describe teachers and interpreters of the law. Our word "doctor" is Latin for "teacher." These "teachers of the law" are called elsewhere in the Gospels "scribes" (\grammateis\) as in Matthew and Mark (see on ¯Matthew:5:20; strkjv@23:34|) and strkjv@Luke:5:21; strkjv@19:47; strkjv@21:1; strkjv@22:2|. Luke also employs \nomikos\ (one skilled in the law, \nomos\) as in strkjv@10:25|. One thinks of our LL.D. (Doctors of Civil and Canon Law), for both were combined in Jewish law. They were usually Pharisees (mentioned here for the first time in Luke) for which see on ¯Matthew:3:7,20|. Luke will often speak of the Pharisees hereafter. Not all the "Pharisees" were "teachers of the law" so that both terms often occur together as in verse 21| where Luke has separate articles (\hoi grammateis kai hoi Pharisaioi\), distinguishing between them, though one article may occur as in strkjv@Matthew:5:20| or no article as here in verse 17|. Luke alone mentions the presence here of these Pharisees and doctors of the law "which were come" (\hoi san elluthotes\, periphrastic past perfect active, {had come}). {Out of every village of Galilee and Judea and Jerusalem} (\ek pass kms ts Galilaias kai Ioudaias kai Ierousalm\). Edersheim (_Jewish Social Life_) observes that the Jews distinguished Jerusalem as a separate district in Judea. Plummer considers it hyperbole in Luke to use "every village." But one must recall that Jesus had already made one tour of Galilee which stirred the Pharisees and rabbis to active opposition. Judea had already been aroused and Jerusalem was the headquarters of the definite campaign now organized against Jesus. One must bear in mind that strkjv@John:4:1-4| shows that Jesus had already left Jerusalem and Judea because of the jealousy of the Pharisees. They are here on purpose to find fault and to make charges against Jesus. One must not forget that there were many kinds of Pharisees and that not all of them were as bad as these legalistic and punctilious hypocrites who deserved the indictment and exposure of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:23|. Paul himself is a specimen of the finer type of Pharisee which, however, developed into the persecuting fanatic till Jesus changed his whole life. {The power of the Lord was with him to heal} (\dunamis Kuriou n eis to isthai auton\). Songs:the best texts. It is neat Greek, but awkward English: "Then was the power of the Lord for the healing as to him (Jesus)." Here \Kuriou\ refers to Jehovah. {Dunamis} (dynamite) is one of the common words for "miracles" (\dunameis\). What Luke means is that Jesus had the power of the Lord God to heal with. He does not mean that this power was intermittent. He simply calls attention to its presence with Jesus on this occasion.
rwp@Luke:6:1 @{On a sabbath} (\en sabbati\). This is the second sabbath on which Jesus is noted by Luke. The first was strkjv@Luke:4:31-41|. There was another in strkjv@John:5:1-47|. There is Western and Syrian (Byzantine) evidence for a very curious reading here which calls this sabbath "secondfirst" (\deuteroprti\). It is undoubtedly spurious, though Westcott and Hort print it in the margin. A possible explanation is that a scribe wrote "first" (\prti\) on the margin because of the sabbath miracle in strkjv@Luke:6:6-11|. Then another scribe recalled strkjv@Luke:4:31| where a sabbath is mentioned and wrote "second" (\deuteri\) also on the margin. Finally a third scribe combined the two in the word \deuteroprti\ that is not found elsewhere. If it were genuine, we should not know what it means. {Plucked} (\etillon\). Imperfect active. They were plucking as they went on through (\diaporeuesthai\). Whether wheat or barley, we do not know, not our "corn" (maize). {Did eat} (\sthion\). Imperfect again. See on ¯Matthew:12:1f.; strkjv@Mark:2:23f.| for the separate acts in supposed violence of the sabbath laws. {Rubbing them in their hands} (\pschontes tais chersin\). Only in Luke and only here in the N.T. This was one of the chief offences. "According to Rabbinical notions, it was reaping, threshing, winnowing, and preparing food all at once" (Plummer). These Pharisees were straining out gnats and swallowing camels! This verb \psch\ is a late one for \psa\, to rub.
rwp@Luke:6:4 @{Did take} (\labn\). Second aorist active participle of \lamban\. Not in Mark and Matthew. See strkjv@Matthew:12:1-8; strkjv@Mark:2:23-28| for discussion of details about the shewbread and the five arguments in defence of his conduct on the sabbath (example of David, work of the priests on the sabbath, prophecy of strkjv@Hosea:6:6|, purpose of the sabbath for man, the Son of Man lord of the sabbath). It was an overwhelming and crushing reply to these pettifogging ceremonialists to which they could not reply, but which increased their anger. Codex D transfers verse 5| to after verse 10| and puts here the following: "On the same day beholding one working on the sabbath he said to him: Man, if you know what you are doing, happy are you; but if you do not know, cursed are you and a transgressor of the law."
rwp@Luke:6:22 @{When they shall separate you} (\hotan aphorissin hums\). First aorist active subjunctive, from \aphoriz\, common verb for marking off a boundary. Songs:either in good sense or bad sense as here. The reference is to excommunication from the congregation as well as from social intercourse. {Cast out your name as evil} (\exbalsin to onoma humn hs ponron\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \ekball\, common verb. The verb is used in Aristophanes, Sophocles, and Plato of hissing an actor off the stage. The name of Christian or disciple or Nazarene came to be a byword of contempt as shown in the Acts. It was even unlawful in the Neronian persecution when Christianity was not a _religio licita_. {For the Son of man's sake} (\heneka tou huiou tou anthrpou\). Jesus foretold what will befall those who are loyal to him. The Acts of the Apostles is a commentary on this prophecy. This is Christ's common designation of himself, never of others save by Stephen (Acts:7:56|) and in the Apocalypse (Revelation:1:13; strkjv@14:14|). But both Son of God and Son of man apply to him (John:1:50,52; strkjv@Matthew:26:63f.|). Christ was a real man though the Son of God. He is also the representative man and has authority over all men.
rwp@Luke:7:30 @{Rejected for themselves} (\thetsan eis heautous\). The first aorist active of \athete\ first seen in LXX and Polybius. Occurs in the papyri. These legalistic interpreters of the law refused to admit the need of confession of sin on their part and so set aside the baptism of John. They annulled God's purposes of grace so far as they applied to them. {Being not baptized by him} (\m baptisthentes hup' autou\). First aorist passive participle. \M\ is the usual negative of the participle in the _Koin_.
rwp@Luke:7:33 @{John the Baptist is come} (\elluthen\). Second perfect active indicative where strkjv@Matthew:11:18| has \lthen\ second aorist active indicative. Songs:as to verse 34|. Luke alone has "bread" and "wine." Otherwise these verses like strkjv@Matthew:11:18,19|, which see for discussion of details. There are actually critics today who say that Jesus was called the friend of sinners and even of harlots because he loved them and their ways and so deserved the slur cast upon him by his enemies. If men can say that today we need not wonder that the Pharisees and lawyers said it then to justify their own rejection of Jesus.
rwp@Luke:9:31 @{There talked with him} (\sunelaloun auti\). Imperfect active, were talking with him. {Who appeared in glory} (\hoi ophthentes en doxi\). First aorist passive participle of \hora\. This item peculiar to Luke. Compare verse 26|. {Spake of his decease} (\elegon tn exodon\). Imperfect active, were talking about his \exodus\ (departure from earth to heaven) very much like our English word "decease" (Latin _decessus_, a going away). The glorious light graphically revealed Moses and Elijah talking with Jesus about the very subject concerning which Peter had dared to rebuke Jesus for mentioning (Mark:8:32; strkjv@Matthew:16:22|). This very word \exodus\ (way out) in the sense of death occurs in strkjv@2Peter:1:15| and is followed by a brief description of the Transfiguration glory. Other words for death (\thanatos\) in the N.T. are \ekbasis\, going out as departure (Hebrews:13:7|), \aphixis\, departing (Acts:20:29|), \analusis\, loosening anchor (2Timothy:4:6|) and \analusai\ (Phillipians:1:23|). {To accomplish} (\plroun\). To fulfil. Moses had led the Exodus from Egypt. Jesus will accomplish the exodus of God's people into the Promised Land on high. See on Mark and Matthew for discussion of significance of the appearance of Moses and Elijah as representatives of law and prophecy and with a peculiar death. The purpose of the Transfiguration was to strengthen the heart of Jesus as he was praying long about his approaching death and to give these chosen three disciples a glimpse of his glory for the hour of darkness coming. No one on earth understood the heart of Jesus and so Moses and Elijah came. The poor disciples utterly failed to grasp the significance of it all.
rwp@Luke:10:25 @{And tempted him} (\ekpeirazn auton\). Present active participle, conative idea, trying to tempt him. There is no "and" in the Greek. He "stood up (\anest\, ingressive second aorist active) trying to tempt him." \Peiraz\ is a late form of \peira\ and \ekpeiraz\ apparently only in the LXX, and N.T. (quoted by Jesus from strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:16| in strkjv@Matthew:4:7; strkjv@Luke:4:12| against Satan). Here and strkjv@1Corinthians:10:9|. The spirit of this lawyer was evil. He wanted to entrap Jesus if possible. {What shall I do to inherit eternal life?} (\Ti poisas zn ainiou klronoms;\). Literally, "By doing what shall I inherit eternal life?" Note the emphasis on "doing" (\poisas\). The form of his question shows a wrong idea as to how to get it. {Eternal life} (\zn ainion\) is endless life as in John's Gospel (John:16:9; strkjv@18:18,30|) and in strkjv@Matthew:25:46|, which see.
rwp@Luke:10:26 @{How readest thou?} (\ps anaginskeis;\). As a lawyer it was his business to know the facts in the law and the proper interpretation of the law. See on ¯Luke:7:30| about \nomikos\ (lawyer). The rabbis had a formula, "What readest thou?"
rwp@Luke:10:27 @{And he answering} (\ho de apokritheis\). First aorist participle, no longer passive in idea. The lawyer's answer is first from the _Shema_ (Deuteronomy:6:3; strkjv@11:13|) which was written on the phylacteries. The second part is from strkjv@Leviticus:19:18| and shows that the lawyer knew the law. At a later time Jesus himself in the temple gives a like summary of the law to a lawyer (Mark:12:28-34; strkjv@Matthew:22:34-40|) who wanted to catch Jesus by his question. There is no difficulty in the two incidents. God is to be loved with all of man's four powers (heart, soul, strength, mind) here as in strkjv@Mark:12:30|.
rwp@Luke:10:28 @{Thou hast answered right} (\orths apekriths\). First aorist passive indicative second singular with the adverb \orths\. The answer was correct so far as the words went. In strkjv@Mark:12:34| Jesus commends the scribe for agreeing to his interpretation of the first and the second commandments. That scribe was "not far from the kingdom of God," but this lawyer was "tempting" Jesus. {Do this and thou shalt live} (\touto poiei kai zsi\). Present imperative (keep on doing this forever) and the future indicative middle as a natural result. There was only one trouble with the lawyer's answer. No one ever did or ever can "do" what the law lays down towards God and man always. To slip once is to fail. Songs:Jesus put the problem squarely up to the lawyer who wanted to know {by doing what}. Of course, if he kept the law {perfectly always}, he would inherit eternal life.
rwp@Luke:10:29 @{Desiring to justify himself} (\theln dikaisai heauton\). The lawyer saw at once that he had convicted himself of asking a question that he already knew. In his embarrassment he asks another question to show that he did have some point at first: {And who is my neighbour?} (\kai tis estin mou plsion;\). The Jews split hairs over this question and excluded from "neighbour" Gentiles and especially Samaritans. Songs:here was his loop-hole. A neighbour is a nigh dweller to one, but the Jews made racial exceptions as many, alas, do today. The word \plsion\ here is an adverb (neuter of the adjective \plsios\) meaning \ho plsion n\ (the one who is near), but \n\ was usually not expressed and the adverb is here used as if a substantive.
rwp@Luke:11:45 @{Thou reproachest us also} (\kai hms hubrizeis\). Because the lawyers (scribes) were usually Pharisees. The verb \hubriz\ is an old one and common for outrageous treatment, a positive insult (so strkjv@Luke:18:32; strkjv@Matthew:22:6; strkjv@Acts:14;5; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:2|). Songs:Jesus proceeds to give the lawyers three woes as he had done to the Pharisees.
rwp@Luke:11:46 @{Grievous to be borne} (\dusbastakta\). A late word in LXX and Plutarch (\dus\ and \bastaz\). Here alone in text of Westcott and Hort who reject it in strkjv@Matthew:23:4| where we have "heavy burdens" (\phortia barea\). In Gal strkjv@6:2| we have \bar\ with a distinction drawn. Here we have \phortizete\ (here only in the N.T. and strkjv@Matthew:11:28|) for "lade," \phortia\ as cognate accusative and then \phortiois\ (dative after \ou prospsauete\, touch not). It is a fierce indictment of scribes (lawyers) for their pettifogging interpretations of the written law in their oral teaching (later written down as _Mishna_ and then as _Gemarah_), a terrible load which these lawyers did not pretend to carry themselves, not even "with one of their fingers" to "touch" (\prospsau\, old verb but only here in the N.T.), touch with the view to remove. strkjv@Matthew:23:4| has \kinsai\, to move. A physician would understand the meaning of \prospau\ for feeling gently a sore spot or the pulse.
rwp@Luke:11:48 @{Consent} (\suneudokeite\). Double compound (\sun, eu, doke\), to think well along with others, to give full approval. A late verb, several times in the N.T., in strkjv@Acts:8:1| of Saul's consenting to and agreeing to Stephen's death. It is a somewhat subtle, but just, argument made here. Outwardly the lawyers build tombs for the prophets whom their fathers (forefathers) killed as if they disapproved what their fathers did. But in reality they neglect and oppose what the prophets teach just as their fathers did. Songs:they are "witnesses" (\martures\) against themselves (Matthew:23:31|).
rwp@Luke:11:52 @{Ye took away the key of knowledge} (\rate tn kleida ts gnses\). First aorist active indicative of \air\, common verb. But this is a flat charge of obscurantism on the part of these scribes (lawyers), the teachers (rabbis) of the people. They themselves (\autoi\) refused to go into the house of knowledge (beautiful figure) and learn. They then locked the door and hid the key to the house of knowledge and hindered (\eklusate\, effective aorist active) those who were trying to enter (\tous eiserchomenous\, present participle, conative action). It is the most pitiful picture imaginable of blind ecclesiastics trying to keep others as blind as they were, blind leaders of the blind, both falling into the pit.
rwp@Luke:11:53 @{From thence} (\k'akeithen\). Out of the Pharisee's house. What became of the breakfast we are not told, but the rage of both Pharisees and lawyers knew no bounds. {To press upon him} (\enechein\). An old Greek verb to hold in, to be enraged at, to have it in for one. It is the same verb used of the relentless hatred of Herodias for John the Baptist (Mark:6:19|). {To provoke him to speak} (\apostomatizein\). From \apo\ and \stoma\ (mouth). Plato uses it of repeating to a pupil for him to recite from memory, then to recite by heart (Plutarch). Here (alone in the N.T.) the verb means to ply with questions, to entice to answers, to catechize. {Of many things} (\peri pleionn\). "Concerning more (comparative) things." They were stung to the quick by these woes which laid bare their hollow hypocrisy.
rwp@Luke:12:4 @{Unto you my friends} (\humin tois philois\). As opposed to the Pharisees and lawyers in strkjv@11:43,46,53|. {Be not afraid of} (\m phobthte apo\). First aorist passive subjunctive with \m\, ingressive aorist, do not become afraid of, with \apo\ and the ablative like the Hebrew _min_ and the English "be afraid of," a translation Hebraism as in strkjv@Matthew:10:28| (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 102). {Have no more that they can do} (\m echontn perissoteron ti poisai\). Luke often uses the infinitive thus with \ech\, a classic idiom (7:40,42; strkjv@12:4,50; strkjv@14:14; strkjv@Acts:4:14|, etc.).
rwp@Luke:12:13 @{Bid my brother} (\eipe ti adelphi mou\). This volunteer from the crowd draws attention to the multitude (verses 13-21|). He does not ask for arbitration and there is no evidence that his brother was willing for that. He wants a decision by Jesus against his brother. The law (Deuteronomy:21:17|) was two-thirds to the elder, one-third to the younger.
rwp@Luke:12:33 @{Sell that ye have} (\Plsate ta huparchonta humn\). Not in Matthew. Did Jesus mean this literally and always? Luke has been charged with Ebionism, but Jesus does not condemn property as inherently sinful. "The attempt to keep the letter of the rule here given (Acts:2:44,45|) had disastrous effects on the church of Jerusalem, which speedily became a church of paupers, constantly in need of alms (Romans:15:25,26; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@9:1|)" (Plummer). {Purses which wax not old} (\ballantia m palaioumena\). Songs:already \ballantion\ in strkjv@Luke:10:4|. Late verb \palaio\ from \palaios\, old, to make old, declare old as in strkjv@Hebrews:8:13|, is passive to become old as here and strkjv@Hebrews:1:11|. {That faileth not} (\anekleipton\). Verbal from \a\ privative and \ekleip\, to fail. Late word in Diodorus and Plutarch. Only here in the N.T. or LXX, but in papyri. "I prefer to believe that even Luke sees in the words not a mechanical rule, but a law for the spirit" (Bruce). {Draweth near} (\eggizei\). Instead of strkjv@Matthew:6:19| "dig through and steal." {Destroyeth} (\diaphtheirei\). Instead of "doth consume" in strkjv@Matthew:6:19|.
rwp@Luke:14:3 @{Answering} (\apokritheis\). First aorist passive participle without the passive meaning. Jesus answered the thoughts of those mentioned in verse 1|. Here "lawyers and Pharisees" are treated as one class with one article (\tous\) whereas in strkjv@7:30| they are treated as two classes with separate articles. {Or not} (\ ou\). The dilemma forestalled any question by them. {They held their peace} (\hsuchasan\). Ingressive aorist active of old verb \hsuchaz\. They became silent, more so than before.
rwp@Luke:14:5 @{An ass or an ox} (\onos bous\). But Westcott and Hort \huios bous\ ({a son or an ox}). The manuscripts are much divided between \huios\ (son) and \onos\ (ass) which in the abbreviated uncials looked much alike (TC, OC) and were much alike. The sentence in the Greek reads literally thus: Whose ox or ass of you shall fall (\peseitai\, future middle of \pipto\) into a well and he (the man) will not straightway draw him up (\anaspasei\, future active of \anaspa\) on the sabbath day? The very form of the question is a powerful argument and puts the lawyers and the Pharisees hopelessly on the defensive.
rwp@Luke:15:12 @{The portion} (\to meros\). The Jewish law alloted one-half as much to the younger son as to the elder, that is to say one-third of the estate (Deuteronomy:21:17|) at the death of the father. The father did not have to abdicate in favour of the sons, but "this very human parable here depicts the impatience of home restraints and the optimistic ambition of youth" (Ragg). {And he divided} (\ho de dieilen\). The second aorist active indicative of \diaire\, an old and common verb to part in two, cut asunder, divide, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:12:11|. The elder son got his share also of the "substance" or property or estate (\ts ousias\), "the living" (\ton bion\) as in strkjv@Mark:12:44|, not "life" as in strkjv@Luke:8:14|.
rwp@Luke:18:12 @{Twice in the week} (\dis tou sabbatou\). One fast a year was required by the law (Leviticus:16:29; strkjv@Numbers:29:7|). The Pharisees added others, twice a week between passover and pentecost, and between tabernacles and dedication of the temple. {I get} (\ktmai\). Present middle indicative, not perfect middle \kektmai\ (I possess). He gave a tithe of his income, not of his property.
rwp@Luke:18:18 @{Ruler} (\archn\). Not in strkjv@Mark:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:19:16|. {What shall I do to inherit?} (\Ti poisas klronoms;\). "By doing what shall I inherit?" Aorist active participle and future active indicative. Precisely the same question is asked by the lawyer in strkjv@Luke:10:25|. This young man probably thought that by some one act he could obtain eternal life. He was ready to make a large expenditure for it. {Good} (\agathon\). See on ¯Mark:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:19:16| for discussion of this adjective for absolute goodness. Plummer observes that no Jewish rabbi was called "good" in direct address. The question of Jesus will show whether it was merely fulsome flattery on the part of the young man or whether he really put Jesus on a par with God. He must at any rate define his attitude towards Christ.
rwp@Luke:19:8 @{Stood} (\statheis\). Apparently Jesus and Zacchaeus had come to the house of Zacchaeus and were about to enter when the murmur became such a roar that Zacchaeus turned round and faced the crowd. {If I have wrongfully exacted aught of any man} (\ei tinos ti esukophantsa\). A most significant admission and confession. It is a condition of the first class (\ei\ and the aorist active indicative) that assumes it to be true. His own conscience was at work. He may have heard audible murmurs from the crowd. For the verb \sukophantein\, see discussion on ¯3:14|, the only two instances in the N.T. He had extorted money wrongfully as they all knew. {I return fourfold} (\apodidmi tetraploun\). I offer to do it here and now on this spot. This was the Mosaic law (Exodus:22:1; strkjv@Numbers:5:6f.|). Restitution is good proof of a change of heart. D. L. Moody used to preach it with great power. Without this the offer of Zacchaeus to give half his goods to the poor would be less effective. "It is an odd coincidence, nothing more, that the fig-mulberry (sycamore) should occur in connexion with the _fig_-shewer (sycophant)."
rwp@Luke:20:41 @{How say they?} (\Ps legousin;\). The Pharisees had rallied in glee and one of their number, a lawyer, had made a feeble contribution to the controversy which resulted in his agreement with Jesus and in praise from Jesus (Mark:12:28-34; strkjv@Matthew:27:34-40|). Luke does not give this incident which makes it plain that by "they say" (\legousin\) Jesus refers to the Pharisees (rabbis, lawyers), carrying on the discussion and turning the tables on them while the Pharisees are still gathered together (Matthew:22:41|). The construction with \legousin\ is the usual infinitive and the accusative in indirect discourse. By "the Christ" (\ton Christon\) "the Messiah" is meant.
rwp@Luke:23:25 @{Whom they asked for} (\hon itounto\). Imperfect middle, for whom they had been asking for themselves. Luke repeats that Barabbas was in prison "for insurrection and murder." {To their will} (\ti thelmati autn\). This is mob law by the judge who surrenders his own power and justice to the clamour of the crowd.
rwp@Luke:23:38 @{A superscription} (\epigraph\). strkjv@Mark:15:26| has "the superscription of his accusation" strkjv@Matthew:27:37|, "his accusation," strkjv@John:19:19| "a title." But they all refer to the charge written at the top on the cross giving, as was the custom, the accusation on which the criminal was condemned, with his name and residence. Put all the reports together and we have: This is Jesus of Nazareth the King of the Jews. This full title appeared in Latin for law, in Aramaic for the Jews, in Greek for everybody (John:19:20|).
rwp@Mark:1:22 @{They were astonished} (\exeplssonto\). Pictorial imperfect as in strkjv@Luke:4:32| describing the amazement of the audience, "meaning strictly to strike a person out of his senses by some strong feeling, such as fear, wonder, or even joy" (Gould). {And not as their scribes} (\kai ouch hs hoi grammateis\). strkjv@Luke:4:32| has only "with authority" (\en exousii\). Mark has it "as having authority" (\hs echn exousian\). He struck a note not found by the rabbi. They quoted other rabbis and felt their function to be expounders of the traditions which they made a millstone around the necks of the people. By so doing they set aside the word and will of God by their traditions and petty legalism (Mark:7:9,13|). They were casuists and made false interpretations to prove their punctilious points of external etiquette to the utter neglect of the spiritual reality. The people noticed at once that here was a personality who got his power (authority) direct from God, not from the current scribes. "Mark omits much, and is in many ways a meagre Gospel, but it makes a distinctive contribution to the evangelic history _in showing by a few realistic touches_ (this one of them) _the remarkable personality of Jesus_" (Bruce). See on strkjv@Matthew:7:29| for the like impression made by the Sermon on the Mount where the same language occurs. The chief controversy in Christ's life was with these scribes, the professional teachers of the oral law and mainly Pharisees. At once the people see that Jesus stands apart from the old group. He made a sensation in the best sense of that word. There was a buzz of excitement at the new teacher that was increased by the miracle that followed the sermon.
rwp@Mark:1:29 @{The house of Simon and Andrew} (\tn oikian Simnos kai Andreou\). Peter was married and both he and Andrew lived together in "Peter's house" (Matthew:8:14|) with Peter's wife and mother-in-law. Peter was evidently married before he began to follow Jesus. Later his wife accompanied him on his apostolic journeys (1Corinthians:9:5|). This incident followed immediately after the service in the synagogue on the sabbath. All the Synoptics give it. Mark heard Peter tell it as it occurred in his own house where Jesus made his home while in Capernaum. Each Gospel gives touches of its own to the story. Mark has "lay sick of a fever " (\katekeito puressousa\), lay prostrate burning with fever. Matthew puts it "stretched out (\beblmenn\) with a fever." Luke has it "holden with a great fever" (\n sunechomen pureti megali\), a technical medical phrase. They all mention the instant recovery and ministry without any convalescence. Mark and Matthew speak of the touch of Jesus on her hand and Luke speaks of Jesus standing over her like a doctor. It was a tender scene.
rwp@Mark:1:32 @{When the sun did set} (\hote edusen ho hlios\). This picturesque detail Mark has besides "at even" (\opsias genomens\, genitive absolute, evening having come). Matthew has "when even was come," Luke "when the sun was setting." The sabbath ended at sunset and so the people were now at liberty to bring their sick to Jesus. The news about the casting out of the demon and the healing of Peter's mother-in-law had spread all over Capernaum. They brought them in a steady stream (imperfect tense, \epheron\). Luke (Luke:4:40|) adds that Jesus laid his hand on every one of them as they passed by in grateful procession.
rwp@Mark:2:6 @{Sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts} (\ekei kathmenoi kai dialogizomenoi en tais kardiais autn\). Another of Mark's pictures through Peter's eyes. These scribes (and Pharisees, strkjv@Luke:5:21|) were there to cause trouble, to pick flaws in the teaching and conduct of Jesus. His popularity and power had aroused their jealousy. There is no evidence that they spoke aloud the murmur in their hearts, "within themselves" (Matthew:9:3|). It was not necessary, for their looks gave them away and Jesus knew their thoughts (Matthew:9:4|) and perceived their reasoning (Luke:5:22|). {Instantly Jesus recognized it in his own spirit} (\euthus epignous ho Isous ti pneumati autou\, strkjv@Mark:2:8|). The Master at once recognizes the hostile atmosphere in the house. The debate (\dialogizomenoi\) in their hearts was written on their faces. No sound had come, but feeling did.
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:2:16 @{The scribes of the Pharisees} (\hoi grammateis tn Pharisain\). This is the correct text. Cf. "their scribes" in strkjv@Luke:5:30|. Matthew gave a great reception (\dochn\, strkjv@Luke:5:29|) in his house (Mark:2:15|). These publicans and sinners not simply accepted Levi's invitation, but they imitated his example "and were following Jesus" (\kai kolouthoun auti\). It was a motly crew from the standpoint of these young theologues, scribes of the Pharisees, who were on hand, being invited to pick flaws if they could. It was probably in the long hall of the house where the scribes stood and ridiculed Jesus and the disciples, unless they stood outside, feeling too pious to go into the house of a publican. It was an offence for a Jew to eat with Gentiles as even many of the early Jewish Christians felt (Acts:11:3|) and publicans and sinners were regarded like Gentiles (1Corinthians:5:11|).
rwp@Mark:4:28 @{Of herself} (\automat\). Automatically, we say. The secret of growth is in the seed, not in the soil nor in the weather nor in the cultivating. These all help, but the seed spontaneously works according to its own nature. The word \automat\ is from \autos\ (self) and \memaa\ desire eagerly from obsolete \ma\. Common word in all Greek history. Only one other example in N.T., in strkjv@Acts:12:10| when the city gate opens to Peter of its own accord. "The mind is adapted to the truth, as the eye to the light" (Gould). Songs:we sow the seed, God's kingdom truth, and the soil (the soul) is ready for the seed. The Holy Spirit works on the heart and uses the seed sown and makes it germinate and grow, "first the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear" (\prton chorton, eiten stachun, eiten plr siton en ti stachui\). This is the law and order of nature and also of grace in the kingdom of God. Hence it is worth while to preach and teach. "This single fact creates the confidence shown by Jesus in the ultimate establishment of his kingdom in spite of the obstacles which obstruct its progress" (Gould).
rwp@Mark:7:8 @{Ye leave the commandment of God} (\aphentes tn entoln tou theou\). Note the sharp contrast between the command of God and the traditions of men. Jesus here drives a keen wedge into the Pharisaic contention. They had covered up the Word of God with their oral teaching. Jesus here shows that they care more for the oral teaching of the scribes and elders than for the written law of God. The Talmud gives abundant and specific confirmation of the truthfulness of this indictment.
rwp@Mark:7:9 @{Full well do ye reject the commandment of God that ye may keep your traditions} (\kals atheteite tn entoln tou theou hina tn paradosin humn trste\). One can almost see the scribes withering under this terrible arraignment. It was biting sarcasm that cut to the bone. The evident irony should prevent literal interpretation as commendation of the Pharisaic pervasion of God's word. See my _The Pharisees and Jesus_ for illustrations of the way that they placed this oral tradition above the written law. See on ¯Matthew:15:7|.
rwp@Mark:9:4 @{Elijah with Moses} (\Eleias sun Musei\). Matthew and Luke have "Moses and Elijah." Both, as a matter of fact were prophets and both dealt with law. Both had mysterious deaths. The other order in strkjv@Mark:9:5|.
rwp@Mark:10:12 @{If she herself shall put away her husband and marry another} (\ean aut apolusasa ton andra auts gamsi\). Condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of determination). Greek and Roman law allowed the divorce of the husband by the wife though not provided for in Jewish law. But the thing was sometimes done as in the case of Herodias and her husband before she married Herod Antipas. Songs:also Salome, Herod's sister, divorced her husband. Both Bruce and Gould think that Mark added this item to the words of Jesus for the benefit of the Gentile environment of this Roman Gospel. But surely Jesus knew that the thing was done in the Roman world and hence prohibited marrying such a "grass widow."
rwp@Mark:10:21 @{Looking upon him loved him} (\emblepsas auti gapsen\). Mark alone mentions this glance of affection, ingressive aorist participle and verb. Jesus fell in love with this charming youth. {One thing thou lackest} (\Hen se husterei\). strkjv@Luke:18:22| has it: "One thing thou lackest yet" (\Eti hen soi leipei\). Possibly two translations of the same Aramaic phrase. strkjv@Matthew:19:20| represents the youth as asking "What lack I yet?" (\Ti eti huster;\). The answer of Jesus meets that inquiry after more than mere outward obedience to laws and regulations. The verb \huster\ is from the adjective \husteros\ (behind) and means to be too late, to come short, to fail of, to lack. It is used either with the accusative, as here, or with the ablative as in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:5|, or the dative as in Textus Receptus here, \soi\.
rwp@Mark:12:24 @{Is it not for this cause that ye err?} (\Ou dia touto plansthe;\). Mark puts it as a question with \ou\ expecting the affirmative answer. Matthew puts it as a positive assertion: "Ye are." \Planaomai\ is to wander astray (cf. our word _planet_, wandering stars, \asteres plantai\, strkjv@Jude:1:13|) like the Latin _errare_ (our _error_, err). {That ye know not the scriptures} (\m eidotes tas graphas\). The Sadducees posed as men of superior intelligence and knowledge in opposition to the traditionalists among the Pharisees with their oral law. And yet on this very point they were ignorant of the Scriptures. How much error today is due to this same ignorance among the educated! {Nor the power of God} (\mde tn dunamin tou theou\). The two kinds of ignorance generally go together (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:15:34|).
rwp@Mark:12:28 @{Heard them questioning together} (\akousas autn sunztountn\). The victory of Christ over the Sadducees pleased the Pharisees who now had come back with mixed emotions over the new turn of things (Matthew:22:34|). strkjv@Luke:20:39| represents one of the scribes as commending Jesus for his skilful reply to the Sadducees. Mark here puts this scribe in a favourable light, "knowing that he had answered them well" (\eids hoti kals apekrith autois\). "Them" here means the Sadducees. But strkjv@Matthew:22:35| says that this lawyer (\nomikos\) was "tempting" (\peirazn\) by his question. "A few, among whom was the scribe, were constrained to admire, even if they were willing to criticize, the Rabbi who though not himself a Pharisee, surpassed the Pharisees as a champion of the truth." That is a just picture of this lawyer. {The first of all} (\prt pantn\). First in rank and importance. strkjv@Matthew:22:36| has "great" (\megal\). See discussion there. Probably Jesus spoke in Aramaic. "First" and "great" in Greek do not differ essentially here. Mark quotes strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:4f.| as it stands in the LXX and also strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|. strkjv@Matthew:22:40| adds the summary: "On these two commandments hangeth (\krematai\) the whole law and the prophets."
rwp@Mark:12:34 @{Discreetly} (\nounechs\). From \nous\ (intellect) and \ech\, to have. Using the mind to good effect is what the adverb means. He had his wits about him, as we say. Here only in the N.T. In Aristotle and Polybius. \Nounechonts\ would be the more regular form, adverb from a participle. {Not far} (\ou makran\). Adverb, not adjective, feminine accusative, a long way (\hodon\ understood). The critical attitude of the lawyer had melted before the reply of Jesus into genuine enthusiasm that showed him to be near the kingdom of God. {No man after that} (\oudeis ouketi\). Double negative. The debate was closed (\etolma\, imperfect tense, dared). Jesus was complete victor on every side.
rwp@Mark:14:56 @{Their witness agreed not together} (\isai hai marturiai ouk san\). Literally, the testimonies were not equal. They did not correspond with each other on essential points. {Many were bearing false witness} (\epseudomarturoun\, imperfect, repeated action) {against him}. No two witnesses bore joint testimony to justify a capital sentence according to the law (Deuteronomy:19:15|). Note imperfects in these verses (55-57|) to indicate repeated failures.
rwp@Matthew:1:18 @{Of the Holy Ghost} (\ek pneumatos hagiou\). The discovery that Mary was pregnant was inevitable and it is plain that she had not told Joseph. She "was found with child" (\heureth en gastri echousa\). This way of putting it, the usual Greek idiom, plainly shows that it was the discovery that shocked Joseph. He did not as yet know what Matthew plainly asserts that the Holy Ghost, not Joseph and not any man, was responsible for the pregnancy of Mary. The problem of the Virgin Birth of Jesus has been a disturbing fact to some through all the ages and is today to those who do not believe in the pre-existence of Christ, the Son of God, before his Incarnation on earth. This is the primal fact about the Birth of Christ. The Incarnation of Christ is clearly stated by Paul (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|; and involved in strkjv@Colossians:1:15-19|) and by John (John:1:14; strkjv@17:5|). If one frankly admits the actual pre-existence of Christ and the real Incarnation, he has taken the longest and most difficult step in the matter of the supernatural Birth of Christ. That being true, no merely human birth without the supernatural element can possibly explain the facts. Incarnation is far more than the Indwelling of God by the Holy Spirit in the human heart. To admit real incarnation and also full human birth, both father and mother, creates a greater difficulty than to admit the Virgin Birth of Jesus begotten by the Holy Spirit, as Matthew here says, and born of the Virgin Mary. It is true that only Matthew and Luke tell the story of the supernatural birth of Jesus, though strkjv@John:1:14| seems to refer to it. Mark has nothing whatever concerning the birth and childhood of Jesus and so cannot be used as a witness on the subject. Both Matthew and Luke present the birth of Jesus as not according to ordinary human birth. Jesus had no human father. There is such a thing in nature as parthenogenesis in the lower orders of life. But that scientific fact has no bearing here. We see here God sending his Son into the world to be the world's Saviour and he gave him a human mother, but not a human father so that Jesus Christ is both Son of God and Son of Man, the God Man. Matthew tells the story of the birth of Jesus from the standpoint of Joseph as Luke gives it from the standpoint of Mary. The two narratives harmonize with each other. One credits these most wonderful of all birth narratives according as he believes in the love and power of Almighty God to do what he wills. There is no miracle with God who has all power and all knowledge. The laws of nature are simply the expression of God's will, but he has not revealed all his will in the laws that we discover. God is Spirit. He is Person. He holds in his own power all life. strkjv@John:3:16| is called the Little Gospel because it puts briefly the love of God for men in sending his own Son to live and die for us.
rwp@Matthew:1:19 @{A Righteous Man} (\dikaios\). Or just, not benignant or merciful. The same adjective is used of Zacharias and Elizabeth (Luke:1:6|) and Simeon (Luke:2:25|). "An upright man," the _Braid Scots_ has it. He had the Jewish conscientiousness for the observance of the law which would have been death by stoning (Deuteronomy:22:23|). Though Joseph was upright, he would not do that. "As a good Jew he would have shown his zeal if he had branded her with public disgrace" (McNeile). {And yet not willing} (\kai m theln\). Songs:we must understand \kai\ here, "and yet." Matthew makes a distinction here between "willing" (\theln\) and "wishing" (\eboulth\), that between purpose (\thel\) and desire (\boulomai\) a distinction not always drawn, though present here. It was not his purpose to "make her a public example" (\deigmatisai\), from the root (\deiknumi\ to show), a rare word (Colossians:2:15|). The Latin Vulgate has it _traducere_, the Old Latin _divulgare_, Wycliff _pupplische_ (publish), Tyndale _defame_, Moffatt _disgrace_, Braid Scots "Be i the mooth o' the public." The substantive (\deigmatismos\) occurs on the Rosetta Stone in the sense of "verification." There are a few instances of the verb in the papyri though the meaning is not clear (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). The compound form appears (\paradeigmatiz\) in strkjv@Hebrews:6:6| and there are earlier instances of this compound than of the uncompounded, curiously enough. But new examples of the simple verb, like the substantive, may yet be found. The papyri examples mean to furnish a sample (P Tebt. 5.75), to make trial of (P Ryl. I. 28.32). The substantive means exposure in (P Ryl. I. 28.70). At any rate it is clear that Joseph "was minded to put her away privily." He could give her a bill of divorcement (\apolusai\), the \gt\ laid down in the Mishna, without a public trial. He had to give her the writ (\gt\) and pay the fine (Deuteronomy:24:1|). Songs:he proposed to do this privately (\lathrai\) to avoid all the scandal possible. One is obliged to respect and sympathize with the motives of Joseph for he evidently loved Mary and was appalled to find her untrue to him as he supposed. It is impossible to think of Joseph as the actual father of Jesus according to the narrative of Matthew without saying that Matthew has tried by legend to cover up the illegitimate birth of Jesus. The Talmud openly charges this sin against Mary. Joseph had "a short but tragic struggle between his legal conscience and his love" (McNeile).
rwp@Matthew:5:7 @{Obtain mercy} (\elethsontai\) "Sal win pitie theirsels" (_Braid Scots_). "A self-acting law of the moral world" (Bruce).
rwp@Matthew:5:17 @{I came not to destroy, but to fulfil} (\ouk lthon katalusai alla plrsai\). The verb "destroy" means to "loosen down" as of a house or tent (2Corinthians:5:1|). Fulfil is to fill full. This Jesus did to the ceremonial law which pointed to him and the moral law he kept. "He came to fill the law, to reveal the full depth of meaning that it was intended to hold" (McNeile).
rwp@Matthew:5:22 @{But I say unto you} (\eg de leg humin\). Jesus thus assumes a tone of superiority over the Mosaic regulations and proves it in each of the six examples. He goes further than the Law into the very heart. "{Raca}" (\Raka\) and "{Thou fool}" (\Mre\). The first is probably an Aramaic word meaning "Empty," a frequent word for contempt. The second word is Greek (dull, stupid) and is a fair equivalent of "raca." It is urged by some that \mre\ is a Hebrew word, but Field (_Otium Norvicense_) objects to that idea. "_Raca_ expresses contempt for a man's head=you stupid! _Mre_ expresses contempt for his heart and character=you scoundrel" (Bruce). "{The hell of fire}" (\tn geennan tou puros\), "the Gehenna of fire," the genitive case (\tou puros\) as the genus case describing Gehenna as marked by fire. Gehenna is the Valley of Hinnom where the fire burned continually. Here idolatrous Jews once offered their children to Molech (2Kings:23:10|). Jesus finds one cause of murder to be abusive language. Gehenna "should be carefully distinguished from Hades (\hids\) which is never used for the place of punishment, but for the _place of departed spirits_, without reference to their moral condition" (Vincent). The place of torment is in Hades (Luke:16:23|), but so is heaven.
rwp@Matthew:5:38 @{An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth} (\ophthalmon anti ophthalmou kai odonta anti odontos\). Note \anti\ with the notion of exchange or substitution. The quotation is from strkjv@Exodus:21:24; strkjv@Deuteronomy:19:21; strkjv@Leviticus:24:20|. Like divorce this _jus talionis_ is a restriction upon unrestrained vengeance. "It limited revenge by fixing an exact compensation for an injury" (McNeile). A money payment is allowed in the Mishna. The law of retaliation exists in Arabia today.
rwp@Matthew:5:39 @{Resist not him that is evil} (\me antistnai ti ponri\). Here again it is the infinitive (second aorist active) in indirect command. But is it "the evil man" or the "evil deed"? The dative case is the same form for masculine and neuter. Weymouth puts it "not to resist a (the) wicked man," Moffatt "not to resist an injury," Goodspeed "not to resist injury." The examples will go with either view. Jesus protested when smitten on the cheek (John:18:22|). And Jesus denounced the Pharisees (Matthew:23|) and fought the devil always. The language of Jesus is bold and picturesque and is not to be pressed too literally. Paradoxes startle and make us think. We are expected to fill in the other side of the picture. One thing certainly is meant by Jesus and that is that personal revenge is taken out of our hands, and that applies to "lynch-law." Aggressive or offensive war by nations is also condemned, but not necessarily defensive war or defence against robbery and murder. Professional pacifism may be mere cowardice.
rwp@Matthew:5:40 @{Thy coat... thy cloke also} (\ton chitna sou kai to himation\). The "coat" is really a sort of shirt or undergarment and would be demanded at law. A robber would seize first the outer garment or cloke (one coat). If one loses the undergarment at law, the outer one goes also (the more valuable one).
rwp@Matthew:10:33 @{Shall deny me} (\arnstai me\). Aorist subjunctive here with \hostis\, though future indicative \homologsei\ above. Note accusative here (case of extension), saying "no" to Christ, complete breach. This is a solemn law, not a mere social breach, this cleavage by Christ of the man who repudiates him, public and final.
rwp@Matthew:10:35 @{Set at variance} (\dichasai\). Literally divide in two, \dicha\. Jesus uses strkjv@Micah:7:1-6| to describe the rottenness of the age as Micah had done. Family ties and social ties cannot stand in the way of loyalty to Christ and righteous living. {The daughter-in-law} (\numphn\). Literally bride, the young wife who is possibly living with the mother-in-law. It is a tragedy to see a father or mother step between the child and Christ.
rwp@Matthew:12:3 @{What David did} (\ti epoisen Daueid\). From the necessity of hunger. The first defence made by Christ appeals to the conduct of David (2Samuel:21:6|). David and those with him did "what was not lawful" (\ho ouk exon n\) precisely the charge made against the disciples (\ho ouk exestin\ in verse 2|).
rwp@Matthew:12:7 @{The guiltless} (\tous anaitious\). Songs:in verse 5|. Common in ancient Greek. No real ground against, it means \an\ + \aitios\. Jesus quotes strkjv@Hosea:6:6| here as he did in strkjv@Matthew:9:13|. A pertinent prophecy that had escaped the notice of the sticklers for ceremonial literalness and the letter of the law.
rwp@Matthew:12:10 @{Is it lawful?} (\ei exestin\). The use of \ei\ in direct questions is really elliptical and seems an imitation of the Hebrew (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 916). See also strkjv@Matthew:19:3|. It is not translated in English.
rwp@Matthew:13:21 @{Tribulation} (\thlipses\). From \thlib\, to press, to oppress, to squeeze (cf. strkjv@7:14|). The English word is from the Latin _tribulum_, the roller used by the Romans for pressing wheat. Cf. our "steam roller" Trench (_Synonyms of the N.T._, pp. 202-4): "When, according to the ancient law of England, those who wilfully refused to plead, had heavy weights placed on their breasts, and were pressed and crushed to death, this was literally \thlipsis\." The iron cage was \stenochria\.
rwp@Matthew:14:3 @{For the sake of Herodias} (\dia Hridiada\). The death of John had taken place some time before. The Greek aorists here (\edsen, apetheto\) are not used for past perfects. The Greek aorist simply narrates the event without drawing distinctions in past time. This Herodias was the unlawful wife of Herod Antipas. She was herself a descendant of Herod the Great and had married Herod Philip of Rome, not Philip the Tetrarch. She had divorced him in order to marry Herod Antipas after he had divorced his wife, the daughter of Aretas King of Arabia. It was a nasty mess equal to any of our modern divorces. Her first husband was still alive and marriage with a sister-in-law was forbidden to Jews (Leviticus:18:16|). Because of her Herod Antipas had put John in the prison at Machaerus. The bare fact has been mentioned in strkjv@Matthew:4:12| without the name of the place. See strkjv@11:2| also for the discouragement of John \en ti desmtrii\ (place of bondage), here \en ti phulaki\ (the guard-house). Josephus (_Ant_. xviii. 5.2) tells us that Machaerus is the name of the prison. On a high hill an impregnable fortress had been built. Tristram (_Land of Moab_) says that there are now remains of "two dungeons, one of them deep and its sides scarcely broken in" with "small holes still visible in the masonry where staples of wood and iron had once been fixed. One of these must surely have been the prison-house of John the Baptist." "On this high ridge Herod the Great built an extensive and beautiful palace" (Broadus). "The windows commanded a wide and grand prospect, including the Dead Sea, the course of the Jordan, and Jerusalem" (Edersheim, _Life and Times of Jesus_).
rwp@Matthew:15:2 @{The tradition of the elders} (\tn paradosin tn presbutern\). This was the oral law, handed down by the elders of the past in _ex cathedra_ fashion and later codified in the Mishna. Handwashing before meals is not a requirement of the Old Testament. It is, we know, a good thing for sanitary reasons, but the rabbis made it a mark of righteousness for others at any rate. This item was magnified at great length in the oral teaching. The washing (\niptontai\, middle voice, note) of the hands called for minute regulations. It was commanded to wash the hands before meals, it was one's duty to do it after eating. The more rigorous did it between the courses. The hands must be immersed. Then the water itself must be "clean" and the cups or pots used must be ceremonially "clean." Vessels were kept full of clean water ready for use (John:2:6-8|). Songs:it went on _ad infinitum_. Thus a real issue is raised between Jesus and the rabbis. It was far more than a point of etiquette or of hygienics. The rabbis held it to be a mortal sin. The incident may have happened in a Pharisee's house.
rwp@Matthew:15:3 @{Ye also} (\kai hmeis\). Jesus admits that the disciples had transgressed the rabbinical traditions. Jesus treats it as a matter of no great importance in itself save as they had put the tradition of the elders in the place of the commandment of God. When the two clashed, as was often the case, the rabbis transgress the commandment of God "because of your tradition" (\dia tn paradosin hmn\). The accusative with \dia\ means that, not "by means of." Tradition is not good or bad in itself. It is merely what is handed on from one to another. Custom tended to make these traditions binding like law. The Talmud is a monument of their struggle with tradition. There could be no compromise on this subject and Jesus accepts the issue. He stands for real righteousness and spiritual freedom, not for bondage to mere ceremonialism and tradition. The rabbis placed tradition (the oral law) above the law of God.
rwp@Matthew:15:6 @{Ye have made void the word of God} (\ekursate ton logon tou theou\). It was a stinging indictment that laid bare the hollow pretence of their quibbles about handwashing. \Kuros\ means force or authority, \akuros\ is without authority, null and void. It is a late verb, \akuro\ but in the LXX, Gal strkjv@3:17|; and in the papyri Adjective, verb, and substantive occur in legal phraseology like cancelling a will, etc. The moral force of God's law is annulled by their hairsplitting technicalities and immoral conduct.
rwp@Matthew:17:3 @{There appeared} (\phth\). Singular aorist passive verb with Moses (to be understood also with Elijah), but the participle \sunlalountes\ is plural agreeing with both. "Sufficient objectivity is guaranteed by the vision being enjoyed by all three" (Bruce). The Jewish apocalypses reveal popular expectations that Moses and Elijah would reappear. Both had mystery connected with their deaths. One represented law, the other prophecy, while Jesus represented the gospel (grace). They spoke of his decease (Luke:9:31|), the cross, the theme uppermost in the mind of Christ and which the disciples did not comprehend. Jesus needed comfort and he gets it from fellowship with Moses and Elijah.
rwp@Matthew:18:25 @{Had not wherewith to pay} (\m echontos autou apodounai\). There is no "wherewith" in the Greek. This idiom is seen in strkjv@Luke:7:42; strkjv@14:14; strkjv@Hebrews:6:13|. Genitive absolute though \auton\ in the same clause as often in the N.T. {To be sold} (\prathnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \piprask\. This was according to the law (Exodus:22:3; strkjv@Leviticus:25:39,47|). Wife and children were treated as property in those primitive times.
rwp@Matthew:18:28 @{A hundred pence} (\hekaton dnaria\). A denarius was worth about eight and a half pence. The hundred denarii here were equal to some "fifty shillings" (Bruce), "about 4 pounds" (McNeile), "twenty pounds" (Moffatt), "twenty dollars" (Goodspeed), "100 shillings" (Weymouth). These are various efforts to represent in modern language the small amount of this debt compared with the big one. {Took him by the throat} (\epnigen\). "Held him by the throat" (Allen). It is imperfect, probably inchoative, "began to choke or throttle him." The Roman law allowed this indignity. Vincent quotes Livy (iv. 53) who tells how the necks were twisted (_collum torsisset_) and how Cicero (_Pro Cluentio_, xxi.) says: "Lead him to the judgment seat with twisted neck (_collo obtorto_)." {What thou owest} (\ei ti opheileis\). Literally, "if thou owest anything," however little. He did not even know how much it was, only that he owed him something. "The 'if' is simply the expression of a pitiless logic" (Meyer).
rwp@Matthew:22:19 @{Tribute money} (\to nomisma tou knsou\). \Knsos\, Latin _census_, was a capitation tax or head-money, _tributum capitis_, for which silver denaria were struck, with the figure of Caesar and a superscription, e.g. "Tiberiou Kaisaros" (McNeile). \Nomisma\ is the Latin _numisma_ and occurs here only in the N.T., is common in the old Greek, from \nomiz\ sanctioned by law or custom.
rwp@Matthew:22:36 @{The great commandment in the law} (\entol megal en ti nomi\). The positive adjective is sometimes as high in rank as the superlative. See \megas\ in strkjv@Matthew:5:19| in contrast with \elachistos\. The superlative \megistos\ occurs in the N.T. only in strkjv@2Peter:1:4|. Possibly this scribe wishes to know which commandment stood first (Mark:12:28|) with Jesus. "The scribes declared that there were 248 affirmative precepts, as many as the members of the human body; and 365 negative precepts, as many as the days in the year, the total being 613, the number of letters in the Decalogue" (Vincent). But Jesus cuts through such pettifogging hair-splitting to the heart of the problem.
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@Matthew:25:27 @{Thou oughtest therefore} (\edsi se oun\). His very words of excuse convict him. It was a necessity (\edei\) that he did not see. {The bankers} (\tois trapezeitais\). The benchers, money-changers, brokers, who exchanged money for a fee and who paid interest on money. Word common in late Greek. {I should have received back} (\eg ekomisamn an\). Conclusion of a condition of the second class (determined as unfulfilled). The condition is not expressed, but it is implied. "If you had done that." {With interest} (\sun toki\). Not with "usury" in the sense of extortion or oppression. Usury only means "use" in itself. The word is from \tikt\, to bring forth. Compound interest at six per cent doubles the principal every twenty years. It is amazing how rapidly that piles up if one carries it on for centuries and millenniums. "In the early Roman Empire legal interest was eight per cent, but in usurious transactions it was lent at twelve, twenty-four, and even forty-eight" (Vincent). Such practices exist today in our cities. The Mosaic law did not allow interest in dealings between Hebrews, but only with strangers (Deuteronomy:23:19,20; strkjv@Psalms:15:5|).
rwp@Matthew:26:3 @{Then were gathered together the chief priests and elders of the people} (\Tote sunchthsan hoi archiereis kai hoi presbuteroi tou laou\). A meeting of the Sanhedrin as these two groups indicate (cf. strkjv@21:23|). {Unto the court} (\eis tn auln\). The _atrium_ or court around which the palace buildings were built. Here in this open court this informal meeting was held. Caiaphas was high priest A.D. 18 to 36. His father-in-law Annas had been high priest A.D. 6 to 15 and was still called high priest by many.
rwp@Matthew:26:52 @{Put up again thy sword} (\apostrepson tn machairan sou\). Turn back thy sword into its place. It was a stern rebuke for Peter who had misunderstood the teaching of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:22:38| as well as in strkjv@Matthew:5:39| (cf. strkjv@John:18:36|). The reason given by Jesus has had innumerable illustrations in human history. The sword calls for the sword. Offensive war is here given flat condemnation. The Paris Pact of 1928 (the Kellogg Treaty) is certainly in harmony with the mind of Christ. The will to peace is the first step towards peace, the outlawing of war. Our American cities are often ruled by gangsters who kill each other off.
rwp@Matthew:26:63 @{Held his peace} (\esipa\). Kept silent, imperfect tense. Jesus refused to answer the bluster of Caiaphas. {I adjure thee by the living God} (\exorkiz se kata tou theou tou zntos\). Songs:Caiaphas put Jesus on oath in order to make him incriminate himself, a thing unlawful in Jewish jurisprudence. He had failed to secure any accusation against Jesus that would stand at all. But Jesus did not refuse to answer under solemn oath, clearly showing that he was not thinking of oaths in courts of justice when he prohibited profanity. The charge that Caiaphas makes is that Jesus claims to be the Messiah, the Son of God. To refuse to answer would be tantamount to a denial. Songs:Jesus answered knowing full well the use that would be made of his confession and claim.
rwp@Matthew:27:11 @{Now Jesus stood before the governor} (\ho de Isous estath emprosthen tou hgemonos\). Here is one of the dramatic episodes of history. Jesus stood face to face with the Roman governor. The verb \estath\, not \est\ (second aorist active), is first aorist passive and can mean "was placed" there, but he stood, not sat. The term \hgemn\ (from \hgeomai\, to lead) was technically a _legatus Caesaris_, an officer of the Emperor, more exactly procurator, ruler under the Emperor of a less important province than propraetor (as over Syria). The senatorial provinces like Achaia were governed by proconsuls. Pilate represented Roman law. {Art thou the King of the Jews?} (\Su ei ho basileus tn Ioudain;\). This is what really mattered. Matthew does not give the charges made by the Sanhedrin (Luke:23:2|) nor the private interview with Pilate (John:18:28-32|). He could not ignore the accusation that Jesus claimed to be King of the Jews. Else he could be himself accused to Caesar for disloyalty. Rivals and pretenders were common all over the empire. Songs:here was one more. By his answer ({thou sayest}) Jesus confesses that he is. Songs:Pilate has a problem on his hands. What sort of a king does this one claim to be? {Thou} (\su\) the King of the Jews?
rwp@Matthew:27:37 @{His accusation} (\tn aitian autou\). The title (\titlos\, strkjv@John:19:19|) or placard of the crime (the inscription, \he epigraph\) which was carried before the victim or hung around his neck as he walked to execution was now placed above (\ep' an\) the head of Jesus on the projecting piece (\crux immurus\). This inscription gave the name and home, {Jesus of Nazareth}, and the charge on which he was convicted, {the King of the Jews} and the identification, {This is}. The four reports all give the charge and vary in the others. The inscription in full was: This is Jesus of Nazareth the King of the Jews. The three languages are mentioned only by John (John:19:20|), Latin for law, Hebrew (Aramaic) for the Jews, Greek for everybody. The accusation (charge, cause, \aitia\) correctly told the facts of the condemnation.
rwp@Revelation:2:14 @{There} (\ekei\). That is \par' humin\ (among you). A party in the church that resisted emperor-worship, to the death in the case of Antipas, yet were caught in the insidious wiles of the Nicolaitans which the church in Ephesus withstood. {Some that hold} (\kratountas\). "Men holding" (present active participle of \krate\). {The teaching of Balaam} (\tn didachn Balaam\). Indeclinable substantive Balaam (Numbers:25:1-9; strkjv@31:15f.|). The point of likeness of these heretics with Balaam is here explained. {Taught Balak} (\edidasken ti Balak\). Imperfect indicative of \didask\, Balaam's habit, "as the prototype of all corrupt teachers" (Charles). These early Gnostics practised licentiousness as a principle since they were not under law, but under grace (Romans:6:15|). The use of the dative with \didask\ is a colloquialism rather than a Hebraism. Two accusatives often occur with \didask\. {To cast a stumbling-block} (\balein skandalon\). Second aorist active infinitive (accusative case after \edidasken\) of \ball\, regular use with \skandalon\ (trap) like \tithmi skandalon\ in strkjv@Romans:14:13|. Balaam, as Josephus and Philo also say, showed Balak how to set a trap for the Israelites by beguiling them into the double sin of idolatry and fornication, which often went together (and do so still). {To eat things sacrificed to idols} (\phagein eidlothuta\). Second aorist active infinitive of \esthi\ and the verbal adjective (from \eidlon\ and \thu\), quoted here from strkjv@Numbers:25:1f.|, but in inverse order, repeated in other order in verse 20|. See strkjv@Acts:15:29; strkjv@21:25; strkjv@1Corinthians:8:1ff.| for the controversy over the temptation to Gentile Christians to do what in itself was harmless, but which led to evil if it led to participation in the pagan feasts. Perhaps both ideas are involved here. Balaam taught Balak how to lead the Israelites into sin in both ways.
rwp@Revelation:5:1 @{In the right hand} (\epi tn dexian\). "Upon the right hand" (\epi\, not \en\), the open palm. Anthropomorphic language drawn from strkjv@Ezekiel:2:9f|. {A book} (\biblion\). Diminutive of \biblos\, but no longer so used, \biblaridion\ occurring instead (10:2|). {Written} (\gegrammenon\). Perfect passive predicate participle of \graph\. {Within and on the back} (\esthen kai opisthen\). "Within and behind." Description of a roll like that in strkjv@Luke:4:17|, not a codex as some scholars think. Usually these papyrus rolls were written only on the inside, but this one was so full of matter that it was written also on the back side (\opisthen\), and so was an \opisthographon\ like that in strkjv@Ezekiel:2:10|. There are many allegorical interpretations of this fact which are all beside the point. {Sealed} (\katesphragismenon\). Perfect passive predicate participle of \katasphragiz\, old compound (perfective use of \kata\), to seal up (down), here only in N.T. {With seven seals} (\sphragisin hepta\). Instrumental case of \sphragis\, old word used in various senses, proof or authentication (1Corinthians:9:2; strkjv@Romans:4:11|), signet-ring (Revelation:7:2|), impression made by the seal (Revelation:9:4; strkjv@2Timothy:2:19|), the seal on books closing the book (Revelation:5:1,2,5,9; strkjv@6:1,3,5,7,9,12; strkjv@8:1|). "A will in Roman law bore the seven seals of the seven witnesses" (Charles). But this sealed book of doom calls for no witnesses beyond God's own will. Alford sees in the number seven merely the completeness of God's purposes.
rwp@Revelation:18:6 @{Render as she rendered} (\apodote hs apedken\). Second aorist (effective) active imperative and first aorist (effective) active of \apodidmi\, old and common verb for requital, to give back, the _lex talionis_ which is in the O.T. (Jeremiah:50:15,29; strkjv@51:24,56; strkjv@Psalms:137:8|), and in the N.T. also (Matthew:7:2|). Here the reference is to persecutions by Rome, particularly the martyrdom of the saints (18:24; strkjv@19:2|). {Double the double} (\diplsate ta dipla\). First aorist imperative of \diplo\, old verb (from \diploos\, double, strkjv@Matthew:23:15|), here only in N.T. \Dipl\ is simply the neuter plural accusative (cognate) contract form for \diploa\ (not \dipl\). Requite here in double measure, a full requital (Exodus:22:4,7,9; strkjv@Isaiah:40:2; strkjv@Jeremiah:16:18; strkjv@17:18; strkjv@Zechariah:9:12|). The double recompense was according to the Levitical law. {Which she mingled} (\hi ekerasen\). First aorist active indicative of \kerannumi\. The relative \hi\ is attracted to the locative case of its antecedent \potrii\ (cup), for which see strkjv@14:8,10; strkjv@17:4; strkjv@18:3|. {Mingle unto her double} (\kerasate auti diploun\). First aorist active imperative of the same verb \kerannumi\, with the same idea of double punishment.
rwp@Revelation:19:9 @{Write} (\Grapson\). First aorist active imperative of \graph\ as in strkjv@1:11; strkjv@14:13|. The speaker may be the angel guide of strkjv@17:1|. {It is another beatitude} (\makarioi\, Blessed) like that in strkjv@14:13| (fourth of the seven in the book). {They which are bidden} (\hoi keklmenoi\). Articular perfect passive participle of \kale\, like strkjv@Matthew:22:3; strkjv@Luke:14:17|. Cf. strkjv@Revelation:17:14|. This beatitude reminds us of that in strkjv@Luke:14:15|. (Cf. strkjv@Matthew:8:11; strkjv@26:29|.) {These are true words of God} (\Houtoi hoi logoi althinoi tou theou eisin\). Undoubtedly, but one should bear in mind that apocalyptic symbolism "has its own methods and laws of interpretation, and by these the student must be guided" (Swete).
rwp@Info_Revelation @ EMPEROR WORSHIP AS THE OCCASION FOR JOHN'S APOCALYPSE There is no doubt at all that the emperor cult (emperor worship) played a main part in the persecution of the Christians that was the occasion for this great Christian apocalypse. The book itself bears ample witness to this fact, if the two beasts refer to the Roman power as the agent of Satan. It is not possible to single out each individual emperor in the graphic picture. Most would take the dragon to be Satan and the first and the second beasts to be the imperial and provincial Roman power. The Roman emperors posed as gods and did the work of Satan. In particular there were two persecuting emperors (Nero and Domitian) who were responsible for many martyrs for Christ. But emperor worship began before Nero. Julius Caesar was worshipped in the provinces. Octavius was called Augustus (\Sebastos\, Reverend). The crazy Emperor Caius Caligula not simply claimed to be divine, but actually demanded that his statue be set up for worship in the Holy of Holies in the Temple in Jerusalem. He was killed in January A.D. 41 before he could execute his dire purpose. But the madcap Nero likewise demanded worship and blamed in A.D. 64 the burning of Rome on the Christians, though guilty of it himself. He set the style for persecuting Christians, which slumbered on and burst into flames again under Domitian, who had himself commonly termed _Dominus ac Deus noster_ (Our Lord and God). The worship of the emperor did not disturb the worshippers of other gods save the Jews and the Christians, and in particular the Christians were persecuted after the burning of Rome when they were distinguished from the Jews. Up till then Christians were regarded (as by Gallio in Corinth) as a variety of Jews and so entitled to tolerance as a _religio licita_, but they had no standing in law by themselves and their refusal to worship the emperor early gave offence, as Paul indicates in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3|. It was \Kurios Isous\ or \Kurios Kaisar\. On this very issue Polycarp lost his life. The emperors as a rule were tolerant about it, save Nero and Domitian, who was called Nero _redivivus_, or Nero back again. Trajan in his famous letter to Pliny advised tolerance except in stubborn cases, when the Christians had to be put to death. After Nero it was a crime to be a Christian and all sorts of slanders about them were circulated. We have seen already in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3ff.|, the man of sin who sets himself above God as the object of worship. We have seen also in strkjv@1John:2:18,22; strkjv@4:3; strkjv@2John:1:7| the term antichrist applied apparently to Gnostic heretics. One may wonder if, as Beckwith argues, in the Apocalypse the man of sin and the antichrist are united in the beast.
rwp@Romans:1:18 @{For the wrath of God is revealed} (\apokaluptetai gar org theou\). Note in Romans Paul's use of \gar\, now argumentative, now explanatory, now both as here. There is a parallel and antecedent revelation (see verse 17|) of God's wrath corresponding to the revelation of God's righteousness, this an unwritten revelation, but plainly made known. \Org\ is from \orga\, to teem, to swell. It is the temper of God towards sin, not rage, but the wrath of reason and law (Shedd). The revelation of God's righteousness in the gospel was necessary because of the failure of men to attain it without it, for God's wrath justly rested upon all both Gentiles (1:18-32|) and Jews (2:1-3:20|). {Ungodliness} (\asebeian\). Irreligion, want of reverence toward God, old word (cf. strkjv@2Timothy:2:16|). {Unrighteousness} (\adikian\). Lack (\a\ privative and \dik\) of right conduct toward men, injustice (Romans:9:14; strkjv@Luke:18:6|). This follows naturally from irreverence. The basis of ethical conduct rests on the nature of God and our attitude toward him, otherwise the law of the jungle (cf. Nietzsche, "might makes right"). {Hold down the truth} (\tn altheian katechontn\). Truth (\altheia, alths\, from \a\ privative and \lth\ or \lanthan\, to conceal) is out in the open, but wicked men, so to speak, put it in a box and sit on the lid and "hold it down in unrighteousness." Their evil deeds conceal the open truth of God from men. Cf. strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:6f.| for this use of \katech\, to hinder.
rwp@Romans:2:3 @{And doest the same} (\kai poin auta\). "And doest them occasionally." {That thou shalt escape} (\su ekpheuxi\). Emphasis on \su\, "thou conceited Jew expecting to escape God's \krima\ because thou art a Jew." Cf. strkjv@Matthew:3:8f|. Paul justifies the bitter words of the Baptist to the Pharisees and Sadducees. The future middle of the old verb \ekpheug\ (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:3|). The Jew posed as immune to the ordinary laws of ethics because a Jew. Alas, some Christians affect the same immunity.
rwp@Romans:2:23 @{Through thy transgression of the law} (\dia ts parabases tou nomou\). Old word for stepping across a line. Trench calls attention to "the mournfully numerous group of words" for the varieties of sin like \agnoma\, ignorance, \anomia\, violation of law, \hamartia\, missing the mark, \hettma\, falling short, \parabasis\, passing over the line, \parako\, disobedience to a voice, \paranomia\, putting the law aside, \paraptma\, falling down, \plmmeleia\, discord.
rwp@Romans:2:25 @{If thou be a doer of the law} (\ean nomon prasseis\). Condition of third class and the present (continued action) subjunctive of \prass\, a verb meaning to do as a habit. {Is become uncircumcision} (\akrobustia gegonen\). The Jew is then like the Gentile, with no privilege at all. Circumcision was simply the seal of the covenant relation of Israel with God.
rwp@Romans:2:27 @{If it fulfill the law} (\ton nomon telousa\). Present active participle (conditional use of the participle) of \tele\, to finish, continually fulfilling to the end (as would be necessary). {Judge thee} (\krinei--se\). Unusual position of \se\ (thee) so far from the verb \krinei\. {With the letter and circumcision} (\dia grammatos kai peritoms\). \Dia\ means here accompanied by, with the advantage of.
rwp@Romans:3:20 @{Because} (\dioti\, again, \dia, hoti\). {By the works of the law} (\ex ergn nomou\). "Out of works of law." Mosaic law and any law as the source of being set right with God. Paul quotes strkjv@Psalms:43:2| as he did in strkjv@Galatians:2:16| to prove his point. {The knowledge of sin} (\epignsis hamartias\). The effect of law universally is rebellion to it (1Corinthians:15:56|). Paul has shown this carefully in strkjv@Galatians:3:19-22|. Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:10:3|. He has now proven the guilt of both Gentile and Jew.
rwp@Romans:3:21 @{But now apart from the law} (\nuni de chris nomou\). He now (\nuni\ emphatic logical transition) proceeds carefully in verses 21-31| the {nature} of the God-kind of righteousness which stands manifested (\dikaiosun theou pephanertai\, perfect passive indicative of \phanero\, to make manifest), the {necessity} of which he has shown in strkjv@1:18-3:20|. This God kind of righteousness is "apart from law" of any kind and all of grace (\chariti\) as he will show in verse 24|. But it is not a new discovery on the part of Paul, but "witnessed by the law and the prophets" (\marturoumen\, present passive participle, \hupo tou nomou kai tn prophtn\), made plain continuously by God himself.
rwp@Romans:4:7 @{Blessed} (\makarioi\). See on strkjv@Matthew:5:3|. {Are forgiven} (\aphethsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \aphimi\, without augment (\apheithsan\, regular form). Paul quotes strkjv@Psalms:32:1f.| and as from David. Paul thus confirms his interpretation of strkjv@Genesis:15:6|. {Iniquities} (\anomiai\). Violations of law whereas \hamartiai\ (sins) include all kinds. {Are covered} (\epekaluphthsan\). First aorist passive of \epikalupt\, old verb, to cover over (upon, \epi\) as a shroud. Only here in N.T.
rwp@Romans:4:13 @{That he should be the heir of the world} (\to klronomon auton einai kosmou\). The articular infinitive (\to einai\) with the accusative of general reference in loose apposition with \h epaggelia\ (the promise). But where is that promise? Not just strkjv@Genesis:12:7|, but the whole chain of promises about his son, his descendants like the stars in heaven, the Messiah and the blessing to the world through him. In these verses (13-17|) Paul employs (Sanday and Headlam) the keywords of his gospel (faith, promise, grace) and arrays them against the current Jewish theology (law, works, merit).
rwp@Romans:4:15 @{Worketh wrath} (\orgn katergazetai\). Because of disobedience to it. {Neither is there transgression} (\oude parabasis\). There is no responsibility for the violation of a non-existent law.
rwp@Romans:4:16 @{Of faith} (\ek pistes\). As the source. {According to grace} (\kata charin\). As the pattern. {To the end that} (\eis to einai\). Purpose again as in 11|. {Sure} (\bebaian\). Stable, fast, firm. Old adjective from \bain\, to walk. {Not to that only which is of the law} (\ou ti ek tou nomou monon\). Another instance where \monon\ (see verse 12|) seems in the wrong place. Normally the order would be, \ou monon ti ek tou nomou, alla kai ktl\.
rwp@Romans:7:4 @{Ye also were made to the law} (\kai humeis ethanatthte\). First aorist indicative passive of \thanato\, old verb, to put to death (Matthew:10:21|) or to make to die (extinct) as here and strkjv@Romans:8:13|. The analogy calls for the death of the law, but Paul refuses to say that. He changes the structure and makes them dead to the law as the husband (6:3-6|). The relation of marriage is killed "through the body of Christ" as the "propitiation" (3:25|) for us. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:1:22|. {That we should be joined to another} (\eis to genesthai heteri\). Purpose clause with \eis to\ and the infinitive. First mention of the saints as wedded to Christ as their Husband occurs in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:13; strkjv@Galatians:4:26|. See further strkjv@Ephesians:5:22-33|. {That we might bring forth fruit unto God} (\hina karpophorsmen ti thei\). He changes the metaphor to that of the tree used in strkjv@6:22|.
rwp@Romans:7:5 @{In the flesh} (\en ti sarki\). Same sense as in strkjv@6:19| and strkjv@7:18,25|. The "flesh" is not inherently sinful, but is subject to sin. It is what Paul means by being "under the law." He uses \sarx\ in a good many senses. {Sinful passions} (\ta pathmata tn hamartin\). "Passions of sins" or marked by sins. {Wrought} (\energeito\). Imperfect middle of \energe\, "were active." {To bring forth fruit unto death} (\eis to karpophorsai ti thanati\). Purpose clause again. Vivid picture of the seeds of sin working for death.
rwp@Romans:7:6 @{But now} (\nuni de\). In the new condition. {Wherein we were holden} (\en hi kateichometha\). Imperfect passive of \katech\, picture of our former state (same verb in strkjv@1:18|). {In newness of spirit} (\en kainotti pneumatos\). The death to the letter of the law (the old husband) has set us free to the new life in Christ. Songs:Paul has shown again the obligation on us to live for Christ.
rwp@Romans:7:7 @{Is the law sin?} (\ho nomos hamartia?\). A pertinent query in view of what he had said. Some people today oppose all inhibitions and prohibitions because they stimulate violations. That is half-baked thinking. {I had not known sin} (\tn hamartian ouk egnn\). Second aorist indicative of \ginsk\, to know. It is a conclusion of a second class condition, determined as unfulfilled. Usually \an\ is used in the conclusion to make it plain that it is second class condition instead of first class, but occasionally it is not employed when it is plain enough without as here (John:16:22,24|). See on ¯Galatians:4:15|. Songs:as to {I had not known coveting} (lust), \epithumian ouk idein\. But all the same the law is not itself sin nor the cause of sin. Men with their sinful natures turn law into an occasion for sinful acts.
rwp@Romans:7:8 @{Finding occasion} (\aphormn labousa\). See strkjv@2Corinthians:5:12; strkjv@11:12; strkjv@Galatians:5:13| for \aphormn\, a starting place from which to rush into acts of sin, excuses for doing what they want to do. Just so drinking men use the prohibition laws as "occasions" for violating them. {Wrought in me} (\kateirgasato en emoi\). First aorist active middle indicative of the intensive verb \katergazomai\, to work out (to the finish), effective aorist. The command not to lust made me lust more. {Dead} (\nekra\). Inactive, not non-existent. Sin in reality was there in a dormant state.
rwp@Romans:7:9 @{I was alive} (\ezn\). Imperfect active. Apparently, "the lost paradise in the infancy of men" (Denney), before the conscience awoke and moral responsibility came, "a seeming life" (Shedd). {Sin revived} (\h hamartia anezsen\). Sin came back to life, waked up, the blissful innocent stage was over, "the commandment having come" (\elthouss ts entols\, genitive absolute). {But I died} (\eg de apethanon\). My seeming life was over for I was conscious of sin, of violation of law. I was dead before, but I did not know. Now I found out that I was spiritually dead.
rwp@Romans:7:12 @{Holy, and righteous, and good} (\hagia kai dikaia kai agath\). This is the conclusion (wherefore, \hste\) to the query in verse 7|. The commandment is God's and so holy like Him, just in its requirements and designed for our good. The modern revolt against law needs these words.
rwp@Romans:7:13 @{Become death unto me?} (\emoi egeneto thanatos?\). Ethical dative \emoi\ again. New turn to the problem. Admitting the goodness of God's law, did it issue in death for me? Paul repels (\m genoito\) this suggestion. It was sin that (But sin, \alla h hamartia\) "became death for me." {That it might be shown} (\hina phani\). Final clause, \hina\ and second aorist passive subjunctive of \phain\, to show. The sinfulness of sin is revealed in its violations of God's law. {By working death to me} (\moi katergazomen thanaton\). Present middle participle, as an incidental result. {Might become exceedingly sinful} (\gentai kath' huperboln hamartlos\). Second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\ with \hina\ in final clause. On \kath' huperboln\, see on ¯1Corinthians:12:31|. Our _hyperbole_ is the Greek \huperbol\. The excesses of sin reveal its real nature. Only then do some people get their eyes opened.
rwp@Romans:9:31 @{Did not arrive at that law} (\eis nomon ouk ephthasen\). First aorist active indicative of \phthan\, old verb to anticipate (1Thessalonians:4:15|), now just to arrive as here and strkjv@2Corinthians:10:14|. The word "that" is not in the Greek. Legal righteousness Israel failed to reach, because to do that one had to keep perfectly all the law.
rwp@Romans:10:4 @{The end of the law} (\telos nomou\). Christ put a stop to the law as a means of salvation (6:14; strkjv@9:31; strkjv@Ephesians:2:15; strkjv@Colossians:2:14|) as in strkjv@Luke:16:16|. Christ is the goal or aim of the law (Gal strkjv@3:24|). Christ is the fulfilment of the law (Matthew:5:17; strkjv@Romans:13:10; strkjv@1Timothy:1:5|). But here (Denney) Paul's main idea is that Christ ended the law as a method of salvation for "every one that believeth" whether Jew or Gentile. Christ wrote _finis_ on law as a means of grace.
rwp@Romans:10:5 @{Thereby} (\en auti\). That is by or in "the righteousness that is from law." He stands or falls with it. The quotation is from strkjv@Leviticus:18:5|.
rwp@Romans:12:17 @{Render to no man} (\mdeni apodidontes\). "Giving back to no man." Independent participle again. {Evil for evil} (\kakon anti kakou\). Directly opposite to the law of retaliation of the Pharisees as in strkjv@Matthew:5:39; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:15; strkjv@1Corinthians:13:5f|. {Take thought of} (\pronooumenoi\). "Taking thought beforehand." Old word. See strkjv@2Corinthians:8:21|.
rwp@Romans:13:1 @{Every soul} (\psa psuch\). As in strkjv@2:9; strkjv@Acts:2:43|. A Hebraism for \ps anthrpos\ (every man). {To the higher powers} (\exousiais huperechousais\). Abstract for concrete. See strkjv@Mark:2:10| for \exousia\. \Huperech\ is an old verb to have or hold over, to be above or supreme, as in strkjv@1Peter:2:13|. {Except by God} (\ei m hupo theou\). Songs:the best MSS. rather than \apo theou\ (from God). God is the author of order, not anarchy. {The powers that be} (\hai ousai\). "The existing authorities" (supply \exousiai\). Art ordained (\tetagmenai eisin\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \tass\, "stand ordained by God." Paul is not arguing for the divine right of kings or for any special form of government, but for government and order. Nor does he oppose here revolution for a change of government, but he does oppose all lawlessness and disorder.
rwp@Romans:13:9 @{For this} (\to gar\). For the article (\to\) pointing to a sentence see strkjv@8:26|, here to the quotation. The order of the commandments here is like that in strkjv@Luke:18:20; strkjv@James:2:11| and in B for strkjv@Deuteronomy:5|, but different from that of the Hebrew in strkjv@Exodus:20; strkjv@Deuteronomy:5|. The use of \ou\ with the volitive future in prohibitions in place of \m\ and the imperative or subjunctive is a regular Greek idiom. {And if there be any other} (\kai ei tis hetera\). Paul does not attempt to give them all. {It is summed up} (\anakephalaioutai\). Present passive indicative of \anakephalaio\, late literary word or "rhetorical term" (\ana, kephalaion\, head or chief as in strkjv@Hebrews:8:1|). Not in the papyri, but \kephalaion\, quite common for sum or summary. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Ephesians:1:10|. {Namely} (\en ti\). See \to gar\ at the beginning of the verse, though omitted by B F. The quotation is from strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|. Quoted in strkjv@Matthew:5:43; strkjv@22:39; strkjv@Mark:12:31; strkjv@Luke:10:27; strkjv@Galatians:5:14; strkjv@James:2:8| it is called \basilikos nomos\ (royal law). {Thy neighbour} (\ton plsion sou\). \Plsion\ is an adverb and with the article it means "the one near thee." See on ¯Matthew:5:43|.
rwp@Romans:13:10 @{The fulfilment of the law} (\plrma nomou\). "The filling up or complement of the law" like \peplrken\ (perfect active indicative of \plro\, stands filled up) in verse 8|. See strkjv@1Corinthians:13| for the fuller exposition of this verse.
rwp@Romans:16:26 @{But now is manifested} (\phanerthentos de nun\). First aorist passive participle of \phanero\, to make plain, genitive case in agreement with \mustriou\. {By the scriptures of the prophets} (\dia graphn prophtikn\). "By prophetic scriptures." Witnessed by the law and the prophets (3:21|). This thread runs all through Romans. {According to the command of the eternal God} (\kat' epitagn tou ainiou theou\). Paul conceives that God is in charge of the redemptive work and gives his orders (1:1-5; strkjv@10:15f.|). The same adjective \ainios\ is here applied to God that is used of eternal life and eternal punishment in strkjv@Matthew:25:46|. {Unto obedience of faith} (\eis hupakon ts pistes\). See strkjv@1:5|. {Made known unto all the nations} (\eis panta ta ethn gnristhentos\). First aorist passive participle of \gnriz\, still the genitive case agreeing with \mustriou\ in verse 25|.
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}